FALSE - Jesus never claimed to be 'God Almighty', but did admit to being the '
Son of God'. There is a
significant difference. Jesus and his disciples were Unitarians, in that they held to their native traditional orthodox Judaism, at least at the core, where God the Father, is the Only 'God', even YHWH Elohim, the Most HIGH, and this God is one. See the Shema. Jesus gave his sole allegience to the One True God, his 'God' and our 'God'. The passage above is only a narrative by the writer describing
what the Jews 'assumed' or 'believed',
and/or is
what the writer himself is assuming.
Jesus himself refutes this belief fully in his discourse in the same gospel; we shall review again -
31 The Jews picked up stones again to stone Him. 32 Jesus answered them, “I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?” 33 The Jews answered Him, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God.” (see here, this is the Jews assuming Jesus was making himself out to be 'God') 34 Jesus answered them, “Has it not been written in your Law, ‘I said, you are gods’? 35 If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), 36 do you say of Him, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’? (Note here Jesus quotes scripture to show that God even called human judges 'gods'(elohim), just to show them that even they were regarded as 'sons' of 'God' as well. Then he testifies ONLY to the attribution of being the Son of God, NOT 'God Almighty') 37 If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me; 38 but if I do them, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, so that you may [f]know and understand that the Father is in Me, and I in the Father.” 39 Therefore they were seeking again to seize Him, and He eluded their grasp.
- John 10
See above, Jesus DID clear up their mis-assumption
- brilliantly in fact by quoting
scripture and his own testimony.
Uh huh,...God gave him that power.
We've been over this many times. Of course honor is given to God's Son, just as well to 'God'.
The passage above in chapter 10 shows otherwise. This is what the writer put within the narrative, but remember Jesus testimony himself. I think what Jesus says trumps the Jews and writers assumptions
You are with the Jews assuming things. Jesus by his own testimony clears this up, and his example of quoting scripture shows even if he they believed he was claiming the title of 'elohim', that God of old also called the human judges/leaders of Israel 'god'! BUT Jesus clarifies their mistaken correlation,....and affirms his SONSHIP,....NOT his DEITY. - do make the distinction
You can attibute, superimpose or assume any measure of divinity upon Jesus if you like, and John's gospel actually affords you the luxury of such with many possible passges (which are a matter of 'translation') but lets be true to the text. Furthermore,...John ends his profilic gospel in showing that faith in Jesus the Christ as the
SON of God is what affords one eternal life.
A Unitarian interpretation of scripture still holds as a tenable, rational and logical composite thru which to understand one's relationship to God, and God's relationship to His Son. But you're free to believe whatever seems most appropriate at any given time in your religious studies
- with more study, viewpoints could be modified. Points of view are subject to change.