Summer in the Systematics – Christology (Part 4): The Natures of Christ

Transcript

JRS 44
06/23/2024
Summer in the Systematics, Christology Part 4 “The Natures of Christ”
Selected Scriptures
Jesse Randolph

There’s a story that’s out there about Daniel Webster, the nineteenth century American statesman who once was dining in Boston with several eminent literary figures. And as the conversation turned to Christianity, Webster, who was a committed Christian, confessed his belief in Jesus Christ and in the Lord’s atoning work. There was a Unitarian minister at the table with Webster and the Unitarian minister asked him, “Mr. Webster, can you comprehend how Jesus Christ could be both God and Man? And Webster replied this way. “No sir, I cannot understand it, and I would be ashamed to acknowledge Christ as my Savior if I could comprehend it. He could be no greater than myself, and such is my conviction of accountability to God, my sense of sinfulness before Him, and my knowledge of my own incapacity to recover myself, that I feel I need a superhuman Savior.” That’s very much in line with the lyrics we were just singing. Now we all need a super human Savior. One who is not only human as we saw last week, but is divine.

And welcome back to Summer in the Systematics. Our summer-long study of Systematic Theology and specifically Christology, the doctrine of Christ.

As has already been announced, tonight, our subject of study is The Natures Of Christ. The word “Natures” there is intentionally plural because Jesus Christ our Lord has two natures. Just as we saw two weeks ago, Jesus is fully God. He was and always has been one of the three eternal members, persons, of the Trinity. And Jesus, as we saw last week is fully human. He walked as we walked. Albeit perfectly. He had actual hands and feet which were pierced. He shed real tears. He wasn’t a shadow or a phantasm. He didn’t merely “appear” to be human as the various false teachers would teach back in the day. He was actually human.

But how? How can it be said that Jesus Christ, the second Person of the Trinity is both God and Man? How is it possible to have Him have two separate natures, two different natures simultaneously? For lack of a better phrase, how does this work? Well, that’s what we’re going to be looking at tonight as we take on this admittedly-complex topic.

You have five lines of blanks on your worksheets there. And you’re going to see that they’re two blanks on each line, separated by the word “AND.” I’ve given you the word AND but you fill in the rest of the blanks. So you have 10 blanks in total. Our first 2 for line one would be PERSONHOOD AND NATURE I’ll give you these upfront so you can lock in on the content as we go. PERSONHOOD AND NATURE would be number one. All give you more time for number 2. That would be NESTORIANISM AND EUTYCHIANISM. I’m sure you are looking forward to learning about that tonight. I’ll come back to it don’t worry. Third is: COUNCILS AND CREEDS. Fourth is: DEITY AND HUMANITY. They seem like Jeopardy categories don’t they? And then fifth would be REVELATION AND MYSTERY. I’ll show you to these again. PERSONHOOD AND NATURE. NESTORIANISM AND EUTYCHIANISM. COUNCILS AND CREEDS. DEITY AND HUMANITY. REVELATION AND MYSTERY.

All right with that let’s start with point one heading one, PERSONHOOD AND NATURE. Now, I have to warn you that what we are going to be covering tonight is some pretty complex material. Some pretty difficult material. But I will do my best, with God’s help, to lay it out for you and hopefully provide more clarity than confusion. As we’ve seen over the last two Sunday evenings, the Bible teaches clearly that Jesus was, is both perfectly God and perfectly man. And our task for tonight is to come to a clearer understanding of how. Jesus, though one Person, possesses two natures in that one Person. How can it be said that He was both God and man in one person.

Well we first need to first address that question by defining terms. Specifically, what do we mean when we say that Jesus had a human nature? And what do we mean when we say that Jesus has a divine nature? What is a “nature” to begin with? Well, a “nature” is the sum total of the essential qualities of a thing or a person. The sum total of the essential qualities of a thing or a person. Here’s how Rolland McCune says it much more artfully than I just did. A nature “is that which makes something what it is.” Pretty simple. The nature is that which makes something what it is. Now the English word that we have for “nature” comes from the Latin “natura.” Which is tied in to the Greek word “physis.” Which is a word that we see all over the New Testament. To describe the essence of what something or someone is. For instance, Romans 2:14. Says “when Gentiles who do not have the Law naturally (that’s our word there) do the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves.” So Gentiles, by nature, are a “law to themselves.” Or Galatians 4:8. “when you did not know God, you were slaves to those which by nature are no gods.” So idols, by nature, are “no gods.” Ephesians 2:3 says we were, speaks of how we “formerly conducted ourselves in the lusts of our flesh, doing the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath.” So unbelievers by nature are children of wrath. And then 2 Peter 1:4 says “For by these He has granted to us His precious and magnificent promises, so that by them you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world by lust.” So believers, by contrast to the “children of wrath” of Ephesians 2:3, are partakers of “the divine nature.” So “nature,” in other words, is essential. Meaning, it relates to the essence. It points to who we are at our core. It speaks to our essential being. I am, by nature, a human. So are you. God is, by His nature, divine. Angels are, by their nature, angelic.

Now, in our study of theology, that word, “nature” is used to refer to either divine or human elements in the person of Christ. It points to the divine attributes He possesses. And the human attributes He possesses. Jesus, in that sense, has two natures. He has a divine nature. And He has a human nature. His divine nature includes all that belongs to His deity. While His human nature includes all that belongs to His humanity. Here’s a helpful quote from Robert Lightner on this subject. He says “The Son of God, who was one in person and nature (divine), became two in nature (divine and human) while remaining one in person through his incarnation.” Now we’re going to go through the incarnation in a later Sunday evening message.

So that’s a bit about that term “nature.” Now, we need to consider another term. The other term that I mentioned at the beginning which is “person.” Or “personality.” Or “personhood.” And we need to cover that because those terms “nature” and “person” are not synonymous. Persons have natures. But personhood involves more than a nature. I have a nature and I have personality. Some might say. Maybe some would object. But it would be right to say I have personhood. I have a nature and I have personhood. So do you as a human being. God, though divine in nature, is personal. He has the attributes of personhood. He reveals Himself as one who has intellect and emotion and will. So, there’s this distinction between one’s nature. One’s essence. And one being a person. God is a person with a divine nature. We are persons with human natures. And then applying these truths again to Christ. Robert Lightner is helpful. He says “The eternal Son of God did not join himself with a human person, it must be remembered, but with a human nature.” In other words Christ was always a person. He’s an eternal Person. One of the three eternal Persons of the Triune Godhead. And as we’re going to see next, He is singular in His Personhood. He’s not 2 persons He’s one.

And the Scriptural evidence for the single personhood the unitary personhood of Christ abounds. He always spoke of Himself as one. He never distinguished Himself as a divine person or as being different than a divine person or being different than a human person. What I mean to say is He never revealed Himself as being two Persons. He’s one. John 8:18. He says “I am He who bears witness about Myself, and the Father who sent Me bears witness about Me.” John 8:23 “And He was saying to them, ‘You are from below, I am from above. You are of this world, I am not of this world.’” John 16:7 “I tell you the truth, it is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Advocate will not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you.” I’ve highlighted these Scriptures because they all highlight that singular first-person “I” statement that Christ used to reveal Himself to show among other things that He was a singular person. He wasn’t two persons. He was one. You’ll see why that makes sense and why that’s important later. One person, with two natures.

Now we see something similar in these next passages. Which show aspects of Christ’s two natures being united to His one Person. For instance, Romans 1:3-4 says, speaks of His Son, God’s Son “who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh, who was designated as the Son of God in power.” This picks up both His human nature “according to the flesh.” And a divine nature “Son of God” being united in one Person. He is “His Son.” Or consider Galatians 4:4. “But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman” It’s the same thing, the same idea here. There is both a human nature , he was“born of a woman.” The divine nature “God sent forth His Son.” And it’s unified, there’s unity in a single Person of Christ. Then there’s this key passage Philippians 2 the great kenosis passage where Christ Jesus a singular Person here is spoken of as being “in the form of God.” It also He takes “the form of a slave.” The references in this one person to both His deity and His humanity.

So we speak of God being Triune. One God, one essence, one divine essence three Persons. And we speak of Christ, as one of those three Persons. And He’s one of those 3 persons who has two natures. He’s the only member of the Godhead that has 2 natures. The key point though is to be careful in distinguishing, this is our major takeaway for this first heading. We have to be careful to distinguish what we mean by the person of Christ. And the natures of Christ. In person, He is one. And in that one Person, He has two natures.

That takes us to our second major heading. And I’m going to correct spelling on this later. As you walk out of the south lobby. NESTORIANISM AND EUTYCHIANISM. Under this heading we’re going to look at two sets of errors which, especially early in its history pervaded the church on this matter of the natures of Christ. First, is Nestorianism. Nestorius was the Archbishop of Constantinople in the early 400s. And though Nestorianism, named after Nestorius, recognized the two natures of Christ. One human, one divine. Nestorians ultimately resolved the issue of Christ having two natures in one Person what is known as the Theanthropic Person of Christ by dividing Christ into two Persons. Nestorians, in other words rejected the idea that Christ existed with two natures in one Person. Instead, they held that He had two natures in two persons. So while Nestorians rightly recognized that He had these two natures it wrongly denied the union of those two natures in a singular Person. I appreciate this illustration of Nestorianism by Bruce Demarest. He says “The idea is that of a play horse, where a cloth painted like a horse is draped over two people. In outward appearance the horse appears to be one, but in reality it is two.” It’s a colorful way of illustrating what historians taught. Well, Nestorius’ enemy back in the 4th century was Cyril of Alexandria. Who convinced the early church, at the Council of Ephesus in 431 A.D. that Nestorius was a heretic. Because he was as he says here in “every way declaring two sons and dividing the one Lord Jesus Christ.” Believe it or not despite Nestorianism being declared a heresy in 431. It actually still lives on today. There are parts of this teaching that exists in the south part of india even now.

Here’s our other false teaching that we want to cover tonight. That would be Eutychianism This was not name after Eutychus. The guy that fell asleep during Paul’s sermon in Acts chapter 20. Rather, this was named after a monk from Constantinople named Eutyches. And Eutychianism was actually a reaction against Nestorianism. And it did so by teaching that there was only one nature in Christ. Which was called, here’s another fun word, Monophysitism. Monophysitism. This is the teaching that yes He is one person but He is only one nature. Not 2 natures. Now according to this teaching Christ’s divine nature was not fully divine. Nor was His human nature fully human. And what they did then is they mixed together the 2 incomplete natures making it one. It’s a “commingled” nature idea. And they made it all kind of one blended mess. Here are the words of Eutyches on this very topic. He says “I admit that our Lord was of two natures before the union, (before the hypostatic union. Before the incarnation. But after the union, one nature, that’s Monophysitism not two. ” Well, Eutychianism was condemned as heretical at the Council of Chalcedon in 451 A.D.

So review time. Nestorianism wrongly divided Christ into two persons. Whereas Eutychianism wrongly declared that Christ had only one nature. Orthodox Christianity, lower case o, as we’re going to see, would say the opposite. That Christ was not two persons. But One. And Christ did not have a singular nature. But two.

And that takes us to our third major heading here this evening. COUNCILS AND CREEDS. In response to the heretical teachings that we just went over from the Nestorians and the Eutychians. The church eventually reexamined its beliefs in light of Scripture at the Council of Chalcedon in 451 A.D. And this Council was made up of about 650 bishops at the time. Chalcedon was close in proximity to Constantinople. And they met to discuss this matter of the union of the human and the divine in the Person of Christ. And the Creed that came out of this Council, called the Chalcedonian Creed. What they did in this Creed was first they re-stated their commitment to Nicene orthodoxy. Specifically, their commitment to the deity of Christ and their commitment to Trinitarianism. Robust biblical trinitarianism. All of that was settled at Nicaea in 325 A.D. And then it was affirmed here at Chalcedon in 451 A.D. about a 125 years later.

But then they took on this other issue, the issue we are covering tonight. Which is the matter of Christ being one person in 2 natures. And this is what we know as the Chalcedonian Creed. I’m going to read the thing in its entirety and we’ll kind of work through it section by section. It say “Therefore, following the holy fathers, we all with one accord teach men to acknowledge one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, at once complete in Godhead and complete in manhood, truly God and truly man, consisting also of a reasonable soul and body; of one substance with the Father as regards his Godhead, and at the same time of one substance with us as regards his manhood; like us in all respects, apart from sin; as regards his Godhead, begotten of the Father before the ages, but yet as regards his manhood begotten, for us men and for our salvation, of Mary the Virgin, the God-bearer; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, (here’s the key here) recognized in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation; the distinction of natures being in no way annulled by the union, but rather the characteristics of each nature being preserved and coming together to form one person and subsistence, not as parted or separated into two persons, but one and the same Son and Only-begotten God the Word, Lord Jesus Christ; even as the prophets from earliest times spoke of him, and our Lord Jesus Christ himself taught us, and the creed of the fathers has handed down to us.”

Now what you see here in the Chalcedonian Creed, related to our topic of the natures of Christ are really four things. One you see this proper reference to Christ’s deity. He is “of one substance (it says) with the Father as regards his Godhead.” He’s God in otherwords. Second, is a reference to His humanity. This is just tracking with what we’ve studied so far in this summer series. He is “at the same time of one substance with us as regards his manhood; like us in all respects, apart from sin.” Third, and this gets into what we’ll cover tonight. He’s “at once complete in Godhead and complete in manhood, truly God and truly man.” That sounded like the union of the divine and the human there. And then fourth, is this important and critical reference to the proper distinction of the two natures. He is “one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only begotten, recognized in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation; the distinction of natures being in no way annulled by the union, but rather the characteristics of each nature being preserved and coming together to form one person and subsistence, not as parted or separated into two persons, but one and the same Son and Only-begotten God the Word, Lord Jesus Christ.” You can hear some of the heresies that they were going after here. Both those that like NESTORIANISM and those like EUTYCHIANISM. But what the Chalcedonian Creed ultimately summarized is what has been known now for centuries as the “hypostatic union.” The union of the two natures of Christ in the one, theanthropic person of Christ. And as the Chalcedonian formulation tells us, in this union, the two natures of Christ are preserved. Without “confusion,” without “change,” without “division,” without “separation.”

Now you probably know it by now, that I’m not a big Creeds guy. I don’t think we often times need to go through them with all that much detail. They’re helpful. Helpful guardrails in different ways to make sure we aren’t steering too far away from what those who came before us held to especially these early days of church history. But there are some helpful summaries like Chalcedon and others like the Belgic Confession, that stand for this idea of the union of the 2 natures of Christ in the one person. The Belgic Confession. “We confess that He is Very God and Very Man.” I won’t show you the rest of the Belgic Confession. Or the Westminster Shorter Catechism. “He continueth to be God and man, in two distinct natures and one person forever.” That’s an orthodox teaching right there. Enough of that.

Let’s turn our pages over now as we head into our fourth major heading here this evening. And we’ll be spending most of our time here. Which is why you’ve been given a lot more space for point number 4 than you have for point number 5. So save room. Here’s point number 4. DEITY AND HUMANITY. Now, we’re with this one, getting really to the heart of our topic for this evening on the natures of Christ. As we consider the deity and humanity of Christ. There are a lot of moving parts to what I’m about to lay out here. And different theologians and Bible teachers lay them out in differently. But I think we need to start here, with The Indivisibility of the Person of Christ. This goes back to what we looked at earlier where we saw that Jesus is one person. Who has these two distinct and inseparable natures. And the temptation among theologians and philosophers has always been, we just saw it with this Nestorianism and Eutychianism to either divide His person or to confound (to mix up) His natures. That’s we got those 2 false teachings.

So, in working our way biblically and theologically and methodically through the subject of the two natures of the singular Christ. We first need to start with the fact that He is singular in His Person. Which then feeds into the corresponding truth, that His natures are indivisible. He’s not two persons with two natures. He is one person with two natures.

Let’s dig into some of the biblical evidences. And in doing so let’s begin with the fact that on the pages of Scripture. Christ always refers to Himself as an individual Person. He always speaks of Himself we covered this just a moment ago, in the singular. He never speaks of Himself in the plural would be another way of saying that. Here’s just one example. He says “I in them and You in Me.” As He prays to God the Father. Or another one in that same prayer, “so that the world may know that You sent Me, and loved them, even as You have loved Me.” Note those singular pronouns. “I.” “Me.” The point being indisputably that Christ here is referring to Himself as an individual person.

Not only that. The singularity of Christ’s personhood is also picked up by the fact that He distinguished Himself from others. He distinguished Himself from the Father. Like in John 8:18. “I am He who bears witness about Myself, and the Father who sent Me bears witness about Me.” So the Father and the Son are distinct in personhood. He also distinguished Himself, Christ did, from other persons. John 8:23. “And He was saying to them, ‘You are from below, I am from above. You are of this world, I am not of this world.’” So His human and divine natures, then are united in a single, indivisible Person.

Here’s another one. Though the Bible often ascribes human names to “the eternal Son of God.” And divine names to the “man Christ Jesus.” So there seems to be like this mixing of names on the pages of Scripture. Scripture never recognizes two persons. Rather, there’s always one indivisible person being represented. For example, the author of Hebrews spoke of “Jesus.” that’s a human name being the same “yesterday and today and forever.” That’s describing His eternality, His immutability which are traits of God. Likewise, Matthew spoke of the virgin who would give birth to a son emphasizing His humanity. Yet the child’s name, here we see, would be Immanuel. God with us. Which clearly is a reference to His deity. Here’s another one though we often in the gospel accounts see references to attributes of Christ’s 2 natures appearing together. They’re always applied to the One person. Like we see here in Luke 13. Jesus remember here, He casts out demons and performs other miracles. Those would be evidences of His deity. But He’s doing so on this journey to Jerusalem where He was going to die. It’s a statement about His humanity. “Just at that time some Pharisees approached, saying to Him, ‘Leave and go from here, for Herod wants to kill You.’ And He said to them, ‘Go and tell that fox, “Behold, I cast out demons and perform cures today and tomorrow, and on the third day I finish. (That’s all deity reference) Nevertheless I must journey on today and tomorrow and the next day, for it is not possible that a prophet would perish outside of Jerusalem.”’” Meaning I need to go to Jerusalem to die. In His humanity.

And all of this happened in the singular person of Christ. Here’s another example from Paul now in Acts 20. He’s here speaking to the elders of the church at Ephesus. And in doing so, He’s explaining how Christ purchased the church. That’s a reference to His deity. And He did so by what means? With His blood. Reference to His humanity. “Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.” And again, all of this happened in the singular person of Christ. 2 natures, One Person.

Another Pauline example comes from Philippians 2. Where Paul explains how Jesus Christ is God, and yet He became a servant. “Have this way of thinking in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, although existing in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, by taking the form of a slave, by being made in the likeness of men. Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.” This passage of course and we will get into this later when we speak of His incarnation and His life and His humility. He is speaking both to Christ deity of course, He’s in the form of God and His humanity. He took the form of a slave. And all of this (and this is the key here) occurred in the singular person of Christ.

Christ is our Advocate. John tells us in 1 John 2:1 and 2. It says “My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.” And as John does so, as he writes this we have to remember what he says in the remainder of his letter of 1 John like this in 1 John 4:2, where he’s assuming Christ’s humanity. “every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God.” But also in that same letter He is assuming that there’s understanding that people know that Jesus is not just perfectly human but He is God. “Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God.” And again all of this is centered around the singular person of Christ. I could keep going. Christ was asleep in the boat. That picks up on His human nature. But what happens when He wakes up in the boat? He calms the storm. That’s a reference to His divine nature. It’s all picked up here in Matthew 8. Note here as I read this, this highlighting of both the human and the divine. “behold, there arose a great storm on the sea, so that the boat was being covered with the waves; but Jesus Himself was sleeping. (very human of Him) And they came to Him and got Him up, saying, ‘Save us, Lord; we are perishing!’ And He said to them, ‘Why are you so cowardly, you men of little faith?’ Then He got up and rebuked the winds and the sea, (that’s a statement of deity) and it became perfectly calm.” And again this is all centered in the singular person of Christ.

Jesus became physically hungry and wanted figs from a nearby tree. We see that in Mark 11. “And on the next day, when they had left Bethany, He became hungry. And seeing at a distance a fig tree that had leaves, He went to see if perhaps He would find anything on it; and when He came to it, He found nothing but leaves, for it was not the season for figs.” We’ve all been there before. That’s like going to through the drive through and they don’t have what you order or the food that you wanted, or the coffee you ordered, that you wanted to purchase. It’s a very human indicator here right? But then look what comes next? He curses this tree into barrenness. “And He answered and said to it, ‘May no one ever eat fruit from you again!’” That’s not something you can I can do at Scooters. Right?

All of this happened in the singular person of Christ. Both the human and the divine. In the account of the woman at the well. Jesus stopped there in the first place because He was physically thirsty. An indication of His humanity. “Jesus, being wearied from His journey, was sitting thus by the well. It was about the sixth hour. A woman of Samaria came to draw water. Jesus said to her, ‘Give Me a drink.’” He’s thirsty. But at the same time He offered that very same woman He met there what? Living water of eternal life. John 4:13. “Jesus answered and said to her, ‘Everyone who drinks of this water will thirst again; but whoever drinks of the water that I will give him will never thirst—ever; but the water that I will give him will become in him a well of water springing up to eternal life.’” A testimony to His deity. And again centered upon the singular person of Christ. At the tomb of Lazarus, “Jesus wept.” At that same tomb, He asked that a stone be moved for Him. “Jesus being deeply moved within, came to the tomb. Now it was a cave, and a stone was lying against it.”" The next part says, Jesus said ‘Remove the stone.’” I missed that part. But the point is it’s a very human episode. But at the same time, He calls a dead man out of his grave. “when He had said these things, He cried out with a loud voice, ‘Lazarus, come forth.’” That’s about as divine as you can get.

In the heavenly court that convenes after the Rapture of the church. The person of Christ is the Lamb who was slain is pictured here as human. But He also is receiving dominion, blessing, honor, glory, and eternal reign. Revelation 5:13. “And every created thing which is in heaven and on the earth and under the earth and on the sea, and all things in them, I heard saying, ‘To Him who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb, be the blessing and the honor and the glory and the might forever and ever.’” And all of this again is centered around the singular person of Christ.

Now, this is where things, if this isn’t already confusing enough or complicated enough, this is where things can get extra complicated. And thrown out of whack. Because it’s common human nature, on our part, to want to say, “Jesus was acting purely in His human nature” when He did this. Or “Jesus was acting purely in His divine nature” when He did that. But we really have to check the Scriptures to see if we can make that case. Because I don’t think the Scriptures characterize our Lord’s being in that way. Now as we’ve seen from many of these different descriptions, the Scriptures don’t divide the activities of Jesus. Ascribing some purely to His human nature. And ascribing others purely to His divine nature. Rather, what the Scriptures teaches is that while in His actions, Jesus may have manifested one nature over the other at a particular time or particular circumstance. All of His actions were still those of that one person. That one theanthropic person. The one indivisible God-man who has two natures. Bruce Demarest again can say it much better than I. He says “Whatever may be affirmed of either nature may be affirmed of the one person.” Or Luther says “Often Christ is spoken of only according to the human nature, often only according to the divine nature, although what is said should be credited to both natures.” And I think that’s right as you go through Scriptures and what they teach as opposed to layering theological constructs or presuppositions on top of our reading of the Scriptures. It might be tempting to conclude that as our Lord lay asleep in the stern of the boat or as He wept at Lazarus’ tomb, His human nature prevailed. Or that He was operating only in His human nature. Or that when He stilled the raging storm, or walked across the sea, that the divine nature was dominant. Or that it was only His divine nature that was operating. But the problem with that is that is dividing Christ. And the fact is that the Scripture upholds one Lord Jesus Christ. Who is and was and will forever be, from this point on, God and man. He was and is one in Person. Whatever Jesus did, He did as the God-Man.

So we’ve looked at the fact that Christ, in His Person, is singular and indivisible. Now, we’re going to spend some more time on the fact now that He possesses two natures. And how those two natures relate to each other. Christ has a human and divine nature. And as we’ve seen already, groups like the Nestorians and the Eutychians. They denied either the undiminished deity of Christ, or the perfect humanity of Christ. And when they do so they put themselves outside the pale of orthodoxy. What we need to do is make sure we’re seeing what the Scriptures say to make sure we’re within those boundaries. Let’s start with this basic truth again. We’ll hit this over and over tonight. That Jesus has two natures. One divine. One human. Rolland McCune summarizes this nicely. He says “A nature is the sum total of all the essential qualities of a thing. It is that which makes something what it is. (that’s the quote I gave you earlier) Jesus in that sense had two natures, two complexes of attributes, one divine and one human.”

Now, we’ve already seen that Christ is singular in His Person. As the Second Person of the Trinity. And we’ve already noted from a couple of other different thought trails that we’ve gone down that Christ possesses two natures, one divine, one human. Now we want to spend more time analyzing, understanding how Christ’s two natures relate to each other. What is the relationship between His divine nature and His human nature? And that brings us to our next subtopic under heading number 4, The Hypostatic Union. This is probably one of the most difficult concepts to grasp in all of Christian theology. So we covered the virgin conception, Mary’s womb this morning. Why not cover the hypostatic union tonight? The term “hypostatic union” was first mentioned in those terms in a letter that Cyril of Alexandria wrote to our friend Nestorius, back in the late 300s A.D. And we’ll recall that the Chalcedonian Creed which we looked at earlier came later, in 451 A.D. And in that creed, the Chalcedonian Creed it stated the two “natures” of Christ. His divine nature. And His human nature. Were united without mixture without change without division without separation. That is the definition of the “hypostatic union.” And what that means is that the entire complex of attributes that are associated with Christ’s deity. And that entire complex of the attributes that are associated with Christ’s humanity have been maintained in Jesus Christ in this singular, theanthropic Person, at all times since His incarnation. He has two natures comprising one Person forever.

So if these two natures are perfectly united in the one person, what is the nature of this union? How do we describe it? How should we think about it? Well, as is true of any “mystery” human reasoning and human words ultimately fail us. And fail to explain the ultimately unexplainable. So what we have to do is chase down what the Scriptures say, and then allow those Scriptures to inform our thinking of this reality of this single Person of Christ possessing these two natures. And then we trust it’s true, because God’s timeless Word reveals it to be true.

For instance, in passages like these. The hypostatic union is revealed through the fact that both human and divine qualities and acts are ascribed to Christ under various names. With human qualities and characteristics being ascribed to Christ under His divine titles. “He will be great and He will be called the Son of the Most High.” We see a little bit of human and we see a little bit of divine there. 1 Corinthians 2:8 “if they had understood it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.” It would be another example of both natures being revealed there. Crucified in His flesh of course. But He’s the Lord of glory. He’s divine. There are also the Scriptures where divine characteristics and attributes are ascribed to Christ under His human names. So it’s the opposite. Like in Acts 17. ______________37:45 Paul there says “Therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now commanding men that everyone everywhere should repent, because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He determined, having furnished proof to all by raising Him from the dead.”

Another Scriptural evidence for the “hypostatic union” would be John’s prologue. The Person who was made flesh and who dwelt among us. John 1:14 Is the same “Word” who was with God. And who is God. John 1:1 And later in John’s Gospel, we learn that the very person who this same one who lived forever is also the same one who transformed water into wine in John 2. And then spoke to Nicodemus about being born again in John 3. And who washed disciples’ feet in John 13. There’s aspects of divine and human throughout.

That same sequence is found here in 2 Corinthians 8:9. Where we see that the very Lord who was rich in His preexistent state. Became poor in the incarnation. “For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though being rich, yet for your sake He became poor, so that you through His poverty might become rich.”

Paul highlights the truths pertaining to the hypostatic union at length in I have Romans 1 up here but also in Philippians 2. We already addressed it but where he said that the One who is existing eternally in the form of God made Himself nothing. He took the form of a servant. Submitted to the crucifixion and was exalted by God the Father. That’s Philippians 2. And then here in Romans 1, we see He was born of the seed of David according to the flesh, who was designated as the Son of God in power.” You see both humanity and divinity here. And note, here that Christ was born as a descendant of David. The seed of David according to the flesh. That’s the human nature and then He’s designated as the Son of God, that’s divine nature, in power. In Romans 9:5, we see a similar reference to both natures. “Christ according to the flesh, who is God over all.” Human and divine. And here’s the key and I’ve mentioned it a couple of times. I just want to make sure it gets nailed in. This links all that we’ve said so far. The two natures of Christ. The “hypostatic union.” Are anchored in this singular person of Christ. The “theanthropic person” of Christ.

And in the whole scope or the whole sweep of His eternal existence from His pre-existence to His humiliation, to His crucifixion, to His exaltation. It’s the same Person acting, and the Person being affected. Donald Macleod is helpful on this. He says “This means that whenever we look at the life of Christ and ask, Who did this? Who suffered this? Who said this? the answer is always the same. ‘The Son of God!’ We can never say, ‘The divine nature did this!’ or, ‘The human nature did this!’ We must say, ‘He did this. He, the Son of God!’ He was born, baptized, tempted, and transfigured. He beheld the city and wept over it. He agonized in Gethsemane. He was betrayed, arrested, and condemned. He was flogged, immolated, crucified, dead, and buried. He rose from the dead. He reigns. He will come again. He will judge the living and the dead. He was the blood shed, his the body broken, his the life poured out. He is our propitiation. He is our ransom-price. He is the revealer of God: and the revelation. He is our Savior and our salvation. In him God acts, speaks and suffers for our redemption. In him, God provides and even becomes the atonement which he demands.

Now by understanding it that way. That big picture statement here by Macleod, we can better understand those Scriptures which describe Jesus during His earthly ministry. Experiencing and demonstrating what can only be called divine power. Like here in John 6:51. It says “I am the living bread that came down from heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and also the bread which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh.” This text explains how Jesus could be the living bread that came down from heaven and the One who could impart eternal life. But at the same time we know cause the text tells us here that this “bread” was His flesh, speaking of His humanity, which He would give for the life of the world. Jesus, in His human nature, could experience all that’s described here. And He did, on the cross. But at the same time, because of the union of His human nature. And His infinite divine nature. His death, actually experienced in the flesh, would be of infinite merit and then the benefits of His atonement would be available to all.

It would be by means of this union. That the divine nature would be capable of experiencing some of the experiences that Jesus went through in His humanity, His human nature. Now it’s not necessarily the case that the divine nature actually partook of each of these experiences directly. However these experiences occurred in union with the human nature, in this singular person of Christ. For instance, we know that the divine nature is not capable of death. God cannot die despite what Niche said. But the divine nature experienced what it would have been like to go through death. Because of the hypostatic union, the theanthropic person of Christ, the singular person of Christ, went through those experiences.

It's this explanation that also explains the purported ignorance of Jesus that He expressed on certain occasions. For instance, like these concerning His second coming. “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone.” Now we know that the divine nature, being omniscient, is incapable of being ignorant, or forgetting, or learning. So whatever ignorance is revealed here, had to be predicated on this one person of Christ. The singular person of Christ having both this divine and this human nature. Shedd says it this way. “Christ’s knowledge was, and ever is, dependent upon the amount of information vouchsafed by the deity of His person.” In other words, the divine nature of Christ did not make this particular piece of information known to the human consciousness of Jesus.

Similarly, because of the reality of the hypostatic union of the two natures of Christ, Christ could “learn obedience.” As we see here in Hebrews 5:8. Learning obedience as in the implications of obedience. “Although He was a Son, He learned obedience from the things which He suffered.”

And in view of these truths of the hypostatic union, Jesus could “advance” as we see here in Luke 2:52, in wisdom, in stature, in favor with God and with men. And it’s by means of this hypostatic union that the “Lord of glory” we saw in 1 Corinthians 2:8 could be “crucified.” And that Christ through death here Hebrews 2:14 could render powerless him who had the power of death, that is, the devil.”

This just gives us a taste of some of the key issues. And the key passages. Supporting the reality of the hypostatic union and the two natures of Christ. And this I know is like deeply theological deep waters. I’m sure I will get objections at the south lobby tonight. That’s ok. But when we get to the life of Christ where we’ll also work through some of these and work through some of the mystery that’s involved.

But before we get to our next heading. Probably running out of room on point number 4. Sorry about that. I want to give you some of a taste of some of the key issues and the key passages. Well actually I’ve just given you those. But I want address a couple of misconceptions concerning the hypostatic union. First, would be this. The thought that the hypostatic union of Christ’s two natures in the one person, is comparable to a human marriage relationship. That doesn’t work. In a marriage, the two parties to that union though they become one flesh, we know, they are still two distinct persons. Christ, we’ve seen is not two distinct persons. He is one Person with 2 natures. Second, it’s also not true that the divine nature dwells in Christ the same way that Christ dwells in a believer. Because if that were the case, then he would be a man filled with God. And not God Himself. No as we’ve seen though there are two natures, there is but one person. And so complete is this union in this one person as John Walvoord mentions here. “Christ at the same moment has seemingly contradictory qualities. He can be weak and omnipotent, increasing in knowledge and omniscient, finite and infinite.”

Which ties into some of the examples we’ve just looked through. Where we’ve seen attributes of both Christ’s human and divine natures. Belonging to His single Person without mixing the natures or dividing the person. Practically speaking this concept of the hypostatic union is how we reconcile those passages which speak of Christ demonstrating some form of lack or weakness. With those passages that describe His omnipotence. It’s this doctrine that helps us recognize how to reconcile those passages that seemingly reveal Christ being ignorant with those which describe His omniscience. And it’s these passages that help us speak of Christ’s limitations on the one hand and at the same time Him being infinite as Walvoord’s notes. So the person offered living water but the Person also thirsted. The Person knew all things. Yet the Person doesn’t know the day and the hour. Both are true, because both are revealed by God in His Word. And we’re charged to accept both as a matter of faith.

That brings us to our next subheading. And yes we’re still under number 4. The Necessity of the Hypostatic Union. So far we’ve covered more on the “what.” Next we’re going to cover more of the “why.” The Necessity of the Hypostatic Union. And the first one to mention is that hypostatic union. The union of His divine and human natures is Necessary For His (I’ll call it) Mediatorial Ministry. The union of the two natures in the one person of Jesus Christ is necessary for Him to be the mediator between God and man. We think back to Job in chapter 9. It says “For He is not a man as I am that I may answer Him, that we may go to court for judgment together. (this is Job speaking of Yahweh) There is no adjudicator between us, Who may lay his hand upon us both.” He’s articulating here man’s need for a mediator between God and mankind.

Well in the Hebrews author notes, in detail here how Job’s yearnings back in Job 9 were fulfilled in Jesus Christ. “Therefore, since the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of the same, that through death He might render powerless him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, and might free those who through fear of death were subject to slavery all their lives.” And of course Paul, in 1 Timothy says “For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” Robert Letham is helpful here. He says “If He were not one integrated person but instead some kind of schizoid, God could in no sense be said to have identified Himself with us in our suffering. We would instead by left with a hollow Savior and a God aloof and detached from us in our greatest need.” So there’s a mediatorial component to this.

Not only that. The hypostatic union of the divine and human in the One Person of Christ, is necessary for the accomplishment of redemption, salvation from sin. If Christ were less-than-human, He could not be the Savior for all human beings. And if He was less-than-divine, He wouldn’t be an authentic revelation of God. The revelation 1:18 or the John 1:18 statement that He explained God. He exegeted God. What He is, then, as the God-Man. The singular Person of Christ. With two divine natures. Is determinative of what He can do. He’s the redeemer. Loraine Boettner, who we would disagree with him on a lot of things but I agree with him on this. “It is necessary that the Redeemer of mankind should be both human and divine. It was necessary that He be human if He was really to take man’s place and suffer and die. For Deity as such was not capable for that. And it was necessary that He should be Divine if His suffering and death were to have infinite value.” In other words human sin could only be atoned for by a sinless human who was also completely and totally divine.

Next subheading. Still under heading 4 is this. The Permanence of the Hypostatic Union Meaning the union of Christ’s divine and human natures began at the conception of Jesus in Mary’s womb, what we studied this morning. And it permanently holds. Even though He experienced physical death on the cross. Rolland McCune says it this way. “The theanthropic person began with the Holy Spirit effecting the virgin conception. The hypostatic bond that holds the two natures together will forever hold.” So did Christ have a human nature before the incarnation? The answer is no. But He had as of the incarnation and going forward forever. Colossians 2:9. “in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells bodily.” That’s not a past-tense statement. That’s a present-tense statement. I’m going to skip these 2 for time sake. But we do see this in other places as well. The Bible teaches that Christ physically and presently is seated at the right hand of the Father today, from which He will return to earth as the Son of Man. That’s in Matthew 26. The Bible teaches that Jesus appeared in visible body form following His resurrection. Also at His ascension. Acts 1:9 “And after He had said these things, He was lifted up (that’s a bodily reference) while they were looking on, and a cloud received Him out of their sight.” All that to say, this hypostatic union, of Christ’s divine and human natures began at His incarnation and will exist into perpetuity.

One more under this heading. The Self-Consciousness and Wills of Christ. Goodness I’m running late. There is considerable debate over whether Christ had though He had 2 natures whether He had 1 or 2 wills. And also, whether He had singular or dual consciousness as a person with 2 natures. Let’s take that second one first. This idea of consciousness. The self-consciousness of Christ. Did He have a singular self consciousness or a dual self consciousness? Well the Scripture teaches a dual self consciousness. For instance, He was conscious of Himself as a human being. That’s why He would say things like, “I am thirsty.” But He was also conscious of His self as a divine being. I and the Father are One. He was always aware of both His deity as well as His humanity.

How about the matter of 2 wills? Did He have one or two wills? At the Council of Chalcedon, in 451, we saw this earlier. We saw that Christ had those two natures united in one person. Over the next one hundred fifty years, there was this group called the Monothelites. Who maintained that though Christ had two natures, He had only one will. That’s what that word means. And that was declared heresy at the Council of Constantinople in 680. To say that Christ had 2 natures but one will was declared heretical at this council.

So we’re not gonna go with that. We’re going to instead note what the Scriptures say. Again its not about councils and what they say, it’s about what the Scriptures say. And we do see there are 2 wills revealed on the pages of Scripture. It was in His human will that we see here that He desired in some sense to avoid going to the cross. “My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me; yet not as I will, but as You will.” At the same time it was in His divine will to always do the Father’s will as we see here in Hebrews 10:8-9. And of course that will always be fully accomplished.

We’re almost done. I hope I haven’t lost too many of you. Here’s number 5. Finally. Mercifully. Heading number 5. REVELATION AND MYSTERY. Now clearly, and I have alluded to this a couple times already. The relation of the human and divine natures in the singular person of Christ, just like this morning’s message, and the conception of Jesus in the virgin’s womb is a mystery. And the apostle Paul, under the guidance of the Spirit said this of Christ. The one singular in person and dual in nature. He said and by common confession great is the mystery of godliness. He who is manifested in the flesh. Look at the link between the mystery of godliness being connected to Jesus being manifested in the flesh. God being revealed in the flesh.

Like the Trinity. Like the virgin conception. Like the relationship between divine sovereignty and human responsibility. We have no comparisons to make. We have no analogies to draw. In attempting to express this union of these two natures in the single Person of Christ. This is an area of deep mystery. I mean ask the man on the street. How can a single person have 2 natures and he’ll look at you like you have 2 heads. Well if you’re feeling confused and perplexed about all that we’ve learned tonight and I hope you’re not. I hope you’re encouraged. Hope your head hurts in a good way. Take comfort from these words, from a very intelligent man. B.B. Warfield, seminary professor at Princeton back when it was still decent Princeton. He said “We can never hope to comprehend how the infinite God and finite humanity can be united in one single person; (and that’s really the heart of it) and it is very easy to go fatally astray in attempting to explain the interactions in the unitary person of natures so diverse from one another.” That’s right. That’s why I’ve tried to take it back to the Scriptures tonight and say hey both. It’s one person who’s described admittedly He has 2 natures.

Here’s Martin Luther. “Reason cannot comprehend this. But we believe it; and this is also the testimony of Scripture: that Christ is true God and that He also became a man.” So you have the study of the person of Christ, is very difficult and yes it is sometimes headache inducing as we go through that “blessed despair” that we’ve talked about a couple of summers ago. But it is totally worth it. Popping a couple of Advil is totally worth it. The feeling of those wrinkles embedding in your forehead as you squint and wonder what I am saying up here. It’s totally worth it. The furrowed brow is worth it. As you try to wrap your mind around it, it’s all worth it. These are difficult concepts to understand. But our charge is not to try to figure all this out immediately on the back of a napkin, or on the drive home tonight. So that we can diagram it perfectly or explain it brilliantly. Our charge is to accept what Scripture has revealed about our Savior. The God-Man. One Person. 2 natures. And accept it by faith. 2 more quotes and then we’re done. Demarest again says “Wherever God and man meet, there is mystery. We should accept the doctrine of the unique God-man in the same way we accept the Trinity. By faith in God’s Word, the Bible.” And then Clarence Macartney gets the final word. It says “If God was in Christ, and if He loved me and gave Himself for me, then all problems are solved and all wants are satisfied.” That’s about the best way I can think to end our time together this evening. Let’s pray.

Lord thank you for this time together tonight. In your Word which has been sort of like biblical buckshot all over again. God thank you for the patience of everyone here. I know this is a deep topic. It’s a perilous topic. It’s a topic that sometimes if we’re not thinking a bit right mindedly we can wonder why does this matter. But this does matter. This is you revealing yourself. Revealing the person of your Son who existed and exists in 2 natures according to your perfect will and wisdom. And its those who are called to worship in spirit and in truth, we should labor to figure this out. And we should dig deep to figure out what is this all about. But the same time we should sit back in awe and wonder at the mystery of this and worship you for who you are. God thank you for a wonderful day of worship. Thank you for the songs that we were able to sing. And thank you for the precious children who were singing their hearts out this morning. Thank you for the time that we got to fellowship with one another. Thank you for the time in the Word this morning in Luke and the time this evening in this deeper study. Thank you for the privilege that we have to be children of God. To be attached to a local church that loves you and loves your Word. God I pray we would always be that church. And seek and strive to bring You glory in all that we do. In Jesus name we pray. Amen.