Word became Flesh.

  • Thread starter Thread starter StephenL
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

StephenL

Guest
I have just gotten home from One Bread One Cup at Saint Meinrad. That retreat was so amazing! So now to the question, which came first in the New Testament: word or flesh?
 
In the beginning was the word, and the word became flesh.

Unless you consider the “eternal now”, which explains the representation (re-presentation) of the sacrifice of the Mass not being merely symbolic.

If we follow that line of thought, there was no first or second, but both simply were (and are).
 
The Word not only “came before”, he didn’t have a beginning 🙂
 
Neofight said:
In the beginning was the word, and the word became flesh.

Unless you consider the “eternal now”, which explains the representation (re-presentation) of the sacrifice of the Mass not being merely symbolic.

If we follow that line of thought, there was no first or second, but both simply were (and are).
Click to expand...
The Flesh had a beginning though.
 
MarcoPG said:
The Flesh had a beginning though.
Click to expand...
Only in the realm of time. Time was created by God, for man. God does not live within time, therefore, noting is past, everything is present. Again, without the eternal now, the Mass is all symbolic, and not real.

So, to recap: in the artificial constraints of time, the Flesh did have a “beginning”, or frame of reference, but only because of our inability to wrap our heads around the concept of timelessness. To God, there is no need for linearity of time.
 
Neofight said:
Only in the realm of time. Time was created by God, for man. God does not live within time, therefore, noting is past, everything is present. Again, without the eternal now, the Mass is all symbolic, and not real.

So, to recap: in the artificial constraints of time, the Flesh did have a “beginning”, or frame of reference, but only because of our inability to wrap our heads around the concept of timelessness. To God, there is no need for linearity of time.
Click to expand...
Sure. Just to know that the Word didn’t have a body before Incarnation is sufficient. The Incarnation doesn’t mean the Word had a beginning.
 
MarcoPG said:
Sure. Just to know that the Word didn’t have a body before Incarnation is sufficient. The Incarnation doesn’t mean the Word had a beginning.
Click to expand...
Yes, sufficient perhaps, but theologically unnecessary, except to keep things ordered in our minds.

It truly is an example of what came first, the chicken or the egg.
 
Neofight said:
Yes, sufficient perhaps, but theologically unnecessary, except to keep things ordered in our minds.

It truly is an example of what came first, the chicken or the egg.
Click to expand...
We need order in order … to understand some theology. As Genesis had an order, so will my mind. It is better than chaotic.

And thanks to Genesis, we can say the chicken came first.
 
So there is the proverbial egg on the evolutionists face :D. BTW, Stephen, that would be found in John 1:1. A most appropiate beginning to the book of John.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top