I want to go ahead and open in your Bibles to Peter's first epistle. 1 Peter, I want to begin in chapter 1 this morning at verse 17. We've been looking at the incarnation of our Lord Jesus, and last week we began to look at establishing some grammar, some language by which we can describe the hypostatic union. We know that there remains a great mystery that the eternal second person of the Godhead, the eternal Son, took to himself human flesh. He, in a true sense, became man, but as we looked at last week, His becoming did not constitute a change in God. There are a number of things that sometimes it feels as if we're holding in tension. We know, for example, that God is omnipresent. And that's true of every person of the Godhead, because the Godhead is indivisible. We cannot say that the Father is omnipresent, but the Spirit or the Son are not omnipresent. We cannot, for example, say that Jesus left heaven in the sense of locomotion, in the sense of place, that he was once in heaven and that he ceased to be in heaven and he came down to earth. So those are some of the concepts we've been considering. And as we looked last week at the hypostatic union, when John says that the Word became flesh, it doesn't mean that the eternal Word, the eternal Son, transformed, like a moth becoming a caterpillar, into something that he was not. He never, even for a moment, ceased to be eternal God, the second person of the Trinity. And yet, it is true, he assumed to himself human nature. And so wherever change that is there is located in his human nature, not in His divine nature, nor is that change in His person. What we're going to do today is begin to look at what are some of the consequences of this. What are some of the consequences? I want to look, first of all, at 1 Peter, and then I'm going to turn to our confession in chapter 8, the chapter of Christ the Mediator, and consider some of the language that our fathers employed from, this is taken almost exactly word for word out of the Westminster Confession of Faith, and those words are then taken from the ancient councils and ecumenical creeds. But before we jump in, let's humble ourselves before our God and remind ourselves, as we seek his help, that we are wholly in need of divine help in order to articulate properly and accurately the things that the scriptures say about the Christ. Our goal is not to remove all mystery from the hypostatic union. We cannot do that. We ought not desire to do that. But we do need divine help to understand properly what God has given to us about Himself, about the Son, about our Mediator. So let us pray. God our Father, we are grateful that You have made Yourself known to us in Your Word. The writer of the Hebrews said that you have made yourself known in various ways, in various times, through revelation, through prophets, through dreams and visions. But in these last days, you've made yourself known in your son. And so we pray that as we meditate upon his person, the Christ, and consider his person in two natures, divine and human, that you will give to us understanding. You will help our finite minds to comprehend all that you have given to us to comprehend, and in a sense to put our hands over our mouth and not go further than what you have given to us. to confess that your thoughts are far above our thoughts, that your ways are far above our ways, that we are not able to discern the secret things that belong to the Lord Almighty alone. And yet we want to delight more and more in our Savior, our Mediator, the God-Man, who assumed to Himself our human nature for the sake of seeking and saving we who were lost, And we give you thanks for those who have been found in Him. And we pray that by your Spirit's power, many more who are not yet in Him would be added to this fold, to His fold. We ask this in Christ. Amen. In 1 Peter, Peter makes a profound statement here in chapter 1. We look at beginning in verse 14. I'm sorry, look at verse 17. If you call on him as Father, who judges impartially according to each one's deeds, conduct yourselves with fear through the time of your exile, knowing that you were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your forefathers, not with perishable things such as silver or gold, but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot. He was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but was made manifest in the last times for the sake of you who through him are believers in God, who raised him from the dead and gave him glory so that your faith and hope are in God. Now do you see here, as we read through this text, how Peter, with a sense of fluidity, works back and forth both and the divine and human natures of the person of the mediator. So when Peter says, for example, You were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your forefathers, not with perishable things such as silver or gold, but with the precious blood of Christ. He's holding two things together at the same time, things that were not made with human hands, nothing that is creaturely. We were not saved by anything creaturely. And yet, we were saved, we've been washed, we've been redeemed by means of blood. And He's not speaking there metaphorically. He's speaking actually. Our Savior had a true human body, a true human soul. And when His true human body was crucified, He bled and died. It was true blood, human blood. Like that of a lamb without blemish. But then look what He says in verse 20. He, this same Christ, who bled and died, he was foreknown before the foundation of the world." Now, he's not saying that God merely knew that Christ would come, knew before the foundation of the world that Christ would come. He's speaking about the eternality of the second person of the Trinity. That Christ is truly God, is true God, very God, light of light, God of God, from all of eternity. of the same substance, of the same essence, of the same isness of God. He was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but then was made manifest. By what means was he made manifest? He assumed to himself human flesh by virtue of the Holy Spirit overshadowing Mary and him being conceived in her womb as the God-man. With that in mind, Let's turn from there to our confession of faith in chapter eight. I want you to see the language, the kinds of words that are chosen, very carefully chosen here, to describe this reality where the eternal, transcendent, almighty God takes to himself in the person of his Son human flesh. I'm going to begin at paragraph 2. Paragraph 1 speaks of the eternal purpose of God the Father ordaining the Lord Jesus Christ as the mediator, according to a covenant made between them both. Then paragraph 2, we confess the following. The Son of God, the second person of the Holy Trinity, being very and eternal God, the brightness of the Father's glory, of one substance and equal with Him, who made the world, who upholds and governs all things He has made, did, when the fullness of time was come, take upon Him man's nature, with all the essential properties and common infirmities thereof." I'm going to read the rest of it in just a moment, but I want to maybe appeal to your memory. When we see this language, being very and eternal God, the brightness of the Father's glory, of one substance and equal with Him, do those words sound familiar? Those are taken almost word for word from the Nicene Creed. This was really the issue, wasn't it? There were others who were willing to confess that Jesus is God in some way, or that He is a God, But the fathers in the church said it is a heresy to say something less than He is true God, very God, eternal God, the brightness of the Father's glory of one substance and equal with Him. So before we think about the God-man, we have to have the God part correct. Our Lord Jesus is truly God, very God. And then we see, we confess that when the fullness of time was come, he took upon himself man's nature. Well, then the confession goes on to speak about by what means did he assume to himself human nature. He was conceived by the Holy Spirit in the womb of the Virgin Mary, the Holy Spirit coming down upon her and the power of the Most High overshadowing and so was made of a woman. So here's the uncreated one in a true sense being made. This was a supernatural conception, clearly, but a true conception. The Holy Spirit overshadows Mary. and she becomes to be with child. And through that supernatural work, there is a union of divine and human. She is a woman of this tribe of Judah, of the seed of Abraham and David, according to the scriptures. So see, here's the connection between the human King David, So that the promise made by God through David would be fulfilled. Now look what happens in these last couple of phrases. So that two whole, perfect, and distinct natures are wherein separably joined together in one person. There's an important modifier here, two whole natures. Why do you suppose that word is there? Does anyone want to take a guess? Why do you think it's important that we confess that He had two whole natures, two perfect natures, two distinct natures? The idea of whole, why is that important? He can't be half God. He can't just be God in part. But what else? Because of two natures, Why is it necessary we confess that he's wholly human? He has to be fully human. That which was not assumed cannot be redeemed. And to say he had a whole human nature, in a sense, cuts off at the pass several ancient heresies. Some that said Jesus merely appeared to be human. Some have said he was human with respect to a human body, but he had a divine soul. Others would say his humanity was merely an appearance. It was kind of a man's suit. It was not true humanity. So we're beginning to put the pieces together as we've worked through this over the last several weeks and to see why these words are chosen as they are. It's really amazing to think that such a short statement could be made. I mean, if I were to sit down from scratch and try to write these things out, I mean, I suppose it might be pages and pages and pages and never really actually get to the point. Never actually say what needs to be said. And so the brevity of language is really quite impressive. Two whole, perfect, and distinct natures were inseparably joined in one person. And here the idea of inseparability means this wasn't temporary. This wasn't that Jesus assumed a human nature for approximately 33 years, until the point of His death, and then He returned to a state of divinity. That He had left a state of divinity, existed as a man for a time, and then returned to His divine status. No. He's inseparably joined in one person, without conversion, composition, or confusion. I've mentioned those three words previously, that this is something that would be helpful even just to log in your memory, those three words. We have even the alliteration to help us, the three Cs, without conversion, composition, or confusion. And here, in very basic terms, is what we mean by this. As The eternal Second Person of the Trinity assumed to Himself a human nature. He did so without conversion. His divine nature wasn't changed into a human nature. There was no conversion. It wasn't that one thing ceased to be, or that one thing became something different. The divine nature continued to be truly, wholly, perfectly, distinctly divine. without composition. This is not the sum of parts. This is not that we take red and blue and mix them together and make purple. I heard a pastor one time that he actually took Play-Doh into the pulpit, and he took blue Play-Doh and yellow Play-Doh and he mixed them together, kneaded them together for a few minutes, and of course, What color does it come out to be if you do that? Take blue Play-Doh and yellow Play-Doh and you mix them together, what color does it become? Green, that's exactly right, it becomes green. And what he was illustrating is that's not what happens. That is not what happens when the divine and human natures are inseparably joined together. We don't come up with green. We don't come up with something else. Nor is there confusion. there remains a distinction between the divine and human natures. Which person is very God and very man, yet one Christ, the only mediator between God and man? So when we think about our mediator, we think about our Christ, how many persons Does our Christ possess? One. One person. How many natures does that one person have? Two. Human and divine. And so even just in our minds keeping that one idea, that one concept firmly in our mind. One person, two natures. Two natures. One person. One person of the mediator. Both a human and a divine nature. Without conversion. Without composition. Without confusion. He is the only mediator between God and man. I want to look at paragraph three. We confess the following, the Lord Jesus, in His human nature, or we could say according to His human nature, thus united to the divine in the person of the Son. So you see the language here, nature and person. Jesus in His human nature, thus united to the divine. We could put in parentheses there, divine nature. in the person of the Son." There's one person, the Son. "...was sanctified and anointed with the Holy Spirit above measure, having in Him all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge, in whom it pleased the Father that all fullness should dwell to the end that being holy, harmless, undefiled, and full of grace and truth, he might be thoroughly furnished to execute the office of mediator and surety, which office he took not upon himself, but was thereunto called by his Father, who also put all power and judgment in his hand, and gave him commandment to execute the same." Now if we skip down to paragraph 7, Christ, in the work of mediation, acts according to both natures. So we could say it this way, the person of the Christ, the one person of the Christ, acts according to both human and divine natures. by each nature doing what is proper, or which is proper to itself. Yet, by reason of the unity of the person, that which is proper to one nature is sometimes in Scripture attributed to the person, denominated by the other. One of the footnotes there is chapter 20. Now, this is one of my favorite scenes in the Scripture. It's a dramatic scene. Paul's on the beach at Miletus. Remember, he'd been driven out of Ephesus. For his own safety, he could not go back to Ephesus, but he wanted to meet with the Ephesian elders, because Paul is on his way to Jerusalem, and he's already been told by a prophet that when he arrives in Jerusalem, he's going to be bound in chains. So Paul wanted, he arranged a meeting with the Ephesian elders at sort of the next town over, a town called Miletus. It happened to be a coastal city. He's on the beach meeting with the elders. And he tells them several things there. He sort of alludes to Ezekiel when he says, I did not shrink back from declaring to you the whole counsel of God. Therefore, I am innocent of your blood. Remember Ezekiel gave this imagery that if the watchman is on the wall, and he blows the trumpet and alerts the city to a danger, and the people of the city ignore the warning, and the enemy attacks them and overcomes them, then the blood is not on the watchman's head. But if the watchman fails to blow the trumpet, fails to warn them, and the enemy comes, then he is guilty. He has blood guilt upon him. And so Paul's alluding to that and said, I have no blood guilt for me because I was faithful to declare to you the whole counsel of God's Word. So in that exchange, Paul makes this dramatic statement. He speaks of the church of Jesus Christ. He speaks of the church which God purchased with His own blood. You see where that can be, might sound if you have, that was the only verse in the Bible you had. Did God die? Did God shed his blood? Do we have one person of the mediator? existing inseparably and distinctly in two natures, human and divine. But sometimes, because the unity of the person is true and it is substantial, it's real, so much so that sometimes in the Scriptures, that which is proper to one nature is sometimes in Scripture attributed to the person denominated by the other nature. So we know it was the human body of Christ which shed blood, correct? We know that. And yet Paul says, God purchased the flock with his own blood. Such is the unity. Paul's point there is that there is such a unity in the mediator between the divine and human that we sometimes don't even have to make those absolute distinctions. And yet, there are distinctions to be made. So what are the consequences from this? Once again, I'm going to be working through some material from Dr. Dolezal. I'm going to make some of these as assertions. If you want more background information, if you want more to read on it, I'm happy to provide that to you. In fact, in his notes, he makes the reference that much of this is drawn largely from the Summa Theologiae from Thomas Aquinas. And so, this is where I hope you've done your theological muscle stretching, because some of these concepts are difficult for us to wrap our heads around, but these are, in a sense, necessary conclusions to the hypostatic union. And so we can have some both affirmations and denials that come right out of the Scriptures that we confess in our own confession of faith, which is built upon the ancient creeds. And we can say things like this, God is man. See, because of the unity of the persons, we can say God is man. Remember, one person in two natures, the one person of the Christ, the one person of the mediator, who is inseparably and yet distinctly human and divine. So on the basis of Philippians 2, Thomas draws the appropriate conclusion, thus, he who is in the form of God is man. Now, he who is in the form of God is God. Therefore, God is man. So we can affirm this. God is man. That's not a heretical statement. God is man. And we can also say, alongside of that, man is God. This is why Paul was not in error when he said, that God, or that it was by the blood of God that the church was purchased. Man is God. This follows from the very same logic as the affirmation that God is man. And it's at this point that Dr. Zolozol made an observation that was helpful to me. He said the, and we can use this in quotes, the what is new. But the who is not new. Are you confused? The what is new. There was a point in time, in the fullness of time, God sent forth his Son, born of a woman. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God, but there was a point in time when the Word became flesh. So what is new, or the what is new, the God-man is new. The who, the eternal person of the Son, is not new. So there is a new, we could say it this way, Dolezal says that there is a new what, but there is an eternal who. I found that helpful. It requires some meditation upon it to allow it to soak in. But that's a short, somewhat pithy way to say and remember this. There's a new what, there's an eternal who. So we can also say that God, again, following the same thread of logic, God was made man. God was made man. That's exactly what John says. The word became flesh, not because the word ceased to be that which it once was, for God was made man. But we should not say man was not made God. We don't say that man was made God. We also must say that Christ is not a creature. Remember, it's an eternal who, which means Christ, the one person of the Christ, existing in two natures, is an eternal who. Therefore, he is not a creature. All that is not in God is creaturely. All that is not God himself is made. Even the angels are creatures. They came into being at a point in time. And so, because Christ is not a creature, we also say Christ did not begin to be. There was no point in which Christ was not. We cannot say that there was ever a time when Christ was not. Because, according to his human nature, he cannot change. I'm sorry, thank you, brother. According to his divine nature, he cannot change. Even a slip of the tongue is easy, isn't it? So Christ did not begin to be. So we cannot say that Christ began to be if the referent is the person of Jesus Christ. Remember, one person, two natures. One person, two natures. So the person of the Christ could not begin to be. In fact, Hebrews 13.8 declares Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and today, and forever. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and today, and forever. And you think, well, wait a minute. There was a point in time when He assumed to Himself human flesh. But the person did not change. Any change, as we talked about last week, must be located in His human nature. It's a lot to hold on to, isn't it? It's a lot to hold on to. And if this is just completely going over your head, don't be discouraged. Don't be discouraged at all. This is admittedly the deeper waters of our faith. There are important things. We should not just shrug our shoulders and say, well, it doesn't matter because I don't immediately understand it. And there remains, as I said, a measure of incomprehensibility. But at the same time, we have to strive after what God has given to us to know and to understand. So we also can affirm that Christ as man is a creature. The Christ is not a creature. But if we say the Christ as man is a creature, that's the important qualifier. And therefore, we would also say that Christ, as man, is not God. And that helps us to understand things like when Jesus said, the son does not know the day or the hour that he will return. He's speaking according to his human nature, not according to his eternal person. Jesus as God did not for even a fraction of an instant set aside his divinity. He could not or he would not be God. And lastly, Christ as man is not a person. So we cannot say his human nature is the person. This person is the eternal son, the Christ, who clothed himself in human form and human nature. Back to our confession of faith in paragraph nine, I'll close with this. This office of mediator between God and man is proper only to Christ. Why is it proper only to Christ? Because Christ alone, the person of the Christ alone, possessed both human and divine natures. So the office of mediator between God and man is proper only to Christ, who is the prophet, priest, and king of the church of God, and may not be either in whole or any part thereof transferred from him to any other. This is why Peter would declare, there is one mediator between God and man by which you must be saved. That official capacity as mediator, as the Christ, cannot be transferred. By the way, this is one of many reasons that we will never take an exception in this church when our confession of faith says the Pope is that antichrist. What does the Pope claim to do? Stand between you and God. He claims to be the vicar of Christ. He claims to be the earthly mediator. That's blasphemy. The office of mediator cannot be transferred. It cannot be given in whole or in part to him or from Christ to any other. Only the Christ who has both human and divine natures can be our mediator. So again, that's one of multiple reasons. If you want more, come see me. There are many reasons that we would confess that the Pope is that antichrist. Now again, we're not making an eschatological statement there, we're making an ecclesiological statement. Church has only one head. The church has only one mediator. There's only one mediator between God and man, the God-man, Jesus the Christ. I think that's enough for today, don't you think? That's plenty to chew on. If you have one thing to take away, I think the way that Dr. Dolezal put it was helpful to me, perhaps it's helpful to you. The what is new, the who is not new. So we have a new what, but an eternal who. There's a point in time when the Word became flesh, when He took to Himself our human nature. But the person of the Christ is not new. He is, He was, He remains. to Christ. That's why, as I read in the writer of Hebrews, Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and today, and forever. And this is why Jesus says, before Abraham was born, I am. Amen. Any questions? It was a pre-incarnate Christ. We cannot say that this was a, that he was showing himself then in the body that he would come to have. And there still is some, with several of those passages, we've got them individually, there is some debate on almost all of them whether this was an angelic being or is this the second person of the Trinity. And sometimes we can't know with certainty. Our focus ought to be on what the scriptures have clearly given to us, that in the fullness of time, this is when the incarnation happened. And we don't want to accidentally slide into, there were little mini incarnations along the way. Does that make sense? Yeah, yeah. Anything else? You feel like you need some little floaties on or something? We're in the deep end of the pool? All right. Let me pray for us. Our God and our Father, we are thankful that You've not left us to speculate or to guess or to grope our way in the dark, but You have given us true revelation, sufficient revelation, or forgive us if our hearts demand a comprehensive revelation so far as you have not revealed yourself. Let us be content with mystery that remains. Let us long for heaven when we will behold our mediator, our Christ, our God, face to face. We see now, as your scripture tells us, through a glass dimly, but one day, face to face. May we long for that. And yet at the same time, may we be content today with what you have made known to us and who you have made us to be in Christ. We give you praise and honor and thanksgiving that you have given to us a mediator. that we do not fear when we obey your command to come boldly before the throne of grace, knowing that we are clothed in the all-sufficient righteousness of Christ, and in His perfection, we stand before you. We bless you and we praise you in the name of the Son, the Christ. Amen.