“Jesus Christ is not a Human Person”: the Anhypostasis of Jesus Christ
Notes for presentation given at Restoration Fellowship Theological Conference, July 31, 2020
For video of the presentation click here.
For podcast (audio only) click here.
Summary:
Trinitarian
theologians claim that since God the Son “took on” humanity, Jesus was not a
human person. Otherwise Jesus Christ would be two persons (one divine person
and one human person). Trinitarian theologians call the non-human personhood of
Jesus Christ the anhypostasis (“without personhood”), and the divine
personalizing of the human nature the enhypostasis. Schlegel examines
the anhypostasis theory from a biblical perspective and finds the theory
to be anti-Messiah.
Slide
1
Deity
of Christ claim: “Jesus is not a human person”.
According
to Trinitarian Christology and theology, Jesus is not a human person. Jesus only
has a human nature.
This is called the anhypostasis
of Jesus Christ, meaning “without a person”, “impersonality”.
Slide
2
Most
Christians would probably say, “What do you mean I don’t believe that Jesus is
not a human person? Of course I do.” The truth is, there is a disconnect
between the theological academy and the pew. The average Christian doesn’t
think about the ramifications of claiming “Jesus is God”, but the theologians
have thought about it. However, it seems rarely do the theologians venture into
trying to explain the ramifications to average Christians. I believe that if
more people are confronted with this foundational traditional church teaching,
they will question the whole “deity of Christ” claim.
That
Jesus is not a human person is not a fringe claim for traditional Christianity,
nor am I creating a straw man that no one really believes. Rather, the
non-human personhood of Jesus Christ is essential to deity of Christ theology. The explanations from the five “deity of
Christ” theologians below show that the non-human personhood of Jesus is what traditional, mainstream Christianity claims.
The emphasis in the quotes are mine.
First
is an article by David Matthis, a pastor and Executive Editor of
desiringgod.org (of John Piper), from his article called, Anhypostasis: What
Kind of Flesh Did Jesus Take?
https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/anhypostasis-what-kind-of-flesh-did-jesus-take
“The
famous all-church Council of Chalcedon in 451 confirmed with clarity that Jesus
is “one person” with “two natures” (full divinity and full humanity), but after
the council, years of further discussion ensued. How is it that one person can
have two natures? When the Son of God took on humanity, did that not mean that
he was taking to his divine person a second (human) person as part of that
humanity? Is he not two persons, if he as two natures?”
Slide
3
Continuation
of Mathis article (see slide 2)
“Enter
the theological term anhypostasis. The Greek word hypostasis had come to refer
in the early church discussions to what we’d call personhood—whether in the
Trinity or in the two-natured person of Jesus—and so the negating an- prefix
was added to signify that, considered on its own (apart from his divinity), Jesus’
humanity is impersonal.”
“In
other words, Jesus took a fully human nature, but he did not take a human
person. Jesus can have a fully human nature without also taking a
pre-existing human personhood.”
Slide
4
Article
by a Catholic, Henry Karlson, “God Became Man without a Human Self (Hypostasis)
https://www.patheos.com/blogs/henrykarlson/2017/10/jesus-christ-god-son-without-human-person
“When
looking at him (Jesus Christ), we see one person, but when we discern who he is
in that person, we find he is one person with two natures, God and human. This
is where confusion and debate springs up.
This,
for many of us, seems rather odd. The perfect human is not a human person; the
perfect human has no specific human self.”
Slide
5
Philip Schaff, History
of the Christian Church
Philip
Schaff (January 1, 1819 – October 20, 1893) was a Swiss-born, German-educated
Protestant theologian and ecclesiastical historian, who spent most of his adult
life living and teaching in the United States. Schaff became a professor at
Union Theological Seminary, New York City in 1870.
References
are to the online version of his monumental History
of the Christian Church.
“The anhypostasia,
impersonality, or, to speak more accurately, the enhypostasia, of
the human nature of Christ - This is a difficult point, but a necessary link in
the orthodox doctrine of the one God-Man; for otherwise we must have two
persons in Christ, and, after the incarnation, a fourth person,
and that a human, in the divine Trinity.”
1653
“The
centre of personal life in the God-Man resides unquestionably in the Logos, who
was from eternity the second person in the Godhead, and could not lose his personality.
He united himself, as has been already observed, not with a human person,
but with human nature.” 1653
“And
the human nature of Christ had no independent personality of its own,
besides the divine;” 1654
Slides
6, 7, 8, 9
Dr.
William Lane Craig video excerpts from Interview, A Defense of Neo-Apollinarianism on Youtube Crash Course Apologetics (e.g., 19:25-20:10 in the video)
...in Christ we have one person with two complete natures...
it seems to me that that is correct. Secondly, the Logos is the rational mind
of Jesus, so that Jesus Christ is the second person of the Trinity. Therefore,
there is only one person in Christ. There is not a human person. There is no
man Jesus of Nazareth who is a human person. You have a divine person who has a
human nature.
Note again this statement from Dr. Craig:
…there
is not a human person. There is no man Jesus of Nazareth
who is a human person…”
Slide
10
The
Solution: Enhypostasis
From
the Protestant Got Questions website: What are enhypostasis and anhypostasis?
https://www.gotquestions.org/enhypostasis-anhypostasis.html
“Christ
is ‘anhypostatic’ in that Christ’s human nature is not personal in itself, but
also ‘enhypostatic’ in that it is personalised by being united to the eternal
person who is the second person of the Trinity. This makes his hypostasis or
personhood fully human and fully divine.”
“Sometimes
words seem to make the issue more complicated than it needs to be…If the words
enhypostasis and anhypostasis help us to understand and explain the Incarnation
to others, then they are useful. If they only complicate the issue, we can
communicate the same concept this way: “2 natures; 1 person.”
Slide
11
Continuation
from same web article as slide 10
https://www.gotquestions.org/enhypostasis-anhypostasis.html
“Jesus
did not seize another human and appropriate control of that human’s nature. We
could say that the humanity that He put on was impersonal.
“Jesus
added to His divine nature and person, and what was added was a real human
nature, not a human person.
“Christ’s
genuine human nature is in addition to His genuine divine nature, and He
remains one unified person, not two.
“Christ
is ‘anhypostatic’ in that Christ’s human nature is not personal in itself, but
also ‘enhypostatic’ in that it is personalised by being united to the eternal
person who is the second person of the Trinity. This makes his hypostasis or
personhood fully human and fully divine.
Slide
12
Deity
of Christ version of Romans 5:8
From: What
is the Hypostatic Union, Mathis,
Desiring God Ministries,
https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/what-is-the-hypostatic-union
"He
has demonstrated his love for us in that while we were still sinners, he
took our nature to his one person and died for us” (Romans 5:8, sic).
The
real Romans 5:8: “But God shows his love for us in that while we were
yet sinners Christ died for us.”
Slide
13
Biblical response to the non-human personhood of Jesus
Christ
1. This
is nowhere described in the Bible (like the Trinity itself). There is no
explanation, no discussion, no confusion, nor opposition expressed in the Bible
to concepts like the non-human personhood (anhypostasis), or the personalizing of human nature (enhypostasis)
by a divine being. The Bible knows no God-man, no “dual nature” of Jesus the
Messiah. These are all philosophical concepts created in centuries after Jesus,
totally foreign to the Bible. Rather, the Bible says plainly that Jesus is a
man.
John
8:40 “…but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you
the truth that I heard from God.”
1
Corinthians 15:21 For as by a man
came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead.
1
Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and
men, the man Christ Jesus,
Slide
14
Biblical response to the non-human personhood of Jesus
Christ
2.
“Deity of Christ” theology is a complete denigration of who the man Jesus
Christ is, and of what he has done for us. The man, the human
person, Jesus the Messiah from Nazareth “loved us and gave
himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God” (Eph. 5:2,
5:25; Gal. 1:4, 2:20, 1 Tim. 2:6; Titus 2:14; Rev. 1:5, 5:6, 5:12).
If
Jesus is not a human person, no human person gave
himself up for us, died and was raised from the dead.
Slide
15
Biblical
response to the non-human personhood of Jesus Christ (cont.)
3.
“Diety of Christ” theology attempts to eliminate the human person who has been
exalted to the right hand of Almighty God (Psa. 8, 110:1; Acts 2:33, 5:31,
7:56; Rom. 8:34; Eph. 1:20; Col. 3:1; Heb. 1:3, 13, 8:1, 9:24, 10:12, 12:2; 1
Pet. 3:22; Rev. 5:7, etc.).
If anything, “deity of Christ” and Trinitarian dogma has only an abstract
“human nature”, raised from the dead (re-incarnated?) in heaven at God’s right
hand.
However,
by Trinitarian dogma definition, even the abstract “human nature” has been
eliminated. Otherwise their definition of God would be three persons in two
essences (or four persons in two essences if Jesus is a real human person).
Slide
16
Illustration
of how all deity of Christ claims dishonor and deny the human person Jesus the
Messiah.
All deity of Christ claims are a denial of the human person, Jesus the Messiah.
The human person Jesus did nothing. According to Trinitarians and deity of
Christ claims, there is no human person involved in any of the Bible, including
these chapters: Gospel of John, Philippians 2, Colossians 1, Hebrews 1, etc.
Slide
17
Biblical
response to the non-human personhood of Jesus Christ
A
spirit not of God
1 John 4:2
“By this you know the spirit of God: every spirit which confesses that Jesus
the Messiah has come* in the flesh is of God.”
Jesus
is the name of the human person from Nazareth. Messiah or Christ
is the title of the human person designated by God (Yahweh) as king or priest.
*“has
come” - ἔρχομαι - “comes on the scene, is here”
Luke
7:33, “John the Baptist has come eating no bread and…”;
John
6:14, “When the people saw the sign that he had done, they said, "This is
indeed the Prophet who comes into the world!"
John
7:31 “When Messiah comes, will he do more signs than this one has done”
Slide
18
John 4:2 does NOT
say: “Every spirit is of God that confesses…
1.
that Jesus Christ has come
in the flesh and yet is fully God
2.
that God or one person of
God has come in the flesh as Jesus Christ
3.
that God or one person of
God took on human flesh
4.
that Jesus Christ came from
some pre-existent state into the flesh.
5.
that God added human flesh
to his nature, subsequently being composed of two natures
6.
that God or one person of
God has taken on a non-personal human nature.
Such claims are adding to and changing the Scripture.
"deceiver
and anti-Messiah"
2 John
1:7 “For many deceivers have gone out into the world, men who will not
acknowledge the coming* of Jesus the Messiah in the flesh; such a one is the
deceiver and the antichrist.”
• anti- can mean against,
but also opposite, instead of, in place of
• The trinitarian, deity of Christ is anti-Christ: opposing and
instead of, in the place of the real biblical Jesus Christ. A God-man Christ is
not the biblical human Jesus Christ of Nazareth.
• The Trinitarian anti-christ is a fake, an imposter Christ. The
Trinitarian “deity of Christ, God-man” is “another Jesus, another Gospel” (2
Cor. 11:3-4, Galatians 1:6-7).
Comments
I think you got it...😄
I hope you get further in educating people on what is really the most critical issue (other than the phony Evangelical bibliology even promoted by some in the BU community, e.g. Sean Finnegan, etc.) that is faces those who would name the name of Jesus of Nazareth.
Can the man Christ Jesus function independently of an incarnated deity just like you, I and all men do?
If the man Christ Jesus is not able to function independent of an incarnated deity, what is he missing that you, I and all men have?
If indeed he is missing something that you, I and all men have, he is obviously not fully man...
One more item - it is not that the human person "did nothing" - your first slide - but in fact there was NO human person - to even do anything... I know you get that but the wording in that first slide is confusing.
Blessings, Bill
Very good.
The follow-up question is essential - IF NOT - then what is He missing that you, I and all men have....
IF SO - then there is a human person AND a divine person - two persons (obviously not scriptural) - but there went Nestorius...🙂
This is the exact tack I take - except I add - "Deny Jesus of Nazareth - a MAN - attested to by God" - to keep it specific to the topic...