John 14:28

Salty · Dec 20, 2025

John 14:28 states "...because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I."

Is Jesus saying he is not equal to God the Father?

Would you agree with this statement:
For my Father is greater than I.—These words have naturally formed the subject of controversy in every period of the Church’s history, between those who deny and those who accept the truth that the Son is “very God, of the substance of the Father, begotten before all worlds.” And, as in all controversies, statements have been made on either side which cannot be supported by the words themselves. On the part of those who assert the divine nature, it has been contended that the Father is greater than the Son only as regards the human nature of the Son; but this is not here thought of. In this passage, as in others of the New Testament, it is plainly asserted that in the divine nature there is a subordination of the Son to the Father. (See, e.g., John 14:16; John 17:5; 1Corinthians 3:23; 1Corinthians 11:3; 1Corinthians 15:27-28; Philippians 2:9; Philippians 2:11; and especially Note on John 5:19 et seq.) On the part of those who deny the divinity of our Lord, it has been contended that this text asserts the inferiority of His nature to that of the Father, whereas the words could only have been uttered by one who meant in them to assert His own divine essence. If we try to imagine a man saying, “God is greater than I,” we feel at once that He who really said them claimed for Himself that He was truly God.

Open for discussion

37818 · Dec 20, 2025

Salty said:
John 14:28 states "...because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I."

Is Jesus saying he is not equal to God the Father?

They are not the same Persons. They're the same LORD God. The Son of God has God the Father as His God the Father.

And was sent per John 17:3.

Jesus explained:
John 13:16, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him.

They are not the same Persons. They're the same LORD God.

Charlie24 · Dec 20, 2025

Salty said:
John 14:28 states "...because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I."

Is Jesus saying he is not equal to God the Father?

Would you agree with this statement:
For my Father is greater than I.—These words have naturally formed the subject of controversy in every period of the Church’s history, between those who deny and those who accept the truth that the Son is “very God, of the substance of the Father, begotten before all worlds.” And, as in all controversies, statements have been made on either side which cannot be supported by the words themselves. On the part of those who assert the divine nature, it has been contended that the Father is greater than the Son only as regards the human nature of the Son; but this is not here thought of. In this passage, as in others of the New Testament, it is plainly asserted that in the divine nature there is a subordination of the Son to the Father. (See, e.g., John 14:16; John 17:5; 1Corinthians 3:23; 1Corinthians 11:3; 1Corinthians 15:27-28; Philippians 2:9; Philippians 2:11; and especially Note on John 5:19 et seq.) On the part of those who deny the divinity of our Lord, it has been contended that this text asserts the inferiority of His nature to that of the Father, whereas the words could only have been uttered by one who meant in them to assert His own divine essence. If we try to imagine a man saying, “God is greater than I,” we feel at once that He who really said them claimed for Himself that He was truly God.

Open for discussion

Paul said that Christ thought it not robbery to be equal with God. But made Himself of no reputation and took upon Him the form of a servant.

We have here a before and after the incarnation.

It's my opinion He was speaking of the Father being greater while in His humanity, being a servant.

Although He was equal with the Father the entire time, but considered Himself a servant during His humanity.

Silverhair · Dec 20, 2025

Salty said:
John 14:28 states "...because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I."

Is Jesus saying he is not equal to God the Father?

Would you agree with this statement:
For my Father is greater than I.—These words have naturally formed the subject of controversy in every period of the Church’s history, between those who deny and those who accept the truth that the Son is “very God, of the substance of the Father, begotten before all worlds.” And, as in all controversies, statements have been made on either side which cannot be supported by the words themselves. On the part of those who assert the divine nature, it has been contended that the Father is greater than the Son only as regards the human nature of the Son; but this is not here thought of. In this passage, as in others of the New Testament, it is plainly asserted that in the divine nature there is a subordination of the Son to the Father. (See, e.g., John 14:16; John 17:5; 1Corinthians 3:23; 1Corinthians 11:3; 1Corinthians 15:27-28; Philippians 2:9; Philippians 2:11; and especially Note on John 5:19 et seq.) On the part of those who deny the divinity of our Lord, it has been contended that this text asserts the inferiority of His nature to that of the Father, whereas the words could only have been uttered by one who meant in them to assert His own divine essence. If we try to imagine a man saying, “God is greater than I,” we feel at once that He who really said them claimed for Himself that He was truly God.

Open for discussion

In saying that the Father is greater than I, Jesus was asserting his role as the Father’s servant, for the Son was the one sent to do the Father’s will. (Joh_3:17) This does not deny his equality with God (Joh_10:30); rather, it affirms Jesus’ humble attitude about his relationship with the Father. He was obedient to the Father, who gave Christ His words and works (Joh_14:10, Joh_14:24).

Ben1445 · Dec 20, 2025

37818 said:
They are not the same Persons. They're the same LORD God. The Son of God has God the Father as His God the Father.

And was sent per John 17:3.

Jesus explained:
John 13:16, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him.

They are not the same Persons. They're the same LORD God.

I have a question for you. I ask because I think that we often get too deep into areas we have no knowledge. This is one of those areas.

And the question is, if Jesus is the Son of God the Father, but…

Matthew 1:20
But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.

Would that not make the Holy Spirit the Father of the Son.

Pardon the foolishness of the question. It is just an evidence to me that we understand so little of who God is. Even with all the explanation of Scripture, it appears to me that we are still like the blind from birth having the different colors explained to him. It will all be clear when the blind receives his sight and we are changed and see Him as He is.

kyredneck · Dec 20, 2025

Silverhair said:
his equality with God (Joh_10:30)

Yes.

John Chapter 10

30	*I and the Father are one*.

John Chapter 1

1	In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and *the Word was God*.

14	*And the Word became flesh*, and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father), full of grace and truth.

Oh 'great Calvinist-slayer in your own mind', this is one point we can agree on, if not anything else.

Silverhair · Dec 20, 2025

kyredneck said:
Yes.

John Chapter 10

30
I and the Father are one.

John Chapter 1

1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

14
And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father), full of grace and truth.

Oh 'great Calvinist-slayer in your own mind', this is one point we can agree on, if not anything else.

Ah KY I do not have to slay Calvinism. Those calvinists do a great job showing the errors in that view all by themselves. :Biggrin

37818 · Dec 21, 2025

Ben1445 said:
Would that not make the Holy Spirit the Father of the Son.

I do not think it to be a foolish question.
The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of all three distinct Persons.
Of God, Romans 8:9, . . . the Spirit of God . . . .
Per John 4:24, God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

Of the Son of God, . . . the Spirit of Christ . . . .
1 John 5:12. (John 1:3. John 1:14.)

Of Himself, Romans 8:16, The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: . . . .

And more Holy Scripture can be cited.

Ben1445 · Dec 21, 2025

37818 said:
I do not think it to be a foolish question.
The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of all three distinct Persons.
Of God, Romans 8:9, . . . the Spirit of God . . . .
Per John 4:24, God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

Of the Son of God, . . . the Spirit of Christ . . . .
1 John 5:12. (John 1:3. John 1:14.)

Of Himself, Romans 8:16, The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: . . . .

And more Holy Scripture can be cited.

So just from what I read, They are more the same than They are different.

37818 · Dec 21, 2025

Ben1445 said:
So just from what I read, They are more the same than They are different.

The same being the LORD God. Different in being distinct Persons.

Tea · Tuesday at 5:21 PM

As a Trinitarian, I interpret "greatness" as a matter of functional subordination within the Godhead, viewing Jesus' voluntary humility in his human nature rather than his essential deity. The Father occupies the primary role, and Jesus, as the incarnate Son, willingly submits to that role, demonstrating a relational order of God while preserving unity as part of one divine essence.

canadyjd · Tuesday at 9:00 PM

Ben1445 said:
I have a question for you. I ask because I think that we often get too deep into areas we have no knowledge. This is one of those areas.

And the question is, if Jesus is the Son of God the Father, but…

Matthew 1:20
But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.

Would that not make the Holy Spirit the Father of the Son.

Pardon the foolishness of the question. It is just an evidence to me that we understand so little of who God is. Even with all the explanation of Scripture, it appears to me that we are still like the blind from birth having the different colors explained to him. It will all be clear when the blind receives his sight and we are changed and see Him as He is.

Not a foolish question.

We don’t know all the details of the divine conception of Jesus in Mary’s womb. But Holy Spirit did not “father” a child.

There is no “conception” in heaven. There is only creation. Mary’s egg was not fertilized by God DNA. That is Mormon heresy.

Personally, I don’t believe Mary’s DNA was used either. I believe God Holy Spirit formed Jesus in the womb from nothing. He is “of the Holy Spirit”, not Mary.

Just as the first Adam was formed from without conception, so Jesus formed in the womb without human conception.

Peace to you

Ben1445 · Wednesday at 12:06 AM

canadyjd said:
Not a foolish question.

We don’t know all the details of the divine conception of Jesus in Mary’s womb. But Holy Spirit did not “father” a child.

The Holy Spirit is responsible for the birth of Christ.
That typically is considered Fatherhood.
My point was that I think that the Trinity is much closer One than we realize.

canadyjd said:
There is no “conception” in heaven. There is only creation. Mary’s egg was not fertilized by God DNA. That is Mormon heresy.

Jesus wasn’t born in heaven.

canadyjd said:
Personally, I don’t believe Mary’s DNA was used either. I believe God Holy Spirit formed Jesus in the womb from nothing. He is “of the Holy Spirit”, not Mary.

I disagree with you here. If Jesus was not fully man, how could so much of what is Scripture be written of Him. For example, He took on Him the form of a servant and was made in the likeness of men.
Jesus was a man in the flesh and dust of men. He is the seed of Abraham. That means a descendant. Also of David. If not, the genealogies are a lie.
A virgin would not have conceived. She would merely have carried a child.
Jesus could have just walked into town like Melchizedek, declared He was from Bethlehem and it would be so.
There is only one creation of mankind. There is not a separate Human Race formed for the redemption of the fallen first.

canadyjd said:
Just as the first Adam was formed from without conception, so Jesus formed in the womb without human conception.

It is an interesting thought, but not biblical.

canadyjd · 2026-01-01T22:40:29-0600

Ben1445 said:
The Holy Spirit is responsible for the birth of Christ.
That typically is considered Fatherhood.
My point was that I think that the Trinity is much closer One than we realize.

Jesus wasn’t born in heaven.

I disagree with you here. If Jesus was not fully man, how could so much of what is Scripture be written of Him. For example, He took on Him the form of a servant and was made in the likeness of men.
Jesus was a man in the flesh and dust of men. He is the seed of Abraham. That means a descendant. Also of David. If not, the genealogies are a lie.
A virgin would not have conceived. She would merely have carried a child.
Jesus could have just walked into town like Melchizedek, declared He was from Bethlehem and it would be so.
There is only one creation of mankind. There is not a separate Human Race formed for the redemption of the fallen first.

It is an interesting thought, but not biblical.

I never said Jesus was not fully human. God Holy Spirit formed Him, fully human in Mary’s womb. That would have been understood in that time as conception, obviously. Mary became pregnant and bore a son.

There was no need for God to create sp:rm and use Mary’s egg for the conception. If He did, then the child would have only been partly of God Holy Spirit instead of fully of God Holy Spirit.

There is no need for a direct, biological link to Abraham or any other OT Saint to be considered a descendant. That is a modern concept based on our current understanding of genetics.

Just look at the genealogies found in Matthew and Luke. First, they don’t exactly match. Second, there are very interesting folks in the line, including gentiles (Rahab the harlot for example)

Joseph was told by an angel to take Mary as wife (the were engaged) and that the child was of God. He raised Him as his son. He was considered his son according to Jewish understanding and therefore a descendant of David because Joseph was in the line of David.

Try to look at the issue of a first century Hebrew culture instead a modern understanding of biology and genetics.

Peace to you

Ben1445 · 2026-01-01T22:59:03-0600

canadyjd said:
I never said Jesus was not fully human. God Holy Spirit formed Him, fully human in Mary’s womb. That would have been understood in that time as conception, obviously. Mary became pregnant and bore a son.

There was no need for God to create sp:rm and use Mary’s egg for the conception. If He did, then the child would have only been partly of God Holy Spirit instead of fully of God Holy Spirit.

There is no need for a direct, biological link to Abraham or any other OT Saint to be considered a descendant. That is a modern concept based on our current understanding of genetics.

Just look at the genealogies found in Matthew and Luke. First, they don’t exactly match. Second, there are very interesting folks in the line, including gentiles (Rahab the harlot for example)

Joseph was told by an angel to take Mary as wife (the were engaged) and that the child was of God. He raised Him as his son. He was considered his son according to Jewish understanding and therefore a descendant of David because Joseph was in the line of David.

Try to look at the issue of a first century Hebrew culture instead a modern understanding of biology and genetics.

Peace to you

It doesn’t matter what perspective you come at it from, God was aware of our modern understanding of biology and has a better understanding of it anyway. I think anything Scripture says is likely to be more accurate than what a scientist thinks he understands.

Galatians 4:4
But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,

There is not really much room to say that Jesus was not literally made of a woman.
But I rest my case.

37818 · 2026-01-01T23:49:31-0600

Ben1445 said:
Galatians 4:4
But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,

The Son of God (John 1:2-3) took an x chromosome and replaced it with a y chromosome (John 1:14. Hebrews 10:5.) by means of His Spirit.

John 14:28

Salty

20,000 Posts Club

37818

Well-Known Member

Charlie24

Well-Known Member

Silverhair

Well-Known Member

Ben1445

Well-Known Member

kyredneck

Well-Known Member

30

1

14

Silverhair

Well-Known Member

30

1

14

37818

Well-Known Member

Ben1445

Well-Known Member

37818

Well-Known Member

Tea

Active Member

canadyjd

Well-Known Member

Ben1445

Well-Known Member

canadyjd

Well-Known Member

Ben1445

Well-Known Member

37818

Well-Known Member

John 14:28

20,000 Posts Club

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

30​

1​

14​

Well-Known Member

30​

1​

14​

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

30

1

14

30

1

14