Origin of the incarnate Jesus..

Exploring the details of Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Elijah John
Savant
Posts: 12143
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:23 pm
Location: New England
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 2 times

Origin of the incarnate Jesus..

Post #1

Post by Elijah John »

According to Church orthodoxy, Jesus was eternally pre-existent along with the Father and the Holy Spirit.

Yet we read that it was the Holy Spirit who impregnated Mary. Doesn't that go against the notion that the Son always was? And the fact that it was the Holy Spirit who in effect "Fathered" Jesus suggests that the Son only came into being when the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary.

Which begs the questions.

Shouldn't it have been the pre-existent Jesus who "overshadowed" Mary?

What is the difference between the Holy Spirit and the pre-existent Christ?

Or what is the difference between the Holy Spirit and the Risen Christ?

Are these questions evidence of the confusion wrought by the doctrine of the Trinity, and thus evidence that the Trinity is a man-made model made in order to understand the Divine, and not really Divine revelation?
My theological positions:

-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.

I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 5954
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 16 times
Contact:

Re: Origin of the incarnate Jesus..

Post #2

Post by William »

William: As I understand things.

The Father Granted Jesus the right to create the Metaphysical and Physical Universes.

The Son became "Creator God" of the universes he created.

The Holy Ghost is "The Spirit of Christ" effectively the means by which Jesus creates and recreates his creation through.

Everything within the MU and the PU is the ripple effect of The Sons creativity, with the addition of The Fathers intersession.

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 14371
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 17 times
Contact:

Re: Origin of the incarnate Jesus..

Post #3

Post by JehovahsWitness »

Elijah John wrote: According to Church orthodoxy, Jesus was eternally pre-existent along with the Father and the Holy Spirit.

Yet we read that it was the Holy Spirit who impregnated Mary. Doesn't that go against the notion that the Son always was?

No this would only support the notion that God fathered Jesus as a human. The bible supports the notion of God being a miracle worker, well able to transfer the life of his spirit son to that of being a human


Thus "In the beginning .... the word was with God"...



JW





FURTHER READING : Who is Jesus Christ?
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2005681



RELATED POSTS
Was the spirit person called in the bible THE WORD, a created being?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 590#957590

Was Jesus only a human?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 241#923241

Why is Jesus called the "only-begotten" son of God? (Tigger)
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 451#786451

Was Jesus "divine"?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 896#870896


Go to other posts related to JESUS , LORD and ...GOD
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

shnarkle
Guru
Posts: 2056
Joined: Sun Nov 10, 2013 10:56 am

Re: Origin of the incarnate Jesus..

Post #4

Post by shnarkle »

Elijah John wrote:
According to Church orthodoxy, Jesus was eternally pre-existent along with the Father and the Holy Spirit.
I could be wrong here, but I've noticed that the gospel accounts and Paul both seem to be a bit more careful with their words than the church fathers sometimes. When Paul says something like "Christ Jesus" he is referring to the risen Christ rather than Jesus of Nazareth walking around the Galilee prior to his death.

Oriental and Eastern languages do something quite different than western ones do in that instead of pointing out that the Subject is the Predicate ("S" is "P"), they juxtapose words together. So one can say S is P or Jesus is the messiah, but the sentence structure separates what Paul unites into a unified whole.

When John points out that "the word" pre-existed (e.g. "in the beginning WAS the word"), he also qualifies the fact that "the word" is not anything. He points out that everything that exists was created, but there is no mention of the word being created, and creation begins "in the beginning".

So when he states that "the word became flesh", he isn't suggesting that Jesus existed before creation began, but that the word which isn't anything entered into the created world in human flesh. The word became incarnate in humanity.
Yet we read that it was the Holy Spirit who impregnated Mary.
Here again, I could be wrong, but I'm not sure that's necessarily accurate. When the texts state that it was by the power of the Spirit, I don't think it necessarily follows that "a spirit" impregnated Mary.

The authors refer to a spiritual birth or a 'virgin birth' which isn't as uncommon as we might think. The virgin birth is referred to in other faiths as well, and concerns the heart chakra. It is centered in a heart of compassion. We've probably all seen the images of Christ with a visible heart; sometimes with a crown of thorns as well, no?
Doesn't that go against the notion that the Son always was?
Here is where the bible is somewhat clearer. The Son is eternal and synonymous with "the word". However, the title "son" also points out that he is from the father, but it does not then follow that the human being named Jesus existed eternally. Jesus doesn't really identify with his physical body. It is something to be discarded like clothing. It's a prominent theme in the passion narratives as well. Someone runs off without their clothes. Jesus' clothes are removed for his scourging and crucifixion. A woman wipes his face which leaves his image, but the image isn't Christ. Guards cast lots for his clothes while he hangs there naked. etc.
And the fact that it was the Holy Spirit who in effect "Fathered" Jesus suggests that the Son only came into being when the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary.
I don't think it's effected as much as it is pointing out that it is a spiritual birth; spiritual means producing a spiritual son. However it isn't produced at some point in time except at the incarnation. In other words, there is a spiritual relationship between the father and the son which is eternal, and extends into the created world through the son by this spiritual power.

Perhaps its an allegory of reality pointing to a pre-existent existence which is required for anything to exist, and the animating principle is spiritual. The gospel accounts seem to also point to a spiritual birth that occurs sometime during one's physical life. We see this depicted in the baptism of Christ.
Shouldn't it have been the pre-existent Jesus who "overshadowed" Mary?
I don't think so. Jesus received his name when he was eight days old. That person had a beginning and an end, but his relationship is eternal. He discovers that he is from the father, perhaps in the same way the spirit that animates Adam also is from the father and returns to the father.
What is the difference between the Holy Spirit and the pre-existent Christ?
Christ is Spiritual, and it is his holy spirit that is pre-existent. The medium is spiritual, and this is the only medium between the source and the world. There is no real difference other than perspective. The word isn't anything, but the word is spiritual, and dwells in creation.

I think Jesus receives a revelation that existence exhausts into creation, and as a work of creation, he sees that this is his purpose as well. In other words, he see's self sacrifice or self denial as the way to return to the source of life.
Or what is the difference between the Holy Spirit and the Risen Christ?
I don't think there is any essential difference, but there is an effective difference in that humanity is redeemed through self sacrifice. I'd like to stick with the orthodox articulation, and say "his sacrifice", but I think it may fly in the face of his own teachings on self denial, at least from "his" perspective. From our perspective, it is definitely his sacrifice, but ultimately, when the self is sacrificed, it no longer exists.
Are these questions evidence of the confusion wrought by the doctrine of the Trinity, and thus evidence that the Trinity is a man-made model made in order to understand the Divine, and not really Divine revelation?
I would have to agree. However, it does point to the reality which is not only not confusing, it can't be understood to begin with. This is why there can be no mediator between God and humanity. This must include our own intellect. In other words, when the intellect is added as a mediator, this addition only serves to separate us further from ultimate reality. There can be no other mediator other than reality (itself). When we attempt to understand, which on some level is to "stand under", we attempt to make our understanding the fundamental principle rather than reality.

This is the most effective way to become lost in confusion.

seve
Under Probation
Posts: 104
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 7:52 am
Location: Manila, Philippines

Re: Origin of the incarnate Jesus..

Post #5

Post by seve »

Elijah John wrote: According to Church orthodoxy, Jesus was eternally pre-existent along with the Father and the Holy Spirit.

Yet we read that it was the Holy Spirit who impregnated Mary. Doesn't that go against the notion that the Son always was? And the fact that it was the Holy Spirit who in effect "Fathered" Jesus suggests that the Son only came into being when the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary.

Which begs the questions.

Shouldn't it have been the pre-existent Jesus who "overshadowed" Mary?

What is the difference between the Holy Spirit and the pre-existent Christ?

Or what is the difference between the Holy Spirit and the Risen Christ?

Are these questions evidence of the confusion wrought by the doctrine of the Trinity, and thus evidence that the Trinity is a man-made model made in order to understand the Divine, and not really Divine revelation?
Dear Elijah,

Sorry, I believe, it is your understanding of the Scripture that is Convoluted and Misplaced w/c resulted to your own confusion.

Read and Learn:

The Holy Spirit is the Spirit that is of the invisible Almighty God Father.

Luke 11:13 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?

1Th 4:8 He therefore that despiseth, despiseth not man, but God, who hath also given unto us his holy Spirit.


The Holy Ghost is the Spirit that is of the pre- existent Son of God, the Christ - who overshadowed Mary.

Mat 1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

Mat 1:20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.

Jhn 20:21 Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as myFather hath sent me, even so send I you. v22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:



TRY AGAIN?

Elijah John
Savant
Posts: 12143
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:23 pm
Location: New England
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Origin of the incarnate Jesus..

Post #6

Post by Elijah John »

[Replying to post 5 by seve]

Are you making a distinction between the "Holy Spirit" and the "Holy Ghost"? Equating the Holy Ghost with the "pre-existent" Jesus?

Seems arbitrary based on an update of (English translated) language when the term "Ghost" was considered antiquated and replaced with the word "Spirit".
My theological positions:

-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.

I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.

Zzyzx
Site Supporter
Posts: 25050
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:38 pm
Location: Bible Belt USA
Has thanked: 33 times
Been thanked: 50 times

Re: Origin of the incarnate Jesus..

Post #7

Post by Zzyzx »

.
seve wrote:

Sorry, I believe, it is your understanding of the Scripture that is Convoluted and Misplaced w/c resulted to your own confusion.

Read and Learn:

TRY AGAIN?
:warning: Moderator Warning

No one, you included, has exclusive rights to Bible interpretation -- or the right to be condescending toward other members.




Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.
.
Non-Theist

If you stop claiming knowledge of invisible, undetectable unicorns, I will stop challenging your claim. Same goes for gods

ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence

For a quick tutorial on science vs. religion, compare modern internet weather radar to ancient religious beliefs and superstitions about weather

"Demand money with the threat of violence and you'll get arrested. Do it with the threat of eternal damnation and it's tax deductible"

seve
Under Probation
Posts: 104
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 7:52 am
Location: Manila, Philippines

Post #8

Post by seve »

Dear Readers,

The Lord is called YHVH in the Old Testament and Jesus Christ in the New Testament.

The Lord is the Only Begotten Son of the Invisible Spirit of God. YHVH, the Son, is the Only God you will ever see and witness. He is the Express image of the invisible Godhead, bodily or physically. IF you have seen the him... you have seen the Father.

Isa 43:10 Ye are my witnesses (eye witnesses), saith the LORD (YHvH), and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

To be an eye witness is to see the subject physically, first hand.

Exo 6:3 And I (YHVH) appeared (in physical form) unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty (representing his Father), but by my name JEHOVAH (YHVH) was I not known to them.

Therefore, YHVH, who appeared in physical form on several occasions in the OT... to be seen and witnessed by many of his chosen people.... could not have been the invisible Almighty God Father but the Son of God himself, the Christ.

The invisible Almighty God Father is a Spirit without physical shape or form that never change... nor... his name has been revealed to anyone at this time.

Thus, it is IMHO that.... only willingly ignorant supporter of this thread always stumble to this Scriptural Truth - as it is clearly written, accordingly, in the Old and New Testaments.

God Bless
Last edited by seve on Wed Aug 14, 2019 9:12 pm, edited 5 times in total.

Eloi
Sage
Posts: 541
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:31 pm
Been thanked: 2 times

Post #9

Post by Eloi »

[Replying to post 8 by seve]

Seve, in the NT Jesus still talk about Jehovah, and called him in a very special way:

Matt 11:25 At that time Jesus said in response: “I publicly praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and intellectual ones and have revealed them to babes. 26 Yes, O Father, because to do thus came to be the way approved by you.

Are you sure you know Jesus?

seve
Under Probation
Posts: 104
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 7:52 am
Location: Manila, Philippines

Post #10

Post by seve »

[Replying to post 9 by Eloi]

Dear Eloi,

Clearly, Isa 43:10 speaks of Jehovah being the ONLY God physically FORMED for us to witness. BEFORE him, there's no God Formed, neither there shall be AFTER him.

Isa 43:10 Ye are my witnesses (eye witnesses), saith the LORD (Jehovah), and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

In fact, it was Jehovah who made this declaration, himself.... read again..

Exo 6:3 And I (Jehovah) appeared (in physical form) unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty (representing his invisible Father), but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.

Jehovah was sent AGAIN into this world in the New Testament and MADE Flesh and took the FORM of a Man in order to DIE and save us from our sins.

Therefore, Jesus Christ is Jehovah himself of Old, the Son of the invisible Almighty God Father - of whom no man hath seen at any time nor his name has been revealed to anyone at this time.

God Bless
Last edited by seve on Wed Aug 14, 2019 9:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Post Reply