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 God’s 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.
Jesus is God
Moderator: Moderators
- tam
- Savant
- Posts: 6477
- Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
- Has thanked: 356 times
- Been thanked: 327 times
- Contact:
Re: When was the idea invented that Jesus was God?
Post #251Peace to you,
polonius wrote: Tam posted,
RESPONSE: Yes, Paul died in 64 AD. The Christians remained orthodox JewsHere I would just point out that Paul never suggests that [Jesus] (or Christ) is Yahweh.
I am not sure what you mean by 'orthodox', but Jews who were anointed with holy spirit (which is what makes one a Christian), were indeed still Jews.
Except that Jews were persecuted and put out of the synagogues and even imprisoned by Paul... whom you just said died almost 20 years earlier than 82 AD.believing in only one(person) as God until about 82 AD at which time they began to claim Jesus was God too, and were drive out of Judaism and the Jewish synagogues as apostates (minim).
So regardless of when men began to (erroneously) claim that Christ is God (YHWH), that was not the reason Jewish Christians were being persecuted and imprisoned and put out of the synagogues.
I do not know what the Twelfth Benediction is, but "John" claims the following:See the Twelfth Benediction, John's gospel, and "minim".
His parents said this because they were afraid of the Jewish leaders, who already had decided that anyone who acknowledged that [Jesus] was the Messiah would be put out of the synagogue. John 9:22
Nevertheless, many of the leaders believed in Him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess Him, for fear that they would be put out of the synagogue. John 12:43
This occurred long before 82 AD as well.
"John" does not claim that Christ is God (YHWH) any more than Paul ever made that claim.
Before this Jesus was regarded as only a heroic man, but not divine.
Christ (not "Jesus", as that is not His name) was regarded as the Messiah and the Son of God, by those who belonged to Him and by those who believed Him. Because that is who He (and God) said He was: the Messiah (Chosen One of Jah), the Son of God.
"This is my Son, my Chosen One, listen to Him." Luke 9:35
Peace to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy
Post #252
Tam posted
All orthodox Jews believe “Hear O Israel. The Lord is one.� Not three gods." That's a Trinity, a third century Christian invention to account for more than one God as a "Trinity." That would be heresy to a Jew.
“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.).�
There were many “sons of God.� Hint: Changing the lower case “s’ to a capital “S� didn’t make Jesus divine. And check your Old Testament. The “Messiah� was a man who never claimed to be God
RESPONSE:I am not sure what you mean by 'orthodox', but Jews who were anointed with holy spirit (which is what makes one a Christian), were indeed still Jews.
All orthodox Jews believe “Hear O Israel. The Lord is one.� Not three gods." That's a Trinity, a third century Christian invention to account for more than one God as a "Trinity." That would be heresy to a Jew.
RESPONSE:Christ (not "Jesus", as that is not His name) was regarded as the Messiah and the Son of God, by those who belonged to Him and by those who believed Him. Because that is who He (and God) said He was: the Messiah (Chosen One of Jah), the Son of God.
“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.).�
There were many “sons of God.� Hint: Changing the lower case “s’ to a capital “S� didn’t make Jesus divine. And check your Old Testament. The “Messiah� was a man who never claimed to be God
The diference between a lower case "s" and a capit
Post #253polonius wrote: Tam posted
RESPONSE:I am not sure what you mean by 'orthodox', but Jews who were anointed with holy spirit (which is what makes one a Christian), were indeed still Jews.
All orthodox Jews believe “Hear O Israel. The Lord is one.� Not three gods." That's a Trinity, a third century Christian invention to account for more than one God as a "Trinity." That would be heresy to a Jew.
RESPONSE:Christ (not "Jesus", as that is not His name) was regarded as the Messiah and the Son of God, by those who belonged to Him and by those who believed Him. Because that is who He (and God) said He was: the Messiah (Chosen One of Jah), the Son of God.
“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.).�
There were many “sons of God.� Hint: Changing the lower case “s’ to a capital “S� didn’t make Jesus divine. And check your Old Testament. The “Messiah� was a man who never claimed to be God
- onewithhim
- Savant
- Posts: 9240
- Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
- Location: Norwich, CT
- Has thanked: 1262 times
- Been thanked: 329 times
Post #254
Absolutely!polonius wrote: Tam posted
RESPONSE:I am not sure what you mean by 'orthodox', but Jews who were anointed with holy spirit (which is what makes one a Christian), were indeed still Jews.
All orthodox Jews believe “Hear O Israel. The Lord is one.� Not three gods." That's a Trinity, a third century Christian invention to account for more than one God as a "Trinity." That would be heresy to a Jew.
Jesus would have to have bent over backwards to convince the Jews that he was equal to YHWH and part of a triune God, making this new doctrine crystal clear...and he did no such thing. Because it is not true.
- onewithhim
- Savant
- Posts: 9240
- Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
- Location: Norwich, CT
- Has thanked: 1262 times
- Been thanked: 329 times
Post #255
[Replying to post 247 by polonius]
"Son of God" and "God" are two very different things. Jesus said he was the Son of God, and never God.
It's a shame men have tampered with the text of the Hebrew Scriptures and the Greek. The original meanings are in the manuscripts for people to see, if we but could read the original languages. We trust translators to be honest, but unfortunately they often are not.
In the Scriptures the Messiah was obviously to be super-human, because he is spoken of as accomplishing many things an ordinary human could not do, and having a kingdom forever. (See Isaiah 9:6,7; Isaiah 11:1-10; Isaiah 42: 1-3; Isaiah 52: 13-15; Isaiah 53:11,12; Isaiah 61:1,2 and 10.)
This "chosen one" is righteous, having no violence or deception, and anointed by Jehovah to do just what Jesus did. Therefore, he is an above-ordinary "son of God."
(Who do you think Psalm 2: 2-12 and Psalm 110 refer to? More than an ordinary man, I would say.)
"Son of God" and "God" are two very different things. Jesus said he was the Son of God, and never God.
It's a shame men have tampered with the text of the Hebrew Scriptures and the Greek. The original meanings are in the manuscripts for people to see, if we but could read the original languages. We trust translators to be honest, but unfortunately they often are not.
In the Scriptures the Messiah was obviously to be super-human, because he is spoken of as accomplishing many things an ordinary human could not do, and having a kingdom forever. (See Isaiah 9:6,7; Isaiah 11:1-10; Isaiah 42: 1-3; Isaiah 52: 13-15; Isaiah 53:11,12; Isaiah 61:1,2 and 10.)
This "chosen one" is righteous, having no violence or deception, and anointed by Jehovah to do just what Jesus did. Therefore, he is an above-ordinary "son of God."
(Who do you think Psalm 2: 2-12 and Psalm 110 refer to? More than an ordinary man, I would say.)
-
- Guru
- Posts: 1915
- Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 3:29 pm
Re: Jesus is God
Post #256I don't need to point out "specific" examples, given the fact that my point is; in ANY case where proskyneo is used for Jehovah, it is rendered as "worshiped" in the NWT.onewithhim wrote: I asked you to type out specific instances of this. Show us exactly where the word "proskyneo" is applied differently to God and to Jesus.
So starting in the old testament, look up every time the word "worship" is used in reference to God, it is rendered that way from the Greek "proskuneo". But when the same word is used for Jesus, "obeisance" is used.
Again, if the word means the same thing, then there would be no reason why it isn't rendered to the same English word...unless you don't like the implications of one of the English words (worship) being applied to Jesus, so you change it to another English word, "obeisance".
Plain and simple.
It isn't about being specific when it is a case of "all".
And all three of you probably have one thing in common; the WTS.onewithhim wrote: Tigger's and JehovahsWitness' and my "fancy explanations" would be acceptable, I'm sure, to anybody else.
You are clearly either missing or deliberately ignoring the point. If you don't get it by now, then I can't help you. That won't stop me from continuing to point it out as needed, though.onewithhim wrote: Why you want to "strain out a gnat and swallow a camel" I don't know. (Matthew 23:24) The word "proskyneo" means both "worship" and "obeisance" and they both mean the honoring of a person in authority.
-
- Guru
- Posts: 1915
- Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 3:29 pm
Re: Jesus is God
Post #257shnarkle wrote: Perhaps you might want to actually look at the context of the discussion before claiming others are presenting strawman arguments.
Here's what you actually posted:
There is no salvation without atonement. Then there's my response to this:Now, I am in no way saying that I know of any "atonement" arrangements that God has/had with the angels.
Actually, no. As post #210 indicates, your response about "atonement" had nothing to do with what you quoted me for. In the quote, there was no mention of atonement or anything.You cannot have "free will" and not be without sin..because eventually, you will make a bad decision.
That is what I was responding to so let's put the pieces together.
There are two separate issues here (correlated, yet separate); Do/can angels sin...and if they do/can, is there any atonement for their sin.
And who is arguing that it is? Is this another straw man?shnarkle wrote: Salvation cannot be dependant upon one's free will because the decisions anyone makes cannot insure success.
No, they no longer PRACTICE sin..but they still sin.shnarkle wrote: However, when one has been foreordained and predestined to conformity in Christ by God's promise, then they no longer sin.
This is just completely false. So, just because a person accepted Christ, that this "acceptance" somehow means that, for the rest of the person's life, that this person will never EVER commit one single sin?shnarkle wrote: If this isn't true, then God's will and promises can be thwarted. We know this isn't the case because Paul plainly points out that what God knows beforehand, is predestined to happen. (See Romans chapters 8 and 9 for a more detailed explanation.)
So, do those who are conformed to the perfection of Christ have free will or not? If they do, then your claim, e.g. "you cannot have 'free will' and not be without sin.." is false. Obviously those who are conformed to the image of Christ are without sin.
What do you think the concept of "asking God for forgiveness" is all about?
You lost me here.shnarkle wrote: Do they have free will, or not? Are they brought into perfection against their will? Are they to spend eternity in heaven against their will?
The point here is that it isn't that we don't have free will, but that it is irrelevant. One cannot choose what they don't know, and Jesus points out that one has to search for the truth. Searching necessarily points out that one doesn't have the truth because you don't search for what you already have.
You are contradicting scripture. Jesus said that we are to forgive our brother who sins against us 70x7 times (Matt 18:21-22), which parallels how often the Father will forgive us for our sins.shnarkle wrote: Then there's this gem:
Let's look at the greater context:Yet, Paul said we all sin and fall short of the glory of God. (Rom 3:23).
Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.
20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
25 Whom God hath set forth to be a PROPITIATION THROUGH FAITH IN HIS BLOOD, to declare his righteousness for the remission of SINS THAT ARE PAST, through the forbearance of God;
26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.
28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.
Clearly this has everything to do with salvation as well as pointing out that when sins go into remission, they are dead just like cancer goes into remission when it dies off. Paul is explicitly pointing out that we all sin, yet Christ's sacrifice covers the sins of our fallen sinful nature, and leaves them in the past. Christ's sacrifice doesn't cover present sin because the new creature in Christ doesn't sin.
It is almost as if Jesus said this because he knew that, since we are imperfect, we will be forever be in debt to him (and I say "almost" sarcastically). If a "new creature" in Christ doesn't sin, then why are we given these all of these chances of forgiveness if, according to you, no one supposedly will ever sin again anyway (after Christ is accepted), which would render what Jesus said about forgiveness IRRELEVANT.
Everyone "continues" to sin and it is up to God to judge us in our efforts to STOP sinning.shnarkle wrote: There can be no sin in Christ. Those who continue to sin must rely upon Christ's sacrifice to cover their sins until they receive a regenerated heart to keep God's commandments.
As Thomas Aquinas once said..
"You can't stop a bird from landing on your head; but you can stop it from building a nest (on your head)".
- onewithhim
- Savant
- Posts: 9240
- Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
- Location: Norwich, CT
- Has thanked: 1262 times
- Been thanked: 329 times
Re: Jesus is God
Post #258So I take it that you have looked up all instances where the word for "worship" or "obeisance" refers to Jehovah and Jesus. Is that so?For_The_Kingdom wrote:I don't need to point out "specific" examples, given the fact that my point is; in ANY case where proskyneo is used for Jehovah, it is rendered as "worshiped" in the NWT.onewithhim wrote: I asked you to type out specific instances of this. Show us exactly where the word "proskyneo" is applied differently to God and to Jesus.
So starting in the old testament, look up every time the word "worship" is used in reference to God, it is rendered that way from the Greek "proskuneo". But when the same word is used for Jesus, "obeisance" is used.
Again, if the word means the same thing, then there would be no reason why it isn't rendered to the same English word...unless you don't like the implications of one of the English words (worship) being applied to Jesus, so you change it to another English word, "obeisance".
Plain and simple.
It isn't about being specific when it is a case of "all".
And all three of you probably have one thing in common; the WTS.onewithhim wrote: Tigger's and JehovahsWitness' and my "fancy explanations" would be acceptable, I'm sure, to anybody else.
You are clearly either missing or deliberately ignoring the point. If you don't get it by now, then I can't help you. That won't stop me from continuing to point it out as needed, though.onewithhim wrote: Why you want to "strain out a gnat and swallow a camel" I don't know. (Matthew 23:24) The word "proskyneo" means both "worship" and "obeisance" and they both mean the honoring of a person in authority.
Jesus ' divine knowledge
Post #259If Jesus is God how come he doesn't know what God the Father knows? Like when end times will occur?
Matthew 24:36 (and Mark 13:32) tells us, “No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.�
Maybe He did know but forgot? Or he wasn't fully God. Or Jesus turned his divine intellect on or off?
But if Jesus did something the Father never did, they are not "co-equal." There goes the Trinity claim!
Matthew 24:36 (and Mark 13:32) tells us, “No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.�
Maybe He did know but forgot? Or he wasn't fully God. Or Jesus turned his divine intellect on or off?
But if Jesus did something the Father never did, they are not "co-equal." There goes the Trinity claim!
-
- Guru
- Posts: 1915
- Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 3:29 pm
Re: Jesus is God
Post #260The fact that I disagree with you here simply means that we have a fundamental disagreement as to what constitutes as a "being".shnarkle wrote:
By definition, it most certainly necessarily follows. God is not a created being. God isn't even an uncreated being.
If you don't agree that God is a "being", then all other conversations about God strikes me as meaningless.