Page 42 - Christology - Student Textbook

121
Monophysitism is a Greek compound word. Monos means “one,” and physis, “nature.” The initial
supporter of this view came from Eutyches, abbot of Constantinople, who rebutted the
unchangeableness of both human and divine nature after Jesus added humanity to His divine
nature. Further, he taught that “the human nature of Christ was taken up and absorbed into the
122
divine nature, so that both natures were changed somewhat and a third kind of nature resulted.”

Response to Monophysitism
Scriptures are quiet concerning the relationship between the divine and human nature after the
incarnation. However, what is clear is that it does not say that there was a third nature which was
formed as a result of Jesus’ incarnation. His teaching is not just foreign to Scriptures, but it is most
extreme.

The Chalcedonian Council responded by stating that:

We, then, following the holy Fathers, all with one consent, teach men to confess one and the
same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in Manhood; truly
God and truly man, of a reasonable [rational] soul and body; consubstantial [co-essential] with the
Father according to the Godhead, and consubstantial with us according to the Manhood; in all
things like unto us, without sin; begotten before all ages of the Father according to the Godhead,
and in these latter days, for us and for our salvation, born of the Virgin Mary, the mother of God,
according to the Manhood; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only begotten, to be
123
acknowledged in two natures, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably . . .

Furthermore, it attested that “whether we can understand it or not, these two natures are united
together in the one person of Christ.”
124

Below is the quotation from Millard J. Erickson, to help us draw some conclusions.

There are basically six, all of which appeared within the first four Christian centuries. They either
deny the genuineness (Ebionism) or the completeness (Arianism) of Jesus’ deity, deny the
genuineness (Docetism) or the completeness (Apollinarianism) of his humanity, divide his person
(Nestorianism), or confuse his natures (Eutychianism). All departures from the orthodoxy doctrine
of the person of Christ are simply variations of one of these heresies. While we may have difficulty
specifying exactly the content of this doctrine, full fidelity to teaching of Scripture will carefully
avoid each of these distortions.
125

There is no single author in Scripture that presented any conflict between the two natures in one-
person, Christ. Jesus was and is both human and divine. He is God welded to humanity, having a
human nature without sin and a divine nature fused together in one being.

9.4. Let’s Practice this Lesson…

1. Define the hypostatic union.

121 Grudem, Systematic Theology, 555.
122 Ibid.

123 Chafer, Systematic Theology, 386-87.
124 Grudem, Systematic Theology, 558.

125 Erickson, Christian Theology, 755.

41