Thank you very much. That was very insightful and understandable.
That kind of brings us full circle in this discussion. Christianity teaches that Jesus had two complete natures - a divine one and a human one. So he was 100% God and 100% human, all at the same time (We invented a fancy term for that too, it’s called the hypostatic union.), He was not a mixture of both God and human, and not a human who achieved God status, or God who just looked and acted human.
The Bible says that the fullness of God exists in Christ in bodily form, like you just said. (Colossians 1:19) But in other places, the Bible alludes to an emptying of his some of his Divine atttributes and a putting aside of his Divine privileges in order to fully enter humanity (Philiipians 2:7). Of course what that all means is a topic of lively debate. But some people would say that some of the attributes of God (like knowing the future, or being all-powerful) were not accessible to Jesus while he was on earth as a human, even though he was God.
Accused is such a mean word. More like teased. All in good theology-nerd fun, I hope. Plus these days you don’t get burned at the stake for being a heretic, you get cable tv shows and book deals, so it’s not such a bad gig anymore.
1 Like
Yes, teased would be a better word.
Looking up the verse you shared, it’s interesting that almost every translation says “He emptied himself”, it’s only in the King James where it says “He made himself of no reputation.”… I guess it could be debated on how different those meanings can be, and whether or not the KJV is misleading on this one point. “Making himself of no reputation” seems to mean he was born of a man of little stature: not a handsome man, or a rich man. While emptying himself sounds like he lost certain qualities… The real debate is not whether or not Jesus is human and god, all in one package… but how far his humanity goes, and how far his divinity goes.
I’ve heard other says Melchizedek (the mysterious encounter with Abraham in Genesis 14) was also Jesus. Which, of course, just makes thing all the more confusing!
-Tim
“Emptied” is the translation choice you find in the more literal translations (NASB, ESV, RSV, HCSB). It is interesting the KJV went with a more interpretive choice, since it usually is over on the literal side. Other interpretations of what the Greek meant by “emptied himself” are “gave up his divine privileges” (NLT) “Made himself nothing” (NIV) “gave up his place with God and made himself nothing” (NCV) “gave up everything” (CEV) and “gave up all that he had” (GNT).
I’ve never heard that Melchizadek was the preincarnate Son. I have heard that the angel who wrestled Jacob and the fourth person in the furnace with Shadrach Meshach and Abednego was though. A lot of the early church Fathers saw any reference to the “Angel of the Lord” in the OT as referring to preincarnate appearances of the Son. Things changed with Augustine, probably due to a translation issue because the word for angel in Latin lost the more generic meaning it had in Hebrew and Greek of “messenger” and came to be exclusively associated with a certain kind of heavenly being.
1 Like
Melchizedek is rather a very fascinating character.
Hebrews 7:1-3 NASB says this:
“For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God, who met Abraham as he was returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him, to whom also Abraham apportioned a tenth part of all the spoils, was first of all, by the translation of his name, king of righteousness, and then also king of Salem, which is king of peace. Without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, he remains a priest perpetually.”
and later on, in verses 14-17:
" For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, a tribe with reference to which Moses spoke nothing concerning priests. And this is clearer still, if another priest arises according to the likeness of Melchizedek, who has become such not on the basis of a law of physical requirement, but according to the power of an indestructible life. For it is attested of Him,
'You are a priest forever
According to the order of Melchizedek.’ "
Melchizedek was the priest of the Most High God, as well as the King of Salem (which means King of Peace), in Genesis 14. The only other person in the Bible that is both a “priest” and a “king” is Jesus. Melchizedek also offered bread and wine (more allusion to Christ?)
Melchizedek is like the Son of God (according to Hebrews) while Jesus is “after the order of Melchizedek”. The other divinities attributed to Melchizedek is that he has no genealogy: no mother and father.
In the specific account of Genesis 14:22,23 it says:
" Abram said to the king of Sodom, “I have sworn to the Lord God Most High, possessor of heaven and earth, that I will not take a thread even to a shoelatchet or anything that is yours, for fear you would say, ‘I have made Abram rich.’ "
This last point is, I admit, rather speculative. But the only other passage I know of in the Bible that refers to a “shoe-latchet” is when John the Baptist says, “Who’s shoe-latchet I am not worthy to unloose.”
-Tim
This topic was automatically closed 3 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.