Article Does the Bible Identify Jesus as God?

[Lori Jane]

Does the Bible Identify Jesus as God?​

by Kermit Zarley​

Early Jewish Christianity​

The post-apostolic, institutional church has always proclaimed that Jesus was both man and God, and this is still the situation to this day. This church asserts that Jesus preexisted as God, being one of three co- equal and co-eternal members of a Trinity: the Father, the Son (Jesus), and the Holy Spirit. In the fourth century, the Catholic Church proclaimed in its Nicene Creed that Jesus was fully God and anathematized (cursed) anyone who believed otherwise, thus deeming them non-Christian. The later Protestant Church accepted this determination. Thus, the institutional church has assessed that anyone who does not believe Jesus is God is not a Christian. But this was not the case with the apostolic church of the first century CE.

The book of Acts reveals that the earliest followers of Jesus were Jews who preached that He was the Messiah and the Son of God; but they did not claim he was God (e.g., Ac 2.36; 3.18, 20; 4.26; 9.20, 22). When this Jesus Movement spread into neighboring lands to produce Gentile Christianity, these Christians asserted that Jesus was the Messiah and God. It happened because Gentile church fathers had become somewhat anti-Semitic, supersessionistic (church replaces Israel), and influenced by Greek metaphysics. In proclaiming that Jesus is God, these Gentile Christians departed from biblical, apostolic Christianity.

The book of Acts also relates that this early Jesus Movement was first called “the Way” (Ac 9.2; 24.14, 22). It is an innocuous term that seems to have not been applied to these early followers of Jesus by their opponents, as is sometimes the case with religious sects, but one chosen by them perhaps due to Jesus calling himself “the way” (Jn 6.14). Later, the Apostle Paul’s Jewish opponents—the temple high priest and some elders at Jerusalem—identified him as “a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes” (Ac 24.5).

This term Nazarenes originated because Jesus, during His earthly sojourn, was called “Jesus the Nazarene” by His disciples, enemies, and angels (Mt 2.23; Mk 10.47; 14.67; 16.6; Lk 24.19; Jn 8.5, 7; Ac 2.22; cf. 3.6; 4.10; 6.14). It was because His parents had resided in the village of Nazareth in Galilee, and that’s where Jesus grew up and lived until He departed from there soon after He began His public ministry (Mt 2.23; 4.13). Furthermore, this identification was nailed to His cross (Jn 19.19). Moreover, the heavenly Jesus, speaking in a vision to Saul (Paul), identified Himself as “Jesus the Nazarene” (Ac 22.8). Similarly, Jesus was identified as “Jesus of Nazareth,” even by demons (Mk 1.24; Lk 4.24). And Paul later testified, “I thought to myself that I had to do many things hostile to the name of Jesus of Nazareth” (Ac 26.9).

Walter Bauer, the great German NT lexicographer of the early 20th century, wrote an important book entitled Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity.1 In it, he convincingly demonstrates that the penchant of church fathers as heresy hunters was often misguided, misrepresenting the historical situation. Georg Strecker wrote a 45-page appendix added to this ET volume. He explains that Bauer concluded “that for broad areas the heresies [so deemed by church fathers] were ‘primary,’” meaning they were the true apostolic teachings. Strecker continues, “Jewish Christianity, according to the witness of the New Testament, stands at the beginning of the development of church history, so that it is not the gentile Christian ‘ecclesiastical doctrine’ that represents what is primary, but rather a Jewish Christian theology.”2 Consequently, knowing early Jewish Christianity is of utmost importance in establishing Christian origins.

In the early post-apostolic centuries, as Christianity was being established in Gentile lands, some church fathers tell in their writings about two groups of Jewish people called Nazarenes and Ebionites. These Jews, often referred to in modern times as Jewish Christians, believed Jesus was Israel’s Messiah and that God had vindicated Him by raising Him from the dead. The Ebionites seem to have been so named due to the Hebrew word ‘ebyon, which means “poor.” It is well known that most of these Ebionites did not accept Jesus’ virgin birth, and all of them detested the Apostle Paul and his writings; whereas the Nazarenes accepted all of these. Both groups were Law observant, keeping the Jewish Sabbath as well as the Christian Eucharist. The Nazarenes, however, did not demand that Gentile Christians keep the Law, whereas the Ebionites generally did. Moreover, both groups clearly rejected that Jesus was God, although there seems to have been some later Ebionites who also believed that Jesus had preexisted.3

The book of Act informs that “it was in Antioch that the disciples were first called ‘Christians’” (Ac 11.26). And according to Acts 24.5 and church fathers Tertullian and Epiphanius, in the beginning of Christianity all Christians were also called Nazarenes (=Nazoraeans).4 Some notable, modern scholars believe the post-apostolic Nazarene Jewish Christians were called Nazarenes since they were the successors of apostolic Christianity, having had a historical connection to the early Jerusalem church.5 If so, these Nazarenes rejecting that Jesus was God is strong evidence that the apostolic church at Jerusalem did too.

The Three Foremost Irrefutable Texts​

The NT provides a massive amount of evidence affirming that Jesus’ apostles and other early Jewish believers in Him did not believe He was God, nor did they go about proclaiming He was God. Two points which emerge often in the NT affirming this are that (1) only the Father is God, and (2) Jesus Christ is distinguished from God. Three irrefutable texts that declare both of these points are as follows, with the first one being in Jesus’ high-priestly prayer and the other two occurring in the Apostle Paul’s writings:

“And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent” (Jn 17.3).

“There is no God but one yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things, and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him” (1 Cor 8.4, 6).

“There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all” (Eph 4.4- 6).

These three texts establish without any doubt whatsoever that Jesus is not God. If there are other biblical texts which proclaim that Jesus is God, they conflict with these verses.

The Scarcity of Biblical Texts​

So, what about those biblical texts which traditionalists claim identify Jesus as God? Indeed, some traditionalist expositors cite not a few of them. Scholarly authorities on this subject usually classify these passages by separating them into two categories: (1) those believed to call Jesus “God” explicitly, having theos in the Greek text, and (2) those believed to do so implicitly, thus not having theos in the Greek text.

Regarding the first category, the Greek NT contains twenty-two instances that contain the word theos which various traditionalist expositors throughout church history have thought identify Jesus as “God.”6 However, the majority of recent traditionalist authorities—those who have written rather extensively on the subject of whether Jesus is God7—concede that most of these twenty-two biblical texts do not identify Jesus as “God” (Gr. theos). Murray Harris claims “only seven certain, very probable, or probable instances out of a total of 1,315 uses of theos” in the NT are applied to Jesus.8 Harris provides a survey of twenty- seven of the most notable NT scholars who have written on this subject over the past century, and he observes, “the majority of [these] scholars hold that theos is applied to Jesus no fewer than five times and no more than nine times in the NT.”9 Indeed, Oscar Cullman proposes at least nine;10 R.N. Longenecker thinks there are “only eight or nine;”11 A.W. Wainwright identifies seven;12 Karl Rahner reckons for only six;13 R.E. Brown decides that three are certain and five are probable.1

Historical critics are inclined to decide that there are even fewer theos texts applied to Jesus in the NT. For example, Rudolf Bultmann decides on only one for certain, it being Jn 20.28, and perhaps two or three others having some degree of divinity applied to Jesus. He concludes, “Neither in the synoptic gospels nor in the Pauline epistles is Jesus called God; nor do we find him so called in the Acts of the Apostles or in the Apocalypse.”15 Vincent Taylor subscribes to Bultmann’s conclusion by saying, “The one clear ascription of Deity to Christ” in the NT is Jn 20.28.16

Some traditionalist authorities therefore admit that their position is not firmly rooted in Scripture. Wainwright explains, “Indeed it might have been expected that the predicate theos would have been used of Jesus far more often in the pages of the New Testament.”17 And John Macquarrie remarks in his typically candid style, “it may strike us as rather odd that such an apparently central Christian affirmation as ‘Jesus Christ is God’ is so minimally attested in the Scriptures that we have to hunt around for instances, and when we have found them, argue about what they really mean.”18

Indeed. It is also surprising that, with the possible exception of Jn 1.1c, none of these NT theos texts are found in any treatise, however brief, which identifies Jesus. Traditionalist R.E. Brown readily admits concerning these theos texts, “none of the instances attempt to define Jesus essentially.”19 And he adds, “even in the New Testament works that speak of Jesus as God, there are also passages that seem to militate against such a usage.”20

Some contemporary traditionalists have sought to defend their position by offering an explanation for this scarcity of biblical support. Their most common explanation has been that calling Jesus “God” was a late NT development so that those passages that are presumed to call Jesus “God” were authored at a late date.21 (See Appendix C: Modern Christologies.) R.E. Brown is representative of this position. He asserts, “The New Testament does call Jesus ‘God,’ but this is a development of the later New Testament books. In the Gospels, Jesus never uses the title ‘God’ of Himself.”22

A few traditionalist scholars, e.g., M. Harris, reason that if the early Christians had called Jesus theos as regularly as they did the Father, Jews and pagan Gentiles alike would have tended to regard Christianity as di-theistic.23 Harris therefore implies what R.N. Longenecker states outright,24 that the early Christians largely avoided such an identification due to the likelihood of this misunderstanding. On the contrary, since when do we think that the first Spirit-filled, emboldened Christians formulated their theology in reaction to others, especially to non-believers? And why should we think that people in the 1st century would so react any more than people in any other century?

The Major, Debated Theos Texts​

Scholars refer to these few texts, which arguably call Jesus “God,” as “the major, debated theos texts.”

They are called “major” because they are considered of utmost importance compared to other theos texts that allegedly identify Jesus as “God.” They are called “debated” because, except for Jn 20.28>, there exists considerable disagreement among modern scholars as to whether these passages call Jesus “God.”

Indeed, upon examining these major, debated theos texts in various English translations of the Bible, it is surprising to learn that half or more of them are translated quite differently.25 Some English versions translate these verses so that they read that Jesus is “God;” yet other reliable English versions do not translate them as calling Jesus “God,” but that the word “God” (theos) in such cases refers to the Father.26

In addition, some modern Bible versions translate these major, contested theos texts a certain way while including an alternate translation as a footnote, or a “marginal reading” (“mg”), which states otherwise. Accordingly, some particular text of a modern English version of the Bible might have a reading that identifies Jesus as “God” while the alternate reading does not identify Jesus as God.

William Barclay well summarizes this rather confusing situation. He explains, “It is when we begin to examine the evidence that we run into very real difficulties. The evidence is not extensive. But we shall find that on almost every occasion in the New Testament in which Jesus seems to be called God there is a problem either of textual criticism or of translation. In almost every case we have to discuss which of two readings is to be accepted or which of two possible translations is to be accepted.”27 Barclay concludes, “One of the most vexed questions in Christian thought and language is whether or not we can directly and simply call Jesus “God.”28

Perhaps the most disturbing problem that Barclay hints at regards variants in the MS evidence.29 Traditionalist D.A. Fennema observes, “Most of the passages which may call Jesus ‘God’ are plagued by textual variants or syntactical obscurity, either of which permits an entirely different interpretation of the passage.”30 Oscar Cullmann similarly states, “Passages which apply the designation ‘God’ to Jesus are not numerous, and some of them are uncertain from the standpoint of textual criticism. Even in ancient times some people apparently attributed undue importance to the question whether or not Jesus was to be called ‘God’ ... This explains the many textual variants precisely in the passages.”31 What Cullmann infers is the dreaded problem that textual critics sometimes encounter in the ancient Greek MSS of the NT or portions of it: scribal interpolations. These are unwarranted, purposeful, even fraudulent, insertions or alterations by copyists.

Many of these debated christological theos texts only contain grammatical problems that arise due to the unpunctuated Greek NT. That is, during the 1st century, when the documents that eventually comprised the NT were originally written in the Greek language, they had no punctuation, all letters were in upper case (uncials), and there were no spaces between words, as with the Hebrew Bible. Often, it is uncertain how the grammar of these critical verses in the Greek NT should be treated. Usually, the disputed text only concerns a brief phrase or a single word. The question may be whether to place a comma or a period in a certain place, or how to treat an indefinite (anarthrous) noun. These grammatical issues can be complex, if not incomprehensible, for most Bible readers because they do not know koine (“common”) Greek.

This grammatical uncertainty becomes even more evident when perusing these verses in the better NT commentaries. M. Harris explains, “it is a curious fact that each of the [disputed theos] texts ... contains an interpretative problem of some description; actually, most contain two or three.”32 And A.E. Harvey alleges, “The New Testament writers … show no tendency to describe Jesus in terms of divinity; the few apparent exceptions are either grammatically and textually uncertain or have an explanation which,… brings them within the constraint of Jewish monotheism.”33

It is surprising to discover that, with the exception of perhaps only two of these NT theos passages, contemporary traditionalist authorities are about evenly divided as to whether these major theos passages call Jesus “God.” For instance, R.T. France adduces, “in many cases the apparent direct attribution of divinity to Jesus melts away in the light of uncertainty about either the text, or the punctuation, or the syntax, leaving us with no undisputed (or almost undisputed!), direct attribution of divinity to Jesus outside the opening and closing declarations of the Gospel of John (Jn. 1:1; 1:18, 20:28).”34

Testament in Modern Translations: Does the New Testament Call Jesus God?” ExpT 87 (1975-76): 214-15. Incidentally, this chart shows that the NASB translates more of these texts as calling Jesus “God” than any other English Bible version. However, it wrongly cites the NEB as identifying Jesus as “God” in Jn 1.1c, surely a misunderstanding of that rendering.

Indeed, the two theos passages in the NT that traditionalist authorities have regarded as providing incontrovertible evidence that Jesus Christ is “God” are Jn 1.1c> (“the Word was God”) and Jn 20.28> (“Thomas ... said to Him, ‘My Lord and my God.’”). And this has held true among not only traditionalists but most historical critics. O. Cullmann calls these two texts “indisputable” evidence that Jesus is God;35 M. Harris renders them “incontestable.”36 These two texts will be examined in detail in Chapter Six, and we will see that a few of these authorities only regard Jn 20.28 as indisputable.

The following table shows all nine major, debated christological texts (arranged in their NT order) which contain the word theos and their type(s) of problem(s) and genre. (A difficulty with syntax is herein regarded as a grammatical problem.)

Table 1: Jesus as Theos in the New Testament​

Text	Problem(s)​	Genre	Translation (NASB)
Jn 1.1c	punctuation grammatical	hymn (?)	In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Jn 1.18	textual grammatical	hymn (?)	No man has seen God at any time; the only begotten God, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.
Jn 20.28	grammatical​	confession	Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!”
Rom 9.5	punctuation grammatical	doxology	whose are the fathers, and from whom is the Christ according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen.
2 Th 1.12	grammatical​	doctrine	according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.
Tit 2.13	grammatical​	prophecy	looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus
Heb 1.8-9	textual grammatical contextual	Old Testament citation	But of the Son He says, THY THRONE, O GOD, IS FOREVER AND EVER,… THEREFORE GOD, THY GOD, HATH ANOINTED THEE
2 Pt 1.1	textual grammatical	salutation	by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ
1 Jn 5.20	grammatical​	summary	we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life.

The genre of these theos texts is significant. The first four listed above, in Table 1, appear in a liturgical context. Only one out of the nine—1 Jn 5.20—can legitimately be classified as didactical. Due to this evidence, some scholars concede that in such instances these authors were not primarily concerned with the doctrinal precision of most of these texts. Some of these scholars thus recommend caution in appealing to liturgical or otherwise non-didactical NT material when seeking to determine the identity of Jesus. Wilhelm Bousset especially cautions about NT hymns, “Singing is something different from the hard, fixed formula of doctrine and even from prayer.”37 (See Appendix C: Modern Christologies.) Accordingly, Christology would have proceeded from exposition to hymnology rather than the reverse.38

Likewise, the categories in which these theos texts do not appear is significant as well. They are not in any of the following NT material: (1) the gospel sayings of Jesus, (2) the evangelistic speeches recorded in the book of Acts, (3) descriptive information about what the apostles preached, (4) definitions of the gospel, or (5) an author’s didactic expositions in which he seeks to establish Jesus’ identity. Obviously, these five categories are critical for determining what the NT teaches about the identity of Jesus.

In sum, this avalanche of evidence strongly suggests that grammatical problems in these few disputed theos texts should be resolved so that they do not call Jesus “God.”

The Debated, Non-Theos Texts

Most traditionalists further contend that the following major, non-theos NT texts implicitly identify

Jesus as God: Jn 5.18; 8.24, 28, 58; 10.30-33; Phil 2.5-11; Col 1.19; 2.9; 1 Tim 2.5; 3.16. (Note that the last three appear in what are regarded as hymns or hymnal fragments.) Some traditionalists cite the following minor, non-theos texts as also implicitly identifying Jesus as God: Mt 1.23; 28.19; Mk 2.5-12; 10.17-18 par.; Jn 3.13; Ac 20.28; Gal 2.20; Eph 5.5; 1 Jn 5.7; Rev 1.8.

As for the OT, many traditionalist scholars regard the following as major, implicit texts which substantiate that Jesus is God: Gen 1.26; 3.22; 11.7; Isa 7.14; 9.6. And many traditionalists cite OT quotations or allusions to OT texts which appear in the NT and are applied to Jesus as further evidence that He is God.

In my book, The Restitution of Jesus Christ, I thoroughly address each of these major, debated theos and non-theos texts, showing that none of them identify Jesus as God.

____________________________________
1 ET edited by Robert Kraft and Gerhard Krodel (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1971). German original 1934.
2 Georg Strecker, “On the Problem of Jewish Christianity,” in Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity, 241.
3 Petri Luomanen, “Ebionites and Nazarenes,” in Jewish Christianity Reconsidered: Rethinking Ancient Groups and Texts, edited by Matt Jackson-McCabe (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007), 99.
4 Jackson-McCabe, Jewish Christianity Reconsidered, 103; Wolfram Kinzig, “The Nazoraeans,” in Jewish Believers in Jesus, edited by Oskar Skarsaune and Reidar Hvalvik (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2007), 479.
5 E.g., Albrecht Ritschl, Die Entstehung der altkatholischen Kerche: Eine kerchen- und dogmenge-schichtliche Monographie, 2nd ed. (Bonn, Germany: Adolph Marcus, 1857), 152-54; Ray A. Pritz, Nazarene Jewish Christianity: From the End of the New Testament Period until Its Disappearance in the Fourth Century (Leiden: Brill, 1988); Martinus C. de Boer, “The Nazoreans: Living at the Boundary of Judaism and Christianity,” in Tolerance and Intolerance in Early Judaism and Christianity, edited by Graham N. Stanton and Guy G. Stroumsa (Cambridge: University, 1998). Indebted to Jackson-McCabe, Jewish Christianity Reconsidered, 82, 105.
6 Murray J. Harris, 3 Crucial Questions about Jesus (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994), 119n16.
7 The foremost include (in alphabetical order) W. Barclay, G.H. Boobyer, R.E. Brown, O. Cullmann, M. Harris, B.A. Mastin, K. Rahner, E. Stauffer, and A.W. Wainwright. See “Selected Bibliography.”
8 M. Harris, Jesus as God, 274. See also p. 268.
9 M. Harris, Jesus as God, 274.
10 O. Cullman, The Christology of the New Testament, 308-14.
11 R.N. Longenecker, The Christology of Early Jewish Christianity, 139.
12 A.W. Wainwright, “The Confession ‘Jesus is God’ in the New Testament,” 294.
13 Karl Rahner, “Theos in the New Testament,” in Rahner’s Theological Investigations 1:136.
14 R.E. Brown, Jesus God and Man, 23, 28-29.
15 Rudolf Karl Bultmann, Essays, Philosophical and Theological, tr. J.C.G. Greig (New York: Macmillan, 1955), 275.
16 V. Taylor, “Does the New Testament Call Jesus God? 118.
17 A.W. Wainwright, The Trinity in the New Testament (London: SPCK, 1962), 66. Likewise, R.N. Longenecker, The Christology of Early Jewish Christianity, 141.
18 J. Macquarrie, Jesus Christ in Modern Thought, 295.
19 Raymond E. Brown, “Does the New Testament Call Jesus God?” JTS 26 (1965): 572.
20 R.E. Brown, Jesus God and Man, 33.
21 E.g., R.E. Brown, R.T. France, A.W. Wainwright, J.L. D’Aragon, and tentatively R.N. Longenecker.
22 R.E. Brown, Jesus God and Man, 86.
23 Murray J. Harris, “Titus 2:13 and the Deity of Christ,” in Pauline Studies: Essays Presented to Professor F.F. Bruce on His 70th, eds. Donald A. Hagner and Murray J. Harris (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980), 265-66.
24 R.N. Longenecker, The Christology of Early Jewish Christianity, 140-41.
25 Of the eight major, disputed theos texts (so not including Jn 20.28 and 1 Jn 5.20), the following versions translate half as identifying Jesus as “God” and the other half as not: AV, RV, RSV, NEB. The NRSV even has five of the eight calling Jesus “God.” So much for Christian Fundamentalists alleging the AV adheres to the true doctrine about Jesus more than modern versions do, especially the one preferred by (liberal) scholars!
26 See the chart published by Graeser-Lynn-Schoenheit (One God & One Lord, 618), which shows how the major English versions translate the major, disputed theos texts. This chart is reproduced from Victor Perry’s journal article, “Problem Passages of the New
27 William Barclay, Jesus As They Saw Him: New Testament Interpretations of Jesus (London: SCM, 1962), 20-21.
28 W. Barclay, Jesus As They Saw Him, 20.
29 Textual criticism is indispensable to the Bible. See, e.g., Bruce M. Metzger, The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption and Restoration, 2nd ed. (New York: Oxford University, 1968); Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland, The Text of the New Testament: An Introduction to the Critical Editions and to the Theory and Practice of Modern Textual Criticism [1981], tr. Erroll F. Rhodes (Grand Rapids: Leiden, 1987).
30 D.A. Fennema, “John 1.18: ‘God the Only Son,’” NTS 31 (1985): 125.
31 O. Cullmann, Christology, 307-08.
32 M. Harris, Jesus as God, 11.
33 A.E. Harvey, Jesus and the Constraint of History, 157. Similarly, idem, “Christology and the Evidence of the New Testament,” in
God Incarnate: Story and Belief, ed. A.E. Harvey (London: SPCK, 1981), 52.
34 R.T. France, “The Worship of Jesus: A Neglected Factor in Christological Debate?” in Christ the Lord: Studies in Christology presented to Donald Guthrie, ed. H.H. Rowdon, 23.
35 O. Cullmann, Christology, 308.
36 M. Harris, Jesus as God, 284.
37 Wilhelm Bousset, Kyrios Christos: A History of the Belief in Christ from the Beginnings of the Christianity to Iranaeus [1913], tr. John Steely. ET of 5th ed. (Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 1970), 304-05. Christian hymns should reflect sound doctrine, which we can expect of those (and fragments) in the NT.
38 Contra, e.g., L.W. Hurtado, One God, One Lord: Early Christian Devotion and Ancient Jewish Monotheism (London: SCM, 1988), 100-04; idem, At the Origins of Christian Worship: The Context and Character of Earliest Christian Devotion (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 72, 86-92; M. Hengel, Studies in Early Christology, 246-47.

 

[Lori Jane]

It happened because Gentile church fathers had become somewhat anti-Semitic, supersessionistic (church replaces Israel), and influenced by Greek metaphysics. In proclaiming that Jesus is God, these Gentile Christians departed from biblical, apostolic Christianity.

This is how I see it after an honest study of the Bible after coming out of the influence of the Watchtower organization. I studied the writings of the church fathers as well and I agree with this conclusion.

knowing early Jewish Christianity is of utmost importance in establishing Christian origins.

I agree. This understanding changed my whole perspective and made all the pieces fit together without forcing.

For instance, R.T. France adduces, “in many cases the apparent direct attribution of divinity to Jesus melts away in the light of uncertainty about either the text, or the punctuation, or the syntax, leaving us with no undisputed (or almost undisputed!), direct attribution of divinity to Jesus outside the opening and closing declarations of the Gospel of John

Exactly! If this is such a key teaching it should be more clear! People should not be called heretics for not believing Jesus is God. It should be the other way around according to these proofs - but I refuse to call others that love God and Jesus heretic, blasphemer or anti-christ - I will let Jesus do the judging. But I do want my friends to understand the weight of this - to not be lulled into believing things that are not Biblical just because it is the more popular belief or the mainstream belief.

We need to DIG for accurate biblical truth. It is not easy but after 30 years of being spoon-fed what to believe I refuse to be spoon-fed anymore. And if what I unearth in my studies makes my conclusions unpopular then so be it. I will keep digging and will keep challenging my beliefs but as of today I do not believe Jesus is God. He had a God like I do. Jesus is my saviour, my King, my High Priest but he is not my God. I adore him and am dedicated to following him and look forward to his coming back soon!

 

[Samizon]

Does the Bible Identify Jesus as God?

Hello and God’s love to you.

I want to say up front that I disagree with the article that was posted at the beginning of this thread. I will attempt to explain my reasons why, and you may not agree with me either, but that’s okay. You are free to believe the truth that the Spirit of Truth (the Holy Spirit) reveals to you and at the time when he does it. You don’t have to agree with me, and even though I will be making some strong statements about my beliefs, please be aware that I’m not trying to bully anyone into agreeing with me.

Now concerning if the Bible identities Jesus as God; If we really want to arrive at the truth of the matter, we must consider the full council of God’s word and not just pick out one set of scriptures and say these verses are okay and mean what they say, but these other verses on the subject are problematic and really don’t mean what they say (as this author seems to be doing). I don’t think it’s wise to base our beliefs on that type of analogy no matter who is saying it or how slick their presentation is. Even to base your beliefs on just one Bible writer or one individual book of the Bible is also not usually a good thing to do. If we want to arrive at the real truth of a matter when some scriptures on the subject seem to conflict with others, then we must determine how all the Bible verses on the subject are all true at the same time. All the verses have to be true without contradicting each other, or else we’ve arrived at the wrong conclusion because the Bible is the word of God and God does not contradict himself.

It’s no surprise to me that many of the early Christians in the book of Acts didn’t have a full revelation of the deity of Christ. Most of the New Testament hadn’t even been written yet and they could only go by the bits of information they had.

Most of the original 12 apostles didn’t even have a revelation of the deity of Christ either, and that’s okay. It’s a progressive revelation that takes time grasp if it isn’t given to you by direct revelation from the Spirit of God. Peter believed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God, but even he didn’t realize that Jesus was also God in the flesh. John however, did have this revelation, and later after Jesus’ resurrection, even doubting Thomas eventually realized that Jesus was God, and even called him God.

But it makes no difference to me who believed in this revelation or not. All I care about is if the Bible says it or not. Even if no one in all of history ever believed in it, I would still believe in it because I can see it in the Bible for myself and the Bible is what I go by, not by what anyone else believes or doesn’t believe.

It is amazing to me how this article’s author can explain away everything that the Bible says about Jesus being God and call it all grammatical or punctuation problems. My apologies but He sounds to me just like one of those religious pharisees that Jesus was always rebuking for making the word of God of no effect by their religious traditions. But anyway, I digress…

Please understand, my purpose is not to debate in order win an argument or try to prove anyone wrong, I only want to help people to see the real truth.

So concerning Jesus being God and the trinity, let me start by explaining what the trinity does not mean and then what it does mean. The trinity does not mean that Jesus, the Father, and the Holy Spirit are all the same person. It means that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are 3 different persons who are in relationship together as one God. Even though it is not wrong to say that they are 3 different persons, to say that they are 3 separate persons might be taking it a little too far, because they are not totally separate in the same sense as we humans are separate individuals because they each can hear each other’s thoughts and feel the emotions/desires of each other’s heart. So they are not totally 100% separate individuals in that respect, not in the same sense that we as humans are separate individuals. But still, they are 3 different persons; 3 persons who are in relationship together as one God.

So that is why Jesus could pray to God (to the Father) and not be talking to himself. Jesus was both fully man and fully God. But he laid down his power as God and came to the earth and operated as a man.

If you read the Gospel of John in a good translation of the bible (like the New King James for instance) you will see the trinity all over the place. Even John chapter 1 starts off revealing the trinity.

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made… 14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us…

The word who became flesh and dwelt among us is obviously Jesus. So how could Jesus be God and be with God at the same time? Because as I’ve explained, they are 3 different persons who are in relationship as one God. The JW’s New World Translation says that Jesus was “a god”, but how can that be a correct translation when that contradicts even their own bible in several places that say that there is only one God, including Isiah 43:10,11 and 44:6.

Isiah 43:10 “You are My witnesses,” says the LORD, “And My servant whom I have chosen, That you may know and believe Me, And understand that I am He. Before Me there was no God formed, Nor shall there be after Me. 11 I, even I, am the Lord, And besides Me there is no savior.

Isiah 44:6 “Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel, And his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: ‘I am the First and I am the Last; Besides Me there is no God.

If Jesus is “a God” then that would make two God’s, which contradicts the whole rest of the bible (unless they were calling Jesus a false god, which we know they are not).

There are many scriptures that demonstrate that Jesus is God. Here are a few of them.

Matthew 1:23 - “Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,” which is translated, “God with us.”

Isaiah 9:6 - For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God… 14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us…

1 Timothy 3:16 - And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in the flesh, Justified in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Preached among the Gentiles, Believed on in the world, Received up in glory.

John 8:24 - “Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I AM [He], you will die in your sins.”

John 8:58 - Then Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”

John 10:30-33 - Jesus answered them, “I and My Father are one.” Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, “Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?” The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.”

John 20:28 - And Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!”

Colossians 2:9 - For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.

Titus 2:13 - looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.

Hebrews 1:8-9 - But to the Son He says: “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You with the oil of gladness more than Your companions.”

And I can post even more scriptures for you if you wish that compare Jesus and God the Father and demonstrate that they are both the same God. But for now, I will just show you one more scripture that the New World Translation leaves out of their bible because it doesn’t line up with their doctrine.

1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.

If we really want to arrive at the real truth then we must determine how all the verses on the subject are all true at the same time. The Bible is the word of God, and God does not contradict himself. All the verses have to be true without contradicting each other, or else we’ve arrived at the wrong conclusion.

Yes, Jesus said other things like “The Father is greater than I.” (Matt 27:46), and also prayed to the Father and called him God, but he also said things like “He who has seen Me has seen the Father” (John 14:9) and “I and My Father are one.” (John 10:30).

So how do you reconcile all these verses and more that seem to contradict each other? They have to all be true at the same time or else the Bible is contradicting itself. There is only one way that these verses can all be true together at the same time without contradicting each other, and that is that Jesus and the Father are one and the same God. I’m not saying that they are the same person but that same God. This is why we have the doctrine of the trinity, because it’s the only way that all the bible verses are true without contradicting each other. The trinity does not mean that Jesus, the Father, and the Holy Spirit are all the same person. It means that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are 3 different persons who are in relationship together as one God.

That is why Jesus could pray to God (to the Father) and not be talking to himself. And that is why the Father could be greater than Jesus while he was on the earth as a man. Jesus was fully God but he laid down his power as God and came to earth as a man. But not as a fallen man, but a spiritually alive man with the Holy Spirit living in him, just as we today can be born again and made spiritually alive with the Holy Spirit living in us.

In the article that was posted the author quotes three scriptures (Jn 17:3, 1 Cor 8:4,6 & Eph 4:4-6) and then states “These three texts establish without any doubt whatsoever that Jesus is not God. If there are other biblical texts which proclaim that Jesus is God, they conflict with these verses.” Well, he is only proving my point exactly, because there are indeed other scriptures which proclaim that Jesus is God as I’ve just sown you above, and without the doctrine of the trinity these scriptures do indeed conflict with those other verses. I can only conclude therefore that the trinity is true because the Bible is the word of God and God does not contradict himself. The revelation that God is indeed triune in nature is the only way that all the scriptures on this subject are all true at the same time without destroying the truth of what one half of these scriptures say, as this author attempts to do.

Please let me know what you think. Again, you don’t have to agree with me. My purpose is not to debate in order to try to prove anyone wrong, but only to help people to progress into a deeper revelation of God and of his great love for you. When you come to understand that it was God himself who came to die for you and not just some angle he sent to do it for him, then you will begin comprehending a much greater revelation of God’s love for you; And this will in turn cause you to love him even more.

I don’t believe that you absolutely have to believe in the trinity or that Jesus is God in order to be saved. I think it’s enough to believe that he is the Son of God who died for our sins and rose again. Just please don’t believe that he is an angel or was created because that is a false version of Jesus who is not the true Son of God.

God’s love to you…

 

[Lori Jane]

I don’t believe that you absolutely have to believe in the trinity or that Jesus is God in order to be saved. I think it’s enough to believe that he is the Son of God who died for our sins and rose again. Just please don’t believe that he is an angel or was created because that is a false version of Jesus who is not the true Son of God.

That's good to know.

I'm working on a thorough reply but there are a lot of scriptures to respond to as on your other post. I'll get to it soon. Hopefully, others will chime in too.