Mariolatry?

[Grip Docility]

-
​

Ok i have replied to your questions.

Now do you hold to the Oneness view that, Jesus is the Father and the Spirit and the Son!

No, that is modalism.

 

[Grip Docility]

@d taylor

If this helps, only one sermon really expresses what I believe quite well. It's a snippet of Rev. Lockridge. I would dare to say that you would agree with me that Lockridge said it quite well.

 

[Grip Docility]

@d taylor,

This song expresses how I speak of Mary.

 

[Jipsah]

Jesus was a form of Deity, no doubt.

A "form of Deity"? That doesn't mean anything. Jesus Christ is God or He isn't.

Ca
Was Mary then Mother of God? Of course not.

Of course yes. Jesus Christ is God Incarnate. The Blessed Virgin is His mother. So whether it offends uber Protestant sensibilities, the Blessed Virgin Mary is the God Bearer, the Mother of God.

Jesus is God. Not a "form of Deity", not "a part of God", not "half human half God".

1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2The same was in the beginning with God.
3All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
5And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

14And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth

God does not have a mother.

Then you must deny that Jesus is God.

However, in the form of man God did have a mother

Sorry, but that's simple heresy. Our Lord is not "God in the form of a man", He is God, end of.

, who had nothing whatsoever to do with producing a divine child.

Except being His mother.

She just "had him."

The same can be said of your mother, or anyone else's

The emphasis here was not on Mary, but on the Lord, who Mary carried.

That's like saying that becuase no one remembers King David's mother that he didn't have one.

In Mary coming, she brought the Lord with her. You are turning this around to be about Mary, rather than about the Lord she carried.

Sorry, that's just gibberish.

 

[Valletta]

You are very poor at arguing things. Language is not geometric, but a vehicle for conveying information. A word, such as "all," can mean many things. But it is *context* that matters, and the thing that defines what "all" means in a particular instance.

In this case, "all" is not exhaustively referring to Jesus. It's common sense, but you have to use it.

If I say "everyone is getting sick," the context would be determining that "everyone" does not include everyone in all places and in all times. The common sense understanding would be that I'm referring generally to a trend that has become dominant and that *many*--not "all," are getting sick. It *appears* that "all" are getting sick. You are clearly playing with words.

In some cases "all" would be referring, in context, to all of *created* mankind, excluding the Son of God whose body was created but whose divine personality was uncreated. By definition he would be excluded.

But then again, understanding this requires "common sense." And I wish you would use it?

The context is not about Mary. Quite simply "all" either means every individual or it does not. So far you've admitted you consider Jesus to be an exception. I've brought up babies now twice, and you've avoided a specific response twice. What sin do you accuse newborns of committing? What about severely handicapped people who don't have the capacity to make moral decisions?

 

[d taylor]

No, that is modalism.

-
​

Well here is my belief, you take it however you want.

Jesus is God, He, Jesus is God The Son and has all the fullness of the Godhead as The Father and The Holy Spirit has. Meaning Jesus is not a lesser part of The Godhead. Jesus is co equal with The Father and The Spirit.

Jesus is not The Father or Jesus is not The Holy Spirit. The only way to receive God's free gift of Eternal Life and become a permanent born again child of God is to believe in Jesus. Believing that Jesus is who He said He is: The Son of God The promised Messiah, the resurrection and the Life.
Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?”
She said to Him, “Yes, Lord, I believe that You are the Christ, the Son of God, who is to come into the world.”

And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.

So there you go, take however you want.

 

[Grip Docility]

​

Jesus is God, He, Jesus is God The Son and has all the fullness of the Godhead as The Father and The Holy Spirit has. Meaning Jesus is not a lesser part of The Godhead. Jesus is co equal with The Father and The Spirit.

Jesus is not The Father or Jesus is not The Holy Spirit. The only way to receive God's free gift of Eternal Life and become a permanent born again child of God is to believe in Jesus. Believing that Jesus is who He said He is: The Son of God The promised Messiah, the resurrection and the Life.
Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?”
She said to Him, “Yes, Lord, I believe that You are the Christ, the Son of God, who is to come into the world.”

And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.

So there you go, take however you want.

You believe as I have known you believe. You express it well, in this post. We do not disagree on any words with this quote. Iron sharpens Iron.

All Love in the Highest Name above All Names to you, D Taylor, sibling who is IN Jesus Christ.

Thank you for patiently discussing this with me back and forth on this thread.

 

[Jipsah]

Nobody is denying that Jesus' mother gave birth to a divine child!

I'm sorry, whose mother was that? Are you referring to Jesus, Who is God Incarnate? Last post you said, quite emphatically, that He didn't have a mother. Now you agree that He did.

What I deny is that God the Father has a "mother!"

One and inseparable, OM. Not three gods, but One God. There's no prying them apart.

It is heresy to say that God has a Mother

No, it is simple fact. And in light of the ancient Creeds of the Church, to deny that the Blessed Virgin is the mother of God is heretical.

and is not a self-existent entity.

God is obviously a self-existent entity. No, the BVM didn't create God. Then again, no mother "creates" her child. Every living soul is a creation of God.

In saying Jesus had a mother is not the same thing as saying God the Father has a Mother!!

And what I see you saying is that God the father is God, but God the Son is Not God. That, mi compa, is heresy, of the rankest kind.

You heretic!

You shoud have been looking in the mirror when you typed that. That is Good New Fashioned American Protestantism reaching back across the centuries to pull Nestorianism out of the junk yard of history and peddle it as though it had improved with age. It hasn't, it was heresy back then, and it's heresy now. But it sorts well with the modalist view of the Trinity that was the standard Sunday School fare back in my Baptist days.

This isn't about the Deity of Christ. It isn't about Christology.

You'd think the two had at least some relationship to each other, wouldn't you?

It is rather about the doctrine of God.

And Christ is God.

And that holds that God is eternally self-existent, and the source of all else.

Which is impossible to gainsay.

He did not have a Mother since He had no beginning.

Is Christ God? Simple binary answer set, He is, or He is not. If not, then go off and be an Aryan. If so, then God Has A Mother.

I understand Trinitarian theology

So far I've seen little evidence of that. It looks a lot more Aryan or Nestorian.

, and we are not arguing Christology.

Inseparable. Christ is God.

I've never said Jesus is partly God and partly Man

A "form of Deity", was it?

. God did not simply inhabit Man, whether as a spirit or as a mind, nor as the Word of God.

Dunno what that is supposed to mean.

Jesus is entirely the product of God's Word representing the full Deity of God. I've neve said anything else.

Jesus is God or He is not. Oerthodoxy says Jesus is God, no circumlocution allowed.

My opinion is: tu no comprendes!

Yo intiendo. So, do you believe that Jesus is God? A yes or no will suffice.

God as an omnipotent, infinite Being had no mother to give Him birth. But as the Son of God it is said that the God-Man had a mother, namely Mary. I can go with this.

Then you're embracing the Nestorian Heresy.

And from my long experience, that, along with Modalism, is the common viewpoint of most American Protestants.

 

[Lost4words]

I agree that you are "lost for words."

Awesome. You keep agreeing! Woof!

 

[Jipsah]

-
​

Jesus is God

So far so good.

, He, Jesus is God The Son and has all the fullness of the Godhead as The Father and The Holy Spirit has. Meaning Jesus is not a lesser part of The Godhead. Jesus is co equal with The Father and The Spirit.

If I'm reading it properly, you're bang on so far.

Jesus is not The Father or Jesus is not The Holy Spirit.

You're on a roll...

The only way to receive God's free gift of Eternal Life and become a permanent born again child of God is to believe in Jesus.

Not gonna argue soteriology right now, but in simplest terms that isn't wrong.

So back to the original contention here. If Jesus is God (and we seem to agree on that point), and Mary is Jesus mother (which I believe that we agree on), then Mary is the Mother of God.

Same as saying Meekyung is the Mother of Jipsah. She didn't "create" me, God did, as He does us all. Otherwise we'd simply be animals. She contributed half the genes that make up my physical self, as did my dad. (Aside here - it seems here that our Lord didn't have a physical father, so all His physical attributes came from the Blessed Virgin. So no one gets to claim to be the physical Father of God, and afaik no one makes such a claim)

So I din't see a real bone of contention between us here except that you don't like the idea of calling the BVM the Mother of God. But again. my position is simple: Jesus is God, the Blessed Virgin is His Mother, ergo Mary is the Mother of God.

 

[Jipsah]

It's the same old argument. Mary is the mother of Jesus.

Yes.

Jesus is God.

Yes.

So Mary is the mother of God.

Yes.

You miss the point, or refuse to acknowledge it.

The point is that Protestants don't think we ought to say that, because they aremn't really comfortable with the idea of Jesus being the Word Who was made flesh and dwelt among us.

That; and it's Just Too Catholic,

There is a difference between saying Mary is the mother of Jesus and saying Mary is the mother of God.

Only if you're trying to dodge around the fact that Jesus is God.

The difference is if we mean by "Mother of God" that Deity in its infinite form has a "mother."

Jesus is God Incarnate of He isn't. No weaseling.

It does not.

Deity has a mother only in its finite form.

God has become an "it" now. Hmmmm...

But you have a problem with the word "form," and apparently with any Bible translator that translates Philippians 2 as such?

As you're using it it seems to imply the "shape" or "appearance" of God, which is of course bogus. Jesus is God.

 

[RandyPNW]

The Septuagint was the first complete Bible that could be utilized by individuals and contained the entire OT, as well as the Deuterocanonical books. The practice of using the Greek word kyrios was carried forward in the NT.

I've not disputed whether "master" can be applied to God. He is indeed a "master" and a "lord." But the word "Lord" is not always synonymous with "God," no. It is an interpretive fallacy to apply the word "Lord" in the same way in different contexts.

Applying "Lord" to Jesus may indeed be a reference to the lordship of God. But in this matter you are confusing God the Father with God the Son. God the Father was *not* in the womb of Mary!

This is the picture of Semi-Arianism, if not full blown Arianism.

You apparently don't understand what Arianism was? It viewed Jesus as somewhere between God and Man, but not God Himself. Jesus was God in the form of the Son. The Son, however, was not the Father. That is Modalism.

Thirdly, the very word "FORM" as it is used in Philippians 2 is not how you are using it, but is fully a proof to the very usage of the matter being expressed by the people that you are disagreeing with.

Yes, Philippians indicates Jesus was the "form" of God--not matter what synonym you wish to use. Do you believe that all synonyms, because they are different words, are not really synonyms?

You are saying that Jesus is not God.

Not at all. I'm saying the Son is not the Father. Jesus is God's Word made flesh. Jesus is not the Father. Rather, he is God in human form, aka the Son.

Since you don't seem to understand the difference between the Incarnation and Sabellianism, I will cut this short.

 

[RandyPNW]

@Xeno.of.athens stated that the Child is Jesus, thus, even if you focus on Israel, that the Child's mother is clearly Mary.

Do you deny that simple truth within scripture?

Yes, it's already been answered. It's a metaphorical "mother" of Jesus and of the 12 tribes of Israel. Mary did not give birth to all 12 tribes of Israel!

 

[RandyPNW]

Such a divine and beautiful mystery. Yes, that infinite, timeless, unborn, uncreated God took human flesh born of a woman.

You instantly show no understanding of the issue! Mary did not give birth to God the Father! Did Mary give birth to a limited form of God? Yes! Jesus was the Word of God, but only presented the Father in his human form.

 

[RandyPNW]

A "form of Deity"? That doesn't mean anything. Jesus Christ is God or He isn't.

I've already argued this.
Phil 2.6 Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
7 rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!

 

[RandyPNW]

The context is not about Mary. Quite simply "all" either means every individual or it does not.

You reject the rules of grammar, which require "context" for any word to be properly understood, including the word "all."

 

[RandyPNW]

I'm sorry, whose mother was that? Are you referring to Jesus, Who is God Incarnate? Last post you said, quite emphatically, that He didn't have a mother. Now you agree that He did.

No, you're confused. Jesus had a mother. God the Father did not have a mother.

Then you're embracing the Nestorian Heresy.

No, I accept Christ had 2 natures, divine and human, simultaneously and inseparably. The Father, however, is not the Son. They are the expression of 2 Persons--not just 1 Person.

I accept the designation of Mary as "Mother of God" in the sense she bore the Son of God, but not God the Father.

 

[jas3]

You instantly show no understanding of the issue! Mary did not give birth to God the Father!

No, but she gave birth to God. What you and @d taylor seem to be missing is the concept of the Persons of the Trinity being homoousios - "consubstantial" or "of the same essence." This is how the Son can be God and the Father can be God without the Son being the Father, and without the Son or the Father being only "part of God" or three gods.

 

[RandyPNW]

The point is that Protestants don't think we ought to say that, because they aremn't really comfortable with the idea of Jesus being the Word Who was made flesh and dwelt among us.

You obviously don't know Protestants or wish to slander them. I don't know of a single Protestant who rejects Jesus being the Word of God made flesh!

 

[RandyPNW]

No, but she gave birth to God. What you and @d taylor seem to be missing is the concept of the Persons of the Trinity being homoousios - "consubstantial" or "of the same essence." This is how the Son can be God and the Father can be God without the Son being the Father, and without the Son or the Father being only "part of God" or three gods.

What makes you think I don't understand that? I believe the Father and Son are united by divine "substance."

At the same time I don't believe Mary gave birth to God the Father. When God the Father chose to reveal Himself as God the Son He made a distinction between 2 Persons within the Godhead. The Son is the product of God's Word assuming a finite form of Deity. He is infinite in His origins, but finite in his human expression.