Autotheos and the Self-Existence of the Son in John 5:19–26

J. Neil Daniels

Introduction 

The doctrine of autotheos—that God is “of Himself”—stands as a vital pillar in the edifice of classical Christian theology. It affirms that God’s existence, being, and essence are underived and independent. In trinitarian theology, this doctrine plays a central role in articulating both the unity of essence among the divine persons and the distinction of personal relations. John 5:19–26 is one of the most consequential texts in the New Testament for understanding this doctrine, especially in relation to the Son of God.

The Controversy in John 5

In this passage, Jesus makes a series of declarations that, to His Jewish hearers, amounted to blasphemy. He called God His Father, and thereby, in their eyes, made Himself equal with God (John 5:18). Jesus does not correct this assumption. Rather, He builds upon it with further affirmations of His divine identity and prerogatives. The climactic statement in verse 23 (“Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him”) demands recognition of the Son's equality with the Father in glory and honor.

The Five “For” Statements

Jesus explains His equality with the Father through five “for” (gar) statements:

1. “For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise” (v. 19b).
   The Son does not merely imitate; He shares in the very operations of God.

2. “For the Father loves the Son and shows Him all that He Himself is doing” (v. 20a).
   This statement emphasizes perfect communion and mutual knowledge.

3. “For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whom He will” (v. 21).
   The Son, like the Father, possesses sovereign life-giving power.

4. “For the Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son” (v. 22).
   Judgment is a divine prerogative now given to the Son.

5. “For as the Father has life in Himself, so He has granted the Son also to have life in Himself” (v. 26).
   This statement is foundational for the doctrine of autotheos.

Life in Himself and the Son’s Aseity

Verse 26 has been especially influential in the development of Reformed Christology. The phrase “life in Himself” (zōēn en heautō echō) speaks to divine aseity, life not derived from another. In affirming that the Son, like the Father, has life in Himself, the text supports the claim that the Son is autotheos, God in Himself. Yet, the clause “He has granted the Son…” introduces an important distinction: this self-existent life is not independent of the Father with respect to personhood, but it is one with the Father in essence.

Reformed Debate and Historical Reception

John Calvin affirmed that the Son, considered according to His divine essence, is autotheos. “We say,” Calvin writes, “that the Godhead is absolutely of itself. And hence also we hold that the Son, regarded as God, and without reference to person, is also of himself; though we also say that, regarded as Son, he is of the Father.”¹ This careful distinction—essence from self, person from Father—became foundational for later Reformed theology.

Francis Turretin likewise explains that while the Son is from the Father in terms of personhood, He is nonetheless autotheos with respect to His essence: “The Son may be from the Father, yet is no less called autotheos, not by reason of Person, but by reason of Essence…”² This distinction preserves the Nicene formula: the Son is “God from God” (personal relation), but also true God (essential identity).

Some theologians, such as Johannes Maccovius, denied the communication of essence, affirming instead only the communication of the mode of subsistence.³ Gisbert Voetius, however, criticized this position as based on an overly physical understanding of “communication” and argued that the dominant Reformed view affirmed communication of essence in eternal generation.⁴

Affirmation of Communication of Essence

The Reformed orthodox generally maintained that the eternal generation of the Son involved the communication of the divine essence from the Father. Robert Rollock wrote that “the eternal generation of the Son consists in that communication of the one and whole nature of the Father.”⁵ Franciscus Gomarus likewise affirms that “the Father gave life to the Son” (John 5:26) by communication of the divine essence, and this communication is the basis for the Son’s equality with the Father.⁶

The Synopsis Purioris Theologiae, a key post-Reformation theological compendium, explicitly states: “The Son’s equality with the Father evinces that the Father truly has communicated His whole essence to the Son by this eternal generation.”⁷

Even medieval theologians such as Anselm of Canterbury maintained this balance. In his Monologion, he argues that the Son has essence, wisdom, and life in Himself—not by derivation from an external source, but by the eternal begetting of the Father, who gives the Son to have these attributes in Himself.⁸ This is no denial of aseity; rather, it locates the ground of the Son’s self-existence in the eternal generation that communicates the whole divine essence.

Terminological Nuance

The term autotheos has not always been used uniformly. Some authors employ it cautiously, aware of tritheistic connotations if misapplied. Others, like Trelcatius Jr., affirm it explicitly: the Son is autotheos “as to his absolute essence.”⁹ Others, like Samuel Rutherford, warn against confusing the communication of essence with the multiplication of essence.¹⁰ Thus, distinctions between person and essence, and between relative and absolute modes of speaking, are essential in avoiding doctrinal error.

Conclusion

John 5:19–26 provides the exegetical foundation for the Son’s full divinity and self-existence. Far from undermining divine unity, the passage reveals the harmony of Father and Son in will, action, and essence. The Reformed tradition, while nuanced in its articulation, has consistently affirmed that the Son is autotheos—not in the sense of existing independently of the Father as person, but as fully possessing the divine essence in Himself. In Him, as in the Father, is life—eternal, uncreated, and underived.

Endnotes

1. John Calvin, Institutio Christianae Religionis 1.13.25; Institutes of the Christian Religion, trans. Henry Beveridge (Edinburgh: Calvin Translation Society, 1845), 1:142.

2. Francis Turretin, Institutio Theologiae Elencticae 3.28.40.

3. Johannes Maccovius, Loci Communes Theologici (1658), 311.

4. Gisbertus Voetius, Selectae Disputationes Theologicae, vol. 1, 527.

5. Robert Rollock, In Evangelium Secundum Sanctum Johannem (1602), 5.

6. Franciscus Gomarus, Opera Omnia: Disputationes Theologicae, disp. 7.20, 26.

7. Synopsis Purioris Theologiae, thesis 8.14 (ed. 1624), 134.

8. Anselm of Canterbury, Monologion, in Opera Omnia, ed. F. S. Schmitt, vol. 1 (Edinburgh: Thomas Nelson, 1946), 68.

9. Lucas Trelcatius Jr., Institutio Theologiae Elencticae (1605), 32.

10. Samuel Rutherford, Examen Arminianismi (1668), 149.