Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: D-fendr

Orthodox patristic teaching is that Christ assumed human nature as it was before the fall. He submitted voluntarily to the "unblameworthy passions" (hunger, thirst, weariness...). The fact that he did not assume fallen human nature does not take away from his likeness to us, for sin is not a part of human nature as God first created it, but is rather something parasitic. So Christ having an unfallen human nature does not compromise our salvation. One would include in this the suffering he endured -- his submitting to suffering and being killed was not sinful (although the Gnostics had other ideas.)

My point was that Christ was fully God and fully man. His sinless life, his death and resurrection were to achieve our salvation -- not his own. It was not so he could conquer death for himself, but for us.

The Theotokos was a human being who was born with the effects of the ancestral sin -- Christ was not. She labored for her own salvation, which she needed -- Christ labored for ours, and didn't need salvation.

The Theotokos is the exemplary Christian -- Christ is not a Christian, he is the Christ.

By taking the Theotokos and putting her into a special category where she was conceived differently from the rest of us, this makes her more than human, but less than God -- precisely what Protestants accuse those of us who revere her of doing.

If our baptism put us in a pre-fall state, then we would not get sick or die unless we sinned. Since infants who have been baptized but haven't yet sinned get sick and die, it is clear that baptism does not put us into a pre-fall state.


5,788 posted on 05/06/2006 12:07:16 AM PDT by Agrarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5779 | View Replies ]


To: Agrarian

Very interesting, lots to think of there. Your closing logic points to the difference very well.

So that I'm clear: Was temptation for Christ as strong as temptation for us? (I'm referring to temptation outside the "unblameworthy passions")

Something else I'd like to ask your view on: Did Christ know who he was always or did it unfold to Him?

thanks very much for your reply.


5,790 posted on 05/06/2006 12:18:53 AM PDT by D-fendr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5788 | View Replies ]

To: Agrarian; Full Court; 1000 silverlings; HarleyD; Forest Keeper; blue-duncan; qua; ...
The Theotokos was a human being who was born with the effects of the ancestral sin -- Christ was not. She labored for her own salvation, which she needed -- Christ labored for ours, and didn't need salvation.

The Theotokos is the exemplary Christian -- Christ is not a Christian, he is the Christ.

By taking the Theotokos and putting her into a special category where she was conceived differently from the rest of us, this makes her more than human, but less than God -- precisely what Protestants accuse those of us who revere her of doing.

If our baptism put us in a pre-fall state, then we would not get sick or die unless we sinned. Since infants who have been baptized but haven't yet sinned get sick and die, it is clear that baptism does not put us into a pre-fall state.

Excellent points about Mary and baptism. I'm relieved to see there are differences between the Orthodox and the Roman churches. I was beginning to think the distinctions had been erased.

5,806 posted on 05/06/2006 9:01:04 AM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5788 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson