The Nature of Christ: Monophysitism vs. Chalcedonianism - Christian
Do you like this debate?
No Yes +0
The Voting Period Ends In
days19 hours45 minutes15 seconds
Open Point System:
3 months ago
Debate Rounds (5)
After private research, I have come to the conclusion that Christ is of one nature: homoiousian with the Father and homoiousian with man. This is normally considered Monophysite, and that's propbably an accurate title for my belief, even though it's not exactly the same as Eutychianism and not even close to Miasphytism. To me, both Nestorianism and Chalcedonianism both suggest a disconnect between the humanity and godliness of Christ.
christ is from supernature, fantasy.. for it to rise from the grave
I don't think you understand the focus of this debate. It's Monophysitism vs. Chalcedonianism.
its the same, but supernature is a construct, not nature.. nature is not of the mind or from the mind
I'm here to argue for Monophysitism and against Chalcedonianism (or Nestorianism.) If you don't argue about the topic, I'll close this debate.
im saying they are equally the same level of non sense, no difference
Then this is the wrong debate. Look for a debate suited for what you're arguing.
i am a higher level position, knowledge.. if i am not con you are no longer religious
You're so stupid. Do you not understand that I choose the topic of debate?
so you are con on this stuff to great
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.