So we have two natures of Jesus – God and Man. This is a basic argument that has been battered that tossed and discussed quite a bit among the greats of theology. Some have claimed that Jesus was fully God, although perhaps a little less than the God, and other claim that he was fully man, although more than ordinary people. Tradition has done its part and insured that both lines of thinking were chased out of the church with burning torches and the like. Instead we have great metaphysical terms, Greek words and multi-syllable approaches to understanding the nature of Jesus.
P.T. Forsyth eschews such terms and concepts (specifically in The Person and Place of Jesus Christ). He is writing from a early 20th century context, wrestling with liberalism, orthodoxy and from time to time Catholicism. Forsyth argues that there are two natures to Christ, but one should not use the cumbersome metaphysical language of the early church fathers. Instead, one should look to the moral (his word) aspect of Christ and how it relates to us. According to Forsyth, there are basically two motions occurring – there is “the upward movement of man’s quest for God and the downward of God’s conquest of man” (335). In the upward movement from the point of humanity we have faith, and in the downward movement from the point of God we have grace. Forsyth describes these two movements as basic to creation. Both are moral acts; humanity – faith and God – grace. In Christ we have the union of the moral acts; in Christ we have, “the union of God and man… as the mutual involution of two personal movements raised to the whole scale of the human soul and the divine.”
Forsyth claims that such is possible because in Christ we have kenosis or a self-emptying and plerosis or a self-fulfillment.
Now I could go into further detail about Forsyth’s understanding of these terms, he approach to scripture, and understanding of “moral” doctrines. What I find fascinating is the idea that in Christ there is a constant pulling. There is a pulling to be with God, and to lead others to be with God. Christ understands our basic desire to have communion with God, because that basic desire is a part of him, and so shows us the way to fulfill that desire. Yet at the same time there is a desire to be with us. There is a desire to be in our presence, to care for us and to share grace with us. When Christ forgives the sins of the sick, he is offering the grace of God. He is incarnating God’s desire to be with us. So rather than thinking of two natures, or two persons, Forsyth offers one person with pulling desires. There is a desire to be with God, and a desire to be with us.
Here is my thought. Far be it from me to assume that we can be Jesus, but what if we follow such desires ourselves? What if we still follow our desire to claim faith in the grace of the Lord and grow closer to God, but at the same time yearn to share God’s grace with others? What if we see our mandate not only to believe but to bring others to believe? I think there may be scripture to back up such a crazy idea (Mt 28). I am not suggesting that we become Jesus, but perhaps we follow more closely his ministry and his life with such an approach.
P.T. Forsyth eschews such terms and concepts (specifically in The Person and Place of Jesus Christ). He is writing from a early 20th century context, wrestling with liberalism, orthodoxy and from time to time Catholicism. Forsyth argues that there are two natures to Christ, but one should not use the cumbersome metaphysical language of the early church fathers. Instead, one should look to the moral (his word) aspect of Christ and how it relates to us. According to Forsyth, there are basically two motions occurring – there is “the upward movement of man’s quest for God and the downward of God’s conquest of man” (335). In the upward movement from the point of humanity we have faith, and in the downward movement from the point of God we have grace. Forsyth describes these two movements as basic to creation. Both are moral acts; humanity – faith and God – grace. In Christ we have the union of the moral acts; in Christ we have, “the union of God and man… as the mutual involution of two personal movements raised to the whole scale of the human soul and the divine.”
Forsyth claims that such is possible because in Christ we have kenosis or a self-emptying and plerosis or a self-fulfillment.
Now I could go into further detail about Forsyth’s understanding of these terms, he approach to scripture, and understanding of “moral” doctrines. What I find fascinating is the idea that in Christ there is a constant pulling. There is a pulling to be with God, and to lead others to be with God. Christ understands our basic desire to have communion with God, because that basic desire is a part of him, and so shows us the way to fulfill that desire. Yet at the same time there is a desire to be with us. There is a desire to be in our presence, to care for us and to share grace with us. When Christ forgives the sins of the sick, he is offering the grace of God. He is incarnating God’s desire to be with us. So rather than thinking of two natures, or two persons, Forsyth offers one person with pulling desires. There is a desire to be with God, and a desire to be with us.
Here is my thought. Far be it from me to assume that we can be Jesus, but what if we follow such desires ourselves? What if we still follow our desire to claim faith in the grace of the Lord and grow closer to God, but at the same time yearn to share God’s grace with others? What if we see our mandate not only to believe but to bring others to believe? I think there may be scripture to back up such a crazy idea (Mt 28). I am not suggesting that we become Jesus, but perhaps we follow more closely his ministry and his life with such an approach.
No comments:
Post a Comment