I have been trying to work out how God necessarily creates, and creation through the human nature of the Logos to connect the material, to the immaterial, to the divine makes sense. However did the Logos have a human nature before the incarnation of Christ? Of course the physical actualisation of Christ came into being, but was the human nature created along with it? Or was the human nature begotten and realised its full actualisation with the incarnation of Christ? Without a human nature in the Logos I can't quite figure out how anything could be created, for it seems logical that everything was spoken into existence by the human nature of the Logos in order that God not share his divinity with the created thus creating a logical paradox.
I don't understand what you just said but isn't the whole point of the logos is that it's God's will, creation was created by God for his glory and when we as humans direct our will towards God we live in accordance with the logos, Jesus is the incarnation of the logos and lived without sin
Hudson Jones
Bump, im still new to this, so im probably not the best person to answer it, But someone with more knowledge, on, the scriptures can help.
Thing is, he doesnt. He is necessarily good, necessarily one, necessarily just etc. But he do not necessarily creates stuff as long as you hold that he is Triune and that there was "time" when there was not time and world No. Incarnation signifies the very thing - assumption human nature to the eternal person of Logos. Yes. For what is human nature? It is union of flesh with intellectual soul. You cannot be said to have human nature without flesh. Yes. Christ is not a Creature but Christ as a man is a creature (for his human nature has beginning). And if you are creature you cannot be creator. Thus human nature of Christ did not take part in act of creation (how could it if it not exited yet?) but creation was made for the sake of incarnation. Not to mention that creation is common work of Godhead. As for your objection: there is no paradox. Notion that God interacting with creation means that creation sheers it's divinity is islamic - thus you have God unloving and not possibly incarnate. Creation by it's very nature i.e. to thing to start exist out of nothing implies certain separation from God, uncreated. But that does not neglect fact that Trinity have it's trace in all of creation and that God interacting with it does not mean that creation sheer in it's divinity, save by participation in grace.
James Diaz
No because God is a Spirit john 4:24 and not flesh until Christ was born. Yes, because romans 8:7 applies ephesians 2:15-16
Evan Lewis
yeah just read genesis 3:8 And they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God amongst the trees of the garden. 3:9 And the Lord God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou? 18:1 And the Lord appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day; 18:2 And he lift up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him: and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground, 18:3 And said, My Lord, if now I have found favour in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant: 18:4 Let a little water, I pray you, be fetched, and wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the tree:
I think so too. God's essence transcends time itself, thankfully. Since if that were not true, then the God would've been changeable, therefore destroying objective morality. Thankfully that is not the case.
Blake Wood
God does necessarily create though otherwise how could he be necessarily good and loving if he did not want to share existence with us? The fact that he did create us shows that it was necessary by his necessary nature, for God is pure logic and non of his being or actions can be contingent.
You are saying Christ cannot be creator? That he has lost his ability to create because he assumed a human nature forever? This sounds like Nestorianism to me for you are breaking the hypostatic union of the divine and human nature.
Also the issue of God sharing his divinity is actually anti Islamic, for Islam believes God can create without sharing his divinity whereas catholics recognise the necessity of the Logos to avoid that problem of creating from the divine nature.
Hudson Perry
Speculation here: If the incarnate Logos return to the Father who is outside of time, dwelling in eternity, then there is no past or future where the Logos didn't have his human nature right? Even as he dwelled on earth, his incarnate self already was with the Father outside of time. Also, doesn't it say that the Lamb was slain since the foundation of the world? Does that mean that at creation, when time entered the world, that the Logos already in some sense finished his incarnation and ministry (in the future but dwelling outside it was already done). Am I retarded?
