Latest / Reformed Thinking / Jesus, the Eternal Son of God

Transcript

Jesus, the Eternal Son of God · Reformed Thinking

0:00
You know, if you were to stand on the shore of the Pacific
0:02
Ocean, just listening to the crashing waves, looking at the
0:06
terrifying vastness of all that water extending out to the
0:09
horizon. It is a staggering amount of
0:11
water. Yeah, all of it.
0:13
And then imagine someone hands you a standard fragile porcelain
0:17
teacup, and they look at you and say I need you to fit the entire
0:20
ocean into this cup. Oh, wow.
0:23
Yeah, All of it without losing a single drop and without breaking
0:27
the porcelain. I mean, you would look at them
0:30
like they had lost their minds. It is a categorical
0:33
impossibility. It defies every law of physics,
0:35
honestly. The finite cannot contain the
0:37
infinite. The container would shatter
0:39
instantly under the pressure, or the water would just wash right
0:42
over it completely unrestrained. Those two realities are
0:45
incompatible in that configuration.
0:47
Spot on. And yet this is the very claim
0:50
we are looking at today, because within the opening pages of the
0:52
New Testament, we are confronted with the assertion that the
0:55
infinite God of the universe, the creator of that proverbial
0:58
Pacific, somehow fit all of his uncreated reality into the
1:03
fragile teacup of a human life. Which is just a massive claim to
1:07
wrap your head around. It really is.
1:08
We are talking about Jesus of Nazareth, a Jewish Carpenter who
1:12
bled, who wept, who walked the dusty, dangerous roads of 1st
1:16
century Galilee. Inside that human life, we are
1:19
told, dwells all the fullness of God.
1:22
So welcome to Reformed thinking. I'm your host.
1:24
And today we are looking straight into the absolute core
1:26
of the Christian faith. Yes, we have a huge topic ahead
1:29
of us. Today we do.
1:30
Our mission for this deep dive is to examine 2 comprehensive
1:34
texts we have in front of US. One is called Jesus as God and
1:37
the other is Jesus, the eternal Son of God.
1:39
We're going to investigate this staggering claim that Jesus is
1:43
fully and eternally God, the unique, only begotten Son of the
1:46
Father. And I think it is helpful to
1:48
stay right at the top for you, listening, that both of us
1:51
approach this deep dive as Protestant Christians who adhere
1:55
to the Westminster Confession. Yes, that is our shared
1:58
framework. We approach this discussion
2:00
knowing that understanding the deity of Christ is an essential,
2:04
non negotiable doctrine. It is the absolute anchor for
2:07
the entire framework of salvation.
2:10
OK, let's unpack this, because to graft the sheer magnitude of
2:13
claiming Jesus is God, we first have to understand the strictly
2:16
monitored religious environment he entered.
2:19
Right, you cannot just drop that claim into a vacuum.
2:22
No, you cannot. We have to start with the Old
2:24
Testament context. I mean, to really feel the
2:26
weight of this, we need to picture the religious
2:28
environment of the ancient Near East.
2:30
Yeah, the entire world back then was totally saturated with
2:33
polytheism. Nations had massive pantheons of
2:36
deities. You had local household gods,
2:38
gods of the harvest, gods of war, gods of the rivers like.
2:41
Male and Marduk and all those figures.
2:43
Yes, precisely. And against that chaotic
2:46
backdrop, the faith of Israel was this radical, isolated
2:49
island of strict monotheism. The absolute baseline of
2:52
biblical faith is anchored by the Shema, which is found in
2:55
Deuteronomy chapter 6 verse 4. It says, Hear, O Israel, the
2:59
Lord our God, the Lord is 1. And that was not just some
3:02
abstract doctrinal statement they kept in the scroll.
3:05
Not at all. It was the daily breath of the
3:08
Jewish people. You see this fiercely defended
3:10
throughout the prophets in the book of Isaiah, chapters 43
3:13
through 45. God speaks with absolute jealous
3:17
exclusivity. He makes very definitive
3:19
statements there. Really does he says before me,
3:22
no God was formed, nor shall there be any after me.
3:25
And he also says, I am the 1st, and I am the last.
3:29
Besides me there is no God. The writers of the Old Testament
3:32
guarded the oneness of God with their very lives.
3:35
Especially after the Babylonian exile, I would imagine.
3:37
Oh absolutely, The exile was a massive trauma for them which
3:40
they viewed as a correct punishment for idolatry.
3:43
So to suggest that there was another God or some lesser
3:47
divine being alongside Yahweh was the highest form of
3:50
blasphemy. It was the quickest way to face
3:52
execution by stoning. Wait, hold on a second.
3:55
If that is true, if Israel is surrounded by polytheists and
3:58
violently defending this strict monotheism, how do we explain
4:02
the bizarre textual anomalies early in the Hebrew Scripture?
4:06
That is the big question, isn't it?
4:08
It is because right in the middle of these fiercely guarded
4:11
texts we start seeing hints of internal plurality.
4:15
You go all the way back to the first chapter of Genesis, verse
4:17
26. God is creating the world and he
4:20
says let us make man in our image after our likeness.
4:25
Using those plural pronouns right from the start.
4:27
He uses plural pronouns. So if you are an ancient
4:30
Israelite reading that, wouldn't you just assume God is talking
4:33
to a heavenly court of angels? Or maybe using a royal?
4:36
We like a human king does. Why jump to the conclusion that
4:40
this hints at a plural Godhead? What's fascinating here is how
4:43
the Hebrew grammar and the theological context shut down
4:47
those alternative explanations pretty quickly.
4:49
First, regarding the angels. Angels do not create in biblical
4:54
theology or creation is an exclusive prerogative of Yahweh
4:57
right God. Alone is the creator.
4:58
Yes. Furthermore, humanity is not
5:00
made in the image of angels. We are made in the image of God.
5:03
So God cannot be including angels in the our image
5:06
statement. And 2nd, regarding the royal we,
5:09
or the Pluralis Magistatus as scholars call it, linguists
5:12
point out that this concept did not actually exist in ancient
5:15
biblical Hebrew. Oh really?
5:16
I didn't know that. Yeah, it is a much later
5:18
historical development in human language.
5:21
So when the text says, let us, it leaves this lingering,
5:25
unresolved tension in the mind of the ancient reader, and that
5:29
tension just continues to build. You see it moving forward into
5:32
the Psalms too. Yes, look at Psalm 110 verse
5:35
one. King David writes.
5:37
The Lord says to my Lord, sit at my right hand until I make your
5:41
enemies your footstool. That phrasing always trips
5:43
people. Up it does.
5:45
David is talking about Yahweh speaking to another distinct
5:48
figure, a figure that David, who is the supreme earthly king of
5:52
Israel, submits to and calls my Lord.
5:55
And this figure is seated at the very right hand of God.
5:58
And we also see the evolution of this concept of sonship tracking
6:01
alongside those hints. It starts broad and gets
6:04
incredibly specific. Early in the book of Exodus, God
6:07
refers to the whole corporate nation of Israel as his first
6:09
born son. Right Israel as a collective.
6:12
Yeah. Then, centuries later, the
6:14
concept narrows down to a royal covenant title specifically for
6:18
the Davidic King, which we see in Second Samuel Chapter 7.
6:22
But it does not stop there. It stretches further toward this
6:25
future divine eschatological figure.
6:29
The promised Messiah. Yes, you look at Isaiah Chapter
6:31
9 promising A literal child who will be born, but this human
6:35
child will actually bear the title Mighty God.
6:39
So it goes back to my earlier thought.
6:41
It is like trying to fit a second sovereign monarch onto a
6:44
single throne room chair. How could ancient devout Jewish
6:48
writers record these prophecies without feeling like they were
6:51
violating the first commandment? Well, they could record them
6:54
because these Old Testament categories were deliberately
6:57
tilled soil. The prophets were writing under
6:59
the inspiration of the Holy Spirit who is orchestrating the
7:02
scriptural landscape. So is a gradual preparation.
7:04
Yes, a very intentional one. These plural pronouns, these
7:07
mysterious visitations of the Angel of the Lord who speaks as
7:10
Yahweh but is distinct from Yahweh, and those royal sonship
7:13
titles, they did not contradict monotheism.
7:16
They prepared the theological vocabulary.
7:18
So they would have the right words when the time came.
7:21
Correct. God was ensuring that when the
7:23
Messiah arrived, his divine nature would be recognized as
7:26
the unfolding of God's own eternal identity rather than the
7:30
invention of a new competing deity.
7:34
You mentioned trying to fit 2 monarchs on one chair.
7:37
Look at how the prophet Daniel handles this exact imagery.
7:40
Oh, in Daniel Chapter 7. Yes, Daniel Chapter 7, which is
7:42
arguably one of the most vital texts for understanding who
7:45
Jesus claimed to be. Daniel receives a vision of the
7:49
throne room of heaven. He sees the Ancient of Days
7:52
clearly. Yahweh, God the Father taking
7:54
his seat. A very majestic scene.
7:56
Very. But then Daniel sees one, like a
7:59
son of man coming with the clouds of heaven.
8:01
And writing on the clouds is a massive detail in that specific
8:05
cultural context. Right, that is correct.
8:07
In the literature of the ancient Near East, writing on the clouds
8:10
was the defining characteristic of the Supreme Deity.
8:13
In Canaanite mythology, the storm God Baal was known as the
8:17
cloud writer. They actually called him that.
8:19
They did so. The Old Testament writers
8:21
constantly Co opted that imagery to declare that Yahweh alone
8:25
writes the clouds. It is a specific, exclusive
8:28
prerogative of the God of Israel.
8:30
Yet here in Daniel 7, we see a distinct figure appearing as a
8:34
man writing the clouds. Approaching the Ancient of Days.
8:37
Yes, he approaches the Ancient of Days and is given everlasting
8:41
dominion, glory, and a Kingdom so that all people's nations and
8:45
languages should worship him. Now, in a strictly monotheistic
8:48
framework, giving universal worship to anyone other than
8:52
Yahweh is idolatry. It breaks the most basic rule
8:55
they have. It does, yet the Ancient of Days
8:57
commands it. The line between a human
9:00
representative and divine rule is deliberately blurred by the
9:03
biblical text itself. That blurring of the line is
9:06
what sets the stage for the New Testament.
9:08
The Old Testament set up this expectation of a divine Sun
9:11
King, so the New Testament writers were able to take these
9:14
established categories and apply them directly to the historical
9:17
Jesus. And they do it with a level of
9:18
explicit clarity that is just shocking.
9:21
We go from hints and shadows to blinding stadium lights.
9:24
But I want to frame this experientially for the listener,
9:27
because reading a list of Bible verses can sometimes feel like
9:30
scanning a textbook it. Can feel a bit dry if you miss
9:33
the context, yeah. So imagine you are a 1st century
9:36
Jew. You know the Torah inside and
9:38
out. You know that pronouncing the
9:40
sacred name of God is completely forbidden.
9:43
And then you are standing in the temple courtyard listening to
9:46
this Carpenter for Nazareth debate the religious elite.
9:50
The tension must have been incredibly high.
9:52
Extremely high. In John chapter 8 the debate
9:55
gets heated and Jesus looks them dead in the eye and says before
9:59
Abraham was I am. He takes the sacred burning Bush
10:03
name of God from Exodus chapter 3.
10:06
I AM WHO IMM and just claims it for himself.
10:10
Which is an astonishing thing to say out loud.
10:12
If you heard that, you wouldn't just be confused, you would be
10:14
looking for the nearest heavy rock to execute him for
10:17
blasphemy. And that is what the Pharisees
10:19
did. They absolutely did because they
10:21
understood the linguistics of his claim better than many
10:24
modern critics do today. When Jesus said that, he was not
10:28
claiming to be a prophet with a really old soul, he was claiming
10:32
self existent eternal being. He was claiming to be Yahweh.
10:35
Yes, and the apostles echoed this unapologetically.
10:38
You look at the opening of John's gospel, he does not ease
10:40
the reader into it at all. He writes in the beginning was
10:44
the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.
10:47
And by verse 14, he tells us this eternal word became flesh.
10:50
It is a very blunt opening statement.
10:53
Very blunt. Or look at the end of John's
10:55
Gospel, where Thomas, the disciple who famously doubted
10:58
the resurrection, finally sees the risen Jesus.
11:02
Thomas falls down and confesses. My Lord and my God.
11:05
And Jesus does not stop him. He does not correct him at all.
11:08
If Jesus were just a human prophet, accepting that title
11:11
would be monstrous idolatry. A good prophet would immediately
11:15
tear his clothes and say stand up, worship God alone.
11:17
Like we see other figures do in the Bible when people try to
11:20
worship them. Right, like the angels in
11:21
Revelation or Paul and Barnabas. But Jesus accepts the worship as
11:26
his rightful. Do we see the same explicit
11:29
claims in Romans Chapter 9, Titus chapter 2, Hebrews chapter
11:33
1, and Second Peter chapter 1? All of them bypass metaphor and
11:37
refer to Jesus directly as God. And they don't just use the word
11:41
God, they also take the personal name of Yahweh and map it onto
11:46
Jesus, which is a massive conceptual leap for a Jewish
11:49
writer. Yes, the terminology is
11:51
incredibly precise. In the Greek translation of the
11:54
Old Testament, known as the Septuagint, the divine
11:57
unspeakable name of God YHWH was translated using the Greek word
12:01
curious, meaning Lord. So they swapped out the sacred
12:05
name for Lord. Correct.
12:06
And the apostles took that supreme divine title and freely
12:09
applied it to Jesus of Nazareth. A perfect illustration of this
12:12
is found in the book of Romans chapter 10.
12:14
What happens there? Well, the Apostle Paul is
12:16
explaining how a person is saved and he quotes the Old Testament
12:18
prophet Joel saying everyone who calls on the name of the Lord
12:21
will be saved. OK, I know that verse.
12:23
Right, but if you scroll back to Joel chapter 2, that text is
12:26
explicitly about calling on Yahweh to be saved from the
12:29
coming day of judgment. But Paul takes that text and
12:32
applies it directly to calling on the resurrected Jesus.
12:36
That is a huge shift. It is furthermore, the apostles
12:39
adopt Trinitarian formulas naturally, as if they were
12:42
established unquestionable facts of the universe.
12:45
In Matthew chapter 28, Jesus commands baptism in the singular
12:49
name. Not names plural, but singular
12:52
name of the Father and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.
12:55
Grouping them all under one name.
12:57
Yes, this grammatical construction places the Son and
13:00
the Spirit on the exact same divine level of authority and
13:03
essence as the Father. It highlights the unique nature
13:06
of Christ's sonship. The Greek word used for Jesus in
13:10
John's writings is monogenous, meaning the only begotten, the
13:13
one-of-a-kind Son. Meaning he is not a son the way
13:15
we are sons. That is right.
13:17
This is entirely distinct from the derivative adoption we
13:20
experience. We become children of God by
13:22
grace. Jesus is the Son of God by
13:24
nature. So what does this all mean on a
13:26
practical level for the people who actually lived with him?
13:29
I try to think about the cognitive dissonance the
13:32
disciples must have experienced on a daily basis.
13:34
It must have been overwhelming at times.
13:36
I mean, you are walking the roads with this man.
13:38
You see him get hungry. You see him fall asleep on a
13:41
cushion in the back of a fishing boat because he is just
13:45
physically exhausted. You see him weep openly at the
13:48
tomb of his friend Lazarus. You smell the sweat on his
13:52
clothes. He was fully immersed in the
13:54
human experience. Right.
13:55
So how do they mentally reconcile his obvious visible
14:00
human limitations with a staggering claim that he was the
14:04
eternal creator of the cosmos? How do you watch a man eat a
14:07
piece of broiled scythe and simultaneously believe his hands
14:11
knit the Milky Way Galaxy together?
14:12
To reconcile that cognitive dissonance, we have to
14:15
distinguish between 2 dimensions of Christ's sonship that the
14:18
biblical texts present. We have his ontological sonship
14:21
and his messianic sonship. Ontological meaning his being.
14:25
Yes, ontology just means the study of being.
14:28
So ontological sonship refers to who Jesus is eternally within
14:32
the Trinity before time began. The Son is eternally begotten of
14:36
the Father. He is God of God, light of
14:38
light. That is his unchangeable nature.
14:41
And the messianic sonship. Messianic Sonship refers to his
14:44
historical role as the Incarnate Davidic king entering into human
14:48
history to accomplish redemption.
14:50
As the Apostle Paul writes in Romans chapter 1, Jesus was
14:53
descended from David according to the flesh, and was declared
14:56
to be the Son of God in might by his resurrection from the dead.
14:59
So taking on human flex did not diminish his deity.
15:02
Not at all. Taking on human flesh did not
15:04
mean he subtracted from his divine nature.
15:07
It means he added a human nature to himself.
15:10
This is a crucial distinction. In addition, not a subtraction.
15:12
Yes, His human experiences, the hunger, the fatigue, the sorrow,
15:16
the pain, belong properly to His human nature, while His divine
15:19
nature remains infinitely robust, omniscient and
15:22
omnipotent. OK, let's unpack how the
15:25
historical church organized all this data.
15:28
Because the New Testament contains these intense claims of
15:31
both utter humanity and absolute deity, and the early church
15:34
leaders had to systematize this into a coherent doctrinal
15:38
framework. They had a lot of data to sort
15:40
through. They really did.
15:42
Yeah. Human nature hates a mystery,
15:44
and people were naturally trying to figure out the mechanics of
15:46
how this worked. So to protect the truth from
15:49
being diluted by bad philosophy, the church categorized the
15:53
scriptural evidence into four buckets.
15:55
The names, the attributes, the works and the worship of Jesus.
15:59
Those are various helpful categories.
16:00
Yeah, when you look at the divine attributes, the texts
16:03
assigned to Jesus, characteristics that belong
16:05
solely to the Creator, he possesses eternity as we see in
16:09
John chapter 17, where he casually speaks of the glory he
16:12
shared with the Father before the world existed.
16:14
As if it was just a stated fact. Right.
16:16
He possesses omnipotence, upholding the universe by the
16:19
word of his power. According to Hebrews chapter 1,
16:22
he possesses omniscience. In John chapter 21, Peter said
16:25
to him, Lord, you know everything.
16:27
Which is an attribute only God has.
16:29
Yes, and he possesses immutability.
16:33
Hebrews chapter 13 declared Jesus Christ as the same
16:35
yesterday, today, and forever. Then you look at his works.
16:39
He handles creation, He manages Providence, He takes on the
16:43
final judgement of all humanity, and maybe most shockingly to the
16:47
Jewish mind, he forgives sins. The forgiveness of sins is a
16:51
massive theological indicator in the text.
16:54
Can you break that down for us? Sure, in Mark chapter 2 we see
16:58
the incident of Jesus forgiving the paralyzed man.
17:01
Jesus looks at the paralytic and says Son your sins are forgiven.
17:05
And the scribes sitting there reason in their hearts who can
17:08
forgive sins, but God alone. They are not wrong about that,
17:12
are they? They are absolutely right in
17:13
their theological premise. Only the offended party can
17:16
forgive the offense. Think of it this way, if you
17:19
punch me in the face, my neighbor cannot step in and say
17:21
I forgive you. Right, because I didn't hit the
17:23
neighbor. Exactly.
17:24
I have to be the one to forgive you because I am the offended
17:26
party. In the biblical worldview, all
17:29
sin, at bottom is a cosmic offense against God's holiness.
17:33
Therefore, only God can unilaterally forgive sin.
17:36
So when Jesus does it, he is stepping into God's shoes, yes.
17:40
And Jesus does not correct their theology.
17:42
He uses it. He heals the man's physical
17:45
paralysis right in front of them to prove that their invisible
17:48
theology applies to his visible person.
17:51
He demonstrates a visible divine work to authenticate His
17:54
invisible divine authority. Here's where it gets really
17:57
interesting when you look at how the early church councils
18:01
formulated this places like the Council of Chalcedon.
18:05
I like to use an analogy from quantum physics.
18:07
Oh, I like where this is going. In classical mechanics,
18:09
something is either a particle, like a grain of fan, or a wave,
18:13
like a ripple in a pond. It cannot be both.
18:15
It has to be one or the other. Right.
18:17
But when scientists look at light, they discover it behaves
18:20
entirely as a particle and entirely as a wave.
18:23
Simultaneously. It defines our classical earthly
18:26
logic. If you try to force light to be
18:28
just a ways, the math breaks. If you force it to be just a
18:32
particle, the math breaks. You just have to accept what you
18:35
were observing. Yeah, you have to accept the
18:37
paradox. The two distinct realities are
18:39
perfectly united in one phenomenon.
18:42
That is what the Church Fathers were doing with the two natures
18:45
of Christ. They were looking at the data of
18:47
the Gospels and saying he is entirely human, He is entirely
18:51
divine. We cannot compromise either.
18:54
That quantum analogy is far superior to trying to imagine
18:57
blending physical materials together.
19:00
It perfectly captures the tension the early church faced
19:03
and it leads us directly into the brilliance of the definition
19:06
of Chelsea Don, which is also echoed in the Westminster
19:09
Confession. So what were the Church Fathers
19:11
trying to avoid? The theologians had to avoid 2
19:14
catastrophic philosophical failures.
19:16
The first failure is Nestorianism.
19:19
Nestorianism attempts to split Jesus into two separate people,
19:23
one human person and one divine person.
19:25
So like two different individuals occupying 1 space?
19:28
Yes, it divides the subject, creating a schizo phrenic
19:31
scenario where the human Jesus does one thing like weeping, and
19:34
the divine Christ does another, like raising the dead.
19:37
It destroys the unity of his person.
19:39
That sounds incredibly confusing.
19:40
What was the second failure? The second failure is
19:42
uticianism, which attempts to blend the two natures into a
19:46
third, unrecognizable thing, like a theological smoothie.
19:50
A theological smoothie. Yeah, in Uticianism, the divine
19:53
in human natures are mixed to form a composite nature that is
19:56
neither truly human nor truly divine.
19:58
It creates a hybrid. So he wouldn't really be one of
20:02
us anymore. Right, and he wouldn't be fully
20:04
God either. The historical church firmly
20:07
rejected both of those errors. They stated that the two
20:10
distinct natures, divine and human, are united in the one
20:13
Person of the Sun without conversion, composition or
20:16
confusion. So he remains one person, yes.
20:19
The singular subject, the I who speaks and acts, is always the
20:22
one person of the Sun. The person of the Sun
20:25
experiences the fatigue through his human nature and upholds the
20:28
universe through his divine nature simultaneously.
20:31
And the precision of those definitions from the church
20:33
councils was not just an academic exercise for guys in
20:36
robes sitting in ivory towers. The reason they had me so
20:39
incredibly precise is that this doctrine faced relentless,
20:42
vicious attacks from the very beginning.
20:44
It was a heavily contested issue.
20:46
It was a brutal historical battleground.
20:49
When we go back to the 4th century, you have the rise of
20:52
Arianism. Arianism was the claim that the
20:55
sun was a created being. They had a popular slogan they
20:59
would chant in the streets. Actually, they would say there
21:02
was when he was not. Catchy, but highly problematic.
21:06
Very They believed Jesus was the highest, most glorious creature
21:09
God ever made, but still just a creature.
21:12
To understand the appeal of Arianism, you have to look at
21:15
the Greek culture of the time. The Greco Roman world was
21:18
entirely comfortable with the idea of demigods.
21:21
They loved stories of Hercules, a figure who was more than
21:24
human, possessing immense strength, but not the supreme
21:27
creator of the universe. So it fit right into their
21:30
existing category. It did.
21:31
Arianism essentially turned Jesus into a Christian Hercules.
21:35
It made him a super powered intermediary, which was highly
21:38
palatable to the Pagan philosophers of the 4th century,
21:41
but it fundamentally destroyed the biblical gospel.
21:44
Because a creature cannot save another creature.
21:46
That is correct. This massive cultural debate
21:49
sparked the Council of Nicaea in the year 325.
21:53
At this council the Church fiercely defended the Greek term
21:56
homousios, meaning of 1 substance.
21:59
Not a similar substance. Right.
22:01
They declared that Jesus was not a similar substance to the
22:04
Father, nor created substance, but the exact same eternal
22:08
substance as the Father. And there is that famous
22:11
historical anecdote, which might be legendary, but it illustrates
22:16
the intensity of the debate about Saint Nicholas.
22:18
Yes, the figure we associate with Santa Claus.
22:20
Yeah, that very guy. The story goes that Nicholas was
22:23
so enraged by Arias standing up the council and stripping Christ
22:26
of his eternal deity that Nicholas walked across the room
22:29
and punched Arias square in the face.
22:31
It is a striking mental image. It really is, and whether that
22:34
literal punch happened or not, it shows that these were not
22:37
mild disagreements over tea. They viewed this as a battle for
22:40
the soul of the Christian faith. But even after Nicaea, the
22:43
counterfeits kept coming. You had modalism, which is
22:46
sometimes called civilianism. Modalism is just the human brain
22:49
trying to simplify the Trinity into an easier concept.
22:52
How so? Well, it claims that the Father,
22:55
Son, and Holy Spirit are not distinct persons who interact
22:59
with each other, but just different masks worn by a single
23:03
divine actor. Think of a stage play where one
23:06
man runs backstage, puts on a crown to play the Father, runs
23:10
back to put on a carpenter's robe to play the Son, and then
23:13
puts on a flowing garment to play the Spirit.
23:16
It sounds a bit like an ancient quick change routine.
23:19
It does. It simplifies the math for us,
23:21
but it makes a mockery of the New Testament narrative when
23:24
Jesus is baptized and the Father speaks from heaven while the
23:27
Spirit descends as a dove. Modalism forces you to conclude
23:31
that God is essentially putting on a deceptive puppet show.
23:34
Because there is no real relationship happening there,
23:36
right? We also saw adoptionism back
23:38
then, which is the idea that Jesus was an ordinary biological
23:41
human who was simply promoted or adopted by God because of his
23:45
exceptional moral behavior. And the scary thing is, these
23:48
are not just dusty old heresies locked away in the 4th century.
23:52
We see modern echoes of them everywhere today.
23:54
They just get repackaged. Yeah, we see Arianism repackaged
23:58
in the theology of Jehovah's Witnesses, who view Jesus as the
24:02
created Archangel Michael. We see echoes in the teachings
24:06
of Islam, which reveres Jesus as a mighty prophet but vehemently
24:10
denies his deity. We see it in liberal theology,
24:14
which strips away the supernatural and reduces Jesus
24:16
to a social justice activist or a really insightful moral
24:20
philosopher. It is very common to see him
24:22
reduced that way. It is, and even in circles that
24:25
claim to be orthodox, we see practical downgrades.
24:27
The seeker sensitive and prosperity gospel movements
24:30
often treat Jesus as a celestial life coach, a vending machine
24:33
for self fulfillment, rather than the sovereign Lord of the
24:36
universe. Which brings me to a question.
24:38
Sure. Why is there such a persistent
24:40
historical human impulse to domesticate Jesus?
24:43
Why do people across all centuries and cultures
24:45
constantly try to downgrade him from the eternal God to just a
24:49
really good guy or a Hercules figure or helpful mentor?
24:52
This raises an important question, and it gets to the
24:54
absolute core of the human condition.
24:57
The impulse to domesticate Jesus is rooted entirely in our desire
25:00
to maintain our own autonomy. We want to stay in charge.
25:03
We want to be the captains of our own souls.
25:06
If Jesus is merely A gifted human teacher, we can listen to
25:09
his lectures, take notes, and feel perfectly free to critique
25:13
his lessons. We can adopt the ethical
25:15
principles we like, such as loving our neighbor, and discard
25:18
the demands we find inconvenient, such as taking up
25:21
our cross. We get to edit the script.
25:22
Yes, and if he is an exalted Angel or a demigod, we can
25:27
admire his glorious status from a safe distance without it
25:30
demanding A fundamental surrender of our daily lives.
25:33
We can treat him like a consultant.
25:35
And you can always ignore a consultant.
25:36
You can always fire a consultant, yes, But if Jesus of
25:39
Nazareth is the eternal creator of the cosmos, the one who knit
25:43
our DNA together in the womb, and the one who will judge the
25:46
living and the dead with eyes like fire, then our autonomy
25:49
evaporates instantly. Because he actually owns us,
25:52
yes. We have no choice but total
25:55
unconditional submission and worship.
25:57
Recognizing His absolute deity strips away our cherished
26:00
illusion of being the sovereign rulers of our own lives.
26:03
We can trace a direct historical and psychological line from
26:06
ancient Arianism right down to modern day pop spirituality.
26:10
It is the same underlying rebellion.
26:12
It is treating Jesus as an inspiring metaphor or a
26:15
therapeutic aid for our self esteem.
26:17
Strips the Christian faith of its ability to save anyone.
26:21
It leaves people with a Christ light religion.
26:24
Christ light, I like that phrasing.
26:26
And a Christ light religion inevitably collapses under the
26:29
agonizing pressure of real world suffering and the crushing
26:32
weight of human guilt. A domesticated life coach, Jesus
26:37
cannot bear the weight of your salvation.
26:39
That brings us to the practical application of this entire
26:41
discussion. Defending these ancient creeds,
26:44
arguing over Greek terms like Homo lusios, is not a
26:48
disconnected academic exercise. High Christology dictates high
26:52
soteriology, meaning what you believe about the identity of
26:55
Christ directly controls whether you actually have a valid
26:58
salvation. They are completely linked
27:00
together. Let's look at the mechanics of
27:01
the Atonement and Reformed theology.
27:03
The sources point out that sin is not just a mistake, it is an
27:07
act of cosmic treason, and an offence against an infinite
27:11
eternal God carries an infinite eternal guilt.
27:13
The punishment has to match the crime.
27:15
Yes. Therefore, only a truly divine
27:19
Savior can offer a sacrifice of infinite worth to satisfy that
27:23
infinite justice. If Jesus is just a perfect
27:26
human, his death might cover one other human.
27:30
But because he's God Incarnate, his sacrifice has infinite,
27:34
inexhaustible value. 1/2 Divine Christ provides only half a
27:38
salvation, which is no salvation at all.
27:41
That is a very stark reality. Furthermore, there is the
27:43
concept of union and adoption. The New Testament says believers
27:47
become sons in the Son. What does that mean for us
27:50
practically? It means our adoption as
27:51
children of God is grounded entirely in Christ's eternal,
27:55
natural sonship. We are grafted into the
27:57
relationship He has possessed with the Father from all
27:59
eternity. We also find our primary comfort
28:02
and suffering right here in this doctrine.
28:04
Which is something everyone deals with.
28:06
Yes, one of the titles given to Jesus is Emmanuel, which
28:09
translates to God with us. If we connect this to the bigger
28:12
picture, He is not a distant, detached observer sitting safely
28:16
in the pristine halls of heaven, watching us struggle.
28:19
He actually entered the mess. He did.
28:21
He is the sovereign God who intentionally stepped into the
28:24
mud and blood of human history. He physically tasted human
28:28
grief. He knows what it feels like to
28:30
be betrayed by a friend, to be falsely accused, to bleed and to
28:34
suffocate to death. Because of his human nature.
28:36
Yes, because he is human, He sympathizes with our weaknesses.
28:40
But because he is God, He possesses the divine authority
28:45
in might to actually sustain believers through their darkest
28:49
trials. I think of it like this.
28:51
A merely human savior, A moral teacher, is like a fellow
28:55
drowning man in the middle of a raging ocean trying to rescue
28:58
you. He might have fantastic
28:59
intentions, he might be thrashing the water trying to
29:01
help you stay afloat, but in the end he is subject to the same
29:05
fatal currents he is going down with.
29:07
You. That is a terrifying.
29:09
Thought it is a divine savior, however is like a massive rescue
29:12
helicopter dropping a steel cable from above.
29:15
He enters the turbulent water. He gets wet, he feels the
29:18
freezing cold, but he remains absolutely anchored to this guy.
29:21
He's not subject to the current. He has the external invincible
29:25
strength to pull you out of the water.
29:26
I think that captures the dynamic perfectly.
29:29
And this completely shapes our view of worship and evangelism.
29:32
Jesus commands self denial. Evangelism is not inviting
29:36
people to add a new religious accessory to their busy
29:38
schedules, like downloading a meditation app to help them
29:41
relax. It is summoning rebels to lay
29:43
down their weapons and surrender to their rightful conquering
29:47
king. Exactly.
29:48
I mean spot on. If we look at the overarching
29:50
framework of Reformed theology, we see how it uniquely weds a
29:54
high view of Jesus with a high view of grace.
29:57
How do those two connect in this context?
29:59
Well, in theological systems that lower the identity of
30:02
Christ, human effort inevitably has to step in to compensate.
30:06
If the Savior is weak or limited, the Sinner must work
30:09
harder to bridge the gap. But because the eternal Son of
30:12
God offered himself, the sacrifice is infinitely
30:15
sufficient. There is nothing left for us to
30:17
add. It is a finished work.
30:19
It is. This is the absolute bedrock of
30:21
Christian assurance. Our assurance of salvation does
30:24
not rest on our shifting moods, our daily behavioral
30:26
performance, or our fluctuating emotional states.
30:29
Which is good news because my emotions change hourly.
30:32
Right. If it rested on us, we would be
30:34
terrified every single day. Our assurance rests entirely on
30:37
the Father's unchanging delight in His eternal Son and the fact
30:41
that we are securely united to that Son.
30:44
This speaks directly to the internal doubts that plague so
30:47
many listeners. Those late night worries.
30:48
Yes, when you lie awake at night staring at the ceiling
30:51
wondering, have I done enough? Is my faith strong enough?
30:54
Am I truly acceptable to God after what I did today?
30:58
The doctrine of the deity of Christ steps into that quiet
31:01
room to answer you. What does it tell us?
31:03
It tells you that you were never worthy in yourself, and your
31:05
faith is frequently weak. But the bloodshed on the Roman
31:08
cross belong to the Incarnate God Himself.
31:11
The value of the payment is directly tied to the infinite
31:14
identity of the person who made it.
31:16
Because the person is infinite, the payment is infinite, making
31:19
it an unfailing, unbreakable guarantee of your salvation.
31:22
That is an overwhelming reality to rest your life upon.
31:26
As we close this deep dive, I want to leave you with a
31:28
striking image from the historical accounts of the
31:31
crucifixion. We look at Golgotha, the moment
31:34
where Christ's divine glory was the most concealed from human
31:37
eyes. He is beaten, bloodied,
31:39
stripped, nailed to rough wood, and appears utterly, completely
31:44
defeated by the Roman Empire. It was the ultimate picture of
31:47
weakness to the outside. World.
31:48
Yeah, it was. Yet standing right there at the
31:50
foot of that cross is a Roman centurion.
31:54
This is a Pagan executor, a battle hardened man who had
31:57
likely supervised hundreds of brutal, agonizing deaths.
32:00
He has no Jewish theological background.
32:03
And this hardened soldier looks up at the bleeding, dying Jesus
32:06
as he takes his final breath and the century and confesses.
32:09
Truly, this man was the Son of God.
32:11
I want to challenge you with this thought as you go about
32:13
your week. If a Pagan executioner could
32:16
recognize the Divine Son in the absolute lowest moment of His
32:19
humiliation amidst a bloody execution, how much more should
32:22
we recognize and submit to Him in His resurrected cosmic glory,
32:26
seated at the right hand of the Father?
32:28
That is a very challenging thought to leave on.
32:31
We want to thank you for joining us on this deep dive on Reformed
32:33
thinking. We encourage you to read these
32:35
source materials for yourself, to dig into the scriptures, into
32:38
critically evaluate your own answer to Jesus's ultimate
32:42
question. Who do you say that I am?
32:44
It is the most vital question anyone will ever answer.
32:46
Because, as we established at the beginning, trying to fit the
32:49
identity of Jesus of Nazareth into a safe, comfortable human
32:53
category is like trying to fit the crashing waters of the
32:56
Pacific Ocean into a fragile porcelain teacup.
32:59
It will shatter your categories. Let him be the infinite God he
33:02
is.