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

[Dokimas]

Doki ,

Why must “God’s opinion” of Our Lady be so low? A surrogate mother only gives birth to a child and their relationship ends with all that is physical. But a true mother’s relationship with her child surpasses the flesh. A mother is part of her child’s life in every single way. Beyond feeding, clothing, and protecting him from harm, a mother cares for her child and is involved both socially and spiritually in his life. Mary did not leave Jesus to someone else’s care after giving birth to Him. She did all that is required of a mother with love and humility. She is not “surrogate.” Her very role in the life of Jesus following the Will of the Father defines motherhood itself!

+Peace

Mary carried Jesus for nine months (give or take). She then nurtured Him in His Humanity. So I guess she was more than a surrogate, a surrogate plus an adoptive parent.

I’m looking forward to God straightening out my idea, if it’s that important for me to understand the particulars. It may not be til Heaven, though.

 

[Dokimas]

*I have just jumped in here. I need to ask you how do Protestants interpret Luke 1:43 “Any why has this happened to me, that the mother of my Lord comes to me?” What do Protestants believe Elizabeth meant by “the mother of my Lord” ?

Cinette*
*
CORRECTION
*
Luke 1:43 “Why has this happened to me that the mother of my Lord comes to me?”

First of all, it does not say ‘mother of my God’.

Then I’d refer you to my last post for the rest of my ideas on the subject.

 

[Dokimas]

How do you know that the process that God took was not similar to this? How do you know that God did not use Mary’s ovum?

I do not know and I don’t believe you know what happened either. The difference with respect to our beliefs is you are dogmatic and I am not. You could be correct making me incorrect.

 

[Cruxis117]

Mary carried Jesus for nine months (give or take). She then nurtured Him in His Humanity. So I guess she was more than a surrogate, a surrogate plus an adoptive parent.

I’m looking forward to God straightening out my idea, if it’s that important for me to understand the particulars. It may not be til Heaven, though.

This again, comes to the conclusion that Mothers (who she is, not an adoptive parent but his Biological Mother) give birth to Persons, not Natures. My mother did not give birth to my humanity, she gave birth to Me. Jesus was God from the beginning, through the Incarnation, and through his death and Resurrection.

While you’ve correctly stated that Jesus had a human body (not an alien body, to be sure), it would be foolish to cross into the idea of Nestorianism, which IS heresy to the fullest extent. This heresy attempts to split Jesus into two different ‘natures’, Human and Divine, when it is fact that Jesus was fully man and fully God. Look up the Hypostatic Union. Jesus has one nature, one essence, not two natures.

 

[Dokimas]

But since you said that Mary was not the mother, then there has to be a mother. Every human being has a mother. Jesus was fully human, so therefore Jesus had a mother.
Here are parts of my posts where you replied “sounds like a surrogate mother to me”
Benedictus: Only God can bring to existence. The mother and father are only the means by which God does this."
Benedictus: a female person who is pregnant with or gives birth to a child.
Since all mothers both fall under 1 and 2, then, you are therefore saying that there only surrogate mothers, no real mothers.

Both 1 and 2 define real mothers.

Nope God was not created in Mary's womb BUT Jesus the God-Man was incarnated in Mary’s womb.so therefore Mary was his mother.

Jesus was both fully Human and fully Divine. The Second Person of the Trinity had no beginning, but Jesus the Man-God, a the point of the Incarnation.

Like everyone else who have disputed the term Mother of God, you make this same mistake.

There is a third mother, an adoptive mother which is very much a mother to a child.

Correct me if I’m wrong: a surrogate has planted inside her a fertilized ovum (ovum from another woman) and the unborn grows inside her and she give birth to the child

Then there’s the mother that ovulates, recieves sperm, the ovum is fertilized withing her body and she give birth to the child.

I just realized there’s a fourth: the mother who’s ovum (fertilized) that is placed inside the surrogate who receives the child and brings it up after birth.

 

[Cruxis117]

First of all, it does not say ‘mother of my God’.

Then I’d refer you to my last post for the rest of my ideas on the subject.

While you are correct that it does not say ‘Mother of God’, the text says ‘Mother of my Lord’. Now, when people in that time used the word ‘Lord’ (also look at the surrounding verses in this chapter, 28, 32, 38, 46, 58, 68) they were referring to God. To refer to Mary as ‘the Mother of my Lord’, she was saying ‘the Mother of my God’. Because as we agree, Jesus is God. And in the rest of the New Testament, Jesus was always referred to as Lord, for we recieve him as our Lord, as our God. This is self-evident.

 

[Dokimas]

While you are correct that it does not say ‘Mother of God’, the text says ‘Mother of my Lord’. Now, when people in that time used the word ‘Lord’ (also look at the surrounding verses in this chapter, 28, 32, 38, 46, 58, 68) they were referring to God. To refer to Mary as ‘the Mother of my Lord’, she was saying ‘the Mother of my God’. Because as we agree, Jesus is God. And in the rest of the New Testament, Jesus was always referred to as Lord, for we recieve him as our Lord, as our God. This is self-evident.

In Revelation the term Lord God is found. Should it say, “God God”?

 

[Cinette]

First of all, it does not say ‘mother of my God’.

Then I’d refer you to my last post for the rest of my ideas on the subject.

*My question was how do Protestants interpret those words “mother of my Lord”? What did Elizabeth mean by Lord? Why did the child within her heave? Was Elizabeth not speaking from inspiration by the Holy Spirit? Why would the Holy Spirit inspire Elizabeth to speak in such a way?

Thank you
Cinette

 

[Cinette]

I do not know and I don’t believe you know what happened either. The difference with respect to our beliefs is you are dogmatic and I am not. You could be correct making me incorrect.

*What is wrong about being dogmatic about truth?

Cinette*

 

[Cruxis117]

In Revelation the term Lord God is found. Should it say, “God God”?

Of course not. But that’s a rather poor strawman. I am not saying that the word Lord meant God, but referred to God. We agree that the word Lord was commonly used to address God. In the same way that we address the King as King. To speak of the ‘Lord God’, we address who he is.

To address Jesus as ‘Lord’ was to say that he was God. No one else was called the Lord, except Jesus, who was the Lord God himself.

Therefore, my previous reply to your statement still stands.

 

[Cinette]

There is a third mother, an adoptive mother which is very much a mother to a child.

Correct me if I’m wrong: a surrogate has planted inside her a fertilized ovum (ovum from another woman) and the unborn grows inside her and she give birth to the child

Then there’s the mother that ovulates, recieves sperm, the ovum is fertilized withing her body and she give birth to the child.

I just realized there’s a fourth: the mother who’s ovum (fertilized) that is placed inside the surrogate who receives the child and brings it up after birth.

*Hmmmmmmm…!

What has this got to do with the Blessed Virgin Mary?

*

 

[benedictus2]

There is a third mother, an adoptive mother which is very much a mother to a child.

Correct me if I’m wrong: a** surrogate has planted inside her a fertilized ovum (ovum from another woman**) and the unborn grows inside her and she give birth to the child

Exactly! That is why I keep asking you, was there another woman’s ovum involved in the conception of Jesus to make Mary only a surrogate mother. Is there anything in the Bible that suggests this?

Then there’s the mother that ovulates, recieves sperm, the ovum is fertilized withing her body and she give birth to the child.

Which based on Biblical account and on how God acts in nature is what happened to Mary except that there was no human sperm involved but the Holy Spirit.

I just realized there’s a fourth: the mother who’s ovum (fertilized) that is placed inside the surrogate who receives the child and brings it up after birth.

This is the same as the one you described above (surrogacy) but viewed from the other woman’s angle.

 

[benedictus2]

In Revelation the term Lord God is found. Should it say, “God God”?

Mental gymnastics aside, what do you think Elizabeth meant when she referred to the Child in Mary’s womb as my Lord?

Are you saying that the Child in Mary’s womb was not God? That Elizabeth meant something else?

 

[elvisman]

You are welcome to your opinion.

Sounds like the old ‘clobber the opposition in the head’ Elvisman I’ve come to know.

Wrong conclusion as to what I believe. Jesus DID have a HUMAN nature, yet without sin. His Body was HUMAN. (no herecy here, my friend)

It’s no opinion about your belief. It is a dead-on observation.
You are espousing a bizarre belief, the like of which I have never heard before from ANY Christian, Catholic or Protestant.

Secondly, nobody is “clobbering” you for your opposing belief.
What I would like to know - but I won’t hold my breath for - is WHERE you came about this belief that Mary was a “surrogate mother”. I’d like to know which church, theologian, preacher or Church father taught you this belief.

Finally, Doki - it’s ALWAYS heresey when somebody tries to divide Christ’s 2 indivisible natures. This was the case with ALL of the early heresies. Virtually EVERY heresy begins with the miscponception of the nature of God.

 

[elvisman]

In Revelation the term Lord God is found. Should it say, “God God”?

The Greek word for, “Lord” used by Elizabeth in Luke 1:43 is kurios, which usually means “God”.
κυριου noun - genitive singular masculine
kurios koo’-ree-os: supreme in authority, i.e. (as noun) controller; by implication, Master (as a respectful title) – God, Lord, master, Sir.

However, Elizabeth and Mary didn’t speak Greek, the language of commerce in 1st century Palestine and the surrounding areas. They spoke ARAMAIC. You HAVE to get beyond the Greek to truly understand what was being said in Scripture.

What Elizabeth would have said to Mary in Aramaic was "MarYah”, which is the Aramaic for “LORD JHVH” (Yaweh). She would have asked:
"And how does this happen to me, that the mother of "MarYah” should come to me?"

---

In this passage - she was asking how the mother of GOD should come to her.
Any questions . . . ?

 

[SunshineZA]

et factum est ut audivit salutationem Mariae Elisabeth exultavit infans in utero eius et repleta est Spiritu Sancto Elisabeth
42 et exclamavit voce magna et dixit benedicta tu inter mulieres et benedictus fructus ventris tui
43 et unde hoc mihi ut veniat mater Domini mei ad me
44 ecce enim ut facta est vox salutationis tuae in auribus meis exultavit in gaudio infans in utero meo
Luke 1:41-44 (Vulgate)

Even the unborn baby John the Baptist leapt in Elisabeths womb when he heard the voice of Mary now carrying our Lord Jesus Christ in her womb - Also remember that He, the Logos was not called ‘Jesus’ before His conception - Angel Gabriel told Mary that His name shall be Jesus (Emmanuel) meaning: God is with us.

English Translation.
42 She said in a loud voice, “You are the most blessed of all women, and blessed is the child that you will have. 43 I feel blessed that the mother of my Lord is visiting me. 44 As soon as I heard your greeting, I felt the baby jump for joy. 45 You are blessed for believing that the Lord would keep his promise to you.”
Luke 1:42-45 (GW)

Notice that the word LORD is used twice in the scripture quoted above. Meaning Lord God.

Regards,

 

[SunshineZA]

By reference to Psalm 22 our Saviour confounded the Pharisees, Matthew 22:42-46. … That the passage in this Psalm refers to the Messiah is clear. … Our Saviour, in Matthew 22:42-46, expressly applied it thus, and in such a manner as to show that this was the well-understood doctrine of the Jews. … Matthew 22:42, etc.

How Can David’s Son Be David’s Lord?
41 While the Pharisees were still gathered, Jesus asked them, 42 “What do you think about the Messiah? Whose son is he?”
They answered him, “David’s.”
43 He said to them, “Then how can David, guided by the Spirit, call him Lord? David says,
44 ‘The Lord said to my Lord,
“Take the highest position in heaven
until I put your enemies under your control.”’

Matt 22:41-44 (GW)

My God, my God,
why have you abandoned me?
Why are you so far away from helping me,
so far away from the words of my groaning?

Psalms 22:1 (GW)

Let God rescue him since he is pleased with him!”
9 Indeed, you are the one who brought me out of the womb,
the one who made me feel safe at my mother’s breasts.
10 I was placed in your care from birth.
From my mother’s womb you have been my God.

Psalms 22:8-10 (GW)

 

[Cinette]

*I would still like to learn how Protestants interpret this passage.

Cinette*

 

[Dokimas]

*My question was how do Protestants interpret those words “mother of my Lord”? What did Elizabeth mean by Lord? Why did the child within her heave? Was Elizabeth not speaking from inspiration by the Holy Spirit? Why would the Holy Spirit inspire Elizabeth to speak in such a way?

Thank you
Cinette

I believe ‘lord’ is a term given to rulers, people of high authority.

John, in Elizabeth, no doubt knew Jesus was special. Jesus said John was Elijah, who never died. If John is who Jesus said he was, God, somehow put Elijah into the womb of Elizabeth.

 

[Dokimas]

*What is wrong about being dogmatic about truth?

Cinette*

Nothing wrong about being dogmatic about Truth. The problem is with being dogmatic about something that is only part truth or not truth at all. Sometimes we need to be careful what we are dogmatic about.