|
[MORMONISM. The Faith of the Twenty-first Century. Volume 1. Edward K. Watson. (Liahona Publications. Copyright © 1998 Edward K. Watson.) p. 244. MORMONISM: Section 2, Part 2, Introduction. All rights reserved.]
PART TWO: IS JESUS “GOD”?
The word “God” usually refers to God the Father, or Heavenly Father. He's the Father and God Jesus worshiped. Jesus is frequently contrasted with “God” which shows they are separate persons and this is how they are viewed by the biblical writers. This study isn't an attempt to combine “God” (Heavenly Father) and Jesus into the same being since they are clearly separate but is focused on the status and nature o f Jesus Christ. Is his nature/being/essence/make up “God”? We know he was `True Man' but the question is: “Is Jesus `True God' as well?”1
I use the word “God” in this work in reference to Jesus Christ as a status and nature, not as a person, just as “ Adam” [“the man”] can be used as either a status and nature which encompasses both male and female genders (human/Homo Sapiens-Gen 5:2; 1:26-27; 2:5,7; 3:22,24) or a person (our primordial male ancestor).2
The Bible is very clear that Jesus is the Son of God and is separate from the being known as “God.” He viewed his Father to be “God.”
Does this distinction and separateness mean Jesus wasn't “God”? No it doesn't. It merely shows Jesus is not the being/person known as “God” [i.e., Heavenly Father]. It doesn't deny his having the “God” nature just like he has the “Man” nature (Jesus belongs to both the “God” species and the Homo Sapiens species).
Who is Jesus? According to the NT, he is “God” and the “Son of God.”
Jesus is “God” by having the “God” nature just as I am a “Man” by having the “Man” nature, a Dalmatian is a “Dog” by having the “Dog” nature, and so forth. The singular “God” is due to his unity, interpenetration and equality with the Father. This is why we refer to him as “God” instead of “a God” (never “a god” [i.e., an inferior being to the Father]) since the focus is on his having the “God” nature, not on what kind of nature he has because the usage of “a God” may imply inferiority or a different nature than the Father.
Jesus is both “God” (nature) and the “Son of God” (Son of the person known as “God”). His possession of the “God” nature enables him to be addressed or referred to as “God” just as my possession of the “Man” nature enables me to by known and addressed as “Man” or a Golden Delicious can be referred to as “Apple,” etc. by those outside such species/natures.
Insisting Jesus is the “Son of God” but not “God” contradicts what is clearly taught in the NT. Insisting he is “God” but not the “Son of God” contradicts the Scriptures as well.
[ENDNOTES]:
1.TCERK. p. 159 “No book of the New Testament is satisfied to present Jesus merely as a great teacher, noble example, or powerful personality. Every book presents Him as the risen Christ who is the living Lord of His church.”
2.NIDB. p. 15.
|