"God became human, but not a human person." — civic

Anhypostasia is essential to a trinitarian understanding of the person of the God-man. It is impossible to be a trinitarian without a confession of it.
do not Anhypostasia refer to the Nature and not the PERSON of Christ? let's look at this definition. Anhypostasia is a doctrine that refers to the quality of Jesus Christ's humanity. It means that although Jesus Christ had two natures, a divine and a human, these are united in a single person (hypostasis), and this person is the divine Logos. The human hypostasis is superseded and replaced by the hypostasis of the divine Logos. The quality of Jesus Christ's humanity has its existence entirely from the hypostatic union, rather than from any independent human personhood.

so, Anhypostasia is in reference to his so-callrd dual natues,,,,, nd not his Personhood.. well the bible do not agree with this doctrine. supportive scripture, Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:"

the Lord Jesus nature never changed, but was "ADDED to or as the bible say "took on" another NATURE, which was not his.
Philippians 2:7 "But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:"

God is not GENERATED/Born.... listen to the definition of "MADE",
G1096 γίνομαι ginomai (ǰiy'-no-mai) v.
1. to cause to be (“gen”-erate).
2. (reflexively) to become (come into being).
3. (of events) to happen.
{used with great latitude (literal, figurative, intensive, etc.):}
[a prolongation and middle voice form of a primary verb]
KJV: arise, be assembled, be(-come, -fall, -have self), be brought (to pass), (be) come (to pass), continue, be divided, draw, be ended, fall, be finished

notice definition #1, to cause to be (“gen”-erate) God is not Generated, flesh bone and blood is. so, what was Generated? a body of flesh and blood. which God is NOT. he only "TOOK" it on. so what he "TOOK" on is not his NATURE. for he "TOOK" it off, hence the RESURRESTION.
now as for PERSON. Hebrews 1:3 "Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;" it's the SAME ONE PERSON. for express here is synonyms with "exact" meaning his "PERSON", and that Exact person is mediator, consul, intermediator, intercessor. when used as a NOUN, "A messenger, collector, or agent for a person or company". this info. can be found here. https://www.wordhippo.com/what-is/another-word-for/express.html#C0-

so, this doctrine of Anhypostasia is false. in both areas, Nature, or Personhood of the Lord Jesus .

101G.
 
Luke's genealogy ends with Adam being named the son of God.

John's gospel begins stating by what basis we have a "right" to be sons of God.

John's gospel also records that stating you are the son of God also means you are equal to God.

(who am I to question God's generosity?)
 
do not Anhypostasia refer to the Nature and not the PERSON of Christ? let's look at this definition. Anhypostasia is a doctrine that refers to the quality of Jesus Christ's humanity. It means that although Jesus Christ had two natures, a divine and a human, these are united in a single person (hypostasis), and this person is the divine Logos. The human hypostasis is superseded and replaced by the hypostasis of the divine Logos. The quality of Jesus Christ's humanity has its existence entirely from the hypostatic union, rather than from any independent human personhood.

so, Anhypostasia is in reference to his so-callrd dual natues,,,,, nd not his Personhood.. well the bible do not agree with this doctrine. supportive scripture, Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:"

the Lord Jesus nature never changed, but was "ADDED to or as the bible say "took on" another NATURE, which was not his.
Philippians 2:7 "But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:"

God is not GENERATED/Born.... listen to the definition of "MADE",
G1096 γίνομαι ginomai (ǰiy'-no-mai) v.
1. to cause to be (“gen”-erate).
2. (reflexively) to become (come into being).
3. (of events) to happen.
{used with great latitude (literal, figurative, intensive, etc.):}
[a prolongation and middle voice form of a primary verb]
KJV: arise, be assembled, be(-come, -fall, -have self), be brought (to pass), (be) come (to pass), continue, be divided, draw, be ended, fall, be finished

notice definition #1, to cause to be (“gen”-erate) God is not Generated, flesh bone and blood is. so, what was Generated? a body of flesh and blood. which God is NOT. he only "TOOK" it on. so what he "TOOK" on is not his NATURE. for he "TOOK" it off, hence the RESURRESTION.
now as for PERSON. Hebrews 1:3 "Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;" it's the SAME ONE PERSON. for express here is synonyms with "exact" meaning his "PERSON", and that Exact person is mediator, consul, intermediator, intercessor. when used as a NOUN, "A messenger, collector, or agent for a person or company". this info. can be found here. https://www.wordhippo.com/what-is/another-word-for/express.html#C0-

so, this doctrine of Anhypostasia is false. in both areas, Nature, or Personhood of the Lord Jesus .

101G.
1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

1Ti 2:5 For Adonoi echad hu (there is one G-d) and there is also metavekh echad (one melitz, IYOV 33:23, YESHAYAH 43:27; cf. DEVARIM 5:5,22-31), one between Hashem and kol Bnei Adam, the man Rebbe, Melech HaMoshiach Yehoshua,

1Ti 2:5 Εἷς Heis|G1520|Adj-NMS|One γὰρ gar|G1063|Conj|for Θεός, Theos|G2316|N-NMS|God [there is], εἷς heis|G1520|Adj-NMS|one καὶ kai|G2532|Conj|then μεσίτης mesitēs|G3316|N-NMS|mediator Θεοῦ Theou|G2316|N-GMS|between God καὶ kai|G2532|Conj|and ἀνθρώπων, anthrōpōn|G444|N-GMP|men, ἄνθρωπος anthrōpos|G444|N-NMS|
[the] man Χριστὸς Christos|G5547|N-NMS|Christ Ἰησοῦς, Iēsous|G2424|N-NMS|Jesus,

ONE GOD TWO NATURES - Part 2
A LOOK AT THE HUMANITY OF CHRIST
“For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men,
the man Christ Jesus.”
- 1 Timothy 2:5
1. The Importance of this Issue

a. It is where people break their backs, JW’s, Unitarians, Christadelphians, Muslims

b. It affects the preaching of the cross: was it an example, a fraud, or a payment?

c. Christ could only die if he was man, he could only die for our sins if he was God.

2. The Nature of Man
a. Man was created in the image of God; thus cannot become God - Gen 1:26-27

b. Man was formed of the dust of the ground (made flesh) – Gen 2:7

c. Man is a spirit, soul, body – 1 Thess 5:23, Heb 4:12

d. Man’s nature and limitations: temporal? (2 Cor 4:18), power? (Col 2:9-10), knowledge(1
John 2:20, 1 Cor 13:2), holiness(Lev 19:2), earthy(1 Cor 15:47-48)
e. Sin has changed man – Genesis 2:17, 5:3, Rom 5:12, Rom 1:20-25

f. It is man’s whole duty to keep God’s commandments – Ecc 12:13, Psa 8:4-6

3. The Two Natures of Christ
a. Jesus is a person of the Godhead; he is God: Col 2:9; Rev 1:11-17; Isa 44:6
b. He became man, added humanity not subtracted deity: Joh 1:3,10,14, Heb 7:24

c. Wrong views of the Two Natures in Christ

i. He only appears to be man – then his death was not real

ii. He is mixed God and man –then he is not your kinsman, but a new thing

iii. He is part man/ part God – then he is not either completely

iv. He can only be one at a time – then he ceases to be the other

4. Jesus’ Human Nature
a. Jesus is God, but he is also a man - 1 Timothy 2:5, 1 John 4:1-3, 2 Cor 5:16
b. Being human meant taking on flesh and blood, not flaws – John 6:54, Phil 2:5-7
c. He was made of a woman – Isaiah 7:14, 9:6, Gal 4:4, Mat 1:1, 16-18
d. He ate, slept, cried, walked, touched, talked, bled, and died.
e. As man he is not required to sin or die – Heb 4:15, 2 Cor 5:21, John 10:17-18
f. He had body, soul, and spirit, when he died and rose – Luke 23:42-52, 24:39
g. His humanity does not diminish, abandon, remove, or give up his deity.
5. Why Jesus Needed to Be Man
a. To be a proper mediator - Heb 2:9-18, 1 Tim 2:5, Gal 3:20
b. To manifest God to man – 1 Tim 3:16, John 1:18, 31
c. To sit on David’s throne – Luke 1:32, Acts 2:29-30, 2 Tim 2:8
d. To be preeminent in all things – Col 1:16-18
e. To reconcile all things to himself – Col 1:20, Rom 8:19-21

Shalom brother.
J.
 
Last edited:
Recently our beloved resident poster posted this very incredible statement.

I personally find it heretical.

What is a non-personal human?

A zombie?

An empty shell of a nature walking around like an automaton?

What say the forum to this amazing claim.

You're viewing Christ's human nature in isolation from Christ's Personhood. That does not nor can it exist as you're accusing it of being. Christ's human nature has never existed apart from the Personhood of Christ. The Walking Dead episodes have enlightened your imagination to such possibilities but that is just a figment of the imagination of the producers of the Walkng Dead series. The bottom line is that you've constructed a Strawman image in your mind that has absolutely no basis in reality.

Tell you what. Why don't you enlighten us on how you think the Divine Logos topk on human nature and became man. And then we can compare your thinking to what Chalcedon actually said which was not a prelude to the Walking Dead series.
 

Recently our beloved resident poster posted this very incredible statement.

I personally find it heretical.

What is a non-personal human?
I don't know about other applications maybe they're right but I'd definitely say a non human person would be like politicians always wanting to raise taxes upon those on a fixed income. :)
 
More accurately is "The Creator came to earth as a human."
Less accurately, more extreme eisegesis.

Yet, it proves again the trinity is false. IF the Creator came to earth as a human, then there is no Holy Spirit. BTW, it is the non-person Holy Spirit that fits civic's monstrosity of a statement toward our master.
 
God became man.
Yet, no verse even says anything like this.

Ever read Deut 18:15-18? It is not that God became man but God would put his words into the mouth of a man chosen among God's people. This explains why Phillip said to Nathaniel that we found the man Moses (and the prophets) told us about in John 1:45. NOTE: Phillip did not say, we found God incarnate. He said they found a man.

This also explains why Jesus said in John 12:49 I don’t speak on my own authority. The Father who sent me has commanded me what to say and how to say it.

If Jesus is God as all you heretics claim, this verse makes no sense. God speaks not on his own authority, is told what to say and how to say it? Not much of a God.
 
Recently our beloved resident poster posted this very incredible statement.

I personally find it heretical.

What is a non-personal human?

A zombie?

An empty shell of a nature walking around like an automaton?

What say the forum to this amazing claim.

See this post since you twisted my words in your OP. This is for the readers :)


And see this post too :)


Conclusion : my view is the historical trinitarian view, the view that upholds the Creeds of Christendom( orthodox) and last but not least the biblical view. The Son always was and will be a Divine Person, the 2nd Person of the Trinity. :)

hope this helps !!!
 
Last edited:
See this post since you twisted my words in your OP. This is for the readers :)

I didn't twist your words at all, I quoted you word for word.

Don't be a slandering false accuser.

Show me where I misquoted you? You can't.

Are you practicing the old Calvinist slimy technique to say any repeating back is "misrepresentation" no matter what?

You even insulted and accused me when I simply asked you to clarify your statement one time, so I didn't misrepresent you.

Please know this kind of debate is demonic and disingenuous and completely unfair.

You should take a long look at yourself, ask God to open your eyes, and repent.

Let the righteous strike me; It shall be a kindness.
And let him rebuke me; It shall be as excellent oil; Let my head not refuse it (Ps. 141:5 NKJ)
 
See this post since you twisted my words in your OP. This is for the readers :)


And see this post too :)


Conclusion : my view is the historical trinitarian view, the view that upholds the Creeds of Christendom( orthodox) and last but not least the biblical view. The Son always was and will be a Divine Person, the 2nd Person of the Trinity. :)

hope this helps !!!
He has a knack of dreaming up strawmen and delighting in burning them up.
 
You depersonalize "the Word" as much as civic does with the human Jesus.

They are BOTH a person, the SAME person.
You're the one who "depersonalize "the Word"", not civic. You're the one viewing Christ's human nature in isolation from Christ's Personhood. That does not nor can it exist as you're accusing it of being. Christ's human nature has never existed apart from the Personhood of Christ. The bottom line is that you've constructed a Strawman image in your mind that has absolutely no basis in reality.

Stop revelling in your Strawmen.
 
Recently our beloved resident poster posted this very incredible statement.

I personally find it heretical.

What is a non-personal human?

A zombie?

An empty shell of a nature walking around like an automaton?

What say the forum to this amazing claim.

I did not say “ non human person “ did I ??

Here is what I actually said and in its full context.

“humans are not God and God became human, but not a human person. :)

nuff said I’m not a liar as I was falsely accused of being.

I’m very precise with my words I use in 5 specific areas of doctrine and can recall and know what I say and do not say.

1- the Trinity
2- the 2 natures in Christ
3- the resurrection of Christ
4- the gospel
5- the atonement
 
You falsely accused me as well, just made up in your own mind things I never said.

It's an evil thing, nothing you say here is true, I did no such thing.
Did you forget that you sent us a zombie picture which ridiculed Christ's human nature as depersonalized? I would advise that you stop with those insulting and blaspemous strawmen.
 
I know all too well your container theory. Where we mainly diverge is that I believe that the Uncreated Word of God is uncreated and is God by virtue of his God Nature.
I don't think that is the point of our divergence. The point of our divergance is you think a word is a person distinct from the person who conceives the word. I hold that a word is an attribute of a person.
 
Back
Top Bottom