Jesus

[sixpence]

[Ziggamafu]

The Incarnation is of course the central truth of Christianity. I wonder at how easily and comfortably we state our faith in the Incarnation, however. It is such a radical and incomparable doctrine. How many of us would have had the faith we have now had we been Jewish contemporaries of Christ? How many of us would have looked on a "just" another hairy, sweaty, street-preacher and believed? This thread is a great opportunity to reflect on the audacity of Christian faith.

If anything is proof that faith is a supernatural gift, it is the record of believers in the Gospel stories. I see David Blaine and Lance Burton do things that look impossible, with inspirational messages attached to them; I do not think the clever magicians truly have supernatural powers. I hear about people making unbelievable claims and gaining followers; their gentleness and apparent sanity do not make me feel compelled to join the cult. And if I heard that somebody was raised from the dead, even if forecast ahead of time, I would believe the alleged appearances to be deception.

No, I believe that faith in the Son of God is a [i]gift[/i]. Not a product of rationalization or something to be blithely accepted. Faith is itself a [i]miracle[/i]. Not a "duh" moment. The Gospel can only be offered; it can neither be forced, nor proven.

[Apotheoun]

Remember that at the Transfiguration there was no alteration in Christ, for He is the same yesterday, today, and forever. The change occurred in the Apostles, whose eyes were opened to see in the power of the Spirit what was always visible to anyone who was properly attuned by grace.

[Ziggamafu]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='26 July 2010 - 02:31 PM' timestamp='1280169091' post='2148295']
Remember that at the Transfiguration there was no alteration in Christ, for He is the same yesterday, today, and forever. The change occurred in the Apostles, whose eyes were opened to see in the power of the Spirit what was always visible to anyone who was properly attuned by grace.
[/quote]

His human nature was not, I think, different than any other human. The change was the perception of the divine nature by means of supernatural revelation. Most people do not experience a supernatural revelation that intersects with the natural world, as the Apostles did. Most people's gift of faith is a revelation that does not touch their physical experience. So in looking at Christ with their physical senses, they would "see" just another hairy, dirty, sweaty, stinky guy. That's why faith in the Incarnation is so radical.

[kafka]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' date='27 July 2010 - 11:52 AM' timestamp='1280245925' post='2148687']
His human nature was not, I think, different than any other human. The change was the perception of the divine nature by means of supernatural revelation. Most people do not experience a supernatural revelation that intersects with the natural world, as the Apostles did. Most people's gift of faith is a revelation that does not touch their physical experience. So in looking at Christ with their physical senses, they would "see" just another hairy, dirty, sweaty, stinky guy. That's why faith in the Incarnation is so radical.
[/quote]
Isaiah
{53:1} Who has believed our report? And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?
{53:2} And he will rise up like a tender plant in his sight, and like a root from the thirsty ground. There is no beautiful or stately appearance in him. For we looked upon him, and there was no aspect, such that we would desire him.

so good point. On the otherhand, he was not a rag-tag slovenly Person. When he taught he was brilliant, genius. The Jewish people would often say, no one has ever taught or spoken like him. He spoke with authority. He did things majestically and with reverence before the face of his Father. A sincere human person would be able to recognize the goodness and beauty of his Person in his face, actions, words, etc.

Edited July 27, 2010 by kafka

[Ziggamafu]

[quote name='kafka' date='27 July 2010 - 12:06 PM' timestamp='1280246804' post='2148692']
Isaiah
{53:1} Who has believed our report? And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?
{53:2} And he will rise up like a tender plant in his sight, and like a root from the thirsty ground. There is no beautiful or stately appearance in him. For we looked upon him, and there was no aspect, such that we would desire him.

so good point. On the otherhand, he was not a rag-tag slovenly Person. When he taught he was brilliant, genius. The Jewish people would often say, no one has ever taught or spoken like him. He spoke with authority. He did things majestically and with reverence before the face of his Father.
[/quote]

It is one thing to hear someone speak and come away thinking, [i]Wow, that guy has got to be the greatest communicator in human history; I wonder if he's some sort of communication-savant?[/i] Quite another to come away thinking, [i]That guy is the Infinite & Eternal One; the Creator-God Almighty!!![/i] Sure, you might even find it reasonable to think He is prophet or the greatest among humans. But believing that God has become flesh is a hugely different thing.

As for "slovenly", I would never use an offensive term toward Christ; the qualities I mentioned in reference to His human nature (e.g. "stinky") are perfectly natural and perfectly human. Deodorant didn't exist at that time and neither did scented soaps (at least not to commoners). My point in all of this is to emphasize just how extraordinary and outlandish the doctrine of the Incarnation should seem even to those of us blessed to have received the gift of faith. It is easier to think of Christ as God than it is to think of Christ as a man.

Edited July 27, 2010 by Ziggamafu

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' date='27 July 2010 - 09:52 AM' timestamp='1280245925' post='2148687']
His human nature was not, I think, different than any other human. The change was the perception of the divine nature by means of supernatural revelation. Most people do not experience a supernatural revelation that intersects with the natural world, as the Apostles did. Most people's gift of faith is a revelation that does not touch their physical experience.
[/quote]
I agree that Christ's human nature is identical to that of every other man, which is why I said in another post that there is no sin in nature, but only in the personal employment of nature. As far as seeing Christ's divinity is concerned, every man can see it if he has the gift of the eyes of the Spirit, that is, if he is participating in the uncreated energies of God.

[quote name='Ziggamafu' date='27 July 2010 - 09:52 AM' timestamp='1280245925' post='2148687']
So in looking at Christ with their physical senses, they would "see" just another hairy, dirty, sweaty, stinky guy. That's why faith in the Incarnation is so radical.[/quote]
I do not agree. In the Byzantine spiritual tradition a man who sees Christ in this way would be viewed as lacking faith, not possessing it.

Edited July 27, 2010 by Apotheoun

[Ziggamafu]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='27 July 2010 - 02:00 PM' timestamp='1280253610' post='2148739']
I do not agree. In the Byzantine spiritual tradition a man who sees Christ in this way would be viewed as lacking faith, not possessing it.
[/quote]

One would lack faith if that is all one saw, but in regards to [i]physical perception alone[/i], you think there would still be seen a difference from other men?

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' date='27 July 2010 - 12:04 PM' timestamp='1280253862' post='2148740']
One would lack faith if that is all one saw, but in regards to [i]physical perception alone[/i], you think there would still be seen a difference from other men?
[/quote]
I sometimes sense a quasi-Nestorian viewpoint in your comments. The human nature of Christ within His one divine subsistence is distinct from His divine nature in "contemplation only" (τὴ θεωρὶα μόνη) as the Fifth Ecumenical Council decreed.

[Ziggamafu]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='27 July 2010 - 02:09 PM' timestamp='1280254182' post='2148745']
I sometimes sense a quasi-Nestorian viewpoint in your comments.
[/quote]

Ew. Has Karl Adam's [i]Christ of Faith[/i] polluted my mind?

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' date='27 July 2010 - 12:15 PM' timestamp='1280254532' post='2148750']
Ew. Has Karl Adam's [i]Christ of Faith[/i] polluted my mind?
[/quote]
I read that book back in the 1980s, and must admit that I no longer find it valuable.

[Ziggamafu]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='27 July 2010 - 02:23 PM' timestamp='1280254981' post='2148756']
I read that book back in the 1980s, and must admit that I no longer find it valuable.
[/quote]

It has definitely been the most lastingly and deeply influential book of christology that I've ever read. If you recall reading it, I'm kind of making paraphrased regurgitations of what his points were.

[Apotheoun]

For Christology I found the books listed below helpful:

[url="http://books.google.com/books?id=x0Lnu_cm-GAC&printsec=frontcover&dq=the+unity+of+christ&hl=en&ei=sidPTP71JIyksQP6lJnbBw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false"]On the Unity of Christ[/url] by St. Cyril of Alexandria

[url="http://books.google.com/books?id=QxhR9ihUAWkC&printsec=frontcover&dq=the+christology+of+st.+cyril+of+alexandria&hl=en&ei=yCdPTJvIHZC8sQPOx_HvBw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=the%20christology%20of%20st.%20cyril%20of%20alexandria&f=false"]St. Cyril of Alexandria and the Christological Controversy[/url]

Edited July 27, 2010 by Apotheoun