Pin The Tail On The Sect

“_____________ (This group) considered politics to lie outside the New Testament. The Gospel contained principles for ruling citizens of the Kingdom of heaven, but not for legislation of a secular state in the … world …. _________ (This group) acknowledged that ‘the temporal sword is an ordinance of God, besides the perfection of Christ; lo princes and superiors of the world are ordained to punish wicked, and to put them to death. But in the perfection of Christ, excommunication is the utmost pain, and not corporal death.'”

I pulled the above quote out of a book I am finishing up. I want the readers to guess the group of which the author is referring to in the quote. Was the author referring to

A.) The Medieval Cathari
B.) The Reformation Ana-Baptists
C.) The 3rd Century Church Novatians
D.) The Current Radical Two Kingdom phenomenon

Caleb’s Baptist — Behold The Deliverer (HC Q. 18)

Question 18. Who then is that Mediator, who is in one person both very God, (a) and a real (b) righteous man? (c)

Answer: Our Lord Jesus Christ: (d) “who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption.” (e)

Questions 16 and 17 taught us that if we are going to be delivered from our sins then certain quality characteristics must be found in the person who rescues us from our sin. Those character qualities are repeated in question 18 with the inquiry asking who fits that description.

Note that in question 18 that the our deliverer and rescuer is spoken of as a Mediator. We have mentioned the mediatorial aspect before but reviewing briefly we underscore that a Mediator is one who represents both parties in a dispute. In the Old Testament the Priests filled the role as the Mediator. The Old Testament Priest represented the people to God in his sacrificial responsibilities and he represented God to the people in his very person. So, we learn from this language that whoever is in one person both very God, and a real righteous man, is also the person who God has set aside to be a Mediator.

One aspect that is interesting about the Lord Christ having the two natures of God and real righteous man is that in being both God and Man the person of Christ has the properties which belong to both natures. This is only to say that the human and divine natures belong to the person of the Lord Christ and so are ascribed to Him in his person. The impact of this means that properties that belong uniquely to both divine and human natures are attributed to the one person of Jesus. For example, the person Jesus can be spoken of in his human nature (Jesus wept, Jesus grows in wisdom and stature, Jesus was tired) but the person Jesus can also be spoken of in his divine nature (omnipresence, all knowing, etc.) However, as we learned in our last session, this does not mean that any of his human nature was divinized, nor was any of his divine nature mixed with the human nature.

Let me clarify with a couple examples Caleb. In John’s Gospel Jesus says,

17:5, “And now, glorify Thou Me together with Thyself, Father, with the glory which I had with Thee before the world was.”

The person of Jesus here is claiming something that could only be true of divinity. Jesus is claiming pre-existence and eternality. We might ask how it is that Jesus, who was born of a virgin, and so had a beginning of days, could claim pre-existence with the eternal God. The answer to that is that second person of the Trinity took to himself a human nature, as that was added in the incarnation, and so the person Jesus of Nazareth can speak John 17:5 as one who has a divine nature belonging to His person. The language of Scripture often ascribes to the person of Jesus attributes that could only belong to God.

Another example of this that works in the other direction is found in Acts 28:20

“Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.”

Of course it is Jesus who purchased the church of God with His own blood. Paul, in Acts, is speaking of the attributes of humanity (blood) as being ascribed to God. As the person Jesus has a divine nature, and as a man he has blood, it can be said that God purchased the church with His own blood even though the divine nature can not bleed.

So, we see that the Scripture teaches that Jesus has two natures. We see that Scripture affirms that Jesus was one person. But we also see Scripture speaking in such a way that “the properties of both, the human and the divine natures, are now the properties of the person, and are therefore ascribed to the person,” and yet without confusing or mixing, nor separating or changing the Divine and Human natures. The fancy theological term for this is communicatio idiomatum.

The reason this is important to keep in mind is that there is a tendency to forget one or the other of these natures. In the early Church, the temptation was to forget the humanity of Jesus. The heresy called gnosticism was constantly denying that Jesus was human. In our era the tendency is to forget that Jesus is divine. We treat the Lord Christ so casually. This is evidenced, I would suggest, by people talking incessantly about having a “relationship with Jesus,” forgetting that this person we talk so casually about having a relationship with is the one whom the Apostle John fell before as dead because of the intense divine glory of His divine presence.

Question 18 gives a number of Scriptures to support the fact that Jesus is God. Here are but three,

1 John 5:20 And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.

Rom.9:5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.

Jer.23:6 In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.

Question 18 gives a number of Scriptures to support the fact that Jesus is Man. Here are but three,

Luke 2:6 And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered. Luke 2:7 And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.

Philip.2:7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

Heb.2:14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; Heb.2:16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. Heb.2:17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.

Question 18 gives a number of Scriptures to support the fact that Jesus was without sin. Here are but four,

Heb.4:15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

Heb.7:26 For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens;

1 Pet.1:19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:

1 Pet.2:22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth:

Remember, this all started by looking for someone qualified to bring us rescue from our sins. That all of this is, in Scripture, seen predominantly in that light is proven by a few texts from Scripture,

1 Tim.2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

Heb.2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

Luke 2:11 For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.

There are other philosophical reasons why the divine and the human meeting in Jesus is monumentally important but the Catechism is only concerned with the soteriological (pertaining to salvation) reasons as to why the Lord Christ Christ is both human and divine. In short, unless the Lord Jesus Christ was and is human and divine we could not have been delivered from our sins and would be without God and without hope.

Question 18 ends by quoting 1 Cor.1:30,

But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:

The importance of this text is found in the reality that as we as Christians are placed in Christ as our representative before the Father, we now wear before the Father the wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption of our representative the Lord Jesus Christ so that when we are considered by the Father we are considered as belonging to the one the Father delights in and so the Father delights in us.

This is why there is no other name under heaven by which men must be saved.

Solzhenitsyn on the Brandon Raub Illegal & Unconstitutional Detention

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/21/brandon-j-raub-marine-detained_n_1817484.html

“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?… The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If…if…We didn’t love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation…. We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”

― Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn

Oh My Akin Body

“If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down,” Akin said on KTVI-TV. “But let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work or something: I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be of the rapist, and not attacking the child.”

Todd Akin
Missouri Republican Candidate for US Senate

“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury…”

US Constitution
5th Amendment

A great deal of buzz has been created by the first quote above. Akin, the Republican candidate for the US Senate in Missouri has had calls from Republican Presidential nominee Mitt Romney to vacate his position as GOP standard bearer for the Missouri US Senate race.

A few observations from someone who votes neither Republican or Democrat

1.) Republicans have to meet a double standard. Joe Biden accuses Republicans of wanting to put blacks back and chains and the hub bub is a mere blip. Nancy Pelosi says that “we have to pass the Obama-care bill in order to see what is int it,” and there is a few guffaws but she doesn’t have to spend any political capital for such asinine statements. But let a George Allen make a “Macaca” comment and suddenly the press descends upon him like piranhas. Similarly with Todd Akin. At the very worst Akin was misinformed on his facts. At the very best he simply made a blunder in his communication.

However, having said that, the fact that the Democrats don’t get what they deserve when they make verbal gaffes (and Obango has made tons of verbal gaffes …e.g., — “You did not build that …”) does not mean that it is wrong for Republicans to get what they deserve when they make verbal gaffes. Yes, it is a double standard, but if gaffes are really stupid (and Akin’s was monumentally stupid) then they should be lampooned.

2.) Of course the reason that Republicans get slapped harder by the media is that their gaffes tend more to violate the narrative of political correctness and cultural Marxism. The major media outlets agree with Obango’s socialism and so try to cover for the man we call President by excusing his “you didn’t build that” comment. However, when Akin talks about “the female body having ways to shut down the whole (impregnation by rape) thing” then the media howls since abortion is one of the sacraments of a key constituent (feminism) supporting Cultural Marxism.

This is one way by which the major media outlets control conversation, and so thought, in our politically correct paradise.

3.) Akin, despite his in-artful way of phrasing matters, is on the right side of the life of the child issue. To be sure if a woman is impregnated as a result of a rape that is a burden of a consequence that has to be born by that woman. However, why should the baby the raped woman is carrying, be tortured and punished all because the baby’s mother was tortured by rape? Why should we kill the baby as opposed to bring capital charges against the rapist? Why shouldn’t the genuine criminal be visited with the death penalty as opposed to the judicially innocent baby?

4.) There was a time in history that families of criminals would be held liable for a individual family member who committed a crime. In recent history even, Communist countries would let people travel in other countries knowing that the communist traveler would know that if he sought asylum to escape Communism his family back in the old country would be murdered. The West has always thought that such blood ransoming of family as incentive for individuals to keep laws was pagan. And yet, that is exactly what is done when we abort babies conceived in rape scenarios. We murder them because of the criminal guilt of their rapist Father.

5.) Akin should have replied to the question that was asked of him,

“I believe that at conception we have a person. In believing that, the fifth amendment to the constitution forbids me from holding any person to answer for a capital crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury. When a Grand Jury begins indicting the unborn persons for capital crimes then I will have to consider again my position but until then I must honor the US Constitution’s 5th amendment by not supporting ending the life of any person not indicted by a Grand Jury.”

Caleb’s Baptism … Very God of Very God (HC Q. # 17)

Question 17. Why must he in one person be also very God?

Answer: That he might, by the power of his Godhead (a) sustain in his human nature, (b) the burden of God’s wrath; (c) and might obtain for, and restore to us, righteousness and life. (d)

In the previous question and answer Caleb we examined why it was that Christ must be very man of very man (100% man) in order to qualify as someone who could rescue the descendants of Adam from their sins. In this question the Catechizers (principally Zacharius Ursinus, and secondarily Caspar Olevianus) explain why it is that Christ must be very God of very God in order to successfully become our deliverer.

Before we get to the issue of Christ’s divinity in relation to accomplishing our deliverance we should say a brief word about the the combination of Heidelberg questions 16 and 17. In these two question and answers we have taught what is known as the doctrine of Christ’s Hypostatic Union. This is the doctrine that affirms that the Lord Jesus Christ was one person with two natures. We could get lost in all of the implications of this Caleb but suffice it to say that this is an important doctrine to embrace even if we will not understand it completely in this life. The doctrine is so important that the Church has an ancient creed that teaches on it (creed of Chalcedon) and is so important that one cannot be a Christian without embracing Scripture’s teaching on Christ’s hypostatic union.

The doctrine of the hypostatic union teaches that at one and the same time the Lord Jesus Christ has both a human and divine nature and yet within one person. The early church argued about this for centuries before affirming that Christ was perfect in Godhead while at the same time being perfect in manhood. Teasing out the Scriptures, the Church went on to affirm, as against a party in the Church called “the Eutychians” that these two natures of Christ were not co-mingled so that the Lord Christ was a kind of a being with a hybrid single nature that was partly God and partly man. Continuing to embrace Scripture, the Church, at the same time, had to correct another party that was on the other extreme from the Eutychians, and who, instead of giving us a Christ whose natures were blended into a hybrid, gave us a Christ who was two persons as well as two natures. What the Scriptures affirm and what the Heidelberg catechism teaches is that Christ is one person with two natures.

That Christ has both natures can seen with a simple glance at Scripture,

Very God of Very God

He is worshiped (Matt. 2:2,11; 14:33)
He was called God (John 20:28; Heb. 1:8)
He was called Son of God (Mark 1:1)
He is prayed to (Acts 7:59).
He is sinless (1 Pet. 2:22; Heb. 4:15)
He knows all things (John 21:17)
He gives eternal life (John 10:28)
All the fullness of deity dwells in Him (Col. 2:9)

Very Man of Very Man

He worshiped the Father (John 17).
He was called man (Mark 15:39; John 19:5)
He was called Son of Man (John 9:35-37)
He prayed to the Father (John 17)
He was tempted (Matt. 4:1)
He grew in wisdom (Luke 2:52)
He died (Rom. 5:8)
He has a body of flesh and bones (Luke 24:39)

This doctrine of the Hypostatic Union also insists, as against yet a different heretical school of thought (Apollonarians) that the Lord Christ is human as to both body and soul. Some of the errant teaching yet today, following the errant teaching from centuries ago, insist that Jesus Christ has a human body but that His Spirit was the divine spirit logos.

The denial of this important doctrine continues with us today. The same errors are taught today that were taught thousands of years ago. This is true, not only of the example mentioned in the paragraph above but it is also true of Jehovah Witnesses and Christian Scientists for example. The Jehovah Witnesses deny Christ’s divinity while affirming His humanity. The Christian Scientists deny Christ’s humanity while affirming His deity. All of these sects will marshal Scripture to prove their heresy, conveniently leaving out other Scripture that is against them.

I can’t stress enough how important this teaching of the Heidelberg Catechism is. If a person denies this Hypostatic Union of Christ they have no reason to be considered a Christian. A great deal more could be said here, but I don’t want to bog you down. For our purposes here it is important to remember that, in the words of the Chalcedon Confession that is confessed by all Christians everywhere,

(Christ is) to be acknowledged in two natures, 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, and only begotten, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ;

Now, as the Catechism deals with this issue it wants to emphasize that Christ had to be God in order to able to provide deliverance for His people. If Christ was merely human he could not have successfully undergone the intense wrath of the Father against sin. Scriptures teaches the character of God’s just wrath against sin that the Lord Christ bore for His Father’s glory,

Deut.4:24 For the LORD thy God is a consuming fire, even a jealous God.

Nah.1:6 Who can stand before his indignation? and who can abide in the fierceness of his anger? his fury is poured out like fire, and the rocks are thrown down by him.

Ps.130:3 If thou, LORD, shouldest mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand?

This was the wrath of God against our sins that the Lord Christ suffered in our place. That just wrath of God against sin would have consumed a merely human Jesus before the penalty against sin had been fully recompensed. So, the catechism teaches that Christ had to likewise be very God of very God in order to receive in His person the just penalty against sin.

Note a matter important here though Caleb. Note the way the catechism carefully phrases the truth,

“by the power of his Godhead sustain in his human nature the burden of God’s wrath”

Reformed theology, following Scripture, has always taught that God can not suffer, nor can God die. If God dies all the lights in the universe go out. Since this is true, Biblical theology affirms that it was Christ’s divine nature (HC — “by the power of His Godhead”) that sustained Christ’s human nature so that the person of Christ could pay for the sins of His people. Some people will say, in a sloppy manner, that “God died on the cross,” but it is more accurate to say that the person of the Lord Christ, as the lamb of God, died on the cross, if only because by definition the God of the Bible can’t die.

Clearly, what HC #17 is concerned about is the fact that the death of the Lord Christ, who is very God of very God, is a substitutionary death (a death in our place) and is so successfully, in part, because as sustained by His divine nature the person of Christ could bear our penalty in full, and win for us the life and acceptability before God that had been forfeited by Adam. That Christ was there dying in our place (in our stead, on our behalf) is clearly taught by Scripture,

Isa.53:4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted….

Isa.53:11 He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.

And that the consequence of that death in our place (in our stead, on our behalf) is acceptability again before God and a restoration of life is likewise taught in Scripture,

Our healing is in His wounding

Isa.53:5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

Acceptability before God dependent upon Christ’s Death

1 Pet.3:18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Restored brought to the elect because of Christ’s Death

Acts 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

John 1:4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

So, Heidelberg Catechism question and answer #17 teaches us that if were to be saved, then He who would serve as our deliverer must be very God of very God.