i must admit this video is the greatest one to link between the lutheran christology and the early/medieval western christology . great effort Dr.Cooper
In the beginning the word was with GOD, the word became flesh and the word WAS God, this means Jesus became flesh but wasn't GOD, he became a human, and God dwelled in him for a short time until the mission was fulfilled, after his resurrection he revealed himself to the disciples as GOD, how long I have been with you and you don't know me?
Moses' pre-existence is mentioned in The Assumption of Moses 1:24 - ( He designed me and prepared me before the foundation of the world that I should be the mediator of the Covenant ) Joseph's Prayer ( quoted by Origen ) Jacob says, " I am an angel of God and a primeval spirit, the first-born of all creatures, and like me were Abraham and Isaac created before any other work of God. I am invested with the highest office in the face of God and invoke Him by His ineffable name." The Patriarchs are declared to have been part of the Merkabah (Gen. Rabba ) the bridal gown of Asenath "prepared from the beginnings of the world"). These bit of "Jewish Pre-existence", and much more is discussed on the JewishEncyclopedia. "The throne of glory was the first thing created by God" (Slavonic Enoch 25:4). Paradise with all the treasures of reward for the righteous is prepared from the beginning The blood of the martyred prophets was believed to have been "shed from the foundation of the world" (Luke 11:50); hence, also, that of the "Lamb" (Rev. 13:8; Heb. 9:26).
I go to a reformed baptist church which teaches Calvinist theology and we definitely don't believe that Christ's human nature and divine nature are divided so that we should only worship the divine and we also do teach the eternal generation of the Son. So pls stop trying to give us a bad name
Really enjoying the Christology videos. They sync up nicely with the Master's program I'm doing and give some additional tidbits in addition to what I'm learning there.
Do you think that the alexandrian school and Origen’s influence and Neoplatonism’s influence on Augustine turned to the Amillennial (non-chiliast) perspective?
Dr. Cooper, do you think orthodox Christology works better in a Platonic framework than Aristotelian? Platonists can argue that the Word assumes humanity in the abstract (through Platonic participation). So the individuation of Christ's human nature (and hence its personhood) comes from the Word, so there is only one person. But Aquinas and Aristotelians do not accept that human nature exists in the abstract, so they are forced to admit that the Word assumed an already individual human nature ("already" meaning logically prior, not that the human nature existed temporally prior to its assumption). But isn't an individual human nature a person? So why aren't there two persons? Aquinas seems to me to be forced to make metaphysical distinctions that are not well-motivated in order to salvage his Christology, by saying that an individual human nature that is assumed by a divine person is not itself a person, but any other individual human nature is a person.
I'm enjoying this series on Christology, just as much if not more than your making of the modern world series, but it's all great, thanks for the awesome scholarly content Dr. Cooper. 😁
22:03 To clarify, the more precise formulation by certain Reformed (such as Beza) was that Christ is worshiped *in view* (according to/by means of) His divinity and not *in view* of His humanity, similar to stating Christ died *in view* of His humanity, and not His divinity, and yet the Person of Christ died, not the natures in isolation of each other. So, the Person was still the object of worship, not the nature. There's a somewhat infamous quote "we worship the Whole of Christ, not the whole of Christ" by Beza, iirc. Essentially, what that meant was that the "Whole Person" of Christ is worshiped, not the Humanity of Christ in isolation from the Divinity of Christ.
Dr Jordan Cooper Another enlighten content. However correct me if I am wrong. But why the church has separate seating because men and women. Should be separate in there worship to God. Anyway enough of me rambling God bless you brother 🙏
The series videos may not be as popular, but they are incredibly valuable. Thanks for doing them regardless of their popularity.
Romans 7:2 Yahweh YAHSHUAH MESSIAH is our new husband
Could you also delve into early Pneumatology?
It could be worthwhile.
i must admit this video is the greatest one to link between the lutheran christology and the early/medieval western christology . great effort Dr.Cooper
In the beginning the word was with GOD, the word became flesh and the word WAS God, this means Jesus became flesh but wasn't GOD, he became a human, and God dwelled in him for a short time until the mission was fulfilled, after his resurrection he revealed himself to the disciples as GOD, how long I have been with you and you don't know me?
Moses' pre-existence is mentioned in The Assumption of Moses 1:24 - ( He designed me and prepared me before the foundation of the world that I should be the mediator of the Covenant )
Joseph's Prayer ( quoted by Origen ) Jacob says,
" I am an angel of God and a primeval spirit, the first-born of all creatures, and like me were Abraham and Isaac created before any other work of God. I am invested with the highest office in the face of God and invoke Him by His ineffable name."
The Patriarchs are declared to have been part of the Merkabah (Gen. Rabba ) the bridal gown of Asenath "prepared from the beginnings of the world").
These bit of "Jewish Pre-existence", and much more is discussed on the JewishEncyclopedia.
"The throne of glory was the first thing created by God" (Slavonic Enoch 25:4).
Paradise with all the treasures of reward for the righteous is prepared from the beginning
The blood of the martyred prophets was believed to have been
"shed from the foundation of the world" (Luke 11:50); hence, also, that of the "Lamb" (Rev. 13:8; Heb. 9:26).
Wonderful introduction and a big help for me in my church discussion group on Christ's nature.
(I know that you are of course a Doctor and also a Pastor; your work is very helpful)
I go to a reformed baptist church which teaches Calvinist theology and we definitely don't believe that Christ's human nature and divine nature are divided so that we should only worship the divine and we also do teach the eternal generation of the Son. So pls stop trying to give us a bad name
I thought your next video upload was gonna be the Hegel video. Hopefully you upload that soon please
Next week.
It seems this series has been relatively popular, after all!
Really enjoying the Christology videos. They sync up nicely with the Master's program I'm doing and give some additional tidbits in addition to what I'm learning there.
I have a very serious theological problem with something you brought up, Dr. Cooper.
Pizza. 😁
Chicago style is far superior.
38:58 This interested me, so I searched it up. It's in western Catalonia. :)
YAHWEH YAHSHUAH MESSIAH
Do you think that the alexandrian school and Origen’s influence and Neoplatonism’s influence on Augustine turned to the Amillennial (non-chiliast) perspective?
Dr. Cooper, do you think orthodox Christology works better in a Platonic framework than Aristotelian? Platonists can argue that the Word assumes humanity in the abstract (through Platonic participation). So the individuation of Christ's human nature (and hence its personhood) comes from the Word, so there is only one person. But Aquinas and Aristotelians do not accept that human nature exists in the abstract, so they are forced to admit that the Word assumed an already individual human nature ("already" meaning logically prior, not that the human nature existed temporally prior to its assumption). But isn't an individual human nature a person? So why aren't there two persons? Aquinas seems to me to be forced to make metaphysical distinctions that are not well-motivated in order to salvage his Christology, by saying that an individual human nature that is assumed by a divine person is not itself a person, but any other individual human nature is a person.
I'm enjoying this series on Christology, just as much if not more than your making of the modern world series, but it's all great, thanks for the awesome scholarly content Dr. Cooper. 😁
22:03
To clarify, the more precise formulation by certain Reformed (such as Beza) was that Christ is worshiped *in view* (according to/by means of) His divinity and not *in view* of His humanity, similar to stating Christ died *in view* of His humanity, and not His divinity, and yet the Person of Christ died, not the natures in isolation of each other. So, the Person was still the object of worship, not the nature.
There's a somewhat infamous quote "we worship the Whole of Christ, not the whole of Christ" by Beza, iirc. Essentially, what that meant was that the "Whole Person" of Christ is worshiped, not the Humanity of Christ in isolation from the Divinity of Christ.
Jordan Peterson needs to see this. I believe that he overly platonizes nearly every single thing.
Dr Jordan Cooper Another enlighten content. However correct me if I am wrong. But why the church has separate seating because men and women. Should be separate in there worship to God. Anyway enough of me rambling God bless you brother 🙏
Seating in churches is a relatively new innovation within western Christianity. Historically churches had no seating.
@@chrisj123165 thank you for your kind reply. And answers my question. Take care God bless you 🙏
Maybe I am missing something, but your name at the beginning of the video said Dr. Jordan C Cooper
Not B Cooper
Hah! Typo.
what do you think of dietrich bonhoeffer's religionless christianity?
Probably nothing demonstrates the intellectual bankruptcy of the early church so well as Christology.