FK: Not only does He imply it all over the place, He says it specifically in several Gospels: Mark 14:60-62..."Yes I am"...Matt 26:62-64.. "Yes, it is as you say"...Luke 22:66-71 "You are right in saying I am."
NB: John doesn't even mention it (and for a good reason). I will return to this later on.
FK, He never said He was God, as you claim. Let's repeat the question in context. He was asked "Are you the anointed one (moshiah), the son of God?" Why is it important to rephrase the question? Because no one ever called Him or referred to Him as "Christ." Christ is a Greek word and means the same thing as the Hebrew moshiah, namely the anointed one. It's a title, not a proper name.
The term "son[s] of God" is also a title and does not mean someone divine. Luke uses it (3:38) for Adam, angels and those who are born again (20:36), as well as for Jesus. It is also a title used in the same manner as the word elect or chosen in the Old Testament. Thus, the OT refers to the Jews in general as sons of God, and the NT uses it for Christians (those who are tested/chastised) by God as in Heb 12:5-8.
The Jews did not take lightly anyone claiming to be the messiah, the anointed one, whose sole purpose was to restore the kingdom of Israel (acting on God's behalf). This restored Israel, under God, is called the Kingdom of God on earth (as mentioned in the OT), and will represent the Olam Ha-Ba or the "World to Come" (the new world order). The Sanhedrin took such claims very seriously, and making false claims to that effect was disrespectful towards God and, as such, blasphemous by definition. And Lev 24:16 says "anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD must be put to death."
So, what does moshiah or messiah mean in the context in which the Sanhedrin asked Jesus of he was the anointed son of God?
The word "moshiach" does not mean "savior." The notion of an innocent, divine or semi-divine being who will sacrifice himself to save us from the consequences of our own sins is a purely Christian concept that has no basis in Jewish thought. [Judaism 101, Moshiah]
When they asked Him if was the anointed son of God, they meant the Jewish missiah. They did not ask Him is He was the second Person of the Holy Trinity, or if He was divine. The idea that what the Man they were looking at was God Incarnate never crossed their minds (as it didn't cross anyone's minds, including those of the Apostles at that time) because it is alien to Judaism.
And what will the Jewish messiah do?
The moshiach will bring about the political and spiritual redemption of the Jewish people by bringing us back to Israel and restoring Jerusalem (Isaiah 11:11-12; Jeremiah 23:8; 30:3; Hosea 3:4-5). He will establish a government in Israel that will be the center of all world government, both for Jews and gentiles (Isaiah 2:2-4; 11:10; 42:1). He will rebuild the Temple and re-establish its worship (Jeremiah 33:18). He will restore the religious court system of Israel and establish Jewish law as the law of the land (Jeremiah 33:15). [Ibid]
So, claiming to be someone like that was a big deal, because it is in the Bible, and making false claims without being able to substantiate them was as good as blasphemy.
If you say that Christ never claimed to be God, then why do you say He was crucified? He was crucified BECAUSE He claimed to be God.
No, He did not. He never said He is God because He was never asked "Are you God?" He was crucified because He was found guilty of blasphemy (that is gross disrespect, an insult) towards God for claiming He was the moshiah and not proving satisfactory evidence to that effect.
Now, back to my note at the very beginning. Why doesn't John say anything about the "trial" by the Sanhedrin? Well, it could be simply because he wasn't there to testify (frankly, I don't know where do Mark, Matthew or Luke get their information from, since they weren't there either; and neither were Peter or Paul, the two Apostles feeding the information to Mark and Luke respectively).
The other reason may be because, to John, Jesus was a lot more than the Jewish moshiach. He knew that Jesus said enough things that could get Him convicted of blasphemy and the sentence was a foregone conclusion as much as His "trial" was. Concentrating on, and stressing Christ's divinity was a lot more important to John.
I showed you scriptures that were self-explanatory. I showed you that He was crucified specifically for CLAIMING He was God. That's all I can do. :)
The term "son[s] of God" is also a title and does not mean someone divine. Luke uses it (3:38) for Adam, angels and those who are born again (20:36), as well as for Jesus. It is also a title used in the same manner as the word elect or chosen in the Old Testament. Thus, the OT refers to the Jews in general as sons of God, and the NT uses it for Christians (those who are tested/chastised) by God as in Heb 12:5-8.
So for you "Son of God" has no particularly important meaning as far as the Bible is concerned? I sure hope your priest wouldn't go for that. :) What is your theory as to why Christ would hide His identity from the people, as you claim? Jesus certainly spoke of His identity, so wouldn't that be a lie of omission?
So, what does moshiah or messiah mean in the context in which the Sanhedrin asked Jesus of he was the anointed son of God?
So according to you, when Jesus said "YES", He was lying??? Or, did Jesus perhaps misunderstand the question? :)