Thanks for the lesson. I'm thinking you fashion yourself as a teacher...I am a teacher too...but It wasn't really a lecture I was looking for, but answers to the simple questions I asked...so...in the context of your lucid and cogent reply, I'll rephrase my questions and let you wrestle with the implications of your doctrine. Thanks in advance.
Given. And we accept Him as One person of the Trinity...which is Three.
OK...He was an expression of the Divine nature, the visible expression of the invisible God, and died to make us partakers with HIm in the divine nature expressed by the life He lived. Your doctrine is not just a statement...it's a promise to us.
Latin is an admirable language, but I'm not much for obfuscating discussions with Latin terminology. You realize that you're regurgitating the interpretation of doctors who preceded you here...none of this is inspired, and some is debatable. Correct? For instance, Jesus was never omniscient. He, like the church of Acts, exhibited Gifts of the Holy Spirit, like words of Knowledge, Words of Wisdom and prophecy as did the prophets before Him. He drew upon the Spirit Who breathed in Him. And despite those moments of epiphany, there was much He did not know. He was never omnipresent...He was not in Nazareth and in Jerusalem at the same time. He was as omnipotent as anyone who can boast that he can do all things through Christ...He was limited to doing those things He saw the Father do, and saying those things He heard the Father say...Our contention is this, that Jesus lived His life on Earth as Adam should have, in relationship with the Father, and drawing all resources from His relationship with Him. This is why He met with Him in the cool of the morning. This is why Moses and Elijah came to Him to show Him what lay ahead, and of His end. He received as we received in those hours we spend with Him in prayer. To give Jesus superpowers of which we can avail ourselves nothing defeats the purpose of His victory over satan the usurper, who stole what authority he boasted of in Luke from Adam in the garden. Jesus as the Word gave Adam dominion over the whole Earth. Jesus as redeemer, restored that dominion to Adam's sons, which is why it is essential HIs position as Son of Adam be recognized and was announced by Him. Look again in the gospels at the authority He ascribes to Himself "because He is the Son of Man/Adam." Please do not deny ignorantly the fact that, while the Hebrew version calls Ezekiel Ben Adam, the LXX calls Ezekiel huios anthropou...,Son of Man...and that traces Ezekiel's lineage, just as the Son of David would. Lineage was the source of authority in Hebrew understanding, and linked the bearer to land and power. There is absolutely no accident or misunderstanding in the establishment of Jesus authority in every way, to heal, to forgive sins...in short to rule...because Adam had been delegated all authority over all.
Again...he did not know all things, and admitted as much. He knew and expressed what He was given to know and express while He lived in the body. He accepted man's limitations, and lived by the faith he then passed on to us. We are saved by the faith of Jesus Christ.
You are extrapolating. John told us that those who deny that Jesus came in the flesh are the spirit of antichrist...They don't have to even acknowledge the permutations of your Latin corollaries. Jesus will always be Jesus, Who is, Who was and Who is to come...the same.
In that each is He...One. OK...and, of that divine nature, through His precious and numerous promises, we have been made partakers, by His divine Will.
I think you're being redundant...I want to give you a clue...and this is just me, I never memorized the Bible chapter and verse...when an author slings one hundred references to chapter and verse without direct quotes, I've been duped by non-scholars like John MacArthur to know that they defeat their own purposes, because those references are more distraction than support. I do not look up your references. If it's important enough, quote the verse. Note above, where you extrapolated, if you do not understand what I mean. Specifically, John never said "Those who deny 'the person of Jesus will always be both Divine and human' are the spirit of antichrist." That's your dubious interpretation. He said what I quoted Him as saying.
That council was established in the onset of the Jesus wars that pitted Rome against Alexandria, Ephesus against Antioch and Constantinople, and made a mockery of all Christendom to the foretold extinguishing of a lampstand,, and the end of our reputation as a church. Their decrees were neither canon, nor inspired. You do know that, I hope.
It helps me get to know you. Now please answer these questions: Do you believe Jesus died? Do you believe he "gave up the Spirit?" Do you believe He commended His Spirit to the Father, as He said on the cross...or was he being strangely symbolic. You see...It was as Jesus Son of Adam that His soul could be made a sin offering, that He could proceed to Sheol, and do what Peter describes in his epistle. God doesn't die and yet He did...opening the way for our own Resurrection. When He emptied Himself...he even gave His own Life for ours, that we should be partakers in His.