"... the Son can do nothing by himself ..." (John 5:19)

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. Jesus gave them this answer: "Very truly I tell you, the son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his father doing, because whatever the father does the son also does." (John 5:18-19) 

Is Jesus saying this literally or metaphorically?

Many have misinterpreted this literally, with the "son" being Jesus and the "father" being God. For this reason, many translations have added capitalization to "father" and "son."

Rather, Jesus is using the relationship between a father and his son metaphorically to explain the relationship he has with God.

If Jesus was referring strictly to himself and God here, he would have said something like:

"Very truly I tell you, I can do nothing by myself; I can do only what I see my Father doing, because whatever the Father does I also do."

Certainly, this would be a more appropriate statement for Jesus to make if he was referring specifically to himself.

Why wouldn't Jesus do this, and speak in the first person instead of the third person if he were speaking literally of himself?

Because Jesus was referring to a role - not a specific individual. Yes, he was conferring that he was in that role - but this role was not exclusively himself, or else he would have just said "Jesus" or "me."

We do find that Jesus does make a similar statement about himself directly, later on:

“When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me." (John 8:28) 

Is Jesus referring to dependency?

Jesus was responding to those wanting to criticize Jesus, saying that Jesus was putting himself equal to God. Jesus clarified that just as a son is dependent upon his father, he was. 

Jesus is suggesting that he is dedicated and dependent upon God, just as a son is dependent upon his father.

In response to the Pharisees' complaint about Jesus, Jesus is also indicating that his followers have the opportunity to regain their relationship with God and become dedicated to God. 

What kind of relationship? Taking shelter of God. Becoming dependent upon God.

Such is the opportunity for each of us. Any of us can choose to take shelter in God and become one of God's dependents. One of God's lovers. This is what Jesus is trying to teach his students.

Jesus was also illustrating that indeed, he is to be included as someone who has taken shelter in God. 

This occurs in any loving relationship. A person who loves another will do the will of and act on behalf of the one they love. This is the essence of Jesus' life and the essence of Jesus' relationship with God.

"... testify that the Father has sent me.” (John 5:35-36)

"Not that I accept human testimony; but I mention it that you may be saved. John was a lamp that burned and gave light, and you chose for a time to enjoy his light. "I have testimony weightier than that of John. For the works that the Father has given me to finish—the very works that I am doing—testify that the Father has sent me." (John 5:35-36)

Why was John a lamp?

Jesus is speaking metaphorically. When Jesus says, "John was a lamp that burned and gave light," he is communicating that John taught others with spiritual teachings. The 'light' refers to spiritual knowledge, which is enlightening. When a person has spiritual knowledge, they are enlightened. Metaphorically, this lights their path.

A lamp gives out light just as a spiritual teacher gives out spiritual knowledge. Because such knowledge provides the wisdom to navigate life, we can compare this to light that provides a way to navigate a path in the darkness.

Jesus follows with "and you chose for a time to enjoy his light." This indicates that people were enlightened by John's teachings, and Jesus is now carrying that same torch in his teachings.

What about the human testimony?

So why does Jesus say: "Not that I accept human testimony; but I mention it that you may be saved" when he is speaking of John? When Jesus says he doesn't accept human testimony, he is meaning that he only accepts the word of God. As indicated in the verse before (John 5:32), Jesus accepts only God's testimony.

But in this case, Jesus speaks of John because Jesus is teaching the same message that John taught. John was credible because he changed people.

And because Jesus says "the Father has sent me" he is inferring that not only did God send Jesus, but He also sent John and the Prophets before John.

Why are John's teachings important?

In the second sentence, "I have testimony weightier than that of John," Jesus states this after saying that John's teachings provided wisdom and truth:

"John was a lamp that burned and gave light, and you chose for a time to enjoy his light."

Jesus was not saying that John did not save those whom he taught to and baptized. For we can balance this with other statements by Jesus:

"Truly I tell you, among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist" (Matt. 11:11)

and

"For John came to you to show you the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes did. And even after you saw this, you did not repent and believe him." (Matt. 21:32)

The phrase "to show you the way of righteousness" clearly means that Jesus accepted that John was saving those who followed his teachings. Indeed, as Jesus himself followed John's teachings - evidenced by his baptism by John (a ceremony representing becoming a disciple).

Did Jesus teach what John taught?

In those days John the Baptist came, preaching in the wilderness of Judea and saying, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near." (Matt. 3:1-2)

After John was imprisoned, Jesus began his mission with the same principle teachings:

From that time on Jesus began to preach, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near." (Matt. 4:17)

Then Jesus also instructed his own disciples to teach the same:

"As you go, proclaim this message: 'The kingdom of heaven is near.'" (Matt. 10:7)

Why is Jesus' testimony 'weightier'?

So why is Jesus saying that his "testimony" is "weightier" than John's? Is he saying that his teachings are better than John's?

No. The word "weightier" is being translated from the Greek word μέγας (megas), which can certainly be applied as "weightier" or "heavier" - as the lexicon indicates: "of the external form or sensible appearance of things (or of persons) - mass and weight: great"

However, Jesus is not speaking of physical stature here. He was not saying that he weighed more than John. Or that his words weighed more than John's words. The word μέγας (megas) can also mean, as indicated by the lexicon: "used of intensity and its degrees: with great effort, of the affections and emotions of the mind, of natural events powerfully affecting the senses: violent, mighty, strong" and "things esteemed highly for their importance: of great moment, of great weight, importance."

We must understand the context of Jesus' statement. Jesus is not saying that he is greater than John or his teachings are more important. Why would he accept baptism from John if he thought he was better than John?

Rather, Jesus is teaching among those who had been students of John's - and had been hearing from John, or had heard about John. Now Jesus is explaining that Jesus' teachings - at that moment - were coming from the Supreme Being, and because they were coming from God, they should be given their immediate attention. This is confirmed by his statement just before this:

"By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but Him who sent me." (John 5:30)

This illustrates that Jesus is referring to the fact that his teachings - coming from God - have more importance at that time and place. They were more important at that time and circumstance - they were appropriate for that current situation and audience, just as a live narration about a current event has more importance at that time than a historical reference about a past event. This is even more critical when we are speaking of spiritual teachings.

Let's use an example:

Let's say that a child is in the fourth grade. Their third-grade teacher taught the child to add numbers together by putting them side by side with an equal sign at the end so they could read left to right and add them together. Then the fourth-grade teacher begins teaching them to add larger numbers (say 1031+2672) by putting them on top of each other so that the tens digits can be carried. The child then raises his hand and says "our third-grade teacher taught us to add differently."

Was the third-grade teacher wrong? No. The teacher was teaching them based on their age and level of math. The fourth-grade teacher may say something like, "that method is okay, but this method is a better way to do heavier calculations." In this way, the third-grade teacher is simply giving the kids more advanced teachings. Not that either teacher was teaching a better method.

How do Jesus' teachings get taken out of context?

Over the centuries, many of Jesus' statements have been taken out of context. How does this happen?

In some cases, Jesus' teachings were specifically tuned to the particular situation and particular audience. They were also designed for a particular time and circumstance. When the time and circumstances become different, the original context can be lost. And when the audience hearing or reading those teachings is substantially different - from a different society and speaking a different language, the underlying meaning of Jesus' statements can be misunderstood.

We could compare this again with the third and fourth-grade teachers. The fourth-grade teacher was teaching a method that was specific to the readiness of the child. There was nothing wrong with the previous method for the third grade, but the children were now ready for adding larger numbers. So the method the fourth-grade teacher uses becomes substantially different. This could easily be misinterpreted, instead of simply being a different methodology.

Again we must understand that Jesus is not speaking of himself as being the central issue. In fact, he was not speaking of himself at all. He was speaking of his service to God:

"For the very work that the Father has given me to finish, and which I am doing, testifies that the Father has sent me.”

Jesus is clearly identifying himself as God's messenger. A person who is sent by another is the messenger of the sender. Furthermore, Jesus is clarifying that he is working for God: "the very work that the Father has given me to finish..." So not only is Jesus God's messenger, but Jesus is God's servant.

Was Jesus' service to God forced?

He was not forced by God to testify on behalf of God or do God's work. There is a big difference between being a slave and a loving servant. A loving servant serves his master out of volition: out of love. This means that Jesus is the loving servant of God.

This also means that Jesus enjoyed a personal relationship with God. If one person "sends" another, and the other works hard to do the work of the sender out of choice, there must be a relationship between the sender and his servant the messenger. Furthermore, if the messenger is undergoing great hardship to do the work of the sender, this illustrates a relationship of love must exist between the two.

This also explains the "oneness" that exists between Jesus and God, as Jesus alluded to in other statements. God and Jesus are "one" because Jesus loves the Supreme Being and Jesus does the will of God: He works for the Supreme Being. This creates a oneness of love and a oneness of purpose.

This could be compared to a loving husband and wife. Because of their loving relationship, the wife's and husband's activities, even if done separately, are considered collectively. They act as a unit. When the wife buys something, the household has bought it - they own it collectively. Such a "oneness" is also represented by the fact that the husband can usually sign for the wife and vice versa. They have a theoretical "oneness" of will and purpose - which is founded (hopefully) upon love.

Because the institutional translators and scribes employed under Constantine and his appointed bishops - and the many sectarian institutions that followed - all assumed the Nicene Creed (if they didn't they would have been an illegal group and would have been persecuted) - the real "oneness" of love that exists between Jesus and God has been lost in translation.* They decided to claim that Jesus is God because:

1) They did not know who the Supreme Being is;
2) They did not have a relationship with the Supreme Being;
2) They wanted to create exclusivity within religiosity in order to ban all other forms of religion in Rome. This, in fact, created a monopoly on religion to further the political interests of the Roman empire.

Did the Prophets love God?

Even a passing review of the Old Testament indicates that the Prophets enjoyed a loving relationship with God. They were also servants of God, and this is why Jesus often quoted the prophets before him, such as Moses, David, Samuel and others.

And many since Jesus have also been loving servants of God, despite the misinterpretation of the Bible as designed by Constantine and his politically-appointed bishops organized under the Councils of Nicea.

To confuse Jesus - God's confidential loving servant - with the Supreme Being produces two unfortunate byproducts:

1) By accepting Jesus as God, we ignore the real Supreme Being. We are forgetting the very Person who sent Jesus and the One who Jesus loves and wants us to love.

2) This, in turn, offends Jesus because Jesus came to teach us to love the Supreme Being.

This is precisely why Jesus said:

“Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will come to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles? Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!” (Matt. 7:21-23)

Now isn't it curious that Jesus, who drove out demons and performed miracles, would reject a person who also healed and performed miracles in Jesus' name?

Rather, he is clarifying that even the greatest charity works will not replace the central teaching of Jesus to love and serve God: "but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven."

This clarifies that Jesus wants us to love and serve the same Supreme Being Jesus was serving. In fact, this was his central message, as stated by Moses before him:

“‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment.” (Matthew 22:37-38)

*Here is the translation of Jesus' statement according to the Lost Gospels of Jesus:

"John was the lamp that shined and gave light, and you rejoiced for a time in his light. Yet the testimony is more critical than that of John. For the work that the Creator has given me to finish — the very work I am doing — indicates the Creator has sent me." (John 5:35-36)

"The work of God is this: to believe in the one He has sent." (John 6:29)

Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires?" Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent." (John 6:28-29)

How is this 'the work of God'?

The translation* above focuses the question on "the work of God." Did Jesus really say that to "believe in the one He has sent" is the "work of God"?

This makes absolutely no sense rhetorically. "Work" relates to doing something - an activity. And "to believe" is a principle or feeling.

Yes, the Greek word ἔργον (ergon) can mean, "business, employment, that which anyone is occupied" according to the lexicon. But it can also mean "an act, deed, thing done."

In this case, the topic is what is being done to please the Supreme Being - not just a job or work that one does in exchange for compensation. Thus what is being discussed is not the work of the Supreme Being - the issue is about what is pleasing to God. Doing what pleases God.

That is what a person does when they love someone. They don't do "work." They find out what is pleasing to the one they love, and they do that.

In other words, Jesus' followers are asking what pleases God, and Jesus is telling them what pleases God. Therefore, an action of the body or an act of the heart may fulfill this question, because both are a "thing that is done."

Why is believing this so important?

Here Jesus is answering a question that arose from his students. From Jesus’ statement, we know there are two distinct individuals being discussed – the Supreme Being and God's messenger ("the one He has sent"). In other words, there is a sender and the one being sent – two personalities.

Therefore, we can know clearly from Jesus' statement here that he is not and never claimed to be God. He was identifying himself as God's representative – God's messenger. To send someone means to dispatch a messenger.

So why is "believing" in God's messenger so important?

The word being translated* to "believing" is πιστεύω (pisteuō). This word means "have confidence" and "to entrust a thing to one" and "to be entrusted."

In other words, Jesus is not speaking of belief. Certainly, his students all believed in Jesus. Jesus is speaking of trust: Trusting

Why is this about trust?

Just consider what we currently trust. We might trust in our family, or our job, or our health. But none of these things can truly be trusted because none of them will last. Once our body dies, all of these things will disappear.

Trust in the sense that Jesus speaks goes further - it is putting one's life in the hands of the person we trust. It means to surrender oneself or give of oneself.

This lies at the very crux of spiritual life: The loving relationship between God and His loving servants. To trust the loving servant of God is to honor the one who is being served - the Supreme Being. It means to put oneself under the shelter of the Supreme Being.

Trust in what?

Furthermore, to "trust" in Jesus means to trust in his instructions, because those instructions are ultimately coming from the Supreme Being. And by trusting in the instructions of God's messenger, we can learn to enter the relationship of love that exists between the Supreme Being and His loving servant.

To enter into such a relationship of loving service with God is to satisfy the primary instruction of Jesus, Moses, and all other bonafide representatives of the Supreme Being:

“ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment.” (Matt. 22:37-38)

What is a loving relationship?

Within the loving relationship between the Supreme Being and His loving servant lies the intent and meaning of all the scriptures. Within this loving relationship lies the importance of Abraham, the instructions of Moses, the songs of David, the devotion of Solomon, and the focus of Isaiah. Within this loving relationship, we see the true essence of the spiritual world.

We see the intention of God as He works to bring us back. We see the rationale for all the suffering and pain upon the temporary physical bodies of the illusory material world. We see the reason for prayer; for songs of praise; for temples and offerings. We see the reason for beauty, kindness and compassion.

We see the reason we are away from God now. And finally, we see the essence of the relationship between Jesus and God, why Jesus can say "I and the Father are one," and the reason why Jesus sacrificed his physical body in God’s service.

All of this can be seen within the relationship that exists between God and His loving servant. The loving servant is the embodiment of this relationship, simply because the loving servant works to please God, and the desire to please God is the symptom of love for God – the first and foremost commandment.

This relationship is so important to God that even God Almighty treasures this relationship, and treasures the one who shares it with Him.

*Here is the translation of this verse according to the Lost Gospels of Jesus:

Therefore they asked him, “What must we do to please God?” Jesus answered and said to them, “What will please God is that you trust in the one He has sent.” (John 6:28-29)

"I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me ..." (John 8:12)

"I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life." (John 8:12)

What does Jesus mean by 'light'?

The word "light" - translated from the Greek word φῶς (phōs) - refers to illumination, and when used in a metaphorical sense, "of truth and its knowledge" according to the lexicon.

Quite simply, a light is an illumination bright enough to see with. A light in the darkness gives the ability to see. A light offers someone who is stumbling in the darkness the opportunity to see where they are going.

"Light" is thus being used metaphorically by Jesus.

Jesus is using the word "light" to refer to himself as being able to illuminate the Truth. Through his teachings, Jesus can guide anyone who hears them back to God. Imagine if we were in the woods at dark with no light. If we found someone with a flashlight we would certainly follow them because their flashlight allows us to see where we are going.

What is the 'light of life'?

Jesus follows this statement by saying that, "Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life."

What does Jesus mean by "Whoever follows me"? The word "follow" in the text is translated from the Greek word, ἀκολουθέω (akoloutheō), which means, according to the Greek lexicon, " to follow one who precedes, join him as his attendant, accompany him."

This is consistent with the English word "follow." According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, “follow” means:
1. to go, proceed or come after
2. to engage in as a calling or way of life
3. a) to be or act in accordance with; b) to accept as authority

We can, therefore, apply Jesus’ statement. To follow Jesus is to accept his authority and act in accordance with his teachings. To follow Jesus is to engage in Jesus' teachings as a calling or way of life. To follow Jesus is to engage in the instructions of Jesus. And what were those instructions? Jesus confirms his most important instruction:

“ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment.” (Matt. 22:37-40)

A person in the darkness of ignorance does not realize that loving and serving God brings the ultimate happiness. A person in ignorance lives a life directed by a constant search for fulfillment through the senses. A person in ignorance moves from one thing to another, thinking that the next thing or the next person will fulfill them. This person is constantly empty because they do not know what will ultimately fulfill them. So they keep searching, in ignorance that loving God will fulfill them.

What is 'darkness' in this context?

A person in darkness will not know who they are. Thus they search for their identity, asking "who am I?"?

When someone follows Jesus, they first learn from him through his teachings. They learn about their identity as spiritual rather than the physical body:

"Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul." (Matt. 10:28)

"The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.” (Matt. 26:41)

"The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you—they are full of the Spirit and life." (John 6:63)

A follower of Jesus will learn that the Supreme Being is also spirit:

"Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit." (John 3:6)

"God is spirit, and His worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth." (John 4:24)

Jesus also teaches his follower to connect with the Supreme Being who lies on another plane of existence and sees from within:

"But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you." (Matt. 6:6)

What is the goal of life according to Jesus?

Jesus also taught that the goal of life was to do the will of the Supreme Being - which means to serve Him and please Him out of love:

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven." (Matt. 7:21)

Yes, doing the will of the Supreme Being doesn't mean being forced to serve Him, as a slave might be forced to serve a master. Nor does it mean to serve God in order to receive something back, as one might engage in a business relationship.

Rather, Jesus was teaching voluntary service - service that is performed out of love:

“ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment.” (Matt. 22:37-40)

Jesus not only taught these things. He also showed by his example how to execute this devotional relationship with the Supreme Being. Consider this prayer to God:

Going a little farther, he [Jesus] fell with his face to the ground and prayed, "My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as You will." (Matthew 26:39)

This indicates that Jesus did not want to do his own will, but he wanted to do God’s will because he loved God and wanted to serve God.

This service attitude, wanting to please God out of love, is the core principle of Jesus’ life and teachings. Jesus' teachings were about executing a loving service relationship with the Supreme Being: Seeking to please the Supreme Being with one's life. 

Jesus didn't just ask this of his followers - He also stated this about his own relationship with the Supreme Being:

"By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but Him who sent me." (John 5:30)

"... I honor my Father and you dishonor me ..." (John 8:49-51)

"I am not possessed by a demon," said Jesus, "but I honor my Father and you dishonor me. I am not seeking glory for myself; but there is one who seeks it, and he is the judge. Very truly I tell you, whoever obeys my word will never see death." (John 8:49-51) 

What is Jesus responding to?

This statement follows the institutional temple priests offensively stating to Jesus:

"Aren't we right in saying that you are a Samaritan and demon-possessed?" (John 8:48)

This is within an ongoing conversation where Jesus has criticized these Pharisees and temple priests. He has told them to their faces that they use their congregation for their own wealth, display their supposed religiosity in public, expect preferential treatment for their positions of authority, and commit other abuses of their positions with the temple.

Now they are lashing back at Jesus. They know he was neither a Samaritan nor possessed. They were simply blaspheming Jesus in an attempt to discredit him.

To blaspheme or dishonor Jesus is one of the worst things someone can do. Jesus came to the earth to give us the gift of love for God. 

This offense of theirs, and Jesus' understanding of his position, is summed up in Jesus' simple and clear words as he defends himself. As he denies their accusation, he proclaims simply:

"I honor my Father and you dishonor me."

The word "honor" here is translated from the Greek word, τιμάω (timaō), which means 'to revere or venerate.' Understood by the words, 'honor, revere and venerate' - τιμάω (timaō) is the activity of praising that person.

A person who venerates another does not keep it to themselves. They spread it around. They announce to others the great qualities of that person.

Is Jesus explaining his intentions?

We do not have to speculate about Jesus' intentions, because Jesus is describing himself and his purpose. He is dedicated to the Supreme Being. He is venerating God. He is honoring the Supreme Being. He is glorifying God.

What is the position of someone who does these things? Does this mean that Jesus is God and he is glorifying himself? That would be preposterous. The words "my Father" clearly indicate Jesus is obviously honoring and glorifying someone other than himself.

This self-description by Jesus clearly indicates Jesus is God's loving servant. He is revering and venerating God, which means that he sees himself in a subservient position.

Did Jesus ever pose as God?

Jesus never posed to be God - as many gurus and other teachers do as they try to teach that we are all God but only they realize it and we don't so that's why they have to teach us.

Such a teaching bears the question: How could God forget He was God? This would make God subject to forgetfulness, which would negate the very position of being God.

Furthermore, Jesus states clearly that he is not seeking his personal fame and glory. But he clarifies that the Supreme Being is:

"I am not seeking glory for myself; but there is One who seeks it, and He is the judge."

This indicates a clear distinction between Jesus and God. One is serving the other. God is seeking our attention because He wants our love. He enjoys loving relationships. And Jesus is involved in a loving relationship with God.

Jesus was clearly identifying himself as God's loving, devoted servant, who has focused his life upon pleasing the Supreme Being God, in turn, has empowered Jesus as His representative, which gave Jesus his authority and power. This is stated clearly by Jesus elsewhere:

"By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who sent me." (John 5:30)

Thus we can know that Jesus was attempting to please the Supreme Being with his life. This is the aspect of Jesus' life that few recognize: That Jesus was God's loving servant and his activities were intended to please God. This makes Jesus God's loving servant.

Many believe that seeing Jesus as God's loving servant is offensive, but rather, those who see and talk of Jesus as being anyone other than God's loving servant and representative are offending him, because they are not only misidentifying Jesus, but they are ignoring the loving relationship that existed between Jesus and the Supreme Being.

The bottom line is that it is not only offensive to consider Jesus a common man or blaspheme him otherwise as these institutional temple priests did. It is also offensive to create a fictional position of Jesus being the Supreme Being. This is offensive to both Jesus and the Supreme Being. Jesus confirms this when he said:

"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'" (Matt. 7:21-23)

"Away from me, you evildoers!" is a strong statement.

Why is this so strong?

Jesus is obviously offended by this activity of people putting him on a pedestal while forgetting his beloved Supreme Being. Jesus is very clear here. 

Even if a person may heal others and do other miracles in his name, and proclaim Jesus' greatness, if they do not accept Jesus' instruction of doing God's will, he wants no part of them.

This clearly indicates the loving relationship that exists between Jesus and the Supreme Being. Jesus does not see God as a burning bush, a vague cloud, or some impersonal force. He and God have a personal relationship. A relationship of love. 

This means there are two personalities: Jesus and God - yet they are unified by their love. There is a oneness between them because Jesus is wanting to please God. If we praise Jesus but ignore the Supreme Being, that offends Jesus. Why? Because he loves God. He venerates and reveres God.

Jesus also wants us to also venerate and honor God, and come to love Him and give our lives to the Supreme Being. This is confirmed by Jesus' primary teaching:

“ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment." (Matt. 22:37-38)

"I tell you the truth, I am the gate for the sheep...” (John 10:7-10)

"I tell you the truth, I am the gate for the sheep. All who ever came before me were thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not listen to them. I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved. He will come in and go out, and find pasture. The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.” (John 10:7-10)

What is the 'gate'?

Because the disciples did not understand Jesus' parable of the sheep (John 10:1-5), Jesus is explaining it to them.

The word "gate" here is being translated from the Greek word θύρα (thyra) which typically means 'door, opening or entrance.' What is a gate, door or entrance? It is an opening that gives entrance to something inside the doorway or gate. Since the gate or door is not the destination but the entry for the destination, Jesus is saying he's not the destination.

So what is this gate or entrance in the practical context of Jesus' activities? It is Jesus’ teachings. Consider this statement:

Jesus answered, "My teaching is not my own. It comes from Him who sent me." (John 7:16)

The gateway that Jesus is providing to his students and disciples is the knowledge he gives them within his teachings. Jesus is confirming, as he does elsewhere, that he is God’s messenger.

What does Jesus mean by 'will be saved'?

Jesus says that "I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved [or kept safe]." The Greek word σῴζω (sōzō), according to Thayer's lexicon, means "to save, keep safe and sound, to rescue from danger or destruction." So "kept safe" or "saved" are both applicable.

We need to consider the parable closely, however. Those sheep that are within the pen - inside the "gate" - are safe according to the parable. They are safe because they are protected. The question is whether they will be kept safe.

Using this parable, getting to that point of being "kept safe" is the processing of becoming "saved." Being "kept safe" means to be protected. It means to be cared for. Being "saved" means being cared for and protected. 

It should be noted that this statement by Jesus contradicts the teaching presented by many sectarian institutions, who claim that only Jesus' crucifixion will save us. Jesus mentions nothing about his coming crucifixion in this statement.

Now that we understand that "the gate" is Jesus' teachings, we can know that Jesus is stating that becoming "saved" takes place upon hearing and applying Jesus' teachings.

Isn't this about love?

Being cared for - being kept safe - is the topic of love. When someone loves someone else, they care for them. They protect them. They keep them safe.

This is what Jesus is getting at. Those who accept Jesus' protection are accepting the protection of the Supreme Being. Because the Supreme Being loves us, He cares for us. He protects us.

This isn't just about the physical body. It isn't though God will protect our bodies from getting sick or at some point, dying. Every single body gets sick and every body dies at some point. These things are part of the learning facility of the physical world.

But the protection that God gives us is our spiritual path. Through the teachings of Jesus, the Supreme Being guides us and protects our spiritual self. He "keeps safe" our spiritual journey, and progress.

Whatever progress we make, the Supreme Being allows us to keep, and continue moving forward. He does that because He loves us. Each of us, like the sheep in Jesus' parable.

But didn't Jesus teach salvationism?

The focus of some sectarian teachers upon the self-centered notion of "being saved" has taken the purpose and intent of Jesus' statement outside the boundary of what it actually is.

Practically every minister, reverend, priest, bishop, cardinal, pope or other elected teacher from most organized sects has made salvation the primary and leading purpose for their teachings. For many, the entire assembly and process of the Sunday sermon and ceremonial rituals are centered around being "saved."

And this has naturally become the driver for most to come into their churches: the desire for salvation - purification from their sins. This is because people have been threatened: If they don't come into church and be "saved," they will "go to hell."

While the byproduct of following Jesus' teachings certainly has the ability to save people from the grips of our selfish, sinful lives and save us, salvationism was not Jesus' primary teaching. In fact, salvationism is also selfish.

His primary teaching was for us to come to love and serve God:

“ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment.” (Matt. 22:37-38)

"This is the first and greatest commandment” is very clear. "Greatest" means most important. It means primary. This means that Jesus was teaching love for God, not salvationism.

We can see this in another statement he made, for those whose focus was upon salvationism rather than following his primary instruction:

“Not everyone who says to me ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.” (Matt. 7:21)

This is also very clear. Why would someone be saying "Lord, Lord" to Jesus? Because they want to be "saved." They want salvation from their sins. They don't want to suffer the consequences of sinful behavior.

What is sinning, anyway? Sinning is activities based on self-interest: Selfish activity.

Notice that Jesus' statement says that "only he who does the will of my Father" will "enter the kingdom of heaven." This means activities based not upon self-interest, but activities focused upon the interests of someone else: God. Doing "the will of my Father" means serving God rather than serving ourselves.

When we sin we are serving ourselves. We are doing those things intended to please me individually; or please my group, country,

 or other self-concern. Jesus, on the other hand, is teaching love for God. He is teaching us to do activities intended to please the Supreme Being.

When a person loves another person, they do what pleases that person. This is what love is about.

Is love the same as sentiment?

Loving someone may also include sentiment, but just having sentiment does not mean we are loving that person. So a person may cry sentimentally for Jesus and think they are loving God, but this is not necessarily the case. Jesus is talking about loving and serving "my Father in heaven."

Real love, as opposed to sentiment, is practical. When we really love someone, we work on a practical basis to do what pleases them.

This means we must know someone in order to love them. Jesus' teachings introduced those around him to God. Then he said clearly that his primary instructions were to love God and do God's will.

Then Jesus illustrated by example how a person does this. Note Jesus' prayer to God:

Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, "My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will." (Matt. 26:39)

Jesus is showing us how it is done. He goes to pray in private and asks God to steer him towards doing God's will rather than his own will. This illustrates that not only are we talking about two individual personalities here: Jesus and God. We are talking about one individual wanting to do what pleases another. We are talking about love. Jesus is loving God, and wanting to do God's will rather than his own will.

Just consider the extent of Jesus' wanting to do God's will. He allowed his body to be nailed to a cross, where his physical body suffered a gruesome death. Is this not a testament to the extent to which Jesus was prepared to sacrifice his own will for doing God's will? Certainly, no one would want to suffer this kind of physical pain.

And this is precisely why understanding Jesus' crucifixion can "save" a person: By understanding the ultimate act of love for the Supreme Being: Undergoing pain and suffering on behalf of doing the will of God.

What about worldly love? 

When parents love their children they will make many sacrifices in order to care for them. Instead of going out with their friends they will stay at home and take care of their children. They will save money for their college tuition. They will read bedtime stories to them. They are doing these things because they care about their children.

Or when spouses care about each other and will make sacrifices in order to please their spouse, this is love.

When someone does what is best for another person despite whether it is best for them, they usually do this because they love that person.

The only problem is what they are loving. Sure, they may be caring and loving the other person. But are they loving the physical body, or the person within? Is it physical love or is it spiritual love?

In many cases, it is both. In many cases, the person may be loving the person within as well as the physical person.

But in many other cases, the love is superficial. It is dependent upon whether the person "loves" them back. Or it may be dependent upon whether they are being sexually satisfied. Or whether the other person is around. These types of "love" are conditional.

This "worldly love" is conditional because it not only depends upon various requirements as mentioned. But it is conditional because it is related to the physical body. If each person is identifying themselves as the physical body, the "love" they give is to another physical body - making it worldly love.

As such, this type of love is temporary. It exists as long as the bodies exist. When the physical body is gone the love is gone.

What about Jesus' love? 

Each of us needs to love and be loved. Yet worldly love does not satisfy us. This is why we see so many divorces and broken families. They once declared their love for each other but the love was temporary. It was fleeting.

This doesn't mean that we cannot love in a deeper way - a spiritual love. This is the type of love that God has for us, and Jesus wants us to have for God and others.

Jesus is asking us to steer our natural love and care towards God and His children without condition.

If we fall in love with God we will then want to please God. That means we will do God's will rather than our own will. Such a scenario is being "saved." 

But being "saved" is not Jesus' central teaching. Being "saved" is the byproduct of loving God and His children - which is Jesus' central teaching.

We can know it is the byproduct because, in order to love someone and do someone else's will, we have to forego our own will. If we follow Jesus' instructions, our will and focus will be on pleasing God, not on ourselves and our own salvation. Seeking our own salvation is a selfish concern. It is a concern for someone who wants to not suffer the consequences of their sinful activity. So wanting salvation is diametrically opposed to Jesus' teachings. This is why Jesus said, after Matt. 7:21 (quoted above):

"Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'" (Matt. 7:22-23)

So not only will those whose concern is their own salvation, (saying "Lord, Lord") not be entering the kingdom of God (as stated in Matt. 7:21 above), but those who have performed miracles and prophesized in Jesus' name - and hence also preached salvation in Jesus' name, will also be rejected by Jesus. He is calling them "evildoers." He says, "away from me." He wants no part of them.

Why? Because they did not follow or teach Jesus' primary instruction: To love and serve God.

Notice that the statement by Jesus says, "All who ever came before me were thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not listen to them." Does this include the prophets like Moses, Abraham, David and so on who came before Jesus too? Certainly not. Why would Jesus quote Moses in his primary instruction (Deut. 6:5) if he thought that?

Is Jesus' statement being mistranslated?

Jesus is referring to teachers of the institutional temple that have been teaching those people before he arrived on the scene. The Greek word πᾶς (pas), which has been translated to "all" can mean, according to the Greek lexicon as "everyone" when spoken about individuals, or it can mean "some of all types" when it is spoken collectively.

Jesus is not referring to John the Baptist, his teacher, along with Moses, Abraham, Job, Solomon, Samuel, David and all the other loving servants of God in this category. Thus the later meaning of πᾶς must be applied.

As for "who ever came before me," the Greek text does not indicate a basis for "ever." Jesus is referring to those institutional temple teachers who were teaching in the temples prior to his arrival, not the prophets. We can see this when he says "the sheep did not listen to them." Moses, Abraham, David, Samuel and others had thousands and even millions of followers over the years who heard from them and followed them. Their "sheep" certainly did "listen to them."

But those elected institutional temple official priests were not being followed. They had to threaten and coerce their assembly to come into the temples. If people didn't abide by their authority, they would have them beat and imprisoned, just as they had Jesus arrested, imprisoned, beat and crucified, because Jesus was not following their authority.

Rather - and ironically - this mistranslation of "all who ever came before me" is driven by precisely the same seeking of power and authority of those institutional temple teachers Jesus was describing. Many ministries of today's sectarian organizations claim that the only way to be saved is to belong to their sect. This began with the Roman government's Synod of Nicene and Nicene Creed, which guided the power-hungry early Roman Catholic Church. Other ecclesiastical sects followed in the centuries after the Roman Catholic Church's enforced domination of Christianity.

The intent has been to control people by twisting the translation and interpretation of the scriptures to give their organization the exclusive means to people's salvation. If people don't join their church and receive the "bathing in the blood" rituals to become "saved," they will go to hell.

This effort to scare people into becoming members enriches their coffers, which is used to pay generous salaries of priests, ministers, reverends, and other religious officials. This is precisely what Jesus was criticizing about the institutional temple teachers, as he was trying to establish a contrast between his teachings and theirs.

Still, these mistranslations cannot remove Jesus' central messages from scripture. God could not allow this. A discerning person can still understand Jesus' central message. And this was not salvationism, as salvationism is a self-centered concern.

Jesus' central message was that we come to love and serve God, and not be concerned about our own salvation. This is why he says "I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full." Having "life" means loving and serving God. This is the destination.

Our salvation will come automatically if we come to love and serve God. But love for God will not come if salvation is our primary focus and purpose.

*Here is the translation of these verses according to the Lost Gospels of Jesus:

“Very truly, I say to you, I am the gateway for the sheep. All who are appearing here before me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep do not hear them. I am the gateway. If one enters through me, he will be saved, and will come in and go out to find pasture. The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come in order to give them life, so they will have it abundantly.” (John 10:7-10)

"I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life ...” (John 10:11-13)

"I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. The hired hand is not the shepherd who owns the sheep. So when he sees the wolf coming, he abandons the sheep and runs away. Then the wolf attacks the flock and scatters it. The man runs away because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep.” (John 10:11-13)

What does 'the good shepherd' mean?

Most sectarian versions of this statement translate the Greek word καλός (kalos) to "good." What distinction does this have? Would Jesus really describe himself as the "good shepherd" and what purpose would that have?

According to Thayer's lexicon, the Greek word καλός actually means "genuine." It can also mean "approved" as well as "precious" and "competent." But in this context, "genuine" is the appropriate translation.

The distinction Jesus is trying to make is that there are many teachers who were posing to be God's representatives - i.e., Pharisees, Sadducees, chief priests, scribes and so on. They are posing as "shepherds" but they are not really.

But Jesus was the genuine shepherd. He was the true teacher - God's representative. He wasn't just posing as God's representative. He was the genuine article - he was genuinely representing God.

Do you see how using the word "good" here misrepresents Jesus' statement? Do you see how it actually hides the fact that he is distinguishing himself from these other teachers that makes his statement so meaningful?

The fact that sectarian translators have mistranslated this word is just one of the key indicators that these sectarian translators were not themselves genuine. They were not genuinely representing God as they translated the scripture of His representative.

In fact, most were the "hired hands," as Jesus speaks of. Professional priests, preachers or translators are all "hired hands."

Who is the 'hired hand'?

Jesus is making a clear comparison between the kind of commitment he, a loving servant and representative of the Supreme Being has towards his followers, versus the professional priests or teachers that were vying for the attention of the Jewish people at that time.

"The hired hand" is specifically mentioned here in this verse because it reflects those institutional temple priests - the Pharisees and high priests - who were not teaching to others as a service to the Supreme Being. They were teaching as part of their professional positions. Jesus had criticized this aspect before as he spoke of these professional priests:

"They devour widows' houses and for a show make lengthy prayers. Such men will be punished most severely." (Luke 20:47)

How were they devouring widows' houses? Because the temple was collecting tithings from the households of men who passed away to pay the salaries of the priests. This illustrates how Jesus abhorred the professional teachers of the temple.

Jesus' parable illustrates the lack of commitment these professional priests have towards their followers: "So when he sees the wolf coming, he abandons the sheep and runs away." In other words, the professional teacher is not prepared to commit his life to God and therefore his followers.

A professional priest, pastor, minister, reverend, pope, bishop or cardinal is teaching in exchange for a salary. This is not loving service to God. Loving service to God is unconditional. Loving service to God is not done in exchange for a reward. Service in exchange for a salary is a business arrangement. It is not love.

What did Jesus mean by 'lays down his life for the sheep'?

Many sectarian teachers will focus on this phrase. They interpret this to mean that Jesus will die on the cross for our sins. Their teaching is that all we have to do is accept that Jesus died for our sins, and we will be "saved."

Yet this is not what Jesus taught. And just in this statement, we can see it doesn't make sense. 

According to this translation, Jesus is stating that only good shepherds will lay down their lives for the sheep.

Do shepherds typically die for their sheep? No. If they did, who would be around to care for them?

Thus we find the metaphor fails to substantiate the hypothesis that Jesus was speaking of dying - and that would save us.

Rather, the phrase, "lays down" is translated from the Greek word τίθημι (tithēmi). This word doesn't mean to die. It means, according to the lexicon, to "commit" or "bow." It means to put aside one's own self for the purpose of helping someone else.

Furthermore, the word "life" is being translated from the Greek word, ψυχή (psychē), which doesn't mean "life." Rather, this word means "soul" or "the vital force which animates the body."

This means that Jesus could not be speaking of dying - since his soul did not die on the cross - only his body died.

What was Jesus saying then?

Jesus was not talking about dying on the cross. He was speaking of commitment. He was committing his life (and soul) to taking care of those who follow him (his "sheep").

This is a big deal. Jesus was speaking of something much bigger. Love. Jesus was speaking of the love he has for those who hear and follow his teachings to love God and do God's will.

Jesus' real teachings transcend the narrow view offered by sectarian institutions, who worship Jesus as God and say he died for our sins. Such a philosophy was condemned by Jesus himself:

“Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will come to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles? Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!” (Matt. 7:21-23)

Jesus clearly indicates that even those who were supposedly "saving" others in Jesus' name, or proclaiming to be "saved" ("Lord, Lord") - the equivalent of proclaiming that Jesus died for our sins - Jesus calls them "evildoers!" He will tell them to get "away from me"!

So what is Jesus teaching then? Clearly, he states "but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven."

In other words, Jesus is teaching us to serve God. Not only that: Jesus is saying that serving God is the only true pathway back to the spiritual world.

Service to God is also voluntary loving service because it is not done in exchange for a reward. This means we are not exchanging service to get salvation.

Salvation is not a bargaining chip - something that we get in return for doing something else.

Jesus was not teaching us to come to church and accept that he died for our sins and then we're saved. He was trying to teach us to voluntarily love God, and serve God. This is stated clearly in his "greatest" instruction:

“‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment.” (Matt. 22:37-38)

But what about Jesus' dying on the cross? Didn't that mean anything? It surely did not mean that we now have the permission to do whatever selfish thing we want and then come into church to get cleansed by Jesus' crucifixion ("bathing in the blood" as many ecclesiastical teachers put it).

Jesus was murdered because of his teachings. He allowed himself to be arrested because he stood up for his teachings and this should show us how important his teachings are. Jesus' teachings are so important - and God is so important to him - that he was ready to sacrifice his physical body for them.

This means, in effect, that he was ready to make this sacrifice in order to get his message through to us. Many sectarian teachers are misconstruing Jesus' sacrifice. They want to turn it into a self-centered pitch - that we need to be saved and we need to come to their church so we can get saved - even though Jesus' body died on the cross 2,000 years ago.

Rather, Jesus' sacrifice should make us serious about learning to love and serve the Supreme Being. It should show us that loving and serving God is more important than the life of our physical body.

This is Jesus' message. And if we take it, Jesus will be our shepherd. If we ignore it, then Jesus will tell us, as he stated, "I never knew you. Away from me."

*Here is the translation of Jesus' statement according to the Lost Gospels of Jesus:

"I am the genuine shepherd, and the genuine shepherd commits his life for the sake of his sheep. One who is a hired hand and not a shepherd – who is not the owner of the sheep – sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees. The wolf will then snatch them and scatter them. He flees because he is a hired hand and doesn’t care about the sheep." (John 10:11-13)

"This command I received from my Father." (John 10:16-18)

"I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd. The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life—only to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father." (John 10:16-18)

Who are the other sheep of this sheep pen?

Jesus is continuing to utilize his parable of the sheep to indicate his directive, his purpose and his relationship with the Supreme Being.

Jesus says, "I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen." The word "other," translated from the Greek word ἄλλος (allos) - clearly indicates that Jesus is involved with multiple missions in different locations. By "not of this sheep pen" - οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ or "not of this" - Jesus is clearly stating that he is not of this world.

Certainly, Jesus taught and had followers in other towns and villages. But the scriptures also indicate he left this world after his physical body was persecuted:

"He was put to death in the body but made alive by the spirit, through whom also he went and preached to the spirits in prison." (1 Peter 3:18-19)

This statement indicates that Jesus' physical body was murdered, but the spiritual person of Jesus continued to live, and he continued to preach.

Since he was not present on the earth after presenting himself to his followers after his persecution, we must accept that Jesus has had followers outside the realm of this particular planet and time.

Who are these "spirits in prison"?

Many translators will refer to this as people living in hell (or "hades"). But this statement indicates that Jesus was teaching to those in another dimension.

Should we take up the notion that Jesus went to a place called hell as though we are somehow not in hell now? What is hell anyway? Is hell not a place of suffering? A place of imprisonment? What about those who currently suffer from starvation right here on this planet? What about those who are raped and beaten by militants and terrorists? About those who are in jail for making political statements? Are these people not in hell?

The entire physical dimension is hell. This is the place where those who want to be away from God dwell. Jesus ascended to God after his physical body died because he returned to the spiritual world after his physical body was beaten and gruesomely tortured to death by a combination of evil government officials and high priests. Certainly, we can define this planet as hell too.

It is clear from the verses above that Jesus reached out to various peoples in his attempt to bring us back to our eternal relationship with the Supreme Being.

What did Jesus mean by 'one flock and one shepherd'?

Does this mean that Jesus is saying he is the only teacher ever? Does that make any sense, given that Jesus often quoted the Prophets, including David, Isaiah, Moses and others? Certainly not.

In many other statements by Jesus, including the "greatest commandment," (see below - also taught by Moses, Deut. 6:5), Jesus is teaching the very same teachings that Moses, David, Samuel and other prophets taught before him to love and serve God. Why would he now say he was the only teacher?

Jesus is not indicating that he is the only shepherd. He is indicating that the Supreme Being is the only shepherd. How do we know this?

Why would Jesus say he received 'this command'?

This clearly indicates that Jesus is not on his own here. He is following the instructions of his Father, God. Jesus is serving God, in other words. He is God's loving servant. Anyone who is following a command from someone else is that person's servant.

This means that Jesus' activities are representing God's will. Jesus is not acting alone here. He is working in conjunction with God's command. Therefore, the Supreme Being is the ultimate shepherd.

Now the Greek word τίθημι (tithēmi) is being translated to "lay down," interpreted by many ecclesiastical sectarian teachers as referring to Jesus' dying for our sins. Yet this is not exactly true. τίθημι can mean to 'lay' or 'put down,' but this does not refer to dying. τίθημι also means 'to set, fix, establish' or 'set forth,' or 'ordain.' This refers to commitment, not death. "Laying down to die" is an English colloquialism. This is not what Jesus is discussing.

What is being established or committed here is not Jesus' physical body. Consider this statement:

"The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life — only to take it up again."

"My life" here is translated from the Greek ψυχή (psychē), which refers to "the vital force which animates the body,' 'a living being,' 'a living soul" according to the lexicon. It does not refer to the physical body. It was Jesus' physical body that was murdered by the Romans and high priests, not his ψυχή or spiritual self.

Thus we cannot accept that Jesus is talking about laying down his physical body or dying, in this discussion. Jesus is talking about here is committing his life.

Isn't this about a relationship?

Yes, Jesus is speaking of a relationship. Jesus is saying that because he is committing his life to God and to helping God's children, God loves him. This is called a relationship. When a person commits themselves to another and their cause, they do that because they care about the person. And the other person usually responds in kind. This is love.

"No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again." What does this mean? Because the translators have not understood that Jesus is not referring to the physical body (because they do not understand the difference between the temporary physical body and the eternal spiritual person) they have mucked up this verse. The correct way to say this would be:

"The reason my Father loves me is that I have committed my life - only to regain my life. No one forces me to commit my life, but I commit myself voluntarily. I can give myself or not, but I choose to give myself."

What about the "authority" from the previous translation? Authority is being translated from the Greek ἐξουσία (exousia). The very first meaning according to the lexicon is 'power of choice, liberty of doing as one pleases.'

And finally, "This command I have received from my Father." The word "command" is being translated from the Greek ἐντολή (entolē). According to the lexicon, this can be 'an order, command, charge, precept,' or an 'injunction.'

Jesus has chosen to give his life to God and God's service. But he is also saying that God gave him this freedom. God has sanctioned this choice. This also infers that God also sanctions what Jesus is doing, because he has given his life.

Jesus has given his life to the Supreme Being and is serving God. Jesus has a personal relationship with God. He knows what pleases God and he is doing what pleases God. What pleases the Supreme Being? To help Him bring us home. Jesus knows that the Supreme Being wants us back. God wants us to return to our original loving relationship with Him. This is why Jesus' most important teaching was:

“‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment.” (Matt. 22:37-38)

*Here is the translation of Jesus' statement according to the Lost Gospels of Jesus:

"I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must lead them as well. They will hear my voice and they will become one flock with one shepherd. For this reason the Creator loves me, because I commit my life in order to reclaim my life. No one takes it from me, but I commit my life on my own. I choose to commit my life and thus choose to reclaim my life. I have received this instruction from my LORD.” (John 10:16-18)

"... the Father set apart as His very own and sent into the world ..." (John 10:34-36)

"Is it not written in your Law, 'I have said you are gods'? If he called them 'gods,' to whom the word of God came - and the Scripture cannot be broken - what about the one whom the Father set apart as His very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, 'I am God's son'? (John 10:34-36) 

Why is Jesus talking about 'gods'?

The Pharisees and priests of the temple were threatening to stone Jesus. When he asked why they wanted to stone him when he had done so many good works, they responded with:

"We are not stoning you for any good work," they replied, "but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God." (John 10:33)

Actually, in this context, the word "gods" would not be the appropriate translation* of the Greek phrase, θεοί ἐστε. This would more appropriately be translated to "to be divine" or "to be godly."

To translate this to "gods" would not make any sense, because they were accusing Jesus of claiming to be the Supreme Being. So Jesus' reply talking about the "gods" is nonsensical.

Rather, by Jesus saying that don't the scriptures talk about being divine or godly - would give Jesus' response the logic that he was responding with.

This translation error is also mirrored in the verse that Jesus is quoting from the Psalms.

What is Jesus quoting?

The word "Law" here is being translated* from the Greek word νόμος (nomos). "Law" may be a good secular translation but what Jesus is referring to is something called "Mosaic law." Strictly speaking, Mosaic law is the application of Moses' teachings in the form of rules and regulations.

Yet Moses' teachings are available in the Old Testament and the Hebrew Scriptures, which included the Five Books of Torah along with related texts. We find here that Jesus is quoting from the Five Books of Torah here. More specifically, Jesus is quoting from the Psalms.

In other words, Jesus is referring to "Scripture" not "Law."

Here is the Psalm that Jesus is quoting from:

A psalm of Asaph. God presides in the great assembly; he renders judgment among the "gods":
"How long will you [fn] defend the unjust and show partiality to the wicked?
Defend the weak and the fatherless; uphold the cause of the poor and the oppressed.
Rescue the weak and the needy; deliver them from the hand of the wicked.
"The 'gods' know nothing, they understand nothing. They walk about in darkness; all the foundations of the earth are shaken.
"I said, 'You are "gods"; you are all sons of the Most High.'
But you will die like mere mortals; you will fall like every other ruler."
Rise up, O God, judge the earth, for all the nations are your inheritance. (Psalm 82:1-8)

Similar to the Greek translation above, the translation to "gods" here in this Psalms verse comes from the Hebrew word אֱלֹהִים ' (elohiym). This word can mean "divine ones" or "angels" or "gods."

But in the context of this verse, "gods" is not the most appropriate translation. The more appropriate translation would be:

"I said, 'You are divine - you are all servants of the Most High."

What about 'son' and 'sons'?

According to the translation, in John 10:35 Jesus refers to himself as "God's son". He also references Psalm 82:6, which is translated to "sons of the Most High" - meaning sons of God. 

The key to this is understanding the Greek and Hebrew words being translated* to "son" and "sons."

In John 10:36, the word "son" is translated* from the Greek word υἱός (huios).

According to the lexicon, this word only means "son" - "in a restricted sense, the male offspring (one born by a father and of a mother)." This means a biological son. Certainly, the context of these passages is not the physical body or a physical father-mother/son relationship.

According to Thayer's lexicon, the word υἱός (huios) can also be "used to describe one who depends on another or is his follower - of teachers - i.e. pupils."

The word also can mean, "one who is connected with or belongs to a thing by any kind of close relationship." And, "instructed in evangelical truth and devotedly obedient to it;" and, "one to whom anything belongs," and, "those to whom the prophetic and covenant promises belong."

Then there is this significant definition in Thayer's lexicon:

"The Jews called the Messiah υἱὸς εἶ τοῦ θεοῦ pre-eminently, as the supreme representative of God"

All of these mean that terms that could be translated from the Greek word υἱός (huios) - depending upon the context, would include: follower, devotee, subject, servant, representative.

The translation to representative is consistent with follower or devotee because a representative is performing service on behalf of whom they follow. This describes Jesus as he acted on behalf of God. Jesus confirmed his position as God's representative throughout his teachings, with statements such as:

“Anyone who welcomes you welcomes me, and anyone who welcomes me welcomes the One who sent me." (Matt. 10:40)

The concept that some teachers have claimed - of God begetting an exclusive son - is not supported by Scripture. We can see this reality from David's reference to "sons" in Psalm 82:6 above. [The Hebrew word for "sons" also translates in this context to devoted followers or loving servants]:

'... you are all [devoted followers or loving servants] of the Most High.'

Would God (the Controller of all creation) somehow be limited in His ability to beget children? Most men can theoretically beget tens if not hundreds of children in their lifetime. And we are saying that God can only beget one person? Is God now impotent? This is simply illogical.

Furthermore, we see from scripture and general observation that no one is forced to become a loving servant of God. We can each freely make this decision. We can also refuse to accept God, and even deny God's very existence. Now that is freedom.

Is this consistent with Scripture?

This also contradicts the use of υἱός (or huios) elsewhere in scripture. Consider other translations from the Greek word υἱός (huios) in Jesus' statements in the Bible (NIV):

"But the subjects [υἱός (huios)] of the kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” (Matthew 8:12)

"The field is the world, and the good seed stands for the people [υἱός (huios)] of the kingdom." (Matt. 13:38)

“Say to Daughter [υἱός (huios)] Zion, ‘See, your king comes to you, gentle and riding on a donkey, and on a colt, the foal of a donkey.’ ” (Matt. 21:5)

“Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when you have succeeded, you make them twice as much a child [υἱός (huios)] of hell as you are." (Matt. 23:15)

“How can the guests [υἱός (huios)] of the bridegroom fast while he is with them? They cannot, so long as they have him with them." (Mark 2:19)

"Truly I tell you, people [υἱός (huios)] can be forgiven all their sins and every slander they utter" (Mark 3:28)

"But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be children [υἱός (huios)] of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked." (Luke 6:35)

"Now if I drive out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your followers [υἱός (huios)] drive them out? So then, they will be your judges." (Luke 11:19)

“The people [υἱός (huios)] of this age marry and are given in marriage. But those who are considered worthy of taking part in the age to come and in the resurrection from the dead will neither marry nor be given in marriage, and they can no longer die; for they are like the angels. They are God's children, since they are children [υἱός (huios)] of the resurrection." (Luke 20:34-36)

We can see from the above that the Greek word υἱός (huios) is being translated to subjects of the kingdom; people of the kingdom; daughter of Zion; child of hell; guests (actually better translated to servants) of the bridegroom; children of the Most High; followers; and children of this age.

Thus the only appropriate meaning to this word υἱός (huios) relates to being a follower, a devoted servant, a subject or representative.

What is Jesus really calling himself?

Jesus is calling himself a devoted servant of God - a follower of God - a loving servant of God and because God specifically sent Jesus, God's representative.

"I am God's son" should thus be "I am God's representative."

Jesus also was not saying that he was the only "son" - loving servant of God. Nor were his followers. Consider these statements:

[Jesus speaking] “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons [servants] of God.” (Matthew 5:9)

...Adam, the son [servant] of God. (Luke 3:38)

"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons [servants] of God." (Matt. 6:9)

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons [servants] of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)

For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons [servants] of God. (Romans 8:14)

For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons [servants] of God. (Romans 8:19)

The word "sons" in David's Psalm is translated from the Hebrew word בֵּן (ben), which also can also mean 'son, male child,' as well as 'children' 'people' or 'members' (as in 'followers'). In the context of David's Psalm, it would be most appropriate to refer to them as God's devoted followers or servants, just as υἱός indicates - ultimately loving servants or devoted followers of the Supreme Being.

In the Old Testament we also find multiple "sons of God" among the Old Testament, translated from בֵּן:

When men began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, the sons [servants] of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose. (Genesis 6:1-2)

The Nephilim were on the earth in those days — and also afterward — when the sons [servants] of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. (Genesis 6:4)

Now there was a day when the sons [servants] of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them. (Job 1:6)

Again there was a day when the sons [servants] of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD. (Job 2:1)

When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons [servants] of God shouted for joy? (Job 38:7)

Certainly, in some verses, the Hebrew בֵּן and the Greek υἱός refer to physical sons in many verses. But in the specific verses discussed here, we can conclude that the translation to "son(s) of God" derived from υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ in Greek and הָֽאָדָם כִּי טֹבֹת in Hebrew within the context of what is being spoken of regarding these relationships with God in both the Old and New Testaments are mistranslations.

The English word "son" applies to a relationship that exists between the physical body of a male child to the parents of their physical body. The relationship that exists between God and those of His children that serve Him is a spiritual one.

Aren't we all God's children?

We can certainly translate all these to "children" because God created each of us. But the scriptures are clearly pointing to a distinction between those God created and those who choose to dedicate their lives to the Supreme Being. This means being a "devoted follower" or "loving servant" rather than simply a child of God.

We are all God's dependents in that we all depend on God - even if we don't admit it. But in our pure spiritual state, we have the choice to love and serve God. We are never forced. Even still, this is our natural position. We are innately God's loving servants and playmates.

With God's grace, someone who re-develops this innate relationship and accepts their position as God's dependent, follower, and servant becomes elevated to a state of loving servant of God.

So when David calls the "gods" dependents or servants of God, he is reminding them that ultimately they are subservient to God. They may temporarily be occupying higher positions within the universe, but they ultimately were created – as we all were – to be God’s loving servants.

The Nephilim referred to in Genesis 6 were dedicated followers of the Supreme Being. They were exalted because of their dedication to God. While some have interpreted the description of the Nephilim as being that they were physically large - we must understand this reference is to their great devotion.

Does the Bible teach the existence of gods?

Again, these translations* to "gods" in these contexts not only don't make any sense: They also conflict with the very premise that was taught by the Prophets. 

That is, that there is the Supreme Being and there are God's children. We are all God's children. Yes, there are different roles and assignments that different souls can have. Some may be more powerful than others and thus have more authority.

But most of the direct references to 'gods' in the Old Testament speak of the gods as being foreign or of human origin and thus their worship being offensive to the Supreme Being:

"But if you turn away and forsake My statutes and My commandments which I have set before you, and go and serve other gods, and worship them, then I will uproot them from My land which I have given them; and this house which I have sanctified for My name I will cast out of My sight, and will make it a proverb and a byword among all peoples." (2 Chron. 7:19-20)

Thus we see that both Jesus' and David's reference to 'gods' would not only be out of context. They would be offensive if they were actually offering those words. This is why both the Psalms and Jesus' statements are mistranslated.

BTW: Why were 'gods' considered offensive to God? Because the Supreme Being wants us to be happy. We will never be happy by worshiping stone gods or even mythological deities in want of some material benefit (which is why many worship them). We are innately attached to the Supreme Being and by developing our love for Him we become whole - and fulfilled.

Why were these verses translated to 'gods' then? First, we must understand the initial translators of both the Hebrew texts and the Greek texts into what we consider today as the Bible. The first Latin Bible was translated by Romans who were appointed by Eusebius, who was appointed by the Roman Emperor Constantine.

This was a culture that worshiped the Roman pantheon of "gods." The Romans did not accept the Supreme Being. Instead, they worshiped various gods such as Invictus and Caelestis, but also Augustus - a title given to Emperors and Empresses (Augusta).

As such, these Romans had a history of acceptance of these gods. It was difficult for them to see beyond that within the context of David's and Jesus' teachings. 

Both of them strictly followed this fundamental commandment:

“You shall have no other gods before Me." (Exodus 20:3)

The phrase "before me" uses the Hebrew word עַל (`al) which means "above" - so "before" is someone of a misnomer.

At any rate, the meaning is clear. This commandment is central to the doctrine that both Jesus and David accepted. Neither would be giving any esteem to 'gods'.

What does Jesus mean by 'the Father set apart'?

Jesus describes this difference with the phrase "set apart as His very own," which is being translated from the Greek word ἁγιάζω (hagiazō), which means 'to render or acknowledge, or to be venerable or hallow' or 'to separate from profane things and dedicate to God' according to the lexicon. 

The key element we find here is the result of one dedicating themselves to the Supreme Being, and God accepted this dedication.

In other words, we are talking about a relationship between God and Jesus: A loving relationship. This is confirmed by the phrase "and sent into the world."

Let's use an example. Let's say that the king of a country wants to communicate with another country. So he sends to the other country's government an emissary - a representative. Who would the king send? Just anyone? No. The king would send someone he trusted. 

Someone who understood the king and what the king wanted. In other words, the emissary would have an established relationship with the king, with the king trusting that the emissary would act in the interests of the king.

This same situation is being explained by Jesus. God personally sent Jesus into the physical world to represent Him. This is because Jesus and God enjoy a special personal relationship: A relationship of love and loving service. Jesus is God's dedicated loving servant. So God dispatched Jesus. This makes Jesus the Representative of God.

And what did the Supreme Being dispatch Jesus to do? To bring us home. The Supreme Being wants us back. He wants us to return to Him. The Supreme Being is a loving person. He cares about each of us.

God knows that we will only be happy when we return to our natural position of exchanging a loving relationship with Him. He knows we will only be happy when we are engaged in that relationship - exhibited by loving service. Jesus made this clear by stating his most important teaching:

“‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment.” (Matt. 22:37-38)

*Here is the translation of Jesus' statement according to the Lost Gospels of Jesus:

“Is it not written in your Scriptures, ‘I said, you are divine’? If he called them divine, to whom the wisdom of God came – and the Scripture cannot be broken. Do you say of him who the Creator has empowered and sent into the material world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Representative of God?’" (John 10:34-36)