I wasn’t necessarily arguing with your overall point, just prodding you to watch your language closely.
Hey doc,
What follows is not an answer to yours or anybody else's post. I just picked up on your phrase,
"watch your language closely," and thought that some questions about Jesus the man, God, one Person, and two natures might be interesting and helpful to to some.
Introductory Notes:
Below are what I call some "important and interesting questions" about the Lord Jesus Christ. Many of the questions relating to Jesus, us laymen are not regularly conversant with. Now the brainiacs out there, the theological wizards know these things plus a lot more. Fisher' Catechism talks about Jesus in little bite-size questions and answers that I believe are quite easy to understand, even though the topic is wildly profound. Take your time, and don't think you have to read them in one sitting. Many of the things are worth prolonged meditation and praise to our God for sending His wonderful gift to the world.
You might want to pick up a copy of Fisher,s Catechism for your personal edification. It has over 4,000 questions and even more Scripture references based on the Westminster Shorter Catechism. I love this work with all my heart and soul, and have put hundreds and hundreds of hours typesetting it and studying it. I just plain fell in love with it. I think you could too.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Some important and interesting questions from
Fisher's Catechism: The Westminster Assembly's Shorter Catechism Explained
Westminster Shorter Catechism
Question 21. Who is the Redeemer of God’s elect?
Answer: The only Redeemer of God’s elect, is the Lord Jesus Christ, who, being the eternal Son of God, became man, and so was, and continues to be God and man, in two distinct natures, and one person, for ever.
Below are some of sub questions from Fisher's Catachism:
Q. 24. When he became man did he cease to be God?
A. No; but he became Immanuel, God-man, Matt. 1:23.
Q. 25. What is the import of the name Immanuel?
A. It imports, that God is in our nature; and that a God in our nature is not against us, but a God with us, and for us, to save us from the hands of all our enemies, Luke 1:71.
Q. 26. What moved God to become man, in the person of the Son? A. Nothing but matchless and undeserved grace and love, 1 John 4:10. Q.
27. How many natures has Christ?
A. Two: namely, the nature of God, and the nature of man, 1 Tim. 3:16.
Q. 28. Why are they called two distinct natures?
A. In opposition to the error of the Eutychians of old, who maintained, that the two natures were mixed or blended together, so as to make but one nature.
Q. 29. Why is he said to have but one person?
A. In opposition to the error of the Nestorians, who maintained, that each nature was a person; or, that he had two persons.
Q. 30. How does it appear, that the two natures of God and man are united in the person of the Son?
A. From Isaiah 9:6 —“Unto us a child is born — and his name shall be called — The mighty God.” It neither being possible nor true, that he who is the child born, could be the mighty God, except by union of the divine and human natures in one person, Rom. 9:5; 1 Tim. 3:16.
Q. 31. Will ever the union between the two natures be dissolved?
A. By no means: for he is, and will continue to be our Kinsman, Priest, and Representative, in both natures for ever, Heb. 7:24, 25.
Q. 32. Does not each nature, notwithstanding of this union, still retain its own essential properties?
A. Yes; the divine nature is not made finite, subject to suffering or change; nor is the human nature rendered omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent, as the Lutherans, contrary to scripture and reason, affirm.
Q. 33. Are not the acts and works of either of the two natures, to be ascribed to the person of Christ?
A. Yes; because all he did and suffered, or continues to do, as Mediator, must be considered as personal acts, and from thence they derive their value and efficacy, Acts 20:28.
Q. 34. Why is the union of the two natures called a hypostatical or personal union?
A. Because the human nature is united to, and subsists in the person of the Son of God, Luke 1:35.
Q. 35. What is the difference between the hypostatical union, and the union that takes place among the persons of the adorable Trinity?
A. The union that takes place among the persons of the adorable Trinity, is a union of three persons in one and the same numerical nature and essence; but the hypostatical is a union of two natures in one person.
Q. 36. What is the difference between the hypostatical union, and the union that takes place between the soul and body?
A. Death dissolves the union that is between the soul and the body; but though the soul was separated from the body of Christ, when it was in the grave, yet both soul and body were, even then, united to the person of the Son as much as ever.
Q. 37. What is the difference between the hypostatical union, and the mystical union that is between Christ and believers?
A. Both natures in the hypostatical union are still but one person; whereas, though believers are said to be in Christ, and Christ in them, yet they are not one person with him.
Q. 38. Why was it requisite that our Redeemer should be man?
A. That being our kinsman and blood relation, the right of redemption might devolve upon him; and that he might be capable of obeying and suffering in our nature, Heb. 2:14.32
Q. 39. Why was it requisite that our Mediator should be God? A. That his obedience and sufferings in our nature and room, might be of infinite value for our redemption, Acts 20:28; and that the human nature might be supported under the infinite load of divine wrath; which he had to bear for our sins, Rom. 1:4.33
Q. 40. “Why was it requisite that the Mediator should be God and man in one person?” A. “That the proper works of each nature might be accepted of God for us, and relied on by us, as the works of the whole person, Heb. 9:14; 1 Pet. 2:6.”
Q. 41. What may we learn from the indissoluble union of the two natures in the person of Christ?
A. That this union shall be an everlasting security for the perpetuity of the union between Christ and believers: that the one shall never be dissolved more than the other; for he has said, “Because I live ye shall live also,” John 14:19.
Westminster Shorter Catechism
Question 22. How did Christ, being the Son of God, become man?
Answer: Christ, the Son of God, became man, by taking to himself a true body and a reasonable soul, being conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost, in the womb of the virgin Mary, and born of her, yet without sin.
Q. 1. Did Christ assume the person of a man?
A. No; he assumed the human nature, but not a human person, Heb. 2:16.
Q. 2. Had ever the human nature of Christ a distinct personality of its own?
A. No; it never subsisted one moment by itself, Luke 1:35.
Q. 3. What is the reason that the human nature of Christ never subsisted by itself?
A. Because it was formed and assumed at once; for the moment the soul was united to the body, both soul and body subsisted in the person of the Son of God.
Q. 4. How came the human nature to subsist in the person of the Son?
A. The whole Trinity adapted and fitted the human nature to him; but the assumption of it, into a personal subsistence with himself, was the peculiar act of the Son, Heb. 2:14, 16.
Q. 5. Since the human nature of Christ has no personality of its own, is it not more imperfect than in other men, when all other men are human persons?
A. The human nature of Christ is so far from being imperfect, by the want of a personality of its own, that it is unspeakably more perfect and excellent than in all other men, because to subsist in God, or in a divine person, is incomparably more noble and excellent than to subsist by itself.
Q. 6. In what lies the matchless and peculiar dignity of the human nature of Christ?
A. That it subsists in the second person of the Godhead, by a personal and indissoluble union.
Q. 7. What is the difference between the human nature and a human person?
A. A human person subsists by itself; but the human nature subsists in a person.
Q. 8. When Christ became man, did he become another person than he was before?
A. No; there was no change in his person; for he assumed our nature with his former personality, which he had from eternity.
Q. 9. What is the reason that the assumption of the human nature made no change in the divine person of the Son?
A. Because the human nature was assumed by Christ without a human personality.
Q. 10. Whether is it more proper to say, that the human nature subsists in the divine nature, or in the divine person of Christ?
A. It is more proper to say, that it subsists in the divine person of Christ, because the natures are DISTINCT, but the person is ONE; and it was the divine nature only, as it terminates in the second person, which assumed the human nature into personal union.
Q. 11. Can we not say, consistently with truth, that the man Christ Jesus is God?
A. We assuredly may; because in this case, we speak of the person, which includes the human nature. Q. 12. But can we say, in consistency with truth, that Christ Jesus, as man, is God? A. No; because in this case, we speak only of the human nature, which does not include his divine person.
Q. 12. But can we say, in consistency with truth, that Christ Jesus, as man, is God?
A. No; because in this case, we speak only of the human nature, which does not include his divine person.
Q. 13. What is the human nature, or in what does it consist?
A. It consists in a true body and a reasonable soul, of which the first Adam, and every man and woman descending from him, are possessed.
Q. 14. Had our Redeemer always a true body and a reasonable soul, subsisting in his divine person?
A. No; until he came in the fulness of time, and then took to himself a true body and a reasonable soul.
Q. 15. How do you prove that he took this human nature to himself?
A. From Heb. 2:14, 16 —“Verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.”
Q. 16. Why is Christ said to take to himself a true body?
A. To show that he had real flesh and bones, as we have, Luke 24:39; and that it was not, as some ancient heretics alleged, only the mere shape and appearance of a human body.
Q. 17. How does it appear that he had a true and real body, as other men have?
A. He is called Man, and the Son of man, Psalm 80:17; he was conceived and born, Matt. 1:20, 25; he was subject to hunger, thirst, and weariness, like other men; he was crucified, dead, buried, and rose again: none of which could be affirmed of him, if he had not had a true body.
Q. 18. Had not he a reasonable soul, as well as a true body?
A. Yes; otherwise he had wanted the principal constituent part of the human nature: accordingly, we read, that his “soul was exceeding sorrowful, even unto death,” Matt. 26:38.
Q. 19. Why was not the human body created immediately out of nothing, or out of the dust of the earth, as Adam’s body was?
A. Because, in that case, though he would have had a true body, yet it would not have been akin to us, bone of our bone, and flesh of our flesh.
Q. 20. Did Christ bring his human nature from heaven with him?
A. No; for he was the “seed of the woman,” Gen. 3:15.
Q. 21. How then is it said, 1 Cor. 15:47 —“The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man, is the Lord from heaven?”
A. The plain meaning is, the first man had his original from the earth; but the second man, as to his divine nature, is the eternal, independent, and sovereign Lord of heaven and earth, equally with the Father; and as to his human nature, there was a more glorious concurrence of the adorable Trinity, in the formation of it, than in making of the first Adam.
Q. 22. What was the peculiar agency of each person of the adorable Trinity in this wonderful work?
A. The Father prepares a body, or human nature for him, Heb. 10:5; the Holy Ghost forms it, by his overshadowing power, out of the substance of the virgin, Luke 1:35; and the Son assumes the entire human nature to himself, Heb. 2:14, 16.
Q. 23. Why was Christ born of a virgin?
A. That the human nature might be found again in its primitive purity, and presented to God as spotless as it was at its creation, free from the contagion of original sin, which is conveyed to all Adam’s posterity by natural generation.
Q. 24. Was it necessary that Christ should be conceived and born without sin?
A. It was absolutely necessary; both because the human nature was to subsist in union with the person of the Son of God, and likewise because it was to be a sacrifice for sin, and therefore behoved to be without blemish, Heb. 7:26.
Q. 25. What benefit or advantage accrues to us by the spotless holiness of the human nature of Christ?
A. The spotless holiness of his human nature is imputed to us as a part of his righteousness, 1 Cor. 1:30; and it is a sure earnest of our perfect sanctification at last, Col. 2:9, 10.
Q. 26. Was not the virgin Mary, the mother of our Lord, a sinner as well as others?
A. Yes; for she descended from Adam by ordinary generation; Christ rebuked her for going beyond her sphere, John 2:4; and she needed a Saviour as much as others; and believed in him for salvation from sin, Luke 1:47.
Q. 27. What necessarily follows upon the union of the two natures?
A. A communication of the properties of each nature to the whole person.
Q. 28. How does the scripture apply this communication of properties to his person?
A. By ascribing that to his person, which properly belongs to one of his natures.
Q. 29. How is this illustrated in scripture?
A. It is illustrated thus: though it was only the human nature that suffered, yet God is said to purchase his church with his own blood, Acts 20:28; and though it was only the human nature that ascended to heaven, yet, by reason of the personal union, God is said to go up with a shout, Psalm 47:5.
Q. 30. Can an imaginary idea of Christ, as man, be any way helpful to the faith of his being God-man?
A. So far is it from being any way helpful, that it is every way hurtful; because it diverts the mind from the object of faith to an object of sense; by means of which we cannot believe any truth whatever, divine or human; all faith being founded solely and entirely upon a testimony.
Q. 31. How then is the person of Christ, God-man, to be conceived of?
A. It can be conceived of no other way, than by faith and spiritual understanding; or, by “the Spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him,”Eph. 1:17.
Q. 32. What improvement ought we to make of Christ’s incarnation?
A. To claim him as our own, in virtue of his wearing our nature, saying, “Unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given,”Isaiah 9:6; or, which is the same thing, to follow the practice of Ruth, in lying down at the feet of our blessed Boaz, saying, “Spread thy skirt over me;”that is, take me, a poor bankrupt sinner, into a marriage relation with thee, “for thou art my near kinsman,” Ruth 3:9.
