Response to Fighting Vatican (part 3) - On the full deity and humanity of Jesus Christ
Also, I am quite sure no where in the Bible is defined that Jesus was fully man and fully God as the same being. We know he was God and Human, but I quite sure (correct me) does the Bible explicitly say in the same being...Maybe God and human in one body, just two people, but this was one the early arguments of the Church, weather or not Jesus was truly 1 being! This was defined i believe in the 2nd or 3rd century that indeed Jesus was fully man and fully God in the same being, not two separate people.
I will agree that the Bible does not have written the explicit formula found in the Nicene Creed or even the Creed of Chalcedon. However, the teachings of Nicea and Chalcedon are completely contained within the Scriptures. We know that Jesus was human because of the Incarnation. After all, what would it mean for God to become incarnate, if not to take on a human nature? I would certainly beg to differ that the Scriptures do not say that Jesus Christ was fully God and fully man! I think Athanasius, who stood up to the Arian heresy in the 4th century would also differ with you. Athanasius’ very arguments were taken from the exegesis of Scripture against the Arians.
Take the prologue to the Gospel of John for instance (John 1:1-18). Lets see if we can’t see that Jesus Christ, the one person, is not fully God and fully man.
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”
Now, the verb form of the verb “to be” is an imperfect tense and is often translated as “was”. The sense that we should understand is that the Word of God was already in existence before the beginning. Hence, the Logos is eternal and its existence preceded “the beginning”. I have a paper exegeting John 1:1 with special regards to refuting the JW’s understanding of the text that you are welcomed to on my website (here is the link). In short, the Logos is eternal with God the Father. Jesus Christ shares in the eternal nature with God, thus qualifying Him as fully human. For only God alone is eternal and there is only one God. Hence, we conclude the Logos of God, identified as Jesus Christ, shares in the one eternal nature that is God. Fully God, no questions asked. This teaching of the Deity of Christ also comes out in such passages as Phillippians 2:5-1 as well as Colossians 1:17. There are many other Scriptures that may bring this out including Hebrews 1:8-12. I would recommend picking up any sound Reformed Theological work on the Deity of Christ which may clearly show that the fully deity of Jesus Christ is a Biblical doctrine.
“He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness does not overcome it.”
Again, we see the eternal nature of the Logos and even His role in creation, again showing that Christ was not created but rather was a medium for creation and nothing was created without His agency.
“There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. He came as a witness, to bear witness about the light, that all might believe through him. He was not the light, but came to bear witness about the light. The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.”
More is seen here of the high Christology presented in the Bible. We see that John the Baptist fulfills the role of the “messenger” pointing to the Christ but not being the Christ himself. Jesus is the “true light” and the world does not perceive him. Rather, only those granted with the gift of faith through the regeneration of the Holy Spirit are alone able to see Jesus Christ as God’s anointed. Now we get to it…
“And the word became flesh…”
After all the high and divine things that have been said about the Word of God, how unworthy are we as creatures to be in the presence of such a being who has had eternal audience with God the Father! How unworthy of our nature is this being! This “light of the world” this “word of God” this “true light”….and the Scriptures declare, “the word became FLESH.” Now, surely there can be no question as to what the Scripture is saying here. Jesus Christ, the second person of the blessed Trinity, co-equal and co-eternal with God the Father, took on for himself human nature, summed up here as “flesh”. Other passages of Scripture teach the same thing. As mentioned before, Philippians 2:5-11 clearly teaches that Jesus, who was God in nature, took on human nature. We read, “Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, 6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.” There is no question that the full humanity of Jesus Christ is affirmed in Scripture LONG before Nicea and Chalcedon. John’s prologue finishes:
“And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. (John bore witness about him, and cried out, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks before me, because he was before me.’”) And from his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father's side, he has made him known.”
I think it is important to note that Roman Catholics have traditionally claimed that the doctrines that get defined in the Church were always part of the Depositum Fidei (Deposit of Faith) well before they are officially pronounced. I would certainly not have a problem with that in the sense that I believe God’s truths do not become truth when they are defined but have always been truth that was revealed to us. And we know that God says that His word is truth (John 17:17). Thus, it seems rather odd that you would assert that it took the Council of Nicea (even Chalcedon) to define Christ as one person with two nature, and of one and equal substance with the Father. As I understand it, those beliefs have always been part of the Church. I think even a cursory reading of the First Epistle of John will show that John was combating the belief that Christ was not a man. Hence, he would say that anybody who denies the incarnation – that Christ was really a man, fully man – was “antichrist” (see I John 4:1-4).
Hence, and very clearly, the teachings of the fully deity and full humanity of Jesus Christ is clearly contained within the pages of Holy Scripture. I myself have not read the Trinitarian works of Athanasius but I have read from numerous works on Church history, including Phillip Schaff’s “History of the Christian Church” (8 volumes!) that Athanasius adamantly stood on Scripture and appealed to its pages to make his arguments against the Arians.
Thus, while Scripture may not use the language that was thrown around in Nicea (homoiousios and homoousios), the meanings behind these words to describe the nature of Christ are clearly contained within the Scritpures. As B.B. Warfield once said, (paraphrase), “If we search for particular words in Scripture regarding the doctrine of the Trinity, we will search in vain…However, we should know that the sense of Scripture is still Scripture.” By that Warfield meant that the meaning of Scripture is equal to the words of Scripture. With this I would agree. So while particular theological phrase – which are human constructs for understanding the Scriptures and their meaning – are absent, the meanings are not and I would rather cling to the truth of Scripture than quibble over words.
I will agree that the Bible does not have written the explicit formula found in the Nicene Creed or even the Creed of Chalcedon. However, the teachings of Nicea and Chalcedon are completely contained within the Scriptures. We know that Jesus was human because of the Incarnation. After all, what would it mean for God to become incarnate, if not to take on a human nature? I would certainly beg to differ that the Scriptures do not say that Jesus Christ was fully God and fully man! I think Athanasius, who stood up to the Arian heresy in the 4th century would also differ with you. Athanasius’ very arguments were taken from the exegesis of Scripture against the Arians.
Take the prologue to the Gospel of John for instance (John 1:1-18). Lets see if we can’t see that Jesus Christ, the one person, is not fully God and fully man.
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”
Now, the verb form of the verb “to be” is an imperfect tense and is often translated as “was”. The sense that we should understand is that the Word of God was already in existence before the beginning. Hence, the Logos is eternal and its existence preceded “the beginning”. I have a paper exegeting John 1:1 with special regards to refuting the JW’s understanding of the text that you are welcomed to on my website (here is the link). In short, the Logos is eternal with God the Father. Jesus Christ shares in the eternal nature with God, thus qualifying Him as fully human. For only God alone is eternal and there is only one God. Hence, we conclude the Logos of God, identified as Jesus Christ, shares in the one eternal nature that is God. Fully God, no questions asked. This teaching of the Deity of Christ also comes out in such passages as Phillippians 2:5-1 as well as Colossians 1:17. There are many other Scriptures that may bring this out including Hebrews 1:8-12. I would recommend picking up any sound Reformed Theological work on the Deity of Christ which may clearly show that the fully deity of Jesus Christ is a Biblical doctrine.
“He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness does not overcome it.”
Again, we see the eternal nature of the Logos and even His role in creation, again showing that Christ was not created but rather was a medium for creation and nothing was created without His agency.
“There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. He came as a witness, to bear witness about the light, that all might believe through him. He was not the light, but came to bear witness about the light. The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.”
More is seen here of the high Christology presented in the Bible. We see that John the Baptist fulfills the role of the “messenger” pointing to the Christ but not being the Christ himself. Jesus is the “true light” and the world does not perceive him. Rather, only those granted with the gift of faith through the regeneration of the Holy Spirit are alone able to see Jesus Christ as God’s anointed. Now we get to it…
“And the word became flesh…”
After all the high and divine things that have been said about the Word of God, how unworthy are we as creatures to be in the presence of such a being who has had eternal audience with God the Father! How unworthy of our nature is this being! This “light of the world” this “word of God” this “true light”….and the Scriptures declare, “the word became FLESH.” Now, surely there can be no question as to what the Scripture is saying here. Jesus Christ, the second person of the blessed Trinity, co-equal and co-eternal with God the Father, took on for himself human nature, summed up here as “flesh”. Other passages of Scripture teach the same thing. As mentioned before, Philippians 2:5-11 clearly teaches that Jesus, who was God in nature, took on human nature. We read, “Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, 6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.” There is no question that the full humanity of Jesus Christ is affirmed in Scripture LONG before Nicea and Chalcedon. John’s prologue finishes:
“And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. (John bore witness about him, and cried out, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks before me, because he was before me.’”) And from his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father's side, he has made him known.”
I think it is important to note that Roman Catholics have traditionally claimed that the doctrines that get defined in the Church were always part of the Depositum Fidei (Deposit of Faith) well before they are officially pronounced. I would certainly not have a problem with that in the sense that I believe God’s truths do not become truth when they are defined but have always been truth that was revealed to us. And we know that God says that His word is truth (John 17:17). Thus, it seems rather odd that you would assert that it took the Council of Nicea (even Chalcedon) to define Christ as one person with two nature, and of one and equal substance with the Father. As I understand it, those beliefs have always been part of the Church. I think even a cursory reading of the First Epistle of John will show that John was combating the belief that Christ was not a man. Hence, he would say that anybody who denies the incarnation – that Christ was really a man, fully man – was “antichrist” (see I John 4:1-4).
Hence, and very clearly, the teachings of the fully deity and full humanity of Jesus Christ is clearly contained within the pages of Holy Scripture. I myself have not read the Trinitarian works of Athanasius but I have read from numerous works on Church history, including Phillip Schaff’s “History of the Christian Church” (8 volumes!) that Athanasius adamantly stood on Scripture and appealed to its pages to make his arguments against the Arians.
Thus, while Scripture may not use the language that was thrown around in Nicea (homoiousios and homoousios), the meanings behind these words to describe the nature of Christ are clearly contained within the Scritpures. As B.B. Warfield once said, (paraphrase), “If we search for particular words in Scripture regarding the doctrine of the Trinity, we will search in vain…However, we should know that the sense of Scripture is still Scripture.” By that Warfield meant that the meaning of Scripture is equal to the words of Scripture. With this I would agree. So while particular theological phrase – which are human constructs for understanding the Scriptures and their meaning – are absent, the meanings are not and I would rather cling to the truth of Scripture than quibble over words.
posted by prchdaword at 8:04 PM
1 Comments:
Moses,
Great to see a dead blog resurrected! LOL. Good job -- I think you did well to present the Biblical evidence for the dual natures of Christ. You are certainly correct to say:
"Thus, while Scripture may not use the language that was thrown around in Nicea (homoiousios and homoousios), the meanings behind these words to describe the nature of Christ are clearly contained within the Scritpures."
Athanasius himself said: "This enables us to see brethren, that they of Nicaea breathe the spirit of Scripture…" [Athanasius. “Ad Afros Epistola Synodica” in NPNF2, Phillip Schaff and Henry Wace, eds. (Hendrickson, rpt. 1995), 4:490.]
R.P.C. Hanson so aptly stated:
"The theologians of the Christian Church were slowly driven to a realization that the deepest questions which face Christianity cannot be answered in purely biblical language, because the questions are about the meaning of the biblical language itself." [Search for the Christian Doctrine of God: The Arian Controversy, 318-381, (Baker Academic, rpt. 2005)xxi.]
But I noticed an error in the statement of the gentleman to whom you were responding. He said:
"We know he was God and Human, but I quite sure (correct me) does the Bible explicitly say in the same being...Maybe God and human in one body, just two people, but this was one the early arguments of the Church, weather or not Jesus was truly 1 being! This was defined i believe in the 2nd or 3rd century that indeed Jesus was fully man and fully God in the same being, not two separate people. "
I'd like to know how he is using the term 'being' here. The doctrine of the hypostatic union that was articulated at Chalcedon is that the one person of Jesus was to be:
...acknowledged in two natures (ἐν δύο φύσεσιν), inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably; the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one Person and one Subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son...
The term nature (physis) is synonymous with being (ousia) in many cases. So his wording would lead one to believe that he was arguing for a single nature even though perhaps he wasn't. But I think this is a perfect example of how we have to be very careful in the terms we use to express ourselves. I think when he's saying being he really means person but I can't be sure -- if not, he's effectively (and no doubt unwittingly) embracing the heresy of Monophysitism.
In any event... Thanks for pointing me to this! Lord willing one day GNRhead will send you his opening statement and you guys can kick off your debate on whatever it was you were going to debate -- it's been so long I forgot! lol.
God bless!
Post a Comment
<< Home