Did John believe Jesus is God?

 Note: Words and phrases within curly braces { } within quotations are furnished by the author to explain such quotations. Words and phrases within square brackets [ ] within quotations are part of the quoted text.  

                John wrote, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god {Gr. “theos”}.” (John 1:1) There have been many arguments on the translation of this verse. Most Christian translators render it “and the Word was God” because they believe that Jesus is equal to God. On the other hand, The New World Translation (the translation of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, who believe that Jesus is the Archangel) renders it “the Word was a god.” Christian translators translate though their belief system. For example, in Exodus 34:14 they capitalized the word “god”: “... for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God.” (Exodus 34:14 KJV) This capitalization is improper because in this instance “god” is not a proper name: “a jealous god.” Likewise, in the following example, “{God told Abraham} And I will establish my covenant between me and you ... to be a God to you ...” (Genesis 17:7 KJV) The word “God” is a noun: “a god.” In these cases, the improper capitalization does not create a controversy, but in John 1:1 it does.
            Did John believe that Jesus was God? In the first verse of his gospel, he used the word “god” twice: “... and the Word was with God {Gr. ton Qeon}, and the Word was a god {Gr. qeoV, “theos”}.” (John 1:1) In the first instance he placed in front of the word “god” the definite article “ton”(Gr. ton Qeon). This clearly refers to God. But in the second instance he omitted the definite article (“o”). As a rule, and rules have exceptions, when the definite article is missing, “theos” means “a god.” When the article is present, “o Qeos” or “ton Qeon,” means “God.” One must also consider that John was influenced by Philo, who wrote the following: “There is only one true God; but they who are improperly called gods are many. ... the holy scripture in the present instance indicates Him who is the true God by means of the article; the expression being, ‘I am the God’ {o Qeos}, while it omits the article when mentioning him who is improperly called {god} so, the expression being ... not ‘of the God,’ {Gr. tou Theou} but simply ‘of god’ {Gr. theou}.” According to Philo’s grammatical explanation, in the second instance, John meant “and the Word was a god.” What kind of god? An angel. People called the angels “gods.” Here is another rendering of John’s verse: “... and the Word was an angel.” As Philo wrote, “... the Word appointed as judge and mediator, who is called Angel.” Philo’s influence on John is indisputable.
    There is one exceptional instance in the Gospel of John where the article “o” appears before the word “god” and it refers to Jesus. Thomas called Jesus “my god.” “Thomas answered and said to Him {Jesus}, ‘My Lord and my god! {Gr. o qeoV mou}’ ” (John 20:28) [1] In this instance, even though the definite article “o” precedes the word “theos,” it does not mean God because it is followed by the possessive “mou.” The possessive “mou”qualifies the word “god” as a noun. “My god,” “your god,” “their god,” are qualifying expressions. “God is great” refers to God (the god of the Jews). In this case “God” is a name. But “my god is great” can refer to any god. In this case “god” is a noun. Here is another example, from the New Testament, where the article “o” appears before the word “god” and it qualifies “god” as a noun: “... their god is the belly {Gr. wn o qeoV}.” (Philippians 3:19 NRSV) The word “god” is a noun because of the possessive qualifier “their,” that is “their god.” Thomas called Jesus “my god,” that is, “my angel” (such as, “my guardian angel”). Allegedly, at that time, Jesus was a spiritual being, and spiritual beings were called gods or angels. Many believed in guardian angels: “{Jesus said:} Take care that you do not despise one of these little ones; for, I tell you, in heaven their {guardian} angels continually see the face of my Father in heaven.” (Matthew 18:10 NRSV)

            Throughout his gospel John refers to the Father of Jesus as “God.” He does not indicate or imply that Jesus is God. He wrote, “No one has seen God at any time.” (John 1:18 NASB) Since thousands of Jews saw Jesus for thirty years, he was not God. John wrote that Jesus said, “... that they {the disciples} might know you the only true God, and {me} Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.” (John 17:3 KJV) The phrase “you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ” clearly differentiates God from Jesus. John used the expression “the only true God” to distinguish the Father from the “improperly called god”: Jesus, the Archangel. (Notice that the term “the true God” does not appear in the Synoptic gospels because their writers did not call Jesus “a god.” It appears in John’s and Paul’s writings, simply because they called Jesus “a god,” that is, “an angel.”) John also wrote, “Then cried Jesus ... he {God} that sent me is true {i.e. the true God} ...” (John 7:28 KJV) In another passage John wrote, “Jesus said to her, ‘Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem.’ ” (John 4:21 NRSV) John did not write, “You will worship the Father and the Son (and the Holy Spirit).” He wrote, “You will worship the Father,” because, as he wrote in John 7:28 and 17:3, the Father is “the only true God.”
            John believed that the Father was Jesus’ god: “ {Jesus said:} I ascend to my Father, and your Father; to my God and your God.” (John 20:17 KJV) John believed that the Father is greater than Jesus. He wrote that Jesus said, “My Father ... is greater than all.” (John 10:29 NASB) In other words, John believed that God is greater than his Archangel.
            John believed that Jesus’ existence had a beginning. He indicated (as Philo did) that the Word was begotten by God: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son ...” (John 3:16 KJV) The term “only-begotten son” denotes that Jesus was generated by the God. He was a unique angel because he was the only angel begotten by God. However, the begotten comes after the begetter and cannot be equal to the begetter. One difference between Jesus and God is: Jesus is “begotten” while God is “unbegotten.” John did not express the Trinity doctrine in his gospel. He did not call the Holy Spirit “God.”
            John believed that the father-son relationship between Jesus and God existed before Jesus entered the world: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son ...” (John 3:16 KJV) He believed that before Jesus came to earth he was subject to God because God sent him. He wrote that Jesus said, “For I came down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him that sent me.” (John 6:38 KJV) He who sends is greater than him who is sent. John wrote that Jesus said, “Very truly, I tell you, servants are not greater than their master, nor are messengers greater than the one who sent them.” (John 13:16 NRSV) Messengers are inferior to those who sent them and Jesus was the messenger of God: “What I {Jesus} speak, therefore, I speak just as the Father has told me.” (John 12:50 NRSV) “... the word that you hear is not mine, but is from the Father who sent me.” (John 14:24 NRSV) “Then Jesus answered them, ‘My teaching is not mine but his who sent me.’ ” (John 7:16 NRSV) Jesus was the servant/ angel of God because God commanded him: “This commandment have I received of my Father.” (John 10:18 KJV) The master is greater than the servant.
            John believed that the reason Jesus called himself “Son of God” was because he was the angel (the angels were called “sons of God”) whom God sent to save mankind. This is evident in the following passage: “The Jews answered, ‘It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you, but for blasphemy, because you, though only a human being, are making yourself a god.’ Jesus answered, ‘Is it not written in your law, “I said, you are gods?” If those {the angels}to whom God spoke were called “gods”--and the scripture cannot be annulled-- can you say that the one {me} whom the Father has sanctified and sent into the world is blaspheming because I said, ‘I am God's Son?’ ” (John 10:33-36) John believed in reincarnation, and Jesus was the incarnation of the Archangel of God.
            John believed that after Jesus went to Heaven, he remained subject to the Father. He wrote, “... the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father ...” (John 1:18 KJV) Notice that John used the present tense: “is.” He described the Jesus, who had returned to Heaven and had been reinstated to his former position. The expression “who is in the bosom of the Father” depicts Jesus being held like a child in the lap of the Father.
            John believed that Jesus’ power was not his own. God gave Jesus absolute authority and power: “{The Father} has committed all judgment to the Son.” (John 5:22 KJV) This implies that there was a time when Jesus did not have such authority. He who gives authority is greater than him who receives authority. He believed that Jesus was the instrument of God: “I {Jesus} can do nothing on my own authority.” (John 5:30 RSV) “For I {Jesus} did not speak on My own initiative, but the Father Himself who sent Me has given Me a commandment as to what to say and what to speak.” (John 12:49 NASB) “The son {Jesus} can do nothing of himself, but what he sees the Father do. For the Father loves the Son, and shows him all things that himself does.” (John 5:19-20 KJV) Jesus could not act on his own. John wrote that God “granted” Jesus life: “For just as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself.” (John 5:26 NRSV) He wrote that Jesus lives because of the Father: “{Jesus said:} I live because of the Father ...” (John 6:57 NRSV) In other words, if it was not for the Father, Jesus would not have been alive.
            John believed that since Jesus is the absolute representative (mediator) of God, then, when one receives Jesus, he receives God: “Very truly, I tell you, whoever receives one {disciple} whom I {Jesus} send receives me; and whoever receives me receives him {God} who sent me.” (John 13:20 NRSV)
            Many claim that in the following verse Jesus indicated that he was equal to the Father: “Jesus said to him {to Philip}, ‘He who has seen Me has seen the Father.’ ” (John 14:9 NASB) Jesus said this because Philip asked him “Show us the Father.” But, according to John, the Father is invisible: “No one has seen God at any time.” (John 1:18 NASB) Jesus repeatedly claimed that he represents the Father and does exactly what the Father showed him to say and do. He imitated his Father. In other words, he told Philip, “You cannot see my Father, because he is invisible. Seeing me imitating my Father is the like seeing my Father.”
            Many claim that in the following verse Jesus declared himself equal to God. “Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the Sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal {Gr. ison} with God.” (John 5:18 KJV) This statement is fictional. The Jews would not have accused Jesus of saying “that God is my Father” because they themselves believed that God was their Father: “They said to Him {Jesus} ‘... we have one Father: God.’ ” (John 8:41 NASB) Also, the Jews accused him that he “made himself equal {Gr. ison} with God.” This was merely a slander. Philo made a similar slur against atheists. He used the same Greek word “ison” (equal). He wrote, “But the selfish and atheistical mind, thinking itself equal {Gr. ison} with God ...” The phrase “thinking itself equal with God” is an accusation for pride: arrogance. The Jews accused Jesus of arrogance. Jesus responded immediately to their accusation by expressing his submission to God: “Then answered Jesus and said to them, Verily, verily, I say to you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he sees the Father do.” (John 5:19 KJV) Jesus could do nothing on his own. He was under the control of his Father. Even the terms “Father” and “Son” indicate subordination. In that culture a son was subordinate to his father.
            Again, in another instance Jesus declared to the Jews his inferiority to God: “... my Father is greater than I.” (John 14:28 KJV) Origen wrote, “It is obvious the we {Christians} ... hold that the Son is not mightier than the Father, but subordinate. And we say this because we believe him who said, ‘The Father who sent me is greater than I.’ ”  This was the standard interpretation of these verses by the early Christians (before the Synod of Nicaea).
            Today, many claim that when Jesus said “I am,” he called himself “God” because God used the phrase “I am” to describe himself in Exodus.

Did Jesus really say “I am?” Let us examine the context of John’s passage. The Jews questioned Jesus: “Then said the Jews to him, You are not yet fifty years old, and you have seen Abraham?” (John 8:57 KJV) This question was not about who Jesus was, but about how long he had been in existence. Jesus answered, “Before Abraham was, I have been.” In other words, “I existed before Abraham.” (This, too, is not a saying of the historical Jesus. John put it in Jesus’ mouth because he believed that Jesus pre-existed.) “I have been” is the proper translation.
            Why did the KJV translators rendered it “I am”? A peculiarity in the grammar of the Koine Greek presented the opportunity for the KJV translators to render this grammatically awkward phrase. The Koine Greek was a dialect inferior to the Attic Greek. In the 1st century CE, it was used mainly by non-Greeks. Being a secondary language to them, they compromised several of its grammatical rules. One of the compromises was the lack of perfect tense for the verb “to be” (“I have been”). John, like the rest of the New Testament writers, used the Koine Greek. He meant to write “I have been.” But because the Koine had no perfect tense, he had to use the present tense, “I am” (Gr. ego eimi). The English language, though, has a perfect tense to accommodate the meaning intended by the writer. However, the KJV translators declined to use the intended meaning of the phrase because by translating it as “I am” it sounds like the “I am” of Exodus 3:14. They used the similarity of these English words to promote the belief that Jesus is God. But this similarity is merely a play on words, created by translators. (The Hebrew word “haw-yaw” has nothing to do with the Greek words “ego eimi.”)
            Notice that the Worldwide English (New Testament) version, reads “... I already was before Abraham was born.” (John 8:58 WE) The New Living Translation reads, “... I existed before Abraham was even born.” (John 8:58 NLT) These translations make sense.
            Evidence that the KJV translators manipulated the translation of the Greek words “ego eimi” is the fact that in the following passage they translated the same words (“ego eimi”) as “I have been”: “Jesus said to him, I have been {Gr. ego eimi} so long time with you, and yet you have not known me, Philip?” (John 14:9 KJV) In this case they translated correctly the meaning intended by the author because it does not affect the Trinity doctrine.
            Many claim that Jesus called himself equal to God by pointing out this: “{Jesus said:}I and my Father are one {Gr. en}.” (John 10:30 KJV) They claim that Jesus meant he is one nature with God. The word “one” does not imply “nature.” To imply “nature” the Greek text would have been “mia” (“nature” in Greek is female: “jusiV”) instead of “en.” The word “en” means “one” as in “united.” In other words, united in spirit or in purpose. Jesus used the same word in reference to his disciples. He prayed that his disciples would become “en,” “one” as he was “one” with his Father: “... that they {the disciples} may be one {Gr. en}, even as we are one {Gr. en}.” (John 17:22 KJV) Obviously, his disciples did not need to become one nature. They were one nature: they were all human beings. “Holy Father, keep ... those whom you have given me that they may be one, as we {the Father and me} are {one}.” (John 17:11 KJV) Jesus and his Father were united in purpose. He prayed to God that his disciples may become united as he was with God. Cicero wrote, “Pythagoras requires of ideal friendship, that several {friends} are united in one.” Paul wrote, “But anyone united to the Lord becomes one {Gr. en} spirit {becomes one in purpose} with him.” (1 Corinthians 6:17 NRSV) When a believer unites with Jesus, he does not become Jesus, but “one in purpose,” (united in spirit) with Jesus. Even the Essenes strove to unite in spirit with God: “... through the submission of his soul to all God’s ordinances ... he may purify himself with the water-for-impurity and sanctify himself with rippling water ... this will become for him a covenant of eternal Communion {with God}.” (1QS 3:8-9, 12 ) This “eternal Communion” was a spiritual union with God, like the union that Jesus claimed to have with God: “I and my Father are one.”
            John believed that Jesus was begotten by God, the Son of God, a god, that is a unique angel, the only angel begotten by God: the Archangel.

Note: The book contains over 2,500 footnotes (quotations and references), which explain or document the facts presented. Those footnotes are not included in most excerpts presented in this web site.

If you find this page beneficial, "spread the word": link it to another web-site or send it to a friend. Click on "File," then  click "Send,   Page by E-mail ..."