Christ's Two Natures: Exaggeration of Diversity - rejection of Unity

Scholars in the early Christian Church had to wrestle with passages of Scripture such as this:

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1.

Later in this passage, the "Word" (Greek logos) was identified with Jesus Christ, the "Word made flesh". This presented them with a trilemma:

  1. The reports from the Apostles in the Gospels clearly taught that Christ was divine.
  2. The Gospels clearly taught that Christ was human.
  3. Christ was described as a single person, with one consistent mind and will.
How could all three of these claims be true at the same time? Attempts to harmonize, explain and formulate a coherent doctrine of the nature(s) of Christ became a whole field of study called Christology. Over the course of several centuries, every imaginable combination of ideas were devised and taught. The early church had to decide which of these were most consistent with the totality of Scripture, and which were to be rejected as heresies. This they did, in several ecumenical councils. See the 3D Overview for further information about these developments.

One possibility was that the two natures did not coexist in Christ; one or the other was an illusion. Docetism taught that Christ was divine and not actually human. One problem with this idea is that it made Christ's sacrifice for sins also an illusion. In order for sins to be atoned for, a real, human sacrifice was necessary. That is why Christ was called the "Lamb of God, Who takes away the sin of the world" by John the Baptist. As the Reformers taught, "That which is not assumed is not healed". Therefore Christ had to be truly human, as well as truly divine. So the teaching of Docetism was ruled heretical by early church leaders such as Ignatius of Antioch, Irenaeus and Tertullian.

Return to trilogic diagram