[ckilmer]

I’m not episcopal. My background presbyterian.

The low view of Christ means that Jesus is considered to be fully man but not fully God.

The low view of Christ takes the Arian position that was anathematized at the council of Nicea. We recite the Nicean creed because of the disputes of the 325 AD.

In the modern age the low view comes through higher criticism school on the continent—where it took over the protestant seminaries after 1848. It jumped the pond for presbyterians in the 1890’s. And completed the takeover in the 1930’s;

the double speak that came out of the seminaries since then would put the communists to shame.

If you want to see how it happened in the presbyterian church—there’s a good author/pastor from the period called Gresham Machen who wrote a book called christianity and liberalism. you can read it online here.
http://www.extremetheology.com/files/MachenLiberalism.pdf

The USA was fertile ground for the higher criticism school because of the work of Issac Newton back in the 1600’s. He was a unitarian. He held to the low view of christ. He was something of a demigod in the anglo saxon world during the 18th and 19th centuries. People simply deferred to him. If the master said it. Well then it must be true. the theological boundary between the liberals and conservative founders of the USA was defined by who they thought Jesus is.

[Elsie]

This all seems a bit much for me.

 

It's no WONDER that the early church came up with creeds to cut to the chase!  Who He was or what He is can be left for another day.

 

1 Corinthians 2:2 
For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.

 

 

 

 

Did Jesus of Nazareth provide enough evidence to show that He was God?
Yes.

 

 

FULLY God?   Can the mind of man even GRASP what this means?

Not mine.

 

 

Did He die for MY sins?
Yes.

 

 

 

Did He rise to show power over the grave?
That's what the book says.

 

 

 

Did He say...
...go ye into all the world and have endless discussions about My Nature?
I don't see it in the Book that has described Him.

 

 

Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
Mark 16:15

 

Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me.
Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,

and teaching them to obey all that I have commanded you. 
Matthew 28:18-20

 

---

There are folks in my congregation that appear to be on the lower end of the IQ curve. 

These 'views' would fly over their heads like the hand of Peanut.

However; they are just as saved as the next fella.

 

Romans 14:1  
Accept the one whose faith is weak, without quarreling over disputable matters.

 

 

I know we are not arguing over this topic, but trying to explain; as another blind man has placed his hand on the hide of the pachyderm and made an assessment.

 

 

I appreciate learning about this subject.

Thanks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Reverend Wright]

thanks for the clarification.

Here is the Anglican description of Jesus, right from the 39 Articles:

II. Of the Word or Son of God, which was made very Man.
The Son, which is the Word of the Father, begotten from everlasting of the Father, the very and eternal God, and of one substance with the Father, took Man’s nature in the womb of the blessed Virgin, of her substance: so that two whole and perfect Natures, that is to say, the Godhead and Manhood, were joined together in one Person, never to be divided, whereof is one Christ, very God, and very Man; who truly suffered, was crucified, dead, and buried, to reconcile his Father to us, and to be a sacrifice, not only for original guilt, but also for actual sins of men