I have a medical background, and the first time I heard mention of a HYPOstatic Union, my brain immediately thought of injections. Of course, this is actually the theological term for the dual nature of Christ, God and Man. This is one of the most glossed-over and most important doctrines of Christianity. I say “glossed over” because it rarely is the subject of Sunday School or an in-depth preaching series. I say important doctrines, because either Christ is who He and the Bible declare, human and divine, or Christianity is a farce. Without Christ’s human nature, we have no one worthy of Propitiation for our sins. Without His Divine Nature, there is no Mediator at the right hand of the Father
The issue, of course, is our limited (finite) minds. It is nearly impossible to wrap one’s head around the fact that our God is a trinitarian God (three beings in one), then you add that one of those three is also human, and
Thankfully, there are many men far smarter than I whom we can study alongside in our Bibles. I have provided a small sample of these below.
DEFINITIONS
hypostasis, hypostatic union. Hypostasis is a Greek noun first used by Eastern theologians in the early centuries of church history to refer to the three persons of the Trinity. The Cappadocian fathers, Basil in particular, argued that God is three hypostaseis in one ousia (“essence,” or “substance”). Although helpful, the term also led to confusion. Western theologians described God as one *substantia in three personae, with confusion arising out of the fact that substantia was the Latin equivalent to hypostasis. Technically, hypostasis refers to each of the three concrete and distinct trinitarian persons who share a single divine nature or essence. The hypostatic union, in contrast, is an important christological designation. At the Council of Chalcedon in A.D. 451 the church declared the doctrine of the hypostatic union. The doctrine is an attempt to describe the miraculous bringing together of humanity and divinity in the same person, Jesus Christ, such that he is both fully divine and fully human.
two natures, doctrine of. A way of describing the orthodox position about the person of Christ as being fully human and fully divine. Upheld at the Council of Ephesus (A.D. 431) and clarified at the Council of Chalcedon (A.D. 451), the two-natures doctrine affirms that the one person Jesus Christ is both divine and human. In the incarnation, the two natures became united in one person. As a result, the two form a hypostasis (that is, they do not merely exist side by side), although they remain distinct (that is, they are not coalesced or changed into a composite third nature).
Stanley Grenz, David Guretzki, and Cherith Fee Nordling, Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 1999), 61–62.
STUDY
Jesus is the fully human embodiment of God—God’s goodness, righteousness, wisdom, and power to save—in our history. The early Christians debated how one should conceive of Jesus as human and divine, and the majority agreed on some guidelines in the Symbol of Chalcedon of 451. Calvin adopts these guidelines and emphasizes them in the following way:
1. Jesus is the incarnation of the eternal Word of God that the Gospel of John speaks about (“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” [John 1:1]). The Word is one of the three persons of the Trinity, and so is fully divine.
2. To say that Jesus is the Word incarnate means more than that he simply appeared to be human; he is genuinely and authentically human (“like us in every way apart from sin” [cf. Heb. 4:15]).
3. And so we can talk about Jesus as having two natures—a human and a divine nature. It would be a mistake
a. to confuse the two,
b. to say that one changes into the other,
c. to divide up Christ into two distinct persons,
d. or to separate the two natures.
4. Jesus Christ, then, is a single person; and yet within that single person are two distinct natures. Should we lose the distinction, “mixing heaven and earth,” we would lose something crucial to who Jesus is.
a. He is certainly one of us (since otherwise we would not benefit from his earthly presence).
b. And in him the free transcendence and power of God’s Word are present (since otherwise the ability of God to save through him would be in doubt).
Christopher Elwood, Calvin for Armchair Theologians, Armchair Theologians Series (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2002), 74–75.
Two Natures: Jesus Christ is Fully Human by J I Packer
What Is The Hypostatic Union? by Got Questions
The London Baptist Confession of 1689 In Modern English, Chapter 8 Christ the Mediator
CHAPTER XII
CHRIST HAD TO BECOME MAN IN ORDER TO FULFILL THE OFFICE OF MEDIATOR
(Reasons why it was necessary that the Mediator should be God and should become man, 1–3)
- Only he who was true God and true man could bridge the gulf between God and ourselves
Now it was of the greatest importance for us that he who was to be our Mediator be both true God and true man. cIf someone asks why this is necessary, there has been no simple (to use the common expression) or absolute necessity. Rather, it has stemmed from a heavenly decree, on which men’s salvation depended. Our most merciful Father decreed what was best for us. Since our iniquities, like a cloud cast between us and him, had completely estranged us from the Kingdom of Heaven [cf. Isa. 59:2], no man, unless he belonged to God, could serve as the intermediary to restore peace. But who might reach to him? Any one of Adam’s children? No, like their father, all of them were terrified at the sight of God [Gen. 3:8]. One of the angels? They also had need of a head, through whose bond they might cleave firmly and undividedly to their God [cf. Eph. 1:22; Col. 2:10]. What then? The situation would surely have been hopeless had the very majesty of God not descended to us, since it was not in our power to ascend to him. Hence, it was necessary for the Son of God to become for us “Immanuel, that is, God with us” [Isa. 7:14; Matt. 1:23], and in such a way that his divinity and our human nature might by mutual connection grow together. Otherwise the nearness would not have been near enough, nor the affinity sufficiently firm, for us to hope that God might dwell with us. So great was the disagreement between our uncleanness and God’s perfect purity! eEven if man had remained free from all stain, his condition would have been too lowly for him to reach God without a Mediator. What, then, of man: plunged by his mortal ruin into death and hell, defiled with so many spots, befouled with his own corruption, and overwhelmed with every curse? In undertaking to describe the Mediator, Paul then, with good reason, distinctly reminds us that He is man: a“One mediator between God and men, the man Jesus Christ” [1 Tim. 2:5]. He could have said “God”; or he could at least have omitted the word “man” just as he did the word “God.” But because the Spirit speaking through his mouth knew our weakness, at the right moment he used a most appropriate remedy to meet it: he set the Son of God familiarly among us as one of ourselves. aTherefore, lest anyone be troubled about where to seek the Mediator, or by what path we must come to him, the Spirit calls him “man,” thus teaching us that he is near us, indeed touches us, since he is our flesh. Here he surely means the same thing athat is explained elsewhere at greater length: “We have not a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sinning” [Heb. 4:15]. - The Mediator must be true God and true man
This will become even clearer if we call to mind that what the Mediator was to accomplish was no common thing. His task was so to restore us to God’s grace aas to make of the children of men, children of God; of the heirs of Gehenna, heirs of the Heavenly Kingdom. Who could have done this had not the self-same Son of God become the Son of man, and had not so taken what was ours as to impart what was his to us, and to make what was his by nature ours by grace? Therefore, relying on this pledge, we trust that we are sons of God, for God’s natural Son fashioned for himself a body from our body, flesh from our flesh, bones from our bones, that he might be one with us [Gen. 2:23–24, mediated through Eph. 5:29–31]. Ungrudgingly he took our nature upon himself to impart to us what was his, and to become both Son of God and Son of man in common with us. Hence that holy brotherhood which he commends with his own lips when he says: “I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God” [John 20:17]. In this way we are assured of the inheritance of the Heavenly Kingdom; for the only Son of God, to whom it wholly belongs, has adopted us as his brothers. “For if brothers, then also fellow heirs with him.” [Rom. 8:17 p.]
For the same reason it was also imperative that he who was to become our Redeemer be true God and true man. It was his task to swallow up death. Who but the Life could do this? It was his task to conquer sin. Who but very Righteousness could do this? It was his task to rout the powers of world and air. Who but a power higher than world and air could do this? Now where does life or righteousness, or lordship and authority of heaven lie but with God alone? aTherefore our most merciful God, when he willed that we be redeemed, made himself our Redeemer in the person of his only-begotten Son [cf. Rom. 5:8]. - Only he who was true God and true man could be obedient in our stead
The second requirement of our reconciliation with God was this: that man, who by his disobedience had become lost, should by way of remedy counter it with obedience, satisfy God’s judgment, and pay the penalties for sin. Accordingly, our Lord came forth as true man and took the person and the name of Adam in order to take Adam’s place in obeying the Father, to present our flesh as the price of satisfaction to God’s righteous judgment, and, in the same flesh, to pay the penalty that we had deserved. In short, since neither as God alone could he feel death, nor as man alone could he overcome it, he coupled human nature with divine that to atone for sin he might submit the weakness of the one to death; and that, wrestling with death by the power of the other nature, he might win victory for us. Those who despoil Christ of either his divinity or his humanity diminish his majesty and glory, or obscure his goodness. On the other hand, they do just as much wrong to men whose faith they thus weaken and overthrow, because it cannot stand unless it rests upon this foundation.
Besides, the hoped-for Redeemer was to be that son of Abraham and David whom God had promised in the Law and the Prophets. From this, godly minds derive another benefit: on the basis of his descent from David and Abraham they are more certain that he is the Anointed One who had been hailed by so many oracles. But we should especially espouse what I have just explained: our common nature with Christ is the pledge of our fellowship with the Son of God; and clothed with our flesh he vanquished death and sin together that the victory and triumph might be ours. He offered as a sacrifice the flesh he received from us, that he might wipe out our guilt by his act of expiation and appease the Father’s righteous wrath.
John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. John T. McNeill, trans. Ford Lewis Battles, vol. 1 & 2, The Library of Christian Classics (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2011), 464–467.
CHAPTER XIV
HOW THE TWO NATURES OF THE MEDIATOR MAKE ONE PERSON
(Explanation of the human and divine natures in Christ, 1–3)
- Duality and unity
On the other hand, we ought not to understand the statement that “the Word was made flesh” [John 1:14] in the sense that the Word was turned into flesh or confusedly mingled with flesh. Rather, it means that, because he chose for himself the virgin’s womb as a temple in which to dwell, he who was the Son of God became the Son of man—not by confusion of substance, but by unity of person. For we affirm his divinity so joined and united with his humanity that each retains its distinctive nature unimpaired, and yet these two natures constitute one Christ.
b(a)If anything like this very great mystery can be found in human affairs, the most apposite parallel seems to be that of man, whom we see to consist of two substances. Yet neither is so mingled with the other as not to retain its own distinctive nature. For the soul is not the body, and the body is not the soul. Therefore, some things are said exclusively of the soul that can in no wise apply to the body; and of the body, again, that in no way fit the soul; of the whole man, that cannot refer—except inappropriately—to either soul or body separately. Finally, the characteristics of the mind2 are [sometimes] transferred to the body, and those of the body to the soul. Yet he who consists of these parts is one man, not many. Such expressions signify both that there is one person in man composed of two elements joined together, and that there are two diverse underlying natures that make up this person. Thus, also, the Scriptures speak of Christ: they sometimes attribute to him what must be referred solely to his humanity, sometimes what belongs uniquely to his divinity; and sometimes what embraces both natures but fits neither alone. And they so earnestly express this union of the two natures that is in Christ as sometimes to interchange them. This figure of speech is called by the ancient writers “the communicating of properties.” - Divinity and humanity in their relation to each other
These things would be quite unconvincing if many and oft-recurring phrases of Scripture did not prove none of them to have been humanly devised. aWhat Christ said about himself—“Before Abraham was, I am” [John 8:58]—was far removed from his humanity. I am quite aware of the captious argument with which erring spirits corrupt this passage: that he was before all ages because he was already foreknown as Redeemer, both in the Father’s plan and in the minds of the godly.5 But since he clearly distinguishes the day of his manifestation from his eternal essence, and expressly commends his own authority as excelling Abraham’s in antiquity, there is no doubt that he is claiming for himself what is proper to his divinity. Paul declares him to be “the first-born of all creation … who was before all things and in whom all things hold together” [Col. 1:15, 17]. Also, he says that he was “glorious in his Father’s presence before the world was made” [John 17:5 p.]; and that he is working together with his Father [John 5:17]. These qualities are utterly alien to man. b(a)Therefore they and their like apply exclusively to his divinity.
But he is called “the servant of the Father” [Isa. 42:1, and other passages]; he is said to have “increased in age and wisdom … with God and men” [Luke 2:52], and not to “seek his own glory” [John 8:50]; “not to know the Last Day” [Mark 13:32; cf. Matt. 24:36]; not to “speak by himself” [John 14:10], and not to “do his own will” [John 6:38 p.]; he is said to have been “seen and handled” [Luke 24:39]. All these refer solely to Christ’s humanity. In so far as he is God, he cannot increase in anything, and does all things for his own sake; bnothing is hidden from him; he does all things according to the decision of his will, and can be neither seen nor handled. Yet he does not ascribe these qualities solely to his human nature, but takes them upon himself as being in harmony with the person of the Mediator.
But the communicating of characteristics or properties consists in what Paul says: “God purchased the church with his blood” [Acts 20:28 p.], and “the Lord of glory was crucified” [1 Cor. 2:8 p.]. eJohn says the same: “The Word of life was handled” [1 John 1:1 p.]. aSurely God does not have blood, does not suffer, cannot be touched with hands. But since Christ, who was true God and also true man, was crucified and shed his blood for us, the things that he carried out in his human nature are transferred improperly, although not without reason, to his divinity. Here is a similar example: John teaches “that God laid down his life for us” [1 John 3:16 p.]. Accordingly, there also a property of humanity is shared with the other nature. aAgain, when Christ, still living on earth, said: “No one has ascended into heaven but the Son of man who was in heaven” [John 3:13 p.], surely then, as man, in the flesh that he had taken upon himself, he was not in heaven. But because the selfsame one was both God and man, for the sake of the union of both natures he gave to the one what belonged to the other. - The unity of the person of the Mediator
But the passages that comprehend both natures at once, very many of which are to be found in John’s Gospel, set forth his true substance most clearly of all. For one reads there neither of deity nor of humanity alone, but of both at once: he received from the Father the power of remitting sins [John 1:29], of raising to life whom he will, of bestowing righteousness, holiness, salvation; he was appointed judge of the living and the dead in order that he might be honored, even as the Father [John 5:21–23]. Lastly, he is called the “light of the world” [John 9:5; 8:12], the “good shepherd,” the “only door” [John 10:11, 9], the “true vine” [John 15:1]. For the Son of God had been endowed with such prerogatives when he was manifested in the flesh. Even though along with the Father he held them before the creation of the world, it had not been in the same manner or respect, and they could not have been given to a man who was nothing but a man.
In the same sense we ought also to understand what we read in Paul: after the judgment “Christ will deliver the Kingdom to his God and Father” [1 Cor. 15:24 p.]. Surely the Kingdom of the Son of God had no beginning and will have no end. But even as he lay concealed under the lowness of flesh and “emptied himself, taking the form of a servant” [Phil. 2:7, cf. Vg.], laying aside the splendor of majesty, he showed himself obedient to his Father [cf. Phil. 2:8]. Having completed this subjection, “he was at last crowned with glory and honor” [Heb. 2:9 p.], e(b/a)and exalted to the highest lordship that before him “every knee should bow” [Phil. 2:10]. So then will he yield to the Father his name and crown of glory, and whatever he has received from the Father, that “God may be all in all” [1 Cor. 15:28]. For what purpose were power and lordship given to Christ, unless that by his hand the Father might govern us? In this sense, also, Christ is said to be seated at the right hand of the Father [cf. Mark 16:19; Rom. 8:34]. Yet this is but for a time, until we enjoy the direct vision of the Godhead. Here we cannot excuse the error of the ancient writers who pay no attention to the person of the Mediator, obscure the real meaning of almost all the teaching one reads in the Gospel of John, and entangle themselves in many snares. Let this, then, be our key to right understanding: those things which apply to the office of the Mediator are not spoken simply either of the divine nature or of the human.7 Until he comes forth as judge of the world Christ will therefore reign, joining us to the Father as the measure of our weakness permits. But when as partakers in heavenly glory we shall see God as he is, Christ, having then discharged the office of Mediator, will cease to be the ambassador of his Father, and will be satisfied with that glory which he enjoyed before the creation of the world.
And the name “Lord” exclusively belongs to the person of Christ only in so far as it represents a degree midway between God and us. Paul’s statement accords with this: “One God … from whom are all things … and one Lord … through whom are all things” [1 Cor. 8:6]. That is, to him was lordship committed by the Father, until such time as we should see his divine majesty face to face. Then he returns the lordship to his Father so that—far from diminishing his own majesty—it may shine all the more brightly. Then, also, God shall cease to be the Head of Christ, for Christ’s own deity will shine of itself, although as yet it is covered by a veil.
John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. John T. McNeill, trans. Ford Lewis Battles, vol. 1 & 2, The Library of Christian Classics (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2011), 482–486.
In-Depth Studies
Hypostatic Union: How Two Natures Constitute the Person of the Mediator by John Calvin
Discover more from Faithful Steward Ministries and FSM Women's Outreach
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Faithful Steward Ministries and FSM Women's Outreach 