Mary mother of God

[lovemuffin]

Here Jesus is saying he wants all to be one with he and the father.This obviously does not mean literally.It speaks of a spiritual union.Notice too that the holy spirit is never mentioned in this union.

I'm not sure I'd use the word "literally" but it I do read this (and other related passages) as expressing an actual reality and not just a metaphor. The very word "union" implies a reality beyond a metaphor, and I think it would be difficult to give a plausible account of Paul's extensive use of this kind of language as being entirely metaphorical in his understanding. A good example would be when he says that we are the temple of God. The temple is where God especially dwelt (not to exclude God being present everywhere), not in metaphor but in actuality, according to the stories.

 

[Wharton]

You are mislead.

You're still not ransomed.

 

[lovemuffin]

I believe that our God is triune. Father, Son and Holy Spirit share a divine nature. They are equal in essence ( sharing the same attributes and characteristics. Father, Son and Holy Spirit are the ONE God. Each has a different role. Jesus is always submissive to the Father. This doesn't make Him an unequal or lesser God. It is simply the structure of the Godhead. That's where I'm coming from. Hope it helps.

You are describing the trinitarian dogma (or close enough). It is equality "of essence" that I referred to as the way in which the church fathers understood "theos", which is not the same as a title, even if theos is in some sense also a title. In other words we're mostly in agreement I'm just suggesting that explaining the trinity by saying that the three persons are one God because God is a title is not actually the same as saying they are equal in essence.

 

[katiemygirl]

You are describing the trinitarian dogma (or close enough). It is equality "of essence" that I referred to as the way in which the church fathers understood "theos", which is not the same as a title, even if theos is in some sense also a title. In other words we're mostly in agreement I'm just suggesting that explaining the trinity by saying that the three persons are one God because God is a title is not actually the same as saying they are equal in essence.

I'm simply trying to make the point that it is incorrect and very misleading to call Mary the Mother of God because both the Holy Spirit and the Father are also God. Regardless of how the catholic church views it, the church has the responsibility to be the pillar of truth for the world. Add their title Mother of God to all the other titles and attributes they have applied to Mary, (Queen of heaven, co-mediator, co-redeemer, co-advocate, etc.) and the message they are sending out to the rest of the world is that they have elevated Mary to God status.

 

[Nada]

No, it is you who are misled. Wharton is correct.

"In the beginning was the word and the word was with God, and the word was God." John 1:1

Your NWT is a corrupt, sectarian paraphrase. They have inserted "Jehovah" into the New Testament 227 times, where Jehovah NEVER in any extant Greek manuscript appears. They have removed words. The NWT cannot be trusted.

Oh, I see what you mean.Yes I do see! So when the words are removed as you say,this is very bad.
Exodus 6:3 King James Bible
And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.

Here is the new 2000 version of the King James Bible.

Exodus 6:3 And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name the LORD was I not known to them.

Yep! That is corrupt.Wow! They just removed God's true name.They removed words.

 

[lovemuffin]

the message they are sending out to the rest of the world is that they have elevated Mary to God status.

I think there's something of an interesting topic here that has to do with how we should try to understand people from different traditions. You say that in using these various titles catholics have "elevated Mary to God status", but it's very clear that catholics (and orthodox, to the extent they use some of those titles) don't believe they have done so. In fact, their dogmas explicitly state otherwise. So how is it that you think it's clear the titles have this effect but they do not?

What I would propose is that, from outside the tradition, you should understand that the expression of religious belief is often symbolic, which means that the expressions use words that can be understood in various shaded ways. They are not univocal concepts where you can apply a strict logic to deduce conclusions from them as premises. In other words, you arrive at the conclusion that the title "Mother of God" makes Mary divine because you are understanding the phrase in a particular logical way, but that way misunderstands what catholics actually mean. Given the general limitations and imprecision of language, and especially the way religious symbology works, there's not really any justification for saying that your understanding of the phrase is "correct" over against the catholic understanding.

Because of that, I don't think you should claim that catholics elevate Mary to being God when they explicitly deny having done so. It's one thing to criticize the choice of terminology and to express why you are uncomfortable with it: because you think it implies a conclusion that is wrong. That's how I feel about "co-mediatrix", for example. Expressions may be better or worse at conveying the ideas we have in mind, but there is some subjectivity involved. If you take the time to understand the history of the term theotokos or "Mother of God", and you follow the arguments that the churches were having at the time that led them to formulate that phrasing, you may at least understand how it is true that catholics call Mary the Mother of God without considering her equal to God or divine in any way. You may still dislike the phrase, but you could at least avoid misrepresenting it.

 

[Nada]

I'm not sure I'd use the word "literally" but it I do read this (and other related passages) as expressing an actual reality and not just a metaphor. The very word "union" implies a reality beyond a metaphor, and I think it would be difficult to give a plausible account of Paul's extensive use of this kind of language as being entirely metaphorical in his understanding. A good example would be when he says that we are the temple of God. The temple is where God especially dwelt (not to exclude God being present everywhere), not in metaphor but in actuality, according to the stories.

What Paul means by the temple of God is that they are chosen vessels blessed with God's holy spirit.They are anointed ones.They are God's personal property.We know "temple" is not to be meant literally because Paul goes on to say, 24"The God who made the world and all the things in it, being, as he is, Lord of heaven and earth,does not dwell in handmade temples;"

There is much symbolic language and literal.

 

[lovemuffin]

What Paul means by the temple of God is that they are chosen vessels blessed with God's holy spirit.They are anointed ones.They are God's personal property.We know "temple" is not to be meant literally because Paul goes on to say, 24"The God who made the world and all the things in it, being, as he is, Lord of heaven and earth,does not dwell in handmade temples;"

There is much symbolic language and literal.

I believe you're referring to Acts 17:24, but if so I'm not sure it's very relevant here, as human bodies are not made by human hands, and the context in which Paul is speaking to the areopagites makes a difference.

There is probably a lot that should be said here also about Paul's understanding of new life in Christ after baptism, which I think should imply strongly the idea that this temple that we are is a work of God and not of man, but in any case, even if he contradicted himself, he very much said that we are the temple of God. Trying to make a comprehensive case for understanding Paul's views is probably beyond my capacity, especially here. I don't think it can be resolved merely by quoting a few out of context verses either way.

 

[Nada]

I believe you're referring to Acts 17:24, but if so I'm not sure it's very relevant here, as human bodies are not made by human hands, and the context in which Paul is speaking to the areopagites makes a difference.

There is probably a lot that should be said here also about Paul's understanding of new life in Christ after baptism, which I think should imply strongly the idea that this temple that we are is a work of God and not of man, but in any case, even if he contradicted himself, he very much said that we are the temple of God. Trying to make a comprehensive case for understanding Paul's views is probably beyond my capacity, especially here. I don't think it can be resolved merely by quoting a few out of context verses either way.

I think you are misunderstanding me.

Ps. Also,when Paul said "we" are the temple of God,Paul was referring to the anointed ones.Not to all common men.Not all are of this fold.Only a selected amount.Those of the 1st century who walked with Christ were of this fold.

1 Corinthians 3:16,17. 16Do you not know that you are a temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?17If any man destroys the temple of God, God will destroy him, for the temple of God is holy, and that is what you are.…

 

[katiemygirl]

I think there's something of an interesting topic here that has to do with how we should try to understand people from different traditions. You say that in using these various titles catholics have "elevated Mary to God status", but it's very clear that catholics (and orthodox, to the extent they use some of those titles) don't believe they have done so. In fact, their dogmas explicitly state otherwise. So how is it that you think it's clear the titles have this effect but they do not?

What I would propose is that, from outside the tradition, you should understand that the expression of religious belief is often symbolic, which means that the expressions use words that can be understood in various shaded ways. They are not univocal concepts where you can apply a strict logic to deduce conclusions from them as premises. In other words, you arrive at the conclusion that the title "Mother of God" makes Mary divine because you are understanding the phrase in a particular logical way, but that way misunderstands what catholics actually mean. Given the general limitations and imprecision of language, and especially the way religious symbology works, there's not really any justification for saying that your understanding of the phrase is "correct" over against the catholic understanding.

Because of that, I don't think you should claim that catholics elevate Mary to being God when they explicitly deny having done so. It's one thing to criticize the choice of terminology and to express why you are uncomfortable with it: because you think it implies a conclusion that is wrong. That's how I feel about "co-mediatrix", for example. Expressions may be better or worse at conveying the ideas we have in mind, but there is some subjectivity involved. If you take the time to understand the history of the term theotokos or "Mother of God", and you follow the arguments that the churches were having at the time that led them to formulate that phrasing, you may at least understand how it is true that catholics call Mary the Mother of God without considering her equal to God or divine in any way. You may still dislike the phrase, but you could at least avoid misrepresenting it.

The catholic people may be using the titles innocently. That doesn't make it right. It is up to each of us to be like the Bereans, and study the Scriptures to be sure that what is being said is true (Acts 17:11). Once again, our standard of authority is and must always be the Bible, not the teachings of men. Mother of God is not found anywhere in the Bible. Neither are the other catholic teachings about Mary. These teachings are the teachings of men. Where are any of the following teaching found in Scripture?

IMMACULATE CONCEPTION -- Mary was preserved from all stain of original sin from the first instant of her conception. (Catechism 490-492).

PERPETUAL VIRGINITY - Mary was a virgin before, during and after the birth of Christ. (Catechism 496-511)

MOTHER OF THE CHURCH - Mary is the Mother of the Church. (Catechism 963, 975).

ASSUMPTION - At the end of her life, Mary was taken up (“assumed”) body and soul into Heaven. (Catechism 966, 974)

CO-MEDIATOR - Mary is the Co-Mediator to whom we can entrust all our cares and petitions. (Catechism 968-970, 2677)

QUEEN OF HEAVEN - God has exalted Mary in heavenly glory as Queen of Heaven and earth. (Catechism 966) She is to be praised with special devotion. (Catechism 971, 2675)

Neither Jesus nor His apostles ever taught that we should try to understand the teachings of men, or be sympathetic towards them. In fact, they taught the opposite. They taught that we are to reject the teachings of men, and to contend for the faith ONCE FOR ALL delivered to the saints. (Jude 5)

 

[katiemygirl]

I think you are misunderstanding me.

Ps. Also,when Paul said "we" are the temple of God,Paul was referring to the anointed ones.Not to all common men.Not all are of this fold.Only a selected amount.Those of the 1st century who walked with Christ were of this fold.

1 Corinthians 3:16,17. 16Do you not know that you are a temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?17If any man destroys the temple of God, God will destroy him, for the temple of God is holy, and that is what you are.…

Oh please!

There are not two classes of christians. That is not supported in Scripture.

 

[Nada]

Oh please!

There are not two classes of christians. That is not supported in Scripture.

Oh yes it is sister.The HS specifically speaks of those blessed with God's holy spirit and those of another fold.Those who are blessed with holy spirit,anointed,are those who will reside in heaven.The rest will reside on earth forever.

 

[katiemygirl]

What Paul means by the temple of God is that they are chosen vessels blessed with God's holy spirit.They are anointed ones.They are God's personal property.We know "temple" is not to be meant literally because Paul goes on to say, 24"The God who made the world and all the things in it, being, as he is, Lord of heaven and earth,does not dwell in handmade temples;"

There is much symbolic language and literal.

Every christian is the temple of the Holy Spirit.

Every christian has the indwelling Holy Spirit.

The Holy Spirit is promised to ALL christians (Acts 2:38)

38 Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

 

[katiemygirl]

Oh yes it is sister.The HS specifically speaks of those blessed with God's holy spirit and those of another fold.Those who are blessed with holy spirit,anointed,are those who will reside in heaven.The rest will reside on earth forever.

HOGWASH! Lies of Satan. This is your cult's teaching. It is not Scriptural.

 

[katiemygirl]

Oh, I see what you mean.Yes I do see! So when the words are removed as you say,this is very bad.
Exodus 6:3 King James Bible
And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.

Here is the new 2000 version of the King James Bible.

Exodus 6:3 And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name the LORD was I not known to them.

Yep! That is corrupt.Wow! They just removed God's true name.They removed words.

God's true name is not Jehovah. The letter "J" wasn't even invented until the 1500's. And you can thank the Roman Catholics for it.

 

[Nada]

Every christian is the temple of the Holy Spirit.

Every christian has the indwelling Holy Spirit.

The Holy Spirit is promised to ALL christians (Acts 2:38)

38 Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

This is incorrect.Not everyone.There is a difference between water baptism and being baptized with holy spirit.

"At Pentecost, Jews who bore community responsibility for Jesus’ death, and who doubtless knew of John’s baptism, were “stabbed to the heart” by Peter’s preaching and asked: “Brothers, what shall we do?” Peter answered: “Repent, and let each one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the free gift of the holy spirit.” (Ac 2:37, 38) Notice that Peter pointed out something new to them—that, not repentance and baptism in John’s baptism, but repentance and baptism inthenameofJesusChrist was necessary for forgiveness of sins. He did not say that baptism itself washed away sins. Peter knew that “the blood of Jesus [God’s] Son cleanses us from all sin.” (1Jo 1:7) Later, after speaking of Jesus as “the Chief Agent of life,” Peter said to Jews at the temple: “Repent, therefore, and turn around so as to get your sins blotted out, that seasons of refreshing may come from the person of Jehovah.” (Ac 3:15, 19) Here he instructed them that repenting of their bad deed against Christ and ‘turning around,’ to recognize him, was what brought forgiveness of sin; he did not at this point mention baptism."
WOL

 

[Nada]

Every christian is the temple of the Holy Spirit.

Every christian has the indwelling Holy Spirit.

The Holy Spirit is promised to ALL christians (Acts 2:38)

38 Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

READ THIS CAREFULLY.

"Likewise those who undergo Christian baptism become God’s property, his slaves, to employ as he sees fit. (1Co 6:20) An example of God’s direction of such matters is found in Revelation, where reference is made to a definite number of persons finally “sealed,” namely, 144,000. (Re 7:4-8) Even before such final approval, God’s holy spirit serves as a seal that gives those sealed a token in advance of their inheritance, a heavenly one. (Eph 1:13, 14; 2Co 5:1-5) Those having such a hope are also told: “God has set the members in the body [of Christ], each one of them, just as he pleased.”—1Co 12:18, 27.

Jesus called attention to another group when he said: “I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; those also I must bring, and they will listen to my voice, and they will become one flock, one shepherd.” (Joh 10:16) These are not of the “little flock” (Lu 12:32), but they too must approach Jehovah through Jesus Christ and be baptized in water."



Baptism — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

 

[katiemygirl]

ha, I am probably the worst person to ask that of because I fall short of everyone's expectations. I debated writing some long boring response including my history of how I got here to catholicism.... or a quick and short one. I'm opting for the short one, (cause who wants to be bored) lol. How do I love thee, let me count the ways, is the real answer which would be a litany of things that are pleasing to God.

But if I had to name 2: (since it is hard for anyone to say they spend all their time thinking only of God when we have gas chromatographs to set up (work stuff) and kid's tuition to pay (home stuff)).
Make time everyday (through prayer, or research of whatever God topic is on your mind) to contemplate the almighty and your relationship with him and others, and
take time to honor (as in..give extra-special consideration to) the sacrifice he made for you ...which we do each week in Mass, (but could be done everyday if one had the time).

Great. Thank you.

Okay, so let's see if I can sum up what you said.

Prayer, research or thinking about God, honoring Him, taking communion. Did I miss anything?

I agree with three things you said. Prayer is an act of worship. Taking communion is also an act of worship. I would put research about God into the preaching or listening to the word of God. They too are forms or acts of worship. I believe that we are honoring God when we worship Him in these ways. I would add a couple more to your list. I would say that singing praises to God is also an act of worship. I think when we serve God in any way, we are worshiping Him. For example: feeding the hungry, visiting the sick and those in prison, taking care of widows and orphans.

Are you familiar with the Greek words that translate as worship?

 

[katiemygirl]

This is incorrect.Not everyone.There is a difference between water baptism and being baptized with holy spirit.

"At Pentecost, Jews who bore community responsibility for Jesus’ death, and who doubtless knew of John’s baptism, were “stabbed to the heart” by Peter’s preaching and asked: “Brothers, what shall we do?” Peter answered: “Repent, and let each one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the free gift of the holy spirit.” (Ac 2:37, 38) Notice that Peter pointed out something new to them—that, not repentance and baptism in John’s baptism, but repentance and baptism inthenameofJesusChrist was necessary for forgiveness of sins. He did not say that baptism itself washed away sins. Peter knew that “the blood of Jesus [God’s] Son cleanses us from all sin.” (1Jo 1:7) Later, after speaking of Jesus as “the Chief Agent of life,” Peter said to Jews at the temple: “Repent, therefore, and turn around so as to get your sins blotted out, that seasons of refreshing may come from the person of Jehovah.” (Ac 3:15, 19) Here he instructed them that repenting of their bad deed against Christ and ‘turning around,’ to recognize him, was what brought forgiveness of sin; he did not at this point mention baptism."
WOL

There are other threads where you can debate JW doctrine. This is not it. I prefer to discuss the thread topic, so I won't be addressing your posts unless they are about the thread topic.

 

[katiemygirl]

READ THIS CAREFULLY.

"Likewise those who undergo Christian baptism become God’s property, his slaves, to employ as he sees fit. (1Co 6:20) An example of God’s direction of such matters is found in Revelation, where reference is made to a definite number of persons finally “sealed,” namely, 144,000. (Re 7:4-8) Even before such final approval, God’s holy spirit serves as a seal that gives those sealed a token in advance of their inheritance, a heavenly one. (Eph 1:13, 14; 2Co 5:1-5) Those having such a hope are also told: “God has set the members in the body [of Christ], each one of them, just as he pleased.”—1Co 12:18, 27.

Jesus called attention to another group when he said: “I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; those also I must bring, and they will listen to my voice, and they will become one flock, one shepherd.” (Joh 10:16) These are not of the “little flock” (Lu 12:32), but they too must approach Jehovah through Jesus Christ and be baptized in water."



Baptism — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

I do not read links.