How can Jesus be Man and God?

[dóxatotheó]

Jesus is man and God. He has the nature of both eternal deity and mortal humanity which makes it possible for Jesus to be the way we can connect with God and experience heaven with earth. The virgin birth is what unites the two natures into the person of Jesus Christ (Matt 1:18). Fulfilling prophecy (Isa 7:14), Jesus was born of a virgin: conceived in the womb of His mother Mary, through the Holy Spirit, without the agency of a human father. His virgin birth protected Christ’s deity and preserved His humanity, making Jesus fully man and fully God. We can try to explain it as this think of Christ as something that subsists, without attending to the fact that he exists as God and human. In the second way, we consider a sup-posit as existing in its substantial nature. For example, we can think of Christ as something that exists as divine and human. When we look at Christ in the second way, that is, with regard to the manners of his subsistence, we must say that he is composite. He counts among his constituents not only divinity but also humanity.This shows that Christ is composite in the sense that he is not divine only. It doesn‘t directly show that he is composite in the sense of having a multiplicity of human parts, but that poses no special difficulty. If Christ were utterly simple, then indeed we couldn‘t say that he has a multiplicity of human parts, but once it is allowed that he is a composite of divinity and humanity, there is no reason to doubt that he is composite in this other way as well. This is the inseparable explanation we can explain for the hypo-static union taught by physician Thomas Aquinas is that Christ is composite in that
he has two natures, which allows him to have a human nature and the parts that come with it; this protects the integrity of Christ‘s humanity. Further, since this composition is a composition of natures within the whole person, and not a composition within the divine nature, the integrity of Christ‘s divinity is protected as well.
Sources: SUMMA THEOLOGIAE: The mode of union of the Word incarnate (Tertia Pars, Q. 2)
Aquinas’ Philosophical Theology | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

 

[Andrewn]

Fulfilling prophecy (Isa 7:14), Jesus was born of a virgin: conceived in the womb of His mother Mary, through the Holy Spirit, without the agency of a human father.

Luke 1:35 The angel said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be holy; he will be called Son of God.

Jesus the God-man is the Logos / Word of God. But who did the action described in this verse: The Logos, the Holy Spirit, or the Most High Father?

 

[dóxatotheó]

Luke 1:35 The angel said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be holy; he will be called Son of God.

Jesus the God-man is the Logos / Word of God. But who did the action described in this verse: The Logos, the Holy Spirit, or the Most High Father?

define action because the angel who appeared to Mary was Gabriel and the holy spirit was spirit that Jesus was incarnated through the term Son of God foreshadows pre-existence of Christ easily shown through the use of Son of God which we can see that this is use in a eternal way as seen in Colossians 2 and all persons in the trinity are in use in depth in regards to the incarnation if we state one does and the other doesn't that would entail a ontological subordination not economical the humbleness the logos took in eternity should not entail a paradox with christ being eternal

 

[yeshuasavedme]

Easy.
YHVH, in the Person of the Word, put on the New Creation Flesh of a man [ISH] in the same manner one dons a garment. Read it in Isaiah 59.
The flesh was created new, in the womb of a virgin, so that He could reverse adopt Himself into the Adam race, so as to be the Kinsman/Redeemer/brother to the Adam creation.

Jesus is man and God. He has the nature of both eternal deity and mortal humanity which makes it possible for Jesus to be the way we can connect with God and experience heaven with earth. The virgin birth is what unites the two natures into the person of Jesus Christ (Matt 1:18). Fulfilling prophecy (Isa 7:14), Jesus was born of a virgin: conceived in the womb of His mother Mary, through the Holy Spirit, without the agency of a human father. His virgin birth protected Christ’s deity and preserved His humanity, making Jesus fully man and fully God. We can try to explain it as this think of Christ as something that subsists, without attending to the fact that he exists as God and human. In the second way, we consider a sup-posit as existing in its substantial nature. For example, we can think of Christ as something that exists as divine and human. When we look at Christ in the second way, that is, with regard to the manners of his subsistence, we must say that he is composite. He counts among his constituents not only divinity but also humanity.This shows that Christ is composite in the sense that he is not divine only. It doesn‘t directly show that he is composite in the sense of having a multiplicity of human parts, but that poses no special difficulty. If Christ were utterly simple, then indeed we couldn‘t say that he has a multiplicity of human parts, but once it is allowed that he is a composite of divinity and humanity, there is no reason to doubt that he is composite in this other way as well. This is the inseparable explanation we can explain for the hypo-static union taught by physician Thomas Aquinas is that Christ is composite in that
he has two natures, which allows him to have a human nature and the parts that come with it; this protects the integrity of Christ‘s humanity. Further, since this composition is a composition of natures within the whole person, and not a composition within the divine nature, the integrity of Christ‘s divinity is protected as well.
Sources: SUMMA THEOLOGIAE: The mode of union of the Word incarnate (Tertia Pars, Q. 2)
Aquinas’ Philosophical Theology | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

 

[dóxatotheó]

Easy.
YHVH, in the Person of the Word, put on the New Creation Flesh of a man [ISH] in the same manner one dons a garment. Read it in Isaiah 59.
The flesh was created new, in the womb of a virgin, so that He could reverse adopt Himself into the Adam race, so as to be the Kinsman/Redeemer/brother to the Adam creation.

did you read this forum or just the title?

 

[yeshuasavedme]

did you read this forum or just the title?

You mean this thread, not this "forum".

I read it.
I gave a very short answer from the Word.
the Word is very clear.
Did you read Isaiah 59?
He is fully YHVH the Creator in the 2nd Person who put on the "Body Prepared in the Womb brand New, NOT of Adam flesh", for Him to don like a garment.
He is still wearing it, and He ALWAYS will, forever!
Rev 19 shows Him returning in the same "garment".

 

[dóxatotheó]

You mean this thread, not this "forum".

I read it.
I gave a very short answer from the Word.
the Word is very clear.
Did you read Isaiah 59?
He is fully YHVH the Creator in the 2nd Person who put on the "Body Prepared in the Womb brand New, NOT of Adam flesh", for Him to don like a garment.
He is still wearing it, and He ALWAYS will, forever!
Rev 19 shows Him returning in the same "garment".

oh ok it wasnt an attack it was a question and i agree

 

[Andrewn]

the term Son of God foreshadows pre-existence of Christ easily shown through the use of Son of God which we can see that this is use in a eternal way as seen in Colossians 2

Yes, indeed. the Nicene Creed expresses perfectly the pre-existence of the Logos/Word (Son of God):

"And [we believe] in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages;"

and all persons in the trinity are in use in depth in regards to the incarnation if we state one does and the other doesn't that would entail a ontological subordination not economical the humbleness the logos took in eternity should not entail a paradox with christ being eternal

Yes, again, God is One but in the Incarnation, it was the pre-existent Logos/Word that was specifically embodied. Yet this is not what Luk 1:35 implies

Luke 1:35 The angel said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be holy; he will be called Son of God.

and the holy spirit was spirit that Jesus was incarnated through

Exactly, Luk 1:35 implies that the Holy Spirit was incarnated in Jesus Christ. I know this is not the orthodox belief but I raise the issue as a question asking for an explanation. From Luk 1:35, one gets the impression that the Son of God is the same as the Holy Spirit is the same as the power of the Most High.

 

[disciple Clint]

Jesus is man and God. He has the nature of both eternal deity and mortal humanity which makes it possible for Jesus to be the way we can connect with God and experience heaven with earth. The virgin birth is what unites the two natures into the person of Jesus Christ (Matt 1:18). Fulfilling prophecy (Isa 7:14), Jesus was born of a virgin: conceived in the womb of His mother Mary, through the Holy Spirit, without the agency of a human father. His virgin birth protected Christ’s deity and preserved His humanity, making Jesus fully man and fully God. We can try to explain it as this think of Christ as something that subsists, without attending to the fact that he exists as God and human. In the second way, we consider a sup-posit as existing in its substantial nature. For example, we can think of Christ as something that exists as divine and human. When we look at Christ in the second way, that is, with regard to the manners of his subsistence, we must say that he is composite. He counts among his constituents not only divinity but also humanity.This shows that Christ is composite in the sense that he is not divine only. It doesn‘t directly show that he is composite in the sense of having a multiplicity of human parts, but that poses no special difficulty. If Christ were utterly simple, then indeed we couldn‘t say that he has a multiplicity of human parts, but once it is allowed that he is a composite of divinity and humanity, there is no reason to doubt that he is composite in this other way as well. This is the inseparable explanation we can explain for the hypo-static union taught by physician Thomas Aquinas is that Christ is composite in that
he has two natures, which allows him to have a human nature and the parts that come with it; this protects the integrity of Christ‘s humanity. Further, since this composition is a composition of natures within the whole person, and not a composition within the divine nature, the integrity of Christ‘s divinity is protected as well.
Sources: SUMMA THEOLOGIAE: The mode of union of the Word incarnate (Tertia Pars, Q. 2)
Aquinas’ Philosophical Theology | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

well done

 

[dóxatotheó]

Yes, indeed. the Nicene Creed expresses perfectly the pre-existence of the Logos/Word (Son of God):

"And [we believe] in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages;"


Yes, again, God is One but in the Incarnation, it was the pre-existent Logos/Word that was specifically embodied. Yet this is not what Luk 1:35 implies

Luke 1:35 The angel said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be holy; he will be called Son of God.


Exactly, Luk 1:35 implies that the Holy Spirit was incarnated in Jesus Christ. I know this is not the orthodox belief but I raise the issue as a question asking for an explanation. From Luk 1:35, one gets the impression that the Son of God is the same as the Holy Spirit is the same as the power of the Most High.

i wouldnt say the holy spirit incarnate but rather e apart of the process for the manifestation of Christ

 

[Daniel Marsh]

well done all

 

[The Liturgist]

Exactly, Luk 1:35 implies that the Holy Spirit was incarnated in Jesus Christ. I know this is not the orthodox belief but I raise the issue as a question asking for an explanation. From Luk 1:35, one gets the impression that the Son of God is the same as the Holy Spirit is the same as the power of the Most High.

Forgive me Andrew but I never got that impression from the text. Rather it seemed to me to simply be stating what Matthew 1 states albeit from the perspective of the Theotokos rather than St. Joseph.