These are common designations for the two positions on what constitutes Christ's humanity. At issue is whether the incarnated Christ possesses the true and complete faculties of man (WORD-man) or whether He lacks some of man's faculties (Word- flesh). Modern adherents of Word Flesh Christology are: AH Strong, Christ does not have a human will or consciousness (Systematic Theology, 695) ; McIntyre, the human nature does not act (The Chalcedon Faith and its Clarifications in The Theology of Christ 164-168); and Erickson ,the huiman mind in Christ is the self-limited mind of the Logos (Christian Theology , 1985,735,721,715) and God in Three Persons ,223. MANY others hold this view! Other moderns teach Word-man Christology. Grudem says that there are two intelligences and wills in Christ and that Scripture applies the experiences & behaviors to either one or the natures (Systematic Theology, 561,558,562). Warfield posits that there are two centers of consciousness in Christ and some acts of Christ are attributable only to the human consciousness.( The Person& Work of Christ, 258) The human nature acts in distinction from the deity! Chas Hodge affirms that the human nature in Christ is an entity that acts and these acts are NOT to be predicated to the divine nature. (Systematic Theology II:387-392) Many other hold this view. I am a Word-Man Christologist In your opinion, which understanding of Christ is correct and why?