Did Jesus Christ preexist His human existence? If so, was He a created being, perhaps an archangel, as many claim? Or was he truly God?

        As we have seen, from the early centuries of Christian history to the present, the question of who is Jesus has produced many differing views as to the Person and nature of the Son of God. Some claim that He was, in His preexistent state, as an archangel, a created being, while others claim that He "preexisted" only as a thought in the mind of God. Others accept His divinity, but claim that His human existence was not truly human—that He had the appearance of a man, but was not only truly man. And still others claim that the Father and the Son are two manifestations, modes, or roles of the one Person known as God.

       Obviously, if Jesus Christ preexisted His human conception, if He was indeed God, though distinct from the Father, and if He came to this earth as truly flesh-and-blood human being, then all the Christological concepts that deny Him divinity and prehuman existence are heretical and must be declared as such! Clearly, then, we should approach this subject prayerfully and with a spirit of deep respect for the revealed Word of God.

        Before we examine the question of Christ's preexistence, it is necessary that we first determine whether scriptural descriptions of God allow more than one Person in the Godhead. Scripture clearly teaches that "The LORD our God is one LORD" (Deuteronomy 6:4; cf. Mark 12:29). But does this mean that the one God is only one Person?

       Let's begin with the Hebrew word translated "God" in the Old Testament.

Elohim

       "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" (Genesis 1:1). The word translated "God" in this verse is the Hebrew Elohim. It is a plural noun, and is used both of the true God and of false "gods." In Exodus 20, the word is used in both senses: "And God [Elohim] spake all these words, saying, I am the LORD the God [Elohim]... Thou shalt have no other gods [elohim] before me" (verse 1-3).

       While the word is often used of multiple "gods," it is sometimes used in reference to a single "god." For instances, "Chemosh" was a "god [elohim] of the Moabites," and "Milcom" was the "god [elohim] of the children of Ammon" (I Kings 11:33). Thus, the word, though plural, does not necessary denote a plurality of persons.

       According to Smith, "The fanciful idea that it [the word Elohim] referred to the trinity [or plurality] of persons in the Godhead hardly finds now a supporter among scholars. It is either what grammarians call the plurality of majesty, or it denotes the fullness of divine strength, the sum of the powers displayed by God" (William Smith, L.L.D., A Dictionary of the Bible, p.220).

       It is true that the word itself does not prove a plurality of Persons in the Godhead, but the fact that the word is plural at least allows for the possibility that the one God is more than one Person. Therefore, to find evidence for a plurality of Persons in the Godhead, we must look for other clues.

       One such clue is found in the use of plural verbs. Unitarians argue that since Elohim (when used in reference to the one true God) is followed by a singular verb, the word cannot refer to plurality of Persons. However, this argument overlooks the that Elohim is sometimes followed by a plural verb, thus indicating that the noun (Elohim) is to be understood in the plural sense. While such cases do not necessarily demand that "God" be understood as a plurality of Persons, the Hebrew construction does allow for the possibility.

       Another, more powerful, clue is found in the use of plural pronouns. In Genesis 1:26, God (Elohim) says, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness..." In Genesis 3:22, God (Elohim) says, "Behold, the man become as one of us..." And in Genesis 11:7, God (Elohim) says, "Go to, let us go down..."

       The fact that both singular and plural verbs and pronouns are used with the plural Elohim is not a contradiction, as some suppose; rather, it suggest (or allows for) plurality in unity—that is, one God but more than one Person. This "plurality in unity" is suggested in Isaiah 6:8, where God says, "Whom shall I [note the singular pronoun] send, and who will go for us [plural]?" This verse allows for the possibility that one Person is speaking for Himself and on behalf of at least one other Person.

       While Unitarians attempt to "explain" their way around the above verses, anyone should be able to see that the use of plurals certainly presents a strong case for the plurality of Persons in the Godhead.

       Another clue lies in understanding the meaning of the word translated "one" in Deuteronomy 6:4. Interestingly, this verse (known as the Shema) is used more than any other verse to "prove" that God is one Person. The verse states, "Hear O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD." In Hebrew, the word for "one" is echad, which is often used as a compound "one" rather than an absolute "one." The two persons, Adam and Eve, were to come as "one [echad] flesh" (Genesis 2:24). In this case, one plus one equals one. The Shema, then, does not prove that God is one Person. The Hebrew terms (Elohim and echad) allow more that one Person while confirming that God is one—just Adam and Eve, though distinct, were "one flesh."

       Apparently, those who reject the belief that God is more than one Person do so because, to them, the concept smacks of Polytheism, or belief in many "gods." But if we understand "one" in the sense of composite unity, then we can easily see how the one God can be more than one Person.

       With that understanding that the Hebrew term "God" is plural, that the term is sometimes used with plural verbs and plural pronouns, and that the word for "one" in the Shema is often used as a compound "one," Person—just as we have no difficulty in understanding that Adam (translated "man" in Genesis 1:26,27) is more than one person.

       Notice again the first part of Genesis 1:26: "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness..." In view of all that we have seen, the most logical explanation of this verse is that one divine Person was speaking to at least one other Person of like nature.

       With this foundation, let's now go to the New Testament for further revelation.

The Logos

       The apostle John wrote: "In the beginning was the Word [Greek: Logos], and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him; and without Him was not any thing that was made... And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us (and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth" (John 1:1-3,14).

       Notice, the Logos, or "Word," was made flesh. Clearly, the Logos is Jesus Christ. Note also that in the beginning the Logos was with God and was God—that is, Jesus Christ was not only with God the Father in the beginning, He was God! Further, all things were made by (or through) Him, meaning that both the Father and the Son, were involved in creation. This agrees perfectly with Genesis 1:26: "And God [Elohim, plural] said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness..."

       Here we see "plurality in unity" in very simple, easy to understand language. However, the modern counterparts of Arius and Socinus have found ways to strip this simple passage of its obvious meaning. Some, for instance, claim that John 1:1 should read this way: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god." Thus, the Word was not God in the absolute sense, but was "a god," or "mighty one," just as an angel is a "mighty one."

       Others claim the second "God" should be rendered "divine," thus taking away any suggestion of Personhood. They read the latter part of John 1:1 this way: "...and the Word was with God, and the Word was divine." The "Word," they claim, refers to the expression of God's divine will. It is the spoken Word, not the speaking Word.

       However, these interpretations are an unfortunate attempt to make John 1:1 say something other than what it clearly says.

       First, the Greek Term for the second "God" is Theos. This word means "God," not "divine." Had John intended to say that the "Word was divine," he would have used a Greek term that means "divine"—and there is such a term.

       Second, verse 3 clearly identifies the Word as the One through whom all things are made. This verse makes no sense if the Word is viewed as an impersonal "divine principle," or as the "divine will of God" expressed through His creative acts.

       Those who hold the "a god" theory agree that the Word is a Person but claim that since the definite article (in the Greek) appears before the first "God" but not before the second "God," the latter should be understood not as the God, but as a "god" (the lower-case g suggests an inferior god). Unfortunately, those who hold this view disregard the best of Greek scholarship, which insists that such a translation is a linguistic atrocity.

       In the latter clause of John 1:1, the subject is "the Word," the verb is "was," and the definite predicate nominative is "God." Had John inserted the definite article before "God," he would have created a confusing and grammatically incorrect construction. No Greek scholar worth his salt accepts the "a god" theory.

       The "a god" proponents also disregard the fact that the word "God" (Greek: Theos) appears without the definite article throughout the New Testament. One example of this appears within a few verses of John 1:1. Verse 6 reads: "There was a man sent from God [Theos, without the definite article], whose name was John." Here, the word "god" refers to the God, though the definite article does not appear. It makes no sense to say that John was "a man sent from a god." And neither does it make sense to say that the Word was anything less than God! "The Word was with God, and the Word was God"—truly God!—though clearly distinct from the One He was with in the beginning.

       Moreover, the idea that Jesus Christ was an archangel (a modern form of Arianism) in His preexistent state clearly contradicts the teaching of the New Testament. The writer of the book of Hebrews asks: "For unto which angels said He [God the Father] at any time, Thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?" (Hebrews 1:5). The point is that God never said this things to any angels, including archangels. Therefore, Christ is not, and never was, an angel.

       The word angel means "messenger." In the sense that Christ was sent as the Father's Messenger, He was an Angel. But the writer of Hebrews, when distinguishing Christ from the angels, is clearly speaking of created angels.

       The writer of Hebrews further states: "But to which of the angels said He at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I mike thine enemies thy footstool? Are they [the angels, including archangels] not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?" (Hebrews 1:13,14). Again, had Christ been an angel—archangel or otherwise—in His preexistent state, the writer of Hebrews could have never made these statements.

       In spite of clear evidence to the contrary, Unitarians claim that the Greek word logos suggest "divine principle," and should not be understood as "spokesman." They point out that in various ancient Greek writings this word is used in reference to "wisdom" or "logic," and claim that John's use of Logos should be understood similarly. When John spoke of the Logos being "made flesh," then, he was merely speaking of the manifestation of the wisdom of God. In other words, until His birth, Christ was nothing more than a "divine thought" in the mind of God.

       No doubt, John fully intended to convey to his Greek readers the thought of divine wisdom, but Unitarians tend to overlook John's Jewish background and the fact that many of his readers were Jewish. Are we to conclude that his use of the word Logos had little meaning for his Jewish readers?

       The truth is, any Jew of John's time would have immediately understood the Logos of God to be the "Spokesman" of God. According to the Encyclopedia Judiaca, certain rabbinic writings that date later than John's Gospel "understand logos as a second god... Among the rabbis a belief in a 'second God,' or divine intermediary, is represented in the heretical views of Elisha B. Avuyah... His views seems related to the speculations about the Creation, in which the voice, or Word, of the Lord on the waters (Ps. 29:3 and Gen. 1) and at the revelation of Sinai (Ex. 20) are hypostatized" (Volume 11, p. 462).

       Though the rabbinic concept of "logos" as "a second god," or "divine intermediary [Spokesman]" post-date John's Gospel, its appearance in rabbinic writings, without Christian influence, suggest that the concept originated much earlier. At least, it shows that, in Jewish thought, the term Logos can and does connote "Spokesman."

       Further, John was familiar with the ancient custom of a king's use of a spokesman (an "interpreter," or logos) who exercised the judicial authority of the king when petitioners sought audience with the monarch. The king's throne was inaccessible to the public, so the spokesman served as the king's visible representative. In the same way, when the Logos "was made flesh," He served as the Father's visible representative. "He that hath seen me," Jesus said, "hath seen the Father" (John 14:9).

       In addition, had John written in Aramaic, a language commonly used by the Jews of his time, he would have used the word Memra, the Aramaic equivalent of Logos, which was often viewed as a messenger, or spokesman, sent form God. Those who claim that Logos cannot mean "Spokesman" are wrong! It can, and does. Thus, in the beginning the Spokesman was with God, and the Spokesman was God, not an angelic intermediary or "divine principle."

       The Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Like) emphasize the humanity of Christ and provide important clues as to His preexistent state, but John's Gospel goes beyond the Synoptics in emphasizing both the divinity and preexistence of Christ, as well as His humanity.

       Let's see what John said about the preexistence and deity of Jesus Christ.

The Preexistence and Deity of Christ in John's Gospel

       John's purpose for writing his Gospel is found in John 20:31: "But these were written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through His name."

       Notice that John wanted his readers to know that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Just as "son of man" refers to a human being, or one whose essential nature is like that of his father, "Son of God" (when used of Christ) refers to the One whose essential nature is like that of His Father. The son of a human being is human, and the Son of God is God. That is what John meant when he spoke of the Son of God, and that is precisely what he wanted his readers to understand.

       It should be pointed out, however, that to the first-century Jew, the phrase "son of God" did not denote divinity. It was generally used of an angel or of a righteous man. It was used by the Messiah, whose appearance the Jews of that period expected. However, John's concept of "Messiah" was not identical to the traditional Jewish concept. He had been taught by the Messiah Himself, and understood that "Son of God" means more than "angelic messenger" or "righteous man."

       Since much of the New Testament was written in response to heresies or problems within the church, it is probable that John wrote in order to combat certain heresies that were gaining a foothold within Christianity. Scholars generally agree that John wrote toward the end of the first century, A.D., about the time, or shortly before, "Christian Gnosticism" and related heresies first appeared as a force to be reckoned with (though there is evidence that certain docetic views appeared much earlier).

       Some scholars believe that John's primary purpose was to combat Gnosticism, while others believe his Gospel was a response to other heretical teachings. His assertion that the preexistent Logos was "made flesh" seems to suggest that John was opposing Gnosticism, or some form of Docetism, while his emphasis on the Jew's rejection of Jesus (1:11), their unbelief, and their lack of understanding regarding the nature of the Messiah and His Kingdom (John 3) leaves open the possibility that he was combating the teachings of some branch of Jewish "Christianity" which, like the Ebonites, rejected belief in the preexistence and deity of Christ as well as the Virgin Birth.

       "Gnosticism" is very complex. The term has been used to identify a large number of sects that flourished in the second and third centuries. Some scholars believe that John's Gospel was written too early to have been polemic against Gnosticism. However, the existence of "Christian Gnosticism" in the second century suggests that Gnostic ideas had begun circulating among Christians much earlier.

       The Gnostics were not uniform in their theology, but all held erroneous beliefs about the nature of Christ. Generally, they held the ancient philosophy of cosmic "duality"—the belief that there are two fundamental realities, good and evil, and that these two realities oppose each other. To the Gnostics, only God and His spiritual hierarchy are good; everything else, including the physical universe, is evil. This philosophy disallowed the belief that the Saviour of the world could exist as a physical human being—for physical things are evil. Further, Christ's advent was for revelatory rather than redemptive purposes, for Gnostics held that salvation comes through enlightenment and special knowledge (Greek gnosis, from which "Gnosticism" is derived, means "knowledge").

       At least two concepts about the nature of Christ emerged from this philosophy. One (Docetism) held that Jesus, the divine Logos, had the appearance of flesh, but was not truly a flesh-and-blood human being. The other differentiated between "Jesus" and "the Christ," claiming that Jesus was an ordinary man born to ordinary parents, while the Christ was the "divine essence" that descended upon Jesus at His baptism and departed from Him during the Crucifixion.

       To what extent John was dealing with Gnosticism is uncertain, but one thing is sure: John's teaching disallowed any form of Gnosticism (or Docetism). The apostle insisted that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that the Logos, who was with God and was God, was made flesh. John allowed no room for the argument that Jesus was other than the Christ or that His human existence was not truly human.

       John further condemned Gnosticism (and/or similar heresies) in his first and second epistles. He wrote: "Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus us the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son" (I John 2:22). In his second epistle, he stated: "For many deceivers are entered in to world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This a deceiver and an antichrist" (II John 7). In dealing with this heresy, he confirmed the deity of Christ. He wrote: "...we are in Him that is true, even in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life" (I John 5:20).

       With an understanding of the types of heresies John was dealing with, we can easily see why he repeatedly referred to Jesus' preexistence and divinity. John insisted that Jesus Christ the Person, not some "divine essence," descended from heaven and became a flesh-and-blood human being. Any other interpretation does violence to John's Gospel and his epistles.

       Notice how John emphasized the preexistence and divinity of Jesus Christ:

       John 3:13: "And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but He that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven."

       John 3:31: "He that cometh from above is above all: he that is of the earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth: He that cometh from heaven is above all."

       John 6:38: "[Jesus said] For I came down heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of Him who sent me."

       John 6:51: "[Jesus said] I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world."

       John 6:62: "[Jesus asked] What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?"

       John 8:58: "Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am."

       John 17:5: "[Jesus prayed] And now, O Father, glorify thou me with the thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was."

       In order to conclude that Jesus Christ preexisted only as a thought in the mind of God, or that the Christ was somehow separated from Jesus, or that He was not God, one must construct an elaborate, logic-defying system of theological interpretation whereby the above easy-to-understand scriptures can be "spiritualized" away and emptied of their clear meaning. Or one must simply reject John's Gospel all together.

       The heretics may have understood that "the Christ" had come down from heaven and was divine. But John wanted his readers to understand what the heretics didn't: that the Person known as Jesus was the divine Christ—the Logos—who had come down from heaven.

       On one occasion, when Jesus spoke of God as His Father, the unbelieving Jews who heard Him accused Him of "making Himself equal with God" (John 5:18). The Jews understood that Jesus' claim of being the Son of the Father was a claim of divinity.

       When "doubting Thomas" felt the wounds of the risen Christ, his doubts were replaced with conviction. "And Thomas answered and said unto Him, My Lord and My God" (John 20:28). Jesus didn't respond with rebuke, but said, "Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed" (verse 29).

       Earlier, when Jesus said, "Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad," the unbelieving Jews chided, "Thou art not fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?" Jesus' reply drew an angry response. He stated, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am" (John 8:56-58). Upon hearing this starling statement, the Jews gathered stones to cast as Jesus, for they clearly understood that not only had He claimed preexistence; He had applied to Himself the name of God ("I AM"—see Exodus 3:14).

       Interestingly, Jesus did not say, "Before Abraham was, I was." He said, "I AM!" This curious construction makes no sense had Jesus been speaking only of His preexistence. But it makes perfect sense if we understand that He was speaking of His preexistence and His identity. He was applying to Himself the name of Deity, and His opponents knew this was what He meant. (Note: While Yahweh—the Hebrew name for Jehovah, translated "the LORD" in most English versions—is the name of the Father, or "Prime Mover" of the Godhead, the name may also be applied to the Son, for the Son is of the same nature as the Father and is the Father's representative.)

       Students of the Bible are well aware of the numerous "I AM" verses in John's Gospel. No doubt, John included these to emphasize the identity of Jesus. One of the most outstanding of the "I AM" passages is found in John's account of the betrayal and arrest of Jesus.

       When the mob came for Him and announced that they sought Jesus of Nazareth, "Jesus saith unto them, I am... As soon as He had said unto them, I am, they went backward, and fell to the ground" (John 18:5,6; note: the "hr" following "I am" in the KJV was added by the translators). Obviously, "I AM" meant much more than "I'm the one you seek." Jesus was affirming His divinity.

       Some argue that the "I AM" sayings of Jesus could not be linked with the "I AM" of Exodus 3:14 because the Hebrew for "I AM" means "I shall be." However, they overlook the fact that in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament, well known to New Testament writers) the words for "I AM" are ego emi, which are the same words translated "I am" in John's Gospel. Further, it is true that the Hebrew expression means "I shall be," but this expression also carries the meaning of "I am."

       With this evidence, can any honest truth-seeker deny that John's Gospel clearly teaches both the preexistence and the deity of Jesus Christ?

       But John's Gospel is not alone in affirming the divinity and prehuman existence of Jesus. Upon close examination, we find this same truth revealed in the Synoptic Gospels.

Evidence From the Synoptic Gospels

       Some believe that of the first four books of the New Testament, only John's Gospel presents Jesus as the Second Person of the Godhead. But, as we shall see, this is not true. A careful survey of several passages leads to the indisputable conclusion that the deity of Christ was not a foreign concept to the Synoptic writers.

       Consider the following facts from the Synoptic Gospels:

       1. Jesus is the Savior of His people. "And she [Mary] shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call His name JESUS [Savior, or Yahweh Saves]; for He shall save His people from their sins" (Matthew 1:21).

       2. The Savior's name "shall be called Emmanuel, which being interpreted is God with us" (verse 23).

       3. He is greater than the Temple (Matthew 12:6).

       4. He is Lord of the Sabbath (verse 8).

       5. He has power to forgive sins (Mark 2:5,10).

       6. He has power to baptize with the Holy Spirit (Mark 1:8).

       7. He is the ultimate Judge of the wicked (Matthew 7:21-23; Luke 3:17).

       8. He accepts worship (Matthew 8:2; 9:18; 14:33; 28:9,17).

       Can the Savior and Judge who is Lord of the Sabbath day; who is greater than the Temple; who has power to forgive sins, baptize with the Holy Spirit, and judge the ungodly; who receives worship; and whose name means "God with us" be other than God? Can these descriptions be used of a person who "preexisted" only as a thought in the mind of God, or of a created angelic being?

       Through the prophet Isaiah, God says, "For I am the LORD thy God, the Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour... I, even I am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour" (Isaiah 43:3,11). In the day of her salvation, Israel will say, "Verily thou art a God that hidest thyself, O God of Israel, the Saviour (45:15). In that day, "all flesh shall know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer" (49:26; 60:16; cf. 63:8). He reveals Himself as "a just God and a Saviour" (Isaiah 45:21).

       True, an ordinary human messenger can be described as a "savior," but when we compare the above descriptions of God as Savior with the preceding descriptions of Jesus, we can only conclude that Jesus Christ is more than ordinary man. As the Second Member of the Godhead, and as His Father's representative, He has a right to the titles of divinity.

       His divine identity was demonstrated in the healings He performed. On one occasion, He said to a man "sick with palsy," "Son, thy sins be forgiven thee." Certain scribes who were present accused Him of blasphemy and asked, "Who can forgive sins but God only?" Jesus replied, "Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy. Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk? But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (He saith to the sick of the palsy,) I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house" (Mark 2:5-11). The man was healed immediately.

        The message to the scribes was clear: Since only God can forgive sins, and since Jesus proved His own power to forgive sins by healing the sick man, then Jesus is "God with us" (Immanuel). Surely these scribes were familiar with such scriptures as Psalm 103:3, which says that God "forgiveth all thine iniquities" and "healeth all thy diseases"; and Daniel 9:9, which states, "To the Lord our God belong mercies and forgiveness..." Thus, when Jesus healed the sick man, He declared His divine identity.

       It was God, not Moses, who sanctified the Sabbath Day and commanded His people to observe it.. "Remember the Sabbath day," He said, "to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy works: But the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD thy God..." (Exodus 20:8-10). How could Jesus be "Lord of the Sabbath day" if He were only an ordinary man who had no preexistence? Though He was prophesied to be a Son of David and prophet like Moses (Deutronomy 18:15), neither Moses nor David could claim to be "Lord of the Sabbath day."

       Jesus' preexistence is also seen in His lamenting of Jerusalem's sins. When He prophesied the desolation of Jerusalem, He reflected upon His involvement with the city's stiff-necked forebears: "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem," He lamented, "thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered they children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!" (Matthew 23:37).

       How could Jesus have said this had He not been there to witness the hard-headedness of His people? Obviously, He had witness Israel's disobedience in the wilderness, had seen the slaying of the prophets, and had seen Jerusalem's stubborn refusal to allow her children to be gathered under His divine care.

       He confirmed His preexistence and divinity when He asked the Pharisees, "What think ye of Christ? whose son is He?" The Pharisees answered, "The son of David." They were correct: Christ was the descendant of David. But Jesus' reply to the Pharisees shows that He was much more than the son of David. He asked:"How then doth David in spirit call Him Lord, saying, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool? If David then call Him Lord, how is He his son?" (Matthew 22:42-45; cf. Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-44).

       Christ's message is clear: The Messiah is not only a descendant of David; He is the Son of God, the One David called "Lord. And since David lived centuries before the New Testament period, the One David called "Lord" must have preexisted His human birth.

       We see, then, that John was not alone in declaring the divinity and preexistence of Jesus Christ. When all four Gospel accounts are considered, the evidence overwhelmingly draws us to one indisputable conclusion: Jesus Christ is God!

       But there's more, much more, clear scriptural proof of Christ's divinity and preexistence. Let's now turn our attention to Paul's epistles.

Evidence From Paul's Epistles

       Some claim that the apostle Paul's strict monotheistic background—he described himself as a "Hebrews of the Hebrews" (Philippians 3:5)—would not have allowed him to believe in the deity of Jesus Christ. This argument, however, assumes that Paul's encounter with Jesus on the road to Damascus (Acts 9) was either fictitious or had little influence upon Paul's theology. It assumes that Paul was incapable of recognizing plurality in the Godhead form the Old testament terms and descriptions.

       The truth is, Paul clearly recognized the divine identity of Christ, and did not hesitate to identify Him with the God of his Hebrew forebears.

       Speaking of Jesus Christ, Paul wrote, "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved" (Romans 10:13). The casual reader may not notice that Paul, in speaking of Christ, was actually quoting from Joel 2:32: "And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD [Hebrew: Yahweh] shall be delivered..." Surely Paul would have never applied this verse to Jesus Christ had he not believed on the divinity of Christ.

       Paul said that a Christian's attitude should be like that of Christ, "Who, being in the form of God, though it not robbery to be equal with God: But made Himself of no reputation, and took upon Him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of man" (Philippians 2:6,7). This verse does not mean that Christ was in the "form of God" in the same way man was made in the "image of God," as some claim. This is seen by comparing "form of God" with "form of a servant. " Christ took on the "form of a servant" by being made "in likeness of man." The phrase "though it not robbery to be equal with God" is best rendered "did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped" (NASB), which shows that He had "equality with God" (i.e., He and the Father were of the same nature) before willingly taking on "the form of a servant." He "made Himself of no reputation," or "emptied Himself" (NASB), which means that, in being "made in the likeness of a man." He laid aside the privileges He had in His preexistent state.

       Those whom empty this passage of its obvious meaning but reading their own beliefs into it should pay closer attention to what Paul himself believed. In verse 10, Paul leaves no doubt as to what he believed. He wrote: That at the name of Jesus, very knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth." Standing alone, this verse strongly suggest that Jesus could be no less than fully divine. But once we consider the fact that Paul was quoting from Isaiah 45:23, the verse becomes much more than a mere "suggestion" of Christ's divinity. In Isaiah, 45:23, God Himself says, "That unto me every knee shall bow..." Paul's use of this passage in reference to Jesus confirms his belief in the deity of Christ.

       To the Ephesians, Paul declared that God "created all things by Jesus Christ" (Ephesians 3:9), thus affirming what John's Gospel states: that the preexistent Christ acted as God's divine agent in the creation of the universe.

       If doubts persists, then consider what Paul wrote to the Christians at Colossae. Speaking of Christ, he wrote: "Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature [or "all creation"—NASB]: For by Him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by Him, and for Him. And He is before all things, and by Him, all things consist" (Colossians 1:15-17).

       Could anything any be clearer? When this passage is considered alongside everything else Paul said about the deity of Christ, we can only conclude that any attempt to strip Christ of His divinity requires that the Scriptures be twisted beyond recognition—or rejected outright!

       But in spite of the evidence, some claim the above passage provides no proof that Jesus Christ is God. They say that the phrase "firstborn of all creation" shows that Christ was the first of all things (both heavenly and earthly) to be created. Not so! The title "firstborn" denotes preeminence, not "first to be created." He has preeminence over all creation because He is Creator! That's what Paul clearly said.

       Paul further stated, "For in Him [Christ] dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily" (Colossians 2:9). The Greek word for "Godhead" is Theotes, rendered "the Deity" in the NASB, and refers to the divine nature, not "divine attributes." Christ could not embody the fullness of the divine nature if His nature were different from His Father's nature. Yet, some try to strip Him of His deity by stripping theotes of its full meaning. The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, for example, erroneously translates this word "divine quality." (This is not surprising, for the same "translation" substitutes "a god" for Theos in John 1:1.)

       Further proof that Jesus Christ is God is found in Titus 2:13. The NASB is correct in its translation of this verse: "looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus." Not only is Christ identified as "our great God and Savior" by the literal translation of the Greek; He is identified as both God and Savior by the assertion that He is the One whose "appearing" (that is, the Second Coming!) is expected. Paul never encouraged anyone to look for the "appearing" of God the Father.

       Moreover, Paul said that the proclamation of God's Word was committed to him "according to the commandment of God our Savior" (Titus 1:3). We read of Paul's commission, and of the One who commissioned him, in Acts 9:15: "But the Lord [Jesus Christ] said unto him [Ananias], Go thy way: for he [Paul] is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel." To Paul, "God our Savior" and Jesus Christ were one and the same.

       In his first epistle to the Corinthians, Paul said that the ancient Israelites "drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ" (I Corinthians 10:4). Paul was referring metaphorically to two occasions when water for the children of Israel miraculously came forth from a rock (Exodus 17:6; Numbers 20:11). According to rabbinic legend, both occasions involved the same rock, which (according to the legend) miraculously "followed" the Israelites in their wilderness wanderings. Paul said that the true supernatural Rock that went with Israel was Christ.

       Doubtless, Paul's description of Christ as the "Rock" that went with Israel was linked with his awareness of the many Old Testament passages that describe God as a "Rock" (Deuteronomy 32:4,15,18,30,31; Psalm 18:2,31,46; 28:1; 31:3; etc.)

       Clearly, if Paul were here today he would fervently and without hesitation condemn all teachings that deny the preexistence and divinity of Jesus Christ, and would boldly proclaim that Christ is both God and Savior, in whom dwells all the fullness of the Godhead, and by whom all things were created.

       We find this same truth throughout the New Testament. Let's now turn our attention to the book of Hebrews.

Evidence From the Book of Hebrews

       The first chapter of the book of Hebrews proclaims the deity of Christ in no uncertain terms. We are told right away that Christ has been "appointed heir of all things, by whom also He [God the Father] made the worlds" (Hebrews 1:2). Here Christ is presented as Creator (or "Co-creator"). This agrees perfectly with John's description of Christ as the Logos through whom all things were made.

       Verse 3 declares: "[Christ is] the brightness [or "reflection"] of His [the Father's] glory, and the express image of His Person [or "exact imprint of God's very being"—NRSV], and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down on the right of the Majesty on high". In the preceding verse, Christ is presented as Creator. Here, He is Sustainer. It is hardly believable that the Creator and Sustainer who reflects the Father's glory and shares His nature (as the "exact imprint") could be other than God.

       Further, if He were anything less than a God, He would not be worthy of worship. He must be God, then, for verse 6 tells us He is worthy of worship: "And let all the angels of God worship Him." This is a paraphrased quotation taken either from the end of Psalm 97:7 or from the end of Deuteronomy 32:43, which is missing from the Massoteric text (from which the KJV Old Testament was translated) but present in other ancient manuscripts, including the Septuagint. In either case, the "Him" the angels of God are to worship is God.

       In verses 8 through 10, Jesus is identified as both God and Messiah: "But unto the Son He saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom. Thou has loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with oil of gladness above thy fellows. And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are thy works of thine hands." In this passage, the writer quoted from Psalm 45:6,7 and Psalm 102:25. The "Lord" who "laid the foundation of the earth" (Psalm 102:25) is the Messiah figure (Psalm 45) whom God "hath anointed... with the oil of gladness."

       Here we see the Messiah presented as both God and the "righteous servant" of God (Isaiah 53:11). Many stumble on this point, wondering how the Messiah can be God if He is the servant of God. The seeming contradiction is resolved once we understand that the Second Person of the Godhead took upon Himself the form of a servant.

       This great truth is echoed throughout the Bible, right to the closing chapters. Let's now w\examine several important passages from the final pages of God's Word.

Evidence Form the Book of Revelation

       In the book of Revelation, the Person, nature, and redemptive work of Jesus Christ are beautifully portrayed in descriptive language and through a kaleidoscope of marvelous imagery. He is both the fierce "Lion of the tribe of Judah" and lowly "Lamb" whose body bears the wound of a sacrificial offering. He is the royal "root and Offspring of David," the brightly glowing "Morning Star", the magnificent "King of kings and Lord of lords." He is the "Faithful Martyr," the "Firstborn of the dead," the "Ruler of the kings of the earth."

       And He is God! This truth is seen in Christ's own use of the titles of divinity.

       John, through a visionary experience, was glimpsing the climactic Day of the Lord when he heard "a great voice as of a trumpet, Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last..." (Revelation 1:10,11). When he turned to see the source of the voice, he beheld "one like unto the Son of man... His head and His hairs were white as wool, as white as snow; and His eyes were as a flame of fire; And His feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and His voice as the sound of many waters" (verse 17,18).

       Clearly, the One who identified Himself as "Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" was non other than Jesus Christ! The "alpha" is the first letter of the Greek alphabet, the "omega" the last. Jesus Christ is the "Alpha and Omega," which suggest that in Him is the beginning and the end of God's revelation to man. This alone suggests preexistence and divinity, but when we realize that Yahweh identified Himself as the "first and the last," the truth of Christ divinity is inescapable.

       In Isaiah 41:4, God says, "I am the LORD [Yahweh], the first, and with the last; I am He." In Isaiah 48:12, Yahweh says, "I am the first, I am also am the last." In the book of Revelation, "Alpha and Omega" is a title belonging to "the Almighty." Notice: "I am the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty" (Revelation 1:8; cf. 21:6,7).

       In Revelation 22, Jesus identified Himself as both "Alpha and Omega" and "Root and Offspring of David" (verses 13,16), thus confirming His identity as both God and Messiah, the servant of God. This is in perfect harmony with the Gospels accounts, Paul's epistles, and the book of Hebrews. With so much evidence, who can deny that Jesus Christ is both God and Messiah?

       An honest study of the New Testament leads to the indisputable conclusion that the early disciples believed in the deity of Christ. But what about the Old Testament? Is there any evidence of Christ's deity in the inspired prophecies of the B\Hebrew Scriptures?

Evidence From the Old Testament

       In Isaiah 53, the Messiah is described as the "righteous servant" of God (verse 11). If He is the servant of God, many have asked, how can He be God? As we have seen, the Hebrew Elohim and the plural verbs and pronouns sometimes associated with it allow for the possibility of a plurality of Persons in the Godhead. But is there anything in Isaiah's prophecies that identifies the Messiah as a divine Personage?

       Indeed, there is. Concerning the future Messiah, Isaiah wrote: "For unto us a child is born, unto as a child is given: and the government shall be upon His shoulder: and His name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace" (Isaiah 9:6).

       Some Jewish commentators insert the word "is" between "Counselor" and "The mighty God," causing the verse to suggest that the Messiah's name will be called "Wonderful Chancellor is the mighty God." However, nothing in the Hebrew suggests that "is" should be inserted. Therefore, as in the New Testament, the book of Isaiah indicates that the Messiah is both God and the servant of God.

       Psalm 45 is another prophecy about the Messiah, and was so recognized by the Jewish rabbis of the time of Jesus. Speaking of the Messiah's victory in establishing His Kingdom, the Psalmist wrote: "Thine arrows are sharp in the heart of the king's enemies; whereby the people fall under thee. Thy throne, O God is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy Kingdom is a right sceptre" (verses 5,6). Again the Messiah is called "God' (cf. Hebrews 1:8).

       In Psalm 110:1, the Messiah is called "Lord" (Adonai): The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool." The One who would later reveal Himself as the Messiah was David's "Lord," showing that He was much more than a "son of David," and suggesting that He existed long before His human birth (cf. Matthew 22:41-46).

       But was He a created being who came into existence at some point in time, as some claim? Through the prophet Micah, God answers: "But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee He come forth unto me that is to be ruler of Israel [clearly a prophecy concerning the Messiah]: whose goings forth have been from old, from everlasting" (Micah 5:2). The "ruler of Israel" who came forth from "Bethlehem Ephratah" existed before the foundations of that small town were laid—in fact, before the foundations of the world were laid! He is Creator, not creature.

        Apparently it was Christ who appeared to Moses and the ancient Israelites as the "Angel of Yahweh." As we have seen, He was not one of the created spirits known as angels (Hebrews 1), but He was an "angel" in that He was the Personage of the Godhead who served as the Spokesman, or Messenger, and who went with Israel to lead them to the place God had prepared for them. The word "angel" means "messenger," and can refer to spirit beings as well as human beings. Jacob equated "the God who fed me all my life" with "the Angel which redeemed me from all evil" (Genesis 48:15,16). The fact that the Spokesman of the Godhead, who himself is God, is called an "Angel" does not in any way suggest that He was one of the created "ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation" (Hebrews 1:14).

       In Exodus 3, the "angel of the LORD" who appeared to Moses in the burning bush (verse 2) identified Himself as "the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob" (verse 6) whose name is "I AM" (verse 14). He is presented as both God and the Messenger ("Angel") of God. When we compare this with the prophecies describing the Messiah as "God," "the Mighty God," "Lord," and the "Ruler of Israel, whose goings forth have been... from everlasting," it seems most likely that the Angel of Yahweh was the One who would later declare, "Before Abraham was, I AM!"

       Evidently, the Angel sent to lead Israel was the same Personage. God said: "Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him" (Exodus 23:21). The terms used here indicate that the Angel, as God's Spokesman ("my name is in him"), had power to judge people ("he will not pardon"), and was to be feared and obeyed ("Beware of him, and obey his voice"). Could this be any other than the Logos who "was with God, and was God," or the spiritual Rock" who "was Christ," and who was with Israel in the wilderness?

       There is also indication in the Old Testament that the the Messiah is worthy of our worship. Speaking of the Son of God, Psalm 2:12 states: "Kiss [or Do homage to] the son, lest He be angry, and ye perish from the way, when His wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in Him." While this verse alone is not conclusive roof of the deity of the Son, the fact that His subjects are called upon to do homage and to put their trust in Him leaves the impression that He is much more than a "son of David."

       Zechariah's prophecy leaves us with no doubt that the Messiah is much more than a son of David. God said: "And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for Him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for Him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn." Notice that it was Yahweh who said "they shall look upon me whom they pierced." The One who was actually "pierced" was Jesus Christ, the "suffering servant" of Isaiah 53. Again, the Messiah is presented as both Yahweh and the servant of Yahweh.

       Just as Jesus Christ was the Person who was pierced, He is also the Person who will come to establish His Kingdom on this earth. Yet, Zechariah's prophecy tells us that the King who will come to this earth and gather His saints is none other than Yahweh. God declares: "Then shall the LORD [Yahweh] go forth, and fight against those nations, as when He fought in the day of battle. And His feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives... and the LORD my God shall come, and all the saints with thee... And the LORD shall be King over all the earth..." (Zechariah 14:3-9). This could be none other than the Personage who promised: "And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be (Revelation 22:13).

       In summary, the Messiah is called "God," "Lord," "the Mighty God," and "the Ruler of Israel" who existed "from everlasting." At the same time, He is presented as a human being capable of suffering and subject to death (Isaiah 53). Thus, the Old and New Testaments are in perfect harmony in proclaiming both the deity and the humanity of Jesus Christ.

       Some have asked, "But how could so many Jews who were strict Monotheists have accepted the deity of Christ?" the answer is simple: The prophets declared it, Christ Himself taught it, and His resurrection confirmed it. No wonder "doubting Thomas," upon touching the risen Messiah, said, "My Lord and my God!"

       The deity of Christ is central to true Christianity. Those who teach that Jesus is not God have perverted the Gospel and corrupted the one true Faith, "the Faith which was once delivered unto the saints" (Jude 3). As the Son of God Himself said, "if ye believe not that I AM, ye shall die in your sins" (John 8:24).