10

I generally write from a reformed perspective, but I don't think there's anything in this post that other Christians (Oriental Orthodox and Church of the East aside) would disagree with. The doctrine was first formulated clearly by the Council of Chalcedon: One and the same Son, the Self-same Perfect in Godhead, the Self-same Perfect in Manhood; truly God ...


9

Your question is whether God could, or perhaps should, have chosen to save us other than by becoming incarnate himself. To begin with, the Incarnation is an act of grace. From the teaching we have received in the sacred scriptures, we know that the coming of God into the world, in the person of Jesus Christ, was a free and unmerited gift of God's love. God ...


7

Human nature entails a human soul. When Christ became man, every aspect of His human nature was created: It is to be remembered that, when the Word took Flesh, there was no change in the Word; all the change was in the Flesh. At the moment of conception, in the womb of the Blessed Mother, through the forcefulness of God's activity, not only was the ...


7

The Bible specifically reveals God as spirit, that is, not physical (John 4:23). So, Jesus took on flesh (the physical dimension), but this was something new. God--the Father, Son, and Spirit0--exist outside of the physical universe. God created the physical universe, so He cannot be inside the physical universe. So, no, Jesus took on flesh, but ...


6

According to Chalcedonian Doctrine (that is shared by Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholics and Protestant churches) Christ is fully God and fully human. Christ is however one person which is both God and human. He isn't a person of God that dwelled in a separate human person (which is the teaching of nestorianism). The Oriental Orthodox (e.g. Coptic) churches ...


6

A better summarization of your statement would be "Monophysitism and Nestorianism are heresy; the Chalcedonian position is orthodox. The heresies over-emphasize one of the natures, but the orthodox position stresses that both are fully present and effective." Obviously, "heresy" is a word that carries a strong connotation, but it does have an actual ...


6

First, let's have some slightly more in-depth definitions. Charles Hodge describes what traducianists believe as follows: Traducianists on the one hand deny that the soul is created; and on the other hand, they affirm that it is produced by the law of generation, being as truly derived from the parents as the body. The whole man, soul and body, is ...


6

According to the Westminster Confession of Faith: The Son of God, the second person in the Trinity, being very and eternal God, of one substance and equal with the Father, did, when the fulness of time was come, take upon Him man's nature,(1) with all the essential properties and common infirmities thereof, yet without sin;(2) being conceived by the power ...


6

In the Old Testament God does take physical forms however the incarnation of the Messiah is unique. Hypostatic union means human and divine natures united in one person. It would be misleading to say the OT appearances of God as an angel, man or tree are hypostatic union. Some helpful references from the tanakh - The Hebrew Bible Teaches Complex Monotheism ...


6

1. Jesus enjoyed the Beatific Vision from his conception. From the moment of his conception Jesus enjoyed the Beatific Vision, i.e. his human soul saw the divine essence with an intuitive vision and face to face, and in this vision his soul enjoyed the divine essence. 2. As a consequence, Jesus did not need faith. Believing, an act whose enabling virtue ...


5

I think this answer is needed to avoid confusions. The short answer to the title is “yes”: Christ’s human nature is created. (Indeed, it could not be otherwise: the only nature that could possibly be uncreated is the Divine Nature.) As far as what was created: everything that pertains to that human nature; that is, body, soul, intellect, will, and human ...


5

First, lets look at the setting of the entire passage. Jesus was talking to Jewish leaders, and they were accusing him for his claims of equality with God (John 5: 17- 23). This verse has to be looked in a historical and cultural context. In the Jewish law, the testimony of a witness is not received in his own case, so these leaders would render his claim, ...


5

These are deep questions that are difficult to answer, but I'll give it a shot. Most of what I'm going to say is derived from Oliver D. Crisp's book Divinity and Humanity. How far is this model to be extended? I have heard it said that not only does Christ have two wills, but also two minds. Is this an accurate interpretation of Chalcedonian theology? ...


5

James White discusses this in What Every Christian Needs to Know About the Qur'an. Here is the relevant quote with some emphasis added: One early source, the Tanwīr al-Miqbās min Tafsīr Ibn ’Abbās, directly connects the encounter with the Najran Christians with the text of Surah 4: Allah then revealed about the Nestorian Christians of Najran ...


4

If I were to continue being true to form, I would answer your question in too many paragraphs, most of which would not be read. Let me go against type, then, and offer a two-paragraph answer to your question, "Why does Jesus have to be God?" The reason Jesus has to be God stems from God's holiness. The sin which first entered the celestial universe ...


4

The answer to this question hinges on how trinitarians understand the incarnation of Christ. And while there is broad (though not quite universal) agreement with the Chalcedonian Definition (451), and its statements that Christ is "truly God and truly Man" with two natures that are joined "unconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, [and] ...


4

In Chalcedonian Council, a letter from Pope Leo I called "Epistola Dogmatica", was endorsed which explains the mystery of the Incarnation. Pope declared that : “after the Incarnation what was proper to each nature and substance in Christ remained intact and both were united in one person, but so that each nature acted according to its own qualities ...


4

The doctrine of the Trinity says that God is three persons in one being. One of those persons, the second person of the Trinity, took on flesh and became a human, the man Jesus. If I understand what you're suggesting, you would run into one of these two problems: Because the pre-baptism Jesus was a person, the hypostatic union would be two people, a heresy ...


4

No, Calvin was not Nestorian. This can be concluded on the strength of the following evidence: His defense of the Chalcedonian Definition and rejection of Nestorius Related to the above, reformed theology's rejection of icons of Christ on the basis of the unity of the natures His implicit acceptance of the reality described in the term theotokos, and his ...


4

I think I am correct in stating that the Roman Catholic Church, as well as the Eastern Orthodox Church, hold to the belief that Christ was both truly God and truly man (I am a convert from the former to the latter, not that it matters here). Even if one accepts that "faith and hope aren't needed once you've been in the presence of God" (which is somewhat ...


4

Yes, Jesus said he was a man (John 8:40). Jesus is referred to as the “Son of Man” 88 times in the New Testament. God called the prophet Ezekiel “son of man” 93 times. God was simply calling Ezekiel a human being. A son of a man is a man. Jesus was fully human, having been born of a woman. Jesus is also fully God: In the beginning was the Word, and the ...


4

Is Jesus human soul created or assumed? Jesus, at the Incarnation, assumed a human soul:[1] Because "human nature was assumed, not absorbed",97 in the mysterious union of the Incarnation, the Church was led over the course of centuries to confess the full reality of Christ's human soul, with its operations of intellect and will, and of his human body. ...


3

When we say God is one essence with three persons, the Greeks would say that God is one essence with three substances (hypostasis). In the Latin church, substantia was employed to translate hypostasis and together with essentia to translate ousia: “That which must be understood of persons, according to our usage, is to be understood of substances, ...


3

The Old Testament Christophanies (like the man appearing to Joshua in Joshua 5 as the "Commander of the army of the Lord") are clues that God might do this (become a man), but these should be combined with prophecies that prove that God MUST do this. Throughout the Bible, the prophets add one feature after another to the description of the coming Messiah. As ...


3

The Jehovah’s Witness religion teaches that there was a time when God was utterly alone and decided to create, as his first creation, a being known in the Bible both as the Word of God, and Michael the Archangel. Then the Word / Michael created all the other angels plus this universe and planet earth and all life on it. He is said to have been subordinate ...


3

As Dr McGowan points out Jesus is frequently referred to as a man, and it is an important part of most Christian doctrine. During His time on Earth it is unlikely that anyone ever doubted that He was a man; and so there would be no occasion to directly state it. Jesus does, however, clearly refer to Himself as a man (Greek anthropon) in John 8 40 But ...


2

Christ did not “pretend” to be not God but rather, he chose to not use his Godhead. He literally became similar to his brethren in every way ( Hebrews 2:17) for he became similar to men ( Philippians 2:7), he was sent similar to sinful flesh ( Romans 8:3). It is true that he does not know the day and the hour ( Mark 13:32) and it is equally true that all ...


2

How can the Son not know what the Father knows? Or put another way: Did Jesus know the day and the hour of the Apocalypse? “However, no one knows the day or hour when these things will happen, not even the angels in heaven or the Son himself. Only the Father knows.” (Matthew 24:36 (NLT) and Mark 13:32 (NLT)). How could Jesus have spoken such words and ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible