• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Is John Mcarthur guilty of heresy?

Status
Not open for further replies.

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
15,511
8,172
50
The Wild West
✟756,109.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
The creeds and councils were directed at major teaching authorities not laypeople.

To put a charitable slant on The Liturgist's latest clariation, JM was on that occasion skirting nominal error.

Also I think we have to remember whom his audience are. It appears the Mexicans have at least simmered down somewhat!

I have to say if he actually denies that the Blessed Virgin Mary is Theotokos, then it is severe error, although it does not rise to the level where I could accuse him of heresy.

However if he went all the way to the end of the Via Nestoria, and declared that the human Jesus and the divine Logos were separate persons in a union of will, that would be heresy.

And that is what this is really about: whereas the title Mother of God has never lead anyone I am aware of to believe that the Blessed Virgin Mary gave birth to the Holy Trinity, and I include in that vast number of people all of those I am aware of who commit heresy by actually worshipping St. Mary in violation of the Second Commandment and the Second Council of Nicaea, belief in Nestorianism has resulted on many occasions in people claiming that the humanity of Jesus is hypostatically or even personally separate from His Divinity, united only through a common will. This outcome is also similar to the heresy of Apollinarianism, which claimed that Jesus Christ had a divine soul and a human body and the heresy of Monothelitism which claimed He had only a divine will, rather than a divine and human will.

So by denying the Theotokos, one can inadvertently imply a separation between the humanity and divinity of Christ, which in turn has been known to lead to people explicitly acknowledging such a separation. That is why the Council of Ephesus declared St. Mary was Theotokos.

You are also mistaken that the Ecumenical Councils were directed at major teaching authorities. What made the councils ecumenical was their acceptance by the entire church including the laity. This is why the Council of Florence is regarded as ecumenical by the Roman Catholic Church, but, despite all but one of the Orthodox bishops present agreeing to it, it is rejected as ecumenical by the Eastern Orthodox, because the laity rejected it once the one dissenting bishop, St. Mark of Ephesus, told them what it entailed (which was submission to the authority of the Pope of Rome in return for military assistance against the Ottoman Empire). The Eastern Orthodox laity chose the horrors of Turkocratia over the greater horror of compromising their faith.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: OldAbramBrown
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
15,511
8,172
50
The Wild West
✟756,109.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
Yes I do understand. Your clarification on that point especially combined with your explanation on "oikonomia" (which I had implicitly intuited while unable to articulate) has made a lot of difference to me. I fully understand differing degrees of (in)formality.

Forgive me, but my reply was directed towards @Ordinary Christian and not you. I have written a separate reply to you.

At any rate, if John MacArthur rejects the status of St. Mary as Theotokos, which I have yet to confirm, then he has committed a major Christological error but for reasons of oikonomia, as I explained in my reply to @Ordinary Christian I would only accuse him of heresy if he then went on to explicitly state what is inadvertantly implied by casual rejection of the term Theotokos.
 
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
15,511
8,172
50
The Wild West
✟756,109.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
Is it still being maintained that John MacArthur is a Nestorian?

If he denies that St. Mary is Theotokos, that is Nestorianism per se. However, as @OldAbramBrown just said, I recognize, for pastoral reasons, degrees of Nestorianism, and it would not be a case of heresy unless he explicitly declared what he allegedly may have inadvertently implied.

Charity requires me to assume that he inadvertently implied Nestorian Christology if it should prove to be the case that he engaged in Nestorianism by denying that St. Mary was the Theotokos, and thus I would regard that as a severe Christological error but not a heresy, as long as he is adhering to the Nicene Creed.
 
Upvote 0

OldAbramBrown

Well-Known Member
Jul 4, 2023
857
149
70
England
✟31,618.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Did you listen to all of them? Some were outright saying salvation is through Mary and praising Mary for the forgiveness an salvation she brings as a conduit to Christ. In literature approved by the RCC.
This is among reasons why we are not endorsing organisations. I took The Liturgist's opinions as identifying "a good point about" (Moravians et al).

In practice (in some countries but probably not your neighbourhood or JM's) attenders ignore a great deal of what that organisation says.
 
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
15,511
8,172
50
The Wild West
✟756,109.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
Is that the same as modalism? I think those that want to control the charisms (to bear Christ to each other), like Grudem are that? But JM doesn't endorse that means or motive.

Well it would be fair to say all Sabellians were Modalists, but modern day Modalists like Oneness Pentecostals are not actually literally followers of the ancient sect, but they are Sabellians in the same way that people who deny the deity of Christ are Arians even if they have never heard of Arius (for example, Jehovah’s Witnesses).
 
Upvote 0

ozso

Site Supporter
Oct 2, 2020
27,444
14,989
PNW
✟960,363.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Calling the Blessed Virgin Mary the Queen of Heaven is a Roman Catholic devotion and is irrelevant to the issue at hand. However, denying that Mary is Theotokos implies a denial that the divinity and humanity of Jesus Christ coexist without change, confusion, separation, or division. This is because it’s simply impossible for the Blessed Virgin Mary to have given birth to Jesus Christ without having given birth to God, unless the fullness of God does not dwell In Him bodily, which contradicts what the Holy Apostle Paul wrote, and also, if St. Mary did not give birth to Jesus Christ than she was not the Mother of the Lord of St. Elizabeth, since St. Elizabeth did not know about Trinitarian theology but she did know about God, and the idea that Mary is Theotokos is expressly based on chapter 1 of the Gospel of St. Luke the Evangelist. It is also because of Chapter 1 of that Gospel, specifically, the canticle it records as being sung by St. Mary, the Magnificat, that we call her the Blessed Virgin.

The status of Mary is important to the status of Christ because what she gave birth to is what Jesus Christ is. You cannot separate Mariology from Christology, since it was through Mary that God became incarnate as a human being. That is the issue.
Again having listened to what MacArthur had to say plus all of the Catholic literature he read, there is a hundred fold emphasis on Mary than the New Testament gives her. The Christology of the New Testament barely says anything about Mary.

In the New Testament from the beginning of Acts to the end of Revelation, Mary is only mentioned one single time:

"All these were constantly devoting themselves to prayer, together with certain women, including Mary the mother of Jesus, as well as his brothers." Acts 1:14

And this one single time tells us that the Scriptural title for Mary is: "Mary the mother of Jesus".

The Apostles sure don't seem to see Mariology as being integral to Christology.
 
Upvote 0

ozso

Site Supporter
Oct 2, 2020
27,444
14,989
PNW
✟960,363.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
If he denies that St. Mary is Theotokos, that is Nestorianism per se. However, as @OldAbramBrown just said, I recognize, for pastoral reasons, degrees of Nestorianism, and it would not be a case of heresy unless he explicitly declared what he allegedly may have inadvertently implied.

Charity requires me to assume that he inadvertently implied Nestorian Christology if it should prove to be the case that he engaged in Nestorianism by denying that St. Mary was the Theotokos, and thus I would regard that as a severe Christological error but not a heresy, as long as he is adhering to the Nicene Creed.
As was posted earlier MacArthur teaches the hypostatic union. One can understand and teach the hypostatic union perfectly well without including Mary into the hypostatic union.
 
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
15,511
8,172
50
The Wild West
✟756,109.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
Again having listened to what MacArthur had to say plus all of the Catholic literature he read, there is a hundred fold emphasis on Mary than the New Testament gives her. The Christology of the New Testament barely says anything about Mary.

In the New Testament from the beginning of Acts to the end of Revelation, Mary is only mentioned one single time:

"All these were constantly devoting themselves to prayer, together with certain women, including Mary the mother of Jesus, as well as his brothers." Acts 1:14

And this one single time tells us that the Scriptural title for Mary is: "Mary the mother of Jesus".

The Apostles sure don't seem to see Mariology as being integral to Christology.

Forgive me, but that is an argument from silence and is logically fallacious, and also factually incorrect, since the Blessed Virgin Mary giving birth to God is explicitly described in Revelation 12:1-5, and Revelation 12:6 appears to be a reference to the Dormition.*

Also, the Scriptural title given to Mary in the Gospel According to Luke is “The Mother of my Lord.” And the three Gospels which mention her make it clear she gave birth to God incarnate.

Now I want to be clear, I have no personal animus towards you whatsoever, but I do entirely reject your arguments concerning Nestorianism, and I regard this issue as a distraction from the actual topic of the thread, which is whether or not John MacArthur engaged in accidental Nestorianism (it is obvious that it is a severe but accidental error based on your last post, since if he teaches the hypostatic union he ought to know the implications of denying that Mary is the theotokos, but perhaps he does not deny she is the Theotokos but rather objected to the phrase “Mother of God” and I am prepared to regard such a scenario as suboptimal but not an actual case of Nestorianism, as I have said previously.

Thus I request if you wish to debate the Third Ecumenical Council, you post a thread either in General Theology or in Denominational Theology or ideally in the Paterology - Christology - Pneumatology forum where the item is most topical: Paterology, Christology & Pneumatology

Youj can quote this post of mine in your OP, and I will reply to your response.

*I do not believe these errors were intentional on your part.
 
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
15,511
8,172
50
The Wild West
✟756,109.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
@Ordinary Christian also just to reiterate I am not accusing you of intentionally using a logical fallacy in your argument in an attempt to score points, I am merely pointing out that arguments from silence are technically a form of logical falllacy.

I desire your friendship and fellowship even though we have a major doctrinal disagreement, because you have a sharp mind and a capability to understand complex subjects and I believe we can learn from each other.
 
Upvote 0

ozso

Site Supporter
Oct 2, 2020
27,444
14,989
PNW
✟960,363.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Forgive me, but my reply was directed towards @Ordinary Christian and not you. I have written a separate reply to you.

At any rate, if John MacArthur rejects the status of St. Mary as Theotokos, which I have yet to confirm, then he has committed a major Christological error but for reasons of oikonomia, as I explained in my reply to @Ordinary Christian I would only accuse him of heresy if he then went on to explicitly state what is inadvertantly implied by casual rejection of the term Theotokos.
MacArthur teaches the Hypostatic Union. He doesn't believe that the Hypostatic Union can not be taught, understood or believed without subscribing to the Catholic veneration of Mary or the titles outside of Scripture that the Catholic church came up with for her.
 
Upvote 0

ozso

Site Supporter
Oct 2, 2020
27,444
14,989
PNW
✟960,363.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Forgive me, but that is an argument from silence and is logically fallacious, and also factually incorrect, since the Blessed Virgin Mary giving birth to God is explicitly described in Revelation 12:1-5, and Revelation 12:6 appears to be a reference to the Dormition.*
I'm talking about Mary being mentioned by name. Which occurs only once as "Mary the mother of Jesus" in Acts 1:1.

As you say, Rev 12:1-6 appears to be about Mary. But that's not certain. The vision could also represent Israel.
Also, the Scriptural title given to Mary in the Gospel According to Luke is “The Mother of my Lord.” And the three Gospels which mention her make it clear she gave birth to God incarnate.
There's no dispute there. MacArthur wouldn't have a problem with "mother (not capitalized) of my Lord".
Now I want to be clear, I have no personal animus towards you whatsoever, but I do entirely reject your arguments concerning Nestorianism, and I regard this issue as a distraction from the actual topic of the thread, which is whether or not John MacArthur engaged in accidental Nestorianism (it is obvious that it is a severe but accidental error based on your last post, since if he teaches the hypostatic union he ought to know the implications of denying that Mary is the theotokos, but perhaps he does not deny she is the Theotokos but rather objected to the phrase “Mother of God” and I am prepared to regard such a scenario as suboptimal but not an actual case of Nestorianism, as I have said previously.
I consider Nestorianism to be moot. MacArthur teaches the Hypostatic Union. Which rules out Nestorianism. I seriously doubt anyone in this thread has actually espoused Nestorianism. The actual issue is the worship of Mary, because that's what MacArthur talked about in the link provided in the OP. Not whether or not Jesus is God or whether or not Jesus was 100% God and 100% man. But whether or not the Catholic church worships Mary.
Thus I request if you wish to debate the Third Ecumenical Council, you post a thread either in General Theology or in Denominational Theology or ideally in the Paterology - Christology - Pneumatology forum where the item is most topical: Paterology, Christology & Pneumatology

Youj can quote this post of mine in your OP, and I will reply to your response.

*I do not believe these errors were intentional on your papart.
I'm debating what MacArthur said which was posted in the OP: Exposing the Idolatry of Mary Worship: An Overview

You on the other hand, dear brother, are adding everything but kitchen sink as they say.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
15,511
8,172
50
The Wild West
✟756,109.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
MacArthur teaches the Hypostatic Union. He doesn't believe that the Hypostatic Union can not be taught, understood or believed without subscribing to the Catholic veneration of Mary or the titles outside of Scripture that the Catholic church came up with for her.

Just a quick reply on this - the Roman Catholic Church did not come up with the title Theotokos. If you want to accuse any denomination of it, accuse us, the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox, because Nestorius was Patriarch of Constantinople, he was supported by Patriarch John of Antioch, and he was opposed by Pope St. Cyril of Alexandria who was supported by the bishop of Rome, who at the time was not called Pope, St. Celestine, however, as usual in the case of the early Ecumenical councils, no Roman bishops were present, only representatives, and the support of St. Celestine only had the effect of preventing Nestorianism from spreading to the ultra-conservative Roman Church (which remained extremely conservative until Pope Leo I, the successor of St. Celestine, but did not begin to clash with the Eastern Orthodox until after the reign of Pope St. Gregory the Great, who is much loved in Eastern Orthodoxy.

So this was an issue that occurred in an Orthodox Church and was resolved by Orthodox bishops. It also predates the Chalcedonian schism, which occurred because the Oriental Orthodox were concerned that the Chalcedonian formula was too close to Nestorianism, and wanted to stick to the formula established by St. Cyril of Alexandria, and furthermore, there was the issue of Pope St. Dioscorus of Alexandria being deposed based on a false accusation by a crypto-Nestorian named Ibas, that he adhered to the heresy of Eutyches, when in fact he had realized Eutyches had lied to him and had anathematized Eutyches.

The Pope of Alexandria is a title used by both the Greek Orthodox Church of Alexandria and the Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria, both of which reject the doctrine of Papal Supremacy. In fact there was a legendary incident in the Coptic Orthodox Church where the Pope of Alexandria showed up to celebrate the Divine Liturgy with a local diocesan bishop, but the local bishop was late, having been unavoidably detained, so the Pope started the liturgy without him. This is a direct violation of the most ancient canons, the Apostolic Canons, which prevent bishops from intruding on the territory of another bishop, and celebrating the divine liturgy without the presence of the local bishop or his express consent to celebrate it in his absence in the event he was, for example, hospitalized and unable to conduct the liturgy, is strictly forbidden, and thus the Pope has no right to celebrate the liturgy outside of the Archdiocese of Alexandria. Thus, the local bishop took the Pope’s mitre (which at the time was probably of the type the Copts call an Emma, which is a turban with icons affixed to it) and stomped on it. The Pope accepted this rebuke. Needless to say it would result in bad things happening if a diocesan bishop in the Roman Catholic Church dared to stomp on the mitre of Pope Francis. He would probably be tackled by plain clothes agents of the Swiss Guard.

My Coptic Orthodox friend @dzheremi can confirm the above.

Thus, Theotokos is a Greek word prescribed by Greek and Syriac and Coptic-speaking bishops of what became the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox churches (Pope St. Cyril had the liturgy translated into Coptic for the benefit of the native Egyptians; the Bible was already available in Coptic but having the worship in Coptic was of great benefit), at the Third Ecumenical Council, which is also the last one recognized as Ecumenical by the Oriental Orthodox, and this was in response to the Patriarch of Constantinople going off the rails. Patriarch John of Antioch was not deposed; he managed to interfere with St. Cyril but without actually committing Nestorianism and while keeping his job. The four main Orthodox patriarchates are those of New Rome (Constantinople), Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem. Before the schism between the Eastern Orthodox and the Roman Catholics became official in 1054, these four patriarchates, along with that of Old Rome (the Pope was also called the Patriarch of the West) were referred to as the Pentarchy. The autocephalous (independence) of Antioch, Alexandria and Jerusalem is written into Canons 6 and 7 of the Council of Nicaea.

So to summarize, the roughly 250 Orthodox bishops and a couple of Roman legates at Ephesus deposed Nestorius and mandated the use of the Greek word Theotokos, with the agreement and support of the Roman church; these decisions were upheld at Chalcedon, albeit not to the satisfaction of the Oriental Orthodox, and Martin Luther and most other traditional Protestant leaders. agreed with the Council of Chalcedon and the status of the Virgin Mary as Theotokos, and traditional Protestants still do. So you cannot dismiss this as a Roman Catholic issue.

However, referring to St. Mary as Queen of Heaven is a Roman Catholic practice, although I find nothing objectionable in it.
 
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
15,511
8,172
50
The Wild West
✟756,109.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
I'm talking about Mary being mentioned by name. Which occurs only once as "Mary the mother of Jesus" in Acts 1:1.

There's no dispute there. MacArthur wouldn't have a problem with "mother (not capitalized) of my Lord".

I consider Nestorianism to be moot. MacArthur teaches the Hypostatic Union. Which rules out Nestorianism. I seriously doubt anyone in this thread has actually espoused Nestorianism. The actual issue is the worship of Mary, because that's what MacArthur talked about in the link provided in the OP. Not whether or not Jesus is God or whether or not Jesus was 100% God and 100% man. But whether or not the Catholic church worships Mary.

I'm debating what MacArthur said in the OP: Exposing the Idolatry of Mary Worship: An Overview

Well in this thread I as of now am only willing to discuss whether or not MacArthur denies the title Theotokos, because I fear we are way off topic and the legitimacy of Ephesus is only tangentially relevant to the OP, and it has been debated to the point where in this thread it is no longer providing edification. If you want to continue to challenge the legitimacy of the Council of Ephesus or the term Theotokos or the definition of Nestorianism, post another thread and I will happily reply. Or I can post a thread and link you to it.
 
Upvote 0

ozso

Site Supporter
Oct 2, 2020
27,444
14,989
PNW
✟960,363.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Just a quick reply on this - the Roman Catholic Church did not come up with the title Theotokos. If you want to accuse any denomination of it, accuse us, the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox, because Nestorius was Patriarch of Constantinople, he was supported by Patriarch John of Antioch, and he was opposed by Pope St. Cyril of Alexandria who was supported by the bishop of Rome, who at the time was not called Pope, St. Celestine, however, as usual in the case of the early Ecumenical councils, no Roman bishops were present, only representatives, and the support of St. Celestine only had the effect of preventing Nestorianism from spreading to the ultra-conservative Roman Church (which remained extremely conservative until Pope Leo I, the successor of St. Celestine, but did not begin to clash with the Eastern Orthodox until after the reign of Pope St. Gregory the Great, who is much loved in Eastern Orthodoxy.

So this was an issue that occurred in an Orthodox Church and was resolved by Orthodox bishops. It also predates the Chalcedonian schism, which occurred because the Oriental Orthodox were concerned that the Chalcedonian formula was too close to Nestorianism, and wanted to stick to the formula established by St. Cyril of Alexandria, and furthermore, there was the issue of Pope St. Dioscorus of Alexandria being deposed based on a false accusation by a crypto-Nestorian named Ibas, that he adhered to the heresy of Eutyches, when in fact he had realized Eutyches had lied to him and had anathematized Eutyches.

The Pope of Alexandria is a title used by both the Greek Orthodox Church of Alexandria and the Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria, both of which reject the doctrine of Papal Supremacy. In fact there was a legendary incident in the Coptic Orthodox Church where the Pope of Alexandria showed up to celebrate the Divine Liturgy with a local diocesan bishop, but the local bishop was late, having been unavoidably detained, so the Pope started the liturgy without him. This is a direct violation of the most ancient canons, the Apostolic Canons, which prevent bishops from intruding on the territory of another bishop, and celebrating the divine liturgy without the presence of the local bishop or his express consent to celebrate it in his absence in the event he was, for example, hospitalized and unable to conduct the liturgy, is strictly forbidden, and thus the Pope has no right to celebrate the liturgy outside of the Archdiocese of Alexandria. Thus, the local bishop took the Pope’s mitre (which at the time was probably of the type the Copts call an Emma, which is a turban with icons affixed to it) and stomped on it. The Pope accepted this rebuke. Needless to say it would result in bad things happening if a diocesan bishop in the Roman Catholic Church dared to stomp on the mitre of Pope Francis. He would probably be tackled by plain clothes agents of the Swiss Guard.

My Coptic Orthodox friend @dzheremi can confirm the above.

Thus, Theotokos is a Greek word prescribed by Greek and Syriac and Coptic-speaking bishops of what became the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox churches (Pope St. Cyril had the liturgy translated into Coptic for the benefit of the native Egyptians; the Bible was already available in Coptic but having the worship in Coptic was of great benefit), at the Third Ecumenical Council, which is also the last one recognized as Ecumenical by the Oriental Orthodox, and this was in response to the Patriarch of Constantinople going off the rails. Patriarch John of Antioch was not deposed; he managed to interfere with St. Cyril but without actually committing Nestorianism and while keeping his job. The four main Orthodox patriarchates are those of New Rome (Constantinople), Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem. Before the schism between the Eastern Orthodox and the Roman Catholics became official in 1054, these four patriarchates, along with that of Old Rome (the Pope was also called the Patriarch of the West) were referred to as the Pentarchy. The autocephalous (independence) of Antioch, Alexandria and Jerusalem is written into Canons 6 and 7 of the Council of Nicaea.

So to summarize, the roughly 250 Orthodox bishops and a couple of Roman legates at Ephesus deposed Nestorius and mandated the use of the Greek word Theotokos, with the agreement and support of the Roman church; these decisions were upheld at Chalcedon, albeit not to the satisfaction of the Oriental Orthodox, and Martin Luther and most other traditional Protestant leaders. agreed with the Council of Chalcedon and the status of the Virgin Mary as Theotokos, and traditional Protestants still do. So you cannot dismiss this as a Roman Catholic issue.

However, referring to St. Mary as Queen of Heaven is a Roman Catholic practice, although I find nothing objectionable in it.
Why do you think it's necessary to make encyclopedia-like posts? All of that didn't really address the fact that all of the tiles for Mary outside of "mother of my Lord" and "Mary the mother of Jesus" were invented outside of Scripture, which wasn't even the crux of my statement.
 
Upvote 0

ozso

Site Supporter
Oct 2, 2020
27,444
14,989
PNW
✟960,363.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
@Ordinary Christian also just to reiterate I am not accusing you of intentionally using a logical fallacy in your argument in an attempt to score points, I am merely pointing out that arguments from silence are technically a form of logical falllacy.

I desire your friendship and fellowship even though we have a major doctrinal disagreement, because you have a sharp mind and a capability to understand complex subjects and I believe we can learn from each other.
I don't have any complaints. Other than carping that you tend to crank out big posts that I'm too lazy to want to deal with. Both of us are debating views that were debated before we were born. And I doubt that we have much doctrinal difference outside of Mariology. That and the whole thing with the saints, the only major bone I have to pick with the RCC or the EOC.

It might surprise you that the only YouTube channel I'm subscribed to is one hosted by an Archimandrite.


Although I also listen to John MacArthur's Grace To You on the radio on the way to work. Mainly because it's the only Christian program that I know of on the radio at that time.

I'll also add that coincidentally last night on my way to work, I heard MacArthur teach a message similar to whatFather Philip taught in that video. Both talked about denying yourself and taking up your cross.
 
Last edited:
  • Friendly
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

ozso

Site Supporter
Oct 2, 2020
27,444
14,989
PNW
✟960,363.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Well in this thread I as of now am only willing to discuss whether or not MacArthur denies the title Theotokos, because I fear we are way off topic and the legitimacy of Ephesus is only tangentially relevant to the OP, and it has been debated to the point where in this thread it is no longer providing edification. If you want to continue to challenge the legitimacy of the Council of Ephesus or the term Theotokos or the definition of Nestorianism, post another thread and I will happily reply. Or I can post a thread and link you to it.
I never brought up the Council of Ephesus or the term Theotokos or the definition of Nestorianism, you did. You and others introduced all off that into this thread. All I've done in regard to it, is respond to it. I can easily just ignore all of the times they get brought up in the future if you wish.

As to Theotokos, MacArthur probably views that as a forgin term used by Catholics (Greek and Latin). In my 55 years of attending church and Bible school, I never heard it as I recall. The first time I recall hearing/reading it was here on CF. And I had to look it up. The issue with MacArthur not Jesus being God and Mary being His mother, but rather what appears to be Idolatry regarding Mary.
 
Upvote 0

Xeno.of.athens

I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven.
May 18, 2022
7,367
2,326
Perth
✟199,701.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Did you listen to all of them? Some were outright saying salvation is through Mary and praising Mary for the forgiveness an salvation she brings as a conduit to Christ. In literature approved by the RCC.
There are many titles related to Blessed Mary that are Christological, almost all of them are in fact Christological. For example ...
Blessed Mary,
the Most Holy Mother of God,​
Queen of Heaven,​
Seat of Wisdom,​
Ark of Salvation,​
Mother of Mercy,​
Mother of Love,​
Mother of the Faithful,​
Queen of Peace,​
Joy of All Who Sorrow,​
Help of Christians.​
Take a few moments to reflect on each and see if you understand how they are Christological.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

ozso

Site Supporter
Oct 2, 2020
27,444
14,989
PNW
✟960,363.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
There are many titles related to Blessed Mary that are Christological, almost all of them are in fact Christological. For example ...
Blessed Mary,
the Most Holy Mother of God,​
Queen of Heaven,​
Seat of Wisdom,​
Ark of Salvation,​
Mother of Mercy,​
Mother of Love,​
Mother of the Faithful,​
Queen of Peace,​
Joy of All Who Sorrow,​
Help of Christians.​
Take a few moments to reflect on each and see if you understand how they are Christological.
I wasn't taking about the titles, but rather all of the the published Catholic prayers to Mary that MacArthur reads out loud.
 
Upvote 0

dzheremi

Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian
Aug 27, 2014
13,897
14,168
✟458,328.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Why do you think it's necessary to make encyclopedia-like posts? All of that didn't really address the fact that all of the tiles for Mary outside of "mother of my Lord" and "Mary the mother of Jesus" were invented outside of Scripture, which wasn't even the crux of my statement.

The very idea that things that are outside of scripture in the sense of not being explicitly mentioned there in the exact words that would satisfy whatever type of Protestantism you belong to are thereby "invented" and can be summarily dismissed or rejected does your position a real disservice, as the same would have to be said regarding many things that I'm sure you accept, and many things you have mentioned in your arguments in this thread. For instance, you mention in post #976 that you never heard the term Theotokos in all your years of attending "Bible School", which is itself a phenomenon that is of course found nowhere in the scriptures, as the first theological school (itself not really equivalent to Protestant "Bible School", but probably as close as we can get to that in the ancient world, in that it provided a place with some structure around which people would learn the scriptures and their interpretation from recognized teachers) cannot be found with certainty in the written record until the mid-to-late second century, though tradition dating from long ago (mentioned in, e.g., St. Jerome and elsewhere) points to its founding by apostle and evangelist of Egypt St. Mark himself (this is the Coptic Orthodox Church's belief, and we have lists of deans of the theological school which fill in who presided over it before 190 to back that up, though they are written later, based upon the tradition that has been present in Egypt since at least the second century).

Does such a comparatively 'late' date mean that "Bible School" as a concept is inherently suspect and to be rejected? If so, why did you go there?
 
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
15,511
8,172
50
The Wild West
✟756,109.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
Why do you think it's necessary to make encyclopedia-like posts? All of that didn't really address the fact that all of the tiles for Mary outside of "mother of my Lord" and "Mary the mother of Jesus" were invented outside of Scripture, which wasn't even the crux of my statement.

Forgive me, but firstly, members on Christianity know me for my detailed responses, and secondly, for striving for accuracy in discussions. You suggested Theotokos was a Catholic term and while it is true insofar as the Orthodox possess Catholicity as well as doctrinal and liturgical Orthodoxy, the implication was the term was of Roman Catholic origin and I for one, having a great devotion to the Alexandrian and Coptic Christians in general and particular those* such as St. Cyril the Great could not accept such an error.

*Also for the benefit of @dzheremi some other Coptic and Alexandrian fathers I admire are St. Anthony the Great, his biographer St. Athanasius, the mysterious St. Paul the Hermit, St. Pishoy, St. Serapion of Thmuis, St. Alexander of Alexandria, St. Peter of Alexandria, St. Dioscorus, St. Moses the Black, St. Pachomius, the other Desert Fathers like Abba Sisoes and the many holy martyrs, especially St. Mina and the child martyr St. Abanoub. One really sees an example of true Christian living in these glorious heroes of the faith, whose lives reflect the infinite brilliance of the Holy and Life-Giving Trinity.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.