In this episode, SuperLutheran lays out an explicitly Lutheran view of Mary, Mother of Jesus.
Are Jews the chosen people of God? No: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzHB5Caglgo
Age of Ruin: From the Ashes: https://poa.st/@Godcast/posts/ALVRT05jJfK3me3PtY
The first of what I hope to be many entries in a science fiction universe both by and for /ourguys/.
Things we talked about during the show:
Mary: https://infogalactic.com/info/Mary_(mother_of_Jesus)
Download this Episode: https://traffic.libsyn.com/secure/thegodcast/Godcast_Bonus_Mariology_May.mp3
RSS Feed: https://feeds.libsyn.com/106598/rss
If you have questions about the Christian faith or just want to get in touch with us, we can be reached at TheGodcast@Protonmail.com
If you’d like to support the Godcast and/or The Very Lutheran Project, you can do so here: https://verylutheran.gumroad.com/
Myles and Super can be found improving timelines on the Fediverse here:
poa.st/@Godcast
poa.st/@SuperLutheran
Pugnus Pastorem
“Mother of Jesus therefore mother of church”-
Your justification of this point here underlies the problem with the Chalcedonian overemphasis on the “twoness” of natures – dividing what God brought together. Because Mary birthed the flesh, and the flesh is Christ, therefore the church is Mary’s child. It’s a bit of a shell game.
Take this:
“Those who do the will of my Father in heaven are my brother and sister and mother.”
From Matthew 12:46-50. In direct contrast to his disciples bringing to His attention that Mary was outside.
There are only two choices here:
1) Negate what He said here with added subtext and eisegesis, or
2) Accept that we are talking about more than a daughter of Zion when we say “the mother” of Christ and the church.
Given Paul tells us that Jerusalem above is our mother, it is only the second choice that is rewarded with confirmation in the writings of the apostles. It is also the only one that is of acceptable comportment with Christ’s own words. The consequence is that we must accept a different understanding of what it means to be our “mother” and “father” – which makes a lot of what Christ says on these topics undeniably clear.
I emailed you a while ago about the very many reasons why Myaphysitism is correct Christology. There is no hypostatic union in dyaphysitism. This is one consequence of the subtle disintegration of the patristic understanding of the person of Christ.
I’ve always been bothered by the notion that Mary necessarily must have been completely without sin in order for God to miraculously work through her, given what that would imply for the rest of us
At 16:20 you say the kings of Juda are barred from priestly activity, which is true, but it’s important to remember that the role of high priest given to Christ is not one of the Hebrew tradition, it’s one that predates it. In Hebrews, chapter 7 specifically, we’re told that Christ is the high priest according to the order of Melchisedec, not according to Mosaic law. So I don’t think that his position as high priest is really a strong argument against there being no correlation between the kingdom of Juda and the kingdom of Heaven. Neither is it a strong argument to bring up polygamy. At that point you may as well mention the innumerable sins that the kings of Juda committed which resulted in them being led away to captivity. I think it’s pretty clear that the essence of the kingdom of Juda (and arguably monarchies in general) is certainly modeled after the Heavenly kingdom. The reverence of the queen-mother is a necessary component of monarchies in order to keep true to the commandment to honor one’s parents.
Your last sentence is a complete non sequitur from everything else written.
If it’s necessary, why did it start with the king that lead to the schism of Israel because of rampant idolatry (Solomon), and not David? David had no “queen mother.”