The dual effort in the creation of the God-Man

Loversofjesus_2018 · Nov 1, 2019

Albion said:
No.

and this is why the above is answered "No."

It is generally thought that for the reality of God becoming Man to impact us mortals, it was important for God not to simply show up as a man, etc. like some superhero or apparition, but to be a man as we understand men.

[/QUOTE

generally thought basically means we don’t know but we accept what the consensus is on the matter right? Is it just not sufficient for people to say they don’t know when it comes to parts of the Bible?

Yahkov · Nov 1, 2019

God is not limited to His creation. It is true to say God came down as man, born of Mary, which we know is Jesus. It is also true to say that Jesus was before Abraham. Instead of trying to understand this from a creation perspective, we can attempt to understand this from the Creator's perspective...God's ways are above our ways. We were created, Jesus wasn't.

Jesus stepped down into creation. His beginning is before His birth into the world. So no, Jesus was not created. He is the Creator (Colossians 1:16).

I believe joshua 1 9 nailed it on the head with what he said in his post..."He became as we are so that we can become as He is." Very well said.

There is also a clear difference between mankind and Jesus. All of mankind has sinned and falls short of the glory of God. Jesus knew no sin.

Loversofjesus_2018 · Nov 1, 2019

Dave L said:
This is way off the rails. You need to consider the early Church doctrine of the trinity.

Chalcedonian Creed

The Chalcedonian Creed was adopted at the Council of Chalcedon in 451 in Asia Minor as a response to certain heretical views concerning the nature of Christ. This Council of Chalcedon is the fourth of the seven ecumenical councils accepted by Eastern Orthodox, Catholic, and many Protestant Christian churches. It is the first Council not recognized by any of the Oriental Orthodox churches.

The Chalcedonian Creed was written amid controversy between the western and eastern churches over the meaning of the incarnation (see Christology), the ecclesiastical influence of the Byzantine emperor, and the supremacy of the Roman Pope. The western churches readily accepted the creed, but some eastern churches did not. The adopted Creed specifically maintained the two distinct natures of Christ (divine and human) over against teaching of Eutyches -- that Christ had only one nature, a mixture of human and divine. Eutychianism is also known as monophysitism from monos (single) and physis (nature), which confuses both Christ’s true humanity and his true deity.

An English translation of the Creed

We, then, following the holy Fathers, all with one consent, teach men to confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood; truly God and truly man, of a reasonable soul and body; consubstantial with us according to the manhood; in all things like unto us, without sin; begotten before all ages of the Father according to the Godhead, and in these latter days, for us and for our salvation, born of the virgin Mary, the mother of God, according to the manhood; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures, inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably; the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one Person and one Subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ, as the prophets from the beginning have declared concerning him, and the Lord Jesus Christ himself taught us, and the Creed of the holy Fathers has handed down to us. [1]

What if the early church doctrine isn’t accurate? Is that possible?

ViaCrucis · Nov 1, 2019

BCsenior said:
IMO, Jesus was called “the Son of God” because
the Holy Spirit “played the role of His father”.
(He was the “father”, Mary was the mother.)

That would be incorrect.

Jesus is called the Son of God because He is the only-begotten of the Father, begotten from all eternity.

The Holy Spirit wasn't Jesus' "father". Jesus' Father is the Father, in fact that's why we call the Father "Father" because He is Father of the Son.

"We believe ... in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one Being with the Father, by whom all things were made." - The Nicene Creed

-CryptoLutheran

ViaCrucis · Nov 1, 2019

BCsenior said:
IMO, He was indeed a most unique God-man blend.

There's no "blend".

Jesus Christ is fully God and fully human without confusion and without separation. The one undivided Person of the Son is truly God and truly human. Not blended, but united.

-CryptoLutheran

ViaCrucis · Nov 1, 2019

Loversofjesus_2018 said:
What if the early church doctrine isn’t accurate? Is that possible?

Alternatives were offered and found wanting, namely the errors of Nestorianism and Eutychianism.

Nestorianism divides the Person of Jesus, thereby denyin the true Deity and humanity of Christ.
Eutychianism confuses the two natures, thereby denying the true Deity and humanity of Christ.

There are Christians who do not subscribe to the Chalcedonian formula, namely the Oriental Orthodox Churches which subscribe to something called Miaphysitism (the Chalcedonian formula is known as Diaphysitism); but it is generally understood that the distinction between the two boils down to semantics, not substance. Both Chalcedonians and non-Chalcedonians confess one undivided Jesus Christ, who is both God and man without confusion or separation.

-CryptoLutheran

Dave L · Nov 1, 2019

Loversofjesus_2018 said:
What if the early church doctrine isn’t accurate? Is that possible?

The doctrines originated in the scriptures. The were attacked by heretics and underwent debate wich brought refinement. These became the Ecumenical Creeds that define Christianity. Later, most denominational creeds incorporate these but cause division in other areas.

Aussie Pete · Nov 1, 2019

BCsenior said:
They say Jesus was “fully God” and “fully Man”.
All human beings are created …
and since Jesus was “fully Man”, wasn’t He also created?

The Word was God who became flesh (Jesus)

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God,
and the Word was God” (John 1:1)

“And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us” (John 1:14)

The Holy Spirit who is God caused Mary to conceive

The angel Gabriel said to Mary: “The Holy Spirit will
come upon you, and the power of the Most High will
overshadow you. So the Baby to be born will be holy
and He will be called the Son of God” (Luke 1:35)

The angel Gabriel said to Joseph: “For the Child within her
was conceived by the Holy Spirit. And she will have a Son,
and you are to name Him Jesus” (Matthew 1:20-21)

“… while she was still a virgin, she became pregnant
through the power of the Holy Spirit.” (Matthew 1:18)

IMO, Jesus was called “the Son of God” because
the Holy Spirit “played the role of His father”.
(He was the “father”, Mary was the mother.)

So, why was this dual effort to create Jesus required?

Who is the only true God?

“And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God,
and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.” (John 17:3)

“… and we are in Him (Father God) who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ.
This is the true God and eternal life.” (1 John 5:20)

All Scriptures are from the NKJV.

Lord Jesus gets His humanity from the physical birth through Mary. The Holy Spirit caused the egg in Mary to be fertilised. Lord Jesus thus received the nature that makes Him God. No, I don't understand it fully or much at all. Lord Jesus had to be Man to represent us to God as the Last Adam. He had to be mortal so that He could die for our sins. He had to be God so that we, in Him, could be partakers of the divine nature. As the ancient carol says, "Begotten, not created".

renniks · Nov 1, 2019

BCsenior said:
They say Jesus was “fully God” and “fully Man”.
All human beings are created …
and since Jesus was “fully Man”, wasn’t He also created?

The Word was God who became flesh (Jesus)

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God,
and the Word was God” (John 1:1)

“And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us” (John 1:14)

The Holy Spirit who is God caused Mary to conceive

The angel Gabriel said to Mary: “The Holy Spirit will
come upon you, and the power of the Most High will
overshadow you. So the Baby to be born will be holy
and He will be called the Son of God” (Luke 1:35)

The angel Gabriel said to Joseph: “For the Child within her
was conceived by the Holy Spirit. And she will have a Son,
and you are to name Him Jesus” (Matthew 1:20-21)

“… while she was still a virgin, she became pregnant
through the power of the Holy Spirit.” (Matthew 1:18)

IMO, Jesus was called “the Son of God” because
the Holy Spirit “played the role of His father”.
(He was the “father”, Mary was the mother.)

So, why was this dual effort to create Jesus required?

Who is the only true God?

“And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God,
and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.” (John 17:3)

“… and we are in Him (Father God) who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ.
This is the true God and eternal life.” (1 John 5:20)

All Scriptures are from the NKJV.

"In the beginning was the Word, And the word was with God and the Word was God."
John 1:1

BCsenior · Nov 1, 2019

His student said:
The view of Oneness is that there is but one person beside Whom there is no other.

Recently, I spent about 2 weeks on the Pentecostal Oneness forum
trying to get them to accept John 1.
No cigar ... they refused to accept John 1 ... end of story.

BCsenior · Nov 1, 2019

PaulCyp1 said:
Yes, the man Jesus was created in the womb of His mother.
He had existed from all eternity as God, second Person of the Most Holy Trinity,
but Jesus Christ was His human nature, which did not exist until 2,000 years ago.

Thanks for your input, Paul ... Hope to hear more from you!

John 1 indicates that the Word existed from all eternity as God,
and we should view Him as being the second Person of the Most Holy Trinity.

Albion · Nov 1, 2019

BCsenior said:
Recently, I spent about 2 weeks on their forum trying to get them to accept John 1.
No cigar ... they refused to accept John 1 ... end of story.

That's correct. They simply do not understand the concept we call "the Trinity," and they have been schooled to ignore all the verses in Scripture that conflict with the "Oneness" theory.

BCsenior · Nov 1, 2019

Thir7ySev3n said:
The divine part of Jesus is eternal, the human part of Christ is created. This is part of Him being truly human in His humanity. This is not difficult and is actually one of the simpler doctrines in the Bible. How these natures coalesce is a wonderful mystery, but the description of the unity itself is exceedingly simple and explicit, and so one is left to wonder just as mysteriously how so many bizarre interpretations can be inferred.

Thanks for your input ... are you American?

BCsenior · Nov 1, 2019

Miss Shelby said:
This is why the teaching of Mary the Mother of God is so important. In the early centuries discussions like this were initiated by Nestorians who emphasized Jesus human nature to be independent of his divine nature. Strictly translated ‘God bearer’ the teaching states that Jesus human nature came from
his mother and was intertwined with his divine nature, inseparably by the power of the holy spirit.
This question has been answered and put to rest.

Why is the teaching of Mary the Mother of God so important?

A British lady doctor told me that a child receives DNA from each of its' parents.
If she is correct, then just perhaps Jesus received Mary's DNA.
IMO, the question of this whole deal has NOT been answered and put to rest.

One reason being that many biblical scholars did NOT even have the Holy Spirit,
let alone the precious baptism of the Holy Spirit.

FYI, almost all believers during the time of the book of Acts
had this baptism with the Holy Spirit (with the evidence of tongues).
But then, Satan messed up the church BIG-TIME concerning this ...
because this baptism was/is where the believer's spiritual power comes from!

Let's believe the NT, which says that Satan:
-- is the god of this world
-- is the ruler of this age/world
-- controls the world! (1 John 5:19)
-- is the greatest liar and deceiver
-- holds non-believers in bondage
-- spiritually blinds non-believers
-- holds non-believers as captives, slaves, prisoners
All of this is from the NT.
I will be happy to send one to anyone who asks.

Albion · Nov 1, 2019

Of course he received DNA from his mother (Mary).

BCsenior · Nov 1, 2019

sdowney717 said:
Christ identifying Himself as the 'I AM' confirms he is God.

Is there anyone here who does NOT believe that Jesus was/is God?
IMO, no.

BCsenior · Nov 1, 2019

His student said:
Jesus told His disciples to baptize in the Name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

I have about 20 NT verses, each of which mentions the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.
Each verse mentions all Three.
Just another powerful proof of the Triune Godhead, the Trinity.

BCsenior · Nov 1, 2019

redleghunter said:
That is not what is communicated in Philippians.
There is no evidence in the text God the Son emptied Himself of Deity.

Jesus emptying Himself of His rights is NOT the same as emptying Himself of His Deity.
This has to do with His humility, etc.

DamianWarS · Nov 1, 2019

BCsenior said:
IMO, He was indeed a most unique God-man blend.
Unique means one-of-a-kind, period.
The Word did the God part.
The Holy Spirit did the Man part.

The Word of God did not just unite to a person but actually became flesh. The Word is eternally existent, existing before the incarnation and was the same person after the incarnation but now enfleshed. Although we (Chalcedonian Christians) describe Christ's natures as two, the divine and the flesh, this is only intellectually observed, but Christ himself is indivisible and not split into two.

Christ is not a blend that can't be separated, as a blend suggests two preexistent components put together because the flesh did not exist outside of the Word. Your thoughts remind me of Eutyches idea of Christ who proposed that before the incarnation there were 2 natures and after the incarnation, there was 1 nature but the problem with this is it's logically muddled as before the incarnation there was no flesh nature disembodied and preexistent there was only the Word. It is when the Word becomes incarnate can we speak of flesh and it's not a blend it is the flesh of the Word.

These have all been hashed out through the Chruch in its earlier years. Often we look at the early church as a spoiled child failing its arms about picking up doctrines that pacified it for the time. This simply is just false and they seriously worked these things out, we think we have the magic formula that no one has ever thought about, but I pretty much guarantee it's been discussed before and probably took many years to figure out.

I would suggest a good book on how the early church was formed to get an idea of how mainstream Christians believe what we do today. Do you want to know why we believe in a dual nature of Christ? Well, it comes from the council of Ephesus 451 but had a lot of controversy surrounding before and after it, it's just not a few guys smoking around a table saying this is what we believe, this stuff takes centuries to develop.

A good book for me was "The First Seven Ecumenical Councils (325-787): Their History and Theology" by Leo D. Davis. fantastic book and it does not read like a history book but really helps paint a picture of the early church, and you walk away with an understanding of the pains of the early church and also its heresies to the development of what most mainstream denominations are based on even though thought out a millennium before the reformation.

BCsenior · Nov 1, 2019

Albion said:
That's correct. They simply do not understand the concept we call "the Trinity,"
and they have been schooled to ignore all the verses in Scripture that conflict with the "Oneness" theory.

Yes, but they are NOT the only "Christians" who ignore obvious Scripture
because it disagrees with their particular long-held false doctrines!
IMO, this is one of the reasons that many Spirit-filled Christians
on the Internet have been saying that the church today is FAST ASLEEP.
This is one reason God has been sending WAKE-UP calls to America.
But, the #1 reason for these judgments is the law allowing ABORTIONS.
So God has been telling His prophets.

The dual effort in the creation of the God-Man

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Confessional Lutheran

Confessional Lutheran

Confessional Lutheran

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Still an evangelist

Still an evangelist

Facilitator

Still an evangelist

Still an evangelist

Facilitator

Still an evangelist

Still an evangelist

Still an evangelist

Follower of Isa Al Masih

Still an evangelist

Similar threads