PDA

View Full Version : Luke 1:43



Christian3
07-11-2017, 04:43 AM
Luke 1:43Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)

43 How could this happen to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?

What is the Greek word used for "Lord" and what does it mean?

In addition, what Greek word is used for "Lord" in the following passage?

John 20:28Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)

28 Thomas responded to Him, “My Lord and my God!”

Thanks.

Sparko
07-11-2017, 05:03 AM
Good resource is

http://www.studylight.org/desk/interlinear.cgi

It is an interlinear bible. Shows you the greek words when you click on the english.

Luke 1:43 Lord

# 2962 κύριος
kýrios
from kuros (supremacy)


he to whom a person or thing belongs, about which he has power of deciding; master, lord
the possessor and disposer of a thing
the owner; one who has control of the person, the master
in the state: the sovereign, prince, chief, the Roman emperor
is a title of honour expressive of respect and reverence, with which servants greet their master
this title is given to: God, the Messiah

KJV (748) - Lord, 667; Sir, 6; lord, 54; master, 11; misc, 4; sir, 6
NAS (720) - Lord, 626; Lord of lords, 2; Lord's, 12; lord, 10; lords, 1; master, 38; master's, 3; masters, 8; masters', 1; owner, 6; owners, 1; sir, 11; sirs, 1
HCS (717) - 'Master, 1; He, Sir, 1; Him, 1; LORD, 1; Lord, 411; Lord's, 19; Master, 10; Masters, 1; OF LORDS, 1; Sir, 11; Sirs, 1; The Lord, 13; The Lord's, 3; You, Lord, 3; a Master, 1; am, Lord, 1; as Lord, 2; as you would the Lord, 1; for the Lord, 4; from the Lord, 3; in the Lord's, 1; is Lord, 3; it for the honor of the Lord, 1; it is for the Lord, 1; it, lord, 1; lord, 2; lords, 1; many as the Lord, 1; master, 31; master's, 5; masters, 6; of lords, 1; of our Lord, 1; of the Lord, 44; of the Lord's, 1; owner, 5; owners, 3; take the Lord's, 1; the Lord, 109; the Lord's, 7; the owner, 1; then the Lord, 1; will, sir, 1


Same word in John 20:28

Christian3
07-11-2017, 05:18 AM
Good resource is

http://www.studylight.org/desk/interlinear.cgi

It is an interlinear bible. Shows you the greek words when you click on the english.

Luke 1:43 Lord

# 2962 κύριος
kýrios
from kuros (supremacy)


he to whom a person or thing belongs, about which he has power of deciding; master, lord
the possessor and disposer of a thing
the owner; one who has control of the person, the master
in the state: the sovereign, prince, chief, the Roman emperor
is a title of honour expressive of respect and reverence, with which servants greet their master
this title is given to: God, the Messiah

KJV (748) - Lord, 667; Sir, 6; lord, 54; master, 11; misc, 4; sir, 6
NAS (720) - Lord, 626; Lord of lords, 2; Lord's, 12; lord, 10; lords, 1; master, 38; master's, 3; masters, 8; masters', 1; owner, 6; owners, 1; sir, 11; sirs, 1
HCS (717) - 'Master, 1; He, Sir, 1; Him, 1; LORD, 1; Lord, 411; Lord's, 19; Master, 10; Masters, 1; OF LORDS, 1; Sir, 11; Sirs, 1; The Lord, 13; The Lord's, 3; You, Lord, 3; a Master, 1; am, Lord, 1; as Lord, 2; as you would the Lord, 1; for the Lord, 4; from the Lord, 3; in the Lord's, 1; is Lord, 3; it for the honor of the Lord, 1; it is for the Lord, 1; it, lord, 1; lord, 2; lords, 1; many as the Lord, 1; master, 31; master's, 5; masters, 6; of lords, 1; of our Lord, 1; of the Lord, 44; of the Lord's, 1; owner, 5; owners, 3; take the Lord's, 1; the Lord, 109; the Lord's, 7; the owner, 1; then the Lord, 1; will, sir, 1


Same word in John 20:28

OK, I am trying to decide if Lord in Luke 1:43 can be translated as God, not just a title of respect. Catholics say that Elizabeth is saying Mary is the mother of God, using Luke 1:43 to prove it.

BTW: I'm not very good at this and that is why I need help.

37818
07-11-2017, 06:00 AM
Luke 1:43Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)

43 How could this happen to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?

What is the Greek word used for "Lord" and what does it mean?

In addition, what Greek word is used for "Lord" in the following passage?

John 20:28Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)

28 Thomas responded to Him, “My Lord and my God!”

Thanks.The Greek word is the same Greek word κυριος kurios used both of God and of men.

It is my understand it is being used referring to Christ in His incarnation, in Him being a man, in a distinction from Him being God. Christ, of course, being both the man and God.
Psalm 110:1,
The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
1 Corinthians 8:6,
. . . But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by Him. . . .
1 Timothy 2:5,
. . . For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; . . .

Christian3
07-11-2017, 06:24 AM
The Greek word is the same Greek word κυριος kurios used both of God and of men.

It is my understand it is being used referring to Christ in His incarnation, in Him being a man, in a distinction from Him being God. Christ, of course, being both the man and God.
Psalm 110:1,
The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
1 Corinthians 8:6,
. . . But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by Him. . . .
1 Timothy 2:5,
. . . For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; . . .

Do you think Luke 1:43 supports the Catholic position that this verse says Mary is the mother of God?

Sparko
07-11-2017, 06:50 AM
Do you think Luke 1:43 supports the Catholic position that this verse says Mary is the mother of God?

They mean that:

1. Jesus is the incarnation of God
2. Mary is Jesus' mother
so therefore, she is technically the mother of (the incarnation) of God the Son.

It doesn't mean she is the creator of God or anything like that.

so in Luke 1:43, the word "Lord" refers to Jesus, who is God the Son, so indirectly it is referring to God. Just like when you pray "My Lord, blah blah blah" when you are saying "Lord" you are referring to God.

Christian3
07-11-2017, 07:18 AM
They mean that:

1. Jesus is the incarnation of God
2. Mary is Jesus' mother
so therefore, she is technically the mother of (the incarnation) of God the Son.

It doesn't mean she is the creator of God or anything like that.

so in Luke 1:43, the word "Lord" refers to Jesus, who is God the Son, so indirectly it is referring to God. Just like when you pray "My Lord, blah blah blah" when you are saying "Lord" you are referring to God.

It is important to know what Elizabeth meant by "Lord" at that time.

Even though we know now that Jesus is God, they didn't know it then. They were not expecting the Messiah to be God.

So, if John 20:28 uses the same word for "Lord" as Luke 1:43, Thomas must have used a different word for "God." Theos?

If so, then in order for Luke 1:43 to mean God, (mother of God) the same word would have been used -- Theos.

Otherwise, Thomas is saying "My God and my God."

John Reece used to take pity on me for some of my questions!

tabibito
07-11-2017, 07:40 AM
It is important to know what Elizabeth meant by "Lord" at that time.

Even though we know now that Jesus is God, they didn't know it then. They were not expecting the Messiah to be God. The point is contestable.


So, if John 20:28 uses the same word for "Lord" as Luke 1:43, Thomas must have used a different word for "God." Theos? o kurios mou kai o theos mou (my lord and my God) - your surmise is correct.


If so, then in order for Luke 1:43 to mean God, (mother of God) the same word would have been used -- Theos. Kurios translates the Hebrew "YHVH" (Jehovah) among other words.


Otherwise, Thomas is saying "My God and my God." No. Kurios in that context does not mean God.


John Reece used to take pity on me for some of my questions! Identity of Christ is important. Identity of Mary, not so much. Hebrews chapter 9 and Philippians 2: 1 - 11 will explain well enough the identity of Christ. (though note: the translations of Ephesians 2:6 are sub-optimal)

"kurios" acknowledges the person spoken of as a superior. An adult acknowledging an as yet unborn child as her superior doesn't incontestably show that the unborn child is God, but it does say that there is something more than usually significant about that child.

Sparko's reply in post#6 is more than adequate.

Sparko
07-11-2017, 07:45 AM
well if "Lord" in verse 43 wasn't indirectly referring to God, then who was "Lord" referring to in verse 45?

43 Why should this happen to me, to have the mother of my Lord visit me? 44 As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb jumped for joy. 45 How blessed is this woman who believed that what the Lord told her would be fulfilled!”

tabibito
07-11-2017, 07:50 AM
There you go. One verse by itself would not be enough to establish the matter, but in conjunction with others, it becomes cut and dried.

Just as John 1:1 standing alone won't establish that Jesus was God, nor even the Word come to that. It takes more than the one verse to show that he was incontestably both.

Christian3
07-11-2017, 10:45 AM
well if "Lord" in verse 43 wasn't indirectly referring to God, then who was "Lord" referring to in verse 45?

43 Why should this happen to me, to have the mother of my Lord visit me? 44 As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb jumped for joy. 45 How blessed is this woman who believed that what the Lord told her would be fulfilled!”

What did the Lord tell her that would be fulfilled?

Go back and see:

30 Then the angel told her:

Do not be afraid, Mary,
for you have found favor with God.
31 Now listen:
You will conceive and give birth to a son,
and you will call His name Jesus.
32 He will be great
and will be called the Son of the Most High,
and the Lord God will give Him
the throne of His father David.
33 He will reign over the house of Jacob forever,
and His kingdom will have no end.

These verses say that Jesus would be the Messiah.

It says nothing about Jesus being the second person of the Trinity.

http://classic.studylight.org/com/bnn/view.cgi?book=lu&chapter=1&verse=43#Lu1_43

Clip:

Verse 43. And whence is this to me? An expression of humility. Why is it that the mother of my Lord {q} should come to me, as if to honour me?

Mother of my Lord. The word Lord sometimes denotes divinity, and sometimes superior, master, teacher, or governor. It was given by the Jews to their expected Messiah; but whether they understood it as denoting divinity cannot now be ascertained. It is clear only that Elisabeth used it as denoting great dignity and honour.

Note: John 13:13

John 13:13Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)

13 You call Me Teacher and Lord. This is well said, for I am.

So, are we to understand that Jesus is calling Himself God in this verse? No.

Sparko
07-11-2017, 10:54 AM
What did the Lord tell her that would be fulfilled?

Go back and see:

30 Then the angel told her:

Do not be afraid, Mary,
for you have found favor with God.
31 Now listen:
You will conceive and give birth to a son,
and you will call His name Jesus.
32 He will be great
and will be called the Son of the Most High,
and the Lord God will give Him
the throne of His father David.
33 He will reign over the house of Jacob forever,
and His kingdom will have no end.

These verses say that Jesus would be the Messiah.

It says nothing about Jesus being the second person of the Trinity.

http://classic.studylight.org/com/bnn/view.cgi?book=lu&chapter=1&verse=43#Lu1_43

Clip:

Verse 43. And whence is this to me? An expression of humility. Why is it that the mother of my Lord {q} should come to me, as if to honour me?

Mother of my Lord. The word Lord sometimes denotes divinity, and sometimes superior, master, teacher, or governor. It was given by the Jews to their expected Messiah; but whether they understood it as denoting divinity cannot now be ascertained. It is clear only that Elisabeth used it as denoting great dignity and honour.

Note: John 13:13

John 13:13Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)

13 You call Me Teacher and Lord. This is well said, for I am.

So, are we to understand that Jesus is calling Himself God in this verse? No.


sigh. :sigh:

One Bad Pig
07-11-2017, 11:44 AM
What did the Lord tell her that would be fulfilled?

Go back and see:

30 Then the angel told her:

Do not be afraid, Mary,
for you have found favor with God.
31 Now listen:
You will conceive and give birth to a son,
and you will call His name Jesus.
32 He will be great
and will be called the Son of the Most High,
and the Lord God will give Him
the throne of His father David.
33 He will reign over the house of Jacob forever,
and His kingdom will have no end.

These verses say that Jesus would be the Messiah.

It says nothing about Jesus being the second person of the Trinity.

http://classic.studylight.org/com/bnn/view.cgi?book=lu&chapter=1&verse=43#Lu1_43

Clip:

Verse 43. And whence is this to me? An expression of humility. Why is it that the mother of my Lord {q} should come to me, as if to honour me?

Mother of my Lord. The word Lord sometimes denotes divinity, and sometimes superior, master, teacher, or governor. It was given by the Jews to their expected Messiah; but whether they understood it as denoting divinity cannot now be ascertained. It is clear only that Elisabeth used it as denoting great dignity and honour.

Note: John 13:13

John 13:13Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)

13 You call Me Teacher and Lord. This is well said, for I am.

So, are we to understand that Jesus is calling Himself God in this verse? No.
To understand verse Luke 1:43, you need to understand what Zacharias and Elizabeth understood.

13 But the angel said to him, “Do not be afraid, Zacharias, for your prayer is heard; and your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you shall call his name John. 14 And you will have joy and gladness, and many will rejoice at his birth. 15 For he will be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink. He will also be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother’s womb. 16 And he will turn many of the children of Israel to the Lord their God. 17 He will also go before Him in the spirit and power of Elijah, ‘to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children,’ and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just, to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.”
See also Zacharias' prophecy:
68 “Blessed is the Lord God of Israel,
For He has visited and redeemed His people,
69 And has raised up a horn of salvation for us
In the house of His servant David,
70 As He spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets,
Who have been since the world began,
71 That we should be saved from our enemies
And from the hand of all who hate us,
72 To perform the mercy promised to our fathers
And to remember His holy covenant,
73 The oath which He swore to our father Abraham:
74 To grant us that we,
Being delivered from the hand of our enemies,
Might serve Him without fear,
75 In holiness and righteousness before Him all the days of our life.
76 “And you, child, will be called the prophet of the Highest;
For you will go before the face of the Lord to prepare His ways,
77 To give knowledge of salvation to His people
By the remission of their sins,
78 Through the tender mercy of our God,
With which the Dayspring from on high has visited us;
79 To give light to those who sit in darkness and the shadow of death,
To guide our feet into the way of peace.”
John is going before the Lord, the God of Israel (v. 16-17), "the face of the Lord" (v. 76). Does that help?

37818
07-11-2017, 12:15 PM
Do you think Luke 1:43 supports the Catholic position that this verse says Mary is the mother of God?

My understanding, no. It refers to Him being Lord in regard to His humanity.

But Catholics do think it refers to His deity.
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/mary-mother-of-god

Christian3
07-12-2017, 04:33 AM
My understanding, no. It refers to Him being Lord in regard to His humanity.

But Catholics do think it refers to His deity.
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/mary-mother-of-god

I think we can safely say that Mary is the mother of God the Son.

Saying that Mary is the Mother of God implies that she is the mother of the Father and the Holy Spirit since God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

I took my question to a person who teaches Greek and this is what he said:

Often "my lord" just means "the honored person to whom I'm speaking" or "you, sir." In this case, that isn't the meaning. The speaker is addressing Mary, the mother of Jesus. He means that Jesus would be his lord or ruler. The text reads:

καὶ πόθεν μοι τοῦτο ἵνα ἔλθῃ ἡ μήτηρ τοῦ κυρίου μου πρὸς ἐμέ;
- Luke 1:43 (SBLGNT)

The word for "lord" is part of a genitive phrase. The whole phrase is ἡ μήτηρ τοῦ κυρίου μου "the mother of my lord." It is the same word that is used at least hundreds of times for Jesus in the NT. It's normally used in a slave-master relationship, but is a general term for someone that you serve.

I asked him if Elizabeth is saying that Mary is the mother of God and he replied:

"If she meant that, why wouldn't she say "the mother of my god" (ἡ μήτηρ τοῦ θεοῦ μου)?"

tabibito
07-12-2017, 04:35 AM
Often "my lord" just means "the honored person to whom I'm speaking" or "you, sir."
The correct declension for that would be κυριε
:popcorn:

One Bad Pig
07-12-2017, 05:58 AM
I think we can safely say that Mary is the mother of God the Son.

Saying that Mary is the Mother of God implies that she is the mother of the Father and the Holy Spirit since God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

I took my question to a person who teaches Greek and this is what he said:

Often "my lord" just means "the honored person to whom I'm speaking" or "you, sir." In this case, that isn't the meaning. The speaker is addressing Mary, the mother of Jesus. He means that Jesus would be his lord or ruler. The text reads:

καὶ πόθεν μοι τοῦτο ἵνα ἔλθῃ ἡ μήτηρ τοῦ κυρίου μου πρὸς ἐμέ;
- Luke 1:43 (SBLGNT)

The word for "lord" is part of a genitive phrase. The whole phrase is ἡ μήτηρ τοῦ κυρίου μου "the mother of my lord." It is the same word that is used at least hundreds of times for Jesus in the NT. It's normally used in a slave-master relationship, but is a general term for someone that you serve.

I asked him if Elizabeth is saying that Mary is the mother of God and he replied:

"If she meant that, why wouldn't she say "the mother of my god" (ἡ μήτηρ τοῦ θεοῦ μου)?"
It's rather unlikely that she was speaking Greek. In the LXX, κυρίου is often substituted for the divine name, which was considered too holy to profane by speaking it.

37818
07-12-2017, 06:19 AM
It's rather unlikely that she was speaking Greek. In the LXX, κυρίου is often substituted for the divine name, which was considered too holy to profane by speaking it.
In either case the Aramaic or Hebrew word for lord.

Christian3
07-12-2017, 06:20 AM
It's rather unlikely that she was speaking Greek. In the LXX, κυρίου is often substituted for the divine name, which was considered too holy to profane by speaking it.

But in this case, Elizabeth was speaking of the Messiah. At that point in time, the concept of the Trinity was unknown.

And, if Elizabeth meant Mary was the Mother of God, then surely she would have told her son and there is no evidence that John the Baptist thought Jesus was divine.

tabibito
07-12-2017, 06:28 AM
But in this case, Elizabeth was speaking of the Messiah. At that point in time, the concept of the Trinity was unknown.

If Elizabeth had said hashem, as is a reasonable interpretation advanced by OBP, there would not (without support from other verses) be any real way to determine that the wording intended more than "man or woman of God" might. However, the claim that the trinity was an unknown concept is doubtful in the extreme. The Targums refer to the "Memra of God" which has a reasonably close confluence with the "Word" of John's gospel.

Sparko
07-12-2017, 06:29 AM
But in this case, Elizabeth was speaking of the Messiah. At that point in time, the concept of the Trinity was unknown.

And, if Elizabeth meant Mary was the Mother of God, then surely she would have told her son and there is no evidence that John the Baptist thought Jesus was divine.That didn't stop Thomas from calling Jesus "God" did it? The "trinity" is the explanation for what the Gospels reveal.

And Elizabeth did know that her son would be the one making way for the Messiah. And Isaiah is pretty clear that the Messiah will be God.

Isaiah 40:3 A voice of one calling: "In the desert prepare the way for the LORD; make straight in the wilderness a highway for our God. … 9 You who bring good tidings to Zion, go up on a high mountain. You who bring good tidings to Jerusalem, lift up your voice with a shout, lift it up, do not be afraid; say to the towns of Judah, "Here is your God!" 10 See, the Sovereign LORD comes with power, and his arm rules for him. See, his reward is with him, and his recompense accompanies him.

and don't forget what the angel told Mary:

*Matthew 1:21 She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins." 22 All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: 23 "The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel" --which means, "God with us."

One Bad Pig
07-12-2017, 06:32 AM
But in this case, Elizabeth was speaking of the Messiah. At that point in time, the concept of the Trinity was unknown.

And, if Elizabeth meant Mary was the Mother of God, then surely she would have told her son and there is no evidence that John the Baptist thought Jesus was divine.
Did you even read my first post in the thread? Just wondering.

Adrift
07-12-2017, 07:25 AM
If anyone is interested, here's the take on the subject from a few commentators,

43-45. The use of the title my Lord shows that Elizabeth recognized that Mary's child would be the Messiah (cf. Ps. 110:1; 'Lord' is used of God twenty-five times in chs. 1 - 2; it is an exalted title). She goes on to explain that at Mary's greeting her own baby leaped for joy (the word means 'exultation') in her womb. It was this that enabled her to recognize Mary for what she was. She concludes with a further blessing of Mary. We should probably take her words to mean 'Blessed is she who believed, for there will be . . .' (the Greek is ambiguous, but 'for' seems better than 'that'). Elizabeth is affirming that the fulfillment will certainly take place, not saying that Mary believed it would.

We should not miss the absence of all jealousy in Elizabeth's attitude to Mary. The older woman, who had received such a signal blessing from the Lord, might well have tried to guard her position jealously. But in genuine humility she recognized the greater blessing God had given to Mary. A further point of interest is that John the Baptist did not recognize Jesus as Messiah until the baptism (Jn. 1:32f.). Apparently Elizabeth's recognition that he is Lord was inspired, but personal. John had to find it out for himself.

43. mother of my Lord: This is Elizabeth's most dramatic statement, dropped almost casually. "Lord" is a title first of all for God (as already in Luke 1:6, 9, 11, 15, 16, 17, 25). Of Jesus, it is used most properly as a resurrection title (see Acts 1:21; 2:34-36; 4:26, 33; 8:16, etc.). But Luke, even more than Matthew, uses it for Jesus not only as a greeting but also as a title (see Luke 2:11; 7:13; 10:1; 11:39; 12:42; 17:6; 18:6; 19:8, 31; especially 24:3 and 34). At the very least, Elizabeth recognizes the infant as "master," but a deeper dimension is surely implied.

41-42 To speculate about how Mary's greeting caused the child to leap in Elizabeth's womb (v.41) would be to miss the unaffected beauty of this narrative in which the stirring of the unborn child becomes a joyful prelude to Elizabeth's being "filled with the Holy Spirit," who enlightened her about the identity of the child Mary was carrying (v.42).

43 Nowhere in the NT is Mary called "Mother of God." Deity is not confined to the person of Jesus (we may say, "Jesus is God," but not [all of] "God is Jesus"). She was, however, the mother of Jesus, the Messiah and Lord. In Luke, "Lord" (kyrios, GK 3261) is a frequently used title (95 out of 166 occurrences in the Synoptics; so Gaston, 76). Jesus is called "Lord" two other times in the Lukan birth narratives (1:76; 2:11).

Pretty sure these are all Protestant scholars though, and I imagine a Catholic or Orthodox scholar would come to other conclusions. I personally think it's a lot of hair splitting. It seems likely to me that Elizabeth said it in the sense of "Messiah", and not necessarily God the Son, but if she did mean God the Son, then that knowledge was provided her by the Holy Spirit.

One Bad Pig
07-12-2017, 07:37 AM
If anyone is interested, here's the take on the subject from a few commentators,

43-45. The use of the title my Lord shows that Elizabeth recognized that Mary's child would be the Messiah (cf. Ps. 110:1; 'Lord' is used of God twenty-five times in chs. 1 - 2; it is an exalted title). She goes on to explain that at Mary's greeting her own baby leaped for joy (the word means 'exultation') in her womb. It was this that enabled her to recognize Mary for what she was. She concludes with a further blessing of Mary. We should probably take her words to mean 'Blessed is she who believed, for there will be . . .' (the Greek is ambiguous, but 'for' seems better than 'that'). Elizabeth is affirming that the fulfillment will certainly take place, not saying that Mary believed it would.

We should not miss the absence of all jealousy in Elizabeth's attitude to Mary. The older woman, who had received such a signal blessing from the Lord, might well have tried to guard her position jealously. But in genuine humility she recognized the greater blessing God had given to Mary. A further point of interest is that John the Baptist did not recognize Jesus as Messiah until the baptism (Jn. 1:32f.). Apparently Elizabeth's recognition that he is Lord was inspired, but personal. John had to find it out for himself.

43. mother of my Lord: This is Elizabeth's most dramatic statement, dropped almost casually. "Lord" is a title first of all for God (as already in Luke 1:6, 9, 11, 15, 16, 17, 25). Of Jesus, it is used most properly as a resurrection title (see Acts 1:21; 2:34-36; 4:26, 33; 8:16, etc.). But Luke, even more than Matthew, uses it for Jesus not only as a greeting but also as a title (see Luke 2:11; 7:13; 10:1; 11:39; 12:42; 17:6; 18:6; 19:8, 31; especially 24:3 and 34). At the very least, Elizabeth recognizes the infant as "master," but a deeper dimension is surely implied.

41-42 To speculate about how Mary's greeting caused the child to leap in Elizabeth's womb (v.41) would be to miss the unaffected beauty of this narrative in which the stirring of the unborn child becomes a joyful prelude to Elizabeth's being "filled with the Holy Spirit," who enlightened her about the identity of the child Mary was carrying (v.42).

43 Nowhere in the NT is Mary called "Mother of God." Deity is not confined to the person of Jesus (we may say, "Jesus is God," but not [all of] "God is Jesus"). She was, however, the mother of Jesus, the Messiah and Lord. In Luke, "Lord" (kyrios, GK 3261) is a frequently used title (95 out of 166 occurrences in the Synoptics; so Gaston, 76). Jesus is called "Lord" two other times in the Lukan birth narratives (1:76; 2:11).

Pretty sure these are all Protestant scholars though, and I imagine a Catholic or Orthodox scholar would come to other conclusions. I personally think it's a lot of hair splitting. It seems likely to me that Elizabeth said it in the sense of "Messiah", and not necessarily God the Son, but if she did mean God the Son, then that knowledge was provided her by the Holy Spirit.
I have no issue with any of those comments. :shrug: She was speaking under the influence of the Holy Spirit, not from personal knowledge.

"Theotokos" is more precisely translated "God-bearer".

37818
07-12-2017, 11:29 AM
"Theotokos" is more precisely translated "God-bearer".

The concept is disputed.
https://www.gotquestions.org/Mary-mother-God-theotokos.html

One Bad Pig
07-12-2017, 11:33 AM
The concept is disputed.
https://www.gotquestions.org/Mary-mother-God-theotokos.html
...by a latter day Nestorian. :duh:

Sparko
07-12-2017, 11:36 AM
I'm sorry, are some of you under the impression that Catholics literally believe that Mary is the mother of the Triune God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit?) and that they are too stupid to realize that God (all three persons) existed before Mary did?

:rofl:

37818
07-12-2017, 11:39 AM
...by a latter day Nestorian. :duh:
https://www.gotquestions.org/Nestorianism.html

Argument by Weblink is not allowed.

One Bad Pig
07-12-2017, 12:05 PM
Nestorius disagreed that Mary should be called "Theotokos"; instead, he thought she should be called "Christotokos" - exactly what your earlier link suggests.

37818
07-12-2017, 12:15 PM
Nestorius disagreed that Mary should be called "Theotokos"; instead, he thought she should be called "Christotokos" - exactly what your earlier link suggests.

What is wrong with Jesus' mother being called "Christotokos," the Christ-bearer? And that she was.

Christian3
07-12-2017, 12:35 PM
That didn't stop Thomas from calling Jesus "God" did it? The "trinity" is the explanation for what the Gospels reveal.

And Elizabeth did know that her son would be the one making way for the Messiah. And Isaiah is pretty clear that the Messiah will be God.

Isaiah 40:3 A voice of one calling: "In the desert prepare the way for the LORD; make straight in the wilderness a highway for our God. … 9 You who bring good tidings to Zion, go up on a high mountain. You who bring good tidings to Jerusalem, lift up your voice with a shout, lift it up, do not be afraid; say to the towns of Judah, "Here is your God!" 10 See, the Sovereign LORD comes with power, and his arm rules for him. See, his reward is with him, and his recompense accompanies him.

and don't forget what the angel told Mary:

*Matthew 1:21 She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins." 22 All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: 23 "The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel" --which means, "God with us."

What I am trying to point out that it took a long time for Jesus' disciples and followers to believe He was divine.

Thomas believed after Jesus' resurrection from the dead.

Heck, Jesus' disciples didn't even believe He would die and rise from the dead.

And John the Baptist wondered if Jesus really was the Messiah.

Christian3
07-12-2017, 12:35 PM
Did you even read my first post in the thread? Just wondering.

Of course.

One Bad Pig
07-12-2017, 12:42 PM
What is wrong with Jesus' mother being called "Christotokos," the Christ-bearer? And that she was.
What is wrong with her being called "Theotokos"? If Jesus is God, she was.

37818
07-12-2017, 01:51 PM
What is wrong with her being called "Theotokos"? If Jesus is God, she was.

Would it be correct to say Jesus' mother is the mother of YHWH?

37818
07-13-2017, 08:56 AM
Would it be correct to say Jesus' mother is the mother of YHWH?

No.

Sparko
07-13-2017, 08:57 AM
No.debating yourself now? :wink:

37818
07-13-2017, 09:10 AM
debating yourself now? :wink:

No. The question I asked was not answered I gave my answer. Would you like an explanation for my answer of "No?"

Sparko
07-13-2017, 09:13 AM
No. The question I asked was not answered I gave my answer. Would you like an explanation for my answer of "No?"no.

One Bad Pig
07-13-2017, 10:10 AM
Would it be correct to say Jesus' mother is the mother of YHWH?
Is Jesus YHWH?

37818
07-13-2017, 12:02 PM
Is Jesus YHWH?

As the man, no (Psalm 110:1), as the Son of God, yes (John 5:18-23).

37818
07-13-2017, 07:44 PM
...by a latter day Nestorian. :duh:Based on what? Your mere disagreement? Christ being one person being both fully human and fully God is not being denied. Mary is the mother of the Christ. Not the mother of God.

One Bad Pig
07-14-2017, 09:29 AM
As the man, no (Psalm 110:1), as the Son of God, yes (John 5:18-23).
How Nestorian of you. I'm beginning to understand your angst over this.

8 Now there were in the same country shepherds living out in the fields, keeping watch over their flock by night. 9 And behold, an angel of the Lord stood before them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were greatly afraid. 10 Then the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid, for behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy which will be to all people. 11 For there is born to you this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord.

If "the Lord" is referring to the same thing in v. 9 (twice) and v. 11, then it is certainly fair to say that the Son of God was born of Mary in the Incarnation. If it's not referring to the same thing, well, you're in the same camp as the Jehovah's Witnesses, who alter the first two instances (but not the last) to "Jehovah."

37818
07-14-2017, 12:16 PM
How Nestorian of you. I'm beginning to understand your angst over this.

8 Now there were in the same country shepherds living out in the fields, keeping watch over their flock by night. 9 And behold, an angel of the Lord stood before them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were greatly afraid. 10 Then the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid, for behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy which will be to all people. 11 For there is born to you this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord.

If "the Lord" is referring to the same thing in v. 9 (twice) and v. 11, then it is certainly fair to say that the Son of God was born of Mary in the Incarnation. If it's not referring to the same thing, well, you're in the same camp as the Jehovah's Witnesses, who alter the first two instances (but not the last) to "Jehovah."

No. Jesus being born a man is both Christ and Lord (Psalm 110:1; Acts 2:36; Acts 20:21). That as the Christ He is also the LORD in being the Christ is not in dispute (Romans 10:13; Acts 10:43; Isaiah 43:11; Acts 4:12; John 12:41; Isaiah 6:5).

Sparko
07-14-2017, 12:25 PM
No. Jesus being born a man is both Christ and Lord (Psalm 110:1; Acts 2:36; Acts 20:21). That as the Christ He is also the LORD in being the Christ is not in dispute (Romans 10:13; Acts 10:43; Isaiah 43:11; Acts 4:12; John 12:41; Isaiah 6:5).

and who is "the LORD?"

One Bad Pig
07-14-2017, 01:04 PM
No. Jesus being born a man is both Christ and Lord (Psalm 110:1; Acts 2:36; Acts 20:21).
I don't think those verses say what you want them to say; they utterly fail to address your underlined bit, which is the very thing you're seeking to prove. Did the Word become flesh (Jn. 1:14)? Was the Son of God born of the seed of David (Rom. 1:1-4)?

That as the Christ He is also the LORD in being the Christ is not in dispute (Romans 10:13; Acts 10:43; Isaiah 43:11; Acts 4:12; John 12:41; Isaiah 6:5).
Yes, that is not in dispute.

I have little desire to continue this conversation; we've made our positions clear, and further argument is unlikely to budge either of us.

37818
07-14-2017, 01:51 PM
and who is "the LORD?"

I thought you knew? God by His Name. The self Existent one.

37818
07-14-2017, 09:25 PM
I don't think those verses say what you want them to say; they utterly fail to address your underlined bit, which is the very thing you're seeking to prove.What do you think I was "seeking to prove?"



Did the Word become flesh (Jn. 1:14)?Precisely. The Word was made flesh. What was born of Mary was flesh. The Word having been made fully human. (ref also John 1:3 regarding the Word.)
John 1:3,
All things were made by Him; and without Him was not any thing made that was made.



Was the Son of God born of the seed of David (Rom. 1:1-4)? It does not say that. It says Jesus Christ our Lord was made of the seed of David according to the flesh. And that Son of God was declared the Son by His resurrection (see Psalm 2:7).
Romans 1:4,
. . . And declared [to be] the Son of God with power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead: . . .
The Son of God was the Son of God before He was born the man. He always was the Son of God (Proverbs 30:4).

What was born of Mary was the man, not God. (Acts 17:28; 2 Chronicles 2:6; Jeremiah 23:24.)


I have little desire to continue this conversation; we've made our positions clear, and further argument is unlikely to budge either of us. What ever you want to do. Truth still matters.

One Bad Pig
07-15-2017, 08:46 AM
It does not say that. It says Jesus Christ our Lord was made of the seed of David according to the flesh.
You are incorrect. The NKJV literally says "born of the seed of David after the flesh." The NET agrees that this is literally what the Greek says.

Truth still matters.
Indeed. Why, then, are you ignoring clear statements in scripture in order to twist less clear statements to support your contention? That is not honest biblical interpretation. It is a clear sign that your personal beliefs are driving your reading of the scriptures, and not vice versa.

tabibito
07-16-2017, 04:37 AM
John 7:42 42 ουχι η γραφη ειπεν οτι εκ του σπερματος δαυιδ και απο βηθλεεμ της κωμης οπου ην δαυιδ ο χριστος ερχεται

it's an interesting statement.

Sparko
07-17-2017, 06:35 AM
I thought you knew? God by His Name. The self Existent one.

So if Mary gave birth to the Christ the Lord, who is God, who did Mary give birth to?

37818
07-18-2017, 08:10 AM
You are incorrect. The NKJV literally says "born of the seed of David after the flesh." The NET agrees that this is literally what the Greek says.
Romans 1:3, . . . 4c,
. . . περι του υιου αυτου του γενομενου εκ σπερματος δαβιδ κατα σαρκα . . .
. . . ιησου χριστου του κυριου ημων . . . .

. . . concerning His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh, . . .

γενομενου
NKJV = "was born"
KJV = "was made"



Indeed. Why, then, are you ignoring clear statements in scripture in order to twist less clear statements to support your contention? That is not honest biblical interpretation. It is a clear sign that your personal beliefs are driving your reading of the scriptures, and not vice versa.What clear statement of scripture have I ignored? What was it that I twisted? How did I twist it?

37818
07-18-2017, 08:21 AM
So if Mary gave birth to the Christ the Lord, who is God, who did Mary give birth to?

Mary gave birth to the man, the Lord Jesus Christ according to the flesh. God was never born. The deity of Christ is not at issue.

Sparko
07-18-2017, 08:26 AM
Mary gave birth to the man, the Lord Jesus Christ according to the flesh. God was never born. The deity of Christ is not at issue.

You just said she gave birth to the Christ and the Christ is the Lord, who is God.

You want to separate the man from God as if the Son was a ghost who possessed the man. Like OBP said, that is nestorianism.

No one is saying Mary literally created God by giving birth to Jesus. derp.

37818
07-18-2017, 09:31 AM
You just said she gave birth to the Christ and the Christ is the Lord, who is God.

You want to separate the man from God as if the Son was a ghost who possessed the man. Like OBP said, that is nestorianism.

No one is saying Mary literally created God by giving birth to Jesus. derp.
I did not say Christ who is also Lord means God (Acts 2:36; 1 Corinthians 8:6; Ephesians 4:5-6).

The Christ is both God and man (Ephesians 5:5). Nowhere does the holy scripture teach Mary gave birth to God when she gave birth to the man who is the Christ. God did not change, the Word changed (John 1:14) becoming flesh. And the Word was always God and still is (Hebrews 1:3; etc). The Word being God (John 1:1; Malachi 3:6) is not what changed, the Word being with God is how He changed (John 1:2).

Sparko
07-18-2017, 09:49 AM
I did not say Christ who is also Lord means God (Acts 2:36; 1 Corinthians 8:6; Ephesians 4:5-6). so you don't think the Christ the Lord is God?



The Christ is both God and man (Ephesians 5:5). Nowhere does the holy scripture teach Mary gave birth to God when she gave birth to the man who is the Christ. God did not change, the Word changed (John 1:14) becoming flesh. And the Word was always God and still is (Hebrews 1:3; etc). The Word being God (John 1:1; Malachi 3:6) is not what changed, the Word being with God is how He changed (John 1:2).

Sounds like you know you are wrong and are trying to deflect. You want to separate Jesus from the Son while claiming you are not.

37818
07-18-2017, 06:42 PM
so you don't think the Christ the Lord is God?You are not hearing. understanding the view. Christ is both the man and God. As the man, Christ is also Lord. Thomas called Him both "My Lord and My God" (John 20:28).




Sounds like you know you are wrong and are trying to deflect. You want to separate Jesus from the Son while claiming you are not.No. You do not want to hear the view. It is one thing not to agree, it is another to refuse to hear it. The Son of God was the Son of God before the incarnation to be the Christ.

37818
07-19-2017, 06:00 AM
Here is the task, is there any reference in the NT where Jesus is called Lord where being called Lord can only mean that He is God?

The deity of Jesus being the Christ is not at issue.
The Trinity is not at issue.

It is my understanding that Jesus being the one Lord in the NT has to do with His incarnation and exultation by God (Acts 2:36; 1 Corinthians 8;6; 1 Corinthians 15:24-28).

tabibito
07-19-2017, 06:05 AM
Here is the task, is there any reference in the NT where Jesus is called Lord where being called Lord can only mean that He is God?

The deity of Jesus being the Christ is not at issue.
The Trinity is not at issue.

It is my understanding that Jesus being the one Lord in the NT has to do with His incarnation and exultation by God (Acts 2:36; 1 Corinthians 8;6; 1 Corinthians 15:24-28).

In short - you're saying that Jesus of Nazareth had been God, and would be God after his resurrection ... but he sort of temporarily retired from being God for the duration and became a man.

Sparko
07-19-2017, 06:06 AM
You are not hearing. understanding the view. Christ is both the man and God. As the man, Christ is also Lord. Thomas called Him both "My Lord and My God" (John 20:28).


No. You do not want to hear the view. It is one thing not to agree, it is another to refuse to hear it. The Son of God was the Son of God before the incarnation to be the Christ.

yes the Son existed before the incarnation. He added flesh to himself. Which was born. The Son was born. The Son is God. Thus the Catholics say "Mary Mother of God"

You want to say both that the Man and the Son are one being, and also separate them so that only the Man was born. Can't have it both ways.

Adrift
07-19-2017, 06:53 AM
yes the Son existed before the incarnation. He added flesh to himself. Which was born. The Son was born. The Son is God. Thus the Catholics say "Mary Mother of God"

You want to say both that the Man and the Son are one being, and also separate them so that only the Man was born. Can't have it both ways.

Remember that he also holds the view that Jesus' human nature was not added to himself. Rather he holds the unorthodox view that Jesus had two natures before the incarnation, a divine nature and a placeholder nature that turned into a human nature at his incarnation.

Sparko
07-19-2017, 07:23 AM
Remember that he also holds the view that Jesus' human nature was not added to himself. Rather he holds the unorthodox view that Jesus had two natures before the incarnation, a divine nature and a placeholder nature that turned into a human nature at his incarnation.yeah, but that doesn't really change anything regarding the birth and whether Mary can be called "the mother of God" in the sense that Catholics use the term.

Personally I think the title is a bit presumptive, I think Mary would be too humble to consider herself "the Mother of God"

But I understand what they mean by the title. They are not claiming that Mary is higher than God, or created God.

One Bad Pig
07-19-2017, 07:41 AM
yeah, but that doesn't really change anything regarding the birth and whether Mary can be called "the mother of God" in the sense that Catholics use the term.

Personally I think the title is a bit presumptive, I think Mary would be too humble to consider herself "the Mother of God"

But I understand what they mean by the title. They are not claiming that Mary is higher than God, or created God.
I'm pretty sure that every single person who is venerated as a saint would be too humble to consider themselves such.

Adrift
07-19-2017, 08:08 AM
yeah, but that doesn't really change anything regarding the birth and whether Mary can be called "the mother of God" in the sense that Catholics use the term.

Right. I was just pointing out how error compounds upon error. His Christology was already on shaky ground. It's no surprise it gets messier the deeper you dig.


Personally I think the title is a bit presumptive, I think Mary would be too humble to consider herself "the Mother of God"

But I understand what they mean by the title. They are not claiming that Mary is higher than God, or created God.

Agreed.

Sparko
07-19-2017, 08:18 AM
I'm pretty sure that every single person who is venerated as a saint would be too humble to consider themselves such.yeah I have a problem with "sainthood" for the same reasons.

One Bad Pig
07-19-2017, 08:28 AM
yeah I have a problem with "sainthood" for the same reasons.

On a far more mundane level, if your firm honored you with "Employee of the Year" would you turn it down because you didn't feel worthy of the honor?

Sparko
07-19-2017, 08:32 AM
On a far more mundane level, if your firm honored you with "Employee of the Year" would you turn it down because you didn't feel worthy of the honor?That's a fair point. But I wouldn't like it if they said "Now that you are employee of the year, we will put your picture up on the wall and people will pray to it and expect you to help them all because that's your new job"

One Bad Pig
07-19-2017, 08:37 AM
That's a fair point. But I wouldn't like it if they said "Now that you are employee of the year, we will put your picture up on the wall and people will pray to it and expect you to help them all because that's your new job"
:hrm: When someone asks me to pray for them, I don't consider that as a job assignment.

tabibito
07-19-2017, 08:40 AM
Would a saint really indulge in false humility?

Sparko
07-19-2017, 08:43 AM
:hrm: When someone asks me to pray for them, I don't consider that as a job assignment.

It just seems way too conveniently like rewriting the whole pantheon of Gods into Christianity to me. Instead of a god/goddess of such and such you have a saint for it.

One Bad Pig
07-19-2017, 08:44 AM
Would a saint really indulge in false humility?
No. A saint would be truly humble. The closer one gets to God, the more one's faults are visible. Knowing that I'm a sinful man doesn't prevent me from praying for others, however.

tabibito
07-19-2017, 08:54 AM
I'm pretty sure that every single person who is venerated as a saint would be too humble to consider themselves such.

Seems to me that a saint would likely know what he was - and would be unlikely to deny it.

One Bad Pig
07-19-2017, 08:58 AM
It just seems way too conveniently like rewriting the whole pantheon of Gods into Christianity to me. Instead of a god/goddess of such and such you have a saint for it.
:hrm: That's actually an ignorant way to look at things, AFAICT. There were gods pagans prayed to for various things, but it's not like there's a saint of trees or the ocean or love or whatnot. It's sort of human nature to go to, e.g., a famous sailor for help with sailing. :shrug: In Christianity, it is improper to believe that the saint actually does the curing, and any saint can intercede for any problem. That's a completely different concept than needing to go to a particular god for that god to exert its powers in a certain situation.

One Bad Pig
07-19-2017, 09:04 AM
Seems to me that a saint would likely know what he was - and would be unlikely to deny it.
From the saint's point of view, because he is so close to God he can see the faults we can't see - so he could truthfully say that he is a sinner. Again, it's largely beside the point; he'd still intercede regardless.

37818
07-19-2017, 09:09 AM
In short - you're saying that Jesus of Nazareth had been God, and would be God after his resurrection ... but he sort of temporarily retired from being God for the duration and became a man.

No. The Son of God's Godhood would throughout remain unchanged. God does not change.

Sparko
07-19-2017, 09:47 AM
:hrm: That's actually an ignorant way to look at things, AFAICT. There were gods pagans prayed to for various things, but it's not like there's a saint of trees or the ocean or love or whatnot. It's sort of human nature to go to, e.g., a famous sailor for help with sailing. :shrug: In Christianity, it is improper to believe that the saint actually does the curing, and any saint can intercede for any problem. That's a completely different concept than needing to go to a particular god for that god to exert its powers in a certain situation.
I don't know about in Orthodoxy but in Catholicism you have "Patron" saints of various things from AIDs caregivers to Zoos (http://www.catholic.org/saints/patron.php).

Sparko
07-19-2017, 09:51 AM
so 37818,

Who was Jesus Christ God the Son's mother?

37818
07-19-2017, 12:07 PM
Remember that he also holds the view that Jesus' human nature was not added to himself. Rather he holds the unorthodox view that Jesus had two natures before the incarnation, a divine nature and a placeholder nature that turned into a human nature at his incarnation.

So what in the following do you deny?


The Christ is both God and man (Ephesians 5:5). Nowhere does the holy scripture teach Mary gave birth to God when she gave birth to the man who is the Christ. God did not change, the Word changed (John 1:14) becoming flesh. And the Word was always God and still is (Hebrews 1:3; etc). The Word being God (John 1:1; Malachi 3:6) is not what changed, the Word being with God is how He changed (John 1:2).

37818
07-19-2017, 12:09 PM
so 37818,

Who was Jesus Christ God the Son's mother?

What you just asked makes no sense.

Sparko
07-19-2017, 12:11 PM
What you just asked makes no sense.

Who was Jesus Christ's (aka God the Son) mother?

or don't you believe that Jesus is God the Son?

37818
07-19-2017, 12:19 PM
yes the Son existed before the incarnation. He added flesh to himself. Which was born. The Son was born. The Son is God. Thus the Catholics say "Mary Mother of God"

You want to say both that the Man and the Son are one being, and also separate them so that only the Man was born. Can't have it both ways.

The fact that as the Son of God He was born to Mary as a son according to the flesh (Matthew 1:23) and according to prophecy (Isaiah 7:14; Isaiah 9:6). And that is not at issue. So do you yourself agree that Mary should be called the mother of God?

37818
07-19-2017, 12:22 PM
Who was Jesus Christ's (aka God the Son) mother?

or don't you believe that Jesus is God the Son?

Jesus the Christ is the Son of God, God with His Father (Hebrews 1:8, The Father calls His Son God).

Sparko
07-19-2017, 12:23 PM
Jesus the Christ is the Son of God, God with His Father (Hebrews 1:8, The Father calls His Son God).

So who is his mother?

37818
07-19-2017, 01:54 PM
So who is his mother?

The Son of God does not have a mother. Unless you deny the eternal Sonship, and hold that the second person of the Godhead did not become the Son of God until He was born of Mary.

One Bad Pig
07-19-2017, 05:28 PM
I don't know about in Orthodoxy but in Catholicism you have "Patron" saints of various things from AIDs caregivers to Zoos (http://www.catholic.org/saints/patron.php).
There's a little bit of that, but it's not very prominent. Most people in Orthodoxy petition the Theotokos, their own patron saint (mine is St. Luke the Evangelist), and those to whom they feel a particular attachment for whatever reason.

37818
07-20-2017, 06:22 AM
From the Creed of Chalcedon, ". . . for our salvation, born of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, according to the Manhood; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures, inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably; the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the unity, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one Person and one Subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ; . . ."

And a proof text of the word of God, the Lord being God, having blood, Acts 20:28, ". . . Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of the Lord and God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. . . ."

Sparko
07-20-2017, 06:35 AM
The Son of God does not have a mother. Unless you deny the eternal Sonship, and hold that the second person of the Godhead did not become the Son of God until He was born of Mary.

You just said that Jesus was the Son of God and he has a mother. Now you want to separate them into two. Which as OBP pointed out is Nestorianism.

37818
07-20-2017, 09:00 AM
You just said that Jesus was the Son of God and he has a mother. Now you want to separate them into two. Which as OBP pointed out is Nestorianism.

For one your accusation and OBP's is false. And the Son of God has no mother, being the eternal Son. Like I said, " Unless you deny the eternal Sonship, and hold that the second person of the Godhead did not become the Son of God until He was born of Mary."

Sparko
07-20-2017, 09:53 AM
For one your accusation and OBP's is false. And the Son of God has no mother, being the eternal Son. Like I said, " Unless you deny the eternal Sonship, and hold that the second person of the Godhead did not become the Son of God until He was born of Mary."

You are defining mother as "creator" which is not the case. Think of it as a relationship. Did Jesus have brothers and sisters? if Jesus is the Son of God, then the Son of God also has brothers and sisters. Doesn't make them Gods. It is a relationship through his incarnation but the Son and Jesus are not two separate people. You can't say Jesus had brothers and sisters but God the Son didn't. They are the same person.

37818
07-20-2017, 12:14 PM
You are defining mother as "creator" which is not the case. Think of it as a relationship. Did Jesus have brothers and sisters? if Jesus is the Son of God, then the Son of God also has brothers and sisters. Doesn't make them Gods. It is a relationship through his incarnation but the Son and Jesus are not two separate people. You can't say Jesus had brothers and sisters but God the Son didn't. They are the same person.

Again another false accusation. I nowhere defined Jesus mother as "creator." Yes, the man Jesus had brothers and sisters. Jesus did not become the Son of God being born of His human mother. He always was the Son of God, and in becoming the man Jesus He did not cease being the Son of God.

Sparko
07-20-2017, 12:21 PM
Again another false accusation. I nowhere defined Jesus mother as "creator." Yes, the man Jesus had brothers and sisters. Jesus did not become the Son of God being born of His human mother. He always was the Son of God, and in becoming the man Jesus He did not cease being the Son of God.and thus, as he gained humanity the Son also gained a human family: A mother, brothers, sisters, a step-father, friends, cousins, etc.

Rushing Jaws
09-13-2017, 01:27 PM
well if "Lord" in verse 43 wasn't indirectly referring to God, then who was "Lord" referring to in verse 45?

43 Why should this happen to me, to have the mother of my Lord visit me? 44 As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb jumped for joy. 45 How blessed is this woman who believed that what the Lord told her would be fulfilled!”For the question about verse 45, see verse 28. She was "told" by the words of the angel. The Lord in verse 43 = Jesus.

37818
09-14-2017, 08:40 AM
For the question about verse 45, see verse 28. She was "told" by the words of the angel. The Lord in verse 43 = Jesus.

As an interpretation. Your Catholic interpretation. I understand the Lord in v.28 to refer to the LORD (YHWH). And the Lord in v.43 to refer to the Son of David, David's Lord (Luke 20:41-44). V.28 to the first LORD in Psalm 110:1 and v.43 to the second Lord in Psalm 110:1.

"The LORD [YHWH, God] said unto my Lord [the Son of David, the Christ, the man], Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool. . . ." -- Psalm 110:1.