For an introduction, explanation and links to the entire work, click here.
We have come a long way in our theological adventure concerning the deity of Christ and the nature of the Godhead. Our friends from the Watchtower who have followed us this far are probably glad that such a trip is finally coming to an end. Some of our Trinitarian friends probably don’t feel much better about this voyage either. For both of these groups we can only be grateful that they have come this far on such a subject.
One of the occupational hazards of those who deal with the cults is to become so riveted on the errors of the cults that they miss a very important point, i.e., that the most serious errors are committed by those who really don’t care one way or another. Too many today find any such journey into the truth to be a tiresome business; they just want to feel good and forget about the rest. Having to stop and actually seriously consider an issue such as this is just too much for some. These are the people who are in the most serious difficulty because those who stand for nothing will fall for anything, and in our time we see too much of that for comfort. As we begin a new millennium we realise that we are living on borrowed time, because when people in general lose their concept of truth they are only preparing themselves for power hungry opportunists – the Antichrist being chief amongst them – to move in and take everything they have for his own aggrandisement, up to and including their lives and souls.
The fact remains, however, that the identity of Jesus Christ is the central question in human history. It is one that cannot be ignored; it must be faced. The Scriptures clearly teach that a) he was and is God and b) he is subordinate to the Father. To deny these requires either to deny the truth of the Scriptures – the authoritative witness of the life of Jesus on earth and of what came immediately after — or to interpret them against their own plain sense. Both have been tried, the former by liberal Christians and non-Christians and the latter by such groups as the Watchtower
Of these two the first is most important. Without a fully divine Saviour it is not possible to break the power of sin and death over us and to bring us to everlasting life. This is what the Arians, lost in a philosophical maze and more zealous for God’s honour than God himself, did not realise. The Arians were content to have themselves a “perfect man” who somehow received value enough to effect the redemption, rather than God himself who was sufficient in every respect himself.
In asserting this, though, those who affirmed three persons in one God – Trinitarians – had to come to grips with how a changeless, timeless God could intervene in the history of the creation and ultimately become one of us to redeem us. Their solution reflected what the underlying philosophical thought that had come into Christianity would allow. We have seen, however, that it is certainly possible to explain, if mathematically and not philosophically, how it is possible that God could be both the unmoved mover of the universe on the one hand and moved to tears by the death of Lazarus on the other. Such a relationship, both between the persons of the Godhead on the one hand and between the Son as God and man on the other, can only be explained if we first are prepared to take the Scriptures’ assertion seriously that the Father is, in fact, greater than both Son and Spirit.
But to reiterate such a diatribe would be repetitious, and we have been repetitious enough. On this account this work has been too long, but on the other hand we have but scratched the surface of a subject that has filled volumes in the past and could justify more in the future. Our ultimate goal with such a work as this is and must be to help bring all who claim the name of Christ to the feet of our ascended Master and for all of us to proclaim with one voice, “My Lord and my God!”