The Only Begotten Son of God is the God of Mary

[zarthan]

The Son of God pre-existed as the only-begotten of the Father before he was sent by God the Father and conceived in the womb of the Virgin Mary, partaking of human flesh. All things and all beings are created by the God the Father through His Son. (this includes Mary).

The humanity that the Son of God received from his mother, Mary is Jesus.
Therefore, Mary is the mother of Jesus in his humanity. Referring to Mary as the mother of God confuses the issue. Mary in no way is the mother of the divinity of the Son of God.

I really think there is a lack of understanding in the meaning of the term, “the only-begotten of the Father.” I think there is a certain percentage of Catholics and even non-Catholics who believe that the term 'the only-begotten of the Father" refers to the virgin conception of Jesus Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit. It does not!

The only-begotten of the Father refers to the pre-existence of the Son of God before all of creation. All of creation came into existence by God the Father through His only-begotten Son, including the angelic hosts of heaven. Mary gave birth to the humanity of the Son of God known as Jesus, or Jesus Christ. The humanity of Jesus Christ is of time, the divinity of the Son of God is outside of time.

 

[Nita]

The Son of God pre-existed as the only-begotten of the Father before he was sent by God the Father and conceived in the womb of the Virgin Mary, partaking of human flesh. All things and all beings are created by the God the Father through His Son. (this includes Mary).

The humanity that the Son of God received from his mother, Mary is Jesus.
Therefore, Mary is the mother of Jesus in his humanity. Referring to Mary as the mother of God confuses the issue. Mary in no way is the mother of the divinity of the Son of God.

I really think there is a lack of understanding in the meaning of the term, “the only-begotten of the Father.” I think there is a certain percentage of Catholics and even non-Catholics who believe that the term 'the only-begotten of the Father" refers to the virgin conception of Jesus Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit. It does not!

The only-begotten of the Father refers to the pre-existence of the Son of God before all of creation. All of creation came into existence by God the Father through His only-begotten Son, including the angelic hosts of heaven. Mary gave birth to the humanity of the Son of God known as Jesus, or Jesus Christ. The humanity of Jesus Christ is of time, the divinity of the Son of God is outside of time.

Mary gave birth to a Person and that Person was God - the Divine 2nd Person of the Trinity. She did not give birth to a human person (there is no human “person” in Jesus).

I’m not sure what you mean by this statement: “The humanity that the Son of God received from his mother, Mary is Jesus”. “Jesus” does not just refer to Our Lord’s humanity. From the moment of His conception in Mary’s womb, there were 2 natures present in Jesus – a human nature and a divine nature. Both were present when He was born of Mary.

As human parents, the children we give birth to only take their flesh from us - not their souls. We don’t go around saying I’m the mother of his flesh. We call ourselves “mother” of the entire being who proceeds from our womb - the person.

 

[panner]

The Son of God pre-existed as the only-begotten of the Father before he was sent by God the Father and conceived in the womb of the Virgin Mary, partaking of human flesh. All things and all beings are created by the God the Father through His Son. (this includes Mary).

The humanity that the Son of God received from his mother, Mary is Jesus.
Therefore, Mary is the mother of Jesus in his humanity. Referring to Mary as the mother of God confuses the issue. Mary in no way is the mother of the divinity of the Son of God.

I really think there is a lack of understanding in the meaning of the term, “the only-begotten of the Father.” I think there is a certain percentage of Catholics and even non-Catholics who believe that the term 'the only-begotten of the Father" refers to the virgin conception of Jesus Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit. It does not!

The only-begotten of the Father refers to the pre-existence of the Son of God before all of creation. All of creation came into existence by God the Father through His only-begotten Son, including the angelic hosts of heaven. Mary gave birth to the humanity of the Son of God known as Jesus, or Jesus Christ. The humanity of Jesus Christ is of time, the divinity of the Son of God is outside of time.

Very good post. It amazes me how many Catholics think Christ was only God after He was born

 

[lil_flower_luv]

And this is why I pray my rosary…(first and foremost to make reparation to our Blessed Mother for the sins committed against her Immaculate Heart.) But also because of the undermining of her role as Jesus’ Mother as well as our Mother, our helper, and our Christian role model. She does us (and the world) so much good because of her role…the role that God Himself has given her! Who are we to decide her place?

Why the confusion…the attacks? Why the insensitivity as the Church will very soon celebrate the Solemnity of Mary, the Mother of GOD on January 1st? I can only say I am deeply saddened by the words of Catholics and non-Catholics alike on this board.

What has the Church proclaimed to be true? What have basic Christian beliefs proclaimed to be true? Jesus is God and Man come down to us! He was born of a Virgin, Mary!

 

[zarthan]

Mary gave birth to a Person and that Person was God - the Divine 2nd Person of the Trinity. She did not give birth to a human person (there is no human “person” in Jesus).

I’m not sure what you mean by this statement: “The humanity that the Son of God received from his mother, Mary is Jesus”. “Jesus” does not just refer to Our Lord’s humanity. From the moment of His conception in Mary’s womb, there were 2 natures present in Jesus – a human nature and a divine nature. Both were present when He was born of Mary.

As human parents, the children we give birth to only take their flesh from us - not their souls. We don’t go around saying I’m the mother of his flesh. We call ourselves “mother” of the entire being who proceeds from our womb - the person.

The name ‘Jesus’ did not exist prior to the angel Gabriel giving the Virgin Mary this name to the child that would be born of her. Mary did not generate the soul of Jesus Christ, neither did Mary generate his pre-existent divinity as the Son of God. Mary generated the flesh of Jesus Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit. No one knows the name of the pre-existent Son of God.

As parents, we are not the mothers or fathers of the souls of our children. We have been entrusted to guard their souls, and spiritually nurture their souls. We do not own their souls, they are the possession of God Almighty who created them. This is why He is called the Heavenly Father of those who know His Son. Jesus Christ from the very beginning of his birth was spiritually instructed by his Heavenly Father. Everything Jesus Christ ever did or said was according to his obedience to the instruction of his Heavenly Father.

The apostle Paul referred to himself as the spiritual father of Timothy and to others. The apostle Paul was God’s vessel in bringing TImothy’s soul to life through the preaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Mary beings this to the table that never leaves Jesus Christ or the Son of God. And that is HUMAN NATURE. Which through the Hypostatic Union is inseperable from His Divine Nature.

So when Christ “really” died on the Cross as the Son of Man, both the HUMAN and divive Both those Natures never seperated. They still Exist with him to this day. Mary’s Annunciation, Assumption and Corination. By Cath. Doc. Make Her Queen of Heaven. Mother of God.

Here lies the “confusion” and " most importantly the “DENIAL” of the Blessed Mother.

“Do NOT be afraid to Love Her, You will Never love Her as much as Her Son loves Her.”

Maximilian Kolbe

 

[GaryTaylor]

The name ‘Jesus’ did not exist prior to the angel Gabriel giving the Virgin Mary this name to the child that would be born of her. Mary did not generate the soul of Jesus Christ, neither did Mary generate his pre-existent divinity as the Son of God. Mary generated the flesh of Jesus Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit. No one knows the name of the pre-existent Son of God.

As parents, we are not the mothers or fathers of the souls of our children. We have been entrusted to guard their souls, and spiritually nurture their souls. We do not own their souls, they are the possession of God Almighty who created them. This is why He is called the Heavenly Father of those who know His Son. Jesus Christ from the very beginning of his birth was spiritually instructed by his Heavenly Father. Everything Jesus Christ ever did or said was according to his obedience to the instruction of his Heavenly Father.

The apostle Paul referred to himself as the spiritual father of Timothy and to others. The apostle Paul was God’s vessel in bringing TImothy’s soul to life through the preaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

You would be “wrong” about Mary not generating the “Soul” of Jesus Christ. That is also Catholic Doctrine and the EXACT word “you” used “GENERATE” is used in Catholic Doctrine.

Now do you want to see it in writing? CATHOLIC DOCTRINE!

Second Vatican Council, Chapter VIII of “Lumen Gentium” tells us that Mary not only Generates Jesus, She Generates Us. And the word used is in Latin “generavita”. Thats in the “original” text of that Council.

 

[benedictus2]

The Son of God pre-existed as the only-begotten of the Father before he was sent by God the Father and conceived in the womb of the Virgin Mary, partaking of human flesh. All things and all beings are created by the God the Father through His Son. (this includes Mary).

The humanity that the Son of God received from his mother, Mary is Jesus.
Therefore, Mary is the mother of Jesus in his humanity. Referring to Mary as the mother of God confuses the issue. Mary in no way is the mother of the divinity of the Son of God.

I really think there is a lack of understanding in the meaning of the term, “the only-begotten of the Father.” I think there is a certain percentage of Catholics and even non-Catholics who believe that the term 'the only-begotten of the Father" refers to the virgin conception of Jesus Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit. It does not!

The only-begotten of the Father refers to the pre-existence of the Son of God before all of creation. All of creation came into existence by God the Father through His only-begotten Son, including the angelic hosts of heaven. Mary gave birth to the humanity of the Son of God known as Jesus, or Jesus Christ. The humanity of Jesus Christ is of time, the divinity of the Son of God is outside of time.

There are two other threads on current live on this topic. I hope the moderator sees this and merges all three.

The approach of January 1 must be the reason for this.

But to shed some light on your problem.

First: Mary is the Mother of God. If you say Mary is only the mother of Jesus you are falling into Nestorian heresy.

Jesus Christ is both FULLY HUMAN AND FULLY DIVINE. These two natures cannot be separated.

Second: What does it mean to be a mother? It simply means that the woman conceived, bore and gave birth to the Child. The Child that Mary conceived happened to be the Second Person of the Trinity. So whether Christ got only His Human nature from her is completely beside the point because Mary bore the totallity of Christ (Humanity and Divinity) together in her womb.

If you say that Mary bore only the human Christ then when did the Human Christ become Divine? After birth? But that is not what the Gospel says? Otherwise Jesus would have a human father.

Mary bore the whole Person of Jesus - divine nature included. That is why she is Theotokos - God bearer.

Prior to His Incarnation, the Second Person of the Trinity has always existed in eternity.

But at some point in human history, this Second Person took on human form by being conceived by the Virgin Mary. Before that, He was ALL Divine but after that He became both Fully Human and Fully Divine. This God-Man is the one that had a beginning in time.

 

[benedictus2]

Very good post. It amazes me how many Catholics think Christ was only God after He was born

Actually, the post you were replying too is the one that claims that Jesus became God only after He was born.

If the child that Mary conceived, bore and gave birth to is only human, since you say she is the mother of the human Jesus, therefore whilst Jesus was in her womb He was not God. ** If** that is so, then Jesus became God only after He was born.
**
**

 

[GaryTaylor]

Thats it my brother, …anyway, look I know this isn’t easy to comprehend. I get that. And Benedict is right. This appears to be a continue of the other threads. For whatever the “exact” intention, which could be simple misunderstanding. Or not, time will tell.

Look I was given this the benifit of the doubt until the word “Generate” arrived. Now it appears we have arrived at the “same point” as the other threads EARLY. Which is a Good Thing because I have a couple weeks worth of Reading for you today.

We “will” educate you correctly in Catholic Doctrine if you keep coming with an open mind. Mistakes, sidetracks, denial, even pure evil…all that will appear also. But in the END! The Immaculate Heart of Mary will Triumph.

ALL GRACE comes to us through the Maternal Hands of the Blessed Virgin. Thats Catholic Teaching from Pope Leo XIII and Saint Pius X.

 

[puzzleannie]

The Son of God pre-existed as the only-begotten of the Father before he was sent by God the Father and conceived in the womb of the Virgin Mary, partaking of human flesh. All things and all beings are created by the God the Father through His Son. (this includes Mary).

The humanity that the Son of God received from his mother, Mary is Jesus.
Therefore, Mary is the mother of Jesus in his humanity. Referring to Mary as the mother of God confuses the issue. Mary in no way is the mother of the divinity of the Son of God.

I.

Wrong. the doctrine of Mary as the mother of God was defined at the Council of Ephesus and confirmed in councils in the 4th century, and not disputed by any Christians, except heretics, including the Reformers, until the last 150 years or so. To deny that Mary is the Mother of God is to deny the foundational doctrine, that Jesus is fully human and fully divine, entirely without division, what is described as the hypostatic union. This doctrine had to be defined because like all doctrine about Mary, it defines doctrine about the nature of Christ, against challenges of the heretics such as Docetists and Arians.

since you chose this forum, please describe the Christian denomination that denies this doctrine and the source and authority for its teaching. Please also refer for discussion of the orthodox doctrine to the Apologetics forum where you will find much more in greater detail.

 

[benedictus2]

The name ‘Jesus’ did not exist prior to the angel Gabriel giving the Virgin Mary this name to the child that would be born of her. Mary did not generate the soul of Jesus Christ, neither did Mary generate his pre-existent divinity as the Son of God. Mary generated the flesh of Jesus Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit. No one knows the name of the pre-existent Son of God.

Well hellooo, did your mother generate your soul? Is she less your mother because it was God who generated your soul? So is she your mother or is she only the mother of your physical body?

As a matter of fact that would not be true either because some parts of you were not really her, but are of your father. So are you saying that she is only mother of that part of you that can be genetically traced back to her?

As parents, we are not the mothers or fathers of the souls of our children.

Sigh! As parents we are mothers and fathers of our children not just their bodies; the entire personhood of our children not just their physical body. Your mother gave birth to a person! What, did you think your soul arrived after you were born?

You know what, get a dictionary and find the definition of mother.

Better yet, here it is :

Mother - A female person who is pregnant with or gives birth to a child.

We have been entrusted to guard their souls, and spiritually nurture their souls. We do not own their souls, they are the possession of God Almighty who created them.

And duh! being mother does not mean owning their souls. Seriously, you need to get a reality check because you are going off on all tangents that the term Mother of God does not even hint at.

This is why He is called the Heavenly Father of those who know His Son. Jesus Christ from the very beginning of his birth was spiritually instructed by his Heavenly Father. Everything Jesus Christ ever did or said was according to his obedience to the instruction of his Heavenly Father.

And what has that got to do with whether she was conceived and born of Mary?

The apostle Paul referred to himself as the spiritual father of Timothy and to others. The apostle Paul was God’s vessel in bringing TImothy’s soul to life through the preaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

So again, what has that got to do with Mary being the mother of God?

 

[benedictus2]

Wrong. the doctrine of Mary as the mother of God was defined at the Council of Ephesus and confirmed in councils in the 4th century, and not disputed by any Christians, except heretics, including the Reformers, until the last 150 years or so. .

I think that ought to be stressed.

 

[tester]

But at some point in human history, this Second Person took on human form by being conceived by the Virgin Mary. Before that, He was ALL Divine but after that He became both Fully Human and Fully Divine. This God-Man is the one that had a beginning in time.

I’m sure you meant “conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary.”

 

[tester]

…
Referring to Mary as the mother of God confuses the issue. …

AGREED!

**Theotokos:
Its literal English translations include God-bearer and the one who gives birth to God. **Less literal translations include Mother of God.

The Creed of Chalcedon, A.D. 451, includes the Greek term “theotokos‟ to define the identity of Christ. “Theotokos” literally means ,God-bearer‟, which is loosely translated into Latin “Mater Dei” - Mother of God. The term was used to underline the fact that the child born of Mary was truly God, and thus to guard against the error that Christ was two persons in one body, rather than one person. This heresy, “Nestorianism”, was condemned at the First Council of Ephesus in A.D. 431.

We all agree Jesus the Christ is fully God and fully human and “Nestorianism” is a heresy.

Catholic teaching confirms that the second person of the Trinity (Christ; a title not a name) was for all of eternity past the “Son of God”. (Begotten, not created, the same substance of God)
c.s.lewis gives some good analogies here : chapter 23
ldolphin.org/CSLtrinity.html

There was never a time when Christ was NOT the “Son of God”
There was never a time when the Son of God did not have a father
There was a time when the Son of God did not have a mother.
The Son of God existed for most of eternity without a mother.
The Son of God did not require a mother to be the Son of God.
Mary became a mother (there was a time when she was not a mother) **Christ never became a son **(Christ was never “not a son”)

We all agree that Mary is the Theotokos, but the imprecise translation of Theotokos to Mother of God causes so much confusion that it requires much explanation.

 

[GaryTaylor]

I’m sure you meant “conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary.”

Yes, many Pray the Rosary thus the Apostles Creed. Yet Mary conceived without Sin a Soul, and that Soul "generated in Marys Womb, was only THEN, both “Human and Divine”.

But you already know all this.

 

[Nita]

… Mary did not generate the soul of Jesus Christ, neither did Mary generate his pre-existent divinity as the Son of God. Mary generated the flesh of Jesus Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit. No one knows the name of the pre-existent Son of God.
.

I completely agree with everything above. But we draw different conclusions I think.

Calling someone “mother” does not mean that every part of their nature was generated from her (and her spouse). I have no problem calling myself Steve’s (my son’s name) mother - or identifying myself as being a mother of a human being. I don’t think it confuses anyone into thinking I’m implying I generated their soul.

Likewise with Mary. Any Christian I know of would DEFINE “God” as an eternal being - no beginning, no end. ** So, when Mary, a finite human being, is referred to as being “Mother of God” because she gave birth to Jesus - in time**, it should not confuse anyone into thinking she generated His divinity anymore than she generated His human soul. At least not anyone who uses the reasoning powers God gave them.

And if by chance there is someone who is truly confused by the title ( not just nitpicking), it ought to take only a few brief sentences to clarify their misunderstanding.

 

[GaryTaylor]

You would think so, and probly had we been sitting and conversing in person this would be true, or rejection and denial would come into play.

The 7th and 8th Ecumenical Councils are still a part the existing communication between Orthodox and Catholic’s. In an effort of Full Communion of two sister churchs.

The term theotokos is the original church term. Personally I have no issue with it and I like the term. Yet the 8th Ecumenical Council further define’s Mary’s reality. At this point the Catholic church evolves past the Orthodox thinking in teaching of Marys reality which is Queen of Heaven!

The only issue with Theotokos comes when it is used to downplay Mary’s reality which is Genesis 3:15. And is also in real time as we talk.

 

[Publisher]

Mary gave birth to a Person and that Person was God - the Divine 2nd Person of the Trinity. **She did not give birth to a human person (there is no human “person” in Jesus). **I’m not sure what you mean by this statement: “The humanity that the Son of God received from his mother, Mary is Jesus”. “Jesus” does not just refer to Our Lord’s humanity. From the moment of His conception in Mary’s womb, there were 2 natures present in Jesus – a human nature and a divine nature. Both were present when He was born of Mary.

As human parents, the children we give birth to only take their flesh from us - not their souls. We don’t go around saying I’m the mother of his flesh. We call ourselves “mother” of the entire being who proceeds from our womb - the person.

In many ways this is the argument some of the Gnostic sects beleived…Jesus wasn’t really “human”…he only appeared to be.

Scripture seems to indicate Jesus was FULLY HUMAN in every way we are…he had “emptied himself and became a servant”…he set aside his divinity and became one of us. That is the Mystery of the incarnation…God BECAME FULLY HUMAN in the man Jesus of Nazareth.

Much of the early controversies didn’t surround his divinity…but his humanity.

 

[Irish_Polock]

Theotokos:
Its literal English translations include God-bearer and the one who gives birth to God. Less literal translations include Mother of God.

From what I understand “Birth-giver to God” would be the most literal translation of the Greek word Theotokos.

“Mother of God” is properly translated from the Greek words “Meter Theou”

The Creed of Chalcedon, A.D. 451, includes the Greek term “theotokos‟ to define the identity of Christ. “Theotokos” literally means ,God-bearer‟, which is loosely translated into Latin “Mater Dei” - Mother of God. The term was used to underline the fact that the child born of Mary was truly God, and thus to guard against the error that Christ was two persons in one body, rather than one person. This heresy, “Nestorianism”, was condemned at the First Council of Ephesus in A.D. 431.

We all agree Jesus the Christ is fully God and fully human and “Nestorianism” is a heresy.

1. If anyone does not confess that Emmanuel is God in truth, and therefore that the holy virgin is the mother of God (for she bore in a fleshly way the Word of God become flesh, let him be anathema. (Council of Ephesus - Twelve Anathemas Proposed by Cyril and accepted by the Council of Ephesus)

Catholic teaching confirms that the second person of the Trinity (Christ; a title not a name) was for all of eternity past the “Son of God”. (Begotten, not created, the same substance of God)
c.s.lewis gives some good analogies here : chapter 23
ldolphin.org/CSLtrinity.html

There was never a time when Christ was NOT the “Son of God”
There was never a time when the Son of God did not have a father
There was a time when the Son of God did not have a mother.
The Son of God existed for most of eternity without a mother.
The Son of God did not require a mother to be the Son of God.
Mary became a mother (there was a time when she was not a mother) **Christ never became **a son (Christ was never “not a son”)

I am not real sure what your trying to imply here, or what C.S. Lewis has to do with anything. We all should agree that God the Son is eternal, least we fall into heresy.

We all agree that Mary is the Theotokos, but the imprecise translation of Theotokos to Mother of God causes so much confusion that it requires much explanation.

You claim an imprecise translation - I will argue that it defines Christ perfectly.

Honestly, as I have mentioned in other threads of this same topic, I feel that this misunderstanding is a generally a U.S. phenomenon due to the puritan roots of U.S. protestants. I feel this misunderstanding has more to with the your disdain of Catholic teachings in regard to the BVM then any kind of semantics error.