Two Natures

[JonC]

Did Jesus have "Two Natures"? Were they inseparable as natures (not a human and a divine nature, but a human-divine nature without mixture)? How do we define "nature" here?

 

[HankD]

Did Jesus have "Two Natures"? Were they inseparable as natures (not a human and a divine nature, but a human-divine nature without mixture)? How do we define "nature" here?

This I believe is a part of the schism between the Roman and Greek Church along with a technical question concerning the procession of the Holy Spirit whether from the father alone or from the Father and the son.

The Hypostatic Union:
I believe the Greek Church says that Jesus has one nature (God-man).
The Roman Church (and us as well) teach that he has two distinct natures : a divine and a human nature.

https://carm.org/dictionary-hypostatic-union

HankD

 

[JonC]

Yes, Hank...that is the most biblical response I've seen on this topic in a long while. In fact, it is exactly what Scripture says.

 

[The Biblicist]

Yes, Hank...that is the most biblical response I've seen on this topic in a long while. In fact, it is exactly what Scripture says.

So the Scriptures say nothing about who Christ is with regard to his essential being????? Must be reading a different Bible than what I read, perhaps the Koran?

 

[JonC]

So the Scriptures say nothing about who Christ is with regard to his essential being????? Must be reading a different Bible than what I read, perhaps the Koran?

Please be careful, brother. The "smiley" at the end indicates a bit of 'tongue in cheek' as Hank didn't say anything in his post.

And yes, I am saying Scripture does not state that Jesus has two natures. But by your words here, am I correct to understand you believe "nature" to be anything associated with one's essential being?

 

[The Biblicist]

Please be careful, brother. The "smiley" at the end indicates a bit of 'tongue in cheek' as Hank didn't say anything in his post.

And yes, I am saying Scripture does not state that Jesus has two natures. But by your words here, am I correct to understand you believe "nature" to be anything associated with one's essential being?

There are attributes that distinguish God from all created beings and there are attributes that are shared in common between God and created beings. Those attributes that distinguish God from all created beings are his essential "nature" not shared by anything or anyone else.

There are attributes that distinguish man from all other creatures and there are attributes that are shared in common between man and other creatures. Those attributes that distinguish man from all other creatures are his essential "nature."

Jesus Christ shared both those attributes that distinguish God from all other creatures and shared attributes that distinguish man from all other creatures. Therefore, Jesus Christ consisted of two distinct natures in ONE PERSON without confusion of one with the other.

This does not mean that a indivisible NEW GOD/MAN NATURE was invented at the incarnation that did not exist prior to the incarnation as that would be the creation of another kind of God after the incarnation that did not exist prior to the incarnation.

There is an element of mystery here, but that mystery should not be philosophized into ONE NATURE that is defined as GODMAN thus producing a new kind of God nature that did not exist prior to the incarnation.

In other words, the very same essential attributes that defined and differentiated God from creatures before the incarnation was not changed after the incarnation.

 

[HankD]

Please be careful, brother. The "smiley" at the end indicates a bit of 'tongue in cheek' as Hank didn't say anything in his post.

And yes, I am saying Scripture does not state that Jesus has two natures. But by your words here, am I correct to understand you believe "nature" to be anything associated with one's essential being?

I added to it later. This is what is taught in most Baptist bible schools and seminaries.

It is a composite doctrine similar to the teaching of the Trinity which took about three hundred years to develop.

Yes I believe in the Trinity - Three distinct persons in one divine essence.

Yes I believe Jesus Christ is God come in the flesh, born of woman made under the law.


HankD

 

[tyndale1946]

I added to it later. This is what is taught in most Baptist bible schools and seminaries.

It is a composite doctrine similar to the teaching of the Trinity which took about three hundred years to develop.

Yes I believe in the Trinity - Three distinct persons in one divine essence.

Yes I believe Jesus Christ is God come in the flesh, born of woman made under the law.

HankD

I like these thoughts by John Gill on 1 Timothy 3:16 on the two natures... Your comments... Brother Glen

And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness,
&c.] What follows is so, the incarnation of Christ, his birth of a virgin, the union of the two natures, divine and human, in his person; this is a mystery, which though revealed, and so to be believed, is not to be discerned nor accounted for, nor the modus of it to be comprehended by reason: and it is a great one, next, if not equal, to the doctrine of a trinity of persons in the divine essence; and is a mystery of godliness, which tends to encourage internal and external religion, powerful and practical godliness in all the parts and branches of it; and is so beyond all dispute and doubt.
God was manifest in the flesh;
not God essentially considered, or Deity in the abstract, but personally; and not the first nor the third Person; for of neither of them can this or the following things be said; but the second Person, the Word, or Son of God; see ( 1 John 3:8 ) who existed as a divine Person, and as a distinct one from the Father and Spirit, before his incarnation; and which is a proof of his true and proper deity: the Son of God in his divine nature is equally invisible as the Father, but became manifest by the assumption of human nature in a corporeal way, so as to be seen, heard, and felt: and by "flesh" is meant, not that part of the body only, which bears that name, nor the whole body only, but the whole human nature, consisting of a true body and a reasonable soul; so called, partly to denote the frailty of it, and to show that it was not a person, but a nature, Christ assumed; and the clause is added, not so much to distinguish this manifestation of Christ from a spiritual manifestation of him to his people, as in distinction from all other manifestations of him in the Old Testament, in an human form for a time, and in the cloud, both in the tabernacle and temple. This clause is a very apt and full interpretation of the word "Moriah", the name of the mount in which Jehovah would manifest himself, and be seen, ( Genesis 22:2 Genesis 22:14 ) .

Justified in the Spirit;
either by the Spirit of God, making his human nature pure and holy, and preserving it from original sin and taint; and by descending on him at his baptism, thereby testifying that he was the Son of God; and by the miracles wrought by his power, which proved Jesus to be the Messiah against those that rejected him; and by his coming down upon the apostles at Pentecost; and who in their ministry vindicated him from all the aspersions cast upon him: or else it is to be understood of the divine nature of Christ, in distinction from his flesh or human nature; in the one he was manifest and put to death for the sins of his people, which were put upon him, and bore by him; and by the other he was quickened and declared to be the Son of God; and being raised from the dead, he was justified and acquitted from all the sins of his people, and they were justified in him; he having made full satisfaction to justice for them.

Seen of angels;
meaning not ministers of the Gospel, and pastors of churches, who are sometimes so called; but the blessed spirits, the inhabitants of heaven: by these he was seen at his birth, who then descended and sung praise to God on that account; and in the wilderness, after he had been tempted by Satan, when they ministered unto him; and in the garden upon his agony and sweat there, when one appeared and strengthened him; and at his resurrection from the dead, who rolled away the stone from the sepulchre, and told the women he was risen from the dead; as also at his ascension to heaven, when they attended him thither in triumph; and now in heaven, where they wait upon him, and worship him, and are ministering spirits, sent forth by him to do his pleasure; and he is seen by them the ministry of the Gospel; into the truths of which they look with pleasure, and gaze upon with unutterable delight and admiration; especially those which respect the person and offices of Christ. Some copies read, "seen of men", but that is implied in the first clause:

preached unto the Gentiles;
the worst of men, and that by the express orders of Christ himself; and which was foretold in the prophecies of the Old Testament, and yet was a mystery, hid from ages and generations past:
believed on in the world;
among the Jews, and in the nations of the world, so that he was preached with success; and faith in Christ is the end of preaching; though this is not of a man's self, but is the gift of God, and the operation of his power: and it was a marvellous thing, considering the reproach and ignominy Christ lay under, through the scandal of the cross, that he should be believed on as he was. This can be ascribed to nothing else but to the power of God, which went along with the ministry of the word.

Received up into glory;
he was raised from the dead, and had a glory put upon his risen body; he ascended in a glorious manner to heaven, in a cloud, and in chariots of angels, and was received there with a welcome by his Father; and is set down at his right hand, and crowned with glory and honour, and glorified with the glory he had with him before the world was.

 

[HankD]

I believe Gill is excellent on the points in your post.

HankD

 

[Craigbythesea]

In 1578, the classic work on the two natures of Christ by Martin Chemnitz was published in Leipzig with the title, De Duabis Naturis in Christo (On the Two Natures of Christ). An English translation by J. A. O. Preus was published in 1971 by Concordia Publishing House. This English edition includes extensive indexes (45 pages) that make this work an excellent starting point for the study of the two natures of Christ. It is currently in print.

 

[JamesL]

What seems to be the case is that men start with the Nicaea instead of scripture.

What the councils declared is first accepted as authoritative, and all of a man's theology and philosophy is shaped from that paradigm.

What that does is disregard everything which contributed to the need for those councils.

I'm 100% convinced that the struggle against the Gnostics impacted all of the philosophy of Christians up til our time.
Unfortunately.

 

[HankD]

What seems to be the case is that men start with the Nicaea instead of scripture.

What the councils declared is first accepted as authoritative, and all of a man's theology and philosophy is shaped from that paradigm.

What that does is disregard everything which contributed to the need for those councils.

I'm 100% convinced that the struggle against the Gnostics impacted all of the philosophy of Christians up til our time.
Unfortunately.

James you do know that a very prolonged and intense scrutiny of the scriptures led up to the Council of Nicaea?

If you mean that now in the 21st century many start with the Nicene councils and/or the Early church fathers and their results before searching the scriptures then I would agree.

Perhaps I misunderstood your focus?

HankD

 

[JamesL]

James you do know that a very prolonged and intense scrutiny of the scriptures led up to the Council of Nicaea?

If you mean that now in the 21st century many start with the Nicene councils and/or the Early church fathers and their results before searching the scriptures then I would agree.

Perhaps I misunderstood your focus?

HankD

Hank,
Yes. I meant that ever since the Big 7, virtually every "orthodox" believer learns to first agree with the Nicene fathers, then go to scriptures.

And anyone who dares to challenge the philosophical meanderings of those Greek thinkers is anathema.

Virtually every heretic through the ages has had the same cry..."but scripture says"

Not that I'm willing to dismiss outright everything determined by those councils, but those men also had a paradigm through which they approached the scriptures, and it was not always a biblical paradigm

 

[Craigbythesea]

Hank,
Yes. I meant that ever since the Big 7, virtually every "orthodox" believer learns to first agree with the Nicene fathers, then go to scriptures.

And anyone who dares to challenge the philosophical meanderings of those Greek thinkers is anathema.

Virtually every heretic through the ages has had the same cry..."but scripture says"

Not that I'm willing to dismiss outright everything determined by those councils, but those men also had a paradigm through which they approached the scriptures, and it was not always a biblical paradigm

Does James have any data, any data all that supports his wild claims? No, he does not! His claims are mean, nasty, malicious, and historically false!

 

[JonC]

Does James have any data, any data all that supports his wild claims? No, he does not! His claims are mean, nasty, malicious, and historically false!

Do you have any data in support of your claim here, brother?

 

[Craigbythesea]

Do you have any data in support of your claim here, brother?

Absolutely—tens of thousands of pages of it from the Church Fathers themselves, church history, early theologies, commentaries, collections of sermons, etc. The proof that JamesL is wildly mistaken, however, will most easily be seen when a search for data supporting his views comes up empty.

 

[JamesL]

Absolutely—tens of thousands of pages of it from the Church Fathers themselves, church history, early theologies, commentaries, collections of sermons, etc. The proof that JamesL is wildly mistaken, however, will most easily be seen when a search for data supporting his views comes up empty.

You have tens of thousands of pages written by the Church Fathers concerning people who lived hundreds of years after them?

I wonder if they wrote anything about me!!

 

[HankD]

Hank,
Yes. I meant that ever since the Big 7, virtually every "orthodox" believer learns to first agree with the Nicene fathers, then go to scriptures.

And anyone who dares to challenge the philosophical meanderings of those Greek thinkers is anathema.

Virtually every heretic through the ages has had the same cry..."but scripture says"

Not that I'm willing to dismiss outright everything determined by those councils, but those men also had a paradigm through which they approached the scriptures, and it was not always a biblical paradigm

Thanks James,

Yes that was me.

Being a former Catholic, I barely remember memorizing the Baltimore Catechism but it was required so I guess I'm one of the spoon fed (brainwashed anyway) threaten with the dire consequences and shown pictures of souls in hell being tormented because they did not accept the teachings of the church and practice the sacraments.

So when I believed on Christ in truth (while in the military - USAF) , the Trinity , the deity of Christ, etc was not an issue. However I did challenged the church of Rome concerning grace through faith salvation and eventually left - about 51 years ago.

HankD

 

[JonC]

Absolutely—tens of thousands of pages of it from the Church Fathers themselves, church history, early theologies, commentaries, collections of sermons, etc. The proof that JamesL is wildly mistaken, however, will most easily be seen when a search for data supporting his views comes up empty.

I've been at the symphony, so I apologize for the late response. Ok...ok....it was Styx with the Nashville Symphony.

James is right. You are aware that what we are discussing here is mid-fifth century....right? But that history itself (the real one) affirms Jame's post. It is not that the creeds are necessarily wrong, but that we take them at a starting point. We would not have the Chalcedonian formula, for example, except as a rebuttal to "heresy". Come to think of it, we wouldn't have many doctrines except in a response to something else. That can't be our starting point.

 

[Craigbythesea]

You have tens of thousands of pages written by the Church Fathers concerning people who lived hundreds of years after them?

I wonder if they wrote anything about me!!

I did NOT write that I have tens of thousands of pages written by the Church Father, but collectively in the publications that I listed.