Truth Unites - Was God the Son Omnipresent in 10 A.D.?

Episode Date: December 21, 2023

In this video Gavin Ortlund discusses the meaning of the incarnation, particularly the so-called extra Calvinisticum. For more on the author-story analogy (Tolkien writing himself into The Lord of the Rings): https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/moth.12308 Truth Unites exists to promote gospel assurance through theological depth. Gavin Ortlund (PhD, Fuller Theological Seminary) serves as senior pastor of First Baptist Church of Ojai. SUPPORT: Tax Deductible Support: https://truthunites.org/donate/ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/truthunites FOLLOW: Twitter: https://twitter.com/gavinortlund Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TruthUnitesPage/ Website: https://truthunites.org/

Merry Christmas, everybody. It's a different background because we're in the midst of a move. You could pray for us as we're making our way to Tennessee. My office is a total mess right now. So a few videos will look a little different in the background. But I want to talk about the incarnation, which is what we celebrate this time of year at Christmas, and it means the Son of God became a man. The question we can ask is, was the Son of God omnipresent, meaning everywhere, in the year 10 AD? Kind of an interesting question if you think about it. I think this is one of those aspects of the incarnation. sometimes we haven't thought about, and it's really beautiful to consider. So really quickly, I want to address this in this video.

Here's a way to pose the question. Not only do we know that the son of God, like the Father and the Spirit, along with the first and third members of the Godhead, is omnipresent, but also we're told in Hebrews 1-3 that he upholds the universe by the word of his power, and in Colossians 1-15, that in him all things hold together. So the incarnation poses this question. was that still happening in the year 10 AD when Jesus is walking around Nazareth or when he's a baby, sleeping in Mary's arms in the manger, is he still doing Hebrews 1-3 and Colossians 115 and so forth,

or is there like a break in that for 30 years during the incarnation? According to what we call the extra Calvinisticum, which I'll explain in a moment, the answer is yes. God becomes a man without ceasing to be God, and therefore the incarnate son of God was not limited to his human flesh. He continued to fill the highest heavens and uphold the universe by the word of his power. It's just so wonderful to think about. He's a baby, and yet he's keeping and preserving every star. So three questions about that, because that's pretty tough to wrap your mind around. So let's try to make sense of it. Three questions. First, what that means? Second, how it makes sense,

and third, why it matters. First, what does that mean? So Extra Calvinisticum is just a Latin phrase, Calvinisticum means calvins and extra means outside or beyond. So Calvin's beyond. This is a doctrine that comes up in the 16th and 17th century debates between the Lutherans and the reformed theologians about how Christ is present during the Lord's supper. Some of the Lutherans had concerns about John Calvin's teaching that the Son of God retained existence beyond his flesh. Here's what he had written in the institutes. The Son of God descended from heaven in such a way that without leaving He willed to be born in the Virgin's womb, to go about the earth, to hang upon the cross, yet he continuously filled the world even as he had done from the beginning.

One thing to say, though, is that even though the term extra Calvinism associates this with Calvin, and it kind of comes up in those disputes, 16th century, 17th century, this is an ancient doctrine, I would argue. You see it in Athanasius. One of the classic texts treating this calls it the extra Catholicum to show that it's a Catholic doctrine, not just Calvinistic. And basically, I'll give one example. There's a few others, Athanasius. The word was not hedged in by his body,

nor did his presence in the body, prevent his being present elsewhere as well. When he moved his body, he did not cease also to direct the universe by his mind and might. At one and the same time, this is the wonder. As man, he was living a human life, and as word, he was sustaining the life of the universe. And as son, he was in constant union with the father.

So the important thing to note there is that Athanasius emphasizes not merely omnipresence. It's not just that he's outside of the body. You know, that's not really the point only. It's his role as the sustainer and director of the universe. It's his full deity. Same with Calvin. If you read through Calvin's sermons and Calvin's commentaries, he emphasizes not just the spatial character of the extra,

but its implication for Christ's governance of the world, his mediatorship over angels. And so the important point is basically the Son of God remains fully divine with all that that entails even during the incarnation, even during the death of Jesus. Okay, second question, how in the world does that make sense? I mean, two immediate questions might leap to mind. The first thing you might wonder about is, is this irrational? How does that not violate the law of non-contradiction? Because you're saying Christ is both finite and infinite at the same time. You know, he's both localized and omnipresent. How does that make sense logically? Second, you might wonder about that in terms of Chalcedonian Christology. You might

worry this would lead to the old Nestorian error of separating the human and divine natures of Christ, because you have a Christ who's both finite and infinite. And the answer here has to do with the creator-creation relationship and basically the qualitative difference between them. So here's metaphor that's helped me understand this. And I link to an article in the video description in which I developed this if you're interested. Suppose that Tolkien had written himself into the Lord of the Rings as a character in the story and he's walking around with Gandalf and Frodo and all the others. Now he would not, for that reason, cease to exist in Oxford. In fact, his existence in Middle Earth would depend upon his existence and his continued writing in Oxford. Nor is it clear that

the unity of his person or the laws of logic would be violated by such a situation. Because Middle Earth and Oxford are not just two different places in one world, like Chicago and New York, but rather two different worlds altogether. Now, this is just a metaphor, but this is a way of getting into the Creator- Creation relationship and what's happening with the incarnation, because the relationship between God and creation is much more like Oxford to Middle Earth than Chicago to New York. So if you're picturing Tolkien walking around the shire while he's still at his Oxford desk, this might be one way to start to get progress in conceptualizing. How can this be that the Son of God is a local, finite, fully human person while at the very

same time sustaining the universe, filling the highest heavens, etc.? Okay, third question. Why does this matter? And I'd basically say there is a Chalcedonian concern that undergirds, the extra. Okay, so basically I would say, first of all, it protects the full deity of Christ. That's the most obvious thing. If you have a son of, if the son of God somehow loses or sheds his deity, that's a problem. Deity is not the kind of thing that can be discarded. Part of the very qualities of deity is immutability, which means you don't change. You can't

cease to be God. That's the most obvious thing. But the second thing is that the extra Calvinisticum protects Christ's full humanity. because it reduces the temptation to divinize Christ's human nature in various ways. One example would be there's been lots of people who have posited the ubiquity of Christ's human flesh. Or sometimes you'll get this idea of a communication of attributes between the divine nature and the human nature of Christ. And this comes up, for example, in discussions of the Lord's Supper and how it is that the flesh of Christ can be present in the elements. With the extra Calvinisticum, it's easier to see how you can have a genuine localized humanity. that remains so even after Christ's ascension to heaven,

because Christ remains a human being, and he will. His human nature is never going away. This is discussed a little bit, but most theologians think Christ will remain human for all eternity. Kind of amazing thought there. So the extra Calvinisticum has this emphasis upon the distinctness of the human and the divine nature. And what it helps us to do is to envision the incarnation as an addition not a subtraction. The Son of God, don't think of it like this. The Son of God shrinks down, leaving behind deity down to become a tiny embryo in Mary's womb, leaving His Divine Majesty behind him.

Now the angels don't have him as their head anymore. On the contrary, he adds or takes on or assumes a human nature. And there's different verbs that are discussed in relation to that. But it's not a subtraction. He comes to us fully, as a genuine human being, wow. remaining God. There's a really helpful older study of the extra that summarizes its significance in this way. The incarnation was not the Eternal Son's abdication of his universal empire, but the reassertion of that empire over rebellious creation. More basically, and to recalibrate our hearts to this at Christmastime, the extra Calvinisticum helps us marvel at just the wonder of what we celebrate at Christmas. The incarnation, I've

often thought like this, that the incarnation is such a unique event. You could almost put it like this. The incarnation is to other miracles, what miracles are to natural law. It's like this complete standout event that organizes how you view everything else. The incarnation is the miracle of miracles. Just consider it. God becomes a baby. The one who is swaddled tightly is filling the heavens. The one who's clinging to his mother is holding every atom in place. He's sustaining Mary while Mary is feeding him. He's crying for comfort. He's sleeping among the donkeys, and yet he's being worshipped by the angels.

At the same time, the baby in the manger is the Lord God. It's just wonderful to behold, and it's a great image of how our God has conquered and triumphed through humility. This Christmas, if you sing this song, it'll give new meaning to these words, or new meaning to these words, which are so beautiful, veiled in flesh. the Godhead sea, hail the incarnate deity. What a happy thought that the God we worship became a baby for us and for our salvation. So Merry Christmas, everyone. Hope that stimulates your heart to a little bit of worship and adoration. As it does mine, every time I think about it, it amazes me afresh.