Allen Roy wrote:
> From: "D. F. Siemens, Jr." <dfsiemensjr@juno.com>
> > What Allen posted concerning the soul is standard SDA teaching, usually
> > described as "soul sleep." I consider the claims special pleading. The
> > nonreductionistic monism of Nancey Murphy and others happens to overlap
> > it. As I and Paul noted some time back, the latter group ignores all the
> > scriptures that do not fit their view.
>
> It isn't clear whom you mean by "the latter group." If you are refering to
> SDAs, I'd be happy to consider the scriptures that "do not fit their view."
>
> I will here go further and state
> > that nonreductive monism cannot accommodate the incarnation. I have
> > submitted a paper to EPS arguing this point.
>
> The incarnation was unique. Jesus was fully God who took on human nature,
> and so, was also fully human. Unlike us, He had a dual nature -- divine and
> human, but he never used his divine nature while living on earth. He
> depended fully upon the Father for everything. Because Jesus is God, there
> is no way that he could become exactly like us -- of a single nature. He
> was Divine, that put on humanity. We are just human.
>
> Jesus was tempted just as we all are, in all ways. It may even have been
> harder for Him to live a life of full dependence upon God, because He could
> have done things on His own that we could never do. For instance, Satan
> tempted Him to turn stones to bread so that He could abate his hunger. That
> would never be a temptation for any of us because we could not turn stones
> to bread no matter how hard we tried.
>
> Jesus' dual nature in no way implies that we have a dual nature. Salvation
> does not require for Jesus to quit becoming divine to become human. All
> that matters is that he lived a sinless human life only using the same
> resources that are available to us.
I don't know if anybody in this discussion is making the
error I'm going
to point out but it's worth noting because it is common. Even C.S.
Lewis, as he
later admitted, came close to it at one point.
The classical teaching that Christ is one person in two natures means
that both his human and his divine natures were _complete_ - i.e., there is
absolutely nothing proper to genuine humanity or genuine deity that is missing.
The divine Logos did _not_ take the place of the mind, soul, spirit &c or
anything else in Christ. He had a fully human body, mind, and everything else
that pertains to human nature. Just what everything _is_ that
pertains to human
nature is an anthropological question that doesn't have to be settled in order
to make this statement. If we have souls then Jesus does. If we are body-soul
unities then so is Jesus.
Shalom,
George
George L. Murphy
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
"The Science-Theology Interface"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jul 19 2002 - 10:42:49 EDT