Where does Jesus claim to be God?

Forums: Spirituality And Religion
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Islam Jewdism and Christianity all obviously have differing oppions on this. Islam and Jewdism both believe Jesus was a prophet and never claimed to be god. Christians say there is no question in it, Jesus claimed to be the son of god, and to be god himself. Ive been reading through the bible and cant find anything that is a definate way of Jesus claiming to be god.

So does anyone have anything to prove this in either way?

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 996 • Replies: 14

No top replies

I don't have a Bible on hand to reference the verses, but I believe there are several instances where Jesus is recognized by his disciples as being the "Son of God." ("Tell me, who do they say that I am?" - "You are the Son of God.")

Read the Introduction to John's Gospel. The English word "Word" is a translation of the Greek word "Logos," which derived from the writings of Aristotle and the Jewish writer Plotinus. Jesus is the incarnation of this Reason, according to John.

There are several places throughout the Gospels where Jesus makes statements saying "I am." For example, as he walks to his disciples on the water in John, "Do not be afraid, it is I." This reflects back to God's statement of his own name in Exodus chapter 3. "I am what I am.", where God defines himself as essentially the verb "to be." By saying this, Jesus relates himself to God.

0 Replies

I must say, without biblical references, that Jesus was very likely a mystic who intuitively realized his spiritual unity with ultimate reality, i.e., his egolessness. When he said he was God; he was probably saying that he, LIKE ALL OF US, is one with the "Godhead." Mystics have been saying that throughout the ages. Jesus was just another announcer of this "good news."

0 Replies

While possibly true, Jesus' role is also largely steeped in Jewish and Greek thought. The Jesus of history probably did NOT proclaim himself to be the Son of God. In the aftermath of his execution, however, the Christ of faith developed with philosophical explanations. I do not think that anyone would disagree that Jesus did not say that he was the "eschatological manifestation of the karigma," but Jesus came to be seen as thus. The Jewish interpretation of Jewish as the new David is also vitally important. Mark's Gospel is written from the perspective of an immanent eschatology. "The Kingdom of God is at hand, repent and believe the Gospel." The Jewish meaning of the expression "at hand" means literally like a hand covering your face. The "good news" of Jesus comes from the Greek "evangelium" (I'm not sure on that spelling), which refers not to just any good news, but to good news specifically regarding the kingdom -- if the King had a new son, for instance. For this reason, with Jesus interpretted as the breaking of God's kingdom into the world, through several exorcism's in the case of Mark's Gospel, I would have to disagree with your point that Jesus was interpretted just as all others had been throught the ages. Jesus' use of the word "Abba" (translated roughly as "Daddy") implied a very personal relation with God, which caused controversy among the Jewish community of the period.

0 Replies

My take, for what it's worth, is that JESUS was an historical mystic and ethical genius, while CHRIST was a mythical invention of SAUL OF TARSUS (Paul).

0 Replies

I hold essentially the same view.

0 Replies

JLNobody wrote:

I must say, without biblical references, that Jesus was very likely a mystic who intuitively realized his spiritual unity with ultimate reality, i.e., his egolessness. When he said he was God; he was probably saying that he, LIKE ALL OF US, is one with the "Godhead." Mystics have been saying that throughout the ages. Jesus was just another announcer of this "good news."

Jesus did not teach some kind of New Age, 'everybody is god' schtick.

Quote:

John 14:1Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me.

2In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.

3And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.

4And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know.

5Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way?

6Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

7If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.

8Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us.

9Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father?

Jesus' specific disqualification of the 'everybody is god' idea is that NO ONE can come to the Father, except thru Jesus.

0 Replies

He is not saying every1 is god, JL Nobody was simply stating Jesus was like a mystic, teaching something that has never been taught before. I agree that Jesus was a good man, philosopher, great teacher of ethics but yet again not god. And even in the bible i can find nothing that would have him say he was god.

If Jesus was god why did he call himself the Son of Man?

0 Replies

I cannot arrive at an understanding of Jesus based solely on the language attributed to him since that might reflect cultural conditions much different from ours. And, I'm not terribly confident in the truthfulness or the Bible's authors--or its translators.
I based my perceptions--as subjective as they are--on a broader foundation of religio-mystico writings, i.e., from the Upanishads and Buddhist literature. Either Jesus was a mystic (from the perspective of the Eastern literature) or a megalomaniacal schizophrenic (as suggested by the Christian literature). "I am God and you are not" sounds crazy!

0 Replies

C.S. Lewis take (my favorite christian author):
I am trying here to prevent anyone from saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him [Jesus Christ]: "I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept his claim to be God."

That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said wouldnot be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic -- on a level with a man who says he is a poached egg -- or else he would be the Devil of Hell.

You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is,the Son of God,: or else a madman or something worse .... You can shut him up for fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon; or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God. But let us not come up with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great humanteacher. He has not left that option open to us. He did not intend to.²

-- From Case for Christianity, by C.S. Lewis.

___________________________________________________________

Jesus main tenet, all the things he said measure up to two things: 1. He is son of god and through him and only through him can one get to heaven and 2. Love others as you would love yourself.

The latter statement is the MOST SANE thing I have ever heard. If everyone practiced that belief there would be no violence, poverty, greed, Hate, apathy, etc.,

These two beliefs are mentioned so often and clearly in the bible that I doubt very much that there was any misinterpretation or misquotation (even in the form of creative invention) from those who have recorded them.

0 Replies

Thalion and Nobody I respect your opinions on Christ though (by your own admission) they are opinions.

afterall you have no proof that Jesus wasn't god and that anybody invented any views or beliefs aout Jesus.

It is possible that Jesus really did rise from the dead after three days (unless you can disprove it by producing a body Smile

)

There of course is no way to prove these things either.

The real problem with talking about a historical Jesus is that there is pretty much no historical evidence about Jesus apart from the bible.

In the end maybe Jesus (and in my view God) planned it this way.

another test of faith.

either way it's not the faith you choose to have, so of course you will never have any confidence in the bible and it's authors.

(BTW I do have many doubts at times. One big doubt I've always had, even as a Christian, is that god will send people to hell just b/c they are not a christian. It's an occasional doubt but it's still there. In other words I really do understand why you believe what you do.)

0 Replies

xguymontagx wrote:

The real problem with talking about a historical Jesus is that there is pretty much no historical evidence about Jesus apart from the bible.

When Matthew, Mark, Luke and John wrote their accounts, they were not 'in the Bible' but were produced at different times (years apart) and in different locations under different circumstances.

The fact that they are now, centuries later, published in one volume 'in the Bible' really has no bearing on whether they can be considered historical evidence.

0 Replies

xguymontagx wrote:

Jesus main tenet, all the things he said measure up to two things: 1. He is son of god and through him and only through him can one get to heaven and 2. Love others as you would love yourself.

The latter statement is the MOST SANE thing I have ever heard. If everyone practiced that belief there would be no violence, poverty, greed, Hate, apathy, etc.,

These two beliefs are mentioned so often and clearly in the bible that I doubt very much that there was any misinterpretation or misquotation (even in the form of creative invention) from those who have recorded them.

Yes i agree Jesus was a great teacher of compasion but look....everything he siad we all already knew, its in human nature, he just put it into words. Also there would still be poverty. B/c that would bre impossible to avoid. And they could be alot of tampering with the bible, anyone could cut out or add anything to anything.

0 Replies

Matthew and Luke were both largely copied from and modelled on the Gospel of Mark, which was written first (circa 70 AD -- there is debate about whether it was written before or after the destruction of the Temple, which would have great importance.) A great deal of the material is identical. Some is altered to fit the audience of the writer. For example, Luke's Gospel was written to the gentiles, reflected in Jesus' command to make disciples of all nations. Matthew wrote to Jews, hence the division of the Gospel into 5 parts, reflecting the Pentateuch. The earliest Gospel was not written until almost 40 years after Jesus' death. There are very few (if any) contemporary writings about Jesus' life.

0 Replies

xguymontagx,
I'm sorry but I can't take your position seriously. It makes no sense to me in that it resonates with nothing in my experience. Neither science, practical common sense nor contemporary philosophical thinking lead me to such (fanciful) conclusions. You find them personally gratifying and you justify such conclusions with "faith." I have my own non-logical understandings based on intuitive processes so I will not deprecate your religious beliefs on the grounds that they are not logical or scientific, but I wonder how you, or any religious believer, can endorse beliefs that cannot reflect intuitive insight. To me such beliefs are the opposite of both scientific knowledge (which is always provisional but for the time being logically and empirically undeniable) and mystical intuition (which is another type of experience-based knowledge).

0 Replies

Where does Jesus claim to be God?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know