Calvin quiz 6 Flashcards
What was Luther’s view about the way Scripture speaks of the Incarnate Christ when speaking of the two natures as well of the one person (the “communication of properties”/ “communication of attributes” issue?
Communication of Properties: Although each nature, both human and divine, retains its own integrity and the characteristics of one nature never become the possession of the other, they do nevertheless share these characteristics.
Communication of Attributes: The Lord uses both natures and wields all of their properties, at times only properties of the divine nature and at other times also properties of the human nature, so that we know that both natures are participating.
What does Kolb say is Luther’s primary emphasis when speaking of Christ’s atonement?
Jesus’s divine power that could overcome death and other enemies of the believer though he did not discount the divine ability to compensate for sin.
Kolb notes that in Luther’s Confession Concerning Christ’s Supper, Luther gives three presuppositions based on Luther’s understanding of God’s power and presence that serve as background and helped provide him with his support for his belief that Christ’s body and blood are sacramental and really present in and with and under the bread and wine of the Supper. What are the three presuppositions
- The Article of our faith that Jesus Christ is essential, natural, true complete God and human being in one person, undivided and inseparable
- That the Hebrew understanding of God’s right hand did not refer to a physical location within or outside the bounds of the created order but rather to the position that shared God the Father’s power and glory.
- That more than one definition of “presence” is used in Scripture to describe how God is in and with his people and his whole creation
How did Luther use his understanding of the “communication of attributes” to oppose the Christological teaching of Caspar Schwenkfeldt.
Luther affirmed that in Christ there is a divine nature and a human nature, and those two natures are in one person so that no other thing is conjoined and nevertheless the humanity is not the divinity nor is the divinity the humanity, nor does that distinction hinder anything but rather confirms the unity.
In the later 16th century Martin Chemnitz continues to reflect on Luther’s earlier considerations on the issue of the “communication of the properties”/ “communication of the attributes”. Chemnitz presented three principles (in Latin genus((singular)/genera(plural)). In a matching way be able to distinguish between Chemnitz’s three principles called:
a. genus idiomaticum
b. genus apostelismaticum
c. genus maiesticum
Genus Idiomaticum: affirmed that the chacteristics belonging to the one nature or the other shall be used to describe the entire person of Christ.
Genus apostelismaticum: Posited that the actions that Christ performed as he carried out his specific tasks, particularly his activities on behalf of the salvation of sinners, are to be attributed to the whole person of Christ.
Genus majesticum: maintained that within the personal union that is Jesus Christ, the Second Person of the Trinity shares with the human nature all of his divine attributes.
What does Trueman argue is the foundation of Christological reflection for those of the Reformed tradition?
The “pactum salutis” or the divine decision to save humanity in the light of its fall in Adam into sin.
While both the Lutheran and Reformed traditions affirmed as Biblical the concept from the Church Fathers called the “communication of properties”, how does Trueman say that each tradition, the Lutheran and the Reformed, approached this issue in slightly different ways?
What particular theological issue did this especially affect in terms of differences between the two traditions?
The Lutheran doctrine of the real presence of the whole Christ in, with, and under the eucharistic elements assumes that Christ’s body is not spatially limited in the manner typically associated with human embodiment. This in turn tests on the notion that certain properties of Christ’s deity are communicated directly to his human nature.
Reformed theology firstly desires to take seriously the Chalcedonian point that the natures are not to be commingles in such a way as to produce a third nature that is neither human nor divine but an amalgam of the two. Second, it hold to the principle that what is finite cannot comprehend or contain the infinite(finitum non capax infiniti).
Trueman notes that another concern from the Church Fathers that became important for the Reformed as they sought a Biblical Christology were the ideas called anhypostatic and enhypostatic.
a. What do these two terms mean in terms of the Incarnate Christ?
b. Which particular ancient here say were the Reformed seeking to avoid by reflecting on the importance of these ideas?
a. By “anhypostatic” the human nature considered abstractly in itself was being referenced, it was “anhypostatic”, that is not possessing intrinsic personhood but receiving its personhood from its union with the divine.
By “Enhypostatic” The human nature joined with the Logos receives its personal subsistence of the Second Person of the Godhead.
b. Nestorianism: Acribed two persons to the incarnation
Trueman notes that the Reformed share with many Lutheran theologians the “taxonomy of a threefold office of the Messiah/Mediator.
a. What is meant by this office?
b. Which aspect of Christ’s threefold mediatorial office do the reformed typically devote most of their attention
a. The threefold office refers to Christs role as a prophet, priest, and king, as well as how he fulfills each office.
b. The reformed typically devote most of their attention to Christs office as a priest.
In the midst of recognizing that within the Reformed tradition there is a basic spectrum of thought on how to explain the “particularity or “efficaciousness” of redemption in the midst of the recognition that all the Reformed ultimately reject the Arminian teaching on what the Armenians call an “unlimited atonement”, Trueman contends that “perhaps the most powerful arguments in favor of efficacious atonement derive from” what particular emphasis?
Perhaps the most powerful arguments in favor of efficacious or “limited” atonement derive from emphasizing the unity of the sacrifice and the intercession, the idea that Christ does not die for any for whom he does not intercede.
What was the basic teaching Luther learned on “freedom/bondage of the will” during his University studies?
Luther learned that he/sinners could earn sufficient grace to make our imperfect works count for merit in God’s sight if he could only first do his best.
By the time of the “Reformation breakthrough”, how did Luther understand the idea of the “freedom/bondage of the will”
By this time Luther held that the will continues to be active in its bondage to sin. Its ability to choose God is bound to make false choices by its sinfulness: it continues to will and to move human beings to place trust in objects God created rather than in the Creator himself.
Given Luther’s emphasis on the “bounded” will, how did Luther describe the will’s ability prior to conversion?
Before humans creatures are born again as new creatures in the realm of the Spirit, they do nothing and attempt nothing to prepare themselves for this new birth and this realm. When they have been re-created, they do nothing and attempt nothing toward remaining in this realm, but the Spirit alone does both of these things in us, re-creating us without our contribution and preserving us without our help as re-created beings.
What was Luther’s way of looking at the relationship of the sovereignty of God and the reality of evil?
God remains in complete control, but he is not responsible for the evil that has perverted the sinner at the core of beings and life. The tension defies logical mastery but preserves both God’s responsibility for all things and his creature’s responsibility for being the person God created.
What was the principal issue that led to the Strasbourg Dispute and what “basic consensus” was reached?
The concern to preserve the proper function of the distinction of law and gospel in preaching and pastoral care was the principal issue that lead to the Strasbourg dispute. A consensus was reached that affirmed that none should judge oneself to be a vessel of wrath but should instead heed the apostolic admonition that “all who cleanse themselves will become special utensils, dedicated and useful to the Lord, and used for every good work.