Byblos wrote:
Whatever it is called or who holds it, the heresy is the separation of Jesus the God from Jesus the man in any way. If nestorianism doesn't espouse that position then I see no difference whatsoever between 'Mother of Christ' and 'Mother of God', they mean exactly the same thing and, therefore, nestorianism is not only NOT a heresy, it is not a position at all.
But if nestorianism holds that Christ is somehow different than Jesus the God then it is a heresy and ought to be condemned as such.
On that basis, what is your objection?
From the Nestorian site, I see that they believe Jesus Christ of Nazareth is God. Specifically the second person of the Trinity. The Word incarnate.
I've never heard the term, "Jesus the God", so I don't even know what that means. The meaning of Christ, is Messiah, or anointed. And that's not the same meaning as God. While Jesus Christ is both Christ and God.
So, getting back to Nestorius and Nestorianism. Jac said if one won't use the term "mother of God", one has to be either Arian or Nestorian. Apparently Nestorius was neither , yet he didn't use the term. According to the Nestorian site, Nestorius didn't like the term, because (rightly or wrongly) he felt it didn't give enough emphasis on the humanity of Christ. Nestorius would've preferred a term that meant both God-bearer, and Man-bearer. Which he thought, gave equal emphasis to both natures, while not separating them in the person of Jesus Christ. Hence the term "Christotokos". Which means Christ-bearer. Which shows Christ is both human and divine, in one person.