Whose Mother is Mary . . . .

[racer]

The other thread discussing the title of Mary was close at the request of the OP. Myself, I wasn't through with the discussion. So, for those still interested we can continue our talk here. I'll be posting more later on today.

 

[seekingpurity047]

Mary is the mother of Jesus.

I know precisely what Roman Catholics will say to this though, they will say, "Well, if Mary is the mother of Jesus, then she is the mother of God." But that's not consistent with logic. God is not Jesus, though Jesus is God. Believe me, there is a difference. I would show you a picture of it... unfortunately, I can't on here, or.. maybe you can, I just odn' tknow how...

 

[Mary of Bethany]

She is the mother (NOT the creator!) of God the Word.

Mary

 

[QuantaCura]

What Mary of Bethany said. Also, she is the Mother of the Church

 

[simonthezealot]

Mary's divine motherhood 495 Called in the Gospels "the mother of Jesus", Mary is acclaimed by Elizabeth, at the prompting of the Spirit and even before the birth of her son, as "the mother of my Lord".144 In fact, the One whom she conceived as man by the Holy Spirit, who truly became her Son according to the flesh, was none other than the Father's eternal Son, the second person of the Holy Trinity. (here is were the huge leap is) Hence the Church confesses that Mary is truly "Mother of God" (Theotokos).145

(my emphasis)

 

[IamAdopted]

What Mary of Bethany said. Also, she is the Mother of the Church

Beg to differ with this post. For Paul shows us who our mother is in scripture and this is not Mary.

 

[Rhamiel]

Seeking, I am very worried, you said " God is not Jesus, though Jesus is God. Believe me, there is a difference" I do not think this way of looking at it is healthy. Think through the implecations of this unnatural disconect of Jesus and God.
IamA, what is The Church? are we not the Body of Christ? who would be our mother?

 

[IamAdopted]

Seeking, I am very worried, you said " God is not Jesus, though Jesus is God. Believe me, there is a difference" I do not think this way of looking at it is healthy. Think through the implecations of this unnatural disconect of Jesus and God.
IamA, what is The Church? are we not the Body of Christ? who would be our mother?

Read Galatians and you will see whom Paul calls our Mother. Very clear. It is not Mary. Mary was the Mother of Jesus. This would be the sign that God would give Isreal that a virgin would be with child , a son, and His name will be Emmanuel.

 

[IamAdopted]

24These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. 25Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. 26But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother.

this says all I need to know. For God is a covenant God.

 

[racer]

What Nestorianism is:

Nestorianism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nestorianism is the doctrine that Jesus exists as two persons, the man Jesus and the divine Son of God, or Logos, rather than as a unified person. This doctrine is identified with Nestorius (c. 386–c. 451), Patriarch of Constantinople. This view of Christ was condemned at the Council of Ephesus in 431, and the conflict over this view led to the Nestorian schism, separating the Assyrian Church of the East from the Byzantine Church.

What Augustine said about Mary:

. . . . . He was in an extraordinary manner begotten of the Father without a mother, born of a mother without a father;

without a mother He was God, without a father He was man; without a mother before all time, without a father in the end of times . . . .

"At that time, therefore, when about to engage in divine acts, He repelled, as one unknown, her who was the mother, not of His divinity, but of His [human] infirmity" (Tract. in Ioannem CXIX, 1).

"It was as if [Jesus] said [in John 2], ‘You did not give birth to my power of working miracles, it was not you who gave birth to my divinity. But you are the mother of all that is weak in me" (Tract. in Ioannem VII, 9.)

Why, then, said the Son to the mother, "Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come?" Our Lord Jesus Christ was both God and man. According as He was God, He had not a mother; according as He was man, He had. She was the mother, then, of His flesh, of His humanity, of the weakness which for our sakes He took upon Him. But the miracle which He was about to do, He was about to do according to His divine nature, not according to His weakness; according to that wherein He was God not according to that wherein He was born weak. But the weakness of God is stronger than men. His mother then demanded a miracle of Him; but He, about to perform divine works, so far did not recognize a human womb; saying in effect, "That in me which works a miracle was not born of thee, thou gavest not birth to my divine nature; but because my weakness was born of thee, I will recognize thee at the time when that same weakness shall hang upon the cross." This, indeed, is the meaning of "Mine hour is not yet come." . . . How then was He both David’s son and David’s Lord? David’s son according to the flesh, David’s Lord according to His divinity; so also Mary’s son after the flesh, and Mary’s Lord after His majesty. Now as she was not the mother of His divine nature, whilst it was by His divinity the miracle she asked for would be wrought, therefore He answered her, "Woman, what have I to do with thee?" (Tract. in Ioannem VIII, 9).

Now, someone has put forth the argument that Augustine is only saying that Mary was not a Mother to Jesus’ divinity. That she was only mother to his human nature. Okay, a couple of thoughts about this. It has also been argued by proponents of the title “Mother of God” that a “mother” does not give birth to a “nature.” So, then how did Augustine argue that she was only mother to his human nature? As proponents of the title argue, one can only be a mother to a “person,” not simply a “nature.” So, what was Augustine’s point? Even if this argument holds, and I believe it does, Jesus’ “divinity” was/is one nature which combined with his human nature—hypostatic union—merges into one person. So, who is that person? The person formed by his human and divine nature is Jesus.

Anyhow, was Augustine doing merely as one person pointed out to me? Was he merely saying that Mary was not the mother of Jesus’ divine nature? Let’s look at a couple of his comments again:

1. without a mother He was God, without a father He was man
2. According as He was God, He had not a mother
3. but He, about to perform divine works, so far did not recognize a human womb

So, please anyone who holds that Augustine is only saying that Mary was not the mother of Jesus’ divine nature, please explain how these comments do not mean more than that? Augustine explicitly said, “according that He was God, he had not a mother.” Could he be any more clear than that? He didn’t just say that God did not have a mother, he specifically stated that God (Jesus) did not have a mother. He states that in exhibiting His divinity in performing divine works, he did not recognize a HUMAN womb!

No one here has asserted that Jesus is not God incarnate; no one here has asserted that Jesus was two persons, one divine and one human; no one here is Nestorian. Yet, people who desire to elevate Mary, toss out accusations of heresy and Nestorianism in attempts to intimidate people into silence. People make condescending remarks such as read history, etc . . . insulting others’ intelligence and hoping to intimidate them to silence or at least second guess themselves.

No one who has argued contra-Mother of God title has accused anyone else of heretical beliefs and practices. We have merely pointed out using logical and credible arguments as well as historical evidence how the term—though one may technically argue is correct—is misleading and not quite true and accurate.

If one more person is going to spout the baseless accusation of “heresy! And Nestorianism!” I challenge you to explain how St. Augustine, himself was not Nestorian?

I think those here tossing the allegations around have grossly abused the term and twisted the definition to serve their accusatory dialogue.

 

[Hentenza]

The other thread discussing the title of Mary was close at the request of the OP. Myself, I wasn't through with the discussion. So, for those still interested we can continue our talk here. I'll be posting more later on today.

The mother of Jesus our Lord, of course.

 

[Iollain]

I thought that the 'mother of God' was made because some Arius dude was spreading around that Jesus was not God.........so from then on, if Mary is known as 'mother of God', people would have a better understanding that Jesus is God.?

 

[E.C.]

racer, about Nestorianism, there was a little more to it than just this:

Nestorianism is the doctrine that Jesus exists as two persons, the man Jesus and the divine Son of God, or Logos, rather than as a unified person. This doctrine is identified with Nestorius (c. 386–c. 451), Patriarch of Constantinople. This view of Christ was condemned at the Council of Ephesus in 431, and the conflict over this view led to the Nestorian schism, separating the Assyrian Church of the East from the Byzantine Church.

Nestorius did not believe Mary to be the Theotokos. This thought is what lead to his attempted splitting of Christ.

 

[Petunia]

Whose Mother is Mary . . . .

She's the mother of the Lord's humanity.

 

[Petunia]

I thought that the 'mother of God' was made because some Arius dude was spreading around that Jesus was not God.........so from then on, if Mary is known as 'mother of God', people would have a better understanding that Jesus is God.?

Why not simply say 'Jesus is God'? Why does the Lord need 'Mary' to confirm His diety? The Lord is His Own confirmation of His deity.

 

[racer]

racer, about Nestorianism, there was a little more to it than just this:

No!? Really?

Nestorius did not believe Mary to be the Theotokos. This thought is what lead to his attempted splitting of Christ.

Apparently, you are unaware of the fact there's more to what Nestorius believed that what your faith teaches . . . .

 

[Iollain]

Why not simply say 'Jesus is God'? Why does the Lord need 'Mary' to confirm His diety? The Lord is His Own confirmation of His deity.

WEll, there is verses in the Bible that state Jesus is God, so 'God-bearer' leaves no room for mistake that Jesus is the God who was beared.



'''Its literal English translations include "God-bearer" and "the one who gives birth to God"; less literal translations include "Mother of God Incarnate"[1] and "Mother of God".'''..........from the Wikipedia


So if there are Scriptures that say that God is with us, God made flesh, then there must be a bearer of God.



(Isaiah 7:14)

Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign the virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son and will call him Immanuel.
(Matthew 1:22)

All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: "The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel" - which means, "God with us."



Isaiah 9:6

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given, and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace.




.......so i take it, "God-bearer" and "the one who gives birth to God" is the proper translation of Theotokos?




When St. Hilary [315-367 A.D.] was asked by a brother bishop the meaning of the text, he replied: "The sword which pierced her soul was disbelief, which smote her at the time of Christ's passion." [] Chrysostom, mentioning the miracle at Cana in Galilee, says: "Not even did all the apostles know Him as He ought to have been known. Not even His mother or His brothers knew him." Again: "Why do I speak of many, whereas not even the virgin who conceived him knew the ineffable mystery; not even His brothers believed on Him." Further: "Now we see the foolish arrogance, of both her and of them."



.........i guess Mary didn't know she was the Theotokos, herself.



Augustine wrote thus: "When the Lord said, 'Woman! what have I to do with thee? Mine hour is not yet come,' He gave us to understand that as being God, He had no mother." Ambrose laid down a far-reaching principle "We are brought into the presence of kings by lords and officers; because a king is, after all, a man, and knows not to whom he may safelY entrust his realm. But in order to come to God, from whom nothing is hidden and Who knows the merit, of all men, we need no middle man-only a devout mind. For wheresoever such a one speaks to God, God will answer him."

Epiphanius [of Salamis, 315-403 A.D.], writing against the Collyridian heretics [who offered bread sacrifices to Mary], whose error was Mariolatry, said: "Christ said to His mother: Woman, what have I to do with thee? Mine hour is not yet come. Lest any one should think that the virgin was of a greater excellence than others, He called her 'Woman,' as if prophesying the future species of sects and heresies which were to arise on earth; lest persons admiring too much that holy woman should slip into this heresy of the Collyridians and its deliriums. For indeed, their whole doctrine is a mockery, and an old wife's tale, and, so to speak, nothing but the working of a heresy." [Panarion]


The early church did not mean 'God-bearer' in a way that Mary is mother of the Alpha and Omega, who was, and who is and who is to come! Maranatha!

 

[Hentenza]

racer, about Nestorianism, there was a little more to it than just this:


Nestorius did not believe Mary to be the Theotokos. This thought is what lead to his attempted splitting of Christ.

Let me make something perfectly clear. A nestorian is someone who attempted to split the nature of Christ. Not believing that Mary is Theotokos does NOT make you a nestorian. I don't believe in the TITLE of theotokos but I DO NOT split Jesus nature. There is a LARGE difference.

 

[Mary of Bethany]

.......so i take it, "God-bearer" and "the one who gives birth to God" is the proper translation of Theotokos?

Right. Theo = God, tokos = bearer or birthgiver

The early church did not mean 'God-bearer' in a way that Mary is mother of the Alpha and Omega, who was, and who is and who is to come! Maranatha!

Exactly!

Mary

 

[E.C.]

Nestorius did not believe Mary to be the Theotokos. Instead he thought that she was "Christokos" meaning Mother of Christ. Now, to justify this, he did some thinking and concluded a few things:

-Mary gave birth to the human nature of Christ, but what about the divine?
-A human can not have any connection with the divine, so maybe the human and divine were in two separate bodies?

You're only being taught that Nestorius tried to split Christ. You are not being taught why or what lead him to do so or what he said about Mary.

Tell me your thoughts on Mary being the Mother of God (briefly) and I'll bet anything that there will be hints of Nestorianism.