(Martineau, Types, 1:254). and Channing speaks of Christ as more than a human being, as having exhibited a spotless purity which is the highest distinction of heaven; F. W. Robertson has called attention to the fact that the phrase ?Son of man ?( <430527>John 5:27; cf. Dan. 7:13) in itself implies that Christ was more than man because it would have been an impertinence for him to have proclaimed himself Son of man, unless he had claimed to be something more. Could not every human being call himself the same? When one takes this for his characteristic designation, as Jesus did, he implies that there is something strange in his being Son of man, that this is not his original condition and dignity. In other words, that he is also Son of God.
It corroborates the argument from Scripture, to find that Christian experience instinctively recognizes Christ?s Godhead and that Christian history shows a new conception of the dignity of childhood and of womanhood, of the sacredness of human life and of the value of a human soul. All of this arises from the belief that, in Christ, the Godhead honored human nature by taking it into perpetual union with itself by bearing its guilt and punishment and by raising it up from the dishonors of the grave to the glory of heaven. We need both the humanity and the deity of Christ. The humanity, for, as Michael Angelo?s Last Judgment witnesses, the ages that neglect Christ?s humanity must have some human advocate and Savior and find a poor substitute for the ever-present Christ in Mariolatry. The invocation of the saints and the ?real presence? of the wafer and the mass; the deity, for unless Christ is God, he cannot offer an infinite atonement for us nor bring about a real union between our souls and the Father. Dorner, Glaubenslehre, 2:325-327 (Syst. Doct., 3:221223) ? ?Mary and the saints took Christ?s place as intercessors in heaven; transubstantiation furnished a present Christ on earth.? It might almost be said that Mary was made a fourth person in the Godhead.
Harnack, Das Wesen des Christenthums: ?It is no paradox and neither is it rationalism, but the simple expression of the actual position as it lies before us in the gospels. It is not the Son, but the Father alone, who has a place in the gospel as Jesus proclaimed it?; i. e., Jesus has no place, authority, supremacy, in the gospel, the gospel is a Christianity without Christ. See Nicoll, The Church?s One Foundation, 48. And this in the face of Jesus? own words: ?Come unto me? ( <401128>Matthew 11:28); ?the Son of man shall sit on the throne of his glory: and before him shall be gathered all the nations? ( <402531>Matthew 25:31, 32); ?he that hath seen me hath seen the Father? ( <431409>John 14:9); ?he that obeyeth not the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him? ( <430336>John 3:36). Loisy, The Gospel and the Church, advocate the nut-theory in distinction from the onion-
<- Previous Table of Contents Next ->
Was this article helpful?