The Hypostatic Union- the 2 Natures in Christ

[synergy]

@civic , @praise_yeshua , @dizerner , @Complete :
Where is this God has a literal Soul doctrine coming from? It must be from all those people who did not attend school the day their English Language Teachers taught the concept of anthropomorphism.

At least half of all heresies would immediately evaporate if people would just practice basic language skills.

 

[civic]

Heresies About the Incarnation

Justin Johnson
Heresy is a doctrinal error that affects a fundamental of Christianity. Since Jesus Christ is the foundation of Christianity, getting the teaching of Christ wrong can quickly devolve into heresy.

The good news is that getting Christ right is not hard. The bad news is that there are many ways to get him wrong.

This is evident when people talk about the incarnation of Jesus Christ. Incarnation refers to Christ putting on flesh and refers to the time of his birth and after. Was he a real man? Was he truly God? How was the Word, which was in the beginning before all things, made flesh (John 1:14)?

The Biblical teaching of the person of Christ is clear and simple:

1) Jesus is a man (1 Tim 2:5).
2) Jesus is God (Titus 2:13).
3) Since his incarnation, Jesus is always both at the same time (Col 2:9; 1 Tim 3:16).
There are many heresies, but they can all be summarized by a denial of one of the above statements. Changing these statements changes who Christ is and fundamentally alters the foundation of Christianity.

Denying Christ is Man

Heresies that deny Christ’s humanity are not popular today, though you can still see them float around if you wait long enough. For example, Jehovah Witnesses’ teach that Jesus’ resurrection was not in a real body which would be a denial of his full humanity.

An ancient heresy called Docetism said that Jesus was God, but that he only appeared to be a man. Apollinarian heresy said that he had a human body, but a divine soul. Since a man is made of both body and soul, not having the soul of a man makes him an incomplete man.

Errors in this area most often arise from the tendency to protect his deity, or a misunderstanding of what it means to be a man (e.g. thinking being a man requires sin). All of these heresies teach a different Christ than what is found when all scripture is considered.

Jesus was fully and completely man in order to die for humanity, and to quicken any man to his image in salvation after death. He was in all ways like we are, human, yet without sin (Heb 4:15).

Denying Christ is God

A more popular and still prevalent heresy is denying the deity of Christ.

Unitarians, Jehovah Witnesses (modern day Arian heresy), Christadelphians, and other groups teach that Jesus was not God in the ultimate sense, but was a created being.

They vary in the degree to which Christ is magnified, but all deny Jesus as God. Many scholars of religion, Jews, and secularists fall into this category acknowledging the full humanity of Jesus, but denying he was God (modern day Ebionite heresy).

Adoptionism says that Jesus was a man and put on divinity at his baptism or his resurrection. The problem here is clear when we consider God’s attributes of eternality and necessity. If Jesus was not God for a single moment, he could not be God at any time, because God is forever.

The logic of scripture demands either that he was always God or never God.

If Jesus was not God, the Bible is wrong and Christianity is false. If Christ was not God then he could not atone for our sins, forgive a single sin, God would not be the Saviour, our faith would be in vain, and eternal life would be a wish not a promise.

Denying He is Both at the Same Time

One of the most subtle heresies and prevalent in otherwise sound Christian groups is the heresy regarding the union of the two natures of Christ (i.e. hypostatic union).

The true teaching is that Jesus is one eternal person who, after the incarnation, is described by two complete, unaltered, and unmixed natures: God and man. (Before the incarnation he was only God).

These kind of heresies are created when people allow one of the natures of Christ to change/affect/alter/limit/diminish the other nature.

Eutychianism and monophysitism are ancient heresies that taught that Jesus existed in only one nature: a mixture of man and God. A sort of superman – half-man half-God. If this were true, then, like Superman, he was not a true human, but a mutant human, and he was not truly God, but a new form of God.

Nestorianism on the other heretical hand says that there were two persons of Jesus: Jesus the God and Jesus the Man. This provides for two natures, but creates disunity in the person of Jesus who has always been one.

Kenoticism is a prevalent liberal heresy that is making inroads into more conservative Christian groups, and even in grace circles today. It teaches that in order to become a man, Jesus had to limit/diminish/empty/lay aside/subtract or in some way change his deity attributes.

If the two natures do not remain complete, full, inseparable, and without mixture, then either the Godhead must change, or Christ is not adequate to be the Saviour and mediator of men. Neither option is acceptable to Biblical Christianity, but that is why it is called heresy.

Conclusion

When the eternal divine Word was made flesh, he did not stop being God. He started also being human at the same time. From that point forward he was fully God with every attribute of deity, and he was fully man with every attribute of humanity. Jesus Christ is both man and God in one person.

Heresies are like poison and when ingested begin to disrupt the inner workings of the body. When taught and believed they affect how you think about God and salvation. If not now, then later when the crack in the foundation has had time to do its work.

Unlike other teachings which may be trivial or inconsequential to your salvation, getting the doctrine of Christ wrong throws into question whether you are a true Christian or not. If we teach another Jesus, then it is not the true Jesus Christ who is God and Saviour, Head of the Body, and in whom we are complete.

It is important to know the true teaching of Christ, and beware of the heresies throughout history that have often deceived men by fine words against the truth. Truth about Christ is necessary to be a true Christian.

Shalom
J.

The person you quoted is what I have been saying on this forum all the time regarding the Trinity and 2 natures in Christ. This is the biblcal, historical and orthodox view.

So do you agree with the article you quoted ?

 

[Diserner]

Kenoticism is a prevalent liberal heresy that is making inroads into more conservative Christian groups, and even in grace circles today. It teaches that in order to become a man, Jesus had to limit/diminish/empty/lay aside/subtract or in some way change his deity attributes.

Calling someone a hairy tick, without actually praying and looking at Scripture for yourself, is in fact just intellectual pride.

It is the idolatry of relying on man-made opinions, and making a false security out of the traditions and doctrines of past Christians.

We all must come fresh again to the Word to see what it says, rather than paste in the "official" pronouncement of a bunch of past intellects.

 

[civic]

@civic , @praise_yeshua , @dizerner , @Complete :
Where is this God has a Soul doctrine coming from? It must be from all those people who did not attend school the day their English Teachers taught the concept of anthropomorphism.

Not sure but the soul/spirit are used as synonyms in numerous places in scripture and in other places there is a distinction but then it gets into a philosophical discussion/debate regarding those differences/distinctions. In Hebrews it says that the Word of God can discern the difference and the dividing of the soul/spirit implying they are united/one.

For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.

 

[civic]

Calling someone a hairy tick, without actually praying and looking at Scripture for yourself, is in fact just intellectual pride.

It is the idolatry of relying on man-made opinions, and making a false security out of the traditions and doctrines of past Christians.

We all must come fresh again to the Word to see what it says, rather than paste in the "official" pronouncement of a bunch of past intellects.

I think your view is one of the most conservative on the side of kenosis. I have a problem with the other extreme. You see people can change . Even though I disagree with the white article its much more acceptable than the traditional kenotic view.

 

[civic]

@civic , @praise_yeshua , @dizerner , @Complete :
Where is this God has a literal Soul doctrine coming from? It must be from all those people who did not attend school the day their English Language Teachers taught the concept of anthropomorphism.

At least half of all heresies would immediately evaporate if people would just practice basic language skills.

agreed and some of the arguments are convoluted with no lexical definitions and scripture references to support their ideas.

 

[Johann]

The person you quoted is what I have been saying on this forum all the time regarding the Trinity and 2 natures in Christ. This is the biblcal, historical and orthodox view.

So do you agree with the article you quoted ?

I don't believe in what you are saying but hold to the oracles of God-yes-I agree with the article I have posted.

Bereshis (in the Beginning) was the Dvar Hashem [YESHAYAH 55:11; BERESHIS 1:1], and the Dvar Hashem was agav (along with) Hashem [MISHLE 8:30; 30:4], and the Dvar Hashem was nothing less, by nature, than Elohim! [Psa 56:11(10); Yn 17:5; Rev. 19:13]
Joh 1:2 Bereshis (in the Beginning) this Dvar Hashem was with Hashem [Prov 8:30].
Joh 1:3 All things through him came to be, and without him came to be not one thing which came into being. [Ps 33:6,9; Prov 30:4]
Joh 1:4 In him was Chayyim (Life) and the Chayyim (Life) was the Ohr (Light) of Bnei Adam. [TEHILLIM 36:10 (9)]
Joh 1:5 And the Ohr shines in the choshech [TEHILLIM 18:28], and the choshech did not grasp it. [YESHAYAH 9:1]
Joh 1:6 There came an ish haElohim (a man of G-d), having been sent from Hashem. His name was Yochanan.
Joh 1:7 This Yochanan came for an eidus (witness), that he might give solemn edut (testimony) about the Ohr, that kol Bnei Adam might have emunah through him.
Joh 1:8 This ish haElohim was not the Ohr, but he came that he might give solemn edut (testimony) about the Ohr.
Joh 1:9 The Ohr, the Ohr HaAmitti (the True Light), which gives rational haskalah (enlightenment) to kol Bnei Adam (all mankind), was coming into the Olam Hazeh.
Joh 1:10 He was in the Olam Hazeh, the Olam (world) came to be through him [Ps 33:6,9]; yet the Olam Hazeh did not recognize him.
Joh 1:11 He came to his own, and his own were not mekabel (accepting) the Kabbalus HaMalchus of him [YESHAYAH 53:3].
Joh 1:12 But as many as him lekabel pnei Moshiach (receive him as Moshiach), to them he gave the tokef (authority) to become in fact yeladim haElohim [DEVARIM 14:1].
Joh 1:13 He gave this tokef to the ones whose being born was not by the agency of natural descent, nor by the ratzon (will) of basar (fallen human nature), nor by the ratzon of a gever (male)--rather, to the ones born of G-d (Yn 3:3,7).
Joh 1:14 And the Dvar Hashem took on gufaniyut (corporeality) and made his sukkah, his Mishkan (Tabernacle) among us [YESHAYAH 7:14], and we [Shlichim, 1Y 1:1-2] gazed upon his Kavod [SHEMOT 33:18; 40:34; YESHAYAH 60:1-2], the Shechinah of the Ben Yachid from Elohim HaAv, full of Hashem's Chesed v’Emes.

και ο λογος σαρξ εγενετο και εσκηνωσεν εν ημιν και--

Joh 1:14 Καὶ Kai|G2532|Conj|And ὁ ho|G3588|Art-NMS|the Λόγος Logos|G3056|N-NMS|Word σὰρξ sarx|G4561|N-NFS|flesh ἐγένετο egeneto|G1096|V-AIM-3S|became καὶ kai|G2532|Conj|and ἐσκήνωσεν eskēnōsen|G4637|V-AIA-3S|dwelt ἐν en|G1722|Prep|among ἡμῖν, hēmin|G1473|PPro-D1P|us, καὶ kai|G2532|Conj|and ἐθεασάμεθα etheasametha|G2300|V-AIM-1P|we beheld τὴν tēn|G3588|Art-AFS|the δόξαν doxan|G1391|N-AFS|glory αὐτοῦ, autou|G846|PPro-GM3S|of Him, δόξαν doxan|G1391|N-AFS|a glory ὡς hōs|G5613|Adv|as μονογενοῦς monogenous|G3439|Adj-GMS|of an only begotten παρὰ para|G3844|Prep|from Πατρός, Patros|G3962|N-GMS|[the] Father, πλήρης plērēs|G4134|Adj-NMS|full χάριτος charitos|G5485|N-GFS|of grace καὶ kai|G2532|Conj|and ἀληθείας. alētheias|G225|N-GFS|truth.


the Word: Joh_1:1; Isa_7:14; Mat_1:16, Mat_1:20-23; Luk_1:31-35, Luk_2:7, Luk_2:11; Rom_1:3-4, Rom_9:5; 1Co_15:47; Gal_4:4; Php_2:6-8; 1Ti_3:16; Heb_2:11, Heb_2:14-17, Heb_10:5; 1Jn_4:2-3; 2Jn_1:7
we: Joh_2:11, Joh_11:40, Joh_12:40-41, Joh_14:9; Isa_40:5, Isa_53:2, Isa_60:1-2; Mat_17:1-5; 2Co_4:4-6; Heb_1:3; 1Pe_2:4-7; 2Pe_1:17; 1Jn_1:1-2
the only: Joh_1:18, Joh_3:16, Joh_3:18; Psa_2:7; Act_13:33; Heb_1:5, Heb_5:5; 1Jn_4:9
full: Joh_1:16-17; Psa_45:2; 2Co_12:9; Eph_3:8, Eph_3:18-19; Col_1:19, Col_2:3, Col_2:9; 1Ti_1:14-16

 

[Diserner]

I think your view is one of the most conservative on the side of kenosis. I have a problem with the other extreme. You see people can change . Even though I disagree with the white article its much more acceptable than the traditional kenotic view.

Nice.

And you know what is really, really cool?

I don't care what you think.

 

[civic]

Nice.

And you know what is really, really cool?

I don't care what you think.

ditto. But I do care about you

 

[synergy]

Not sure but the soul/spirit are used as synonyms in numerous places in scripture and in other places there is a distinction but then it gets into a philosophical discussion/debate regarding those differences/distinctions. In Hebrews it says that the Word of God can discern the difference and the dividing of the soul/spirit implying they are united/one.

For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.

I can understand soul verses that pertain to us as human. Thats not what I'm asking. What I'm asking about is soul verses that pertain to God. Who is promoting this God has a literal Soul doctrine?

 

[Diserner]

In Hebrews it says that the Word of God can discern the difference and the dividing of the soul/spirit implying they are united/one.

For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.

Are joints and marrow the same thing?

Then why would Jesus dividing soul and spirit, be dividing the same unified thing?

 

[civic]

I can understand soul verses that pertain to us as human. Thats not what I'm asking. What I'm asking about is soul verses that pertain to God. Who is promoting this God has a literal Soul doctrine?

I found this from Got ?

Does God have a soul ?

The first mention of a soul in the Bible is in the context of the creation of the first man, Adam, in Genesis 2:7: “Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being” (or “a living soul” in the KJV). Unlike what He had done with His previous creations, God made people in His image (Genesis 1:26–27) with His own breath within them. This non-physical part of a person is usually referred to as a soul (Hebrew nephesh).

Throughout Scripture, people are referred to as having a soul (Psalm 62:5; 104:1; Luke 1:46). Since we are created in God’s image, does this mean God has a soul as well?

There are passages that indicate that God does have a soul: Leviticus 26:11 and Judges 10:16 use a form of the word nephesh in relation to God. And in Jeremiah 32:41, God makes a promise concerning Israel: “I will rejoice in doing them good and will assuredly plant them in this land with all my heart and soul.” However, Scripture also refers to God having a hand or a face, applying human qualities to God in a figure of speech known as anthropomorphism. It could be that biblical descriptions of God’s “soul” are anthropomorphisms similar to descriptions of God’s “hands.” So, we must be careful about saying that God has a soul. God is Spirit (John 4:24), but nowhere in Scripture is it said that God is Soul or that He literally possesses a soul.

When we consider God the Son, we can be more certain. Jesus was (and is) fully God and fully man. When the Son of God became incarnate, He took on a sinless human nature, and this included a truly human soul. In His agony in the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus said, “My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death” (Matthew 26:38). His human nature—including His soul—recoiled at the thought of crucifixion and all it entailed.

Much of this discussion depends upon how one defines the word soul. If we equate the word soul with personhood, then, yes, God has a soul; He is a person in that He is a being who possesses a mind, emotion, and will. If we view the word soul as the ability to express emotions, then, yes, God has a soul—He is not “soulless” in the sense of having no feeling. But we normally use the word soul in the context of humanity. In fact, some would define the soul as that immaterial part of us that links the spirit with the body. The Father is not human. He is spirit; the Holy Spirit is also immaterial; the Son has a human body and a human soul/spirit, because He is a true a human being, the God-Man who makes intercession for us (Hebrews 7:25).

 

[civic]

Are joints and marrow the same thing?

Then why would Jesus dividing soul and spirit, be dividing the same unified thing?

Is God a unified One ?

Are there differences ?

 

[Diserner]

I can understand soul verses that pertain to us as human. Thats not what I'm asking. What I'm asking about is soul verses that pertain to God. Who is promoting this God has a literal Soul doctrine?

Scripture does use this terminology, attributing a soul to God.

And logic attaches soul as an attribute of personhood.

So we have converging lines of corroborating evidence.

 

[civic]

I can understand soul verses that pertain to us as human. Thats not what I'm asking. What I'm asking about is soul verses that pertain to God. Who is promoting this God has a literal Soul doctrine?

I found this from Biola University

What Does it Mean to Say God Is a Soul?

This is the weekly Q & A blog post by our Research Professor in Philosophy, Dr. William Lane Craig. Question I would like to ask a clarifying question, and also ask you to consider some implications of your view on the Trinity. For reference sake, here is the view...

www.biola.edu

 

[Diserner]

Is God a unified One ?

Are there differences ?

Some people compare the Trinity to spirit, soul, body.

I think there are some differences.

 

[synergy]

Apollinarian heresy said that he had a human body, but a divine soul. Since a man is made of both body and soul, not having the soul of a man makes him an incomplete man.

That sounds suspiciously like what @sawdust and @GeneZ are promoting.

 

[Johann]

Calling someone a hairy tick, without actually praying and looking at Scripture for yourself, is in fact just intellectual pride.

It is the idolatry of relying on man-made opinions, and making a false security out of the traditions and doctrines of past Christians.

We all must come fresh again to the Word to see what it says, rather than paste in the "official" pronouncement of a bunch of past intellects.

You have discernment-don't you? It is called entering the labors of others and be edified through the indwelling Holy Spirit.
For without the Spirit NONE is of Christ Jesus.

Even an unbeliever can quote a bunch of Scriptures-what does it make him?

Don't attack the person-prove the post wrong.
J.

 

[Tranquil]

A time to weep and a time to laugh, a time to mourn and a time to dance…
ECCLESIASTES 3:4

I believe we need to look for reasons to laugh every day.

 

[Diserner]

Don't attack the person-prove the post wrong.
J.

I didn't attack any person.

Accusing someone of attacking them when they didn't is a form of attack.