Non-Catholics, how is Mary not the Mother of God?

  • Thread starter Thread starter rwillenborg
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

rwillenborg

Guest
I had mentioned in another thread why this confuses me.
Here’s where I’m coming from.
Jesus = God
AND
Mary = Mother of Jesus

THEREFORE
Mary = Mother of God

See my confusion?
But, people say "Mary is the mother of Jesus, not God’ and I say ‘But Jesus IS God, right?’ and they say ‘Yes, but she is not the mother of God’ and then this is me -->:confused:

And some people say she gave birth to his human nature, not to Him, but that’s just nonsense. When I gave birth to my children I gave birth to a WHOLE PERSON, not a nature. How do you give birth to a nature? 🤷

Okay, so help me out. I know many non-catholics who defend their positions well, and most of them are here on CAF!! 🙂 So, a better understanding of this would be greatly appreciated. Also, if anyone has any links to the early Church Fathers who did not believe Mary to be the mother of God, and what they called her instead, that would help, too. I’m on something of an ECF kick right now. Thanks again in advance for your time!

PS - Also, an understanding of how Elizsabeth calling mary the Mother of my Lord differs from the term Mother of God. I don’t get that either.

I’m no ttrying to attack anyone’s position. This is something I simply don’t get. Thank you!
 
If a non-Catholic rejects the divinity of Jesus Christ, then they will naturally reject the concept that Mary is the Mother of God (Jesus). They also will reject the concept of the Holy Trinity.

Some non-Catholic religions do not believe that God takes a corporeal form. Instead, they hold the belief that God is invisible, and never took on the form of human nature in the form of Jesus Christ.

While they might agree that Mary was, therefore, the human mother of Jesus Christ, since they reject Christ, they will not agree that Mary was the Mother of God (Christ).

I also think that the way you are phrasing your question, some people might be thinking that you are stating that Mary is the Mother of God, the Father, as opposed to “Mary is the Mother of God, the Son”.
 
GerardMajella said:
I also think that the way you are phrasing your question, some people might be thinking that you are stating that Mary is the Mother of God, the Father, as opposed to “Mary is the Mother of God, the Son”.
Click to expand...
You are correct, Mary is the Mother of God, the Son. She did not bear God the Father, of course. But God the Father and God the Son are BOTH rightly considered God, right? So, Mary, rightly would be called the Mother of God, right?
The people I have talked to were non-denom christians, and I would think that they believed in the divinity of Christ.🤷
 
rwillenborg said:
You are correct, Mary is the Mother of God, the Son. She did not bear God the Father, of course. But God the Father and God the Son are BOTH rightly considered God, right? So, Mary, rightly would be called the Mother of God, right?
The people I have talked to were non-denom christians, and I would think that they believed in the divinity of Christ.🤷
Click to expand...
If you don’t believe in Jesus, I would think that means you’re not a Christian.
 
Well, Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons both deny the title Theotokos because they reject the co-eternality, co-divinity, co-equality, and consubstantiality of the Father and Son.*

Nestorianism was a solution proposed by His All-Holiness Nestorius, Archbishop of Constantinople, to the seeming paradox that a temporal person, Mary, became the mother of an eternal person. His solution was that Mary could only be the source of his humanity. Therefore, she could be termed the Mother of Christ (Christotokos) because Christ was a human. However, since Christ acted both as God and as Man, Nestorious thought it necessary to separate the components. Mary had originated the man Jesus Christ, but she had no part in the origin of his divinity. Furthermore, it necessitated that the man Jesus did things separate from

However, when taken to its completeness, his theory entails that there are two separate persons in a single body - God the Son, and Jesus the Christ. However, orthodox Christianity holds that God that Son is the one and the same person as Jesus the Christ. The two cannot be separated.

Nestorius was anathematized at Ephesus in 431, and while there is no official record of him explicitly recanting, he died in a monastery, apparently orthodox.

We cannot separate Christ’s humanity and divinity from. They are both aspects he has. So, the questions Nestorius asked are legitimate, and must be answered.

How did Christ get his divinity? By being begotten by God the Father, making him God the Son.

When did Christ get his divinity? Before all ages.

How was Christ able to act as God when he was on earth? Because he is divine.

How did Christ get his humanity? By being begotten of the Virgin Mary by the power of the Holy Spirit, making him the Son of Man.

When did Christ get his humanity? When he was conceived by the Virgin Mary.

How was Christ able to act as a man when he was on earth? Because he was human.

He has both traits, humanity, and divinity. However, there are not human and divine parts. The singular person Jesus Christ is divine and human simultaneously.

This means that he deserves two titles, Adam, and God. Adam he deserves because of his humanity, God because of his divinity.

The confusion comes when people mistake the titles Adam and God for two persons who most perfectly bear those titles. Adam of Genesis, who is the origin of all other persons who are Adam, and God the Father, who is the origin of all other divine persons (but not Gods).

Because Mary was Christ’s Mother, she is appropriately called the Mother of Adam, and the Mother of God. However, neither means that she originated humanity or divinity. It refers to the physical reality of child-bearing which she enacted upon a divine person.

*Slightly more complex with the Mormons because they believe, as I understood it, that all matter and persons were initially disorganized “intelligences” which at some point, infinitely long ago in a regression of Gods, became organized. Through various methods, more intelligences were organized in Gods. Heavenly Father, in Mormonism, began his existence as an intelligence in eternity - just like us. The only advantage he has is that his intelligence was organized by his God and Father before ours. This is a facet of Mormon doctrine that many people, even Mormons, are unfamiliar with. Of course, the LDS Church has recently tried to back away from the emphasis of these beliefs as it’s unpalatable to most of their converts. However, as far as I know, it’s still on the books.
 
WetCatechumen said:
How did Christ get his humanity? By being begotten of the Virgin Mary by the power of the Holy Spirit, making him the Son of Man.
Click to expand...
Christ is not begotten of the Virgin Mary. we profess that Jesus was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit and BORN of the Virgin Mary

in the Nicene Creed it is further professed that Jesus was “beggotten, not made” of the Father. but through the Virgin Mary He was MADE man
 
Why is she not the Mother of the Holy Spirit if Jesus, the Father, and Holy Spirit are one?
Perhaps that would clarify this for me.
 
Rightlydivide said:
Why is she not the Mother of the Holy Spirit if Jesus, the Father, and Holy Spirit are one?
Perhaps that would clarify this for me.
Click to expand...
because only Jesus shared in our humanity
remember the Trinity is 3 distinct persons, but one God
 
choy said:
because only Jesus shared in our humanity
remember the Trinity is 3 distinct persons, but one God
Click to expand...
That is true but how does that answer the question? Did God the Father share our humanity? My how is a legitimate how. You state a fact but how it directly relates alludes me as of yet.
You know all of this would have been rendered moot if your council would have simply said “Mother of God the Son”. Or did they? I never read the official council report or its been awhile.
 
its Biblical

[BIBLEDRB]Luke 1:43[/BIBLEDRB]

see that Elizabeth herself didn’t say, “Lord the Son,” but just “Lord”
 
Kyrios does not specifically only refer to the Father or Christ’s relationship to Him. It depends on the context. It has several different uses. Are you suggesting in this passage that it means Mother of God?
It literally does not say “Mother of God”. You of course know the difference between the words.
 
RightlyDivide: Maybe this would help. Mother of God implies the Son and although it would have been easier to call her “Mother of God the Son” (I do not actualy know the exact council title either), it would also have been easier for Jesus to show the Pharisees a sign or for God to just make a huge miracle for everyone to believe. Saying that Mary is also the “Mother of the Holy Spirit” (or Father) is denying uniqueness and distinctness of the Holy Trinity. That implies instead that they are a Unity which, as a Christian, would be absurd. Mary is Mother of God, the Son. The law of non-contradiction also applies here. Yes the Father is God; the Son is God; the Holy Spirit is God. But that cannot mean that the Son is the Father (or any other combination). Sorry for my redundancies. Mary is Mother of the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, the Son, the Word, the Logos. That help or am I a bad explainer-of-things?
 
GreggAlvarez said:
RightlyDivide: Maybe this would help. Mother of God implies the Son and although it would have been easier to call her “Mother of God the Son” (I do not actualy know the exact council title either), it would also have been easier for Jesus to show the Pharisees a sign or for God to just make a huge miracle for everyone to believe. Saying that Mary is also the “Mother of the Holy Spirit” (or Father) is denying uniqueness and distinctness of the Holy Trinity. That implies instead that they are a Unity which, as a Christian, would be absurd. Mary is Mother of God, the Son. The law of non-contradiction also applies here. Yes the Father is God; the Son is God; the Holy Spirit is God. But that cannot mean that the Son is the Father (or any other combination). Sorry for my redundancies. Mary is Mother of the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, the Son, the Word, the Logos. That help or am I a bad explainer-of-things.
Click to expand...
No, you are not a bad explainer. I think that for Catholics, the title’s full implication is part of your framework. You get it because you know it implies it.
You know what it does not imply. Those outside of your background, like me, do not necessarily agree OR disagree it just takes a lot more work to understand why exactly you do mean!
Thanks for responding. Have a good day.
 
Rightlydivide said:
That is true but how does that answer the question? Did God the Father share our humanity? My how is a legitimate how. You state a fact but how it directly relates alludes me as of yet.
You know all of this would have been rendered moot if your council would have simply said “Mother of God the Son”. Or did they? I never read the official council report or its been awhile.
Click to expand...
Well, if it had, you’d have people claiming that Jesus wasn’t fully God. You see it now with the JWs for example.

Now, Jesus died on the cross, right? The Father and Spirit did not die on the cross, did they?

BUT. . .we don’t say that because the Father and Spirit did not die ‘with’ Jesus that Jesus didn’t die because THOSE TWO didn’t die, right? How can that be? They’re all God–but they didn’t all die.

See, the Father and the Spirit did not die. Yet the Son did.

One God–Three Persons – Two of the Persons did not die; One did.

Two of the Persons were not incarnate of the Virgin Mary–One was.

Now. . .do we say that when Christ died for us that He somehow ‘wasn’t God’ when He died?
So. . .when Christ was born of Mary, was He somehow not God?

Is Christ somehow 'less God" as Christ?
 
Rightlydivide said:
Kyrios does not specifically only refer to the Father or Christ’s relationship to Him. It depends on the context. It has several different uses. Are you suggesting in this passage that it means Mother of God?
It literally does not say “Mother of God”. You of course know the difference between the words.
Click to expand...
it refers to the same Person. throughout the Bible, Lord and God are used interchangable to refer to God
 
A Catholic in conversation with a Protestant:

CATH: Theotokos is greek for " Mother of God".

PROTEST: I have a problem with calling her “Mother of God”.

CATH: Then, who was she the mother of?

PROTEST: She gave birth to Jesus.

CATH: And giving birth makes you a…

PROTEST: Mother.

CATH: Then Mary was the mother of…

PROTEST: Jesus.

CATH: And Jesus is…

PROTEST: God.

CATH: Then Mary is the Mother of God.

PROTEST: I have a problem with calling her that.

CATH: Apparently.
 
Tantum_ergo said:
Well, if it had, you’d have people claiming that Jesus wasn’t fully God. You see it now with the JWs for example.

Now, Jesus died on the cross, right? The Father and Spirit did not die on the cross, did they?

BUT. . .we don’t say that because the Father and Spirit did not die ‘with’ Jesus that Jesus didn’t die because THOSE TWO didn’t die, right? How can that be? They’re all God–but they didn’t all die.

See, the Father and the Spirit did not die. Yet the Son did.

One God–Three Persons – Two of the Persons did not die; One did.

Two of the Persons were not incarnate of the Virgin Mary–One was.

Now. . .do we say that when Christ died for us that He somehow ‘wasn’t God’ when He died?
So. . .when Christ was born of Mary, was He somehow not God?

Is Christ somehow 'less God" as Christ?
Click to expand...
I get your point but thats not the worlds best example for many reasons. First, nothing you said in your example really says why he could not be called God the Son. Because He is. Right?
Next, and most importantly, When do you ever hear a non-Trinitarian call Jesus God the Son? IF you do, Christ is not the problem usually anyone. It ususally breaks down around the Holy Spirit.
Absolutely nothing about saying God the Son diminishes anyone. In fact, it clarifies. The Father is God. The Holy Spirit is God. Christ is God. All three are God. See?
Nevertheless, this is what your church spent a great deal of time talking about and we still end up with the same view on things in regards to the Trinity even without this.
 
This subject is indeed a mystery and we as God’s sons, we try to understand His mysteries. So we must take this subject seriously and with all the due respect. Everyone has his/her way of viewing it, if someone has it wrong, that person doesn’t have it wrong because he/she wants, that person is only trying to understand, some people are unable to digest a mystery and are better off thinking that because they leave the subject plain and simple to avoid confusion, others however try to understand it, and this sometimes, leads to a better spiritual growth.

My view:

Mary is the mother of Jesus human nature. Yes human nature, when people have a son they only make the body(this case the Holy Spirit and Mary), God is the One who gives the life to this person(Job 33:4). Jesus is God and He was before Mary and anyone else.

Colossians 1:16
For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him.

John 1:3
Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

Without Jesus, Mary couldn’t have been made. Also remember Jesus gave up His God status when He came to Earth.

Philippians 2:6-8
Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death–even death on a cross!

Jesus was tempted and this temptations were hard for Him to overcome, He suffered them, and never sinned. He was tempted in every way (Heb 4:15) , and yet He didn’t sin. It was hard for Him but He made it through, because He had faith in the One who sent him. Jesus lived a human life here, Mary was His mother in His lifetime as a human because He already was, “before Abraham I was”. So Mary is the mother of Jesus human nature.

God bless.
 
The doctrine of the Theotokos, or Mary as Mother of God, is intended more to say who Jesus is than to say who Mary is.

She is the “God-Bearer” (Theotokos) because the Person whom she bore is a divine person, not a human person. (He does have a human nature, as well as a human nature, but the Person whom He is, is the 2nd Person of the Trinity.)

She is not the Mother of the Father, or the Mother of the Holy Spirit, because those are distinct divine Persons, who have no human mother and no human nature, and no human birth. It was only the Son who became incarnate as man, and was born of Mary.

Because the Person whom she bore was a divine Person we can call her mother of God.
That in no way implies that she preceded the Son in existence.

I do not call my own mother, the mother of my human nature only, since obviously she did not supply my immortal soul. But I am a human person with an immortal soul, and she is my mother
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top