"The Son (Logos) is distinguished from the Father not for being different or subordinate to Him, but for being begotten of Him."
"Our Lord Jesus Christ prayed to the Father in strict obedience to Him in His human nature."
"When it comes to Christ, it is absolutely essential to distinguish everything He says in terms of His two natures"
Isn't this the position we have been maintaining concerning Mary being the mother of Jesus' human nature that was taken on at the incarnation?
Poison? Mary did not give birth to a nature, BD. That's pretty silly, don't you think? Or do you believe women give birth to 'nature?'
Mary gave birth to a Person Who is God, the same God the Word the only-begotten of the Father before all ages, not to a new person, and not to a demigod.
I am curious, have you read them?
If you have, do you think asking the same questions already asked and authoritatively answered or adopting the same theological opinions as those previously condemned makes any sense or advances any fresh insights into Scripture?
You already know Kosta and Kolo know and abide by the first Seven Ecumenical Councils. They are as about as likely to repudiate them as Ted Kennedy is to turn down a free drink from a leggy blonde
"Isn't this the position we have been maintaining concerning Mary being the mother of Jesus' human nature that was taken on at the incarnation?"
Nope; Panagia was the mother of the Second Person of the Trinity Incarnate.
Yes, absolutely. I fully agree with all three of your statements. From having read most of the rest of the conversation, for clarity's sake, I would only add that our side would also say that even in Mary's womb, the baby was fully God and fully man. Sometimes, it seems that we need magic words to say that. :)