Did Jesus Say he was God?

[Jimmy_B]

Response to BayCityRickL continued:I disagree, in part, with your second sentence: “We see rather plainly that he would have been “taken out” for blasphemy, before His mission was complete.” That’s exactly what happened (but not before his mission was complete):
John 10:31-33

Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him,

but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”

“We are not stoning you for any of these,” replied the Jews, "but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God

**Although, it’s true when Jesus performed miracles and revealed himself as the Messiah, he told his disciples, not to tell anyone:

**

Luke 9

---

20 Then he said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Peter said in reply, "The Messiah of God."

---

**21 He directed them not to tell this to anyone. **

---

Matthew 16

---

**20 Then he strictly ordered his disciples to tell no one that he was the Messiah. **

---

Mark 8

---

**29 And he asked them, “But who do you say that I am?” Peter said to him in reply, “You are the Messiah.” **

---

**30 Then he warned them not to tell anyone about him. **

---

---

---

Statement:

John Paul II said in Crossing the Threshold of Hope that some people don’t believe in Jesus because of the way He revealed Himself. That’s what you’re saying here. Nice that you agree with the Pope on this one.

---

---

---

Response:

---

Thank you, I guess. I don’t quite know what you are saying here?

---

Thank you. God Bless!

 

[Jimmy_B]

Elizabeth B.:

Are you saying that you do not believe Jesus is God? If so, this contradicts your statement that you are a good Catholic because by definition, a Catholic worships our Triune God (which includes Jesus.)

Thank you Elizabeth B. I agree,Thats it!
God Bless!

 

[prodromos]

You missed John 5:17-18
The Jews understood that God Himself was exempt from the Sabbath law for if He ceased working on the Sabbath, the world would spin off into non-existance. In the above verses Jesus mentions this to His accusers but also applies it to Himself.

John.

 

[hermit]

Jimmy

No offense meant by my post. It’s just that quoting scripture relating Jesus to the Messiah or King of the Jews takes away from the central question whether or not Jesus was God.

Even the Jews could not agree on the nature of the Messiah; was he to be a warrior king freeing Israel from the Romans or a suffering Messiah as described by Isiah.

 

[Uracan]

This is more a philosophical issue than one of finding the right quote in the Bible.

The controversy started before the first Nicene Council. Several Christian sects were running around philosophizing about the true nature of God and Christ. These sects vehemently argued with each other, and depending on who was in favor with the emperor at the moment, declare those with opposing view as heretics and had their leaders either banished or killed.

Along came Bishop Athanasius and his sect. They claimed Jesus and God are the same, and added that to be perfect, God is actually a trinity. Bishop Arius and his followers disagreed, claiming there is only one indivisible God. Arius died (or was murdered), and the rest is history.

The concept of the trinity was common in many of the pagan religions at the time.

 

[mlchance]

Uracan:

The concept of the trinity was common in many of the pagan religions at the time.

No, it wasn’t. There is not a single example of any religion of the time developing a concept of a single deity as Trinity.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[_Joshua]

JOHN:14 8 Philip saith to him: Lord, shew us the Father; and it is enough for us.
9 Jesus saith to him: Have I been so long a time with you and have you not known me? Philip, he that seeth me seeth the Father also. How sayest thou: Shew us the Father?
10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father in me? The words that I speak to you, I speak not of myself. But the Father who abideth in me, he doth the works.
11 Believe you not that I am in the Father and the Father in me?
12 ¶ Otherwise believe for the very works’ sake. Amen, amen, I say to you, he that believeth in me, the works that I do, he also shall do: and greater than these shall he do.
13 Because I go to the Father: and whatsoever you shall ask the Father in my name, that will I do: that the Father may be glorified in the Son.

 

[patg]

The question originally posed was:

**Did Jesus *himself *say (claim) he was God? **

There have been an awful lot of scriptural references posted in answer to this but very many of them are not relevant. I think we need to be honest about the sources we are using. There have been three basic categories:

1. Old testament references - these are not Jesus himself saying anything (since he wasn’t alive to say anything). They are at best indirect statements which possibly bear some relationship to a messiah.

2. New testament statements other than from John’s gospel. In none of these does Jesus state that he is God. They either are somenone else stating something like it or are non-answers to that question. For example, in Luke:

*18 *Once when Jesus was praying in solitude, and the disciples were with him, he asked them, “Who do the crowds say that I am?” They said in reply, “John the Baptist; others, Elijah; still others, ‘One of the ancient prophets has arisen.’” Then he said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Peter said in reply, “The Messiah of God.”

Note that there is no direct statement from Jesus here (only questions) as is true of all the other non-John references.

3. Then there is John. John is recognized as a late development by a group bordering on gnosticism and with a very highly developed Christology. The Jesus presented in John is a totally different person than the one presented by the earlier (and probably more historical) synoptic gospels. There is very little relationship between the John and the synoptics and there are many words and events that would have been inexcusable to exclude from the earlier writings if they are historically accurate. If the long speeches by Jesus and the ultimate miracles (such as the raising of Lazarus) actually occured, it is ridiculous to think they would have been left out by the others who were writing much earlier.

So if you are really answering the original question, “Did Jesus himself say he was God?”, the only answer I can see is probably not.

 

[springbreeze]

patg:

**Did Jesus *himself ***say (claim) he was God?

Dear friend

You do not believe Jesus is God Incarnate and the second person of the Truine God.

1. Old testament references - these are not Jesus himself saying anything (since he wasn’t alive to say anything). They are at best indirect statements which possibly bear some relationship to a messiah.

Christ Jesus is the Word and has always been alive for all eternity, it is that He became incarnate,God made man. The Old testament is the Divine inspired Word of God, they bear every relationship to Christ Jesus as it is through Him all things are made and all is revealed.

Where is your basis for saying that the OT is just a bunch of indirect statements?

2. New testament statements other than from John’s gospel. In none of these does Jesus state that he is God. They either are somenone else stating something like it or are non-answers to that question. For example, in Luke:

**

Clearly there are references outside of the Gospel of St John that indicate Christ Jesus is God. I am not going to repeat all the hard work of previous posters, scroll back and read what they have gifted to the thread, even better read Sacred Scripture for yourself.

Note that there is no direct statement from Jesus here (only questions) as is true of all the other non-John references.

3. Then there is John. John is recognized as a late development by a group bordering on gnosticism and with a very highly developed Christology. The Jesus presented in John is a totally different person than the one presented by the earlier (and probably more historical) synoptic gospels. There is very little relationship between the John and the synoptics and there are many words and events that would have been inexcusable to exclude from the earlier writings if they are historically accurate. If the long speeches by Jesus and the ultimate miracles (such as the raising of Lazarus) actually occured, it is ridiculous to think they would have been left out by the others who were writing much earlier.

We know that the gospels each fulfill a purpose Luke is Marian etc etc each gospel written to not repeat but to account on varying levels Christ’s Ministry, Divinity, humanity etc Marks’ Gospel contains many human images of Christ, such as ‘he reclined on a cushion’ these enable the reader to see Christ Jesus asleep on a cushion as any man may lie down to sleep. St John’s Gospel accounts in great detail in regard to Christ’s Divinity and the command of love that He gave to all His disciples. It is in this gospel we know that God is love.

The gospels existed long before they were ever written down, they existed by word of mouth and in Jewish tradition the jews would learn scripture from memory, they could quote word for word what was contained in Jewish scripture. So it was with the early Christians, they coudl quote and learnt word for word what Jesus had taught, it was only as this tradition began to die out as people died and because of the spread of the faith to the gentiles also, that a written account was made and much much later the bible was compiled. It is believed that the first written accounts are that of St Paul in His letters and he makes many references to the gospels which indicates also that Christ’s followers knew by memory these teachings of Christ even before they were written down.

Therefore the Gosepl of John long existed before it was written down, your argument of when the actual gospels were put into writing therefore does not stand dear friend.

So if you are really answering the original question, “Did Jesus himself say he was God?”, the only answer I can see is probably not.

Jesus did say He is God, He said ‘I AM’ many many times I AM is the name God gives to Himself revealed in the Word whom is Christ Jesus in the OT. He would not have been put to death otherwise.

God Bless you and much love and peace to you

Teresa

 

[whowantsumadebo]

Jesus did not declare the Divine Name in reference to himself only in John’s Gospel.
Let’s take a look at some mysterious passages in the Gospel According to Mark, considered by many scholars to be the earliest (and consequently, the simplest theologywise):
The Walking on the Water, Mark 6:50- But immediately he spoke to them and said, “Take heart, it is I…” Greek- Ego Eimi- Literally I AM.
The signs of the times, Mark 13:6: Many will come in my name, saysing, ‘I AM He!’… Ego Eimi- Literally I AM.
Christ before the High Priest, Mark 14:61-62: …“Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?” And Jesus said “I Am”… Ego Eimi.
All these ‘I AM’s’ are emphatic. They were deliberately put there by the author to tell the reader that Jesus is God himself, the I AM. It is not just Jesus saying, “that’s me alright.” It has deep theological meaning.
This goes to show that Jesus’ divinity was not a later construct, but was the pivatol cornerstone to early Christianity.

 

[springbreeze]

whowantsumadebo:

Jesus did not declare the Divine Name in reference to himself only in John’s Gospel.
Let’s take a look at some mysterious passages in the Gospel According to Mark, considered by many scholars to be the earliest (and consequently, the simplest theologywise):
The Walking on the Water, Mark 6:50- But immediately he spoke to them and said, “Take heart, it is I…” Greek- Ego Eimi- Literally I AM.
The signs of the times, Mark 13:6: Many will come in my name, saysing, ‘I AM He!’… Ego Eimi- Literally I AM.
Christ before the High Priest, Mark 14:61-62: …“Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?” And Jesus said “I Am”… Ego Eimi.
All these ‘I AM’s’ are emphatic. They were deliberately put there by the author to tell the reader that Jesus is God himself, the I AM. It is not just Jesus saying, “that’s me alright.” It has deep theological meaning.
This goes to show that Jesus’ divinity was not a later construct, but was the pivatol cornerstone to early Christianity.

Dear friend

True!

God Bless you and much love and peace to you

Teresa

 

[Uracan]

Mlchance,

There are several examples of trinities throughout pagan literature and art. The Hindus had the TRIMOURTI of Brahma the creator, Vishnu the protector and Shiva the destroyer. The Romans had the Goddess Hecate, a three-faced goddess is another Trinity. The three faces represented the Maiden, the Matron, and the Crone. The Babylonians had Nimrod, Semiramas, and Tammuz; the Egyptians had Osiris, Isis, and Horus.

It doesn’t necessarily mean that the concept is wrong. The pagans may have intuitively understood the true nature of God, just like the Bishops in the 4th century AD figured it out without any reference in the Bible. Many Catholics Our concept of the trinity is one more variation of the Trinity, although some Catholics feel compelled to maintain that our concept is radically different.

 

[mlchance]

Uracan:

There are several examples of trinities throughout pagan literature and art. The Hindus had the TRIMOURTI of Brahma the creator, Vishnu the protector and Shiva the destroyer. The Romans had the Goddess Hecate, a three-faced goddess is another Trinity. The three faces represented the Maiden, the Matron, and the Crone. The Babylonians had Nimrod, Semiramas, and Tammuz; the Egyptians had Osiris, Isis, and Horus.

Not a single one of those in an example of a Triune Deity. The Hindu, Babylonian, and Egyptian examples are instances of three separate deities, not examples of three divine persons sharing a single substance. The Roman example (which is really Greek, by the way) is merely an example of a single goddess with three different forms, again not three divine persons sharing a single substance.

Your examples don’t hold any more water than claims that John’s Gospel is ahistorical and “recognized as gnostic.”

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[Jimmy_B]

Uracan:

This is more a philosophical issue than one of finding the right quote in the Bible…

The concept of the trinity was common in many of the pagan religions at the time.

Uracan,
I love people who make a big deal out of nothing. You know who I’m talking about, those who think everything is a conspiracy and see something where there is nothing. There is no big coincidence or conspiracy behind the Holy Trinity*. *The fact that a trinity might have occurred in the pegan religion means absolutely nothing! This has absolutely nothing to do with Catholicism. Trinities or patterns of “three” are everywhere and indicate the wholeness of life or the threefold nature of being, which is a trinity. “Threes” are a natural occurrence in life. There are a lot of things which are described in the form of a “trinity” or “threes”.

Here are a few examples of trinities.

• man-woman-child
• masculine-feminine-offspring
• creative-medium-effect
• spirit- mind –body
• faith-hope-charity
• sperm-egg-embryo
• pollen-seed-plant
• 1+1=2 (math problems)
• Sun-Earth-Moon (the Solar System)

To make more of this than what it is, is crazy. If you think about it, a stop light is a trinity (Stop-lights are referred to as a “tri-light”, three lights in one signal), does that mean that Catholicism is based on a “stop-light”, off coarse not. God Bless!

 

[patg]

whowantsumadebo:

Jesus did not declare the Divine Name in reference to himself only in John’s Gospel.

Again the question was “Did Jesus himself claim he was God”.

Let’s take a look at some mysterious passages in the Gospel According to Mark, considered by many scholars to be the earliest (and consequently, the simplest theologywise):

I agree.

The walking on the Water, Mark 6:50- But immediately he spoke to them and said, “Take heart, it is I…” Greek- Ego Eimi- Literally I AM.

I agree you could push this to be a reference to the “I AM” words of the O.T. but it is pretty weak.

The signs of the times, Mark 13:6: Many will come in my name, saysing, ‘I AM He!’… Ego Eimi- Literally I AM.

This again requires quite a stretch to be interpreted as directly saying “I am God”.

before the High Priest, Mark 14:61-62: …“Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?” And Jesus said “I Am”… Ego Eimi.

I’ll grant a little more credit for this one as it is more or less a direct quote. However, since there were no witnesses to this event (all the followers ran away), it doesn’t do much for argument of Jesus proclaiming God-ship, especially since this statement wasn’t even made to his followers.

All these ‘I AM’s’ are emphatic. They were deliberately put there by the author to tell the reader that Jesus is God himself, the I AM. It is not just Jesus saying, “that’s me alright.” It has deep theological meaning.
This goes to show that Jesus’ divinity was not a later construct, but was the pivatol cornerstone to early Christianity.

I totally agree that the emphatic words were deliberately put there by the author to tell the reader that Jesus is God. But again, that is not the question we are discussing. The authors included a lot of words and stories to convey their concept that Jesus is God but we know that many of those are later interpretations of events retold in the light of a post-resurrection experience, not eyewitness news reports.

 

[patg]

You do not believe Jesus is God Incarnate and the second person of the Truine God.

That is not the topic of this thread - no one (including me) is discussing whether we believe that or not.

Where is your basis for saying that the OT is just a bunch of indirect statements?

Jesus the man was not alive during O.T. times and thus could not have said anything. God may have said things but God did not speak of Jesus and Jesus did not speak. Again, remember the topic we are discussing.

Clearly there are references outside of the Gospel of St John that indicate Christ Jesus is God. I am not going to repeat all the hard work of previous posters, scroll back and read what they have gifted to the thread, even better read Sacred Scripture for yourself.

No there aren’t - if you read them they are either somene else saying “something like” Jesus is God or very indirect references. Please remember the topic of this thread… Did Jesus himself say he was God!!!

Therefore the Gosepl of John long existed before it was written down, your argument of when the actual gospels were put into writing therefore does not stand dear friend.
When they were written down has nothing to do with the question here or my argument. As I said, John is widely recognized as a late development by a group bordering on gnosticism and with a very highly developed Christology and theology. The Jesus presented in John is a totally different person than the one presented by the earlier synoptic gospels. There is very little relationship between the John and the synoptics and the Jesus of John is presented in a radically different manner. Scholars tell us that John is a very poor place to go if you are looking for what Jesus may have actually said.

 

[prodromos]

patg:

As I said, John is widely recognized as a late development by a group bordering on gnosticism and with a very highly developed Christology and theology.

Widely recognised by whom?

 

[springbreeze]

patg:

That is not the topic of this thread - no one (including me) is discussing whether we believe that or not.

Jesus the man was not alive during O.T. times and thus could not have said anything. God may have said things but God did not speak of Jesus and Jesus did not speak. Again, remember the topic we are discussing.

No there aren’t - if you read them they are either somene else saying “something like” Jesus is God or very indirect references. Please remember the topic of this thread… Did Jesus himself say he was God!!!

If you want to split a hair then you can say, no, it is not relevant to believe that Jesus is God to provide evidence as to where in the Bible does it say that Jesus said He is God BUT seeing as you do not believe He is God you have an agenda to disprove any evidence to support He is and so far you have not provided any evidence regarding Jesus saying He is not God, the overwhelming evidence is that Jesus is God.

What do you think is the purpose of the OT? It was to lead God’s people and to begin teach them His way and to prepare them for the coming of the Messiah who is Christ Jesus Who would not abolish the way of the OT (Judaism) but fulfill it. Jesus is the Word, the LIVING Word. God is the LIVING God and therefore Christ Jesus has existed for all eternity and therefore LIVES for all eternity, He is the Word Incarnate, the Living God begotten as man; (God from God , man from man, true God and true man)He took flesh as man over 2000 years ago to redeem mankind. If you assert that Jesus is not God, what is His purpose, what is the purpose of Sacred Scripture and what is the purpose therefore of mankind? Who is this man Who can die and then rise from the dead? I know I cannot raise my own life and neither can anyone else. Who is this man in Scripture (Isaiah) who will redeem the seed of Abraham, who will be wounded for our iniquities and we will be healed by His stripes? Who is this woman who is the Virgin who will bring forth the Saviour? You ask many questions and make bold statements, my friend about the Divinity of Christ Jesus, but you ask without interpreting the NT in context with the OT.

When they were written down has nothing to do with the question here or my argument. As I said, John is widely recognized as a late development by a group bordering on gnosticism and with a very highly developed Christology and theology. The Jesus presented in John is a totally different person than the one presented by the earlier synoptic gospels. There is very little relationship between the John and the synoptics and the Jesus of John is presented in a radically different manner. Scholars tell us that John is a very poor place to go if you are looking for what Jesus may have actually said.

The Gospel of St John was written by the one who Jesus loved, who was most close to Jesus. If you want to watch tv and consider arguments presented by the media that are fundamentally anti-Christianity (I have yet to watch a documentary programme on tv or any other programme that promotes Christianity rather than to try and smear it) Recently over the Christmas period there was a few airings of programmes that implied that the Gospel of John is Gnostic and that Mary Magdalen probably wrote it, utter pish! That furthermore Mary wrote another gospel that has been hidden by the church, the church did destroy some gospels simply because they were gnostic and harmful to the deposit of faith and nothing to do with the disciples who witnessed all of Christ’s teachings, as to whether Mary wrote a gospel is very questionable…anyway I disgress…none of the Gospels deny Christs Divinity and furthermore when other people in Sacred Scripture recognised Christ’s Divinity, Jesus Himself did not deny it but gloried at their faith. He built His church on Peter the Rock who proclaimed Jesus and His Divinity, He didn’t say to Peter, ‘well actually friend I have to tell you I’m not God you got that one wrong mate’, rather Jesus marvelled at His faith.

Throughout all of the NT and the OT we are clearly shown that Jesus is God. To satisfy you on this I will provide as many quotes as I can this evening and type them all here, especially from the OT…

God Bless you and much love and peace to you

Teresa

 

[whowantsumadebo]

patg:

I agree you could push this to be a reference to the “I AM” words of the O.T. but it is pretty weak.

Any scholar on the Gospel of Mark can tell that that is what it means. What else would it mean?

patg:

I’ll grant a little more credit for this one as it is more or less a direct quote. However, since there were no witnesses to this event (all the followers ran away), it doesn’t do much for argument of Jesus proclaiming God-ship, especially since this statement wasn’t even made to his followers.

First of all, there were plenty of witnessess there, like the High Preist and the council. Second, by your standards, I could just as easily say that Jesus didn’t say he was not God.

patg:

The authors included a lot of words and stories to convey their concept that Jesus is God but we know that many of those are later interpretations of events retold in the light of a post-resurrection experience, not eyewitness news reports.

So, are you looking for a piece of paper with Jesus’ signature on it or a video where he directly into the lens and declares, “I’m God alright.”? Again, how do you know that they are theological reflections and not based on Christ’s actual words? It seems to me that you are stacking the deck in your own favor by assuming that Jesus never made a claim to divinity, and by dismissing any New Testament evidence that you are presented with. What kind of evidence will you accept?

 

[patg]

whowantsumadebo:

So, are you looking for a piece of paper with Jesus’ signature on it or a video where he directly into the lens and declares, “I’m God alright.”?

No, I’m not. But it appears to me that many think that is what we have and I’m just trying to point out that we don’t have it.

Again, how do you know that they are theological reflections and not based on Christ’s actual words?

We don’t. BUT if he regularly said such things, these would be very important statements and one would expect them to be mentioned as such in the more historical early gospels. As it is, there is almost no such report.

It seems to me that you are stacking the deck in your own favor by assuming that Jesus never made a claim to divinity, and by dismissing any New Testament evidence that you are presented with. What kind of evidence will you accept?

I’m not doing anything other than saying that the early historical gospels fail to support the claim. I’ve already stated what I have learned from gospel scholars regarding John’s gospel.

Divinity is not “proven” in a scientific way, with court-of-law evidence, or with third-hand reports of oral traditions - it is a component of the supernatural which is a matter of faith. The gospels are manifestations of this faith - especially John’s.