First, we have to affirm 2 things: Jesus really was tempted. If we say he wasn’t really tempted, we’ve swung too far to one side of the pendulum: “For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are–yet was without sin.” Hebrews 4:15
Secondly, we must affirm that God cannot be tempted with evil: “When tempted, no one should say, ‘God is tempting me.’ For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone.” James 1:13
The obvious question: If God can’t be tempted, and Jesus was tempted, then how can Jesus be God?
The answer, in part, is described in the definition of Jesus’ incarnation: “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.” What does it mean that Jesus ‘became flesh?’
Here’s what it doesn’t mean:
1. That Jesus’ divine nature and his human nature morphed into a single nature.
2. That Jesus took on the appearance of flesh, but didn’t actually take on human flesh.
3. That Jesus took on a human body, but not a human will or consciousness.
4. That Jesus was part God and part man.
The incarnation means that Jesus “added” a nature to himself, without subtracting anything from his Divine nature. In other words, Jesus was fully God – no part of his Godhead was taken away when he added his human nature. Also, Jesus was fully man – there was no part of Jesus that did not experience what it was like to be a man.
So what of temptation? We know that Jesus’ divine nature could NOT experience temptation, as James 1:13 makes clear. At the same time, we know that Jesus did experience real temptation. The answer then must be that Jesus experienced real temptation in his human nature, but not in His Divine nature. In other words, as a second Adam, Jesus’ human nature faced a real choice over whether to sin or not. However, his Divine nature did not.
This, of course, is not temptation the way we experience it before salvation. Before the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, we are dead to God and slaves to sin – we MUST sin (Ephesians 2:5, Romans 6:20). Jesus didn’t have a sinful flesh. Jesus temptation, rather, is more like the temptation of Adam in the garden of Eden, where Adam had a choice to choose good or choose evil. The difference was that Jesus never “fell” into temptation, and so he can truly be called “The second Adam”. (1 Corinthians 15:45)
How does the fact that Jesus faced real temptation but without sin impact your relationship with Him?
godstory.wordpress.com 
When I was teaching a doctrine class a while back, the week we got to the Incarnation was one of the funnest. For discerning Jesus’ experiences as recorded in the Bible and seeing some as obviously divine (calming the sea, for example) and others as quite human (such as being hungry and tired), I relied on what the early church fathers said: When we read of something Jesus did that is human we can ascribe it to his human nature, and when we read of a divine action we then ascribe that to his divine nature. They went on to say that it is not up to us to figure out how he was able to have both natures, but to recognize that he did have them both fully and perfectly.
Tim
Jesus executed numerous marvels by God’s will. Does this come as a shock to anyone? If God wishes for His creature to do something, he can make sure that happens, because He is the Creator. Jesus was performing more wonders compared to any human being because God desired him to do so. God is singular, unique, and inherently one. He has no partner. The obvious question has an obvious answer.
“When we read of something Jesus did that is human we can ascribe it to his human nature, and when we read of a divine action we then ascribe that to his divine nature.” Jesus’ divine nature? Am I missing something here? The definition of “divine” leaves no room for hunger, thirst, etc., which are quintessentially human qualities. What about God’s nature? God has power over all things. Shouldn’t we be attributing his qualities to calm the sea, etc. to God almighty? Is this hard to believe? God has power over all things.
“Jesus’ divine nature? Am I missing something here?”
Jesus is God. Then again, I’m solidly Trinitarian.
Blessings,
Tim
On what basis? Certainly not the passages below.
“Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one” (Deuteronomy 6:4).
“The most important one,” answered Jesus “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one” (Mark 12:29).
Also note how Jesus affirmed “our God”, which includes him to be under GOD Almighty’s Creation and divine power, and not an equal to GOD Almighty.
Jesus warns: “Why do you call me good?” Jesus replied, “No one is good–except God alone” (Mark 10:18). Jesus clearly gives exclusivity to GOD Almighty.
John 1:1 – In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 1:18 – No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God …
John 20:28-29 – Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!” Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”
Romans 9:5 – … from them is traced the human ancestry of the Messiah, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen.
Titus 2:13 – … we wait for the blessed hope—the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ …
Hebrews 1:8 – … But about the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever …”
Those will have to do for starters.
Jesus said a lot of things that also show his fully human nature as well (but not in the verses you cite). He was fully God and fully human, as shown throughout the Scriptures. This has been acknowledged not only in the writings of the Apostles as noted above, but also by those in the Church from the earliest days, and which comes to us now in what we call the Doctrine of the Incarnation. Thus we have the Nicene Creed and even earlier statements of faith in Jesus as God, which were themselves based on the Scriptures and the teachings of those who lived in the decades after the Apostles.
People can deny Jesus being God if they choose, but to do so contradicts Jesus himself who commended Thomas for acknowledging that Jesus is in fact God.
Blessings,
Tim
Jesus did not preach the religion of Trinitarianism, but a religion that imparts every part of praise and worship to an exclusive God. In fact, Jesus prophesied that people would worship him futilely and rely on doctrines manufactured by men (Matthew 15:9). “But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.” This verse, Matthew 15:9, is further supported by these Biblical verses:
“By myself, I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who sent me” (John 5:30); John 12:49; John 14:28; Isaiah 42:8; and Acts 2:22, among others.
It should be noted, as it is well established across the religious world, that the selection of the contemporary four “gospels” of the New Testament (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) were levied in the Council of Nicea 325 CE for political purposes under the tutelage of the Emperor Constantine, and not by Jesus. Constantine was an oppressor and felon who murdered his son, his wife, and thousands of innocent individuals due to his thirst for political clout. Constantine consented other decisions in the Nicene Creed such as the decision to brand Christ “the Son of God, only begotten of the father,” which was in complete contradiction to the teachings of Jesus, who would never associate a partner to the All-Knowing and All-Powerful, exclusive Divine Creator.
Jesus instructed people to follow the commandments. He even stated himself that he had not been sent but for the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Looking out the window, there are a line of trees, with leaves that fall perfectly; a stream, with rainbow fish that swim flawlessly; and nightfall, with a moon no man could ever create. Consider, how could a human being ever be capable of that? Only a true God, above and beyond any mortal qualities, could have constructed such a perfect masterpiece.
Jesus never taught that he was God. He even affirmed that he did not end the law of Moses, who was sent before him. He would never have done that. He came to execute God’s law, not to do away with it. Jesus himself actually stated
“By myself, I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who sent me,” as stated above. He was sent “unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel,” and was relayed totally for those people. There appears to be some serious contradictory elements in passages like these, if they are promoting different conclusions. It seems crystal clear as Jesus himself stated that inheriting the eternal life was made possible by following the commandments.
“… inheriting the eternal life was made possible by following the commandments.” That’s not even supported by Old Covenant prophets, let alone Jesus and the New Testament writers. You think Jesus is merely a created human and not God. I know otherwise based on Scripture. I am not going to try further to convince you, but merely endeavor to give Jesus the honor due to God. It’s what John and Thomas and Paul and the writer of Hebrews did, and they were not spurned for that teaching in the early church.
You choose to spurn the canon of Scripture, though, and that is your prerogative. As long as you reject Scripture as merely a political collection of writings, your thoughts are nothing but one person’s opinion. Jesus is Lord God, though, and I will praise and honor him as the Bible instructs.
Blessings and a hope you will one day understand,
Tim
A.P. – I notice you didn’t really deal with the verses Tim presented, except to say that all of his verses were put in because of a desire for political power, but apparently not the ones you cited?? If it’s true that the 4 books of the gospels were “inserted” for political reasons, why did the apostles and early church fathers quote them as authoritative? And on what basis do YOU know what Jesus claimed and didn’t claim?
Blessings, Nick
“…inheriting the eternal life was made possible by following the commandments…’That’s not even supported by Old Covenant prophets, let alone Jesus and the New Testament writers.'”
Jesus not only supported following the commandments, but also he followed them to a tee himself and preached others to do the same (Matt 19:16) “And behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
And he said unto him, “Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.”
What exactly constitutes “spurn[ing]” the canon of Scripture. Reading it and quoting the words verbatim on the page or acknowledging the context from which it has emerged? The prerogative of command rests with none but God. He alone declares the truth and he alone embodies the best in judgment. No where in the phrase “There is none good but one, that is, God” indicates another person’s opinion except that of Jesus himself.
How can the message that Jesus carried be discredited with such clear proof as the Biblical passage above instructs? Jesus even implored man himself, “Why callest thou me good? There is non good but one, that is, God.” Jesus also advised man to heed God’s laws and not to reject them, with “eternal life” as the grand reward for those who followed the commandments. Who would not be inspired by the prospect to inherit an eternal life, one which surpassed any instant gratification in this world? Yet, man still found a way to distort his message.
Jesus was not “merely” a created human. He had the greatest fortune (and responsibility) that any created human being could ever have. He was a messenger sent by God. He was a mortal, a human being, endowed by Divine revelations and appointed by God, the All-Knowing and All-Powerful, to instruct mankind. He did not come to abolish God’s law. Why would one think Jesus would ever want to, let alone actually, abolish something perfect? God is perfect, and His laws are perfect. Jesus came to implement His law (not abolish God’s law) and he expected others to follow God’s law. Again, Jesus is not God. That would be against God’s nature. Man has to remember He who created man. God is above and beyond anything in this world, yes, even human beings. The very first commandment is, “Thou shalt have no other gods before me.” Why would one demerit the command of God for the sake of one’s tradition?
“Why did the apostles and early church fathers quote them as authoritative?” Great question, and I ask the same question as well. I also wonder why a person would break the command of God for the sake of his or her tradition.
A.P. – see the post from today as an answer to “Jesus was not God”.
So…according to you, you know more about what Jesus did and didn’t claim than did Peter, James and John who spent every waking moment with him for three years? Oh, and also the other 8 dudes who spent three years with him and literally gave themselves to torture and death asserting that Jesus was God? Unless you’re a resurrected disciple, I don’t see how you can make that kind of claim, and even if you did, the rest of the disciples disagree with you. They’d stake their lives on it.
“…On what basis do YOU know what Jesus claimed and didn’t claim?”
Jesus says in no verse, I am God, worship me. Further, the nature of Jesus was very different to that of God. For one, God is All-Knowing but Jesus by his own declaration was not All-Knowing. Second, God is independent but Jesus was not independent. Third, God is unseen and is not a man, and Jesus was seen and was a man. Fourth, God does not change, but Jesus experienced many changes in his lifetime. Additional information furnished upon request.
A.P. – First of all, Jesus DOES allow people to worship him, and commends them when they do worship Him. Furthermore, Jesus clearly claims to be Divine many times (again, see today’s post) and so do those who knew Him best, which is even MORE important. Anyone can say, “I am God”, but not everyone can convince the 12 people who knew them best that they were God in the flesh. Aside from that, I’m referring to the fact that you tried to discredit all of the gospels by saying they were formed for political reasons. If that’s true, then how do you know anything about Jesus?
“Before Abraham was, I am.” (John 8:58.)
Deal with it A.P., that’s not a statement lightly made, and certainly not one that would be made by someone who was convinced he was a mere mortal.
How does Jesus allow people to worship him? When did Jesus grant permission to man to worship anyone but God? Jesus did not allow anyone to distort the message that God sent him to convey. Unfortunately, the changes in his message occurred long after his lifetime. He was not here to stop those changes. He probably expected that his words, “Follow the commandments” would have been crystal clear. How could someone mess that up?
Jesus did not advocate to anyone to believe He was God in the flesh. That’s absolutely correct- anyone can say, “I am God.” That’s exactly the thing- Jesus never said I am God. Is this a coincidence? I do not think so. If one makes a claim on another person, one would expect that person to back that claim up. If I claim someone is the king, I would expect that person to affirm that he is the king, at least once. Consider, for example, how in the Old Testament, God declares he is God numerous times. Why not once with Jesus in the New Testament? Did God change, alter, or modify his ways? No, because God does not change.
“Before Abraham was, I am.” (John 8:58.)
Deal with it A.P., that’s not a statement lightly made, and certainly not one that would be made by someone who was convinced he was a mere mortal.
Tim, that’s a great quote. In my opinion, I am in complete agreement: it’s a statement that should not be lightly made. Regrettably, it was…
Here are some interesting verses…
Jeremiah was with his father before the time too…
As per Jeremiah, 1:5
“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,
before you were born I set you apart;
I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.”
Bingo…one could say Jeremiah is God too by the statement posed above, he was with the father before he was born.
Further, Melchisedec would be more divine than anyone…
According to Hebrews 7:1-4,
For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him;
To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace;
Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.
Wow! Melchisedec has no father and no mother, Jesus has a mother at least.
Melchisedec has no beginning no end, Jesus has anend, when he died…so by the definition posited above, Melhizedek would be more divine…I’m not sure if I’m comfortable with that.
Wait! Solomon was with the others before the creation…BINGO.
No, really. Let’s see what Solomon has to say about all this…
Proverbs 8:22-31
22The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old.
23I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was.
24When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water.
25Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth:
26While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world.
27When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth:
28When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep:
29When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth:
30Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him;
Solomon was pretty detailed here , he explains that he was before anything was created ….BINGO
This is just a mess….why do people have trouble understanding that God can do anything He wants? He simply has to say “Be” and it can “Be.” He’s God, come on! If God wants Jesus to have no father…why is that difficult to understand?
A.P. – These verses are a perfect example of how you’ve totally missed the point of scripture. The priest Melchisedec was a typology of Jesus – he did have a father and mother, a beginning and an end, but these aren’t recorded in the Bible because the priest Mechisedec foreshadows Jesus. It’s the same with wisdom – Jesus is Wisdom. He was there from the beginning. Every scripture you just cited works against your case and proves that from the beginning, God was showing us Jesus through the prophets. This is precisely what Jesus explains to his disciples:
“And he said to them, “O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?” And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.” Luke 24:25-27
On the Jeremiah passage – that’s a ridiculous interpretation, and I think you know it. Just because God says he “knew” someone from the beginning of time doesn’t mean they existed from the beginning of time.
Who here uses the title of “I AM”, the title for God, except Jesus Christ? No one. Jesus CLEARLY claims to be Divine, even in this one quote!
So, you’ve essentially dug up more support for the fact that Jesus was with God from the beginning.
Finally, since you’re hung up on the “No one is good but God alone” quote: Have you read the rest of this story? The whole point of Jesus’ response is to challenge the R.Y.R’s point of view on Jesus. He says, in essence, “Don’t call me good unless you’re prepared to call me God.” Then Jesus lists the ten commandments. When the rich young ruler asserts that he’s followed them all, Jesus commands him to sell all he has and make Jesus Lord over his life. When the young man refuses, Jesus says that he will not inherit the kingdom of heaven.
The whole point of that story is that following the commandments aren’t enough – you need to let Jesus command your whole life.
Here’s my question before we even continue this discussion, A.P. – have you read the New Testament from beginning to end? You’re grabbing lots of quotes left and right and you don’t understand what they mean. Read the New Testament and all 4 gospels, then we’ll return to this discussion when you know what you’re talking about.
AP, what one do you read?
Grace and Peace,
Sandy
Let me pose another question. If a holy book contained conflicting verses, should it still be considered holy?
Good question, and one that smarter folks than I have answered more than adequately. Here’s one resource that gathers some of the reliable scholarship on the subject: http://www.monergism.com/directory/link_category/Bibliology/
Blessings,
Tim
I entered this conversation somewhat late LOL. I actually read this earlier but am now entering because it is interesting.
This entire topic makes for some great discussion and truly promotes a radical journey (no pun intended). I use NIV (usually), but which one is used here?
Hi Sandy,
I’m Uncle Steve, I’m a professor emeritus at Bob Jones University. My niece, A.P., no longer has access to this blog. She tried to post responses, but to no avail. I think she will no longer be able to post here unfortunately.
She read this to me via telephone, and I wanted to and am honored to, respond to your post above to A.P. on her behalf.
I can tell you that A.P. has read a whole gamut of them. She reads all the ones in MY library, and that is saying a lot. I also read what she reads.
Now before I leave, one last thing.
A.P. also reads both Greek and Hebrew because she learned them at a young age. I often credit the reality that she has a different perspective on this topic, to two very important facts: 1) being that she studies the Bible in these authentic forms as well, and 2) being that she has also read and studied many religious texts in addition to the Bible. What religious texts do I speak of? Pretty much any one you could think of, but principally the Torah and the Qur’an.
I am sure you have heard of the former, but have you heard of the Qur’an? It is easily available at any local bookstore or library. Unfortunately, after 9/11, the Qur’an, which is the book of Islam, unduly received a bad name in the United States. The Qur’an is a beautiful book though, and I strongly encourage you to supplement your NIV library with a copy of it. You will find that there are MANY similarities between the two texts and between Christianity and Islam in general. You will also find that the Qur’an served to confirm information that was in the Bible and the Torah. There is even an entire chapter dedicated to Jesus (peace be upon him) and his mother, Mary. Can you believe that? Imagine- and you will just have to find out for yourself how many times Jesus (peace be upon him) is mentioned throughout the Qur’an!
You might wonder why this would matter. Interestingly enough, Christianity is a religion that followed Judaism and preceded Islam. That means that every Christian has a duty to familiarize themselves with the holy texts that accompanied these two monotheistic faiths. Oftentimes, that responsibility is not taken, however, and this leads to very wrong and metaphysical sophistries that are contrary to ALL Abrahamic faiths. Let me tell you from personal experience that, educating oneself- that is, taking time to explore these texts- makes for a must more interesting, enlightening, and fulfilling life and career. Even many people that I worked with had not scrutinized the Bible nearly as much as she has (and I don’t know if you know this, but the university I taught at actually specializes in this kind of stuff), nor had they explored texts outside of Christianity, so I know she is very passionate and knowledgeable about what she does and what she believes in.
Having been in education, I can’t help but read this entire blog post and offer one closing comment. Maybe it’s due to the fact that I realize how much time my niece spent taking time to respond on this, or maybe it’s due to the fact that people say, teachers are the ones who learn the most, and you never really quit the profession, I don’t know.
Christ’s teaching, like his life, was simple. The disputations about the nature of Jesus Christ are vain, but also unrelenting and unkind. Contemporary Christian churches have pushed them into the background, but they would do well to desert foolish dogmas altogether. Begetting a son is a physical act contingent on the needs of man’s animal nature. God, Most High, is independent of all needs, and it is derogatory to Him and indeed to all Abrahamic faiths to attribute such an act to Him. It is merely a vestige of pagan and anthropomorphic materialist superstitions.
Christ’s teaching was simple, but unfortunately many people have made it crooked. Keep reading your copy of the NIV- trust me, the answer IS in there and God willing, you WILL find it. Don’t lose sight of what’s important.
God bless,
-Uncle S.
Uncle S-
I appreciate so much you taking the time to respond to my post regarding the NIV. I am sorry to hear that A.P. cannot contribute anymore. (I find that ironic seeing that I joined this conversation in the first place because I found this entire discussion truly riveting). Since this blog’s inception, I have trailed it just as a regular “reader.” I have simply enjoyed reading others’ comments to the different posts on God, Jesus, and faith in general. It’s my belief that every voice should be encouraged and engaging dialogue like this should be supported—but that is just my opinion.
After reading your post, I realize now, I do indeed need to expand my library. Clearly in A.P.’s case, regardless of where one stands in the religious spectrum, it is patently obvious that books have served to open and broaden the mind profusely.
When I received your response, I was at Books-A-Million. I was actually in the section they have for religion. That’s not unusual for me because religion is thoroughly, my career and my life. Of course I had to purchase a copy of the Qur’an (and it was on sale, too!) after you wrote me back. I will be honest—I was interested to see what it had to say about Jesus. (Which Christian would not be? And of course I was interested in what it had to say about everything else in Christianity…but especially Jesus).
And I was really surprised, I will be quite honest with you, because what I ultimately learned is not at all what I expected to find (It has really changed my perspective about a lot of different things, and I encourage everyone to get ahold of a copy, regardless of where you stand on the religious spectrum).
As you are aware, mainstream media does not exactly present neither Islam nor its followers in a positive light. But there is a reason God gave man a brain to think and to reflect and not to accept everything at face value.
Now, for fellow bloggers: you might think that reading the Qur’an means losing your Christian identity. Well, here’s some news that may be of interest to you:
The Qur’an instructs this: go back to the traditional teachings of Jesus. The essentials. The fundamentals. This is precisely the “what we have lost sight of” element in our world today, and in my experience, modern Christianity.
Here is the most important thing I have read thus far in the Qur’an:
To God do we belong and to Him is our return.
The Qur’an teaches that God is nothing like a human being, a mortal, or anything that we can imagine. He is truly, above and beyond anything in this world.
The concept of God is summarized in the Qur’an as follows:
“Say, He is God, the One. God, the Absolute. He does not give birth, nor was He born, and there is nothing like Him.” (112:1-4).
It is time for me to move on in my own radical journey. I still have a long way to go. But there is something different: the end looks much brighter for me. May God’s peace and blessings be upon you for the rest of your days in your journey. Thank you so much for your very insightful response, without which I would not be following the path I now intend to pursue.
And to bloggers out there, enduring their own radical journey: I am confident you will reach your “destination,” just as I have reached mine.
Sandy
Sandy – If the Qu’ran teaches the God could not become flesh, how do you reconcile that with the Bible where it says:
“The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.” – John 1:14?
Also, Uncle S. – you say that the disputes about the nature of Jesus are vain. So why does Jesus summarize his entire teaching in this sentence –
John 6: 28-29 – Then they said to him, “What must we do, to be doing the works of God?” Jesus answered them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent.”
How do we believe on the one who God sent (Jesus) if we decide that teachings about his nature are vain?
“We know that Jesus’ divine nature could NOT experience temptation, as James 1:13 makes clear. At the same time, we know that Jesus did experience real temptation.”
Its just way too complicated, and this is clearly why Arianism has always been so popular. Rather than twisting and contorting the whole of the New Testament to explain a few interpolation by Gnostical teachers (such as John 1), Arianism simply can accept the majority of passages. If Trinitarianism is true, then Peter in the book of Acts would have been a heretic for saying in Acts 2:22;
“Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:”
Now how he doesn’t say:
“Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man who is God and proved it among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which he as God did in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:”
But Trinitiarianism has to re-interpret what Peter said to make it more like that. Arianism can take it at face value. The best Christology is the one that can take the MAJORITY of passages at face value. The one that has to CONTORT THE MAJORITY of passages to make them fit with the minority (which are likely to be interpolations) is not right.