JESUS OF NAZARETH: MESSIAH AND SON OF GOD

Part One

When one abandons Trinitarianism, he is immediately confronted by the question, Who, then, is Jesus? My own experience has been a gradual shift from Trinitarianism to Arianism to Socinianism. (I use these terms loosely, only as they pertain to the person of the Messiah Jesus.) Having made the shift, I realize now it may be expressed in another way: from Trinitarianism to Binitarianism to Biblical Unitarianism. I hasten to add, however, that my conversion has not been made within the context of dogmatics or an exploration of theological systems. It has been made within the exegetical experiences of a pastor. And here I must mention several things, before explaining why I believe Jesus is Messiah and Son of God, not "God the Son."

As a pastor, most of my study time has been in the Scriptures, not in theological textbooks, although the latter were always at hand for reference. This is normal, I believe, to the pastoral life, and is the way it should be if one is to obey Paul's injunction, "Preach the word."

However, I believe that the pastor's lesson or message preparation must begin with an examination of a passage in its Hebrew or Greek text. This is an imperative and, I feel, is mandatory, if a pastor or any student of the Scriptures is to ascertain for himself what Scripture really says. A door of discovery is opened, and deliverance from "translation theology" is at hand.

As I look back over the years, I did not set out to study myself out of or into a position. I believed that the so-called orthodox theology received in seminary was true; even virtually infallible! And so, my purpose, almost always, was simply to prepare a message or lesson for presentation. But that is where discovery entered in; from simple attempts to exegete a passage of Scripture, in order that I might expound it more accurately to a congregation or class.

For these reasons, I believe my theological transition has been providential. For these reasons, I present here primarily the Scripture texts that have influenced me, not the polemics of theology. I believe, therefore, that Jesus of Nazareth is God's Son and the Messiah for the following reasons.

1. The scriptures present Jesus as one specially created by God in the womb of Mary

Luke 1:35: And the angel [Gabriel] answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore, also the one to be born will be called holy, the Son of God. [not God the son]

Alfred Plummer, in his commentary on Luke, points out the parallel between Luke 1:35 and Genesis 1:2. As the Spirit of God moved upon the waters at creation, so the creative power of God moved upon Mary. Luke 1:35: describes the creation of Jesus in the womb of Mary. Jesus was the second man specially created by God, Adam being the first. Both are referred to as the son of God.

Here, then, is the explanation of John's phrase, "uniquely begotten Son."  It must be understood in a biological sense. Jesus was the result of a miraculous supernatural event upon Mary. He was the uniquely begotten Son of God. Created in the womb of Mary, he was born into the world. The first man Adam was formed from the soil of the earth, and the second man Jesus was created by the Spirit of God in the womb of Mary.

Subsequently, Luke 2:40 and 52 present the normal human development of Jesus, although by the word "normal" we do not rule out the grace or favor of God being upon him and in him to the fulness of His nature. There was a steady advance in wisdom, stature or bodily size, and favor before God and man. Thus "Docetism" is ruled out, and here also is the explanation of that marvelous episode which we commonly call "the boy in the Temple." The latter is an example of the child Jesus increase in wisdom which God would like all men to have, and which He intended the first Adam in Eden to experience.

2. The Scriptures Clearly Assert the humanity of the Messiah Jesus

Here I must begin with a negative note. Those impressive Greek words theanthropos and homoousios are not found in the Greek New Testament. The adjective "theanthropic" is a part of the English language. But this does not make it a biblical word; or add it to the text of Scripture. So also, homoousios has become a part of our language. But the Spirit of God has denied it access to Holy Writ. Edwin Hatch, in his book, The Influence of Greek Ideas on Christianity, explains that homoousios first occurs in the sphere of Gnosticism.

I mention these matters because, unless we can to free ourselves from the "pitiless iron vise" of theological formulations, we are unable to receive the plain words of Scripture. It is with relief, then, that we consider a small portion of the biblical evidence in favor of the above proposition.

Peter, on the Day of Pentecost, describes "Jesus of Nazareth" as "a man approved of God." [Acts:2:2] The word which Luke puts in Peter's mouth is aner which simply means a man or human being, a male person.

Peter goes on to say that God has raised this person from the dead, [Acts 2:24] because it was not possible for him to be held by death. But this was because his prophesied destiny was to be raised from the dead and sit at God's right hand.

In 1 Timothy 2:5-6: For there is ONE GOD and ONE MEDIATOR between God and human beings, THE MAN, the Messiah Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all.

This passage must take its place along with 1 Corinthians 8:6: “… for us there is ONE GOD, the Father, from whom are all things, and we for Him, and there is one lord, Jesus the Messiah, because of whom are all things, and we because of him.”

And

Ephesians 4:1-6: “Therefore I, the prisoner in the lord, exhort you to live in a manner worthy of the calling with which you were called: with all humility and gentleness, with patience, putting up with one another in love, being eager to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace; one body and one Spirit (just as also you were called with one hope of your calling), one lord, one faith, one baptism, ONE GOD and Father of all, who is over all, and through all, and in all, as a New Testament text asserting a nontrinitarian God.”

There is ONE GOD [Yehovah], and there is ONE MEDIATOR. GOD IS ONE: Deuteronomy 4:35: You yourselves were shown this wonder for you to acknowledge that Yahweh is the God; there is no other God besides him.” There is ONE MEDIATOR, the Messiah Jesus: 1 Timothy 2:5: “For there is one God and one mediator between God and human beings, THE MAN the Messiah Jesus.” The stress here is on the humanity of the Messiah Jesus.

We now turn to the simple and clear testimony of John in his first Epistle. John distinguishes between the Father and the Son, and the Son he defines as "in flesh" or a human being. [2 John 1:7: “For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not confess Jesus the Messiah coming in the flesh. This person is the deceiver and the antichrist! The proper relationship between God and the Messiah Jesus is simply that of Father and Son.

It is an astonishing fact of Scripture that in the writings of John, the Messiah Jesus is never called "the true God" or, in Greek, ho alethinos theos. This point is not refuted by such passages as John 1:1: “In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God.” [Genesis 1:1-3: “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the surface of the waters. And God said [spoke these words], “Let there be light!” And there was light.” or John 20:28: Thomas answered and said to him, “My lord and my God [Elohim is a Hebrew word that can be applied to God and to humans who who represent God – Yehovah on earth, as the Messiah Jesus did]!”.

The word "root" is used here in the Hebrew sense of a root or scion growing from the root. To say that our lord Jesus is "the root and the offspring of David" is an emphatic way of indicating his descent as a human being from David.

We are entitled here to some remarkable inferences. An immortal glorified man who is a descendant of David, a Jew, is at God's right hand. And as he is a human being and a descendant of David, he could not have pre-existed his birth in Bethlehem, because in fact, he had his beginning when he was specially created by God’s Holy Spirit in the womb of Mary [Luke 1:35].

At the risk of belaboring our point, I would point out that Revelation 22:16 also refutes transmutation theories. In this ascension to heaven, there is no conversion of Jesus' humanity into deity. "Jesus the Messiah, the same yesterday, and today, and forever" must be taken in a Jewish Messianic sense. The man of Galilee was a human being, a descendant of David when he walked this earth. He remains the same in his exaltation and glorification, and he will be that in his reign over the earth when every knee will bow to him.

3. The Mystery of the Messiah's Pre-existence Resides in the Omniscience and Purpose of God

The Messiah is a human being; an anthropos; who first came into existence in the womb of Mary, so that settles the question of any pre-existence. Scripture passages that seem to indicate an actual pre-existence must be interpreted in the light of this fact; more specifically, in the light of the witness of Luke 1:35: And the angel answered and said to her, the Holy Spirit will come upon you and the power of the Most He will overshadow you. Therefore, the one to be born will be called holy, the Son of God..

However, to the traditional mind, the problem cannot be dismissed out of hand. We must consider several significant passages of Scripture, namely John 1:1-14, 1 Corinthians 15:45-47, Philippians 2:5-12, and perhaps one or two others. Furthermore, this is consistent with our approach in this article. I begin, therefore, with the opening verses of John's Gospel.

The key to the introduction of John's Gospel is the phrase ‘ho logos. It must be understood in an etymological way, not in a Gnostic, Greek, or philosophical way.

In its simplest sense, ‘logos’ means a spoken word, a saying, a declaration, a speech, or a discourse. Here in John 1:1 ho logos means "the spoken word" or "the declaration."

The subject of John 1:1-5 is the spoken word of God. It was "in [the] beginning" or "at first." All things began with it. It was with God ‘theos’. Here theos has the force of the Hebrew Elohim which means the putter forth of power.  Certainly, at creation, the spoken word of God was a putter forth of power! [Genesis 1:1-3]

We read in John 1:3, then, that all things were made by the logos or spoken word, this theos or Elohim, this putter forth of power. In English, we would say, "All things were made by it," not "by him." This is confirmed by Psalm 33:6-9 which says, "By the word [Hebrew dabar] of Yehovah were the heavens made… For He spoke, and it was done; He commanded, and it stood fast."

Finally, we read in John 1:14 that "the word”; the spoken word [Genesis 3:15]; became flesh and dwelt among us. This is in keeping with Hebrews 1:1, 2 which tells us that in many ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets. But in these last days, He has spoken to us in the person of a Son.

I turn now to 1 Corinthians 15:45-47. Here is another passage that is sometimes taken to indicate the deity and incarnation of the Messiah, but which really indicates his humanity.

In verse 45 we read: "And so it is written, the first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a life-giving spirit." The question is, Does the word "spirit" indicate that the Messiah pre-existed as a spirit being? He is called here "a life-giving spirit." The Greek word is ‘zoopoieo’ and speaks of resurrection from the dead. In his resurrection, our lord became a "life-giving spirit," a capacity or ability that will be exercised to the fullest at his parousia. Hence the word "spirit" refers to the Messiah as a glorified immortal man seated at the right hand of his God and Father Yehovah in resurrection, not in pre-existence.

In 1 Corinthians 15:47, we read: "The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the lord from heaven." These, of course, are the familiar words of the King James Version. In agreement with the textual evidence, and most modern translations, we must leave out the phrase, "the Lord." Hence, we have: "the second man [is] from heaven." [How? He was created by the Spirit of God in the womb of Mary and became the second man specially created by God, Adam being the first]

The first part of verse 47 obviously refers to the creation of Adam as recorded in Genesis 2:7. The second part refers to the Messiah Jesus, but in what way? The idea of pre-existence is eliminated by the removal of the phrase, "the Lord." The International Critical Commentary says, "from heaven" (ex ouranou) refers to the Second Advent. H.A.W. Meyer says the phrase (ex ouranou) is used of "heavenly derivation" and applies to the glorification of the body of the Messiah Jesus. This glorification originated from heaven; it was a work wrought by God.

We begin, therefore, to understand the significance of the phrase "from heaven" or "out of heaven" (ex ouranou). It refers to a work wrought or created by God. Jesus, therefore, is "from heaven" or "out of heaven" in the sense that he is a work wrought by God. He is the uniquely begotten Son, created in the womb of Mary by the overshadowing power of the Spirit of God.

(Also compare the reference in 2 Corinthians 5:2 to our resurrection body. It is "from heaven" or, in Greek, (ex ouranou). This does not mean that our resurrection body pre-exists in heaven, but simply that it too will be a work wrought by God.)

Now we must consider that crux of interpretation, Philippians 2:5-10: "Think this in yourselves, which was also in the Messiah Jesus, who, existing in the form of God [as we all exist in the form of God], did not consider being equal with God something to be grasped [as Adam did], but emptied himself by taking the form of a slave, by becoming in the likeness of people. And being found in appearance like a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, that is, death on a cross. Therefore, also God exalted him and graciously granted him the name above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,” 

(1) The context of Philippians 2 is about humility, and the passage presents the humility of the Messiah Jesus in contrast with Adam's disobedience or lack of humility, who grasped at becoming like God.

(2) As the first Adam was in the form of God, so also the last Adam was in the form of God. The word "form" must be interpreted in its simple sense.

(3) The Messiah Jesus did not consider being equal with God something to be grasped. He resisted the blandishments of the devil in his temptation in the wilderness. By way of contrast, Adam and Eve succumbed to the Satanic lie, "You shall be as God," and ate the fruit of the forbidden tree.

(4) Whereas Adam would have exalted himself, the Messiah Jesus "made himself of no reputation." The Greek (kenoo) means to empty, but it does not mean that he emptied himself of all self-will and self-exaltation and was totally committed to carrying out the will of his God and Father Yehovah.

(5) In his life he assumed the role of a servant; a servant of Yehovah; being made - created in the likeness of men. And, as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Consequently, God has highly exalted him, and to him, every knee shall bow.

Philippians 2:5-10 does not tell of a pre-existent God who assumed human form. It tells of the humility, obedience, death, and exaltation of the Messiah. Jesus the Messiah lived to the fullest his own exhortation: "For whosoever exalts himself shall be abased, and he that humbles himself shall be exalted." He demonstrated that humility is the passport to promotion in the Kingdom of God.

Before bringing the discussion of our third proposition to a close, brief reference must be made to one more subject, the fact that the Messiah is called "the beginning" and "the beginning of the creation of God." [This is speaking of those who have become new creations in the lord Messiah Jesus. As a new creation in Jesus, we are members of the New Humanity that God has been creating since Adam. All the Old Testament saints will be members of the New Humanity in the Messiah Jesus also, and that means Jesus is the Federal head of the New Humanity that God has and is creating now]

The Greek word involved in these phrases is arche which means beginning, origin, first cause, ruler, etc.

In Colossians 1:18 we read of the Messiah as "the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the pre-eminence [as the Federal head of the New Humanity]." The meaning here should be obvious: as the firstborn from the dead, he is the beginning of the New Humanity, the Federal head of the new order of things for the Kingdom of God. As such, he has the pre-eminence.

But in Revelation 3:14 we read: He is "the beginning of the creation of God." It is here that a philosophical definition of arche may enter in and the Messiah is seen as "the first cause," as indicated by the lexicon of Arndt and Gingrich. But Arndt and Gingrich's lexicon goes on to say that the meaning "beginning" in the sense of first created is linguistically possible. This need not mean "first created" in an Arian sense, but, in the light of the overall testimony of Scripture, may mean "beginning" of God's new order by virtue of his resurrection and glorification.

Jesus was "foreordained before the foundation of the world," Realize that foreordination is something quite different from actual pre-existence. I close this discussion of our third proposition by saying that foreordination - to be foreknown in the purpose of God - is the only Scriptural pre-existence of our Lord.

Ephesians 1: 3-114: Blessed is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus the Messiah, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in the Messiah, just as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him in love, having marked us out beforehand to adoption through Jesus the Messiah to Himself according to the good pleasure of His will, to the praise of the glory of His grace that He bestowed on us in the beloved [Jesus], in whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His [God’s] grace, that He caused to abound to us in all wisdom and insight, making known to us the mystery of His will, according to His good pleasure that He purposed in him [Jesus], for the administration of the fullness of times, to bring together all things in the Messiah, the things in the heavens and the things on the earth, in him whom we also were chosen, having been marked out beforehand according to the purpose of the One who works all things according to the counsel of His will, that we who hoped beforehand in the Messiah should be for the praise of His [God’] glory, in whom also you, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, in whom also when you believed you were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, which is the down payment of our inheritance, until the redemption of the possession, to the praise of His glory.

Ephesians 2:4-10:  God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, and we being dead in trespasses, He made us alive [quickened us] together with the Messiah, and raised us together and seated us together in the heavenly places in the Messiah Jesus [when our God and Father Yehovah look on Jesus at His right hand he sees all those that are His in him], in order that He might show in the coming ages the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness upon us in the Messiah Jesus. For by grace, you are saved through faith, and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God; it is not from works, so that no one can boast. For we are His creation, created in the Messiah Jesus [as members of the New Humanity] for good works, which God prepared beforehand, so that we may walk in them.

What glorious things our God and Father Yehovah have done for us! In the Messiah Jesus, we are new creations in him a member of the New Humanity of which is the beginning of the Federal Head. By the Spirit of Adoption, our God has made us members of His household as His sons and daughters! But remember by the sin-offering sacrifice of the lord Jesus on the cross we have been purchased with a price, his precious blood. Therefore, we are his slaves and as he was acting as the agent of his Father, we are slaves of God also. As slaves we are to be slaves of righteousness totally committed to following God’s instruction, which He has given us through His son Jesus.

Notice: John 15:15: No longer do I call you servants - slaves, for the servant-slave does not know what his lord is doing. But I have called you friends because all that I have heard from my Father I have made known to you.

 

Part Two

In Part One I explained that my transition from Trinitarianism to biblical Unitarianism was within the context of my pastoral ministry, not theological polemics. It was my hope always to exegete a passage before teaching it, the result of my own life being the unitarian view. In that article I set forth three propositions: (I) The Scriptures Present the Messiah's Birth and Human Development, (2) The Scriptures Clearly Assert the Humanity of the Messiah to the Exclusion of his being God, and (3) The Mystery of the Messiah's Pre-existence that resides in the Omniscience and Purpose of God. 4. Certain Claims of the Messiah show forth his Humanity, Not Deity

There is a need to reexamine our Lord's claims and/or titles from a non-Trinitarian standpoint. They do not indicate membership in a Trinity at all. The unitarian aspect of Jesus' claims and titles needs to be brought out. I shall touch on several of them.

When Jesus asked the disciples, "Who say you that I am?" Peter replied very simply, "You are the Messiah. Luke's account is a delightful variation but equally simple: "The Messiah of God." The Greek text has the definite article before "God" (theou). If we wish to be baldly literal, we could translate the sentence, "The Messiah of the [true] God." Matthew's account adds "the Son of the living God" to Peter's testimony. But this does not alter the simplicity of the Petrine testimony. As indicated earlier in this article (Proposition I), the "Son of God" needs to be understood in a biological, albeit miraculous, sense.

I fear that in today's evangelical environment, a simple assertion of faith in Jesus' Messiahship would be deemed inadequate. But for Peter, it earned the commendation of the Savior, and for John, it was considered sufficient for salvation.

In this connection, let us consider the theology of Thomas as indicated in his wonderful confession, "My Lord and my God [Elohim a title of humans commissioned to do the will of God]." First, any consideration of Thomas' theology must consider his identity and background.

He was one of the twelve apostles, before and after Jesus' death and resurrection. He was an Israelite, sent by the Lord Jesus to "the lost sheep of the house of Israel." In today's parlance, he would simply be called a Jew or an Israelite [which we who are new creations in the Messiah are also members of the true Israel of God, having been grafted in – Romans 11].

Logically, then, Thomas' theology and faith would be that of the Hebrew Scriptures. This would include the pristine doctrine of the Old Testament, "Hear, O Israel: Yehovah our God, is one Yehovah." Also, Thomas' knowledge of the Scriptures would certainly include something else: those who represent God are sometimes called "God - Elohim." This would include Moses, the judges of Israel, [the angels, [and more especially the Messiah.

It is common knowledge that 'Elohim is used in the Old Testament of those who represent God. On the other hand, the singular form 'eloah’ is used especially for the God of heaven. However, it is interesting that on a special occasion, it is used for the Messiah. In Habakkuk 3:3 we read, "God ['eloah] came from Teman, and the Holy One from Mount Paran. Selah. His glory covered the heavens, and the earth was full of his praise."

Habakkuk 3 is, I believe, a wonderful picture of the return of the Messiah in glory. It is the march to Zion The lord Messiah Jesus is portrayed as advancing in triumph from Teman or "the south." His glory covers the heavens. He is "the Holy One," Yehovah's representative he is called "God" or 'Elohim.

What then is Thomas saying when he exclaims, "My Lord and my God - Elohim?"

"You are the Messiah," Thomas says in effect. "You are the One whom the prophets said would come. As such, you are 'my Lord.' As the One whom Yehovah has appointed to rule in the kingdom, you are 'my God - Elohim.' "

Thomas is not saying, "You are the God of heaven" or "You are the equal of God." He does not see in the resurrected Jesus one who was a member of a pluralistic Godhead. Such thoughts would have been incomprehensible, even blasphemous, to Thomas. His faith existed in a different world.

There is a brief epilogue to the confession of Thomas. That he saw in Jesus the Messiah of Israel, the promised One of Scripture, is confirmed by John's words which follow in verse 31: "But these [signs] are written, that you might believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God; and that believing you might have life through his name." I look upon John's words as being explanatory matter to Thomas' words.

The subject of the Messiah's claims or titles must include the phrase "I am" which occurs frequently in the Gospels. It invites exhaustive treatment, and my examination here may therefore be cursory. I trust, however, that it will be sufficient to make my position clear. I observed as a pastor that the phrase "I am" is to many Christians irrefutable evidence that Jesus is claiming to be God. But is this what he is saying?

In the Olivet discourse, in Mark 13:6, Jesus says, "For many shall come in my name, saying, I am the Messiah; and shall deceive many." The original Greek expression is ego eimi, "I am," and in translating it, the translators (KJV) have rightly supplied the word "Christ." Other translations have "I am he," but the point is the same.

Jesus is saying in effect that in later times many will come claiming his title and office. In doing so, they will say, "I am the Messiah." Recognition of this sense of "I am" in Mark 13:6 indicates that it means,

"I am the Messiah," not "I am God."

Further evidence as to the meaning of "I am" is in the parallel passage in Matthew 24:5. The Greek text of Matthew has the full expression, ego eimi ho Christos, "I am the Messiah." Perhaps Matthew was familiar with Mark's Gospel. It would indicate then how he interpreted Mark's words. He took them to mean "I am the Messiah" not "I am God."

In Mark 14:61, 62 the high priest asked Jesus, "Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed?" Jesus replied simply, "I am" (ego eimi). The context requires that we interpret his words as meaning: "I am, indeed, the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed."

"I am" occurs frequently in the Gospel of John. There too it means, "I am the Messiah." This is proven by the familiar John 20:31 where the beloved disciple plainly says, "Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God."

This would be true of John 18:5, 6 where Jesus said, "I am," and those who came to arrest him went backward and fell to the ground. For a moment, the Messianic power, and the power of God in him manifested itself.

This would be true also of John 8:58 where Jesus said, "Before Abraham was, I am" or as various translations have it, "Before Abraham was born, I am."

It is argued that Jesus is saying here that he existed before Abraham. And, if he existed before Abraham, he must be God. Therefore, we must understand John 8:58 to mean, "I am God."

When he said, "Before Abraham was, I am," he simply meant that, even then, he was in the plan and purpose of God. This kind of "being marked out beforehand," being in the plan of God, prevails throughout the Gospel of John. Abraham had seen the glory of the Messiah and his day in prophetic vision.

The "I am" of the New Testament is often identified with the "I AM" of Exodus 3:14 (KJV) where God spoke to Moses from the burning bush. However, to do that, I fear, is superficial "translation theology" based merely on an English translation, and not on the original text.

The two expressions are not identical and differ in several respects. The "I AM" of Exodus 3:14 is a translation of the Hebrew verb hayah which means "become, come to pass, occur, happen, appear," etc. It is the Hebrew "imperfect" or future tense and literally means, "I will become." In effect, God is saying to Moses, "I will appear on your behalf."

The Hebrew hayah is a stronger verb than the Greek eimi of the New Testament. Hayah's Greek equivalent would be ginomai, not eimi. This is proven by the Septuagint, the Greek Old Testament, where the Hebrew hayah is most often translated by ginomai which means "become, come into being, be born, etc."

It is not proper therefore to identify the "I am" of the Gospels with the "I AM" of Exodus 3:14. If the two expressions were identical, the Greek New Testament would probably have used the verb ginomai, not eimi.

In the "I am" of the New Testament, the emphasis is on the word "I," not "am." The "am" is simply the copula. Thus, Jesus is saying, "I am the Messiah, not someone else." But in the "I AM" of Exodus 3:14, the emphasis is on the verb. No personal pronoun is present in the Hebrew text; it is simply a part of the verb form. Thus, God is saying, "I will become" or "I will appear."

Mention must be made of such full expressions as "I am the bread of life," "I am the light of the world," "I am the good shepherd," "I am the first and the last," etc. These are glorious aspects of our Lord's being the Messiah representing his God and Father Yehovah.

In the Old Testament, Yehovah is called the "Shepherd" and the "Light." So as God's representative on earth, these titles and prerogatives are granted to the Lord Jesus.

In the light of the foregoing evidence, it is only fair to conclude that the phrase, "I am," when found on the lips of the Savior, means "I am the Messiah," not "I am God." The Scriptural evidence is against the latter interpretation. It may stem from a desire to exalt our Lord, but it must be recognized for what it is: reading trinitarian theology into Scripture.

Finally, in the category of claims and titles, we have in Jesus' own words a warning against a fulsome Christology a Christology which attributes to Jesus more than he claimed for himself.

That one whom we call "the rich young ruler" came to Jesus one day and asked him, "Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" Jesus replied, "Why call thou me good? none is good, save one, that is God."

Our lord Jesus's reply is, admittedly, difficult. His apparent rejection of any claims to goodness of his own raises a host of questions too numerous to mention here. I share, though, several thoughts which have been helpful to me.

The word for "good" is agathos. It occurs not only here, but also in Matthew's and Mark's accounts of the rich young ruler.

Agathos is both an adjective and a noun, and its usage is broad in the New Testament. According to Abbott-Smith's lexicon, it properly refers to "inner excellence." When used of God, Thayer says, it refers to the fact that He is completely, perfectly, and essentially good.

Jesus says that only God possesses this agathos or goodness. We may identify it with His principal attribute of holiness.

On the practical level, it means that God cannot sin. He could not sin, nor could he even be tempted to sin. This is confirmed by 1 Timothy 1:17 which says that God is "incorruptible." The Greek word is aphthartos which means not liable to corruption.

Here, then, is an astonishing thing. By saying what he does to the rich young ruler, Jesus rejects for himself agathos, that inner harmonious perfection which belongs only to God. In essence, he rejects this divine attribute of holiness, and, on the negative side, he rejects incorruptibility.

This means, then, that our Lord's trials were real. We think of the temptation in the wilderness, and the agony in Gethsemane. There was on those occasions the possibility of failure to do God's will, of falling, of sinning. He was, indeed, liable to corruption.

I must agree with William Barclay who, in discussing Gethsemane, describes it as an "agony" for our lord, his "supreme struggle" in submitting his will to God's will. Barclay writes. The world's salvation hung in the balance and at that moment Jesus could have turned back a man like all of us.

The very thought makes us shudder, but it is unavoidable and inescapable.

Before we turn away from such a thought, let us consider the other side of the matter: not only were our lord's trials real, but his victories were also real. He was truly "a lamb without blemish and without spot." He was qualified to become "the lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world." [by his sin-offering sacrifice on the cross] Consequently, as Paul told the elders at Ephesus, "he has purchased [us] with his own blood," and as such we are his slaves.

Our Lord did have a certain goodness, a goodness unique in human history. It was the goodness that he acquired as he "increased (advanced) in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man." This was a goodness in growth - the possible goodness which Adam forfeited.

As the Captain of our salvation, he was made perfect through suffering. As our High Priest, he can be touched with the feelings of our infirmities, for he was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. As God's uniquely begotten Son, he learned obedience by the things which he suffered. If he were God, he wouldn’t have to learn anything.

This is the goodness that qualified him to be "the good shepherd" who gave his life for the sheep. The word for "good" here in John 10:11 is not agathos, but kalos meaning morally excellent, noble, and worthy of recognition.  Certainly, this describes the lord Jesus!

"Orthodox" theology tells us it was not possible for Jesus to sin. But Scripture presents to us something far more wonderful and dramatic: a victory over sin, enabled to be victorious over sin by the indwelling power of God in him. We also can be victorious over sin enabled by the power of the Spirit of God in us!

Alfred Plummer, in his comments on the rich young ruler, says that the title, "Good Master," was unknown among the Jews. It was, therefore, an extraordinary address, perhaps even a "fulsome compliment." The words of the young man may have been not only excessive to our lord, but also offensive. His response certainly indicates that.

In the light of our lord's words to the young man, we must be careful that our conception of Jesus is not fulsome! We are not honoring or exalting him when we attribute to him what he himself rejected, and what belongs only to his heavenly Father.

5. The Ministry of the Messiah Indicates his Messiahship, not Deity

In this division of my article, I have in mind the miracles of the Messiah, his authority to forgive sins, given to him by his God and Father Yehovah, his mission to "declare" God’s soon-coming Kingdom and His present Kingship.

The Scriptures indicate that Jesus healed all who came to him. I think it is safe to say that there were no exceptions and no disappointments. What is the secret of this amazing success?

Luke tells us, "The whole multitude sought to touch him: for there went virtue out of him and healed them all."

The Greek word for "virtue" is dunamis. In this context, it means "power" or "energy." A special power, a dynamic force, emanated from Jesus' person. He did not need to say anything. His presence alone was sufficient to heal.

In the epoch of the Book of Acts, Peter and Paul had this same power through the indwelling power of the Spirit of God and Jesus. As Peter walked by, people were healed. The power of the apostles was in keeping with the promises of Mark 16:17, 18, and Acts 1:8.

It is a rather common assumption that Jesus' power to heal came from an attribute of being God. He limited himself, but when the occasion required, he called on those powers God had given to him. Even The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, in its article "Miracle," says that the miracles of the Messiah are "eloquent evidence" that he possessed powers that belonged to God Himself.

If by this statement the writer meant that Jesus was God, I must point out that Luke 6:19 gives a different reason for his healing power. Jesus healed because his Father gave him a dunamis or healing dynamic.

Our Lord's response to the imprisoned John the Baptist tells us that he considered his miracles to be evidence that he was the promised Messiah of the Old Testament, the One who, if accepted, could usher in the Messianic Era – the 1,000-year rule. Also, we must not overlook his reliance on prayer before working a miracle. With Jesus and with us, whatever our God and Father Yehovah asks of us He always provide the power to do what He has commissioned us to do!

What about Jesus' authority to forgive sins? Does that prove him to be God? In seeking an answer to this question, we can do no better than consider the wonderful story of the paralytic let down through the roof. In that story, Jesus forgave the man's sins. Then, to the astonishment of the crowd, he healed him.

In Mark 2:10, 11 Jesus explains why he healed the paralytic: "But that you may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins . . . I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house."

"Power" in this passage means "authority." And "Son of man" is equivalent to "a human being."

Here, then, is the reason our Lord healed the paralytic: to demonstrate that a human being on earth could have the authority to forgive sins. That human being, of course, was our lord. He was the Messiah, the one provided by God through the virgin birth.

The scribes misunderstood our Lord's motives in forgiving the paralytic's sins. "Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? Who can forgive sins but God only?" Like a later form of "orthodoxy," they read into this miracle a claim to deity. But if we read the passage carefully, we see that our Lord is not claiming deity, he is claiming "authority."

The healing of the paralytic demonstrates a great truth: to a "human being," the "Son of man," God gave authority to forgive sins.

I come now to the ministry of Jesus as the one who "declared" God. In this aspect of his ministry, we find an answer to the question, how is Jesus the word of God?

The Apostle John has written: "No man has seen God at any time; the only uniquely begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him."

I have considered already, under Proposition I, Jesus being the only uniquely begotten Son. The statement that he is "in the bosom of the Father" indicates, I believe, a favored relationship with his Father. However, the final part of the verse tells us that Jesus is the word of God because he "has declared" God.

"Declared" is the translation of the verb exegeomai which means "to tell, explain," or unfold in teaching.  This is its usage in Scripture. From exegeomai come our words "exegete" and "exegesis." 

The lord is the word of God because he is the exegete of God. He has explained God. He had a "commandment" or commission from God as to what he should say. Finally, in his "unfolding" of God, we must include his miracles or "signs," and his life, death, and resurrection.

Our Lord is not the word of God because he was at creation. On that occasion, God spoke directly, not "in a Son." (To speak "in a Son" comes much later.) Finally, John 1:14 tells us that "the word [not God] was made flesh." [Genesis 3:15]

How is Jesus the word of God? As the only uniquely begotten Son, he has explained God. He has unfolded Him in his life and work, and in his redemption at Calvary.

What now about the assertion, sometimes encountered, that Jesus was "equal" to God? A passage sometimes cited to "prove" this contention is John 5:18: "Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God."

"Equal" is our English translation of the little Greek word isos which means "equal, like, the same," or "in agreement." Instances of this last meaning of the word are found in Mark 14:56 and 59 where the testimonies of those who witnessed against Jesus "agreed not together."

Thus, we have the senses of John 5:18. By saying God was his Father, Jesus made himself in agreement with God!

In John 5:18 Jesus aspires to be like God in the latter's will and work. As the Son of God, he chose to agree with and be identical to his Father's will.

That likeness with God's will and work is the meaning of John 5:18 is indicated by the context of verses 17-31. "My Father worketh hitherto, and I work." This involves complete submission and identification with the Father's will (verse 19). It will even involve "greater works": quickening the dead, judgment, etc. But in no sense will it include an essential deity. Rather, it will always involve doing "the will of the Father which has sent me"

Before forming our conclusion, however, one other passage must be considered. In John 10:30 Jesus said, "I and my Father are one." Again, the thought is "one" in purpose, will, and work.

The Greek word here for "one" is hen. It is a neuter form. Marcus Dods, writing in The Expositor's Greek Testament, says that Christ speaks here as an ambassador might speak. The ambassador is doing the sovereign's will. He does not claim royal dignity but asserts that what he does, the sovereign does.

H.A.W. Meyer writes here of "dynamic fellowship" or "unity of action."

Unity of purpose and action is, indeed, the thought in our lord's claim, "I and my Father are one

6. Conclusion: The Practical Value of a Biblical Unitarian View of the Messiah

"Of what value is this view to me?" To the man or woman in the church on Sunday morning, this is the "bottom line" of any doctrine. Unless some intrinsic value can be demonstrated, it remains, to all practical purposes, grist from the mills of theologians.

To the biblical unitarian, there is a glorified immortal man, not a glorified god, at the right hand of the Father in heaven. A victorious anthropos is our Mediator and our Advocate (parakletos).

Where I would ask, is the victory in the essentially Gnostic idea that a heavenly spirit assumed a human body? The humanity of the Messiah is the common bond with our Savior. This, I believe, is theology's "original intent."

In the great story of the book of Job, Elihu comes to speak for God. He is the mediator.  In the midst of his suffering, Job has cried out, "[God] is not a man, as I am, that I should answer him, and we should come together in judgment." But when Elihu appears on the scene, he says, "Wherefore, Job, I pray you, hear my speeches, and hearken to all my words. . . . Behold, I am according to your wish in God's stead: I also am formed out of the clay." That is to say, "Hear my words, Job; I also am a human being!"

The above article is taken from: 

http://thefaithofjesus.blogspot.com/2007/08/jesus-of-nazareth-messiah-and-son-of.html

http://www.abc-coggc.org/jrad/volume1/issue3/jrad_v01.3_art2.htm

http://www.abc-coggc.org/jrad/volume2/issue1/jrad_v02.1_art4.htm

Posted by Adam Pastor on Thursday, September 27, 2007