[Arthur McGowan]

I say: The title “Mother of God” has never meant that Mary is the mother of the eternal Triune God.

Your position is: I reject the title “Mother of God” because Mary could not be the mother of the eternal Triune God.

I explain again: The title “Mother of God” has always meant that Mary is the mother of Jesus, and because Jesus is the Second Person of the Trinity, who is God, and Mary is his mother, Mary can be properly called the “Mother of God.”

You answer: I reject the title “Mother of God” because Mary could not be the mother of the eternal Triune God.

Am I following the conversation accurately so far?

[Iscool]

I explain again: The title “Mother of God” has always meant that Mary is the mother of Jesus, and because Jesus is the Second Person of the Trinity, who is God, and Mary is his mother, Mary can be properly called the “Mother of God.”

Absolutely not...The Jesus who now sits at the right hand of God is not Mary's son...

You guys seems to think God was made in our image...

[Elsie]

... Mary can be properly called the “Mother of God.”

Did she BLEED when Jesus was born?

Her 'virginity' was intact BEFORE the birth; so...

[metmom]

I explain again: The title “Mother of God” has always meant that Mary is the mother of Jesus, and because Jesus is the Second Person of the Trinity, who is God, and Mary is his mother, Mary can be properly called the “Mother of God.”

If you mean that Mary is the mother of Jesus, then just SAY it.

There's no need to change her title, making her into something she isn't.

GOD has no mother, no beginning. Jesus did. Jesus was born. God wasn't.

If you insist that Mary is the mother of God because she's the mother of Jesus, then you are denying Jesus' humanity and falling into the error of modalism.