Did the Earliest Followers of Jesus Believe in His Deity?

The following presentation is a production of Alpha and Omega Ministries, Inc. and is protected by copyright laws of the United States and its international treaties. Copying or distribution of this production without the expressed written permission of Alpha and Omega Ministries, Inc. is prohibited.

Then we can get to the debate. Again, my apologies for giving you guys unnecessary exercise from the auditorium to the IT building, but let's just blame it on the university, then I'm not to blame. Guys, a debate such as tonight, just allow me one or two preliminary remarks until we get this sorted out and get the banners up, etc.

A debate like this, a lot of people would say, polarizes the two groups. Polarizes, just makes the division between Christians and Muslims that much bigger. And I must say, that sort of criticism can be fair at times.

I've been to debates, and if you come to the debate with an expectation to pick a fight, then you're definitely at the wrong venue. In fact, if you want to pick a fight, the are you the toy is still available for you.

A lot of detractors would say that this is not helpful, especially in a complex society such as South Africa, where racial division and religious division has been here for centuries. Now, can I just ask the Muslims quickly, how many of you are annoyed when you encounter a Christian, a very ignorant Christian, I might add, that says, who's so excited to speak to you and tell you that you are an idiot for believing in Islam because you guys are responsible for terrorism, and Al-Shabaab, and Jihad, who are annoyed with that sort of criticism?

Okay, there's two that's annoyed with that sort of criticism. If I was a Muslim, I would have been annoyed with that, because that's a very ignorant way of thinking. And you are not even willing to wait for an answer from the other perspective.

In the same way, a Christian, yeah, I'm not going to embarrass myself by asking you guys to raise your hands again, but in the same way, Christians will be very annoyed if a Muslim is very much ready with his arguments, saying the Trinity is silly because God seems to be schizophrenic, and he himself is Jesus, but he is not, he sends his son, so he's actually committing suicide.

In the same way that we try to ridicule one another, we are not taking this conversation forward because we're not even willing to wait for an answer. We're like a big man walking around with a hammer, and with a man walking around with a hammer, everything looks like nails, and he just wants to bash in nails.

So please, come to this debate willing to learn something, willing to be challenged, and then this debate will be very, very meaningful. I also want to say that it is okay in a place like South Africa, where tolerance is the big word, and we don't want to offend everybody, and we must just hold hands and sing Kumbaya and not disagree about big things.

I can tell you that these guys are two examples of people who can disagree with one another, but in a civil manner, and the basis for that disagreement, or the basis for it happening in a civil manner, is not relativism, it's not the lack of truth, but it's mutual respect and love, and I think we can learn something from that sort of discussion methodology.

I also want to thank the Muslims for last night, I mean, I'm just going to put on my Christian hat for a moment, and just thank the hospitality that we had there last night. The debate did start at an ungodly hour, which is ironic, because it's a religious debate, but I can tell you that as a Christian, I felt very welcomed there, and I want to thank you guys so much, and the snacks outside was amazing.

In fact, the cheesecake I had alongside Hashim Amla is probably the best arguments for Islam, in my opinion. So again, I just want to say thank you so much for the hospitality and inviting us into the mosque, and it was a historic occasion.

So you can give yourself a hand for what it's worth, thank you so much for that. All right, just quickly, I want to thank the sponsors for tonight, Campus Crusade for Christ, they helped us. All these cables over here are their responsibility, and if you trip, you can sue them.

IPCI, they were here a couple of minutes ago, but IPCI, the Islamic Propaganda Center for Islam, Mohammed Khan, Yusuf, you guys, thank you so much for all your trouble, and then of course Antwerp, which should not be confused with the band.

So that's very important. Okay, guys, again, I'm just quickly going to introduce these speakers to you, and you know a speaker has arrived on the world platform if he has a Wikipedia page. That is my, I think I can die if I realize I've got a Wikipedia page, if you want to do something like that.

Now, I'm going to read Shabir Ali, what I got from Wikipedia, I'm going to read his very, very short CV. If I had to read his whole CV, it's longer than the Old Testament. So I'm just quickly going to give you a brief idea.

Shabir holds a BA in Religious Studies from, now these are Canadian names, and luckily you're South Africans, you're not going to judge me for my accent, Laurentian University in Sudbury, Ontario, it's in Canada, with a specialization in Biblical Literature.

He holds an MA and PhD from the University of Toronto with a specialization in Quranic exegesis. He is the President of the Islamic Information and Dawa Center International in Toronto, where he functions as Imam.

He travels internationally to South Africa to represent Islam in public lectures and interfaith dialogues. He explains Islam on a weekly television program called Let the Quran Speak. And again, if I can just put my neutral hat on again, by the way, I'm the moderator.

I don't think there's an intelligent voice out there in Islam, no offense to anybody who thinks he's an intelligent Muslim, but I don't think they give him a warm South African round of applause. In fact, I've spoken to numerous Christian apologists who've debated him.

He holds an MA from Penn College, an MA from Fuller Theological Seminary, and then a bunch of things that I don't know what it means, but it sounds very academic, a THD and a Dmin from Columbia Evangelical Seminary.

He served as Professor of Greek, Hebrew, Systematic Theology, and various apothecary, John Salbespong, all guys that you won't find in a church anytime soon. And probably his, and this is your seventh debate, am I right?

Yeah. This is their seventh debate. All right. All right, guys, Nadim, just very quickly, some...

The Deity of Christ in James 2, Philippians 2, 1 Corinthians 8, and the Shema

Well I'm going to try to give my opening statement if the microphone will allow me to do so and not to provide a rhythm section during the entirety of my presentation. I'm not sure what that is, but hopefully it will go away, or maybe it won't, maybe we'll just learn to ignore it.

Our topic this evening is a very, very important topic. It's going to require you to focus in upon what both sides are saying. We are asking the question, did the earliest followers of Jesus view him as God?

The question is not, did the earliest followers of Jesus view him as a prophet? Because they did. Did they view him as a man? Because they did. Did they view him as King of Israel? Because they did. Did they view him as Messiah?

Because they did. The issue is, when we look at the earliest material, the earliest material that can give us any meaningful and documented understanding of what the earliest Christians believed, is there evidence there that they believed in the deity of Christ?

We are not debating wild esoteric scholarly theories tonight where there is no evidence. What I'm going to give you is documentary evidence. I'm not going to be talking about Jimmy Dunn and his theories and all these people that have to get published and so they have to try to read between the lines and can't allow the text to speak for itself.

I'm going to go straight to you and show you the evidence and then you can answer the question for yourself, did the earliest followers of Jesus view him as God? So to view Jesus as God would be to attribute to him words, actions, names, offices and functions that would be blasphemous if the person of Jesus was not truly divine.

Now normally, especially if you're a Christian and you've grown up reading the New Testament, you skip over so many of the evidences of the deity of Christ because you're so accustomed to hearing it. You're just so accustomed to hearing Jesus speak in a certain way.

But I'm going to be challenging you to think a little bit more closely as to the original context of the words of Jesus this evening. And the earliest disciples, of course, are represented by the earliest sources.

Now what are the earliest sources that I'm going to be looking at? Well, I will present my case this evening from the following sources. First of all, from James chapter 2, verse 1. And the phraseology that James uses there of our glorious Lord Jesus Christ.

Then we're going to look at the Carmen Christi, Philippians 2, 5 through 11. We're going to look at 1 Corinthians chapter 8, verse 6. And we're going to look at the Gospel of Mark in toto, which means it's going to be a really fast run through the Gospel of Mark since I only have now about 23 and a half minutes or 22 and a half minutes.

It goes by very, very quickly unless you're waiting to get your turn to speak. Then it goes by very slowly. Anyways, let's look at James chapter 2, verse 1, which says, my brothers do not hold the faith of our glorious Lord Jesus Christ in a favorite spirit of favoritism.

Now tradition tells us, and it seems that James is the half brother of Jesus, obviously because of the virgin birth. And what would it take to force a person who had grown up with someone, someone who was in fact, obviously, according to the biblical testimony and unbelievers, at least in John chapter 7, he'd be an unbeliever in Jesus's ministry.

What would it take to cause a person to refer to Jesus by the phrase, the glorious Lord. In fact, when you think about that phrase, think about that phrase also as it appears in 1 Corinthians 2, 8, which says, none of the rulers of this age understood this for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

The Lord of glory. Compare that with Isaiah's temple vision, Isaiah 6, 1, where he saw the glory of the Lord and that Lord was Yahweh. These are high and exalted words. How could any mere prophet be described as the glorious Lord?

That is not terminology that any Muslim would use today of Jesus. And yet Jesus's own half brother utilizes that description of him there in James chapter 2. Now, in Philippians chapter 2, we have something that most scholars believe goes well before Paul.

Obviously, there were Christians before the apostle Paul. He learned from those individuals. He talks about receiving tradition from them and things like that. And Philippians chapter 2 is called the Carmen Christi because it's the hymn to Christ as to God.

And most people believe that this section of scripture is from the early Jerusalem hymn book. I would like to see the rest of the hymn book. It seems to be better than most that we have. But it's a hymn to Christ that predates the apostle Paul.

It's something that he himself would be familiar with, but that his audience would be familiar with. He's basically using a sermon illustration, like if I, for you who are Christians, if I said, amazing grace, how sweet the sound.

I don't have to even finish that out because most Christians know the hymn, amazing grace. In the same way, Paul is using this and listen to the words of what is found in this very early tradition, even prior to Paul's own writings, because it's something that's the common possession of himself and the Corinthian church.

You must have the same mindset among yourselves that was in Christ Jesus, who, although he eternally existed in the very form of God, that's Morphe Tuthayu, the very form of God, no mere apostle could eternally exist in the Morphe Tuthayu, did not consider that equality had with God the father, something to be held on to at all costs.

But instead he made himself nothing by taking on the very form of a slave, by being made in human likeness. And so the humiliation of Jesus is not his ceasing to be God. The humiliation of Jesus is his taking on a true human nature.

He actually makes himself nothing by entering into his own creation, by taking on the very form of a slave, by being made in human likeness. And again, this is in the very first decades. This isn't the Council of Nicaea.

This isn't the second century. This is in the very first decades of the Christian experience. You have these words being said of Jesus. And the hymn goes on to say, and having entered into human existence, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even the death one dies on a cross.

I simply say to all my Muslim friends, you will find nothing in history to substantiate Surah 4, 157, and everything to not substantiate it. It is a very important point. He goes on to say, having said that Jesus dies on the cross, because of this, God the father exalted him to the highest place and bestowed on him the name which is above every name.

So at the mention of the exalted name of Jesus, everyone who is in heaven, on earth, and under the earth bows the knee, and every tongue confesses Jesus Christ is Lord, all to the glory of God the father.

Now, to someone who is familiar with the Old Testament text, those words sound very, very familiar. Because for example, God had said in Isaiah chapter 48 that he gives his glory to no one. In Isaiah 45, 23, it was said that it is to Yahweh that every knee will bow.

How does this early hymn of the church understand that? That to Jesus, every knee will bow. This is not later development. This is not some kind of evolution over time. This is from the very earliest decades of the Christian experience there in the Carmen Christi in Philippians chapter 2.

Now, I'd like to show you the Christian Shema. Christian Shema. If you know anything about Judaism, you know that the faithful conservative Jew gets up in the morning and he says, the Orthodox Jew says, Shema Yisrael, Yahweh Eloheinu, Yahweh our God.

Here in Israel, Yahweh is our God, Yahweh is one. Well, the early Christians were monotheists. They came out of the Jewish faith. So how did they understand that important statement of faith? Well, you see it here as it's found in Deuteronomy 6 .4.

And please notice at the bottom, the Greek here, Akureh Yisrael, Kurias Hafeas Haimon, Kurias Hais Estim. That's the Greek Septuagint. Now, why does that matter to us? Well, the Greek Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament was the Bible of the early church.

When Paul's writing to the Corinthians, for example, what Bible would they be reading? They wouldn't be reading the Hebrew text. They couldn't read Hebrew. So what would they be reading? They would be reading the Greek Septuagint translation.

And so it's very important to keep that in mind because this would have been what they were familiar with in regards to the form of the Shema. And so notice the words that are found here. Here the word Kurias is the translation of the Hebrew Yahweh.

God is the translation of Elohenu here. And then the word one comes from Echad. All right. That's going to become important because now let's look at what Paul said to the Corinthians in regards to our knowledge of the fact there's only one true God over against the peoples around them who believe that there were many gods and many lords.

Notice what he says. But for us, there is one God, comma. And then notice how he defines the term God. He does so in two phrases. The Father, from whom are all things and we for him. And one Lord, Jesus the Messiah, through whom are all things and we through him.

Now the words should look familiar to you. Here they are in the Greek language. You have hais theos hapater, one God the Father, from whom are all things and we unto him. And hais kurias, one Lord, Jesus the Messiah, through whom are all things and we through him.

Now let's put the words in color so we can see them. Remember the words that were important. We had God, theos, hais is one, and kurias was the word for Yahweh. Now let's compare these two together. Over on this side you have the shema and here's Paul's words here.

And you can see he's using the very same words, hais, theos, kurias, but he has filled them out. Why? Because Paul's a bad man trying to come up with a new religion? No, that is absolutely absurd. Because Paul is having to deal with the reality of what God has done in the incarnation of Jesus Christ.

This one has come in fulfillment of the prophetic scriptures. He is the El Gabor, the mighty God of Isaiah 9. He is the Emmanuel of Isaiah 7 through 11. He has come. He has demonstrated his messiahship.

He has demonstrated he was a prophet. He has risen from the dead. He has ascended into heaven. He's sent the Holy Spirit from the Father who's now indwelling Paul and the other believers. And so it is that incarnation and then that outpouring of the Spirit that the early church has to deal with.

And yet they still believe in the Shema. But they understand now what the Shema is telling them. And they see that one Lord, that name of Yahweh, that Lord becomes applied to the person of Jesus Christ.

And so you have the Father, you have the Son. Why? Because of the incarnation. And this is not a denial of monotheism, but it is a demonstration that again, in the earliest decades of the Christian experience, it was their understanding that Jesus was not a mere prophet.

He was a man. He truly was a man. That's what the incarnation's all about. He was a prophet. He was messiah. But he was more than all of that. And here you have evidence from that source. Now, most of the time, in the debates I hear with Muslims, they like to get into speculations as to which gospels are written first.

And again, no documentary evidence on this can ever answer the question. It's all theoretical. But a lot of them will present the idea that, well, Mark has this low view of Jesus and John has this high view of Jesus.

And I just wonder, have you read the book of Mark? Let's run through. It's literally, because I only have 14 minutes left, or even less than that, no, 13 minutes. I have 13 minutes left to go through the entire gospel of Mark.

So it's going to be fast. So you're going to have to be awake and have to have a deep seat in the saddle because I just want to present to you some of the evidence from the gospel of Mark, where once again, ask yourself a question.

Can the Muslim view of Jesus be fit into the words and actions and descriptions of Jesus found even in the shortest gospel, the gospel of Mark? And I submit to you, the answer is no, they cannot. They cannot.

So if you're going to say, well, Mark shows a later development, then show me documentary evidence before Mark. You can't do it, but that's the challenge I'm going to be making. So let's take a look at it.

The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. The phrase the Son of God is a textual variant, however, it is found in Sinaiticus, it's found in Vaticanus, it's found in a number of the other early manuscripts, and there is really no reason to, why it would have been taken out if it was not the original reading.

He is called the Son of God. In the next, very next phrase says, in chapter one, the voice of one crying in the wilderness describing John the Baptist, prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.

If you go back to Isaiah, the quotation is actually saying, prepare the way of Yahweh in Isaiah 40, verse three. The way of Yahweh, described as the way for whom? That John was preparing for Jesus, here in fulfillment of Isaiah chapter 40, verse three.

In chapter one, verses nine through 11, in those days, Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee and was baptized by John of the Jordan, and when he came up out of the water, immediately he saw the heavens being torn open, and the spirit descending on him like a dove, and a voice came from heaven, you are my beloved son, with you I am well pleased.

Now here, once again, we have language that could never be used of a mere prophet. You are my beloved son. If you've heard anyone say God has sons by the tons, they never understood the New Testament.

Never understood the uniqueness of the sonship of Christ, the fact that when Jesus uses this terminology of himself, the Jews are offended because they recognize what it means. And here, it's you are my beloved son.

At the end of the gospel, you're gonna see that the high priest is gonna ask him, are you the son of the blessed one, and when Jesus says I am, then the high priest recognizes he has committed blasphemy.

Anyone who says when Jesus says he's son of God, I'm just a godly man, has totally missed the intention of Mark, the intention of Luke, the intention of Matthew, and the intention of John in their utilization of this language.

Chapter two, verse five, and immediately there was in their synagogue a man with an unclean spirit, and he cried out, what have you to do with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are, the holy one of God.

That's actually chapter one, verses 23 through 24. The unclean spirits recognize that Jesus is not just a mere prophet, he's not just a razul, he is the holy one of God who has power over them to destroy them, and even before Jesus says anything to them, they react and recognize who he is.

In chapter two, verse five, when men brought a sick man to Jesus, lowering him down through the roof, when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, son, your sins are forgiven. He didn't simply proclaim a way of forgiveness, he actually forgave men's sins, and the Jews that were sitting around saw this as blasphemy.

Then in chapter two, verses 27 through 28, and he said to them, the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath, so the son of man is Lord even of the Sabbath. Jesus identified himself as the son of man, as we're gonna see in his trial, he quotes from the book of Daniel, chapter seven, of this heavenly son of man, and he makes application to himself.

Jesus, as the son of man, is Lord, kurios, even of the Sabbath. Who established the Sabbath? God established the Sabbath. It is part of his law, and Jesus claimed to be Lord of the Sabbath. What mere prophet could ever make a statement like that?

Chapter three, verse 11, and whenever the unclean spirits saw him, they fell down before him and cried out, you are the son of God. You're the son of God. There is no question that the earliest material we have of the Christian faith identifies Jesus not as a son of God, like anyone else can be just a godly person, but the demons themselves say, you are the son of God.

You are unique. They recognized him in a way that, unfortunately, even the scribes and Pharisees could not recognize who he was, Mark chapter three, verse 11. Mark chapter five, verses six through seven, here's another demon-possessed man.

This is the one who is Legion. His name is Legion, and when he saw Jesus from afar, he ran and fell down before him and crying out with a loud voice, he said, what have you to do with me, Jesus, son of the most high God?

I adjure you by God, do not torment me. So once again, this one who will be healed recognizes who Jesus is and recognizes his authority and recognizes his power over even the unclean spirits in Mark chapter five.

In Mark chapter seven, and he said to them, then are you also without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile him, since it enters not his heart but his stomach and is expelled, thus he declared all foods clean.

Now it took the Jews along, the Jewish believers a long time to figure that out. In fact, for poor Peter, God had to drop a sheet down from heaven three times, so sort of like smack, smack, smack, to get Peter to figure this out because of their tradition, but the reality is that even at this early point in time, Mark recognizes that Jesus by his teaching can actually change the dispensation and application of God's law to God's people.

Who can do that? No mere result, no mere prophet, no mere man, it is one who has an authority that is far beyond that level. In chapter eight, verses 31 to 34, you read, in calling the crowd to him with his disciples, Jesus calls the crowd to him and he said to them, if anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.

For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses life for my sake and the gospels will save it. For whoever is ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him will the son of man also be ashamed when he comes in the glory of his father with the holy angels.

So here in calling men to be followers of him, to take up their cross, which in that day meant to join the death march, anyone who took up the cross, there was only one place you were going, that was to die.

That was to die, that is the call of Jesus for each one of us, is to die to self and live only to him. That's why Paul can say, I have been crucified with Christ. But here the assertion is, you must not be ashamed of me, not of God.

And if you're ashamed of him, then the son of man also be ashamed when he comes in the glory of his father, who can bear the glory of the father and also with the holy angels. These again are words that do not fit into the mouth of Amir Razul.

In Mark chapter 10, verses 17 through 18, as he was setting out on his journey, a man ran up and knelt before him and asked, good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life? And Jesus said to him, why do you call me good?

No one is good except God alone. This passage is so misunderstood by my Muslim friends. They've completely missed it. It's like a veil lies over their eyes. Don't you see what Jesus is saying? He's not saying, I'm a bad guy.

Jesus is not saying, I'm not good. In fact, we have evidence. Jesus said, which one of you convicts me of sin? This young man didn't know who he was asking. He thought he was just asking another religious teacher.

He didn't know who he was approaching. And Jesus is trying to get him to think about what he's actually saying, and it's not going to work because what happens with this young man? He loved his things so well.

He thought he had kept all the commandments. He hadn't. He actually was an idolater, and he didn't recognize the very giver of the law who was standing right before him. This is why Jesus asks him what he asks him.

Mark chapter 13, verses 26 to 27, here is the mount of transfiguration, and a cloud overshadowed them, and a voice came out of the cloud. This is my beloved son. Listen to him. And then they will see the son of man.

I'm sorry, it's chapter nine, verse seven. So here again, God speaking, refers to Jesus and says, this is my beloved son. Not just one son amongst many sons. Not just one son amongst many tons of sons, but this is my beloved son.

Listen to him. And then in chapter 13, verses 26 to 27, and then they will see the son of man coming in clouds with great power and glory. And then he will send out the angels and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth and from the ends of the heaven.

Do you hear what Jesus says? The elect people of God are whose? Well, they're God's, right? Jesus says, they're mine. I will gather my people. They are my elect. I will send the angels. Who sends the angels?

Who has power over the angels? Isn't that God? Of course, Jesus says he has that power, and he gathers his elect people to himself. Same chapter, verses 31, 32. Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away.

That's the promise of the word of God in the Old Testament. But concerning that day or that hour, no one knows that I am the angels in heaven or the son but only the father. All this text is always used.

See, he can't be God because he doesn't know. Well, that means he can't be God because he didn't glow all the time and God's glorious. He laid aside the exercise of certain divine prerogatives so that he might fulfill his mission as Messiah to die and provide salvation.

But notice, no Muslim actually believes Jesus could ever have said these words because notice where Jesus puts himself. He says, no one knows, no man knows, not even the angels in heaven nor the son but only the father.

He puts himself above men and angels in his relationship with the father. Can Amir Rezul do that? Can Amir Rezul do that? And if you've ever had a Muslim reading this text actually bring that fact out, I bet you you have not.

Look at the end here. At the trial of Jesus, but he remained silent and made no answer. Again, the high priest asked him, are you the Christ, the son of the blessed? And Jesus said, I am and you will see the son of man sit at the right hand of power and coming with the clouds of heaven.

And the high priest tore his garments and said, what further witnesses do we need? You have heard that his blasphemy, what is your decision? And they all condemned him as deserving death. Why did they condemn him for death for claiming to be the son of man?

Because he was quoting from first Psalm 110, but he also quotes from Daniel chapter seven. I kept looking the night visions and behold, with the clouds of heaven, one like a son of man was coming and he came up to the ancient of days and was presented before him and to him was given dominion, glory, and a kingdom that all the peoples, nations, and men of every tongue might serve.

La truo, the highest form of worship, him, the son of man is worshiped by all of humanity, not just the Jews. And that's why when Jesus quoted it, the Jews recognized it's blasphemy. It could never be applied to a mirror Azul and therefore they convicted him of blasphemy.

Were they wrong? Of course they were wrong, but that is why they did it. Now you need to keep a sharp eye tonight. You need to keep a sharp eye and do not be distracted saying the earliest disciples testified of Jesus divinity.

It does not mean they did not testify as of his humanity saying he was a prophet, a man or a teacher, et cetera. They did because Jesus is all of that. Christians accept all that they said about Jesus.

We don't cut the text up into little pieces and only accept little parts of it. Theories require facts. Theorizing about Q sources, redactions, Jimmy Dunn, or anybody else requires a little something called proof.

Give us documents. I've just given you the documents and if there's a question about any one of those particular texts I'll be happy to show you the textual basis for any one of them in the earliest manuscripts I have all that information with me.

If you're going to say those two texts are wrong, then give me documentation, not theories of someone sitting in a faraway classroom who wants to get published. We have examined the earliest sources we possess and they clearly present a Jesus who is more than a mere prophet.

And so tonight we have to consider this and ask ourselves the question, did those early followers of Jesus know something that maybe some of us don't? Or has God preserved that message all the way down to this very day?

Thank you for your attention.

Why the Original Disciples Did Not Consider Jesus to Be God

Okay, I begin by praising our creator and fashioner as asking to send peace and blessings upon all of his prophets and messengers and upon all of his righteous servants from the beginning of time to the end of time and to all of us here.

I greet you with the greetings of peace and I thank the organizers, the IPCI, first of all, for bringing me into this country, making it possible for me to be here tonight. I want to thank Johan and all of the organizers who have put together this program here tonight and I thank you for coming out.

Well, the topic before us tonight is about the original disciples of Jesus and whether or not they considered Jesus to be God. My answer obviously would be no, they did not consider Jesus to be God. Let me look at some preliminary points and then I will summarize my argument in five points.

So first point, the gospels in their present form were not written by disciples of Jesus. Let me explain that further. The gospels do not name their writers. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are names that have been tacked onto these gospels by Christian tradition over time, mostly in the second century of Christianity.

What we find is that the gospel according to Luke, in fact, could not have been written by a disciple, even according to Christian tradition, because Luke, it is said, was a disciple of Paul, he was a companion of Paul, and not a disciple of Jesus, or a direct disciple is what I mean.

What about Mark's gospel? It is generally agreed that Mark's gospel was not written by a disciple of Jesus. It is said, in fact, that Mark was a disciple of Peter, and so he was second generation, one removed from Jesus.

So we're asking tonight, did the original disciples of Jesus consider him God? And we want to find what the original disciples said. Well, the gospel according to Matthew has been said by Christian tradition to be written by one Matthew, a disciple of Jesus.

However, now it is widely recognized that Matthew did not write this gospel because Matthew copied Mark, and since Mark was not a disciple, it is unlikely that Matthew wrote this because it is unlikely that a disciple would learn about the master from a non-disciple.

Then, we go to the gospel according to John, the last of the four now, and the gospel according to John, according to modern studies, had gone through stages of editing. Some say five stages of editing, according to Raymond Brown, but I'll narrow this down to three for simplicity and for shortness of time.

The first stage, we have an original disciple of Jesus said to be John, son of Zebedee, who preached what he remembered about Jesus. But the decades will pass, and there comes, in stage two, a disciple of the disciple who himself took what John, the son of Zebedee, preached, and he preached that further.

Now, you know how it is in church sermons or mosque khutbas. When somebody quotes a text of scripture and then expounds upon it, sometimes you can get lost between where the scripture stops and the explanation continues.