Hello, Robert. :-)
-
I'm starting to feel like someone who is playing several different games
of chess at the same time. Many people are now responding to my various
statements, and since it generally takes me about an hour and a half to
compose a comprehensive response I find myself simply running out of
time in attempting to keep up with them. I do have other demands on my
time in my life.
-
I will respond to you now because our conversation came before many of
the others.
------------
ROBERT: If you'll look at my
syllogism, I do not use the phrase "divine nature," but rather
"God's Nature." It is this to which I referred when I used the
term "divine nature."
-
BBS: As may be, the use of the term "divine nature" by
many of the commentators I have cited is not a reference to the nature
that belongs to God alone, nor does the NT use it in this sense, nor
have I.
--------------
ROBERT: Of course, what I'm really trying to
get at is what is it that makes God God? There must be some
characteristics that make Him God, and I submit that these
characteristics are inherent in His Nature - or, put another way, that
His Nature is the sum total of these characteristics (and, undoubtedly,
others, which God did not choose to reveal to us).
-
BBS - If this is the case, then Jesus does not have God's nature, since
he lacks omniscience and omnipotence.
----------
As to your analysis of the use of "koinonos" in 2 Peter, if I
understand you correctly you are saying that it refers to the fact that
pre-resurrection humans who have received salvation in Christ are
thereby able to avail themselves of Christ's divine nature and thereby
avoid (although not perfectly) behaviors which displease God. Your
evidence and arguments on this point seem entirely sound to me and I
will have to conform my understanding of this passage to them. Thank you
for taking the time and effort to enlighten me on this matter.
-
I am still left with the fact that in the resurrection we "shall be
changed" and "like unto angels". Angels are divine beings
("gods") having divine nature, even though lacking the
attributes which make God God. I find it reasonable to infer that beyond
the explicit distinction noted in scripture that we will not marry in
our resurrected state (possessing "spiritual bodies" rather
than physical ones) this suggests that we will also become divine
beings, as angels, yet not God. I suspect that you will disagree, and
perhaps again you will persuade me that this idea is inconsistent with
scripture.
-
Also, just off the top of my head, it seems to me that Jesus is a unique
being and that even though the divinity possessed by angels ( and
possibly to be possessed by us in the resurrection) is different in ways
from his, this does not rule out the possibility that his divinity,
though like God's, is still different than God's.
-
We still have the fact that Jesus lacks at least two of the defining
attributes of God, without which (it seems to me) he cannot BE God.
-
While the commentators I cited in my article allude to Jesus being
divine, like God, etc., he clearly (or am I wrong about this?) does not
possess some of the attributes which make God God.
-
Perhaps now is the time to consider this point.
-
:-) BBS
|