BACK
ourselves and did not have an existence except in God’s mind before He was born into this world. Certainly Christ was God’s elect (chosen) and this must not be lost sight of (Isaiah 42:1; Matthew 12:18). However, he existed as a person distinct from God before He was born (John 1:1 and John 17:4-5). A son in any case is a person distinct from his father. It is necessary to see this, for He needed to be personally distinct from God in order to be able to offer Himself to God (Ephesians 5:2; Hebrews 9:14). God offering Himself to Himself would have been no offering. The sin-bearer had to be one distinct from God, the one sinned against (1 John 2:2 and 4:10). A mediator must be personally distinct from those between whom He stands as mediator (1 Timothy 2:5). At the same time the one who is offered must be perfect and one who did not have the nature of God absolutely would not be perfect, hence Scripture says the Word was God (John 1:1). To say John 1:1 means that God in both expressions is the same person would make the passage neutralise itself - God being with God is a meaningless statement.

Christ’s existence was a hidden one before He came into this world. God had Him in reserve. He subsisted in the form of God. We cannot conceive the form of God, much less what is in it. When we speak of God we must include in our minds his Spirit and his Word. Each have their own peculiar distinction; they are not just persons identical to God the Father. They have their own glories as do the physical heavenly bodies (1 Corinthians 15:40-41). The so-called Athanasian creed goes wrong, making the Father, Son and Spirit identical persons.

It is significant that Scripture never uses the term God the Son which is often used in Christendom, particularly by those who hold creeds considered orthodox. It is difficult to see that if Christ is God the Son that one should not also speak of Him as God junior, after all, to use my own name Simmonds, one of my own sons has quite often said to me on the phone “Simmonds junior here” implying that I am Simmonds senior. However I have no doubt Christians would refuse these terms as unscriptural and lacking in reverence. However, they seem quite happy to use the term God the Son, but this is, I have no doubt, because they think of Christ not as a Son of God in any real sense, but simply as the name of the second

NEXT