You have posted verses the you think say want you want per your understanding of the nature of of the man who is Jesus.
You must not have been fully awake when you wrote the above. I think what you intended to write was:
“You have posted verses that you think say what you want per your understanding of the nature of the man who is Jesus.”
My understanding of the nature of the man who is Jesus is this. God lowered Himself to become a human being in the person of Jesus Christ. And like any other human being, Jesus was made up of that which came from His mother and that which came from His Father. Like any other mother, Mary did not contribute what came from the Father. But also like any other mother, Mary was the mother of the person of Jesus, both the human nature that came from her and the divine nature that came from His Father.
This is how Scripture reveals to me that Mary is the mother of God incarnate. Not that His divinity is from her, but that she is the mother of the person who is the Word made flesh, i.e., God.
I can understand how you would disagree with the other Marian beliefs of the Catholic Church. But Mary as the mother of God incarnate is so Scriptural, that I can not grasp how it could be understood any other way. That’s why I keep referencing the infancy narratives.
Please show me how those verses could be interpreted differently. What is your understanding of the nature of the man who is Jesus? How in your mind could Mary be the mother of Jesus without being the mother of all that He was?
My fallible mind cannot in any way comprehend the full impact of the nature of Christ. I must therefore stay with what the Holy Spirit inspired to be written and not add to it or speculate. The angel Gabriel told them to name Him Jesus and the Holy Spirit inspired only the term "mother of Jesus". Neither Jesus nor the apostles taught the elevated status of Mary that the Catholics teach. In fact, she is totally ignored after Pentecost.