Did the New Testament writers think that Jesus is God?

Ever had a visit from a Jehovah Witness on a Saturday morning? I have several and each time I do try to engage them in conversation. They will often tried to convince me from the scripture that Jesus is not God. Are they right? Have we in fact misunderstood the Bible? One difficulty we have is that the word Trinity does not exist in Bible. So does that mean Jehovah Witnesses are right. Well yes the word Trinity does not exists in the Bible but you don't need to dig very deep into the Bible to realize that Jesus quite forthrightly states that he and the Father are one. When we are reading the Bible we cannot allow the Jehovah Witness to manipulate the scripture to support their view about Jesus. Rather I found it helpful to see people's reaction to Jesus proclamation. Let the scripture speak for itself.

Firstly, let us consider how Jesus' supporter see Jesus. In chapter 9 of John's Gospel, Jesus healed a man born blind. The Pharisees want to discredit Jesus because he healed the blind man on the Sabbath. John recorded that Jesus caught with the previously blinded man after the Pharisees had rejected the miracle. In verse 35, Jesus asked if the previously blind man believe in the Son of Man. Jesus go on to tell the man that he is the Son of Man. According to many English translations (King James, New International Version) of the original Greek text, when man find that Jesus is the Son of Man, the man worshiped Jesus. The Jehovah Witness Bible use the word obeisance which is only an expression of respect or homage. In fact, In Matthew 28:17

NIV has:

16 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

Interestingly, Jehovah's Witnesses Bible has in v17:

17 and when they saw him they did obeisance, but some doubted.

In both cases, the original Greek word used is prosekynēsan which can mean two things:

1. to do reverence or homage by prostration
2. to pay divine homage, worship, adore

Note that this same Greek word also appear in v9 of the same chapter where Mary Magdalene and the other Mary met the risen Jesus.

Could the Jehovah's Witnesses translation be right? The women have just met the risen Jesus, did they merely paid homage to someone who had just risen from the dead? Verse 17 is even more interesting when we ask who were the ones that doubted. From the other Gospels we know that by this point the disciples had already seen the resurrected Jesus. Therefore they weren't doubting that this was the risen Christ. Could it be that they were doubting whether it was OK to worship Jesus (Deuteronomy 6:4)?

But in all three cases mentioned:

1. The man born blind
2. The women who met the risen Jesus
3. The disciples who see Jesus ascension to heaven

If the Jehovah's Witnesses are right then Jesus must in every instance order his disciples to stop worshiping but he did not. One Jehovah's Witness said to me that perhaps the Gospel writers did not record it. But that is not true because the word prosekynēsan was again used in Acts 10:25-26. Here's Jehovah's Witness translation:25 As Peter entered, Cornelius met him, fell down at his feet and did obeisance to him. 26 But Peter lifted him up, saying: “Rise; I myself am also a man.”

Clearly, Peter considered Cornelius' "obedisance" is not merely homage. Peter saw Cornelius' action as one of worship! More importantly Peter proceeded to stop Cornelius from worshiping him. Jesus not stop the previously blind man, the women nor his disciples from "obedisance" him.

Finally, how did Jesus detractors react to Jesus' claims. For this we can look at Jesus healing of a paralyzed man in Matthew Chapter 9. Jesus said to the paralyzed man:

“Take heart, son; your sins are forgiven.” and then go on to heal the man. More interestingly, Matthew recorded that the teachers of the law thought Jesus was blaspheming! This is because only God can forgive sins.

From the recorded reactions of Jesus contemporary, the only correct understanding is that Jesus is truly man and truly God.

P.S.

Another interesting passage is Isaiah 42 - the Servant of the LORD (Yahweh). Consider in particular 42:8

“I am the Lord; that is my name!
    I will not yield my glory to another
    or my praise to idols. "

Yet in John 17, Jesus asked the Father to glorify him, in particular Jesus prayed this:


⁵ And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.

Even the Witness' NWT has:

5 So now you, Father, glorify me alongside yourself with the glory that I had alongside you before the world was.

Surely this is only possible and if Jesus is also Jehovah. The same being but a different person! 

In John 8, particularly 8:58 the NIV has:

⁵⁸ “Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!”

This was in the context that Abraham has seen him and the Jews complaining how they could be possible when Jesus (to them) is not yet 50.

Even the NWT has:

58 Jesus said to them: “Most truly I say to YOU, Before Abraham came into existence, I have been.”

This passage in itself doesn't mean anything. A loony can say the same thing. However, the telling part is verse 59 where the NIV has:

⁵⁹ At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.







   
Wouldn't this be a bit drastic if such a claim is from a loony, obviously the Jews didn't think Jesus is a loony. They want to stone Jesus for blasphemy because the they recognize they Jesus is claiming equality with the Father. 
 

DFO - Directed and Foolish Outcomes

What does one do with ones wife on a Sunday afternoon? Why not relax and head to the nearest DFO (Direct Factory Outlet)? Yes, we went to the Jindalee DFO as I wanted to see a pair Sunglasses that Oakley claimed to be specially designed for the Asian face. No more glasses slipping off the bridge of your nose. Unfortunately, the Sunglasses shop at the DFO did not carry Oakleys. Well, I guess Google isn't always your friend :-(. More disturbingly, I noticed that there were not many shoppers at DFO and some shops were empty or not opened. True, apart from Mother's Day, people don't usually shop prior to Easter. Yes they have many cheap clothing stores but no matter how cheap they make shirts, one can only buy so many. Even the moths (Matthew 6:19) don't have enough time to chew through all that cotton! The other day I had an argument with my friend at work. To him, religion is an utter waste of time because we have science now. It is a pity because I think he would found that Jesus has a lot to say about storing treasure in heaven vs shirts in ones overfilling wardrobe. I thought science is neutral about this sort of things. Would science tell us human beings to buy less shirts? All science will do is created shirts that we can stored in yet smaller cupboards. Sure we are destroying the environment and making millions of Chinese workers work day and night to make us more shirts (and sunglasses) but does science care?

DFO indeed! No not "Direct Factory Outlet" but "Directed and Foolish Outcomes". Isn't storing treasure in heaven really just pie in the sky stuff? How can Jesus' word have any significance for the Chinese sweetshop worker or the malnourished African orphan or our environment? Before all you non-religious readers turn off I think we ought to read the relevant passage in Matthew's Gospel where Jesus said:

"Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. 20 But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moths and vermin do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. 21 For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also."

Jesus is not merely talking about the future (if you believe in an afterlife but that's another story) but he is also talking about the here and now. Jesus is saying whatever we value then that thing that we value will direct our action. If buying more shirts and sunglasses (boy is that me??) then these are the things that direct your action. If you must wear a new shirt every day for the rest of your natural life then I suspect that even Imelda Marcos's wardrobe would not be big enough for you. On the other hand if you value having a right relationship with people, the environment and God more valuable than shirts (and sunglasses) then your action would be directed by that desire. Again science will not care that you value relationship more than things. I suppose with AI (Artificial Intelligence), I am sure one day I could have a very fulfilling relationship with my sunglasses (only one way though).

But why God? Actually the whole point about God is that our action today not only affects the short term, it has long term consequences. However if we are only focusing on things that are here today and dinner for moths tomorrow then we are forever focusing on the short term. We are forever focusing what keeps "me" happy and not about what happens to our children and their children and their children's children. But isn't that precisely what environmental awareness is all about? We want to ensure that the earth is still habitable for our grand kids. But that is not what DFOs are about.

DFOs not only have consequences for the way we consume (mine I miss the yummy KFC). It also has consequences for how our young people view the world. As an electrical engineer and a computer scientist, I am forever despairing at how so many in my profession are always on the lookout for the easy solutions. Recently I had a discussion with a young man who has just started to work in the computer industry. I asked him why he hasn't done any programming. He said that programming was hard and difficult and he is not the only young person who used such adjectives. No wonder our science is on the decline in our high schools and universities. More DFOs indeed!

Lastly, I wondered if DFOs also affect how we deal with the GFC (Global Financial Crisis). Not long after Kevin Rudd and the ALP was sweep into power, Wayne Swan, the treasurer, loved to trumpet how he has put in the stimulus so that our economy can ride out the GFC. But where did stimulus go to? It did boost the retail industry but now what? Sure, people are more careful than ever about their spending but again Mr Swan, we can only buy so many pairs of sunglasses. To our politicians, it is time for them to read their history books about how our great-parents dealt with crash of 1929. If it wasn't for the building of the Sydney Harbour Bridge then there would have been 1400 fewer jobs in NSW during the Great Depression. Similarly the Hoover Dam in the United States also provided employment for workers who have lost their jobs after the 1929 crash. Unlike sunglasses and shirts, the Coat Hanger and the Hoover Dams are still here today and providing vital support to our economy today. Today we have more than just civil infrastructure, we also vital informational infrastructure like the NBN. Surely it is time for both sides of politics to re-assess where does our treasure lie.