tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17617194.post113058737300967751..comments2024-03-07T06:52:34.516+00:00Comments on Exiled Preacher: Jesus is the Son of God with PowerGuy Davieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09184743462264437085noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17617194.post-1130776965704128552005-10-31T16:42:00.000+00:002005-10-31T16:42:00.000+00:00Guy,thank you for your response. I do think that w...Guy,<BR/>thank you for your response. I do think that we can meaningfully talk about Christ’s adoption since the eternal Sonship isn’t the only sonship that he has.<BR/><BR/>Just as the title, ‘Son of Man’ is a title of honour taken by him in his humiliation, so he has been ‘given a name which is above every name’ in his exaltation.<BR/>John/.Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17759257675723564468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17617194.post-1130621182821489962005-10-29T22:26:00.000+01:002005-10-29T22:26:00.000+01:00Thanks - I completly agree with that, it's godo to...Thanks - I completly agree with that, it's godo to check another perspective on it!<BR/><BR/>Cheers - SteveStevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16284015818964162977noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17617194.post-1130615342210431022005-10-29T20:49:00.000+01:002005-10-29T20:49:00.000+01:00Hi John,I certainly do not think of the adoption o...Hi John,<BR/><BR/>I certainly do not think of the adoption of believers to be a mere subset justification. In a sense I suppose that we are justified that we might be adpoted into the family of God. But I am not sure how we can speak meaningfully of the Son being adpoted as Son. He is Son autotheos, in his own right.Guy Davieshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09184743462264437085noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17617194.post-1130614605450523202005-10-29T20:36:00.000+01:002005-10-29T20:36:00.000+01:00I would say that Jesus not only retained his human...I would say that Jesus not only retained his human experiences, but his humanity at his resurrection / exaltation. Even as the glorified Son of God he remembers his experiences while on earth in a state of humliation. Hebrews 4:14 & 15 point us to Jesus who has passed through the heavens, the Son of God. Yet, he is able to sympathise with us ie suffer with us because he suffered being tempted (Hebrews 2:18.) Christ’s sovereign lordship is conditioned by his resurrected humanity. The King of kings and Lord of lords knows our frame, he remembers that we are flesh because he shared and continues to share our humanity. <BR/><BR/>Some of the old hymns unpack this for us:<BR/><BR/>Touched with a sympathy within / He knows our feeble frame; / He knows what sore temptations mean, / for he has felt the same. (Isaac Watts)<BR/><BR/>Our fellow-suffered yet retains / A fellow-feeling with our pains, / And still remembers in the skies / His tears, His agonies, and cries.<BR/><BR/>In every pang that rends the heart, / The Man of Sorrows had a part, / He sympathizes with our grief, / And to the suffer sends relief. (Michael Bruce)<BR/><BR/>God suffers with us in the glorified humanity of the Son.Guy Davieshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09184743462264437085noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17617194.post-1130611162468482732005-10-29T19:39:00.000+01:002005-10-29T19:39:00.000+01:00Hi Guy,I've read this through twice to get to grip...Hi Guy,<BR/><BR/>I've read this through twice to get to grips with it. It's been a long time since I looked at Christology.<BR/><BR/>Would you say (and I don;t remember reading anything on this, thogh it seems it must be so), that Jesus, ressurected, as son of God with power, retained his human experieces. That is, God who has experiecned being a man, and suffering.<BR/><BR/>The appearances of Jesus after the russurection and befoer the ascension would seem to back this up.<BR/><BR/>A strict calvinism site I was reading recently, which talked of a God who did not suffer or feel anything?<BR/><BR/>Steve<BR/><BR/>Cheers - SteveStevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16284015818964162977noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17617194.post-1130603798749644042005-10-29T17:36:00.000+01:002005-10-29T17:36:00.000+01:00Guy,You say, ‘Evangelical expositors will want to ...Guy,<BR/>You say, ‘Evangelical expositors will want to avoid any suggestion that Jesus became the Son of God at his resurrection. This would be to fall into the heresy of adoptionism – the notion that Jesus was adopted as God’s Son, rather than being God’s Son from eternity.’<BR/><BR/>I think that you are right and that they, the evangelical expositors of which you speak, do avoid adoptionism by quite a distance, sometimes even denying any relevance to adoption itself in the meantime. If we are to restore adoption to its place in Christian theology (or even to its places in Christian theology) we might do worse than to get as close as we can to viewing the declaration of Christ’s sonship as his adoption.<BR/><BR/>I suspect that many expositors have not pursued this link, not because they thought that to do so would be to reintroduce adoptionism but because they knew that making such a link explicit would open themselves up to accusations of adoptionism.<BR/><BR/>The right defence against adoptionism is to teach clearly about the eternal sonship. It seems to me that a great deal is lost if we continue to try and defend against adoptionism by fencing off adoption as something that happens to us only; ie. that <BR/>we are adopted in Christ but not in his being declared to be the Son with power.<BR/><BR/>Fear of being accused of adoptionism surely reaches its nadir with those theologians who try and relegate adoption to be no more that the second part of justification.<BR/><BR/>I think that we should be teaching ‘the notion that Jesus was adopted as God’s Son, <B>as well as</B> being God’s Son from eternity.’Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17759257675723564468noreply@blogger.com