Genesis 32:30

Julian Morales
Julian Morales

Genesis 32:30: “I have seen the face of God”
John 1:18 & 1 John 4:12: “Nobody has seen the face of God”
Please explain.

Attached: D3244978-19AF-4ABE-A2A7-40AB4D73AD71.jpeg (142.78 KB, 673x598)

Other urls found in this thread:

gotquestions.org/hypostatic-union.html
blogs.ancientfaith.com/glory2godforallthings/2015/08/29/wrestling-with-god/

William Brooks
William Brooks

That Genesis verse was obviously a figure of speech

Isaac Perez
Isaac Perez

For what?

Colton Bell
Colton Bell

For knowledge of God.
That should be obvious though if you read any other verse in the passage, because none of them describe Jacob literally seeing God's face.

Luke Rogers
Luke Rogers

Ok I see

Kevin Nguyen
Kevin Nguyen

Genesis 32 is referring to God the Son, i.e., Jesus' face is what Jacob saw.

John 1 & 4 are referring to God the Father. No-one has seen the face of God the Father. As he told Moses, "no man may see my face and live."

You are wrong. He wrestled with God. Do you think he wrestled with some stranger and somehow translated that into gaining knowledge of God? Your interpretation makes no sense.

Ian Jones
Ian Jones

But Jesus’ body wasn’t created yet. You also make no sense

Joshua Wood
Joshua Wood

Wrong. Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever. Jesus has always been fully man as well as fully God. That includes his body.

Aiden Lewis
Aiden Lewis

I don’t think there is proof of that in scripture.

Joshua Martinez
Joshua Martinez

You don't think there's proof that God doesn't change in scripture?

Lucas Johnson
Lucas Johnson

Yeah but his body. Begotten, yes. But not pre existent. That doesn’t make sense. A body forms in the womb, he wasn’t magically teleported into a womb. I do not believe his body was pre existent. His body is not the logos which was there before the world.

William Hernandez
William Hernandez

His body is part of his being fully man. Hence his body must have existed from the beginning.

Julian Cox
Julian Cox

Who says he was fully man from the beginning? I believe he was logos and then at his conception became fully man also. The only opinion that makes sense.

Andrew Green
Andrew Green

Who says he was fully man from the beginning?
Uh, the Bible, which says that God does not change. Hebrews 13:8. Jesus' nature can't have altered from not fully man to fully man at some point. He is the same now as he has always been.

William Myers
William Myers

God does not change but his body has to be created. That is just logic mate.

Sebastian Nguyen
Sebastian Nguyen

That is just logic mate.
It's not logical at all. If you claim that Jesus Christ was not fully man from the beginning then you are saying that he is not God. The illogical thing at that point is to continue to call yourself a Christian.

Hudson Rivera
Hudson Rivera

He was not fully man from the beginning of time, when things like man, woman and child were not even concepts. Are you Protestant? You are deeply wrong, please stop right now.

Zachary Mitchell
Zachary Mitchell

He was not fully man from the beginning of time
So you reject the clear teaching of the Bible in Hebrews 13:8. Congratulations on being a heretic.

Dominic Ramirez
Dominic Ramirez

when things like man, woman and child were not even concepts
And so you're also claiming that Jesus wasn't the Son of God from the beginning lol. Literally denying the Trinity.

Jason Stewart
Jason Stewart

Hebrews 13:8 means the logos and not his body. It’s absurd to think he had a fashioned body since the beginning of time. Protestantism everyone.

Jackson Lewis
Jackson Lewis

What’s your winnie the pooh problem?

Luke Young
Luke Young

It’s absurd
Right, it's absurd to trust the Bible over the fallible "logic" of human beings. How silly of me.
A son is a child. Don't get mad at me just because you said something idiotic without thinking it through first.

Austin Wright
Austin Wright

In all honesty, I had never thought about this before. Time is created, and seperate from God, but if God (specifically the second person of the Trinity) took on a human nature, became incarnate at a point in time, does that mean the Logos/Word (who is eternal) is now eternally human? I'm confused, hopefully someone could explain this.

Jayden Myers
Jayden Myers

I am actually mad. Why would you
Lol at that? Calling someone a heretic and saying he denies the trinity. Get gassed you k*ke

Cameron Lee
Cameron Lee

He literally denied the Trinity by claiming there was no concept of a child at the beginning, i.e., there was no Son of God, i.e., there was no Trinity. I don't know whether it was accidental or not, but considering the way he is rejecting the Bible, I wouldn't be surprised if he was a modalist.

Ryder Howard
Ryder Howard

Don’t listen to the bullshit this guy spouts. Christ’s body was created and the logos incarnated as Jesus. If we take Hebrews literally, meaning Christ never changes, that means also his soul would not separate from his body, since that would be change. It is not meant that way.

William Green
William Green

Christ is not the literal son of god and you know that. You are a kike

Hudson Thompson
Hudson Thompson

The nature of God is not some incidental thing. God's nature cannot change. If God was fully man at any point, then he was always fully man. God doesn't evolve over time like some kind of cosmic organism.
Christ is not the literal son of god
lmao
Condemned out of your own mouth. Massive heretic.

Christian Flores
Christian Flores

Not rejecting the Bible. You are rejecting the Bible. God is no man, is written in the Bible. He BECAME man at the incarnation. But he was not eternally a man. That sounds so retarded to someone sane.

Tyler Torres
Tyler Torres

Jesus Christ is the son of god, the divine son, not the literal son. Admit that you are a Protestant who makes shit up.

Liam Collins
Liam Collins

So what about Deuteronomy saying god is not a man, that he might change his mind. What about that?

Joshua Lewis
Joshua Lewis

Numbers 23:19 actually

Carson Hill
Carson Hill

Are you saying Jesus’ adult male body became a baby? Lmao, now that is funny.

Oliver Rodriguez
Oliver Rodriguez

More specifically, I want to know how the eternal Word, considering that time is a creation of God, (and how He transcends time), I'd like to understand how something in time (the Incarnation) "changed" His very form, and wouldn't this -eternally- change His "form" (or rather, give Him a human body, to the point that He would indeed still be the eternal Word, but He would eternally have a human body, so all the theophanies in the OT would indeed be the Christ, Jesus, true man and true God). Hopefully this makes a lick of sense…

Justin Cruz
Justin Cruz

There is no scripture that supports this view, and also consider Numbers 23:19 “God is no man, that he might lie” he became man but was not man from the beginning, since in that time man and woman were not created yet.

John Fisher
John Fisher

That sounds so retarded to someone sane.

"For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God."

Enjoy perishing.

Why did you reply three different times to the same post? Were you trying to samefag and you forgot to switch on your proxies?
Jesus Christ is the son of god, the divine son, not the literal son.
Jesus Christ is the literal Son of God, yes. You are a heretic if you deny this.
Numbers 23:19 actually
In Numbers it's God the Father speaking, not God the Son.
Are you saying Jesus’ adult male body became a baby? Lmao, now that is funny.
Now you're literally mocking God. Major wicked heresy.

Elijah Gutierrez
Elijah Gutierrez

So, then the pre-incarnate Word/Logos eternally "ceased" to exist after the Incarnation, when the Word became flesh? I don't mean that in a heretical way, I'm genuinely trying to wrap my head around this.

Asher Wright
Asher Wright

God the son is not God according to you? It clearly says God, not god the father. God, is not a man. He wasn’t, Prior to the incarnation.

Caleb Campbell
Caleb Campbell

It existed inside Christ. Like a bowl being filled with water.

William Peterson
William Peterson

God doesn't evolve or change. It's completely obvious that if God was ever fully man then he was always fully man.

But it's impossible for limited beings trapped inside time to fully grasp an infinite being that exists outside time. Some things are just mysteries that need to be accepted on faith.

The person of the Trinity speaking in Numbers is God the Father. The Bible obviously never specifies in the Old Testament since the Trinity is a New Testament doctrine.

Like a bowl being filled with water.
lmao

Thomas Parker
Thomas Parker

I should be the one laughing at such Protestant heresy. Not you. Discard everything this guy says.

Josiah Harris
Josiah Harris

You've already denied the Trinity and claimed Jesus is not the Son of God. Now that I think about it you might be a Jew come here to spread heresy and attack Christianity. Those are two very Jewish heresies.

Evan Parker
Evan Parker

Okay, thank you. What I'm about to say ask sounds silly, but I'm serious… could Christ, who is the Word, "shift" back into His pre-incarnate form at will? Your responses edify me. I'm guessing it's not something we can truly know?

Jace Wright
Jace Wright

Nope. It’s not God speaking, it’s Moses. And he knew full well that God is not a man, and never was, up until his incarnation. His body was then created. Everything that was made includes his body, obviously. How does a body exist before time? Before the first man and woman are created? Nonsense.

Kayden Wilson
Kayden Wilson

Are you the guy who says He can’t have scars, because that’s change? The Bible explicitly states that God BECAME a man.

Hudson Cooper
Hudson Cooper

Interesting question. I guess if he wanted to shift back into his spirit/body-less form he would have to un-create his body, is that a satisfying answer?

Bentley Lopez
Bentley Lopez

You are the heretic

Adam Kelly
Adam Kelly

could Christ, who is the Word, "shift" back into His pre-incarnate form at will?
This is literally the heresy of modalism.
It's God speaking in the book of Numbers, Moses isn't just making stuff up.
How does a body exist before time? Before the first man and woman are created?
How does a son exist before time? Before the first child was created? I notice you are at least not including "child" in your list anymore. I guess the heresy was too blatant even for you.
The nature of God is not incidental like a scar. God's nature does not change.
The Bible explicitly states that God BECAME a man.
He did. And he also eternally had a fully human nature.
I guess if he wanted to shift back into his spirit/body-less form he would have to un-create his body
LITERAL MODALISM
Holy shit hahaha. Imagine being a modalist heretic who thinks God is some kind of shapeshifter.

Logan Barnes
Logan Barnes

“And also he eternally had a human nature”
Source: Dude trust me
Stop right there. Ask any catholic or even orthodox priest and he will tell you that is complete and utter bullshit. I wish I wouldn’t have to bother with this utter nonsense.

Adam Stewart
Adam Stewart

You are the heretic, again. Stop right there because all your claims are false and you are attacking your own brothers, Christians, who should be dear to you. You have shown to be extremely malignant so stop right there and meditate upon the meaning of the incarnation. Cease being a malignant and evil person and come to the light, embrace the teachings of the church and cease with your false teachings.

Xavier Evans
Xavier Evans

Source: Dude trust my priest
Stop replying multiple times to the same post, it's obnoxious.
Stop right there because all your claims are false
Not an argument.
you are attacking your own brothers, Christians
Heretics who claim Jesus isn't the Son of God aren't Christian.
Cease being a malignant and evil person and come to the light, embrace the teachings of the church and cease with your false teachings.
Not an argument.

Lincoln Perry
Lincoln Perry

John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Philippians 2:5-8 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

James Bennett
James Bennett

Why would you say that about someone? That I don’t think Jesus is the son of God? God did not procreate with Mary to make Jesus, so he is not the literal son of God. Simple. Any priest would tell you that and you know it. So cease with this bullshit.

Lucas King
Lucas King

But you actually attacked me before I ever talked about Jesus being the (non literal) son of god. So you are wrong.

Josiah Taylor
Josiah Taylor

God did not procreate with Mary to make Jesus, so he is not the literal son of God
Wow. Just wow.
Any priest would tell you that and you know it.
Any priest who would tell you that is retarded. If anything Jesus is more literally the Son of God than any human being is the son of his human father, since the relationships of the persons of the Holy Trinity are what define sonship and fatherhood and the human equivalents are just imperfect shadows of these.

And Mary conceived by God the Holy Ghost. So the literal temporal father of Jesus is God, too.

Yeah, for denying the Bible in favour of your own personal "logic."

Kevin Myers
Kevin Myers

26: In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent by God to a town in Galilee called Nazareth,
27: to a virgin engaged to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. The virgin's name was Mary.
28: And he came to her and said, "Greetings, favored one! The Lord is with you."
29: But she was much perplexed by his words and pondered what sort of greeting this might be.
30: The angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God.
31: And now, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you will name him Jesus.
32: He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High, and the Lord God will give to him the throne of his ancestor David.
33: He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end."
34: Mary said to the angel, "How can this be, since I am a virgin?"
35: The angel said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be holy; he will be called Son of God.
36: And now, your relative Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son; and this is the sixth month for her who was said to be barren.
37: For nothing will be impossible with God."
38: Then Mary said, "Here am I, the servant of the Lord; let it be with me according to your word." Then the angel departed from her.

Owen Brooks
Owen Brooks

The Bible says Jesus body was not created? Must have missed that. You know, it actually is heretical to think something physical exists that was not created by the logos. That is akin to docetism.

Robert Ward
Robert Ward

I don’t think there is proof of that in scripture.
The Son isn't co-eternal with the Father

Attached: HERESY-DETECTED.webm (2.93 MB, 640x360)

Justin Miller
Justin Miller

Wrong. I am saying the body is not co eternal.

Chase Young
Chase Young

His body is now eternal as well. It had a beginning, but now has no end.

Jace Gomez
Jace Gomez

Yes?

Adam Cook
Adam Cook

I hope you two don't mind me interjecting but I just want to ask:
How many people believe that because Jesus is fully man and fully God and that his nature never changes, that Jesus must have always been fully man and fully God? How normal is this perspective? The poster arguing in favour of it seems to assert it to be obvious but I don't think I've ever heard of this. I was always of the opinion that when the Word was made flesh, that's the point where Jesus became both fully man and fully God. I just feel like, if this is really true, then the idea that Jesus was always fully man and fully God would have been included in the Nicene Creed. It feels like something absolutely fundamental that would have to be covered.

Perhaps, regarding God's unchanging nature, the explanation would be that the line concerned exclusively God the Father? I don't think Jesus has much of a role in the Old Testament.

Also, there's the fact that I always hear (don't quite know where) that Jesus humbled himself when he became Man. If Jesus was always man and God then surely, it would've been that he humbled himself entering time and leaving eternity rather than becoming Man.

Isaac Foster
Isaac Foster

Are you Protestant?
hold up, are you implying that you're not a Protestant yourself? because if so… I can't even. Are Catholics seriously being taught this these days? Cause I doubt any Orthodox would ever make this mistake after getting the idea of Jesus' 2 natures drilled into you every liturgy.

Noah Sanchez
Noah Sanchez

How normal is this perspective?
It's literally Orthodox theology 101 material. Just check out a copy of the Orthodox Study Bible, this interpretation is literally all over the footnotes.

Aaron Reed
Aaron Reed

How many people believe that because Jesus is fully man and fully God and that his nature never changes, that Jesus must have always been fully man and fully God? How normal is this perspective?
It's one poster here, and it's not a normal view. Christians accept Christ's own words on the subject.

Thomas Allen
Thomas Allen

I tried to Google around on the issue and I found this article.

gotquestions.org/hypostatic-union.html

Is this not Orthodox theology then?

Cameron Brown
Cameron Brown

Just to clarify, so you don't think I intend for you to read the entire thing.

The hypostatic union is the term used to describe how God the Son, Jesus Christ, took on a human nature, yet remained fully God at the same time. Jesus always had been God (John 8:58, 10:30), but at the incarnation Jesus became a human being (John 1:14).

Do the Orthodox not believe in the Hypostatic Union?

Caleb Jenkins
Caleb Jenkins

No, we most certainly do, don't let one poster on a chinese cartoon imageboard make you think otherwise.

Sebastian Cook
Sebastian Cook

So you are now denying the Son!! Why are people overlooking this post?

There is no scripture that supports this view
Yes there is you heretic.

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.

Your feeble mind and logic don't constrain God. What you're saying contradicts actual scripture on the matter.

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;)

Colossians 1:15
Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

Colossians 2:8-9
Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

Lucas Ortiz
Lucas Ortiz

You’re deliberately ignoring the scripture that says He BECAME a man in the incarnation. Yes, God the Son, the Word, has always existed, but He did not have a human body before He incarnated. Read it.

Juan Morales
Juan Morales

You've got Hebrews 13:8 which says "Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever."

Why would you think the Son of God existed as a disembodied, de-personed shell during the course of history when Colossians 1:17 clearly says that all things actually consist by him. That would include everything right from the very beginning. And in Colossians 1:15 it clearly says that he is the firstborn of all, he is the Alpha and Omega, why would the Alpha be different than the Omega.

I don't think Jesus has much of a role in the Old Testament.
Just look at the theophanies. Like others have been saying, God exists outside of time and you can't attribute a change to God's nature just because someone's flimsy logic requires it. It's just like an Arian who thinks the Trinity is "illogical" and not a mystery of God. Paul himself knew this was part of the mystery of Godliness in 1 Timothy 3:16—

And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

You’re deliberately ignoring the scripture that says He BECAME a man in the incarnation.
Then quote it for us. Shouldn't be that hard.

Benjamin Jackson
Benjamin Jackson

And another thing, in Revelation 22:16 he takes on the name of the root and the offspring of David. We have people here saying Jesus is only the offspring but denying that he is the root.

I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

Colton Rivera
Colton Rivera

I have seen the face of God
Quite literally the same as saying "I've been to hell and back".

Michael Rivera
Michael Rivera

Saying that he's always had a body (though not always an incarnate one manifested physically on Earth) as a part of his human nature, is not contrary to the hypostatic union. Re-read this part closely:
Jesus always had been God (John 8:58, 10:30), but at the incarnation Jesus became a human being (John 1:14).
Does not say that the specific incarnation described in the gospels was his only one ever. It is merely asserting, that yes, the Son has become incarnate at least once before, and that yes, Jesus in the gospels was an instance of this. Yet it is also Orthodox understanding that the incarnate Son was the one who wrestled with Jacob:
blogs.ancientfaith.com/glory2godforallthings/2015/08/29/wrestling-with-god/

In other words, we're not saying Jesus is some kind of immortal human that's always around in the flesh, but rather that the human body is part of his eternal human nature, and as such, can become incarnate whenever he wishes.

Parker Hall
Parker Hall

so it is possible taht Buddha is Jesus?

Ayden Allen
Ayden Allen

And what scripture are you getting that from?

Michael Martinez
Michael Martinez

None, it's just a concept, but actually…
John 10:16
And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.

Henry Thompson
Henry Thompson

Oh great, so now a universalist entered the thread. Who could have seen that coming.

See John 14:6.

Benjamin Reed
Benjamin Reed

I am not, I am just asking the questions
What is interesting is that when Jesus comes to heaven he enters eternity and be outside of time and mater but there is problem when he is in heven when born to world and have body befor he had body?

you winnie the poohed my mind christanons

PS. sorry for broken english

Colton Morales
Colton Morales

Just look up theophanies. But yes, it is part of the mystery of godliness as stated in 1 Timothy 3:16.

Matthew Brooks
Matthew Brooks

this whole conversation was about something we can't understand kek

Caleb Sullivan
Caleb Sullivan

Then quote it for us. Shouldn't be that hard.

Philippians 2:5-8
5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross

Read your Bible. Shouldn’t be that hard.

Julian Stewart
Julian Stewart

That passage doesn't support the interpretation that Jesus never had a human body prior to his incarnation as described in the gospels. If someone were to say that they became ill, would that imply that they had never become ill before?

Caleb Hill
Caleb Hill

Now you’re just being stupid on purpose.
He incarnated once, to die once, to pay our debt in full once and for all.

Owen Phillips
Owen Phillips

Exactly, thank you. He made himself of no reputation, took upon him the form of a servant and was made in the likeness of men. Or in words reflected elsewhere in the Bible, he was manifested in the flesh specifically unto them. See 1 John 1:1-2. This is entirely within view with his eternal pre-existence in a hypostatic union of both fully God and fully man. Being the firstborn of all creatures and that by which all things consist according to Colossians 1:15-17 he is able to manifest most perfectly as a man being that his Person unchangeably has that nature.

Carter Thomas
Carter Thomas

Kind of a theologlet here but I'm given to understand Jesus having not yet incarnated does not preclude Him from being able to be physically manifest beforehand. Presuming that puts deep limitations on Jesus' capabilities and also implies weird things about the incidents in the Bible where angels appear in physical form.

Michael Gomez
Michael Gomez

The face of God is Jesus.

"He is the image (Greek - Icon) of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. (Colossians 1:15)

The Angel of the Lord who appeared to Hagar, Moses, Abraham, Joshua, Jacob, etc is Jesus.

And you should quote all of John.

"No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him."

Luis Moore
Luis Moore

He incarnated once, to die once, to pay our debt in full once and for all.
For being a bible idolater, your reading comprehension is rather weak.
Also, debt to who? Satan? a vengeful Father? himself? Stop turning Jesus into some pagan sacrifice.

Blake Harris
Blake Harris

Does not say that the specific incarnation described in the gospels was his only one ever.
Surely, it makes more sense to presume so then not?

but rather that the human body is part of his eternal human nature, and as such, can become incarnate whenever he wishes.
So basically, Mary isn't needed for Jesus to become incarnate? Are you really sure about what you're saying?

Ryan Long
Ryan Long

Haha, That's actually heretical to say
The verse that you mentioned doesn't mean what you think it does and Christ became man at the incarnation when he was born of a virgin by the holy spirit.

Landon Ramirez
Landon Ramirez

This entire thread is so heretical. Wow.

Brandon Anderson
Brandon Anderson

My guy, go and study basic Christian theology before making such statements on the internet. Christ did not change but rather at the incarnation took on flesh alongside his preexistent divine nature. Reread John 1:1
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
And John 1:14
14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son[d] from the Father, full of grace and truth.

Kayden Bell
Kayden Bell

If you look at one his later posts (>>797236) he argues that Jesus's incarnation during the time of the Gospels wasn't necessarily his only incarnation. He even argues that Jesus can become incarnate whenever he wishes.

Xavier Kelly
Xavier Kelly

Wew

Nathaniel Reed
Nathaniel Reed

Watch the embedded video from 6:20-8:20. It discusses exactly what you said about Hebrews

Jayden Collins
Jayden Collins

For God's sake, user. Read Hebrews 10.

8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law; 9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. 10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. 11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: 12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God; 13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool. 14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified

Then, read the board rules:
3. This is a board for Christian discussion and fellowship. For the intentions of the board, a Christian is one who believes in the Nicene Creed (Specifically the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed) and the Chalcedonian Definition.

Then, read the Nicene Creed:
We believe (I believe) in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, and born of the Father before all ages. (God of God) light of light, true God of true God. Begotten not made, consubstantial to the Father, by whom all things were made. Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven. And was incarnate of the Holy Ghost and of the Virgin Mary and was made man; was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate, suffered and was buried; and the third day rose again according to the Scriptures. And ascended into heaven, sits at the right hand of the Father, and shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead, of whose Kingdom there shall be no end. And (I believe) in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of life, who proceeds from the Father (and the Son), who together with the Father and the Son is to be adored and glorified, who spoke by the Prophets. And one holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. We confess (I confess) one baptism for the remission of sins. And we look for (I look for) the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen.

Then, enjoy your vacation.

James Richardson
James Richardson

You're actually Insaine! If you take the term "Son" of God literally then who was Gods wife? Did he have sex? Also, read genesis 6:2
2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose.
Guess God has many sons and don't you dare say they're not because it clearly says son and so we should apply human definitions to God.

Ayden Thomas
Ayden Thomas

You’re actually insane!
Well I guess Christ must’ve been insane when He said He’s the only begotten son of God.
God does not have to fit in your finite mind. It does not matter if it makes you uncomfortable, His power is infinite, and by His power Mary conceived and bore His son. If you don’t like it, then it’s your eternal soul.

Isaac Brooks
Isaac Brooks

The word begotten isn't in the original manuscript. It only appears in later manuscripts that insert the word begotten. But still you think that Christ's human nature was eternal with his divine nature. But the very definition of human is being finite and if it was eternal along with his divine nature then guess what, it isn't human. And how do you read the parts where it says he took on flesh in John 1:14? How can he take on something if he always had it?

At least understand that what you are promoting isn't orthodox Christianity but rather your own misunderstanding. Catholics, Protestants and eastern orthodox alike do not agree with you.

Adrian Barnes
Adrian Barnes

You’re mistaking me for someone else ITT. I am affirming my belief that His human nature was taken on at the incarnation, His only incarnation.

Jaxson Wood
Jaxson Wood

This only just came to me, but, remember that Jacob's new name is Israel. Israel then becomes the name of the people of God as a whole, and the Church is called the New Israel. That Jacob saw the face of God in the angel he fought with prefigures how we will really contemplate the face of God:
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. (Matthew 5:8)
For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know just as I also am known. (1 Corinthians 13:12)
And there shall be no more curse, but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it, and His servants shall serve Him. They shall see His face, and His name shall be on their foreheads. (Revelation 22:3-4)

That aside, here's the Orthodox Study Bible's notes about Jacob's encounter with God:
The man who wrestled with Jacob was the Son of God, who appeared to him as a weak man (Athanasius the Great and Hilary of Poitiers). When He became incarnate, He assumed the weakness of human flesh for man's salvation.
Jacob's name was changed to Israel, which means “God prevails.” In this meaning, Jacob was a type of the Son of God, who became Man and prevailed as God and Man for man's salvation.
The Form of God was the Son and Word of God, who revealed Himself to Jacob (Athanasius the Great and Hilary of Poitiers). He is the Radiance of the Father who reveals the Father in Himself, for as He said, “He who has seen Me has seen the Father” (Jn 14:9). The rising and radiating of the sun on Jacob illustrated this relation of the Son to the Father

Note on John 1:18:
No one has seen God at any time: No one can see the nature, or essence, of God, for to see God is to die (Ex 33:20). Only One who is Himself divine can see God, and thus the Son is the only One who can declare Him. This revelation of God's energies can be received by the faithful. Moses saw the “back” of God (Ex 33:21–23); Isaiah saw His glory (see Is 6:1; John 12:41).

In a sense, no one has seen God, because His essense is unreachable.
In another sense, the face of God can be seen through Jesus. But with the fall we have lost even the ability to see the face of God, but this is restored to us if we are saved.

Samuel Wood
Samuel Wood

He even argues that Jesus can become incarnate whenever he wishes.
Are you claiming Jesus can't become incarnate whenever he wishes? That's blatant heresy.
So basically, Mary isn't needed for Jesus to become incarnate?
She wasn't. God could have become incarnate in any manner he chose. Mary was how he did it, but he didn't need to do it that way.

Disable AdBlock to view this page

Disable AdBlock to view this page

Confirm your age

This website may contain content of an adult nature. If you are under the age of 18, if such content offends you or if it is illegal to view such content in your community, please EXIT.

Enter Exit

About Privacy

We use cookies to personalize content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyze our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our advertising and analytics partners.

Accept Exit