M
Micosil
Guest
It would seem “assumed” was used there with the meaning of “took on”, if I am not mistaken.
- Status
G
grannymh
Guest
In brief. There are three Persons, yes Persons, real Persons in the divine nature, which means divine and not human, in the Most Holy Trinity. The words person and nature are precisely used in Catholicism. The Most Holy Trinity is solid in the Catholic Church.
A person has a specific nature. A human person is not a dog or a bear because a person has a human nature and not a dog nature and not a bear nature. A human person cannot change his nature when it rains. God also has an unchangeable nature.
It does not matter to me if you believe in the Most Holy Trinity, or deny the Most Holy Trinity, or exclude the Most Holy Trinity because you have a human nature which is not capable of destroying the Divine Nature of God. It does not matter to me if you accept Catholic teachings, or deny Catholic teachings, or exclude Catholic teachings, the Catholic Church will not crumble into a black hole.
I realize and accept the fact that a person with a human nature will have difficulty with the concept of three separate Persons having the same single nature which is divine, not human, not dog, etc.,
Jesus Christ is a divine Person. Because His divine nature is greater than a human nature, He can do more things than a human person can. Because Jesus Christ is a divine Person, He can assume human nature which means adding an additional nature to His divine Person. Please note that He is not changing His fundamental nature, He is adding a nature to His Person. His Person is assuming a second nature which happens to be a human nature. His Person has a divine nature; therefore, His Person is capable of assuming a secondary nature per se. Please note that Jesus Christ assumes human nature as a pure human nature without any kind of sin. Jesus Christ, having a divine nature, does not have to sin in order to assume human nature.
Because Jesus Christ is divine, He does not have to change His nature to human. All He has to do is to take upon Himself (assume) the separate human nature. Assuming a human nature does not require that the Person Jesus Christ change His divine nature to a lower level. The divine nature of the three Persons in the Blessed Trinity is solid.
Jesus Christ is a Person Who has His own specific nature similar to humans who have their own specific nature. What is being proposed in this thread is basically that the divine Person has to downgrade His particular nature so He can add an additional nature.
G
grannymh
Guest
That is how the word assumed in used in post 22.
M
Micosil
Guest
Beautifully explained!In brief. There are three Persons, yes Persons, real Persons in the divine nature, which means divine and not human, in the Most Holy Trinity. The words person and nature are precisely used in Catholicism. The Most Holy Trinity is solid in the Catholic Church.
A person has a specific nature. A human person is not a dog or a bear because a person has a human nature and not a dog nature and not a bear nature. A human person cannot change his nature when it rains. God also has an unchangeable nature.
It does not matter to me if you believe in the Most Holy Trinity, or deny the Most Holy Trinity, or exclude the Most Holy Trinity because you have a human nature which is not capable of destroying the Divine Nature of God. It does not matter to me if you accept Catholic teachings, or deny Catholic teachings, or exclude Catholic teachings, the Catholic Church will not crumble into a black hole.
I realize and accept the fact that a person with a human nature will have difficulty with the concept of three separate Persons having the same single nature which is divine, not human, not dog, etc.,
Jesus Christ is a divine Person. Because His divine nature is greater than a human nature, He can do more things than a human person can. Because Jesus Christ is a divine Person, He can assume human nature which means adding an additional nature to His divine Person. Please note that He is not changing His fundamental nature, He is adding a nature to His Person. His Person is assuming a second nature which happens to be a human nature. His Person has a divine nature; therefore, His Person is capable of assuming a secondary nature per se. Please note that Jesus Christ assumes human nature as a pure human nature without any kind of sin. Jesus Christ, having a divine nature, does not have to sin in order to assume human nature.
Because Jesus Christ is divine, He does not have to change His nature to human. All He has to do is to take upon Himself (assume) the separate human nature. Assuming a human nature does not require that the Person Jesus Christ change His divine nature to a lower level. The divine nature of the three Persons in the Blessed Trinity is solid.
Jesus Christ is a Person Who has His own specific nature similar to humans who have their own specific nature. What is being proposed in this thread is basically that the divine Person has to downgrade His particular nature so He can add an additional nature.
B
Bahman
Guest
Your long post didn’t helped much. Let me put things together to see where is the problem. Trinity simply means that we have one being, God, and three persons. We also have Jesus as human being which means that we have a human soul and a body. This means that we have a new being (human) unless he is unified with the second person of Trinity, son of God. So far so good. Here is the problem: Jesus as human being is human whereas the second person of Trinity is God so there is a problem in unifying them. This is a problem because of many reasons: 1) You cannot possibly unite a changeable being with a changeless being, 2) God undergoes a change upon unification which is not allowed, 3) God is in state of timeless where as human is in state of time bound so again we have problem with unification,…In brief. There are three Persons, yes Persons, real Persons in the divine nature, which means divine and not human, in the Most Holy Trinity. The words person and nature are precisely used in Catholicism. The Most Holy Trinity is solid in the Catholic Church.
A person has a specific nature. A human person is not a dog or a bear because a person has a human nature and not a dog nature and not a bear nature. A human person cannot change his nature when it rains. God also has an unchangeable nature.
It does not matter to me if you believe in the Most Holy Trinity, or deny the Most Holy Trinity, or exclude the Most Holy Trinity because you have a human nature which is not capable of destroying the Divine Nature of God. It does not matter to me if you accept Catholic teachings, or deny Catholic teachings, or exclude Catholic teachings, the Catholic Church will not crumble into a black hole.
I realize and accept the fact that a person with a human nature will have difficulty with the concept of three separate Persons having the same single nature which is divine, not human, not dog, etc.,
Jesus Christ is a divine Person. Because His divine nature is greater than a human nature, He can do more things than a human person can. Because Jesus Christ is a divine Person, He can assume human nature which means adding an additional nature to His divine Person. Please note that He is not changing His fundamental nature, He is adding a nature to His Person. His Person is assuming a second nature which happens to be a human nature. His Person has a divine nature; therefore, His Person is capable of assuming a secondary nature per se. Please note that Jesus Christ assumes human nature as a pure human nature without any kind of sin. Jesus Christ, having a divine nature, does not have to sin in order to assume human nature.
Because Jesus Christ is divine, He does not have to change His nature to human. All He has to do is to take upon Himself (assume) the separate human nature. Assuming a human nature does not require that the Person Jesus Christ change His divine nature to a lower level. The divine nature of the three Persons in the Blessed Trinity is solid.
Jesus Christ is a Person Who has His own specific nature similar to humans who have their own specific nature. What is being proposed in this thread is basically that the divine Person has to downgrade His particular nature so He can add an additional nature.
I hope this help to understand the source of problem.
G
grannymh
Guest
You can start to understand the source of the problem by referring to Jesus as a Divine Person. Think and say Divine Person, Divine Person, Divine…
B
Bahman
Guest
Did you mean Son of God or Jesus as human being?
G
grannymh
Guest
Thank you for your response.
Divine Person — God is three Divine Persons in one Divine Nature.
The names of the three Divine Persons are Father, Son, Holy Spirit. We say those three names when we make the Sign of the Cross.
We also refer to God without saying those three names. We simply say God because there is one Divine Nature. Another way we speak about God is to say that there are three Divine Persons in the one Most Holy Trinity.
With the above in our minds, we go to your valid question: “Did you mean Son of God or Jesus as human being?”
When we study the above, we find that none of the Persons in the Most Holy Trinity are an “either - or” Person. When we make the Sign of the Cross, we do not say in the name of the Father, in the name of either Son of God Person or the Person Jesus. When we pray, we do not first look at the calendar and say – today is an even number; therefore, we will pray to God the Son Person and since tomorrow, being an odd number, we will pray to the Jesus Person. The Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity is not an “either - or” deal. It does not matter which name we call the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity, the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity is still one Person.
In other words, we do not normally call a kitten an elephant. Each is a single creature in the animal kingdom. Nor is it expected that when we bring a kitten home, the next morning we will find an elephant at the foot of our bed.
The point is that the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity will always be one Person regardless of how this one Person is described.
Comments?
When we look at a kitten and an elephant in the pet store, we normally consider the nature of each. Which nature will we hold on our lap? Perhaps we need to check if we are seeing “pink elephants.”
When we think about God, we normally think about a Divine Nature. God is super-natural. If God were one person, we would describe that person as having a Divine Nature. The Catholic Church says that there are three Persons in one Divine Nature. That statement at face value means that each Person has a Divine Nature. The Catholic Church does not say that it is possible that a Person in the Most Holy Trinity can lose His Divine Nature.
The Catholic Church does not picture God the Father saying that His Son lost His Divine Nature when He chose to visit the material world in a nature which would be familiar to earth’s inhabitants.
Instead, the Catholic Church listens to Matthew 3: 16- 17 usccb.org/bible/matthew/3
16
After Jesus was baptized, He came up from the water and behold, the heavens were opened [for Him], and He saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove [and] coming upon Him.
17
And a voice came from the heavens, saying, “This is My beloved Son,* with whom I am well pleased.”
Comments before continuing ?
B
Bahman
Guest
So far no comments. I am just wondering why Jesus needed to be baptised.Thank you for your response.
Divine Person — God is three Divine Persons in one Divine Nature.
The names of the three Divine Persons are Father, Son, Holy Spirit. We say those three names when we make the Sign of the Cross.
We also refer to God without saying those three names. We simply say God because there is one Divine Nature. Another way we speak about God is to say that there are three Divine Persons in the one Most Holy Trinity.
With the above in our minds, we go to your valid question: “Did you mean Son of God or Jesus as human being?”
When we study the above, we find that none of the Persons in the Most Holy Trinity are an “either - or” Person. When we make the Sign of the Cross, we do not say in the name of the Father, in the name of either Son of God Person or the Person Jesus. When we pray, we do not first look at the calendar and say – today is an even number; therefore, we will pray to God the Son Person and since tomorrow, being an odd number, we will pray to the Jesus Person. The Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity is not an “either - or” deal. It does not matter which name we call the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity, the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity is still one Person.
In other words, we do not normally call a kitten an elephant. Each is a single creature in the animal kingdom. Nor is it expected that when we bring a kitten home, the next morning we will find an elephant at the foot of our bed.
The point is that the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity will always be one Person regardless of how this one Person is described.
Comments?
When we look at a kitten and an elephant in the pet store, we normally consider the nature of each. Which nature will we hold on our lap? Perhaps we need to check if we are seeing “pink elephants.”
When we think about God, we normally think about a Divine Nature. God is super-natural. If God were one person, we would describe that person as having a Divine Nature. The Catholic Church says that there are three Persons in one Divine Nature. That statement at face value means that each Person has a Divine Nature. The Catholic Church does not say that it is possible that a Person in the Most Holy Trinity can lose His Divine Nature.
The Catholic Church does not picture God the Father saying that His Son lost His Divine Nature when He chose to visit the material world in a nature which would be familiar to earth’s inhabitants.
Instead, the Catholic Church listens to Matthew 3: 16- 17 usccb.org/bible/matthew/3
16
After Jesus was baptized, He came up from the water and behold, the heavens were opened [for Him], and He saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove [and] coming upon Him.
17
And a voice came from the heavens, saying, “This is My beloved Son,* with whom I am well pleased.”
Comments before continuing ?
D
davidv
Guest
F
fisherman_carl
Guest
B
Bahman
Guest
You baptise for salvation. Did Jesus need baptism?
D
davidv
Guest
Stop diverting. Please address my question.
B
Bahman
Guest
By need I mean simple plain need. Do you know why he was baptized?
M
Micosil
Guest
Why did Mary make a sin offering in Luke 2:24, even though she was (according to Catholic understanding, anyway) sinless?
catholic.com/quickquestions/at-the-presentation-why-did-mary-make-a-sin-offering-lk-224-lv-128-if-she-was-without
D
davidv
Guest
Yes. How does the answer have anything to do with this thread?
B
Bahman
Guest
I just was curious.
J
JapaneseKappa
Guest
You’re talking past Bahman to a certain extent. He is not arguing against the possibility of having multiple natures, or divvying up one nature between multiple entities.A person has a specific nature. A human person is not a dog or a bear because a person has a human nature and not a dog nature and not a bear nature. A human person cannot change his nature when it rains. God also has an unchangeable nature.
I realize and accept the fact that a person with a human nature will have difficulty with the concept of three separate Persons having the same single nature which is divine, not human, not dog, etc.,
Jesus Christ is a divine Person. Because His divine nature is greater than a human nature, He can do more things than a human person can.
Jesus Christ is a Person Who has His own specific nature similar to humans who have their own specific nature. What is being proposed in this thread is basically that the divine Person has to downgrade His particular nature so He can add an additional nature.
Suppose you have “Nature A” that entails whoever or whatever has that nature is perfectly good. Suppose you also have “Nature B”, which says that whoever or whatever has that nature is perfectly evil.
Now, suppose we want to assert that there exists an entity who possesses both Nature A and Nature B. Most people would say that this is impossible, since having both natures would imply that the entity is both perfectly good and perfectly evil.
That is the sort of objection that Bahman is leveling against the concept of a hypostatic union (except with changeability instead of good/evil.)
G
grannymh
Guest
You have a good point.
Personally, I think the problem is the Person aspect. For example. There is Nature A and Nature B. Natures do not exist by themselves. Now, what kind of Person has Nature A etc.?
I did see "Suppose you have “Nature A”
Who is the Person? Or what kind of Person?
J
JapaneseKappa
Guest
First off, I strongly suspect that the use of terms like “person” and “nature” as both common and proper nouns is an intentional apologetic tactic to make subtle equivocations easier. Indeed, when I read things like this from the Catholic Encyclopedia, I become even more suspicious:
“From the theological point of view the distinctions between nature and person… are of primary importance. The former arose from the dogma of the Trinity, i.e., of one Divine Nature in three persons, and chiefly from that of the Incarnation, i.e., of the two Natures, Divine and human, in the one Divine Person in Christ.”
Because what I hear is “we couldn’t explain our theological beliefs without drawing subtle distinctions between terms with heavy colloquial baggage.”
You are somewhat right to say natures don’t exist by themselves, but according to the Catholic Encyclopedia: “Nature properly signifies that which is primitive and original, or, according to etymology, that which a thing is at birth, as opposed to that which is acquired or added from external sources.”
So it looks like the situation is this:
- There exists a general human nature that is a collection of properties you get by virtue of being human. It is some subset of the necessary and sufficient conditions for being human.
- There exists a particular and unique nature that we each get according to our genetics/God/accidents of birth. These are things like temperament or personality quirks or vocations.
- A “person” is a poorly-defined entity that has one or more natures (both types 1. and 2.) and possibly something else, but theologians disagree about what that something else is, or if it exists at all.
- The “divine humanity” in Christ has a type 1 human nature and a type 2 nature but is not a person by itself.
- Christ has the “divine humanity” as well as a type 1 “God nature” (at least, he could have others)
- Status