The Heretical Christology of Pastor Steven Anderson Critiqued

Steven Anderson is the founder of the New Independent Fundamental Baptist movement, although it is not a large denomination by numbers, it has attracted a large group of young followers due to the internet. However, I wrote this article as a warning of this teaching of Eutychianism, which Steven Anderson teaches. Eutychianism or Monophysitism has its origins in the 5th century, from a man called Eutyches. Eutyches argued that the two natures of Jesus (human and divine), were not only united in the person of Jesus Christ, but also mixed together. Thus, Eutyches argued that Jesus is like God and man put into a blender, where the humanity mixes with the divinity like in a soup, thus Jesus' human nature is not the same as ours.

This teaching largely died out after the Council of Chalcedon, however it has been recently resurrected by the NIFB, through Steven Anderson. He has himself even called the classical view of Jesus "stupidity". According to Steven Anderson, because Jesus had two parents (God the Father and Mary), they must have mixed like any act of procreation would, Steven argued that just as a son has half of their dna from the father and half of their dna from the mother, Jesus would have had half of his essence from God and half of his essence from Mary, which then mixed like a blender. Now, there are obvious problems with this, as Steven clearly is thinking anthropomorphistically, additionally Steven Anderson's doctrine of Christ undermines the humanity of Jesus, and denies Jesus as consubstantiality with us.

A biblical refutation of Eutychianism

Steven Anderson has argued that Jesus is called the "Son" because of the incarnation, where he received half of his dna from God's divine essence. However, biblically the sonship of Christ is eternal, and He was the Son even before the incarnation.

There are many verses which speak of "Son" creating everything (Colossians 1:13-16; Hebrews 1:2), if Christ being the "Son" is only a matter of the incarnation, it would not have been the Son who created the universe before the incarnation. God is also called the Father prior to the incarnation (there can be no Father without a Son), for example Jesus in John 16:28 says that when Jesus came forth from the Father, He was already the Son, however the incarnation is the result of the coming forth. However, bible prophecy already calls Jesus the Son in the Old Testament, for example Proverbs 30.

The heresy of Eutychianism

We must also focus on the full humanity of Christ, Hebrews declares that Christ is like us "in every way" (Hebrews 4:15), if Jesus was a mixture or a blend of God and man into one, Jesus would not have been a normal human. Imagine this, what if Jesus' dna was half crocodile and half man, would such a person atone for our sins? Certainly He would not be able represent humanity in the cross, if He was half crocodile. In the same sense, Christ could not have represented humanity in the cross if we assume Christ being mixed. Monophysitism follows in the spirit of Docetism, which fails to affirm Christs full humanity, Docetism was condemned by John in 1 John 4:3.

Anderson's anthropomorphism must also be avoided, we should not bind God to the ways of the world. Although it is certain that Christ had a full set of chromosomes, they must have been human chromosomes, we are told is that Jesus must have been fully consubstantial with us for the atonement, thus we can rule out the view that half of Jesus' chromosomes are of the divine essence, or "God's dna" (which I would argue doesn't exist, although Steven Anderson believes is real) as heretical.

Secondly, if Eutychianism is true, and the two natures are blend together, then the human limitations of Jesus would also be non-existent, for example God does not get tired (Isa. 40:28), but Jesus got tired and slept? This cannot be explained unless we have two distinct but united natures. 

The Athanasian creed

The Athanasian creed states: "For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess; that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man; God, of the Substance [Essence] of the Father; begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the Substance [Essence] of his Mother, born in the world. 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. One; not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh; but by assumption of the Manhood into God. One altogether; not by confusion of Substance [Essence]; but by unity of Person."

Although the Athanasian creed is fallible, it does provide a good biblical summary of the doctrine of Christ. The problem here is, that when the Athanasian creed states " One altogether; not by confusion of Substance [Essence]; but by unity of Person.", Steven Anderson would deny the term "not by confusion of substance". However, as already demonstrated, is blatantly unbiblical and attacks the atonement.