Mary

[Rick Otto]

PaladinValer; One was not a yes-no question.

Repeat it, I'll re-answer it.

Yes or no: Was Jesus God in her womb?

I thought you were the expert at implications!
Of course I do.

Answer the questions please. Do you know what an Incarnation is? Do you know what the word means?

I already answered that:
Yes, I do, but surely not in the religiously affected way in which you do!
Here, I'll even answer it again for you, since you like to repeat yourself so much:
Yes, I do, but surely not in the religiously affected way in which you do!

Which none is provided, conveniently (and unsurprisingly) enough.

None is needed. It isn't a problem with interpreting scripture, it is a problem dispensing with Hebephrenic delusions of grandeur, the coin of which the other side is Paranoid delusions of Heresy.

Compared to the others, how many times have used the word "heresy," excluding this one time?

More like Ninety-twelve, certainly not as many as Eleventy-seven.
You'd have to take my word on it, so why bother pretending you're willin' to?

And I don't see anyone choking on it, nor do I see anyone posting nearly as much negative sarcasm as I see you doing.

Polish that gold chain on your avatar, & look at your reflection, you're face is turnin' blue.
ALL sarcasm is negative. It is humorous criticism of absurdity. You should be very used to that. Sarcasm is far more friendly than pompous condescension & sanctimony.

No, we just go by the facts.

Inflatable facts.

I grade papers. That was an extremely indirect statement.

Oi! I survived more than a few "career" teachers myself.

In other words, it sounds like you wish to go around believing in your own self-conceived ideas of what you think we believe instead of actually learning what we truly do believe.

It only sounds that way, because you have your accusitive fingers in your ears.

Dense is not answering a few, simple questions.

Dense is thinking you corner a street-wise Christian with Denominational over-simplifications.

You do implicitly.

Person A: "I believe Jesus is both human and Divine"
Person B: "Great! Glad to know you recognize St. Mary the Theotokos as the Mother of God"
Person A: "I don't believe that"
Person B: "Then you don't believe Jesus is Divine"
Person A: "I just told you I do"
Person B: "You say you do but in practice you don't, which makes your statement void. If you say St. Mary the Theotokos isn't the Mother of God, then that says that Jesus was not God in the womb."

Simple as that.

You haven't given 1 iota of a reason for the implication, you have simply re-iterated it in anecdotal form.
I'm praying for your students.

Respectful? Like refusing to answer simple questions? Like the language you use in this post?

YES! Exactly like that. Refusing to be manipulated & calling a spade, a spade. Take a lesson, "teacher"!

Intelligent? You refuse to use simple theological terms. That is unintelligent.

You mean "Theotokos"? You deem that pseodo-intellectual greek monstrosity of a word simple?

Take the log out of your eye please.

I did. That's how I can see what you're shoving toward my throat is a camel, not a "simple theological term".

Really respectful! I'll use this example when I go over hypocricy with my catechumen students.

Well, go easy on 'em. I can see you require a lot more respect than you earn.

Why don't you practice what you preach?

If you would remove your blind loyalty glasses from your religion glazed eyes,you would see clearly that I do.

Where's Oblio?! This guy needs 50CCs of Scotch, STAT!

 

[SeraphimSarov]

You mean by partying with religious lawyers?

My friend, this is a theological forum. We are debating theology. And we are not theological relativists. There is a distinct truth, and we are going to argue for it. You can disagree all you want, but we're not being legalistic. Many people have been martyred for what you seem to consider minute details.

.

Yeah, I don't waste my intelleigence on what can be easily dismissed with relevant scripture.

Funny, I'm starting to feel the same way.

You're funny. I never play the "H Card", but I do like to make people who throw it at me, choke on it.

Still breathing quite easily, my friend. The Church hasn't choked on the "h card" in 2000 years; no offense, but you certainly aren't going to accomplish that. One need not know fine points of theology to know Christ, but those fine points of theology exist, and there is a right and wrong to them.

That statement was absolutely direct. It was in my own words & it stated explicitly what the person who said it to me (not "we") believed. You already said what you believe - Mary is the mother of God, and I already told what is wrong with that.

And we've told you what's wrong with your point of view. Point please?

You're trippin', now. I never denied His divinity, His humanity, or tried to define them as somehow resident but not united. You realy have to getover your religious education. It's getting in the way of your ability to have a respectful & intelligent conversation.

I've never taken any religious classes. Except catechism many years ago for my first communion in the Roman church, which talked about none of this stuff. We actually spent most of our time reading the Bible - imagine that.

Like I told you 2 or 3 times now, I deny neither, nor do I induldge in any sophisticated nonsense about it, or pose triumphant while slingin' the "H" word at anybody for thinkin' different. Get a grip, Pal.

There's nothing sophisticated about it. You're the one who's making a big deal out of nothing. Jesus is God incarnate as a man. Jesus was fully man and fully God. Since Mary carried God in her womb, as Jesus was fully both from conception, that makes her the mother of God - Theotokos. That does not mean she gave birth to the Trinity or that He did not exist prior to this. It's very, very simple logic. It's you who's making the fuss, not us.

 

[Rick Otto]

And we've told you what's wrong with your point of view. Point please?

My point was to explain to Pal that it was a direct statement, and that it was directed toward one person, not the "we" he used to include himself for an excuse to pile on.

I've never taken any religious classes.

Well then good for you! But brace yourself for this news,...classes aren't the only place education happens.

There's nothing sophisticated about it.

BALONEY. It is Greekophilic, it is sported like a trophy, by people bedecked in hilariously sophisticated costumes, who wax euphoric over it.
Keep it real.

You're the one who's making a big deal out of nothing.

Pffffftttt! If it was nothing, you'd ignore it. This is a great example of "inflatable facts"-alternately maximizing & marginalizing.

Jesus is God incarnate as a man.

Never denied it, always affirmed it.

Jesus was fully man and fully God.

Never denied it, always affirmed it.

Since Mary carried God in her womb, as Jesus was fully both from conception, that makes her the mother of God - Theotokos.

No it doesn't.

That does not mean she gave birth to the Trinity or that He did not exist prior to this.

Sure it does. God is a Trinity. You just denied that (by your method of calculation).
His pre-existence denies Her giving birth to His divinity(by any method of calculation).
You have two feet & just shot 'em both.

It's very, very simple logic. It's you who's making the fuss, not us.

By this time, it would be absurd for either of us to deny we're fussin'.
I tried to make it fun, but it looks like it's against your religion.(to do that)

 

[SeraphimSarov]

BALONEY. It is Greekophilic, it is sported like a trophy, by people bedecked in hilariously sophisticated costumes, who wax euphoric over it.
Keep it real.

Little kids at my church say the word "Theotokos" all the time. They know it's Greek. They know what it means. Nothing inherently more sophisticated about Orthodox children, is there? Give me a break.

Sure it does. God is a Trinity. You just denied that.
His pre-existence denies Her giving birth to His divinity.
You have two feet & just shot 'em both.

I denied the Trinity, eh? Wow, I can't believe it - nobody in 1500 years ever figured out that calling Mary the Theotokos is actually denying the Trinity until you did just now! Once again, give me a break.

And how did Mary not give birth to Christ in His divinity? Was He not God in her womb? And what I am trying to tell you, which you can't seem to understand, is that Christ's divinity did not originate with Mary. She is NOT God. Once again, you are making this FAR more complicated than it has to be.

At any rate, my two feet are intact. I would like you to outline what your theory is on the Incarnation since I don't feel like I'm getting through to you at all. You'd rather accuse me of denying the Trinity when Orthodoxy has been defending the Triune God for thousands of years.

By this time, it would be absurd for either of us to deny we're fussin'.
I tried to make it fun, but it looks like it's against your religion.(to do that)

If this discussion is going to cause you to harbor negative feelings toward me, I'd rather just stop. I apparently disagree with much of your theology, but that does not stop me from enjoying some of your more humorous posts. I will never cease to defend Orthodoxy, but there is a point where there is no longer any point. If that makes any sense.

 

[PaladinValer]

Repeat it, I'll re-answer it.

You never answered it in the first place.

I asked: And what are Jesus' natures?

I thought you were the expert at implications!

You gave no such implication.

Of course I do.

And who gave birth to Him?

I already answered that:

Yes, I do, but surely not in the religiously affected way in which you do!
Here, I'll even answer it again for you, since you like to repeat yourself so much:
Yes, I do, but surely not in the religiously affected way in which you do!

Last time I'll ask these questions:

Do you know what the Incarnation is?

Do you know what the word means?

And here's a new one: Can you please define Incarnation?

None is needed.

It is needed.

't a problem with interpreting scripture,

That is exactly what the problem is!

it is a problem dispensing with Hebephrenic delusions of grandeur, the coin of which the other side is Paranoid delusions of Heresy.

Ever thought that you just might possible be *gasp* wrong?!

More like Ninety-twelve, certainly not as many as Eleventy-seven.
You'd have to take my word on it, so why bother pretending you're willin' to?

No, I want you to prove your assertion or to retract, which is a part of the rules here. Either offer proof or retract.

Polish that gold chain on your avatar, & look at your reflection, you're face is turnin' blue.

Your clairvouyant powers need glasses.

ALL sarcasm is negative. It is humorous criticism of absurdity. You should be very used to that. Sarcasm is far more friendly than pompous condescension & sanctimony.

And if you note a person who doesn't care for it, do you act like a Christian should and end it or do you act in a non-Christlike way and continue it?

Inflatable facts.

No, logically or historically proven facts.

Oi! I survived more than a few "career" teachers myself.

Then you should know how to give a direct statement.

It only sounds that way, because you have your accusitive fingers in your ears.

I'll ask you again:

"Why don't you, instead of beating around the bush, explain in your own words what you think we believe, and perhaps we can show you how either 1) we are right or, if the case may be, 2) you're arguing a Straw Man [and WDBT]."

Dense is thinking you corner a street-wise Christian with Denominational over-simplifications.

Dense is not answering a simple question meant for dialogue.

You haven't given 1 iota of a reason for the implication, you have simply re-iterated it in anecdotal form.
I'm praying for your students.

I'm simply summing up this debate simply, which is what you seemed to want.

And my students wouldn't need it.

You mean "Theotokos"? You deem that pseodo-intellectual greek monstrosity of a word simple?

Instead of "playing dumb," why not ask what a word means? Very simple.

I did. That's how I can see what you're shoving toward my throat is a camel, not a "simple theological term".

Theotokos is no more difficult than archaeology. Middle schoolers get the word.

Well, go easy on 'em. I can see you require a lot more respect than you earn.

My students are disciplined.

If you would remove your blind loyalty glasses from your religion glazed eyes,you would see clearly that I do.

Actions prove otherwise.

My friend, this is a theological forum. We are debating theology. And we are not theological relativists. There is a distinct truth, and we are going to argue for it. You can disagree all you want, but we're not being legalistic. Many people have been martyred for what you seem to consider minute details.

Exactly.

I might also add that, since this is a theological debate, you're going to end up hearing theological jargon. If you (speaking generally, not specifically to you, KjellBjarne!) don't know what a word means, just ask.

I've never taken any religious classes. Except catechism many years ago for my first communion in the Roman church, which talked about none of this stuff. We actually spent most of our time reading the Bible - imagine that.

I must say, you're really doing an excellent job!

There's nothing sophisticated about it. You're the one who's making a big deal out of nothing. Jesus is God incarnate as a man. Jesus was fully man and fully God. Since Mary carried God in her womb, as Jesus was fully both from conception, that makes her the mother of God - Theotokos. That does not mean she gave birth to the Trinity or that He did not exist prior to this. It's very, very simple logic. It's you who's making the fuss, not us.

 

[Rick Otto]

KjellBjarne;Little kids at my church say the word "Theotokos" all the time. They know it's Greek. They know what it means. Nothing inherently more sophisticated about Orthodox children, is there? Give me a break.

You need a break? Your church is typical?
I'll take one of those breaks, right here.

I denied the Trinity, eh? Wow, I can't believe it - nobody in 1500 years ever figured out that calling Mary the Theotokos is actually denying the Trinity until you did just now! Once again, give me a break.

If you had been paying attention instead of stalking my response,you'd notice I DID give you a break. I said "by your method of calculation"

And how did Mary not give birth to Christ in His divinity?

You're re-phrasing to obfuscate. Homey don't play dat.

Was He not God in her womb?

WHAT? You can't read my posts? I've answered that a half dozen times now, & YOU're beggin' for a break???!

And what I am trying to tell you, which you can't seem to understand, is that Christ's divinity did not originate with Mary.

Why would you try to tell me what I'm trying to tell you?

She is NOT God.

Then act like it.

Once again, you are making this FAR more complicated than it has to be.

I didn't conjure up "Theotokos"

At any rate, my two feet are intact.

And bleeding.

I would like you to outline what your theory is on the Incarnation since I don't feel like I'm getting through to you at all.

"Getting through" obviously means "convincing", because you're fishing for bones to contend with, or you're too addicted to sophistication to grasp all that I'm saying is Mary did not reproduce God, rather she birthed His flesh.
To say she birthed God is an oversimplification feeds religious affection, rather than illustrate spiritual reality.

You'd rather accuse me of denying the Trinity when Orthodoxy has been defending the Triune God for thousands of years.

Why not? You guys want to repeatedly accuse me of denying the divinity or humanity of Jesus! Can't take what you dish out?

If this discussion is going to cause you to harbor negative feelings toward me, I'd rather just stop. I apparently disagree with much of your theology, but that does not stop me from enjoying some of your more humorous posts. I will never cease to defend Orthodoxy, but there is a point where there is no longer any point. If that makes any sense.

Perfect sense, finaly! I knew ya had it in ya!
I never have a problem with agreeing to disagree.
Now, buy me a beer & tell me what we're gonna do about all these people who couldn't give a wit, & would rather waste their time on sports!

 

[Rick Otto]

PaladinValer;You never answered it in the first place.
I asked: And what are Jesus' natures?

Sure I did, when I affirmed both His divinity & His humanity, plus the fact they are both united in Him.

And who gave birth to Him?

No one birthed His divinity. Mary birthed His humanity.
His divinity pre-existed, his flesh did not.

Last time I'll ask these questions:
Do you know what the Incarnation is?

Yes. Last time I'll answer it.

Do you know what the word means?

Yes.

And here's a new one: Can you please define Incarnation?

Not for you. it would be a waste of time.

It is needed.

What you're fishing for is a reason to believe Mary is God's mother. I already told you why she isn't. You can't refute my answer, so you try to get me to restate it in a way you think you can. It is a fool's errand, like say invading Iraq.

Ever thought that you just might possible be *gasp* wrong?!

You flatter yourself.

No, I want you to prove your assertion or to retract, which is a part of the rules here. Either offer proof or retract.

I haven't disabled my "Find all posts by~" function.
Do your own dirty work. Besides, there is evidence enough in this very thread.

Your clairvouyant powers need glasses.

Your sarcasm needs regular workouts and dietary supplements.

And if you note a person who doesn't care for it, do you act like a Christian should and end it or do you act in a non-Christlike way and continue it?

Not caring for it and condemning it are two different things. Try modeling the charity you require of me.

No, logically or historically proven facts.

It isn't about them being proven or unproven, it's about the way you alternately charactize them as important or unimportant, as serves your PR needs of the moment.

Then you should know how to give a direct statement.

I do. I did. You should learn how to recognize them.

I'll ask you again:
"Why don't you, instead of beating around the bush, explain in your own words what you think we believe, and perhaps we can show you how either 1) we are right or, if the case may be, 2) you're arguing a Straw Man [and WDBT]."

And I'll answer again:
You already said what you believe - Mary is the mother of God, and I already told what is wrong with that.

Dense is not answering a simple question meant for dialogue.

Pal, you're idea of dialogue is all one-sided.

I'm simply summing up this debate simply, which is what you seemed to want.

I don't want nothin'. I'm happy!
But your summation doesn't include any reason for your conclusion, it only re-iterates it in anecdotal form.
You're conclusion is what is wanting.

And my students wouldn't need it.

In your humble opinion! (lol)
I'll let them be the judge of that!

Instead of "playing dumb," why not ask what a word means? Very simple.

"Playing dumb" is pretending you & I both don't already know & agree what that means. Deal with our disagreement over the validity of the definition, stop obsessing with the already agreed upon definition.

Theotokos is no more difficult than archaeology. Middle schoolers get the word.

Whatever. It is beside the point. You are too easily distracted by side issues.

My students are disciplined.

I'm sure they are! It would take a lot of self discipline for me to to have to sit and listen to you for more than 5 minutes.

Exactly.

Exactly the inflatable fact: "It is no big deal" in one post, and "Many have been martyred (for it)" in the next post.

I might also add that, since this is a theological debate, you're going to end up hearing theological jargon. If you (speaking generally, not specifically to you, KjellBjarne!) don't know what a word means, just ask.

Patronizing condescension. (answering "generaly", not for KjellBjarne!)
If you can't tell what you're own baloney smells like, just ask!

 

[Oblio]

Well, if the Greek is to complex for you Rick or offends your Ellenophobia, how about this:

ღვთისმშობელი Ghvtismshobeli
Богородица Bogoroditsa
Աստվածամայր Astvatzamayr

 

[Rick Otto]

It isn't so much the Greek, Obie, it is the pretension of genius that accompanies it.
The RCs do it with Latin.
It all amounts to forming an intellectual clique to 'lord it over' a laity.
Don't bother protesting that you're not clergy.
It is the same with racist people of color who play the racism card, & then turn around and be racist towards their darker cousins.
The defacto divisions always outnumber & outdistance the acknowleged ones.

 

[Oblio]

It all amounts to forming an intellectual clique to 'lord it over' a laity.

Spoken by someone with no experience in the Orthodox Church.

Don't bother protesting that you're not clergy.

Actually I am a tonsured member of the minor clergy, sort of the Cub Scouts of Orthodox hierarchy

 

[Rick Otto]

Oblio;Spoken by someone with no experience in the Orthodox Church.

So what? I have plenty of experience of political & religious oppression. I don't have to have been a Nazi to say authoritatively that Hitler was wrong.

tually I am a tonsured member of the minor clergy, sort of the Cub Scouts of Orthodox hierarchy.

My tonsures kept getting infected, so I had them surgicaly removed as a child.

 

[Oblio]

I don't have to have been a Nazi to say authoritatively that Hitler was wrong.

But you have to have factual knowledge, something you have yet to demonstrate possesion of WRT EO praxis and belief.

 

[PaladinValer]

You need a break? Your church is typical?

I'd say the Eastern Orthodox Church has typical theology.

I'll take one of those breaks, right here.

Nope.

If you had been paying attention instead of stalking my response,you'd notice I DID give you a break. I said "by your method of calculation"

Since a rejection of the Trinity is anathema in his church and therefore instand self-excommunication, I highly doubt my EO friend has, in fact, done so.

You're re-phrasing to obfuscate. Homey don't play dat.

He asked a vital, honest question. Why do you not answer simple questions?

WHAT? You can't read my posts? I've answered that a half dozen times now, & YOU're beggin' for a break???!

Perhaps it is because your denial of St. Mary as Theotokos contradicts your supposed statement.

p
~p
Therefore, invalid argument.

Which is it?

Why would you try to tell me what I'm trying to tell you?

Perhaps it is because, as I tried to explain to you earlier, your ideas of what we believe are incorrect. Actually, cancel the "perhaps;" that's the actual reason.

Then act like it.

He does more than you.

I didn't conjure up "Theotokos"

At 21, he's knowledgeful and intelligent enough to learn what words mean instead of making a big deal out of not initially knowing.

And bleeding.

If they are, at least it is holy blood of martyrdom, considering this thread.

"Getting through" obviously means "convincing", because you're fishing for bones to contend with, or you're too addicted to sophistication to grasp all that I'm saying is Mary did not reproduce God, rather she birthed His flesh.

Illogical. You cannot separate Christ.

To say she birthed God is an oversimplification feeds religious affection, rather than illustrate spiritual reality.

No, its bloody truth. Otherwise you have two Jesuses instead of one: the Divine Jesus and the Human Jesus. There aren't two, just one.

If a woman gives birth to a baby, she gives birth to the whole person, body and soul. Same thing with Jesus: unless there are two Jesuses, then she gave birth to the whole Jesus: Man and God. To say that she didn't give birth to His Divinity means that only Jesus the Man was in her womb. That's Nestorianism.

Why not? You guys want to repeatedly accuse me of denying the divinity or humanity of Jesus! Can't take what you dish out?

Because you are.

Sure I did, when I affirmed both His divinity & His humanity, plus the fact they are both united in Him.

Where they united in the womb? In other words, was Jesus "whole" in the womb?

No one birthed His divinity. Mary birthed His humanity.
His divinity pre-existed, his flesh did not.

Then you deny the Incarnation, which is a rejection of the Nicene Creed.

Yes. Last time I'll answer it.

Yes.

yet...

Not for you. it would be a waste of time.

No, because you don't believe in it. That's why.

What you're fishing for is a reason to believe Mary is God's mother. I already told you why she isn't.

All your reasons are illogical because you commit the Fallacy of Exclusion: you leave out the doctrine of the Incarnation.

You can't refute my answer,

Incarnation. Your argument is thusly refuted irrevocably.

You flatter yourself.

I haven't the ego possible for that feat.

I haven't disabled my "Find all posts by~" function.
Do your own dirty work. Besides, there is evidence enough in this very thread.

I asked you this: "Compared to the others, how many times have I used the word "heresy," excluding this one time?"

Why should I look in your's? You accused me, now find proof or retract.

Not caring for it and condemning it are two different things. Try modeling the charity you require of me.

You do care or otherwise you would have stop debating in this thread long ago.

It isn't about them being proven or unproven, it's about the way you alternately charactize them as important or unimportant, as serves your PR needs of the moment.

Jesus' Divinity is important, I'd daresay.

And I'll answer again:
You already said what you believe - Mary is the mother of God, and I already told what is wrong with that.

Its a Straw Man.

Pal, you're idea of dialogue is all one-sided.

Its completely logical.

J -> (G ^ H) (if you are Jesus, you are God and Human)
M -> J (if you are St. Mary, you gave birth to Jesus)
Therefore, M -> (G ^ H) (if you are St. Mary, you gave birth to God and Human.

That's called the Rule of Hypothetical Syllogism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothetical_syllogism

I don't want nothin'. I'm happy!
But your summation doesn't include any reason for your conclusion, it only re-iterates it in anecdotal form.
You're conclusion is what is wanting.

My logic, as proven above, is sound.

In your humble opinion! (lol)
I'll let them be the judge of that!

That my students wouldn't need me to sum things up and make it simple for them? No; they do very well actually.

"Playing dumb" is pretending you & I both don't already know & agree what that means.

Or moaning about "complex" words even though you know what they mean?

Deal with our disagreement over the validity of the definition, stop obsessing with the already agreed upon definition.

You never agreed with it.

Whatever. It is beside the point. You are too easily distracted by side issues.

Then stop moaning about the use of "complex words."

I'm sure they are! It would take a lot of self discipline for me to to have to sit and listen to you for more than 5 minutes.

No, it is because if they gave me attitude, that'd be marks off their participation grade, which is worth a whopping 10% of the final grade.

Well, if the Greek is to complex for you Rick or offends your Ellenophobia, how about this:

ღვთისმშობელი Ghvtismshobeli
Богородица Bogoroditsa
Աստվածամայր Astvatzamayr

**raises hand**

Theotokos
Theotokos
Theotokos

Lesson learned: Google (and wikipedia) is our friend

 

[Rick Otto]

But you have to have factual knowledge, something you have yet to demonstrate possesion of WRT EO praxis and belief.

you have provided it ad nauseum.

 

[Yeznik]

So what? I have plenty of experience of political & religious oppression. I don't have to have been a Nazi to say authoritatively that Hitler was wrong.

My tonsures kept getting infected, so I had them surgicaly removed as a child.

Well let share a part of my life here,

I am a white man, who lived with a black family for a while. So, I know every little innuendo, that black people call or name each other.

So what struck me the most is that some black people treated me as a cracker who used to own one of their relatives, until they found out that I wasn't really "white", being that I'm Armenian.

So what does this mean, your experience of political and religious oppression, has nothing to do with anyone from any orthodox church.

On the contrary if I was a person of any color living in the U.S.A I would probably hate Protestantism, because under the Protestant flag, people who weren't Protestant were hung, like the blacks, beaten and treated like animals, like the Irish Catholics, made to build railroads by enslavement, like the Chinese.

 

[Fireinfolding]

BALONEY. It is Greekophilic, it is sported like a trophy, by people bedecked in hilariously sophisticated costumes, who wax euphoric over it.
Keep it real.

Can I borrow more then a few words from your posts (for my collection) this being one of them?

 

[Oblio]

Just a note.
Greek is not Greek
Therefore neither is Greekophilic which is a Griffinesque construct.

The proper term would be something like Hellenophilic (with a silent H).

 

[SeraphimSarov]

Just for the record, I am not Hellenophilic. I converted from Roman Catholicism to Orthodoxy, and it pains me greatly that the bishop of Rome is in schism with the Church. I wish the Tridentine Mass were Orthodox, but it's not. Hardly something a Hellenophile would say, is it?

However, Catholics and even many Protestants use the term Theotokos. I can't understand the fuss being made about it, nor the theology used to oppose it. But I'm done beating the dead horse, and I'll be just reading the thread for the time being. Maybe Oblio or PV can make the case better than I have done.

 

[Apollo Celestio]

I say ditch it for all the confusion it causes. I guess I can say that Mary the human gave birth to the flesh that contained God.(This wording will get me ripped apart, I know it..) She didn't bring him into exsistence.

The veneration comment was sarcasm btw.

 

[Kristos]

I'm a WASP and I don't find it confusing at all.