Does the relationship between the Father and the Son have an end, or is it eternal?

[My Rock]

A central point of contention between Trinitarian and Oneness Pentecostals is the nature of the Sonship of Jesus Christ. Trinitarians assert that the Sonship is an eternal relationship within the Godhead, while Oneness Pentecostals often argue that it is a temporary state that will cease after the final judgment.

To explore this issue, let's consider the scriptural evidence. Does the Bible suggest that the Sonship is a permanent or temporary aspect of Jesus' relationship with God?

1 Corinthians 15:24 states, "Then comes the end, when he will deliver over the kingdom to God the Father, after he has destroyed every rule and every authority and power." This passage seems to imply that Jesus' role as Son will eventually come to an end.

However, in 1 Corinthians 15:28, we read, "And when all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who subjected all things to him, that God may be all in all." This verse suggests that even after all things are subjected to the Son, he will still be subject to the Father.

How do we reconcile these two passages? Does the Bible indicate that the Sonship is a temporary state that will eventually cease, or is it an eternal aspect of the Godhead?

 

[Free]

There is nothing to reconcile. The Son has always been the Son and can never cease to be the Son, just as with the Father and the Holy Spirit.

 

[Hopeful 2]

A central point of contention between Trinitarian and Oneness Pentecostals is the nature of the Sonship of Jesus Christ. Trinitarians assert that the Sonship is an eternal relationship within the Godhead, while Oneness Pentecostals often argue that it is a temporary state that will cease after the final judgment.

To explore this issue, let's consider the scriptural evidence. Does the Bible suggest that the Sonship is a permanent or temporary aspect of Jesus' relationship with God?

1 Corinthians 15:24 states, "Then comes the end, when he will deliver over the kingdom to God the Father, after he has destroyed every rule and every authority and power." This passage seems to imply that Jesus' role as Son will eventually come to an end.

However, in 1 Corinthians 15:28, we read, "And when all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who subjected all things to him, that God may be all in all." This verse suggests that even after all things are subjected to the Son, he will still be subject to the Father.

How do we reconcile these two passages? Does the Bible indicate that the Sonship is a temporary state that will eventually cease, or is it an eternal aspect of the Godhead?

Substitute the name "Word" for Son, and ask the same question.

 

[My Rock]

The glorified body of Christ will be completely God, but this needs to be understood within the context of how God manifests and reveals Himself. Here's a breakdown of what this means:

1. Jesus as God Manifest in Flesh

Jesus Christ is not a separate person from God but is the full manifestation of the one true God in the flesh. This means that from the moment of the Incarnation, God Himself was embodied in human form. Colossians 2:9 says, "For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily."

So, even during His earthly life, Jesus was fully God and fully human, but in the form of a servant (Philippians 2:7). The sonship was temporary, serving the purpose of redemption, but the divine nature within Jesus was always fully God.

2. The Glorified Body of Christ Post-Resurrection

After the resurrection, Jesus' body was glorified. This glorified body is still the physical representation of God but now transcends the limitations of earthly life. In His resurrection state, Jesus retains the glorified body, and He remains the visible and eternal manifestation of God.

Even though the mediatorial role of the Son will end after Jesus delivers the kingdom to God (1 Corinthians 15:24-28), His glorified body will not cease to exist. Instead, that body becomes the eternal, glorified representation of God’s nature—fully divine. In this sense, the glorified Christ is completely God, as the redemptive role of the Son concludes.

3. God "All in All" and the Glorified Christ

When 1 Corinthians 15:28 says that "God may be all in all," it indicates that the purpose of the redemptive mission will be fulfilled, and there will no longer be any distinction in terms of redemptive roles (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). The glorified Christ, who once functioned as the Son for the sake of salvation, now exists in His full divine glory, with no need for the sonship or mediatorial function. He will still be the glorified manifestation of God, but not as "the Son" in the redemptive sense—He is fully God.

In this state, the glorified body of Christ becomes the visible embodiment of the invisible God for eternity. There is no longer a need for the distinctions between the Father and the Son because the sonship has ended, and the glorified Christ exists as the eternal, visible presence of the one God. Therefore, the glorified body of Christ is not merely a vessel or a separate person, but the complete manifestation of God’s glory.

4. Fullness of God in Eternity

This represents the unification of all things in God. The glorified body of Christ, which continues for eternity, symbolizes how God’s work in creation and redemption is complete. In the glorified Christ, God reveals Himself fully and eternally, and the redeemed will see God as He is, through the glorified Christ.

Thus, the glorified body of Christ will fully and eternally embody the presence of God, with no remaining distinction of roles, but simply God "all in all"—His fullness fully realized and manifested for all eternity.

 

[Free]

The glorified body of Christ will be completely God, but this needs to be understood within the context of how God manifests and reveals Himself. Here's a breakdown of what this means:

1. Jesus as God Manifest in Flesh

Jesus Christ is not a separate person from God but is the full manifestation of the one true God in the flesh. This means that from the moment of the Incarnation, God Himself was embodied in human form. Colossians 2:9 says, "For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily."

So, even during His earthly life, Jesus was fully God and fully human, but in the form of a servant (Philippians 2:7). The sonship was temporary, serving the purpose of redemption, but the divine nature within Jesus was always fully God.

Jesus is the Son, the Word, in the flesh, and has always been a distinct person from the Father and the Holy Spirit. The fullness dwelt in Jesus because he is of the same substance as the Father and the Holy Spirit and they cannot be divided. He even said that he is in the Father and the Father is in him, which also proves the Oneness/Modalist view false.

2. The Glorified Body of Christ Post-Resurrection

After the resurrection, Jesus' body was glorified. This glorified body is still the physical representation of God but now transcends the limitations of earthly life. In His resurrection state, Jesus retains the glorified body, and He remains the visible and eternal manifestation of God.

Even though the mediatorial role of the Son will end after Jesus delivers the kingdom to God (1 Corinthians 15:24-28), His glorified body will not cease to exist. Instead, that body becomes the eternal, glorified representation of God’s nature—fully divine. In this sense, the glorified Christ is completely God, as the redemptive role of the Son concludes.

Christ always was and will be fully God.

3. God "All in All" and the Glorified Christ

When 1 Corinthians 15:28 says that "God may be all in all," it indicates that the purpose of the redemptive mission will be fulfilled, and there will no longer be any distinction in terms of redemptive roles (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). The glorified Christ, who once functioned as the Son for the sake of salvation, now exists in His full divine glory, with no need for the sonship or mediatorial function. He will still be the glorified manifestation of God, but not as "the Son" in the redemptive sense—He is fully God.

In this state, the glorified body of Christ becomes the visible embodiment of the invisible God for eternity. There is no longer a need for the distinctions between the Father and the Son because the sonship has ended, and the glorified Christ exists as the eternal, visible presence of the one God. Therefore, the glorified body of Christ is not merely a vessel or a separate person, but the complete manifestation of God’s glory.

The Son has always existed as the Son and will continue to always exist as the Son.

4. Fullness of God in Eternity

This represents the unification of all things in God. The glorified body of Christ, which continues for eternity, symbolizes how God’s work in creation and redemption is complete. In the glorified Christ, God reveals Himself fully and eternally, and the redeemed will see God as He is, through the glorified Christ.

Thus, the glorified body of Christ will fully and eternally embody the presence of God, with no remaining distinction of roles, but simply God "all in all"—His fullness fully realized and manifested for all eternity.

Except that the Father is not the Son nor the Holy Spirit, and the Son is not the Father nor the Holy Spirit. All three have always existed and always will. The Son will forever be the God-man, Jesus.

 

[My Rock]

Jesus is the Son, the Word, in the flesh, and has always been a distinct person from the Father and the Holy Spirit. The fullness dwelt in Jesus because he is of the same substance as the Father and the Holy Spirit and they cannot be divided. He even said that he is in the Father and the Father is in him, which also proves the Oneness/Modalist view false.

The assertion that Jesus is a distinct person from the Father and the Holy Spirit misinterprets the Oneness understanding of God’s revelation. Oneness believers affirm the full deity of Jesus Christ, in whom "dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily" (Colossians 2:9). This means Jesus is not merely part of the Godhead but the full manifestation of the one true God in the flesh. While distinct roles are present in God's interactions with humanity (Father, Son, Holy Spirit), these are not distinct persons in the sense of a separate, co-equal Trinity. Rather, they are distinct manifestations or expressions of the one God, who is Spirit and omnipresent (John 4:24).

Oneness theology does not subscribe to classical modalism, which suggests that God appears successively in different modes (Father, then Son, then Holy Spirit). Instead, we believe God can manifest in different ways simultaneously. For example, at Jesus' baptism, the voice from heaven and the Spirit descending like a dove occur simultaneously with Jesus' presence in the water. These events demonstrate God’s ability to manifest in multiple ways without dividing His essence (Matthew 3:16-17). This supports God’s omnipresence—His ability to fill all space while revealing Himself in a particular, visible form.

God, being Spirit, is invisible and beyond human comprehension, but He chose to veil His glory in Christ (John 1:14). Just as Moses encountered God in the burning bush (Exodus 3:2-6), where God manifested Himself visibly while remaining omnipresent, the fullness of God is veiled in Jesus Christ so that humanity can relate to and see God. Jesus is the one true God's permanent and ultimate self-revelation, and His glorified body will eternally be the visible representation of the invisible God. When Jesus said, "I and my Father are one" (John 10:30), it affirmed the oneness of His divine nature with the Father, not a separate personhood. Therefore, the Oneness view remains theologically sound and aligns with Scripture.

Christ always was and will be fully God.

God the Father in human form. Yes.

The Son has always existed as the Son and will continue to always exist as the Son.

Not According to:

1 Corinthians 15:24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule, and all authority, and all power. 25 For he must reign till he hath put all enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. 27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith, All things are put under him, it is clear that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. 28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

God as All in All: The ultimate goal is for God to be "all in all." This means that there will be no more distinctions or separations within the Godhead. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit will be united in a perfect harmony, and God will reign supreme over all creation in the glorified body of Christ for eternity but not as Son but as fully God in visible form.

Except that the Father is not the Son nor the Holy Spirit, and the Son is not the Father nor the Holy Spirit. All three have always existed and always will. The Son will forever be the God-man, Jesus.

If you were to deny the Father being the Son you would essentially also deny Colossians 2:9, "For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily."

The Sonship, which began at the Incarnation, was a temporary role for the purpose of redemption, but God did not change His essence or nature in the process; He remains the one indivisible God who is Spirit (John 4:24). As for the glorified Christ, after His resurrection, Jesus retains His glorified body, which becomes the eternal, visible representation of God’s nature. When the redemptive role of the Son concludes (1 Corinthians 15:24-28), the distinctions related to redemption—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—will no longer be needed, and God will be "all in all," not as three separate persons but as the one God manifested fully in the glorified Christ. The idea that "the Son will forever be the God-man" overlooks that the Son’s mediatorial role will end, and Christ’s glorified body will become the eternal revelation of God's full nature, not as a distinct "person" in the Godhead but as the everlasting, visible manifestation of the invisible God. Thus, while Jesus will forever be glorified, the fullness of God's presence and essence remains united and indivisible, as Scripture consistently teaches.

 

[Free]

The assertion that Jesus is a distinct person from the Father and the Holy Spirit misinterprets the Oneness understanding of God’s revelation.

I was giving the biblical, Trinitarian view, not Oneness.

Oneness theology ...

Therefore, the Oneness view remains theologically sound and aligns with Scripture.

It really doesn't, as discussed below.

God the Father in human form. Yes.

Absolutely not. That is neither stated nor implied anywhere in the NT, which makes very clear that that Son never has been the Father. Again, when is a son ever his own father or a father his own son?

Not According to:

1 Corinthians 15:24 ... 25 ... 26 ... 27 ... 28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

God as All in All: The ultimate goal is for God to be "all in all." This means that there will be no more distinctions or separations within the Godhead. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit will be united in a perfect harmony, and God will reign supreme over all creation in the glorified body of Christ for eternity but not as Son but as fully God in visible form.

If you were to deny the Father being the Son you would essentially also deny Colossians 2:9, "For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily."

No. That is making certain assumptions about what the text is saying which, at this point, have not been justified.

The Sonship, which began at the Incarnation, was a temporary role for the purpose of redemption, but God did not change His essence or nature in the process; He remains the one indivisible God who is Spirit (John 4:24).

Too bad anti-Trinitarians seem to continually ignore context, which includes the entirety of Scripture. I've made these points before, but if you have, please either copy and paste your responses or link me to them.

1Co 8:4 Therefore, as to the eating of food offered to idols, we know that “an idol has no real existence,” and that “there is no God but one.”
1Co 8:5 For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”—
1Co 8:6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist. (ESV)

First, we should note that Paul dismisses the idea of any other actual god or lord, supporting the monotheism he had just stated in verse 4.

Second, notice that at the end of verse 4, Paul says "there is no God but one." That is, at least in part, from Deut 6:4:

Deu 6:4 “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. (ESV)

Third, now look at what Paul writes in verse 6: "there is one God, the Father . . . and one Lord, Jesus Christ." Note that verse 6 is a continuing argument from verse 4. Putting the argument together then, without the aside in verse 5, we see: "we know . . . that there is no God but one yet for us there is one God, the Father . . . and one Lord, Jesus Christ." This strongly suggests that Paul was expanding on the Shema, as some theologians, such as N.T. Wright, claim.

Fourth, if "of whom are all things" speaks of the Father's absolute existence and his nature as God, then it necessarily follows that "by whom are all things" speaks of the Son's absolute existence and nature as God. We cannot say that in relation to the Father "all things" means absolutely everything that has come into existence but that it means something different in relation to the Son. And this is confirmed in John 1:1-3, Col 1:16-17, and Heb 1:2, 10-12.

So, simple, sound logic leads to the only conclusion that Jesus, or rather the Son, although being God in nature is distinct from the Father. Both are mentioned as being involved in creation, albeit in different roles--the Father as originator; the Son as agent. No anti-Trinitarian has yet even attempted to refute the logic of point four.

And we also see the same thing in other passages that Jesus, or the Son, was involved in creation:

Heb 1:2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.
...
Heb 1:10 And, “You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of your hands;
Heb 1:11 they will perish, but you remain; they will all wear out like a garment,
Heb 1:12 like a robe you will roll them up, like a garment they will be changed. But you are the same, and your years will have no end.” (ESV)

Notice that the writer of Hebrews states in verse 2 that God (the Father) created through the Son. That is supported in verses 10-12 where the writer essentially states that the Father says that the Son was the creator, by using an OT passage about YHWH creating, but having the Father apply it to the Son, saying he did it.

Again, this is impossible if the Son didn't exist prior to all creation. Those are all the more important when we look at the next chapter:

Heb 2:10 For it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the founder of their salvation perfect through suffering. (ESV)

That is speaking of God. And, once again, notice the use of "through whom" in speaking of the Son, in 1:2, and then "for whom and by whom" in 2:10, which is speaking of God. That is what Paul says in 1 Cor 8:6.

All of those verses are further supported by John 1:1-3, 10 and Col 1:16-17, and contradict the Oneness/Modalist unitarian view of God.


Then, we have John's statements that "God is love," in 1 John 4:8, 16.

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Joh 1:2 He was in the beginning with God.
Joh 1:3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.
...
Joh 1:10 He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. (ESV)

In verse 1, pros ("with") indicates relational intimacy, after already having spoken of absolute existence with en ("was"). It makes no sense to say that the Son was with the Father for eternity but they are both one and the same person. However, it does make sense when speaking of at least two persons. And this is supported by 1 John saying that "God is love" in 1 John 4:8, 16. That is, to say God is love, is to make a statement about his essence, his nature, and not merely the idea that he is loving.

1Jn 4:8 Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love.
...
1Jn 4:16 So we have come to know and to believe the love that God has for us. God is love, and whoever abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him. (ESV)

Joh 17:24 Father, I desire that they also, whom you have given me, may be with me where I am, to see my glory that you have given me because you loved me before the foundation of the world. (ESV)

That is exactly why John says what he does in John 1:1--the Word was in intimate, interpersonal relationship with God prior to creation. Everything John says about the Son and the Father is based on Jesus's own words, including the many times Jesus says he is from above and not from earth.

So, what then is love?

Joh 15:13 Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends. (ESV)

At its fullest, it is an outward expression and action towards others. We should fully expect then, that if God is love, that his love must have the fullest expression and necessarily includes actual loving action towards others from before creation of all time and space, from “eternity past.” However, if God is a monad, then to say that “God is love” means 1) that God only loved himself, and 2) that the fullest and proper expression of his love is dependent on creation. This contradicts the statement that “God is love” and leaves His love, and therefore his nature as God, incomplete and deficient.

When we consider the Trinity, however, it all works. There are three persons each being truly and fully God, equally possessing the full and undivided essence (one being that is God), having been in an intimate, loving relationship and communion for eternity past, that is, prior to creation. Only now we can truly say that God is love. Diversity within the unity.

A unitarian view of God just doesn't make sense of the full revelation of God in Scripture.

 

[My Rock]

Absolutely not. That is neither stated nor implied anywhere in the NT, which makes very clear that that Son never has been the Father. Again, when is a son ever his own father or a father his own son?

1 Timothy 3:16, "And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory."

Why would a loving God, who deeply desires to redeem His children back to Himself, send a second, distinct person when He could come to Earth Himself? Why would the Father, who holds the heart of a perfect Father, entrust the ultimate act of love and sacrifice to another when He alone has the power and passion to save? Scripture reminds us that "God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself" (2 Corinthians 5:19). In His profound love and infinite wisdom, would it not make sense that the very Creator who formed us with His own hands would come in flesh to redeem us with His own blood? The Incarnation of Jesus is not the story of a distant God delegating redemption to another person distinct from Himself, but of a God so near, so personal, that He wrapped Himself in human flesh and came directly to us. God Himself came to seek and save that which was lost (Luke 19:10), showing us that our salvation was far too precious to be entrusted to any distinct person but Himself.

Fourth, if "of whom are all things" speaks of the Father's absolute existence and his nature as God, then it necessarily follows that "by whom are all things" speaks of the Son's absolute existence and nature as God. We cannot say that in relation to the Father "all things" means absolutely everything that has come into existence but that it means something different in relation to the Son. And this is confirmed in John 1:1-3, Col 1:16-17, and Heb 1:2, 10-12.

So, simple, sound logic leads to the only conclusion that Jesus, or rather the Son, although being God in nature is distinct from the Father. Both are mentioned as being involved in creation, albeit in different roles--the Father as originator; the Son as agent. No anti-Trinitarian has yet even attempted to refute the logic of point four.

When Scripture speaks of both the Father and the Son being involved in creation, it’s important to understand that these references are not describing two separate, distinct divine persons. Instead, they reflect how the one God—who is Spirit—acts and reveals Himself through different roles or manifestations.

The Bible says in Colossians 1:16, "For by Him [the Son] all things were created," and in John 1:3, "All things were made by Him [the Word]." At first glance, this might seem like the Son is somehow distinct from the Father in creation. But we know from Deuteronomy 6:4 that "the Lord our God is one Lord," and that there is only one Creator—God Himself. So how do we reconcile this?

The key is understanding that the "Son" is the name given to God when He took on human form as Jesus Christ. Before Jesus was born, God was already at work creating all things, as Genesis 1:1 says, "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." When the New Testament says that all things were created "by the Son" or "through the Son," it’s not pointing to a second, independent person, but rather showing that God’s eternal Word, His divine plan and power, was involved in creation. This same Word was later made flesh in Jesus Christ (John 1:14).

God’s Word, His creative power, was always with Him from the beginning—this is what John 1:1 means when it says, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." The Word was not a separate person, but God's own self-expression, which He later revealed to us in the man Christ Jesus. Hebrews 1:3 beautifully explains that the Son is "the express image of His person," meaning that Jesus is the visible, tangible revelation of the invisible God—not a separate divine being, but the one God manifest in the flesh (1 Timothy 3:16).

So, when we read that "all things were created by Him" (Colossians 1:16), we’re seeing that God, who later revealed Himself in Christ, is the same God who created all things. The Father is the originator, the source of all, and the Son is God’s way of revealing Himself to us. It’s one God working in different roles, not two separate beings. In creation, God was acting in His eternal power, and in redemption, that same God became flesh to save us. This shows us God’s oneness, not division.

In short, Jesus, as the Son, is not a separate person from the Father but the full and final revelation of the one true God. There’s only one God who created all things, and that same God came to us in Jesus Christ to redeem us.

When we consider the Trinity, however, it all works. There are three persons each being truly and fully God, equally possessing the full and undivided essence (one being that is God), having been in an intimate, loving relationship and communion for eternity past, that is, prior to creation. Only now we can truly say that God is love. Diversity within the unity.

By this statement are we not dividing God Internally. We are supposed to know God is indivisibly (externally and internally) One.

(I respectfully don't want this to become an argument, but rather trying to figure out where the major differences are. Because so many times it seems like Trinitarians and Oneness say the same thing just using different terms)

Plus you didn't comment on this:

If you were to deny the Father being the Son you would essentially also deny Colossians 2:9, "For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily."

The Sonship, which began at the Incarnation, was a temporary role for the purpose of redemption, but God did not change His essence or nature in the process; He remains the one indivisible God who is Spirit (John 4:24). As for the glorified Christ, after His resurrection, Jesus retains His glorified body, which becomes the eternal, visible representation of God’s nature. When the redemptive role of the Son concludes (1 Corinthians 15:24-28), the distinctions related to redemption—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—will no longer be needed, and God will be "all in all," not as three separate persons but as the one God manifested fully in the glorified Christ. The idea that "the Son will forever be the God-man" overlooks that the Son’s mediatorial role will end, and Christ’s glorified body will become the eternal revelation of God's full nature, not as a distinct "person" in the Godhead but as the everlasting, visible manifestation of the invisible God. Thus, while Jesus will forever be glorified, the fullness of God's presence and essence remains united and indivisible, as Scripture consistently teaches.

 

[Free]

1 Timothy 3:16, "And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory."

Why would a loving God, who deeply desires to redeem His children back to Himself, send a second, distinct person when He could come to Earth Himself? Why would the Father, who holds the heart of a perfect Father, entrust the ultimate act of love and sacrifice to another when He alone has the power and passion to save? Scripture reminds us that "God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself" (2 Corinthians 5:19). In His profound love and infinite wisdom, would it not make sense that the very Creator who formed us with His own hands would come in flesh to redeem us with His own blood? The Incarnation of Jesus is not the story of a distant God delegating redemption to another person distinct from Himself, but of a God so near, so personal, that He wrapped Himself in human flesh and came directly to us. God Himself came to seek and save that which was lost (Luke 19:10), showing us that our salvation was far too precious to be entrusted to any distinct person but Himself.

That entire paragraph shows a lack of understanding of the Trinity. The Son is just as much God as the Father is; they are of the same substance.

When Scripture speaks of both the Father and the Son being involved in creation, it’s important to understand that these references are not describing two separate, distinct divine persons. Instead, they reflect how the one God—who is Spirit—acts and reveals Himself through different roles or manifestations.

It can only mean that the Father and Son are distinct persons. It cannot mean anything else. It is you who needs to reconcile the clear teachings that both the Father and the Son were involved in the creation of everything that was ever created. That precludes the Father and Son from being the same person.

The Bible says in Colossians 1:16, "For by Him [the Son] all things were created," and in John 1:3, "All things were made by Him [the Word]." At first glance, this might seem like the Son is somehow distinct from the Father in creation. But we know from Deuteronomy 6:4 that "the Lord our God is one Lord," and that there is only one Creator—God Himself. So how do we reconcile this?

There is nothing to reconcile. I've explained this before and it is a continual error in reasoning that anti-Trinitarians make by conflating monotheism with the nature of God. The Shema is a statement of monotheism only and says nothing about whether God is one or three persons, although it does leave the door open to three.

The key is understanding that the "Son" is the name given to God when He took on human form as Jesus Christ.

Yes, God the Son who took on human flesh. Please provide one verse that clearly states the Father came in the flesh.

Before Jesus was born, God was already at work creating all things, as Genesis 1:1 says, "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." When the New Testament says that all things were created "by the Son" or "through the Son," it’s not pointing to a second, independent person, but rather showing that God’s eternal Word, His divine plan and power, was involved in creation. This same Word was later made flesh in Jesus Christ (John 1:14).

God’s Word, His creative power, was always with Him from the beginning—this is what John 1:1 means when it says, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." The Word was not a separate person, but God's own self-expression, which He later revealed to us in the man Christ Jesus. Hebrews 1:3 beautifully explains that the Son is "the express image of His person," meaning that Jesus is the visible, tangible revelation of the invisible God—not a separate divine being, but the one God manifest in the flesh (1 Timothy 3:16).

You completely side-stepped the argument from 1 Cor 8:4-6. God's eternal Word, his self-expression, is a person, that is John's whole point. That is only how the Word and the Father could be in intimate interpersonal relationship. That claim makes no sense if the Word isn't actually a person.

So, when we read that "all things were created by Him" (Colossians 1:16), we’re seeing that God, who later revealed Himself in Christ, is the same God who created all things. The Father is the originator, the source of all, and the Son is God’s way of revealing Himself to us. It’s one God working in different roles, not two separate beings. In creation, God was acting in His eternal power, and in redemption, that same God became flesh to save us. This shows us God’s oneness, not division.


In short, Jesus, as the Son, is not a separate person from the Father but the full and final revelation of the one true God. There’s only one God who created all things, and that same God came to us in Jesus Christ to redeem us.

The context of Col 1:16 says otherwise:

Col 1:13 He has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son,
Col 1:14 in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.
Col 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.
Col 1:16 For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him.
Col 1:17 And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. (ESV)

At least in their deception, The Watchtower recognizes what is being said and falsely adds "other" to each instance of "all things." Because without falsely saying "all other things," the implication is clear. There is a very clear distinction being made between the Father and the Son in verse 14. And it is by the Son that "all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him." That is why Paul adds that "he is before all things." That utterly destroys the Oneness view of God and proves the Son has always existed with the Father.

By this statement are we not dividing God Internally. We are supposed to know God is indivisibly (externally and internally) One.

Being three distinct persons also does not divide God internally.

Plus you didn't comment on this:

If you were to deny the Father being the Son you would essentially also deny Colossians 2:9, "For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily."

The Sonship, which began at the Incarnation, was a temporary role for the purpose of redemption, but God did not change His essence or nature in the process; He remains the one indivisible God who is Spirit (John 4:24).

I addressed all the above.

You, however, didn't address Heb 1:2, 10-12 and 2:10 nor the argument from love, neither of which the Oneness view of God simply cannot take into account. You made some comments but didn't actually address the arguments.

Too many passages, as given above, show that the Sonship is eternal: there has never been a "time" when the Son did not exist.

 

[Free]

As for the glorified Christ, after His resurrection, Jesus retains His glorified body, which becomes the eternal, visible representation of God’s nature. When the redemptive role of the Son concludes (1 Corinthians 15:24-28), the distinctions related to redemption—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—will no longer be needed, and God will be "all in all," not as three separate persons but as the one God manifested fully in the glorified Christ. The idea that "the Son will forever be the God-man" overlooks that the Son’s mediatorial role will end, and Christ’s glorified body will become the eternal revelation of God's full nature, not as a distinct "person" in the Godhead but as the everlasting, visible manifestation of the invisible God. Thus, while Jesus will forever be glorified, the fullness of God's presence and essence remains united and indivisible, as Scripture consistently teaches.

There is nothing to suggest that Jesus will not forever be the God-man. Your argument is based on begging the question, namely, that the Son is the Father in the flesh, which is nowhere stated in Scripture. That his redemptive role may be concluded is not relevant. Why wouldn't he continually bear the marks of his sacrifice so that those in heaven can continually be reminded of the infinite vastness of God's love, mercy, and grace, ever increasing each person's joy and worship of him? (That he will retain the evidence of his sacrifice for eternity is, of course, just speculation.)

God reveals himself as Father and Son for a reason. We know what father and son relationships are--two distinct persons of the same nature. And we are the analogues to God, having been made in his image. That strongly suggests God revealed himself as Father and Son either because that relationship actually exists, or it is the closest analogue to our understanding. As far as analogies go, they all break down when it comes to God and this one also breaks down because God is of an entirely different nature than us. While our distinctness means we are individual persons because of our nature, God's nature is such that the distinction between persons does not mean they are three completely separate individuals.

We all know that a father cannot be his own son nor a son his own father. As such, there is no reason to think that the Father is his own Son or the Son his own Father, or else God's revelation to us is as Father and Son communicates nothing.