In this short video Dr. William Lane Craig unfortunately promotes a demonstrable falsehood about Jesus in the New Testament and makes some very misleading and contentious statements too. Can you hear them?
First, the question is unclear and will be misleading to the ordinary person: “Is Jesus presented as God in the Bible?” The ordinary person will hear this as asking if in the Bible Jesus and God are one and the same. But in Craig’s view, they are not; if Jesus were identical with God, then in Craig’s view Jesus would be the Trinity . . . which he would deny. BTW, I think Craig is correct that the Bible doesn’t identify Jesus and God. Craig doesn’t clarify that when he says “Jesus is God” he means only that Jesus is divine – and not in the way which implies being a god, but rather only in the way that implies being “a divine Person.” Saying “the Bible presents Jesus as God” is not a good shorthand for this claim!
Second, Craig gives a misleading answer, that in the New Testament Jesus is given “unique divine titles, properties, and honors.” Unique . . . as in, only God can have that title, property, or honor. (That’s what the ordinary person will hear.) In other words, for any x whatever, if x has that title, property, or honor, then x = God . D’oh! To be consistent with his work on this topic thus far, Craig must mean instead that only a divine Person, only a member of the Trinity, can have those titles, properties, or honor. But good luck finding a claim like that stated, implied, or presupposed in Scripture!
Lastly, he urges that in at least seven places the word “God” (Greek: ho theos) is applied to Jesus. But this is demonstrably false. In our forthcoming debate book Craig urges that the word theos is meant in reference to Jesus in the following eight passages: John 1.1, John 20.28; Romans 9.5, Titus 2.13, Hebrews 1.8, and 2 Peter 1.1, John 1.18, and 1 John 5:20, so I take it he’s referring to those here. If you know a little Greek, you can check that link yourself and see that in John 1:1 and John 1:18 we have the word theos but without the definite article ho (“the”). The is a “the” in Romans 9:5 in the articular participle ho on (“who is”), and the grammar allows that it could refer either to the Christ or to God, although deity-of-Christ proponents usually take the ho there to refer to the preceding word christos.
What can be argued is that in those seven or eight places theos (with or without the definite article ho/”the”) is supposed to refer to Jesus. (Of course, one can argue against each alleged example too on various grounds!) But Craig conveniently leaves out that according to the lexicons, beings other that God can be referred to as theos, and so a theos in the New Testament needn’t be either God or a divine “Person” in God.
Lastly, Craig asserts that “it is indisputable that Jesus is presented as God in the Bible.” But this clearly is disputable, whatever one means by “presented as God” here. Just the cases of ancient Dynamic Monarchians, the so-called “Arians,” and modern-era unitarian Christians show us that such claims can be disputed by informed people for whom the Bible is inspired and authoritative. The God of the New Testament is essentially immortal, necessarily top-level (not under a god), untemptable, and essentially omniscient, where the New Testament Jesus is (pre-resurrection) mortal, under God, temptable, and ignorant of at least one truth known to God. Is such a Jesus clearly “God” – that is, clearly fully divine, or at least divine in a way a divine Person is divine? No. Craig’s claim here is irresponsible and patently false, and it is a disservice to the Christian public.
And his claim that ho theos seven times in the New Testament refers to the Jesus is demonstrable misinformation, and he should take this video down, then correct it in another video ASAP.
