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 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.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 1 by For_The_Kingdom]

I think that you've done a good job of demonstrating that the New Testament indicates (albeit indirectly) that Jesus is God.

But the New Testament also contains internal evidence that Jesus is not God:

Matthew 16:28 28

"Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom."

God would not have been wrong about the timing of the "Son of Man's" return. Jesus' contemporaries have all passed away, tasted death, and still he has not returned in his kingdom, ie the 2nd coming.

[RightReason]

[Replying to For_The_Kingdom]

That is the point, you cannot be without sin and not BE God. If you are without sin and you AREN'T God

I agree that God is without sin, but that does not mean that if you are without sin, you are God.

I agree with your conclusion – Jesus is God. However, I do not see your first point proving your conclusion. As a Catholic, the Church teaches Mary is without sin. And yet Mary is not God.

[For_The_Kingdom]

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.

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

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.

That diagram you alluded to earlier about the Trinity does a perfect job of illustrating how all three (Father/Son/Holy Spirit) can be God, with all three being separate, individual persons.

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.

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".

What Jesus is saying is; "My presence with you is just as good as the Father's presence with you would be".

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.

I am not.

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

How so?

Because you say that as if I am speaking against it...when not only am I not speaking against it, but I actually AGREE with you.

[For_The_Kingdom]

I agree that God is without sin, but that does not mean that if you are without sin, you are God.

Actually, it does. To be without sin is to be morally perfect, and only God is morally perfect. Unless you can point out a created being who have the same level of moral benevolence as the Most High God.

I agree with your conclusion – Jesus is God. However, I do not see your first point proving your conclusion. As a Catholic, the Church teaches Mary is without sin. And yet Mary is not God.

Saying that Mary is without sin contradicts Romans 5:12. Of course, people can believe what they want, but does what they believe line up with Scripture? That is the question..and in this case, obviously not.

[RightReason]

[Replying to post 53 by For_The_Kingdom]

RightReason wrote:


I agree that God is without sin, but that does not mean that if you are without sin, you are God.


Actually, it does. To be without sin is to be morally perfect, and only God is morally perfect.

Is there some distinction you are making between perfect and morally perfect? Anyone who keeps the commandments of God and has not committed an immoral act is in fact at that moment morally perfect.

Is a baby capable of immorality?

Everyone who is now in heaven is without sin and yet that does not make them gods.

Unless you can point out a created being who have the same level of moral benevolence as the Most High God.

I’m not sure what you mean by level of benevolence. If you are moral, then you are moral.

Mary was referred to as full of grace and Christ’s Church teaches that she was conceived without sin and assumed into heaven. Like I said, she was without sin, but not God. Do you doubt God can do that?

Saying that Mary is without sin contradicts Romans 5:12.

Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned

No, it doesn’t. First, Jesus is a man and yet you agree He was born without sin. Second, like I said, Mary was spared the normal buried in the ground death. She was assumed into heaven body and soul. So typical death actually did not come to her.

And then of course we have properly understanding Biblical language . . .

*********

Paul writes that “all Israel will be saved,� (11:26), but we know that many will not be saved. And in 15:14, Paul describes members of the Roman church as “filled with all knowledge� (cf. 1 Cor 1:5 in KJV), which clearly cannot be taken literally.


Pas can have different meanings according to its different uses . . . in many verses, pas is used in the NT simply to denote a great number, e.g., “all Jerusalem� in Mt 2:3 and “all the sick� in 4:24. (pp. 796-797)


We see Jewish idiom and hyperbole in passages of similar meaning. Jesus says: “No one is good but God alone� (Lk 18:19; cf. Mt 19:17). Yet He also said: “The good person brings good things out of a good treasure.� (Mt 12:35; cf. 5:45; 7:17-20; 22:10). Furthermore, in each instance in Matthew and Luke above of the English “good� the Greek word is the same: agatho.

Is this a contradiction? Of course not. Jesus is merely drawing a contrast between our righteousness and God’s, but He doesn’t deny that we can be “good� in a lesser sense.

One might also note 1 Corinthians 15:22: “For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.� As far as physical death is concerned (the context of 1 Cor 15), not “all� people have died (e.g., Enoch: Gen 5:24; cf. Heb 11:5; Elijah: 2 Kings 2:11). Likewise, “all� will not be made spiritually alive by Christ, as some will choose to suffer eternal spiritual death in hell.

The key in all this is to understand biblical language properly in context. It’s not always literal.

http://www.ncregister.com/blog/darmstro ... ulate-mary

[For_The_Kingdom]

Is there some distinction you are making between perfect and morally perfect?

Sure. You can be perfect in your knowledge/wisdom without being perfect in your ways (action, morality). Can't you?

Anyone who keeps the commandments of God and has not committed an immoral act is in fact at that moment morally perfect.

Yeah, but once someone reaches the age of accountability, sin and the accountability of sins (from God) is right around the corner.

Is a baby capable of immorality?

I will answer that question by asking you a question; any arbitrary baby who has obviously committed no sin...can the death of this baby be the atonement for the sins of mankind?

Yes or no.

Everyone who is now in heaven is without sin and yet that does not make them gods.

I am led to believe that in heaven, mankind's free will will be striped away..and with the striping of this free will; sinful nature will also be striped away.

Therefore, man will be without sin not because they "choose" to be, but because God will take it away from them.

The difference is; man has to be "helped" in order not to sin...God doesn't need help, because it is simply not in his nature.

Unless you can point out a created being who have the same level of moral benevolence as the Most High God.

I’m not sure what you mean by level of benevolence. If you are moral, then you are moral.

Well, look at it this way; Jesus called John the Baptist the "greatest man born of a woman" (Luke 7:28). Think about that. Of all of the holy men that has existed (Noah, Abraham, Moses, Elijah, Job)..all of these men were born of a woman...yet Jesus said that John the Baptist is greater than all of them.

So OBVIOUSLY, there are levels to this stuff.

Mary was referred to as full of grace and Christ’s Church teaches that she was conceived without sin and assumed into heaven. Like I said, she was without sin, but not God. Do you doubt God can do that?

What the Church teaches is irrelevant. Where does the BIBLE say that Mary was "without sin and assumed into heaven"? Where?

Saying that Mary is without sin contradicts Romans 5:12.

Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned

No, it doesn’t. First, Jesus is a man and yet you agree He was born without sin.

First of all, obviously Jesus is EXCLUDED from the context of that scripture...and if that is the best you can do..then no wonder..

Second, we are not just talking about being "BORN" without sin...we are talking about living your life completely sin free. Only God can come on earth and live a sinless life, and if you argue otherwise, you are saying that there are "some" people on earth of whom Jesus' sacrifice doesn't apply to...but scripture is clear that "we all sin and fall short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23), which Paul also said in just a few chapters BEFORE the scripture in question.

So we have at least two scriptures that are just chapters apart which contradicts the "sinless Mary" theory.

Second, like I said, Mary was spared the normal buried in the ground death. She was assumed into heaven body and soul. So typical death actually did not come to her.

UnBiblical Catholic doctrine. You go by what the Catholics "teaches". I go by what the Bible "says".

Big difference between us.

[RightReason]

[Replying to For_The_Kingdom]

RightReason wrote:



Is there some distinction you are making between perfect and morally perfect?


Sure. You can be perfect in your knowledge/wisdom without being perfect in your ways (action, morality). Can't you?

Sure. But if you are moral in your actions, then you have acted morally perfect. You can’t be more moral than is moral. If you found a wallet with money in it and returned it to its owner, you have acted morally. Giving the person who lost the wallet their wallet and an extra $100 isn’t acting more morally. You can do that if you want to, but it doesn’t make returning the wallet even more moral. And like I tried to previously explain human beings are capable of doing the right thing and being free from sin. It isn’t easy, but it is possible, especially especially with the help of God.

Yeah, but once someone reaches the age of accountability, sin and the accountability of sins (from God) is right around the corner.

Unless God saved you from sin (for example like He did with Mary). Or unless you are Jesus. Or unless you take advantage of the many Sacraments that God left us with that not only forgive us of our sins, but also help keep us free from sinning.

RightReason wrote:


Is a baby capable of immorality?


I will answer that question by asking you a question; any arbitrary baby who has obviously committed no sin...can the death of this baby be the atonement for the sins of mankind?

No idea what that has to do with the fact that innocent Baptized babies are not guilty of sin. And here you said only God is without sin.

RightReason wrote:


Everyone who is now in heaven is without sin and yet that does not make them gods.


I am led to believe that in heaven, mankind's free will will be striped away..and with the striping of this free will; sinful nature will also be striped away.

Therefore, man will be without sin not because they "choose" to be, but because God will take it away from them.

Yes, just like He is free to save Mary prior to death and free to take away are Original Sin via Baptism, which renders all babies free from sin.

The difference is; man has to be "helped" in order not to sin...God doesn't need help, because it is simply not in his nature.

You didn’t mention the help part in your original argument. You merely said only God is without sin, which simply isn’t true. So, your first argument doesn’t really work.

What the Church teaches is irrelevant. Where does the BIBLE say that Mary was "without sin and assumed into heaven"? Where?

Where does the BIBLE say the Bible is our sole authority? The Bible actually tells us we are to listen to the Church. Both Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture are our authority. Given that, there is Scriptural evidence of Mary being free from sin and assumed into heaven, however there wouldn’t need to be Scriptural evidence of that for it to be true, because we have been told to listen to the Church and the Church tells us so. There is also evidence from early Church writings indicating this as well.

Second, we are not just talking about being "BORN" without sin...we are talking about living your life completely sin free.

Yes, that is what I am talking about with Mary as well. Don’t be so shocked—with God all things are possible.

Only God can come on earth and live a sinless life

For most of us, yes, this seems to be true. However, it also seems to be true in the case of Mary. Why so hard to believe God could do that if He so desired? Scripture tells us Mary was full of grace. Mary herself said my soul magnifies the Lord. And Scripture says all generations shall call her blessed. Why don’t you?

UnBiblical Catholic doctrine. You go by what the Catholics "teaches". I go by what the Bible "says".

Well my method is ironically more Scriptural. Because the Bible does not tell us to only go to the Bible.

Big difference between us.

I couldn’t agree more

[tam]

Peace to you jgh7,

[Replying to post 45 by tam]

Thank you tam for you explanation. As I've read throughout the NT, there is a common theme among the translations. Typically, wherever the KJV/NKJV is trinitarian, the other versions omit or change the wording in such a way that it's non-trinitarian.

For now, I need to learn more about the source manuscripts as this is the cause of the differences in translation. Needless to say, these differences can be dramatic, and it's quite frustrating to me that they exist. I must suspend any further debate on this topic because too much is up in the air for me. Peace of the Lord to you!

Thank you for your wish of peace.


I understand your frustration. I, too, became frustrated over this issue. Most of Christendom believed in the trinity, but everything that goes into supporting that belief is all interpretation. Christ does not teach it.

That should have been a red flag, but for a little while, I searched and struggled to find a clear statement about it as well. And of course there is no such statement, so I also became frustrated. I just wanted to know the truth, and I could not find it 'searching the scriptures'.


But wait a second! Why was I struggling to discover the truth (or falsehood) of a doctrine that Christ never taught? Why was I paying this doctrine any attention at all? Just because Christendom teaches it and most accept it? That is not a good reason to accept something.

I am a disciple of Christ. HE is my Teacher. I am to listen to Him.


The moment I heard (and truly understood) what that meant... everything became so simple (and I received peace, HIS peace). I would go only with what Christ teaches. I would stop worrying about what man teaches (which serves to confuse the truth), and I would simply listen to Christ. He has never led me wrong.


So I completely understand your need to search for the truth of this matter. If I may, I would only remind you that Christ is Himself the Truth, and the Teacher God sent to us, the One to whom God told us to listen.


May you be granted ears to hear if you wish them, so as to hear the truth on this matter, and may you also hear as the Spirit and the Bride say to you, "Come! Take the free gift of the water of Life!"


Peace again to you, as my Lord gives peace,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[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.

Opinions vary.

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.’

 �

[onewithhim]

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.

First of all......where in the Bible does it say that "only God is without sin"?? Sadly, your religious instructors have failed you. You were told a falsehood. Nowherein the Bible does it say that only God is without sin.

No HUMAN is without sin, but there are millions of ANGELS that are without sin. When God made Adam, he made him without sin. Adam only became sinful when he disobeyed God.

So your premise from the start is flawed.

Besides God (who is the Father and the Father ONLY), Jesus and all the angels are without sin, and all of mankind would be also if Adam had not disobeyed and passed sin and death on to his offspring.