John 5 23 - divinity claim?

[Wootah]

Jesus said: John 5 23: that all may honour the Son, just as they honour the Father.

Does any being that is not God deserve to be honoured equally with God?

[Wootah]

If there are degrees of honor:

John 5:23 does not have to mean that the honor given to the Son has to be exactly equal in quantity and quality as that given to the Father.

For example,

“just as [kathos] Moses lifted up the [copper] serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up� - John 3:14, NRSV.

These two events are hardly exactly equal. There is a degree of similarity only. Just as there was a “lifting up� in one part of the comparison, there was also a “lifting up� (of a different kind and to a different degree) in the other part. We know Moses didn’t lift up a timber as large and heavy as the one Jesus died on. We know he didn’t swing it up and anchor one end in a hole in the ground until the copper serpent died a horrible death. We know that the one act was much more important than the other in all respects. It was a similar act only in a certain respect and to a certain degree.

And examine Luke 11:30,
“Just as [kathos] Jonah became a sign to the people of Ninevah, so the Son of man will be to this generation,� - NRSV

This does not mean the two signs are equal either literally or figuratively. The details of the sign to the Ninevites were very different from the sign of Jesus’ death and resurrection. The degree of importance of the sign of Jonah was much less than that of Jesus!

And John 17:16,
“[Jesus' followers] are not of the world, just as [kathos] I am not of the world.� - NKJV

It would be foolish to insist that, in every aspect of the phrase, Jesus’ followers were not of the world precisely as he was not. We could, in such a case, end up ‘proving’ that Jesus’ followers had been created in heaven as spirit persons before all the rest of creation, just as he had been. (Or for trinitarians, that they had always existed as God Himself from all eternity.)

I don't see your point.

Jesus was lifted up just as the serpent in the wilderness.
Jesus is a sign just as Jonah was.
Jesus is not of the world just as Christians are not of this world.

The use seems fine to me in your examples.

The problem I have for you is that there is no circumstance I would honour anyone just as the Father. This isn't a matter of scale or degree. It's a matter of blasphemy.

Non-Christians can either claim they honour the Son differently or less than the Father and then they are not obeying the initial verse being discussed or they can honour the initial verse and commit blasphemy by worshipping something that is not God just as they would worship God.

How can you honour the Son just as you honour the Father without committing blasphemy?

[Wootah]

Jesus: …Furthermore, the Father judges no one, but has assigned all judgment to the Son, so that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him. Truly, truly, I tell you, whoever hears My word and believes Him who sent Me has eternal life and will not come under judgment. Indeed, he has crossed over from death to life.…

Wootah: Does any being that is not God deserve to be honoured equally with God?

William: The point of Jesus mission was to inform us that we are all 'of GOD' and in that, Jesus was the messenger.
Jesus came to replace the false ideas of GOD which organised religions of the day had conjured.
Indeed, his message is clear that if we honor one another in the same spirit the information was given to us, we would be honoring GOD.
Would we argue that honoring one another is something we do not 'deserve' from one another because we are 'not GOD'?
If so, then we would do well to understand the Christ's message and stop following such notions of GOD which provoke us to feel about each other as beings who do not deserve to be honored.
Either way, it is a learned thing and the choice is each of ours to make.
We ultimately are the ones who's judgments will judge us. Christ is that which allows it to happen. The Christ acts as the individuals mirror and will reflect back exactly what the individuals judgments are...ONTO the individual.
Essentially then, through Christ, the individual ends up judging him/her self.
If the individual understands intimately that they are an aspect of GOD and express themselves accordingly, then the individual does not judge and is not judged. Because 'GOD does not judge'.

Jesus's purpose was to die for our sins and be a sacrifice that would allow those that want relationship with God to have it.

I think to engage you further would require a different thread because I don't think we mean the same thing even though I probably agree in general with some of your statements re: honouring each other but we are not an aspect of God.

Please don't reply in thread. If you want to discuss your views then please point me to a thread to discuss them.

[William]

Wootah: Jesus's purpose was to die for our sins and be a sacrifice that would allow those that want relationship with God to have it.

William: That is obviously debatable Wootah.
Not everyone requires a sacrifice of another human being in order to only then be able to "commune with GOD".
Jesus knew this and did not hide this from others...

Wootah: I don't think we mean the same thing even though I probably agree in general with some of your statements re: honouring each other but we are not an aspect of God.

William: Then in honouring each other, how do we also honour GOD?
If we do not recognize one another as aspects of The One True GOD, how are we to build GODs Kingdom on this planet? Why would we even want to?

Wootah: Please don't reply in thread. If you want to discuss your views then please point me to a thread to discuss them.

William: I want to give the reader alternative ways in which to think about the evidence re the story of Jesus.
I also want to debate your assertions in the OP.

Your OPQuestion Wootah;

"Does any being that is not God deserve to be honoured equally with God?"

...requires judgment where 'every other being' is not an aspect of GOD and therefore mustn't be honoured in the same way as one honors GOD.

Please explain to the reader exactly how one honours others which is different from how one honours GOD.
Perhaps then, the reader can get a better understanding as to the purpose you had behind the creation of this thread.

[William]

Jesus: The Father judges no one

William: That seems reasonable...

Jesus: The Father has assigned all judgment to the Son so that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father

William: How does one honor The Son?

Jesus: Truly, truly, I tell you, whoever hears My word and believes Him who sent Me has eternal life and will not come under judgment. Indeed, he has crossed over from death to life.…

William: So one honors The Father by believing that The Father sent The Son and that what The Son says The Father told him to say, is believed.
If such is believed, then The Son does not Judge the believer, Just as The Father does not judge.

Jesus: Correct.

William: Did The Son say that we should be perfect like The Father?

Jesus: Yes.

William: Then as The Father does not Judge, nor do I. Those who Judge others are not of The Father, and will be Judged by The Son.

[Wootah]

[Replying to William]

It's all way off topic William. But if you like I'll create a thread for you and I when I get a chance tomorrow. I'm keen.

[William]

Wootah: It's all way off topic William.

William: I do not think so Wootah - but am more than happy for you to explain to the reader as to why you think my replies are off-topic... the topic is about Jesus apparent claim to divinity...and therein, his claims of The Father being GOD and his being The Fathers messenger...

Wootah: But if you like I'll create a thread for you and I when I get a chance tomorrow. I'm keen.

William: I would be interested in how you would word the OP of that thread Wootah...it would help me to appreciate where you might be misunderstanding me in relation to this present thread topic...
I would be keen to explore the possibility of a head to head with you, once we can agree on the subject....in relation to our differences in this current thread, what will the topic be, from your perspective?
If you want to discuss this re possible head2head, let me know in PM and we can tease out the particulars and maybe agree to a topic related to this current disagreement which has surfaced between us...

[marco]

Jesus's purpose was to die for our sins and be a sacrifice that would allow those that want relationship with God to have it.

Before Jesus many people wanted relationship with God and got it. The phrase: "dying for our sins" is now commonplace, but it is extremely hard to find a meaning in it. Whose sins? Those of the righteous, whose minor sins would presumably be excused by their righteousness? It seems an absurdity that anyone would have to suffer and die so that nice folk could get God's attention. Sins continued through two millennia post Christum: it's hard to see what difference the Nazarene made. If however his purpose was to lead people into moral goodness, much of that has been achieved, but some would say Gandhi did well without Christ's prompting.

Which leads one to ask: what indeed was the point of his brief stay with us? Does partial success equate with divinity?

[2timothy316]

[Replying to post 22 by 2timothy316]

I picked the race example to make things clearer. I had no intention you would imagine Jesus and Jehovah and Jupiter were racing. Change the metaphor.

Should an author be honoured as much as the editor or the printer or the critic or the reader?

Now does it make sense to you? Who should be honoured most in the above scenario?

In a race people are not working for a common goal. Yet on a book or magazine, they are all working on the same project. One gets the honor as the author, the other gets the honor for being the editor, same goes for the printer. The reader may or may not be honored. Unless the book or article is about the readers than honor can be assigned to the reader.

These people are not in a competition. Are any of the jobs you described more or less important to the project? What is there to edit with no author. An author without an editor could lead to misinformation. The job of the author and editor are pointless without a printer.

Even the Greek word used for honor in this verse means to assign value, set a price or fix a value in a uniform way.
https://biblehub.com/greek/5091.htm
This is what John 5:23 seems to be saying if we read the rest of the scripture in context. Not that one is valued more than the other but that both should have value and to assign no value to one assigns no value to the other.

There is one that not part of the project. The critic. I see no reason that the critic hold any honor. What did he do in the making of the book. In fact today, when a book or movie is critically acclaimed does any honor go to the critics? No, the critic is the one doing the honoring.

Here is a question for you.

Lets say there is a movie you love. You love the plot, the actors and the direction. Can you honor the movie without honoring the director for his part in the movie?

Much like mankind's salvation, I don't see how we can honor (value) Jehovah the sender of Jesus and not honor (value) Jesus too. According to John 5:23, though each had their own task in the salvation of humans, we can't honor Jehovah for His part in our salvation without honoring Jesus' part in it too. In fact to dishonor (remove value from) the means of mankind's salvation is to dishonor (remove value from) the orchestrator of mankind's salvation. John 5:23 isn't assigning how much value but that there is value. According to the context of the scripture, the only equal value that could be assigned would be in their judgement qualities. But again this is a equality in an action not an equality in worth of the entire person.

That's honor for John 5:23.

However, now that we have established that John 5:23 supports Jehovah and Jesus have honor which simply means they have value in the broader sense. And that when it comes to qualifying to make judgement on mankind they are equal. What John 5:23 doesn't support is that they have equal value. Trinitarians erroneously suggest that Jehovah and Jesus are equal in value. The Bible is clear in many scriptures that Jesus is not equal to Jehovah in value. (John 14:28, John 20:17, 1 Cor 11:3, 1 Cor 15:28, Philippians 2:5, 6) Just don't make the mistake that the value of Jesus isn't high. It's really really high, as in second to Jehovah.

[Checkpoint]

Jesus's purpose was to die for our sins and be a sacrifice that would allow those that want relationship with God to have it.

Before Jesus many people wanted relationship with God and got it. The phrase: "dying for our sins" is now commonplace, but it is extremely hard to find a meaning in it. Whose sins? Those of the righteous, whose minor sins would presumably be excused by their righteousness? It seems an absurdity that anyone would have to suffer and die so that nice folk could get God's attention. Sins continued through two millennia post Christum: it's hard to see what difference the Nazarene made. If however his purpose was to lead people into moral goodness, much of that has been achieved, but some would say Gandhi did well without Christ's prompting.

Which leads one to ask: what indeed was the point of his brief stay with us? Does partial success equate with divinity?

Yes, Gandhi did do well.

This famous quote says volumes:

I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.

[Wootah]

[Replying to Checkpoint]

Gandhi was a racist and a pervert. A quick google can establish this. I don't think India is any better off for his actions either.