I believe there isn't much evidence of what the apostles thought, so one could specualte all kinds of wild ideas. I go by what Jesus said and I agree He could not have said what He said as a blasphemy and still have done the miracles because God would not support a blasphemer.
When we read the scriptures, what we are reading are the accounts of people, many of whom never actually knew or heard the people they quote, so we have to be cautious about accepting any rendition as being 100% accurate. I am not a scriptural literalist, not only with the Christian scriptures but the Torah and the Tanakh as well.
The reality is that we can't be absolutely certain of what Jesus said-- or Moses, or Mohammed, or the Buddha, ... However, it's very difficult to me to imagine Jesus strutting around claiming to be God and attracting Jewish followers as this runs so counter to what we traditionally have been taught. If Jesus literally was God, and since the apostles we can assume say him face to face, you can see where there's going to be a conflict with the verses.
Also, to repeat myself in an earlier post, what we do read Jesus supposedly saying in the gospels is to refer to "the Father" as being a different "person" than he (check back at a previous post to see some of the verses I quote to show this). How can it make one iota of sense to have Jesus praying to "the Father" if he indeed is God? OTOH, if the apostles believed that Jesus was
of God, then we can make sense of these verses.
