Timeline for Trinitarian Christianity says Jesus was fully God and Fully man. Did Jesus (the man) know this to be the case?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 20 at 4:52 | comment | added | GratefulDisciple | @JimmyOsbert So in that occasion he operates in both natures. My point is not that he NEVER accessed his divine nature, but when he doesn't, he deliberately chose to be "merely human" like us, at which time his divine nature is somewhat obscured from him. See this article which uses the walking on water miracle as illustration, especially the section "But Who Really Walked on Water?". | |
| Sep 20 at 4:38 | comment | added | user77014 | @GratefulDisciple "deliberately not accessing his divine nature while operating in his human nature" cannot work if, for instance, he walked on water. | |
| Sep 19 at 13:08 | history | edited | GratefulDisciple | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
minor grammar
|
| Sep 19 at 13:02 | history | edited | GratefulDisciple | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
add a prologue
|
| Sep 19 at 11:38 | history | edited | GratefulDisciple | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 3 characters in body
|
| Sep 19 at 5:16 | history | edited | GratefulDisciple | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 17 characters in body
|
| Sep 19 at 5:11 | history | edited | GratefulDisciple | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
adding answers to the questions
|
| Sep 19 at 5:05 | history | edited | GratefulDisciple | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
adding answers to the questions
|
| Sep 19 at 2:21 | comment | added | curiousdannii♦ | "most of the time chose not to access it (i.e. not operate in it)" I don't think that's true, but it's more debatable. Edit did help! | |
| Sep 19 at 1:01 | comment | added | GratefulDisciple | @curiousdannii on hindsight, "blinding" may suggest kenoticism which is problematic, but I intend "blinding" not as permanent obscuring, but as deliberately not accessing his divine nature while operating in his human nature. I want to emphasize that it is ONE person here. Since the capacity of human nature is a subset of divine nature, I thought using the analogy "blinding" is appropriate. If my description is faulty, I just want to rephase how Eleonore Stump & Fr. Thomas White explained it. I hope with my edit, I paraphrase it better. | |
| Sep 19 at 0:59 | history | edited | GratefulDisciple | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
remove "blinding" and explain the interaction more clearly as ONE person with TWO natures
|
| Sep 18 at 22:53 | comment | added | curiousdannii♦ | I don't know if "blinding" is the best way of describing the dual nature of Christ... his human nature thinks as a human, and his divine nature thinks as divine. Blinding implies his human nature would be omniscient if it weren't being actively repressed, which I don't think is right. And I'm sure that saying that the divine nature couldn't access his human mind/senses is wrong. | |
| Sep 18 at 19:30 | history | answered | GratefulDisciple | CC BY-SA 4.0 |