The Fundamentals: Volume 1, Chapter 2: The Deity of Christ

8/20/2019 The Fundamentals: Volume 1, Chapter 2: The Deity of Christ

1/8

CHAPTER II.

THE DEITY OF CHRIST.

BY PROF. BENJAMIN B. WARFIELD, D. D., LL. D.,

PRINCETON THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY.

A recent writer has remarked that our assured conviction

of the deity of Christ rests, not upon proof-texts or passages,

nor upon old arguments drawn from these, but upon the general

fact of the whole manifestation of Jesus Christ, and of the whole

impression left by Him upon the world. The · antithesis is

too absolute, and possibly betrays an unwarranted distrust of

the evidence of Scripture. To make it just, we should read

the statement rather thus: Our conviction of the deity of

Christ rests not alone on the scriptural passages which assert

it, but also on His entire impression on the world; or perhaps

thus : Our conviction rests not more on· the scriptural asser

tions than upon His entire manifestation. Both lines of evi

dence are valid; and when twisted together form an unbreak

able cord. The proof-texts and passages do prove that Jesus

was esteemed divine by those who companied with Him; that

He esteemed Himself divine; that He was recognized as divine

by those who were taught by the Spirit; that, in fine, He was

divine. But over and above this Biblical evidence the impres

sion Jesus has left upon the world bears independent testimony

to His deity, and it may well be that to many minds this will

seem the most conclusive of all its evidences. It certainly is

very cogent and impressive.

EXPERIENCE AS PROOF.

The justification which the author we have just quoted

gives of his neglecting the scriptural evidence in favor of that

borne by Jesus' impression on the world is also open to criti

cism.

]

esus Christ, he tells us, is one of those essential

21


2/8

22

The Fit 1tdame1itai s

truths which are too great to be proved, 'like God, o,r ,freedor11,

or immortality.'' Such things rest, it seems, not on proofs

but on experience. We need not stop to point out that this

experience is. itself a proof. We wish rather to point out that

some confusion seems to have been fallen

into here

between

our ability to marshal the prfby which we are convinced

and our accessibility to its force. It is quite true that ''the

most essential conclus ·i,0

1

ns

of the h'uman

mind a:re m'u

1

cl1

wider ,

and stronger than the ar guments

by

which they are sup

ported;'' that

the

proofs '

1

'are always changing but the

beliefs

per sist. But this is not because the conclusions in question

rest on no sound proofs ; but because we have not had the

•

skill to adduce, in our argumentative presentations of them, the

rea lly fundamental proofs on which

they

rest.

UNCONSCIOUS RATIONALITY.

A man recognizes on sight the face of

his

friend, or his

own handwriting. Ask him how he knows this face to be that

of his

friend,

or this h.andwriting t.o be his own, , and

he ii

dumb, or, seeking to reply, babbles nonsense. Yet his recog

nition re sts 11 solid grounds, th

1

ough

he lacks analyti ,cal skill

to isolate a11dstate these solid grounds. We

believe

in God

and f1~eedom and immortality on good

gr ,ou·nds,

though we

may not be able satisfactorily to analyse these grounds. No

true conviction exists with .out adequate rational

grot1ndina

in

evidence. So, if we are solidly assured of the

deity

of Christ,

it

will be on ade ,quate

grounds, appealing to

the

reason.

But

it may well be on

grounds

n

1

ot analysed, perhaps not analysable,

15y

s, so as to exhib .it

themselves ,in

the forms

of

formal

logic.

We ,

do

not need to wait to , analyse the grounds , of o,ur

convictions before they operate to pr ,oduce convictions, any

more than we need to

wait

to analy se our f,ood

'before

it

nour

ishes us ; and we can soundly

believe

on evidence much mixed

with error, just as we can thrive on food far from pure. The

alchemy of

th.e

mind,

as

of the

digestive

tract,

knows

how

to

-


3/8

T/1eDeity of Christ

23

sepa ,rate out from the mas ,s what it requires f

1

or its support;

and as we may live with

1

out any lcnowled.ge of chemistry, so

we may possess earnest convictions, solidly founded in right

rea.son, with out

the : ,slighte :st knowled·ge

of

logi,c.

The

Chris ·

tian's

conviction of the deity of his Lord does not depend for

its soun dness on the Christian's ability convincingly to state

the g ro unds of his convictio

1

n. Tl1e evidence he offers for it

may be wholly inadequa ·te, while the ev·i.dence on which it. ,

res.ts

may be absolutely compelling.

•

TESTI .MONY IN SOLUTION.

The very abundance and per sua siveness of

the

evidence

of

the deity of Christ greatly incr eases the difficulty of ad:equate ly

sta tin g it . This i.s true even of the scrip tural evidence, as pre

cise and defin.ite as much of it is,~ For it is a ~rue reinark of

Dr. Dale's that

the particular texts

in

which

it

is

definitely

ass,ert led are ,far from the w h

1

ol,e,

0

1

r even th ,e m

1

0 ,s.t im-

pressive, proof s which the Sc rjptures supp ly of ou·r Lord's

deity.

He

compares th ese text s to the sa lt-crystals which

appear

on the sand of the sea-beach after the

tid ·e

has receded.

''These are not, he rema rk s, ''the stronges t, though they may

· 'be the most ap,parent, proofs that the sea is salt; tl1e salt is

present in

solution

in every bucket of sea -water .' ' The deity

of Chri st is in soluti on in every page of the New Testament.

Every word that is spoken of Him, every word which He is

reporte ·d to have s,pok

1

en of Hims lelf, i,s spoken , O'n the , ass

1

ump- ,

tion

that He

is God.

And

that is

the rea son why the ''criti

cism'' which addresses it self to eliminating the testimony of

the

New Testament to the deity of

our Lord

has

set itself a

ho

1

P

1

elcss t,ask. T;he New Te stame ,nt i·tse 'lf would . have to be

eliminated. Nor can we ge t behind this testimony. Because

the deity of Christ is the presupposition of every word of the

New Testament, it is impossible to select words

out of

the

New Testament from whicl1 to

1

constru ,c.t earlier

d,ocuments

in

which the deity of Christ shall not be assumed. The assured

•

•


4/8

•

•

24

•

The Fundamentals.

conviction of the deity of Christ

is

coeval with Ch·ristianity

it

self. There never wa s a Christianity, neither in the times o·f

the Apostles nor since, of which this was not a prime tenet.

A SATURATED

1

GOSPEL.

Let us obs,erve i·n an example or two how thoroitghly satu

rated

the

Gos .pel narrat .ive is with the ass11mption

of

the deity

of Christ, so that

it

crop .s

1

out in the n10

1

st une ,xpected ·ways and

places. ·

In three

p

1

assages . of Matthew,

re,porting

words .

of

Jesus

He is r·epresented as sp

1

eaking familiarly a·n,d. in th ,e tnos .t.

natural manner in the wor1d, of His angels'' ( 13 :41; 16 :27;

24 :31). In all three He designates Hims

1

elf as the ''Son of

man'' '; .and in all thre ,e th

1

ere are additional suggestions of His

maje sty . ''The

S

on of man shall send forth

His

angels, and

they shall gather out of His

kingdom

all things that

cause

stumbling a'nd tho ,se that do ·iniquity, and shal : cast tl1em into

the furnace of fire."

Who is this Son of man who has an .gels., by whose instru

mentality the final judgment is executed at His comman

1

d

1

?

''Th ,e Son of man shall come in the · glory of His Fath

1

er with

His angels ; and then shall He reward every man

according

to

his dee,ds.' ' Who , is this Son of mlan surroun ,de .

by

His

1

an-

ge ·ts, in whos ,e

hands

are

the

issues of life? The S

1

on. of man

"'shall send forth His angels with a gr ·eat sottnd of a trumpet,

and they shall

gather

t-0gether

His

elect from the four winds,

•

fro ·m one end of heaven to· the other.'' Who is this ,Son of

man at whose behe st His angels winn ,ow men? A scrutiny

of the

passages

will

sho

1

w th.at it is not

a

peculiar body of

angels which is meant

b y

tl1e

S

on.

1

of man's an

1

g

1

els,

b,ut

j ·u,st

tl1e angels as a body, who are His to serve Him as He com

mand s. In a word, Je sus. Chri st is above angels (Mark 13 :32)

.. ,as is ·ar .gue ,d at explicit length at th·e b.eginnin .g of the Ep ·istle

to the HelJrews. ' 'To wl1ich of the ang

1

els said he at any tim

1

e,

Sit

on

my

right hand, etc.'' (Heb. 1 :13) .

•


5/8

Th e Dei ty of

Christ

25

HEAVEN C0ME TO EARTH.

There are thre ·e parables ] recorded in the fi·fteenth chapter

of Luke as spoken by our Lord 'in His d

1

ef ence against the

murmurs of the

Pharisees

at His

receiving sinners and

eating

with

them.

The

essence of the

def1nc:e

w'hich ·our

Lord off

1

rs

for Himself is,

that

there is joy in heaven

over

repentant sin

ners . Why ''in heaven,'' ''before the

t'hro11e

of God''? Is H

1

e

merely setting the judgment of heaven over against that of

earth,

Or pointing ,

forw ,ard

to His

fu ture

vi,ndic.ation?

By

no

means. He is representing His action in receiving sinners, in

seeking the lost, a·s His

proper

action,

becau s,e

it is the normal

conduct of heav

1

en, manifested in Himo lie is heaven come

to earth. His defence is thus simply the unveiling of what th ,e

re ,al

nat ·ure

of th

1

e transaction is. The lost when

the y

c,om,e

to

Him

aTe received · becau se

this

is

heaven' s

way;

and

He

can-

_not act othe.,wise than in heaven's

way.

He ta,citly assumes

the good

Shepherd' s

part as

His

own.

THE

UN .IQUE

POSITION ~

All th

1

e great

d,esignatio ,ns

are not so much asserte d

as as

sumed b y Him f,or Him se]f. H ,e

does

not call Hi mself a

proph ,et, though H ,e ac,cepts this designati ,on from

others:

He

places Himself above aJ] the prophets, even abo ,ve John the

greatest of the pr ,ophets, as Him to whom all t.he prophets

lool{ for ,ward. If He calls

Hims ,elf

Messiah, He fills that term,

by doin .g so, with a deeper significance , dwelling ever on the

uni ,que relation of Messiah to God as His repre sentative and

His ,Son. Nor

i,s

H e

satisfie,d

to

repre sent

Himself mer ,ely as

standing in a unique relation to

God:

He proclaims Him self

to b,e the recipient of

the

divine fulln .ess, the share r in all th.at

God has (Matt. 11 :28),, He

spe,aks

freely of

Him self indeed

as God's Oth ,er, ·the manif

1

es,t:ation of God on

ear ,th,

whom to

have seen was to have seen the Father also, and who does the

work Of Go

1

d on earth. He openly claims divine p·rerogative s-

•


6/8

26

The undamentals

the

reading

of

the

l1eart

of

man,

the forgiveness of

sins,

the

exerci se

of

all

authority in

heaven and earth. Indeed, all

that

God has and

isl

He

asserts

Him self. to have and be;

0

1

mnipo

tence, omniscience, .

perfection

belong

as

to the one so to the

other~ Not

·only

does

1

He

pe.rform

all divine

a,cts

1

;

His self

con sciousness coalesces with the ·divine cons

1

ciousness. If His

iollo ,wers lagged in

recognizing

His

deity, this

was not

be-

•

ca·u,se

He was

n,ot

God

or

did not

sufficiently manifest His

deity . It was

because

they were ·foolish and

.s.low

of

he·art

to

believe what

lay

patently before their eyes.

THE

GRE AT

PROOF.

The Scriptures give us

evidence enough,

then, that Christ

is God. But

the

Scriptures ~re far from giv·in,g us al] the

evidence we have. There is, for example, t he revo

1

lution which

Christ

has wrought

in the world.

If, indeed,

it

were asked

wha.t th ,e mo.st. convincing · pr

1

oof of the deity· of Christ

is,

p

1

er

h .aps tl1e best answer would be, just Christianity. The n,ew

life He has brought

into

the

world;

the new creation which

He has prod ·uced b.y His . life and w

1

ork in the world; here are

at

least

His

most palpable

credentials.

. -

Take

it obj ectively.

R

1

ead such a book as Harnack s

The

Expan sion

of Chr·istia·ni.ty,

or

su.ch

.an

one

as

Vo·n Dobs,c.:.utz s

Christian Life in the Primitive Church neither of

w·hi,ch

allows the d

1

eity

of Christ and then ask, .

Could

these

things

have been wro,ught by

powe·r

les.s. t·han

di.vin.e?

And then re

member that

these

things were not only wrougl1t in

that

heathen world tw,o thousand years a.go, but have been w·rought

over again

every

generation

since ;

for

Christianity

has

re.-,

conquered the world to itse1£ each generation. Think of how

t·h,e Christian proclam.ati·on

spread,

1

e,ating its way ove~

the

world like

fire

in the gr1ss of a pr.airie.

Think

how,

as

it

spread,

it transfo:rmed lives.

The thing, whether

in its objec

tive or in its subje

1

ctive asp

1

ect, w·ere incre ,dible,

bad

i·t

not

actually occurred.

Sho

1

uld

a

voyager, says Charles

Darwin,


7/8

The

De·it:y

o f

Christ.

2.7

chance to b·e on the point of shipwreck on some unknown

. coast, he will most devoutly pray

that

the

less,on

of

·th e

mis-

•

sionary

111a.y

hav,e

rea.c.hed

thus far.

The

l

1

es,,on

1

of

the

mis-

sionary is the enchanter s wand. Could this transfortning in

fluence, undiminished after tw,o, millenniums, ha·ve proceeded

from a mere man? I ·t is historically imposs.i.ble that the

,great

movement which we call Christianity, which remai·ns, unspent

a.fter all these years, could have o,riginated in a merely human

impulse ; or could represent today the working of a merely

h.u:m.an.

fo rce.

;

THE PROOF WIT-HIN.

Or

take it subjectively. Every Christian has within him

self t.he proo·f of the transforming power of Christ, and can

repeat the b]ind man s syllogism: Why herein is the marvel

that ye know not whe·nc,e H ·e is,, and

y

1

et H,e opened my eyes.

Sp ,irits are not touched to fine issues who are not fine1y

t ·O·U

1

che:d.· Shall we trust ., demands , an

1

eloque·nt reasone ·r,

the touch of our fingers, the sight of our eyes, the hearing

o·f our ear·s, and not trust our d1·epest conscio

1

usness

O·f

0ur

higher nature ~he an ,swer of consci.en, e, the flower of spirit

ua·~

gladness,

the

glow

ojf

spiritual lov,e?

To

1

deny

that s·piritual

experience is as real as

physic.al

experience is

to

slander ·the

noblest faculties of our nature.

It

is to say that one half ef

our n.a.tu·re t,ells, the truth;

and

the

otbe,r

half

ut.ters lies., .Th ,e

proposition that facts in the spiritual region are less real th.an

facts in the

pl1ysical

realm contradicts all philosophy .. The

trans f·ormed hearts of Ch.ristians, registering themselves in

gentle tempers, in noble motives, in .l.ives visibly lived under

the empire of great aspirations these are the ever-present

proofs of the

divinity

of

the Person from

w·hom

their inspira

tion is drawn.

The supreme proof to every Christian of the deity of his

Lord is then his own inner experience of the transforming

power of his Lord upon

the

heart and

life.

Not

more

surely

..

•

..


8/8

28

The Fundamentals

does he who feels the present warmth of the sun know that the

sun exists, than he who has experienced the re-creative power

of the Lord know Him to be his Lord and his God. Here

is, perhaps we may say the proper, certainly we must say the

most convincing, proof to every Christian of the deity of

Christ; a proof which he cannot escape, and to which, whether

he is capable of analysing it or drawing it out in logical state

ment or not, he cannot fail to yield hi s sincere and unassailable

conviction. Whatever else he may or may not be assured of,

he knows that his Redeemer lives. Because He lives, we shall

live als~that was the Lord s own assurance. Because we

live, He lives also-that is the ineradicable conviction of every

Christian heart.

Documents

The Fundamentals: Volume 1, Chapter 2: The Deity of Christ