Three Strikes - Fully God/Fully man

[music4two]

Three Strikes?


From scriptures it is very clear that Jesus has the same general make up as the rest of humanity. But is Jesus like the rest of humanity in every way? Fortunately, scripture is very clear on this point.
Hebrews 2/17 and 18 - Therefore, He had to be made like His brethren IN ALL THINGS, so that He might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people.

18 For since He Himself was tempted in that which He has suffered, He is able to come to the aid of those who are tempted.

All of Christianity is based on the fundamentals of Christ’s nature. One of the most fundamental teachings of scripture is that Jesus is to be our example and we are to become like him.

1 Peter 2/21 and 22 - For you have been called for this purpose, since Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example for you to follow in His steps,

22 who committed no sin, nor was any deceit found in his mouth;

1 John 2/5 and 6 - but whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected By this we know that we are in Him:

6 the one who says he abides in Him ought himself to walk in the same manner as He walked.


The previously stated scriptures are universally accepted among orthodox Christians. Even in light of these very clear scriptures most Christians come to believe what they have been taught from historical dogma. One of those historical doctrines is called the dual nature of Christ. This doctrine states that Jesus had a dual nature. He is both fully God and fully man at the same time. This belief is held by both Trinitarian and Oneness denominations. In fact, most of their belief systems are centered around this doctrine. For years the fight between Oneness and Trinitarian believers has raged. It is curious that both sides cling to this concept to support their dogma. But, does this doctrine stand up to close examination?
There are no such words as Dual Nature or 100% man and 100% God in scripture. In fact the concept is conspicuously absent in any clear form whatsoever. Would God hide this most important understanding of Christianity? Would the nature of Jesus remain hidden so as to make it impossible to understand or see him as a clear pattern?
When a doctrine requires words and phrases outside of clear scripture, one should take note and beware. One of the most common ways in which false teachers attempt to prove doctrine is by using scriptures out of context and reading scripture with preconceived ideas of doctrine. Instead of letting scripture interpret doctrine some let doctrine interpret scripture.
Since there are no clear scriptures to define this dual nature of Christ we must look elsewhere to determine it’s origin and history. First let’s look at some of the history, by which this doctrine entered the teaching of the church.

Most of the primary tenants of the dual nature doctrine stem from several councils starting in 325 A.D. These councils were formed for the purpose of denouncing what was believed to be false doctrine and for instituting some central statements defining the faith. Unfortunately, by this time in history, Christianity had been corrupted by Paganism and Greek philosophy and the councils reflected this influince. The Nicean council stated that Jesus was fully God in response to the Arians who believed that Jesus was not God. Of course this council was lead by Constantine emperor of Rome, who himself was an admitted sun worshipper and forced his own will on the council by virtue of threats of death and banishment. Constantine himself suggested the critical statement that Jesus and God were of the same substance. This subject will be brought to more light later in this article.
The Apollianarians Did not believe that Jesus was fully human, therefore the council of Constantinople (381 A.D.) declared he was fully human.
The Nestorianism group denied that Mary could be called the mother of God. They believed that Mary was only the mother of the human part of Jesus. The resulting belief dictated that there exists two Christs, one divine and one human. In response to this the council of Ephesus (431 A.D.) decreed That the two natures of Jesus are one and cannot be separated.
This concept lead to an impossible conclusion. Everything that happened to Jesus, happened to both his divine and human natures. From this standpoint both natures were born of Mary and both died on the cross. This makes Mary, a human woman, the literal mother of God and that God literally died on the cross. Can a human woman be the mother of God? Can God literally die?
This concept that God can be a man contradicts very clear scripture.
Numbers 23/16 Then the Lord met Balaam and put a word in his mouth and said, “Return to Balik and thus you shall speak” Numbers 23/19
“God is not a man that He should lie, Nor a son of man that He should repent.”
God simply cannot be man or become man. Jesus continually spoke of His father and separated himself in distinction from Him.

Mark 13:32 - [Jesus does not know everything the Father knows] - "But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father."
[Is this the omniscience of a co-equal or dual natured person of God?]

John 14:28 - "Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: FOR MY FATHER IS GREATER THAN I." [Again can Jesus be a co-equal person of God or have the nature of God and yet be lesser then Yahweh?]

John 20:17 - "Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto MY FATHER AND YOUR FATHER; and to MY GOD, AND YOUR GOD." [ Can a God (Jesus) have a God?]

1 Cor. 11:3 - "But I would have you know that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and THE HEAD OF CHRIST IS GOD." [Co-equal?, Dual Natured?]

1 Cor 15:24-28 - "Then cometh the end, when he [Jesus] shall have delivered up the kingdom to GOD; EVEN THE FATHER; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. And when all things shall be subdued unto him, THEN SHALL THE SON ALSO HIMSELF BE SUBJECT UNTO HIM THAT PUT ALL THINGS UNDER HIM, THAT GOD MAY BE ALL IN ALL."
[ Clearly Jesus’ reign is subject to the Father. He eventually places all things, including himself into subjection to Yahweh ]

In previous verses remember that Jesus clearly differentiates between the will of the Father and his own will. (John 5/30) In addition scripture clearly speaks of Jesus being made like his brethren (us) in ALL THINGS. Not in all things except his nature.(Hebrews 2/17 and 18)
Rather then continue to take the common approach of only dissecting scriptures let us, to some degree, examine this doctrine from a pure logical stand. Let’s discuss this from a functional standard. For a doctrine to function correctly it must accomplish goals that are in sinc with God’s plan. A teaching must help us to become like Christ. As previously stated, most orthodox Christians believe that Jesus has a full human nature and a full divine nature. In addition most believe that Jesus is the pattern son and that we are to become like him.

STRIKE ONE

Let’s look at the dual nature aspect. In order for Jesus to possess both human and devine natures he must be mortal and immortal at the same time. Finite and infinite, infallible and infallible, temptable and non temptable, This is a logical impossibility. At this point most "dual nature believers" make statements such as “God’s ways are higher then our ways” or it is a paradox that we cannot understand with our feeble fallen minds.
Firstly from the very beginning of recorded history in scripture God has dealt with man according to reason and logic. The rules of action and reaction are clearly shown in God’s covenants with man. If we act in accordance with God’s covenant then we receive the blessing of God. If not then we do not. If God were not a reasoning creature or we not able to understand reason, we could never understand or follow his covenants. We are created in the image of God, with the same reasoning abilities as God. In fact God calls upon us to reason with Him. Isaiah 1:18
"Come now, let us reason together," says the LORD. "Though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow, though they are red as crimson, they shall be like wool.” Would God calls us to reason with Him were we not capable of doing so?
Without clear understanding of how Jesus accompolished what he did we cannot imitate it. There must be an understanding of the nature and character of Jesus for us to follow.
In one of the most definitive statements in the word God proclaims to Moses “I Am”. This statement makes very clear that the nature of God does not change. He cannot be immortal one moment and mortal the next. God cannot be a Spirit and be flesh and blood.
Secondly this is not a paradox. A paradox is something that appears to be impossible yet proves itself to be possible. An example of a paradox is the belief held for years that, according to the then believed laws of physics, bumble bees could not fly. Yet bumble bees DID fly. This paradox existed because our understanding of nature continues to expand and further understanding resolved the paradox. This does not hold true with laws of reason and logic. There are absolute truths based on logic that do not change. 2 + 2 will always equal 4. There are no square circles. Black does not equal white ect. In the same way opposites cannot be equal. Jesus cannot possess immortal qualities and mortal qualities at the same time. Jesus cannot being temptable and non-temptable at the same time. Jesus cannot be faillable and non-failable.
Simply put the doctrine of the dual nature of Christ cannot be expressed without causing contradictions. It cannot be stated in a meaningful way. We can recite the words but our minds cannot understand them in any logical way free of contradictions. It would be like saying something is a square and a circle at the same time. Logic does not permit such a conclusion.

STRIKE TWO

Another problem with the dual nature concept arises when considering if Jesus is the same as the rest of humanity. The very essence of humanity is it’s single human nature. If you change the nature of a man, you change that man into a different creature. If the doctrine of the dual nature of Christ is true and Christ's two natures cannot be seperated, then he is fundamentally different then the rest of mankind, since we have only our single human nature and make up. This makes Jesus a different creature then the rest of Humanity. It makes him non human. Followers of this doctrine can state time and again that Jesus is fully human, but the belief that He has a different nature makes Him different. An augmented, dual natuerd Christ is not the same as the rest of humanity. They must, by excepting this doctrine, qualify Jesus’ humanity. This of course contradicts hundreds of very clear scriptures.

STRIKE THREE

This dual nature further begs the question, How is Jesus a pattern for us if he is different in nature then us? We then have to examine every act of Jesus to determine if he did it by virtue of his human nature or his divine nature? When Jesus healed people was it his divine or human nature in action. If we say it was his human nature then we must conclude that humanity has miracle power without God. If his divine nature then how can we do or imitate any of Jesus powerful gifts. After all we have only our human nature! Even though Jesus says “Greater things then this we you do”, we still must question from which nature he did them.
What of Jesus’ resurrection? The most powerful hope and example in the word. Did He resurrect as a man or as a God? What power did it? Of course scripture says God raised Jesus from the dead. This does not solve our dilemma. If Jesus' nature has to be qualified to fullfill the dual nature doctrine and the two natures cannot be seperated, then what was raised from the dead, a God or a man? Because this doctrine makes Jesus different we still must question his ability to be a pattern for us. The fact that God raised a dual nattured God/man from the dead is not an example for those of us that are of a single nature. How do we know that we, of a single nature, will be raised from the dead? Because this dual nature of Christ makes Jesus different, in basic nature, then the rest of humanity, we cannot use his life as an example. This scraps all of the plan of God to raise up others like Christ. How can others become dual natured like Jesus?

In most cases Christians determine doctrine by discting scripture. Unfortunately most can never agree on a uniform honest set of principles for interpreting scripture. For this reason I prefer to see doctrine from a functional stand. The primary function of doctrine/teaching is to help us become like Christ and to fullfill the plan of God for His creation. Other sub aspects would include having a clear picture the motives and intentions of God.
With these goals of doctrine in mind several questions must come to mind when examining doctrines for accuracy.
1. Does the doctrine make Christ a more viable example or more of an inigma?
2. Doers the doctrine support, defend and promote the true motives and intentions of God?
3. Does the doctrine help us to complete God’s plan or not?
4. Does the doctrine make rational/reasonable sense or does it depend on a mystical and mysterious formula that cannot be understood.

If the answers to these questions are unfavorable then the doctrine should at best be questioned if not totally avoided. Regardless of the so-called scripture proof text if the conclussions contradict reason or are dysfunctional within the plan of God, the doctrine is wrong.

 

[music4two]

I am not sure why I get no responses on this thread. Is it over the nead of most? Perhaps it is the fact that it takes more then 20 seconds to read and think about. I realise that most of Christianity is the instant gratification type. It is forbidden to ask anyone to think too hard or take more then a few moments for God and truth.

 

[perrin275]

Wow, that has to be the best article i have read about the nature of Yeshua. I am in full agreement with you. To me Yeshua was not, and is not G-d. It is an impossibility for him to be such. If more people would try to take G-d's word for what it is, and not try to make G-d's word say what they think it should, we wouldnt have so many different types of "churches" out there.

There is one G-d, one Messiah, one truth, and as G-d tells us in John 14.6 "Yeshua said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me"".

 

[Rev Wayne]

I am not sure why I get no responses on this thread. Is it over the nead of most? Perhaps it is the fact that it takes more then 20 seconds to read and think about. I realise that most of Christianity is the instant gratification type. It is forbidden to ask anyone to think too hard or take more then a few moments for God and truth.

Perhaps the level of disinformation has a lot to do with it. For instance:

We are created in the image of God, with the same reasoning abilities as God. In fact God calls upon us to reason with Him. Isaiah 1:18

God says, “My thoughts are higher than your thoughts.” Therefore the claim is not true that we have “the same reasoning abilities as God.” He has clearly said we do not.

God cannot be a Spirit and be flesh and blood.

Philippians 2 says Jesus did exactly that. “Though He was IN THE FORM OF GOD. . . He took the form of a servant” and came “in the likeness of human flesh.”

It would be like saying something is a square and a circle at the same time. Logic does not permit such a conclusion.

It doesn’t matter “what logic permits.” What God has declared is more important. God has declared that the wisdom of God is "a stumbling-block to the Jews, and foolishness to the Greek.” The Greeks took pride in their logic, which is the point of the statement in 1 Corinthians about “foolishness.”

So the first strike is no strike.

Another problem with the dual nature concept arises when considering if Jesus is the same as the rest of humanity. The very essence of humanity is it’s single human nature. If you change the nature of a man, you change that man into a different creature.

Saying that Jesus is “the same” as humanity is not a declaration of identicality. It is saying that He took on all the characteristics of humanity. But it was not a substitution for His divinity, it was an addition. When He was “tempted in all points as we are,” He was tempted in His humanity, not His divinity, for “God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He tempt anyone.”

Philippians 2 says Jesus “emptied Himself” in taking on the form of humanity. Since He cannot empty Himself of His true nature, this much-debated passage has most often been interpreted as an emptying Himself of the prerogatives of Deity, that is, of the free exercise of what it means to be God. The interpretation of Jesus as being of both natures is based on the clear understanding given in the Word. You seem to limit your investigation of these matters to a one-sided citing of verses that support the claims you make. But both natures are affirmed throughout Scripture in the NT. Even in His humanity, He exhibited qualities that are beyond the human. He told Phillip that He saw him under the fig tree before he was ever brought to meet Jesus. He commanded a storm to be calm and it did. He changed water into wine. And yet, Jesus ate, so we know He felt hunger. He said on the Cross “I thirst,” so we know He required water for sustenance. The body He took on died on the Cross. But His Spirit did not, no more than our spirits will when we die. Therefore both are affirmed. The way this is possible, is His humanity was due to His physical entry into the world, while His divinity was due to His eternal existence as the only begotten of God. This does no harm to any Scripture witness to either His humanity or His divinity.

So the second strike is no strike.

This dual nature further begs the question, How is Jesus a pattern for us if he is different in nature then us? We then have to examine every act of Jesus to determine if he did it by virtue of his human nature or his divine nature? When Jesus healed people was it his divine or human nature in action. If we say it was his human nature then we must conclude that humanity has miracle power without God. If his divine nature then how can we do or imitate any of Jesus powerful gifts. After all we have only our human nature! Even though Jesus says “Greater things then this we you do”, we still must question from which nature he did them.

First, the verse you quote is irrelevant to the issue. The “greater” in this case in the Greek is megale, which is indicative of quantity, not quality. It just means they will do more deeds than He did, which I imagine was accomplished long ago during the 2000 years since. Secondly, we were never meant to imitate the things He did that show His divinity. Nowhere in any of the places where Jesus is mentioned as our “pattern” will you find His miracles to be required of us. Thirdly, as for how we can be made “like Him,” as you question, we are not made “like Him” in our humanity. Paul clearly says in the most detailed and direct passage on resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15, that “we shall be changed.”

So strike three is no strike either.



But there was far more that is incorrect in the assertions. The early church fathers had already fleshed out (pun intended) the doctrine of the Incarnation well before the challenges arose in 325 and beyond. I have often seen the same allegation made in connection with the doctrine of the Trinity, yet the same is true of it as well (Tertullian was probably the first, around 180 A.D.; Hippolytus was another as I recall). The whole assertion about political maneuvering being behind the doctrines was first raised by atheists bent on disproving not only Christianity, but theism in general.

The argument that there is no mention of “dual nature” or 100% God and 100% man is an invalid argument, being, as it is, an argument from absence. The same has been attempted with the idea of the rapture, which is there in principle but not in name.

The claim that “God is not a man that He should lie, Nor a son of man that He should repent,” citing Numbers 23, is invalid also, because it is not speaking of Jesus and the Incarnation at all. It is simply stating that because God is who He is, He does not lie. Jesus in His Incarnation was the same, He was the very embodiment of truth.

The objection against Jesus’ divinity based on “My Father is greater than I,” fails to consider that Jesus said this during the Incarnation. Having “emptied Himself,” as we are told He did, and thus surrendered certain prerogatives for a time during the Incarnation, certainly during that time the statement was true. The same holds true for the objection based on Mark 13:32; Jesus in the Incarnation did not know when His return would be; but it does not necessarily follow that He does not know now.

 

[music4two]

REvwayne has not surprised me. I have seen this same nonsense throughout these discussion. He assumes the incarnation and then uses it to prove his doctrine - circular reasoning.
He even admits that Jesus is different then the rest of us. That certainly opens up a can of worms. Just exactly what qualities of Jesus are we to be able to have then. And by what do you determine this. Not only is a non-human Jesus unscriptural it also denies us the possibility to become like Him.
This is exactly waht Satan said in the beginning. "|Hath God said?" They deny He came in the flesh as Paul discribed it as being completely human. This places them in the category of teaching the anti Christ

 

[Rev Wayne]

REvwayne has not surprised me. I have seen this same nonsense throughout these discussion. He assumes the incarnation and then uses it to prove his doctrine - circular reasoning.
He even admits that Jesus is different then the rest of us. That certainly opens up a can of worms. Just exactly what qualities of Jesus are we to be able to have then. And by what do you determine this. Not only is a non-human Jesus unscriptural it also denies us the possibility to become like Him.
This is exactly waht Satan said in the beginning. "|Hath God said?" They deny He came in the flesh as Paul discribed it as being completely human. This places them in the category of teaching the anti Christ

If you say so. I guess a lame defense is better than none, eh? You could, though, point out exactly where you thought the reasoning was circular. It's just not there, looks like you were trying to sell the quick, easy out to the readers. Could you elaborate?