WHAT IS THE CONTEXT?
It is unfair on the part of the Reverend, having failed to provide the context, then to ask me, "Do you know the context?" "Of course," I said. "Then, what is it?" asked my learned friend. I said, "That which you have quoted is the text of John chapter 10, verse 30. To get at the context, we have to begin from verse 23 which reads:
23 And Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon's porch. John, or whoever he was, who wrote his story, does not tell us the reason for Jesus tempting the Devil by walking alone in the lion's den. For we do not expect the Jews to miss a golden opportunity to get even with Jesus. Perhaps, he was emboldened by the manner in which he had literally whipped the Jews single-handed in the Temple, and upset the tables of the money-changers at the beginning of his ministry (John 2:15).
24 Then came the Jews round about him. And said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly. They surrounded him. Brandishing their fingers in his face, they began accusing him and provoking him; saying that he had not put forth his claim plainly enough, clearly enough. That he was talking ambiguously. They were trying to work themselves into a frenzy to assault him. In fact,their real complaint was that they did not like his method of preaching-his invectives, the manner in which he condemned them for their formalism, their ceremonialism, their going for the letter of the law and forgetting the spirit. But Jesus could not afford to provoke them any further-there were too many and they were itching for a fight. Discretion is the better part of valour. In a conciliatory spirit, befitting the occassion -
25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and you believed not:the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me. that is to say , the miracles bear witness of my prophethood and of me being the Messiah .
26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. Jesus rebuts the false charge of his enemies that he was ambiguous in his claims to being the Messiah that they were waiting for. He says that he did tell them clearly enough, yet they would not listen to him, but
27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
28 And I give unto them enternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man PLUCK THEM OUT OF MY FATHER"S HAND.
29 My father which gave them me, is greater than all, and no man is able to PLUCK THEM OUT OF MY FATHER'S HAND.
How can anyone be so blind as not to see the exactness of the ending of the last two verses. But spiritual blinkers are more impervious than physical defects. He is telling the Jews and recording for posterity, the real unity or relationship between the Father and the son. The most crucial verse -
30 I and my Father are one.
One in what? In their Omniscience? In their Nature? In their Omnipotence No! 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. This is the purpose of the "Father" AND the "son" AND the "Holy Ghost" AND of every man AND every woman of faith. Let the same John explain his Gnostic mystic verbiage.
If Jesus is "ONE" with God, and if that "ONENESS" makes him God, then the traitor Judas, and the doubting Thomas, and the satanic Peter, plus the other nine who deserted him when he was most in need are God(s),because the same ONENESS which he claimed with God in John 10:30, now he claims for ALL "Who forsook him and fled"(Mark 14:50) - ALL "ye of little faith" (Mathew 8:26) - ALL "O faithless and perverse generation"(Luke 9:41) Where and when will the Christian blasphemy end? The expression "I and my Father are one," was very innocent, meaning nothing more than a common purpose with God. But the Jews were looking for trouble and any excuse will not do, therefore, -
31 The Jews took up stones again to stone him.
32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father for which of those works do you stone me
33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself a God.
In verse 24 above the Jews falsely alleged that Jesus was talking ambiguously. When that charge was ably refuted, they then accused him of blasphemy (kufr) which is like treason in the spiritual realm. So they say that Jesus is claiming to be God--"I and my Father are one". The Christians agree with the Jews in this that Jesus (pbuh) did make such a claim; but, differ, in that it was not blasphemy because the Christians say that he was God and was entitled to own up to his Divinity. The Christians and the Jews are both agreed that the utterance is serious. To one as an excuse for good "redemption", and to the other as an excuse for good "reddance". Between the two, let the poor Jesus die. But Jesus refuses to co-operate in this dirty game, so -
WHY "YOUR LAW"?
34 Jesus answered them, is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the son of God?
He is bit sarcastic in verse 34, but in any event, why does he say: "Your Law"? Is it not also his law? Did't he say:
"YE ARE GODS"
"Ye are gods:" He is obviously quoting from the 82nd. Psalm (verse 6) "I have said, YE ARE GODS: and all of you are, the children of the most High." Jesus, continues, "If he (i.e. God Almighty) called them gods, unto whom the word of God came (meaning that the prophets of God were called 'GODS' and the scripture cannot be broken (in other words- YOU CAN'T CONTRADICT ME!)." - Jesus knows his Scripture; he speaks with authority; and he reasons with his enemies that "if good men, holy men, prophets of God are being addressed as "GODS" in our Books of Authority, with which you find no fault - then why do you take exception to me? - When the only claim I make for myself is far inferior in our language, viz. "a son of God" as against others being called "GODS" by God himself. Even if (Jesus) described myself as "god" in our language, according to Hebrew usage, you could find no fault with me." This is the plain reading of Christian Scripture. I am giving no interpretations of my own or some esoteric meaning to words!Christ in Islam by Ahmed Deedat