The relationship between the divine and human natures of Christ has been a sore point of controversy throughout the history of Christianity. There are two equal and opposite errors regarding the nature of Christ: one is to over-emphasise his divine nature leading to heresies such as docetism -- the idea that God did not really come in the flesh but only appeared to do so; and the other is to over-emphasise his humanity leading to heresies such as that of Arius who believed that Christ was not divine but was the highest created being.
One denomination which has struggled with these issues over the course of its own history is Seventh-day Adventism (SDA). To read the history of this doctrine within this movement provides an excellent insight into the issues of Christ's nature, in particular, his human nature. Early SDAs believed that Christ came in sinful human flesh with the only difference from the rest of us that he didn't actually sin. Around the 1950s, however, a 'new theology' of Christ's human nature began to emerge within the denomination -- at least, new for Seventh-day Adventism. A number of their theologians began to teach that Christ came in the human nature of Adam before the Fall. This has been the understanding of most of Christendom but not by the SDA Church up until that time. Of course, the conservative/traditional theologians of the denomination reacted against this movement and, since then, the debate has raged without any end in sight.
J R Zurcher's highly readable book Touched with Our Feelings: A Historical Survey of Adventist Thought on the Human Nature of Christ describes the history of this doctrine within the SDA church from the early 1800s to the present day. His overall purpose is to show that the original understanding of Seventh-day Adventists was in the fallen human nature of Christ (which, in his view, is the correct view) and that, since the 1950s, the push by some SDA theologians toward a more orthodox Christian view is a departure from the truth.
Despite Zurcher's obvious agreement with the belief that Christ came with a fallen human nature, he presents what seems to be an objective and fair survey of the debate with Seventh-day Adventism. He leaves his positive support of his view to the last chapter of the book although hints of it obviously come through in other chapters. In his last chapter he offers what he considers to be the biblical evidence in support of Christ's human nature being that of fallen humanity. This is an important place to finish because a good deal of time within Seventh-day Adventism is spent arguing from the writings of their prophetess, Ellen G White. Zurcher tries to avoid that in his last chapter. He is not entirely successful at this because on a number of occasions Ellen White's views intrude into his argument.
There are a number of good reasons for reading this book. Firstly, it provides an interesting case study of a denomination which has tried to grapple with the mysterious doctrine of the nature of Christ -- not only through intellectual debate but also through some interesting deviations such as the Holy Flesh Movement which, during the late 1800s, asserted that a person's flesh became like that of Adam's before the Fall. All of this makes for fascinating reading.
Secondly, it is an interesting case study of theological debate in its own right. Along the way there are some interesting issues to do with what documents are authoritative for believers in their struggle to find truth. The prophetess of Seventh-day Adventism, Ellen G White, features prominently in the story on both sides of the debate. There are also practical implications that are derived from an individual's understanding of the human nature of Christ and the nature of the gospel.
In my view, Zurcher achieves his aim of showing that early Seventh-day Adventists believed in the fallen human nature of Christ. However, I do not believe it is appropriate to read this book with the intention of deciding what is truth in this matter. There may be some within Seventh-day Adventism who will accept the original doctrine because it was the belief of the founders of the denomination and because they believe that Ellen White confirms that position. But, of course, neither of those is adequate as the basis of belief. For the Christian, the final and ultimate authority is the Bible and the truth must be evaluated on that basis alone. The Seventh-day Adventists' own Statement of Fundamental Beliefs state that quite clearly.
For the general Christian reader, then, the book can be read for the valuable insights and lessons that can be derived from any story of the followers of Christ as they struggle to be faithful disciples. It may also motivate us to pursue a greater understanding of the miracle of the incarnation -- God, in Christ, reconciling the whole world to himself.
Related Links
Non-Seventh-day Adventist
The Divine and Human Nature of Christ -- Herman Bavinck
Did Christ Have a Fallen Human Nature? -- Donald McLeod
Human Nature of Christ, The -- Torrey's Topical Textbook
Seventh-day Adventist
Christ's Human Nature -- Angel Manuel Rodriguez
The Nature of Christ -- GreatControversy.org
Buy Touched with Our Feelings from Amazon.com
Saturday, February 05, 2005
Book Review: 'Touched with Our Feelings'
The relationship between the divine and human natures of Christ has been a sore point of controversy throughout the history of Christianity. There are two equal and opposite errors regarding the nature of Christ: one is to over-emphasise his divine nature leading to heresies such as docetism -- the idea that God did not really come in the flesh but only appeared to do so; and the other is to over-emphasise his humanity leading to heresies such as that of Arius who believed that Christ was not divine but was the highest created being.
One denomination which has struggled with these issues over the course of its own history is Seventh-day Adventism (SDA). To read the history of this doctrine within this movement provides an excellent insight into the issues of Christ's nature, in particular, his human nature. Early SDAs believed that Christ came in sinful human flesh with the only difference from the rest of us that he didn't actually sin. Around the 1950s, however, a 'new theology' of Christ's human nature began to emerge within the denomination -- at least, new for Seventh-day Adventism. A number of their theologians began to teach that Christ came in the human nature of Adam before the Fall. This has been the understanding of most of Christendom but not by the SDA Church up until that time. Of course, the conservative/traditional theologians of the denomination reacted against this movement and, since then, the debate has raged without any end in sight.
J R Zurcher's highly readable book Touched with Our Feelings: A Historical Survey of Adventist Thought on the Human Nature of Christ describes the history of this doctrine within the SDA church from the early 1800s to the present day. His overall purpose is to show that the original understanding of Seventh-day Adventists was in the fallen human nature of Christ (which, in his view, is the correct view) and that, since the 1950s, the push by some SDA theologians toward a more orthodox Christian view is a departure from the truth.
Despite Zurcher's obvious agreement with the belief that Christ came with a fallen human nature, he presents what seems to be an objective and fair survey of the debate with Seventh-day Adventism. He leaves his positive support of his view to the last chapter of the book although hints of it obviously come through in other chapters. In his last chapter he offers what he considers to be the biblical evidence in support of Christ's human nature being that of fallen humanity. This is an important place to finish because a good deal of time within Seventh-day Adventism is spent arguing from the writings of their prophetess, Ellen G White. Zurcher tries to avoid that in his last chapter. He is not entirely successful at this because on a number of occasions Ellen White's views intrude into his argument.
There are a number of good reasons for reading this book. Firstly, it provides an interesting case study of a denomination which has tried to grapple with the mysterious doctrine of the nature of Christ -- not only through intellectual debate but also through some interesting deviations such as the Holy Flesh Movement which, during the late 1800s, asserted that a person's flesh became like that of Adam's before the Fall. All of this makes for fascinating reading.
Secondly, it is an interesting case study of theological debate in its own right. Along the way there are some interesting issues to do with what documents are authoritative for believers in their struggle to find truth. The prophetess of Seventh-day Adventism, Ellen G White, features prominently in the story on both sides of the debate. There are also practical implications that are derived from an individual's understanding of the human nature of Christ and the nature of the gospel.
In my view, Zurcher achieves his aim of showing that early Seventh-day Adventists believed in the fallen human nature of Christ. However, I do not believe it is appropriate to read this book with the intention of deciding what is truth in this matter. There may be some within Seventh-day Adventism who will accept the original doctrine because it was the belief of the founders of the denomination and because they believe that Ellen White confirms that position. But, of course, neither of those is adequate as the basis of belief. For the Christian, the final and ultimate authority is the Bible and the truth must be evaluated on that basis alone. The Seventh-day Adventists' own Statement of Fundamental Beliefs state that quite clearly.
For the general Christian reader, then, the book can be read for the valuable insights and lessons that can be derived from any story of the followers of Christ as they struggle to be faithful disciples. It may also motivate us to pursue a greater understanding of the miracle of the incarnation -- God, in Christ, reconciling the whole world to himself.
Related Links
Non-Seventh-day Adventist
The Divine and Human Nature of Christ -- Herman Bavinck
Did Christ Have a Fallen Human Nature? -- Donald McLeod
Human Nature of Christ, The -- Torrey's Topical Textbook
Seventh-day Adventist
Christ's Human Nature -- Angel Manuel Rodriguez
The Nature of Christ -- GreatControversy.org
Buy Touched with Our Feelings from Amazon.com
Are atheists morons?
Someone recently sent me this amusing little story:
Wise Little Lucy A young woman teacher with obvious liberal tendencies explains to her class of small children that she is an atheist. She asks her class if they are atheists too. Not really knowing what atheism is but wanting to be like their teacher, their hands explode into the air like fleshy fireworks. There is, however, one exception. A girl named Lucy has not gone along with the crowd. The teacher asks her why she has decided to be different. "Because I'm not an atheist." "Then," asks the teacher, "what are you?" "I'm a Christian." The teacher is a little perturbed now, her face slightly red. She asks Lucy why she is a Christian. "Well, I was brought up knowing and loving Jesus. My Mom is a Christian, and my dad is a Christian, so I am a Christian." The teacher is now angry. "That's no reason," she says loudly. "What if your Mom was a moron, and your dad was a moron. What would you be then?" A pause, and a smile. "Then," says Lucy, "I'd be an atheist."It's cute isn't it? But the assumption underlying this story is that atheists are morons and that Christians are not. The term moron comes from a Greek word meaning unintelligent or thoughtless. And that is precisely the sense in which it is used in this story. Many Christians believe that atheists must be unintelligent or thoughtless if they can't see the truth of Christianity. But are atheists unintelligent or thoughtless? Most definitely not! Any Christian who has genuinely listened to, or read, the point of view of an atheist would know that they are no more likely to be unintelligent or thoughtless than a Christian. There are unintelligent and thoughtless people within any group and Christians, along with atheists and other stereotyped groups, have just as many. You might be interested in reading some of the results on the relationship between religion and intelligence here. In essence, a number of scientific studies have been done on students over the years to see if there is a correlation between IQ and religious belief. Starting in 1927, Thomas Howells studied 461 students and 'showed religiously conservative students "are, in general, relatively inferior in intellectual ability."' In 1951, Brown and Love tested 613 male and female students at the University of Denver. 'The mean test scores of non-believers was 119 points, and for believers it was 100. The non-believers ranked in the 80th percentile, and believers in the 50th. Their findings "strongly corroborate those of Howells."' As recently as 1978, Robert Wuthnow studied 532 students and showed that '[o]f 532 students, 37 percent of Christians, 58 percent of apostates, and 53 percent of non-religious scored above average on SATs.' There are many, many more studies on the web site so take a look. Studies of other groups have given similar results. Overall, 'The consensus [of the studies] is clear: more intelligent people tend not to believe in religion. And this observation is given added force when you consider that the ... studies span a broad range of time, subjects and methodologies, and yet arrive at the same conclusion.' So, if these studies are to be believed, Lucy in the story actually got it around the wrong way. My purpose here is not to discuss the issue of which belief system, atheism or Christianity, is the correct one. But, as Christians, one thing we just cannot do is assume that, if a person is an atheist, they are therefore stupid, unintelligent, or unthoughtful. Not only is this untrue but, to assert such a thing actually backfires on the Christian who does so. To accuse atheists of being unintelligent or unthoughtful is, in fact, the result of unintelligent, unthoughtful thinking!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)