Why Christians Call Mary the Mother of God.

[amigo de christo]

In some case , Protestants are worse:bow and worship a human!
View attachment 92890

This is gonna sound very grave .
But the RCC is a pit of darkness .
Now let me go ahead and answer your question .
By making a statement . IF any m an ever , any woman; ever , any child ever
bowed before ME , I had done exactly as peter did and said GET UP i am but a man , WORSHIP GOD .
The RCC is not the only pit of darkness my friend . Almost all within even protestantville has now made its bed
with darkness .
NOW DONT JUDGE ME . lol , oh yeah i am going to use this satan following judge not generations words agaisnt them .
DONT JUDGE . HEY DONT JUDGE ME for exposing the falsehoods .
I g uess you may have already figured out
I AM TOTALLY done with any doctrine pumped out of anyt hing ecumeincal inclusive or its anti christ peace .
Fake love that has led this people into direct hatred of the words of GOD that expose their sins .
Do be encouraged now . BUT NO MAN will ever call me MOST HOLY anything , let alone reverand or father .
I WONT ALLOW IT . THEY will be rebuke the moment they even dare try to kneel before me
LET ALONE KISS my hand or ring , wait i dont have a ring .
I AINT GOD . THEM titles BELONG TO HIM . Most h oly father , most holy reverand , DOES NOT belong to man .
AND any who thinks it does IS DECIEVED . and ANY who has man t o call them selves such
IS FULL OF PRIDE .

 

[BreadOfLife]

You are Not the ONLY Catholic…

And I've never said that I was the ONLY Catholic. There are well over a BILLION baptized Catholics.

Other Catholics Also Have their say, IN WHAT THEY “DO” and “Believe.”

And unfaithful Catholics who believe what is contrary to the doctrines of the Church are in HERESY.

Jesus put His Church in charge of protecting the Gospel and passing it on to the world .
YOUR sect and all others came as an afterthought some 15-20 centuries LATER . . .
. . .

2 Thess 2:15
"Stand firm and hold fast to the Traditions you were taught, whether by an ORAL STATEMENT or by a LETTER from US."

Matt 16:16-19, 18:15-18
I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. WHATEVER YOU BIND on earth shall be bound in heaven; and WHATEVER YOU LOOSE on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

Luke 10:16
Whoever listens to YOU listens to ME. Whoever rejects YOU rejects ME. And whoever rejects ME rejects the ONE who sent ME."

As far as Catholics TEACHING Catholics…
They are TAUGHT By Instruction…
Verbal, Written “side book”, and Observance TO MINIC,
Catholic Popes, Catholic Priests, Catholic Elders, Catholic Nuns, Parents, Guardians.
…Behaviors, Gestures, Diagrams, Vows to Join the church, Support the Church, Attend the Church, Obey its Established Traditions, Rules and Doctrines. (As they change or remain the same.)

Right. That’s the way JESUS set it up . . .

1 Cor. 12:28
And God has appointed in the church first APOSTLES, second PROPHETS, third TEACHERS, then miracles, then gifts of healing, helping, administrating, and various kinds of tongues.

John 17:20-21
“I pray not only for them, but also for those who will believe in me through THEIR WORD, so that they may all be one, as you, Father, are in me and I in you, that they also may be in us, that the world may believe that you sent me.

1 Thess. 5:12
We ask you, brothers, to RESPECT those who are laboring among you and who are OVER YOU in the Lord and who admonish you

1 Tim. 5:17
Let the elders that RULE WELL be counted worthy of DOUBLE HONOUR, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.

They Early Church didn’t even HAVE a New Testament Canon of Scripture until 383AD, when it was compiled declared by the Catholic Church. After that - there were NO Bibles to pass out until the invention of the printing press in the 15th century.

What was learned by believers was taught by the CHURCH that Jesus left in charge.

Not others…it is one of your Tactics to Attempt to cause others Duress. And think yourself Clever to have achieved your goal and gaslight others saying they ARE upset, or whatever cheesy term, tickles your fancy, to give you a means to deflect off point.

I don't have any "tactics".
Just a l0ve for the TRUTH . . .

I’ve heard plenty of Catholics speak their own Words, of what THEY Believe, THEY DO, and WHY…

Yup - there are unfaithful christians in every group.
When you see a CINO (Catholic In Name Only) who denies basic doctrines - they are in HERSEY.

I have seen plenty of Popes, heard their Words…seen their Behaviors, Gestures.

I have Heard horror stories of Priests Behaviors AND How they exude accountability.

And that’s what happens when you are no longer faithful.

I’ve heard JUST as many “horror stories” about countless Protestant/Non-Catholic congregants and clergy . . .

My Preference is to NOT Have a Relationship with the Catholic Church.

You DO have one.

Unfortunately, it’s based on hatred and ignorance on YOUR part . . .

 

[prism]

Yes, Mary is the mother of Jesus according to the flesh (Romans 1:3). No Christian disputes that. But that's not really the point under discussion. The question is not: "According to which nature is Mary His mother?" The question is:

Who is the person Mary gave birth to?

Romans 1:3 says Christ was: "made of the seed of David according to the flesh." Amen. That speaks of His humanity. But the same Jesus is not a separate human person distinct from the eternal Son of God. John does not say: "A human person was joined to the Word." He says:

"The Word became flesh" (John 1:14).

Likewise, Elizabeth does not say: "the mother of my Lord's human nature." She says:

"the mother of my Lord" (Luke 1:43).

And Thomas later says to that same Lord:

"My Lord and my God" (John 20:28).

So I completely agree that Mary is not the source of Christ's divinity, and that His divine nature is eternal. But mothers are mothers of persons, not natures. Therefore, while Mary gave birth to Jesus according to the flesh, the Person She gave birth to is the eternal Word made flesh. That is why Christians call her Mother of God. Not because She originated His divinity, but because the Person she bore is God the Word incarnate.

The distinction is between incarnation and creation. Christians are not saying that Mary created the eternal Son of God or brought His divinity into existence. The Son is eternally begotten of the Father and has no beginning. Rather, the eternal Word became flesh (John 1:14) and took His human nature from Mary.

Mary did not create God; She gave birth to God incarnate.

She did not create the Person of the Son. She bore the Person who is the eternal Son.

Otherwise, I have to ask the same question I've been asking throughout this thread:

Who exactly was Mary the mother of?

If your answer is "Jesus Christ," and Jesus Christ is one divine Person with both a human and divine nature, then the title follows from the identity of the Person She bore, not from the origin of His divine nature.

Sounds like you're preaching to the choir. The Reformers had no qualms with Rome when it came to the Trinity.

 

[Taken]

Jesus put His Church in charge of protecting the Gospel and passing it on to the world .

Jesus never called “His Church”
catholic

YOUR sect

Sect… ?

and all others came as an afterthought some 15-20 centuries LATER . . .
. . .

Amazing what happened when men learned to read!

2 Thess 2:15
"Stand firm and hold fast to the Traditions you were taught, whether by an ORAL STATEMENT or by a LETTER from US."

Please identify the Letters and quoted excerpts from the Apostles Jesus appointed and Sent out to Preach…
specifically the TRADITIONS the Apostles practiced regarding Mary

Matt 16:16-19, 18:15-18
I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. WHATEVER YOU BIND on earth shall be bound in heaven; and WHATEVER YOU LOOSE on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

So…which Apostle… started the binding on earth…of
Statues of Mary?
Bowing before statues?
Crucifix trinkets?
Prayer Beads?
Calling on Mary ( after her bodily death? )
Calling out to departed souls or spirits?

Luke 10:16
Whoever listens to YOU listens to ME. Whoever rejects YOU rejects ME. And whoever rejects ME rejects the ONE who sent ME."

Okay Gospel according to Luke…
Where are Luke’s’ Traditions Regarding Mary?

They Early Church didn’t even HAVE a New Testament Canon of Scripture until 383AD, when it was compiled declared by the Catholic Church.

Yes… the Early Church …
Jesus called His Church…

Name Change..
Men hearing but not reading / verifying.

Printing presses…
Books scarce / expensive.
Men broadly illiterate for centuries.
Inferences “the Catholic Church is Jesus’ only True Church”… (but not Taught by the Apostles)

 

[Moonwood]

Lev 26:
[1] Ye shall make you no idols nor graven image, neither rear you up a standing image, neither shall ye set up any image of stone in your land, to bow down unto it: for I am the LORD your God.

Yes, some Catholics bow before statues. That has never been in dispute. What is in dispute is whether bowing before a statue is necessarily wrong or necessarily an act of worship.

You cite Leviticus 26:1, but if that passage prohibited all religious images, then God would be contradicting Himself when He later commands the making of images of cherubim for the Ark of the Covenant (Exodus 25:18-20), images woven into the Tabernacle veil (Exodus 26:1), and numerous sacred images in the Temple (1 Kings 6). Therefore, the issue cannot simply be the existence of an image or even bowing in its presence. The issue is whether the image is being treated as an idol or a god.

You keep saying, "Nothing about worship was in question." But then what exactly is the significance of asking whether someone bows before a statue? If your point is that bowing before a statue is inherently sinful, then you'll need to explain why God commanded sacred images to be made in the first place. If your point is that bowing before a statue is idolatry, then we're right back to the question of worship, because idolatry is a form of worship.

So merely establishing that some Catholics bow before statues does not establish your conclusion. You still have to demonstrate why that act, in and of itself, constitutes idol worship.

Yes…
Here body dead.
Her departed soul saved.

Where is the Teaching…a living man is to Pray TO, Communicate WITH…
Dead body’s?
Departed Souls?

Where does Scripture instruct, teach, condone…
Living men to communicate in any fashion “TO / WITH”
Dead bodys?
Departed souls?
Departed spirits?

Where is the teaching that a living man is to pray to departed souls?

First, notice that this is a different claim from the one you were making earlier. Earlier, you argued that asking saints for intercession is equivalent to necromancy. I pointed out that Deuteronomy 18 condemns divination, mediums, familiar spirits, and attempts to obtain hidden knowledge through the dead, not asking fellow members of Christ's body to pray for us.

Now you're asking where Scripture teaches believers to ask saints in Heaven for intercession. That's a question about biblical warrant, not necromancy.

As I already acknowledged, there is no verse that says verbatim, "Pray to Mary" or "Ask the saints in Heaven to pray for you."

But there is also no verse that says glorified believers in Heaven are unable to hear, unable to pray, unable to intercede, or cut off from the rest of Christ's body.

In fact, Scripture points in the opposite direction. Jesus says God is "not the God of the dead, but of the living" (Luke 20:38). Moses and Elijah converse with Jesus at the Transfiguration (Matthew 17:1-3). Revelation depicts the souls of the faithful in Heaven consciously crying out to God (Revelation 6:9-10).

Hebrews 12:1 comes immediately after Hebrews 11, where the author lists Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and many other faithful believers. When he says we are surrounded by "so great a cloud of witnesses," the most natural reading is that he is referring to those very believers he has just described, not suddenly switching subjects to angels.

So the question isn't whether our earthly bodies die. Christians agree that they do. The question is whether physical death removes someone from the body of Christ and prevents them from praying for fellow believers.

You've already agreed that Mary is a saved soul alive with Christ in heaven. Therefore, the point that still needs to be demonstrated is not that her body died, but that physical death somehow prevents a member of Christ's body from interceding for another member of Christ's body.

If your position is simply that Scripture never explicitly instructs Christians to ask saints in Heaven for intercession, then I understand your argument. But that is very different from saying the practice is necromancy, and different again from saying it is idolatry.

Jesus IS A Spirit….with a Body….and Soul.
Living Humans Are a Body…with a spirit and soul.

Angels ARE spirits.

Numerous SPIRITS have appeared to Living Humans, in the Likeness AS a man since ancient History…to this day.

When A Spirit appears to a Human (in the likeness AS a man)… they appear as Person!

Before His incarnation, God the Word existed eternally with God the Father (John 1:1-2) and was not flesh and blood. But when '"the Word became flesh" (John 1:14), He did not merely appear as a man or temporarily wear a body. He became truly human.

After His resurrection, Jesus did not say, "I am a spirit appearing as a man." Instead, He said, "A spirit does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have" (Luke 24:39). He invited His disciples to touch Him and even ate food before them (Luke 24:42-43).

Angels may appear in human form, but Jesus distinguished Himself from a spirit by pointing to His resurrected body. Therefore, while the eternal Word existed before His incarnation, the risen Christ is not merely a spirit appearing in the likeness of a man. He is the incarnate Word with a real, glorified human body, possessing flesh and bones exactly as He said.

The Son of man…who was the son of…
(Abraham, Issac, king David, Joseph of the House Of David)..

About Age 30, That Son of man was Revealed Declared…By God…
The Son of God…

Many Human men…
Begin life from the Seed of a man.
They can choose to Take upon themselves…
Gods “seed”
Thus they are also …
Abraham’s “seed”…

And as well become … Declared…
The son of God…
The son of Abraham…

God Prepared a Body For His Word and Sent IT to Mary’s Womb.
Mary delivered forth, her First child, a male, called The Son of Man, given the Name JESUS.


Glory to God,
Taken

The problem with this argument is that it seems to separate the human Jesus from the divine Son in a way Scripture does not. The Bible does not present Jesus as a human person who later became God's Son. Rather, the eternal Word became flesh (John 1:14). The one born of Mary is the same Person who existed before Abraham (John 8:58) and who is called God (John 1:1; John 20:28).

 

[Moonwood]

Sounds like you're preaching to the choir. The Reformers had no qualms with Rome when it came to the Trinity.

I agree. The Reformers had no quarrel with orthodox Trinitarian doctrine, and that's really my point. If we're affirming one divine Person in Christ, not two persons, then Romans 1:3-4 is distinguishing His natures, not separating Him into a human son and a divine Son.

So I come back to the same question: Who was Mary the mother of?

If the answer is Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ is the eternal Son incarnate, then Mary is His mother according to the flesh. Not the source of His divinity, not the origin of the Son, but the mother of the Person who is God the Word made flesh.

That's why Christians use the title Mother of God. It follows from who Jesus is, not from where His divine nature came from.

 

[Taken]

What is in dispute is whether bowing before a statue is necessarily wrong or necessarily an act of worship.

That is per individuals to know what they are DOING.

You cite Leviticus 26:1, but if that passage prohibited all religious images, then God would be contradicting Himself when He later commands the making of images of cherubim for the Ark of the Covenant (Exodus 25:18-20), images woven into the Tabernacle veil (Exodus 26:1), and numerous sacred images in the Temple (1 Kings 6). Therefore, the issue cannot simply be the existence of an image or even bowing in its presence. The issue is whether the image is being treated as an idol or a god.

Don't see a contradiction of Erecting graven images to bow down to…
Or
A decorated BOX holding the Word of God written in The significance of Stone.
Or
A decorated Curtain and what that Curtain signifies.

You keep saying, "Nothing about worship was in question." But then what exactly is the significance of asking whether someone bows before a statue?

Already answered. A graven image erected to bow down to.

If your point is that bowing before a statue is inherently sinful

Did I make that Point?

So merely establishing that some Catholics bow before statues does not establish your conclusion. You still have to demonstrate why that act, in and of itself, constitutes idol worship.

No I do not, have to demonstrate anything I did not claim.

Where is the teaching that a living man is to pray to departed souls?

First, notice that this is a different claim from the one you were making earlier.

Seems you are having trouble differentiating between a question and a claim.

Earlier, you argued that asking saints for intercession is equivalent to necromancy.

Why do you think Calling on departed spirits was discouraged… regardless of whatever term?

I pointed out that Deuteronomy 18 condemns divination, mediums, familiar spirits, and attempts to obtain hidden knowledge through the dead, not asking fellow members of Christ's body to pray for us.

Do you mean… asking Departed fellow members of Christs Body?

Now you're asking where Scripture teaches believers to ask saints in Heaven for intercession. That's a question about biblical warrant, not necromancy.

Again… asking is not claiming.

As I already acknowledged, there is no verse that says verbatim, "Pray to Mary" or "Ask the saints in Heaven to pray for you."

Okay. Agree…

And…a message of Who to Pray TO
Matt 6:
[6] But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.
[7] But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.
[8] Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.
[9] After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.
[9] After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.


Eph 6:
[18] Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints;

Does the difference between TO and FOR puzzle you!

 

[Dryhn]

Correcyt.
My onluy exception was your reference to Trinity being 3 "Entities".
3 distinct Persons, yes - but ONE entity (Being).

A person like you ?
GOD is 3 people ?

 

[Moonwood]

Ex. 20:4,5 (Webster)
4 Thou shalt not make to thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:
5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;

From the above, we see what the prohibitions are:

1) We are not to make graven images (statues) or images to represent what is in heaven, on earth, or in the waters of the earth

2) We are not to bow down to any such statues or images

3) We are not to serve them

You are reading Exodus 20:4-5 as three separate prohibitions:

1. Do not make images.
2. Do not bow before images.
3. Do not serve images.

But that interpretation creates an immediate problem, because God Himself later commands the making of images. God instructed Moses to make two golden cherubim for the Ark of the Covenant (Exodus 25:18-20). He also commanded cherubim to be woven into the Tabernacle veil (Exodus 26:1), and Solomon's Temple contained numerous carved images of cherubim, palm trees, oxen, lions, and other figures (1 Kings 6-7).

Therefore, Exodus 20:4 cannot be an absolute prohibition against making images of things in heaven or on earth, otherwise God would be commanding what He had just forbidden. The context shows that the command is directed against idols: "You shall have no other gods before Me" (Exodus 20:3). The prohibition concerns making images as objects of religious devotion and treating them as gods. That's why verse 5 continues:

"Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them."

The issue is not merely the existence of an image. The issue is rendering to an image the honor and service that belong to God. Catholics do not believe statues of Mary are gods. Catholics do not believe statues possess divine power. Catholics do not serve statues as deities. So simply pointing out that a statue exists, or that someone bows in its presence, does not establish a violation of Exodus 20 unless you first demonstrate that the image is being treated as a god or idol. Otherwise, you'll need to explain why God commanded the construction of cherubim and other sacred images after giving the commandment.

 

[Moonwood]

Don't see a contradiction of Erecting graven images to bow down to…
Or
A decorated BOX holding the Word of God written in The significance of Stone.
Or
A decorated Curtain and what that Curtain signifies.

But that's precisely my point. You are already recognizing that not every religious image is forbidden.

God commanded the making of the cherubim (Exodus 25:18-20), the images in the Tabernacle (Exodus 26:1), and the images in the Temple (1 Kings 6). Therefore, the mere existence of a religious image cannot be what Scripture condemns. So what principle distinguishes a forbidden image from a permissible one?

If your answer is that the cherubim were not idols and were not being treated as gods, then we agree. But that means the issue is not simply whether an image exists or whether someone bows in its presence. The issue is whether the image is being treated as a god.

Catholic statues are not erected because Catholics believe they are gods. They are representations of real persons, just as the cherubim were representations of real heavenly beings. You keep saying that worship is not the issue, but then what conclusion am I supposed to draw from the fact that someone bows before a statue?

If your point is merely that Catholics bow before statues, I've already acknowledged that some do.
If your point is that such bowing is sinful, then you still need to explain why God commanded sacred images to be made.
If your point is that such bowing is idolatry, then we are right back to the question of worship, because idolatry is a form of worship.

So merely pointing out that a statue exists or that someone bows before it does not establish idolatry. You still have to demonstrate that the image is being treated as a god.

Okay. Agree…

And…a message of Who to Pray TO
Matt 6:
[6] But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.
[7] But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.
[8] Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.
[9] After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.
[9] After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.


Eph 6:
[18] Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints;

Does the difference between TO and FOR puzzle you!

Not at all. The difference between "to" and "for" is obvious. The problem is that you're treating two different kinds of prayer as though they are the same thing. When Jesus says, "Pray to your Father" (Matthew 6), He is teaching whom worship and petition are ultimately directed to: God. Catholics agree completely. Every grace, blessing, answer to prayer, and act of worship comes from God, not Mary. But Ephesians 6:18 also instructs Christians to pray for one another. So Scripture clearly teaches that other members of Christ's body can intercede.

The question is not whether prayer is directed to God. We both agree that it is. The question is whether members of Christ's body may pray for one another. You already accept that living Christians can do so. The issue under debate is whether physical death removes a believer from that ministry.

Since you have already acknowledged that Mary is a saved soul alive with Christ in Heaven, the point that still needs to be demonstrated is why being alive with Christ prevents her from praying for fellow members of Christ's body.

Asking Mary to pray for us is not a replacement for praying to God. Catholics do both.

In fact, every time a Christian asks a pastor, spouse, friend, or church member to pray for them, they are doing the same thing in principle: requesting intercession while still directing worship and petition ultimately to God.
So the distinction isn't "to" versus "for." Catholics already recognize that distinction. The real question is whether those alive in Christ in Heaven remain capable of participating in that intercessory ministry.

Yes…
Here body dead.
Her departed soul saved.

Where is the Teaching…a living man is to Pray TO, Communicate WITH…
Dead body’s?
Departed Souls?

Where does Scripture instruct, teach, condone…
Living men to communicate in any fashion “TO / WITH”
Dead bodys?
Departed souls?
Departed spirits?

Where is the teaching that a living man is to pray to departed souls?

First, notice that this is a different claim from the one you were making earlier. Earlier, you argued that asking saints for intercession is equivalent to necromancy. I pointed out that Deuteronomy 18 condemns divination, mediums, familiar spirits, and attempts to obtain hidden knowledge through the dead, not asking fellow members of Christ's body to pray for us.

Now you're asking where Scripture teaches believers to ask saints in Heaven for intercession. That's a question about biblical warrant, not necromancy.

As I already acknowledged, there is no verse that says verbatim, "Pray to Mary" or "Ask the saints in Heaven to pray for you."

But there is also no verse that says glorified believers in Heaven are unable to hear, unable to pray, unable to intercede, or cut off from the rest of Christ's body.

In fact, Scripture points in the opposite direction. Jesus says God is "not the God of the dead, but of the living" (Luke 20:38). Moses and Elijah converse with Jesus at the Transfiguration (Matthew 17:1-3). Revelation depicts the souls of the faithful in Heaven consciously crying out to God (Revelation 6:9-10).

Hebrews 12:1 comes immediately after Hebrews 11, where the author lists Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and many other faithful believers. When he says we are surrounded by "so great a cloud of witnesses," the most natural reading is that he is referring to those very believers he has just described, not suddenly switching subjects to angels.

So the question isn't whether our earthly bodies die. Christians agree that they do. The question is whether physical death removes someone from the body of Christ and prevents them from praying for fellow believers.

You've already agreed that Mary is a saved soul alive with Christ in heaven. Therefore, the point that still needs to be demonstrated is not that her body died, but that physical death somehow prevents a member of Christ's body from interceding for another member of Christ's body.

If your position is simply that Scripture never explicitly instructs Christians to ask saints in Heaven for intercession, then I understand your argument. But that is very different from saying the practice is necromancy, and different again from saying it is idolatry.

Jesus IS A Spirit….with a Body….and Soul.
Living Humans Are a Body…with a spirit and soul.

Angels ARE spirits.

Numerous SPIRITS have appeared to Living Humans, in the Likeness AS a man since ancient History…to this day.

When A Spirit appears to a Human (in the likeness AS a man)… they appear as Person!

Before His incarnation, God the Word existed eternally with God the Father (John 1:1-2) and was not flesh and blood. But when '"the Word became flesh" (John 1:14), He did not merely appear as a man or temporarily wear a body. He became truly human.

After His resurrection, Jesus did not say, "I am a spirit appearing as a man." Instead, He said, "A spirit does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have" (Luke 24:39). He invited His disciples to touch Him and even ate food before them (Luke 24:42-43).

Angels may appear in human form, but Jesus distinguished Himself from a spirit by pointing to His resurrected body. Therefore, while the eternal Word existed before His incarnation, the risen Christ is not merely a spirit appearing in the likeness of a man. He is the incarnate Word with a real, glorified human body, possessing flesh and bones exactly as He said.

The Son of man…who was the son of…
(Abraham, Issac, king David, Joseph of the House Of David)..

About Age 30, That Son of man was Revealed Declared…By God…
The Son of God…

Many Human men…
Begin life from the Seed of a man.
They can choose to Take upon themselves…
Gods “seed”
Thus they are also …
Abraham’s “seed”…

And as well become … Declared…
The son of God…
The son of Abraham…

God Prepared a Body For His Word and Sent IT to Mary’s Womb.
Mary delivered forth, her First child, a male, called The Son of Man, given the Name JESUS.


Glory to God,
Taken

The problem with this argument is that it seems to separate the human Jesus from the divine Son in a way Scripture does not. The Bible does not present Jesus as a human person who later became God's Son. Rather, the eternal Word became flesh (John 1:14). The one born of Mary is the same Person who existed before Abraham (John 8:58) and who is called God (John 1:1; John 20:28).

 

[prism]

That's why Christians use the title Mother of God. It follows from who Jesus is, not from where His divine nature came from.

If Jesus is fully God/fully man, then Mary is the mother of the Incarnate God. No biggie.

 

[Moonwood]

If Jesus is fully God/fully man, then Mary is the mother of the Incarnate God. No biggie.

Then I think we're on the same page. My only point is that "Mother of God" is simply shorthand for "mother of the Incarnate God," not "source of God's divine nature."

Mary is Jesus' mother according to the flesh, and Jesus is the Incarnate God. Therefore, Mary is the mother of the Incarnate God.

The title primarily tells us something important about who Jesus is: the child Mary bore was God the Word made flesh. But it also tells us something unique about Mary. By God's grace, She was chosen to bear the Incarnate Son, and through Her the eternal Word took on human flesh and entered the world. I'd say that's a pretty big deal. God clearly had His reasons for that, and more than one. Not because She originated His divinity, but because She became the mother of the Person who is God incarnate.

 

[Taken]

But that's precisely my point. You are already recognizing that not every religious image is forbidden.

I recognize …
Make THIS…WHAT it is for.
Do NOT make THAT..(it will be misconstrued)

So what principle distinguishes a forbidden image from a permissible one?

DO NOT
DO

If your answer is that the cherubim were not idols and were not being treated as gods, then we agree.

Not my answer.

Catholic statues are not erected because Catholics believe they are gods.

Reason irrelevant

If your point is merely that Catholics bow before statues, I've already acknowledged that some do.

Point. Do NOT Make.
Point. Misconstrued.

If your point is that such bowing is sinful, then you still need to explain why God commanded sacred images to be made.
If your point is that such bowing is idolatry, then we are right back to the question of worship, because idolatry is a form of worship.

Point… Do NOT MAKE.
Point…Misconstrued.

So merely pointing out that a statue exists or that someone bows before it does not establish idolatry.

Establishes… Doing What God commanded
To NOT Do.

The problem is that you're treating two different kinds of prayer as though they are the same thing.

Absolutely NOT the Same thing.
Pray TO God Period.
Pray FOR Others “Living”…
Saints (the Sav-Ed)
Followers (not Sav-ED)
Enemies (Denying, Not following or sav-ed)

When Jesus says, "Pray to your Father"

That IS Precisely What He Means…
Pray TO “your Father”… Period.

(Matthew 6), He is teaching whom worship and petition are ultimately directed to: God. Catholics agree completely. Every grace, blessing, answer to prayer, and act of worship comes from God, not Mary. But Ephesians 6:18 also instructs Christians to pray for one another. So Scripture clearly teaches that other members of Christ's body can intercede.

The question is not whether prayer is directed to God. We both agree that it is.

THEN… Praying “TO” other than “your father”,
IS settled.

The question is whether members of Christ's body may pray for one another. You already accept that living Christians can do so.

Not ONLY “Christians”…
Anyone can pray “TO” … their father.

Are you “aware”… Satan mimics Gods “teachings, behaviors, manners” ?
Drawing his followers, to pray TO Their “father” Satan, (in secret) TO call on Him,
TO Pray For “their father”…
TO “intercede in the lives of the People they NAME”?

Do YOU NOT realize…There IS a silent battle going on “FOR the souls of Every Living human”?

The “sav-ed” are untouchable!
But the …UN-saved…the followers of God, the non-followers, the children being “raised” by day-care centers, schools, street-gangs…
“HAVE BEEN and ARE PRIME “Targets”…
For Satan and his powerful angels…
TO “intercede” in their lives.

Open EYES… OBSERVE…the behaviors of the little children, youths, young adults, middle aged…
HEAR…their open mouths, rhetoric Against God, their arrogant in your face (everywhere, public squares, streets, media platforms, homes…)of PRIDE of their Behaviors.

THEY ARE … the Result of the “misconstrued” “prayers that are Not Directed TO God alone”…

They “ARE” being “sucked into” Satan’s fold.

They ARE the Enemies God says TO PRAY FOR… identify them, Name them.. THAT God Will Send His Angels to “intercede”….
Because… you Asked!

Since you have already acknowledged that Mary is a saved soul alive with Christ in Heaven, the point that still needs to be demonstrated is why being alive with Christ prevents her from praying for fellow members of Christ's body.

First… Give me any example of the Living ON Earth having a Conversation..with a Departed Soul…
What each is Saying.

Because I can give You an Example OF:
Two living humans communicating,
What they say.
And
Two departed souls communicating,
What they Say.
But … Don’t Find a living humans, conversation with a departed soul and what the departed soul says.

Asking Mary to pray for us is not a replacement for praying to God. Catholics do both.

Asking a living person to Pray For You…
Invokes a “Response”…

What is Mary’s “Response”?

In fact, every time a Christian asks a pastor, spouse, friend, or church member to pray for them, they are doing the same thing in principle: requesting intercession while still directing worship and petition ultimately to God.

And? The “Response of the one being asked”?

So the distinction isn't "to" versus "for”.

Absolutely False.
“TO” is precisely Limited …
TO God.

“FOR” is Unlimited.
FOR anyone/thing.

 

[Marvelloustime]

This is gonna sound very grave .
But the RCC is a pit of darkness .
Now let me go ahead and answer your question .
By making a statement . IF any m an ever , any woman; ever , any child ever
bowed before ME , I had done exactly as peter did and said GET UP i am but a man , WORSHIP GOD .
The RCC is not the only pit of darkness my friend . Almost all within even protestantville has now made its bed
with darkness .
NOW DONT JUDGE ME . lol , oh yeah i am going to use this satan following judge not generations words agaisnt them .
DONT JUDGE . HEY DONT JUDGE ME for exposing the falsehoods .
I g uess you may have already figured out
I AM TOTALLY done with any doctrine pumped out of anyt hing ecumeincal inclusive or its anti christ peace .
Fake love that has led this people into direct hatred of the words of GOD that expose their sins .
Do be encouraged now . BUT NO MAN will ever call me MOST HOLY anything , let alone reverand or father .
I WONT ALLOW IT . THEY will be rebuke the moment they even dare try to kneel before me
LET ALONE KISS my hand or ring , wait i dont have a ring .
I AINT GOD . THEM titles BELONG TO HIM . Most h oly father , most holy reverand , DOES NOT belong to man .
AND any who thinks it does IS DECIEVED . and ANY who has man t o call them selves such
IS FULL OF PRIDE .

@amigo de christo

 

[amigo de christo]

If Jesus is fully God/fully man, then Mary is the mother of the Incarnate God. No biggie.

Well She is the mother of our Lord and savoir Jesus the Christ .
but as i am sure you realize whom she birthed had created all that was .
And while i sure will call her blessed , what i wont do is pray to her or any angel or any saint .
For to do so is Blasphemous .
However to call her blessed is just fine to do .
Just like the mary who had washed the feet of JESUS
was allowed a testimony to be put into the gospel , AS JESUS even said ,
what she has done shall be written as a testimony unto her .
But it dont mean we pray to her either .
Nor does it mean we should ever once have sat under
men who went about in long robes and desired fancy titles
and to be called most holy reverand and have rings kissed and m en
kneel before them .
Quick news flash , LOOK at what the true apostel peter had done and said
to the house of cornelious when he too had kneeled at peters feet . HE didnt say kiss my RING
and call ME most holy father or reverand . HE said GET UP , i am but a man LIKE YOU .

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

Elizabeth, filled with the Holy Spirit, says to Mary:

"And why is this granted to me that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" (Luke 1:43)

In Luke's Gospel, "Lord" is a divine title:

• Luke 1:17 - "the Lord their God"
• Luke 1:76 - "go before the Lord"
• Luke 2:11 - "Christ the Lord"

Later, the Apostle Thomas says directly to Jesus:

"My Lord and my God!" (John 20:28)

Elizabeth calls Mary "the mother of my Lord."
Thomas calls Jesus "My Lord and my God."

Thomas makes explicit what Elizabeth had already recognized: the child Mary carried is God the Son incarnate.

That is why Christians call Mary the Mother of God.

The title does not mean Mary created God, existed before God, or is greater than God.

It means the one She bore is truly God in the flesh.

Ultimately, "Mother of God" is not primarily a statement about Mary. It is a confession about who Jesus is.

Physically, not spiritually.

 

[David1701]

You are reading Exodus 20:4-5 as three separate prohibitions:

1. Do not make images.
2. Do not bow before images.
3. Do not serve images.

But that interpretation creates an immediate problem, because God Himself later commands the making of images. God instructed Moses to make two golden cherubim for the Ark of the Covenant (Exodus 25:18-20). He also commanded cherubim to be woven into the Tabernacle veil (Exodus 26:1), and Solomon's Temple contained numerous carved images of cherubim, palm trees, oxen, lions, and other figures (1 Kings 6-7).

Therefore, Exodus 20:4 cannot be an absolute prohibition against making images of things in heaven or on earth, otherwise God would be commanding what He had just forbidden. The context shows that the command is directed against idols: "You shall have no other gods before Me" (Exodus 20:3). The prohibition concerns making images as objects of religious devotion and treating them as gods. That's why verse 5 continues:

"Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them."

The issue is not merely the existence of an image. The issue is rendering to an image the honor and service that belong to God. Catholics do not believe statues of Mary are gods. Catholics do not believe statues possess divine power. Catholics do not serve statues as deities. So simply pointing out that a statue exists, or that someone bows in its presence, does not establish a violation of Exodus 20 unless you first demonstrate that the image is being treated as a god or idol. Otherwise, you'll need to explain why God commanded the construction of cherubim and other sacred images after giving the commandment.

What is the difference between, "You shall not make to yourselves images.", and God commanding the making of cherubim and other images?

Answer: the prohibition is against making statues or images that have not been commanded by God.

As usual, R.C. teaching uses sophistry to try to circumvent clear prohibitions or instructions from God. Making idols of, for example, Mary, to bow down before and to pray to her, is exactly the kind of idolatry that the prohibition is against. Claiming that she is not treated as a goddess is simply denial and empty rhetoric.

My mother attended an R.C. "church" for a time. When an idol of Mary was transported from another R.C. "church", to the one she attended, so that people could bow down before it and pray to her, was when my mother left Romanism.

 

[amigo de christo]

What is the difference between, "You shall not make to yourselves images.", and God commanding the making of cherubim and other images?

Answer: the prohibition is against making statues or images that have not been commanded by God.

As usual, R.C. teaching uses sophistry to try to circumvent clear prohibitions or instructions from God. Making idols of, for example, Mary, to bow down before and to pray to her, is exactly the kind of idolatry that the prohibition is against. Claiming that she is not treated as a goddess is simply denial and empty rhetoric.

My mother attended an R.C. "church" for a time. When an idol of Mary was transported from another R.C. "church", to the one she attended, so that people could bow down before it and pray to her, was when my mother left Romanism.

Yes and now a word .
Do you remember what GOD had told moses to make . A rod with a golden serpent .
THEN to hold it up and that everyone that looks upon it will be healed .
BUT guess what ends up happening to that ROD .
They had stored it for years and kept it for years and years .
BUT THEN when the people turned it into an idol , WHY GOD had it destroyed by a king .
For in those days the peoples did burn incense unto it .
Yes . So you are quite correct my friend . When folks kneel down before and blow incense unto .........
HELLO THAT IS IDOLARTY .
When folks pray to angels or saints and or mary
THEY commit blasphemy and have not TRUSTED IN GOD and IN HIS CHRIST ONLY .
YE shall not make and BOW DOWN UNTO images of ANYTHING in heaven , on earth etc .
And THERE IT IS for all to see .

 

[Moonwood]

Don't see a contradiction of Erecting graven images to bow down to…
Or
A decorated BOX holding the Word of God written in The significance of Stone.
Or
A decorated Curtain and what that Curtain signifies.

But that's precisely my point. You are already recognizing that not every religious image is forbidden. God commanded the making of the cherubim (Exodus 25:18-20), the images in the Tabernacle (Exodus 26:1), and the images in the Temple (1 Kings 6). Therefore, the mere existence of a religious image cannot be what Scripture condemns. So what principle distinguishes a forbidden image from a permissible one? You keep saying "Do NOT DO," but that's just repeating your conclusion. I'm asking for the principle that allows the cherubim, the Ark decorations, and the Temple imagery while forbidding Catholic statues.

If the issue is simply that an image exists, then God commanded images to be made.
If the issue is simply that someone bows in the presence of an image, then you'll need to show where Scripture teaches that every instance of bowing before an image is forbidden.
If the issue is idolatry, then we are back to the question you've repeatedly said isn't being discussed. Because idolatry means treating something as a god.

Catholics do not believe statues of Mary are gods. Catholics do not believe statues possess divine power. Catholics do not worship statues. So unless you can provide a principle that distinguishes the cherubim from Catholic statues, you're simply assuming that one is permissible and the other is not without demonstrating why.

“TO” is precisely Limited …
TO God.

“FOR” is Unlimited.
FOR anyone/thing.

You're arguing:

1. We should pray to God alone.
2. We should pray for others.
3. Therefore we should not ask Mary for intercession.

We agree completely that prayer, worship, and petition are ultimately directed to God. Where we disagree is that you seem to assume that asking another member of Christ's body for prayer somehow becomes a rival act of prayer to that person. When I ask a friend, pastor, spouse, or church member to pray for me, I am not ceasing to pray to God. I am asking another believer to join me in prayer. So when you repeatedly quote Matthew 6, you're proving something Catholics already believe: "Pray to your Father." Catholics do pray to the Father. Catholics pray to Christ. Catholics pray directly to God every day. The question under discussion has never been whether Christians should pray to God. The question is whether those alive in Christ in Heaven can pray for us. You wrote:

"THEN... Praying 'TO' other than 'your Father', IS settled."

But that's the point you're assuming rather than proving. Asking Mary to pray for us is not the same thing as directing worship to Mary. In fact, every time you ask another Christian to pray for you, you are directing a request to that Christian while still directing worship and petition ultimately to God. You also asked:

"Give me any example of the Living ON Earth having a Conversation with a Departed Soul."

But notice how the standard has shifted again. Earlier the argument was that asking saints for intercession is necromancy. Then the argument was that Scripture never commands it. Now the argument is that Scripture doesn't record a conversation between a living believer and a departed saint. Those are three different claims. I have already acknowledged there is no verse that explicitly says, "Ask Mary to pray for you." But the absence of an explicit example does not establish that glorified believers are unable to intercede. Scripture repeatedly shows the righteous alive after death: Moses and Elijah speaking with Jesus at the Transfiguration (Matthew 17:1-3), the souls under the altar crying out to God (Revelation 6:9-10), and Jesus saying God is "not the God of the dead, but of the living" (Luke 20:38). So the question remains the same:

Since you agree that Mary is alive with Christ in Heaven, where does Scripture teach that physical death prevents a member of Christ's body from praying for another member of Christ's body?

Finally, you ask:

"What is Mary's response?"

Why would Mary's response need to be separate from God's? Catholics do not believe Mary is an independent source of grace, revelation, or answers to prayer. Any knowledge Mary has, any intercession she offers, and any assistance she provides would ultimately come from God. If God permits the saints in Heaven to know our prayers and intercede for us, then whatever follows is God's work, not Mary's apart from God. Catholics are not asking Mary for secret knowledge, new revelation, or information unavailable from God. Catholics are asking Mary to pray to God on their behalf.

Moreover, Catholics are not claiming to hear audible replies from Mary. The same is true when many Christians ask their congregation to pray for them online, leave a prayer request, or write a name on a prayer list. The request itself does not depend on receiving a direct verbal response from every person praying. In fact, your question assumes that intercession requires a direct conversational response. Scripture never establishes such a requirement.
The issue is whether the saints in Heaven can intercede before God, not whether they carry on ordinary earthly conversations or provide independent answers apart from God.

Jesus IS A Spirit….with a Body….and Soul.
Living Humans Are a Body…with a spirit and soul.

Angels ARE spirits.

Numerous SPIRITS have appeared to Living Humans, in the Likeness AS a man since ancient History…to this day.

When A Spirit appears to a Human (in the likeness AS a man)… they appear as Person!

Before His incarnation, God the Word existed eternally with God the Father (John 1:1-2) and was not flesh and blood. But when '"the Word became flesh" (John 1:14), He did not merely appear as a man or temporarily wear a body. He became truly human.

After His resurrection, Jesus did not say, "I am a spirit appearing as a man." Instead, He said, "A spirit does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have" (Luke 24:39). He invited His disciples to touch Him and even ate food before them (Luke 24:42-43).

Angels may appear in human form, but Jesus distinguished Himself from a spirit by pointing to His resurrected body. Therefore, while the eternal Word existed before His incarnation, the risen Christ is not merely a spirit appearing in the likeness of a man. He is the incarnate Word with a real, glorified human body, possessing flesh and bones exactly as He said.

The Son of man…who was the son of…
(Abraham, Issac, king David, Joseph of the House Of David)..

About Age 30, That Son of man was Revealed Declared…By God…
The Son of God…

Many Human men…
Begin life from the Seed of a man.
They can choose to Take upon themselves…
Gods “seed”
Thus they are also …
Abraham’s “seed”…

And as well become … Declared…
The son of God…
The son of Abraham…

God Prepared a Body For His Word and Sent IT to Mary’s Womb.
Mary delivered forth, her First child, a male, called The Son of Man, given the Name JESUS.


Glory to God,
Taken

The problem with this argument is that it seems to separate the human Jesus from the divine Son in a way Scripture does not. The Bible does not present Jesus as a human person who later became God's Son. Rather, the eternal Word became flesh (John 1:14). The one born of Mary is the same Person who existed before Abraham (John 8:58) and who is called God (John 1:1; John 20:28).

 

[Moonwood]

What is the difference between, "You shall not make to yourselves images.", and God commanding the making of cherubim and other images?

Answer: the prohibition is against making statues or images that have not been commanded by God.

As usual, R.C. teaching uses sophistry to try to circumvent clear prohibitions or instructions from God. Making idols of, for example, Mary, to bow down before and to pray to her, is exactly the kind of idolatry that the prohibition is against. Claiming that she is not treated as a goddess is simply denial and empty rhetoric.

You say:

"the prohibition is against making statues or images that have not been commanded by God."

But where does Exodus 20 actually say that? The reason I raised the cherubim is because your interpretation of Exodus 20 was that the commandment contains three separate prohibitions:

1. Do not make images.
2. Do not bow before images.
3. Do not serve images.

The problem is that God Himself later commands images to be made. So the commandment cannot be an absolute prohibition against making images. Now you've introduced a new qualification: images are permitted if God commands them. But that qualification is not found in Exodus 20:4-5 itself. It is a conclusion you're drawing in order to reconcile Exodus 20 with Exodus 25. I agree that Exodus and Leviticus must be read together. That's precisely why I do not interpret Exodus 20 as a blanket prohibition on religious images. The commandment begins:

"You shall have no other gods before Me."

That is the context. The concern is idolatry. God's later commands regarding the cherubim demonstrate that images themselves are not the issue. The issue is treating an image as a god or an idol. You then say:

"Making idols of, for example, Mary, to bow down before and to pray to her, is exactly the kind of idolatry that the prohibition is against."

But that is the point under debate, not something that has been demonstrated. Catholics do not believe Mary is a goddess. Catholics do not believe statues of Mary possess divine power. Catholics do not offer Mary the worship due to God alone. Simply referring to a statue of Mary as an "idol" assumes the very conclusion you're trying to prove. The real question is: what biblical principle distinguishes the cherubim, the Temple imagery, and other sacred images commanded by God from Catholic statues? If the answer is that the former were not treated as gods, then we agree. But that means the issue is not the existence of an image. The issue is whether the image is being worshipped as a god.