Right Divider
Body part
A human nature, but without sin.And what is included in the human nature He took on?
A human nature, but without sin.And what is included in the human nature He took on?
Right, but what do you count as "human nature"?A human nature, but without sin.
Do you really not know what a human nature is?Right, but what do you count as "human nature"?
I don't think everybody that says "human nature" is talking about the same thing, so I'd like to know what you mean when you say it. It isn't that easy a question, is it?Do you really not know what a human nature is?
Jesus took on a human nature. He was a man, like all men... yet without sin.I don't think everybody that says "human nature" is talking about the same thing, so I'd like to know what you mean when you say it. It isn't that easy a question, is it?
Don't be afraid. Just spell it out. What do you mean by "human nature"?Jesus took on a human nature. He was a man, like all men... yet without sin.
1Tim 2:5 (AKJV/PCE)(2:5) For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
Jesus got hungry, tired, thirsty and had the same sexual drives we do, but without our sinful flesh. You ever been tempted to turn stones into bread when hungry? Jesus was after not eating for 40 days but yet was tempted in all points like as we are. So what is our common point of temptation with Jesus? To live the Christian life in our own power. Jesus had that inherent ability. We don't. That's why we sin so often. We are trying to live the Christian life without God's power. If Jesus had ever used His own divinity to not sin for Him it would have been a sin. That's why His life here on earth is an example for us of how to live by faith.Don't be afraid. Just spell it out. What do you mean by "human nature"?
I just did. Are you being dense again?Don't be afraid. Just spell it out. What do you mean by "human nature"?
I'm not the one who keeps using the word I'm defining in the definition.I just did. Are you being dense again?
Jesus became a man. What is your problem?I'm not the one who keeps using the word I'm defining in the definition.
Jesus didn't take on a human nature. He took on the human nature as there is only one human nature and Jeremiah tells us what that nature is like.Jesus took on a human nature. He was a man, like all men... yet without sin.
1Tim 2:5 (AKJV/PCE)(2:5) For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
I get the humor in your comment but the meaning of "death" isn't nearly as obvious as the meaning of the word "mortal", right? "mortal" is sort of a yes or a no issue. One can either die or not. What does it mean to die, that's a completely different ball game. Maybe that's where Gary's confusion is at.No, our disagreement was based solely on the completely obvious meaning of the single word "death", which is hardly anything like "mortal".
I've heard this my whole life and never really understood what it meant. I'm pretty sure that I've never seen anyone establish it biblically.No, He took upon Himself a SECOND nature.
No, God does not change some of His "eternally-held characteristics".
Jesus took on a SECOND nature as a human.
I am not claiming "two separate natures". Jesus took on a SECOND nature without "giving up" any of His nature as God. Did God the Son have a human nature before the incarnation? Does He have one now? Is the human nature identical to His nature as deity?I've heard this my whole life and never really understood what it meant. I'm pretty sure that I've never seen anyone establish it biblically.
It seems to me that God the Son became a man and died and rose from the dead - period. He is now both God and a human. His nature changed, to be sure, but I see no evidence that He has TWO separate natures but rather He is now One unified "theánthropos" - God-man.
This sound like blaspheme.Jesus didn't take on a human nature. He took on the human nature as there is only one human nature and Jeremiah tells us what that nature is like.
Jeremiah 17: 9 ¶ The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?
What does that mean, "took on a SECOND nature"? He does not have two natures, so far as I can see. He has One totally divine, totally righteous, totally perfect nature that now includes being a man.I am not claiming "two separate natures". Jesus took on a SECOND nature without "giving up" any of His nature as God.
No.Did God the Son have a human nature before the incarnation?
Yes.Does He have one now?
Wrong question. The question, as posed, presupposes the idea that this human nature is separate and apart from His deity, which is the question at hand.Is the human nature identical to His nature as deity?
I see no, "second" nature. It is merely a change in His nature (singular). God the Son isn't a bifurcated being nor are there four members of the Trinity, right?You cannot have it both ways (i.e., taking on a second nature that is not a second nature).
It means that Jesus did not have a human nature (which includes a human body) before He took on a human nature (which includes a human body).What does that mean, "took on a SECOND nature"?
Jesus did not have a human body before He took one on. Is having a human body part of having a human nature? (Yes, it is).He does not have two natures, so far as I can see. He has One totally divine, totally righteous, totally perfect nature that now includes being a man.
As God, could Jesus die? After He took on a human body, He could die. Are these not two natures?Wrong question. The question, as posed, presupposes the idea that this human nature is separate and apart from His deity, which is the question at hand.
Indeed, but at one time He did NOT have "part of what makes Him, Him"; His human body.You might as well ask me whether an hour hand is identical in nature to being a clock. The question doesn't make sense. The hour hand is part of an integrated whole that we call a "clock". Put another way, just as you own body is part of make you, you. God the Son's humanity is part of what makes Him, Him!
I hope you know that I do not argue against that.God the Son is now Jesus the Man.
BOTH is TWO things. Separate only in the sense that they are TWO THINGS.It doesn't take away anything from His deity, nor does His deity subtract from Him being a man. His is both.
You seem to be covering your eyes.I see no, "second" nature.
Perhaps we are simply battling semantics here. The ONE person Jesus is BOTH (ie., two) things. He is God and man. They are not "separate" in the sense that they are the SAME Jesus.It is merely a change in His nature (singular). God the Son isn't a bifurcated being nor are there four members of the Trinity, right?
Good! Now let's go back to how this part of the conversation got started:Jesus became a man.
And you responded:So Jesus was immortal, then He became mortal, right?
You said above that Jesus became a man. Here's a definition of "mortal" from Merriam-Webster:No, He took upon Himself a SECOND nature.
as here:He laid aside some of His eternally-held characteristics to become flesh.
No, God does not change some of His "eternally-held characteristics".
I'll reply to some other posts on this, as the conversation is continuing (and is a good conversation to have).Jesus took on a SECOND nature as a human.
It seems that if God (even putting aside the trinity part of the equation for now) became something else while still remaining God, then He must have added something, in this case "man-ness" or "human nature".What does that mean, "took on a SECOND nature"? He does not have two natures, so far as I can see. He has One totally divine, totally righteous, totally perfect nature that now includes being a man.
No.
Yes.
Wrong question. The question, as posed, presupposes the idea that this human nature is separate and apart from His deity, which is the question at hand.
You might as well ask me whether an hour hand is identical in nature to being a clock. The question doesn't make sense. The hour hand is part of an integrated whole that we call a "clock". Put another way, just as you own body is part of make you, you. God the Son's humanity is part of what makes Him, Him!
God the Son is now Jesus the Man. It doesn't take away anything from His deity, nor does His deity subtract from Him being a man. His is both.
I see no, "second" nature. It is merely a change in His nature (singular). God the Son isn't a bifurcated being nor are there four members of the Trinity, right?
Yes!It means that Jesus did not have a human nature (which includes a human body) before He took on a human nature (which includes a human body).
Yes!Jesus did not have a human body before He took one on. Is having a human body part of having a human nature? (Yes, it is).
Not to derail, but aren't these conflicting things? 1. That He was immortal (could not die), and 2. That He was mortal (He could die).As God, could Jesus die? After He took on a human body, He could die. Are these not two natures?
And after He took on flesh, His human body, He had something that made Him different than He was before, His mortality.Indeed, but at one time He did NOT have "part of what makes Him, Him"; His human body.
Yep. Two things that apply to the same person, whereas previously one of those things did not apply to Him.I hope you know that I do not argue against that.
BOTH is TWO things. Separate only in the sense that they are TWO THINGS.
Which was an important point about immutability...if God never changes in any way, then how could He now have a second nature that he didn't have before.You seem to be covering your eyes.
Perhaps we are simply battling semantics here. The ONE person Jesus is BOTH (ie., two) things. He is God and man. They are not "separate" in the sense that they are the SAME Jesus.
I seem to remember Bob Enyart debating James White about this. Bob argued that Jesus took on a second nature (since He was, at one time, not a man).