Do you have to believe that Jesus is God in order to receive eternal life? Some people think so because of what John says in John 20:31.
These are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.
Since most people assume that “Christ”=”God” and that “Son of God”=”God” they think that it is required to believe that Jesus is divine in order to receive eternal life.
But is this assumption correct? Is it true that the title “Christ” (or “Messiah”) means “God”? How about the term “Son of God”?
“Christ” and “the Son of God” do not require divinity
Many people believe that the terms “Christ” and “Son of God” refer to the divinity of Jesus – the fact that He was God. While that certainly has been a popular view in the past, and is the “traditional” view, more and more students of Scripture are realizing this view does not fit all the Biblical data.
Instead, the terms seem to refer to the role or function of someone who is being used by God in a special way to carry out God’s will on earth. Here is what I believe about the terms “Christ” and “Son of God”:
The terms “Christ” (or “Messiah”) and “Son of God” did not originally refer to someone who was divine, but to someone who had a special relationship with God and was therefore given a God-appointed task, which was often related to some sort of deliverance. However, as Jesus performed His ministry as “the Christ, the Son of God” the terms grew in significance to include the idea that the God-appointed task of Jesus required Him to be God in the flesh. The Gospel writers (especially John) emphasized the divinity of Jesus to prove that everlasting life is freely given to those who believe in the name of Jesus for it.
I believe this for many reasons. First, the term “Christ” (or “Messiah”) simply referred to an anointed deliverer. In Jewish literature, mere humans were often referred to as “Messiah.” No Jewish person thought that the promised Messiah would be God in the flesh. They were looking for, hoping for, and praying for a human deliver who would be specially anointed and gifted by God to lead the Hebrew people back into their rightful place among the nations.
Support for this idea is seen in the fact that the disciples believed Jesus was the promised Messiah long before they believed He was God incarnate. But the disciples do not appear to understand that Jesus is God incarnate until sometime after Jesus rises from the dead. Even at the Last Supper, they ask Jesus to “reveal the Father to us” and Jesus says, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me? He who has seen Me has seen the Father” (John 14:9).
Secondly, regarding the term “Son of God,” it was a term that was commonly used for Kings, Emperors, and Caesars. It was thought that Emperors and Caesars were the offspring of a deity, but were not themselves deity. An Emperor or a Caesar could become a god once they died, but they were not considered to be fully divine while alive.
Much more can be said about this. But the point is that the terms “Christ” (or “Messiah”) and “Son of God” are not, in themselves, equivalent with deity. One could believe that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God, but not realize that He was also God incarnate, God in the flesh.
What does this mean for John 20:31?
The Gospel of John is often seen as “the only evangelistic book of the Bible.” I am not completely convinced that this is the case. In fact, I think every single book of the Bible is “evangelistic” but this is primarily due to how I understand the word “evangelism” than anything else.
I believe that John, in his Gospel, is trying to get people to see that Jesus is God, and is possibly trying to inject more meaning into the terms “Christ” and “Son of God” than the average person in the first century would have understood or immediately grasped.
In other words, one of the primary purposes of John is to impregnate the terms “Christ” and “Son of God” with new meaning and significance that cannot be used of any other human throughout history.
If this is true, John is not trying to teach that believing that Jesus is God is how a person receives eternal life, but that believing that Jesus is God brings a person to the place where they can believe in Jesus for everlasting life. There is a vast difference.
While I don’t think a person necessarily has to believe that Jesus is God in order to receive eternal life, I do think that believing that Jesus is God will help get a person to the place where they understand why and how Jesus can give eternal life to anyone who believes in Him for it. A person does not need to believe that Jesus is God to receive eternal life, but why would they believe in Jesus unless they believed Jesus was God?
So while believing that Jesus is God may be logically necessary for receiving eternal life, it is not theologically required.
Yes! Jesus IS God
I do believe that Jesus is God, and I do believe that some of the later uses of the term “Christ” and “Son of God” in the New Testament refer to the divinity of Jesus.
Jesus is God! Jesus is fully divine.
But there is a difference between believing that Jesus is God and believing that it is required to believe that Jesus is God in order to receive eternal life.
I do not believe that to receive eternal life, one must grasp and understand the divinity of Jesus. According to Jesus Himself, He gives eternal life to everyone and anyone who simply believes in Him for it.
Of course, who would believe in Jesus for eternal life without understanding that Jesus is God? So in this sense, it is unlikely that anyone will believe in Jesus for eternal life without believing that Jesus is God, but once again, there is a difference between something being likely and something being required. After all, none of the apostles believed that Jesus was God until after Jesus had risen from the dead, but they did believe in Jesus for eternal life.
Anyway, let me get your thoughts on the subject in the comment section below, and if you want to learn more about how the gospel truth that Jesus is God fits in with the offer of eternal life through Jesus, take my online course on the gospel:
Want to learn more about the gospel? Take my new course, "The Gospel According to Scripture."
The entire course is free for those who join my online Discipleship group here on RedeemingGod.com. I can't wait to see you inside the course!
Jeremy ~ Praise God for your study. I will be greatly looking forward to what you find and will do any research (with my limited library) that I can to help contribute to the discussion. Also, I will email you my paper per your request. ~ Tom
Jeremy,
Good Idea! I have been kicking around on this with a couple of folks who think of me as a heretic as well, I will post the longer version on my blog. Here’s the short version:
What kind of Messiah did the Jews look for? Many say a King. The Kingship of the Messiah contains the strange God-Man Concept concerning the Messiah.
Some passages which deal with the Kingship of the Messiah add a whole new dimension to the Person of the Messiah, making Him a man—and yet more than a man.
Isaiah 9:6-7
Verse 6 declares that a son will be born into the Jewish world who will eventually control the reigns
of government. Verse 7 identifies Him as the Messianic descendant of David; it gives a dramatic description of His reign, which will be characterized by peace and justice. However, in verse 6 He is given names that can only be true of God Himself: Mighty God and Everlasting Father. Wonderful Counselor and Prince of Peace can be true of a man. This new dimension, presented by Isaiah regarding the Person of the Messiah, is that the Messiah had to be a man, a descendant of David, but He was to be God as well. This further explains what the prophet said two chapters earlier in Isaiah 7:14, when he stated: Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
In this passage Isaiah declares that there is going to be a Son born of a virgin. Then He is given a name which is said to be Immanuel. In the Bible, when a parent names his child, it shows the thinking of the parents. However, when God gives a person a name, it actually represents the person’s very character as only God can foresee. When this Child is named Immanuel by God, the name portrays the actual character of the Child. What does Immanuel mean? It means: “With us, God.” Here we have a Child that is born of a virgin and who is “With us, God” or “God is among us!” The Isaiah 9 passage further clarifies that this Son is a descendant of David, and He is labeled as God Himself. Isaiah clearly portrays the Messiah as the God-Man.
Jeremiah 23:5-6
Jeremiah echoes Isaiah in Jeremiah 23:5-6. A descendant of David reigns upon the throne of David and the character of His reign is described as one of peace and security for Israel. Yet He is given the very name of God, which can only belong to God Himself—Adonai Tzidkenu—Jehovah our righteousness. This is the YHWH, the very name that God revealed to Moses as being His own personal name: I AM. Once again, the future King Messiah of Israel is seen as a man on one hand but as God on the other.
There is also the Sonship concept, as the God-Man concept is related to the Messiah’s Kingship.
Micah 5:2
According to Micah 5:2, the Messiah’s birth would be in Bethlehem. According to Micah 5:2 the Messiah’s human origin will be Bethlehem, but Micah states even further that this Individual, who is to be born in Bethlehem, has His origins from eternity. Only one Person is eternal from eternity past, and that is God Himself. As to His human origin, He was born in Bethlehem; as to His divine origin, He is from eternity, which means He is both God and man at the same time.
Zechariah 13:7
The Hebrew word translated as “fellow” (KJV) associate (NET) means “my equal”. The verse literally reads: “Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that is my equal [deity], says Jehovah of hosts” Again, the Messiah was to be both God and man.
Psalm 110:1-2 (NET)
The Lord says to my Lord: “Here is the Lord’s proclamation to my lord: “Sit down at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool!” The Lord extends your dominion from Zion. Rule in the midst of your enemies!”
We should note first of all that the psalmist here is David. David had no human lord; there was no authority over him except Jehovah Himself. Yet, in verse 1 of this psalm, David speaks of two lords: “The LORD said to my Lord …” David is speaking of two personalities here—LORD and “my Lord.” But who could “my Lord” be, since David had no human over-lord? The only way to understand this verse is to see Jehovah as God the Father and “David’s Lord” as Messiah. It is Messiah, therefore, who is invited to sit at God’s right hand.
Implicit within this prophecy is the concept of the God-Man. We know from 1 Kings 2:19 that anyone who sits at a king’s right hand must be equal with the king. Since Messiah is invited to sit at God’s right hand, it follows that Messiah must be equal with God. As to His humanity, Messiah is to be a descendant of David, and as to His deity, He can sit at the right hand of God.
I also found some old bibsac articles where Cullen I. K. Story wrote about “What Kind of Messiah Did the Jews Expect?” Here are some excerpts:
BEGIN CITATION
It is apparent as we read the four Gospels that, with very few exceptions, the understanding of the person of Messiah by the vast majority was at the most only partially complete. For example, when our Lord sets forth a certain claim, and that claim is questioned or rejected by the Jews, He appeals to the Old Testament for substantiation. From their Scriptures they should have known Messiah in His full character; yet Christ infers that their Messianic perception was only partial, either as a result of a lack of diligence in searching the Scriptures or a lack of an understanding of the Scriptures.
Included in that partial conception there seems to have been by many a belief in the pre-existence and even in the eternal existence of Messiah. Alfred Edersheim notes that the Midrash on the eighth chapter of Proverbs expressly states the Messiah is among the seven things created before the world. This would not only prove Messiah to be above the ordinary conditions of humanity but it would mean, since His pre-mundane state is asserted in other places, that Messiah existed long before He appeared. Indeed Dr. Edersheim says: “Even in strictly Rabbinic documents, the pre-mundane if not the eternal existence of the Messiah appears as a matter of common belief.”
The discussion of the eternal existence of Messiah naturally leads up into the question of His divine character. A Messiah who is a pre-existent being could not be an ordinary man. As a starting point for our consideration of the Jewish conception of the divinity of Messiah we observe three definite, basic facts. In the first place the Messiah as prophesied in the Old Testament was to be of divine nature. The passages are numerous in this regard. For instance, the clear-cut language of the 110th Psalm , the vision in Daniel 7, and the “mighty God” of Isaiah 9:6 all point to Messiah as being God, not in a representative sense or a metaphysical sense but in actual nature. Godet declares that “the idea of the divinity of the Messiah is the soul of the entire Old Testament.” And Warfield, whose treatment of the subject of the divine Messiah in the Old Testament is indeed excellent, speaks of “the hope of the coming of God to His kingdom” as “the heart of Israelitish religion from its origin.”
Secondly, the writers of the New Testament assert the deity of Messiah and without hesitation appeal to the Old Testament for confirmation. And thirdly, Christ Himself recognized that the Old Testament Scriptures were replete with references to His divine nature. In a reference already cited, Mark 12:35–37, our Lord asked the Pharisees whose son Christ is. When they made answer, “the son of David,” He replied with a question, “How then doth David in spirit call him Lord?” and in doing it appealed to the 110th Psalm as supporting the divine side of Messiah’s nature.
END CITATION
Hope this helps…
Hi Jeremy
I think this study will be very beneficial! I like this comment you made:
>I believe that John, in his Gospel, is trying to get people to see that Jesus is God, and is possibly trying to instill more meaning in the terms “Christ” and “Son of God” than the average person in the first century would have understood or immediately grasped. In other words, one of the primary purposes of John is to impregnate the terms “Christ” and “Son of God” with new meaning and significance that cannot be used of any other human throughout history.
If this is true, John is not trying to teach that believing that Jesus is God is how a person receives eternal life, but that believing that Jesus is God brings a person to believe in Jesus for everlasting life. There is a vast difference.
Alvin,
Thanks for reading! I hope all is going well for you. How is SheeLa?
Jim,
Thanks for the preliminary study and listing of passages. I will try to look at every single one of those in my study.
The final quote by Story is interesting. Where is that from? Is is a book or an article? Also, do you know where the Edersheim quotes are from?
My Hebrew professor from DTS is probably a leading expert on the OT understanding of the Messiah. He is writing an entire book on it, and has been presenting papers at ETS for years. On Friday, I talked to him for about an hour about this “Messiah” issue, and he ended up giving me his entire manuscript! I was so excited. Of course, I don’t always agree with everything he says, so will be reading it with a critical eye, but that’s the way we should read everything, right?
Jeremy:
One question, will you interact with Greg Schliesmann or myself in the comment threads at your blog or at mine on these important doctrinal discussions?
LM
PS: (5pm) I just replied to your reaction (see JM 1pm) to the question above. My reply did not appear in this thread. Are my comments being blocked or moderated? Please advise. Thanks.
11pm- It appears your site is having some technical difficulty because my second post from 6 hours ago has not appeared. Following is my reply to your statement below that you posted at 1:01pm.
BEGIN…
Jeremy:
I will react here, we will report on and explain your “study”, at my blog.
You wrote, “You misquote, misrepresent, use pejorative language, name calling, personal ad-hominem attacks, and other behavior unfit for Godly online dialogue.”
I have to assume you actually believe what you wrote above. These statements are, IMO, untrue, and are impressions that are being created to evade defining and defending your views.
IMO, Greg Schliesmann’s series devastated your (Hodges/Wilkin/GES) position and underpinnings on the Gospel and the titles of the Lord Jesus Christ. Once you had no answer to his penetrating questions you essentially cried, “foul,” and checked out of the discussion with him.
You also wrote, “It is not that I am afraid of your questions. I gladly accept all questions, if they are asked in a spirit of love seeking understanding.”
Again, I do not agree with your interpretation of the “spirit” of the questions being asked. They are and have been direct, to the point, and get at what we believe is the root of the errors we find in the GES position on the Gospel and the titles of the Lord Jesus Christ.
If you are unafraid of questions, how do you explain the deletion of the articles and comments threads at your GES blog?
Finally, allow me to ask once more: Are you willing to interact with Greg Schliesmann or myself in the comment threads at your blog or at mine on these important doctrinal discussions?
LM
Hi Jeremy
Sheelagh had exploratory surgery a couple of days ago. And everything went real well. They didn’t find any cancer this time. Waiting for the biopsies to come back, but all looks well.
Hope your family is doing well, congratulations on the new little one.
blessings alvin
Alvin,
Sorry I spelled Sheelagh wrong in my comment…
We will keep her in prayer. Let me know what you find out.
Lou,
I am hesitant to interact with you anywhere since in the past, you and Greg have shown a complete lack of self-control in what you write and how you write. It is not that I am afraid of your questions. I gladly accept all questions, if they are asked in a spirit of love seeking understanding. For example, Jonathan, who agrees with your position, is more than welcome to interact with me here since he knows how to interact with grace. But I have not seen this come from you yet. You misquote, misrepresent, use pejorative language, name calling, personal ad-hominem attacks, and other behavior unfit for Godly online dialogue.
Even IF you are right in your position, and I am wrong, I don’t think the Lord Jesus Christ is pleased with how you say it. The way you interact with those who disagree with you is neither glorifying to God, nor conducive for helping people see the truth. For someone who claims to be “free grace” you do not exude much grace.
If you think I am wrong on this too, how you react to this comment on your own blog will reveal the truth.
Jeremy,
I found in the BSac—V104 #416—Oct 47—483ff. Probably needed to include this as a footnote…
Jim
Thanks, I’ll check it out.
Jesus, “You will die in your sins, unless you believe that I AM.”
Yes, Jesus was speaking to the Jewish religious leaders here about accepting Him as the promised Messiah. And John does begin the process of equating the Messiah with divinity, as in this passage.
Jeremy asked: “why would they believe in Jesus unless they believed Jesus was God?” Why? Because they can recognize truth. My question would be how can someone “believe in Jesus” and not “believe Jesus”?
Jeremy also stated that “A person does not need to believe that Jesus is God to receive eternal life”, and Jesus agrees. Jesus said that “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Master, Master,’ shall enter into the reign of the heavens, but he who is doing the desire of My Father in the heavens. Matt 7:21.
In Matt 25:31-46 Jesus illustrated what “the desire of My Father in the heavens” is.
What translation are you using there?
If a guy named Bill showed up and said, “Believe in me for eternal life,” would you believe in him? Probably not. Why not? Because a guy who says that is crazy. … Unless he provides some evidence for his claim…
Also, not that entering into the Kingdom of Heaven is not the same things as “going to heaven when you die.” The Kingdom of heaven refers to the rule and reign of God upon the earth.
I’m using the Institute for Scripture Research’s translation.
Your last statements seem vague. Reference to supporting scripture passages should help. You said that “The Kingdom of heaven refers to the rule and reign of God upon the earth”, but you don’t say that this won’t happen until Jesus returns [Matt 25:31-46].
I’ve never heard of that translation … I only commented on it, because they correctly translated the Greek “basilea” as “reign.” A fully study on why the rule and reign of God is not the same thing as going to heaven would take a book.
And no, I’m not talking about the future Millennial reign of Jesus Christ either.
I recommend starting with a book by NT Wright: http://amzn.to/2m6s0pn
Amazon’s intro to Wright’s book said that “Wright’s powerful re-reading of the Gospels helps us re-align the focus of our spiritual beliefs, which have for too long been focused on the afterlife. Instead, the forgotten story of the Gospels reveals why we should understand that our real charge is to sustain and cooperating with God’s kingdom here and now.”
It seems that your objective for my reading Wright’s book may have been for me to “understand that our real charge is to sustain and cooperate with God’s kingdom here and now”. But, Jesus seems to think that our real charge for the here and now is to be “doing the desire of My Father in the heavens”[matt 7:21].
In Amazon’s audio exerpt, we hear that the gospel message is that “because of Jesus’ death alone, your sins can be forgiven and all you have to do is believe it rather than trying to impress God with doing good works”. In John 15’s vineyard teaching, the branches don’t produce fruit to impress God, they produce fruit because it’s their nature. If they don’t produce fruit they are cut off and burned. The same is true for followers of Jesus who do or don’t do the desire of the Father.
Let me restate my question. How can someone “believe in Jesus for eternal life” and not “believe Jesus”? I suspect that this is impossible.
Roy, the John 15 image is about Jesus pruning and tending to believers. Not causing some believers to go to hell because they weren’t fruitful enough.
The NT Wright book explains more about the Kingdom of Heaven, since you asked.
Anyway, as for your last questions, of course believing in Jesus for eternal life is the same as believing Jesus. He promises eternal life to those who believe in Him for it, so if you believe what Jesus says, then you believe in Him and you believe what He says, and therefore, you believe Him. It’s all the same.
But nobody who believes in Jesus (or believes Jesus) truly believes everything He said. We *think* we do, but until our understanding of His teachings is 100% infallible, none of us completely believe Jesus.
Anyway, I hope that helps. I am not sure what you were trying to say with your question.
Jeremy, let’s consider your statement that “the John 15 image is about Jesus pruning and tending to believers. Not causing some believers to go to hell because they weren’t fruitful enough.”
Jesus is the vine, the Father does the pruning…. not Jesus.
Branches that bear some fruit get pruned….. not burned.
Branches that bear no fruit arn’t in the vine and get taken away and burned.
None of this seems sifficult to understand, so why did you change it?
No change. Just understanding the text in its original context as Jesus intended.
https://redeeminggod.com/sermons/john/john_15_1-8/
OK, you said “No change. Just understanding the text in its original context as Jesus intended.” This sounds good, but doesn’t ring true to me.
Being in the vine is necessary to produce fruit [v5]. Then verse 6 explains what happens when fruit isn’t produced. “If anyone does not stay in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up. And they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned.”
In the link you provided you want to show that verse 6 doesn’t say what it says. Reminds me of Levine the Genius Tailor.
I agree that it says what it says. I explained what it says. You just understand the words differently than I do. If you disagree, use logic, reason, and sound hermeneutics to do so.
OK, if James 5:19-20 is right then understanding is worth continuing and stopping at verse 1 should be easy,
You said that you explained what it says, and suggested that we just “understand the words differently”. I’ve reread your posts and it’s not apparent to me where you explained how the vine prunes it’s branches.
Verse 1 has 12 words. The verse from an Interlinear has: |1473| I |1510| am |3588| the |0288| vine |0228| true, |2532| and |3588| the |3962| Father |3427| of me |3588| the |1092| Vinedresser |2076| is.
From this you understood that “the John 15 image is about Jesus pruning and tending to believers”. My understanding is that since “the |3962| Father |3427| of me |3588| the |1092| Vinedresser |2076| is” then the “pruning and tending to believers” will be done by the Vinedresser Father…. not by the vine Jesus.
You also suggested that I should “use logic, reason, and sound hermeneutics”. Having the vine prune it’s branches is illogical to me, it’s also unreasonable to me, and it seems to deny what Jesus said. I can’t see how this verse could be interpreted to cast Jesus as the Vinedresser. It seems that it would have to be rewritten.
So, how about giving me the date/time of the post that “explained what it says”, and I will study it.
You raise a good point about the Vine and the Vinedresser, being Jesus and the Father. I should have been clearer. But of course, this argument misses the entire point of your disagreement with me about what happens to unfruitful branches. Whether it’s the Father or Jesus, God does not send unfruitful Christians to burn in hell.
This entire discussion might be better on the actual page in question:
https://redeeminggod.com/sermons/john/john_15_1-8/
Heresy jeremy
What exactly?
People do have to believe Jesus is God