If you do Not believe that Blessed Mary is the Mother of God, than who do you believe Jesus Christ is?

[SyCarl]

I’ve never heard anything about Mary not having birthing pains, not from Catholics or any other denomination. But let’s read on in Revelation 12:

"She gave birth to a son, a male child, destined to rule all the nations with an iron rod. Her child was caught up to God and His throne. The woman herself fled into the desert where she had a place prepared by God, that there she might be taken of for twelve hundred and sixty days (5-9).

Then in verses 13-18: “When the dragon saw that it had been thrown down to the earth, it pursued the woman who had given birth to the male child. But the woman was given the two wings of the great eagle, so that she could fly to her place in the desert, wher, far from the serpent, she was taken care of . The serpent, however, spewed a torrent of water out of his mouth after the woman to sweep her away with the current. But the earth helped the woman and opened its mouth and swallowed the flood that the dragon spewed out of its mouth.”

If the dragon never could affect the woman, it means that she never fell under his influence. If this is Mary,( and I’m sure it is, so not to beg the question), it would be consistent with the belief that Mary never sinned.

There appears to be a problem with this woman being Mary. The Assumption of Mary teaches that Mary was assumed bodily into Heaven. Now the dragon was cast down from Heaven yet he was still able to pursue the woman which would indicate that she on earth, not in Heaven.

 

[JackVk]

There appears to be a problem with this woman being Mary. The Assumption of Mary teaches that Mary was assumed bodily into Heaven. Now the dragon was cast down from Heaven yet he was still able to pursue the woman which would indicate that she on earth, not in Heaven.

But the time when Mary was assumed into Heaven is never specified. This could have happened before the Assumption.

 

[SyCarl]

But the time when Mary was assumed into Heaven is never specified. This could have happened before the Assumption.

The arguments I have seen about the Assumption and Revelation 12 are that the woman appears in Heaven and this means Mary is in Heaven. However this ignores the later verse which place the same woman on earth.

 

[seeker57]

Jesus was a wise Jewish man and teacher, which is why he is so often described as a rabbi.

 

[panner]

I don’t believe she is the Mother of God in the sense that God started with her giving birth. God has no beginning and no ending and in reality no parents, He is the Great I Am

 

[ByHisWounds]

Panner, if I could “like” your post I would.

 

[BlueShadow123]

She is NOT the mother of God.

She is the mother of Jesus. Jesus was a human.

God himself does not have parents. Then again, I don’t know, ive never personally met him to ask the question, but if he did, I do not think it would be Mary. That means Mary must be the original God along with Gods father, who was married to Mary and had God in heaven?

Yea right. But anything is possible I guess.

However if this was true, Mary would not have to question Jesus’s sanity if she was Gods mother.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

I think I said this either earlier in this thread or on another one, but…

Remember what Gabriel said to Mary when he greeted her at the annunciation?
“Hail, Full of Grace (that’s where we fish-eaters get it). You have found favor with the Lord. You SHALL bear a son, and you SHALL name him Jesus.”

In other words, Mary had no choice but to be the Mother of God. There was no tree with an abortificient apple in her backyard.

So are you saying that Mary had no free will? That her yes means nothing?

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

She is NOT the mother of God.

She is the mother of Jesus. Jesus was a human.

As I said before, we are using different definitions. When we Catholics say that Mary is the Mother of God we are not saying that she is the source of Jesus’ Divinity, only that she gave birth to Jesus who had two natures, Human and Divine.

Look at it logically.

1. Mary gave birth to Jesus
2. Jesus is God
   so therefore
3. Mary is the Mother of God

You use a different definition, one that includes being the source of something,

It is like we are speaking a different language.

You can not argue against our Catholic beliefs using your protestant definition.

 

[Roy5]

The problem with Mary being the mother of God is that God was not created. So, the language is misleading.

Mary was the mother of Jesus, the human Jesus. God did not have parents in any sense whatsoever. To me, it is demeaning God to even suggest that. 

And why isn't it quite enough that Mary was given the privilege of bearing Jesus? To make her the mother of God is, in my view, to make her a goddess, nothing less.

I think this is where many Protestants and also many Catholics take issue. Honor Mary as the mother of Jesus, but she should not be venerated. Why is the most popular prayer among Catholics the 'Hail Mary' and not the 'Our Father', specifically taught by Christ? The 'Hail Mary' took the words of an angel to which the church later added a prayer to Mary - "Holy Mary, pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death." That is not scriptural.

 In all the epistles of St. Paul and the other writers Mary is not mentioned once. Why is that? If she should receive such adulation and veneration, doesn't it seem likely that they would have made reference to her in some of those instructions to early believers. 

 It is no slight to Mary - in my view - when she is honored for being the mother of the human Christ. To make her somehow creator of the creator in any sense is questionable. God simply did not have parents. God was and is from everlasting to everlasting. Jesus the man had a mother.

 

[Daegus]

If you think about it (correctly, mind you), saying that Mary is not the Mother of God is a logically untenable assertion.

This, however, only applies if you believe Jesus is God.

 

[BlueShadow123]

Jesus is God in human form, but God himself, in heaven, was the creator of all, which means he essentially created Mary, not really the other way around. She did create the human though.

 

[Daegus]

Jesus is God in human form, but God himself, in heaven, was the creator of all, which means he essentially created Mary, not really the other way around. She did create the human though.

So, you agree that Jesus is God, therefore effectively defeating your own argument.

No one is saying that Mary is the Mother of God The Father, but she is the Mother of God The Son, unless you believe that Jesus isn’t God. God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) created the universe and everything in it along with Mary, and Mary did not create Jesus because He has always existed. However, what Mary did do was give birth to the person of Jesus Christ who happens to be God, therefore making her the Mother of God turned flesh.

Like I said, if you believe that Jesus is God, you cannot defend the position that Mary is not the Mother of God unless you want to deny logic.

 

[lil_flower_luv]

Jesus is God in human form, but God himself, in heaven, was the creator of all, which means he essentially created Mary, not really the other way around. She did create the human though.

Why are Jesus (God) and the Father (God) suddenly separate from each other?

Mary isn’t the Mother of God to one who doesn’t have basic Christian beliefs.

 

[BlueShadow123]

So, you agree that Jesus is God, therefore effectively defeating your own argument.

No one is saying that Mary is the Mother of God The Father, but she is the Mother of God The Son, unless you believe that Jesus isn’t God. God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) created the universe and everything in it along with Mary, and Mary did not create Jesus because He has always existed. However, what Mary did do was give birth to the person of Jesus Christ who happens to be God, therefore making her the Mother of God turned flesh.

Like I said, if you believe that Jesus is God, you cannot defend the position that Mary is not the Mother of God unless you want to deny logic.

What I highlighted and colored is exactly what I am talking about. So you basically agreed with what I said, you just didn’t apparently understand what I said.

 

[lil_flower_luv]

To make her somehow creator of the creator in any sense is questionable.

Ahh, but is Mother the same as Creator? I think not.

Mary gave birth to the human form of God (that makes her Mother), but she did not “create” God or even the divine form of Jesus (simply by looking at the definition of what it is to “create.”) Did Mary bring God into existence? No. She was a vessel. The Ark of the New Covenant. A whole other thread.

P.S. Can the “it’s not scriptural therefore it isn’t true” argument please be taken out of this discussion? I can ask you countless questions about Christian beliefs–that you and I both share–that are not cited in the Bible -
“Hold fast to the TRADITIONS you were taught EITHER by an oral statement or by a letter of ours.” (2 Thess.2:15).

Let it go is all I ask.

 

[benedictus2]

I think that Jesus (if he existed) was a good man, to be sure, and made a difference to many people, but, I believe he is/was a man.

We can equivocate on this one. Jesus is God.
If we say that Jesus is a good man and do not believe that He is God then he cannot be a good man because he is either demented or a liar to be claiming to be God.

If we accept that He is indeed a good man, then, because of the claims He made, we have to accept that He is God.

And his mother, Mary, was a woman.
Not a god or the mother of a god, a woman…

So if Jesus is God and Mary is His mother then Mary is the Mother of God.

 

[benedictus2]

She is NOT the mother of God.

She is the mother of Jesus. Jesus was a human.

God himself does not have parents. Then again, I don’t know, ive never personally met him to ask the question, but if he did, I do not think it would be Mary. That means Mary must be the original God along with Gods father, who was married to Mary and had God in heaven?

Yea right. But anything is possible I guess.

However if this was true, Mary would not have to question Jesus’s sanity if she was Gods mother.

Have you ever heard of a heresy called Nestorianism?

This post smacks of that.

Jesus is both human and divine and you cannot separate the two because God became incarnate, that is God became human. In becoming Human He did not loose His Divinity and in remaining Divine He is at the same time fully Human.

So the God become man is both Human and Divine.

And Mary gave birth to God.

How is that possible? To God everything is possible.

 

[benedictus2]

The problem with Mary being the mother of God is that God was not created. So, the language is misleading.

Mary was the mother of Jesus, the human Jesus. God did not have parents in any sense whatsoever. To me, it is demeaning God to even suggest that.

Well duh. It is God who suggested that. No more than suggested that. It is God who made that possible.

You cannot separate the human Jesus from the Divine Jesus because there is only one Jesus.

And why isn’t it quite enough that Mary was given the privilege of bearing Jesus? To make her the mother of God is, in my view, to make her a goddess, nothing less.

We did not make her the Mother of God. God was the one who made her His mother.

You have an issue with God not with the Church.

I think this is where many Protestants and also many Catholics take issue. Honor Mary as the mother of Jesus, but she should not be venerated. Why is the most popular prayer among Catholics the ‘Hail Mary’ and not the ‘Our Father’, specifically taught by Christ? The ‘Hail Mary’ took the words of an angel to which the church later added a prayer to Mary - “Holy Mary, pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death.” That is not scriptural.

What is the most unscriptural is the sinners prayer and yet most protestants say that, that is how one gets “saved” when nowhere in any part o the Bible will you find that.

We can find more Biblical support for the Hail Mary than you can for the sinners prayer.

In all the epistles of St. Paul and the other writers Mary is not mentioned once. Why is that? If she should receive such adulation and veneration, doesn’t it seem likely that they would have made reference to her in some of those instructions to early believers.

So what? The Gospels of Mark, Matthew, Luke and John mention her. And all these four Gospels say she is the mother of Jesus. Not the human Jesus but simply Jesus.

That is so typically protestant hoping to debunk the gospel with an epistle.

It is no slight to Mary - in my view - when she is honored for being the mother of the human Christ.

Well duh, the Human Christ is at the same time God. You are falling into Nestorian heresy.

To make her somehow creator of the creator in any sense is questionable. God simply did not have parents. God was and is from everlasting to everlasting. Jesus the man had a mother.

And another major duh. Who said that by giving birth to Jesus she is the creator? Do you say that you are the creator of your children? If you do then I say that is one of the most stupid things you can say. Mary is no more the creator of God than you are the creator of your children. This argument is really ill thought on your part.

 

[Daegus]

What I highlighted and colored is exactly what I am talking about. So you basically agreed with what I said, you just didn’t apparently understand what I said.

Didn’t I just say I agreed with you? What point are you even trying to make anymore?

I’d rather not endlessly repeat myself refuting a position that can’t logically be defended if one truly believes that Jesus is God.