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

Money Changers In The Temple

Now days before the crucifixion and coming resurrection, Jesus has arrived at the Temple riding on the foal of a Donkey to the lauds and praise of the crowd. Already in motion, is the plot to “silence” him. This is not his first trip to the Temple, he has done so before.  On that occasion (John 2:13-25), Jesus saw things in the Temple that were wrong and not seeing the religious authorities doing anything about it, Jesus chased the perpetrators out.  Money Changers, people engaged in currency exchange and animals and birds that were for sale to those coming to Jerusalem to worship (John 2:16; Matthew 21:12). Now he enters the Temple again, and once again sees these same events (Matt.21:12-13; Mk. 11:15-18; Lke. 19:45-48). Now for a second time, Jesus chases these people out of the Temple.

In our world today, especially if we are not acquainted with the traditions, the Biblical Law and matters, we might wonder what the big deal is. Let’s look at some things together:

1.    

 

    The temple, or the area being spoken of here is the “hieron,” in the outer courtyard. Not the sanctuary where only priests were allowed (the naos). This is commonly called the Court of the Gentiles as seen in the picture above.  According to Jewish tradition the Messiah will enter Jerusalem from the east. Jesus entered Jerusalem through the East gate (also referred to as the Golden Gate) as he came down from the Mount of Olives and entered the Temple (Lke 19:28-48)

     Money changers. Foreign money (Roman currency, Greek Currency etc.) was not allowed to be offered in the Temple. As such, the money had to be changed into the half-shekel of Hebrew currency. This would necessitate “money changers,” or what would be like an ancient ATM where you could exchange one country’s currency for another.  Ferrell Jenkins in his Travel Blog points out that it is generally held that the coin used by the Jews for the temple tax was the Tyre shekel, which after 19 B.C. was most likely minted in Jerusalem (cf. Hendin, Guide to Biblical Coins, 175). Alfred Edersheim, who wrote a book on The Temple: Its Ministry and Services, pointed out that the total sum derived annually from the Temple tribute was large.  

What was so wrong with this? Jesus exclaimed a quote from Isaiah, "It is written, 'My house shall be a house of prayer,' but you have made it a den of robbers (Lk.19:46)." How so?  The act of the money changers in the Temple was a profanity of the Temple itself. The Temple was a house of Worship and prayer and the religious authorities had allowed merchants to come in and make what was to be a joyful experience, a solemn, prayerful and insightful experience into something of hardship and commerce.  They were a den of robbers because they were gouging people in the exchange of coinage and offering purchase of sacrificial animals at exorbitant rates. A lot like going to a theater today and having to pay $5 for a $1 cola.  

There are several warnings here. 

1. First, is that God’s assemblies, churches, temples are NEVER to be places where usury, or commerce. God’s house is always a place of worship, prayer, and communing with God.  
2. Second, man does not have authority to make God’s house something it is not. When we do, we face the wrath of God.

We would do well to heed these warnings, and work toward making worship the spiritual experience and learning that it was always meant to be.

Jim