Skip to content

podcast 371 – Dr. Steven Nemes on divine Christology in the New Testament

Play

In this episode Dr. Nemes and I discuss chapter 6 of his new book Trinity and Incarnation: A Post-Catholic Theology.

Clearly the Jesus of the New Testament is supposed to be special, indeed, unique, and in some sense he must be “divine.” But in what sense, exactly? And what if anything does this have to do with God’s giving Jesus his spirit?

Topics include:

  • whether the full deity of Christ is an obvious New Testament teaching
  • Spirit Christology
  • what Dr. Nemes calls the basic argument for Christ having two natures and how this compares to analyses given in my debate book, pp. 17-24
  • traditional partitive exegesis and Dr. Neme’s objections to this
  • whether only God (or only a divine Person) can forgive sins
  • Jesus as a “deified” human being
  • the New Testament’s portrayals of Jesus as having various human limits
  • A trilemma based on the question: Exactly who did God the Father empower to forgive sins and to perform miracles?
  • Whether a non-divine Jesus should be called “a mere man” and how this tradition originated in the 2nd Christian century.
  • The ancient Dynamic Monarchians within the Christian mainstream.
  • “Kenosis” and the modern suggestion that the Incarnate Christ, even though divine, nonetheless had to do miracles though the power of God’s Spirit, rather than using his own divine powers.
  • Opera trinitatis ad extra indivisa sunt.
  • divine simplicity and immutability
  • Why John 3:13 doesn’t presuppose Jesus’ literal pre-human existence.
  • The significance of Jesus’ baptism by John.
  • How Philippians 2 and 2 Corinthians 8:9 are about the man Jesus
  • why Paul says in Galatians 1:1 that he’s not an apostle “through man”
  • Why John 17:5 doesn’t presuppose Jesus’ literal pre-human existence.

Links for this episode:

podcast 370 – Dr. Steven Nemes’s formal challenge to Trinity theories

Trinity and Incarnation: A Post-Catholic Theology

Dr. Nemes’s homepage

A letter from the Lord Jesus: About God and Me

podcast 334 – “Who do you say I am?”

podcast 338 – What John 1 Meant

podcast 291 – From one God to two gods to three “Gods” – John 1 and early Christian theologies

Racovian Catechism

podcast 188 – Dr. Paul W. Newman’s Spirit Christology – Part 2

podcast 187 – Dr. Paul W. Newman’s Spirit Christology – Part 1

Clarifying Catholic Christologies – by Dr. Dale Tuggy

podcast 235 – The Case Against Preexistence

a reading of Philippians 2:5-11

podcast 268 – Another look at Philippians 2 with Dr. Dustin Smith

podcast 145 – ‘Tis Mystery All: the Immortal dies!

Date & Tuggy, Is Jesus Human and Not Divine?

This week’s thinking music is “Blood (Instrumental)” by Anthem of Rain.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

2 thoughts on “podcast 371 – Dr. Steven Nemes on divine Christology in the New Testament”

  1. As a former paper trinitarian, quotes such as these strike me as bold and erroneous:

    “… if we deny the deity of Jesus then we do not know the Father and, therefore, we do not have eternal life.”

    “Deity” can be an elusive term to define with precision, but no matter how one defines it, how do trinitarians have a “better” view of Jesus when unitarians honor the Son as they do the Father? (John 5:23) I would argue that my view of Jesus has been elevated.

    Yahweh cannot be tempted with evil and does not sin. Jesus WAS tempted, being a man, yet he never sinned. No wonder Yahweh has exalted Jesus to a functional equality with himself. Jesus is incredible. His ontological inferiority magnifies his accomplishments.

  2. I have been listening to your podcast for about 2 years. I am completing a MS titled (Jailbreaking Christ: Unlocking Christ from His Chapter & Verse Prison-)-which you would find, likely, absolutely scandalous.
    I only have a formal 8th grade education and self-taught myself a bunch of arm-chair theology and science in the last 30 years.
    I am working tonight on getting my chapter “No Father-No Son” ready for my editor and finding myself digging into the abyss at multiple levels.
    I have a very specific question: Am I being fair about the Nicean formulation regarding Father/Son essential ontology given that the creed does hold to eternal generation?
    Here is a snapshot, unedited:
    “This concept of the Trinity as it emerged from the battle of the three-month-long Nicean conference—I suggest—became the quintessential contraceptive that denies both God’s genuine fatherhood and Christ’s true sonship. It strikes me as particularly pernicious in this regard.
    Consider the following; Jesus is clearly portrayed in the Gospels as the Father’s Son.
    A father-son relationship that had its inception at some point of conception. In fact, it’s in the word “begotten.” The entire concept of “Fathering” is to engender or to originate.
    The doctrine of the Trinity goes to great lengths to work out that Jesus is essentially co-equal with God when all we need to do is ask Jesus himself.
    In Christ’s own words: “My Father is greater than I.” John 14:28 KJV”

Comments are closed.