2
- Status
2
2ndGen
Guest
D
Dauphin
Guest
I know.
D
Dauphin
Guest
This isn’t according to me, it’s according to the Third Council of Constantinople:Ohhh!
So according to you, Jesus is truly God and truly man with separate wills? Or that in the case of His will, He can be separated and that the will of Jesus as God doesn’t submit to God The Father?
“the heresy of a single will and a single principle of action in the two natures of the one member of the holy Trinity Christ our true God, a heresy in harmony with the evil belief, ruinous to the mind, of the impious Apollinarius, Severus and Themistius, and one intent on removing the perfection of the becoming man of the same one lord Jesus Christ our God, through a certain guileful device, leading from there to the blasphemous conclusion that his rationally animate flesh is without a will and a principle of action.”
"And we proclaim equally* two** natural volitions or wills in him and two natural principles of action which undergo no division, no change, no partition, no confusion, in accordance with the teaching of the holy fathers."*
I want to be clear that I don’t mean that the two wills “struggle” against one another, only that the human will is subject to the divine will:
“And the two natural wills not in opposition, as the impious heretics said, far from it, but his human will following, and not resisting or struggling, rather in fact subject to his divine and all powerful will.”
I hope that you didn’t misinterpret me. I agree with this completely.
He couldn’t be referring to his divine will, could he?
The will of the father, as he said.
That’s not what I’m trying to do! read the statements of the Third Council of Constantinople. Christ’s human and divine natures are united in a single hypostasis, but that doesn’t mean that they’re indistinguishable.
A direct contradiction of Catholic dogma
Third Council of Constantinople : 680-681 A. D.
No it’s not!
That just endorsed my position…
Exactly! Jesus comes not to do his human will, but the divine will! Read this again, but carefully. I never said that the two wills weren’t in harmony. The human will is certainly subject to the divine will.
WOW! You’ve got it completely backward. Monothelitism is the heresy that Jesus Christ had only one will, and not two separate wills corresponding to his human and divine natures. The prefix “mono” means one. It seems that you’ve not only embraced the Arian heresy, but the Monothelite heresy as well!
Please find an orthodox priest to discuss this with. These are serious errors, and you are in need of serious orthodox instruction. It’s not judging someone to point out their error. Would it have been a charity for me to allow you to continue spreading these heretical ideas?
D
Dauphin
Guest
No. I don’t.
To God, all moments in time are present in their immediacy. There was no “beginning point” for time. For God, all time has happened already. Everything that has ever happened or will happen has always been present to Him. God created all moments in time, including those that haven’t yet occured for us.
Btw, please take a more respectful tone. There’s no need for the insults. Don’t take my call to go to confession as an insult. It’s a serious request.
2
2ndGen
Guest
H
holdencaulfield
Guest
Thank You. The Son was begotten. However the Son was always begotten. He has been begotten for an eternity. He has always existed.
A
abucs
Guest
I think from reading the NT you can make different claims according to your own thoughts.
I guess a lot of it depends on what you think Son of God means.
The Jews as in John 19:7 thought Jesus should be killed for that claim as it was blasphemy.
Jesus saying ‘I Am’ seemed to have the following Jewish reactions when he said it the three times - They wanted to arrest him, the soldiers fell down on the floor and in the Sanhedrin they pronounced him guilty with a tearing of clothes.
More explicitly Jesus claimed before Abraham I AM.
Thomas in John 20:28 greets the risen Jesus as My Lord and My God.
John’s prologue says the ‘Word was God’ which i think clearly refers to Jesus with the associated accompanying lines.
Another Jewish writer, writing Hebrews to the Jews about Jewish issues, very early on in the Church, is also explicit about the universe being created through Jesus and the early writing clearly makes it known he is greater than the prophets or the angels.
It goes on to say that Jesus commands angels and the writer depicts God saying to Jesus - your throne, O God,stands forever and ever. It also speaks of Jesus when it says - You loved justice and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, annointed you …
I know we can make claims and counter claims on these passages and others but it seems the special status of Jesus (including the way he was conceived) was there at the early stage of the Jewish church if not explicitly stated and defined throughout the included books.
Would God go to all the trouble of the redemption and let us misunderstand and not correct us if we got it wrong ?
Is Jesus indeed with us until the end of the age with the spirit leading us to all truth ?
I trust the early Jewish-Gentile Christian church to get it right because i trust that the New Covenant is important to God and if he is going to raise Jesus, fulfil prophecies made during the whole Jewish old covenant, destroy the old temple and send the Holy Spirit to the apostles, then he’s not going to set that new Covenant up with a belief that is repugnant to him.
Unless of course you want to ditch the whole of Christianity - which i don’t.
Respect.
I guess a lot of it depends on what you think Son of God means.
The Jews as in John 19:7 thought Jesus should be killed for that claim as it was blasphemy.
Jesus saying ‘I Am’ seemed to have the following Jewish reactions when he said it the three times - They wanted to arrest him, the soldiers fell down on the floor and in the Sanhedrin they pronounced him guilty with a tearing of clothes.
More explicitly Jesus claimed before Abraham I AM.
Thomas in John 20:28 greets the risen Jesus as My Lord and My God.
John’s prologue says the ‘Word was God’ which i think clearly refers to Jesus with the associated accompanying lines.
Another Jewish writer, writing Hebrews to the Jews about Jewish issues, very early on in the Church, is also explicit about the universe being created through Jesus and the early writing clearly makes it known he is greater than the prophets or the angels.
It goes on to say that Jesus commands angels and the writer depicts God saying to Jesus - your throne, O God,stands forever and ever. It also speaks of Jesus when it says - You loved justice and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, annointed you …
I know we can make claims and counter claims on these passages and others but it seems the special status of Jesus (including the way he was conceived) was there at the early stage of the Jewish church if not explicitly stated and defined throughout the included books.
Would God go to all the trouble of the redemption and let us misunderstand and not correct us if we got it wrong ?
Is Jesus indeed with us until the end of the age with the spirit leading us to all truth ?
I trust the early Jewish-Gentile Christian church to get it right because i trust that the New Covenant is important to God and if he is going to raise Jesus, fulfil prophecies made during the whole Jewish old covenant, destroy the old temple and send the Holy Spirit to the apostles, then he’s not going to set that new Covenant up with a belief that is repugnant to him.
Unless of course you want to ditch the whole of Christianity - which i don’t.
Respect.
H
holdencaulfield
Guest
Well, I think that this thread is pretty much completed.
- Status