Final

Question 1

Anhypostasis

Answer 1

Definition: Greek for “impersonality”, meaning the humanity of
Christ was not independent of his deity. Jesus was not a human and
then ‘adopted’ by God the Father to be his Son. Jesus has been one
person since his conception.

Question 2

Enhypostasis

Answer 2

Definition: Greek for “inpersonality” In other words, Jesus, in his
humanity, lived and moved and had his being upheld by his deity, just
like a normal person. This was to guard against the idea that Jesus’s
two natures fused, melded, or blended into one new nature.

Question 3

Extra Calvinisticum

Answer 3

Definition: Latin for “the Calvinistic extra”, a term that Lutherans
use to poke fun at the Reformed doctrine of the transcendence of
Christ’s deity. The Reformed argue that the deity of Christ and his
humanity were united, but that deity was transcendent as not to make
Christ’s humanity omnipresent or what have you.

Question 4

Finitum non capax infiniti

Answer 4

Definition: Latin for “The finite is incapable of the infinite”. It is a
maxim that is used in the debates between the Reformed and the
Lutherans. Basically, the finite is unable to grasp or comprehend the
infinite. This is used in Christology to explain how the humanity of
Christ is unable to be omnipresent or possess any of the other
attributes of God.

Question 5

Generatio

Answer 5

Definition: Latin for “generation” or in human terms birth. But when
speaking about the Second Person of the Trinity it is talking about the
eternal begottenness of the Son.

Question 6

Incarnandus

Answer 6

Definition: Latin for “to be incarnate/ incarnate” A reference to the
work that the Incarnate Lord did in his time on earth.

Question 7

Incarnatio

Answer 7

Definition: Latin for “Incarnation”. A reference to the act of uniting
human flesh with the Word of God.

Question 8

Intercessio Christi

Answer 8

Definition: Latin for “The Intercession of Christ”. This work of
intercession is different from his other works as priest. Basically, this
is the phrase used to describe Christ pleading his own blood before the
Father by simply being there.

Question 9

Logos

Answer 9

Definition: Greek for, “Word”. The word ‘word’ has a broad meaning,
but mostly it is used to refer to Jesus.

Question 10

Logos asarkos

Answer 10

Definition: Greek for, “The Word without flesh”, this is a phrase
used to describe Jesus before his Incarnation.

Question 11

Logos endiathetos/Logos prophorikos

Answer 11

Definition: Greek for, “The Immanent Word” and “The Word
brought forth”. The first one means that the Word is near rather than
transcendent above our knowledge and grasp. The Word brought forth
is a reference to Word being brought forth as the first born of all
creation.

Question 12

Munus triplex

Answer 12

Definition: Latin for, “The Threefold Office”, that office is the
Prophetic ministry, the Priesthood, and Kingship of Jesus.

Question 13

Regnum Christi

Answer 13

Definition: Translates to “The Reign of Christ”, a phrase used to
describe the reign of Christ over all things. The Lutherans and
Reformed disagree over what this can apply to. Not very surprised
about that.

Question 14

Satisfactio

Answer 14

Definition: Latin for, “Satisfaction”, which refers to the making of
emends for sin through Christ’s death for us.

Question 15

Satisfactio vicaria

Answer 15

Definition: Latin for, “Vicarious satisfaction”, meaning the
satisfaction that Christ made on our behalf on the cross.

Question 16

Sessio Christi

Answer 16

Definition: Latin for, “The sitting of Christ”, which is a reference to
his intercession at the right hand of the Father.

Question 17

Status exaltationis

Answer 17

Definition: Translates to “State of Exaltation”, referencing the state
Christ is in at the present time after his resurrection and will remain
this way forever.

Question 18

Status humiliationis

Answer 18

Definition: Translates to “State of Humiliation”, the state of the Lord
Jesus after he took on human flesh in the womb of the Virgin Mary,
his life as a man, his passion, up until his resurrection.

Question 19

Theanthropos

Answer 19

Definition: Literally translates to “God-man”, a title that affirms both
the deity and the humanity of the Lord Jesus being truly God and truly
man.

Question 20

Theotokos

Answer 20

Definition: Literally translates to “God-bearer”, a title given to Mary
to make clear that Christ was fully God even in her womb.

Question 21

How do the four Gospels complement
each other in their revelation of the
person of Jesus Christ?

Answer 21

All of these point to the person and work of Jesus
Christ as perfect savior for humanity. Each present his advent from different angles showing that his salvation
is perfect…

Question 22

What is the significance of the
difference in the way each of the
four Gospels begins?

Answer 22

Matthew: Promised Messiah

Mark: Son of God, Fulfillment of Prophecy

Luke: The wonder of the Incarnation

John: Jesus is God

Question 23

Summarize the basic
Christological emphases in the
letters of Paul.

Answer 23

The heart of Paul’s Christology is that Jesus is the
Son of God, the Jewish messiah, and the
descendant of David.

Jesus is the Divine Savior (Gal. 4:4-7); Jesus is the
Incarnate Savior (1 Cor. 8:6); Jesus is the Second
Adam (Rom. 5:12-21); Jesus is the Image of God (Col.
1:15-20); Jesus is Truly Human (Phil. 2:5-8); Jesus is
the LORD (1 Cor. 8:6)

Question 24

When we read the Gospels, what
phenomenon do we encounter that gave rise
to the theological questions concerning the
person of Christ?

Answer 24

Jesus is a human that is doing and saying things that
only God can either do or say. This led to much
controversy in the Early Church over the person of
Jesus. They wrestled over his divinity and his
humanity and how they related to one another, or even
if Christ was divine or had a physical body.

Question 25

What was the Ebionite
heresy?

Answer 25

The Ebionite heresy was a heresy that taught that Jesus
was just a human and was not divine; He was only a
really good prophet.

The Problem with Ebionitism is that it does not take
into consideration John 1:1-18 or 1 Cor. 8:6.

Question 26

What was the Docetic
heresy?

Answer 26

The Docetic heresy was a heresy that taught that
Christ was not really human, only a mirage to the eyes.
He did not really suffer on the cross or feel hunger.

This heresy fails to take into account the apostolic
witness of the humanity of Jesus (1 John 1:1-4).

Question 27

Summarize the basic tenets
of Arius’s doctrine.

Answer 27

“There was a time when the Son was not” – popular
slogan

The Father was not always the Father

Christ is not an angel, but is a lower class of god

The issue with Arianism is that Scripture ascribes
things to Christ that only God can do (Col. 1:17)

Question 28

Summarize Apollinarian
Christology

Answer 28

Jesus had a divine mind and a human body.

Like a hand in a glove.

“That which is not assumed is not healed.” – Gregory
of Nazianzus

Christ, If he was not truly human (meaning if he was
just as human as you and I are), then he could not
sympathize with us (Heb. 4:14-16; Heb 2:10-18).

Question 29

Summarize the doctrine of
Diodore of Tarsus and Theodore
of Mopsuestia

Answer 29

Another name for it is Two Sons Theology

Taught that there was a Son of God and Son of Mary

All built on the assumption that deity could not change
or unite, Mary is not the origin of God

The issue is that Christ is described as one person in
the Bible.

Question 30

Summarize the basic elements of
the Christology of Nestorius

Answer 30

The Son of Mary is not the Son of God

Two natures or subjects are connected by moral unity
or accidental unity

Human activities are asserted by the man

Cannot say that God Incarnate suffered and died

Mary cannot in any sense be the bearer of God

Question 31

Why is Cyril of Alexandria
important in the history of
theology?

Answer 31

Cyril of Alexandria is the first one to Articulate the
‘Hypostatic Union’. He asserted that Christ was truly
God and truly man without any confusion and melding
of his natures. Jesus is One Person with Two natures.
He is one and the same person. The Chalcedonian
Definition draws heavily upon his language.

Question 32

Why was the doctrine of “theotokos” a
flash point in the Nestorian controversy?

Answer 32

The doctrine of theotokos (θεοτοκος) was such a
controversial point for Nestorius because he falsely
reasoned that when the fathers called the Virgin Mary
theotokos, they were saying that Mary was the origin
of Christ’s divinity. We agree with Nestorius on that
point, Mary is not the origin of God, but she did ‘bear’
God Incarnate. The term theotokos is not so much
about Mary is it is about Jesus. Jesus was fully God
even in the womb of Mary and from the moment of his
conception.

Question 33

What are the major theological points of the
penultimate paragraph in the Definition of
Chalcedon? (This question will be on the
exam for sure…)

Answer 33

The major theological points are, “the same perfect in
divinity and perfect in humanity…” “one and the
same Christ, Son, Lord, only-begotten, acknowledged
in two natures which undergo no confusion, no
change, no division, no separation;” There is no
mixture or separation between the natures, yet there
is one person, one and the same Jesus Christ who for
us men and our salvation became Incarnate.

Question 34

What is the meaning of Anhypostasia
(ἂνυπόστασια) and Enhypostasia
(ἒνυπόστασια), and why are these terms
important in our Christology?

Answer 34

Anhypostasia (ἂνυπόστασια) or “impersonality” teaches that
Christ’s humanity does not exist before the hypostatic union and
Enhypostasia (ἒνυπόστασια) or “inpersonality” teaches that
Christ’s humanity was upheld by his deity just like the rest of us.

Anhypostasia is important for our Christology because is guards
against the idea that Jesus was ‘adopted’ by the Father and ‘made’
the son of God. Ever since his conception, Jesus has been
God-Incarnate.

Enhypostasia is important for our Christology because it is a
testament to Christ’s true humanity. If Christ was not truly human
like us, we could have no salvation.

Question 35

Summarize the basic arguments
for and against images that led to
the seventh ecumenical council

Answer 35

The basic argument for images is that we are honoring Christ, the saints, and
whoever else with images, but we are not worshipping them. John of
Damascus, in favor of images, distinguished between doulia (δοῦλια) which
means ‘service’ and latria (λάτρια) which means ‘worship’. The problem with
this is that Scripture no where commands this image making or veneration of
any of the saints or angels. Service and Worship are to be given ultimately to
Christ alone.

The argument against images is from the Second Commandment. Scripture is
clear, images or any representation of any persons of the Godhead is sin.

The Seventh Ecumenical Council, however, sided with John of Damascus and
has permitted the usage of images to extreme of cultic practices in both the
Roman Catholic and Eastern traditions.

Question 36

Summarize the main difference
between Chalcedonian and
Lutheran Christology

Answer 36

Chalcedonian Christology is adamant about the unity and distinction of the
natures of Christ. Christ is one person with two natures. These natures do not
combine into a third nature. Yet, Christ does certain things according to his
human nature (eats, sleeps, dies) and he does things according to his divine
nature (forgives sins, knows the thoughts of men). His two natures are in
perfect harmony in the one person of Jesus. This does not mean they share
attributes, rather they work in perfect harmony together.

Lutheran Christology asserts that the human nature of Christ and the Divine
nature of Christ share attributes. Their view could be called a Semi-Eutychian
view, since the Eutychians taught that the divine nature of Christ and the
human nature of Christ combined to make a third nature. All of this is done to
preserve the Lutheran’s doctrine of Lord’s Supper.

The problem with Lutheran Christology is that it does not present Jesus as
truly human. Humans, by definition, are not omnipresent. Just like God, by
definition, cannot die on a cross. If the human nature of Christ is omnipresent,
then he is not truly human. Just like if God could die, he would not be God.

Question 37

What is Christ’s state of
humiliation?

Answer 37

Christ’s state of humiliation is his work as the
Incarnate Son of God. He came down from heaven,
took on our nature, lived a sinless life all the while
being tempted like’a nobodies’ business. Then he is
unjustly condemned and executed like a criminal, he
bears the weight of his Father against the sins of his
people, then he is buried in a stranger’s tomb.

Question 38

What is Christ’s state of
exaltation?

Answer 38

The state of Christ’s exaltation is his resurrection and
vindication by God the Father, his ascension, his
sitting at the right hand of the Father, his current ruling
and reigning over all things, and one it will be his
physical rule and reign over all things and the
resurrection of his people.

Question 39

Is the Son eternally subordinate
to the Father? Explain. (This will
be on the exam for sure)

Answer 39

You bet your Baptist britches he isn’t.

The language that the Council of Nicaea uses to equate
the Father’s deity and the Son’s deity is in direct
rebuttal to Arianism, which teaches that the Son is a
lesser god than the Father who is God. The issue with
Eternal Subordination is that it uses the same
reasoning as the Arians to say that Christ is eternally
subordinate to the Father. Jesus is truly God, and God
is one. He shares the same dignity and substance as the
Father and the Spirit. Eternal Subordination could then
be rightly called Semi-Arianism.

Question 40

Did the Son assume a fallen
human nature? Explain

Answer 40

No. Jesus did not assume a fallen human nature. If he
did this would make him disqualified from being our
perfect mediator (Psalm 15). A sinful nature produces
sin, and Hebrews says that he can sympathize with us
in every way, sin only excepted (Heb. 4:14-16).

Question 41

Was Christ able to sin?
Explain

Answer 41

It depends on what you mean by able. Yes, Jesus had
arms that could have strangled someone, he had eyes
to look lustfully, he had feet to ‘rush to do evil’. Jesus
had the faculties to sin.

But Jesus is also God in the Flesh. God cannot sin. Not
only this, but Jesus assumed an unfallen human nature.
So, although he had the faculties to sin, he was not
able to sin being God Incarnate.

Question 42

Why was the atonement
necessary?

Answer 42

The atonement was necessary because of the nature of
our debt to God. Our debt for failing to keep his law is
a penal one, meaning that it deserves punishment. Our
sinful natures keep us from obeying the law. Not only
this, but a mere human cannot bear the full wrath of
God against sin. Therefore, once Adam fell, the
atonement of Jesus became necessary.

Question 43

What is the penal substitutionary
doctrine of the atonement, and what
biblical support is there for the doctrine?

Answer 43

The doctrine of Penal Substitution can be defined by
looking at its two aspects: ‘penal’ and ‘substitution’.
‘Penal’ is an adjective that describes something as
deserving punishment, and substitution means
someone or something standing in place for someone
or something else. So Penal Substitution means a
substitution for a penal debt. Jesus was our substitute
in his life and in his death. He was punished for our
penal debt of sin. Scripture speaks of this in Isa. 53, 2
Cor. 5:21, and Eph. 1:7.

Question 44

Summarize the biblical and
theological case for
definite/limited atonement

Answer 44

The biblical case for definite atonement can be found in John 6
and John 10. In these passages Jesus himself tells the
unbelieving Jews that they are not his sheep, or that the Father
has not given them to him. It follows that when Christ dies for
his sheep, he dies for them alone.

The Theological case can be made from looking at the
alternatives. If Christ died for every single person, then every
single person is atoned for. And if every person is atoned for,
that means that everyone will be saved. If people, for whom
Christ died, are in hell right now, then Christ death for their sins
did not save them.

Scripture also never speaks of man being made savable. Christ
came to die for sinners. Those sinners for whom Christ died
either have been, are presently, or will be saved. Christ is not a
potential Savior. He is a definite Savior.

Question 45

Summarize the doctrine of
hypothetical universalism

Answer 45

Hypothetical Universalism teaches that Christ’s death
applies to all people generally, making all men savable. It
does this by rearranging the order of the decrees of God,
putting redemption before election, implying that every
person is elect. This view is a very nuanced view which
seeks to preserve the integrity of God’s offering of the
gospel.

Limited/Definite Atonement makes it a whole lot easier.
God has elected a people for himself. We do not know
who God’s elect are. Therefore, when preach the gospel
of Jesus, we know that God knows those who are his and
will bring them and not one of them will be left behind
(John 10)

Question 46

The Ransom Theory

Answer 46

The Ransom Theory teaches that after the fall of Adam mankind
is owned by Satan. God wants to redeem mankind, so he sends
his Son to pay for the debt to Satan. However, Satan does not
know that Jesus is God Incarnate and when he kills him he
accidentally kills the Son of God. By raising Jesus from the
dead, Jesus defeats Satan and invites all people to join in his
spoils.

This theory fails to take into account the penal nature of the fall
and the sin that comes from. Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109)
helpfully showed how the nature of the fall does not put man
into the debt of the devil, rather it makes him a coconspirator
with him, and both are liable to judgement.

Question 47

The Christus Victor Theory

Answer 47

The atonement is the culmination of the divine conflict between God and the serpent; Christ gains the victory in the cosmic battle at the cross

This idea sometimes overlaps with the Ransom to Satan theory, but Aulén removes that influence

Only made complete when paired with Penal Substitutionary Atonement; Christ is victorious through Him being punished on our behalf in order to secure our redemption

Question 48

The Recapitulation Theory

Answer 48

The Recapitulation Theory teaches that Jesus, in his Incarnation,
was redeeming mankind at every stage of life. As an infant
Christ did not sin and therefore made atonement for infants. As
a teenager Christ did not sin and therefore made atonement for
teenagers and so on. Irenaeus taught that Christ was 55 years old
when he died.

This view places all the emphasis on Christ’s Incarnation, and
not on the Incarnation and his atoning death together as one
unified working. It is true that Christ lived a perfect life for us,
but that really means nothing if our sins are not dealt with one
the cross.

Question 49

The Satisfaction Theory

Answer 49

We owe God a triple honour:

We must immediately render to God honour in everything (total obedience)

We must pay back the honour which we deprived God of (reparation)

We must pay back even more honour due to our infinite insult (reparation)

Anselm essentially says that God wants to fill empty seats, previously reserved for angels that didn’t come, in His giant football stadium, so He must save the required number of sinners to fill those seats

Question 50

The Vicarious Repentance
Theory

Answer 50

Held to unlimited atonement, meaning that he disagreed with penal substitution

Christ suffered as an atoning sacrifice, but not in a penal substitutionary way

Christ suffered, but it was not punishment

God’s justice is satisfied by Christ’s perfect confession of sin (throughout His ministry) on our behalf, not His death on the cross

One tear of sorrow by seeing us in our lost condition offers more atonement than a thousand years of punishment according to Campbell

We are redeemed by Christ essentially saying “I’m sorry” on our behalf (contrition/repentance)

This begs the question, “Why did Christ die?” Campbell doesn’t seem to have an answer

Question 51

The Moral Influence or
Exemplar Theory

Answer 51

The Moral Influence or Exemplar Theory teaches that Jesus’s
death on the cross was an example for all who follow him.
Christ dies as an act of love to the Father and we as Christians
must follow in such love. This view was allegedly taught by
Peter Aberlard, but when looking at his commentary on
Romans, his view appears to be more nuanced than this.

This theory is like some of the others. It is not wrong, it is just
incomplete. Yes we should follow the example of Christ, but
this view completely overlooks sin and God’s wrath against sin.
It also overlooks Christ’s love for his people in dying for them.

Question 52

The Governmental Theory

Answer 52

The Governmental Theory teaches that although he
could have just forgiven people, God wanted to
maintain order in the universe. Jesus’s sacrifice is
nothing more than God showing humanity what
happens if he disobeys.

This theory is not founded in Scripture. If anything,
the opposite is found. “For God so loved the World
that he gave his only begotten Son, that whoever
would believe in him would not perish, but have
everlasting life.” (John 3:16).

Question 53

The Definition of Chalcedon

Answer 53

“One and the same” frames the whole document

Perfect divinity and perfect humanity (not fallen humanity)

No confusion, change, division, or separation between the natures

Two natures in one person, not two

The one person is the only-begotten Son of God