Was Jesus Made Divine By Humans - Part 5 Did Jesus Ever Claim to be Divine?

The question under consideration for this article, is whether the Messiah was ever promised to be Divine, and if Jesus is the Messiah, whether He ever claimed to be Divine?  Psalm 110 spoke initially to this as we have seen in the previous post. It was God Himself, that said that the Messiah would "Sit at His Right Hand." Yet, there is another prophesy that speaks to this and introduces one called the "Son of Man" coming to the Ancient of Days (God) and being given an eternal Kingdom made up of all nations. Of course, this is the prophesy of Dan.7:13,14.

This also reflects visions of David in Psa.2:6,7 "Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion. I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee."  Here the Messiah is:

• Set by God upon the throne of His Kingdom
• Declared by God to be His  "Son"
• Is described as the "begotten" of  God.

We have seen that Jesus was not made Divine by Humans, but now the question arises as to whether Jesus ever claimed to be Divine? The Psalms and Daniel very definitely state that the Messiah is one instilled by God and one whom God calls "His Son." Daniel's "Son of Man" is recognized by scholars Jewish and otherwise, to be the Messiah. Even the Samaritan in John 4 said that this was taught to her by her circles (John 4). Notice her statement, "The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias comes, which is called  Christ: when he is come, he  will tell us all things.(Jn.4:25)." What you specifically want to notice here is Jesus' response in vs.26, "Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he."(vs.26)  Jesus DEFINITELY stated here, that He is the Messiah that was to come. That was the way that SHE understood it.

Messiah is one thing, but Divine?

Yet, to many, it is one thing to claim to be the Messiah, and another to claim to be divine. The next article will focus Messiahs, and what set Jesus apart in a world that had them then, and even has them now. But for this article, the question is whether Jesus ever claimed to be Divine? 

The first question to ask ourselves here, is what does it mean to claim to be divine? One can be sent by God and called an Angel, Messenger, Prophet, Evangelist. Yet, to refer to oneself as Divine, means to place oneself in God's realm, to say that you are God. A statement that threw the Jewish leadership into a violent tizzy in Jesus' day is in Jn 8:56-58. Jesus here made the statement, "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad."  They then wondered how Jesus who hadn't even turned 50 years old, could have seen Abraham who had died some 2500 years before Jesus was even born. Jesus then makes a very remarkable statement, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am." There are a couple of of interesting things in this statement that we need to observe:

• "Before Abraham Was" - is an obvious statement that before Abraham existed. Before 2500 years ago.  That is a statement!
• "I Am" - in Greek is "ego emi" It is a simple statement, yet for the audience familiar with the Old Testament it is the same statement found in Ex.3:14. The Jewish audience understood it this way to. I AM is "I Exist" - it is the name of God.
• What is interesting, is the audience's hostile reaction to the statement that Jesus makes. They regarded Jesus' statement as blasphemous. What is blasphemy? To speak profanely about God (i.e., curse God), or to claim to be God. 

The Healed Blind Man

Now the question, is there any other evidence that Jesus claimed to be divine outside of this verse? It is clear that the apostles themselves understood him to be or thought that he was. Yet, there is another instance in John 9:33-37. Jesus healed a blind man who was chided by the Jewish authority for stating simply that Jesus was From God. After they cast him out of the hearing, Jesus found him. He asked a simple question, Dost thou believe on the Son of God?" This is definitely an allusion to the Psalms and Daniel that we had seen previously. The man answered, "Who is he, Lord,  that I might believe on him?"  Jesus answers, "You  have both seen him, and it is he that talks with you."

Thomas' Explicative

After the Resurrection, Thomas (called doubting Thomas by history) says that he will not believe that Jesus is risen until he can touch him, touch the wounds and prove that it is him. When he does, his statement is explication! John 20:28 "My Lord and My God."  Thomas states that he no longer doubted, Jesus was the Son of God!

The Father and The Holy Spirit

The Father and the Spirit state such in Mt.3:17, Lk.2:10; 3:21. 

Yet, Jesus Himself stated it best,  'If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead (Lk.16:31).'  You either believe based upon the evidence or you don't. What does the evidence say to you?  If Jesus is Divine as He claims and you give your life to Him, then eternal life is what He promises you in turn, and the only thing you have to lose is not living a worldly sinful life. If you choose not to believe? Well, that is up to you. Are you willing to live with the consequences if your choice is wrong?

Jim

Was Jesus Made Divine By Humans - Part 4

Considering Psalm 110 is a crucial matter in our discussion, as it predates all the prophets and the New Testament. It is referred to by many as THE Messianic Psalm, and is alluded to in the New Testament by Jesus as well as the other New Testament writers in that context.  Regardless of what the New Testament says, does this Psalm proclaim anything about the Messiah being a divine being? 

This will require us to get technical in this article, but, I assure you it will be worth the investigation. 

There are two sections of the Psalm as a whole that we will hone in on in this article. First is Psa 110:1  A Psalm of David. The LORD says to my Lord: "Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool."  The verse speaks of a time in the future, when the subject (my Lord)  will be sitting to the right of God (the Lord) and waiting till his enemies are subdued. 

There is no mistaking who the first Lord is here if you look to the original language, and scholars on both sides of the fence agree that this is YHWH - God that is speaking.  So, we can set that aside as settled and accepted. The question arises, as to who this second "Lord" mentioned in the sentence is. The other word translated “Lord" is ADONAI. In general without context, it can mean one who has rule or authority; one of high rank; one who has dominion; one who is the owner or possessor, etc. This word is applied frequently to a creature. It is applied to kings, princes, rulers, masters. What gives the word its ultimate meaning, is the context in which it occurs and used.  In this verse, it is a significant thing that ADONAI is spoken to by YHWH and invited to "sit at my right hand." So, God invites David's Lord or Master to sit at His right hand.  The fact that David himself (the King of Israel) refers to this one as "Lord" indicates that David clearly sees this individual as being above him. So, there is no problem this one is greater than he is. The question is, is this being divine or made divine in the context of this statement. It cannot be David, therefore, who is this?   The simple answer from the text is that the one whom David considered greater than himself was God.

It is interesting, that even the Jewish scholars of the time of Jesus, recognized this statement in the Psalm as referring to the Messiah or Mashiach. 

• It was also understood that this mashiach will be a great political leader descended from King David (Jer.23:5). 
• The mashiach is often referred to as "mashiach ben David" (mashiach, son of David). 
• He will be well-versed in Jewish law, and observant of its commandments (Isa.11:2-5), a charismatic leader, inspiring others to follow his example. 
• He will be a great judge, who makes righteous decisions (Jer.33:15), will bring about the political and spiritual redemption of the people (Isa.11:11-12; Jer.23:8; 30:3; Hos.3:4-5). 
• He will establish a government in Israel that will be the center of all world government, both for Jews and gentiles (Isa. 2:2-4; 11:10; 42:1). 

It is in Psalm 110 that the context of the Psalm states that the "Lord" or Messiah is invited by God to sit at His right hand.  Even in ancient times more than today, to sit at the right hand of the ruler, was to be considered to be equal with the ruler. This is seen with Joseph in Egypt, who serves the Pharaoh, yet, bears in anything he does the signet power of the Pharaoh himself. In Psalm 110, to be invited to sit at God's right hand, is  to be considered equal with God and bearing the power of God.  This is borne out by Psa.110:5 where David states, "the Lord is at your right hand; he will shatter kings on the day of his wrath." What does this mean? Contextually, it means that the one whom God Himself has invited to sit at His right hand, is one who is equal to and bearing the power of God Himself.  Another interesting thing to notice in the Psalm is that vs. 1 is stated as "having happened!" even in David's time. Meaning that God determined this even at that time.

So, what does the Psalm state that we should look for, if we are to find one whom God would invite to sit at His right hand?

1. Someone GREATER than David, whom God considered in the Psalm to be a model for this statement in Psalms
2. That this one in Psa.110:1 is going to have the authority and power of God
3. This one in Psa.110:1 is also going to also be the Spiritual Leader as well as the King or ruler of the People of the world, Jew and Gentile.
4. The one whom David considered greater than himself. 
5. The one whom in the Psalm would be a Ruler or King FOREVER and the one who would be a Priest appointed by God FOREVER. 

We find that one, we have found the Messiah and we have found what God has appointed to be the one who would Sit at HIS right hand. 

And if that is whom God has chosen, then who are we to say no?

Jim

Did Humans Make Jesus Divine? - Part 3

Next to consider in the subject of "Did Humans Make Jesus Divine?" is whether the Old Testament scriptures present the Messiah as one who would be Divine? Or was the Messiah just going to be another human leader that would make Israel victorious? Have we misunderstood God altogether?  

"Messiah," is a term found deep in the Old Testament, having the concept of an "anointed one." It was a term in Levitical days that was used as an adjective in referring to Priests (Lev.4:3,5; 4:16; 6:22), but was predominantly used in reference to the Kings (1Sam.24:6,10; 2 Sam.19:21; 23:1; Lam.4:20).  However, it was in the time of the captivities, that Isaiah was the first of the prophets to refer to an extraordinary king of the future to come (Isa.8:8; 9:6; 53) an enigmatic one who would be sent from God, called by the designations of God, with the attributes of God and born of a young maiden or virgin. Isaiah adds that this enigmatic one would die in a shameful and pitied way.  Similarly, his contemporaries Amos (Ams. 9:11) foretold of a time when the shattered fortunes of Judah would be restored by God, and Hosea (Hos.3:5) speaks of the reunion of the two kingdoms under David's line, adding yet another characteristic. 

It was a foregone thing, that by the time of Jeremiah and Ezekiel, that the throne of David was seen as gone forever. Jeremiah, a child of the captivity then speaks longingly of a Messiah called the “righteous Branch” who is to be raised after the concept of David. This Messiah would be called “God (is) our righteousness,” that is, God as the one making righteous dwell in him (Jer.23:5; 30:9). His contemporary Ezekiel alluded to a future king as the coming one “whose right it is” (Ezk.21:27), and as God's “servant David”, a “prince” or “king” who would rule forever over a reunited people (Ezk.34:23 37:24). While the argument might be made that they are simply pining for a new human king to bring them out of their despair; it is difficult to avoid  the language of Ezekiel makes that it is the ideal Messianic ruler who is here being spoken of. In Ezekiel's vision, the Prince plays a subordinate part, yet is connected to the complete ideal of God. Zechariah sees the Messiah, the futuristic King regarded as the sign of the coming Branch (Zech.3:8). Though unique to Zechariah, is  Zech.9:9 where the Messiah comes not on a splendid charger like a warrior king, but upon the foal of an ass, righteous and victorious, yet lowly and peaceful, strong by the power of God to help and save.

So, did they make the Messiah divine? It is interesting how that even though different men, living at different times, their concepts and writings are similar. They describe not what a human would want, but what meets the ideal of God. Yet, notice again, it is not with the arrogance of a human king, a dominating rule, or vanquishing military leader that they say will describe the one who is the Messiah.  He is lowly, despised of men, no one who you would look upon to be a leader. He is humble, He is going to die and yet, He will be victorious. 

Does this make Him divine? Not per se'.  Yet, to describe this Messiah as they did, they could not do so without appointing him the same designations that they would apply to God. the point that they make is that only God could fit this role. 

So, the next question that we have to ask for the next article, is if man did not make the Messiah divine, who did?  Is Jesus the Messiah and if so, did Jesus make any claim to being divine? And if He is divine, what makes Him so?

Jim

BOOK REVIEW: The Wedding at Cana: Experiencing the Glory and Kingdom Kindle Edition by V. M. Liew

The Wedding at Cana: Experiencing the Glory and Kingdom Kindle Edition

by V. M. Liew

The Wedding At Cana came referred to me. My first impression off the bat is that this was not what I was expecting. I mean this in both a good sense and bad. I am glad to say that I think the good outweighs the bad.

First the bad, but its not that bad.  This book is very intellectual and analytical. This is good because it is what I think we should do with scripture and biblical study, In fact, Mr.Liew did an excellent expose of the subject, analyzing in depth the subject. That however is the bad, at least for me. I found the analyzing tedious and losing my interest, making the book hard to complete. That may be because of the stage of reading that I am in at the current time. My time is limited and I don't find time for a lot of analytical inspection right now.

This said, I do recommend this book, especially for those looking into the miracles of Jesus. It is one of the better expose's that I have read on the subject, and Mr. Liew does an excellent job of getting into the cracks, crevices, and nuances of this event. I applaud him for doing so and in my book that makes him one of the better authors. Too many breeze over matters without looking in depth.

I definitely would recommend, especially for ministers, biblical teachers and those doing analytical studies of the scripture. 

Was Jesus made Divine by Humans? Part 2

The last article brought us in text to an accumulation of letters written by Paul, discovered in

Engraving of Polycarp

1937 and having been written around 175 A.D. In particular, the letter of Paul to the Phillippians was penned by Paul around 62 A.D. was quoted by Polycarp who lived in the latter half of the second century, quoting from the Philippians text of Ph'p.2:7-10, just as we have it in our bibles today. This tells us that the text of this was unaltered from the time that Paul penned it. In it, he says that, "So at the name of Jesus everyone will bow down, those in heaven, on earth, and under the earth. And to the glory of God the Father everyone will openly agree, "Jesus Christ is Lord!" Php 2:10,11.

So, we have seen that the concept that Jesus was and is Divine was not something promoted simply by the Council of Nicea in 321 under Constantine. The Council therefore adapted a "tenet" that Jesus was the "true Son of God" ergo divine, therefore as with Php.2:7-10 He was God. It was not the Council that made Him God, but they were simply agreeing with what was already in the scripture of that day (300's A.D.) and putting down an argument they considered to be in controversy to that.  However, the next dart thrown, is that Jesus was made divine by Paul. The proposition is that Paul (aka Saul of Tarsus), who was a Jewish scholar at one point, became corrupted by the Greek polytheistic influences that he encountered and resulting from that he began to proclaim Jesus as Divine or God. This is supposedly in opposition to the original disciples/apostles who lived with and followed Jesus who claimed him to be the "Messiah" - not God.

Did the disciples/apostles (excluding Paul) proclaim Jesus as divine? 

Well, it is interesting that if we isolate certain things in the New Testament from others, we can make the apostles say anything that we want to. We need to remember that taking things in context here is going to be crucial. Another thing to take in mind, is that the things we see these men saying in the beginning of the gospels, are made in more mature statements by much older men by the time we get to their letters in the New Testament. That said, let's begin in the beginning - with the Gospels.

The Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John), containing narratives from the life of Jesus through His resurrection and ascension. A significant fact in dating these particular books, is a historical event, the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. Jesus foretold of this event (Mt.24), and the fact that this event is not included or mentioned outside of Jesus' prediction suggests their writing was before that date.  Matthew (originally in Aramaic or Hebrew) has dates ranging between 40-140 A.D. However as it was quoted by Iraneus in

Iraneus of Lyons

115 A.D. we know that it had to be written before then, and with no mention of the Temple's destruction outside of Jesus' prediction in Mt.24 gives us a rounded date of around 50 A.D.  Mark also, is supposed to have been written within 5 years prior to Matthew. While Mark was not an eyewitness to the events of Jesus' life. He was a disciple of Peter and it is suggested that it was Peter who informed Mark of the life of Christ and guided him in writing the Gospel known by his name.  Luke also was not a direct disciple of Jesus, but a convert and partner with Paul. He was a physician and also a historian. Luke was written before the book of Acts and Acts does not mention "Nero's persecution of the Christians in A.D. 64 or the deaths of James (A.D. 62), Paul (A.D. 64), and Peter (A.D. 65). John's gospel is the only one of the four, which the date is uncertain. We know the Revelation (also penned by John supposedly near the end of the first century after the Temple's destruction) and it is assumed the gospel was written around the same timeframe. 

Did they simply proclaim Jesus as the Messiah, or did they - He proclaim himself to be divine?  Peter's statement in Mat 16:16 is a key one, "Simon Peter spoke up, "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God."  Not only does Peter state that Jesus is the Messiah (Anointed One of God), but he includes in this statement, "Son of the Living God."  He literally declares Jesus to be the Offspring of God - of God, i.e., Divine. What is also significant, is that Jesus in none of the gospels repudiates Peter for making this statement.   In Matt 14:33 after calming the storm on Galilee the statement "And those in the boat worshiped him, saying, "Truly you are the Son of God." Same as in Mt.16 and prior to Mt.16, where again the exclamation is made that they considered Him not just "Messiah," but Divine - God!  Again, the statement is not repudiated. One other key instance, is

Fragment  of Gospel of Mark

recorded in Mark 9:7,8 where Jesus is transfigured on the mountain. Peter, James, and John are there and the record states, " And a cloud overshadowed them, and a voice came out of the cloud, "This is my beloved Son; listen to him." And suddenly, looking around, they no longer saw anyone with them but Jesus only." So, if only the four of them were there, and Jesus is transfigured, who is the voice coming from the cloud saying, "This is my beloved Son"?  If we take this to be God speaking, saying "This is my beloved Son" then what does that tell you? It's not Peter, James, John, any of the apostles or Paul and definitely not the Nicean Council.  Perhaps the most significant of the gospels exclaiming that Jesus is Divine and God, is the gospel of John. The entire gospel is devoted to and presents this as a physically witnessed fact that "...the Word WAS God.....the Word became flesh and dwelt among us."  It is also presented to an audience that lived during the time of the events, and to those who were aware of the events about which John writes.

In our previous article, we have seen that the presentation of Jesus as divine, was not something made up by the Nicean Council. They believed it, but their declaration was based on belief and teaching that existed before they did, and it was in effort to squelch those who were teaching the opposite as "doctrine." To say that Paul was the one who made Jesus divine is another straw being grasped by those who have not seriously handled the scriptures with any depth. Yes, Paul does believe, preach, and proclaim that Jesus is Divine - the Son of God!  What is interesting to me, is that Paul came to this conclusion on his own  (Acts 9:6; 26:16) without the help of the other apostles, who even considered him a threat in the beginning. But, the teaching that Jesus was Divine, the Son of God, is as we have seen, inherent in the Gospels themselves. It is presented and proclaimed by those who were the initial disciples of Jesus, as well as presented outside of them. In fact, the conclusion the gospels expect you to reach after reading the accounts and weighing the events and history, is that Jesus is not only the Messiah/Christ, He is indeed the Son of the Living God!

Next to consider in this, is whether the Old Testament scriptures present the Messiah as one who would be Divine? Or was the Messiah just going to be another human leader that would make Israel victorious? Have we misunderstood God altogether?  Check out the blog next week!

Jim

Was Jesus made divine by humans?

A recent discussion that I had was interesting, where the question arose as to whether Jesus is/was "God" or he was made divine by Paul or by the Council of Nicea formed under Constantine. This has been a huge debate among many for years.  Jesus said , "During this very night, all of you will reject me, as the Scriptures say, 'I will strike down the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered.' (Mat 26:31) and this was to his own disciples. So, doubting Him, was something that even Jesus said would happen.The question is, whether the hypothesis presented is true. Was Jesus made divine by humans, did He claim to be divine, and then finally WAS He divine.

Needless to say, this is not something that can be diligently considered in one article, so I am going to try to approach this in several different articles. As such, I encourage you to follow them. This particular article will center on whether His disciples or Paul made Him Divine, or was it the Council of Nicea under Constantine that made Jesus divine.

The Council of Nicea in 321, arose partially because of what was known of as the Arian

controversy. Arius was a "presbyter" in Alexandria, who because of disputes over the words "begotten," "born" "created," "essence," "substance," nature," and "person" began to postulate that The Father alone was divine and since Jesus was "born" of a human mother he could not be divine or God.  The majority of the council argued against this, stating that the scriptures clearly stated Jesus' divinity therefore Arius' argument was rejected. The Council therefore adapted a "tenet" that Jesus was the "true Son of God" ergo divine, therefore as with Php.2:7-10 He was God. It was not the Council that made Him God, but they were simply agreeing with what was already in the scripture of that day (300's A.D.) and putting down an argument they considered to be in controversy to that. 

This brings us to another consideration in this, what were the scriptures between the first and third centuries?  It is a foregone conclusion, that the Old Testament as we have it in our own bibles today, was in existence even in the time of Jesus, and was quoted by Jesus and his Disciples in the New Testament. There were even Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek versions of the Old Testament that existed and were quoted within the time frame of the first century. But what about the New Testament (33 A.D.-100 A.D.)?  There has been much controversy over this as well, as well as many spurious books that came up in the latter first century through fourth centuries. All making their claim for a position to be recognized as "true" scripture. So, this section will deal with how do we establish the books of the New Testament and the second part of this shall be do they proclaim Jesus as God or divine.

What is called by scholars as the "canon" of the New Testament, are the 26 books or letters

that we have assembled in our bibles today. This was formalized in the Second Council of Trullan of the Year 692, although it was universally accepted in the mid 300's to be the most accurate records of Jesus and his apostles. The "original" letters written by the apostles (gospels and letters) have not been authenticated of found. What we do have though are copies written by fellow Christians so that they could be circulated among the numerous churches of the day. The latest substantial find was in 2008, when 47 new manuscripts were discovered in Albania; at least seventeen of these were unknown to Western scholars. In 1937 a manuscript containing the majority of the letters written by Paul were discovered and are on display at housed in part at the Chester Beatty Library in Dublin, Ireland. While the earliest manuscript is dated to 175 A.D., it is interesting that Polycarp (69-156 AD) quoted from 2 Thessalonians, Matthew, Gospel of Mark, Gospel of Luke, Acts of the Apostles, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Epistle to the Hebrews, 1 Peter, 1 John, 3 John. Paul is said to have  penned the letter to the Philippians in 62 A.D. which is only 29 years after the death and resurrection of Jesus, and Polycarp is quoting this in the mid First Century. What is the point of all of this tracking and dating?  It shows that the text of Php.2:7-10 existed in the form that we have it without change or alteration. So it wasn't the Nicean Council that was proclaiming Jesus as God, they were quoting Paul who penned it in 62 A.D.

Now we come to another argument raised, that it was Paul that made Jesus "divine" and that before Paul neither Jesus or his apostles taught such. That - we shall examine in the next article. 

Jim