Challenging Kenosis

Kenotic Christology? Yes but no? Why? Why not? Or is there something else going on?

___________

More NTT YouTube series:

Women in Ministry: • Women in Ministry...

__________

Like! Share! Subscribe!

#theology #atonement #jesus

[theidolbabblerthedailydose]

I found “impoverished” helpful. In Mcknight’s new translation, he uses “hollowed.” I found that helpful as well. “Emptied” doesn’t speak to me the way these other two words do.

[ravissary]

Interesting "side view" on kenosis.
I kean towards it being literal, even ontologically descriptive, bur not to say God became not-God... in other words mauve God's Godness is his essence, not simplicity which implies all attributes are immutable... instead his trauts are more like "feats" in comic book power scaling debates. God did do x, he CAN do x squared, but whwn he enploed himself he didnt stop being one who is "one who did x", but he rrstrained the application of his feats so he do a new kind of feat: sacrifice. You cant really do that without actual weakness. That means removing or somehow containing his attributes, demonstrating he isnt actually identical with them, and doing so diesnt give up who or what he is, but it removes the satanic legal counterarguments that seem "unfair"... think Job and how hurting job proved something.
God proved he doesnt win because hes powerful. Hes not good because hes grand. His goodness niw transcends power becoming a new kind of power... love that shatters all power and shuts up all arguments. And then he tales it up again, but now clothed in the glory of his manifest love that pierces all darkness and shuts up every rebel and excuse.

I think it had ontic power because what he proved wasnt an illusion. But at no point did it mean he wasnt himself.