Is Jesus God ?!!

[mms20102]

As for all Christians its known by nature that Jesus is God yet there are many contradictions in the bible that can prove that Jesus is only a prophet .

In this debate i want every one who has a good knowledge to give the reasonable proofs that Jesus is god or at any point of the bible where Jesus said worship me .

At the same time i will be providing proofs from the bible that Jesus is not God but only a messenger

as for a start i will ask a question :

What Are The Qualification Of God ?!

[mms20102]

[Replying to Elijah John]

brother now u are going to another topic called is the bible is the true word of god if u can't accept the words " and he rested " at first u said it was the creatures now u say its not real resting you should stick to one word so we can define the fact if he rested or not in Quran there is nothing called he didn't mean with the literal meaning simply because he is god again u will go to trinity the following verse of John 5:7 about TRINITY is removed by 32 eminment scholars ... because they considered this verse is a fabrication ... same topic which is are u considering bible to be the true word of god ?
" this topic is deviated from the original and if u accept the bible then u have to remove trinity and crucifixion as both considered as fabrication .... "

[JLB32168]

Now, you LOST me [regarding Christ being God and Adam#2 at once.] I'm sure that it makes perfect sense to you, but to me... nothing.

Christ possesses all of the aspects proper to deity (i.e. an immaterial essence comparable to the human soul), uncreated-ness, omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence, etc.) And Christ also possesses all of the aspects proper to a male H. sapiens (e.g. physical body, need for food, water, shelter, clothing, the righteous passions [not all passions are wrong], etc.), but without the ability to sin.

Because Christ possesses all of the aspects proper to man, he is able to reboot man’s ontology by doing the exact opposite of Adam. He is able to be perfectly obedient to the Father because He is also impassible (unable to change) deity.

WHY now, MUST Adam number 2 undo what Adam number 1 do?

Death ruled man. It was permanent. Resurrection and the rejoining of the soul w/the body was impossible. Christ fixed that by A)living perfectly, B)dying as man, C)coming back to life.

How does one precisely UNDO an action?

He’s undoing the consequences. How does one undo the action of putting out the light – by lighting a candle or flipping the switch back “on.� That is why Christ is called the Second Adam. I really don’t understand why this is so impossible to understand and it’s beginning to sound a lot like I’m being baited for the purpose of mocking my beliefs. If that’s the case (and I think it is) then the questions aren’t being asked in good faith/honesty of intention to understand the theology, but for the sake of subsequently mocking the belief and the believer by extension.

This was one reason that I rejected atheism when I was considering it in college. I functioned under the premise that truth should enlighten and elevate (disabuse yourself of superstitious belief in deities and society will be better for it); however, the atheists with which I was in contact had the same bad behaviors as everybody else (scathing criticism of believers – equating their minds and thought processes to that of medieval Russian serfs that didn’t possess a modicum of sophistication.) Since they demonstrated the same narrow-mindedness and intolerance as everybody else, I concluded that atheist secularism wasn't true.

Not that it is relevant to this discussion of course.

The GOD who can LITERALLY do EVERYTHING "had to become a man and do the exact opposite of what the first man did?"

Yup.

Who told God that he HAD to.... ?

If X is the best way to do something then God cannot do anything else since He is perfect and doing that which is imperfect is impossible.

I get it that you COULD see things that way. BUT... I can all too easily interpret God as evil, too.

Okay. Again, I’m not sure why that’s supposed to matter to me but Okay.

I don't think it was for the highest good of the DROWNED VICTIMS. And I can't even IMAGINE that all of them were so evil as to DESERVE and NEED to be drowned.

Okay so you don’t know how it could be the highest good. I understand your point. I hope you’re not going to assert that because you don’t know of a reason that one doesn’t exist because that would be a fallacious assertion to make since it is an argument from silence.

I can't even verify that the story is true AT ALL.. and that's exactly my response to MOST biblical stories. I can't verify them.

One way to fix that problem would be to simply stop asking questions on the topic.

I don't do that.

Okay.

When I don't know something, I say to myself and others I DON'T KNOW.

And I should think that is important because . . . why exactly?

I don't know about you, but that sounds like God is punishing to me.

When I was eighteen my Dad said, “Because you wrecked the car. The insurance rates are going to rise.� Dad was stating what was going to happen. He wasn’t punishing me.

[JLB32168]

so sir again god remade himself into human form to remove the sins of humanity why me " imagine iam Christian " can have done all sins on earth then go to heaven because god created a human to die for my own deeds ?

Get yourself out of a western mindset. Christ did all of this to conquer the power of the permanence of death. He sacrificed himself to death (not the Father) to do this

second thing is if jesus is part from real god why would jesus pray for god to save him from romans !!

I read nowhere that Christ said, “Save me from the Romans.�

if jesus is an aspect of god so why god would sacrifice himself or at least his own son to help sinners ?!

Jesus is God. He’s not being sacrificed by the Father. He is willingly going to his crucifixion because God has one will and the way God is doing it is the best way to do it – reboot Adam.
Of course, an atheist doesn’t have to believe any of this but if s/he asks the question I’ll answer it.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 37 by mms20102]

Hello, mms20102

We can type as fast as we want but two cats don't make a dog

I was trying to say by typing fast that two cats can't produce a dog

I'm not exactly sure how that's intended.
I say we skip it.

for sure son of god must be god because if not then Jesus is only a prophet or not god's real son with the full meaning

I don't have a problem with that consequence.

People write fast, and two cats don't make a dog. In ANY CASE... just because someone wrote something down.. doesn't mean it's true.

The "full meaning" of the Bible is HIGHLY debatable.
Welcome to debates.

yes brother you can read the bible

I can and do.

but u can't get to know how god should be since u ignore the fact that god exists in general

I don't "ignore the fact"... I don't BELIEVE it's a "fact".
Do you see the difference?

so any characteristic of god would seem to you as fairy tale

Yes. I agree.

It all sounds like elaborate and highly stylized historical "fairy tales" .. fantasy... myth, fiction, political propaganda, religious propaganda.. poetry... tall tales, scary stories and lists.. lots and lots of lists.

I'd say a hodge-podge of random books.

unless u are seeking truly to find a god " which is I doubt "

You are right to doubt.

I don't need to seek any god. If I get a good REASON to seek god, ok. But so far, the only reason that I ever sought God was because the priests told me I had to. When I rejected their authority over me ( when I HAD a choice ) , I lost the reason, too.

but iam sure u use logic to testify things and this may help you find the right god

I try to be logical, but I'm not looking for a god. I'm trying to understand people who DO look for gods, claim to have FOUND the "right" one and are willing to talk about it.

I can held another debate does god exists ?! and this time you will be better at this one

I'm way more practiced, for sure.
BUT.. we all have to start somewhere.

I started about 5 years ago.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to Elijah John]

brother now u are going to another topic called is the bible is the true word of god if u can't accept the words " and he rested " at first u said it was the creatures now u say its not real resting you should stick to one word so we can define the fact if he rested or not in Quran there is nothing called he didn't mean with the literal meaning simply because he is god again u will go to trinity the following verse of John 5:7 about TRINITY is removed by 32 eminment scholars ... because they considered this verse is a fabrication ... same topic which is are u considering bible to be the true word of god ?
" this topic is deviated from the original and if u accept the bible then u have to remove trinity and crucifixion as both considered as fabrication .... "

First, to stick to the OP I agree, that Jesus is NOT God. He does not display the characteristics of God, Omnipotence, Omnipresence, Omniscience, and accroding to the Bible, Jesus died, and rose again. God does not die, God cannot die. He is immortal and not subject to death.

Yes, Jesus performed remarkable miracles, according to the Scriptures, but his miracles were the result of the Father's power, not his own.

Also, those verses (I think there are only about two) that imply the Trinity, are acknowledged to have been later additions. SO I think we agree there. Even the New Tesatament does not teach Trinity. Jesus certainly never taught it.

Regarding the issue or resting, I agree that God does not need rest. That is only a poetic way the Bible has of describing God's completion of Creation. I think part or our impasse is because of the differences between Muslims and Christians regarding our respective Scriptures. Whereas most Muslims consider the Qur'an the literal, dictated (by the angel Gabriel) Word of God, many Christians consider the Bible to be the inspired, not literal Word of God.

Only Fundamentalist-Evangelical Christians consider the Bible to be infallible, and literal in many, if not most details.

And regarding the Crucifixion, only Muslims believe that Jesus was not crucified, and folks who don't believe Jesus existed at all. (there are some, even here on these boards!)

But all Christians, and virtually all scholars, (Jewish, Christian, atheist, agnostic, secular, etc) believe that Jesus was crucified by the Romans.

That is one of the very few biographical details that everyone (except Muslims) agrees on.

[mms20102]

[Replying to post 42 by JLB32168]

I will refer you to the shortest verse of the bible and again I will remind you that if you open the RSV 1952 there is nothing in bible called trinity yet you have no prove for Jesus to be god you just saying your own believes u have no verse to support your case

". . . and began to be sorrowful and very depressed.
Then saith he unto them, 'my soul is exceedingly sorrowful, even unto
death' . . ."
"And he went a little further, and fell on his face (Exactly as the Muslim
does in Salaat), and prayed, saying, 'O my Father, if it be possible, let this
cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt'." (This is
the quality of a good Muslim who submits his will to the will of God).
(Matthew 26:37-39)
"And being in an agony, he prayed more earnestly; and his sweat was,
as it were, great drops of blood falling down to the ground."
(Luke 22:44)

If this was God's plan for a vicarious atonement to redeem mankind, then obviously He had chosen a wrong substitute. This candidate was most reluctant to die. Arming! Wailing! Sweating! Crying! Complaining!3 Contrast these responses with those of Lord Nelson, a war hero, who gave up the ghost with these undying words: "THANK GOD, I HAVE DONE MY DUTY!".
Major Yeats-Brown, in his "Life of a Bengal Lancer", summarises the Christian Doctrine of
the Atonement in just a single sentence:
"NO HEATHEN TRIBE HAS CONCEIVED SO GROTESQUE AN IDEA, INVOLVING AS IT
DOES THE ASSUMPTION, THAT MAN WAS BORN WITH A HEREDITARY STAIN UPON
HIM: AND THAT THIS STAIN (FOR WHICH HE WAS NOT PERSONALLY
RESPONSIBLE) WAS TO BE ATONED FOR: AND THAT THE CREATOR OF ALL THINGS
HAD TO SACRIFICE HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON TO NEUTRALISE THIS MYSTERIOUS
CURSE."

yet if god can eat and drink then god needs to excrete " I didn't say that you said god eats and drinks " which is not logical at all because god should not ask his upper part to save him if he has the power

[JLB32168]

This candidate was most reluctant to die. Arming! Wailing! Sweating! Crying! Complaining!

First of all, he predicted his passion and crucifixion and went to Jerusalem in spite of knowing what it’d get him. Secondly, he was going to undergo a completely unnatural occurrence – the separation of the soul from the body. That wasn’t our original programming. We weren’t supposed to die. We weren’t supposed to have our souls violently torn from our bodies. Christ certainly wasn’t supposed to have this done since he was sinless. That is why his humanity was repelled at the idea.
Unnatural things repel us.

[mms20102]

[Replying to post 45 by Elijah John]

I guess now we have an agreement on this debate so far as the majority stated that Jesus is not god

and I guess we should be opening a new debate to enjoy the wonderful people I met here again

[mms20102]

[Replying to post 47 by JLB32168]

I thought gods have no human nature yet you didn't speak about the fact the verses were before he was captured

[JehovahsWitness]

Regarding the issue or resting, I agree that God does not need rest. That is only a poetic way the Bible has of describing God's completion of Creation..

This is correct, the Hebrew word for rest can mean to cease an activity.

JW