Jesus responded in his own defense against his persecutors that God is not subject to the Law of Moses. Moreover, the name of God, I AM (YHWH), is more like a verb than a noun. In other words, God is active, not complacent. He may have rested from or ended his work of creation on the seventh day, but he didn’t rest from doing good on the seventh day. He continues even to our own day to uphold all things by the word of his power (Psalm 75:3). Furthermore, he continues every day to provide all things for his creatures (Genesis 1:29-30), and he ceaselessly works out his labor of love for mankind, namely his redemptive work in those he has created (Psalm 7:9, 11). This understanding is also known and believed by the Jews, including the authorities of Jesus’ day. Therefore, Jesus reasoned, if he was doing the work of God, evidenced in the miracle (John 5:8-9), which even the authorities had to admit they couldn’t do, accusing Jesus of wrongdoing would be the same as accusing God of wrongdoing, because God performed that work through Jesus! In other words, Jesus identified himself as the Arm of the Lord (Exodus 6:6; 15:16; Isaiah 53:1), continuing the work of God that no man could do (John 5:17).
If we consider the purpose of the law of any land, it was instituted for the benefit of the people. In other words, people are not born in order to serve the law, but laws are formed for the benefit of the people. Nevertheless, there will be folks, some in authority, who will consider only the letter of the law, and thereby require the punishment of folks who break the law. Thus, not coming to a full stop at a four way stop sign, but drifting through the intersection when no other cars are in sight, is considered to be an infraction of the law. Nevertheless, the safety considerations, concerning which the law was implemented in the first place, were not violated.
What the Jewish authorities held up as important was the letter of the Law (John 5:18), and, technically speaking Jesus did break the Law. How so? One cannot interpret the rest of the verse to mean Jesus claimed equality with the Father, if he didn’t break the letter of the Law. The logic of the last phrase is dependent upon the accuracy of the first. Therefore, Jesus broke the Sabbath in the literal sense. However, even the Law of Moses permitted breaking the Sabbath for the purpose of the work of God. Indeed, the priests broke the Sabbath every week, through slaughtering animals, cutting them up and sacrificing them in the service of the Temple. Yet, they were blameless, because this was the thing God required (Numbers 28:9-10; Matthew 12:5).
Nevertheless, although doing the work of God was not forbidden on the Sabbath, the authorities sought to destroy Jesus, not only for breaking the Sabbath, but also for saying God was his Father. Jesus phrased his reply (John 5:17) in such a manner that he differentiated his relationship with God from theirs. By claiming God was uniquely his Father (not in the sense of creation nor in the sense of the Jews being God’s people), Jesus was claiming equality with God. Obviously, his claim wasn’t that he was omnipotent, omniscient or omnipresent. Those qualities he had given up, when he took on the form of a servant (Philippians 2:6-7). Nevertheless, he was the same person who was equal with God, when he was in the form of God (Philippians 2:6), prior to his taking flesh to himself (John 1:14). Therefore, he had the same right to authority over creation, since, even as man, he was still the Creator, and the Father was bound by his own integrity to perform whatever Jesus desired. So, the Father’s omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence served the work of Jesus, who was sent by the Father to do the Father’s will (John 4:34).
Smoodock's Blog 
13 responses to “How Could Jesus Be Equal with God?”
Greetings and happy Easter to you, as well, Linda. Once again, I’ve edited your “comment”, but what remains is what we can agree to. However, what is between “Imagine” and “did not go and preach…” is the kind of speculation that contradicts what the Bible says. I inserted the parenthesis and the caps to replace the preaching.
Have a nice evening, Linda. :-)
I’m sure the first men said the very same thing! When one gets to the solid meat of Paul’s preaching and connects Luke’s Acts of the Apostles and Paul’s letters to the Gospel of John and Mark 15:21 and the story of Zacchaeus and John 3:1-32 …the evidence mounts up. More importantly, please remember my master’s thesis Mary Magdalene: her image and relationship to Jesus was successfully defended by an accredited university. Since my defence, I have written extensively on Creation and the need for eco-Justice, putting my faith into papers I presented at the Orthodox Academy of Crete. My papers have been published by the Orthodox Academy of Crete in the conference proceedings. You can download these papers on my website. You might also like to buy a copy of my book The Ecumenical Affair and read about how and why I became involved with the Ecumenical movement and the face to face movement of the Orthodox Academy of Crete.
Greetings Linda. Perhaps, you have misunderstood why I’ve continued to edit your comments. I have no problem with your success, with your writing your book or your education. Congratulations on all that. My problem is not that we have differing points of view. Sometimes, the differences help us see a higher truth. My problem stems from the fact that you are very subtle about your commenting. You say you agree with me, but then you go on and on about your ‘stuff’ that has no similarity to what I’ve said or what I believe. You preach, when no one has asked you to do so. You have your thoughts, and I have mine. You have your beliefs, and I have mine. We nearly NEVER agree on anything, but you continue to open your remarks by saying you agree with me. Please… please… please do that somewhere else. You aren’t commenting. You’re not agreeing with me. You’re not even disagreeing with me. You simple SAY your agree, then go off on your preaching on some other subject never mentioned. I’ve tried to be friendly, but you aren’t friendly. Good night, and I hope your tomorrows are bright and successful somewhere else. :-)
Hi Eddie
Let me clarify my point a bit. Christianity, I believe, essentially agrees on the concept of the deity of Christ. But I have come to recognize that the humanity of Christ is more important than I previously considered. That he suffered physically and emotionally as a man is remarkable; it is through his humanity that he set an example of how to live, that he submitted to his Father’s will in all things and ways further shows us how to thrive as Christians, and this submission goes against our human nature!
Best to you Eddie.
Thanks, Dave, and the best to you, as well. In my youth I was Roman Catholic, and the deity of Christ was never in question. It was his humanity that troubled me, not in the sense that I didn’t believe he was a man, but I didn’t understand how the wedding (so to speak) of God and Man could take place. How was he, in his humanity, ONE. I don’t know that I’ve ever had an epiphany, whereby I understood better, but I did grow to understand better. I came to understand that God, as God, suffers in this rebellion, and Jesus’ sufferings, image that (Hebrews 1:3). I sense this to the degree that I wonder if pain and suffering cease at death. If God, truly suffers, bearing our sin of rebellion, will we also suffer with him on the other side? I don’t mean to say we won’t have a “paradise” experience or not have inexplicable joy, but I tend to believe (presently) that suffering is more important than we realize. By embracing our suffering-God, and imaging him in this way, whenever the table of the Lord presents us with that option, honors him and glorifies him in the face of the rebels, who don’t understand a God like we serve. In this manner, we become their ‘food’ for thought, and they are forced to consider our behavior, while we suffer the consequences of their making, and they without realizing, at least at first, find themselves in the presence of God, in as much as we reflect him back to them.
Lord bless you, Dave.