[Alex to FK:] "Mother of Christ is fine. Mother of God is more precise, that is all. We do not object to the first, but you object to the second."
Joe: "This is an example of why, after 8000 posts later, some people just refuse to be swayed or see common sense, despite being given Bible verses that make this all crystal clear and not worth arguing over.......... Apparently, "Mother of God" is wrong because Catholics call Mary the Mother of God, so some feel they must argue against it for a minimum of 5000 posts, "
Alex, perhaps you did not see my earlier posting on this issue, but your description does not fit me. Further, I don't think it fits the other Protestants' comments toward the reasons given or implied above. Earlier on this thread, I made it pretty clear that I did not have a problem with Theotokos, AS LONG AS it accompanied an explanation. Among two Apostolic speakers, perhaps an explanation is unnecessary. However, to anyone not familiar with how the term is used, it could lead to a very wrong impression that you do not intend. That's all I was saying.
I also think that was what the other Protestants were saying too. I saw several posts along the lines that "mother of Christ", or "mother of Jesus", or "mother of the second person in the Trinity" were all preferable on their faces, because they stand alone better and do not need much explanation, if any. I have seen no Protestant posts denying that the baby Mary gave birth to was all God and all man.
I would like to hear an explanation that Mary is the Mother of something OTHER than God in this verse... [Luke 1:41-43]
No explanation needed, Joe. :) We understand the meaning in the same way, but we might use different terms first to express the same idea.
Anything less would not be an accurate description of who Christ is.
Regards
Good.