The divinity of Jesus? Asked

Man was made to worship and obey: but if you don’t command him, if you don’t give him anything to worship, he will form his own deities and find a leader in his own passions.

—Benjamin Disraeli, Coningsby

The critical difference between Jesus‘ teachings and the Trinity is that Jesus is elevated to a divine status – a status that Jesus rejects in the Gospels:

“What do you approve of me? Nobody is good than God alone. ” (Matthew 9:17, Mark 10:18, and Luke 18:19)
“… because the father is taller than me.” (John 14:28)
“I don’t do anything about myself, but as the father taught me, so I speak.” (John 8:28)
„Truly, truly, I tell you, the son cannot do anything about himself …“ (John 5:19)
„I know him because I am from him and he sent me.“ (John 7:29)
“But whoever despises me despises the one who sent me.” (Luke 10:16)
“But now I go to the one who sent me …” (John 16: 5)
“Jesus answered them and said: ‚My teaching is not mine, but the one who sent me .´ ”(John 7:16)
“ For I did not speak of myself; but the father who sent me gave me a commandment of what to say and say. ” (John 12:49) [1]

What does Paul’s theory say? That Jesus is a partner in divinity, God’s embodiment. So who should man believe? If it is Jesus, then let us hear what he would have to say about it in today’s Gospels:

„The most important commandment is this: ‚Hear, Israel, the Lord our God, is only the Lord.“ (Mark 12:29)
“No one knows about the day and the hour, not even the angels in heaven, not even the son, but only the Father.” (Mark 13:32)
“’You shall worship God your Lord and serve him alone.’” (Luke 4: 8)
“My food is that I do the will of those who sent me …” (John 4:34)
„I can’t do anything about myself … because I’m not looking for my will, but the will of the one who sent me.“ (John 5:30)
“For I came from heaven, not to do my will, but to do what who sent me.” (John 6:38)
“My teaching is not mine but that which sent me.” (John 7:16)
“I go up to my father and to your father, to my God and to your God. ”(John 20:17)
The italicized emphasis in the verses printed above is not intended to indicate that Jesus spoke emphatically, although no one can say with certainty that he did not. The emphasis rather emphasizes the fact that Jesus not only never claimed to be divine himself, but would have been the first to reject it. In the words of Joel Carmichael: “The idea of ​​this new religion with himself as a deity was something he [Jesus Christ] could never have known a thing about. As Charles Guignebert used: ‚it would never have occurred to him‘. ”[2]

So if Jesus never claimed to be divine, what exactly was He? He himself answered this question:

„Nowhere is a prophet less valued than in his fatherland and with his relatives and in his home.“ (Mark 6: 4)
„But Jesus said to them: Nowhere is a prophet less valued than in his homeland and in his own house.“ (Matthew 13:57)
“… because it is not acceptable for a prophet to perish outside of Jerusalem.” (Luke 13:33)

Those who knew him announced him: „This is Jesus the Prophet from Nazareth in Galilee.“ (Matthew 21:11), and: “A great prophet has risen among us …” (Luke 7:16). The disciples recognized one in Jesus: „a prophet, powerful of deeds and words …“ (Luke 24:19. See also: Matthew 14: 5, 21:46, and John 6:14). If these statements were incorrect, why didn’t Jesus correct them? Why didn’t he declare his divinity, that is, if he was actually divine? When the woman at the fountain said, „Lord, I see that you are a prophet.“ (John 4:19), why didn’t he thank her for her humble expression and explain that there was more than just prophecy?
Or wasn’t it?

Jesus Christ, a simple man? Could it be? Much of the religious, inward, verbal wonder, „Why not?“ Acts 2:22 tells of Jesus as: “Jesus of Nazareth, the man, shown by God among you with deeds and miracles and signs, which God did through you among you, as you know yourself.” Jesus himself is said to have said: „Now you are trying to kill me, such a person who I have told you the truth that I have heard from God.“ (John 8:40).

We find a similar remark in the Quran:

“He [Jesus] said: ‚I am a servant of Allah; He gave me the book and made me a prophet. ‚”(Quran 19:30)

So was Jesus a ’servant of Allah‘ (ie a servant of God)? ‚ If we go to the Bible, then yes. Or at least we understand that from Matthew 12:18: “Behold, this is my servant that I have chosen …” Furthermore, the Acts of the Apostles trace the traces of the early Church in the first thirty years after Jesus, but were not identified anywhere in the Acts of the Apostles the disciples Jesus as ‚God‘. When they spoke of Jesus, it was as a man and servant of God. [3]

In fact, we find the only verses in the New Testament that support the doctrine of incarnation in 1 Timothy 3:16. [4] However, with regard to these verses (which state: ‚He is revealed in the flesh‘), Gibbon notes: ‚This strong expression may be justified in the language of St. Paul (1 Tim. 3:16), but we are from spoiled our modern Bibles. The word ë (which) was converted to Constantinople in the beginning of the sixth century inqeèv (god): the true meaning, which is still visible in the Latin and Syrian versions, still exists in the inference of the Greek as well as that of the Latin Fathers. And this deception, along with that of the three witnesses of St. John, was exposed by Sir Isaak Newton. ‚[5]

Illusion? Well, that’s a tough word. However, if we look at more modern sciences, it is an expression of the fact that ’some passages in the New Testament have been changed to emphasize more precisely that Jesus himself is divine.‘ [6]

The Bible Has Been Changed? For doctrine reasons? Under the circumstances, it is difficult to find a more appropriate word than ‚deception‘. In a chapter entitled ‚Theologically Motivated Changes in Texts‘, Professor Ehrmann wrote in his book ‚Wrong Quotes from Jesus‘ about the falsification of 1 Timothy 3:16, not only by Sir Isaac Newton but also by an eighteenth-century scholar , Johann J. Wettstein, was revealed. In Ehrmann’s words: ‚A later writer changed the original wording so that it is no longer called‘ which one ‚but‘ God ‚(is revealed in the flesh). In other words, this later ´improver´ changed the text in such a way to emphasize the divinity of Jesus … our oldest and best manuscripts speak of Christ, who became flesh,

Ehrmann emphasizes that this change is evident in five of the ancient Greek manuscripts. Nevertheless, it was the falsified and not the ‚oldest and best‘ of the biblical manuscripts that prevailed both in the medieval manuscripts and in the early translations of the Bible. [8] As a result, the doctrines of Christian doctrine have suffered since the Middle Ages under the falsifying influence of a church that was more subject to theology than reality. *


Ehrmann added: ‚As Wettstein continued his research, he found further passages which were typically intended to further consolidate the doctrine of the divinity of Christ, but which actually had textual problems. When he went to the bottom of these problems in a text-critical manner, he was able to determine in most cases that there was no question of a divinity of Jesus. ‚

Given these impressions, it is hardly surprising that Christianity in the 21st century has started to include those who deny the alleged divinity of Jesus. A clear sign of this realization is the following report from the London Daily News: ‚According to a survey published today, over half of the bishops of the Anglican Church in England say that Christians are not obliged to believe that Jesus Christ was God.‘ [10 ] It should be noted that it was not just the clergy who were interviewed, but bishops. Undoubtedly, this caused many parishioners to scratch their heads and wonder who they should believe in, if not their bishops!

Copyright © 2007 Laurence B. Brown; with his consent.
The above excerpt comes from Dr. Brown’s upcoming book MisGod’ed, which will soon be published along with its sequel God’ed. Both books can be found on Dr. Browns website can be viewed :. www.LevelTruth.com. Dr. Brown can be contacted at: BrownL38@yahoo.com



[1] See also Matthew 24:36, Luke 23:46, John 8:42, John 14:24, John 17: 6-8, etc.
[2] Carmichael, Joel. P. 203.
[3] Man: see Acts 2:22, 7:56, 13:38, 17:31; Servants of God: see Acts 3:13, 3:26, 4:27, 4:30.
[4] In the past, some theologians attempted to prove the validity of incarnation based on John 1:14 and Colossians 2: 9. Given modern textual criticism, however, these verses have lost their probative value, and for good reason. In John 1:14 it says: „And the Word became flesh“, which does not necessarily indicate divinity, and „the only begotten son of the father“, which is by no means an exact translation. These two issues were discussed (and questioned) in the previous chapters. As for the Colossians, the problems go beyond the incomprehensible wording, starting with the simple fact that nowadays they are believed to be fake. For further details see: Bart D. Ehrman’s Lost Christianities, p. 235.
[5] Gibbon, Edward, Esq. Vol. 5, Chapter XLVII, p. 207.
[6] Metzger, Bruce M. and Ehrman, Bart D. The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration. P. 286.
[7] Ehrman, Bart D. Misquoting Jesus. P. 157.
[8] Ehrman, Bart D. Misquoting Jesus. P. 157.
* For further explanations see: Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. Pp. 573-4.
[9] Ehrman, Bart D. Misquoting Jesus. P. 113.
[10] London Daily News. June 25, 1984.


Source: https://www.islamland.com/deu/articles/die-gttlichkeit-jesu- inquired