Worship and Proskyneō

What is this concept?

The argument from worship is one of the most intuitive in the entire Christological debate. It goes like this: Jews were strict monotheists who would never worship anyone other than God. Early Christians were Jews. Early Christians worshipped Jesus. Therefore, early Christians believed Jesus was God.

The argument has real force. But it depends entirely on what the word "worship" means — and the Greek word at the centre of this discussion, proskyneō (προσκυνέω, "to bow down, prostrate oneself, do obeisance"), turns out to be considerably broader than the modern English word "worship" suggests.

Modern English has narrowed "worship" to mean something close to "religious devotion to the Creator alone." Hebrew shachah (שָׁחָה) and Greek proskyneō preserve a much wider range. A working definition that fits how the words are actually used across Scripture would be: "the giving of proper and deserved honour, respect, and devotion to someone" — or, equivalently, "reflecting true and rightful glory to another." On this definition, what counts as worship is governed by who the recipient is and what is rightfully owed to them. The same word covers acts that, in modern English, would have to be split between "worship" (reserved for God), "reverence" (paid to royalty), and "homage" (offered to social superiors). The Hebrew and Greek do not split. Whether a particular instance is appropriate depends on whether the honour given matches the worthiness of the recipient — not on a hard categorical line between "religious" and "civil" acts.

Where does it come from?

Proskyneō literally describes a physical gesture: falling to one's knees or prostrating oneself before someone. In the ancient Near Eastern world, this gesture was directed at a wide range of figures, not exclusively at God. The word itself carries no inherent distinction between "divine worship" and "respectful homage" — the distinction has to be determined from context.

In the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament), proskyneō is used for:

God: Obviously and frequently. Israelites proskyneō before YHWH throughout the Hebrew scriptures.

Kings and rulers: Subjects bow before their king as a gesture of loyalty and submission. This is honour, not deity.

Prophets: In 2 Kings 2:15, the sons of the prophets bow before Elisha — the same word used for bowing before God.

Social superiors: Abraham bows before the Hittites (Gen 23:7). Jacob bows before Esau (Gen 33:3). These are acts of social deference, not religious worship.

God's agents: In Daniel 2:46, King Nebuchadnezzar falls on his face and performs proskyneō before Daniel after Daniel reveals the king's dream. The LXX uses the same word. Nebuchadnezzar is not worshipping Daniel as God — he is acknowledging the God who speaks through Daniel by honouring God's representative.

Angels: This is debated territory. In Revelation 19:10, an angel refuses proskyneō, saying "worship God." But in Joshua 5:14, Joshua bows before the commander of YHWH's army without rebuke.

The list of named figures who receive proskyneō (or its Hebrew equivalent shachah) across the canon is striking: Abraham (Gen 23:7), Esau (Gen 33:3), Joseph (Gen 42:6; 43:26), Pharaoh (multiple), Saul (1 Sam 24:8), David (1 Chr 29:20), Solomon (1 Chr 29:23 LXX), Samuel (1 Sam 28:14), Elisha (2 Kgs 2:15), Daniel (Dan 2:46), Haman (Esth 3:2), the Angel of YHWH (Josh 5:14), and in the New Testament Jesus himself (multiple), with attempts to give it to Peter (Acts 10:25–26), Paul and Barnabas (Acts 14:13–15), and an angel (Rev 19:10; 22:8–9). In every case, the same word is used. The categories of "worship" and "due honour" are not separated in the underlying vocabulary; they are calibrated by the recipient.

Who accepts, who rejects — and why

The pattern of accepted and refused proskyneō across Scripture is internally consistent, and the principle that emerges is illuminating for the Christological debate.

Peter (Acts 10:25–26), Paul and Barnabas (Acts 14:13–15) refuse. Cornelius falls at Peter's feet and Peter pulls him up: "Stand up; I too am only a man." When the Lystrans take Paul and Barnabas for Zeus and Hermes and try to offer sacrifice, the apostles tear their clothes: "Why are you doing this? We too are only human, like you. We are bringing you good news, that you should turn from these worthless things to the living God." They reject the homage because it is being offered on grounds that do not apply to them — the Lystrans think they are gods, the Cornelius scene risks honour due elsewhere. The honour being offered does not match the worthiness of the recipient.

The angel in Revelation 19:10 and 22:8–9 also refuses — with the same logic: "I am a fellow servant with you and your brothers… worship God." The angel is a creature; the worship John is offering would treat him as something he is not.

The Angel of YHWH accepts it (Josh 5:14; cf. Exod 3:2–6) — and the OT narrators make no attempt to rebuke or correct. The Angel of YHWH is the bearer of God's name as God's special messenger (cf. Exod 23:20–21: "my name is in him"); to honour him in that capacity is to honour the God who sent him. The Jewish category of agency makes this coherent: the agent represents the sender so fully that, within the scope of the mission, the honour given to the agent is honour given to the sender.

Israel's anointed kings accept it (e.g. 1 Sam 24:8; 1 Chr 29:20, 23) — for the same reason. The king bears YHWH's appointment and represents YHWH's rule; honouring God's chosen king is the right response to what God has done in installing him. Whether the honour is rightful depends on whether the recipient genuinely holds the office given, and the Adamic/Davidic kingship pattern is the OT framework that lets this honour flow without breaking the Shema.

On this pattern, the question for the New Testament is not whether proskyneō may rightly be directed at Jesus. It clearly is. The question is on what grounds. The NT consistently grounds Jesus's worthiness in his installation by God (Acts 2:36, "God has made him both Lord and Christ"), in his obedient faithfulness as God's anointed (Phil 2:6–11), and in his sacrificial vocation as the Lamb who has ransomed people for God (Rev 5:9). When the ground given for the honour is rightful, the honour is rightful. Whether that honour is the worship due to the one God of Israel, or the worship due to the God-appointed Lord through whom the one God's purposes are accomplished, is the question the rest of this concept page is asking.

Latreia (cultic service) vs. proskyneō (bowing/homage)

When Trinitarians argue from "worship," it matters which Greek word is in play. Latreia (λατρεία — the service/worship due to God alone in a cultic sense) is not interchangeable with proskyneō. Paul urges believers to present their bodies as latreia to God (Rom 12:1). Hebrews uses latreuō of the Levitical cult (Heb 9:14) and of serving the true God (Heb 12:28).

By contrast, proskyneō describes the physical gesture of homage and can be directed at figures who are not the Creator. That does not settle every debate about Revelation 5 or Philippians 2 — it simply blocks the illegitimate move from "Jesus receives proskyneō" to "Jesus receives latreia that only the Creator may receive" without an argument. The BU case is that early Christians honoured Jesus as God's exalted king and agent while still reserving ultimate cultic devotion to the Father (cf. John 4:23–24; 1 Cor 8:6).

How does it appear in the New Testament?

One Old Testament text deserves special attention before we turn to the New Testament, because it cuts directly against the assumption that proskyneō must indicate deity.

"Then David said to all the assembly, 'Bless the LORD your God.' And all the assembly blessed the LORD, the God of their fathers, and bowed their heads and paid homage [proskyneō] to the LORD and to the king."

— 1 Chronicles 29:20 (LXX uses proskyneō)

This verse is crucial. The assembly performs the same act — proskyneō — directed at both YHWH and the king, in the same sentence, without any suggestion that this makes the king God. The act of bowing honours both the sovereign God and his anointed human king. The king receives proskyneō because of his God-given role, not because he is divine. Notice the immediately preceding context: David has just led the assembly in praising YHWH (1 Chr 29:10–19). The bowing in v. 20 follows directly on that praise — the assembly honours God as God, and honours God's anointed king as God's anointed king, in one continuous act of devotion. The grounds are distinct (God as covenant Lord; the king as YHWH's installed regent), but the bowing is undivided.

An outside observer of that scene, unfamiliar with the structure of Israel's covenant theology, could plausibly report that the Israelites "were bowing down to their king as if to their God." That is, in fact, exactly the kind of report Pliny the Younger sent to the Emperor Trajan around AD 112 about early Christian gatherings: he described Christians as singing hymns "Christo quasi deo" — "to Christ as to a god." Pliny was an outsider observing devotional practice from outside the community's own framework. His testimony tells us what early Christian devotion looked like — it does not, by itself, settle what that practice meant within the Christians' own categories, any more than an outsider's report of 1 Chronicles 29:20 would settle whether the Davidic king was being worshipped as YHWH. Devotional practice that bows toward God's appointed Lord in close juxtaposition with worship of God is exactly what we would expect on a BU reading of the NT — not a deviation from Jewish monotheism but its messianic outworking.

In the Gospels, Jesus receives proskyneō from a variety of people:

The Magi (Matt 2:11) come to pay homage to the newborn "king of the Jews." The context is royal honour — they have followed a star to find a king, and they bring gifts appropriate for a king. Nothing in the narrative signals divine worship as opposed to royal homage.

A leper (Matt 8:2) bows before Jesus asking for healing. This is the gesture of a desperate person before a powerful figure — the same word, but the context is petition, not liturgy.

The disciples after Jesus walks on water (Matt 14:33) bow and say, "Truly you are the Son of God." This is stronger — reverent awe in response to a display of divine power. But "Son of God" in Jewish context is a royal messianic title (see the Son of God concept page), not necessarily a statement of ontological deity.

Thomas (John 20:28) exclaims "My Lord and my God!" — the strongest individual response to Jesus in the Gospels and a passage that deserves its own detailed analysis.

The key question is not whether Jesus receives proskyneō — he clearly does. The question is whether the proskyneō he receives exceeds what a king, prophet, or God's supreme agent could receive. And the answer is not as obvious as it might seem, precisely because the word covers such a wide range.

Before turning to Revelation 5, it is worth pausing on Revelation 4. The four living creatures and twenty-four elders worship "the Lord God Almighty" for a specific stated reason: "You are worthy, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honour and power, for you created all things, and by your will they existed and were created" (Rev 4:11). The ground of worship is creation — the unique act of YHWH alone.

Revelation 5 is the most developed worship scene in the New Testament, and it deserves careful attention. The Lamb (Jesus) receives honour alongside "the one who sits on the throne" (God). The heavenly beings sing, "Worthy is the Lamb that was slain!" and the closing doxology is directed at both:

"To the one seated on the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honour and glory and might forever and ever!"

— Revelation 5:13

This is striking. The Lamb receives glory alongside God. For many readers, this settles the question — sharing in divine worship means sharing in divine identity.

But several features of the same passage complicate that conclusion. The Lamb is consistently distinguished from the one on the throne. He "took the scroll from the right hand of him who sat on the throne" (Rev 5:7) — spatial and personal distinction. The Lamb is "worthy" because he "was slain" (Rev 5:9-12) — his worthiness is earned or bestowed, not inherent. And Revelation 7:10 maintains the distinction: "Salvation belongs to our God who is seated on the throne, and to the Lamb." Both receive glory, but they remain two distinct figures throughout, and God remains the primary source.

The reasons given for the two doxologies are also strikingly different. Revelation 4 grounds the worship of God in creation: he is worthy because he made all things. Revelation 5 grounds the worship of the Lamb in redemption: "Worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation, and you have made them a kingdom and priests to our God" (Rev 5:9–10). The Lamb's worthiness is grounded in his sacrificial vocation, and the result is people purchased and made priests for God — the prepositions matter. Jesus is honoured precisely as the slain Lamb whose mediation brings people back to God, not as the Creator who is also being worshipped in the same scene. The two chapters set the underlying structure: God is worshipped as Creator and ultimate source; the Lamb is worshipped as the Redeemer who has been faithful on God's behalf. The closing doxology in 5:13 brings them together — but the grounds for each remain distinct, and the directionality (people purchased for God, made priests to our God) flows toward the Father throughout.

Compare 1 Chronicles 29:20 again: the assembly bows to YHWH and to the king. The pattern is not unique to Revelation. Honour directed at both God and his anointed representative, simultaneously, has Old Testament precedent — and in that precedent, the king is not God.

Why does it matter for the debate?

The worship argument matters because it reaches beyond individual proof-texts to the practice of the early church. Titles can be debated. Individual verses can be read different ways. But if the earliest Christians — Jewish monotheists — actually worshipped Jesus as God in their regular practice, that is evidence of a kind that individual texts alone cannot provide.

Larry Hurtado has argued powerfully that the pattern of Christ-devotion in the earliest church — prayer to Jesus, hymns about Jesus, ritual invocation of Jesus's name — exceeds anything directed at any previous Jewish intermediary figure. Even if individual acts of proskyneō could be explained as royal homage, the cumulative weight of early Christian devotional practice points to something unprecedented.

The counterargument notes that the direction of worship is always significant. In Philippians 2:11, every tongue confesses Jesus as Lord "to the glory of God the Father." In 1 Corinthians 15:28, the Son himself will be subjected to the one who subjected all things to him, "so that God may be all in all." The glory flows upward. Jesus is never worshipped as the source — he is honoured because the Father exalted him, and the honour redounds to the Father. This is not how you worship the one true God. This is how you honour God's supreme representative.

What do the different traditions say?

Trinitarian: The worship pattern is the single strongest argument for the deity of Christ. First-century Jews did not worship angels, patriarchs, or human kings in the way they worshipped God. The fact that Jewish monotheists offered Jesus prayer, hymns, and ritual devotion from the very earliest period — not as a later development but from the beginning — requires divine identity. No mere agent could receive what Jesus receives in Revelation 5. Richard Bauckham has argued that worship marks the boundary of Jewish monotheism: only the Creator receives worship, and Jesus receives it. Larry Hurtado's work on early Christ-devotion supports this, showing that the intensity and scope of devotion to Jesus is without parallel in Second Temple Judaism.

Biblical Unitarian: Worship in the biblical sense is the giving of due honour — right treatment of a person according to who they are and what God has done in and through them. It is therefore calibrated to its object: YHWH receives the worship due to him as Creator and covenant Lord; God's anointed king receives the worship due to him as YHWH's image-bearer and vice-regent, on the same throne (1 Chr 29:20, 23). The two acts are not in competition. Phil 2:11 makes the structure explicit: Christ's universal acclamation is "to the glory of God the Father." Believers honour Jesus precisely because honouring God's appointed Lord is the right response to what God has done in him — the climax of the Adamic-vocational pattern in which humanity (and Jesus perfectly, as second Adam) was always meant to bear God's image and reflect God's weight (Gen 1:26–27; Ps 8:5).

The salvation logic of the NT depends on this distinction. Hebrews insists that "in the days of his flesh, [Jesus] offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to the one who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission" (Heb 5:7). A divine person in disguise cannot meaningfully cry out to be saved from death, or genuinely trust a God greater than himself. Jesus must be the kind of saviour his followers can actually follow — a man whose obedience and trust were real. The "competition" framing — either Jesus is the one God or honouring him is idolatry — misreads the biblical grammar. Hurtado is right that early Christ-devotion is unprecedented in intensity, but unprecedented does not mean the category has changed. Sean Finnegan (Restitutio, ep. 21) and Dale Tuggy (JBU 1:1, 2014) both anchor the worship of Jesus in his having been exalted by the Father, ordered toward the Father's glory. Heb 1:6 ("let all God's angels worship him") must be read alongside OT texts where proskyneō is given to kings and prophets without implying deity. For the encyclopaedic BU treatment, see BiblicalUnitarian.com.

A more delicate point is worth surfacing. The NT consistently portrays Jesus as a man — the second Adam, the Davidic Messiah, the appointed Lord at God's right hand — and consistently distinguishes him from "the one God, the Father" (1 Cor 8:6; John 17:3; 1 Tim 2:5). It also warns against giving to a creature the worship that belongs to the Creator alone (Rom 1:25; Acts 14:15). The BU concern is not that Jesus should be honoured less — it is that the object of ultimate worship is exactly what Scripture works hardest to get right. The aim is not to scare anyone — God is gracious, and devotion to Christ is the heartbeat of the Christian life. The aim is the question: when the NT itself grounds Christ's worthiness in his having been installed and exalted by another, what does it look like to honour Jesus on the grounds the NT gives, rather than on grounds it does not?

Logos Christology: The Logos, as a genuinely divine being derived from the Father, rightly receives a level of honour that exceeds what any merely human agent could claim. But this honour remains subordinate to the worship of the one God from whom the Logos proceeds. Some early church writers, including Origen, distinguished between latreia (λατρεία, supreme worship due to God alone) and proskynesis (προσκύνησις, honour that can appropriately be directed at the divine Logos). Justin Martyr similarly held that the Son is worshipped in "second place" after the Father — genuinely worshipped, but not as the ultimate source of divinity.

Modalism: The worship of Jesus is one of Modalism's strongest arguments. If Jesus is fully YHWH in the flesh, then worshipping Jesus is worshipping God — simply, directly, without remainder. There is no Trinitarian difficulty of explaining how worship of a "second person" does not compromise monotheism, and no Biblical Unitarian difficulty of explaining why worship is directed at someone who is not God. The problem simply does not arise. When Thomas cries "My Lord and my God!" (John 20:28), he is recognising that the risen Jesus is the one God — not a second divine person, not an exalted human agent, but God himself in bodily form. Revelation 5 presents no tension for Modalists: the Lamb and the one on the throne receive joint worship because they are the same God in two modes — the transcendent mode (seated on the throne) and the incarnate mode (the Lamb who was slain). David K. Bernard (The Oneness of God) argues that the worship data in the New Testament makes the strongest possible case for Jesus's full deity — and that full deity means numerical identity with the Father, not a second divine person alongside him. Oneness Pentecostals worship Jesus with unqualified devotion precisely because they believe he is the one God manifest, the Father revealed in flesh (1 Timothy 3:16).

Go Deeper

For further study on worship, proskyneō, and early Christ-devotion:

• Larry Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity
• Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel: God Crucified and Other Studies on the New Testament's Christology of Divine Identity (Eerdmans, 2008)
• Loren Stuckenbruck, Angel Veneration and Christology
• James Dunn, Did the First Christians Worship Jesus?
• Sean Finnegan, Restitutio, ep. 21: "Should We Worship Jesus?"
• Dale Tuggy, "Who Should Christians Worship?" in Journal of Biblical Unitarianism 1:1 (2014)
• BiblicalUnitarian.com — encyclopaedic resource on worship and Christology

See also the passage analyses for John 20:28, Philippians 2:5-11, Hebrews 1:1-4, and Revelation 3:14.