Who raised Jesus from the dead?

[Tassman]

Asserted but not proven. It is not incoherent to state that Jesus is "fully human" in the sense that he has every essential human quality, and "fully divine" in the sense that he has every essential divine quality.

No matter how you spin it, it remains a logical contradiction. Black cannot be simultaneously white, just as God in his fullness cannot be simultaneously fully non-God.

Whilst the Doctrine of the Hypostatic Union is theology important to mainstream Christianity, it nevertheless cannot be seen as anything more than a divine mystery by the faithful.

Asserted but not proven. Belief in God is no more itrational than believing that my senses allow me to accurately perceive the universe around me.

Your senses can be tested and empirically verified whereas belief in an invisible, allegedly all powerful deity cannot.

[firstfloor]

There are holes in the plot.

[JonathanL]

No matter how you spin it, it remains a logical contradiction. Black cannot be simultaneously white, just as God in his fullness cannot be simultaneously fully non-God.

Well I guess it's a good thing the doctrine of the Hypostatic Union doesn't teach anything of the sort then, eh?

[Tassman]

Well I guess it's a good thing the doctrine of the Hypostatic Union doesn't teach anything of the sort then, eh?

Well yes it does. The Doctrine of the Hypostatic Union says it is "The union of the human and divine natures in the one person of Christ". The Council of Chalcedon, in the fifth century, declared that in Christ the two natures, each retained its own properties and are "united in one subsistence and one person". The Westminster Confession of Faith many centuries later confirmed this by saying, “Two whole perfect and distinct natures, the Godhead and manhood were inseparably joined together in one person, without conversion. That is, the human did not become divine; the divine did not become human without composition."

[Mountain Man]

Black cannot be simultaneously white, just as God in his fullness cannot be simultaneously fully non-God.

I suppose Christians can take comfort in the fact that their theology doesn't teach this.

Your senses can be tested and empirically verified....

How can you verify the accuracy of your own senses without first assuming the accuracy of your own senses?

(Hint: You can't.)

[Mountain Man]

Well yes it does. The Doctrine of the Hypostatic Union says it is "The union of the human and divine natures in the one person of Christ". The Council of Chalcedon, in the fifth century, declared that in Christ the two natures, each retained its own properties and are "united in one subsistence and one person". The Westminster Confession of Faith many centuries later confirmed this by saying, “Two whole perfect and distinct natures, the Godhead and manhood were inseparably joined together in one person, without conversion. That is, the human did not become divine; the divine did not become human without composition."

You're trying to read above your grade level, because none of that says that Jesus was both God and not-God at the same time and in the same sense.

[Roy]

You will be judged by your own words.

Uh-oh. Is he not including enough gratuitous insults?

[JonathanL]

Well yes it does. The Doctrine of the Hypostatic Union says it is "The union of the human and divine natures in the one person of Christ". The Council of Chalcedon, in the fifth century, declared that in Christ the two natures, each retained its own properties and are "united in one subsistence and one person". The Westminster Confession of Faith many centuries later confirmed this by saying, “Two whole perfect and distinct natures, the Godhead and manhood were inseparably joined together in one person, without conversion. That is, the human did not become divine; the divine did not become human without composition."

None of the above says Jesus is simultaneously fully God and fully not-God.

[Tassman]

None of the above says Jesus is simultaneously fully God and fully not-God.

Unless they were alternating persons (i.e. sometimes God and sometimes man), that's precisely what “Two whole perfect and distinct natures, the Godhead and manhood were inseparably joined together in one person" means.

[Mountain Man]

Unless they were alternating persons (i.e. sometimes God and sometimes man), that's precisely what “Two whole perfect and distinct natures, the Godhead and manhood were inseparably joined together in one person" means.

Are you really this clueless?

[JonathanL]

Unless they were alternating persons (i.e. sometimes God and sometimes man), that's precisely what “Two whole perfect and distinct natures, the Godhead and manhood were inseparably joined together in one person" means.

Of course it doesn't. Divinity and humanity doesn't relate to each other in the same way as black and white does, they're not two mutually exclusive states of being. Humans aren't "not-God" in virtue of being humans, but because we are created beings.

[Tassman]

Of course it doesn't. Divinity and humanity doesn't relate to each other in the same way as black and white does, they're not two mutually exclusive states of being. Humans aren't "not-God" in virtue of being humans, but because we are created beings.

Well yes they are logically two exclusive states of being. One cannot be both fully human and fully divine at the same time except, as claimed by the 'mystery' of the Doctrine of the Hypostatic Union whereby the "human and divine natures are united in the one person of Christ". . It can only be accepted as an article of faith, not a logical belief system. It took nearly 500 years for the Church (at the Council of Chalcedon) to devise such irrational, contradictory nonsense as a means to rebut the numerous Christological heresies besetting Christianity at the time.

[JonathanL]

Well yes they are logically two exclusive states of being. One cannot be both fully human and fully divine at the same time . . .

Ok, so how exactly are they logically exclusive? Can you explain? Or is this just another pure assertion without any argument to back it up from you?

[rogue06]

Are you really this clueless?

It appears he thinks that Jesus suffers from some sort of Dissociative Identity Disorder (multiple/split personalities)

[Tassman]

Ok, so how exactly are they logically exclusive? Can you explain? Or is this just another pure assertion without any argument to back it up from you?

The Doctrine itself implies that they are a logical contradiction. It states that God and Jesus are “Two whole perfect and distinct natures, the Godhead and manhood, inseparably joined together in one person”, i.e. a logical contradiction.

One cannot reconcile being omniscient (divine) with not being omniscient (human) in one person. Ultimately it is simply a theological assertion believed by Christians as a revealed truth of the Church.