atpollard
Well-Known Member
THE SYMBOL OF CHALCEDON
The Symbol of Chalcedon, adopted at the fourth and fifth sessions of the Fourth Ecumenical Council, dates back to 451 A.D.. Philip Schaff, in his Creeds of Christendom, writes of the Symbol (or Creed) of Chalcedon, “While the first Council of Nicaea had established the eternal, pre-existent Godhead of Christ, the Symbol of the Fourth Ecumenical Council relates to the incarnate Logos, as he walked upon earth and sits on the right hand of the Father. It is directed against the errors of Nestorius and Eutyches, who agreed with the Nicene Creed as opposed to Arianism, but put the Godhead of Christ in a false relation to his humanity.”3
We, then, following the holy Fathers, all with one consent, teach men to confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood; truly God and truly man, of a reasonable [rational] soul and body; consubstantial [coessential] with us according to the manhood; in all things like unto us, without sin; begotten before all ages of the Father according to the Godhead, and in these latter days, for us and for our salvation, born of the Virgin Mary, the mother of God, according to the Manhood; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures, inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably; the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one person and one Subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ, as the prophets from the beginning [have declared] concerning him, and the Lord Jesus Christ himself has taught us, and the Creed of the holy Fathers has handed down to us.
Historic Creeds and Confessions. (1997). (electronic ed.). Oak Harbor: Lexham Press.
This SYMBOL OF CHALCEDON came up in another topic and I went and read it. The issue being addresses seems to be the nature of Jesus Christ as God and Man. The CHALCEDON view places the two natures (human and divine) as utterly inseparable (a God-man nature) against an alternative view of two compatible natures (God and man). The London Confession agrees with the inseparable nature view and claims that Christ as our Priest cannot perfectly comprehend God’s requirements without his divine nature and can not communicate those requirements to us without a human nature, so both natures must be forever united in one inseparable God-man nature for Christ to perform his perfect office.
From the incarnation forward, I have no problems with that (speaking in terms of mental comprehension). However, can anyone shed light on how that might work from Genesis 1:1 to the Incarnation?
How does the second person of the Trinity have an eternal God-man nature pre-incarnation?
Is it his post-Resurrection “glorified” body?
I am just looking for ideas and “In a multitude of counselors there is wisdom”.
The Symbol of Chalcedon, adopted at the fourth and fifth sessions of the Fourth Ecumenical Council, dates back to 451 A.D.. Philip Schaff, in his Creeds of Christendom, writes of the Symbol (or Creed) of Chalcedon, “While the first Council of Nicaea had established the eternal, pre-existent Godhead of Christ, the Symbol of the Fourth Ecumenical Council relates to the incarnate Logos, as he walked upon earth and sits on the right hand of the Father. It is directed against the errors of Nestorius and Eutyches, who agreed with the Nicene Creed as opposed to Arianism, but put the Godhead of Christ in a false relation to his humanity.”3
We, then, following the holy Fathers, all with one consent, teach men to confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood; truly God and truly man, of a reasonable [rational] soul and body; consubstantial [coessential] with us according to the manhood; in all things like unto us, without sin; begotten before all ages of the Father according to the Godhead, and in these latter days, for us and for our salvation, born of the Virgin Mary, the mother of God, according to the Manhood; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures, inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably; the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one person and one Subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ, as the prophets from the beginning [have declared] concerning him, and the Lord Jesus Christ himself has taught us, and the Creed of the holy Fathers has handed down to us.
Historic Creeds and Confessions. (1997). (electronic ed.). Oak Harbor: Lexham Press.
This SYMBOL OF CHALCEDON came up in another topic and I went and read it. The issue being addresses seems to be the nature of Jesus Christ as God and Man. The CHALCEDON view places the two natures (human and divine) as utterly inseparable (a God-man nature) against an alternative view of two compatible natures (God and man). The London Confession agrees with the inseparable nature view and claims that Christ as our Priest cannot perfectly comprehend God’s requirements without his divine nature and can not communicate those requirements to us without a human nature, so both natures must be forever united in one inseparable God-man nature for Christ to perform his perfect office.
From the incarnation forward, I have no problems with that (speaking in terms of mental comprehension). However, can anyone shed light on how that might work from Genesis 1:1 to the Incarnation?
How does the second person of the Trinity have an eternal God-man nature pre-incarnation?
Is it his post-Resurrection “glorified” body?
I am just looking for ideas and “In a multitude of counselors there is wisdom”.
