Essential Doctrines (Part 3): The Incarnation of Jesus Christ

jesus-on-shroud     The incarnation of Jesus Christ is critical in understanding the person of Jesus Christ and in understanding the salvation that comes from Jesus. It is due to aberrations of the understanding of Jesus’ identity in the movements of Jehovah Witnesses and for many in the LDS church that those two movements are normally not recognized within the umbrella of Christian faith by most evangelicals. For instance, Jehovah Witnesses claim that Jesus was a created being. Charles Taze Russell, the founder of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, claimed that Jesus was the archangel Michael. Joseph Smith, the founder of the Mormon church, claimed that Jesus was the first offspring from a Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother. The LDS hymn “O My Father” (LDS Hymnbook #292) refers to a Heavenly Mother. Therefore, Jesus is reduced to a mere offspring and not the God incarnate as identified in Scripture. This article will examine the essential doctrine of the incarnation of Jesus Christ.

 

What is the Doctrine?

The doctrine of the incarnation of Christ has to do with the person of Jesus Christ. It seeks to answer the question that Jesus posed to Simon Peter, “Who do you say that I am” (Matthew 16:15). Who was Jesus? Those who knew Jesus best answered that Jesus had two natures: Jesus was divine and Jesus was human.

The Divinity of Jesus

Christians from the earliest of times have understood that Jesus was divine. This is clear from the early Christian hymn which was preserved in Philippians. The hymn states,       

“who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father” (Philippians 2:6-11).

This hymn is important because it pre-dates many of the New Testament documents. For instance, Elwell and Beitzel write about the early nature of the incarnation, “As a result, some believe that it represents an earlier stage in the development of the church’s theology, before the doctrine of the incarnation had evolved. That is doubtful for two reasons: incarnation passages like the Philippians hymn (2:6–11) probably antedate Mark’s Gospel; and Mark has a well-developed theology of the two natures of Christ” (Osbourne 1988, 1026). Although John’s gospel was one of the later documents written, John left no room for doubt concerning Jesus’ divine nature as John wrote, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made” (John 1:1-3, NIV). So, it can be seen that Jesus was viewed as divine from the earliest times of church history.

The Humanity of Jesus

Jesus was clearly seen as a human being, as well. This is clear from the Philippians hymn as it was recorded that Jesus “taking the form of a bond-servant…made in the likeness of men.” Jesus was not a theological concept nor was Jesus an intellectual invention. Jesus was in fact a human being. This is evidenced by the fact that Jesus grew in stature (Luke 2:52), became tired (John 4:6), slept (Matthew 8:24), wept (John 11:35), and became hungry (Mark 11:12). All these attributes show that Jesus was in fact human. It is important to keep a good balance of Jesus’ humanity along with Jesus’ divinity.

  

Why should a Person Believe the Doctrine?

There are at least four reasons why an individual should believe that Jesus is both divine and human:

Evidence of Jesus’ Existence

 No reputable historian denies the existence of the historical Jesus. Only those in secular online communities give any weight to the “Jesus is fiction” myth. Jesus’ existence is not only confirmed in the New Testament records, but there are extra-biblical writers who confirm the existence of Jesus of Nazareth (the official historical name for Jesus). It would be irresponsible for this article to seek to offer an exhaustive list of extra-biblical writers, however, a few of the more popular sources will be given.

Tacitus, a reliable Roman historian writes,

Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures of a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their center and become popular” [Annals 15.44].

 Pliny the Younger wrote a letter to Emperor Trajan in 112 A.D. that said,

“They were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to do any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food—but food of an ordinary and innocent kind” [Letters 10:96]

 From these two sources, one can find that there is good and early evidence to support the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth as well as the New Testament documents which must be included.

Evidence of Jesus’ Miracles

 There is also evidence that Jesus performed miracles. Not only was Jesus known by the early Christians for performing great wonders, Jesus was known for doing the same by His opponents. The Babylonian Talmud, compiled from 70 – 200 A.D. has a portion of the Sanhedrin that reads,

“On the eve of Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, “He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy. Any one who can say anything in his favour, let him come forward and plead on his behalf.” But since nothing was brought forward in his favour he was hanged on the eve of the Passover” [Sanhedrin 43a, Babylonian Talmud]!

 Obviously “Yeshu” is the Hebrew, or Aramaic, form of “Yeshua” which is translated over to “Jesus” in English. In this text, it is seen that Jesus was hung (another term for crucifixion) on the evening of Passover. Jesus was accused of working sorcery. Obviously this is a link to the miracles performed by Jesus. The greatest miracle of all would be that of the resurrection of Jesus. The resurrection is not mentioned here as it will be addressed in the 6th installment of this series.

Evidence of Jesus’ Understanding of Himself

 Jesus obviously believed Himself to be the incarnate God. Jesus called Himself “Son of Man.” This was, in fact, Jesus’ favorite term for Himself. The phrase “Son of Man” alludes to the Daniel prophecy pertaining to the one who approached the “Ancient of Days.” The “Son of Man” prophecy alluded to one who would be divine (Daniel 7:13). John records Jesus’ “I Am” teachings. This was a direct reference to divinity as the sacred personal name for God (YHWH) was defined as “I AM WHAT I AM” (Exodus 3:14). So for Jesus to call Himself the “I Am” is a direct reference to His divine nature.

 Evidence of Jesus’ Transforming Power

 This may not be popular with some theologians and apologists, but I believe that the transformation of individuals that comes from a relationship with Christ is to be understood as an important aspect of Jesus’ identity. The fact that people are transformed shows that there is power in the one who was known as Jesus of Nazareth.

  

Why is the Doctrine Essential?

 John writes, “This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God” (1 John 4:2, NIV). It is clear that one must accept Jesus as God come in the flesh is important for one to be identified as a true Christian. Jesus’ divinity is mandatory, as well. Jesus Himself said, “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life” (John 3:16, NASB). This text shows that it is important to understand the divine nature of Jesus in order to be saved from sin. Therefore, it is important to understand that the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history are the one and same person. It is this historical Jesus Christ that can redeem a person from sin and set a person on a right path.

Jesus1

Bibliography

 All Scripture identified as (NASB) comes from the New American Standard Bible: 1995 Update. LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation, 1995.

All Scripture identified as (NIV) comes from The New International Version. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011.

Osborne, Grant R. Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible Edited by Walter A. Elwell and Barry J. Beitzel. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1988, page 1026.

Pliny the Younger. Letters 10.96. In Norman L. Geisler. Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, Baker Reference Library. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1999.

Sanhedrin 43a. Babylonian Talmud. In Norman L. Geisler. Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, Baker Reference Library. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1999.

Tacitus. Annals 15.44. In Norman L. Geisler. Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, Baker Reference Library. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1999.

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “Essential Doctrines (Part 3): The Incarnation of Jesus Christ”

  1. Smile….the usual suspects, I see?

    However the correct translation in Tacitus is ”Chrestus”. Go check. And you might be quite surprised to find out what that word really means.

    I should also dig a bit deeper on Tacitus too. Try Gibbon to start with.
    You might want to dig up a bit of info on this rather naughty chap: Sulpicius Severus 😉
    I’ll let you do the Google thing.

    No Seutonius or Josephus I note. Good for you. At least you haven’t stooped that low this time.

    Best of luck, Brian.

    1. As mentioned in the article, no serious historical scholar dismisses the historicity of Jesus. The only attention the “Jesus is a myth” argument receives is among those involved in popular atheist communities. I am aware of the variations of “Christus” and “Chrestus” in Tacitus’ work. However, that does not diminish the reference to Christ. Why? Because he is addressing the Christian community. Even if “Chrestus” was used as a derogatory term, it still refers to Jesus of Nazareth.

      As far as Suetonius and Josephus, Josephus is more scandalous for some. It is generally observed that Josephus’ statement is based upon authentic treatment by the historian. Unfortunately, there have been interpolations in his text. The fact that Josephus refers to Jesus in his text is necessitated by the fact that Josephus also refers to the death of James the brother of Jesus later in the book. The method of his referral seems to indicate a previous reference. In addition, Josephus also refers to John the Baptist, as well. Also, the fact that Josephus was preserved by Christians demonstrates that some form of reverence to Jesus of Nazareth was found in the original text. Josephus was a Roman sympathizer. The ancient Jews had no use for him for that fact. So, the fact that Josephus was preserved in addition to the other references of those surrounding Jesus shows an abbreviated statement of Jesus of Nazareth to be authentic, although interpolated to a degree. The fact is, these are but a few of the many references to Jesus of Nazareth. Early church fathers, such as Clement of Rome who wrote in the late first century, Ignatius, and a whole host of others in addition to the New Testament references and Roman and Jewish references creates a very strong case for the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth.

      Thanks for the comment my skeptical friend. 🙂


      1. Even if “Chrestus” was used as a derogatory term, it still refers to Jesus of Nazareth.

        I did not even suggest it was used as a derogatory term? I was not aware that it was, in fact derogatory.
        Odd..

        Anyway, ‘fraid not old sport….Try looking at a non-Christian site for the etymology. Just to get a balanced perspective.

        It is generally observed that Josephus’ statement is based upon authentic treatment by the historian.

        Yes, some < christianscholars consider there is a core.
        Ever wonder why he never became Christian if he believed JC was the Messiah?
        Besides, Josephus dad was alive during Jesus supposed ministry. He would have been a perfect contemporary witness. Odd he never mentioned anything.

        And no Christian scholar referenced the TF prior to Eusebius.

        Have you read Contra Celsum?

      2. I wasn’t saying that “Christus” or “Chrestus” was a derogatory term. Only that if it were to be used that way, it still would not demerit the reference to Jesus of Nazareth. On Christian scholarship, one could argue the same about non-Christian scholars in their refusal to accept a Josephus core. I do not believe that Josephus was a Christian. The reference to Josephus’ dad has little impact because there were many who did not accept Jesus as the Messiah, but there may have been several reasons for this: political power, devotion to tradition, and so on. The basis for Josephus’ authentic reference to Jesus has little to do with Christian references to his work. Again, early Christians knew Jesus to be a real person. There would have been no benefit in quoting a man who was as unpopular as Josephus.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s