Is Christ "completely God, completely flesh"?

[1689Dave]

I have no idea what you are talking about.

The only thing I said about the Chalcedon Creed is that I believe it is correct.

I also said I am not creedal (while I believe both creeds accurate I do not hold them in an authority for my faith).

I am Baptist. We do not hold Ecumenical creeds the same way you do.

Again, quote me departing from the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity or be called a liar.

You keep saying things you cannot back up.

You keep making charges but cannot provide a quote.

Provide a quote when making wild accusations.

If you originally thought it was correct, you would not have made an issue out of it. But we have all in print where you challenged it stating your Nestorian beliefs. You and the OP. Anyone can read it if they have the time.

 

[1689Dave]

I am still confused. Can you state exactly what you believe and what the issue is with what others believe. is it the natures, the persons, the wills etc.?

Chalcedonian Creed
We, then, following the holy Fathers, all with one consent, teach people to confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood;

truly God and truly man, of a reasonable [rational] soul and body;
consubstantial [co-essential] with the Father according to the Godhead, and consubstantial with us according to the Manhood;
in all things like unto us, without sin;

begotten before all ages of the Father according to the Godhead, and in these latter days, for us and for our salvation, born of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, according to the Manhood;
--------------------------------------------
> one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures, inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably;

> the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one Person and one Subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ;
---------------------------------------------------------
as the prophets from the beginning [have declared] concerning Him, and the Lord Jesus Christ Himself has taught us, and the Creed of the holy Fathers has handed down to us.

The original debate centered on earlier creeds that say Christ is fully human and fully divine. Which tends to Nestorianism. Two persons/two natures = multiple personality = crazy.

The fullest statement, Chalcedon clarifies Christ as having two natures, one fully human and one fully divine concurring in ONE PERSON, God.

 

[1689Dave]

You need to study before making ignorant accusations.

No member has stated Nestorianism.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

The issue is you are taking a Catholic stance on the Baptist section of the board. Baptists will not accept your position when it comes to the creeds. But Baptists (unlike you) do hold in common with other theologies the orthodox Christian view of the Trinity.

It's documented in the OP. You cannot wiggle out of it.

 

[1689Dave]

You have absolutely no clue.

You need to study before making such ignorant claims.

The creed was not a written by Athanasius.

How is Athanasius dead before Chalcedon existed? And the final incomplete word from Chalcedon?

Athanasius of Alexandria, also called Athanasius the Great, Athanasius the Confessor or, primarily in the Coptic Orthodox Church, Athanasius the Apostolic, was the 20th bishop of Alexandria. Wikipedia
Born: Alexandria, Egypt ?
Died: May 2, 373 AD, Alexandria, Egypt

451 produced the Chalcedon creed. It is later than Athanasius.

 

[1689Dave]

I have no idea what you are talking about.

The only thing I said about the Chalcedon Creed is that I believe it is correct.

I also said I am not creedal (while I believe both creeds accurate I do not hold them in an authority for my faith).

I am Baptist. We do not hold Ecumenical creeds the same way you do.

Again, quote me departing from the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity or be called a liar.

You keep saying things you cannot back up.

You keep making charges but cannot provide a quote.

Provide a quote when making wild accusations.

You spend your time on trying to dig yourself out. I need not lift a finger.

 

[JonC]

How is Athanasius dead before Chalcedon existed? And the final incomplete word from Chalcedon?

Because Athanisus died before Chalcedon existed. So did all of the Apostles. So what????

Athenasus did not write the creed. This is common knowledge (which makes me wonder your education experience....have you ever actually studied theology?)

 

[Mikey]

Chalcedonian Creed
We, then, following the holy Fathers, all with one consent, teach people to confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood;

truly God and truly man, of a reasonable [rational] soul and body;
consubstantial [co-essential] with the Father according to the Godhead, and consubstantial with us according to the Manhood;
in all things like unto us, without sin;

begotten before all ages of the Father according to the Godhead, and in these latter days, for us and for our salvation, born of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, according to the Manhood;
--------------------------------------------
> one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures, inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably;

> the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one Person and one Subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ;
---------------------------------------------------------
as the prophets from the beginning [have declared] concerning Him, and the Lord Jesus Christ Himself has taught us, and the Creed of the holy Fathers has handed down to us.

The original debate centered on earlier creeds that say Christ is fully human and fully divine. Which tends to Nestorianism. Two persons/two natures = multiple personality = crazy.

The fullest statement, Chalcedon clarifies Christ as having two natures, one fully human and one fully divine concurring in ONE PERSON, God.

So is the issue the usage of fully rather than truely when describing Christ as man and God?

 

[1689Dave]

Because Athanisus died before Chalcedon existed. So did all of the Apostles. So what????

Athenasus did not write the creed. This is common knowledge (which makes me wonder your education experience....have you ever actually studied theology?)

Chalcedon is the latest we have a record of. You lose.

 

[1689Dave]

So is the issue the usage of fully rather than truely when describing Christ as man and God?

It's more Nestorianism "Fully Human" VS Chalcedon "Full human nature. Fully human presents two persons instead of "One Divine Person".

 

[JonC]

You spend your time on trying to dig yourself out. I need not lift a finger.

I still stand where I have always stood:

Christ is One Person, two natures, fully God, fully man.

You said that I advocated that Christ is two persons. You could not provide a quote of me doing so. Are you a liar?

You complained of my "reaction" to the Chalcedonan Creed. My reaction is that I agreed with the Creed but did not hold it as an authority of faith because I am Baptist. You could not provide a quote of me rejecting the Creed. Are you a liar?

You rejected the Orthodox Christian doctrine of the Trinity as applies to Christ by claiming that "fully God, fully man" equates to two persons. Are you a heretic?

You bring up Athanasius as if he were the writer of the Athanasius Creed. Are you willfully ignorant (did you intentionally assume he wrote the creed)?

 

[1689Dave]

I still stand where I have always stood:

Christ is One Person, two natures, fully God, fully man.

You said that I advocated that Christ is two persons. You could not provide a quote of me doing so. Are you a liar?

You complained of my "reaction" to the Chalcedonan Creed. My reaction is that I agreed with the Creed but did not hold it as an authority of faith because I am Baptist. You could not provide a quote of me rejecting the Creed. Are you a liar?

You rejected the Orthodox Christian doctrine of the Trinity as applies to Christ by claiming that "fully God, fully man" equates to two persons. Are you a heretic?

You bring up Athanasius as if he were the writer of the Athanasius Creed. Are you willfully ignorant (did you intentionally assume he wrote the creed)?

Why attack the Chalcedon Creed? And hold out Nestorianism as the truth?

 

[JonC]

@1689Dave ,

On this forum you have demonstrated that you reject Reformed Theology, the Belgic Confession, Calvinism, Arminianism, Presbyterianism, Lutheran Theology., Catholic Theology, and orthodox Christian theology in regards to your doctrine of the Trinity.

On this forum you have denounced Baptist theology with your catholic adherence to select creeds.

So you are not a Baptist, you are not a Calvinist, you are not Presbyterian, you are not Methodist, you are not Reformed, you do not hold Christian doctrine when it comes to the Trinity.....(not that you are not a Christian, I believe you are, but speaking of doctrine).

What exactly are you?

 

[1689Dave]

@1689Dave ,

On this forum you have demonstrated that you reject Reformed Theology, the Belgic Confession, Calvinism, Arminianism, Presbyterianism, Lutheran Theology., Catholic Theology, and orthodox Christian theology in regards to your doctrine of the Trinity.

On this forum you have denounced Baptist theology with your catholic adherence to select creeds.

So you are not a Baptist, you are not a Calvinist, you are not Presbyterian, you are not Methodist, you are not Reformed, you do not hold Christian doctrine when it comes to the Trinity.....(not that you are not a Christian, I believe you are, but speaking of doctrine).

What exactly are you?

I am a Baptist subscribing to the 1689 London confession. Even you denounce Calvin and Reformed theology in certain areas. But the Ecumenical Creeds define essential Christian doctrines.

 

[JonC]

Why attack the Chalcedon Creed? And hold out Nestorianism as the truth?

You are confused. I never attacked any of the Creeds (to include the Chalcedon Creed). I would if I disagreed with the creeds, but on this account I do not. I find them biblical.

I do not care if anyone attacks the creeds. I do care when members depart from orthodox Christian doctrine. But as a Baptist I do not revere the Creeds or the Counsels as you do.

You have to realize, brother, that this is a Baptist board. I am not sure why you are posting in this section of the forum, but people here are assumed to be Baptist.

For some the creeds accurately express their views. With this topic, I am one of them. Both creeds express my understanding of the Trinity.

I have never expressed Nestorianism. I quoted the creeds as my definition of the Trinity. You take exception to the creeds (and that is fine, I do not force them on anyone). But you are intentionally making false accusations against orthodox Christianity.

Quote one time when I stated that Christ is two persons....or be a liar.

 

[1689Dave]

You are confused. I never attacked any of the Creeds (to include the Chalcedon Creed). I would if I disagreed with the creeds, but on this account I do not. I find them biblical.

I do not care if anyone attacks the creeds. I do care when members depart from orthodox Christian doctrine. But as a Baptist I do not revere the Creeds or the Counsels as you do.

You have to realize, brother, that this is a Baptist board. I am not sure why you are posting in this section of the forum, but people here are assumed to be Baptist.

For some the creeds accurately express their views. With this topic, I am one of them. Both creeds express my understanding of the Trinity.

I have never expressed Nestorianism. I quoted the creeds as my definition of the Trinity. You take exception to the creeds (and that is fine, I do not force them on anyone). But you are intentionally making false accusations against orthodox Christianity.

Quote one time when I stated that Christ is two persons....or be a liar.

You dove into a discussion between me and the OP placing your dog in the fight. And it all went embarrassingly downhill from there.

 

[JonC]

I am a Baptist subscribing to the 1689 London confession. Even you denounce Calvin and Reformed theology in certain areas. But the Ecumenical Creeds define essential Christian doctrines.

I think that you believe that you do. You may subscribe to the 1689 London Confession but you are ignorant of it's history and development. The London Confession is a reformed confession. You have denounced the Reformed position on the nature of Christ and called it Nestorianism. Have you ever read the Belgic Confession. Have you ever read the Canons of Dort? If so then you have read intertwined the doctrines you denounce.

I do believe that you are a Christian. And I do believe that you accept Reformed Theology on your own terms. I even grant that you hold many, perhaps even most, of those things that form Baptist Theology. But you are not a Baptist based on your arguments here. You hold too much of a catholic like adherence to creeds and confessions in terms of establishing your faith and determining what is orthodox to be a Baptist.

 

[1689Dave]

I think that you believe that you do. You may subscribe to the 1689 London Confession but you are ignorant of it's history and development. The London Confession is a reformed confession. You have denounced the Reformed position on the nature of Christ and called it Nestorianism. Have you ever read the Belgic Confession. Have you ever read the Canons of Dort? If so then you have read intertwined the doctrines you denounce.

I do believe that you are a Christian. And I do believe that you accept Reformed Theology on your own terms. I even grant that you hold many, perhaps even most, of those things that form Baptist Theology. But you are not a Baptist based on your arguments here. You hold too much of a catholic like adherence to creeds and confessions in terms of establishing your faith and determining what is orthodox to be a Baptist.

You are falsely accusing me with no evidence to support it.

 

[JonC]

You dove into a discussion between me and the OP placing your dog in the fight. And it all went embarrassingly downhill from there.

You do not need to be embarrassed. It is obvious you have never formally studied Christian history and many of those mistakes and assumptions you have made are understandable (like assuming the Athanasius wrote the Athanasian creed, assuming the Chalcedonian creed was the latter creed taken as the measure of orthodoxy, assuming Baptists submitted to the authority of the Ecumenical Counsels).

Do not be embarrassed by your ignorance on these issues. Ignorance is not a matter of shame. Correcting that ignorance, however, is. So take the time to study Baptist Theology (understand why you are not a Baptist) and take the time to study a little Christian history before engaging the topic. Many of your errors could have been easily prevented.

 

[1689Dave]

You do not need to be embarrassed. It is obvious you have never formally studied Christian history and many of those mistakes and assumptions you have made are understandable (like assuming the Athanasius wrote the Athanasian creed, assuming the Chalcedonian creed was the latter creed taken as the measure of orthodoxy, assuming Baptists submitted to the authority of the Ecumenical Counsels).

Do not be embarrassed by your ignorance on these issues. Ignorance is not a matter of shame. Correcting that ignorance, however, is. So take the time to study Baptist Theology (understand why you are not a Baptist) and take the time to study a little Christian history before engaging the topic. Many of your errors could have been easily prevented.

I studied seminary-level baptist theology at a church I attended under an accredited THD and author published by Moody. And from there I have many years studying Greek and Reformed Theology with over 3000 books in my library.

 

[Van]

Question

Did this, "Spirit/Soul" become this, "spirit/soul" ?

Please indicate whether you were referring to the "human spirit/soul" claimed by some to animate Christ's human nature, or our "spirit/soul" that animates our human nature?