Author Topic: On My Mother's Side - Theology?  (Read 1295 times)

Mike Bennett

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 1031
    • View Profile
On My Mother's Side - Theology?
« on: September 07, 2010, 01:49:38 PM »
A friend of mine from high school posted a link to this catchy song on his facebook page:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5ddoyfn6g4

Being a country music lover I like the sound. 

And the theology was pretty good up to a point, I thought, until the answers to the question:  "What's your plan?" So what do you all think of the theology of the answers to that question, from a two natures theological point of view?  I'm thinking it misses the mark regarding exactly Who died on the cross? and Who rose on the third day?  (Jesus of Nazareth, or God the Son, or both?)  But maybe I'm wrong, or maybe those answers are too big for processing by my human brain.

(I also have a little quibble with the "on my Father's side" answer to the question "Where're you from?"  but it's a relatively minor quibble).

Thanks in advance for your thoughts, and for a rancor-free topic.

Mike Bennett
“What peace can there be, so long as the many whoredoms and sorceries of your mother Jezebel continue?”  2 Kings 9:22

pr dtp

  • Guest
Re: On My Mother's Side - Theology?
« Reply #1 on: September 07, 2010, 02:47:35 PM »
A friend of mine from high school posted a link to this catchy song on his facebook page:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5ddoyfn6g4

Being a country music lover I like the sound. 

And the theology was pretty good up to a point, I thought, until the answers to the question:  "What's your plan?" So what do you all think of the theology of the answers to that question, from a two natures theological point of view?  I'm thinking it misses the mark regarding exactly Who died on the cross? and Who rose on the third day?  (Jesus of Nazareth, or God the Son, or both?)  But maybe I'm wrong, or maybe those answers are too big for processing by my human brain.

(I also have a little quibble with the "on my Father's side" answer to the question "Where're you from?"  but it's a relatively minor quibble).

Thanks in advance for your thoughts, and for a rancor-free topic.

Mike Bennett


Country music and rancor free ???  You are kidding - right?

Mike Bennett

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 1031
    • View Profile
Re: On My Mother's Side - Theology?
« Reply #2 on: September 07, 2010, 03:38:06 PM »
Found a version I like better.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRVfr7tP_x4&feature=related

Nobody here wants to address whether this faithfully presents the two natures?

Maybe it's so simple that nobody wants to embarrass me by responding?

Mike Bennett
“What peace can there be, so long as the many whoredoms and sorceries of your mother Jezebel continue?”  2 Kings 9:22

James_Gale

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 4082
    • View Profile
Re: On My Mother's Side - Theology?
« Reply #3 on: September 07, 2010, 04:01:26 PM »
Found a version I like better.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRVfr7tP_x4&feature=related

Nobody here wants to address whether this faithfully presents the two natures?

Maybe it's so simple that nobody wants to embarrass me by responding?

Mike Bennett

I, like you, know enough to know that the song is theologically problematic.  And enough to know that I am not the one to start explaining why.  I'd get myself into trouble very quickly with the professional theologians who post here.

I am confident, though, that the lack of responses to your thread is not due to the simplicity of the issues involved.  It's much more likely that the opposite is true.

Mike Bennett

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 1031
    • View Profile
Re: On My Mother's Side - Theology?
« Reply #4 on: September 07, 2010, 04:36:42 PM »
Found a version I like better.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRVfr7tP_x4&feature=related

Nobody here wants to address whether this faithfully presents the two natures?

Maybe it's so simple that nobody wants to embarrass me by responding?

Mike Bennett

I, like you, know enough to know that the song is theologically problematic.  And enough to know that I am not the one to start explaining why.  I'd get myself into trouble very quickly with the professional theologians who post here.

I am confident, though, that the lack of responses to your thread is not due to the simplicity of the issues involved.  It's much more likely that the opposite is true.

From the Athanasian Creed:

But it is necessary for eternal salvation that one also faithfully believe the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore it is the true faith that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is at once God and a human being. He is God, begotten from the substance of the Father before all ages, and a human being, born from the substance of his mother in this age. He is perfect God and a perfect human being, composed of a rational soul and human flesh. He is equal to the Father with respect to his divinity, less than the Father with respect to his humanity.

Although he is God and a human being, nevertheless he is not two but one Christ. However, he is one not by the changing of the divinity in the flesh but by the taking up of the humanity in God. Indeed, he is one not by a confusion of substance but by a unity of person. For, as the rational soul and the flesh are one human being, so God and the human being are one Christ.

He suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose from the dead, ascended into the heavens, is seated at the right hand of the Father, from where he will come to judge the living and the dead. At his coming all human beings will rise with their bodies and will give an account of their own deeds. Those who have done good things will enter into eternal life, and those who have done evil things into eternal fire.


Kolb, R., Wengert, T. J., & Arand, C. P. (2000). The Book of Concord : The confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church (24–25). Minneapolis: Fortress Press.

I guess I'm thinking that a Person was crucified and rose again, and that that Person had two natures, not to be either confused or separated, and that the part of the song that deals with crucifixion and resurrection gets derailed because of that. 

I didn't have it sharply focused until I was provoked to look up the Athanasian Creed.

Mike Bennett
“What peace can there be, so long as the many whoredoms and sorceries of your mother Jezebel continue?”  2 Kings 9:22

Steven Tibbetts

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 10213
  • Big tents are for circuses.
    • View Profile
Re: On My Mother's Side - Theology?
« Reply #5 on: September 07, 2010, 10:16:34 PM »
Interesting lyrics and, up to a point, not a bad approach.  However, both Jesus' "mother's side" and "Father's side" were crucified and raised from the dead.

The second stanza's tense -- that he was the Son of God and Son of Man -- is also a present tense declaration, though since it focusses on his life between birth and crucifixion, we could give them a bye on that.  But then again, he is King of Kings not on only his Father's side, but on his mother's and her husband's sides, too -- which had the lyricist(s) gotten it right might have put it right up there with Steve Goodman's "You Never Even Call Me by My Name" as the perfect Country & Western song.

Being provoked to go the Athanasian Creed, of course, is spot on.

Pax, Steven+
The Rev. Steven Paul Tibbetts, STS
Pastor Zip's Blog

George Erdner

  • Guest
Re: On My Mother's Side - Theology?
« Reply #6 on: September 07, 2010, 10:28:35 PM »
Interesting that Jesus was Son of Man on his mother's side. Shouldn't the revisionists change all the references to the dual nature of Christ to Son of God and Son of Woman?

Tom Senge

  • Guest
Re: On My Mother's Side - Theology?
« Reply #7 on: September 08, 2010, 03:23:53 PM »
HEAVY SIGH

Steven Tibbetts

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 10213
  • Big tents are for circuses.
    • View Profile
Re: On My Mother's Side - Theology?
« Reply #8 on: September 08, 2010, 06:53:04 PM »
I don't believe, George, that the lyricist(s) of the song or the artists performing them are "revisionists."  Well, at least not "revisionsts" in an early 21st century context.  Take it back to 16th Century and, yeah, they sound like "enthusiasts."  But they don't seem to confuse "gender" with "sex," orvice-versa.

But, FWIW, in the New Testament the NRSV translates "Son of Man" with "Son of Man."

The "Inclusive Verson" of the NRSV NT and Psalms, which is thoroughly revisionist, translates "the Son of Man" as "the Human One."

Pax, Steven+
With Lutherans on both his father's side and mother's side.
The Rev. Steven Paul Tibbetts, STS
Pastor Zip's Blog

Brian Stoffregen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 43260
  • ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν
    • View Profile
Re: On My Mother's Side - Theology?
« Reply #9 on: September 08, 2010, 11:28:12 PM »
But, FWIW, in the New Testament the NRSV translates "Son of Man" with "Son of Man."

The "Inclusive Verson" of the NRSV NT and Psalms, which is thoroughly revisionist, translates "the Son of Man" as "the Human One."

Most translations render "son of man" in the OT as "human being" or "mortal being" especially in reference to Ezekiel being called, literally, "son of man". Why shouldn't they translate it the same way in the New?
"The church … had made us like ill-taught piano students; we play our songs, but we never really hear them, because our main concern is not to make music, but but to avoid some flub that will get us in dutch." [Robert Capon, _Between Noon and Three_, p. 148]

Steven Tibbetts

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 10213
  • Big tents are for circuses.
    • View Profile
Re: On My Mother's Side - Theology?
« Reply #10 on: September 08, 2010, 11:57:18 PM »

Most translations render "son of man" in the OT as "human being" or "mortal being" especially in reference to Ezekiel being called, literally, "son of man". Why shouldn't they translate it the same way in the New?

1) Because the "Son of Man" in the New Testament is Jesus Christ, not Ezekiel.  

2) Because when "Son of Man" it is translated differently in the Old and New Testaments, Christians will not (and thus unlike the first Christians and Christians until the most recent generation) see this particular, key connection of himself with the Prophet.

3) Because the Hebrew and Greek words are not "human being" or "mortal being" -- they are "Son of Man."   Why mistranslate the Bible and make it harder to understand it on it's terms?

Or, as Mike wrote to begin this topic:

I'm thinking it misses the mark regarding exactly Who died on the cross? and Who rose on the third day?  


spt+
« Last Edit: September 09, 2010, 12:00:21 AM by The Rev. Steven P. Tibbetts, STS »
The Rev. Steven Paul Tibbetts, STS
Pastor Zip's Blog

G.Edward

  • Guest
Re: On My Mother's Side - Theology?
« Reply #11 on: September 12, 2010, 01:32:21 AM »
Will you stop making so much sense?  Your really making life difficult for all the revisionists out there!   ;D