The illusion of humanity and divinity and the Orthodox worship of the body

 We will cite the words of the fathers and texts from the Bible that prove that Christ has one nature and not two natures.

First, the words of the fathers.

1. Pope Shenouda's words

After the union of the two natures in the Virgin Mary and the birth of Christ, we no longer speak of two natures, but rather we speak of one nature. The one nature that we mean is the nature of the incarnate God. The one nature is neither the divinity nor the humanity, but rather the divinity and humanity united together in one nature that we call the nature of the incarnate God.
As for the one nature, after the union of the two natures in the Virgin Mary and the birth of Christ, we no longer speak of two natures, but rather we speak of one nature. The one nature that we mean is the nature of the incarnate God.

We see here that after the birth of Christ, we no longer speak of two natures, contrary to what we hear from the church that he is a perfect human and a perfect God. Here is a separation between the two natures, although they are one nature. Here

is a link to this statement

: http://www.engeel.net/shobohat/3abd_almasi7/book_29.htm

Under the title Theological Foundation, Shenouda says: As long as sin is directed at God originally, and God is unlimited, then it is an unlimited sin. If one disbelieves, There must be an unlimited atonement sufficient for forgiveness, but there is no unlimited other than God, so God himself had to be incarnate because no one can take the place of man, and the Lord Christ carried out this mission to save the whole world, so God became
(the book Theology of Christ by Pope Shenouda, pages 83-84).

We benefit from this statement that God himself is the incarnate and he is the one who died on the cross, not the humanity as they claim, because if it had happened to the humanity only, then there would have been no redemption at all.

1. Father Angelo S. Thabet, priest of Anba Abraam Monastery in Fayoum

There is a theological rule that comforts students: what is attributed to the divinity of Christ is attributed or applied to his humanity, and what is applied to the humanity is attributed to the divinity. Here

is a link to this statement:
http://www.stabraammonastery.com/sabraam/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=8616&view=previous

1. Saint Gregory, brother of Basil the Great

(Do not separate His divinity from His humanity, for after His union He is not separate or mixed. He is from the beginning God in all times and He remains forever. And do not think that the high deeds (miracles) are for one, and the lowly deeds (pain, fatigue, hunger, and thirst) are for another, but rather these and those are for this one and only One. Here

is the link to these words:
http://www.god-is-love.net/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=695%20%20

1. Athanasius the Apostolic

Yet He was one person, one hypostasis, and one nature. He is the same one who was hungry and who fed five thousand men, besides women and children, with five loaves of bread and two fish. He is the same one who slept in the boat and who rose and rebuked the winds and waves, and there was a great calm. And thus he also spoke of himself as a human and as God at the same time, he spoke of himself as the Son of Man but present everywhere, as he spoke of himself as the Almighty God but who gave himself for sinners, and the book also speaks of him (27

Here is the link to this statement

http://www.engeel.net/shobohat/3abd_almasi7/book_29.htm

Athanasius the Apostle
If he is God, he took for himself the body, and if he is in the body, he deifies this body .
http://popekirillos.net/ar/bible/tafseer/john1.htm

Saint Athanasius the Apostle
... One nature for God the Word incarnate and we worship him with his body" (25) .
http://fatherbassit.com/shobohat/3abd_almasi7/book_29.htm



Athanasius the Apostle in the book The Incarnation of the Word, Chapter Five

No one can renew creation except the Creator, for he alone can create anew and suffer for all and offer Everyone to the Father

, who can create again, humanity or divinity? Divinity. Of course, we see the words like this ( He alone can create again and suffer for everyone ) We notice the word and suffer for everyone, the one who suffered remains God himself, who was struck is God

5- Father Younan Obeid
The union of God with the body is a true union, not a partial, temporary, formal, arbitrary, or temperamental union. God became human, the great God became small, God descended to raise man.

We notice the word ( God became human ). So they worship the body of Jesus because He is God to them in this body.
Link to the words (First - One)
http://www.ayletmarcharbel.org/taalimgr10.htm

6- His Grace Bishop Moussa, Bishop of Youth
The Orthodox Church called the Virgin Mary the Mother of God, believing that the one born from her womb is not just a human being, but rather the incarnate God or the incarnate Word.

The speech indicates that the one born from her womb is not a human being but rather a god, and they worship this one born in a body. An important question: Is it appropriate for a god to be born from a woman’s womb? Was this womb able to contain the god?
Link to this speech:
http://www.masi7i.com/index.pl/bishop_moussa_articles?wid=105&func=viewSubmission&sid=1321


7 - The Orthodox Church says,
and we do not accept the Chalcedonian expression that the Chalcedonian churches say (i.e. those that agree with the decisions of the excommunicated Council of Chalcedon) that in Christ there are two united natures. This is a wrong expression because it has the meaning of duality and separation in Christ. However, we only say (one nature of the incarnate Word) or we say (one nature from two natures) and we do not say in Christ that he is both god and human because this expression also has the meaning of duality.

Link to this speech:
http://www.god-is-love.net/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=695


8- If He were not a human being, He would not have been able to represent humanity, bearing their sins and bearing their judgment on their behalf. And if He were not God, or were less than the Father, even a hair's breadth, He would never have been able to fulfill all of God's rights.

Link to the speech
: http://www.god-is-love.net/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=129

9- The book Principles of Christian Doctrines: Their Authenticity and Effectiveness. Reviewed by the venerable bishops: His Grace Bishop Domadius, Bishop of Giza, and His Grace Bishop Moussa, General Bishop. Chapter Three: The Doctrine of the Divinity of the Lord Christ. Under the title: The Correct Belief in the Nature of the Lord Christ
(Rather, one nature, one hypostasis, and one person, the incarnate Word. So Christ Jesus our Lord is one person, one hypostasis, one nature of God, the incarnate Word).

The speech indicates one nature of the incarnate God.
Link to the speech
: http://www.god-is-love.net/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=695

10- The book Explaining the Theological Basis of the Fathers' Teaching on the Nature of the Lord Christ, His Grace Bishop Bishoy Bishop of Damietta, Kafr El-Sheikh and El-Barari, head of the Monastery of Saint Deniana and Secretary of the Holy Synod of the Coptic Church

(The Son of God the Word is the same as the Son of Man, and the Son of Man, who is Jesus Christ, is not another person other than the Son of God the Word, and therefore the one born from the womb of the Virgin Mary is the same as the one born from the Father, and the one who was crucified on the cross is the same as the one who rose from the dead and ascended to heaven and sat at the right hand of his Father).

The speech is clear that he is talking about one nature, that the Son of Man is the Son of God, the one born from the Virgin Mary is the one who died on the cross, one nature, God the Word incarnate. In

the same previous book he says
(Jesus Christ is the same as the Son of the living God who became incarnate and was born from the womb of the Virgin Mary, the mother of the eternal God. As for the Orthodox teaching, it rejected dividing Christ into two entities, each independent of the other, and therefore we understand that the hypostatic union is that we believe in one hypostasis of the Word).

In the same previous book under the title Explanation of the Doctrine of Saint Cyril and Saint Severus the Philosopher
in the Intellectual Distinction between the Divine Nature And the human nature
( when we say that He took a body, we mean that He took a complete human nature with a rational soul. We say that the Word was incarnate or that the Word became flesh. We mean that He took a body that was revived with a rational soul, that is, He became human or a man. Rather, we believe and confess strongly that one of the two, meaning the one who was born of the Virgin Mary after the union of humanity with divinity, is God, Son, Christ, and Lord. But after the union, since the distinction into two has now been removed, we believe that there is one nature for the Son as one, one nature that became human and incarnated ).
The speech is clear that it speaks about one nature for Christ and that after the union there is no such thing as two natures, but one nature. We notice in the speech (He became human or man), that is, God, according to them, became a human (human), that is, they worship humans because humans are God according to them.


Secondly, the texts from the book,
the Son of Man means humanity, and the Son of God means divinity. This is how Christians believe,
but we see in the book texts in which the Son of Man is used to refer to divine actions. And texts in which the Son of God is called by his human actions, which indicates that there is no difference between humanity and divinity, but rather they are one nature. This is confirmed by

the words of Anba Bishoy in his talk about the exchange of titles, where he says:
(Because the person of the Lord Christ is one, He Himself bore the title of Son of God and the title of Son of Man at the same time, and He uses His human title to express divine matters concerning Him, just as He uses His divine title to express human matters concerning Him, in order to emphasize that He is one person.)


Here are examples of that:

1- (Al-Fandik) (Matthew’s Gospel) ( Mt-12-8 ) (For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath also)
In this text we see that the Lord of the Sabbath is the divinity, but the term Son of Man is used to mean Lord of the Sabbath, which indicates that there is no difference between the two natures.

2- (Al-Fandik) (Matthew’s Gospel) ( Mt-25-31 ) (And when the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then he will sit on the throne of his glory.)
Who will come in the glory of his Father, the humanity or the divinity? The divinity of course, but here the term Son of Man is used , which indicates that there is no difference between the humanity and the divinity.

3- (Al-Fandik) (First Epistle to the Corinthians) ( 4- (Al-Fandik) ( Matthew's Gospel) ( Mt-16-27 ) (For the Son of Man will come in the glory of his Father with his angels, and then he will reward each one according to his works.) Who will reward each one according to his works? The
divinity or the humanity? The divinity of course, but here he says that the Son of Man is the one who will reward each one, which indicates that there is no difference between the humanity and the divinity.




5- (Al-Fandik) (Matthew's Gospel) ( Mt-9-6 ) (But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins, then he said to the paralytic, Arise, take up your bed, and go to your house.)
Who forgives sins? The humanity or the divinity? The divinity by nature, but here in this text he says that the one who forgives sins He is the Son of Man, which indicates that there is no difference between humanity and divinity.

6- (Al-Fandik) (The First Epistle of John) ( Jn1-1-1 ) (That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, concerning the Word of life.)
Who was from the beginning, humanity or divinity? Of course, divinity.
And in the text it says that they touched, heard, and saw what was from the beginning until He is divinity. So there is no difference between the two, divinity and humanity.


7- (Al-Fandik) (The Gospel of John) ( Jn-3-14 ) (And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up.)
Who will lift up, humanity or divinity? Divinity is the one who will lift up, but the text here says that the one who will lift up is humanity, which indicates that there is no difference between humanity and divinity.


8- (Al-Fandik) (The Gospel of John) ( Jn-3-13 ) (And no one has ascended to heaven except He who came down from heaven, the Son of Man who is in heaven.)
Ascending to heaven and descending from heaven are specific to humanity or divinity. In theology, of course, but we find here that the one in heaven is humanity, which indicates that there is no difference between humanity and divinity.

ConclusionHe called the Son of Man the actions of the divinity and he called the Son of God the actions of the humanity, which indicates that there is no difference between the humanity and the divinity. If there was a difference between the two, there would have been a difference between them in actions. The actions of the humanity would have been called the Son of Man and the actions of the divinity would have been called the Son of God, which indicates that God, according to them, is one nature in his actions or words, whether his actions are high or low. So whatever comes from Jesus comes from God, as we have explained from the words of the fathers that they worship the body because God, according to them, became a human being. They worship the human being because this is their God who became incarnate.