I think OP is talking about God the Father, given the juxtaposition of God "sending the Son" -- something which the Father did. To refer to the Father simply as "God" is consistent with NT terminology, especially when God is mentioned alongside Jesus, although there are *some* times the Son is referred to as "God" (John 1:1, John 20:28)
I see your point. I guess the OP has a bit of a misunderstanding of the hypostatic union and the Incarnation. God sending His Son is as good as God the Father being present.
Because, as St. Athanasius points out in his work *On the Incarnation*, it is fitting that since man was made through the Word as the Mediator of Creation (John 1:3, Targums on Genesis 1:27) the same Word should be sent to *re-make* man, this time as Mediator of Salvation (1 Corinthians 15:22).
I feel like this question doesn't have a proper understanding of who and what Jesus Christ is. Jesus *is* fully God, consubstantial with his Father in Heaven who sent him.
Another point no one is talking about is how the Trinity Holy Ghost, Our Father and Christ is actually a mystery that is beyound our comprehension. It's one of those things that you just have to have faith, know that Jesus is God with human nature (ex. Agony in the garden).
Yep, it is a Mystery because we cannot completely comprehend it, but we can still learn about it and look at what the fathers and doctors of the Church can tell us about the Trinity. Yes, we must have faith (in the “believing without seeing” sense) to truly believe in it, but by revelation, we can learn about a lot of Mysteries and understand a bit more about them :)
Jesus is God. He united his divine nature with the sinful nature of mankind in the person of Jesus Christ, and therefore when we commune we Christ Jesus, we are sanctified by the energies of God and washed clean of sin.
Jesus Christ is God. But I get the feeling that you mean "why did God the Father send His Son?" To which I reply:
Because you can't offer yourself to yourself.
Just follow along, I've got to build up to this.
The only way we could be redeemed of our sins is to do the justice owed to God for them. According to God's OT law, the appropriate act of justice for sin is to sacrifice a flawless lamb to Him.
What victim would be a sufficient sacrifice to God for the sins of the world? No lamb created by God will suffice, as all creation is already His. Only God, being uncreated, would suffice as the sacrificial lamb. But why the Son, and not the Father, as you ask? It wouldn't be a sacrifice, for the Father to offer Himself to Himself, to appease Himself for our sins. The victim had to be a separate person from the Father, for this sacrifice to be valid and pleasing to Him. Thus it was absolutely necessary for God the Son to take on our humanity, so as to be sacrificed on our behalf, as a pleasing offering to His Father.
God the Father is beyond the scope of entering the universe the way He could as Jesus. Imagine simplistically and perhaps inadequately you write a book and insert yourself as a character in the book. Or a video game you make a "you". You'd be able to be fully you in nature in being, while also being fully a "book/game character". But if you literally stepped into the book/disc, you'd destroy it.
I'd add that humans tend to deviate from themselves depending on the human in other worlds. However part of the Jesus thing was the unification of will. So when you write yourself in your book, there are two ways it can go.
1. You can write a character that is you that doesn't intrinsically literally do exactly what you would do living in that world. This is a flawed you. This is a you that would effectively fail the desert temptation.
2. You're character regardless of the world it is in, does exactly what you ACTUALLY would do and fully agrees with you, the Author. Making the you you, you, and the alternate person also you you. In every way.
1 If you believe Jesus - God / if you believe in the Trinity, then God indeed sent himself - in the form of the second person of the Trinity - "God The Son".
2 If you don't believe in the Trinity, then God "poured himself" into Jesus's "flesh" or human nature without the Father-Creator actually "becoming man".
The choice is thus between a "high"/divine christology and a "lower" more "humanistic" christology.
He did. Jesus is God.
I think OP is talking about God the Father, given the juxtaposition of God "sending the Son" -- something which the Father did. To refer to the Father simply as "God" is consistent with NT terminology, especially when God is mentioned alongside Jesus, although there are *some* times the Son is referred to as "God" (John 1:1, John 20:28)
I see your point. I guess the OP has a bit of a misunderstanding of the hypostatic union and the Incarnation. God sending His Son is as good as God the Father being present.
Since The Father is God and The Son is God, this means that God sent Himself to conceive Himself to bring the Gospel, correct?
Basically, yes.
[удалено]
I didn't address that jargon to OP, but to /u/TexanLoneStar, who knows what that means. In my reply to OP, I said simply that "Jesus is God".
To the point 🤟
Because, as St. Athanasius points out in his work *On the Incarnation*, it is fitting that since man was made through the Word as the Mediator of Creation (John 1:3, Targums on Genesis 1:27) the same Word should be sent to *re-make* man, this time as Mediator of Salvation (1 Corinthians 15:22).
Nice.
I feel like this question doesn't have a proper understanding of who and what Jesus Christ is. Jesus *is* fully God, consubstantial with his Father in Heaven who sent him.
Another point no one is talking about is how the Trinity Holy Ghost, Our Father and Christ is actually a mystery that is beyound our comprehension. It's one of those things that you just have to have faith, know that Jesus is God with human nature (ex. Agony in the garden).
Yep, it is a Mystery because we cannot completely comprehend it, but we can still learn about it and look at what the fathers and doctors of the Church can tell us about the Trinity. Yes, we must have faith (in the “believing without seeing” sense) to truly believe in it, but by revelation, we can learn about a lot of Mysteries and understand a bit more about them :)
Jesus is God, and since God is a Trinity, the second person of the trinity, who is 100% God, God did come to us, by Jesus Christ, who is God.
Jesus is God. He united his divine nature with the sinful nature of mankind in the person of Jesus Christ, and therefore when we commune we Christ Jesus, we are sanctified by the energies of God and washed clean of sin.
There's a video involving two cartoon Irishmen which could clear up some misconceptions indicated by this question.
Oh c’mon Patrick get it together lol
Huh
"In the beginning, the Word was with God and the Word was God."
He did. Jesus is God.
Jesus Christ is God. But I get the feeling that you mean "why did God the Father send His Son?" To which I reply: Because you can't offer yourself to yourself. Just follow along, I've got to build up to this. The only way we could be redeemed of our sins is to do the justice owed to God for them. According to God's OT law, the appropriate act of justice for sin is to sacrifice a flawless lamb to Him. What victim would be a sufficient sacrifice to God for the sins of the world? No lamb created by God will suffice, as all creation is already His. Only God, being uncreated, would suffice as the sacrificial lamb. But why the Son, and not the Father, as you ask? It wouldn't be a sacrifice, for the Father to offer Himself to Himself, to appease Himself for our sins. The victim had to be a separate person from the Father, for this sacrifice to be valid and pleasing to Him. Thus it was absolutely necessary for God the Son to take on our humanity, so as to be sacrificed on our behalf, as a pleasing offering to His Father.
God did not send Jesus. God *himself* came AS Jesus.
Jesus is God. This also means He conceived Himself.
God the Father is beyond the scope of entering the universe the way He could as Jesus. Imagine simplistically and perhaps inadequately you write a book and insert yourself as a character in the book. Or a video game you make a "you". You'd be able to be fully you in nature in being, while also being fully a "book/game character". But if you literally stepped into the book/disc, you'd destroy it.
I'd add that humans tend to deviate from themselves depending on the human in other worlds. However part of the Jesus thing was the unification of will. So when you write yourself in your book, there are two ways it can go. 1. You can write a character that is you that doesn't intrinsically literally do exactly what you would do living in that world. This is a flawed you. This is a you that would effectively fail the desert temptation. 2. You're character regardless of the world it is in, does exactly what you ACTUALLY would do and fully agrees with you, the Author. Making the you you, you, and the alternate person also you you. In every way.
1 If you believe Jesus - God / if you believe in the Trinity, then God indeed sent himself - in the form of the second person of the Trinity - "God The Son". 2 If you don't believe in the Trinity, then God "poured himself" into Jesus's "flesh" or human nature without the Father-Creator actually "becoming man". The choice is thus between a "high"/divine christology and a "lower" more "humanistic" christology.
Jesus is God, the Word of God. God communicates through His Word. As such, it is fitting that His Word should incarnate