Hi Theocrat

Many thanks for stimulating parts of my mind that other interlocutors do not normally reach! I cannot fault most of what you say but I still feel your estimation of Jesus is less than he deserves. I shall continue mulling over your latest comments and will respond to them later if anything occurs to me, but meanwhile I would like to throw a few more counter-arguments at you to see if I can find a chink somewhere in your armour!

(1) Colin Brown wrote: “Indeed, to be a ‘Son of God’ one has to be a being who is not God!”
But I would say that by the same argument the title “Son of Man” implies Jesus is not man. So why don’t you draw that conclusion?

(2) You stated in your opening post that Jesus “… is the uniquely normal man, the living example of a spiritually mature humanity which will be the standard of the age to come. So, far from minimising the problem of sin, his example is more inspiring, given his success in spite of the absence of any hidden advantage.”

However, Jesus himself spoke of his pre-incarnational existence in heaven, sharing glory with his Father. Therefore, even though you regard Jesus as less than God, surely even you would have to admit that he was not a normal human being in the same category as the rest of us but was rather a spiritual/heavenly/angelic being who was incarnated as a man.

(3) John 14:1 says “You believe in God. Believe also in me” (or “Believe in God. Believe also in me”). If Jesus were merely God’s vice-regent (or his malak who represented God fully and transacted business in his name), then wouldn’t Jesus have said:

“Believe in me, because by so doing you will effectively be believing in God.”

or

“Believe in God, which you can accomplish in practice by believing in me.”

However, Jesus’ words in John 14:1 tend to suggest two distinct objects of faith.

(4) Romans 8:27 speaks of the Spirit interceding to God on behalf of people. Does that not imply at least two centres of consciousness within the godhead? I would never think of my own spirit interceding to me.

(5) You wrote: “Apart from ‘comforter’, the figures used to describe the spirit are predominantly impersonal, fire, oil, water etc. As I wrote above, the word itself means wind.”

I would reply: Many of the figures used to describe Jesus are also impersonal (bread, light, door, bronze statue of a serpent, etc.) but I do not therefore doubt Jesus’ personality.

(6) Whether the Spirit of God is personal or impersonal, would a creaturely vice-regent of God have the audacity to send the Spirit of God? John 16:7

(7) And would a creaturely vice-regent of God choose who acquires a relationship with God? The context of Matthew 11:27 implies it is Jesus’ choice distinct from (albeit in harmony with) that of the Father.

(8) Does our different theology about Jesus actually make any difference in practice? We view him differently but do we really treat him any differently? Have you given Jesus your ultimate allegiance? Do you depend on Jesus for peace, rest, joy, strength, and everything else you need to cope with life? Do you esteem Jesus as highly as you esteem God? Do you submit to Jesus’ lordship unquestioningly (even though in your opinion he is not incapable of error)? If it came to the crunch, would you die for Jesus’ sake (he who is only a creature in your opinion)? Matthew 10:39; Luke 9:23-24; Matthew 11:28; John 14:1; John 5:23; John 15:4-5

Regards … Phil