/christianity/ - Christian Theology & Philosophy

I have a thread as an addendum to this one ;)

>>6641

>>10686

yours is erroneous

>>10685

>If Jesus is God, then Mary is theotokos, mother of God.

No. Jesus is God. Who is eternal. He was not born of Mary, only his earthly body was. Jesus himself gives her no special regard or status, and refers to her merely as "woman", not even by name.

>>10719

You're correct

In John 1 it's written that Jesus BECAME flesh when he was born of Mary. This strongly implies that flesh is not part of his nature, and that Mary was only mother to the flesh.

>inb4 what about bodily appearances of Jesus before his advent

A spiritual body is not a fleshly body

>>10719

>>10725

Depart from me, heretical Nestorians.

>>10744

But why am I wrong?

Jesus BECAME flesh and dwelt among us.

Is John 1 wrong?

>>10719

Daniel 3:25 is one of many old testament examples of Jesus manifesting before his birth.

If anyone can think of others and would like to post them that'd be swell

>>10744

Calling Mary a God is the real Heresy here.

>>10750

Every time in the Old Testament, when someone speaks to God face to face, or sees The Man who has brass skin, eyes like a flame of fire, and a face like beryl stone; every occurrence of these is an appearance of Jesus Christ.

>>10751

Excuse, me, I meant body like a beryl stone.

>>10745

>>10750

You quite literally don't understand Christology. He is one divine Person, the eternal Son of God, who took on a true human nature, along with His divine nature, in what is called the Hypostatic union. He is the Second Person of the Trinity, with two natures (a created human nature, and an eternal divine nature) who was birthed by the Virgin Mary. That makes her the mother of God.

>>10753

That very clearly makes her not the mother of God. He predates her. She can not be his mother. He is God, she is a mere human. She can not be his mother. She was simply the portal through which Christ took on his earthly body. The fact that he is God is in itself complete proof that she is not his mother. If she is somehow special and important and the mother of God, why does it never say that in the Bible? Why does Jesus himself refer to her merely as "woman", while clearly indicating she is not his mother?

>>10750

"Theotokos" in Christian usage doesn't mean she's mother of all the trinity, or that she chronologically precedes Christ. If it did your criticism would be valid.

>>10753

You got one detail wrong here, there is no part of his human nor divine nature that is created.

That would be against the immutability of Jesus Christ, of eternally and unchangeably being in hypostatic union.

Matthew 22:41-45

While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The Son of David. He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying,

The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?

If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?

John 1:1-4

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

The same was in the beginning with God.

All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

Colossians 1:15-17

Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

>>10764

He also had two births. The Son was begotten/comes forth from the Father from all eternity (John 8:42, John 16:28). The Son came forth from the Father from all eternity, in His divine nature. (Of course, He was not *created* by the Father, but rather, eternally begotten.) But He also had another birth, in time, in His humanity, from Mary. His humanity predicates His personhood, God the Son is one person; He also is the man Christ Jesus. One person, two natures.

>>10764

>Did the Incarnation happen at a point in time? Yes.

His human nature predates this. He predates Adam and is what Adam was made in the image of.

John 1:15

John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.

1 John 1:1-2

That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;

(For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)

>Furthermore, I remember having this EXACT debate with you on the other board a couple months ago.

You're saying that his life started at some point when actually his life has no beginning as it starts in eternity past. His full and complete hypostatic union nature has no beginning nor end.

Ephesians 3:9

And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

Hebrews 13:8

Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

Colossians 1:15-17

Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

>You think that the Messiah, Lord, cannot be David's son, because then David could not call Him Lord.

No he is, according to prophecy. And at the same time as this, he is eternally pre-existent as a life that predates the beginning of Adam's life, according to John 1:1-4.

>You are as blind to the truth as the Pharisees.

The book of Revelation, chapter 22 and verse 16 agrees with me. He is the root and the offspring of David.

You would have him be only the offspring and thus subsistent on David/Mary/etc. This is incorrect and not Biblical.

>You are denying that Christ, Lord, is a son/descendant of David.

By quoting the Gospel I am in the act of denying something that it clearly says? Now you're going off an a tangent and most of the rest of your wall of text is meant only to distract us from your resistance toward the eternal pre-existence of the Son of God.

>If God died, everything would cease to exist.

His divine nature is omnipresent, so this end-of-the-world doesn't follow. It's like I'm really explaining the hypostatic union to a novice who has never studied the word of God before in this field.

>His human nature is created in time,

No, the divine and human nature of Jesus Christ are eternally pre-existent in hypostatic union. Jesus Christ the same yesterday, today and forever. "Before Abraham was, I am."

>but you'd have to say He died in His divine nature,

Why is that? The hypostatic union explains how this is possible. His divine nature is omnipresent and in heaven at all times.

>Furthermore, Luke 1:43 uses Mother of Lord, and all uses of Lord in Luke 1 are of God. Luke 1:31-32, teaches that her Son is the Son of the Highest. Galatians 4:4-5 says God the Son was born of woman. How could that be true if John 8:58 is Scripture? Because His divine nature did not come from Mary, and yet Galatians 4:4-5 says that THE SON was born of WOMAN.

All true. And at the same time, his manifestation (John 1:14, 1 Timothy 3:16) At the same time, his manifestation is not the beginning of his complete hypostatic union nature. Being born is not the same as coming into existence. And that is where you have badly misjudged.

Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:

Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son: In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:

Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

- Colossians 1:12-17

>>10777

>No, the divine and human nature of Jesus Christ are eternally pre-existent in hypostatic union.

Sorry, it should have said "natures" here. That's just a typo error.

>>10777

You do not understand Scripture. When he says, for example, before Abraham was, I am, He is talking about His existence before the Incarnation, as the Second Person of the Trinity. Once the Incarnation, happened, His humanity becomes a predicate of His personhood.

>His human nature predates this.

No, it does not. He was born of woman, and dwelt among us (John 1:14, 1 John 4:2, Isaiah 9:6 (ie, a messianic prophesy of His second birth as an infant), Romans 1:3, Hebrews 2:14, Philippians 2:8) It's quite literally absurd to say that His humanity is not created.

>that his life started at some point when actually his life has no beginning as it starts in eternity past

His life as the man Jesus who is the Christ began at the Incarnation. He was also the second divine person of the Trinity while assuming a true human nature, who also is a Davidic King.

>eternally pre-existent in hypostatic union.

False.

>eternal pre-existence of the Son of God.

True, and as >>10769 states, He had two births, an eternal begetting from the Father outside of time, and the Incarnation. He always stayed ONE person, the eternal Son of God.

>It's like I'm really explaining the hypostatic union to a novice who has never studied the word of God before in this field.

Does the Bible even use the words "hypostatic union"–furthermore, do you think Paul, Peter, or John ever said it? No. We know it because of the Church, and you are alien to the Body of Christ. You are considered a heathan and publican to Christ. Go mewl about the "paedo-baptist" "state churches" and the exorbitant purported persecutions of KJV-onlyists. You know nothing of the history of Christianity, in fact, you make a mockery of it. Depart from me, Satan.

>His divine nature is omnipresent

True, but God created all things, and all things DEPEND on His existence. (Acts 17:28.) If He ceased to exist as God, everything would stop existing.

>Being born is not the same as coming into existence. And that is where you have badly misjudged.

His humanity was born, and created, unlike His divine nature. You are a bad-willed heretic and are relying on private judgment. Your Jesus Christ does not exist. Your post is rigmarole gobbledygook simply because you don't want to consider Mary the Mother of God, and in doing so you create a false Christ, and fall under Saint Paul's anathema.

>>10764

>You have divided Christ into two persons.

No. The Lord is one and eternal. He entered this world in the flesh through Mary. That is all.

>>10754

She gave birth to him, breast fed him and changed his diapers when he shit or pissed himself. Sounds like a mother to me

>>10719

Mary is the mother of God. This is clear. She is not the mother of man. Jesus had a human nature and a human body but not a human person. He only had a divine person. The divine person begotten of the father before all worlds assumed the human flesh and nature, in a permanent hypostatic union with his divine nature

>>10847

>Jesus had a human nature and a human body but not a human person. He only had a divine person.

No, the one person is human and divine. What you're saying is almost apollinarism.

>The divine person begotten of the father before all worlds assumed the human flesh and nature, in a permanent hypostatic union with his divine nature

this is orthodox, but contradictory with the first sentence

<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

>>10853

Honestly I'm still very confused about the hypostatic union. I know Jay Dyer explained the chalcedonian definition before, and I should rewatch it

>>10858

Why don't you just read it yourself, it's not long. E-celebs are a very bad place to get your theology from.

>>10860

I have read it, it's just very complex. I could use some diagrams

>>10868

Well that's not exactly true. It's not half and half. Jesus is fully God and fully man. You really seem to be looking at it like it's some kind of additive formula, which it isn't. It isnt the divine nature + the human nature making the hypostatic union. It is the assumption of the human nature and will into the divine person.

>>10872

you're right, that's an oversimplified mistake of that cartoon