By carlos@thehumanjesus.org
From the Old to the NT the idea of God becoming man is not only incompatible with scripture but warned against. For example, human forms are clearly included as a type of idol worship in Exodus 20.4; Romans 1.25.
So talk of the Son being “sent” by the Father is to be understood as a created commission. The noted Catholic German scholar Karl Rahner was right to say “the Son’s mission does not mean that the one sent existed as such before he was sent. In my view the mission may imply the creation of the man Jesus.” (A New Christology)
And another German scholar, Isaak August Dorner, was right to ask:
From the Old to the NT the idea of God becoming man is not only incompatible with scripture but warned against. For example, human forms are clearly included as a type of idol worship in Exodus 20.4; Romans 1.25.
So talk of the Son being “sent” by the Father is to be understood as a created commission. The noted Catholic German scholar Karl Rahner was right to say “the Son’s mission does not mean that the one sent existed as such before he was sent. In my view the mission may imply the creation of the man Jesus.” (A New Christology)
And another German scholar, Isaak August Dorner, was right to ask:
“How shall we determine the nature of the distinction between the God who became man and the God who did not become man, without destroying the unity of God on the one hand or interfering with Christology on the other? Neither the Council of Nicea nor the Church Fathers of the fourth century satisfactorily answered this question.”
(The History of the Development of the Doctrine of the Person of Christ, Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1882, Div. I, Vol. 2, p. 330.)