What kind of dualism?

Discussions pertaining to scripture and theology from a philosophical approach.

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby DaveB » Tue Apr 11, 2017 5:14 pm

In this wide-ranging thread, a sub-thread has been: Did someone Divine die on the cross? Did an eternal god of some sort actually die?

Here is an interesting podcast that was posted today at Trinities.Org. It deals with those very questions:

http://trinities.org/blog/podcast-178-a ... ie-part-1/
All things bright and beautiful,
All creatures great and small,
All things wise and wonderful:
The Lord God made them all.
DaveB
 
Posts: 3885
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 3:07 pm

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby Paidion » Wed Apr 12, 2017 8:22 am

Dave, I just now noticed the following for the first time:

You wrote:But a bigger question for non-dualists is: how can 'meat' be self-aware and conscious of itself? Those are NOT qualities of materials, they are qualities of self-conscious persons.


The question could be asked concerning your dog. It cannot be proven that it is "self-aware" since it cannot speak. But in some sense, it demonstrates awareness of a lot of things in a similar way that people are aware. True "dog meat" in itself clearly is not aware. Yet no one explains the awareness of dogs by claiming that dogs have "souls" or "spirits."

In your last post, you asked:
Did someone Divine die on the cross? Did an eternal god of some sort actually die?

These are two separate questions. I would answer "yes" to the first, and "no" to the second, that is if "eternal" implies having no beginning.

I also checked out the blog you indicated. It correctly indicated that not all of the following statements can be true:

1. Jesus died.
2. Jesus was fully divine.
3. No fully divine being has ever died.

The writer opted for statement 2 as being the one that was false. I think that statement 2 is true, but that statement 3 is the false one.
To be "fully divine" is not tantamount to being God Himself or to being a second God who is without beginning and who is self-existing.

My understanding is that the Son of God is truly a Son in a way that is unique and different from the sense in which we are sons of God. Thus the New Testament writers refer to Him as "the ONLY-begotten Son." Indeed, papyrus 66 (around 150 A.D.) and papyrus 75 (around 200 A.D.) refer to Him as "the only-begotten God" in John 1:18. Only in later editions of the Greek was "θεος" (God) changed to "υιος" (Son).

The early Christian writers stated that the Son of God was "begotten (or "generated") before all ages." That continued to be believed and was even written in the original Nicene Creed (about 325 A.D.) which was accepted by the early Trinitarians. But later Trinitarians realized that the single event of being "begotten before all ages" was inconsistent with Trinitarian thought, and so they changed "begotten before all ages" in the Nicene Creed to "eternally begotten."

Justin Martyr in his "Dialogue with Trypho" compared the begetting of the Son to a smaller fire coming into existence by being ignited by a larger one.The smaller fire is of the same "substance" as the larger, but yet is a separate fire. As I see it, perhaps a better analogy could be seen in human generation. When we beget children, they are human like ourselves, and just as we are generically called "man," so our offspring are "man." So when God begat His one and only Son, that Son was divine like His Father, and can therefore be called "God" in that sense.

However, in being born as a human being, the Son divested Himself of all His divine attributes, and became fully human. While He lived on earth He could do no miracles on his own, but trusted his heavenly Father to do the miracles through Him. Indeed, as I see it, He emptied Himself of his Deity itself, and retained only his identity as the Son of God.

...who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross. (Philippians 2:6-8 RSV)

He did not wish to "grasp" or hold on to his Deity, but become FULLY human! We speak of the sacrifice of Christ on the cross on our behalf—as well we should. But do we ever consider the great sacrifice He made in emptying Himself of his Deity and becoming fully human? As a human being, He was tempted in every respect as we are, and yet without sin (Heb 4:15). Indeed, as a fully human being, it was necessary for him to learn obedience through the things that He suffered. (Heb 5:8).
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 76 years. I am now in my 80th year of life.
User avatar
Paidion
 
Posts: 3911
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 5:38 pm
Location: The Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby DaveB » Wed Apr 12, 2017 10:16 am

Thanks Paidon for taking the time to look into this and for making your thoughts clear.

I know that you and I agree that there is one God, and that is the Father, Who cannot die.
And I think we agree that Jesus of Nazareth was (and is?) a fully human being, meaning among other things, that He could and did die.

I confess that I am speculating now - BUT if as you maintain, a pre-existent Being, who was begotten by God the Father before time, and had existed since that point during the creation of the universe, and thence either for 6,000 years +/- or 15 billion years, +/- had been with the Father, and then with the Father in the creation of the world and mankind, was indeed then 'transformed into flesh' i.e., became an ACTUAL human being, certain things seem to logically follow:

-He could not be born with any memories of his eternal experiences or knowledge - any more than other actual humans are.
-He could not have two natures (which noone can explain anyway), any more than other actual humans do.
-He (as a pre-existing Being) was not actually made flesh - He did not inhabit a freshly-made but inanimate body, nor was he, as an eternal Spirit, fashioned into a body.
-To be human, he had to come from a fertilized egg and grow as we all do.
-If He really, really was a man, he grew and learned and developed without having ANY attributes or consciousness of being Deity at all, other than is common to all men.
-So I double down on my NO TWO NATURES stance, for these and many other reasons.

As I said, speculations only - I'd be interested to get comments from one and all.
All things bright and beautiful,
All creatures great and small,
All things wise and wonderful:
The Lord God made them all.
DaveB
 
Posts: 3885
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 3:07 pm

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby Holy-Fool-P-Zombie » Wed Apr 12, 2017 12:28 pm

Image

Image

The best book I've read on NDE's is:


In the US, you can probably obtain a copy - like I did - via the inter-library loan program. Just ask your local, adult reference librarian. :D

Image
Charismatic / Eastern Anglo-Catholic/ Holy Fool; Inclusivist / Purgatorial Conditionalist / Nicene Creed / Theosis;
Franciscan Contemplation (i.e. Fox Golden Key, Mindfulness, Yoga); Healing (i.e. Homeopathy, Kampo / TCM, Ayurveda, Spiritual);
User avatar
Holy-Fool-P-Zombie
 
Posts: 2665
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 3:30 pm
Location: Near Chicago or hanging out with Holy Fools, Zombies, P-Zombies, Nerds and Geeks

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby Paidion » Wed Apr 12, 2017 1:49 pm

Hi Dave,
Thanks for responding. I would like to share my thought's on each "couldn't" and "had to." But first I would like to say that I don't believe He remained purely human being after resurrection but regained his Deity. That is why He is now able to send his Spirit into his people. He told his disciples that He could not do that until He "went away." But now He can extend His Spirit along with the Father's Spirit (actually they share the same Spirit) into his people. He promised that He and his Father would come to those who love Him and make their dwelling with them. And that is exactly what They did. How could an ordinary resurrected human being do that? Also Paul stated that the last "Adam" (Christ) became a life-giving spirit (1 Cor 15:45).

John 14:23 (ASV) Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my word: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.


-He could not be born with any memories of his eternal experiences or knowledge - any more than other actual humans are.

I agree that as a baby and a young child, He probably had no such memories of his pre-existence. As a baby doubtless He cried and wet his diapers (or whatever they used back then) just like any other child. I am sure He didn't stand up at 6 months of age and give a discourse as the second-century gnostics affirmed. But by age 12, when He knew He must be about the things of his Father, He must have known something of his pre-existence. The very fact that He began to call God his "Father" at that time would indicate that He was becoming aware of who He was. As far as I know, it was not usual for Jewish children refer to God as their Father.

-He could not have two natures (which noone can explain anyway), any more than other actual humans do.

I agree that He DID NOT have two natures during his sojourn on earth. But perhaps it's going too far to say that He COULD NOT have had two natures. However, I would say that now He has the divine nature but retains the same, but changed, physical body which, according to Paul, is as different from the corruptible physical body as the full grown wheat plant is from the seed that was planted.

-He (as a pre-existing Being) was not actually made flesh - He did not inhabit a freshly-made but inanimate body, nor was he, as an eternal Spirit, fashioned into a body.


But the Logos became flesh (John 1:14). If He didn't pre-exist, then there was no one to become flesh. Have you ever heard it said of any other human being that he "became flesh."

-To be human, he had to come from a fertilized egg and grow as we all do.

Why does a human being have to come for a fertilized egg. Just because there was never a virgin birth prior to Jesus or since, doesn't imply that a virgin birth is impossible. Or do you disbelieve that He was born from a virgin as Matthew and Luke affirm?

-If He really, really was a man, he grew and learned and developed without having ANY attributes or consciousness of being Deity at all, other than is common to all men.


I don't think that follows. His Father could have gradually revealed to Him who He really was.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 76 years. I am now in my 80th year of life.
User avatar
Paidion
 
Posts: 3911
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 5:38 pm
Location: The Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby DaveB » Wed Apr 12, 2017 2:30 pm

Thanks for your thoughtful comments!

Just a couple of points:

1. The 'logos ' became flesh is, to me at least, the fact that all of the Father's desires, aims, reasons - in other words, the Word he wanted to make flesh - were in fact brought to fruition in the flesh of the actual human Jesus of Nazareth.
I do not understand the verse to be referring at all to a pre-existent divine being. It is the 'word' - God's fullest expression - that became flesh.

2. I think that to die AS a MAN rules out the possibility of the two natures - what other human being died having the 'nature' of God as well as a human nature?

3. No matter how we conceive it (no pun) - under your scenario, it sounds like a divine Being was brought into existence by the Father, then at some point, ceased that eternal existence, was somehow conceived in a womb and born like the rest of us. If He had the advantage of gradually recovering all the experience and knowledge He had from eternity, he certainly died in a human body, but not as a human being. I could be wrong about this (duh!) but I am trying to hold us to the fact that the scripture points Him out as a MAN.

For this reason he had to be made like them, fully human in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people.
All things bright and beautiful,
All creatures great and small,
All things wise and wonderful:
The Lord God made them all.
DaveB
 
Posts: 3885
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 3:07 pm

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby Paidion » Wed Apr 12, 2017 4:23 pm

1. The 'logos ' became flesh is, to me at least, the fact that all of the Father's desires, aims, reasons - in other words, the Word he wanted to make flesh - were in fact brought to fruition in the flesh of the actual human Jesus of Nazareth. I do not understand the verse to be referring at all to a pre-existent divine being. It is the 'word' - God's fullest expression - that became flesh.


Yes,the only-begotten Son, the only-begotten divine Being was God's fullest expression. He became flesh.

2. I think that to die AS a MAN rules out the possibility of the two natures - what other human being died having the 'nature' of God as well as a human nature?


As you know, I don't take the position that as a man, the Son of God had two natures. He was fully human while on earth. He didn't die having two natures. He died with only his human nature. If God hadn't raised Him from death, He would have remained dead. He had the same identity during the entire time of his humanity, as He had prior to his birth. That identity did not change. He was the same Individual as He was prior to his birth. He was begotten by God, the first of God's acts. That act marked the beginning of time. After God raised Him from the dead, his divine nature was restored to Him.

3. No matter how we conceive it (no pun) - under your scenario, it sounds like a divine Being was brought into existence by the Father, then at some point, ceased that eternal existence, was somehow conceived in a womb and born like the rest of us. If He had the advantage of gradually recovering all the experience and knowledge He had from eternity, he certainly died in a human body, but not as a human being. I could be wrong about this (duh!) but I am trying to hold us to the fact that the scripture points Him out as a MAN.


Again it wasn't an "eternal" existence. The Son had a beginning when the Father begat Him (begotten not created). He didn't cease that existence by being born. He was the same Individual as He was prior to his birth. And yes, He did die as a human being. And yes, He was a MAN. Indeed, He emphasized many times that He was the son of man. He didn't go around saying that He was the Son of God, but admitted that He was when pressed.

For this reason he had to be made like them, fully human in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people.


I think we are in exact agreement on this point. No doubt you are referring to Hebrews 2:17
Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God...(Hebrews 2:17 ESV).

How did God make Him like his brothers in every respect? By causing Him to be born as a human being by means of a virgin, namely Mary.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 76 years. I am now in my 80th year of life.
User avatar
Paidion
 
Posts: 3911
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 5:38 pm
Location: The Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby DaveB » Wed Apr 12, 2017 4:43 pm

We ARE in agreement on a large portion of this question. But of course the devil..........uh, you know what I mean :D ....is in the details.

I am having difficulty grasping what it would mean for 'the same individual' to be the same after his birth and before it. The 'same' implies the same memories of experiences, the same knowledge gained through those experiences, the same personal identity. But he was NOT a man if, as you believe (and I don't) he existed before his birth. If not 'eternal', at least I think we agree that he was immortal from the moment of his begetting.

If that is true, then he did cease to exist at birth. He was born like us - no special privileges, no awareness in the womb of who he had been etc. What could possible have survived of an immortal, immensely 'old' spiritual being once he became LIKE US?

AS to John 1 - I think the meaning is NOT that Jesus was a pre-existent being, but that, as a man like us, he did express his Father's desires, will, aims etc. perfectly. He became the Word to us when he was born in the human manner.

What pre-existed was the Father, Who had a will, ideas, aims, loves - those things collectively, the N.T, calls the 'Word", the logos. Not a pre-existent being. IMO.
Fascinating discussion. The value of the discussion to me - outside of just conversing with you and others - is that these considerations work to shed a critical light on creedal trinitarianism. I think that is important.
All things bright and beautiful,
All creatures great and small,
All things wise and wonderful:
The Lord God made them all.
DaveB
 
Posts: 3885
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 3:07 pm

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby Holy-Fool-P-Zombie » Thu Apr 13, 2017 3:59 am

I might be teaching an intro to philosophy class...to a classroom full of P-Zombies and Zombies

How can I convince them...that the ideas of René Descartes have merit :?:

Image
Charismatic / Eastern Anglo-Catholic/ Holy Fool; Inclusivist / Purgatorial Conditionalist / Nicene Creed / Theosis;
Franciscan Contemplation (i.e. Fox Golden Key, Mindfulness, Yoga); Healing (i.e. Homeopathy, Kampo / TCM, Ayurveda, Spiritual);
User avatar
Holy-Fool-P-Zombie
 
Posts: 2665
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 3:30 pm
Location: Near Chicago or hanging out with Holy Fools, Zombies, P-Zombies, Nerds and Geeks

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby Laurie » Thu Apr 13, 2017 7:59 am

Jesus is God.

My Lord and my God. - Thomas

The only God who saves. ( All OT scripture )

To Phillip.
Have I been so long with you and you do not
Know me?

John 14:9
Laurie
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 6:42 pm

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby DaveB » Thu Apr 13, 2017 8:10 am

Jesus said, "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, 'I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'" John 20.17

Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent. John 17.3
All things bright and beautiful,
All creatures great and small,
All things wise and wonderful:
The Lord God made them all.
DaveB
 
Posts: 3885
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 3:07 pm

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby Laurie » Thu Apr 13, 2017 8:20 am

Yes. Which only proves at the very least Father is God.

In no way do His statements there disqualify Himself from being a member of that. Godhead.
Except perhaps, Him being then in time, in a prepared body to do all God's will on Earth. Sent. Humbled Son to do all His Father's will.

God is a relationship.Always existing. God is luv.
Laurie
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 6:42 pm

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby DaveB » Thu Apr 13, 2017 8:23 am

Okey-dokey.
All things bright and beautiful,
All creatures great and small,
All things wise and wonderful:
The Lord God made them all.
DaveB
 
Posts: 3885
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 3:07 pm

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby Laurie » Thu Apr 13, 2017 8:35 am

When you see Him...You do not see God?

Who do you see, then?
Laurie
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 6:42 pm

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby Laurie » Thu Apr 13, 2017 8:45 am

When I see Jesus
I behold everything possible
In this world
I hear a breath, a word of Life

I see the One who made butterfly wings
Flutter
And a hummingbird's wings
Almost countless

A most creative Hand
Giving Life to all
Freely
Is Who I see
When I see Jesus

Life imparted
My King brings
Laurie
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 6:42 pm

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby DaveB » Thu Apr 13, 2017 8:48 am

I see the express image of God. God's word to us, expressed through a human being, His son. When I 'see' Jesus, I see what the Father wants us to know about HIm. How great it is to know that a human being, like us, is mediating between us and God. We have an Elder brother like us.
All things bright and beautiful,
All creatures great and small,
All things wise and wonderful:
The Lord God made them all.
DaveB
 
Posts: 3885
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 3:07 pm

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby Laurie » Thu Apr 13, 2017 9:42 am

I know those scriptures too, about Him.

But you don't see God Himself?

That is what puzzles me about theologies sometimes. They have all the right scripture to back up their take on it.....But they don't actually see God in Jesus. Jesus as God.

And so theology dies there.

Instead of bringing Life to this world.

You have to know who He is
As the starting point.

A starting point may be like Thomas had.

When He recognized. Him, finally.
Laurie
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 6:42 pm

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby DaveB » Thu Apr 13, 2017 10:09 am

That's fine, Laurie. We'll just be unnecessarily twisting ourselves into a knot if we continue, I think. What counts is righteousness and peace in the Holy Spirit.
All things bright and beautiful,
All creatures great and small,
All things wise and wonderful:
The Lord God made them all.
DaveB
 
Posts: 3885
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 3:07 pm

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby Paidion » Thu Apr 13, 2017 7:49 pm

Laurie wrote:Jesus is God.


This statement could be true or false depending on what you mean by "God."

When I read this statement, the meaning that comes immediately to my mind is that the statement identifies Jesus with His Father, that is, affirms that both He and His Father are the same divine Individual. Is that what you mean? If not, could you explain what you do mean?
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 76 years. I am now in my 80th year of life.
User avatar
Paidion
 
Posts: 3911
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 5:38 pm
Location: The Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby steve7150 » Fri Apr 14, 2017 12:58 pm

DaveB wrote:
when Jesus died - who died? The combined God-human, or the human? Or were the docetists corrects, that the 'God part' left Jesus' body before the actual death?

I'm afraid this is way over my pay grade, as I have no knowledge of Jesus' "parts."
Bob Wilson

Posts: 1179
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 10:10 am





Didn't the human Jesus die since in Phil 2.7 Paul said Jesus "emptied himself" apparently of his divine attributes. Plus God can not die therefore by definition it had to be human Jesus who died.
steve7150
 
Posts: 1018
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 6:01 am

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby DaveB » Fri Apr 14, 2017 4:00 pm

I agree Steve - some go further and say 'the human PART of Jesus died' which I think betrays a confusion.
All things bright and beautiful,
All creatures great and small,
All things wise and wonderful:
The Lord God made them all.
DaveB
 
Posts: 3885
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 3:07 pm

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby Paidion » Fri Apr 14, 2017 6:57 pm

Steve 7150 wrote:Didn't the human Jesus die since in Phil 2.7 Paul said Jesus "emptied himself" apparently of his divine attributes.

Yes, He did, Steve. Indeed it seems to me that He emptied Himself not only of his divine attributes, but of his deity itself! How else could He have become fully human?

As I see it, when the Father raised Him from death, He glorified his Son, and the Son regained his deity. How else could the Son (along with the Father who is Spirit) have come and made their dwelling with Jesus' disciples according to Jesus' promise (John 14:23)? After his resurrection, Jesus Himself (the second Adam) became the life-giving Spirit (1 Corinthians 15:45) . Also in 2 Corinthians 3:18, according to the ESV, we, in being transformed into the image of the Lord (Jesus) comes from the Lord (Jesus) who is the Spirit. The NASB has it "from the Lord, the Spirit." Other translations such as the NKJV have it "from the Spirit of the Lord." I think that is incorrect, though, since the word "Lord" comes before the word "Spirit" in the Greek.
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 76 years. I am now in my 80th year of life.
User avatar
Paidion
 
Posts: 3911
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 5:38 pm
Location: The Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby DaveB » Fri Apr 14, 2017 7:26 pm

I think there is a more fruitful way of understanding Phillipians 2, one that does not espouse the theory that Paul was describing a pre-existing divine being, Here is a short pdf that makes a pretty good case imo. YMMV.

http://www.christianmonotheism.com/medi ... NS%202.pdf

Here is a short excerpt:

WHAT DOES 'EMPTIED HIMSELF' MEAN?
It is often stated that Jesus emptied himself of himself or of his ‘divinity
’(Trinitarian) or ‘god-form’ (Arian) as if this were his essence. But as discussed
above the ‘form’ (morphe) is synonymous with image (eikon) and has the 1st
century Koine meaning of ‘status’ which is why Paul gives the comparison with
“form of a slave” and not ‘form of a man’. The phrase “form of a slave” makes no
reference to one’s essence or essential being but of one’s lowly status. Adam
being in the image of God certainly was not of God’s essential being. A basic
difference in Jewish thinking and Greek thinking of the time was that Jews
thought in terms of ‘FUNCTION’ and would use a great deal of metaphorical
language; whereas Greeks thought more in terms of essence or substance, that
is ontologically (substance)or metaphysically. Many scholars have now
recognized this difference and have adjusted their interpretations accordingly.
The phrase "emptied himself" (Greek 'ekenosen') is also translated as: "but
made himself of no reputation" KJV, NKJ. or "but made himself nothing" ESV,
NIV. It is a parallel thought to "poured out his soul to the death" Isaiah 53:12. "
'kenos' -- divested himself of his prestige or privileges. Phil 2:7...An early
Christian confession holds that the kenosis is not the incarnation but the cross [
Isa 53:12 ] ." Bauer's Greek Lexicon of NT Literature.
This was a matter of self-renunciation by Jesus including divesting himself of his
right to incorruptibility that was his because of his sinless condition.
WHEN DID JESUS 'EMPTY HIMSELF'?
The NWT of verse 7 "emptied himself and took a slave's form" gives the
incorrect impression that he emptied himself first and then became a slave;
whereas, the Greek grammatical structure is: "himself he emptied form of slave
having taken". This shows that Jesus emptied himself because he had already
or at that point in time "taken a slave's form". Also the word 'and' as used in the
NWT changes the correct order of events; yet this word does not exist in the
Greek and is not implied as Ernst Lohmeyer states. The correct structure also fits
with the context, giving the meaning that Jesus, having become slave-like then
immediately began emptying (daily sacrificing) himself.
Lohmeyer's translation reads : "but sacrificed himself having taken the form of a
slave"
The 'sacrificing' would have been Jesus' entire life course leading to his death.
"In this case the aorist 'ekenosen' (he emptied himself) does not refer to a
single moment of 'incarnation' but the completeness of a series of repeated
acts; his earthly life, looked at as a whole, was an unfailing process of selfemptying."
A.H. McNeile. former Regius Professor of Divinity.
“We have here an “emptying” related directly to the terrestrial condition of
Christ…” Jerome Murphy O’Connor.
Therefore in his life course Jesus (Messiah-the man) laid aside such rightful
dignity, prerogatives, privileges, and rulership; humbling himself to live a life of
servitude which ended with his death. Would the Philippians be asked to copy
the impossible example of emptying themselves of their essence? Rather, they
were to 'empty' themselves of their contentious, egotistical and selfish nature and
imitate Jesus' lifetime example of humility and self-sacrifice. Paul does not
appeal to us to be like an archangel or heavenly being. He appeals to us to be
humble servants as humans. Additional context is shown when he says in
Philippians 2:17 :"I (Paul) am being poured out like a drink offering upon the
sacrifice and public service to which faith has led you." Yet Paul's essence was
not poured out.
From 1860, a Lutheran theologian - Gotfried Thomasius began what has now
developed into the false doctrine of kenosis i.e. that Christ emptied himself of
his essence. This seems to be the first time that Philippians 2:7 was
applied in this way. It appears that the main reason for the development of this
doctrine by trinitarians was to explain how Jesus could be God and man without
postulating two centres of consciousness as in the doctrine of the hypostatic union.
All things bright and beautiful,
All creatures great and small,
All things wise and wonderful:
The Lord God made them all.
DaveB
 
Posts: 3885
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 3:07 pm

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby davo » Fri Apr 14, 2017 8:56 pm

Here are a few quotes from the broader article…
pdf article wrote:So Jesus' "being in the image / form of God" means that, as the human Messiah, he was the visible image of God, having divine status. As Son of God he had the right to function as God as had the rulers in Israel who functioned as 'gods' (Ps 82:6 ; John 10:34). Eg "See I have made you [ Moses ] God to Pharaoh" Ex 7:1. Also in Mark 2:7 the scribes state: "who can forgive sins except one, God ?" Yet this authority was delegated to Jesus by God as vs 10 says "But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority to forgive sins upon the earth." Jesus was also granted authority to raise the dead. (John 5:21). Further, "all judgment has been entrusted to the Son" (John 5:22,23). Therefore he functions as God but is not of God's essence or substance.

On the issue of Moses *being God to Pharaoh* in Ex 7:1 I have previously noted this same point… HERE, HERE and HERE.

NOWHERE in the gospels does Jesus require of any a belief in the theological proposition of his own divinity… to accept that he was FROM God was to believe that he Jesus carried God’s message with His imprimatur. That makes Jesus “divine” BUT not ontologically “God”he was God to them like Moses was God to Pharaoh i.e., Jesus was God’s Man for the hour doing God’s job… which is WHY Jesus could say “if you’ve seen me you’ve seen the Father” and “I and the Father are one” i.e., they were on the SAME page.

pdf article wrote:Therefore in his life course Jesus (Messiah-the man) laid aside such rightful dignity, prerogatives, privileges, and rulership; humbling himself to live a life of servitude which ended with his death. Would the Philippians be asked to copy the impossible example of emptying themselves of their essence? Rather, they were to 'empty' themselves of their contentious, egotistical and selfish nature and imitate Jesus' lifetime example of humility and self-sacrifice. Paul does not appeal to us to be like an archangel or heavenly being. He appeals to us to be humble servants as humans.

Yes… and THIS is exactly what we see laid down by Jesus in Jn 13:1-17.
“...the power and mercy of God’s grace is NOT limited to man’s ability to comprehend it...”
User avatar
davo
 
Posts: 1618
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:10 am
Location: Brisbane Australia

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby DaveB » Fri Apr 14, 2017 9:41 pm

Thanks Davo!!
All things bright and beautiful,
All creatures great and small,
All things wise and wonderful:
The Lord God made them all.
DaveB
 
Posts: 3885
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 3:07 pm

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby qaz » Sat May 13, 2017 12:32 pm

1 Corinthians 2:11
For who knows a person's thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is in him?
qaz
 
Posts: 1360
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby Paidion » Sat May 13, 2017 5:46 pm

Jesus said to the Jews, "Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad.”

The Jews obviously understood Him as making the claim that He and Abraham were contemporaneous. For they responded:
“You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?”

Then Jesus said to them as clear as words can express, that he existed even before Abraham:

Before Abraham was, I am. (John 8:58)
Paidion

Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.

Avatar shows me at 76 years. I am now in my 80th year of life.
User avatar
Paidion
 
Posts: 3911
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 5:38 pm
Location: The Back Woods of North-Western Ontario

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby Holy-Fool-P-Zombie » Sun May 14, 2017 4:42 am

This came today from the Catholic email, from the Center for Contemplation and Action. I liked it and I will share it here.


The Evolution of the Temple
Sunday, May 14, 2017


The brilliant Anglican theologian, N. T. Wright, concludes that we have largely missed Paul’s major theme. [1] After Luther, many thought Paul’s great idea was “justification by faith” (Protestants) versus “works righteousness” (Catholics). It makes a nice dualistic split, but Wright believes the great and supreme idea of Paul is that the new temple of God is the human person. In this insight, he offers us a superb example of thin-slicing the texts and finding the golden thread. Once you see it, you cannot not see it.

The first stone temple of the Jewish people was built around 950 BC. On the day of the dedication of “Solomon’s Temple,” the Shekinah glory of YHWH (fire and cloud from heaven) descended and filled the Temple (1 Kings 8:10-13), just as it had once filled the Tent of Meeting (Exodus 40:34-35). This became the assurance of the abiding and localized divine presence of YHWH for the Jewish people. This naturally made Solomon’s Temple both the center and centering place of the whole world, in Jewish thinking.

When the Babylonians destroyed the Temple and took the Jews into exile (587 BC), it no doubt prompted a crisis of faith. The Temple was where God lived! People like Ezra and Nehemiah eventually convinced the people that they must go back to Jerusalem and rebuild the temple so God could be with them again. Yet Wright points out there is no account of the fire and glory of God ever descending on this rebuilt temple (515 BC). And this “Second Temple” is the only temple Jesus would have ever known and loved.

The absence of visible Shekinah glory must have been a bit of an embarrassment and worry for the Jewish people. Wright says it could explain the growth of Pharisaism, a belief strong in Jesus’ time that if liturgical and moral laws were obeyed more perfectly—absolute ritual, priesthood, and Sabbath purity—then the Glory of God would return to the Temple. This is the common pattern in moralistic religion: our impurity supposedly keeps God away. They tried so hard, but the fire never descended. They must have wondered, “Are we really God’s favorite and chosen people?” (This is a common question for all of us in early-stage religion.)

Knowledge of this history now gives new and even more meaning to what we call the Pentecost event (Acts 2:1-13). On that day, the fire from heaven descended, not on a building, but on people! And all peoples—not just Jews—were baptized and received the Spirit (Acts 2:38-41). Paul understood this and spent much of his life drawing out the immense consequences. In that moment, Christianity began to see itself as a universal rather than a tribal or regional religion, which is why they very soon called themselves “catholic” (universal) as early as the year 108 AD. Paul loved to say, “You are the Temple!” (1 Corinthians 3:16-17, 2 Corinthians 6:16, Ephesians 2:21-22), and of course this morphs into his entire doctrine of corporate humanity as the very Body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:12-30).

Gateway to Silence:
I am God's dwelling place.
References:

[1] See N. T. Wright, Paul and the Faithfulness of God (Fortress Press: 2013), two-book fourth volume in his series Christian Origins and the Question of God.

Adapted from Richard Rohr, an unpublished talk, February 2015 at the Center for Action and Contemplation.


P.S. Hum! This might be a good post, for that poster with the "off the wall", non-free will, Pauline theology - to read :lol:

Image
Charismatic / Eastern Anglo-Catholic/ Holy Fool; Inclusivist / Purgatorial Conditionalist / Nicene Creed / Theosis;
Franciscan Contemplation (i.e. Fox Golden Key, Mindfulness, Yoga); Healing (i.e. Homeopathy, Kampo / TCM, Ayurveda, Spiritual);
User avatar
Holy-Fool-P-Zombie
 
Posts: 2665
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 3:30 pm
Location: Near Chicago or hanging out with Holy Fools, Zombies, P-Zombies, Nerds and Geeks

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby qaz » Mon Jul 17, 2017 11:24 am

I am starting to subscribe to emergent dualism. If you have time, gives this a lesson. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0hlkZOpdZIo
qaz
 
Posts: 1360
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:51 am

Re: What kind of dualism?

Postby maintenanceman » Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:47 pm

Hey Randy, how do I get to the 'really bad theology' :lol: just up my alley. 8-)

:lol: :lol: :lol:
User avatar
maintenanceman
 
Posts: 1188
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 4:22 am

Previous

Return to Philosophical

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

cron