i've always found it interesting to consider historically how jesus became a god .
and this particularly interesting work by two yale professors "king and messiah as
son of god divine human and angelic messianic figures in biblical and related literature"
this is an academic book written by scholars obviously for scholars and students of the new
testament but these two yale professors describe the historical process by which
jesus became a god . i just wanted to read a couple of paragraphs from a chapter i'll
just read the text it is an academic language and then i'll make some interpretive comments on it
and try and unpack what they are saying so bear with me as i read the text and then hopefully
i'll make it clearer what i think they're getting at . i'm reading from a page 174 and the
subheading here is the issue of worship : one of the key questions they say in the debate about the
divinity of jesus has been whether he is worshiped in a way that principle agents of god are not .
it is difficult to distinguish ancient texts and practices expressing political
submission and respect on the one hand from practices that we will call religious
which express worship and devotion on the other if jesus was seen as taking over god's functions
as king , warrior and judge at the End (with a capital "E") as god's agent
his divinity may have been perceived primarily in functional terms at first
but the idea of a heavenly messiah opens the door to speculation and rhetoric about pre-existence .
the notion of pre-existence intensifies the divine status of the heavenly messiah , similarly the
honorific recognition as god's son is intensified in language about a virginal conception .
the cultural environment must also be taken into account . in the hellenistic ruler cults and
especially in the imperial cults men who were once human beings were honored and worshipped as gods .
some were even worshipped as gods during their earthly lifetimes . the messiah of israel was
conceived at first primarily as a king of his own nation first of all and then of the whole world .
the understanding of jesus that emerged after his resurrection involved his kingship over israel and
over the entire world . given the practices of imperial cults , it is not surprising that jesus
was viewed as a god and that worship of him became an alternative to the worship of the emperor .
end quote . so that's quite a tightly packed academic bit of analysis there . going back to
the first paragraph one of the key questions about the divinity of jesus has been whether he
is worshiped in a way that principle agents of god are not , so in other words is there something
special about the divinity of the worship of jesus that is unique and quite different from
the way that other agents of god were worshiped in a secondary sense not in the worship
given to the one true god . and you talk about the difficulty of distinguishing in ancient texts
and their practices . the differences between the political submission and respect
on the one hand that's given to say a ruler and on the other what we would call now religious
worship . now there's a footnote here and this is where it goes into the greek : the use of the verb
proskunéō in the book of revelation with god and the lamb as objects (proskunéō
is sometimes translated as worship so in the book of revelation god and the lamb meaning jesus are
objects of worship) and then the same word is used with the community in philadelphia
also as the object of proskunéō in chapter three verse nine , is a case in point they say .
so the verb proskunéō (to worship) can have a political meaning
even to the community in philadelphia and revelation 3 9 as well as be used in a more
religious sense of worship . so then they talk about how jesus was first the king of
israel this is after the ascension of jesus and then how his kingship was extended globally
later on , but what i find particularly interesting in this paragraph is the penultimate paragraph , it
says : the cultural environment must also be taken into account when we discuss the issue of worship
was jesus worshipped as god . and they talk about the hellenistic ruler cults
these are the the ruler cults in the greater roman world particularly the imperial cards to
do with the roman emperor himself where men (emperors) who were once human beings were honored
subsequently and worshipped as god . sometimes at their death the senate would in an honorific
way say that they are now divine . but some were worshipped as gods even during their own lifetimes
and they say : the messiah of israel jesus was conceived at first primarily as a king of his own
nation israel and then of the whole world . and they say that : the understanding of jesus that emerged
in the church after his resurrection ascension given the practices of the imperial roman cults .
it's not surprising that as the gospel spread outside of israel into the great
roman world mainly through the preaching of paul of course and the hellenistic christians
not surprising that jesus also came to be viewed as a god and that worship was given
to him as an alternative to the worship of the emperor . so this is how they say it's
important that we look at the historical and cultural environment in the development of the
worship of jesus as a god in the first century . there's a fascinating little footnote here in
the next chapter . chapter eight when the authors of this book are talking about how
to translate the third clause of john 1 1. this is john's gospel chapter one verse one .
and the word was god in the beginning was the word and the word was with god and the word was
god is the traditional christian translation . they say john 1 1 may be translated either
the word was god or the word was a god the word was a god . and then the footnote here
talks about someone B.A. Mastin considers it overwhelmingly probable that john 1 1 describes
the pre-existent logos as god in a particular work . this conclusion though (they say) however is based
on his view that thomas's acclamation in john 20 28 . you remember where thomas acclaims jesus
my lord and my god yeah an extraordinary statement . so they say that : thomas's acclimation in 20 28
is the one verse in the new testament which does unquestionably describe christ as god
but they criticize this view . this view fails to recognize however that the phrase dominus edeus
and presumably its greek equivalent is an honorific exclamation used for example by
those who wish to flatter domitian ( domitian is the roman emperor) . so what are they saying here
that they're saying : my lord and my god they're saying that john at the end of the first century
is calling has thomas a claim to jesus my lord and my god which in latin is dominus deus .
this is an honorific acclamation known to being used by those at that time in the end of the
first century who wish to flatter domitian . domitian was a roman emperor of course . so what
john is doing , he's saying no jesus is the lord and god not the roman emperor . so but of course the
roman emperor wasn't really the absolute one high god of the universe he wasn't yahweh he wasn't
the original . no one thought that he was zeus in an absolute sense . it was an honorific title . it
was given to flatter him (the flash of the roman emperor) oh you're so marvelous you are the king
you are the lord and god but they didn't really think that he was zeus or yahweh .
in the same way on the lips of thomas , thomas is saying in effect : no jesus is dominus edeus
not the roman emperor . so in a similar way we shouldn't take these words in the strongest
sense of actually asserting that jesus is yahweh no that's not quite what's going on here .
it's the greek gospel equivalent or the title that was known to be used to flatter
the roman emperor and that's what the gospel writer is using that term to make his own point .
that kind of makes sense . so i think these two writers i'll just perhaps say a bit
more about them one is Adela Yarbro Collins professor of new testament criticism interpretation at yale
university . the other is John J. Collins professor of old testament criticism interpretation at yale
university . i get the impression they are a married couple have an extraordinary marriage
one is professor in the new testament . the other is a professor in the old testament both at yale . they
both co-authored this . so the chapters to do with the old testament written by one person
and the new testament by the other person in the marriage so to speak .
but these are world-class experts and they clearly see the issue of worship
we need to take into the cultural environment take that into account when we understand
why gentile christians ultimately came to worship jesus as god as a counterpoint
as a way of saying no we don't we're not going to worship the emperor we're going to worship jesus .
you know he is our king but of course this is a later development it's not something that
we find in the earliest jesus tradition . the evidence suggests that wasn't present at all .
so as they say in the last sentence given : the practice of the imperial
cults (the roman imperial cults) it's not surprising that jesus was viewed as a god
and that worship of him became an alternative to the worship of the roman emperor . so that's their
insight . i think that's quite an astute comment and yeah what do you think . till next time