Just Human Nature

My friend, Lady Fett, was speculating on her blog (http://ladyfettscantina.blogspot.com) whether it would be possible for a human to have more than one nature. Since I spent all my "blogging time" today composing a comment, I thought I would simply copy it here to my own blog:

It wouldn't be possible for us to have two natures, because we're actually created with a single nature. If we had two natures, we wouldn't be human creatures, we would be something else. If you have a human nature, you are a human man or woman. A creature with an angelic nature is an angel. A creature with a wolf nature is a wolf. What we are is what we are created as.

Jesus can have two natures because He is a Divine Person with a divine nature from all eternity, Who then entered into time and took upon Himself a created human nature (body and soul) at His conception.

Personal identity is different than our nature. Our identities are so complex that we can't even completely know ourselves--there are just too many things hidden from our awareness and understanding. Only God can know us as we really are.

I'm just guessing, but it's more likely that someone could have a secondary identity, not a secondary nature. I don't think it needs to be considered a drawback. If one has taken on elements of an animal identity, the perceived beauty and strength of that animal will still be emulated by a human person.

A simple example: Imagine a duck egg is "orphaned" and placed with a broody hen. The duckling will imprint on the hen when it hatches, and line up with the chicks behind her. It has a duck nature (that is, it was created to be a duck), so it IS a duck. We could say it has a secondary identity as a chicken, because it thinks it's a chicken. But sooner or later, that duck is going to follow its true nature and swim--at which point it will begin to own its true identity as well, even if for a while it "thinks" of itself as a chicken that floats.

So say a human person has imprinted to or identified as a dog, or bear, or eagle. That would be a secondary identity, second to the primary human identity even when the animal identity seems to be stronger or dominant. A human person will do things that an animal cannot do. Just like a duck will do things a chicken cannot do.

A secondary identity would only be a problem if it is acted out in inappropriate ways: A duck trying to prove it's a chicken by fighting for a place in the pecking order is going to get raggedy pretty fast . . . chickens draw blood. I think here of those poor souls who suffer with gender identification issues, and how they are wounded by their struggle to be what they are not. They try to insist they have a right to their place, and fault the chickens for their pecking.