John 10:30, "I [Jesus] and my Father are one." According to the opinion prevailing among the Christians, Jesus declared in these words his perfect identity with the Godhead; but we have already noticed a passage which completely refutes this view. For we find in Mark 13:32, "But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the son, but the Father." Every attempt to reconcile the two contradictory verses, only leads to new perplexities. The more we examine into the purport of the New Testament, the more clearly we perceive its general tenor is not to deify Jesus; and that the doctrines which assign to him the title of God, have arisen from want of due investigation, and are not upheld by the force of sound argument.
So now, Troki quotes a New Testament verse and doesn't even criticize it. He goes to Mark 13, which I already discussed in Chapter 31.
But let's not waste the post. A. Lukyn Williams has some interesting commentary on this.
He brings forward a more serious argument by saying, on the authority of a Socinian writer, Martin Czechowitz, who died in 1608, that Jesus' words do not necessarily mean that the Father and the Son are of one essence, for St. Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 3:8: "Now he that planteth [St. Paul] and he that watereth [Apollos] are one," which does not mean that St. Paul and Apollos were one man, but only that they worked together with the same aim and purpose. What have we Christians to say in reply? This, that no one ever supposed that our Lord's words in themselves necessarily conveyed the usual Christian interpretation of them, but that when they are considered in their context they do necessarily convey it. For read the passage. In verse 28 Jesus said: "I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, and no one is able to snatch them out of my hand." Then in verse 29: "My Father, which hath given them unto me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand." There we have similarity, and, as it would seem, equality of infinite power, predicated of both the Father and the Son. Can beings possess equality of infinite power and yet be distinct in essence?
Further, how did they who listened to our Lord understand Him? This at least is certain. For the Jews were so furious with Him that they took up stones to cast at Him, and when He asked the reason, they replied, "For blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God." To them His meaning was quite clear; by saying "I and the Father are one "He claimed to be God, in the highest possible sense of the term. Yet, as the words are recorded for us in the Greek, there are two points which ought not to be overlooked. First, the word "one" is in the neuter gender, not the masculine. Our Lord does not, that is to say, mean that He is identical in personality (for want of a better term) with the Father, but that He is one in essence with Him. Secondly, that along with this unity He and the Father remain distinct; He says "are," not "am." He claims, while remaining other than the Father, to be of one essence with Him.James White said it well when he interpreted this verse as, "Jesus and the Father are one in their mission to redeem humanity." The opponents of Jesus were right to accuse him of claiming a divine prerogative. Williams goes a little far in stating that Jesus is claiming a divine essence, when he is really claiming a divine function, and one that God does not delegate to any creature, no matter how exalted.