Defining the hypostatic union, responding to Godlogic and refuting apollinarinism

Explaining the hypostatic union and rejecting apollinarinism

Godlogic, in his debate with Jacob stated that he did not affirm the hypostatic union. It should be noted that he was debating the trinity, not the divinity of Christ. Neverthless, this is a very important issue for Christians to address. This article will: define the hypostatic union, look at the testimony of Church history; and explain the importance of this doctrine on the gospel. He made the following statement in his debate:

"I would not say that the divine person has a human mind per se...You do have certain interpretations that would say that Jesus has a human mind and a divine mind; I don't personally hold that view" [1]

In taking this stance, Godlogic is alligning himself with a heretic from the 4th century named Apollinarius, who founded apollinarianism. Demetrios Bathrellos defines this false doctrine:

'Apollinarius seems to have fallen prey to the philosophical axiom that two perfect things cannot become one. He stated that 'if perfect God has been conjoined to perfect man, they would be two, a Son of God by nature and a Son of God by adoption'. In order to avoid the theory of two Sons, Apollinarius denied the existence of a complete humanity in Christ. What Apollinarius in fact excluded from Christ's humanity was a rational soul, because, in his view, the existence of a human rational soul in Christ would render the incarnation impossible." Thus, according to Apollinarius, the place of the human mind in Christ was occupied by the divine Son.' [2]

However, this was ruled as a heresy at Constatinople I 381 AD: 'The profession of faith of the holy fathers who gathered in Nicaea in Bithynia is not to be abrogated, but it is to remain in force. Every heresy is to be anathematised and in particular that of the Eunomians or Anomoeans, that of the Arians or Eudoxians, that of the Semi-Arians or Pneumatomachi, that of the Sabellians that of the Marcellians, that of the Photinians and that of the Apollinarians.' [3]

Then, the hypostatic union was later defined at the Council of Chalecdon in 451 AD 'So, following the saintly fathers, we all with one voice teach the confession of one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ: the same perfect in divinity and perfect in humanity, the same truly God and truly man, of a rational soul and a body; consubstantial with the Father as regards his divinity, and the same consubstantial with us as regards his humanity; like us in all respects except for sin...rather the property of both natures is preserved and comes together into a single person and a single subsistent being; he is not parted or divided into two persons, but is one and the same only-begotten Son, God, Word, Lord Jesus Christ' [4].

Evidently, within the first 4 centuries of the Church's history, the councils had ruled that Jesus was a divine person who possessed two natures - a divine nature and a human nature. The council clearly affirmed that he had a rational soul (human mind) and any other characteristic that comes along with having a human nature. Interstingly, in the debate, Jacob stated that it would be impossible to be human without a rational human mind (which is true), and Godlogic responded with: "what is your justification for that?"

As demonstrated, the Council of Constantinople I decreed that Christ was "like us in all respects except for sin". This is the inital thelogical argument against apollinarism: the bible is clear that sin is not part of human nature, but we have no reason to believe that a human rational mind is not part of human nature. Following the verses which explain that God created male and female in his image, it is written, 'God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.' Genesis 1:31 NIV . Therefore, we know that sin is not a part of human nature but we have no basis to reject a rational human mind.

This is only one of many arguments that can be made to disprove this form of monophysite theology. There is yet another problem - the Gospels record that Jesus had to learn and grow in his knowledge. In the early stages of his life, Jesus (being truly human) was a baby and he even spent time learning from his elders:

'After three days they found him in the temple courts, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions.' Luke 2:46 NIV

 And Jesus grew in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man. Luke 2:51 NIV

These verse clearly support that person of Christ had two minds. Apollinarians would have to explain why a divine mind would have to learn and 'grow in wisdom' to make their case. Furthermore, the ruling of the Council of Chalcedon on this matter is supported by God-breathed scripture:

'For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham’s descendants.  For this reason he had to be made like them, fully human in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people.' Hebrews 2:17 NIV. This demonstrates that Christ's human nature is like the descendents of Abrahams' human nature in every aspect (excluding sin).

The consequence of this to the gospel is that it takes the glory away from Christ. Apollinarism, which Godlogic alligns himself with, rejects the idea that Christ became human in every way, so Avery is (perhaps inadverntly) denying penal substitutionary atonement. It is written: 'But we do see Jesus, who was made lower than the angels for a little while, now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone' Hebrews 2:9 NIV. Thus, the glory Christ has in heaven is linked to how Son lowered himself, becoming fully human and dying on the cross.

But how can the Person of Christ possess two minds?

It is not inconceivable that Christ, being fully God, could possess two minds. The following verses demonstrate this:

For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. John 3:17 NIV

No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father.” John 10:18 NIV

Three facts are affirmed in these verses: the Father and Son act in perfect union, whatever the Father wills, the Son wills; and Christ is in perfect control of his humanity and his human body. Thus, it is plausible that the Father and Son could will the Son's human mind to lack knowledge.

[1] GodLogic Apologetics (2026). INTENSE! GodLogic VS Jacob Hansen: Is The Trinity Biblical? (FULL DEBATE). [online] YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dncG6E4EQ20 [Accessed 2 Apr. 2026].

[2] Demetrios Bathrellos (2018). Jesus Christ in the anti Apollinarian Treatises of St Gregory of Nyssa. [online] Academia.edu. Available at: https://www.academia.edu/35684010/Jesus_Christ_in_the_anti_Apollinarian_Treatises_of_St_Gregory_of_Nyssa.

[3] Papal Encyclicals. (381AD). First Council of Constantinople 381. [online] Available at: https://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/ecum02.htm.

‌[4] Papal Encyclicals. (2018). The Council of Chalcedon – 451 A.D. - Papal Encyclicals. [online] Available at: https://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/ecum04.htm.

‌© 2026 Yardmantop apologetics

‌