De Moor IV:25: Not Composition of God with the Creature

β. On the other hand, God’s Simplicity excludes all Composition that God might enter into with the Creature. For, if, 1. God’s Simplicity prevents all Composition, then it also prevents Composition with Creatures. By which, 2. the Immutable God would have endured actual Mutation. By which also, 3. God, who is distinguished from all other things by His Independence, would be made Dependent: since in the coming together of multiple things to constitute a composite, properly so called, a certain mutual dependence of the parts upon each other is evident. 4. In this way, the infinitely perfect God would obtain greater perfection, in such a way that from the composition of God with the Creature One more perfect Substance would be produced: since the whole is more perfect than its individual parts taken individually; while the very notion of part involves defect, by the very ordering and bearing of it to constitute one whole composite. All which things are absurd and blasphemous. Therefore, God, as He is not able to be compounded from parts, so He is not Himself able to be a part.



And so they raved, however many have imagined for themselves a Composition of God with the World, and called God the Sould of the World, and the World the Body of God, with the Stoics: see WALCH’S Miscellanea Sacra, book III, Exercitation III, § 9, page 584; BUDDEUS’ de Atheismo et Superstitione, chapter I, § 18, pages 33-35, chapter II, § 9, 10, pages 132, 135, 139, chapter VI, § 4, pages 336-338; LELAND’S de Utilitate et Necessitate Revelationis Christi, part I, section I, chapter IV, pages 158, 159, section II, chapter XII, pages 348-351, 364, 383-400. God, says MARESIUS, Systemate Theologico, common place II, § 22, is able to be called the Form of the World, not forming from within and compounding, but standing beside, like a captain on a ship.


Neither does a Composition of this sort obtain from the divine and human natures in the Person of the θεανθρώπου/God-man. For, in Chapter XIX, § 20, we shall see that the Incarnation of the Son of God was accomplished by Assumption of the human nature by the Person of the Λόγου/Logos, whence a Hypostatic Union of the two natures was produced, not by composition of Deity with humanity, as of a part with a part; that no Third Nature ought to be acknowledged here, as the human nature arises from the soul and body joined together: but that the Person of the Λόγου/Logos with respect to the human nature is as perfecting and sustaining; so that everything that from this Union is produced as a new perfection pertains to the human nature assumed and sustained, but absolutely no new perfection is added to the divine Person or Nature.

ABOUT US

Dr. Steven Dilday holds a BA in Religion and Philosophy from Campbell University, a Master of Arts in Religion from Westminster Theological Seminary (Philadelphia), and both a Master of Divinity and a  Ph.D. in Puritan History and Literature from Whitefield Theological Seminary.  He is also the translator of Matthew Poole's Synopsis of Biblical Interpreters and Bernardinus De Moor’s Didactico-Elenctic Theology.

ADDRESS

540-718-2554

 

426 Patterson St.

Central, SC  29630

 

dildaysc@aol.com

SUBSCRIBE FOR EMAILS

© 2019 by FROM REFORMATION TO REFORMATION MINISTRIES.