If Jesus is not God is only a mere man?
Perhaps the only deific man? A quote from Steve Hakes'
The Father's Gone Global.
[The Athanasian Creed biblically states that Christianity neither confuses the persons of the triunity, nor separates their mission, though it limits salvation to understanding such.
[1] Its biblical bit is the gold-standard, and is the mission of this book. So before going any further, let me say that God the father is not God the son; that God the son is not God the spirit; that God the spirit is not God the father; that Jesus is not God; that Jesus is not God the son; that Jesus is God-the-son-as-a-human-being.
Jesus is a merger of facts, snippets put somewhat poetically in Scripture. He is deity-with-humanity and when a mortal, created by his crucifixion the basis for a new humanity (Eph.2:15). Together, God the father, God the son, and God the spirit, are deity, and each is deific, deity in spiritual essence/substance (ὁμοουσια/homoousia).
Jesus is the permanent temporal mode of the uncreated second person of the eternal tripersonal society. In his essence, God the son is noncarnate, but has a carnate mode (that is, Jesus) begun in time and space, an outraying of himself.
[2] Even like there were places where Jesus, born in Bethlehem, was not born, so there was a time when Jesus was not. There was not a time when God the son was not. It’s a little bit like saying—highly simplified—that our sun has always been, yet that the ray of light that shone two thousand years ago on Bethlehem, had not always been shining. Hence, Jesus (not the immortal,
pace Charles Wesley) could die (1 Cor.15:3); hence Jesus had limited knowledge (Mk.13:32); hence Jesus was subordinate to his heavenly father (Jhn.10:25).
Ah, you might say with a smug smile, but does the NT not call Jesus God? Firstly, I would reply that what it says is that God the son is Θεος/Theos. It’s how best to translate that in such contexts, that is the issue. I readily insist that such texts do indeed proclaim that he is deific (deity incarnate), though he is not all that there is to deity.
[3]
“The language of trinitarian theology is much more abstract, complicated, and careful, than the language of the New Testament, but the content of the doctrine of the trinity is only an explication of the New Testament doctrine of God. We are not here in the realm of philosophical conundrums, but of scriptural truth set out in a way that could define and defend it against the attacks that were being made upon it” (Smail 22).]
[1] Such knowledge is basic to Level 3, but not to Level 4, salvation.
[2] I was pleased to find that Karl Barth also spoke of Jesus as “a different mode of being” (Smail 121); God the son noncarnate is the fulness; Jesus the mode.
[3] NT texts directly saying that God the son (whether noncarnate or incarnate), is deific: Jhn.1:1,18; Rm.9:5; Tts.2:13; 2 Pt.1:1. MEVV Grades: A+ (NLT); A (NRSV); B+ (ERV/NIV); B (NCV); C+ (CEB); C (CEV/LEB); D- (NKJV).