Jesus is God

[For_The_Kingdom]

First of all, I never knew that so many suspected "unbelievers" in the Christian religion were so fascinated about whether or not Jesus is God. If you don't believe in Jesus or God, then why do you care? It blows my mind.

Anyway..

I have a Biblically simplistic way of proving that Jesus is God..

Argument from Perfection: The Bible is clear, Jesus was/is without sin (morally perfect). The argument goes like this..

1. Only God is without sin
2. Jesus is without sin
3. Therefore, Jesus is God

#1 is virtually undisputed. #2 is Biblical based on two immediate Scriptures..

a. 2 Corin 5:21 "For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him".

b. Heb 4:15 "For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin".

Now, the idea is; if you replace Jesus' name in #2 with ANY other name in Heaven or on Earth, the proposition becomes false and the entire syllogism is false.

The conclusion is simple; in order to be God, you must be without sin..and to be without sin, you must be God. Jesus meets/met those requirements, therefore, Jesus is God.

Argument from John 14:1-9: Long story short, Jesus was constantly preaching/lecturing about "The Father this, The Father that"...until Philip finally said "Lord, show us the Father, and that will be good enough"...and Jesus said, "He who has seen me has seen the Father".

Jesus is saying that seeing him is the same has seeing the Father...but if the Father is on SUCH A HIGH PEDESTAL and is light years ahead of any other entity in Heaven or on Earth, how dare Jesus say "He who has seen me has seen the Father".

In other words, if the Father took on human form and made his dwelling among us on Earth, his form would be Jesus.

If the Father is God, and Jesus said to see him is to see the Father, then Jesus must also be God. This just follows logically.

Argument from Hebrews 1:3: "The Son is the radiance of Gods glory and the exact representation of his being.."

This is the same reasoning applied to Heb 4 (above). If God is the holiest of all holiest, how can any other being come close, must less be the "exact representation" of his being?

How can you be the "exact representation" of someone that is the epitome of holiness/righteousness...unless you yourself is also the epitome of holiness/righteousness?

Actually, you can sum up all three arguments as the "Argument from Perfection"..and of course, there are plenty of other "Trinity proof" Scriptures that I can throw in there, but I wanted to attack this from a different angel.

And lastly, as much as these arguments harmonize, they are all independent...so even if you manage to wiggle your way out of one...you still have to deal with the others.

Actually, there is no way out; Jesus is God, whether we like it or not.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to For the Kingdom]

Secondly, when Jesus said that if you've seen him you've seen the Father, he only meant that he so closely resembled the Father in word and deed that anyone could say that they see the Father in him. Colossians tells us that Jesus perfectly REFLECTS the Father (God).....the IMAGE of God, not God.

He said that seeing him, you know what God is like, because he has copied God in every way.

"He is the image of the invisible God." (Col.1:15) You can't be OF something and at the same time BE that something.

Jesus also plainly indicated that he COPIED his Father, and whatever the Father did, he did as well. Jesus LEARNED from the Father:

"The Son cannot do a single thing of his own initiative, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever things that One does, these things the Son does in like manner." (John 5:19)


If you appreciate what Jesus was saying here, then all your other misunderstandings will become straightened out.

[onewithhim]

I wouldn't say they are unbelievers. They are believers. Look up Arius and Athanasius. Its been going on since the beginning or at least post 70 ad. They all believed. They all did not say Christ was YHVH.

The apostle John called Jesus "God" (John 20:28). And if the apostle John (who was in Jesus' inner circle) thought Jesus was God, then I think Jesus is God.

As far as "unbelievers" are concerned, I was mainly speaking about those that are on this forum. Look at the threads in this forum; a good chunk of them are related to the Trinity...threads created by people who I suspect AREN'T under the Judeo-Christian umbrella...yet, they seem to care about whether Jesus is God.

Like I said, it blows my mind.

As for my opinion, for what it matters, I hold this question open without a full answer. If God were to ask me today if Christ was God, I would have to honestly answer that I don't know. I also think this is a sidebar debate pulling away from what Christ did. He is our savior. Whether God or not, does not matter.

I think it does matter, at least to an extent. I mean, I don't personally think that whether or not one believes in the Trinity has any barren on their eternal salvation...HOWEVER, if one wants to worship in truth, then their doctrine should be in order.

Christ never claimed to be God.

But he "implied" that he is God, which is enough for us (Trinitarians). And besides, there were good reasons why Jesus didn't flat out say "I am God"..however, he did occasionally put it out there..which is all us Trinitarians need to know to draw the conclusion.

He deferred all prayer and honor to God.

So, you mentioned prayer, and honor...right?

Honor: Jesus said that they should "honor the Son as they honor the Father" (John 5:23).

You wouldn't dare give any person on Earth or in Heaven the same honor that you give the Father, would you? Unless the person is also God.

Prayer: Stephen, while he was being stoned to death, prayed to Jesus (Acts 7:59).

Hmmm.

Being an exact representation tells the reader they are not the same but a "spitting image" of each other. Christ does say he and the Father are one.
Unified. I and my wife are one. We are two different people. Since the OT always claimed the savior as a man who would come first as a suffering servant and later as a king, I defer to the scripture.

By "the same", we are not saying they are the same PERSON...we are saying they share the same NATURE/ESSENCE...which is divinity.

We (orthodox Trinitarians) don't hold a modalistic view of the Trinity...we are saying that the Father/Son/Holy Spirit are three distinct persons who share the same Deity/nature.

The Apostle John did not call Jesus God. He never did, not even at John 1:1. If someone were to research that, they would see that the Greek has been sloppily translated there by almost every translator, copying the KJV tradition.

At John 20:28 he was simply reporting what Thomas said, but what he said is not clear. He could have been merely saying something in exasperation, just as we say, "Oh my God!" when seeing or hearing something hard to understand or believe. Nowhere else in Scripture do any of Jesus' disciples say anything like that. In fact, John himself says at the end of chapter 20 that "these things have been written down so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and because of believing, you may have life by means of his name."

John did not say that Jesus is God but that he is THE SON OF God. If he believed that Jesus was God, surely he would have said "that you may believe that Jesus is God."

There are so many verses that show that Jesus is subordinate to the Father, who is God, and yet people pick out vague, unclear verses to prove their point that Jesus is God. It is sad.

Jesus' disciples went on to teach that God is superior to Jesus, so Jesus could not BE God.

"...The head of Christ is God." (I Corinth. 11:3)

[brianbbs67]

here's a neat little piece of Koine deception perpetrated by scribes. Notice the word "Tov". Translate one place and not the other. If you really look , they is at least one other mistranslated word also in the acts 20:7.

https://biblehub.com/interlinear/acts/20-7.htm

https://biblehub.com/interlinear/john/1-1.htm

[For_The_Kingdom]

[Replying to post 56 by RightReason]

You are depending too much on what the Catholics began to teach decades after the fact, while I am depending on what PAUL was teaching from the very beginning of Christianity.

Paul said, WE ALL SIN. Point blank, period. No exceptions.

[For_The_Kingdom]

[Replying to post 6 by For_The_Kingdom]

The apostle John called Jesus "God" (John 20:28). And if the apostle John (who was in Jesus' inner circle) thought Jesus was God, then I think Jesus is God.

That was Thomas, not John.

It sure was Thomas. But guess what, Thomas was still an APOSTLE of Jesus, and he would have no business committing BLASPHEMY in front of Jesus' face by calling him God..and Jesus would have no business ACCEPTING that kind blasphemous praise by allowing anyone to call him God...if he weren't in fact, God.

Opinions vary.

Opinions only vary to those who change the words and contextual meaning of what was actually said (as Jehovah's Witnesses do), instead of simply letting the Bible speak for itself.

I choose to believe what Jesus himself said on this matter.

John 17:

1 After Jesus said this, he looked toward heaven and prayed:

Father, the hour has come. Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you.
2 For you granted him authority over all people that he might give eternal life to all those you have given him.

3 Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

John 20:17

Jesus said, Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.

That's interesting...because the Father called the Son God, too...

Heb 1:7-8

7 "Now about the angels He says: He makes His angels winds, His servants flames of fire. 8But about the Son He says: Your throne, O God, endures forever and ever, and justice is the scepter of Your kingdom."

So apparently, what we find in Scripture is both the Son and the Father calling each OTHER God...which they have every right to do, considering they are both God..which is what the Trinity is all about; both sharing the same essence (Divine) while being distinct persons.

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to post 6 by For_The_Kingdom]

The apostle John called Jesus "God" (John 20:28). And if the apostle John (who was in Jesus' inner circle) thought Jesus was God, then I think Jesus is God.

That was Thomas, not John.

It sure was Thomas. But guess what, Thomas was still an APOSTLE of Jesus, and he would have no business committing BLASPHEMY in front of Jesus' face by calling him God..and Jesus would have no business ACCEPTING that kind blasphemous praise by allowing anyone to call him God...if he weren't in fact, God.

Opinions vary.

Opinions only vary to those who change the words and contextual meaning of what was actually said (as Jehovah's Witnesses do), instead of simply letting the Bible speak for itself.

I choose to believe what Jesus himself said on this matter.

John 17:

1 After Jesus said this, he looked toward heaven and prayed:

Father, the hour has come. Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you.
2 For you granted him authority over all people that he might give eternal life to all those you have given him.

3 Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

John 20:17

Jesus said, Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.

That's interesting...because the Father called the Son God, too...

Heb 1:7-8

7 "Now about the angels He says: He makes His angels winds, His servants flames of fire. 8But about the Son He says: Your throne, O God, endures forever and ever, and justice is the scepter of Your kingdom."

So apparently, what we find in Scripture is both the Son and the Father calling each OTHER God...which they have every right to do, considering they are both God..which is what the Trinity is all about; both sharing the same essence (Divine) while being distinct persons.

Nice try.

The Trinity is about what man invented many decades after Jesus said the Father is the only true God and thus is his God.

The Father never says that of His Son.

[tam]

Peace to you,

There is a reason we cannot say that to see us is to see God. Because we are not the image of God.

Man WAS made in the image of God. ADAM was made in the image of God.

We, however, are born in the image of Adam AFTER Adam sinned. (see also Genesis 5:3)


We are CURRENTLY being made over INTO the image of Christ - who is Himself the image of God.

For those God foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brothers. Romans 8:29

And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into His image with intensifying glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit. 2 Corinthians 3:18

If we are being transformed/conformed into the image of Christ, then we are obviously not already IN the image of Christ (who is Himself the image of God).

I think you must also agree that us being made over into the image of Christ does not mean that when we are in the image of Christ, that we will be Christ (or God). So if it does not mean that for us, why should it mean that for Christ?

As I am sure you are aware of, the whole subject of the "image of God" thing can get a bit foggy in Christian circles. Many Christian theologians have spoken (or written) their piece of the Biblical concept of "image of God"...and admittedly, I am not sure I have it down as of yet.

Okay, then you should have no objection to the point in my original post about Christ being the image of God. Christ being the image of God (the perfect representation of His being) does not mean that Christ is God (and a representative is not the thing or person being represented).

However, I need not bog myself down with any of that stuff. Why? Because my argument is not based upon any of it.

Okay...

My argument is based on the perfection of Jesus Christ, and his bold statements about himself, as he placed himself on the same pedestal as his righteous, holy, sacred Father.

Okay:

A - The perfection of Christ (by which I assume you mean Him being without sin). You suggest that only God is without sin, therefore if Christ is without sin, Christ must be God. This is circular (as I said in my first post, because you are starting with the premise that only God can be without sin, and you have not proven that to be true). On top of that though, we can also consider Adam (and Eve), as I think OWH also mentioned. Adam was created without sin. Adam had no sin in him until after he ate from the TOKGB. Yet Adam was not God.


B - Christ did not place Himself on the same pedestal as His Father. He said the exact opposite:

"You heard me say, 'I am going away and I am coming back to you.' If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I."

Yes, I understand what the doctrine states.

But the verse you are using as support is from Christ saying, "Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father."

If that verse does not mean that Christ IS the Father, then it also does not mean that Christ IS God.

Because you are assuming that in order for Christ to be God, he would also have to be the Father...and that is simply not the case, from the Trinitarian's point of view and what we read from the Bible.

No... I am simply following your logic through to its natural conclusion. More below:

How can you use that verse to state that Christ is God, without also stating that Christ is the Father? Since the Father is the One that Christ is saying we have seen, if we have seen Christ?

Because Christ is CLEARLY not saying nor implying, "To see me is to see the Father, therefore, I am the Father". After all, Jesus had been making clear distinctions between the Son (himself) and his Father throughout all four Gospels.

Then you CANNOT use the verse to demonstrate that Christ is God.

This is your own argument, from your OP:

Argument from John 14:1-9: Long story short, Jesus was constantly preaching/lecturing about "The Father this, The Father that"...until Philip finally said "Lord, show us the Father, and that will be good enough"...and Jesus said, "He who has seen me has seen the Father".

Jesus is saying that seeing him is the same has seeing the Father...but if the Father is on SUCH A HIGH PEDESTAL and is light years ahead of any other entity in Heaven or on Earth, how dare Jesus say "He who has seen me has seen the Father".

In other words, if the Father took on human form and made his dwelling among us on Earth, his form would be Jesus.

If the Father is God, and Jesus said to see him is to see the Father, then Jesus must also be God. This just follows logically.

You seem to be trying to have it both ways, but you can't.

If saying 'if you see me you have seen the Father'... does not mean that Christ is the Father... then it also does not mean that Christ is God. Simple. THAT is what follows logically.

So, if Jesus made the statement "To see me is to see the Father", what did he mean? Again, Phillip suggested that Jesus show the Father to them...and Jesus pretty much said "How can you say "show us the Father"? Whoever sees me sees the Father".

Yes, because Christ is the image of God. He shows us God as God truly is. He is not saying that He is God, Himself. Just as He is not saying that He is the Father, Himself.

This equality that Jesus gave himself with the Father not only harmonizes with the "perfect representation of God" that Heb 1:3 gives us, but also John 1:1-3 followed by John 1:14.

Except He did not give Himself equality with the Father; He said that the Father is greater than Him.


And 'perfect representation' goes back to Christ being the image of God, a description you admit you do not fully understand.

I am not.

Oh, good. Then John 1:3 followed by verse 14 should not be a point of contention between us, should it?

It should not be. Neither of those verses suggest that Christ is God. I suspect you meant John 1:1, but John 1:2 clarifies that the Word (Christ) is WITH God.

As for verse 3:

Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.



Yes, God created all things through Christ (who is the Son of God). This is described also in Proverbs 8:22-31. And again at 1Corinthians 8:5, 6:

For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as there are many so-called gods and lords), yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we exist. And there is but one Lord, [Jesus] Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we exist.


A - note that all things come FROM God THROUGH Christ.

B - note that Paul states - point blank - that the Father is God. The one God.


Just as Christ said previously (praying to the Father):

Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and [Jesus] Christ, whom you have sent. John 17:2


He calls His Father the only true God.


Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[RightReason]

[Replying to For_The_Kingdom]

You are depending too much on what the Catholics began to teach decades after the fact, while I am depending on what PAUL was teaching from the very beginning of Christianity.

Not at all. It was taught from the beginning that Jesus established a church to whom He gave authority and told us to listen. This was evident from the beginning.

Paul said, WE ALL SIN. Point blank, period. No exceptions.

Sorry, one could use a similar argument/reasoning for just about every sentence written in the Bible and yet we all know the Bible as a whole must be considered and understood. There are many phrases/expressions in the Bible that have varying meaning. Good thing Jesus left us His Church to clarify such things.

[tam]

Peace again to you!


As to Thomas (or Peter elsewhere) possibly referring to Christ when saying God, post 18 on the following thread:


viewtopic.php?p=954932#954932

[polonius]

A certain number of posters take the claim by Jesus in John's Gospel that he is the "son of God" to mean that h is claiming divinity.

Lets take a look what that really means and the Catholic Encyclopedia explains it:

"The title "son of God" is frequent in the Old Testament. The word "son" was employed among the Semites to signify not only filiation, but other close connexion or intimate relationship. Thus, "a son of strength" was a hero, a warrior, "son of wickedness" a wicked man, "sons of pride" wild beasts, "son of possession" a possessor, "son of pledging" a hostage, "son of lightning" a swift bird, "son of death" one doomed to death, "son of a bow" an arrow, "son of Belial" a wicked man, "sons of prophets" disciples of prophets etc.

The title "son of God" was applied in the Old Testament to persons having any special relationship with God. Angels, just and pious men, the descendants of Seth, were called "sons of God" (Job 1:6; 2:1; Psalm 89:7; Wisdom 2:13; etc.). In a similar manner it was given to Israelites (Deuteronomy 14:50); and of Israel, as a nation, we read: "And thou shalt say to him: Thus saith the Lord: Israel is my son, my firstborn. I have said to thee: Let my son go, that he may serve me" (Exodus 4:22 sq.).

If you pray the "Our Father" are you claiming then that you are a son of God ("Father") and therefore divine?

Note especially that a divine Jesus doesn't exist in the first three gospels. Jesus is the Messiah. According to the first Christians, Jesus only became divine himself in the early 80's resulting in the Christians becoming heretics and excluded from their synagogue. See John's Gospel written about 95 AD.