Did Jesus Say he was God?

[whowantsumadebo]

Ok, Patg,

I understand this discussion is not quite what you were looking for. It seems that you’ve entered a realm of Biblical criticism. You’re looking for the historical Jesus, no? That’s a very vast and complicated field of study.
Sorry, it’s 12:45 in the a.m., but this might help:
leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/docs/rediscover2.html

He has a little bit to say about Jesus’ self understanding about half way through.
Basically, it is a little silly to pose that the early church simply made up whole the Jesus is God thing. That is, it takes a bit of imagination to come up with an alternate explanation, other than Jesus told them that.

 

[mlchance]

Uracan:

For a very basic explanation of the origins of the concept of the Trinity, read ancienthistory.about.com/cs/godsreligion/p/aa082499.htm

This “very basic” explanation can’t even get basic facts right. For example: “The Trinitarian bishops prevailed. Emperor Constantine was not himself a Christian. Despite this, he had recently made Christianity the official state religion of the Roman empire.”

Constantine did not make Christianity the official state religion of the Roman empire. That didn’t occur until the reign of Theodosius in A.D. 380.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[Jimmy_B]

whowantsumadebo:

Ok, Patg,

I understand this discussion is not quite what you were looking for. It seems that you’ve entered a realm of Biblical criticism. You’re looking for the historical Jesus, no? That’s a very vast and complicated field of study.
Sorry, it’s 12:45 in the a.m., but this might help:
leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/docs/rediscover2.html

He has a little bit to say about Jesus’ self understanding about half way through.
Basically, it is a little silly to pose that the early church simply made up whole the Jesus is God thing. That is, it takes a bit of imagination to come up with an alternate explanation, other than Jesus told them that.

whowantsumadebo,
Thanks for the link.

Excerpts from:

**The Evidence for Jesus **

By, Dr. William Lane Craig Burden of Proof

**Here we confront the very crucial question of the burden of proof. Should we assume that the gospels are reliable unless they are proven to be unreliable? **

…I want to list five reasons why I think we ought to assume that the gospels are reliable until proven wrong

1. There was insufficient time for legendary influences to expunge the historical facts.

---

2. The gospels are not analogous to folk tales or contemporary "urban legends."

3. The Jewish transmission of sacred traditions was highly developed and reliable.

4. There were significant restraints on the embellishment of traditions about Jesus, such as the presence of eyewitnesses and the apostles’ supervision.

5. The Gospel writers have a proven track record of historical reliability.

“We must always be ready to inquire, in a rational way, into the things human reason can disclose concerning God."

**~Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles, I. 9. n. 4

"Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts."
~Albert Einstein

“If the world’s intellectual leaders can accept that the universe is purposeful, nobody’s life will be the same again.”
**~John Nash, Nobel Laureate (Nash, depicted in the movie – A Beautiful Mind)

***“Many people claim to have experienced God, and this should be trusted unless there is any reason to doubt it.” ***
**~Richard Swinburne (Professor in philosophy at **Oxford University in England)

---

 

[Uracan]

**

I don’t know what point you are trying to make? I’m not going to agree with an anti-Catholic, heretical view-point because you might find someone who does. There are all sorts of people, who have opinions that conflict with Catholicism. I try not wasting my time reading material contrary to my faith. I do so only when necessary to use as a reference to defend my faith.

JimmyB,

Your faith should be strong enough to withstand reading material contrary to your faith. But I’m not even suggesting that you read material that’s anti-catholic or heretical; I’m simply suggesting that you read material that will help you understand the origins of the trinity in the Catholic Church. Certainly your faith is strong enough to withstand reading about a bit history!**

 

[Jimmy_B]

** **

JimmyB,

Your faith should be strong enough to withstand reading material contrary to your faith. But I’m not even suggesting that you read material that’s anti-catholic or heretical; I’m simply suggesting that you read material that will help you understand the origins of the trinity in the Catholic Church. Certainly your faith is strong enough to withstand reading about a bit history!

**Uracan, thank you Sir. Your right and I do a lot of reading, including books on history and government. I’m not a big fan of fiction. Although, fiction is about the only thing my wife reads. Everybody has different tastes. No matter what I do, I try and do it as a good Catholic. Thank you for responding, I’ve enjoyed our conversation. Always defend your Catholic Faith.

**
***“Let no one ever come to you without leaving better and happier.”
***Mother Teresa

**

 

[Uracan]

**

Uracan, thank you Sir. Your right and I do a lot of reading, including books on history and government. I’m not a big fan of fiction. Although, fiction is about the only thing my wife reads. Everybody has different tastes. No matter what I do, I try and do it as a good Catholic. Thank you for responding, I’ve enjoyed our conversation. Always defend your Catholic Faith.

**

JimmyB, That’s why it’s so important to understand the truth. You can’t allow others to determine for you what being a good Catholic means or what you should read or question. Too many good Catholics have been led down the road to perdition because they accepted false doctrine.

 

[Jimmy_B]

Uracan:

JimmyB, That’s why it’s so important to understand the truth. You can’t allow others to determine for you what being a good Catholic means or what you should read or question. Too many good Catholics have been led down the road to perdition because they accepted false doctrine.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church and the Pope are my doctrine.

 

[jimmy]

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.

Interesting prodromos, I have not thought about that passage in that way before.

 

[jimmy]

Uracan:

JimmyB,

Search for ‘Arian Heresy’, ‘Athanasius’, Arius, or ‘Pagan Trinity’. For a very basic explanation of the origins of the concept of the Trinity, read ancienthistory.about.com/cs/godsreligion/p/aa082499.htm

I also recommend Julian, a fascinating novel by Gore Vidal which immerses the reader in political and religious controversies of the years soon after the Council of Nicea.

The doctrine of the Trinity existed long before the Arian heresy and the council of Nicea. The early Christians speak of Christ being God. Athanasius was just one of the great preachers of the Trinity.

 

[Uracan]

The doctrine of the Trinity existed long before the Arian heresy and the council of Nicea. The early Christians speak of Christ being God. Athanasius was just one of the great preachers of the Trinity.

Couldn’t agree more. Also, various concepts of the trinity predated Christ by thousands of years

 

[Mathetes007]

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

Jesus Himself claimed to be the “son of God” (Matthew 27:43; John 10:36; 19:7; Revelation 2:18). In the NT, this phrase is used to denote His divinity. The phrases “son of man” and ''son of God" reveal the natures of Christ. Recall that Jesus is described as the “son of man” throughout Scripture. Yet Scripture also states that Jesus had no human father (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:23; Luke 1:30-35). There is no contradiction here because the phrase “son of man” is referring to Christ’s human nature. Similarly, “son of God” refers to Christ’s divine nature. Consequently, Christ did claim to be God not just in John’s Gospel.

 

[blackfish152]

There has been a lot made of the I AM, statement, (Jesus using the personal name of GOD. )

like “before abraham was I AM”

In recent discussions, I have been told that the phrase I AM has been used by other prophets, like possibly jerimiah.

Is anyone aware of other usages of the phrase I AM? and if so does this detract from the Christs claim for divinity.

 

[Jimmy_B]

blackfish152:

There has been a lot made of the I AM, statement, (Jesus using the personal name of GOD. )

like “before abraham was I AM”

In recent discussions, I have been told that the phrase I AM has been used by other prophets, like possibly jerimiah.

Is anyone aware of other usages of the phrase I AM? and if so does this detract from the Christs claim for divinity.

JMJ

**blackfish152, **

We all use the term “I am”.

In the discussion you referred to, did the prophets say 'I am" (normal use) or “I AM”, meaning that they were in fact God? I would like to see another response to your post and the context of what may or may not have been said.

Thank you for your response.

 

[TobyLue]

This has gotten ridiculous. We are looking for scripture that specifically says, “I, Jesus, am God”. No you will not find those exact words in scripture. . Probably the closest verse to what you are looking for is John 10:30 where Jesus says, “The Father and I are one”. Just like you will not find the exact words in scripture that says, “You shall baptize infants”, we look to what the Church has taught throughout its history. Now, if we claim to be faithful Catholics or even good Christians and we deny one of the basic teachings regarding the Trinity, we may make as many claims as we want but we are not Catholic nor Christians for that matter. Maybe a JW’s. And if Catholic, we then make a mockery every time we go to Mass and receive our Lord in communion, because communion also means we believe in everything the Church teaches. Go ask your priest if you can be a good Catholic and not believe Jesus is God and see what he tells you. If you say, that you look to the Bible and not to the interpretations of man, then you my friend are telling God you know more than His Church and telling God that you know better than He.

 People now a-days want something specific. If your mother shows you a picture of an elderly gentleman and tells you, he was my father, will you not believe that he cant be your grandfather because she never said the exact words "this is your grandfather"? You then would not be trusting your mother just as you are not trusting Mother Church. Lets look at the wedding vows. When the preacher or priest says. “Do you Paul take Mary to be your lawful wedded wife” and Paul answers, “I do”, can Paul later tell Mary I never promised to be your husband because I only said “I do”? I never said, “I do take you Mary to be my lawful wedded wife”. To look for specific wording is utterly ridiculous. 

 However, here is a scripture that is specific. Matthew 18:17 Jesus says, “If he will not listen even to the Church, treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector”. Some versions render it “…treat him as a heathen”. The Church throughout its history and in the CCC teaches that Jesus is God so we must believe or we then refuse to be in communion with the Church and thus put our souls in jeopardy.

 

[Jimmy_B]

JMJ

Great post TobyLue! Thank You.

 

[patg]

TobyLue:

This has gotten ridiculous. We are looking for scripture that specifically says, “I, Jesus, am God”.

Yes, that was the original question.

No you will not find those exact words in scripture.

That’s what I have been saying all along - I’m glad someone finally agrees with me. Jesus did not go around saying he was God.

 

[mtr01]

patg:

No - my statements are fully in line with recent papal writings on gospel interpretation.

Wow, I can’t believe I never saw this thread until today. Just read it through, and unfortunately, patg, your above statement couldn’t be further from the truth. Taking into consideration the quotes of yours that Jimmy has highlighted, I thought you might like to see what Dei Verbum (the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation) has to say about the Gospels:

19.** Holy Mother Church has firmly and with absolute constancy held, and continues to hold, that the four Gospels just named, whose historical character the Church unhesitatingly asserts**, faithfully hand on what Jesus Christ, while living among men, really did and taught for their eternal salvation until the day He was taken up into heaven (see Acts 1:1). Indeed, after the Ascension of the Lord the Apostles handed on to their hearers what He had said and done. This they did with that clearer understanding which they enjoyed (3) after they had been instructed by the glorious events of Christ’s life and taught by the light of the Spirit of truth. (2) The sacred authors wrote the four Gospels, selecting some things from the many which had been handed on by word of mouth or in writing, reducing some of them to a synthesis, explaining some things in view of the situation of their churches and preserving the form of proclamation but always in such fashion that they told us the honest truth about Jesus.(4) For their intention in writing was that either from their own memory and recollections, or from the witness of those who “themselves from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the Word” we might know “the truth” concerning those matters about which we have been instructed (see Luke 1:2-4). [emphasis mine]

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

blackfish152:

There has been a lot made of the I AM, statement, (Jesus using the personal name of GOD. )

like “before abraham was I AM”

In recent discussions, I have been told that the phrase I AM has been used by other prophets, like possibly jerimiah.

Is anyone aware of other usages of the phrase I AM? and if so does this detract from the Christs claim for divinity.

To answer your question, I’m not aware of any other quotes where Jesus specifically said “I AM” other than that one. But if you look at the context of that particular statement and take into account the fact that the pharisees called him a blasphemer for that statement, then we can be 100% sure that he was attesting to his Divinity. It wouldn’t have been phrased like that if he wasn’t intentionally using the Father’s name. One might also note that in the OT, YHWH tells Moses to tell his people that his name is “I AM THAT I AM” and Christ only calls himself I AM.

 

[TobyLue]

Quote:

        Originally Posted by **TobyLue**

This has gotten ridiculous. We are looking for scripture that specifically says, “I, Jesus, am God”.

Yes, that was the original question.

Quote:

        No you will not find those exact words in scripture.

That’s what I have been saying all along - I’m glad someone finally agrees with me. Jesus did not go around saying he was God.

Simply because we do not find exact wording from Jesus in scripture to suit our fancy does not mean that what the Church teaches is incorrect. Like I said, there are many things that we do not say specifically but others understand what we mean. One would have to be a (as Bugs would say) maroon not to understand. We do not find the words “This book is part of the Bible” nor, “This book was written with the inspiration of the Holy Spirit”, but we know that what we have as the Bible** IS** the Bible and we know that the Bible IS inspired by the Holy Spirit because of the authority given to the Church by Jesus Christ. The Church has said that Jesus is God because of the many scriptural references. For us to claim that because we do not find a certain wording the Church, who has more than 2000 years of history, is wrong is putting ourselves above God. We know that God is directing the Church just as He promised. It is quoted specifically on 2 Peter 1:19-21 “So we have confirmation of what was said in prophecies; and you will be right to depend on prophecy and take it as a lamp for lighting a way through the dark until the dawn comes and the morning star rises in your minds. At the same time, we must be most careful to remember that the interpretation of scriptural prophecy is never a matter for the individual. Why? Because no prophecy ever came from man’s initiative. When men spoke for God it was the Holy Spirit that moved them.” (JB) The word prophecy here does not mean a prediction of the future but an inspired utterance from divine revelation.

Old Testament writings point to the divinity of Christ.  Just one example Isaiah 32:11 “I, I am Yahweh, there is no other saviour but me." Back to 2 Peter 2:20-21 “…. And anyone who has escaped the pollution of the world once by coming to know our Lord and saviour Jesus Christ and who then allows himself to be entangled by it a second time and mastered, will end up in a worse state than he began in”. (JB) Here Peter is referring to Jesus as our savior and we know that God is our only savior. The Church teaches that “The Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit is not the Father, but the Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Spirit is God” Not three gods but One God, three Persons. We may disagree as much as we want, but as stated previously CCC 469. The Church thus confesses that Jesus is inseparably true God and true man. He is truly the Son of God who, without ceasing to be God and Lord, became a man and our brother: 

  As the words that are attributed to St. Augustine say, “Rome has spoken, the case is closed”.

 

[TobyLue]

Here is something additional. The following is from the St. Michaels Apologetic web page.

Can. 750 §1 Those things are to be believed by divine and catholic faith which are contained in the word of God as it has been written or handed down by tradition, that is, in the single deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, and which are at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn Magisterium of the Church, or by its ordinary and universal Magisterium, which is manifested by the common adherence of Christ’s faithful under the guidance of the sacred Magisterium. All are therefore bound to shun any contrary doctrines.

Comment:

Denying Level 1 teaching makes one a heretic and thereby automatically excommunicated.

EXAMPLES

• the articles of faith of the Creed
• the various Christological dogmas
• the various Marian dogmas
• the doctrine of the institution of the sacraments by Christ and their efficacy with regard to grace
• the doctrine of the real and substantial presence of Christ in the Eucharist
• the sacrificial nature of the eucharistic celebration
• the foundation of the Church by the will of Christ
• the doctrine on the primacy and infallibility of the Roman Pontiff
• the doctrine on the existence of original sin
• the doctrine on the immortality of the spiritual soul
• the immediate recompense after death
• the absence of error in the inspired sacred texts
• the doctrine on the grave immorality of direct and voluntary killing of an innocent human being.

So Catholics must be extremely careful when refusing to believe the teachings of the Catholic Church. Someone once uttered the words “I will not serve”. We all know who that was and what his outcome is.

For more examples of the levels of teachings see
[saint-mike.org/qa/FS/ViewAnswer.asp?QID=473](http://www.saint-mike.org/qa/FS/ViewAnswer.asp?QID=473)