Christ for Us

Part one of three episodes on the Sacrament of the Altar. We will go over the different views, what Lutherans believe, and why Lutherans are right. You can follow along to the outline of the Bible study at Christforus.org. 
#theology #Lutheran #Lord'sSupper #LutheranConfessions #BibleStudy
What is the Sacrament of the Altar.It is the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ under bread and wine, instituted by Christ Himself, for us Christians to eat and to drink. 
Where is this written? 
The holy Evangelists Matthew, Mark, Luke, and St. Paul write:  
Our Lord Jesus Christ, on the night when He was betrayed, took bread, and when He had given thanks, He broke it and gave it to the disciples and said: “Take, eat; this is my body, which is given for you. This do in remembrance of Me.”  
In the same way also He took the cup after supper, and when he had given thanks, He gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you; this cup is the new testament in My blood, which is shed for you for the forgiveness of sins. This do as often as you drink it in remembrance of Me.” (Matthew 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-24; Luke 22:19-20; 1 Corinthians 11:23-30; 10:16)
The Formula of Concord states, “All three evangelists (Matthew 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-24; Luke 22:19-20) and St. Paul, after Christ’s ascension, received the same <institution of the Lord’s Supper> (1 Corinthians 11:23-26). Unanimously and with the same words and syllables they repeat these distinct, clear, firm, and true words of Christ about the consecrated and distributed bread, ‘This is My body.” They repeat these words in one way, without any interpretation, turn of phrase, <figure,> and change. Therefore, there is no doubt about the other part of the Sacrament. The words of Luke and Paul, ‘This is the new covenant in my blood,’ can have no other meaning than what St. Matthew and St. Mark give: ‘This is My blood of the covenant,’ whereby I establish, seal, and confirm with you men this: My testament and new covenant (i.e., the forgiveness of sins).
Who instituted the Sacrament of the Altar?Jesus Christ instituted it on the night he was betrayed.I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” 1 Corinthians 11:23-24
The formula of Concord says of this, “This very opinion, just stated (that the body and blood of Christ are present in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper), is founded on the only firm, immovable, and undoubtable rock of truth. It comes from the words of institution, in the holy, divine Word. This is how it was understood, taught, and spread by the holy evangelists and apostles and their disciples and hearers.” (SD VII:42) The Formula goes on to site Matthew 17:5, “Listen to Him,” Luke 21:33, “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away,” and Matthew 28:18, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me.”
People refuse to believe that the Lord’s Supper is truly Christ’s body and blood, because it is impossible for our human reason to comprehend. Would God ever ask you to believe something you could not understand?Yes.“Jesus answered him, ‘What I am doing you do not understand now, but afterward you will understand.” John 13:7“But Jesus answered him, ‘Let it be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Matthew 3:15“Now to him who is able to do far more abundantly than that we ask or think…” Ephesians 3:20“With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” Matthew 19:26
How do we know that Jesus wasn’t just using picture language when he said that the bread and wine were his body and blood?
These words of Jesus are his last will and testament. A person’s last will and testament cannot be changed once a person dies.“This cup is the new covenant (testament) in my blood.” 1 Corinthians 11:25“Even with a man-made covenant (will), no one annuls it or adds to it once it has been ratified.” Galatians 3:15
God’s Word clearly teaches us that the bread and wine in the sacrament are a communion (or participation) in Christ’s body and blood.“The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation (communion) in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ.” 1 Corinthians 10:16
God’s Word clearly teaches that those who misuse the Sacrament sin not against bread and wine, but against Christ’s body and blood.“Whoever, therefore, eats the bread and drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord. … For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself.” 1 Corinthians 11:27, 29
Do unbelievers also receive Christ’s body and blood in the Sacrament?Yes, everyone who receive the Lord’s Supper receive Christ’s body and blood whether they believe or not. But those who eat or drink it in an unworthy manner, eat and drink to their own judgment.“Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord.” 1 Corinthians 11:27
What do other denominations believe about the Lord’s Supper?
Symbolic View: The bread and wine only represent Christ’s body and blood. But Christ’s body and blood is not present. (Baptists, Pentecostals, most non-denominational churches). Baptists think of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper as ordinances instead of Sacraments, which means that they are law instead of gospel. Baptists teach that the bread and “fruit of the vine” are symbols of Christ’s body and blood, but are not actually present.
“Baptists usually use the term “ordinances” rather than “sacraments” when referring to baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Even if “sacraments” is used, it is never intended to imply that either of these two is necessary for a person to be saved. … Jesus indicated that the bread was symbolic of his body and the fruit of the vine symbolic of his blood. The unleavened bread symbolizes the purity of Christ, for he was without sin (Hebrews 4:15) and thus his body was an unblemished sacrifice for our sins. The juice from crushed grapes symbolizes the blood that Christ shed for us. In partaking of the bread and the cup, Christ’s disciples are to remember his sacrifice on the cross of Calvary as he gave his body and shed his blood for our sins. Baptists believe the Bible teaches that the elements used in the Supper are not literally the body and blood of Christ. They are symbols of his body and blood. In eating the bread and drinking from the cup, a person does not actually partake of Christ’s flesh and blood. Rather, it is an opportunity to obey a command of Christ and to recall his sacrifice for us, his presence with us and his certain return (1 Corinthians 11:24-28).” (https://www.baptistdistinctives.org/resources/articles/two-ordinances-baptism-and-the-lords-supper/)
Reformed/Calvinist: The body and blood of Christ is not physically present in the Sacrament, but Jesus is “spiritually present.” (Methodists, Presbyterians, Episcopalians)
“It is here declared, that thereby no Adoration is intended, or ought to be done, either unto the Sacramental Bread or Wine there bodily received, or unto any Corporal Presence of Christ’s natural Flesh and Blood. For the Sacramental Bread and Wine remain still in their very natural substances, and therefore may not be adored; ( for that were Idolatry, to be abhorred of all faithful Christians;) and the natural Body and Blood of our Saviour Christ are in Heaven, and not here; it being against the truth of Christ’s natural Body to be at one time in more places than one.” Book of Common Prayer (Official teaching of the Church of England and the Episcopalian Church.
The Eastern Orthodox: The bread and wine turn into Christ’s body and blood through a mystery and are a propitiatory Sacrifice.
“It is the only Sacrament offered by the Church in which the elements of bread and wine not only carry the Grace of God, as a mysterion, but are “changed” into and “are” the very Body and the very Blood of Christ, being a propitiatory sacrifice.” (https://www.goarch.org/-/the-fundamental-teachings-of-the-eastern-orthodox-church)
It is correct that the body and blood of Christ are truly present, but it is wrong that the bread and wine no longer are present and that this is a continued propitiatory sacrifice. Jesus suffered once and for all on the cross.
The Roman Catholic Church: Transubstantiation: “through the consecration of the bread and the wine there occurs the change of the entire substance of the bread into the substance of the Body of Christ, and the entire substance of the wine into the Blood of Christ – even though the appearance or ‘species’ of bread and wine remain.” Catechism of the Catholic Church, 902.
This is wrong, because they say that the bread and wine are no longer present, but they are. The greater error is that they believe that the Lord’s Supper is a continuation of the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ. See 1367, 1368, 1371 in CCC.
Lutheran View: It is the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ under the bread and wine, instituted by Christ himself for us Christians to eat and to drink.” We leave this a mystery how this can be. This is not a continued sacrifice, but God feeding us what Christ earned for us on the cross.
Although Lutherans disagree with the Roman Catholics on transubstantiation, that is not the main disagreement between the Lutherans and the Roman Catholics concerning the Sacrament. That has to do with the benefits of the Lord’s Supper, which I will cover in the next episode. Regarding what the Sacrament actually is, the main opponent of the Lutheran view is the Sacramentarians, both the crude (Baptists, Anabaptists, and Pentecostals) and the subtle (Reformed, Episcopalians, Methodists, etc). To understand this controversy and what Lutherans teach from the Bible against it, we turn to The Formula of Concord: Solid Declaration VII: The Lord’s Supper.
“Some Sacramentarians strive to use words that come as close as possible to the Augsburg Confession and the form and way of speech in our churches. They confess that in the Holy Supper Christ’s body is truly received by believers. Still, when we insist that they state their meaning precisely, sincerely, and clearly, they all say this in unison: Christ’s true essential body and blood is absent from the consecrated bread and wine in the Holy Supper as far as the highest heaven is from the earth. For there own words state this, ‘We say that Christ’s body and blood are as far from the signs as the earth is distant from the highest heaven.’ Therefore, they understand this presence of Christ’s body not as a presence here on earth, but only with respect to faith. In other words, our faith is reminded and excited by the visible signs, just as it is by the Word preached. It elevates itself and ascends above all heavens. It receives and enjoys Christ’s body, which is present there in heaven. Yes, they say they receive Christ Himself, together with all His benefits, in a true and essential way, but nevertheless only in a spiritual way. For they hold that as the bread and wine are here on earth and not in heaven, so Christ’s body is now in heaven and not on earth. So nothing else is received by the mouth in the Holy Supper than bread and wine.” 1-3.
In contrast to this, the Augsburg Confession X states, “That the body and blood of Christ are truly present and distributed to those who eat the Lord’s Supper.”
Lutherans do not believe in transubstantiation or consubstantiation.
Quote from Martin Luther in the Formula, “They confess, according to the words of Irenaeus, that in this Sacrament there are two things, a heavenly and an earthly. So they hold and teach that with the bread and wine the body and blood of Christ are truly and essentially present, offered, and received. They do not believe in transubstantiation (i.e., an essential transformation of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ). Nor do they hold that the body and blood of Christ are included in the bread locally [localiter] (i.e., otherwise permanently united with the bread and wine even after the use of the Sacrament) [This is called consubstantiation, which Lutherans are accused of and deny. Lutherans call this Capernaitic eating, because it implies that Christ’s body and blood are rent asunder by the teeth.] Yet, they concede that through the sacramental union the bread is the body of Christ, and such. For apart from the uses, when the bread is laid aside and preserved in the sacramental vessel <the pyx>, or is carried about in the procession and exhibited, as is done in popery, they do not hold that the body of Christ is present.Second, they hold that the institution of this Sacrament made by Christ is effective in Christendom, and that it does not depend on the worthiness of the minister who offers the Sacrament, or of the one who receives it. Since St. Paul says even the unworthy partake of the Sacrament, they hold that the body and blood of Christ are also truly offered to the unworthy, and the unworthy truly receive them. This happens if the institution and command of the Lord Christ are observed. But such persons receive them to condemnation, as St. Paul says. For they misuse the holy Sacrament, because they receive it without true repentance and without faith. For it was instituted for this purpose, that it might testify that the grace and benefits of Christ are here applied to those who truly repent and comfort themselves by faith in Christ they are incorporated into Christ and are washed by His blood.” 14-16.
Recap: Lutherans believe that in the Lord’s Supper, both the body and blood of Christ as well as the bread and wine are consumed. We do not teach transubstantiation, which teaches that the bread and wine cease to exist, or consubstantiation, which teaches that the bread and wine share one substance with Jesus’ body and blood, so that His body and blood are destroyed in the eating or are present outside of the use. Not the worthiness of the minister nor the worthiness of the communicant makes the Sacrament a Sacrament, but rather the words and institution of Christ Jesus.
“However, this is not in a crude, carnal, Capernaitic way, but in a supernatural way, beyond understanding.” SD VII 64-65.
“When Dr. Luther or we use the word spiritual in this matter, we understand this: the spiritual, supernatural, heavenly way that Christ is present in the Holy Supper. … By this use, we reject the Capernaitic [consubstantiation] thoughts of the crude and fleshly presence that is attributed to and forced on our churches by the Sacramentarians against our many public protests. This is how we want the word spiritually to be understood when we say that in the Holy Supper Christ’s body and blood are spiritually received, eaten, and drunk. Even though this participation happens with the mouth, the way it happens is spiritual.” SD VII 105.
This is why Luther writes in the Smalcald Articles III VI 1, “The bread and wine in the Supper are Christ’s true body and blood. These are given and received not only by the godly but also by wicked Christians. (1 Cor. 11:29-30)” And in the Large Catechism, “It is the Word, I say, that makes and sets this Sacrament apart. So it is not mere bread and wine, but is, and is called, Christ’s body and blood (1 Cor. 11:23-27) (LC V 10).
Luther further writes in the Large Catechism (V 12-19): With this Word you can strengthen your conscience and say, “If a hundred thousand devils, together with all fanatics, should rush forward, crying, ‘How can bread and wine be Christ’s body and blood?’ and such, I know that all spirits and scholars together are not as wise as is the Divine Majesty in His little finger” [see 1 Cor. 1:25]. Now here stands Christ’s Word, “Take, eat; this is My body. … Drink of it, all of you; this is My blood of the new testament,” and so on. Here we stop to watch those who will call themselves His masters and make the matter different from what He has spoken.
This is we sing in that great Lord’s Supper hymn, “Yet, Savior, You are not confined to any habitation; But You are present even now Here with Your congregation. Firm as a rock this truth shall stand, Unmoved by any daring hand Or subtle craft and cunning.” Samuel Kinner, tr. Emanuel Cronenwett, LSB 622:3, “Lord Jesus Christ, You Have Prepared.”
However, Lutherans teach that if one changes the words or their meaning, the Sacrament is no longer the Sacrament “It is true, indeed, that if you take away the Word or regard the Sacrament without the words, you have nothing but mere bread and wine. But if the words remain with them, as they shall and must, then, by virtue of the words, it is truly Christ’s body and blood.” Large Catechism V) This is why Lutherans deny that the Baptists, Pentecostals, Reformed, etc have the Sacrament.
Likewise, Luther also wrote, as is quoted in the Formula, “In the same way I also say and confess that in the sacrament of the altar the true body and blood of Christ are orally eaten and drunk in the bread and wine, even if the priests who distribute them or those who receive them do not believe or otherwise misuse the sacrament. It does not rest on man’s belief or unbelief but on the Word and ordinance of God—unless they first change God’s Word and ordinance and misinterpret them, as the enemies of the sacrament do at the present time. They, indeed, have only bread and wine, for they do not also have the words and instituted ordinance of God but have perverted and changed it according to their own imagination. [LW 37:367] (Solid Declaration VII 32.)
The Formula also quotes Justin Martyr (100-165 AD), “This we receive not as common bread and common drink. We receive them as Jesus Christ, our Savior, who through the Word of God became flesh. For the sake of our salvation He also had flesh and blood. So we believe that the food blessed by Him through the Word and prayer is the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ.”
The Formula distinguishes between two types of eating Christ’s body and blood, the spiritual and the oral. The one is done by faith, the other with the mouth. The eating with the mouth is not beneficial without the eating by faith. The Sacramentarians teach that Christ’s body and blood are only eaten spiritually. This will be discussed more in the next episode on the benefits of eating the Sacrament.
How is Christ’s body present in the Supper if He is at the right hand of God? The Formula explains by quoting Martin Luther:
First is this article of faith, that Jesus Christ is essential, natural, true, complete God and man in one person, undivided and inseparable.
The second, that the right hand of God is everywhere.
The third, that the Word of God is not false or deceitful.
The fourth, that God has and knows various ways to be present at a certain place, not only the single one of which the fanatics prattle, which the philosophers call “local.” [LW 37:214] (SD VII 94-97)
Because Jesus is not just any man, but is in fact God in the flesh, the Formula quotes Luther in explaining how Christ is able to be bodily present in more ways than an ordinary man can.
“Thus the one body of Christ has a threefold existence, or all three modes of being at a given place. First, the circumcscribed corporeal mode of presence as when He walked bodily on earth, when He occupied and yielded space according to His size. He can still employ this mode of presence when He wills to do, as He did after His resurrection and He will do on the Last Day, as Paul says in 1 Timothy [6:15], ‘Whom the blessed God will reveal,’… Secondly, the uncircumscribed, spiritual mode of presence according to which He neither occupies nor yields space but passes through everything created as He wills. [He then gives a crude example of light and heat not taking up space, but being present] He left the closed grave and came through closed doors, in the bread and wine in the Supper, and as people believe, when He was born in His mother. Thirdly, since He is one person with God, the divine, heavenly mode, according to which all created things are indeed much more permeable and present to Him than they are according to the second mode. … For He is one indivisible person with God, and where God is, He must be also, otherwise our faith is false.” SD VII 99-101
Some may claim that this is getting too philosophical. However, this is what Scripture teaches. Ephesians 4:10, “He who descended is the one who also ascended far above all the heavens, that he might fill all things.)” and Matthew 19:26, “with God all things are possible.” And Ephesians 3:20, “Now to him who is able to do far more abundantly than all that we ask or think,” This is why Luther states, “But how this happens, we do not know; it transcends nature and reason, even the comprehension of all the angels in heaven.” SD VII:102
Conclusion
The Bible teaches that that Lord’s Supper is the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, although the bread and wine are still present. Jesus Christ, who is God, instituted this Sacrament, so we should believe that this is true and possible for Him. The body and blood of Christ are present despite the unworthiness or unbelief of the minister or communicant; however, if the words are changed or the meaning is changed, then it is just bread and wine. We do not believe that Christ’s body and blood become one substance with the bread and wine (consubstantiation) so that the body and blood are destroyed by the teeth (Capernaitic eating), but that Christ is able to be present in a special mode, so that His body and blood are not damaged, but are truly present.

Trinity 4 sermon preached by Rev. James Preus from Luke 6:36-42. You can read the sermon on Christforus.org. 

Trinity 7 sermon preached by Rev. Rolf Preus on July 6, 2008. 

Trinity 6 sermon preached by Rev. Rolf Preus in 2009 on Matthew 5:20. 

Trinity 5 sermon preached by Rev. Rolf Preus in 2009 on Luke 5:1-11. 

Trinity 4 sermon from 2010 preached by Rev. Rolf Preus on Luke 6:36-42.

Sermon preached by Rev. James Preus on Luke 15 for Trinity 3 Sunday. 
The Gospel declares that God finds the value of a sinner in Christ's atonement. 
Repentance is when a sinner finds his own value in Christ's atonement. 
Reconciliation is when you find your brother's value in Christ's atonement. 
#Trinity3 #Gospel #Repentance #Reconciliation #Value #Lutheran

Bible Study on the Person of Christ. What does it mean that Christ is true God and true man in one person? 
As always, you can read and follow along to the Bible Study at Christforus.org. 
#Arianism #Adoptionism #Docetism #Nestorianism #Christology #PersonofChrist #TwonaturesofChrist #FormulaofConcord #Lutheran #Theology
Nicene Creed
       …And in one Lord Jesus Christ,
     the only-begotten Son of God,
     begotten of His Father before all worlds,
     God of God, Light of Light,
     very God of very God,
     begotten, not made,
     being of one substance with the Father,
     by whom all things were made;
     who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven
     and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary
     and was made man;
     and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate.
     He suffered and was buried.
     And the third day He rose again according to the Scriptures
          and ascended into heaven
     and sits at the right hand of the Father.
     And He will come again with glory to judge both the living and the dead,
     whose kingdom will have no end. …
Popular Heresies
Arianism
Arius was a presbyter near Alexandria, who died in 336 AD. He was excommunicated by a council of Alexandria in AD 321 and later Arianism was condemned at the Council of Nice in 325, which produced the first draft of the Nicene Creed.
Arius taught that God is only one undivided person, who, in order to create the universe, first created an intermediate being through whom he would create the rest of creation. This being is the Logos or Son of God, but is not himself God. He has a beginning, he is capable of sin, and he is capable of changing. This teaching of course conflicts with John 1; Hebrews 13:8; among many other passages.
Adoptionism
A teaching that Jesus received Divine power at his Baptism and was adopted as the Son of God, but really wasn’t one person with the second person in the Trinity.
One proponent of a form of Adoptionism was Paul of Samasota (Bishop of Antioch 260-272), whom the Formula of Concord condemns with a quote from Theodore, “He wickedly taught that the Lord Christ was nothing other than a mere man in whom God the Word dwelt, just as in every prophet.” SD VIII:16
Docetism
The teaching that Jesus was not really true man, but that he only appeared to be true man, hence the name from the Greek δοκεῖν, which means to seem. So, Christ only appeared to be suffering on the cross.
Apollinarianism
A reaction to Arianism, named after Apollinaris of Laodocea (ca 310-390), who taught that Jesus is God; however, he erred by saying that he had a Logos instead of a human soul, which would make Jesus not fully man. This then is a form of Docetism, because Jesus would only seem like a man. This was condemned in the Council of Constantinople in 381 AD.
Eutychianism
Named after Eutyches (ca. 378-454 ca.), which teaches that there are two natures of Christ before the incarnation, but only one after, because the divine nature swallowed up the human nature like a great ocean swallowing up a drop of liquid. This is a form of Monophysitism, which teaches that there is only one nature in Christ, as opposed to dyaphysitism, which is taught in the Nicene Creed.  
Gregory of Nazianzus writes, “For that which He has not assumed He has not healed; but that which is united to His Godhead is also saved.” Letter 101 to Cledonius the priest against Apolinarius in NPNF 7:440.
Monothelitism, a form of monophysitism, which teaches that Christ only has one will (Greek θέλημα), that is, the divine will. This runs into the same problem as Monophysitism, in that it essentially denies the humanity of Christ. Monothelitism was condemned in the Sixth Ecumenical Council (Third Council of Constantinople) on Sept. 16, 681, which asserted that Christ has two wills, a divine and human, but that the human is subordinate and perfectly conformed to the divine will, as is taught in Mt 27:34; Jn 1:43; 17:24; 19:28; divine will Lk 13:24; Jn 5:21.
Nestorianism
Nestorius, died 451 AD, patriarch of Constantinople 428, condemned in 431 Council of Ephesus. He allegedly taught that there is no communion between the human and divine natures of Christ, that Mary is not the Theotokos, but the Christotokos. This means that the Son of God was not born and did not suffer or die. This is basically a form of Adoptionism.
Nestorianism is still widely taught in churches in the east. Lutherans accuse the Reformed of Nestorianism, because they deny that Christ is able to be present with His body and blood in the Sacrament, because His body is in heaven.
For example, Luther criticizes Ulrich Zwingli, who uses the Greek phrases alloeosis (ἀλλοίωσις: difference, alteration), to explain why Christ is said to do something, which only his human nature actually did. Zwingli used the concept of alloeosis to construe “all passages of Scripture in which anything is ascribed to the divine nature of Christ or to the entire Christ that is property of the human nature. The purpose of the alloeosis, as used by Zwingli, was denial of the communication of attributes.”[1]
Thus Luther wrote, as is quoted in the Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration:
[Zwingli] calls it alloeosis when something is said about the divinity of Christ which after all belongs to His humanity, or vice versa—for example, in Luke 24[:26], “Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and so enter into glory?” Here he performs a sleight-of-hand trick and substitutes the human nature for Christ. Beware, beware, I say, of this alloeosis, for it is the devil’s mask since it will finally construct a kind of Christ after whom I would not want to be a Christian, that is, a Christ who is and does no more in His passion and His life than any other ordinary saint. For if I believe that only the human nature suffered for me, then Christ would be a poor Savior for me, in fact, He Himself would need a Savior. In short, it is indescribable what the devil attempts with this alloeosis! [LW 37:209-10] SA VIII:39-40
Formula of Concord VIII
The Formula of Concord discusses the Pesron of Christ in article 8, because of the Lord’s Supper controversy:
In opposition to the Sacramentarians, Dr. Luther maintained the true, essential presence of Christ’s body and blood in the Supper with solid arguments from the words of institution. The objection was raised against him by the Zwinglians that, if Christ’s body were present at the same time in heaven and on earth in the Holy Supper, it could be no real, true human body. For such majesty was said to be peculiar to God alone. They said Christ’s body was not capable of it. SD VIII:2
The Formula of Concord affirms:
We believe, teach, and confess that God’s Son from eternity has been a particular, distinct, entire, divine person. Yet He is true, essential, perfect God with the Father and the Holy Spirit. In the fullness of time He received also the human nature into the unity of His person. … Christ Jesus is now in one person at the same time true, eternal God, born of the Father from eternity, and a true man, born of the most blessed Virgin Mary. This is written in Romans 9:5, “from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ who is God over all, blessed forever.” SD VIII:6
In this undivided person of Christ, there are two distinct natures: the divine, which is from eternity, and the human, which in time was received into the unity of the person of God’s Son. SD VIII:7
Both natures mentioned remained unmingled and undestroyed in their nature and essence. SD VIII:8
We believe, teach, and confess that it is the property of the divine nature to be almighty, eternal, infinite, everywhere present at the same time, and all-knowing. In other words, it agrees with the properties of [the divine] nature and its natural essence. These are essential attributes of the divine nature. Never in eternity do they become essential properties of the human nature. SD VIII:9
On the other hand, these are properties of the human nature: being a bodily creation or creature, flesh and blood, finite and located in one place; it suffers, dies, ascends, and descends; it moves from one place to another, suffers hunger, thirst, cold, heat, and the like. These properties never become properties of the divine nature. SD VIII:10
Each nature in Christ does not exist by itself so that each is, or makes up, a separate person. These two natures are so united that they make up one single person, in which the divine and the received human nature are and exist at the same time. So now, since the incarnation, there belongs to the entire person of Christ personally not only His divine nature, but also His received human nature. So without His divinity, and also without His humanity, the person of Christ or the incarnate Son of God is not complete.” SD VIII:11
Through the personal union with the Deity, and afterward through the glorification, Christ’s human nature has been exalted to the right hand of the majesty, power and might, over everything that can be named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come [Ephesians 1:21]. SD VIII:12
The Formula explains the union between the divine and human natures as a communion, using the analogy of fire heating iron, where the iron, while remaining iron, shares in the attributes of fire, namely, heat and light. See SD VIII:19.
In Christ two distinct natures exist and remain unchanged and unconfused in their natural essence and properties. Yet there is only one person consisting of both natures. Therefore, that which is an attribute of only one nature is attributed to the entire person, who is at the same time God and man (whether the person is called God or man). SD VIII:36
Communication of Attributes: The Three Genera.
Genus Idiomaticum: Attributes of either nature are ascribed to the entire person of Christ
John 8:58: Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.”
Luke 3:23: Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age,
John 21:17: he said to him, “Lord, you know everything
Luke 2:52: And Jesus increased in wisdom and in stature and in favor with God and man.
Colossians 1:16: For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him.
John 18:12: Soldiers bind Jesus.
Genus Maiestaticum: Genus of glory, deals with the attributes of the divine nature, such as omniscience, perfection, omnipotence, omnipresence, etc. being communicated to the human nature.
Matthew 28:19
Hebrews 1:3-4: He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4 having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs.
Colossians 1:9: For in Him [Christ] the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily,
“This divine power, life, might, majesty, and glory was given to the received human nature in Christ.” SD VIII:61
“Scripture testifies clearly (John 5:21, 27; 6:39-40) that the power to give life and to execute judgment has been given to Christ because He is the Son of Man and since He has flesh and blood.” SD VIII: 58
The blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin (1 John 1:7) (quoted SD VIII 59)
“To make alive, to have all judgment and all power in heaven and on earth, to have all things in His hands, to have all things subject beneath His feet, to cleanse from sin, and so on, are not created gifts. These are divine, infinite properties. Yet, according to the declaration of Scripture, these have been given and communicated to the man Christ. (See John 5:27; 6:39; Matthew 28:18; Dan. 7:14; John 3:35; 13:3; Matt. 11:27; Ephesians 1:22; Heb. 2:8; 1 Cor. 15:27; John 1:3). SD VIII:55
“In, with, and through the human nature, Christ shows, uses, and acts on His divine power, glory, and efficacy, as the soul does in the body and fire in glowing iron.” SD VIII:64
For on Him the Father poured the Spirit of wisdom and power without measure. So as man, Christ has received all knowledge and all power (in deed and truth) through this personal union. SD VII:74
Genus Apotelesmaticum: derived from the Greek term for the performance of a task, this is the biblical teaching that whatever one nature (divine or human) performs, it does with the participation of the other nature and is indeed done by the united Christ. For this reason, we say that when Christ died, which He did according to His human nature, that God indeed died for our sins, although, God Himself cannot die. Not only did Christ die for our sins (1 Cor. 15:3), but God’s own Son died for our sins (Romans 5:10).
In fulfilling Christ’s office, the person does not act and work in, with, through, or according to only one nature. It works in, according to, with, and through both natures. SA VIII:46
Theological Implications
If Zwingli’s alloeosis stands, then Christ will have to be two persons, one a divine and the other a human person, since Zwingli applies all the texts concerning the passion only to the human nature and completely excludes them from the divine nature. … [LW 37:212] SD VIII:43
If it cannot be said that God died for us, but only a man, we are lost; but if God’s death and a dead God lie in the balance, His side goes down and ours goes up like a light and empty scale … For God in His own nature cannot die; but now that God and man are united in one person, it is called God’s death when the man dies who is one substance or one person with God. [LW 41:103-4] SD VIII:44
Christ’s presence with His Church on earth: We do not understand these testimonies (Matthew 18:20; 28:20) to mean that only Christ’s divinity is present with us in the Christian Church and congregation, and that such presence does not apply to Christ according to His humanity in no way whatever. SD VIII:77
By this communicated <divine> power, according to the words of His testament, He can be and is truly present with His body and blood in the Holy Super. He has pointed this out for us by His Word. This is possible for no other man, because no man is united with the divine nature the way Jesus, the Son of Mary, is. SD VIII:29
Conclusion
The divine and human natures of Christ are perfectly united into one Person, so that what is said of one nature belongs to the entire Christ. This is how we are able to say that Mary is the mother of God and that God suffered and died for our sins and that the man Jesus can forgive sins, His blood can wash away our sins, that He is able to be present with His Church and give us His body and blood to eat and to drink in the Sacrament. This teaching is incredibly important for the doctrine of salvation, the Church, and the Sacraments.
[1] https://cyclopedia.lcms.org/definitions?mode=index&page=0&index=ALLOEOSIS&definition=D6E7D78A-B266-EE11-9148-0050563F0205

Trinity 2 sermon preached by Rev. James Preus on Luke 14:12-24. 

Trinity 3 sermon preached by Rev. Rolf Preus in 2008. Look forward to this Sunday with this sermon. 
 
#Trinity3 #Lutheran #Sermon