The Witness of Jesus to His own Divine Identity (Part 19)

In the previous installment of this web series, I endeavored to show that belief in the divinity of Jesus Christ goes back to the earliest Christian communities, right back to the apostolic Church itself. There are even hints in the gospels that the great mystery of Christ’s divine identity first began to dawn on the apostles as soon as Jesus was risen from the grave (see Mt 28:19; Jn 20:28-29).

The obvious question then arises: did Jesus Himself believe that He was a divine person “incarnate” (that is, “in the flesh”)? Did he witness to His own divine identity in any way? Or did the apostles get it all wrong right from the start?

Here the reader needs to refer to the evidence collected in the first series of articles on the quest for the historical Jesus posted on this website, a series titled “In Search of Jesus,” and in particular to article 20 in that web series: “Did Jesus really Know Who He Was and What He Was Doing?” Toward the end of that article, I summed up the matter like this:

The central, explicit message of Jesus in the Synoptic gospels is … the proclamation of the dawning of God’s Kingdom … but one could also argue that the implicit message that permeates his words and deeds was that the Kingdom of God is breaking into the world precisely because God Himself has come to dwell among us, sharing our lot in a truly and fully human way, in the person of His Son (Mt 11:27; 22:41-46; Mk 12:6, 13:32; Lk 10:22).

If Jesus really believed Himself to be the divine Son of God, then why would he not openly proclaim it? Why hide the truth in parables, or in cryptic sayings and mysterious titles for himself like “The Son of Man”?

To begin with, it seems obvious that Jesus was biding his time. If He had openly proclaimed the truth — “I am the divine Son of God, the God of Israel come among you in human flesh!” — He would not have lasted even one day before the Jews would have stoned Him to death for blasphemy. In fact, He came very close to meeting that fate, according to the gospels. The charge of “blasphemy” swirled around him during His Galilean ministry:

The Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father; for which of these do you stone me?” The Jews answered him, “We stone you for no good work but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God” (Jn 10:31-33; cf. Mt 9:3; Mk 2:6-7; Jn 19:5-7).

Even at his trial before the high priest and the Jewish high court in Jerusalem, the Sanhedrin, it was the charge of “blasphemy” that they used to justify condemning Jesus to death (See Lev 24:16). We need to remember that claiming to be the Messiah might be foolish and reckless, but in itself it was not blasphemous, because it did not necessarily entail making any claim to divine status or stealing any divine prerogatives. But in response to the high priest’s question about whether or not He was the Messiah — “Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?”, Jesus alludes to two passages from the Hebrew Scriptures, Psalm 110:1-3 and Daniel 7:13-14, both of which (arguably) can be interpreted as referring to a divine figure: “I am; and you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.” To be seated at God’s right hand (“the Power” was another way of referring to God in ancient Israel) meant to share in his authority and power over the whole world, and to come “on the clouds of heaven” was something only God does in ancient Jewish scriptures. [See article seven in this web series for a discussion of the divine implications of Jesus’ self-chosen title, “The Son of Man”]. It is not surprising, therefore, that according to St. Mark’s gospel, after Jesus spoke these words “the high priest tore his clothes, and said, ‘Why do we still need witnesses? You have heard his blasphemy. What is your decision?’ and they all condemned him as deserving death” (Mk 14:61-64). Catholic New Testament scholar Brant Pitre tells us:

[T]he reaction of Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin confirms the divine implications of Jesus’s answer. Caiaphas immediately tears his garments and declares Jesus guilty of “blasphemy” (Mt 26:65; Mk 14:63). Strikingly, this is precisely the same reaction described in early rabbinic literature when someone blasphemes against God by pronouncing the divine name: “the judges stand up on their feet and rend their garments (Mishnah, Sanhedrin 7:5). ... Recall once again that simply claiming to be the Messiah was not blasphemy. But if Jesus is claiming to be a divine Messiah who will be seated on a heavenly throne (like God) and come on the clouds of heaven (also like God), then the charge of blasphemy makes sense. (The Case for Jesus, p. 161)

Thus, if Jesus had some very important things he wanted to teach and show his disciples, and the people of Israel, before His death, then He needed to bide His time and tell the truth about Himself more implicitly than explicitly.

One of the most important things He evidently wanted to convey to His disciples was a more in-depth revelation of the nature of “God.” One would think that as His disciples were mostly faithful Jews, they would already have a pretty good grasp of what the word “God” means. But Jesus spends much of His time in teaching them that there is more to the mercy and love of God, and to His Kingdom, than they could possibly imagine [On this, see article 4 in this series, “The Dawning of the Kingdom”]. For example, He taught them to pray to God not just as Lord, King and Shepherd of Israel, but also as “Father”: like the Father in His parable, whose love wells up so deeply from His Heart that He forgets the social dignity of his oriental fatherhood, and runs to meet his long lost prodigal son at the first sign of his son’s coming home, showering him with tender compassion and forgiveness (Lk 15:11-24). He is the Father who knows what you need before you ask Him, and is more willing to provide for you than you are to believe and receive (6:25-33). Most of all, He is the God of infinite mercy, who calls us all to share that mercy with one another; “Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful” (Lk 6:36). Jesus needed to convey all this about the mystery of God before the blasphemy-hunters finally got hold of Him. No wonder He was somewhat circumspect about His own divine identity in His public preaching ministry!

Besides, if He had simply proclaimed out loud “I am God” He easily could have been misunderstood. He knew that His people, and even His own disciples, were struggling to understand the true nature of God, and so any explicit claim by Jesus to divine status would imply that they already knew well enough what the word “God” meant. They would equate Him with that God, that is, with the collection of half-truths about the nature of God that they already had in their own minds, rather than with the God of merciful love whom Jesus really was.

In addition, there was a mystery about the essence of God that Jesus knew His disciples and His countrymen could not even begin to fathom. That is why, most often, even when Jesus spoke implicitly about the mystery of His own divinity, He often referred to himself mysteriously as “the Son” (Again, see Mt 11:27; 22:41-46; Mk 12:6, 13:32; Lk 10:22). For the truth is that Jesus was not simply God Incarnate. To be more precise, He was and is the divine Son Incarnate: the manifestation in human flesh of divine Sonship, showing that God in His inner being is not one single, solitary person, but an eternal communion of love between the divine Father and His eternal Son, and the divine Holy Spirit as well.

Saint John’s gospel tells us that Jesus explained all this in-private and in-depth to His disciples on the night of His arrest (although there is no sign that they really understood what he was teaching them; see John chapters 13-17). In short, the evidence suggests that Jesus did witness to His divine identity, implicitly to the crowds and explicitly to His inner circle of disciples, but always as the divine Teacher who knew just the right way, and the just right time to convey His message.

Also, like any good teacher, Jesus often showed the truth about Himself to His disciples, rather than simply speaking about it. He did this especially in two of His most amazing nature miracles: the calming of the storm at sea, and walking on the water (see the historical evidence for these in our web series, “In Search of Jesus,” article 13, “On the Nature Miracles and the Transfiguration”). First, Brant Pitre comments on the gospel story of Jesus stilling the waves of the sea (Mk 4:35-41):

Over and over again, the Old Testament emphasizes how the God of the universe displays his power by controlling two of the most powerful forces in creation: the wind and the sea. For example, in the book of Job, God shows his might when at his “rebuke” and “by his power” he “stilled the sea” (Job 26:11-12). Likewise, the book of Psalms shows how “great” the Lord is by declaring that he has power over the “winds” and that he “rebuked” the “waters” of the sea when he made the world (Psalm 104:1- 7). Finally, and most striking of all, Psalm 107 describes the Lord as having the power to save His people by stilling a storm and calming the waves of the sea ....

[By stilling the wind and the waves on the Sea of Galilee] Jesus has not merely performed a remarkable miracle. Even more, he has displayed a power that the Old Testament repeatedly attributes to God alone. ...

The divine implications of Jesus’s actions become even clearer when we realize that he does not pray to God to make the wind and the sea stop. He gives no impression that he depends on any outside force to supply this divine power. Instead, he simply commands the wind and sea himself, and they obey him. (The Case for Jesus, p. 123 and 125)

Much the same holds true for the story of Jesus walking on the water of the Sea of Galilee (Mk 6:45-51). Jesus does what only God can do, according to the Hebrew Scriptures: namely tread safely upon the sea (Job 9:8). This gospel actually includes an implicit verbal statement of His divine identity as well, for when His disciples catch sight of Jesus walking toward them on the waters, and He says to them (according to the RSVCE translation), “Take heart, it is I; have no fear” (Mk 6:50), the actual phrase He literally uses is not “it is I” but “I am” (Greek ego eimi), the same phrase in Greek used to translate God’s self-chosen name in Exodus 3:14.

So, Jesus really did witness, in various ways, to the mystery and miracle of His own divine identity. All of this, therefore, brings us to the classic “trilemma,” made famous especially by C.S. Lewis in Mere Christianity:

I am trying to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: ‘I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God.’ That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on a level with a man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to. (Book Two, chapter three).

It seems we are left, therefore, with this stark trilemma: either Jesus was and is who he claimed to be, the divine Son of God, or He was a megalomaniac, or an immoral charlatan. Lord, Liar or Lunatic: take your pick.

Not so fast, some commentators say; those are not the only three options available. After all, it could be a mere Legend that the true, historical Jesus claimed, implicitly or explicitly, to be the divine Son. Perhaps He was deified in the religious imagination of His followers some decades after He died, and this legend crept into the gospel records. Trouble is: we met this claim before and discussed it in-depth in our web series “In Search of Jesus” (see articles 11, 12, 13 and 20 in that series). The “Legend” option just does not pan out.

Still, it is understandable that unbelievers may not be fully convinced by the trilemma alone. They rightly say: “To justify such an extraordinary claim as the divine identity of a human being who lived over 2000 years ago, we surely need extraordinary corroborating evidence.” But the gospels are ready to provide that too. For Jesus alone, among all who have ever lived, rose from the dead: the historical evidence for the astonishing miracle of His resurrection is very strong (see articles 10-15 of this present web series, “Jesus and His Story”).

After all, why would God raise from the dead a Jewish rabbi who falsely claimed to be the divine Son of God, dwelling among us in human form? The miracle corroborates the mystery.

Next Time: Epilogue: The Mystery of the Incarnation

Robert Stackpole, STD

©2020 Mere Christian Fellowship