Replies

Christians believe that God was once a man. He was born of a virgin, lived, ate, drank, slept, and died on a cross. God is no longer mortal. (Your post #11)

My response: ...the historic Christian church has taught that Christ never stopped being man. He is the everlasting God-man.

Your response: I am Christian, and that's news to me. Where in the Bible does it state that Christ is "the everlasting God-man?" The concept of the Trinity contradicts this.

Let's break this down: First of all, your Q of "Where in the Bible does it state that Christ is 'the everlasting God-man?'"

Have you not read Revelation 1? Rev. 1:12-19:

12 I turned around to see the voice that was speaking to me. And when I turned I saw seven golden lampstands, 13 and among the lampstands was
someone like a son of MAN, dressed in a robe
reaching down to his FEET and
with a golden sash around his CHEST.
14 The HAIR on his HEAD was white like wool, as white as snow,
and his EYES were like blazing fire.
15 His FEET were like bronze glowing in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of rushing waters. 16
In his RIGHT HAND he held seven stars,
and coming out of his MOUTH was a sharp, double-edged sword. His face was like the sun shining in all its brilliance.
17 When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. Then he placed his right hand on me and said: “Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last. 18 I am the Living One; I was dead, and now look, I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades. 19 “Write, therefore, what you have seen, what is now and what will take place later.

This is John the Revelator’s vision of the ascended Christ…still very much a glorified man – as well as God! Dual, distinct natures, yet united in Him!

Do you think the glorified Jesus was just putting on some illusory pretend guise as this glorified divine-man being?

Your statement: Christians believe that God was once a man.

I guess you deny the authority of Revelation 1 then? How long have you been choosy about which books or chapters you believe?

Do you realize that in 431 AD, the Council of Ephesus deposed Nestorius from his “see” position. Why? Because the early church ruled him to be a heretic; the term “Nestorian” became equated with the belief that Jesus had two distinct natures or was two distinct persons – one a Mary-born human & the other divine.

Tell us, Jess Kitting: Is that your contention as well? Are you a heretic after the order of Nestorius? Do you consider yourself a Nestorian 'Christian?'

Besides John, what was the testimony of the early church closer to the apostles of Jesus? Have you investigated that? If you attend a Christian church, perhaps you should go to your church leaders and ask them why they've neglected to tell you who Jesus is today -- or have badly misinformed you in light of both Rev. 1 & church history.

Below is first a brief summary of some of the early fathers’ expressions which flesh out the early church’s view of Jesus Christ’s dual nature-- followed by quotations of some of those expressions.

(IOW, if you disagree with me, well, you're disagreeing with the historic early Christian position on this...which is your right...just don't pretend that I'm not representing what was being taught 80 to less than 340 years after Christ died and was resurrected).

Summary of what can be derived from quotes that follow:

(1) The MAN Christ IS [not WAS] to be adored
(2) In Christ two operations exist: one divine, the other human
(3) The Word assumed a human nature, so that now He has two natures, each distinct – though united
(4) The union of the two natures in the Incarnate Word is a personal union [IOW, Jesus didn't don a Halloween suit dressed up like a man...He personally became a full incarnation of man...this was part of His identity--His very personhood]

The early church embraced the Athanasian Creed. Athanasius dealt with opposing the Arian heresy toward the end of his life. Arianism as a heresy was defeated at the Council of Constantinople eight years after Athanasius’ death. A few years before he died, Athanasius said – and note the highlighted future & present-tense of how they worshiped Jesus minus “separate[ing] Him from the flesh”:

Nor, indeed, the body [of Jesus] being such, do we divide it from the Word and adore it by itself; neither, when we wish to worship the Word, do we separate Him from the flesh. Rather, as we said before, knowing that the Word was made flesh, we recognize Him as God even after He has come in the flesh. Who, then, is so lacking in sense that he would say to the Lord: ‘Leave the body, so that I may worship You?’ (St. Athanasius, Letter to Adelphius, Bishop and Confessor, Against the Arians, AD 370 or 371 pp. 344-345)

Hence, Jess Kiting, Athanasius would ask you this question: “Who, then, is so lacking in sense that he would say to the Lord: “Leave the body, so that I may worship You?”

A dozen or so years before that, Athanasius knew of no compartmentalized worship:

”…the fact that the Son of God IS STILL worshipped when He became man is for us a grace and an extraordinary exaltation; for now the heavenly powers will not be astonished at seeing all of us, who have with Him a common nature, introduced into their realms.” (St. Athanasius, Discourses Against the Arians, AD 358-362, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Jurgens as translator, p. 328)

In those same discourses, he also stressed how “the flesh was His” and “the body in which He bore our sins is His own body” (St. Athanasius, Discourses Against the Arians, AD 358-362, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Jurgens as translator p. 332)

I mean, what do you think Jesus did with the body after he was bodily resurrected and ascended? Did He “unzip” it to free Himself as if the body wasn’t His?

We cannot separate His union as God-man…notice the “is” – not “was” – in the first sentence by Tertullian:

”Or why IS Christ man and son of man, if in Him there is nothing of man and nothing from man?…The origins of both His substances display Him as man and as God: from the one, born, and from the other, not born; from the one, flesh, and from the other, spiritual; from the one, weak, and from the other exceedingly strong, from the one, living…Would you with a lie divide Christ in halves? He was all truth. Believe me, He chose to be born, rather than to make a lie of any part of Himself.” (Tertullian, The Flesh of Christ, AD 208, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Jurgens as translator p. 146)

Same thing with Ignatius – not long after the John of the Bible dies:

”There IS one Physician, who IS both flesh and spirit, born and not born, who IS God IN MAN, true life in death, both from Mary and from God…” (St. Ignatius, Letter to the Ephesians, 110AD, Faith of the Early Fathers, Jurgens as translator, p. 18)

”A man is ignorant indeed – he does not even know his own life – if he is ignorant of the fact that Christ Jesus IS true God as well as true man. And it is equally perilous to deny Christ Jesus, whether as Spirit of God or as flesh of our body…He Himself has been appointed Mediator in His own person for the salvation of the Church. And in that very mystery of mediation between God and man, He IS one and both; for by the fact of His union of natures, He has the reality of each nature equally; and this in such wise that He lacks nothing in neither, lest perhaps He might cease being God by reason of His birth as man, or lest, on the other hand, He might not BE a man while remaining God. This, therefore, is the true faith which brings blessedness to men: to acknowledge Him as God and man, to confess Him as the Word and as flesh, neither forgetting His divinity in view of His humanity, nor ignoring His flesh because He is the Word.” (St. Hilary of Poitiers, Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew, 353-355 AD, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Jurgens as translator p. 378)