The Nature of Christ

This was written by Frank Jamerson and appeared in The Gospel Teacher, a weekly publication of the Church of Christ in Hilliard, Ohio. Grant B. Caldwell was the editor.

"In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth" (Genesis 1:1). The word God in this verse is the plural form Elohim which indicates that more than one being have the nature of Godhead. The Bible teaches that the Father, the Word (Son) and the Holy Spirit have the same nature; God, or Deity. To affirm that they are Divine beings is to affirm their eternity. We want to notice specifically the claims of Jesus to Godhead, or Deity.

In Exodus 3:10, God said to Moses, "I AM." This term denotes timelessness in existence. God was saying to Moses, "I am eternal." In John 8:58, Jesus claimed the same for Himself. "Before Abraham was born, I am." In affirming that He is the, "I am" He is saying that He, "was with God and was God" (John 1:1). Other passages clearly show that Christ was God. Isaiah 40:3 says, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert a highway for our God." This is quoted and applied to Jesus in Matthew 3:3. In Isaiah 40:28, the Lord is the Creator but John 1:3 affirms that the Son was the Creator. Jesus was called, Immanuel" which means, "God with us." Yes, the Bible clearly says that Jesus is "God the Son." The word God sometimes refers to the Father (Romans 15:6) but often refers to the Godhead; the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Does the term "begotten" indicate that Jesus had a beginning? As a human being, Jesus was conceived of the Holy Spirit then was brought forth as other human beings are but this does not tell the whole story of how Jesus was the "begotten." The Psalmist's statement, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten Thee" (Psalm 2:7) is quoted in Acts 13:33035. It is applied to His resurrection and exaltation, thus has nothing to do with origin but rather is a title of position. In W.E. Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, concerning, "only begotten," he says, "We can only rightly understand the term the only begotten when used of the Son, in the sense of unoriginated relationship. The begetting is not an event of time, however remote, but a fact irrespective of time. The Christ did not become but necessarily and eternally is the Son. He, a Person, possesses every attribute of pure Godhead. This necessitates eternity, absolute being; in this respect He is not 'after' the Father." To this we may conclude that if there ever was a time when the Son was not the Son, then there was a time when the Father was not the Father!

Does "Son of God" prove that God created Jesus? No! The term "son of" was used in the Bible to refer to "sameness," thus stating His Godhood. In Mark 3:17, "sons of thunder" shows a nature (explosive) rather than origin. Luke 20:34 refers to, "children of this world" referring to the worldly minded. The term "father" is also used to refer to sameness. In Genesis 4:20, Jabal was "father" of tent dwellers and cattle raisers. In verse 21, Jubal is called, "father of all such as handle the harp and organ." These uses of "father" and "son" show equality with, or sameness. The Jews understood that when Jesus was claiming to be, "the Son of God" that He was making Himself God. He was claiming to be the same (John 5:18).

In 2 Samuel 7:12-16, we find a dual prophecy that refers to both Solomon and Christ. Hebrews 1:5 quotes part of verse 14 and shows its fulfillment in Christ. "I will be to him a Father and he shall be to Me a son." This shows that in the sense of servitude or submission, His sonship had a beginning. When the New Testament speaks of the subjection of Jesus, it is using sonship in the sense of 2 Samuel 7:14. That role had a beginning (when he came into the world as a man [Philippians 2:6-8]) but that does not prove that Jesus was not eternal. Again, a definition for Vine on the Son of God sets forth the New Testament teaching. "An eternal relation subsisting between the Son and the Father in the Godhead is to be understood. That is to say, the Son of God, in His eternal relationship with the Father, is not so entitled because He at any time began to derive His being from the Father (in which case He could not be co-eternal with the Father), but because He is and ever has been the expression of what the Father is..." Then he gives John 14:9 and Hebrews 1:3 and concludes that, "absolute Godhead, not Godhead in a secondary or derived sense, is intended in the title.

The Bible teaches that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are God, thus co-eternal. I readily admit that I cannot conceive of eternity but to deny the eternity of either is to deny His Deity, or Godhead!