Christological Implications of Nestorianism

Personally, I trust the Nestorians of that day in history far more than I do the Mary-worshipping Catholics! And since much of what we know about the Nestorians comes from their enemies the Catholics, well, let's take the history with a grain of salt. I suspect that in Heaven we'll meet quite a few Nestorians from the 5th-8th centuries.

By the way, here is a link to a scholarly book about how Nestorians went to China as missionaries: http://www.aina.org/books/bftc/bftc.htm

They may have even made it to Japan. There is varied evidence such as an ancient tomb with a cross on it in a village in northern Honshu. The natives, though, have a legend that Judas died in Christ's place, and then Christ fled to Japan, married a Japanese woman and had a bunch of kids. :laugh: :laugh:

 

Of course, the underlying "theme," the "subtext," of the debate is how much glory to give to Mary rather than to God. Does it take a "god" to birth a "God?"

It's a bogus issue. Christ Himself never gave any special glory to Mary. She was young, innocent, and God was picking specific descendants of David for His appearance into the world, period. If Mary had had a dozen sisters, they all would have been eligible.

skypair

 

Benjamin, without taking the time to look all this up, I would offer that this 'quiz' (one of several), to which you are referring, is bogus and I have already shown this at least three times previously in threads on the BB. You are fully correct in not giving much credence to it.

Please save yourself the effort in posting the link. (And me, the effort of refuting it.)

Click on the thread three times, and the questions come up in three varying orders.

Also one can find 1200 of these such 'quizzes' (several of which contain material completely inappropriate to the BB) at "QuizFarm", where this originates.

In other words, while your OP is completly legit, the quiz is not.

Ed

 

I believe most Baptists, like Skypair, would tend toward Nestorianism although most would not be as blunt about it as he is. Let's face it, Baptists get the heebie jeebies when you start talking about Theotokos and Mother of God. It conjures up ideas of Mary worship and having a goddess in the Christian pantheon, so it seems more plausible to say that Mary is only the mother of Christ's humanity, i.e., Nestorianism. In reality, however, it's no big deal. If Mary is the mother of Jesus and Jesus is fully God, then Mary is the mother of God. It doesn't mean she preexisted God or that she is equal to God in any way. Indeed she is a human creature just like the rest of us--a very blessed and special human to be sure, but still a creature. I can't agree with Skypair, who implies Mary's status could have been the result of random selection from the female descendants of David. The second chapter of Luke leaves no doubt in my mind that Mary was carefully selected for this great honor that all generations would call her blessed.

 

Wow. A Baptist who actually believes Mary to be the "mother of God." Very strange. Do you have Scripture that agrees with you, or only human logic? Applying human logic to the hypostatic union of Christ is about like tossing a baseball in the air and saying you threw it into outer space.

 

1. I was applying human logic, which is a lot more to the point than some example about outer space.

2. I had not thought about scriptural support for this but we do have Luke 1:43. Incidentally, my reference to the second chapter of Luke in Post #5 should have been to the first chapter of Luke.

3. I don't recall ever reading anything in scripture about the hypostatic union, although the root word may appear in passages unrelated to this concept. As nearly as I can tell, this concept came about by application of human logic to scriptural truths.

 

Ever hear of hyperbole? :smilewinkgrin:

Luke 1:43 is quite a stretch for calling Mary the "Mother of God"! The Greek word kyrios there can be used for a wide range of meanings, including "sir," "boss," "lord," "Lord," etc. Furthermore, since Jewish theology of the day did not consider the Messiah to be deity, the chance that this was calling Mary the "Mother of God" is extremely remote.

The Greek word hypostasis, from which hypostatic came, is used 5 times in the NT, including a reference to Christ in Heb. 1:3. And the evidence in Scripture for a hypostatic union is far, far greater than that Mary was the "Mother of God."

 

Exactly. Every English translation I have ever seen says, "mother of my Lord." There is not much sentiment for rendering this as "mother of my boss" or even "mother of my lord." You're right, Elizabeth was not referring to the Messiah. She was referring to her Lord, i.e., God.

 

Nope, sorry, "Lord" does not have to mean "God," and you can't prove it does here. Example: Thomas called Jesus, "My Lord and my God" in John 20:28.

 

All right, who do you think Elizabeth was talking about when she referred to "the mother of my Lord"?

 

She meant her Messiah, as per Ps. 110:1.