Since Jesus had two natures, one divine and one human, is human nature included in the Trinity, or just the divine nature? What did the early Christians and the traditions have to say about this?

  • I may formulate an answer later, but remember that Jesus is the incarnation of the logos. Therefore his spot in the trinity is reserved for the word - not the flesh and bone. If they found Jesus' remains tomorrow, only a hand full of denominations would have a concern. May 20, 2015 at 19:46
  • 2
    I'll wait but I guess it's impossible for one to find the remains of Jesus since he resurrected in his bodily form as many believe.
    – Max
    May 20, 2015 at 20:00
  • 6
    Finding Jesus' fleshly body would sort of undermine the resurrection. May 20, 2015 at 21:01
  • 1
    Finding Jesus' fleshly body would sort of undermine <strike>the resurrection</strike> the common understanding of the resurrection. May 22, 2015 at 19:01
  • 1
    It has never been universally accepted that there was a physical resurrection. Some believed that it was a spiritual resurrection. There are issues with both sides. May 25, 2015 at 1:01

2 Answers 2


"Is human nature included in the Trinity?" Included it what sense? Everything that is part of God is God, since God is supremely simple. But God is certainly not human nature, although He contains all the perfections of human nature (and more). The Second Person of the Holy Trinity assumed (took up) a human nature.

As St. Thomas says in "Whether the union of the Incarnate Word took place in the Person?":

The Word of God "did not assume human nature in general, but 'in atomo'"—that is, in an individual—as Damascene says (De Fide Orth. iii, 11); otherwise, every man would be the Word of God even as Christ was.

In the question "Whether the human nature was united to the Word of God accidentally?" of St. Thomas Aquinas's Summa Theologica, he states:

the Catholic faith, holding the mean between the aforesaid positions,* does not affirm that the union of God and man took place in the essence or nature, nor yet in something accidental [like clothing is to a man], but midway, in a subsistence or hypostasis.

*[heresies on the Incarnation like Nestorianism]

Also, one could argue this way:

  1. God is not a body.
  2. A human is a body and soul.
  3. Therefore, God is not a human.

Per John 1:1, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." The Word of course was Jesus. Also, from Genesis we see mainly God and the Holy Spirit, the other co-existence of the triune God: "...and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters.…" So Jesus is one with God, although he co-existed as a human being only while He was on this earth. So no, human nature is not included in the Trinity at all, in my belief....

One of the primary sources of the people at that time and which is still existing outside of the Bible by such as St. Paul in his many epistles, is Josephus, who wrote in 93 A.D./C.E. the following [I have the volume at home, but Googled it just now, for which I express my regrets in advance]:

"About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who performed surprising deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Messiah. And when, upon the accusation of the principal men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross, those who had first come to love him did not cease. He appeared to them spending a third day restored to life, for the prophets of God had foretold these things and a thousand other marvels about him. And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared." - Jewish Antiquities, 18.3.3 §63 (Based on the translation of Louis H. Feldman, The Loeb Classical Library.) http://www.josephus.org/testimonium.htm

  • Welcome to the site and thank you for sharing. However, the question asks specifically: "What did the early Christians and the traditions have to say about that?" So this doesn't really count as an answer to that question. If you know of some early sources that say what you've said, then please do tell us and edit that into your post. I hope to see you post again soon.
    – user3961
    May 20, 2015 at 21:10
  • Have added to it and hope to add more. Sorry, but I was posting and then going to add/edit. Did not expect someone so quick to read! Thanks! May 20, 2015 at 21:37

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .