Can Jesus be considered as both human and divine?

[Thomas123]

In what manner, can this be done?
Personally speaking, I feel that the message of this human philosophy does not transcend into the 'Divine Realm'.
I would like to debate this point with others.
Thanks.

[AquinasForGod]

[Replying to Thomas123 in post #1]

Of course. A person can be more than one thing, such as a soul and a body. We are a composition of body and soul. A person can also be divine and human without the two natures mixing or changing each other. One divine being united with the person of Christ, which is why there is but one Christ, one person yet two natures, two wills.

[JoeyKnothead]

[Replying to Thomas123 in post #1]

Of course. A person can be more than one thing, such as a soul and a body. We are a composition of body and soul. A person can also be divine and human without the two natures mixing or changing each other. One divine being united with the person of Christ, which is why there is but one Christ, one person yet two natures, two wills.

That and dissociative personal disorder look a lot alike.

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to Thomas123 in post #1]

Of course. A person can be more than one thing, such as a soul and a body. We are a composition of body and soul. A person can also be divine and human without the two natures mixing or changing each other. One divine being united with the person of Christ, which is why there is but one Christ, one person yet two natures, two wills.

Argument from analogy is always a poor argument. Even allowing that (e.g) an human can be two things - such as head and body is no good evidence that there is a soul. What is called a soul could as well be an instinctive human delusion derived from a mind that has self awareness and and instinct to survive.

Cue (as they say ) accusation of bias - based denial. Not really. If there is a soul, I want to know and don't mind if there is. It neither guarantees an afterlife nor a particular god. There are again three levels of validation that will be needed - that there is a soul at all, that it is actually immortal and that it anything to do with a particular god and religion. (1) The First has only just got started with NDEs and OBEs (though I prefer the acronym OOB since you don't get a medal even across the pond for floating up to the ceiling) and the believers haven't really validated their case, despite the usual Believer clamor that the case be accepted just on say - so.

No, you have all the work to do before you can slip from analogy ("A person can be more than one thing") to faith -claim ("we are a composition of body and soul").

Hint: Appeal to Bible or Catholic Dogma validates nothing, no more than pointing to Egyptian wall paintings of the 'Ka' or 'Ba' or to Chinese ghost stories.

(1) I had to add - A priori godfaith obtains here:; the Theist mindset will be that a god exists and a soul, afterlife, heaven (probably hell, too) angels, Jesus and Bible validity all go with it, and the burden of proof is on the unbeliever to debunk every bit of that 100% in real time, provide hard evidence and get the believer to admit it or the atheist loses. We have to understand the Theist mindset before we can make sense of the theist argument.

[Thomas123]

There is a way for this Divine/Human merger to be tenable. I would argue that this is the way that things should have 'played out'.I would argue, with reference to the old/dead pope society that a dynamic element of Jesus followers could still move in this direction.

The polarity of the Divine/Human elements demands that they approach each other for a fusion to occur.

Consider the traditional Judaic Divine figurehead that is Yahweh. This is a 'down and dirty' everyday God. You carry his rules in a box and you respect his capacities to influence every aspect of your life.  
  Jesus insists that the Kingdom of God is near at hand. Can it be any closer than to be within us. Humans show breathtaking capabilities as part of their constant evolvement.

"What a piece of work is a man, How noble in reason, how infinite in faculty, In form and moving how express and admirable, In action how like an Angel, In apprehension how like a god"

If we consider the Divine and the Human in this manner, ie if we consider Jesus within the Judaic tradition, we now have a cog and a wheel, or a wheel and a rim or at least a composite that is coherent and functional.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to Thomas123 in post #24]

if we consider Jesus within the Judaic tradition, we now have a cog and a wheel, or a wheel and a rim or at least a composite that is coherent and functional.

If we consider Jesus as having been tempted in all things common to men [Hebrews 4:15], we can hardly consider him to have had a divine nature which cannot be tempted [James 1:13]. Either someone can be tempted or they can't. It's strictly either/or.

[Thomas123]

Reply to Athetotheist,
Thank You for your contribution here. I cannot consider either of your references to be relevant to what I referred to as 'the Judaic tradition'.They are both later soundbites from a time of conjecture and invention!

[Athetotheist]

Reply to Athetotheist,
Thank You for your contribution here. I cannot consider either of your references to be relevant to what I referred to as 'the Judaic tradition'.They are both later soundbites from a time of conjecture and invention!

I was trying to give an answer to the subject line.

[AquinasForGod]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #23]

But I am not addressing reality but a theological issue. I explained how it can work logically.

If it is true or not is another discussion.

[Thomas123]

Thanks AquinasForGod,
Is theologically logical the same in your book as theoretically logical, or even hypothetically logical. Basically anything can be made to have a sequential narrative regardless of the disparities between it's stages and their own individual incredulous nature.
Consider for example, the dual nature of the vampires in the Twilight Series. Is that how Jesus is God and human simultaneously?

You did not explain how it can work 'logically'
In this thread I am suggesting that it does not work at all, at any level. The whole notion appears to be fabricated fantasy that is ripe for cinematic scriptwriters. I am currently watching The Two Popes,....it passes a wet evening, and that's being kind!

[Thomas123]

"And God created humankind in the divine image,
creating it in the image of God—
creating them male and female."

This is the theological cornerstone of the God in Man Story. Would you like to guess when this declaration first appeared and perhaps suggest it's origins. This is part of Judaic tradition, but where did they get it from? The Christian Christ is an untenable notion without this Judaic precedent.

How robust is the above declaration as a perceived truth or is it assumed to be allegorical in its essence and used in the Judaic tradition to have God speak, get angry, etc etc. Your knowledge and opinions are welcomed here. Thanks!