Jesus repudiates Mariolatry, Part the Fourth

That's too funny! You mean you didn't know you were talking to a female this whole time?
This is her post #116 way back in the first thread (similar to this one).

Hint- when they wave at you with that smiley wavey guy in the beginning, it's usually a tip off their female. LOL

 

mrtumness,

Well, we're gonna...ummmm...probably....in due time...well....I havent got that figured out yet.

But then, remember....the (((MEETING of the MEN))) has not taken place yet.

Trust me. When a group of men get together and do some deciding...things happen!

Stay tuned....

Mike

 

Joe,

No. I didnt know. Had no idea. I guess I missed the post you referred to earlier. When I read "mr" I just assumed she was a he.

GLAD YOUR HERE NOW, THOUGH!

The MEETING of the MEN is happening!

Mike :thumbs:

 

Thanks, count me in. I have a few ideas....


(don't worry tumnus, we'll be gentle )

 

mrtumnus,

Do you believe Christ is the one and ONLY mediator between God and man?

Mike

 

Was the Zygote contributed by any part of Mary or any particle of Mary?

So, you are believing Mary was the Deity carrier, not the mother of Deity, right?

 

Mary carried both natures of Christ!!! His humanity and His Divinity. What do you believe Eliyahu?

ICXC NIKA
-

 

Well, I'm definitely shaking after that.

With laughter.

 

Yes, I do.

 

I believe the differentation being made is there are those who do not believe that Mary is Jesus' biological mother. I would be one who disagrees with that.

 

So, you disbelieve in order to call Mary the Biological Mother?

You may believe this:

Flesh became Flesh

Word cannot become Flesh.

 

Nowhere in the Bible, Mary is exalted above any human beings, nor was she called Mother of God.

You may not believe in Bible and that's why you feel free to exalt anyone else than God.

 

No, I believe, and that is that Mary is indeed the biological mother. There is no reason to believe otherwise.

The red is interesting, and is directly contradicted by Scripture:

Joh 1:14 -
The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.

 

You cannot believe both as they are contradictory.

Biological Mother means that she offered something to the embryo so that it may form a part of it, i.e. she offered the ovum so that the half of the baby body is from her.

In such case, the Bible cannot claim that Word became Flesh, because the flesh was originated from the flesh ( Ovum is from the flesh).

Moreover, Ovum is not designed for fertilization with the Word.

1. Bible clearly denied the claim that Flesh became Flesh. (Jn 1:14)

2. Jesus was already born before He was born out of Mary.
Read Matthew 1:20

το γαρ εν αυτη γεννηθεν εκ Πνευματοσ εστιν Αγιου

(The one in her is born by the Holy Spirit)

3. Hebrew 1:5

Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.

4. If there were any fertilization process and thereby Jesus was born, where was the previous Jesus gone who met Abraham and for whom Moses worked for? Read John 8:56-58, Heb 11:26.

5. This is why the Hebrew writer said this;

1 For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him; 2 To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace; 3 Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually. 4 Now consider how great this man was, unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils. 5 And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though they come out of the loins of Abraham:

The Bible verses cannot stand if either of Melchizedek or Son of God have a Mother. Both of them are very similar each other like the comparison of 2 photos of one person between childhood and adulthood, in the sense that they both have no ( earthly) father, no mother, no genealogy, no beginning of the days, no end of life, King of Righteousness, KIng of Peace, but live forever as the eternal Priest.

 

You cannot believe the above Bible verse if you believe Jesus had a Biological mother.

The red portion is what you are believing.

Instead you strongly believe and insist that Flesh became Flesh and that Word cannot become Flesh.

 

No, the Word became flesh. There is no contradiction regarding using Mary's ovum for this.

You seem to be of the opinion that because Jesus has existed from all eternity, this rules out that Mary is his biological mother? Am I understanding this correctly?

The Bible says (more than once) that Mary is Jesus' mother. It never calls Joseph Jesus' father. If they were both surrogates, this would be clear. In fact, it points out that 'it was thought' that Joseph was Jesus' father. Why doesn't it say this about Mary (it was thought that she was his mother)? Instead, it repeatedly says -- she is his mother. Is the Bible in error?

The Bible also says that the human nature of Jesus was a descendant of David. So how is this true, if he has no biological ties to anybody?

 

If the Word became Flesh, then Jesus can have NO Biological Mother !

You are claiming Oxymoron !

No ! The Truth that Jesus Cannot have any Biological Mother comes from the Truth that Word became Flesh. Biological Mother means that Some Flesh became Another Flesh !

Calling any surrogate Mother or step-Father as Mother orFather is a small issue.

Read Luke 2:41, which states His parents. Joseph was a step father and Mary was a surrogate mother, both were in different status.
Read Luke 2:48 - Mary said thy father.
Calling somone who is surrogate mother or step father doesn't make them Biological parents.

Why did the Bible record about the genealogy of Joseph? Is it a great honor for him? Why doesn't the Bible record only the gealogy of Mary?

 

Yes! The fact that Word became Flesh has nothing to do with 'how' God achieved this. There is no conflict here with Mary being Jesus' biological mother.

Because the genealogy of Joseph also satisified the requirement from the perspective of the patriarchal nature of society. Mary's geneology satifies the actual descendancy, the 'seed' of David from which the Messiah came. However, in these geneologies it is noted that it was only 'thought' that Joseph was the father. From your perspective, there is no reason to quote the geneologies at all, because the prophecy that the Messiah would be from the seed of David is false.