A tardy response here.
1) Though the narrative may not always explicate that Jesus did things by the power of God, such an omission would not prove that the power employed was Jesus' own, and a function of his own divinity. Even if the deeds were done as an exercise of Jesus' authority, such would not necessitate that the power and authority were innate (=divine) as opposed to delegated (humanly stewarded).The difference between the miraculous things the prophets in the OT did and what Jesus did is that when the prophets did it , it was clear that is was by God's power there was not a modicum of doubt but when Jesus performed miracles there was no doubt He had the power to do it. There is not a hint that he did'nt calm the storm by his own authority or raise Lazarus or heal the sick or forgive sinners or accept worship or tell Peter he would deny Jesus three times. These events are in the synoptics and IMO portray divinity.
2) To be picky, Lazarus was not raised in the synoptics, but only in John.
3) In Matthew, Jesus emphasizes that the Son of Man has power to forgive sins, and the people marvel that such power has been given to men [9:6-8]. As such, forgiving sins fails as a proof of divinity.
4) The verb used for "worship" in the synoptics, proskuneo, means "to bow down." In the Septuagint, it is used repeatedly to describe the cultural body language for giving honor and deference to another, including influential people and, notably, the anointed king [e.g., Genesis 23:7, 33:3, 42:6; Ruth 2:10; II Samuel 15:5, 18;21]. Notably, David receives this honorific on many occasions [e.g., II Samuel 9:6, 14:22, 16:4, 18:28, 24:20]. It cannot be assumed that accepting such honor was a pretense to divinity in Jesus' culture.
This is precisely the argument that John uses to elevate his eucharistic construct over that presented in the Didache. But I don't buy it. It smacks of a secondary layer of Christian tradition, wherein the embarrassing hallmarks of worldly messianism (with its imagery of material abundance, as found in Second Temple Judaism) are replaced with spiritualizations. This became a desirable trend in Christian thought, as the return of Jesus and the messianic age failed to transpire in a timely fashion.Jesus probably did offend some of the people following him but he was speaking about believing and abiding in him if you read some parallel verses in John 6 there isn't a doubt.
He who COMES TO ME will never go hungry ,and he who BELIEVES in me will never be thirsty." 6.37
Jesus also had previously said "I tell you the truth ,you are looking for me not because you saw miraculous signs but because you ate the loaves and had your fill. Do not work for food that spoils but for food that endures to eternal life." 6.26
Perhaps Jesus was looking to weed out those who looked for food for the belly from those who looked for food that endures.