HTH-505: Week 4 Discussion – Christology and the Hypostatic Union

Discussion Instructions

Assessment Context

Faithful Christian theology rests upon the identity of Jesus Christ. This week, our focus shifts to the Council of Chalcedon and the development of the doctrine known as the Hypostatic Union. You are required to post a substantive initial response and engage with at least two of your peers to deepen our collective understanding of these foundational truths.

Initial Post Guidelines

Please address the following prompts in an initial post of 300 to 400 words. Your writing should reflect a synthesis of the weekly readings and personal theological reflection.

• Identify the historical significance of the Definition of Chalcedon (451 AD). Explain how this council sought to resolve the tensions between the schools of Antioch and Alexandria regarding the nature of Christ.
• Describe the specific meaning of Christ being “fully God and fully man” in one person. You must explain why the preservation of both natures is necessary for the Christian doctrine of salvation.
• Select one historical heresy, such as Arianism or Nestorianism, and explain how it distorts the biblical witness of Jesus. Discuss why this particular error fails to provide a sufficient basis for the atonement.

Peer Response Guidelines

Respond to at least two classmates by the end of the module. Each response should be 150 words and must contribute more than simple agreement. You might ask a clarifying question about their chosen heresy or offer a complementary scriptural passage that supports their argument. We encourage you to maintain a tone of academic charity while pursuing theological precision.

Grading Rubric and Requirements

1. Theological Accuracy: The post correctly identifies the two natures of Christ and uses appropriate terminology from the Chalcedonian Definition.
2. Support and Evidence: At least one scholarly source or primary text is cited using proper APA or Turabian format. Discussion includes relevant biblical references to support claims about Christ’s deity and humanity.
3. Engagement: Peer responses are timely and move the conversation forward through critical inquiry or meaningful theological extension.
4. Clarity and Flow: The writing is organized logically. Sentences are clear and follow standard grammatical conventions without distracting errors.

Athanasius argued that only a Savior who is truly God can restore the divine image in humanity. If Jesus were merely a created being, his death would lack the infinite merit required to reconcile a sinful world to a holy God. Therefore, the union of divine and human natures ensures that Christ acts as the perfect mediator who truly represents both parties in the covenant.

References

Behr, J. (2020). John the Theologian and his Paschal Gospel: A Prologue to Theology. Oxford University Press.

Context: A deep dive into early Christological development and the Johannine influence on the creeds.

Link: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198837534.001.0001

Bates, M. W. (2021). The Birth of the Trinity: Jesus, God, and Spirit in New Testament and Early Christian Interpretations of the Old Testament. Oxford University Press.

Context: Examines how early Christians used the Old Testament to define the divinity of Jesus.

Link: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198858560.001.0001

Wellum, S. J. (2024). The Person of Christ: An Introduction. Crossway.

Context: A current systematic defense of the orthodox view of the Hypostatic Union.

Link: https://www.crossway.org/books/the-person-of-christ-tpb/

Emery, G. (2019). The Trinity: An Introduction to Catholic Doctrine on the Triune God. Catholic University of America Press.

Context: Provides essential background on how Christology interacts with the doctrine of the Trinity.

Link: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv11sn30p