As we consider Jesus’ divinity in the context of the Incarnation, we are faced with the question of logical coherence. To say that Jesus was Incarnate Deity may be deemed logically problematic for two reasons:
Firstly, to say that Christ is both God and man might seem logically contradictory. After all, God is by definition infinite and able to accomplish all that is logically possible while being unable to err. On the other hand, a man is finite and very much limited in his capacity. In the words of Alexander Pope, “to err is human”. We are inevitably faced with the challenge of reconciling Jesus’ infinite divinity with his finite humanity. Would the Incarnate Christ be subject to physical limitations? Could he err? These are but some of the questions we would have to wrestle with.
Secondly, the idea of God being “born” implies him having a beginning. This is inherently problematic as God by definition has no beginning. To make matters worse, we hold on to the idea that God eventually died in Calvary.
Jesus is truly God and truly man
This raises questions as to who was sustaining the universe when Jesus died. The Trinitarian appeal to the remaining members of the Godhead provides little resistance to the objection, as it would seem that the unity of the Godhead had been ripped apart by mere men. This second problem in many ways does seem more damaging to the Christian concept of God than the first.
The key to resolving both these problems is essentially the same. It was summed up in the “Definition of Chalcedon” (A.D. 451) which stated that Jesus was “truly God and truly man….to be acknowledged in two natures”. This understanding of Christ as one person with two indivisible natures resolves both the aforementioned problems. It engages the first by affirming the logical problem in holding Christ to be both infinite and finite but goes further to demonstrate how having two natures (infinite and finite) puts the issue to rest. For unlike Greek mythology, where demigods such as Hercules were half god and half human, Jesus is truly God and truly man. As such, despite being limited in His human nature (i.e. facing fatigue and hunger), Jesus was the fullness of God veiled in flesh and thus unable to err or fail. As Paul states, “for in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily” (Colossians 2:9, ESV).
To illustrate this, we believe the Bible is the “Word of God” (Mark 7:13). But is the Word of God we possess to take a physical form or is it immaterial in nature? In a sense, there is nothing intellectually problematic about claiming both! For instance, while the “Word of God” may have been revealed to Moses spiritually on Mt. Sinai, it ultimately came down to the people and to us in a physical form (The tablet and eventually, the Bible).
If this is true of the “Word of God” through Moses, there is no problem in seeing why Jesus, also referred to as “the Word” (John 1:1), could not have possibly come to us in both a physical and immaterial form. This same principle can also be applied to the second problem which holds that God can neither be born or killed. If we find a printed date on the aforementioned Bible, would that indicate that God’s eternal word only came into existence on that stated date? Of course not! Likewise, if one were to burn the Bible (this is highly unrecommended), this would do no damage at all to God’s eternal Word! Though Jeremiah’s scroll was destroyed by his enemies, God simply reproduced the revelation and the only victim in that incident was the scribe that had to repeat his written assignment. Hence, it is logically coherent to affirm Jesus as God and yet as a man in the context of Him possessing two natures.
