There was this German dude named Osiander. Osiander thought that God's eternal plan was to be united with humanity. For Osiander, salvation comes from unity with God, not necessarily from Christ's redemption. Christ's redemptive work was intended to clear a path for dwelling with (or indwelling) humanity. So, Jesus would have taken on flesh and blood whether Adam sinned or not.
At this point, Calvin spits out his beer in a frothy fury. NO! The only reason Jesus became a human was the work of redemption. Of course, at this point, Calvin has to deal with the awkward subject of predestination, which he does not get into fully, nor shall we.
I do want to deal with one thing, here. Calvin drops this little gem:
the only end that the Scripture uniformly assigns for the Son of God voluntarily assuming our nature, and even receiving it as a command from the Father, is that He might propitiate the Father to us by becoming a victim (II.12.4)So, the only reason Jesus came was to die and thus rescue sinners? It is fairly obvious that such a perspective represents only a part of the Gospel. Is it an important part? Of course. Is it the most important part? Perhaps. But, I don't know how Calvin can say that the 'only end' of assuming our nature is propitiation.
Calvin also rejects Osiander's theology of the image of God. Osiander took the imago dei in man very seriously. The imago dei is Jesus Christ, to Osiander, and God is trying to reinfuse that image into humanity by uniting with humanity (Incarnation). Calvin thinks this is bogus. He says the imago dei only refers to certain ethical and moral abilities.
All I learned from this chapter is that I need to look into this Osiander guy some more. He sounds cool.
No comments:
Post a Comment