Soul Invictus

The intent of this thread is not to go into the messianic prophecy direction. I've picked up on a pattern of what I think are figurative phrases purported to have been Jesus' words to be taken as literal. My general question is what are your reasons based solely to what is attributed to having been said by Jesus do you believe Jesus to be God. I want all of them so I can understand the Christian justification for what I think is an improper worship of a man.

Jeremiah

Here is one of the clearest passages: Matthew 16:13-27 (NIV)

13When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, "Who do people say the Son of Man is?"
14They replied, "Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets."
15"But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?"
16Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ,[2] the Son of the living God."
17Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. 18And I tell you that you are Peter,[3] and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades[4] will not overcome it.[5] 19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be[6] bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be[7] loosed in heaven." 20Then he warned his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Christ.

21From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life.
22Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. "Never, Lord!" he said. "This shall never happen to you!"
23Jesus turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men."
24Then Jesus said to his disciples, "If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. 25For whoever wants to save his life[8] will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will find it. 26What good will it be for a man if he gains the whole world, yet forfeits his soul? Or what can a man give in exchange for his soul? 27For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done.

Qinopio

Both references you quoted, Jeremiah, are to Jesus claiming to be the Son of God.

What I've always been curious about is the reference in Mark where Jesus says "I am" in response to a question posed by Pharisees, and they accuse him of blasphemy. [Mark 14:64]

One response I've seen, by someone who was attempting to show that Jesus was not claiming to be God, is as follows:

The problem with this is that God says to moses "ego eimi ho on", and "tell them that ho on sent you". If Jesus was quoting that Exodus passage, he would have either used the full phrase or the second half of it, not the first.

But it doesn't explain why the Pharisees thought he was blaspheming.

Doctor X

The Mt 16:13-23 is based on and expands Mk 8:27-23

Mt 16:15-16 in RSV:

Mk 8:29 in RSV:

with "Christ" in Mk actually being "annointed" and more properly refering to a king. "We" consider a "christ" as a deity; not necessarily in this passage.

Lk similarly expands on Mk in Lk 9:18-22 with 9:20 stating:

Mk consistently "cuts" the disciples for failing to understand what Junior is. Mt and Lk share such disdain, but they expand the text to reaffirm what they believe and wish their audiences to believe.

The problem wish such redaction is that is say little about what Junior himself said or thought. It is reasonable that since the tradition of his followers not considering him divine exists--particularly in Mk--to consider he never declared himself divine. It makes, however, little evidence either way.

As for current adherents, people need very little by way of facts to believe anything.

--J.D.

Jeremiah

Here is another from Matthew 9

2Some men brought to him a paralytic, lying on a mat. When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, "Take heart, son; your sins are forgiven."
3At this, some of the teachers of the law said to themselves, "This fellow is blaspheming!"
4Knowing their thoughts, Jesus said, "Why do you entertain evil thoughts in your hearts? 5Which is easier: to say, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, 'Get up and walk'? 6But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins...." Then he said to the paralytic, "Get up, take your mat and go home." 7And the man got up and went home. 8When the crowd saw this, they were filled with awe; and they praised God, who had given such authority to men.

To the Jews only God can forgive sins and that is why they considered him blaspheming in this situation. Jesus would have known that and if he wanted to deny this connection he could have said God forgives your sins.

To claim that Jesus was a misunderstood or misinterpreted individual is not the view of Gospels. Jesus is recorded to have done many things directly to challenge the Jewish religious leaders and to show that something new was at hand.

If the meaning of Christ is not that of the Messiah and if the meaning of Son of God is not that of a position of deity, then why are we speaking of Jesus today? Surely Jesus would be just a forgotten historical, delusional man. However, Jews and Christians continue this debate 2000 years later because these meanings are clear to them from these statements.

You can argue that you think Jesus was misquoted, but on what basis do you have to make such an argument? We have only the NT on which to understand Jesus. He claimed to have God’s power and he called people to follow after him and to teach others to follow after him. Either we follow after him today or we go our own way? What other responses are there to Jesus?