- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Mary: Mother of God
Fundamentalists are sometimes horrified when the Virgin Mary is referred to as the Mother of God. However, their reaction often rests upon a misapprehension of not only what this particular title of Mary signifies but also who Jesus was, and what their own theological forebears, the Protestant Reformers, had to say regarding this doctrine.
A woman is a man’s mother either if she carried him in her womb or if she was the woman contributing half of his genetic matter or both. Mary was the mother of Jesus in both of these senses; because she not only carried Jesus in her womb but also supplied all of the genetic matter for his human body, since it was through her—not Joseph—that Jesus “was descended from David according to the flesh” (Rom. 1:3).
Since Mary is Jesus’ mother, it must be concluded that she is also the Mother of God: If Mary is the mother of Jesus, and if Jesus is God, then Mary is the Mother of God. There is no way out of this logical syllogism, the valid form of which has been recognized by classical logicians since before the time of Christ.
Although Mary is the Mother of God, she is not his mother in the sense that she is older than God or the source of her Son’s divinity, for she is neither. Rather, we say that she is the Mother of God in the sense that she carried in her womb a divine person—Jesus Christ, God “in the flesh” (2 John 7, cf. John 1:14)—and in the sense that she contributed the genetic matter to the human form God took in Jesus Christ.
To avoid this conclusion, Fundamentalists often assert that Mary did not carry God in her womb, but only carried Christ’s human nature. This assertion reinvents a heresy from the fifth century known as Nestorianism, which runs aground on the fact that a mother does not merely carry the human nature of her child in her womb. Rather, she carries the person of her child. Women do not give birth to human natures; they give birth to persons. Mary thus carried and gave birth to the person of Jesus Christ, and the person she gave birth to was God.
The Nestorian claim that Mary did not give birth to the unified person of Jesus Christ attempts to separate Christ’s human nature from his divine nature, creating two separate and distinct persons—one divine and one human—united in a loose affiliation. It is therefore a Christological heresy, which even the Protestant Reformers recognized. Both Martin Luther and John Calvin insisted on Mary’s divine maternity. In fact, it even appears that Nestorius himself may not have believed the heresy named after him. Further, the “Nestorian” church has now signed a joint declaration on Christology with the Catholic Church and recognizes Mary’s divine maternity, just as other Christians do.
Since denying that Mary is God’s mother implies doubt about Jesus’ divinity, it is clear why Christians (until recent times) have been unanimous in proclaiming Mary as Mother of God.
The Church Fathers, of course, agreed, and the following passages witness to their lively recognition of the sacred truth and great gift of divine maternity that was bestowed upon Mary, the humble handmaid of the Lord.
Irenaeus
“The Virgin Mary, being obedient to his word, received from an angel the glad tidings that she would bear God” (Against Heresies, 5:19:1 [A.D. 189]).
Hippolytus
“[T]o all generations they [the prophets] have pictured forth the grandest subjects for contemplation and for action. Thus, too, they preached of the advent of God in the flesh to the world, his advent by the spotless and God-bearing (theotokos) Mary in the way of birth and growth, and the manner of his life and conversation with men, and his manifestation by baptism, and the new birth that was to be to all men, and the regeneration by the laver [of baptism]” (Discourse on the End of the World 1 [A.D. 217]).
Gregory the Wonderworker
“For Luke, in the inspired Gospel narratives, delivers a testimony not to Joseph only, but also to Mary, the Mother of God, and gives this account with reference to the very family and house of David” (Four Homilies 1 [A.D. 262]).
“It is our duty to present to God, like sacrifices, all the festivals and hymnal celebrations; and first of all, [the feast of] the Annunciation to the holy Mother of God, to wit, the salutation made to her by the angel, ‘Hail, full of grace!’” (ibid., 2).
Peter of Alexandria
“They came to the church of the most blessed Mother of God, and ever-virgin Mary, which, as we began to say, he had constructed in the western quarter, in a suburb, for a cemetery of the martyrs” (The Genuine Acts of Peter of Alexandria [A.D. 305]).
“We acknowledge the resurrection of the dead, of which Jesus Christ our Lord became the firstling; he bore a body not in appearance but in truth derived from Mary the Mother of God” (Letter to All Non-Egyptian Bishops 12 [A.D. 324]).
Methodius
“While the old man [Simeon] was thus exultant, and rejoicing with exceeding great and holy joy, that which had before been spoken of in a figure by the prophet Isaiah, the holy Mother of God now manifestly fulfilled” (Oration on Simeon and Anna 7 [A.D. 305]).
“Hail to you forever, you virgin Mother of God, our unceasing joy, for unto you do I again return. . . . Hail, you fount of the Son’s love for man. . . . Wherefore, we pray you, the most excellent among women, who boast in the confidence of your maternal honors, that you would unceasingly keep us in remembrance. O holy Mother of God, remember us, I say, who make our boast in you, and who in august hymns celebrate your memory, which will ever live, and never fade away” (ibid., 14).
Cyril of Jerusalem
“The Father bears witness from heaven to his Son. The Holy Spirit bears witness, coming down bodily in the form of a dove. The archangel Gabriel bears witness, bringing the good tidings to Mary. The Virgin Mother of God bears witness” (Catechetical Lectures 10:19 [A.D. 350]).
Ephraim the Syrian
“Though still a virgin she carried a child in her womb, and the handmaid and work of his wisdom became the Mother of God” (Songs of Praise 1:20 [A.D. 351]).
Athanasius
“The Word begotten of the Father from on high, inexpressibly, inexplicably, incomprehensibly, and eternally, is he that is born in time here below of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God” (The Incarnation of the Word of God 8 [A.D. 365]).
Epiphanius of Salamis
“Being perfect at the side of the Father and incarnate among us, not in appearance but in truth, he [the Son] reshaped man to perfection in himself from Mary the Mother of God through the Holy Spirit” (The Man Well-Anchored 75 [A.D. 374]).
Ambrose of Milan
“The first thing which kindles ardor in learning is the greatness of the teacher. What is greater than the Mother of God? What more glorious than she whom Glory Itself chose?” (The Virgins 2:2[7] [A.D. 377]).
Gregory of Nazianz
“If anyone does not agree that holy Mary is Mother of God, he is at odds with the Godhead” (Letter to Cledonius the Priest 101 [A.D. 382]).
Jerome
“As to how a virgin became the Mother of God, he [Rufinus] has full knowledge; as to how he himself was born, he knows nothing” (Against Rufinus 2:10 [A.D. 401]).
“Do not marvel at the novelty of the thing, if a Virgin gives birth to God” (Commentaries on Isaiah 3:7:15 [A.D. 409]).
Theodore of Mopsuestia
“When, therefore, they ask, ‘Is Mary mother of man or Mother of God?’ we answer, ‘Both!’ The one by the very nature of what was done and the other by relation” (The Incarnation 15 [A.D. 405]).
Cyril of Alexandria
“I have been amazed that some are utterly in doubt as to whether or not the holy Virgin is able to be called the Mother of God
. For if our Lord Jesus Christ is God, how should the holy Virgin who bore him not be the Mother of God?” (Letter to the Monks of Egypt 1 [A.D. 427]).“This expression, however, ‘the Word was made flesh’ [John 1:14], can mean nothing else but that he partook of flesh and blood like to us; he made our body his own, and came forth man from a woman, not casting off his existence as God, or his generation of God the Father, but even in taking to himself flesh remaining what he was. This the declaration of the correct faith proclaims everywhere. This was the sentiment of the holy Fathers; therefore they ventured to call the holy Virgin ‘the Mother of God,’ not as if the nature of the Word or his divinity had its beginning from the holy Virgin, but because of her was born that holy body with a rational soul, to which the Word, being personally united, is said to be born according to the flesh” (First Letter to Nestorius [A.D. 430]).
“And since the holy Virgin corporeally brought forth God made one with flesh according to nature, for this reason we also call her Mother of God, not as if the nature of the Word had the beginning of its existence from the flesh” (Third Letter to Nestorius [A.D. 430]).
“If anyone will not confess that the Emmanuel is very God, and that therefore the holy Virgin is the Mother of God, inasmuch as in the flesh she bore the Word of God made flesh [John 1:14]: let him be anathema” (ibid.).
John Cassian
“Now, you heretic, you say (whoever you are who deny that God was born of the Virgin), that Mary, the Mother of our Lord Jesus Christ, cannot be called the Mother of God, but the Mother only of Christ and not of God—for no one, you say, gives birth to one older than herself. And concerning this utterly stupid argument . . . let us prove by divine testimonies both that Christ is God and that Mary is the Mother of God” (On the Incarnation of Christ Against Nestorius 2:2 [A.D. 429]).
“You cannot then help admitting that the grace comes from God. It is God, then, who has given it. But it has been given by our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore the Lord Jesus Christ is God. But if he is God, as he certainly is, then she who bore God is the Mother of God” (ibid., 2:5).
Council of Ephesus
“We confess, then, our Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, perfect God and perfect man, of a rational soul and a body, begotten before all ages from the Father in his Godhead, the same in the last days, for us and for our salvation, born of Mary the Virgin according to his humanity, one and the same consubstantial with the Father in Godhead and consubstantial with us in humanity, for a union of two natures took place. Therefore we confess one Christ, one Son, one Lord. According to this understanding of the unconfused union, we confess the holy Virgin to be the Mother of God because God the Word took flesh and became man and from his very conception united to himself the temple he took from her” (Formula of Union [A.D. 431]).
Vincent of Lerins
“Nestorius, whose disease is of an opposite kind, while pretending that he holds two distinct substances in Christ, brings in of a sudden two persons, and with unheard-of wickedness would have two sons of God, two Christs,—one, God, the other, man; one, begotten of his Father, the other, born of his mother. For which reason he maintains that Saint Mary ought to be called, not the Mother of God, but the Mother of Christ” (The Notebooks 12[35] [A.D. 434]).
NIHIL OBSTAT: I have concluded that the materials
presented in this work are free of doctrinal or moral errors.
Bernadeane Carr, STL, Censor Librorum, August 10, 2004IMPRIMATUR: In accord with 1983 CIC 827
permission to publish this work is hereby granted.
+Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego, August 10, 2004Mary: Ever Virgin
Most Protestants claim that Mary bore children other than Jesus. To support their claim, these Protestants refer to the biblical passages which mention the “brethren of the Lord.” As explained in the Catholic Answers tract Brethren of the Lord, neither the Gospel accounts nor the early Christians attest to the notion that Mary bore other children besides Jesus. The faithful knew, through the witness of Scripture and Tradition, that Jesus was Mary’s only child and that she remained a lifelong virgin.
An important historical document which supports the teaching of Mary’s perpetual virginity is the Protoevangelium of James, which was written probably less than sixty years after the conclusion of Mary’s earthly life (around A.D. 120), when memories of her life were still vivid in the minds of many.
According to the world-renowned patristics scholar, Johannes Quasten: “The principal aim of the whole writing [Protoevangelium of James] is to prove the perpetual and inviolate virginity of Mary before, in, and after the birth of Christ” (Patrology, 1:120–1).
To begin with, the Protoevangelium records that when Mary’s birth was prophesied, her mother, St. Anne, vowed that she would devote the child to the service of the Lord, as Samuel had been by his mother (1 Sam. 1:11). Mary would thus serve the Lord at the Temple, as women had for centuries (1 Sam. 2:22), and as Anna the prophetess did at the time of Jesus’ birth (Luke 2:36–37). A life of continual, devoted service to the Lord at the Temple meant that Mary would not be able to live the ordinary life of a child-rearing mother. Rather, she was vowed to a life of perpetual virginity.
However, due to considerations of ceremonial cleanliness, it was eventually necessary for Mary, a consecrated “virgin of the Lord,” to have a guardian or protector who would respect her vow of virginity. Thus, according to the Protoevangelium, Joseph, an elderly widower who already had children, was chosen to be her spouse. (This would also explain why Joseph was apparently dead by the time of Jesus’ adult ministry, since he does not appear during it in the gospels, and since Mary is entrusted to John, rather than to her husband Joseph, at the crucifixion).
According to the Protoevangelium, Joseph was required to regard Mary’s vow of virginity with the utmost respect. The gravity of his responsibility as the guardian of a virgin was indicated by the fact that, when she was discovered to be with child, he had to answer to the Temple authorities, who thought him guilty of defiling a virgin of the Lord. Mary was also accused of having forsaken the Lord by breaking her vow. Keeping this in mind, it is an incredible insult to the Blessed Virgin to say that she broke her vow by bearing children other than her Lord and God, who was conceived through the power of the Holy Spirit.
The perpetual virginity of Mary has always been reconciled with the biblical references to Christ’s brethren through a proper understanding of the meaning of the term “brethren.” The understanding that the brethren of the Lord were Jesus’ stepbrothers (children of Joseph) rather than half-brothers (children of Mary) was the most common one until the time of Jerome (fourth century). It was Jerome who introduced the possibility that Christ’s brethren were actually his cousins, since in Jewish idiom cousins were also referred to as “brethren.” The Catholic Church allows the faithful to hold either view, since both are compatible with the reality of Mary’s perpetual virginity.
Today most Protestants are unaware of these early beliefs regarding Mary’s virginity and the proper interpretation of “the brethren of the Lord.” And yet, the Protestant Reformers themselves—Martin Luther, John Calvin, and Ulrich Zwingli—honored the perpetual virginity of Mary and recognized it as the teaching of the Bible, as have other, more modern Protestants.
The Protoevangelium of James
“And behold, an angel of the Lord stood by [St. Anne], saying, ‘Anne! Anne! The Lord has heard your prayer, and you shall conceive and shall bring forth, and your seed shall be spoken of in all the world.’ And Anne said, ‘As the Lord my God lives, if I beget either male or female, I will bring it as a gift to the Lord my God, and it shall minister to him in the holy things all the days of its life.’ . . . And [from the time she was three] Mary was in the temple of the Lord as if she were a dove that dwelt there” (Protoevangelium of James 4, 7 [A.D. 120]).
“And when she was twelve years old there was held a council of priests, saying, ‘Behold, Mary has reached the age of twelve years in the temple of the Lord. What then shall we do with her, lest perchance she defile the sanctuary of the Lord?’ And they said to the high priest, ‘You stand by the altar of the Lord; go in and pray concerning her, and whatever the Lord shall manifest to you, that also will we do.’ . . . [A]nd he prayed concerning her, and behold, an angel of the Lord stood by him saying, ‘Zechariah! Zechariah! Go out and assemble the widowers of the people and let them bring each his rod, and to whomsoever the Lord shall show a sign, his wife shall she be. . . . And Joseph [was chosen]. . . . And the priest said to Joseph, ‘You have been chosen by lot to take into your keeping the Virgin of the Lord.’ But Joseph refused, saying, ‘I have children, and I am an old man, and she is a young girl’” (ibid., 8–9).
“And Annas the scribe came to him [Joseph] . . . and saw that Mary was with child. And he ran away to the priest and said to him, ‘Joseph, whom you did vouch for, has committed a grievous crime.’ And the priest said, ‘How so?’ And he said, ‘He has defiled the virgin whom he received out of the temple of the Lord and has married her by stealth’” (ibid., 15).
“And the priest said, ‘Mary, why have you done this? And why have you brought your soul low and forgotten the Lord your God?’ . . . And she wept bitterly saying, ‘As the Lord my God lives, I am pure before him, and know not man’” (ibid.).
Origen
“The Book [the Protoevangelium] of James [records] that the brethren of Jesus were sons of Joseph by a former wife, whom he married before Mary. Now those who say so wish to preserve the honor of Mary in virginity to the end, so that body of hers which was appointed to minister to the Word . . . might not know intercourse with a man after the Holy Spirit came into her and the power from on high overshadowed her. And I think it in harmony with reason that Jesus was the firstfruit among men of the purity which consists in [perpetual] chastity, and Mary was among women. For it were not pious to ascribe to any other than to her the firstfruit of virginity” (Commentary on Matthew 2:17 [A.D. 248]).
Hilary of Poitiers
“If they [the brethren of the Lord] had been Mary’s sons and not those taken from Joseph’s former marriage, she would never have been given over in the moment of the passion [crucifixion] to the apostle John as his mother, the Lord saying to each, ‘Woman, behold your son,’ and to John, ‘Behold your mother’ [John 19:26–27), as he bequeathed filial love to a disciple as a consolation to the one desolate” (Commentary on Matthew 1:4 [A.D. 354]).
Athanasius
“Let those, therefore, who deny that the Son is by nature from the Father and proper to his essence deny also that he took true human flesh from the ever-virgin Mary” (Discourses Against the Arians 2:70 [A.D. 360]).
Epiphanius of Salamis
“We believe in one God, the Father almighty, maker of all things, both visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God . . . who for us men and for our salvation came down and took flesh, that is, was born perfectly of the holy ever-virgin Mary by the Holy Spirit” (The Man Well-Anchored 120 [A.D. 374]).
“And to holy Mary, [the tit
le] ‘Virgin’ is invariably added, for that holy woman remains undefiled” (Medicine Chest Against All Heresies 78:6 [A.D. 375]).Jerome
“[Helvidius] produces Tertullian as a witness [to his view] and quotes Victorinus, bishop of Petavium. Of Tertullian, I say no more than that he did not belong to the Church. But as regards Victorinus, I assert what has already been proven from the gospel—that he [Victorinus] spoke of the brethren of the Lord not as being sons of Mary but brethren in the sense I have explained, that is to say, brethren in point of kinship, not by nature. [By discussing such things we] are . . . following the tiny streams of opinion. Might I not array against you the whole series of ancient writers? Ignatius, Polycarp, Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, and many other apostolic and eloquent men, who against [the heretics] Ebion, Theodotus of Byzantium, and Valentinus, held these same views and wrote volumes replete with wisdom. If you had ever read what they wrote, you would be a wiser man” (Against Helvidius: The Perpetual Virginity of Mary 19 [A.D. 383]).
“We believe that God was born of a virgin, because we read it. We do not believe that Mary was married after she brought forth her Son, because we do not read it. . . . You [Helvidius] say that Mary did not remain a virgin. As for myself, I claim that Joseph himself was a virgin, through Mary, so that a virgin Son might be born of a virginal wedlock” (ibid., 21).
Didymus the Blind
“It helps us to understand the terms ‘first-born’ and ‘only-begotten’ when the Evangelist tells that Mary remained a virgin ‘until she brought forth her first-born son’ [Matt. 1:25]; for neither did Mary, who is to be honored and praised above all others, marry anyone else, nor did she ever become the Mother of anyone else, but even after childbirth she remained always and forever an immaculate virgin” (The Trinity 3:4 [A.D. 386]).
Ambrose of Milan
“Imitate her [Mary], holy mothers, who in her only dearly beloved Son set forth so great an example of material virtue; for neither have you sweeter children [than Jesus], nor did the Virgin seek the consolation of being able to bear another son” (Letters 63:111 [A.D. 388]).
Pope Siricius I
“You had good reason to be horrified at the thought that another birth might issue from the same virginal womb from which Christ was born according to the flesh. For the Lord Jesus would never have chosen to be born of a virgin if he had ever judged that she would be so incontinent as to contaminate with the seed of human intercourse the birthplace of the Lord’s body, that court of the eternal king” (Letter to Bishop Anysius [A.D. 392]).
Augustine
“In being born of a Virgin who chose to remain a Virgin even before she knew who was to be born of her, Christ wanted to approve virginity rather than to impose it. And he wanted virginity to be of free choice even in that woman in whom he took upon himself the form of a slave” (Holy Virginity 4:4 [A.D. 401]).
“It was not the visible sun, but its invisible Creator who consecrated this day for us, when the Virgin Mother, fertile of womb and integral in her virginity, brought him forth, made visible for us, by whom, when he was invisible, she too was created. A Virgin conceiving, a Virgin bearing, a Virgin pregnant, a Virgin bringing forth, a Virgin perpetual. Why do you wonder at this, O man?” (Sermons 186:1 [A.D. 411]).
“Heretics called Antidicomarites are those who contradict the perpetual virginity of Mary and affirm that after Christ was born she was joined as one with her husband” (Heresies 56 [A.D. 428]).
Leporius
“We confess, therefore, that our Lord and God, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, born of the Father before the ages, and in times most recent, made man of the Holy Spirit and the ever-virgin Mary” (Document of Amendment 3 [A.D. 426]).
Cyril of Alexandria
“[T]he Word himself, coming into the Blessed Virgin herself, assumed for himself his own temple from the substance of the Virgin and came forth from her a man in all that could be externally discerned, while interiorly he was true God. Therefore he kept his Mother a virgin even after her childbearing” (Against Those Who Do Not Wish to Confess That the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God 4 [A.D. 430]).
Pope Leo I
“His [Christ’s] origin is different, but his [human] nature is the same. Human usage and custom were lacking, but by divine power a Virgin conceived, a Virgin bore, and Virgin she remained” (Sermons 22:2 [A.D. 450]).
NIHIL OBSTAT: I have concluded that the materials
presented in this work are free of doctrinal or moral errors.
Bernadeane Carr, STL, Censor Librorum, August 10, 2004IMPRIMATUR: In accord with 1983 CIC 827
permission to publish this work is hereby granted.
+Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego, August 10, 2004Dear Apologist,
You spend a lot of time covering Mary's claim as Mother of Jesus and so as you put it Queen Mother. I don't think anyone is debating Mary's role as mother of Jesus. The title Queen Mother is something new and is not in the Bible but added later. The Title “Queen of Heaven” is in the Bible and clearly refers to the goddess Ashera who was wife to the Caananite chief god EL (who many believe was later merged into the worship of Yehwah). Archeological evidence has also linked her as Yehwah's consort. Later she was reduced to pagan goddess, then demonized and eventually forgotten. Yet for what is is worth in Scripture itself, Queen of Heaven clearly is the title of Asherah, not Mary. Personally I think the Catholic church's elevation of Mary was in response to providing the faithful an alternative to goddess worship of various kinds prevalent in the pagan world. Those people who had found comfort in the worship of Juno, Freya, Isis, Hera or whomever could move it to Mary. Mary was also a way to add a little of the divine feminine into what had become in late Judaism an overly masculine patriarchal system as the result of Asherah being demonized and God being presented as clearly male and alone without peers.
Apologist The Catholic Church has a long time made Mary a Queen of Heaven. That is nothing new. We called Her that when we were in that Church from Birth until my Husband was 47 and I was 46. That is now 25 years ago. We prayed to Her, we put Her as High as Jesus and Honored Her equal to Jesus our Savior. Only Jesus deserved that Honor. She also did not stay a Virgin which they claim. I did make a larger post on the other Tread Catholic Church. It makes me very sad that Catholics do what they do. We were there too, and I was very active and even started Rosary Society in the New Parish on the street we lived on. I also was the first President of the Women's Organization. Again I will say how thankful I am to our Heavenly Father that He called us out/
IreneQuote (Cato @ Aug. 25 2009,22:54) Dear Apologist, You spend a lot of time covering Mary's claim as Mother of Jesus and so as you put it Queen Mother. I don't think anyone is debating Mary's role as mother of Jesus. The title Queen Mother is something new and is not in the Bible but added later. The Title “Queen of Heaven” is in the Bible and clearly refers to the goddess Ashera who was wife to the Caananite chief god EL (who many believe was later merged into the worship of Yehwah). Archeological evidence has also linked her as Yehwah's consort. Later she was reduced to pagan goddess, then demonized and eventually forgotten. Yet for what is is worth in Scripture itself, Queen of Heaven clearly is the title of Asherah, not Mary. Personally I think the Catholic church's elevation of Mary was in response to providing the faithful an alternative to goddess worship of various kinds prevalent in the pagan world. Those people who had found comfort in the worship of Juno, Freya, Isis, Hera or whomever could move it to Mary. Mary was also a way to add a little of the divine feminine into what had become in late Judaism an overly masculine patriarchal system as the result of Asherah being demonized and God being presented as clearly male and alone without peers.
Not everything worthy of belief is in the Bible. Please see the post on Sola ScripturaQuote (Cindy @ Aug. 26 2009,01:35) Apologist The Catholic Church has a long time made Mary a Queen of Heaven. That is nothing new. We called Her that when we were in that Church from Birth until my Husband was 47 and I was 46. That is now 25 years ago. We prayed to Her, we put Her as High as Jesus and Honored Her equal to Jesus our Savior. Only Jesus deserved that Honor. She also did not stay a Virgin which they claim. I did make a larger post on the other Tread Catholic Church. It makes me very sad that Catholics do what they do. We were there too, and I was very active and even started Rosary Society in the New Parish on the street we lived on. I also was the first President of the Women's Organization. Again I will say how thankful I am to our Heavenly Father that He called us out/
Irene
Irene,I was an anti-Catholic “church planter”. We planted congregations in the Cayman Islands and in the States. My foundational belief was Sola Scriptura. I never saw that this was the reason, like many here, I could never be absolutely certain that the position I held and therefore preached was certain. At least for a great many topics. At first I believed in the Trinity, then I didn't know…or I believed that baptism didn't save you, then that it did (Acts 2:38). Was there an unpardonable sin? Wasn't there? There seemed to be Scriptures to line up on each side of a myriad of issues.
I was driven and tossed by every wind of doctrine because I did not have the constant rudder of the universal teaching of the church in every age and generation of the church since Jesus came in the flesh.
So you may think that you have some sort of freedom, or that God has led you out of His church. But I can assure you that either:
A. You never knew your faith to begin with
B. You were disillusioned by sinful men be they priests or parishioners
C. You were enamored with something new that you perceived to be freedom. When in fact it was emotionalism packaged in a form that was palatable to you.I'm not trying to put you in a box. I am willing to admit that it may not be A, B, or C. But please let me know WHAT it was.
“There are not one hundred people in the United States who hate The Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they wrongly perceive the Catholic Church to be.”
— Fulton J. SheenHi CA,
Come out of her lest you suffer for her sinsrebellion, apostasy, denial of the Son and the Father, denial of the written works of the Spirit of God, worship of man and his doctrines, murder and torture and the establishment of an earthly counter kingdom, false teaching…..etc, etc
Mother of God Debate:
Hi CA,
Foolish Greek Logic rules the church of apostasy.
First decide that Jesus is God and logic will tell you Mary is the Mother of God.
Then imagine her immaculate conception and presume her assumption into heaven and the folly is complete.Wake up
CA………not one of you quotes is found in any of our bibles , Show us one Scripture that says Mary is Mother of GOD in any translation made by competent translators. What does you TRINITARIANS teachings do with this. “FOR THOU ART THE ONLY TRUE GOD” Jesus said that, and this “THOU SHALT HAVE NO OTHER GOD BESIDES ME” , God himself said that. Straying away into all kind of PAGAN writings and teachings is Pure folly. You have produce (NO) proof of you claim of MARY bing the MOTHER of GOD. Just suppositions by blind Pagans forced to convert to “Christianity” by their Pagan Emperors, so they mengaled their teachings into their “New Faith”. Pure hog wash!. IMO
Peace and love……………….gene
Quote (CatholicApologist @ Aug. 26 2009,08:35) Mother of God Debate:
If Mary is the Mother of God then her Mother is the Grandmother of God and once you go there eventually Adam is God's parent for we are all children of Adam.But we know that God created Adam.
Quote (bodhitharta @ Aug. 26 2009,11:17) Quote (CatholicApologist @ Aug. 26 2009,08:35) Mother of God Debate:
If Mary is the Mother of God then her Mother is the Grandmother of God and once you go there eventually Adam is God's parent for we are all children of Adam.But we know that God created Adam.
Was Jesus God?I want a straight answer from every one of you. Yes or No.
That goes for you, Nick. Finally show us you can give a straight answer so we can take you seriously.
Quote (CatholicApologist @ Aug. 26 2009,12:23) Quote (bodhitharta @ Aug. 26 2009,11:17) Quote (CatholicApologist @ Aug. 26 2009,08:35) Mother of God Debate:
If Mary is the Mother of God then her Mother is the Grandmother of God and once you go there eventually Adam is God's parent for we are all children of Adam.But we know that God created Adam.
Was Jesus God?I want a straight answer from every one of you. Yes or No.
That goes for you, Nick. Finally show us you can give a straight answer so we can take you seriously.
NO, Jesus was not God and if you say he was you are misinformed.And I will testify by The Power and The Authority of The Holy Spirit that Jesus is not God so if you would please testify that Jesus is God by The Power and Authority of The Holy Spirit and let the curse of God be on who is in error.
Quote (3) When she was delivered, she said: “O my Lord! Behold! I am delivered of a female child!”- and Allah knew best what she brought forth- “And no wise is the male Like the female. I have named her Mary, and I commend her and her offspring to Thy protection from the Evil One, the Rejected.”
( سورة آل عمران , Aal-e-Imran, Chapter #3, Verse #36)4) Right graciously did her Lord accept her: He made her grow in purity and beauty: To the care of Zakariya was she assigned. Every time that he entered (Her) chamber to see her, He found her supplied with sustenance. He said: “O Mary! Whence (comes) this to you?” She said: “From Allah. for Allah Provides sustenance to whom He pleases without measure.”
( سورة آل عمران , Aal-e-Imran, Chapter #3, Verse #37)Have you been a Muslim all of your life? Or are you a convert to Islam?
Quote (CatholicApologist @ Aug. 26 2009,13:44) Quote (3) When she was delivered, she said: “O my Lord! Behold! I am delivered of a female child!”- and Allah knew best what she brought forth- “And no wise is the male Like the female. I have named her Mary, and I commend her and her offspring to Thy protection from the Evil One, the Rejected.”
( سورة آل عمران , Aal-e-Imran, Chapter #3, Verse #36)4) Right graciously did her Lord accept her: He made her grow in purity and beauty: To the care of Zakariya was she assigned. Every time that he entered (Her) chamber to see her, He found her supplied with sustenance. He said: “O Mary! Whence (comes) this to you?” She said: “From Allah. for Allah Provides sustenance to whom He pleases without measure.”
( سورة آل عمران , Aal-e-Imran, Chapter #3, Verse #37)Have you been a Muslim all of your life? Or are you a convert to Islam?
Neither.How on Earth can a human woman give birth to God. Do you people ever read the Bible. It never through any stretch of the imagination, says Mary gave birth to God. She gave birth to the Son of God, Jesus. Look it up. God begot a Son, not himself. You just make this so much more complicated than it is.
Quote (eveh @ Aug. 26 2009,14:17) How on Earth can a human woman give birth to God. Do you people ever read the Bible. It never through any stretch of the imagination, says Mary gave birth to God. She gave birth to the Son of God, Jesus. Look it up. God begot a Son, not himself. You just make this so much more complicated than it is.
Exactly. Quite simpleCA….> we all here know Mary was Not the mother of any GOD Whatsoever. Why don't you go and read 2Ths2, Where it shows that Saying Jesus is a GOD is creating the image of the (MAN OF SIN). Which Image He will abolish when He appears again. Go and read the Article I wrote on the Man of Sin. and tell us what you think about that . In 2Ths 2……….it says that GOD would send a deluding Spirit into people that do not love the truth, in order for them to believe a LIE, The LIE is that Jesus is a GOD, and all that believe that are deluded . The best thing you can do for yourself is to dump those false Pagan teachings and who knows GOD may give you the understand to come to the truth. IMO
peace and love…………………………gene
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
