Yet you have said many times: “Jesus is fully God”. He lacks no attribute of deity. Yet the OT says it is impossible for God to be limited to a human body, let alone an embryo.
I did not write that Jesus is “not a person”; rather I wrote that “Jesus is fully God by substance, not person” = Jesus is not the person of the Father, nor the person of the Holy Spirit.
Jesus is one Divine Person with 2 natures, yes; but He is not the person of the Father, nor the Person of the Holy Spirit.
Ken, I know you like to teach me Christian Theology, but indulge me – just assume I have read the creeds, studied the early councils, and studied historical theology (which I did at uni). That way we can get to the question at hand quicker:
The verse from the Old Testament expresses clearly why it is not possible for God to be an embryo. You evidently disagree with it.
You may have studied the creeds and Christian theology at University, but your way of answering above shows either a twisting or bias and deliberate deception, since you changed my words from “not person” to “not a person”.
The verse from the Old Testament expresses clearly why it is not possible for God to be an embryo.
No it does not, because that passage is about God’s omnipresence and omniscience and that He cannot be limited to a house or temple on earth; the issue there is about a temple; God is not a spacial or physical being anyway. God is Spirit. John 4:23-24
But it is not denying that in the future; God the Son cannot voluntarily become human if He wants to. The OT passage in 1 Kings 8:27 is revelation to the Jews at the time based on what they know about God – the full doctrine of the incarnation and the Trinity has not been revealed yet to them.
Even in the incarnation, God the Father and the Spirit are still omnipresent and omniscient and exist outside of time and space (and can enter into time and space to communicate with humans); so your argument fails.
“But it is not denying that in the future; God the Son cannot voluntarily become human if He wants to. The OT passage in 1 Kings 8:27 is revelation to the Jews at the time based on what they know about God – the full doctrine of the incarnation and the Trinity has not been revealed yet to them.”
How convenient! So God could do that all along, but decided to deliberately mislead the Jews. Right…that makes sense…
You said that the “son” could “voluntarily” come down as a man if he wanted to. What about the “Father”? Could he do that if he wanted to?
It doesn’t mean anything. It’s clear verbal gymnastics that has Zero logic in it. How can abybody have a faith where they have to play with words like that? I have NEVER seen such verbal gymnastics in my life. NEVER.
It is a clear logical contradiction so they make up fancy words as if that somehow refutes anything. The funny thing is that by making up these fancy words they commit even more logical fallacies.
This verse from the Old Testament expresses clearly why it is not possible for God to be an embryo
https://www.flickr.com/photos/142084295@N06/44536723050/in/dateposted/
The eternal Son became flesh/human (John 17:5), the eternal Word (John 1:1-5; 1:14; Philippians 2:5-8), not the Father, nor the Holy Spirit.
Yet you have said many times: “Jesus is fully God”. He lacks no attribute of deity. Yet the OT says it is impossible for God to be limited to a human body, let alone an embryo.
Glorious and Exalted Is He!
Jesus is fully God by nature/substance/essence; not person – He is not the Father nor is He the Holy Spirit.
I am familiar with Christian doctrine. “Not a person” – what you write is not orthodox. Jesus is fully a person.
I refer you to the biblical quote above as to why it is impossible for God to be confined in a bunch of human cells.
I did not write that Jesus is “not a person”; rather I wrote that “Jesus is fully God by substance, not person” = Jesus is not the person of the Father, nor the person of the Holy Spirit.
Jesus is one Divine Person with 2 natures, yes; but He is not the person of the Father, nor the Person of the Holy Spirit.
But He is the Person of the Son, with 2 natures.
Ken, I know you like to teach me Christian Theology, but indulge me – just assume I have read the creeds, studied the early councils, and studied historical theology (which I did at uni). That way we can get to the question at hand quicker:
The verse from the Old Testament expresses clearly why it is not possible for God to be an embryo. You evidently disagree with it.
You may have studied the creeds and Christian theology at University, but your way of answering above shows either a twisting or bias and deliberate deception, since you changed my words from “not person” to “not a person”.
The verse from the Old Testament expresses clearly why it is not possible for God to be an embryo.
No it does not, because that passage is about God’s omnipresence and omniscience and that He cannot be limited to a house or temple on earth; the issue there is about a temple; God is not a spacial or physical being anyway. God is Spirit. John 4:23-24
But it is not denying that in the future; God the Son cannot voluntarily become human if He wants to. The OT passage in 1 Kings 8:27 is revelation to the Jews at the time based on what they know about God – the full doctrine of the incarnation and the Trinity has not been revealed yet to them.
Even in the incarnation, God the Father and the Spirit are still omnipresent and omniscient and exist outside of time and space (and can enter into time and space to communicate with humans); so your argument fails.
“But it is not denying that in the future; God the Son cannot voluntarily become human if He wants to. The OT passage in 1 Kings 8:27 is revelation to the Jews at the time based on what they know about God – the full doctrine of the incarnation and the Trinity has not been revealed yet to them.”
How convenient! So God could do that all along, but decided to deliberately mislead the Jews. Right…that makes sense…
You said that the “son” could “voluntarily” come down as a man if he wanted to. What about the “Father”? Could he do that if he wanted to?
//Jesus is fully God by nature/substance/essence; not person//
What’s this supposed to mean in any language humans have ever spoken o_O ?
It doesn’t mean anything. It’s clear verbal gymnastics that has Zero logic in it. How can abybody have a faith where they have to play with words like that? I have NEVER seen such verbal gymnastics in my life. NEVER.
It is a clear logical contradiction so they make up fancy words as if that somehow refutes anything. The funny thing is that by making up these fancy words they commit even more logical fallacies.
Cloning God