On The Hypostatic Union, Christ is Truly God and Truly Man -- Pleading with IFB Pastors

[@AndreaWhoGoesByAndrea]

I dearly love my family in my little ifb church. But about a year ago one of those christian brothers that I love was talking about a neighbor church and outright said, "We're better than them. We have better doctrinal teaching. " That distressed me because the church was a sound church, and the funny thing is that ever since then, I've been hearing more and more little errors from the pulpit. Nothing deal- breaking or gospel-twisting, but still... things that show a lack of careful study. I think pride has a grip on many of us, and I appreciate you, Pastor Burris, for calling it out when you see it.

[@banmancan1894]

I feel that. I did not come from IFB church but I did come from a little church that struggled with the a superiority complex towards other denominations.

[@drbill-r9f]

Another great and straightforward presentation. Thank you for sharing your gifts.

[@terryswails1191]

This is a very important subject, we must give proper glory and honor to God and the Lord Jesus, we must not belittle or minimize the glory and majesty and power and honor they deserve. Let all men be liars but God be truth.

[@Spitzer3964]

Amen! Lack of theological teaching is in my opinion why young people leave the Church when they get their driver’s license. They need answers, and the Church must give the answers chapter and verse.

[@jonathanclemens4660]

🔥I pray pastors will turn from the ungodly attack on contemporary Bible translations and fight the real battles like this one

[@brothermike434]

There is no “dearth” of hopeful anticipation for the next video! As always, thanks Doc! Blessings

[@billcovington5836]

Excellent Thank you

[@bradmckinney922]

Amen! No one should be allowed behind the pulpit that does not confess these truths of the person of Christ. We have to stop letting men get behind the pulpit just because they say they believe they are “called to preach”. They must be thoroughly discipled and tested. No novices. It’s too important. Keep up the good fight! All glory to Christ

[@ellisrowe363]

Well done! Keep up the good work, the split Jesus is not to be found in Scripture.

[@r.m.solympic1771]

Thank you so much for this teaching. We need more men of God to speak out on these issues. I was aware of Arianism and Modalism, but I didn't know the names of those other heresies, though I have encountered some of them. It is becoming a lot more prevalent than in the past. I used to take for granted that all Christians believed in this core doctrine of the Hypostatic union. I am always shocked to hear professing Christians hold to heretical views, but I believe many have been influenced by Jehovah's Witness. It saddens me greatly when I encounter professing Christians that don't hold to these core doctrines. Just reading the Bible shows us that Jesus is God and man at the same time. I think a big part of the problem is that Christians don't read their Bibles, so they don't know how to defend these beliefs. I also think that many professing Christians don't actually trust their Bibles, so they pick what they want and manufacture the rest from their imaginations. Thank you again for going more in depth as to what Jesus being the God-man means. I am so glad I discovered you, by accident as it were. An acquaintance of mine is falling into KJV onlyism and is listening to Robert Breaker and wanted me to listen to his stuff. I warned her about some of his teaching being wrong- like there being more than one gospel - and looked for someone solid who has refuted him. That is how I stumbled upon Jonathan Burris. Now I continue to listen to his teachings. He seems very solid. We appreciate you, Jonathan Burris.

[@jamestrotter3162]

One of my favorite books is " On the Incarnation" by Athanasius.

[@Agben35]

Love your content Jonathan. Keep up the great work. Praying your message reaches more and more folks .

[@brothermike434]

Thank you for emphasizing “truly” instead of “fully” or “100%” God/man. I think we should never introduce the concept of quantity when discussing the incarnation , as it gives the skeptic a toehold to argue the math (so to speak) which takes the focus off Jesus. We should always say He was truly God and truly man, which removes quantity from the discussion and it then becomes a contention over/about truth. Standing on a plain, historical and grammatical interpretation of the text, we prevail every time when contending for the truth of the incarnation of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Thanks Doc! Blessings

[@jamesaburks]

Very good!!! Praying for them to open their heart and understanding. Yes, I am with you brother.

[@Sgomes-is4or]

Its surprising they would believe that because alot think they are the only defenders of truth and all others are heresy. Pride will keep them in error. Great video!

[@joelooney7201]

Thank you for your voice!

[@krisv001]

Excellent message!

[@rrsafety]

“Jesus Christ is true God and true man, in the unity of his divine person; for this reason he is the one and only mediator between God and men. Jesus Christ possesses two natures, one divine and the other human, not confused, but united in the one verson of God's Son. Christ, being true God and true man, has a human intellect and will, perfectly attuned and subject to his divine intellect and divine will, which he has in com- mon with the Father and the Holy Spirit. The Incarnation is therefore the mystery of the won- derful union of the divine and human natures in the one person of the Word.” … from the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

[@notsatch]

Before Abraham was...

[@gailreineke7186]

For anyone to deny that Jesus is both divine and human is deceived.

[@inhistime2007]

This is a great video!

[@annakimborahpa]

On The Hypostatic Union, Christ is Truly God and Truly Man -- Pleading with IFB Pastors 1. Pastor Burris speaking at 4:37-53: "The Athanasian Creed, named after Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, who defended the doctrine of the Trinity and the Deity of Christ against Arius, lived from 293 to 374 AD. This early Christian creed is in two parts." Response: For clarification, the Wikipedia article on the Athanasian Creed provides links in support of: A. Not authored by Athanasius B. Not originally called a creed C. Athanasius' name later was added to it D. Likely composed in Latin; Athanasius composed in Greek E. Neither Athanasius nor his contemporaries ever mention it F. Not mentioned in any of the ecumenical councils' records G. Addresses post-Athanasius concerns like the Filioque H. Circulated among Western Christians but not in the East. I. Strong similarity to the writings of St. Vincent of Lerins and/or from his milieu that would place its origin at southern France in the late 5th or early 6th century AD J. Oldest manuscript dates from the late 8th century 2. PB at 6:05-11: "Then there's the Council of Nicaea. The Council of Nicaea produced the creed that bears the same name in 325 AD." - and - PB at 6:33-43 "And then there's the Chalcedonian Creed. The Chalcedonian Creed is a declaration of the nature of Christ that was adopted in 451 AD at the Council of Chalcedon." Response: A. In the Declaration of Faith of the Council of Chalcedon, it is also stated: "And this have we done with one unanimous consent, driving away erroneous doctrines and renewing the unerring faith of the Fathers, publishing to all men the Creed of the Three Hundred and Eighteen, and to their number adding, as their peers, the Fathers who have received the same summary of religion. Such are the One Hundred and Fifty holy Fathers who afterwards assembled in the great Constantinople and ratified the same faith. Moreover, observing the order and every form relating to the faith, which was observed by the holy synod formerly held in Ephesus, of which Celestine of Rome and Cyril of Alexandria, of holy memory, were the leaders, we do declare that the exposition of the right and blameless faith made by the Three Hundred and Eighteen holy and blessed Fathers, assembled at Nice in the reign of Constantine of pious memory, shall be pre-eminent: and that those things shall be of force also, which were decreed by the One Hundred and Fifty holy Fathers at Constantinople, for the uprooting of the heresies which had then sprung up, and for the confirmation of the same Catholic and Apostolic Faith of ours. The Creed of the three hundred and eighteen Fathers at Nice. We believe in one God, etc. Item, the Creed of the one hundred and fifty holy Fathers who were assembled at Constantinople. We believe in one God, etc." [Nicene and post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/ Vol XIV/The Fourth Ecumenical Council, Philip Schaff et al. Wiki Source Org /wiki/Nicene_and_Post-Nicene_Fathers:_Series_II/Volume_XIV/The_Fourth_Ecumenical_Council/The_Definition_of_Faith] B. According to first part of this declaration authored by the Chalcedon Council fathers, both (1) the Nicene Creed from the Council of Nicaea of 325 AD and (2) the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed, a revision/expansion of the Nicene Creed, from the First Council of Constantinople of 381 AD were affirmed. C. Since Pastor Burriss is quoting as authoritative the Council of Chalcedon's Declaration of Faith, does he also consider as authoritative both (1) the Nicene Creed and (2) Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed that the Chalcedon Council fathers affirmed as authoritative in their declaration? D. The Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed contains the following: "We believe ... in one holy catholic and apostolic Church; we acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; we look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen." E. What "one holy catholic and apostolic Church" were the Chalcedon Council fathers referring to when they affirmed the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed? Is that church still around today? 3. PB at 12:21-48: "Number 8: Monothelitism. This heresy asserts that Jesus Christ had only one will, a divine will, rather than two wills, divine and human. It was condemned as a heresy at the Third Council of Constantinople in 680 to 681 (AD), affirming Christ, being fully human and fully divine, or truly humand and truly divine, possessed both a divine will and a human will which work together in perfect harmony." Response: A. "The Third Council of Constantinople, counted as the Sixth Ecumenical Council by the Eastern Orthodox and Catholic Churches, as well as by certain other Western Churches, met in 680-681 ..." [Continuity and Change in Creed and Confessions, Credo: Historical and Theological Guide to Creeds and Confessions of Faith, ed. Jaroslav Pelikan (Yale University Press, 2013), p. 15] B. Does Pastor Burris affirm the teachings of any ecumenical councils beyond 3rd Constantinople or just stop there? If the latter, on what grounds? 4. PB at 1742-59: "Five times Athansius was run out from his bishopric in Alexandria, but each time he would return and continue the fight. The church father Athanasius has been dubbed Athanaius Contra Mundum. Translated from the Latin, it means Athanasius against the world." Response: A. Quoting Athanasius of Alexandria: "When I left Alexandria, I did not go . . . to any other persons, but only to Rome; . . . having laid my case before the Church . . ." (Defense before Constantius 4, NPNF 2, Vol. IV, 239) [EWTN Co UK /article-14-proofs-that-st-athanasius-was-100-catholic/] B. Quoting from the Britannica Com article on Pope Julius I: "Saint Julius I (born, Rome-died April 12, 352; feast day April 12) was the pope from 337 to 352. The papacy had been vacant four months when he was elected as St. Mark’s successor on Feb. 6, 337. Julius then became the chief support of orthodoxy and the Nicene Creed against Arianism, a heresy that held Christ to have been human, not divine." "In 339 he gave refuge at Rome to Bishop St. Athanasius the Great of Alexandria, who had been deposed and expelled from his see by the Arians. At the Council of Rome in 340, Julius reaffirmed Athanasius’ position. Julius then tried to unite the Western bishops against Arianism by convoking in 342/343 the Council of Sardica (now Sofia, Bulg.). The council acknowledged the pope’s supreme authority, enhancing his power in ecclesiastical affairs by granting him the right to judge cases of legal possession of episcopal sees. Thus Julius restored Athanasius and refuted all Arian charges; his decision was confirmed by the Roman emperor Constantius II (an Arian) at Antioch. Julius’ letters are preserved in Athanasius’ Apology Against the Arians." [Britannica Com /biography/Saint-Julius-I#:~:text=In 339 he gave refuge at Rome to,342%2F343 the Council of Sardica (now Sofia%2C Bulg.).] 5. And if the King James Bible was good enough for Athanasius of Alexandria, then that's good enough for me.

[@FaithFounders]

Having had a little time to contemplate the video of that IFB preacher's unbiblical view of the blood of Christ. The notion of Christ's blood being "magical" or "mystical" in some way, firstly, smacks of some ideas of early gnostics in the 1st Century. In addition, the idea that the blood of Christ still flowing, in a mystical manner, is very similar to what the Roman Catholic Church believes in it's blasphemous view of the mass and the Lord's table. Do the men who preach this stuff not see how they are preaching things that apostate churches and heretics have taught?

[@conradaxe3895]

Spurgeon also talked about things using those terms (and similiar ones). Very strange 🤔

[@AndreaWhoGoesByAndrea]

About 12:45:00, I was really stuck, trying to understand what Pastor Burris meant by Jesus having "one wheel" and God's "divine wheel"... 😅 Southern accents...smh. haha

[@pastorburris]

🤣

[@chriscoesbodyshop]

Great job!

[@FaithFounders]

Pastors have sadly abandoned teaching doctrine in a thorough way. A question a pastor must answer is this: If a Muslim, Unitarian Universalist, Mormon, Jehovah's Witness, Agnostic, Atheist, Modern Gnostic, Trained Roman Catholic, Charismatic Faith Healer type, or any other modern day false teacher or heretic approached any of your flock, could they defend their faith with Biblican references because you have prepared them to do so? If not, go look in the mirror! It's YOUR fault. Repent, confess your sin to Christ, then be a man of God and begin to adequately prepare them to face the world, flesh, devil, and false teachers. How well do your church members KNOW their Bible? Do you YOU know them well enough to be able to gauge their level of Biblical knowledge? If not, why not? Is your church a body of believing Christians who are ready and able to give an answer to any man of the hope which lieth within them? Or is your building a Goat farm of people who have a veil of Christianity about them but NO desire to seek Christ in His word daily and seek Him in prayer? Given what is happening in our nation, if tomorrow, the current Government administration brought the hammer down on Christians, like happens in other godless nations every day across the world, have YOU prepared them for that storm? Have you prepared them to suffer for Christ? Have you prepared them to be rock solid defenders of the faith once delivered to the saints? If not, why not? Repent, return to your first love, Christ, then be the shepherd you were called to be. Christ's body and His sheep need to be nourished, not starved from the pulpits across this nation. May God have mercy on us and raise up men that set aside these stupid secondary separation issues, which the Bible NEVER commands Christians to use as measures of fellowship, and unite around the Gospel of Jesus Christ: His incarnation, by taking on human nature. His undeniable deity as one member of the Godhead: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This death, burial, bodily resurrection and ascension. Sola Fide (Faith Alone), Sola Scriptura (Scripture Alone), Sola Christos (Christ Alone) as our sole rule of faith and practice for the Orthodox Christian religion.

[@kevinjodrey7664]

@ScottRock-mr6qk You are an Arian. A condemned heresy. John 17:5-"And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began." John 1:1-3 " In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made." Colossisans 1:16-17 "For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together." How could Jesus have created the world if he hasn't always existed??? And in Genesis 1:26 God said let us make man in OUR image. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit all 3 made the universe and created man. Three in one.

[@carolbarlow8896]

Honestly asking. What do some of you oneness folks do with Genesis 1:26 where the one true God refers to himself in a plural way? Not trying to pick a fight. I’m genuinely curious to know.

[@brothermike434]

One doesn’t have to go all the way to verse 26 to make the case. Genesis 1:1 “In the beginning ĕlōhîm created the heavens and the earth.” ĕlōhîm is the plural form of ĕlôha. The Word speaks but fewer and fewer are listening. Blessings

[@chrisf.3002]

They would say either it is the plurality of majesty (the royal we), or it is a discussion within the Divine Council.

[@jeremsgarage]

🔥

[@euston2216]

*JOHN 10 (KJV)* [17] Therefore doth my Father love me, because *I lay down my life,* that I might take it again. [18] No man taketh it from me, but *I lay it down of myself.* I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. *This commandment have I received of my Father.* The Father *commanded* the Son to be sacrificed, and the Son had *no choice* in the matter. When a father commands his personally distinct son to be sacrificed, and that personally distinct son has no choice in the matter, we call that child sacrifice, which is an abomination. So if the Father and the Son are two distinct persons, then the Father committed the abomination of child sacrifice. But if the Father "came down from heaven" _without leaving heaven,_ and manifested _himself_ on earth in genuine human form, as _his own_ Son, then the Father's sacrifice of the Son is the *sacrifice of self,* which is the greatest demonstration of *love.* Receive the revelation of the *self-sacrificial love* of the _true_ Father...whose name is the name which is above _every_ name: *JESUS.* _"Greater _*_LOVE_*_ hath no man than this, that a man lay down _*_HIS_*_ life for his friends."_ -- John 15:13 (KJV) _"Hereby perceive we _*_the LOVE of GOD,_*_ because _*_HE laid down HIS life for us:_*_ and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren."_ -- 1 John 3:16 (KJV)

[@kardiognostesministries8150]

Jesus is not the Father (John 14:23).

[@euston2216]

@@kardiognostesministries8150 *1. How many Fathers, in the eternal sense, do you have?* If your answer is "One" (which it should be), then... *2. Does your one and only Father love you enough to have laid down HIS OWN LIFE for you?* If your answer is anything other than "Yes", then you have the wrong Father.

[@kardiognostesministries8150]

@@euston2216 You dodged John 14:23. Try again.

[@4jgarner]

That's *modalism* Patrick!

[@mrgeorge1888]

The Father in heaven & the Son of the Living God are One Person. The One True God that not interact with His creation is the Father. The One True God that interacting with His creation is the Son. The Father/ the Son of God sent our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of man (100% God 100% man), Deu 18 : 18, Isai 55 : 11 kjv. Jesus is outside from the One True God (trinity), John 17 : 3 kjv. The Son of man WAS the Son of God/ the Word of God/ the Lord God/ the Christ that became flesh (John 1 : 14 kjv). The Son of God still exist forever although there is our Lord Jesus Christ until forever too, that's why Rev 3 : 21 can be understood. One throne is Jesus's throne with us believers, the other throne is the Son of God's throne with Jesus in His right hand. Gbu always, oneness is false indeed but trinitarian is not perfect either.

[@jasonwells5760]

Either a poor English translation of the Chalcedon Creed or bad theology; Mary most certainly was not the mother of God (which would beg the question, Who is God's grandmother?), and Jesus Christ is most certainly NOT the only begotten God/god but rather the only begotten Son. (The NASB is in error in John 1:18.)

[@pastorburris]

Sir, Theotokos was used to affirm that the person Mary gave birth to was truly man and truly God. It does not make Mary divine or holy. It was used to affirm the person and nature of Christ - not to extol any glory or title to Mary. It would not be until centuries later that Mariolatry would pervert the term. And John 1:18 in the NASB, LSB, and many other translations is consistent with extremely early manuscripts and papyri.

[@jasonwells5760]

@@pastorburris As a Spanish professor, I am cognizant of the ever-important role of translation, however, we need to look at...how it comes out in English, right? (This reminds me of Acts 8:37). John 1:18 may be consistent with early manuscripts (whatever that means), but to translate it as "only begotten god" is completely absurd. Jesus Christ was not begotten in eternity (Psalm 2:7).

[@pastorburris]

Not at all. It’s what was written in Greek. It translates perfectly. You are assuming an improper definition of begotten.

[@jasonwells5760]

@@pastorburris I am not assuming anything. It does NOT translate perfectly. Jesus Christ is not a begotten God; he's the only begotten Son. Also, I can rely on the scriptures alone to inform me on Christ's nature. I don't need to read from idiotic creeds.

[@pastorburris]

It’s not from a creed. It’s from the scripture. John 1:18 (NA28): *18 Θεὸν οὐδεὶς ἑώρακεν πώποτε·* ⸂μονογενὴς θεὸς⸃ ὁ ὢν εἰς τὸν κόλπον τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκεῖνος ἐξηγήσατο⸆. P75 is the earliest manuscript with John 1:18 in it and it reads as above.

[@ScottRock-mr6qk]

Wow!! Him being truly God isn't what my King James Bible says. It says that Jehovah is truly God Almighty not Jesus. And that Jesus is the Son of God and that Jesus is the Word of God and that Jesus is the Servant of God. Are you noticing a trend there with what I'm saying??? Jesus is always something "OF" God, not God himself. Oh and he's also the mediator between men and God. What??? So, he's the mediator between us and himself??? What?? So,let me make sure I understand you correctly. You're saying that Jesus is truly Jehovah and truly a man too. I get the him being a man part but are you your father?? And is your father you??? No to both questions so how is Jesus Jehovah??? It's true that Jehovah gave him the power and wisdom of God because Paul said so at 1 Corinthians 1:24 and so did at John 1:14. But according to 1 Corinthians 8:5,6, there is only one true God, the Father and Jesus is Lord. Not LORD but Lord. So if the Bible says that there is only one God the then that means the Son is not God Almighty. And you're preaching the wrong thing. Shame on you. And you can show all the John 10:30s and any other scriptures you want, but the Bible is VERY clear about who God Almighty is. And it ain't Jesus. There is no three are one and Jesus NEVER EVER claimed to be God. And 1 John 5:7 was not written by John but a Dutch Catholic scholar named Erasmus in the 1500's

[@pastorburris]

Please tell me what your religion is, because it is certainly not Christianity.

[@TheJpep2424]

Wow! You're deceived and lost. The old testament says Jesus is God. Jesus said He is God. The apostles preached he is God. The entire new testament teaches Jesus is God.

[@keithm1689]

One God, three persons. You can't escape it, it's throughout the Bible. ‭Genesis 1:26 Then God said, “Let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness".

[@milesmcloughlin1767]

20 And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life. 1 John 5:20 | KJV

[@4jgarner]

"my Lord my God!" Where's the "of?" I can't find it.