[Mad Dawg]

I hereby declare myself lost.

Additionally, the slope gets slippery when one attempts to hinge their identity of Jesus Christ as both human and divine nature in one person upon demands that Mary must also be of the same nature as the Son of God.

My lostness is specifically this: WHO says (much less demands) that Mary must (also) be of the same nature as the Son of God?

I'm not sure it's relevant, but in classical Ephesian/Chalcedonian Christology we say that IHS has 2 natures, human and divine, in one person. Mary is of the same nature as ONE of His TWO natures, namely the human nature.

[RnMomof7]

Mary is of the same nature as ONE of His TWO natures, namely the human nature.

But if she was sinless she had the same nature as He did.All she would have added was a body

[Cronos]

I hereby declare myself lost.

Additionally, the slope gets slippery when one attempts to hinge their identity of Jesus Christ as both human and divine nature in one person upon demands that Mary must also be of the same nature as the Son of God. My lostness is specifically this: WHO says (much less demands) that Mary must (also) be of the same nature as the Son of God?
I'm not sure it's relevant, but in classical Ephesian/Chalcedonian Christology we say that IHS has 2 natures, human and divine, in one person. Mary is of the same nature as ONE of His TWO natures, namely the human nature.

No one in the history of The Church has EVER stated, inferred, implied or even suggested that Mary was of the same Nature a Jesus who had/has 2 natures: divine and human