Jesus 16 – Did Jesus P Claim Divinity 6 Jesus P Denies Godhood
Channel: Jamal Badawi
Series: Jamal Badawi - Jesus
File Size: 7.22MB
AsSalamu Alaikum and welcome you once again to Islam and focus.
Today we have our 16th program on Jesus, the beloved messenger of Allah.
Our program today will be decided on did Jesus claimed divinity. I'm your host Sheldon image. And here with me once again from St. Mary's University is Dr. Jamal Badawi as always,
for the benefit of our viewers could have a quick summary of last week's program, please. Okay, another quick. We continued also, in the discussion of the question of claims of divinity.
you discuss some of the statements attributed to Jesus as saying that my words do not pass away. And we explained it in the light of john 1424.
The statement attributed to him that he said all authority has been given to me. And again, we said the word given itself mean that there is higher authority than himself, which means the relationship between the divine and the human.
The reference to the fact that
of is this disciples actually worshipped him. And we indicated again, that the term worship hears in the context actually means intense love, that doesn't mean that they consider him to be divine.
We discuss the term also son of men, and that it is inconceivable to take that term, which is obvious indication of his humanity and humanity, only, no mixed humanity with divinity.
And to try to prove that this is a proof of divinity, and you discuss some of the basis that some writers use for that, and showed that it doesn't have any basis for any.
And finally, the question
was approached from another angle really, not only by looking at what Jesus said, which has been interpreted by some to mean that he claimed divinity, but also to look at it from the other side, to see whether there are statements in the Bible, in which Jesus clearly rejects the notion that he is divine or say something that
indicate this. And we have given a number of references mostly from the Gospel of john and chapters five 814, in which several times Jesus indicated that he does not speak of his on his authority, he does not do anything, or say anything except as commanded by God. In one statement, even in john 1428, he said it very clearly that God is greater than on on the father is greater than I. And we all know that there is none who is greater than God, which means that he is only a fiscal servant and human being created by God and sent by him for a particular mission.
Now, I would ask for some corroborating evidence from the Bible. To support that understanding. Once again, the evidence is overwhelming. Let me just give a few please. But let us begin first with some basic points, I hope of agreement between the three closely related religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam. It is my humble understanding that in all of these three communities, there are certain divine attributes that are indisputable. One is that the divinity of the creator's or his divine qualities are constantly with him, it does not leave him at anytime. It's always there.
Secondly, that the divine cannot be tested by anyone. He is the one actually who tests His creatures, that the divine should know the unseen. In fact, he the divine is the only one who knows the unseen or what will happen in the future. We all agree again, that the divine is not like the creatures is not subject to growth or change. See is immutable, is unchangeable.
We all agree also I know that one, when he prays, he or she prays, it means that you're praying to a power or the power that is greater than you are. Prayer is petition.
As such, one who prays is not or cannot be divine.
In on each of these, if you look into the Gospels, you will find that there is evidence that Jesus indicated clearly that he was not divine. It was a human being a servant of God.
Take for example, as a first reference in question, the Gospel according to Matthew, chapter four, especially verses one to 11, the first 11 verses,
we have told bears that Jesus was tempted by Satan.
Jesus was tempted by Satan, in fact, say that Satan offered Jesus the kingdoms if he worshipped him, and that after the Satan failed to to tempt Jesus,
the angels came to ministers to Jesus.
Well, it is obviously that it is pointless. It's absolutely pointless for Satan to even try to tempt history at
number one. And what does he tempt him with? He tempt him with kingdoms, which he himself created. So it's, it just doesn't seem to hold? How could the engines come to minister to one who created them?
Let us remember also, that this interpretation or that understanding that it is impossible if the Jesus was divine that Satan would even attempt to test him. This is even within the context of the Bible itself. In the New Testament, in the book of James, chapter one, verse 13, it says it very clearly, and I quote, God, cannot be tempted with evil. God cannot be tempted, with even
so obvious that he could have not been defined
in the Gospel according to Mark in chapter 13, verse 32, which we refer to in the previous program in a different context, let's take it now in the context of the knowledge of the unseen. Speaking of the hour, the day of judgment, Jesus was quoted as saying, quote, But of that day, or that hour, no one knows
what even the engines in heaven, nor the sun, ie himself, nor the sun, but only the Father. And there's a similar statement that you can find in the Gospel, according to Matthew, in 2436. And definitely, as we indicated before, the knowledge of the unseen, is one of the inseparable, divine qualities and he who does not know the unseen, obviously, is free for everyone understand, I am a human, I don't know everything, only the creator knows everything.
in more than one occasion, we are told that Jesus prayed, prayed to the Father or prayed to God, capital G. For example, in Mark 1432 in the garden, who gets 70, when he told his disciples, you know, sit here while I pray.
In verse 35, in the same gospel Mark, chapter 14, it says that he fell on the ground and prayed. Similar statements can be found in Luke 516, and Matthew 26, verses 30 through 44. The question here is this, to whom was Jesus peace be upon him, praying, we all know that God does not pray to God, the divine does not petition that the mind
because prayer is nothing but petition petition of a helpless creature of his creator, who is all powerful. So obviously, again, Jesus is indicating that he is only a human. In addition to this, we find that as related to the point earlier, that in verse 36, in the same chapter, Jesus was praying to God that if he wished, he can remove this cup from him, this trial that is awaiting him, which meant also that he didn't know even what is going to happen to him. And that night, read some questions, in view of other statements that can be found also in the New Testament that Jesus said, Yes, the Son of Man will be crucified, and this will what will happen, but the evidence he has
seemed to show that he didn't even know what will become of him whether or not he will be crucified or arrested, even
in the question of non change ability of God, God being immutable. If you check the gospel, according to Luke, and in chapter two, verse 52.
It says, and I quote again, and Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and the Revised Standard Version of the virus tests at your old ears
and in favor with God and men. The question here is this. Is it possible to think of the Divine
The creator of heavens and earth, the all knowledge of the powerful to increase or decrease in knowledge or wisdom as we human beings learn through our lives.
Could God increase in favor of gods, if Jesus truly was God, the divine increased in favor of the Divine. Or when we talk about somebody increasing in favor with God, that means he is a faithful Prophet, servant, messengers of his creator.
It is interesting to notice that in the very same chapter in Luke chapter two, in another verse 21,
it says, and at the end of eight days, when he was
circumcised, he was called Jesus,
that when Jesus was eight days old, he was circumcised. Obviously, the divine doesn't go through this process that we human beings go through.
It is important to notice here that it is not only the Old Testament that upholds the immutability of God, that God does not change. But you find evidence of that, in the New Testament, itself.
One more point in the Gospel of Mark, for example, in chapter 10, verse 18, it says, that Amen, started to run after Jesus, calling him good masters.
The answers of Jesus is quite revealing. Because it says, and I quote, and Jesus said to him, Why do you call me good? No one is good, but God alone.
Of course, we believe that Jesus was good. But apparently, he meant to say that one who is absolutely good, or goodness in the absolute sense, not equality, or perfection is a quality of God and not, you know, perfect, I'm not good in the absolute sense, which means I am a Hindi.
This does not only imply that it was not divine, but it will also indicate that he was a prophet, and messenger of God, a submissive servant, to the will of he who created him and said to
him, are you given several
areas of proof in the Bible itself that he was not divine? Another related question would be whether Jesus was actually referred to as a prophet. When, indeed, yes, and that reminds me with
a little incident that took place, which shows to me, in fact, that many of our Christian brethren might not be totally aware of some of the conditions which is there already in the Bible, because probably, it is not referred to frequently in typical Sunday, you know, sermons. I was on a radio show, an open line radio show in Orlando, Florida.
And one of the audience, a lady called and she said, No, but Jesus was never referred to as a prophet. And she seemed to be knowledgeable of the Bible, but apparently, maybe she didn't observe or notice some of the following verses. In the Gospel according to Luke, chapter seven, verse 16, it says, a great prophet has risen among us in reference to Jesus. Luke, chapter 24, verse 19, it says, a prophet referring to Jesus, a prophet, mighty indeed, and word before God, and all the people. JOHN, chapter six, verse 14, this is indeed the prophet who is to come into the world.
JOHN, chapter six, verse 40, some of the people said, this is really the Prophet.
In the book of Hebrews,
chapter three, verse one, it says, about Jesus, Jesus, the apostle, and high priest of our confession, the apostle messengers, that is,
in Luke chapter 13, verses 33 and 34, which, again would be quite relevant to phase four, it cannot be that a prophet should perish away from Jerusalem. Another term also which normally is used to refer to prophets and messengers, even though it applies to all human beings is the term servant, because it is an honor for a prophet or messenger or great personality, to be called servant of God because we all serve God's will, because they are sincere servants of God. That was also used to refer to Jesus at least often should I give you a couple of more examples. Okay. Take for example, the book of Acts. In chapter three, verse 13.
It speaks about Jesus and says that God glorified his servant, Jesus, his servant.
similar statement in the book of Acts, chapter four, verse two
27 and verse 30, referring to Jesus as the holy servant, Jesus, holy seven, of course, as we indicated before, there's no problem at all of calling Jesus Holy, Moses holy, or Abraham. But of course, holy is not equivalent to divine or creator of heavens and earth.
In the Gospel, according to Matthew, in his apparent interpretation of one of the old prophecies in the book of Isaiah,
refers to Jesus as God's servant. And he says that this is the you know, so that the prophecy would come to pass that this is the one who's spoken of in Isaiah. And here's the seventh, which appear also, by the way, in Isaiah, I believe in certain chapter 42. And I say, the reference here is in Matthew, chapter 12, verse 18. Now to be divine, to be God's,
or a member or person in God's word, whatever message you interpret it means that you are not a prophet of anyone, you are not a messenger of anyone, you are not a servant, or anyone but the whole universe, serve you, on other creatures serve you as God.
Likewise, being a prophet, being a messenger, being servant, it means that you are submissive to God, which means that you cannot be divine. It's just so clear and so obvious. Indeed, there are many texts in the Bible, which indicate that Jesus Himself is definitely made a clear distinction between himself and God, the Creator, that there is an important line between the human and the divine, and that he never claimed equality with God in His divine attributes. What can you give us a few examples of that, that is, the Jesus and God are not equal. All right, in the some of the letters of Paul, for example, let's take the first Corinthians, and chapter 11, verse three,
porn is addressing the Corinthians and say, but I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a woman is her husband, and the head of Christ is God. This is quite interesting. He says, the head of every man is Christ. Of course, every prophet in his time, is the head of his people, because he is the spokesperson of he who sent him the creators. So Jesus was the head of those who believed in him, no problem with that.
And then he says, the head of a woman as a husband, but the interesting part of the condition is the last one, and the head of Christ is good. When you say that the head of Christ is God, it means that one of them is superior, the other one is not superior is subordinate to him. Okay? Now, we all know and that was one of the basic assumptions. We started early in the program that in Judaism and Christianity and Islam, for that matter,
the divine, cannot have any superiors because if they're superior to the divine, then he's not divine. God is the absolute, ultimate truth. Then, one who has anyone who is superior to him is only subordinate. Because everything in this universe is subject to the creator alone. That means quite clearly that Jesus peace be upon him, was not claiming to be divine, but to be a servant of the Divine of God.
This is not the only occasion where this is stated in this clarity. In fact, if you check the same book, The first Corinthians chapter eight, verse six, it says, and I quote,
yet for us, there is one God, the Father, from whom
from whom are We are all things, and for whom we exist, and one Lord, not to say the difference, one God, one Lord, and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we exist. Now, this is a clear and obvious distinction, he is between God or the Father, and lords, and we have indicated before that the term Lord has been used in reference to Jesus peace be upon him to mean master teachers. All right. And this is quite interesting, which means then, that you and I, Prophet Abraham, Prophet Moses, Jesus, all prophets May peace and blessings be upon them all, are creatures of Allah, there are loads. But the statement is quite clear that there is only one God,
one God and one Lord and speaks about Jesus and God.
Had it been true that Jesus actually was part of divinity, or Triune God with that distinction would have not been made in this community and conclusive terms. Although to better illustrate this previous question a little further, Did Jesus Himself make a distinction between God and himself in a way which negates any claim of divinity? on his path? You mean other than what has been said about him? He himself saying that? There's no question about that. And it's very important, like they say, to have it also from the horse's mouth, in addition to acknowledgment of some of his disciples. Yes, certainly he did. I take for example, the gospel, according to Matthew, chapter 23, verses eight to
10, Matthew 23, eight to 10. Let me read it directly. It says, but you are not to be called Rabbi Jesus addressing is the second you are not to be called rabbi. For you have one teachers, and in our own Brethren,
and call Newman, your father on Earth, for you have one Father, Who is in heaven,
notice this, neither be cold masters, for you have one master the Christ.
This is quite revealing, because when Jesus tells them that you have only in the first part of the quotation, that you have only one teacher,
when obviously, he's referring to himself. And this, definitely a designation to designate the person, as a teacher, is quite different from designation that relate to the One God to the Creator, or the Father.
Secondly, he refers to himself in the last verse, as Master, because he says, You have only one master the Christ.
And now, when you speak about the Masters, definitely you speak about a person who's quite distinct from the one and only God because He said before, again, you have only one father's use the term fathers refers to God. So he's talking about master as different from the Father.
Now, if Jesus peace be upon him, had the slightest notion of Trinity, which was developed after him,
or the slightest notion of considering himself divine, he would have not called God or the Father, the one God, Father,
he would have said, for example, you have only one God, and one of the persons in God is the Father. This is very significant. Let me again, indicate that explain, hopefully, a little bit more clearly. You see, in the basic concept of Trinity, or any notion, for that matter that defies Jesus peace be upon him. The assumption here made is that God is one, but in the oneness of godhood, there are three persons,
the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, okay. Now, the father, then according to that definition,
which is again, the theological theologian definition is not imposed from outside the father then, in fact, is one person of the three persons constituting the agency or the godhood. So, if Jesus actually meant
that he is divine, he would have not used the term God
or refer to the the God, the One God capital G. As father.
Okay, because father is only one of the persons in China, in God's word, he would have said something different, you know, that, and one of the one of the persons and I am the second person, he never said that at all. Sometimes the question is raised here, and that is, despite of the fact that the term master here,
which is used does not mean differently, and we have explained for that the term master is used, actually to refer to somebody who's a teacher who is, you know, a needle.
So, in theology, of course, that God is not equivalent to any of the fathers. So we cannot say masters, in that sense used is the equivalent of
a person in godhood. It appears to me, however, that the original Greek
use the term
which was translated into masters in a sense of teachers, or leaders, and I'll give you the evidence for that, there are two other translations of the same quotation, Matthew, chapter 23, verses eight to 10, which, translated as teachers or leader instead of Master, so that removes any vowels even that master me in Divine. For example, in the air
Arabic version of the Bible, which is distributed by the Bible Societies in the Near East, the Arabic series number 14 published in 1966.
It says, and I have course, to read translate it to English to convey the meaning it says neither be called teachers, for you have one teacher, the Christ. So the term master actually is not used their teachers modeling or modeling in Arabic, which means this and another version.
It's called the New Testament and Psalms, today's English version, published by the American Bible Society, third edition 1972. Again, we find instead of using the term Master, the word leader is used. So that's also significant so that there'd be no doubt even you know that the term master here does not really necessarily imply any divine attributes. And whichever translation you take in any case,
it shows that Jesus peace be upon him never claimed divinity, he made a clear distinction between the one and only true God and Creator of the whole universe, the creator of all prophets, and between himself whether he's called master for his people, leader, or teachers. There is something also that
may confirm this, which is found in the Gospel according to Matthew, in chapter 10, verse 24, in which Jesus says, and I caught, a disciple is not above his teacher, nor a servant or slave, above his master.
A disciple is not above his teachers, nor a servant above his masters, we find masters used in a different context. Why? We all know that Jesus was never referred to as a disciple, his followers are referred to as disciples. So in the first part of the quotation, he describes his relationship with them.
Okay. And the second one, he describes his relationship with God by analogy again, and he says, The servant is not about his masters,
which again, shows his absolute complete servitude to he who created him. They
think the points in terms of the claims of divinity are so obvious that it appears to me that it takes really a great deal of manipulation and turning around of this player statements to come up with any
that Jesus either claimed the divinity, or implied that divinity. Actually I have a very brief statement here that is made not even by anyone who has any connection with my say, non Christian ideas or thoughts. It actually comes from the writings of a very devout Christian theologian by the name of
a hickey resented it first before his article called the portrait of Jesus in the Koran that was published in the Muslim world. And a couple of conditions here might be quite relevant. He says that the court the first
Christian preachers did not draw the conclusion that he that Jesus was himself God, but that he was a man, a man chosen by God for a special role. In fact, this was a quotation that he took a page 171 from the myth of God incarnate, published by by john hick.
He adds also that there is no
or there are no seeds of Trinitarian doctrine, in the look that's in the Gospel of Luke.
That is, Jesus is not God. Even though he was he caught, he says divine in some way. He doesn't explain divine summons. Because again, to me, that sounds sort of contradiction of terms,
in his comments about the gospel, according to do, and he says, look, and I quote, gives us a Christology characterized by the emphatic subordination of Jesus to God, whereas the rest of the New Testament uses the title, Christ. Absolutely. So I mean, the it's not just a sort of totally new interpretation or ideas. I claim no credit for that the biblical scholar themselves have been analyzing and studying the Bible. And the to say that Jesus in any way, shape or form, claimed divinity is really not supported at all by evidence from the Bible. Well, thank you very much, Doctor, by the way. And thank you all for joining us here once again, this time and focus, as usual.
Any questions or any comments will be most appreciated. Our phone number Anna
Lazarus will be appearing on your screen. All of us