[Who Do You Say I Am? by Edward E. Stevens]
III. Why Did God Have To Become Flesh?
I believe it was Dr. James Kennedy who quoted an atheist who said something to the effect: “How can you believe in a God you can’t see and touch and feel and know experientially? Have you ever seen Him? Has he ever come down to Earth and lived as a human among us? How do you know you can trust him? How do you know He understands us and has our best interests at heart?” This is exactly what Jesus did, and exactly why He did it! This was the whole point of the incarnation! Without God taking fleshly form, there is no overwhelming evidence that He understands us, loves us, saved us and has completely and intimately revealed Himself to us. There would be no way for us to experientially know Him. Jesus’ statement to Philip is extremely relevant and interesting here:
"If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; from now on you know Him, and have seen Him." Philip said to Him, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us." Jesus said to him, "Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how do you say, 'Show us the Father'? "Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on My own initiative, but the Father abiding in Me does His works. "Believe Me that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me; otherwise believe on account of the works themselves. (John 14:7-11 NASV, emphasis mine EES)
These profound words speak volumes about the relationship between the Father and the Son. The way Jesus speaks here is not the way a human, angel or anyone less than God could speak without blasphemy. If Jesus is not Deity, these words and many others like them in the Gospels would indeed portray Jesus as guilty of blasphemy. He makes too many statements without qualification that are unequivocal claims to Deity. It is no wonder the Jews picked up stones on several occasions to stone Him. If He was not God, He was blaspheming. He claimed too much for any being that is not God to get away with.
The Atonement becomes suspect if God Himself (not just representatively) did not manifest Himself in a fleshly body and die for our sins. The atheist’s questions above pinpoint exactly what a God would have to be and do in order to be credible to His creation, and they illustrate very clearly why Jesus must be God. Our atonement rests squarely on the incarnation of Yahweh! If Jesus was only a man or created being (and not God), then His sinless sacrifice would only have saved himself. Only if He is God would His sacrifice atone for all mankind. If Jesus was not that incarnation of God, then we are not saved. It is not enough for God to only indirectly and representatively use some other being to make atonement for us. God must directly and exclusively save us, or we are not saved. No human, angel or other “unique being with a starting-point” will do for our salvation. If God hasn’t saved us, we are not saved. There are not two Saviors. No mere man could live a sinless life in the first place (only God can do that). But even if a mere man could live sinlessly he would only save himself. Only if the man is also God would His sinless sacrifice have universal saving benefits. So, there is a double reason why Jesus must be God.
The Plan of Redemption Demands Christ’s Deity
It is easy to see why so many fall into the trap of denying the Deity of Christ. It does at first seem like just another esoteric or theological issue. But the nature of Christ (theology) has deep and profound connections with the plan of redemption (soteriology) and its consummation (eschatology). Because we don’t keep a sharp focus on the redemptive plan of God, we too easily miss the connection between Christ’s Deity and the Plan of Redemption. No mere man or created being could save us, simply because they could not live a perfect, sinless life. Only God can do that, so only God can save us. The redemption of our souls from the penalty of sin requires a perfect and sinless Redeemer. Only God can meet that criterion.It is not human reasoning and tradition that is decisive here. It is the whole tenor of Scripture. It is the very plan of redemption which argues most forcefully for the Deity of Christ. God Himself personally MUST save us. It is not just a matter of what is possible or probable, or what was the easiest or most convenient method for God to use. It is impossible for a created being to remove the curse even if God had tried to let someone else do this propitiatory work for Him. It just isn’t possible (because of the inability of imperfect creatures to satisfy the perfect demands of God’s justice), but even if it was, it would reflect decisively against God’s nature to force someone else to reverse what He had imposed. No creature can atone for our sins. God Himself must do it. And if God Himself did not do it, we have not been saved. The virgin birth, the Word becoming flesh, and the Son relationship Jesus had with the Father speak volumes about WHO Jesus must be. The phrase “Son of God” means far more than just some unique created being. To which of the angels or other creatures did God ever relate like He did with Christ? There was something different about Christ. He spoke differently than any man or angel. He did things only God had the right and power to do (like forgive sins and live sinlessly and raise Himself back out of the dead).
The Good News becomes Bad News if God Himself didn’t become flesh and save us. It is not good enough for some created being to come to earth and do God’s work for Him. This is something that only God Himself directly can do.
Was the Incarnation of God Necessary?
There are many questions involved in this whole issue of the Deity of Christ and the doctrine of the Trinity, but none are as crucial to the outcome of the discussion as the issue of Redemption:Is there any way we can interpret the virgin-birth narratives as teaching the incarnation of God? Only if there is some way to determine what they CAN NOT mean and what they absolutely HAVE TO mean.
We first need to ask whether it is even possible for God to manifest Himself in human form. If it is not possible, we don’t need to go any further in our study. We can settle the issue right here. Because, if it simply isn’t possible for God to become flesh, there is no use debating whether He did or not. But, I don’t know any unitarians who would affirm that it is impossible for God to manifest Himself in flesh. They may not believe it has ever happened, but they don’t go so far as to deny that God could do it if He so chose. All of us seem to agree that God could take human form if He wanted to. He could still be omnipresent in the universe at the same time He appeared in fleshly form. Everything is possible with Him. And since it is possible, we have to look more closely to see if it has, in fact, really happened. If God were to take human form to redeem us and show us that He cares and understands us, how would He do it? Would it be just a temporary appearance, or would he live out a whole life? Would He subject Himself to everything that is human, or would there be some exceptions? Would it be a complete life-cycle role-model, or just a temporary here today and gone tomorrow brief visit? Would he just do a quickie and take the easy way out? Or would He really do it right and pay the whole price? We know what the answer has to be, don’t we?
God could miraculously conceive in a virgin’s womb and manifest Himself in human flesh if He so chose to. But, is there any reason why He HAS to do that?“ Is there any critical reason why He MUST become flesh? It is not enough to say there are some good reasons why He MIGHT WANT to do that. God doesn’t do things for whimsical reasons. If it does not fit His redemptive plan, He doesn’t do it. So, unless we can establish from Scripture that it was an absolute necessity in God’s redemptive plan for God to become human flesh, we will all have to back away from the idea no matter what the various controversial texts could be interpreted to mean. Making the Deity of Christ an essential for both salvation and fellowship depends entirely on its connection with the Plan of Redemption. If it was necessary to our salvation that God become flesh and dwell among us and die for us, you can be absolutely sure that God did it and that Jesus is that very Incarnation. And, if it is absolutely necessary for God to do that in order for us to be saved, who is so presumptuous as to suggest that belief in the Incarnation of God (the Deity of Christ) is merely an opinion issue? And if it was not necessary for God to become flesh in order to save us, we can be sure He didn’t bother to do it. It would be superfluous, and He doesn’t waste His creative powers on irrelevant activities. If God doesn’t have to become flesh in order to save us, then we can be sure God didn’t become flesh.
What Is Necessary For Redemption?
If the Incarnation of God was not absolutely necessary to man’s salvation, there not only would be no reason to make it an essential issue, but there would be no reason to believe He had done it at all. So, the whole issue revolves around the question of whether the Incarnation of God was absolutely necessary in order for mankind to be saved. This is the major issue involved in this whole study of the Trinity. We could get bogged down in a whole plethora of secondary issues and prooftexts and debate them back and forth for centuries like the early church did and never get to the real heart of the issue.The crucial point where the Deity of Christ stands or falls is simply this: Was it necessary to man’s salvation that God become flesh and dwell among us and die for us, or could an angel or some other created or non-eternal being accomplish atonement for us without God having to do it directly and personally Himself?
Obviously it is not enough to simply say “Yes” to this question. And, to answer it properly we will have to survey the whole Biblical revelation to see what God has revealed about His Plan of redemption. What does the Bible say about how God’s plan was to be accomplished? We are talking about forgiveness of sins (atonement, propitiation, redemption, justification, salvation, etc.). What did God absolutely HAVE to do in order for man to regain life in the presence of God in a justified condition? These are certainly “fundamental” issues. Here’s the Biblical proposition:
• Without the shedding of blood there can be no forgiveness of sins (Lev. 17:11; Heb. 9:22)
• That blood must be human blood (animal sacrifices will not atone). So, the one who makes atonement must at least be human. (Heb. 9:8-26)
• The sacrifice had to be perfect and sinless (without a spot or blemish) (cf. Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers & Deuteronomy; Heb. 7:16-28; 8:7; 9:7-10; 9:14; 10:14)
• God is the only one who is sinless, so God is the only one who could save His people. So, the one who makes atonement must also be God at the same time he is human. (Tit. 1:2; 2 Tim. 2:13; 1 Sam. 15:29; Deut. 32:4; Heb. 6:18; Rom. 3:10-23; Mk. 10:18; Lk. 18:19)
• No mere human is holy enough or powerful enough to reverse the curse. (Deut. 32:39; Psa. 49:7,8; Isa. 43:13)
• The payment must be made or salvation will not happen. God doesn’t make exceptions or take bribes. (Deut. 10:17)
• So, God must become a man in order to save His people. The Savior must be both man and God.
Human redemption can only come through a human redeemer, so Jesus had to at least be human in order to redeem humans. (Heb. 2:17) But since a mere man is not able to be sinless, the redeemer must be more than just a mere man. He must also be God, since only God is perfect and sinless and qualified to pay the costly price required to satisfy God’s justice. From the very beginning when Adam and Eve fell into sin God promised that the redeemer would be a human. He promised (Gen. 3:15) that the deliverer would be “seed of woman.” The book of Genesis narrows the scope of that promise to not only being human, but specifically being a descendant of certain persons (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Judah, David, etc.). Micah 5:2 and Jer. 30:21 are two good examples of messianic promises that limit the redeemer to the Jewish nation and specifically David’s family. So, it should be evident that the Savior/Redeemer/Deliverer would have to at least be human.
But does Scripture go further and necessitate that the Messianic Deliverer also be Deity? This is the heart of the issue. No mere human can redeem us, because redemption requires a perfect sacrifice and a perfect high priest, and no human is perfect. If the savior is mere man he could not live sinlessly. And even if he could, his mere human sacrifice would only atone for himself, not for any other person. Since only God is perfect, the redeemer must also be God in addition to human, in order for redemption of all God’s people to take place.
We are talking here about the Biblical concept of Propitiation, satisfying the demands of God’s justice against our sinfulness. How is God’s wrath against our sins appeased? How is His justice satisfied? Can any mere man or created being reverse the curse God Himself imposed against man’s sin? Is any created being holy enough or powerful enough to loosen what God has bound? Take a look at Yahweh’s statements in this regard:
(Deut. 32:39) 'See now that I, I am He, and there is no god besides Me; it is I who put to death and give life. I have wounded, and it is I who heal; and there is no one who can deliver from My hand.
(Ps. 49:7,8) No man can by any means redeem his brother, Or give to God a ransom for him -- For the redemption of his soul is costly, And he should cease trying forever--
(Is. 43:13) "Even from eternity I am He; and there is none who can deliver out of My hand; I act and who can reverse it?"
But Yahweh goes even further and not only says that no one can deliver out of His hand, but that He Himself is the only one who can deliver us, and that He is the one who will deliver us. Look at these passages:
(Is. 12:2) "Behold, God is my salvation, I will trust and not be afraid; For Yahweh God is my strength and song, And He has become my salvation."
(Is. 25:9) And it will be said in that day, "Behold, this is our God for whom we have waited that He might save us. This is Yahweh for whom we have waited; let us rejoice and be glad in His salvation."
(Is. 33:22) Yahweh is our judge, Yahweh is our lawgiver, Yahweh is our king; He will save us
(Is. 43:11) "I, even I, am Yahweh; And there is no savior besides Me.
(Is. 43:12) "It is I who have declared and saved and proclaimed, and there was no strange god among you; so you are My witnesses," declares Yahweh, "And I am God.
(Is. 43:25) "I, even I, am the one who wipes out your transgressions for My own sake; and I will not remember your sins.
(Is. 45:17) Israel has been saved by Yahweh with an everlasting salvation; you will not be put to shame or humiliated to all eternity.
(Is. 60:16) "You will also suck the milk of nations, and will suck the breast of kings; then you will know that I, Yahweh, am your Savior, and your Redeemer, the Mighty One of Jacob.
(Hos. 13:4) Yet I have been Yahweh your God since the land of Egypt; and you were not to know any god except Me, for there is no savior besides Me.
The dilemma comes when we reach the NT and notice that the NT writers claim salvation can only come through Jesus Christ:
(Acts 4:12) "And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men, by which we must be saved."
(1 John 4:14) And we have beheld and bear witness that the Father has sent the Son to be the Savior of the world.
(Titus 2:13,14) looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus; who gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from every lawless deed and purify for Himself a people for His own possession, zealous for good deeds.
Notice how this last passage connects Christ with God in being the Savior, and claims that Jesus “gave Himself for us.” I thought God gave Jesus!? This passages says Jesus gave Himself. This is an irreconcilable dilemma unless Jesus is God. And notice that Jesus is the one who redeemed us and purified us “for Himself, a people for His own possession.” This kind of language was reserved in the OT exclusively for Yahweh. Paul has not just stuck his little toe on the boundary line and said something that is a little bit debatable. He has jumped completely out of bounds by this remark, if Jesus is not Yahweh. Only Yahweh owned “His people.” We do not belong to any created being (angel or otherwise). We belong only to Yahweh. The OT is replete with statements to that effect, especially in the prophets and in the Pentateuch. But here, Paul claims that we are Christ’s personal possession, using the very language that Yahweh used of the Israelites throughout the OT. If Jesus is not Yahweh, this would be blasphemy of the highest sort. Any good Jew would rend his garments at such a statement if Jesus was not Yahweh. But this is exactly what Paul affirms about Jesus here, that He is “our great God and Savior.” “Our great God...gave Himself for us.” What an awesome and precious truth to ponder! And what a blasphemy to say otherwise!
Even if God tried to send someone else to make atonement for us, it would not work for two reasons. Not only are created beings not holy enough (perfect, sinless and impeccable), but they are not powerful enough to reverse the curse God has placed upon mankind. The omnipotence of God stands behind the curse to enforce it. No one but God Himself can remove it. Not even the combined power of all created beings put together is enough to make the slightest impression upon the bulwark of God’s omnipotence. No one else is perfect enough, and no one else is powerful enough to reverse the curse and make propitiation. So, even if God sent someone else to do it, they could not succeed in doing so. Only God can deliver us from His wrath against our sin and satisfy His justice.
Propitiation cannot be accomplished by any other being except God. And it cannot be done representatively by others on God’s behalf, simply because the sacrifice itself (not just the One who sent it) must be perfect. The OT Levitical sacrifices had to be without blemish in and of themselves. It was not the character of the sinner who paid for the sacrifice that was under consideration here. It was the sacrificial animal itself. The ultimate sacrifice for humanity’s sins which was typified by the Levitical sacrifices must be sinless in and of Himself. And there is no one that perfect except God. No created being (or being who is not the one true God) is impeccable/infallible. Only God is. And the priest who offered the perfect sacrifice must also be perfectly sinless as well. The NT makes Jesus out to be both the sinless sacrifice and the sinless High Priest. So, even if God did try to send someone else outside of His Being to perform the redemptive duties, they would not be able to do it simply because God’s own justice requires something of the Savior that no one but God could provide. It would still require God Himself to personally and directly be the sacrifice and the High Priest.
The English word propitiation means to “conciliate or appease or satisfy.” The Greek root word is hilaskomai, and means to appease, render propitious, expiate, make atonement or expiation for, be gracious, show mercy, pardon, the cover of the ark of the covenant (the mercy seat – cf. Heb. 9:5). It is found in three different forms (hilasterios, hilaskomai, and hilasmos) in these passages (Matt. 16:22; Luke 18:13; Rom. 3:25; Heb. 2:17; 8:12; 9:5; 1 John 2:2; 4:10). We learn several things from these uses of the word propitiation. Rom. 3:25; 1 Jn. 2:2; 4:10 all speak of propitiation from the perspective of the sacrifice itself. Jesus was that perfect sacrifice that God provided for Himself (cf. Gen. 22:8).
Whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed; (Rom. 3:25)
And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world. (1 John 2:2)
In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins. (1 John 4:10)
Heb. 2:17 looks at propitiation from the High Priest’s viewpoint. Jesus was that High Priest. Notice the emphasis here on the necessity of the High Priest being a man in order for propitiation to take place.
Therefore, He had to be made like His brethren in all things, that He might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. (Heb. 2:17)
The Greek word for propitiation is translated “mercy seat” in Heb. 9:5. The typology here becomes awesome when we realize that an angel was stationed at each end of the mercy seat. The mercy seat was where the blood was spattered on the annual day of atonement. It was the throne of God’s Shekinah presence in the inner shrine of the Temple. It was the Holiest of all things inside the Holiest of all places (the Holy of Holies). Jesus is said to be our propitiation (mercy seat). And when He was raised from the dead, two angels stood at the head and foot of where His body had been in the tomb. Not only does this show we have been forgiven, but it suggests that Christ is the mercy seat where God sits. This has strong implications. Not only is Jesus the sinless sacrifice and the clean High Priest, but He is the mercy seat where the blood of the sacrifice was spattered. Jesus fulfills every one of the types. It would be blasphemy of the highest sort for any man or created being to put himself into those typological positions, simply because it demands that the sacrifice and the High Priest have to be God.
The public display of Christ shedding His blood was propitiatory (satisfying to God). The physical mercy seat in the physical temple was a propitiatory place, but only symbolically. Ultimate propitiation had to be accomplished in heaven (Heb. 9:5,23). The humanity of the sacrificial victim was essential for propitiation to occur (Heb. 2:17), but so was the Deity. Jesus Himself personally (not just representatively) was the propitiation for the sins of the whole world (1 Jn. 2:2). God sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins (1 Jn. 4:10). If that Son was not also God Himself, He could have accomplished nothing on our behalf.
Redemption Requires Both God and Man
Only someone who was a real human could save humanity. (Heb. 2:17) The blood of bulls and goats could never atone. It required a human sacrifice, but not just any old human. It required a sinless human sacrifice. The sacrifice had to be perfect, sinless, without blemish. The man had to live a perfectly sinless life. No human can do that. The only being in the universe who is perfect, infallible, and impeccable is God. Every other being (including the angels) is peccable, fallible and able to fall into sin, especially mankind. In fact, man is guaranteed to fall into sin. He has no way to avoid it. Otherwise how could apostle Paul make such unconditional statements about everyone having fallen short of the mark (Rom. 3:23). If it was possible for a mere man to live a sinless life, the Holy Spirit (through Paul) would not have said that all have fallen short. He would leave the possibility open that some might possibly live perfectly. But scripture does not leave that open. Scripture has shut up all men under sin (Rom. 11:32; Gal. 3:22). All have sinned and come short of the glory of God (Rom. 3:23). No mere human could ever escape being under the condemnation of sin unless God intervenes on man’s behalf. Only God can remove the curse that He Himself imposed. He does not make exceptions or take bribes (Deut. 10:17). No human or angel is powerful enough or perfect enough to reverse the curse or satisfy the justice of God. Only God can forgive sin. Jesus provided that forgiveness/propitiation (the sacrifice, the High Priest and the Mercy Seat where His blood was spattered). If that doesn’t imply He is God, nothing does.And God can not change His mind about what is required to satisfy (propitiate) His justice. In the NT book of Hebrews it absolutely claims that without the shedding of human blood there can be no remission of sins. The death (or other punishment) of the sinner is only the penalty for his own sin, so it accomplishes nothing toward the propitiation of God’s justice on behalf of all mankind. All mankind would have to die, since all sinned like Adam. Adam was our federal head. Someone like Adam must come and perfectly fulfill the demands of righteousness and propitiation for us as our new federal head. Satisfaction of God’s justice against sinful humanity can only come from the sacrificial death of a human who is not a sinner. This is what all the “without spot, wrinkle, blemish or defect” statements in the OT Levitical system were pointing to. The ultimate sacrifice for mankind to reverse the curse and satisfy the justice of God had to be a perfect, sinless human being. Since no mere man or angel can successfully avoid the temptations that prey upon our sinful natures, it must have seemed to Satan that he had a sure victory over humanity. No man could ever beat his system (he thought). Boy, did he ever miscalculate. Well, he was at least partially right in his assumption. No mere man could successfully live sinless. But he didn’t anticipate the possibility that God Himself would take human form and accomplish that task.
The only Being in the universe who is holy, blameless, righteous, totally sinless and impeccable (cannot sin) is God. Every other Being is peccable (fallible). Since redemption required a sinless and impeccable human sacrifice, and since God is the only one with those qualifications, there could be no redemption unless God took human form. And God would have to prove His impeccability by living out a human life, not just appearing briefly and getting it over with quickly. The payment for mankind’s redemption had to be a human to atone for human sin, but had to have the impeccable nature of God uniquely joined (hypostatic union) with it in such a way that the advantages (and none of the handicaps) of both natures were packaged in only one person. The sacrifice had to be human, but it also had to be perfect like God. Only a perfect union of the two natures into one person could accomplish propitiation. And only a virgin birth can explain how such a union could occur. There is no logical redemptive reason for the miraculous conception in Mary’s womb by the Holy Spirit (God Himself), and for the virgin birth and 33 years of human life for Jesus, unless He was the incarnation of God. Because Jesus did not have a human father, he did not have the sin nature handicap that humans have, which is passed down through our earthly fathers from Adam (our federal head). But not only did Jesus not have the sin nature that humans have, but He had something in addition that we don’t have. And that is the impeccable, holy, perfect nature of God. So, Jesus was not under the curse, nor was He vulnerable to temptation and sin. He was the perfect one to accomplish redemption. But He could not have done that unless He was the Son of God. God had to overshadow a virgin and conceive the Holy Offspring in her womb. This offspring from the union of God and woman was the literal “Son” of God. He was the offspring of God. He was both God and human. It was a perfect union – one person who was both God and man in nature. God became flesh and dwelt among us. Glory hallelujah! Praises be to His Holy Name.
Satan failed to take the significance of the virgin birth and its implications for the nature of Christ into account. And he did not anticipate what would happen when a sinless person died. When Jesus died it was His full-scale assault on Satan’s domain (the realm of Death and Hades). Satan had no power over Christ to hold Him in Death and Hades. Jesus could come back out. But not only that, He could take the dead saints with Him. Satan thought he was killing another childless heir to David’s physical throne. He thought the death of Christ would be another victory for him and another stalling off of the crushing head wound he was promised to get. He really thought he could outwit the Messiah of Israel. But his killing of Christ was the very act which forfeited his domain to Christ. Amazing how wise and comprehensive God’s plan was! God used Satan to carry out the most crucial event in the Plan of Redemption. And God kept it hidden from Satan and all the other rulers of that age until the very consummation of it. Only those who were taught of God and who used their spiritual discernment could even come close to seeing more than just a shadowy hint of what was ahead. Satan missed even that little clue because he was not tuned in at all to what God was saying to His people throughout the OT period.
On one of my many trips to the library, as I looked through the books dealing with the Atonement, Incarnation, Redemption, Propitiation and Virgin Birth, I was amazed how many shelves of books they had on these subjects. It was obvious how crucial this issue is considered to be. Many expositors (e.g., Redemptive Incarnation by Albert Schlitzer) of Christ’s atoning sacrifice on the cross have noted that not only is Jesus the sacrificial victim, but He is also the High Priest who presents the sacrifice to God. And both the sacrifice and the high priest had to be sinless (without spot or blemish or defect). One needs only to look at the scrupulous attention to detail the High Priests had to bother themselves with throughout their whole lives as well as on the Day of Atonement to see what we mean. No one could serve as a priest if he had a defect or blemish of any kind. There were tight restrictions on every detail of his life. Every step the High Priest took on the Day of Atonement was regulated. On the Day of Atonement he took at least five complete baths, and washed his hands and feet at least seven additional times. Before He could go to the temple he had to be absolutely ceremonially clean and pure. Then he had to have a sacrifice performed on his behalf to make sure he was not only physically and ceremonially pure, but typologically sinless before he set foot in the Holy of Holies (symbolic of heaven itself where Christ ascended to offer His own blood). The point is, both the sacrifice and the High Priest who presented it had to be sinless. This is what the typology demands. And it is this typology which defines the nature of the Heavenly Sacrifice and the Heavenly High Priest. If the High Priest who ascended to the heavenly realm to appear in the presence of God in the Heavenly Holy of Holies was not perfect and sinless, not only would He not be able to present the sacrifice, but he would die trying. No High Priest could enter the presence of God and live unless all impurities had been cleansed and all sin had been atoned for. He had to be sinless. And God is the only one who can meet that requirement. No atonement for the sins of mankind could be valid if the Heavenly High Priest had any sin guilt, because there were no other perfect human sacrifices available to remove his guilt. If Jesus had any sin there would be no way to remove it before His entry into the Heavenly Holy of Holies. He must be totally sinless so that His sacrifice could count for the rest of humanity. The nature of the Heavenly High Priest must be sinless at the beginning of His life and all the way through until the presentation in the Heavenly Holy of Holies. There can be no defect, blemish, sin or impurity of any kind. That is the typology. No human or any other created being can meet that qualification of a sinless life. Only God can. Jesus had to be both God and man, or the atonement could not take place. So, if Jesus is not both God and man, we have not been saved. The Deity of Christ is essential to our Atonement. It was absolutely necessary for God to become a man to atone for us (Heb. 2:14-18). The whole question we began with in this section was whether it was absolutely essential to our atonement for God to take human form. It is not just a matter of whether it is possible for God to take human form, it is whether it is essential for Him to do so in order for us to be saved. I rest my case on the above evidence. Only God could save us. If Jesus was not God, we have not been saved.
The Jehovah’s Witnesses deny the efficacy of the atoning sacrifice of Jesus if He is God. If they are wrong about Jesus not being Deity (and they most assuredly are), their ideas as expounded by Bowman below are very close to (if not in fact) blasphemy:
The Witnesses believe that if Jesus had been God, his death would not have been a fitting sacrifice because it would have exceeded God's just requirement. The JW booklet explains:
.... The perfect human life of Jesus was the “corresponding ransom” [1 Tim. 2:6 NWT] required by divine justice – no more, no less.... If Jesus, however, were part of a Godhead, the ransom price would have been infinitely higher than what God's own Law required. (Why You Should Believe In The Trinity, by Robert M. Bowman, Jr., Page 76)
We have shown that God’s justice required something which no one but God Himself could pay. No one was holy enough or powerful enough to pay the expense of human atonement. And the JW’s theory of a “perfect human” being all that’s needed begs the question and sidesteps the obvious difficulty. How can any “mere human” be perfect? The fact that Jesus was “perfect” (which they don’t deny) necessitates the conclusion that He was more than a mere man. It certainly borders on (if not, in fact, is) blasphemy to suggest that man is capable of living a sinless life and earning justification. If salvation is that easy, then our condemnation must not be all that strong. And even if God created a sinless creature specifically for the purpose of saving us, that creature would still not be powerful enough to reverse the curse God had placed on mankind. The creature has to not only be holy enough, but also powerful enough to reverse that curse. It insults the Spirit of Grace by suggesting that God’s work on our behalf is not needed after all, and that some creature can save us. All we would need then is for a human to live a perfect life and die as a sacrifice for us, and we have saved ourselves. To say such is to nullify the Grace of God. In net effect it is to say that we don’t need God – we can save ourselves. That indeed is a “different gospel.” Only God can atone for our sin. It is all God’s work. Man cannot do anything to save Himself. We absolutely depend completely on God for our salvation. Justification cannot be accomplished without Him directly and personally involved. Jesus had to be God or He could not have lived sinlessly, and therefore could not have atoned for our sins.
No created being can replace or act on God’s behalf. God didn’t send an angel to walk and talk with Adam in the Garden, and He didn’t send a representative to deliver the Bad News after Adam and Eve’s Fall into sin. At those decisive moments in Redemptive History, God Himself showed up. How could He do otherwise at the most important of all the decisive redemptive moments – the cross? To send a creature or some other non-God spirit representative to do that costly work of redemption would undermine God’s credibility, and nullify redemption itself.
God says He is our only savior, and Jesus is also (Is. 43:3,11; 45:21; 49:26; 60:16; 63:8; Hos. 13:4; Lk 2:11; Jn 4:42; Acts 5:31; 13:23; Eph. 5:23; Phil. 3:20; 1 Tim. 1:1; 2:3; 4:10; 2 Tim. 1:10; Tit 1:4; 2:13; 3:6; 2 Pet. 1:1,11; 2:20; 3:18; 1 Jn 4:14). God also says He will not give any of His glory to anyone else, but Jesus shared it (Josh. 7:19; Ps. 106:47; 115:1; Is. 42:8; 42:12; 48:11; 60:19; John 17:5; Acts 12:23; Rev. 4:9; 16:9; 19:7). God Himself must personally satisfy (propitiate – cf. Rom. 3:25; Heb. 2:17; 1 Jn 2:2; 4:10) and atone for the penalty imposed by His justice. Who would trust a God that will not personally love His creation enough to become flesh and dwell among us and reverse the curse that He Himself imposed? See John 3:16. If Jesus is not God, that verse means (in net effect) that God did not love us enough to do it Himself, but picked on one of His creatures and coerced him to do His redemptive work for Him. Is God so untouchable that He can not or will not humble Himself and take on the form of a bond-servant (human flesh)? And, aren’t we limiting God by thinking that it is impossible for God to take human form? Is it really impossible for God to do that (Lk. 1:37)? Nothing short of an incarnation of Deity would convince mankind that “God so loved us” (Jn. 3:16). Jesus has to be “our God for whom we have waited that He might save us.” (Isa. 25:9) If Jesus is not that God for whom mankind waited since the Fall in the Garden and the promise to Adam & Eve (Gen. 3:15), then the NT revelation is a complete farce, because it claims all those Messianic passages connected with the coming God (the Immanuel, God with us) were fulfilled in Christ. Daniel and Isaiah talk about the Ancient of Days (a clear reference to Yahweh) being the One who is to come, and those passages are applied to Jesus in the NT. We cannot be saved unless God Himself directly took human form and experienced the atoning and propitiating death for us. It could not be accomplished indirectly through some other created being. God Himself has to be the provider of His own salvation. Anselm (A.D. 1033-1109), Archbishop of Canterbury, in his book Why God Became Man, is just one example of many down through the centuries who have reasonably and convincingly shown that God’s incarnation was absolutely necessary in order to propitiate God’s justice and make atonement. But, of course, the inspired writers were the first to affirm it (see especially the gospel of John and the book of Hebrews). It was absolutely necessary for Yahweh to personally and directly become flesh in order to save us.
God Was Always There When It Mattered
At all the critical events where God’s plan of redemption was being revealed and taken to its next stage of development, God manifested His presence. After creation we see Him communing with Adam in the Garden before the Fall. We then see Him reappear to Adam and Eve after the Fall to execute the penalty and promise ultimate deliverance through the (miraculously conceived and virgin born) seed of woman. He walked with Enoch. We see His visitation to Noah, and later at the Tower of Babel. He chose Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and revealed Himself to them. He spoke directly to and through Moses and manifested His consuming fiery presence to the Hebrews in the wilderness throughout their forty years wandering. On and on we could go citing the occasions when God manifested His presence and revealed His redemptive purposes directly and personally, all of which unmistakably imply that God is going to be present on every occasion that has important redemptive significance. The Jews would certainly have expected nothing less. What event could possibly have any more redemptive significance than the Cross? But if the unitarians are right, it would mean that the Cross event was accomplished by some other Being than God. It would mean God stayed in heaven for the most crucial event of redemptive history and sent someone else to do His work for Him. How could God do that after He Himself had established the pattern of personally appearing on all other significant redemptive occasions leading up to it, especially if the other being He sent was not perfect and was able to sin. This means God would have jeopardized His redemptive plan by putting its critical accomplishment (the cross) in the hands of a fallible being. Unthinkable! This idea demands two important conclusions. First, that God must have been present and directly/personally involved in the cross event. And secondly, that the One who died on the cross must be infallible, sinless, perfect, utterly holy and impeccable. This demands the Deity of the One who died on the Cross. He must be both Son of Adam (a human) and Son of God (Deity).
Early Christian Beliefs About Christ’s Nature
The Ebionites, a Hebrew Christian sect of the first and second century, are an interesting cult in regard to their beliefs about Christ. They were a carry-over from the Jerusalem and Judean churches which were very zealous for circumcision and law-keeping. They retained their Jewish identity and continued in some of the basic Judaizer positions. They continued keeping the law and kept hanging onto their Jewish exclusiveness after the temple fell. They diverged more and more away from mainstream Christianity. The longer they continued as a separate group, the more evident it became that their position forced them to deny the Deity of Christ. It is interesting that the various epistles of Paul and John severely condemned the Judaizer position, not just because of its legalism and separatism, but also because of its position regarding the nature of Christ. This cult taught a different gospel (a different way of being justified and a different concept about the nature of Christ). It is not surprising that they were forced to devalue Christ and the efficacy/sufficiency of His sacrifice in order to bolster their views. Their Judaizing position, if taken to its full logical conclusion, leads to (and in fact resulted in) a denial of the Deity of Christ. This group dwindled until they became extinct before AD 400. This shows that the early church understood a direct link between the nature of Christ and our justification. It is no surprise the early church rejected the Ebionites as heretics, since their view downgraded the value of Christ’s sacrifice and ascribed a merely human nature to Jesus (the same thing JW’s and unitarians today are saying in regard to Christ, as Bowman has ably shown in his statements quoted above). This is why the Judaizers were such a threat to the early church, and why Apostles Paul and John ferociously assaulted them in their epistles. The Ebionites stood directly against the very founder of the Faith (antichrists). They were indeed teaching a different gospel about Christ. They were making Him out to be a mere man or created being, and minimizing the importance of His sacrifice. If Jesus is not God, then the Ebionites were right and mainstream Christianity is grossly off-base. That begs the question as to why the Ebionites disappeared from history, if they were the true church that Jesus said He would build (and the gates of Hades would not overpower it).The Ebionites could never get away with devaluing the Cross of Christ and elevating law-keeping as long as the church believed Jesus was God incarnate, because if Jesus is God, the Cross had to be extremely significant and efficacious in our atonement. But if Christ is not God, the Ebionites could get away with devaluing the Cross and pushing their Judaizing system, since the Cross would only be the death of a lesser created being. But the Church understood too well just how essential it was for God Himself to become flesh and die on behalf of man to satisfy the demands of His Own Justice. No being less than God could save us because no one else was holy enough or powerful enough. God could not use any lesser being to do His redemptive work for Him. God had to personally and directly intervene. Only God could remove the penalty for sin, and only if He Himself interposed on our behalf against the very curse and condemnation He had imposed. To attempt to save us any other indirect way would be no salvation at all. To say Jesus is not God is to make the Cross the work of someone lesser than God. It would mean that God did not pay the penalty His justice demanded. He sent someone lesser to do it. It would mean that He considered Himself too high and holy to take human form and subject Himself to the very kinds of torture and afflictions He had forced human beings to endure. How could God ask any lesser being to take human flesh and suffer on the Cross if He Himself is unwilling to do it? Who would want to believe in a God who has never walked a mile in our moccasins? If Jesus was not that incarnation of God in human flesh, then God has never become like us, and we are not saved. No lesser being can atone for us. If God didn’t do it directly and personally, our sins are still upon us. No wonder Paul and John had such critical things to say about the Judaizers (the precursors of the Ebionites). They were teaching doctrines that led directly to a denial of the very incarnation of God to save us. And this is the very thing some unitarians today believe. They say God only indirectly saved us through Jesus. They deny God took on flesh and saved us personally and directly. They believe a lesser being, the Son of God, took on flesh and represented God by suffering death for us, so that God only indirectly saved us through Jesus. Their definition of “Son of God” does not include His Deity. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to discern that there is something wrong with the picture of Christ they are painting. They are teaching a different gospel, which Judaizers, Ebionites and Gnostics might have agreed with, but which the historic church properly rejected.
Tradition Is Not The Deciding Factor
It is true some have gone to the extreme of gulping down traditional views of the Trinity without question, but others have gone to the equally dangerous extreme of rejecting ALL traditional positions whether they are based on careful and thorough exegesis or not. They have thrown the baby out with the bath water. Sure there are a lot of bones in the fish of tradition, but there is a lot of good nourishing meat there as well. It is worth the effort to pick the bones clean. The Deity of Christ and the Trinity are issues that the historic church spent multiple centuries studying, debating and interacting with. Much of that debate centered around how we understand and explain the Trinity. I have studied some of the arguments on both sides of the debates, even the arguments of those who rejected the Deity of Christ. But it is not the arguments of the historic church which anchor my convictions in the Deity of Christ. It is the redemptive plan of God which drives and forces and compels me to the ungetoverable conclusion that if God Himself did not personally and directly remove the curse that He had placed on mankind, then our sin-guilt remains and Death and Hades have prevailed.The highest praise belongs to God for taking human form (as Christ Jesus) to reveal Himself to us and to mercifully die on our behalf to redeem us from the curse that His own justice had imposed. No angel or man (or even a third kind of unique being that is not God) is powerful or holy enough to die for us and adequately atone against the curse of spiritual death. A sacrificial death by any created being (no matter how high up the hierarchy of beings he is) would be no more effective for the atonement of our sins than were the sacrifices of animals. No other being can atone against the ultimate enemy of mankind (the curse of spiritual death – eternal condemnation and separation). Only God Himself can remove the penalty for sin. If God didn’t take human form, place the sins of the whole world upon Himself and die for us, then we aren’t saved. To give anyone else credit for doing that is blasphemy. The kind of praise that such a sacrifice calls forth is only worthy of God. How could God make someone else die to save mankind but then demand all the praise and worship for that incredible act to be directed to Him instead? If He wants the credit for saving us, He must do it Himself, or else let the being who did it receive the praise and worship for it. This would be sharing His glory with another, and God says He will not share His glory with another! But He did share His glory and worship with Christ (cf. Rev. 5), so what is the implication? Jesus is God!