@Wonderment
Your
argument presumes a zero-sum dynamic between the Father and the Son, as though
exclusive devotion to the Father were logically or theologically incompatible
with the full, cultic worship of the Son. John 4:23 is not an exclusion of the
Son from worship, but rather sets the stage for a new mode of worship, “in
Spirit and in truth,” inaugurated by the coming of Christ. In Johannine
theology, “truth” is not a mere abstraction; it is intimately bound to the
person of Jesus, who unambiguously declares, “I am the way, and the truth,
and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6).
Far from relativizing the Son or reducing Him to a mere conduit, this
identification means that the very act of true worship is now mediated through
and oriented by Christ Himself. Hence, the same Gospel repeatedly depicts Jesus
as the recipient of proskynesis—formal acts of worship—which He never
rebukes (John 9:38; cf. John 20:28). If Johannine Christology intended to
delimit worship to the Father alone, this narrative and theological
motif would be inexplicable.
The
citation of Luke 4:8 likewise fails as an Arian prooftext. Jesus is here quoting
Deuteronomy 6:13, affirming the Shema and the monotheistic devotion that
defines Israel’s worship. Yet, what the objector overlooks is that the entire
shape of NT devotion to Christ is forged precisely within this monotheistic
matrix. The earliest Christians, themselves monolatrous Jews, would have
recoiled at any suggestion of creaturely worship that rivaled God. Yet the
canonical texts—especially Revelation 5:13-14—portray the Lamb as enthroned
alongside the Father, receiving the same doxological acclamation, the same
proskynesis, the same universal blessing, honor, glory, and power “forever
and ever.” The language is not distributive but unitive: a single throne, a
single worship, a single sovereignty. The divine prerogatives that belong to
the Lord God of Israel are, astonishingly, extended to the Son without any hint
of rivalry or diminution. The singular grammar of Revelation 22:3—“his servants
will worship him”—further demonstrates that the Father and the Lamb are
recipients of the same cultic service.
Moreover,
the Arian reading misrepresents the logic of Trinitarian theology. The doctrine
does not posit three gods, nor does it teach a division of the divine essence.
Rather, the one God exists eternally as three co-equal and co-eternal Persons,
such that to worship the Son is not to draw honor away from the Father but to
honor the Father as He has revealed Himself—in the Son and by the Spirit. As
Jesus Himself declares in John 5:23, “That all may honor the Son just as
they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father
who sent him.” This is not a statement of “relative honor” but of equal,
unqualified, and divine honor. The economic mission of the Son—His incarnation,
ministry, and mediatorial work—unfolds within the unity of the divine will and
does not negate His intrinsic divinity or His worthiness of worship.
Furthermore,
the worship offered to Christ in the NT is not merely that of honor or respect,
but of the cultic, doxological adoration owed to God alone. Thomas’s
acclamation, “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:28), is not an aberration
but the climactic confession of the Johannine narrative. The hymnic traditions
in Philippians 2:6-11 and Colossians 1:15-20 explicitly ascribe to Christ the
name, authority, and creative prerogatives of the Lord God. The cosmic liturgy
of Revelation crowns this witness, culminating in the prostration of every
creature before both the Father and the Lamb.
In
conclusion, the objection that Jesus’ direction of worship to the Father in a
few isolated texts precludes the worship of the Son simply does not withstand
the force of the full canonical and theological evidence. The NT’s vision is
not one of competitive devotion, but of an integrated, tri-personal worship
wherein to worship the Son is, by divine appointment and self-revelation, to
worship the Father. The earliest Christian communities—composed of strict
monotheists—consistently rendered cultic adoration to Christ precisely because
they recognized Him as the definitive manifestation of Israel’s God. To deny
the Son this worship is not to uphold biblical monotheism, but to rend asunder
the unity of revelation and to impoverish the faith delivered once for all to
the saints. The Church’s unwavering confession, expressed in creed, canon, and
liturgy, remains: “Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy
Spirit, as it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without
end.”
