Also, thanks for clarifying the communication of idioms. That is such an important point. I struggled for several years with teaching that opposed that language and it hindered me in my understanding of Christ. Hearing teaching from the early church on this was so liberating! Thank you for clear teaching on the person and work of Christ! Christ is so beautiful! This is where the mystery lies. We shouldn't go beyond the mystery. Thank you brothers!
The chat for this video was on fire. We had some well educated, well informed in church history Christians in the chat, discussing this stuff, as well as a lot of us normal "I just love Jesus" guys. It was great. Oh yeah, the vid was good too ;)
Hey guys. Thanks for trying to answer my question. I see you guys never heard of that debate lol. You had said Lutherans are reformed and technically yes but no… Jordan Cooper would call Calvinists reformed but not himself (I’ve heard him say that) even though Lutherans did start the reformation (well I would argue Wycliffe did sort of but whatever). The Calvinists brothers hijacked that term so yeah hahaha but good point. Gbu all
56:28 - 4 minutes to go so I'll get through this quickly; 31 mins later the episode ends XD. In all seriousness, thanks for the episode guys! It was great being able to listen in.
I have never heard anybody define "nature" in a definite enough way that I could tell whether I agreed with their view or not. It feels to me like these conversations about "nature" are trying to split very fuzzy hairs. Is there any name for the theory that Jesus was God in identity (who) and Man in situation(what, when, where)? Is there any verse in the Bible that disputes this view?
I would say Jesus, father and the Holy Spirit. None of them identifies God predicate. If you don’t understand the difference, here’s an example of identity. I am my daughters father. I am the only one that can claim that. Here’s an example of predication. I am a man. If I identified as a man that means I’m the only man other man I’m not making an identity statement of making a predicate statement.
Seems that the problem with the Hypostatic union is that is has our Lord with two natures. His identity for sure was Deity, Logos incarnate. But to say he had two natures causes all kinds of problems and puts us back into the camp of Nestorianism. For example, when we ask how is it that Jesus didn't know the day or hour of his return, the usual reply is that he didn't know in his human nature only. But then why not just jump over into the divine nature and find out? This can't be right. It would also have our Lord pretending to be baby and learn new things. Chalcedon tried to have it both ways but with its paradoxical language in the end gave us Nestorianism. It seems more accurate to say he had a human nature, but was God in spiritual identity. The Logos spirit was transformed into a human spirit. His flesh had the DNA of the Father. Then he was given the Holy Spirit without measure at his baptism and he would have done no miracles as a child. Amen?
Please refer Oriental Church definition of hypostatic union. Oriental church stops the communion with Catholic church because Pope Leo letter inclined to Nestorian teaching.
These verses explain all, Rev 1 : 4, Isaiah 11 : 2, II Cor 3 : 17, Rome 8 : 9, Rome 8 : 2 KJV, John 14 : 17, Gal 4 : 6, Act 16 : 7, Eph 1 : 13, Col 2 : 9 and John 1 : 1. So miaphysite (Egypt), Nestorian belief (Assyria), and diaphysite (Israel) are not perfectly right all of them (Isaiah 19 : 25).
Also, thanks for clarifying the communication of idioms. That is such an important point. I struggled for several years with teaching that opposed that language and it hindered me in my understanding of Christ. Hearing teaching from the early church on this was so liberating! Thank you for clear teaching on the person and work of Christ! Christ is so beautiful! This is where the mystery lies. We shouldn't go beyond the mystery. Thank you brothers!
The chat for this video was on fire. We had some well educated, well informed in church history Christians in the chat, discussing this stuff, as well as a lot of us normal "I just love Jesus" guys. It was great.
Oh yeah, the vid was good too ;)
Looking Forward to catching this tomorrow!
Those were some of the best closing thoughts I have ever heard on this channel. The beauty of the mystery of God... incredible.
Yay! I love this
New to Remnant. Cool series idea!
Hey guys. Thanks for trying to answer my question. I see you guys never heard of that debate lol.
You had said Lutherans are reformed and technically yes but no… Jordan Cooper would call Calvinists reformed but not himself (I’ve heard him say that) even though Lutherans did start the reformation (well I would argue Wycliffe did sort of but whatever). The Calvinists brothers hijacked that term so yeah hahaha but good point. Gbu all
56:28 - 4 minutes to go so I'll get through this quickly; 31 mins later the episode ends XD. In all seriousness, thanks for the episode guys! It was great being able to listen in.
I have never heard anybody define "nature" in a definite enough way that I could tell whether I agreed with their view or not. It feels to me like these conversations about "nature" are trying to split very fuzzy hairs.
Is there any name for the theory that Jesus was God in identity (who) and Man in situation(what, when, where)? Is there any verse in the Bible that disputes this view?
I would say Jesus, father and the Holy Spirit. None of them identifies God predicate. If you don’t understand the difference, here’s an example of identity. I am my daughters father. I am the only one that can claim that. Here’s an example of predication. I am a man. If I identified as a man that means I’m the only man other man I’m not making an identity statement of making a predicate statement.
Seems that the problem with the Hypostatic union is that is has our Lord with two natures. His identity for sure was Deity, Logos incarnate. But to say he had two natures causes all kinds of problems and puts us back into the camp of Nestorianism. For example, when we ask how is it that Jesus didn't know the day or hour of his return, the usual reply is that he didn't know in his human nature only. But then why not just jump over into the divine nature and find out? This can't be right. It would also have our Lord pretending to be baby and learn new things. Chalcedon tried to have it both ways but with its paradoxical language in the end gave us Nestorianism. It seems more accurate to say he had a human nature, but was God in spiritual identity. The Logos spirit was transformed into a human spirit. His flesh had the DNA of the Father. Then he was given the Holy Spirit without measure at his baptism and he would have done no miracles as a child. Amen?
Please refer Oriental Church definition of hypostatic union. Oriental church stops the communion with Catholic church because Pope Leo letter inclined to Nestorian teaching.
These verses explain all, Rev 1 : 4, Isaiah 11 : 2, II Cor 3 : 17, Rome 8 : 9, Rome 8 : 2 KJV, John 14 : 17, Gal 4 : 6, Act 16 : 7, Eph 1 : 13, Col 2 : 9 and John 1 : 1. So miaphysite (Egypt), Nestorian belief (Assyria), and diaphysite (Israel) are not perfectly right all of them (Isaiah 19 : 25).