By Sonny Hernandez
Unitarians reject the Tri-personality of the one true God, the preexistence of the Son, the dual nature of Christ, God the Logos, and full deity of the person of Christ who became incarnate. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to provide a concise and exegetical overview of several biblical texts, which undeniably stress the multi-personality of God, and the coessential divinity of the Son.
I. John 1:1
Unitarians deny the preexistence and full deity of Christ, but the stative verb ēn ("was") in John 1:1 is in the imperfect tense, which signifies that Christ, the monogenes Theos, is eternally self-existent and uncaused.
Exegetically, John 1 not only teaches that Christ predates creation [Gk: “ēn”; Eng: “was” (John 1a); imperfect tense indicates “…continuous timeless existence” (Rogers & Rogers, 1998, p. 175)], but it also reveals that Christ is wholly God, but distinct from the Father.
II. John 1:14
Christ is the second person of the Trinity, and He is consubstantial, coessential, or homoousios [homo: same + ousios: substance] with the Father. Jesus possessed and exercised the fullness of deity or divine attributes (before, during, and after the incarnation).
The Son of God was begotten [mono: only + genes: kind or class] of the Father before time, not made or created, and was made flesh [Gk: “sarx egeneto” (John 1:14); lit., “to become, be made” (Thayer, p. 115)].
Christ is wholly God and wholly man, with two distinct, unmingled, and inseparable natures. Therefore, He is one person (hypostasis), not two (Nestorian heresy), and He has two wills, not one [Monothelitism heresy: monos (single) + thelo (will)].
Monothelitism [monos: single + thelo: will] is an insurmountable trap, and those who affirm it cannot explain how Christ is all knowing (Matthew 9:4; 12:25; Mark 2:8; Luke 6:8; 9:47; 10:22; John 2:24-25; 6:64; 10:15; 16:30; 21:17; Revelation 2:23), but did not know the day or the hour (Matthew 24:36; Mark 13:32).
When the preexistent [ēn (“was”), lit. predates creation] Christ “became flesh” [sarx egeneto], His divinity and humanity were inseparably or indissolubly united, without contradiction. So the person of Christ has two wills and two minds. For example, Matthew 26:39 says, “...O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will (human will), but as thou wilt (divine will).”
III. John 8:58
According to John 8:58, Christ said "...Before Abraham was (prin abraam genesthai), I am" (egō eimi). The verb genesthai is an aorist, which signifies that Abraham had a beginning, whereas egō eimi points to Exodus 3:14, which indicates the essence or divinity of the one true God who subsists in a plurality of persons.
“I am” refers to the absolute sovereignty of God, and it denotes Yahweh’s eternality, self-existence, and immutability (see Gill’s exegesis of Exodus 3:14). Therefore, when Christ said “egō eimi,” He was literally declaring to be the one true God or the Yahweh of the Old Testament (OT). Christ was also maintaining that He is the ultimate standard of all standards, the being of all beings, the sole ultimate cause of all things, and the source or foundation of all blessings.
IV. John 20:28
Unitarians don't believe that Christ is both Lord and God, but Thomas said in John 20:28, "... My Lord [definite article: ὁ ("the") + κύριός ("Lord")] and my God [definite article: ὁ ("the") + θεός ("God")]. Based on the context of John's gospel (John 20:19-29), Thomas is without a doubt speaking to Jesus in John 20:28.
V. Philippians 2:6/Hebrews 1:3
There are two significant present tense participles that need to be examined: “[Who], being (hyparchō, ὑπάρχων) in the form of God…” (Philippians 2:6), and “[Who] being (ōn, ὢν) the brightness of his glory…” (Hebrews 1:3). The participles are preceded by the relative pronoun (“who”), which undoubtedly refers to Christ [pronoun-antecedent agreement (number/gender)], God the Logos, and each verb (“being”) is in the present tense. Exegetically, these participles emphasize the Son’s continuous being or existence. This means the preexistent Christ has and will always be the intrinsic form of YHWH, and the doxa of God.
VI. Colossians 1:16
There are many EFS (Eternal Functional Subordination) or ERAS (Eternal Relations of Authority and Submission) exegetes who argue that Christ, the monogenes Theos, is eternally subordinate to the Father. What exegetical arguments are used to support the notion of EFS or ERAS? As an example, some scholars insist that the grammatical construction dia + genitive refers to the intermediate agent (The Son), not ultimate, whereas upo/apo/para + genitive points to the ultimate agent (The Father).
Yes, dia + genitive refers to Christ. Both John 1:3 and Colossians 1:16 teach that all things were made “by Him” (dia + genitive autou). The New Testament (NT) also reveals that the construction apo + genitive points to the Father. Revelation 12:6 states, “where she hath a place prepared of God…” (apo + genitive tou Theou). But do these grammatical constructions indicate that Christ is the intermediate agent (not ultimate), or eternally subordinate to the Father? Absolutely not!
The preposition dia + genitive autou not only indicates intermediate, but also ultimate. Before addressing how dia + gen also refers to the ultimate agent, one must carefully examine how notable scholars have defined intermediate agent, since this is who most EFS or ERAS advocates appeal to. For example, Wallace defined intermediate agent (dia + gen) as "Indicating the person who carries out the act for the ultimate agent" (GGBB, 1996, p. 747, emphasis mine).
But the context of Colossians 1:16 [prep: dia + gen: autou], which refers to Christ, does not indicate that the Son carried out the act for the Father, but for Himself. See Paul’s exegesis: "By Him" [preposition (en) + dative (auto)], "through Him" [preposition (dia) + genitive (autou)], and "for Him" [preposition (eis) + accusative (autov)]. This text literally means that Christ conceived, created, and controls all [nuet. ta panta] things for Himself.
VII. 2 Peter 1:1/2 Corinthians 13:14
Read 2 Peter 1:1 ("...by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ"), and examine the following grammatical construction: …tou [def art: “the”] + Theou [noun: “God”] + kai [conj: “and”] + Iesou Xristou” [noun: “Jesus Christ”].
According to the Granville Sharp Rule, when the conjunction kai ("and") connects both nouns of the same case, and the preceding noun has the article [“tou”: "the"], while the latter does not, this basically means that both nouns are synonymous (see Wallace, GGBB, 270-290).
Additionally, when the copulative kai connects nouns of the same case, and each case has a definite article, each noun refers to distinct and divine hypostases, i.e., the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. For example, see the following construction in 2 Corinthians 13:14: definite article (“the”) + noun (“Jesus”) + conjunction (“and”) + definite article (“the”) + noun (“God”) + conjunction (“and”) + definite article (“the”) + noun (“Spirit”).
Those who don’t understand the biblical doctrine of the Trinity don’t truly know God or His gospel, because the one true God of the Bible subsists in a plurality of distinct and consubstantial persons, and the gospel is grounded in the Trinity. So giving adulation or praise to anyone else is gross idolatry, and will worship (ethelothrēskia). How is will worship defined? Definition of ethelothrēskia [Gk: ἐθελοθρησκεία; Eng: “will worship” (Colossians 2:23, KJV)]: superstitious worship, invented by imprudent men, who think worship must be entertaining or relevant, and not explicitly regulated by the one true God.
While many are vexed about the doctrine of the Trinity or Christology, no one can deny the existence of the one true God who is multi-personal, not unipersonal. Romans 1:21 proves that all men—head for head—have an instinctual knowledge of God's existence. This text states, “Because that, when they knew God…” (dioti gnontes ton Theon). The verb gnontes (“knew”) is a participle, and it means to perceive or to be intellectually aware (see Thayer, p. 117-118).
Additionally, the Greek NT includes the definite article (“…ton Theon”), which stresses particularity. So Paul was literally teaching that all men are intuitively aware of the God, not a god. This is why Psalm 14:1 states, “The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God…”
Closing
All doctrines that reject the person of the Son, or the dual nature and full deity of Christ, or the unity and plurality of the Godhead, must be condemned as heresy.
Comments