Was Jesus a Young Earth Creationist?
- Thread starter cloudyday2
- Start date
The way I understand it, it's not the physical person named "Jesus" that He referenced, but that it is that inner Christ or Light of God within that made Him Divine that He wanted us to see.
If you look at Genesis 2, "Let there be Light", what light is being pointed towards?
Upvote
0
Jonaitis
Soli Deo Gloria
- Jan 4, 2019
- 5,191
- 4,204
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Protestant
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
I see.
Well, I understand Genesis 1:3 to refer to an actual light (before the sun), for God separates the light he spoke into existence from the present darkness that we read in verse 2 that covered the empty, formless earth.
Upvote
0
No, I'm not arguing that Jesus had a "divine mind". I am arguing that Jesus had a limited, stupid human mind. What Jesus DID have was a habit of prayer and obedience that gradually transformed him from an ordinary human into a saintly human and finally into the perfect image of God. Jesus began to think like God. Jesus valued the same things that God values, and he tried to teach God's values in parables when he said "the Kingdom of Heaven is like..."
Upvote
0
- Oct 4, 2016
- 7,236
- 7,312
- 56
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Oriental Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Single
Ah so your concept is what we would call Adoptionism, or the teacher of Righteousness view.
Adoptionism - Wikipedia
Teacher of Righteousness - Wikipedia
Upvote
0
Adoptionism is getting closer, but I think Theosis is the best description. Normally theosis is a goal that is never fully achieved, but in the case of Jesus it was actually achieved. God knew that Jesus would achieve this goal from his birth, but Jesus still needed to mature into this divine state through a lifetime of religious practice. At the baptism, God confirmed to Jesus and John the Baptist that Jesus was now a perfect image of God and ready to start his ministry.
Theosis (Eastern Christian theology) - Wikipedia
Of course this is only speculation. I am asking myself "what if Jesus was truly divine and special?" and then I am trying to imagine possible scenarios that seem more realistic and rational than the standard "born in a manger" scenario.
Upvote
0
com7fy8
Well-Known Member
- May 22, 2013
- 13,698
- 6,129
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
Jesus did healings which needed for tissue to be created, for example changing a leper's skin into soft and new quality skin. He could do such creating in very little time . . . less than six days. So, from this I see it is possible with God to bring the whole universe into existence in a moment, or in six days.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
TheOldWays
Candidate
Probably not. Jesus was smart I am sure. If he was divine he probably realized there wasn't any need to talk about this kind of thing to folks who would have zero clue to what he was talking about, in regards to a scientific explanation. He stuck with what they knew. Their scriptures. Which contained the Genesis account.
Upvote
0
That's an interesting idea. If God was able to do something that defies natural laws on a SMALL scale (by healing a leper) then God was able to do the same thing on a COSMIC scale (by creating the universe in 6 days).
Upvote
0
What do you think about Jesus being COMPLETELY human including believing that Genesis was literal history since probably EVERY Jew believed that in the first century? The Old Testament prophecies that the Suffering Servant would not be particularly handsome by human standards, so why should he be omniscient or even smarter than average?
When I imagine Christianity being true, I like to imagine Jesus as completely ordinary. Jesus probably caught colds and hit his finger with a hammer, because that is part of being human.
Upvote
0
com7fy8
Well-Known Member
- May 22, 2013
- 13,698
- 6,129
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
Well, we do have that prophecy about Jesus not being desirable because of what He looked like. But He did show He knew more than humans. Also, Jesus was loving and caring, so differently and better than how humans love. So, yes He was human by having a human flesh and blood body, but Jesus was God's own Son in that flesh.
His being in a human body was not about doing what we humans tend to do. But Jesus went through things of this life so now He as our Groom can feel for us and bless us with the grace which had Him doing so well, including how He was loving while going through things, instead of only trying and struggling to get Himself through > Hebrews 4:15.
Upvote
0
You will probably agree with me when I say that there is a difference between sinning and stumbling. Was Jesus immediately able to tap dance like Fred Astaire from birth, or did Jesus go through a process of stumbling and falling before he could walk? Is it possible that Jesus might have made an arithmetic mistake occasionally?
I would define "sinning" as knowing what God wants you to do and not doing that. Believing that the Earth is flat is not sinning. Jesus probably knew the Earth was spherical, but if he had believed the Earth was flat, he could have still qualified as sinless and divine IMO.
What probably distinguished Jesus most from ordinary people was his intimacy with God that developed through a lifetime of prayer. This intimacy allowed Jesus to know God's will clearly, whereas most people can only guess. And of course, Jesus was completely obedient to God's will as the Crucifixion demonstrated.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Akita Suggagaki
Well-Known Member
- Jul 20, 2018
- 6,868
- 4,981
- 69
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Upvote
0
Akita Suggagaki
Well-Known Member
- Jul 20, 2018
- 6,868
- 4,981
- 69
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Jesus was not present at creation; the Logos was. Just how much Jesus retained is impossible to know. But to require that he knew everything or was never wrong seems to me to mythologized him.
Upvote
0
ViaCrucis
Confessional Lutheran
- Oct 2, 2011
- 37,422
- 26,863
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Lutheran
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
- Politics
- US-Others
It's clear from the writings of the fathers, the theologians, and doctors of the Christian Church throughout history that Young Earth Creationism has never been dogma. Indeed, it wasn't even dogmatically held by American Fundamentalists until the mid-20th century (many of the early Fundamentalists were Old Earth Creationists).
Do I think Jesus was a Young Earth Creationist? No, I don't. For one because I don't think that term really makes sense in a first century context, and for another because I believe that Jesus is God. The Fourth Evangelist writes, "All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made." As the God the Eternal Logos, the One through which all things came to be, I think He would have known how all things came to be. And seeing as Young Earth Creationism does not match the observable world and what we know about it, I think it errant to ascribe to the Son of God such serious error. The question and mystery of the Incarnation does leave us open with some questions, such as the fact that Jesus does at times seem to not know things (e.g. the time of His own Parousia), so that is perhaps permissible here as well.
That the Lord refers to events and figures from the Scriptures for the purpose of illustration and teaching does not in and of itself necessitate the strict historicity of those events and figures. It only means that as these stories are divinely inspired and sacred stories contained in Sacred Scripture that they are authoritative for teaching purposes (cf. 2 Timothy 3:16), which is how Jesus uses them.
-CryptoLutheran
Do I think Jesus was a Young Earth Creationist? No, I don't. For one because I don't think that term really makes sense in a first century context, and for another because I believe that Jesus is God. The Fourth Evangelist writes, "All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made." As the God the Eternal Logos, the One through which all things came to be, I think He would have known how all things came to be. And seeing as Young Earth Creationism does not match the observable world and what we know about it, I think it errant to ascribe to the Son of God such serious error. The question and mystery of the Incarnation does leave us open with some questions, such as the fact that Jesus does at times seem to not know things (e.g. the time of His own Parousia), so that is perhaps permissible here as well.
That the Lord refers to events and figures from the Scriptures for the purpose of illustration and teaching does not in and of itself necessitate the strict historicity of those events and figures. It only means that as these stories are divinely inspired and sacred stories contained in Sacred Scripture that they are authoritative for teaching purposes (cf. 2 Timothy 3:16), which is how Jesus uses them.
-CryptoLutheran
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
ViaCrucis
Confessional Lutheran
- Oct 2, 2011
- 37,422
- 26,863
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Lutheran
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
- Politics
- US-Others
This is a Christologically problematic statement; as Jesus is the Logos. There is only one Person in the Incarnation, the Person of the Son/Logos, and this Incarnate Person is named Jesus. See the terms Enhypostasia and Anhypostasia.
Enhypostasia - The Logos personalizes the humanity, that is the Person is the Logos who takes upon Himself human nature.
Anhypostasia - There is no distinct human hypostasis apart from the Logos, as the humanity assumed is the particular humanity of the Logos.
Hence the language of Chalcedon, "one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, recognized in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation; the distinction of natures being in no way annulled by the union, but rather the characteristics of each nature being preserved and coming together to form one person and subsistence, not as parted or separated into two persons, but one and the same Son and Only-begotten God the Word, Lord Jesus Christ;"
-CryptoLutheran
Upvote
0
Similar threads
