Kenosis and Hypostasis

[Goinheix]

Jesus divine and human natures are in no way confused or annulled by their union with each other; so there remains only One person in the Son and yet another in the Father, the HS makes three Persons and we have the Trinity. Do you disagree?

Not at all in any details of what you say. Your words are like coming from my lips and hart.

 

[Goinheix]

Talking about the incarnation of God Son as Jesus of Nazaret...

Kenosis
Christ Jesus who in form of God existed not something to seize hold regard the be equality to God but himself emptied form of bondman having taken in likeness of men having become and form find as men he lowered himself having become obedient point death of death even from cross.

Hypostasis
Who being radiance of glory and exact image of nature of him upholds and the things by the word of power of him purification of sins having made he sat down on right hand of majesty on high

Those two verses are the Biblical support for both theological concepts: kenosis and hypostasis. The hypostasis enfasizes that Jesus was the exact image of God; and is not the only verse pointing in that direction, but the only one using the word hypostasis. In the other hand, kenosis emfasizes that Jesus was empty of all divine atrributes; and is not the only text pointing in that direction, but the only using the word kenosis.

Are hypostasis and kenosis contradictories? Can be God continue to be God without the divine atributes? Could Jesus be the eaxct image of God while not having God`s atributes?

My point is that God is God for being God. He is "I am". God is not God because of his divine atributes. God has divine atributes because He is God. But He continues to be God despite or besides His divine atributes.

Jesus is/was God, and is/was (was means during the years on earth) God despite or besides the divine atributes. Jesus was the exact image of God since God is not the divine atributes but Got itself (Himself).

Is this offending? Is it difficult to accept?

 

[glfredrick]

Not to pick on you too much -- you ask interesting questions and have a desire to learn -- but if you actually did a harmony of the Gospels, you would have seen this:

1εν αρχη ην ο λογος και ο λογος ην προς τον θεον και θεος ην ο λογος
2ουτος ην εν αρχη προς τον θεον

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God.

 

[kyredneck]

Not to pick on you too much -- you ask interesting questions and have a desire to learn -- but if you actually did a harmony of the Gospels, you would have seen this:

1εν αρχη ην ο λογος και ο λογος ην προς τον θεον και θεος ην ο λογος
2ουτος ην εν αρχη προς τον θεον

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God.

14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us......

 

[Goinheix]

Not to pick on you too much -- you ask interesting questions and have a desire to learn -- but if you actually did a harmony of the Gospels, you would have seen this:

1εν αρχη ην ο λογος και ο λογος ην προς τον θεον και θεος ην ο λογος
2ουτος ην εν αρχη προς τον θεον

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God.

I have a desire to teach. I actualy did the harmoni of the harmony of the Gospels. And there is something that you can not understand: Jesus is God. There is not controversy about Jesus being God.

Here is an interesting question: How do you explain kenosis?

 

[Goinheix]

14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us......

That is hypostasis wich is biblical. What about kenisis wich is equally biblical?

 

[Iconoclast]

Now: where do ypou read that "Jesus did emptied himself of the visible manifestation of his divine atributes"? That is one of the heresies invented (while the wheel was already invented) by short mind theologist.

You read it here if you understand the verses;

and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

4I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.

5And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

1God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,

2Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

3Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:

12And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks;

13And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle.

14His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire;

15And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters.

16And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength.

17And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last:

18I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.

 

[Matt Black]

Re the OP question: it's a 'both/ and' not 'either/ or' answer ie: Jesus did empty Himself (kenosis; per Phil. 2:7) but remained 100% God (per Phil 2:6). See also Nicaea I, Chalcedon Councils.

 

[glfredrick]

I have a desire to teach. I actualy did the harmoni of the harmony of the Gospels. And there is something that you can not understand: Jesus is God. There is not controversy about Jesus being God.

Here is an interesting question: How do you explain kenosis?

The kenosis (keno o') is but one theological point of view used to describe the actions of Jesus as found in Philippians 2:7 as regards setting aside His deity.

The idea behind that term does not necessarily denote that he divested Himself of His divinity (His godhood, deity) and I have argued here on the board before that He did not, in fact, divest Himself of His deity, but rather that He "set aside" His divine attributes that would have stood in the way of being the humble servant described in the balance of that pericope.

He was still, and always, fully God and fully man, as described in the Scriptures.

To carry the kenosis to a point where Jesus failed to be fully God would be to do great damage to the text and implications of Scripture, as well as to render the atonement of Christ null and void, for only a God/man Messiah could accomplish what it was that Jesus accomplished. And, further, that "accomplishment" (atonement) was not just a good example, nor a princely thing to do -- it was an actual imputation of our sin (all of it) unto His person, and in return an actual imputation of His righteousness unto those of His whom the Father gave or is yet giving. None of that would be possible if Jesus set aside His deity and became solely a man, nor would it have been possible if Jesus was only God, and not man at all.

The first two great heresies of the church were, in order, that Christ was only God and not man, and then that Christ was only man and not God. Both heresies were firmly set in their place by the early council of the church, where the Scriptures were examined to determine that Christ indeed was God/man in full essence of each.

 

[Goinheix]

You read it here if you understand the verses;

Let me see:
Jesus was the brightness of his glory; how then He is asking God to restore his glory?

If Jesus didnt have the glory of God...then according to you he was not 100% fully God.

Make your mind.

 

[Goinheix]

Re the OP question: it's a 'both/ and' not 'either/ or' answer ie: Jesus did empty Himself (kenosis; per Phil. 2:7) but remained 100% God (per Phil 2:6). See also Nicaea I, Chalcedon Councils.

I am not sure if I undersdtand your post; but strongly believe that my posts are not being understood.

We can not denay kenosis, we can not make a christology ignoring it or pretendidng is not writen in the NT. If God the Son was God before kenosis and he continues to be God after kenosis; then we have to figure out what kenosis means.

Kenosis do not mean at all to seace to be God. Kenosis is not at all quiting or resigning to the condition of being God. If we have to understand the real meaning of kenosis then we have to acceot that Jesus was God in all the significance of being God.

There is only one way of being God...being 100% God. There is not such a thing as being half a God, or almost God, or barely God. Being God means to be God in all the meaning of it. Jesus was (during in earth) and is God in not other way that being totally, and fully God.

But by kenosis he did emptied out, did give up, did resign to something that did not lessen his condition of being God. Whatever he did emptied out of, he continues to be God. How much of a God? Fully God? As In say: there is only one way to be God and declaring to be fully God is redundant and unnecesary. After kenosis, after emtiing out Jesus was totaly and absolutely God. His divine condition can be resume in: Jesus is/was God; making unnecesary any "fully" added.

What did God the Son emptied out for entering the world in flesh as Jesus? Because he did emtied of something. Actually the term kenosis inplies a total emtyiness. What did God the Son emtied himself totaly and still continues to be God?

In my opinion, God the Son did emtied of all divine atributes. God the Son emptied of being - for example - omniscient. In that case, Jesus was not onmiscient.

What is so offensive? It is that for the most of the christianas can not understand that beinmg God and being omniscient are not the same thing, but two different things. It is possible to God to give up on his omniscience without being any less God. This is the focus of our discussion.

We - all you and me - are nos diagreen on Jesus being God. Fully God if you prefer. We disagree in that Jesus not being omniscient signifies him being less than full God. In my opinion, Jesus not being omniscient still is fully God; because God is not his atributes but God is God despite and besides of his atributes.

Now the big question: was Jesus omniscient?
If Jesus was in fact omniscient, then my opinion is in problems.
If Jesus was in fact not omniscient, then my opinion is in solid ground.

If I am right, not being omniscient has nothing against beinmg God...fully God.

 

[Goinheix]

The kenosis (keno o') is but one theological point of view used to describe the actions of Jesus as found in Philippians 2:7 as regards setting aside His deity.

The idea behind that term does not necessarily denote that he divested Himself of His divinity (His godhood, deity) and I have argued here on the board before that He did not, in fact, divest Himself of His deity, but rather that He "set aside" His divine attributes that would have stood in the way of being the humble servant described in the balance of that pericope.

He was still, and always, fully God and fully man, as described in the Scriptures.

To carry the kenosis to a point where Jesus failed to be fully God would be to do great damage to the text and implications of Scripture, as well as to render the atonement of Christ null and void, for only a God/man Messiah could accomplish what it was that Jesus accomplished. And, further, that "accomplishment" (atonement) was not just a good example, nor a princely thing to do -- it was an actual imputation of our sin (all of it) unto His person, and in return an actual imputation of His righteousness unto those of His whom the Father gave or is yet giving. None of that would be possible if Jesus set aside His deity and became solely a man, nor would it have been possible if Jesus was only God, and not man at all.

The first two great heresies of the church were, in order, that Christ was only God and not man, and then that Christ was only man and not God. Both heresies were firmly set in their place by the early council of the church, where the Scriptures were examined to determine that Christ indeed was God/man in full essence of each.

I agree with you. Jesus was God because God the Son (that is Jesus before birth) did not empty of his deity but of his divine atributes; and being emtied of all divine atributes made not damage to his deity.

Please notice that I have never ever say or mean that Jesus were less that fully God.

 

[percho]

Did this emptying take place in a less than a nanosecond moment in existence?
If not then did it really not take place?
If so, when do you think it took place?
Being the word for but is there in the Greek please list from the text of Philippians 2:6 what self empties (pl) is relative to?
Does, ἐκένωσεν, remotely mean laid aside?
Did this take place, "form of slave getting in likeness of humans becoming," before or after, "self empties"?

Six questions for all who would be gracious enough to answer.

 

[Iconoclast]

Let me see:
Jesus was the brightness of his glory; how then He is asking God to restore his glory?

If Jesus didnt have the glory of God...then according to you he was not 100% fully God.
Make your mind.

No...wrong guess..... he is always God....

think of it like a brightly lit lamp.....and it gets covered by a dark green towel..some light might peek through...the light is still on, but only a little glimpse of the light is visible...

Jesus visible glory...was veiled in flesh...as He humbled Himself taking upon Himself the form of a servant.....do you see it now???

 

[Goinheix]

Did this emptying take place in a less than a nanosecond moment in existence?
If not then did it really not take place?
If so, when do you think it took place?
Being the word for but is there in the Greek please list from the text of Philippians 2:6 what self empties (pl) is relative to?
Does, ἐκένωσεν, remotely mean laid aside?
Did this take place, "form of slave getting in likeness of humans becoming," before or after, "self empties"?

Six questions for all who would be gracious enough to answer.

Some christians have messure the kenosis, or at least tried to, and have come with the cientific result that it lasted 0.5284056725 of a nanosecond. I dont agrre and myself prefer the foundings of some others, that is 75.8763529 atoseconds. But that is not for sure and it is better to asume that we simple dont know.

Ekenoses means in every greek dictionary that have been published in the last mileniums "emptying". As used by Paul means emptying of the condition of being equal to God, and there is not room at all to other interpretation.

 

[Goinheix]

No...wrong guess..... he is always God....

think of it like a brightly lit lamp.....and it gets covered by a dark green towel..some light might peek through...the light is still on, but only a little glimpse of the light is visible...

Jesus visible glory...was veiled in flesh...as He humbled Himself taking upon Himself the form of a servant.....do you see it now???

You are defending an oìnion that the kenosis teached by Paul to the Philipians was like a towell (I dont understand why it is datk green). Can you more specific. My question is: God the Son was omniscient as God. After the kenosis (towel) ...how much of omniscient was Jesus?

 

[Goinheix]

Did this emptying take place in a less than a nanosecond moment in existence?
If not then did it really not take place?
If so, when do you think it took place?
Being the word for but is there in the Greek please list from the text of Philippians 2:6 what self empties (pl) is relative to?
Does, ἐκένωσεν, remotely mean laid aside?
Did this take place, "form of slave getting in likeness of humans becoming," before or after, "self empties"?

Six questions for all who would be gracious enough to answer.

2nd If not...Paul was wrong
3rd It took place in the very moment of the conception in Mary
5th Ekenosen means emptying. there is two condition: a cup with water (full or half) and a cup empty. empty is without any water.
6th Tokk place in first place

 

[Skandelon]

I apologize to Goinheix for moving this post. I was given bad information. But, I do not moderate this forum thus do not have the authority to move it back.

Again, I am sorry. Goinheix is a baptist.

 

[Goinheix]

I apologize to Goinheix for moving this post. I was given bad information. But, I do not moderate this forum thus do not have the authority to move it back.

Again, I am sorry. Goinheix is a baptist.

Is it OK if I open a kenosis thread in the baptist section?

 

[Skandelon]

Yes, I requested this one be moved back but it may be easier to repost a new one. Again, sorry for the mix-up