Did Jesus claim Divinity?

[scriptures]

Godchild87,

A. You have not address properly the issues involved regarding 2pet1:1-2…..

Therefore I will post again my arguments…..

1. 2pet1:1 should be translated just like in the older versions to reflect God and Saviour Jesus as two beings….
(2Pe 1:1 ASV) Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained a like precious faith with us in the righteousness of our God and the Saviour Jesus Christ:


2. It is proper to translate it that way because a distinction between God and Jesus was very clear in 2pet1:2
(2Pe 1:2 ASV) Grace to you and peace be multiplied in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord;

3. It is the opening verse of the epistle, and reading all the epistles will show that it is common to introduce both God and the anointed one as distinct beings… not as one being divided into different roles…. As you claimed…..

(1Jo 1:3 ASV) that which we have seen and heard declare we unto you also, that ye also may have fellowship with us: yea, and our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ:

4. Other verses such as Eph 5:5 support the distinction between God and his anointed one with the greek word "kai" separating the two beings….



(Eph 5:5 ASV) For this ye know of a surety, that no fornicator, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God.


B. Your claim that Jesus is God because He is Lord is contrary to the definition of the word Lord……

1. kurios
koo'-ree-os
From κῦροςkuros (supremacy); supreme in authority, that is, (as noun) controller; by implication Mr. (as a respectful title): - God, Lord, master, Sir.

2. κύριος
kurios
Thayer Definition:
1) he to whom a person or thing belongs, about which he has power of deciding; master, lord
1a) the possessor and disposer of a thing
1a1) the owner; one who has control of the person, the master
1a2) in the state: the sovereign, prince, chief, the Roman emperor
1b) is a title of honour expressive of respect and reverence, with which servants greet their master
1c) this title is given to: God, the Messiah

3. (Rev 7:13 ASV) And one of the elders answered, saying unto me, These that are arrayed in white robes, who are they, and whence came they?

(Rev 7:14 ASV) And I say unto him, My lord, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they that come of the great tribulation, and they washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

One of the elders was called "My lord" by no less that Apostle John, yet no one in his right mind will say that the elder was God.......

 

[Zebra1552]

Godchild87,

A. You have not address properly the issues involved regarding 2pet1:1-2…..

Therefore I will post again my arguments…..

1. 2pet1:1 should be translated just like in the older versions to reflect God and Saviour Jesus as two beings….
(2Pe 1:1 ASV) Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained a like precious faith with us in the righteousness of our God and the Saviour Jesus Christ:


2. It is proper to translate it that way because a distinction between God and Jesus was very clear in 2pet1:2
(2Pe 1:2 ASV) Grace to you and peace be multiplied in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord;

3. It is the opening verse of the epistle, and reading all the epistles will show that it is common to introduce both God and the anointed one as distinct beings… not as one being divided into different roles…. As you claimed…..

(1Jo 1:3 ASV) that which we have seen and heard declare we unto you also, that ye also may have fellowship with us: yea, and our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ:

4. Other verses such as Eph 5:5 support the distinction between God and his anointed one with the greek word "kai" separating the two beings….



(Eph 5:5 ASV) For this ye know of a surety, that no fornicator, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God.


B. Your claim that Jesus is God because He is Lord is contrary to the definition of the word Lord……

1. kurios
koo'-ree-os
From κῦροςkuros (supremacy); supreme in authority, that is, (as noun) controller; by implication Mr. (as a respectful title): - God, Lord, master, Sir.

2. κύριος
kurios
Thayer Definition:
1) he to whom a person or thing belongs, about which he has power of deciding; master, lord
1a) the possessor and disposer of a thing
1a1) the owner; one who has control of the person, the master
1a2) in the state: the sovereign, prince, chief, the Roman emperor
1b) is a title of honour expressive of respect and reverence, with which servants greet their master
1c) this title is given to: God, the Messiah

3. (Rev 7:13 ASV) And one of the elders answered, saying unto me, These that are arrayed in white robes, who are they, and whence came they?

(Rev 7:14 ASV) And I say unto him, My lord, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they that come of the great tribulation, and they washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

1- I don't care because your arguments have been shown to hold no water. You are bypassing a main rule of interpreting another language- assuming that one word with many meanings has the same meaning in every case. And that's just not smart.
2- You are intentionally ignoring other verses that I have quoted. You have not even mentioned them. Instead, you have tried to build upon your ignorance of translating a single word another language in multiple verses.
3- Until the time you can address all the verses and questions that have already been posed to you, you will get no response from me. I have made it clear to anyone reading that you are not interpreting correctly using proper methods. You are ignoring them.

 

[scriptures]

1- I don't care because your arguments have been shown to hold no water. You are bypassing a main rule of interpreting another language- assuming that one word with many meanings has the same meaning in every case. And that's just not smart.

Your not answering....

2- You are intentionally ignoring other verses that I have quoted. You have not even mentioned them. Instead, you have tried to build upon your ignorance of translating a single word another language in multiple verses.

Your not dealing with the issue...

3- Until the time you can address all the verses and questions that have already been posed to you, you will get no response from me. I have made it clear to anyone reading that you are not interpreting correctly using proper methods. You are ignoring them.

Great excuse....

 

[Zebra1552]

Can anyone tell me how language translation works? We seem to be having an issue with it today.

 

[scriptures]

Can anyone tell me how language translation works? We seem to be having an issue with it today.

2pet 1.1 is another example of alteration this time by NASB......

 

[meforevidence]

Is Jesus the Son of God (Refuting Muslim Teachings that He was only a prophet). Below is a list of those who called Jesus the Son of God.
Satan: Mt 4:3-6, Lk 4:3-9
Unclean Spirits: Mt 8: 29, Mk 3:11, Lk 4:41
Disciples: Mt 14:33
Elders, Scribes, Chief priests state they heard Jesus say he was the son of God Mt 27: 43
Centurion: Mt 27:54, Mk 15:39
John the disciple (or disciple Jesus loved): John 1:1, John 1:34, Jn 20:31
Angel Gabriel Lk 1:35
Matthew: Matthew 16:16 “Thou are the Christ the son of the Living God” and Jesus blessed Peter and did not deny being the son of God. He even calls God His Father and claims authority over the kingdom of Heaven and Earth.
Luke Lk 3:38
Nathanael Jn 1:49
Jesus Jn 3:18, 5:25, Jn 9:35-37
Jesus Jn 10:36, Jn 11:4, Jn 11:4
Martha Jn 11:27
Mary of Magdala: My lord and my God. (Jesus calls His Father His God and Father in this text as well).
The Jews heard Jesus say it: Jn 19:7
Phillip Acts 8:37
Paul Acts 9:20
God: Hebrews 1:9 “GOD THY GOD HAS ANNOINTED THEE”
Genesis 19:24 “The Lord sent fire down from the Lord in Heaven”
Daniel 7 13-14 : a Son of Man beside God who was given dominion, power, glory over God’s kingdom. This Elect one is more than a mere prophet. He will judge the nations and they all shall serve HIM.
Book of Enoch: Numerous references to the Elect ONE and judgment.
Dead Sea Scrolls: Numerous but most interesting is Messiah Scroll which Jesus quotes. (Isaiah leaves “raising the dead” out of his text).
Numerous other New Testament references specifically calling Jesus the son of God.

 

[Gary51]

Is Jesus the Son of God (Refuting Muslim Teachings that He was only a prophet). Below is a list of those who called Jesus the Son of God.
Satan: Mt 4:3-6, Lk 4:3-9
Unclean Spirits: Mt 8: 29, Mk 3:11, Lk 4:41
Disciples: Mt 14:33
Elders, Scribes, Chief priests state they heard Jesus say he was the son of God Mt 27: 43
Centurion: Mt 27:54, Mk 15:39
John the disciple (or disciple Jesus loved): John 1:1, John 1:34, Jn 20:31
Angel Gabriel Lk 1:35
Matthew: Matthew 16:16 “Thou are the Christ the son of the Living God” and Jesus blessed Peter and did not deny being the son of God. He even calls God His Father and claims authority over the kingdom of Heaven and Earth.
Luke Lk 3:38
Nathanael Jn 1:49
Jesus Jn 3:18, 5:25, Jn 9:35-37
Jesus Jn 10:36, Jn 11:4, Jn 11:4
Martha Jn 11:27
Mary of Magdala: My lord and my God. (Jesus calls His Father His God and Father in this text as well).
The Jews heard Jesus say it: Jn 19:7
Phillip Acts 8:37
Paul Acts 9:20
God: Hebrews 1:9 “GOD THY GOD HAS ANNOINTED THEE”
Genesis 19:24 “The Lord sent fire down from the Lord in Heaven”
Daniel 7 13-14 : a Son of Man beside God who was given dominion, power, glory over God’s kingdom. This Elect one is more than a mere prophet. He will judge the nations and they all shall serve HIM.
Book of Enoch: Numerous references to the Elect ONE and judgment.
Dead Sea Scrolls: Numerous but most interesting is Messiah Scroll which Jesus quotes. (Isaiah leaves “raising the dead” out of his text).
Numerous other New Testament references specifically calling Jesus the son of God.

Jesus being the Son of God is not in question here...

But Jesus being God the Son is!

 

[Hentenza]

Jesus is never directly said in the Bible the exact words, “I am God.” That does not mean, however, that He did not proclaim that He is God. Take for example Jesus’ words in John 10:30, “I and the Father are one.” At first glance, this might not seem to be a claim to be God. However, look at the Jews’ reaction to His statement, “We are not stoning you for any of these, replied the Jews, but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God” (John 10:33). The Jews understood Jesus’ statement to be a claim to be God. In the following verses, Jesus never corrects the Jews by saying, “I did not claim to be God.” That indicates Jesus was truly saying He was God by declaring, “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30). John 8:58 is another example. Jesus declared, "I tell you the truth, before Abraham was born, I am!" Again, in response, the Jews take up stones in an attempt to stone Jesus (John 8:59). Why would the Jews want to stone Jesus if He hadn’t said something they believed to be blasphemous, namely, a claim to be God?

John 1:1 says that “the Word was God.” John 1:14 says that “the Word became flesh.” This clearly indicates that Jesus is God in the flesh. Acts 20:28 tells us, "...Be shepherds of the church of God, which He bought with His own blood." Who bought the church with His own blood? Jesus Christ. Acts 20:28 declares that God purchased the church with His own blood. So, Jesus is God!

Thomas the disciple declared concerning Jesus, “Lord and my God” (John 20:28). Jesus does not correct him. Titus 2:13 encourages us to wait for the coming of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ (see also 2 Peter 1:1). In Hebrews 1:8, the Father declares of Jesus, "But about the Son He says, "Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom."

In Revelation, an angel instructed the Apostle John to only worship God (Revelation 19:10). Several times in Scripture Jesus receives worship (Matthew 2:11; 14:33; 28:9,17; Luke 24:52; John 9:38). He never rebukes people for worshiping Him. If Jesus were not God, He would have told people to not worship Him, just as the angel in Revelation had. There are many other verses and passages of Scripture that argue for Jesus’ deity.

The most important reason that Jesus IS God is that if He is not God, His death would not have been sufficient to pay the penalty for the sins of the whole world (1 John 2:2). Only God could pay such an infinite penalty. Only God could take on the sins of the world (2 Corinthians 5:21), die, and be resurrected, proving His victory over sin and death.

Yes, Jesus is God.

Anyone?

 

[ronniechoate34]

Did Jesus say he is a God?

That's simple to answer, so let's take a look at this topic.


First let's see what Jesus had to say.


John:8:58: Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.


John:14:9: Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?


1Jo:5:7: For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.


No, Jesus said that He is God. There is your answer.

 

[one11]

Yes, Jesus is God, manifest in the flesh, born of the Virgin Mary.

There is another scripture that explains something like "he took on human form in order to take our punishment upon himself so that through belief in him the world might be saved" or something like that. Does anyone know the scripture I'm trying to think of here?

 

[Zebra1552]

Yes, Jesus is God, manifest in the flesh, born of the Virgin Mary.

There is another scripture that explains something like "he took on human form in order to take our punishment upon himself so that through belief in him the world might be saved" or something like that. Does anyone know the scripture I'm trying to think of here?

Php 2:5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus,
Php 2:6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped,
Php 2:7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.
Php 2:8 Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.

Is it that one?

 

[one11]

Php 2:5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus,
Php 2:6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped,
Php 2:7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.
Php 2:8 Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.

Is it that one?

I'm not sure if that is the one I'm thinking. It could be, as i'm not feeling well today.

Here is a website I found with a lot of scriptures, and I will look over them later also.

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/pentecostal/One-Ch4.htm

 

[meforevidence]

Jesus being the Son of God is not in question here...

But Jesus being God the Son is!

Thomas said My Lord and My God. Nothing about "son" mentioned here. It only takes one example to show he accepted this. Also, only God can forgive sins. The point in the text was that Jesus is God and Jesus proved this not by just mere words, but by his miracles.

 

[itisdeliciouscake]

John 10:30

"I and the Father are one."


I don't see anyway of getting around that one....

 

[Gary51]

Thomas said My Lord and My God. Nothing about "son" mentioned here. It only takes one example to show he accepted this.

Did all the other Aposles believe that He was God too? And was it at that moment they realised He was God, or did they know before?

Bump...

 

[average650]

why is john 1:1 not enough?

It clearly says "the Word was God"

and the Word is clearly Jesus, as the verses after 1 through 18 show, especially verse 14, "The Word became flesh".

and john 10:30 posted above. How do you get around these?

 

[epistemaniac]

another example of Jesus doing the sorts of things only God can do is the forgiveness of sins.... now of course if someone offends me, if someone sins against me, then I can forgive him or her.... but it would not be right for someone else to come along and forgive the person who offended me.... and so when Jesus forgives sins committed against God, either He must be God Himself, or He is guilty of blasphemy and claimed to do what he did not possess the right or ability to do.... namely to forgive sins committed against God. Mark 2:7 (ESV) “Why does this man speak like that? He is blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?”

Hendriksen says on this passage:
"The scribes were right in considering the remission of sins to be a divine prerogative (Exod. 34:6, 7a; Ps. 103:12; Isa. 1:18; 43:25; 44:22; 55:6, 7; Jer. 31:34; Mic. 7:19). To be sure, there is a sense in which we, too, forgive, namely, when we earnestly resolve not to take revenge but instead to love the one who has injured us, to promote his welfare, and never again to bring up the past (Matt. 6:12, 15; 18:21; Luke 6:37; Eph. 4:32; Col. 3:13). But basically, as described, it is God alone who forgives. It is he alone who is able to remove guilt and to declare that it has actually been removed. But now the thinking of the scribes arrives at the fork in the road, and they make the wrong turn. Either: a. Jesus is what by implication he claims to be, namely, God; or b. he blasphemes, in the sense that he unjustly claims the attributes and prerogatives of deity. The scribes accept b.
Not only do they commit this tragic error, but, as the following context indicates, they compound it by reasoning somewhat as follows, "It is an easy thing for him to say, 'Your sins are forgiven,' for no one is able to disprove it, since no one can look into his neighbor's heart or enter the throne-room of the Almighty and discover his judicial decisions as to who is, and who is not, forgiven. On the other hand, to tell this man, 'Get up and walk' would be far more difficult, for if no cure results, as is probable, we are all here to witness his embarrassment." As they see it, therefore, Jesus is both blasphemous and flippant.
In what the Master now says and does he annihilates both of these false conclusions: 8-11. And immediately Jesus, perceiving in his spirit that they were reasoning thus within themselves, said to them, Why are y o u reasoning thus [or: harboring such thoughts] in y o u r hearts? Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, Your sins are forgiven, or to say, Get up, take up your pallet and walk? But in order that y o u may know that the Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins (he said to the paralytic) I say to you, get up, take up your pallet and go home. Jesus perceived in his spirit what these scribes were thinking. Their inner deliberations were not concealed from him. Cf. Matt. 17:25; John 1:47, 48; 2:25; 21:17. Had he not been God he would not have been able to penetrate so deeply into their "secret" cogitations (Ps. 139; Heb. 4:13). Baker New Testament Commentary - Baker New Testament Commentary – Exposition of the Gospel According to Mark.
blessings,
ken

 

[Yekcidmij]

I think the easiest example that takes up the least amount of space is Jesus' trial. It's a famous setting. Many false witnesses come foward and Jesus just keeps silent. Nobody is able to make a case. Finally 2 people come foward and accuse Jesus of claiming He was going to destroy the temple and rebuild it in 3 days. The High Priest would have had a case to accuse Jesus of being a messiah. People at the time believed that when the messiah came, he was going to build/rebuild/cleanse the temple. So Caiaphas' question to Jesus is a natural one, "tell us, if you are the messiah, the son of God". Now, it's important to realize that Caiaphas is NOT asking Jesus if He is YHWH. Caiaphas is wondering if Jesus is making a messianic/kingly type of claim, which would have been a very human claim. But something in Jesus' response causes Caiaphas to get really upset to the point of tearing His garments crying "blasphemy" and stopping the trial, "what further witness do we need? You heard his blasphemy. What is your judgment? The answered, 'He deserves death'". What is it in Jesus' response here that sends Caiaphas over the edge?

Matt 26: 64 Jesus said to him, “You have said so. But I tell you, from now on you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power [Psalm 110] and coming on the clouds of heaven [Dan 7].”


At first glance, Psalm 110 could be refering to just the king in general. It was probably a corronation Psalm. It was definitely taken as a messianic Psalm at the time refering to David (see the Targums), but not as refering to a divine figure. Dan 7 could be taken to be refering to some sort of divine figure, but not necessarily. Rabbi Akkiba in 135 AD thought that Bar Kokhba was the figure in Daniel 7, but Akkiba didn't think Bar Kokhba to be YHWH Himself. But still, if we take the gospels seriously, SOMETHING about Jesus' response has upset Caiaphas. I think the solution is found in another recorded trial before a High Priest:

This is Paul's trial before the chief priests and Sanhedrin:

Acts 22:30 But on the next day, desiring to know the real reason why he was being accused by the Jews, he unbound him and commanded the chief priests and all the council to meet, and he brought Paul down and set him before them.​

23 And looking intently at the council, Paul said, “Brothers, I have lived my life before God in all good conscience up to this day.” 2 And the high priest Ananias commanded those who stood by him to strike him on the mouth. 3 Then Paul said to him, “God is going to strike you, you whitewashed wall! Are you sitting to judge me according to the law, and yet contrary to the law you order me to be struck?” 4 Those who stood by said, “Would you revile God’s high priest?” 5 And Paul said, “I did not know, brothers, that he was the high priest, for it is written, ‘You shall not speak evil of a ruler of your people.’ ”

6 Now when Paul perceived that one part were Sadducees and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, “Brothers, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees. It is with respect to the hope and the resurrection of the dead that I am on trial.” 7 And when he had said this, a dissension arose between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, and the assembly was divided.​

This looks like an informal meeting of the council and chief priests which was convened by the Roman Commander which might mean that Paul didn't recognize the High Priest here. Paul had been away from Jerusalem for some time. Or it could be that Paul is purposefully taking a jab at him. In any case, Paul speaks and is immediately struck in the mouth. What did Paul do to rate a fist or palm to the face? Are they a bunch of evil men just out to get Paul? No. Paul addressed the High Priest incorrectly. First, it must be understood that the High Priest was the most honorable position in all of Israel. Nobody had a status higher than the High Priest. The only thing with a higher honor and status than the high priest was YHWH Himself. Since the High Priest had more honor than Paul and had a higher status, Paul was way out of place to speak first. The High Priest should have spoken first. Paul then makes another mistake by addressing the High Priest as "brother". Oh my. The High Priest was not equal to Paul as a brother. He's the HIGH Priest. So Paul is stuck in the mouth. At this point I don't think Paul really realizes who's he's addressing and so he get's in a little more hot water. In vs. 3 Paul proceeds to say some type of formulaic curse on the high priest. Now this isn't like a witches curse or anything, it just means Paul is acting like he is sitting as judge over the high priest. Paul has completely stepped over the line now. Finally someone nearby clues him in (vs 4) sort of like, "hey man, you better shut up". Paul sems to realize "OOPS" and he backs off and acknowledges his error by quoting from Exodus 22:28:

Ex 22:28 “You shall not revile God,
nor curse a ruler of your people.

Here in Exodus 22:28 cursing the ruler of Israel is equivalent to blaspheming God. Why? Only God could judge the ruler. If someone were to try to curse/sit in judgment over the annointed one (king or high priest), this person would have been claiming a status reserved for God alone, and consequently they would have been put to death according to Lev 24:15-16. 2 Sam records a similiar scenario:

2 Sam 19:21 Abishai the son of Zeruiah answered, “Shall not Shimei be put to death for this, because he cursed the Lord’s anointed?”

Now go back to Paul's trial. Paul is in really hot water. He spoke out of turn, which would have indicated to them that Paul thought he had more honor than the High Priest. There's one big mistake. Then Paul addresses the High Priest as "brother" which would have indicated that Paul was addressing an equal. Another mistake. Then Paul curses/sits in judgment over him. At this point in his trial, Paul is borderline getting stoned for blasphemy. His response is a genius move by dividing the council over the resurrection issue. Paul barely saved his skin here.


Now go back to Jesus' trial and look at how Jesus uses these 2 passages from Dan 7 and Psalm 110. Jesus combines the imagery of the enthronement of the son of man figure after suffering with a passage about the king sitting in judgment and defeating his enemies. Jesus uses these two passages and directs them at Caiaphas, the High Priest. The effect of Jesus combination of passages directed at Caiaphas is Jesus saying "You will see ME sitting in judgment over YOU". Judgment over the high priest was reserved for YHWH alone. THIS is what sends Caiaphas over the edge. And as far as Caiaphas can tell, he is correct. Jesus has commited a terrible blasphemy and was unapologetic for it (contrary to Paul's trial) and the Torah is clear on the punishment. No more witnesses are required since Jesus said it Himself. Death it was.

This is why the resurrection of Jesus is so crucial. If Jesus was not raised, then Caiaphas' sentence was the correct one. Jesus was a blasphemer and the Law was carried out as it should have been. But, if Jesus was raised from the dead, then the sentence had been overturned and Jesus was vindicated for His claims. As the Torah records YHWH saying in Deut 32 "see now I even I am HE there is no one besides me. I kill and I give life. I wound and I heal. And no one can resist my power".


Did Jesus claim to be YHWH? Oh yeah; you bet.

 

[Gary51]

Did all the other Aposles believe that He was God too? And was it at that moment they realised He was God, or did they know before?

BUMP....

 

[k2svpete]

Jesus did not claim to be God. It is important to study and know the conventions of the time in which the scriptures were written and the events happened.

Thomas's story ought to be read in conjunction with Ps 82. It was convention to use god as a term of respect for those in authority. This was a term used for the judges as well.

Grabbing a concordance and interlinear bible, it is apparent that the god used in the passage with Thomas is not the same as God used in most other occasions.

So, why did Thomas make the statement that he did? 'My Lord and my god.' The first part is straightforward. This is acknowlegement to him being the Son of God, the Messiah. (Also refer to Ps with David writing 'The LORD said to my Lord.').

Next part then. Why then say, 'and my god.'? As mentioned earlier, the term 'god', was once used as a title. The meaning of words can change over time, for a more recent difference think of the the word 'gay'. 30 years ago if someone used gay you would think of the use as a descriptor for happy and cheerful. Today, the use of that word has the immediate thought of homosexuality. That is a change in 30 short years.

So, when Thomas refers to Jesus as 'his god' it is a title of reverence. What is this in relation to? Christ being the King of the Jews.

Did Jesus claim divinity? Not at all. He acted with the authority of God, as His agent on Earth. Through this authority, he was able to heal the sick, forgive sin and command nature. Jesus was a man, with God as his father. To paint Jesus as divine cheapens what was achieved during his life and flies in the face of biblical teaching.