Who said What ? Some quotes from christology teachers
The doctrine and belief of our opponents is, "That this separate Son of God, in due time, became a real son, body and soul, of the flesh and blood of Mary." Mark, two Sons, and a divided Christ. Our doctrine and belief is that this same Word, Wisdom, or Firstborn, as we have confessed, in due time descended from heaven, and that he became a true, passive, mortal man, by the power of the Most High and his Holy Spirit; not of Mary, but in Mary.
(Menno Simons - Thirty-One articles - Secondly)
--
Now Micron writes, "That we should free from sin whatever the Scripture frees therefrom; and that man should not declare common or unholy that which God testifies to be holy," and refers to Acts 10:15. We confess and say, and that in accordance with the Lord's word, that the Scripture frees none from sin but him that is free indeed, namely, Christ Jesus, Isa. 53:12; 2 Cor. 2:15; 1 Pet. 2:22; 1 Jn. 3:5; whereby it is plainly shown that he is not of Mary's flesh, which was also concluded under sin; but that the Father's most glorious word, which knew not sin, became flesh, Jn. 1:14.
(Menno Simons - Thirty-One articles - Twentieth)
--
The distinct doctrine of our opponents is, "That the man Christ who died for us, was not of heaven, but of earth." In the fifteenth place, mark, two sons, and a divided Christ. Our foundation and doctrine is, according to the Scriptures, that he was of heaven and not of earth, as he himself says, "I am the living bread which came down from heaven;" "and the bread that I will give, is my flesh," Jn. 6:51. Again in verse 62, "What and if ye shall see the son of man (mark he says, The son of man, who Micron says, was of earth) ascend up where he was before?" Again, "I am from above; ye are of this world," Jn. 8:23. Again, "He that cometh from above, is above all," Jn. 3:31. Christ says, "I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world; again, I leave the world, and go to the Father," Jn. 16:28. Paul also says, "The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven," 1 Cor. 15:47, and many other similar Scriptures.
(Menno Simons - Thirty-One articles - Twenty-second)
--
If our opponents should say, "That the Word was Spirit from the beginning, and could therefore not become flesh," then you may answer, first, If the Word could not become flesh, as you say, the power of the Father is made less and his arm is shortened, by which he can do anything he pleases; and the angel bore a false testimony to Mary, when he said that there is nothing impossible with God, Luke 1:37.
Secondly, you may answer: If the Word was not made flesh, as you say, then all the Scriptures deceive us, which testify and teach, without any division, union, or exception as to nature, sons or persons, that Christ Jesus is God's Son, and that God is his Father, as was said.
Thirdly, you may answer: If the Word was not made flesh, as you say, then the Holy Scriptures testify falsely, that he is of heaven and not of earth, Jn. 3:31; 8:23; Eph. 4:10, that he came forth from the Father, Jn. 16:28, that he is the bread and Lord from heaven, Jn. 6:35; 1 Cor. 15:47, that he is the Alpha and Omega, Rev. 1:8; 22:13, and other like Scriptures.
Fourthly, you may answer: If the Word could not become flesh, as you say, then one or the other of you must be wrong. Either you who say that he could not become flesh, or John, who says that he was made flesh, as was heard.
If they should further say, that the Word put on, by generation, of Mary's seed, as they actually do, you may answer then thus: First, Then we desire that you show to us where this is written in the Scriptures or else we say, that it is the flattering and falsehood of the old serpent, and not the Lord's truth.
Secondly, you answer: By such acceptation you rob the Father of his Son, and the Son of his Father. You divide Christ into two parts, into good and evil, into righteous and unrighteous, into heavenly and earthly. You point us to a sinful creature and an impure offering. You idolize the earthly and sinful flesh of Adam. You make all the pious witnesses of Christ, such as John the Baptist, Peter, &c., false and lying, and yourselves anti-christ; and make the Scriptures contradictory.
Thirdly, you may answer: Becoming is becoming, and putting on is putting on; nor will it be found otherwise in the Scriptures. Thus when Christ became twelve years of age, he did become twelve years of age, counting from the time of his human birth. Christ became a curse, Gal. 3:13. He became such, so as to be hung between two murderers, on the cross, Matt. 27:38; Mark 15:27; Luke 23:32. Water was made wine, and it was made, John 2:9; Lot's wife became a pillar of salt, and she did become one, Gen. 19:26. For becoming I say, is becoming, and cannot be explained in any part of the Scriptures as meaning putting on.
If they would still follow their intellect and say, "If the Word is become flesh, it has lost its first being by the change," you might answer, first: John has taught us that it was made flesh, and he has not said a word further, as to how or to what extent it was changed; something that you, inquisitive ones, want to know and hear of us, without any Scripture.
(Menno Simons - How the divine Word in the fullness of time according to the scriptures was made flesh)
--
First of all [we say], that the eternal Word of God had become human nature out of divine nature and not taken on human nature of the highly praised virgin Mary.
(Melchior Hofmann - Manuscript Thomas archive Strassbourg - free translation)
--
Since the God-Man Jesus Christ neither on the cross nor in the grave was an assumed flesh and blood of Mary, instead alone the pure and eternal Word and the infinite Son of the Most High
(Melchior Hofmann - Worhafftige Zeucknus gegen die Nachtwechter, 1533 - free translation)
--
"The Luthernas were particularly bothered by [Caspar] Schweckfeld's Christology, which he namely penned down in his writing "Summarium etlicher Argumente, dasss Christus nach seiner Menschheit keine Kreatur, sondern ganz unser Gott und Herr sei". In the opinion about Christ's person, which is the basis for the lutheran teaching of communion, he saw a seperation of Christ. He assumed that the flesh of Christ (all of Christ's humanity) is not derived from the natural creation, but out of the being of God. The flesh of Christ was clean and holy from the beginning, and only through life, humiliation and death does it arrive at glory and transfiguration; of course this deified body cannot enter into communion. This favorite idea of Schwenckfeld about the deification of Christ's flesh reminds of Melchior Hoffmann's appearing assumption, Christ had not received his flesh from Mary, but brought it from heaven."
(Johann Jakob Herzog , Abriss der gesamten Kirchengeschichte, Volume 2)
--
About Caspar Schwenckfeld:
"Man alone of all creature [supposedly] is determined to be parttaker of the divine nature. For this, the Word had become flesh, however not a created man, but inside the virgin conceived out of the divine being and thus of the same form of substance as the Word."
(August Sartori, Die christlichen und mit der christlichen Kirche zusammenhängenden Secten)
--
And what is spoken of as the blood of the grape, signifies that He who should appear would have blood, though not of the seed of man, but of the power of God.
(Justin Martyr Apology I chapter 32)
--
Christ is not man of men, begotten in the ordinary course of humanity.
(Justin Martyr - Dialogue with Trypho 54)
--
