1. The True Divinity of Christ.
Scripture places great emphasis on the nature of the person of Christ, especially the divinity of Christ. Recently, it has been asserted again that a "Christological" confession is not a prerequisite for the Gospel, and in particular, Christ did not include the sentence: "I am the Son of God" in his Gospel. 7) The exact opposite is the case. Christ himself puts the "christological" confession of his essential divinity so powerfully in the foreground that he recognizes faith in himself only where it is present. We have Matt. 16:13 ff. a catechesis with His disciples about His (Christ's) person. In response to Christ's question, the disciples report that people (oi avGpezot) consider him to be John the Baptist, Elijah, Jeremiah or one of the Prophets, that is, a mere man. Christ appeals to the better knowledge of his disciples, not of flesh and blood, but of his Father in heaven, and states that the Son of Man is 6 Yidc tod Weod tod CHvtoc [v. 16]. On this confession hangs the salvation: Maxéptoc ei Liu@v Baptwva, and this confession is the métpa [rock] of which Peter is and on which the Church of Christ stands, which the gates of hell should not overpower. This confession, that the Son of Man is 6 Yidc tod god tod CHvtoc, is the confession that the Church of God of all times has held fast to gross and subtle error. Unitarians claim that Christ is only called God (Christus Deus nuncupativus), without accomplished in the act of incarnation, has no reason to search for the way of communication of the attributes in the sense of the Church; but for whom this unification and unity is a fact of faith, he will not be able to do otherwise than to set now also somehow comnunicatio idiomatum in the God-man.... Precisely for this reason, all the objections of the Reformed theology, as they certainly revealed the weak points of the Lutheran view" (?), "did not reach their goal; for whoever once admits the hypostatic unity of the God-man and claims this most intimate and deepest union of the two natures, loses with it the right to declare himself against the communication of the attributes.
God' has not been inserted into his Gospel by Jesus himself, and whoever puts it there as one sentence next to others adds something to the Gospel". p. 93: "How far away from his (Jesus) thoughts and from his instruction one is from his (Jesus) instruction, when one puts a 'Christological' confession before the gospel and teaches that first one had to think about Christ correctly, only then one could approach the gospel. This is a reversal." being God in essence or in the metaphysical sense of the word. It comes to the same result when in recent times one has expressed oneself in such a way that the predicate of the Godhead attached to Christ does not contain a "judgement of being" but only a "value judgement". 7 Likewise already de Wette, when he says of the faith in Christ's divinity that it is of "ideal aesthetic kind" and belongs to "pious feeling", but in no way has a divine nature in Christ as its basis. >) Also so-called positive theologians of our time let the essential divinity of Christ (the "two natures doctrine") run wild and convert the divinity of Christ e.g. into a potentiated will of God, which becomes effective in Christ in a unique way. © This is unitarian navigation. The Subordinationists want to leave the essential Deity of Christ standing. They claim that Christ is God not only in name but in essence, but—God of lesser quality, God "only in the second sense of the word". * That both the Unitarians and the Subordinationists have the Scriptures against them, and that only 6uoobows, in the sense of eandem numero essentiam cum Patre habens [having the same number essence with the Father], is in accordance with Scripture, has been explained in detail in the doctrine of God (De Deo). For the sake of the overview and with reference to Christ's work of redemption, only so much is repeated here: When Scripture mentions Christ G26 and 5 vioc Tov tov Seov?, it does not use these expressions in the improper sense, as creatures are also called God because of divine functions,* but in the actual, that is, essentially or metaphysical sense of the word. This follows unquestionably from the fact that Scripture attributes to the Son, in relation to the Father, the same divine nature and the same divine effects by number (eandem numero essentiam et easdem numero operationes ad extra) and, in general, the whole series of divine attributes. For, however, the statement Joh. 10:30: "I and the Father are one" (ev eopsv) does not refer to the unity of mind or of will or performs the same operations with the Father, 3! but to the unity, and specifically the numerical unity,
Subordinatianism in the Light of Scripture", L. u. W. Vol. 40 (17, 49, 71, 97, 129)
of the being. A different view is not possible according to the context. In v. 28 Christ says of himself the omnipotence and omnipotent action by assuring that no one can pluck his sheep from his hand. To this he adds v. 29 the statement that no one can pluck his sheep, which the Father has given him, out of his Father's hand. The equality and unity of omnipotence and omnipotence effect thus expressed by him and the Father is then justified by Christ v. 30 with the further statement: "Land my Father are one ","Ey@ kai d mathp sv éousv, that is, with the unity of being, unitas essentiae. * In the same way the statement Joh. 5:17: O Tlatip pov éws tpt épyaCetat Kayo épyaCouoat [My Father worketh hitherto, and I work’] refers to the numerical unity of the omnipotence of the Father and the Son. For when the Jews see in these words of Christ a blasphemous presumption, because Christ thereby makes himself equal to God (isov éavtov To1dv TH OEd, Vv.
substantiates it by the further statement that the unitas operationis with the Father belongs to him: "Whatever the Father does, the Son does likewise" (Opoiws), v. 19. The Son cannot do anything of his own, because there are not two omnipotence effects, but only one and the same omnipotence effect in the Father and the Son. The so-called orthodox view of this passage is the only one that is in accordance with the text. °°) As for the divine attributes in general, Scripture testifies: Christ is before Abraham * and before the world. >> He created
ov and &k Tis YElpOc TOV TATPdc LL OV gives occasion to the assertion that Christ and the Father are one, one in essence primarily, but therefore also one in working and power and will."
ov dev noleiv non notat ddvvayiay, impotentiam seu imbecillitatem, ut Joh. 15:5: "Sine me nihil potestis facere", sed potius cum de Deo simpliciter praedicatur, summam perfectionem naturae eodem modo operantis, ut aliter se habere nequeat, designat, uti alias d0bvatov dicitur Deum mentiri, cum sit dyevone, Tit. 1:2 De Christo vero cum usurpatur exprimit ipsius et Patris et essentiae et potentiae et voluntatis et operationis identitatem, unitatem, inseparabilitatem ac simul tpomov vaapcews, quod nimirum Filius, sicut non a se ipso, sed a Patre per aeternam generationem essentiam suam habeat, sic quoque a Se ipso operandi potentiam non habeat aut a se ipso agat, sed a Patre. [Google] (Syst. I, 470.)
the world;*® he sustains the world and is present in the world. 3) He knows all things. >® He is omnipotent like the Father,* he raises the dead like the Father * and does miracles in general like the Father by his own power. *!) He is therefore also to be worshipped by all creatures as their God and Lord.
In response to the peculiar objection of some subordinators that Christ is mentioned God only in the predicate, not in the subject (9e6c) * and is therefore God of lesser rank or quality, it must be said that this argument is based on_polytheistic views. God, in the metaphysical sense of the word, is not a generic term, but always designates the divine being that exists only once (unam numero essentiam divinam). If one now admits that the Son of God is according to his nature or in the metaphysical sense of the word 9edc, and if one nevertheless calls the Son of God "God in the second sense of the word", then one has the tritheistic idea that there are, like three different divine persons, so also three divine beings that are different according to their rank and quality, a supreme God and two sub-gods. Subordinatianism is an obvious relapse into pagan polytheism. The words Joh. 14:28: O zatyp Lov peiG@v sotww describe Christ according to human nature, namely according to human nature in the state of humiliation, because according to the context there is talk of a state of Christ that ceases with the going to the Father. * To the question how, in the numerical unity of the divine being, only the Son could become man, without the Father and the Holy Spirit becoming man at the same time, one can only
OvvéaTI KEV.
not fallen critically (the closer to the teaching of God), one should turn the matter around and say that Christ is even mentioned in the predicate (Gedc Hv 4 Adyos, Joh. 1:1) and in the vocative (Hebr. 1:8: 5 Bpdvoc cov, 5 OEdc, Etc Tov aidva; Joh. 20:28: 0 Kiptdés pov Kai 6 Ogdc¢ Lov) Ogdc and in addition with the more detailed provisions 6 GAnitwoc Yedc, 1 Joh. 5:20, 6 péyac Yedc Tit. 2:13, 6 ov exit AavTMV BeEdc, Rom. 9:5. The predicate that is attached to a thing is what matters first and foremost in determining its nature.
63] with Luther say: I probably wanted to be as wise as any heretic, if I could understand that. *°) All attempts at explanation are of evil. On the basis of the testimony of Scripture, the Christian faith holds two things: 1. that in the Son of God there is not only a part but the whole fullness of the Godhead, Col. 2:9; 2. that not the Father but only the Son became man in the fullness of time, Gal. 4:4-5. The details in the Doctrine of the Trinity. Causes of the denial of the true divinity of Christ. * If one asks why the true divinity of Christ is denied again and again in spite of its so clear testimony in the Scriptures, it is to be said that this happens once out of rationalistic interest. For if Christ is not the true God, but only, as they thought, John the Baptist, Elijah, Jeremiah or one of the Prophets,*® then there is no need to believe the admittedly great mystery *) that 5 vioc tov dvGpamov is 6 vioc Tov Yeov Tov Caovtos, that is, one person is God and man, SedvGperoc. Significant in this respect is de Wette’s naive remark that the whole doctrine of Christ's person is "confused" by the doctrine of the essential divinity of Christ. 4 Primarily, however, the denial of the true deity of Christ is based on a Pelagian interest. It is the delusion of all naturally- minded people that man can and must go to heaven by his own works. Man is free from this delusion as long
Father and the Holy Spirit and keeps only the Son; hw says: the Word, as it was in the beginning, became flesh, not the Father, nor the Holy Spirit. The Father is not the Son of Mary, nor is the Holy Spirit.... If you now ask reason why the Son and not the Father became man, it will certainly not be able to tell you; indeed, it will become a fool. Therefore hear what the Holy Spirit says to you through St. John's: the Word became man and suffered, and not the Father. How these things are done, you shall believe, and not know, nor understand, but save until that blessed day of our redemption. Reason clashes with this article when it wants to measure and grasp it with its wisdom, remembering: in the Godhead there is one unified, inseparable being; how can the middle person alone become man and not all three? I wanted to be as wise as any heretic when I said these words: "The Word became flesh" of my will. It means believed, not seen, measured or grasped.... Therefore, we will not let the other two persons be added to humanity." (St. L. VI, 2160 f.)
as he considers Christ to be a mere man and therefore regards him only as a model of virtue etc. But if in Christ God Himself appeared in the flesh to redeem men as a God-man through His deeds *) and His suffering >, then it is unquestionably certain that all the works of man for the attainment of salvation, that is, the so-called religion of morality, are nothing and that men can only exist and become saved before God by complete despair of their own morality and their own works, solely by trusting in Christ's divine- human [theanthropic] merit (sola fide). The true divinity of Christ drives out Pelagianism and every form of the doctrine of works, in which every naturally-minded person is imprisoned. Luther inculcates this powerfully. He remarks on Gal. 2:20: "These words:..."the Son of God," "he loved me and..: "He gave himself for me" are all thunderbolts and fire from heaven against the righteousness of the law and the teaching of works. So great wickedness, so great error, darkness and ignorance was in my will and mind that I could only be delivered by such an unspeakably great ransom. Why do we boast, then, that our reason guides us rightly, that our natural powers are unharmed, that our reason is inclined to the best, that everyone must do as much as he can... when I hear here that there is so much evil in my nature that the world and all creatures have not been enough to reconcile God, but God's Son Himself has had to be given up for this?... Do you still want to come here with your cap and plate, with your chastity, obedience, poverty? What is all this? Yes, what is the law of Moses and the works of the law? What are all the works and sufferings of all the martyrs? What is all the obedience of the holy angels to the Son of God, who was given, and is given in the most shameful way, to the death on the cross, so that His most precious blood was shed entirely for your sins? When you look at this treasure, you should curse, tread in the dung, spit, curse and cast into hell all caps, plates, all vows, works, merits for equity and merits for dignity. Therefore, it is an intolerable and terrible blasphemy when you create any work, whereby you miss to reconcile God, seeing that he cannot be reconciled other than by this immense and infinite treasure, namely
the death and blood of his Son, for a drop of his blood is more precious than all creatures">!’ Luther therefore also powerfully promoted "Christology" in his sermons to the people, especially the article on the true, essential divinity of Christ. In a sermon on the 23rd chapter of the Gospel of Matthew, he says: "These texts should be viewed with care, that we may hold fast the article of the divinity of Christ, of which we speak and confess in our Christian faith: "I believe in Jesus Christ, his only begotten Son, our Lord, who was conceived of the Holy Spirit" etc. Christ is a different person (than the Father). He may not be Father, but he is the Creator of heaven and earth, has a divine nature and nature, and is born of the Virgin Mary in time; and yet not two Christians are sons, but one Jesus, as we say: And to Jesus Christ, who is an individual son, one person, and yet has two natures, united in the one person and in Christ. This is what the holy Gospels teach us and prove; and if this article wavers, we are lost. The Turk and the heretics want their turn and will not let the article be good.... Therefore have good heed to these and similar sayings, for if this article is lost, we are no longer Christians." >) And in this emphasis on the divinity of Christ, Luther follows only the Scriptures, which find the redeeming value of Christ's fulfillment of the law and the reconciling power of Christ's death in that it is the fulfillment of the law and the death of the Son of God: éGaméotetiev 6 Osdc tov Yiov adtod... yevopevov 020 voplov iva Tod b10 VOLOV éEayopdo; > KATMAAGYNLEV TO Os 814. 10d Vavatov tod Yiod adtod.