1
Nestorius placed a special emphasis on the humanity of Jesus. He began preaching against the title Theotokos or Mother of God, beginning to be used of the Virgin Mary. He distinguished between the logos (“divine nature”) and Christ (the Son, the Lord) as a union of divine nature and human nature. He refused to attribute the human acts and the sufferings of Jesus to the divine nature, arguing that God could not suffer on the cross, as God is omnipotent. Therefore the Virgin Mary, could not be viewed as the Mother of God, but simply as the mother of a man. St. Cyril began a series of attacks against Nestorius. Cyril argued that the two natures were mutually united in Christ and since the holy Virgin brought forth corporeally God for this reason we should also call her Mother of God.
The Council of Ephesus, which was held in 431, was crucial in affirming the truth of the title “Mother of God.” People had been calling Mary that for quite some time, but it was not dogmatically defined until the Council of Ephesus. In denouncing Nestorianism, the bishops affirmed the unity of the divine and human natures of Christ. Given that one cannot separate Christ’s divine nature from his human nature, …show more content…
This means God foreknows everything including our future acts. The question then is how can we have free will when God knows everything. Augustine, in a form of a dialog, argues that free will and God’s foreknowledge are compatible. He refute the idea that God’s activity puts freedom at risk and that our free choices are free from God’s activity. Human beings can choose one particular action from among various alternatives. The power to will is not taken from us by or is not opposed to God’s foreknowledge. If we did not have free will, in other words, if we must act in a certain way, then why would God judge us? This would be meaningless. Just because God Knows our future actions doesn't mean that we have choose that
Nestorius placed a special emphasis on the humanity of Jesus. He began preaching against the title Theotokos or Mother of God, beginning to be used of the Virgin Mary. He distinguished between the logos (“divine nature”) and Christ (the Son, the Lord) as a union of divine nature and human nature. He refused to attribute the human acts and the sufferings of Jesus to the divine nature, arguing that God could not suffer on the cross, as God is omnipotent. Therefore the Virgin Mary, could not be viewed as the Mother of God, but simply as the mother of a man. St. Cyril began a series of attacks against Nestorius. Cyril argued that the two natures were mutually united in Christ and since the holy Virgin brought forth corporeally God for this reason we should also call her Mother of God.
The Council of Ephesus, which was held in 431, was crucial in affirming the truth of the title “Mother of God.” People had been calling Mary that for quite some time, but it was not dogmatically defined until the Council of Ephesus. In denouncing Nestorianism, the bishops affirmed the unity of the divine and human natures of Christ. Given that one cannot separate Christ’s divine nature from his human nature, …show more content…
This means God foreknows everything including our future acts. The question then is how can we have free will when God knows everything. Augustine, in a form of a dialog, argues that free will and God’s foreknowledge are compatible. He refute the idea that God’s activity puts freedom at risk and that our free choices are free from God’s activity. Human beings can choose one particular action from among various alternatives. The power to will is not taken from us by or is not opposed to God’s foreknowledge. If we did not have free will, in other words, if we must act in a certain way, then why would God judge us? This would be meaningless. Just because God Knows our future actions doesn't mean that we have choose that