Do you agree with this statement?

Hank77 · Aug 29, 2015

patricius79 said:
How is it taken out of context?

Even if I quoted other things the he said, that do not lead to your conclusion, you would not believe me. Go read the writings for yourself if you really want to know.

patricius79 · Aug 29, 2015

Hank77 said:
Even if I quoted other things the he said, that do not lead to your conclusion, you would not believe me. Go read the writings for yourself if you really want to know.

Could you explain what Irenaeus means when he calls Mary the "cause of our salvation"?

justinangel · Aug 29, 2015

Albion said:
Cause of our salvation does not equate to means of salvation.

I think Irenaeus would be shocked to hear his observation so incorrectly presented. It may also serve as a good example of what's wrong with making "Tradition" one's guide to doctrine.

So you don't believe that an obedient act of faith is an instrumental means of salvation? Or is it only the blood of Christ (sola Christo)?

PAX

Berean777 · Aug 29, 2015

Lion King said:
"Without the Virgin Mary, there would be no Jesus Christ. Without the Virgin Mary there would be no Mother Church."

Yes or No?

Without the Virgin, there would be no Jesus Christ?

Without the Living Word there would be no Virgin.

Without the Virgin Mary there would be no Mother Church?

The Living Word is the Church. Jesus said My Church, for we are his living stones that make up his church. The Living Word made Mary HIS SERVANT, one of those living stones amongst the many.

Berean777 · Aug 29, 2015

Everything is centred around the Living Word, for he is called the Living Vine and Mary, you and I are branches attached to this Living Vine.

Berean777 · Aug 29, 2015

Cappadocious said:
With a couple modifications:

*There would be no incarnate Jesus Christ.

There would be no Mother Church in Christ, because the assembly of God as such pre-existed the Virgin Mary.

I love the Eastern Orthodox they are Living Word focussed who predates all creation including Mary, for that is why he is eternal and Mary is not. Mary is the creature, the servant of the almighty God.

This was contended in 425AD by the church of the East who called Mary Christokos rather than Theotokos, meaning she is the mother of the flesh, who is the Christ, Jesus of Nazereth. She is not the mother of the Living Word who exists before her, that is, from Eternity to eternity.

topcare · Aug 29, 2015

The Orthodox called her Theotokos

The Virgin Mary is the Theotokos, the mother of Jesus Christ, the Son and Word of God. She conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit. She was cared for by her betrothed husband, Joseph, who took the child and his mother into his home as his own. One very strong tradition in the Orthodox Church holds that the birth of Jesus was also miraculous and left Mary's virginity intact as a sign; it is also the tradition of the Church that Joseph and Mary did not have relations after the birth of Jesus. She is also called Panagia, the "All-Holy," indicating her closeness to God in her obedience.

The title Theotokos (in Greek, Θεοτοκος) is a Greek word that means "God-bearer" or "Birth-giver to God."

----------

Adoption at the Third Ecumenical Council

As a title for the Virgin Mary, Theotokos was recognized by the Orthodox Church at Third Ecumenical Council held at Ephesus in 431. It had already been in use for some time in the devotional and liturgical life of the Church. The theological significance of the title is to emphasize that Mary's son, Jesus, is fully God, as well as fully human, and that Jesus' two natures (divine and human) were united in a single Person of the Trinity. The competing view at that council was that Mary should be called Christotokos instead, meaning "Birth-giver to Christ." This was the view advocated by Nestorius, then Patriarch of Constantinople. The intent behind calling her Christotokos was to restrict her role to be only the mother of "Christ's humanity" and not his divine nature.

Nestorius' view was anathematized by the Council as heresy, (see Nestorianism), since it was considered to be dividing Jesus into two distinct persons, one who was Son of Mary, and another, the divine nature, who was not. It was defined that although Jesus has two natures, human and divine, these are eternally united in one personhood. Because Mary is the mother of God the Son, she is therefore duly entitled Theotokos.

Calling Mary the Theotokos or the Mother of God (Μητηρ Θεου) was never meant to suggest that Mary was coeternal with God, or that she existed before Jesus Christ or God existed. The Church acknowledges the mystery in the words of this ancient hymn: "He whom the entire universe could not contain was contained within your womb, O Theotokos."

The title "Theotokos" continues to be used frequently in the hymns of the Orthodox Church.

------------

The title Our All-holy, immaculate, most blessed and glorified Lady, the Theotokos and Ever-Virgin Mary (Greek: Τῆς Παναγίας, ἀχράντου, ὑπερευλογημένης, ἐνδόξου, δεσποίνης ἡμῶν Θεοτόκου καὶ ἀειπαρθένου Μαρίας) is often used in Orthodox services when Mary is mentioned.

http://orthodoxwiki.org/Theotokos

To call Mary Christokos is heresy in the East

Berean777 · Aug 29, 2015

John 1:1-4
In the beginning was the Living Word, and the Living Word was with God, and the Living Word was God. The same Living Word was in the beginning with God. All things were made by the Living Word; and without the Living Word was not any thing made that was made. In the Living Word was life; and the life was the light of men.

Mary the mother of the flesh, who is the Christ, Jesus of Nazereth. (Christokos)

Mary the mother of the Living Word. (Theotokos)

Mary mother of God (Living Word)

According to John 1:1-4 the Living Word who created all things should be by the same method be called the Father of all of Creation? Yes/No.

No one neither the Eastern church called her Theotokos up until 425AD council of Ephesus.

If the Living Word is eternal according to John 1:1-4 and Mary is not, how could Mary who came after be the mother of the one who existed before her?

Berean777 · Aug 29, 2015

I will stick to the belief of the Church fathers from the disciples, the 72 apostles, the church at Babylon all the way up to 425AD.

Those early church fathers can't be wrong can they?

Berean777 · Aug 29, 2015

I will stick to the belief of the Church fathers from the disciples, the 70 apostles, the church at Babylon all the way up to 425AD.

Those early church fathers can't be wrong can they?

List of Catholicoi of Seleucia-Ctesiphon and Patriarchs of the East until 1552Edit
Legendary eraEdit

Shimun Keepa (Saint Peter) (33–64)[7]

Thoma Shlikha, (Saint Thomas) [8]

Tulmay (St. Bartholomew the Apostle) [8]

Mar Addai, (St. Thaddeus) of the Seventy disciples (c.66–c.87)

Aggai of the Seventy disciples (c.81)

Mari of the Seventy disciples (c.87–c.120)

1 Aggai (Mar Aggai) (120–152 AD) disciple of Mar Addai and spiritual director of Mar Mari

2 Saint Mari (Mar Mari) (152–185 AD)— During his days the bishopric was formally established at Seleucia-Ctesiphon

Seleucia-Ctesiphon eraEdit
See also: Al-Mada'in

3 Abris (Abres or Ahrasius) (121–137 / 185–201 AD)

4 Abraham (Abraham I of Kashker) (159–171 / 201–213 AD)

5 Yaʿqob I (Mar Yacob I) (c. 172-190 / 213–231 AD)

6 Ebid M’shikha (191–203)[8]

7 Ahadabui (Ahha d'Aboui) (204–220 / 231–246) - First bishop of the East to get statikon as Catholicos. Ordained in 231 AD in Jerusalem Council.

8 Shahaloopa of Kashker (Shahlufa) (220–224 / 246–266 AD)

vacant (224–c. 280)

Metropolitan of Seleucia-Ctesiphon elevated as titular CatholicosEdit
Around 280, visiting bishops consecrated Papa bar Aggai as Bishop of Seleucia-Ctesiphon, thereby establishing the succession.[9] With him, heads of the church took the title Catholicos.

9 Papa bar Aggai (Mar Papa bar Gaggai (c. 280–317 / 267–336 AD)

vacant (317–329)

10 Shemʿon bar Sabbaʿe (Simeon Barsabae) (329–341 / 337–350 AD)

11 Shahdost (Shalidoste) (341–343 / 350–352 AD)

12 Barbaʿshmin (Barbashmin) (343–346 / 352–360 AD)

vacant (c. 346–c. 363)

13 Tomarsa (Toumarsa) (363–371 / 360–368 AD)

vacant (c. 371–c. 377)

14 Qayyoma (Qaioma) (370–375 / 377–399 AD)

15 Isaac (375–386 / 399–410 AD)

Catholicos of the East with jurisdiction over Eastern provincesEdit
Isaac was recognised as 'Grand Metropolitan' and Primate of the Church of the East at the Synod of Seleucia-Ctesiphon in 410. The acts of this Synod were later edited by the Patriarch Joseph (552–567) to grant him the title of Catholicos as well. This title for Patriarch Isaac in fact only came into use towards the end of the fifth century.

16 Ahha (Ahhi) (386–393 / 410–414 AD)

17 Yahballaha I (Yab-Alaha I) (393–398 / 415–420 AD)

18 Maʿna (Maana) (398–400 AD / 420)

19 Farbokht (Frabokht) (401–420 AD / 421)

topcare · Aug 29, 2015

Berean777 said:
Mary the mother of the flesh, who is the Christ, Jesus of Nazereth. (Christokos)

Mary the mother of the Living Word. (Theotokos)

Mary mother of God (Living Word)

According to John 1:1-4 the Living Word who created all things should be by the same method be called the Father of all of Creation? Yes/No.

No one neither the Eastern church called her Theotokos up until 425AD council of Ephesus.

If the Living Word is eternal according to John 1:1-4 and Mary is not, how could Mary who came after be a the mother of the one who existed before her?

Because Christ cannot be separated, He is always fully God and always fully Man. The EO did call Mary Theotokos before that as the EO article stated if you read the article and at the council officially recognized Theotokos and condemned Christokos strongly as heresy. Christ is not two separate entities God and Man, He is the perfect unification of Man and God. Always fully God and Always fully Man so the term Theotokos is very apporiate

topcare · Aug 29, 2015

Berean777 said:
I will stick to the belief of the Church fathers from the disciples, the 72 apostles, the church at Babylon all the way up to 425AD.

Those early church fathers can't be wrong can they?

You may delve into ancient heresies as you wish, I will not stop you.

Berean777 · Aug 29, 2015

Even though they are inseparable it doesn't mean she is mother of the Living Word.

This is the heresy that Mary the creature is the mother of the Living Word. The early church fathers certainly thought that Mary being a creature created by the Living Word cannot be called his mother regardless of his inseparable natures. Mary doesn't even own her nature, the Living word does own his nature and owns Mary's for that matter as well.

Berean777 · Aug 29, 2015

For further elaboration the early church fathers believed in the inseparable natures of man and God. Though the Living Word chose his natures by virtue of his will and his plan through the Virgin.

Mary as the creature on the other hand was handed down her nature by the Living Word who through prophesies purposed her to elect the nature of Godman. Mary didn't decide her nature and so the purpose was that of the Living Word and not Mary's that is why Mary said I am his maid servant let him do as he pleases.

To make Mary the will behind the active plan of the Living Word is the heresy that needs to be put to rest once and for all. It was not Mary's will but he Living Word's will through her.

If we can't differentiate this then sure enough we make Mary the mother of the Living Word. This is pure ignorance at best.

topcare · Aug 29, 2015

Berean777 said:
Even though they are inseparable it doesn't mean she is mother of the Living Word.

This is the heresy that Mary the creature is the mother of the Living Word. The early church fathers certainly thought that Mary being a creature created by the Living Word cannot be called his mother regardless of his inseparable natures. Mary doesn't even own her nature, the Living word does own his nature and owns Mary's for that matter as well.

Mary may be created but that does not mean she is not the Theotokos. If She was not than their is no Christ, He is always both. Your heresy is that you assume that Christ became only man at His birth. Here is the ancient heresy:

Nestorianism is a Christological heresy which originated in the Church in the 5th century out of an attempt to rationally explain and understand the incarnation of the divine Logos, the Second Person of the Holy Trinity as the man Jesus Christ. Nestorianism teaches that the human and divine essences of Christ are separate and that there are two persons, the man Jesus Christ and the divine Logos, which dwelt in the man. Thus, Nestorians reject such terminology as "God suffered" or "God was crucified", because they believe that the man Jesus Christ suffered. Likewise, they reject the term Theotokos (Giver of birth to God) for the Virgin Mary, using instead the term Christotokos (giver of birth to Christ) or Anthropotokos (giver of birth to a man).

http://orthodoxwiki.org/Nestorianism

Now if you really want to know what the Church taught and teaches you can ask in http://www.christianforums.com/forums/the-ancient-way-eastern-orthodox.145/ or http://www.christianforums.com/forums/traditional-theology.1149/

patricius79 · Aug 29, 2015

Albion said:
Cause of our salvation does not equate to means of salvation.

I think Irenaeus would be shocked to hear his observation so incorrectly presented. It may also serve as a good example of what's wrong with making "Tradition" one's guide to doctrine.

I didn't say the Bible was just a book. As I indicated, it is the Book (of the Catholic Church)--"the Bible" means "the Book"-- and that I don't think the Bible is more important than Mary, who is the Mother of God and the Mediatrix of All Graces.

As to Irenaeus, he said that the way to know the truth is through the Tradition and Succession of Bishops in the Catholic Church. So I don't think he would be shocked by the idea of following Tradition.

He says that Mary is the "Cause of our salvation". You say that "cause" doesn't mean "means". What does it mean in your view?

Berean777 · Aug 29, 2015

For anyone thinking of labelling the early church fathers as Nestorian heretics is bordering on insanity.

Is the list mentioned below Nestorian heretics. Who came first them or Nestorus who had a falling out with the Roman relgious Empire.

List of Catholicoi of Seleucia-Ctesiphon and Patriarchs of the East until 1552Edit

Legendary eraEdit

Shimun Keepa (Saint Peter) (33–64)[7]

Thoma Shlikha, (Saint Thomas) [8]

Tulmay (St. Bartholomew the Apostle) [8]

Mar Addai, (St. Thaddeus) of the Seventy disciples (c.66–c.87)

Aggai of the Seventy disciples (c.81)

Mari of the Seventy disciples (c.87–c.120)

1 Aggai (Mar Aggai) (120–152 AD) disciple of Mar Addai and spiritual director of Mar Mari

2 Saint Mari (Mar Mari) (152–185 AD)— During his days the bishopric was formally established at Seleucia-Ctesiphon

Seleucia-Ctesiphon eraEdit
See also: Al-Mada'in

3 Abris (Abres or Ahrasius) (121–137 / 185–201 AD)

4 Abraham (Abraham I of Kashker) (159–171 / 201–213 AD)

5 Yaʿqob I (Mar Yacob I) (c. 172-190 / 213–231 AD)

6 Ebid M’shikha (191–203)[8]

7 Ahadabui (Ahha d'Aboui) (204–220 / 231–246) - First bishop of the East to get statikon as Catholicos. Ordained in 231 AD in Jerusalem Council.

8 Shahaloopa of Kashker (Shahlufa) (220–224 / 246–266 AD)

vacant (224–c. 280)

Metropolitan of Seleucia-Ctesiphon elevated as titular CatholicosEdit
Around 280, visiting bishops consecrated Papa bar Aggai as Bishop of Seleucia-Ctesiphon, thereby establishing the succession.[9] With him, heads of the church took the title Catholicos.

9 Papa bar Aggai (Mar Papa bar Gaggai (c. 280–317 / 267–336 AD)

vacant (317–329)

10 Shemʿon bar Sabbaʿe (Simeon Barsabae) (329–341 / 337–350 AD)

11 Shahdost (Shalidoste) (341–343 / 350–352 AD)

12 Barbaʿshmin (Barbashmin) (343–346 / 352–360 AD)

vacant (c. 346–c. 363)

13 Tomarsa (Toumarsa) (363–371 / 360–368 AD)

vacant (c. 371–c. 377)

14 Qayyoma (Qaioma) (370–375 / 377–399 AD)

15 Isaac (375–386 / 399–410 AD)

Catholicos of the East with jurisdiction over Eastern provincesEdit
Isaac was recognised as 'Grand Metropolitan' and Primate of the Church of the East at the Synod of Seleucia-Ctesiphon in 410. The acts of this Synod were later edited by the Patriarch Joseph (552–567) to grant him the title of Catholicos as well. This title for Patriarch Isaac in fact only came into use towards the end of the fifth century.

16 Ahha (Ahhi) (386–393 / 410–414 AD)

17 Yahballaha I (Yab-Alaha I) (393–398 / 415–420 AD)

18 Maʿna (Maana) (398–400 AD / 420)

19 Farbokht (Frabokht) (401–420 AD / 421)

At least have a little respect for the church at Babylon who are of the church of the East.

1 Peter 5:13-14
The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you; and so doth Marcus my son. Greet ye one another with a kiss of charity. Peace be with you all that are in Christ Jesus. Amen.

After all it is the church at Babylon who ordained a Roman clergy as bishop who later became the pope.

Berean777 · Aug 30, 2015

These are the true successors of Peter the rock my friend. The highway of God prophesied in

Isaiah 19:23-25
23In that day shall there be a highway out of Egypt to Assyria, and the Assyrian shall come into Egypt, and the Egyptian into Assyria, and the Egyptians shall serve with the Assyrians.

24In that day shall Israel be the third with Egypt and with Assyria, even a blessing in the midst of the land: 25Whom the LORD of hosts shall bless, saying, Blessed be Egypt my people, and Assyria the work of my hands, and Israel mine inheritance.

The Assyrian church of the East is the founding church founded on the rock through ecclestical chronological hierarchy and in fulfilment to who the handy work of God is. Even Jesus said the men of Nineveh (Assyrians) will come to rebuke this generation.

Peter and the apostles knew the Old Testament prophesy and established the elected church in Babylon Iraq (Assyrians) as the fulfilment of the highway with their close Semitic brothers and sisters. Peter would not even be inclined to preach to Rome until Acts 10 when the Holy Spirit ordered him to do so. So Rome is the symbol of once pagan Egypt who were once not called God's people and after accepting Christ they came and served alongside the Assyrians and in due process the Assyrian patriarch ordained a Roman clergy as bishop who later became pope.

Who is the successor? Hmmmmmmmmm..............

Berean777 · Aug 30, 2015

prodromos · Aug 30, 2015

Berean777 said:
If we can't differentiate this then sure enough we make Mary the mother of the Living Word. This is pure ignorance at best.

The above is pure sophistry at best.

Do you agree with this statement?

Well-Known Member

Called to Jesus Through Mary

Newbie

Servant of Christ Jesus. Stellar Son.

Servant of Christ Jesus. Stellar Son.

Servant of Christ Jesus. Stellar Son.

The Eucharist is Life

Servant of Christ Jesus. Stellar Son.

Servant of Christ Jesus. Stellar Son.

Servant of Christ Jesus. Stellar Son.

The Eucharist is Life

The Eucharist is Life

Servant of Christ Jesus. Stellar Son.

Servant of Christ Jesus. Stellar Son.

The Eucharist is Life

Called to Jesus Through Mary

Servant of Christ Jesus. Stellar Son.

Servant of Christ Jesus. Stellar Son.

Servant of Christ Jesus. Stellar Son.

Senior Veteran

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency