HONOR THE SON AS GOD

Furthermore, GJohn presents Jesus’ divine sonship as unique, an emphasis especially evident in the Johannine use of monogenes (“only/unique,” 1:14; 3:16, 18). Whereas those who believe in Jesus are given “authority to become children [tekna] of God” (1:12), Jesus alone is “the Son [ho huios]” to whom God has given authority over all people, to give eternal life to the elect, and who uniquely shared in divine glory “before the world was made” (17:1-5). This uniqueness is also reflected in the requirement that the Son be honored just as the Father is honored (timao; 5:23). This obviously connotes general reverence and obedience, but it also likely alludes to the cultic practice of Johannine believers in which Jesus was liturgically reverenced along with “the Father.”²⁵ (Larry W. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity [William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, MI/Cambridge U.K. 2003], 6. Crises and Christology in Johannine Christianity, Jesus in the Gospel of John, pp. 363-364) 

Furthermore, especially in the absolute ” I am” statements but also in some of the predicative statements, Jesus speaks in the manner of God, and claims to be authorized to exercise the powers and prerogatives of God. To cite one transparent example, the statement in John 11:25, “I am the resurrection and the life,” corresponds to statements in 5:21-29 that the Father who has power to raise the dead has granted the Son resurrection power as well (w. 21, 26, 28), and has authorized the Son to execute “all judgment” (w. 22, 27). 4 6 In the coming resurrection “the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live” (v. 25). Consequently, obeying Jesus’ word is the determining factor as to whether one comes into eschatological life or judgment (v. 24). Still further, it is God’s will that “all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father”; indeed, to refuse to honor the Son is to dishonor the Father (v. 23). As I have indicated already, the term for ” honor” used here can refer to worship-honor given to a deity,⁴⁷ so worship is obviously what is intended in verse 23. (Ibid., p. 373)

5:23. The reason why the Father has entrusted all judgment to the Son is now disclosed: it is so that all may honour the Son just as they honour the Father. Whatever functional subordination may be stressed in this section, it guarantees, as we have seen, that the Son does everything that the Father does (cf. notes on vv. 19–20); and now Jesus declares that its purpose is that the Son may be at one with the Father not only in activity but in honour. This goes far beyond making Jesus a mere ambassador who acts in the name of the monarch who sent him, an envoy plenipotentiary whose derived authority is the equivalent of his master’s. That analogue breaks down precisely here, for the honour given to an envoy is never that given to the head of state. The Jews were right in detecting that Jesus was ‘making himself equal with God’ (vv. 17–18). But this does not diminish God. Indeed, the glorification of the Son is precisely what glorifies the Father (cf. notes on 12:28), just as in Philippians 2:9–11, where at the name of Jesus every knee bows and every tongue confesses that Jesus Christ is Lord, and all this is to the glory of God the Father. Because of the unique relation between the Father and the Son, the God who declares ‘I am the Lord; that is my name! I will not give my glory to another’ (Is. 42:8; cf. Is. 48:11) is not compromised or diminished when divine honours crown the head of the Son.

Granted that the purpose of the Father is that all should honour the Son, it is but a small step to Jesus’ conclusion: He who does not honour the Son does not honour the Father, who sent him. In a theistic universe, such a statement belongs to one who is himself to be addressed as God (cf. 20:28), or to stark insanity. The one who utters such things is to be dismissed with pity or scorn, or worshipped as Lord. If with much current scholarship we retreat to seeing in such material less the claims of the Son than the beliefs and witness of the Evangelist and his church, the same options confront us. Either John is supremely deluded and must be dismissed as a fool, or his witness is true and Jesus is to be ascribed the honours due God alone. There is no rational middle ground.

Such a statement also betrays a strong salvation-historical perspective (as the church Fathers of the first three centuries understood). Jesus is not saying that Abraham, Moses and David were not truly honouring the Father because they failed to honour the Son who had not yet been sent. Rather, he is focusing on the latest development in the history of redemption: the incarnation of the Word, the sending of the Son. Just as there were many who did not listen to the prophets of old, leaving but a remnant who faithfully obeyed Yahweh’s gracious disclosures, so now with the coming of the Son there will be some who think they honour God while disowning God’s Word, his gracious Self-Expression, his own Son. But they are deluded. Now that the Son has come, the person who withholds the honour due the Son similarly dishonours the Father (cf. 14:6; Acts 4:12). The statement not only makes an unyielding Christological claim, but prepares the way for the obduracy motif that dominates ch. 12. (Donald A. Carson, The Gospel according to John, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Leicester, England; Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity Press; W.B. Eerdmans, 1991), pp. 254–255)

Jesus explains his relationship with the Father through a series of four explanatory clauses (5:19–23), each headed by the conjunction gar (variously translated in the NIV). He begins by saying he can only do what he sees the Father doing because [gar] whatever the Father does the Son also does (v. 19). Here the same unity of action is stated, yet it is not in terms of limitation (the Son can only do what he sees the Father doing), but through a mind-boggling claim of completeness. He does everything (ha gar an, translated whatever) the Father does. That is, not only is everything in Jesus’ life reflective of God the Father, but also everything the Father does is reflected in Jesus’ life. Jesus is claiming to be the full revelation of the Father (cf. 15:15; 16:13, 15; 17:10).

Next, the Son’s complete revelation of the Father is grounded in the Father’s own love for the Son and the fact that the Father has not held anything back from the Son. For [gar] the Father loves the Son and shows him all he does (5:20). The Father’s love is the heart of everything. It is this love between the Father and the Son “that moves the sun and the other stars” (Dante, The Divine Comedy: Paradise 33.145). God’s love for the world (3:16) leads him to send the Son so we may be able to share through the Spirit in the Father’s love for the Son (16:27; 17:23). This eternal relationship is the source of Jesus’ activity for it leads the Father to show the Son all he does. We see again in verse 20 that the Father takes the initiative; he is in control, and he is the source of all. This passage also emphasizes that the Father has held back nothing of his activity from the Son. All that God does is revealed to Jesus, and Jesus passes everything on to us (15:15).

Jesus’ healing on the sabbath and his other deeds have amazed people, but he promises the Father will show the Son even greater things (“works,” erga) than these (5:20). Jesus’ desire for his opponents to be amazed is not due to any interest he might have in their acclaim—he does not care for human praise (5:30, 41). Rather, Jesus works miracles that, like the miracles of Moses (Ex 3), will make people sit up and take notice and recognize that God has sent him. But on a deeper level God seeks an amazement that comes from recognizing the Father in the Son, for the miracles actually reveal the identity of Jesus and the character of the Father. This amazement is a part of faith, as seen, for example, in the case of Nathanael (1:49–50): he was amazed, and Jesus promised him he would see even greater things. As we learn more of God we continue to be amazed. If we are not amazed by Jesus, then we, like these opponents, have not yet really seen him.

Jesus then explains that these greater works have to do with giving life and judging. For [gar] just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it. Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the Son (5:21–22). The Father has put everything into the Son’s hands (3:35), including the most fundamental realities of human existence, the giving of life and judgment. These two activities are at the heart of everything Jesus does in this Gospel, and these verses spell out his right to such responsibility and power.

He has been commissioned by God as his agent, but he transcends that role. He does not simply commit to the Father’s plan and faithfully execute it, as a good agent would do according to Jewish ideals (cf. Rengstorf 1964a: 415; see note on 5:21). He is to give life to whom he is pleased [thelei] to give it (5:21). Jesus’ own will is involved. While Jesus can do nothing by himself (5:19), he does have a will of his own, and the Father authorizes Jesus to act according to that will. His human will, however, is completely in harmony with the Father’s will. So again we see the distinctness and the oneness of the Father and the Son. An agent might bring life in the name of God, but no agent could say “I am the resurrection and the life” (11:25). This statement, spoken by Jesus at the raising of Lazarus, helps us perceive the significance of his staggering claims made here in chapter 5. Indeed, the raising of Lazarus is one of the greater works that does cause onlookers to marvel.

The last explanatory clause (5:22) states emphatically that the Father judges no one [oude … ouden], but has entrusted all judgment to the Son. Jesus is given this authority because of who he is; it is part of his identity (5:27). Jesus is the light of the world (8:12) and the truth itself (14:6), and his very presence is a judgment on all that is evil and false.

In these verses Jesus’ equality with God is revealed with the result (v. 23, hina) that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. Here their complete equality is expressed in terms of people’s proper attitude toward Jesus: the very same honor given to the Father is to be given to the Son. Again the Jewish idea of agent is used and transcended (see note on 5:21). An agent was to be received as the one who sent him would be received. But here God is the one sending, and no one sent by God in the Old Testament ever claimed equal honor with God! Unless Jesus is wholly and completely God this verse promotes blasphemy. Indeed, the last part of the verse makes the point even more strongly: failure to honor the Son is failure to honor the Father. Honoring God, which was at the heart of the Jewish religion, is said to be dependent on honoring Jesus as the Son of God.

This keynote section states clearly the scandal of particularity that some Christians find discomforting today. The complex language of these verses shows the struggle to guard the truth of monotheism while claiming that Jesus is God. The concerns of monotheists such as Jews and Muslims are legitimate, and this Gospel reveals that God is indeed One, though not in the way these other religions understand. This Gospel encourages monotheists to understand their truth in light of what has now been revealed by the Son of God about himself and the Holy Spirit. This Gospel, however, offers no encouragement to Christians who wish to say that Jesus is not the unique Son of God with exclusive and ultimate authority over every person on earth. All judgment has been given to him, and all are to honor the Son just as they honor the Father. John allows for no syncretism, for that would deny the uniqueness and exclusivity of Jesus.

5:21 In Judaism there was a principle that “a man’s agent [šālîaḥ] is like to himself” (m. Berakot 5:5; m. Terumot 4:4; m. Me’ilah 6:4; cf. Mt 10:40–42; 25:40; Lk 10:16; Jn 5:23; 12:44–45; Acts 9:4–5; 22:7–8; 26:14–15; Talbert 1992:195). Such an agent could be used, for example, both for betrothing and divorcing (Rengstorf 1964a:415). God uses agents to execute judgment, but three areas were viewed as normally the prerogatives of God: provision of water, birth and resurrection. The fact that Moses, Elijah, Elisha and Ezekiel were used by God in connection with these matters shows their greatness (Rengstorf 1964a:419). They are the exceptions that prove the rule, and thereby they also provided types for Jesus to fulfill and transcend, as he transcends the category of agent itself (see comments on 3:34; 7:37; 8:58; 10:36, 38; 14:9). (Rodney A. Whitacre, John, vol. 4, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Westmont, IL: IVP Academic, 1999), pp. 127–130)

That all may honour the Son (ινα παντες τιμωσιν τον υιον). Purpose clause with ινα and present active subjunctive of τιμαω (may keep on honouring the Son).

He that honoureth not the Son (ο μη τιμων τον υιον). Articular present active participle of τιμαω with negative μη. Jesus claims here the same right to worship from men that the Father has. Dishonouring Jesus is dishonouring the Father who sent him (John 8:49; John 12:26; John 15:23; 1 John 2:23). See also Luke 10:16. There is small comfort here for those who praise Jesus as teacher and yet deny his claims to worship. The Gospel of John carries this high place for Christ throughout, but so do the other Gospels (even Q, the Logia of Jesus) and the rest of the New Testament. (A.T. Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament, Chapter 5)

Verse 23. That all men should honour the Son, c.] If then the Son is to be honoured, EVEN AS the Father is honoured, then the Son must be God, as receiving that worship which belongs to God alone. To worship any creature is idolatry: Christ is to be honoured even as the Father is honoured therefore Christ is not a creature; and, if not a creature, consequently the Creator. See John 1:3.

He that honoureth not the Son — God will not receive that man’s adoration who refuses to honour Jesus, even as he honours him. The Jews expected the Messiah as a great and powerful Prince; but they never thought of a person coming in that character enrobed with all the attributes of Godhead. To lead them off from this error, our Lord spoke the words recorded in these verses. (Adam Clarke’s Commentary, Chapter 5)

That all men should honour the Son,…. This is the end of all judgment, and the exercise of all authority, and power being committed to him; namely, that he might have the honour given him by men that is due unto him:

even as they honour the Father; that the same honour and glory may be given to the one, as to the other, which must never have been done was he not equal with him, since he gives not his glory to another, Isaiah 42:8. Indeed, all men do not honour the Father as they should; the Gentiles, who had some knowledge of God, glorified him not as God; and the Jews, who had an external revelation of the one, true, and living God, which other nations had not, yet were greatly deficient in honouring him, which made him complaining say, “if then I be a father, where is mine honour?” Malachi 1:6. And Christians, who are favoured with a clearer revelation still of the Father of Christ, are much wanting in giving him his due glory; but in common he is honoured, though in an imperfect manner; nor is there so much danger of his losing his honour, as of the Son’s losing his; the reason is this, though the Son is in the form of God, and equal with him, yet by taking upon him the form of a servant, by becoming man, he has veiled the glory of his divine person, and made himself of no reputation; and by reason of this was reckoned by many, or most, as a mere man: wherefore, by agreement, that judgment, power, and authority, which equally belonged to the Father, and the Son, the exercise of it is put visibly and openly into the Son’s hands, that he might have his due honour and glory from all men, whether they will or not: from true believers in him he has it willingly, by their ascribing deity to him, by putting their trust in him, by attributing the whole of their salvation to him, and the glory of it, and by worshipping him: and he will be honoured by all men at the last day; they will be obliged to do it; for all judgment being committed to him, and he being Judge of all, every knee shall bow to him, and every tongue shall confess that he is Lord, to his own glory, and to the glory of God the Father; see Isaiah 45:23.

He that honoureth not the Son; that denies his divine sonship, or his proper deity; that detracts from the dignity of his person or office; that shows no regard to him in point of salvation, or of obedience:

honoureth not the Father which hath sent him; they are so the same in nature and perfections, in power, will, affections, and operations; and their interests and honours are so involved together, that whatever dishonour is done to one, reflects on the other: and indeed, whatever is done in a way of disrespect to the Son, as incarnate, and in his office capacity, highly reflects on his Father, that sent him in the fulness of time, in human nature, to obtain eternal redemption for his people, according to a rule often expressed by the Jews, “a man’s messenger is as himself”; Isaiah 45:23- :. (John Gill’s Exposition of the Whole Bible, Chapter 5)

That all men should honour … – To honor is to esteem, reverence, praise, do homage to. We honor one when we ascribe to him in our hearts, and words, and actions the praise and obedience which are due to him. We honor God when we obey him and worship him aright. We honor the Son when we esteem him to be as he is; when we have right views and feelings toward him. As he is declared to be God John 1:1, as he here says he has power and authority equal with God, so we honor him when we regard him as such. The primitive Christians are described by Pliny, in a letter to the Emperor Trajan, as meeting together to sing hymns to Christ “as God.” So we honor him aright when we regard him as possessed of wisdom, goodness, power, eternity, omniscience – equal with God.

Even as – To the same extent; in the same manner. Since the Son is to be honored even as the Father, it follows that he must be equal with the Father. To “honor the Father” must denote “religious” homage, or the rendering of that honor which is due to God; so to honor the Son must also denote “religious” homage. If our Saviour here did not intend to teach that he ought to be “worshipped,” and to be esteemed as “equal” with God, it would be difficult to teach it by any language which we could use.

He that honoureth not the Son – He that does not believe on him, and render to him the homage which is his due as the equal of God.

Honoureth not the Father – Does not worship and obey the Father the First Person of the Trinity – that is does not worship God. He may imagine that he worships God, but there is no God but the God subsisting as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. He that withholds proper homage from one, withholds it from all. He that should refuse to honor “the Father,” could not be said to honor “God;” and in the like manner, he that honoreth not “the Son,” honoreth not “the Father.” This appears further from the following considerations:

1. The Father wills that the Son should be honored. He that refuses to do it disobeys the Father.
2. They are equal. He that denies the one denies also the other.
3. The same feeling that leads us to honor the “Father” will also lead us to honor the “Son,” for he is “the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person,” Hebrews 1:3.
4. The evidence of the existence of the Son is the same as that of the Father. He has the same wisdom, goodness, omnipresence, truth, power.

And from these verses we may learn:

1. That those who do not render proper homage to Jesus Christ do not worship the true God.

2. There is no such God as the infidel professes to believe in. There can be but one God; and if the God of the Bible be the true God, then all other gods are false gods.

3. Those who withhold proper homage from Jesus Christ, who do not honor him even as they honor the Father, cannot be Christians.

4. One evidence of piety is when We are willing to render proper praise and homage to Jesus Christ – to love him, and serve and obey him, with all our hearts.

5. “As a matter of fact,” it may be added that they who do not honor the Son do not worship God at all. The infidel has no form of worship; he has no place of secret prayer, no temple of worship, no family altar. Who ever yet heard of an infidel that prayed? Where do such men build houses of worship? Where do they meet to praise God? Nowhere. As certainly as we hear the name “infidel,” we are certain at once that we hear the name of a man who has no form of religion in his family, who never prays in secret, and who will do nothing to maintain the public worship of God. Account for it as men may, it is a fact that no one can dispute, that it is only they who do honor to the Lord Jesus that have any form of the worship of God, or that honor him; “and their veneration for God is just in proportion to their love for the Redeemer – just as they honor him.” (Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Whole Bible, Chapter 5)