Collection › LCMS Convention Proceedings (St. Louis, Missouri) › 1965 · 46th Convention › Page 31
LCMS Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 1965, Page 31
front matter 1
front matter 2
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
Page 37
Page 38
Page 39
Page 40
Page 41
Page 42
Page 43
Page 44
Page 45
Page 46
Page 47
Page 48
Page 49
Page 50
Page 51
Page 52
Page 53
Page 54
Page 55
Page 56
Page 57
Page 58
Page 59
Page 60
Page 61
Page 62
Page 63
Page 64
Page 65
Page 66
Page 67
Page 68
Page 69
Page 70
Page 71
Page 72
Page 73
Page 74
Page 75
Page 76
Page 77
Page 78
Page 79
Page 80
Page 81
Page 82
Page 83
Page 84
Page 85
Page 86
Page 87
Page 88
Page 89
Page 90
Page 91
Page 92
Page 93
Page 94
Page 95
Page 96
Page 97
Page 98
Page 99
Page 100
Page 101
Page 102
Page 103
Page 104
Page 105
Page 106
Page 107
Page 108
Page 109
Page 110
Page 111
Page 112
Page 113
Page 114
Page 115
Page 116
Page 117
Page 118
Page 119
Page 120
Page 121
Page 122
Page 123
Page 124
Page 125
Page 126
Page 127
Page 128
Page 129
Page 130
Page 131
Page 132
Page 133
Page 134
Page 135
Page 136
Page 137
Page 138
Page 139
Page 140
Page 141
Page 142
Page 143
Page 144
Page 145
Page 146
Page 147
Page 148
Page 149
Page 150
Page 151
Page 152
Page 153
Page 154
Page 155
Page 156
Page 157
Page 158
Page 159
Page 160
Page 161
Page 162
Page 163
Page 164
Page 165
Page 166
Page 167
Page 168
Page 169
Page 170
Page 171
Page 172
Page 173
Page 174
Page 175
Page 176
Page 177
Page 178
Page 179
Page 180
Page 181
Page 182
Page 183
Page 184
Page 185
Page 186
Page 187
Page 188
Page 189
Page 190
Page 191
Page 192
Page 193
Page 194
Page 195
Page 196
Page 197
Page 198
Page 199
Page 200
Page 201
Page 202
Page 203
Page 204
Page 205
Page 206
Page 207
Page 208
Page 209
Page 210
Page 211
Page 212
Page 213
Page 214
Page 215
Page 216
Page 217
Page 218
Page 219
Page 220
Page 221
Page 222
Page 223
Page 224
Page 225
Page 226
Page 227
Page 228
Page 229
Page 230
Page 231
Page 232
Page 233
Page 234
Page 235
Page 236
Page 237
Page 238
Page 239
Page 240
Page 241
Page 242
Page 243
Page 244
Page 245
Page 246
Page 247
Page 248
Page 249
Page 250
Page 251
Page 252
Page 253
Page 254
Page 255
Page 256
Page 257
Page 258
Page 259
Page 260
Page 261
Page 262
Page 263
Page 265
Page 266
Page 267
Page 268
Page 269
Page 270
Page 271
Page 272
Page 273
Page 274
Page 275
Page 276
Page 277
Page 278
Page 279
Page 280
Page 281
Page 282
Page 283
Page 284
Page 285
Page 286
Page 287
Page 288
Page 289
Page 290
Page 291
Page 292
Page 293
Page 294
Page 295
Page 296
Page 297
Page 298
Page 299
Page 300
Page 301
Page 302
Page 303
Page 304
Page 305
Page 306
Page 307
Page 308
Page 309
Page 310
Page 311
Page 312
Page 313
Page 314
Page 315
Page 316
Scan: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
⤓ Download page image (full resolution)
Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected
DOCTRINAL-DEVOTIONAL ESSAYS 31
nor like unto Eusebius Number Two with his pussy-
footing, but give us an Athanasius who can say, ‘Here
lies the truth.’ ”
Christ, the Sender, Is Net the Christ of Calvin
There came the Middle Ages, in which the struggle
for the truth was heightened in its intensity. An eccle-
siastical empire had been developed that held both,
keys and swords. This spiritual empire blocked every
pathway that led back to the citadel of truth. Hun-
dreds of thousands died in the struggle. Some lived to
find the truth. Others lived to find only a half truth.
Calvin was one of the latter. ’Tis true, he was a theolo-
gian of no mean capability. Calvin said, “I know who
the Sender is.” But then he started out with the prop-
osition: “The finite is incapable of the infinite.” That,
he said, is basic.
This principle he then applied to Jesus Christ. In
that body of Christ there could not live “the fullness of
the Godhead bodily” (Col. 2:9). The Man, Christ Jesus,
because He was a man, because He was a human being
with flesh and blood, was finite. Therefore all the
attributes which are predicated of the Deity could not
be enclosed in His human body. This Jesus, although
He was the Son of God, had His limitations. This was
Calvin’s position. And so he never came to understand
the real Sender, who was possessed of all the attributes
of the Deity during the days of His flesh. After the
days of His humiliation He was still that God-man
who could fulfill the promise: “I am with you alway,
even unto the end of the world.”
Therefore, because Calvin believed that the finite
is incapable of the infinite, he could not agree with
you that from that altar last night we received the
visible elements of bread and wine, and at the same
time, as Paul says, there was a sharing, a communica-
tion of something that only God could give us, Christ’s
holy body and His holy blood. Calvin rejected the real
presence of the body and blood in the Eucharist.
And so we say to Calvin, “Calvin, your Christ is
too small.” The Christ of the Scriptures is the God-
man who claimed that while He was in the room with
Nicodemus, He was at the same time, as He said, “the
Son of Man, which is in heaven” (John 3:13). Here’s
the Sender —in the room with Nicodemus and at the
same time the Son of Man, who is sitting at the right
hand of God the Father. Calvin never grasped this.
The result of his position was that he never reached
the right Biblical understanding of the doctrines of
grace.
Christ, the Sender, Is Not the Christ of the Modernist
Who is the Sender? We answer finally, it is not the
Christ of the modernist. The Christ who sent us into
the world is He who claimed to be equal with God
the Father. The modernist wants a Christ who can be
squeezed into a test tube. Nothing else will satisfy him.
He wants a Christ who can walk on land, but he won’t
take a Christ who can walk on water. He wants a
Christ who will eat fish, but he won’t accept a Christ
who with two small fish can feed many thousands. He
wants a Christ who can be judged by a Gentile Pon-
tius Pilate, but he doesn’t want a Christ who will judge
all mankind, Jew and Gentile, at the end of time. He
wants a Christ who can die, but he doesn’t want a
Christ who can rise again.
The True Nature of the Christ
What kind of Christ have we then? If He is not
the Christ of Arius, if He is not the Christ of Calvin,
if He is not the Christ of the modernist, what is He
then? He is what His Word spells Him out to be.
Briefly:
He Is “Immanuel”
“They shall call His name Emmanuel” (Matt. 1:23).
Isaiah said it, and Matthew says that Isaiah said it.
“Immanuel!” Now that’s not English. That’s Hebrew.
And that Hebrew word means: “God is here — with us.”
Who is that baby lying in the manger at Christmas?
That’s God. Who is the teen-ager in the temple, an-
swering and asking questions? That’s God. Who is
the carpenter who with calloused hands saws timbers
for houses and barns in Nazareth? That’s God. Who
is the teacher gathering people to hear sermons on
the mount and sermons on the plain? That teacher
is God. Who is that physician who makes the blind
eyes see, the withered hands work, the lame feet walk,
diseased and leprous bodies once again function? That
physician is God. Who is that dead man on the cross
who comes to life by His own will? That man is God.
Who is that man of whom the Scripture says three
things? “He made the world! He redeemed the world!
He shall judge the world!” That man is God. Let this
convention without equivocation tell the world, even
though the world may hate us, that we still know the
answer to the question, who has sent men to men to
win them for God? Who is the Sender? He is none
other than God in Christ Jesus. Furthermore,
He Is the Messiah
He is the Messiah of Israel, the Messiah who said
of the holy books of Israel that they were written about
Him. He points to the Pentateuch, and He doesn’t say
that there were four authors of those books. What does
He say? He says: “Moses... wrote of Me” (John 5:46).
Note the emphatic order of the words in the original
Greek, “For it was of Me that he wrote.” Now either
He’s right or He’s wrong. And Jesus will not fall into
that trap of theological accommodation where he used
terms that were common among people, employing
them in the sense in which the people understood
them, knowing full well that people had an altogether
false conception about hermeneutics. When Jesus said:
“Moses wrote of Me,” He meant to say, “I am that
Prophet. I am that One who was to come. I am that
One who was to redeem the world from its guilt and
sin. I am the only One standing between God and
man to bring lost man back to God. Moses is My
biographer. He wrote these things of Me.”
Caiaphas asked Him, and with Caiaphas the church