He Was More than Just a Man

[tbpew]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Would you describe yourself as an adoptionist?

Sorry, but I think I started a discussion about this before with someone - but I don't remeber it being you. My scorecards may be jumbled, so please forgive me if I'm dragging you through a discussion you may be tired of having.

You: Would you describe yourself as an adoptionist?
Me: No.


....but, please know:
I will not oppose any title or label you affix to me. I count it as part of the cost of participating in online discussion boards where human politic is certainly alive and well.

It appears that our intellect has a love affair with catagories and labels.

IMO, it lets a person conclude a matter without encumbering much (if any) bandwidth; specific statements or thoughts are rarely important. The 'hearer' is alert for key words that will enable him to pronounce the applicable category and then be content with their skill to properly shelve each and every speaker.

.....

So Pel, while you're here,
please share how you reconcile the words Jesus spoke concerning his relational position with his Father. This is why I jumped on the whole LATENT attribute (pertaining to the divine nature) that Prax presented.

You have affirmed Prax's view that Son of God was possessed by two natures; FULLY God and FULLY human.
It is always the FULLY God nature that has so many contradictions when we consider the witness of the Son of God's testimony.

I submit the following four scenes we read from scripture:

[The Son of God speaking to Mary at the tomb]
"Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God."

[The Lamb speaking in the Revelation of Jesus Christ]
"Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, [which is] new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and [I will write upon him] my new name." [Rev 3:12]


[The Son of God speaking privately with James, John and Peter at the mount of Olivet]
""But of that day and [that] hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father." [Mk 13:32]

[The beloved Son of God sharing real intimacy after his meal, discussing the transition facing them]
"Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I." [John 14:12]

Pel, How do you harmonize these witnesses if your Christology has the Son being Fully established by the divine nature and Fully established by the human nature?

Pel, can anything in your logical, reasoning mind, reconcile any creature being possessed by two FULL natures and not be continually tossed about.

Pel, in the presence of a FULLY divine nature being in force, can we apply ANY SIGNIFICANCE to the role of a HUMAN nature?

FULLY one nature and FULLY another nature is FULLY SILLY.