Matthew 6:5-15 Prayer

[Radiant1]

:shrug: What part of 100% God & 100% human did you miss me saying?

Don't be disingenous. What we didn't miss was you saying this:

Jesus is God

Mary was the mother of Jesus, not God.

I then let you know that there is no logic to your statement. I didn't think I needed to spell it out for you, but apparently I do so here it is. If Jesus is God and Mary is the mother of Jesus, then Mary is mother of God. You then replied with:

I think YOU have trouble separating the 2 natures of Jesus...

You're right. I have trouble separating the two natures, because they aren't to be separated. This is when I gave you a warning about the Nestorian heresy. Zguy posted a link for you, here are some quotes from it since you didn't seem to read it, emphasis mine:

Jesus has two complete natures—one fully human and one fully divine. What the doctrine of the hypostatic union teaches is that these two natures are united in one person in the God-man. Jesus is not two persons. He is one person. The hypostatic union is the joining of the divine and the human in the one person of Jesus.

Jesus is not divided. He is not two people. He is one person. As the Chalcedonian Creed states, his two natures are without confusion, without change, without division, and without separation. Jesus is one.

So, again, the Hail Mary is taken directly from scripture and logic from scripture, but yet you continue to take issue with it due to it's repetitive use in the rosary; however, libby and I pointed out that repetitive prayer is found in scripture and Jesus Himself used it (Matthew 26:39-44). Now, you asked us to prove you wrong using the bible; we did. It appears that not only would you continue in heresy but also throw Jesus under the bus in order to continue with your willfully ignorant and ill-advised diatribe against all things Catholic. Although I think you too proud to do it, you have serious need to perform an examination of conscience and get on your knees to ask God for forgiveness.

 

[cheezgrits]

IS, you hate Catholics. Just admit it.

You're one reason I'm glad I'm not a christian.

If I were, I wouldn't claim you as one.

I'm not misled, you assume too much.

In fact, you may have met me and not even know it.

 

[ItalianScallion]

If Jesus is God and Mary is the mother of Jesus, then Mary is mother of God. I have trouble separating the two natures, because they aren't to be separated. This is when I gave you a warning about the Nestorian heresy. So, again, the Hail Mary is taken directly from scripture and logic from scripture, but yet you continue to take issue with it due to it's repetitive use in the rosary; however, libby and I pointed out that repetitive prayer is found in scripture and Jesus Himself used it (Matthew 26:39-44). Now, you asked us to prove you wrong using the bible; we did. It appears that not only would you continue in heresy but also throw Jesus under the bus in order to continue with your willfully ignorant and ill-advised diatribe against all things Catholic. Although I think you too proud to do it, you have serious need to perform an examination of conscience and get on your knees to ask God for forgiveness.

So, according to you all, Jesus did wrong when He spoke of His 2 natures differently at different times? He claimed to be God AND claimed to be subordinate to God? (Matt 22 v 41-46) The Jews took BIG issue with that because they refused to admit that He was correct. BTW, just for you: God has NO mother.

IS, you hate Catholics. Just admit it.
You're one reason I'm glad I'm not a christian.
If I were, I wouldn't claim you as one.
I'm not misled, you assume too much.
In fact, you may have met me and not even know it.

Actually you're judging me (the very same thing you said I was doing). Do you see into my heart? Just because I "contend" with the people on here passionately doesn't mean I have one iota of hatred towards them. YOU are assuming that about me.

You acknowledge a "Creator" and that's good. I'm just trying to show you who the ONLY Creator is and to tell you that, if you refuse to acknowledge Him, you will be misled and possibly lost.

Actually we have a mutual friend or two so maybe we have met...

 

[Radiant1]

So, according to you all, Jesus did wrong when He spoke of His 2 natures differently at different times? He claimed to be God AND claimed to be subordinate to God? (Matt 22 v 41-46) The Jews took BIG issue with that because they refused to admit that He was correct.

Surely you are out of your mind. Matthew 22:41-46 is reiterating that the Messiah (Jesus) is also God -- "The Lord said to my Lord". There is nothing there that could be indicative of Jesus being subordinate to God as you claim. In fact, it was the opposite. He was telling them that the Messiah was someone greater than the son of David and using David's psalm to prove it. So yes, of course the Jews took issue with it.

BTW, just for you: God has NO mother.

We proved you wrong by your own standards. I can't keep you from stating falsehoods if it makes you feel better, but you really need to think about where that desire of yours stems from. I have a pretty good idea from where and whom it originates.

 

[libby]

The consequences of trying to separate the two natures of Jesus go beyond your desire to take Mary out of the equation.
God became fully human, that includes having a mother. (don't forget that "nothing shall be impossible with God" thing-y)
But if you insist on separating the two things, we lose our salvation, the way I see it, because:
Jesus died, which the Divine cannot do. That means a human died, and a mere human cannot offer an infinite sacrifice for our salvation.

You, IS, cannot have it both ways.

 

[hotcoffee]

OK.... we are obviously not going to get this solved in this thread.

Christians have been battling this out for decades.... I understand that we all have very strong feelings about prayer.

This bickering, though, is detracting from the Bible Study this thread is part of.

Please stop.... As we read on, if we continue to read on, there will be more than one chance to discuss it again. There is a lot of prayer in the Bible.

Please.... stop... let's allow this thread to stop....

 

[Zguy28]

The consequences of trying to separate the two natures of Jesus go beyond your desire to take Mary out of the equation.
God became fully human, that includes having a mother. (don't forget that "nothing shall be impossible with God" thing-y)
But if you insist on separating the two things, we lose our salvation, the way I see it, because:
Jesus died, which the Divine cannot do. That means a human died, and a mere human cannot offer an infinite sacrifice for our salvation.

You, IS, cannot have it both ways.

You guys are starting to pick nits.

They are two separate natures in the sense that they are complete. They are one in the sense that they are united in the personhood of the eternal Son of God, second person of the trinity.

Surely you don't believe that the physical man we know as Jesus of Nazareth (European blue eyes and all! Haha! ) always existed as Jesus of Nazareth in eternity? By reading your post I could begin to think you believe this.

I know you don't, but hopefully you get the point.

The point that IS is making and I agree with, is that one could easily think you believe Mary is the literal mother of Jesus' divine nature. She is not. She is neither that, nor the mother of the person of Jesus Christ, the eternal Son. She is the mother of Jesus of Nazareth, the human nature. Yes, they are united. We get that and agree, but there is also distinction between the two.

Lest we forget again: http://www.theopedia.com/Two_natures_of_Jesus

We all agree on this.

 

[Zguy28]

:shrug: What part of 100% God & 100% human did you miss me saying?

IS, perhaps "distinct" is preferable to separate as the most useful term?

 

[Zguy28]

OK.... we are obviously not going to get this solved in this thread.

Christians have been battling this out for decades.... I understand that we all have very strong feelings about prayer.

This bickering, though, is detracting from the Bible Study this thread is part of.

Please stop.... As we read on, if we continue to read on, there will be more than one chance to discuss it again. There is a lot of prayer in the Bible.

Please.... stop... let's allow this thread to stop....

I will cease posting on the Mary topic per your request.

 

[ItalianScallion]

Surely you are out of your mind. Matthew 22:41-46 is reiterating that the Messiah (Jesus) is also God -- "The Lord said to my Lord". There is nothing there that could be indicative of Jesus being subordinate to God as you claim. In fact, it was the opposite. He was telling them that the Messiah was someone greater than the son of David and using David's psalm to prove it. So yes, of course the Jews took issue with it.

Always have to get personal don't ya? I didn't actually expect you all or the Jews to follow Jesus' intent in that passage so answer me this:

When Jesus died on the cross, did His spirit remain with His body? WHAT??!! I thought they couldn't be separated? Jesus was making a powerful point to show His TWO natures. He is the Son of David (His human side) because He, Mary & Joseph are from the lineage of David. He is Divine (God) because He is always God and didn't stop being God when He came to earth as a human.

On the cross His body died and His spirit left it, so why didn't His spirit die also (if they are one)? Could they be 2 different entities? Soo simply and, yet, YOU make it soo difficult.

IS, perhaps "distinct" is preferable to separate as the most useful term?

Distinct is also a good word and I use it when referring to the Trinity:
One God in essence or nature, but 3 separate or distinct beings. The ladies seem to have a problem with this though. If God was born then He had a beginning.

Hotcoffee; This is an important point that needs to be made but I'll let Radiant1 & Libby have the last words if they want. I'll go back to the Lords' prayer topic now.

 

[Radiant1]

She is neither that, nor the mother of the person of Jesus Christ, the eternal Son. She is the mother of Jesus of Nazareth, the human nature. Yes, they are united. We get that and agree, but there is also distinction between the two.

Re-read what you just wrote and give that some deeper thought please.

Always have to get personal don't ya? I didn't actually expect you all or the Jews to follow Jesus' intent in that passage so answer me this:

When Jesus died on the cross, did His spirit remain with His body? WHAT??!! I thought they couldn't be separated? Jesus was making a powerful point to show His TWO natures. He is the Son of David (His human side) because He, Mary & Joseph are from the lineage of David. He is Divine (God) because He is always God and didn't stop being God when He came to earth as a human.

On the cross His body died and His spirit left it, so why didn't His spirit die also (if they are one)? Could they be 2 different entities? Soo simply and, yet, YOU make it soo difficult.

Distinct is also a good word and I use it when referring to the Trinity:
One God in essence or nature, but 3 separate or distinct beings. The ladies seem to have a problem with this though. If God was born then He had a beginning.

Hotcoffee; This is an important point that needs to be made but I'll let Radiant1 & Libby have the last words if they want. I'll go back to the Lords' prayer topic now.

I usually give you the last word but I think I'll take it this time, thank you.

Did Mary only carry the human nature of Jesus in her womb? Be careful how you answer.

There is no way around the logical conclusion that if Jesus is God, then Mary is also Mother of God. Does that mean she is older than God? No. Does that mean God had a beginning? No. Does that mean Mary is the source of Jesus' divinity? No. Did Mary give birth to a nature? No. Did Mary give birth to a person? Yes. Did Mary give birth to a person who is both God and man? Yes. Does that make Mary Mother of God (or God Bearer as Zguy would prefer)? Yes.

Finis.

 

[Zguy28]

Re-read what you just wrote and give that some deeper thought please.



I usually give you the last word but I think I'll take it this time, thank you.

Did Mary only carry the human nature of Jesus in her womb? Be careful how you answer.

There is no way around the logical conclusion that if Jesus is God, then Mary is also Mother of God. Does that mean she is older than God? No. Does that mean God had a beginning? No. Does that mean Mary is the source of Jesus' divinity? No. Did Mary give birth to a nature? No. Did Mary give birth to a person? Yes. Did Mary give birth to a person who is both God and man? Yes. Does that make Mary Mother of God (or God Bearer as Zguy would prefer)? Yes.

Finis.

i have given this some serious thought, study and prayer over this intervening time, and I see where I indeed was in error on this particular issue. What I said was wrong and a heretical belief according to the council of Ephesus in 431. I am not as concerned with that though as I am to the potential damage I could have done to entire meaning of the atonement. If Mary only gave birth to Jesus the man alone, then did only the man Jesus die on the cross? Of course not! Forgive me my arrogance and pride on this one.

 

[hotcoffee]

I'm glad you started this back up again.

Over the weekend the last chapter of Matthew was posted. We had the opportunity to watch all kinds of movies about Jesus, His life, His work, His crucifixion, and His Ascension.

Mark leaves Mary totally out of all this so far. I mean Mark seems to be more interested in the work of Jesus than His family or His heritage. Mark was one of the first Cardinals of the Catholic Church [according to the research I did.... which was meager, I admit]. Why doesn't Mark discuss Mary and her part in the story more?

When we were posting about the mini-series called "The Bible" I commented that they left out the part about the trinity when they showed the baptism. I bring that up again here because I think it's the key to understanding Mary's part in the whole story.

There is no doubt in my mind that there is a trinity. It's evident that there is one God, one Son, and the Spirit of God Himself. That's been a part of both Matthew's and Mark's depiction of the baptism.

Women were created to be a companion and to bear children. They were created to become one with man [in marriage]. When Matthew described the lineage of Jesus.... it was through Joseph. It doesn't say anything about Mary. If we go into Luke we'll hear that Mary was the cousin of Elizabeth who was married to Zechariah. Again the Bible doesn't tell us anything about Elizabeth's lineage either.

When did Mary and Elizabeth become important? When they bore Jesus and John the Baptist. Mary was a virgin birth and Elizabeth was a birth well past it's accepted time. Both bore children through Divine intervention.

It wasn't until Jesus started His ministry that women were accepted into the family of God. Women became important because of their faith not just by blood lineage.

Women are important because they are touched by the Spirit of God Himself.

 

[Radiant1]

i have given this some serious thought, study and prayer over this intervening time, and I see where I indeed was in error on this particular issue. What I said was wrong and a heretical belief according to the council of Ephesus in 431. I am not as concerned with that though as I am to the potential damage I could have done to entire meaning of the atonement. If Mary only gave birth to Jesus the man alone, then did only the man Jesus die on the cross? Of course not! Forgive me my arrogance and pride on this one.

I can't tell you how much I appreciate your intellectual honesty.

 

[bcp]

When did Mary and Elizabeth become important? When they bore Jesus and John the Baptist. Mary was a virgin birth and Elizabeth was a birth well past it's accepted time. Both bore children through Divine intervention.

It wasn't until Jesus started His ministry that women were accepted into the family of God. Women became important because of their faith not just by blood lineage.

Women are important because they are touched by the Spirit of God Himself.

Not being Catholic, I never understood this whole thing with Mary, So I did some research to see if I could find out when Mary became important,
As I remember there were a few different sources that gave a somewhat acceptable explanation to this

In these sources it was said that during the early days of the church, The Catholics were having a hard time getting people to convert from their current religions to the Christian religion. One of the reasons was that these people were used to their Gods, and their Goddesses, they had females to worship too. The Christian faith surrounded itself with God, and Jesus. By putting Mary out there, It created a sense of familiarity for those others.
In an attempt to gain support, the Catholic church put Mary up as one to pray to.
The Bible does not refer to Mary in such an elevated role, that was mans doing. Now Im pretty sure that there is no sacrilege going on with the Catholics and Mary, I personally tend to look at her as the vessel that was used to bring Jesus Christ to the world.
Jesus Christ is the way, in no place in the Bible does it mention a devotion to Mary as a requirement for salvation.

 

[Radiant1]

As I remember there were a few different sources that gave a somewhat acceptable explanation to this

But yet you don't cite the sources, and what may be acceptable to you doesn't mean it's the truth.

in no place in the Bible does it mention a devotion to Mary as a requirement for salvation.

That's because it's not, nor does the Catholic Church teach that a "devotion" is necessary.

 

[bcp]

But yet you don't cite the sources, and what may be acceptable to you doesn't mean it's the truth.



That's because it's not, nor does the Catholic Church teach that a "devotion" is necessary.

The only reason I tried to find what it is about her and the Catholic church is because the Bible does not in anyway support the devotion to her that the Catholic church gives.
Im not trying to be disrespectful, but she just does not have the attention in the Bible that you think she would have to gain such a place in the church.

 

[Radiant1]

The only reason I tried to find what it is about her and the Catholic church is because the Bible does not in anyway support the devotion to her that the Catholic church gives.
Im not trying to be disrespectful, but she just does not have the attention in the Bible that you think she would have to gain such a place in the church.

But yet the bible coupled with the early church actions (catacomb paintings) and writings (early Church Fathers) do, all of which speak or point toward an honor for Mary from the very earliest days of Christianity. But, being a bible-only Christian (which Christianity never was for the first 1500 years), you perhaps have a bias (and one that maybe you're not even aware of).

At any rate, a "devotion" to Mary is not required for salvation, so even if you think of her as nothing but a mere vessel I don't suppose you'll burn in hell for it or anything. :shrug:

 

[bcp]

MARY WORSHIP by Mary Ann Collins (A Former Catholic Nun)

Exposing the Idolatry of Mary Worship: What the Bible Says
For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus (1 Timothy 2:5)

Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people (Luke 1:68).

My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous (1 John 2:1).
Romans 3:23 says, "All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God." First John 1:8 adds, "If any man says he has no sin he is a liar and the truth is not in him."
Mary said, ‘My soul rejoices in God my savior’ in Luke 1:47.


The site that contains the following quote is interesting reading. Take it for what you will, I am not saying it is 100% true. It is however one of many examples and writings by people far more educated in this than I am, that do state Mary was used as I said, a replacement for the pagans female part of their equation to make the change easier.
And if by using Mary in that way worked, then God does work in mysterious ways and more power to those that did it.
Again, I dont think anyone is going to hell for including Mary in their prayers or service, but the end reality is that Jesus Christ is the light, and the way. Mary is not any part of ones salvation.. of course, Im not sure how Jesus takes mother jokes, so...
at any rate, this will serve as proof that I didnt just make up my claim. If you want more examples, you can search for them, or if you dont mind waiting until tonight, I will search again for some more reliable sources.

When Rome went from being pagan to Christian under Constantine, they had to find a replacement for the great mother of paganism. It was not until the time of Constantine that anyone began to look at Mary as a goddess. Since Mary was the mother of Jesus Christ, she was the most logical person to replace the pagan mother goddess. The pagans could continue their prayers and devotion to the mother goddess, only they would call her Mary. The pagans worshipped the mother as much or more than her son and this is exactly what the Roman Catholicism does. True Christianity teaches that Jesus Christ is to be worshipped – not his mother. The fact remains that Jesus never hinted at the idea of Mary worship nor did any of the apostles. Worshipping the mother goddess along with her child took place centuries before Jesus Christ was ever born in many different parts of the world. In 431 A.D. Mary worship became an official doctrine of the church in at the Council of Ephesus.

 

[Radiant1]

Let me kick this out from under you real quick. All the bible verses you could possibly quote have been answered and countered (and have been for centuries) in full elsewhere in this forum. In addition, there is evidence of the honor to Mary before Constantine, so your website and subsequently your claim is invalid. But hey, who am I to disabuse you of your notions erroneous or not? It's your issue, not mine. :shrug: