JESUS CHRIST AS GOD’S ONLY AND UNIQUE SON IN THE GOSPEL OF JOHN
TRINITY SCHOOL FOR MINISTRY
JESUS CHRIST AS GOD’S ONLY AND UNIQUE SON IN THE GOSPEL OF JOHN
SUBMITTED TO DR. WESLEY HILL IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF NT 500: INTRODUCTION TO THE NEW TESTAMENT
BY SAMSON COVATCH
APRIL 9, 2018
The understanding of Jesus as the only and unique Son of God in the Gospel of John is a central theme to understanding who Jesus is. The prologue of John’s gospel puts this relational attribute of Jesus to God the Father as the first concept the reader needs to come to terms with. “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth” (John 1:14 ESV). We are introduced to the fact that Jesus is not an adopted son or a child through a generative process as with mankind, but that he is ontologically one with the Father. I. Howard Marshall notices the theanthropos relationship as well, “Although he was a human being, nevertheless they saw beyond the mere humanity to a person who embodied the glory of God. At this point God is identified as the Father, and the Word is identified as his Son.”
The cultural uniqueness that we may miss today is when claiming to be the son of someone you are claiming, not just kinship, but that you are the same thing or essence as your father. This concept is clear when Jesus interacts with some of his dissenters who are quick to reword what he says to them in a way that was culturally relevant to them. In chapter ten at the time of the Feast of Dedication, Jesus claims, “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30 ESV). I’ve spoken to people of different faiths about this passage before on what exactly do they think that Jesus means by saying this? Mormon missionaries who lived near me for many years said that this indicated Jesus and Heavenly Father are one in will and purpose. If we allow the pericope to remain intact the gravity of what Jesus said comes to light. The Jews pick up stones to throw at him, but Jesus presses them to expose the motive based on what he has said. How are they interpreting him at this time? Jesus asks if they want to stone him because of the good works from the Father that he has shown them or is it something else? They quickly respond, “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God” (John 10:33 ESV).
Jesus does not back down from this accusation, but he does not endorse it completely either. Jesus wants it to be clear about his relationship to God the Father in that he is not the God the Father but God the Son. Knowing the culture as it was, Jesus challenges them on the meaning they are prescribing to the word God by appealing to Psalm 82:6 which reads “I thought ‘You are gods; all of you are sons of the Most High’” (Ps 82:6 ESV). The study note in the NET Bible will flesh out this understanding further.
It is important to look at the OT context: The whole line reads “I say, you are gods, sons of the Most High, all of you.” Jesus will pick up on the term “sons of the Most High” in 10:36, where he refers to himself as the Son of God. The psalm was understood in rabbinic circles as an attack on unjust judges who, though they have been given the title “gods” because of their quasi-divine function of exercising judgment, are just as mortal as other men. What is the argument here? It is often thought to be as follows: If it was an OT practice to refer to men like the judges as gods, and not blasphemy, why did the Jewish authorities object when this term was applied to Jesus? This really doesn’t seem to fit the context, however, since if that were the case Jesus would not be making any claim for “divinity” for himself over and above any other human being – and therefore he would not be subject to the charge of blasphemy. Rather, this is evidently a case of arguing from the lesser to the greater, a common form of rabbinic argument. The reason the OT judges could be called gods is because they were vehicles of the word of God (cf. 10:35). But granting that premise, Jesus deserves much more than they to be called God. He is the Word incarnate, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world to save the world (10:36). In light of the prologue to the Gospel of John, it seems this interpretation would have been most natural for the author. If it is permissible to call men “gods” because they were the vehicles of the word of God, how much more permissible is it to use the word “God” of him who is the Word of God?
Although they no longer want to stone Jesus on the spot they do want to arrest him and bring him to trial for the statement that follows, “I am the Son of God” (John 10:36b ESV). This is a very interesting word selection in that “I am” could be seen as an identification as YHWH and where “Son of God” could be referring to himself as in Psalm 82:6 along with the others, but you can’t ignore the definite article within the statement. “The Son of God” shows uniqueness and exclusivity insinuated by Jesus that only he alone possesses with God the Father. John then finishes his pericope by writing, “but if I do them (works of the Father), even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father” (John 10:38 ESV). In doing so, John shows that verses 30 and 38 are bookends with the qualifying and quantifying substance in between. The High Priestly Prayer of Jesus reveals to us another uniqueness of him being the only Son of God, and that is of a pre existence before creation. John shows us in the first chapter of his gospel that he thinks of Jesus as having existed before all creation and now we have the same declaration from the lips of Jesus. “Father the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you; And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed” (John 17:1b, 5 ESV). The uniqueness of this relationship is an actual infinite, eternal sonship. In Putting Jesus In His Place we read, “It is difficult to imagine a more explicit affirmation of Christ’s existence before creation. To these statements we may add Jesus’ statement, ‘Before Abraham came into being, I am’ (John 8:58, literal translation).” Chapter seventeen also walks us through the intimate reconciliation of mankind by our being united with Christ as he is united with the Father. The language that Jesus uses about his relationship with God the Father is the same wording he then uses of our relation to him. “All mine are yours, and yours are mine, and I am glorified in them (17:10 ESV); they may be one, even as we are one (17:11b ESV); for those who will believe in me through their word, that they may be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us” (17:20b-21a ESV). This is a powerful and awesome understanding that our relationship to the Son is how we are united with the Father. What can be more comforting than to know the uniqueness of the only Son to the only God?
A striking aspect in John’s gospel is that by identifying Jesus as the Son of God is also to negate any claims made by or for any created beings such as angels or humans. John’s Gospel was recognized as scripture by the Church full of believers who already agreed with this concept. Otherwise, they would have rejected or disputed such claims. What we can deduce from this is a three-fold description of Jesus Christ as God the Son. First, his ontological relationship with God the Father, second is his unity with the Father within the incarnation, both expressed by John and understood by Jesus, and third his pre existence before creation itself. Any Christological doctrine must take into account the timeless immutability of the eternal sonship of Christ along with the ultimate causal power and authority he possesses that is reserved for God alone. To read the gospel of John and not have an understanding of Christ’s deity and unity with the Father as His unique and only Son, would be a very shallow reading indeed.
Works Cited
Bowman Jr., Robert M., and J. Ed Komoszewski, Putting Jesus In His Place, Kregel Publications, Grand Rapids, MI, 2007.
Marshall, I. Howard, New Testament Theology, InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, IL, 2004.
The NET Bible First Edition, Biblical Studies Press, L.L.C., 2005.