The following is an adapted excerpt from one of the finest recent defenses of the deity of Christ:
Robert M. Bowman Jr. & J. Ed Komoszewski, The Incarnate Christ and His Critics: A Biblical Defense (Kregel Academic, 2024), Part 1, Chapter 3 (“Honoring the Son”), pages 88–90.

In my considered judgment, this volume is currently the most thorough and carefully argued biblical case for the full deity of Jesus Christ available. Every serious student of Scripture, apologist, or theologian who holds to the historic Trinitarian faith should own and master this work.

“Honor the Son” (John 5:23) in Its First-Century Jewish Context

In the ancient Mediterranean world, including first-century Judaism, honor was a central social and religious category. To honor someone was to publicly acknowledge their true status and to treat them accordingly. For monotheistic Jews, ultimate honor—expressed in praise, obedience, and exclusive worship—belonged to the one true God alone as Creator, Sustainer, and Sovereign (Exod 15:2; Deut 10:20–21; Ps 29:1–2; 103:1–5, 19–22). Honoring any creature as deity inevitably diminished the honor due to God (Exod 20:3–5; cf. Exod 34:14). As the Jewish philosopher Philo stated, “God’s honour is set at naught by those who deify the mortal” (On Drunkenness 110).

It is against this strictly monotheistic backdrop that Jesus declares:

“For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so the Son gives life to whom he wishes. … The Father … has given all judgment to the Son, so that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him.” (John 5:21–23, NASB, emphasis added)

Jesus claims that the Father’s deliberate purpose in entrusting life-giving and judgment to the Son is precisely so that humanity would render to the Son the identical honor rendered to the Father.

Why This Claim Is Unprecedented

No faithful Jew would ever say that all people must honor the angel Gabriel, Moses, or the apostle Peter “just as” they honor God. Such a statement would be recognized instantly as blasphemous or idolatrous. Yet Jesus makes exactly this claim for himself—and the Gospel presents it without apology or correction.

Common Objections and Responses

1. Unitarian Claim: The “honor” in John 5:23 is merely respect for Jesus as God’s messenger, not religious worship.
   Response: The immediate context is not Jesus delivering a message but performing uniquely divine works—raising the dead and executing final judgment (5:21–22). Even if it were about messianic agency, as D.A. Carson notes, no ambassador ever receives the same honor as the king who sent him. The analogy breaks down completely.
2. Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Claim: Jesus did not say we must honor the Son “as much as” or “equally with” the Father.
   Response: The Greek adverbs hōsper … houtōs … kathōs (“just as … so … just as”) repeatedly emphasize exact correspondence between the actions and honor of Father and Son (Colin Kruse). The Father hands over life-giving power and universal judgment for the express purpose that the Son receive precisely the same honor.
3. Appeal to Jesus’ Dependence: Verses such as “the Son can do nothing of himself” (5:19) and “the Father has given all judgment to the Son” (5:22) are said to prove subordination or creatureliness.
   Response: These statements reflect (a) the eternal Son’s voluntary submission to the Father’s will in the pact of redemption, and (b) the self-imposed dependence of the incarnate Son during his state of humiliation. Far from undermining his deity, they highlight the perfect unity and harmonious distinction within the Godhead. The Son’s humility leads to his exaltation and the Father’s determination that he receive the same divine honor (cf. John 17:5; Phil 2:5–11).

Trinitarian Balance in John 5:23

The verse simultaneously:

• Distinguishes Father and Son as two distinct persons (the Father sends and gives; the Son is sent and receives).
• Elevates the Son to the same level of honor rightfully belonging only to the one true God.

There is no coherent way to read this text as teaching modalism (Jesus is the Father), Arianism (Jesus is a created being), or Islamic prophetology (Jesus is merely a human messenger).

Conclusion

John 5:23 is one of the clearest affirmations in Scripture that the Father wills the Son to receive the full honor that belongs to God himself—because the Son is God, eternally distinct from yet fully equal with the Father in essence, power, and glory.

To withhold from Jesus the honor we give to the Father is, Jesus says, to dishonor the Father himself.