Jesus: Appointed the Son of God?

October 13, 2012 in Theology · 7 comments

Romans 1:4 in the NIV 2011 reads: “and who through the Spirit of holi­ness was appointed the Son of God in power by his res­ur­rec­tion from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord.”

Does this mean that because of his res­ur­rec­tion God appointed Jesus as his Son? Prior to the res­ur­rec­tion Jesus was just some guy, but post-resurrection God decided Jesus was good enough so he let him into the family?

Maybe some other trans­la­tions can offer some insight:

The NIV 1984 reads “and who through the Spirit of holi­ness was declared with power to be the Son of God by his res­ur­rec­tion from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord.”

The NRSV reads “and was declared to be Son of God with power accord­ing to the spirit of holi­ness by res­ur­rec­tion from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord.”

Here Jesus is declared to be God’s Son. The KJV, NAS and ESV all say he was “declared” as well. So then was the res­ur­rec­tion God’s pub­lic announce­ment of Jesus’ son­ship? The NLT goes so far as to say that Jesus “was shown to be the Son of God when he was raised from the dead.”

But here’s the prob­lem: the Greek text doesn’t really say “declared,” it says he was “appointed.” Paul uses the word ὁρισθέντος, which is the par­tici­ple of the verb ὁρίζω. And ὁρίζω, accord­ing to BDAG, means “to make a deter­mi­na­tion about an entity, deter­mine, appoint, fix, set.” Every occur­rence of ὁρίζω in the New Tes­ta­ment car­ries the clear mean­ing of appoint, decide or determine:

Luk 22:22 For the Son of Man is to go just as it has been deter­mined
Act 2:23 who was handed over by the pre­de­ter­mined plan
Act 10:42 he is the one appointed by God as judge
Act 11:29 So the dis­ci­ples … decided to send relief
Act 17:26 deter­min­ing their set times
Act 17:31 by a man whom he des­ig­nated
Heb 4:7 So God again appoints a cer­tain day

If one accepts that “appoint” is in fact the best trans­la­tion of the text (so that the NIV 2011 is really a more accu­rate ren­der­ing than the NIV 1984), does that leave us at a the­o­log­i­cal dead-end?

But there is another option: “in power” is describ­ing the Son of God, not the appoint­ment, so that Paul is not say­ing that “the Son of God was pow­er­fully appointed”” but rather that the “pow­er­ful Son of God was appointed” or, as in the NET: “who was appointed the Son-of-God-in-power.” Jesus was the Son of God pre-resurrection, but it was because of the res­ur­rec­tion that God chose to appoint him as the Pow­er­ful Son of God. Anders Nygren sum­ma­rizes this impor­tant point: “So the res­ur­rec­tion is the turn­ing point in the exis­tence of the Son of God. Before that he was the Son of God in weak­ness and low­li­ness. Through the res­ur­rec­tion he becomes the Son of God in power.”

This issue not only sheds light on the way the­ol­ogy can influ­ence our Eng­lish trans­la­tions, it also makes a cru­cial point about the impor­tance of the res­ur­rec­tion. Chris­tian­ity is not pri­mar­ily about the Jesus’ pub­lic min­istry or his death on the cross. Ours is, above all else, a res­ur­rec­tion faith — if Christ has not been raised, then our preach­ing is futile and your faith is empty (1 Cor 15:14). It is only through the res­ur­rec­tion that God’s plan for human­ity and Jesus’ role in that plan, as the appointed Son of God in Power, can be fully realized.

7 comments… read them below or add one

Ellen K. October 15, 2012 at 11:23 am

I’m puzzled. You say the word can mean “determined”, which is very different from “appointed” in the verse under question, yet you don’t address this as a possible translation.

Reply

Dan October 15, 2012 at 2:08 pm

I’m not sure that “determined” is very different from “appointed.” Both involve making some sort of decision — a demarcation — between two states.

Merriam Webster’s first definition for each are virtually synonymous:
determine: 1a: to fix conclusively or authoritatively
appoint: 1a: a : to fix or set officially

Both “determine” and “appoint” are certainly within the semantic range of ὁρίζω, but to my mind there isn’t a significant difference between the two in the context of this verse. Using “determined” makes for an awkward-sounding English construction: “and who through the Spirit of holiness was determined the Son of God…” and still leaves the same theological issue as “appoint” does: God didn’t “determine” Jesus was the Son of God because of the resurrection.

Reply

Ellen K. October 15, 2012 at 3:59 pm

Determined means to me “figured out”. Recognizing that something is how it already is. Whereas “appoint” is actually doing something. And if that dictionary puts definitions chronologically, as many do, then which is first is irrelevant. Really, the question is, does the ordinary meaning of “determine”, which does not mean making something true, but simply recognizing it is true, match a meaning of the Greek word. Maybe it doesn’t. But, in that case, you should have addressed that.

Reply

Dan October 15, 2012 at 4:06 pm

Do you think God “figured out” that Jesus was the Son of God?

Reply

Ellen K. October 15, 2012 at 4:12 pm

The quote doesn’t say anything about God doing it. It doesn’t say who did the appointing, or determining, or deciding.

Reply

Dan October 15, 2012 at 5:54 pm

Actually, it does. It says he was appointed/determined/decided/declared “by his resurrection.”

Reply

Tim Wilcox July 31, 2013 at 10:48 am

The terms “Jesus” and “Christ” can be thought of as separate concepts, united in one Person (Son of Man vs. Son of God). Jesus of Nazareth was a man. Christ is the Son of God – it is the specific force/power/function through which all was made (John 1:1-5) and is God’s personal expression of Love Itself. It was God’s first movement – His Only Begotten Son – and the part of the Trinity that is the active participant in Creation. When God said “Let there be Light” this is metaphorically when the Christ was “begotten”. However, Christ as the Son of God existed eternally before Jesus of Nazareth was born on earth. The Trinity is an Eternal concept (it has no beginning or end) but no particular person was associated with the identity of The Son until after Jesus. Jesus of Nazareth obtained the title “The Christ” because of the perfection in which he lived his life and demonstrated the attributes of God through his human actions. He was the Chosen One to fulfill this mission. Thus he was appointed the title “The Christ and Son of God”. Jesus, Son of Man, was fully unified with the Christ aspect of God and would have fully inherited the identity of Son of God after he was resurrected. This is why we call him Jesus (the) Christ “….who through the Spirit of holi­ness was appointed the Son of God in power by his res­ur­rec­tion from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord.”

Reply

Leave a Reply

Previous post:

Next post: