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.

Question, simple question; If Jesus was to come to earth, would seeing and being with Jesus be just as good as seeing and being with the Father?

Yes/No?

Yes, and it must be that way, because no one has seen God nor can see God, except those in the heavenly realm. Jesus is as close to seeing God that humans will ever get, and it was loving of him to come here in his Father's place, because the Father is so magnificent that if He were to come to Earth literally, our planet would be an instant cinder.

I am curious to see what you have to say about the other points I made in my posts 59,60,61.

[onewithhim]

You can't copy something that is holy and righteous (God) in "every" way, unless you yourself are holy and righteous in "every" way.

And to be holy and righteous in "every" way, is to be God.

"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.

That's the point!!! If God made himself visible, in human form...he would be JESUS!! That is the entire point; Jesus is the physical, visible image of the immaterial, invisible God.

God's human manifestation is Jesus Christ!!

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)

Yeah, but you can't copy something perfect in every way, if you yourself aren't perfect in every way.

And besides, Jesus only made that statement AFTER the events of Phil 2:5-9.

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

The irony..

Jesus said that he learned from the Father---those are HIS words. You are dismissing what he himself said. He said he copied everything the Father did. How can you say that he wasn't telling the truth?

And you suggest that Jesus was not perfect and righteous in every way so therefore he could not represent or reflect God. He was perfect and righteous in every way, and he did REPRESENT God.

You say he made that statement after the events of Phil. 2:5-9. No, he made that statement before his crucifixion, and I don't know why it matters anyway, when he said it.

[For_The_Kingdom]

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.

It was more than just a "nice try"...it was a nice rebuttal. You say "the Father never says that of His Son".

Yet, I provided a scripture at which the Father said it EXACTLY of his son. But instead of tackling the scripture head-on, you gloss over it as if it is insignificant...yet, it say exactly what you are still claiming it doesn't.

LOL.

And that is precisely why the Church shall remain divided...due to stubbornness and in some cases, willful ignorance.

[RightReason]

[Replying to Checkpoint]

"His Church" is not identified as a specific named organization, but is all believers in Jesus Christ.

All believers who follow His established Church. Where/what is the church you follow? Christs Church can be traced back to Peter to whom Christ said, thou art Peter and upon this rock I build my church. If your church cannot be traced back to Peter, well then . . .

[For_The_Kingdom]

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).

Then please explain to me in what ways did Christ "lack" divinity (or lack being God). Whatever explanation you give, it will go against Christ being the "perfect" representation of His being.

Christ can't be "perfect", and yet be lacking. So if you believe Christ is lacking, then you are going against what Scripture calls, "PERFECTION". Perfection is not lacking, and lacking is not perfection.

Scripture states that Christ is the PERFECT representation of His (God the Father) being. If you want to downplay or water down Christ's perfection as it relates to God, then you are going against Scripture.

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).

Yes, exactly.

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).

Ok, so I will ask you a simple yes/no question; can any created being with "free will" have the SAME level (for lack of a better term) of holiness/righteous than the Almighty God?

I had thought that what is so great about God, that his ways are wayyyy higher than our ways and no matter how hard we try, we will never amount to such greatness, not just in terms of morality, but in terms of ANYTHING.

And here you are contending with the fact that I claim that only God is without sin, as if you believe that it is possible for mere created beings to also be without sin. Well, if that were the case, you are implying that the quality of man's benevolence is the SAME as the Almighty God...which is blasphemous.

How dare you?

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.

First off, Adam was not perfect. If you have the ability to "go bad", you aren't perfect. Perfect milk cannot spoil.

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."

Christ obviously made that statement after the events of Phil 2:5-9. Second, in a school system, the principal is "greater" than the teacher. In the military, the "Sgt" is greater than the "PVT". In the Christian household, the husband is "greater" than the wife.

But in either case, the "greater" person isn't necessarily the "better" person. "Greater" is just in terms of position/rank/role. It says nothing about essence/nature/divinity.

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:

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".

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.

No, it doesn't follow logically. Obviously, Christ is not claiming to be the Father, and since we know this for a FACT, we don't need to hypothesize any scenario at which he might say it or WOULD say it.

The fact of the matter is; he said it, and the question we need to ask ourselves is, what did he mean when he said it?

I say again, if God is on such a HIGH LEVEL relative to any puny created being...then why would a puny created being (relative to God) make the statement; "if you see me you have seen the Father (God)"...and to make this statement AFTER someone suggested that the Father be down to them is even more evident.

In other words; why do you need me to show you the Father when I (someone who ISN'T the Father) am here with you?

So either Jesus was clearly committing blasphemy, or he is saying that he and his Father are so equal that they are interchangeable, and to see one is to see the other.

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.

No one is denying that Christ shows us God as God truly is...but to say that he is able to do so on a perfect level, and that to see Jesus is to see the Father, that is taking things to a completely different level.

And yes, Jesus took things to a different level, something that only God would be able to do.

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

"To see me is to see the Father". It really doesn't get any more "equal" than that.

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

Again, my argument is not based upon any interpretation regarding the "image of God", so you bringing it up is irrelevant to the subject at hand. But to my point of "perfect representation"; if God follows his own ways perfectly, and Jesus follows God's ways perfectly, then how is God any better than Jesus...if they are BOTH meeting the "perfect" criterion?

So, either you have to admit that Jesus is God, or you have to explain how a mere peasant of a creature is on the same level as the ALMIGHTY and SOVERIGN God.

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.

Actually, I meant John 1:1-3, followed by verse 14. Now, you already admitted that you aren't a Jehovah's Witness...so John 1:1-3 followed by 14 is the best "Trinity Proof" scripture and should be enough to convince anyone who ain't a Jehovah's Witness.

So the case should be closed.

Yes, God created all things through Christ (who is the Son of God). This is described also in Proverbs 8:22-31.

Hmm. The Proverbs 8:22-31 thing...sounds very "Jehovah's Witnessy" to me..not to mention the fact that the entire Scripture has NOTHING to do with Christ...never mind that fact, though.

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.

So, both the Father and the Son played a part in the creation of the world. No argument from me..

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.

Hmm. But as you pointed out, Paul also stated that there is only one Lord, Jesus...yet,

Deut 6:13 You shall fear only the Lord your God; and you shall worship Him and swear by His name.


Why is "God" being called Lord if there is only one Lord, Jesus?

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.

Yeah, that is amazing, isn't it? I mean, Jesus calling his Father only "true" God...only for his Father to also call his Son, "God".

Heb 1:8.."But about the Son he says, "Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever; a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom."

Hmm.

[polonius]

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.


Not so.

According to the Catholic Church and perhaps some others:
. The Church has constantly regarded Mary as holy and free from all sin or moral imperfection. The Council of Trent expresses this conviction, affirming that no one "can avoid all sins, even venial sins, throughout his life, unless he is given a special privilege, as the Church holds with regard to the Blessed Virgin" (DS 1573). Even the Christian transformed and renewed by grace is not spared the possibility of sinning. Grace does not preserve him from all sin throughout his whole fife, unless, as the Council of Trent asserts, a special privilege guarantees this immunity from sin. And this is what happened with Mary.

[For_The_Kingdom]

Ooops, forgive me, I didn't get this far when I said you didn't comment on my posts.

Its all gravy, baby.

You say that somehow "all have sinned" (Romans 3:23) means that everyone but God has sinned. No. It is referring to HUMANS, after Adam rebelled. He was not saying that the angels sinned, because he knew they did not. Only fallen humans. Jesus, as the Son of God, was sinless also, and he was not God.

Simple yes/no question: Do angels have free will?

Yes, I get instruction from the Faithful and Wise Servant---the Watchtower's faithful Governing Body.

And where in the Bible does it state that the Governing Body of the WTS is the "Faithful and Wise Servant" and should be followed?

But here is the difference: They are telling the truth.

Were they telling the truth when the prophesized that the end of the world would come in 1975? And how would you know if what they are saying is true, if you are forbidden/discouraged to do any research outside of the organization?

If you were being told the truth, you would see that Paul was talking about all humans on Earth that inherited sin and death from Adam. The faithful angels did not get involved with the fall of mankind. They remain sinless.

I ask again; where in the Bible does it say that angels are sinless?

You seem unaccustomed to the fact that a created being can be sinless.

Because, since God is sinless, I don't put the morality of mankind on the same pedestal as I put the benevolence of the Almighty.

Tell me this, please: Don't you believe that when God creates, he creates perfectly? Why would God make something that isn't perfect.... something that is flawed? Why would anybody assume such a thing? When he made Adam and Eve, they were perfect.

I will answer your question, but first; let me ask you a question; what is your favorite sport (pick a sport you most enjoy). You will see my point once you answer.

They lost perfection when the rebelled. The angels were created perfect also. The majority of angels who did not go with Satan are STILL perfect.

Non scriptural.

Jesus has always been perfect, and he wasn't touched by the fall of mankind. He did not inherit sin and death. So it's easy to see that Jesus doesn't have to be God to be sinless.

Hmm. I don't recall Satan inheriting sin/death or being "touched" by the fall of mankind..and none of that preventing him from sinning, did it?

Hmm.

([Moses said of God:

"The Rock, PERFECT is his activity..." (Deuteronomy 32:4) ]


For the Kingdom, I think it is incumbent upon YOU to show from the Scriptures that the faithful angels are NOT perfect and are NOT sinless.

God has no equals. To say that angels are sinless and "perfect", while maintaining that God is sinless and perfect...is to say that angels are equal with God.

Blasphemous.

To be sinless does not make a person on a level with God. I don't think there is anything in the Bible that would support that.

Well, what would you call it, then? If God is sinless, and angels are sinless..how are angels not equal with God?

Huh?

[For_The_Kingdom]

Question, simple question; If Jesus was to come to earth, would seeing and being with Jesus be just as good as seeing and being with the Father?

Yes/No?

Yes, and it must be that way, because no one has seen God nor can see God, except those in the heavenly realm. Jesus is as close to seeing God that humans will ever get, and it was loving of him to come here in his Father's place, because the Father is so magnificent that if He were to come to Earth literally, our planet would be an instant cinder.

So, the presence of a merely created being (according to YOUR theology) is interchangeable with God the ALMIGHTY?

SMH.

I am curious to see what you have to say about the other points I made in my posts 59,60,61.

I will in my next responses.

[brianbbs67]

[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.

Question, simple question; If Jesus was to come to earth, would seeing and being with Jesus be just as good as seeing and being with the Father?

Yes/No?

Yes, and it must be that way, because no one has seen God nor can see God, except those in the heavenly realm. Jesus is as close to seeing God that humans will ever get, and it was loving of him to come here in his Father's place, because the Father is so magnificent that if He were to come to Earth literally, our planet would be an instant cinder.

I am curious to see what you have to say about the other points I made in my posts 59,60,61.

I agree with your general position except that no one has seen the Lord. Christ said that those who ate and drank saw the Lord. This is referring to Exodus where the 70 leaders, Moses and Aaron and his sons all meet with the Lord and ate and drank.

[tam]

Peace to you,

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).

Yes, exactly.

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).

Ok, so I will ask you a simple yes/no question; can any created being with "free will" have the SAME level (for lack of a better term) of holiness/righteous than the Almighty God?

No - but for a different reason than you are thinking.

Because the Son is Holy, the Father is elevated to the MOST Holy.


Just as a human son may bring even greater honor to his father (or family) because his honor reflects well upon his father. The glory of Christ is to the credit and increasing glory of the Father (who taught His Son and gave His Son life, to begin with).


Scripture supports this as well.

Christ is the Holy One. His Father (God Most High) is the MOST Holy One. Scripture demonstrates this in the example given to us by the design of the Temple, and of course Christ confirms this when He says that His Father is greater than Him. In the Temple there was the room called the Most Holy Place and there was the room called the Holy Place. One had to pass through the Holy Place in order to come to the Most Holy Place.


The Holy Place represents Christ (the Holy One).

The MOST Holy Place represents God (the MOST Holy One).


No one ccould come into the MOST Holy except through the Holy. Just as Christ said of Himself and of His Father (God):

"No one comes to the Father except through the Son."

I had thought that what is so great about God, that his ways are wayyyy higher than our ways and no matter how hard we try, we will never amount to such greatness, not just in terms of morality, but in terms of ANYTHING.

God having such high ways is one thing that is great about God, of course. But that should not have the qualifier that we are not great, as if God is only great because we are not.



God is awesome for the love that He is, and for the love that He shows. Enough love (and power) for Him to have brought forth life, beginning with His Son, and then through His Son, bringing forth creation and the rest of life. His mercy, His love, His justice, His Truth, His promises and patience and plan and wisdom.

And here you are contending with the fact that I claim that only God is without sin, as if you believe that it is possible for mere created beings to also be without sin. Well, if that were the case, you are implying that the quality of man's benevolence is the SAME as the Almighty God...which is blasphemous.

How dare you?

I am not speaking about 'mere created beings' or 'man'.

Christ is the Son of God. He is no mere created being, and He is no mere man (though He came in the form of a man for a short period of time).

He is the Son of God. This is what He says about Himself.


So you can skip the theatrics, FTK. How can a person blaspheme by believing what Christ said about Himself?

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."

Christ obviously made that statement after the events of Phil 2:5-9.

I don't think that reasoning is going to work out for you. Christ made all of His statements (in the NT) after the events of Phil 2:5-9. Including the statement that to see Him is to see His Father.

Second, in a school system, the principal is "greater" than the teacher. In the military, the "Sgt" is greater than the "PVT". In the Christian household, the husband is "greater" than the wife.

But in either case, the "greater" person isn't necessarily the "better" person. "Greater" is just in terms of position/rank/role. It says nothing about essence/nature/divinity.

Sure, but that does not work out for the trinity does it? Because the trinity states that the Father and Son and "Holy Spirit" are all co-equal. Yet here the Son is saying that the Father is greater than Him.


Also:

So either Jesus was clearly committing blasphemy, or he is saying that he and his Father are so equal that they are interchangeable, and to see one is to see the other.

But He just finished saying that His Father is greater than Him, did He not? He did not say that He and His Father are equal.


And Christ committed no blasphemy.

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

"To see me is to see the Father". It really doesn't get any more "equal" than that.

I gave you His words, FTK, not my own. So who are you really arguing with?

Yes, God created all things through Christ (who is the Son of God). This is described also in Proverbs 8:22-31.

Hmm. The Proverbs 8:22-31 thing...sounds very "Jehovah's Witnessy" to me..not to mention the fact that the entire Scripture has NOTHING to do with Christ...never mind that fact, though.

All religion has some truth, FTK, and some falsehood. You can't dismiss something just because a particular religion happens to teach it. I mean, you can do as you choose, but that is not a good reason to decide something is untrue. To do the opposite - accept a religion simply because it has some true teachings- is equally unwise.


I digress.

Proverbs 8 is about Christ. Christ is Wisdom.

Does Christ not speak what is true (verses 6 and 7)?

Does Christ not call out to all mankind (verses 4)?

Is Christ not our Teacher, our instructor (verse 10, and throughout)?


Do kings not reign by Him (verse 15, 16... compare to Rev 5:9,10; 3:21; 20:4-6)?

Do we not find Christ if we seek Him (verse 17)?

Is not His fruit (fruits of the spirit, fruit of the tree of Life aka Christ) better than gold (verse 18)?

Are we not blessed if we listen to Him (verse 33)?

If we find Him, do we not find life (verse 35; compare with John 17:3 and John 14:6; John 11:25)?



I did not learn this from the WTS.


My Lord is the one who opened these scriptures to me.

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.

So, both the Father and the Son played a part in the creation of the world. No argument from me..

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.

Hmm. But as you pointed out, Paul also stated that there is only one Lord, Jesus...yet,

Deut 6:13 You shall fear only the Lord your God; and you shall worship Him and swear by His name.


Why is "God" being called Lord if there is only one Lord, Jesus?

Just as a point of fact, there is no word "Lord" in that verse. This verse actually reads:

You shall fear only JAHVEH your God; and you shall worship Him and swear by His name.

"The LORD" has been inserted there over "YHWH".

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.

Yeah, that is amazing, isn't it? I mean, Jesus calling his Father only "true" God...only for his Father to also call his Son, "God".

Heb 1:8.."But about the Son he says, "Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever; a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom."

When God says this about His Son, it is more in the following sense (from another post on another thread):

"Because even being called god and savior, this would not mean that Christ is being called the Most Holy One of Israel (God Most High; JAH). Christ is the Son of God, as He consistently says.

Take the following for example:

"[Jesus] answered them, Is it not written in your Law, I said, you are gods? If he called them gods to whom the word of God came"and the Scripture cannot be broken" then what about the One whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world? How then can you accuse me of blasphemy for stating that I am the Son of God?" John 10:34-36


And the reference to this is at Psalm 82:6,

"I have said, "You are gods; you are all sons of the Most High."


Being the Son of the Most High (JAHVEH) does not make that person (even Christ) out to be JAH, Himself."



viewtopic.php?p=954932#954932



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