The Chalcedonian formula (451 AD) carefully articulates that Christ is one person (hypostasis) in two natures (divine and human), “without confusion, change, division, or separation.” This avoids the errors of Monophysitism (denying His full humanity) and Nestorianism (dividing His personhood). The unity is psychological, not in the modern therapeutic sense but in terms of personhood. Christ, as one person, has a divine will and human will in harmony. He is not “split” but fully integrated as the God-man, which addresses redemption and divine mediation. Philosophically, this is akin to composite unity: human beings are both physical and spiritual, yet we consider ourselves unified persons. Similarly, the mystery of Christ’s unity doesn’t imply logical incoherence but divine transcendence.
While love is central to God’s nature (1 John 4:8), reducing Christ’s deity to love alone oversimplifies biblical testimony. The Gospel of John (e.g., John 1:1-3, John 10:30) presents Christ as the eternal Logos, sharing in the full essence of God (divinity), which includes omniscience, omnipotence, and holiness. Divine love cannot exist in isolation; it is an expression of God’s triune nature. The Father loves the Son and the Spirit, and this intra-Trinitarian relationship reflects the eternal self-giving nature of God. Thus, love is one attribute, not the sole definition of deity. Reducing Jesus’ deity to love risks theological sentimentalism and does not account for His cosmic role as Creator (Colossians 1:15-20) and Judge (Revelation 19:11-16).
The hypostatic union addresses not a human psychological problem but a metaphysical reality: Jesus’ two natures coexist in one person. Modern psychology is ill-equipped to judge divine mysteries since its categories are limited to human experiences. Philosophy does not contradict the hypostatic union. Aristotelian metaphysics, employed by Aquinas, shows how two distinct essences can coexist without contradiction. Christ’s divine essence (Godhead) and human essence (manhood) are united in His personhood, which transcends finite comprehension. Moreover, the biblical account provides theological coherence. Jesus displayed divine authority (Mark 2:10) while fully participating in human experiences (Hebrews 4:15), proving the compatibility of His dual natures in practice, not just theory.
Trinitarian doctrine is not merely conceptual; it arises from the lived experience of the early Christians. They experienced the Father’s love, the Son’s redemptive work, and the Spirit’s transformative presence (Matthew 28:19, 2 Corinthians 13:14). The Trinity explains relational and redemptive aspects of God’s interaction with humanity. For instance, God the Father initiates salvation, the Son accomplishes it, and the Spirit applies it (Ephesians 1:3-14). Far from being an abstraction, the Trinity is the framework for Christian worship, prayer, and mission. Early Christians worshipped Christ as God (Philippians 2:9-11) and invoked the Spirit as divine (Acts 5:3-4), integrating the triune God into their faith praxis.
John’s Gospel emphasizes Christ’s divine attributes alongside His love. Jesus is presented as the Creator (John 1:3), the sustainer of life (John 6:35), and the sovereign judge (John 5:22). These roles require omnipotence and omniscience, not merely love. Love as an attribute of Christ does not negate His full divinity. Rather, His love is grounded in His divine essence, expressed through His incarnation and atonement (John 3:16, Philippians 2:5-11). Moreover, the Johannine emphasis on Jesus’ unity with the Father (John 10:30) and His preexistence (John 8:58) demonstrates a broader divine identity than Davey acknowledges.
2 comments:
Source: Davey, J. Ernest. “The Jesus of St. John : historical and Christological studies in the Fourth Gospel.” (1958).
The Chalcedonian formula (451 AD) carefully articulates that Christ is one person (hypostasis) in two natures (divine and human), “without confusion, change, division, or separation.” This avoids the errors of Monophysitism (denying His full humanity) and Nestorianism (dividing His personhood). The unity is psychological, not in the modern therapeutic sense but in terms of personhood. Christ, as one person, has a divine will and human will in harmony. He is not “split” but fully integrated as the God-man, which addresses redemption and divine mediation. Philosophically, this is akin to composite unity: human beings are both physical and spiritual, yet we consider ourselves unified persons. Similarly, the mystery of Christ’s unity doesn’t imply logical incoherence but divine transcendence.
While love is central to God’s nature (1 John 4:8), reducing Christ’s deity to love alone oversimplifies biblical testimony. The Gospel of John (e.g., John 1:1-3, John 10:30) presents Christ as the eternal Logos, sharing in the full essence of God (divinity), which includes omniscience, omnipotence, and holiness. Divine love cannot exist in isolation; it is an expression of God’s triune nature. The Father loves the Son and the Spirit, and this intra-Trinitarian relationship reflects the eternal self-giving nature of God. Thus, love is one attribute, not the sole definition of deity. Reducing Jesus’ deity to love risks theological sentimentalism and does not account for His cosmic role as Creator (Colossians 1:15-20) and Judge (Revelation 19:11-16).
The hypostatic union addresses not a human psychological problem but a metaphysical reality: Jesus’ two natures coexist in one person. Modern psychology is ill-equipped to judge divine mysteries since its categories are limited to human experiences. Philosophy does not contradict the hypostatic union. Aristotelian metaphysics, employed by Aquinas, shows how two distinct essences can coexist without contradiction. Christ’s divine essence (Godhead) and human essence (manhood) are united in His personhood, which transcends finite comprehension. Moreover, the biblical account provides theological coherence. Jesus displayed divine authority (Mark 2:10) while fully participating in human experiences (Hebrews 4:15), proving the compatibility of His dual natures in practice, not just theory.
Trinitarian doctrine is not merely conceptual; it arises from the lived experience of the early Christians. They experienced the Father’s love, the Son’s redemptive work, and the Spirit’s transformative presence (Matthew 28:19, 2 Corinthians 13:14). The Trinity explains relational and redemptive aspects of God’s interaction with humanity. For instance, God the Father initiates salvation, the Son accomplishes it, and the Spirit applies it (Ephesians 1:3-14). Far from being an abstraction, the Trinity is the framework for Christian worship, prayer, and mission. Early Christians worshipped Christ as God (Philippians 2:9-11) and invoked the Spirit as divine (Acts 5:3-4), integrating the triune God into their faith praxis.
John’s Gospel emphasizes Christ’s divine attributes alongside His love. Jesus is presented as the Creator (John 1:3), the sustainer of life (John 6:35), and the sovereign judge (John 5:22). These roles require omnipotence and omniscience, not merely love. Love as an attribute of Christ does not negate His full divinity. Rather, His love is grounded in His divine essence, expressed through His incarnation and atonement (John 3:16, Philippians 2:5-11). Moreover, the Johannine emphasis on Jesus’ unity with the Father (John 10:30) and His preexistence (John 8:58) demonstrates a broader divine identity than Davey acknowledges.
Post a Comment