Did Jesus ask us to worship Him?

  • Thread starter Thread starter AlanFromWichita
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I thought that the Gospels bring out very clearly that:
  1. Till His glory and divine identity were revealed by His resurrection, He strictly
    forbade and carefully eluded glorification or worship by anyone
  2. As the Risen Lord, He showed no objection at all to being worshipped.
Exactly!

…just as the Command not to reveal His Transfiguration till after His Resurrection!

Maran atha!

Angel
 
I thought that the Gospels bring out very clearly that:
  1. Till His glory and divine identity were revealed by His resurrection, He strictly
    forbade and carefully eluded glorification or worship by anyone
  2. As the Risen Lord, He showed no objection at all to being worshipped.
Depends on which gospel you’re reading.

In Mark’s gospel, the motif of the ‘messianic secret’ (as it is called) is very strong. The opening words of the gospel reveal Jesus’ identity to the reader as “son of God;” one of the ironies here is that no human character ever uses this title for Jesus until the end of the story, when the most unlikely of persons - the centurion presiding at the crucifixion - proclaims Jesus as “son of God,” when He was already dead. In fact, the only ones who use this title are supernatural beings like God and the demons, but usually either everyone around Jesus is too thick (too ‘deaf’) to comprehend or Jesus Himself (with one exception) silences those who dare proclaim His true identity or what He had just done.

All in all, Mark is a gospel laced with irony: first of all, as mentioned, there is one instance where Mark’s Jesus breaks the mold and actually commands the man he healed to tell everyone about it - and this was in gentile territory (the Gadarene demoniac). Secondly, when Jesus, under interrogation by the high priest, does finally own up to the title “son of the Blessed” (note that the high priest in Mark does not say “son of God”), He is “condemned as deserving death.” We can see here that for Mark, Jesus’ identity and Jesus’ fate are intertwined with one another: Jesus’ fate is sealed when the ‘messianic secret’ is finally broken. Thirdly, when the “young man” at the tomb tells the women to proclaim the news of Jesus’ resurrection to the disciples, they run away and “[say] nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.” Mark’s gospel thus ends (the gospel most likely originally ended in 16:8; verses 9-20 are most likely an addition to this rather abrupt conclusion) in irony: whereas before, when Jesus commanded someone to hush up they still couldn’t stop proclaiming about what He had done, now, when the “young man” orders the women to proclaim that Jesus has been raised they hush up out of fear.

To some extent, this particularly Markan theme can also be found in the other synoptics, although it is not so much emphasized there and is mainly only peripheral. Matthew in particular does not have too much of a qualm in having the human characters confess Jesus as “son of God” every now and then (case in point: compare the confession of Peter at Caesarea Philippi in Matthew and Mark). Matthew emphasizes a different title for Jesus: “son of David,” a title which he uses more than any other evangelist. It is this title which Matthew’s Jesus reacts to (He tries to make the two blind men who use this title in 9:27-31 to be quiet).

Luke, meanwhile, has a ‘passion secret’: in Luke, Jesus’ eventual fate is portrayed as being supernaturally hidden from the eyes of the disciples, only to be revealed at the proper time, which is after the resurrection (the Road to Emmaus episode serves as the ‘unveiling’ of this secret story-wise). This is his difference with Mark: while Mark has ‘messianic secret via human misunderstanding’, Luke has ‘messianic-passion secret via divine concealment’. For Luke, it is not only the theological truth that the Messiah must suffer and die which is hidden from men, but the identity of Jesus as being that Messiah which were kept secret from the disciples, and by extension, everyone else.

John is different from the synoptics in that Jesus is here much more overt and outspoken about His real identity: as an adage summarizes, in John “the proclaimer has become the proclaimed.” However, he does have his own ‘messianic secret’ in the form of the ‘misunderstanding’ motif. In John, despite Jesus’ signs (as John calls miracles), there is a sense in which during his mission the nature of His glory remains elusive. Jesus’ words generate confusion to His family, friends, enemies as well as casual onlookers, mainly because He has His own distinctive idiosyncratic way of using words, which is not always in accord to how everyone understands them. The Word spawns words and gives them His own meaning. So the irony in John is that while Jesus is more open about who He is in this gospel, the misunderstanding has not lessened.

He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.
 
Depends on which gospel you’re reading.

In Mark’s gospel, the motif of the ‘messianic secret’ (as it is called) is very strong. The opening words of the gospel reveal Jesus’ identity to the reader as “son of God;” one of the ironies here is that no human character ever uses this title for Jesus until the end of the story, when the most unlikely of persons - the centurion presiding at the crucifixion - proclaims Jesus as “son of God,” when He was already dead. In fact, the only ones who use this title are supernatural beings like God and the demons, but usually either everyone around Jesus is too thick (too ‘deaf’) to comprehend or Jesus Himself (with one exception) silences those who dare proclaim His true identity or what He had just done.

All in all, Mark is a gospel laced with irony: first of all, as mentioned, there is one instance where Mark’s Jesus breaks the mold and actually commands the man he healed to tell everyone about it - and this was in gentile territory (the Gadarene demoniac). Secondly, when Jesus, under interrogation by the high priest, does finally own up to the title “son of the Blessed” (note that the high priest in Mark does not say “son of God”), He is “condemned as deserving death.” We can see here that for Mark, Jesus’ identity and Jesus’ fate are intertwined with one another: Jesus’ fate is sealed when the ‘messianic secret’ is finally broken. Thirdly, when the “young man” at the tomb tells the women to proclaim the news of Jesus’ resurrection to the disciples, they run away and “[say] nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.” Mark’s gospel thus ends (the gospel most likely originally ended in 16:8; verses 9-20 are most likely an addition to this rather abrupt conclusion) in irony: whereas before, when Jesus commanded someone to hush up they still couldn’t stop proclaiming about what He had done, now, when the “young man” orders the women to proclaim that Jesus has been raised they hush up out of fear.

To some extent, this particularly Markan theme can also be found in the other synoptics, although it is not so much emphasized there and is mainly only peripheral. Matthew in particular does not have too much of a qualm in having the human characters confess Jesus as “son of God” every now and then (case in point: compare the confession of Peter at Caesarea Philippi in Matthew and Mark). Matthew emphasizes a different title for Jesus: “son of David,” a title which he uses more than any other evangelist. It is this title which Matthew’s Jesus reacts to (He tries to make the two blind men who use this title in 9:27-31 to be quiet).

Luke, meanwhile, has a ‘passion secret’: in Luke, Jesus’ eventual fate is portrayed as being supernaturally hidden from the eyes of the disciples, only to be revealed at the proper time, which is after the resurrection (the Road to Emmaus episode serves as the ‘unveiling’ of this secret story-wise). This is his difference with Mark: while Mark has ‘messianic secret via human misunderstanding’, Luke has ‘messianic-passion secret via divine concealment’. For Luke, it is not only the theological truth that the Messiah must suffer and die which is hidden from men, but the identity of Jesus as being that Messiah which were kept secret from the disciples, and by extension, everyone else.

John is different from the synoptics in that Jesus is here much more overt and outspoken about His real identity: as an adage summarizes, in John “the proclaimer has become the proclaimed.” However, he does have his own ‘messianic secret’ in the form of the ‘misunderstanding’ motif. In John, despite Jesus’ signs (as John calls miracles), there is a sense in which during his mission the nature of His glory remains elusive. Jesus’ words generate confusion to His family, friends, enemies as well as casual onlookers, mainly because He has His own distinctive idiosyncratic way of using words, which is not always in accord to how everyone understands them. The Word spawns words and gives them His own meaning. So the irony in John is that while Jesus is more open about who He is in this gospel, the misunderstanding has not lessened.

He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.
…but this is after-fact analysis… the fact remains that Jesus sought to remain as ambiguous as possible (“Father, I thank you… except for the little ones” – St. Matthew 11:25, 27); there were very precise moments when Jesus openly revealed Who He Is (the Samaritan woman, the resurrection of Lazarus, the Passion), and even these instances are directed at a very limited number of individuals… on most other times He would allow the listeners to make their own conclusion (“the lame walk…” “the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath,” “…one Greater than Moses/Solomon,” etc.); even with the Twelve, Jesus, for the most part, allowed them to speculate… there’s only one particular passage that I can recall when He overtly stated Who He Was:
You call me Master and Lord, and rightly; so I am. (St. John 13:13)
Maran atha!

Angel
 
…but this is after-fact analysis… the fact remains that Jesus sought to remain as ambiguous as possible (“Father, I thank you… except for the little ones” – St. Matthew 11:25, 27); there were very precise moments when Jesus openly revealed Who He Is (the Samaritan woman, the resurrection of Lazarus, the Passion), and even these instances are directed at a very limited number of individuals… on most other times He would allow the listeners to make their own conclusion (“the lame walk…” “the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath,” “…one Greater than Moses/Solomon,” etc.); even with the Twelve, Jesus, for the most part, allowed them to speculate… there’s only one particular passage that I can recall when He overtly stated Who He Was:

Angel
But these assertions do not constitute an exhortation to worship. His worship though was already prophesied in the OT:

“In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed." (Daniel 7:13-14)
 
But these assertions do not constitute an exhortation to worship. His worship though was already prophesied in the OT:

“In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed." (Daniel 7:13-14)
…I thought that we were in agreement… 🤷

…even this particular prophecy can be seen in the title Jesus took upon Himself (Son of Man); still, He made no strenuous efforts to emphasize it… which I believe was necessary for the fulfillment of the prophecy about Israel and the Gentiles as described in St. John 1:10-13.

Maran atha!

Angel
 
This is probably about the most difficult question I’ve asked myself, and after years of not mentioning it to anybody, I asked my pastor the other day, and now I’m bringing it to you.

It seems I read, but now can’t find, a scripture that says Jesus came as a servant, and not to be served – or something like that. I’m not sure about this, so don’t hold me to it.

When they called Jesus “good,” He said that only His Father in heaven is Good.

So He is divine, but why wouldn’t He let them call Him “good?”

Then we have Peter unworthy to have his feet washed by Jesus, but Jesus insists that Peter doesn’t understand. Seems to me Jesus did not want us to worship Him, possibly because He was showing us the way to be and we should not seek admiration from other humans.

Then we have John the Baptist, unworthy to untie Jesus’ sandals – but Jesus didn’t want to be treated above anyone else, and instructed John to proceed.

I got up the courage to ask my pastor, “does the Bible say anywhere that we are to worship Jesus?”

He referred to the desert scene:

I had just enough courage to ask one follow up question, “but isn’t He referring to His Father?”

Pastor said, “since Jesus was God, he was in effect referring to Himself.”

:hmmm:

I let it go, with “thank you, Father, something to think about I suppose.”

What I thought but didn’t state exactly, that I was hoping he would think about it more and find me a better example, because in one case I see that He is saying only the Father, not He, is to be called “good.” In the other case, He says “God” but now equates to God?

In a prayer, reading, book, somewhere I remember a sentence something like, “He was God, but didn’t consider Himself equal to God.”

I’m not trying to start a fight, and I ask we keep the utmost of respectful tone in this thread. I really want to know. I want to believe that the Church practices what Jesus teaches. I believe it in faith, but I don’t understand it with my mind, and I struggle sometimes with believing in my heart – because my head just won’t quite let this go.

Can anybody help shed some light on this?

Thanks in advance,
Alan

P.S. One other thing that caused me to think of this question in the first place, was when I heard a Presbyterian minister claim that as Jesus rode on the donkey with people praising Him and throwing flowers or whatever, He wept. The minister suggested that Jesus knew by the way they were worshiping Him, that they still hadn’t “gotten the point.” That was before I ever started reading the Bible myself, so I didn’t go study it. It seems I found that reference about Him weeping one time, but now I can’t find it again.
Jesus came as a human to reveal to us the face of God. “When you’ve seen me you’ve seen the Father”. To recognize Jesus’ divinity is to experience revelation, as Peter did in Matt 16:16’ a gift we’re incapable of arriving at on our own, without grace. Via the Incarnation, God actually reveals Himself to be, amazingly, a humble servant to mankind. Athanasius said that ‘God became man so that man might become gods’. The name ‘Jesus’ means ‘God saves’. IOW, man needs to learn that he can’t save himself; God, alone, can save man. Jesus leads us to Himself.
 
…I thought that we were in agreement… 🤷

…even this particular prophecy can be seen in the title Jesus took upon Himself (Son of Man); still, He made no strenuous efforts to emphasize it… which I believe was necessary for the fulfillment of the prophecy about Israel and the Gentiles as described in St. John 1:10-13.

Maran atha!

Angel
Very much in agreement. I am only saying that though Jesus revealed His identity He did not exhort worship and gently prevented it till His ascension.
 
Thought that , in this Year of Faith , it would be good to help anyone struggling with the central truth of our faith , of the One Triune God , in Three Persons - this esp. so , with regrad to the divinity of The Son !

The lie of the enemy in The Garden that put doubt in our hearts about God’s goodness and thus of our own worth ,and its effects in our lives ,esp. from enemy claims , even over generations , through unrepentant sin , is undone , even at such great a price of what The Father and The Son has done for us and thus giving us of The Spirit !

There is John Chap. 5 , wherein the Jews begin to get more antagonistic , because of The Lord revealing more of His identity as the Son of God ; The Lord fearlessly teaches about the role and truth of the relationship of The Father and The Son and in Verse 23 stating - ’ that all may honor the Son, just as they honor The Father ’ and we know that worship and adoration is what we owe to The Father , thus to The Son and The Spirit !

Thank God that the truth of the goodness of our God, thus helps us to repent deeply , on behalf of all in our lives , even those of the past , thus to bring all to the timelessness of His mercy , as The Spirit helps us in same , in the merits of The Passion , that we and others may, in turn adore even more , in a never ending song of praise !
 
I know that this is an old post, but I just wanted to note that I read through the responses just as I have started having doubt… nay, I affirmed that I do not believe in God as Trinity/Jesus s divinity, and reading this thread put me back in the mere doubt category. I am now feeling a desire to be proven wrong and to believe once again, so thank you 🙂
 
I know that this is an old post, but I just wanted to note that I read through the responses just as I have started having doubt… nay, I affirmed that I do not believe in God as Trinity/Jesus s divinity, and reading this thread put me back in the mere doubt category. I am now feeling a desire to be proven wrong and to believe once again, so thank you 🙂
Hi, anilorak!

I can tell you that you are not the only person having such problems… Scriptures, though seemingly plain and clear at times, can be confusing.

One thing to consider is that it is the Holy Spirit who enable us to understand God’s Revelations (2 Peter 1:19-21; 1 Corinthians 2:6-16).

I will begin by offering some passages that are related to the post’s question:

S. Matthew 2:2, 11; 8:2-14; 9:18-19; 14:26-33; 15:25-28; 28:9, 16-19
S. Mark 5:6-8; 15:19
S. John 9:38-39
Philippians 2:10

Though Jesus is being worshiped in the above passages Scriptures do not warn against worshiping Him. Conversely in Apocalypse (Revelation) 19:10 and 22:8-9 we find a creature being worshiped and Scriptures expediently correct the act (see also Acts 14:8-18).

Once you have studied these passages I can offer more… you have to understand that I cannot change your mind about anything, specially about God. I can only offer Scriptures that will demonstrate that God chose to reveal Himself to man in the Way He has.

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top