Outlook Editor:
I am writing this in response to the article “Should we make pictures of Jesus Christ?” by Stefan Trenev in the July,1979 edition of the Outlook . This article states that making and using pictures of the Lord Jesus Christ in Sunday School material, Baptism certificates, etc. is in “direct violation of the Word of God.” Some important verses, however, are overlooked in coming to this conclusion.
Deut. 4:15, 16, 23, 24 is cited to support the conclusion that we may not make pictures of Jesus Christ. These verses relate to the second commandment but only quote half of that commandment. From Ex. 20:5; Deut. 5:9 and Lev. 26:1, we find that the making of pictures or images is forbidden only if they are made for the purpose of worshipping them:
Ex. 20:5, Deut. 5:9 – “Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate Me.”
Lev. 26:1 – “Ye shall make you no idols nor graven image, neither rear you up a standing image, neither shall ye set up any image of stone in your land, to bow down unto it: for I am the Lord your God.”
Christian Reformed Sunday School material doesn’t use pictures of Jesus Christ as objects of worship. Students are not being taught to bow down to or to treat such pictures as idols. Since these pictures are not being worshipped there is no violation of the second commandment in using them.
The article states: “According to the Word of God we ought not to change the glory of the living, incorruptible, Holy Christ for t he likeness of an image of corruptible man.” Rom. 1:23 actually says “changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man” and doesn’t talk of Jesus Christ.
The article states “we must not and cannot make pictures of God.” It then goes on to say that Jesus Christ is God in bodily form and therefore we cannot make pictures of Him.
The fact that Jesus is God doesn’t prove this conclusion since Jesus is also true man. Jesus came in the likeness of men, not God. He was made in all things like His brethren, sin excepted. This is clearly taught in Phil. 2:7; Heb. 2:14, 17 and Rom. 8:3 not cited in the article:
Phil. 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, 17 – “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; Wherefore in all things it behooved 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.”
Rom. 8:9 – “For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh.”
Jesus Christ in His divine nature is Spirit and has no form (Jn. 4:24; Deut. 4:15, 16). In His divine nature He is “invisible” II Tim. 1:17) and dwells “in the light which no man can approach unto, whom no man hath seen, nor can see” (I Tim. 6:16).
A lifeless picture of Jesus Christ in His human form therefore cannot represent Jesus in His divine nature. Per II Cor. 4:18, “the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal.”
Pictures of Jesus Christ in Christian Reformed Sunday School material are pictures of Jesus as “man,” not “God,” and as such they do not violate the second commandment.
If we say it is a sin to portray Jesus Christ as a man then we had better be very careful to not even think of Jesus in the form of man as this would also be sinning. Following this thought to its logical conclusion, the apostles must have also been sinning when they looked at Jesus while on earth, which is preposterous.
When we think of Jesus we must be careful that we don’t fuse His two natures together. Article XIX of the Belgic Confession teaches that while these two natures are united in one single person, “yet each nature retains its own distinct properties.” Article 32 of the Athanasian Creed states that while Jesus is perfect God. He is also perfect man, “of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting.” In article 36 it further states, Jesus is “One altogether, not by confusion of substance, but by unity of person.”
The fourth paragraph from the end of the article states that the apostle “John does not separate the two natures of Christ” using I Jn. 1:1–3 as the text. This is an erroneous conclusion as it is the apostle John who is very careful to caution against uniting the two natures of Christ. In I Jn. 4:2, 3 he states:
I Jn. 4:2, 3 – “Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God.”
This verse cautions us to be careful when we consider the human nature of Christ. We may not fuse His human nature with His divine nature as He truly came in the flesh. He is true God (I Jn. 5:20). He truly came in the flesh (Rom. 1:3). Therefore, we may not humanize His deity or deify His humanity.
If we deify His humanity and fuse it with His divine nature we will be denying I Jn. 4:2, 3 which says He came “in the flesh.”
At the present time Jesus is our Advocate with the Father (I Jn. 2:1). From I Tim. 2:5, Jesus is carrying out this role of Mediator as “the man Christ Jesus” which He could not now do if His human nature was fused with His divine nature. Job 9:32, 33 states:
Job 9:32, 33 – “For He is not a man, as I am, that I should answer Him, and we should come together in judgement. Neither is there any daysman (or umpire) betwixt us, that might lay his hand upon us both.”
If Jesus is not now man, we have “no umpire” or Mediator between us and God. If we have no Mediator we are lost. “Who is able to stand before this Holy Lord God?” (I Sam. 6:20) There is only One that can stand before Him for us and that is the “man Christ Jesus” who has a true divine nature but also a separate distinct real human nature in the One Person.
Yours in Christ,
Arthur R. Schick
Mr. Trenev Replies
My response to Mr. Schick’s letter.
Mr. Schick states that the second commandment does not forbid to make images—pictures of God, as long as we do not worship them. My answer to him is that from the Heidelberg Catechism, Lord’s Day 35
97 Q. May we then not make any image at all?
A. God can not and MAY NOT be visibly portrayed in any way.
98 Q. But may not images be permitted in the churches AS TEACHING AIDS for the unlearned?
A. No, we shouldn’t try to be wiser than God. He wants his people instructed by the living preaching of his Word—not by idols that cannot even talk.
To instruct to worship images is not only to violate the second commandment, but it is directly violating the first commandment (H.C., Lord’s Day 34, 94 + 95).
When we look at the ten commandments we see that each distinct sin is forbidden by God with a distinct “NO.”
In our case: We are NOT to make images and we are NOT to worship them.
INSTITUTES OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION by John Calvin BOOK FIRST, CHAPTER XI
“If it be unlawful to make any corporeal representation of God, still more unlawful must it be to worship such a representation instead of God, or to worship God in it.”
“We know too well from experience that the moment images appear in the churches, idolatry has as it were raised its banner; because the folly of manhood cannot moderate itself, but forthwith falls away to superstitious worship.”
KNOWING GOD by J.I. Packer Chapter 4, The only· true God, I.1
“The point here is not just that an image represents God as having a body and parts, whereas in reality He has neither. If this were the only ground of objection to images, representations of Christ would be blameless. But the point really goes much deeper. The heart of the objection to pictures and images is that they inevitably conceal most, if not all, of the truth about the personal nature and character of t he divine being whom they represent.”
Mr. Schick states that I misquoted Rom. 1:23. If you check my article you will find that I did not.
Moreover, he insists that Rom. 1:23 teaches that Jesus Christ is not included in “God.” Is he in the “corruptible image?”
If anyone thinks so of Christ, that is an abominable t hought to God. Jesus Christ “is the image of the invisible God.” Col. 1:15, Heb. 1:3
“For such a high priest became us, holy, guileless, undefiled, separated from sinners, and made higher than the heavens;” Heb. 7:26
When we say that Jesus Christ is in all things like his brethren, sin excluded, with this statement “sin excluded” we say a lot, more than we know. The difference between sinful and sinless is as far as earth from heaven, hell from life.
HOLINESS EQUALS AND RADIATES GLORY—THE GLORY OF GOD.
GLORY –THE GLORY OF GOD.
“HOLY, HOLY, HOLY, is the Lord God; the Almighty, who was and who is and who is to come.” Rev. 4:8
Mr. Schick states that pictures of Jesus Christ are pictures of him as “man,” not as “God.”
The truth is that Jesus Christ is not separated into man and God, he is one person with two natures.
All who worship Jesus Christ the Son of
God, worship Jesus Christ the Son of Man.
Belgic Confession, Article XIX
“But these two natures are so closely united in one person that they were NOT SEPARATED even by his death.”
See also Athanasian Creed, 34–37.
Heidelberg Catechism: Lord’s Day 30
80 A . . . . . It also declares to us that the Holy Spirit grafts us into Christ, who with HIS VERY BODY is now in heaven at the right hand of the Father where he wants us to WORSHIP HIM.
“Jesus heard that they cast him out; and finding him, he said, Dost thou believe on the SON OF GOD? He answered and said, And who is he, Lord, that I may believe on him? Jesus said unto him, Thou hast both SEEN HIM, AND HE IT IS THAT SPEAKETH WITH THEE. And he said, Lord, I believe. AND HE WORSHIPPED HIM.” Jn. 9:35–38
In the article I stated that in I Jn. 1:1–3 John does not separate the two natures of Christ.
Mr. Schick calls this an “erroneous conclusion.”
My answer is again from the Heidelberg Catechism, Lord’s Day 18
48 Q. If his humanity is not present wherever his divinity is, then aren’t the two natures of Christ separated from each other?
A. Certainly not. Since the divinity is not limited and is present everywhere, it is evident that Christ’s divinity is surely beyond the bounds of the humanity he has taken on, but at the same time his divinity is in and remains personally united to his humanity.
The divine life was manifested and expressed in the flesh (Christ having definite expressions and creating definite impressions) and John witnesses of him. Therefore the apostle does not hesitate to say “The life was manifested and we have seen it.”
Jn. 4:2 does not support making images of Christ, nor does it divide the two natures of Christ, as Mr. Schick thinks, but the Athanisian Creed is in full harmony with Jn. 4:2 when it states: “one, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking of the manhood into God.” Ath. Creed (35)
Christ the Son of Man is the visible, perfect and true image of God forever. Jn. 1:14, 14:9; Col. 1:15, 2:9; Heb. 1:3. Beautiful Savior! King of Creation!
Son of God and Son of Man!
Truly I’d love thee, truly I’d serve thee, light of my soul, my joy, my crown.
Stefan Trenev 1140 Peach St. Alameda, CA 94501
May I express my hearty agreement with and appreciation of the article “PICTURES OF CHRIST” in OUTLOOK, July, 1979, pages 8–10.
So-called “pictures of Jesus” are relatively new in Calvinistic churches of the Scottish tradition. They were almost unknown 75 years ago–rejected for reasons of theological principle.
The Westminster Assembly (A.D. 1647) rejected them absolutely as shown by the Westminster Shorter Catechism, 21, 22. “Christ . . . being the eternal Son of God, became man, and so was, and continueth to be, God and man, in two distinct natures, and one person forever.” “Christ, the Son of God, became man by taking to himself a true body and a reasonable soul, being conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost, in the womb of the virgin Mary, and born of her, yet without sin.”
It follows that Jesus Christ is not a human person. He is a divine being with two natures, divine and human, united in one {divine) person. This is further proved by our Lord’s eternal pre-existence John 1:1–5.
No picture or art can possibly portray the divine nature of Jesus. Therefore all so called “pictures of Jesus” inevitably give a false impression—they show only His human nature. The divine person and nature cannot be portrayed and therefore are left out. Hence the Liberal idea of the purely human Jesus.
Johannes G. Vos 3408 Seventh Ave. Beaver Falls, PA 15010