Is the virgin birth an essential part of the Christian faith? What do we mean when we say that Jesus is both fully God and fully human? Jesus is conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit but is also born to Mary. Is Mary the Mother of God?

This week I try to show that if Mary is not the Mother of God, then our salvation is lost. If God did not truly pass through Mary’s womb, then He is not truly Emmanuel; not truly God with us.

Robert Jenson has one of my favorite lines on the issue: “Mary is indeed the Mother of God, but she need not be a goddess to achieve this.”

The question about Mary being the Mother of God is not a question about Mary’s divine status. She is not a goddess. Her Son is her creator. The question about Mary being the Mother of God is a question about the identity of Jesus.

Jesus made Mary his mother out of love for all humanity. By doing this he revealed the incomprehensible humility of our God. God is humble enough to pass through the blood and guts of a womb just as he is humble enough to pass through the blood and guts of a tomb for us and for our salvation.

From birth and through death he is Emmanuel: God with us.

Here are a couple of the diagrams I drew on the board:

Diagram #1: In the fourth century Arius (Arianism) put the question about the identity of the Son of God into sharp focus. Is the Son of the same essence as the Father? Arius said no. Arius argued that while the Son is of a higher nature than all created things (humans, angels, archangels, etc.) he is still a sort of second-level deity below the Father. And so there was a wedge driven between the Father (who is full-fledged God, and so cannot have passed through a womb or died on a cross) and the Son.

Diagram #2: The Council of Nicaea (AD 325) corrected the heresy of Arianism. The council declared that the Son is coequal with the Father. The Son is not a second-level deity, but truly and fully God. But this simply moved the problem back one notch. Whereas before the wedge was driven between the Father and the Son, now the wedge was moved back a notch between the eternal Son and the human Jesus. If the Son is full-fledged God just as the Father is, then he also cannot have passed through a womb or died on a cross. All this suffering must be what the human nature of Jesus accomplishes while the divine nature shines forth in the glory. The issue now is that we’ve separated the human Jesus from the eternal Son, implying there are two persons (or two subjects). Before (Diagram #1) the split was between Father and Son, but now the split is within the Son himself. And I’m not sure we’ve ever fully recovered from this issue. Our tendency is still to think in terms of two subjects: the human Jesus (who has a mother, who sleeps in the bottom of the boat, and who dies) and the eternal Son (who does not have a mother, who calms the stormy sea, and who resurrects).  

But the truth of the gospel must be this: you cannot accurately pick Jesus of Nazareth out of a lineup without simultaneously picking out the eternal Son of God. Jesus is one person with two natures. We believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, who healed humanly and suffered divinely.

More resources:

* Ben Myers, The Apostles’ Creed

* Robert Jenson, “Jesus in the Trinity”

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit cameroncombs.substack.com