Based on continued discussion in chat, I went ahead and made the changes I mentioned below, and the question's now reopened.
We were talking about this in chat the other day: asking whether or not Jesus literally says "I am God" or makes a claim to be God would be a fine enough question (albeit trivial), and wouldn't require the question asker specifying a Bible: if He said it and an answerer cites the translation, it'd be sufficient enough to test.
However, looking at the body of the question, that really wasn't what was asked:
[...]does Jesus ever claim to be God, God-like or God-related, or is this something that we infer?
Should I, in fact, put aside the claims to being a messiah or king? Or does this reliably mean a claim to "Godness" in the context of the texts?
And looking at the answers, none of them actually cite passages where Jesus literally said He was God; they're interpretations of passages that don't explicitly say anything about Jesus being God:
- The reference to Jesus saying "Before Abraham was, I am"
- Jesus forgiving sins
- Jesus equating Himself to the Father
- Jesus not correcting people who call Him Lord
For people who don't know enough to scope their question in a meaningful manner (i.e. your objection to requiring a scope), these are meaningless without some context. Why are they clear references to Jesus saying He's God? Who believes that? What secondary sources confirm that?
It's because people are going to be coming here who are not well versed in the Bible or Christianity that we want specific, well-defined questions. Without some amount of reliance on scope, there is absolutely no way to test or verify the answers. Voting, the best way we have to sort answers, is meaningless: it doesn't matter if it's actually correct, relevant, or indicative of what Christians actually believe, if it sounds nice people will vote it up.
I would hope that's not what we want to do here: we're not here to opine about the Bible, but to help people get answers to questions about Christianity. People who aren't going to know what's accurate and what isn't, and they aren't going to know whether or not an answer's particular interpretation of the Bible relates in any way to other Christians, or if does, how it relates or who it applies to.
But compare to a question about what a specific group of Christians believe: "How do Lutherans justify Jesus's belief that He was God?" That's straightforward: find prominent secondary sources from Lutheran theologians and present the argument based on that. There's no room for ambiguity: the asker (and people voting on answers) can verify the sources themselves if they doubt the veracity of what's presented.
- YES: Asking whether or not something specific is mentioned in the Bible (i.e. "Did Jesus ever literally say or claim He was God?")
- YES: Asking why a specific group of Christians believe something (i.e. "Why do Lutherans believe Jesus was God?")
- NO: Asking whether or not we can infer or justify a doctrine via the Bible without specifying the doctrinal scope (i.e. "What passages can be interpreted to mean Jesus was God?" or "Do references to the Messiah or King always mean a reference to God?")