Modern humanism assumes that man’s inner equilibrium is simply disturbed along with his relationship

to his neighbors and surroundings. Therefore, man seeks a way to save himself, e. g. through meditation
or psychotherapy. That is the old attempt of man trying to save himself, just as he did at the beginning
of human history.

Man cannot save himself by any effort of his own even if all religions maintain this. It is solely the Biblical
Christian faith that says that man is saved by grace alone. When considering redemption, we can and
must only trust the revelation of God through his word: Jesus Christ is the “Word” made flesh (Greek:
lo ,goj [lógos]; cf. Joh 1:1.14.18). If we want to consider what salvation or redemption is, then we must
first consider the Redeemer who is the author of redemption (cf. Joh 4:22.42).

We know Jesus Christ mainly through the New Testament. He was born for us at “Christmas”. Who in
fact is this one who was born for us? The Holy Scripture teaches the pre-existence of Jesus, that is that
he existed before he became man. On the subject of his nature (or his essence or substance; see more
on this in the chapter over the two natures of Jesus Christ), Christ is identical with God. This is why he
must unavoidably be eternal, that is without beginning. He always existed, from eternity. The question
of his relationship to God the Father and to creation naturally poses itself. The relationship between God
and Christ is described in Holy Scripture as that of Father and Son. This does not mean it is like a “natural
human” relationship, it is rather a “relationship of revelation”.

Jesus is the name of the incarnate (self humbling) Son of God. This name occurs frequently in the
gospels. In the epistles, it is mostly used where the humiliation of the Lord is emphasised (for example in
Heb 2:9: “But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, now 5 crowned with glory and
honour because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.”).

ISSUE: An overemphasis of the godly nature of Jesus Christ resulting in minimizing or denying his human
nature.

The controversy concerning the divinity of Christ without any doubt reached its climax in the views of
Arius, a priest from Alexandria, Egypt ( 336). We speak therefore of the Arian controversy: 5 Arius Arius
denied the full divinity of Jesus-Christ. He rejected especially the conception of the eternal pre-existence
of Jesus Christ. He considered Jesus Christ as the first created being, in terms of his essence, only similar
(homoiousios) to God, but not equal (homoousios).17 For 10 him, Christ was “the most noble of all
God’s creation”. Arius didn’t believe that God was always the Father; in his opinion God only became
Father through the creation of Christ. In other words, Christ was not of one substance or essence
(consubstantial) with the Father! In 325, the emperor Constantine convened the council of Nicaea (his
town of residence). It 15 was called to answer the question “What do you think of the Christ? Whose
Son is he?” Athanasius It was above all Athanasius ( 373), a deacon from Alexandria (who later became
bishop), 20 who opposed Arius, in that he held firmly to Jesus Christ being of one substance
(homoousios) with the Father. He insisted that the Son was eternal like the Father. At the above
mentioned council of Nicaea, the doctrine of Arius was condemned and the symbol of Nicaea (Latin:
“Nicaenum”) was adopted practically unanimously. The eternal 25 divinity and pre-existence of the Son
was proclaimed: begotten, not made; being of one substance (homoousios) with the Father. The peace
didn’t last too long, because the Arians didn’t accept this decision of the council. It didn’t take long
before further disputes concerning the question “who do you say I am?” 30 arose. One reaction was that
of Apollinaris from Laodicea in Syria ( approximately 390). The so called apollinarian controversy goes
back to him. At the beginning Apollinaris was a friend of Athanasius. But in order to emphasise the deity
of Christ he rejected his full humanity. He 35 maintained that Jesus had a human body and a human
soul, but the divine Logos (cf. Joh 1:1ff) took the place of the human spirit, or understanding, which all
other people possess. Apollinaris was condemned by various councils, but especially that of
Constantinople in 381. The symbol of Nicaea was reaffirmed and the so called Nicaeno-
Constantinopolitan creed (“Nicene”) adopted. But soon there was a new dispute: the Nestorian
controversy. Nestorius ( 451) was bishop (patriarch) of Constantinople. He said that Jesus was true God
and true man but he was of the opinion that the two natures of Jesus existed side by side (juxtapositum)
without forming a real unity of the two but rather two different personalities. Nestorius was condemned
by the council of Ephesus in the year 431. His followers were expelled from the kingdom and fled mainly
to Persia, from where they undertook missionary journeys to India and even to China. Then there was
the Eutychian Controversy. Eutyches (Eutychus) was an abbot in Constantinople who maintained, as a
reaction against the Nestorians, that the two natures of Christ were mingled into one (not divided from
each other as Nestorius affirmed). The human 20 nature was absorbed into the divine nature. Eutyches
rejected the idea that the human nature of Christ was “homoousios” (of the same nature) as ours (i.e.
with that of mankind).18 Through the initiative of Pope Leon 1st , in 451, Eutychianism was condemned
at the council of Chalcedon. The council condemned on the one hand Nestorianism and on the other
hand Eutychianism and affirmed the two natures of Jesus Christ, fully God and fully Man at the same
time, in two natures which cannot be mingled into one (against Eutyches), nor can they be separated
(against Nestorius): without confusion, without change, without division, without separation. By the
way, the Arian controversy is still a theme today. There have always been theologians who speak against
the teaching of the divine trinity. They are called Antitrinitarians or Unitarians. I will limit myself to two
examples: (1) The Socinian movement which bears the name of the Italian Lelio Sozzini (→ Socinus) and
mainly goes back to his nephew Faustino Sozzini. In their opinion, the Bible (which is for them too the
only valid revelation of God!) cannot contain anything which contradicts human reason. Consequently
they deny the teaching of the trinity and also salvation by faith. (2) The organisation Jehovah’s
Witnesses (Watchtower Society, Brooklyn, New York, founded by Charles Taze Russel [1852-1916]) has
its roots also in Arianism. As mentioned above, it rejects the eternal divinity of Jesus Christ and
considers Jesus as the first of God’s creation. With great regret it must be observed that many of today’s
theologians in the so called state churches no longer adhere to the testimony of these important
councils. In fact, the humanity of Jesus Christ is rarely contested. On the contrary, his divinity, especially
his eternal divinity, certainly is. Representatives of so called “modern” liberal Theology reject the eternal
divinity of Jesus Christ. 1Jo 4:3 says that this is the fruit of the spirit of the Antichrist. It is all the more
important to know what the Holy Scripture itself says about the nature of Jesus Christ.

The New Testament asserts that Jesus Christ is equal to, and identical with God, performing works that
only God can do. As the Son he is distinct from the Father he is of identical being with him and the Holy
Spirit.
SUMMARY

Jesus’ deity was expressed indirectly but pervasively in the New Testament. It was indirect since the
powerful Old Testament monotheism rendered any claim to deity blasphemous. It was pervasive since
the overwhelming evidence for Jesus’ identity with God dominated the thought, belief, and worship of
the church from its earliest days after Pentecost. Jesus characteristically called God his Father and
asserted that he was co-ordinate with him as the object of faith. Paul regarded Jesus Christ as identical
to Yahweh in status and being. The New Testament as a whole sees him as creator, judge and savior –
works only God could do. He is the object of worship, the theme of early Christian hymns, and is
frequently addressed in prayer. He is regarded as one with the Father in being.

Background

The strict monotheism of the Old Testament meant any claim to deity would be ruled out as
blasphemous. Israel was repeatedly warned that there is only one God, all other claims to religious
worship being idolatry (e.g., Deut. 6:4, Isa. 44:6-8). The exile had reinforced this point.

Jesus and the Father

Given this, Jesus’ repeated designation for God as his Father, with the entailment that he is the Son, was
unprecedented and startling. The title “Son of God” was used in the Old Testament for the Messiah, and
occasionally for Israel, but not for an individual.1 Jesus used “Father” as a personal name rather than a
metaphor or a description of what God is like.2 God’s revelation as the Father does not refer to a
general fatherhood of all his creatures but to mutual relations within the being of God. Jesus speaks of
the temple as “my Father’s house” (Luke 2:49, John 2:16). At Jesus’s baptism, the Father declares him to
be his Son (Matt. 3:17). Jesus asserts that he was sent by the Father (John 5:30, 36, 6:38–40, 8:16–18,
26, 29), shares with the Father in raising the dead (John 5:24–29), and in judging the world (John 5:27).
All will honor him just as they honor the Father (John 5:23). The Father gives him his disciples and draws
them to him (John 6:37–65). The Father knows him and loves him, while he fulfills the Father’s charge
(John 10:15–18). In turn, Jesus prays to the Father (Matt. 6:9, John 17:1–26). “Abba” is his normal way of
addressing God (Matt. 16:17, Mark 13:32, Luke 22:29–30), a familiar Aramaic word for father.3 In
Gethsemane and on the cross Jesus calls on the Father, in extremis (Matt. 26:39–42 et. al., Luke 23:34).

Jesus speaks of the glory he shared with the Father before creation, anticipating its renewal (John 17:5,
22–24), having completed the work the Father gave him (v.4). He reflects on his union and mutual
indwelling with the Father (vv. 20ff). Earlier, he defended his equality and identity with the Father (John
10:30, 14:6–11, 20), an indivisible union, so that his own word will be the criterion the Father uses in
judgment (John 5:22–24, 12:44–50). He tells Mary Magdalene he will ascend to his Father (John 20:17,
cf. 16:10, 17, 28, 14:1–3).
Conversely, Jesus also says that he is less than the Father (John 14:28), but this refers to his incarnate
state in which he took human nature into union and restricted himself to human limitations. Thereby he
does nothing other than he sees the Father doing (John 5:19). As the Father raises the dead, so the Son
gives life to whoever he wills (John 5:21). As the Father has life in himself so he has given to the Son to
have life in himself and to exercise judgment (John 5:26–29).

To Thomas he says that to know him is to know the Father, and to Philip he says “he who has seen me
has seen the Father” (John 14:6–9). Behind this is the fact that he and the Father are one (John 10:30),
and that he is, with the Father, the object of the disciples’ faith (John 14:1). No one can come to the
Father except through Jesus. Throughout John 14–16 Jesus refers to himself in relation both to the
Father and the Holy Spirit. He mentions the mutual indwelling of the three. The Father will send the
Spirit in response to Jesus’s own request (John 14:16ff, 26, 15:26). The disciples’ prayer to the Father is
to be made in the name of Jesus (John 15:16).

In Matthew, Jesus claims mutual knowledge and sovereignty with the Father (Matt. 11:25–27). H.R.
Mackintosh described this passage as “the most important for Christology in the New Testament,”
speaking as it does of “the unqualified correlation of the Father and the Son.”4 Jesus the Son thanks the
Father for hiding “these things” [the things he did and taught] from the wise, revealing them instead to
babes. The Father is, he says, sovereign in revealing himself. However, Jesus immediately claims that he,
the Son, has this sovereignty also. To know the Father is a gift given by the Son to whomever he
chooses. As the Father reveals “these things” concerning the Son to whoever he pleases, so the Son
reveals the Father – and “all things” the Father has committed to him – to whomever he pleases.
Moreover, Jesus shares fully in the Father’s comprehensive knowledge. Only the Father knows the Son
and only the Son knows the Father. Jesus shares fully in both the sovereignty of God the Father and his
knowledge, as the Father’s, is comprehensive and mutual. On the other hand, in passages such as
Matthew 24:36, where Jesus says he is ignorant of the time of his parousia, which the Father alone
knows, he refers to the voluntary restrictions of his incarnate state.

In short, Jesus as Son is distinct from the Father and yet one with him. Bauckham comments, “Jesus is
not saying that he and the Father are a single person, but that together they are one God.”5 It
distinguishes him from the prophets and, in the writings of Paul, entails his participation in God’s
attributes.6

Paul, in his important statement about the Son in Romans 1:3–4, distinguishes between the Son of God
“of the seed of David according to the flesh” and as he is “appointed Son of God with power by the Holy
Spirit since the resurrection of the dead” (my translation). Both clauses refer to Jesus Christ, God’s Son
(v.3a). God’s Son was descended from David in his incarnation; he was resurrected by the Spirit to a
new, transformed state – Son of God with power. As God’s Son before the crucifixion he was in
weakness, “the form of a slave” (Phil. 2:7). Now that he has risen he is exalted to the right hand of God
the Father (Acts 2:33–36, Phil. 2:9–11, Eph. 1:19–23, Col. 1:18, Heb. 1:3–4) and reigns over the whole
cosmos (Matt. 28:18), directing all things until all his enemies submit (1Cor. 15:24–26), at which point
death will finally be eliminated and he will hand back the kingdom to the Father (1Cor. 15:24–28). There
is a distinction and an identity.

Jesus’ Equality and Identity with God

Jesus asserts his equality and identity with God in the face of blasphemy charges by the Jewish leaders.
He is charged with making himself equal with God (John 5:16–47) and later for identifying himself with
God (John 10:25–39). His accusers threaten the penalty for blasphemy. In both cases, Jesus denies the
charge on the grounds that he is speaking the truth, citing in support the plurality of witnesses required
by Jewish law. In John 14:1 Jesus co-ordinates himself with God as the object of faith – “Believe in God;
believe also in me.” Similarly, like frames around a picture, John refers to him as “God” in John 1:18 at
the start of his Gospel and has Thomas confessing him as “my Lord and my God” in John 20:28 at the
end.

Paul’s characteristic name for Jesus Christ is “Lord” (kurios), the Greek word commonly used for YHWH (
‫)יהוה‬, the covenant name of God in the Old Testament. By this pervasive use Paul shows he regards Jesus
as having the status of God, without abridgement. He makes no attempt to explain or defend it,
mentioning it so unselfconsciously that, as Hurtado comments, it entails its being everyday currency
among the early Christians. Paul’s letters testify to belief in the full deity of Jesus Christ as the basic
axiom of the church not as a point of contention. This, Hurtado points out, is confirmed by the Aramaic
acclamation in 1 Corinthians 16:22, marana tha (Lord, come!). Paul uses this in a Gentile context without
explanation or translation, addressing Christ in a corporate, liturgical prayer, with the reverence shown
to God. Moreover, the roots of this prayer are Palestinian, widely familiar beyond its original source and
probably pre-Pauline.7 Bauckham writes of “its very early origin.”8 Paul applies the divine name (YHWH)
to Christ via kurios “without explanation or justification, suggesting that his readers were already
familiar with the term and its connotation.” In Romans 9:5 it is likely that Paul expressly designates Jesus
Christ as theos (God). Witherington writes of John that he “is willing to predicate of Jesus what he
predicates of the Lord God, because he sees them as on the same level.”9

The author of Hebrews, too, in his argument for Christ’s supremacy, cites Psalm 45 to support the
incarnate Son as possessing the status of God (Heb. 1:8–9). The Son is the brightness of the Father’s
glory, the express image of his being. All angels are to worship him (Heb. 1:1-14). Since he is superior to
the angels, Bauckham comments, “he is included in the unique identity of the one God.”10 Psalm 102,
referring to the creator of the universe, is here applied directly to Christ. As T.F. Torrance puts it, Christ
is “not just a sort of locum tenens, or a kind of ‘double’ for God in his absence, but the incarnate
presence of Yahweh.”11

Furthermore, Jesus’ resurrection discloses that he is Lord, the deity of Christ becoming “the supreme
truth of the Gospel … the central point of reference consistent with the whole sequence of events
leading up to and beyond the crucifixion.”12 At the center of the New Testament message is the
unbroken relation between the Son and the Father.13

Jesus as Creator, Judge, and Savior

To Jesus Christ are attributed works God alone can do. John declares that Jesus Christ is the eternal
Word who made all things, who is with God and who is God (John 1:1–18). Not one thing came into
existence apart from that Word. The Word who is “in the beginning” is “with God,” directed toward God
and is God. This entails pre-existence. He is the only-begotten God (v.18). Paul echoes this (Col. 1:15–
20). Hebrews 1:1–4 says the same, for the Son made the world and directs it towards his intended goal.
In 1 Corinthians 8:6, Paul couples God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ in their respective work in
creation. This throws light on incidents in the Gospels (Matt. 14:22–36, cf. Psa. 77:19, Job 9:8, Job
26:11–14, Psa. 89:9, 107:23–30) where Jesus displays the functions of deity, in sovereign charge of the
elements. While presented as signs of the kingdom of God they point to his lordship over the world as
its king.

In John 5:22–30 Jesus describes himself as the judge of the world; this can only be God. In Matthew
25:31–46, Jesus as the Son of man will judge the nations with righteousness (cf. Mark 8:38, Dan. 7:14).
Paul is emphatic (1Thess. 3:13, 5:23, 2Thess. 1:7–10); we must all appear before the judgment seat of
Christ (2Cor. 5:10).

The Old Testament stresses that deliverance could only come from Yahweh, not man (Psa. 146:3–6).14
The name Jesus, required by the angel, means “savior.” He was to save his people from their sins (Matt.
1:21). His healings demonstrate him to be the lord of life. Beyond that, he delivers from sin and death.
Since salvation is a work of God, Paul’s persistent description of Jesus as savior is an implicit attribution
of deity (Titus 2:11–13, 1:4, 3:6, Phil. 3:20, 2Tim. 1:10; 2 Pet. 1:11). The once common view that New
Testament teaching about Christ was purely functional misses the point; in Bauckham’s words, “Jesus’
participation in the unique divine sovereignty is not just a matter of what Jesus does, but of who Jesus is
in relation to God.” As a result, “it becomes unequivocally a matter of regarding Jesus as intrinsic to the
unique identity of God.”15

Worship of Jesus

A number of New Testament passages express praise to Jesus Christ, indicating Christ to be an object of
worship (John 1:1–18, Heb. 1:3f, Col. 1:15–20, Phil. 2:5–11, 2Tim. 2:11–13). The way Jesus is described
requires that hymns be addressed to him. Not needing any special explanation, and assuming wide
familiarity in the church, it seems likely that the hymns in Revelation were based on an established
practice. Hurtado considers that “the practice of singing hymns in Christ’s honor goes back to the
earliest stratum of the Christian movement.”16 Moreover, there is no hint of objection from the Jewish
churches.17 Since he is the Son of the Father, worship of Christ is simultaneously worship of the Father
(Phil. 2:9-11). Wainwright lists a range of New Testament doxologies clearly or probably addressed to
Christ (2Pet. 3:18, Rev. 1:5b–6, Rom. 9:5, 2Tim. 4:18).18 Bauckham concludes that the bearing of the
divine name YHWH, via kurios, by the risen Jesus “signifies unequivocally his inclusion in the unique
divine identity, recognition of which is precisely what worship in the Jewish monotheistic tradition
expresses.”19

Prayer is also offered to Christ. Stephen calls out to the Lord Jesus as he is being stoned to death (Acts
7:59–60), his cry in parallel with Jesus’ own words (Luke 23:46). Paul prays to the risen Christ that his
thorn in the flesh be removed (2Cor. 12:8–9). He refers to a common cry “Maranatha” (1Cor. 16:22, cf.,
Rev. 22:20; see also 1Thess. 3:11–12, Acts 9:14, 21, 22:16). Salvation consists in confessing Jesus Christ
as kurios (Rom. 10:9–13, 1Cor. 12:1–3, Phil. 2:9–11).

As T.F. Torrance says, we rely for our belief in the deity of Christ not on various incidents recorded in the
Gospels or on particular statements but

upon the whole coherent evangelical structure of historical divine revelation given in the New
Testament Scriptures. It is when we indwell it, meditate upon it, tune into it, penetrate inside it, and
absorb it into ourselves, and find the very foundations of our life and thought changing under the
creative and saving impact of Christ, and are saved by Christ and personally reconciled to God in Christ,
that we believe in him as Lord and God.20

In consequence, Torrance continues, we pray to Jesus as Lord, worship him and sing praises to him as
God. No wonder Thomas, confronted with the very tangible evidence of Jesus’ resurrection could say in
response “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28).