Jesus' Divinity and Humanity Nature (Essay Sample)

Jesus’ Divinity and Humanity Nature Name Institution Affiliation Jesus’ Divinity and Humanity Nature Introduction The biblical teachings on the full deity and humanity of Christ are so broad that both attract the belief from the earliest times in the Church history. However, a correct comprehension of the manner in which the divine and human nature of Jesus combined in a single person was formulated only gradually in the church. The formulation did not reach the final form until the Chalcedonian Definition at around A.D. 451. Prior to this point, several inadequate perspectives of the person of Christ were proposed and subsequently rejected. The doctrine of Incarnation attempts to expound the nature of God as being both human and divine in one. The early church saw the principle as the critical truth of the Christian faith, which resulted in the formulation of the Chalcedonian Creed. The Creed sets forth what the Christians have to believe as well as what the Christians should not believe on Incarnation, the fact that Jesus was God in human flesh. For this reason, the paper purposes to explain how the early Church, including the writers of New Testament, responded to the question of Jesus’ divinity and humanity. At the outset, the early church including the writers of the New Testament responded to the question of Jesus’ divinity and humanity by alleging that each nature of Jesus was distinct. The two natures of Christ remained separate besides retaining their individual properties. The distinctness of these two attributes was clear in these two attributes not altering the properties of the other and neither of the two attributes mixed to create a third form of an attribute. The early church had to fight and validate the reality that the two attributes of Jesus were separate and distinct from the other. The validation was to counter controversies evident in the three inadequate views of the person of Christ. These inappropriate views included the Apollinarianism that was perceptible about A.D. 361, which acclaimed that Jesus had a human body; however, he lacked a human spirit or mind. The second controversial view was Nestorianism, which stated the existence of two separate persons in Christ. The last inadequate view was the Monophysitism, which argued that Christ had one nature resulting from the two natures of human and divinity combining to form a third nature. The church claimed that Jesus often performed his roles based on his attributes without permitting either of the two attributes conflicting (A217 introducing religions, 2006: 14-17). Secondly, the church, as well as the New Testament writers, responded to the question of Jesus’ divinity and humanity by arguing that Christ was only one person. Woodhead (2014: 69), avow that the early church and authors of the New Testament argued that Jesus had two natures united in a single person forever. The church interpreted their argument by asserting that in spite of Jesus being a manifestation of two distinct attributes, the two attributes existed together in a manner that they constituted a single thing. The assertion was observable in the Chalcedonian Creed, which affirmed that Christ was to be seen in two natures but concurring in a single person along with a single subsistence. The subsistence was not to be divided into two persons but rather in the same Son, who is the only begotten God, the Word, and the Lord Jesus Christ. The arguments received validation from authors of New Testament, where the representation of both natures of Jesus was in a united one person evident in John 1: 14, Galatians 4: 4, Romans 8: 3, First Timothy 3: 16, First John 4: 2-3 and Hebrews 2: 11-14. Moreover, these scriptures affirm that Jesus spoke of him using the term ‘I’ and not ‘We,’ in addition to, several scriptures referring to both natures of Jesus but with a clear intention of refereeing to one person. Thirdly, the Church along with the writers of the New Testament addressed the question of Jesus’ deity and humanity by averring that each nature of Jesus was full and complete meaning that Jesus was entirely God, besides, being an absolute man. In the first instance of acknowledging that, Jesus was entirely God, the early church based their argument on the each person of the Christian doctrine of Trinity. The Christian doctrine of Trinity acknowledges that God is palpable in three consubstantial hypostases evident in the Father, the Son (Jesus) and the Holy Spirit. For this reason, the early church argued that anything that was essential to the being of God was also true to being of Jesus. Moreover, the writers of the New Testament in Colossians 2: 9 acknowledge that in Jesus all the fullness of divinity resides in his bodily form (A217 introducing religions, 2006: 16-18). In the second instance of perceiving Jesus as an entire man, the early church argued that the reference to Jesus as a man, the attributes typifying humans were also visible in Jesus hence making him comparable to the rest of the humanity. The authors of New Tes...