"...Mary is the Mother of God is actually the right answer and to deny it runs afoul of this commitment of the Deity of Christ..." 7:56. Its good to hear a Protestant say this out loud.
I don't actually agree. It's better to say Mary is the mother of God made flesh. To say mother of God is pretty vague. It creates a lot of heresy that will eventually lead to mart becoming a deity
@@scottbowen6689 No it does. God can't have a mother. Doesn't make sense. God the creator of every thing having a mother is madness that makes his mother God as well think about it. No wonder the Catholics pray to her over venerate her adore her build statues in her honor. She is literally a godess to them. Some can't go any day when there in trouble without calling on mary. Mary is the mother of Jesus Christ not God. Jesus is a man with a divine origin as the word/son of God who as phillipians 2 says took on human nature via Mary. Mary isn't the mother of God
@@scottbowen6689 ON MARY BEEN PRAISED AND VENERATED Luke 11:27-28 "As he said these things, a woman in the crowd raised her voice and said to him, “Blessed is the womb that bore you, and the breasts at which you nursed! But he said, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it!”(This is Jesus downplaying the importance of mary in bringing him to earth) Jeremiah 7:18 "The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger" (in reference to mary been falsely called as queen of heaven shows the worship or reverence of these godess is ancient and pagan) ON PRAYER IN GENERAL Matthew 6:9 ""This, then, is how you should pray: "'Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name" (this is Jesus teaching his disciples on prayer nowhere does he mention the importance of praying to his mother for graces or protection) Ephesians 6:18 "And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the Lord's people." (This is one of Paul's numerous teachings on prayer there's just no sign of rosary or mary) ON MARY BEEN SEEN AS MEDIATOR OR AS A NECCESSARY INTERCESSOR 1 timothy 2:5 "For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus" Romans 8:26 " Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words" Hebrews 7:25 "Consequently, he is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them." ON PRAYING TO DEAD PEOPLE AMD ADRESSING SAINTHOOD Romans 1:7 "To all those in Rome who are loved by God and called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ" (Shows who is a saint. Its not some process the Vatican makes. Its everyone who loves God and Beleives in Jesus christ) For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: 1Thessalonians 4:17 "For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord"(shows there is no one alive in any heaven. This is paul speaking years after the resurrection of christ. 1 Corinthians 15 talks about this too) ON WHAT IS NEEDED TO BE SAVED Romans 10:9 "If you declare with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved"(this is wjat is needed baptism is the final confirmation. No where do we see you need to be baptized first to be saved or you need to be baptized by any specific church) Mark 16:16 "He that believes and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believes not shall be damned" (as you can see Beleiving is the emphasis and tue consequences of not Beleiving is the main topic not being baptized. When you Beleive tobbe baptized woukd be the least of problems) Matthew 28:16-20 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”(He gave this commission to his disciples that is all who were following him. Not to any church organization) ON THE MEANING OF THE CHURCH, WHAT THE CHURCH DID WHEN THEY MET AND CHURCH ADMINISTRATION 1 Corinthians12:13 "For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body-Jews or Greeks, slaves or free-and all were made to drink of one Spirit" (This talks about how one becames part of the body of christ and that is true his spirit. How does one receive the spirit, acts 2:38 "Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy spirit") Matthew 18:20 "For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them" (This is quite clear) 1 Corinthians 14:26 "What then shall we say, brothers and sisters? When you come together, each of you has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. Everything must be done so that the church may be built up." (This is what we should do when we come together we don't see this in the RCC and to be fair many protestant and orthodox churches as well, paul teaches we all have different gifts and different things to contribute to the growth of one another. Today the opposite is the case. Its usually one head man or gis subordinates in different branches of an organization calling the shots) Titus 1:5-6" For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee: An elder must be blameless, faithful to his wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient" 1 timothy 3:1-6" This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity"(requirements for being a bishop/elder of a local congregation. No where do we see that they must not be married or celibate. This is falsehood the Catholic Church forces on its clergy(whom they call priest btw) Ephesians 4:11 Now these are the gifts Christ gave to the church: the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, and the pastors and teachers.(Like many of the protestant churches the Catholic Church barely or doesn't recognize these gifts. Instead it has its strange hierarchical structure of priests, bishops, archbishops, cardinals and finally the pope who has a pagan title pontifux maximus and vicar of christ meaning representative of Christ. This is who Jesus said was his representative on earth. John 14:26 "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you" no one man is representative of christ only his spirit. The argument of Peter is forced in. Peter was a spokesman quite alright but he never assumed any authority as head of christs church that title belongs to Christ alone Collosians 1:17-18 "And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent" Theres little evidence peter was in rome and peter for sure wasn't called papa nor did he have a papal palace not did he decree papal bulls. These are all strange to the new testament church) Finally the churches in the new testament were local congregations with elders or bishops they did not have any subordination to rome or some pope somewhere. They only had subordination to Christ. The bishop or elder was appointed for guidingthe people in the right direction.
In min 17:15 Sanders said before union, the right Jesus exists in Godhood. But this premise is similar to Nestorius that that predicated by the two natures are associated in one person. Predication is subject to person not nature. This is why before Chalcedon was convened, Nestorius in 449 wrote in response to Leo's Tome that his dihypostases view is similar to Leo's diphyses view. Because of this Leo expanded his tome in 453 written to Palestinian monks so that no Nestorian reading is possible, cf. Oxford monograph by Susan Wessel. To speaks about one person in respect with each natures might passed Chalcedon but won't passed Constantinople II scrutiny. To says that Jesus dies in his humanity, via Chalcedon is acceptable. But via Constantinople II it won't. Because humanity of Jesus can't die, person does. To attribute what happens to one person via two natures is condemned at Constantinople II. The two natures are fully united indivisibly. One can say he died in his humanity but this need to be explained that his humanity is the humanity of the divine person of Logos. But over all this is a good video. I hope someday others at Biola or Sanders would expand this overview to include Constantinople II, II, and Nicaea II.
Don't you just love it? There are three persons but one God. Yes, three distinct persons but not three Gods but one, because they are one in essence. Yet, with Jesus, this all flips. Jesus is one person, but has two natures. So how are we to understand person? Throughout the OT and the NT, God is depicted as one person. It is always He.. When people talk to God, it is always You (singular ). But, apparently, the Bible writers got it wrong. God is not really one, but three in one. Obviously, the later Greek educated Church Fathers had much more insight than the NT Bible writers who just somehow could not articulate this to us. I struggle to find passages in the gospels where Jesus expounds on all of this, explaining to his Jewish audience that the concept they have of a Unitatian God is in fact wrong and that God is in reality triune. Likewise, when reading the book of Acts about the Apostles' preaching, I struggle to find them explaining any of this to anyone and we certainly don't have their opponents complaining about it. I find it strange that the the hundreds , if not thousands of verses that talk about God as one person are ignored . The claim of the Evangelists was that Jesus was the Messiah ( Christ ) the Son of God. The NT says that he died and was raised. He ascended into heaven and exalted to the right hand of God. This is simple basic stuff that anyone can understand. But no ! We can't actually accept what it says, we have to invent new doctrines Did the two natures only apply while Jesus was on earth. ? Is he now one, co-equal and co-eternal again with the Father and Holy Spirit? Yet, the resurrected, ascended, exalted and glorified Jesus in heaven still has a God (Rev3 :12) and for eternity is in subjection to his heavenly God and Father( 1 Cor 15 : 24-28) You couldn't make this stuff up. Wait a minute, they did.
@@approvedofGod what madness you talking, and the angel said on her, thou shall conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a Son, and call his name Jesus luke 1:31 Of cause Jesus was inside Mary womb, Behold a virgin shall be with child, and bring forth a son, his name shall be call Emmanuel, God with us
@@pdub69triniboy You are not understanding the Trinitarian position. The bible states "the word was made flesh." These people teach that the Son preexisted before as God the Son. Then, God the Son came down and entered Mary. This is not a biblical doctrine.
@@approvedofGod bro, Jesus is the word made flesh , that preexisting with the Father before all things, both Matthew and Luke said Jesus was born of Mary, it not that hard to understand, you just saying saying the word was made flesh, but not saying how
Jesus did not have two natures as usually understood. Jesus was the Logos made flesh, the Logos Spirit transformed into human spirit but kept his identity the whole time. So he didn't know the day or hour of his return because he chose to limit himself by becoming a man. If he did know the day or hour of his return in his human nature, then why not just go into his divine nature and find out?? The problem is Chalcedon gave us a basically Nestorian Jesus, but said they didn't by simply stating there was no separation.
This is a superficial presentation made to students who are very unfamiliar and easily misled. Thus Fred is easily able to pull the wool right over their eyes with his folksy presentation. While I appreciated his observation that natures are not agents (obvious that it is), he completely covers up the real issue - there is NO man Christ Jesus in the hypostatic union (anhypostasis). What would have represented a step of integrity is to have someone who advocates for the man Christ Jesus - the HUMAN PERSON of Jesus - the person that Fred must necessarily deny (though the students are not inform) to provide a counter-point for a true educational experience.
+Greg Logan So to make it clear are you saying you believe that there are two Persons in the hypostatic union? Man and Divine? What exactly are you saying that Professor Sanders did not or should have done.
EmmanuelGoldstein74 Great question. My focus is first on the traditional model itself. The traditional model describes Jesus as a divine person + a divine nature joining to a human nature. There is NO human person - the person Jesus is NOT a man in this model. The person Jesus is a god that simply actuates a mere non-functional "human something". This critical issue was completely side-stepped by Fred. The point here is obvious - the NT plainly declares that Jesus IS a man. 1Tim2:5 - there is one God AND (someone other than the one God) - the one mediator - the MAN Christ Jesus. This is the pattern that you will see throughout the sermons in Acts. One God having designated the one man as Lord and Christ. This is the clear statement made by Paul in ICor15:21 - by a man came death - so by a MAN comes the resurrection. An impersonal human nature actuated by a deity is NOT a man. If Fred wants to deny the man Christ Jesus - that is his prerogative - for him to not make the full implication of his model crystal clear to his students is very deceptive. He is clearly an apologist with an agenda. I would love to see, rather, a teacher with a focus on the man Christ Jesus.
Thank you so much for this. It has brought real clarity. I've also watched your other videos 😁
"...Mary is the Mother of God is actually the right answer and to deny it runs afoul of this commitment of the Deity of Christ..." 7:56.
Its good to hear a Protestant say this out loud.
I don't actually agree. It's better to say Mary is the mother of God made flesh. To say mother of God is pretty vague. It creates a lot of heresy that will eventually lead to mart becoming a deity
@@toyosioyejobi309 No. It doesn't create any heresy. Mary is not a deity. She is the Mother of God.
@@scottbowen6689 No it does. God can't have a mother. Doesn't make sense. God the creator of every thing having a mother is madness that makes his mother God as well think about it. No wonder the Catholics pray to her over venerate her adore her build statues in her honor. She is literally a godess to them. Some can't go any day when there in trouble without calling on mary. Mary is the mother of Jesus Christ not God. Jesus is a man with a divine origin as the word/son of God who as phillipians 2 says took on human nature via Mary. Mary isn't the mother of God
@@scottbowen6689 ON MARY BEEN PRAISED AND VENERATED
Luke 11:27-28
"As he said these things, a woman in the crowd raised her voice and said to him, “Blessed is the womb that bore you, and the breasts at which you nursed! But he said, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it!”(This is Jesus downplaying the importance of mary in bringing him to earth)
Jeremiah 7:18 "The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger" (in reference to mary been falsely called as queen of heaven shows the worship or reverence of these godess is ancient and pagan)
ON PRAYER IN GENERAL
Matthew 6:9 ""This, then, is how you should pray: "'Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name" (this is Jesus teaching his disciples on prayer nowhere does he mention the importance of praying to his mother for graces or protection)
Ephesians 6:18 "And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the Lord's people." (This is one of Paul's numerous teachings on prayer there's just no sign of rosary or mary)
ON MARY BEEN SEEN AS MEDIATOR OR AS A NECCESSARY INTERCESSOR
1 timothy 2:5 "For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus"
Romans 8:26 " Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words"
Hebrews 7:25 "Consequently, he is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them."
ON PRAYING TO DEAD PEOPLE AMD ADRESSING SAINTHOOD
Romans 1:7 "To all those in Rome who are loved by God and called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ" (Shows who is a saint. Its not some process the Vatican makes. Its everyone who loves God and Beleives in Jesus christ)
For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
1Thessalonians 4:17 "For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord"(shows there is no one alive in any heaven. This is paul speaking years after the resurrection of christ. 1 Corinthians 15 talks about this too)
ON WHAT IS NEEDED TO BE SAVED
Romans 10:9 "If you declare with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved"(this is wjat is needed baptism is the final confirmation. No where do we see you need to be baptized first to be saved or you need to be baptized by any specific church)
Mark 16:16 "He that believes and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believes not shall be damned" (as you can see Beleiving is the emphasis and tue consequences of not Beleiving is the main topic not being baptized. When you Beleive tobbe baptized woukd be the least of problems)
Matthew 28:16-20 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”(He gave this commission to his disciples that is all who were following him. Not to any church organization)
ON THE MEANING OF THE CHURCH, WHAT THE CHURCH DID WHEN THEY MET AND CHURCH ADMINISTRATION
1 Corinthians12:13 "For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body-Jews or Greeks, slaves or free-and all were made to drink of one Spirit" (This talks about how one becames part of the body of christ and that is true his spirit. How does one receive the spirit, acts 2:38 "Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy spirit")
Matthew 18:20 "For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them" (This is quite clear)
1 Corinthians 14:26 "What then shall we say, brothers and sisters? When you come together, each of you has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. Everything must be done so that the church may be built up." (This is what we should do when we come together we don't see this in the RCC and to be fair many protestant and orthodox churches as well, paul teaches we all have different gifts and different things to contribute to the growth of one another. Today the opposite is the case. Its usually one head man or gis subordinates in different branches of an organization calling the shots)
Titus 1:5-6" For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee: An elder must be blameless, faithful to his wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient"
1 timothy 3:1-6" This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity"(requirements for being a bishop/elder of a local congregation. No where do we see that they must not be married or celibate. This is falsehood the Catholic Church forces on its clergy(whom they call priest btw)
Ephesians 4:11 Now these are the gifts Christ gave to the church: the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, and the pastors and teachers.(Like many of the protestant churches the Catholic Church barely or doesn't recognize these gifts. Instead it has its strange hierarchical structure of priests, bishops, archbishops, cardinals and finally the pope who has a pagan title pontifux maximus and vicar of christ meaning representative of Christ. This is who Jesus said was his representative on earth. John 14:26 "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you" no one man is representative of christ only his spirit. The argument of Peter is forced in. Peter was a spokesman quite alright but he never assumed any authority as head of christs church that title belongs to Christ alone Collosians 1:17-18 "And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent" Theres little evidence peter was in rome and peter for sure wasn't called papa nor did he have a papal palace not did he decree papal bulls. These are all strange to the new testament church)
Finally the churches in the new testament were local congregations with elders or bishops they did not have any subordination to rome or some pope somewhere. They only had subordination to Christ. The bishop or elder was appointed for guidingthe people in the right direction.
@@toyosioyejobi309 Jesus is one person you heretic, God with us, im knot Catholic, and she is mother of God
In min 17:15 Sanders said before union, the right Jesus exists in Godhood. But this premise is similar to Nestorius that that predicated by the two natures are associated in one person. Predication is subject to person not nature. This is why before Chalcedon was convened, Nestorius in 449 wrote in response to Leo's Tome that his dihypostases view is similar to Leo's diphyses view. Because of this Leo expanded his tome in 453 written to Palestinian monks so that no Nestorian reading is possible, cf. Oxford monograph by Susan Wessel. To speaks about one person in respect with each natures might passed Chalcedon but won't passed Constantinople II scrutiny. To says that Jesus dies in his humanity, via Chalcedon is acceptable. But via Constantinople II it won't. Because humanity of Jesus can't die, person does. To attribute what happens to one person via two natures is condemned at Constantinople II. The two natures are fully united indivisibly. One can say he died in his humanity but this need to be explained that his humanity is the humanity of the divine person of Logos. But over all this is a good video. I hope someday others at Biola or Sanders would expand this overview to include Constantinople II, II, and Nicaea II.
Jesus is one person
Did that one person die yes or no?
Don't you just love it? There are three persons but one God. Yes, three distinct persons but not three Gods but one, because they are one in essence. Yet, with Jesus, this all flips. Jesus is one person, but has two natures.
So how are we to understand person? Throughout the OT and the NT, God is depicted as one person. It is always He.. When people talk to God, it is always You (singular ). But, apparently, the Bible writers got it wrong. God is not really one, but three in one. Obviously, the later Greek educated Church Fathers had much more insight than the NT Bible writers who just somehow could not articulate this to us.
I struggle to find passages in the gospels where Jesus expounds on all of this, explaining to his Jewish audience that the concept they have of a Unitatian God is in fact wrong and that God is in reality triune. Likewise, when reading the book of Acts about the Apostles' preaching, I struggle to find them explaining any of this to anyone and we certainly don't have their opponents complaining about it.
I find it strange that the the hundreds , if not thousands of verses that talk about God as one person are ignored . The claim of the Evangelists was that Jesus was the Messiah ( Christ ) the Son of God. The NT says that he died and was raised. He ascended into heaven and exalted to the right hand of God. This is simple basic stuff that anyone can understand. But no ! We can't actually accept what it says, we have to invent new doctrines
Did the two natures only apply while Jesus was on earth. ? Is he now one, co-equal and co-eternal again with the Father and Holy Spirit? Yet, the resurrected, ascended, exalted and glorified Jesus in heaven still has a God (Rev3 :12) and for eternity is in subjection to his heavenly God and Father( 1 Cor 15 : 24-28)
You couldn't make this stuff up. Wait a minute, they did.
I think it's actually two instincts and one decision-maker.
There is no bible for a "biblical incarnation." The Word was made flesh! Simple.
He became man, same tbing
@@pdub69triniboy
What Catholics mean by incarnation is that the "begotten God" (preexistent son) came down from heaven and into Mary. Not biblical.
@@approvedofGod what madness you talking, and the angel said on her, thou shall conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a Son, and call his name Jesus luke 1:31
Of cause Jesus was inside Mary womb,
Behold a virgin shall be with child, and bring forth a son, his name shall be call Emmanuel, God with us
@@pdub69triniboy
You are not understanding the Trinitarian position. The bible states "the word was made flesh." These people teach that the Son preexisted before as God the Son. Then, God the Son came down and entered Mary. This is not a biblical doctrine.
@@approvedofGod bro, Jesus is the word made flesh , that preexisting with the Father before all things, both Matthew and Luke said Jesus was born of Mary, it not that hard to understand, you just saying saying the word was made flesh, but not saying how
Jesus did not have two natures as usually understood. Jesus was the Logos made flesh, the Logos Spirit transformed into human spirit but kept his identity the whole time. So he didn't know the day or hour of his return because he chose to limit himself by becoming a man. If he did know the day or hour of his return in his human nature, then why not just go into his divine nature and find out?? The problem is Chalcedon gave us a basically Nestorian Jesus, but said they didn't by simply stating there was no separation.
This is a superficial presentation made to students who are very unfamiliar and easily misled. Thus Fred is easily able to pull the wool right over their eyes with his folksy presentation. While I appreciated his observation that natures are not agents (obvious that it is), he completely covers up the real issue - there is NO man Christ Jesus in the hypostatic union (anhypostasis). What would have represented a step of integrity is to have someone who advocates for the man Christ Jesus - the HUMAN PERSON of Jesus - the person that Fred must necessarily deny (though the students are not inform) to provide a counter-point for a true educational experience.
+Greg Logan So to make it clear are you saying you believe that there are two Persons in the hypostatic union? Man and Divine? What exactly are you saying that Professor Sanders did not or should have done.
EmmanuelGoldstein74 Great question. My focus is first on the traditional model itself. The traditional model describes Jesus as a divine person + a divine nature joining to a human nature.
There is NO human person - the person Jesus is NOT a man in this model. The person Jesus is a god that simply actuates a mere non-functional "human something".
This critical issue was completely side-stepped by Fred. The point here is obvious - the NT plainly declares that Jesus IS a man. 1Tim2:5 - there is one God AND (someone other than the one God) - the one mediator - the MAN Christ Jesus.
This is the pattern that you will see throughout the sermons in Acts. One God having designated the one man as Lord and Christ.
This is the clear statement made by Paul in ICor15:21 - by a man came death - so by a MAN comes the resurrection. An impersonal human nature actuated by a deity is NOT a man.
If Fred wants to deny the man Christ Jesus - that is his prerogative - for him to not make the full implication of his model crystal clear to his students is very deceptive. He is clearly an apologist with an agenda. I would love to see, rather, a teacher with a focus on the man Christ Jesus.
@@greglogan7706 there's no atonement then