Keep in mind that the Church of the East signed an agreement with the Roman Catholics that Mother of God is an accepted term as long as the proper context is understood (or something like that). Evangelicals are literally more Nestorian than the Nestorians.
I think you meant to say, "... that Mother of God is an ACCEPTED term..." "Accepted" means "that which one can accept; okay; proper; legitimate". "Excepted" means "except for; but; in all cases minus this one".
repent. you just broke the 10 commandments: For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother,’ and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother is to be put to death.’ Mat 15:4
It always shocks me to hear how some protestants will refer to Mother Mary and how they constantly want to downplay her role in salvation, and how disrespectful they behave towards Mary. Imagine saying those things about your own mother, and then imagine how Christ feels when you talk bad about *_his_* mother that way.
If in the Bible that term is never used for Mary, why should we give her that title? And I’m not Protestant. The Bible says she’s Jesus’s mother why should we use our logic and take these extra steps and call her mother of God??? Lean not on ur own understanding.
The implication of saying that Mary is "just' the mother of Jesus' humanity is that Jesus' humanity is anything other than THE central importance and fact of the Incarnation, and that frankly isn't Christianity at all.
God is often shorthand for God the Father. While I believes it’s true that Mary is the mother of God, she’s the mother of God the Son. It can be misleading to just say “God” and not distinguish which person of the trinity. Also, for a newb Christian, it can be confusing without emphasizing that the Son of God existed forever. Therefore, I think it’s okay to make qualifications when making such a statement. We should’ve deny it, only clarify it. Especially when there is a tendency of some to idolize Mary. We should not swing the pendulum to the other side and avoid the topic, just work to clarify. I think it’s a good thing to want to not mislead others. Unqualified statements can mislead terribly.
i accidentally committed heresy claiming that Mary was simply the mother of Jesus and was the vessel when i was strictly a Bible-believing Protestant. that was almost two months ago. i am now in love with her story especially the Lady of Guadalupe apparition, and might even convert to Catholicism. i always used to think Catholics exalted Mary too much. but she is a really important piece of the puzzle!
“If anyone will not confess that the Emmanuel is very God, and that therefore the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God (Θεοτόκος), inasmuch as in the flesh she bore the Word of God made flesh [as it is written, “The Word was made flesh”] let him be anathema.” - The XII. Anathematisms of St. Cyril Against Nestorius, Anathematism I
I feel like it’s a confusing term because “God” is usually used for God the father, or the divine nature of God. I’ve had a friend say that Mary never died and never sinned because she was a perfect creation of God and is currently right next to him because she’s his mother. It gets confusing to people that just take the term Mother of God and never really understand it, because we tend to look at our mothers and think Jesus sees her exactly like we do
Well, to be fair, Mary did not die, since death is the price of original sin which God cleansed Mary of in her conception. She was assumed into heaven.
While your friend is partially right, Mary never sinned, never died, and is seated with God in heaven, the meta-physical analysis is a bit more nuanced than "She's God's perfect creation". Mary was as human as everyone else, but God pulled timey-wimey shenanigans (To use simple terms) and wiped original sin from her at conception by applying her son's sacrifice on the cross... before it happened. Like I said Timey-wimey God exists out of time etc... Since death is the price man pays for original sin, Mary lacking that would mean there is no reason for her to die.
We Catholics are allowed to disagree about the "never died" part; the Assumption of Mary is a dogma of our faith, along with the Immaculate Conception (the "perfect creation of God" bit, where God prevented her from being tainted by Adam's original sin), but there's nothing denying the tradition of the Dormition of the Theotokos held by the Orthodox, by many Eastern Catholics as part of their Orthodox heritage, and evidently by Saint Pope John Paul II as well, in which Mary physically died. Catholic teaching only officially claims that Mary was taken bodily into heaven, whether or not she biologically died first.
@@osbornejohnson7919 The whole concept of Christianity is that Jesus paid for the sin of all of us. Mary was the first one cleaned by Jesus, because she received the holy spirit before. However, she’s “free of sin” not because she didn’t commit any sins but because Jesus paid for her sin already, the same way we as followers can commit sin but our soul is clean because of Jesus sacrifice
@@osbornejohnson7919 No, that doesn’t make sense. Jesus death on the cross paid for the sins of everybody, not just Mary’s. And it was her soul that was cleansed not her body, so her soul went up to heaven not her body. The same way every Christians soul is going to go to heaven. Jesus sacrifice saves you from a SPIRITUAL death not a physical one
When I went to Protestant churches they seemed to gnome Mary more than anything. Like she was a minor footnote and was only mentioned around Christmas it seems.
I think Redeemed Zoomer must come back and discuss another doctrine related to Mary: Perpetual Virginity. Also, interesting enough, Occam's Razor will simply say that Mary did intimate relations with Joseph, and had other children, including James, brother of Jesus. Those promoting Perpetual Virginity seems to go through a lot of hoops and ladders to prove it.
Good video. Always irks me when so-called Protestants will straight up spew some unbiblical heresies because of this ingrained anti-Catholicism. Speaking of Mary, maybe you can make a future video talking about the Presbyterian/your own personal views of Mary and of the Roman Catholic/Eastern Orthodox Mariology? I'm interested to see how they compare to the Lutheran views of Mary (which seems to be some of the highest Mariology among Protestants, probably alongside the more high-church Anglicans).
Zoomer has a 15 minute video summarizing church history. If you want something longer and more detailed, there's an 8 part series about church history that youtuber UsefulCharts made: ruclips.net/video/uzuYZi749CM/видео.html
Personally, I tend to avoid calling Mary the Mother of God. However, it is a true statement, she was Jesus's earthly mother. I avoid it because it's mostly used by Catholics, who also believe Mary was concieved without sin, is a mediator in her own right, remained a virgin etc.. Mary was a sinful human like the rest of us, but did find favour with God, just as many others did, even if Jesus's brothers didn't come from her, they would have at least consumated the marriage, and Jesus is our mediator, a role no one only human can fulfill.
Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. Holy Mary Mother of God, pray for us sinners now and in the hour of our death. Amen. Hail Holy Queen, Mother of Mercy our life, our sweetness, our hope. To thee do we cry, poor banished children of Eve. To thee do we send up our sighs, mourning and weeping in this valley of tears. Turn then, oh my gracious advocates, thine eyes of mercy towards us and after this our exile, show unto us the fruit of thy womb, Jesus O clement, O sweet, O loving Virgin Mary. Pray for us O Holy Mother of God that we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ. Amen.
Out of ignorance as a a non-denominational member, who hasn’t ever touched this subject before, what is the importance of Mary and her personage? And what do we do with these views?
Well...Mary gave birth to Jesus, who is God....therefore she's the mother of God. Thats the simple way to put it, but as someone who came from a background of protestantism that would not accept that. I was never taught it as a kid, but understanding the trinity of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. I realize that now calling Mary the mother of God is correct.
Swing to far on one end and you end up worshiping Mary, which is what the Bible forbids, and is actually one of the many faults many Catholics are doing. Swing too far on the right and you commit Nestorianism and deny Jesus' human origin. I personally stand on Mary is indeed the mother of God, but it DOES NOT equate Mary into a goddess, nor is she 'special' in any way except being chosen to be as such. She still has original sin as every one of us, has to pay a sin offering like every Jew of her era, and such. She, alongside the rest of Jesus' family, also claimed Jesus is mad for being a Rabbi (and that was clearly recorded by scripture). So, in essence, she is technically the mother of God, but no different from any other human being.
I'm 100% ok with calling Mary the mother of Jesus, who is called Christ, as the Bible does. Mary as the Mother of God I feel is an attempt to elevate her herself beyond simple humanity. Mary was given a unique honor beyond any other human in history, but then so was Moses (spoke to God face to 'face') and so was David (God called him a man after God's own heart). Mary was also kinda, pseudo rejected by Jesus in Matthew 12:47-50, when Mary and her other sons come to Jesus wanting to talk to him (there is an implication they're going to try to get him to stop preaching or something). "Jesus responded 'Why is my mother, and who are my brothers.' Pointing to his disciples, he said 'There are my mother and brothers. For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.'" Of course, that's not an outright condemnation of any kind, but Jesus clearly says His ministry comes before regular familial relations, and Mary is a regular familial relation. As to the whole 'distinguish between body and soul, and physical lineage and spiritual lineage', I think that's a messy soup that we can't even be sure is meaningful to distinguish between. Was Mary just a surrogate mother for an infant body God Himself created? Was she the genetic mother of Jesus? What spiritual or soul-wise was going on? I have no idea, and I won't say anything on the topic. But Jesus is fully Man and fully God, one person with two complete natures. Hell, I'll even say those two don't necessarily conflict. I'm 100% human and 100% male, and 100% my age and 100% several other things. They're different dimensions, they don't conflict. Could God and Man be similar? I have no idea.
Jesus is God. Mary gave birth to God. The logic is undeniably clear. It’s a christological statement it’s actually not saying anything ab Mary besides using her as a reference
@@Bigchickens Jesus is God, but not all that God is. God the Father is God, and not a child of Mary. God the Holy Spirit is God, and not the child of Mary. Thus calling Mary the Mother of God is a generalizing term that portrays her as more than she was, and is often associated with the practice of praying to Mary, which is idolatry by the biblical standards. If YOU mean something less by that, then that's fine. I'm just pointing out what many people mean by it.
@@colinsmith1495listen...what youre saying is exactly what zoomer is saying is wrong. Study the early councils, and the saints. Look into the trinity, its actually what was established by the earliest Christians. Mary is the mother of God
I'm way more happy with "God-bearer" than "Mother of God". "Mother of Jesus" also works better to me. Yes yes I know Jesus is God, but so is the Father and the Holy Spirit, who Mary is not the mother of. She is only mother of Jesus. I'm sounding like I'm suggesting Tritheism. I am not. You all know that. Anyway, despite Jesus pre-existing Mary, she is his mother. Obviously. But mother of God? Really? How about "Mother of the Incarnation". Anyway everyone kinda means the same thing as far as I can tell. It's all semantics
That last point is exactly why it grinds my gears a bit when people like to play semantics with the title “Mother of God”. Because yes, those of us who use that title know full well that she didn’t give birth to the Father or the Holy Spirit. But because the three persons of the trinity are all equally God, it’s not inaccurate to call her that either. I think people often tend to focus on an argument that those of us who use the title aren’t actually making. We want to emphasize her grace and her relationship with Jesus, our fully divine and fully human savior, with his fully human mother. And let’s be honest, most of the other alternative titles people will concede to are a bit of a mouthful
I am curious why you say Catholics view Mary too highly? We do view her as the Highest of all humans, second to Jesus of course, and attribute her Hyperdulia, but why would we not? This is God's momma we're talking about. Did Jesus not tell John "This is your mother"? By being the Mother of God, we as children of God must respect Mary as our own spiritual mother, per the 4th commandment. what are your thoughts on this?
@@WaylonElstad While I can see that, the context is important here. the 2 preceding parables are about opening your eyes and ears to God, this statement seems to be a punctuation of this fact, not a reason to disregard Mary. There are many more examples of Jesus' high regard for his Mother than just this one verse. The assumption of Mary being the big one. The only human to be taken into heaven without having to die. That's a pretty high level of respect given.
@@osbornejohnson7919 The bible was not formed in the 1,000s. The original books of the new testament were written all before 100 AD, with 21 of the 27 books immediately being considered Canon, with slight reservations for James, Jude, 2nd and 3rd John, 2nd Peter, and Revelation, although the reservations were short lived and we had 95% of today's new testament considered canon by 200 Ad, with the canon (not considering the Apocrypha) being finalized in 397, although today's specific canon (just the 27 books) had been circulating since at least the 360s with Athanasius's canon, although Origen seemed to consider all the 27 books canon in the 250s, with the possible exception of Revelation.
The main problem with “mother of God” is that God can refer to all three persons, and is most often used to refer to the Father. Obviously no one thinks Mary is the mother of the Father or the Spirit (or that she created the Son), but it can sound like that to non-Christian ears.
If Mary didn’t preexist God then she isn’t the Mother of God. The mother of something predates the something. It’s a ridiculous title. She was simply the mother of Jesus Christ’s human form. She was the vessel through which God came into the world in flesh.
@@redeemedzoomer6053 the church condemned all Protestants anathema as well. I don’t see why the council should be considered infallible. That’s the part that’s confusing me the most. Jesus existed before Mary. As well as the Father and the Holy Spirit. All mothers in nature exist before the thing that they’re the mother of. There isn’t a single exception to that, so I don’t know why we have to give Mary this “Mother of God” title. She quite literally gave birth to the human Jesus because the divine Jesus had existed since the beginning
@@earnyourgold if Jesus was fully and inseparably human and god, Mary would be the mother of god. Catholicism and orthodoxy don't deny the existence of Jesus before Mary as the word that was with god. The idea is that if you don't want to call Mary the mother of god, then you are inherently denying the unity of Jesus' human and divine nature.
@@jayasuryangoral-maanyan3901 I know what the “idea” is but it’s a false idea. Jesus’ divine nature existed long before Mary. She did not give birth to his divine nature. Every example ever of someone giving birth is them giving birth to something that simply did not exist beforehand. Something they grew in their own body. Mary only did that with Jesus’ human body. She was a vessel that was used to create his flesh. I can believe this and still think that Jesus was 100% God and 100% man. They’re not mutually exclusive at all. This whole argument is based on a false dichotomy.
@@earnyourgold I don't understand your idea, the giving birth is giving birth. The title isn't creator of god. Mary raises Jesus, she gives birth to Jesus, and Jesus is god. Theotokos means god-bearer because Mary bore god in her womb and gave birth to him. Mary is called Mother of god because she was the mother of Jesus and Jesus was god. You are saying that Jesus' divine and human natures were so separate that Jesus was not god when he was born? I also thought Jesus' birth was supposed to be a miracle, and that not just anyone gives birth to a jesus, why would you expect anyone to give birth the same way that Mary did?
Mary was not the mother of God, as "God" refers to the entire trinity. Mary was only the mother of the physical body of Jesus, as Jesus appeared in the fire in Daniel chapter 3 before his physical body existed. Even if you could call Mary the mother of God during the early life and ministry of Jesus, at the cross, Jesus gave her to the apostle John, giving John the responsibilities culturally given to the firstborn son.
First of all, the Father is God, the Son is God and the Holy Spirit is God. The nature of God is not a mathematical equasion (so it isn't like Father + Son + Holy Spirit = God) because all Persons of the Trinity are the same God.
Secondly, Mary has to be the mother of God because if she wouldn't be then that would imply that Jesus isn't God which is completely worng. Jesus has two natures but He is one Person. If Mary didn't gave birth to God than that would also mean that God didn't die and rose from the dead which is also wrong.
"Before Abraham was, I am" Good thing Mary existed way back before Abraham, eh? Like in the beginning, there was the Word and the Word was God, and Mary bore Him? Even Jesus said that anyone who believes and follows him is more blessed than Mary. Evangelicals didn't say it - Jesus did.
@@atticusboman4444 very nice. But what did Jesus say about his own mother? Did he say that Mary was the most blessed human? Like, in Luke 11, say? Did he revere her in a special, unique way, like maybe in Matthew 12? When you're looking for evidence of something, it's always better to go to the source, correct? Most Catholic/Orthodox traditions come from the apocryphal Gospel of James. They rejected the book and kept the traditions. I believe that shows the fallibility of the early 'church fathers'. Just as today we see confusion around 'affirming Christians' who say that certain sins are fine, the old Christians had their own confusions.
Mary said “Surely, from now on all generations will call me blessed” in Luke. The angel Gabriel said to Mary “Hail, Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou amongst women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb”.
mary wasn’t Jesus’s mother in the same way your mothers are. she played the role of His mother here on earth, she was still so very special because God Himself chose her to bring forth His Son and raise Him. but she wasn’t blood-related to Jesus. Jesus had no biological connection to her. Jesus was God in flesh, God cannot have a mother. Jesus was neither Jew nor Gentile. He was God revealed in a human body, but God created His body, He was brought forth by the Power of the Holy Spirit. however, for all intents and purposes, mary was His mother here on earth, but just as joseph was essentially His foster dad, mary had just about the same role as His mother. she was basically a surrogate given the role as mother to raise and look after Jesus Christ as He grew, she was privileged and a special, exemplary woman, indeed. but “mother of God”? no.
even so, i’m pretty sure Jesus never called mary “Mother” in the Bible. He referred to her as “woman”. when Mary came to see Him, and someone alerted Him that His mother was there, He replied and stated that “His mother/brother/sister are those that do the Will of God”
@GospelGirll in my opinion, we should just call her Mary, or the Virgin Mary to distinguish her from the other marys in the Bible lol. i even refer to her as the Mother of Jesus because she played the role of mother to Him, but i understand she wasn’t biologically His *mother*
@@roseth777 what you’re saying is coming across as if you’re denying that Jesus was biologically human. That he was some kind of divine creature that looked like a human and came out of a woman’s womb but wasn’t actually a human person. If that is what you’re claiming this is a very ancient heresy known as Docetism. Mary is understood as the source of Jesus’s humanity. His divinity and humanity were perfectly linked in an actual living flesh and blood person. Jesus’s divine nature pre-existed obviously but his human nature was supplied at a moment in time the same way all of us become human. Through his mother - Mary. And his two natures were perfectly unified from the moment of conception in her womb.
@@roseth777now where have I heard the word woman before in the Bible? Genesis 3:15 And did I heard that term in Revelation 12? Maybe she is the woman that Christ promised
Keep in mind that the Church of the East signed an agreement with the Roman Catholics that Mother of God is an accepted term as long as the proper context is understood (or something like that).
Evangelicals are literally more Nestorian than the Nestorians.
that is very very true, sadly
I think you meant to say, "... that Mother of God is an ACCEPTED term..." "Accepted" means "that which one can accept; okay; proper; legitimate". "Excepted" means "except for; but; in all cases minus this one".
@@darreljones8645 Yes, thank you. Just edited.😅
*some evangelicals
Sort of like "Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it"?
Yes. Jesus is God. Mary is the mother of Jesus. Mary is the mother of God.
Even more than that, We are Children of God, Mary is the mother of God, We are also spiritual children of Mary.
@@osbornejohnson7919that’s an unnecessary leap
@@osbornejohnson7919Not really, that's too far of a leap.
@@wrenithilduincats Catholic teaching of Mary. not sure how that's a leap.
@@osbornejohnson7919no one in council of Ephesus (which term theotokos come from) thinking like that.
I once said “Mother of God” to my Protestant mother and she asked me who that was.
Oh wow
repent. you just broke the 10 commandments: For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother,’ and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother is to be put to death.’ Mat 15:4
@@michaelg4919 no
This is circular: We need church history to remain in line with Church history.
It always shocks me to hear how some protestants will refer to Mother Mary and how they constantly want to downplay her role in salvation, and how disrespectful they behave towards Mary. Imagine saying those things about your own mother, and then imagine how Christ feels when you talk bad about *_his_* mother that way.
Exactly protestants basically believe Christians got salvation 500 years ago
If in the Bible that term is never used for Mary, why should we give her that title? And I’m not Protestant. The Bible says she’s Jesus’s mother why should we use our logic and take these extra steps and call her mother of God??? Lean not on ur own understanding.
@@SurtierWoodNo?
There is one mediator between God and man, Jesus Christ.
@@notyourtypicalcomment2399The Bible calls her "mother of my Lord" (Luke 1.43)
Mary is the mother of God
Mary is the theotokos
Mary is the God bearer
absolutely
The implication of saying that Mary is "just' the mother of Jesus' humanity is that Jesus' humanity is anything other than THE central importance and fact of the Incarnation, and that frankly isn't Christianity at all.
Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of God; Mother of Jesus the Risen Lord! Happy Easter. Alleluia! Alleluia!
Rejoice, unwedded bride!!!
God is often shorthand for God the Father. While I believes it’s true that Mary is the mother of God, she’s the mother of God the Son. It can be misleading to just say “God” and not distinguish which person of the trinity. Also, for a newb Christian, it can be confusing without emphasizing that the Son of God existed forever. Therefore, I think it’s okay to make qualifications when making such a statement. We should’ve deny it, only clarify it.
Especially when there is a tendency of some to idolize Mary. We should not swing the pendulum to the other side and avoid the topic, just work to clarify. I think it’s a good thing to want to not mislead others. Unqualified statements can mislead terribly.
Read the creed of st athanasius
@@anglicanwingaling I've read it.
i accidentally committed heresy claiming that Mary was simply the mother of Jesus and was the vessel when i was strictly a Bible-believing Protestant. that was almost two months ago. i am now in love with her story especially the Lady of Guadalupe apparition, and might even convert to Catholicism.
i always used to think Catholics exalted Mary too much. but she is a really important piece of the puzzle!
Become catholic or orthodox
Seems like a fake story
@@alan_e_why?
Run from pagan Catholicism
Converting to Catholicism is a big big mistake my friend. Mary doesn’t hear, understand and answer prayers… neither does she save…
“If anyone will not confess that the Emmanuel is very God, and that therefore the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God (Θεοτόκος), inasmuch as in the flesh she bore the Word of God made flesh [as it is written, “The Word was made flesh”] let him be anathema.”
- The XII. Anathematisms of St. Cyril Against Nestorius, Anathematism I
yeah cuz I should listen to some random guy with a pointy hat says so.
I feel like it’s a confusing term because “God” is usually used for God the father, or the divine nature of God. I’ve had a friend say that Mary never died and never sinned because she was a perfect creation of God and is currently right next to him because she’s his mother. It gets confusing to people that just take the term Mother of God and never really understand it, because we tend to look at our mothers and think Jesus sees her exactly like we do
Well, to be fair, Mary did not die, since death is the price of original sin which God cleansed Mary of in her conception. She was assumed into heaven.
While your friend is partially right, Mary never sinned, never died, and is seated with God in heaven, the meta-physical analysis is a bit more nuanced than "She's God's perfect creation". Mary was as human as everyone else, but God pulled timey-wimey shenanigans (To use simple terms) and wiped original sin from her at conception by applying her son's sacrifice on the cross... before it happened. Like I said Timey-wimey God exists out of time etc...
Since death is the price man pays for original sin, Mary lacking that would mean there is no reason for her to die.
We Catholics are allowed to disagree about the "never died" part; the Assumption of Mary is a dogma of our faith, along with the Immaculate Conception (the "perfect creation of God" bit, where God prevented her from being tainted by Adam's original sin), but there's nothing denying the tradition of the Dormition of the Theotokos held by the Orthodox, by many Eastern Catholics as part of their Orthodox heritage, and evidently by Saint Pope John Paul II as well, in which Mary physically died. Catholic teaching only officially claims that Mary was taken bodily into heaven, whether or not she biologically died first.
@@osbornejohnson7919 The whole concept of Christianity is that Jesus paid for the sin of all of us. Mary was the first one cleaned by Jesus, because she received the holy spirit before. However, she’s “free of sin” not because she didn’t commit any sins but because Jesus paid for her sin already, the same way we as followers can commit sin but our soul is clean because of Jesus sacrifice
@@osbornejohnson7919 No, that doesn’t make sense. Jesus death on the cross paid for the sins of everybody, not just Mary’s. And it was her soul that was cleansed not her body, so her soul went up to heaven not her body. The same way every Christians soul is going to go to heaven. Jesus sacrifice saves you from a SPIRITUAL death not a physical one
When I went to Protestant churches they seemed to gnome Mary more than anything. Like she was a minor footnote and was only mentioned around Christmas it seems.
I think Redeemed Zoomer must come back and discuss another doctrine related to Mary: Perpetual Virginity.
Also, interesting enough, Occam's Razor will simply say that Mary did intimate relations with Joseph, and had other children, including James, brother of Jesus.
Those promoting Perpetual Virginity seems to go through a lot of hoops and ladders to prove it.
Good video. Always irks me when so-called Protestants will straight up spew some unbiblical heresies because of this ingrained anti-Catholicism. Speaking of Mary, maybe you can make a future video talking about the Presbyterian/your own personal views of Mary and of the Roman Catholic/Eastern Orthodox Mariology? I'm interested to see how they compare to the Lutheran views of Mary (which seems to be some of the highest Mariology among Protestants, probably alongside the more high-church Anglicans).
Yes☦
Where could I study church history though?
In the Catholic Orthodox Church
Zoomer has a 15 minute video summarizing church history. If you want something longer and more detailed, there's an 8 part series about church history that youtuber UsefulCharts made: ruclips.net/video/uzuYZi749CM/видео.html
@@deutschermichel5807no The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints the first church Catholics change everything
@@xxrandmlinksxxbruh2419Mormon is a cult,not even Christian.Repent.
Buy Church history books, watch RUclips videos.
I found this video convincing
Imagine if nobody ever asked this question. Would be a lot nicer around Christian town.
Even I, an ordinary man, have more than one will...
The divine essence is eternal...
Personally, I tend to avoid calling Mary the Mother of God. However, it is a true statement, she was Jesus's earthly mother. I avoid it because it's mostly used by Catholics, who also believe Mary was concieved without sin, is a mediator in her own right, remained a virgin etc.. Mary was a sinful human like the rest of us, but did find favour with God, just as many others did, even if Jesus's brothers didn't come from her, they would have at least consumated the marriage, and Jesus is our mediator, a role no one only human can fulfill.
Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. Holy Mary Mother of God, pray for us sinners now and in the hour of our death. Amen.
Hail Holy Queen, Mother of Mercy our life, our sweetness, our hope. To thee do we cry, poor banished children of Eve. To thee do we send up our sighs, mourning and weeping in this valley of tears. Turn then, oh my gracious advocates, thine eyes of mercy towards us and after this our exile, show unto us the fruit of thy womb, Jesus O clement, O sweet, O loving Virgin Mary. Pray for us O Holy Mother of God that we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ. Amen.
Great video and explanation. So, under this definition, can we also call Mary the mother of the Holy Spirit?
still rub me the wrong way, cause of the Trinity, and the literal translation of God-bearer is better
Out of ignorance as a a non-denominational member, who hasn’t ever touched this subject before, what is the importance of Mary and her personage? And what do we do with these views?
Well...Mary gave birth to Jesus, who is God....therefore she's the mother of God. Thats the simple way to put it, but as someone who came from a background of protestantism that would not accept that. I was never taught it as a kid, but understanding the trinity of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. I realize that now calling Mary the mother of God is correct.
Swing to far on one end and you end up worshiping Mary, which is what the Bible forbids, and is actually one of the many faults many Catholics are doing.
Swing too far on the right and you commit Nestorianism and deny Jesus' human origin.
I personally stand on Mary is indeed the mother of God, but it DOES NOT equate Mary into a goddess, nor is she 'special' in any way except being chosen to be as such.
She still has original sin as every one of us, has to pay a sin offering like every Jew of her era, and such.
She, alongside the rest of Jesus' family, also claimed Jesus is mad for being a Rabbi (and that was clearly recorded by scripture).
So, in essence, she is technically the mother of God, but no different from any other human being.
I'm 100% ok with calling Mary the mother of Jesus, who is called Christ, as the Bible does. Mary as the Mother of God I feel is an attempt to elevate her herself beyond simple humanity. Mary was given a unique honor beyond any other human in history, but then so was Moses (spoke to God face to 'face') and so was David (God called him a man after God's own heart).
Mary was also kinda, pseudo rejected by Jesus in Matthew 12:47-50, when Mary and her other sons come to Jesus wanting to talk to him (there is an implication they're going to try to get him to stop preaching or something). "Jesus responded 'Why is my mother, and who are my brothers.' Pointing to his disciples, he said 'There are my mother and brothers. For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.'" Of course, that's not an outright condemnation of any kind, but Jesus clearly says His ministry comes before regular familial relations, and Mary is a regular familial relation.
As to the whole 'distinguish between body and soul, and physical lineage and spiritual lineage', I think that's a messy soup that we can't even be sure is meaningful to distinguish between. Was Mary just a surrogate mother for an infant body God Himself created? Was she the genetic mother of Jesus? What spiritual or soul-wise was going on? I have no idea, and I won't say anything on the topic.
But Jesus is fully Man and fully God, one person with two complete natures. Hell, I'll even say those two don't necessarily conflict. I'm 100% human and 100% male, and 100% my age and 100% several other things. They're different dimensions, they don't conflict. Could God and Man be similar? I have no idea.
Jesus is God.
Mary gave birth to God.
The logic is undeniably clear.
It’s a christological statement it’s actually not saying anything ab Mary besides using her as a reference
@@Bigchickens Jesus is God, but not all that God is. God the Father is God, and not a child of Mary. God the Holy Spirit is God, and not the child of Mary.
Thus calling Mary the Mother of God is a generalizing term that portrays her as more than she was, and is often associated with the practice of praying to Mary, which is idolatry by the biblical standards.
If YOU mean something less by that, then that's fine. I'm just pointing out what many people mean by it.
@@colinsmith1495listen...what youre saying is exactly what zoomer is saying is wrong. Study the early councils, and the saints. Look into the trinity, its actually what was established by the earliest Christians. Mary is the mother of God
Nah, the mother of God is probably Peter or John. All the disciples probably argued about which one was the mother after Mark 3:34.
I'm way more happy with "God-bearer" than "Mother of God". "Mother of Jesus" also works better to me. Yes yes I know Jesus is God, but so is the Father and the Holy Spirit, who Mary is not the mother of. She is only mother of Jesus. I'm sounding like I'm suggesting Tritheism. I am not. You all know that. Anyway, despite Jesus pre-existing Mary, she is his mother. Obviously. But mother of God? Really? How about "Mother of the Incarnation". Anyway everyone kinda means the same thing as far as I can tell. It's all semantics
That last point is exactly why it grinds my gears a bit when people like to play semantics with the title “Mother of God”. Because yes, those of us who use that title know full well that she didn’t give birth to the Father or the Holy Spirit. But because the three persons of the trinity are all equally God, it’s not inaccurate to call her that either. I think people often tend to focus on an argument that those of us who use the title aren’t actually making. We want to emphasize her grace and her relationship with Jesus, our fully divine and fully human savior, with his fully human mother. And let’s be honest, most of the other alternative titles people will concede to are a bit of a mouthful
Yes, next question
Shouldn’t Nestorians be “Quadritarian” by that logic?
Should we pray to mary then?
No. We have a personal relationship with God because Jesus is our mediator. Mary is not our mediator, nor are any of the saints.
Then don’t ask anyone to pray for you because prayer is simply a request, and by doing that you would be breaking Christ’s role as the sole mediator.
The Bible says that Christ is our only mediator between God and man
I am curious why you say Catholics view Mary too highly? We do view her as the Highest of all humans, second to Jesus of course, and attribute her Hyperdulia, but why would we not? This is God's momma we're talking about. Did Jesus not tell John "This is your mother"? By being the Mother of God, we as children of God must respect Mary as our own spiritual mother, per the 4th commandment. what are your thoughts on this?
Luke 8:19-21 is what is most commonly used.
@@WaylonElstad While I can see that, the context is important here. the 2 preceding parables are about opening your eyes and ears to God, this statement seems to be a punctuation of this fact, not a reason to disregard Mary. There are many more examples of Jesus' high regard for his Mother than just this one verse. The assumption of Mary being the big one. The only human to be taken into heaven without having to die. That's a pretty high level of respect given.
@@osbornejohnson7919 I am curious, where in the bible did it say Mary was assumed into heaven?
@@WaylonElstad I'll answer that if you can answer how the early church knew what to believe before the bible came to be in the early 1000's.
@@osbornejohnson7919 The bible was not formed in the 1,000s. The original books of the new testament were written all before 100 AD, with 21 of the 27 books immediately being considered Canon, with slight reservations for James, Jude, 2nd and 3rd John, 2nd Peter, and Revelation, although the reservations were short lived and we had 95% of today's new testament considered canon by 200 Ad, with the canon (not considering the Apocrypha) being finalized in 397, although today's specific canon (just the 27 books) had been circulating since at least the 360s with Athanasius's canon, although Origen seemed to consider all the 27 books canon in the 250s, with the possible exception of Revelation.
The main problem with “mother of God” is that God can refer to all three persons, and is most often used to refer to the Father. Obviously no one thinks Mary is the mother of the Father or the Spirit (or that she created the Son), but it can sound like that to non-Christian ears.
If Mary didn’t preexist God then she isn’t the Mother of God. The mother of something predates the something. It’s a ridiculous title. She was simply the mother of Jesus Christ’s human form. She was the vessel through which God came into the world in flesh.
That's Nestorianism, which is condemned by the church has heresy at the council of Chalcedon.
@@redeemedzoomer6053 the church condemned all Protestants anathema as well. I don’t see why the council should be considered infallible. That’s the part that’s confusing me the most. Jesus existed before Mary. As well as the Father and the Holy Spirit. All mothers in nature exist before the thing that they’re the mother of. There isn’t a single exception to that, so I don’t know why we have to give Mary this “Mother of God” title. She quite literally gave birth to the human Jesus because the divine Jesus had existed since the beginning
@@earnyourgold if Jesus was fully and inseparably human and god, Mary would be the mother of god. Catholicism and orthodoxy don't deny the existence of Jesus before Mary as the word that was with god. The idea is that if you don't want to call Mary the mother of god, then you are inherently denying the unity of Jesus' human and divine nature.
@@jayasuryangoral-maanyan3901 I know what the “idea” is but it’s a false idea. Jesus’ divine nature existed long before Mary. She did not give birth to his divine nature. Every example ever of someone giving birth is them giving birth to something that simply did not exist beforehand. Something they grew in their own body. Mary only did that with Jesus’ human body. She was a vessel that was used to create his flesh. I can believe this and still think that Jesus was 100% God and 100% man. They’re not mutually exclusive at all. This whole argument is based on a false dichotomy.
@@earnyourgold I don't understand your idea, the giving birth is giving birth. The title isn't creator of god. Mary raises Jesus, she gives birth to Jesus, and Jesus is god. Theotokos means god-bearer because Mary bore god in her womb and gave birth to him. Mary is called Mother of god because she was the mother of Jesus and Jesus was god.
You are saying that Jesus' divine and human natures were so separate that Jesus was not god when he was born? I also thought Jesus' birth was supposed to be a miracle, and that not just anyone gives birth to a jesus, why would you expect anyone to give birth the same way that Mary did?
Mary was not the mother of God, as "God" refers to the entire trinity. Mary was only the mother of the physical body of Jesus, as Jesus appeared in the fire in Daniel chapter 3 before his physical body existed. Even if you could call Mary the mother of God during the early life and ministry of Jesus, at the cross, Jesus gave her to the apostle John, giving John the responsibilities culturally given to the firstborn son.
First of all, the Father is God, the Son is God and the Holy Spirit is God. The nature of God is not a mathematical equasion (so it isn't like Father + Son + Holy Spirit = God) because all Persons of the Trinity are the same God.
Secondly, Mary has to be the mother of God because if she wouldn't be then that would imply that Jesus isn't God which is completely worng. Jesus has two natures but He is one Person. If Mary didn't gave birth to God than that would also mean that God didn't die and rose from the dead which is also wrong.
"Before Abraham was, I am"
Good thing Mary existed way back before Abraham, eh? Like in the beginning, there was the Word and the Word was God, and Mary bore Him?
Even Jesus said that anyone who believes and follows him is more blessed than Mary. Evangelicals didn't say it - Jesus did.
@@atticusboman4444 very nice.
But what did Jesus say about his own mother? Did he say that Mary was the most blessed human? Like, in Luke 11, say?
Did he revere her in a special, unique way, like maybe in Matthew 12?
When you're looking for evidence of something, it's always better to go to the source, correct?
Most Catholic/Orthodox traditions come from the apocryphal Gospel of James. They rejected the book and kept the traditions. I believe that shows the fallibility of the early 'church fathers'.
Just as today we see confusion around 'affirming Christians' who say that certain sins are fine, the old Christians had their own confusions.
Mary said “Surely, from now on all generations will call me blessed” in Luke. The angel Gabriel said to Mary “Hail, Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou amongst women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb”.
mary wasn’t Jesus’s mother in the same way your mothers are. she played the role of His mother here on earth, she was still so very special because God Himself chose her to bring forth His Son and raise Him. but she wasn’t blood-related to Jesus. Jesus had no biological connection to her. Jesus was God in flesh, God cannot have a mother. Jesus was neither Jew nor Gentile. He was God revealed in a human body, but God created His body, He was brought forth by the Power of the Holy Spirit. however, for all intents and purposes, mary was His mother here on earth, but just as joseph was essentially His foster dad, mary had just about the same role as His mother. she was basically a surrogate given the role as mother to raise and look after Jesus Christ as He grew, she was privileged and a special, exemplary woman, indeed. but “mother of God”? no.
even so, i’m pretty sure Jesus never called mary “Mother” in the Bible. He referred to her as “woman”.
when Mary came to see Him, and someone alerted Him that His mother was there, He replied and stated that “His mother/brother/sister are those that do the Will of God”
@GospelGirll in my opinion, we should just call her Mary, or the Virgin Mary to distinguish her from the other marys in the Bible lol. i even refer to her as the Mother of Jesus because she played the role of mother to Him, but i understand she wasn’t biologically His *mother*
@@roseth777 what you’re saying is coming across as if you’re denying that Jesus was biologically human. That he was some kind of divine creature that looked like a human and came out of a woman’s womb but wasn’t actually a human person. If that is what you’re claiming this is a very ancient heresy known as Docetism.
Mary is understood as the source of Jesus’s humanity. His divinity and humanity were perfectly linked in an actual living flesh and blood person. Jesus’s divine nature pre-existed obviously but his human nature was supplied at a moment in time the same way all of us become human. Through his mother - Mary. And his two natures were perfectly unified from the moment of conception in her womb.
@@roseth777that is blasphemy
Rejecting the Title of Theotokos
Is rejecting the Incarnation of Christ and the Hypostatic Union of Christ
@@roseth777now where have I heard the word woman before in the Bible?
Genesis 3:15
And did I heard that term in Revelation 12?
Maybe she is the woman that Christ promised