[Arthur McGowan]

I’m not insinuating that at all. I am insinuating only what I actually said: Certain opinions or beliefs cannot be believed by people of normal intelligence, and among those are the notions that Mary is the mother of the Trinity, or mother of God the Father.

Thus, the charge that Catholics DO believe those idiotic propositions is clearly preposterous, and is rooted, not in honest theological reasoning, but in malice.

The title “Mother of God” means that Mary, by virtue of her being the mother of Jesus, and by virtue of the fact that Jesus is one divine Person, is the mother of God the Son, the Second Person of the Trinity, the Eternal Word. The title has never meant anything else.

Those who deny Mary the title “Mother of God” necessarily deny that Jesus Christ is one divine Person, the Son, the Second Person of the Trinity. They will say, “Mary is the mother of Jesus, but not the mother of God.” And if you let them talk a little while, sure enough, they start digging the hole deeper and deeper, talking about Jesus and God the Son as two distinct persons or two distinct beings. They have done so many times in history, and here on FR.

[MHGinTN]

Did The Son exist before His incarnation? ... Try to step out of magic thinking and be honest with your response. Say 'yes, The Son as a person in the Triune God has always existed, as John 1 testifies under Holy Spirit inspiration.'

Now in human terms being the mother of someone means that the someone came into existence in that mother's body. Jesus The Son has always been with God and Is God, so He did not come into existence in Mary's body, but His physical body did. And ya know what, Scriptures tell us that for a season He made Himself a little lower than the Angels, to be our Savior.

Mary could not be the one in whom even a part of the Godhead came into existence, because God exists before Mary. Mary therefore is not the mother of God, since God pre-exists mary, but she is the Mother of the physical body God The Son of The Almighty Father occupied. Of course, you nor I can say precisely when The Son began to occupy that gestating body, but it had to be pretty early since the six months old nane in Elizabeth's body recognized His Lord's Presence.

Now ask yourself if the body Jesus now occupies had a mother. If you recognize that God made The Son new, in a glorified body, then the answer is that the current body Jesus occupies did not have a mother to gestate in.

[Rashputin]

". . .sure enough, they start digging the hole deeper and deeper,. . ."

You got that right, out of the frying pan and into the fire. They do the same on several other subjects.

[metmom]

The title "Mother of God" means that Mary, by virtue of her being the mother of Jesus, and by virtue of the fact that Jesus is one divine Person, is the mother of God the Son, the Second Person of the Trinity, the Eternal Word. The title has never meant anything else.

Those who deny Mary the title "Mother of God" necessarily deny that Jesus Christ is one divine Person, the Son, the Second Person of the Trinity. They will say, "Mary is the mother of Jesus, but not the mother of God." And if you let them talk a little while, sure enough, they start digging the hole deeper and deeper, talking about Jesus and God the Son as two distinct persons or two distinct beings. They have done so many times in history, and here on FR.

Have you put the Holy Spirit on notice about His short comings in inspiring Scripture?

Are you going to accuse Him of heresy as well?

[Elsie]

...Certain opinions or beliefs cannot be believed by people of normal intelligence,...

Thank GOD for this!

[Elsie]

Those who deny Mary the title “Mother of God” necessarily deny that Jesus Christ is one divine Person...

This is NOT logic; but mere assertion of a concept unproven.