From: hartigan@ac.dal.ca
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Christology 101 [was: There are two years left!]
Date: 10 Sep 92 11:55:25 -0300
Organization: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

In article <Sep.10.01.15.31.1992.19629@athos.rutgers.edu>, hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu (Charles Hedrick) writes:
> hartigan@ac.dal.ca writes:
> 
>>In article <Sep.7.20.10.23.1992.7388@athos.rutgers.edu>, hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu (Charles Hedrick) writes:
> 
>>> the Logos.  As a human, he is subject to the normal human limitations.
> 
>>Right. Like being able to raise the dead, walk on water, calm storms, etc.
>>I understand now. It's all so clear...:)
> 
> Note that the early church (and even some current Christians) are
> reported to have done similar acts.  They are not because of any
> metaphysical difference between Jesus and other humans, but because
> God's power worked through him.  He had a special role, and thus a
> more direct access to God's power, but it is God's power, which is
> separate from Jesus' nature as a human being.  Christians do not
> regard Jesus as superman, i.e. someone who as a human being has extra
> powers.  Such views have been suggested, but are considered heretical.

Are you sure about this? To me, it is your views that sound heretical. 
The version of the Nicene Creed in Kenneth Scott Latourette's 
_A History of Christianity, Vol.1_  reads, in part...

 We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of all things visible
 and invisible, and in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only-
 begotten of the Father, that is, of the substance of the Father, God
 from God, light from light, true God from true God, begotten, not made,
 of one substance with the Father, through whom all things came to be, those
 things that are in heaven and those things that are on earth, who for us
 men and for our salvation came down and was made flesh, and was made man,
 suffered, rose the third day, ascended into the heavens, and will come
 to judge the living and the dead.

This says that "Jesus Christ" is "true God from true God." It says that
"Jesus Christ" is "of one substance with the father," "suffered, rose the
the third day, etc."   

In other words, Jesus was not just an ordinary guy with the power of God
working through him. He was "true God from true God." 

Your view smacks of the Apollinarian heresy, actually, which, according
to Latourette "held that the _Logos_ dwelt in Jesus much as God dwells in
a temple."   Latourette adds that "Emphatic decisions against the views
of Apollinaris were pronounced by various synods...and in 381 by the Council
of Constantinople which condemned the Arians."

Tsk, tsk...:)

> 
>>Besides, doesn't the Nicene creed state that Jesus is of the same
>>substance as the Father?  
> 
> No, it says that the Son is of the same substance as the Father.  As I
> commented before, "son" is used in several different ways.  Here it's
> talking about the eternal Logos, not Jesus as a human being.

In fact, it DOES say that "Jesus Christ" is of the same substance as the
Father.

See the Creed, above. Your views do not coincide with the Creed. I guess
you're a heretic! :)

 Re: the Trinity

>
> Then it's important to realize that the Trinity is not about the
> relationship between Jesus and God.  The Trinity is about the unity of
> God.  When it speaks of the Son, it is the eternal Logos that is
> involved.  The doctrine that speaks of God becoming man is the
> Incarnation.  The critical document there is the formula of Chalcedon.
> It attempts to strike a delicate balance, maintaining on the one hand
> that in Jesus, God himself is present, but that the presence is in a
> fashion that does not compromise Jesus' humanity.  I'm not entirely
> happy with the results.  I don't think Greek metaphysics were the
> ideal tool to use to describe this.  But the basic points that they
> were trying to make are clear enough.  One of them is that in Jesus,
> there are two things that we must keep conceptually separate: a human
> being, and God's presence.  God's presence is somehow through Jesus'
> humanity.  It does not turn Jesus into something else, whether
> superman or demigod.

The formula of Chalcedon states...(again, from Latourette)

 Following the holy fathers we all, with one voice, define that there is 
 to be confessed one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, perfect in 
 Godhead and perfect in manhood, truly God and truly man, of rational soul
 and body, of the same substance with the Father according to the Godhead, and
 of the same substance to us according to the manhood...the peculiarity of
 each nature being preserved in one person and one substance, not 
 parted or separated into two persons....
 
You are emphasizing only one half of the equation. There are two natures,
but in Jesus of Nazareth these two natures were One substance.
This emphasis you make would have got you excommunicated as an
Apollinarian in the fifth century.

Jesus was certainly NOT a normal human being, with God "present in
and through Jesus" as you say below. Not according to these two creeds.

> 
> It's unfortunate that Christians insist on saying "Jesus is God".
> There's nothing wrong with that statement when made in the proper
> context.  But to people on the outside, it's very misleading.  It
> suggests that we are completely identifying two rather different
> things: a human being and God. 

See above - "of one substance." "True God from true God..."
This identification is the hallmark of Christian orthodoxy. From which
you seem to have regretfully departed. :)

> We do believe that God was present in
> and through Jesus, so that Jesus' acts are God's acts, and Jesus
> reveals God's nature to us.  But Christian theology keeps his humanity
> and God's identication with him carefully separate.  Confusing
> Christ's humanity and divinity is one of the classic heresies.

Wow! Calling the Creeds of Nicea and Chalcedon "heresies!"
Better not let your minister hear you say that...:) 

Strictly speaking, NOT con-fusing (putting together) Christ's humanity
and divinity is the mark of heresy. The Apollinarians stressed Jesus'
humanity, saying that God/Logos was present in him. The Monophysites
stressed his Divinity.  Both points of view were condemned as heretical.

So...where did this all start? Oh yeah...Jesus was certainly NOT 
subject to ordinary human limitations, unless you call being
"true God from true God" a normal human limitation. If you do, then
you're a Hindu, not a Christian! How's that for heresy? :)

Sean Hartigan
hartigan@ac.dal.ca
Xref: sparky talk.religion.misc:15831 alt.atheism:16692