Words?

As a former journalist the meaning and use of words is very important to me. Once, when I was a sports writer covering a girls' basketball game, I asked the coach what happened during the game and he said that his team had been manhandled. The fact that we were talking about a basketball team made up of teenage girls made that particular word stick out to me.

When people talk about their faith they often downplay the importance of using the right words. I'm trying to find the right answer myself. How important is the use of the right words? Last week I was listening to a religious program on the radio and a minister was telling this woman about the importance of the Incarnation. She said, "Oh, I believe that Jesus is God in human form." That reminded me of the Wonder Twins who could lightly punch one another's knuckles and say, "form of a glacier" and transform into the form of a glacier. They did not actually become a glacier. They were super heroes in the form of a glacier. See the problem? They only appeared to be a glacier.

So, is the wording "in human form" correct? In my humble opinion this woman's words did not describe Jesus Christ. The Council of Chalcedon said the following:

Following, then, the holy fathers, we unite in teaching all men to confess the one and only Son, our Lord Jesus Christ. This selfsame one is perfect both in deity and in humanness; this selfsame one is also actually God and actually man, with a rational soul [meaning human soul] and a body. He is of the same reality as God as far as his deity is concerned and of the same reality as we ourselves as far as his humanness is concerned; thus like us in all respects, sin only excepted. Before time began he was begotten of the Father, in respect of his deity, and now in these "last days," for us and behalf of our salvation, this selfsame one was born of Mary the virgin, who is God-bearer in respect of his humanness.

That's why I have trouble with the idea of Jesus being "God in human form." The teaching of Christians for so many centuries has been that Jesus is God and man, not God in the form of man. But, how much does it matter that we all talk the same? This woman, who was really more concerned about kicking her nicotine habit than deep theology, probably isn't sitting at home right now thinking about personhood and what it means to have a rational human soul and/or a divine nature.

Hebrew 2:14-15 says, "Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil—and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death."

I think it's important to speak clearly about the Incarnation because without Jesus assuming our nature we cannot be saved. However, I struggle with how much emphasis we should put on speaking correctly. I think I should make sure I don't say something that seems to "water down" the reality of Jesus' humanity or divinity, but should I appoint myself the language police for others? Can I assume that this woman I heard on the radio doesn't truly believe in the Incarnation? How do I know that she doesn't have a correct understand of this great mystery and just chose her words poorly? I don't.

However, I think it's bad to let people be ignorant of what our faith really teaches. I think it's uncharitable to let people think that, for example, Jesus only looked like a man and was only divine. So, where is the balance? I've been in churches where no one seemed to worry about what anybody really believed, and I've been in churches where people will make sure you know you're wrong if you speak incorrectly about an article of faith. I've been uncomfortable in both settings.