T(r)oy's Marbles

Dear Ashley,

I so thoroughly enjoyed our discussion last night. I want to applaud your hunger and thirst for a deepening understanding of your faith. I want to commend you, specifically, on your approach in cultivating deeper understanding. That is, it is clear to me that the starting point of your quest for understanding is faith. This, in my opinion, is a good foundation and Christians down through the centuries have affirmed the importance of faith as a starting point in our quest for understanding. In fact, Christian thinkers in the medieval period stressed that they did not seek to understand in order to believe; rather, they believed in order to understand. The exact phrase they used to describe this was: “faith seeking understanding.” Ashley, you have a faith that seeks understanding, and (as I said) I want to applaud that and cheer that on. Don’t ever lose that childlike faith and trust. It is the best thing in the world.

Having said that: If I can continue to be a resource to you on your quest for understanding that would be wonderful. Please do not hesitate to ask me if you have any other questions about these kinds of things. You should know that if you ask me about these kinds of questions, sometimes I will include the following in our discussion: 1) A restatement of the issue. 2) A clarification of “what’s at stake” with regard to the issue. 3) An explanation of what various Christians from different traditions and times have said about the issue. and 4) An explanation of what the Bible says about the issue.

You may wonder, “Why not just go straight for what the Bible says?” I do this because I realize that we are never alone in our thinking about these things, and very often I have found that Christians who have come before us have actually done some very good thinking already, so there is no need to “re-invent the wheel.” By looking at what other Christians say, we also develop an appreciation for different ways of thinking about the topic at hand and a respect for those who have gone before us. This promotes unity in the Body of Christ. At any rate, those are some of the assumptions I bring to these kinds of questions, and those assumptions generally form the basis of how I address these questions.

On that note, let’s address the question in particular that you asked at the end of the evening last night. I’m sorry that we ran out of time, but trust that this email will prove to be a help to you.

If I remember correctly, you asked if Jesus was fully aware of his divinity when he was a child or if his God-consciousness developed to full maturity as he got older.

This is an excellent question, indeed, and (to be sure) it is a question that Christians down through the centuries have addressed as well. This also is a question that, even though the New Testament records very little on the life of Jesus as a boy, there is an explicit biblical reference to this that helps clear up the issue. But rather than go straight for “what does the Bible say” I think it would be beneficial to look at 1. What’s at stake with the issue (in other words, why does this even matter?) and 2. What have other Christians said about this?

To define the question more specifically (and, paradoxically, put the question in a broader context) it may be helpful to know that this is a question of what theologians call “Christology.” Specifically, we are asking the question, “How does Jesus Christ’s human nature relate to his divine nature?”

To be sure, Christology was of utmost importance to Christians in the ancient church. Indeed, it was of primary importance because there is no Christianity without a proper understanding of Christ. So, Christology always came first when thinking about issues of faith in the early church. Christology was given top priority because of what was at stake. Specifically, the early church said, our salvation was at stake. The reason was two-fold:

1. The early Christians believed “Only God can save.” Humanity had gotten itself into such a predicament that only God had the ability to get us out of it. That’s because humanity was enslaved to the devil, forever destined to doing the devil’s works and forever chained to death and decay. Humanity doesn’t have the ability to overcome the devil. Only God can do that. So, the early Christians believed “Jesus is God” in part because “only God can save.”

But they also believed a second truth was crucial when it came to Christology.

2. The early Christians believed “Only That Which God Becomes can be saved.” In other words, if God wanted to save humans, He had to become human. The reason is very simple: Adam, as our human representative, was made by God, but he corrupted humanity when he rebelled against God. But Jesus (“The Second Adam”--Romans 5:12-21) who was begotten by God (not made) became our new representative, liberating humanity from its bondage to decay through his unity with the Father. When immortal God assumed mortal flesh, we mortals were offered immortality. Thus, our salvation (that is, our “eternal life”, our “immortality”) could only be achieved as God became Man. It was through God becoming Man that the great exchange took place.

For example, see these quotes from the early church:

Athanasius: “For as the Lord became man by putting on the body, so we men are deified by the Word…”

Eusebius: “…whatever he touches with his divine…power, is bound to be endued with both life and spiritual light. Thus any bodily object that he touches is immediately sanctified and enlightened. Anything in the way of disease or weakness is done away, and the lack is supplied by his fullness.”

At the base of those quotes lies the principle: “If God had not become a man, man would not be saved.”

So: Jesus was fully God and fully man. And the early church would add to that: He was this way at all times. He did not become God later in his life. He always was God. (By the way, the Mormons teach that Jesus was not always God. They teach that he became God through performing good works and they believe that we, too, can become gods of our own planet one day if we lead good lives as well, just like Jesus. This, you should know, is outside the bounds of “orthodox”—that is, “correct”—belief because it is a faulty view of the person of Christ and it is a faulty view of how we are saved. That’s why Mormons are considered a cult.)

So, we’ve stated the basis of our faith: Jesus is fully God and fully man. And we’ve stated that He always was (from the moment of his conception) fully God and fully man. And we’ve stated “what’s at stake” with the issue: if Jesus isn’t God, mankind is lost; if Jesus isn’t man, mankind is lost.

I’ll stop there for now and continue this in another letter tomorrow so you can digest this much. Tomorrow we’ll delve further into this topic and look at: “How does Jesus’ divine nature relate to his human nature?”

Until then...

Troy