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

[Frank Russell]

Church of Christ has ~2.3 million adherents that do not subscribe to the belief that Christ is a God-Man or both God and man. I'm sure there are more.

Interesting. I did not know that. I attended their Church services a while back ago and I never realized that. Can you tell me in what way they do not believe Christ is a God-man.

In retrospect, I remember CoC members being dead set against not only creeds but against putting their beliefs down on paper. That was a red flag for me as to how non-committal or unclear they were on what they actually believed.

Well this one kind of lets the cat out of the bag.

Iglesia ni Cristo - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The church believes that Jesus Christ is the Son of God[38] and the mediator between God the Father and humanity,[21] and was created by God the Father. God sanctified him to be without sin, and bestowed upon him the titles "Lord" and "Son of God". The church sees Jesus as God's highest creation, believe that he is a Man and denies the deity of Jesus.[19] Adherents profess Jesus' substitutionary role in the redemption of humankind. He is believed to have been "foreordained before the foundation of the world" and sent by God "to deal with sin". Members "are saved by Christ's blood" who died because of his "self-sacrificing love".[9][40]

INC believes that the Holy Spirit is the power of God and also not a deity, being sent by God the Father and Jesus Christ to guide God's people.[41]

Turns out we're talking about two different denominations. I was talking about the Church of Christ denomination in the USA. It's difficult keeping up with all these Protestant fractures and splinters. Thanks for the information, anyways.

Churches of Christ - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

On this subject, I recall in the early 2000s, there was a church split over a difference in doctrine .. before that there was a group who called themselves the Church of Christ and insisted that they were the only church.

So depending on how that doctrinal issue resolved, there may be many organizations now calling themselves the Church of Christ.

 

[synergy]

On this subject, I recall in the early 2000s, there was a church split over a difference in doctrine .. before that there was a group who called themselves the Church of Christ and insisted that they were the only church.

So depending on how that doctrinal issue resolved, there may be many organizations now calling themselves the Church of Christ.

The CoC Churches I attended in the early 2010's were allergic to the recording and exposing of any of their doctrines or beliefs. I guess they saw the fracturing that was happening and chose to hide their doctrines and beliefs. That was a huge red flag for me. I expressed my concern but to no avail. I was too much of an analytical person for them and I left that denomination soon after.

 

[Olde Tymer]

~

What verse states that?

"in the book" was meant as a colloquialism, for example:

That's the oldest trick in the book.

He tried to impress her with one of the dumbest pick-up lines in the book.
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

~
Re: "God became human, but not a human person."

It's been my experience during +/- 27 years of activity on internet forums, that
quite a few Christians online are unable to discern the difference between the Word
of John 1:1-3 and the flesh that the Word became per John 1:14

* That particular configuration is very interesting as it depicts the cosmos' creator
existing as an eternal spirit being, and a temporal material being, simultaneously.

Anyway, it's no trouble at all to trace the origin of the Word's flesh all the way back
to Adam's flesh.

● Gen 3:15 . . And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between
your seed and her seed. He shall bruise you on the head, and you shall bruise him
on the heel.

Petty much everybody on both sides of the aisle agrees that prophesy pertains to
Messiah.

● Gen 22:18 . . In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed

Pretty much all are agreed that one also pertains to Messiah.

For sure a genealogy is needed for Gen 22:18 because any man claiming to be
Messiah has to present credible evidence that he descends from Abraham-- plus
Isaac (Gen 26:4) Jacob (Gen 28:14) and Judah. (Gen 49:9-10)

However; there's no need for a genealogy relative to Gen 3:15 because the only
qualification required is that the candidate be Eve's posterity, i.e. a human being.

She was constructed with material taken from Adam's body. So then, Eve owes her
existence to Adam's existence, and if so; then her seed also owes its existence to
Adam's existence; which brings us up to David.

Not just any Jew qualifies to take David's throne. God requires that the man must
first of all be one of David's biological descendants.

● Ps 132:11 . .The Lord has sworn in truth unto David; and He will not turn from it:
"Of the fruit of your body will I set upon your throne"

The New Testament verifies Christ is the fruit of David's body spoken of in that
oath.

● Acts 2:29-30 . . Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch
David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulcher is with us unto this day.
Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him,
that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on
his throne.

● Rom 1:3 . . . His son; descended from David according to the flesh

If true that Christ is David's biological descendant, and if true that David was Eve's
biological descendant, then it must be true that Christ, along with David, is also
Adam's biological descendant. So then if Adam was a created being, then his
biological descendants Eve, David, and Christ are also created beings.

FAQ: Jesus is alleged to have been miraculously conceived (Luke 1:27-35) How
then did he in any way at all descend from David's loins, i.e. David's flesh?

REPLY: Baby Jesus' wasn't implanted in Mary's womb as a surrogate mother,
rather, he was conceived in her womb (Luke 1:31). Seeing as how Joseph wasn't
Jesus' biological father, then conception by means of his mom's flesh became her
child's default biological path to David's flesh (Gal 4:4). Although women are rare in
biblical genealogies, they still matter. For example Rahab, Ruth, and Bathsheba.
(Matt 1:5-6)
_

 

[TheLayman]

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.

https://berean-apologetics.community.forum/threads/the-hypostatic-union-the-2-natures-in-christ.7/page-48#post-47651

To help me understand why you take issue with this, would you mind answering a couple of questions about your belief?

1. Do you believe the Son of God existed prior to the incarnation?
2. Assuming you answer to question #1 was yes, do you believe the Son of God merely indwelled a human person making Jesus 2 persons?
3. Do you believe the divine person of the Son ceased to exist and was transmuted/transformed into merely a human person?
4. Do you believe that when we are resurrected in a glorified body we will be sharing it with another person? Or it will be an empty shell of a nature walking around like an automaton?

The historic Christian faith teaches that the Son of God possessed His human nature exactly as you and I possess ours, and that there was no other person in Jesus but the Son of God. He perceived the universe through human nature just as we do, and interacted with the universe through human nature just as you and I do. I say this sincerely...I have no idea what it is you are trying to say because nothing in the historic Christian faith teaches anything like a "zombie...an empty shell of a nature walking around like an automaton." No rational nature actually exists apart from a person.

TheLayman

 

[civic]

To help me understand why you take issue with this, would you mind answering a couple of questions about your belief?

1. Do you believe the Son of God existed prior to the incarnation?
2. Assuming you answer to question #1 was yes, do you believe the Son of God merely indwelled a human person making Jesus 2 persons?
3. Do you believe the divine person of the Son ceased to exist and was transmuted/transformed into merely a human person?
4. Do you believe that when we are resurrected in a glorified body we will be sharing it with another person? Or it will be an empty shell of a nature walking around like an automaton?

The historic Christian faith teaches that the Son of God possessed His human nature exactly as you and I possess ours, and that there was no other person in Jesus but the Son of God. He perceived the universe through human nature just as we do, and interacted with the universe through human nature just as you and I do. I say this sincerely...I have no idea what it is you are trying to say because nothing in the historic Christian faith teaches anything like a "zombie...an empty shell of a nature walking around like an automaton." No rational nature actually exists apart from a person.

TheLayman

Spot on brother, excellent post.