Kenotic Christology

[The Learner]

Kenotic Christology uses Philippians 2 to say that God the Son “’emptied’… or divested himself of certain of his divine attributes, such as omnipresence and omniscience, or of the use of one or more of them, in assuming human flesh” (Reymond). In kenotic Christology, Christ’s ‘moral qualities, such as love and mercy, were maintained” (Erickson, 237). Hawthorne’s position must be an extreme form of Kenotic Christology, in that even the divine moral qualities of Christ are not in use during his earthly life (though fully present). Ware seems to be taking a mediating position between the classic view of the divine-human union and this strict kenotic view since he is open to the idea that Christ’s divine moral attributes may have influenced the actions of the person of Christ. He also believes that Jesus did many of his miracles as God.

The variety of kenotic theories makes me wonder about the distinction between the idea that Christ laid aside his attributes and the idea that he laid aside the use of his attributes. Practically speaking, what is the difference between having no divine attributes at all and having divine attributes that lie dormant, rarely to be used (a “humanity only” position)? Either way, Jesus would not be revealing the Father to us through his divine qualities. But Jesus showed himself to be unique, not simply in His identity, but also in His character, His judgment, His authority, His personality, His actions, His speech, and His demeanor! Why was he unique? He was different because He was the God-man, not simply because He was empowered by the Spirit, as many prophets and apostles had been.

The Character of the Theandric Union
The character of the theandric union necessitates a dual functioning of Christ’s two natures: the divine and human natures participates in every action of Christ. This concept is important to defend the biblical teaching that Christ is the enfleshed revelation of God.

Following are a few verses that emphasize the truth of the incarnation, that Christ was God manifested in the flesh.

Jesus was called Emmanuel, which means “God with us” (Matt 1:23).
“Without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh…” (I Timothy 3:16a).
For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily (Colossians 2:9).

God had become flesh in the person of Jesus. The fullness of the Godhead dwelled in Christ bodily; the human nature indwelled the divine nature as the divine nature indwelled the human. The expression “all the fullness of the Godhead dwells in him bodily” is never used of a mere prophet or apostle. For Him to have all the fullness of God dwelling in Him bodily means that He Himself is fully God, and is expressing Himself as both fully human and fully God.

“Paul taught that ‘in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form’ (Col. 2:9). Church teaching interpreted this to mean that the divine nature penetrates and perfects every aspect of the human, and human is pervaded by the divine (John of Damascus…). This was powerfully conveyed by the termperichoresis.…

“The perichoresis or active intermingling of the natures was that abundant interpenetration…by which the divine nature of the Son pervaded inwardly the human nature so as fully to impart his divinity to his humanity and his God-manhood to every aspect of his action…. In this way the deity participated in the Passion of the humanity and the humanity in the majesty of the deity without blurring or confusing either.”[41]

If this perichoretic participation of both natures really took place, the deity of Christ was active during Christ’s temptations and his miracles. The Logos was not dormant during those times in Christ’s life, nor at any other time.

“Some challengers to ecumenical Christology have persisted in holding that the Logos has become reduced to the limits of human nature, disavowing eternality, destitute of divine attributes. They say that the divine nature became dormant, paralyzed, or even nonexistent during Christ’s earthly ministry.

“There is no exegetical warrant for this conclusion, for in Scripture it is precisely the Word that has become flesh to dwell among us, not the Word that ceased to be in becoming flesh. The New Testament does not imply that the Logos in becoming flesh temporarily quit being Logos and began being merely a man. Rather ‘the Word became flesh and dwelt among us’ (John 1:14). The central point is that God became flesh without contradiction or negation of either deity or humanity (I Tim. 3:16; I John 4:2; John 1:14).”[42]

Consistency with Orthodox Christology

To What Extent Did Jesus Operate in His Deity While on His Earthly Mission? - Holy Joys

In this paper I will argue that the innate divine attributes of Jesus were substantially manifested in his life and ministry while he was on his earthly mission. This paper was prompted by Bruce Ware’s presidential address at ETS last year (2009), but that will not exclusively be the subject of...

holyjoys.org

 

[St. SteVen]

Good topic, thanks.

I have maintained for some time that Christ did his miracles in his humanity, not in his deity.
Or better put, that Jesus was a channel/conduit for God's healing power.
He maintained that he could do nothing of himself but watched to see what the Father was doing and partnered with that.
How could he expect us to partner with miracles if he was doing them in his divinity?

/ cc: @The Learner

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Kenotic Christology uses Philippians 2 to say that God the Son “’emptied’… or divested himself of certain of his divine attributes, such as omnipresence and omniscience, or of the use of one or more of them, in assuming human flesh” (Reymond). In kenotic Christology, Christ’s ‘moral qualities, such as love and mercy, were maintained” (Erickson, 237). Hawthorne’s position must be an extreme form of Kenotic Christology, in that even the divine moral qualities of Christ are not in use during his earthly life (though fully present). Ware seems to be taking a mediating position between the classic view of the divine-human union and this strict kenotic view since he is open to the idea that Christ’s divine moral attributes may have influenced the actions of the person of Christ. He also believes that Jesus did many of his miracles as God.

The variety of kenotic theories makes me wonder about the distinction between the idea that Christ laid aside his attributes and the idea that he laid aside the use of his attributes. Practically speaking, what is the difference between having no divine attributes at all and having divine attributes that lie dormant, rarely to be used (a “humanity only” position)? Either way, Jesus would not be revealing the Father to us through his divine qualities. But Jesus showed himself to be unique, not simply in His identity, but also in His character, His judgment, His authority, His personality, His actions, His speech, and His demeanor! Why was he unique? He was different because He was the God-man, not simply because He was empowered by the Spirit, as many prophets and apostles had been.

The Character of the Theandric Union
The character of the theandric union necessitates a dual functioning of Christ’s two natures: the divine and human natures participates in every action of Christ. This concept is important to defend the biblical teaching that Christ is the enfleshed revelation of God.

Following are a few verses that emphasize the truth of the incarnation, that Christ was God manifested in the flesh.

Jesus was called Emmanuel, which means “God with us” (Matt 1:23).
“Without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh…” (I Timothy 3:16a).
For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily (Colossians 2:9).

God had become flesh in the person of Jesus. The fullness of the Godhead dwelled in Christ bodily; the human nature indwelled the divine nature as the divine nature indwelled the human. The expression “all the fullness of the Godhead dwells in him bodily” is never used of a mere prophet or apostle. For Him to have all the fullness of God dwelling in Him bodily means that He Himself is fully God, and is expressing Himself as both fully human and fully God.

“Paul taught that ‘in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form’ (Col. 2:9). Church teaching interpreted this to mean that the divine nature penetrates and perfects every aspect of the human, and human is pervaded by the divine (John of Damascus…). This was powerfully conveyed by the termperichoresis.…

“The perichoresis or active intermingling of the natures was that abundant interpenetration…by which the divine nature of the Son pervaded inwardly the human nature so as fully to impart his divinity to his humanity and his God-manhood to every aspect of his action…. In this way the deity participated in the Passion of the humanity and the humanity in the majesty of the deity without blurring or confusing either.”[41]

If this perichoretic participation of both natures really took place, the deity of Christ was active during Christ’s temptations and his miracles. The Logos was not dormant during those times in Christ’s life, nor at any other time.

“Some challengers to ecumenical Christology have persisted in holding that the Logos has become reduced to the limits of human nature, disavowing eternality, destitute of divine attributes. They say that the divine nature became dormant, paralyzed, or even nonexistent during Christ’s earthly ministry.

“There is no exegetical warrant for this conclusion, for in Scripture it is precisely the Word that has become flesh to dwell among us, not the Word that ceased to be in becoming flesh. The New Testament does not imply that the Logos in becoming flesh temporarily quit being Logos and began being merely a man. Rather ‘the Word became flesh and dwelt among us’ (John 1:14). The central point is that God became flesh without contradiction or negation of either deity or humanity (I Tim. 3:16; I John 4:2; John 1:14).”[42]

Consistency with Orthodox Christology

To What Extent Did Jesus Operate in His Deity While on His Earthly Mission? - Holy Joys

In this paper I will argue that the innate divine attributes of Jesus were substantially manifested in his life and ministry while he was on his earthly mission. This paper was prompted by Bruce Ware’s presidential address at ETS last year (2009), but that will not exclusively be the subject of...

holyjoys.org

Me thinks too many people do too much opinionizing about Jesus emptying Himself and exactly what it means. He did practice omniscience at times (He knew what phillip was reading under the tree) and omnipresent (He saw Him under the tree) omnipotence (He walked on water, calmed storms, raised the dead, multiplied bread and fish)

Based on Greek studies- it means more of abasing HImself or humbling HImself. It would be like a king, taking off their royal robes and putting on beggars robes.

 

[Wick Stick]

Kenotic Christology uses Philippians 2 to say that God the Son “’emptied’… or divested himself of certain of his divine attributes, such as omnipresence and omniscience, or of the use of one or more of them, in assuming human flesh” (Reymond). In kenotic Christology, Christ’s ‘moral qualities, such as love and mercy, were maintained” (Erickson, 237). Hawthorne’s position must be an extreme form of Kenotic Christology, in that even the divine moral qualities of Christ are not in use during his earthly life (though fully present). Ware seems to be taking a mediating position between the classic view of the divine-human union and this strict kenotic view since he is open to the idea that Christ’s divine moral attributes may have influenced the actions of the person of Christ. He also believes that Jesus did many of his miracles as God.

The variety of kenotic theories makes me wonder about the distinction between the idea that Christ laid aside his attributes and the idea that he laid aside the use of his attributes. Practically speaking, what is the difference between having no divine attributes at all and having divine attributes that lie dormant, rarely to be used (a “humanity only” position)? Either way, Jesus would not be revealing the Father to us through his divine qualities. But Jesus showed himself to be unique, not simply in His identity, but also in His character, His judgment, His authority, His personality, His actions, His speech, and His demeanor! Why was he unique? He was different because He was the God-man, not simply because He was empowered by the Spirit, as many prophets and apostles had been.

The Character of the Theandric Union
The character of the theandric union necessitates a dual functioning of Christ’s two natures: the divine and human natures participates in every action of Christ. This concept is important to defend the biblical teaching that Christ is the enfleshed revelation of God.

Following are a few verses that emphasize the truth of the incarnation, that Christ was God manifested in the flesh.

Jesus was called Emmanuel, which means “God with us” (Matt 1:23).
“Without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh…” (I Timothy 3:16a).
For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily (Colossians 2:9).

God had become flesh in the person of Jesus. The fullness of the Godhead dwelled in Christ bodily; the human nature indwelled the divine nature as the divine nature indwelled the human. The expression “all the fullness of the Godhead dwells in him bodily” is never used of a mere prophet or apostle. For Him to have all the fullness of God dwelling in Him bodily means that He Himself is fully God, and is expressing Himself as both fully human and fully God.

“Paul taught that ‘in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form’ (Col. 2:9). Church teaching interpreted this to mean that the divine nature penetrates and perfects every aspect of the human, and human is pervaded by the divine (John of Damascus…).

The context of Colossians 2 is probably a warning against gnostic thought. The verse before this one reads, "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men."

The gnostic thought in question I hypothesize to be some form of emanationism - the idea that various attributes of God are each incarnated separately in the world. I.e. Jesus is the Logos of God, but Simon Magus may be the Exousia of God, and the various wisdom goddesses of paganism are only expressions of the Sophia of God. This sort of gnosticism reconciles polytheism to monotheism, making God into a troupe of different emanations or gods, which man may encounter apart from the whole Godhead. (Valentinian gnosticism is an example of this, but too late-coming to be precisely what Paul is writing about here).

So then... I don't think we're supposed to be reading this to establish an idea of the mixed deity and humanity dwelling in Christ. I think we're supposed to read it as a rejection of those ideas which would give God a multiple-personality-disorder, or fragment him into a pagan pantheon of gods.

This was powerfully conveyed by the termperichoresis.…

“The perichoresis or active intermingling of the natures was that abundant interpenetration…by which the divine nature of the Son pervaded inwardly the human nature so as fully to impart his divinity to his humanity and his God-manhood to every aspect of his action…. In this way the deity participated in the Passion of the humanity and the humanity in the majesty of the deity without blurring or confusing either.”[41]

If this perichoretic participation of both natures really took place, the deity of Christ was active during Christ’s temptations and his miracles. The Logos was not dormant during those times in Christ’s life, nor at any other time.

“Some challengers to ecumenical Christology have persisted in holding that the Logos has become reduced to the limits of human nature, disavowing eternality, destitute of divine attributes. They say that the divine nature became dormant, paralyzed, or even nonexistent during Christ’s earthly ministry.

“There is no exegetical warrant for this conclusion, for in Scripture it is precisely the Word that has become flesh to dwell among us, not the Word that ceased to be in becoming flesh. The New Testament does not imply that the Logos in becoming flesh temporarily quit being Logos and began being merely a man. Rather ‘the Word became flesh and dwelt among us’ (John 1:14). The central point is that God became flesh without contradiction or negation of either deity or humanity (I Tim. 3:16; I John 4:2; John 1:14).”[42]

Permit me a small digression... The ideas of thought and speech are visualized in Hebrew Scriptures as water. A man is a clay vessel and his thoughts are the contents of his vessel. When he speaks he pours his waters out (Psa 142:2), and they may go and fill up other vessels, or accomplish some goal (Isa 55:11).

With that in mind, the pouring out of the Godhead ought to be understood as filling, rather than emptying. The Word of the LORD has been spoken and poured in order to fill a human vessel - Jesus. Not to empty Himself. If we look through Scripture, we will find many words and prophesies are fulfilled. We do not find that the one who speaks them is emptied.

That idea, while logical, is extending the metaphor to a place that Scripture doesn't go.

 

[Mr E]

Great topic.

If one recognizes Jesus as a man-- an actual, flesh and blood human (as scripture states) then being in nature- a common man in every familiar way, he is just like us and we are just like him.

A man is a clay vessel and his thoughts are the contents of his vessel.

This clay vessel is ordinary. 'It's what's inside that counts.' It is not the bottle that makes the wine special, but the wine can and does make the bottle special. Set aside, -unique even. And the wine is the spirit/son sent-- the perfect, sinless one that was seen in spirit by John as the lamb and also as the dove. One who is heavenly, spiritual, uncorrupted, and holy. This one descends upon the man and fills that vessel and with this heavenly-spiritual anointing, he becomes Christ. Filled with the spirit from above. A holy messenger sent to humanity with the word of God-- which becomes flesh, taking on the container and filling it. Jesus is that wine skin.

And it's not the cheap stuff that is in him. He's not some kind of ordinary messenger-- within him is the fullness of the Father, because it is the son of God that is sent with His word. His logos. And this logos informs and instructs the man, who yields to that spirit within him-- and together both man and spirit agree-- Not my will, but Thine, Father. And then the three are one, and we in turn are invited into this union--

--that they will all be one, just as you, Father, are in me and I am in you. I pray that they will be in us, so that the world will believe that you sent me.