Replies

betty boop: "He was an existential threat to their own power and authority, which was increasingly dubious under the Roman occupation in the first place.

"In the end, they persuaded Pontius Pilate to accept a "mutually-beneficial" political accommodation, wherein the rabble would be coached to free the thief Barrabas instead of Jesus.
Thus both the Sanhedrin and Rome could "save face." "

Agreed, FRiend boop, but that's not the question here.
The assertion on the table, from Kevmo, is that Jesus claimed to be God Himself, and that's why the Sanhedrin had him murdered.
But in fact, in all four gospels, Jesus made no such claim:

Matthew 14:63-65: But Jesus remained silent.
The high priest said to him, “I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Messiah, the Son of God.”
64 “You have said so,” Jesus replied. “But I say to all of you: From now on you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.”[e]
Mark 14:61-65 Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?”
62 “I am,” said Jesus. “And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.”
63 The high priest tore his clothes. “Why do we need any more witnesses?” he asked.
64 “You have heard the blasphemy."
Luke 22:67-71: "If you are the Messiah,” they said, “tell us.”
Jesus answered, "If I tell you, you will not believe me, 68 and if I asked you, you would not answer.
69 But from now on, the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the mighty God.".
70 They all asked, “Are you then the Son of God?”
He replied, "You say that I am.”
71 Then they said, “Why do we need any more testimony? We have heard it from his own lips.”
65 Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, “He has spoken blasphemy!"
John 18:22-24: When Jesus said this, one of the officials nearby slapped him in the face. “Is this the way you answer the high priest?” he demanded.
23 "If I said something wrong,” Jesus replied, "testify as to what is wrong.
But if I spoke the truth, why did you strike me?”
24 Then Annas sent him bound to Caiaphas the high priest.

So, in four Gospels, only Mark has Jesus telling the Sanhedrin he is the Messiah -- not that Jesus is God Himself.
In all the others Jesus answers are vague enough so the Sanhedrin could interpret them however they wished.
The Sanhedrin obviously wished to find blasphemy, and so it didn't matter what Jesus actually said.

Kevmo insists that Jesus remarks in Matthew, Mark and Luke (but not John!) about the "Son of Man sitting on the right hand of the Mighty One", are code words which meant: Jesus is God.

Kevmo's "proof" is that the Sanhedrin heard these words as "blasphemy" and only a claim of being God Himself would qualify for their death sentence.

I say that the title "the Son of Man" certainly does not refer to God Himself, and does not suggest that Jesus = God.
Furthermore, from the context it's obvious that regardless of what Jesus actually said, or didn't say, as we see clearly in the Gospel of John: it didn't matter.
The Sanhedrin was "out to get him", and would have convicted him regardless.

Finally, let's look at the reason why Kevmo claims that "Son of Man sitting on the right hand of the Mighty One" means: Jesus = God.

"In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man,[a] coming with the clouds of heaven.
He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence.
14 He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him.
His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed."

This passage in Daniel says nothing -- zero, zip, nada -- about Jesus being equal to God.
It does, however, make a political claim that Jesus will rule over "all nations and peoples", a political claim which certainly justified the Sanhedrin's sending Jesus to their political authority: Pontius Pilate.

Do you disagree?