Comments on: The Word made Flesh - An examiination of the Mennonite COF, Part 2 http://young.anabaptistradicals.org/2010/06/01/the-word-made-flesh-an-examiination-of-the-mennonite-cof-part-2/ let's activate something Sun, 20 May 2012 23:07:50 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: Ray Nachtigall http://young.anabaptistradicals.org/2010/06/01/the-word-made-flesh-an-examiination-of-the-mennonite-cof-part-2/#comment-40410 Ray Nachtigall Tue, 06 Jul 2010 22:42:30 +0000 http://young.anabaptistradicals.org/2010/06/01/the-word-made-flesh-an-examiination-of-the-mennonite-cof-part-2/#comment-40410 As I travel about, I am becoming more and more aware of the passivity, tolerant, and non-challenge in our conversations with others concerning who we believe Jesus the Christ is. If we really believe that He is the only "Way, Truth, and Life and that no man cometh to Father except through Him", than in order to be faithful to that belief and acceptance of that truth we need to be unapologetic and proclaim it clearly in our daily lives and in our statements of faith. John the apostle apparently didn't have any doubts about who Jesus the Christ was when by inspiration of the Holy Spirit he writes in John 1:1 "In beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." Than in John 1:14 inspired by the same Spirit, he writes "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us..." (NIV)We as humans, even regenerated ones have a tendency to dismiss truth that we in our human state cannot understand. Reason is not the final judge of truth. And so we need to proclaim it as truth if it is Scripture. We ought to be able to say "this is scripture but I am not able to grasp it all." As I travel about, I am becoming more and more aware of the passivity, tolerant, and non-challenge in our conversations with others concerning who we believe Jesus the Christ is. If we really believe that He is the only “Way, Truth, and Life and that no man cometh to Father except through Him”, than in order to be faithful to that belief and acceptance of that truth we need to be unapologetic and proclaim it clearly in our daily lives and in our statements of faith. John the apostle apparently didn’t have any doubts about who Jesus the Christ was when by inspiration of the Holy Spirit he writes in John 1:1 “In beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”
Than in John 1:14 inspired by the same Spirit, he
writes “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us…” (NIV)We as humans, even regenerated ones have a tendency to dismiss truth that we in our human state cannot understand. Reason is not the final judge of truth. And so we need to proclaim it as truth if it is Scripture. We ought
to be able to say “this is scripture but I am not able to grasp it all.”

]]> By: John Arthur http://young.anabaptistradicals.org/2010/06/01/the-word-made-flesh-an-examiination-of-the-mennonite-cof-part-2/#comment-38496 John Arthur Wed, 09 Jun 2010 11:40:32 +0000 http://young.anabaptistradicals.org/2010/06/01/the-word-made-flesh-an-examiination-of-the-mennonite-cof-part-2/#comment-38496 Hi, I think I agree with you. Yoder described Jesus the Word of God and normative human person. How to relate the Godhood of Jesus and his humanity in one person is a mystery and we should hold these truths in tension as you correctly state. Thanks for your post. Shalom, John Arthur Hi,
I think I agree with you. Yoder described Jesus the Word of God and normative human person. How to relate the Godhood of Jesus and his humanity in one person is a mystery and we should hold these truths in tension as you correctly state.
Thanks for your post.
Shalom,
John Arthur

]]> By: Robert Martin http://young.anabaptistradicals.org/2010/06/01/the-word-made-flesh-an-examiination-of-the-mennonite-cof-part-2/#comment-38022 Robert Martin Wed, 02 Jun 2010 06:47:22 +0000 http://young.anabaptistradicals.org/2010/06/01/the-word-made-flesh-an-examiination-of-the-mennonite-cof-part-2/#comment-38022 Samuel, An interesting point. I think I recall something in my theology classes about a necessary tension. When confronted with seeming paradoxical ideas (like being both fully human as well as fully divine), the best rule is to maintain that tension. Leaning too far one way or the other risks losing the richness of the revelation of God. As for pre-resurrection and post-resurrection, I think the fully-human/fully divine tension still exists. Consider what is supposed to happen to us after our resurrection. In the New Creation, we are not spirits but we are given new bodies, new flesh that is incorruptable. I just got finished reading one of the final chapter's to C.S. Lewis "The Last Battle" of the Narnia Chronicles and Lewis invokes Plato's analogy of the cave. What we have now in the way of the nature of being human is just a shadow of what we were intended of being. Jesus before the resurrection still lived in that shadow. Jesus after the resurrection, though, had a fully redeemed body, one that could eat and drink, but also one that was not confined to the limitations of the fallen flesh. So, after the resurrection, I think we see Jesus still as fully human and fully divine both, but the human part, that "first fruit", was completely redeemed into what a human SHOULD be. That is our hope, that we will someday truly be what we were originally created to be. Not Gods, but humans, created in God's image. Samuel,

An interesting point. I think I recall something in my theology classes about a necessary tension. When confronted with seeming paradoxical ideas (like being both fully human as well as fully divine), the best rule is to maintain that tension. Leaning too far one way or the other risks losing the richness of the revelation of God.

As for pre-resurrection and post-resurrection, I think the fully-human/fully divine tension still exists. Consider what is supposed to happen to us after our resurrection. In the New Creation, we are not spirits but we are given new bodies, new flesh that is incorruptable.

I just got finished reading one of the final chapter’s to C.S. Lewis “The Last Battle” of the Narnia Chronicles and Lewis invokes Plato’s analogy of the cave. What we have now in the way of the nature of being human is just a shadow of what we were intended of being. Jesus before the resurrection still lived in that shadow. Jesus after the resurrection, though, had a fully redeemed body, one that could eat and drink, but also one that was not confined to the limitations of the fallen flesh. So, after the resurrection, I think we see Jesus still as fully human and fully divine both, but the human part, that “first fruit”, was completely redeemed into what a human SHOULD be. That is our hope, that we will someday truly be what we were originally created to be. Not Gods, but humans, created in God’s image.

]]> By: Samuel http://young.anabaptistradicals.org/2010/06/01/the-word-made-flesh-an-examiination-of-the-mennonite-cof-part-2/#comment-38016 Samuel Wed, 02 Jun 2010 04:36:34 +0000 http://young.anabaptistradicals.org/2010/06/01/the-word-made-flesh-an-examiination-of-the-mennonite-cof-part-2/#comment-38016 I enjoyed this, and am curious where the conversation is going to go! One thing I thought of while you were reading this is keeping both parts of the ‘fully divine’ ‘fully human’ conversation going. In a recent issue of either the Mennonite or the Weekly Review (help, I clearly recycled it-can someone find it) one of the letter’s to the editor argued that Jesus never learned anything, because he was born fully divine, thus fully omniscient, and quoted his wisdom in the temple as a young man. You point out the dangers in saying Jesus was ‘just a man’ I wonder if there are dangers in saying he was ‘just God’. I wonder exactly what it means to be human-are ‘Godlike’ attributes, like omnipotence, omniscience, etc. limiting to being human? One of the quotes I like from this article is ‘He was declared to be Son of God with power by his resurrection from the dead’ that is, it was only after resurrection that we know who he really was. Does that have implications for who Jesus was before resurrection? I enjoyed this, and am curious where the conversation is going to go!
One thing I thought of while you were reading this is keeping both parts of the ‘fully divine’ ‘fully human’ conversation going. In a recent issue of either the Mennonite or the Weekly Review (help, I clearly recycled it-can someone find it) one of the letter’s to the editor argued that Jesus never learned anything, because he was born fully divine, thus fully omniscient, and quoted his wisdom in the temple as a young man. You point out the dangers in saying Jesus was ‘just a man’ I wonder if there are dangers in saying he was ‘just God’. I wonder exactly what it means to be human-are ‘Godlike’ attributes, like omnipotence, omniscience, etc. limiting to being human? One of the quotes I like from this article is ‘He was declared to be Son of God with power by his resurrection from the dead’ that is, it was only after resurrection that we know who he really was. Does that have implications for who Jesus was before resurrection?

]]>