– DEITY OF JESUS –
THE UNION: DEITY/HUMAN
LET’S GO OVER THIS ONCE MORE. There are millions that are confused over this “union” thing. Let’s get orthodox again.
The orthodox view holds that Christ was both divine and human. I know some forbid (us) to mention Jesus Christ as “human” and “divine” = two natures; but for the sake of understanding that both human and divine natures are both complete in themselves yet they are so organically and indissolubly united that they make up ONE person-Jesus Christ = the God man.
Jesus spoke of Himself as ONE, no interchange of speech between the 2 natures. But we know the Bible uses such titles as “the Son of God” and “the Son of man”. Jesus never spoke of Himself as “God the Father” or “God the Holy Spirit”, for He was a distinct person.
Jesus, being completely human, acted like man before the fall of man. Fallen men are re-created men in Christ, a new creation/creature.
So, Christ Jesus, as God, can uphold the place of Deity. As a man, He can be mediator between God the Father and fallen man.
There are dozens and dozens of Scriptures that make the distinction between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; too many to go into all this. One can consult good orthodox scholars for this. I do have an outline showing the three are distinct, yet ONE. If my readers need proof, I can respond. The N.T. is full of verses whereby we find “Son of God”/”Son of man”/”The Father”/”the Spirit” etc..
THE SAME?
JESUS SAID that He was the same that He claimed to be “from the beginning,” as in Jn. 8:25. So, because He always claimed to be only “the Son” and not “the Father,” we can believe the two are distinct persons, divine persons.
Some question Jn. 14:9. Well, let’s take a minute to see what Jesus was saying there:
“Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?”
Jesus had well established the fact that He was not “the Father” in verse 6-“Jesus saith unto him (Thomas), I am the way, the Truth, and the life: no man comes unto THE FATHER, but by me.” Here Christ claims that He is the way to “the Father.”
Philip breaks into the conversation between Jesus and Thomas: “…show us the Father, and it sufficeth us,” verse 8. Then Jesus answers, “…Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip?” (v.9). It seems like Jesus is hinting that He is “the Father.” One has to take into account that all Jesus said, and did, and was, He was the express image of God’s very person.
Jesus makes it clear that, “…I am in the Father, and the Father in me; the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, He doeth the works” (v. 10).
So, verse 9, “…he that hath seen Me hath seen the Father” is explained. The truth between “the Father” and “the Son” had already established in Jn. 8:28, 29 and 10:38.
The Greek word for “seen” (v. 9) is “horao,” (Strong’s #G3708) to discern, to experience, perceive, comprehend. The English word “seen” means here to truly comprehend and not only to see with the natural eye, but the spiritual eye (see Jn. 1:18; 6:46; 8:38; 1 Jn. 3:6; 2 Jn. 11).
You might want to study the following texts that prove that Jesus and the Father are not one and the same: Jn. 14:1, 2; 14:6; 14:7; 14:9;-there are lots more. “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father” is a true statement of representation of another person (1 Jn. 2:6; 3:3, 7; 4:17; 1 Cor. 11:1; Phil. 4:9; 2 Cor. 3:1-3, 18 and Rom. 8:29).
Also, one needs to study out the SON in connection with His Deity. Some think that the Son (human) existed in eternity past. This is no small task but needful if one is to make the distinction between Deity and humanity (The theory of eternal Sonship needs to be corrected. At one time I didn’t see a need to do this).
Early Christian Beliefs
WHAT DID THE EARLY CHURCH FATHERS believe about the deity of Christ? Below are a few quotes:
Justin Martyr (c. AD 160), Ante-Nicene Fathers, 1.211 (-vol 1, p. 211).
“For Christ is King, Priest, God, Lord, Angel, and man;”
Irenaeus (c. AD 180), 1.449.
“Jesus is Himself in His own right, beyond all men who ever lived, God, Lord, King Eternal, and the Incarnate Word…and the Mighty God;”
Clement of Alexandria (c. AD 195), 2.438.
“He is the circle of all powers…the Word called Alpha and the Omega of whom alone the end becomes the beginning…”
Origen (c. AD 248), 4.541.
“His Son is God the Word, and Wisdom, and Truth, and Righteousness…,”
Cyprian (c. AD 250), 5.521-5.527.
“Christ is called a sheep and a Lamb who was to be slain…Christ is also called a Stone…He Himself is both Judge and King.”
Lactantius (c. AD 304-313), 7.110.
“He is called…Savior, Emmanuel means ‘God with us’. Because He was born of a virgin, men should confess that God was with them—that is, on the earth and in mortal flesh;”
Extended discussion of Lactantius (c. AD 304-313, w), 7.215.
“He is the Deliverer, Judge, Avenger, King, and God-whom we call Christ;”
Melito (c. AD 170), 8.751.
“He really exists, and by His power everything subsists. This Being is in no sense made, nor did He ever come into existence. Rather, He has existed from eternity, and He will continue to exist forever and ever;”
Theophilus (c. AD 180), 2.90.
“He is without beginning, because He is unbegotton. And He is unchangeable; because He is immortal. And He is called God.”
OMNIPOTENCE OMNISCIENCE -OMNIPRESENCE
IF ONE CARES TO SEARCH OUT the above meaning in Scripture, one will conclude that Christ had the above. Some scripture relates to His pre-earthly existence, some to His earthly ministry. But Christ always worked with the Holy Spirit and the Father. He never acted alone without the anointing of the Holy Ghost. This was because of the (GK) Kenosis (Strong’s #G2758 from Kenoo) (Phil. 2:5-8 which we’ve already looked into). “Kenosis” of Christ literally means that Christ “emptied Himself.” It is translated “made void” in Romans 4:14, “make void” in 1 Cor. 9:15, “make of none effect” in 1 Cor. 1:17, and “be in vain” in 2 Cor. 9:3. So, Christ, on earth, relied upon both Father and Holy Spirit. In plain English, He humbled Himself from deity to humanity (yet never losing deity).
Although Jesus the Christ had the 3 “o’s,” He was limited because of the “kenosis.” As we read certain Scriptures that relate to the 3 “o’s,” it appears that Christ was not limited in power, knowledge, etc., others seem to think that He was. Although Jesus Christ was God (the only Begotten Son), He too, was filled with the Holy Spirit, and was led by Him (see Lk. 4:1-). Verse 14 states, “And Jesus returned in the POWER of the SPIRIT into Galilee…” Jesus never LOST deity, but divested Himself of His divine attributes, or at least the power to use them at will. Remember, Christ Jesus became a “human” servant, so He had to deny His deity at times in order to relate to man in all things (Heb. 2:9-18). This concept is difficult to explain. It is difficult to explain the limitations of Christ in knowledge and wisdom in the light of the fact that He had “omniscience” (“all knowing”). The same goes for “omnipresence” (on-the-present”) and “omnipotence” (all power).
Jesus, as a man, had to rely upon both the Father and the Holy Spirit, daily (as we do!). Isa. 7:14-16 speaks of Christ Jesus learning to choose the good and refuse the evil; as a child, He grew. In Isa. 11:1 and 53:1-12 we see Jesus the Messiah “growing up” before His God as a “tender plant” and “as a root out of dry ground; which needs and depends upon another source of nourishment.
Thus Far
WE HAVE LEARNED that the premier O.T. confession is the famous Jewish monotheistic claim found in Deut. 6:4: “Hear O Israel, the Lord our God is One.” We have learned that the N.T. confession adds one-Jesus of Nazareth, which the Jews, to this day, reject! “Jesus is Lord” (e.g., Phil. 2:11). This presents two personal foci-Father and Son-for the accolade of “Lord our God”, as written explicitly by Paul; “As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one. For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.”
So, the Theo-logic of this statement led the early church to the doctrine of Christ’s deity, His co-equal status and nature with God the Father. Without this fundamental tenet of faith, Christianity isn’t Christianity. And we have many in this hour and in this generation denying this doctrine.
MORE THAN A MAN!
THE N.T. PROVES that Jesus was more than a “man,” He was “God,” or “deity,” also. He was the (pre-)existent Logos/Word. Personally, I can’t prove that God, nor the Son, exists-but our critics can’t prove that they do not.
The “deity” assertion is rooted in the uniqueness of Christ’s own life teachings, and death/resurrection/ ascension. We can grasp that Jesus Christ was/is the second Adam, a new Moses (e.g., “you have heard that it was said (by Moses/prophets)…but I say to you…” (Mt. 5-7).
Jesus was quite different from these modern-day “Christian” leaders; He had ΝΟ self-interests-politically, socially, economically-apart from the O.T. vision of a Kingdom of righteousness, justice and peace (shalom). Unlike these greedy, selfish, ambitions and worldly leaders of our day, Jesus WALKS the WALK.
While His early followers saw in Him the anticipated Jewish Messiah (Gk. Christos), a title not expressly used by Him (but He never denied either), this title did not/does not imply “divinity.” But “Son of man”/”Son of God” does. While the Hebraism title “Son of man” can mean “human being” (Ezekiel’s self-designation), it gives intertestamental apocalyptic reflections on Daniel’s “One like a son of man” (7:13). The “Son of man” on Jesus’ lips refers to, as some claim, the expectation of a pre-existent heavenly figure coming as final Judge (see Mk. 14:61-64).
Prof. T.R. Thompson, BA, M.Div, PhD (Calvin College) says, “…association of Christ with deity is found in the title ‘son of God’.” Though divine sonship admitted a range of candidates in the O.T. (angels, Davidic King, Heb. nation), in the N.T., an exclusive claim develops around Christ, one He Himself admits (Mk. 12:6, 7; 13:32; Lk. 10:22). This culminates in the Johannine assertion that Jesus is the ‘unique Son’, the ‘only begotten Son’ (Jn. 3:16). This both distinguishes Christ personally and puts Him in the closest possible relationship of ‘deity’ with God the Father and is reinforced by the fact that the best manuscript reading of John 1:18, typically translated, ‘only begotten Son’, is more accurately rendered (ONLY BEGOTTEN God,” (emphasis mine), (New Dictionary of Christian Apologetics, 2006, p. 208).
Only Begotten God!
Yes! Exactly!
JESUS CHRIST WAS BOTH deity human-one-the Son as the humanly incarnate “sent one” is subordinate to God, He is at the same time so united as ONE with the Father (Jn. 10:30) that to see Jesus is to see the Father (14:9). We have seen the Christ’s association with the God of Israel is particularly punctuated in St. John by a series of ” I AM” sayings (e.g., Gk. “ego eimi”
Strong’s #G1473 and G1510), which in essence identifies Jesus the Christ with the divine name YHWH, first revealed to Moses in Ex. 3:14; “ego eimi” in the LXX (Septuagint, The Gk. version of the Heb. Scriptures) is quoted and supposed by N.T. authors.
We’ve already looked at Jn. 8:58, which predicates (e.g. 11:25, “I am the resurrection and the life”).
Apocalyptic Son
WE’VE LOOKED INTO THIS also (Matt. 25:31-46; Mk. 8:38) where Jesus uses “Son of man,” implied as divinity. Also, the “Son of man” can forgive sins (Mk. 2:7-12), which the Jews call blasphemy.
So, Jesus’ claim to “deity,” being ONE with the Father, takes Him out of the “human alone/only” category of mere wise teacher/prophet etc..
So, Christian faith in Christ’s deity depends on the reality of His ONENESS with the Father and His resurrection from the dead. Biblical Christianity emphasized, from the beginning, the historical reliability (non-falsification) of the empty-tomb and the cloud of eyewitnesses to the risen Christ.
TODAY
WE TOO, ARE COMPELLED by our personal encounter with the risen Christ. Dead church religion never experiences this “living force.” The very force (power) that raised Jesus from the dead, now dwells in all born-again, Spirit filled believers. The very Pentecostal Power (Acts 2) is present in the born-again believer-a Spiritual Verve (e.g. energy and enthusiasm) and vitality (eternal life/quality of life) that nourishes our faith, hope, and charity. John Wesley’s father called it “the inner witness,” which we would call the “inner witness and testimony of the Holy Ghost (the intuitive sense and experience with the risen Christ in its transforming effect).
I really feel sorry for mere dead church members who have never experienced what I write here. There are so many that merely belong to some sort of church or organization, but never have been Biblically “born-again” (Jn. 3). This life-affirming and renewing Spirit is real. We can experience immortality of soul and spirit in this life and our body will experience it after the final resurrection.
CHRIST Is God!
NO DOUBT ABOUT IT! (Jn. 1:1; 20:28; Heb. 1:8, 9 etc.) Another probably 5 can be added: Jn. 1:18; Rom. 9:5; Titus 2:13; 2 Pet. 1:1 and 1 Jn. 5:20.
Jesus is Lord!
NO DOUBT ABOUT IT!, though “Lord” admits of various senses (sir, master, household lord etc.), as ultimately applied to Jesus the Christ in the confession, “Jesus is Lord,” it implies deity, since “Lord” (Gk. “kurios” (kyrios), Strong’s #G2962) is the Word used for the divine name YHWH in the LXX.
So, to call Christ “Lord” in the context of worship is the same as “God.” Deut. 6:4 uses “Lord” and “God” in the monotheistic confession.
The name YHWH distinguished God as Creator from all the other so-called gods. We’ve already seen where Father/Son were creators together of the world’s creation (Jn. 1:3; Col. 1:16; Heb. 1:38), in sustenance (Col. 1:17), goal (Eph. 1:9), and re-creation (2 Cor. 5:17). And in finality, Christ will be the primary agent of the yet-to-be resurrection of the dead, the event associated with His second coming in JUDGMENT (Jn. 5:25-29). These are uniquely DIVINE ACTS.
Prof. Thompson writes: “Most telling for the claim of Christ’s deity is the fact that He was worshipped together with the Father. All the designations that ‘Christ is God’, are probably of liturgical origin, indicating that Christ was worshipped during NT times.” He continues, “This is bolstered by the ascription of doxologies to Christ in Romans 9:5; 2 Tim. 4:18; 2 Peter 3:18 and prayers to Christ in His own right, Acts 7:59, 60; 1 Cor. 16:22; 2 Cor. 12:8.” He concludes, “If worshipped, Christ had to be considered on the divine side of the Creator/creature divide, since to worship Him as a creature would constitute both idolatry and polytheism” (Ibid, p. 209).
Panoply of Titles
WE’VE ALREADY LOOKED INTO THIS, but two books in particular integrate the evidence for Christ’s deity: the Gospel of John and the book of Revelation. Both elaborate the panoply of titles, functions and worship that accord Jesus the Christ’s divine status with God the Father.
In 325 A.D. the church, by ecumenical declaration (at Nicaea), stated that Jesus Christ is of EQUAL DEITY with the Father. But this declaration had/has its counterpart; the rejecting of His pre-existence, Jesus is seen as a naturally born man, a creature, who was later adopted into special relationship with the Father, thereby achieving a high and holy degree of divinity or “God-likeness,” but failing to be “co-equal” with the eternal Father. But this view is FALSE!
CONSTANTINE
CONSTANTINE CENSURED this false view at Nicaea, he endorsed the true concept of deity (God) as indivisible and incommunicable-possessed only by the Father; Arius held to the false idea that Christ (the Son) as a discrete person could not share this same “divine”/”deity” nature. Christ was/is God! He is not some metaphysical bridge between God and man. This is considered today as New Age thought.
Homoousios
JESUS WAS AND IS homoousios, that is of the same essence with the Father. This established the official orthodox (right/correct opinion), thereby endorsing an incarnational adoptionism, hence, the Trinity, or better, Tri-Unity Father, Son, Holy Ghost.
The Cappadocian settlement of the Trinity (c. 381) defined Father, Son and Spirit as 3 persons who share the same deity, 3 persons in one God. The deity of Christ stands or falls with the doctrine of the Trinity. The unitarian conception of God as one person (Father) is to deny the deity of Christ, hence, advocating an adoptionistic conception of Christ (if He is recognized as more than a moral teacher/prophet).
Christ Prayed-
HE PRAYED in Jn. 17:5 for His preexistent glory to be restored-it was not until after His death and resurrection that He made that famous statement in Matt. 28:18: “…ALL POWER is given unto Me in heaven and in earth.” As a man, Jesus relied upon the power and infilling of the Holy Ghost (Lk. 4) to do the works/miracles (see Jn. 3:34, 35; 5:22, 26, 27; 17:2; Acts 10:38). Jesus the human did work/miracles in the Father’s name. Some stumble over the words that Jesus said in John 10:29: “My Father, which gave them Me, is greater than all…” In Jn. 14:28 Jesus said, “…I go unto the Father: for My Father is greater than I.” Only in His humanity was He referring, not in His deity. There are dozens of Scriptures that tell us that Jesus the man was under the control/command of the Father and Holy Spirit. I could fill a whole page of verses, but you do your own research.
Jesus Christ (God in flesh) laid aside His omniscience, omnipotence, and other powers in order to operate in Holy Spirit power, the same as we Christians do (we do not possess the 3 “o’s” though, we only operate by the power of the Holy Spirit).
Human Intellectualism
THIS “DEMON” IS the antithesis of godly wisdom and knowledge. Yet, we have many “Christians” so-called, who believe themselves to be WISE and ENLIGHTENED. These folks, intellectual as they may be, are not under the mind of Christ/Spirit.
Jesus never spoke of Himself apart from the Father and the Spirit (see Jn. 8:38, 40; 12:49; 14:10). Nor did He seek His own glory as these “wise ones” do (both “Christian” and “intellectual”). NO! Jesus always gave glory to His Father (Jn. 8:50); He sought to honor His Father (Jn. 8:50). But look at these folks today-they seek glory and honor from others as well as from themselves. Jesus sent His disciples to confirm the “good news” and do “divine works” just as the Father had sent Him (see Jn. 17:18; Mk. 16:15-20; Mt. 28:19, 20; Acts 1:1-14; Heb. 2:3, 4). Consider these religious leaders today-they send their disciples out to proclaim their particular denomination/organization first and foremost. Basically they are religious prostitutes working for the Denomination/Organization pimps!
This WHOLE WHORISH Emergent church Movement has conspired against the doctrine of Christ’s deity, His authority, His Will, His Way, His Works… His WARFARE. The SOLUTION to the religious POLLUTION is BLOODY REVOLUTION- The blood of Jesus cleanses from ALL SIN!!!
(P.S. For more on the Emergent Church Movement, read our article series – Recreant Philosophers!)
This WHOLE BABYLONIAN/CHURCHIANITY movement has gone for the jugular of Biblical Christianity… hoping to KILL it!! Well, I’ve got news for you wolves, God is NOW raising up a NEW REMNANT ARMY that will pull out your fangs!! He will vindicate Himself upon all the pimps and prostitutes, wolves and sucking worms, upon all workers of witchcraft/priestcraft…get ready for HELL on earth dear REBELS.
All this “Jesus was only a good man, a moral teacher” has accommodated the Emergent church into a full-blown revolution against Christ’s full deity, thusly, putting Him on the same plane as sinning men.
If Christ is not divine, how can He lead sinning man out of his sins? We need to stop playing Enlightenment, Political Correctness, Unitarianism, Deism, Mythological Christ, rationalism.
This Emergent Church-the WAY forward they call themselves-is, in reality, the WAY backwards. Brian McLaren devotes several chapters in his really STUPID book, A Generous Orthodoxy, to the subject of Jesus Christ. Be careful when you run across some titles of Christ he uses, for his definitions and terms are not the Bible’s. He refuses to say, “Jesus is God.” This mocking apostate mocks Jesus’ salvation; Cpt. 4 opens with “Jesus: Savior of What?” He mocks the truth about Jesus saving men from eternal Hell after death. Repentance (of one’s sins) is reduced to making society and the physical world a better place, but not turning from sin to faith in Christ. NO! His audacity of heresy is chilling-and he calls himself a “Christian. HA! He is “Christless.”
TAKE THE CHALLENGE
IT IS TIME, PAST TIME, to articulate the credible doctrine of the Tri-Unity, Christ’s deity. On the other hand, let’s be careful not to let Christ’s deity overwhelm His historic humanity (Docetism = the inability to affirm the full humanity of Christ).
Another Truth
THE COUNCIL of Chalcedon (AD 451), as already stated beforehand, met and formulated the faith of the Church respecting the person of Christ – He was both divine and human; His nature was not divided into two persons. But for the sake of distinction, in the Bible, we find both natures revealed. And, as already stated, the eternal Son of God took upon Himself our humanity, and not that the man Jesus acquired divinity.
Fierce controversy has raged over the years about all this. Men ask, “Did the Lord’s deity render sin impossible (for Him), and consequently make His temptations unreal?” The following argument is thusly set forth: “If sin was impossible to Christ, then His temptation by Satan was a worthless display, and His victory a delusion, and His coronation (Phil. 2:6) a shadow.” How do we answer? One charitable answer, as one Bible scholar puts it, to this theological problem, is that, “We may say it was impossible Jesus would sin. We dare not say it was impossible He could not sin” (S.E. Murrell, A Glorious Institution, 1998, p. 122).
Historically, the Christian church (Ekklesia) has argued that Jesus was free, both from hereditary depravity, and from actual sin. We know this by: a) His never offering a sacrifice (as did Jews of His earthly days); b) by His never praying for forgiveness. He went up to the Temple as other Jews did, but never asked for forgiveness; He prayed, “Father, forgive them” (Lk. 23:34); He never prayed, “Forgive Me”. c) He made it a point to tell one religious Jewish leader, Nicodemus in Jn. cpt. 3, that he needed to be re-born, but not He Himself (Jn. 3:7). So, it was not personal experience of sin, but perfect resistance to it that made Jesus our redeemer from sin: d) by always challenging His critics to convict Him of sin (Jn. 8:46 and Jn. 14:30, read those).
You Ask…
“IF THERE WAS no sin in Christ, or tendency to sin, how could He be tempted?” The Bible tells us that He WAS tempted in all points, in the same way that Adam/and all of us are-which is susceptibility to all the forms of desire. To these desires temptations may appeal. Sin consists, not in these desires (lusts too often), but in the doing of them, yielding your body/spirit to them. Satan tempted Jesus, as one put it, in the desire for food, for applause, and for power (Mt. 4:1-11). He was tempted in all points like unto man (see Heb. 4:15). He was tempted in the wilderness (as He fasted 40 days-I’ve done this fasting many, many times, believe me, Satan and his demons will tempt you sorely!); He was tempted in the garden (Lk. 4:13) with fear; He was tempted in Gethsemane (Jn. 14:30)-if possible to deter Christ from His mission, He withstood the test “without sin” (Heb. 4:15). He was tempted on the cross by one of the malefactors (acting under Satan’s mockery). “If thou be Christ, save they self and us” (Lk. 23:39).
Sinlessness
THIS PROVES THAT JESUS CHRIST WAS GOD. Christ Jesus had both natural integrity (as man) and moral integrity (as God). Luke 1:25 testifies to the fact that Christ was “that holy thing which shall be born of thee (Mary) shall be called the Son of God.” Amen! Jesus asked in Jn. 8:46, “which of you convinceth Me of sin?…” 2 Cor. 5:21 tells us that “He hath made Him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him.” Again, Heb. 4:15 tells us that He was our High Priest, touched by our infirmities, tempted in all points, yet He never sinned! Amen! And what about Heb. 9:14? “…offered Himself without spot to God…?” And of 1 Peter 2:22, “Who did no sin…?” 1 Jn. 3:5 says that “He was manifested to take away our sins; and in Him is no sin.”
Get It???
IT’S SIMPLE: while Christ was made to be sin (for us sinners) judicially, yet ethically He was free from hereditary depravity and actual sin. What man can boast of this? NONE!
Jesus had a human body, a will, a soul; He also had/has divinity in virtue of the immanence of God in Him/Holy Spirit indwelling.
JEHOVAH’S PROMISE
ISAIAH 7:14 (which we’ve looked into before) and 9:6 and Micah 5:2 revealed to us that Jehovah Himself would appear in human form-He has kept His promise, “God with us” (Mt. 1:23; Lk. 1:32; Jn. 1:14) has been fulfilled.
Isa. 43:10, 11 declares that Jehovah is God, therefore Jesus Christ and Jehovah God are of the same substance in power and eternity, thus equal. The Matt. 1:22-25 fulfillment is that which was distinctly written about in Isa. 7:14. Jesus Christ is “the mighty God” of Isa. 9:6, not “a mighty God,” but the Almighty God. We find this “mighty God” in Isa. 10:21, where Isaiah (without the article), declares that “Jacob shall return” unto the “mighty God,” and know that Jehovah is by His own word to Moses
“the God of Jacob” (Ex. 3:6). In Jer. 32:18 (with the article) the prophet of God declares that He (Jehovah) is “the great and the Mighty God” (2 forms of saying the same thing). There is only ONE TRUE and MIGHTY GOD (Isa. 45:22), not two (e.g., “a mighty God”/”the mighty God”).
“But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting” (Micah 5:2).
The term “goings forth” can also be rendered “origin” (see B.D.B. Heb. Lexicon of O.T., p. 426 (a) Item (2)-whose “origin” is “from everlasting” must be God Himself, since He alone is “the eternally existing One” (Isa. 44:6, 8). These texts prove that the Deity of the Lord Christ, God in human form, offered Himself “once for all” a RANSOM…the eternal sacrifice who is able to save the worst of sinners.
ORIGIN
JOHN 1:1, which we’ve looked at literally reads: “In the beginning (or “origin,” Gk. Arche, Strong’s #G746) was the Word (Gk. Logos, Strong’s #G3056) and the Word was with God (Ton Theon) and the Word was God (Theos, Strong’s # G2316)” (not “a god”).
WAS GOD!
DR. WALTER MARTIN Ph.D., M.A., points out that “contrary to the translations of The emphatic Diaglott and the New World Translation (Jehovah’s Witnesses translation) translation) the Gk. grammatical construction leaves no doubt whatsoever that this is the only possible rendering of the text (Jn. 1:1),” He continues, “The subject of the sentence is ‘Word’ (Logos), the verb, ‘was’. There can be no direct object following ‘was’ since according to grammatical usage intransitive verbs take no objects but take instead predicate nominatives which refer back to the subject; in this case, ‘word’ (Logos).” (Note: Colwell’s rule clearly states that a definite predicate nominative (Theos = God) never takes an article when it proceeds the verb (was) as in Jn. 1:1).
Dr. Martin refutes the false teaching of the JW’s who use the New World Translation as their Bible, in which they claim that Jesus Christ was created as “a god.”
Martin goes on to refute the JW’s saying that “it is easy to see that no article is needed for ‘Theos’ (God) and to translate it ‘a god’ is both incorrect grammar and poor Greek since ‘Theos’ is the predicate nominative of ‘was’ in the third sentence-clause of the verse and must refer back to the subject, ‘word’ (Logos)” (W. Martin, Kingdom of the Cults, 1965, p. 75).
So, dear readers, Christ then, if He is “the Word made flesh” (Jn. 1:14) can be no one else except God unless the Gk. text and, consequently, God’s Word be denied, (see their NWT Appendix 773-777 on how the JW’s discredit the Gk. text on the above point, for if they accept that Jesus and Jehovah are “One” in nature their (bad) theology can’t stand up, since they deny that “unity” of nature).
Jesus is not “a god,” thus inferior to God, He IS God. The JW’s make a big stink (p. 776b) that Jesus is “a god,” but the Bible, not their NWT, teaches the FULL and EQUAL Deity of Christ.
At best, pseudo-scholarship is used by the JW’s and others who deny Jesus is God. The truth remains, omission of the article with “Theos” does not mean that “a god” other than the One True God is meant.
Bible scholars (Gk. as a major) prove for us that passages where the article is not used with “Theos” and see if the rendering “a god” makes sense (see Mt. 5:9; 6:24; Lk. 1:35, 78; 2:40; Jn. 1:6, 12, 13, 18; 3:2, 21; 9:16, 33; Rom. 1:7, 18; 1 Cor. 1:30; 15:10; Phil. 2:11, 13; Titus 1:1 etc.. We challenge our critics to examine these texts). To be consistent in this rendering of “a god,” JW’s would have to translate every instance where the article is absent as “a god” (nominative), of “a god” (genitive), to or “for a god” (dative), etc.. They won’t attempt this on texts like Mt. 5:9; 6:24; Lk. 1:35, 78; Jn. 1:6, 12, 13, 18: Rom. 1:7, 17, etc.. Check out their NWT and ED at the above references.
You may want to look at D. Erwin Nestle’s or Westcott and Hort’s Gk. N.T. or F. Kingsley Ball’s The Elements of Greek on noun endings (pp. 7, 14). Actually, the JW’s are not by any measure Christian, although they claim to be.
Contradictions
ON pp. 773, 774, N.W.T., the JW’s say “it is nonsense to say that a simple noun can be rendered “divine,” and that one without article conveys merely the idea of quality.” Well, well, well, the same authors of that quote themselves later render the same noun “Theos” as “a god” not as “a quality.” This is a glaring contradiction!!
Again, on p. 774, N.W.T., the authors made it clear, according to them, it is “unreasonable” that the Word (Christ) should be the God with whom He was (Jn. 1:1). So, their own ERRING reason is made the criterion for determining exegesis/Scriptural Truth.
Others point out that the obvious measure in their quotation from Dona and Mantey (pp. 774, 775). Mantey clearly means that the “Word was Deity” in accord with the overwhelming testimony of Holy Scripture. Instead these fake Gk. scholars use “a god” to suit their own purpose-to deny Christ as Deity.
COMPARE
IF WE COMPARE Phil. 2:11 with Isa. 45:23 and Col. 2:9, all three show us the full deity of Jesus the Christ. Phil. 2:11 and Isa. 45:23 are almost twins. And, as we’ve already seen, Col. 2:9 declares that in Christ dwells the fulness of the Godhead. The literal translation of the Gk. word “Theotes” (Godhead, Strong’s #G2320) is “Deity,” so in Christ all the fullness (pleroma, Strong’s # G4138) of the Deity resides in the flesh (somatikos, Strong’s #G4985), (consult Thayer’s Gk.-Eng. Lexicon of N. T., which is referred to as being “comprehensive” (p. 19, New World Translation of the JW’s), a complete analysis of “Theotes” is given. Unfortunately, Thayer was a Unitarian who denied Christ’s Deity. Nevertheless, Thayer was a renowned Gk. scholar.
On p. 288 of the 1886 edition, Thayer states that “Theotes” is a form of “Theos” (Strong’s #G2306) (Deity) or in his own words “i.e., the state of being God, Godhead.” He, by Gk. definition had to admit Col. 2:9 is what we say it says-Jesus was/is God, or Christ was the fullness of “The Deity” (Jehovah in the flesh!!!)
Contradiction
AGAIN, THE JW’S CONTRADICT THEMSELVES. Their The Emphatic Diaglott Correctly translates Theoletos “Deity;” but in their N.W.T. they render it “the divine quality,” not the same as Deity. They are guilty of word fraud!
Actually, the JW’s are guilty of blasphemy! against Jesus the Christ. I have found scholastic dishonesty among those who deny everlasting punishment and those who deny that a Christian CAN LOSE his/her salvation. Both of these great subjects, HELL/ETERNAL SALVATION ETERNAL SEPARATION practice BOLD mistranslations and BAD exegesis (order our many free booklet’s we’ve put together refuting “once saved, always saved” and Annihilation vs. Eternal Punishment).
There is no honest way to deny the fact that Christ had the same Substance and Essence as Jehovah God, and as the Essence (Deity) differs from the quality (divinity) so He is God!
BAD THEOLOGY/TRANSLATION
AGAIN, IN REV. 1:17 AND 2:8, we see the bad theology/translation of the JW’s. First Born: by suggesting the translation of “Prototokos” (first born, Strong’s #G4416) instead of “Protos” (First, Strong’s #G4413) in the verses, as seen in the N.W.T./E.D., the JW’s again ROB Christ of His Deity. Instead, they come up with the false idea that Christ was a created being, e.g., “a beginning” (found in Let God Be True, p. 88). By magic, they point us to Col. 1:15/Rev. 3:14 PROVING (?) that the Logos (Word) had “a beginning (as in Jn. 1:1). But again their theology/exegesis is fallacious. Again, one can consult Thayer’s Lexicon (1886, which on p. 19 of the N.W.T. is quoted as authoritative, states that the correct interpretation of “protos” is “first” and in Thayer’s, “The Eternal One” (Jehovah) in Rev. 1:17).
Bible scholars list several authoritative MSS that have “Protos” = “first”-Sinaiticus, Vaticanus; the Alexandrian ms (which has no accent marks) should read “Original Bringer Forth” (or more literally, “First Begetter,” as in Heb. 1:2). The JW’s cheat. It is a contradiction to accentuate “prototokos” so as to make Christ a created being, instead of being the Creator. But the correct accentuation of “prototokos” agrees with all other mss in portraying Jesus Christ the Lord as “The pre-eminent one”. What we have here is “First” vs. “First Born.” We sometimes don’t think much of this in our reading, but it makes a BIG difference if we side with the JW’s and claim that Christ was a created being. Jesus was/is the Lord of ALL and the Eternal Word of God incarnate.
Rev. 3:14 and Col. 1:15 in no wise indicate that Christ was a created being EXCEPT in the Physical sense (Jn. 1:14). Please note: the Gk. word “Arche” (Strong’s #G746) (as in Rev. 3:14) can be correctly rendered “origin” as already stated. In the N.W.T. (1950 edition) it is so translated (Jn. 1:1).
“Origin” = “source”-see Bishop Ronald Knox’s Translation; also An American Translation by Goodspeed.
Firstborn
TRUE, CHRIST WAS the firstborn of all creation since He is the new Creation, e.g., second Adam, conceived without SIN! (Lk. 1:35; 1 Cor. 15:45-47). He was the fulfillment of the divine Promise of the, if you will, God-man or Deity-human. He is also the Redeemer of the world (but not all will receive His free gift of salvation, Col. 1:14).
Want proof of His Deity? Jn. 3:13 sates: “And NO MAN hath ascended up to Heaven, but He that came down from Heaven, even the Son of man which is in Heaven.” Look at this: Christ was first in Heaven, descended to earth, yet claimed to be still in Heaven!
“Heaven,” in one sense, is not a place, it is a REALM OF LIFE, even a character. Christ lived in the earthly realm-physically, yet moved by the heavenly mind of His Father. Aren’t we instructed to have the “mind of Christ?” Sure! Jesus reflected what “Heaven” was like, a realm in the Spirit of God.
Jesus was/is, as Phil. 2:11 declares, Lord (Gk., Kurios, Strong’s #G2962), and as such is “The Lord from Heaven” of 1 Cor. 15:47, thus God, and not “a created being” or “a god.” Get serious people!!
Jesus was also the “First Born” of the dead (Rev. 1:5), that is, the First to rise in a glorified/immortal body (see 1 Jn. 3:2). dam
Texts which can be cross referenced with Jn. 17:5 are Isa. 42:8 and 48:11-which PROVE the identity of Jesus Christ and His Deity. Check all 3 passages out, see if Jehovah has IRREVOCABLY declared His divinely inherent glory, which is of His own Nature, cannot be given to any other person, other than Himself.
Before moving on, let it be said that God bestowed, upon the (incarnate) Word, glory manifested in the presence of the Holy Ghost, thru whose power and agency Christ worked while on earth, as a man (see Lk. 4). In turn, He bestowed this upon His followers (as in Jn. 17:22; the Holy Ghost also was given to Jesus’ followers in order for them to preach, baptize, cast out devils, speak in new tongues, heal the sick etc., as in Mk. 16:15-18). The “glory” of Jn. 17:22 was not the glory of God’s Nature, but instead, the abiding presence of His Spirit. Jesus, in John 17:5 prayed to receive back again the glory He HAD with the Father “before the world was.” Scholars point out that it was not the “glory” given to Him as Messiah, which glory Christ promised to share with His disciples (v. 22), the two are not the same.
Son in Virtue
SO, JESUS WAS/IS THE SON in virtue of a new creative act of God the Father: “this ‘newness’ implies that He does not restore an imaginary, perfect covenant relationship from prehistoric times, thus wrote Hendrikus Berkhof (Christian Faith, 1979, p. 291). What Jesus did was pave the way for erring/lost/damned man to come into a covenant relationship with the Father, by His death. Jesus became man, the sinless, perfected covenant man, the new man, the eschatological man.
Thus, the exclusive sphere of God, the “glory” (Heb. Kubod, Strong’s #H3519; Gk. Doxa, Strong’s #G1391), passes in Jesus to one man. Jesus is filled with the Holy Ghost, Lk. 4:1, and lived by the power of the Spirit, v. 14,… becoming totally-wholly-holy (in stature) in order for His new creation to follow. Jesus was more than a moral teacher, He was God in flesh.
Christology
THRU THE CENTURIES, theology was thrown back and forth between a Christology “from below” which took its starting-point in Jesus’ humanity, and a Christology “from above” which started from His deity.
As already stated, this heated debate (war!) was carried into the A.D. 451 Chalcedon arena where it became a decisive ecclesiastical Christology doctrine: Jesus is “truly God and truly man…so that one and the same Christ, the only begotten Son and Lord, is known in two natures, without confusion or change, without division separation…whereby the two natures come together in ONE person and ONE subsistence.” This is orthodoxy.
But, needless to say, Chalcedon really did not settle this dispute the controversy continues unabated, hence, this long article!!
The an-hypostasis vs. vs. the en-hypostasis debate the human “I,” or the divine “I,” is still questioned. However, as Prof. Berkhof puts it, “…since The Enlightenment, Chalcedon and classical Christology were increasingly put on the defensive in relation to the Christology from below.” He continues, “…the Chalcedonian formula becomes much more intelligible if we remove it from the framework of the static notions of ‘nature’ that governed the thinking of the Gk. Church fathers and that of many centuries after them. The N.T. speaks a different language, also when it speaks of the duality of the structure of the being of Jesus’ person. It does not speak of the two structures as being found statically on top of each other, but as historically following each other” (Ibid, p. 292). One might want to re-read the following: Acts 2:22-36; Rom. 1:3; Phil. 2:8-11; 1 Tim. 3:16; and Heb. 5:7-9. Some use terms like “Adoptionism” and “Monophysitism” in this debate. The first = Jesus from the beginning, the second = Jesus its end. (a good useful recent summary of all this is found in R. Schnackenburg’s MS III, 1, pp. 227-383). Another good book is J.A.T. Robinson’s The Human Face of God (1973). Ch. 5 of E. of E. Schweizer’s Neotestamentica (1963), pp. 105-109 speaks of the pre-existence of Jesus Christ, as in Rom. 10:6 and 2 Cor. 8:9.
PNEUMATOLOGICAL-ESCHATOLOGICAL
SO, APART FROM THE PRE-EXISTENCE STATEMENTS which aim to express, and do express, the divine initiative in the sending of the “Son,” the N.T. authors wrote other statements which place Jesus above and outside our empirical human existence; but equally applicable is the claim: what is solely ascribed to Him, is at the same time a pneumatological-eschatological promise to us: Sonship, resurrection, exaltation, priesthood and Kingdom, parousia etc.
Blind/ See the Light
2 CORINTHIANS 4:34 SAYS that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is hid from the lost (e.g., damned) because Satan has blinded their eyes, in turn, they believe not. This blinding keeps His light from shining unto them, to keep them in darkness, so as they will never perceive God Jesus exists as the Eikon (Strong’s #G1504 )of God, that is, as the “image of God.” Colossians 1:15 tells us the same thing-“who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn (remember that?) of every creature.” Verse 17 tells us that “He is before all things, and by Him all things consist.”
All this is so that sinners, blind sinners, can come to Christ and SEE the light. Not only this, but that they might share His Eikon (Rom. 8:29; 1 Cor. 15:49; 2 Cor. 3:18). Let’s take a moment to delve into this “image” thing. The Gk. word Eikon, as in 2 Cor. 3:18 (“…are changed into the same IMAGE from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord”; see also 1 Cor. 15:49 and Rom. 8:29) and the Gk. word xαραктnρ-charakter, as in Heb. 1:3 (used only here) are different. Heb. 1:3 states that Jesus was “the brightness of His (God’s) glory, and the EXPRESS IMAGE of His Person…”
Eikon- Єíkov: Paul, in 1 Cor. 11:7- “…forasmuch as he (man) is the IMAGE and glory of God…” Here we see that Paul had been able to deduce from man’s divine likeness certain practical consequences in terms of the concrete life of his own day. Then in 1 Cor. 15:49, we see that Paul regards the είκών / Eikon as τοῦ χοϊκού, deduced from Gen. 5:3, thus as determinative of earthly existence; and the Eikon τοῦ ἐπουρανίου as denoting a future fullness of existence.
Most scholars believe that the main emphasis in Pauline anthropology is this: man as cíkúv which is still to be established, or better, restored FULLY (e.g., as he was before the Fall). And of course, this will be done – is being done by connection with the being of Jesus Christ as εíkúv. It is as it says in 1 Cor. 15:49 – “…we have borne the IMAGE of the earthly (e.g., the first Adam of sin, which = ruin), we shall also bear the IMAGE of the heavenly (e.g., the Second Adam, even Christ).”
We Christians bear the image (inwardly) of Christ now, in a limited sense; but in fulness after the final resurrection. This “likeness” / “image,” is the goal of the divine προώρισεν and the divine εις.
The teaching in 2 Cor. 3:18 is exactly the same.
Only BY and THROUGH Jesus Christ the Lord is this “likeness” / “image” accomplished – mere church membership will never bring us into this Spirit/Image realm. We MUST put on the New Man (Christ Jesus), by putting off the OLD MAN!!
Col. 3:10 explains the above. We must PUT OFF the SIN LIFE, dear Christians. Look at today’s churchgoers: THEY BEAR THE IMAGE OF DEMONS MORE THAN CHRIST.
While it is true that the future is in sight, as the ultimate goal, we can NOW, PRESENTLY, attain “glory to glory.” Col. 3:10 points to the restoration of the Єíkov posits a goal of ethical action in this aeon (time). We can NOW enjoy Christ’s/God’s image, yet not enjoyed fully. It’s eschatology is even NOW at work (in the sincere, not in the rebellious “Christian”), and its presence has an eschatological basis.
Concerning xapaктnρ (which is found only in Heb. 1:3), we find God’s glory has impressed itself on Jesus Christ the Son as the One exalted by the Father, He is its “reflection” and “image.”
Both Philo’s “logos” and that of Wisdom 7 we find the “image” of the Father inasmuch as God’s nature, His radiant light and glory is impressed on them, so Christ as the Son of God is the impress (imprint) of God’s nature (ref. Col. 1:15).
By way of Jesus’ discipleship/soldiership, God leads those who belong to Him, as sons/daughters, to glory; as Heb. 2:10 states, “For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.”
The book of Hebrews expounds the humiliated and exalted Christ as “the impress/express of God (reflection and emanation) and thus develops the meaning of salvation with reference to the relationship of Christians (not mere Church-goers) to Christ in homology.
MORPHE OF GOD
AS ALREADY SAID, Jesus exists in the Morphe, (Strong’s #G3444) (form) of God (Phil. 2:6), in order that we might become Summorphos (Strong’s #G4832) to Him (as in Rom. 8:29, “conformed to the image of His Son,” and Phil. 3:21 so as to “be fashioned like unto His glorious body”), Metamorphousthai (From Strong’s Metamorphoo, #G3339) after His eikon (2 Cor. 3:18).
Scripture shows us that Jesus shares in the doxa of God, in the sphere which is most uniquely God’s, so that we also might share in it (e.g. Jn. 1:14; 17:1, 10, 22).
Peter boldly wrote: “Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world…” This we know (and experience) was done by a new act of God in Christ Jesus as the true covenant (allow me to use this word that now is associated with homosexuality, but then wasn’t) partner-our humanity being joined in union with the life of our Savior (see TDNT III, S.V. Theos, p. 106. TDNT is the acronym for Theological Dictionary of the New Testament).
To Us Christians –
JESUS IS THE SON of God’s new creative beginning, the image bearer who answers to the final intentions God has with His human creation. Jesus stands at the beginning and end of the history of mankind. Again, passages in our N.T. where this cosmic significance of Christ is expressed are: Jn. 1:1-5; 1 Cor. 8:6; 15:44-49; Eph. 1:10, 22; Col. 1:15-20; Heb. 1:1-4. Rev. 3:14. Especially 1 Cor. 8:6: “But as there is but One God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we by Him.”
Not only do we find passages referring to a Trinitarian dwelling of the Son with the Father, but also a co-operating of the “historical Jesus” with God in the work of creation (thusly, Col. 1:15 can speak of the “first-born of all creation”).
FIN
I WANT TO FINISH THIS STUDY with clear clarification between Jesus the man and Christ the divine.
In John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 Jn. 4:9, Only Begotten (Gk. μovoуεvýc) denotes more or “incom- parability” of Jesus. In all these verses He is expressly called the “Son,” and He is regarded as such in Jn. 1:14. So, in John, especially μovoyεvýs denotes the ORIGIN of Jesus. He is μovoyεvý as the Only-Begotten.
“What is meant by ὁ μονογενής υἱός in detail can be known in its full import only in the light of the whole of John’s proclamation” (F. Buchsel, TDNT, Vol. IV, p. 741). What is said here is when John speaks of the Son of God, he has primarily in view the man Jesus, though not exclusively the man, but also the risen and pre-existent Lord. We’ve learned already about the relation of the pre-existent Lord to God is that of “Son” to “Father,” see Jn. 17:5 and 24.
Jesus had a personal fellowship with the Father, divine sonship. It is pointed out that neither in the prologue, nor in 8:58, nor in chapter 17 does John use the term “Son” for the pre-existent Lord.
Buchsel points out that He describes His relation to the Father as that of a Son (one can hardly argue from expressions like “God sent His Son,” Jn. 3:17, 1 Jn. 4:9-10, Jn. 3:16, since here the term “Son” might be used proleptically, with reference only to the man. But we see from 1 John 4:14: “The Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the world,” that by sending, He who was already the Son became the Savior, so that there is no room for DOUBT that the pre-existent Lord was already the Son. Other scholars disagree with this. The fact that John also uses ó óyoç for the pre-existent Lord gives us no right to assume that this Aóyos was for him a power of God standing in an impersonal relation to Him).
To maintain that in John the pre-existent Lord is only the “Word,” and that the “Son” is only the historical and risen Lord, is to draw too sharp a line between the pre-existent on the one side and the historical and post-historical life on the other.
As said before, some do not believe that the “Son” was pre-existent, only the “Word” (Logo). I’ll leave it to the experts to battle it out over this issue.
For John, the Lord is always the “Son.” Did He, or did He not exist in eternity is the question still debated. The title “only-begotten Son” of God seems to indicate His pre-existence. I see nothing strange about believing the “Son” (as deity/divine) existed with the Father before earth’s time. We know the “Son” was time’s historical Jesus. It all boils down to this: does μovoyεvnç denote the human birth or the begetting from God (e.g. 1 Jn. 5:18)?
We Do Know
AS THE ONE WHO BECAME MAN, Jesus was in the position (willingly!) of a slave, or, more correctly, He bore the figure or form (Gk. Hoppn) of man. Even after His resurrection, Jesus “appeared in another form…” (Lk. 16:12, e.g. in a human “form” but different form than before His death/resurrection). Luke 24:16 states the disciples “eyes were holden that they should not know Him.” What changed? He had a changed body, yet still a body. All we can make of this is that our bodies will be fashioned after His resurrected and glorified body, immortal, the absolute antithesis to our prior form-as Jesus gave His 3 disciples a preview of a coming attraction on the Mt. of transfiguration in Mk. 9:2 of His radiance of heavenly light-the WAY has been opened up for all Christians (who finish their course with honors!). The Bible does not speak of a metamorphosis in the sense of Hellenistic belief or superstition, neither does the Bible speak of the exchanging of one’s own “form” for another-NO! We shall be CHANGED!
So, dear ones, becoming a Christian is depicted as a “new birth,” and the goal of God the Father, with the Holy Spirit, is the fashioning of Christ in us. In order that this Christ-life may come into being in believers, Christ must take “form” in them. He must in some sense be incarnate afresh in each individual. Again, I’m not speaking of church membership, but a living, loving, serving, obeying, relationship with Jesus Christ, the Lord.
Again, as Christ enters each believer (after full repentance of sins and forgiveness following), He, as the Glorified Christ humbles Himself to become a babe once again; the nerve of this metaphor, which is based on the development of the child in the mother’s womb (supra), is that Christ should come to full growth, to maturity, in the Christian. This only will happen as we learn obedience as did the Son of God.
One professor aptly put it: “That this is a process which is never completed in this aeon, that it is both open and secret, both gift and task.”
So, is Jesus only a man? Was He merely the historical Jesus and not God? He was both God and man. Amen.