I can only repeat the previous explanation: When Elizabeth was speaking and when Luke recorded it, they chose the word that is a direct reference to God according to the language in use. No different than when I call Mary Mother of God today. If you can infer that God in Elizabeth’s speech is the Christ, you should as easily infer that God in my speech is the Christ.
“I can only repeat the previous explanation:”
You have fallen into a common problem with Biblical language. Just because you see a word, does not mean it is identical to when the word is used in another instance. I see this problem with people from all different denominations, and especially the cults like mormonism.
“When Elizabeth was speaking and when Luke recorded it, they chose the word that is a direct reference to God according to the language in use.”
This is partly true. Unfortunately, it is a logical fallacy to substitute a partial truth for whole truth. In this case, the Greek word “lord” had many meanings. The two we are discussing are:
It was used to refer to Messiah.
It was used as a substitute word to avoid writing or saying Yahweh.
Which is it here? Only the context can tell you that. The context is God’s announcement that Mary would bear Messiah - and the identical recognition by Elizabeth that Mary was chosen to bear Messiah.
“No different than when I call Mary Mother of God today.”
You have two Biblical choices in this regard, according to the passage:
1. Call Him Messiah.
2. Call Him Yahweh.
The first is correct. The second is false.
Here you slip into the same logical fallacy. All of Jesus is God, but not all of God is Jesus in human form.
For this reason, the Bible never ascribes the title “Mother of God” to Mary. Ever. Mary was the mother of Jesus, who was Elizabeth’s Lord (Messiah), since He was God.
Here I will note that MARY had no trouble in this passage differentiating between Messiah and God. In verse 47, Mary, under inspiration of Scripture refers to GOD using Deos and not kurios.
It would seem that if Mary can differentiate between Messiah and God in the same passage, then we can as well.
“If you can infer that God in Elizabeth’s speech is the Christ,”
You do not need to infer what the Scripture says in language, context, Jewish culture, etc. The Angel and Elizabeth both refer to Messiah. Mary refers to God (v. 47 - Deos)
Neither Mary, nor Elizabeth knew Jesus was eternally God. They were all looking for a human champion, as promised to Israel.
“you should as easily infer that God in my speech is the Christ.”
I am left to infer that despite the passage differentiating between Messiah and God, you (apparently) prefer the later (much later) pagan idea read back into Scripture of Mary as a demigod who birthed a god.
Best.