Originally posted by knightmeister
What do you think St. Paul meant by his en emoi Christos? That Jesus was inside him? VISTED
Obviously he was refering to Christ Jesus in the form of the Holy Spirit. This Christ Jesus is within us all waiting to emerge , but the NT is the story of how it got there. I don't think Paul doubted the divinity of Jesus.
Obviously he was referring to Christ Jesus in the form of the Holy Spirit.
First, I think he was referring to
the Christ here, not the Christ as Jesus (in the Greek, the definite article may be implied; nevertheless, Christ is not simply another name for Jesus).
Second, from a Trinitarian viewpoint, I’d be a bit cautious about conflating the Spirit and the Christ, let alone Jesus. In the Nicene view, the three hypostases share the same divine ousia, but are nevertheless distinct hypostases. The language of Chalcedonian Christology applies here as well, I think: “the distinction of natures being in no way annulled by the union.”
__________________________________________
This Christ Jesus is within us all waiting to emerge...
The
logos tou theou, from which all things are engendered, is the
eikon tou theou in humanity. That is, the image reflects the logos. Fully realized and actualized (emergent) this is the Christ. That is why Jesus was the Christ, but the Christ is not just Jesus. When Jesus points to himself, he is pointing to the Christ-manifest, not to his material person—if you wish, you could say, I think, that while the logos became
sarx, it is not his
sarx that Jesus is pointing to, but the logos that engenders that
sarx. What he is pointing to is the logos hypostasized.
That is what it means to be called “the image (
eikon) of the invisible God, existing before (or, firstborn of) all creation...” (Colossians 1:15) “Existing before” because the logos is
en arche.
Logos = the Christ = the son, which, by putting confidence in the logos (as manifest by Jesus), we are empowered to become—which is the
eikon/image that we are all along, but which is obscured by the existential condition called “the fall.” (I am remembering your comment here about not unnecessarily reading the biblical texts literally.)
Jesus was viewed as
ho Christos (and “son” ) because he was (or came to be) seen as the exemplar (or sacrament) of the
logos tou theou manifest in human form.
monogenes, often translated as “only-begotten,” really means unique, as opposed to exclusive (“only-begotten” would be
monogenete).
Because we are all imaged in that same
logos, we all are empowered to be
uion tou theou (“sons of God” ) and
teknon tou theou (“children, people or inhabitants of God” ). That is the message of the incarnation, as described by St. Gregory of Nyssa (4th century):
“That God should have clothed himself in our nature is a fact that should not seem strange or extravagant to minds that do not form too paltry an idea of reality ... that God is all in all; that he clothes himself with the universe, and at the same time contains it and dwells in it.
“If then all is in him and he is in all, why blush for the faith that teaches us that one day God was born in the human condition,
God who still today exists in humanity?
“Indeed, if the presence of God in us does not take the same form now as it did then, we can at least agree in recognizing that
he is in us today no less than he was then.” (My bold.)
In Orthodox Christianity, the “fall” represents impairment (largely due to illusion) to our likeness to God, but not our being in the image of God. The Orthodox
soteriology of sanctification is based on salvation as healing (the root of
soterias is
soza, meaning to cure or make well), as opposed to the juridical concepts prominent in the west.
Gregory again: “The
logos, in taking flesh, was mingled with humanity, and took our nature within himself, so that the human should be deified by this mingling with God; the stuff of our nature was entirely sanctified by Christ....”
All this is a “high Christology,” reminiscent of the early church, which has never been abandoned except perhaps in some forms of Protestantism.
As an aside, here are some quotes by early church fathers:
“God became man so that man might become God.” (St. Athanasius)
“By participation of the Spirit, we are
knit into the Godhead.” (St. Athanasius; my bold)
“The son of God was made man so that man might become son of God.” (Irenaeus of Lyons)
“The Logos of God had become man so that you might learn from a man how a man may become God'' (Clement of Alexandria, c. 140-220)
“Christ is the first-born of God, his Logos, in whom all people share. That is what we have learned and what we bear witness to ... All who have lived in accordance with the Logos are Christians, even if they have been reckoned atheists, as among the Greeks Socrates, Heraclitus and the like.” (Justin Martyr; d. 165 C.E.)
________________________________
I don't think Paul doubted the divinity of Jesus.
Neither do I. For Paul, divinity was also that in whom we live and move and have our being...