My First Question: Trinitarians: How can Jesus be fully man outside of earth's atmosphere?

Trinitarianism teaches that "Jesus' two natures, human and divine, are inseparable. Jesus will forever be the God-man, fully God and fully human, two distinct natures in one Person. Jesus' humanity and divinity are not mixed, but are united without loss of separate identity."
http://www.gotquestions.org/hypostatic-u…

But now Jesus is in heaven, outside of earth's atmosphere. How can he retain his human nature and keep it intact? He never had to before the incarnation. But now he has to maintain his human nature, sustaining it outside of earth's atmosphere, forever?

Additional Details

@ Bar_enosh: Thank you for your response. I'd like to hear from Trinitarians too.

@ Carlito, hi and thank you for your response.

“Heaven,” God’s abode, is by definition outside of earth’s atmosphere. If it wasn’t, then God would be physically discernable and measurable, which he isn’t. Corroborating this is Psalms 57:5 and 11, which says: “Be exalted above the heavens, O God; Let Your glory be above all the earth.” (NASB) (See also Psalms 108:5 and 113:4, and Deuteronomy 10:14.) Thus, both reason and scripture lead one to conclude that God dwells outside of earth’s atmosphere.

I agree with you that “heaven” is “the spiritual dimension.” But that too is by definition outside of earth’s atmosphere.

Regarding human nature and the human body, the Hypostatic Union doctrine teaches that Jesus is the union of two hypostases, two substances, in one hypostasis or substance. It is a union of the human and divine hypostases. Trinitarianism teaches that Jesus retained his human body he acquired at his incarnation.

“The addition of the human nature to the divine nature is Jesus, the God-man. This is the hypostatic union, Jesus Christ, one Person, fully God and fully man.”[1] Additionally, one Trinitarian wrote that “Jesus is God in human flesh. He is not half God and half man. He is fully divine and fully man. That is, Jesus has two distinct natures: divine and human.”[2] Thus, Jesus’ human nature is declared to be human flesh.

The Trinitarian Jesus is the union of his human nature or body of his incarnation with his divine nature. To say that his human nature is not human would contradict Trinitarianism’s doctrine that Jesus is fully man. It would also be similar to the docetic heresy, that Jesus only appears to be human.[3]

This being said, my sincere question remains.

Footnotes:
[1] “What is the hypostatic union? How can Jesus be both God and man at the same time?” http://www.gotquestions.org/hypostatic-u…

[2] Slick, Matt. “The Trinity, the Hypostatic Union, and the Communicatio Idiomatum.” http://carm.org/christianity/christian-d…

[3] “Docetism” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docetism

"Docetic" in that Jesus retained a docetic human form. But that is anathema. He retained his incarnate human body according to the Trinitarian sources above. I agree it would make more sense if Trinitarianism would teach that Jesus is human experientially (human by experience only now), but it doesn't. It teaches that Jesus is fully human and fully divine, in hypostatic union.

@ Carlito
In addition to Psalms 57:5, 11, 108:5 and 113:4, and Deuteronomy 10:14, we have the Lord Jesus’ own description recorded at John 8:23: “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world.” (NIV) Thus he said that his world, “heaven,” is “above” this world. We also have the accounts of an angel’s and Jesus’ ascension to heaven. (Judges 13:20; Acts 1:9) Lastly, there is the account in Revelation 12 where Satan and his angels are “thrown down to the earth.” (NASB) Since you said you favor heaven being “the spiritual dimension,” this could be illustrated by calling it “above” earth, as it would be a higher realm.

Where did your comment go Carlito? [He removed his comment, but I continued to reply to what I read him say.]

1 Corinthians 15:50 declares an axiomatic truth: “flesh and blood cannot inherit God’s kingdom.” (NWT) This applies to the laws of creation. The natural cannot exist in the supernatural.

Any teaching that leads to ridiculous conclusions has to be questioned. The Trinity teaching of the hypostatic union is one of these. It teaches that Jesus is now fully human in heaven, whereas before he was fully divine only. Trinitarians also say, correctly in this case, that God is transcendent. Here lies an apparent contradiction, for this leads to an impossible situation of something from “the below” (TWN KATW), his human body under the laws of physics, existing in “the above” (TWN ANW), the divine heavenly realm above the laws of physics (John 8:23), and a situation where Jesus now has to maintain his human body in this transcendent realm where by definition it cannot exist. This would make Jesus a fool for not discarding his human body, and since the Lord Jesus is not a fool, the hypostatic union is offensive to him. Trinitarian reasoning and exegesis then falls into question as a whole, as a much more reasonable exegesis exists, one that has a valid soteriology.

A point in conclusion: God can only create what is allowable by the laws of physics that he put in place. So, this is not about lack of faith in His ability to make a human-divine hypostatic union, but faith in His superior intelligence to not waste time and energy in something that His laws of physics will not support, in this case of having a human body in heaven.

LINK


Related blog post:

• Trinitarianism and Docetism: Did the Person of Jesus Feel the Pain of His Ransom Sacrifice? http://jimspace3000.blogspot.com/2015/04/trinitarianism-and-docetism-did-person.html

My Answer to: The verse that says one must believe that Jesus is God in order to be a Christian and therefore be saved?

Would someone please give me the Bible book, chapter, and verse?

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker
Well, Jesus is God in the same sense that the angel in Exodus 23:21 was Jehovah God.

Exodus 23:21 in the NWT-Ref reads: Watch yourself because of him and obey his voice. Do not behave rebelliously against him, for he will not pardon YOUR transgression; because my name is within him. [Footnote: That is, the “angel” as Jehovah’s representative, to act in his name.]

Exodus 23:21 in the NET Bible reads: Take heed because of him, and obey his voice; do not rebel against him, for he will not pardon your transgressions, for my name is in him.
The footnote on "name" says in part: "Driver quotes McNeile as saying, 'The "angel" is Jehovah Himself "in a temporary descent to visibility for a special purpose."'"

As Jesus represented his Father and came in his Father’s name (John 5:43; 8:29), it could be said that Jesus is Jehovah God Himself in a temporary descent to visibility for a special purpose. Perhaps this is why Thomas declared "My Lord and my God!" (John 20:28) John recorded Thomas' exclamation "that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God." (John 20:31)

Thus, the angel was Jehovah representationally, not literally or ontologically. The same with Jesus. He is Lord "to the glory of God the Father." (Phil. 2:11) He honors his God and says "my God" four times as a resurrected being in Revelation 3:12.

Source(s):
New World Translation
New English Translation

Asker's Rating:
    5 out of 5
Asker's Comment:
    Thanks, fascinating points.

    Those who think such a verse exists in the Bible have the Bible confused with the Athanasian Creed, formulated by man, not by God.

    Thanks to all who gave thoughtful replies.
Link 

 

My Answer to: This is from Greek Mythology - written long before the bible was ever thought of - does it sound familiar?

When Zeus planned to destroy an ancient race living on Earth, he sent a deluge. However, Deucalion, a son of Prometheus, and his wife Pyrrha—the Greek equivalents of the biblical Noah and his wife—put provisions into a chest and climbed into it. Carried across the waters of the flood, they landed on Mount Parnassus. After the waters receded, the couple gratefully made sacrifices to Zeus.

If you care to study more Greek mythology you will see - there are many parables that were plagiarized for the bible - that were originally stories of how Zeus and the other gods ruled earth.


Why do people discount these as "Myths" while saying the bible is not?

Thank you for this opportunity.
Moses compiled the account known today as Genesis. This may have been done by consulting existing writings or documents, as the evidence indicates. It is those and oral traditions based on those that fanciful flood legends originate, and other fanciful stories we call myths. Interestingly, the description of the ark in Genesis is sea-worthy and in accord with naval architecture. But more could be said concerning the credibility of Genesis.
So when considering which came first, it is always wise to consider different options. In this case, written or oral tradition that predates both Genesis and Greek myth may be the solution.

Source(s):

Insight on the Scriptures. "Genesis, Book of"

Link

Credits: Deucalion throwing a rock behind him. https://www.greekmythology.com/Myths/Mortals/Deucalion/deucalion.html

My Answer to: Is the creation museum doing Christianity more harm than good?

I get the impression that at least 50% of Christians either wouldn’t take their children there at all or if they did, they wouldn’t allow them to have the impression that the “facts” being presented are truth beyond doubt. Could this type of fundamentalism be driving a wedge between Christians? Would some of them start listening to or at least not rejecting outright the words of atheists like Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris?

 I understand what they are trying to accomplish, having an alternative museum to the museums dominated by atheistic evolution.

The problem is, that museum advertises young-earth creationism (YEC), the teaching that the six creative days in Genesis 1-2 are solar days. However, contrary to that claim, the events in the creation week cannot be restricted to solar days of twenty-four hours, specifically the growth of vegetation in Day 3 and the garden of Eden in Day 6. (Genesis 1:11-12; 2:8-9) Vegetation, especially the fruit trees in the garden of Eden, takes time to grow to maturity—time that greatly exceeds twelve-hours of daylight allowed for in YEC. Also, the claim that Adam would have had enough time to settle in the garden, name the animals, and get married after his “deep sleep” in a period of some hours less than twelve is strained to absurdity. (Genesis 2:15, 19-22) A plain reading of the Genesis account leaves no room for YEC.

Also, YEC holds that the sun and moon were created on Day 4, as opposed to merely appearing then to an earthly observer. Creating the sun in Day 4 would mean that God was micromanaging earth by placing and maintaining temporary light and heat sources for the first three days. This would not reflect wisdom. The Creator does not micromanage his creation, but establishes physical laws for it to function in.

So to answer your question, YEC causes people to view the Bible superficially. It also stumbles others into regarding the Bible as mythological. The later ones may become agnostic or atheistic. However, when these see that the creative works are not being confined to six solar days, it can help them see how reasonable the Bible really is.
Link