Post #9 1700 Years of the Nicene Creed - "The only begotten Son of God" (P2 Why the doctrine of eternal generation holds despite opposing arguments to it)

Introduction:

    In the last post here Growing Christian Resources: Post #8 1700 Years of the Nicene Creed - "The only begotten Son of God" (P1 Arguments favorable to the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son),we began to look at that part of the Nicene Creed that asserts that Jesus Christ is "the only begotten Son of God". This is what the Nicene Creed says in its opening lines about God the Son:

"And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God"

      I want to review first the main reason we are taking extra time on this phrase "only-begotten". It all has to do with the doctrine of the Son's "eternal generation" from the Father.

Review: What is the doctrine of eternal generation about?

    In the last post we looked at how the Greek word "monogenes", translated "begotten" in the Nicene Creed, is connected to what is known as "the doctrine of eternal generation." In the last post we defined this doctrine along two lines. 

1. First, those who argue for the eternal generation of the Son teach that Father eternally communicates to Him the entire Divine nature. In eternal generation, the Divine essence is shared without division from The Father to The Son. 

2. Then secondly, the distinguishing characteristic that defines the Son as "the Son" is in how the Father begets Him or what theologians call "filiates". Filiation conveys to the Son His identity. 

    Eternal generation is not creation. Unlike the ancient Arians, who proclaimed "there was a time when the son was not", akin to Jehovah Witnesses today who proclaim the Son to be God's "highest created being", eternal generation is an eternal act within the Trinity. 

    Theologian Matthew Barrett summarizes the main points of eternal generation in his book "Simply Trinity", pages 167-175. I'll supply headings and scripture to bring home what Barrett states.

1. The Divine essence is not reduplicated by the Father in eternal generation. "When the Father begets he communicates the one (simple) divine essence to His Son, but He does not multiply the Divine essence." Barrett later says: "Not only is the Divine nature not multiplied, it is not divided." Scripture supports this first idea in John 5:26 from Jesus Himself: "For just as the Father has life in Himself, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in Himself."

2. The Son is eternally equal in all respects to the Father. Barrett comments on the eternality of the Son's generation: "And if eternal, then the generation of the Son is not the generation of a lesser being (made in time or before time) but the generation of a Son who is equal in deity to His Father." Hebrews 1:8 "But of the Son He says, Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, and the righteous scepter is the scepter of His kingdom."

3. The Triune God undergoes no change with the Son's eternal generation. "The Son's generation involves no change in the Trinity." What Barrett means here is there is no change in the number of Divine persons (from one to now two or three). There has only ever been Three Persons. He also means there is no diminishing of the Divine nature, where God the Father has more deity than the Son. The Father and Son are equal in all respects. God's Divine immutability still holds in the eternal relation between the Father and Son. Hebrews 1:10-12 "And, 'You, Lord, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the works of Your hands; 11 They will perish, but You remain; and they all will become old like a garment, 12 And like a mantle You will roll them up; like a garment they will also be changed. But You are the same, and Your years will not come to an end.”

4. Eternal generation is an act within the Trinity, between the Father and the Son. Barrett finally notes that the generation of the Son by the Father occurs within the Trinity, not outside, meaning the Father is not creating a lesser being. David writes in Psalm 2:7 “I will surely tell of the decree of the Lord: He said to Me, ‘You are My Son, Today I have begotten You." We know this is in reference to an eternal acts between the Father and the Son, as in Hebrews 1:5 "For to which of the angels did He ever say, “You are My Son,
Today I have begotten You”? And again,
“I will be a Father to Him And He shall be a Son to Me”?

    The doctrine of eternal generation, as noted, centers around a particular word in the New Testament that is translated "begotten" in older English translations, the word "monogenes". Five key passages which we looked at in the last post are direct proof-texts used by those affirming the doctrine of eternal generation and the translation "begotten" (John 1:14; 1:18; 3:16; 3:18; 1 John 4:19). That summarizes what is meant by the doctrine of eternal generation. 

Not everyone is a fan of the doctrine of eternal generation

    However, over the last century scholarly opinion has suggested that the term "monogenes" ought be translated "one and only" to highlight the uniqueness of the Son of God over against adopted sons (i.e. those born again in saving faith, see for instance Romans 8:14-16) and that special class of created angelic beings called "sons of God" (Job 38:7). 

    In so far as the second Person of the Trinity is certainly unique as compared to those other two classes, the point of those advocating monogenes to mean "one and only" or "unique" is to do away with what is in their view un-necessary speculation about the eternal relation between the Father and the Son. 1

    If we were to apply this more recent set of suggestions, the Nicene Creed would read something like this:

"And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the one and only Son of God".

    In this post, I'll mention a couple of thinkers that oppose the doctrine of eternal generation and the translation of monogenes as "only-begotten". I will then end the post with why eternal generation of the Son as "only begotten" is still the preferred position.

Some suggest that the doctrine of eternal generation is unnecessary, and instead the Person of the Son is distinguished from the Father another way

    Two theologians whom I would otherwise consider sound in their doctrine have in the past denied the doctrine of eternal generation of the Son. Drs. Bruce Ware and Wayne Grudem have at various points attempted an alternative approach to describing what distinguishes the Father and the Son. Both men assert the co-eternality and co-equality of the two Divine Persons in the Godhead. For them though, the distinction lies in various roles of authority and submission.

    God the Father, for Ware and Grudem, is the lead authority in the Trinity, while the Son eternally submits to Him. This view, known as "eternal subordination of the Son" or "ESS", or "Eternal Relationships of Authority and Submission" or ERAS, sees the Son as subordinated in role, not essence or being to the Father. Grudem for instances writes in the second edition of his systematic theology:

"This priority of the Father (or leadership role, or authority, of the Father) with respect to the Son is a consistent pattern in Scripture that is true prior to creation."

    Grudem takes the doctrine of eternal generation to be about roles and positions between the Father and Son, while all the while continuing to affirm the Father and Son's eternal equality and unity of nature. 

    As Ware and Grudem apply this to understanding the roles of male headship in marriage, they argue that the marriage relationship is patterned off of what they claim is an authority structure within the Trinity. As much as I support the distinct roles and equal value of the husband and wife in marriage, I cannot find evidence in Scripture that directly links that pattern as drawn from equality and distinction within the Trinity. 

    ESS advocates will point to representative passages to show the Son's role of submission to the Father. For instance, in John 5:19, Jesus taught: "Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, 'Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner."2

  The failure at times to distinguish the work the Trinity does in our world from how the Three Persons are within the Godhead is among the weaknesses of the Eternal Subordination of the Son (ESS) view. Theologian Charles Lee Irons evaluates the ESS view and then makes this observation:3

"The urgent question that must be faced by theologians who want to retain and aspect of eternal functional subordination theology is whether it is possible to relate these two divergent understandings of Sonship: is the Son's identity grounded in eternal generation or in eternal obedience?"

    For Irons, such an attempt (as done by Drs. Bruce Ware and Wayne Grudem) is fraught with too many tensions. Eternal generation affirms without qualification the equality of the Son to the Father, making the distinction between them only about the Begetter (The Father) and the Begotten (the Son). 

    The unintentional effect can be if we also add "roles" or "authority" language to the Father and Son, the ESS position can almost sound similar to the beginnings of the heresy of Arianism, which flat-out asserts the Son's subordination as a created being. 

Why eternal generation of the Son still best explains the term "monogenes" or only begotten in the Bible and thus the Nicene Creed

    Since around 2016, Drs. Bruce Ware and Wayne Grudem have changed their minds about denying the doctrine of eternal generation of the Son. In Wayne Grudem's 2nd edition of his "Systematic Theology", he ends up affirming the doctrine of eternal generation. However, he still holds to the eternal submission of the Son to the Father as a second way of distinguishing the two Divine persons.4 Their change of opinion is commendable, since it takes a lot of humility to express how one has changed their mind on a major issue in print. Still, the tensions in their view as I described above shows how relatively fragile the ESS view can be compared to the time-tested view of eternal generation. 

    When I look at another modern example of someone changing their mind on the doctrine of eternal generation, Dr. John MacArthur, the difference is He didn't try to hold onto a viewpoint that would had tension with the doctrine. MacArthur's change of mind to affirming eternal generation led to him sharpening and preaching a more robust doctrine and defense of the Son's equality with the Father.5

Why "begotten" better captures the eternal relation between the Father and the Son than the rendering "one and only".

   As we draw this post to a close, let me offer one final argument to reinforce why the doctrine of eternal generation and the translation of "begotten" is most appropriate as summarized by the Nicene Creed's handling of the Scriptural data. Many modern translations have taken the stance to render "monogenes" as uniformly "one and only" or "unique". The problem I have in translating "monogenes" as "one and only" or "unique" is it assumes that rendering is the only way to translate that word. 

    There are places of course where "monogenes" refers to the sole offspring of someone without other children (Judges 11:34 in the Greek translation of the Old Testament or Septuagint, also Luke 7:17; 8:42; 9:38). However, there are cases where "monogenes" carries the additional meaning of a special, covenantal, or even transmission of spiritual identity from a father to a son (take for instance Abraham and Isaac in Hebrews 11:17). In other words, to translate "monogenes" as one and only in those contexts may risk under-translating the passages that deal with the eternal relations of the Father and the Son (John 1:14; 1:18; 3:16 for example).6

Final thought. 

   Despite modern efforts to deny the doctrine of eternal generation, or to do away with the translation "begotten", for the reasons cited near the end of this post, I would argue that the doctrine of eternal generation as expressed in the Nicene Creed still holds. 

Endnotes:

1. The "unnecessary speculation" referred to here has to do with the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son. For some, this view is a by-product of Greek philosophical thinking imported into the history of theological reflection on the Son. Further, opponents of eternal generation assert the Nicene Creed itself betrays this Greek influence, spelling out its doctrine of eternal generation with allegedly no Biblical support. Some notable authors of the recent past who had reservations about the doctrine of eternal generation and the translation of "monogenes" as "only-begotten" were such notables as B.B. Warfield and New Testament Greek Scholar F.J. Hort. The latter began the idea that "monogenes" ought be translated "one and only" or "unique", prompting many English translators to gradually render "monogenes" as "one and only", especially in the last twenty five years.

2 Those promoting the eternal submission of the Son (ESS) doctrine will use such a passage to prove their point. However, when one carefully reads what Jesus is teaching, the passage is not advocating an eternal submissive role of the Son to the Father within the Trinity. Instead, Jesus is describing how He and the Father act inseparably in our world, what theologians call "inseparable operations". 

    When the Son became incarnated, He in His humanity yielded to the Father and submitted Himself under the work and ministry of the Holy Spirit. Whenever we see the Trinity at work in creation and salvation, we call their work an "economic work". In other words, for the sake of creation, God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit will work in a particular ordered pattern or economy. The Son is sent by the Father, for example, and the Spirit is sent by the Father and the Son. God in His revelation operates this way for our sakes. However, within the life of the Trinity itself, we do not see such ordering, since the only things distinguishing the Father from the Son is the Son being begotten of the Father. The Holy Spirit's distinction from the Father and the Son lies in His proceeding from the Father through the Son (see John 15:26).

3 On Classical Trinitarianism. Edited by Matthew Barrett. Intervarsity Press. 2024. See chapter 23 in that book. Charles Lee Irons, Only Begotten Son, page 440-441. 

4 The doctrine of eternal generation teaches that the Father has conveyed to the Son the Divine essence without beginning, meaning that the Son, begotten of the Father from eternity, is equal and not lesser than the Father. It would seem that this would create a tension in Grudem's system, since eternal subordination of the Son does make the Son under the Father in position as ever submitted to Him. 

5 Here is the link to MacArthur's full statement on how he changed his mind on the doctrine of eternal sonship. Reexamining the Eternal Sonship of Christ

6 Take for instance in Hebrews 11:17, where Isaac is offered by Abraham. In many more recent translations (LSB, NASB 2020, CSB, NIV, ESV), Isaac is referred to as Abraham's "only" or "one and only" son. On the other hand, the KJV, NKJV, and MEV render Isaac as Abraham's "only begotten" son. If we were to translate monogenes as "one and only", that would neglect Abraham's other son, Ishmael, who came before Isaac by 13 years. Isaac is the son of promise, a special, spiritually significant begetting that transmits the promise of God given to Abraham to his son Isaac. As for the eternal Son of God, his "begetting" by the Father is an eternal act between the Father and the Son. 

    The Divine nature is shared in such a way between the Father and the Son that without the Son being begotten by the Father, there would be no Father. Likewise, without the eternal conveyance of "Son-ship" to the Son by the Father (as noted earlier, "filiation"), there would be no Son. The act of begetting is what makes the Father the Father, and being begotten by the Father is what makes the Son the Son. 

    No other means of distinction (whether differing roles, or heretical route of differing natures, as proposed by Arius) suffice to preserve consistently the equality of the Father and Son in essence with their distinct identities within the Godhead. The Apostle John captures this point when he records Jesus saying in John 6:65 - "For just as the Father has life in Himself, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in Himself." This equality and union in nature is expressed by Jesus in John 14:9 "Jesus said to him, 'Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how can you say, ‘Show us the Father?" 

Post #8 1700 Years of the Nicene Creed - "The only begotten Son of God" (P1 Arguments favorable to the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son)

Introduction:

    I spent the last three posts expressing the Biblical understanding of Jesus Christ being the only way to God. Readers may review that series here Growing Christian Resources: Part One: One God, One Way, One Faith - A Defense For Why Jesus Is The Only Way of Salvation here Growing Christian Resources: Part Two: One God, One Way, One Faith - A Defense For Why Jesus Is The Only Way of Salvation and here Growing Christian Resources: Part Three: One God, One Way, One Faith - A Defense For Why Jesus Is The Only Way of Salvation. As we return back to our series on the Nicene Creed, I refer readers back to the last post I had done a few weeks back for sake of review here Growing Christian Resources: Post #7 1700 Years of the Nicene Creed - "And in one Lord, Jesus Christ"  We observed in that last post how the Divine title "LORD" is used in the New Testament to attest to the Son's Divine nature in union with the Father on the one hand, while affirming His distinction from the Father in the Godhead on the other. 

    What will follow in this post and in the next post will be a look at the current discussion among theologians on what the Creed means by its use of the term for the Son as "the only begotten". The term "begotten" (Greek noun "mono-gin-ay" = μονογενη) has become a subject of discussion and debate among Biblical theologians, church historians, and New Testament Greek scholarship over the last one hundred and fifty years, most notably the last twenty-five years. At issue is the historic teaching of what is known as "the eternal generation" of the Son from the Father, affirmed by the Nicene Creed yet questioned today by some theologians. 

    In this post, I'll present arguments favorable to the idea that the Greek term "monogenes" (the word used to translate "only-begotten" in older English translations, such as in John 3:16), as well as in the Nicene Creed. In the next post I'll explore arguments that dispute this claim, and instead argue that the term "monogenes" ought be translated "one and only", as well as resisting the doctrine of eternal generation. 

The term "only-begotten", does it only mean "one and only" or it is referring to the eternal generation of the Son as "only begotten"?

    When we talk about the doctrine of "eternal generation", what do we mean? In the history of theological reflection, two live options are discussed. Some theologians, such as Charles Hodge, would advocate that the personhood of the Son, rather than the essence, as conveyed by the Father to the Son.1 

    What is meant by this is that between the two Persons of the Father and the Son, the only distinguishing marks are that the Father "filiates" or "begets", and the Son is "begotten". These personal properties are what ensure we do not confuse the Father with the Son, or the Son with the Father. This at least expresses a foundational point of the doctrine of the Trinity, keeping in mind the distinctions between the Father, Son, and Spirit while affirming their equality of glory, power, and eternity in the Godhead.

    Others, such a Herman Bavinck, and the original defender of the Son's deity at the Council of Nicaea, Athanasius, would argue that eternal generation is the Father's communication of the entire essence to the Son, without beginning, from all eternity.2 To say the Son of God is "eternally generated" is meant that to Him is the entire Divine nature, point for point, with all perfections, eternally and without origination communicated by the Father to the Son. Either understanding (whether the Father begets the substance of deity or personhood to the Son) still results in affirming the Divine persons of the Father and Son being co-equal, sharing in the same undivided nature of the Godhead, and distinguished from each other respectively as begetter and begotten.  

    Charles Lee Irons, a leading proponent of the notion that the phrase "only-begotten" refers to the eternal generation of the Son from the Father summarizes his view with leading Scripture references from John's Gospel using the term "only-begotten" or "monogenes":

"Traditionally, the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son was supported by an appeal to the five Johannine texts in which Christ is identified as monogenes (Jn 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; I Jn 4:9). As early as Jerome's Vulgate, this word was understood in the sense of 'only begotten' (unigenitus), and the tradition was continued by the Authorized Version."

    Dr. Irons then summarizes what has been the controversy surrounding this term:

"However, most scholars of this century reject this understanding and believe, instead, that the idea behind the word is more along the lines of 'only' (RSV) or 'one and only' (NIV)." 2 We will look at some of these objections in the next post.

The main passages used to support the eternal generation of the Son as the true meaning of "mono-genes" or "only-begotten".

   To remind ourselves again, those who argue for the eternal generation of the Son teach that the Son of God is "eternally generated", meaning that that Father eternally communicates to Him  the entire Divine nature, point for point, with all perfections. Also, the distinguishing characteristic of the Son, "begottenness", is conveyed by the Father to Him, with the Father Himself being the unbegotten Person, hence distinguishing Him in identity from the co-equal and co-eternal Son. 

    There are proof texts that theologians in favor of this doctrine appeal as direct evidence for the doctrine, and then a handful of passages that theologians would say are indirect proof-texts.

Direct proof-texts for the eternal generation of the Son from the Father

John 1:14 "And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth."

John 1:18 "No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him."

John 3:16 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life."

John 3:18 "He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."

1 John 4:19 "By this the love of God was manifested in us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world so that we might live through Him."

    In addition to these five Johannine proof texts, a few others that convey the teaching of the eternal generation of the Son are used. In Proverbs 8:24-25, Wisdom is personified and described as "brought forth" from God before creation of anything else: 

“When there were no depths I was brought forth, when there were no springs abounding with water. 25 “Before the mountains were settled, Before the hills I was brought forth." 3

Indirect Proof Texts

    Although the following other passages do not use the term "only-begotten", the idea of the Son being eternally generated by the Father is resident in their various phrases. Colossians 1:16-17 "For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created through Him and for Him. 17 He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. 18 He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything." I've highlighted four phrases in Paul's words here in Colossians. 

    The first three bolded phrases portray the Son as responsible for creation, rather than being created, as some groups like the Jehovah Witnesses would advocate. The term "firstborn" is a Greek noun that refers to inheritance more so than just mere birth-order. The Son of God was promised in eternity, by the Father, that He would inherit all of creation before it was made (compare Psalm 2:8; 82:8).

    There are other indirect proof texts we could offer, but for sake of space let me submit Psalm 2:7 "I will surely tell of the decree of the Lord: He said to Me, ‘You are My Son, Today I have begotten You." The word "today" in context is not referring to there at that moment. Sometimes in the Bible, the term "day" can refer to an indeterminate period of time, or even eternity itself.4

The Nicene Line and clarifying the Creed's confession of the Deity and humanity of the Son

    As we close out today's post, I wanted to refer to a recent lecture Dr. Fred Sanders gave at the Credo Conference back in May of 2025 here (1081) Fred Sanders: True God from True God - YouTube, on the phrase in the Nicene Creed about Jesus Christ being "God of very God". In the talk, Sanders used a very helpful tool that aids greatly in clarifying what the Creed is communicating about the Person of the Son in terms of His deity and humanity. I'll reproduce what he said below by way of a red line he used in his lecture to draw attention to the Nicene Creed's confession of God the Son.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ,

      the only Son of God,

      begotten from the Father before all ages,

      God from God,

      Light from Light,

      true God from true God,

      begotten, not made;

      of the same essence as the Father.

  Nicene Line----------------------------------------

      Through him all things were made.

      For us and for our salvation

      he came down from heaven;

      he became incarnate by the Holy Spirit and 

      the virgin Mary,

      and was made human.

      He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate;

      he suffered and was buried.

      The third day he rose again, according to the 

             Scriptures.

      He ascended to heaven

      and is seated at the right hand of the Father.

      He will come again with glory

      to judge the living and the dead.

      His kingdom will never end.

    Why did Dr. Sanders draw his red line between the phrases "of the same essence as the Father" and "through whom all things are made"? In his lecture, he points out that the Creed is delivering to us the entire narrative of the Son of God, eternally pre-existent with the Father above the red line, and then becoming incarnated in history below the same line. 

    What the "Nicene Line" does is help us "tell the story of Jesus", marking out what He is by nature as God above the line, and then reminding ourselves that though taking unto His person a total human nature below the line, He was still retaining all His Divine attributes which are spoken of Him above the line, especially in that phrase "through whom all things are made". This tool at least can help us keep term "only begotten", in mind as we see it situated within the larger context of the Nicene Creed's confession of the equality of the Son's deity with the Father. 

Next time....

    In the next post I'll write more about the discussion on the term translated "begotten" (monogenes), noting some arguments that prefer to translate the term "one and only", as well as denying the need for the doctrine of the Son's eternal generation.

     

Endnotes:

1. Theologian Lorainne Boettner summarizes this view of the Father conveying the personal property of "begottenness" to the Son in eternal generation as coming from Charles Hodge. On page 121 of his "Studies in Theology", Boettner quotes Hodge's "outlines in theology" as follows: 

"an eternal personal act of the Father, wherein, by necessity of nature, not by choice of will, He generates the person (not the essence) of the Son, by communicating to Him the whole indivisible substance of the Godhead, without division, alienation, or change, so that the Son is the express image of His Father's person, and eternally continues not from the Father, but in the Father, and the Father in the Son".

2. https://www.monergism.com/son-generation-or-filiation 

From Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics: God and Creation, transl. John Bolt, and John Vriend (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2004), 2.308–310.

Theologian Herman Bavinck writes this about eternal generation: "divine generation implies that the Father begets the Son out of the being of the Father, “God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father,” as the Nicene symbol has it." 

Bavinck then uses this analogy:

"Just as the human mind objectivizes itself in speech, so God expresses his entire being in the Logos [Christ]." 

 Bavinck later on expands on the Father's begetting of the Son in this doctrine: "Creation is 'the bringing into being, from the outside and not from the substance of the Creator, of something created and made entirely dissimilar [in substance],' while 'begetting' means “producing of the substance of the begetter an offspring similar in substance to the begetter.' The Son is not a creature but he is “God over all, forever praised!” (Rom. 9:5 NIV). Accordingly, he was not brought forth by the will of the Father out of nothing and in time. Rather, he is generated out of the being of the Father in eternity. Hence, instead of viewing “generation” as an actual work, a performance (ἐνεργεια), of the Father, we should ascribe to the Father “a generative nature” (φυσις γεννητικη). This is not to say, of course, that the generation is an unconscious and unwilled emanation, occurring apart from the will and power of the Father. It is not an act of an antecedent decreeing will, like creation, but one that is so divinely natural to the Father that his concomitant will takes perfect delight in it. It is a manifestation of what is truly expressive of his nature and essence, and therefore also of his knowledge, will, and power, in fact of all his virtues."

2. The Upper Register: Papers and mp3's by Lee Irons. 

3. The Hebrew verb translated "brought forth" is the verb "chul" חוּל. In Proverbs 8:25, the verb חוּל is in a verbal form called the "hophal", which refers to wisdom being brought forth by another. We can tell the writer of Proverbs is advocating an eternal act of God bringing forth wisdom, not as a creation, but as an act from within His nature, by how this same verb is used in Job 15:7, which uses irony in the mouths of one of Job's supposed friends, contrasting creation with bringing forth: "Are you the first man who was born?Or were you brought forth before the hills?" The second part of Job 15:7 is set in eternity, since the phrase "before the hills" is a Hebrew idiom for eternity. As we look again at Proverbs 8:25, the Greek translation of this verse in the Septuagint uses the Greek verb "gennao" (γεννᾷ) which means "to birth, to bring forth, to beget". It is argued by those favoring the doctrine of eternal generation that this Greek verb is the root of the noun "monogenes" (only begotten). In ancient church fathers such as Athanasius, the prime defender and exponent behind the wording of the Nicene Creed, Proverbs 8:25 was a main proof text along with the passages in John's Gospel for the eternal generation of the Son. 

4. God the Father is referred to as "The Ancient of Days", a title that is a round-about-way of speaking of His Divine eternity or eternal nature. In 2 Peter 3:12, the Apostle Peter writes of the "Day of God" in reference to what will be the New Heavens and New Earth that will begin eternity future following Christ's earthly reign (see also Revelation 21-22). Thus, the idea of "day" used in Psalm 2:7 speaks of the Father begetting or communicating the Divine nature to the Son, without beginning, thus indicating that the Father and the Son have forever related as Begetter and Begotten Persons within the Godhead.

Part Three: One God, One Way, One Faith - A Defense For Why Jesus Is The Only Way of Salvation

 

Introduction:

This week our church is hosting a Vacation Bible School that has as its theme: "One Way" here New Hope Baptist Church: Watertown, NY > Vacation Bible School 2025. Every year, we try to offer a series of adult classes that coincide with whatever the VBS is studying. I've devoted the last two posts and today's to covering what I'll cover with the adults, thus our series: "One God, One Way, One Faith."

The last two posts have featured what I'm calling "a defense for why Jesus is the only way of salvation". In this short series I have proposed three stages or three steps that lead to this conclusion.

First, we proposed that since there is One God, it follows that there is One Way. We compared other views of what counts as ultimate reality. Included in our evaluation was giving an account for such things as objective truth, laws of logic, and objective morality. Any other worldview besides monotheism leads to the undoing of objective truth, laws of logic, and objective morality. Atheism, pantheism, panentheism, polytheism, dualism, agnosticism, and henotheism all suffer from viewing ultimate reality as one reality, with either no Divine agents or multiple Divine beings presiding over everything. One cannot hold to object truth in those systems, since truth by its very nature demands an objective standard. 

Monotheism, with its belief in two realities (God as ultimate reality, and then the created reality that had a beginning) grounds objective truth, morality, and laws of logic. We saw that only Christian monotheism, with its affirmation of the Trinity, grounds morality, truth, and logic, since only a Triune monotheism makes sense of God being truly self-sufficient and not in need of creation. 

Such a God chooses to interact with our world, designing our world as not only a physical, but moral order. As the God of love, He included such things as redemption and created free-will creatures such as ourselves. Interested readers who want to review this first point of "One God" in detail may read the first post here: Growing Christian Resources: Part One: One God, One Way, One Faith - A Defense For Why Jesus Is The Only Way of Salvation  

The second part of our series dealt with "One Way". As we built this second part off of the truth of "One God leading to One way", we saw that the incarnate Son of God, Jesus Christ, is central to our argument. Jesus Christ repeatedly expressed Himself as the decisive revelation of God in history and humanity. He being truly God, and thus a member of the Trinity in which the entire Divine nature has "subsisted" or stood for all eternity, means He by nature of His deity is the proper ground of salvation, as seen in the Biblical phrase "salvation is of the Lord" (Jonah 2:9). 

   The doctrine of the incarnation teaches that this eternal, second Person of the Trinity, the Son, came to earth to have added unto His person a true and entire human nature (John 1:14). The Son of God incarnated to be the man, Jesus of Nazareth. He is the unique and total revelation of the Father (John 14:8, Hebrews 1:3) and thus the clear revelation of what God is like. 

As man, He represents all who would ever believe upon Him in the same way the original Adam was the representative of all mankind in the Garden of Eden (see Romans 5:12-21; 1 Corinthians 15:45-47). Therefore, Jesus Christ as truly God and truly man is uniquely the only way of salvation (John 14:6). No other founder of any religion ever claimed nor proved to be God. No other founder of any religion demonstrated His identity by raising from the dead. Interested readers may read more about this second part of the argument here Growing Christian Resources: Part Two: One God, One Way, One Faith - A Defense For Why Jesus Is The Only Way of Salvation.

In this short series, we have aimed to understand the Bible’s rationale for affirming that there is One God, One Way, and One Faith. It is that final piece, "One Faith" that will occupy our time in this final post for the series. In today's post, we will discover that saving faith as presented in the Bible is just as unique as Jesus the only way and as the Triune God, who is the One God of salvation.  

The Uniqueness of the Christian faith, and the manner of receiving salvation by faith alone.

    Years ago I heard R.C. Sproul give a lecture on the doctrine of saving faith found in the Scriptures. What he taught was this: saving faith has three essential elements to itself. I think of a three-legged stool upon which Biblical faith rests. 

1. There is “notitia” or the contents            of faith.

2. There is “assensus” or                            intellectual ascent to the faith.

3. Then there is “fiducia” or trust in the      Christ of faith.

In his teaching, Sproul noted the following, as reflected in an article he wrote here: Saving Faith: Foundations - An Overview of Systematic Theology with R.C. Sproul

    Sproul first noted: "What are the constituent elements of saving faith? The Protestant Reformers recognized that biblical faith has three essential aspects: notitia, assensus, and fiducia. Notitia refers to the content of faith, the things we believe." (Compare 1 Corinthians 15:2-4).

    Then Sproul moves on with the second element of saving faith: 

"Assensus is the conviction that the content of our faith is true. One can know about the Christian faith and yet believe that it is not true."  (Compare 2 Timothy 1:12)

    Then Sproul mentions one more leg or constituent element of saving faith, not only "notitia" (the doctrines "that we believe"), and "assensus" (agreement with the doctrines "because I believe"), but thirdly "fiduci", or "I trust in what I believe". Dr. Sproul stated again:

    "Fiducia refers to personal trust and reliance. Knowing and believing the content of the Christian faith is not enough, for even demons can do that (James 2:19). Faith is effectual only if one personally trusts in Christ alone for salvation." (See Rom. 10:8-10).

    It is this element, along with the first two, which makes sufficient conditions for true saving faith. Do I trust in the God and what He has said in His Word about Jesus Christ and salvation? This is why the Apostle John in 2 John 1:9 uses the language of "abide" in reference to saving trust in God the Father and God the Son: "Anyone who goes too far and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God; the one who abides in the teaching, he has both the Father and the Son."

I had noted Ephesians 4:4-6 in the first lesson of this short series, but it bears repeating again. Ephesians 4:4-6 “There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all.”

      The Bible teaches that the way we know that salvation is one way is by not only the affirmation of the One Triune God and the One unique Savior, Jesus Christ, but also the one way through which salvation is received – by faith alone. Romans 3:24-26 “being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; 25 whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed; 26 for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.”  

Only two religions in the world. 

     The late D. James Kennedy once noted that there are only two religions in the world: salvation by grace through faith apart from works, and salvation by works. As I’ve studied various religions over the past three decades of Gospel ministry, I’ve found his observation to be true. 

    For instance, Mormonism teaches four different ways to receive salvation, always adding something to faith, what we could call a “faith+” approach. Islam has you observe the five pillars, which include prayers toward Mecca, a once-in-a-life pilgrimage, and other ethical prescriptions. Buddhism has you follow what it calls “eight noble truths”. All of these are works-based approaches to salvation. 

Why saving faith is unique. 

   The way to God is unique – Christ alone. God Himself is unique – God alone. Now realize that the way to receive salvation in Biblical Christianity is unique – by faith alone. Let me note three things about saving faith with Scripture references.

1. Faith is bestowed by God. 

    We know that no confession of Jesus Christ occurs apart from the Holy Spirit (see 1 Corinthians 12:3 “No one says ‘Jesus is Lord’ except by the Holy Spirit’”). Justifying faith is Divinely grounded by how its bestowed by God, that is it is a Divine gifting of God (Ephesians 2:8) that becomes a decision of the will to trust in Him (Acts 16:31). Charles Hodge, a nineteenth century theologian, says this about saving faith:“The first conscious exercise of the renewed soul is faith, as the first conscious act of a man born blind whose eyes have been opened, is seeing.” 

    Just as a baby is born with muscles, organs, and a brain to begin its life outside the womb, no doubt developed from conception, a born-again sinner has faith granted as a gift, an awakening, whereby the sinner is freed to exercise his or her decision to trust in Christ and repent of their sins. There is human faith, contrived and naturally stirred toward emotional or natural things. Only saving faith leads the sinner to trust in the Savior (see John 1:12-13; Romans 9:14-15; 1 Peter 1:3,5; James 1:18,21).

2. Faith is a divine work of God. 

    That is, faith is God’s doing. James 1:18a “In the exercise of His will He brought us forth by the word of truth…”. Or again, 1 Corinthians 1:30a “But by His doing you are in Christ Jesus…”. See also John 6:28-29 and Ephesians 2:8-9. Faith is a gift that is bestowed by God and a Divine work in the soul. Jesus notes this in John 6:39 "Jesus answered and said to them, 'This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.'" 

3. Faith is prompted by the call              of God. 

      I think of Lydia in Acts 16:14 who was listening to Paul’s preaching: “and the Lord opened her heart to respond to the things spoken by Paul.”  We do not see Lydia forced against her will to trust in Christ. If anything, her heart is "opened", nearly imperceptibly as a flower opens its petals to the light of the sun. The inward call of the Holy Spirit in the Gospel is what shines the light of God's glory in Christ to illuminate the sinner to the awfulness of their sin and the awesomeness of the Savior. The human will, bound by sin, is freed by that call of grace. Faith, implanted in the soil of the heart, springs up in the sinner as a free-made decision. 

    Only in Christianity to you have a supernaturally given, worked forth, and Divinely called faith. This unique quality of saving faith, in the Unique way of salvation, Jesus Christ, being Himself a member of the Triune God, explains why the Bible teaches only one way of salvation. 

Closing thoughts:

     As we close out this short study, I had you introduced to the Apostles’ Creed in the last two posts. Notice its first words: “we believe”. Can you say that? Do you believe? Do you have confidence in the doctrine or truth of Christ? Do you agree that He alone can save your soul? Do you trust in Him right now for your soul’s salvation. There is only one way – Jesus Christ.

Part Two: One God, One Way, One Faith - A Defense For Why Jesus Is The Only Way of Salvation

Introduction:

     We saw in our last post that God is One God here Growing Christian Resources: Part One: One God, One Way, One Faith - A Defense For Why Jesus Is The Only Way of Salvation. We also laid out the Bible’s teaching on the doctrine of the Trinity, and how it specifically defines Biblical Monotheism. 

    One God who alone is worthy of worship, forever identified as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, has specified the Person of the Son, incarnated as the man Christ Jesus, to be the only way to have salvation. Readers may wonder why we're focused on "One Way of salvation" as central to the Biblical Gospel. First, I certainly want non-Christian readers to see in print why Christian people hold to this claim of Christianity. As the reader will see in a moment, there are myths needing dispelled and good reasons given for this claim. 

    But there is a second reason. Two independent polls (Pew Survey, Religious Landscape Survey, 2008; Ligonier State of Theology Survey, 2022) surveyed Evangelical Christians on the subject of whether there is more than one way to God besides Jesus Christ. The former poll delivered the result of 57% claiming more than one way to God, with Ligonier's poll resulting in 58%. The view that there are many paths to God is called "religious pluralism". I'll deal with this viewpoint in a moment.

    Why is this significant? Think about it. Statistically, on any given Sunday, even in so-called Bible believing churches, over half of professing Bible-believing Christians would dispute the position we're advocating for in these posts - that Jesus Christ is the only way one can get to Heaven, and that explicit faith in Him in required. 

    As readers will see today, the "one way" of salvation follows from "One God". The way of salvation is Jesus Christ. As we will see, He not only came to be truly man for us, but He also came as God with us (Matthew 1:21-23; 1 Timothy 2:5). In other words, the Biblical monotheism I argued for in last post includes in it the understanding that the Son is truly God, along with the Father and the Holy Spirit. To affirm Biblical monotheism is to include the notion that the incarnate Son of God must be the only way, since Scripture tells us that "salvation is of the Lord" (Jonah 2:9).  

Myth-busting a claim by religious pluralism

    Religious pluralists will argue there is no privileged religion, since in their view, all religions are of the same value. The question to ask of course is this: is that true? 

    Before we get to the Scriptures that reveal the exclusivity of salvation in Jesus Christ, it is important to dispel a commonly held myth propagated by pluralism.  Pluralists will try to show that Christianity's exclusive truth claims is bigotry and mean-spirited, since according to them, it alone claims to be "the only way". When you fact-check other religions, you quickly discover Christianity isn't the only religion claiming exclusivity. Let’s look at a few other religions and their claims. 

1. The Bhagavad-Gita – One of the three main Hindu holy books. Hare Krishnas use this. Bhagavad-Gita 18:66 “Abandon all varieties of religion and just surrender unto me. I shall deliver you from all sinful reactions. Do not fear.” This religious book believes Krishna to be one of three main deities which are part of a much larger group of deities in Hinduism (130 million or so).

2. Dhammapada – One of the main sources for Buddhism. Chapter 14 “He who has gone to refuge to the Buddha, the teaching and his order penetrates with transcendental wisdom the four fold truths.” Buddha did not believe in God or at least in a personalized deity. Ultimate reality is cyclical and impersonal.

3. Quran – The main book of Islam. Surah (Chapter) 47 – “God will render of none effect the works of those who believe not, and who turn away men from the way of God; but as to those who believe, and work righteousness, and believe the revelation which hath been sent down to Muhummad (for it is truth from their Lord), he will expiate their evil deeds from them, and will dispose their heart aright.”

4. Pluralism. Some may be surprised, since pluralism itself claims that there are multiple paths to God. However, Pluralism itself is an exclusivist claim. How so? It positions itself as the definitive world on all other religions. Further, it rules out exclusivist claims like "Jesus is the only way" in favor of its own objectivity "there are multiple paths to God". 

The uniqueness of Christianity is what sets it apart, even more so than its exclusive truth claim to be the only way to God.

Contrary to many today who promote “pluralism” or the belief that all ways lead to God, the above examples show that other religions claim exclusivity. What sets Christianity apart in its exclusive truth claims is the Person of Jesus. He claimed to be God (John 8:58). He gave His life for the sins of His people. He raised from the dead. 

The deities of Hinduism, Buddha, and Mohummad never claim to be the One True Living God. Never gave their lives for their people’s sins. Never raised from the dead to tell about it. The uniqueness of Jesus Christ sets Him apart as “The Way”. 

I’m going to present two main points as to why “The Way” to God is one way through Jesus Christ. First, we will note the Bible’s testimony. Then second, what sets Jesus Christ apart from all others, and thus proves that He alone is the way of salvation.

A. Biblical testimony of the one way of salvation.

Wherever theologians and professing Christians get the notion that there is possibly more than one way to God, or there is possibly of salvation outside of express faith in Jesus Christ, its not from the Bible. In such cases, practitioners of so-called "inclusivism" or the most extreme opposite view of exclusivism, universalism (all people will be saved regardless of what they believe) have to import a man-made system or philosophy.

 Below I’m going to lay out some of the Bible verses that talk about what theologians call “the exclusivity of the Gospel” or there only being one way to God.

Isaiah 35:8-9 “A highway will be there, a roadway, and it will be called the Highway of Holiness. The unclean will not travel on it, but it will be for him who walks that way, and fools will not wander on it. 9 No lion will be there, nor will any vicious beast go up on it; these will not be found there. But the redeemed will walk there.”

Matthew 7:13-14 “Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. 14 For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.”

Matthew 11:27 “All things have been handed over to Me by My Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him.”

John 10:9 “I am the door; if anyone enters through Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture.”

John 14:6 “Jesus said to him, ‘I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.’”

Acts 4:12 “And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved.”

Romans 5:1-2 “Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, 2 through whom also we have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand; and we exult in hope of the glory of God.”

Ephesians 2:18 “for through Him we both have our access in one Spirit to the Father.”

1 Timothy 2:5 “For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.”

Hebrews 10:19-22 “Therefore, brethren, since we have confidence to enter the holy place by the blood of Jesus, 20 by a new and living way which He inaugurated for us through the veil, that is, His flesh, 21 and since we have a great priest over the house of God, 22 let us draw near with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.”

B. What makes Jesus Christ unique and thus the only way of salvation.

    I'm going to put forth five unique doctrines of Christianity that no other religion in the world shares. These five truths are tied to Jesus Christ, who himself is the core, the foundation, and exclusive personality of Christianity.

(B1). He alone is God in human flesh.

      Dr. Ed Hindson in “The Popular Encyclopedia of Apologetics”, page 138, notes this: “Jesus is deity on foot! He walks among men, but He lives above men. He looks like a man, but He talks like God. He is fully human and yet totally Divine. He is the window through which we see the nature and character of God in action. And He is the mirror through which we see ourselves in relation to God.”  The second main part of the Apostle’s Creed affirms: I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord. See John 1:14; 14:6,8.

(B2). He alone was virgin born.

     Contrary to what you may hear on the internet today, the virginal conception and birth of Jesus Christ is unique among all religions and philosophies, whether modern or in antiquity. The Egyptian story of Osiris from the Egyptian Book of the Dead recounts Osiris deriving from the sky and earth gods. No virgin birth there. Mithra of Persian and Roman religious fame came out of a rock to journey into the netherworld – again no virgin birth. 

    In the Pali Canon of Buddhism, Buddha allegedly came about when two people from the celestial realm or “Brahma” touched his mother’s stomach. She was already a married woman, so again, no virgin birth there. 

    Among the Greeks, the historian Plutarch and the later Suetonius tell the story of the conception of Alexander the Great, the mighty conqueror. A serpent laid by the side of his mother and she became pregnant. You guessed it – no virgin. The Bible alone teaches a virgin birth, and Jesus alone fulfilled i

      Author Erwin W. Lutzer in his book “Christ Among Other gods”, page 79, notes this about Jesus’ virgin birth: “To be a Savior, Christ had to meet three requirements. First, He had to be a male, born of a woman as predicted in Genesis 3:15. He had to become one of us to redeem us. No angel could have been born our sin; He had to represent us in all respects. 

    Second, He had to be sinless in order to have the perfection God demands. As sinners, we cannot pay for our own sin even if we suffered forever, much less could we pay for the sin of someone else. Whether the sacrifice was accepted dependent on its value, its perfection. Third, he also had to be God, so that it could be said that God himself undertook a rescue mission to reconcile sinful humanity. If salvation is of the Lord he had to provide the very sacrifice he demanded.” He alone is God in the flesh. He alone experienced a virgin birth.

(B3). He alone died for sinners.

      We so often take for granted the uniqueness of Christ dying for our sins as a substitutionary atonement (Romans 3:24-26; Ephesians 1:7; 1 Peter 1:18; 3:18). No other founder or leader of any religion, philosophy, or movement in history ever died for His people for the sake of not only love, but for appeasing or propitiating the wrath of a Holy God. As man He died. As God, He provided the infinite value to the cross (Acts 20:28). Only Christ and Christianity proves God’s love via the cross (Rom 5:8).

(B4). He alone raised from the dead.

     Jesus Christ alone is God and man, alone had a virgin birth, and alone died for sin. We now see a fourth uniqueness about Jesus – His resurrection. Jesus predicted His own death and resurrection (see John 2:19-20 and roughly about ten more spots throughout the Gospel accounts). Remarkably, He raised from the dead as public vindication that all He achieved on the cross was accepted by God (1 Corinthians 15:1-4; Acts 3:14-15). 

    Only the four Gospel accounts give us a consistent, historically rooted, and prophetically fulfilled narrative surrounding the events of the empty tomb. His subsequent twelve appearances over a forty-day period cemented the certainty we have of knowing that He physically, and bodily raised from the dead. Muhummad, though being claimed to have ascended into Heaven, never died for His people and certainly did not raised from the dead. Buddha’s remains were cremated and distributed among his followers. No other religion has this claim of a resurrection.

(B5). He alone is necessary for Christianity to exist and salvation to exist.

This final point on the uniqueness of Jesus Christ as the way of salvation is meant to note how if you remove Him from Christianity, you have no Christianity.1 

 Biblical faith would collapse without Jesus Christ. He is the hinge of the first 39 books of the Bible in their anticipation of Him; and He is that same hinge of the 27 books of the New Testament in their proclamation of Him. 

All other religions will claim that our greatest need is enlightenment, moral reformation, or a code of laws to deal with our guilt and our problems. Christianity alone tells us we need the Savior. Our problem is sin, not ignorance. The message and the Master are one-and-the-same, meaning Jesus Christ is the Good News of the Gospel. If we don’t have Him at saving faith, we don’t have God, nor reconciliation, nor forgiveness of sins.

    I close with the Apostles’ Creed. Notice how it summarizes Jesus Christ in His uniqueness.  

The Apostles’ Creed

I believe in God, the Father almighty,

creator of heaven and earth.

I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the virgin Mary.

He suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried; he descended to hell. The third day he rose again from the dead. He ascended to heaven and is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty. From there he will come to judge the living and the dead. 

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic (that is, universal) church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. Amen.

In tomorrow's post we will close out this short series by noting "One Faith", and what makes saving faith in particular unique to Christianity. 

Endnote:

1. I’ve dealt with Muslims in the past. Any Muslim will tell you that as important as Muhummad is, Islam would still be Islam with or without Muhummad (severely altered, but not eliminated). 

  The principles of enlightenment taught by Buddha could be recreated without him as seen in other similar Eastern faiths. Hinduism claims no central deity or founder. 

Mormonism, though claiming Jesus as their Savior too, yet have a different Jesus who is one among a long string of deities stretching back through eternity. You could still have Mormonism without Christ. All other religions can still persist with or without their founder because they are simply human made principles and morals.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Part One: One God, One Way, One Faith - A Defense For Why Jesus Is The Only Way of Salvation

Introduction:

I decided to break away momentarily from what has been our long-term series on the Nicene Creed to present a short series I've entitled "One God, One Way, One Faith". Why? This week our church will host a VBS that has as its theme: "One Way" here New Hope Baptist Church: Watertown, NY > Vacation Bible School 2025. Every year, we try to offer a series of adult classes that coincide with whatever the VBS is studying. What follows are notes from this year's study which I've already mentioned: "One God, One Way, One Faith".

What this study is about
    This study is about giving Scriptural,
apologetical, and historical reasons why there is only one way of salvation in Jesus Christ. Scripturally, we will turn to the doctrines of God, Christ, and saving faith to demonstrate this truth. One God, One Way, and One Faith will be our cornerstones.

As a matter of apologetics or "defense of the Christian faith", we will compare Christianity to other religions, offering  an apologetic or “defense of the Christian faith’s uniqueness”. In seeing the uniqueness of Christianity, the reader will hopefully better understand the Biblical teaching on the exclusivity of One God, One Way, One Faith. When I say “exclusivity”, I simply refer to that explicit trust in Jesus Christ, who reveals the true living God and salvation in the Gospel, as the only way of salvation (John 3:16). 

Then lastly, I will introduce the student to the historic Apostle’s Creed as a witness to Christianity’s historic confession of One God, One Way, and One faith.

Why the exclusivity of the Gospel is so important to study.

The bi-annual Ligonier State of Theology Poll conducts a survey among Evangelical Christians and the wider American population to see what they believe about key Biblical doctrines. On the survey’s website here: https://thestateoftheology.com/, we read the following:

“Key to orthodox Christianity is Jesus’ own assertion that He alone is “the way, and the truth, and the life,” and that “no one comes to the Father except through [Him]” (John 14:6, emphasis added). Trends over time and the 2022 survey results reveal an increasingly unbiblical belief among evangelicals that God is pleased by worship that comes from those outside the Christian faith.”

In one of its questions the poll asked Bible believing Christians (i.e. Evangelicals) as to whether they agree or disagree with the following: “God accepts the worship of all religions, including Christianity, Judaism, and Islam.”  This poll, conducted every two years since 2016, found the following answers year by year. 2016 48% agree. 2018 51% agree. 2020 42% agree. 2022 56% agree. Our key verse is John 14:6 “Jesus said to him, ‘I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.”  In this short series of posts, we want to look at the Bible’s rationale for affirming that there is One God, One Way, and One Faith by noting its emphasis on "One God".

A. Biblical Monotheism: God is One God in Being, Three in Person.

      The Bible affirms this fundamental truth that there is only One God. To argue for what I'll call "Biblical monotheism" is to express the foundation for why there is only one way of salvation. The argument is simple: One God leads to one way of salvation. 

    The Bible teaches “monotheism” meaning “one God”. Deuteronomy 6:4-5 “Hear, O Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord is one! 5 You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.”  James 2:19 “You believe that God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder. 20 But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless?” 

    Establishing the One God of the Bible as the basis for “One Salvation” and “One faith” is the goal of this lesson. Let’s probe further to grasp what I’ll call “Biblical monotheism”. 

    Biblical monotheism asserts that God is a “Unity in Trinity and a Trinity in Unity”. That is, God is One God in being and Three in identity: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. We will note two main points making up Biblical monotheism. First, that God is one God in unity. Then second, this One God is three persons in identity. Noting the Trinity lends not only to showing the uniqueness of the Christian faith, but also to why there is only one way of salvation, due to this One God, who is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Let's unpack each of these truths in their order.

A1. One God in unity.

There are many more passages we could note as to this first main point of there being “One God”. James P. Boice, a great 19^th century Baptist theologian, lists the following headings from his “Abstracts of Systematic Theology, Chapter 4” with proof texts for God being One God.

(1.) The passages which declare explicitly that God is one: Deut. 6:4; Mal. 2:10: “Hath not one God created us?” Mark 12:29, 32; 1 Tim. 2:5; Eph. 4:5, 6; James 2:19.

(2.) Those that assert that there is none else or none beside him: Deut. 4:35, 39; 1 Sam. 2:2; 2 Sam. 7:22; 1 Kings 8:60; Isa. 44:6, 8; Isa. 45:5, 6, 21, 22; Isa. 46:9; Joel 2:27.

(3.) That he alone is God: 2 Sam. 22:32; Neh. 9:6; Ps. 18:31; 86:10; Isa. 37:16; 43:10, 12; 46:9; John 17:3; 1 Cor. 8:4-6.

A2. Three persons in identity.

Let’s establish our second main point about Biblical monotheism: God is One God who is Three Persons - Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Dr. Boice offers the following definition:

“THE Scripture doctrine of the Trinity is set forth in the abstract of principles of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in these words (Art. III.): ‘God is revealed to us as Father, Son and Holy Spirit, each with distinct personal attributes, but without division of nature, essence or being.’

          Dr. Boice then writes:

“The scriptural proofs of the personality and divinity of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit having now been considered, it is proper to notice a few passages of Scripture in which the Three are revealed distinctly, by being mentioned, or manifested together.” (See Matt. 3:17; Matt. 28:19, John 14:26, and 15:26, 1 Cor. 8:6, 12:4-6)

B. Weaknesses of non-Christian monotheistic views  and non-monotheistic views.

    As we laid out the definition and Scripture proofs for "Biblical monotheism" (i.e. the doctrine of the Trinity), lets compare and contrast it to other positions. We must note that when it comes to world religions and the philosophies of men, there have been seven general categories: 

Monotheism (One God).

Polytheism (many gods).

Pantheism (Everything is God).

Panentheism (God is in everything, the universe is His body).

Henotheism (One powerful God among lesser gods).

Atheism (no God). 

Agnosticism (we cannot know whether there is a God).

     Below I will list the weaknesses of non-Christian monotheistic views and non-monotheistic views.

Non-Christian monotheistic views and their weaknesses.

B1. Deism – God made the world and left it to itself. Weakness: Denies God’s personal involvement in our world, possibility of miracles, possibility of revelation. Not the God of the Bible.

B2. Non-Trinitarian monotheisms – Whether Islam, modern Judaism, or others, to say God is simply a unity without the Trinity makes God dependent somehow on the creation to complete Himself. The Biblical portrayal of God consistently reveals He is self-sufficient and Personal, requiring the ability to interact within Himself. 

    Also, God is a God of love, meaning there needed to be a subject to give love (the Father), a subject to receive love (the Son), and a third subject to complete the circuit of love (the Holy Spirit), see Luke 3:21-22; Romans 5:4-5; 1 John 4:8, 16. Any monotheism without the Triune persons is an incomplete monotheism.

Non-monotheistic views and their weaknesses.

B3. Polytheism – The weaknesses here are that multiple deities have different wills, which leads to conflict, which leads to the absence of objective truth and morality. When you read the polytheistic accounts of Egypt, Greece, or Rome, such systems could not consistently develop a universal sense of right or wrong or truth. 

    Even if they affirmed it, their system could not account for it. Only Biblical Monotheism, having truth and morality as grounded in God, and the Personal involvement of the Trinity, can makes sense of truth and morality. A subset of Polytheism is Dualism, which sees an evil deity and a good deity in conflict with one another. Similar weaknesses beset dualism.

B4. Henotheism. This view sees One God among lesser deities. It suffers the same problems as Polytheism.

B5. Atheism – Without One God, there is no grounding for morality, truth, meaning, or purpose in life. Sometimes a weakness in a worldview is seen in not only logical inconsistency, but also whether it is livable. Atheists will still perform burial rights for their dead loved ones, still pursue a good noble life, and follow the golden rule. Their worldview tells them there is no value to such things, yet their humanity and behavior betrays what they truly know – that God exists (see Romans 1:18-20).

B6. Agnosticism – By stating “I cannot know there is a god” or “We cannot know anything about any god” is self-defeating.

B7. Panentheism and Pantheism – I decided to lump these together, since both affirm a view of deity that is impersonal. The weakness here is that if God were impersonal, there would be no morality or truth, since moral and truth categories require personal agents (one who is the standard, the other who receives the standard). Pantheists (such as Buddhists Hindus) and Panentheists (many who believe God is evolving with history) resort to believing there are no objective truth nor morality.

C. How the Apostle’s Creed highlights One God who is Three Persons.

    Now that we have overviewed the Biblical and apologetical reasons why One God is the basis for the one way of salvation, I want to close out today's post with historical evidence for Christianity confessing the exclusivity of salvation as argued for in this opening post. The Apostle's Creed is stated below. Deriving from at least the second or third century, the Apostle's Creed represents what early Christians confessed, as well as what even earlier church fathers would had inherited from the Apostles themselves. Although the Apostles did not pen the creed, it reflects the historic Christian faith that we find in the New Testament.

The Apostles’ Creed

I believe in God, the Father almighty,

creator of heaven and earth.

I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord,

who was conceived by the Holy Spirit

and born of the virgin Mary.

He suffered under Pontius Pilate,

was crucified, died, and was buried;

he descended to hell.

The third day he rose again from the dead.

He ascended to heaven

and is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty.

From there he will come to judge the living and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Spirit,

the holy catholic church,

the communion of saints,

the forgiveness of sins,

the resurrection of the body,

and the life everlasting. Amen.

      As you can see, the Church from the days of Christ and the Apostles has affirmed there is only one truly and living God who is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. One God. One Way. One Faith. 

Conclusion:

I close with Ephesians 4:4-6, which is an early creedal expression Paul inserted under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Notice the repetition of the word “one”: “There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all.”

    In our next post we will continue with this short series, noting Biblical, apologetical, and historical arguments for why Jesus Christ is the One Way of salvation.