In the last chapter of Ecclesiastes, Solomon brought focus to the importance of strict attention to the written wisdom given by God (12:9-14). Solomon, from the beginning of this book, stated his purpose to employ all the talent and experimental method at his disposal in writing this book (1:13, 17; 2:3, 9). This is generally true of all the writers of Scripture. They do research, they reason on the basis of divine providence, and seek proper interpretation of already-certified Scripture. They look to their own encounters with God and his truth. According to the nature of revelation, many of the things that they set forth as revealed truth utterly transcend both their experiences and their self-conscious gifts. At the same time, they knew that at no point were they merely unconscious amenuenses. Instead, they were being used by God as he employed their peculiar gifts and experiences. Note how Peter said, “I will make every effort so that after my departure you may be able at any time to recall these things” (2 Peter 1:15). This statement came in the immediate context of his testimony that his words were giving greater clarity to the revelation that had come before (19). He himself, was, like the prophets “carried along by the Holy Spirit” even in the context of his “effort.”  Solomon, in this task given him by God was “weighing and studying and arranging . . . with great care.” From a literary standpoint, he “sought to find words of delight, and uprightly he wrote words of truth” (12:9, 10).
Though Solomon was engaged in the project as a conscientious literary artist, or closely reasoning philosopher, in the end he does not doubt that his product would be “words of truth.” He presented the image of goads and nails “firmly fixed” (12:11). This particular labor, though all others that he described were “chasing after the wind,” was of sober purpose and enduring value. These words, taken in the whole, embodied truth. Even as Paul before Agrippa and Festus, Solomon could use such language, “I am not out of my mind, most excellent Festus, but I am speaking true and rational words.” (Acts 26:25). The writers of inspiration were aware both of the use of their labors and capacity as well as the perfect truth and authority given their writing by the Spirit of God. See Luke 1:1-4; Romans 14:14-21; 16:25-27; 1 Corinthians 2:10-13; Ephesians 3:1-13; 1 Peter 5:12; 2 Peter 3:1, 2; 1 John 1:1-4; Revelation 22:18, 19. In each of these scriptural testimonies, we engage both the transcendent character of revelation inscribed by inspiration and the writers’ consciousness that their own minds and perceptions stewarded that body of truth.
Solomon was also conscious that this book was superintended by God and that its teachings, understood correctly, are sure guides as part of a larger collection of inspired literature. The “collected sayings”(12:11) were given by one Shepherd.  When combined with other inspired writings, this contemplation of Solomon as the Preacher gives depth and contour to the entire picture of the divine purpose of God in glorifying Himself through the wisdom of the plan of redemption. The “collected sayings” refer immediately to the accumulated argument of Solomon in this book and the conclusion toward which it drove him. By extension, this refers to the entirety of revelation, the “collected sayings,” at the end of the inspiration to record revelatory truth is final. Though many people will write books, one must make sure that the teaching of another does lead him away from the truths revealed in Scripture—“Beware of anything beyond these” (12:12).
Many, many books, and a virtually infinite presentation of opinions will flood the world as author after author desires an audience either for material gain or for philosophical or political fame. Seeking to grasp all these opinions and understand the nuances of the thought of so many varying and contradictory opinions is indeed a “weariness to the flesh.” If an infatuation with such vanities and the thoughts of persons with such limited scope of understanding drives us away from the fullness of truth contained in divine revelation, then the warning is intensified for us, “Beware of anything beyond these.” Paul labored to bring “every thought captive to obey Christ” by destroying “arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God” (2 Corinthians 10:4, 5). For this reason Paul told Timothy, “Charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the stewardship from God that is by faith” (1 Timothy 1:3, 4).
Solomon concludes his writing with a final statement of its purpose and a concomitant warning.  He has made observations about wisdom and foolishness, righteousness and unrighteousness, legitimate pleasure and dissolute living, this short life and the long home of death, authority and submission, freedom and judgment, divine sovereignty and human responsibility, time and eternity. Now he gives the conclusion that he has reached, under the guidance of the “One Shepherd.”  All of these things, considering the final vanity of everything  when viewed from the perspective of this life only, resolve into this infinitely important and compelling single duty: “Fear God and keep his commands.”
This is a confirmation of all the Law and the prophets, to love God with all our heart, mind, soul, and strength. To fear God includes viewing him with a sense of awe and wonder in light of his holiness, a holiness that is seen as the essence of beauty and loveliness. If holiness is the sum total of his attributes (or if holiness gives unity to each of his diverse attributes), it is eternal and immutable, never-changing, never diminishing, never augmenting. But to creatures, though God never changes, he is incomprehensible. Because incomprehensible, never will there be a time in eternity when there are not more expressions of beauty unfolding even though nothing can be added to his eternal infinite attributes. Both in unity and eternal diversity God will be displayed in eternally unfolding layers of beauty, joy, pleasure, and exuberant happiness. When viewed in this way, an accompanying affection is love, for one cannot look upon infinite holiness, impeccable righteousness, and condescending mercy with the proper sense of fear and wonder, without at the same time being engulfed with a complacent love for the perfection of the character of such a Being.
To fear God includes viewing him with a sense of awe and wonder in light of his holiness, a holiness that is seen as the essence of beauty and loveliness.
Solomon’s words, “Keep his commandments” (12:13) brings us immediately into the realm of the purpose of the Law. God requires an absolute obedience to his law for those that will enjoy eternal life in his presence. “Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them” (Deuteronomy 27:26 cited in Galatians 3:10) and “If a person does them, he shall live [achieve the goal of eternal life] by them” (Leviticus 18:5 cited in Galatians 3:12). Paul says “For it is not the hearers of the Law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law will be justified” (Romans 2:13).
Solomon also has established the fact that, though created in innocence and righteousness, the single great reality of the present human condition is his sinfulness. It is original, it is personal, it is progressive, it is destructive. (Ecclesiastes 7:20 ,29; 8:11ff ; 9:3) We are, therefore, in consistent violation of the supreme duty that is absolutely incumbent upon us.  None of our actions, our thoughts, will be invisible to God in the day of final reckoning. “God will bring every deed into judgment, with every secret thing, whether good or evil” (12:14) Though at times, Solomon’s language seemed to despair of any meaning to anything, he now sets forth this great truth, that, viewed from the standpoint of eternity and the perfection of God’s moral nature and the legitimacy of his law to his creature, nothing in the view of eternity is empty but all will come before him for commendation or blame. His perfect standard will not be compromised but will be the inflexible guide and will be viewed as holy and just so that every mouth is stopped and the whole world held guilty before God.
In this light, we again see that the Law is a schoolmaster, or guardian, to lead us to Christ in whom alone is that perfection of righteousness called for by the Law. The Law, this law approved by Solomon, holds before us both righteousness and judgment until “Christ came in order that we might be justified by faith” (Galatians 3:24) In his coming he accomplished righteousness and received our judgment so by submitting with perfect resignation to his atoning work, we are given union with him for both the removal of judgment and the imputation of righteousness.
Solomon’s solemn and thorough investigation of life here in the light of eternity pushes forward the design of God’s redemptive revelation. The revelation of how absurd and utterly vain all existence would be if viewed only from a temporal standpoint serves as a foundation for the clear revelation given to Paul, “For this slight momentary affliction is preparing for us an eternal weight of glory beyond all comparison” (2 Corinthians 4:14),
Series Navigation

The elders of Grace Baptist Church in Cape Coral, Florida have produced the following documents to serve the members of our church as an increasing number are facing vaccine mandates at their places of employment. We have drawn on the wisdom of many others in this process and have particularly benefitted from the labors of other churches and elder bodies. Due to the unique responsibility to shepherd this particular flock in which the Lord has made us overseers we have written the following document with specific consideration to our context, confessional documents, and commitments as a church. We are happy to share the fruit of our work with others who might benefit from it and encourage them to use and/or adapt it for their own purposes with or without attribution—whatever serves them best. We view this document as the result of the collaborative efforts of many. Special thanks is due to Pastor Chad Vegas of Sovereign Grace Church in Bakersfield, California for sharing helpful insights from their elders. Pastor Graham Gunden of GBC, Cape Coral, did the bulk of the research and original drafting of this statement in behalf of all of the Grace elders.

The members of Grace Baptist Church stand within the two-thousand-year Christian tradition. We are committed to the doctrinal standards of our church constitution and the supremacy of the Holy Scriptures. Because of this, we affirm our religion’s principles of liberty of conscience as expressed in our confession of faith, which is the Second London Confession of 1689 (see chapter 21, paragraph 2). We are committed to honoring and preserving human life from conception to natural death and teach that individuals and families bear full responsibility for making medical and healthcare decisions in the fear or the Lord. We also affirm that an individual’s conscience is a gift from God and is answerable to Him alone who is Lord of the conscience.
Therefore, Scripture teaches that any act a person believes to be sin is in fact sin for that person, whether it is intrinsically sinful or not. “For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin” (Rom. 14:23). “Without faith it is impossible to please God” (Heb. 11:6). Furthermore, our church confession states that, “subjection, in all things lawful commanded by them ought to be yielded by us to them, in the Lord.” (2nd London Confession of 1689, Chapter 24, paragraph 3). Mandatory medical procedures do not conform to that which is lawful, i.e. that which conforms to the eternal law of God.
These mandates fall outside the jurisdiction of the divinely instituted authority of the state or employer. Therefore, individuals are under no moral obligation to comply with such mandates. Furthermore, these mandates fall outside the jurisdiction of the government according to the first amendment of our own constitution.
Therefore, we state our unequivocal support for the right to refuse, on the basis of religious conviction, mandatory medical procedures (including vaccinations), whether ordered by a branch of civil government, an employer, or any other institution to which an individual is subject or dependent. In addition, the Holy Scriptures teach Christians that our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit. “Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own” (1 Corinthians 6:19). Stewardship of our bodies before God necessitates being free to make decisions about health and medical treatments according to Scriptural principles, the light of nature, and the dictates of individual conscience. Therefore, the refusal to obey mandatory medical procedures may also be based on an individual’s sincere belief that his or her (or his or her child’s) life, health, welfare, or ethical integrity is potentially endangered by such procedures.
We affirm that our Christian religion protects the liberty of individuals and families to refuse any medical procedure or product on the basis of sincerely held concerns for known or unknown side effects, experimental or emergency uses, potential involvement in fetal cell lines whether in development or testing, or medical and/or political corruption or coercion. The sixth commandment—“You shall not murder”— makes every person responsible “to preserve our own life, and the life of others” and prohibits “the taking away of our own life, or the life of our neighbor, unjustly, or whatsoever tendeth thereunto.” (The Baptist Catechism, Q72-73.) Many Christians believe, in good faith, that involvement in such medical procedures violates this commandment.
Therefore, in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, we uphold the rights and responsibilities of the members of Grace Baptist Church to make responsible medical decisions for themselves and their families, including their right to refuse vaccinations or gene therapies on religious grounds. And we hereby call upon all authorities: political, governmental, organizational, or otherwise, to respect these deeply held religious convictions by upholding this religious liberty and/or providing religious exemptions as requested.
On Behalf of the Elders of Grace Baptist Church of Cape Coral,
Thomas Ascol, Senior Pastor

To Whom It May Concern:
The elders of Grace Baptist Church are writing on the behalf of _______________, a member in good standing of our church since _____, to confirm that his/her sincerely held religious beliefs prevent him/her from receiving a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination. He/she is sincerely convinced that to take the vaccine would violate the law of God as found in the Holy Scriptures as well as in our church’s Confession of Faith (Romans 14:23; Hebrews 11:6; 1 Corinthians 6:19-20; Second London Baptist Confession of Faith, 21.2; 24.3; The Baptist Catechism, Q 72-73). Our church teaches that to take any action one believes in conscience to be contrary to the law of God is to defy God’s authority and is therefore not permissible. Our eldership affirms the right (and where applicable, the obligation) for each member of Grace Baptist Church to take religious exception to mandatory vaccination by governmental authorities and/or employers on this basis. Our church has also issued a statement confirming this right and obligation according to our doctrinal standards and Scripture.
____________’s application for religious exemption is, therefore, not merely a matter of personal opinion or philosophy, but of bona fide religious conviction with the support of his/her church. Thank you for your understanding in this matter.
Sincerely,
Thomas Ascol

Grace Baptist Church – Statement on Religious Exemption to Mandatory Medical Procedures

Tweet Share

Is the Son of God inferior to God? The answer to this question, after the incarnation, is both “yes and no.” The Son of God is indeed inferior to God, according to His assumed human nature, but He is not inferior to God, according to His divine nature. To understand this answer, it is necessary to understand that the incarnate Son of God has two natures, a true divine nature and a true human nature, united in the one person of the Son of God. At the incarnation, the eternal Son of God took to Himself a true human nature. In theology, this union of Christ’s two natures in one person is called the “hypostatic union” which refers to a “personal union” of true God and true man.

The Hypostatic Union

Consider the hypostatic union in a bit more detail. The term “hypostatic” is from a Greek word, hupostasis, or person, and refers to the manner in which a rational nature subsists. The term “person,” according to Boethius, refers to “an individual substance of a rational nature.”[1] Others have defined it as “subsistence endowed with reason.”[2] “In general, ‘person,’ is defined as a substance, or individual nature, endowed with intelligence, subsisting by itself, really and truly distinguished from others by its own incommunicable property.”[3]

To understand the hypostatic union, it is necessary to reflect on the terms “nature” and “person.” The difference between a rational nature and a person is that a person refers to the particular way in which a rational nature acts. Rational natures do not act. Only persons act. Or to put it differently, rational natures subsist as particular persons, which act distinctively within and by those natures. 

Consider three examples of rational natures that subsist as persons: God, angels, and human beings. God’s being is rational, and His nature exists in three ways, persons, or subsistences: the Father is neither begotten nor proceeding, the Son is eternally begotten from the Father, and the Spirit is eternally proceeding from the Father and the Son. Angels also have a rational nature, and each individual angel subsists as a particular person, or way of being and acting as an angel. Each human being also has a rational nature, and each individual human being exists as a particular person, or way of acting as a human.

This brings us to the Lord Jesus Christ. At the incarnation, the eternal person of the Son of God assumed a human nature. The eternal Son of God is nothing other than the very being of God subsisting personally, and thus at the incarnation, the whole divine essence, subsisting in the manner of the Son, joined Himself to a human nature. The Bible speaks of the incarnation of the Son of God in various ways. It says “the Word became flesh” (Jn 1:14), “came in the flesh” (1 Jn 4:2-3), “took the form of a servant” (Phil 2:7), was made a “partaker of flesh and blood” (Heb 2:14), and was “manifested in the flesh” (1 Tim 3:16).

The Son of God is indeed inferior to God, according to His assumed human nature, but He is not inferior to God, according to His divine nature.

But how are the divine and human natures united in Christ? What sort of union is it? It is not an essential union, in which the two essences are blended together. It is not a covenantal union, such that the two natures simply agree together. It is not a natural union as in the union of the human body and the soul. It is not an external union, like the union of God with the angel of the Lord, or of angels to their bodily manifestations.  Rather it is a true personal union.

But what is meant by personal union? The great Reformed theologian, Francis Turretin helpfully describes the personal union of Christ’s two natures. He said that God the Son (the divine nature subsisting) assumed to Himself a human nature, which does not subsist in the manner of a human person. It is crucial to grasp that the human nature of Christ is not a human person and has no personal subsistence of its own. If the human nature subsisted, it would be a human person, not a divine person. If it is claimed that the human nature subsisted as the Son of God, then the human nature would subsist as God, which is impossible because the finite cannot grasp or contain the infinite. Rather, Christ’s human nature, a true body and a reasonable soul, which did not subsist personally, was assumed into the person of the Word, or the Son, and was so joined to Him that the human nature became “substantial with the Logos.”[4]

Turretin goes on to explain the way this personal union happens. He says that the union of the two natures is by a “personal sustenation,” activity, or operation, of the Son of God within and by the human nature, such that Christ’s human nature really is one of the two natures of the Son of God.[5] Put differently, the action of God the Son within, throughout, and by His rational human nature is nothing other than the very person of God the Son, according to His human nature. Herman Bavinck, quoting Thomas, writes, “The human nature in Christ must be considered as though it were a kind of organ of the divine nature.”[6] The Triune God so acts upon a human nature that the resulting action, or personal operation, within, throughout, and by that nature is that of the Son of God.

The Incarnate Son

The hypostatic union means that after the incarnation and for all eternity afterwards, the eternal Son of God really has two natures, a divine nature and a human nature, acting according to both natures at the same time. It means that when Mary conceived Jesus by the power of the Holy Spirit, she really carried God the Son in her womb. In Luke 1:31-32, the angel Gabriel said to Mary, “And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High.” Therefore, Mary is rightly called “Theotokos,” the God-bearer.

The incarnation further means that when Christ died on the cross for our sins, the Son of God Himself really died for our sins, according to His human nature. The divine nature cannot die. But God the Son can die, according to His human nature by virtue of the hypostatic union. 1 Corinthians 15:3 says, “Christ died for our sins.” Without the hypostatic union, all we would be able to say is that a human nature died for us. But a human nature in itself cannot possibly atone for our sins. We must be able to say that the eternal Son of God Himself died for our sins, according to His human nature, and He did so by virtue of the hypostatic union.

But while it is true that the Son of God truly assumed a human nature into His person, it is also true that He continued to be God, and to act according to His divine nature. Thus, while the Son of God came down from heaven, and was born of a virgin, He did so in such a way that He never left heaven (Jn 3:13). The Son, according to His divine nature, remained in heaven and fully present in every place, even when He became flesh and dwelt among us. Similarly, though the Son of God ascended into heaven, He did so in such a way that He never left earth  (Matt 28:20). Though the Son of God, according to His human nature, went back into heaven, His divine nature is present with us forever.

The Son as Not Inferior to God

The Bible speaks in ways that must be understood in terms of what has been called “partitive exegesis.” The Second London Confession 8.7 says, “Christ, in the work of mediation, acts according to both natures, by each nature doing that which is proper to itself; yet by reason of the unity of the person, that which is proper to one nature is sometimes in Scripture, attributed to the person denominated by the other nature.” Thus, sometimes, the Bible speaks of Christ and His actions in terms of His divine nature, and sometimes it speaks of Christ and His actions according to His human nature. Other times, it speaks of the human nature in terms of the divine nature and the divine nature in terms of the human nature (Jn 3:3; Acts 20:28). This is appropriate because of the real personal union of the two natures.

We must be able to say that the eternal Son of God Himself died for our sins, according to His human nature, and He did so by virtue of the hypostatic union.

Many passages of Scripture teach that Christ, the Son of God, is not inferior to God, but is in fact God Himself. Scripture says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (Jn 1:1); He declares, “I and the Father are one” (Jn 10:30), which does not mean that they are the same person, but that they share the same essence. Hebrews 1:8 says, “of the Son he says, Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;” and after the resurrection, “Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!” (Jn 10:28); (Heb 1:8); He is declared to be the “King of kings and Lord of lords” (Rev 19:16). The Bible teaches that Christ created everything: “All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made” (Jn 1:3); He is present everywhere: “where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them” (Matt 18:20); He is all powerful: “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me” (Matt 28:18). He does not change: “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever” (Heb 13:8); He forgives sin: “Your sins are forgiven” (Lk 7:48).

None of these attributes belong to the Son’s human nature, but only to the Son, according to His divine nature. Therefore, the Son of God, according to his divine nature is equal to God. But that is not the whole story.

The Son as Inferior to God

The Bible teaches that the Son of God, according to His human nature, is in fact inferior to God. And that must be the case, since how could the Son of God identify with us, substitute for us, or represent us, unless He assumes a human nature, which is inferior to God? The ancient creeds recognize this fact. The Athanasian Creed declares that the incarnate Son is “Perfect God; and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting. Equal to the Father, as touching his Godhead; and inferior to the Father as touching his Manhood. Who although he is God and Man; yet he is not two, but one Christ” (emphasis added). Therefore, the incarnate Son stands in a twofold natural relation to God the Father. With respect to His divine nature, He is equal to the Father, but with respect to His human nature, He is inferior to the Father.

The Bible plainly teaches that the Son, according to His human nature, is inferior to God. He changed and grew: “Jesus increased in wisdom and in stature and in favor with God and man” (Lk 2:52); He experienced hunger: “He was hungry” (Matt 4:2); He experienced thirst: “I thirst” (Jn 19:28); He became tired: “Jesus wearied” (Jn 4:6); He was tempted: “He Himself suffered when tempted” (Heb 2:18); He was weak: “He was crucified in weakness” (2 Cor 13:4); He died: “He breathed His last” (Lk 23:46). None of these things can be true of the divine nature. They can only be true of Christ’s human nature, which is inferior to the divine.

One text that shows the inferiority of the Son of God, according to His human nature is 2 Corinthians 8:9, which says, “For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sake he became poor, so that you by his poverty might become rich.” The Son of God, prior to the incarnation, was rich only, but at the incarnation, He became poor, according to His human nature. Yet it is important for us to understand that He only became poor (according to His human nature) in such a way that He remained rich (according to His divine nature). The only way we can become rich through Christ’s poverty is if He also remains rich! Thus, the Son of God, according to His human nature is inferior to God the Father, but He is equal to God the Father, according to His divine nature.

Summary and Conclusion

To summarize, Jesus Christ is true God and true man, united in the one person of the eternal Son of God. Therefore, He is equal to God the Father, according to His divine nature, but inferior to God the Father, according to His human nature. This means that the incarnate Son of God is simultaneously weak and all powerful, ignorant and all knowing, located in space and fully present everywhere, dependent and independent, creature and Creator, limited and infinite, temporal and timelessly eternal, changing and unchangeable, subject and sovereign, visible and invisible, and so forth.

This is absolutely necessary for our salvation. If Christ were less than God, He could not save us. If He were more than man, He could not be our substitute. JC Ryle puts it well:

I find a deep mine of comfort in this thought, that Jesus is perfect Man no less than perfect God. He in whom I am told by Scripture to trust is not only a great High Priest, but a feeling High Priest. He is not only a powerful Savior, but a sympathizing Savior. He is not only the Son of God, mighty to save, but the Son of Man, able to feel….

Had my Savior been God only, I might perhaps have trusted Him, but I never could have come near to Him without fear. Had my Savior been Man only, I might have loved Him, but I never could  have felt sure that he was able to take away my sins. But, blessed be God, my Savior is God as well as Man, Man as well as God – God, and so able to deliver me – Man, and so able to feel with me.[7]

[1]    Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica I, q. 29, a. 1.

[2]    William Den Boer and Reimer A. Faber, eds., Synopsis of a Purer Theology, vol. 1 (Davenant: China, 2023), 70.

[3]    Ibid., 71.

[4]    Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, vol. 2 (Phillipsburg: P&R, 1994), 312.

[5]    Ibid.

[6]    Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, vol. 3 (Baker: Grand Rapids, 2006), 307; Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica 3, q. 4, a. 2, ad. 2.

[7]    JC Ryle, Holiness (Charles Nolan: Moscow, 2001), 238-239.