Talk:Theotokos

Article Needs reorganization

Honestly this article should be titled Mother-of-God and the "Theotokos" article should redirect here. The word "theotokos" is not known to most non-Greek speakers and it is very confusing (not to mention - somewhat unpleasant sounding to English speakers). I am Orthodox and I did not know what this meant until just now. This is the English version of Wikipedia, and main articles should have titles in English where such exist. The term "Mother-of-God" is very well known and deep rooted in the English language and is easy to understand for international users who have English as a second language. That's what the article should be named.

Also, in the opening sentence after Theotokos in brackets the variations of this name need to be listed in all Eastern Orthodox languages. The Greek one is in no way universal and NOT used in the other liturgical languages.

Not to mention that labeling Slavic orthodox icons at the top with "Theotokos" (instead of the proper Slavic term "Bogoroditsa") could be infuriating as it implies supremacy of the Greek term over the Slavic one. Most Orthodox people in the world are Slavic so if anything, the Slavic term is way more popular and more widely understandable. Which brings me back to the above - just use the neutral and proper English term, it keeps the article from going into lots of murky areas.

~George

Theotokos can be used as person's name in English-speaking countries; so as name is part of language, is a word in this language (albeit borrowed, non-native root), it is part of English language as well. Like Peter or smth. :) BirgittaMTh (talk) 11:49, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

In need of translation

MATIA added the following, which I do not have sufficient Greek to translate. JHCC (talk) 14:29, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Greek text

Ο Ωριγένης το 230 μ.Χ. χρησιμοποίησε πρώτος το όνομα της Παρθένου Θεοτόκος. ερμηνεύοντας το κβ':23 του Δευτερονομίου, «την ήδη μεμνηστευμένην γυναίκα καλεί ούτω και επί του Ιωσήφ και της Θεοτόκου ελέχθη». Ο Ωριγένης, που κατακρίθηκε για άλλες κακοδοξίες του, δεν κατακρίθηκε γιά το όνομα Θεοτόκος, πράγμα που θα συνέβαινε, αν αυτό ήταν κάποια καινούρια προσφώνηση και οχί παλαιά.

Ο Διονύσιος ο Αλεξανδρείας το 250 μ.Χ. σε επιστολή του προς τον Παύλο τον Σαμοσατέα λέγει: «τον σαρκωθέντα εκ της Αγίας Παρθένου και Θεοτόκου Μαρίας». Ο Γρηγόριος ο Νεοκαισαρείας ο θαυματουργός το 275 (λόγος εις τον Ευαγγελισμόν) λέει: «ταύτης ουν της προφητείας την ωδήν η Αγία Θεοτόκος ανέπεμπε λέγουσα, Μεγαλύνει ή ψυχή μου τον Κύριον κτλ».

Ο Ιερός Μεθόδιος επίσκοπος Πατάρων και εκκλησιαστικός συγγραφέας (το 300-311) λέει: «Και δη λαβομένη η Θεοτόκος τον εκ του αχράντου και παναμώμου αυτής θυσιαστηρίου σαρκωθέντα ζωοποιόν και ανέκφραστον άνθρακα, ως λαβίδι...» Και αλλού: «επί τούτοις παρρησιασάμενος ο δίκαιος, και τη προτροπή είξας της διακονησαμένης Θεώ προς ανθρώπους θεομήτορος...» Και αλλού πάλι «τι προς σε φθέγξομαι, ω μήτερ παρθένε, και παρθένε μήτερ; Πατρικοίς σε ύμνοις προσφθέγξομαι, θύγατερ Δαυίδ και μήτερ του Κυρίου και Θεού Δαυίδ... ω πασών γενεών υψηλοτέρα και πάντων ορατών τε και αοράτων δημιουργημάτων τιμιωτέρα φανείσα, διά σου γέγονε Κύριος ο Θεός των δυνάμεων μεθ' ημών. Εύγε εύγε εύγε Μήτερ Θεού, και δούλη».

Ο Αλεξανδρείας Αλέξανδρος το 320, σε επιστολή προς τον Κωνσταντινουπόλεως Αλέξανδρον τον επί της Α' οικουμενικής αγίας Συνόδου, και ο Άμμων Επίσκοπος Ανδριανουπόλεως, ονόμαζαν την Παρθένο Θεοτόκο. Και ο Παμφίλου Ευσέβιος το 320 (εν βίω Κωνσταντίνου κεφ. μγ'.) λέει: «Διό δη βασιλίς η θεοσεβεστάτη (Ελένη), της Θεοτόκου την κύησιν (ήτοι την Βηθλεέμ), μνήμασι θαυμαστοίς κατεκόσμοι». Επίσης ο ίδιος ονομάζει την Παρθένο Μητέρα Θεού, λέγων «ανάγκη γαρ τον δημιουργόν των έργων αυτού κήδεσθαι, επεί δε κοσμικώ σώματι πλησιάζειν εν τε τη γη χρονίζειν έμελλε, της χρείας τούτο απαιτούσης, νέαν τινά γέννησιν εαυτού εμηχανήσατο, χωρίς γαρ τοι γάμων σύλληψις, και Αγνής παρθενίας ειλείθυια, και Θεού μήτηρ, κόρη κτλ.» (βλ. αυτόθι σ. 162).

Ο Μέγας Αθανάσιος το 330 λέει «και αυτός δε ο Άγγελος δρώμενος ομολογεί απεστάλθαι παρά του δεσπότου, ως επί Ζαχαρίου ο Γαβριήλ, και επί της Θεοτόκου Μαρίας ο αυτός ωμολόγησε». Και πάλι «σκοπός τοίνυν ούτος και χαρακτήρ της αγίας Γραφής, ως πολλάκις είπομεν, διπλήν είναι την περί του Σωτήρας επαγγελίαν εν αυτή ότι τε αεί Θεός ων και υιός εστί, λόγος ων και απαύγασμα και σοφία του Πατρός, και ότι ύστερον δι' ημάς σάρκα λαβών εκ παρθένου της Θεοτόκου Μαρίας άνθρωπος γέγονε». Και πάλι «όθεν και γενομένης της σαρκός εκ της Θεοτόκου Μαρίας, αυτός λέγεται γεγεννήσθαι ο τοις άλλοις γέννησιν εις το είναι παρέχων και ο Ιωάννης γενομένης φωνής παρά της Θεοτόκου Μαρίας εσκίρτησεν εν αγαλλιάσει». Και πάλι «πόσον αν τις είποι το καύχημα της Αγίας παρθένου, και θεοειδούς Μαρίας». Και αλλού, «Διό και παρθενομήτωρ ως Θεοτόκος η Αγία Μαρία.» (Αθανασ. λογ. γ. κατά Άρειον: τόμ. α' σελ. 563-579-583, τόμ. β' σελ. 824-875-1271 τόμ. γ' σελ. 1351 κ. εξ.).

Ο Γρηγόριος ο θεολόγος το 370, (επιστ. προς Κληδ. τόμ. α' σελ. 738) κατά Απολλιναρίου, λέει: «Ει τις ου Θεοτόκον την Μαρίαν υπολαμβάνει χωρίς εστί της Θεότητος.» Και πάλι ο ίδιος (λόγος α' περί Υιού, προς Έλληνας) «Που γαρ εν τοις σοις έγνως Θεοτόκον παρθένον;» και στον λόγο λε' «Θεοτόκον παρθένον» ονομάζει την Παναγίαν.

Ο Ιωάννης ο Χρυσόστομος το 400 (λόγ. εις την Αγίαν παρθένον τόμ. ε' σελ. 876 Εκδ. Ετόν.) λέει: «Ουδέν τοίνυν εν βίω οίον η Θεοτόκος Μαρία, περίελθε, ω άνθρωπε, πάσαν την κτίσιν τω λογισμώ, και βλέπε ει εστίν ίσον ή μείζον της Αγίας Θεοτόκου παρθένου, περινόστησον την γην, περίβλεψον την θάλασσαν, πολυπραγμόνησον τον αέρα, τους ουρανούς τη διανοία ερεύνησον, τας αοράτους πάσας δυνάμεις ενθυμήθητι, και βλέπε ει εστίν άλλο τοιούτον θαύμα εν τη κτίσει». Και πάλι ο ίδιος «Και νυν ου λείπει τω Θεώ Δεβώρα, ου λείπει τω Θεώ Ισραήλ, έχομεν γαρ και ημείς την Αγίαν Παρθένον Θεοτόκον Μαρίαν πρεσβεύουσαν υπέρ ημών, ει γαρ η τυχούσα γυνή ενίκησε, πόσω μάλλον η του Χριστού μήτηρ καταισχύνει τους εχθρούς της αληθείας;» (Λόγ. περί του χρησίμως τας προφητείας ασαφείς είναι). Και πάλι ο ίδιος: «Εάν ουν είπωσιν ότι των ουρανίων εστίν ο Μελχισεδέκ, ή άλλου τινός χωρίου, ακουσάτωσαν ότι και αυτός γόνυ κάμπτει τω Χριστώ τω σαρκωθέντι εκ της Θεοτόκου Μαρίας, λέγει γαρ ο Απόστολος κτλ.» (Ίωάν. Χρυσοστ. εις Μελχισεδέκ τόμ. στ' 296). Και πάλι «ο Θεός ουν ου μόνον έβλεπε την των Ιουδαίων ακμάζουσα ευσέβειαν, αλλά και την μετά ταύτα των πιστών ευσέβειαν προήδει ότι έμελλε προϊέναι εκ της Ιουδαίας η Αγία Θεοτόκος παρθένος, προεώρα τον χορόν των Αποστόλων, προέβλεπε τα τάγματα των ομολογητών, τας μυριάδας των Ιουδαίων των μελλόντων πιστεύειν κτλ.» (εις την δ'. ήμερ. της Κοσμοποιΐας τόμ. στ'. σελ. 475).

Ο Πρόκλος Πατριάρχης Κωνσταντινουπόλεως, μαθητής του Ιωάννου του Χρυσοστόμου, και Πατέρας της Εκκλησίας λέει: «Συνεκάλεσαν ημάς νυν ενταύθα η Αγία Θεοτόκος και παρθένος Μαρία το αμόλυντον της παρθενίας κειμήλιον, ο λογικός του δευτέρου Αδάμ παράδεισος, το εργαστήριον της ενώσεως των φύσεων, η πανήγυρις του σωτηρίου συναλλάγματος, η παστάς εν η ο λόγος ενυμφεύσατο την σάρκα, η έμψυχος της φύσεως βάτος, η παρθένος και ουρανός, η μόνη Θεού προς ανθρώπους γέφυρα, ο φρικτός της οικονομίας ιστός, εν ω αρρήτως υφάνθη ο της ενώσεως χιτών...», (εγκωμ. εις την Θεοτόκον κτλ 6).

Ο Ιερός Αυγουστίνος το 400 (λόγ. περί φύσ. και χάριτ. κεφ. λστ') λέει: «Πλην μόνης της Θεοτόκου πάντες οι λοιποί ήμαρτον , κατά το, εάν ειπωμεν ότι αμαρτίαν ουκ έχομεν, ψευδόμεθα, μόνη γαρ η Θεοτόκος πλείονα έλαβε χάριν». Ο δε Ιερός Θεοδώρητος το 436 μαρτυρεί στεντορείως ότι είναι αποστολική παράδοση και διδασκαλία να ονομάζουμε την Μαριάμ Θεοτόκον, λέγει γαρ: «των πάλαι και πρόπαλαι της ορθοδόξου πίστεως κηρύκων κατά την Αποστολικήν παράδοσιν Θεοτόκον διδαξάντων ονομάζει και πιστεύει την του Κυρίου μητέρα» (Βλέπ. Θεοδ. επιστ. Σπορακίω τόμ. δ'. σελ. 639).

Gregory of Nyssa,

"Mother of God Virgin", Mother of God is similar to the title theopator (θεοπάτωρ, sometimes translated as royal in english) which was assigned to David

Ο Γρηγόριος ο Νύσσης εις την γέννησιν του Κυρίου (Τόμ. III σελ. 460) λέγει περί της μητρός του Κυρίου η «Θεομήτωρ Παρθένος», το δε θεομήτωρ ερρήθη κατά το θεοπάτωρ, όπερ ειναι επίθετον αποδιδόμενον τω προφήτη Δαυίδ παρά των υμνογράφων και των Αρχαίων πατέρων της Εκκλησίας ένεκεν της εξ αυτού κατά σάρκα καταγωγής του Κυρίου ημών Ιησού Χριστού.

The above excerpts are from the Study for the Mother of the Lord the All-Holly Theotokos and Ever-Virgin Mary (Μελέτη περί της Μητρός του Κυρίου της Υπεραγίας Θεοτόκου και Αειπαρθένου Μαρίας) by Saint Nectarios (Άγιος Νεκτάριος).

---

And I don't have the sufficient english :) I 've added some of them in english but I could use some help. +MATIA ☎ 14:37, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

I've translated the phrase "Τελικά και ο Νεστόριος πείστηκε στη χρήση του όρου Θεοτόκος, προβάλλοντας την θέση της φαινομενικής μετάδοσης των ιδιωμάτων." into "By the end of his life, Nestorius had agreed to the title Theotokos, stating the apparent communication of the attributes (idiomata)." (now that I see it I'm not sure if it was "by the end of his life" or "finally"). +MATIA ☎ 15:52, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't really know enough Greek for this sort of translation. Regarding Nestorius, I remember our priest reading us a prayer attributed to his later days in which he repents and acknowledges Mary as Theotokos. Wesley 12:46, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

The Virgin Mary is from Northeast Africa, Ethiopia. Jesus was an African priest. Christianity is a European concept that has adopted African scrolls and writings. Information should be translated from the orgins of the people. 69.148.247.46 14:59, 3 December 2006 (UTC)Ragland

Funny, if you ask the Ethiopians they have a completely different opinion. TCC (talk) (contribs) 05:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Reductions by Csernica

Csernica has removed the English translations from the introduction. I have reinstated them. The reason for putting in the heading what the word "Theotokos" means in English is becasue this is an English encyclopedia. Using Greek alone is not enough to introduce the topic of this article. It is quite ok for something mentioned in the introduction to be discussed in further detial in subsequent paragraphs. That is exactly what a good introduction does. Also Csernica may not be aware of 'Theotokos' being translated 'Mother of God Incarnate' but that does does not mean it is never translated this way. It is. There are more people engageing in theoloigcal conversations in English than Csernica is aware of. If someone thinks it is a pecular or contentious translation they are free to look for quotes or ask others for a quoted example. Just stripping information about things you do not know from articles is not a good editorial habbit.--Just nigel 08:56, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Then add a citation. It's a very bad translation, frankly, and not at all common. (One often comes across the phrase, not as a translation of "Theotokos" but as an additional epithet.) Also, it seems absurd to insert information in the intro that's given again just a few lines down; it makes for very tiresome reading. TCC (talk) (contribs) 08:59, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Citation added as requested. I am in a cantacerous mood tonight, so in response to your "It's a very bad translation, frankly, and not at all common." I can't help myself but say you will have to take it up with the officials of the Catholic Church and Anglican communion who use it. This is an encyclopaedia for acurately describing what is beleived and spoken about 'Theotokos' not for editing to keep out things you consider bad. -- Have a good night, and ask me to be more gracious tomorrow. I'll try harder then. --Just nigel 09:51, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

The citation does not support the claim. "Mother of God incarnate" is not here being used to translate "Theotokos" -- if it is, then it's ambiguous -- but is a separate title. If you read the article, you'll find that "Mother of God" (not exclusive of further qualifications like "incarnate") has its own tradition of usage even in Greek. See, for example, any Greek Orthodox icon of the Theotokos. The inscription abbreviates «Μήτηρ Θεού», "Mother of God". See also the hymn "Axion estin" which uses both epithets. There does exist a Latin equivalent to "Theotokos" which eludes me for the moment, but it just happens that their tradition favors "Mother of God" in prayers and hymns. Show me where it's clearly being used as you claim -- preferably in an English translation of a hymn where "Theotokos" is used in the original -- and I'll believe you.

But really, the trouble with putting this in the intro is that there are significant translation issues with this word, and to just give various translations without explaining the issues is misleading. That's why the Translations section immediately follows the intro. TCC (talk) (contribs) 23:27, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

You are right this Greek word is often translated "Mother of God". I agree and wrote this into the introduction. You are also right that there are significant translation issues with the word. I agree and that too is indicated in the introduction - both through the variety of translations listed and an explicit indication that "Mother of God" while an accurate transliteration has the potential to be misleading. The deatils of these translation issues and the context in which "Mother of God" can be understood or misunderstood are then spelt out in the body of the article. It is correct Wikipedia style for the introduction to include information spelt out in greater detail in the body of the article.

You assert the quote I cited does not support the statement 'Theotokos is translated "Mother of God incarnate"'. In good faith I can offer another similar, earlier, example from the Anglican and Catholic chruch "We agree in recognising the grace and unique vocation of Mary, Mother of God Incarnate (Theotókos)" 1981. I do wonder if your assertion is infulenced by your inclination to not accept it as a valid translation. There is no ambiguity here in my mind.

You also reveal your own preferance for an English translation of a Greek hymn. This again suggests your bias. I once again point out that "there are more people engageing in theoloigcal conversations in English than Csernica is aware of." such debate or veneration may even include styles or expression that you find unaceptable - so what? It doesn't stop it needing a place in an encyclopeadia that is trying to accurately describe how 'Theotokos' is used.

Also, Csernica, when you say things like "if you read the article" i feel you are trying to patronise me. This is troubling me. I suggests we focus on what is true not on what you do or don't like or do or don't know. --Just nigel 03:03, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I never said "Mother of God" was a translation of "Theotokos", and I very much do not agree with you that it is. I said "Mother of God" has its own tradition of usage independent of "Theotokos" and that's one reason why it's not a good choice for translation, quite apart from the problems raised by its failure to preserve the sense of the original. I suggested that you read the part of the article where it explained this for no other reason than to save myself some typing. The implication in your preferred intro, that "Mother of God Incarnate" is preferable to "Mother of God" is a POV claim you may not make so baldly. It translates "Theotokos" no better than the other, for the same reasons.

On the other hand, your continued insistence that I disagree with you out of simple ignorance is more than patronizing; it's downright insulting. Please assume good faith and believe me when I say I disagree out of some actual knowledge, as I have also said elsewhere in exchanges with you.

Neither phrase is in any way a "transliteration" of "Theotokos" as you claim above.

I'm afraid your new citation is no better. It reads to me as if one is intended as a gloss of the other, not a translation. Perhaps it's you who is being affected by your bias.

It is entirely reasonable, when saying that a word from one language translates a word in another, to ask for an example of a text where the one word occurs in the original and the other in the translation, when that translation is carried out by a reliable person. "Theotokos" is a Greek word. I would therefore expect to see "Mother of God Incarnate" used in its place in a translation of a Greek text, if a valid translation it be. That's not a theological issue at all. It need not be a hymn, which I mentioned simply because Greek-language hymns containing "Theotokos" are plentiful and many are translated. Any text will do. TCC (talk) (contribs) 04:19, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Where did the phrase 'Mother of God incarnate' go? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Just nigel (talk • contribs) 12:19, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Good translation: 'birthgiver' ? If 'birth' is no verb in English, only 'to give birth'. Or, if it is, 'birthing', then - 'birther'...? Well, no good translation, was joking. Theotokos = Godbirther - ? As English sometimes uses shamelessly latin words as very own, like, vice versa and like, maybe adopt Deipara into English as well? - or, even simpler, ol' Theotokos. as word in English language. like 'poet' or 'pelagic' or 'geology' - as greek words as any. So no tranlsation, just explanation needed. 'who give birth to god (incarnate)' BirgittaMTh (talk) 11:58, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Merge with Mother of God

I was wondering if anyone could comment at Talk:Mother of God on merging that article (which was only recently created, and doesn't contain much original content) here and to Mary, mother of Jesus. Any comments would be appreciated-Andrew c 02:35, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

comments merged from Talk:Mother of God -- Pastordavid 04:08, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

This article is redundent with content found at Mary, mother of Jesus and Theotokos and Blessed Virgin Mary. I am of the theory that wikipedia should have detailed, and reliable broad articles, instead of a dozen small articles that could have been combined. This artice drags out three basic concepts and turns them into a few paragraphs. There is a lot of redundancy (I tried to reduce some). Also, there isn't a single source. I don't see what this article adds that a user couldn't find at any of the other 3 stated articles. Any existing content should be merged, andt his page restored as a redirect.-Andrew c 13:27, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I guess I am confused as to what unique information necessitated a seperate article for the Greek theological term - theotokos - and the English translation of it. At a glance I would say Merge Away. If there is a compelling reason not to, speak up please, because I just don't see it. -- Pastordavid 06:52, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

By now it has already happened, but just so you know, I too agree with the merge.--Just nigel 02:03, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your support. I figured 2 weeks (well a little less) was enough time for comment. Because this is wikipedia, all edits can easily be undone, so I felt bold enough going on with the merger after waiting a good while. -Andrew c 02:09, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

This articles references the Catholic Church enshrining "numerous Marian dogmas." In point of fact, there are only four: the Immaculate Conception, the Perpetual Virginity, the Assumption, and the Theotokos. That's it. Only two more than the Orthodox. That hardly qualifies as "numerous."

I believe there are three more. It is, of course, a matter of dogma that the Lord was born of Mary while she was yet a virgin, but I can't recall any dogma of her perpetual virginity. That she remained a virgin all her life is also a matter of Tradition, enshrined in our hymnology and the writings of the Fathers, but not (IIRC) dogma. TCC (talk) (contribs) 21:11, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

To merge these articles would be missing the entire point of Theotokos and its importance in the history of the church. Take notice of the specific role it played within the Council of Ephesus (i.e. the founding of doctrine that most of the church follows to this day). If you relate this entirely to Mary (a figure that plays a very small role within both orthodox and evangelical circles) then you're missing 99% of the debate in which this term is used. The term roots itself in Mary in an effort to preserve Jesus' purported human nature (i.e. proving that he was born of a human). At the time of the widespread debate within the church people were questioning Jesus' nature. Some, such as the Monophysites, believed in a singular nature, while others were convinced of a two-part nature. My point is this: Mary is not the source or center of this term and its usage but rather used as the proof of Jesus' human birth within the context of a much broader debate. Placing it solely within the body of her article would misconstrue and dilute its value and history. 206.114.191.254 (talk) 20:57, 15 October 2009 (UTC)refutatus

I suggest unmerging Mother of God from Theotokos, from this article dominated by an Eastern POV. Mother of God deserves it's own page or at least a disambiguation of its own because it was and still is an important doctrine of ancient Ecumenical councils of the United Church, before the Great Schism. The Theotokos article deals specifically with the Greek understanding of Theotokos, not with the common Christian "Mother of God" concept as a whole. Unmerging Mother of God from Theotokos would also benefit non-Christian readers who might be mistaking Mother goddess with Mother of God. See also: Talk:Theotokos#Rename_to_Mother_of_God/_God_bearer Nolicmahr (talk) 04:19, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Mother of Allah

I noticed that some Arab Christians used the expression Mother of Allah when talking about the Theotokos. It would be interesting to find sources on this and perhaps include it in the article. ADM (talk) 22:05, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

That's probably because "Allah" simply means "God" in Arabic. I can't say I'd consider a difference in the language used to be particularly notable. Farsight001 (talk) 00:06, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Agree. "Allah" is a literal translation of God in Arabic, so there is no conceptual difference I believe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.232.205.22 (talk) 03:45, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Embryo/Foetus of Jesus

With the development of modern embryology and neonatology, there is a debate within the pro-life movement on whether the embryo and foetus of Jesus should be proclaimed as fully divine and whether it could be venerated as such. This is an interesting theological perspective that is directly related to the Theotokos doctrine, which was promulgated at a time when people did not have the same kind of scientific knowledge about un-born, pre-born and newborn babies. ADM (talk) 10:01, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Mary's other kids

I think this should be mentioned as it is scriptural and people get in a right state over it.

family of Jesus Mat 12:46-50 Matt 13:55 -56, Luke 8:19-21, John 2:11-12, John 7:3-5, Acts 1:13-14. There are clear distinctions here about the family and disciples, Also they Recognise Jesus's family as being such. I think we need to look at the truth verses tradition even if it costs us in the end, we need to be right before God —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darthsuma (talk • contribs) 14:35, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not the place to get people "right before god". It appears you are trying to insert your own personal interpretations of biblical verses into the article. I'd ask you to review some of our policies and guidelines WP:NOR and WP:PSTS. We need to use care when adding primary sources, and in most circumstances, instead, cite scholars who hold these interpretations. Furthermore, you should take care in writing encyclopedic content. You should follow basic rules of grammar. Your addition to the article was not even a complete sentence, and has poor sentence structure. Anyway, I don't want to discourage you from editing in any way. I just want you to be familiar with our rules, and encourage you to make your contributions that much better. Finally, touching on my first point, you should review WP:NPOV. Wikipedia is not about The Truth, but instead about presenting all notable points of view, in due weight. We don't take sides, or say one view is better or truer (though we can say if one view is held by more people. however, in this case, Catholic + Orthodox adherents clearly outnumber)-Andrew c ^[talk] 15:42, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

I have a question

Why didn't you input the protestant's opinion of this article, and how these Consensus made? If someone tell the reason, I can refer on the making of Korean article. - Ellif (talk) 03:20, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Most Eastern Orthodox are not Greek

The article begins by claiming that "theotokos (Greek Θεοτόκος) is a title of Mary, mother of Jesus, used especially in Eastern Christianity". This is factually incorrect. Maybe the article means Greek Eastern Christianity? Russians, Romanians, Serbs, Bulgarians etc. do not speak Greek, they don't use Greek as their liturgical language and therefore do not call her theotokos. In Romanian her title is născătoare de Dumnezeu, bearer [forth] of God, she who gave birth to God. Her Russian title has a similar meaning. In both cases the titles use usual words combined in a usual way with no special technical meaning. There has never been a time during the last half millenium when most Eastern Orthodox spoke Greek. Imerologul Valah (talk) 14:10, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

I fail to see your point tbh. Of course the article by saying "the title" means the original Greek title and its various vernacular translations. It spends a lot of time going into the various Slavic translations. I didn't include discussion of the Romanian translation because I didn't have references on it, but clearly nobody has kept you from adding such a discussion in the appropriate place. The entire point about "the Church" is that it is a diachronous entity spanning two millennia. The important decisions regarding the terminology were made in the 5th century, and obviously both the terminology and the language of the discussion were Greek. This would still be the case today even if every single Christian for the past "half millennium" had been monolingual in Klingon. --dab (𒁳) 05:14, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Missing word (apparently)

In the final paragraph of the Iconography portion of the article, the second sentence reads: "The tradition of Luke the Evangelist being the _____ [sic] to have painted Mary is established by the 8th century." The missing word may have been "first." I do not know what the intended word was, but there is an error of a missing word(s). Torcher01 (talk) 14:55, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Noting that this was fixed some time ago. Klbrain (talk) 06:01, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Resolved

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Theotokos. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Replaced archive link http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:s3A4sCERlAUJ:st-takla.org/books/en/ecf/214/2140263.html+&cd=10&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ch&client=ubuntu with https://web.archive.org/web/20170511212317/http://st-takla.org/books/en/ecf/214/2140263.html on http://st-takla.org/books/en/ecf/214/2140263.html
• Replaced archive link http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:s3A4sCERlAUJ:st-takla.org/books/en/ecf/214/2140263.html+&cd=10&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ch&client=ubuntu with https://web.archive.org/web/20170511212317/http://st-takla.org/books/en/ecf/214/2140263.html on http://st-takla.org/books/en/ecf/214/2140263.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080703074931/http://orthodoxwiki.org/ to http://www.orthodoxwiki.org/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:49, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 15 March 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by page mover) GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 23:58, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

---

Theotokos → Mother of God – Many inlinks to this article are named "Mother of God". That is also a perfectly prevalent expression in English language. Although indeed existing in theological circles, no reason to keep a Greek term here like this as default title. See also discussion on this issue above. Chicbyaccident (talk) 16:40, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose. Theotokos is a specific usage from Eastern Christianity and the Greek word is usually used by theologians and art and architectural historians even in English-language sources. I think Mother of God should probably redirect to Mary, mother of Jesus. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:33, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose no. Theotokos is a title used commonly in Eastern Christianity for devotional purposes and the Latin Mater Dei, from where we get Mother of God, is an approximation of it. The term is also used in Western Christianity in academic theology, and has seen an increased usage in those groups belonging to the Western Christian tradition, including in English. I'd oppose Mother of God redirecting anywhere but here as it is a title that is used to approximate this theological concept in English. TonyBallioni (talk) 14:38, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Except that the common Catholic prayer/exclamation "Holy Mary, Mother of God" (or, as an exclamation, just "Mother of God"), which is probably by far the commonest usage of the phrase "Mother of God" in English, doesn't really refer to the theological concept of the Theotokos. It seems like a primary redirect to me. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:57, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Rename to Mother of God/ God bearer

Theotokos is a Greek Christian term that most English speakers will not be able to relate to. Why name the article Theotokos in Greek when you have an English equivalent? "Mother of God" is the most widely accepted translation of Theotokos and Deipara. Mother of would be more suitable and appropriate from an encyclopedic& reader friendly for non-Christians on "English Wikipedia." Nolicmahr (talk) 13:05, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Nolicmahr, Eastern Christians typically leave this term untranslated, and so the preponderance of reliable secondary sources on this topic will call her "Theotokos" rather than "Mother of God". Elizium23 (talk) 13:06, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

So this article is only for Eastern Christians? What about Western Christian POV "Deipara" and "Mater Dei"? It's been reduced to a footnote. There ought be a separate article for "Deipara"/ "Mother of God" as used by Western Christians who are not familiar with the Greek term. Nolicmahr (talk) 13:14, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Mother of God is the common ground. English speaking Eastern Christians will agree that this phrase is the widely accepted English rendering of Theotokos Nolicmahr (talk) 13:17, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

There is a separate article, Catholic Mariology. The Theotokos article is chiefly about her veneration in the Eastern Churches, so yes, it does take an Eastern POV as compared to the Western Catholic one, of which there is plenty of documentation in other articles. So why do you have to attack this one? What do you have against Eastern Christianity? Elizium23 (talk) 13:19, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

This is not an attack or war, it's a discussion on wiki. Mother of God and Mariology are not the same topics. You cannot take down an article on the EU simply because there's already a page on Europe. The name of the article ought to be a common one, with both Western and Eastern POVs represented equally. Nolicmahr (talk) 13:30, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

No, it shouldn't. We editors have chosen quite prudently that the topics are separable and deserve independent coverage, and that's how we've set it up. Elizium23 (talk) 13:32, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Then please separate the mother of God article. I read in an earlier discussion that it was merged into this. Nolicmahr (talk) 17:07, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Syriac Tradition

Using a current Chaldean Catholic liturgy that says “Mother of God” to claim that this goes back to the third century doesn’t make sense. This isn’t part of the original text of the Liturgy. 108.174.97.50 (talk) 15:20, 24 April 2023 (UTC)