from Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics

(A conservative evangelical view)

Trinity simply means “triunity.” God is not a simple unity; there is plurality in his unity. The Trinity is one of the great mysteries of the Christian Faith. Unlike an antinomy or paradox, which is a logical contradiction, the Trinity goes beyond reason but not against reason. It is known only by divine revelation, so the Trinity is not the subject of natural theology but of revelation.

The Basis for the Trinity. While the word Trinity does not occur there, the concept is clearly taught in the Bible. The logic of the doctrine of the Trinity is simple. Two biblical truths are evident in Scripture, the logical conclusion of which is the Trinity:

1. There is one God.

2. There are three distinct persons who are God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

One God. The central teaching of Judaism called the Shema proclaims: “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one” (Deut. 6:4). When Jesus was asked the question, “What is the greatest commandment?” he prefaced the answer by quoting the Shema (Mark 12:29). In spite of his strong teaching on the deity of Christ (cf. Col. 2:9), the apostle Paul said emphatically, “there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live” (1 Cor. 8:6a). From beginning to end, the Scriptures speak of one God and label all other gods as false (Exod. 20:3; 1 Cor. 8:5-6).

The Bible also recognizes a plurality of persons in God. Although the doctrine of the Trinity is not as explicit in the Old Testament as the New Testament, nonetheless, there are passages where members of the Godhead are distinguished. At times they even speak to one another (see Ps. 110:1).

The Father Is God. Throughout Scripture God is said to be a Father. Jesus taught his disciples to pray, “Our Father in heaven” (Matt. 6:9). God is not only “our heavenly Father” (Matt. 6:32) but the “Father of our spirits” (Heb. 12:9). As God, he is the object of worship. Jesus told the woman of Samaria, “Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshippers the Father seeks” (John 4:23). God is not only called “our Father” (Rom. 1:7) many times but also “the Father” (John 5:45; 6:27). He is also called “God and Father” (2 Cor. 1:3). Paul proclaimed that “there is but one God, the Father” (1 Cor. 8:6). Additionally, God is referred to as the “Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Rom. 15:6). Indeed, the Father and the Son are often related by these very names in the same verse (Matt. 11:27; 1 John 2:22).

The Son Is God. The deity of Christ is treated below in the section on attacks on the Trinity and most extensively in the article Christ, Deity of. As a broad overview it should be noted that:

Jesus claimed to be Yahweh God. YHWH; translated in some versions Jehovah, was the special name of God revealed to Moses in Exodus 3:14, when God said, “I am who I am.” In John 8:58, Jesus declares: “Before Abraham was, I am.” This statement claims not only existence before Abraham, but equality with the “I am” of Exodus 3:14. The Jews around him clearly understood his meaning and picked up stones to kill him for blaspheming (see Mark 14:62; John 8:58; 10:31-33; 18:5-6). Jesus also said, “I am the first and the last (Rev. 2:8).

Jesus took the glory of God. Isaiah wrote, “I am the Lord [Yahweh], that is my name; I will not give to another, or my praise to idols” (42:8) and, “This is what the Lord [Yahweh] says . . . I am the first, and I am the last; apart from me there is no God” (44:6). Likewise, Jesus prayed, “Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began” (John 17:5). But Yahweh had said he would not give his glory to another.

While the Old Testament forbids giving worship to anyone other than God (Exod. 20:1-4; Deut. 5:6-9), Jesus accepted worship (Matt. 8:2; 14:33; 15:25; 20:20; 28:17; Mark 5:6). The disciples attributed to him titles the Old Testament reserved for God, such as, “the first and the last” (Rev. 1:17; 2:8; 22:13), “the true light” (John 1:9), the “rock” or “stone” (1 Cor. 10:4; 1 Peter 2:6-8; cf. Ps. 18:2; 95:1), the “bridegroom” (Eph. 5:28-33; Rev. 21:2), “the chief Shepherd” (1 Peter 5:40), and “the great shepherd” (Heb. 13:20). They attributed to Jesus the divine activities of creating (John 1:3; Col. 1:15-16), redeeming (Hosea 13:14; Ps. 130:7), forgiving (Acts 5:31; Col. 3:13; cf. Ps. 130:4; Jer. 31:34), and judging (John 5:26). They used titles of deity for Jesus. Thomas declared: “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:28). Paul calls Jesus, “the one in whom the fullness of deity dwells bodily” (Col. 2:9). In Titus, Jesus is called, “our great God and savior” (2:13), and the writer to the Hebrews says of him, “Thy throne, O God, is forever” (Heb. 1:8). Paul says that, before Christ existed as a human being, he existed as God” (Phil. 2:5-8). Hebrews 1:5 says that Christ reflects God’s glory of God, bears the stamp of his nature, and upholds the universe. The prologue to John’s Gospel also minces no words, stating, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word [Jesus] was God’ (John 1:1).

Jesus claimed equality with God in other ways. He claimed the prerogatives of God. He claimed to be Judge of all (Matt. 25:31-46; John 5:27-30), but Joel quotes Yahweh as saying, “for there I will sit to judge all the nations on every side” (Joel 3:12). He said to a paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven” (Mark 2:5b). The scribes correctly responded, “Who can forgive sins but God alone?” (vs. 7b). Jesus claimed the power to raise and judge the dead, a power which only God possesses (John 5:21, 29). But the Old Testament clearly taught that only God was the giver of life (Deut. 32:39; 1 Sam. 2:6) and the one to raise the dead (Ps. 2:7).

Jesus claimed the honor due God, saying, “He who does not honor the Son does not honor the father, who sent him” (John 5:23b). The Jews listening knew that no one should claim to be equal with God in this way and again they reached for stones (John 5:18). When asked at his Jewish trial, “Are you the Christ (Messiah), the Son of the Blessed One?” Jesus responded, “I am, and you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven” (Mark 14:61b-62).

The Holy Spirit Is God. The same revelation from God that declares Christ to be the Son of God also mentions another member of the triunity of God called the Spirit of God, or Holy Spirit. He too is equally God with the Father and the Son, and he too is a distinct person.

The Holy Spirit is called “God” (Acts 5:3-4). He possesses the attributes of deity, such as omnipresence (cf. Ps. 139:7-12) and omniscience (1 Cor. 2:10, 11). He is associated with God the Father in creation (Gen. 1:2). He is involved with other members of the Godhead in the work of redemption (John 3:5-6; Rom. 8:9-17, 27-27; Titus 3:5-7). He is associated with other members of the Trinity under the “name” of God (Matt. 28:18-20). Finally, the Holy Spirit appears, along with the Father and Son, in New Testament benedictions (for example, 2 Cor. 13:14).

Not only does the Holy Spirit possess deity but he also has a differentiated personality. That he is a distinct person is clear in that Scripture refers to “him” with personal pronouns (John 14:26; 16:13). Second, he does things only persons can do, such as teach (John 14:26; 1 John 2:27), convict of sin (John 16:7-7), and be grieved by sin (Eph. 4:30). Finally, the Holy Spirit has intellect (1 Cor. 2:10, 11), will (1 Cor. 12:11), and feeling (Eph. 4:30).

That the three members of the Trinity are distinct persons is clear in that each is mentioned in distinction form the others. The Son prayed to the Father (cf. John 17). The Father spoke from heaven about the Son at his baptism (Matt. 3:15-17). Indeed, the Holy Spirit was present at the same time, revealing that they coexist. Further, the fact that they have separate titles (Father, Son, and Spirit) indicate they are not one person. Also, each member of the Trinity has special functions that help us to identify them. For example, the Father planned salvation (John 3:16; Eph. 1:4); the Son accomplished it on the cross (John 17:4; 19:30; Heb. 1:1-2) and at the resurrection (Rom. 4:25; 1 Cor. 15:1-6), and the Holy Spirit applies it to the lives of the believers (John 3:5; Eph. 4:30; Titus 3:5-7). The Son submits to the Father (1 Cor. 11:3; 15:28), and the Holy Spirit glorifies the Son (John 16:14).

A Philosophical Defense of the Trinity. The doctrine of the Trinity cannot be proven by human reason; it is only known because it is revealed by special revelation (in the Bible). However, just because it is beyond reason does not mean that it goes against reason. It is not irrational or contradictory, as many critics believe. The Logic of the Trinity. The philosophical law of non-contradiction informs us that something cannot be both true and false at the same time and in the same sense. This is the fundamental law of all rational thought. And the doctrine of the Trinity does not violate it. This can be shown by stating first of all what the Trinity is not. The Trinity is not the belief that God is three persons and only one person at the same time and in the same sense. That would be a contradiction. Rather, it is the belief that there are three persons in one nature. This may be a mystery, but it is not a contradiction. That is, it may go beyond reason’s ability to comprehend completely, but it does not go against reason’s ability to apprehend consistently.

Further, the Trinity is not the belief that there are three natures in one nature or three essences in one essence. That would be a contradiction. Rather, Christians affirm that there are three persons in one essence. This is not contradictory because it makes a distinction between person and essence. Or, to put it in terms of the law of non-contradiction, while God is one and many at the same time, he is not one and many in the same sense. He is one in the sense of his essence but many in the sense of his persons. So there is no violation of the law of non-contradiction in the doctrine of the Trinity.

A Model of the Trinity. By saying God has one essence and three persons it is meant that he has one “What” and three “Whos.” The three Whos (persons)

each share the same What (essence). So God is a unity of essence with a plurality of persons. Each person is different, yet they share a common nature. God is one in his substance. The unity is in his essence (what God is), and the plurality is in God’s persons (how he relates within himself). This plurality of relationships is both internal and external. Within the Trinity each member relates to the others in certain ways. These are somewhat analogous to human relationships. The Bible’s descriptions of Yahweh as Father and Jesus as Son says something of how the Son relates to the Father. Also, the Father sends the Spirit as a Messenger, and the Spirit is a Witness of the Son (John 14:26). These descriptions help us understand the functions within the unity of the Godhead. Each is fully God, and each has his own work and interrelational theme with the other two. But it is vital to remember that the three share the same essence, so that they unify as one Being..

Some Illustrations of the Trinity. No analogy of the Trinity is perfect, but some are better than others. First, some bad illustrations should be repudiated. The Trinity is not like a chain with three links. For these are three separate and separable parts. But God is neither separated nor separable. Neither is God like the same actor playing three different parts in a play. For God is simultaneously three persons, not one person playing three successive roles. Nor is God like the three states of water: solid, liquid, and gaseous. For normally water is not in all three of these states at the same time, but God is always three persons at the same time. Unlike other bad analogies, this one does not imply tritheism. However, it does reflect another heresy known as modalism.

Most erroneous illustration of the Trinity tend to support the charge that trinitarianism is really tritheism, since they contain separable parts. The more helpful analogies retain the unity of God while they show a simultaneous plurality. There are several that fit this description.

A Mathematical Illustration. One aspect of the problem can be expressed in mathematical terms. Critics make a point of computing the mathematical impossibility of believing there is a Father, Son and Holy Spirit in the Godhead, without holding that there are three gods. Does not 1 + 1 + 1 = 3? It certainly does if you add them, but Christians insist that the triunity of God is more like 1 x 1 x 1 = 1. God is triune, not triplex. His one essence has multiple centers of personhood. Thus, there is no more mathematical problem in conceiving the Trinity than there is in understanding 1 cubed (one to the third power).

A Geometric Illustration. Perhaps the most widely used illustration of the Trinity is the triangle. One triangle has three corners, which are inseparable from, and simultaneous to, one another. In this sense it is a good illustration of the Trinity. Of course, the triangle is finite and God is infinite, so it is not an imperfect illustration. Another aspect of the Godhead is that Christ is one person (shown as one corner of the triangle), yet he has two natures, a divine nature and a human nature. Some show this aspect graphically by symbolizing Christ’s divinity by the corner of the triangle and using another geometric figure, a circle for instance, to illustrate the human nature. At the point of the person of Jesus Christ, the circle is welded onto the triangle, human nature touching, but not mixed with, divine. Human and divine natures exist side-by-side without confusion in the Son. His two natures are conjoined in one person. Or, in Christ there are two Whats and one Who, whereas, in God there are three Whos and one What.

A Moral Illustration. Augustine suggested an illustration of how God is both three and one at the same time. The Bible informs us that “God is love” (1 John 4:16). Love involves a lover, a beloved, and a spirit of love between lover and loved. The Father might be likened to the Lover; the Son to the One loved, and the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of love. Yet love does not exist unless these three are united as one. This illustration has the advantage of being personal, since it involves love, a characteristic that flows only from persons.

An Anthropological Illustration. Since humankind is made in the image of God (Gen. 1:27), it would seem reasonable that men and women bear some snapshot of the Trinity within their being. One that causes more problems than it solves is to visualize the human being as a “trichotomy” of body, soul, and spirit. Whether the trichotomist position is accurate, this is not a helpful illustration. Body and soul are not an indivisible unity. They can be (and are) separated at death (cf. 2 Cor. 5:8; Phil 1:23; Rev. 6:9). The nature and persons of the Trinity cannot be separated.

A better illustration based in human nature is the relation between the human mind, to its ideas, and the expression of these ideas in words. There is obviously a unity among all three of these without there being an identity. In this sense, they illustrate the Trinity.

An Islamic Illustration of Plurality in God. When talking with Muslims, the best illustration of a plurality is the relation between the Islamic conception of the Qur’an and God. Yusuf K. Ibish in an article entitled, “The Muslim Lives by the Qur’an,” cited by Charis Waddy, The Muslim Mind, described it this way: The Qur’an “is an expression of Divine Will. If you want to compare it with anything in Christianity, you must compare it with Christ himself. Christ was the expression of the Divine among men, the revelation of the Divine Will. That is what the Qur’an is.”

Orthodox Muslims believe the Qur’an is eternal and uncreated. It is not the same as God but is an expression of God’s mind as imperishable as God himself. Surely, there is here a plurality within unity, something that is other than God but is nonetheless one with God in essential characteristics.

Attacks on the Trinity. The Trinity is at the heart of orthodox Christianity. But many critics-Jews and Muslims in particular-contend that it is incoherent and contradictory. Orthodox Christians insist that the teaching that God is one in essence but three in personhood is complex, but not contradictory.

The central issue is the deity of Christ, a doctrine inseparable from the Trinity. If one accepts the biblical teaching about the deity of Christ, then a plurality in the Godhead has been acknowledged. Conversely, if the doctrine of the Trinity is received, the deity of Christ is part of the package. Of course, strict monotheists, such as Muslims and Orthodox Jews, reject both the deity of Christ and the Trinity as a denial of the absolute unity of God.

Muslim Misunderstanding. Obstacles in the Muslim mind hinder acceptance of the triunity of God. Some are philosophical; some biblical. Islamic scholars often engage in an arbitrary and selective use of the biblical texts as it suits their purposes. However, even the texts they pronounce “authentic” are twisted or misinterpreted to support their teachings.

Christ as “begotten” of God. Perhaps no Christian concept draws so violent a reaction among Muslims than that of Jesus as the “only begotten Son of God.” This raises red flags immediately, because Muslims understand the words in a grossly anthropomorphic way. Evangelical Christians likewise would be offended to hear what Muslims think they hear in this term. Clearing away this misunderstanding is necessary.

The King James Version Bible refers to Christ as the “only begotten” Son of God (John 1:18; cf. 3:16). However, Muslim scholars often misconstrue this in a fleshly, carnal sense of someone who literally begets children. To “beget” implies the physical act of sexual intercourse. This they believe, and Christians agree, is absurd. God is a Spirit with no body. As the Islamic scholar Anis Shorrosh contents, “He [God] does not beget because begetting is an animal act. It belongs to the lower animal act of sex. We do not attribute such an act to God” (Shorrosh, 254). But only a few cults, notably the Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) have a teaching that approaches this view of “begetting.”

Further, to the Islamic mind, begetting is “creating.” “God cannot create another God. . . . He cannot create another uncreated” (ibid., 259). Once again, Christians would agree fully. The foregoing statements reveal the degree to which the biblical concept of Christ’s Sonship is misunderstood by Muslim scholars. For no orthodox Christian equates the King James Version translation of “begat” with “made” or “create.” Arianism taught that and was strenuously fought wherever it has appeared in church history. Its primary adherents today belong to another cult, the Jehovah’s Witnesses. No wonder ‘Abdu ‘L-Ahad Dawud concludes that from a “Muslim point of belief the Christian dogma concerning the eternal birth or generation of the Son is blasphemy” (205).

New, more accurate English translations have been more careful to say in English what was originally meant in Greek. Only begotten does not refer to any physical generation but to a special relationship between the Son and the Father. It means a unique relationship, or could be translated, as the New International Version, “one and only Son.” It does not imply creation by the Father or any other sort of generation. Just as an earthly father and son have a special filial relationship, so the eternal Father and his eternal Son are uniquely and intimately working in concert with one another. It does not refer to physical generation but to an eternal procession from the Father. Just as for Muslims the Word of God (Qur’an) is not identical to God but eternally proceeds from him, even so for Christians, Christ, God’s “Word” (sura 4:171) eternally proceeds from him. Words like generation and procession are used of Christ in a filial and relational sense, not in a carnal and physical sense.

Some Muslim scholars confuse Christ’s Sonship with his virgin birth. Michael Nazir-Ali noted that “in the Muslim mind the generation of the Son often means his birth of the Virgin Mary” (Nazir-Ali, 29). As Shorrosh notes, many Muslims believe Christians have made Mary a goddess, Jesus her son, and God the Father her husband (114). With such a carnal misrepresentation of a spiritual reality, there is little wonder Muslims reject the Christian concept of eternal Father and Son.

Islamic misunderstanding of the Trinity is encouraged by the misunderstanding of Muhammad, who said, “O Jesus, son of Mary! didst thou say unto mankind: Take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah?” (sura 5:119). Hundreds of years before Muhammad Christians condemned such a gross misunderstanding of the sonship of Christ. The Christian writer Lactantius (240-320), writing in about 306, said, “He who hears the words ‘Son of God’ spoken must not conceive in his mind such great wickedness as to fancy that God procreated through marriage and union with any female,-a thing which is not done except by an animal possessed of a body and subject to death.” Furthermore, “since God is alone, with whom could he unite? or [sic], since He was of such great might as to be able to accomplish whatever He wished, He certainly had no need of the comradeship of another for the purpose of creating” (Pfander, 164).

Distortion of John 1:1. If rejection of the eternal Sonship of Christ is based on a serious misunderstanding of the Christian concept of Christ as God’s Son, another text proclaiming Christ’s deity is often distorted: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1). Without textual support from even one of the 5300 plus Greek manuscripts, Muslims render the last phrase, “and the Word was God’s.” Dawud declares, without any warrant, “the Greek form of the genitive case ‘Theou,’ i.e., ‘God’s’ was corrupted into ‘Theos’; that is, ‘God,’ in the nominative form of the name!” (16-17). This translation is not only arbitrary, but it is contrary to the rest of the message of John’s Gospel where the claims that Christ is God are made multiple times (cf. John 8:59; 10:30; 12:41; John 20:28).

Misconstruing Thomas’s confession. When Jesus challenged Thomas to believe after seeing him in his physical resurrection body, Thomas confessed Jesus’ deity, declaring, “My Lord and My God” (John 20:28). Many Muslim writers diminish this proclamation of Christ’s deity by reducing it to an ejaculatory exclamation, “My God!” Deedat declares, “What? He was calling Jesus his Lord and his God? No. This is an exclamation people call out. . . . This is a particular expression” (Shorrosh, 278).

Deedat’s alternative reading is not viable. First, in an obvious reference to the content of Thomas’s confession of Jesus as “my Lord and my God,” Jesus blessed him for what he had correctly “seen” and “believed” (John 20:29). Thomas’s confession of Christ’s deity comes in the context of a miraculous appearance by the risen Christ, not to mention at the climax of the post-resurrection ministry, when Jesus’ disciples were gaining increasing belief in Christ, based on his miraculous signs (cf. John 2:11; 12:37). Thomas’s confession of Christ’s deity fits with the stated theme of the Gospel of John “that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his Name” (John 20:31). Even putting all this aside, Thomas was a devout Jew who revered the name of God. He simply would not have used God’s name in so profane an ejaculation.

No doubt there was an amazed note in Thomas’s voice as he pronounced Christ’s deity, but to reduce it to an emotional ejaculation is to claim that Jesus blessed Thomas for breaking the commandment against using God’s name in vain.

David’s Son and David’s Lord. In Matthew 22:43, citing Psalm 110, Jesus said, “How is it then that David, speaking by the Spirit, calls him ‘Lord’ [Messiah]?” According to Dawud, “By his expression that the ‘Lord,’ or the ‘Adon,’ could not be a son of David, Jesus excludes himself from that title” (89).

However, a careful look at the context shows that Jesus is saying just the opposite. Jesus stumped his skeptical Jewish questioners by presenting them with a dilemma that blew their own neat calculations about the Messiah out of the sky. How could David call the Messiah “Lord” (as he did in Ps. 110:1), when the Scriptures also say the Messiah would be the “Son of David” (which they do in 2 Sam. 7:12f.)? The only answer is that the Messiah must be both a man (David’s son or offspring) and God (David’s Lord.) Jesus is claiming to be both God and human. The Islamic mind should have no more difficulty understanding how Jesus can unite in one person both divine and human natures than their own belief that human beings combine both spirit and flesh, the enduring and the transient in one person (sura 89:27-30; cf. 3:185). Even according to Muslim belief, whatever Almighty God, the Creator and Ruler of all things, wills in his infinite wisdom he is also able to accomplish for “He is the irresistible” (sura 6:61).

God only good. Many Islamic scholars claim that Jesus denied being God when he rebuked the rich young ruler, saying, “Why do you call me good? No one is good-except God alone” (Mark 10:18). A careful look at this text in its context reveals that Jesus was not denying his deity. He was rather warning the young man to consider the implications of his careless appellation. Jesus does not say, “I am not God, as you claim” or “I am not good.” Indeed, both the Bible and Qur’an teach that Jesus is sinless (cf. John 8:46; Heb. 4:14). Rather, Jesus challenged him to examine what he was really saying when he called Jesus “Good Master.” In essence, Jesus was saying, “Do you realize what you are saying when you call Me ‘Good Master’? Only God is good. Are you calling me God?” The fact that the young ruler refused to do what Jesus said, proves that he did not really consider Jesus his Master. But nowhere did Jesus deny that he was either the Master or God of the rich young ruler. Indeed, elsewhere Jesus freely claimed to be both Lord and Master of all (Matt. 7:21-27; 28:18; John 12:40).

The greater Father. Jesus’ assertion that “My Father is greater than I” (John 14:28) is also misunderstood by Muslims. It is taken out of its actual context to mean that the Father is greater in nature, but Jesus meant only that the Father is greater in office. This is evident from the fact that in this same Gospel (of John) Jesus claimed to be the “I Am” or Yahweh of the Old Testament (Exod. 3:14). He also claimed to be “equal with God” (John 10:30, 33). In addition, he received worship on numerous occasions (John 9:38; cf. Matt. 2:11; 8:2; 9:18; 14:33; 15:25; 28:9, 17; Luke 24:52). He also said, “He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him” (John 5:23).

Further, when Jesus spoke of the Father being “greater” it was in the context of his “going to the Father” (John 14:28). Only a few chapters later Jesus speaks to the Father, saying, “I have completed the work you gave me to do” (John 17:4). But this functional difference of his role as Son in the very next verse reveals that it was not to be used to diminish the fact that Jesus was equal to the Father in nature and glory. For Jesus said, “And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory which I had with you before the world began” (John 17:5).

Misunderstood Philosophical Concepts. Islamic scholars also offer philosophical objections to the doctrine of the Trinity. These too must be cleared away before they will be able to understand the biblical teaching about a plurality of persons within the unity of God.

Emphasis on the Oneness of God is fundamental to Islam. One Muslim scholar said, “In fact, Islam, like other religions before it in their original clarity and purity, is nothing other than the declaration of the Unity of God, and its message is a call to testify to this Unity” (Mahud, 20). Another author adds, “The Unity of Allah is the distinguishing characteristic of Islam. This is the purest form of monotheism, i.e., the worship of Allah Who was neither begotten nor beget nor had any associates with Him in his Godhead. Islam teaches this in the most unequivocal terms” (Ajijola, 55).

Because of this uncompromising emphasis on God’s absolute unity, in Islam the greatest of all sins is the sin of shirk, or assigning partners to God. The Qur’an sternly declares “God forgiveth not (The sin of) joining other gods With Him; but He forgiveth Whom He pleaseth other sins Than this: one who joins Other gods with God, Hath strayed far, far away (From the Right)” (sura 4:116). However, this misunderstands the unity of God.

The Trinity and heresy. There are two primary heresies from which the Trinity is to be distinguished: modalism and tritheism. The heresy of modalism, also called Sabellianism, denies there are three distinct eternal persons in the Godhead. It believes that the so-called “persons”of the Trinity are modes of God substance, not distinct persons. Like water with its three states (liquid, solid, and gaseous), the Trinity is said to be only three different modes of the same essence. Unlike modalists, trinitarians believe there are three distinct persons (not just modes) in the one substance of God.

Both Islam and Christianity proclaim that God is one in essence. What is in dispute is whether there can be any plurality of persons in this unity of nature. The inadequacies in the Muslims’ view of God arise in part out of their misunderstanding of Christian monotheism. Many Muslims misconstrue the Christian view of God as tritheism rather than as monotheism. The opposite error of tritheism affirms that there are three separate gods. Few, if any, Christian theologians or philosophers have held this view, but it often has been attributed to trinitarians. Unlike tritheists, trinitarians do not affirm a god with three different substances; they confess that God is three distinct persons in one substance.

The Bible declares emphatically: “The Lord our God, the Lord is one” (Deut. 6:4). Both Jesus (Mark 12:29) and the apostles repeat this formula in the New Testament (1 Cor. 8:4, 6). And early Christian creeds speak of Christ being one in “substance” or “essence” with God. The Athanasian Creed, reads: “We worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; Neither confounding the Persons; nor divining the Substance (Essence).” So Christianity is a form of monotheism, believing in one and only one God.

The Trinity and complexity. Many Muslims complain that the Christian concept of the Trinity is too complex. They forget, however, that truth is not always simple. As C. S. Lewis aptly puts it, “If Christianity was something we were making up, of course we could make it easier. But it is not. We cannot compete, in simplicity, with people who are inventing religions. How could we? We are dealing with fact. Of course anyone can be simple if he has no facts to bother about” (Lewis, 145). The fact confronting Christians which led to their formulating this complex truth was, of course, the claims and credentials of Jesus of Nazareth to be God. This led them of necessity to posit a plurality within deity and thus the doctrine of the Trinity, since this Jesus was not the same as the one whom he addressed as Father. So Christians believe and Muslims deny that there are three persons in this one God. At this point the problem gets philosophical.

The Neoplatonic concept of unity. At the heart of the Muslim inability to understand the Trinity is the neoplatonic concept of oneness. The second-century a.d. philosopher Plotinus, who heavily influenced the thinking of the middle ages, viewed God (the Ultimate) as the One, an absolute unity in which is no multiplicity at all. This One was so absolutely simple that it could not even know itself, since self-knowledge implies a distinction between knower and known. It was not until it emanated one level down, in the Nous or Mind, that it could reflect back on itself and therefore know itself. For Plotinus, the One itself was beyond knowing, beyond consciousness, and even beyond being. It was so undividedly simple that in itself it had no mind, thoughts, personality, or consciousness. It was void of everything, even being. Thus, it could not be known, except by its effects which, however, did not resemble itself (Plotinus, 1.6; 3.8-9; 5.1, 8; 6.8, 18).

It is not difficult to see strong similarities between the Plotinian and Muslim views of God. Nor is it hard to see the difficulty with this view. It preserves a rigid unity in God at the expense of real personality. It clings to a rigid simplicity by sacrificing relationship. It leaves us with an empty and barren concept of deity. By reducing God to a bare unity, they are left with a barren unity. As Joseph Ratsinger insightfully noted,

The unrelated, unrelatable, absolutely one could not be a person. There is no such thing as a person in the categorical singular. This is already apparent in the words in which the concept of person grew up; the Greek word “prosopon” means literally “(a) look towards”; with the prefix ‘pros’ (toward). It includes the notion of relatedness as an integral part of itself. . . . To this extent the overstepping of the singular is implicit in the concept of person. [Ratsinger, 128-29]

Confusion Regarding the Trinity. Confusing unity with singularity. The Muslim God has unity and singularity. But these are not the same. It is possible to have unity without singularity. For there could be plurality within the unity. Indeed, the Trinity is precisely a plurality of persons within the unity of one essence. Human analogies help to illustrate the point in a superficial way. My mind, my thoughts, and my words have a unity, but they are not a singularity, since they are all different. Likewise, Christ can express the same nature as God without being the same person as the Father.

In this connection, Muslim monotheism sacrifices plurality in an attempt to avoid duality. In avoiding the extreme of admitting any partners to God, Islam goes to the other extreme and denies any personal plurality in God. But, as Joseph Ratsinger observed, “belief in the Trinity, which recognizes the plurality in the unity of God, is the only way to the final elimination of dualism as a means of expanding plurality alongside unity; only through this belief is the positive validation of plurality given a definite base. God stands above singular and plural. He bursts both categories” (Ratsinger, 128).

Confusing person (who) and nature (what). That Christ “bursts the categories” explains why Christian and non-Christian alike, have struggled to understand the two natures of Christ. One of the better explanations of what Christians believe, though it doesn’t go far toward explaining it, is found in one of the sixteenth-century Reformation statements of faith, the Belgic Confession, chapter 19:

We believe that by this conception [of two natures], the person of the Son is inseparably united and connected with the human nature; so that there are not two Sons of God, nor two persons, but two natures united in one single person; yet each nature retains its own distinct properties. As, then, the divine nature has always remained uncreated, without beginning of days or end of life, filling heaven and earth, so also has the human nature not lost its properties but remained a creature, having beginning of days, being a finite nature, and retaining all the properties of a real body . . . . But these two natures are so closely united in one person that they were not separated even by his death. . . . Wherefore we confess that he is very God and very man: very God by His power to conquer death; and very man that He might die for us according to the infirmity of His flesh.

Orthodox Christianity does not believe Jesus Christ was like a milkshake, the two natures blended together in an indistinguishable mass. Neither do Christians believe Jesus had a schizophrenically split identity in which divine and human natures were so distinct they would have had to call one another long-distance. These views and other equally wrong ideas have muddied Christian theology throughout its history. A popular modern theory, which misses the whole point of Philippians 2 and the reason God had to take on a human nature states that Jesus emptied himself of all his divine attributes of power and authority and kept only his moral perfection.

So how is it conceivable? The orthodox view is that God the Son took off nothing of his godhood, but rather added to it the human nature. He accepted limitations. As a human being, Jesus had to grow up and learn. He felt want and sorrow and there were things the human nature of Jesus did not know, such as the date of his return (Matt. 24:36).

One theologian, Charles *Hodge, wondered if God did not draw the clearest analogy of the two natures in the design of Israel’s temple at Jerusalem. The inner court where the daily work of worship and the sacrifice happened was the court of Israel or the holy place. But within this space was another room that represented the presence of God in the midst of his people. This central room, the “holy of holies” was only entered by the high priest once a year. A curtain separated the two sections of the sanctuary so that the room was hidden. But symbolically it empowered the priests in their daily life in temple worship. The two were unmixed but united and inseparable.

The orthodox view of the two natures of Christ is that one person is both God and human. The two natures commune intimately but do not overlap. Christ possesses two natures united. Hence, when Jesus died on the cross for our sin he died as the God-man. It is not going too far, said John Calvin, to say that at the moment Jesus was hanging on the cross his power as Creator God was holding together the hill on which the cross stood. Unless Jesus is God and human he cannot reconcile God and humanity. But the Bible says clearly, “there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” (1 Tim. 2:5). Since Christ is one Who (person) with two Whats (natures), whenever one question is asked about him it must be separated into two questions, one applying to each nature. For example, did he get tired? As God, no; as human, yes. Did Christ get hungry? In his divine nature, no; in his human nature, yes. Did Christ die? In his human nature, he did die. His divine nature is eternally alive. He died as the God-man, but his Godness did not die.

When this same logic is applied to other theological questions raised by Muslims it yields the same kind of answer. Did Jesus know everything? As God he did, since God is omniscient. But as man Jesus did not know the time of his second coming (Matt. 24:36), and as a child he “increased in wisdom” (Luke 2:52). Could Jesus sin? The answer is the same: as God, no; as man yes (but he didn’t). God cannot sin. For example, the Bible says “it is impossible for God to lie” (Heb. 6:18; cf. Titus 1:2). Yet Jesus was “in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin” (Heb. 4:15). While he never sinned (cf. 2 Cor. 5:21; 1 Peter 1:19; 1 John 3:3), he was really tempted and it was possible for him to sin. Otherwise, his temptation would have been a charade. Jesus possessed the power of free choice which means that when he chose not to sin it was a meaningful choice. He could have done otherwise.

Dividing every question of Christ into two and referring them to each nature unlocks a lot of theological puzzles that otherwise remain shrouded in ambiguity. And it makes it possible to avoid logical contradictions which are urged upon Christians by Muslims and by other nonbelievers.

Conclusion. The doctrine of the Trinity is one of the great mysteries of the Christian Faith. That is, it transcends reason without being contrary to reason. It is not known by reason but only by special revelation. God is one in essence but three in persons. He is a plurality within unity. God is a triunity, not a rigid singularity.

Once those conceptions are understood, many of the barriers that separate even such radical monotheists as Orthodox Jews and Muslims fall.

Sources A. Ajijola, The Essence of Faith in Islam Augustine, On the Trinity S. Balic, “The Image of Jesus in Contemporary Islamic Theology,” in A. Shimmel and A. Falaturi, eds., We Believe in One God C. Beisner, God in Three Persons A. Dawud, Muhammad in the Bible J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity A. H. Mahud, The Creed of Islam M. Nazir-Ali, Frontiers in Muslim-Christian Encounter C. G. Pfander, The Mizanu’l Haqq (The Balance of Truth)

Plotinus. The Enneads G. L. Prestige, God in Patristic Thought. J. Ratsinger, Introduction to Christianity, J. R. Foster, trans. A. Shorrosh, Islam Revealed Thomas Aquinas, On the Trinity

(Geisler, Norman L.: Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics. Grand Rapids, Mich. : Baker Books, 1999 (Baker Reference Library), S. 730)

—

Christ, Deity of. from Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics

Central to Christianity is the belief that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, that is, God manifest in human flesh. The evidence for this is as follows: 1. Truth about reality is knowable (see Truth, Nature of; Agnosticism). 2. Opposites cannot both be true (see Pluralism, Religious; Logic). 3. God exists (see God, Evidence for). 4. Miracles are possible (see Miracle). 5. A miracle is an act of God to confirm the truth of God claimed by a messenger of God (see Miracles, Apologetic Value of; Miracles as Confirmation of Truth). 6. The New Testament documents are reliable (see New Testament Documents, Reliability of; New Testament Manuscripts; New Testament, Historicity of). 7. In the New Testament Jesus claimed to be God. 8. Jesus proved to be God by an unprecedented convergence of miracles (see Miracles in the Bible). 9. Therefore, Jesus was God in human flesh.

Since the first six points are treated in the materials noted, this article will stress points five and six.

Jesus’ Claim to Be God. Jesus claimed to be God, both directly and by necessary implication from what he said and did.

Jesus Claimed to Be Yahweh. Yahweh (YHWH; sometimes appearing in English translations as “Jehovah” or in small capital letters as “Lord”) is the special name given by God for himself in the Old Testament. It is the name revealed to Moses in Exodus 3:14, when God said, “I AM WHO I AM.” Other titles for God may be used of humans, such as Adonai (“Lord”) in Gen. 18:12, or false gods, such as elohim (“gods”) in Deut. 6:14. Yahweh, however, only refers to the one true God. No other person or thing was to be worshiped or served (Exod. 20:5), and his name and glory were not to be given to another. Isaiah wrote, “This is what the Lord says. . . . I am the first, and I am the last; apart from me there is no God” (Isa. 44:6) and, “I am the Lord; that is my name! I will not give my glory to another, or my praise to idols” (42:8).

Jesus claimed to be Yahweh. He prayed, “And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was” (John 17:5). But Yahweh of the Old Testament said, “my glory will I not give to another” (Isa. 42:8). Jesus also declared, “I am the first and the last” (Rev. 1:17)-precisely the words used by Jehovah in Isaiah 42:8. He said, “I am the good shepherd” (John 10:11), but the Old Testament said, “Yahweh is my shepherd” (Ps. 23:1). Further, Jesus claimed to be the judge of all people (Matt. 25:31f.; John 5:27f.), but Joel quotes Jehovah as saying, “for there I will sit to judge all the nations on every side” (Joel 3:12). Likewise, Jesus spoke of himself as the “bridegroom” (Matt. 25:1)

while the Old Testament identifies Jehovah in this way (Isa. 62:5; Hos. 2:16). While the Psalmist declares, “The Lord is my light” (Ps. 27:1), Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12).

Perhaps the strongest claim Jesus made to be Yahweh is in John 8:58, where he says, “Before Abraham was, I am.” This statement claims not only existence before Abraham, but equality with the “I AM” of Exodus 3:14. The Jews around him clearly understood his meaning and picked up stones to kill him for blaspheming (cf. John 8:58 and 10:31-33). The same claim is made in Mark 14:62 and John 18:5-6.

Jesus Claimed to Be Equal with God. Jesus claimed to be equal with God in other ways. One was by claiming for himself the prerogatives of God. He said to a paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven” (Mark 2:5-11). The scribes correctly responded, “Who can forgive sins but God alone?” So, to prove that his claim was not an empty boast he healed the man, offering direct proof that what he had said about forgiving sins was true also.

Another prerogative Jesus claimed was the power to raise and judge the dead: “I tell you the truth, a time is coming and has now come when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear will live . . . and come out-those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evil will rise to be condemned” (John 5:25, 29). He removed all doubt about his meaning when he added, “For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it” (John 5:21). But the Old Testament clearly taught that only God was the giver of life (Deut. 32:39; 1 Sam. 2:6) and the one to raise the dead (Ps. 2:7) and the only judge (Deut. 32:35; Joel 3:12). Jesus boldly assumed for himself powers that only God has.

Jesus also claimed that he should be honored as God. He said that all men should “honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father, who sent him” (John 5:23). The Jews listening knew that no one should claim to be equal with God in this way, and again they reached for stones (John 5:18).

Jesus Claimed to Be Messiah-God. Even the Qur’an recognizes that Jesus was the Messiah (sura 5:17, 75). But the Old Testament teaches that the coming Messiah would be God himself. So when Jesus claimed to be that Messiah, he was also claiming to be God. For example, the prophet Isaiah (in 9:6) calls the Messiah, “Mighty God.” The psalmist wrote of Messiah, “Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever” (Ps. 45:6; cf. Heb. 1:8). Psalm 110:1 records a conversation between the Father and the Son: “The Lord (Yahweh)

says to my Lord (Adonai): ‘Sit at my right hand.’ ” Jesus applied this passage to himself in Matthew 22:43-44. In the great messianic prophecy of Daniel 7, the Son of Man is called the “Ancient of Days” (vs. 22), a phrase used twice in the same passage of God the Father (vss. 9, 13). Jesus also said he was the Messiah at his trial before the high priest. When asked, “Are you the Christ [Greek for “Messiah”], the Son of the Blessed One?” Jesus responded, “I am. . . . And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.” At this, the high priest tore his robe and said, “Why do we need any more witnesses? . . . You have heard the blasphemy!” (Mark 14:61-64). There was no doubt that in claiming to be Messiah, Jesus also claimed to be God (see also Matt. 26:54; Luke 24:27).

Jesus Claimed to Be God by Accepting Worship. The Old Testament forbids worshiping anyone other than God (Exod. 20:1-4; Deut. 5:6-9). The New Testament agrees, showing that humans refused worship (Acts 14:15), as did angels (Rev. 22:8-9). But Jesus accepted worship on numerous occasions, showing he claimed to be God. A healed leper worshiped him (Matt. 8:2), and a ruler knelt before him with a request (Matt. 9:18). After he stilled the storm, “those who were in the boat worshiped him saying, ‘Truly you are the Son of God’ ” (Matt. 14:33). A group of Canaanite women (Matt. 15:25), the mother of James and John (Matt. 20:20), the Gerasene demoniac (Mark 5:6), all worshiped Jesus without one word of rebuke. The disciples worshiped him after his resurrection (Matt. 28:17). Thomas saw the risen Christ and cried out, “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:28). This could only be allowed by a person who seriously considered himself to be God. Not only did Jesus accept this worship due to God alone without rebuking those who gave it, but he even commended those who acknowledged his deity (John 20:29; Matt. 16:17).

Jesus Claimed to Have Equal Authority with God. Jesus also put his words on a par with God’s. “You have heard that it was said to the people long ago. . . . But I tell you . . .” (Matt. 5:21, 22) is repeated over and over again. “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations . . .” (Matt. 28:18-19). God had given the Ten Commandments to Moses, but Jesus said, “A new commandment I give you: Love one another” (John 13:34). Jesus said, “until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law” (Matt. 5:18), but later Jesus said of his words, “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away” (Matt. 24:35). Speaking of those who reject him, Jesus said, “that very word which I spoke will condemn him at the last day” (John 12:48). There is no question that Jesus expected his words to have equal authority with God’s declarations in the Old Testament.

Jesus Claimed to Be God by Requesting Prayer in His Name. Jesus not only asked people to believe in him and obey his commandments, but he asked them to pray in his name. “And I will do whatever you ask in my name. . . . You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it” (John 14:13-14). “If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be given you” (John 15:7). Jesus even insisted, “No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6). In response to this, the disciples not only prayed in Jesus’ name (1 Cor. 5:4), but prayed to Christ (Acts 7:59). Jesus certainly intended that his name be invoked both before God and as God in prayer.

In view of these clear ways in which Jesus claimed to be God, any unbiased observer of the Gospels should recognize that Jesus of Nazareth did claim to be God in human flesh. He claimed to be identical to Yahweh of the Old Testament.

Alleged Counter-claims of Christ. In spite of these repeated claims to be God, some critics take certain statements of Jesus as denials of deity. Two such incidents are commonly used: In one, a rich young ruler came to Jesus and addressed him as “Good teacher.” But Jesus rebuked him, saying, “Why do you call me good? No one is good-except God alone” (Mark 10:17-18; see Mark 10:17-27; cf. parallels Matt. 19:16-30; Luke 18:18-30).

Notice, however, that Jesus did not deny that he was God; he asked the young man to examine the implications of what he said. Jesus was saying, “Do you realize what you are saying when you call me good? Are you really saying that I am God?” Of course, the man did not realize the implications of either his statements or what the law was really saying, so Jesus was forcing him into a very uncomfortable dilemma. Either Jesus was good and God, or he was evil and human, for each human is evil and does not deserve eternal life.

The second supposed counter-example is found in John 14:28, where Jesus said, “My Father is greater than I.” How can the Father be greater if Jesus is equal to God? The answer is that, as a man, Jesus subordinated himself to the Father and accepted limitations inherent with humanity. So, as man the Father was greater. Further, in the economy of salvation, the Father holds a higher office than does the Son. Jesus proceeded from the Father as a prophet who brought God’s words and a high priest who interceded for his people. In nature of being as God, Jesus and the Father are equals (John 1:1; 8:58; 10:30). An earthly father is equally human with his son, but holds a higher office. So the Father and Son in the Trinity are equal in essence but different in function. In like manner, we speak of the president of a nation as being greater in dignity of office, but not in character.

Jesus cannot be said to have considered himself less than God by nature. This summary helps us understand the differences:

Jesus and the Father as God Jesus Is Equal Jesus Is Subordinate in his divine nature in his human nature in his divine essence in his human function in his divine attributes in his human office in his divine character in his human position

Jesus’ Claim to Be God. In addition to Jesus’ claim about himself, his disciples also acknowledged his claim to deity. This they manifested in many ways, including the following:

Disciples Attributed the Titles of Deity to Christ. In agreement with their Master, Jesus’ Apostles called him “the first and the last” (Rev. 1:17; 2:8; 22:13), “the true light” (John 1:9), their “rock” or “stone” (1 Cor. 10:4; 1 Peter 2:6-8; cf. Pss. 18:2; 95:1), the “bridegroom” (Eph. 5:28-33; Rev. 21:2), “the chief shepherd” (1 Peter 5:4), and “the great shepherd” (Heb. 13:20). The Old Testament role of “redeemer” (Ps. 130:7; Hos. 13:14) is given to Jesus in the New Testament (Titus 2:13; Rev. 5:9). He is seen as the forgiver of sins (Acts 5:31; Col. 3:13; cf. Ps. 130:4; Jer. 31:34) and “savior of the world” (John 4:42; cf. Isa. 43:3). The apostles also taught of him, “Christ Jesus, who will judge the living and the dead” (2 Tim. 4:1). All of these titles are unique to Jehovah in the Old Testament but are given to Jesus in the New.

Disciples Considered Jesus the Messiah-God. The New Testament opens with a passage concluding that Jesus is Immanuel (God with us), which refers to the messianic prediction of Isaiah 7:14. The very title “Christ” carries the same meaning as the Hebrew appellation Messiah (“anointed”). In Zechariah 12:10, Jehovah says, “They will look on me, the one they have pierced.” But the New Testament writers apply this passage to Jesus’ crucifixion (John 19:37; Rev. 1:7). Paul interprets Isaiah 45:22-23 (“For I am God, and there is no other. . . . Before me every knee will bow; by me every tongue will swear”) as applying to Jesus: “At the name of Jesus every knee should bow . . . and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father” (Phil. 2:10-11). Paul says that all created beings will call Jesus both Messiah (Christ) and Yahweh (Lord).

Disciples Attributed the Powers of God to Jesus. Works and authority that are God’s alone are attributed to Jesus by his disciples. He is said to raise the dead (John 5:21; 11:38-44) and to forgive sins (Acts 5:31; 13:38). He is said to have been the primary agent in creating (John 1:2; Col. 1:16)

and sustaining (Col. 1:17) the universe.

Disciples Associated Jesus’ Name with God’s. His followers used Jesus’ name as the agent for answering and the recipient of prayer (Acts 7:59; 1 Cor. 5:4). Often in prayers or benedictions, Jesus’ name is used alongside God’s, as in, “Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” (Gal. 1:3; Eph. 1:2). The name of Jesus appears with equal status to God’s in the so-called trinitarian formulas: Jesus commanded to baptize “in the name [singular] of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matt. 28:19). This association is made at the end of 2 Corinthians (13:14): “May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.”

Disciples Called Jesus God. Thomas saw Jesus’ wounds and cried, “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:28). Paul calls Jesus the one in whom “all the fullness of Deity lives in bodily form” (Col. 2:9). In Titus, Jesus is “our great God and Savior” (2:13), and the writer to the Hebrews says of him, “Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever” (Heb. 1:8). Paul says that before Christ existed in the form of man, which clearly refers to being really human, he existed in the “form of God” (Phil. 2:5-8). The parallel phrases suggest that if Jesus was fully human, then he was also fully God. A similar phrase, “the image of God,” refers in Colossians 1:15 to the manifestation of God. This description is strengthened in Hebrews where it says, “The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word” (1:3).

The prologue to John’s Gospel states categorically, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word [Jesus] was God” (John 1:1). Disciples Considered Jesus Superior to Angels. The disciples did not simply believe that Christ was more than a man; they believed him to be greater than any created being, including angels. Paul says Jesus is “far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every title that can be given, not only in the present age but also in the one to come” (Eph. 1:21). The demons submitted to his command (Matt. 8:32). Angels that refused the worship of humans are seen worshiping him (Rev. 22:8-9). The author of Hebrews presents a complete argument for Christ’s superiority over angels, saying, “For to which of the angels did God ever say, ‘You are my Son; today I have become your Father’? . . . And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says, ‘Let all God’s angels worship him’ ” (Heb. 1:5-6).

Disciples’ Alleged Counter-claims to Jesus’ Deity. Critics offer texts to argue that Jesus’ disciples did not believe he was God. They need to be briefly examined in context. Jehovah’s Witnesses use John 1:1 to show that Jesus was “a god,” not “the God,” because no definite article the appears in the Greek. This misunderstands both the language and the verse. In Greek, the definite article is normally used to stress “the individual,” and when it is not present the reference is to “the nature” of the one denoted. Thus, the verse can be rendered, “And the Word was of the nature of God.” In the context of the following verses and the rest of John (for example, 1:3; 8:58; 10:30; 20:28) it is impossible that John 1:1 suggests that Jesus is anything less than divine. The rest of the New Testament joins John in forthrightly proclaiming that Jesus is God (for example, in Colossians 1:15-16 and Titus 2:13).

Further, some New Testament texts use the definite article and clearly refer to Christ as “the God.” It does not matter whether John used the definite article in 1:1. He and other writers of Scripture considered Jesus as God, not “a god” (see Heb. 1:8).

Critics also use Colossians 1:15, where Paul classifies Christ as “firstborn of all creation.” This seems to imply that Christ is a creature, the first creature as the universe was made. This interpretation likewise is contrary to the context, for Paul in Colossians 1:16 has just said that Christ “created all things” and he is about to say that “the fullness of the Godhead” is in him (2:9). The term firstborn frequently refers to a position of preeminence in the family which it clearly does in this context (cf. 1:18). Christ is heir of all things, creator and owner. He is before all things.

The same applies to Revelation 3:14, another verse used to deny Christ’s deity. John refers to Christ as the “beginning of the creation of God.” This sounds as if Christ was the first created being. Here, though, the meaning is that Christ is the Beginner of God’s creation, not the beginning in God’s creation. The same Greek word for beginning is used of God the Father in Revelation 21:6-7: “It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To him who is thirsty I will give to drink without cost from the spring of the water of life. He who overcomes will inherit all this, and I will be his God and he will be my son.”

Force of the Testimony. There is manifold testimony from Jesus and from those who knew him best that Jesus claimed to be God and that his followers believed that he was. Whether this was the case, there can be no doubt that this is what they believed. As C. S. Lewis observed, when confronted with the boldness of Christ’s claims, we are faced with distinct alternatives.

I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish things that people often say about Him: “I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept His claim to be God.” That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would rather be a lunatic-on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg-or else he would be the Devil of Hell. [Lewis, 55-56]

Evidence That Jesus Is God. To say that Jesus and his disciples claimed that he was God in human flesh does not in itself prove that he is God. The real question is whether there is any good reason to believe the claims. To support his claims to deity, Jesus showed supernatural power and authority that is unique in human history.

Fulfilled Messianic Prophecies. There were dozens of predictive prophecies in the Old Testament regarding the Messiah (see Prophecy as Proof for Bible). Consider the following predictions, made centuries in advance, that Jesus would be:

1. born of a woman (Gen. 3:15; cf. Gal. 4:4). 2. born of a virgin (Isa 7:14; cf. Matt. 1:21f.) (see Virgin Birth). 3. cut off (would die) 483 years after the declaration to reconstruct the temple in 444 b.c. (Dan. 9:24f.; this was fulfilled to the year. See Hoehner, 115-38). 4. The seed of Abraham (Gen. 12:1-3 and 22:18; cf. Matt. 1:1 and Gal. 3:16). 5. of the tribe of Judah (Gen. 49:10; cf. Luke 3:23, 33 and Heb. 7:14). 6. a descendant of David (2 Sam. 7:12f.; cf. Matt. 1:1). 7. born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2; cf. Matt. 2:1 and Luke 2:4-7). 8. anointed by the Holy Spirit (Isa. 11:2; cf. Matt. 3:16-17). 9. heralded by a messenger (Isa. 40:3 and Mal. 3:1; cf. Matt. 3:1-2). 10. a worker of miracles (Isa. 35:5-6; cf. Matt. 9:35; see Miracles in the Bible). 11. cleanser of the temple (Mal. 3:1; cf. Matt. 21:12f.). 12. rejected by Jews (Ps. 118:22; cf. 1 Peter 2:7). 13. die a humiliating death (Ps. 22 and Isa. 53; cf. Matt. 27:31f.). His death would involve: enduring rejection by his own people (Isa. 53:3; cf. John 1:10-11; 7:5, 48). standing silence before his accusers (Isa. 53:7; cf. Matt. 27:12-19). being mocked (Ps. 22:7-8; cf. Matt. 27:31). having hands and feet pierced (Ps. 22:16; cf. Luke 23:33). being crucified with thieves (Isa. 53:12; cf. Mark 15:27-28). praying for his persecutors (Isa. 53:12; cf. Luke 23:34). the piercing of his side (Zech. 12:10; cf. John 19:34). burial in a rich man’s tomb (Isa. 53:9; cf. Matt. 27:57-60). the casting of lots for his garments (Ps. 22:18; cf. John 19:23-24). 14. being raised from the dead (Ps. 2:7 and 16:10; cf. Acts 2:31 and Mark 16:6). 15. ascending into heaven (Ps. 68:18; cf. Acts 1:9). 16. sitting at the right hand of God (Ps. 110:1; cf. Heb. 1:3).

These prophecies were written hundreds of years before Christ was born. They are too precise to have been based on reading trends of the times or just intelligent guesses, like “prophecies” in a supermarket tabloid.

They are also more precise than the so-called prophecies of Muhammad in the Qur’an (see Qur’an Alleged Divine Origin of). Even the most liberal critics admit that the prophetic books were completed at least 400 years before Christ and the Book of Daniel no later than 165 b.c (see Daniel, Dating of). There is good evidence to date these books much earlier (some Psalms and early prophets to the eighth and ninth centuries b.c.). But any reasonable dating places these writings long before Jesus lived. It is humanly impossible to make clear, repeated and accurate predictions 200 years in the future. The fulfillment of these prophecies in a theistic universe is miraculous and points to a divine confirmation of Jesus as the Messiah.

Some have suggested that there is a natural explanation for what only seem to be supernatural predictions here. One explanation is that the prophecies were accidentally fulfilled in Jesus. He happened to be in the right place at the right time. But what are we to say about the prophecies involving miracles? “He just happened to make the blind man see?” “He just happened to be resurrected from the dead?” These hardly seem to be chance events. If a God is in control of the universe, then chance is ruled out. Further, it is unlikely that these events would have converged in the life of one man. The probability of sixteen predictions being fulfilled in one man has been calculated at 1 in 1045. If we go to forty-eight predictions, the probability is 1 in 10157. It is almost impossible to conceive of a number that big (Stoner, 108).

But it is not just a logical improbability that rules out this theory; it is the moral implausibility of an all-powerful and all-knowing God letting things get out of control so that all his plans for prophetic fulfillment are ruined by someone who just happened to be in the right place at the right time. God cannot lie, nor can he break a promise (Heb. 6:18). So we must conclude that he did not allow his prophetic promises to be thwarted by chance. All the evidence points to Jesus as the divinely appointed fulfillment of the messianic prophecies. He was God’s man, confirmed by God’s signs. If God made the predictions to be fulfilled in the life of Christ, he would not allow them to be fulfilled in the life of any other. The God of truth would not allow a lie to be confirmed as true (see Miracles as Confirmation of Truth). A Miraculous and Sinless Life. The very nature of Christ’s life demonstrates his claim to deity. To live a truly sinless life would be a momentous accomplishment, but to claim to be God and offer a sinless life as evidence is another matter. Muhammad did not (see Muhammad, Character of). Nor did Buddha nor any other religious leader (see Christ, Uniqueness of). Some of Jesus’ enemies brought false accusations against him, but the verdict of Pilate at his trial has been the verdict of history: “I find no basis for a charge against this man” (Luke 23:4). A soldier at the cross agreed, saying, “Surely this was a righteous man” (Luke 23:47), and the thief on the cross next to Jesus said, “this man has done nothing wrong” (Luke 23:41). But the real test is what those who were closest to Jesus said of his character. His disciples had lived and worked with him for three years at close range, yet their opinions of him were not diminished. Peter called Christ, “a lamb without blemish or defect” (1 Peter 1:19) and added, “no deceit was found in his mouth” (2:22). John called him, “Jesus Christ, the Righteous One” (1 John 2:1; cf. 3:7). Paul expressed the unanimous belief of the early church that Christ “had no sin” (2 Cor. 5:21), and the writer of Hebrews says that he was tempted as a man, “yet was without sin” (4:15). Jesus himself once challenged his accusers, “Can any of you prove me guilty of sin?” (John 8:46), but no one was able to find him guilty of anything. He forbid retaliation (Matt. 5:38-42). Unlike Muhammad, he never used the sword to spread his message (Matt. 26:52). This being the case, the impeccable character of Christ gives a double testimony to the truth of his claim. It provides supporting evidence as he suggested, but it also assures us that he was not lying when he said that he was God.

Beyond the moral aspects of his life, the miraculous nature of his ministry is a divine confirmation. Jesus performed an unprecedented display of miracles. He turned water to wine (John 2:7f.), walked on water (Matt. 14:25), multiplied bread (John 6:11f.), opened the eyes of the blind (John 9:7f.), made the lame to walk (Mark 2:3f.), cast out demons (Mark 3:11f.), healed the multitudes of all kinds of sickness (Matt. 9:35), including leprosy (Mark 1:40-42), and even raised the dead to life on several occasions (John 11:43-44; Luke 7:11-15; Mark 5:35f.). When asked if he was the Messiah, he used his miracles as evidence to support the claim saying, “Go back and report to John what you hear and see: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cured, the deaf hear, the dead are raised” (Matt. 11:4-5). This special outpouring of miracles was a special sign that Messiah had come (see Isa. 35:5-6). The Jewish leader Nicodemus even said, “Rabbi, we know you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the miraculous signs you are doing if God were not with him” (John 3:2). To a first-century Jew, miracles such as Christ performed were clear indications of God’s approval of the performer’s message (see Miracles as Confirmation of Truth). But in Jesus’ case, part of that message was that he was God in human flesh. Thus, his miracles verify his claim to be true deity.

The Resurrection. Nothing like the resurrection of Christ is claimed by any other religion, and no other miracle has as much historical confirmation. Jesus Christ rose from the dead on the third day in the same physical body, though transformed, in which he died. In this resurrected physical body he appeared to more than 500 disciples on at least one of twelve different occasions over a forty-day period and conversed with them (Acts 1:3; 1 Cor. 15:3-6; see Resurrection, Order of Events). The nature, extent, and times of, these appearances remove any doubt that Jesus indeed rose from the dead in the numerically same body of flesh and bones in which he died. During each appearance he was seen and heard with the natural senses of the observer. On at least four occasions he was touched or offered himself to be touched. At least twice he definitely was touched with physical hands. Four times Jesus ate physical food with his disciples. Four times they saw his empty tomb, and twice he showed them his crucifixion scars. He literally exhausted the ways it is possible to prove that he rose bodily from the grave. No event in the ancient world has more eyewitness verification than does the resurrection of Jesus (see Resurrection, Evidence for).

What is more amazing about the resurrection is the fact that both the Old Testament and Jesus predicted that he would rise from the dead. This highlights the evidential value of the resurrection of Christ in a unique way.

Old Testament prediction of the resurrection. Jewish prophets predicted the resurrection in specific statements and by logical deduction. The apostles applied specific Old Testament texts to the resurrection of Christ (Ps. 2:7; cf. Heb. 1:5 and Acts 13:33). Peter says that, since we know that David died and was buried, he must have been speaking of the Christ when he said, “you will not abandon me to the grave, nor will you let your Holy One see decay” (Ps. 16:8-11, quoted in Acts 2:25-31). No doubt Paul used this and similar passages in the Jewish synagogues when “he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and proving that the Christ had to suffer and rise from the dead” (Acts 17:2-3).

Also, the Old Testament teaches the resurrection by logical deduction. There is clear teaching that the Messiah was to die (cf. Ps. 22; Isa. 53) and equally evident teaching that he is to have an enduring political reign from Jerusalem (Isa. 9:6; Dan. 2:44; Zech. 13:1). There is no viable way to reconcile these two teachings unless the Messiah who dies is raised from the dead to reign forever. There is no indication in the Old Testament of two Messiahs, one suffering and one reigning, as some Jewish scholars have suggested. References to the Messiah are always in the singular (cf. Isa. 9:6; 53:1f.; Dan. 9:26). No second Messiah is ever designated.

Yet Jesus had begun no reign when he died. Only by his resurrection could the prophecies of a Messianic kingdom be fulfilled.

Jesus’ prediction of his resurrection. On several occasions Jesus also predicted his resurrection from the dead. In the earliest part of his ministry, he said, “Destroy this temple, [of my body] and I will raise it again in three days” (John 2:19, 21). In Matthew 12:40, he said, “as Jonah was three days and nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and nights in the heart of the earth.” To those who had seen his miracles and stubbornly would not believe, he said, “A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a miraculous sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah” (Matt. 12:39; 16:4). After Peter’s confession, “he then began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things . . . and that he must be killed and after three days rise again” (Mark 8:31). This became a central part of his teaching from that point until his death (Matt. 27:63; Mark 14:59). Further, Jesus taught that he would raise himself from the dead, saying of his life, “I have authority to lay it down and I have authority to take it up again” (John 10:18).

Philosopher of science Karl Popper argued that, whenever a “risky prediction” is fulfilled, it counts as confirmation of the theory that predicted it. If so, then the fulfillment of Jesus’ prediction of his own resurrection is confirmation of his claim to be God. For what could be riskier than predicting your own resurrection? If a person will not accept these lines of evidence as support of Christ’s truth claim, then he has a bias that will not accept anything as evidence.

Summary. Jesus claimed to be God and proved it by a convergence of three unprecedented sets of miracles: fulfilled prophecy, a miraculous life, and his resurrection from the dead. This unique convergence of supernatural events confirms his claims to be God in human flesh. It also answers David Hume’s objection that, since all miracles have similar claims, their proof claims are mutually canceling. Not all religions have like miracle claims. Only in Christianity does its leader claim to prove to be God by a convergence of unique supernatural events such as Jesus offered (see Christ, Uniqueness of). Hence, only Christ is miraculously confirmed to be God and, by virtue of that, to be believed in whatever he teaches as true.

Sources F. F. Bruce, and W. J. Martin, “Two Laymen on Christ’s Deity,” CT J. Buell, et al., Jesus: God, Ghost or Guru? N. L. Geisler, Christian Apologetics — and A. Saleeb, Answering Islam C. Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 1, chapter 8 H. W. Hoehner, Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity J. McDowell and B. Larson, Jesus: A Biblical Defense of His Deity R. Rhoads, Christ Before the Manger P. W. Stoner, Science Speaks B. . Warfield, The Person and Work of Christ CT Christianity Today

(Geisler, Norman L.: Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics. Grand Rapids, Mich. : Baker Books, 1999 (Baker Reference Library), S. 129)