If you are a Trinitarian, what makes you so certain

[Elijah John]

If you believe that Jesus is God, what makes you so certain that Jesus is God? Anything beyond "the Bible tells me so".

If not, how, where does "the Bible tell you so"?

[marco]

If you believe that Jesus is God, what makes you so certain that Jesus is God? Anything beyond "the Bible tells me so".

If not, how, where does "the Bible tell you so"?

John 20: 28 - " And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God."


The problem here is we can reject John and we can either say Thomas was mistaken or his words were just an exclamation of surprise and joy. If we read the Bible and accept that it is inspired, then rejection of some part must have huge justification. That surely comes in the form of Christ himself never saying he was God. That would be an incredible omission if he was.



I think the Trinity is a political invention. It is hard to be a monotheist and a Trinitarian without intricate operations on language.

[Bust Nak]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

Not a Trinitarian, but do they need anything other than faith to be so certain that Jesus is God?

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

Not a Trinitarian, but do they need anything other than faith to be so certain that Jesus is God?

Not in their everyday lives, not in their churches, But if they want to make their case that "Jesus is God" on these boards then don't they need to "be ready to account for their faith"? (paraphrase)

Just wondering if their belief in that doctrine derives entirely from the Bible, from their upbringing, from the influnece of pastors and preachers, or from personal reflection, encounters and experiences.

Personally, I just don't see any evidence outside of the Bible that "Jesus is God" and New Testament evidence is ambiguous at best.

And I certainly need more than the say so of pastors and preachers.

[Goose]

If you believe that Jesus is God, what makes you so certain that Jesus is God?

Firstly, I prefer to use the expression Jesus was God made flesh. It's a subtle but important distinction.

Secondly, I'm not certain. As in conclusively sure beyond all doubt. I could be wrong. I simply think the position that Jesus was God made flesh is very well supported by scripture.

Anything beyond "the Bible tells me so".

Well since this is a question about Christian theology and since I'm a Christian, I don't really need anything beyond "the Bible tells me so" to justify my position. But, since you asked, the writings of the early church fathers and students of the disciples such as Ignatius and Polycarp support my position.

If not, how, where does "the Bible tell you so"?

You've started enough threads on this topic over the years to know all the typical verses. But I think the first chapter of John's Gospel is pretty much a slam dunk supporting my position.

[marco]

But I think the first chapter of John's Gospel is pretty much a slam dunk supporting my position.

It is hardly a "slam dunk" verification. We can argue for ages over the meaning of John and his elusive Word; and people do, with no slam dunk conclusions.

Your theory that Jesus was a magical manifestation of God in human flesh is as difficult to refute as it is to prove. His nearest and dearest were not convinced. We discount tales of Zeus appearing in many forms, but they are entertaining. I suppose having God become a baby in Bethlehem, visited by sheep and shepherds and cherubim and anonymous potentaties from "the East" is just an example of how he works in mysterious ways his wonders to perform. People have have gone to the moon, defying gravity, and Jesus went in the same direction to Paradise, where Paradise was thought to be. O sancta simplicitas!


There are no words from the man himself that suggest he was a god in any form, just a mere messenger.

[Goose]

But I think the first chapter of John's Gospel is pretty much a slam dunk supporting my position.

It is hardly a "slam dunk" verification. We can argue for ages over the meaning of John and his elusive Word; and people do, with no slam dunk conclusions.

My position is that Jesus was God made flesh.

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God....And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.� John 1:1, 14

Your theory that Jesus was a magical manifestation of God in human flesh is as difficult to refute as it is to prove.

It's not that difficult to support it with scripture. I just did above. But go ahead and refute it.

His nearest and dearest were not convinced.

Why did they worship Him as though he were God then?

We discount tales of Zeus appearing in many forms, but they are entertaining.

Irrelevant.

I suppose having God become a baby in Bethlehem, visited by sheep and shepherds and cherubim and anonymous potentaties from "the East" is just an example of how he works in mysterious ways his wonders to perform.

It's also an example of another scripture supporting my position. Thanks for mentioning.

People have have gone to the moon, defying gravity, and Jesus went in the same direction to Paradise, where Paradise was thought to be. O sancta simplicitas!

Irrelevant rant.

There are no words from the man himself that suggest he was a god in any form, just a mere messenger.

Jesus suggested his own divine self concept.

So the Jews said to [Jesus], “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?� Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.� Therefore they picked up stones to throw at Him, but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple. - John 8:57-59

[Willum]

I think an answer is deceptively simple.

An omnipotent god is immune from paradox.
Omnipotence can be a Trinity, a puppy dog, solid light, dry water, anything an imaginer can imagine, beyond what an imaginer can imagine, because omnipotence can warp reality and time.

The one thing it can't do, apparently, is change its mind.

[marco]

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God....And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.� John 1:1, 14

It's not that difficult to support it with scripture. I just did above. But go ahead and refute it.

Logos existed with God; and the entire order of the universe was figuratively God. A preacher called Christ was the carrier of this logos, the word of God, and so, in a sense, the vector of Christ's word was flesh. In no way does this mean that the human preacher, carrier of God's message, was God himself. That would of course be absurd. One must be conversant with metaphor or with metonymy.

His nearest and dearest were not convinced.

Why did they worship Him as though he were God then?

This must be classified knowledge. When his family came to see him, not to worship him, he stayed put. Prophets, remember, are not recognised in their home.

There are no words from the man himself that suggest he was a god in any form, just a mere messenger.

Jesus suggested his own divine self concept.

So the Jews said to [Jesus], “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?� Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.� Therefore they picked up stones to throw at Him, but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple. - John 8:57-59

Hilarious - you quote those who didn't accept him as evidence he was God. They thought he was blaspheming but he was simply being deliberately provocative. If he was God's truth (remember he said: I am the way, the truth and the life?) then that existed before Abraham. There's no need to strain one's imagination into supposing the man was around at the time of Abraham.

Figurative language may be hard to understand but it makes more sense than calling the carpenter God. He directed attention to the Father, not to himself. Best regards.