The Scary Nature of God the Son

Sources

1. Hebrews “Hebrews 10:31 (Geneva1599) — It is a fearefull thing to fall into the hands of the liuing God.”
2. Easton's Bible Dictionary “Easton's Bible Dictionary: Fear of the Lord the — Is in the Old Testament used as a designation of true piety (Prov. 1:7; Job 28:28; Ps. 19:9). It is a fear conjoined with love and hope, and is therefore not a slavish dread, but rather filial reverence. (Comp. Deut. 32:6; Hos. 11:1; Isa. 1:2; 63:16; 64:8.) God is called "the Fear of Isaac" (Gen. 31:42, 53), i.e., the God whom Isaac feared. A holy fear is enjoined also in the New Testament as a preventive of carelessness in religion, and as an incentive to penitence (Matt. 10:28; 2 Cor. 5:11; 7:1; Phil. 2:12; Eph. 5:21; Heb. 12:28, 29).”
3. Torrey's Topical Textbook “Torrey's Topical Textbook: Fear, Unholy — A characteristic of the wicked -- Re 21:8. Is described as A fear of idols. -- 2Ki 17:38. A fear of man. -- 1Sa 15:24; Joh 9:22. A fear of judgments. -- Isa 2:19; Lu 21:26; Re 6:16,17. A fear of future punishment. -- Heb 10:27. Overwhelming. -- Ex 15:16; Job 15:21,24. Consuming. -- Ps 73:19. A guilty conscience leads to -- Ge 3:8,10; Ps 53:5; Pr 28:1. Seizes the wicked -- Job 15:24; 18:11. Surprises the hypocrite -- Isa 33:14,18. The wicked judicially filled with -- Le 26:16,17; De 28:65-67; Jer 49:5. Shall be realised -- Pr 1:27; 10:24. God mocks -- P”
4. theology (Catholic (Scholastic)) “Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Third Part (Tertia Pars), Of the Parts of Human Nature Which Were Assumed, Art. 1: Article: Whether the Son of God ought to have assumed a true body? I answer that, As is said (De Eccles. Dogm. ii). The Son of God was not born in appearance only, as if He had an imaginary body; but His body was real. The proof of this is threefold. First, from the essence of human nature to which it pertains to have a true body. Therefore granted, as already proved (Question [4], Article [1]), that it was fitting for the Son of God to assume human nature, He must consequently have as”
5. CCEL (Reformed) “John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, section 50: was a Father to angels and men save in respect of his only-begotten Son: that men, especially, who by their iniquity were rendered hateful to God, are sons by gratuitous adoption, because he is a Son by nature. Nor is there anything in the assertion of Servetus, that this depends on the filiation which God had decreed with himself. Here we deal not with figures, as expiation by the blood of beasts was shown to be; but since they could not be the sons of God in reality, unless their adoption was founded in the head, it is against al”
6. CCEL (Reformed) “John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, section 50: because he is God, not God because he is man, and neither God nor man because he is both at once. Christ, therefore, as God and man, possessing natures which are united, but not confused, we conclude that he is our Lord and the true Son of God, even according to his humanity, though not by means of his humanity. For we must put far from us the heresy of Nestorius, who, presuming to dissect rather than distinguish between the two natures, devised a double Christ. But we see the Scripture loudly protesting against this, when the name”
7. theology (Catholic (Scholastic)) “Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Third Part (Tertia Pars), Of the Defects of Body Assumed by the Son of God, Art. 1: Article: Whether the Son of God in human nature ought to have assumed defects of body? I answer that, It was fitting for the body assumed by the Son of God to be subject to human infirmities and defects; and especially for three reasons. First, because it was in order to satisfy for the sin of the human race that the Son of God, having taken flesh, came into the world. Now one satisfies for another's sin by taking on himself the punishment due to the sin of the other. But these bodily”
8. CCEL (Reformed) “John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, section 50: and only-begotten Son he bestows on Christ alone. But how is he an only Son in so great a multitude of brethren, except that he possesses by nature what we acquire by gift? This honour we extend to his whole character of Mediator, so that He who was born of a Virgin, and on the cross offered himself in sacrifice to the Father, is truly and properly the Son of God; but 421 still in respect of his Godhead: as Paul teaches when he says, that he was “separated unto the gospel of God (which he had promised afore by his prophets in the H”
9. Deuteronomy (Protestant academic) “Tyndale House on Deuteronomy 7:21: 7:21 awesome (literally one to be feared): This fear is not the terror induced by a bully who strikes without reason or plan, but the reverential fear of a loving God whose nature is so majestic that it inspires a kind of dread.”
10. Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “NPNF1 Vol 6: Augustine — Homilies on the Gospels — [CXL. BEN.] (part 3): this John the Evangelist for what he hath said of Christ. "Let us believe," he says, "His True Son Jesus Christ This is the True God and Everlasting Life."(1) What is, "The True God, and Everlasting Life "? The True Son of God is "the True God, and Everlasting Life." Why did He say, "On His True Son"? Because God hath many sons, therefore was He to be distinguished, by adding that He was the True Son. Not by simply saying that He is the Son; but by adding, as I have said, that He is the True Son; therefore He was to be di”
11. CCEL (Reformed) “John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, section 50: from the womb—viz. to be the Son of God. Still, in the unity of person we are not to imagine any intermixture which takes away from the Godhead what is peculiar to it. Nor is it more absurd that the eternal Word of God and Christ, uniting the two natures in one person, should in different ways be called the Son of God, than that he should in various respects be called at one time the Son of God, at another the Son of Man. Nor are we more embarrassed by another cavil of Servetus—viz. that Christ, before he appeared in the flesh, is ”
12. CCEL (Reformed) “John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, section 50: for the first time, when the Word who had been destined to that honour truly began to be the Son of God. We indeed acknowledge that the Mediator who was born of the Virgin is properly the Son of God. And how could the man Christ be a mirror of the inestimable grace of God, had not the dignity been conferred upon him both of being and of being called the only-begotten Son of God? Meanwhile, however, the definition of the Church stands unmoved, that he is accounted the Son of God, because the Word begotten by the Father before all ag”
13. Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “ANF Vol 3: Tertullian — CHAP. XIV.--THE NATURAL INVISIBILITY OF THE FATHER, AND THE VISIBILITY OF THE SON WITNESSED IN MANY PASSAGES OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. ARGUMENTS OF THEIR DISTINCTNESS, THUS SUPPLIED. (part 3): mean the Son of God, appeared--to the prophets and the patriarchs, as also to Moses indeed himself. And even if the Lord did possibly[11] speak with him face to face, yet it was not as man that he could behold His face, unless indeed it was in a glass, (as it were,) and by enigma. Besides, if the Lord so spake with Moses, that Moses actually discerned His face, eye to eye,[”