That is correct. However, the Divine nature, that which we call God, is eternal, not subject to birth. Therefore, while one can make a case for technical correctness, the title "Mother of God" is as misleading as calling King David the "Father of God" would be, and for the same reason: In Hebraic thought, which is to say Biblical thought, one's parents and ancestors are automatically in a superior place and in authority over you. It doesn't matter if you're nine or ninety, if your parents, grandparents, etc. live, they are in authority over you, and you are bound by Torah to honor and obey them.
Why do you think the Pharisees had no answer when Yeshua asked them why David called the Messiah "Lord" in Mat. 22:43-45? Because they understood that no father should call his son "lord"--rather, the son should address the father thus. Yeshua was using the Psalm to point out that the Messiah pre-existed His father David as a way of backing up His claim to be One with God.
Now, if we simply spoke of Mary being the Mother of Yeshua, God the Son, in the same way that we speak of the Messiah being David's son, there would be no problem. The problem arises when the Catholic uses the title "Mother of God" as justification for the unBiblical practice of going to her with their requests instead of going to God: "If your mother asked you do do something, wouldn't you do it?"
Yes, but I'm not also my mother's Creator and God. And even so, I would be greatly insulted if my friends, whom I loved dearly and whom I had said to ask me for anything, anytime went instead to my mother to try to get her to pressure me into something instead of coming to me.
Miryam bat Heli is God's daughter, not His mother. She walks in obedience to Him, not He to her. After all, she herself called herself God's handmaiden (Gr. doute, literally, His slave; Luke 1:38)--one is not a slave to one's son.
Look, you are taking the word out of context. Out of context, you have a point, but we (Orthodox and Catholics) do not see our faith out of context, but in context of the whole life of the Church. Within that context, no one believes that God the Word did not exist. Mary gave birth to a Person who is God even though He is also man. To say that she gave birth to man Jesus is just plain not true.
What was born was holy, as the angel said. The impossible became possible. The pre-existing and eternal God took on Mary's humanity, and became man, was carried for nine months in her womb and was born of a woman as a human Child.
Did you ever finish your book?
[...]
Why do you think the Pharisees had no answer when Yeshua asked them why David called the Messiah "Lord" in Mat. 22:43-45? Because they understood that no father should call his son "lord"--rather, the son should address the father thus. Yeshua was using the Psalm to point out that the Messiah pre-existed His father David as a way of backing up His claim to be One with God.
The scripture tells us that Mary is called "the mother of our Lord". You tell us she is not to be called "Mother of God", but the above logic would likewise prohibit the former title.
The problem arises when the Catholic uses the title "Mother of God" as justification for the unBiblical practice of going to her with their requests instead of going to God: "If your mother asked you do do something, wouldn't you do it?"
I never heard of this "justification". The justification I am familiar with is the Marriage at Cana story.