An Appeal to all Advent Christians, Who Affirm Christ’s Full Deity and Humanity
I am writing this as an appeal to my fellow Advent Christians who personally hold to the full deity and humanity of Christ in his one person but who do not want to challenge those in our ranks who have no conviction regarding this teaching or who actually oppose it. Before I make the particular appeal let me state some assumptions and offer two points for you to consider.
Assumptions
First assumption: That you hold to the deity of Christ because you believe and are convinced that the Scriptures teach this truth. So, you would affirm that he is the eternal Son of God the Father. That when the Scriptures teach that he is the only begotten Son, that this is a description of an eternal and necessary reality within the very essence of the Godhead. Further, you would hold that in John’s prologue to his Gospel the one he calls the Word is the Son, who sustains a distinct and eternal relationship with God. From all eternity he “was with God” as a distinct person and shares fully in the divine nature and therefore John declares, without equivocation, that he “was God.” That the God whom the Word is said to be with from all eternity is identified as God the Father as is stated at the end of the prologue: “No one has ever seen God, the only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father this one has made him known” (John 1:18).
Second assumption: You believe and would affirm that when John states that “the Son has made the Father known” that he is referencing the fact of the Word’s incarnation. “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld his glory as the only begotten from the Father full of grace and truth” (John 1:14). This is the Son whom Paul teaches God sent forth in the fullness of time to be born of a woman, born under law (Gal. 4:4). He, as the eternal Son, was miraculously conceived in the womb of the virgin Mary by the power of the Holy Spirit (Luke 1:30-35). In taking on this new nature the Son does not cease to be God but becomes fully man yet without sin (John 8:46; Hebrews 4:14; 1Pet. 2:22). The incarnation is not a subtraction in which the Son lays aside his glory or any of his attributes or changes in any way. Rather, it is a divine addition in which, at a particular time in history, the eternal Son adds human nature to his divine nature and in this sense he is indeed now also the incarnate Son of the Father.
Third assumption: You would hold to the view that the one born of the virgin Mary was named Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins (Matt. 1:21; Luke. 1:31). That he was sent into the world to fulfill the Father’s will to be the Christ. As Jesus Christ, he is the long awaited Messiah, the anointed one, who has not set aside the Law and the Prophets but came to fulfill them (Matt. 5:17). As such he is the substance of all the types and figures of the Old Covenant (all of Hebrews). During his earthly life and ministry he lived under the Law by fully obeying its every precept. He learned obedience, as the incarnate Son, through what he suffered (Heb. 5:8). Then he freely offered up his righteous life as the final sacrifice for sins making full atonement by his death thus enduring the curse of the law for us. (Gal. 3:13; 2Cor. 5:21; Heb. 9:24-28). That he died and was buried but on the third day he rose from the dead and after appearing to his disciples for a period of 40 days he ascended to the Father as the glorified God-Man and from that position of glory and power he will one day bodily return to bring to fulfillment his kingdom on an earth made new (1Cor. 15:1-8; Mark 16:19; Acts 1:11; 1Pe. 3:22; 2 Pe. 3:13).
Fourth assumption: You would agree that because Jesus Christ is one person with two natures this enables us better to understand and rightly interpret various New Testament texts that stress both his humanness (he hungers, he sleeps, he is ignorant, he suffers and dies) and his deity (he forgives sins, he walks on water, he stills storms, he raises the dead and he is affirmed to be God). That whatever is true either of his human nature (being weary and sleeping) or of his divine nature (stilling storms) may be attributed to his person. So, we can rightly understand that the Lord Jesus Christ became weary and had to sleep and that the Lord Jesus Christ commanded the storm to cease (Mark 4:35-41). There is no conflict between these various passages whereby the texts that reveal his human nature would lead us to deny those that affirm his divine nature or those texts that affirm his deity would lead us to deny his humanity. Likewise, since he entered a state of humiliation at his incarnation, by assuming human nature, he can speak of the Father being greater than himself (Phil. 2:5-12; John 14:28) and this does not lead to a denial of his sharing full deity with the Father as his eternal Son.
This is as far as I would take these assumptions about what you also would believe and affirm regarding the person of the Lord Jesus Christ. I have two further points to put forward that I hold and would ask you to consider.
Points to Consider
My first point for your consideration: Terms like “only begotten Son” and “firstborn,” as applied to Jesus Christ, are not to be understood as teaching that the Son is a creature.
When John in his Gospel and his first letter refers to Christ as the “only begotten Son” or the “only begotten of the Father” he is underscoring the eternal and necessary reality of the Son’s origin from the Father. He is stressing the concept of the eternal generation of the Son. This has been called into question since the mid twentieth century. The Greek word monogenes (in older versions translated “only begotten”) has been understood to describe a special class and as having nothing to do with generation or begetting. For example, we read of Abraham’s son Isaac in Hebrews 11:17, “By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his (monogene)”. However, Isaac was not Abraham’s only begotten son. Abraham had begotten Ishmael by Rachel and seven sons by Keturah. So, it is correct to see Isaac as the only son (monogenes) of Abraham due to the fact that he was the son of promise, he was in this sense Abraham’s unique son. Here the notion of a unique or special status is rightly understood. However, this understanding of monogenes has been applied to the texts in John’s writings where he states that Jesus Christ is the monogenes Son. So, rather than “only begotten,” most modern English versions have “one and only” or “only Son.” The whole notion of the eternal generation of the Son has been called into question based on this reinterpretation of monogenes.
However, there has been pushback in recent years against this reinterpretation of monogenes and the rejection that it has any connection to generation but rather exclusively describes a class in every place it occurs in the New Testament. Rather, both ideas of generation and special class have been shown to be connected with the word monogenes and that context really determines the meaning. So in the texts in John’s writings, when it is applied to Jesus Christ as the Son, it is still best translated as the older English versions and the Latin Vulgate do as “only begotten.” Of course as the only begotten Son of the Father he is the only Son of the Father by nature or the unique Son of the Father but he is this due to the reality of eternal generation.
I am of the conviction that the Greek Fathers who forged the Nicene Creed in 325 AD and its amended form in 381 AD, the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed, understood the meaning of monogenes. The creed affirms that Christ is the only begotten (monogenes) Son of God and then goes further and uses the verb begotten twice declaring that the Son “was begotten of the Father before all ages.” Then it declares that the Son “was begotten not made.” The main point in this consideration is that the noun monogenes, when applied to the Lord Jesus Christ, points to the eternal generation of the Son and hence to his unique eternal status as one who was begotten of the Father and not made, ruling out any notion of the Son being a created being.
Jesus Christ is also called the firstborn (protόtokόs). In Colossians 1:15 he is said to be the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation (c.f. Heb. 1:6). In Romans 8:29 believers in Christ are to be conformed to the image of God’s Son, so that he (the Son) might be the firstborn over many brothers (c.f. Heb. 2:11-12). In Colossians 1:18 and Revelation 1:5 he is described as the firstborn among the dead. What it does not mean is that he is the first of all created beings. This is clear from Colossians 1:16; the one who is the protόtokόs has this dignity and status not because he is the first created being but because all things were created by him, through him and for him! So, here it is describing his uniqueness as he is distinguished from all creation. As Peter T. O’Brien writes: “He is both prior to and supreme over that creation since he is its Lord.” (Word Biblical Commentary - Colossians, Philemon, p.45)
In Romans 8:29 the term (protόtokόs) when used of Christ points to his Messianic work as the incarnate Son and particularly to the fruit of his work of redemption, which is the salvation of those who believe in him. As the incarnate Son, he has rank as the elder brother over those he is not ashamed to call brothers (Heb. 2:11). While he is God’s Son by eternal generation and hence shares fully in God’s nature, believers are God’s sons by grace and the aim of this sonship is that believers be conformed fully to the image of God’s Son, so that he might have preeminence. In this sense the incarnate Son has the rank of primogeniture and as such has been appointed heir of all things (Heb. 1:2). Yet he also shares his inheritance with his people (Rom. 8:17; Gal. 4:7).
Jesus is also described as the firstborn from among the dead. In other words he is the first one to be raised from death and never to die again. In this regard he is also described as “the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep” (1Cor. 15:20). His resurrection is the guarantee of the resurrection to eternal life of every believer, “Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ” (1 Cor. 15:23).
One cannot simply appeal to these passages, which affirm Jesus to be the firstborn, and with the wave of the interpretive hand declare that these prove that he was a created being, the first and highest, but a creature nonetheless and cancel out or change the meaning of a large number of passages that affirm his deity. This is proof texting without any exegesis and it simply will not do.
My second point for your consideration: In John’s Gospel we find the phrase “ego eimi” (ἐγώ εἰμι) used of Jesus in 23 out of 24 occurrences. The verb “eimi” by itself is translated as “I am.” When the first person singular pronoun “ego” is included, it is for emphasis. Depending on the context the phrase will need to be translated with a predicate noun or pronoun. For example the blind man whom Jesus healed uses the phrase to verify that he is indeed the man whom Jesus healed for there was disagreement in the crowd concerning his identity. The Greek text of John 9:9 ends lacking a stated predicate: “Some said, ‘It is he.’ Others said, ‘No, but he is like him.’ He kept saying, ‘I am’” (“ego eimi”). The context requires that a predicate be added in translation such as “I am he” or more emphatically, “I am the one” or “I am the man.”
Yet, especially in John’s Gospel, when this phrase is expressed by the Lord Jesus of himself, he is making a personal declaration of the highest magnitude. For instance, the phrase is found with those important “I am” declarations that Jesus makes of himself and on those occasions the phrase includes a predicate noun: I am the bread of life; I am the light of the world; I am the door of the sheep; I am the good shepherd; I am the resurrection and the life; I am the way, the truth and the life; I am the true vine. What mere human being or even the highest of angels could make such claims and they be true? These claims are made by the one, who declares to his opponents, who sought his death, "You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world.” (Jn. 8:23).
Particularly, in the exchange that Jesus has with those opponents that John records in chapter 8, he is saying more, when he uses the phrase of himself, than the blind man he healed did. In John 8:12 He makes one of his “I am” claims: "I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life." His detractors declare that he alone is making this claim about himself so his testimony is false. Jesus responds that even if he alone testifies to the validity of this claim he is speaking what is true because he knows where he came from and where he is going. He then stresses that his Father also bears witness with his testimony and their combined testimonies meet the standard of verification of Mosaic Law. The Jewish leaders demanded to know where his Father is and Jesus answered, "You know neither me nor my Father. If you knew me, you would know my Father also" (Jn. 8:19). This must have riled his opponents for John writes: “These words He spoke in the treasury of the temple but no one arrested him, because his hour had not yet come” (John 8:20).
Then Jesus states that he is going away and they will seek him but they will die in their sin. For they cannot go where he is going. They query if this means that he plans to take his life since they cannot come where he is going. He then declares to them: "I told you that you would die in your sins, for unless you believe that I am he you will die in your sins." (8:24 ESV) Most English versions like the ESV add the predicate pronoun here to the phrase “ego eimi” - I am he. Without it the verse reads “For unless you believe that I am you will die in your sins.” This indicates that there is indeed some ambiguity with Jesus’ words. Of this ambiguity Craig Keener writes: “The ambiguity of Jesus’ language (ego eimi signifying ‘I am he’ or’ I am’) fits the Gospel’s (John’s Gospel) pattern of double entendres inviting misunderstanding from those disinclined to persevere. The ambiguity is fully resolved in 8:58 however.” (The Gospel of John A Commentary, Vol I p. 744)
So, is it a legitimate translation to add the pronoun here? I would argue that it is a legitimate translation but Jesus is also declaring more by the phrase than a mere surface reading will ascertain and that will become very clear by the end of the chapter. The issue is what Jesus is declaring, “for unless you believe that I am he you will die in your sin.” There are three views.
First, some hold that Jesus is saying that unless his opponents believe that he is the Messiah, they will die in their sins. Certainly, this is true. One must believe that Jesus is indeed the promised Messiah to be saved from sin and judgment. Yet that is not what the debate is specifically centered on in the larger context. If anything Jesus is alluding to the deeper nature of his Messianic person.
Second, it is possible that here Jesus is saying: “for unless you believe that I am the Light of the world, you will die in your sins.” This has more immediate textual validity to be sure but this claim, along with the other six “I am” declarations, point in the direction that Jesus is more than a created being. So, if this is what he is referencing about himself, it is still a very significant claim.
Third, if the pronoun “he” is added it is more than likely that Jesus is using the theophanic formula of divine self-identification that is found in several texts in the prophecy of Isaiah. Isaiah 43:10 reads: "You are my witnesses," declares the LORD, "and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.” The Hebrew has the phrase “ani hu” which literally translates as “I he” - “You are my witness,” declares the LORD, “and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I He. Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.” The ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, the Septuagint, has the same Greek phrase that John uses, “ego eimi.” "You are my witnesses," declares the LORD, "and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he (ego eimi). Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.” Here are a few of the other Isaiah texts:
"I, I am he (ego eimi, ego eimi) who blots out your transgressions for my own sake, and I will not remember your sins. (Isa. 43:25)
Even to your old age I am he (ego eimi), and to gray hairs I will carry you. I have made, and I will bear; I will carry and will save. (Isa. 46:4)
"Listen to me, O Jacob, and Israel, whom I called! I am he (ego eimi); I am (ego eimi) the first, and I am the last. (Isa. 48:12)
Jesus is alluding to these texts when he says to the Pharisees, “for unless you believe that I am he, you will die in your sins.” He is subtly identifying Himself with the Divine Name, Yahweh, by using the same formula of divine self-identification that the LORD uses in these Isaiah texts. His detractors are mystified at first by what he says. So they said to him, "Who are you?" Jesus said to them, "Just what I have been telling you from the beginning. (Jn. 8:25 ESV). Jesus goes further and declares that he was sent to them by the Father and what he declares to the world he has heard from the Father. Then he again makes the claim that he is the “I am he.” "When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he (ego eimi), and that I do nothing on my own authority, but speak just as the Father taught me (Jn. 8:28).
As the debate climaxes Jesus focuses on Abraham. “Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad." So the Jews said to him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?" Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am." So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple. (Jn. 8:56-59 ESV)
The Jewish Rabbis taught that Abraham looked forward to the coming of the Messiah. What Jesus states is that he is indeed that Messiah. The Day toward which Abraham looked and over which he rejoiced Jesus identifies as “my day.” It was this that offended his opponents and drew from them with incredulity the question, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?” Then Jesus says the most astounding thing of all and this makes clear what he had stated earlier when he said “for unless you believe that I am (he) you will die in your sins.” He declares: “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am (ego eimi).” This is the deeper reality to his Messianic person.
Jesus’ detractors are not mystified any longer about his’ “I am” claims. They know exactly what he is declaring about himself. To their ears this is blasphemy. So they picked up stones to throw at him but because it was not yet his time he hid himself and went out of the temple. They hear Jesus saying what God said to Moses when asked whom he should say sent him to deliver the Israelites from Egyptian bondage. “God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM." And he said, "Say this to the people of Israel: 'I AM has sent me to you'" (Exo 3:14). Again in the Septuagint the same phrase “ego eimi” is used to translate the Hebrew ´ehyè ´ášer ´ehyè (I am who I am). The English translation of the Septuagint of Exodus 3:14 reads: “And God spoke to Moses, saying, I am (ego eimi) the One Who Is; and he said, Thus shall you say to the children of Israel, The One Who Is has sent me to you.” The name Yahweh is derived from the Hebrew verb “to be” of 3:14 and that name is clearly spoken by God in 3:15 “God also said to Moses, ‘Say this to the people of Israel: 'The LORD (Yahweh), the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.' This is my name forever, and thus I am to be remembered throughout all generations’” (Exod. 3:15).
The reason that the English word LORD (all in uppercase letters) is used in most English translations is that the Jews, not wanting to misuse the name, would not pronounce it but substituted the word Lord (Adonai), which is used as a title for God in the Hebrew Bible. This is still the practice when the Hebrew Bible is read by Jews. The Massorites, who were responsible during the Middle Ages for preserving, with great accuracy, the Hebrew Bible and, who developed the vowel point system, used the vowels for Adonai when writing the name God spoke to Moses. So, we really do not know how it was pronounced. At one time it was thought to be Jehovah but most recently it is thought to be pronounced Yahweh.
This was the One Jesus was declaring himself to be. In John 8:24 and 28 he was alluding to the formula of divine self-identification found in those texts from Isaiah which were spoken by Yahweh of himself. So, Jesus identifies himself with Yahweh. In John 8:58 he comes right out and makes the claim that the Covenant name of the LORD belongs to him. He is not merely claiming to have existed before Abraham. He did not say, “I was before Abraham was.” He is claiming to be the very God of Abraham and the very God of those with whom he is debating.
My (Humble) Appeal
What one understands that the Bible really teaches about Jesus Christ is not an unimportant or inconsequential matter. Our understanding of the person of Jesus Christ has huge implications regarding his saving work. It is not simply a matter of opinion regarding what the Bible teaches about Jesus. If we get that wrong we get the very nature of eternal salvation wrong! The person and natures of Jesus Christ are not minor theological issues. These are salvific in their depth and scope. One’s very eternal destiny depends on how one understands his person. As Philip Edcomb Hughes wrote, “There is an indissoluble connection between the person of Christ and the work of Christ.” (The True Image, p. 343)
I would further contend that a denomination of believers cannot afford to be broad minded on the theology of the person and natures of Jesus Christ. This has been the historic and even present stance of the Advent Christian Church. We have from our inception allowed theological differences to remain among us regarding the understanding of the person and natures of Christ. For many this has been and continues to be a laudable position to maintain and to promote. However, this is not an issue of minor theological difference over secondary or tertiary matters. This is central to the very nature of God and the Gospel. This is foundational to what it means to be saved from judgment and to have assurance of participation in the Blessed Hope of Christ’s Second Coming and to find eternal life in him. If we get his person wrong, we get salvation wrong. I would contend that Scripture teaches that, if we fail to give to Jesus the highest of all honor that the Scripture reveals he possesses, we will die in our sins.
My appeal is that those of us who hold to the full deity and humanity of the Lord Jesus Christ should in genuine Gospel humility and love engage with, challenge and urge those in our ranks who do not affirm this cardinal Biblical teaching about Jesus Christ to repent. Their spiritual and eternal welfare should matter to us. It should give us pause, at least, as we reflect on what Jesus teaches: “For unless you believe that I am he you will die in your sins!” We want to be sure that we attribute to Jesus as much honor as the Scriptures reveal rightly belongs to him. Saving faith in Jesus Christ entails believing in whom he claims to be, as well as, believing in the work he accomplished to save sinners. In commenting on John’s use of “ego eimi” in 8:24 Leon Morris wrote: “Its use here involves the very highest estimate of Christ’s person. It is worth noting also that this gives a certain intellectual content to faith. Basically faith is trust. But in our reaction against the view that faith means no more than a firm acceptance of certain intellectual propositions we must not go so far as to say that it is entirely a matter of personal relations. It is impossible to have the kind of faith that John envisages without having a certain high view of Christ. Unless we believe that he is more than man we can never trust Him with that faith that is saving faith.” (The NICNT Commentary on John, p. 447)
When I came to faith in Christ I really did not know this about Jesus. What I knew was that Jesus was offered to me as the Savior of sinners. I was convicted of my sins and my sinfulness and seeing Jesus through a mustard-seed-size faith, I trusted in him to save me and he did. However, as I read Scripture and was taught by those who had the highest view of Jesus that the Scriptures reveal, I came to see and to believe that Jesus is indeed the Great I Am. He is also fully human. By virtue of the historic incarnation the one who is the Son, the Word and the Wisdom of God took to himself a human nature. The New Testament clearly affirms his sinless and obedient human nature. The person of the Son, who is fully God with the Father and the Holy Spirit, adds to His divine nature that human nature derived from the virgin Mary by the power of the Holy Spirit. He is one Person who possesses two natures. He is the God-Man. What is therefore necessary is that those who come to trust in Christ grow in their understanding of his person. What is also necessary is that we, who share the Gospel of Jesus Christ with lost men and women, make it clear to them who he is as the God-Man, as we speak of his finished work and call them to repent and to trust in Christ to save them.
What is to be avoided with all seriousness and genuine concern for others is the notion that it really doesn’t matter what one believes about the person of Jesus Christ. Those in our ranks who, either by not being taught Scripture well, or who maintain and promote a view of Jesus that denies His full honor and deity are in danger of dying in their sins. Those among us, who hold to the deity of Christ but think it is unloving to challenge those who do not, are simply wrong. Is it loving to fail to warn a professing believer of the danger he faces if he continues in a sinful behavior? Of course not. We are commanded in Scripture to do just that (Gal. 6:1; James 5:19-20). Love for those who do not believe that Jesus Christ is the “I Am” warrants that we warn them to forsake their error for, if they do no,t they will die in their sins. It is that serious of a matter!
What one holds regarding the Person of Jesus Christ shapes one’s understanding of the work of Jesus Christ. There is no saving Gospel where the hypostatic union of Christ’s two natures are rejected. For him to be the true Savior he must be both fully God and fully man. Anselm was right on this account. The satisfaction required for the atonement of sin only God can make while at the same time only man should make. Philip Edgcomb Hughes writes, “And this is the logic of the incarnation, whereby the eternal Son, who is God (the I AM) is enabled, as our fellowman, to pay the depth of our sin for us.” (The True Image p. 347)
As a denomination, which claims to hold to the Gospel, we do not have the luxury to be broad minded regarding the Person of the Lord Jesus Christ any longer. Love for those who are in our ranks, who err in their understanding and teaching of his person, calls us to challenge them to repent, lest they die in their sins. I would further appeal to you that this is why on the core essentials of the Christian faith we, as a denomination, should fully endorse the Statement of Faith adopted at the 2017 Triennial Convention. Yet we must go further and be willing to work out the implications of such a confession in the relationships and ministries of our churches, conferences and regions. Anything less is to have a confession on paper only, which is to have no confession at all.
Whether you agree with me on that point or not, please consider how genuine saving faith is tied to believing in the high and hence only view of the person of Jesus Christ that the Scriptures reveal. Those in our ranks who do not and even go so far as vehemently reject this teaching stand with Jesus’ detractors in John 8 and that is not a good or safe place to be. I appeal to you to see this and to love them with the truth.