The Hypostatic Union- the 2 Natures in Christ

[101G]

'For Christ also hath once suffered for sins,
the just for the unjust,
that He might bring us to God,
being put to death in the flesh,
but quickened by the Spirit:
By which also He went and preached
unto the spirits (spiritual beings) in prison; (G5438)
Which sometime were disobedient,
when once the longsuffering of God waited
in the days of Noah,
while the ark was a preparing,
wherein few, that is, eight souls
were saved by water.
(1Pe 3:18-20)

Hello @101G,

My reason for entering the verses above, in the reply you are referring to, was in relation to the use of the words, 'eight souls were saved' i.e., six 'persons'), in order to illustrate the fact that the soul is the combination of body and spirit (or the breath of life), and not a separate entity.

* In response to the word 'prison' in 1 Peter 3:19 (above), You have quoted from Isaiah 42:6-7, which prophetically refers to the Messiah's activities:-

'I the LORD have called thee in righteousness,
and will hold thine hand,
and will keep thee,
and give thee for a covenant of the people,
for a light of the Gentiles;
To open the blind eyes,
to bring out the prisoners from the prison,
and them that sit in darkness
out of the prison house.'
(Isa 42:6-7)

You suggest that perhaps the word 'prison', in 1 Peter 3:19, is not contextually appropriate. I believe it is, for those described in Peter and Jude as 'disobedient' in the days of Noah, who left their 'first estate' for which they were created, to engage in an activity for which they were not intended, and thereby corrupting mankind genetically, these are contained or imprisoned awaiting judgement.

Whereas the use of the word 'prison' in Isaiah 42:6-7 (above) I believe to be figurative, referring to those who are spiritually blind and imprisoned by sin. They are described as 'them that sit in darkness', *'sitting' being a permanent condition in which one is placed. A condition that only the Saviour can deliver them from.

So in answer to your question, @101G, I believe the word 'prison' is appropriate in both cases, but in 1 Peter the imprisonment is not figurative, whereas in Isaiah it is, being a spiritual condition brought about by sin entering and death by sin, which only the death and resurrection of Christ, believed, received and applied can deliver from.

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

Note:- * 'sit in darkness' - being a permanent condition in which one is placed. (ref:- 'Figures Of Speech Used In The Bible' by E.W. Bullinger)

First In God I thank you for your earnest response. but also I disagree with your Notre at the bottom of your response by (The Bible' by E.W. Bullinger). to sit in darkness and prison are not permanent conditions. if so, why is there a Pardon, Repentance? and why there is Redemption, via that repentance. but I commend you as to looking into the definition, which is GOOD and GREAT of you. I thank you for that, instead of ignorantly staying in darkness oneself. Good, for you took time is searching out the TRUTH. ..

now, do not take 101G stickiness and analyzation of scriptures and words definition as a hindrance, but as an acclamation, yes, an acclamation on your part. so 101G takes his hat off to you in seeking the Truth, this is Good.

Now, if you don't mind, there is another word 101G like you to check out...... "HEAL" as found in Isaiah 53:4 and as well as in 1 Peter 2:24 in reference to the Isaiah verse. tell me what you think of this healing, is it Physical, or Spiritually......... and why.

Be blessed, and thanks in advance.

101G.

 

[101G]

I agree that the soul is a unifying part. I say that because I believe that the human spirit is the deepest part of our soul, the spiritual eye of our soul. The human spirit is where we admit God into our heart and is part of our soul.

first thing first.... all Souls are God's, as well as our bodies, and spirits. all are given by God. as for the soul, it is volatile in substance and nature. and only God can preserve it. and the soul is not the spirit. there is the ACTIVE, and INACTIVE Soul. depending ... if one is alive or dead. but alive or dead, (according to body actions), the spirit is always ACTIVE, if the Soul is not. meaning Active as in dormant state, meaning if physical functions suspended. and if the resumption of physical activity is restored, then the spirit is not dormant, (being either made new, or as David said, CREATE in me a NEW spirit). or restored as was before the ceased of physical functions, or activities. I. e. if the spirit leaves the body, the soul is as said, "volatile", only the spirit hold the life information of the volatile souls. a good example of this is in the item of a computer.

101G.

 

[Johann]

Wow.

Listened to some of this, I would avoid this guy like the plague.

Literally said "The Gospel is not that he became a man."

Just constant bald ignorant assertions from this guy.

ONE GOD TWO NATURES - Part 3
SOLVING PROBLEM VERSES
“And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in
the flesh...”
- 1 Timothy 3:16

1. The Two Natures of Christ

a. He has the nature of God: not created; eternal; spiritual; timeless

b. He has the nature of man: created, flesh and blood, earthy

c. Many problems are caused by misunderstanding his two natures.

d. Letting the Bible be true does not require understanding all things.

2. Why Jesus Needed to Be Man

a. To be a proper mediator - Heb 2:9-18, 1 Tim 2:5, Gal 3:20

b. To manifest God to man – 1 Tim 3:16, John 1:18, 31

c. To fulfill all things – Mat 1:18-23, 3:15, 5:17

d. To sit on David’s throne – Luke 1:32, Acts 2:29-30, 2 Tim 2:8

e. To be preeminent in all things – Col 1:16-18

f. To reconcile all things to himself – Col 1:20, Rom 8:19-21

3. Kenosis and the “Emptying”

a. The point of Phil 2:5-7: the mind of Christ; lowliness, esteeming others

b. We have knowledge, but are to condescend: 1Cor 2:10, Rom 11:25, 12:16

c. 2:6 - Christ always existed as God; equal to him – John 5:18

d. The new translations open the door to diminishing his deity.

e. 2:7 – “no reputation” is changed to “nothing”, “emptied”

f. The key = he took man’s nature upon himself; he did not remove his deity

g. 2:8 - His humbling was not of his divine nature, but of obedience

h. Who did he obey? The will of God purposed before the world began

i. “obedience” is the human experience: Heb 5:8, John 12:27, Mrk 14:36

j. The new experience was being part of creation; God did not change – Heb 13:8

4. Problem Verses

a. John 5:19: “I can do nothing”, this is defined in context John 5:18, 23, 26, 30

b. John 14:28: “My father is greater than I”: greater in position not nature:Jo10:30

c. John 20:17: “my God” the same as Mat 27:46, Jesus is the God John 20:27-28

d. Luke 2:52: Jesus increased in wisdom; defined in Luke 2:40, 49 and Prov 3:1-6

e. He had the spirit of God, of course he had wisdom – Isa 11:1-5

f. Mark 13:32: no man knows; Jesus was a man (also God); compare to 1 Cor 2:2

g. Col 1:15: he was the firstborn, that is, from the dead not in creation – Col 1:18

h. “How could God die?” He was a man, “How can we worship him?” He was God

i. The problems are solved when we understand that one Jesus had two natures.

This from the third tape-why are you blatantly lying? Constant, bold, ignorant assertions?

1Co 2:12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.

1Co 2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

1Co 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

1Co 2:15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.

1Co 2:16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.

And to make matters worse-@Civic "liked" your blatant lie-this shows me you can have all the books on a bookshelf-and still void of what really matters.

 

[Diserner]

This from the third tape-why are you blatantly lying? Constant, bold, ignorant assertions?

Well, sometimes people contradict themselves and doublespeak. It happens a lot actually, and in a complex topic it can even be hard to avoid.

I disagreed with a lot of other things he said as well.

 

[civic]

Please let’s refrain from making things personal and calling another person a liar. Thanks !

 

[Johann]

May I?

These OT verses speak of God having a soul prior to the Incarnation.

More specifically.. speaks of the Lord God of the Jews having a soul.

You may brother-
This from Got Questions-

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).

Grace and peace.
J.

 

[Johann]

Please let’s refrain from making things personal and calling another person a liar. Thanks !

Well, sometimes people contradict themselves and doublespeak. It happens a lot actually, and in a complex topic it can even be hard to avoid.

I disagreed with a lot of other things he said as well.

Such as?

 

[Johann]

Well, sometimes people contradict themselves and doublespeak. It happens a lot actually, and in a complex topic it can even be hard to avoid.

I disagreed with a lot of other things he said as well.

Again-such as? Give me the links you are in disagreement.

 

[Johann]

Please let’s refrain from making things personal and calling another person a liar. Thanks !

So WHEN a person is telling a lie, and you SHOW him he is telling a lie-I can's say he is lying?

 

[Diserner]

Such as?

I don't mind you calling me a liar, brother, really, feelings get strong and sometimes I am not as careful as I should be, and we all should have the right to express our concerns of misrepresentation.

It was part of a sentence with the implication of "The Gospel is not [only] that [Christ] became a man." I didn't mean to deliberately misrepresent him, but highlight the part I disagreed with.

This fellow is completely against Jesus relinquishing any divine attribute as a human, as far as I could tell. And this is a very common misconception about Kenosis, that it is some dangerous threat to Christ's deity.

I should have made myself more clear, and not spoken in such broad-sweeping terms, and I apologize for that.

 

[Johann]

I don't mind you calling me a liar, brother, really, feelings get strong and sometimes I am not as careful as I should be, and we all should have the right to express our concerns of misrepresentation.

It was part of a sentence with the implication of "The Gospel is not [only] that [Christ] became a man." I didn't mean to deliberately misrepresent him, but highlight the part I disagreed with.

This fellow is completely against Jesus relinquishing any divine attribute as a human, as far as I could tell. And this is a very common misconception about Kenosis, that it is some dangerous threat to Christ's deity.

I should have made myself more clear, and not spoken in such broad-sweeping terms, and I apologize for that.

Apology accepted-of what exactly did Christ emptied Himself from?

 

[Diserner]

Apology accepted-of what exactly did Christ emptied Himself from?

The USE (not possession) of his divine attributes.

Use and possession need to be sharply distinct.

 

[civic]

The Father withholds His anger/wrath towards sin/sinners. He shows mercy, grace, forgiveness etc...... So not using an attribute or withholding/refraining does not mean the Father is not acting as God. The same with Christ at His Incarnation.

 

[Complete]

You are absolutely free to believe what you want. I take no offense to the fact that God has granted us all a free will.

All I'm asking is if you could tell me which passage in the link does not line up with Jesus descending into Hades with the end result being His Resurrection. And in what way is 1 Pet 3:18-20 is not figurative to you, which I agree with. .

Hi @synergy,

I have read through the link now.

I believe that the Lord Jesus Christ died, and His body was placed in the grave (i.e., Hades, Sheol, the place of the dead). I do not believe that there is consciousness in death, so the Lord was as one that sleeps until He was quickened into life again by the Spirit, and rose from the dead. By the Spirit He then visited 'Tartarus', to herald to the spirits (or angelic beings) who are confined there, since before the flood for future judgment, news possibly of His victory over death and the grave (1 Pet. 3:18-20 & Jude 1:6), we are not told.

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[Complete]

'In this was manifested the love of God toward us,
because that God sent His only begotten Son into the world,
that we might live through Him.
Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us,
and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.
Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another.'
(1John 4:9-11)

 

[101G]

4. Problem Verses

a. John 5:19: “I can do nothing”, this is defined in context John 5:18, 23, 26, 30

b. John 14:28: “My father is greater than I”: greater in position not nature:Jo10:30

c. John 20:17: “my God” the same as Mat 27:46, Jesus is the God John 20:27-28

d. Luke 2:52: Jesus increased in wisdom; defined in Luke 2:40, 49 and Prov 3:1-6

e. He had the spirit of God, of course he had wisdom – Isa 11:1-5

f. Mark 13:32: no man knows; Jesus was a man (also God); compare to 1 Cor 2:2

g. Col 1:15: he was the firstborn, that is, from the dead not in creation – Col 1:18

h. “How could God die?” He was a man, “How can we worship him?” He was God

i. The problems are solved when we understand that one Jesus had two natures.

Greeting agent "J". all these can be answered in the Lord Jesus, as the ECHD of himself as the LAST, being the ARM of God. and to understand the "ARM" of God read 2 Chronicles 32:8 to understand, (God in flesh, how he is,
a. John 5:19: “I can do nothing”, this is defined in context John 5:18, 23, 26, 30
b. John 14:28: “My father is greater than I”: greater in position not nature:Jo10:30
c. John 20:17: “my God” the same as Mat 27:46, Jesus is the God John 20:27-28

and as that "ARM of FLESH", it answers yours,
d. Luke 2:52: Jesus increased in wisdom; defined in Luke 2:40, 49 and Prov 3:1-6
e. He had the spirit of God, of course he had wisdom – Isa 11:1-5
f. Mark 13:32: no man knows; Jesus was a man (also God); compare to 1 Cor 2:2
g. Col 1:15: he was the firstborn, that is, from the dead not in creation – Col 1:18
h. “How could God die?” He was a man, “How can we worship him?” He was God
i. The problems are solved when we understand that one Jesus had two natures.

if you have any problem in understanding just ask 101G to help you out... ok.
be blessed.

101G.

 

[Diserner]

The Father withholds His anger/wrath towards sin/sinners. He shows mercy, grace, forgiveness etc...... So not using an attribute or withholding/refraining does not mean the Father is not acting as God. The same with Christ at His Incarnation.

I would see this example a little differently.

I actually would describe it as a hierarchy of attributes and their desires.

A more precise way to describe this would be that the attribute of mercy supersedes or overcomes the attribute of wrath towards sin.

In the case of Christ, we are not saying one attribute supersedes another, nor even that it requires an external cause to manifest.

Rather, we are saying that God himself can just turn it off completely at his own will and discretion.

God does not ever "turn off" his attribute of wrath towards sin.

 

[civic]

I would see this example a little differently.

I actually would describe it as a hierarchy of attributes and their desires.

A more precise way to describe this would be that the attribute of mercy supersedes or overcomes the attribute of wrath towards sin.

In the case of Christ, we are not saying one attribute supersedes another, nor even that it requires an external cause to manifest.

Rather, we are saying that God himself can just turn it off completely at his own will and discretion.

God does not ever "turn off" his attribute of wrath towards sin.

We can have a discussion on Gods innate attributes vs His attributes/actions/interactions with His creation. We must not conflate them. They are different and distinct. Wrath has to do with the fall, not who God is in His character. God has no wrath within The Father, Son and Holy Spirit. He is love within His being, not wrath.

 

[Johann]

The USE (not possession) of his divine attributes.

Use and possession need to be sharply distinct.

This is incorrect-The USE-not POSSESSION of His divine attributes brother-are you saying Jesus divested Himself of His divine attributes? Maybe I am reading it wrong?

Emptied himself. This emptying is the same as the abasement, as to which we shall see afterwards. The expression, however, is used, ευμφατικωτέρως, (more emphatically,) to mean, — being brought to nothing. Christ, indeed, could not divest himself of Godhead; but he kept it concealed for a time, that it might not be seen, under the weakness of the flesh. Hence he laid aside his glory in the view of men, not by lessening it, but by concealing it.

Php 2:7 ἀλλὰ alla|G235|Conj|but ἑαυτὸν heauton|G1438|RefPro-AM3S|Himself ἐκένωσεν ekenōsen|G2758|V-AIA-3S|emptied, μορφὴν morphēn|G3444|N-AFS|[the] form δούλου doulou|G1401|N-GMS|of a servant λαβών, labōn|G2983|V-APA-NMS|having taken, ἐν en|G1722|Prep|in ὁμοιώματι homoiōmati|G3667|N-DNS|[the] likeness ἀνθρώπων anthrōpōn|G444|N-GMP|of men γενόμενος· genomenos|G1096|V-APM-NMS|having been made.

Here I will leave it to the "scholars" that the emptying is abasement"

(1.) When Christ humbled himself, he did not leave, he did not relinquish, he did not forego, his divine nature. He did not cease to be God when be became man. The foundation of it lay here; He was "in the form of God, and thought it not robbery to be equal with God," Phil. 2:6. He was "in the form of God." God hath no innate form but his nature, his being, his essence; and therefore to be "in the form of God" is to be participant of the nature, essence, and being of God. What follows thereon? He "thought it not robbery to be equal with God" the Father, in dignity, power, and authority. Because he was "in the form of God," partaking of the divine essence, therefore he was "equal with God," in dignity, power, and authority: which nothing could give him but only his being in the form of God; for though there is an order in the persons of the Trinity, there is no distinction or inequality in the nature of God. Every one who is partaker of that nature is equal in that nature, in dignity, power, and authority. This was the state of Christ. He had the same nature with God the Father, he was "in the form of God;" and had the same dignity, authority, and power,—"equal with God." Here is the "terminus a quo." This the apostle states. He "took upon him the form of a servant." Ἐκκένωσε, he did "empty himself, he did humble himself, and took upon him the form of a servant" When? While he was God; when he abode "in the form of God," and was "equal with God," then he "took upon him the form of a servant." This is that glorious condescension of Christ, which is the greatest of all gospel mysteries, which is the life and soul of the church. He that is God can no more cease to be God, by any act of his own, or act upon him, than he that is not God can become God by any act of his own, or any act upon him. Christ could not cease to be God,—no more than a worm can make itself God. We say, Christ, being God, was made man for our sakes. The Socinians say, that, being a man, he was made a god for his own sake; he was made equal unto God, in the same authority, but never "in the form of God." In brief, we say, "The Word was made flesh,"—that is, had glorious authority and power given him in this nature. But Jesus Christ did not forego his divine nature; that he could not do. The apostle speaks that with as much confidence as that God cannot cease to be God.

The use should be, to raise up our hearts into the admiration of the great condescension of Christ in thus humbling and emptying himself for our sakes. But I cannot enlarge upon this. The prophet tells us, Isa. 8:14 (which is a prophecy of Christ), "And he shall he for a sanctuary; but for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence to both the houses of Israel; for a gin and for a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem."

Peter expounds this place, 1 Epist. 2:6–8. He shall be "a sanctuary" unto them who believe, to them who are oppressed; but "a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word."

Both these is our Lord Jesus Christ in a peculiar manner, by this self-emptying, by this self-humiliation; he is "a sanctuary," and he is "a stone of stumbling."

Herein Christ is principally a sanctuary unto them who do believe. What do men look for in a sanctuary? Freedom from danger, deliverance out of trouble, and a supply of all their wants. All these are proposed in this self-humiliation of Jesus Christ, if we could by faith make him our sanctuary,—if we could by faith, as we ought, go unto him for relief. If we go unto any one for relief, we question but two things,—his will and his power. If he be willing and if he be able, you have no ground to question but you shall have relief. I know how it is with us all. We have all wants, we have all temptations, we have all fears, we have all inward conflicts and perplexities, more or less; and we all secretly groan to be delivered from all those things.


But herein Christ is also "a stumbling-block and a rock of offence" unto the rest of the world. This they stumbled at of old, and this is that which the world continues yet to do. Some asserted Jesus Christ only to be a prophet come out from God. This the Mohammedans will all comply with; and the Jews were well enough content that John the Baptist should be a prophet, but Christ should be none, because he made himself equal unto God. There they stumbled and fell. And at this day great offence is taken in the world at this divine person of Christ and his self-humiliation. The truth is, "All flesh hath corrupted his way." All the world begins to grow weary of the religion which they profess, and to question whether there be any thing of supernatural revelation.

God gave us a natural religion at first; we lost it; and God raised it by supernatural revelation, which continued till the coming of Christ Then he put an end unto all supernatural revelation. Then the devil was at a loss, and he raised a scandal upon supernatural revelation. The world is grown weary of it, and would return unto a natural religion, having lost the power of all supernatural revelation. It makes way for atheism. They believe nothing the Scripture expresses of gospel mysteries; and this makes way for the disbelief of the Trinity and incarnation of the Son of God. They follow the conduct of men influencing them unto their own secular advantage. But let us hold this fast, because the world grows weary of it. Let this corner-stone be laid hold of by us for a foundation, and it will prove our lift; and safety.

Peace.
Johann.

 

[Diserner]

This is incorrect-The USE-not POSSESSION of His divine attributes brother-are you saying Jesus divested Himself of His divine attributes? Maybe I am reading it wrong?

I have a lot of posts on Functional Kenosis for a more thorough explanation.

We are not ever in any way saying that the Son gives up possession of attributes.

We are saying the Son gives up the use of the attributes.

This is often described as "veiling" the attributes, or similar.