Is John mcarthur guilty of Heresy? #2 Revised Edition.

[Xeno.of.athens]

Mary, though the mother of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, came " after" the existence God. It frankly would not be possible as He is Alpha and Omega. This is precisely why we do not say " Mary is the mother of God"

We happily say Elizabeth is the mother of John (the Baptist) without implying that Elizabeth created John's humanity, shared his calling, or authored his work of being the forerunner of the Lord. And saying that Blessed Mary is the mother of Jesus carries no implication of precedence nor of creation nor of superiority nor of equality to the Godhead on Mary's part. May is and always will be a creature, a human being, and a saint. In being the Mother of God she is declared to be blessed among women because God chose her to be the ark in which the Lord of Glory would come into this world by means of human birth. There is nothing even hinting that "the Mother of God" implies Godhead for Blessed Mary. It's a scandal to suggest such. It is one of the calumnies levelled at Catholics by sixteenth century (and later) Protestants propagandists whose chief aim was to characterise Catholic veneration of saint Mary the Blessed Mother of our Lord and God as paganism. It's a calumny often repeated in CF by some, and it is horrifying for me to see a form of words from you suggesting that such a duplicitous interpretation of the title is excusable or justifiable in any way whatever.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

The council of Ephesus said:

"If anyone does not confess that Emmanuel is truly God, and that therefore the holy Virgin is Theotokos, since she bore according to the flesh the Word of God made flesh, let him be anathema."​

this quote leaves Theotokos untranslated, the way it is translated into English over the centuries is "mother of God".

"1. If anyone does not confess that Emmanuel is God in truth, and therefore that the holy virgin is the mother of God, for she bore in a fleshly way the Word of God become flesh, let him be anathema."​

​

The council condemned the letters of Nestorius to Cyril, for example the second letter contains this paragraph:

"Again I should like to expand on this but am restrained by the memory of my promise. I must speak therefore but with brevity. Holy scripture, wherever it recalls the Lord’s economy, speaks of the birth and suffering not of the godhead but of the humanity of Christ, so that the holy virgin is more accurately termed mother of Christ than mother of God. Hear these words that the gospels proclaim: “The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, son of David, son of Abraham.” It is clear that God the Word was not the son of David. Listen to another witness if you will: “Jacob begat Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called the Christ. ” Consider a further piece of evidence: “Now the birth of Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, she was found to be with child of the holy Spirit.” But who would ever consider that the godhead of the only begotten was a creature of the Spirit? Why do we need to mention: “the mother of Jesus was there”? And again what of: “with Mary the mother of Jesus”; or “that which is conceived in her is of the holy Spirit”; and “Take the child and his mother and flee to Egypt”; and “concerning his Son, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh”? Again, scripture says when speaking of his passion: “God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh”; and again “Christ died for our sins” and “Christ having suffered in the flesh”; and “This is”, not “my godhead”, but “my body, broken for you”."​

No modern Christian should be found walking the same Path as Nestorius, as it seems that John Macarthur may be doing.