The Holy Spirit in the earthly life of Christ

[johnnycanuck]

I have been meditating on the Holy Spirit and His work of sanctification in the life of Christ.

I am primarily concerned about the working of the Holy Spirit in the life of Jesus that brought about his sanctification. I am not looking at every role the Holy Spirit plays in the life of Jesus and I am not looking at every dimension of how Jesus is sanctified. Rather I intend to focus my attention upon the specific role the Holy Spirit exercises in the life of the Incarnate Word. Furthermore, I am not denying the ‘active’ role and participation of Christ in his sanctification, but neither am I suggesting that Christ does not in some way demonstrate a ‘passive’ role that, in the plan of God, enabled his sanctification by the same means as ours, i.e., through the work of the Holy Spirit. I am also wondering about the Holy Spirit and His work in Christ before His baptism. It is obvious that the Holy Spirit was with Christ before but how do you explain the descent of the Spirit on Christ at the baptism if He already had the Spirit within Him?

 

[Contra_Mundum]

I'm not sure that it is entirely accurate to understand the general and common work of Holy Spirit in sanctifying us (saving sinners) as having a parallel to his work in the person and ministry of Christ. Jesus certainly did not need the "sanctification" unto perfection that is the elementary work of Holy Spirit in those whom he comes to indwell. He was perfect, and impeccable, from birth.

I do believe that Christ's ministry was conducted entirely in the power of the Spirit; which is to say he functioned in a radically dependent way on the Spirit's labors in him to the accomplishment of his work between his baptism and his ascension. In this way, he sets the example for us as we live in the Spirit, and serve God in our callings.

 

[johnnycanuck]

So sanctification may not be the word that I am looking for.

I found this quote from Herman Bavinck who writes: “The true human who bears God’s image is inconceivable even for a moment without the indwelling of the Holy Spirit….If humans in general cannot have communion with God except by the Holy Spirit, then this applies even more powerfully to Christ’s human nature.”

In order to fulfill the law perfectly, did Christ as a man have to rely totally on the Holy Spirit to guide/empower Him? Romans 5:19 talks about Christ's obedience that many were made righteous. Hebrews 5:8 tells me that He learned obedience through sufferings, would sufferings be not just the crucifixion but various times throughout His ministry where He relied on the Holy Spirit to lead and sustain Him. I am not at all trying to equate sanctification on the same level as ours, but I am trying to comprehend the process Christ made from the age of 12 to His baptism, to His ministry and culminating in His death, resurrection and ascension. The only word that I can think of is sanctification, what word would you use?

 

[Contra_Mundum]

The Bavinck quote is truncated, so I'm not sure I am getting the context. "Communion with God" is not a synonym for sanctification. Adam and Eve in the Garden had communion with God, and doubtless that included some HS ministry with them. Christ must have prayed to God and been strengthened in his human nature by HS, even as a child and before his ministry commenced.

But it seems to me that HS was no more requisite to his obedience than he was for Adam and Eve. That is, he was necessary, but the indwelling itself was not the entire source of said obedience, the way it must be for us who are tainted by sin. Jesus had no Original Sin to deal with, thus he was suitably empowered by naure to obey God's will (As Adam was). So, his reliance on HS strengthening was different than ours, in that his human nature was not fallen. His communion with God through HS enabled him to do well, so that his own obedience was ideal.

Our obedience is acceptable only because when Christ works in us by HS, our work is accepted AS IF Jesus did it. It is accepted as perfectly done, according to the Spirit who works in us. This factor would not have been exactly represented in Christ's work. Not that he had to "qualify" himself to be Redeemer, by no means. But his life was a meritorious life, not as a factor of HS strengthening him.

We do need to separate, I believe, Jesus reliance on HS before his ministry, and his reliance afterward. His ministry-obedience was wholly dependent on that Spirit-anointing (whence he is named Messiah/Christ/Anointed One). This sets off his labors that we read of in the Gospels as of a different nature and quality than his earlier sinlessness.

Jesus "grew in favor with God" as our own children grow more beloved by us over time. Not because they are "getting holier" (though when they do that, we are even happier), but because they are developing as they must. Jesus grew in knowledge, especially of Scripture and things of God. Jesus certainly never got "holier" since he had noplace "upward" to go. But the Father was always happier with him the next day than the previous, just as your love for a child only deepens with time.

So, I don't know the word I would use. Jesus was "filled with the Spirit without measure."

 

[johnnycanuck]

I am reading from the likes of John Owens and Thomas Goodwin to see what they view as the work of the Spirit in Christ. Goodwin, in his book The Work of the Holy Spirit in our salvation, chapter 7 wrote, "In respect of sanctifying that human nature of Christ, it was the Holy Ghost who made him Christ, that anointed him with himself, and all his graces: Isa. xi.2, 'The Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the Spirit of knowledge and the fear of the Lord.' The graces of Christ, as man, are attributed to this Spirit, as the immediate author of them; for although the Son of God dwelt personally in the human nature, and so advanced that nature above the ordinary rank of creatures, and raised it up to that dignity and worth, yet all his habitual graces, which even his soul was full of, were from the Holy Ghost. The Holy Spirit is therefore said to be 'given him without measure.' And this inhabitation of the Holy Ghost did in some sense and degree concur to constitute him Christ, which, as you know, is the anointed one of God: Acts iv. 27, 'Thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed.' Anointed with what? Acts x. 38, 'God anointed Jesus with the Holy Ghost."

He uses the term sanctifying in regards to the human nature of Christ.

Sinclair Ferguson wrote about John Owens book The Spirit in the life of Christ,

Owen recognised the value of the old Latin axiom: Opera ad extra trinitatis indivisa sunt [the external works of the Trinity are not divisible, they are all works of the entire Trinity]. Nowhere is its truth more evident than in the incarnation. There, Father and Son were both active. The Father prepared a body for His Son [Heb. 10:5]; the Son took hold of the seed of Abraham [Heb. 2:14]. But, Owen adds, neither of these actions took place apart from the ministry of the Spirit. In the incarnation, he worked in two ways:

(i) Jesus was conceived by the power of the Spirit. The conception of Jesus in the womb of the virgin Mary has all the hallmarks of the Spirit's operations. Just as the Spirit overshadowed the waters in creation and later overshadowed the church at Pentecost, so he came to Mary—sovereignly and secretly—and took her already existing substance in order to form it into a humanity that was altogether holy [Lk. 1:35]. The humanity which was assumed by the Son of God really was that of Mary. Jesus was conceived by Mary in her womb by the overshadowing of the Spirit. From the first moment of his conception he experienced human development and every stage of human existence [Heb. 2:17-18].

But that immediately leads to the second aspect of the Spirit's work:

(ii) Jesus was sanctified by the power of the Spirit. There are two questions in Christology which Owen believed can be answered only when we take account of the ministry of the Spirit in the Incarnation. How did Jesus become fully one with us? And, how did Jesus become fully one with us, yet remain free from sin?

Owen's answer was that the Son of God really shared our humanity [Heb. 2:14]. He rejected all forms of Docetism. The holy humanity of Jesus was real humanity. It was earthly, not heavenly. The virgin Mary was truly 'the mother of my Lord' [Lk. 1:43], not merely the channel through which the humanity of Jesus entered this fallen world. [This view had been held at the time of the Reformation by (among others) Melchior Hoffman (d. 1543) and was taught by Menno Simons (1496-1561), founder of the Mennonites. The latter's view was related, at least in part, to his deficient understanding of human biology. It should be noted that his view did not become part of Mennonite theology.] By the Spirit, Jesus came from among us. But, having given this affirmation of the reality of Christ's humanity, Owen was careful to avoid the pseudo-logical deduction sometimes drawn from it-that the Son of God must therefore have assumed sinful humanity. No, says Owen, Scripture teaches us that through the overshadowing of the Spirit, that which was born was holy [Lk. 1:35], the Son of God. At the very moment of conception and assumption, the Holy Spirit sanctified the human nature of Jesus equipping him as Son of God to be the Saviour of men. Consequently Jesus was not only (in a negative sense) separate from sinners, he was positively endowed with all appropriate grace, and was holy and harmless, as well as undefiled [Heb. 7:26].

What is so significant about this for Owen? This: the consequence of the Spirit's ministry in the Head of the new creation is that he is truly man and truly holy. In Jesus, holiness and humanity become one and the same thing, perfectly, for the first time since Adam.

Why should this be so relevant to the continuing ministry of the Spirit? Because our Lord Jesus Christ is the cause, source, and pattern of the Spirit's ministry in the believer. What he did in Jesus he seeks to do in us! In a word, Owen is saying: true humanity is true godliness; true holiness is true manliness or true womanliness! Whatever is dehumanising them, cannot be the fruit of the Spirit's ministry in us. Whatever makes you less human must be carnal, not spiritual.

That fundamental principle is of tremendous significance in Owen's theology, even although it is not one he expounds at great length. Indeed, in one sense his chief exposition of it is not to be found in his published works, but in his own life. Shortly after Owen's death, these words were written about him: there was in him:

Much of heaven and love to Christ and saints and all men; which came from him so seriously and spontaneously as if grace and nature were in him reconciled and but one thing.'

The purpose of the Spirit's ministry is to conform us to the image of the Incarnate Son, in order that he might be the firstborn of many brothers [Rom. 8:29]. John Owen apparently expounded this principle chiefly by his own personal example.

"For John Owen, it was axiomatic that Jesus Christ 'acted grace as a man'. He did this (as men must) through the energy of the Spirit. That was evident in two ways:

(i) In his personal progress in grace. The work of the Spirit in the Messiah was prophesied in Isaiah 11:1-3 and also in 63:lff. Owen saw great significance in the prophecy that it was by the Spirit that the Messiah would be filled with wisdom, and that this characteristic was singled out for reference in Luke's account of Jesus' growth [Lk. 2:52]. In this sense, the coming of the Spirit on Jesus involved a continuous presence. In keeping with the development of his natural faculties as man, and his unique responsibilities as Messiah, he was sustained by the Spirit. The Spirit enabled Jesus to do natural things perfectly and spiritually, not to do them unnaturally. He was taught the wisdom of God from the Word of God by the Spirit of God! This is precisely the picture we are given in the third Servant Song:

Again the word sanctify implying sanctification is used in regards to Christ.

I am embarking to write a research paper on this subject and would truly like some imput that would help me in this, thanks.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

I think those references you've found are all very helpful.

I would read any of my previous comments in the light of them, either for clarification or correction.

Sactification, in Jesus' case, has to apply in the sense of 1) setting apart, 2) continuing in and preserving in holiness, 3) progress in knowledge.

I think you can see in those three aspects Priesthood, Monarchy, and Prophetism, the three-fold office of the Messiah/ Redeemer/ Mediator.

I do think that the Puritans mentioned above will point to not only the HS superintendence of the Incarnation, but also and perhaps with greater emphasis, the Anointing which is at his baptism (since it is the three-year ministry of Christ that takes the biblical emphasis, note the two gospels, Mark and John). I think this is being acknowledged in the first quote above, by Goodwin. This observation speaks to your initial question, relating to what difference or what increase is happening at the baptism.

I would relate the whole matter to the idea of a prince becoming king. Is he not Royal from birth? Is he not privileged? If there is no present occupier of the Throne, is it not his? But when he is anointed, and ordained to office, then he is ready to sit down.

And still our Lord must go through an ordeal. He must perform more work, greater work, in order to take his seat. His ordination therefore uniquely endows him for his task. Whereas before he "grows in grace," in his Ministry he positively acts out entirely of Holy Spirit's energy. No one has ever been as thoroughly subjected to the direction and motive of Holy Spirit as was Christ.

It is from the latter period that I believe we understand how it is that we believers are to live "in the Spirit." We aren't to have "lives of our own," if we are to be truly Christ-like. Like Jesus in his childhood, we are to be dependent on HS. In a sense, this is illustrated by our dedication (baptism? I see you are in a baptist church) of even our children. But whenever we are baptized, it is as sinner, and as one who is obliged to be having another life lived out in us. Hence the parallels to Christ's baptism. We never have any portion of life when we are permitted to live out our own life.

Jesus was living in perfect obedience for the first 30 years of his life, not merely the last 3. His obedience was in the strength of HS. But by my lights, there is a quality of holiness (sanctity) that proceeds from his own Person. He is living for us, and it is precisely because there is a quality of the holiness from himself that makes his obedience analogous to that which Adam should have done, and merited.

The merits of Christ are an important aspect of his active obedience on our behalf (and you can listen to the last two episodes of the Heidelcast for a good discussion of the AO of Christ). It is in his ministry, so radically dependent on HS, that someone could say it was less of the man Jesus, and more of the Spirit of Christ in the work. We refer to all his life as one of suffering, but it is in his ministry that the suffering comes into greater and greater relief. That is, his ministry is the "passive obedience" that culminates on the cross.

I hope some of this is helpful in your thinking through this.

 

[Peairtach]

I do think we need to make a clear distinction, if it hasn't been done already, between the use of the word "sanctification" in relation to the believer and in relation to Christ.

The believer has sin of his own which must be dealt with by sanctification through the indwelling work of the Holy Spirit.

(a) Sanctification of the believer begins at regeneration when he is set apart by God the Holy Spirit and there is a definitive break with the power of sin in his heart and life, often called "definitive sanctification"

(b) From regeneration until death there is "progressive sanctification" as the regenerate soul interacts with the indwelling Holy Spirit in increasingly - if often unevenly and with somewhat backslidings - putting sin to death and living unto righteousness. This is never perfected in this life.

(c) At death the Holy Spirit makes the believer morally perfect and fit for Heaven.

Christ never had any sin of His own to deal with although he carried His people's sins until He said "It is finished!" He didn't rest from the effects of that sin in His physical death until the First Day.

There seems to be little analogy between the word "sanctification" as it is applied to Christ and to us.

In our "sanctification" we as regenerate individuals are dealing with the remaining power and presence of our own sins with the assistance of the Holy Spirit.

In Christ's "sanctification" on Earth Christ was dealing with our sins in a different way and needed the assistance of the Holy Spirit.

I don't know if Bruce would like to correct or add to anything here.

 

[Rich Barcellos]

I recommend my friend Richard Daniels' The Christology of John Owen, especially chapter 11, "God Was Manifest in the Flesh." Also, concerning the impeccability of the human nature of Christ, here's something I wrote here (Midwest Center for Theological Studies: Owensboro, KY

Did Christ assume human nature as bestowed upon Adam prior to the fall - i.e., mutable? ...If we say no, then what kind of human nature did He assume? A glorified human nature? But how would he do this prior to entering into His glory? Or was it a third kind of human nature - neither like Adam's prior to the fall nor like that of just souls made perfect?

If we say yes, then how and when did the human nature of Christ pass into a higher state than Adam's created state? ..., you said, "I'm just saying that Adam had conditional, temporary spiritual life." If he did and if Christ assumed human nature as it was prior to the fall, what kind of relationship to God did the human nature of Christ possess at the incarnation? One conditioned upon obedience and with the potential for unconditional communion with God based on obedience. I realize this brings up the question of peccability v. impeccability. My current understanding is as follows: Essentially, the human nature of Christ was peccable/mutable; it was like Adam's prior to the fall (though even this needs to be qualified due to Rom. 8:3). Accidentally, as united to the divine nature in the Person of the Son, it was and is impeccable. I think Rom. 1:4 comes into play when wondering about His state of exaltation and the qualified peccability of His human nature, "who was declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead, according to the Spirit of holiness, Jesus Christ our Lord." 1 Timothy 3:16 also comes into play here, "justified in the Spirit." Jesus learned obedience, grew in wisdom, etc. The righteousness of His human nature was not static but dynamic. In other words, his state of humiliation was a dynamic state of growing and maturing and culmination.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I recommend Daniels, chapter 12, "He Ascended into Heaven," where he discusses the glorification of Christ's human nature. Great stuff!