[Who Do You Say I Am? by Edward E. Stevens]
Conclusion
Trinity May Be Hard To Comprehend - But Still Essential
I have firmly believed in the Deity of Christ for as far back as I can remember in my Christian life. I have never deviated from my conviction that Jesus was God incarnate. However, I did take a serious look at some of the various ways some have tried to explain the Trinity in the past (such as Modalism, Monarchianism, Sabellianism, Subordinationism, etc.), and was at one time uncomfortable using the term “Trinity,” since it is not a Biblical word. But we all use a lot of terms which are not in the Bible to help explain Biblical doctrines (such as “covenant eschatology” or “preterist” or “plenary inspiration”), so the term “Trinity” should never be objectionable on that basis if it actually represents a Biblically defensible doctrine. For a few months I toyed with a modified form of the Modalist view of the Trinity (the Manifestation idea). But if one believes both the Holy Spirit and Jesus are God (as I have since my “good confession” many years ago), there is no getting around the necessity of holding to some concept of a Tri-Unity of the three Divine Persons (a Trinity) whether we call it a Trinity or not. After a careful four-years-long re-study of the whole issue and an examination of some of the major contributions to the subject both pro and con throughout the centuries, I am more firmly convinced than ever that Jesus IS God in the fullest sense – “For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form.” (Col. 2:9) But I am not so naive as to think that the Deity of Christ and the Trinity are easy concepts to understand.
The disciples of Jesus did understand that Jesus had “come forth from [God]” and they believed that God had “sent” Him (John 17:8,25; 1 Jn. 4:14; John 16:27). They knew He was “the Son of God” in more than just some esoteric sense. They knew about His virgin birth and miracles. They knew He was resurrected out of the Hadean realm never to return, and that He was sinless. They worshipped Him. The revelation was not obscure in any of these matters.
All Christians have difficulty understanding and explaining how three different personal manifestations of God are still only One Divine Being. But that should not disturb us if the revelation is clear about the fact of it. Many things are true whether we understand them or not. Eternity, omniscience, omnipotence and all the attributes of God are “imponderable,” but that doesn’t mean they are optional or any less true just because we cannot fathom them with our finite and limited minds. And the same is true with respect to the Deity of Christ and the Trinity. We might not understand how God could do it, but the fact that He did should be enough to inspire our worship. We will have an eternity to attempt an understanding of it.
We have shown that Jesus equally shares in the Being and Nature of God with the Father and the Holy Spirit, while at the same time He and the Spirit are both subordinate to the Father as persons. Equality of Nature, subordinate in persons. This is why some texts talk about the equality, and others talk about the subordination. The virgin birth is like a lightning bolt through a completely dark sky. It proclaims in an “ungetoverable” way WHO Jesus really is. The real Father of the “Holy Offspring” conceived in Mary’s womb by the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit is God. Jesus is the One and Only Begotten Natural Offspring of God Himself. He truly is the “Son of the Most High” in the most real sense possible. For this reason it is ludicrous to imagine that Jesus is just “Son of God” in some lesser sense. And if He is the real direct descendant of God Himself, He must be God in the same way His Father is, because He is made of the same substance as His Father. And only He would have the right as prince to reign and sit on the throne with His real true Father the King of the Universe. Jesus is God just like His Father.
I’m sure this brief presentation has not resolved all the seeming dilemmas and problems which unitarians have raised against the Trinitarian Faith. There only seems to be a dilemma simply because our presuppositions won’t let us understand it differently. The depth to which we serve God depends a lot on how we perceive the nature of God. Our presuppositions about His limitations or lack of them will drastically affect our resolution of the perceived problems. Robert Bowman shows how these dilemmas are only resolvable within the parameters of the Trinitarian Faith:
...Yes, God is not a man (Num. 23:19), while Jesus is (1 Tim. 2:5); yet Jesus is also God (John 20:28). Yes, God cannot be tempted (James 1:13), while Jesus was tempted (Heb. 4:15); yet Jesus could not sin (John 5:19). Yes, God knows all things (Isa. 41:22-23), while Jesus did not know the day of his return (Mark 13:32); yet Jesus did know all things (John 16:30). Yes, God cannot be seen (John 1:18), while men did see Jesus (1 John 1:1-2); yet no man has seen or can see Jesus (1 Tim. 6:16). Yes, God cannot die (1 Tim. 1:17), while Jesus did die (Phil. 2:8); yet no one could take Jesus' life from him (John 10:18), it was impossible for him to remain dead (Acts 2:24), and he raised himself (John 2:19-22). Yes, God never changes (Ps. 102:26-27), while Jesus grew (Luke 2:52) and learned (Heb. 5:8); yet Jesus also never changes (Heb. 1:10-12; 13:8). Yes, God is eternal (Ps. 90:2), while Jesus was born (Matt. 1:18); yet Jesus has always existed (John 8:58). (Why You Should Believe In The Trinity, by Robert M. Bowman, Jr., Page 75)
We have shown that Christ eternally pre-existed creation (and his incarnation) as a separate person, called “the Word” and the Son. He was eternally with the Father in a glorious Father/Son relationship. Such an eternal personal existence is by definition “God.” Therefore the Son is God. Even when the Son comes into the world and begins the earthly, fleshly, human phase of His eternal existence, there are strong statements to the effect that He is still worshipped as the Divine Son of God even during His incarnation (Heb. 1:6 – And when He again brings the first-born into the world, He says, “And let all the angels of God worship Him.”). And this Sonship implies subordination. If there is a Divine Trinity, all three Divine persons would have to be equal in and sharers in the One Divine nature and substance. But we could not have only One God accomplishing His work in three personal forms if they are all three equal in their interactive personal relations as well. Otherwise, there would be three gods if they are equal in personal relationships also. But if the Son and Spirit are equal in nature to the Father, but subordinate in personal relations, then we can conceive of One God instead of three. Subordination of persons (not nature) is an argument for a Monotheistic Trinity. Equality of both nature and personal relationships makes three equal gods (or a Polytheistic Trinity). So, we would absolutely agree that subordination of the persons of Christ and the Spirit to the Father is taught in the Bible, and that it is an argument for the Trinity, not against it. When we look at the passages which talk about Christ’s “begotten-ness” we see that it is not just a reference to His birth into humanity, but rather a reference to His nature and personhood before, during and after His incarnation. Begotten is not talking about a starting point of His existence, but rather the Father as source of His eternal existence. Jesus always existed, so He was always the Son, and therefore was always the only begotten Son. This makes Jesus “eternally begotten.” There never was a time when the Father and Son did not exist. The Son was always there with the Father. He always was the only begotten Son of the Father. So, “begotten” refers to His relationship with the Father, and means he was subordinate to and directly related to the Father and co-existed with the Father. As long as there was a Father, there was also a Son. And the Spirit existed co-eternally with them. These three persons revealed and explained the One Divine Being to us.
There is a real danger of slipping so far away from these doctrines about Who Christ is that we become ambivalent to the Biblical Faith. There is a tendency to go much farther with unitarianism than just denying the Deity of Christ. It has often led to a denial of Christianity’s distinctiveness altogether (universalism and syncretism). Such apostasy results in believing there are many ways to get to God instead of just through Christ. This is a complete denial and rejection of everything Jesus and the NT teaches. It is utter and complete apostasy from the Holy One who has lived among us. The revelation has been adequate. In fact it is the Deity of Christ that sets Christianity apart from all the other religions in the world. All other religions have mankind trying to be good enough to earn salvation and heaven. But Christianity recognizes that man can never be good enough to work his way up to God. Only if God comes down to us can we be saved. God has to come down to us before we can be back in His presence and fellowship again. That is why Christianity is so unique. We believe in a God who loved us so much that He came down to us and took human form and lived among us and paid the price for our redemption. Glory hallelujah.
The Nature and Identity of Christ is not an opinion issue. It matters crucially Who we believe He is. Our share in eternal life is based directly upon our belief and confession of Jesus as “the Son of God.” We must know what that means, believe it and confess it before men both by our words and our life. Understanding all the intricate nuances of and differences between the various Trinitarian explanations may not be necessary or even possible, but believing in the fact of the Deity of Christ and the Trinity is essential. Christ’s identity is the bedrock and foundation of our faith. If it doesn’t matter WHO we believe the Son of God is, why should it matter that we believe in Him at all? Who is this person who said, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but through Me.”? (John 14:6) Each of us must face the question Jesus asked, “Who do you say that I AM?” It does matter. Our justification depends on answering that question rightly. And there is not more than one right answer. May we all in one accord, like the 24 elders, the myriads of angels and the glorified saints in heaven, prostrate ourselves before the throne and worship Him who sits there along with His Son the Lamb. They are worthy of our praise and adoration. Christ, we do all adore Thee! “Worthy art Thou...” (Rev. 5:9). “Salvation to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb” (Rev. 7:10ff). “Holy, Holy, Holy...” (Rev. 4:8). Christ’s Deity is the bedrock and foundation of our confession (cf. Matt. 16:16-18). To deny this is to make shipwreck of our faith. When we confess Him to be the Son of God, we are confessing our belief in His Deity.
True Christians must believe in the Deity of Christ and the Tri-Unity of Three Divine Persons without any hedging, qualifications or reservations whatsoever. We must hold to the Deity of Christ as being an essential and fundamental belief of Christianity, and that anyone who denies it has left the Christian Faith and is no longer worthy of Christian fellowship and must be considered as an outsider and an unbeliever. Likewise, any Christian who extends fellowship to someone who denies the Deity of Christ has compromised on an essential issue, and is one and the same as if they had denied the Deity themselves, since they excuse false doctrine and refuse to cooperate in the efforts of the faithful to purge the leaven out of the body of Christ. Having to take such purgatory action is not pleasant, but it is necessary when essential moral and doctrinal absolutes have been violated, and repeated attempts to correct it have not produced repentance (acc. to the principles of Matt. 18:15-17). Such disciplinary action by the church is not popular in modern America where individualism and freedom have become more highly valued than self-discipline and covenant commitment to the Christian community. Compromise with and fellowship of the apostate does not motivate the apostate to return to truth, but cutting off fellowship does. If we really love the souls of those in error we will practice “tough-love” with them, not just look the other way and hope the situation will turn out all right without us having to get involved. Imagine what would happen to a flock of sheep if the shepherd took a non-involvement approach every time a predator attacked his sheep. Imagine what would happen to a church if the leaders allowed their doctrinal and moral distinctives to be violated without any response to it. Christian leaders absolutely have to take action against the leavening influence of false teachers. And the whole body of believers have to participate in the removal. It is not just a leadership thing. The leaders must initiate it, but the rest of God’s people must get involved. The whole church will eventually be corrupted if they don’t. Sure, it is not pleasant losing a member, but it is better to lose one member than to lose the whole church. Jesus said this in His sermon on the mount. And He gave no indication that it would be fun to have to amputate an infected part of the body. But if the rest of the body wants to stay alive, it will have to accept the pain and sacrifice of losing one of its members. It is a matter of life and death for the rest of the body. The infection will not go away. It will only spread like gangrene and kill the whole body. Church discipline is a fact of [spiritual] life for the church. Without it the body of Christ cannot survive. Those in the body, especially the leaders in the church, must accept responsibility for practicing this kind of disciplinary oversight. If they won’t, they are not worthy nor qualified to be leaders or members in the church.
Jesus and Paul both exercised this kind of tough-love on occasions when critical issues were involved. Jesus warned His disciples about the leaven [teaching] of the Pharisees, Scribes, Sadducees and leaders of the Jews, and repeatedly rebuked those Jewish leaders openly in front of their followers. Jesus made it very clear that He did not go along with their doctrinal or moral depravity. The apostles (especially Paul and John) and Luke (the writer of Acts) dealt "personally" with people such as Ananias & Sapphira, Simon Magus, Peter's hypocrisy, Mark's defection, Diotrephes' lording it over the flock, Hymenaeus and Philetus, etc. The scriptures command us to "mark" those who are leading the disciples astray. A shepherd protects and goes to bat for his sheep, instead of just sitting there watching while the lion, wolf and bear eat 'em up and scatter them. The shepherd has to get not only "personal," but downright "intimate" with the bear, lion and wolf if he wants to protect his sheep. He doesn't play footsie with them or ignore them and let them do whatever they want. Young immature Christians (babes in Christ) should never be allowed to play over the hole of the cobra (for obvious reasons). There are certain persons who believe (and teach) things contrary to what the apostles taught, whom we are commanded to turn away from, not because they are immoral, but simply because they are false teachers. The elders of the church were to be qualified and capable as teachers of sound doctrine in order to refute the gainsayers and false teachers. How in the world are we going to identify a "false teacher" if there is no doctrinal standard to go by? Do we merely look at their moral and ethical behavior? What if a Moslem lives a good moral life? Is he therefore not a false teacher just because he lives right? Were the apostles just concerned about "moral" and ethical issues only. Or did Hymenaeus and Philetus diverge on a "theological" point? What about the Judaizers? Was Paul's argument with the Judaizers based exclusively or even primarily on moral issues, or was it doctrinal and theological positions? Has our argument with the Jews for the last two thousand years been merely over whether the Jews or the Christians have purer moral character and lifestyles? Or are there some theological and doctrinal questions at dispute here? Did Jesus say that all those who worship him should do so only on the basis of spiritual (moral, ethical, emotional) considerations, or on a standard of "truth" as well? Why does Paul talk about holding to the pattern (or standard) of sound doctrine? The plan of redemption dealt with so intricately in Paul's writings (especially Romans, Galatians, and Hebrews) is pure theology. The doctrines of the atonement, the priesthood, the sacrifices, the typology are all theological issues. If doctrine is optional, and morality is the only essential to being right with God, why be a Christian at all? I can be a good moral person and be a Hindu, Buddhist, Moslem, New Ager, etc. And if we can fellowship someone who rejects the Deity of Christ, we might as well extend our hand of fellowship to the Moslem, the Jehovah's Witness, and the many cult groups (The Way International, The Children of God, The Bahai Faith, the Unitarians, etc.) who also deny the Deity of Christ, but who say they admire and appreciate the teachings of Jesus and look up to him as a teacher. Those people live good moral lives, some of whom would definitely put us to shame. If "morality" is all that is necessary, they have it made. Surely we will not fall into this trap. Surely we see that there are essential doctrines that must be understood and believed before salvation and justification are ours. Who Jesus is, is one of those "doctrinal" issues. His nature is not a pure "moral" issue, it is a theological and doctrinal issue. It is something we must understand and believe and confess. It is essential to confess Jesus as the Christ and the Son of God. We cannot fellowship a Moslem even if he says, "Yes, I believe Jesus was [a] Christ [of some kind] and the Son of God [in some sense]." This begs the question of whether it really matters what we mean when we confess Jesus as the "Christ" and “Son of God.” Can we give those terms any definition we want and still be correct in our confession? Does it matter what we believe about Jesus as long as we say the magical words, "I believe Jesus is the Christ [in some sense] and the Son of God [in some sense]. In fact, do we have to believe anything at all about any doctrinal/theological issue to be right with God, or is it all based solely on moral and ethical lifestyles? Obviously it does matter what we believe about Jesus. We cannot just attach any old meaning to our confession that we want to.
What are the implications of the Deity of Christ for our atonement and salvation and redemption? The High Priest who offers the ultimate sacrifice in the Heavenly Temple in the very presence of Yahweh had to be perfectly sinless (without defect or blemish). And the sacrifice He offered had to be perfectly sinless (without defect or blemish). No mere man could be that kind of priest and sacrifice. All men have fallen short. No man can attain justification with God. That's why God had to come down to us. We could not reach Him. That's why Christianity is so different and infinitely superior to every other religion. It is the only religion where God comes down and pays the price of redemption and unites us back with Himself, instead of staying in heaven and demanding that we somehow live morally perfect lives and earn His good graces. No man can do that, so there is no hope for our salvation without God Himself reversing the curse that His own justice imposed. No created being is strong enough or Holy [enough] to break that curse. God is the only one who is Holy [enough] and powerful enough to reverse what He imposed. If God doesn't pay the price for it, it cannot be reversed. The sacrifice and the High Priest both have to be perfectly sinless. No created being is that HOLY. Only God is. Only God can forgive sin. Only God can raise the dead. Only God can create. Yet the Scriptures say Jesus did all these things. In fact, Jesus says in at least two places that after He dies, He Himself will raise Himself back up from the dead. That is a wee bit more that any created being can claim for Himself. Only God can do such things. The Father and the Son and the Spirit are three separate personal manifestations of the one Being we know as God. Jesus makes claims that no created being should ever make., and did things that no created being can ever do. God said He would never share any of His glory with another being. He is a jealous God. Yet we see in the book of Revelation (ch. 5 esp.), Jesus equally sharing the worship and glory of the Father. And John 17:5 speaks volumes about not only the glory Jesus got after the ascension, but about the same kind of glory He had with the Father before the creation of the universe. Jesus as the eternal Son existed with the Father in eternity before creation and shared the Glory of the Father. If He and the Father and the Spirit are not all personal manifestations of the One Being God, then we have three equal Gods. The beauty of the Trinitarian faith is that we don't believe in three equal Gods (tri-theism). We believe in One God who has manifested Himself in three personal ways, two of which are subordinate to the Father who represents the One. This subordination is expressed in scripture by such statements that refer to Christ being “begotten” by the Father, and the Holy Spirit “proceeding forth” from the Father. Subordination of Christ and the Spirit are Biblical doctrines. Without subordination of the Son and the Spirit, there would be three equal Gods (tri-theism). So, a Trinitarian is a believer in a "subordinationist Christology" as well. The difference is that the unitarians take the "subordination" much deeper than the Trinitarians. They use it to deny Christ's Deity instead of letting it explain how One God can manifest Himself in three personal ways. They say Christ is subordinate to the Father not only in personal relationship, but also in nature/substance/being. Trinitarians say He is subordinate to the Father in personal relationship only, not in nature/substance/being. In substance, Jesus is Deity. In personal manifestation in relation to the Father, He is subordinate.
Few are aware of how far down the Unitarian road some of our former staff writers have traveled. When I was in Baytown, Texas recently, where one of them was presenting her unitarian position, she publicly admitted that she had pretty well accepted the "Conception Christology" view which believes not only that Jesus is not Deity, but also that Jesus did not exist as a separate and distinct person before he was conceived in Mary's womb. She took the position that if He existed before his conception it was only in the sense of God's Logos (the impersonal eternal plan of redemption in God's mind). It did not have a separate personal existence until that plan was "fleshed out" (her words) in Jesus. Christ only existed as a thought in the mind of God. I shouldn't need to cite the numerous passages which teach a personal existence of Jesus both before creation and before His incarnation. John 17:5,24 (indeed the whole gospel of John) is enough to prove that Jesus had a separate conscious and personal existence with the Father before the universe was created. Jesus existed in the eternal realm with His Father before the creation of time and space. Anything which existed before time is by nature eternal. If Jesus existed in the eternal realm before time began, He is eternal. The only Being in the universe who is eternal is God. If Jesus is not of the same essence and substance and being as the Father, then there are two Eternal Ones! It would be just as logical to believe there are two eternities, or two omnipotents! Obviously there can only be one of those. There can only be one true God. With created beings it is impossible to manifest ourselves as multiple persons, or to be in more than one place at one time. But God has no such limitations. He can manifest Himself in as many personal ways and in as many locations at one time as He wants to. So, it does not help the argument of the unitarian to assert that because there is only one true God, He is only one person and can manifest Himself in only one personal way at a time. This is just as ridiculous as asserting that the Holy Spirit (God Himself) can only indwell the heart of one individual at a time. God is not limited like we humans are. God can be everywhere at once. Just because we can’t manifest ourselves as multiple persons doesn’t mean God can’t. Jesus existed with His Father and was loved by His Father (there were distinct persons with a relationship) before the creation (John 17:5,24).
Believing and confessing the Deity of Christ cuts right to the heart of Who Jesus is. He said He would build His church on the very foundation of Peter's confession. That confession was a statement of Who Jesus is. The church is built squarely on Who Jesus is. Tear that out of our confession, and we have a foundation-less church and a meaning-less confession and a salvation-less faith. If we don't stand for something, we will fall for anything. Paul exhorts us to "Retain the standard of sound words..." (2 Tim. 1:13), and to “keep the faith.” We are to “preach the word” (not our opinions and feelings and wishful thinking).
Some seem unwilling to address the question about who the "Son of God" is, and what this phrase means. This title was used in the confession of Peter (Matt. 16:16; etc.). Christ's identity as described by this title is the foundation upon which the Church is built. It is essential to understand WHO Jesus is, believe it, repent and confess it, before we are justified.
Any leader in Christian ministry must always be held accountable for what they believe and teach. We are told to always be ready to give a defense for what we believe. We shouldn't whine about it. It's our obligation. We as teachers are under a stricter judgment, and have to live by a higher standard. We compromise the doctrinal standards of Scripture when we extend Christian fellowship to those who publicly repudiate the Deity of Christ and the Trinity and teach against it. Christ commands us as Christians (and especially as Christian leaders) to take appropriate disciplinary action against such false teachers (Matt. 18:15-17). We as Christians are called to purge out the leaven from among ourselves lest we be corrupted and consumed by it also. Those who will not participate in the removal of the leaven are as guilty as the one who is the leavening influence, since they are going along with the evil and not taking issue with it and are allowing it to spread unchecked. This is the way God tests the leaders of His people. Those who will not take a stand against error do not deserve to be leaders. May God demolish our ministry among His people if we are not obeying His commands to guard His people from error. May we never be found in fellowship with those who demote Christ from His Exalted Position as Divine Son, nor with those who go along with and excuse this apostasy. May we as leaders among God’s people be good shepherds and watchmen.
What does one have to know and believe to be a Christian? Does it include a confession of Jesus as being both the Christ AND the "Son of God?" Mere "verbal agreement that he is Lord and Christ" is not enough. Nor is mere spiritualism and emotionalism enough. Emotion has a place in our covenant relationship with God and His covenant people, but it is not the only thing that has a place there. And it is certainly not to be put on a pedestal at the expense of sound Biblical doctrine. There must be a balance. It is definitely true that some of us go to the legalistic extreme of putting doctrinal distinctives on the pedestal, while others put emotion and moral lifestyle as the supreme good. But, neither extreme is Biblically or spiritually correct. We worship and serve Christ in both Spirit and Truth (John 4:24).
The souls of our friends and relatives are at stake here in regard to this doctrine, including our own if we deny the Deity or compromise with those who do. The souls of those being taught the gospel are at stake as well. These are not trivial matters. Leaders among God's people cannot afford to take this issue lightly. We are expected to follow a higher standard and impose covenant sanctions against those who endanger the flock. It troubles me deeply when I see some act as if there are no injunctions and sanctions and disciplines required within the parameters of the new covenant relationship. But it happens because we as preachers and teachers and leaders have failed to teach the Biblical concepts of "church discipline" or "withdrawal of fellowship" or "excommunication." For others, it is not so much a lack of understanding of Biblical discipline, but a refusal to comply with it. Christian leaders must take a stand on essential issues. Sure it is not pretty, or warm or cozy to have to follow the commands laid down in Matt. 18:15-17. No one likes it. But it must be done whether we like it or not. Leaders who are unwilling to follow Christ in the proper handling of the souls He has placed under their influence would be better off having a millstone hung around their head and thrown into the ocean (so says Christ). God forbid we let His sheep be torn up and scattered by false teachers without lifting a finger to oppose it. Do we care more about our comfortable cozy relationships with people than doing what is best for God's sheep? Are we more concerned about pleasing men or pleasing God? We must not defect or compromise in this critical area. God will hold us accountable.
We must have no fellowship with those who teach against the Deity of Christ, nor with those who compromise with it or refuse to take a stand against it. I pray God will help us understand the seriousness of this issue. The doctrinal purity of this and future generations of the church is at stake.
It truly is a wonder God loved us SO MUCH that He would actually take on human form and live among His creatures and die for us. What a marvelous and wonderful event. It defies description. Profound and imponderable! But who would marvel at it if Jesus was only a creature forced into doing God’s work for Him? I can’t buy that for a split-second. Jesus MUST be God. If He isn’t, we have not been saved. Jesus is “our God for Whom we have waited that He might save us.” (Isa. 25:9) Who says Scripture doesn’t call Jesus God? It does in many places. Another place is Titus 2:13 where it talks about the “glory of our Great God and Savior Christ Jesus.” And 1 Jn. 5:20, where it says, “And we know that the Son of God has come, and has given us understanding, in order that we might know Him who is true, and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life.” In the context of Titus 2:13 (cf. vs. 14) it alludes to OT passages referring to Yahweh and claims they are fulfilled by Jesus. And Jesus shares in the same glory that Yahweh gets for this salvation that they both shared in. This is totally unacceptable if Jesus is not the true Son (offspring) of God in a very direct and unlimited, unqualified sense. The very name given to Jesus before His conception by His Father and announced through the angel Gabriel (Yahshua “Yah Saves” – cf. Lk. 1:31) means that this One would be the promised Salvation of Yahweh. This salvation is connected with “our God for whom we have waited that He might save us.” Yahweh has become our salvation. Yahweh has saved. Yahweh is our only hope and our only salvation. In Judaism, the father had the exclusive right to name his son. Guess who gave Jesus His name? Guess who Jesus’ real Father is! Did the Son have the same essence and nature as His real Father? Jesus wears the name, given to Him by God His Father, and Jesus has brought the salvation that Yahweh was supposed to bring. And Yahweh [Jesus] would say in that day, “I am He” and “Here I am.” (Isa. 43:10; 52:6)
Do you find the Deity of Christ mysterious? It is beyond all mysteries! But wonderful and precious and essential! Who can but prostrate before Jesus and give Him ALL (of God’s) glory. We may never understand HOW the incarnation of God could happen, but that doesn’t change the FACT of it. I don’t understand how God could have any of His attributes (omniscience, omnipresence, immutable, Holiness, justice, perfection, immortal, eternal, etc.), but that doesn’t change the fact that He has them! Who CAN fully comprehend the idea of a Divine Trinity? I certainly can’t, and neither could apostle Paul who affirmed “great is the mystery” (1 Tim. 3:16). But I see the evidence for it, and the necessity of it, and believe the fact of it, and confess it to be the truth. It is a mystery and hard to understand, but true nevertheless, and just as essential to believe as the attributes of God. We worship Jesus not just because of what He was able to accomplish, but primarily because of Who He is! He is “our God for whom we have waited that He might save us.” He is the “I AM” Who became flesh to reverse the curse and draw us back into His presence. And “thus we shall always be with the Lord” to praise Him forever and ever. “Praise God from Whom all blessings flow. Praise Him all creatures here below. Praise Him above ye heavenly hosts. Praise Father, Son and Holy Ghost.” Truly the One Divine Being we call God is “Holy, Holy, Holy ... in three persons, blessed Trinity.”