Search Results
6/26/2025, 10:33:17 PM
>>17793666
>>17793903
I’ve got my EO Study Bible here… If you believe it’s Divinely inspired Scripture, you cannot avoid Luke 1:43–
“But why is this granted to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?”
(Luke 1:43 [NKJV])
So, the EO position, (Forgive me if this is wrong) that Mary is the Theo-tokos (God-bearer) is COMPLETELY biblical, as Elizabeth speaks by the Holy Spirit that she is the mother of her Lord, “Lord” being a Jewish name for God.
This all depends on if you believe in the Bible… However, Mary’s presence within the Biblical narrative is not negligible… The EO position can be defended.
>>17793903
I’ve got my EO Study Bible here… If you believe it’s Divinely inspired Scripture, you cannot avoid Luke 1:43–
“But why is this granted to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?”
(Luke 1:43 [NKJV])
So, the EO position, (Forgive me if this is wrong) that Mary is the Theo-tokos (God-bearer) is COMPLETELY biblical, as Elizabeth speaks by the Holy Spirit that she is the mother of her Lord, “Lord” being a Jewish name for God.
This all depends on if you believe in the Bible… However, Mary’s presence within the Biblical narrative is not negligible… The EO position can be defended.
Page 1