Hypostatic Union
This important theological concept is a second term, in addition to the Trinity, that is not mentioned in scripture. However, the concept is broadly described and is based in the New Testament describing Jesus Christ as being both God and man.
Christian orthodoxy accordingly teaches that Christ is both all man and all God, joined together, being of one essence but two distinct wills. This is called the hypostatic union. The word hypostatic comes from the Greek word ὑπόστασις (Hupostasis) and is defined by Thayer in part as ‘substance, real being, the substantial quality, nature, of a person or thing’.
Important verses indicating the existence of the hypostatic union are the following:
Son of man (the representative man) - There are numerous references to Christ calling Himself son of man in the gospels as it was his favorite reference to Himself - Matthew 16:27-28; John 1:51; John 6:62
Development of the concept
In the first 300 years after Christ, Christianity was illegal in the Roman Empire. Only after the edict of Milan, issued in 313 by Constantine, the first Christian emperor, did Christianity became recognized by the empire. At that time Christian leaders finally were able to congregate to discuss difficult theological issues generated during the first few centuries of Christian history.
These discussions occurred, most importantly, at the first seven ecumenical councils of the church between 325 and 787 AD. The first council was in Nicaea and confirmed Christ is God and of one substance with the Father; being Himself both fully God and man. This theology was stated in the Nicene Creed often repeated still, or it's derivative, in churches today.
However, following the confirmation of Christ’s deity and humanity the issue arose over the manner both these natures interacted within Christ. Therefore, the 3rd, 4th and 5th ecumenical councils dealt primarily with this issue and created statements over Christ and His deity and humanity.
The ecumenical councils examined three basic concepts of the union of Christ’s deity and humanity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_seven_ecumenical_councils):
One essence, one will - This hypothesis was proposed by the Oriental churches represented today by Armenian, Syrian, and Egyptian Coptic fellowships. They claimed that Christ was of one essence and one will, shared between his humanity and deity. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monophysitism
Two essences and wills - This theory was proposed by the Nestorius, Patriarch of Constantinople from 428 to 431, as a reaction to the Oriental churches’ theology. It indicated that Christ was of two distinct essences and possessed two disparate wills. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestorianism
One essence and two wills - This was championed by the church councils and indicated that Christ humanity and deity were composed of one essence but there were two distinct wills.
In summary, it is key for a Christian to understand that Christ was both fully man and fully God. This union shows the importance of the virgin birth when Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit and so was born of man but also is God.
Christ had to be God to provide a perfect sacrifice to satisfy the Father’s justice in demanding the payment for our sins. In contrast, Christ also had to be man, to take our deserved punishment on the cross, so that we could be forgiven and saved by faith.
Thanks for joining us! Come back next week as we begin an exciting discussion about Christian life.
William C. Stewart, MD
Email - info@teleiosresearch.com
Website - http://teleiosresearch.com/
Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/TeleiosResearch
Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/TeleiosResearch
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/c/TeleiosVideos/
Disclaimer - This blog and its content are provided only as information and are intended for visitors 18 and older. No content on the website should be taken as advice or recommendation to any personal or institutional situation. The views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily either shared or endorsed by Teleios. Both the blog and the contents are subject to change at any time without notice. Although I endeavor to ensure that the blog and the content are current and accurate, it may contain errors. I do not represent that the blog or the content is current, accurate or complete, or appropriate for your specific requirements. I do not accept any liability from any person for the blog, the content or any other information (or the use of such information) I provide. I do not have a seminary degree, but I have trained myself in the scriptures to teach and provide this information. For any specific question, I suggest you contact experts in that field and or do your own research into the scriptures.
No comments:
Post a Comment