Jesus divinity

[Wootah]

When God impregnated Mary; was Jesus a man or a demi-God or half and half?

[2timothy316]

Well, how many spirit creatures have been born of a human couple? Answer: none. Jesus was flesh and blood.

Hebrews 2:7 "You made him a little lower than angels;"

[steveb1]

[Replying to post 1 by Wootah]

Matthew and Luke don't have any strongly identifiable "incarnation" theology.
John, who does have a strong incarnation theology, ironically, has no birth narrative.

Whether the Jesus-fetus was partly or wholly divine depends on one's view of the nature and oneness or threeness of the Godhead, on one's view of pre-existent heavenly beings, and on one's definition of "the divine".

So when the Holy Spirit overshadowed Mary and created a miraculous conception, several possibilities are open for discussion:

1 God - or some "divine" transcendent being - entered the Jesus-fetus

2 A pre-existent heavenly being - such as the Adam Kadmon, the heavenly Son of Man, entered the Jesus-fetus

3 A "second person" in the Godhead entered the Jesus-fetus, as Trinitarianism holds

4 "Jesus" was a composite being - a human being whose human nature provided the "flesh" in which the incarnating being entered. He possessed within himself his own soul and the living presence of the incarnating being

5 There was no "Jesus" as a human person, but only a human body which received the incarnating being as its "soul" - Jesus was God, or whatever incarnating being, walking around in a human body as if manipulating a puppet.

Patripassionism and Pentecostal Oneness holds this view, namely, that Jesus was really God - God the Father - in a human body. Patripassionism held that, therefore it was the Father, not Jesus or "the Son", who suffered - underwent a "Passion" - on the cross.

6 Jesus shared his identity and consciousness with the incarnating being - as when the Holy Spirit descended upon and "dwelled" in Jesus, making it possible for Jesus to speak both for and of himself, but also allowed the Spirit to speak of Itself through Jesus

7 Jesus had no pre-existence at all, and only came to be in his mother's womb - that is, was "begotten" at the moment of his conception - Jesus as purely human and not being, or playing host, to any heavenly being

The possible interpretations are many and complex, and some of them were condemned as heresy centuries ago.

[Divine Insight]

When God impregnated Mary; was Jesus a man or a demi-God or half and half?

It seems to me that for the theology to try to work Jesus needs to be both man and God, 100%. And that's what many theists hold. They hold that Jesus was 100% man and 100% God.

However, that's extremely problematic even from a theological view because it's simply impossible to be both 100% God and 100% man simultaneously for the simple reason that no man is omniscient. So a person can hardly be 100% man and be omniscient at the same time.

There are many other contradictions as well. For example, was Jesus truly tempted to sin? If so then is God tempted to sin? And if not, then how can it be claimed that Jesus was 100% God? And if Jesus wasn't tempted to sin, then the idea that he resisted something that he had no desire to do would not be impressive. In other words, the idea that Jesus was sin-free would be a meaningless concept since being God Jesus shouldn't be tempted to sin in the first place and therefore have no need to resist any temptation to sin.

There are just countless problems with this entire idea.

If Jesus was omniscient concerning the true nature of God and spirituality, then how could he be said to be 100% man? No man has that knowledge. Therefore if Jesus had that knowledge it makes no sense to say that he was 100% man. And if he didn't have that knowledge then this makes no sense either because he preached as though he did possess this knowledge.

So the entire paradigm is an extreme contradiction in terms.

As far as I'm concerned this is a situation this religion needs to be true, but makes absolutely no sense at all, and is even extremely self-contradictory.

This is one of the many reasons I no longer give this religious paradigm any serious consideration. It appears to necessarily need to be based on totally contradictory concepts that cannot possibly all be true simultaneously in any meaningful way.

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 4 by Divine Insight]

If a being was truly omniscient they could set aside their omniscience.

Contradiction solved sorry.

[Tcg]

[Replying to post 5 by Wootah]

If a being was truly omniscient, they would know exactly what they were attempting to set aside. They would still know everything. This is no solution to the contradiction.

[brianbbs67]

Well, how many spirit creatures have been born of a human couple? Answer: none. Jesus was flesh and blood.

Hebrews 2:7 "You made him a little lower than angels;"

Remember, Nephillim? Reason for the flood..

[Divine Insight]

[Replying to post 4 by Divine Insight]

If a being was truly omniscient they could set aside their omniscience.

Contradiction solved sorry.

No, that doesn't solve anything. If Jesus put aside his divine knowledge then he couldn't know the things he claimed to know. So that doesn't work.

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 5 by Wootah]

If a being was truly omniscient, they would know exactly what they were attempting to set aside. They would still know everything. This is no solution to the contradiction.

Yes but if i know X as a God I can still only act on the knowledge I have as as man. Essentily DI is claiming that God is not omnipotent and cant set aside his omniscience. If God is not omnipotent then He ain't God.

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 4 by Divine Insight]

If a being was truly omniscient they could set aside their omniscience.

Contradiction solved sorry.

No, that doesn't solve anything. If Jesus put aside his divine knowledge then he couldn't know the things he claimed to know. So that doesn't work.

Of course he has access to it when he wants.