One particular thing that has perplexed me as a Christian is related to the mechanics or inner-workings of the sacrifice of Christ. I've always asked how could Jesus, who is both fully human and fully divine, be separated from God the Father? What I mean is, how can the persons of the trinity be separated? Wouldn't that present some kind of contradiction and thus a massive theological problem for those who espouse the eternality and inner-connectedness of the trinitarian God?
As it turns out, good ol' Ignatius of Antioch studied Scripture and came up with a primitive, yet potent solution to this problem. Long after his passing, the church (at the First Council of Ephesus) refined his ideas and from them came the term "Communicatio Idiomatum" (which is Latin for communication of properties).
It proceeds directly from the concept of the hypostatic union, which states that Jesus the Christ (a.k.a. Jesus of Nazareth) is both fully human and fully divine. The Communicatio Idiomatum simply says that while both human and divine properties are attributed to Jesus, neither of these properties communicate anything to each other. For instance, while Christ was on earth, his divine property of omniscience was not somehow injected into his human brain so that he then had a supernatural psyche which could predict all things. In fact, this is what Jesus plainly states in Mark 13:32; his human and divine natures, though conjoined and contained in one person, did not have an effect on the other. Often times the Bible will use language which explicitly states that Jesus the person is divine (John 17:5) or that he can die a mortal death (Mark 10:33) or mentions human qualities being ascribed to God (Acts 20:28). That is precisely what the Communicatio Idiomatum asserts as well; both divine and human aspects are attributed to the one person, the God-man Jesus Christ.
Now, this solves the dilemma of who was separated from God during the crucifixion. It surely wasn't the divine nature of Jesus, for as I said earlier that would negate the very existence of the trinity itself. Moreover, this would indicate that somehow his divinity became mortal by way of the influence of his human nature; again, the Communicatio Idiomatum says that this type of phenomenon does not occur within the person of Jesus. Thus, it had to be his human or mortal nature which died on the cross. When the mortal nature of Jesus was executed on the cross, his whole person was executed, in a sense. But because divinity, by nature, cannot die this part of Jesus remained intact and in union with the Father. However, we can still say that a divine and thus perfect sacrifice was given to God; Jesus, the God-man person as a whole, gave himself to God. This is important because as finite people, we cannot not appease an infinite God. Thus, the sacrifice of the God-man Jesus Christ, who was endowed with divinity, fully accomplished what we never could. (I'm indebted to Matt Slick at CARM for this observation)
This is complicated stuff to wrap our minds around. But I suppose the take-home point is that 1) this was worked out relatively early on in the church so that there should be no major dilemmas in this area today and 2) the biblical Jesus is one who is both fully man and fully God, however these properties are not smeared or injected into one another.
As a final note, it must be said that the resurrected and glorified Jesus did seem to have this smeared properties phenomenon going on. For instance, he could pass through walls and ascend to heaven on a beam of light or what have you. This typifies the Jesus who sits at the right hand of God at this present moment. Furthermore, this will most likely typify the resurrected and glorified ones in Christ.
As it turns out, good ol' Ignatius of Antioch studied Scripture and came up with a primitive, yet potent solution to this problem. Long after his passing, the church (at the First Council of Ephesus) refined his ideas and from them came the term "Communicatio Idiomatum" (which is Latin for communication of properties).
It proceeds directly from the concept of the hypostatic union, which states that Jesus the Christ (a.k.a. Jesus of Nazareth) is both fully human and fully divine. The Communicatio Idiomatum simply says that while both human and divine properties are attributed to Jesus, neither of these properties communicate anything to each other. For instance, while Christ was on earth, his divine property of omniscience was not somehow injected into his human brain so that he then had a supernatural psyche which could predict all things. In fact, this is what Jesus plainly states in Mark 13:32; his human and divine natures, though conjoined and contained in one person, did not have an effect on the other. Often times the Bible will use language which explicitly states that Jesus the person is divine (John 17:5) or that he can die a mortal death (Mark 10:33) or mentions human qualities being ascribed to God (Acts 20:28). That is precisely what the Communicatio Idiomatum asserts as well; both divine and human aspects are attributed to the one person, the God-man Jesus Christ.
Now, this solves the dilemma of who was separated from God during the crucifixion. It surely wasn't the divine nature of Jesus, for as I said earlier that would negate the very existence of the trinity itself. Moreover, this would indicate that somehow his divinity became mortal by way of the influence of his human nature; again, the Communicatio Idiomatum says that this type of phenomenon does not occur within the person of Jesus. Thus, it had to be his human or mortal nature which died on the cross. When the mortal nature of Jesus was executed on the cross, his whole person was executed, in a sense. But because divinity, by nature, cannot die this part of Jesus remained intact and in union with the Father. However, we can still say that a divine and thus perfect sacrifice was given to God; Jesus, the God-man person as a whole, gave himself to God. This is important because as finite people, we cannot not appease an infinite God. Thus, the sacrifice of the God-man Jesus Christ, who was endowed with divinity, fully accomplished what we never could. (I'm indebted to Matt Slick at CARM for this observation)
This is complicated stuff to wrap our minds around. But I suppose the take-home point is that 1) this was worked out relatively early on in the church so that there should be no major dilemmas in this area today and 2) the biblical Jesus is one who is both fully man and fully God, however these properties are not smeared or injected into one another.
As a final note, it must be said that the resurrected and glorified Jesus did seem to have this smeared properties phenomenon going on. For instance, he could pass through walls and ascend to heaven on a beam of light or what have you. This typifies the Jesus who sits at the right hand of God at this present moment. Furthermore, this will most likely typify the resurrected and glorified ones in Christ.
Deep stuff, D.W.!
ReplyDelete:)
Delete