In this article, our focus is on the biblical basis for the Nicene Creed’s identification of our Lord Jesus Christ as the only begotten (monogenēs) Son of God, which means that he is the eternal Son of the Father who is truly God and not a created being. As the divine Son, he fully shares in the one, simple divine nature with the Father and the Spirit. This is why the Creed affirms that the Son is homoousios (of one nature), namely, that he wholly subsists in the identical nature with the Father and Spirit so that he, along with the Father and Spirit, is fully and equally God.
We cannot do an exhaustive survey of the biblical data teaching the truth of Christ’s deity. Instead, we will focus on some key texts that summarize the New Testament witness to Christ and also teach significant truths that were foundational to the Church’s formulation of the Nicene Creed. It’s crucial to recognize the continuity between what Scripture teaches and what the Church confesses. The Jesus of the Bible is not different than the Jesus confessed in the Nicene Creed, although a different theological vocabulary is used to communicate the biblical teaching.
It’s also important to see that our Lord Jesus’s divine Sonship is unveiled across the Bible’s covenantal story. As Jesus’s eternal Sonship is revealed to us, he is first disclosed as the promised Messiah, David’s greater Son, who inaugurates God’s saving rule and reign. As the human son-king, he was first promised in Eden (Gen. 3:15), given greater definition through the covenants, and then epitomized in the Davidic king (e.g., Isa. 7:14, 9:6–7, 11:1–16; 52:13–53:12; Ezekiel 34). As the human son, he fulfills the role of previous sons (e.g., Adam, Israel, David). But, as the Old Testament unfolds, it becomes clear that this human son-king is not merely human; he is also the divine Son who alone does what God can do. This latter emphasis identifies the human Messiah with Yahweh in a unique Father-Son relation that transcends the human, thus becoming not only the seedbed for the New Testament’s presentation of Christ, but also for the Trinitarian dogmatic construction of the Nicene Creed. Jesus, the Messiah, is not merely human; he is also one with Yahweh: the eternal divine Son of the Father, who for us and salvation became human.
The New Testament evidence for Jesus’s eternal Sonship and deity is abundant. Building on the Law and the Prophets, the New Testament opens by identifying Jesus with Yahweh since he alone establishes God’s promised rule by inaugurating God’s kingdom through a new covenant in fulfillment of God’s covenant promises—thus doing what only God can do (Isa. 9:6–7; 11:1–10; Jer. 31:31–34; Ezek. 34:1–31). Also, along with the Father and Spirit, the Son fully and equally shares the one divine name and nature (Matt. 28:18–20; John 8:58; Phil. 2:9–11; Col. 2:9). Further, as we will discuss below, the Son is identified as God (theos) (John 1:1, 18; 20:28; Rom. 9:5; Titus 2:13; Heb. 1:8; 2 Pet. 1:1) because he is the exact image and correspondence of the Father (Col. 1:15; Heb. 1:3). As the Son, he inseparably shares with the Father and Spirit the divine rule, works, and receives divine worship (Ps. 110:1; Matt. 1:21; Eph. 1:22; Phil. 2:9–11; Col. 1:15–20; Heb. 1:1–3; Rev. 5:11–12). This is why Jesus has the authority to forgive sin (Mark 2:3–12), to say that all Scripture is fulfilled in him (Matt. 5:17–19; 11:13), and to acknowledge that he is from the Father as the Son, but also equal to the Father as the Son (Matt. 11:25–27; John 5:16–30; 10:14–30; 14:9–13).
With this basic overview in mind, let us now focus on five key texts that gloriously teach that our Lord Jesus Christ is the only begotten divine Son—texts on which the Nicene Creed was based and on which the Church faithfully formulated Trinitarian and Christological orthodoxy.
John 1:1–18
We cannot overstate the importance of John’s prologue for the entire Gospel and the New Testament. It reminds us that Jesus is the divine Word, the eternal Son of the Father, become human. In fact, these verses summarize, as D. A. Carson reminds us, “how the ‘Word’ which was with God in the very beginning came into the sphere of time, history, tangibility—in other words, how the Son of God was sent into the world to become the Jesus of history, so that the glory and grace of God might be uniquely and perfectly disclosed. The rest of the book is nothing other than an expansion of this theme.”[1] This is also true of the entire New Testament.
1. D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1992), 111.
How does the prologue identify our Lord Jesus Christ as the divine Son who became human? It does so by its use of “Word” (logos) and “God” (theos). John is the only biblical author to identify Christ by the title, “Word.” To establish its meaning, we need to locate it within the Old Testament, instead of looking outside of Scripture (despite its widespread use in Greek thought). In the Old Testament, “Word” is closely associated with the God who creates, reveals, and redeems—all by his Word (Gen. 1:3ff, 3:8–19; 12:1; Ps. 33:6, 9; 119:9, 25; Isa. 55:11). By the use of this title, John identifies Jesus, the Son, with God. But, second, by his use of “God,” John not only closely identifies the Word with God; he also teaches that the Word is God, yet simultaneously distinct from God (the Father).
In John 1:1, John uses a triadic structure to make these points. Each of the three clauses has the same subject, “Word,” and an identical verb “was” (ēn), and each clause progresses to the next. The first clause, “In the beginning was the Word” (John 1:1a) teaches that the Word is eternal; hence Jesus as the Son is eternal. The second clause, “the Word was with God” (John 1:1b) affirms that although the Word is eternal he is also distinct from God (the Father), hence affirming an eternal Father-Son relation. The last clause, “the Word was God” (John 1:1c) affirms that the Word shares the full deity of God. Since there is only one God, this entails that within God there is a Father-Son relation that shares the one divine nature, hence a foundational verse in the Church’s dogmatic formulation of the Trinity. In this key verse, then, John declares that the Word has an eternal existence in personal intercommunion with God and that both share the same nature. And, as John will now explain, it’s this Word, God’s own self-expression—true God of God—who becomes human and is our Lord Jesus Christ (John 1:14).
However, before we turn to John’s teaching on the incarnation, it’s significant that John’s predication of “God” (theos) to Christ is not limited to him; it’s done at least seven times in the New Testament (John 1:1, 18; 20:28; Rom. 9:5; Titus 2:13; 1 Pet. 1:1; Heb. 1:8). Why is this important? Scripture applies many titles to Christ, but most of them refer to Christ’s deity and humanity, e.g., “Son,” “Son of Man,” and “Messiah.” But theos applied to Jesus is an explicit assertion that he is God. No doubt, the title “Lord” (kurios) is similar, but theos is more explicit.
Why is “God” not used more often, given its clear affirmation of Christ’s deity? Three reasons may be given. First, let’s not forget that Scripture states that the Son is “God” at least seven times and in key places. In fact, four different authors state it (John, Paul, Peter, author of Hebrews) and they do so consistently—immediately after the resurrection (John 20:28), into the 90s A.D. (John 1:1, 18), and in Jewish and Gentile contexts. Second, the predication of “God” to Jesus is carefully done in order to preserve Trinitarian personal relations. Normally, theos refers to God the Father, yet because the Son is God, theos can also be predicated of Christ. However, in order to preserve the personal distinctions within God, theos predominantly denotes the Father and kurios the Son. Third, Jesus is God the Son, but he is also human. If theos had become a personal name for Christ, it’s possible that Christ’s humanity could have been downplayed. But with that said, we must not forget that when theos is predicated of Christ, it explicitly teaches that he is the divine Son.
Let’s now return to John 1:14. Here we discover that the divine Word/Son became flesh, and thus fully human.[2] But, who exactly became flesh? Who is the subject of the incarnation? John is emphatic: It’s the Word who became human, not the divine nature, nor even the Father or the Spirit. The acting subject (what the Church will later call, “person” [hypostasis]) of the incarnation is the Word. It’s he who united himself to a human nature (“flesh”), and now, he subsists in two natures. As God the Son, he remains what he has always been in relation to the Father and Spirit, fully and equally sharing the divine nature (John 1:1). But now, the Word/Son has assumed a human nature to reveal the divine glory and achieve our redemption. In that human nature, the Son is now able to live and experience a fully human life, yet without any change to the Son’s deity, since this would preclude him from displaying the fullness of the Father’s glory (John 1:14, 18) and accomplishing his mission to save.
2. See Carson, John, 117, where he notes how strong John’s language is. It’s possible that John is responding to an early form of Docetism (Gk. dokeō, to appear; this is the heretical teaching that Christ only appeared to be human). John is emphatic: to deny the genuineness of the incarnation is to deny the Jesus of the Bible and the Gospel (see 1 John 1:1–4; 4:1–3).
This point is reinforced by the inclusio that concludes the prologue: “No one has ever seen God; the only Son, who is God (monogenēs theos), who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known” (John 1:18). In the Old Testament some saw visions of God (e.g., Exodus 33–34; Isaiah 6), yet they never truly saw God other than in theophany. But now, in the incarnate Son, the full disclosure of God is now made visible.[3] John, along with the entirety of Scripture, teaches the exclusive, unique identity of Christ. Who is Jesus? He is the divine Son, one with the Father and Spirit, who now in his incarnation has become human to reveal and to redeem.
3. A comment needs to be made about monogenēs. Historically, monogenēs (from monos + gennaō) has been translated, “only begotten” (KJV) and used to warrant the Son’s “eternal generation” from the Father. Today, many think the etymology of monogenēs derives from monos + genos to mean “unique, only.” It is best to interpret it as “only begotten.” For this case, see Charles Lee Irons, “A Lexical Defense of the Johannine ‘Only Begotten’ ” in Retrieving Eternal Generation, ed. Fred Sanders and Scott R. Swain (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2017), 98–116.
Colossians 1:15–20
Here is another key text that teaches that Jesus is the divine Son and which was also foundational for the Nicene Creed and the later Christological formulation. In the Patristic era, this text was used by the Arians to argue that Christ was the “firstborn,” i.e., the first created being and not God the Son. This interpretation continues today among Jehovah’s Witnesses, and sadly, numerous self-identified evangelicals are also confused on this point.[4] However, against the Arians, the text unambiguously teaches the full deity of the Son, and significantly, that even as the incarnate Son, he continues to do the divine work of providence, inseparably with the Father and the Spirit—a truth that the Church’s formulation of the extra seeks to capture.[5]
4. See the 2022 Ligonier Ministries and LifeWay Research Survey entitled “The State of Theology,” statement number six.
5. The “extra” means that Jesus, as the divine Son, is able to act in and through his human nature but also, he is able to act “outside” of it in his divine nature, inseparably with the Father and Spirit.
The text is divided into two main stanzas (Col. 1:15–17 and 1:18b–20) with a transitional stanza between the two (Col. 1:17–18a). In the first main and transitional stanzas, Jesus is presented as God the Son since he is the true image of God, the agent of creation, and the sustainer of the universe. In the second main stanza, Jesus is presented as the incarnate Son, who, due to his incarnation and cross-work, is our only Redeemer. Jesus, then, is supreme over all because he is our Creator and Redeemer. Let’s further look at the text in three steps.
First, the Son’s full deity is taught in Col. 1:15–16 in three staggering affirmations. The Son is first described as “the image of the invisible God,” which means that he possesses the very nature of God. The same thought is found in Hebrews 1:3a, where Christ is described as “the exact representation (charaktēr) of his being.” Although different expressions, they both teach that Christ is God the Son. In addition, “image” also suggests an echo back to our creation in God’s image. The idea is that the Son is the original image of God in his full deity (archetype), and that humans were created to reflect him (ectype). This makes sense of why the Son is not only the pattern of our creation, but also the one who becomes human to redeem us, and that in salvation, we are patterned after his glorified humanity (Eph. 4:22–24; Col. 3:9–10).
Furthermore, the Son is “the firstborn of all creation.” Contrary to the Arian interpretation, the context speaks of “firstborn” in terms of “pre-eminence” in rank and authority (see Ps. 89:27)—“supreme over.” This interpretation is confirmed by Col. 1:16—“for (hoti, because) in him all things were created.” The Son is not the first created being or part of creation, but its Creator. This truth is further confirmed by the third affirmation. The divine work of creation is attributed to the Father through the Son (hence Trinitarian agency), but also the extent of the Son’s supremacy in relation to creation is stated: all things were created “in him, through him, and for him (Col. 1:16). All of these affirmations together teach that Jesus is God the Son.
Second, the intervening stanza (Col. 1:17–18a) teaches the same point as it transitions to the work of the incarnate Son. The opening line, “And he is before all things,” looks back to Col. 1:15–16. The last line, “and he is the head of the body, the church,” introduces a focus on Christ’s reconciling work that is developed in Col. 1:18b–20. The middle line, “and in him all things hold together,” looks both directions as it presents Jesus as LORD because of who he has always been as the divine Son and because of what he does now as the incarnate Son. Specifically, Col. 1:17 teaches the Son’s preexistence and supremacy over the entire universe as its Creator and providential Lord. In fact, by the use of the perfect tense (sunestēken), the emphasis is on the Son’s continuous providential rule: prior to and after his incarnation. This entails that even as the incarnate Son, Jesus continues to uphold the universe and exercise divine cosmic functions. This seems to require that Jesus is able to act in and through both his divine and human natures, something that the Church’s affirmation of the extra tries to capture. No doubt, this raises some legitimate theological questions. Yet here we simply note that in Christological formulation, we must account for all the biblical data, namely, that the Son, even in the incarnation, continues to act as he has always done in relation to the Father and Spirit.
Third, turning to the second main stanza (Col. 1:18b–20), Jesus’s work as the incarnate Son is accented. The same Creator and providential Lord is also head over his people, the church, because of his cross-work for us. Thus, Christ is Lord twice, first as our Creator and second as our Redeemer. But Paul is still not finished. In Colossians 1:19, he again stresses Jesus’s deity: “For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell.” This is not a temporary dwelling either (see Col. 2:9). What is true of God the Son prior to the incarnation is true of him post-incarnation: the entire fullness of deity (nature and attributes) resides in him.[6]
6. The truth that the Son possesses all of the divine attributes is taught throughout the New Testament. Think of God’s communicable attributes. Scripture defines God’s love in relation to the Son (Rom. 8:35–39; Gal. 2:20; 1 John 4:10–12); Jesus is the righteous one (Acts 3:14; 7:52; 22:14), even the one whose wrath is God’s wrath (Rev. 6:16). In terms of truth, Jesus is full of grace and truth (John 1:14)—an allusion to Yahweh in Exodus 34—and the truth (John 14:6). Jesus is the perfect revelation of God (Heb. 1:1–3; cf. John 1:18; 14:8–9). Also, think of God’s incommunicable attributes. For example, the Son shares in the Father’s eternity (John 1:1; 17:5; Heb. 1:2). The Son possesses omnipotence (Eph. 1:19–20; Col. 2:10), omnipresence (Matt. 18:20; 28:20; Eph. 4:10), immutability (Heb. 1:10–12; 13:8), and omniscience (John 1:48; 2:25; 6:64; 21:17; Acts 1:24; 1 Cor. 4:5; Col. 2:9; Rev. 2:23). No doubt, in regard to omniscience, biblical authors also affirm, including Jesus, that the Son grew in knowledge and that he does not know certain things (Luke 2:52; Mark 13:32). How one reconciles this tension is part of Christological formulation, but it’s important to see that Scripture predicates both communicable and incommunicable attributes of Christ.
In this text, as in the entire New Testament, we see the constant emphasis on the only begotten Son, who is truly God (and thus homoousios with the Father) and who became truly man by his assumption of a human nature, and who, as the Son, acts in both natures.
Philippians 2:6–11
This text has also been at the center of critical Trinitarian and Christological debates. It has served as a proof-text for the “kenotic theory,” a phrase taken from the Greek verb, kenoō (Phil. 2:7), “to empty.” In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, some theologians taught that the Son “gave up” or “emptied” himself of some of his divine attributes in becoming human. The problem with such a view is that this text (and the entire Bible) doesn’t teach it. The incarnation is not an act of subtraction; it’s an act of assumption (or addition). In the incarnation, God the Son acts, from the Father and by the Spirit, to assume a human nature so that now and forevermore he subsists in two natures without loss of attributes in either nature. Also, it’s due to the incarnation that the Son is now able to live a fully human life and achieve our redemption as our new covenant head. Let’s look at how this text teaches these truths in five steps.
First, the text is broken into two parts, Phil. 2:6–8 and 9–11. In each section, two verbs describe the Son’s humbling himself in taking our human nature (i.e., “the state of humiliation”) and the Father exalting Christ because of his cross-work (i.e., “the state of exaltation”). The movement of the text is from the preexistent Son to his humiliation that results in his exaltation as the Son in a new role due to his obedience to the Father. When this text is read alongside other texts, we see evidence for triune agency and inseparable action terminating on the Son. The incarnation, then, is an act of the triune God by which the Father sends the Son; the Son assumes a human nature by the Spirit (Luke 1:26–38); and the entire action terminates on the Son and not the Father or Spirit (John 1:14; Phil. 2:6–8).
Second, the Son’s deity is taught by the phrase, “who, though he was in the form of God.” Here is an affirmation of the full deity of the Son with the Father. The text provides a contrast between two forms of existence of the Son: the glory he had from eternity as the divine Son and what he became by taking the “form of a servant” (Phil. 2:7). The Son who was and remains eternally and fully God has become fully and truly human.
Third, the next phrase is best translated, “he did not think equality with God something to be used for his own advantage.” The issue is not whether Jesus gains equality with God or whether he retains it since the text stresses that the Son shares full “equality with God” (Phil. 2:6). Instead, the issue is one of Jesus’s attitude regarding his divine status. The Son did not take advantage of or exploit his full equality with God to excuse him from the task of becoming our Redeemer. In this way, Jesus becomes an example for us (Phil. 2:5), while remaining in a category by himself.
Fourth, the controversial phrase in Philippians 2:7, “but he emptied himself” (or, “made himself nothing”) does not mean that in the incarnation the Son subtracted his divine attributes. The nature of the Son’s “emptying” was by the assumption of a human nature. Those who affirm the kenotic view make this text say something it does not say.
However, with that said, we must not miss the staggering point: the divine Son did humble himself by becoming human and choosing to die on a cross for us (Phil. 2:8), which is breathtaking. In fact, apart from the humbling of the Son in terms of incarnation and the cross, there is no salvation for us. But this is not the end of the story. Although the glory of the Son in the incarnation and the cross is hidden (krypsis) by his flesh, that hiddenness is only our perception of it. The only begotten Son of the Father did not become less than God. As he clothed himself in our human nature, he also bore our sins in that very nature. And in that act of obedience, as our last Adam and new covenant representative and substitute, he turned his great moment of vulnerability into the moment of greatest victory over sin, death, and the evil one.
Fifth, Philippians 2:9–11 concludes where the text began, with the Son exalted in the heavens. Only now, every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Christ is LORD in his “state of exaltation.” In Philippians 2:6–8, Christ is the subject of the verbs and participles, but in Philippians 2:9, it’s the Father who exalts the Son due to his work and obedience. The Father vindicates his Son and exalts him to the highest position and bestows on him the name LORD/Yahweh (from Isaiah 45:22–23).[7]
7. This is not the only text that declares “Jesus is LORD/Yahweh.” The apostles repeatedly apply various Yahweh texts from the Old Testament to Jesus, thus identifying him as God. For example, see Exod. 3:14 with John 8:58; Isa. 44:6 with Rev. 1:17; Ps. 102:26–27 [LXX] with Heb. 1:11–12; Joel 2:32 with Rom. 10:12–13), etc.
In this magnificent text, Paul captures beautifully who Jesus is and why the incarnation took place. Jesus as the divine Son, along with the Father and Spirit, is Lord of all. However, to redeem us, the only begotten Son of the Father had to become human and die for us. In fact, apart from him becoming the last Adam and obeying for us in his life and death, there is no salvation for us. But as a result of his incarnation and work, the Father has highly exalted his Son so that now Jesus is Lord twice: first as the divine Son, and second as the divine Son incarnate.
Hebrews 1:1–4 & Hebrews 2:5–18
The entire book of Hebrews is centered on Christ and his glory and Lordship. Furthermore, in Hebrews, we find exactly what the entire New Testament teaches: Jesus is God the Son (e.g., Heb. 1:2–3) who by virtue of his incarnation and work has won our eternal redemption (e.g., Heb. 2:5–18). Jesus, then, is truly God and truly man, and both must be affirmed without dilution. God the Son cannot redeem us apart from his incarnation and cross-work, but because he became human, all of God’s plan and promises are fulfilled in him. In Christ alone we are justified, reconciled, and restored to the purpose of our creation—to know, obey, and love our triune God.
From the opening single, complex sentence, built around, “God … has spoken” (Heb. 1:1), the author unfolds the glory of Christ. As the author spans redemptive history, he reminds us that God has spoken in the Prophets but that the ultimate purpose of that revelation reaches its fulfillment in God’s Son, our Lord Jesus Christ. In Christ—David’s greater Son who is also the LORD—the promised “last days” and God’s long-awaited kingdom have arrived.
How does the author warrant such staggering claims? He does so by describing who Jesus is by giving a number of identity statements that remind us of the Son’s deity, humanity, and work. He first states that the Son is the “appointed heir of all things” (Heb. 1:2b). This appointment is best understood as referring to the incarnate Son’s work that installs him at God’s right hand as the Messianic King. Yet, the author also insists that Jesus is God the Son since he is the agent of creation (Heb. 1:2b), the radiance of God’s glory, “the exact imprint of his nature” (Heb. 1:3a), and the Lord of providence (Heb. 1:3b). All of these latter identity statements are explicit references to the Son’s deity. Also, like Colossians 1:15–20, the author reminds us that even post-incarnation, the Son remains fully God and continues to act as God, as evidenced in his cosmic functions (Heb. 1:3b). The author then returns to Christ’s work as the incarnate Son by stressing his work as our great High Priest—a work that he did for us and which no mere human (or angel) could ever achieve.
Then in Hebrews 2:5–18, the author finishes his argument that Christ is superior to angels. In doing so, he develops further who Jesus is as the divine Son and what he alone can do for us in his incarnation and cross-work. By the Son taking on our humanity, he has become the representative man of Psalm 8—the last Adam—who, as a result, is now able to undo the first Adam’s failure by his own obedient life and death for us. In Christ, the promised “world to come,” tied to the new creation, is now here.
This text is significant for at least two reasons. First, in a succinct way, the author gloriously unpacks the Bible’s story and explains why God the Son became man. Yet, there is also a second reason why this text is so important. In explaining the why of the incarnation, the author establishes that the kind of Redeemer we need must be truly God and truly human. He must be human because the only way to restore fallen man is by a greater Adam who obeys for us as our covenant head. Yet, he must also be the divine Son, otherwise there is no full forgiveness of sin.
Concluding Reflection
The Church’s Trinitarian and Christological formulation as defined by the Nicene Creed and the later Chalcedonian Definition is confessing exactly what Scripture teaches. As the Church confessed Christ as the only begotten divine Son of the Father, the Church rightly explained all that Scripture taught, namely that Jesus is Lord and Savior because he is God the Son incarnate. Although, the Nicene Creed employed a slightly different language to explain who Jesus is, such as homoousios (although most of it was directly from Scripture), the language used conveys the exact same meaning as what Scripture teaches. Also, the Church was extremely careful in her Trinitarian and Christological formulation because she knew that what was ultimately at stake was the glory of Christ and our salvation. For Christians, this must never become a minor point. Given who Jesus is, he must be our glory, command our obedience, and receive our complete trust and devotion. There are many good things to be concerned about in our lives, but none so central than knowing rightly our Lord Jesus Christ.
