Dale Tuggy

Dale Tuggy is Professor of Philosophy at the State University of New York at Fredonia, where he teaches courses in analytic theology, philosophy of religion, religious studies, and the history of philosophy.

6 Comments

  1. Canadian
    November 9, 2013 @ 10:14 pm

    Dale,
    I found Crisp’s answers thoughtful and I think quite Orthodox.
    I’d have to listen again to confirm, but an underlying issue that came up behind a question or two is the assumption that there is a Natural opposition between humanity and divinity. In St Maximos, John of Damascus and elsewhere like the 6th Council, this dialectic is confronted by proper Christology itself. Gethsemane reveals not two opposing wills in Christ, but two wills choosing distinct good things.
    The interpenetration of Christ’s humanity by the divine energies deifies the humanity of Christ without change, and elevates it to what humanity was created to be. His humanity is employed freely by divine Person and follows without compulsion or coercion.

    His answer about Christ’s dual knowlege is correct. Jesus has a human mind, soul and body. These are created and do not have unlimited capacity, even when deified. Because Christ is without sin, his humanity participates in his divine energies such that his flesh can shine brighter than the sun on the mount, he walks on water, he knows the thoughts of the Pharisees. But only the divine nature is uncircumscribed, his humanity has it’s natural capacities.
    His comments on Nestorianism were good. Christ is only one agent, his divine Person. Natures don’t act, Persons do. Christ is one agent with two natures at his disposal at all times. One Person acting in two natures, doing the things appropriate to those natures. When he goes to relieve himself after supper, a divine Person is relieving himself in his human nature. When he sleeps, eats, is born of a mother, or dies, one divine Person is doing these things but only in his human nature. Meanwhile, at the very same time, the one Son in his divine nature may be attending to the most awesome solar flare and the birth of a child in Inner Mongolia.
    There is no blending of natures in Christ. Each act of Christ is NOT accomplished in both natures. He acts in both natures but the one Son does different acts in each nature, as each nature has it’s own natural will and energies.

  2. John
    November 8, 2013 @ 11:42 pm

    Jaco,
    That was most useful.
    Thanks
    John

  3. Francesco
    November 8, 2013 @ 11:42 am

    So we don’t know how to define to be “human”?
    But we know for sure and have to rely on a specific technical definition of “person”?
    Very odd.

    We know for sure that to be human means to be created.
    To be God means to be uncreated.

  4. Jaco
    November 8, 2013 @ 2:20 am

    @John:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sign_(semiotics)

    “Ceci n’est pas une pipe…”

  5. John
    November 7, 2013 @ 8:19 am

    All
    After I read your post yesterday, I Genesis 1 v27 came to my attention.
    “God created man in his image,
    in the divine image he created him
    male and female he created them”

    What does the word ‘divine’ mean in this contex
    Does it imply that humankind is ‘divine’ in the sensethat it is part of God’s creation?

    I’m not suggesting for a moment that we are ‘God’ or even part of God – which seems to have been Adam’s sin.
    Every Blessing
    John

  6. ZpeaceION
    November 6, 2013 @ 4:49 pm

    Excellent example of how theologians see the human Jesus as an ‘it’ and not a person. I found myself cringing at how he spoke as if Jesus was a man in appearance only, but the real person was veiled in fake flesh nature. What is up with him saying “we don’t know what it takes to be considered a real human being or person”? That seems to be special pleading for his ‘mystery’ that followed. I found that statement to be rather inconsistent with what we know it takes to be the seed of David among other things.

    “If one wants to retain a somewhat partial human existence for Jesus, we must pose two mutually exclusive possibilites; either to assume that The Son exists independently and activates the impersonal body, or that a human soul activates the body, with the Divine Son in tow. The former leading to a sort of naive docetism and the latter of the two leading to a strange corporeal possession. Either the real Divine Spirit being is an autonomous caretaker of the shell of the man, or that the real human being has a passenger along for the ride. This is what it takes for one person to be both created and un-created, both God and man, both mortal and Immortal at the same time” J B Bruner