The Divine Nature of Christ.

[ChessCastle]

Would this be considered a mandatory belief among the Anglican/Episcopal Church? Is there a middle path to take with something this crucial?

 

[Tomoz]

I believe He was fully divine.
I understand the arguments from those Christians who believe he isn't/wasn't uniquely divine, but I personally am just not convinced by them.
I believe Jesus to be fully divine, but I think we need to be constantly reminding ourselves of his full humanness as well. I find that if I don't remember that he was actually a historical figure I can fall into an overly mythological idea of Christ.
In acknowledging His divinity must never lose sight of Christ's earthyness and grit, of the palestinian dust that was caught between his toes, and the tension that must have existed within him, as a man with feelings and physical limitations, but also a fully divine vocation as the Son of God.
It truly is an awesome mystery.

 

[higgs2]

fully human, fully divine.

 

[SumTinWong]

100% human 100% God

 

[JoshuaCh1v9]

We should haver a sub poll.

Will this be the most one sided poll ever in the history of CF?

 

[No Swansong]

All God, All Man
Can't figure out how but hey I'm not Him.

 

[bellantara]

Is there a denomination that even questions this?

 

[ChessCastle]

Is there a denomination that even questions this?

A few months ago I thought this was something that everyone who considered themselves christian could agree upon. But since then I have come to realise that there are some who won't acknowledge Christ's divine nature. I made the poll hoping to find that this was one of the few things all of us can sit in agreement upon.

 

[JasonV]

I voted no for some variety.

 

[gtsecc]

Is there a denomination that even questions this?

Yes, and no.
This was formulated at the 4th Council in Clacedon, 451 AD.
At this council, the See of Mark said Christ was of 2 natures, and the rest said He was in 2 natures.
The Church split over this.
In 1973 HH Pope Shenuda of the Copts and the See of Mark, and HH Pope Paul VI of the Roman Catholics reconciled this, and agreed they were saying the same thing.
I believe the Eastern Orthodox also reconciled this with the Copts in the 70's, but I can't cite the people and place.
The Eastern Orthodox now have no theological differnces preventing reunion between the 2, and our prayers are that they will be fully in communioon in a few years.

 

[ChessCastle]

I voted no for some variety.

Because of course variety is much more important than affirming the divinity of our Lord.

 

[JasonV]

Because of course variety is much more important than affirming the divinity of our Lord.

Don't you think you're taking this a bit too seriously?

 

[No Swansong]

Don't you think you're taking this a bit too seriously?

What do you think he is taking too seriously? The truth of the Divinity of our Lord or your response? While I strongly hold that belief in Christ's Divinity is essential to be a Christian I thought your response was meant tongue in cheek and gave it the chuckle I felt it deserved. However if you do seriously deny the Divinity of Christ that is a different issue.

 

[JasonV]

What do you think he is taking too seriously? The truth of the Divinity of our Lord or your response? While I strongly hold that belief in Christ's Divinity is essential to be a Christian I thought your response was meant tongue in cheek and gave it the chuckle I felt it deserved. However if you do seriously deny the Divinity of Christ that is a different issue.

It was tongue in cheek and I figured that was pretty obvious.

 

[JoshuaCh1v9]

To be honest, I kinda agree with Jason.

There might be some out there on the fringes that would differ on this, but the vast majority of us are going to be united on this, demonstrating which has been stated as the aim of the OP in this thread.

So, we have demonstarated that Christians can actually agree with one another from time to time, now where do we go from here?

 

[JoshuaCh1v9]

Problem is we are actually running out of things to disagree on.

Harry Potter seems to be out of favour as a topic at the moment. We have kinda flogged the women Priest issue to death and then some, and the gay Bishops thing is a little like the seed on stony ground that Jesus spoke about. Flares up quickly but never takes root for long.

 

[JoshuaCh1v9]

What do you think he is taking too seriously? The truth of the Divinity of our Lord or your response? While I strongly hold that belief in Christ's Divinity is essential to be a Christian I thought your response was meant tongue in cheek and gave it the chuckle I felt it deserved. However if you do seriously deny the Divinity of Christ that is a different issue.

I would be VERY surprised if we find anyone in STR who would seriously deny the divinity of Christ.

You'll certainly get no arguement from Salvationists on the issue

 

[ChessCastle]

I would be VERY surprised if we find anyone in STR who would seriously deny the divinity of Christ.

In the middle of a discussion with JasonV, when it appeared he was implying that Christ was not divine, I asked him directly...twice if he believed in the divinity of Christ, and no answer was ever given.

Combine this with the "No" vote given 'for variety', and perhaps its not as big of a surprise as it might originally seem.

You'll certainly get no arguement from Salvationists on the issue

I certainly hope you're right. In fact this is one thing that I'd hoped that every congregational forum on STR would be in complete agreement on. I certainly didn't post this poll because we're running out of things to disagree on...I am regularly in respectful disagreement with some members of this forum, but the divinity of Christ is not some small issue of disagreement...and it certainly isn't something to deny in humor.

 

[Tomoz]

Perhaps a more controversial poll would be who believes Christ was/is uniquely divine.

 

[JoshuaCh1v9]

Perhaps a more controversial poll would be who believes Christ was/is uniquely divine.

Any more of that young man and it'll be.......the comfy chair