martin chemnitz, the two natures in christ...page 1 martin chemnitz, the two natures in christst....

Martin Chemnitz, The Two Natures in ChristSt. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 1971. Trans. J.A.O. PreusChapter II - The Divine Nature in Christ

I. Three powerful attacksA. that the person of Christ did not exist before Mary; denial that the person of Christ consists

of 2 distinct naturesB. that Christ is not of the same substance with the FatherC. that the Father Himself became incarnate

II. The controversies and the correct doctrineA. Christ establishes that He consists of both a human and a divine nature and that He has

existed and subsisted as a person before He was conceived and bornB. Scripture clearly testifies that the second nature in Christ . . . is the actual, true, and eternal

divine essence.C. Many Scripture passages show that only the Son assumed the flesh, but not the entire

Trinity.

III. What Satan seeks in this kind of disputation: to steal away from us the divine nature of the Logos in the hypostatic union of Christ, our Savior.

A. And when we have lost this, He can no longer be our Savior.

IV. Controversialists try to tear this comfort from us by denying that the divine nature in the person of the Son of God is united with the assumed human nature.

A. chashes head on with the testimony of Paul in Col. 2:9B. church has always said that the divine nature of the Logos became incarnate

1. reply: not the divine nature of the Son but only His person has been united with the human nature

2. but: essential attributes of the Deity are equivalent to the Deity itself!3. Luther and Philip on “person” and the divine essence:4. essence and properties may be considered (1) absolutely or (2) relatively

a. (1) absolutelyb. (2) relatively

V. A few of the reasons why the Son became man (following Athanasius):A. to restore, redeem, be the Remaker,B. to rescue sinners from death and restore us to life,C. in order that we might receive adoption,D. to restore us to His image,

E. that we might receive grace for grace, that being loved and received we may be brought back to God the Beloved,

F. Son is the middle person of Trinity and therefore it was proper for Him to be a Mediator,G. that He might show us the Father and reveal knowledge of Him to us

Martin Chemnitz, The Two Natures in ChristSt. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 1971. Trans. J.A.O. PreusChapter III - The Human Nature of Christ

I. What God did in the flesh

II. The true teaching

III. 5 arguments of the heretics and rebuttals of them based on passages:A. that Christ assumed not a body but a specter

1. teaching began immediately2. seemed beautiful to reason, but . . .3. Savior refutes4. motive of the heretics5. true meaning of the subverted passages (Rom. 8:3; Phil. 2:7,8)

B. that Christ had true flesh but not of the same substance as our flesh1. pretended reasons for this opinion:2. twisted Scriptures: 1 Cor. 15:47; Jn. 6:623. implications:4. examples:5. passages:6. answers to objections:

C. that Christ did not assume a complete or total human nature1. condemned by definite and clear testimonies of Scripture

a. body, flesh, bonesb. soulc. mind, will

2. passages: Phil. 2:7,8; Heb. 2:163. important point: 2 reasons He became man (and implications if it was not total)

a. our entire nature vitiated by sinb. Christ undertook to save it in its entirety and, therefore, He assumed a complete and

entire human nature.i. list: body, soul, appetites, drives, faculties, activities

4. sum of the matter:

D. that Christ’s human nature was real and complete, but not subject during the time of His humiliation to infirmities by which our nature is as punishments for sin

1. 2 arguments:

a. Because He was separate from sinners He did not know sin and because He is the Holy One of the saints therefore He was not subject to . . .

b. Because the whole fulness of deity dwelt bodily in His human nature, therefore suffering could not have a place there.

2. passages: Jn. 1:14; Phil. 2:7; Rom. 8:33. importance of the matter here at stake (the sufferings of Christ)

a. key passages:4. Christ could have repelled the attacks of the enemy and averted every feeling of grief, but

He did not; He kept His power withdrawn and yielded to the wrath of the Father.E. Christ’s human nature utterly absorbed into the deity through the hypostatic union (and

therefore there is only one nature: the divine)1. Scripture: Christ, after the union, possessed and retained a true human nature; He rose in

the same substance; He ascended in this body and will return to judge just as He was seen to ascend.

2. comfort that He is in flesh like our flesh seated at the right hand on our behalf3. theological axiom: the nature which the Son once assumed He never lays aside in all

eternity

IV. The true teaching of Scripture concerning the human nature of Christ:

Martin Chemnitz, The Two Natures in ChristSt. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 1971. Trans. J.A.O. PreusChapter IV - The Nature of the Hypostatic Union

I. It is not sufficient to know and believe that in some way or other there are two natures in Christ, the divine and the human. We must add that they have been joined together so imtimately in a personal union that there is one and the same person (ufistamenon) consisting of and subsisting in these two natures.

A. passages which deal with the existence of the personal union:1. 1 Cor. 8:6 (are not two Lords but one Lord Jesus Christ)2. 2 Cor. 5:15 (are not many Christs but one Christ who died for us)3. 2 Cor. 11:12 (you have been espoused to one man Christ)4. 1 Tim. 2:5 (are not two mediators but one)5. Rom. 5:18,19 (is one Lord Jesus Christ)6. Matt. 23:8 (one is your master: Christ)

B. passages describing the union:1. Jn. 1:14 (The Word was made flesh.)2. Heb. 2:14 (As the children are partakers of flesh and blood, so Jesus also became

partaker of them.)3. Heb. 2:16 (He assumed the seed of Abraham.)4. Phil. 2:7 (He took on the form of a servant.)5. Gal. 4:4 (The Son of God was sent, “born of a woman . . .”6. Rom. 1:3 (The Son of God was begotten of the seed of David according to the flesh.)7. Col. 2:9 (In Christ dwells the whole fullness of the Godhead bodily.)

C. Conclusion from passages: these 2 natures in Christ have been united into the unity of one person

II. What this hypostatic union or personal union of the 2 natures in Christ is. A. Names (which call for recognition, invocation and honor):

1. name of the Messiah is called Immanuel (Is. 7:14)2. name of the Branch of David is called Jehovah (Jer. 23:5,6)3. Son of Man is called the Son of God (Matt. 16:16)

B. a great mystery (1 Tim. 3:16)1. mystery of this union far surpasses the mind, comprehension, and language of all men,

yet . . . Scripture tells us as much as we need to know and believe in this life in order to be saved.

2. Let us keep and restrain ourselves within the bounds of the divine revelation given us in the Scripture . . . and be content with the simplicity of the partial knowledge which is given, demonstrated, and set before us in this life by the sure and clear testimonies of Scripture, albeit in part, through a mirror, and as it were in a riddle. As for the rest of the matters . . . let us defer and set them aside for that other heavenly school . . .

C. Many have endeavored to resolve the problem in a brief summary.1. e.g., “. . . that the hypostatic union is the highest and most intimate coming together by

which the divine nature assumes and the human nature is assumed and made the property of the divine nature, so that these two natures, apart from all change or commingling, come together, concur, and are united to produce one person (ufistamenon) in Christ.”

2. definition fails to explain the entire matter; goal must not be just brevity, but that the chief points of the entire doctrine may be understood (required a somewhat fuller statement than the above)

D. necessary and right that we define things on the basis of causes, consequences and effects:1. We can formulate, if not an intricate definition, at least a simple and plain description or

illustration of this union which will correctly and accurately include a brief explanation of:

a. efficient cause of the unionb. material from which the union is composedc. subject of the uniond. form of the unione. purposes of the unionf. the communion which followsg. significance of the humiliation and exaltation

2. Chemnitz’ full definition (“rather, plan, simple and unadorned”):

a. “The hypostatic uniion, or the incarnation, is an action of the entire Trinity in which, by the overshadowing of the Most High and the supervention of the Holy Ghost, the divine nature of the Son of God by the Virgin Mary, without male seed, assumed a true, complete, and entire human nature, yet without sin, of the same substance as ours, and like us in infirmities except for sin. He assumed it into the unity of His person and made it His property by an inseparable union and everlasting connection, not in order to establish some third composite nature but with the difference of the natures and their essential attributes remaining unimpaired, without any abolition, change commingling, or equating. Not that there might be two persons in the incarnate Christ, just as there are two natures, but to form the one united person (ounqeton ufistamenon) of the incarnate Christ, these two natures are joined together by this union so that not only His divine nature, which assumed, but also His human nature, which was assumed, might pertain to the complete person of the incarnate Christ. This union is so imitmate, individual, inseparable, and indissoluble that the divine nature of the Logos neither wills nor is able nor ought to be considered, sought, or comprehended outside this union with the flesh, but rather within this most closely knit union. And the assumed flesh must be considered, sought, and apprehended only within the intimate embrace of the assuming Logos and not outside of Him; not because the Logos did not exist previously in Himself as a proper, individual, and perfect person, nor as if that individual body of the assumed nature subsisted in and of itself and existed before and outside the union at some time as a proper and peculiar person, but because the hypostasis of the Son of God whiich existed from eternity, out of divine kindness, assumed into the unity of His own person that body (massa) of human nature, devoid of its own personality, in the very moment when it was first conceived and formed. By this act of assumption the hypostasis of the Logos, which from eternity subsisted in the divine nature of the Son, became also the hypostasis of the assumed human nature and now subsists in and consists of the two natures, inseparably united, with the divine assuming and the human assumed, and [the human nature] has its own subsistence not in itself but in the person of the Logos in which it is sustained.

3. Chemnitz’ explanation of his definition:a. This union took place for us men and for our salvation.b. Since redemption had to take place through suffering and death, the human nature

was necessary; and since the serpent’s head had to be crushed by divine power through death, the divine nature was also necessary in the person of the Redeemer. It pleased God that for our comfort our assumed nature might be employed . . .

c. From this union we see certain results taking place between the united natures and their attributes, namely a communion and participation, not a communion of commingling, transmutation, or equating but one which corresponds to a true and actual union, such as that of the soul with the body and of fire heated with iron. Thus the things which are properties of the natures become the common properties of the person on account of the union. And in this union neither nature of itself, by itself, or for itself performs the things which are proper to it, but each nature in Christ because of this union performs in communion with the other the things which are proper to it.

d. Since only the divine nature of itself if perfect and immutable, nothing is added to or subtracted from it by this union. But because the human nature of itself and of its own constitution is not sufficient and suitable for all the functions of the kingship, the priesthood and the lordship of Christ, . . . it received from the union with the Logos incomprehensible and ineffable gifts and ornaments both created and finite which formally inhere in it.

e. Because the whole fullness of the deity of the Son of God dwelt personally in the assumed nature, this fullness shines forth in it completely, so that the flesh is kindled by this light, as it were, and even shines and is so enriched by divine powers and workings through the dispensation of the union but not through physical effusion or an essential inherence that the Logos in keeping with His kindness exercises and accomplishes the works of His omnipotence in, with, and through the assumed nature, just as the soul communicates to the body and as fire to heated iron their powers and activities.

f. The human nature received and possessed this majesty in the very first moment of the union, when the whole fullness of the deity began to dwell bodily in Christ. By reason of the exinanition in the time of the humiliation the human nature did not always exercise and use the majesty. But when the servant form was laid aside in the resurrection and ascension, the human nature was exalted to the full and manifest possession and use of it through the session at the right hand of the majesty and power of God.

g. “. . . this description contains the entire doctrineE. a definition condensed into a very brief form:

1. “The hypostatic union, or the incarnation, is a work of the entire Trinity by which the divine nature in the person of the Son alone assumed from the Virgin Mary a true human nature without transmutation and confusion. The two natures are inseparably connected and from them and in them is established one person (ufistamenon) in the incarnate Christ, in whom the assumed nature subsists and is sustained. This union took place for us men and for our salvation in order that the works of redemption by Christ, our King and High Priest, might be accomplished through the activities of each nature.

From this union a certain communion results between the united natures and their attributes, not indeed a natural or essential union but, because of the personal union, a communion like that between the soul and the animated body or between fire and heated iron. For the things which are proper to the natures become the common property of the person on account of the union.

And in this union each nature does what is proper to it, not by itself but in communion with the other.

From this union there were also communicated and given to the assumed human nature not only incomprehensible created and finite gifts, but the whole fullness of the deity of the Logos dwells bodily and personally with all His power, activity, majesty, and glory in the assumed nature and shines forth in, with, and through it, exercising and accomplishing the works of His omnipotence, as a soul in an animate body and as fire in heated iron communicates itself and its properties without any commingling. The assumed human nature received this majesty at the same time as the union, but in the state of humiliation it did not always exercise or use it. But when the form of a servant was laid aside for the full and manifest possession and use of this majesty, the human nature was exalted and placed at the right hand of God.”

2. “. . . is a correct definition, even if plebian and crude”3. is a definition established on the basis of the sure, firm, and clear statements of Scripture

Martin Chemnitz, The Two Natures in ChristSt. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 1971. Trans. J.A.O. PreusChapter V - Definition of the Hypostatic Union

I. Scripture teaches that the incarnation is a work of the entire Trinity (as in Ephesians 1).

A. Gal. 4:4B. Lk. 1:35C. Jer. 23:5D. Matt. 1:20

II. have already shown and proved from clear passage of Scripture that (1) not only one but two complete and perfect natures are present in the incarnate Christ, and, (2) that neither the Father nor the Holy Spirit but only the Son has assumed into the unity of His own person a human nature

III. have already shown by many testimonies from Scripture that these two natures do not exist by themselves of of themselves, apart from or separately from one another

A. two natures have been joined or united into one hypostasisB. have not been mixed together or mingled to produce some new third natureC. is no abolition of either of the natures or from the conversion or transmutation of one nature

into the other, or from the equation of both of themD. “But Scripture teaches that the deity dwells in Christ bodily and that the Word was made

flesh in such a way that these two natures in the incarnate Christ, although not separated and placed apart from one another but united, yet are and remain complete, unimpaired, distinct, and different both in substance and in essential attributes, as we have shown by statements from Scripture in chapters two and three.”

E. not by comingling but by the mode of assumption1. “He who was in the form of God took on the form of a servant” (Phil. 2:7)2. Son of god “took on the seed of Abraham” (Heb. 2:16)3. “He was made a partaker of flesh and blood” (Heb. 2:14)4. “The Deity dwelt bodily in Christ” (Col. 2:9)

F. must be distinguished from other modes of God’s presence (e.g., in the way that God is everywhere with His general presence, in all His creatures or with His essence filling heaven and earth; nor is it as in the simple way in which it dwells with the saints (1 Jn. 3:24); nor in the way in which God will be all in all in eternal life (1 Cor. 15:28) – see below

IV. The chief question: How are the two natures in Christ joined together, or of what nature is the hypostasic union of the two natures in Christ, and wherein is the difference from other modes of indwelling or union with the deity determined?

A. = the “form” or the “specific difference” of the hypostatic unionB. this particular union unique (is to be distinguished from all other modes, is different from all

other modes)C. this particular union an incomprehensible and ineffable mysteryD. is easier to describe what it is not than what it is

1. is not like the way in which God with His essence fills all things or dwells in the saints or in eternal life will be all things in all

2. is not in the way that the Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father

V. Method: we will divide the matter into sectionsA. “First, the human nature did not assume the divine. Nor did man assume God, nor did the

divine person assume a human person. But the divine nature of the Logos, or God the Logos, or the person of the Son of God, subsisting from eternity in the divine nature, assumed in the fullness of time a particular unity (massa) of human nature, so that in Christ the assuming nature is the divine and the assumed nature is the human.”

1. passages: Jn. 1:14, Rom. 1:3, Gal. 4:4, Phil. 2:72. other cases of human nature (always being some definite individual): 1 Cor. 6:18 (each

individual has own body; Ez. 18:27 (each individual has own soul)3. In Christ’s case, His divine nature existed from eternity and assumed the entity of the

human nature in the act of conception.a. passages: Heb. 2:14 (Son of God partaker of flesh and blood); Heb. 9:12 (though

own blood entered Holy of Holies); Son of God speaks of His flesh (Jn. 6:54), of His body (Mk. 14:22), of His soul (Matt. 26:38), of His face, His cheeks, His back (Is. 50:6), of His hands and His side (Jn. 20:27), of His heart, His tongue, His jaws, His feet, His bones (Ps. 22:14-16).

i. language not like that of Ps. 50:12, of Ez. 18:4, of Jn. 10:14 or of Rom. 14:8ii. only this body is the body of Jehovah (Lk. 24:39; 1 Cor. 11:24)iii. only this blood is the blood of the Son of God (1 Jn. 1:7)iv. only this death is the death of the Son of God (Rom. 5:10)

B. “Second, the ancient counsels say that two natures in Christ are united indivisibly, . . . so that they cannot be divided or torn apart from each other; also inseparably . . ., so that never, even in eternity, can the be separated from each other; . . .”

1. Athanasius: “What He united He did not abandon.”C. “Third, the fact that these two natures have been joined together and united to constitute in

the incarnate Christ one hypostasis . . . is related to the form or the specific difference of the personal union.”

1. are and remain 2 natures in Christ without conversion or comingling, yet there are not 2 Christs but only one Christ

2. passages: Rom. 5:18,19; Gal. 3:16; I Cor. 8:6; Eph. 4:5; 1 Tim. 2:5; Matt. 3:17; Lk. 1:35; Lk. 1:32; Jn. 8:58; Jn. 18:37

D. Fourth, it is also important to indicate and acknowledge in some manner the form or specific difference of this secret and incomprehensible hypostatic union.

1. Logos before incarnation was from eternity a perfect but simple hypostasis existing only in the divine nature; through the incarnation Logos became a “composite person”

2. is different in kind from the presence in which the Logos is present with other creatures (or vice-versa)

3. assumed nature is attached to the complete fulness – not just to some portion of the deity of the Logos

4. This hypostatic union does not permit a separation or an absence of one nature from the other (as if one nature were separately located somewhere else).

5. The true and complete Christ is not described as having only one nature – either the divine or the human – and not at the same time having those two natures which are mutually or personally united . . .

E. [Fifth] “. . . now, after the incarnation, the person of the Logos cannot and ought not to be considered or made an object of faith outside of, without or separate from the assumed nature, nor in turn the assumed flesh outside of and without the Logos, if we wish to think reverently and correctly.

1. For sinners, there is no approach open to the divine majesty .2. Logos assumed a nature of the same substance as ours in order that we might know

God, seek and grasp Him.a. We begin with the flesh of Christ, mount to communion with the deity of the Logos,

and from there to communion with the entire Trinity.b. passages: Jn. 1:4, 5:26, 6:40, 14:9, 1 Jn. 1:1; Jn. 20:28

F. [Sixth] “. . . the two natures in Christ are joined together not only through contiguity or proximity, but rather as fire penetrates, permeates, and embraces heated iron . . . and just as a soul is given to a body . . .”

1. not as when the angel stood at the side of Peter [Acts 12:7], or when two pieces of different metals are welded together (where there is not actual communion between the natures which have been joined together

2. result: Logos shines forth, illuminates the assumed nature, shines forth in the whole person

G. Seventh, because it is beyond all controversy that this union is a great mystery, the passages of Scripture often describe it by noting the things which result from this union . . . just as in other matters it is common in the descriptions . . . to show the effects and the consequences.

1. natures remain intact, plus real communion between thema. Some (e.g. Paul of Samosata) have imagined that the natures in Christ had absolutely

no communion between themselves.

b. But the Scriptures (and the ancient orthodox church on the basis of Scriptures), teach that this union is so intimate that in the person of Christ there follows as a result a true communion or communication, but not a commingling or effusion or equation of either the natures or the attributes.

2. We must now explain individually and in order the degrees of communion from which arise the different kinds or genera or predications concerning Christ.

a. “In the first place therefore, through the personal union the one nature in Christ is not to be changed into the other nor confused with the other, and the one is not predicated of the other; nor do we say that the deity is the humanity, or that the human nature is the divine nature. The union took place leaving the difference of the natures intact, yet from the union arises and follows such a communion (koinonia) that the concrete quality of the one nature is correctly predicated of the concretum of the other, so that . . .

i. God is man, man is God,ii. the Son of Man is the Son of the living God (Matt. 16:16),iii. the Son of Mary is the Son of God,iv. the Holy Thing which is born of Mary is called the Son of the Most High (Lk.

1:35),v. the Son of God is Immanuel (Matt. 1:23),vi. the Branch of David is Jehovah (Jer. 23:5),vii. the Word is made flesh (Jn. 1:14).viii. this mode of predication uniqueix. “In brief, because the two natures are united in Christ to form one united

hypostasis (upostasis sunqetox) and not one composite nature, therefore one nature is not predicated of the other, but the concrete quality (concretum) of the one nature is predicated of the concrete quality (concretum) of the other.”

b. “In the second place, because of the hypostatic union of the two natures, whether the person is called God or man, the entire person, which consists of the divine and human natures, must always be understood.

i. because the attributes of the natures are communicated to the person in the concrete sense of the word

ii. *Scripture attributes those things which are the properties of the human nature not only to Christ as man but also to Christ as God, and, conversely those things which are properties of the deity are attributed in Scripture not only to Christ as God but also to the Son of Man.” [e.g., . . .}

(1). God redeemed the church with His blood (Acts 20:28)(2). We have been reconciled to God through the death of His Son (Rom. 5:10)(3). They crucified the Lord of glory (1 Cor. 2:8)(4). The Son of God was born of a woman (Gal. 4:4)(5). The Son of Man ascends where He was before (Jn. 6:62)

c. “In the third place, because of the union the two natures in Christ do not act separately. But as the Chalcedonian Synod says, each nature in Christ performs in communion with the other that which is proper to it.”

d. “In the fourth place, this intimate uniting of the assuming and the assumed natures brings about the fact that although as a result of this union nothing in itself is added to or subtracted from the divine nature, yet in the human nature of Christ because of this union there not only natural attributes . . . nor are there only particular and finite gifts which inhere formally in the humanity . . ., but also because of this union the human nature in Christ not only has the whole fullness of the deity dwelling in it personally, but at the same time, according to the Scripture, it receives the divine majesty which has been given and communicated to it along with divine power, wisdom, life, and other divine qualities.

i. This takes place not by a physical communication of commingling, effusion, or equating, but by the communication of the personal union . . .

(1). in the way that a soul communicates its animate and vital powers to a living body,

(2). and as fire communicates the power of giving light and heat to heated iron.ii. . . . the Spirit is not given to Him by measure (Jn. 3:34)iii. All things are given into His hand (Jn. 13:3)iv. All authority is given to Him (Matt. 28:18)v. The whole fullness of deity dwells bodily in Him (Col. 2:9)vi. He crowns Him with glory and honor and places Him above all the works of His

hands (Heb. 2:7)vii. He has exalted Him above every name (Eph. 1:20-21)viii. The flesh of Christ is life-giving (Jn. 6:54 and 5:21)ix. His blood cleanses consciences (Heb. 9:14)

VI. Some imagine, because in the state of humiliation the divine majesty did not always exercise its wisdom, power, and majesty to the fullest extent, imagine that the assumed nature did not at the time of the humiliation have the divine majesty dwelling personally in it.

A. conflicts with and overturns the true understanding of the personal union.

Martin Chemnitz, The Two Natures in ChristSt. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 1971. Trans. J.A.O. PreusChapter VI - Teaching the Doctrine of the Hypostatic UnionOutline by Joe Patterson (Concordia Univ. Irvine, Spring 1999)

I. In matters which are obscure and difficult to comprehend, the human mind seeks the aid of similes which are better known to us.

A. In the realm of nature, there is no example that exists such as the union in the person of Christ. Yet for the sake of clarity, various similes have been sought which do furnish some guidance to those who are considering the testimonies of Scripture.

1. We seek examples of such a union in which two things which are united remain complete and distinct and yet are so united that one subject results, so that a communication of attributes takes place which agrees with and corresponds to the union.

2. Similes may be applied but they have several weaknesses. The substance of the human nature does not compare correctly with an “accident.” Nor is the divine nature changed by the human in such a way that the subject is changed by its “accident.”

3. The sustaining of a human nature in the person of Christ is well described by the simile of engrafting. It shows that the human nature depends on and is nourished by the Logos and receives excellence from the union. (Is.11:1; Jer. 23:5; Rev. 5:5; Jas. 1:21; Rev. 22:16)

B. Ancient ecclesiastical writers used 3 different similes:1. The simile of light and the sun (Heb. 1:3; Mal. 4:2; Matt. 17:2; Acts 9:2). “The

brightness of God’s glory.” Light from the light.2. The simile of the burning bush (burned intensely, yet was not consumed)3. The simile of the soul united with its body (“Just as a rational soul and the flesh make up

one man, so God and man are the one Christ.” (Justin)C. Scripture itself leads us to consider this figure of speech.D. “It is not necessary that examples agree in all respects or that they be alike in all things, but

they must have some things alike and some things different.” (Justin)1. It is impossible to find examples that are similar to the deity in all respects.2. If all things were the same, they would no longer be called examples but they would be

the very thing themselves!

II. Just as there is an essence, or substance, or a nature in man, so there is also an hypostasis, or a person.

A. There is a distinction between essence & person (with reference to chapter 1).1. “Essence” indicates the nature common to many individuals, including the entire essential

property of the individuals. 2. “Person” indicates the individual substance which rests on that essence. (an individual

substance of a rational nature)B. Things that may be used to cast light on the Incarnation of Christ:

1. There are not two persons, even though there are two natures. (Nestorius)

2. The two natures are not confused, but remain separate. (Eutyches)3. There is not a commingling of natures as a result of the unity of the person.4. In constituting a man, both soul and body are joined together to form an individual

“hypostasis” which is called “man.” Man is not only a body or only a soul, but both.5. The soul, by its union, permeates the body as light fills the solar body it unites with. The

simile of the union of light and the body of the sun, of fire and of iron, and of body and soul.

6. “With reference to His human nature, God is described as dead, and the man Christ is called equal with God by reason of His divine nature.”

7. “The divine nature in Christ could surely exercise and carry out all its activities without the assumed human nature; but he utilized His human members so that he might demonstrate that such a union had been effected.

8. Rational, vital and animate powers are the property of the soul. These are communicated to the body through the union. (inter-penetration)

a. “The flesh was not conceived in the womb of the virgin without the deity, before it was assumed by the Logos; but God, the Logos Himself was conceived by the assumption of the flesh, and the flesh of the Logos Himself was conceived in the incarnation.” (Augustine)

Martin Chemnitz, The Two Natures in ChristSt. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 1971. Trans. J.A.O. PreusChapter VII - A Description of the Hypostatic Union

I. Unions other than the “hypostatic union”:A. through destructionB. through conversionC. through fusionD. through heaping upE. through proximityF. through conditionG. through agreementH. through sharingI. through appearanceJ. personal union (Holy Spirit “joins Himself to Paul”)K. substantial union (Trinity)L. carnal unionM. spiritual unionN. union according to essence

II. Indwelling of the Deity in other creatures:A. God’s universal presenceB. God’s presence in the saints in this lifeC. God’s presence with the angels and with man in the life to comeD. appearances and visions of GodE. God’s presence by the external ministry of the Word and sacraments in the churchF. God’s presence through the prophets, apostles and others as instrumentsG. Father in the Son and Son in the Father

III. Words used in Scripture to decribe the hypostatic union:A. “koinonein”B. “metekein”C. “epilambanesthai”D. “egeneto”E. other wordsF. Col. 2:9

Martin Chemnitz, The Two Natures in ChristSt. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 1971. Trans. J.A.O. PreusChapter XI - On the Use of This Doctrine

I. Reasons why it was necessary for our Mediator, Redeemer, and Savior to be not only God or only man and why the divine and human natures had to be united in the person of the Mediator:

A. “Because human nature was doomed to eternal punishment in accord with the sentence of divine judgment spoken on the day when Adam fell, therefore the Son of God offered Himself for the assumption of human nature and later did assume it, so that man might not be destroyed by death,

B. Because human nature after the Fall was subject to the wrath of God and damnation, it was necessary that our Mediator make satisfaction for us in the human nature,

C. Because human nature through sin was depraved and lost so that it became the body of sin and death, therefore the Son of God in turn willed to condemn sin and to abolish death in the assumed human nature, and in His own person He willed to restore human nature to righteousness, life, and salvation,

D. Because human nature in Adam was turned from God through sin and alienated from the life and fellowship of God, therefore the Son of God in His own person again united it with the divine nature by the most intimate union, and thus restored it to fellowship with God.

E. The Son of God wills to accomplish the work of our redemption in, with, and through His assumed human nature, in order that we might be made certain that we are His brothers and heirs to all His merits.

F. The Son of God with all His fullness has bestowed all His benefits and gifts upon the assumed nature so that, since He is our kinsman, we who are His brothers may receive the things which the Head bestows upon its members.

G. The Son of God assumed a human nature in order that He might share His offices and duties of the kingdom, and the perpetual high priesthood of the Messiah, so that we might be sure that we have access to Him and that we may embrace Him in His work as King and High Priest; for in the kingdom of God His divine nature administers His kingdom and His priesthood in communion with the assumed nature, which is akin to us and of the same substance with us. For no one hates his own flesh, but nourishes it and favors it. He is our King and our High Priest, and we are bone of His bones.

II. In the same way we should piously consider not only why the human nature suffices for the work of redemption and salvation, but also why it was necessary that the divine nature of the Son of God be united with it.

A. Because there would not have been any adequate ransom (lutron) for sin and God’s wrath, which are boundless evils. For this reason therefore the price is so great and the merit of the suffering and death of Christ [so great] that it is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world. For the Son of God suffered and died in His own flesh,

B. Because the creature by itself could not have borne the enormous burden of the wrath of God which was owed for the sins of the entire world.

C. Because human nature by itself could not have removed sin, overcome the wrath of God and death, or crushed the serpent’s head. These works require divine power,

D. Because human nature by itself and with its created powers could not have restored righteousness, life, and salvation, things which pertain to the work of the Mediator,

E. Because it was necessary that the Mediator enter into the recesses of the Trinity in order that He might announce to us the Trinity’s plan and plead our cause before God in His innermost council,

F. Because it is a work of divine power that He gather His eternal church from the human race, convert, justify, sanctify, save, govern, preserve it, and bestow the Holy Ghost upon it, raise all men from the dead, and lead the elect into eternal life. The divine power of the Son of God uses the assumed nature to carry out these duties in order that we may be assured that in these duties He gently embraces us as His brothers,

G. That Christ, because He is true God, might preserve for us these eternal blessings more firmly and effectively than Adam did. Also, because it was necessary that the Mediator be joined to each party and be akin to it, there God is man [in the concrete case of Christ – ed.]

III. statements of the ancient fathers to this effect

Martin Chemnitz, The Two Natures in ChristSt. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 1971. Trans. J.A.O. PreusChapter XII - What Results from the Hypostatic Union

I. Manner of speaking of this matter: A. We must be careful because we will make predications of the person of Christ in one way if

we are thinking of the person of the Logos as He existed before the union, and in another way if we are considering the human nature as subsisting by itself, alone separate.

II. Facts involved in this matter: the natures in Christ do not subsist individually, by themselves, alone; but the person subsists in the 2 natures and does all things according to the properties of each nature

III. Divine nature: Nothing is added to the divine nature of Christ, for it is completely perfect in itself.

IV. Human nature:A. retains its own natural or essential propertiesB. from the union it also receives above and beyond these many preeminent and marvelous

prerogatives and dignities - not merely verbal but real

V. “Communion” ( koinonia)A. ancients included all these things under this one general word: koinonia

1. in Latin, both communio and communicatio (although communio is more apt and suitable)

B. is not a true hypostatic union when absolutely no communion takes place between the united natures

1. He who imagines a union without such communion deceives both himself and others [example of Nestorius].

C. Many shrink from term as if it involved a commingling, transmutation or equating of the natures.

D. But the ancient church did not fear use of term, nor understand that it implied commingling.E. how the term “communion” is to be understood:

1. “Thus we do not understand that from the union there arises and results a communion or communication (koinonia) which is characterized by either an effusion of the natures, a transmutation of the essences, or a formal equating of either the natures or their attributes, but rather it is a communion (koinonia) which permits neither commingling nor separation and which is suitable for and corresponding to the hypostatic union.

2. evidence that the term was always used and received in the ancient church with this meaning [quotations from the fathers cited]

3. evidence that this use accords with Scripture: 2 Cor. 13:14; 2 Pet. 1:4; Heb. 2:14

4. Therefore, we can certainly retain and use the term communion or communication . . .VI. is also an argument as to whether this communication, which results from

the hypostatic union is real or merely verbalA. union is not verbal but real, for the two natures in Christ are not joined only nominally or

verbally, but actually, truly, really, or, as we commonly say, in reality.B. Therefore the communication is not called verbal but real in order that by this term we may

distinguish it from a fictitious, pretended, imaginary or putative communication.C. not natural or essential, but real (God not only verbally but really a man; yet the divine

nature is not really a human nature for this would be a confusion of the natures)

VII. Doctrine of this communication can be summarized in one comprehensive definition, but first Chemnitz needs to make certain distinctions

A. communication divides into certain definite and distinct categories B. ancients taught doctrine through these distinctionsC. the several genera are distinct, not exactly the same or of the same structure, nor can they all

be put neatly under one head or genus or category

Martin Chemnitz, The Two Natures in ChristSt. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 1971. Trans. J.A.O. PreusChapter XIII - First “Genus” of the Communication of Attributes

I. First: as shown previously, the hypostatic union of the 2 natures of Christ does not result from a change, conversion, or equation of the substance of the natures, nor by the abolition or disappearance of one of the natures; but in the incarnate Christ there are and remain two complete, different, distinct natures, the divine and human, . . .

A. that brothers. [sense? (ed.)]II. Second: each of these natures has its own peculiar essential or natural

attributes, which it retains even in the union, yet without conversion or confusion. Nor is the difference of the natures abolished because of the union, but rather the property of each nature is preserved intact and takes part in forming the one person

III. Third: The 2 natures of Christ do not subsist separately or individually, but themselves, or alone, but they are united into one hypostasis or person in such a way that there is one subsistence of and in these 2 natures, one Christ, one Son.

IV. Heresies as background to the true understanding

V. The true faith acknowledges that there is a communication of attributes. But it does not make a commingling or conversion between the natures and the attributes.

A. property which belongs to the one nature is communicated to the person in the concrete (word doesn’t indicate natures but the person!)

1. humanity not said to be deity2. nor that an essential attribute of one nature becomes a substantial property of the other

nature3. would be to consider properties abstractly, outside the union

B. examples of true and false statements

VI. How the attributes of the nature are attributed to the person:A. When in Scripture the property of the divine nature is predicted in concereto of the divine

nature in Christ, as in John 5:19, “What the Father does, these things the Son does also,” and in Heb. 3:4-6, Christ as God created all things

B. When in Scripture the property of the human nature is predicted in concreto of the human nature in Christ, as in Matt. 20:18-19, the Son of Man is betrayed into the hands of sinners, in crucified, and rises from the dead.

C. When in Scripture the property of the divine nature is attributed in concreto to the human nature in Christ, as in John 6:62, “If you shall see the Son of Man ascending where He was before . . .” or in 1 Cor. 15:47, “The Second Man is from heaven.” “For,” as Augustine says, “whatever God does in Christ, He cannot be said not to have done also as man, for God is man.”

D. When in Scripture the property of the human nature is predicted in concreto of the divine nature in Christ, as in 1 Cor. 2:8, “the Lord of glory is crucified;” “You have killed the author of life (Acts 3:15); “God has redeemed the church with His own blood (Acts 20:28);” and “Jehovah, stretching forth the heavens and establishing the earth said, ‘They shall look on Me whom they have pierced.’” (Zech. 12:10),

E. When the properties of the natures are attributed to the person, the things which are proper to each nature are attributed in concreto, regardless of which nature is involved, e.g.“The Mediator between God and men, the man Christ...” (1 Tim. 2:5), or “God has redeemed the church.” (Acts 20:28),

F. When a property which belongs to one nature, either the divine or the human, in attributed concretely to both natures, such as “Christ is . . . yesterday,” that is, from eternity (Heb. 13:8). Likewise, Christ is born of the Virgin Mary (Matt. 1:18ff.); or, Christ suffered and died. (Rom. 6:3ff. and 1 Peter 3:18)

G. When a property which pertains to both natures is predicted concretely of both natures, as, for example, Christ is the Redeemer, Mediator, Savior. But those [properties] which pertain to each nature properly do not belong under this first genus of communication but under the second. (p. 176)

VII. A sort of summary of the matter:A. “For there is one and the same hypostasis of the incarnate Christ, whether we describe Him

concretely by the properties of the divine or the human natures or by both. There is one hypostasis ( ) subsisting in a duality and in two natures. Therefore, in order to demonstrate the intimate unity of the person, those things which belong to either the divine or the human nature or to both are attributed to the one hypostasis which is described as using concrete terms taken either from the divine or the human nature or from both natures, as has been shown by examples. However, lest anyone think the natures are commingled, we are in the habit of adding the statement, and this in accord with Scripture, that to whatever nature a property pertains, this is attributed to the person, or according to one of the two natures something should be attributed to the person, ...” ( p. 177)

Martin Chemnitz, The Two Natures in ChristSt. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 1971. Trans. J.A.O. PreusChapter XVI - The Use of This Doctrine of the First “Genus”

I. will help us to hold and confess the correct faith concerning the one person and the two natures in Christ

II. We, by observing it, separate ourselves from all the fanatic opinions pertaining to either Christ’s person or His natures.

III. Without the support of this doctrine, many passages of Scripture cannot be correctly interpreted or defended against the corruptions of heretics (Jer. 23:6; Jn. 3:13; 1 Cor. 2:8)

A. Jer. 23:6B. 1 Tim. 2:5C. 1 Cor. 15:47D. Jn. 3:13E. Lk. 1:35F. 1 Cor. 2:8

IV. These modes of speaking teach us many useful things about the mystery of the incarnation and redemption. (Lk. 1:43, Lk. 1:35, 1:32)

A. Lk. 1:43B. Lk. 1:35C. Lk. 1:32D. Mary, as mother of the Lord (though the divine nature of Christ did not take its origin from

the substance of Mary)E. Passion involves God’s suffering

Martin Chemnitz, The Two Natures in ChristSt. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 1971. Trans. J.A.O. PreusChapter XVII - The Second “Genus” of the Communication of Attributes

I. Chalcedon is evidence that the ancients recognized more than 1st genus: teaches that both natures in Christ perform with one another what is proper to each of them

A. = definition (for our purposes)B. pertinent first when we deal with the effects, duties, works, merits or blessings which Christ

bestows as Savior (namely redemption, propitiation, salvation and mediationC. pertinent second in that when Christ performs in one nature that which is proper to this

nature, then in this action or suffering the other nature is not supine, doing nothing, . . . but rather that which is the property of the one nature takes place and is performed in communion with Christ’s other nature (e.g., when Christ in his human nature suffers and dies, the divine is present in the human, permits it to suffer and die, yet strengthens and sustains it)

II. difference between predications concerning (1) essential attributes of the individual natures, and, (2) those we make concerning the duties, merits and blessings of Christ the mediator:

A. predications about qualities attributed to the entire person according to the nature whose attributes they are

1. If we consider them outside the union, they are attributes possessed everywhere.2. but are something entirely different when we are speaking of the work and benefits of

Christ - for there are certain things among these works which Christ’s divine nature cannot accomplish without the assumed humanity (e.g. giving His body, shedding His blood, suffering and dying)

a. In order to achieve these, He wills to bring about a communion with the human nature as toward an instrument.

b. Christ could have accomplished His end without this, but He does not so will.i. in order that we can be sure the work of Christ’s priesthood belongs

to us - because He did the work through the assumed nature which is of same substance as ours!

B. All works and benefits of Christ as Savior pertain to the person of Christ not according to either the divine or human nature alone, but according to both.

III. testimony of Scripture: the union took place in order that the work of redemption, propitiation and salvation might be accomplished in, with and through both of His natures

A. if not necessary (that is, if these could have been accomplished through one nature alone), then the Logos descended from heaven and became incarnate in vain!

1. Gal. 4:4; Rom. 8:3-4; Jer. 23:5; Jn. 3:17 - sent as the only-begotten Son of God (hypostatic union took place in person of Christ)

2. Heb. 2:14 - had to be done through death (Redeemer had to be a man)3. 2 Tim. 1:10 - to restore life (proper activity of Him in whom there was life from the

beginning - Jn. 1:4)4. Jn. 10:11 and 28 - two things cannot pertain to either nature alone5. Rom. 5:1-20 - He not only died for us, but we are saved from wrath by His life6. Rom. 8:32-37 - we are victorious not only because of Him but also through Him

B. Conclusion: [?] The Mediator between God (the offended party) and the human race (the offending party) had to be joined to both parties.

C. Antiquity noted how, in the case of Christ’s miracles, each nature in the incarnate Christ operated in communion with the other.

1. Christ could have performed all of these without bodily touch or voice.a. But He deliberately willed to show also His flesh as an organ of deity.b. so that in these outward and visible miracles He might show us the use of the

assumed humanity Deity has no fingers, breath, voice, etc.2. Physical touch, voice, breath have no power.

a. latter received power by participating in the power of the deity and received the power to cleanse and vivify

3. deity could not die, though death of the Mediator required assumed human naturea. suffering and death took place in the power of the deity

4. actions of each nature done in communion with the other a. summed up in one sentence: Heb. 9:14

IV. are not always able in the case of Christ’s works to picture or demonstrate before our eyes the way in which one nature performs in communion with the other that which is proper to it, yet because of the hypostatic union we do not doubt that it occurs

V. can to some extent understand greatness of sin, bondage, necessity of Son’s death to destroy power of death, appease divine wrath

A. a work of divine powerB. yet not done outside the fleshC. comfort of knowing this work done in two natures

VI. must not think that the divine nature was entirely inactive in the work of our redemption (or redemption would be ascribed only to the human nature; nor would our salvation be sure and firm)

A. “Furthermore, we must bear in mind that the hypostatic union is pertinent to a consideration of this kind of communication (koinonia), because this union is so intimate that the one nature acts in communion with the other not only in producing and accomplishing the effects of Christ’s work, but also in that, when the one nature in Christ does that which is proper to it, or when Christ performs according to one nature that which is proper to that nature, then also in the action or the suffering which is proper to this nature the other nature is not inactive, in that it either does nothing or does something else; but at that very time the one nature performs in communion with the other that which is proper to it. For example, suffering and dying are proper to the human nature, yet, because of the intimate hypostatic union, while the humanity suffers the divine nature in Christ also is not idle but is present in the personal union with the suffering nature, willing that it should suffer, permitting it to die, yet strengthening and sustaining it so that it can bear the burden and emerge victorious and its sufferings made saving. Thus Damascenus summarizes in Bk. 3, chs. 16:11 and 18:12 that the human nature in Christ is not motivated by itself or by its own judgment to the things which are natural to it, but it wills those things which the divine will wished it to will, with the deity giving assent (paracwroushs qeothtos), and it performs and suffers the things which are natural to it. Likewise he says that Christ’s soul, by the will of His deity, was tempted to natural infirmity, by the feeling of death and the desire to escape, in order that He might show Himself to be a true man. But again in this infirmity the human nature ‘was strengthened by the divine will and fortified in the face of death’ (tw qeiw neurwqeisa qelhmati tou qanatou kataqaoounetai) so that He willingly chose death, not only according to the fact that He was God but also man.”

Martin Chemnitz, The Two Natures in ChristSt. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 1971. Trans. J.A.O. PreusChapter XIX - The Third “Genus” of the Communication of Attributes

I. A difficult matter to explain because of the exaltation of Christ’s human nature

A. Matt. 17:2, Acts 9:3 and 22:6 - brilliance of the splendor so great that it is not only inexplicable but unendurable to human frailty

II. But still necessary to gain as much comprehension of the matter as Word of God reveals

A. comfortsB. disputes which cannot be settled without a correct understanding of this doctrineC. shall deal reverently and humbly with the express and clear revelations of Scripture, take our

reason captive under the obedience of faith and hold firmly to those things which have the express testimony of Scripture - even though we do not understand the how

1. where we do not have sure, firm and clear testimonies from Scriptures, will defer to that eternal school

2. simplest and safest method: clear passages, oldest and most approved writers of the ancient church

III. Augustine: the method was added to GodA. i.e., through the hypostatic union something was added to the person of the Logos, so that

that which before from eternity was a simple hypostasis consisting of only one nature, namely, the divine, now through the assumption of the flesh was made a composite person . . .

B. divine nature in its essence lost nothing because of the hypostatic union1. nor did it receive anything either new or greater than it had possessed from eternity (I

Chron. 17:17, Is. 2:22, Ps. 102:12, Mal. 3:6, Jas. 1:17, Rev. 1:4)C. assumed nature possesses and retains its own essential attributes in the union

1. because of and through the hypostatic union with the deity, it has received and possesses unnumerable supernatural gifts and qualities which are above every name and also above, beyond, and exceeding its own essential properties, which still, however, remain unimpaired

2. exalted above every name (Eph. 1:21)3. seated at the right hand of the majesty and power of God (Heb. 1:13 and Lk. 22:69)4. given all power in heaven and on earth (Matt. 28:18)5. has all things placed in subjection under His feet (Eph. 1:22)6. has received power, riches, wisdom, strength, honor, glory and blessing (Rev. 4:11 and

5:12)

7. has been anointed above His fellows (Ps. 45:7) and with the Spirit and with power (Acts 10:38)

8. His flesh has been made life-giving (Jn. 5:26 and 6:27); through this Man is the resurrection of the dead (1 Cor. 15:45)

Martin Chemnitz, The Two Natures in ChristSt. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 1971. Trans. J.A.O. PreusChapter XX - The Gifts Conferred on Christ’s Human Nature

I. God dwells graciously in the believers and saints.A. is not idle there but operativeB. accomplishes many supernatural works, things contrary to nature, in themC. gives them many gracious, spiritual, heavenly and divine gifts (called qualities,

characteristics and virtues)D. is called in Scripture “the fellowship ( ) of the Holy Spirit” (2 Cor. 13:14); believers

called “partakers of the divine nature” (2 Pet. 1:4)E. gifts not themselves the essential, uncreated, and infinite attributes of the Deity, but they are

gracious, finite gifts, in a sense, the effects of the Deity

II. is blasphemous to imagine that in the hypostatic union the human nature of Christ is left only in its merely natural state and that from this personal union it has received nothing

A. Christ, according to His human nature, was anointed above His fellows.1. divine nature of the Logos bestowed and poured out upon His assumed human nature

special spiritual, heavenly, and divine gifts2. all divine gifts, in total fullness . . .

B. If the Deity pours out this power on the saints, how much more we must assert that this takes place in the case of Him in whom the whole fullness of the Godhead dwells bodily!

C. But these infused gifts are not actually the essential attributes of the divine nature.1. inhere in the human nature formally, habitually and subjectively2. are in themselves created and finite3. are infused

D. passages used by ancients: Lk. 2:40, 2:52; Is. 11:1-2, 11:3-5, 61:1; Ps. 45:7; Jn. 3:34; Ps. 45:2-7; Col. 1:17; Jn. 1:14; Rom. 12:6; Eph. 1:21

E. This infusion or conferring of gifts upon Christ’s assumed nature remains intact even in the time of His humiliation.

F. From the moment of conception, these gifts were habitual in Christ in an absolute and perfect sense.

III. When the humiliation was finished, these gifts which had been infused were made the highest, the greatest, and completely perfect in supply, number, and degree, both in attributes as well as in activity (list of gifts of glorification follows)

A. “To summarize, He is above every name with the whole fullness of all His spiritual, heavenly, and divine gifts in the highest degree.” (p. 251)

IV. is proper to divide the matter into different categoriesA. review of nature of the infused giftsB. created and finite, and thus do not reach the excellence and preeminence of those things

which according to Scripture and the Fathers, on the basis of Scripture, have been given, bestowed, or communicated to the assumed human nature in Christ as a result of the hypostatic union with the deity

C. Because of the hypostatic union, the human nature of Christ, above and beyond its own natural or essential attributes, has been given, ornamented with, augmented, formed, and perfected by innumerable gifts, or rather by the whole fullness of all spiritual, heavenly, and divine gifts in the highest perfection

1. divine nature of the Logos manifests and exercises all its divine force, power, and activity through the assumed nature

V. these gifts which have been bestowed upon the human nature as a result of the hypostatic union with the deity must not be considered only in an absolute sense

A. as if the humanity were only ornamented with themB. human nature received them in order that it can be the fully and properly prepared instrument

with and through which the deity of the Logos exercises and carries out its activities1. not a soulless instrument (ax)2. nor a brutish thing (Balaam’s ass)3. nor something inactive (sun shines through a glass)4. but an animated organ - living, intelligent, rational- which cooperates as a living and

intelligent instrument when the deity wills to accomplish divine activities through it

Martin Chemnitz, The Two Natures in ChristSt. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 1971. Trans. J.A.O. PreusChapter XXI - Communion of Christ’s Human Nature with the Divine

I. A point on which there is disagreementA. centers on the important point of the majesty of Christ, and the true and saving knowledge

of Him (on which both righteousness and life eternal rest) (Is. 53:11; Jn. 17:3)

B. will not be able to fish out all the depths of this mystery; must be content with partial knowledge

1. will base everything on the clear & sure testimony of Scripture, defer other things for the heavenly and eternal school

2. the simple, sure, firm, and immovable foundation: we rightly can and must attributre to Christ with respect to or according to His assumed numan nature those things which Scripture attributes to Him

C. gifts of which we were speaking in the last chapter in no way equal or fully describe the excellence, preeminence, and majesty of all those things which the Scripture teaches

1. not only created, finite, or habitual gifts, but the very characteristics or attributes of the divine nature of the Logos Himself

2. 2 prior points:a. Those things which Scripture predicates as given to Christ according to His human

nature in this highest category are not created gifts, but are attributes which belong to deity itself.

b. Those things are given to Christ not according to the divine, but according to the assumed human nature.

3. Christ has been given all power (Matt. 28:18; Eph. 1:22; Heb. 2:8; 1 Cor. 15:27; Jn. 13:3; Eph. 1:22)

4. life-giving life given to Christ (Jn. 6:54, 5:26)5. power of performing judgment given to Christ (Jn. 5:27; Ps. 7:8, 9:8, 19:9, 75:7; Heb.

12:23)6. Christ was glorified. (Jn. 17:5)7. blood of Christ able to cleanse and destroy sin (Is. 43:25; 1 Jn. 1:6-7; Heb. 9:14; Rom.

5:9)8. “In Christ dwells the whole fulness of the Godhead bodily.” (Col. 2:9)

D. Scripture passages force us to say that, as a result of the hypostatic union with the Logos, not only created or finite qualities but also attributes which are proper to the divine nature have been given to the human nature in Christ above and beyond its essential or natural properties.

1. qualities given to Christ not simply according to His divine nature, but because of and with respect to the assumed human nature!

2. formal summary:a. “Therefore the correct understanding of Scripture compels us to hold that above and

beyond these divine gifts which were produced or created and are inherent formally in Christ’s human nature because of the hypostatic union, there is another and the highest category of gifts given or communicated to Christ according to His humanity, namely, the attributes of the divine nature of the Logos themselves, with which the assumed nature of Christ by reason of its union has the kind of communion that fire has when it is communicates its essence and power to shine and burn to heated iron, thorough the union, without commingling, so that the heated iron by this union and through the commingling shines and burns, as we shall explain more fully later. Therefore Christ, according to His human nature and insofar as this nature is personally united with the Logos, differs from the other saints not only by reason of His gifts, which by comparison excel the others in number and degree, but also by reason of the union He differs totally from the saints. For in no other nature does the divine glory of the Only-Begotten so shine forth, through no other does it so manifest itself, as in the assumed human nature.” (pp. 262-63)

3. Scholastics in opposition to us in this aspecta. should have little authority in the church, since they depart from the clear testimonies

of Scripture and the confessions of the ancient church; instead they philosophize about abstractions

b. answer: “To the law and to the Testimony!”4. will first establish the true teaching from Scripture, confirming from the ancient faith5. But as soon as we mention this communicating, a clamor goes up that we have made a

commingling, conversion, or equating of the natures in Christ; so we shall first remove this offense.

Martin Chemnitz, The Two Natures in ChristSt. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 1971. Trans. J.A.O. PreusChapter XXII - No Commingling, Conversion, Abolition or Equating of Natures

I. Any time a commingling, conversion or equation either of the nature or of the essential attributes of each nature in Christ is advocated, the orthodox church must rightly condemn it.

A. must look closely as see if the accusation is trueB. accusers’ position:

1. “But Scripture itself, which in no way teaches such a commingling, tells us that vivifying life and the power of executing judgment have been given to Christ, inasmuch as He is the Son of Man (Jn. 5:27).”

2. “Since the Scripture itself predicates that these attributes have been united with the Logos, it is surely manifest that we cannot conclude from this that a commingling of the natures has been created, if we understand this giving and transference in a Scriptural manner.”

C. involves an elementary mistake in arguing, i.e., if it does not take place in this way, it cannot take place at all

1. Scriptures and entire ancient church describe these attributes as communicated to the assumed nature

2. Therefore, they have to be communicated in some other way than through a commingling.

II. Avoidance of a comminglingA. substantial difference of the natures must not be abolished or confusedB. We confess that this communication is neither essential nor natural.

1. attributes peculiar to the deity are not communicated to the assumed human nature in such a way that it possesses them essentially

a. result would be that the nature in the Person of Christ would no longer be distinct and separate

b. We thoroughly condemn such opinions.c. We also reject the equation of the natures.

i. In no sense do we attribute to the incarnate Christ a double deity.2. Summed up: There is no communication of either the essence or the natures.

III. Survey of heresies on this pointA. principal points in the refutation of these ideas from ScriptureB. conclusion: in our churches we in no way teach, allow, or approve a communication of the

majesty which produces, brings, introduces, or establishes a commingling, conversion, or equating of the natures or essential attributes in Christ.

IV. On the other hand, we also reject those men who are contending that the majesty which we have just now been discussing is in no way given or communicated to the assumed nature.

A. are striving not to grant His full majesty to Christ, but rather to deprive Him of itB. First, some who maintain: “attributes do not pertain to the assumed human nature at all but

only to the Person”1. are given to Christ as man only verbally2. only the divine nature in Christ’s person truly possesses them3. results of this position:4. reasons for rejecting the position:

C. Second, others who say: “characteristics given to Christ in time were given to His divine nature, but not for the first time; His deity had possessed them from eternity and they were restored to Him in His exaltation, having been lost by His humiliation”

1. Scripture which refutes this: Jn. 5:27; Eph. 1:20-22, 4:10; Heb. 2:17-18; Jn. 16:15, 5:17, 13:3, 5:27; Col. 2:9, 2:3

D. Third, some “interpret all those things which we read are granted to Christ in time as habitual gifts or finite and created qualities”

1. preceding chapter shows that many of these gifts given to Christ in time arf not infused gifts or created characteristics or finite qualities

E. Fourth, those who say “gifts about which Scripture speaks were given neither to the divine nor to the human nature in time, but only to the Person”

1. But the Person of Christ consists of the two natures!F. Last, some who say: “Christ, according to both natures, has received in time those qualities

which Scripture teaches have been given to Him”1. do not, however, mean or believe that the commission of the work of redemption has

been given to Him, whereby He should direct and complete this work according to both natures

2. Five point refutation:

V. Up to this point, by clear, good, solid and sure arguments we have tried to remove the dangerous, corrupt and false teachings from both sides of this subject; now it will be easier, more expeditious, and more correct to turn to the true mode of this communication.

Martin Chemnitz, The Two Natures in ChristSt. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 1971. Trans. J.A.O. PreusChapter XXIII - The True Mode of the Communication of the Majesty

I. Have by now shown that the attributes belonging to the deity, which (according to Scripture) have been given or communicated to Christ in time, are not to be understood as having been given to His divine nature in time, but to His Person according to His assumed human nature

A. Because the Deity from eternity is in Himself perfect & immutable; is not possible that anything be added or given to Him

B. Because Scripture insists that Christ has been given life & the authority to judge (Jn. 5:27)C. Because Scripture sometimes expressly mentions Christ’s human nature as “making alive” (Jn.

6:54), that “His blood purifies our consciences from sin” (Heb. 9:14)D. Because Scripture often adds a statement that it understands Christ according to that nature in which

He suffered, died, and rose again (Eph. 1:20, 4:10; Heb. 2:9-17, etc.)E. Because whole ancient church is unanimous that, according to Scripture, the things given to Christ

in time must be understood has having been given to His human natureF. Because it is characteristic of heretics of all ages to refer to the divine nature of Christ those things

which Scripture predicates as being given to Him in time.

II. Have demonstrated as well that this communication must not be understood in such a way that we introduce a commingling, conversion, equating, or abolition of either of the natures

III. How we are to understand this communication apart from all commingling or equating:

A. Some will say they cannot see or understand how the divine attributes could be comminicated to the assumed human nature without a commingling.

1. not a satisfactory reason2. Just because we cannot understand how does not mean we must take away from or detract from

His flesh by our denials and contradictions those things which Scripture teaches have been given or communicated to Christ in time according to His human nature.

3. have shown that Scripture rejects any commingling, yet it insists that certain things have been communicated to Christ according to His human nature

B. ought rather to believe with the simple obedience of faith what Scripture testifies – even if we do not understand or grasp how.

1. For, after all, who can understand or explain the mode of the union which gives rise to this communication and upon which it depends?

a. Sarah and Mary inquired about the mode; see reply of angel in each case (Lk. 1:37; Gen. 18:14)

b. Paul says it is a great mystery (1 Tim. 3:16; Eph. 1:21)

IV. Nature itself in the physical world, or rather God in nature, furnishes un clear examples . . . (continue quote p. 289)

A. case of heated iron1. long explanation2. Scripture itself points us to this simile (Son showed Himself to Moses at burning bush (Ex.

3:2), and to John in the glowing brass (Rev. 1:15))3. simile is a reliable and simple description; why so (p. 291)

V. Summary statement:A. . . . just as the divine essence itself is communicated to the assumed nature, in the same way the

attributes of the divine nature are communicated to the human through the personal union. For through the union the whole fullness of deity dwells personally in the assumed nature, not with a simple, bore, or general presence only, as it dwells in the saints and angels, but in such a way that the entire deity shines forth in the assumed human nature; and the humanity in a sense glows with this light and is united with the Logos . . . Just as the assumed nature has the whole fullness of deity dwelling personally in it, so also it receives and possesses the whole majesty, power, and activity which are united personally with it and dwelling in it, not in such a way that they indwell with a separated or mere presence in the assumed nature, or function entirely separately, but rather in such a way that they shine forth in the assumed nature and work with it and through it, so that the assumed nature by virtue of its personal union with the Logos can give life and rule powerfully over all things. This is the real communication of the attributes of the divine nature without any commingling (just as fire communicates to heated iron its power of shining and giving heat), namely, that the divine majesty and power of the Logos demonstrate, carry on, complete, and manifest the works which the Logos did by Himself before the incarnation and still could do. But now after the union, not from necessity but from His own good pleasure, He performs them in and through the assumed human nature, escpecially those activities which pertain to the work of the Messiah.”

B. There remains a great generic difference between the divine and the human nature.1. divine: in essence is life-giving, omnipotent & omniscient2. human: is in no way life-giving, or omnipotent essentially, but only by possession of the diving

majesty and power of the Logos personally united to itself it makes all things alive, knows all, can do all

C. corroborative statements from the ancient church:1. another figure: soul and body2. another figure: luminaries other than the sun3. statements of Cyril, who has treated and explained this doctrine most clearly of all

D. Another summary:

1. “The divine nature of the Logos did not transfuse outside of itself into the assumed nature the same or equal majesty, strength, power, or activities that they might dwell in the humanity separate from the deity so as to become in themselves the proper, peculiar, distinct, formal, regular, or subjective characteristics of the humanity. But rather, the whole fullness of deity dwells personally in the assumed nature in such a way that the divine majesty in all its fullness shines forth in the assumed nature, and the divine strength and power exercise and carry on their works of majesty and omnipotence in, with, and through the assumed nature.”

VI. Not saying that the divine nature of the Logos cannot perform its divine works without the ministration of the assumed humanity

A. could do so before the incarnation, and still can do soB. but by a singular graciousness, He wished to take our assumed nature into communion with His

divine activities, particularly as an instrument in the work of the Messiah . . .1. “so that He might give us in His person a definite pledge that our nature will be blessed . . .2. and that we may know that we have access to these works and have fellowship in them and in

the benefits of the Son of God, our King, Priest, and Head.”C. “In order to accomplish this, and to make us partakers in His works & benefits, He added His

assumed human nature to our nature, Be became of the same substance with us, He became our kinsman, our very brother, flesh of our flesh; . . .”

VII. Sophistic arguments (Chemnitz replies to each):A. if positiontrue, would follow that the whole Trinity became incarnateB. since the essential attributes of the Deity are the same as the divine essence, would follow that the

human nature had become the divine essenceC. since the essential attributes of the Deity are the same as the divine essence, and since the essence is

indivisible, all or none of the divine attributes are communicated to the assumed nature1. cannot be all of them2. therefore, no divine attribute was communicated

D. clamor over word “koinonia” (“communion” or “communication”)1. word by no means includes or implies a commingling, conversion, abolition or equating of

natures2. words “real” or “true” (as in “real communication” or “true communion”)

a. If someone says we are hiding an essential commingling or confusion of natures under this language, it is a lie!

b. Such phrases explain and clarify the entire doctrine in a brief, clear, and simple way and they protect it against all ideas of a verbal, essential, or natural communication.

Martin Chemnitz, The Two Natures in ChristSt. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 1971. Trans. J.A.O. PreusChapter XXIV - Passages on the Communication of the Majesty

I. Col. 2:9

II. Matt. 28:18

III. Scripture passages which deal with the session of Christ at the right hand of the Father

A. Heb. 1:3; Lk. 22:69; Ps. 20:6; Ps. 21:8-9; Ps. 17:7; Ps. 45:4; Ps. 98:1; Ps. 118:16; Ps. 48:10; Ps. 18:35; Ps. 108:6

B. 1 Cor. 15:25; Ps. 110:1C. Matt. 26:64; Eph. 1:20-22; 1 Pet. 3:21-22; Heb. 1:3-5; Heb. 8:1-2; Heb. 12:2; Mk. 16:19;

Acts 2:32-36; Acts 5:31D. Ps. 115:3; Lk. 2:14; Ps. 97:9; Matt. 26:64; Eph. 4:10; Heb. 7:26; Ps. 57:5; Ps. 108:4; Ps.

8:1; Ps. 113:4; Jb. 22:12

IV. Other passages that deal with the communication of the divine glory or majesty

A. Lk. 9:28-36; 2 Pet. 1:17-18B. Heb. 1:3; Mk. 16:19; Heb. 8:1; Heb. 12:2C. Heb. 12:2; Lk. 9:30-32; Matt. 19:28; Matt. 25:31; Matt. 24:30; Lk. 21:27; Matt. 16:27; Acts

7:55; Jn. 17:5D. Jn. 17:24; Jn. 1:14; Acts 9:3; 1 Cor. 15:5-8E. Phil. 2:6-9;

V. Scripture passages which speak of the anointing of the Spirit (referring to the anointing of the human nature in Christ)

A. Ps. 45:7; Jn. 14:10; Lk. 1:35; Acts 2:4ff.; Lk. 4:18; Is. 11:2; Acts 10:38; Jn. 3:34; Jn. 20:22; Acts 2:32-33; Ps. 68:18; Rev. 5:12; Heb. 2:11ff.; Eph. 5:30

VI. Passages referring to the wisdom and knowledge of ChristA. Is. 7:15; Lk. 2:40B. Heb. 2:17-18; 2 Ki. 5:26C. Jn. 1:48; Jn. 2:24-25; Jn. 1:49; Col. 2:3D. 1 Cor. 13:12; 2 Cor. 5:16-17; 1 Cor. 13:12; 1 Cor. 1:18; 1 Cor. 2:14

VII. Passages referring to the vivifying lifeA. Jn. 5:26; Jn. 5:21; Jn. 5:18ff.; Jn. 5:27; Jn. 6:51-55B. Jn. 6:51; 1 Jn. 1:2; C. Jn. 6:51,53-54; Eph. 4:18

D. Jn. 6:47; Jn. 6:53-54; Jn. 5:25; 1 cor. 15:21

VIII. Jn. 5:27A. Acts 17:31; Rom. 2:16; 1 Cor. 4:5; Eccl. 12:14B. Rom. 14:10; Phil. 2:9-10

IX. Passages which speak of Christ’s power to cleanse hearts and consciences from sin

A. Heb. 9:14; Heb. 10:22; Ez. 36:25; Ps. 51:10; Acts 15:9; Matt. 26:28; Heb. 1:3; Heb. 9:12-14; 1 Jn. 1:9; 1 Jn. 1:7; Eph. 5:26-27; Lk. 5:21; Is. 43:25; Matt. 9:6; Col. 2:14; Heb. 9:12-14

B. Rev. 1:5; Acts 20:28; 1 Pet. 1:18-19; Rev. 7:14; Rev. 22:14; 1 Jn. 5:6

X. Passages which refer to the duties of Christ (as Propitiator, Mediator, Intercessor, Head, High Priest, King and Savior)

A. . . . are in keeping with His person not only according to the one but also the other nature; so that in the case of these duties the person has its actions and activities in and through both natures. The divine nature of the Logos acts as the principal agent in these functions in common with the assumed nature as with an immediate organ which cooperates as its own and in unity with it, . . .

B. summed up under three heads:1. the works of grace in the church

a. 1 Cor. 3:9; Jn. 3:25ff.b. Eph. 1:22-23; Eph. 4:12-16; Col. 4:1

2. the works of judgment against enemies and those who are godlessa. Jer. 23:5; Is. 9:6; Ps. 72:4,7,8,11,12,13; Ps. 2:2,5,6,8,9,12

3. the works of power in all creatures?4. eternal priesthood of Christ

a. Jn. 17:19; Ps. 110:2-3; Rom. 8:34; 1 Jn. 2:1; Heb. 9:24; Heb. 7:25; Rom. 5:9; Heb. 2:10; Ps. 68:18-19; Eph. 4:11-12; Heb. 2:17-18; Heb. 4:15-16; Eph. 5:29

XI. Passages which refer to the church as it practices the divine worship of Christ

A. . . . that is, when it believes in Christ as its Redeemer, Head, King, High Priest, and Savior and places its hope and confidence in Him, adores, invokes, worships, fears, serves, praises, and glorifies Him, this refers not only to His divine nature but includes the whole person and thus also the assumed nature. For the works of the Savior pertain to the person according to both natures.

B. Rom. 10:9; Rom. 3:25; Is. 53:10-11; Jn. 6:54; Ps. 2:11,12; Ps. 72:5,11,15,17,19; Rev. 5:5,6,8-9,11-12; Phil. 2:9-10; Heb. 1:6; Heb. 2:16-18; Heb. 4:15-16; Acts 7:56-59

XII. Summary:“I wanted to gather together and utilize the chief passages of Scripture as testimonies regarding the communication of the majesty, both for the sake of order and clarity and in order that when we have examined them we might have the explanation and witness of Scripture, for the practice of studying all these statements is the surest, safest, and clearest way to proceed. We should particularly note three points in these verses: (1) the all-sufficiency and perfection of which the Scripture passages speak have been given and communicated in time to Christ, not according to the divine nature, which has all things from eternity, but according to the assumed human nature; (2) Scripture predicates not only created gifts or finite and infused qualities as being given and communicated to the human nature in Christ above and beyond His essential characteristics but also the very attributes which belong to the deity; (3) that these attributes have not been communicated through an essential effusion or a natural or formal attachment or through some commingling, conversion, or equating of the natures or the essential attributes, but through the plan of the union, as the figure of the heated iron illustrates so well.”

Martin Chemnitz, The Two Natures in ChristSt. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 1971. Trans. J.A.O. PreusChapter XXVII - The Logos the Second Person of the Trinity

I. Some argue that the Logos is related to the Trinity in that:A. . . . the assumed nature of Christ is as far outside the Trinity as the rest of created beings [or]B. . . . that the assumed nature in Christ, even now after the union, is related to the substance or

essence of the Trinity [or]C. . . . that the assumed nature in the union has been changed into the deity itself.

II. Summary warning by Chemnitz:A. Therefore, we must be careful that we do not believe or speak in such a way that we divide

the unity of the Person of the incarnate Christ into two persons, nor bring a foreign substance into the unique and pure essence of the Trinity, nor change the humanity into the deity, nor make them equal. And because Christ’s human nature, with the difference between the natures unimpaired, is united with the divine nature, the human nature does not subsist of or by itself, nor does it constitute an individual person; it has been taken into union with the Person of the Logos, Who now subsists in both natures, the divine and the human, and yet He is and remains the Second Person of the Trinity. Hence we are correct when we say that the assumed human nature pertains personally to the Trinity because it is related personally to the Logos, who is the Second Person of the Trinity. And because it is not personally separate from the Logos, it is also not personally separate from the Trinity. However, the humanity of Christ does not pertain to the Trinity substantially or essentially, as if it were an essential, consubstantial, or coequal part of the Trinity.

Martin Chemnitz, The Two Natures in ChristSt. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 1971. Trans. J.A.O. PreusChapter XXVIII - The Session at the Right Hand of God

I. The ancients understood “the right hand of God” in a threefold sense:A. Basil: with reference to the consubstantial, coeternal, and coequal relationship of the Father

and the Son1. Scripture describes the session at the right hand such that it refers properly to the

assumed human nature (Is. 53:1, 63:5)B. Augustine: as “divine happiness and eternal blessedness” (Ps. 16:11)

1. also correctly applied to the human nature which has been exalted (but it does not explain the entire mystery)

C. as God’s glory, majesty, power, authority, dominion, and divine rule1. again, must understand this not only according to Christ’s deity, but also according to

His humanity, because it takes place in time

Martin Chemnitz, The Two Natures in ChristSt. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 1971. Trans. J.A.O. PreusChapter XXIX - The Worship of the Two Natures

I. is a difficult and important question as to how Christ is to be adored, invoked, worshipped, and glorified, as well as how we are to believe in Him

A. For the purpose of faith, worship and adoration, the name of Christ and His works of salvation are bound together in certain ways (Rom. 10:14; Acts 4:12, 10:43, 2:21; Rom 10:13)

B. Question: Is Christ to be worshipped only according to His divine nature, or according to both natures?

1. answer of the Scholastics: Christ the man is certainly to be worshipped with a unique _____________, inasmuch as He is also God, but He is not to be worshipped as a man, except with respect to the Logos, with Whom He is united

a. amounts to insisting that only the divine nature in the Person of Christ, and not at the same time also His human nature, is the object of faith and worship

b. Chemnitz rebuts by using Thomas (Jn. 20:28) and Stephen (Acts 7:59)2. one particular argument which has some appearance of credibility: that adoration or

invocation ought not be given to a creature, but to God alonea. Chemnitz’ reply: if Christ possessed only a human nature, or if there were in fact no

personal union between the human nature and the Logos, no worship, honor, adoration or invocation whatever should be given to the human nature. “But we believe in Christ and give Him the worship of adoration and invocation because He is not only a man but also true God; and the deity of the Logos has been united personally with the flesh.”

3. church worships Christ not only as a Person, but it looks especially to His work and His benefits (redemption, propitiation, salvation, justification, mediation, kingship, priesthood and headship), not only through His divine nature but also in, with, and through His assumed human nature

a. And in these works, His human nature also has its own efficacy.b. Conclusion: the Object which faith, adoration or invocation, worship, and

glorification look to and lay hold upon in the Person of Christ is not only His divine nature but also His assumed human nature.

4. Since Christ’s human nature through the personal union and the exaltation or glorification has been raised above every name, He therefore rules powerfully over all, but especially as the Head of the church (Eph. 1:22), not only by the divine but also by His assumed human nature

a. Thus the church by its faith, worship, adoration, glorification, and honor confesses its subjection to Christ and honors Him as its Lord, not only according to the divine but also according to the human nature.

i. Acts 2:34-36; Rom. 14:8-9; Heb. 2:14, 4:15; Rom. 14:10-11; Jn. 5:27; Phil. 2:9; 1 Cor. 15:25

ii. how Paul’s statement regarding the bowing of the knee on the part of things heavenly, earthly, and under the earth (Phil. 2) is to be understood: as in Rev. 4:9-11 and 5:1ff.

(1). Paul here shows clearly that the church, both militant and triumphant, adores, worships, and invokes Christ, not only with respect to the divine nature (as God the Creator), but also with respect to the assumed human nature (in which as man or as the Lamb He was slain).

5. Because of the personal union, the incarnate Logos is worshipped with the same adoration as the assumed flesh or humanity and not, as the Scholastics say, partly with worship (___________) and partly with bond service (_____________).

Martin Chemnitz, The Two Natures in ChristSt. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 1971. Trans. J.A.O. PreusChapter XXX - Christ Present in the Church According to Both Natures

I. are many clear statements in Scripture that tell us that Christ is present with His members, gathering, ruling, defending, preserving, and saving His church

A. is no controversy now about the divine nature of Christ, as to the fact that He is present with His church and with all creatures according to this nature (although in ancient times, there were many disputes on this question)

1. Scripture expressly says that God is not absent or far away, but close at hand and present, that He fills heaven and earth with His being (Jer. 23:23-24; Ps. 139:7-9)

2. Furthermore, Scripture also calls the church and the saints the habitation of God (Ps. 76:2; Ps. 132:14).

B. dispute today: where and how the entire Person of Christ – according to both natures – is present

1. method: divide the question into different parts and follow the Word of God2. have in Scripture the express words, institutions, ordination, assertion, or promise as to

the presence of the whole Christ according to His assumed human nature3. should not permit ourselves to be seduced from the saving truth of the human nature by

any kind of argument that this cannot happena. Son has all power given to Him – in heaven and on earthb. He can do those things of which He gives us a definite and express word (even if we

are not able to understand the way in which it takes place)

II. Gospel history is clear that Christ in the time of His visible and external life on earth existed in a circumscribed and local manner as is the case with other men (Jn. 11:15; Lk. 13:33; Matt. 28:6; Lk. 24:51).

A. With the attributes of its own nature, the body of Christ is finite in essence and by nature.B. If it were to gain nothing above and beyond its own essential qualities as a result of the

personal union, it would surely follow that He would be present only in a circumscribed way, as other ordinary bodies.

C. But the assumed human nature was subject to the dominion, command, and guidance of the divine Logos.

D. Logos willed that in the time of His humiliation He would live as any ordinary man (normal life, in a physical location); humbled Himself and therefore did not make use of His divine majesty and power

E. laid this circumscribed and local form of the presence of His body aside at His ascension (Jn. 16:28; Mk. 14:7)

III. The body of Christ, through His ascension or translation from this world to the Father, was glorified.

A. conditions or gifts of the glorified nature listed by Paul: 1 Cor. 15:42-44 (incorruption, glory, power, spiritual bodies, perfectly obedient to the Spirit , will utilize power of the Spirit)

B. According to the visible form or condition of glorified bodies, Christ is not present to us with His body in this life, but is in heaven whence He will return to judge.

IV. There is agreement concerning these two sides.

V. Christ is not so restricted and imprisoned in heaven that He cannot, when He wishes, also show and exhibit His presence in that form on earth.

A. Paul saw Christ in His assumed human nature after the Resurrection (1 Cor. 15:8)B. Ananias on Paul’s Damascus Road experience (Acts 9:17, 22:14)C. From this, Paul proves the resurrection of the flesh.D. clear that Paul’s rapture into heaven did not occur at the time of his conversion

VI. And we have an express word and a specific promise: Christ wills to be present with His body and blood in the obedience of His supper.

A. adversaries admit that if the words of institution are allowed to stand apart from all figurative language, they demonstrate the presence of the body and blood of Christ in the supper; they therefore take refuge in figures of speech when they try to deny this presence.

B. Anyone who believes Christ is God could not doubt the presence of His deity in the church.C. is still possible, however, to be in doubt as the presence of Christ’s humanityD. So He expressly mentions these things of which His human nature consists that He might

face all sophistries and deceptions . . .1. . . . according to His assumed human nature

VII. 7 points which both sides reject

VIII. Heart of the questionA. quote p. 434 – “Now in this . . . figures of speech.

IX. Importance of this matter:

X. Arguments of the Sacramentarians ultimately come down to this: essence of the human nature of Christ (both in the union and in glory) truly remains without change and must be retained; and since the true nature and attributes of the human body, inasmuch as it consists of a definite and finte arrangement of its members, naturally will not allow or endure that one body be present in many places with its substance at one and the same time; and since Christ’s body, both in the union and in glory, is and remains finite in the attributes of its nature . . . therefore the reality of the substance of the human nature of Christ must not be denied nor an abolition of His essential attributes introduced or allowed. Therefore the Sacramentarians conclude that the analogy of faith does not permit the wording of the words of institution to be retained . . .

A. whole argument comes down to this conclusion, because the natural reason and the normal manner and practice of this world believe that one body, according to its essential or natural characteristics, cannot at the same time be in different places

B. Christ’s body does not possess as an essential property the quality of being in different places at the same time

C. We grant all of this. For if we did not, the true nature of the essesnc of His human nature and His essential attributes would really be denied and abolished.

D. But by no means does it follow from this1. quote p. 4362. In the observance of the Supper He declares His will.3. There is no boundary on divine power.4. no contradictions5. Since it is a true, divine action, how can we subject it to the laws of nature?

E. Conclusion: the arguments of the Sacramentarians are not sufficiently certain, sure or compelling to cause us of necessity to reject the simple and proper meaning of the words of the testament of the Son of God.

XI. Reasons why we should retain the proper and native sense of these words:A. No one knows better and more surely than Christ Himself what He received for His

assumed human nature as a result of the personal union.1. We do have the passages in Scripture which deal with the substance of the human nature

and the fact that the essential attributes remain unimpaired – both in the union and in glory.

2. We have the express and definite words in the testamentary ordination and institution of the Supper regarding the presence of Christ’s body in the Supper.

3. So let us believe the Scripture when it speaks of Christ’s human nature – both as to things which are according to nature, and the things which are above nature and even contrary to nature.

4. Nor should we be fearful that because of this Christ’s true humanity will be lost or destroyed, for we have the express and sure word of God concerning these things.

5. Certainly in other creatures, God is not bound by secondary and natural causes, but when He wills, through His divine power He works many things which are above and contrary to reason . . . Why, therefore, should we be so harsh towards Christ’s body?

6. By no mental process can I understand and by no language can I explain how this takes place.

a. But the words of the will and testament of the Son of God teach the presence of His body in the Supper.

b. divine omnipotence of Christc. I ought to accept and believe these things, conclude that He wills and is able to

accomplish both the unimpaired reality of His true body, and His presence in the Supper.

7. How can we venture to say with good conscience . . . (quote p. 440)B. The hypostatic union of the two natures in Christ makes it now only possible, but easy for

Him to accomplish and perform this.1. person of Logos is above and beyond all localization2. after the incarnation, we cannot correctly or reverently think or believe anything about the

Logos outside the union with the assumed nature; this is the highest category of God’s presence with a creature.

3. assumed human nature has not lost its essential properties; with the union, however, He can be present with His body where and when He wills; we have a definite, special and particular word; must not be determined on the basis of human reason since this presence does not exist according to some rational condition of this world (All thought, therefore, about localization, mode or condition of presence, as the world understands it, must be set aside) – Why then do we argue against the presence? We ought to believe it with simplicity and obedience – even if we can in no way investigate or understand it.

a. must abide by Scripture in this deep mysteryb. use doctrine not to satisfy inquisitive subtleties, but rather for our comfort

4. axiom: (quote p. 445): On the basis of . . . however He wills.5. not a natural or an essential presence, but a voluntary and wholly free presence which

depends only on the will and power of the Son of God, that is, on His promises and assertions to us whereby with definite word He assures us of His will to be present with His human nature.

6. Thus we do not have sufficiently serious, compelling, or necessary reasons for departing from the words of the testament of the Son of God as they stand, but rather we should cling to these words in humble faith, deciding that the Son of God wills and is able to do what He promises.

C. based on the session at the right hand of God1. objection of natural properties of His finite body

a. reply: human nature of Christ has not only its own essential and natural attributes, but He has exalted His assumed humanity as well

b. “right hand of God” is not a circumscribed place but rather is God’s infinite majesty, power and authority

c. Therefore, Christ can be present where He wills to be – by reason of, and through the efficacy of, the majesty and power of God, at whose right hand He sits.

D. opposition: matters of locations, distances, intervals and separations of places1. reply: all things have been placed in subjection under Christ’s feet, also according to His

assumed human nature; how then can we say that intervals of space prevent or impede the Son of God from being able to be present with His body in the Supper; He has both space and time and all things powerfully in His hands and under His feet, also according to His human nature.

2. Therefore in His pure Word He has given and promised the church that, with His true nature inimpaired, He can be present with it beyond every localization where He wills to be present (Matt. 28:20).

3. Summary of method of argument on this point: (quote p. 448, “Thus, when we . . . qualities of the body.)

E. In the Lord’s Supper there is a public, solumn, and peculiar witness that Christ wills to be present with His church not only with one part of Himself (His deity), but wholly and completely (with His assumed nature also).

1. His, but this latter, of the same substance with us, our Brother.2. In it, He was tempted, suffered, died3. promises in the Word of God concerning the presence of the whole Christ in the church:

Matt. 28:16, 28:204. is a presence in which He is active and efficacious, which gives increase (Mk. 16:20;

Eph. 1:20; Col. 1:16; 1 Thes. 1:5, 2:13)a. He effects these things according to both natures.b. How can this be?

i. “All power on heaven and on earth has been given to Me . . .”ii. Christ anticipates this sort of question and joins together both His

activities (Mk. 16:20) and His presence (Matt. 28:20)5. Christ, after His ascension, gave to Paul clearly and expressly His solumn testimony that

He wills to be present in His church with His body and blood (1 Cor. 10:16).6. comfort that He wills to be present with us in the very nature by which He is of the same

substance with us, our Brother

XII. We must be especially careful that we do not break apart, separate or destroy the union of the natures.

A. are many who would have us say He is present in His divine nature only – but in saying this, they separate and destroy the union of the two natures!

B. these men quote the church fathers to the effect that the body of Christ, both in the union and in glory, is finite and circumscribed or local

C. Chemnitz: We reply, with Augustine, that we do not regard the writings of the Fathers as canonical Scripture, but consider them on the basis of the canonical writings.

XIII. Concerning creatures which are outside the churchA. Scriptures are clear: all things have been made subject to Christ as to the Lord, also

according to His humanity, not only in the church, but in all ways. Nothing is excepted . . .B. Christ’s human nature, therefore, cannot and ought not be removed or excluded from the

general dominion which He possesses and exercises over all things, or from the administration of the world, since Scripture expressly affirms that all things, even those which are outside the church, have been put under Christ’s feet.

C. We do not consider the human nature of Christ as only within physical bounds, but in the personal union, in accord with the exaltation, etc.; then we can believe this in simple faith – even if we do not understand how it can take place.

D. Question: Is then the body of Christ also in wood and stones, etc.?1. We do not have an express promise that He wills to be sought and found in such places.2. safest to drop such questions from our discussions and to limit ourselves to the

boundaries of divine revelation3. best to defer other questions for that future, heavenly acacemy

XIV. Luther’s advice for the simple in this dispute:A. (quote)

Martin Chemnitz, The Two Natures in ChristSt. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 1971. Trans. J.A.O. PreusChapter XXXI - Doctrine of the Exaltation of Christ’s Human Nature

I. Have always been those who thought this could not take placeA. could not deny the many clear passages of Scripture which describe itB. So they denied the actuality of the substance of His human nature.

1. imagined that by the exaltation it was changed into another substance entirely different from ours

2. true church, on the basis of the Word of God, has defended the fact that the substance, the essential attributes of Christ’s human nature actually remained, unimpaired

C. When Scripture predicates something about the body of Christ which seems to be above or contrary to nature, they deny that these two can exist together: (1) the reality of Christ’s human nature, and, (2) that the Logos operates in, with and through the human nature in a way which is beyond, above, and even contrary to the properties of human nature.

1. example: “sophisticaticated” interpretations of Christ’s walking on the sea or coming to His disciples when the doors were shut

a. are contrary to the careful details of the storiesb. are at variance with all the testimonies of all antiquityc. But we can understand this in a correct and simple sense from the fact that Christ

walked on the waves.i. Thus, the reality of Christ’s human nature is not abolished – even if something

happens which is not only above and beyond, but even contrary to the law of nature.

II. From Scripture it is clear that God, by His omnipotence, can and does perform many such things in other creatures.

A. not only above, but also contrary to the law and order of natureB. yet substance of these created things is neither changed nor destroyedC. examples: waters of the sea, of the Jordan, sun, iron, fireD. What insanity, therefore, . . . to argue that the omnipotence of God, while reataining the

reality of the nature unimpaired, cannot do something when it wills to do so which is above, beyond and contrary to nature, in and with that body in which dwells all the fulness of the Godhead!

E. The reality of the human nature does not reduce the divine omnipotence to so narrow or confine that the Son of God, when He wills, cannot, in, with, or through His body, while still retaining the reality of its substance intact, do something which is above, beyond, or even contrary to the natural and usual conditions of the human body.

III. Question: What are those supernatural things which we must believe and assert regarding the body of Christ?

A. fanatical opinions?1. are without testimony of Scripture2. are own speculations3. hold that nothing is impossible for the divine power of the Son of God

B. rationalistic opinions?1. argue from the capacity of human thought, the natural capacity of human bodies2. disagree with the words of Scripture and impose a more “reasonable” meaning

C. the one true, sure, firm and infallible rule which will guard our faith and direct it so that it strays neither to the left nor to the right: the witness of Scripture

1. the one wholly true, firm, and safe rule because He Himself knows best and most certainly of all what and how much can take place in, with, and through the human nature while it still retains the reality of its substance

2. When we have the testimony of Scripture, . . . we must not fear that the reality of Christ’s human nature will be abolished if we believe the Scripture.

a. even if it is beyond, above, or contrary to natureb. must not be led away from the clear words of Scripture, “. . . [F]or He who has

revealed His will to us in the Word surely knows best what and how much He wills and can do in, with, and through His assumed body, while leaving unimpaired its substance and reality.”

3. use arguments of the personal union and what the immeasurable power of God can do in created things

a. (therefore, He can do much more easily, surely and truly those things which Scripture affirms concerning the human nature of Christ – even those which are above or contrary to the law of nature)

b. examples: that the flesh of Christ is life-giving, that Christ is present at the same time both in heaven and in the Supper

4. testimonies of Scripture concerning Christ’s human nature are two-fold: (1) some testify as to His essential or natural properties, while (2) others speak of those things which are added to it beyond its natural properties because of the hypostatic union

a. should not cause us to be “caught on the horns of a dilemma”b. rather, affirm that both are the word of God

IV. We have how demonstrated by many arguments that the objection against the reality of the human nature is, when we have the Word of God, not a valid one.

A. ought to be held without exception – but Scripture itself shows what confusions human reason under this pretext of the reality of Christ’s human nature, is wont to excite in the face of the clear word of Christ (even in the minds of believers!)

1. Matt. 14:16-23; Mk. 8:17ff.; Jn. 20:19; Lk. 24:34,39,41

2. see how tenaciously even the minds of the apostles themselves were possesses by arguments concerning the reality of Christ’s human nature and against the things which Christ with His own voice attributed to His own body, on the grounds that these things are above and contrary to nature

3. We have cited these examples from the apostles themselves in order that we may be warned not to permit ourselves to be led away from the words of Scripture by thoughts and reasonings of this kind. For both the explanation and the refutation of such arguments have been shown and given us by the Son of God Himself in these accounts.

B. These supernatural things, or things which are contrary to nature in the human nature of Christ, must be understood as having the clear witness of the Word of God.

1. Defer other questions to yonder school in eternity.

Martin Chemnitz, The Two Natures in ChristSt. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 1971. Trans. J.A.O. PreusChapter XXXIII - On the Humiliation

I. At the time of His humiliation, His glory and majesty did not always reveal themselves openly.

A. He manifested the assumed infirmities of the humanity and endured sufferings of every kind.

B. Many have seized on this, arguing that the personal union with the deity gave or communicated nothing to the assumed nature.

1. feel that after the resurrection and ascension the human nature in Christ has now received those things which Scripture teaches concerning His exaltation – but from somewhere outside – not from the personal union with the Logos (which had taken place long before the ascension)

2. teach that exaltations of Christ’s humanity consist only of created gifts, finite qualities, or infused characteristics

3. define the personal union as a mere joining together of the natures, without any real communion

4. result: the glory and majesty of Christ’s assumed nature consists only of created gifts, finite qualities, and characteristics which are infused or formally attached

C. Chemnitz: idea is absurd and false that the exaltation and glorification of Christ’s human nature did not come to Him as a result of the personal union with the deity

1. is beyond all controversy that the most intimate, close, full and perfect presence or communion of God with any creature exists in the personal union, . . .

2. . . . therefore, no sane person can say that the exaltation and glorification of the human nature in Christ comes from elsewhere than from the personal union with the Deity

a. took place at the very moment of His conceptionb. fullness of the Godhead did not begin to dwell in Christ bodily right

after His resurrection

II. Philippians 2A. “Humiliation” does not indicate a deprivation, removal, robbing, exclusion, taking away,

degradation, putting away, lack, absence, loss, bareness, or emptiness of the fulness of the Godhead which dwelt in Christ bodily from the very moment of His conception; rather, it has to do with the exercise of it.

1. Christ drew in and restrained, to some degree, the divine power and presence which dwelt bodily in Him by working in and through His humanity, permitting the natural characteristics and other assumed infirmities to prevail and predominate.

B. Lest anyone get the idea, however, that because He refrained from using these characteristics, therefore Christ’s humanity had lost the fulness of deity, He at the very time of His humiliation and whenever He wished could show forth the fulness which dwelt in His flesh.

1. in His miracles, He manifested His glory (Jn. 2:11).2. In the transfiguration (Matt. 17:2; Jn. 1:14, 2:11; 2 Pet. 1:16), the apostles saw His

majesty.C. Both the word “empty” (kenos) and the term “I empty” are commonly used in Scripture with

reference to the use and working of things (1 Cor. 15:10; 1 Thes. 2:1; 2 Cor. 6:1; 1 Cor. 1:17; 2 cor. 9:3)

D. Therefore, with respect to these gifts, the plan of the humiliation was this, that although the Logos could have rendered His assumed humanity complete and perfect through the fulness, yet He willed to assume our infirmities for our sakes, restraining or holding in check the radiance of the indwelling fulness of the Deity.

III. Principle point regarding the incarnation: the whole fulness of the Godhead exercises His power, authority, and activity in and through the assumed nature – even at the time of His humiliation.

A. could have shown it forthB. hid Himself under a covering of infirmitiesC. a humiliation incomprehensible and indescribableD. expiates our first parents’ sin of disobedience and pride (Phil. 2:6)E. He is said to have received exaltation and glory at the moment He laid aside His infirmities,

but this doesn’t imply that He had not possesses this power and glory dwelling in Him previously.

1. Even in the time of His humiliation, He manifested His glory to the disciples (Jn. 2:11, 1:14).

IV. Summary: For in the incarnation . . . who dwells in Him personally. [quote pp. 491-92]

martin chemnitz, the two natures in christ...page 1 martin chemnitz, the two natures in christst....

Documents