Mariolatry?

[Jipsah]

I never said Jesus wasn't God and didn't have a Mother.

Ah, so you do believe that the Blessed Virgin is the Mother of God. Glad we got that sorted out.
Happy I could be of help!

 

[George95]

The "Mother of God" must be some kind of God herself!

It has been explained on several times that is not the case. As the Mother of God, why would we not revere her and honor her? Surely her words of "All generations shall call me Blessed" mean exactly that?

 

[Jipsah]

It was originally used to defend the Deity of Christ and the Trinity.

Still is. I think we've seen a bit of that right here.

Later, Catholics used it to elevate Mary to heights God never envisioned for her.

Roman Catholics aren't the only folks who call the Blessed Vigin the Mother of God and/or Theotoks/God Bearer. For example, I'm Anglican. not RCC., and you'll find out Orthodox brethren also share that belief.

She was not a perpetual virgin, with no bearing on the topic at hand.

Different discussion, with no bearin on the topic at hand.

, was not, sinless, was not superior to all other women (and men), and is never called the "Queen of Heaven."

Other points to argue if you insist, but none that are relevant to the fact that the BVM is the God Bearer, the Mother of God.

Hero-worship, or a form of idolatry, at worst, is my opinion.

"My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior; Because He has regarded the lowliness of His handmaid; for behold, henceforth all generations shall call me blessed..."

Though this may be read as Catholic hatred

Yeah, pretty much. Doesn't help support your arguments in the least, though.

As brothers and sisters in Christ I would only plead with them to stop being so sectarian.

And simply embrace whatever it is that American Protestants believe ay any given time.

and controlling in their denomination.

Which denomination is that? Most of Christendom venerates the Blessed Virgin as the Mother of God/God Bearer.

I know--probably falls on deaf ears. But maybe some????

Sure. American Protestants., mostly.

I said in Post 18: 1) The "Mother of God" title originated with a different argument, with arguing for the Trinity.

Yep. It's still about that.

Mary gave birth to a God-Man--not obviously to God the Father.

Jesus Christ is God, the Word, the Creator. The only way you can argue that His mother is not the Mother of God is to declare that He is not God.

So painting her as "Mother of God" has migrated into something else more akin with Greek mythology

Baloney.

The "Mother of God" must be some kind of God herself!

No, she just has to be the Mother of Christ.

 

[Jipsah]

Brother, I just don't think you understand my argument?

I'm not all sure that you understand your argument.

This has never been about whether the God-Man has a "Mommy.

There's the "God-Man" again. Yet another "Yes, He's God, but..." maneuver. It ain't working, mate. The "Mommy" part was uncalled for.

1) The "Mother of God" title originated with a different argument, with arguing for the Trinity.

Still there, as we're continuing to see. "God-Man", right?

Mary gave birth to a God-Man

A descripton of the Creator of the Universe of which you seem to be very fond. "Yeah, He's God, but...".

--not obviously to God the Father.

Irrelevant. That's the tri-theist tack again, with God the father as the Real God, while the Holy Spirit and the Son are subordinate deities. WEe're back to defending the Trinity again, aren't we? And that's what it always comes down to.

So painting her as "Mother of God" has migrated into something else more akin with Greek mythology.

If you see the Holy Trinity as akin to a mini-pantheon, perhaps.

The "Mother of God" must be some kind of God herself!

Nah, just a run-of-the-mill Baptist housewife whose name was drawn to give birth to a God-Man. Happens all the time in Greek mythology. Ain't no big deal.

 

[jas3]

You need to go back and read how this started. I said precisely what you said. I never had a problem with theotokos when understood properly as an argument for the Trinity.

Reading back over the earlier posts, I see you did say that, but in that case I don't know why you insist that the term has evolved in meaning to require a deification of Mary.

So when theotokos is used to glorify Mary as "Queen of Heaven," as sinless, and as someone we should pray to, I denounce that particular use of the term, "Mother of God."

Then it seems to me that your argument should be that these conclusions can't be drawn from Mary being the mother of God, not that Mary isn't the mother of God, or to object to the title on the basis that Mary isn't the mother of the Father or the Holy Ghost.

The "Mommy" part was uncalled for.

In all fairness, it was @Grip Docility who first used that, including in the part @RandyPNW quoted. I cringe a little every time I read that word in this context.

 

[Grip Docility]

Reading back over the earlier posts, I see you did say that, but in that case I don't know why you insist that the term has evolved in meaning to require a deification of Mary.
Then it seems to me that your argument should be that these conclusions can't be drawn from Mary being the mother of God, not that Mary isn't the mother of God, or to object to the title on the basis that Mary isn't the mother of the Father or the Holy Ghost.
In all fairness, it was @Grip Docility who first used that, including in the part @RandyPNW quoted. I cringe a little every time I read that word in this context.

@Jipsah and @jas3

I apologize for the offense I’ve caused and ask forgiveness from my siblings. I’m kind of a little kid at heart and think simple thoughts on big matters. It was the way that the Holy Spirit convicted me on the matter. No matter how well spoken I sound sometimes, in my flesh, I’m all crayons and construction paper.

Omnis Love to Omnis of you!

- Grip

 

[d taylor]

-

​

The only reason i see for saying Mary is the mother of God. Instead of saying Mary gave birth to the Messiah, Jesus or Son of God like The Bible states.

Is to elevate Mary to a position of deity. Because saying Mary is the mother of God by people who do. Is always accompanied by the belief about Mary that, she was sinless, that she was taken to heaven, that she remained a virgin her whole life, who make Mary the women in Revelation 12 and that she can hear and receive prayers. Making her all hearing and having some type of omniscient.

 

[d taylor]

-

​

As I am not a writer and do not always communicate thoughts on a topic precisely. But here is part of an answered question from the website Got Questions.


From Got Questions:
We should distinguish the term Theotokos from mother of God, because there is a subtle yet important difference. The term mother of God could be taken wrongly as implying that Mary was the source or originator of God, similar to how Juno was the mother of Vulcan in Roman mythology. Of course, Christianity teaches that God is eternal and that Jesus Christ has a pre-existent, divine nature. The idea that Mary is the mother of God in the sense that she was the source of God or somehow predated God or is herself part of the Godhead is patently unbiblical.

The term Theotokos, on the other hand, is more specific and less open to being misconstrued. Theotokos simply implies that Mary carried God in her womb and gave birth to Him. Mary was the human agent through whom the eternal Son of God took on a human body and a human nature and entered the world. The term Theotokos was a succinct expression of the biblical teaching of the Incarnation, and that is how the Council of Ephesus used the word. Mary is the “God-bearer” in that within her body the divine person of God the Son took on human nature in addition to His pre-existing divine nature. Since Jesus is fully God and fully man, it is correct to say that Mary “bore” God.


Want to read the full written answer
Is Mary the mother of God (Theotokos)? | GotQuestions.org

 

[George95]

-

​

The only reason i see for saying Mary is the mother of God. Instead of saying Mary gave birth to the Messiah, Jesus or Son of God like The Bible states.

Is to elevate Mary to a position of deity. Because saying Mary is the mother of God by people who do. Is always accompanied by the belief about Mary that, she was sinless, that she was taken to heaven, that she remained a virgin her whole life, who make Mary the women in Revelation 12 and that she can hear and receive prayers. Making her all hearing and having some type of omniscient.

Respectfully, you’re seeming to miss that she gave birth to the Savior who is God. Unless I’m missing something, that’s not just something minuscule. That and that she was hand picked, so my question is why would you not honor her and realize the connection she has?

 

[d taylor]

Respectfully, you’re seeming to miss that she gave birth to the Savior who is God. Unless I’m missing something, that’s not just something minuscule. That and that she was hand picked, so my question is why would you not honor her and realize the connection she has?

-
​

Mary gave birth to God's human nature, not God's divine nature. In Mary's womb these natures were combined to bring to humanity the God-man, Jesus
Mariolatry?

 

[George95]

-
​

Mary gave birth to God's human nature, not God's divine nature. In Mary's womb these natures were combined to bring to humanity the God-man, Jesus
Mariolatry?

No one ever said she gave birth to God, but your post clearly shows you’re splitting his natures into two separate when both are not to be separated.

 

[RandyPNW]

Reading back over the earlier posts, I see you did say that, but in that case I don't know why you insist that the term has evolved in meaning to require a deification of Mary.

I did explain that in the clearest possible way. While "Mother of God" indicates that Mary mothered Christ, a divine son, over time the belief that Mary's role as mother of Christ came to present her as "Queen of Heaven," as a "perpetual virgin," as "sinless," as superior to all other women, and as someone to pray to or to have her pray for others. Her name is used in incantations, in rituals, and even to introduce posts here, as if invoking her name brings prophetic value to whatever is being said.

Then it seems to me that your argument should be that these conclusions can't be drawn from Mary being the mother of God, not that Mary isn't the mother of God, or to object to the title on the basis that Mary isn't the mother of the Father or the Holy Ghost.

I've made my positions clear--you just failed to see them apparently? Jesus is the one we worship--we all agree that Mary is not to be worshiped. Paul saw himself as "nothing." Mary also is "nothing," just as we all are "nothing."

Christ has the glory, the honor, the virtue, and deserves the exclusive praise. Exalting humans or angels is an exercise in futility.

We worship one God. All of humanity, except for Christ, are sinners and capable of error. Even the prophets stooped low, degrading themselves before the presence of God. They knew we are nothing!

 

[Grip Docility]

No one ever said she gave birth to God, but your post clearly shows you’re splitting his natures into two separate when both are not to be separated.

Nestorianism may be a topic that get's addressed in the near future. It seems to be undermining peoples understanding of the Incarnation quite strongly.

 

[d taylor]

No one ever said she gave birth to God, but your post clearly shows you’re splitting his natures into two separate when both are not to be separated.

-
​

So mother of God does not mean she gave birth to God. Or as catholics and others of the same belief write Mother of God

So you do not believe in Mary's womb the two natures were combined by God, so God could bring forth the God-man to humanity.

You believe that in Mary's womb from The Holy Spirit the God-man came to Mary already one nature. So Jesus' divine and human nature were not brought to a union in Mary's womb.

 

[Grip Docility]

-
​

So mother of God does not mean she gave birth to God. Or as catholics and others of the same belief write Mother of God

So you do not believe in Mary's womb the two natures were combined by God, so God could bring forth the God-man to humanity.

You believe that in Mary's womb from The Holy Spirit the God-man came to Mary already one nature. So Jesus' divine and human nature were not brought to a union in Mary's womb.

In my opinion,

If a person insists that Mary did not give birth to God, then, they are saying that the Man Jesus was Just a Man.

By saying that "So Jesus' divine and human nature were not brought to a union in Mary's womb." a person would literally be saying that Jesus was a mere Man and nothing more. They would also be denying that The Word which was God, has always been God and was With God became Flesh.

John did not write that The Word didn't really BECOME flesh, but simply shared a room next to the soul of a mortal human that became flesh.

John wrote that God became flesh (period).

Any other belief than The Father is His Father and Mary is His Biological Mother, which led to the Birth of God the Word become Flesh, through Mary, doesn't align with scripture (IMO).

 

[d taylor]

This is simple Logic.

If you insist that Mary did not give birth to God, then, you are saying that the Man Jesus was Just a Man.

By saying that " So Jesus' divine and human nature were not brought to a union in Mary's womb." you are literally saying that Jesus was a mere Man and nothing more. You are also denying that The Word which was God, has always been God and was With God became Flesh.

John did not write that The Word didn't really BECOME flesh, but simply shared a room next to the soul of a mortal human that became flesh.

John wrote that God became flesh (period).

I do not say this to be rude, but to point out that you are unknowingly denying that Jesus is God.

-

​

Do you do this often, say people wrote and accuse them of saying something they did not write or say.

 

[Grip Docility]

-

​

Do you do this often, say people wrote and accuse them of saying something they did not write or say.

I will correct the way I worded that. I apologize. Please forgive me. I will drop a mention and link after it is fixed.

My Brother in Jesus @d taylor, I beg your forgiveness. I have fixed the reply. Link Here

 

[d taylor]

I will correct the way I worded that. I apologize. Please forgive me. I will drop a mention and link after it is fixed.

My Brother in Jesus @d taylor, I beg your forgiveness. I have fixed the reply. Link Here

-

​

Do not apologize when you do not mean it, i mean you are giving winner symbols to other posters who are also saying things i said that i did not say. So really just keep you post like they are, it does not bother me that i am accused of something. It happens around here all the time, but i am not harmed by peoples opinion of me.

 

[Grip Docility]

-

​

Do not apologize when you do not mean it, i mean you are giving winner symbols to other posters who are also saying things i said that i did not say. So really just keep you post like they are, it does not bother me that i am accused of something. It happens around here all the time, but i am not harmed by peoples opinion of me.

I apologize sincerely. I will leave this thread now, because I have obviously offended you, and you are rightfully offended by me, because I did mess up the wording of my post. I think demeanor on this thread is heated, because it is about such very critical doctrinal matters.

I'm glad you don't care about anyone's opinion except for God's. That is righteous. I'm in a painful place in my life at the moment and I'm certain that my flesh got in the way of the Holy Spirit on that last post.

I was genuinely seeking your forgiveness.

I am sorry, once more and do actively seek your forgiveness, but you do not have to give it, for certain.

All Love to you in Jesus Christ, Brother in Him D taylor

 

[RandyPNW]

In my opinion,

If a person insist that Mary did not give birth to God, then, they are saying that the Man Jesus was Just a Man.

Yes, that issue has been dealt with repeatedly. Nobody in this thread, that I'm aware of, has a problem with saying that Mary mothered a divine representative. She was mother of a form of God.

So your concerns are understood, but have not been the issue. For me, the issue has been using the term "Mother of God" to elevate Mary beyond a mere mortal, to being a mystical creature we should pray to. So it is the abuse of the term that bothers me--not the term itself or what it was intended to mean.

If you continue to harp on the Trinitarian aspect of this term I can only conclude that you wish to use this to misdirect the real issue, which is Mary's undue exaltation. In this regard you may wish to digress again by claiming that the Bible indicates she is blessed for being "Mother of God." But that, again, is not the issue.

Clearly Mary is blessed. But the real issue is: what is the nature of her blessing? Is she blessed by becoming "Queen of Heaven" and someone to be prayed to? Is she kept from ever sinning, and somehow more holy for never having borne a child by procreation?

No, she was blessed simply by being used by God, just as can be applied to any one of us who take on the name "Christian." Those who are least in the kingdom of heaven was greater than John the Baptist. Why do you exalt Mary as a kind of super-human or angel? That is what I would ask of Catholics.