Does Romans 1:4 Teach Heresy?

Concerning His Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh and was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by His resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord.

Romans 1:3-4

The ancient heresy “Adoptionism” is a teaching that developed in the 2nd-3rd centuries. It is the teaching that the man Jesus became the divine Son of God at one point in time. Those who adopt this adoptionism teaching cite Romans 1:4 as a proof text. They say that the Greek word for “declare” means “to become”. In other words, at one point Jesus was not the Son of God but then He became the Son of God by His resurrection from the dead.

The Argument From Grammar That This Is NOT Teaching Heresy

By definition, the word for “declare” (Gk. ὁρισθέντος) comes from the word ὁρίζω which means “to set a limit, boundary, determine, or appoint”. That last word is the most accurate of what is being referred to here.

Thomas Schreiner says, “He was exalted to a position of power and authority that he did not occupy previously…The interpretation proposed here doesn’t suggest an adoptionistic Christology in verse 4. The appointment of Jesus as the Son of God should not be understood as a reference to His exaltation to deity. It is crucial to recall that the one who is exalted as Son of God in power was already the Son. The appointment of Jesus being described here is His appointment as the messianic king…The title ‘Son of God’ in verse 3 is a reference not to Jesus’ deity but to His messianic kingship as the descendant of David (cf. 2 Sam. 7:14; Ps. 2:7)…Upon His resurrection, however, He was enthroned as the messianic king…While Jesus was on earth, He was the Messiah and the Son of God, but His death and resurrection inaugurated a stage in His messianic existence that was not formerly His. Now He reigns in heaven as Lord and Christ.”¹

In other words, the eternal divine Son (v3a) is who took on human flesh to be the prophesied Messiah (i.e. the Christ). The text is clearly saying that “His Son” is the one who was descended from David according to the flesh (v3b). That same Son is the one who was declared “to be the Son of God” by His resurrection (v4).

The Messiah—as the GodMan—is the one who would atone for our sins, bring in the kingdom of heaven, fulfill the promises of God, and be the true King who would defeat our enemies (see 2 Sam. 7). As the GodMan, Jesus is that Messiah. His resurrection (which is what was the death blow to sin, Satan, and death itself) inaugurated His sovereign rule as the victorious Messiah who brings in the kingdom of God as the greater David.

There is no change (in subtraction or addition) to His divine nature. Rather, as our covenant representative, He is the Messiah who fulfills the old covenant to bring to us the blessings of the new covenant (Jer. 31; Ek. 36-37). And this new covenant brings about a new age for God’s people.²

The Argument From Theology That This Is NOT Teaching Heresy

It is clear that verse 4 is a participial phrase referring back to the first part of verse 3 which says, “concerning His Son”.

The question of verse 4 is: Who are we talking about who was declared to be the Son of God in power? The answer looks backward to verse 3: “His Son”. Whose Son? This looks back to the end of verse 1 where it talks about “God”. In other words, we see that the gospel of God is concerning His Son (implying that “God” here is particularly referring to the Person of the Father).

With good Trinitarian theology, we know that God the Father never became Father. That would be an addition to His Being which would imply that at one point He was either better off or worse off until He became a Father. This cannot be. The Father is always Father. That means that the Father has never been without His Son. Jesus, the Son, is the eternally begotten Son of God.

The Trinity has always been Trinity—The Father begetting the Son and the Holy Spirit proceeding from both the Father and the Son. These are timeless and eternal processions. This Triune God is the “I Am” (Ex. 3:14). The Trinity is never not the Trinity—or else God would not be God. If there is any addition to God then the question is whether this addition made Him increase for the better (i.e. to become God) or decrease for the worse (i.e. to not be God).

But, according to Malachi 3:6, “I, the LORD, do not change.”

The Argument From Redemptive History That This Is NOT Teaching Heresy

You might still be confused because it clearly says that this Son is declared to be “
the Son of God”. What does that mean? This is referring to 2 Samuel 7:14 when God is making the covenant with David. He says that David will have a son who will be the true King and be the Messiah of Israel. This King will have a special relationship with God. “I will be to Him a father, and He shall be to me a son.” This Son of David will also be known as the Son of God.

This pertains to His humanity because He is the Second Adam (Rom. 5:12-21). Adam is known as “the son of God” (Lk. 3:38). It does not mean that Adam was divine. Rather, Adam is the first man created who was directly created by God. Jesus, the Second Adam, was “knit in the womb” of His human mother Mary by the Holy Spirit.

The First Adam is a covenant representative. The Second Adam is a covenant representative. When the First Adam fell, God pronounced a curse for our sins. In that curse, God promised that He would bring about an offspring (Heb. “seed”) of the woman who would defeat The Enemy and save God’s people. That Person would be the Messiah. Does that not sound familiar to what we’ve been talking about?

The idea in Romans 1:3-4 that the eternal Son—very God of very God—is declared to be the Son of God in power is the idea that this Son of God is the Second Adam and the Messiah.

The eternal Son is the Messiah who took on flesh to be the true Son of David and is appointed to be the risen and ascended victorious Son of God (a better Adam) who made sufficient atonement for His elect—this being Jesus Christ our Lord.

Conclusion: Why It Matters

To say that Jesus became the Son of God is to make severe mistakes to the doctrine of God and even salvation. Rather than heresy, what we see is the beauty of our salvation. The eternally begotten Son is the One who took on flesh to be the Messiah. This has huge ramifications.

First, it means that everything He does is done with infinite worth. That righteousness is given to us by grace through faith in Christ. This radically changes our understanding of what it means to be justified.

Second, it means that He is infinitely qualified to be the Messiah as the GodMan. There should be no doubt as to the sufficiency of Christ to secure our salvation and bring in the kingdom of heaven.

Third, it means that since He is our covenant representative that we need never add anything to Him in order to be saved or kept saved. He is sufficient for our conversion, growth in grace, and making it to heaven. We ought to reject all forms of legalism that results in any “Jesus + ______” type of religion.

Fourth, it means that the love of God is so great that He Himself came to solve our greatest problem. There could be no bigger gift than for God to send Himself (Jn. 3:16) for us to be saved.

1. Thomas Schreiner, Romans, 2nd Ed. (Baker Academic, Grand Rapids, MI 2018), p. 46-47.

2. See p. 92-101 in Brandon Crowe’s book The Lord Jesus Christ (Lexham Academic: Bellingham, WA 2023).