Jacobs was the professor of theology at the Philadelphia Seminary - General Council, which was founded as an alternative to the Pietistic, ecumenical General Synod. I was interviewed for a position at this seminary, long ago. It is now United Lutheran Seminary.
Topics included
7. What topics are included in Christology, or that portion
of Theology treating of the Mediatorial Office?
The Person, the States and the Offices of Christ. Chalcedon
Symbol
8. How has the Church summarized its faith on this subject?
Most comprehensively in the symbol of Chalcedon:
“We, then, following the holy Fathers, all with one consent
teach men to confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same
perfect in Godhead and also perfect in Manhood; truly God and truly Man, of a
reasonable soul and body; consubstantial with the Father, according to the
Godhead, and consubstantial with us, according to the Manhood; in all things,
except sin, like unto us; begotten before all ages of the Father, according to
the Godhead, and in these latter days, for us and for our salvation, born of
the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, according to the Manhood; one and the same
Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures,
‘inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably’; the distinction of
natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of
each nature being preserved and concurring in One Person and One Subsistence,
not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only
begotten God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ; as the prophets from the
beginning have declared concerning Him, and the Lord Jesus Christ Himself has
taught us, and the Creed of the Fathers has handed down to us.”
In its simplest form, this truth is stated in the Small
Catechism, Creed, Article 11. The Divinity of Christ
9. What is the first thing to be considered in treating of
the Person of Christ?
That He is true God, consubstantial, coequal and coeternal
with the Father.
158
The proof for this is given above, Chap. 3, Sec. 17-23. For
“consubstantial,” see same chapter, Q. 48. The divinity of Christ does not
consist in divine gifts, but in His entire and complete oneness in all His
attributes with God.
The Humanity of Christ
10. What is the second?
That He is true man, consubstantial with us. The proof for
this is found in that He has: A. The names of man Tim. 2:5; John 8:40; Acts
17:31. His favorite designation of Himself is “Son of man.” He is called
“flesh” (John 1:14), “a child” (Acts 4:27), “Son of Abraham, David,” etc., especially
in the genealogical tables of Matthew and Luke. B. The parts of a man Body and
soul or spirit, and various parts of His body are mentioned. C. The experiences
of men He was conceived, was born, grew, hungered, thirsted, was fatigued,
grieved, wept, exulted, died. D. The acts of men. He went about, conversed,
etc.
Truth of the Humanity
11. Why did the early Church lay such emphasis upon the
word “true”?
Particularly against the Docetists who maintained it was
not a true body which Christ had, but only the appearance of a body.
12. Upon
what arguments did they base this error?
They said that angels repeatedly appeared in human bodies,
and yet were not true men; that the Holy Spirit appeared in the form of a dove
without being a true dove. They quoted Rom. 8:3, “God sent his Son in the
likeness of sinful flesh,” laying especial emphasis upon “likeness.”
13. How
were they answered?
Angels assumed human bodies only temporarily, and for some
transient purpose. Christ Himself declares the difference in Luke 24:39.
“Handle me and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones,
as ye behold me having.”
The union of the Spirit with the dove was symbolical; that
of the Son of God with man, personal. The former was temporary; the latter
permanent. The emphasis in Rom. 8:3 is not on “likeness,” but on “sinful”. The
meaning is the same as in Phil. 2:7, “He was”found in fashion as a man,"
i.e., to all outward appearances, He was nothing more than any other man — a
child like other children, a Galilean peasant among Galilean peasants. This is
not opposed to the truth of His humanity, but is contrasted simply with
His
State of Glory. Completeness of the Humanity
159
14. What is implied in His true manhood?
Its completeness or perfection.
15. Who attacked this?
Apollinaris, in the Fourth Century, who sought to explain
the personal union by teaching that the Divine Nature replaced a part of
Christ’s humanity, viz., the rational soul; and the Monothelites of the Seventh
Century, who taught that the Divine Nature took the place of a truly human
will. Unity of Person
16. What is meant by saying that there is but one Person?
That “there is one and the same Christ, Son, Lord,
Only-begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures” (Chalcedon). “Who although He
be God and man; yet He is not two, but one Christ; one, not by conversion of
the Godhead into flesh, but by taking the manhood into God; one altogether, not
by confusion of substance, but by Unity of Person” (Athanasian Creed). The
difference between “me” and “thee” is never applied to the divine and human
natures. There is but one “I” acting and speaking, thinking and feeling and
willing through both natures. There is but one “Thou” whom the Father addresses
and one “He” to whom the Spirit bears witness.
17. What proof have you of this
unity?
In Rom. 1:3, the same person is said to be “made of the
seed of David according to the flesh,” and declared to be “the Son of God.” In
Luke 1:3, that which is born of the Virgin Mary is called “the Son of God.” In
John 1:14, “the Word,” who is declared in V. 1, to be God, is said to have
become “flesh.” In Gal. 2:20, “the Son of God” is said to have given Himself
for sinful man. Relation of Person and Nature
18. Is the person related in the same way to each nature?
The person, with the divine nature, has existed from all
eternity. The human nature began in time. The person, therefore, was once
without a human nature. But the human nature could not exist without a person.
The person of the human nature, therefore, came not from that nature, but from
the divine. Since the human nature entered into the world, i.e., was conceived
and born and lived by the divine person uniting Himself with our race in the
womb of the Virgin Mary, we say that the human nature has no personality of its
own, but that the personality of the human nature is that which it has derived
from the divine. The Greek theologians called this the doctrine of the
anhypostasia of the human nature, which our theologians accept, although
stating that enhypostasia is preferable. The unity of the person requires that
we must hold to the want of personality on the part of the human nature.
19. If
we were to affirm that the human nature had a personality of its own, what would
follow?
The doctrine that in Christ, there are two persons, as as
well as two natures. Unity of personality could be taught, then, only by
finding place for the destruction at some time of the human personality, and
its being replaced by the divine. Double Generation
20. Since there are two natures, can we say there are two
Sons, viz., a Son of God and a Son of Man?
160
No. There is but one Son, at one and the same time Son of
God and Son of Man. That through which, He is the Son of God, is His eternal
generation of the Father, “true God begotten of the Father from all eternity”
(Small Catechism). See Chapter 3, 51-53. That through which He is the Son of
Man is His conception by the Holy Ghost and birth of the Virgin Mary (Lukes
1:35; Gal. 4:4). We speak, therefore, of a double generation of Christ: one,
eternal; the other, temporal; one, according to the divine; the other,
according to the human nature. Incarnation
21. By what term is the act of the Son of God in assuming
human nature known?
Incarnation.
John 1:14. “And the Word became flesh.” Heb. 2:14. “Since
the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself in like manner
partook of the same.” Heb. 2:16; 1 Tim. 3:16; Rom. 9:5; 1:3.
22. Was this peculiar to the Second Person of the Trinity?
Only the Son of God assumed human nature. But the Father
who sent the Son into the world, and the Holy Spirit who appears in the
conception of Christ (Luke 1:35), just as in creation (Gen. 1:2), were also
active. There was a special intervention of God in and beyond the order of
nature established at the creation. God, who at creation established an order,
in virtue of which men came into the world through certain means, can, at His
will, dispense with such means, and provide for a virgin birth. To deny the possibility
of this, is to question the existence and almighty power of God. To admit its
reality is to admit the possibility of everything else mysterious and
supernatural in Christianity. Consubstantiality of Humanity
23. The conception of Jesus being so unlike that of others,
was the human nature that resulted also unlike that of other men?
“He was consubstantial with us according to the manhood; in
all things, except sin, like unto us” (Chalcedon).
Heb. 4:15. “He hath been in all points tempted like as we
are, yet without sin.”
Christ, therefore, experienced all the infirmities that are
common to the race, as hunger, thirst, sleep, fatigue, tears, sorrow, pain; but
no individual infirmities are ascribed to Him, as particular diseases which
attack some, but do not affect all. Sinlessness of Humanity
24. How do you prove the sinlessness of Jesus?
A. From distinct passages of Scripture Heb. 4:15, quoted
under 23; 2 Cor. 5:21; Heb. 7:26; John 8:46; 1 Peter 1:19; 2:22. B. From His
divinity Sin is a personal matter. It is always a person who sins. But the
person of Christ is God.
161
C. From the definition of sin “Sin is the want of
conformity with God’s Law.” But the Law is the declaration of God’s will. God
cannot will what is contrary to His will, i.e., Jesus could not sin. He was,
therefore, not only sinless, but impeccable. Admit peccability, and the
divinity of Christ is practically denied.
25. But if Christ were impeccable,
how do you explain His temptation? Is temptation possible, where a fall is
impossible?
Temptation properly is only testing or proving. When gold
is brought to the touch-stone or submitted to the blowpipe or treated with
various chemical reagents, there is no possibility of any other result than
that it will stand the test and be proved to be gold. We inevitably associate
the thought of temptation with that of the possibility of a fall, from the fact
that man’s nature is corrupt, and that even the regenerate are only partially
renewed, and, therefore fallible, and likely, under the test, to show its worst
features. The agony of our Lord’s temptation came not from the necessity of a
great struggle in order that He might prove Himself victor, but from the fact
that it was a part of His passion. That He, the manifestation of the absolute
holiness of God, should endure the presence and be subjected to the humiliation
of the conversation and suggestions of the lowest and vilest of all creatures,
the source and head of all the crime in the universe, was an indignity that
called forth all His repugnance to the great enemy.
26. Was there any other
particular in which the humanity of Christ was distinguished from that of
others?
All the excellences and perfections of human nature He had
in the highest degree. These He possessed as the sinless man, and as the one
within whose body the Godhead dwelt in a peculiar way. Whatever physical
attractiveness He may have had, and for which the old teachers cite Ps. 45:2,
came from His holy character as it was expressed in His outward form. While the
bodies of others contain the seeds of mortality (Rom. 6:23), that of Christ was
by its own nature immortal, His death occurring by an act of His will (John
10:18), and not from inner weakness or external force, and His body, after
death, being incorruptible (Acts 2:31).
27. What was the purpose of the
Incarnation?
The Redemption of the human race.
Matt. 20:28. “The Son of man came, to give his life a
ransom for many.”
Heb. 2:14. “He partook of flesh and blood, that, through
death, he might bring to nought him that had the power of death.”
28. Would the Son of God not have become incarnate if Adam
had not sinned?
The doctrine that He would have come only for the completion
of humanity, or to furnish a model of a holy life, or for any other purpose
than to rescue men from sin, is without any authority from Scripture. God’s
will or decree to send His Son into the world everywhere presupposes God’s
foreknowledge of sin, and His determination to provide a remedy for it.
Personal Union
29. In what two senses is the expression, Personal Union,
used?
On the one hand, it designates an act (unüo), and is
synonymous with Incarnation.
162
On the other hand, it refers to a state, resulting from the
act (unio).
30. In what does the state of union consist? In that henceforth
both natures have but one person — the personal communion; and, as a result,
the intimate and perpetual personal presence of each nature in and with the
other. Attributes of Union
31. How has the Church guarded the statement of this
doctrine?:
The Chalcedon Symbol (see above, 8) has denied this union
negatively as: A. Unconfused There is no mingling of natures. Although there is
a communion, they remain distinct. B. Unchanged One is not changed into the
other. C. Indivisible i.e., with respect to place. “Nowhere is the human nature
unsustained by the Logos, or the Logos not sustaining the human nature. The
human nature is not outside of the Logos, nor is the Logos without the human
nature.” D. Inseparable i.e., with respect to time. The union is never
dissolved, but is perpetual. Items (a) and (b) are in opposition to the
Eutychians; (c) and (d) in opposition to the Nestorians. The Eutychians
confused the natures; the Nestorians divided the person. 32. How has the
Athanasian Creed defined it?
“Who although He be God and man: yet He is not two, but one
Christ. One; not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh; but by taking the
manhood into God. One altogether; not by confusion of substance, but by Unity
of Person. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and man is
one Christ.”
Communion of Natures
33. What follows from this communion of the Person with
both natures?
The communion of natures with each other. There is a
perichoresis or pervasion or penetration of one nature by the other, or
existence of one nature within the other. “The divine nature is said actually
to penetrate or perfect the human, and the human to be passively penetrated or
perfected by the divine; but not in such way that the divine successively
occupies one part of the human after the other, and extensively diffuses
itself, through it; but, since it is spiritual and indivisible, it at the same
time as a whole perfects and energizes each part of the human nature and that
nature as a whole, and remains entire in the entire human nature, and entire in
every part” (Baier).
Col. 2:9. “In him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead
bodily.”
John 1:14; Heb. 2:14.
