# Did Jesus' human will ever conflict with His divine will?



## earl40 (Feb 23, 2011)

My first reaction is no. While believing such I do recognize there were human limitations in His human will. For instance we are saddened or grieved when a close relative dies in unbelief. Did Jesus grieve when someone He knew died in unbelief? BTW I do not use "He knew" in a redemptive sense.


----------



## Grillsy (Feb 23, 2011)

No.


----------



## earl40 (Feb 24, 2011)

Grillsy said:


> No.


 
Now that is exactly what I was looking for. I really mean this, for to recieve confirmation from a resourse such as this board and its knowledgeable brothrs and sisters is invaluable.

Thank you Grillsy


----------



## py3ak (Feb 24, 2011)

No, there was never any opposition; but Gethsemane, and Hebrews 5:7,8 show that submission was not always easy; not that there was ever a question about submitting, but that submission came at a cost.


----------



## fredtgreco (Feb 24, 2011)

No, but we must be very careful that we do not slip into the error of monothelitism, which asserts that Jesus had only one will. Each of His natures has a will (human and divine).


----------



## Gage Browning (Feb 24, 2011)

Great Point Pastor Fred. Two natures joined together without confusion!


----------



## Grillsy (Feb 24, 2011)

fredtgreco said:


> No, but we must be very careful that we do not slip into the error of monothelitism, which asserts that Jesus had only one will. Each of His natures has a will (human and divine).



Good point Reverend.


----------



## ac7k (Feb 24, 2011)

I agree that when Jesus asked that the cup be passed if possible... that was His human will and human desire that differed from the Father's... but of course there was no harm in asking... and of course his submitted perfectly.


----------



## rbcbob (Feb 24, 2011)

Luke 22:42 saying, "Father, if it is Your will (Βούλομαι), take this cup away from Me; nevertheless not My will (θέλημα), but Yours, be done



> As respects the distinction between Βούλομαι and θέλημα, the former seems to designate the will which follows deliberation, the latter the will which proceeds from inclination.


 –Thayer’s Greek Lexicon


This might indicate that in the Garden there was both the pressure of Christ's human desire and His Father's will. But in the final analysis Christ's will (Βούλομαι) and the Father's will (Βούλομαι) were in perfect agreement.


----------



## Oecolampadius (Feb 24, 2011)

The following lecture by Carl Trueman has some very good insights on this question:

SermonAudio.com - Session 5 - John Owen on the Holy Spirit


----------



## earl40 (Feb 24, 2011)

ac7k said:


> I agree that when Jesus asked that the cup be passed if possible... that was His human will and human desire that differed from the Father's... but of course there was no harm in asking... and of course his submitted perfectly.


 
I think the word's "if possible" show that Jesus was asking, in His humanity, if there was any other way.


----------



## Peairtach (Feb 24, 2011)

fredtgreco said:


> No, but we must be very careful that we do not slip into the error of monothelitism, which asserts that Jesus had only one will. Each of His natures has a will (human and divine).


 
I never thought of Christ having two wills. But I was aware that there were two centres of consciousness, shown by His humanity not being omniscient.

What's the name for the error that there were two persons in Christ, the Divine and the human, because that would be the error on _the other side_ when we are trying to make careful distinctions between His natures without denying His unipersonality?


----------



## Phil D. (Feb 24, 2011)

Richard Tallach said:


> I never thought of Christ having two wills. But I was aware that there were two centres of consciousness, shown by His humanity not being omniscient.



But in order to be "fully" human and "fully" God, I would think Jesus would have to have two distinct, yet inseparable wills. When Jesus prays to the Father "yet not my will, but thine," surely the first has reference to a human will. In his divinity Christ's will was one with the Father's (and Spirit's). 



Richard Tallach said:


> What's the name for the error that there were two persons in Christ, the Divine and the human,



I believe that is Nestorianism.


----------



## Peairtach (Feb 24, 2011)

> But in order to be "fully" human and "fully" God, I would think Jesus would have to have two distinct, yet inseparable wills. When Jesus prays to the Father "yet not my will, but thine," surely the first has reference to a human will. In his divinity Christ's will was one with the Father's (and Spirit's).



The thought maybe hadn't occured to me, because

(a) His human and Divine will always agree and we tend to talk of "two wills" where there is a conflict.

(b) The idea of Christ having two wills, in the sense of two wills disagreeing, would have been a ridiculous, monstrous and blasphemous idea.

It _is_ implied in His "conflict" or tension of will in His humanity with the Father's will in the Garden, because the will of the Father, Son and Spirit are one.


----------



## Phil D. (Feb 24, 2011)

Richard Tallach said:


> The idea of Christ having two wills, in the sense of two wills disagreeing, would have been a ridiculous, monstrous and blasphemous idea.



To be sure! Rather than the two somehow "disagreeing," Christ amenably and completely put his human will in "submission to" the divine. 

At the same time, it is also astounding to me that Christ's suffering - both present and anticipated - was so utterly horrific that in a very real way he still yearned to avoid the ordeal of Calvary. And yet He willingly went to the cross on our behalf... Amazing love!


----------

