God was born of a woman ???
![[Deleted User]](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/fcddec765be35f238a0844bd23f54b59/?default=https%3A%2F%2Fvanillicon.com%2F8ce8323767a20f0f45db140c4cd2cea1_200.png&rating=g&size=200)
The Scriptures (Biblical Scriptures) are rather clear about women being able to only give birth to human beings, either male (sons) or female (daughters). This truth is also acknowledged by all people, even those who have no knowledge of the Biblical Scriptures.
When it comes to the Messiah, Jesus, Scripture is plain and clear that he was born of a woman (cp. Gal 4:4)
Gal 4:4 (NASB95)
But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under 1the Law,
The one whom God sent forth as His Son, was a human being BORN OF A WOMAN.
Unless one would want to go the route of ancient Babylonian (and other ancient) mystery and mythology, there can not be any question about this plain truth. Mary was NOT "the mother of God", just as nobody could be "the father of God". It is impossible for GOD to have a mother, just as it is impossible for GOD to have a father. Since Jesus had both -- God as his Father, Mary as his mother -- it is impossible for Jesus to be GOD.
Comments
-
Oh Wolfgang.....
Jesus existed before his physical birth. God took on flesh to be born of humans and dwell among us (John 1).
So, physically, was Mary the mother of Christ? Yes. But Christ has always been (John 1) so in that sense, no, he does not have a mother.
-
@reformed wrote
Oh Wolfgang.....
hmn ...
Jesus existed before his physical birth. God took on flesh to be born of humans and dwell among us (John 1).
So you actually do say that God was born of a woman ... your words are "God took on flesh to be born of humans ..." A rather strange idea contradicting what is commonly believed to be the truth which is that a woman can NOT give birth to God but only to a human baby.
Perhaps you are saying that God CHANGED from being God to being a human ? That of course would be another impossibility
So, physically, was Mary the mother of Christ?
Why are you all of a sudden switching fomr "God" to "Christ"? We know that Christ was NOT God but a human being ... The topic here is the question whether God was born of a woman.
Yes. But Christ has always been (John 1) so in that sense, no, he does not have a mother.
So Christ was born of a woman but does not have a mother .... WOW !! Are you serious? or perhaps totally confused?
-
No I am not saying a woman gave birth to God. You are twisting my words, purposefully I imagine.
I am saying God the Son is both God and Man according to the Scriptures. And no, that is not an impossibility and you cannot prove from Scripture that it is. I can, however, prove from Scripture that is exactly what happened.
Christ was God so I reject your argument about me switching the two.
And you on your last line again are purposefully twisting my words and I don't appreciate it.
-
@reformed wrote
No I am not saying a woman gave birth to God. You are twisting my words, purposefully I imagine.
No twisting of words needed ... I just quoted what you had written. The problem seems to be that you seem to not recognize what you actually are saying / writing. When someone points out what you are writing, you claim they are twisting your words. Something else you seem to be doing is to make impossible claims and then think that what you say is possible just because you think so
-
No, I know what I am saying and writing. You are twisting it.
-
@Wolfgang said:
The one whom God sent forth as His Son, was a human being BORN OF A WOMAN.
Unless one would want to go the route of ancient Babylonian (and other ancient) mystery and mythology, there can not be any question about this plain truth. Mary was NOT "the mother of God", just as nobody could be "the father of God". It is impossible for GOD to have a mother, just as it is impossible for GOD to have a father. Since Jesus had both -- God as his Father, Mary as his mother -- it is impossible for Jesus to be GOD.
Could it be Wolfgang, the answer to your many questions or solution to your concerns, you need a little humility? I don't say this to be mean or flippant. I say so to remind us all we are finite and God infinite. You seem to be very elementary and "black and white" in your approaches or reasonings of who God is. Again, I don't say this in anyway to be mean or to put you down.
Sometimes, we all get too wise for God in questioning Him to doubt and not to inquiry for answers and understanding. Accept what is revealed and trust God where we can't trace Him on those things that are beyond our present comprehension.
Remember, Wolfgang, when you were a child, you saw, heard and were told many things you didn't understand. Today, you know much more. As time, building of relationships, and experiences, unfold themselves, then comes understanding. Accept what is revealed and more will be given.
Jesus said:
-- "I am the light of the world! The one who follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”
-- "Walk while you have the light, so that the darkness does not overtake you"! CM
SOURCE:
Harris, W. H., III, Ritzema, E., Brannan, R., Mangum, D., Dunham, J., Reimer, J. A., & Wierenga, M. (Eds.). (2012). The Lexham English Bible (Jn 12:35; Jn 8:12). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.
-
If there was a like button (@jan) this post would receive it!
-
@C_M_ wrote:
Could it be Wolfgang, the answer to your many questions or solution to your concerns, you need a little humility? I don't say this to be mean or flippant. I say so to remind us all we are finite and God infinite. You seem to be very elementary and "black and white" in your approaches or reasonings of who God is. Again, I don't say this in anyway to be mean or to put you down.
Am I the one who lacks humility because I endeavor to adhere to the simple truths stated more or less directly in Scripture while refusing to adhere to Trinitarian complicate and at times illogical and unreasonable interpretation in addition to Scripture ?
Furthermore, in a sense it doesn't matter whether a poster is writing with humility, with arrogance, or lack of either ...what is written and posted either is true or it is false ... the most humble could have an incorrect understanding and the most prideful could have a correct understanding on a matter. Consider Jam 2:19 - "Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble." ... Were the devils wrong in their knowledge about God and believing that God is ONE and not many? No, the devils were absolutely correct in that belief ... and they knew it, that is why they tremble !!
Sometimes, we all get too wise for God in questioning Him to doubt and not to inquiry for answers and understanding. Accept what is revealed and trust God where we can't trace Him on those things that are beyond our present comprehension.
But accepting what is revealed is exactly what I do .,.. See, it is the Trinitarians who are not adhering to what is revealed and they are the ones who trust Trinity teachers and man's dogmas regarding that which is even acknowledged and claimed to be non-traceable and a mystery. Why do you not recognize this simple and plain truth?
Remember, Wolfgang, when you were a child, you saw, heard and were told many things you didn't understand. Today, you know much more. As time, building of relationships, and experiences, unfold themselves, then comes understanding. Accept what is revealed and more will be given.
And why would that not apply to Trinitarians? If they would accept what is revealed in Scripture, they would be able to receive more insight into other related topics taught in Scripture.
Please note: In this matter, I speak also of own experience ... I grew up in a Trinitarian church surrounding and accepted the mystery ideas of the Trinity dogma during childhood and some into early adulthood. When my questions regarding the matter became more and bigger, I was able to see truth of Scripture and see through the deception of the Trinity dogma as more truth was given to me by God while reading and more carefully actually studying the Scriptures rather than reading catechism and a "just have faith (especially when something makes no sense" guidance by church priests and teachers
-
I see no need in claiming that God could have a father or a mother even for a Trinitarian, why would that be necessary?
I'll try to explain: the trinity doesn't necessarily mean that The father is the son is the holy spirit, actually, most Trinitarians reject that idea, they say that all are "God" and a possible way to explain this is that they all are positions, lets take "John Doe" for example, he may be a father (to his son), a son (to his father) and a pastor (to his community), some say a pastor is a holy duty, therefore a good example, but then you may say that nobody could be the father of himself, as some Trinitarians claim due to misunderstanding the scriptures, and that could easily by explained the way Messianic Jews usually use in order to explain it, the Trinity is only a spiritual definition, it does not mean that God is the father of himself, we all are children of God, spiritually, because our soul is godly (a part of God, or from God). regarding Mary, of course she didn't give birth to God, as God is eternal, has no beginning and no end, Mary gave birth to Jesus, who was given a part of God's holy spirit in his body from the day he was born, even though, that's as much as they could explain, they don't explain why Joseph was or was not Jesus'es father and they don't need to, because since we could claim that Joseph was the biological father of Jesus (most of them would disagree, but I'm going to explain why it could make sense) since the word עלמה in Hebrew does not necessarily mean virgin, in most contexts, it only means a young lady, please read Proverbs 30:19 : "the way of an eagle in the sky, the way of a snake on a rock, the way of a ship on the high seas, and the way of a man with a young woman." , in Hebrew it was "דֶּרֶךְ הַנֶּשֶׁר בַּשָּׁמַיִם, דֶּרֶךְ נָחָשׁ עֲלֵי צוּר, דֶּרֶךְ אֳנִיָּה בְלֶב יָם, וְדֶרֶךְ גֶּבֶר בְּעַלְמָה" , if that עלמה was a virgin, how would he not leave evidence (such as tearing her hymen, which would cause some bleeding from her vagina in most cases)
Please read Genesis 24:43 : "See, I am standing beside this spring. If a young woman comes out to draw water and I say to her, “Please let me drink a little water from your jar,” - originally "הִנֵּה אָנֹכִי נִצָּב עַל עֵין הַמָּיִם, וְהָיָה הָעַלְמָה הַיֹּצֵאת לִשְׁאֹב וְאָמַרְתִּי אֵלֶיהָ הַשְׁקִינִי נָא מְעַט מַיִם מִכַּדֵּךְ"
In Hebrew, there is another word for virgin, which is "בתולה", please read Genesis 24:16 : "The woman was very beautiful, a virgin; no man had ever slept with her. She went down to the spring, filled her jar and came up again." - originally "וְהַנַּעֲרָ טֹבַת מַרְאֶה מְאֹד בְּתוּלָה וְאִישׁ לֹא יְדָעָהּ וַתֵּרֶד הָעַיְנָה וַתְּמַלֵּא כַדָּהּ וַתָּעַל. " , therefore, the word עלמה in Isaiah 7:14 could mean "young woman", rather than "virgin" and that resolves our issue but still doesn't debunk the definition of the Trinity as a spiritual, or in another definition godly bonding.
Thanks,
ASN_032
-
In addition to user ASN_032's astute on point post above below I have posted the some of the Hebrew words and references to some of their occurrences in Scripture. Why? As ASN_032 rightly points out the nuance of a word is often dependent on its use in context. So, the following is posted for so that anyone who wishes can make up their mind as to the meaning the words under consideration.
עלמה (maiden / ‘almāh)
Gen. 24:43, Exod. 2:8, 1 Chr. 15:20, Ps. 46:1, Ps. 68:26, Prov. 30:19, Cant. 1:3, Cant. 6:8, and Isa. 7:14
בתולה (virgin / Betulah)
Gen. 24:16, Exod. 22:15-16, Lev. 21:3, 14, Deut. 22:19, 23, 28, Deut. 32:25, Jdg. 19:24, Jdg. 21:12, 2 Sam. 13:2, 18, 1 Ki. 1:2, 2 Ki. 19:21, 2 Chr. 36:17, Est. 2:2-3, 17, 19, Job 31:1, Ps. 45:15, Ps. 78:63, Ps. 148:12, Isa. 23:4, 12, Isa. 37:22, Isa. 47:1, Isa. 62:5, Jer. 2:32, Jer. 14:17, Jer. 18:13, Jer. 31:4, 13, 21, Jer. 46:11, Jer. 51:22, Lam. 1:4, 15, 18, Lam. 2:10, 13, 21, Lam. 5:11, Ezek. 9:6, Ezek. 44:22, Joel 1:8, Amos 5:2, Amos 8:13, Zech. 9:17
נערה (Young woman/ na'ará)
Gen. 24:14, 16, 28, 55, 57, 61, Gen. 34:3, 12, Exod. 2:5, Deut. 22:15-16, 19-21, 23-29, Jos. 16:7, Jdg. 19:3-6, 8-9, Jdg. 21:12, Ruth 2:5-6, 8, 22-23, Ruth 3:2, Ruth 4:12, 1 Sam. 9:11, 1 Sam. 25:42, 1 Ki. 1:2-4, 2 Ki. 5:2, 4, 1 Chr. 4:5-6, Est. 2:2-4, 7-9, 12-13, Est. 4:4, 16, Job 40:29, Prov. 9:3, Prov. 27:27, Prov. 31:15, Amos 2:7
-
@ASN_032 wrote
I see no need in claiming that God could have a father or a mother even for a Trinitarian, why would that be necessary?
It is not only not necessary, it is a rather nonsensical idea.
However, when Trinitarians (or any others) claim that Jesus is God, they are in effect saying that God had a mother ... why? Because Scripture rather plainly states that Jesus was born of a woman which point they readily admit.
By the way, in regards to this point the considerations whether the Hebrew word is translated and means either "virgin" or "young woman". Jesus was born of a female human being, a woman. And since God does not have a Father or a mother, any claim that Jesus is God is unbiblical and furthermore false and total nonsense
