Basic HTML Version
316
The States of Christ
I. The State of Humiliation
A. INTRODUCTORY: THE DOCTRINE OF THE STATES OF CHRIST IN GENERAL.
1. THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN A STATE AND A CONDITION.
It should be borne in mind that,
though the word “state” is sometimes used synonymously with “condition,” the word as
applied to Christ in this connection denotes a relationship rather than a condition. In general a
state and a condition may be distinguished as follows: A state is one’s position or status in life,
and particularly the forensic relationship in which one stands to the law, while a condition is the
mode of one’s existence, especially as determined by the circumstances of life. One who is
found guilty in a court of justice is in a state of guilt or condemnation, and this is usually
followed by a condition of incarceration with all its resulting deprivation and shame. In theology
the states of the Mediator are generally considered as including the resulting conditions. In
fact, the different stages of the humiliation and of the exaltation, as usually stated, have a
tendency to make the conditions stand out more prominently than the states. Yet the states
are the more fundamental of the two and should be so considered.[Cf. Kuyper, Dict. Dogm., De
Christo II, pp. 59 ff.] In the state of humiliation Christ was under the law, not only as a rule of
life, but as the condition of the covenant of works, and even under the condemnation of the
law; but in the state of exaltation He is free from the law, having met the condition of the
covenant of works and having paid the penalty for sin.
2. THE DOCTRINE OF THE STATES OF CHRIST IN HISTORY.
The doctrine of the states of Christ
really dates from the seventeenth century, though traces of it are already found in the writings
of the Reformers, and even in some of the early Church Fathers. It was first developed among
the Lutherans when they sought to bring their doctrine of the communicatio idiomatum in
harmony with the humiliation of Christ as it is pictured in the Gospels, but was soon adopted
also by the Reformed. They differed, however, as to the real subject of the states. According to
the Lutherans it is the human nature of Christ, but according to the Reformed, the person of
the Mediator. There was considerable difference of opinion even among the Lutherans on the
subject. Under the influence of Schleiermacher the idea of the states of the Mediator gradually
disappeared from theology. By his pantheizing tendency the lines of demarcation between the
Creator and the creature were practically obliterated. The emphasis was shifted from the
transcendent to the immanent God; and the sovereign God whose law is the standard of right
disappeared. In fact, the idea of objective right was banished from theology, and under such
conditions it became impossible to maintain the idea of a judicial position, that is, of a state of
the Mediator. Moreover, in the measure in which the humanity of Christ was stressed to the
exclusion of His deity, and on the one hand His pre-existence, and on the other, His resurrection