The Hypostatic Union- the 2 Natures in Christ

civic

civic

Well-known member
Hypostatic Union


1. Jesus is a person. (1 Tim 2:5)

2. Jesus, the Person, has two natures- Divine and human (John 1:1, 14, 1 Timothy 3:16): Divine and human. This is the Hypostatic Union.( Col 2:9, Heb 1:3,2:16)

3. The Communicatio Idiomatum (Communication of the Properties) states that the attributes of His Divine nature and human nature are both ascribed to the one Person of Jesus, the Divine Son who is the 2nd Person of the Trinity. So Jesus can exhibit attributes of Divinity (Omnipresence, Omniscience, Omnipotence, . John 2:23, 3:13, 8:58, He was prayed to in Acts 7:59, John 14:13, He was is worshiped Matt 2:2:11, Rev 5:13-14) and at the same time exhibit attributes of His humanity( He was tempted, ate, prayed,wept, grew in wisdom and stature,was anointed,was baptized, the Father was greater, didn’t know the day or the hour of His Return, He cried My God my God why has Thou forsaken Me, He died etc.). The communicatio idiomatum does not mean that any part of the Divine nature was communicated to the human nature. The Creed of Chalcedon declares that : “in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation, 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 persona and one subsistence, not parted or divided into two person, but one and the same Son, and only begotten, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ.

4. The Man(anthropos) Jesus is what we perceive (if we were there 2000 years ago in Israel) and through the Man we encounter the Divine nature (Jesus knowing all things, is on earth while in heaven, answers prayer, forgiving sins, etc.).

5. The Person of Jesus will always be both Divine and human. (John 1:1,14,20:28, 1 John 5:20, 1 Timothy 2:5) Those who deny this fact are the spirit of antichrist. (1 John 4:1-4,2 John 7)

6. The Divine Nature is within the Trinity.(Father, Son and Holy Spirit)

7. Since the Person of Jesus claims the attributes of Divinity(John 3:13,8:58,Matthew 9:2,12:8), then the Person of Jesus is a member of the Trinity.( John 14-16, Math 28:19)

Anything said of either of Christ's two natures applies to the one Person of Christ, so that is how it is said that Christ died on the cross. The term "hypostatic union" refers to the two natures united in the one Person, so anything said of those two natures in the one Person applies to the whole Person. So we see that the Person of Christ is both God and man. The phrase hypostatic union was adopted by the general council at Chalcedon 451 AD. That council declared that the union of two natures is real (against Arius), not a mere indwelling of God in a man (against Nestorius), with a rational soul (against Apollinaris), and that in Christ’s Divine nature remains unchanged (against Eutyches).

We need to look to the Monothelite Controversy which had to deal with whether there was one or two wills/minds in the person of Christ. The outcome was that there were two; one human and one divine with the human subjected to the divine. The eternal Son of God did not assume a part of a human nature without a mind, without a will, without human activity, but He assumed all the things that were planted in our nature by God.

Now then, to act (or in this case, speak) is the work of a person, but the form or nature is the cause of this action; for each person acts in accord with the form or nature which it has. A difference in causes (natures) produces a difference in effects (actions). Therefore, where there are different natures, there are also different activities. So in the one Person of Christ there are two natural actions, the divine and the human, each of which has its own essential attributes, functions, and actions. Jesus was thirty years old according to His human nature (Luke 3:23); according to His divine nature He could say: "Before Abraham was born, I am" (John 8:58). The question is did both natures know this and communicate it to the Person. The answer is yes because the divine nature with its corresponding divine will willed the human nature to respond in such a fashion in keeping with Christ's office and ministry. In the text regarding Mark 13:32, we have a slightly different situation here. Christ is acting (speaking) from His human nature, but, this time, the divine will does not allow the human will access to this knowledge. For this information is not to be published on earth. Therefore, as man, Christ cannot answer the question. In the works pertaining to the office of Christ as Prophet, Priest, and King both natures act in conjunction with each other, each nature doing what is peculiar to the same. The book of Hebrews goes into great detail with these offices.

hope this helps !!!
 
There has been a whole spectrum of views in church history and it is interesting to see people wrestle with ideas.

Rather than just latch on dogmatically to something that can make us feel secure and "more right" than our fellow Christians, I would encourage a diversity of thought bathed in constant prayer.

From Nestorianism (2 persons) to Eutychianism (one mixed nature) the terms and names can seem confusing to the uninitiated, but I have found it fairly helpful in doctrinal matters to try to boil things down to essential ideas. Historically the church has been eager to condemn and ostracize each other, rather than build and edify each other in a loving discussion.

Classic orthodoxy (if we can say there is such a thing) has settled on, "2 natures in 1 person," but I have some problems with their view labeled as "the Hypostatic Union." The problem I have is they centralize the person in the divine nature, and thus they are left with kind of a "personless" human nature, to avoid a lot of logical problems of God dying or being limited.

The Biblical account to me describes a kind of transference from a pre-existing state into humanity, and as such this does not describe an "addition" to the divine nature by "association" as orthodoxy will commonly describe it, to "protect" God from becoming things that create logical problems. Rather than a human nature tacked on to a divine nature with a divine person, I see the Bible describing a divine person becoming a human person on this earth. This is called Functional Kenosis or Semi-Kenosis as opposed to Full Kenosis where Jesus no longer possesses anything divine at all, and it is what I personally subscribe to, but many have called me a heretic for it. I also disagree with the orthodox position that Christ has 2 wills, one in each of his natures, as there is 1 will per person by definition.

As such this would encompass a divine person becoming a human person, while still retaining a recessive divinity as it were, a veiled divine nature, temporarily turned off for his human life.
 
dizerner said:
There has been a whole spectrum of views in church history and it is interesting to see people wrestle with ideas.

Rather than just latch on dogmatically to something that can make us feel secure and "more right" than our fellow Christians, I would encourage a diversity of thought bathed in constant prayer.

From Nestorianism (2 persons) to Eutychianism (one mixed nature) the terms and names can seem confusing to the uninitiated, but I have found it fairly helpful in doctrinal matters to try to boil things down to essential ideas. Historically the church has been eager to condemn and ostracize each other, rather than build and edify each other in a loving discussion.

Classic orthodoxy (if we can say there is such a thing) has settled on, "2 natures in 1 person," but I have some problems with their view labeled as "the Hypostatic Union." The problem I have is they centralize the person in the divine nature, and thus they are left with kind of a "personless" human nature, to avoid a lot of logical problems of God dying or being limited.

The Biblical account to me describes a kind of transference from a pre-existing state into humanity, and as such this does not describe an "addition" to the divine nature by "association" as orthodoxy will commonly describe it, to "protect" God from becoming things that create logical problems. Rather than a human nature tacked on to a divine nature with a divine person, I see the Bible describing a divine person becoming a human person on this earth. This is called Functional Kenosis or Semi-Kenosis as opposed to Full Kenosis where Jesus no longer possesses anything divine at all, and it is what I personally subscribe to, but many have called me a heretic for it. I also disagree with the orthodox position that Christ has 2 wills, one in each of his natures, as there is 1 will per person by definition.

As such this would encompass a divine person becoming a human person, while still retaining a recessive divinity as it were, a veiled divine nature, temporarily turned off for his human life.
Click to expand...
His Person is Divine as the 2nd Person of the Trinity. We can establish that in scripture.

We can see from Scripture with the Trinity that nature does not equate to person. God is One nature, essence, substance, Being and 3 in Persons.

So Christ has a human nature but is not a human person. His Singular Person is Divine as the Son.
 
civic said:
@PapaLandShark good to see you brother .

Should we have a Calvinist/ Arminian forum 😂😂😂😂
Click to expand...
Not for my sake, Civic. If you feel it is needed for the actual edification of the brethren here then go for it. I think after 400+ years everyone is fairly up to speed on the differences. If not then they can stick their heads in that grinder on their own.

I'll offer corrective measures if the yen strikes and it seems to be needed.

The new site is lovely, btw!
 
only two words....... "Partake" and "Took Part" ... Hebrews 2:14, then one will KNOW what his Nature is.

101G.
 
After He ascended and was seated at the right hand of the Father?
Then Jesus ceased being God as a man.

Jesus is now God being the man, and the man being God.

For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, and in Christ you have been
brought to fullness. He is the head over every power and authority." Colossians 2:9-10

Jesus no longer has to pray as a man to the Father for his every need.
For He has returned to being Lord God over all creation.
 
dizerner said:
There has been a whole spectrum of views in church history and it is interesting to see people wrestle with ideas.

Rather than just latch on dogmatically to something that can make us feel secure and "more right" than our fellow Christians, I would encourage a diversity of thought bathed in constant prayer.
Click to expand...
That sounds reasonable.
dizerner said:
Historically the church has been eager to condemn and ostracize each other, rather than build and edify each other in a loving discussion.
Click to expand...
Agreed. And there are some issues, not all but some, where I believe some of Christ followers are more upset about someone not being totally right about everything more than God himself.
 
civic said:
So Christ has a human nature but is not a human person. His Singular Person is Divine as the Son.
Click to expand...

In my experience about 1 in 10 trinitarians are aware that this is what trinitarianism teaches.

Trinitarians have called me a liar, a demon and mentally ill when I bring it up.

I commend you for presenting it.

Have you had any pushback from trinitarians over this?
 
Matthias said:
In my experience about 1 in 10 trinitarians are aware that this is what trinitarianism teaches.

Trinitarians have called me a liar, a demon and mentally ill when I bring it up.

I commend you for presenting it.

Have you had any pushback from trinitarians over this?
Click to expand...
Yes I get pushback from many but thats because they have not studied it or the creeds and church history and the debates that arose in the early church over the Person of Christ.

Also depending upon the person I'm talking with whether or not they are a trinitarian I can defend it from both the creeds and scripture. So depending on the discussion it will determine if I bring the creeds and church history into the discussion.

I do the same with calvinists. And some of them get so mad they say " we don't follow calvin we follow Jesus. Then I say stop calling yourself a calvinist and start calling yourself a Christian :). Some get really upset when I bring up calvin, luther and other theologians of the part with what calvinism really teaches. Then they will resort to this one when they run out of answers- you were never a calvinist. I was one for over 40 plus years and they get mad because I know more than most of them with what is actually taught and believed by the early calvinists.

Most of them are much closer these days to what Jacob Arminius taught than calvin. Sometimes I will quote Arminius to a calvinist and not say its him and they affirm it lol. :)

I say that to say church history is important to understand in Christianity to see how these doctrines were developed and who they were fighting against.
 
Last edited:
civic said:
Yes I get pushback from many but thats because they have not studied it or the creeds and church history and the debates that arose in the early church over the Person of Christ.
Click to expand...

Glad to hear that I’m not alone.

I don’t think the average person (trinitarian and non-trinitarian) sitting in a pew week by week is doing that kind of studying on their own.

I’m sure some trinitarian pastors must preach it from their pulpits but I haven’t come across anyone - whether they know that this is what trinitarianism teaches or not - who has told me that they have heard it preached from the pulpit.

I think trinitarian pastors should be held responsible for preaching it and teaching it to those in their care. I have a few friends and many acquaintances in the trinitarian clergy. When I’ve asked them about it they dismiss it as something that people don’t come to church to hear. Surprisingly, they’ve told me that it really isn’t anything that people need to know; it’s enough that they profess belief in the Trinity and the deity of Christ.

What is your position on it being preached from the pulpit?
 
A few years ago I asked someone on an Internet discussion forum if they were aware that trinitarianism teaches us that Jesus is not a human person. The person said that I was lying. I then posted the following quote from an article written by William Lane Craig:

”He is not a human person… there is no human person named ‘Jesus of Nazareth.’”

Is Worship of Jesus Idolatry?

This is the weekly Q & A blog post by our Research Professor in Philosophy, Dr. William Lane Craig. Question Hello Dr. Craig, First, I want to thank you for all that you have done for the cause of Christ. You have been a powerful witness for the faith....
www.biola.edu www.biola.edu

I was banned by a trinitarian moderator. Reason? Accusing trinitarianism of teaching that Jesus is not a human person.

I love irony. I was banned by a trinitarian moderator who didn’t know that’s what trinitarianism teaches about Jesus.
 
Matthias said:
Glad to hear that I’m not alone.

I don’t think the average person (trinitarian and non-trinitarian) sitting in a pew week by week is doing that kind of studying on their own.

I’m sure some trinitarian pastors must preach it from their pulpits but I haven’t come across anyone - whether they know that this is what trinitarianism teaches or not - who has told me that they have heard it preached from the pulpit.

I think trinitarian pastors should be held responsible for preaching it and teaching it to those in their care. I have a few friends and many acquaintances in the trinitarian clergy. When I’ve asked them about it they dismiss it as something that people don’t come to church to hear. Surprisingly, they’ve told me that it really isn’t anything that people need to know; it’s enough that they profess belief in the Trinity and the deity of Christ.

What is your position on it being preached from the pulpit?
Click to expand...
Not sure about the pulpit for for sure in home groups, sunday school etc..... I'm 99.999 % sure I know more about the doctrine of the Trinity and the HU than my pastor but thats only because I have been studying and debating it for several decades on a daily basis. I have 2 full bookshelves on the Trinity and deity of Christ and another shelf of commentaries just on the gospel and epistles of John. My pastor in the early/mid 80's taught Greek in seminary and he was my next door neighbor in our apartment complex. He taught me NT Greek for 2 years meeting one on one. So I was very fortunate as a young believer in my mid 20's to have a theologian as my neighbor, friend and pastor. It was because of his influence I learned how to study at a seminary level like all his students would have to learn. I consulted him several times once I put my thesis paper together on the Atonement and the Tri-Unity of God and he encouraged me to continue my studies and add more references to each of my points. So thats my next project.
 
Matthias said:
Do you believe God died? (I don’t.)
Click to expand...

I believe Jesus is God, therefore by logical necessity I have to believe God died.

Death is the price of sin, only God could pay it on behalf of all sinful humanity.

If you check that thread out you will see a lot of my argumentation.

Regards.
 

Similar threads

Diserner
"God became human, but not a human person." — civic
2 3 4
Replies
65
Views
2K
civic
civic
P
The Hypostatic Union (The Bane of Unitarianism).
Replies
10
Views
80
Studyman
S
Diserner
Dr. James White on Functional Kenoticism
2 3
Replies
58
Views
962
101G
101G
Rory Wilson
The Trinity and the Incarnation
4 5 6
Replies
110
Views
893
Runningman
Runningman
charismaticlady
With the New Covenant, How many Natures Do We Have?
4 5 6
Replies
107
Views
731
e v e
e v e
Back
Top Bottom