Two Natures

[benstenson]

I don't think the royals would see themselves only in a role -- think of the divine rights of kings. At least in the context I'm speaking of, they don't believe themselves to be merely filling a role. Nobility is born, not assumed.

Divine rights and birth rights seem like two different things to me. But maybe we already agree about whether Jesus was omnipotent, mortal, omniscient, while on earth?

ps - are you American?

[Candlepower]

...they don't believe themselves to be merely filling a role. Nobility is born, not assumed.

I'm assuming you are stating what you think nobility think of themselves, not what they actually are. If so, I agree with you. You would agree, I bet, that princes and paupers are sinners and that our righteousness is filthy rags to God. Unfortunately for the rest of us, nobility usually assumes they were born noble.

Candlepower

[darinhouston]

...they don't believe themselves to be merely filling a role. Nobility is born, not assumed.

I'm assuming you are stating what you think nobility think of themselves, not what they actually are. If so, I agree with you. You would agree, I bet, that princes and paupers are sinners and that our righteousness is filthy rags to God. Unfortunately for the rest of us, nobility usually assumes they were born noble.

Candlepower

amen

[darinhouston]

I don't think the royals would see themselves only in a role -- think of the divine rights of kings. At least in the context I'm speaking of, they don't believe themselves to be merely filling a role. Nobility is born, not assumed.

Divine rights and birth rights seem like two different things to me. But maybe we already agree about whether Jesus was omnipotent, mortal, omniscient, while on earth?

ps - are you American?

Yes, I'm American. I'm not sure we agree as to Jesus' omnis because I'm not sure of your position, though I do think we agree as to his mortality. I do not believe Jesus was omni anything while on earth. I believe His power on earth came directly from and through the Holy Spirit working through Him, and His knowledge was from the Father (as made known through the Spirit).

[benstenson]

Darin, I believe Jesus became a man plain and simple. I normally don't use the word "Christology" much because it makes him sound like a field of science rather than a man. I believe he has great power now as he had before his incarnation, but I was basically arguing against the idea of him having a divine nature while he was a mortal man. I was suggesting that he remained divine simply by identity (who) rather than his nature/attributes (what). I think this could resolve the whole conflict over whether he was God or not, but it would require a little change in doctrine for most groups, except maybe Mormons(?).

[Paidion]

Ben, you are the first person I have ever read who sees this matter as I do. I believe that when Jesus came to earth through birth, He divested Himself of all His divine attributes, and became totally a human being (Philippians 2:5-8). Is that not why He called Himself "the son of man" so frequently? It is recorded in the gospels that He did so 84 times! Just once in Luke did He refer to Himself as the Son of God, and that only in answer to being asked whether He was, by the council of elders (Luke 22:70). The apostle John records 3 times in his gospel that Jesus referred to Himself as the Son of God (John 5:25, 10:36, 11:4). There is no doubt that Jesus was the only-begotten Son of God, but He emphasized His humanity while here on earth.

He was a complete human being while on earth. He got hungry and thirsty like any other man. He was tempted in every way just as we are, but without sinning. It was possible for Him to have sinned, but He chose not to do so. He could do no miracles of Himself. The Father did these miracles through Him. As a one-year old baby, He was similar to all other human babies. He did not stand up and give great orations as the gnostics would have it. No doubt as an infant he wet His diapers (or the equivalent) just like any other infant. No doubt as an infant, He sometimes cried (in spite of the Xmas song "Away in a Manger"). As you say, Ben, the only aspect of Deity which He retained was His identity! What a wonder! What a demonstration! ...that a complete human being, the second Adam, showed us the way, exemplified the possibility of trusting God fully, and serving Him completely...in righteousness!

[benstenson]

Paidion ..Sir it is very exciting to hear that you think the same. I have had many of the same thoughts as those which you brought up. Your post was very encouraging, thank you.