How can we get our fellow Christians to face reality about Jesus?

[Wootah]

How can we get our fellow Christians to face reality about Jesus?

I thought this summary was good:

How come the NT consistently uses verses from the OT that apply to God alone and IF I applied those verse to me, you, anyone, any angel, any king, you would identify that as blasphemy BUT when you have actual evidence of them being applied to a not God being Jesus you fail to see this?

I need to pray more .

[tam]

Peace to you Wootah,

How can we get our fellow Christians to face reality about Jesus?

I thought this summary was good:

How come the NT consistently uses verses from the OT that apply to God alone and IF I applied those verse to me, you, anyone, any angel, any king, you would identify that as blasphemy BUT when you have actual evidence of them being applied to a not God being Jesus you fail to see this?

I need to pray more .

Because Christ is the Son and Heir of God, many of the titles that apply to God are inherited by His Son, and so also apply to the Son. Christ also said that He received all power and authority from His Father, and so many of the tasks applied to the Father can also be done by the Son.

That does not mean they are both "YHWH".

Because Christ also differentiates between Himself (the Son, whose name is Jaheshua) and His Father (whose name is JAH; and often rendered as YHWH)

[YHWH] says to my lord: “Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.” Psalm 110:1.

Christ identifies Himself as 'my lord' in this passage. Therefore, [YHWH] is the One who is speaking to Christ in this verse.


There are other verses, but the point is - sharing titles and duties makes sense if someone is the heir and representative of another person. It does not make them the same being.

The Son of God is divine - He is the Son of God. But that does not make Him [YHWH], any more than me being the daughter of my mother ("Louise") means that I am "Louise."


Peace again to you.

[Wootah]

[Replying to tam in post #2]

You aren't facing the question. Here is a specific example of what I mean:

Philippians 2:10–11 → Isaiah 45:23

OT (Isa 45:23): “By myself I have sworn… that to me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear allegiance.”

NT (Phil 2:10–11): “…so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow… and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord (Kyrios), to the glory of God the Father.”

→ The universal worship and confession that Isaiah says belongs exclusively to YHWH is here transferred to Jesus.

Isn’t it extremely wrong to take verses about God and apply them to a not-God creature?

Isaiah 45 is even more condemning of your understanding of the NT?

22 “Turn to me and be saved,
all you ends of the earth;
for I am God, and there is no other.
23 By myself I have sworn,
my mouth has uttered in all integrity
a word that will not be revoked:
Before me every knee will bow;
by me every tongue will swear.
24 They will say of me, ‘In the Lord alone
are deliverance and strength.’”
All who have raged against him
will come to him and be put to shame.
25 But all the descendants of Israel
will find deliverance in the Lord
and will make their boast in him.

How dare the NT use verses related to God and apply them to Jesus?

[tam]

Peace to you Wootah,

[Replying to tam in post #2]

You aren't facing the question.

The only question in the OP is the title of the thread. I think I did face that. You bring up verses that are written in the OT of the Father, and some of those verses or their content are being applied to the Son.

This makes sense, since the Son is the HEIR (who received all things from His Father, including titles, honor, duties, and authority.)

Here is a specific example of what I mean:

Philippians 2:10–11 → Isaiah 45:23

OT (Isa 45:23): “By myself I have sworn… that to me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear allegiance.”

NT (Phil 2:10–11): “…so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow… and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord (Kyrios), to the glory of God the Father.”

→ The universal worship and confession that Isaiah says belongs exclusively to YHWH is here transferred to Jesus.

I don't claim to know what Paul was thinking, but while that (the verse) may once have been applicable only of the Father (YHWH), it is now also true and applicable of the Son. At His name every knee will bend, and every tongue confess that He is Lord. Because the Father (YHWH) appointed His Son and Heir to this position.

"Kiss the Son, lest He (the Father) be angry."

And if we swear allegiance to the Son, it is the same as swearing allegiance to the Father. If we obey the Son, it is the same as obeying the Father. Not because Christ is YHWH, but because He is the Son, Heir, Representative, Holy and Chosen One of God (YHWH). The one of whom the Father appointed the head of all His possessions. (John 17:6; 10:29; Isaiah 49:5-7 <- which also speaks of knees bowing to the Servant of God.) This doesn't diminish the Father (YHWH) - just the opposite - it elevates the Father even higher:

Christ is the HOLY One. His Father (YHWH) is the MOST Holy One.

The Philippians verse acknowledges this as well, because at the end of the verse, everything is all done "to the glory of God, the Father."

Isn’t it extremely wrong to take verses about God and apply them to a not-God creature?

It is not wrong to apply them to the Son of God, who is also the Heir of God.

Isaiah 45 is even more condemning of your understanding of the NT?

22 “Turn to me and be saved,
all you ends of the earth;
for I am God, and there is no other.
23 By myself I have sworn,
my mouth has uttered in all integrity
a word that will not be revoked:
Before me every knee will bow;
by me every tongue will swear.
24 They will say of me, ‘In the Lord alone
are deliverance and strength.’”
All who have raged against him
will come to him and be put to shame.
25 But all the descendants of Israel
will find deliverance in the Lord
and will make their boast in him.

How dare the NT use verses related to God and apply them to Jesus?

I think this has been answered above.

**

Now if you had a statement from Christ that He is [YHWH], then you would have a case. But not only is there no such statement, there is at least one statement that speaks against that claim, such as Psalm 110:1.


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

[Wootah]

Thank you for presenting the problem very accurately. How can we get our fellow Christians to face reality about Jesus? The denial of there even being a problem. Holy Scripture has a verse where God alone is speaking for God alone and then that scripture is being applied to not God.

If I took that verse and applied it to someone other than Jesus you would say that was wrong to take a verse about God and apply it to Napoleon/Obama/Mohammad/Smith/Ghandi but when it comes to Jesus, they can't even see the problem. Why is that?

[tam]

Peace to you,

Thank you for presenting the problem very accurately. How can we get our fellow Christians to face reality about Jesus? The denial of there even being a problem. Holy Scripture has a verse where God alone is speaking for God alone and then that scripture is being applied to not God.

If I took that verse and applied it to someone other than Jesus you would say that was wrong to take a verse about God and apply it to Napoleon/Obama/Mohammad/Smith/Ghandi but when it comes to Jesus, they can't even see the problem. Why is that?

You are equating the Son of God, the Heir and Messiah, the Chosen and Holy One of God... with mere men. I don't know why you are making that comparison. If you applied that verse to Napoleon/Obama/Mohammad/Smith/Ghandi, it would be wrong (and absurd) because Napoleon/Obama/Mohammad/Smith/Ghandi are NOT:

1 - the Son of God
2 - the HEIR of God (and of all God's Kingdom)
3 - the ones to whom God gave all power and authority in heaven and on earth
4 - the ones to whom God told us to listen
5 - the ones to whom God (YHWH) said "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet."

Christ is the Son and Heir of God, the one to whom God gave all power and authority in heaven and on earth, the one to whom God told us to listen, the One to whom God (YHWH) said "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet."

In Revelation 3:12 - and so after His resurrection and ascension - Christ still calls God "my God." Why would He do that if He was, Himself, that same God?

Keep in mind also that the verse in question (in Philippians) is not an exact replica. Circumstances have been taken into account: there are additions at the beginning and end of the passage in Philippians, first by stating that God exalted Christ, and second that this is being done to the glory of the Father.


Peace again to you.

[Wootah]

[Replying to tam in post #6]

Yes but those things are just lies to blind you and trick you to worship not God.

They fall into my argument. Someone has applied concepts to Jesus to elevate him high enough for you to worship not God.

[tam]

Peace to you,

[Replying to tam in post #6]

Yes but those things are just lies to blind you and trick you to worship not God.

I'm sorry, but what? What exactly in my post is a lie?

They fall into my argument. Someone has applied concepts to Jesus to elevate him high enough for you to worship not God.

I don't see the word worship, so I'm not sure what you mean when you are using it. Regardless, the person who elevated Christ is God Himself, as seen in the Philippians verse that you, yourself, used:

Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
10
that at the name of [Jesus] every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11
and every tongue acknowledge that [Jesus] Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.



Peace again

[Wootah]

[Replying to tam in post #8]

Sorry. To be clearer:

1 - the Son of God
2 - the HEIR of God (and of all God's Kingdom)
3 - the ones to whom God gave all power and authority in heaven and on earth
4 - the ones to whom God told us to listen
5 - the ones to whom God (YHWH) said "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.

Christ is the Son and Heir of God, the one to whom God gave all power and authority in heaven and on earth, the one to whom God told us to listen, the One to whom God (YHWH) said "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet."

All the above are additional lies in your Bible to deceive you into thinking that a not God being, Jesus, is worthy of your worship.

Your list of points are evidence of further deception to allow you to read the Bible and not question why so much of the Bible is about YHWH and then applied to Jesus. You wouldn't do that to anyone else.

For me, the only way to reconcile this is that Jesus is God.

[tam]

Peace to you,

[Replying to tam in post #8]

Sorry. To be clearer:

1 - the Son of God
2 - the HEIR of God (and of all God's Kingdom)
3 - the ones to whom God gave all power and authority in heaven and on earth
4 - the ones to whom God told us to listen
5 - the ones to whom God (YHWH) said "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.

Christ is the Son and Heir of God, the one to whom God gave all power and authority in heaven and on earth, the one to whom God told us to listen, the One to whom God (YHWH) said "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet."

All the above are additional lies in your Bible to deceive you into thinking that a not God being, Jesus, is worthy of your worship.

Well, obviously everything that I wrote in my post is truthful and also biblical. So I think you are now avoiding the fact that there is a good reason why I would not apply that verse to some random person, but WOULD apply it to Christ.

Your list of points are evidence of further deception to allow you to read the Bible and not question why so much of the Bible is about YHWH and then applied to Jesus. You wouldn't do that to anyone else.

Same response as above - no one else is the Son and Heir of God, the one to whom God gave all power and authority in heaven and on earth, the one to whojm God told us to listen, the One to whom God (YHWH) said "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your fee."

I will, however, add that there isn't a replacement of God with Christ in the NT. Because the OT is not absent of the Messiah. The NT is not absent of God (the God and Father of Christ.) Both God and the Messiah/Christ are present in the OT, as well as in the NT.

For me, the only way to reconcile this is that Jesus is God.

But is that what Christ taught?

Because that is the bottom line for me. He did not teach that He is [YHWH]. He teaches that He is the Son of God. And the problem you have presented is not a real problem, because you are comparing Christ to just "some guy", when Christ is instead the Son and the Heir and Holy and Chosen One of God.

I know the trinity is a long-standing traditional teaching of religion, and it is very deeply embedded in many people. But God did not tell us to listen to religion. He told us to listen to His Son.

"This is my Son, whom I love. Listen to Him."


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