Replies

The Fathers all used terminology from Greek philosophy to make theological points. A bad result of that was the rise of true Neo-Platonism in some and true Aristotelianism in others, notwithstanding the fact that the original users of Platonic or Aristotelian vocabulary and constructs absolutely rejected those philosophies. The bad result of believing that God is moved by emotion the same way we are is that it transforms God into a being moved by necessity...

Thank you for your reply.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "necessity." Are you speaking of it in a particular philosophical sense?

What do you think the following means?

Hebrew 8:3
"Every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices, and so it was necessary for this one also to have something to offer."

When Jesus wept at the tomb of Lazurus that wasn't anthropomorphic, too, was is?

Cordially,

You know, I had a nice reasoned answer for you, left it to check something, came back and it was gone! Someday I'll get the hang of this computer! Here's the thumbnail of the longer version!

"I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "necessity." Are you speaking of it in a particular philosophical sense?"

I am using it in the Greek philosophical sense of "H Ἀνάγκη", "Necessity", an impersonal, wholly rationalistic, pre-existent, uncreated force which, it was posited, existed beyond the gods and to which the gods were subject. Both Plato and Aristotle dealt with it. "What do you think the following means? Hebrew 8:3 "Every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices, and so it was necessary for this one also to have something to offer."" Of course this has to be read within the context of what Hebrews is teaching about and to whom it is written. The High Priest spoken of here is of course Christ. The role of the High Priests in the OT were to mediate in one manner or another between God and mankind, to act in a manner to bring the people to God. But their sacrifices didn't work (Psalm 40:6, 51:16, Isaiah 1:11, Amos 5:21; Jeremiah 6:20; 14:21 and Jeremiah 7:21). The OT does make clear what is an acceptable sacrifice, however, and how what motivated sacrifice is in fact "pleasing" or "acceptable" to God. As I have observed elsewhere, however, these acts are for us, not God. They change us, not God's opinion of us. At any rate, in order for Christ to be recognized by us men as the Hogh Priest, according to our understanding and nature, He had to have a "sacrifice" and that "sacrifice" was His perfect obedience in His human nature to God's will. "When Jesus wept at the tomb of Lazurus that wasn't anthropomorphic, too, was is?" Nope, not anthropomorphic at all. The Holy Fathers at Chalcedon taught us that Christ is fully God and fully Man. Christ's human nature felt and experienced what humans feel and experience. It isn't anthropomorphic to decribe that humanity in human terms.