[Forest Keeper]

In His human nature He sweated, bled, cried, thirsted, ate — and died. But that same Christ did none, felt none and suffered none of these things in His divine nature. So to say that He was just a "regular" Guy is completely dismissing His divine nature which was with Him from the beginning.

Oh, I never intended to dismiss His divine nature, I just meant to distinguish it against His human nature. I don't think it subtracts anything from Christ or Mary if the pregnancy was as it goes with us, and if Mary felt normal birth pains. Since divine Christ was never born, I associate the birth with His human side.

[adiaireton8]

Since divine Christ was never born, I associate the birth with His human side.

I don't see how that is not either Nestorianism or Docetism. What was born was not a "side" or a "nature" but a person, i.e. the Second Person of the Trinity.

-A8

[kosta50]

Since divine Christ was never born, I associate the birth with His human side

But that's just the point: there is never a time when Chirst since the Incarnation can be associated only with His "human side." The two natures are never separate, nor mixed, althought unconfused. He is not a demigod, half-god and half human, nor is there divine "schizphrenia," or multiple personality. At no point can anything about Christ be considered "normal" or "natural" from the human point of view.

[wagglebee]

Since divine Christ was never born, I associate the birth with His human side.

Christ is, AT ALL TIMES, fully Human and fully Divine. God's Plan decreed that He be born of a Virgin, He did not NEED to do this, He CHOSE to do this. He could have descended from Heaven as a grown man or any other form He desired. You seem to be trying to present this crazy idea that there are two distinct parts of His Nature and that they operate seperately of each other. This heretical thinking has been discounted by the Church numerous times and to the best of my knowledge has never been accepted by Protestants either.

[Kolokotronis]

"Oh, I never intended to dismiss His divine nature, I just meant to distinguish it against His human nature. I don't think it subtracts anything from Christ or Mary if the pregnancy was as it goes with us, and if Mary felt normal birth pains. Since divine Christ was never born, I associate the birth with His human side."

Oh, FK, no, no, no! That's heresy. Its very, very close to Arianism.

"The final end of Orthodoxy is pure knowledge of the two dogmas of faith - the Trinity and the Duality; to contemplate and know the Trinity as indivisible and yet not merged together; to know the Duality as the two natures of Christ joined in one person - that is, to know and to profess one's faith in the Son of God both before incarnation, and after incarnation, to praise Him in His two natures and wills unmerged, the one Divine and the other human." +Gregory of Sinai