The Deity of Christ-2 (Not edited ~7514) The I Am Statements At this point we are only beginning to explore the

classic arguments that Jesus is God, but it is at least clear that Jesus as remembered in the earliest texts understood himself as the heavenly Son of Man of prophetic expectation, possessing a unique relation of Sonship to God the Father, and accepted the ascriptions of Lordship and Messiah, such that our relation to God hinges radically upon our response to him. The direct question to Jesus, Who do you think you are? was asked by his pious opponents in a conversation that centered on the question of whether Jesus might possibly be crazy (or demon-possessed). When he answered, I am not possessed by a demon, he then added a phrase that convinced opponents that he was indeed crazy: If anyone keeps my word, he will never see death. At this his opponents exclaimed, Now we know that you are demonpossessed! They were outraged: Are you greater than our father Abraham! He died, and so did the prophets. Who do you think you are? (John 8:4953). Jesus answer astonished them: My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me. Before Abraham was, I am! (John 8:54, 58). This caused his shocked hearers to pick up stones to stone him, for this is what they perceived their duty to be in relation to blasphemy. Either Jesus was indeed blaspheming against the holy divine name, I am (= Yahweh, Exod. 3:14) or he was revealing something about his identity that stands as the central feature of the gospel. Johns Gospel is organized around a series of key signs, each culminating in an I am (ego eimi) statement reminiscent of the declarations of Yahweh. When he raised a dead man he said, I am the resurrection and the life (John 11:25). In giving sight to the man born blind Jesus said, I am the light of the world (John 8:12). When he fed the five thousand, he declared, I am the bread of life (John 6:35). He later said, I am the door of the sheep (10:7) and I am the good shepherd (10:10, italics added). These are extremely immodest statements if applied to an ordinary human subject. Jesus did not teach as the prophets taught when they pointed beyond themselves to the source of the divine revelation. Rather he taught and spoke in the first person, as Yahweh had spoken in the form of I am in the Exodus account of deliverance. Luther thought that by this means Jesus deliberately used language to stop all mouths. The way he taught people is a clue to the remarkable presence he commanded. He taught as one who had authority, not as their teachers of the law (Matt. 7:29). The Temple guards remarked, No one even spoke the way this man does (John 7:46). When he taught in the Temple courts, the religious leaders were amazed and puzzled: How did this man get such learning without having studied, to which Jesus answered; My teaching is not my own. It comes from him who sent me (John 7:1416). Even those of remote Nazareth were amazed at the gracious words that came from his lips. Isnt this Josephs son? they asked (Luke 4:22). Resurrection as Ultimate Validation His identity was not fully grasped by the disciples until the resurrection. Thomas recognition was particularly dramatic. Having been told by the others: We have seen the Lord! (John 20:25), Thomas testily replied: Unles s I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it. A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, Peace be with you! Then he said to Thomas, Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe. Thomas said to him, My Lord and my God! (John 20:2528). Jesus could have rejected this ascription. Rather he received it, chiding Thomas not for his adoration, but for the tardiness of his belief, delayed by the requirement of having to see. One who could welcome such an ascription must either be God or deceiver. Such claims are not to be found merely in obscure corners of the New Testament or in minor writers. They are found widely throughout all strata of the Gospels and in all Gospels, and they recur in both the early and late epistles. The picture of Jesus that confronts us in the New Testament is too consistent to be fantasized or projected, too unrelenting to be fabricated. These are the claims that we constantly meet on whatever page we read of the New Testament. Turn to most any paragraph of the New Testament and see if you can read it without the premise that God has come in Jesus and the claim that in Jesus we are being met by nothing less than God. The resurrected Lord taught that he would return to judge the world at the end timea prerogative belonging only to God. Matthews report of his language is audacious: Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven. But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven (Matt 10:3233).

Why Delusion Is an Implausible Charge All this is very unusual language, especially in the monotheistic Hebraic tradition. It is unconvincing to argue that Jesus did not say these things. They are so extraordinary that it seems implausible that they would have been invented by the disciples and put in Jesus mouth decades later. The delusion premise has a major flaw: If the reports were inaccurate, they would be challenged and easily discredited. This would require the witnesses to be quite sure they reported accurately, to avoid being discredited. The traditions reported by synoptic writers could have been contested and corrected by many living eyewitnesses during the period of oral transmission. This is why so much deliberate attention is given in the New Testament to accuracy and credibility of testimony (Luke 1:14; Mark 1:1; John 15:27, Acts 1:2122; 1 John 1:1).

Scriptural Reasoning About Christs Deity

The primitive Christian community had deep roots in Jewish monotheism. With such a heritage, it must have required an extraordinary motivation to confess Jesus Christ as Lord or speak of him without qualification as the one God. The motive would have had to have been powerful enough to overcome rigorous piety and religious training to the contrary. These witnesses, however, had met him as risen Lord. Only on this eventful and experiential basis were they able to draw the conclusion that he was the heavenly Son of Man, messianic King, Son of God, and indeed truly God. No ancient Christian creed fails to confess the deity of Christ, for that would omit the central feature of Christian confession. Christ is called God in the same sense and with the same meaning that the Old Testament applies that address to Yahweh, the one God to whom worship is owed, to whom the divine attributes rightly apply. Accordingly, Jude confessed Christ as our only Sovereign and Lord, the same One who delivered his people out of Egypt (Jude 45). Classic exegetes thought that no argument of itself could finally convert the heart. Rather than by argument, such a conclusion can only be a deep-seated decision of the whole heart and mind, based upon whatever evidences one may be able to bring together to achieve a reliable sense of comprehensive coherence. Whatever hypothesis best explains the widest range of evidence is the one upon which one may best ground ones active, risk-laden trust. The classic tradition is not without careful arguments to attempt to grasp and understand what faith knowsthat Christ is God (Tertullian, Apology 21). Here they are: Classic Reasons That Christ Is God There are five key arguments that flow together in classic Christian teaching to achieve this trust that Christ must be truly God. IFthe Son is addressed in scripture by ascriptions that could only be appropriate for God; if the Son possesses attributes that only God could possess; if the Son does the works that only God could have done; if the Son is worshiped as God without disclaiming it; and, if the Son is viewed by the apostles as equal to God; THENQuestion: where these five streams flow together, do they mutually compel faith to confirm that the Son indeed must be confessed as truly God? These five arguments recur in classical exegesis of hundreds of New Testament texts. 1. Reasoning from Ascriptions. If Jesus Christ is repeatedly called God in Holy Writ, then Christ must either be God or the writ lacks authenticity. The Sons deity is taught because it is expressed in Scripture in lofty utterances such as Only-begottenthe Way, the Truth, the Life, the Light the Effulgence, the Impress, the Image, the Seal Lord, King, He That is, The Almighty (Gregory of Nazianzus, Orat. 29.17). Paul salutes the church of Corinth with the phrase: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ (1 Cor. 1:3). For us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through who we exist (1 Cor. 8:6; Ambose, On the Holy Spirit 13.132). Matthew identifies him as the same Immanuel expected by Isaiah (Matt. 7:14), God with us (Matt. 1:23). John calls him the only Son of God, God the One and Only, the only one to have seen God (John 1:18). I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me (John 6:38; Augustine, Sermon 14A.5). There is no accompanying recollection that Jesus protested when these terms were ascribed to him (Chrysostom, Hom. on John 87; Augustine, Comm. on John, John 20:1029, Tractate 121). James refers to him as Lord of glory (2:1). The author of Revelation calls him King of kings and Lord of lords (19:16; Apringius of Beja, Tractate on the Apocalypse, 19.1516).

2. Reasoning from the Divine Attributes. If to him were ascribed attributes that could only rightly be ascribed to God, and if canonical Scripture bears truthful witness, then he must be God (Hilary, Trin. 11; Pearson, EC I: 21930). Among divine attributes repeatedly ascribed to Christ were: holiness (the Holy and Righteous One, Acts 3:14) underived being (Col. 1:15) uncreated eternality (John 8:58; 17:5; the same yesterday and today and forever, Heb. 13:8; Heb. 9:14; Hilary, Trin. 9.53) unsurpassable power (Matt. 28:20; Mark 5:1115; John 11:3844) exceptional knowledge (knowing the hearts of all, Acts 1:24; Matt. 16:21; Luke 68; 11:17; John 4:29, Hilary, Trin. 9.62) absolute veracity (the truth, John 14:6) eternal love (that surpasses knowledge, Eph. 3:19) 3. Reasoning from Gods Actions. If it should be the case that Christ in fact performed actions and op erations that only God could do and acted in a way that only God could act, by forgiving sin (Mark 2:112); giving life to the dead; by engendering new life in the Spirit (John 5:21); by being himself raised from the dead (Matt. 28:115; Luke 16:114; Hilary, Trin. III), then he must be nothing less than true God (Ursinus, CHC: 18889). If Jesus Christ searches the hearts and reveals the thoughts of men, stills the storm, lays down his life and takes it up again, he could only be God. His works reveal who he is as eternal Son, and on this premise do his benefits interpret His nature (P. T. Forsyth, PPJC: 6). 4. Reasoning from the Adoration of the Worshiping Community. If Christ was worshiped as God and unresistingly received worship due only to God (1 Cor. 11:24, 25; John 5:23; 14:14; Acts 7:59), then he must either be a blasphemer or God. There was little reserve in the adoration given him. That Jesus is Lord (Rom. 10:9) is the heart of the Christian confession. Johns Gospel states that He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father, who sent him (John 5:23; Chrysostom, Hom. on John 39). This is an especially powerful statement in the light of the perennial Hebraic religious antipathy against the worship of a human being. Recall Pauls refusal of idolatrous worship at Lystra (Acts 14:820). 5. The Son is Equal to the Father. The Son does not need to grasp at equality with God since he is always and already the eternal Son of the Father (Phil. 2:6,7). His accusers were determined to kill him because he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God (John 5:18). Conclusion of the classic Christian consensus: one who is addressed in Scripture by ascriptions that could only be appropriate for God, who possesses attributes that only God could possess, who does the works that only God could have done, who is worshiped as God without disclaiming it; and, who is viewed by the apostles as equal to Godsuch a one must be God. (7654)