10 v24 -- Following: "100 Percent Human, 100 Percent Divine"

Navigation: current directory home

100 Percent Human, 100 Percent Divine

07 December 2024

Christology tells us that Jesus was 100% human and 100% divine. I think Jesus as depicted in the gospels is a guide to who or what to be, at least for the kind of person who takes on a role like Jesus did on earth. So, perhaps, some people are to be 100% human and 100% divine.

"100% divine" sounds almost blasphemous to some, if humans are to become it. From a biblical perspective, we can say that Jesus was the son of God, and many others can become sons and daughters of God. In MSL, God is essentially who he is, his character, and his character is necessarily what we will have someday, if we are to live in heaven. So while we will not have the life history of God, or the role to perform that he does, we will be like him. In that sense, we will be "100% divine."

What does it mean to be 100% human? Humans decide what they think "human" means. To be 100% human is to accept that very power of defining "human" and what follows from that term. To be human is to be limited by hunger, pain, desire, obsession, memory, in a way that is familiar. To be 100% human probably requires a kind of charisma, and likely correlates with a kind of popularity, and requires relatability.

This version of 100% divine and 100% human is a heavy burden. Some particularly virtuous and sociable people are able to approximate it. Perhaps the great (good) leaders of the mainstream world approach 100% divinity and 100% humanity.

Is it necessary to be 100% divine? To be 100% human? To be both 100% divine and human? I don't know that we all have to be like Jesus. In mainstream Christianity, nobody seems to expect it of us in this life (which is the timeframe discussed in this post). So maybe we don't really have to be 100% divine and 100% human.

How hard should we try to be both? It seems to me like 100% divinity is more important than 100% humanity. But I think the culture I find myself in, both Christian and non-Christian, seems to think that really being human is of primary importance, and if you can be divine as well, maybe that's a good thing. Our priority is to belong to the human race, and if that is adequately satisfied, then we can think about belonging to God.

If you find the ideal of being 100% human to be a burden, maybe you can set it down. Some people can or perhaps should carry it, and others shouldn't or can't.

--

Christology explores the tensions produced by considering Jesus as 100% divine and 100% human. Maybe there could be a branch of anthropology that explores the tensions produced by considering humans to be 100% divine and 100% human, or directionally so.