The Church has always confessed that our Mediator “is very God and. very man: Very God by His power to conquer death; and very man that He might die for us according to the infirmity of His flesh” (Belgic Confession, Art. XIX). Of this confession, Charles Hodge wrote:
Here the subject might be left. All the ends of the spiritual life of the believer, are answered by this simple statement of the doctrine concerning Christ’s person as it is presented in the Scriptures. False explanations, however, create the necessity for a correct one (Systematic Theology, II, 386).
Therefore, it is necessary that we go one step further. We must see that our Mediator is God and man in one person. This part of our study is more complex. In fact, it is one of the mysteries of Bible Truth. Nevertheless, we can say some things about this truth – and we must.
To get as clear a picture as possible of this truth we will be considering it in two installments. First, we consider the mystery of this truth and the precise statement of it. Next time, we will consider more fully the nature of this relationship which has been called the “Hypostatic Union.”
III. Our Mediator is God and man in one person.
That is, indeed, a mystery. How our Mediator can be God and man in one person is beyond us. There has never been a birth like that one in Bethlehem and there has not been one like it since. He is unique. There is no one with whom He can be compared. All we can say is, “And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness” (I Timothy 3:16).
This mystery is important. Though we cannot begin to plumb the depths of how our Mediator is this unique person, we are still called on to answer the relevant question of Scripture: “What think ye of Christ?” In answering this we must be as precise as possible because every Christian truth really depends on the doctrine of the Person of Christ. How we answer the question has far-reaching implications. Even the missionary activity of the Church will be in trouble if the wrong answer is given. Without a proper Christology God’s salvation will not be proclaimed. You see, the Christ who is preached must be the Christ of the Bible.
John Owen (1616–1683), the great Non-conformist leader and writer of the Puritan age, wrote:
“It is of great importance unto our souls that we have right conceptions concerning him . . . (the) knowledge of his person (is) the foundation of all the rest, wherein if we mistake or fail, our whole building in the other parts of the knowledge of him will fall unto the ground” (Works, Gold edition, I, 223).
How our Mediator is God and man in one person is impossible to explain. Many attempts have been made at explanation and these have brought great trouble to the Church. The reason for this is simple: man with his finite mind cannot begin to analyze and explain the infinite God. This is impossible. Any attempt at explanation can open the door for heresy. This has already happened!
The early centuries of the Christian Church were battlegrounds over the doctrine of Person of Christ.
Arianism was condemned by the Council of Nicea in 325 AD. The Arians admitted the pre-existence of Christ, but believed that He was not Divine. He was only the best man who ever was. While the present Nicene Creed which we use is not the original statement written in 325 AD, it adequately expresses the doctrinal position decided on by that Council. The Council decided that the proper understanding of Jesus is that He is “the only–begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, . . . very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father . . .”.
In 381 AD, another council was called – this time at Constantinople. Two erroneous views of Christ’s person had to be condemned. Semi–Arianism was one. This heresy conceded that though Christ did not have the same nature as God, he had one like God’s. The other heresy condemned was Apollinarianism which did not do justice to the human nature of the Mediator. It taught that though Christ had a complete human nature, the Divine “logos” – a word used by John (1:1, 14) meaning the Second Person of the Trinity – took the place of the human soul.
Still there was controversy. It took another seventy years to attain doctrinal stability over Christ’s person. In 451 AD, the Council at Chalcedon was called. There, a monumental statement on the two natures and the person of Christ was written. Followers of Nestorius were proclaiming that the Mediator has two persons. Followers of Eutyches were proclaiming that there was no distinction between the two natures; they were fused together. In answer to all this came a very precise statement which, among other things, clearly defined the faith of the Church as being in . . .
. . . one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ; the same perfect in Godhead, and also perfect in manhood; truly God and truly man . . . consubstantial with the Father according to the Godhead. and consubstantial with us according to the manhood . . . 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 . . .
While we do not often read these words, words similar to them appear in one of our creeds – the A than asian – sections 29–36.