Is Jesus The Son of God?

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,451
26,880
Pacific Northwest
✟731,988.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
I feel I need some encyclopedia to understand you :)

Definition of terms:

Diaphysitism - Literally "two natures-ism", from the Greek dyo meaning "two" and physis meaning "nature". In the Definition of Chalcedon the Greek reads that we confess Jesus Christ ἐκ δύο φύσεων (ek dyo physeon), literally "of two natures".

Miaphysitism - Literally "one nature-ism", from the Greek mia, "one". The miaphysite position is that Christ has a single "incarnate nature", not a confusion of humanity and Deity as in the heresy of Eutyches.

The difference here is fundamentally about what we mean by the word "nature", or physis. The diaphysite position is that the term "nature" refers to the two ousia or essences of Jesus (Deity and humanity); while in the miaphysite position the term "nature" refers to Christ's united, and undivided Person or Hypostastasis. That Christ, by the Incarnation, is (we might say) naturally both God and man together.

Eutychianism - The heresy of Eutyches who taught that in the Incarnation Christ's Deity overcame or swallowed up the humanity, he used the analogy of a drop of wine falling into the ocean. Thus Christ's humanity while technically present is swallowed up, overcome, and dominated by His immense Divinity. Resulting in a Divine Jesus who is, really, only human by a technicality--but He never operates as a man, but only as God. Thus Christ has no human will, for example, only a Divine will.

Nestorianism - The heresy of Nestorius of Constantinople, who argued that in the Incarnation the Eternal and Divine Son came down into a man, Jesus, and existed alongside the man Jesus. God the Son inhabited the human Jesus, but they were not the same. Thus there was the Divine Son and Word, and the human Jesus, operating together so to speak, but were never connected together as the one and same Person. Thus implicitly suggesting that there are two persons, an eternal Divine Person and a human person that was born of Mary, come together in purpose and mission, but never one and the same.

Theotokos - Literally "birth-giver of God", but often translated more simply to "God-bearer", and taken as synonymous in meaning with "mother of God". That Mary gave birth to God, because her Child is the one undivided God-Man. This was championed over and against the Nestorian claim that Mary was merely Christotokos, the "birth-giver of Christ", because Nestorius argued that Mary only conceived and gave birth to the human named Jesus, she did not conceive and give birth to the Divine Son. Theotokos, therefore, has always been the term used by orthodox Christians to champion the one, undivided Person of Jesus Christ, as the true and indivisible God-Man. Since we cannot divide the Deity and the humanity, but rather confess that Christ is both God and man without division or separation, we are compelled to say that Mary bore in her womb true God, not merely man, but God-and-man as one Person: our Lord Jesus Christ.

-CryptoLuthean
 
Upvote 0

James A

Active Member
Site Supporter
Apr 25, 2020
244
77
frisco
✟88,752.00
Country
United States
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
As the court system would say...we reject that as hear-say evidence...the story of the supposed eye witnesses cannot be corroborated. God gives us only the Word to check all other information against.
John 17:17: Sanctify them by Thy Truth; Thy Word is Truth.

Excuse me..God gave us Traditions as well

2 Thessalonians 2:15
Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

Bible in fact was a Tradition for the first almost 400 years of Christianity.
 
Upvote 0

Root of Jesse

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord
Site Supporter
Jun 23, 2011
18,910
3,646
Bay Area, California
Visit site
✟354,065.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
And Mary is a surrogate mother, God doesn't have a mother.
Before you start the heated discussion please look for a bible verse that says "Mary was free of original sin".
Well, we would say that God would have the mother of all mothers as his birth-mother. God could do it, and He did. God the Father created the most perfect person to be His mother. We believe her to be the new Ark of the Covenant, and we KNOW that God wouldn't let anything or anyone imperfect touch the Ark of the Covenant. The precedent is there, and we believe He did so.
So God would have a perfect vessel for Himself, Mary was that perfect vessel, and yes, He had her DNA. What do you think it means that the Holy Spirit 'overshadowed' her?
 
Upvote 0

Root of Jesse

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord
Site Supporter
Jun 23, 2011
18,910
3,646
Bay Area, California
Visit site
✟354,065.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
  • Winner
Reactions: RushMAN
Upvote 0

Root of Jesse

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord
Site Supporter
Jun 23, 2011
18,910
3,646
Bay Area, California
Visit site
✟354,065.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
The bible does not support that conclusion as Jesus was Mary's first child.
Here, I will disagree. There is nowhere in Scripture that says Mary had other children.
 
Upvote 0

Root of Jesse

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord
Site Supporter
Jun 23, 2011
18,910
3,646
Bay Area, California
Visit site
✟354,065.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
When you read the story of Jesus' birth you will find that Mary was a completely normal person. Look at Lk 1:29: "Mary was greatly troubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this might be". Apparently she had never met an angel before; nowhere in the whole Bible is any indication that she's had an encounter with God before or that God had removed her original sin in any way. Quite the opposite: the angel says "you have found favor with God". He doesn't say "you had found favor with God [and He made you special years ago by removing your original sin]", no, his words indicate that the whole plan of God using Mary starts only right now. Mary was an "average" young girl, if I may say so, and only at this point her life changed, when the angel announced that she'll receive a child. No word about her being holy or pure, no word about her not having original sin because she was born in a natural way herself. You find the same in Mary's own words (Lk 1:46-48) when she acknowledges that she actually isn't anything special but God uses her nevertheless.
Why would she need to have an encounter with God prior to her being overshadowed? What we know, from extra-Biblical texts, is that Mary was born to a barren couple who promised her consecration if they could only have such a child at their age. At the appropriate age, she was given to be a temple virgin. She was not an average girl. Yes, I know it's not Scriptural, but there are things in Scripture which are not Scriptural, too.
And this is what you see throughout the entire Bible: God uses the normal, average people! Those who are nothing special.
Lastly there is also the logical argument for Mary having original sin. Why did God have to become a human being to die for our sins? Because He wanted to? No, but because it had to be a sinless person! If Mary was holy, without original sin, then God didn't have to die. Mary could have died for our sins then. Jesus only had to be born and die for us because there is not a single sinless human on this earth. Why not a single one? Because all humans have original sin. If Mary didn't have it then Jesus' whole mission was needless.
The difference, though, is that Mary was created, and given sinlessness, whereas God the Son was begotten, not made, and sinless. Mary needed God to have this happen to her. Jesus didn't.
How does it matter whether it was the first or not-first child?



She was the one carrying out the baby, yes. That's pretty much all the Bible says about her. How does it contradict the conclusion of Mary being a surrogate mother?
 
Upvote 0

throughfiierytrial

Truth-Lover
Site Supporter
Apr 7, 2014
2,845
795
✟522,378.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Mary had a sinful nature (just like any of us - through Adam & Eves lineage) .... Yes, Jesus had to have a fleshly (human) body .... what I'm saying is that God made the total conception happen within Mary .... nothing biological from her.

Just as the first Adam was created without sin .... so Jesus was born without sin.

We know all are born with a sin nature .... Jesus was not born with a sin nature.

He was God in the form of a man.

Jesus is fully God and fully man, and the fact of His incarnation is of utmost importance. He lived a human life but did not possess a sin nature as we do. He was tempted but never sinned (Hebrews 2:14-18; 4:15). Sin entered the world through Adam, and Adam’s sinful nature has been transferred to every baby born into the world (Romans 5:12)—except for Jesus.
I'll leave stand what I posted and simply let you know I don't fully agree with your post.
 
Upvote 0

throughfiierytrial

Truth-Lover
Site Supporter
Apr 7, 2014
2,845
795
✟522,378.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Excuse me..God gave us Traditions as well

2 Thessalonians 2:15
Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

Bible in fact was a Tradition for the first almost 400 years of Christianity.
We can only hold to those traditions we become aware as revealed to us in the Scripture. This is in my opinion the safest and most holy effort.
 
Upvote 0

throughfiierytrial

Truth-Lover
Site Supporter
Apr 7, 2014
2,845
795
✟522,378.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hmm, I always thought that families went to the place of the father's origin to be taxed, independent of the mother's origin, but I might be wrong on that.
I know of a Bible study which once was convened to discuss Luke3 as Mary's lineage...I missed it, so I have not proven it to myself yet...some seem very convinced...evidence??? I don't know. Anyway, didn't mean to confuse the OP discussion.
BTW, I do agree that it would seem tradition to do all family registration through the father (in Israel anyway...Numbers worked that way)...don't know how *liberated* the Roman world was at that time...anyway, just a thought.
 
Upvote 0

Bruce Leiter

A sinner saved by God's astounding grace and love
Jun 16, 2018
782
551
81
West Michigan
Visit site
✟56,865.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I know that this is a ridiculous question because the obvious answer is yes He is. Although it seems like that a lot of people don't believe that and think that the Father and the Son are the exactly the same being and person. Which even though they are alike they are not the same because even Jesus refers to the creator as being His Father and prays to Him. He couldn't pray to Himself. So I just had to make this topic to make that perfectly clear. Jesus is the Son of God and Joseph is His step-father. I've known this even before I turned double digits.

The Father and Jesus are the same being but not the same person, a truth we can't fathom because he's God and we're not.
 
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

April_Rose

Well-Known Member
Jul 4, 2020
3,815
2,458
34
Ohio
✟23,719.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Engaged
Yes well if you asked Jesus while on the earth, "Who is your mother?" He would have said Mary. But he would say that knowing he's meaning that only in a certain context. That would be she brought forth the physical component of his flesh and blood body. Not him but IT.

We need to remember though the physical body IS NOT the real person in the truest sense. The true being is the Spirit or the spirit of man.

You'll notice how the prophesy stated, “But a body You have prepared for Me.” ‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭10:5‬ It give you the sense that the body of the physical is not the REAL person but the house they live in. Paul the Apostle stated about the difference between Spirit and flesh even with humans. He stated, But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: 1 Cor 9:27 So he called his physical body IT....and not him.

I think of a glove. The real life of course is that hand that goes in the glove. The glove is a mere covering. We may say the glove is the hand but not really. And the physical body is not really the person.

Now in legal affairs on this earth there is a right context in which we say the physical body is us. If someone hits you you say they hit me. Exactly but the greater spiritual truth is the physical is not you.









I don't know what all of this is about, but when you say somebody is your mother then she's your mother. If she held you in your womb (or in my case adopted me) then she's your mother and Jesus is a male so He's a he. He was also circumcised eight days after He was born so He definitely had male genitals just like every other guy. :rolleyes:
 
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
11,174
5,707
49
The Wild West
✟475,189.00
Country
United States
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
Do you have any evidence that "Chalcedonian" were right in everything they came with? Or why do you quote them?

Deductive logic from Scripture and the ancient and continuing tradition of the Christian religion convinces me that the Christological model of Cyril of Alexandria is correct and that Nestorius was in error. Chalcedon is another issue, which is more complicated, but my view is that in general the four surviving forms of ancient Christianity, that is to say, the Eastern Orthodox, the Oriental Orthodox, the Assyrians, and the mainstream Western Christians (Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican) embrace a correct Christological model which could be broadly defined, to use a tongue in cheek term, as “Chalcedon-compliant.”
 
  • Winner
Reactions: RushMAN
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
11,174
5,707
49
The Wild West
✟475,189.00
Country
United States
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
Definition of terms:

Diaphysitism - Literally "two natures-ism", from the Greek dyo meaning "two" and physis meaning "nature". In the Definition of Chalcedon the Greek reads that we confess Jesus Christ ἐκ δύο φύσεων (ek dyo physeon), literally "of two natures".

Miaphysitism - Literally "one nature-ism", from the Greek mia, "one". The miaphysite position is that Christ has a single "incarnate nature", not a confusion of humanity and Deity as in the heresy of Eutyches.

The difference here is fundamentally about what we mean by the word "nature", or physis. The diaphysite position is that the term "nature" refers to the two ousia or essences of Jesus (Deity and humanity); while in the miaphysite position the term "nature" refers to Christ's united, and undivided Person or Hypostastasis. That Christ, by the Incarnation, is (we might say) naturally both God and man together.

Eutychianism - The heresy of Eutyches who taught that in the Incarnation Christ's Deity overcame or swallowed up the humanity, he used the analogy of a drop of wine falling into the ocean. Thus Christ's humanity while technically present is swallowed up, overcome, and dominated by His immense Divinity. Resulting in a Divine Jesus who is, really, only human by a technicality--but He never operates as a man, but only as God. Thus Christ has no human will, for example, only a Divine will.

Nestorianism - The heresy of Nestorius of Constantinople, who argued that in the Incarnation the Eternal and Divine Son came down into a man, Jesus, and existed alongside the man Jesus. God the Son inhabited the human Jesus, but they were not the same. Thus there was the Divine Son and Word, and the human Jesus, operating together so to speak, but were never connected together as the one and same Person. Thus implicitly suggesting that there are two persons, an eternal Divine Person and a human person that was born of Mary, come together in purpose and mission, but never one and the same.

Theotokos - Literally "birth-giver of God", but often translated more simply to "God-bearer", and taken as synonymous in meaning with "mother of God". That Mary gave birth to God, because her Child is the one undivided God-Man. This was championed over and against the Nestorian claim that Mary was merely Christotokos, the "birth-giver of Christ", because Nestorius argued that Mary only conceived and gave birth to the human named Jesus, she did not conceive and give birth to the Divine Son. Theotokos, therefore, has always been the term used by orthodox Christians to champion the one, undivided Person of Jesus Christ, as the true and indivisible God-Man. Since we cannot divide the Deity and the humanity, but rather confess that Christ is both God and man without division or separation, we are compelled to say that Mary bore in her womb true God, not merely man, but God-and-man as one Person: our Lord Jesus Christ.

-CryptoLuthean

I seriously love your posts @CryptoLutheran

You precisely summarize Christology in a pan-Orthodox, ecumenical manner that all of the liturgical churches should agree to at least subtextually.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: RushMAN
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
11,174
5,707
49
The Wild West
✟475,189.00
Country
United States
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
Here, I will disagree. There is nowhere in Scripture that says Mary had other children.

Indeed, and the most prominent Protestants including Luther, Calvin and Wesley upheld the doctrine of her perpetual virginity.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: RushMAN
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
11,174
5,707
49
The Wild West
✟475,189.00
Country
United States
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
The Father and Jesus are the same being but not the same person, a truth we can't fathom because he's God and we're not.

There is a lot I think we can learn from reflection on the Holy Trinity, however. The Eastern Orthodox scholar Metropolitan Kallistos Ware in his book The Orthodox Way wrote a beautiful chapter which explains Trinitarian theology, called God as Trinity, describing the Trinity as an eternal union of perfect love we are called to emulate.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: RushMAN
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

James A

Active Member
Site Supporter
Apr 25, 2020
244
77
frisco
✟88,752.00
Country
United States
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
We can only hold to those traditions we become aware as revealed to us in the Scripture. This is in my opinion the safest and most holy effort.

That opinion would make one surprise how the early church srvived the first centuries where there was no Canon of New Testament scripture existed.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

James A

Active Member
Site Supporter
Apr 25, 2020
244
77
frisco
✟88,752.00
Country
United States
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Deductive logic from Scripture and the ancient and continuing tradition of the Christian religion convinces me that the Christological model of Cyril of Alexandria is correct and that Nestorius was in error. Chalcedon is another issue, which is more complicated, but my view is that in general the four surviving forms of ancient Christianity, that is to say, the Eastern Orthodox, the Oriental Orthodox, the Assyrians, and the mainstream Western Christians (Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican) embrace a correct Christological model which could be broadly defined, to use a tongue in cheek term, as “Chalcedon-compliant.”

Oriental Orthodox accepts the first three councils only.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: The Liturgist
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
11,174
5,707
49
The Wild West
✟475,189.00
Country
United States
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
Oriental Orthodox accepts the first three councils only.

Indeed so, but they are still completely Orthodox in my opinion. In fact some of the best Christological writing ever was by St. Severus of Antioch. Then we have the exquisite liturgical poetry of St. Jacob of Sarugh, who the Syriac Orthodox refer to as “the Flute of the Spirit” (St. Ephrem the Syrian being the “Harp of the Spirit”).
 
  • Winner
Reactions: RushMAN
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
11,174
5,707
49
The Wild West
✟475,189.00
Country
United States
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
Okay,.. if that's what you believe I guess... remember I'm not Catholic so I don't believe it.

Well, John Wesley did, for whatever that’s worth.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: RushMAN
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