Defending the Deity and Humanity of Christ

What you'll learn

Defend the full deity of Christ from at least six New Testament texts, and answer common counter-readings such as 'a god' in John 1:1 and 'firstborn' in Colossians 1:15
Use the two-natures question ('Which nature is the text speaking about?') to answer objections from Jesus' human limitations, and show why it is not special pleading
Answer the objections 'Jesus never said I am God' and 'Why did Jesus pray to himself?'

Two truths held together

You studied the person of Christ in Know Your Faith, Lesson 4: one person, the eternal Son, in two natures, truly God and truly man. This lesson takes that doctrine into conversation with people who deny it.

Heresies usually deny one half of that confession. The Watchtower, Islam and liberal theology deny his full deity. Some early groups (the Docetists) denied his real humanity, saying he only seemed to have a body (1 John 4:2-3 warns against this). You must defend both.

The Bible's case for Christ's deity is not a single proof text but a pattern: Jesus is given the names of God, the attributes of God, the deeds of God, and the worship due only to God. Keep that four-part framework in your head and you will always have more texts than you need.

Why must you defend both Christ's deity and his humanity, and not just one?Show answer

The Christian confession is that Jesus is truly God and truly man, one person with two natures. Heresies usually deny one half: the Watchtower, Islam and liberal theology deny his full deity, while the Docetists denied his real humanity, saying he only seemed to have a body (1 John 4:2-3). Defending only one side leaves the other error unanswered.

Truly God and truly man
One person, two natures
Errors deny one half
Docetism denied humanity

Explain the four-part framework for showing Christ's deity in your own words.Show answer

The case is not a single proof text but a pattern. Jesus is given the names of God, the attributes of God, the deeds of God and the worship due only to God. If you remember these four categories, you will always have more texts than you need.

Pattern, not one proof text
Names and attributes
Deeds and worship

The major texts, and how opponents read them

These are the texts you will use most. For several of them you also need to know the counter-reading you will hear, especially from Jehovah's Witnesses (covered fully in the Jehovah's Witnesses module).

John 1:1-18. The Word was in the beginning (eternal), was with God (distinct from the Father) and was God (fully divine). All things came into being through him, so he is not part of creation (1:3). The Word became flesh (1:14). Verse 18 in the earliest manuscripts (including P66, P75, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus) calls him 'the only God' (Greek monogenēs theos) who has made the Father known; most modern translations follow this reading, though some scholars prefer 'the only Son'. The Watchtower's 'a god' in 1:1 creates two true gods, which Isaiah 44:6-8 rules out.

Philippians 2:5-11. Christ was 'in the form of God' and did not regard equality with God as something to exploit, but emptied himself by taking the form of a servant. He did not stop being God; he added humanity. Verses 10-11 apply Isaiah 45:23, where Yahweh says every knee will bow to him, directly to Jesus.

Colossians 1:15-20 and 2:9. Jehovah's Witnesses read 'firstborn of all creation' as 'first created'. But 'firstborn' here means rank and heir (compare Ps 89:27, where David is made 'firstborn'), and the next verse gives the reason: 'by him all things were created'. 2:9 says the whole fullness of deity dwells in him bodily.

Hebrews 1. The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact imprint of his nature (1:3). Angels are commanded to worship him (1:6). The Father addresses him, 'Your throne, O God, is forever' (1:8, quoting Ps 45:6), and applies Psalm 102, a psalm about Yahweh as Creator, to the Son (1:10-12).

John 8:58. 'Before Abraham was, I am.' Jesus does not say 'I was' but uses the timeless 'I am' (Greek egō eimi), echoing God's self-identification (Exod 3:14; Isa 43:10 in the Greek Old Testament). His hearers understood: they picked up stones to kill him (8:59), the penalty for blasphemy.

Titus 2:13 and the Granville Sharp rule. Paul writes of 'our great God and Savior Jesus Christ'. Granville Sharp (1735-1813) observed that in Greek, when two singular personal nouns of the same case that are not proper names are joined by 'and' (kai) and only the first has the article ('the'), both refer to the same person. So 'God' and 'Savior' both describe Jesus. 2 Peter 1:1 has the same construction.

How does John 1:1-3 show both that the Word is distinct from the Father and that he is fully God? Why is the Watchtower's 'a god' a problem?Show answer

The Word was in the beginning, so he is eternal; he was with God, so he is distinct from the Father; and he was God, so he is fully divine. All things came into being through him, so he is not part of creation. Translating 'a god' creates two true gods, which Isaiah 44:6-8 rules out.

Eternal, with God, was God
Not part of creation (1:3)
'A god' = two gods
Isaiah 44:6-8

Choose one of John 8:58, Philippians 2:10-11, Hebrews 1:8-12 or Titus 2:13 and explain how it shows Jesus is God.Show answer

In John 8:58 Jesus says 'Before Abraham was, I am', using the timeless 'I am' that echoes God's self-identification (Exod 3:14), and his hearers picked up stones to kill him for blasphemy. Philippians 2:10-11 applies Isaiah 45:23, where every knee bows to Yahweh, directly to Jesus. Hebrews 1 has the Father call the Son 'God' and apply a psalm about Yahweh as Creator to him; Titus 2:13, by the Granville Sharp rule, calls Jesus 'our great God and Savior'.

Uses a specific text
Links to Old Testament Yahweh
Explains the reasoning
Shows hearers' response or grammar

The two-natures question as an apologetic tool

Recall from Know Your Faith, Lesson 4: the hypostatic union is the union of two natures (divine and human) in one person (Greek hypostasis). Jesus is one 'who' with two 'whats'. The Council of Chalcedon (AD 451) confessed one and the same Christ, 'acknowledged in two natures', united 'without confusion, without change, without division, without separation'. The first two phrases rule out mixing the natures (as Eutyches did). The last two rule out splitting Christ into two persons (as Nestorius was accused of doing).

This has a huge payoff in apologetics. When someone points to Jesus being hungry, tired, ignorant of the day of his return (Mark 13:32) or dying, you can say: 'Yes, that is exactly what we would expect. He is truly human.' Texts showing his humanity do not cancel texts showing his deity. The question is never 'God or man?' but 'Which nature is the text speaking about?'

A sharp opponent will reply that this is special pleading (making an exception to escape a problem; see Tactics and Debate, Lesson 4): 'Whenever a verse is awkward, you just say it is his human nature.' The answer is that the two-natures doctrine was not invented to escape awkward verses; it is the conclusion the verses force. Both kinds of statement sit side by side in the same passages: the Word 'was God' and 'became flesh' (John 1:1, 14); he was 'in the form of God' and took 'the form of a servant' (Phil 2:6-7); he is 'the exact imprint' of God's nature and was 'made like his brothers in every respect' (Heb 1:3; 2:17). The doctrine simply refuses to drop either half.

What does 'hypostatic union' mean, and what do Chalcedon's four phrases rule out?Show answer

It is the union of two natures, divine and human, in one person: one 'who' with two 'whats'. Chalcedon (AD 451) said the natures are united 'without confusion, without change, without division, without separation'. The first two phrases rule out mixing the natures, as Eutyches did; the last two rule out splitting Christ into two persons, as Nestorius was accused of doing.

Two natures, one person
No mixing (Eutyches)
No splitting (Nestorius)
Chalcedon AD 451

How would you answer someone who says, 'Jesus got hungry and tired and died, so he can't be God'?Show answer

That is exactly what we would expect, because he is truly human. Texts showing his humanity do not cancel texts showing his deity. The right question is not 'God or man?' but 'Which nature is the text speaking about?'

Expected: truly human
Humanity doesn't cancel deity
Ask which nature

A sceptic says the two-natures doctrine is special pleading: 'Whenever a verse is awkward, you just say it was his human nature.' How would you answer?Show answer

The doctrine was not invented to escape awkward verses; it is the conclusion the verses themselves force. The same passages state both his deity and his humanity side by side: the Word was God and became flesh (John 1:1, 14), he was in the form of God and took the form of a servant (Phil 2:6-7), and he is the exact imprint of God's nature yet made like his brothers (Heb 1:3; 2:17). The two-natures doctrine simply refuses to drop either half.

Not an escape hatch
Conclusion forced by the texts
Same passages hold both (John 1; Phil 2; Heb 1-2)
Refuses to drop either half

'Jesus never said, I am God'

This is a favourite of Muslim apologists. First, ask what words would count. If Jesus had said the exact English sentence, critics would probably say Paul or a later scribe added it. More importantly, Jesus claimed deity the way a first-century Jew would, in Jewish categories.

He forgave sins committed against others (Mark 2:5-7), and the scribes rightly said only God can do that. He claimed to be the Son of Man who comes on the clouds and sits at the right hand of Power (Mark 14:62, combining Dan 7:13 and Ps 110:1), and the high priest tore his robes. He said 'I and the Father are one' (John 10:30) and 'whoever has seen me has seen the Father' (John 14:9). He accepted Thomas's confession, 'My Lord and my God!' (John 20:28). He claimed to be the final judge of all people (Matt 25:31-46) and the one whose words will never pass away (Mark 13:31).

A useful line: 'If I said I can forgive everyone's sins, judge the world and that I existed before Abraham, would you need me to add the words I am God before you understood what I was claiming?'

How would you answer a Muslim friend who says, 'Jesus never said, I am God'?Show answer

Jesus claimed deity the way a first-century Jew would, in Jewish categories. He forgave sins committed against others (Mark 2:5-7), claimed to be the Son of Man at the right hand of Power (Mark 14:62), said 'whoever has seen me has seen the Father' (John 14:9), accepted Thomas's 'My Lord and my God!' (John 20:28) and claimed to be the final judge. If someone claimed all that, you would not need the exact words 'I am God' to understand them.

Claimed in Jewish categories
Forgave sins; Son of Man
Accepted worship (John 20:28)
Exact words not needed

'Why did Jesus pray to himself?'

This objection assumes the Trinity means Jesus is the Father. It does not. Jesus prayed to the Father, a distinct person, not to himself. In fact, Jesus' prayers are strong evidence against modalism, not against the Trinity.

Also, the incarnate Son prays as a true man, in perfect dependence on his Father, which is exactly what the hypostatic union leads us to expect (Heb 5:7). When Muslims raise this, point out that the objection actually fits our doctrine well: an eternal relationship of love between Father and Son (John 17:24), now lived out in human flesh.

Why does the lesson say Jesus' prayers are evidence against modalism rather than against the Trinity?Show answer

The objection assumes the Trinity means Jesus is the Father, but it does not. Jesus prayed to the Father, a distinct person, which shows they are not one person in different modes. And as a true man, the incarnate Son prays in perfect dependence on his Father (Heb 5:7), which the hypostatic union leads us to expect.

Jesus is not the Father
Distinct persons
Prays as true man (Heb 5:7)

Why it matters

Only one who is truly man can represent us, obey the law in our place and die our death (Heb 2:14-17). Only one who is truly God can bear the infinite weight of sin, reveal the Father perfectly and be worthy of our worship and trust. A created Jesus could not save; a merely spiritual Jesus could not substitute. Chalcedon is not hair-splitting; it protects the gospel.

Put in one or two sentences, for a friend, why Jesus must be both truly God and truly man to save us.Show answer

Only one who is truly man can represent us, obey the law in our place and die our death (Heb 2:14-17). Only one who is truly God can bear the infinite weight of sin, reveal the Father perfectly and be worthy of our worship and trust. So Chalcedon is not hair-splitting; it protects the gospel.

Man: represent and die for us
God: bear infinite sin
Protects the gospel

In their own words

“Jesus is the son of Mary, a messenger of God; it is not befitting for God to take a son.” (Quran 5:75; 19:35)

“Jesus is God's firstborn creation, Michael the archangel in his pre-human existence, and is 'a god', not Almighty God.” (NWT John 1:1; What Does the Bible Really Teach? (2005), appendix on Michael)

“Jesus is the Father incarnate; the 'Son' refers only to his humanity, which began at Bethlehem.” (David K. Bernard, The Oneness of God, ch. 5)

Key texts

John 1:1-3, 14, 18: The Word is eternal, distinct from the Father, fully God, uncreated, and became flesh. The backbone of the case.
John 8:58-59: Jesus' timeless 'I am' and the crowd's attempt to stone him show that his hearers understood him to claim deity.
Philippians 2:5-11: Christ was in the form of God before taking human form; the Isaiah 45:23 confession to Yahweh is applied to him.
Colossians 1:16-17; 2:9: All things were created through and for him, so 'firstborn' cannot mean 'first creature'; the whole fullness of deity dwells in him.
Hebrews 1:6-12: Angels worship the Son; the Father calls him God and applies a Yahweh-as-Creator psalm to him.
Titus 2:13: 'Our great God and Savior Jesus Christ' under the Granville Sharp rule names Jesus as God.
Mark 2:5-12: Jesus forgives sins on his own authority, which his opponents rightly recognise as a divine prerogative.

Objections and answers

Try answering each one yourself before you open the response.

“Jesus said 'the Father is greater than I' (John 14:28). How can he be equal with God?”Show a response

Greater in what sense? Greater can describe position or role, not nature. A president is greater in office than a citizen, but not more human. In context, Jesus is going to the Father, returning from his humble state as a servant to the glory he had before (John 17:5). Philippians 2 says the same: he took the form of a servant. Notice also that the statement would be strange coming from a mere creature. No prophet would announce 'God is greater than I'; it would be obvious. It only makes sense from one who could otherwise be thought equal. John's Gospel as a whole calls Jesus God at its beginning (1:1) and climax (20:28), so 14:28 must be read within that frame.

“Jesus didn't know the day or hour of his return (Mark 13:32). God knows everything, so Jesus isn't God. And don't just say 'that was his human nature'; that's a convenient escape hatch.”Show a response

This is precisely where the doctrine of two natures helps, and it is not an escape hatch, because the same New Testament writers who show his limitations also call him God, often in the same breath (John 1:1, 14; Phil 2:6-7). As God, the Son is omniscient (John 21:17, 'Lord, you know everything'; John 2:24-25). As a true man, he grew in wisdom (Luke 2:52) and, in his state of humiliation, did not access certain knowledge for his mission. Chalcedon says the natures are not confused: Jesus' human mind was a real, finite human mind. The objection would work against a doctrine that says Jesus is only God. But we confess he is also fully man, so we expect texts showing human limitation. The real question is whether there are also texts that attribute divine names, deeds and worship to him, and there are many.

“'Firstborn of all creation' in Colossians 1:15 means Jesus was the first thing God made.”Show a response

'Firstborn' (prōtotokos) often means pre-eminent heir, not first in time. God says of David, the youngest son of Jesse, 'I will make him the firstborn' (Ps 89:27). Ephraim is called firstborn though Manasseh was born first (Jer 31:9). The very next verse explains why Christ is firstborn: 'for by him all things were created'. If he created all things, he is not one of them. The New World Translation has to add the word 'other' four times in verses 16-17 ('all other things'), and again in verse 20, to make the passage fit, which shows the text itself does not say what the Watchtower needs. Greek had a word for 'first-created' (prōtoktistos), and Paul did not use it.

“If Jesus is God, why did he cry out 'My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?'”Show a response

He is quoting Psalm 22:1, a psalm of the suffering righteous one that ends in vindication and worldwide worship. Jews often cited a psalm by its opening line to call the whole psalm to mind. On the cross, the Son in his humanity bore the judgement of sin as our substitute (2 Cor 5:21; Gal 3:13), experiencing the Father's wrath against sin. That is the heart of the gospel, not a problem for it. And it is the Son crying to the Father, two distinct persons, which fits the Trinity perfectly. The cry shows how real the cost was, not that Jesus was less than God.

“In the Greek of John 1:1 there is no article before the second 'God'. So 'the Word was a god' is the honest translation.”Show a response

It's good that you care about the Greek. But the absence of the article does not make a noun indefinite in Greek. In the same chapter, 'God' appears without the article several times, for example in verse 6 ('a man sent from God') and verse 18 ('No one has ever seen God'), and the New World Translation itself renders those as 'God', not 'a god'. Grammar alone cannot decide it, so look at what 'a god' does to the theology. If the Word is a true god but not the one God, there are now two gods, which Isaiah 44:6-8 rules out. And verse 3 says all things came into being through him, which puts him outside the category of created things. John's point is that the Word is distinct from the Father yet fully shares what God is.

“The Bible says God cannot be tempted (James 1:13), yet Jesus was tempted in the wilderness. So Jesus cannot be God.”Show a response

That's a thoughtful objection, and it is exactly the kind of question the doctrine of two natures was meant to handle. Hebrews 4:15 says Jesus was 'tempted as we are, yet without sin'. That temptation was real and belongs to his true humanity: he was hungry, he was tired, and he faced the enemy as a man. James 1:13 describes God in his divine nature, which cannot be drawn towards evil. Chalcedon teaches that Jesus is one person with two natures, so we ask, 'Which nature is the text speaking about?' The texts showing his humanity do not cancel the texts showing his deity. In fact, it is good news that he was really tested: he is a high priest who can sympathise with our weakness, and as God he could not fail.

Written task

A Muslim classmate says: 'Show me one place where Jesus says, I am God, worship me. You can't.' Write a 300-400 word response that explains how Jesus claimed deity in his own context, uses at least four texts from at least two Gospels, and briefly addresses the human limitations of Jesus using the two-natures doctrine.

Hand this in to Mr Scott. He will look for:

Respectfully questions the standard of proof being demanded
Uses at least four relevant texts from at least two Gospels, explained accurately
Shows that his hearers understood his claims as claims to deity
Explains the hypostatic union briefly and applies it to a 'limitation' text
Ends by pointing to why Jesus' identity matters for the classmate personally