When the Creator spoke to Adam and warned him against eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, He warned him that he would die if he at of it. Some have looked at the statement and wondered how a father could tell his child, “If you do this thing, I’ll kill you”. The reality is that something vastly different was taking place. The man would surely die, but he was not being warned of it by one who was solely his father.

The relationship between the LORD (YHWH) and Adam was that of a King and his vassal. There is a covenant that is being established. The covenant is that man is to rule the world as YHWH rules it. He is to take dominion, fill the earth, and enjoy the fruits God gave him. There is one point which is a breaking point: if man does not worship God as evidenced by his enjoying Him through His gifts, but decides to turn aside and worship in his own way by disobeying in the partaking of the forbidden fruit, he will be a covenant breaker who is subject to death.

This is not about a father telling his son that he will kill him for disobeying. This is about the King of kings telling his subjects the consequences of treason. It is about the gracious, Covenant making God declaring the results of man’s failing to worship according to the covenant rules.

That is why there is no discrepancy between the warning that death will come and the fact that they did not immediately die. Though mankind was plunged into sin and was spiritually dead (I.e. he was alienated from God.), there was a sense in which he worshiped God and became covenantally alive by means of the death of an animal in his place ( Genesis 3:21). Man’s shame was covered and man lived a while longer due to the provisional nature of the blood sacrifice.

Thankfully we are aware that there is now a sacrifice that does not need to be repeated- that of the lamb of God ( John 1:29;Hebrews 10:11-14).

Augustine. (Tr. ii. 15) Having said, Born of God; to prevent surprise and trepidation at so great, so apparently incredible a grace, as that men should be born of God; to assure us, he says, And the Word was made flesh. Why marvellest thou then that men are born of God? Know that God Himself was born of man.

John 1:1-14

The recto of Rylands Library Papyrus P52 from the Gospel of John. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Introducing The Gospel According To John

Of primary importance when reading the Bible is the answer to the question, “What is this about?” That is the thing we need to consider when reading John’s presentation of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

John 1 see testimony, witness, and acts of testifying :

1:1 The Word of God is testimony of God, and much more.

1:4-5 Life gives light to men- the very fact that we have a rational existence testifies of Christ (See Romans 1:18-20).

1:6-9 John sent to testify

1:9-10 Jesus testifies of Himself to every man.

1:15 John bare witness

1:18 The Son bare witness of God.

1:19-28 John testifies to the Pharisees.

1:29-34 John’s testimony at Jordan

1:35-42 John’s testimony sends disciples after/with Jesus.

1:43-46 Brothers testifying to brothers.

1:47-49 Nathanael’s testimony to Jesus.

1:50-51 Jesus promises that God will testify of Him.

20:30-31 testimony that we might believe.

21:24-25 True, eyewitness testimony of which John is sure.

Refusing to give us hearsay, John instead gives us the strong witness of one who was there and saw and heard Jesus.

1John 1:1-5;5:9-13 eye witness/ witness of God. A witness which we must believe.

Considering these things , it is important to place first things first. Many people live their lives focusing on trivial things. The most important of all things is to believe and know Jesus. We must grow in this knowledge, also. There is simply no time for us to be gagging on gnats and swallowing camels. We MUST believe and know Christ!

It seems that one of the issues relating to Creation and inerrancy is that of the words of Jesus.

The question before us in this post is not whether or not Jesus was fallen (though it seems that some think that He was.), nor that Jesus was omniscient (And I believe that He was/is); but the question is, “Did Jesus speak truthfully and accurately in ALL that He said?”

Let’s remember that there is the idea that Jesus was subject to the same limitations as other men in His day. Some think that Jesus believed many of the same erroneous ideas about cosmology as others of His day. They think that Jesus could have indeed been mistaken in some of the things that He said, and among those things could be statements that seem to show Jesus believing that the Genesis Creation Account was an accurate historical narrative.

I will make a very simple argument here that declares that Jesus did not err in the things which He spoke, because Jesus spoke the very Words of God.

“And Jesus cried out and said, “Whoever believes in me, believes not in me but in him who sent me. And whoever sees me sees him who sent me. I have come into the world as light, so that whoever believes in me may not remain in darkness. If anyone hears my words and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. The one who rejects me and does not receive my words has a judge; the word that I have spoken will judge him on the last day. For I have not spoken on my own authority, but the Father who sent me has himself given me a commandment—what to say and what to speak. And I know that his commandment is eternal life. What I say, therefore, I say as the Father has told me.”” (John 12:44–50, ESV)

Remember that God cannot lie. Neither can Jesus.

Jesus states that He is light come to dispel darkness.

Jesus states that His Words were commanded and given to Him by the Father.

If one decides to come to the Kenotic-Arian conclusion that Jesus emptied Himself of all Divine attributes and was thus subject to err as a man, one must recognize that Jesus’ words were the Word of God. Jesus’ words are the words by which man shall be judged.

It is easy to say that Jesus’ purpose was to give eternal life and that His words had that same goal. I definitely agree with that. Should one proceed to say that Jesus’ words were only related to eternal life and thus His accuracy only related to eternal life, then we shall greatly differ. Jesus in this passage does not differentiate between words relating to faith and practice and words relating to other issues. Jesus plainly and simply stated that He spoke with the authority of God and that His words was the Word of God.

Once we introduce error into Jesus’ words we have a problem. God cannot lie. God commanded Jesus to speak and Jesus spoke God’s Words. When error and untruths are introduced into the words of Jesus God has been made into a liar.

That is an unacceptable conclusion for one who professes Christianity.

God always speaks truly.

Jesus spoke the Words of God.

Jesus always spoke truly.

There is no escaping the matter.

Whatever one may think about the words of Jesus, make no mistake that they were right and true. To deny that is to deny the very truthfulness of God.

The Word of God John 1:1-4,14

See also Rev 19:13

logos – The word of outward form by which the inward thought is expressed and made known: also the inward thought or reason itself.

A saying, speaking, that which is said or spoken

logos never mans a word in the grammatical sense, as the mere name of a thing…but rather as the thing referred to, the material, not the formal, part.

The power of the mind, which is manifested in speech, reason…

Liddell & Scott Lexicon

Logos is common for reason as well as speech. RWP

It therefore signifies both the outward form by which the inward thought is expressed, and the inward thought itself… Vincent’s Word Studies in The New Testament

It is interesting to note that words are the expressions of the heart. “Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.” (Matt 12:34) KJV

Logos is also translated as follows:

intent (Acts 10:29)

matter (Acts 15:6)

shew (Col 2:23)

The above things speak of a substance, essence, and personality. This shows that the Word is the expression of the heart of God, the matter of God, shewing the substance of God, is thus the essence of God and is in every way God.

Closely associated with Christ being the Word is the statement “ I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.” (Rev 22:13) KJV “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.” (Rev 1:8) KJV Words are always associated with the alphabet. Jesus is the beginning and ending of the expression of God. There is no pre-alpha or post-omega. He alone is God’s perfect, eternal thought and expression of Himself. Christ is the eternal expression of the Almighty, eternal God. From A to Z, Jesus is such a perfect expression of God that He is indeed God in person, character, and essence.

It is thus no surprise that we read, “God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high.” (Heb 1:1-3) KJV The Son is of the exact nature, or substance, or essence of God the Father. He is the radiance of the glorious brilliance, majesty, and beauty of the Father. Those who see Him see the Father (John 14:9). Why is this so? It is so because the Son is of the same essence and character as the Father. He is the perfect representation of God, because He is God.

since the writings (literae) of Moses are the words of Christ, He does Himself declare to the Jews, as John has recorded in the Gospel: “If ye had believed Moses, ye would have believed Me: for he wrote of Me. But if ye believe not his writings, neither will ye believe My words.” He thus indicates in the clearest manner that the writings of Moses are His words. If, then, [this be the case with regard] to Moses, so also, beyond a doubt, the words of the other prophets are His [words], as I have pointed out.

Against Heresies, Book 4, Chapter 2.3

For He was not, as might be imagined, circumscribed in the body, nor, while present in the body, was He absent elsewhere; nor, while He moved the body, was the universe left void of His working and Providence; but, thing most marvelous, Word as He was, so far from being contained by anything, He rather contained all things Himself; and just as while present in the whole of Creation, He is at once distinct in being from the universe, and present in oil things by His own power,-giving order to all things, and over all and in all revealing His own providence, and giving life to each thing and all things, including the whole without being included, but being in His own Father alone wholly and in every respect, – 2. thus, even while present in a human body and Himself quickening it, He was, without inconsistency, quickening the universe as well, and was in every process of nature, and was outside the whole, and while known from the body by His works, He was none the less manifest from the working of the universe as well. 3. Now, it is the function of soul to behold even what is outside its own body, by acts of thought, without, however, working outside its own body, or moving by its presence things remote from the body. Never, that is, does a man, by thinking of things at a distance, by that fact either move or displace them; nor if a man were to sit in his own house and reason about the heavenly bodies, would he by that fact either move the sun or make the heavens revolve. But he sees that they move and have their being, without being actually able to influence them. 4. Now, the Word of God in His man’s nature was not like that; for He was not bound to His body, but rather was Himself wielding it, so that He was not only in it, but was actually in everything, and while external to the universe, abode in His Father only. 5. And this was the wonderful thing that He was at once walking as man, and as the Word was quickening all things, and as the Son was dwelling with His Father. So that not even when the Virgin bore Him did He suffer any change, nor by being in the body was [His glory] dulled: but, on the contrary, He sanctified the body also. 6. For not even by being in the universe does He share in its nature, but all things, on the contrary, are quickened and sustained by Him. 7. For if the sun too, which was made by Him, and which we see, as it revolves in the heaven, is not defiled by touching the bodies upon earth, nor is it put out by darkness, but on the contrary itself illuminates and cleanses them also, much less was the all-holy Word of God, Maker and Lord also of the sun, defiled by being made known in the body; on the contrary, being incorruptible, He quickened and cleansed the body also, which was in itself mortal: “who did,” for so it says, “no sin, neither was guile found in His mouth.” Philip Schaff, vol. 4, The Post-Nicene Fathers, electronic ed., electronic ed., 0 (Garland, TX: Galaxie Software, 2000).

The discussion of Jesus’ humanity and ignorance is an important discussion. The whole issue is one of balance and humility.

It is an issue of balance because of the need to remember that Jesus is both God and man. The two natures of Christ are neither mixed nor separated within Him. He is one person with two distinct natures.

It is an issue of humility, because we need to humble ourselves and acknowledge that we don’t understand the mystery of the incarnation of the Son of God. We will not know all there is to know about it.

Thus I can accept that Jesus had to grow in wisdom and in knowledge, did not know the time of His second advent, and was tempted. I can accept this because I know that Scripture testifies to His full humanity.

I can also accept that Jesus is God with all of the attributes of God. This means that, alongside knowing that there were things Jesus did not know, I accept that somehow or another He did know all things. This is born out by the statement of John concerning the knowledge of Jesus.

“Now while he was in Jerusalem at the Passover, during the feast, many believed in his name because they saw his signs which he was doing. But Jesus himself did not entrust himself to them, because he knew all people, and because he did not need anyone to testify about man, for he himself knew what was in man.” (John 2:23–25, LEB)

This statement is very telling, because the Greek doesn’t say that Jesus knew all people (or all men, as some translate it). The Greek simply states that Jesus knew all. That could be taken to mean that Jesus knew all things, though it is indeed reasonable to assume that John was speaking of Jesus knowing all men.

The fact remains that Jesus knew all men and what was in them. This is more than mere human knowledge. In fact, it sounds very much like omniscience.

I realize that it is easy enough to say that Jesus depended on the Father and the Spirit, and that He received words of knowledge. Is it necessary to say that, however? Was Jesus a man just as we are? Yes, He was. No, He wasn’t. He was a man as we are in that He was fully human. On the other hand, He is not a man as we are, because He is fully God. For this reason we should not assume that everything that applies to our persons applies to Him. Jesus’ complete humanity is joined to complete Deity, while ours is not. It is more reasonable to say that omniscience was possible for Him, though it is impossible for us. In fact, the deity of Christ demands that He be omniscient. That being so, that does not mean that the humanity of Christ was omniscient anymore than it means that the Deity of Christ was tempted.

Do I understand how this works? I do not. I do understand that I must humbly bow before the superior wisdom of God and accept it as being so. To move to one side or the other is to lose balance and not recognize the glory of Jesus as I should.

 the divine nature of Christ, is the key-note of John’s Gospel, and of all his other writings. His main object is to convince men that Jesus is God manifest in the flesh, and that the acknowledgment of Him as such is necessary to salvation. This Apostle was, therefore, in the early Church called the Θελολόγος, because he taught so clearly and earnestly that the λόγος is God. In verse 18 of this chapter he says that the Son alone has the knowledge of God, and is the source of that knowledge to others. He showed Nathanael that He knew his character, being the searcher of hearts. In his discourse with Nicodemus, He spoke with divine authority; revealing the things of heaven, because He came from heaven and was even then in heaven.

Charles Hodge, vol. 1, Systematic Theology, 506-07 (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997).

While we think of Jesus as being flesh and fully human, we must not forget that He is God and is fully God.

Jesus, in the incarnation, did not become less than Divine. The kenosis did not leave Him empty of the Divine attributes. Hodge uses John 3:13 to establish that, though Jesus lived in a body on the earth, He was still omnipresent and was also in heaven while upon earth.

This being so, what should we think about the omniscience of Jesus? Did He lose that in the incarnation? No. It seems that He did not always exercise omniscience, but He obviously knew the hearts of men. He knew the future, because He told Peter what would happen to him during his last days. He did not know the day nor the hour of His return, but that does not negate the omniscience of Jesus.

Why is this important? It is important because, just because Jesus possessed omniscience, though He did not always use it. One of the mysteries of the incarnation is how that God the Son as man could actually be both omniscient and not know some things.

He is God, who knows all. He was man, who is limited in knowledge. He is both.

Let us not think that Jesus was lacking the ability to speak to us correctly concerning anything. He spoke the Words of God. He spoke truly. His humanity did not prevent Him from speaking without error.

The Divine is not sullied, tarnished, inhibited, or made less glorious by the union with flesh.

Related articles

• The Incarnation of The Son of God (pastoralmusings.com)
• Charles Hodge on Jesus, The Apostles, And Scripture (pastoralmusings.com)
• Charles Hodge On The Scriptures (pastoralmusings.com)

On 1 February 2012, I debated Bart Ehrman at UNC Chapel Hill on whether we have the wording of the original New Testament today. This was our third such debate, and it was before a crowd of more than 1000 people. I mentioned that seven New Testament papyri had recently been discovered—six of them probably from the second century and one of them probably from the first. These fragments will be published in about a year.

These fragments now increase our holdings as follows: we have as many as eighteen New Testament manuscripts from the second century and one from the first. Altogether, more than 43% of all New Testament verses are found in these manuscripts. But the most interesting thing is the first-century fragment.

It was dated by one of the world’s leading paleographers. He said he was ‘certain’ that it was from the first century. If this is true, it would be the oldest fragment of the New Testament known to exist. Up until now, no one has discovered any first-century manuscripts of the New Testament. The oldest manuscript of the New Testament has been P52, a small fragment from John’s Gospel, dated to the first half of the second century. It was discovered in 1934.

Not only this, but the first-century fragment is from Mark’s Gospel. Before the discovery of this fragment, the oldest manuscript that had Mark in it was P45, from the early third century (c. AD 200–250). This new fragment would predate that by 100 to 150 years.

via Dr. Wallace: Earliest Manuscript of the New Testament Discovered? – Daniel B. Wallace.

This is exciting news, and I look forward to hearing more in the days to come.

HT: ETC