THE DIVINE IDENTITY OF JESUS AS YAHWEH IN THE SCRIPTURES AND SECOND TEMPLE JEWISH THOUGHT
The divine identity of Jesus as Yahweh is evident in the New Testament and Second Temple Jewish literature. The New Testament presents Jesus not only as the Messiah but also as Yahweh incarnate, demonstrated through His divine roles, such as creator and forgiver of sins. The concept of the "Two Powers in Heaven" from early Jewish thought, which describes two divine figures sharing authority, aligns with early Christian views of Jesus. Additionally, some Jewish groups during the Second Temple period held expectations of a divine Messiah, as seen in texts like 1 Enoch and the Psalms of Solomon, which depict the Messiah with divine attributes. These sources affirm that Jesus is portrayed as the incarnate Yahweh in both scriptural and Second Temple contexts.
Christianity has consistently affirmed the doctrine of Jesus Christ’s divinity, a belief deeply rooted in the Scriptures and the teachings of the early Church. The understanding of a divine Messiah was not a foreign concept among some Jewish groups of the Second Temple period and was confirmed through the life and works of Christ. Yet, throughout Church history, there have always been those who deny Jesus' divinity and many others who struggle to grasp its significance. It is essential for Christian theology that Jesus be understood as more than just a prophet and fully embody Yahweh's divine nature.
In Second Temple Judaism, different sects held diverse expectations about the Messiah,[1] ranging from a political leader to a divine figure. However, early Christians believed that Jesus was not only the long-awaited Messiah but also Yahweh in human form, a principle that aligns with Old Testament prophetic expectations. Scripture reveals many instances where Jesus is identified with the divine titles, attributes, and actions reserved for Yahweh. New Testament passages consistently interpret these Old Testament prophecies as pointing directly to Jesus’ divine identity. Furthermore, both biblical texts and Second Temple Jewish literature affirm that the Messiah is Yahweh incarnate, with the early Jewish concept of the “Two Powers in Heaven” offering additional insight into understanding His divine nature within a broader theological framework.
The Bible Teaches that Jesus is God
Based strictly on Scripture, Jesus is understood as the one true God in numerous passages. Some strongly support Jesus’s deity, while others imply his divine identity. For example, John 1:1 states, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” (emphasis added). This passage identifies the “Word” as both being with God and as God. The following verses (John 1:14) clarify that the Word refers to Jesus, underscoring his divinity. Arian influenced groups, such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses (JW), translate these verses differently: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.” (John 1:1, NWT, emphasis added). The JW translation emphasizes Jesus’s preexistence to the material creation but denies the fullness of his deity, portraying him as a lesser god or spirit rather than the one true and eternal God.
If the argument were left there, it might seem to revolve around which theological tradition is most qualified to translate Scripture. The Orthodox, Catholic, and Protestant traditions (with secular linguists) agree on the traditional translation of the passage and its interpretation. However, to refute the JW interpretation, a deeper examination, particularly of the Johannine writings, reveals far more concerning Jesus’s identity. In John 8:58, for example, Jesus says, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.” Here, Jesus uses the divine name from Exodus 3:14, “I AM WHO I AM,” claiming more than just preexistence, but divine identity, “the self-existing, self-living, self-affirming God whose being is his ever-continuing life and whose life is his ever-continuing being.”[2] The response of the crowd—picking up stones to stone him—indicates that they understood this as a claim to divine status. Arian theology, as held by the JW, acknowledges Jesus’ spiritual nature but insists that he is a created being. Yet, historic Christian orthodoxy emphasizes the opposite: “one Lord Jesus Christ, the Only Begotten Son of God, born of the Father before all ages. God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father” (The Nicene Creed).
Another significant claim of divinity comes in John 10:30, where Jesus says, “I and the Father are one.” The immediate reaction of the Jews to this statement—an accusation of blasphemy (John 10:33)—shows that they interpreted his words as a claim to be God. Perhaps Jesus was claiming to be “a god,” not “the God,” as the ancient world had a category for numerous gods (elohim), “lesser divine beings in his heavenly council.”[3] However, such an interpretation introduces significant theological problems. Were Jesus simply one god among many, he could not claim to be one with the Father. Jesus also affirms his divine status in Revelation 1:17-18, declaring, “Fear not, I am the first and the last, and the living one.” The titles “first and the last” are drawn directly from Isaiah 44:6, where Yahweh uses them to describe himself, implying Jesus shares Yahweh’s identity. On Isaiah 44:6, Bates concludes that “God is the only genuine god, so when humans worship idols, they participate in a faulty assessment of reality.”[4] Worship of any other than the one genuine or true God, is idolatry. Thus, across the Johannine literature, “John’s worldview is indeed one in which Jesus is God, equal with God, and is in fact to be seen as God,”[5] equally worthy of worship with the Father.
The Apostle Paul also firmly identifies Jesus as God. In Philippians 2:5-7, Paul writes, “...Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.” Jesus’s preexistence “in the form of God” before his incarnation demonstrates his equality with God. While one might attempt to argue that multiple gods share divine power, this “is not a nebulous allusion to divine power in general but rather a direct allusion to God’s power.”[6] Paul’s writings affirm this notion. In Colossians 1:15-19, Paul says, “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth...For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell.” Here, Paul describes Jesus not merely as a reflection of God but bearing “the sum total of divine attributes and powers, with no aspect of the fullness excepted,”[7] the one in whom all the fullness of God dwells. This is further affirmed in Titus 2:13, where Paul refers to Jesus as “our great God and Savior.” To suggest that Jesus is anything less than fully divine would make such a statement blasphemous within the framework of Judeo-Christian monotheism.
The author of Hebrews also emphasizes Jesus’s divine nature: “He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power” (Hebrews 1:3). This description of Jesus as the ‘exact imprint’ or charakter (Greek, exact representation)[8] of God’s glory reinforces the view of his full divinity. The imagery here is powerful. In Genesis, God spoke all things into existence. Now, it is Jesus who upholds all things by his word, demonstrating the same creative and sustaining power. The Arian interpretation, reflected in the New World Translation (NWT) that Jesus merely reflects God’s glory as a mirror fails to capture the meaning of charakter, which denotes an exact imprint or representation, not merely a reflection. “Yahweh’s and Jesus’ revealed glory serves as a unifying motif”[9] in the Scriptures. While all believers are called to reflect God’s glory, Jesus is uniquely described as the one who embodies the very nature of God.
Scripture consistently portrays Jesus as possessing the divine identity of God. His titles, actions, and claims align with those ascribed to Yahweh, leaving little room for viewing him as anything less than fully God. The biblical narrative does not simply present Jesus as a lesser divine being or a prophet but as God himself, incarnate and active in creation, redemption, and the final restoration of all things.
The Old Testament Expectation of a Divine Messiah
It is no secret that the Jews of the Second Temple period varied in their practice and doctrine of the Jewish faith.[10] Many awaited a merely human Messiah (anointed one)[11] who would deliver Israel from Roman oppression, restore the fortunes of the Promised Land, drive out pagan worship, and reestablish proper worship according to Torah. However, there are compelling reasons to believe that some rabbis and Jewish sects expected a divinely manifested Messiah. In the Old Testament, various prophecies and expectations about the coming Messiah appear, though the idea of a divine Messiah is more implicit than explicit. Nevertheless, several passages suggest that the Messiah will possess divine attributes or closely associate with God.
Isaiah 9:6-7 offers one example, “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. Of the increase of his government and of peace there will be no end, on the throne of David and over his kingdom, to establish it and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from this time forth and forevermore.” This prophecy refers to a future child who will rule on David’s throne—the expectation of a human Messiah—but ascribes to him the title “Mighty God,” implying a divine nature. To give the title “Mighty God” to a mere human who is not Yahweh incarnate would indeed be blasphemous. Like the title “our great God,” previously discussed, this prophecy strongly suggests that the Messiah will be identified as God Himself.
Isaiah prophesies again, “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel” (Isaiah 7:14). The name “Immanuel” means “God with us” (cf. Matthew 1:22–23), indicating that the coming child will, in some real sense, represent God's presence among his people, functioning as “a symbol of God’s faithfulness to the line of David.”[12] As the New Testament authors and early Christian creeds make clear, the most natural understanding is that Jesus represents God's presence because Jesus is God incarnate.[13]
Other prophets concur with Isaiah. Micah proclaims, “But you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah…from you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel, whose coming forth is from of old, from ancient days” (5:2). Micah speaks of a ruler emerging from Bethlehem whose origins are described as being “from of old, from ancient days,” suggesting an eternal or pre-existent nature—characteristics of divinity. Similarly, in Daniel 7:13-14, Daniel prophesies,
I saw in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one like a son of man, and he came to the Ancient of Days and was presented before him. And to him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed.
There is a correlation between “Jewish messianism and Christian Christology” regarding “texts that interpret the Danielic Son of Man.”[14] Here the “Son of Man” is given everlasting dominion, and all nations are to serve him. The term “serve” (pelach) can be translated as “pay reverence to” or “worship,” impling that this messianic figure will receive the same reverence that belongs to the Ancient of Days, an idea common to New Testament Christology and not lost for the Jewish Messiah.
A fascinating connection exists between the titles “Son of Man” and “Son of God.” In the Gospels, Jewish religious leaders saw Jesus as a blasphemer not because his followers called him the Son of God, but because he referred to himself as the Son of Man (ex. Mark 14:61-64), embodying the authority described in Daniel’s prophecy. Craig Keener recommends this correlation of Mark 14:61-64 with Daniel 7:13ff, emphasizing Jesus’s own belief that he fulfills the prophesies of Daniel 7, bringing upon himself the accusations of the religious leaders.[15] Indeed, “the historical Jesus, alluding to Dan 7:13, spoke about a heavenly Son of Man figure to come in the future,”[16] by which he meant, himself. This suggests that at least some of the religious leaders of the day expected a hypostatic union, where the human Messiah also possessed a divine nature as well as an identification with a biblical-theological thread tracking creation to consummation when the Son of Man returns for his Kingdom.
The Psalms also contain hints of a divine Messiah. In Psalm 2:7-8, the psalmist writes, “The LORD [Yahweh] said to me, ‘You are my Son; today I have begotten you. Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage, and the ends of the earth your possession.’” This royal Psalm refers to the Messiah as the “Son” of Yahweh, “whose throne Yahweh swore he would establish forever, speaking of how Yahweh became his father and he became Yahweh’s son,”[17] implying a unique and intimate relationship with God. Though “sonship” language does not necessarily imply divinity, in this context, it seems to suggest a unique, perhaps divine role for the Messiah in God’s redemptive plan. In the Second Temple period, “son of God” could describe an Israelite since Israel was considered God’s son (see Exodus 4:22). This is why Moses writes, “You are the sons of the LORD your God” (Deuteronomy 14:1). However, the psalmist points to a divine, not merely human, quality for this Son of God where Psalm 2 “indicate[s] God’s act of vindicating the Messiah” so that “what was originally a declaration of God’s election of the Davidic dynasty is now fulfilled in the messianic Son of God’s resurrection and enthronement.”[18]
Another key Messianic passage appears in Psalm 110:1, “The LORD [Yahweh] says to my Lord [adonai]: ‘Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.’” This verse portrays Yahweh speaking to “my Lord,” implying that the Messiah is a distinct figure from Yahweh but is also exalted to a divine status, seated at Yahweh's right hand in a position of supreme authority. Some, like the Arians, acknowledge Jesus’s divinity but consider him to be an angelic or lesser divine being.[19] However, the author of Hebrews, quoting Psalm 110:1, dismisses this view; “And to which of the angels has he ever said, ‘Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet?’” (Hebrews 1:13). The writer of Hebrews does not view Jesus as an angel who is adopted into God’s priestly order but rather as the Almighty incarnate who ascends to the Father’s right hand. “Ascension to the heavenly throne” means that Jesus “reign[s] as cosmic king,”[20] as attested to by many other New Testament writers (cf. Matthew 26:64; Mark 16:19; Luke 22:69; Acts 2:33; Acts 7:55-56; Romans 8:34; Ephesians 1:20-23; Colossians 3:1; Philippians 2:9-11; Hebrews 1:3; Hebrews 10:12-13; Hebrews 12:2; 1 Peter 3:22; Revelation 3:21; Revelation 5:6-7).
One more episode contributing to this understanding occurs in Luke 23:35-43, during the crucifixion. The account of the criminal on the cross next to Jesus provides a striking image of the Messiah’s authority and divine kingship. When the criminal says to Jesus, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom,” Jesus replies, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.” In this brief exchange, Jesus asserts his authority over eternal destiny, a power reserved for God alone. The criminal, recognizing Jesus’s kingship, offers one of the simplest, yet most profound, confessions of faith, acknowledging Jesus as the divine King with the authority to grant entrance into Paradise.
While the concept of a divine Messiah is not always explicit in the Old Testament, numerous passages—especially in the writings of Isaiah, Micah, Daniel, and the Psalms—clearly suggest that the Messiah would possess divine attributes and authority. “All four Gospels depict Jesus’s crucifixion as an ironic enthronement of the King of Israel. Within the passion narratives, Jesus is repeatedly referred to as king and messiah, as having his own kingdom.”[21]The New Testament writers and early Christians understood Old Testament prophecies as being fulfilled in Jesus who is both fully human and fully divine, the incarnate God who reigns eternally.
Consider the episode of the criminals on the cross. At the crucifixion, two criminals are executed alongside Jesus (see Luke 23:39–43). Contrary to traditional interpretations that depict them as common thieves, it is more likely that these men were zealots,[22] devout Jews who had committed violent acts against Roman authorities—possibly even murder. This makes them starkly different from Jesus, who submitted peacefully to Roman rule. Despite their shared circumstances, the two criminals stand in contrast to one another in their response to Jesus. One sees Jesus as the Messiah, while the other rejects him. The first criminal mocks Jesus, challenging him to prove his Messiahship by saving himself and them from crucifixion (Luke 23:39). In response, the second criminal defends Jesus, displaying reverence for God. His rebuke, “Don’t you fear God?” (Luke 23:40), reveals that he not only acknowledges Jesus as the Messiah but also fears God, unlike the first criminal, who does not share his belief in a divine Messiah.
The second criminal further demonstrates his allegiance to Jesus by recognizing him as the true King of God’s Kingdom. In doing so, he confesses Jesus as the Davidic heir, fulfilling Israel’s expectations of a messianic King (Luke 23:42). However, he clearly does not expect an earthly reign but rather acknowledges Jesus’s spiritual kingship, indicating his understanding of supernatural elements of Jewish eschatology—indeed Jesus sees himself not as a merely human King, but looks forward to the inauguration of the Kingdom of God quintessential to much Jewish eschatology.[23] The criminal looks beyond the present moment of suffering and understands that Jesus’s kingship will be inaugurated in the heavenly realm, not through an immediate earthly rule. Finally, another indication of the criminal’s faith comes when Jesus promises, “Today you will be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43). This response from Jesus gives the criminal hope, even in the face of imminent death, reaffirming his belief in the Messiah’s ultimate authority over a greater and eternal Kingdom. Confronted with the oppressive reign of Caesar, the criminal places his trust in Jesus, recognizing him as the true King over a more glorious and everlasting Kingdom—the Kingdom of God.[24]
Based on his understanding of the Old Testament, the criminal expected a Messiah with a heavenly kingdom. While the Old Testament does not consistently depict the Messiah as explicitly divine, several passages imply divine attributes or a close association with God. The Messiah is presented as having an eternal nature, and his exaltation to God's right hand is not an indication of lesser status but of his Yahwistic authority. These elements together create the expectation that the Messiah would hold a unique, essentially divine role, which is later fully realized in New Testament portrayals of Jesus.
Second Temple Texts Pointing to Jesus as the Messiah
The influence of Second Temple Jewish texts on shaping messianic expectations is well-documented as the Jews of the intertestamental period interpreted the Old Testament texts in the light of their messianic hope.[25] Various Jewish groups during this period, including the Pharisees, Essenes, and even some early Christians, were shaped by apocryphal and pseudepigraphical writings that expanded on or interpreted the Old Testament. These texts often provide a richer and more developed view of the Messiah than what is explicitly presented in the Hebrew Scriptures. Several of these Second Temple texts offer more detailed visions of the Messiah, which later align with concepts associated with Jesus in the New Testament.
1 Enoch portrays the Son of Man in ways that heighten messianic expectations similar to the Book of Daniel. In 1 Enoch 46:1-4 and 1 Enoch 48:2-10, the “Son of Man” is described as preexistent, seated on a throne, and executing judgment. Though we “presume the actual, hidden existence of the Son of Man in God’s presence before creation,”[26] this figure is depicted as both a divine judge and savior who will defeat the wicked and establish justice—authorities he receives from the Ancient of Days. Thus, the Son of Man in 1 Enoch is a heavenly figure, not merely a human king, aligning with the portrayal of Jesus as both divine and human. Jesus frequently referred to himself as the Son of Man, and this connection to 1 Enoch’s exalted, preexistent Son of Man likely influenced how his followers understood his identity beyond the expectations drawn solely from the Prophets. Furthermore, in 1 Enoch 62:5-9, the Son of Man judges kings and the powerful who oppress the righteous, presenting him as the bringer of salvation and ruler of a future age. This vision parallels Jesus’ role in New Testament eschatology[27] as a messianic judge who will return to establish God’s Kingdom on earth and to judge the world (Matthew 25:31-46, Revelation 19).
4 Ezra (also known as 2 Esdras) provides another glimpse into messianic expectations, prophesying that the Messiah will reign for 400 years before the world's end, a time of peace and righteousness (4 Ezra 7:28-29). Although this text does not detail the Messiah’s divine status as extensively as others, it does describe him as a future king who will inaugurate an era of righteousness. 4 Ezra 13:3-11 describes a man—interpreted as the Messiah—rising from the sea and defeating Israel’s enemies with a word of power from his mouth. This “word of power” imagery connects closely to the logos (word, reason) theology of John 1 in the New Testament, where Jesus is described as the “Word of God.” Though 4 Ezra does not explicitly declare the Messiah to be divine, it depicts him as a powerful figure who will redeem Israel and judge the nations, paralleling the New Testament’s depiction of Jesus' second coming.
Written in the 1st century BC, the Psalms of Solomon (especially Psalms of Solomon 17 and 18) reflect Pharisaic messianic hopes for a Davidic ruler who would establish justice and overthrow the oppressors of Israel[28]—often seen as Rome during the Second Temple period but consistent with the imagery of Babylon, later employed in Revelation. The Messiah in the Psalms of Solomon is a righteous king who will reign, defeat Israel’s enemies, and purify the nation (Psalms of Solomon 17:23-32). Referred to as “the Lord’s Messiah,” the figure emphasizes the Messiah's anointed status, though the text focuses more on national Israel’s political liberation than the Messiah’s heavenly Kingdom. Despite the Psalms of Solomons’ emphasis on a Davidic king, this just ruler who restores Israel would have been understood by early Christians in light of Jesus’ fulfillment of the Davidic kingship—though his kingship is ultimately realized in a spiritual and eschatological Kingdom rather than a purely political one. Indeed, “the commission given to Adam as God’s son is passed on to Israel,”[29] as reflected in the Psalms of Solomon, and extends to the eschaton, creating a biblical-theological thread through the narrative of Scripture.
The Apocalypse of Baruch (2 Baruch) also emphasizes a coming Messiah who will defeat Israel’s enemies (2 Baruch 40:1-3) and describes him as a righteous ruler who brings peace and joy to the righteous (2 Baruch 72:2-6). The messianic era that follows the arrival of the Messiah is portrayed as one of abundance and joy for the righteous (2 Baruch 29:3-8). Early Christians saw Jesus fulfilling these expectations, not through military conquest but through his death, resurrection, and second coming. While 2 Baruch focuses more on the political and military aspects of the Messiah, early Christian interpreters spiritualized these prophecies, seeing their ultimate fulfillment in Christ’s spiritual kingdom.[30]
The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, especially Levi[31] and Judah,[32] include messianic prophecies about a priestly and royal Messiah who will emerge from the tribes of Levi and Judah. This dual role of priest (Levi) and king (Judah) aligns with the portrayal of Jesus in the New Testament, where he is depicted as both the great high priest and the kingly Messiah (read, anointed King).[33] The Messiah in the Testaments fulfills the priestly and kingly roles that are central to New Testament Christology, differentiating the Messiah from the priests of the Old Covenant.
Believers enjoy a high priest who sits at God’s right hand and has access to God’s true sanctuary, his presence, in the heavens. Jesus is not in the same category as the Levitical priests. His ministry is not earthly but heavenly. He has introduced a better ministry and a better covenant that is established on the basis of better promises.[34]
Jesus is described, as in The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, as the great high priest who mediates a new covenant (Hebrews 8:1-6) and the king in the line of David, fulfilling both roles as the ultimate Messiah.
Tobit offers a vision of the restoration of Israel, though it does not directly address a messianic figure. However, the expectation of God’s intervention to bring about justice and peace for his people[35] aligns with broader Second Temple messianic expectations. The hope for God’s coming salvation and the renewal of Israel reflects the broader anticipation of a coming deliverer, a theme that connects closely to Jesus’ mission to establish the Kingdom of God and offer salvation not just to Israel but to all nations.[36]
Finally, the Wisdom of Solomon[37] describes the persecution of a righteous man, mocked and tested by his enemies, ultimately leading to his death. Early Christians saw this as a parallel to the Suffering Servant theme in Isaiah 53,[38] which was later applied to Jesus’ suffering and crucifixion. The theme of the righteous sufferer foreshadows Jesus’ suffering and death on behalf of humanity. The New Testament portrays Jesus as the righteous one who, though innocent, suffers unjustly for the world’s sins (1 Peter 2:22-24).
The Second Temple period was characterized by a wide array of messianic expectations, heavily influenced by apocryphal and pseudepigraphical texts. These writings often elaborate on Old Testament prophecies and provide more precise, more developed portrayals of the Messiah, emphasizing roles such as judgment, kingship, and righteousness—roles that later find fulfillment in the person of Jesus Christ. Although these texts do not always explicitly present a divine Messiah as clearly as the New Testament, they offer a critical context for understanding how Jewish messianic expectations evolved and how they ultimately culminated in the New Testament's depiction of Jesus as the human and divine Messiah.
Biblical Arguments Against Jesus's Deity
Several passages in the Bible have been used to argue against Jesus’ deity, often emphasizing his humanity, submission to the Father, or limitations. However, these passages are generally interpreted within the broader context of his incarnation and mission. Jesus’ life during the incarnation must be understood as categorically different from his pre-incarnational and glorified states.
One commonly cited argument is Jesus’ prayers to the Father. “…how is it that, if this Word was Yahweh, and the Word was visible and embodied, Jews of Jesus’ day could tolerate the notion that Jesus was Yahweh incarnate on earth—while Yahweh was still in heaven?”[39] For example, in John 17:3, Jesus prays, “And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.” Here, Jesus refers to the Father as “the only true God” and himself as the one sent by God. Some argue that if Jesus were God, he wouldn’t need to distinguish between himself and the Father in this way. Instead, his prayer seems to suggest a distinction in roles or identity. However, Trinitarian theology interprets this as affirming the distinct persons within the Godhead—the Father and the Son—without negating Jesus' divinity (cf. John 1:1-3). The glory of the Son is the glory of the Father so that “one could see the glory [of God], and in seeing the glory one could begin to exercise believing loyalty toward Jesus.”[40] In this way, Jesus’ earthly mission can highlight his submission to the Father while maintaining his divine identity as Yahweh.
Another example is found in John 14:28, where Jesus acknowledges that “the Father is greater than I.” Some interpret this as Jesus acknowledging his inferiority to the Father, implying that he cannot be fully divine if the Father is greater. However, this statement is understood as Jesus speaking from the perspective of his incarnate, human nature. During his earthly ministry, he took on human limitations, including submission to the Father’s will (Philippians 2:6-8), rather than “snatching ‘equality with God’ by seizure or exploitation,”[41] while still being equal to the Father in the divine essence, thus preserving Jesus’ divinity and recognizing the functional distinctions within the Trinity.
A challenging passage often cited is Mark 13:32, where Jesus states, “But concerning that day or that hour, no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.” Here, Jesus seems to limit his divine omniscience,[42] which could argue against his characteristic deity. However, this should be seen as part of the mystery of the incarnation. Though fully divine, Jesus voluntarily limited his use of certain divine attributes during his earthly life. Philippians 2:7 speaks of Jesus “emptying” himself, willingly taking on human limitations to accomplish his purpose of salvation.
Further, Jesus himself identified as a human being. In Matthew 19:17, Jesus responds to someone calling him “good teacher” by saying, “Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good.” Jesus could be read as deflecting an attribution of divinity. Yet, many scholars suggest that Jesus was challenging the man’s understanding of goodness, pointing him to God as the source of all good, without denying his own divine nature. Throughout the Gospels, Jesus frequently deflects superficial titles to reveal deeper truths about his identity (ex. John 6:14-15, Jesus withdraws when people try to crown him king).
Another significant objection to Jesus' divinity is the fact of his death. Philippians 2:8 states, “And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.” Some argue that since God cannot die, Jesus, having died, cannot be divine in any or every sense. However, Christian theology accounts for Jesus' death as it pertains to his human nature, not his divine nature. “In the perfect oneness of his human and divine nature it cannot be said that Christ suffered only in his humanity and not in his divinity.”[43] His divine nature suffered, yet remained eternal and untouched by death, while his human nature experienced genuine suffering and death on the cross.
That the first and second deaths are qualitatively different is supported also by [Revelation] 21:4, 8. There, physical death is part of the “first things” that “have passed away,” which are contrasted with “the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”…A facet of the “second death” is separation forever from God’s…Elsewhere the NT can also speak of a spiritual death that separates people from God (e.g., Luke 15:24, 32; Eph. 2:1, 12; Col. 2:13).[44]
Even within New Testament theology, mere humans are seen as undergoing two deaths: a physical death (the first death) and a spiritual death (the second death). In this context, Jesus’ death on the cross relates to his human form, while his divine nature remains sovereign over life and death.
These objections—Jesus praying to the Father, his acknowledgment of the Father’s greatness, his limited knowledge, and his death—are often interpreted as limitations or evidence of Jesus’ inferiority. However, the Christian Church has generally understood these within the framework of the incarnation. Jesus voluntarily assumed human limitations to fulfill his mission of salvation. His divine nature was never compromised, even as he lived out his earthly life in submission to the Father. The Philippians 2:6-11 passage encapsulates this understanding of Jesus as fully God and fully man, revealing the mystery of his dual nature.
It is important to interpret these passages in the broader context of the entire biblical witness and messianic expectations in the Old Testament and Second Temple literature. Isolating a few verses or ideas can lead to misunderstandings or an incomplete view of Jesus’ identity. The New Testament presents a unified testimony that Jesus is both God and man, and the temporary limitations of his incarnate state serve the greater purpose of redeeming humanity.
Is Jesus Yahweh of the Old Testament?
To ascribe Jesus the status of eternal deity, as the New Testament authors do, is to claim that he is, in some sense, Yahweh (the covenant name of God in the Old Testament), the God of Israel. The New Testament strongly recommends that Jesus be identified with Yahweh, though the relationship is nuanced, especially in the context of Trinitarian theology. For example, “The Old Testament pattern for Yahweh as judge is transferred by Paul to Christ…as is also the right to rule as King and Lord.”[45] This is a crucial issue as Jesus’ deity in the New Testament should reveal a category for God incarnate in the Old Testament. Therefore, seeing Jesus in the Old Testament is helpful if he is truly Yahweh incarnate.
Jesus shares the name and titles of Yahweh. In John 8:58, Jesus declares, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.” This statement echoes Exodus 3:14, where God reveals himself to Moses as “I AM WHO I AM” (ehyeh, referring to Yahweh). By using the title, “I AM,” “Jesus claims to share in God’s eternal existence,”[46] directly identifying himself with Yahweh, the eternal God of the Old Testament. The reaction of the Jewish leaders, who attempted to stone him, indicates they understood this as a claim to eternal divinity and identification with Yahweh.
Another connection appears when comparing Isaiah to John. Yahweh says, “I am the LORD [Yahweh]; that is my name; my glory I give to no other” (Isaiah 42:8). Yet, in John 17:5, Jesus prays, “And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.” If Yahweh shares his glory with no one, and Jesus claims to share in this glory, it suggests that Jesus shares in the divine identity of Yahweh,[47] or else he would be guilty of blasphemy.
Furthermore, Yahweh declares himself as “the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end” (Isaiah 44:6). In Revelation, Jesus says, “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end” (22:13).[48] “Now all these titles, which are used in the OT of God, are combined and applied to Christ to highlight his deity.”[49] The same titles are applied both to Yahweh in the Old Testament and to Jesus in the New Testament, linking their identities. Further, “the claim that Jesus is the shepherd in Revelation suggests his deity, though there are also texts in which the shepherd is Davidic (Ezek. 34:23; 37:24; Mic. 5:4), and perhaps both themes are present here.”[50] This potential claim to Jesus’s identification with Yahweh as shepherd applies to Gospel claims of Jesus as shepherd as well.
Jesus also performs acts that are otherwise attributed to Yahweh. In the Old Testament, Yahweh alone is seen as the Creator of all things (Isaiah 44:24, Genesis 1:1, 2:4), but in the New Testament, Jesus is described as the agent of creation; “All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made” (John 1:3). Similarly, Colossians 1:16 affirms, “For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth.” “Among the supernatural…Jesus has no rival. He—and no one else—is before everything in both time and rank.”[51] Jesus exercises the creative power attributed solely to Yahweh in the Old Testament because he is, in some sense, Yahweh.
Moreover, Jesus forgives sins. In the Old Testament, Yahweh is the only one with the authority to forgive sins (Isaiah 43:25). Yet in the New Testament, Jesus directly forgives sins: “And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, ‘Son, your sins are forgiven’” (Mark 2:5-7). The religious leaders’ response, “Who can forgive sins but God alone?” demonstrates their understanding that this is an act only Yahweh can perform. N.T. Wright argues,
Jesus’ claim to be able to provide forgiveness…should not be thought of as a detached, ahistorical blessing, such as might be offered by anyone at any time…Forgiveness was an eschatological blessing; if Israel went into exile because of her sins, then forgiveness consists in her returning: returning to yhwh [Yahweh].[52]
Write teaches that the forgiveness of individuals which Jesus provides equates the individual ecclesiastically with the people of God and his forgiveness with the eschatological forgiveness of Yahweh.
The New Testament authors often apply Old Testament passages about Yahweh to Jesus. For example, Isaiah 40:3 prophesies a voice crying in the wilderness, “Prepare the way of the LORD [Yahweh]; make straight in the desert a highway for our God.” In Matthew 3:3, this passage is used to describe John the Baptist preparing the way for Jesus, implying that Jesus is the Yahweh for whom the way is being prepared. Similarly, Joel 2:32 declares, “And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls on the name of the LORD [Yahweh] shall be saved.” Paul applies this to Jesus, indicating that calling on Jesus is equivalent to calling on Yahweh for salvation, “For ‘everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved’” (Romans 10:13).
But in what sense is Jesus Yahweh? Jesus is Yahweh in the sense that he shares the same divine essence and attributes as Yahweh, performs the works of Yahweh, and receives the worship due only to Yahweh.[53] However, in Christian theology, this does not mean that Jesus is the Father. Rather, Jesus is the second person of the Trinity—distinct in person but one in divine essence with the Father (Yahweh). “In Jesus…we meet with the Lord who has become incarnate among us within space and time in a divinely as well as a historically unrepeatable once and for all event, so that in him the oneness of God’s self-revelation as the Lord is reinforced in the most absolute way.”[54] This distinction is evident in passages where Jesus prays to the Father (ex. John 17), emphasizing the relational roles within the Trinity while claiming unity with the Father (John 10:30).
It is worth noting that some Jewish and early Christian theology, developed from passages where Yahweh appears in one form as Father in heaven and in another as a physical being (such as the Angel of Yahweh, considered by many to be Yahweh pre-incarnate, God in human form),[55] supported a binitarian view of Yahweh. While not fully Trinitarian, this view holds that Yahweh could express himself in two distinct persons. However, this view falls short of explaining the Pharisees’ reaction to Jesus’ claim to divinity, as they seemed to primarily envision Yahweh as the invisible Father. Thus, the tension lies in the fact that Jesus embodies the divine nature of Yahweh in human form, yet he is not identical in person to the Father. This is clarified by Philippians 2:6-7, where “Christ is said to have ‘existed in the form of God’ before his incarnation, and then he ‘came to be in the likeness of men.”[56] This “incarnation” means that Yahweh’s eternal Word (John 1:1) became flesh in the person of Jesus (John 1:14).
The New Testament portrays Jesus as Yahweh in that he shares the divine identity, attributes, and titles of the God of the Old Testament. He is worshiped, acts with divine authority, and is honored with the same names and titles as Yahweh. Yet, in Trinitarian theology, Jesus is distinct from the Father but shares fully in the divine essence as the second person of the Trinity, truly God in every sense.
Two Powers in Heaven
The “Two Powers in Heaven” concept in early Jewish thought, mentioned in the previous section, offers an intriguing parallel to later Christian theology, especially regarding the relationship between Jesus (the Son) and the Father. However, significant distinctions exist as well. The Two Powers in Heaven refers to a strand of Jewish interpretation found in various Second Temple writings, which describe two distinct divine figures who share divine authority, both identified with the Covenant name, Yahweh. The Two Powers in Heaven “language is especially helpful for the study of early Jewish and Christian theophanic accounts in which God appears alongside a second mediatorial figure, who at times paradoxically emulates the deity’s attributes.”[57] This concept, once considered orthodox among Jews and early Christians was later deemed heretical by rabbis after the advent of Christianity, mainly due to its connection with early Trinitarian theology. Further, “members of God’s council participate in the issuing of God’s decrees,”[58] and other works of God, opening the possibility for the second power to merely be a representative power. However, for the purposes of Christological studies, it is essential to recognize that what was “later condemned as two powers heresy would not have been controversial in the first century,”[59] including the Scripture’s implications that the second power expresses himself as Yahweh, not merely a representative.
One of the clearest examples of this duality is the Angel of the Lord, who often appears in the Old Testament acting both as a messenger of Yahweh and as Yahweh himself. His dual identity is particularly evident in texts such as Exodus 3:2-6 (the burning bush)[60] and Genesis 18 (Yahweh’s visit to Abraham),[61] suggesting two figures identified as Yahweh. Similarly, in Daniel 7:13-14, Daniel sees “one like a son of man” coming on the clouds of heaven to the Ancient of Days (identified as God the Father) and being given authority, glory, and an everlasting dominion. The Son of Man receives worship—something due only to Yahweh according to Deuteronomy.[62] This distinction between the two figures suggests a clear relationship, where both are closely associated with divine rule and worship yet have distinct characteristics. Both are Yahweh, but distinct as Father and Son.
The Gideon narrative in Judges 6 offers another compelling example of Yahweh appearing in two forms within the same event, foreshadowing the later Christian understanding of the Trinity.[63] In Judges 6:11-24, the Angel of the LORD [Yahweh] appears to Gideon, first acting as a distinct messenger. However, in Judges 6:14, “the LORD [Yahweh] turned to him and said, ‘Go in this might of yours and save Israel from the hand of Midian; do not I send you?’” Here, Yahweh himself speaks, transitioning seamlessly from the Angel of Yahweh's earlier words. By Judges 6:22-23, Gideon reacts in fear, saying, “Alas, O Lord GOD [Adonai Yahweh]! For now I have seen the angel of the LORD [Yahweh] face to face.” Yet Yahweh immediately comforts him, blurring the line between the Angel and Yahweh himself. This merging of the Angel of Yahweh and Yahweh illustrates Yahweh's incarnate and transcendent presence, anticipating the Christian understanding of the Father and the Son.
The Christian doctrine of the Trinity teaches that one God exists as three distinct persons: Father, Son (Jesus), and Holy Spirit.[64] Within this framework, God is one in essence but three in person. The persons of the Trinity are co-equal and co-eternal, sharing the same divine nature,[65] though each has distinct roles in the economy of salvation and creation.
The Two Powers in Heaven concept overlaps with the Trinity in several important ways. First, it acknowledges a kind of plurality within the Godhead, which is also present in Trinitarian theology. Both models suggest divine figures who share authority within the divine nature. In the Two Powers model, two figures share this authority. In the Trinity, this is expanded to three persons—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—who are distinct but share the same divine essence.
Second, in Christian theology, the Son of Man figure in Daniel 7 is viewed as a prophetic vision of Jesus.[66] Jesus frequently referred to himself as the Son of Man, and in the New Testament, especially in Revelation, he is depicted as receiving worship (Revelation 5:13-14), just like the Son of Man in Daniel 7. “God is mentioned as being glorified together with Christ to highlight that Christ is in the same divine position as God and likewise to be glorified.”[67] Therefore, the Son of Man, Jesus, fits the role of the second person of the Trinity—the Son—distinct from the Father (the Ancient of Days) but sharing divine rule and honor.
Third, “Early Christian interpreters assume the identity of the ‘son of man’ with Christ.”[68] Christian interpretations traditionally identify the Angel of Yahweh as a pre-incarnate appearance of the Son. This figure, who acts both as a messenger and as Yahweh, aligns with Jesus’ dual nature as fully divine and physical, thus distinct from the Father. This fits within the Trinitarian understanding of Jesus as God’s messenger who is also God himself.
Despite these similarities, there are key distinctions between the Two Powers idea and the Trinity. First, the Two Powers view is binitarian, while the orthodox Christian view is Trinitarian. The Two Powers in Heaven model only accounts for two divine figures, whereas the doctrine of the Trinity includes the Holy Spirit as the third person. The Spirit plays a central role in both the Old and New Testaments but is not explicitly part of the Two Powers framework in Jewish thought.
Second, in the Two Powers model, the figures are often depicted as separate entities—Yahweh and his chief agent or representative—whereas in the Trinity, the persons are distinct yet share the same divine essence. This means the Trinity maintains the unity of God more explicitly than the Two Powers model. However, this distinction largely depends on one's interpretation of Scripture and theological decisions made based on the text.
Third, by the time Christianity developed its doctrine of the Trinity several centuries after the establishment of the Christian Church, Jewish theologians had already begun to question the Two Powers in Heaven interpretation as heretical. This rejection was influenced by the rise of Christianity, which identified Jesus as the second person of the divine Godhead. As a result, rabbinic thought distanced itself from these earlier interpretations to maintain a distinct religious and cultural identity even though “there is nothing…that rules out that the one God could not express himself in three [or two] personal representations.”[69]
While the Two Powers concept emphasizes two divine figures, Christian theology incorporates the Holy Spirit as the third person of the Trinity. Passages like Genesis 1:2 (the Spirit of God hovering over the waters)[70] and prophecies such as Ezekiel 36:26-27 speak of God’s Spirit. The New Testament further clarifies the personhood and divinity of the Holy Spirit (John 14:26, Acts 5:3-4). In the Trinity, the Holy Spirit is distinct from the Father and the Son yet shares the same divine essence and works alongside them in creation, redemption, and sanctification.
There are clear parallels between the Two Powers in Heaven idea and the Trinity, especially regarding Jesus’ divine identity and his relationship with the Father. The Two Powers concept highlights a plurality within the Godhead, which is expanded and fully developed in Christian thought to include the Holy Spirit. While the Two Powers model reflects a binitarian understanding, Christian theology extends this to a Trinitarian framework, affirming three distinct persons within the one God. Thus, the Two Powers idea can be viewed as a precursor or partial reflection of the more fully developed Trinitarian theology found in orthodox Christianity.
Conclusion
Scripture consistently presents Jesus as the incarnate Yahweh, bearing divine titles, roles, and authority. Both the Bible and Second Temple Jewish texts affirm His divine identity through the attributes and actions ascribed to Him. The ‘Two Powers in Heaven’ further enriches this understanding, offering a theological framework that aligns with early Jewish thought and the Christian doctrine of the Trinity. The biblical evidence shows that Jesus shared Yahweh’s identity, while the Two Powers concept is a precursor to Trinitarian theology, underscoring His divinity.
The convergence of biblical, apocryphal, and theological evidence creates a compelling case for Jesus as the pre-existent and incarnate Yahweh and the God-man presented in the New Testament. This unified approach has profound implications for understanding the nature of the Trinity, Jesus’ role in salvation, and His perfection in light of his humanity. Ultimately, Jesus is recognized as Yahweh, which enhances our appreciation for the continuity between the Old and New Testaments and strengthens the belief that God’s redemptive plan is fully realized in the person of Christ.
FOOTNOTES
[1] Craig S. Keener, The Historical Jesus of the Gospels (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2009), 264.
[2] Thomas F. Torrance, The Christian Doctrine of God, One Being Three Persons, The Cornerstones Series (London; New Delhi; New York; Sydney: Bloomsbury T&T Clark: An Imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, 2016), 235.
[3] Michael S. Heiser, Angels: What the Bible Really Says about God’s Heavenly Host (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2018), 10.
[4] Matthew W. Bates, Salvation by Allegiance Alone: Rethinking Faith, Works, and the Gospel of Jesus the King (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic: A division of Baker Publishing Group, 2017), 153.
[5] Brian Neil Peterson, John’s Use of Ezekiel: Understanding the Unique Perspective of the Fourth Gospel (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2015), 92.
[6] G. K. Beale, A New Testament Biblical Theology: The Unfolding of the Old Testament in the New (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2011), 267.
[7] Murray J. Harris, Navigating Tough Texts: A Guide to Problem Passages in the New Testament (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2020), 172.
[8] J. Gess, “Χαρακτήρ,” ed. Lothar Coenen, Erich Beyreuther, and Hans Bietenhard, New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1986), 288.
[9] Peterson, John’s Use of Ezekiel, 46.
[10] Nijay K. Gupta, “Christology,” ed. John D. Barry et al., The Lexham Bible Dictionary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2016).
[11] Keener, The Historical Jesus, 264.
[12] Joshua W. Jipp, The Messianic Theology of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2020), 26.
[13] G. K. Beale, The Temple and the Church’s Mission: A Biblical Theology of the Dwelling Place of God, ed. D. A. Carson, vol. 17, New Studies in Biblical Theology (Downers Grove, IL; England: InterVarsity Press; Apollos, 2004), 276.
[14] William Horbury, “Jewish Messianism and Early Christology,” in Contours of Christology in the New Testament, ed. Richard N. Longenecker, McMaster New Testament Studies (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2005), 17.
[15] Keener, The Historical Jesus, 202.
[16] Adela Yarbro Collins and Harold W. Attridge, Mark: A Commentary on the Gospel of Mark, Hermeneia—a Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2007), 600.
[17] James M. Hamilton Jr., Psalms, ed. T. Desmond Alexander, Thomas R. Schreiner, and Andreas J. Köstenberger, vol. 1, Evangelical Biblical Theology Commentary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Academic, 2021), 103.
[18] Jipp, The Messianic Theology of the New Testament, 107.
[19] Thomas R. Schreiner, The Joy of Hearing: A Theology of the Book of Revelation, ed. Thomas R. Schreiner and Brian S. Rosner, New Testament Theology (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2021), 107.
[20] Beale, The Temple and the Church’s Mission, 203.
[21] Jipp, The Messianic Theology of the New Testament, 354.
[22] T. F. Johnson, “Rob; Robbery,” ed. Geoffrey W. Bromiley, The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Revised (Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1979–1988), 203.
[23] Keener, The Historical Jesus, 38.
[24] For a more thorough treatment of the criminals on the cross passage see: Anthony Delgado, The Gospel Is Bigger than You Think. (Palmdale, CA: Biblical Reenchantment Books, 2024), 213-214.
[25] Craig A. Evans, “Messianic Expectations,” in CSB Study Bible: Notes, ed. Edwin A. Blum and Trevin Wax (Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2017), 1618.
[26] George W. E. Nickelsburg and James C. VanderKam, 1 Enoch 2: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch, Chapters 37–82, ed. Klaus Baltzer, Hermeneia—A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2012), 170.
[27] Ibid.
[28] Jipp, The Messianic Theology of the New Testament, 58.
[29] Beale, A New Testament Biblical Theology, 402.
[30] N. T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God, Christian Origins and the Question of God (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1996), 532.
[31] Testament of Levi 18:2-3, The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, “Then shall the Lord raise up a new priest, and to him all the words of the Lord shall be revealed; and he shall execute a righteous judgment upon the earth for a multitude of days.”
[32] Testament of Judah 24:1-3, The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, “And after these things shall arise the Star of Jacob in peace, and a man shall arise from my seed, like the sun of righteousness... and the sceptre of my kingdom shall shine forth.”
[33] Jipp, The Messianic Theology of the New Testament, 334.
[34] Thomas R. Schreiner, Hebrews, ed. T. Desmond Alexander, Thomas R. Schreiner, and Andreas J. Köstenberger, Evangelical Biblical Theology Commentary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2021), 246.
[35] Tobit 14:5-7, “But God will again have mercy on them, and God will bring them back into their land... until all the nations of the earth shall be converted and fear God in truth.”
[36] Jipp, The Messianic Theology of the New Testament, 335.
[37] Wisdom of Solomon 2:12, 19-20, “Let us lie in wait for the righteous man [messianic figure], because he is inconvenient to us and opposes our actions…Let us test him with insult and torture, that we may find out how gentle he is, and make trial of his forbearance. Let us condemn him to a shameful death, for, according to what he says, he will be protected.”
[38] Nickelsburg and VanderKam, 1 Enoch 2, 120.
[39] Michael S. Heiser, The Unseen Realm: Recovering the Supernatural Worldview of the Bible, First Edition. (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2015), 132.
[40] Bates, Salvation by Allegiance Alone, 138.
[41] Ralph P. Martin, “The Christology of the Prison Epistles,” in Contours of Christology in the New Testament, ed. Richard N. Longenecker, McMaster New Testament Studies (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2005), 199.
[42] Keener, The Historical Jesus, 273.
[43] Torrance, The Christian Doctrine of God, 252.
[44] G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle, Cumbria: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 1999), 1036.
[45] Compare Psalm 62:12 and 2 Timothy 4:14, where Yahweh's right to “render to a man according to his work” is transferred by Paul to Jesus as, “the Lord will repay him according to his deeds.” See Philip H. Towner, “Christology in the Letters to Timothy and Titus,” in Contours of Christology in the New Testament, ed. Richard N. Longenecker, McMaster New Testament Studies (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2005), 242.Top of FormBottom of Form
[46] M. M. Thompson, “John, Gospel of,” ed. Joel B. Green and Scot McKnight, Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1992), 377.
[47] Schreiner, Hebrews, 58–59.
[48] cf. Revelation 1:8, “I am the Alpha and the Omega...who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.” There is ambiguity in this verse as to whether it is Yahweh, the Almighty of the Old Testament, or Jesus speaking. Both figures are described with similar titles elsewhere in Scripture, making it possible to interpret the speaker as either Yahweh, Jesus, or both.
[49] Beale, The Book of Revelation, 1138.
[50] Schreiner, The Joy of Hearing, 110.
[51] Harris, Navigating Tough Texts, 171.
[52] Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God, 434.
[53] Heiser, The Unseen Realm, 315.
[54] Torrance, The Christian Doctrine of God, 23.
[55] Michael S. Heiser, Sons and Daughters of God: The Believer’s Identity, Calling, and Destiny, Logos Mobile Education (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2019).
[56] Beale, A New Testament Biblical Theology, 446.
[57] Andrei A. Orlov, The Glory of the Invisible God: Two Powers in Heaven Traditions and Early Christology, ed. James H. Charlesworth, vol. 31, Jewish and Christian Texts in Contexts and Related Studies (London; New York; Oxford; New Delhi; Sydney: T&T Clark, 2019), 7.
[58] Heiser, Angels, 48.
[59] Alister E. McGrath, The Only True God: The History and Theology of God in the Christian Tradition (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2000), 71.
[60] Exodus 3:2–4 states, “…the angel of the Lord appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush…When the LORD [Yahweh] saw that he turned aside to see, God called to him out of the bush….” Notice the ambiguity between the figure in the bush and Yahweh, God himself.
[61] Genesis 18:1-2, 9-10, 13-14 states, “And the Lord appeared to him by the oaks of Mamre, as he sat at the door of his tent in the heat of the day. He lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, three men were standing in front of him. When he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them and bowed himself to the earth... They said to him, 'Where is Sarah your wife?' And he said, ‘She is in the tent.’ The Lord said, ‘I will surely return to you about this time next year, and Sarah your wife shall have a son.’ And Sarah was listening at the tent door behind him…The Lord said to Abraham, ‘Why did Sarah laugh and say, “Shall I indeed bear a child, now that I am old?” Is anything too hard for the Lord? At the appointed time I will return to you, about this time next year, and Sarah shall have a son.’” In this passage, Yahweh appears to Abraham in the form of one of the three men (presumed to be angelic or divine figures). As the narrative progresses, Yahweh is conflated with one of these figures, as the conversation between Abraham and the Lord continues.
[62] Deuteronomy 6:13, “It is the Lord your God you shall fear. Him you shall serve and by his name you shall swear.”
[63] Heiser, The Unseen Realm, 146–148.
[64] Torrance, The Christian Doctrine of God, 136–137.
[65] Ibid, 155.
[66] James M. Hamilton Jr., Psalms, ed. T. Desmond Alexander, Thomas R. Schreiner, and Andreas J. Köstenberger, vol. 2, Evangelical Biblical Theology Commentary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Academic, 2021), 297.
[67] Beale, The Book of Revelation, 365.
[68] John Joseph Collins and Adela Yarbro Collins, Daniel: A Commentary on the Book of Daniel, ed. Frank Moore Cross, Hermeneia—a Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1993), 307.
[69] Ben Witherington III, Who God Is: Meditations on the Character of Our God (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2020), 90.
[70] As many prefer to see Genesis 1:2 as ‘a mighty wind over the water,’ note: “Thus the phrase must be taken to involve some manifestation of God, whether as wind, spirit, or breath…,” see Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 1–15, vol. 1, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1987), 17.
Bibliography
Bates, Matthew W. Salvation by Allegiance Alone: Rethinking Faith, Works, and the Gospel of Jesus the King. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2017.
Beale, G. K. A New Testament Biblical Theology: The Unfolding of the Old Testament in the New. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2011.
———. The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text. New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle, Cumbria: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 1999.
———. The Temple and the Church’s Mission: A Biblical Theology of the Dwelling Place of God. Edited by D. A. Carson. Vol. 17. New Studies in Biblical Theology. Downers Grove, IL; England: InterVarsity Press; Apollos, 2004.
Collins, John Joseph, and Adela Yarbro Collins. Daniel: A Commentary on the Book of Daniel. Edited by Frank Moore Cross. Hermeneia—a Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1993.
Delgado, Anthony. The Gospel Is Bigger than You Think. Palmdale, CA: Biblical Reenchantment Books, 2024.
Evans, Craig A. “Messianic Expectations.” In CSB Study Bible: Notes, edited by Edwin A. Blum and Trevin Wax, 1618. Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2017.
Gess, J. “Χαρακτήρ.” Edited by Lothar Coenen, Erich Beyreuther, and Hans Bietenhard. New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1986, 288.
Gupta, Nijay K. “Christology.” Edited by John D. Barry et al. The Lexham Bible Dictionary. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2016.
Hamilton, James M. Jr. Psalms. Edited by T. Desmond Alexander, Thomas R. Schreiner, and Andreas J. Köstenberger. Vol. 1. Evangelical Biblical Theology Commentary. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Academic, 2021.
———. Psalms. Edited by T. Desmond Alexander, Thomas R. Schreiner, and Andreas J. Köstenberger. Vol. 2. Evangelical Biblical Theology Commentary. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Academic, 2021.
Harris, Murray J. Navigating Tough Texts: A Guide to Problem Passages in the New Testament. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2020.
Heiser, Michael S. Angels: What the Bible Really Says about God's Heavenly Host. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2018.
———. Sons and Daughters of God: The Believer’s Identity, Calling, and Destiny. Logos Mobile Education. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2019.
———. The Unseen Realm: Recovering the Supernatural Worldview of the Bible. 1st ed. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2015.
Horbury, William. “Jewish Messianism and Early Christology.” In Contours of Christology in the New Testament, edited by Richard N. Longenecker, 17. McMaster New Testament Studies. Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2005.
Jipp, Joshua W. The Messianic Theology of the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2020.
Johnson, T. F. “Rob; Robbery.” Edited by Geoffrey W. Bromiley. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Revised. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1979–1988, 203.
Keener, Craig S. The Historical Jesus of the Gospels. Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2009.
Martin, Ralph P. “The Christology of the Prison Epistles.” In Contours of Christology in the New Testament, edited by Richard N. Longenecker, 199. McMaster New Testament Studies. Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2005.
McGrath, Alister E. The Only True God: The History and Theology of God in the Christian Tradition. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2000.
Nickelsburg, George W. E., and James C. VanderKam. 1 Enoch 2: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch, Chapters 37–82. Edited by Klaus Baltzer. Hermeneia—A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2012.
Orlov, Andrei A. The Glory of the Invisible God: Two Powers in Heaven Traditions and Early Christology. Edited by James H. Charlesworth. Vol. 31. Jewish and Christian Texts in Contexts and Related Studies. London; New York; Oxford; New Delhi; Sydney: T&T Clark, 2019.
Peterson, Brian Neil. John’s Use of Ezekiel: Understanding the Unique Perspective of the Fourth Gospel. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2015.
Schreiner, Thomas R. Hebrews. Edited by T. Desmond Alexander, Thomas R. Schreiner, and Andreas J. Köstenberger. Evangelical Biblical Theology Commentary. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2021.
———. The Joy of Hearing: A Theology of the Book of Revelation. Edited by Thomas R. Schreiner and Brian S. Rosner. New Testament Theology. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2021.
Torrance, Thomas F. The Christian Doctrine of God, One Being Three Persons. The Cornerstones Series. London; New Delhi; New York; Sydney: Bloomsbury T&T Clark: An Imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, 2016.
Towner, Philip H. “Christology in the Letters to Timothy and Titus.” In Contours of Christology in the New Testament, edited by Richard N. Longenecker, 242. McMaster New Testament Studies. Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2005.
Wenham, Gordon J. Genesis 1–15. Vol. 1. Word Biblical Commentary. Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1987.
Witherington, Ben III. Who God Is: Meditations on the Character of Our God. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2020.
Wright, N. T. Jesus and the Victory of God. Christian Origins and the Question of God. London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1996.
