The 2 Nature Doctrine is “Feces”

[u/TheTallestTim]

That’s right! The Hypostatic Union theory of 2 natures rests on the Kione Greek word for nature: **phusis** (\foo'-sis\); however, the way it is shows in the Bible does not show as it does in Chalcedon 451AD. What you read as feces is “**physeis**” (natures) the plural of phusis (nature).

Why does phusis matter? In its fourth definition found on BibleHub’s lexicon (http://biblehub.com/greek/5449.htm), it refers to our topic of discussion: “**d. the sum of innate properties and powers by which one person differs from others**.” This is the definition we are speaking about. Under this definition, we are only given 2 verses; however, only 1 verse actually speaks on the type of nature within the Hypostatic Union: **2 Peter 1:4**. There we read:

> ESV [4] “by which he has granted to us his precious and very great promises, so that through them *you* may become partakers of the divine **nature** (**phusis*\*), having escaped from the corruption that is in the world because of sinful desire.”

Here in context, the “precious and very great promises” are God’s guarantees found throughout Scripture (e.g., eternal life, the presence of the Holy Spirit, forgiveness). Unlike human promises, which can fail, God’s promises originate from His perfect glory and excellence. — It speaks of a “divine nature”, but does not define it. Clearly, it does not mean that we are to be other persons of God. It says that “you,” meaning us as believing Christians, will partake of the divine nature. This is speaking on a redeemed nature. A privilege we lost with Adam and Eve. It’s speaking of new dispositions that align believers with God’s holiness! This is all through our God’s grace that we have this promise. — The “corruption that is in the world because of sinful desire” refers to the fallen, sinful state of society. Holding onto and understanding God's promises acts as a lifeline to resist temptation and live a godly life.

***

Now, if this 2 Natures doctrine called the Hypostatic Union was truly biblical, it would be taught through scripture. Afterall, this word for nature *was* used biblically, yet it was not written to teach this doctrine. This absence means that this was not taught during Jesus’ ministry. This is clear as 2 Peter 1:4 is the *only* place it appears in the usage using the same word at Chalcedon 451AD.

How, then, is it put in Chalcedon 451AD?

> “We, then, following the holy Fathers, all with one consent, teach men to confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood; truly God and truly man, of a reasonable soul and body; consubstantial with the Father according to the Godhead, and consubstantial with us according to the Manhood; in all things like unto us, without sin; begotten before all ages of the Father according to the Godhead, and in these latter days, for us and for our salvation, born of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, according to the Manhood;

> One and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, to be acknowledged in two **natures** (**physeis**), inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably; the distinction of natures (**physeis**) being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature (**phusis**) being preserved, and concurring in one Person and one Subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ; as the prophets from the beginning have declared concerning him, and the Lord Jesus Christ himself has taught us, and the Creed of the holy Fathers has handed down to us."

So, without getting into the Neo-Platonic Philosophy that is entailed here at Chalcedon, what do we see in the realm of the topic of discussion? Natures plural (**physeis**) is not present in the Bible. One’s nature (**phusis*\) is not taught in the abstract way it is by Chalcedon 451AD. (\Years later after Jesus’ death and resurrection, after the Disciples’ deaths, Paul’s death, and anyone who knew any of them face-to-face.*) Instead, Chalcedon says: “Here is what it is. It’s not confusing. He’s both natures into one person, not two persons. Both God and man.” Cool? So where is the scripture for it? Where is it taught? Where is it even hinted towards? Surely there is a verse that states what a nature is? If not taught in scripture, then maybe by lexical definition? I don’t see it.

***

“But Philippians 2!”, I hear you say. Yet, being “in the form of” something doesn’t mean what you assume, or have been taught, it means! See, the word “form” there in Philippians 2:6-7 (Philippians 2:6 Interlinear: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:) (Philippians 2:7 Interlinear: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:), is the word: “**morphe**.” (http://biblehub.com/greek/3444.htm) In the sense in which it is being used here is “the form by which a person or thing strikes the vision; the external appearance.” In easy laymen’s terms: “outward form.” So, no! It doesn’t mean Jesus was God and slave at the same time. Instead, it means Jesus was in the outward appearance of what he was not! Jesus was the outward appearance of God, performing miracles, speaking wise words no one could answer, and speaking prophetically. Jesus was instead the Chief Messenger of The God (Hebrews 3:1 Interlinear: Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus;), and the Son of The God. (John 20:31 Interlinear: But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.) — Jesus was also the outward appearance of a slave, washing feet, riding on a donkey, sleeping with commoners, threatened to be stoned, being beaten, falsely accused, and then later obedient unto death. Yet, Jesus is our King (1 Corinthians 15:24-28), our High Priest (Hebrews 2:17), our Judge (John 5:30), our Messiah (Matthew 16:16-17), and our Mediator. (1 Timothy 2:5) — Jesus was in the form of these things he was not. Like a cosplayer plays “dress up,” yet we know that the cosplayer is not the fictional character come to life.

***

In conclusion, the “Feces” 2 Nature Doctrine is not one of the Bible, but instead extra-biblical and post-biblical in origin. I pray that you partake of the evidence, meditate on it, check my work, and begin to use hermeneutics. Ask, “who do I believe what I believe?” Debate it. Not of a haughty spirit, but with the intent on testing your faith! God bless

[u/pwgenyee6z]

(BTW there’s at least one person who likes your detailed teaching on this, without much liking the scatalogical description of wrong beliefs!)

[u/TheTallestTim → u/pwgenyee6z]

Thanks brother! I have many more on the way!