Hello Cristian,
The question is whether Jesus عليه السلام ever said, unequivocally, that he was God or told people to worship him. The Qur'an mentions how Jesus عليه السلام clearly taught people to worship God alone and that he never ascribed divinity to himself.
One of the problems with the Bible verses that you’ve quoted, putting aside the fact that they are written by anonymous authors whose credentials, motives and authority are unknown, is that they are ambiguous at best. For example, the title ‘son of God’ is often used in the Bible to mean a close relationship to God or having authority given by God. Romans 18:14 mentions that, 'For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the
sons of God'. Adam is thus called a 'son' of God in Luke 3:38. So Jesus being praised, respected or being called the 'son of God' does not mean he is God. Prophets are frequently praised and given honourable mention by God in Scripture and this does not mean they have divine status.
Let's have a look at some of the verses you quoted:
John 10:30 – “I and the Father are one”
> Jesus affirms unity with God. Jews understood this as blasphemy (John 10:31–33)
What is meant here is 'one' in purpose. That once a believer has accepted faith, the Messenger sees to it that he remains in faith, and God Almighty also sees to it that he remains in faith. The context of the preceding two verses shows this quite clearly as it repeats the phrase 'no one can snatch (the sheep) out of my hand' and ' no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand'.
John 8:58 – “Before Abraham was, I am”
>Jesus uses the divine title “I Am” (YHWH).
Jesus does not use the complete phrase in Exodus 3:14a, nor the partial (shortened) phrase in Exodus 3:14b, but instead used “
egō eimi” which was a common expression in Greek to identify oneself as the person being talked about, i.e. “I am
he” or “I am
the one” (Matt. 14:27; Mark 13:6; etc.).
Mark 2:5–7 – Jesus forgives sins
>The scribes ask, “Who can forgive sins but God?”
Yet Luke 23:34 quotes Jesus asking God to forgive the people.
John 20:28 - Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!”
>This occurs after the resurrection: Thomas had previously refused to believe the other disciples’ report. Jesus appears, shows Thomas his wounds, and then Thomas responds with this confession.
Thomas' remark here does not prove that Jesus is God because, firstly, these are Thomas' words and, secondly, the verse does not explicitly assign the title “God” to Jesus. It does not read, “You are my Lord and my God,” instead, Thomas simply says both of these titles and one is left to assume what he means. Some verses earlier within the same context in John 20:17, God is distinguished from Jesus: 'I am ascending to my Father and your Father,
to my God and your God’. Jesus is saying he has a God. So its strange to assume Thomas is referring to Jesus as God, because how could God have a God? This is why some Christians interpreted his statement to refer to two different entities.
One more example: after his resurrection, in Matthew 28:18–20, Jesus says, 'All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.'
Eusebius (c. 260'c. 340) was the Bishop of Caesarea and is known as 'the Father of Church History.' He quotes many verses in his writings, and Matthew 28:19 is one of them. He never quotes it as it appears today in modern Bibles, but always finishes the verse with the words "in my name." If the manuscripts he had in front of him read "in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit," he would never have quoted it as "in my name." Moreover, there is not a single occurrence of the apostles baptizing anyone according to that formula.
For example: how is it possible to deny the crucifixion when that's one of the most historically attested events regarding the life of Christ? How can one speak of a corruption of the Bible when it was recognized exactly as it is today by the primitive church around two centuries after Christ
Muslims don't deny that a crucifixion took place; only that it was Jesus who was crucified. It is not true that the Bible is the exact same as primitive versions. 1 John 5:7-8 is an example of a later addition to the Bible - scholars agree it does not appear in the earliest Greek manuscripts and that it first shows up in Latin manuscripts centuries later, likely to support trinitarian beliefs.
and has more than 5,800 INDEPENDENT manuscripts?
Dr. J.K. Elliott, of the Department of Theology and Religious Studies at Leeds University, wrote an article published in The Times, London (10th Sept., 1987) entitled “Checking the Bible’s Roots”. In it, he stated that:
“More than 5,000 manuscripts contain all or part of the New Testament in its original language. These range in date from the second century up to the invention of printing.
It has been estimated that no two agree in all particulars. Inevitably, all handwritten documents are liable to contain accidental errors in copying. However, in living theological works it is not surprising that
deliberate changes were introduced to avoid or alter statements that the copyist found unsound. There was also a tendency for copyists to add explanatory glosses[9]. Deliberate changes are more likely to have been introduced at an early stage before the canonical status of the New Testament was established.”The author went on to explain that
“no one manuscript contains the original, unaltered text in its entirety,” and that, “one cannot select any one of these manuscripts and rely exclusively on its text as if it contained the monopoly the original words of the original authors.”
How is it that the Mohammed repeats the exact same stories about Jesus that were present in non-accepted apocrypha, which at his time and region were widely known and accepted (though historically weak and not accepted by the primitive church)?
The Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم was an unlettered Prophet who could neither read nor write, nor was he taught by a Christian to be able to relate stories from apocrypha. The fact that there are similarities in their teachings points to the fact that both were Prophets sent by the same God, preaching the same core message.