⚠️ 0 in stock. Order now for delivery when our stock arrives (Typically 4-7 weeks)
Please note our normal delivery times have been increased due to coronavirus disrupting international freight. Our freight team is working to ensure products still reach us but we do expect delays.
Did Christ assume a fallen human nature?
“What is not assumed is not healed.” So goes the Chalcedonian maxim articulated by Gregory of Nazianzus regarding the nature and extent of Christ’s work in assuming a human nature. But what is the nature of that assumption? If Christ is to stand in solidarity with us, must he have assumed not merely a human nature, but specifically afallenhuman nature?
InSinless Flesh: A Critique of Karl Barth’s Fallen Christ, Rafael Nogueira Bello argues against the assertion made by Karl Barth, T. F. Torrance, and those who follow them that Christ assumed a fallen nature. Through retrieval of patristic, medieval, and Reformed orthodox theologians, Bello argues that a proper understanding of human nature, trinitarian inseparable operations, and the habitual grace-grace of union distinction leads to the conclusion that the assertion that Christ assumed a fallen human nature is at odds with faithful theological and historical understandings of the incarnation.
Sinless Flesh: A Critique of Karl Barth’s Fallen Christ is in the following collections: