I first became aware of the meaning of the title “Son of God” while studying to become a Christian many years ago. I remember being taught that when one makes the good confession (cf. 1 Tim. 6:12f) he is saying that he believes that Jesus is the Christ and the Son of God. I learned that “Christ” meant the Messiah (the Anointed One) and that “Son of God” was a reference to God becoming flesh (referring to the Incarnation of God and the Deity of Christ). All Christians agree that the confession itself is essential. And, confessing Jesus as being the Son of God is an essential part of that essential confession: “Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God.” (1 Jn. 4:15 – cf. Matt. 16:16; 26:63). If we allow someone to make that confession without understanding it or agreeing with it, we might as well not even require the confession at all. It is obvious that we must not only confess who Jesus is, but we must at the same time understand what that confession means and agree with it. In fact, that’s what the word “confess” means (to agree with). Otherwise we would have to fellowship a whole host of cult groups who would confess Jesus as “the Son of God,” but who define that term in a multiplicity of radically different ways than Christians do. When we confess Jesus as the “Son of God” it matters crucially what we mean by it. We can’t confess Him wrongly and be saved rightly. If the phrase does not refer to the Deity of Christ, then most assuredly to be consistent we must embrace as fellow Christians the Unitarians, New Agers, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and all the cults who deny the Deity of Christ as well. Will those who claim we have freedom of opinion regarding the Deity of Christ extend Christian fellowship to all these other groups?

Since what we believe and confess about Jesus can put us in the position of either blasphemy or idolatry, the meaning of the phrase “Son of God” becomes crucial for us to understand. It very much matters WHO Jesus is. Jesus is the very Son (offspring, descendant) of God Himself. God took human form. He had to. There is no other way to obtain our redemption. And, it is right to give the prince son of a King (the heir to the throne) the praise and worship due to the King. But if that son is not the real offspring of God, but is only a created being, why call him the Son? And, if Jesus IS the real offspring of God Himself, and God resides in Him, and He is of one substance with His real Father and of the same nature and shares in the same glory of the Father, then He most certainly deserves to be called the Son of God in the most real and Divine sense. Sonship is a reference to descendancy from God and being God’s direct offspring. No other sense of “sonship” invented by the cult groups will suffice. Robert Bowman shows how important the right definition of “Son” really is:

The Watchtower booklet argues, “Trinitarians say that since God is eternal, so the Son of God is eternal. But how can a person be a son and at the same time be as old as his father?” ...The better question to ask is how an eternal, infinite, divine Father could possibly have a temporal, finite, creaturely son. If Son as applied to the prehuman Jesus is at all a description of his nature, and not (as when applied to angels or men) a completely symbolic expression picturing our relationship to God, then we would expect the Son to be the same kind of being as his Father in every substantial respect. This is, in fact, what the Bible says about the Son. (Why You Should Believe In The Trinity, by Robert M. Bowman, Jr., Page 83, 84)

In what sense is Jesus God’s “Son?” What is this Sonship all about? I believe the key to understanding this is in the uniqueness of Jesus’ Sonship. The word “the” implies uniqueness and one of a kind. Jesus is the ONLY unitarians to point to other Biblical usage of the phrase in reference to men or angels and apply those meanings to Christ. Jesus is the Son of God in some other unique sense.

So, in what sense is Jesus “the” Son of God? The angels (created beings) were called “sons of God.” (Gen. 6:2; Job 1:6) So Jesus cannot be an angel. Christians are called “sons of God,” but we know that the “only begotten Son of God” is not just a righteous human being. If Jesus is not just a man or an angel, what is He?

Jesus states very clearly that He was in heaven with the Father before His earthly/fleshly tenure (John 17:5). Jesus was from God, and He was God. (cf. John 1:1-3) God was in Him, and He was in God (2 Cor. 5:19; John 10:38; 14:10). He and the Father were both of the same substance/nature since they were Father and Son. They were directly related as truly as any father and son could ever be. It was not just a symbolic or theological or representative father/son relationship. Jesus is the actual, real offspring (son) of God His Father. The miraculous conception and virgin birth testify to this unique Father-Son relationship. No one else is “THE Son of God” in the same sense He is.

What do we mean by the term “son.” What is a son? And in what sense is Jesus the “son” of God? The American Heritage Dictionary defines the term “son” as meaning “male offspring, male descendant, male associated with a place or cause.” Is there any chance that Jesus is the “son” of God in the “offspring” or “direct descendant” sense? Is there any Biblical evidence that this is the case? What about the virgin birth? The story about it is remarkable by any standard, and is a very defining moment for the nature of Christ:

Now in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city in Galilee, called Nazareth, to a virgin engaged to a man whose name was Joseph, of the descendants of David; and the virgin's name was Mary. And coming in, he said to her, "Hail, favored one! The Lord is with you." But she was greatly troubled at this statement, and kept pondering what kind of salutation this might be. And the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary; for you have found favor with God. "And behold, you will conceive in your womb, and bear a son, and you shall name Him Jesus. "He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David; and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever; and His kingdom will have no end. " And Mary said to the angel, "How can this be, since I am a virgin?" And the angel answered and said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy offspring shall be called the Son of God. "And behold, even your relative Elizabeth has also conceived a son in her old age; and she who was called barren is now in her sixth month. "For nothing will be impossible with God." And Mary said, "Behold, the bondslave of the Lord; be it done to me according to your word." And the angel departed from her. (Lk. 1:26-38 – emphasis mine, ees)

Note carefully the boldfaced words above. They are amazing and astounding in their implication. When the Holy Spirit (God Himself) overshadowed Mary, it is no insignificant nor irrelevant question to ask, “Who was the real father of the infant Jesus?” The only other “father” mentioned in this context is David. Unless we want to believe that Jesus was fathered by David being resurrected for the occasion, it seems imperative that we understand Jesus as literally being “the Son of the Most High.” It would not be proper to call Jesus “the holy offspring” and “the Son of the Most High” unless He was directly conceived by the union of the Holy Spirit (God Himself) and Mary. And that is exactly what this passage teaches! Jesus is the unique, one-and-only offspring of God. Jesus is called “the Son of God” because (“for that reason”) the Holy Spirit came upon Mary and the power of the Most High overshadowed her. The Holy Offspring conceived in her womb was called “the Son of God” because He was fathered by God Himself. Jesus literally was the “Son” of God. The Eternal Person of the Son who existed in the same form as His Eternal Father took human form through miraculous conception in Mary’s womb. Jesus is the only time God has taken (and ever will take) human form for the purpose of living out a full human life on earth. He had appeared briefly in angelic form before, and spoken “to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways,” but in those Last Days of the Jewish nation He revealed Himself through the Son (Heb. 1:1ff). To make the Son anything less than the incarnation of God is to reject the inspired testimony about Who Jesus’ Father really is. In net effect it makes Jesus illegitimate. It is no wonder the Jehovah’s Witnesses and other non-trinitarian cult groups try to destroy our belief in the Deity of the Holy Spirit. It has such a direct bearing on who Jesus is in Lk. 1:35. Unitarians usually de-personalize the Holy Spirit and consider Him to be nothing more than an impersonal force or as merely the evidence of God’s presence or activity in some way. Other unitarians see the Holy Spirit as being a reference to God Himself with no thoughts of separate persons so that there is only one person (the Unitarian or oneness doctrine), not a duality or a Trinity of persons. Jesus was a descendant of David because of his mother Mary’s descendancy from David’s family. When we call Jesus “the only son of God,” we need to think about what that sonship means. Sonship implies fatherhood. In view of the virgin birth, how can we conceive of Jesus being the Son of God in any lesser sense than the direct offspring? The parable of the vineyard owner certainly implies that Jesus is in fact the direct offspring of the Father (Mt. 21:33ff and parallels Mk. 12 and Lk. 20; cf. Isa. 5:1ff; Jer. 12:10ff). In Jesus’ teaching He constantly paints Himself as the Son of Yahweh in the most intimate, direct and unique way. (cf. John 17:24 - “Thou didst love me” and Jn. 1:18 - “ in the bosom of the Father”)

Here are some questions the reader may want to think about as we consider the meaning of the phrase, “Son of God.” Does the OT predict the Divine Sonship of Christ? How do the Christologies deal with the Nature of the Messiah when they look at the OT predictions? What did the apostles and early Christians understand when they confessed Jesus as the Christ and the Son of God? What did Jesus mean when He called Himself “the Son of God?” It is obvious that the Jews considered Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God as blasphemy (cf. John 5, 8, 10 and John 10:22-42).

In Jesus’ parable about the Vineyard Owner sending His Son to collect the rent (Mt. 21:33ff and parallels Mk. 12 and Lk. 20; cf. Isa. 5:1ff; Jer. 12:10ff), there is a significant contrast between the servants of the vineyard owner and his son. Jesus is more than just one of the servants. He has a direct relationship and family identity with God as it is pictured here. Jesus created all things (John 1:3; Col. 1:16), so He had to exist before creation in order to create all things. He had glory with the Father before the world existed (John 17:5). Before Abraham existed, Jesus was in existence (John 8:56-58), in fact He even uses the Divine name (“I AM”) in reference to Himself, both here and elsewhere (Mk. 14:61-64; Lk. 22:70; Jn. 8:18,24,28,58; 13:19; 18:5,6,8; Rev. 1:17), the same name which Yahweh used exclusively of Himself in the OT scriptures (Ex. 3:14; Deut. 32:39; Is. 41:4; 43:10,12,13; 45:22; 48:12; 52:6). All the fullness of Deity dwelt in His bodily form (Col. 2:9). He was the image of God, and the exact human representation of the Divine nature (Col. 1:15; Heb. 1:3; Jn. 1:18; 14:7-10). He laid aside the form of God and took on a human form (the Word became flesh) and dwelt among us (Phil. 2:5-8; Jn. 1:14). The Word was already in existence and was already present with God before the creation, in fact, the Word was God (John 1:1). He could forgive sins as only God can do (Mt. 9:6; Mk. 2:7). He was worshipped by angels when he took human form (Heb. 1:6). He was born of a virgin (Lk. 1,2). And it is the very way in which Jesus was conceived and born which speaks volumes about Who He is and what His nature is. He was obviously not just a human being. Angels had cohabited with human women in the days before the Flood and produced wicked offspring (the giants). But Mary didn’t cohabit with an angel or any other created being. She was with child by the Holy Spirit (God Himself). This was unique. No other time in history did God do such a thing. Jesus proceeded forth from (out of and/or away from) the Father (John 8:42; 16:27). He was Deity “revealed in the flesh” for us (1 Tim. 3:16). How can this One who came forth from the Father and was conceived in Mary’s womb be anything but both human and Divine? He is the human son of David through Mary and the Divine Son of God through the Holy Spirit. If you have seen Jesus, you have seen the Father (Jn. 14:7-9). Jesus is God’s Son in the most real and unique sense possible. He is the most we can see of God while at the same time being man – the fullest possible revelation of God’s nature in a fleshly body. The message of the incarnation was not that God sent some created being to somewhat represent Him and do some of His work for Him. It was to completely and exactly communicate God’s nature and will to us. No finite created being could do even a halfway decent job of that. It would take an infinite, eternal, omniscient, omnipotent, holy, just and perfect being to do the job right. That means it would take God to do it. Jesus had to be God.

The Good Confession (1 Tim. 6:12,13) refers to Jesus as being the Christ (the Messiah) and the Son of God. Peter confessed Jesus as being “the Christ the Son of the living God.” (Matt. 16:16) The whole purpose of the NT documents was to prove that “Jesus is the Christ the Son of God.” (John 20:31) By His resurrection, Jesus “was declared with power to be the Son of God ...Jesus Christ our Lord.” (Rom. 1:4) Notice the importance Paul places on the understanding and intent behind the confession:

that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you shall be saved; for with the heart man believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation. (Rom. 10:9,10)

Twice here Paul has mentioned the idea of Jesus being “Lord” in connection with confessional statements. What does it mean to confess Jesus as “Lord.” Is this a reference to Christ’s status as the anointed king of the Jews? The NT constantly refers to Jesus as “Lord.” Several passages which do this are quotes from the OT which referred to Yahweh, but in the NT are applied to Jesus. This unequivocally implies that Jesus is not only “a” Lord of some kind, but that He is “THE” Lord (Yahweh) of OT scripture. It should not surprise us then to see apostle John connect the ideas of “Christ and Son of God” with “Lord and God.” A good example of this is John 20:28-31. After the risen Christ appeared in the midst of the disciples with Thomas present, it says:

Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!" Jesus said to him, "Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed." Many other signs therefore Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these have been written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name. (John 20:28-31)

Notice the closely related statements here. It is not by accident John recorded Thomas’ confession of Jesus being “Lord” and “God” and then said all this was written to prove Jesus is the Christ and the Son of God. What does “Son of God” refer to? It means that Jesus was what Thomas had just confessed – “my Lord and my God.” The connection between these two confessional statements is inescapable.

We must be very careful to honor the previous revelation about the nature of God within the Old Testament. We know so much about Jesus. Do any of His claims or the claims made about Him by the NT writers take Him beyond a created being without contradicting a previous revelation in the OT? This becomes even more significant when we realize that many OT passages which refer to Yahweh are quoted in the NT and applied to Jesus. The implication is obvious. Jesus must be confessed as Lord, which is the NT word for Yahweh in the OT. The NT writers considered Jesus to be Yahweh or the Son of Yahweh who was equal with the Father in Divine Nature. The OT affirmed that Yahweh was the only Savior and God (Isa. 43:11; Deut. 32:39; Isa. 43:10), and that He would not share His glory with another (Isa. 42:8), nor allow worship of anyone or anything else (Ex. 20:2-5; 34:14; Deut. 6:13; Matt. 4:10; Lk. 4:8). Yet, we know that Jesus was worshipped and that He shared the glory of the Father before the world was and shares it now again with Him after His Ascension and especially now after His Parousia (Jn. 17:5; Rev. 5; Rev. 21, 22).

on to Chapter 2 . . .

Who Do You Say I Am? - Table of Contents

Articles
IPA Home