What do we really celebrate at
Christmas?
We celebrate the incarnation of God,
says R.C Sproul:1
R.C. Sproul
reminds us that what we really celebrate at Christmas is the incarnation of God
Himself.
What we
celebrate at Christmas is not so much the birth of a baby, as important as that
is, but what’s so significant about the birth of that particular baby is that
in this birth we have the incarnation of God Himself. An incarnation means a
coming in the flesh. We know how John begins His gospel, “In the beginning was
the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” So in that very
complicated introductory statement, he distinguishes between the Word and God,
and then in the next breath identifies the two, “The Word was with God, and the
Word was God.” And then at the end of the prologue, he says, “And the Word
became flesh and dwelt among us.” Now in this “infleshment,” if you will, of
Christ appearing on this planet, it’s not that God suddenly changes through a
metamorphosis into a man, so that the divine nature sort of passes out of
existence or comes into a new form of fleshiness. No, the incarnation is not so
much a subtraction as it is an addition, where the eternal second person of the
Trinity takes upon Himself a human nature and joins His divine nature to that
human nature for the purpose of redemption.
William Lane Craig’s model for understanding the doctrine of Incarnation
is valuable:2
I suggested a
model for understanding the doctrine of the incarnation that allows us to
affirm the deity and humanity of Christ in a logically coherent way that is
also biblically faithful. This model involved, as you recall, three planks.
First, that we affirm with the Council of Chalcedon that Christ has two
complete natures – human and divine. Secondly, that the soul of the human
nature – that body/soul composite that was Jesus of Nazareth – was the second
person of the Trinity; it was the Logos. In uniting with the flesh, the Logos
brought to the flesh everything needed to complete the human nature and to make
it a genuine human being. And then, thirdly, I suggested that we think of the
divine elements of Jesus’ consciousness as being largely subliminal during the
time of his earthly sojourn. Although on occasion it may have surfaced in
consciousness in different ways, for the most part we think of Jesus as having
an ordinary human consciousness just like any other human being, and that
enables us to explain his growth in wisdom and knowledge, his ignorance of
certain facts, the ability of Jesus to feel genuine temptation, the anxieties
and struggles that he experienced in life, his need for spiritual discipline
and reliance upon his heavenly Father, his prayer life, the struggles in
Gethsemane, and so forth. It gives us a realistic portrait of Jesus as we read
about him in the Gospels, and yet he was also very much aware of who he was and
the divine identity that he possessed at the same time.
The
Incarnation was necessary.
Thomas
Aquinas emphasizes that the Incarnation, a consequence to the human fall, was
necessary for God to communicate HIMSELF
in the highest manner to HIS creation, namely man.:3
Article 1. Whether it was fitting that God
should become incarnate?
Objection 1. It
would seem that it was not fitting for God to become incarnate. Since God from
all eternity is the very essence of goodness, it was best for Him to be as He
had been from all eternity. But from all eternity He had been without flesh.
Therefore it was most fitting for Him not to be united to flesh. Therefore it
was not fitting for God to become incarnate…
…On the
contrary, It would seem most fitting that by visible things the invisible
things of God should be made known; for to this end was the whole world made,
as is clear from the word of the Apostle (Romans 1:20): "For the invisible
things of God . . . are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are
made." But, as Damascene says (De Fide Orth. iii, 1), by the mystery of
Incarnation are made known at once the goodness, the wisdom, the justice, and
the power or might of God—"His goodness, for He did not despise the
weakness of His own handiwork; His justice, since, on man's defeat, He caused
the tyrant to be overcome by none other than man, and yet He did not snatch men
forcibly from death; His wisdom, for He found a suitable discharge for a most
heavy debt; His power, or infinite might, for there is nothing greater than for
God to become incarnate . . ."
…To each
things, that is befitting which belongs to it by reason of its very nature;
thus, to reason befits man, since this belongs to him because he is of a
rational nature. But the very nature of God is goodness, as is clear from
Dionysius (Div. Nom. i). Hence, what belongs to the essence of goodness befits
God. But it belongs to the essence of goodness to communicate itself to others,
as is plain from Dionysius (Div. Nom. iv). Hence it belongs to the essence of
the highest good to communicate itself in the highest manner to the creature,
and this is brought about chiefly by "His so joining created nature to
Himself that one Person is made up of these three—the Word, a soul and
flesh," as Augustine says (De Trin. xiii). Hence it is manifest that it
was fitting that God should become incarnate.
Article 3. Whether, if man had not sinned,
God would have become incarnate?
Objection 1. It would seem that if man
had not sinned, God would still have become incarnate. For the cause remaining,
the effect also remains. But as Augustine says (De Trin. xiii, 17): "Many
other things are to be considered in Incarnation of Christ besides absolution
from sin";…Therefore if man had not sinned, God would have become incarnate…
On the
contrary, Augustine says (De Verb. Apost. viii, 2), expounding what is set down
in Luke 19:10, "For the Son of Man is come to seek and to save that which
was lost"; "Therefore, if man had not sinned, the Son of Man would
not have come." And on 1 Timothy 1:15, "Christ Jesus came into this
world to save sinners," a gloss says, "There was no cause of Christ's
coming into the world, except to save sinners. Take away diseases, take away
wounds, and there is no need of medicine."
…There are
different opinions about this question. For some say that even if man had not
sinned, the Son of Man would have become incarnate. Others assert the contrary,
and seemingly our assent ought rather to be given to this opinion.
For such
things as spring from God's will, and beyond the creature's due, can be made
known to us only through being revealed in the Sacred Scripture, in which the
Divine Will is made known to us. Hence, since everywhere in the Sacred
Scripture the sin of the first man is assigned as the reason of Incarnation, it
is more in accordance with this to say that the work of Incarnation was
ordained by God as a remedy for sin; so that, had sin not existed, Incarnation
would not have been. And yet the power of God is not limited to this; even had
sin not existed, God could have become incarnate.
Endnotes:
1https://www.ligonier.org/blog/incarnation-what-we-celebrate-christmas/
2https://www.reasonablefaith.org/podcasts/defenders-podcast-series-2/s2-doctrine-of-christ/doctrine-of-christ-part-8/
3http://www.newadvent.org/summa/4001.htm#article3
Websites last
accessed on 30th November 2019.
