4. What is the real meaning of - He that hath seen me, hath seen the Father

Jesus had shown the complete way of belief in his ministry, which leads one
towards the inheritance of the eternal life, and all his disciples had shown perfectly
how one should follow that way. But the earlier christians never imagine Jesus
regarding as one equal to Jehovah just as the present christians are involved in,
and they did not propagate anywhere as Jesus was the God. However many
people in the present christian community believe Jesus in the capacity of God
and propagate so. As a matter of fact this manner is complete against to the
message of Bible and the Gospel of Jesus. However in these days the preachers
generally use some parts of the verses in order to attribute the divinity to Jesus by
any means. For example observes such verse in the following.

Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it
sufficeth us. Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time
with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? He that
hath seen me hath seen the Father, and how sayest thou
then, shew us the father? -John 14:8-9

Jesus had exhorted before hand, even before Philip requested him to show
him the Father, that no body has seen his shape which can be seen in the following
verse.

And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne
witness of me, ye have neither heard his voice at any time,
nor seen his shape -John 5:37

Having heared the clear exhortation of Jesus. That God is invisible, sensibly
Philip should not have asked him again to show him the Father. Except Philip no
other had ever requested him so, among all his disciples, which goes to mean that
Philip could not understand the clear exhortatin of Jesus that no body had ever
seen His shape. Suppose we were in the place of Jesus then difinitely we might
have shown the impatiece on the innocent question of Philip, but Jesus being an
ideal reformer having understood that what was the status and nature of Philip,
answered him with love and patiece saying 'he that hath seen me, hath seen
the Father'. In this regard the question comes what for Jesus had compared the
shape of God with him only, while a number of people were there? Because
having the special charecterestic features in him, such as meekness and humble
and lowly in heart and mercy on the sinners and poor people, compared himself
with God allegorically but God is in no way comparable with Jesus there is no
question of comparision at all between God and any other. So in such situation
there was no more answer to the innocent queston of Philip than this and that is
why presumably Jesus answered him so. If Jesus is as superior as Jehovah or
Jehovah is Jesus then why Jesus says further as follows

...for my Father is greater than I -John 14:28

Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater
than his Lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that
sent him -John 13:16

According to the word that had been said by Jesus 'he that hath seen me
hath seen the Father', if one imagine as Jehovah and Jesus both are equel then
why Jesus himself says that his Father is greater than him? Further he says 'neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him'. So ponder over again on
the above verses. Who was sent and by whom?

Jesus answered them, and said, my doctrine is not mine,
but his that sent me -John 7:16

According to the above verse one can notice conspicuously that sender was
Jehovah and Jesus was sent by Him. This is to mean that Jesus is not greater than
Jehovah by any means. As he says in clear term ‘the servent is not greater
than his Lord’. Who is that Lord?

Behold, the heaven and the heaven of heavens is the Lord's
thy God the earth also, with all that there in is -Deuteronomy 10:14

...for the world is mine, and the fulness there of ... -Psalms 50:12

The earth is the Lord's, and the fulness there of the world,
and they that dwell therein. -Psalms 24:1

On close examinatin of above verses we understand that ‘only one Jehovah
is the Lord of the whole universe’, if this be the truth who is the servent in
reality? The Bible gives the appropriate answer to this question as follows.

Be hold my servant... -Matthew 12:18

The above prophecy discloses very clearly that Jesus is the servent of God
and Jesus says regarding himself that he is the servent of God, which can be seen
as recorded in John 16:13 and after the departure of Jesus how did the immidiate
disciples regard him? Whether as a God? or the servent of God? if it is questioned
observe the answer in the following.

The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of
our fathers, hath glorified his son Jesus. Whom ye delivered
up... -Acts 3:13

According to the above verse we understand that after the departure of Jesus
the disciples believed Jesus as one ‘the servent of God’ but not as god or incornation
of God.

Note: Our readers may surprise for our interpretation on the above verse. In
the verse Jesus is said as God’s son while our interpretation of the same verse
sabstituted as servant for son. In this regard we wish to bring to your notice that
the book which you have in your hands is the English translation of Telugu original.
So in original Telugu quotation for relevant argument taken wherein in the
meaning of servant is written, while in its English the same quatation is taken wherein
‘son’ is translated for servant in Telugu. Hence the confusion is caused on account
of irregularities of translation in the Bible. Please verify both Telugu and English
versions which help you to understand our inevitable adjustments of the words so
as to understanding our arguments.

According to John 4:8-9, as Jesus exhorted ‘He that hath seen him hath
seen the Father’ is taken to mean Jesus is the image of God. All disciples should
have worshipped Jesus in the capacity of God. But insted they regarded him only
as a servant of God in the capacity of a prophet as made out in the prophecy.

We often use some figure of speech in our discussions with others to make
clear some points. For example : A Father sent one person to see the bridegroom,
who is the fiance of his daughter. Then that person, who was sent, come and
reported the event ‘your would be son-in-law is exactly resembling me- hence,
He that hath seen me hath seen your son-in-law. What one can understand by his
answer? Does it mean that the bridgroom had transformed as that person? Not at
all.

Next page :2