I am currently in therapy from that thread, so I try not to think much about it!
I don't remember who called you a Nestorian, Redgolum. That was a 14,000 plus thread, so many things were said there! I imagine, though, that you believe that Mary was the mother of the person that we call Jesus Christ (although this person pre-existed the incarnation), and you were probably misunderstood.
I believe adiaireton8 is correct in saying that Mary gave birth to a unique being - a person with two natures, one of these natures which already pre-existed. But since the person is a combination of natures (via the hypostatic union), it is more proper to call Mary the Mother of God, rather than just the Mother of Christ. The Council of Ephesus was merely clarifying who CHRIST was with this definition.
Regards
I believe adiaireton8 is correct in saying that Mary gave birth to a unique being - a person with two natures, one of these natures which already pre-existed. But since the person is a combination of natures (via the hypostatic union), it is more proper to call Mary the Mother of God, rather than just the Mother of Christ ...
So then ... why wouldn't the scriptures do so ?
Certainly there was ample opportunity for the Apostles to include such a title in their writings ...
LOL! Sorry. At the time, I think it was that I wasn't spending a lot of effort defining what I meant by "Jesus Christ preexisted everything", which is true in regards to Jesus is the second person in the Trinity, but doesn't really say what happened in the Incarnation. I was (at the time) taking the Incarnation as a common assumption, which the other RC FReeper didn't understand because it was not stated that way.
We went round and round for a few pages until we both realized that we were on the same side.