Few discussions strike at the very heart of Christian identity like the question of the Son — Was He eternally existent as the Son, or was the Sonship a manifestation in time?
For centuries, this question has divided the church into two camps: those who proclaim an Eternal Son, co-existent and co-equal with the Father, and those who uphold a Begotten Son, revealed in time as the visible manifestation of the invisible God.
The phrase “the only begotten Son” (John 3:16) raises a fundamental question — can One be begotten and yet eternal in Sonship? The very word “begotten” speaks of origin, of a moment when that which was invisible became visible, when the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us. Yet others argue that “begotten” points not to a beginning, but to a relationship within the Godhead that transcends time itself.
Here the tension becomes fierce:
If the Son is eternal, was He always subordinate to the Father — or does that imply a hierarchy within Deity? But if the Son is begotten in time, was there ever a moment when God existed without His Son — and if so, what was revealed at Bethlehem that had not existed before?
This debate is not merely theological—it reaches into the essence of salvation itself.
For if the Son was eternally distinct, then the Cross becomes an act between two divine persons.
But if the Son was begotten in time, the Cross becomes the moment when the invisible God robed Himself in flesh to redeem His creation personally.
The implications ripple through every doctrine — the incarnation, the atonement, the name of Jesus, and the nature of God Himself.
So, what do we really mean when we say “God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son”?
Was this Son already existent from eternity, or was He the Word manifest — God revealed in human form for a redemptive purpose?
Let the discussion begin.
Can the Son be eternal and begotten at the same time?
Is “Son” a title of relationship within time, or a person within eternity?
And does understanding this distinction determine how we view Jesus — as God the Son, or as God Himself made flesh?
Hey Omega. The answer is yes. He is both. He is the only physically begotten. Meaning in human terms, the only one born into holiness and not sin. However, he was always here, and will always be.
How did God create, well, everything? “God Said.” You know, someone once asked me if I believed in the “Big Bang.” My answer? Yes. God Said, BANG! It was so. Look at Genesis.
“God Said, Let there be light.” There was light. By the way, I also want you to think about this. God said, “Light, water, expense, Heaven, Air, dry land, Vegetation,” THEN on the Fourth Day, Day, Thousand years, whatever, Four Days away from God saying “Let there be Light.” He THEN Created the Sun and the Moon, and the Stars. Until then? He was the very Light of the World. Who? Jesus.
“Again, Jesus spoke to them, saying, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.” {John 8:12}
Back to “God Said.” Everything that was created was created by “God Said.” God used His Word to create all things. Did you know that The Word is a Person? Turn to John 1
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.”
Continue in Verse 9
“The true light, which gives light to everyone, was coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God. And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.”
Read that again. “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.” JESUS. Jesus IS the Word of God.
Jump ahead a bit, and you see the story of how corrupt and Evil the heart of Man is, and how God was so disgusted that He even made us, He set us up for destruction. Yet, through one faithful man, Noah, we were given a second chance. Sound familiar? 1 Corinthians 15:21
“For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead.”
Then you have the foretelling of the coming Messiah, Jesus. He will be from the seed of a woman. Read in Genesis 3:15. Came to pass in Luke 1:34-35. The Messiah would be a descendant of Abraham, Isaac & Jacob, as read in Genesis 12:3, 17:19, 28:14, fulfilled in Luke 3:23-34. The Messiah would be a King in the line of Judah, as we read in Genesis 49:10, and fulfilled in John 1:49. Some say He, Jesus, first appeared amongst us as Melchizedek in Genesis 14:18. Some say Melchizedek was simply a shadow of the coming Jesus. Either way. I do truly believe He has always been, and is the firstborn as well.
Scripture shows that the Son is both eternal in nature (John 1:1-2, Hebrews 1:3) and begotten in role (John 1:14, Galatians 4:4). His Sonship reveals an eternal relationship within the Godhead, not a beginning in time, but a distinction in person. Jesus is fully God, eternally with the Father, yet made flesh for our salvation.
That’s a great discussion point — and one that deserves careful distinction between “the Word as God” and “the Word made flesh.”
When John 1 says “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” — it identifies the Word (Logos) as the self-expression or utterance of God Himself, not a person beside Him. The Greek term Logos literally means speech, expression, reasoning, or thought made audible.
Before the Incarnation, the Word was not a being with God in a second-person sense, but the very mind, wisdom, and self-expression of the one invisible God. Everything God created was by His Word — meaning His expressed will or divine command (cf. Psalm 33:6: “By the word of the LORD were the heavens made”).
Now, when John 1:14 declares “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,” that is when the Word became a person — not before.
The eternal Word (God’s self-expression) took on humanity and lived among us as Jesus Christ. The Word became human. The invisible Spirit was now visible in flesh.
So yes — everything was created by “God said,” but that creative Word was God Himself in action.
When that same Word became flesh, it wasn’t the arrival of another divine person in the Godhead; it was the one God manifesting Himself in human form to reveal His nature and redeem His creation.
In essence:
Before Bethlehem: The Word = God’s mind and creative utterance.
At Bethlehem: The Word = God Himself manifested as the man Christ Jesus
The passages cited — John 1:1-2 and Hebrews 1:3 — certainly affirm the eternal deity of Christ, but not the eternal Sonship of Christ. There is a crucial difference between saying the Word is eternal and saying the Son is eternal.
1. The Word Is Eternal — The Son Is Begotten in Time
John 1:1 does not say, “In the beginning was the Son.”
It says, “In the beginning was the Word (Logos).”
The Word is the self-expression of God — His divine mind and creative utterance (Psalm 33:6). The Word was God, not “a second person God.”
The Sonship began when “the Word was made flesh” (John 1:14).
That’s when the eternal God manifested Himself in humanity — when the invisible became visible, the eternal entered time. Luke 1:35 clarifies how this came about:
“The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee… therefore that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.”
Notice: He “shall be called” the Son of God — not “was already called” before His birth. The title Sonalways refers to the incarnate manifestation of God, not a pre-existent person.
2. “Eternal Son” vs. “Eternal Spirit”
Hebrews 1:3 describes the Son as “the brightness of His glory, and the express image of His person.”
That shows the Son as the visible expression of the invisible Spirit — God revealed through human nature. But there’s nothing in the text implying an eternal Father-Son relationship before the Incarnation.
The eternal nature belongs to the Spirit (Deity); the begotten nature belongs to the Son (Humanity).
Thus Jesus is both fully God (Spirit) and fully man (flesh) — one Person who unites both natures.
3. Begotten in Role — But That Role Began in the Incarnation
Galatians 4:4 says, “When the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman.”
The Son was sent forth when He was made of a woman, not before. “Sending” doesn’t mean dispatching a pre-existent person from heaven; it means commissioning the One born for a divine purpose — God manifesting Himself through that human life.
4. The Distinction Is Manifestational, Not Personal
The distinction we see between “Father” and “Son” in Scripture reflects the relationship between deity and humanity within the one Christ, not between two eternal divine persons.
When Jesus prayed, He did so as a true man — the Son expressing dependence upon the indwelling Spirit of the Father (John 14:10).
That’s not a dialogue between two persons, but the genuine human communication of the Incarnate God with His own eternal Spirit.
The Son is not “eternal in relationship” — the Word is eternal, and that eternal Word became the Son at the Incarnation. The Father and Son are not two persons but one God revealed in two natures: Spirit and flesh.
“God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself.” (2 Corinthians 5:19)
Correct Omega. That would be the begotten. However, I think you overlooked these passages.
“All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.“ John 1:3
“But in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.“ Hebrews 1:2
“For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him.” Colossians 1:16
“Jesus said to them, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.” John 8:58
I think it is pretty clear that Jesus has always been, but the flesh of Jesus, in His physical form, to pay the price is the begotten as we are begotten.
Oh, don’t forget this prophecy in Isaiah,
“For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” Isaiah 9:6
Jesus is now, has always been, and will always be.
That’s a solid and familiar line of reasoning, and it’s good that you’re drawing attention to the deity of Christ — because we fully agree that Jesus is eternal, divine, and the Creator of all things.
The real difference isn’t whether Jesus is eternal — it’s how His eternality is defined in Scripture.
Let’s unpack these verses carefully, point by point.
John 1:3 – “All things were made by Him”
Absolutely — all things were made by Him.
But note the context of verse 1–3: the creative “Him” is the Word (Logos) — not yet the Son.
John 1:14 explains when that Word became flesh and thus became the Son.
So, the Creator is the eternal Word (Spirit of God), who later took on flesh as Jesus Christ.
Creation was not through a separate, pre-existent Son-person, but through the one eternal God — whose creative power is expressed through His Word.
The Word (God’s self-expression) created all things; the Word made flesh (the Son) came later for redemption.
Hebrews 1:2 – “By His Son He made the worlds”
This translation can sound like the Son existed during creation, but the Greek phrasing clarifies it:
“Through [in] the Son” (en huiō) He made the ages/worlds.
This means that creation existed in reference to, or in anticipation of, the Son — that is, creation was made with the Incarnation in mind.
The same God who would one day be revealed in the Son is the one who created all things.
The writer isn’t saying the Son was a co-creator — he’s saying that the same God who has now spoken in the Son is the One who made all things from the beginning (see Heb. 1:1–3).
Colossians 1:16 – “By Him were all things created…”
Paul is again identifying Christ as Creator — but the emphasis is not on a second divine person; it’s on the identity of Jesus as God Himself.
Colossians 1:15 calls Him “the image of the invisible God.”
An image is not another person but the visible manifestation of the invisible.
So, Paul is affirming that the One who was manifest in flesh (Jesus) is the same eternal Spirit who created all things.
He’s not teaching that a pre-existent “Son” acted separately from the Father, but that the Creator Himself took on human nature and became the man Christ Jesus.
John 8:58 – “Before Abraham was, I Am.”
Jesus’ words here echo Exodus 3:14 — “I AM THAT I AM.”
He wasn’t identifying Himself as a second eternal person, but as the I AM Himself — the one God of Israel, now standing in flesh.
He did not say, “Before Abraham was, the Son was,” but “I AM.”
That’s not a statement of eternal Sonship; it’s a statement of eternal Deity.
He was claiming the identity of the eternal Spirit who now dwelt bodily in Him (Colossians 2:9).
Isaiah 9:6 – “Unto us a child is born… unto us a son is given…”
Notice the prophecy’s wording — it doesn’t say “the Son is eternally existent.”
It says a child shall be born, a Son shall be given.
That is future tense — the Incarnation.
And look at the titles given to that Son:
Mighty God
Everlasting Father
The child to be born would be called Everlasting Father — showing that the Son is the Father manifested in flesh, not a distinct person beside Him.
Isaiah 44:24 – "Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself”
Beautifully unites the identity of the Creator and the Redeemer as one and the same. The verse says, “Thus saith the LORD, thy Redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself.” Notice that the same One who is called the Redeemer is also the One who made all things by Himself. There is no separation between the Creator and the Redeemer — they are one divine Being acting in different ways toward humanity.
When we recognize that Jesus is our Redeemer, this verse takes on even deeper meaning. If the LORD alone created all things and the LORD is our Redeemer, and the New Testament reveals that Jesus is that Redeemer, then Jesus must be that same LORD who made all things. There is no division of labor in creation or redemption — the One who created is the One who came to save.
Reconciling It All
So yes — Jesus is eternal in His divine nature as God, but His Sonship began in the Incarnation.
When the eternal God took on humanity, He became the Son.
Eternal in deity — begotten in humanity.
Creator in Spirit — Redeemer in flesh.
One God manifested.
A few inconsistencies here, this isn’t what Scripture actually says.
John 1:1–3 - Logos versus Son
Your claim- “The Word (Logos) is eternal Spirit; the Son comes later in flesh.”
John 1:1–3 explicitly identifies the Logos (ho Logos) as both eternal (ēn en archē) and fully God (ho Logos ēn pros ton Theon, kai Theos ēn ho Logos). The verb ēn (imperfect of eimi) stresses continuous existence in the past, eternal coexistence with the Father. John 1:14 does not say “then the Logos became Son”; it says, “the Logos became flesh” (kai ho Logos sarx egeneto)-the Logos existed eternally before the Incarnation. The Greek makes no temporal delay in personal existence; the Son is eternally the Logos, eternally distinct from the Father. Your claim that the Sonship began only at Bethlehem ignores the relational vocabulary John uses, especially pros ton Theon (face-to-face relation with God) which signifies eternal Sonship, not a sudden adoption.
Hebrews 1:2 — “Through [en] His Son” in creation
You say- “Creation existed in reference to the Son, not the Son Himself.”
The preposition en (ἐν) in Hebrews 1:2 does not mean mere anticipation or reference; it signifies agency.The Son (huios) is the one through whom God created (di’ huiou kai en autois ta panta epoiēsen). Greek grammar and parallel passages (~Colossians 1:16, ~1 Corinthians 8:6) affirm the Son as the active agent of creation. This directly contradicts the idea that creation merely looked forward to Him; the text declares He participated personally in creating all things. The verb epoiesen is a finite aorist active, marking real historical action, indicative of eternal agency, not hypothetical foresight.
Colossians 1:15–16 — “Image of invisible God”
You say- “The image is not another person, but the visible manifestation of the invisible God.”
Paul uses eikon tou theou tou aoratou to indicate ontological distinction within the Godhead, not a mere manifestation. The term eikon in Greek does not imply identity only, but relational and personal distinctiveness, as in ~Hebrews 1:3 (apaugasma tēs doxēs kai charaktēr tēs hypostaseōs). The Son reveals the Father, but He is eternally the Son. Saying the Logos is “the same God in flesh” without eternal Sonship collapses the relational distinctions Scripture affirms and denies the pre-existent, relational pros ton Theon from John 1:1–2.
John 8:58 — “Before Abraham was, I AM”
You say- “I AM = eternal Deity, not eternal Sonship.”
Jesus’ use of ego eimi explicitly evokes Exodus 3:14 and applies it personally. Greek idiom does not allow separating eternal Sonship from deity here; He speaks as the pre-existent Logos in relational identity with the Father (pros ton Theon). The text immediately provoked the Jews to attempt stoning (v.59), showing they understood Him as claiming eternal, personal divinity, not simply a manifestation of Spirit. The distinction between I AM as general deity and I AM as eternal Son is a false dichotomy; Scripture presents both in the Logos-Son.
Isaiah 9:6 — Titles of Messiah
You say- “Everlasting Father shows the Son is the Father in flesh, not a distinct person.”
The Hebrew text uses Avi‘olam (Everlasting Father) as a messianic title, not as literal ontological identity. This title denotes divine authority and permanence, not ontological fusion. Isaiah repeatedly distinguishes Messiah as ben (son) who is sent by YHWH (~Isaiah 42:1, 49:6). The text supports pre-existent Sonship, not modalist collapse of Son into Father. Your attempt to equate “Everlasting Father” with the Son as same person contradicts Hebrew parallelism and the NT fulfillment in John 3:16, 17; John 1:14.
Isaiah 44:24 — Redeemer = Creator
You say- “The same one who creates is the same one who redeems, no division of persons.”
Scripture affirms unity of essence (homoousios) but distinguishes persons. Hebrew YHWH creating and redeeming does not negate relational distinctions within the Godhead, which the NT reveals (Father sends Son, Spirit proceeds). To deny eternal Sonship because the Redeemer is Creator is modalism. The NT identifies Jesus as Redeemer (Christ, Son of God, ~1 Corinthians 1:30) and also as Creator (Colossians 1:16–17). These are not contradictions but evidence of one divine essence in three persons, not a single-person modal identity.
“Eternal in deity, begotten in humanity”
You say- “The Sonship begins in the Incarnation.”
This is the classical Adoptionist error. The Greek monogenēs huios in John 1:14 and elsewhere (hoi monogenēs en tō patri, John 3:16) shows relational Sonship before the incarnation. The aorist egeneto refers to becoming flesh, not becoming Son. Hebrews 1:2–3, John 1:1–3, and Colossians 1:16–17 affirm eternal generation (pro tōn aionōn), not creation in time. Scripture presents the Logos as both eternally Son and eternally active in creation, who then assumes humanity, not the reverse.
In looking to the future we cannot even declare if eternity is the end of time or time unending. There are limits to what we are told as well as limits to what we can understand.
If time started with the creation of the world, then Jesus is “eternal” because he created the world.
To make matters even more confusing is the Greek word usually translated as “eternal” is aion which actually means “age”.
Isaiah 44:24: “Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself.”
In this passage, the LORD unites three divine actions under one voice: redeeming, forming, and creating. All are spoken by one “I am the LORD.” The Hebrew emphasizes the singularity of His work—“alone” and “by myself.” There is no mention of another being beside Him. Jehovah insists that He stretched forth the heavens and spread abroad the earth without any helper or companion.
This means that the One who is Redeemer and Creator is the same LORD who acts independently and alone. He excludes the possibility of a second divine person sharing that glory. When the New Testament identifies Jesus Christ as both Redeemer and Creator, it is not introducing another divine agent; it is revealing the true identity of the LORD of Isaiah 44:24.
Jesus is called our Redeemer in Titus 2:13–14 and Creator of all things in John 1:3 and Colossians 1:16. These declarations do not divide God into multiple persons but affirm that the same eternal Spirit who created all things later robed Himself in flesh to redeem what He had made. God did not send another to do His work—He came Himself.
In Jesus Christ, creation and redemption converge. As God, He made all things by His Word; as man, He redeemed us by His blood. Both actions flow from one divine identity. The “alone” and “by myself” of Isaiah 44:24 find their fulfillment in the incarnation, when the invisible Creator became visible in Christ to perform the work of redemption.
The Redeemer of Calvary and the Creator of Genesis are one and the same. The Eternal Spirit who spoke the worlds into being is the very One who entered His creation to save it. “God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself” (2 Corinthians 5:19).
Passage Key Phrase Hebrew / Greek Morphology & Syntax Messianic Significance NT Fulfillment
Isaiah 44:24 “Redeemer… formed thee from womb… I am the LORD that maketh all things… alone/by myself” gō‘ălekha, molidkha, ‘ōśē kol mi-l’vaddi Singular participles and verbs; first-person exclusive -î; one agent performing creation and redemption Introduces one divine agent uniting creation and redemption John 1:3, 14; Col 1:16; Titus 2:14 – Logos/Christ as Creator and Redeemer
Isaiah 42:1–4 “My servant… I have put my Spirit upon him… bring forth judgment to the Gentiles” ebed = servant Singular subject; Spirit empowers servant Servant is Messiah empowered for redemption and justice Acts 10:38 – Spirit anoints Jesus for ministry and salvation
Isaiah 49:5–6 “Formed me from the womb… light to the Gentiles… my salvation unto the end of the earth” yatsar me-rechem = formed from womb Verb in perfect tense, passive; formation and calling pre-birth Pre-existent Messiah appointed for global redemption Luke 1:31–35 – Incarnation of Christ fulfills womb formation prophecy
Micah 5:2 “Out of thee shall come forth… ruler in Israel… from everlasting” min olam = from eternity Singular verb; anticipatory prophetic language Messiah is preexistent, eternal, yet born in time John 1:14 – Logos becomes flesh in Bethlehem
Jeremiah 31:15–16 “I have redeemed thee” ga‘al = redeem Singular verb; first-person agent Messiah as Redeemer foretold Titus 2:14 – Christ redeems us by His blood
John 1:3, 14 “All things were made by Him… the Word became flesh” panta di’ autou, ho Logos sarx egeneto Singular verbs; Logos as agent; aorist for creation, aorist for incarnation Logos eternally active, incarnates to redeem Colossians 1:16 – Creator and Redeemer unified in Christ
Titus 2:13–14 “Jesus Christ… gave Himself… to redeem us” exagorasamenos = redeemed Aorist active participle; singular agent Explicit fulfillment: Messiah as Redeemer Connects Isaiah 44:24 “Redeemer” with Christ’s salvific work
Key Observations here. Very important.
Singular verbs and participles across Hebrew, LXX Greek, and NT texts confirm one divine agent performing creation and redemption.
Pre-birth formation language (molidkha, yatsar me-rechem) in Isaiah 44:24 and 49:5–6 anticipates Messiah’s Incarnation.
NT fulfillment shows Logos/Christ as the eternally pre-existent Creator who enters time to redeem, unifying creation and salvation in one Person.
The modalist reading that denies Sonship ignores the morphological and syntactical consistency across these passages and the relational distinctions in the NT.
I appreciate your careful reading, Johann, and I agree that Scripture must be handled with both linguistic and theological precision. But I’m not denying Sonship — I’m distinguishing between eternal deity and begotten manifestation.
The New Testament clearly presents Sonship as the revelation of God in time. The “relational distinctions” are real, but they’re functional and incarnational, not ontological and eternal. The Son exists because the Word became flesh (John 1:14); the Word took on human nature.
To say the Son existed eternally would require an eternal humanity — which Scripture never teaches. The Son is God with us (Matthew 1:23), the eternal Spirit made visible, tangible, and relatable. His Sonship expresses relationship between deity and humanity, not between two divine beings.
So this understanding doesn’t erase relationship; it locates it properly. The Father–Son language describes how the one God revealed Himself in Christ — Spirit in flesh — rather than introducing multiple divine persons.
The Logos is eternal; the Son is the Logos incarnate. The distinction lies in manifestation, not in multiplicity of deity.
The Bible does not use the phrase “God the Son” even one time. It is not a correct term because the Son of God refers to the humanity of Jesus Christ. The Bible defines the Son of God as the child born of Mary, not as the eternal Spirit of God (Luke 1:35). “Son of God” may refer to the human nature or it may refer to God manifested in flesh—that is, deity in the human nature.
“Son of God” never means the incorporeal Spirit alone, however. We can never use “Son” correctly apart from the humanity of Jesus Christ. The terms “Son of God,” “Son of man,” and “Son” are appropriate and biblical. However, the term “God the Son” is inappropriate because it equates the Son with deity alone, and therefore it is unscriptural.
The death of Jesus is a particularly good example. His divine Spirit did not die, but His human body did. We cannot say that God died, so we cannot say “God the Son” died. On the other hand, we can say that the Son of God died because “Son” refers to humanity.
“I’m distinguishing between eternal deity and begotten manifestation.” This is the central modalist error. You makes γεννάω (gennáō, to beget) mean manifest, when in the New Testament it means generate in relation. In μονογενής (monogenēs) the prefix μόνος (only) plus γίνομαι (to come into being) denotes uniqueness of nature, not mere appearance. In ~John 1:18 the μονογενὴς Θεός (“the only-begotten God”) is ὁ ὢν εἰς τὸν κόλπον τοῦ Πατρός (“the one who is continually in the bosom of the Father”). The participle ὢν is present tense, durative, and shows ongoing personal relationship, not temporal manifestation. The Word is eternally with the Father, not merely appearing later.
“The relational distinctions are functional and incarnational, not ontological and eternal.”
The Greek of ~John 1:1-Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος-uses the imperfect ἦν (“was”) three times to describe continuous pre-creation existence. The syntax πρὸς τὸν Θεόν (“with God”) employs πρός with the accusative, denoting personal, face-to-face relation, not impersonal function. If the relationship were only “incarnational,” πρός would be meaningless before creation.
“The Son exists because the Word became flesh (John 1:14).”
~John 1:14 says ὁ Λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο (“the Word became flesh”), not “the Word became the Son.” The Son already is the Word in personal relation to the Father. ~John 3:16’s τὸν υἱὸν τὸν μονογενῆ (“the only-begotten Son”) uses the aorist of giving, ἔδωκεν, showing the Father sent One who already existed. Similarly ~Galatians 4:4: ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ Θεὸς τὸν Υἱὸν αὐτοῦ (“God sent forth His Son”), not “God sent forth one who would become His Son.” The participial structure shows preexistence prior to being “born of a woman.”
“To say the Son existed eternally would require an eternal humanity.”
This confuses nature with person. The Son’s divine nature is eternal; His human nature began in time. Scripture distinguishes these yet unites them hypostatically. ὁ Υἱὸς (the Son) in ~Hebrews 1:2–3 δι’ οὗ καὶ ἐποίησεν τοὺς αἰῶνας (“through whom He made the ages”) shows creative agency before incarnation. The aorist ἐποίησεν precedes the present φέρων (“sustaining”) and the perfect καθάρισμον ποιησάμενος (“having made purification”), placing creation chronologically before redemption. Thus, the Son existed and acted eternally prior to taking flesh.
“The Bible never says ‘God the Son,’ so it’s unscriptural.”
True, the phrase “God the Son” is not verbatim, but the concept is explicit. ~John 1:18 calls Him μονογενὴς Θεός (“only-begotten God”), and ~Hebrews 1:8 has πρὸς δὲ τὸν Υἱόν· ὁ θρόνος σου ὁ Θεός (“But of the Son He says, ‘Your throne, O God…’”). The nominative-vocative form directly addresses the Son as ὁ Θεός. Lexically, that is “God the Son.” Denying the term because of English phrasing ignores explicit Greek predication.
“The Son of God refers to the humanity of Jesus Christ.”
~John 5:18 shows otherwise: ἴσον ἑαυτὸν ποιῶν τῷ Θεῷ (“making Himself equal with God”). Here “Son of God” is not human title but a claim of ontological equality with the Father. Syntax: ὅτι πατέρα ἴδιον ἔλεγε τὸν Θεόν, the idiomatic ἴδιον (“His own”) implies unique, eternal relation, not merely incarnational role.
“We can never use ‘Son’ correctly apart from humanity.”
Yet ὁ Υἱὸς is active in creation before the incarnation (~Col 1:16, δι’ αὐτοῦ ἐκτίσθη τὰ πάντα). The aorist passive ἐκτίσθη refers to completed creative acts long before Bethlehem. If the Son were only human, Paul’s syntax would be impossible.
“We cannot say ‘God died,’ so we cannot say ‘God the Son’ died.”
Chalcedonian grammar resolves this: one prosopon (person), two physeis (natures). The communicatio idiomatum allows predication of actions to the person, not to the nature. The divine nature did not die, but the Person who is divine and human truly suffered death in His humanity. Scripture supports this idiomatic communication: ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ Θεοῦ ἣν περιεποιήσατο διὰ τοῦ αἵματος αὐτοῦ (~Acts 20:28, “the church of God which He purchased with His own blood”). The genitive τοῦ Θεοῦ modifies αἵματος; the possessive makes “God’s blood” a legitimate expression, affirming the unity of the person who is both God and man.
With his own blood (dia tou haimatos tou idiou). Through the agency of (dia) his own blood. Whose blood? If tou theou (Aleph B Vulg.) is correct, as it is, then Jesus is here called “God” who shed his own blood for the flock. It will not do to say that Paul did not call Jesus God, for we have Rom_9:5; Col_2:9; Tit_2:13 where he does that very thing, besides Col_1:15-20; Php_2:5-11.
“The Logos is eternal; the Son is the Logos incarnate.”
This statement separates what Scripture unites. The Logos does not become Son only in time; He is eternally Son and thus eternal Word. The Latin Fathers rightly rendered ~John 1:1 as In principio erat Verbum et Verbum erat apud Deum et Deus erat Verbum, eternal simultaneity of being, not sequential manifestation. The LXX reinforces this in ~Psalm 2:7: Κύριος εἶπεν πρός με· υἱός μου εἶ σύ, ἐγὼ σήμερον γεγέννηκά σε (“You are My Son, today I have begotten You”). The perfect γεγέννηκα (I have begotten) expresses completed action with continuing results, eternal relationship, not temporal event.
Appreciate the Greek insights, Johann — but none of what you cited changes the clear testimony of Scripture that God acted alone in creation. The grammar of pros ton Theon doesn’t undo what God repeatedly declares in plain Hebrew: He created all things by Himself, with no one beside Him.
Let’s look at the text on its own terms:
Isaiah 44:24 – “I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself.” If “pros ton Theon” implies another eternal person beside Him, this verse becomes meaningless. God says He did it alone — not in eternal company.
Isaiah 45:5–7 – “I am the LORD, and there is none else… I form the light, and create darkness… I the LORD do all these things.”
The Hebrew emphatic “ani YHWH ve ein od” leaves no space for a co-eternal counterpart.
Isaiah 46:9–10 – “I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me.”
Eternal simultaneity doesn’t require eternal plurality. God Himself draws the line of uniqueness around I, not we.
Nehemiah 9:6 – “Thou, even thou, art LORD alone; thou hast made heaven… and all things therein.”
The singular “thou” is personal, exclusive, not corporate.
Job 9:8 – “Which alone spreadeth out the heavens.”
Even Genesis 1:1 preserves that same singularity — Elohim (plural form) paired with the singular verbbara (“created”). The verb governs the meaning: one God acting.
So when I say the distinctions are functional and incarnational, I’m simply keeping the text consistent. The Word (Logos) was with God — yes — but that Word was God Himself in self-expression, not another divine consciousness beside Him. Otherwise, all those singular self-pronouns collapse into contradiction.
The Greek shows that the Word eternally existed; the Hebrew shows that God alone created. The only way both hold true is if the Word is God’s own self-revelation, not a second Person eternally standing “face-to-face” with Him.
Just a quick question, brother. Are you focusing only on the Old Testament? Because I notice many today read only the Old Testament and reject the New, right? Then there are others who cling only to the “red letters” and dismiss the rest, including the writings of Paul, correct?
From what I see, you quote the Old Testament often, yet seem unwilling to yield when it comes to the New. Could you please clarify where you stand?
Reason why I ask is because of this.
Isaiah 44:24 states, “I am YHWH, the Maker of all things, stretching out the heavens alone, spreading out the earth by Myself.” The key verbs are ʿōśeh (Qal participle, “the One who makes”), nōṭeh (Qal participle, “stretching out”), and rōqaʿ (Qal participle, “spreading out”). The prophet’s emphasis is not on numerical solitude but on sovereign independence. The Hebrew lebaddî (“by Myself”) is an idiom of exclusive agency, meaning YHWH used no foreign or idol power, not that there was no personal distinction within His own being. This same idiom occurs in Isaiah 63:3, “I have trodden the winepress alone,” yet in that very chapter (63:9–10) the “Angel of His Presence” is distinguished from YHWH and still called the Savior who redeemed them. The text itself, therefore, contains internal differentiation within the one divine Redeemer.
Now turn to Genesis 1:1. He mentions Elohim (plural) with bara (singular). Exactly. The morphology reveals plurality-in-unity. If Moses had intended a strict singularity, he would have used El or Eloah. Yet he chose Elohim consistently when describing divine action, pairing it with singular verbs to reveal complex unity rather than solitary being. In Genesis 1:26, God says, “Let Us make man in Our image,” (naʿaseh adam be-tzalmenu). The plural cohortative naʿaseh exposes a divine self-deliberation. Jewish expositors wrestled with this because the morphology resists a purely singular interpretation.
When we move to John 1:1–3, the Greek clarifies what the Hebrew hinted at. “In the beginning was the Word (ho Logos), and the Word was with God (pros ton Theon), and the Word was God (kai Theos ēn ho Logos).” The preposition pros with the accusative ton Theon expresses face-to-face relationality, not mere functional association. This construction appears repeatedly in Greek literature to indicate personal communion (cf. Mark 6:3 pros auton, “with Him”). The Logos is not a created word but a personal subsistence eternally oriented toward the Father.
Now, if the Logos “was God” yet is with God, then monotheism is preserved through shared essence, not through denial of personal distinction. John 1:3 then declares, “All things came into being through Him (panta di’ autou egeneto),” using dia with the genitive to express agency through which divine will is executed. Paul echoes this exact syntax in Colossians 1:16 - “For in Him (en autō) all things were created… all things have been created through Him (di’ autou) and for Him.” These Greek prepositions (en, dia, eis) delineate a Trinitarian pattern of origination, mediation, and consummation, not contradiction.
Isaiah 44–46 emphasize YHWH’s ontological uniqueness over idols, not the negation of His tri-personal being. When the prophets say “I alone,” the point is polemical monotheism against polytheism,not philosophical denial of intra-divine distinction. The New Testament writers, steeped in these texts, identify Jesus as Kyrios (YHWH) without violating them (~Philippians 2:10–11, ~Romans 10:9–13). They saw the fulfillment of Isaiah’s “I am the LORD, and there is none else” precisely in the incarnation of the Son, where the Creator who “stretched out the heavens” entered creation to redeem His own work (~John 1:14, ~Colossians 1:20).
Therefore, the Hebrew singulars affirm monotheism, not modalism, and the Greek syntax reveals relational distinction without division. The same YHWH who declared “I alone made the heavens” also speaks in Genesis 1:26 as “Us” and is revealed in John 1 as Father and Word, united in one divine essence yet distinct in personhood. The Creator and Redeemer are the same God, but the text itself refutes the notion that the incarnation was merely God “robed in flesh.” It was the eternal Son, ho Logos, who became flesh, remaining pros ton Theon, face-to-face, even as He walked among men.
Good question, brother — and I appreciate you asking that directly. No, I don’t reject the New Testament at all. In fact, my understanding of God’s oneness comes from reading both Old and New Testaments together as one continuous revelation.
I agree the Logos isn’t a created word — it’s divine and eternal. But being eternal doesn’t automatically make the Logos a separate personal subsistence “toward” another divine Person.
John 1:1 says the Word was with God, and the Word was God — not a God, nor another beside God. The Logos is God’s own eternal self-expression, His mind, wisdom, and voice — not an additional entity standing across from Him. The Word was pros ton Theon (toward God) in the sense of God’s inward relation to His own self-revelation, not one divine consciousness oriented toward another.
If we make “Logos” a second eternal Person, we end up with two divine minds and two centers of consciousness — which Scripture never presents. Yet if the Logos is understood as the self-revealing activity of the one Spirit, then both truths stand: the Logos is eternal, and yet the distinction becomes incarnational when that Word is made flesh (John 1:14).
So yes — the Logos is uncreated, eternal, divine — but not another divine self. It is God revealing Himself, not God relating to a second eternal being.
I see what you’re getting at, Johann, and I respect the depth you’re bringing to the Greek. But shared essence isn’t the only way to preserve monotheism — the Bible itself preserves it through one divine Spirit acting through His own Word.
When John says “the Word was with God, and the Word was God,” the preposition pros doesn’t have to imply two divine persons in fellowship — it can just as well describe the Word as being toward God in expression, the same way God’s wisdom and word are said to be “with” Him in Proverbs 8:22–30 and still fully His. It’s self-communication, not self-companionship.
Regarding dia autou (“through Him”), the same construction is used in Hebrews 1:2 — but that doesn’t mean an independent agent beside God. It expresses the medium through which God acts — His own Word, His own self-expression. The one Creator worked through His own manifestation, not through another divine person.
Paul’s en, dia, eis in Colossians 1:16 doesn’t create a hierarchy of divine beings — it describes the flow of God’s purpose: from God (en), through His Word (dia), and unto Himself (eis). It’s the same one Spirit working in different modes of expression, not separate eternal consciousnesses collaborating.
So yes, all things came into being through Him — but that “Him” is the very God who said, “I stretch forth the heavens alone… and spread abroad the earth by myself” (Isa. 44:24). The Greek prepositions illustrate divine operation, not division of deity.
I guess what I’m really getting at is this — the New Testament says the worlds were created through the Son (Heb. 1:2, Col. 1:16). But Isaiah says the LORD stretched forth the heavens alone and spread abroad the earth by Himself (Isa. 44:24).
So if the Son isn’t the same LORD manifest in flesh — if He’s some 2nd Person other than that one Creator — then Isaiah’s words would be false, and we know that can’t be the case. The only consistent conclusion is that the Son is the Father revealed, not a second Person beside Him. The Creator and Redeemer are one and the same God — working through different manifestations, not divided in being.
Out of reverence for the holiness of God, Jews stopped saying God’s Name a couple of hundred years BC, so the correct pronunciation of YHWH is uncertain.[2] The Hebrew language does not contain vowels, but we can ascertain that the first syllable of God’s Name is pronounced “Yah” because it is found in the word Hallelujah (or Halleluyah). Hallelujah means “Praise the LORD” or, more correctly, “Praise YHWH”. Some Christians pronounce YHWH as “Yahweh”.[3]
Yahweh means: “I Am who I Am.” God explained his Name to Moses during the burning bush encounter when he commissioned Moses to free Israel from Egyptian bondage (Exodus 3:13-15). God’s Name, the “I Am”, gives a sense of the enigmatic, transcendent and eternal nature of God (cf. Rev. 1:8).
Three infinite and eternal persons belong to this Godhead called Yahweh: (1) the Father, (2) the Son, Jesus Christ, and (3) the Holy Spirit. These three persons are bound closely together in unity of power and purpose, and are often referred to as the Trinity. Yahweh is one God made up of three persons.
The fact that Jesus is YHWH (God) is seen when we compare certain OT verses with NT verses.
The fact that Jesus Christ is Yahweh can be seen when we compare the following Old Testament verses with the corresponding New Testament verses.
Isaiah 40:3 speaks about preparing the way for the LORD (Yahweh). When we compare this verse with Mark 1:3 we see that Jesus is the LORD who had the way prepared for him by John the Baptist.
In Joel 2:32a it says that whoever calls upon the Name of the LORD (Yahweh) will be saved. This verse is quoted by Peter in Acts 2:21, and by Paul in Romans 10:13. Both apostles are referring to Jesus as the LORD in these verses.
In Isaiah 6:1-10 we read about the marvellous vision that Isaiah had revealing the glory of the LORD (Yahweh). John tells us in John 12:40-41 that this vision revealed the glory of Jesus.
In Isaiah 44:6, the LORD (Yahweh) refers to himself as “the First and the Last”. In Revelation 1:8 and 17, Jesus similarly refers to himself as “the Alpha and the Omega” and “the First and the Last”.
In Zechariah 12:10 the LORD (Yahweh) speaks and says, “they will look on Me whom they have pierced.”[4] This is Jesus speaking (Psa. 22:16; John 19:34). This verse from Zechariah appears again in Revelation 1:7b and is about Jesus Christ.
As Yahweh (along with the Father and the Holy Spirit) Jesus is eternal, having all the qualities and attributes of God. Even on earth, in human form, Jesus was the image of the invisible God, and the exact representation of God’s nature (Col. 1:15; Heb. 1:3). Jesus is not some sort of demigod; rather, the fullness of deity (“God-ness”) dwells in him in bodily form (Col. 2:9). Jesus Christ, born of the virgin Mary, was fully man and fully God, having both a human and divine nature at the same time.
As eternal God, Jesus Christ existed before he came to earth as a human baby. He existed before the creation of the earth. In fact, Jesus was instrumental in its creation. The Bible says that all things were created by Him, and that nothing was made without Him (John 1:1-3; Col. 1:16-17; Heb. 1:2). Jesus is not a created being himself.
The Scriptures teach us that there is only one God and we are commanded that we should worship no other gods (Exod. 20:3). From Scripture we can see that Jesus Christ is worshipped eternally, further proving his deity and place in the Godhead (Phil. 2:10-11; Rev. 5:9-14).
As wonderful as Yahweh’s Name is, there is a name which has even greater significance and importance:
Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him a name which is above every name; that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord[5] to the glory of God the Father. Philippians 2:9-11.
Footnotes
[1] Jesus’ disciples, those closest to him, testified that Jesus is God. Peter writes “our God and Saviour, Jesus Christ” in 2 Peter 1:1; Thomas addresses Jesus as “My Lord and my God!” in John 20:28; and John called the Word/Jesus, “God” in John 1:1. Also, the apostle Paul calls Jesus “the great God and Saviour” in Titus 2:13
[2] King David had no problem with declaring the Name of God. He uses it frequently in his Psalms. In Psalm 8:1 & 9 he says (or sings), “O Yahweh, our Lord, how majestic is your Name in all the earth!”
Instead of saying God’s Name, many Jews replace YHWH with “Ha’Shem” when reading from Hebrew scripture aloud. Ha’Shem means “the Name” in Hebrew.
[3] “Jehovah” is another way of saying God’s Name and it appears in old English translations of the Old Testament, but this pronunciation has fallen out of favour because it is considered inaccurate by some.
[4] Some paraphrases, such as the Good News Bible and the Living Bible, do not translate this verse accurately.
[5] Several scholars believe we are to understand “Lord” in Philippians 2 as implying God’s name, and that one day every tongue will confess that “Jesus the Messiah is Yahweh.”
“O LORD (Yahweh), our Lord (Adonai), how majestic is your Name in all the earth!” Psalm 8:1 & 9.
And yet, “YHWH said to my Lord, ‘Sit at My right hand until I make your enemies a footstool’” - Psalm 110:1
“Of the Son He says, ‘Your Throne O God is forever and ever’” - Hebrews 1:8
“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever.
The scepter of Your kingdom is a scepter of righteousness;
You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness.
Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You
with the oil of gladness beyond Your companions;” - Psalm 45:6-7
God says, not to Himself, but to Someone else, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever” and then “Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You”
So…God calls Someone else “God” and refers to Himself as “Your God”. So how many Gods are there? Well, just one.
We’ve established that already, “YHWH is one” (Deuteronomy 6:4) and it’s made clear as day by the Prophet Isaiah, “I am YHWH, there is no other, there is no god beside Me” (Isaiah 45:5).
Yet the one and only God refers to Someone as “God”, but He isn’t speaking to Himself; and then says He is, in relation to that Someone, “Your God”.
Well this makes sense when in the New Testament we see Jesus as the object of this statement: “Of the Son He says, ‘Your throne O God’” and we read multiple times of “the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ”. So Jesus is God, and Jesus also knows Someone as God (that isn’t Himself), the One Jesus knows as “God” is His Father; and the Father knows Someone who is God, it’s His Son. So the Father is God, the Son is God; but the Father isn’t His own Son, the Son isn’t His own Father; when the Father speaks to His Son, He calls His Son “God”, and when the Son speaks to His Father, He calls His Father “God”.
How many gods? One God.
Yet there are two very clearly distinct voices in the text. And the New Testament reveals why that is: God the Father and His Son, our Lord Jesus Christ. But this didn’t happen only after Jesus became human, the Incarnation didn’t create a new scenario where there are two voices, those two voices are there already, eternally. One and Another. The Father and His Son. Not two beings, but two Someones. One Being, two Someones.
And if the Holy Spirit is, likewise, a Someone; then that’s Three Someones. That’s one Being, three Someones.
That’s the Holy Trinity.
”We worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity, neither confusing the Persons nor dividing the Essence.”
I believe both. In the same way that God says We and Us in Genesis, and that Christ is both seperate and One with the Father, Christ is both Begotten and Eternal.
Jesus, as we knew him on earth, was a man who entered into time via conception, and birth through the womb of a woman. A special woman chosen for a special reason that we do not fully understand.
But His origins are Ancient of Days. Christ came into our world from Eternity, a place beyond Time where death does not enter and nothing ages or ends.
I believe physics may offer a perfect metaphor in the Laws of Conservation of Mass and Energy.
Google words it:
The principle that energy and matter do not decrease is the law of conservation of mass-energy, which combines the separate laws of conservation of mass and energy. This fundamental principle states that the total amount of mass and energy in an isolated system remains constant over time, although energy can transform into different forms (like kinetic, potential, thermal) and mass can convert into energy (and vice versa.)
The total “stuff” of the universe, a combination of mass and energy, remains constant.
Mass is the measure of the amount of matter in an object, which is the amount of “stuff” it contains
It can be equated with flesh and form. While energy can be equated with spirit.
Christ is the Word of God, Spoken by the Father. Sound, frequency, vibration, essense, energy. Always Conscious, for as He says, “ I Am”
Then the Word became flesh, matter, mass.
Christ was with the Father in the beginning. He was a part of the Father that emanated forth as Sound, a Word with intention and purpose. A Word that Creates LIFE, Existence, Form, Giving the world Shape and solid substance.. And the Word is a Sound that itself takes Form and transforms into Flesh.
But when Christ died on the cross, he did not return to a state of flesh as we exist today. Nor did He become pure Spirit or Sound again. He is the New Adam. He became something that does not die, that exists in Eternity. Something we are meant to become. A joining of two to make one.
And perhaps this difference is found in the Holy Spirit who comes to us as believers to guide us and join with us. Where as people once went to temples to see the face of God, to sacrifice and attone with a focus on outer appearances and physical activities to define sin, through Christ we each become Living Tenples of His Holy Spirit. God meets us, joins with us intimately and stays with us, joining flesh and Spirit, mass/matter/energy together in constant union.
Furthermore, we know the Hoky Spirit is LOVE. LOVE is the Spirit. Christ is LOVE made flesh. And LOVE, as Scripture says, never dies while all other gifts will cease to be. And without LOVE, we are nothing.
But I could be wrong.
You have to understand that I find great joy on pondering such things. As Mary Pondered the words of the angel who brought news of her being with child. And as Abraham and Sarah pondered word of Sarah’s upcoming blessing. But only the mind of God knows which way the Spirit goes, why and how.
