The Union of the Two Natures of Jesus Christ

An intriguing question, but I'm not sure why.

My provisional answer is "no"; but that is because I can't think of a reasonable definition, or combination of definitions, of "in Christ", "kingdom", and "in the kingdom" that would yield a response of "yes".
It's been intriguing me for a while now.
The reason I ask is because we(believers) are admonished to "press" into the kingdom and to "take it by force". But we know that the kingdom is within us, so it's an inner struggle, as opposed to an outer one.
2 Pet.1:5-11says to "add" these things to your faith, in order to gain an "entrance into the everlasting kingdom".

So it leaves me still asking, is it possible for us to be unfruitful in these "fruits", and therefore not enter the kingdom?
 
It's been intriguing me for a while now.
The reason I ask is because we(believers) are admonished to "press" into the kingdom and to "take it by force". But we know that the kingdom is within us, so it's an inner struggle, as opposed to an outer one.
2 Pet.1:5-11says to "add" these things to your faith, in order to gain an "entrance into the everlasting kingdom".

So it leaves me still asking, is it possible for us to be unfruitful in these "fruits", and therefore not enter the kingdom?
I'll start with the 2 Peter passage; I don't read
"add" these things to your faith, in order to gain an "entrance into the everlasting kingdom"
It is an "abundant entrance". Peter is not saying that the fruit developing process he has described is prerequisite to entrance. He is encouraging a developing process which results in an enhanced (abundant) entry (Heavenly rewards; something that I do not understand, but is referred to many times in the NT).

Luke 16:16 is a passage that is not well settled among commentators. For what is probably the most popular interpretation my google revealed this guy, who I think does well to lean on Jonathan Edwards for that interpretation.

http://calvinpca.org/news/2009/04/jonathan-edwards-on-pressing-into-the-kingdom-of-god

I lean another direction. I think the "pressing" referred to is being done by pretenders. Look at vs 10-15, especially 14-15; then Mat 11:12 where the "the violent lay claim to it (the kingdom"). I infer that that "claim" is not valid.

With those interpretations of the two passages, which are independent of your question, the answer must be "no".

Perhaps a more foundational question is "Is it possible for called child of God to be fruitless?", or "Is it purposed for any element of God's creation to be fruitless?"
 
I'll start with the 2 Peter passage; I don't read

It is an "abundant entrance". Peter is not saying that the fruit developing process he has described is prerequisite to entrance. He is encouraging a developing process which results in an enhanced (abundant) entry (Heavenly rewards; something that I do not understand, but is referred to many times in the NT).

Luke 16:16 is a passage that is not well settled among commentators. For what is probably the most popular interpretation my google revealed this guy, who I think does well to lean on Jonathan Edwards for that interpretation.

http://calvinpca.org/news/2009/04/jonathan-edwards-on-pressing-into-the-kingdom-of-god

I lean another direction. I think the "pressing" referred to is being done by pretenders. Look at vs 10-15, especially 14-15; then Mat 11:12 where the "the violent lay claim to it (the kingdom"). I infer that that "claim" is not valid.

With those interpretations of the two passages, which are independent of your question, the answer must be "no".

Perhaps a more foundational question is "Is it possible for called child of God to be fruitless?", or "Is it purposed for any element of God's creation to be fruitless?"
I should probably clarify my reference to the kingdom. I'm speaking of the "kingdom that is at hand", which Jesus(and John the Baptist)said to repent for.
This is the kingdom that is within us, in this temporal life, and is not some sort of determining factor in an after life. The after life is a whole other thing entirely, which has been bought and paid for.
 
Last edited:
I should probably clarify my reference to the kingdom. I'm speaking of the "kingdom that is at hand", which Jesus(and John the Baptist)said to repent for.
This is the kingdom that is within us, in this temporal life, and is not some sort of determining factor in an after life. The after life is a whole other thing entirely, which has been bought and paid for.
I see:
*one kingdom experienced from two places,
*those called repent,
*Peter is the messenger of revelation.

For consideration of temporal experience the only change to my earlier statement about 2 Peter 1 would be to change the parenthetical statement to "(vs. 5 'for this very reason...' referencing vss. 1-4); in which I think you are correct — that is a better approach to the passage.
 
I see:
*one kingdom experienced from two places,
*those called repent,
*Peter is the messenger of revelation.

For consideration of temporal experience the only change to my earlier statement about 2 Peter 1 would be to change the parenthetical statement to "(vs. 5 'for this very reason...' referencing vss. 1-4); in which I think you are correct — that is a better approach to the passage.
I believe verse 9 is very helpful to consider in this context. This person has definitely been purged from his old sins, but yet he lacks the fruit that should have come after the purging. His forgetfulness has contributed to a blindness, or at least a near-sightedness.
Can it be said that, in his present state, he is not experiencing the kingdom within him?
 
I believe verse 9 is very helpful to consider in this context. This person has definitely been purged from his old sins, but yet he lacks the fruit that should have come after the purging. His forgetfulness has contributed to a blindness, or at least a near-sightedness.
Can it be said that, in his present state, he is not experiencing the kingdom within him?
I think your "not experiencing" is too negative (my personal walk included a very long period when I was, at the moment, unaware of what I was experiencing, but it was made clear later that I was indeed experiencing, growing, developing).

Peter names many attributes (not all inclusive), but those attributes do not stand alone, they are each part of all the others, and they are not all or none, not 0% or 100%, they are infinitely variable. I believe that love is last, with nothing following, not only because it is the greatest, but because it is the energy within the others which drives them upward. What I have become more convinced of, during this conversation, is that "not be in the kingdom" or "is not in the kingdom", or "has not entered" can not be said.
 
I think your "not experiencing" is too negative (my personal walk included a very long period when I was, at the moment, unaware of what I was experiencing, but it was made clear later that I was indeed experiencing, growing, developing).

Peter names many attributes (not all inclusive), but those attributes do not stand alone, they are each part of all the others, and they are not all or none, not 0% or 100%, they are infinitely variable. I believe that love is last, with nothing following, not only because it is the greatest, but because it is the energy within the others which drives them upward. What I have become more convinced of, during this conversation, is that "not be in the kingdom" or "is not in the kingdom", or "has not entered" can not be said.
Yes. I can agree with this, and also relate to your experience.

Here's another thought I had, and I think it's related to this subject closely. Romans 8:1, it states "now".. "no condemnation" to a specific people; those "in Christ Jesus". But... there's another qualifier. Those "who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit".
I don't know about you but I don't always walk after the Spirit.
Paul saluted the Corinthians as being "in Christ", but then said they were carnal. This leads me to believe it's possible to be "in Christ" , yet still be unfruitful, carnal, walking after the flesh, and not pursuing the kingdom. But I also believe He won't leave you in that state either.
 
Last edited:
Yes. I can agree with this, and also relate to your experience. (I like the way you can always straighten my rough way of relating ideas).

Here's another thought I had, and I think it's related to this subject closely. Romans 8:1, it states "now".. "no condemnation" to a specific people; those "in Christ Jesus". But... there's another qualifier. Those "who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit".
I don't know about you but I don't always walk after the Spirit.
Paul saluted the Corinthians as being "in Christ", but then said they were carnal. This leads me to believe it's possible to be "in Christ" , yet still be unfruitful, carnal, walking after the flesh, and not pursuing the kingdom. But I also believe He won't leave you in that state either.
Maybe one can still do that stuff but it don't count against you any longer. I have that same question though from time to time. One about having the Spirit within and still doing those things.
 
Yes. I can agree with this, and also relate to your experience. (I like the way you can always straighten my rough way of relating ideas).

Here's another thought I had, and I think it's related to this subject closely. Romans 8:1, it states "now".. "no condemnation" to a specific people; those "in Christ Jesus". But... there's another qualifier. Those "who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit".
That is not a "qualifier", it is a statement of fact. There are only two kinds of people.

I don't know about you but I don't always walk after the Spirit.
Paul saluted the Corinthians as being "in Christ", but then said they were carnal. This leads me to believe it's possible to be "in Christ" , yet still be unfruitful, carnal, walking after the flesh, and not pursuing the kingdom. But I also believe He won't leave you in that state either.
This passage has been made into a major mess (look up "Carnal Christian"). Paul is presenting a very simple idea — a professor of mathematics would be foolish to present one of his standard lectures on vector analysis to a 2nd grade class. That is not because they are all stupid. There are no carnal Believers, only immature Believers. His message is one of encouragement.

>>edit<< Rm. 5:1-4 and 6:1-2. Should we not react to our carnality with thankfulness and praise, along with contrition.>>edit<<
 
Last edited:
That is not a "qualifier", it is a statement of fact. There are only two kinds of people.



This passage has been made into a major mess (look up "Carnal Christian"). Paul is presenting a very simple idea — a professor of mathematics would be foolish to present one of his standard lectures on vector analysis to a 2nd grade class. That is not because they are all stupid. There are no carnal Believers, only immature Believers. His message is one of encouragement.

>>edit<< Rm. 5:1-4 and 6:1-2. Should we not react to our carnality with thankfulness and praise, along with contrition.>>edit<<
Am I being led by the Spirit when I quench the Spirit? What about when I grieve the Spirit?
 
Am I being led by the Spirit when I quench the Spirit? What about when I grieve the Spirit?
I confess that you have me shaking my head, LOL.

Yes. Are you being guided by the Spirit? Who told you that you were quenching the Spirit? What do you see as the consequence of your having quenched the Spirit — did you grow in the Spirit? Are you thankful for His work in your life? Do you praise Him for His power and love manifested in your life and in the world through you and others?

Only when the answers to the above questions are carnal do you grieve the Spirit; and that too, glorifies God.
 
I confess that you have me shaking my head, LOL.

Yes. Are you being guided by the Spirit? Who told you that you were quenching the Spirit? What do you see as the consequence of your having quenched the Spirit — did you grow in the Spirit? Are you thankful for His work in your life? Do you praise Him for His power and love manifested in your life and in the world through you and others?

Only when the answers to the above questions are carnal do you grieve the Spirit; and that too, glorifies God.
Do you not ever walk by the flesh? Paul, speaking to the Romans, is seemingly indicating (to me), that those Romans could walk by the flesh,as opposed to the Spirit. And I can relate to that. I have two natures warring against each other. Do you not?
 
Do you not ever walk by the flesh? Paul, speaking to the Romans, is seemingly indicating (to me), that those Romans could walk by the flesh,as opposed to the Spirit. And I can relate to that. I have two natures warring against each other. Do you not?
Do your questions reflect a belief that our flesh can deny (defy) the power and purpose of God?
 
Do your questions reflect a belief that our flesh can deny (defy) the power and purpose of God?
I'm trying to test my beliefs by what Paul says, while also carefully considering what you say as well. My goal in learning this is not to defy God in any way(not possible), but rather the opposite. To please Him in all that I do by following His Spirit. Crucifying the flesh is a daily task that takes effort. It's not a passive endeavor for me.
 
I'm trying to test my beliefs by what Paul says, while also carefully considering what you say as well. My goal in learning this is not to defy God in any way(not possible), but rather the opposite. To please Him in all that I do by following His Spirit. Crucifying the flesh is a daily task that takes effort. It's not a passive endeavor for me.
What is the source of the strength, energy, and wisdom which fuel your effort?
 
What is the source of the strength, energy, and wisdom which fuel your effort?
Without any debate, God is the only way I ever do anything good.
But hear me out. Even those "in Christ" serve the law of sin from time to time. And every time, without fail, we are delivered out of it. Not prevented from it, but delivered out of it.
Paul says it best:

Romans 7:24-25
24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.
 
Without any debate, God is the only way I ever do anything good.
But hear me out. Even those "in Christ" serve the law of sin from time to time. And every time, without fail, we are delivered out of it. Not prevented from it, but delivered out of it.
Paul says it best:

Romans 7:24-25
24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.
So your faith is that God will regain control.
My faith is that He will never lose control.

I think our positions have been well established.
 
Last edited:
This life into which we have been called is a very different experience, no?
Matters of right/wrong...good/evil, and even lawful/unlawful (though not disregarded as useless) I now see as taking a very subordinate place to being at peace with God.

The matter of fruit...or fruits, is also no less confounding if left to itself for our own discernment. Is the fruit for our tasting...our rumination over?

I think we only injure our own souls when we seek to decide and judge. Not to a ruination by such injury, for I am being persuaded (and that I trust by the Spirit) that these matters of suffering injury are necessary to the seeing, and learning obedience. And God knows, I may be the last man to speak of such a thing. And this I cannot say apart from the very real possibility, and testimony, I may indeed be "the last man" needing to see. Who of us really knows where we are "in place" of assignment?

The seeing the obedience of Christ is always a gift. Even if it be, for God's purposes as showcased against what I might (or any man might) call my own (or his own) failures. Would I exchange my weaknesses perceived, my failings, my own abysmal disability, with their opportunity for God to display before me the reality of Jesus' obedience and victory?

It's easy to see, perhaps, were we to discuss the man who says "I did that right"...or I did good..." in such and such a situation, and how that pride might exclude a seeing in such self satisfaction...till God break through. But how far is that from the man seeking to determine his own "fruitfulness?"

I know, and I trust we all do, that this brings up the matter Paul addressed, as though one might sound as though he is recommending "Let us do evil, that good may come?" But that is surely not right, at all. No. But I (and I can only speak for myself here, particularly in this matter) that there has been a deeper need of a thing to be learned...to be made known to me...in the matter of weakness. My weakness.

It is not that God is not gracious...I know He well understands (far better than we ourselves) a longing to hear "well done good and faithful servant" (for after all, I believe that is no less "in Christ" as desire...and even right desire in His life) But here, particularly in that, might we agree...that where desire is great...we need all the more a discipline...lest we be found seeking to fulfill that...of ourselves? A hope almost unbearable...can work for a premature fulfilling. Or perhaps better understood, be taken advantage of?

When I see Jesus say to the disciples (after the many departed) "will you leave also?" I don't see Him (in a peculiar sense) gambling with the possibility of losing all that might point to His fruitfulness. All may have walked away (I don't think Jesus was being coy, at all)...but He could not...would not let what may have been some indication of His fruitfulness (believing and faithful disciples) ever come into consideration against His speaking the truth of God. This remained all and only His desire...to be faithful to His Father (whether, so to speak) He Himself had (again so to speak) "anything to show for it".

God knows...(how well He knows!) of man's desire to know "hey, I'm doing OK here...right?". But this thing, this lust (if left unbridled) has led to so much ruination...men deciding for themselves "I'm doing alright" "I'm doing what I should...look! I can see here (or there) indications that I am" that He has wisely, through Christ, delivered from such.

When the relationship is itself...all and only what is paramount...even beyond our need to know "I'm doing OK, right?" perhaps then we may be assured...the fruit production is always, and only, in the husbandman's wise hand.

I think of how much and many, have been the labors to "show" a fruitfulness that will show me...the relationship...is right. But...this is all of backwards. Unless I am shown first, having had it been made to me unmistakably primary, despite all my own attempts to make a true thing...true...then I can say I have needed every bit of injury, every scourge of cord and reproof and rebuke...even stiffest of resistance to an almost despair...till this is settled. And God knows what remains of His work to be yet seen.

But, these have only been things a man, not really very convinced of his weakness, has needed. And come at the hand, wisely, by the One...who knows.
 
All I said was what Paul said. What in that says God is ever out of control?
Paul didn't, you did.

O.K. one last try.

What Paul said.

You seem to want to accept that
"[God]with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, so that you will be able to endure it."
but reject the preface
"God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able"
which clearly shows who is in control. God acts in every instance, men react in every instance.
 
Top