14/04/2024
A brother was giving Dawah to a Christian who presented him with a lengthy message trying to show why Jesus never said I am God or worship me. Find below his message and our response.
His message:
I have been asked this in the very same formulation many times before. I hope this response brings out some of the issues I think are important in this regard.
N O W H E R E does Jesus say “I am God, worship me.” Suppose a man does indeed come up to you and does says, “I am God, worship me.” Would you believe him? Would you worship him? The immediate reaction of any decent monotheistic believer would be to call the person making such a claim an impostor and a blasphemer. If that is your reaction too, then why would you demand something from Jesus which you aren’t going to accept anyway? Most would declare insane anybody who would make such a statement. Jesus knows about this natural reaction as well as anybody else and saw no reason to make his claims in such a foolish way. But he did make the claim in indirect ways and those are just as clear. Maybe you are cautious and open and don’t want to completely dismiss such a claim … after all, saying that God is not able to come and appear in the form of a man does restrict his power, and you believe in an all powerful God, … but you would at least demand conclusive proof for such a claim, wouldn’t you? After all, if you do worship somebody who is not God you are guilty of idolatory. But refusing to worship God when he demands so is just as great a sin. What matters in the end is not the existence of this literal statement, but whether there is clear evidence that he is indeed God, no matter in which form he issued the claim. If there is clear proof for his divine identity, then you have to worship Him even if the wording of his commands is not precisely the way you may think they should be. We cannot prescribe for God how he has to reveal himself before we accept it. For example, in the Gospel according to John, (speaking of eternal life) Jesus says, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies.” (John 11:25). He makes the offer of eternal life conditional on faith in his own person. This would be blasphemous for anybody other than God. This is an incredible claim. Does he give any evidence for his authority to make such claims? The record gives many details of what happened at this particular day, but at the end we read, “When he had said this, Jesus called in a loud voice, `Lazarus, come out!’ The dead mean came out, his hands and feet wrapped with strips of linen, and a cloth around his face. Jesus said to them, `Take off the grave clothes and let him go.'” (John 11:43-44). When you read the Gospels carefully you will find that consistently * Jesus talks like he is God, * Jesus acts like he is God, * Jesus gives evidence for claiming this authority rightfully by performing miraculous signs. After 3 years with his disciples we read how one of them asks Jesus and wants to be “shown the Father (God)”. Jesus answered, “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. … Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the miracles themselves.” (John 14:10-11). Jesus expected the disciples and the people around him to recognise his true nature and identity from his words which are only appropriate for God to speak and from his deeds. Jesus does give enough proof and then lets you draw your own conclusions. Everybody could make the claim to be God. And many have made claims to be (a) god throughout history. Only the true God can give true evidence for it and if you have the evidence there is no need for the explicit command to worship anymore. The statement “I am God” adds nothing of substance to the question regarding his identity. His real identity is established by the proof he gives, not by claims each and everybody can make. After he has given the evidence, there is no more need for the statement. Those who are open for the truth will recognise the evidence, those who ignore the evidence won’t be convinced either if he adds this specific statement you seem to demand from him. And if you have recognized his true identity, worshiping him is only proper and will nearly be an “automatic” response. I know this is an incredible thought, it is unbelievable. That is why it took even the disciples themselves such a long time to really understand it. They have really only started to comprehended the meaning of it all after Jesus’ own death and resurrection, after they meet the risen Lord. In the Gospel according to John, end of chapter 20, and the Gospel according to Matthew, end of chapter 28, we read how Jesus receives worship and affims this. Even though he never demands the worship, he accepts it and confirms it as proper. You claim: N O W H E R E Jesus says “I am God, worship me.” and understand this as NOwhere Jesus says “I am God, worship me.” and you are right when taking it the literalistic way. He never says these very words. But he makes his claims very clear in many other ways. Open your eyes and you will see that the right way to read this statement is Now HERE Jesus says “I am God …”
Response:
So just as a response to the points mentioned, I’d like to mention the following:
Obviously if a random person comes up to you and says I am God you are not going to believe him. But why did he not tell even his disciples who knew him and trusted him?
Interestingly, as you said, any decent monotheist would find this absurd, worshipping a human, especially knowing what the OT says about worshipping only the one true God who is not described as a triune being and is said to be “not a man that he should lie nor the son of man that he should repent” Numbers 23:19.
So the question remains, why did God not reveal His true triune nature of 3 coequal, co-eternal persons? Why did He never tell His chosen people to worship all three? What about the rest of humanity? Why was the Messiah expected to be a man, a great man but a man?
And then the man who comes doesn’t say anything explicitly. In fact he says things that contradict this (according to the Gospels). He says the father is greater than I (John 14:28), of my own self I can do nothing (John 5:30), he says he is not the one true God (John 17:3), he says that he has a God (John 20 17).
When people ask him what they should do to enter heaven he says keep the commandments and doesn’t say believe I am God or believe I am going to die for you sins (Mathew 19:16 to 20).
When someone asks him which is the most important (or first) commandnment he says the Shema, hear o Israel the Lord thy God is one God (Mark 12:29). This, to any Jew, meant worship only the Lord of Israel who is not Jesus. This is actively preaching against the truth from a Christian worldview.
These people who heard him say these things only, the people in the cities who heard and saw him once or twice, would never have believed he was God. He never made an effort to tell them this. Why? Was it not important?
Further, the Trinity is actively preached against when Jesus says that not even the Son knows the last hour.(Mark 13:32) This breaks the coequal belief in the Trinity.
Even the disciples after his ascension, when preaching to people, did not call him God. Peter said, Jesus of Nazareth was a man certified by God with wonders miracles and signs (Acts 2:22). When did he explain that he meant only his human nature by there’s also his godly nature? He didn’t of course.
We know the disciples were preaching Christianity to the Jews. They were still following the Mosaic law in the temple precincts, see Acts 21. The Jews were upset that Paul said the law is not applicable, do you think they would have allowed people to worship other beings inside their temple?
So even up to the time of the disciples we have what appears to be clear attestation of his lack of divinity.
The earlier church fathers themselves like Justin Martyr clearly had a subordinationist position, they believed the Son was lower than the Father. It took until the year 325 in the Council of Nicea for people to vote Jesus as equal to the Father. The vote was still split 50/50. After this council there were Arian councils that said the Son is below the Father. The Council of Constantinople in 381 sealed the deal and included the Holy Spirit as well. This is something rarely discussed, where did the Holy Spirit come from in terms of divinity?
Considering the above, the fact that all the prophets spoke about only one God, the fact that Jesus emphasized one God, the fact that the disciples didn’t seem to recognize him as God, the fact that the earliest Christians didn’t believe he was God, considering that the Trinity is a logical impossibility, how then can anyone be expected to believe this and be taken to task for not doing so when all the evidence is against it?
Why take the risk of committed polytheism? Simply believe what all the prophets believed and you’ll be safe.
The second issue I’d like to point out is the following:
Of course we will believe whatever God has revealed, so long as we know it is definitely from Him.
This is far from the case with the Gospels. The Gospels are anonymous accounts of Jesus life that exhibit multiple variances whilst using themselves as sources (Mathew and Mark from Luke).
The issues with the reliability of the Gospels are as follows:
1. Unknown authors
2. Unknown chain of narration
3. Errors
4. Contradictions
5. The manuscript record is weak. Many bible verses which were believed to be the word of God for centuries have been expunged.
6. Who decided on the four Gospels out of the many other Gospels that existed like the gospels of Peter, Thomas and Mary?
7. Nowhere do the authors say they’re inspired, they appear to say the opposite (beginning of Luke)
As for the alleged proofs that Jesus showed he was God, these are either insertions from unknown authors (like John 1:1) or are clearly just showing extra reverence for him and in no way put him on the same level as the Father.
For example, in order to gain salvation, all nations had to believe and obey their respective prophet. The Prophet Muhammad ﷺ also said that whoever believes in him (and consequently the message he brought) will enter heaven.
Miraculous signs are a feature of the prophets, like Moses, Joshua etc. They in no way imply divinity. The example cited of bringing someone back to life is something that was done by the prophets Elijah and Elisha respectively (1 Kings 17:17 and 2 Kings 4:18). Peter and Paul do the same in Acts.
John 14:10 and 11 speaks about Jesus telling his disciples he is in the Father and vice versa. Later on in verse twenty he says that the disciples are in him. Does this imply their divinity? Of course not. It simply implies they are serving his cause and he, Jesus, who is a prophet serves the Father. Verse 28 clearly says the Father is greater than I. Verse 1 shows a separation between himself and God. There is nothing to suggest in these passages that he is equal to the Father.
From a scholarly perspective, John has the highest christology and is therefore quoted most frequently by Christians in this debate.
Yet in fact John, whoever the real author may be, tells you the purpose of writing his gospel- so that you may believe Jesus is the Messiah (who Jews believed is not God) and that he is the Son of God, a term used for people throughout the Old Testament who are not God.
This is mentioned immediately after the incident of doubting Thomas and shows that even the author of John did not take that as a sign that Jesus is equal to the Father.
The idea that they worshipped him as one worships the one true God in Mathew 28 is against the grain of what the author of Mathew is saying.
Firstly, the word proskuno means to pay homage and can also mean to worship. It is used in the Gospels to mean paying homage (Mathew 18:26).
Secondly, why would seeing him alive automatically mean he is the one true God?? What is the logic there? It could show his great power and thus they pay homage to this great feat, but dying certainly isn’t a known feature of the one true God.
Thirdly, this act of “worship” also takes place in Mathew 14. This again after a miracle which is a sign of a prophet. If so, it must mean people knew early on, yet the disciples are confused right till the end as you rightly pointed out.
All of this contradicts the fact that the disciples were monotheistic worshipping with the Jews in the temple.
That’s it for now.