All the fulness of Deity dwells in Him Bodily !

[ChristisGod]

Re:
<<2- The deity of Christ- fully God, fully man>>

Your #21
<<You see there is no bodiless spirit men in heaven unclothed(no body) but indeed with a heavenly body(like Jesus) has now in heaven which is flesh and bones like He said His Resurrected body was to His Disciples.>>

WHY NOT just say <<body(like Jesus) has now in heaven which is flesh>>? Why do you keep on qualifying, <<flesh and bones like He said His Resurrected body was to His Disciples>>?

(By the way, Jesus did not say to his disciples <<His Resurrected body is flesh and bones>>. As little as Thomas, if he reached and stuck his fingers or his hands into any ‘marks’ would have touched or reached actual blood-tissue, would he have touched or reached actual bone-structure. Thomas’ persuasion rested upon what he nor anyone else could physically have seen.

Where the JW’s go to the ‘spirit’ extreme, you go to the literal linguistic extreme of LITERALLY flesh-meat-and-bone TO THE EXCLUSION OF physical BLOOD, making the life of the physical Resurrected Jesus as much ‘spirit’ as the life of the Jehovah’s non-physical resurrected Jesus is just ‘Spirit’ (an in your words, <oxymoron>).

If Jesus died because he bled his blood out, He was not <fully God>; if Jesus rose with no blood only bones and other 'dry' tissue, He was not <fully Man>.

Obviously you do not no the difference between a glorified body and one that is not. perishable puts on imperishable, mortal immortality, corruptible incorruptible.

If Jesus meant flesh and blood He would of said so but instead He said His Resurrected body is flesh and bones. Luke 24:39

You should believe Jesus instead of your bloody human doctrine.

hope this helps !!!

 

[Heyzeus]

He is the creator of the WORLDS, and the one Satan was offering was of no value to him, because it was devoid of breath.

Why would Satan ask God to bow down before him.. Do you think Satan is an idiot ?

 

[ChristisGod]

He is the creator of the WORLDS, and the one Satan was offering was of no value to him, because it was devoid of breath.

Indeed satan knows the Son is the Creator of all things as he once worshipped Him before he fell from heaven with 1/3 of the angles. The Demons knew for sure and said what do we have to do with you "Son of God" ?

Matthew 8:28-29
And He having come to the other side, to the country of the Gadarenes, two men being demon-possessed met Him, coming out of the tombs. They were very violent, so that no one was strong-enough to pass through that way. 29 And behold— they cried-out, saying, “What do we have to do with You, Son of God? Did You come here to torment us before the time?”

Gill says below:

"he was also "the Son of God", a divine person, possessed of almighty power, and so an overmatch for them; at whose presence they trembled, and whose all commanding voice they were obliged to obey, though sorely against their wills."

 

[Heyzeus]

Indeed satan knows the Son is the Creator of all things as he once worshipped Him before he fell from heaven with 1/3 of the angles. The Demons knew for sure and said what do we have to do with you "Son of God" ?

."

Nowhere in the text is it intimated that Satan knew the Son of God was creator of all things .. you are making things up.

But anyway - if what you say is true .. Why did Satan ask God to bow down to him.

Matthew 8:28-29
And He having come to the other side, to the country of the Gadarenes, two men being demon-possessed met Him, coming out of the tombs. They were very violent, so that no one was strong-enough to pass through that way. 29 And behold— they cried-out, saying, “What do we have to do with You, Son of God? Did You come here to torment us before the time?”

Gill says below:

"he was also "the Son of God", a divine person, possessed of almighty power, and so an overmatch for them; at whose presence they trembled, and whose all commanding voice they were obliged to obey, though sorely against their wills

Not sure why you posted this.. we all know that Jesus was depicted as "The Son of God" .. This has nothing to do with - nor does it support the claim that Jesus was God.

You keep avoiding the obvious question. Why would Satan ask God to bow down to him ?

 

[CharismaticLady]

Here is the thing .. when you get into the gory details - these small differences in doctrine do not matter .. but remember they were once much more fluid ... and the folks that put the finishing touches on were goblins .. the people that Jesus hated .. and said so in no uncertain terms.. the the wolves in sheeps clothing he referred to in Matt 7 .. if you want my opinion

but what resulted from this - when these folks got power .. have you read the history .. start to finish ... like the bible ... I have .. or pret neer.. not pretty .. The Church did some horrible things in the name of this .. "dogma" and that is all it is .. just like with sola fide .. which the majority of the church does not believe .. yet one segment stakes their whole future on it ..

God is one .. what ever form that you want this to take in your life . is not going to change because Jesus was 30% divine or 100% divine ..

I focus on how Jesus tells us to live our lives .. and by Jesus .. I mean the real one .. which is not easy to tease out in some ways .. but very easy in others.

Rule that sums up the Law and the Prophets is where one should begin - Matt 7:12 .. then after telling you what you should do ... talks about them wolves .. the ones that don't follow this rule .. those full of hate and war .. power hungry nespotic ..were thouse that brought us the Trinity..

I ask myself one question .. What would Jesus say - and you will have a different answer than me and the next a differnt one

My answer starts with how to make the world a better place .. and follow the Golden Rule in all is splendor .. Something Christianity is still failing to do in many respects .. not near enough emphasis .. .. in particular the fundamentalists .. which is unfortunate because they are good people .. but Jesus was not into forcing religious belief others through physical violence ... and political activism in that direction (Law)

Jesus was not an Islamist - didn't believe in mixing Church and State - Give unto Ceasar .. and follow the Golden rule .. which is the basis for the Social Contract and thus our Constitution .. founding principles .. and so on.

Jesus was a Secularist - Full Stop ...

Don't favor Biden this election .. for a number of Reasons .. but in a debate with Paul Ryan ? .. in one of the Obama elections - hit the nail on the head - debating abortion. Said "As a Catholic I am against it .. but I don't believe in forcing my personal religious beliefs on others - through Law.

Ding Ding Ding .. thats what the rule is about ... making that distinction .. When you make a law you are threatening physical violence if that person does what ever it is you dont want them to do .. and "God says so" is not a legitimate Justification

This is the Wisdom of Jesus .. as per Thomas Jefferson and Crew ..

There are some things I agree with, such as sola fide which is a distortion of the full message of justification by faith. But I do believe in the Trinity as in

1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.

You seem to believe that Jesus is the Father, and I don't fault you for that. After all, Isaiah 9:6 shows that the child is all three.

For unto us a Child is born,
Unto us a Son is given;
And the government will be upon His shoulder.
And His name will be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

 

[ChristisGod]

I already told you since you REFUSED the one direct yes or no question I asked of you that I will no longer be answering your questions. I don't feed hypocrites pearls that have no interest in honest dialogue.

 

[Heyzeus]

There are some things I agree with, such as sola fide which is a distortion of the full message of justification by faith. But I do believe in the Trinity as in

1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.

You seem to believe that Jesus is the Father, and I don't fault you for that. After all, Isaiah 9:6 shows that the child is all three.

For unto us a Child is born,
Unto us a Son is given;
And the government will be upon His shoulder.
And His name will be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

I think something was lost in the translation here ... I have been arguing against the claim that Jesus was "The Father" Do you not believe that Jesus was "The Father" - as is held by Trinity Doctrine.

There is a Father. There is a son who is subordinate to the Father .. the two are of one mind as per the Holy spirit.

 

[MattMooradian]

13 And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of Man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle.
14 His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire;
15 And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters.
16 And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength.

Excuse me, but this does not sound like a flesh and bone body. I have never seen a human body with those characteristics, and I doubt anyone else has seen such a human. The body of Christ in Heaven is as quoted in this passage - not flesh and bone, but a spiritual body with characteristics like "flaming eyes", feet more resembling a glowing metal, a voice as loud as a waterfall, a tongue that could cut through objects, and a face that glows brightly. Jesus put on a human body temporarily, for a purpose - to be a sacrifice for our sins. He is no longer flesh and blood or bone. Don't get me wrong; Jesus does have a body in Heaven, and that body does have characteristics similar to a human body, but not equivalent to a human body.

 

[ChristisGod]

zues still doesn't understand the trinity . why say you do when in reality you do not and distort it ? more oneness heresy.......

 

[FollowHim]

No clue where you get that from Mate .. noting in what I have said denotes this. To the contrary - I assumed the reverse of what you are claiming.

If God is standing before Satan as is claimed by you- and yes Satan can see God .. "not invisible" - why would Satan ask God to bow before him .. offering God "The world" ... knowing full well that it was God that created the world.

You are not using your noggin.

This is an interesting point about who or what Jesus was.
My sense is Jesus is Gods essence, His love and approach to everything, His outworking in all His actions, the message of who He is. So He is God but not the Father but part of the Father, but not all.

There is a conceptual problem which I had not seen before. If something is eternal, has no beginning and no end, what is it? It by its nature is God or part of Him. Can we differentiate between the whole, which in our terms maybe infinite and the many expression of who He is?
Now the eternal will always be superior to the created. So I cannot define Gods expressions or His choices to deliniate between Father, Son and Holy Spirit. What makes me me or you you, so we have separate consciousnesses etc. yet we cannot define what is our seat or essence.

Now Jesus was an expression of God, stripped out, limited, constrained in human form, to show He is able to live perfection here, so can we. Satan's argument is this is a lie, impossible, just Gods self indulgence, optimistic euphoria, where actually selfish ambition, domination and power work better. The discussion about Job highlight this. God sees an example of what His heart desires in Job, and Satan looks for failures in the argument.

So Satans temptation of Jesus is the same. Limited, you will fail, and I and my argument will dominate. You can have all this power etc. if you honour me. Now in the moment this makes sense, immediate relief from trial and cost, but in the eternal it is absurd, because Satan is doomed and love is victorious. But Satan did not believe this to be possible or true, so he had to make his offer. And for God to win the argument, He had to put Himself in this place to show His essence, the very heart of who He is would win through.

In a sense Jesus had to be the essence but not the Father and all that the Father entails as the creator, with foreknowledge and eternal omnipresence, because then the argument would be you only rejected this because you knew otherwise. Emotional subjective reality is something despised, Esaus selling his birth right for a bowl of porridge is an example, or cowardice in the face of death, or sexually betraying the commitments in marriage etc.

People say we project onto other things our behaviours, except we are made in the image of God, so He has given us His attitudes and value systems, because they work, but we compromise and want the easy road, before we are able to handle it.
God bless you

 

[Waiting on him]

Why would Satan ask God to bow down before him.. Do you think Satan is an idiot ?

Yes.

 

[CharismaticLady]

I think something was lost in the translation here ... I have been arguing against the claim that Jesus was "The Father" Do you not believe that Jesus was "The Father" - as is held by Trinity Doctrine.

There is a Father. There is a son who is subordinate to the Father .. the two are of one mind as per the Holy spirit.

Sorry, I must have misread something.

 

[ChristisGod]

This is an interesting point about who or what Jesus was.
My sense is Jesus is Gods essence, His love and approach to everything, His outworking in all His actions, the message of who He is. So He is God but not the Father but part of the Father, but not all.

There is a conceptual problem which I had not seen before. If something is eternal, has no beginning and no end, what is it? It by its nature is God or part of Him. Can we differentiate between the whole, which in our terms maybe infinite and the many expression of who He is?
Now the eternal will always be superior to the created. So I cannot define Gods expressions or His choices to deliniate between Father, Son and Holy Spirit. What makes me me or you you, so we have separate consciousnesses etc. yet we cannot define what is our seat or essence.

Now Jesus was an expression of God, stripped out, limited, constrained in human form, to show He is able to live perfection here, so can we. Satan's argument is this is a lie, impossible, just Gods self indulgence, optimistic euphoria, where actually selfish ambition, domination and power work better. The discussion about Job highlight this. God sees an example of what His heart desires in Job, and Satan looks for failures in the argument.

So Satans temptation of Jesus is the same. Limited, you will fail, and I and my argument will dominate. You can have all this power etc. if you honour me. Now in the moment this makes sense, immediate relief from trial and cost, but in the eternal it is absurd, because Satan is doomed and love is victorious. But Satan did not believe this to be possible or true, so he had to make his offer. And for God to win the argument, He had to put Himself in this place to show His essence, the very heart of who He is would win through.

In a sense Jesus had to be the essence but not the Father and all that the Father entails as the creator, with foreknowledge and eternal omnipresence, because then the argument would be you only rejected this because you knew otherwise. Emotional subjective reality is something despised, Esaus selling his birth right for a bowl of porridge is an example, or cowardice in the face of death, or sexually betraying the commitments in marriage etc.

People say we project onto other things our behaviours, except we are made in the image of God, so He has given us His attitudes and value systems, because they work, but we compromise and want the easy road, before we are able to handle it.
God bless you

interesting perspective thanks for sharing even though we might disagree on the particulars !

 

[ChristisGod]

Yes.

indeed when He tries to reason with God lol .

 

[Waiting on him]

indeed when He tries to reason with God lol .

Most believe that they were spilled from the womb receiving the breath of God, born in His image, this is not the case for me.

 

[Waiting on him]

Out there in that wilderness, Jesus overcame the world.

 

[FollowHim]

interesting perspective thanks for sharing even though we might disagree on the particulars !

This may sound odd, but I often disagree with myself. I explore different aspects and express them, while understanding they fail to capture everything and are always limited. It is human for us to want to get it right, except I get the feeling in Christ there is not a "right" but a light on the infinite in the finite which works in the moment.

My kids often say I change what I mean, except when have I finished what I mean, before the judgement is made. Some languages deal with this problem by leaving everything to the end of the sentence to work out its actual meaning. I often feel like this in Jesus, we see another step, but never the whole, it is in the walking it becomes clearer. God bless you

 

[Waiting on him]

Strangers approach me often and remark “my god you look just like your daddy”,,, I’ve Bourne the image of the earthly.

 

[Heyzeus]

This is an interesting point about who or what Jesus was.
My sense is Jesus is Gods essence, His love and approach to everything, His outworking in all His actions, the message of who He is. So He is God but not the Father but part of the Father, but not all.

There is a conceptual problem which I had not seen before. If something is eternal, has no beginning and no end, what is it? It by its nature is God or part of Him. Can we differentiate between the whole, which in our terms maybe infinite and the many expression of who He is?
Now the eternal will always be superior to the created. So I cannot define Gods expressions or His choices to deliniate between Father, Son and Holy Spirit. What makes me me or you you, so we have separate consciousnesses etc. yet we cannot define what is our seat or essence.

Now Jesus was an expression of God, stripped out, limited, constrained in human form, to show He is able to live perfection here, so can we. Satan's argument is this is a lie, impossible, just Gods self indulgence, optimistic euphoria, where actually selfish ambition, domination and power work better. The discussion about Job highlight this. God sees an example of what His heart desires in Job, and Satan looks for failures in the argument.

So Satans temptation of Jesus is the same. Limited, you will fail, and I and my argument will dominate. You can have all this power etc. if you honour me. Now in the moment this makes sense, immediate relief from trial and cost, but in the eternal it is absurd, because Satan is doomed and love is victorious. But Satan did not believe this to be possible or true, so he had to make his offer. And for God to win the argument, He had to put Himself in this place to show His essence, the very heart of who He is would win through.

In a sense Jesus had to be the essence but not the Father and all that the Father entails as the creator, with foreknowledge and eternal omnipresence, because then the argument would be you only rejected this because you knew otherwise. Emotional subjective reality is something despised, Esaus selling his birth right for a bowl of porridge is an example, or cowardice in the face of death, or sexually betraying the commitments in marriage etc.

People say we project onto other things our behaviours, except we are made in the image of God, so He has given us His attitudes and value systems, because they work, but we compromise and want the easy road, before we are able to handle it.
God bless you

Nice response .. not that I agree with all of it but it was well thought out and coherent.

Your first point "My sense is Jesus is Gods essence," My sense is that God's essense was within Jesus.

The big problem with the Trinity is that it claims 1) Jesus was God's essense - better termed as "of the same substance" Homoousious 2) but at the same time not the same substance ... 3 distinct hypostasis.

When we get into calling each of these different hypostasis "persons" ... .personification of the essense of God .. or anthropomorphism - which was common to the OT.

So what we have is a Godhead with 3 different emanations ... 3 separate entities from the same Godhead. Note how similar this is to the Gnostic beliefs .. hence the fight between the two ... but this should not be confused with Gnostism nor can one claim that these are not related and similar ideas Both of which have their roots in the religious/philosophical dogma of the day .. which was the Logos concept .. in particular that of Philo.

Philo wrote that God created and governed the world through mediators. Logos is the chief among them, the next to God, demiurge of the world. Logos is immaterial, an adequate image of God, his shadow, his firstborn son.[33] Being the mind of the Eternal, Logos is imperishable.[34] He is neither uncreated as God is, nor created as men are, but occupies a middle position. He has no autonomous power, only an entrusted one

So when John used this terminology to described the divinity of Jesus - everyone of that time period knew what he was talking about .. unlike today.

This is not to say that Johns use of the term Logos was exactly the same as Philo ... it certainly wasn't .. and there were numerous variations of the Logos concept other than Philo's - all however having various similarities .. None however stating that the Logos was "The Father" in the way of the modern Trinity Doctrine. This is simply not something the early Church believed.

Of course in religious imagery - particularly w/r to the Logos concept .. you are going to get statements like "The father is in me" .. this in no way meant that Jesus was "The Father " and no one in the early Church took it to mean this.

The influence of helenistic religious/pholosophic tradition on the early Church fathers .. Clement, Ignatius right through Origen .. is well established ... and we should expect no different.

The Jesus of Mark/Matt is clearly not "God - The Father" it would be ridiculous for the author to put things like " My God, My God, Why have you forsaken me" .. "take this cup from my hand" .. and the gazillion other times Jesus refers to "the Father" as other than himself .. saying in Matt that the Father knows things that I do not.

Matt famously uses all of Mark as source material (and he had another source(s) of unknown origin) - perhaps some or all of it from the disciple Matt. This author uses all of Mark "except" a small number of passages that are derogatory to Jesus and/or the disciples. - and you can read this in the Catholic Encyclopedia ..

Now I think the term "Pious Fraud" is a little strong .. certainly we have the "sin of omission" - but lets us settle on "artistic license" ... so if this fellow thought Jesus was God .. why on earth would he leave in all the passages from Mark - and include others that were not in Mark - which clearly indicate that Jesus was subordinate to the Father ?

The answer that none of the disciples - none of the early Church Fathers - nor the people of the day believed that Jesus and God were one in the same .. In fact .. none of the early Church Fathers have heard of this concept -unto around 200 AD Tertullian .. which is not really the modern Trinity but something at least resembling it... It is not until 125 years later that the Church takes this doctrine seriously .. due to an edict from a Pagan Emperor named Constantine.

And BTW .. the dogma we have today was still not complete at nicene .. although it was decreed that Jesus was the substance as God.

To the people of that the time there were two kinds of substances .. 1) what God was made of 2) what humans, trees, the sun and everything else is made of .. so by saying Jesus was "Of the same Substance" as God .. was saying that Jesus was God... Then we had the crazy addition that he is God .. but not God of the same substance .. but 3 different substances Hypostasis.

It is a doctrine that is self contradictory and folks have been trying to apologize their way out of this since inception .. all attempts failing badly.

That said .. what difference does it make whether we say Jesus was "God" or The Logos - emissary between God and Man.. Jesus is still divine .. his words are still "Gods Word" - manifested through the Holy Spirit.

On the Journey through the Pearly Gates .. will it matter whether Jesus/Father/Holy Spirit sitting on 1 chair vs 3 .. or will it matter whether or not you paid attention to Gods word ?

 

[ChristisGod]

A lesson on Church history and God the Word. The Word was and is God as John 1:1 clearly states.




Ignatius, Epistle to the Magnesians, disciple of John the apostle. [30-107 AD]

He, being begotten by the Father before the beginning of time, was God the Word, the only-begotten Son, and remains the same for ever; for “of His kingdom there shall be no end,” says Daniel the prophet. …

Ignatius, Epistle to the Trallians
And God the Word was truly born of the Virgin, having clothed Himself with a body of like passions with our own. He who forms all men in the womb, was Himself really in the womb, and made for Himself a body of the seed of the Virgin, but without any intercourse of man. Since, also, there is but one unbegotten Being, God, even the Father; and one only-begotten Son, God, the Word and man; . . .

Ignatius, Epistle to the Philadelphians
If any one confesses these things, and that God the Word did dwell in a human body, being within it as the Word, . . .

Ignatius, Epistle to the Smyrneans
our Lord Jesus Christ, that He was the Son of God, “the firstborn of every creature,” God the Word, the only-begotten Son, and was of the seed of David according to the flesh, . . .

Ignatius, Epistle to the Tarsians
He who was born of a woman was the Son of God, and He that was crucified was “the first-born of every creature,” and God the Word, who also created all things.

How could such a one be a mere man, receiving the beginning of His existence from Mary, and not 210 rather God the Word, and the only-begotten Son? For “in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”

Ignatius, Epistle to the Philippians
And again, “Hath not one God created us? Have we not all one Father? And there is also one Son, God the Word. For “the only-begotten Son,” saith [the Scripture], “who is in the bosom of the Father.” …

... For “the Word became flesh.” For “Wisdom builded for herself a house.” And God the Word was born as man, with a body, of the Virgin, without any intercourse of man.

Justin - Dialogue with Trypho - [110-165 AD]
God begat before all creatures a Beginning, [who was] a certain rational power [proceeding] from Himself, who is called by the Holy Spirit, now the Glory of the Lord, now the Son, again Wisdom, again an Angel, then God, and then Lord and Logos;

“And that Christ being Lord, and God the Son of God, and appearing formerly in power as Man, and Angel, and in the glory of fire as at the bush, . . .

Irenaeus - Against Heresies Book 1 [120-202 AD] - Disciple of Polycarp, a disciple of John
Very properly, then, did he say, “In the beginning was the Word,” for He was in the Son; “and the Word was with God,” for He was the beginning; “and the Word was God, ” of course, for that which is begotten of God is God. “The same was in the beginning with God” …

Irenaeus - Against Heresies - Book 2 [120-202 AD] - Disciple of Polycarp, a disciple of John
Him who is God over all, since He is all Nous, and all Logos, … and has in Himself nothing more ancient or late than another, and nothing at variance with another, but continues altogether equal, and similar, and homogeneous, … And in what respect will the Word of God — yea, rather God Himself, since He is the Word . . .

Chap 17 Father of all is not to be regarded as a kind of compound Being, who 762 can be separated from his Nous (mind), as I have already shown; . . .he is Logos, must be perfect and impassible,… they are of the same substance with himself, should be perfect and impassible, …

Irenaeus - Against Heresies - Book 3 [120-202 AD] - Disciple of Polycarp, a disciple of John
For inasmuch as the Word of God was man from the root of Jesse, and son of Abraham, in this respect did the Spirit of God rest upon Him, and anoint Him to preach the Gospel to the lowly. But inasmuch as He was God, He did not judge according to glory, nor reprove after the manner of speech.

Irenaeus - Against Heresies - Book 4 [120-202 AD] - Disciple of Polycarp, a disciple of John
And through the Word Himself who had been made visible and palpable, was the Father shown forth, … all saw the Father in the Son: for the Father is the invisible of the Son, but the Son the visible of the Father. And for this reason all spake with Christ when He was present [upon earth], and they named Him God.

He, therefore, who was known, was not a different being from Him who declared “No man knoweth the Father,” but one and the same, the Father making all things subject to Him; while He received testimony from all that He was very man, and that He was very God, from the Father, from the Spirit, . . .

For the true God did confess the commandment of the law as the word of God, and called no one else God besides His own Father.

Theophilus To Autolycus - Book 2 - [115 -181 AD]
In like manner also the three days which were before the luminaries, are types of the Trinity, of God, and His Word, and His wisdom.

Hear what I say. The God and Father, indeed, of all cannot be contained, and is not
found in a place, for there is no place of His rest; but His Word, through whom He made all things, being His power and His wisdom, assuming the person of the Father and Lord of all, went to the garden in the person of God, and conversed with Adam.

The Word, then, being God, and being naturally produced from God, whenever the Father of the universe wills, He sends Him to any place; and He, coming, is both heard and seen, being sent by Him, and is found in a place.

Clement of Alexandria - Exhortation To The Heathen - [153 - 217 AD]
Well, inasmuch as the Word was from the first, He was and is the divine source of all things; but inasmuch as He has now assumed the name Christ, consecrated of old, and worthy of power. . .. This Word, then, the Christ, the cause of both our being at first (for He was in God) and of our well-being, this very Word has now appeared as man, He alone being both, God and man.

He, who is in Him that truly is, has appeared; for the Word, who “was with God,” and by whom all things were created, has appeared as our Teacher. The Word, who in the beginning bestowed on us life as Creator when He formed us, taught us to live well when He appeared as our Teacher; that as God He might afterwards conduct us to the life which never ends.

If it is thy wish, be thou also initiated; and thou shalt join the choir along with angels around the unbegotten and indestructible and the only true God, the Word of God, raising the hymn with us. This Jesus, who is eternal, the one great High Priest of the one God, and of His Father, prays for and exhorts men.

Clement of Alexandria - The Instructor
God in the form of man, stainless, the minister of His Father’s will, the Word who is God, who is in the Father, who is at the Father’s right hand, and with the form of God is God.

Address Of Tatian To The Greeks – [110-172 AD]
God was in the beginning; but the beginning, we have been taught, is the power of the Logos. . . .And by His simple will the Logos springs forth; and the Logos, not coming forth in vain, becomes the first-begotten work of the Father. Him (the Logos) we know to be the beginning of the world. But He came into being by participation, not by abscission;

Chapter XXI.-Doctrines of the Christians and Greeks Respecting God Compared.

We do not act as fools, O Greeks, nor utter idle tales, when we announce that God was born in the form of a man.

A Plea For The Christians By Athenagoras The Athenian: [c.120- 180]

. . . But the Son of God is the Logos of the Father, in idea and in operation; for after the pattern of Him and by Him were all things made, the Father and the Son being one. . . .Who, then, would not be astonished to hear men who speak of God the Father, and of God the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, and who declare both their power in union and their distinction in order, called atheists?

…that they know God and His Logos, what is the oneness of the Son with the Father, what the communion of the Father with the Son, what is the Spirit, what is the unity of these three, the Spirit, the Son, the Father, and their distinction in unity; and who know 255 that the life for which we look is far better than can be described in words,

The Epistle Of Mathetes To Diognetus [c. 130 AD]
…but truly God Himself, who is almighty, the Creator of all things, and invisible, has sent from heaven, and placed among men, [Him who is] the truth, and the holy and incomprehensible Word, and has firmly established Him in their hearts … but the very Creator and Fashioner of all things-by whom He made the heavens-by whom he enclosed the sea within its proper bounds-. . .by whom all things have been arranged, and placed within their proper limits, . . .This [messenger] He sent to them. Was it then, as one might conceive, for the purpose of exercising tyranny, or of inspiring fear and terror? By no means, but under the influence of clemency and meekness. As a king sends his son, who is also a king, so sent He Him; as God He sent Him; as to men He sent Him; as a Saviour He sent Him, and as seeking to persuade, not to compel us; for violence has no place in the character of God....

hope this helps !!!