Calm down, everyone. The conversation was derailed by differences, and now I'm going to back up the track and put it back on track. Choo Choo. Chuga chuga chuga chuga....
First, I am curious about whether Baptists choose to support Christokos or Theotokos. Is only one a proper title, or are they both proper titles?
This is about my journey as a christian. I started out as a baptist, and later attended an anglican church congregation as well, and for the last two years I have not gone to church. Lately, I began this search to examine what denomination I want to be a part of(hence why I've been asking questions in both this and the Eastern Orthodox thread). And strange occurrences have been happening to me. You can read about them here---christianforums.com/t7709310
Now, first off, the impression I have is that Baptists support Christokos over Theotokos. As a baptist, I had always previously questioned the title "Mother Of God" and chosen "Mother Of Jesus/Christ". I conclude so far that both may be correct, since Mary is the mother of the person Jesus, who is God, who is also Christ. Yet, she is only the mother of the human nature, not the divine. And when we as Baptists, or Protestants, hear the name "Mother Of God", it comes across as if Roman Catholics and Orthodox assert the plausibility that Mary should be elevated to a higher status, as if she was the mother of the divine nature.
Giving her glory and honour that puts her at an elevated status with the divine nature of Jesus doesn't sit right with me, suggesting that the divine nature of Jesus should listen/be subject to a human-nature mother, though Roman Catholics may assert they do not worship her.
I am greatly perplexed about this man Jesus in trying to understand him as a person having two natures, before he was born, during the time of his life on Earth in the flesh, and in the present after his resurrection.
God forgive me...
Continue please.
