New theological ideas, right or wrong?

  • Thread starter Thread starter IWantGod
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I

IWantGod

Guest
Is this idea consistent with the faith or erroneous?

Jesus is the truest instantiation of a human being. The human race is merely an imperfect representation of that being. Kinda of like Plato’s forms. Jesus is the form that we represent.

One could go further and say that God’s idea of a human-being is Jesus. And our existence is based on that template.
 
Last edited:
IWantGod said:
One could go further and say that God’s idea of a human-being is Jesus. And our existence is based on that template.
Click to expand...
No, I would say that this isn’t accurate. Jesus is “true God and true Man”, so I would say that this means that we’re not supposed to attain to that. He’s not the “form of human”, so to speak.
 
Jesus showed us how we should live, so in a sense he is an exemplar of humanity.

However, I would not consider him to be something like a Platonic form of humanity.
 
Wouldn’t Mary fulfill that?

CCC 972 After speaking of the Church, her origin, mission, and destiny, we can find no better way to conclude than by looking to Mary. In her we contemplate what the Church already is in her mystery on her own “pilgrimage of faith,” and what she will be in the homeland at the end of her journey. There, “in the glory of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity,” “in the communion of all the saints,”<LG 69> the Church is awaited by the one she venerates as Mother of her Lord and as her own mother.
In the meantime the Mother of Jesus, in the glory which she possesses in body and soul in heaven, is the image and beginning of the Church as it is to be perfected in the world to come. Likewise she shines forth on earth until the day of the Lord shall come, a sign of certain hope and comfort to the pilgrim People of God.<LG 68; Cf. 2 Pet 3 10>
 
It’s not too far off from the Eastern Christian view.

At least to some traditions in the East, like the Syriac, to be made in the “image of God” actually means being made in the image of the New Adam, Christ. In a way, humans were made in reference to the Incarnate Son.
 
RealisticCatholic said:
It’s not too far off from the Eastern Christian view.

At least to some traditions in the East, like the Syriac, to be made in the “image of God” actually means being made in the image of the New Adam, Christ. In a way, humans were made in reference to the Incarnate Son.
Click to expand...
I like the idea that the father made us for his son. For me at least, It would put a new light on the incarnation and the sacrifice that Jesus made for us.

Although i would not argue that this is a necessary interpretation.
 
Last edited:
Gorgias said:
No, I would say that this isn’t accurate. Jesus is “true God and true Man”, so I would say that this means that we’re not supposed to attain to that . He’s not the “form of human”, so to speak.
Click to expand...
Of course, Jesus is one with the father in a way we never could be. But, In another way Jesus bridges the gap between God and the human race through his humanity, and thus in a sense only the humanity of Jesus is worthy of the father. Jesus did say no one can come to the Father except through me.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top