The Man Christ Jesus

[hedrick]

In response to question 1 in the OP:

It’s hard to be sure exactly what this question means. However I think it’s fair to say that Christ’s human nature was a normal human nature, so that in principle it could have been a separate human person.

However I would argue that Jesus’ specific human characteristics were conceived from the beginning to be appropriate for the incarnation of the Word. So while they could in principle be the nature of a normal human person, no human person could in the normal course of history have turned out exactly as Jesus did.

The most specific answer I know is from Aquinas. While he doesn’t exactly consider the possibility of God undoing the incarnation, he does say that the only reason Christ’s human nature isn’t a normal human person is because it doesn’t exist on its own but only in the Word. See the reply to objection 3 of Article 2 here: http://www.newadvent.org/summa/4002.htm#article2. I think that’s pretty close to a yes answer. I’m pretty sure not all orthodox theologians would agree with this answer.

Of course this is all based on the classical approach to Christology. Most modern theology thinks of the Incarnation in functional terms, in which case your original question probably doesn’t make sense.

 

[Aner]

Hedrick

What do you think this statement of Aquinas actually means

"the only reason Christ’s human nature isn’t a normal human person is because it doesn’t exist on its own"

Does this mean that Jesus would not be able to function without an incarnated deity? Does it mean that there is something very fundamentally different about Jesus than a man such as you and I?

 

[Simonline]

Simon - In your first post, you are recognizing that Jesus is a genuine fully functionally human being - a human consciousness/person - that interacts just as you and I do. That is great - and Biblical (ITim2:5, etc., etc.). You ALSO posit the notion that Jesus is the Divine Creator (btw - that seems redundant though immaterial).

No. The Messiah is the single Person of the Son who simultaneously exists as both Divine Creator [YHWH] and human creature [Jesus of Nazareth]. In the case of the Messiah there is no 'Divine Person' or 'human person'. There is just a single Person existing both as Divine Creator and human creature.
It is not Jesus of Nazareth who is Divine (that's absurd) but rather YHWH. In the same way it is equally as absurd to say that YHWH is human. That is simply not the case. The Messiah/Christ is YHWH Himself incarnate as the man Jesus of Nazareth. The One Who has Incarnated is Divine but the Incarnation is human.

Thus you have two persons/consciousnesses in your Christology.

Nonsense. That is absurd. The Messiah is 'bi-natured' not schizophrenic. The Messiah is the Single Person of the SON simultaneously existing as both Divine Creator [YHWH] and human creature [Jesus of Nazareth]. The Personality exists according to the Nature not vice versa (that's why YHWH is Tri-Personal whilst all human creatures are mono-personal).

1. Which of these two persons/consciousnesses is sitting next to the right hand of God (scripture only identifies that there is one person sitting next to the right hand of God)?

The Messiah (as both Divine Creator and human creature) is seated at the right hand of the Father.

2. As an initial contradiction to your assertion of a genuinely functional human being in your first post, your tag states -

THE MESSIAH IS ONE PERSON SIMULTANEOUSLY EXISTING IN TWO (DISTINCT BUT NOT SEPARATE) WAYS AS TWO (MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE) NATURES - DIVINE [YHWH] AND HUMAN [JESUS OF NAZARETH]. THE MESSIAH EXISTS FIRST AND FOREMOST AS THE DIVINE CREATOR AND ONLY IN A SECONDARY SENSE AS THE HUMAN CREATURE.

Obviously this post is asserting that there is only ONE person in contrast to your clear recognition of two persons in your post.

There is no contradiction. The Messiah is both authentic Divine Creator and authentic human creature but the Messiah is a Single Person simultaneously existing by means of two distinct though not separate natures, one Divine and the other human. None of my posts have ever recognised the Messiah as 'two persons' since that is heresy (not to mention absurd...which is why it is heresy). Whilst I have consistently affirmed that the Messiah exists as TWO Natures (one Divine and the other human) I have NEVER declared that the Messiah exists as TWO Persons (one Divine and the other human)?! Though I have often been misunderstood as inferring/declaring/asserting that.

My question is - who is the one person? The human person or the divine person?

Neither. The Messiah is a single Person who is Divine or human according to His nature(s). Obviously, the Son as Divine is both Eternal and Immutable so by definition that has to take precedence over the Son as human who would be both Temporal and mutable. This is why I say that the Messiah is first and foremost Divine Creator and human creature only in a secondary sense. It is for this reason that I take issue with the Messiah constantly being referred to only as 'Jesus' rather than 'YHWH' or the Messiah/Christ . Is it any wonder that people are so utterly confused about the Messiah?

BTW - to clarify - scripturally the whole person/nature dichotomy is completely absent regarding Jesus. It is a mind-game for traditionalists who don't have basic exegetical skills - but this is another topic. My point in the OP is that the fundamental incongruity of the humanly created Hypostatic Union - and blasphemous nature of it - be exposed.

That's because it isn't about Jesus of Nazareth. It's about the Messiah/Christ. Jesus of Nazareth does not simultaneously exist as both Divine Creator YHWH and human creature Jesus of Nazareth (how utterly absurd)?! Jesus of Nazareth IS the HUMAN incarnation of the Divine Creator YHWH. It is the Messiah/Christ Who is both Divine Creator YHWH and human creature Jesus of Nazareth. As Divine Creator the Messiah /Christ is YHWH not Jesus of Nazareth whilst as human creature the Messiah/Christ is Jesus of Nazareth not YHWH. Trust me, this is not rocket science (though it is utterly beyond some people to comprehend).

Serious Christology (note 'Christology' not 'Jesus-ology') is far from a mind game for traditionalists lacking in basic skills of exegesis. There is nothing incongruous about the hypostatic union. Whilst it is not an easy subject to understand, like so many other spiritual truths, it is not something which can be understood solely on the basis of human reason alone. It is something which is revealed by the Father through the Spirit (Matt.16:17).

Let us assume, for argument's sake, that you are correct and the hypostatic union is heretical nonsense. This would mean that there was no virgin birth and that Jesus of Nazareth was just a regular human creature (illicitly conceived?!) and as such was born 'in Adam' and subject to sin (Rom.3:9-18). This means that his sacrifice for sin would be utterly unacceptable to God and that as a result there was no resurrection and the entire human race would still be dead in our trespasses and sins and destined for the everlasting fires of Gehenna?!

Or let's try a different tack...God says in Ex.20.13 that we are not to murder and that the punishment for murder is lawful execution (Gen.9:6). Yet God Himself, being the two-faced hypocritical murderer that He is, openly brags about the fact that He has murdered Jesus of Nazareth (Isa.53:10(a); Acts.2:23; 4:27-28). Now, if Jesus of Nazareth is just a regular human creature and not YHWH Himself incarnate as a man (as the Scriptures declare) then YHWH is guilty of murdering an innocent man ostensibly for the sins of the world?! Who volunteers to hang YHWH on His own petard?!

If Jesus of Nazareth is not YHWH incarnate as a man then how can Col.1:15-16 possibly be the word of God (2Tim.3:16-17)?!

Simonline.

THIS IS THE LAST TIME THAT I WILL POST ON THIS WEBSITE UNTIL THE PEOPLE RUNNING IT FIX THE PROBLEM SO THAT PEOPLE CAN TYPE THEIR POSTS IN REAL TIME WITHOUT ANY TIME DELAY (WHICH GENERATES MANY MISTAKES AND HAVING TO KEEP CORRECTING THEM IS INFURIATING).

 

[Simonline]

Seems to me metaphysical nonsense is exactly what you are spewing out. That Jesus is fully God does not "cancel out" His being fully man, nor does His being fully man "cancel out" His being fully God. Where do you get such a silly notion?

Evidently , you don't know what the word 'fully' means?! To be 'fully' Divine means to be exclusively Divine (like God). To be fully man (i.e. fully human) is to be exclusively human (like the rest of the human race). Whilst the Messiah is both authentically Divine and authentically human he is neither exclusively Divine nor exclusively human...hardly rocket science?! The silly notion comes from people who lack the ability to correctly and precisely articulate exactly what they mean...i.e. 'the Messiah/Christ being fully Divine and fully human'?!

Simonline.

 

[Aner]

Simon

Thanks for your efforts - sorry you are having a problem with the program - currently I do not seem to be having these problems.

I would like to focus on just one item at a time -otherwise my ADD kicks in and I loose touch with everything. Is there any way we could focus on my post 60 in response to your former post?

My only other question - a very simple question - Are you familiar with the doctrine of anhypostasis? This is a critical teaching of the hypostatic union.

 

[Simonline]

God's attributes are who He is in Himself, it is impossible for God to empty Himself of who He is. Choosing to refrain from exercising His divine prerogative, in order to function as a genuine man is exactly what He did.

I agree. I believe the doctrine of Kenosis [the idea that God 'emptied Himself' of His Divine attributes in order to incarnate as a human creature] to be both blasphemous and heretical. I wasn't endorsing Kenosis. I was simply explaining to what it refers (i.e. the 'emptying' of Divine attributes rather than of Divine prerogatives). Evidently, you have misunderstood what I have written.

You have just negated your earlier asertion that "the Messiah 'emptying Himself' refers to the Messiah 'emptying Himself' of His Divine Attributes." You seem rather confused.

Not at all (see above).

Simonline.

 

[Simonline]

Simon

Thanks for your efforts - sorry you are having a problem with the program - currently I do not seem to be having these problems.

I would like to focus on just one item at a time -otherwise my ADD kicks in and I loose touch with everything. Is there any way we could focus on my post 60 in response to your former post?

My only other question - a very simple question - Are you familiar with the doctrine of anhypostasis? This is a critical teaching of the hypostatic union.

It is very difficult to respond to multiple posts from different people at the same time especially when it is taking so long to type before posting.

Yes, I am familiar with the doctrine of anhypostasis (that the Messiah is not a single Person simultaneously existing as Divine Creator and human creature) and I reject it.

Simonline.

 

[Aner]

It is very difficult to respond to multiple posts from different people at the same time especially when it is taking so long to type before posting.

Yes, I am familiar with the doctrine of anhypostasis (that the Messiah is not a single Person simultaneously existing as Divine Creator and human creature) and I reject it.

Simonline.

My understanding of anhypostasis is simply that the human nature is impersonal - not a man - but actuated by a divine person who retains his divine nature. Does that sound like your understanding?

 

[Simonline]

My understanding of anhypostasis is simply that the human nature is impersonal - not a man - but actuated by a divine person who retains his divine nature. Does that sound like your understanding?

I don't believe that the Messiah is a Divine Person in a human 'gorilla suit' either. The Messiah is both authentic Divine Creator and authentic human creature. If that means that the Messiah as human is really just a Divine Person in a human 'gorilla suit' then that means that every human creature is just a Divine Person in a human 'gorilla suit' too (Heb.2:17)?! Maybe God has a serious multiple personality disorder?!

Simonline.

For the record, the problem I was having earlier seems to have sorted itself out and we're back to normal...hallelujah!

 

[Simonline]

To be fully God is to possess necessary, unlimited power; to be fully man is to possess contingent, limited power.

To be fully God is to possess necessary, perfect knowledge; to be fully man is to possess contingent, imperfect knowledge.

To be fully God is to transcend physical reality; to be fully man is to bound by physical reality.

To be fully God is to be eternal and atemporal; to be fully man is to be finite and temporal.

This list is only limited by the number of attributes which God and man both possess.

A God-man, fully God and fully man, is logically absurd. A thing cannot be itself and its negation. It is the proverbial square circle, the married bachelor made flesh.

Or so says this heretic.

I concur wholeheartedly. This is why the Incarnation is about the Messiah simultaneously existing as both Divine Creator [YHWH] and human creature [Jesus of Nazareth] by means of two distinct but not separate natures, one Divine and the other human. The Person of the Son is ONE but the natures (Divine and human) are TWO. Only in this way can the Messiah simultaneously exist as Infinite, Eternal and Immutable Divine Creator and finite, temporal and mutable human creature. As Divine Creator the Messiah is YHWH not Jesus of Nazareth whilst as human creature the Messiah is Jesus of Nazareth not YHWH.

Simonline.

 

[Simonline]

So you said His Person is ONE, existing as divine nature AND human nature.

So why does this ONE person, if he exists in a divine nature AND human nature, NOT have the foreknowledge of Jesus return after the ONE person becomes incarnate as Jesus? Because you said that Jesus AND The Word, are ONE person..?

Mark 13:32
But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.


"You" have basically said that the ONE person, in the pre-incarnate Word AND incarnate-flesh Jesus has lost foreknowledge in his ONE person after being manifested AS JESUS, the incarnate-Word, because you said they are ONE person.

I'm trying to say that incarnate Jesus AND the pre-incarnate Word CANNOT be the same ONE Person, unless the human body causes death in the form of forgetfulness.

Remember the pre-incarnate Word WAS God

John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

I will answer this challenge but not yet. I have set this same challenge for someone else and I don't want my answer to influence or inform their answer.

Simonline.

 

[Simonline]

Simon you saying you had a word from God or a revelation .. do tell us what that was and how he told you that ?

I have had revelations from God via His Spirit in the same way that other believers have had revelations which have enabled them to both perceive and understand spiritual realities (Matt.16:17; 1Cor.2:6-16). I am not claiming 'special revelation' and certainly not revelation which is equal to or greater than the Scriptures which are the Word of God.

Of his body it only says he is the second Adam and the Son of David ' the one greater than Solomon .
yes he was before time and before he was born a man ,he was the right arm of God.. when he gained that part of himself once he was a man and knit in a womb is only speculation.

I'm sorry but as a response to what I have written previously this doesn't make any sense to me so I can't really respond to it?

what day one became both , or was one, or the other or both can only be seen/proven at the baptism. Where he Took his Office/authority from his Father , after having been approved by the father ! and in Full view of many witnesses including John the Baptist who was probably really the high priest or heir to be it, and thus fulfilling his high duty to serve the father .
and everything else is speculations. because that baptism is a witnessed and legally binding document.
everything interesting speculations but not provable. and I got lists and lists of those kind of things..
Boy I do enjoy great great speculations and appreciate great guessing !
if God revealed something to you that is different about the process what is revealed at the baptism , tell us about that part , so that we can judge it ? that is how that is supposed to work I think .

Again, what you have written here makes no sense whatsoever so I can't respond to it? If you'd like to put forward a cohesive and intelligible counter-argument to what I have written then I'd be happy to respond, otherwise don't hold your breath...sorry

Simonline.

 

[Simonline]

Of course Jesus can be fully God and fully man. What is logically absurd is to think that God cannot Self-limit Himself to function as a man while remaining God. Jesus could be God and be man at the same time, but He could not function as God and man at the same time...as God alone is autonomous, independent and self-generating. Whereas man is dependent, derivative and contingent.

No! Absolutely not. It is the Messiah/Christ who simultaneously exists as both authentic Divine Creator YHWH and authentic human creature Jesus of Nazareth. YHWH is in no way human just as Jesus of Nazareth is in no way Divine but the Messiah/Christ is both Divine and human by means of two distinct but not separate natures.

The problem comes because you are starting from the wrong end and working backwards instead of starting from the Beginning and working forwards.

It is the Eternal and Immutable Divine Creator YHWH [specifically the Son] who has incarnated as the human creature Jesus of Nazareth. The Messiah/Christ exists as both Divine Creator [YHWH] and human creature [Jesus of Nazareth]. The Messiah/Christ (not Jesus of Nazareth) is Immanuel [God with us] (Matt.1:23).

As for your assertion that God has 'self-limited' Himself in order to function as a man...whilst remaining as God?! That is the ultimate in contradictory absurdity. The Messiah exists by means of two natures, one Infinitely Divine (Mal.3:6) and the other finitely human (Jn.14:28). That way God doesn't change in any way in order to incarnate as a man.

The human creature Jesus of Nazareth cannot be God and man at the same time. That is also absurd. It is the Messiah/Christ (not the Divine Creator YHWH nor the human creature Jesus of Nazareth) who is simultaneously both God and man. The Messiah/Christ is fully capable of simultaneously functioning as both Divine Creator and human creature (something which is impossible both for YHWH and Jesus of Nazareth which is why YHWH has had to incarnate in order to achieve this).

The Bible declares that the Messiah [i.e. YHWH not Jesus of Nazareth] was responsible both for bringing the Creation into existence from nothing and (since the Creation is utterly incapable of sustaining itself even for a fraction of a millisecond) for sustaining the Creation moment by moment (Col.1:15-16). If, as you assert, the Messiah is incapable of simultaneously functioning as both Divine Creator and human creature then the moment that the Messiah came into existence as the human creature Jesus of Nazareth the entire Creation should have instantaneously ceased to exist since the Messiah, as Eternal, Infinite, Immutable and Omnipotent Divine Creator, would no longer be sustaining it in existence?!

You need to think through what you assert about both God and the Messiah and make sure that it is entirely consistent with the rest of Scripture otherwise you will end up looking very silly with a lot of egg on your face?!

Sorry.

Simonline

 

[Aner]

I don't believe that the Messiah is a Divine Person in a human 'gorilla suit' either. The Messiah is both authentic Divine Creator and authentic human creature. If that means that the Messiah as human is really just a Divine Person in a human 'gorilla suit' then that means that every human creature is just a Divine Person in a human 'gorilla suit' too (Heb.2:17)?! Maybe God has a serious multiple personality disorder?!

Simonline.

For the record, the problem I was having earlier seems to have sorted itself out and we're back to normal...hallelujah!

Simon - Happy that you have your issue sorted out. Perhaps we can keep a little focused continuity.

I agree fully with your logic here - "If that means that the Messiah as human is really just a Divine Person in a human 'gorilla suit' then that means that every human creature is just a Divine Person in a human 'gorilla suit' too (Heb.2:17)?! " as well as the text that you use as reference.

Tell me then - since every human creature has/is fundamentally a human person - is Jesus fundamentally a human person, created at conception, just like every human creature is??

 

[Simonline]

Simon - Happy that you have your issue sorted out. Perhaps we can keep a little focused continuity.

I agree fully with your logic here - "If that means that the Messiah as human is really just a Divine Person in a human 'gorilla suit' then that means that every human creature is just a Divine Person in a human 'gorilla suit' too (Heb.2:17)?! " as well as the text that you use as reference.

Tell me then - since every human creature has/is fundamentally a human person - is Jesus fundamentally a human person, created at conception, just like every human creature is??

The Messiah existing as incarnate is an authentic human creature just like the rest of us (except that he is by nature without sin). Existing as discarnate the Messiah is the Infinite, Eternal and Immutable Divine Creator YHWH (Jn.4:24). As discarnate the Messiah is God Himself. As incarnate the Messiah is the human incarnation of God and therefore the 'Son of God' (Jn.14:28). The Second Person of the Trinity is the Son of the Father but, existing as discarnate God, he is absolutely not the Son of God. Only as incarnate human creature is the Messiah the Son of God otherwise Matt.1:23 is a lie?!

If humans are made in the likeness of God (Gen.1:26-27) then that means Personality exists first and foremost as Divine and only in a secondary sense as human. It is my conviction that Personality is something which 'transcends' nature. In other words, personality can exist as either Divine or human (or, in the exclusive case of the Messiah, as both Divine and Human) but the way in which personality exists will be different in accordance with the nature. A Person existing as Divine is Infinite but that cannot be true of a person existing as human. Nevertheless, the person is no less personal for existing as finite human and no more personal for existing as Infinite Divine.

Simonline

 

[Aner]

The Messiah existing as incarnate is an authentic human creature just like the rest of us (except that he is by nature without sin). Existing as discarnate the Messiah is the Infinite, Eternal and Immutable Divine Creator YHWH (Jn.4:24). As discarnate the Messiah is God Himself. As incarnate the Messiah is the human incarnation of God and therefore the 'Son of God' (Jn.14:28). The Second Person of the Trinity is the Son of the Father but, existing as discarnate God, he is absolutely not the Son of God. Only as incarnate human creature is the Messiah the Son of God otherwise Matt.1:23 is a lie?!

If humans are made in the likeness of God (Gen.1:26-27) then that means Personality exists first and foremost as Divine and only in a secondary sense as human. It is my conviction that Personality is something which 'transcends' nature. In other words, personality can exist as either Divine or human (or, in the exclusive case of the Messiah, as both Divine and Human) but the way in which personality exists will be different in accordance with the nature. A Person existing as Divine is Infinite but that cannot be true of a person existing as human. Nevertheless, the person is no less personal for existing as finite human and no more personal for existing as Infinite Divine.

Simonline

Simon -

Is there any way to give me a Yes or No on the following -

Since every human creature has/is fundamentally a human person - is Jesus fundamentally a human person, created at conception, just like every human creature is??

 

[Simonline]

Simon -

Is there any way to give me a Yes or No on the following -

Since every human creature has/is fundamentally a human person - is Jesus fundamentally a human person, created at conception, just like every human creature is??

The Messiah, existing as incarnate, is the Person of the Son existing as a finite human creature with all which that entails (Heb.2:17) but He is also simultaneously existing as the Infinite Divine Creator YHWH with all which that entails as well (Jn.1:1; 8:58). The Messiah simultaneously exists as One Person by means of TWO distinct though not separate natures.

As long as you're hung up on Divine Person/human person then you will have difficulty understanding the Incarnation. The Messiah is neither a 'Divine Person' nor a 'human person'. He is a Person who simultaneously exists as both Infinite Divine Creator and finite human creature. The Messiah is evidence of the fact that somehow Personality, far from being restricted or confined according to nature can actually transcend nature.

Even though much of the Western Christian Church prefers to deal in the currency of simplistic 'cut and dried' answers the truth (especially truth in the area of theology) does not generally lend itself to such answers.

Simonline.

 

[Aner]

The Messiah is neither a 'Divine Person' nor a 'human person'. He is a Person who simultaneously exists as both Infinite Divine Creator and finite human creature. The Messiah is evidence of the fact that somehow Personality, far from being restricted or confined according to nature can actually transcend nature.

Simon - I think you are treading pretty heavily on "orthodoxy" here....

Regardless, you state "He is a person...". Did that person exist prior to the incarnation?

 

[Cappadocious]

Could that which was conceived in Mary exist/function independently without being assumed by the Logos/2nd Person - just like any man can and does??

Thomas Flint has a view like that, and I respect Thomas Flint as a thinker. However, ancient Christianity rejects this as Theodoreanism or Theodoretanism (a form of the Nestorian heresy), as do I.

Either Jesus was a man - like you and I - and as scripture teaches - or he was simply God assuming a non-functional human nature.

Let me see if I have this right. Let us call the Second Person of the Trinity, the Son of God, "The Word" to keep things straight.

You hold that either:

1. Jesus is a man.
2. Jesus is identical to 'the Word insofar as he has assumed a non-functional human nature'.

And that Jesus cannot be both.

Is that what you mean? If so, I have three questions for you:

1. How do you define "nature"?
2. How do you define "non-functional human nature"?
3. What substantiates and/or individuates a nature?

 

[Aner]

Cappadocious

Thanks for your ability to understand what I think is a relatively simple question - and your honesty re: your denial of the man Christ Jesus - the only mediator between man and God (I use the term "denial" rather than "rejecting" since this is the term that best seems to reflect your ideology - which is that the man Jesus never existed and, that instead, as I understand, you assert Jesus was an impersonal human nature actuated by some sort of divine being (as all incarnational Christologies must...).

So in answer to your question -

Is that what you mean?

- the answer is YES! Jesus cannot be both - and has to be either a man or an incarnationalized divine being (whether in trin, modalist or arian form) IF He is a single person.

As to your questions - I greatly appreciate the genesis of these questions as they are deeply rooted in the received tradition. However, I don't delve into these categories - I delve into text alone. I don't see such categories in text in any meaningful way especially not in a Christological context. I simply see that we use each word according to its standard usage, e.g. "man" means "man" - NOT an incarnated divine being (unless the context clearly demonstrates otherwise, e.g. Gen18). In scripture, I only see "entity" - a singular whole - as we also see throughout nature - rather than some sort of artificial differentiation or sub-division into nature and person - and that, really, only for the only purpose of sustaining conclusions based on defective exegesis. Is my perspective at least understandable?

The real nexus is the answer you gave - Jesus cannot function without the divine being actuating Him. In direct contrast, EVERY man can and does fully function without a divine being actuating them (I think both you and I can testify to that... ). Therefore, the Jesus of the incarnationalist is NOT a man - and, as such, does not conform to the clear and necessary teaching of scripture - ICor15:21, ITim2:5, Rom5:15&ff, Jn8:40, Jn1:30, Acts2:26, etc. as well as the clear statements that Jesus was made exactly like His brethren (I have not seen an impersonal human natures with incarnated divine beings walking around for, say, the entire history of mankind) created by God as were His brethren (Heb1:11 (Gk))

Once we move forward from this perspective, all the scriptures that were so out of sorts, e.g. the only Biblical Creed, ICor8:6, demanding that the Father alone is God - and completely excluding the Holy Spirit - suddenly makes perfect sense with no word games. I much prefer the plain and overt sense of scripture as my primary hermeneutic.

Best,

Greg