Originally Posted by Wayne@purpose
I will address your quesion on John 1 soon. I first need to know how you are defining Human nature and divine nature in your own mind. For example, I see human nature as part of the thinking process of a person. In the case of Jesus, he could think like a man and grow in wisdom, statue and favor with man and with God. Are you saying the thought process of Jesus was not a part of God or a part of God?
Jesus in His human nature was complete, i.e., He possessed a material body and a rational soul. (cf. Matt. 26:26,28,38; Lk 23:46; 24:39 Jh 11:33; Heb 2:14)

Here is a succinct statement held by the Church concerning the Christ:

a. There is but one person in the Mediator, the unchangeable Logos. The Logos furnishes the basis for the personality of Christ. It would not be correct, however, to say that the person of the mediator is divine only. The incarnation constituted Him a complex person, constituted of two natures. He is the God-man.

b. The human nature of Christ as such does not constitute a human person. The Logos did not adopt a human person, so that we have two persons in the Mediator, but simply assumed a human nature.

c. At the same time it is not correct so speak of the human nature of Christ as impersonal. This is true only in the sense that this nature has no independent subsistence of its own. Strictly speaking, however, the human nature of Christ was not for a moment impersonal. The Logos assumed that nature into personal subsistence with Himself. The human nature has its personal existence in the person of the Logos. It is in-personal rather than impersonal.

d. For that very reason we are not warranted to speak of the human nature of Christ as imperfect or incomplete. His human nature is not lacking in any of the essential qualities belonging to that nature, and also has individuality, that is, personal subsistence, in the person of the Son of God.

e. This personal subsistence should not be confused with consciousness and free will. The fact that the human nature of Christ, in and by itself, has no personal subsistence, does not mean that it has no consciousness and will. The Church has taken the position that these belong to the nature rather than to the person.

f. The one divine person, who possess a divine nature from eternity, assumed a human nature, and now has both. This must be maintained over against those who, while admitting that the divine person assumed a human nature, jeopardize the integrity of the two natures by conceiving of them as having been fused or mixed in a tertium quid, a sort of divine-human nature.

[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]