INC's 3rd Doctrine - CHRIST WAS A MAN - "Not God" - Refuted

by G. Enad Tanudtanud

The 3rd Major Doctrine of the INC: Christ was a man - “not God”

The following verses are among the FAVORITE passages they site to support their doctrine:

St John 20:17 “Do not touch me, for I am not yet ascended to my Father. But I go to my brethren and say, I ascended to my Father and to your Father, to my God and to your God.”

Acts 2:22 “Ye mean of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God …”

Osea 11:9 “I will not execute the fairness of my wrath, I will not return to destroy Ephraim, because I am God, not a man…..”

Scrutinizing the INC passages, we have to conclude they have NEVER PROVED Christ was not God. What they have succeeded is Christ is just a man. A doctrine which our Roman Catholic Church also preaches.Therefore, there is no argument with them on Christ as being a man. Since there is no argument with them, their passages are useless and irrelevant to us. We do not need them.

Let us analyze their passages for their enlightenment again, for these people appear they do not understand at all what they are talking about.

In St John 20:17, we need not object to Christ’s statement that His Father was His God too, because after all there is logic in it. That time the people as a whole generally believed Christ’s Father as God Almighty. Since Christ who appeared a man to them, taught them he was the Son of God therefore He would call His Father His God too to show them He was a complete MODEL of a man, respectful to His Father. But here is our question now: While His Father is God, does it necessarily mean Christ is not God also? Nay. The fact that Christ allows St Thomas to call Him God is already evident Christ is God also. Since the truth must stand that there is only one God in the universe of God, then we can say that Christ as the Son and His Father are two persons in ONE Godhood!

Here is St Thomas in St John 20:28 “ Thomas answered and said to Him (Christ) : ‘My Lord and My GOD.’”

But the surest thing we can say about Christ’s divinity is read in St Luke 1:35

“And the angel answering, said to her; the Holy Ghost shall come upon thee and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee. And therefore also the Holy which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.”

Since Christ Father is God Himself and his mother is human we can already say that Christ is Half-God and Half-human. Should the INC people object to this? They can never say that He is just a man or a man only, since Christ must have a human father to back up their assertion. INC people, don’t you know that St Joseph has denied Christ as his son? Now if Christ preaches He is God the more there is credibility on it rather than the INC people’s insistence that Christ is only a man. By reason of Omnipotence, God Almighty can do anything even by going down to us as a man via the womb of a woman and mix with us. He simply cannot do like an evil spirit or a fairy and appear as human, then dwell with us. He must undergo the natural process of man’s life from birth to death in this world.

In Acts 2:22, we do not object if St.Peter says Christ Father did the miracles for Him, for the simple reason that Christ appeared to us as a man. But on the other hand, by these passage we can even more declare that Christ miracles were done by Himself alone on the ground that Christ was half God and half man. Let us assert by logic that if your father is a witch, since you are a son you are a witch too. If your father does the things witches do, you as a witch can also do what witches do. As Son of God, Christ can do miracles without any help from his Father. So this passage does not prove again Christ inability to do miracles. St.Peter was only saying in the point of view of Christ’s being a man.

Let us go to Osee 11:9. We see God Almighty in a state of anger against the Ephraim, but He would not execute His anger as a man. But does it mean God can never execute His anger as a man, if He really does so?