Let me throw a wrinkle in here, just for fun, by introducing a very popular error on the other side of the incarnation, re: Jesus Christ. It is held by MANY professing Christians today, and I believe simply out of ignorance for most, that the "Logos" of John 1:1 was Jesus (of Nazareth). Further, they would hold that Col. 1:16 is speaking of Jesus (of Nazareth), i.e., Jesus, the son of Mary created all things. What they are asserting is the eternality of Jesus, which goes far beyond the necessary affirmation that the Son of God, the second person of the Trinity was and is eternal, both in His essence and in His person, that being eternally begotten of the Father.

Some, in defense of this error, will stand upon the Chalcedon formula, i.e., you cannot separate the two natures of Christ. But what they will not do is to also apply the equally true statement that we cannot confuse the two natures of Christ. There was a time . . . notice time, that Jesus (of Nazareth) did not exist. To deny such is to essentially deny the incarnation. In fact the entire purpose of the apostle John writing his Gospel and three Epistles is effectively destroyed.

Anway..... since we are having so much fun in this thread now, I thought I'd join in the fray and bring my own "party favors"! rofl

In His Grace,

[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]