Luke 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
Galatians 3:26 for ye are all sons of God through the faith in Christ Jesus,
>>She did not conceive and give birth to the Holy Spirit, who came over her. And she did not conceive and give birth to the Most High, who overshadowed her.<<
Colossians 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
>>Mary can rightly be called the mother of God because Jesus is God,<<
So why didn't the Holy Spirit inspire the writers to call her "mother of God"?
Acts 1:14 - These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren.
>>Yet they are distinct in their relations with one another.<<
So you can separate the nature of God but not the nature of Jesus the man?
You say you are looking for answers but I'm sensing you looking more to re-inforce prior beliefs.
Question (Q): So why didn’t the Holy Spirit inspire the writers to call her “mother of God”?
Response (R): Throughout the Gospels, the writers used the term Jesus when referring to Him. Jesus went, Jesus said, Jesus prayed, etc. In the same way, the writers referred to Mary as the mother of Jesus.
Q: So you can separate the nature of God but not the nature of Jesus the man?
R: This is the central mystery of our faith. How there is one God but three separate and distinct persons, each of whom is God, whole and entire. Are you not doing the reverse, separating the nature of Jesus but not of God?
Q: You say you are looking for answers but I’m sensing you looking more to re-inforce prior beliefs.
R: What I am looking for is an understanding of how someone can hold that Mary is not the mother of God. Admittedly, it has reinforced my beliefs.
It appears that the Nestorian doctrine is at play, but I can’t figure out how, with Jesus being God whole and entire, it can be said that Mary is the mother of the Son of God without also saying that Mary is the mother of God.
Maybe an answer to the following would help.
Matthew says that the angel of the Lord told Mary that she will give birth to Jesus because he will save his people from sin. This took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel” (which means “God with us”).
Luke tells us that the angel Gabriel told Mary that she will conceive and give birth to a son who will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High and will be called the Son of God.
Does this mean we can say that Mary is:
the mother of the one who will save his people from sin?
the mother of Immanuel (God with us)?
the mother of the Son of the Most High?
the mother of the Son of God?
If not, why not?
That's what they're saying......