Did Jesus ever clearly say “I am God, worship me” in the Bible?

 

Muhammad Jinnah requested that I answer his question, “Why didn’t Jesus declare, ‘I am God, worship me’?” prior to it being merged together with this one.

Generally speaking, I have no issue answering questions related to Jesus’ divinity. But in this scenario, the question is designed to detract people from the truth. Of course, you must be asking, “What do you mean?” Well, let me explain.

To the Muslim, if Christians cannot point to a text in the NT where Jesus says the precise words, “I am God, worship me” then clearly the Christian perception of Jesus is incorrect. Of course, the question can easily be flipped around and asked of Muhammad Jinnah —where does Jesus say, “I’m only a prophet, don’t worship me”? That’s easily answered. He doesn’t. Anywhere. So then obviously the Islamic (or at least Muhammad Jinnah’s) perception of Jesus is wrong—at least, according to very standards that they hold Christians to.

I am pressed to ask Muhammad Jinnah one very simple question: By saying these specific words (“I am God, worship Me”), is this the only way someone can claim to be God?

Instead of asking Christians to deal with words that Jesus didn’t speak (at least according to what we see in the NT), how come we are not asked to deal with the things He did speak? Words like… Oh, I don’t know:

• “Do not be afraid; I am the First and the Last, and the living One; and I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of death and of Hades.” (Revelation 1:17–18)
• “Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.” (John 17:5)
• “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.” (John 8:58)
• “All things have been handed over to Me by My Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him.” (Matthew 11:27)
• “But when the chief priests and the scribes saw the wonderful things that he did, and the children crying out in the temple, ‘Hosanna to the Son of David!’ they were indignant, and they said to him, ‘Do you hear what these are saying?’ And Jesus said to them, ‘Yes; have you never read, Out of the mouth of infants and nursing babies you have prepared praise?’” (Matthew 21:15-16 cf. Psalm 8:1–3)

Nowhere do any of the OT prophets address God in such a personal way as Jesus does. When invoking God, Christ addresses Him as “Father,” and in like manner, Christ refers to Himself as “the Son of God.” Moses, nor David, nor Noah, nor Abraham – none of them – address God as “Father,” nor do they ever make such explicit claims of themselves to be “the Son of God,” or “a son of God.” For an individual to come and speak the way Jesus did… clearly, Jesus was making claims that had huge implications. Jews had a very specific vocabulary, and Christ far exceeded that vocabulary by way of His claims.

Jesus did not speak as the OT prophets (“thus says the LORD”), but as One with great authority unlike any of the prophets or scribes (“I say unto you”), see Matthew 7:28-29.

I think one of the clearest examples of Christ's supreme authority can be seen in the Sermon on the Mount. For years I struggled with this text (Matthew 5) as I battled with the Law vs. Grace issue. And as a Sabbatarian, for the longest time I thought the point of the Sermon was to bring light to the Law. That is, Christ was giving the true meaning of Moses and contrasting that with the distortions of Moses by the Pharisees. But it took me some years to finally discover that through His, “You have heard it said... But I say unto you” statements, what Christ was doing here was expressing His authority over the Law. Jesus wasn’t “more accurately” defining the Law, but seems to be changing, and in fact transcending (or “raising the bar” so-to-speak) the Law altogether. It is difficult to see the trend until you make it to Matthew 5:38-42,

“You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you.”

​If what Christ was doing here was correcting the distortions of Moses by the Pharisees, rather than “raising the bar,” then how in the world would anyone ever take “an eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth” to really mean, “turn the other cheek”?

Similarly, in Matthew 5:21 Jesus cites one of the Ten Commandments,

“You have heard that the ancients were told, ‘You shall not commit murder’ and ‘Whoever commits murder shall be liable to the court.’ But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, ‘You good-for-nothing,’ shall be guilty before the supreme court… .”

Throughout all the world, and across vast civilizations, laws have been established by governments which prohibit murder. But the Law of Christ — by the Spirit of Truth — demands an even higher standard, and therefore prohibits even the inner most parts of man. And that is the standard by which Jesus calls, and judges all men, because He alone knows the inner most thoughts and desires of man (Matthew 9:4). What worldly judge, ruler, or authority has that type of knowledge that they can penetrate even the depths of man?

Again, in Matthew 5:27, Jesus cites another of the Ten Commandments,

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery’; but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.”

Here again, Jesus’ standard goes beyond that of the standards of man. But the point I’m trying to show is that Jesus’, “You have heard it said... But I say unto you” statements must be interpreted consistently throughout the discourse. Thus, it seems apparent to me that this is a display of Christ's authority, an authority over (not just the OT prophets), but the entire Law, one which no OT prophet would ever dare declare. But also notice v. 17 — “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets” — as if Jesus even had the authority to do so!

If we gather our attention back to the question asked, “Why didn’t Jesus declare, ‘I am God, worship me’?”— the style of question simply astounds me. Why are Muslims concerned with what Jesus didn’t say instead of what He did say? I have a question of my own, if you don’t mind…

• At the outset of the gospel of Mark, the author affirms that Jesus is “the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).
• The demons refer to Jesus as the Son of God (Matthew 8:29; Luke 4:41; Mark 3:11).
• The angel told Mary her child would be the Son of God (Luke 1:35).
• Nathanael said it (John 1:49).
• Martha believed it (John 11:27).
• The centurion agreed with it (Matthew 27:54).
• John the Baptist testified it (John 1:34).
• Jesus claimed it (John 10:36; Matthew 11:27, Matthew 16:15–17).
• Jesus clearly implies it (John 11:4).

And yet Islam denies it—why is that? Are they truly concerned with the words of Jesus?

But He kept silent and did not answer. Again the high priest was questioning Him, and saying to Him, “Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?” And Jesus said, “I am; and you shall see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.” Tearing his clothes, the high priest said, “What further need do we have of witnesses? You have heard the blasphemy; how does it seem to you?” And they all condemned Him to be deserving of death. (Mark 14:61-62)

---

*In John 19:7, the Jews indicate that Jesus claimed to be “the Son of God” and for this reason, He deserved death. This alone should tell us about the way Jesus’ very own application of this title. But more to the point, recall what was said earlier in John, as there is a direct correlation between the words spoken in John 19:7 and those in John 5:18 (“For this reason they tried all the more to kill Him; not only was He breaking the Sabbath, but He was even calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God”), and John 10:25-33.

Jesus’ application of the title “the Son of God” carries with it its fair share of nuances, but might I suggest that one of the more prominent nuances in NT usage is an extremely Jewish one? What I mean by that, is that the “Son of God” epithet is used frequently of the Davidic King, who is God’s vicar, God’s “right hand man,” who mediates God’s presence, and is in that sense (by way of extension), “equal with God.” But I also understand that Jesus’ application of such title runs even deeper than that of the Davidic King motif, for even the Jews of Jesus’ day understood Jesus’ application (what I would consider a more personal application), as going beyond the scope of what any man could rightfully claim for themselves without the charge of blasphemy being brought against them (hence the, “you being a man make yourself out to be” tid bit).

In both, John 5 and John 10, Jesus acts as God acts — in inseparable union — “For this reason the Jews were persecuting Jesus, because He was doing these things on the Sabbath. But He answered them, ‘My Father is working until now, and I Myself am working.’” Jesus uses the present middle indicative for the word “work,” which indicates a presence of past action still in progress. Just as the sustainer of all things (God the Father) continues to work (throughout history) and is thereby exempt from the rules of the Sabbath, in this same manner, Jesus too has been working (hence, 5:18). Jesus’ works are co-extensive with the Father’s. Thusly, Jesus’ application of “the Son of God” epithet of Himself, is intrinsically tied (in a facet of ways) to the idea of Him being “one with” and “equal to,” God. It is this application in John 10 (as in John 5) that leads His Jewish audience to react in such manner.

Given the echoes of Ps. 95 and Deuteronomy 32:39 in the John 10 discourse, the anarthrous θεὸν in v. 33 is probably best understood as qualitative, and therefore understood as a reference to Jesus’ equality with God (as in John 5:18);

“My sheep hear my voice, and they follow Me; and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand...' For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be [or equal with] God" (John 10:25–33)

"For He is our God, and we are the people of His pasture and the sheep of His hand. Today, if you would hear His voice, do not harden your hearts... ." (Psalm 95:7)

Make the connections: John 10:27 (“My sheep hear My voice”) parallels Ps. 95:7 (“Today, if you would hear His voice”). John 10:28 (“My sheep… no one will snatch them out of My hand”) also parallels Ps. 95:7 (“we are the people of His pasture and the sheep of His hand”). John 10:28 also parallels Deuteronomy 32:39 (“there is none that can deliver out of My hand”) and Isaiah 43:13 (“none can deliver from My hand”). John 10:32 (“I showed you many good works”) parallels Ps. 95:9 (“They tried Me, though they had seen My work”).