Glorious Mystery - Chapter 18 (only 3 left!!!)

Here we are dealing with the nature of the person of Christ.

Owen is first going to talk about these things in such a way as to build up people who are already Christians - so that we do not fall into many heresies. Secondly, to manifest how distinct the relation between "the Son of God and the man Jesus Christ is" from any other relation God is able to have with man.

What the bible teaches in this instance can be put under 4 titles:

1. the Son of God assuming to himself a human nature. This happened both actively, the Son of God assumed a human nature and the human nature was passive in this work (it was assumed). We can observe some things here: a) This was an act not just of the Son but of the Trinitarian God (The Father designed it, the Spirit formed the flesh in the womb (Luke 1:35), the Son assumed the nature. b) This is the "only immediate [?] act of the divine nature on the human in the person of the Son" (p. 225) c) some distinctions between assumption and hypostatic union: i) assumption = the immediate act of divine. union = mediate act by virtue of the assumption. ii) Assumption = th act in which the Son and the human nature become one. union = relation of the natures in that one person. iii) Assumption = divine act, human passivity. union = the "mutual" (p. 226)relation of natures to one another.

2. The union of both the divine and human natures in one person. Things of another nature dwelt in the man Jesus Christ: a) The cause of this hypostatic union is "the free grace and favour of God towards the man Christ Jesus" (p. 227). For Jesus had nothing of grace in himself until the union occured. b) This union seperates Christ out from any other creature which ever walked on earth. c) This union provided Christ with the ability to perform his office. This union makes Christ to be called 'wonderful'. a) the most wonderful union is that of Father and Son and Spirit in one nature, which is more glorious than the union of divine and human in Christ - but the one we speak of is in a creature. b) An eminent substantial union is that of the human soul and the human body in one person, this is not how it worked with divine and human natures in Christ. For 1. soul and body make up ONE nature 2. soul added to body makes a new person - Christ was not a new person at his incarnation. 3. Soul and body are united by an external force, the two natures in christ are united by the divine one. 4. neither soul nor body exist apart from the other, but Christ's divine nature existed without the human. c) Christ's two natures were not mixed that they lost some properties else he would be neither God nor man. d) We must not (only on loose analogy) make an artificial union between the two natures. e) There is a union between God and believers in Christ, but the union of the divine and humans natures in Jesus is a union far greater than this.

Here are some errors of Nestorius who denied: "the true union of the person of Christ" (p. 230) He allowed 5 things about Christ: a) the divine nature dwelt in Chirst's body as one would in a house. But the word BECAME flesh. b) there was a union of affections: "The soul of God rested always in that man [Christ]" (p. 231) but all the time the Bible talks of God's affection for Christ it is talking about the love of the Father. c) Nestorius would allow that the same honour as the Son of God deserves can be given to the Son of man - but in denying the hypostatic union, he introduces idolatry. d) He allowed there to be an agreement between the will of God and the man Jesus - but this makes Jesus like the angels (which he is not - Heb. 2:16-17). e) he allowed for the name Son of God to be accomodated (only) to the Son of Man . But his name is not just accomadated to him, rather we are told that God shed his blood (Acts 20). These things he writes about can be considered true, but only if you recognise also the union between the two natures - which Nestorius did not.

Here are testimonies to the union: John 1:14 can mean either a) that the Word ceased to be what it ws and turned into human nature - this destroys the Divine Being. b) "continuing to be what it was, it was made to be also what it was not before" (p. 232). Phil. 2:6-8 - "the human nature is the nature of the person of him who was in the form of God" (p. 233). Isa. 9:6 - "the child and the mighty God are the same person, or he that is 'born a child' cannot be rightly called 'the Mighty God.'" (p. 233).

3. The communication of these two distinct natures. Here we consider: a) what is only from the divine nature to the human - i) What makes Jesus the Son. ii) what fills Jesus with all grace. iii) what gives Jesus' acts "worth and dignity" (p. 233). b) what is from both human and divine natures: i) Each nature keeps its own properties - there is no mixture ii) Each nature does that in christ which it must (divine - upholds the world; human - obeys, dies etc.). iii) All Christ's work cannot be said to be divine in one instance and human in another, but all is done by the one person Jesus Christ.

4. And this last point leads us to our last. Namely, the things said of Christ in Scripture: a) Some things are spoken of Christ and refer to his divine nature (John 1:1; Heb. 1:3); some things are spoken of him and refer to his human nature (Isa. 9:6; 53:3). b)Sometimes he is spoken of not in terms of either nature but in terms of his one person (head, king, priest, prophet). b) sometimes the properties of one nature are assigned to the other - "they crucified the Lord of glory" and, "the Son of man who is in heaven" (John 3:13). d) Sometimes Christ being discussed in one nature has ascribed to him that which belongs to both "according to the flesh, is the Christ who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen" - Romans 9:5.

Owen almost makes the comment that this chapter could have been omitted but that many others in dealing with the person of Christ have included these things, so he had to.