Digital Commons @ George Fox University Western Evangelical Seminary Theses Western Evangelical Seminary 1-1-1992 The oD ctrine of the Two-Natures of Christ: A Historical and Critical Analysis Amos Yong THE DOC TRINE OF THE TWO-NATURES OF CHRIST: A HI STORICAL AND CRI TI CAL ANALYSIS by Am os Yong A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requ irements of the degree of Master of Arts in the Division of Chr ist ian History and Th ought Western Evange lical Seminary October 1992 MURDOCK LEARNING RESOURCE CENTER GEORGE FOX UNIVERSITY NEWBERG, OR 97132 @ 1992 Amo s Yong ALL RIGHTS RESERVED TABLE OF CONTENTS page Acknowledgments . v Preface . vi Introduction viii Part One : The Hi storical Development of the Doctrine of the Two-Natures of Christ 1. Th e New Testament and the Person of Christ 2 Th e Deve lopment of New Testament Christology 3 Johannine Christology and the Incarnation 7 2. From the Apostolic Age to the First Council of Constantinople (381) ..... 13 Second Century Christologies 13 Te rtu llian and the Monarchian Controversies . 16 The Development of Alexandrian Christology . 20 Chr istology from Nicea to Constantinople 25 3. Christ as "Logos-Anthropos" . 32 Antecedents to the "Logos-Anthropos" Christology 33 Theodore of Mopsuestia and the Antiochene School 35 The Christology of Nestorius 39 4. The Road to Chalcedon . 46 The Nestorian-Cyril lian Debates . 46 From the Council of Ephesus to the "Robber Synod" 51 The Counc il of Chalcedon 53 iii 5. The Defense of the Chalcedonian Creed . 60 The Monophysite Re je ction of Chalcedon 61 The Triumph of Orthodox Christology . 66 The Monothelite Controversies 72 6. From the Med ieva l Period to the Reformation . 78 Christology in the Middle Ages . 78 The Reformers and the Eucharistic Controversy . 82 7- Christology in the Modern Era . 87 The Christology of Theologica l Liberalism 88 The Kenotic Theories . 97 Twentieth-Century Christology in England and the United States . 102 Re cent Thought on the Incarnation . 115 Part Two : An Evaluation of the Doctrine of the Two-Natures of Chr ist for Contemporary Theology 8. The Failure of the Chalcedonian Definit ion . 127 Cha lcedon and the New Testament Witness . 128 Chalcedon and the History of Dogma . 131 Chalcedon and the Current Crisis . 135 9. A Preliminary Christological Re construct ion . 141 Chalcedon and Christological Models . 142 The Standard of Scripture . 146 Towards a Modern Christology . 150 Appendix : The Definition of Chalcedon, 451 . 156 Bibliography . 157 iv Acknowledgements Th e labor of theological research is an exhausting process . Special thanks to the library staff at both Fort Vancouver Regional Library and Western Evangelical Seminary who assisted in locating and making accessible many works important to this study . I am greatful to my father , Rev . Joseph Yong, who bore with my periodical rambling and helped me to synthesize my various theological discoveries. I have also been priviliged to sit under the teaching and mentorship of Dr . W. Stanley Johnson, who took time out from the exacting demands of pastoral ministry to supervise this thesis. Th anks also to Dr . Susie Stanley and Dr . Irv Brendlinger , who were both part of my thesis comm ittee, and whose knowledge of church history and theology contributed to inform and direct my research and writing . I am especially indebted , however, to my wife--with whom I celebrated our fifth year anniversary while completing the initial manuscript--who endured patiently as well as supported me generously in every way throughout this project; and to my now twenty-two month old son for inviting me to take "time-out " dur ing some of the hectic and pressured moments throughout the writing of this thesis. It is to them that this work is dedicated . v Preface During the spring term of 1991 , whi le studying the develop­ ment of Christ ian thought in the modern period under Dr . W. Stanley Johnson , I began research for my M.A. thesis on the Christology of Oneness Pentecostalism following a suggestion by Dr . Susie Stanley made in light of my background as a Pente­ costal . Almost immediately , I came upon the definit ive work of David Reed, "The Origins and Development of the Th eology of Oneness Pentecostalism in the Un ited States'' (Ph.d Diss. , Boston University , 1978), wherein he identified Oneness Chr istology as pr imarily Nestorian in character , thus introduc ing me to the de cisive christological controversies of the patristic age . Over the the next six months, while wrestling with his work , I did further research in an attempt to determine the validity of his thesis. Wh en I finally submitted my initial proposal to the faculty of We stern Evangelical Seminary , my intention was to undermine the validity of the Oneness view of the Godhead by exposing the fallacious christological premises--basically Nestorian , following Reed--upon which it was enacted; this I sought to do by way of a historical evaluation of the Nestorian heresy , both in its ancient as well as in its modern dress. At th is point , the thesis committee recognized the importance of the history of doctrinal development to my study , and requested that I work closely with Dr . Johnson in completing vi this project . In view of his expertise and interest in the history of the devel opment of ideas--which was transferred to me as a student in the spr ing term of 1991 as noted above--I received this turn of events as a sign of divine graciousness and attention to my theological devel opment . While the following purports to be nothing more than a historical survey-analysis of the doctrine of the person of Christ , it is presented with the ant icipation that it is ju st the beginning of a lifetime of investigation into the fascinat ing subject of the development of ideas and doctrine , both in the area of Chr ist ian theology and ph ilo sophy as we ll as in the history of religions . vii Introduction The doctrine of the two natures of Christ formulated at the Council of Chalcedon (451) has long been understood by church historians and theologians to be , on the one hand , the terminal po int of the christological controversies of the patristic age and , on the other , the source of theological confusion which has since called for continuous clarificat ion . The explication of the mystery of the incarnation using the two-nature model of Chalcedon has therefore sought to steer the narrow course between the Scylla of Ap o llinarianism and Eutychianism on the one hand , and the Charybdis of Nestorianism on the other . Al though orthodox Christianity has traditionally been measured by the standard of Chalcedon , its formulat ion based upon philosophical and metaphysical categories foreign to both the biblical as well as modern world necessitates a reasse ssment of its validity for contemporary theology . Central to this study , therefore , will be the demonstrat ion of the numerous insuperable difficulties of the two-nature dogma as evidenced by its development in the history of christological thought wh ich will undermine its value for the modern age . This paper will therefore be divided into two main parts . The pr imary method to be employed will be that of historical analysis. Th is will comprise the first , longer, part wh ich will be a survey of the history of the two-nature doctrine itself , viii beginn ing with the New Testament . Considerab le attention will be devoted to the patristic formation of the doctrine leading up to Chalcedon and the ensuing christological debates extending through the Third Council of Constantinople (681) due to the crucial nature of both periods to a proper understanding of the issue s surrounding the two-nature doctrine . Important christo- logical developments during the middle ages and the Reformat ion will be highlighted before focusing on the numerous problems posed by the rat ionalist re sponse of enlightenment theology . Both the impasse created by the Chalcedonian definition and the failures of the speculative metaphysics of the Greek fathers wi ll be de l ineated throughout this study . Other theoretical and dogmat ic deve lopments in christological thought will be commented on primari ly as they inform the two-nature doctrine central to th is study . The historical survey in part one will demonstrate the need for a critical re assessment of the two-nature dogma which will be the focus of part two . Here , the ontological incompatability of Ch alcedonianism with the twenty-first century will be argued using biblical , historical , linguist ic , and philosophical criteria. As A. N. S. Lane has commented, "valuable though the Chalcedonian Definition may be , it is neither necessary nor 1 desirab le nor possible to accept it unreservedly. " This paper 1. A. N. S. Lane , "Christology Beyond Chalcedon ," in Ch ri st the Lord; Studies in Christo logy presented to Donald Guthrie , Harold H. Rowden , ed. (Downers Grove : Inter-Varsity Press, 1982), 258 . We will return to Lane Js criticism of Ch alcedon in Ch apter 8. ix wil l conclude with suggest ions for a preliminary reconstruction of the doctrine of the person of Christ which wil l seek to stay faithful to biblical and historic Christianity wh ile attempt ing to avoid the various difficulties which have been posed by the Chalcedonian dogma of the two natures of Christ . X PART ONE The Historical Devel opment of the Doctrine of the Two-Natures of Christ CHAPTER 1 The New Testament and the Person of Christ The fact that the Chalcedonian Fathers considered their adherence to biblical orthodoxy as fundamental to their under- standing of Christ as one person in two natures necessitates an analysis of the development of New Testament christology at the beginning of this study .