Athanasius, in defending the Nicene creed against Arians, argues that Christ necessarily had to be fully divine or else he could not have effected salvation. Similarly, Christ necessarily had to be fully human or he could not have taken upon himself all the pains and evils of humanity and transformed them toward divinity. He writes, "Just as we die in Adam because we are all from the earth, so 'we are all made alive in Christ' because we are 'reborn' from above 'by water and the Spirit'; the flesh is no longer earthly, but now it has been 'logified' by the work of the divine Logos who on our account became flesh."
I think I'm going to get a t-shirt that says, simply, "logified."
On a similarly different note:
How about Logos for a boys name?
12 comments:
Maybe Logifred?
Logos is a bible computer program.
If you make the shirt I want one too. seriously. that'd make a great band name too!
You may have already heard of this web site, but Jason turned me onto it, and I've enjoyed it.
Apologetics.com
Check it out.
Dennis,
I'm sorry, but I find that site quite bothersome.
Double-ditto for me.
Its content is objectionable to me.
OK, what specifically? For the record, I'm not coming to their defense necessarily by any means. I've recently found the site and heard some interesting discussion from it. So far that's about all the exposure I've had. I mentioned it primarily because I thought it might be a great source for future discussions.
How 'bout Athan? long "a", short "a", either way.
Grahama, WMD. (Weapon of Mass Distraction)
Poker games starting in July?
I'm all in.
(No, on "Logos," even though that was so evangelical of you, which is kinda cool.)
what's this poker stuff about?
oh - cause you'll all be living by each other.
Yeah - well, I'm not going to like any of you when that happens. Ya'll are going to abandon me out here in cyberworld all by my self. You'll have each other physically and won't need this form of communication any more.
I'm feeling quite anxious.
Dennis -
I'm reluctant to answer because I don't really want to start an argument of any kind on that matter, but I need to make some explanation of my self, so here is a very, very broad answer (even though you asked for specifics).
I feel that rational discourse on doctrines has its place (obviously, I'm getting a PhD in theology and operating in the scholastic world). However, that rational discourse should be done in a spirit of dialogue, which necessitates leaving room for other positions.
The tone of that website (and people who think in that way - at least the feeling I get from the website and those people) is one of certitude. Just read a few of the comments on any post - people are throwing down the sledge hammer and walking away. In my opinion, the thrust of the site leaves little room for dialogue.
The always-overwhelming danger of apologetics is certainty; indeed, it is really the goal of most apologetics.
And I'm not terribly interested in certainty. I am, instead, quite suspicious of it. Certainty leads to being a Pharisee or a Sadducee which leads to not recognizing the Messiah which leads to hating our enemies.
Matt, I thank you for noticing. Y'all are all way to serious around here so i try to do what i can to lighten things up ;) Gotta use your talents or they will be given to someone else right?
Poker yes. I've been watching it on tv so now i have some idea what i'm doing!
Tim, Open invitation my friend. Move on out (all the cool kids are) or we can just skype you in!
Post a Comment