 |
| The Mother of God and her Child-God Jesus |
Confuting Mr. Gerry Soliman’s “Responding to the bizarre Arguments of Aquino Bayani.” Part 1 of 2.
Mr. Soliman’s words are in double quotation marks “”, while other quotes are in brackets {}.
“Roman Catholics who defend the doctrine of Mary as the Mother of God use a few syllogism (a form of deductive argument with premises and a conclusion) that would appear logical and make their belief valid. In this article, we shall be examining each syllogism and provide the appropriate
rebuttals.”
rebuttals.”
Soliman is dead wrong. Mary is the Mother of God and it was first and foremost the truth of God from eternity, until a lunatic by the name of Nestorius muddled it at the prompting of Satan. That’s when the Catholic
Church had to act and defend the truth of God and translate it into a dogma for all God-fearing men to keep, observe and defend. Nestorius became the god-hero of Protestantism in distorting the truth of God that Mary is the Mother of God.
Church had to act and defend the truth of God and translate it into a dogma for all God-fearing men to keep, observe and defend. Nestorius became the god-hero of Protestantism in distorting the truth of God that Mary is the Mother of God.
“Uhm… that’s very informative alright but the title of the blog Mr. Bayani is trying to confute is “Refuting the Mother of God Syllogisms”. It’s primarily about the syllogisms used to prove Mary is the Mother of God doctrine of the Roman Catholics and not how it started (which in reality the said doctrine never originated from God).”
Like the minions of iglesia ni cristo (another Protestant cult akin to born again evangelicals), Mr. Soliman is suffering from a very acute case of deficiency in reading comprehension and apparent lack of an analytical mind.
Mr. Soliman would have the gullible fools like him believe that Mary as the Mother of God was just a belief of the Roman Catholics which they made into a doctrine and defend it through syllogisms to invalidate it. That’s why I have to correct him saying that Mary as the Mother of God is the truth of God from eternity and the Catholic Church had to translate it into a dogma and defend it from heretics like him. To which he counter-refuted that the said doctrine never originated from God. Let’s see if this puny born again cult apologist has any merit at all.
Protestants, especially the cult Mr. Soliman is fellowshipping with, are spreading the lie that the expression “Mother of God” was first used in the fifth century only.
Here’s an excerpt from the diabolical book TRUTH ENCOUNTER, p. 133, of their idol ex-Catholic Priest and apostate Anthony Pezzotta:
{The term “mother of God” was used for the first time in the fifth century, during the Council of Ephesus (AD 431). The Council fathers, and later the Greek Orthodox, called Mary the “God-bearer; the Romans preferred to call her “mother of God.”}
Now, who is telling the truth and who is the liar? Is the expression “Mother of God” the truth of God from eternity, or is it used for the first time in the fifth century only and never originated from God? Let us see…
If Christ, Who is God the Son, became flesh (Jn 1:1, 14; 1 Tm 3:16, NLT & KJV) was foreknown before the foundation of the world (1 Pt 1:18-20), then God, Who is all-knowing (1 Sam 2:3), also foreknew Mary, the future mother of God the Son who shall conceive Him and give Him flesh. God will not be all-knowing if He did not foreknow the future mother of God the Son. It’s stupendously preposterous if God did not foreknow the future mother of God the Son and yet He knew even the minutest count of hairs in our heads (Lk 12:7)!
God’s foreknowledge of Mary as the future Mother of the preexistent God from the days of eternity, becoming into flesh in the fullness of time, was revealed to the Apostle John when his spirit was whisked into Paradise (2 Cor 12:2-4; Rev 4:1-2), in this wise:
{A great sign appeared in the sky, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars. She was with child and wailed aloud in pain as she labored to give birth. (Rev 12:1-2)}
The following passages provide additional evidences to the ancientness of the expression “Mother of God:”
{I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel. (Gen 3:15, DRV)} – The Woman here is Mary and her seed is Jesus Christ, God the Son, thus, the Woman Mary is the Mother of God.
{Therefore the Lord himself will give you this sign: the virgin shall be with child, and bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel. (Isa 7:14)} – The Virgin here is Mary and her male Child named Immanuel is Jesus Christ, God the Son, thus, the Virgin Mary is the Mother of God (cf Mt 1:18-25).
{For a child is born to us, a son is given us; upon his shoulder dominion rests. They name him Wonder-Counselor, God-Hero, Father-Forever, Prince of Peace. (Isa 9:5)} – The One who bear and gave us a male Child is Mary and her male Child named Wonder-Counselor, God-Hero, Father-Forever, Prince of Peace is Jesus Christ, God the Son, thus, Mary is the Mother of God.
{But you, Bethlehem-Ephrathah too small to be among the clans of Judah, from you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel; whose origin is from of old, from ancient times. (Therefore the Lord will give them up, until the time when she who is to give birth has borne, and the rest of his brethren shall return to the children of Israel.) (Mic 5:1-2)} – She who is to give birth is Mary and the One She is to give birth to, whose origin is from of old, from ancient times, is Jesus Christ, God the Son, thus, Mary is the Mother of God.
Therefore, the erroneous false teaching of the Protestants, especially the phoney born again cult, that the expression “Mother of God” was used for the first time in the fifth century only and never originated from God falls flat to the ground.
“Moving on,
Since Christ is the only one who was incarnated, it follows that Mary cannot be the mother of the Father and Holy Spirit. It would appear now that it should be understood as whenever they call Mary as the Mother of God, they are only referring to the second person of the Trinity.”
Soliman is dead wrong again. In John 1:1-2, there are two Gods: the Word who is Christ and God who is the Father. In Hebrews 1:8-9, there are again two Gods: the Son who is Christ and God who is the Father of the Son. Are there two Gods then? No, there is only one God because the Father and the
Son are one God (Jn 10:30). And because God is Spirit (Jn 4:24), it follows
that the Father and Son are one Spirit.
Son are one God (Jn 10:30). And because God is Spirit (Jn 4:24), it follows
that the Father and Son are one Spirit.
To emphasize the oneness of Father and Son, Jesus taught us that in order to attain eternal life, He said, “That they should know you.” Who is the “you?” “You” is singular but the “you” Jesus was referring to are the Father and the Son: “the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ (Jn 17:3).”
The apostle John who was privy to the oneness of Father and Son, declared affirmatively, without demur, that the Son Jesus Christ is the true God and eternal life (1 Jn 5:20), that is, in the light of the unity of the Father and the Son.
“Dead wrong? Take a look what Roman Catholic apologist Tim Staples has to say about it:
{Paragraph 495 of the Catechism is very clear that Mary is the Mother of the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity because neither the Father nor the Holy Spirit is incarnate.}
“It’s no surprise to me if Roman Catholics are contradicting each other when it comes to proving their doctrines. But between Mr. Staples and Mr. Bayani, the
latter lacks the competency to defend it.”
latter lacks the competency to defend it.”
As I mentioned earlier, Mr. Soliman is suffering from a very acute case of deficiency in reading comprehension and apparent lack of an analytical mind. He even mastered the fine art of pitting Catholics against Catholics which only backfires at him and makes him the laughing stock even among his peers.
If you read carefully my statements above, I asserted repeatedly that Mary is the Mother of God the Son and I never said Mary is also the Mother of the Father and the Holy Spirit.
What I said was there are two Gods, Christ and the Father and they are one, according to John 10:30. I did not say, Christ is the Father or the Father is Christ. What I asserted is the oneness of the Father and the Son, in accordance with the same John 10:30. Hence, in no way do my statements, Mr. Tim Staples’ statement and the Catechism of the Catholic Church 495 contradict one another, but rather, they enhance one another. Here’s CCC 495:
{Called in the Gospels “the mother of Jesus,” Mary is acclaimed by Elizabeth, at the prompting of the Spirit and even before the birth of her son, as “the mother of my Lord.” In fact, the One whom she conceived as man by the Holy Spirit, who truly became her Son according to the flesh, was none other than the Father’s eternal Son, the second person of the Holy trinity. Hence the Church confesses that Mary is truly “Mother of God” (Theotokos).}
See the serpentine deceptive cunningness of the puny born again cult apologist? He is creating contradiction where there is none.
“The again, what is Mr. Bayani trying to prove here? Mary is also the mother of God the Father (and the Holy Spirit as well)?”
The ineptitude of Mr. Soliman is again showing. Read my statements from the start to the end and I never said, Mary is also the mother of God the Father (and the Holy Spirit as well). It’s just Mr. Soliman’s deceitful conjecture – his hocus-pocus to fool the gullible fools like him.
Source: splendorofthechurch.com.ph
No comments:
Post a Comment