How Can Jesus Be Both God & Man? | Biblical Worldview Conference
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 сен 2024
- Dr. Craig gives a lecture on a classic Christian controversy, explaining historical positions and biblical perspectives on the nature of Christ.
Special thanks to Prestonwood Baptist Church for the filming and editing of this footage.
For more resources visit: www.reasonable...
We welcome your comments in the Reasonable Faith forums:
www.reasonable...
Be sure to also visit Reasonable Faith's other channel which contains short clips: / drcraigvideos
Follow Reasonable Faith On Twitter: / rfupdates
Like the Reasonable Faith Facebook Fan Page: / reasonablefaithorg
Tickling the post with that little finger up there, and commenting to juice the algo so more people see it. Always good times hearing from Dr. Craig.
Lol why you gotta say it like that
Magnificent Articulation. Dr. Craig truly speaks both in our minds as a theologian of the highest kind and in our hearts as a pastor who truly cares for our needs. Salute!
Lol. can't wait for your systematic theology brother William.
I appreciate Dr. Craig's views and his unwillingness to accept the norm, but I feel there are issues. Is it necessary that he have this subconscious aspect to be deity and human? Is that what the Scripture shows us? Jesus emptied himself of the miraculous attributes of deity in the Kenosis. BUT he kept his identity as the Logos made into a man. What happened is that the Logos spirit was made into a man's spirit, yet he was always divine in his identity. But his soul was given at conception but formed in his childhood as he grew in wisdom, and God's grace was upon him as he grew up. He learned to trust his Father while yet in his mother's womb and upon her breasts (Ps. 22), which is how he knew he was God's son from the beginning of his Incarnation. The Bible never shows Jesus learning anything from his subconscious. He learned everything from his Father. He said his disciples could be called friends and not slaves since everything he had heard from the Father he had made known to them. His miracles were done, not be any subconscious area of his mind, but by the Holy Spirit in him. He learned what to do and what to say directly from the Father, as he said in John 10, 14, and other passages. To see him was thus to see the Father. Now he did no miracles as a child, and his own family's unbelief in him testifies to this. He did his miracles after the Holy Spirit came upon him at his baptism. Acts 10:38 says, "... how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power, and how he went around doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil, because God was with him." You see, God was with him doing the works. Amen? God bless.
Son's-of-God are a species in heaven (Gen6, Job 1, 2, 38), separate and apart from Angels. Son's-of-God (SoG's) share enough DNA with humans to procreate (Gen6) and are thus flesh. Son's-of-God DNA differs enough from humans such that their offspring are neither human nor SoG; they are hybrids like iron and clay (Dan2). Jesus was the only "Begotten" SoG, not the only SoG. 'Begotten' means 'born of human,' or son-of-man (Dan7). Gen6 SoG's were not born of human, therefore Jesus was the ONLY Begotten Son-of-God. Was Jesus whole or half-human? Half-human half-SoG is called "Nephilim (Gen6), so No, Jesus was 100% SoG. Jesus was also 100% born-of-human and therefore 100% son-of-man. (more...)
Why look to supernatural, conjured or tortured explanations, when Bible's Words are clear?
When Angels came to Mary, they implanted Jesus (SoG) in her womb. Today, it could be done with a needle, while maintaining Mary's virginity. Again, no supernatural explanation is necessary. No hocus-pocus nonsense.
OK, there is a little hocus-pocus of the heavens and the earth. Where exactly is the kingdom? Where are the host of Angels and the Council of SoG's? Are they in another dimension or simply out of sight? A vast expanse or a mustard seed? Yes, a little mystery remains. Someday, that mystery will also be revealed. Hopefully, mankind will slap themselves on the forehead and say, 'it was so obvious," just like this explanation of Jesus being God (Son-of-God) and son-of-man at the same time.
ps. Although Jesus rightly held both Son-of-God and son-of-man titles, He preferred his 'son-of-man' title. Why? Why does the Admiral prefer his Navy SEAL title to his rank? He holds both proudly, yet most identify first as SEAL, then as Admiral.
Bad theology leads to bad soteriology. Bad soteriology leads to more bad theology.
The Fathers of the Ecumenical Councils were not concerned with penal substitutionary atonement. The issue was not whether Christ could take the penalty of our sins as a full human being. This anachronistic idea of soteriology would have been completely foreign in the fourth century. The issue was whether human nature was SANCTIFIED or not. According to historic Christian doctrine, through the Incarnation, human nature is sanctified by virtue of its being united hypostatically to the Divine Nature in Jesus Christ. As St. Gregory the Theologian says, that which is not assumed is not sanctified. If God did not assume a HUMAN mind, then the human mind is not sanctified, and we are still in our sins. That is the problem with Apollinarianism, and why it should be rejected as heresy in the 21st century as much as in the fourth century.
//This anachronistic idea of soteriology would have been completely foreign in the fourth century.//
Dr. Craig is less concerned with the pronouncements of the (fallible) ecumenical councils than what Scripture actually teaches.
//If God did not assume a HUMAN mind, then the human mind is not sanctified, and we are still in our sins.//
Christ also did not take on contingent existence, being a necessary being. So, to say that the Logos being the mind of Christ would give him a less than human nature seems completely arbitrary. A human nature is an immaterial mind conjoined with a living hominid body. Dr. Craig's model meets this criterion. Since the mind is the locus of one's personal identity, Christ's having two minds would make him, in fact, two people, which is Nestorianism (which, by the way, was condemned as heresy by the Council of Ephesus in 431 AD). - RF Admin
@@ReasonableFaithOrg It seems Dr. Craig is more concerned with his own (fallible) interpretation of the Scriptures than what the Holy Fathers of the Ecumenical Councils taught, men who had seen the Uncreated Light, who lived lives of unceasing prayer, some of whom (including the ones who condemned Apollinarianism at the *Second* Ecumenical Council) had suffered intense persecution under the Roman pagans (and who canonized the texts of the Scriptures).
God did take on contingent human existence, voluntarily. His humanity was certainly contingent upon His divinity. What can be said of the nature can be said of the Person. That’s why we can say that God suffered and died upon the Cross.
There is an infinite chasm between the Uncreated Divine Nature and the created human nature. God is more than merely an un-embodied mind. And man is not an embodied divine mind. There is as much similarity between the Uncreated Divine Nature and the created human nature as there is between an artist and his self-portrait.
The mind is not the locus of personhood. The person is the locus of essence. We speak of the Trinity as three Persons who Each possess the fullness of Divine Essence. Similarly, each human person possesses the fullness of human essence, including a human mind. When we say that God the Son became consubstantial with man, we mean that He took unto Himself the fullness of human essence, that is, everything that makes up human nature (“essence” and “nature” being more or less synonyms according to St. John of Damascus), thereby becoming a Sharer in the whole human experience, yet without sin. If the human mind, made in the Image and Likeness of God, was not assumed, then the Lord did not become a full Sharer in the human experience, and the Image was not renewed in us.
With God, anything is possible.
not stupidity, ...like this nonsense
@@dboulos7 wow thats a cogent and forceful argument
Really enjoyed this lecture!
It would be nice if Dr. William Lane Craig could explicate some more on some of the things he presented in this video. For example, it would help if he could elaborate on the difference between the human soul and the divine soul as then it would be clearer in what manner Jesus was both man and God. For instance, he says that a man is the sum of the human body and the human soul. So, it is difficult to see how Jesus, with his human body and divine soul, could be a man unless the divine soul and the human soul are identical since,
A+B ~=A+C, if B ~= C.
Furthermore, William Lane Craig teaches that God is a disembodied soul. It is, accordingly, difficult to see how Jesus could be God when he had a body, and a human body at that!
William Lane Craig also seems to suggest that the divine soul was either modified or subverted in the human Jesus when he said that Jesus's divine soul was sublimated. On this ground, too, it is difficult to see how Jesus could be God since he wouldn't have had a pure divine soul?
The presentation is also not consistent with Scripture on the immutability of God, such as found in Psalms 102:26-27. This is not only because of the sublimation of the divine soul but also in light of William Lane Craig's explicit statement that God added an attribute, quality, or property at the incarnation. This would be a real change in God's intrinsic nature, violating HIS immutability.
Finally, one wonders if Jesus's consciousness and subconsciousness both originate in the same soul, and whether this soul was human, divine or neither? It can obviously not be both human and divine, as this would entail a contradiction similar to, say, a balloon being wholly blue and wholly red in the same respect at this same time. It would also seem not to do to posit that the divine soul of Jesus had a human aspect and a divine aspect since this wouldn't explain how he’s both man and God. For example, a person could have feminine and masculine aspects to their personality but would still either be male or female by nature.
Based
Good points. I think he wrote about his proposal on his website
He didnt actually say that a man is the sum of a human body and human soul. He was merely paraphrasing the Antiochian objections to Apollinarius' view. Later in the video he explains his own synthesis of the two views which affirms that Jesus had a truly full human nature in virtue of his rational soul (divine, but rational nonetheless). According to THAT view that he is proposing, the sufficient conditions for a full and true human nature is a human body and a rational soul (not necessarily a merely human soul). So Jesus with his human body and divine rational soul, was indeed fully human (and of course fully divine).
@Raiddd__ If Jesus was human in virtue of having a human body and a rational soul, how is that different from saying that a human is the sum of a human body and a human soul, since you seem to be implying that I misquoted Craig on that point?
Next, how does your response resolve the contradiction; is the human soul divine? Is the soul of man identical to that of God? Is a Mercedes on a Peugeot engine still a Mercedes or a Peugeot? Does God have a body according to William Lane Craig? So how can Jesus with his embodied soul have been God? Can a balloon be wholly red and wholly blue in the same sense at the same time?
Excellent critiques. This is why it is best to stick with the formulations of the Ecumenical Councils and the Holy Fathers.
Sathya Sai Baba is God and man, too. See Lord Sai Baba is changing the world. More and more Christians are coming to Lord Sai to learn the Truth.
ruclips.net/video/gNwQdG8zEFM/видео.htmlsi=anG1aHGOh9CIb5PL
ruclips.net/video/gNwQdG8zEFM/видео.htmlsi=anG1aHGOh9CIb5PL
Amazing work, Doctor Craig🎉
How can Sathya Sai Baba be both God & man.
*_”The most important commandment, Jesus answered, is this: ‘Hear O Israel! The Lord OUR God, the Lord is ONE!’”_* ~ The Gospel of Mark 12:29
*_”O people of the Scripture! Do not cross the limits in your religion, nor say anything about God but the truth. The Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary, is only God’s messenger, and His word which He cast into Mary, and a spirit from Him. So believe in God and His messengers, and do not speak of a trinity. Stop-it is for your own good! God is one sole divinity, who is far above having a son. He owns everything in the heavens and everything on earth-and God alone is sufficient to sustain all things!”_* ~ The Recitation [Al-Qur’ān], Sūrah 4:171
"Before Abraham Was, I Am" - John 8:58
"The eyes are the leather strap of the anus" - Sunan Abi Dawud 203
@@mitchwatson6787 A misquoted verse, followed by a gesture of mockery. Spoken like a true apologist.
Oh, and completely ignoring the original point, while making people think the Bible has self-contradictions. Just the cherry on top.
@@celestialknight2339 Misquoted? They literally try to stone him for this, thus showing the alleged blasphemy of claiming Godhood. Also, even if you deny the obvious fact that Jesus is claiming to be God there, he is certainly claiming to exist before Abraham and to have met him, making him more than a mere man.
Also, no Christian denies the Shema, which Jesus starts his speech off with there. That's not a rebuttal of the Trinity.
@@Womb_to_Tomb_Apologetics There’s a few problems with this argument. First, the Gospel of John itself is not a historically reliable source, as many scholars have shown. It has fantastical stories & statements on the lips of Jesus that were not only written several decades after the scene (John’s Gospel is the last of the four gospels), but which also show up in none of the earlier three Gospels of Mark, Matthew, and Luke. Can you imagine walking around with a man who claimed to be the pre-existing God before Abraham himself? - Yet only one of the 4 men who wrote about his life cared to mention it. Yeah, I don’t think so. John 8:58 is almost certainly a fabricated statement, just like John 7:53-8:11 (the beloved Story of the Adulteress) was also found to be a forgery that was added into later Bible manuscripts.
But even if we take your word for it, it still doesn’t help, because the context of Jesus’s claim was him being the Messiah (the Christ) - not God. However, the Pharisees often misunderstood him (as even his own disciples did!) so taking their word is a really bad idea. In John 10:30 for example, they also thought the committed blasphemy (assuming the story even really happened) - but then later in John 10:33-34, Jesus clarifies that he only claims to be the ‘son of God’ in the same sense as the mortal judges of Psalm 82:6, which are likewise called ‘sons of God’ and even ‘gods’ (elohim). And so going back to John 8:58, when he allegedly said “Before Abraham was, I am” - this could have easily meant that he was anointed as the Messiah even before Abraham’s time, and so his status is established & his divine inspiration is timeless; and Abraham could have been told by God about him. This would match what we read about the Prophet Jeremiah, and his “pre-existence” (in the knowledge & plan of God) as well:
*_”Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you; before you were born, I sanctified you; and I ordained you a prophet to the nations!”_* ~ Jeremiah 1:5
Finally, with regards to the Shema, this absolutely does clash with the Trinity. In this passage, Jesus says that “God is one” and also calls him “our Lord” (thereby including himself) - which would make no sense if he was God himself quoting this. Also, we know that Jesus sometimes tweaked (or clarified) the Law and said _”You have heard it say unto you X…but I say unto you Y”_ - yet here there would have been a perfect opportunity to do the same thing and say: _”You have heard it unto you that God is one…but I say unto you that God is three in one!”_ …Yet no such thing ever happened. Jesus was a humble servant of God throughout, and faithfully recited the Shema verbatim as Prophet Moses had done centuries earlier. And if you continue reading in Mark 12, the man he was speaking to continued to say that *_”God is ONE and there is NO OTHER”_* - to which Jesus praised the man for his wisdom and declared his nearness to the Kingdom of Heaven.
Finally, even if you want to stick to the Gospel of John (which is clearly embellished, and adds in new stories that make Jesus more divine-like), then you still have to address the following clear-cut verses that show he wasn’t God:
*_”The Father is GREATER than I!”_* ~ John 14:28
*_”I can do NOTHING on my own! As I hear, I judge, and my judgment is just, because I seek NOT my own will but the will of HIM who SENT me!”_* ~ John 5:30
*_”…I am going to my Father and your Father; to MY GOD and YOUR GOD.”_* ~ John 20:17
*_”Now THIS is Eternal Life: that they know You, THE ONLY TRUE GOD, and Jesus the Messiah whom You have SENT!”_* ~ John 17:3
I pray that you realize the truth and repent, and return to the worship of God Almighty alone, the Creator, and not His creation. Jesus Christ himself would stand with the Muslims today, and will be disappointed at those who falsely worshipped him on Judgement Day - whom he will ask to depart from him, as he never knew them.
Peace be with you.
@@celestialknight2339are you a Muslim that believes that the Bible has been corrupted? Would you say it existed at the time of Mohammed uncorrupted?
Surah 10:94 presupposes an uncorrupted gospel at the time of Mohammed. Correct?
😂😂😂
Are you laughing on "allah" who only is able to have a son when he has a girlfriend (quran 6:101)? 🤣
Man is mortal. God is immortal. So for Jesus to be both God and man is a logically impossible contradiction tantamount to asserting the existence of a married bachelor.
That's interesting because there's plenty of men doing exactly that, living as married bachelors. Given that God can do anything logically possible, becoming a human isn't an impossible contradiction at all. And unlike the hurtful, heartbreaking and home wrecking act of men of living like married bachelors, Jesus' life and death as human happened so that this broken nature of humans may be restored and transformed once they understand it and through living a life following Jesus' example and freely given ransom make restitution, dwell in God's peace and have eternal life.
@@laugustamWell, living "like" a married bachelor and "being" a married bachelor can't be the same thing, obviously, so your argument doesn't succeed, even if it were possible to live like a married bachelor.
@@laugustam I'm not sure how new you are to the teachings of Dr. William Lane Craig but I should mention that I deliberately chose the analogy of the married bachelor in particular because Dr. Craig himself often uses this as an example of a logical impossibility. See his responses to the common objection "If God is omnipotent, can he create a rock so heavy that even he cannot lift it?" as well his response to the common secularist fallacy that claims that it is impossible to prove a universal negative.
The human nature of Christ died (that means it was mortal) and resurrected, in the same way that we (who are saved) will be resurrected on the new heavens and new earth
The human nature of Christ was mortal, but his divine nature is inmortal
Nestorius of Constantinople rejected the title Theotokos for the mother of the incarnated Word. He insisted that Mary as a human being could give birth only to a human being, and not to God. He persisted in calling the Virgin Mary Christotokos. This teaching jeopardised the salvation of the human race.
This is the soft agreement some of my separated Brethern have of Her.
Again and again some say without correction from within their own faith traditions she's only the mother of Jesus and not of Both natures. This is harmful to the Hypostatic union and the incarnation.
It diminishes Christ.
Peace
The Word became flesh, which meant that eternal spirit was made into a man's spirit. The identity of that spirit stayed the same in the Incarnation. But he did not have the miraculous attributes of God, but rather did his miracles by the power of the Holy Spirit who came upon him at his baptism. The Kenosis was when he humbled himself and laid those miraculous attributes aside. So he was deity in identity and also that he had the Holy Spirit without measure.