How to debunk the argument that Mary is not Mother of God?

[AlphaEtOmega]

In my native language, when you google “Mary is not Mother of God”, one of the first search result is from a Nestorian website. I’m afraid a lot of protestants end up on this website and get convinced by a even more Heretical interpretation of the Bible and the Trinity.

One of his arguments goes as follows:
'Catholics claim that:

1. Mary is Mother of Jesus
2. Jesus is God
3. Mary is Mother of God’

Then he proceeds to say Mary also needs to be Mother of the Father and of the Holy Spirit for her to be Theotokos:

‘1. Mary is not Mother of the Father nor the Holy Spirit
2. The Father and the Holy Spirit are God.
3. Mary is not Mother of God’

I know it is a non sequitur fallacy, but I don’t know how to ellaborate on that. Please help

 

[De_Maria]

I’ll try.

In my native language, when you google “Mary is not Mother of God”, one of the first search result is from a Nestorian website. I’m afraid a lot of protestants end up on this website and get convinced by a even more Heretical interpretation of the Bible and the Trinity.

One of his arguments goes as follows:
'Catholics claim that:

1. Mary is Mother of Jesus
2. Jesus is God
3. Mary is Mother of God’

Then he proceeds to say Mary also needs to be Mother of the Father and of the Holy Spirit …

At this point, you need to interrupt him and say,

"No. If that is the case, then you’ve misrepresented your premise.

The premise should be thus.

1. Mary is the Mother of Jesus.
2. Jesus is God, THE SECOND PERSON OF THE HOLY TRINITY.
3. Mary is the mother of God, THE SECOND PERSON OF THE HOLY TRINITY.

Now, you may proceed.

for her to be Theotokos:

‘1. Mary is not Mother of the Father nor the Holy Spirit
2. The Father and the Holy Spirit are God.
3. Mary is not Mother of God’

But she remains the mother of God, the Son, the Second Person of the Holy Trinity.

I know it is a non sequitur fallacy, but I don’t know how to ellaborate on that. Please help

I hope that helps.

 

[Brendan_64]

Then he proceeds to say Mary also needs to be Mother of the Father and of the Holy Spirit for her to be Theotokos:

‘1. Mary is not Mother of the Father nor the Holy Spirit
2. The Father and the Holy Spirit are God.
3. Mary is not Mother of God’

Ask this person if they believe Jesus is the Son of God.

Jesus is not the son of himself, yet Jesus is the Son of God.

 

[midori]

He proved that Mary isn’t the mother of the Trinity-- which we can all agree on.

But she has a different relationship with each Person: the daughter of the Father; the mother of the Son; the spouse of the Holy Spirit.

 

[Brendan_64]

Is the person of the Father God? Is the person of the Son God? Is the person of the Holy Spirit God? Or is “God” a collective of 3 individual persons who are not God in and of themselves?

 

[Syttu]

Just ask yourself these questions:

Who gave birth to Jesus?
Is Jesus the son of God?

Its not that hard to spot a contradiction in the Nestorian standpoints.

 

[snarflemike]

It’s pretty simple, really.

To the full and complete extent that God is capable of having a mother (has a nature which is capable of having a mother), Mary is that mother.

God is only capable of having a mother (has a human nature which makes Him capable of having a mother) in the person of Jesus Christ. It is not as if God the Father and the Holy Spirit are capable of having a mother, and Mary is not that mother.

 

[Zaccheus]

Theotokos:

‘1. Mary is not Mother of the Father nor the Holy Spirit
2. The Father and the Holy Spirit are God.
3. Mary is not Mother of God’

Try this.

My mother and father had three sons.
My wife is wife to me and therefore daughter-in-law to my parents.
She is not wife to my older brother, and she is not wife to my younger brother.
That does not make her not daughter-in-law to my parents.

The Father is God.
Jesus is God.
The Holy Spirit is God.

Mary does not have to be mother to all three members of the Trinity in order to be mother of God, any more than my wife has to also marry both my brothers in order to be daughter-in-law to my parents.

If Mary is mother of any one of the three then she is mother of God.

 

[Wesrock]

In my native language, when you google “Mary is not Mother of God”, one of the first search result is from a Nestorian website. I’m afraid a lot of protestants end up on this website and get convinced by a even more Heretical interpretation of the Bible and the Trinity.

One of his arguments goes as follows:
'Catholics claim that:

1. Mary is Mother of Jesus
2. Jesus is God
3. Mary is Mother of God’

Then he proceeds to say Mary also needs to be Mother of the Father and of the Holy Spirit for her to be Theotokos:

‘1. Mary is not Mother of the Father nor the Holy Spirit
2. The Father and the Holy Spirit are God.
3. Mary is not Mother of God’

I know it is a non sequitur fallacy, but I don’t know how to ellaborate on that. Please help

Mary is not the origin of the Trinity but she is mother to the person of Jesus Christ who is God.

 

[Hodos]

In my native language, when you google “Mary is not Mother of God”, one of the first search result is from a Nestorian website. I’m afraid a lot of protestants end up on this website and get convinced by a even more Heretical interpretation of the Bible and the Trinity.

I think there are few things going on here:

1. People who object to the title Theotakos or God-bearer, or in the vernacular Mother of God haven’t really thought about what this term means and that it is a correct application.
2. To your point, I think many people don’t understand the statement in its original historical context where it was being used to affirm the humanity and divinity of Christ, instead of a statement about Mary’s identity. In other words, it was originally a Christological statement, not a Mariological (if that is a word) statement. Also they may miss the point that it is not meant to be a statement about Mary’s relationship to the other persons of the Trinity.
3. I think the objections are less with the Christological significance of the statement that Mary is the Mother of God, than with objections to the expansion of Marian dogma and venerations that most Protestants would say go far beyond the descriptions and reverence of Mary as seen in the New Testament. Terms like Empress of Heaven coupled with worship practices and prayers that we feel go beyond what were acceptable in Mary’s own day provide a visceral reaction to Protestants who feel their view of veneration of the saints is much more in line with early Christianity.

 

[Vico]

…

This error follows from the denial of the union of the two divine and human natures in one person, the Son of God. The Son of God assumed the incarnation in Jesus Christ, and his mother bore him. Were there no divine nature in Jesus Christ, then there could not have been atonement through the loving act of atonement which takes place in his Mystical Body.

The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are never independent, this is called perichoresis: the mutual penetration and indwelling of the three divine persons in one another.

 

[Rhubarb]

Anyone who objects to calling Mary the mother of God because she isn’t the mother of the Father and Holy Spirit is just splitting hairs.

When people call Mary the mother of God, they mean “mother of Jesus, who is true God”

 

[adamhovey1988]

I went to a Syriac Orthodox church once, and some of the prayers call Mary, “The Mother of Jesus Christ, Our God”. I think, if your refer to her that way, it’s more palatable to some people. I think the phrase “Mother of God”, is accurate, but not precise enough. I think “Theotokos” works better, especially if you know Greek. But, here’s how I think of it. Most Christians believe that Jesus is God, Mary is his mother, therefore, Mary is the Mother of God. Doesn’t seem that hard to believe to me, but I already have accepted it.

 

[De_Maria]

AlphaEtOmega:

In my native language, when you google “Mary is not Mother of God”, one of the first search result is from a Nestorian website. I’m afraid a lot of protestants end up on this website and get convinced by a even more Heretical interpretation of the Bible and the Trinity.

I think there are few things going on here:

1. People who object to the title Theotakos or God-bearer, or in the vernacular Mother of God haven’t really thought about what this term means and that it is a correct application.

Agreed.

1. To your point, I think many people don’t understand the statement in its original historical context where it was being used to affirm the humanity and divinity of Christ, instead of a statement about Mary’s identity. In other words, it was originally a Christological statement, not a Mariological (if that is a word) statement.

It has always been both.

Also they may miss the point that it is not meant to be a statement about Mary’s relationship to the other persons of the Trinity.

That is true. Those people who object to that statement, are truly revulsed when we mention the fact that she also bears other titles in relation to the Trinity.

She is the daughter of the Father.
And the spouse of the Holy Spirit.

How do you feel about those?

1. I think the objections are less with the Christological significance of the statement that Mary is the Mother of God, than with objections to the expansion of Marian dogma and venerations that most Protestants would say go far beyond the descriptions and reverence of Mary as seen in the New Testament.

The problem is, that Protestants don’t understand the New Testament Scriptures. They think that they were written in a vacuum. They read them as though they were written yesterday. Rather than understanding that they were written in a particular context which involves Jewish theology and custom.

Terms like Empress of Heaven

Queen of Heaven. I’ve never heard of God mentioned as the Emperor of heaven. God is the King of heaven and Mary is the Queen.

coupled with worship practices and prayers that we feel go beyond what were acceptable in Mary’s own day provide a visceral reaction to Protestants

These worship practices and prayers were acceptable in Mary’s day. The Bible touches upon some. But it is more clearly illustrated in the history of the early Church.

who feel their view of veneration of the saints is much more in line with early Christianity.

They don’t venerate the saints. That’s not in line with early Christianity. It breaks from early Christianity. It even breaks from early Protestantism.

 

[De_Maria]

Depends on what you mean by daughter of the Father.

In the Old Testament, it frequently says that Israel is God’s daughter.
Mary is the embodiment of Israel.

Disagree with the term spouse of the Holy Spirit, which didn’t appear until the middle ages and essentially begins to ascribe divine characteristics to Mary herself, which is why we are not in fellowship with regard to Marian devotion.

Do you disagree with the Scripture which says:

Luke 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

What do you think that means?

Obviously this is an inflammatory statement assuming a priori your authority to make that claim without any evidence to back it up (circular reasoning). Dismissed since it is uncharitable to begin with.

What evidence would you like? Let’s see, Protestants read into the Scriptures the error of Luther, that one can read the Scriptures alone as their rule of faith. Where is that in Scripture?

Depends on which prayers you are speaking of

True.

and whether the clauses you are likely speaking about were even a prayer directed to Mary

That depends on how you define prayer. Whether you use the ancient meaning which the Catholic Church still holds, or the modern invention of the Protestants.

for her to fulfill some sort of request, or whether they were a greeting that have been recycled to a use and meaning which are alien to their initial creation.

A greeting or a word of praise?

This is a false statement, although I think the issue here is that we have two different understandings of what veneration properly is. I refer you to the Augsburg Confession, Article XXI so that you may be informed on the Protestant view of veneration of the saints.

A very modern view, compared to the Catholic Church which was established by Jesus Christ and which Teaches:

James 5:15 And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him. 16 Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much. 17 Elias was a man subject to like passions as we are, and he prayed earnestly that it might not rain: and it rained not on the earth by the space of three years and six months.

 

[Sbee0]

In my native language, when you google “Mary is not Mother of God”, one of the first search result is from a Nestorian website. I’m afraid a lot of protestants end up on this website and get convinced by a even more Heretical interpretation of the Bible and the Trinity.

One of his arguments goes as follows:
'Catholics claim that:

1. Mary is Mother of Jesus
2. Jesus is God
3. Mary is Mother of God’"

It’s actually a lot simpler than a logical deduction, scripture clearly implies it.
Luke 1:41-43
When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. In a loud voice she exclaimed: “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear! But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?

Elizabeth didn’t figure out that Mary is the Mother of her Lord on her own, the scripture passage above says who revealed that to her.

 

[Thom18]

Take them to the first Christians to see what they had to say:

Believe what we say about the Virgin, and do not hesitate to confess her to be both servant and Mother of God, both virgin and mother. She is a servant as the creature of him who was born of her; she is the Mother of God inasmuch as of her God was born in human flesh. She is a virgin because she did not conceive from the seed of man; she is a mother because she gave birth and became the mother of him who before all eternity was begotten of the Father.

She is therefore the mother of the Lord of angels and our mother; from her the Son of God received the human body in which he consented to be crucified. Do you desire to know how far the Virgin surpasses the power of heaven? Give me your attention then. They veil their faces as they hover in fear and trembling, but she offers the human race to God, and through her we receive the forgiveness of our sins. She bore him whom the angels glorified when they came with reverence to be present at his birth. Glory to God in the highest, they sang, and peace to his people on earth.

 

[De_Maria]

I guess you could try to make that connection, the apostles never did. …

Yes, they did. See Rev 12:1

And, yes, I know that Israel was also mentioned in harsh terms. But Mary is the embodiment of righteous Israel.

Considering Mary was already married, it does NOT mean that she is the wife of the Holy Spirit.

Was Jesus engendered by the Holy Spirit? Yes or no.

That would be a direct contradiction of scripture, especially considering modern Marian contemplation is now equating her as a quasi-divine being within the Trinity,

You’ll have to prove that. Mary is simply a righteous human being in heaven. Well, not simply, the most righteous human being, in heaven.

specifically with regard to her being the person who pours out the gifts of the Holy Spirit upon the Church.

No. Through whom God funnels the gifts of the Holy Spirit. You do realize that the fountain of all grace was carried in her womb, don’t you?

Again, this is an a priori assumption.

Yours is. Mine conforms to Scripture.

You are assuming one that everything Luther says is binding,

On the contrary, I’m declaring that it isn’t. That he is a false prophet and that he misled an entire generation of people who have gone on to mislead all their followers also.

and you are assuming an unnamed error apart from discussing the scripture surrounding the unnamed error you are not referencing.

Everything that Luther taught, in opposition to Catholic Teaching, is error.

With regard to your categorization of Sola Scriptura, … I guess you have missed the numerous forum threads where this has been defined by me. …

Lol! If you’ve interpreted Sola Scriptura, you’ve not shown where the teaching is in Scripture. And that’s the rub.

You would need to define this. This statement is meaningless for further discussion.

Well, if you have missed the many threads where I’ve defined it, then you need to scour the forum to read them.

No a greeting, as in, Hi, I have come to deliver a message.

How about, Hi, you whom God says is full of grace and is God’s favorite amongst all women. Do you think the angel lied when he said that?

But again, you would need to define what specific clause you are referring to as I said above. What is clear though is that the angel was not petitioning Mary for something but delivering the word of the blessing from GOD to HER.

That’s a big deal.

If you are referring to the Hail Mary, which I am confident you are, this pattern has been reversed so that Mary is the petitioned party rather than the heavenly father.

What’s wrong with that? Have you ever seen this in Scripture?

Luke 16:24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, …

Whether you consider this an unimportant distinction or not, my faith tradition is not the one passing on an innovation as binding upon the conscience at the risk of anathema.

1. Please provide evidence of your claim.
2. Since this prayer is found verbatim, in Scripture. I think it is your tradition which is innovating in rejecting it.

 

[De_Maria]

De_Maria:

A very modern view, compared to the Catholic Church which was established by Jesus Christ and which Teaches:

Notice that nowhere in the passage you just cited is James addressing the deceased saints as the providers of these benefits…

Then why does he mention a deceased Saint? Let’s go through the verse.

James 5:16 Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed.

Ok, pray for one another.

The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.

Remember that a righteous man’s prayer is very effective.

*17 Elias was a man subject to like passions as we are, and he prayed earnestly that it might not rain: and it rained not on the earth by the space of three years and six months.

18 And he prayed again, and the heaven gave rain, and the earth brought forth her fruit.*

As an example of a righteous man, he provides the long dead, St. Elijah. If he didn’t want us to pray to St. Elijah, he might’ve said, “but he’s just an example. Don’t pray to him.”

But he doesn’t.

And, you call mine eseigesis. But I call yourse eseigesis. So, we’re even. My explanation of Scripture is based upon the Teaching of the Catholic Church.

113 2. Read the Scripture within “the living Tradition of the whole Church”. …

 

[Hodos]

Yes, they did. See Rev 12:1

And, yes, I know that Israel was also mentioned in harsh terms. But Mary is the embodiment of righteous Israel.

Again, you are can make that case. I will agree this passage could be interpreted in that manner; however, one could not make a definitive or dogmatic case. I don’t think one would be needed on that point. I think it is a weak one for just the reasons I made before, particularly when Christ is typically the comparison to Israel that is being made.

Was Jesus engendered by the Holy Spirit? Yes or no.

You have my answer above. I don’t see a need to change it.

Mary is simply a righteous human being in heaven.

I would agree here if that is your understanding.

No. Through whom God funnels the gifts of the Holy Spirit. You do realize that the fountain of all grace was carried in her womb, don’t you?

Right. I agree, and the object of that worship and veneration in the NT is Christ himself. Feel free to demonstrate otherwise from the apostolic documents.

Everything that Luther taught, in opposition to Catholic Teaching, is error.

We can agree to disagree, although again, my confession is not dependent upon Luther.

Lol! If you’ve interpreted Sola Scriptura, you’ve not shown where the teaching is in Scripture. And that’s the rub.

Right, again, that was not my intention. Since you have no working knowledge of what Sola Scriptura is, we would need to define that first and move from there. Again though, that would be more appropriate in a separate forum.

How about, Hi, you whom God says is full of grace and is God’s favorite amongst all women. Do you think the angel lied when he said that?

Right, the Greek implies that she is the recipient of grace (which you seem to be implying a different meaning of grace than the scriptural one). Do I think the angel lied? Lord No! Not sure how that contradicts the thrust of my statement that the angel was not addressing prayer to Mary, but addressing her in a greeting.

That’s a big deal.

I agree, huge deal. Still doesn’t address my point that you are flipping the use of that passage to communicate the opposite of what the angel was conveying.

What’s wrong with that? Have you ever seen this in Scripture?

Luke 16:24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, …