nature is formed thereby. In brief, to use the antiquated dictum, orthodox doctrine forbids us either to divide the person or to confound the natures.

That this doctrine is Scriptural and rational, we have yet to show. We may most easily arrange our proofs by reducing the three points mentioned to two, namely: first, the reality and integrity of the two natures and secondly, the union of the two natures in one person.

The formula of Chalcedon is negative, with the exception of its assertion of a e[nwsiv uJpostatikh> . It proceeds from the natures and regards the result of the union to be the person. Each of the two natures is regarded as in movement toward the other. The symbol says nothing of an ajnupostasi>a of the human nature nor does it say that the Logos furnishes the ego in the personality. John of Damascus, however, pushed forward to these conclusions and his work translated into Latin was used by Peter Lombard and determined the views of the Western church of the Middle Ages. Dorner regards this as having given rise to the Mariolatry, saint-invocation and transubstantiation of the Roman Catholic Church. See Philippi, Glaubenslehre, 4:189 sq.; Dorner, Person Christ, B. 1:9:1- 119, and Glaubenslehre, 2:320-328 (Syst. Doct., 3:216-223), in which last passage may be found valuable matter with regard to the changing uses of the words pro>swpon , uJpo>stasiv, oujsi>a , etc.

Gore, Incarnation, 96, 101 ? ?These decisions simply express in a new form, without substantial addition, the apostolic teaching as it is represented in the New Testament. They express it in a new form for protective purposes, as a legal enactment protects a moral principle. They are developments only in the sense that they represent the apostolic teaching worked out into formulas by the aid of a terminology, which was supplied by Greek dialectics. What the church borrowed from Greek thought was her terminology, not the substance of her creed. Even in regard to her terminology we must make one important reservation. Christianity laid all stress on the personality of God and man, of which Hellenism had thought but little.?


1. The Humanity of Christ.

A. Its Reality. ? This may be shown as follows:

(a) He expressly called himself and was called ?man.?

Was this article helpful?

0 0

Post a comment