Restoresmysoul
Regular Member
Perhaps we can better understand Lion Kings point by examining Paul's words. I'm not sure, just a thought.
Galatians 4
Galatians 4
Upvote
0
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The Nicene Creed - line by line
- Thread starter ~Anastasia~
- Start date
N
Nanopants
Guest
Uhm hmm. It doesn't say "before all time," it says "ages," which I suppose could be the same ages which the Word framed Himself (Heb 11:3). Then there is this brain teaser:
Look! he answered, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire; and they are not hurt, and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God. -Dan 3:25
I'm not sure if I'm reading this correctly but, not only was He present in the beginning but apparently He was seen, before His arrival
Eh, I think we need an emoticon for mental breakdowns.
Upvote
0
Restoresmysoul
Regular Member
Revelation 22:12 “And behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to give to every one according to his work. 13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last.”[f]
14 Blessed are those who do His commandments,[g] that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city.
18 For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add[j] to him the plagues that are written in this book; 19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away[k] his part from the Book[l] of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
20 He who testifies to these things says, “Surely I am coming quickly.”
Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus!
21 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all.[m] Amen.
14 Blessed are those who do His commandments,[g] that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city.
18 For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add[j] to him the plagues that are written in this book; 19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away[k] his part from the Book[l] of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
20 He who testifies to these things says, “Surely I am coming quickly.”
Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus!
21 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all.[m] Amen.
Upvote
0
Lion King
Veni, vidi, vici
- Mar 29, 2011
- 7,360
- 578
- Faith
- Christian Seeker
- Marital Status
- Single
If you have a point, then if you don't mind I'd rather you come right out and make it than to try to lead with questions, please.
And if you are having trouble understanding what Jesus being "Begotten of the Father" means, that might be a better thing to say.
But it does not mean that Jesus is a created being. God cannot be created - if the Son is God, then He cannot have been created.
Anyone who believes in the Son is BEGOTTEN of the Father (1 John 5:18, 1 Peter 1:3). However, Jesus Christ is the ONLY-BEGOTTEN of the Father.
How is that possible?
The answer is simple, really.
Let's take a close look at the definition of the word "only-begotten" in the Scriptures:
3439. monogenés
monogenés: only begotten
Original Word: μονογενής, ές
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: monogenés
Phonetic Spelling: (mon-og-en-ace')
Short Definition: only, only-begotten, unique
Definition: only, only-begotten; unique.
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." John 3:16
The above verse speaks about Christ being the "monogenēs/unique/only-begotten" Son of God in eternity before creation. God gave His one and only Son, and that He is "unique" in the sense that He is THE only Son of God as to the "many" sons of God (angels, adopted sons of God). This can be further seen in Hebrews 11:17, although Abraham had more than one son, Isaac was his "only begotten" son. The word /monogenes /is the Greek translation for the Hebrew word /yachidh/, or "one and only", the word used of Isaac, who was Abraham's "one and only son" in the sense of his uniqueness and exclusivity as the son of promise and a type of Christ.
Now, on the other hand we have a different meaning to the word "begotten" in the book of Psalm/Acts/Hebrews:
begotten
gennaó: to beget, to bring forth
Original Word: γεννάω
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: gennaó
Phonetic Spelling: (ghen-nah'-o)
Short Definition: I beget, bring forth, give birth to
Definition: I beget (of the male), (of the female) I bring forth, give birth to.
"God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee." Acts 13:33
The passage above is specifically talking in relation to being Christ being "born" by God, and not in relation to the "uniqueness" of Christ. The word (begotten) used by Paul does not have the same meaning as the passages in the book of John. Jesus Christ was "begotten" at His resurrection; but He was/is the unique (only begotten) Son of God in eternity before creation, but there was no "begetting" before the first advent.
Upvote
0
- Dec 1, 2013
- 31,129
- 17,440
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Married
Uhm hmm. It doesn't say "before all time," it says "ages," which I suppose could be the same ages which the Word framed Himself (Heb 11:3). Then there is this brain teaser:
Look! he answered, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire; and they are not hurt, and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God. -Dan 3:25
I'm not sure if I'm reading this correctly but, not only was He present in the beginning but apparently He was seen, before His arrival
Eh, I think we need an emoticon for mental breakdowns.
I know, Theophanies bring in a whole 'nother set of questions, don't they?
I'm pretty comfortable with the idea of the one in Daniel though. I'm not ready to explain Melchizedek or whether he might be one, or get into the three men who visited Abraham.
Not to mention the Glory that Moses beheld, and who Jacob wrestled.
I don't think we have an emoticon for that, no, do we? We can try one of these ...
I think the last one best expresses me sometimes, LOL.
Upvote
0
- Dec 1, 2013
- 31,129
- 17,440
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Married
Thanks for the Greek and notes on the language. I have not had time to look at it.
As far as I can tell, I'd agree with you on almost all of it. I consider Christ to be the firstfruits at His resurrection, yes.
I have to disagree on the last sentence is the only thing - but it depends what you mean by it. I have an idea we are not considering the "begotten before all ages" in the same way as each other. Regardless, I have to support what the Creed says, and I will say it has also greatly helped my understanding of the Trinity in a way no analogy yet has ever done.
Thanks very much for your post.
Upvote
0
- Dec 1, 2013
- 31,129
- 17,440
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Married
So moving ahead ...
(Btw, I keep considering breaking in different places than where I choose. If anyone wants to address one of my posts as if it were two parts or whatever - that's fine too.)
I believe in one God, Father Almighty, Creator of
heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of
God, begotten of the Father before all ages;
Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten,
not created,
of one essence with the Father
through Whom all things were made.
(Btw, I keep considering breaking in different places than where I choose. If anyone wants to address one of my posts as if it were two parts or whatever - that's fine too.)
I believe in one God, Father Almighty, Creator of
heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of
God, begotten of the Father before all ages;
Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten,
not created,
of one essence with the Father
through Whom all things were made.
Upvote
0
- Dec 1, 2013
- 31,129
- 17,440
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Married
This part I actually asked specifically about. This is kind of nit-picking, but I wanted to know. I wasn't sure if this was saying that all things were made through the Father, or if all things were made through the Son.
The answer I received is ... that they are of the same essence ... and it was through the essence that all things were made.
(The essence being "God-ness" in a sense - poorly put I know, but the essence is what is means to be God. The essence and energies of God is a whole other interesting topic)
As for the rest of what I would say, I accidentally broke my own rule yesterday and move ahead without meaning to, which is the point that the Father and the Son share the same essence - they are both God.
Upvote
0
MoreCoffee
Repentance works.
- Jan 8, 2011
- 29,860
- 2,841
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Private
I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the Only Begotten Son of God,
born of the Father before all ages.
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;
through him all things were made.
In the Mass the wording of the creed used today differs slightly from the wording used from the 1970s to 2011. One of the differences is restoring the word "consubstantial" which has its roots in Latin and whose meaning can be expressed as "one being" or "of the same being" or as Kylissa's post indicates "of the same essence".
As always the Church looks to the early church fathers and apostolic tradition as well as to sacred scripture for her understanding of what God has revealed to us about himself. If we remove apostolic tradition from our view and rely on scripture alone it is altogether too easy to generate disputes and lose the intended meaning of the scriptures. Because scripture, like so much of written language, is capable of being read with differences in pauses and differences in meaning for particular words. These differences can, and do, create many disputes; for example, the choice of placement for a single comma in the Lord's statement "I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise." The same difficulties faced the council fathers as they interpreted sacred scripture; had they interpreted without the benefit of apostolic tradition and the writings of the fathers who had lived before them the dispute with Arius and his followers would have been insoluble - it would have been like talking with Jehovah's witnesses about the Holy Trinity today.
But the council fathers did have apostolic tradition and the living interpretive voice of the Church and her fathers. Thus our faith has come to us through sacred Tradition, sacred Scripture, and the living interpretive voice of the Church.
the Only Begotten Son of God,
born of the Father before all ages.
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;
through him all things were made.
In the Mass the wording of the creed used today differs slightly from the wording used from the 1970s to 2011. One of the differences is restoring the word "consubstantial" which has its roots in Latin and whose meaning can be expressed as "one being" or "of the same being" or as Kylissa's post indicates "of the same essence".
When the early Church Fathers gathered in the Ecumenical Council at Nicaea in 325, they were confronted with the task of explaining the relationship between the Father and the Son. They had two Greek words at their disposal in order to explain this relationship — <<homoousious>> and <<homoiousious>>. <<Homoousious>> means that the Son (Jesus) is of the same essence or substance as the Father, while <<homoiousious>> means that the Son is of a similar essence or substance as the Father. The first makes Jesus God, the second does not. The first is the orthodox teaching of the Church, the second is heresy. There is only one iota of a difference between these two words — literally the letter “i”.
This Greek word <<homoousious>> is translated into Latin as <<consubstantialem>> and as we see in the revised English language Missal as “consubstantial.” As the Church prays together that Jesus is “consubstantial with the Father” we are expressing as clearly as our language will allow our belief that Jesus is God and in doing so confirming our belief in the Most Holy Trinity. While the Son (Jesus) is not the Father, He shares the same substance as the Father — here we have the beginning of our Trinitarian theology.
...
Finally, the phrase, “born of the Father” can be confusing if we think within the context of time. But remember, God exists outside of time. To say that Jesus was “born of the Father” might suggest that there was a time when He was not, when He did not exist; and this would certainly be true if we omitted the second part of the phrase, “before all ages.” The second half of the phrase reminds us that Jesus is begotten within the framework of eternity — outside of time. In other words, there has never been a time when He was not. He has always existed as the Son of the Father.
-- Diocese of Covington - Messenger at 1125 Madison Ave., Covington, KY 41011 US - Nicene Creed ? ?Consubstantial?This Greek word <<homoousious>> is translated into Latin as <<consubstantialem>> and as we see in the revised English language Missal as “consubstantial.” As the Church prays together that Jesus is “consubstantial with the Father” we are expressing as clearly as our language will allow our belief that Jesus is God and in doing so confirming our belief in the Most Holy Trinity. While the Son (Jesus) is not the Father, He shares the same substance as the Father — here we have the beginning of our Trinitarian theology.
...
Finally, the phrase, “born of the Father” can be confusing if we think within the context of time. But remember, God exists outside of time. To say that Jesus was “born of the Father” might suggest that there was a time when He was not, when He did not exist; and this would certainly be true if we omitted the second part of the phrase, “before all ages.” The second half of the phrase reminds us that Jesus is begotten within the framework of eternity — outside of time. In other words, there has never been a time when He was not. He has always existed as the Son of the Father.
As always the Church looks to the early church fathers and apostolic tradition as well as to sacred scripture for her understanding of what God has revealed to us about himself. If we remove apostolic tradition from our view and rely on scripture alone it is altogether too easy to generate disputes and lose the intended meaning of the scriptures. Because scripture, like so much of written language, is capable of being read with differences in pauses and differences in meaning for particular words. These differences can, and do, create many disputes; for example, the choice of placement for a single comma in the Lord's statement "I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise." The same difficulties faced the council fathers as they interpreted sacred scripture; had they interpreted without the benefit of apostolic tradition and the writings of the fathers who had lived before them the dispute with Arius and his followers would have been insoluble - it would have been like talking with Jehovah's witnesses about the Holy Trinity today.
But the council fathers did have apostolic tradition and the living interpretive voice of the Church and her fathers. Thus our faith has come to us through sacred Tradition, sacred Scripture, and the living interpretive voice of the Church.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
N
Nanopants
Guest
I think it's a great question. Particularly since I am finally getting somewhere in understanding it myself - which may or may not make me anyone who should be answering you, LOL.
I'll do my best, but I'm afraid I'm going to fall down when it gets to the deep part of it.
I've always been told "we believe in 1 God in 3 persons - Father, Son, and Holy Spirit". Then they told me the Father had a throne in Heaven, and they told me Jesus became a man, and that He is sitting on another throne at the Father's right hand. So while I could imagine the Holy Spirit as something kind of amorphous, nevertheless, I had two bodily forms and another amorphous form, and they were all "God" and yet I was supposed to believe in only one God.
I nodded my head and agreed, "Yes, 3 persons, 1 God" because that's what I was supposed to do, but deep in my heart, I couldn't understand it. I was told "that's ok, nobody understands" but I still felt guilty that I never admitted, in case I was somehow worshipping three Gods and not One.
Forgive me for my mistakes, and forgive me for that explanation that's going to sound simplistic or possibly ridiculous to some. But that's what I was given, that's where it led, and I AM a fairly logical person with at least a little bit of sense.
Now (taking a deep breath) ... from within the Creed ... I am SLOWLY getting an inkling of a new understanding. I have a feeling that some of my brothers and sisters in Christ have always understood this. And I have a feeling I'm not going to be able to explain it well. But I'm going to try. Forgive me ... I know my efforts will be less than wonderful.
What is starting to make a great difference to me - is the idea of the Son being begotten of the Father .... and of the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father.
Wow, I'm stuck already. I know I can say what I don't mean.
I don't mean that these events happened at a point in our time, such that once there was God the Father, then He begat the Son and the Holy Spirit proceeded forth - because that would make the Son and Holy Spirit to be essentially creatures, with a beginning point. There is something I can't quite wrap my mind around with an eternal aspect here, which means that all three are co-eternal (necessary if they are really God).
And the "being of one Substance with the Father" helps me. It is not that God is divided - that is not correct either.
I have heard the Holy Spirit described as something like breath from the Father, or light as it comes from the Sun - that illustration might help?
That sounds interesting. We are told that the Word that God spoke does accomplish what God pleases (Isa 55:11), and if the Word accomplishes it as God, He is God in my estimation. So, I like that bit, except that if it is that same Word who is that which became flesh as the man Jesus, then He is not the Spirit according to the creed, so I have a little trouble with the spoken Word of God being the breath (ruach) of God, and as such being the same as the Spirit. An interesting question but one that's slightly off topic, imo, is that if the Word spoken by God became flesh, what of the words spoken by the Word? I'm not asking expecting you to have an answer, btw, I'm just throwing that out there.
There is an illustration that has been helpful to me, which I drew and is in my "Misc" photo album on my profile, if you're interested. I drew it but I didn't invent it; it's a depiction of something encountered when I was converted, but it wasn't a vision or something merely in my head.
No problem ;] It's definitely a mentally exhausting subject.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
- Jan 31, 2006
- 44,402
- 14,528
- Country
- Canada
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
of one essence with the Father by whom all things were made;
I don't know why it's such a point of contention whether Jesus proclaimed to be God or not. Claiming to be one with God such as in Jn 10:30 seems obvious as to His meaning, especially in light of 10:33 when they were about to stone Him for blasphamy for that reason. Or in 5:58 when the plot for His death began. Or when Thomas brought the Word being with God and is God full circle when he claimed the man Jesus to be not only His Lord but His God.
Three persons composed of one essence isn't the same as three entities.Perhaps that essence can best be described as holiness. Our essense is one of humanity but are made of different parts for different functions.
Equal in strength was a difficult process and it wasn't because I thought of the Father as the old mean guy in the sky while Jesus was the loving Guy balancing that. My thoughts of God were strong and loving while, not realizing it at the time, I thought of Jesus as a wimp. (I think that many who haven't seen Jesus as God are guilty of it) God corrected me on that when I had a dream that I was skipping up the road to the Father's house and He knocked me in the dirt saying to stay there until I learnt repect for Christ and the apostles. Seriously humbling. Now I see the risen Lord as the warrior that He is. The trials that the disciples went thru as learning stones for me to follow.
The ages of the universe unfold in time. All things that the Father created came into being through Jesus Christ as the means, and it is through the means of the Lord's regeneration that we as believers turn to the Father and are unto Him. Hence, both we and all things are through Christ.
I don't know why it's such a point of contention whether Jesus proclaimed to be God or not. Claiming to be one with God such as in Jn 10:30 seems obvious as to His meaning, especially in light of 10:33 when they were about to stone Him for blasphamy for that reason. Or in 5:58 when the plot for His death began. Or when Thomas brought the Word being with God and is God full circle when he claimed the man Jesus to be not only His Lord but His God.
Three persons composed of one essence isn't the same as three entities.Perhaps that essence can best be described as holiness. Our essense is one of humanity but are made of different parts for different functions.
Equal in strength was a difficult process and it wasn't because I thought of the Father as the old mean guy in the sky while Jesus was the loving Guy balancing that. My thoughts of God were strong and loving while, not realizing it at the time, I thought of Jesus as a wimp. (I think that many who haven't seen Jesus as God are guilty of it) God corrected me on that when I had a dream that I was skipping up the road to the Father's house and He knocked me in the dirt saying to stay there until I learnt repect for Christ and the apostles. Seriously humbling. Now I see the risen Lord as the warrior that He is. The trials that the disciples went thru as learning stones for me to follow.
The ages of the universe unfold in time. All things that the Father created came into being through Jesus Christ as the means, and it is through the means of the Lord's regeneration that we as believers turn to the Father and are unto Him. Hence, both we and all things are through Christ.
Upvote
0
- Dec 1, 2013
- 31,129
- 17,440
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Married
Thanks for your post, Cassia. I was at one time guilty of not seeing Jesus as Almighty as well. I think it's an easy mistake to make, at least given the Sunday School materials I can remember.
There's another lesson in there about meekness. That it doesn't mean being weak, or a doormat, or any such thing. True humility can be coupled with very great strength, especially strength that chooses to limit itself for the sake of another.
That's one I think I'd like to think about for a while. Thanks very much for your post.
Upvote
0
- Dec 10, 2003
- 23,896
- 9,864
- Country
- Australia
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
Upvote
0
- Dec 10, 2003
- 23,896
- 9,864
- Country
- Australia
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
Just pointing out that there should be a comma or semicolon after "Father" (added in red above). The "Whom" here refers to "one Lord Jesus Christ," because it is through Christ that all things were made:
Hebrews 1:1-2: Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.
Colossians 1:15-16: He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him.
John 1:1-3: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.
As Dorothy Sayers points out somewhere, it is easy to misread this as "being of one substance with the-Father-by-whom-all-things-were-made."
The semicolon is also missing in the version of the Creed in our CF rules, but the reference to Hebrews 1:1-2 makes clear what is intended.
I'm afraid that makes no sense to me at all. Historically the intent is that all things were made through the Son. That is clearer in the original language and in modern translations of the Creed. Also, the whole paragraph is about our "one Lord Jesus Christ."
To quote Theodore of Mopsuestia (350–428 AD) in his Commentary on the Creed:
"After this they said: By Whom the worlds were made and all things were created.
As in the section of the faith which deals with the Father, after the word 'Father' they added 'Creator of all things,' so also in the section which deals with the Son, after stating that He was born of the Father and was consubstantial with Him, they rightly added that He was the creator of all things, because a true Son who is consubstantial with His Father is also a true creator like Him. In this same way the blessed John the evangelist, after having said 'in the beginning He was with God, and He was God' [John 1:1] added: 'All things were made by Him and without Him was not anything made,' [John 1:3] in order to show us that He was a creator like God His Father.
In this same way after our blessed Fathers had said that the Son was from the Father, that He was true God from true God and that He was consubstantial with His Father, they added: By whom the worlds were made and all things were created. They said this because as He is with His Father before all the worlds, He is the creator of all things like God His Father. And since the worlds were made by Him, He is the creator of all creatures, and He is before all the worlds, because He is from eternity and did not begin to exist later, but was in the beginning and is the creator of all the worlds, as the blessed Paul said: 'By Him He made the worlds' [Heb 1:2].
Our blessed Fathers also after saying like him: 'By Him the worlds were made,' added that He was the creator of all things. In this way they taught us the divinity of the Only Begotten while stating something which was in harmony with the Sacred Books; and gave also encouragement to those who are zealous in their religion, and confuted those who deny the divinity of the Only Begotten.
As to us we have explained to your love the meaning of the (profession of) faith in a succinct manner, according to our ability. If you wish it let the measure of the things which we said suffice for our teaching of to-day, and let us praise the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit for ever and ever. Amen."
Last edited:
Upvote
0
- Jan 31, 2006
- 44,402
- 14,528
- Country
- Canada
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
ya I think meek just means not to resist opposition doesn't it?Thanks for your post, Cassia. I was at one time guilty of not seeing Jesus as Almighty as well. I think it's an easy mistake to make, at least given the Sunday School materials I can remember.
There's another lesson in there about meekness. That it doesn't mean being weak, or a doormat, or any such thing. True humility can be coupled with very great strength, especially strength that chooses to limit itself for the sake of another.
That's one I think I'd like to think about for a while. Thanks very much for your post.
Upvote
0
- Dec 1, 2013
- 31,129
- 17,440
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Married
The real trick I think is to know when it is right to resist, and when not. That's what I'm trying to figure out right now anyway.
Upvote
0
MoreCoffee
Repentance works.
- Jan 8, 2011
- 29,860
- 2,841
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Private
For us men and for our salvation
he came down from heaven,
and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary,
and became man.
God became man so that man might become God, said saint Athanasius who was present at the Nicene council when our Creed was being written. He grasped the purpose God had in mind when he chose to become incarnate. His intention is to elevate humanity above the lot of a earthly creature and even above the lofty heights of the angels. Thus by taking human flesh God elevates human flesh to share the divine nature as much as it is possible for a creature to do so. God became man for our salvation. He was born of the Virgin Mary and thus became man. We ought not to forget what God did for us nor by whose help and agency he chose to do it - by the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary.
he came down from heaven,
and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary,
and became man.
God became man so that man might become God, said saint Athanasius who was present at the Nicene council when our Creed was being written. He grasped the purpose God had in mind when he chose to become incarnate. His intention is to elevate humanity above the lot of a earthly creature and even above the lofty heights of the angels. Thus by taking human flesh God elevates human flesh to share the divine nature as much as it is possible for a creature to do so. God became man for our salvation. He was born of the Virgin Mary and thus became man. We ought not to forget what God did for us nor by whose help and agency he chose to do it - by the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary.
Upvote
0
- Jan 31, 2006
- 44,402
- 14,528
- Country
- Canada
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
There was an important distinction of the creation in Radagast's post that hopefully was clear in mine also.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Poll
