monophysites and mike walker mike walker if you are using the standard formula of fully god and fully human that i m not sure why you object to saying that jesus was human i think the usual analysis would be that sin is not part of the basic definition of humanity it s a consequence of the fall jesus is human but not a fallen human clh the proper term for what mike expresses is monophysitism this was a heresy that was condemned in the council of chalcedon in ad it grew up in reaction to nestorianism which held that the son and jesus are two different people who happened to be united in the same body temporarily monophysitism is held by the copts of egypt and ethipoia and by the jacobites of syria and the armenian orthodox it believes that jesus christ was god which is correct that he was man which is correct that he was one person which is correct but that he had only one nature and one will and oen energy which is heretical the orthodox position is that he had two natures and two wills and two energies both divine and human though the wills were in perfect harmony that is what mike is trying to get across that while jesus came in human form mike says he did not have a human nature or a human will in reality he had both though neither made him subject to original sin it is interesting to note that the monothelites were a reaction to this conflict and attempted to solve the problem by admitting two natures but not two wills or two energies it also was condemned at a late council in constantinople i believe andy byler these issues get mighty subtle when you see people saying different things it s often hard to tell whether they really mean seriously different things or whether they are using different terminology i don t think there s any question that there is a problem with nestorius and i would agree that the saying christ had a human form without a real human nature or will is heretical but i d like to be a bit wary about the copts armenians etc recent discussions suggest that their monophysite position may not be as far from orthodoxy as many had thought nestorius was an extreme representative of one of the two major schools of thought more moderate representatives were regarded as orthodox e g theodore of mopsuestia my impression is that the modern monophysite groups inherit the entire tradition not just nestorius version and that some of them may have a sufficient balanced position to be regarded as orthodox clh
