Anthropomorpic?

[percho]

Phil 2:6-8 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

December 25, 0000

Was that little baby Jesus an anthropomorphic of : In beginning was the word and the word was toward the God and God was the word, this was in beginning toward the God.

Or was the egg of the virgin Mary by the living, speaking, Spirit the God impregnated thus dividing and dividing and dividing and forming a fetus, thereby growing in her womb until she brought forth her firstborn son and named him Jesus, the only begotten of the Father God.

Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: --------Did he metamorphosis?

or

1 Tim 2:5 For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; 1John 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

 

[SolaSaint]

Phil 2:6-8 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

December 25, 0000

Was that little baby Jesus an anthropomorphic of : In beginning was the word and the word was toward the God and God was the word, this was in beginning toward the God.

Or was the egg of the virgin Mary by the living, speaking, Spirit the God impregnated thus dividing and dividing and dividing and forming a fetus, thereby growing in her womb until she brought forth her firstborn son and named him Jesus, the only begotten of the Father God.

Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: --------Did he metamorphosis?

or

1 Tim 2:5 For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; 1John 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

I have to ask--what translation are you quoting from John 1:1?

First off a anthropomorphic is a non living thing taking on attributes of man. Since Jesus is a living human he cannot be anthropomorphic, I think. I guess when Jesus was glorified you could have called it a kind of metamorphosis, but I don't think it's a good word to describe it. Glorified is best.

 

[webdog]

I have to ask--what translation are you quoting from John 1:1?

First off a anthropomorphic is a non living thing taking on attributes of man. Since Jesus is a living human he cannot be anthropomorphic, I think. I guess when Jesus was glorified you could have called it a kind of metamorphosis, but I don't think it's a good word to describe it. Glorified is best.

You added the "non living" part to the definition, it means simply having human qualities or traits, like God striking His enemies with the sword, crushing His enemies in a wine press, etc.

 

[SolaSaint]

I just used the defenition from wikipedia. A better example would be God's strong arm, or God changed His mind.

 

[percho]

I have to ask--what translation are you quoting from John 1:1?

First off a anthropomorphic is a non living thing taking on attributes of man. Since Jesus is a living human he cannot be anthropomorphic, I think. I guess when Jesus was glorified you could have called it a kind of metamorphosis, but I don't think it's a good word to describe it. Glorified is best.

Dictionary.com first I saw

ascribing human form or attributes to a being or thing not human, especially to a deity.


Scripture4all.org Greek interlinear

 

[MNJacob]

I have to ask--what translation are you quoting from John 1:1?

It probably was his own. It is a literal translation, using the first definition of "pros".

 

[Gold Dragon]

Phil 2:6-8 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

December 25, 0000

Was that little baby Jesus an anthropomorphic of : In beginning was the word and the word was toward the God and God was the word, this was in beginning toward the God.

Or was the egg of the virgin Mary by the living, speaking, Spirit the God impregnated thus dividing and dividing and dividing and forming a fetus, thereby growing in her womb until she brought forth her firstborn son and named him Jesus, the only begotten of the Father God.

Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: --------Did he metamorphosis?

or

1 Tim 2:5 For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; 1John 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

I think you questions are not really about anthropomorphisms like "the hand of God" or "the eyes of the Lord" which are human characteristics given to someone/something that is not human.

Your questions seem to be more about the nature of the incarnation and how it fits in with our modern scientific understanding human embryonic and fetal development. Is this correct?

 

[percho]

I think you questions are not really about anthropomorphisms like "the hand of God" or "the eyes of the Lord" which are human characteristics given to someone/something that is not human.

Your questions seem to be more about the nature of the incarnation and how it fits in with our modern scientific understanding human embryonic and fetal development. Is this correct?

Yes, that is what I am asking. Was the egg of Mary actually impregnated with the seed of the Spirit God resulting in the birth of a man child. Sinless, yet subject to temptation to sin but did no sin. Subject to the dying the first man Adam was subject, that is dying thou dost die?

OR

Was Jesus the lower form of some person of the Godhead incarnated which could not be tempted with sin, could not sin and in fact could not die the death assigned Adam in whose figure he, Jesus was.

The question could also be asked.

Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.

Are we as an egg/ovum by the word of God impregnated with the seed of God through the gift of the Holy Spirit, being matured in the church, the body of Christ, Jerusalem above the mother of us all until our birth as children of God?

Luke 20:36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.
Rom 8:19 For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.
1 John 3:9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

Is God through the resurrected man child Jesus. therefore the Comforter could come, changing us, that when we are resurrected we will be in a higher state than was the first man Adam when he was created?

What is man that thou art mindful of him?

Did God do this be begetting a sinless man child who could die and be given
eternal life from the dead? Who was the promise of Titus 1:2 made for? Titus 1:2 In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began; The sinful first man Adam or the last Adam?

 

[Gold Dragon]

I am a man of science and a man of God. And when we ask any questions like this, we need to be reminded that both scientifically and theologically, we are limited in what we can know based on the limited information we have available to us through God's natural revelation in nature and his special revelation in scripture.

So my short answer is, we don't know the specifics how God became incarnate in the person of Jesus Christ. Neither scripture nor nature will be able to tell us. That is why it is a mystery that we will never understand but can still celebrate in the wonderful implications of the incarnation.

But in thinking of the incarnation, we must be careful not to go beyond scripture into the territory of heresy. I use the word heresy here even though it is bandied about like candy in a candy store in these parts. But if we look at the traditional usage of the term heresy in the first millenium of the Christian Church, they were almost entirely about the incarnation.

Was Jesus the lower form of some person of the Godhead incarnated

I think John 1 and John 10 are pretty clear that Jesus was not some lower form. The Word was God. He and the father are one. These are some pretty basic Trinitarian concepts.

Are we as an egg/ovum by the word of God impregnated with the seed of God through the gift of the Holy Spirit

Christ and Paul never imply that the Holy Spirit dwells in us before our spiritual birth that I am aware of.

Is God through the resurrected man child Jesus. therefore the Comforter could come, changing us, that when we are resurrected we will be in a higher state than was the first man Adam when he was created?

The Holy Spirit is definitely changing us. The thing about being a higher state than Adam when he was created is something unknowable and I would say, not really so important. What matters is that the Holy Spirit is changing us to be more like Christ.

 

[percho]

I am a man of science and a man of God. And when we ask any questions like this, we need to be reminded that both scientifically and theologically, we are limited in what we can know based on the limited information we have available to us through God's natural revelation in nature and his special revelation in scripture.

So my short answer is, we don't know the specifics how God became incarnate in the person of Jesus Christ. Neither scripture nor nature will be able to tell us. That is why it is a mystery that we will never understand but can still celebrate in the wonderful implications of the incarnation.

But in thinking of the incarnation, we must be careful not to go beyond scripture into the territory of heresy. I use the word heresy here even though it is bandied about like candy in a candy store in these parts. But if we look at the traditional usage of the term heresy in the first millenium of the Christian Church, they were almost entirely about the incarnation.



I think John 1 and John 10 are pretty clear that Jesus was not some lower form. The Word was God. He and the father are one. These are some pretty basic Trinitarian concepts.



Christ and Paul never imply that the Holy Spirit dwells in us before our spiritual birth that I am aware of.




The Holy Spirit is definitely changing us. The thing about being a higher state than Adam when he was created is something unknowable and I would say, not really so important. What matters is that the Holy Spirit is changing us to be more like Christ.

Well the scripture does say he was emptied of something.

Correct we would have to be indwelt with the Holy Spirit, that is receiving the promise of the Spirit through the faith of Jesus Christ see Gal 3:14.23 before we as an ovum would be conceived with the seed of God, to be born of God when Jesus appears and we are like him.

Well Jesus was the firstborn from the dead and when he returns and we are resurrected in his image he will then be the firstborn of many brethren. Will we not be in a higher state than we were born with from our earthly parents?