And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” John 17:3 Christ refers to His Father as “the only true God”. He did not say though that He, as God’s Son, was not God, neither did He say that only His Father is God or only His Father should be called God. He is simply referring to His Father as the great source of all. Christ is also saying of Himself that He, as a Son, is a distinct individual from His Father.
It was the same when the young man came to Jesus saying to Him “Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?” (Mark 10:17). Jesus replied “…Why callest thou me good? there is none good, but God". He wasn't denying His own divinity. It was just as though He was saying to this man “If you accept that I am good – and it is true that only God is good - then are you acknowledging me as whom I say I am – the Son of God? "
The Scriptures also tell us
“Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:" Philippians 2:5-6
If Christ had been less than God or someone other than God, then He could not have considered Himself as equal with God. This equality is the result of His Sonship with God. Here again we see two divine personalities. One personality is “God” while the other is “Christ Jesus”. Here we are also told that Christ, in His pre-existence, was in the “form of God”. As well as in character, this would be in outward appearance. This is why God could say to Him, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness” (Genesis 1:26). The Greek word translated “form” is morphe. The only other place it is used in the Bible is where Mark wrote that Jesus, on the road to Emmaus, “appeared in another form [morphe]” to two of His followers (Mark 16:12, see also Luke 24:16). William Tyndale translated this verse in Philippians as “Which beynge in the shape of god and thought it not robbery to be equall with god.” Philippians 2:6 Tyndale’s translation 1525
God must have a “shape”. If He didn’t have a shape then there would have been no point in Jesus saying “And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape". John 5:37
Jesus identified Himself with the one true God. This is when He said to the Jews “… Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am". John 8:58
The Jews knew exactly what Jesus was claiming. They knew He had identified Himself with the One who had spoken to Moses from the burning bush.
“And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, the LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations.” Exodus 3:14-15
Christ was indeed the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. He was the God of the Jews. He was their spiritual rock that was with them in the wilderness (1 Corinthians 10:1-4). He is Jehovah (Isaiah 12:2). Now though, in human flesh, He was standing before His people as their God. Unfortunately they failed to recognise Him as such. They would only have applied this appellation (the I AM) to God – and they certainly did not regard Jesus as such. This is why the Scriptures record that they took up stones to throw at Him (see John 8:59). It is also why John wrote in the prologue to His Gospel “.” John 1:11
It was Philip who said to Jesus “Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us”. Jesus could have replied saying “Sorry, I cannot do that Philip. No one can see the Father and live”. Instead He replied “… Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.” John 14:9-10 In these words of Jesus there can be sensed an element of surprise. The disciples had confessed Him to be the Son of God (Matthew 14:33, 16:16, John 1:49). They also knew He claimed to be the Son of God (Matthew 16:16-17, John 5:18, John 9:35). They knew too that this was what the Scribes and Pharisees held against Him (John 5:18). They would even have known that this had been the testimony of God Himself (Matthew 3:17, 17:5). They still though, so it seems, had failed to recognise His true identity. It was just as though Jesus was saying to them, “Are you saying that even though I have been with you for over 3 years you still don’t know who I really am?” Christ then said “Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.” John 14:11 Christ’s words are again the reiteration of the great truth that He spoke to the Jews when He said “I and my Father are one.” John 10:30
God has never explained the oneness of existence between Himself and His Son. It is a mystery known only to divinity. This is why we must never attempt to explain it, and for which reason I cannot go along with the creeds notions that attempt to do such. I can see clearly 3 divine persons comprising the Godhead throughout the scriptures, but not how they are one. Even if God did provide an explanation, it would probably be beyond our comprehension to understand it. Can the finite comprehend the infinite? The Jews certainly realised though what Jesus was claiming. John recorded (this was after Jesus had said that He and His Father were one)
“Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.” John 10:31-33
There can be no mistaking as to what the Jews understood Jesus to be saying. It was that He was God (theos). To many of the Jews, particularly the Scribes and the Pharisees, this was “blasphemy”. If Christ had not been God then they would have been correct. The same reaction came when Jesus healed the impotent man on the Sabbath. John recorded (another of the signs to show that Christ was the Son of God)....
“And therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus, and sought to slay him, because he had done these things on the sabbath day. But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work. 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.” John 5:16-18
We need to remember that John wrote his Gospel with the intent of proving Christ to be the Son of God (John 20:31) – which terminology means that Christ is God (John 1:1). We can see therefore why the Holy Spirit led this Gospel writer to select these discussions that Jesus had with the Jews. They tell us so much. They tell us how the Jews understood Christ’s words. Jesus though had not made Himself God. His existence as a separate person from God was by the pleasure of the Father (Colossians 1:19). The Jews called God their Father. They must have realised therefore that Jesus was not claiming this in the same sense as they were claiming it else they would not have condemned Him for it. They must have understood Him to be claiming God as His Father in a very literal sense. This is why they said He was making Himself equal with God. Jesus did not say they had misunderstood His words. In personality He was not the one true God (the Father) but He was manifesting God in the flesh. It is no wonder therefore that God led the prophet Isaiah to prophecy of the coming Messiah “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.” Isaiah 9:6
