The glory/glorification of Jesus?

Thread starter #1
I'll admit that I don't understand exactly what this means. I do know that Jesus came to reveal God's glory.

First I'd like to start with the glory Jesus had before the incarnation.

John 17:5
And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.

Jesus told his Father that he had glorified Him on the earth as he was commanded. He had revealed his Father's name. They know that everything was given to Jesus was from the Father.

I feel this may be deeper than most make of it. Everything is from the Father, it was his glory being shown by the Son. That concept is kinda repeated within scripture.

Yet still Jesus mentions some type of glory he had before the world was.
 
Thread starter #2
Moving on to John;

John 7:39
He was speaking about the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were later to receive. For the Spirit had not yet been given, because Jesus had not yet been glorified.

What was this glorification? More than the cross since Jesus had some glory before the incarnation. Maybe?
 
Thread starter #3
This glory that has always been shared between the Father and Son, was it also shared with the Holy Spirit?
Do we have scripture to show the Holy Spirit sharing this glory? Do we have scripture other than John 17:5 that Jesus shared the Glory of the Father eternally?

If the glory was shared before the world was, then how did Jesus come to the earth to show his Father's glory yet not his own? He didn't come to share his pre-existing glory with us but his Father's glory.

I guess what I'm asking is "what happened to his glory?" What happened to Jesus' glory?
It would be hard to picture Jesus giving up the glory he once had to present the glory of his Father as the only glory. Jesus went on and on about it being all about his Father's glory, not his own glory.

If Jesus emptied himself of his own glory then why did he only preach the glory of his Father? He never preached his own glory or that of the Holy Spirit. It doesn't sound like Jesus was much of a Trinitarian.

Then Jesus had to be glorified or re-glorified?
 
Thread starter #4
Perhaps one could say that Jesus gave up his glory to show the world the Glory of his Father.

Acts 3:13
The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified his servant Jesus. You handed him over to be killed, and you disowned him before Pilate, though he had decided to let him go.

Why did Jesus go to the trouble to give up his glory if all along it was always about his Father's glory? If Jesus was God or if Jesus was equal to his Father before he came to the earth, why didn't he just stay that way and show his own glory?

I would think he would have come and said "it's my glory as well." It's the Holy Spirit's glory as well. But he did not do that, he said it was my Father's glory that I am presenting, that I am showing.

Why was it presented by the Son to be all about the Father? I understand that Jesus had to humble himself to become the Messiah.

What I don't understand is if he was a co-equal part of the Godhead, why did he never mention that it was also all about himself and the Holy Spirit?
Jesus repeated over and over it was all from the Father. That he was just the messenger, the deliverer of his Father's glory. His Father's message. His Father's power, etc.

If he was in fact God, why did he lose his own glory and have to get re-glorified? Was it just the man part of Jesus that was getting glorified and not the divinity of Jesus getting re-glorified?

But Jesus said to his Father, he wanted the glory that he once had with Him before the world was. So somehow it reads like he lost that glory.

But he doesn't preach it like he once had any glory. He preaches that it was and is always all about his Father's glory. That would make the Son subservient to the Father.

The Son of God makes it very clear that it was and has always been his Father's glory.

John 8:50
I am not seeking glory for myself; but there is one who seeks it, and he is the judge.
 
Last edited:
There are a few different Greek words that are translated "glorify" or glorified" in the English language versions of the New Testament. In John 7, the reference is to the three steps of; crucifixion of the Lord, the Risen Christ, and His Ascension. It gets complicated because Greek words can have FIVE interrelated tenses, and English is limited to an unrelated three.

In general, I believe the New Testament writers were referring to the change from the very human Jesus to the divine. They "knew" that change was somehow a return to what he was before. Perhaps they even understood that the Holy Spirit was somehow also Jesus present in their lives. It was difficult for those writers to express because the concept of the Trinity (three Persons = One God) had not been developed. They "knew" that their friend, their prophet, their anointed leader, was more than the Son of God, but no word, no existent theology, or even concept available then, could explain their understanding.

Please do not get hung up on a 20th century definition of "glory." Websters just doesn't have a definition that covers how a bunch of working stiff Jews from the back side of noplace important, 2,000 years ago tried to explain in a completely different language, the most important events that ever happened and what those events mean to the world! The important point is Jesus died in your place, for your sins, and because He did, you are forgiven. That is glorious.
 
Thread starter #6
In general, I believe the New Testament writers were referring to the change from the very human Jesus to the divine. They "knew" that change was somehow a return to what he was before.

The important point is Jesus died in your place, for your sins, and because He did, you are forgiven. That is glorious.
Important, yes and what I believe as well.

I would agree that part of the glory of Jesus was his death, resurrection, and ascension.

I don't recall a change in the human Jesus returning to a divine persona in scripture. I think he was always divine and became human within time. He didn't return to divinity. He also hasn't given up his humanity.

He may have given up his glory to become human but he hasn't given up his humanity. He may have returned to that glory but not his divinity as he never lost it.
 
Top