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

[po18guy]

Everyone is dancing around the point!

Mary goes to visit Elizabeth.
Elizabeth exclaims “How is it that the mother of my Lord comes to me?”

Who is the Lord?

Jesus.

Who is His mother?

Argumentation is futile.

 

[Londoner]

When you say “Nestorian”, do you mean the Assyrian Church of the East? If so, you should read this: Common Christological Declaration.

 

[Dan_Defender]

Mary goes to visit Elizabeth.
Elizabeth exclaims “How is it that the mother of my Lord comes to me?”

Right on. Add to that:
‘And the dragon stood before the woman who was about to bear a child, that he might devour her child when she brought it forth; she brought forth a male child, one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron, but her child was caught up to God and to his throne,’ - Rev 12:4-5

 

[De_Maria]

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…

It’s not a matter of your interpretation. Jesus didn’t appoint you Teacher of all that He commanded. He appointed the Church that role.

Ephesians 3:10To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,

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

Then, I assume, you agree that Jesus was engendered by the Holy Spirit.

I would agree here if that is your understanding.

That is our understanding. But you don’t realize the power of being a righteous soul in heaven.

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.

Certainly. What does this say? And who is saying it?

Luke 1:48 For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.

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

Nor is it dependent upon Scripture. Your confession is dependent upon your own understanding:

Proverbs 3:5 Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.

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.

Whenever your ready, I am ready to show that Sola Scriptura is a self contradicting proposal.

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.

Who sent the Angel to deliver the message?

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.

On the contrary, God made a big deal about Mary. But Protestants want to sweep Mary, the Mother of God, under their rugs.

 

[De_Maria]

Not sure how a parable being used to demonstrate the consequences of sin in the afterlife …

Christ is depicting the after life. And he is also showing the authority which Fr. Abraham wielded in the after life. Souls prayed to him.

That would be the Council of Trent. 25th Session.

Again, you’ll have to post the verbatim clause. I don’t see it.

And since you are taking the positive argument that this is something that was taught by the apostolic fathers, the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate it from the scriptures they wrote. My role would be to examine your claim and demonstrate if I can whether your claim has merit.

Which prayer?

The praise the angel lavished on Mary.

I thought you were referring to James.

In that instance, the prayers he recommended to the holy saints.

Again, there is a difference between narrative and prayer.

There is such a thing as a prayer of praise.

If you are referring to the angel, the angel was not praying to Mary for intercession, he was announcing that God was going to fulfill his promise to send the Messiah. That is different from praying and/or commanding us to direct prayer to Mary.

The angel was passing on God’s praise of Mary. It is God’s words that he was repeating. It is annotated in the Bible in order to give you an example to follow.

 

[CRV]

1. True
2. True
3. True

Three persons one substance, essence or nature.

The Dogma of the Holy Trinity starting at #253. So as others have said, Mary is the mother of the second Person of the Trinity who is fully God. There is not 3 gods, but 3 persons in ONE God.

 

[Justin_Mary]

This is the way I see it.

God humbled Himself, submitting every part of his being to Mary. He asks us to do the same.

Stop arguing over semantics & follow the one you call Lord.

 

[po18guy]

And further, The ruler with the rod of iron appeared in David’s messianic Psalm 2:7-9

I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.

And this is from the King James Version! Oh, if bible Christians would only read the bible!

 

[Hodos]

Christ is depicting the after life. And he is also showing the authority which Fr. Abraham wielded in the after life. Souls prayed to him.

This actually refutes your position. First, the man in the parable is dead along with Abraham, this does not depict the living petitioning the dead. Second, Abraham informs him that he is incapable of fulfilling his request and points back to the scriptures. Again, the point of the passage is about how we should live in this life now.

Again, you’ll have to post the verbatim clause. I don’t see it.

Council of Trent, Session 25, Decree 2 “But if any one shall teach, or entertain sentiments, contrary to these decrees; let him be anathema.”

The praise the angel lavished on Mary.

Right, again, you will note the angel was not praying to Mary or even asking her intercession but was informing her that God was about to fulfill the prophecies to bring about the Messiah.

In that instance, the prayers he recommended to the holy saints.

I see no reference in that passage to indicate that James is commanding them to pray to the saints, unless you are using the Protestant use of saints, in which case the saints on earth are directing their prayers to God for the benefit of one another. If that is your meaning then we are in agreement.

There is such a thing as a prayer of praise.

Yes, and God being the object of that prayer. Again though, there is nothing about that passage that indicates that the angel is praying to or engaging in worship of Mary, but is doing his job, which is bringing a message from God to Mary.

The angel was passing on God’s praise of Mary. It is God’s words that he was repeating. It is annotated in the Bible in order to give you an example to follow.

I see nothing in that passage that indicates I am to pray to Mary. Again, you are presuming rather than proving that the angel is praying and you are presuming rather than proving that there is an explicit command here. If there is an example to follow, that would be in the Magnificat where Mary actually does pray to God and offers an actual hymn of praise for the coming savior. I gladly follow Blessed Mary in her example!

 

[Hodos]

Now if you don’t mind, I think I provided a pretty honest answer in my initial post why some people object to the title of Mother of God. It generally has to do with not understanding the historical context or the Christological significance that it was initially addressing, and is due to a general objection to the expansion of certain practices that many feel to go beyond what the scriptures present. If you want to debunk the objection to Mary as Mother of God, I would say you need to explain the Christological issues that were being addressed at the Council of Ephesus and how this term was making an affirmation that Christ is indeed fully God from all time. You might even quote verses such as John 1:1 and John 17:5, and Philippians 2:5-11, that demonstrate Christ’s pre-existent nature as God. I would leave out any efforts to convince them that they are to engage in supplication through prayer to Mary as that will cause them to reject your argument on an instinctual basis.

 

[De_Maria]

This actually refutes your position. First, the man in the parable is dead along with Abraham, this does not depict the living petitioning the dead.

On the contrary, it proves several Catholic Doctrines.

First, dead souls have awareness and consciousness.
Second, Fr. Abraham has authority in heaven to respond to petitions from other souls.
Third, even though there is a chasm between them, they can communicate with each other.
Fourth, there is no chasm between the living Christian and the Saints in heaven. See Heb 12:

22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, 23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,

Thus, there is no reason why the Saints in heaven can’t hear our prayers.

Fifth. Sins are expiated in suffering.

Second, Abraham informs him that he is incapable of fulfilling his request

In this instance and he explains why:

25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. 26 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.

Note that a great gulf exists between them. But no such gulf exists between Christians and the Saints. But the gist of this response is that the Rich man is suffering for his sins and Lazarus has already expiated his sin by suffering on earth.

and points back to the scriptures.

The term, Moses and the Prophets, does not point exclusively to Scripture. It also points to the traditions of the Jews, which were the main system in place for the Jews to get their religious instruction.

Again, the point of the passage is about how we should live in this life now.

The main point. But in conveying that point, Jesus revealed so much more.

cont’d

 

[De_Maria]

cont’d

Council of Trent, Session 25, Decree 2 “But if any one shall teach, or entertain sentiments, contrary to these decrees; let him be anathema.”

Now, since I’m showing you that these are all in Scripture, where is the innovation?

Right, again, you will note the angel was not praying to Mary or even asking her intercession but was informing her that God was about to fulfill the prophecies to bring about the Messiah.

You have agreed that the message is from God. Can we deduce then that God praised Mary through His Angel.

There’s 3 elements there.
a. God praised Mary.
b. God willed that His angel also praise Mary.
c. And if we skip further down in the chapter, the Holy Spirit inspired St. Elizabeth, a human being, to praise Mary also.
d. And, let us not forget that God inspired St. Luke to write this all down in Scripture for future generations.
e. But not Scripture alone, because this is also carried down in the Traditions of the Catholic Church.

I see no reference in that passage to indicate that James is commanding them to pray to the saints,

He is recommending.

unless you are using the Protestant use of saints,

That is not exclusive to Protestants. But, no, I’m referring to the Saints in heaven.

in which case the saints on earth are directing their prayers to God for the benefit of one another.

If you ask me or another Christian to pray to God on your behalf, who are you initially speaking to, the Christian or God?

If that is your meaning then we are in agreement.

Both examples suit me. Let’s give an example of St. James’ recommendation. Say you have a car problem and you talk to a friend. And he says, “There’s a lot of good mechanics. But there’s a mechanic on 1st Street that once he fixes your car, it never needs fixing again.”

Do you think he expects you to go to that mechanic?

Yes, and God being the object of that prayer.

Who is the object of this prayer?

Genesis 12:13 Say, I pray thee , thou art my sister: that it may be well with me for thy sake; and my soul shall live because of thee.

Again though, there is nothing about that passage that indicates that the angel is praying to

Is he praising Mary? Yes or no.

or engaging in worship of Mary,

We don’t worship the saints when we pray to them. We praise and petition them, that is all.

but is doing his job, which is bringing a message from God to Mary.

A message of praise, from God. Think about that. God praises Mary, but you refuse.

I see nothing in that passage that indicates I am to pray to Mary.

That’s too bad.

Again, you are presuming rather than proving that the angel is praying and you are presuming rather than proving that there is an explicit command here.

God’s word is my command.

If there is an example to follow, that would be in the Magnificat where Mary actually does pray to God and offers an actual hymn of praise for the coming savior. I gladly follow Blessed Mary in her example!

Luke 1:48 For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.

 

[De_Maria]

Now if you don’t mind, I think I provided a pretty honest answer in my initial post why some people object to the title of Mother of God.

I hope that we’re both being honest explaining our beliefs.

It generally has to do with not understanding the historical context or the Christological significance that it was initially addressing,

I agree with that.

and is due to a general objection to the expansion of certain practices that many feel to go beyond what the scriptures present.

Which in turn is due to the fact that Protestants discarded the historical context when they discarded Sacred Tradition.

If you want to debunk the objection to Mary as Mother of God, I would say you need to explain the Christological issues that were being addressed at the Council of Ephesus

We do. But most Protestants reject the Councils.

and how this term was making an affirmation that Christ is indeed fully God from all time. You might even quote verses such as John 1:1 and John 17:5, and Philippians 2:5-11, that demonstrate Christ’s pre-existent nature as God. I would leave out any efforts to convince them that they are to engage in supplication through prayer to Mary as that will cause them to reject your argument on an instinctual basis.

I try. But it’s very difficult to keep an entire forum on topic. If we’re talking about my discussions on that other forum, I bring up one topic and those who oppose Catholicism throw everything but the kitchen sink.

Nice talk.

 

[Justin_Mary]

I would leave out any efforts to convince them that they are to engage in supplication through prayer to Mary as that will cause them to reject your argument on an instinctual basis.

I “liked” this post because you presented a well thought out argument & I agree the story of Lazarus does not teach us to pray to the dead.

But they do show that the dead are not dead. Our God is the God of the living.

For me, the best scriptural references that leads me to pray to Mary is when Jesus says, “Behold your mother.” & the whole being at the foot of the cross thing.

At the foot of the cross there were Jesus’ followers (who were with Mary) & those who crucified him.

 

[Hodos]

For me, the best scriptural references that leads me to pray to Mary is when Jesus says, “Behold your mother.” & the whole being at the foot of the cross thing.

We would disagree about the interpretation of that verse as well, but I thank you for your charitable reading of where I was going with my advice.

 

[dochawk]

Not sure how a parable being used to demonstrate the consequences of sin in the afterlife and the fact that the living have the scriptures and the prophets to point them to righteousness (how about that, Sola Scriptura in action) is somehow being twisted to a command to direct religious worship of the dead.

I’m not sure whether the raw ignorance or the anti-Catholicism is more offensive . .