Which is risker?

[Elijah John]

Which approach is riskier?

a) To worship Jesus as God, and it turns out that he is not?

b) Or to not worship Jesus as God, and it turns out that he is?

Why?

[The Tanager]

I've offered 10 reasons why I believed Scripture claims Jesus is God in response to Elijah John's request for me to do so.

1. Jesus tells his disciples to pray to him (John 14:13-14 and 16:26)

Is Jesus saying pray to him or pray in his name?

He's saying both. We are to ask Jesus and to do so in His name.

2. Jesus shares glory with the Father before the world was made (John 17:5)

Did Jesus claim he shared Father's glory?

Jesus says the glory he had with the Father. It's not two different cars, using your analogy. God does not share His glory with another according to Isaiah 42:8 and 48:11.

3. Jesus is called the Lord of Glory (James 2:1)

Are you suggesting that since Jesus is called glorious and God is called glorious Jesus must be God?

No, I'm not. I'm not a Greek scholar and we have various translations, so I often resort to a tool like Biblehub to get a better idea of the original writings when discussing contested texts and differing translations. In both James 2 and Psalm 24 glory is a noun, not an adjective. That gives us a reason to side with a translation like the ESV which says "My brothers, show no partiality as you hold the faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of Glory" over a translation like the NWT.

The Greek of James 2 does not have "Lord" two times, but doxes (translated: of-glory) has the definite article 'the' in front of it, so it should at least be a translation like "My brothers, show no partiality as you hold the faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, the glory. Coming from a Jewish background, James probably would have had in mind the glory of the Lord, like we see in the cloud in Exodus 16:10. I don't see why James would call Jesus Lord and the Glory given that background and the connections to God unless James viewed Jesus as God.

4. Jesus has the power to forgive sins which only God has (Mark 2:1-12)

We've been discussing that on another thread, so I don't expect you to do so again here.

5. Jesus doubles down when accused of blasphemy (John 10:22-42, Mark 14:53-65)

You responded to John 10 and I responded further in post 20 that you have not responded to. The other passage you have not responded to.

6. Various authors directly say Jesus is God (John 1:1, 2 Peter 1:1, Titus 2:13, Hebrews 1:8)

John 1:1 has just recently entered our discussion in that other thread as well, but the other three have not.

7. Jesus claims the Divine name "I AM" for Himself (John 8:58)

8. Jesus does not deny people's attempts to worship Him (Matt. 14:33, 28:9 and John 20:28)

9. Jesus is the Creator and not a creature (Colossians 1:15-20)

10. In Jesus the fullness of God dwells (Colossians 1:15-20)

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 39 by The Tanager]

Even if all of what you say here is accurate, (and it is not beyond dispute that it is) where does Jesus ever command anyone to worship him as God?

And even if he is God, since he did not command worship, (nor did he ever say "I am God) how could not worshiping Jesus be sin?

Is someone else telling you that Jesus is God enough for you to take that statement as an imperative from God?

Wouldn't the safest course of action be to worship Father YHVH alone? How could that course of action possibly be a sin?

[JehovahsWitness]

Jesus says the glory he had with the Father.

So if you eat a meal with your Father do you eat his stake of his plate or do you eat your own food of your own plate in his company? What makes you think "with" means "share yours" rather than on the company of another (which is what the word "with" means)?

JW

[JehovahsWitness]

3. Jesus is called the Lord of Glory (James 2:1)

Are you suggesting that since Jesus is called glorious and God is called glorious Jesus must be God?

No, I'm not. I'm not a Greek scholar and we have various translations, so I often resort to a tool like Biblehub to get a better idea of the original writings when discussing contested texts and differing translations.

Are suggesting there is something in how the original Greek for "glory" that can ONLY be applied to someone that is Almighty God? If so, what?



JW

[marco]

Jesus claims the Divine name "I AM" for Himself (John 8:58)

Jesus says: "Before Abraham was, I am " ... not "I AM was before Abraham, which might also be true. It makes no grammatical sense in English to take I am as referring to God's title here. It makes sense to interpret Christ's words as "Since I am the Truth that God has given me, then that truth existed long before Abraham."

Jesus does not deny people's attempts to worship Him (Matt. 14:33, 28:9 and John 20:2

Even today people pay exaggerated homage to heroes, Christ accepted their respect for what it was. They either believed in ONE God or they didn't. They had the sophistication to catch fish not interpret the mystery of two Gods being one.

Paul introduced a new theology which Jesus, already gone, could not endorse. He split the early church with his views, so it is wise not to quote him as if one were quoting Christ. We must look for evidence in the words and acts of Jesus, not in the ideas of later theorists. And there is none precisely because Jesus never saw himself in his own Father's place. He always directs attention to the Father; whatever power he claims to have, he gets from the Father. If he has the power to forgive then he has this power through the Father.

[The Tanager]

Even if all of what you say here is accurate, (and it is not beyond dispute that it is) where does Jesus ever command anyone to worship him as God?

"Jesus worship" is praying to him, as some do, praising him in song and prayer, as many do, and in general putting him in a believer's life in a place where one would normally put God.

If what I said previously is accurate, then Jesus tells his disciples to pray to Him (John 14:13-14), allows and accepts their praise (Matt. 14:33, 28:9 and John 20:28) and puts Himself in a believer's life in places where one would normally put God (the rest of the verses I shared).

And even if he is God, since he did not command worship, (nor did he ever say "I am God) how could not worshiping Jesus be sin?

Jesus consistently talks about people believing in Him and what He does and from that gaining eternal life. That is all a part of worshipping Jesus as God (your option b). To reject this, according to the Bible, leaves one dead in their sins.

Is someone else telling you that Jesus is God enough for you to take that statement as an imperative from God?

Not at all. But, then again, I'm not saying that. I'm saying Jesus told us He is God and the Resurrection is God backing His claims up.

Wouldn't the safest course of action be to worship Father YHVH alone? How could that course of action possibly be a sin?

It misses the mark if it includes a rejection of who God says He is and what He did on our behalf.

[The Tanager]

Paul introduced a new theology which Jesus, already gone, could not endorse. He split the early church with his views, so it is wise not to quote him as if one were quoting Christ. We must look for evidence in the words and acts of Jesus, not in the ideas of later theorists.

I would agree that we should primarily look at the words and acts of Jesus if we were taking a different approach in this thread. Even in doing that, I would disagree with your assessment of the connection (or lack thereof) between Jesus and Paul (and have provided verses and thoughts to respond to from the Gospels themselves).

But here Elijah John asked me for Biblical evidence to back up the view concerning Jesus being God. That assumes the truth of what the Bible claims.

1. Jesus tells His disciples to pray to Him (John 14:13-14)

I originally included John 16:26 as well, but in looking back over it I could understand an interpretation where Jesus is not God fitting into that passage (even though I still don't think that is the most plausible explanation), so we can leave that one off.

JW...any follow-up comments on Jesus telling his disciples to pray to Jesus and to pray in His name?

2. Jesus sharing glory with the Father eternally (John 17:5)

So if you eat a meal with your Father do you eat his stake of his plate or do you eat your own food of your own plate in his company? What makes you think "with" means "share yours" rather than on the company of another (which is what the word "with" means)?

You are equivocating in your analogy. You first connect glory with meal and then you connect glory with a part of that meal, to try to make your point. It's like you are doing this:

P1: The Tanager and his Dad share a meal
P2: The Tanager and his Dad each have a different steak as part of their meal.
C: Therefore, they don't share the same steak.

The conclusion is just a restatement of P2, and says nothing at all against P1. Jesus does not say that His glory is a different steak than the Father's. If glory is equal to steak, then Jesus is sharing the Father's steak.

3. Jesus is called the Lord of Glory (James 2:1, 1 Cor 2:8)

Are suggesting there is something in how the original Greek for "glory" that can ONLY be applied to someone that is Almighty God? If so, what?

No. I'm saying that the original Greek seems to directly connect Jesus to either "Lord of Glory" or "the Glory" and, either way, has connotations of Divinity. I also came across 1 Corinthians 2:8 in this same regard.

I also wanted to ask you about your signature. It translates Kyrios to Jehovah, but that's the same word ascribed to Jesus in these passages, but you obviously don't think that shows Jesus is Jehovah.

5. Jesus doubles down when accused of blasphemy (John 10:22-42, Mark 14:53-65)

6. Various authors directly say Jesus is God (John 1:1, 2 Peter 1:1, Titus 2:13, Hebrews 1:8)

7. Jesus claims the Divine Name for Himself (John 8:48-59)

Jesus says: "Before Abraham was, I am " ... not "I AM was before Abraham, which might also be true. It makes no grammatical sense in English to take I am as referring to God's title here. It makes sense to interpret Christ's words as "Since I am the Truth that God has given me, then that truth existed long before Abraham."

The original is not the noun 'truth', it's the Hebrew adverb amen

Truth is not a noun in the original. It's the Hebrew adverb "amen" which means truly. So, there is no reason to translate the sentence the way you do. The two phrases of Jesus' claim are "before Abraham" and "I am." In the context of the Jews asking how old Jesus is and how he knows what Abraham would say of Jesus' day (57). And to those questions Jesus compares His own existence to Abraham's. And in doing so he uses the Divine Name as revealed to Moses in Exodus 3:14. God there and Jesus here are talking about their eternal, independent existence. Add to this the reaction of the Jewish leaders of trying to stone Jesus for this obviously blasphemous comment (59).

8. Jesus allows and accepts people's attempts to worship Him (Matt 14:33, 28:9 and John 20:28)

Even today people pay exaggerated homage to heroes, Christ accepted their respect for what it was. They either believed in ONE God or they didn't. They had the sophistication to catch fish not interpret the mystery of two Gods being one.

Even simple fishermen knew only God was to be worshipped. If Jesus was just a rabbi who worshipped God, then he would certainly know that. But that didn't stop them from worshipping Jesus or Jesus from accepting it.

9. Jesus is said to be the Creator (Col 1:15-20)

10. The fullness of Jesus is said to dwell in Jesus (Col 1:15-20)

[JehovahsWitness]

P1: The Tanager and his Dad share a meal
P2: The Tanager and his Dad each have a different steak as part of their meal.
C: Therefore, they don't share the same steak.

The conclusion is just a restatement of P2, and says nothing at all against P1. Jesus does not say that His glory is a different steak than the Father's. If glory is equal to steak, then Jesus is sharing the Father's steak.

If the meal consists of two stakes, one of which belongs to the Father and one of which belongs to the son, then the son can have a meal with/ alongside his Father without eating that which belongs uniquely to the Father. If Jesus enjoyed glory with ( ie they both have glory while in each other's company) his Father, then he "shared" glory (ie they both had and enjoyed glory).

It is an assumption that Jesus had the glory that belonged to his Father since Jesus never said I shared YOUR glory; only that he had/shared glory. It is also an assumption that Jesus ever had the same glory as that of his Father, since Jesus never said he shared "the SAME glory".

Is there any scriptural reason you make these assumptions?



JW

[Tcg]

Which approach is riskier?

a) To worship Jesus as God, and it turns out that he is not?

b) Or to not worship Jesus as God, and it turns out that he is?

Why?

I don't see why either should be considered a risk of any kind. Perhaps if you worship a petty God who will punish people for not understanding what he never bothered to make clear. The fault is clearly on him.

[JehovahsWitness]

3. Jesus is called the Lord of Glory (James 2:1, 1 Cor 2:8)

Are suggesting there is something in how the original Greek for "glory" that can ONLY be applied to someone that is Almighty God? If so, what?

No. I'm saying that the original Greek seems to .... [have] connotations of Divinity.

I don't know what you mean by "connotations of divinity" but if the word "glory"/glorious can apply to that which is Almighty God and that which is NOT Almighty God; and if you are not implying that there is something in the employ of the word in Greek that can ONLY be employed in connection with Almighty God, then how can James 2:1 or 1 Cor 2:8 be relevant in establishing whether Jesus is Almighty God or not? Both refer to Jesus as "The Glorious Lord" so? So what?