Christology is not a simple subject. Even so I would say that making categories a,b,c, regarding what comprises a human or “a complete human” are not very satisfactory, much less applied to Christ. One can make a set of word to comprise a definition and invalidate that criteria with formal logical examination. One might define the parameters for an ostrich and if it includes fins then the criterion is wrong. One never gets anything more than words that are logically consistent with the criterion you built. Words are different than objects.
There is the additional problem of words as definite articles compounded, with those words individually difficult to define through reductionist procedures. One has trouble defining a spirit, a mind etc. especially as contingent objects. The divine nature and character cannot be defined exhaustively for that is not an object of human knowledge. How the Spirit of God indwells Christ as a human is not something that can definitely be known. neither is it simple to define what a soul is or how it is constructed; it could just be information or a record that God keeps of the data of a human life. If programmers can know the data that makes a program or an AI and recover it if hardware breaks down I am sure that God can do better than the best quantum computer would ever be able to do in order to capture the entirety of information that makes a human being, soul etc. what it is.
At end one can say that Christ was fully human and God. He is The Son and is Spirit as are the Father and the Holy Spirit. As a human physically he knew God the Father. One cannot satisfy the criterion of defining the proportions or composition of Jesus in regard to the other two members of the Triune God through physical means.
No comments:
Post a Comment