What Are Some Common Objections to the Deity of Christ? 

 People today have a number of common objections to, or intellectual difficulties with, the issue of the deity of Christ. This chapter briefly discusses some of them in particular some that arise among people who are quite familiar with biblical statements and phraseology. More extensive discussion can be found in books on the Recommended Reading List. 

 The Father is Greater than I

 " Jesus said, ' ... the Father is greater than I '"

(John 14:28). "Surely that demonstrates Christ's position as somehow lesser than God' ' is one difficulty commonly raised. 

It is true that in His role as bond-servant while on earth, Jesus occupied a lower rank than the Father.  Such a rank, however, does not deny His divine nature. In that same passage, Jesus told Philip, "He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how do you say, Show us the Father?. (John 14:8-9). That statement makes clear that Jesus and the Father are one in nature. To have seen one was to have seen the other (compare John 12:44, 45). Therefore, Jesus'  words that the Father was greater referred to His temporary position, not to His being.

Here we will quote extensively from Arthur W.  Pink's excellent work on this passage in his Exposition of the Gospel of John:

"My Father is greater than I." This is the favorite verse with Unitarians, who deny the absolute Deity of Christ and His perfect equality with the Father...  The Savior had just told the apostles that they ought to rejoice because He was going to the Father, and then advances this reason, ' 'For my Father is greater than I.' ' Let this be kept definitely before us and all difficulty vanishes. The Father's being greater than Christ was the reason assigned why the disciples should rejoice at their Master's going to the Father.  This at once fixes the meaning of the disputed ' 'greater, ' ' and shows us the sense in which it was here used. The contrast which the Savior drew between the Father and Himself was not concerning nature, but official character and position. 

Christ was not speaking of Himself in His essential Being. The One who thought it not robbery to be ''equal with God'' had taken the servant form and not only so, had been made in the likeness of men.  In both these senses, namely, in His official status (as Mediator) and in His assumption of human nature,  He was inferior to the Father. Throughout this discourse and in the Prayer which follows in chapter 17, the Lord Jesus is represented as the Father s Servant, from whom He had received a commission,  and to whom He was to render an account; for whose glory He acted, and under whose authority He spake. But there is another sense, more pertinent,  in which the Son was inferior to the Father. In becoming incarnate and tabernacling among men, He had greatly humiliated Himself, by choosing to descend into shame and suffering in their acutest forms. He was now the Son of man that had not where to lay His head. He who was rich had for our sakes become poor. He was the Man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief. In view of this, Christ was now contrasting His situation with that of the Father in the heavenly Sanctuary. The Father was seated upon the throne of highest majesty; the brightness of His glory was uneclipsed; He was surrounded by hosts of holy beings, who worshiped Him with uninterrupted praise. Far different was it with His incarnate Son – despised and rejected of men, surrounded by implacable enemies, soon to be nailed to a criminal's cross. In this sense, too, He was inferior to the Father.  Now in going to the Father, the Son would enjoy a vast improvement of situation. It would be a gain unspeakable. The contrast then was between His present state of humiliation and His coming state of exaltation to the Father! Therefore, those who really loved Him should have rejoiced at the tidings that He should go to the Father, because the Father was greater than He, greater both in official status and in surrounding circumstances. It was Christ owning His place as Servant, and magnifying the One who had sent Him ' 

 God the Father Is the "Head" of Christ

 The same relationship of greater and lesser is illustrated in 1 Corinthians 11:3. "But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ."  In this passage, three comparisons are made: man to Christ, man to woman, and Christ to God. The third comparison between Jesus and God is the one under discussion here. "God is the head of Christ. Doesn't that sound like superiority? "  Note that this comparison has to do with patterns of  authority; it does not imply inferiority or superiority.  Instead, while on earth, in order to identify with humankind, Jesus voluntarily put Himself under the Father s headship. 

Jesus Was Subject to the Father

 Another verse that shows Christ's relationship to the Father also raises questions. "And when all things are subjected to Him (Jesus], then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him that God may be all in all' '  (1 Corinthians 15:28). Here, the verb subject again does not mean inequality of persons, but rather a difference in roles. Subjection refers only to function,  and submission does not necessarily imply inferiority. 

Think of it. In order for God to atone for man's sin,  someone had to subject Himself to death. Yet only one who had unlimited ability to atone for sin could do that, only a perfect man. He had to have unlimited ability to atone, because He would be shedding His blood for all humankind. He had to be perfect because God accepts only unblemished sacrifices.  Who could do that?  Only God. And God the Son shed His own blood for us (Acts 20:28). Obedience is a key word. 

 So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men. For as through one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous (Romans 5:18, 19). 

 As the perfect man, Christ had to be obedient to God and thus fulfill God's plan to redeem humanity. Jesus voluntarily submitted to that plan, to God the Father,  in order to save humanity from eternal separation from God. 

Jesus Was "Begotten"

 Some people maintain that the term "only begot-ten» in John 3:16 (also 1:14, 18-, 3:18) denies Jesus divinity, implying that He was only another created being. The term "only begotten," however, does not mean created. The word begotten, as used in John's Gospel, means "unique, specially blessed, or favored.' ' C. S. Lewis clearly illustrates the meaning of "begotten' ' when he writes: 

 One of the creeds says that Christ is the Son of God "begotten, not created' ', and it adds "begotten by his Father before all worlds.' ' Will you please get it quite clear that this has nothing to do with the fact that when Christ was born on earth as a man, that man was the son of a virgin? We are not now thinking about the Virgin Birth. We are thinking about something that happened before Nature was created at all, before time began. "Before all worlds' ' Christ is begotten, not created. What does it mean? 

We don't use the words begetting or begotten much in modern English, but everyone still knows what they mean. To beget is to become the father of: to create is to make. And the difference is this.  When you beget, you beget something of the same kind as yourself. A man begets human babies, a beaver begets little beavers and a bird begets eggs which turn into little birds. But when you make, you make something of a different kind from yourself. A bird makes a nest, a beaver builds a dam a man makes a wireless set – or he may make something more like himself than a wireless set: say, a statue.  If he is a clever enough carver he may make a statue which is very like a man indeed. But, of course, it is not a real man; it only looks like one. It cannot breathe or think. It is not alive. 

Now that is the first thing to get clear. What God begets is God; just as what man begets is man. What God creates is not God; just as what man makes is not man. That is why men are not Sons of God in the sense that Christ is. They may be like God in certain ways, but they are not things of the same kind. They are more like statues or pictures of God. 

A statue has the shape of a man but it is not alive.  In the same way, man has (in a sense I am going to explain) the ''shape'' or likeness of God, but he has not got the kind of life God has. Let us take the first point (man's resemblance to God) first.  Everything God has made has some likeness to Himself. Space is like Him in its hugeness: not that the greatness of space is the same kind of greatness as God's, but it is a sort of symbol of it, or a translation of it into non-spiritual terms. Matter is like God in having energy: though, again, of course, physical energy is a different kind of thing from the power of God. The vegetable world is like Him because it is alive, and He is the «living God. °  But life, in this biological sense, is not the same as the life there is in God: it is only a kind of symbol or shadow of it.  When we come on to the animals, we find other kinds of resemblance in addition to biological life.  The intense activity and fertility of the insects, for example, is a first dim resemblance to the unceasing activity and the creativeness of God. In the higher mammals we get the beginnings of instinctive affection. That is not the same thing as the love that exists in God: but it is like it – rather in the way that a picture drawn on a flat piece of paper can nevertheless be ''like'' a landscape. When we come to man, the highest of the animals, we get the completest resemblance to God which we know of. (There may be creatures in other worlds who are more like God than man is, but we do not know about them ) Man not only lives, but loves and reasons: biological life reaches its highest known level in him.3

 In Hebrews 11:17, Isaac is called the "only begotten son' ' of Abraham though Abraham had two sons, Isaac and Ishmael. Thus the writer of Hebrews was using "begotten' ' in its "unique, specially blessed, or favored "  sense. The same is true in John 3:16 of Jesus (the only difference being that God had one Son and Abraham had two). 

Monogenes, the word translated "only begotten, "  is formed from two words. Monos means "single,  only, sole, lone." Genes means "offspring, progeny,  race, kind, sort, species.'' It is a compound word;  it means a unique kind. 

 Jesus Was a Man

 A possible stumbling block that might keep some individuals from accepting the divinity of Christ is that Jesus is clearly said in the Bible to have been a man.  For example, one reads, "For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men the man Christ Jesus °  (1 Timothy 2.5). Romans 5:12-21 speaks of sin being atoned for through the ''Man, Jesus Christ' ' (v 15). 

Although it is true that Scripture teaches that Jesus was human, it also teaches that He was divine. He was a man, born of the Virgin Mary, but He was also God (John 1:1, 14; 20:28; Colossians 2:9; Titus 2:13; 2 Peter 1:1, Hebrews 1:8). Paul emphasized Jesus'  divinity, saying his message came not from men nor from a man °  but from "Jesus Christ" (Galatians 1:1). Jesus was a man,'' but also "Yahweh,'' "Son of God,' ' ''Lord of lords,'' ''King of kings'' and ''the Alpha and the Omega.' ' 

 Jesus Was Called the First-Born of Creation

 Some people get confused over the word first-born, thinking it must mean "first-created."  That would imply that Jesus was only a created being,  not preexistent, or eternal, or God. 

"First-born," however, does not mean "first-created." When Paul stated that Christ was "the firstborn of all creation'' (Colossians 1:15), he used the Greek word prototokos which meant "heir, first in rank. " Had he intended to say first-created, he would have used the Greek word for first-created, protoktistos. Nowhere in Scripture does it say that God "created ' Jesus. 

In his Theology on the Person of Christ Lewis Sperry Chafer states: ' 'This title – sometimes translated First-Born – indicates that Christ is FirstBorn, the elder in relation to all creation; not the first created thing, but the aniecedent to all things as well as the cause of them (Colossians 1:16). ' '4 Jesus could not have been the first created being and also the agent by which all creation came to be as is claimed for Him in Scripture. If he was the agent of all creation then He, Himself could not be created. 

 Jesus and God Were "One in Agreement"

 Jesus said, "... I give eternal life to them and they shall never perish; and no one shall snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me,  is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand. I and the Father are one' '  (John 10:28-30). Was Jesus claiming to be one and the same as God (i.e., as ice and water are "one''  in nature), or was He claiming only to have a oneness, unity of purpose, or agreement with God?  The text indicates the former. 

First, the Jews to whom He was speaking – who culturally were in a position to interpret His words better than anyone 2,000 years later – understood Jesus to be saying He was "God." They took up stones to stone him "... for blasphemy... because You,  being a man make Yourself out to be God" (John 10:33). Second, in Greek, the word one is neuter (hen), not masculine (heis), which indicates that Jesus and God were one and the same in essence.  The masculine form would mean they were one person, which would deny the personal distinction between the Father and the Son. 

The section of John that follows is Jesus' response to the charge of blasphemy. To a Jew versed in the Law His words made sense. To anyone unacquainted with the Jewish understanding of the Old Testament, it can be a difficult and easily misunderstood passage, especially as it relates to the matter of the deity of Christ. The passage reads: 

 Jesus answered them, ' 'Has it not been written in your Law 'I said, you are gods'? If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), do you say of Him, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ' You are blaspheming,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God'?  If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me; but if I do them, though you do not believe Me,  believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in Me, and I in the Father.' '  Therefore they were seeking again to seize Him; and He eluded their grasp (John 10:34-39). 

 Much of the confusion has to do with Jesus' use of the word gods (v.34). Was He saying: "Other men have been called 'gods.' Why cannot I call myself the 'Son of God'? " (thereby indirectly calling Himself a man, not divine)? 

The phrase, "I said, you are gods,' ' is found in Psalm 82:6. The word gods used in the Psalm is the Hebrew word elohim (eloah = "god,'' im = plural ending = "gods' '). The fact that God is often referred to as Elohim in the Old Testament does not mean that the Bible teaches a form of polytheism (many gods). Throughout the Old Testament the singular form of the verb is always used with Elohim when speaking of God (''In the beginning God (plural:  Elohim] created [singular) the heavens and the earth' ' – Genesis 1:1). If anything, the language of the Bible is consistent with the doctrine of the Trinity, just as in Matthew 28:19 the noun name (singular in Greek) is used to express "the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit."  They comprise one  " name. "  The term   "gods"  (elohim) in Psalm 82 refers to Jewish "judges,'' men who were to act as ''God'' (or "gods' ') on behalf of the people, "god' ' in the sense of being just, fair, etc. Obviously, they were not literally God. Exodus 21:1-6 and 22:9, 28 use the same term the word translated "judges' ' in our English Bibles actually is elohim. 

That was the Old Testament context to which Jesus was referring. Why? Seemingly, Jesus was asking them why they were so upset by the use of the term "Son of God. ' ' They had been exposed to it before (i.e., men being called "gods" in Psalm 82).  The issue before them was this: "Don't stop at the use of the term. Look at Me. Look at My works. Are they from God? If they are, believe what I say, including the names I give Myself.'' 

Obviously, Jesus was not denying His earlier claim of deity. He was making a bold statement, challenging the Jews to decide if His works gave credence to His claims ("I and the Father are one' '). 

The argument is from a lesser to a greater. If God called men "gods'' figuratively, how much more appropriate it is far the one whom "the Father sanctified and sent into the world ' (that was certainly not true of the Old Testament judges) to call Himself the Son of God. He was in fact doing the works of the Father: raising the dead, imparting eternal life, sustaining creation, altering creation (changing water to wine, calming storms, etc.). 

Jesus Had Limited Knowledge

 As a human being, Jesus had limited knowledge.  Speaking of His second coming, He said, ' 'But of that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone' ' (Mark 13:32). As discussed earlier, Jesus in his role as ' 'bond-servant' ' chose to live life on human terms while on earth, trusting in His Father's power, not His own. For example, He said, "... the Son can do nothing of Himself' ' (John 5:19). ''I can do nothing on My own initiative" (John 5:30). "  I always do the things that are pleasing to Him"  (John 8:29).  " The Father abiding in Me does His works "  (John 14:10). 

Thus, when Jesus, in the form of a man, said that He did not know the hour of His return, it could have been because of His self-imposed limitations as a bond-servant. Not that He was not equal to God, but rather in this instance that He had chosen not to exercise all His divine prerogatives. 

 "No One Except God Is Good"

 A man once approached Jesus and said, "Good Teacher... " Jesus interrupted Him "Why do you call Me good? No one is good except God alone''  (Mark 10: 17-18). At first glance it may seem that Jesus was denying His divinity. He was not. Rather, He was underscoring that God alone was good. Scripture is clear. Jesus was ' 'sinless," "holy, " "innocent,'' "righteous,'' "separate from sinners,'' and

" undefiled"  (Acts 3:14 2 Corinthians 5:21,. Hebrews 4:15; 7:26: 1 Peter 2:22; 1 John 3:5). By all standards of goodness, Jesus was truly "good"  Thus, Jesus shared an attribute of God: goodness. 

A possible reason for Jesus' response to the man's statement was to gauge the depth of his awareness of who He was, and how serious his intent was to follow Him. As soon as Jesus told the man that there is none good but God, He asked the man to sell His possessions and follow Him as a disciple. Note that He did not say "Follow God," but "Follow Me."  Contrary to first impressions, this passage lends strong support to Christ s deity. 

In conclusion, almost all of the arguments used to deny that Jesus is God stem from a misunderstanding of Philippians 2:6-u, which teaches that Jesus had two natures, the human and the divine. Jesus "existed in two "forms, °  as God (v.6) and as a man ( "bond-servant,"  v. 7). The text teaches that His first state was a position of "equality' ' with God the second a "humbled'' state. Almost all of the verses used to argue that Jesus was unequal to God the Father, and therefore not one with God, compare Jesus in His humble state as a man with God's exalted position in heaven. The fact is overlooked that Jesus left His exalted position of equality with God the Father in order to become a man, die for the sins of the world, be resurrected, and then once again be exalted.