Sabbath School Lesson podcast

In the centuries-old controversy over the person of Jesus, the Council of Chalcedon (A.D. 451) marked a significant milepost. Essentially, it agreed and proclaimed that Jesus Christ is fully God and fully man: “. . . we all with one voice teach that . . . our Lord Jesus Christ is one and the same God, the Same perfect in Godhead, the Same perfect in manhood, truly God and truly man, . . . [one] with the Father as to his Godhead, and . . . [one] with us as to his manhood; in all things like unto us, sin only excepted.”—Cited in Justo L. Gonzalez, A History of Christian Thought, vol. 1 (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1970), p. 390. For an assessment of the implications of the Chalcedon statement from an Adventist perspective, see Roy Adams, The Nature of Christ (Hagerstown, Md.: Review and Herald® Publishing Association, 1994), pp. 57–72. “In contemplating the incarnation of Christ in humanity, we stand baffled before an unfathomable mystery. . . . The more we reflect upon it, the more amazing does it appear. How wide is the contrast between the divinity of Christ and the helpless infant in Bethlehem’s manger! How can we span the distance between the mighty God and a helpless child? And yet the Creator of worlds, He in whom was the fullness of the Godhead bodily, was manifest in the helpless babe in the manger. Far higher than any of the angels, equal with the Father in dignity and glory, and yet wearing the garb of humanity! Divinity and humanity were mysteriously combined, and man and God became one. It is in this union that we find the hope of our fallen race.”—Ellen G. White, Signs of the Times, July 30, 1896. Discussion Questions: 1. What for you are the big issues surrounding Christ’s humanity? Why are they important for you? At the same time, why must we be careful not to be too harsh or dogmatic about the finer points of Christ’s humanity? 2. Ellen G. White says that Christ’s humanity is everything to us (see Selected Messages, vol. 1, p. 244). What did she mean? In what practical ways does the idea of Christ’s humanity affect you in your Christian walk? 3. How might we use what we have studied in this week’s lesson in our personal witness? How does the reality of Christ’s humanity touch people where they live today?

When we imagine the huge difference between God and ourselves, it is astounding to think that God would reach out to us by condescending to take on human flesh. But after He was done, most of us would have been content for Him to abandon His affinity with us and return fully to what He was before. However—and this absolutely astounds us—we learn that Jesus will forever remain in solidarity with us by retaining our nature! Consider the implications of the following passages in regard to Jesus’ eternal solidarity with us: Luke 24:36-43 Acts 1:10, 11 Acts 17:31 1 Tim. 2:5 “By His life and His death, Christ has achieved even more than recovery from the ruin wrought through sin. It was Satan’s purpose to bring about an eternal separation between God and man; but in Christ we become more closely united to God than if we had never fallen. In taking our nature, the Saviour has bound Himself to humanity by a tie that is never to be broken. Through the eternal ages He is linked with us. ‘God so loved the world . . .’ He gave Him not only to bear our sins, and to die as our sacrifice; He gave Him to the fallen race. To assure us of His immutable counsel of peace, God gave His only-begotten Son to become one of the human family, forever to retain His human nature. . . . God has adopted human nature in the person of His Son, and has carried the same into the highest heaven. It is the ‘Son of man’ who shares the throne of the universe.”—Ellen G. White, The Desire of Ages, p. 25. “Christ ascended to heaven, bearing a sanctified, holy humanity. He took this humanity with Him into the heavenly courts, and through the eternal ages He will bear it, as the One who has redeemed every human being in the city of God.”—Ellen G. White, The SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 6, p. 1054. A friend of yours, hearing about Jesus’ eternal solidarity with us, says, “That is going too far. It is too much!” What would you say to that person? And how do you feel about the fact He will be like us for eternity? However incredible a concept, what does it tell us about God’s love for humanity?

Why did God need to come into the world in human flesh? The question is important. But we should wean ourselves away from purely rational answers to it. It is not as if we need to come up with an answer that makes sense to us. There is no independent research we can do in philosophy, science, sociology, or whatever, that would lead us to an answer. Nor should we concoct our own answer. The safest way is to listen carefully to what the Bible itself reveals on this point. And in the book of Hebrews, we find some of the clearest, most intentional statements on the issue. Nor is it without significance that Hebrews also happens to be the book focusing most directly on Jesus’ present high priestly ministry in the heavenly sanctuary. Each of the following passages highlights one particular aspect of Jesus’ coming in human flesh, then proceeds to answer the implied question: Why did He do that? And in each case a reason for that particular aspect of His humiliation is given. What are those reasons? Heb. 2:9 Heb. 2:14, 15 Heb. 2:16, 17 Heb. 2:18 Heb. 4:14-16 Heb. 5:8, 9 Notice that in each case, the focus is on Jesus; and in each case, the benefit is for us. These inspired reasons for Jesus’ humanity and suffering should be taken with utter seriousness. They should bring us immense joy to know that Jesus meets us in our need; His arms are open wide for us; He knows our plight because He has been here; He has felt our pain. Can we imagine a more merciful Savior, a more understanding and compassionate High Priest? Immense joy and profound gratitude wells up in the souls of those who know that He suffered all for us. Thus encouraged, we “approach the throne of grace with confidence” (Heb. 4:16, NIV), giving ourselves to Him in complete abandon. What trials are you encountering at the moment? How does it help you to know that Jesus feels and understands your pain?

Many of His contemporaries considered Jesus an unusual person, yet they each knew Him to be a human being, a man. When the Samaritan woman rushed to her village to spread the word about the unusual Jew she just had met at the well, her announcement was straightforward: “ ‘Come, see a man’ ” (John 4:29, NIV). Hers was the universal testimony of Jesus’ contemporaries. Even after He had calmed the storm, the exclamation of those closest to Him was, “ ‘What kind of man is this?’ ” (Matt. 8:27, NIV). Howdo the following texts help support the fact that Jesus was a genuine human being of flesh and blood? Matt. 8:24 Matt. 21:18 John 4:5,6 John 4:7, 19:28 John 11:33-35 While on earth, Jesus voluntarily surrendered the independent exercise of the Divine attributes. He surrendered; He did not relinquish. The attributes remained in Him. He could have used them at any time for His own advantage, but He did not. The temptation to call on these attributes to extricate Himself from difficulty (in ways not open to us) was a major ingredient of His daily trials. It is helpful to keep in mind that the Scriptures are not definitive on every point that stirs our interest. They make no overt attempt, for example, to spell out precisely how the human and Divine components of Jesus’ nature are related. But they make it clear that Christ was one unified person. They do not discuss the technicalities of this union, limiting themselves, rather, to the clear confession that such a union did occur, that the Son made of a woman was, indeed, the Son of God (Gal. 4:4). “Christ did not make-believe take human nature; He did verily take it. He did in reality possess human nature.”—Ellen G. White, Lift Him Up, p. 74. Why is Christ’s humanity so important to us? What does it mean to us to know that Jesus became a human being? How does it encourage you to know that Jesus shared our human limitations?

As Christianity spread through the Greco-Roman world and moved into the second generation, people began to reflect on its basic message about Jesus’ person, and to raise questions: How could Divinity and humanity cohabit the same body? How could Deity become mortal? What is Jesus’ relationship to the Father? And so forth . . . Beginning in the first century, two conflicting emphases emerged. One would stress Christ’s humanity at the expense of His divinity; the other would do just the opposite. Among those denying Christ’s deity were the Ebionites, early Jewish Christians who taught that Jesus became the Son of God only at His baptism, at which time He became united with the eternal Christ, a nondivine being who could not save humanity but came, instead, to call humanity to obedience. The Arians later would take up the struggle against Christ’s divinity, beginning around the late third century, a position strongly condemned by the Council of Nicaea in A.D. 325. The heavyweights on the other side of the spectrum were the Gnostics, who taught that spirit was good and matter evil, particularly the matter that forms our body. Therefore, the human body could not serve as a vehicle for the revelation of the Supreme Being. Study 1 John 4:1–3. In what way does John’s concern relate to the Gnostic emphasis just described? The controversy over who Jesus was raged for five solid centuries, from the second century all the way down to the sixth. At first it was over His deity. Was He God? And if so, how was He related to God the Father? The questions then shifted to His humanity, and to how Divinity and humanity were combined in a single person. There were statements and counterstatements, pronouncements and counterpronouncements, accusations and condemnations and excommunications, with one “ism” after another claiming the day. Incredibly, amid all the turmoil and controversy, biblical orthodoxy in respect to Jesus’ essential nature and person ultimately prevailed. (See the quotation from the Creed of Chalcedon in Friday’s lesson.) What are some of the questions in the church today about the human nature of Christ? Why must we be careful not to let these questions divide us, as they often did the early church?

Last week’s lesson spoke about the mystery of Christ’s deity. But as we contemplate His humanity, we stand also in the presence of a profound mystery. As Paul expressed it: “Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great: He [Jesus] appeared in a body, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory” (1 Tim. 3:16, NIV). One scholar makes the point that the claim that the founder of Christianity was Divine was not a big shock in the Roman world; after all, their emperors routinely claimed divinity. But the claim that “the Christian God was concerned about humanity; concerned enough to suffer in its behalf. This was unheard of.”—Huston Smith, The Illustrated World’s Religions (New York: HarperCollins, 1986), p. 219. But however strange to the Greco-Roman world, that, precisely, was the testimony of the New Testament. What do the following passages teach about this amazing condescension? Matt. 1:18-24 Luke 1: 26-35 John 1:1, 14 Gal. 4:4 Phil. 2:5-11 It is fascinating to watch the unstudied precision with which the New Testament writers approach the issue of Christ’s humanity. Matter-of-fact and straightforward, they simply tell the story, with no knowledge (perhaps) of the firestorm that would follow in succeeding centuries. But it is precisely the absence of any posturing that helps give credibility to the documents that we have. It is not as if the earliest disciples faced no controversy in regard to the nature and identity of Jesus; they did, as we see in the New Testament itself. But their arguments in regard to Jesus’ person clearly were not designed to counter the position of rationalistic or scientific opponents, which gives an unspoiled freshness to their witness. It was as though they argued their case out of surprise that anyone would dare to doubt the uncommon mystery that had affected them so dramatically, both corporately and personally.

Memory Text: “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us” (John 1:14, NIV). In the New Testament, without any rationalistic explanations whatsoever, Jesus Christ is presented as both human and Divine. After beginning his Gospel with the Word who is God (John 1:1), John makes the extraordinary declaration that this same Word, this same God, “became flesh and made his dwelling among us” (vs. 14, NIV). And perhaps anticipating future concerns about moral contamination, the New Testament maintains the sinless life of Jesus with unequivocal consistency (Heb. 7:26, 1 Pet. 2:22). Moreover, the writers of the New Testament matter-of-factly regard Jesus as a proper object of worship and veneration (Acts 7:59, Rom. 9:5, Heb. 1:6). These earliest Christians were not detained by the philosophical problems inherent in the concept of the God-man or by the difficulties it would pose for later thinkers. “The humanity of the Son of God is everything to us. . . . When we approach this subject, we would do well to heed the words spoken by Christ to Moses at the burning bush, ‘Put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground’ (Exod. 3:5). We should come to this study with the humility of a learner.”—Ellen G. White, Selected Messages, book 1, p. 244.

Further Study: On the issue of Jesus’ identity, read Ellen G. White, “Is Not This the Carpenter’s Son?” pp. 236–243, in The Desire of Ages. “Who is this Jesus? they questioned. He who had claimed for Himself the glory of the Messiah was the son of a carpenter, and had worked at His trade with His father Joseph. They had seen Him toiling up and down the hills, they were acquainted with His brothers and sisters. . . . They had seen Him develop from childhood to youth, and from youth to manhood. Although His life had been spotless, they would not believe that He was the Promised One.”—Ellen G. White, The Desire of Ages, p. 237. “They would not admit that He who had sprung from poverty and lowliness was other than a common man.”—Page 239. “A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic . . . or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God; or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronising nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”—C. S. Lewis, “The Shocking Alternative,” p. 56, in Mere Christianity (New York: McMillan-Collier, 1960). Discussion Questions: l What makes it easier for us, we who live two thousand years after Jesus, to accept Him as the Messiah, than it was for those who lived at the same time as Jesus to accept Him? What makes it more difficult? l Skepticism about Jesus is likely to continue as long as time shall last. What, for you, is the single most convincing evidence of the validity of Jesus and His saving grace? How could you share this evidence with others in a way that could help convince them as well? l We looked this week at how the scientific rationalism of the Enlightenment had been used as a weapon against faith. What are some other types of “isms,” or philosophies or ideologies, prevalent in your own culture that work against faith, as well? Most important, how can you meet these challenges? lAs a class, go back over 1 Corinthians 1:18–27. What message is Paul giving that is important for all of us to remember?

Messiah, Son of God (John 17:3) Who Jesus was is not simply a theological proposition to be proved or disproved. No, we are dealing here with the faith of untold numbers over the centuries. If Jesus is not what they have believed Him to be, then they have all been clinging to falsehood and fables and are all lost. If Jesus was simply a man who lived two thousand years ago in Palestine, then the Christian church has been involved in the most reprehensible hoax in the history of the world. How do the following texts get at the heart of the issue? _M__a_tt_._ 1__:_2_2_,_ 2__3_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ________________________ _M__a_tt_._ 1__1_:_2_–_6_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _________________________ _M__a_tt_._ 2__2_:_4_1_–_4__5_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _______________________ _M__a_r_k_1__4_:_6_1_–_6__4_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _______________________ J__o_h_n_ _2_0_:_2_6__–_2_8_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _______________________ The reaction of the disciples as they witnessed the miracle of the calming of the storm (Matt. 8:23–27) should be ours, as well: “ ‘What kind of man is this? Even the winds and the waves obey him!’ ” (vs. 27, NIV). The night of His arrest, the high priest put a direct question to Jesus and charged Him to answer under oath: “ ‘Tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God.’ ‘Yes, it is as you say,’ Jesus replied” (Matt. 26:63, 64, NIV). And in Pilate’s judgment hall, the governor had his own query: “ ‘Are you the king of the Jews?’ ” Jesus’ response was the same: “ ‘Yes, it is as you say’ ” (Matt. 27:11, NIV). By any measure, these were two extraordinary responses. If Jesus, only the son (as was believed) of a humble carpenter from Nazareth, could have the boldness to answer yes to Pilate’s question about kingship, He obviously was thinking of realities that transcend this world. And that is what we saw in His response in the high priest’s palace: “ ‘In the future you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven’ ” (Matt. 26:64, NIV). Thus, the Gospels (and the rest of the New Testament) make it clear: In Jesus we have in human flesh the Son of the Living God, the One entitled to extend the exceptional invitation, “ ‘Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest’ ” (Matt. 11:28, NIV).

The Fascination Continues: Part 2 The so-called Historical Jesus movement was founded on the belief that we still can find in the Gospels sufficient data to reconstruct the portrait of Jesus as a historical figure, notwithstanding the theological tampering by the early church (as alleged by Enlightenment thinking). The new approach to studying Jesus was seen by its advocates as scientific, and thus in keeping with the mood of the times. The trend held sway until the twentieth century, when new studies helped undermine this whole movement, showing how this historical Jesus idea was utterly unscientific and subjective. Studies exposed the entire rationalistic enterprise as a miserable failure. The history of Jesus studies are long, winding, and complicated; and they need not detain us further, except to mention the so-called Jesus Seminar, a contemporary group of radical scholars determined to succeed where other historical quests before them failed. Their goal is to "'rescue Jesus from the spin doctors' who wrote the Gospels"—Roy Hoover, in Kenneth L. Woodward, "The Death of Jesus," Newsweek, April 4, 1994, p. 39. Few today take the Jesus Seminar people seriously. (After all, how seriously can you take people who argued that instead of being resurrected, Jesus, after His death, was eaten by dogs?) Today, the prevailing Christian position insists that Christianity stands on a firm, historical foundation. Notwithstanding two millennia of criticism and controversy, Jesus remains the undisputed Master of the centuries. In one of his most penetrating rejoinders to the intellectual sophisticates of his day, Paul zeroed in on the essence of the Christian proclamation: "For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God" (1 Cor. 1:18, NIV). Why is the message of the Cross so important for us today, as well? Read also 1 Corinthians 1:18-27. What message is there for us in those verses? What are some of the things we believe that just cannot be explained by the "wisdom of the world" (vs. 20, NIV)? In what ways has "God made foolish the wisdom of the world" (vs. 20, NIV)?

The New Testament does not speculate about Jesus. It simply presents Him as the divine Son of God. Nor does it answer the numerous concerns about Jesus' being and person that would occupy succeeding generations. Yet, in all the discussions and arguments, there was a rock-bottom acceptance of the centrality of Scripture and the basic identity of Jesus Christ. But the so-called Age of Enlightenment (of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries) would change all that. No longer would Scripture constitute the foundation of discourse about Jesus. Instead, new methods and criteria being applied to the study of other ancient documents also would be applied to the Bible. With everything now subject to rational analysis and criticism, supernaturalism, a foundational presupposition of biblical faith, was rejected. The traditional biblical view of a human race steeped in sin and needing Divine rescue was replaced by humanism, an optimistic belief in human capacity and progress. The change of outlook was so radical and far-reaching that many thought they were witnessing the end of Christianity. Religion was considered obsolete, and reason, once the handmaid of theology, became its acknowledged mistress. The result was that the focus now shifted from the Jesus described in the Gospels, the Jesus of our salvation, to the historical Jesus, supposedly the real Jesus as He actually existed without the theological baggage superimposed by the Gospels and later Christian piety. In other words, this Jesus, whoever He was, surely was not the Savior of the world. As you reflect on these developments, consider the following: (1) The Gospel writers were very confident in the truth of what they had written (see Luke 1:1-4). What does Luke say about what he is writing? Why can we trust it? (2) One of those eyewitnesses that Luke speaks about was Peter, who himself had to confront doubters and skeptics (see 2 Pet. 1:16-21). Though Peter is speaking here about issues wider than the single one about Jesus' identity, how might we use his approach to secure ourselves against the Enlightenment onslaught we are discussing here? (3) Paul also needed to address the issue of Jesus head-on. How did he argue the case? (See 1 Cor. 1:18-27, 15:3-7.)

Not Elijah or Jeremiah or Some Other Prophet Read again Matthew 16:14. That people should mistake Jesus for John is one thing. But for Elijah? Or Jeremiah? Or some other Old Testament prophet? Where did such ideas come from? Elijah was the fearless prophet of Mount Carmel fame, the firebrand who had the temerity to confront Israel's recalcitrant king and demonic wife. He was the one who held forth alone against the combined religious establishment in Ahab's corrupt regime (see 1 Kings 18). Jeremiah ("the weeping prophet"), coming upon the scene at a time of intense national ferment and crisis, conveyed a message to his compatriots that could not have been more unwelcome to the national mood—and he paid for it, too (Jer. 20:1, 2, 7, 8). As for the rest of God's faithful prophets in the Old Testament, Jesus in His scathing woes upon the scribes and Pharisees left Israel's treatment of these godly stalwarts for the last, as if to suggest that it was the central point He wished to make: "So you testify against yourselves that you are the descendants of those who murdered the prophets" (Matt. 23:31, NIV). What significance do you see in the fact that Jesus' contemporaries identified Him with these particular personalities? To have been mistaken for any of the characters included in Peter's response in Matthew 16:14 was clearly a high compliment. These were spiritual giants whose sterling character held deep resonance in Jewish society. But however flattering, such comparisons (as we have come to know) fell utterly short of truth. If Jeremiah had said, for instance, that he was the light of the world, history would have considered him demented. And however spectacular the victory on Carmel, had Jesus quailed in the face of threat, as did the ancient hero of Carmel, we now would not be falling at His feet in reverence. The confusion of Jesus with these ancient stalwarts, however gratifying and intriguing, falls completely short of the reality portrayed in the Gospels. What is the main difference between Jesus and all these other prophets, and why is that difference so important to us? (See John 1:1-5, 17:5; Heb. 1:1-3.)

Not the Baptist (Matt. 16:14) The question raised by Jesus' own townsfolk (Matt. 13:54, 55) came up repeatedly during His public ministry, and in a variety of ways, as people in the different areas of Palestine encountered Him. Thus, as He went through the region of Caesarea Philippi with His disciples, some six months or so before the final showdown of His life, He felt the need to draw them out on the critical question of the day: "Who do people say the Son of Man is?" (Matt. 16:13, NIV). Read the disciples' response in Matthew 16:14. What does this say about their familiarity with the theological questions of the day? Why do you think Jesus wanted to bring up this issue at this specific time? The report on what people were saying about Jesus probably provides insight into how different individuals and groups experienced His ministry in their own setting. How was it possible for some to think that Jesus could be John the Baptist when the two were contemporaries? And what aspects of Jesus' ministry may have resembled that of the Baptist? For possible answers, consider the following passages: Matt. 3:1-3; 4:12, 13, 17; 14:1, 2; Mark 1:1-5. Today, of course, we hardly can understand how it was possible to confuse Jesus with John the Baptist. But given the absence of mass communication in the first century and the abundance of secondhand information and rumor, confusion came easy. After all, the ministries of John and Jesus were not without parallels, as the passages above show. But those who actually encountered John should have been left with no uncertainty (Matt. 3:11, 12; Mark 1:6-8). It is easy to look back at the mistakes of others and wonder how they could have done what they did. What lessons can we learn from watching these mistakes that can help protect us from making the same kinds of mistakes?

SABBATH AFTERNOON Read for This Week's Study: Matt. 16:13-16, John 20:26-28, 1 Cor. 1:18-27, 15:3-7. Memory Text: "When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, 'Who do people say the Son of Man is?'" (Matthew 16:13, NIV). From the earliest days of His ministry, there was discussion and debate about Jesus. How interesting that those discussions continue, even today. They began with the people of His own times and from His own town. "'Where did this man get this wisdom and these miraculous powers?' they asked. 'Isn't this the carpenter's son? Isn't his mother's name Mary. . .?'" (Matt. 13:54, 55, NIV). It is what might be called the scandal of the particular: The Messiah had to come from somewhere, all right, but not from a place so familiar to us, and certainly not from a family that is just like the rest of ours! In one form or another, the same fundamental concerns expressed by these local townspeople concerning His identity have framed the debate about Jesus across the centuries, heightening the mystique around Him. Who, indeed, was Jesus? Why was He confused with other prominent Jewish characters? What were the challenges to Jesus' integrity and identity in the centuries following the New Testament era? How convinced were the Bible writers of His identity, and why? These are some of the questions that our first week's lesson will examine.