Dual Natures
-
darinhouston
- Posts: 3114
- Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am
Dual Natures
Curious what thoughts those might have on the so-called dual nature of Christ - those who hold to this, do you see the dual nature of Christ as having two persons within Christ in the same way Christ is one of the three persons of the Trinity? If not, why not?
-
dizerner
Re: Dual Natures
There has been a whole spectrum of views in church history and it is interesting to see people wrestle with ideas.
Rather than just latch on dogmatically to something that can make us feel secure and "more right" than our fellow Christians, I would encourage a diversity of thought bathed in constant prayer.
From Nestorianism (2 persons) to Eutychianism (one mixed nature) the terms and names can seem confusing to the uninitiated, but I have found it fairly helpful in doctrinal matters to try to boil things down to essential ideas. Historically the church has been eager to condemn and ostracize each other, rather than build and edify each other in a loving discussion.
Classic orthodoxy (if we can say there is such a thing) has settled on, "2 natures in 1 person," but I have some problems with their view labeled as "the Hypostatic Union." The problem I have is they centralize the person in the divine nature, and thus they are left with kind of a "personless" human nature, to avoid a lot of logical problems of God dying or being limited.
The Biblical account to me describes a kind of transference from a pre-existing state into humanity, and as such this does not describe an "addition" to the divine nature by "association" as orthodoxy will commonly describe it, to "protect" God from becoming things that create logical problems. Rather than a human nature tacked on to a divine nature with a divine person, I see the Bible describing a divine person becoming a human person on this earth. This is called Functional Kenosis or Semi-Kenosis as opposed to Full Kenosis where Jesus no longer possesses anything divine at all, and it is what I personally subscribe to, but many have called me a heretic for it. I also disagree with the orthodox position that Christ has 2 wills, one in each of his natures, as there is 1 will per person by definition.
As such this would encompass a divine person becoming a human person, while still retaining a recessive divinity as it were, a veiled divine nature, temporarily turned off for his human life.
Rather than just latch on dogmatically to something that can make us feel secure and "more right" than our fellow Christians, I would encourage a diversity of thought bathed in constant prayer.
From Nestorianism (2 persons) to Eutychianism (one mixed nature) the terms and names can seem confusing to the uninitiated, but I have found it fairly helpful in doctrinal matters to try to boil things down to essential ideas. Historically the church has been eager to condemn and ostracize each other, rather than build and edify each other in a loving discussion.
Classic orthodoxy (if we can say there is such a thing) has settled on, "2 natures in 1 person," but I have some problems with their view labeled as "the Hypostatic Union." The problem I have is they centralize the person in the divine nature, and thus they are left with kind of a "personless" human nature, to avoid a lot of logical problems of God dying or being limited.
The Biblical account to me describes a kind of transference from a pre-existing state into humanity, and as such this does not describe an "addition" to the divine nature by "association" as orthodoxy will commonly describe it, to "protect" God from becoming things that create logical problems. Rather than a human nature tacked on to a divine nature with a divine person, I see the Bible describing a divine person becoming a human person on this earth. This is called Functional Kenosis or Semi-Kenosis as opposed to Full Kenosis where Jesus no longer possesses anything divine at all, and it is what I personally subscribe to, but many have called me a heretic for it. I also disagree with the orthodox position that Christ has 2 wills, one in each of his natures, as there is 1 will per person by definition.
As such this would encompass a divine person becoming a human person, while still retaining a recessive divinity as it were, a veiled divine nature, temporarily turned off for his human life.
Re: Dual Natures
Obviously, from my previous posts, I agree with Dizerner in this matter.
My thoughts on this issue are grounded in, and emerge from, Divine Simplicity (God says all that needs to be said about Himself when He says “I AM”). All else that is said about Him : that He is omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, etc., etc. etc., is for us, not for Him. Certainly He is all this and more, but that He is “I AM”...alone...says Who He IS.
For His creative purpose “I AM” (in His SIMPLICITY) fully and perfectly “self-identified” as a created “i am.” God is not only “high and lifted up” above us, He is low and under us lifting us up to where He is. The JOY (John17:13) of the Lord is our STRENGTH. God, Himself, is creating us by (through) His Presence. It is only the trinitarian model that proclaims this : YHWH is height and depth, He is Alpha and Omega!
The Nature of Christ is this : “I AM” made Himself a (true) “i am” and lived among us.
My thoughts on this issue are grounded in, and emerge from, Divine Simplicity (God says all that needs to be said about Himself when He says “I AM”). All else that is said about Him : that He is omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, etc., etc. etc., is for us, not for Him. Certainly He is all this and more, but that He is “I AM”...alone...says Who He IS.
For His creative purpose “I AM” (in His SIMPLICITY) fully and perfectly “self-identified” as a created “i am.” God is not only “high and lifted up” above us, He is low and under us lifting us up to where He is. The JOY (John17:13) of the Lord is our STRENGTH. God, Himself, is creating us by (through) His Presence. It is only the trinitarian model that proclaims this : YHWH is height and depth, He is Alpha and Omega!
The Nature of Christ is this : “I AM” made Himself a (true) “i am” and lived among us.
-
darinhouston
- Posts: 3114
- Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:45 am
Re: Dual Natures
Otherness>>>The Nature of Christ is this : “I AM” made Himself a (true) “i am” and lived among us.<<<
Darinhouston>>>I don't really understand what that means and I'm not sure how it bears on the "dual nature" discussion, but where exactly does God call himself simply "I am"?<<<
Hi Darin,
In an earlier post I asked you to say a few words about your understanding of the ontology of God. This exchange here gives us an opportunity to actually address this subject.
To start off, God's answer to Moses' question (in Exodus 3) was the “simple” declaration that HE is (that) I AM Who IS! This Voice speaking to Moses is nothing of the created realm (that is all) of Moses' reality, rather this is the very voice of REALITY. This is truly the only reality that is truly REAL in and of Itself (HIMSELF). REALITY is a PERSONAL BEING, and nothing else that exists “need” exist. There is YHWH , and nothing, nothing, nothing “other” (need) exist(s).
This is where thought must start (and must remain faithful to) if REALITY (and created reality) are to be truly understood. This answers(?) your question of “where exactly does God call himself simply 'I am.'” I'm happy to labor with you further on this if you wish.
In the meantime, because I do have an understanding of “what that means,” I made the statement : “The Nature of Christ is this : “I AM” made Himself a (true) “i am” and lived among us.”
We so easily get detoured by our natural cognitive intuitions (presuppositions), too easily defaulting to them even though our beginning premise may be solid. Kant pointed this out in his analysis of the “categories of the mind” in his seminal Critique of Pure Reason, (unintentionally?) leading to the setting of the (Western) mind on the long, ironically vain, road of scientific naturalism and humanism.
Okay, quickly returning to the statement itself : the Nature of “I AM”... is...that HE IS!...and HE IS WHO (What) HE SAYS HE IS (/ desires TO BE). There is no Creation (before creation) that has anything to say about this at all. Here is this PERSONAL BEING, this “I,” and absolutely nothing else, nothing OTHER [even no necessary attributes that He needs to “claim” in order to BE (Who and What He IS]. This is GOD, ALONE. His “attributes” become important (to us) as creation goes forward.
This is the ontology of God : it is just simply HIM (there is not even any such reality as “other”).
Integral to His creative agenda, because of that ONE PURPOSE He seeks in all His creative labor, He planned (needed) to (PERSONALLY) partake of the very nature of Creation. HE, Himself, is the Alpha guaranteeing (predestining) the Omega : the Body of Christ. He knew that these “amazing and glorious created beings that HE had in mind” would need, in their very (spiritually fragile) nature, His Personal Presence to carry them safely to His intended end.
So...in the fullness of time I AM, in all the simple nakedness of being just (an) I AM became flesh (a true “created i am,” – just one of us). I AM “let” (the same “let” of Genesis 1) Himself be a human being – and it was so!
The Word became flesh.
Darinhouston>>>I don't really understand what that means and I'm not sure how it bears on the "dual nature" discussion, but where exactly does God call himself simply "I am"?<<<
Hi Darin,
In an earlier post I asked you to say a few words about your understanding of the ontology of God. This exchange here gives us an opportunity to actually address this subject.
To start off, God's answer to Moses' question (in Exodus 3) was the “simple” declaration that HE is (that) I AM Who IS! This Voice speaking to Moses is nothing of the created realm (that is all) of Moses' reality, rather this is the very voice of REALITY. This is truly the only reality that is truly REAL in and of Itself (HIMSELF). REALITY is a PERSONAL BEING, and nothing else that exists “need” exist. There is YHWH , and nothing, nothing, nothing “other” (need) exist(s).
This is where thought must start (and must remain faithful to) if REALITY (and created reality) are to be truly understood. This answers(?) your question of “where exactly does God call himself simply 'I am.'” I'm happy to labor with you further on this if you wish.
In the meantime, because I do have an understanding of “what that means,” I made the statement : “The Nature of Christ is this : “I AM” made Himself a (true) “i am” and lived among us.”
We so easily get detoured by our natural cognitive intuitions (presuppositions), too easily defaulting to them even though our beginning premise may be solid. Kant pointed this out in his analysis of the “categories of the mind” in his seminal Critique of Pure Reason, (unintentionally?) leading to the setting of the (Western) mind on the long, ironically vain, road of scientific naturalism and humanism.
Okay, quickly returning to the statement itself : the Nature of “I AM”... is...that HE IS!...and HE IS WHO (What) HE SAYS HE IS (/ desires TO BE). There is no Creation (before creation) that has anything to say about this at all. Here is this PERSONAL BEING, this “I,” and absolutely nothing else, nothing OTHER [even no necessary attributes that He needs to “claim” in order to BE (Who and What He IS]. This is GOD, ALONE. His “attributes” become important (to us) as creation goes forward.
This is the ontology of God : it is just simply HIM (there is not even any such reality as “other”).
Integral to His creative agenda, because of that ONE PURPOSE He seeks in all His creative labor, He planned (needed) to (PERSONALLY) partake of the very nature of Creation. HE, Himself, is the Alpha guaranteeing (predestining) the Omega : the Body of Christ. He knew that these “amazing and glorious created beings that HE had in mind” would need, in their very (spiritually fragile) nature, His Personal Presence to carry them safely to His intended end.
So...in the fullness of time I AM, in all the simple nakedness of being just (an) I AM became flesh (a true “created i am,” – just one of us). I AM “let” (the same “let” of Genesis 1) Himself be a human being – and it was so!
The Word became flesh.
-
dwight92070
- Posts: 1550
- Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 12:09 am
Re: Dual Natures
Otherness, no offense is meant, but "wading" through your post is like walking through a blizzard where you can't see three feet ahead of you - except for the bitter cold! I've said this to you before - but you need to learn to speak the same language as the rest of us "earthlings". Are you married with kids? If so, do you speak to them like that? Do you work for a boss? Do you speak to him like that? Do you have parents living or siblings? Do you speak to them like that? Well, the way you speak to your family, is how you can best communicate with us.
-
dwight92070
- Posts: 1550
- Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 12:09 am
Re: Dual Natures
I don't think that the Bible says that Christ has two persons in Him or even two natures - but that He is God and He is man at the same time. If there is a Biblical explanation for that, it would be found in such verses as: "I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me." "He who has seen Me has seen the Father." "I and the Father are One." "I came out of and from God" " ... no one knows Who the Son is except the Father ..." .darinhouston wrote: ↑Sat Jul 08, 2023 9:14 pmCurious what thoughts those might have on the so-called dual nature of Christ - those who hold to this, do you see the dual nature of Christ as having two persons within Christ in the same way Christ is one of the three persons of the Trinity? If not, why not?
Re: Dual Natures
Hi Dwight,
Since you replied to my post I'll respect your “interest” with a reply, but I do want, as much as it lies with me, to avoid saying anything to stir up, unnecessarily, your “displeasure.” Neither one of us wants a repeat of the fallout of our last attempt at a “meeting of the minds.”
DWIGHT>>>Otherness, no offense is meant, but "wading" through your post is like walking through a blizzard where you can't see three feet ahead of you - except for the bitter cold!<<<
I am not offended in the least because, from my perspective, this is not about me at all. You have every right to say whatever you think and feel that you need / want to say. Besides, as Job heard, God is even in the blizzard. To be able to see Him where He is hardest to see is to be able to love those that are the hardest to love...because He is Love.
Dwight>>>I've said this to you before - but you need to learn to speak the same language as the rest of us "earthlings". Are you married with kids? If so, do you speak to them like that? Do you work for a boss? Do you speak to him like that? Do you have parents living or siblings? Do you speak to them like that?<<<
Yes, you have said this before, and I responded pointedly as to why I disagreed. To everything there is a time and purpose.
Dwight>>>Well, the way you speak to your family, is how you can best communicate with us.<<<
I consider you a member of my family, and when I do, quite rarely, talk about “these things” I pretty much say things like I say here. I'm just a regular person like you Dwight, doing and saying “regular” things most all of the time. However, I do love God with a peculiar passion, and am thrilled that He has allowed me to get to know Him so deeply.
Love in Christ,
john
Since you replied to my post I'll respect your “interest” with a reply, but I do want, as much as it lies with me, to avoid saying anything to stir up, unnecessarily, your “displeasure.” Neither one of us wants a repeat of the fallout of our last attempt at a “meeting of the minds.”
DWIGHT>>>Otherness, no offense is meant, but "wading" through your post is like walking through a blizzard where you can't see three feet ahead of you - except for the bitter cold!<<<
I am not offended in the least because, from my perspective, this is not about me at all. You have every right to say whatever you think and feel that you need / want to say. Besides, as Job heard, God is even in the blizzard. To be able to see Him where He is hardest to see is to be able to love those that are the hardest to love...because He is Love.
Dwight>>>I've said this to you before - but you need to learn to speak the same language as the rest of us "earthlings". Are you married with kids? If so, do you speak to them like that? Do you work for a boss? Do you speak to him like that? Do you have parents living or siblings? Do you speak to them like that?<<<
Yes, you have said this before, and I responded pointedly as to why I disagreed. To everything there is a time and purpose.
Dwight>>>Well, the way you speak to your family, is how you can best communicate with us.<<<
I consider you a member of my family, and when I do, quite rarely, talk about “these things” I pretty much say things like I say here. I'm just a regular person like you Dwight, doing and saying “regular” things most all of the time. However, I do love God with a peculiar passion, and am thrilled that He has allowed me to get to know Him so deeply.
Love in Christ,
john
-
dizerner
Re: Dual Natures
Otherness wrote: ↑Thu Jul 20, 2023 6:25 pmHi Dwight,
Since you replied to my post I'll respect your “interest” with a reply, but I do want, as much as it lies with me, to avoid saying anything to stir up, unnecessarily, your “displeasure.” Neither one of us wants a repeat of the fallout of our last attempt at a “meeting of the minds.”
DWIGHT>>>Otherness, no offense is meant, but "wading" through your post is like walking through a blizzard where you can't see three feet ahead of you - except for the bitter cold!<<<
I am not offended in the least because, from my perspective, this is not about me at all. You have every right to say whatever you think and feel that you need / want to say. Besides, as Job heard, God is even in the blizzard. To be able to see Him where He is hardest to see is to be able to love those that are the hardest to love...because He is Love.
Dwight>>>I've said this to you before - but you need to learn to speak the same language as the rest of us "earthlings". Are you married with kids? If so, do you speak to them like that? Do you work for a boss? Do you speak to him like that? Do you have parents living or siblings? Do you speak to them like that?<<<
Yes, you have said this before, and I responded pointedly as to why I disagreed. To everything there is a time and purpose.
Dwight>>>Well, the way you speak to your family, is how you can best communicate with us.<<<
I consider you a member of my family, and when I do, quite rarely, talk about “these things” I pretty much say things like I say here. I'm just a regular person like you Dwight, doing and saying “regular” things most all of the time. However, I do love God with a peculiar passion, and am thrilled that He has allowed me to get to know Him so deeply.
Love in Christ,
john
You might enjoy joining us at a newly opened Christian forum where you would be free to express your thoughts:
https://berean-apologetics.community.forum/
-
dwight92070
- Posts: 1550
- Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 12:09 am
Re: Dual Natures
Otherness, John,Otherness wrote: ↑Thu Jul 20, 2023 6:25 pmHi Dwight,
Since you replied to my post I'll respect your “interest” with a reply, but I do want, as much as it lies with me, to avoid saying anything to stir up, unnecessarily, your “displeasure.” Neither one of us wants a repeat of the fallout of our last attempt at a “meeting of the minds.”
DWIGHT>>>Otherness, no offense is meant, but "wading" through your post is like walking through a blizzard where you can't see three feet ahead of you - except for the bitter cold!<<<
I am not offended in the least because, from my perspective, this is not about me at all. You have every right to say whatever you think and feel that you need / want to say. Besides, as Job heard, God is even in the blizzard. To be able to see Him where He is hardest to see is to be able to love those that are the hardest to love...because He is Love.
Dwight>>>I've said this to you before - but you need to learn to speak the same language as the rest of us "earthlings". Are you married with kids? If so, do you speak to them like that? Do you work for a boss? Do you speak to him like that? Do you have parents living or siblings? Do you speak to them like that?<<<
Yes, you have said this before, and I responded pointedly as to why I disagreed. To everything there is a time and purpose.
Dwight>>>Well, the way you speak to your family, is how you can best communicate with us.<<<
I consider you a member of my family, and when I do, quite rarely, talk about “these things” I pretty much say things like I say here. I'm just a regular person like you Dwight, doing and saying “regular” things most all of the time. However, I do love God with a peculiar passion, and am thrilled that He has allowed me to get to know Him so deeply.
Love in Christ,
john
It goes without saying that you are free to speak any way you want. It's just that I (and I assume others) don't understand what you're saying. Do you not care if people don't understand what you're saying? What's the use of talking that way, if you're not understood.
Listen to what Paul said in 1 Corinthians 14:9: "So also you, unless you utter by the tongue speech that is clear, how will it be known what is spoken? For you will be speaking into the air."
Paul is specifically referring to speaking in tongues here, but it still applies to us today. We all need to speak clear, simple English, so that we can get our message across. If we reject that, then we might as well be speaking in tongues to each other, which is total nonsense.
So I'm reminding you that even Jesus didn't speak in a different manner to His apostles or followers than He did to His "non" followers and enemies. Sure, the content was different, but the plain manner of speaking didn't change.