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

[PRmerger]

please correct me also. i feel very uncomfortable with people saying Mary gave birth to only Jesus human nature, and not the whole package. am i missing something here? i dont think we can seperate the two. somehow i offended a previous poster by stating they had done this. thx in advance. Peace

You are correct to be uncomfortable with people saying Mary gave birth to a human nature.

Ask them if they believe their mom gave birth to a human nature. Point made.

 

[benidict]

You are correct to be uncomfortable with people saying Mary gave birth to a human nature.

Ask them if they believe their mom gave birth to a human nature. Point made.

appreciate it. thats what i thought. i guess im a pit bull when it comes to Catholic Doctrine. this is a very tough subject. you are doing marvellous! Peace

 

[Pat_De]

You are correct to be uncomfortable with people saying Mary gave birth to a human nature.

Ask them if they believe their mom gave birth to a human nature. Point made.

Yeah, the attributes of being God for one. Omnipresent for example.

 

[Pat_De]

Indeed.

Yes.

I wonder, though, if someone was called the “firstborn”, did that necessarily mean that there were other children in the family? That is, can an only child be a “firstborn”?

That depends wholly on the context of the reading. For example, the “firstborn” among many brethren has the same context of preeminence, but another context could be “And she gave birth to her firstborn son; and she wrapped Him in cloths, and laid Him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn.” (Luke 2) – Her it is as it states; her first child.

 

[Pat_De]

fair enough, and you are correct! it is impossible for the One True Church to err in doctrine or morals. and for the record. i was a fundamentalist protestant, and i believed hook line and sinker what fundamentilism taught. so I know how fundamentalist think. so in areas like this, i think we need to go to the One True Church to get our answers. it is unfortunate that you felt like she didnt have them. God bless you, and my prayers for you my friend. Peace

This is a good example of a false faith; you claim you bought into it, yet you walked away from it, so you were never wholly convinced because if you had been you would have persevered; likewise people claim to have faith in Jesus and even participate with and hang around with like-minded people, only to later decide it isn’t right and they do not believe it so they turn around. True faith is true faith because it perseveres; it is its character to do so, whatever the faith. We take your word that you have true faith in the Catholic magisterium because by your actions you demonstrate it, but if you later change your mind and turn around, although you participated in everything Catholic, your faith was not real.

This is just a hypothetical ting here to demonstrate that real faith perseveres by its very nature, which is why people that claim to have faith in Christ and later walk away never had a true faith to begin with or they believed it was true until they found more information and decided …nahhww I don’t believe this or want anything to do with this; this is why John stated "They went out from us, but they were not {really} of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but {they went out,} so that it would be shown that they all are not of us." - the word remain is the key word that is the perseverance characteristic of a true faith in whatever one claims to have faith in.

Just like it takes great faith to believe Mary gave birth to God, not to mention the implication of such a statement, when by His very nature God has always existed and actually created Mary, the channel He used to reveal Himself in the Person of Jesus. The reason Scripture specifically states He is in the “likeness of human flesh” is because of the birth; so to answer Benedict; yes every mother give birth to a little sinner, which is their nature. Whereas Jesus was born in the “likeness of human flesh” because He is without a sin nature. It is a little hard to wrap a mind around because we are so limited in our understanding in comparison to Gods.

 

[Pat_De]

cool! do we finally have a jehovahs witness here? that would be awesome! dont be shy. do tell welcome to the forum. Peace p.s. im not going to lie to you. we are going to tussle! Peace

:slapfight: :takethat:

 

[benidict]

This is a good example of a false faith; you claim you bought into it, yet you walked away from it, so you were never wholly convinced because if you had been you would have persevered; likewise people claim to have faith in Jesus and even participate with and hang around with like-minded people, only to later decide it isn’t right and they do not believe it so they turn around. True faith is true faith because it perseveres; it is its character to do so, whatever the faith. We take your word that you have true faith in the Catholic magisterium because by your actions you demonstrate it, but if you later change your mind and turn around, although you participated in everything Catholic, your faith was not real.

This is just a hypothetical ting here to demonstrate that real faith perseveres by its very nature, which is why people that claim to have faith in Christ and later walk away never had a true faith to begin with or they believed it was true until they found more information and decided …nahhww I don’t believe this or want anything to do with this; this is why John stated "They went out from us, but they were not {really} of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but {they went out,} so that it would be shown that they all are not of us." - the word remain is the key word that is the perseverance characteristic of a true faith in whatever one claims to have faith in.

Just like it takes great faith to believe Mary gave birth to God, not to mention the implication of such a statement, when by His very nature God has always existed and actually created Mary, the channel He used to reveal Himself in the Person of Jesus. The reason Scripture specifically states He is in the “likeness of human flesh” is because of the birth; so to answer Benedict; yes every mother give birth to a little sinner, which is their nature. Whereas Jesus was born in the “likeness of human flesh” because He is without a sin nature. It is a little hard to wrap a mind around because we are so limited in our understanding in comparison to Gods.

i would pretty much agree with you here. especially if the faith you bought into, proved to be based on false premises. such as osas, sola scriptura. etc. coming to faith in Catholocism was a totally different experience by far. and you are correct it is very very difficult to wrap our minds around things this profound because we are so limited. well said. Peace

 

[benidict]

:slapfight: :takethat:

dont get your hopes up my friend. i was thinking more in lines of verbal judo… the gentle art. no mma here! so you will probably be doing more of this:coffeeread: i dont think ive ever seen a JW on this forum so i will treat them with kid gloves. peace

 

[YADA]

Indeed.

Yes.

I wonder, though, if someone was called the “firstborn”, did that necessarily mean that there were other children in the family? That is, can an only child be a “firstborn”?

And what would an “only” child be if not the first born? … And if you say there has to be other children for there to be first born you do not understand Jewish [and just about every other] culture …

There are [were] ritual sacrifices that had to be performed upon the birth of the “first born” child [especially of sons] … These were always performed for the birth of that child - never did they wait to see if another child was to be born before offering same [you can see how silly that would be] … nor did they wait to see if this would be an ‘ony’ child because the only child would still b the “first”

Also, how long would this child be called or considered - a whatever? As in - not ‘first’ and not an ‘only’ … some sort of limbo … keeping its parents in suspense … Honey, is this our first born or only? … Uh, uh - I am not sure yet!

The first born is just that regardless of any child that follows or does not follow!

 

[PRmerger]

Yeah, the attributes of being God for one. Omnipresent for example.

Mary being the Mother of God does not mean that she was omnipresent.

Not sure what point is being made here.

 

[PRmerger]

That depends wholly on the context of the reading. For example, the “firstborn” among many brethren has the same context of preeminence, but another context could be “And she gave birth to her firstborn son; and she wrapped Him in cloths, and laid Him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn.” (Luke 2) – Her it is as it states; her first child.

Good to hear you say that.

For some non-Catholics on this forum have made the inference that Jesus being the firstborn necessarily means that he had brothers and sisters.

Clearly you understand that firstborn can mean just that: first child.
There is no necessarily conclusion that firstborn indicates there was a second born.

 

[PRmerger]

This is just a hypothetical ting here to demonstrate that real faith perseveres by its very nature, which is why people that claim to have faith in Christ and later walk away never had a true faith to begin with or they believed it was true until they found more information and decided …nahhww I don’t believe this or want anything to do with this; this is why John stated "They went out from us, but they were not {really} of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but {they went out,} so that it would be shown that they all are not of us." - the word remain is the key word that is the perseverance characteristic of a true faith in whatever one claims to have faith in.

If it is possible for someone to claim to have faith in Christ, but actually not have “real” faith, how does one know that your faith in Christ is real (this is just a hypothetical question, not meant to inflame, 'kay?)

That is, couldn’t you be one of those folks who claims to have faith and then later walks away? And how do you know?

 

[Izdaari]

How is Mary not the Mother of God?

I don’t think I’ve ever said she’s not. But I do believe in the divinity of Jesus, and in the trinity. Theotokos works for me. But perpetual virgin? Not so much, nor do I consider virginity to be holier and more blessed than being married with kids.

 

[PRmerger]

Not so much, nor do I consider virginity to be holier and more blessed than being married with kids.

That’s very Catholic of you to say that, Izdaari!

 

[dianaiad]

Good to hear you say that.

For some non-Catholics on this forum have made the inference that Jesus being the firstborn necessarily means that he had brothers and sisters.

Clearly you understand that firstborn can mean just that: first child.
There is no necessarily conclusion that firstborn indicates there was a second born.

Just standard usage; “first” is a comparitive term. In general, in order to BE a ‘first,’ the assumption is that there is a second. If not, the term wouldn’t be ‘first,’ but “only.”

You know, the way Jesus is the 'Only Begotten Son" of the Father, but He is Mary’s first born son?

Why is Jesus never referred to as Mary’s only Son, when He IS referred to as the Only Begotten Son of His Father?

It just seems…convoluted.

 

[dianaiad]

If it is possible for someone to claim to have faith in Christ, but actually not have “real” faith, how does one know that your faith in Christ is real (this is just a hypothetical question, not meant to inflame, 'kay?)

That is, couldn’t you be one of those folks who claims to have faith and then later walks away? And how do you know?

I think that this is one of those ‘by their fruits’ things. You know you have faith as long as you are willing to behave as if the things you believe to be true ARE true.

 

[Pat_De]

i would pretty much agree with you here. especially if the faith you bought into, proved to be based on false premises. such as osas, sola scriptura. etc. coming to faith in Catholocism was a totally different experience by far. and you are correct it is very very difficult to wrap our minds around things this profound because we are so limited. well said. Peace

Things based on experience is far inferior to those based on facts. The best is when the two meet in harmony such is the case with the Gospel of God and the Person of Jesus as revealed in Scripture.

 

[Pat_De]

Mary being the Mother of God does not mean that she was omnipresent.

Not sure what point is being made here.

God is omnipresent, not Mary; the point being she in NOT the Mother of God for God has always existed and created Mary and used her to reveal Himself in the human Person of Jesus. She could not give birth to His divine nature since He has always existed and He is omnipresent.

 

[Pat_De]

Good to hear you say that.

For some non-Catholics on this forum have made the inference that Jesus being the firstborn necessarily means that he had brothers and sisters.

Clearly you understand that firstborn can mean just that: first child.
There is no necessarily conclusion that firstborn indicates there was a second born.

You will not find an instance in all of Scripture when the term First born in the context of the first child did not indicate there were more than one child; the phrase “only child” (i.e.Judges 11:34) would clarify this. Doesn’t matter, most Christians know that Scripture clearly identifies that Mary and Joseph had other children. The concept of immaculate conception and perpetual virginity came along much later and is part of your religious beliefs born from tradition of the CC and not from Scripture. I do not believe it is a grave error; so its importance concerning salvation is nil, but it can show an indication of one’s ability to comprehend Scripture in my estimations.

 

[JimG]

God is omnipresent, not Mary; the point being she in NOT the Mother of God for God has always existed and created Mary and used her to reveal Himself in the human Person of Jesus. She could not give birth to His divine nature since He has always existed and He is omnipresent.

Of course God has always existed and always been omnipresent, omnipotent and eternal. None of that has anything to do with Mary being the Mother of God. It was God who created Mary. It was also God who chose to become her infant, conceived in her womb.

Mary being Mother of God no more implies that she preceded or created him than my calling my own mother “mother of JimG” implies that she created my immortal soul. That, of course, was done by God. She’s still my mother, and I have an immortal soul. I don’t call her the “mother of JimG the body but not JimG the soul.” I’m one person with one mother.

Jesus is just one person–the second person of the Trinity, and Mary is his mother.