Is Jesus Deity?
Comments
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Wolfgang said:
Are you going by a different principle, such as God inspired Scripture can and does contradict itself?No. My interpretation doesn't have contradictions and harmonizes perfectly.
Oh, I am sure it is ... in your eyes ;-)
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Wolfgang said:
Did Paul write in Eph 1:3 "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ ..." calling God not only Jesus' Father but also Jesus' God? How could Paul then in Tit 2:13 have called Jesus himself to be that God?Three persons. No big deal with that.
One of the God persons is another God person's God and Father ? Interesting ...
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Wolfgang said:
Did Paul plainly call Christ Jesus a man in 1Ti 2:5? How could Paul then have called Jesus to be God, when in a different epistle he called Jesus a man?He was both after John 1. The Word became flesh.
Funny ... we must be reading different gospels of John
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Wolfgang said:
You may want to take into consideration that Paul had no idea about any Trinity Godhead dogma ... as such a theology and dogma was only invented some time later ... quite a while after Paul's death.That is your assumption actually. I contend he did know.
Actually, it wasn't my assumption at all. It was a point commonly acknowledged by Trinity dogma propagators/authors ... who mention that the dogma was not developed in the 1st century AD.
But then, you are propably more knowledgeable than they are ... perhaps even received some special revelation telling you what is generally not known about Paul? -
This is another verse proclaiming the Deity of Christ.
“And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us insight to know him who is true, and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. This one is the true God and eternal life.” (1 John 5:20)
PLUS, check this out! The NET Bible apparatus says: The pronoun This one (οὗτος, houtos) refers to a person, but it is far from clear whether it should be understood as a reference (1) to God the Father or (2) to Jesus Christ. R. E. Brown (Epistles of John [AB], 625) comments, “I John, which began with an example of stunning grammatical obscurity in the prologue, continues to the end to offer us examples of unclear grammar.” The nearest previous antecedent is Jesus Christ, immediately preceding, but on some occasions when this has been true the pronoun still refers to God (see 1 John 2:3). The first predicate which follows This one in 5:20, the true God, is a description of God the Father used by Jesus in John 17:3, and was used in the preceding clause of the present verse to refer to God the Father (him who is true). Yet the second predicate of This one in 5:20, eternal life, appears to refer to Jesus, because although the Father possesses “life” (John 5:26, 6:57) just as Jesus does (John 1:4, 6:57, 1 John 5:11), “life” is never predicated of the Father elsewhere, while it is predicated of Jesus in John 11:25 and 14:6 (a self-predication by Jesus). If This one in 5:20 is understood as referring to Jesus, it forms an inclusion with the prologue, which introduced the reader to “the eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us.” Thus it appears best to understand the pronoun This one in 5:20 as a reference to Jesus Christ. The christological affirmation which results is striking, but certainly not beyond the capabilities of the author (see John 1:1 and 20:28): This One [Jesus Christ] is the true God and eternal life.
Biblical Studies Press. (2005). The NET Bible First Edition; Bible. English. NET Bible.; The NET Bible. Biblical Studies Press.
-
@Dave_L said:
This is another verse proclaiming the Deity of Christ.“And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us insight to know him who is true, and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. This one is the true God and eternal life.” (1 John 5:20)
When one considers carefully what this statement actually says, how it uses terms, it should be absolutely clear, that "the Son of God", "his Son Jesus Christ" refer to the same individual, and that "{Son} of God", "his {Son ...}", "true God" refer to the same individual.
Simple plain logic then demands that the expression "This one is the true God ..." is a reiterating statement by which it is emphasized that the "God" mentioned before, of Whom Jesus Christ is the Son, is the "TRUE God".Understanding "this one" to refer to "Jesus Christ" makes essentially for 2 Gods in this statement, because Jesus Christ is said to be God's Son! To add further error, the assumption that Jesus Christ is the true God, would imply that the God Who is Jesus Father and who is mentioned in the verse as well is not the true God ...
And, please, don't anyone come with the stupidity claim that I but God in a box ... I am simply reading the verse and pointing to the details in it. If anyone is putting anything about the verse in a box, it is those who claim that Messiah Jesus is the true God, and the box they are using is labeled "The Trinity Dogma"
-
Ooops ... something for some reason was deleted in my previous post in the process of proofreading the text ....
In the first paragraph, the references referring to God should of course have included the "Him Who is true", which is obviously an expression that refers to God, as the immediately following "in his Son Jesus Christ" clearly shows. Furthermore, this "Him Who is TRUE" parallels the "this is the TRUE God".
-
Frankly, the Deity of Jesus Christ is the main point of the New Testament. If that point isn't true, the rest is pretty useless.
Jesus said he was God, did things God does, proved He was God. That pretty well settles it.
-
@GaoLu said:
Frankly, the Deity of Jesus Christ is the main point of the New Testament. If that point isn't true, the rest is pretty useless.The point of the NT is not that Jesus is God, but that Jesus is that man, the Messiah, whom God had promised to come in order to accomplish man's redemption and salvation.
@GaoLu said:
Jesus said he was God,I know of many places where Jesus makes a clear distinction between himself and God, I know of not one place where Jesus said that he himself was that God he was talking about in those many places. Where did Jesus say what you claim he said?
@GaoLu said:
did things God does,According to Jesus' own words, he did the things he did because God had given him the authority and power to do them;
@GaoLu said:
proved He was God.Jesus proved that he was that Messiah, whom God had sent, God's Son.
@GaoLu said:
That pretty well settles it.See above ... Unfortunately, what you claim is not in accordance with the Scriptures
Post edited by [Deleted User] on -
See above ... Unfortunately, what you claim is not in accordance with the Scriptures
Well, most of the Jews rejected Him back then. Many still do.
-
This is another of many verses showing the Deity of Christ. With only one or two verses that clearly state his deity, questions about the less clear verses disappear.
“From Simeon Peter, a slave and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ, have been granted a faith just as precious as ours.” (2 Peter 1:1)
-
@GaoLu said:
See above ... Unfortunately, what you claim is not in accordance with the Scriptures
Well, most of the Jews rejected Him back then. Many still do.
I most certainly do NOT reject Messiah Jesus ... my numerous posts detailing many aspects about him are plenty of evidence of it.
I would think, however, that claiming that Messiah is Himself God, and God sent him, are suspect of possibly rejecting him ... Do we read anywhere in Scripture that God sent God? Such a construct with Messiah Jesus being himself God and being sent by God either is total non-sense or else it makes for 2 Gods ...
-
@Dave_L said:
This is another of many verses showing the Deity of Christ. With only one or two verses that clearly state his deity, questions about the less clear verses disappear.The problem is a different one: The rather few verses you have thus far provided and which you claim show that Jesus is God, are the less clear verses when compared to the over 50 places where Jesus is spoken of as "the Son of God" and quite a number of places where Jesus is rather distinctly called "a man" ...
See, you are taking a few seemingly unclear verses and try to then force a contradictory interpretation on the rest of Scripture. The principle for a true understanding is that the few unclear verses must be understood in light of and in harmony with the many clear verses ... and not the other way around as you are doing.“From Simeon Peter, a slave and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ, have been granted a faith just as precious as ours.” (2 Peter 1:1)
Where is the problem with the righteousness being (a) from God (as the author of it) and (b) the Savior Jesus Christ (as the mediator by whose accomplished work it is made available) ?
Leave out the punctuation (which wasn't in the ancient Greek text anyways) and evaluate the possible ways in which the expression could be understood ... and then decide in favor of the one which doesn't cause contradictions and doesn't produce an error in meaning (as you did here)
-
So are these translators wrong? Were the LXX translators wrong to use kurios for YHWH? And the early church to understand Lord (kurios) as being YHWH?
“It will so happen that everyone who calls on the name of the LORD will be delivered. For on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there will be those who survive, just as the LORD has promised; the remnant will be those whom the LORD will call.” (Joel 2:32)
Were these wrong to call on the name of Jesus?
-
Reading through these post I think some are conflating the concept of Jesus being Diety with Trinity. Not, all Christian who believe in the divinity of Jesus can be said to hold to trinitarianism. For example, they might hold to:
(1) Sabellianism:
(a) Successive modalism
(b) simultaneous modalism(2) Tritheism
(3) Binitarianism
or
(4) Swedenborgianism
-
But here is the problem. If your Jesus is not part of the Trinity, he is not the biblical Jesus. But instead a false Christ.
-
@Dave_L said:
So are these translators wrong? Were the LXX translators wrong to use kurios for YHWH? And the early church to understand Lord (kurios) as being YHWH?that's quite a question ... perhaps someone with more Hebrew language background can provide details concerning this. As far as I can tell from a limited knowledge of Hebrew, the YHWH does actually NOT mean "Lord (En) or "kurios (Gr.) In regards translation of the meaning, I would have to say that "kurios / lord" is in fact an incorrect translation, or perhaps one should say it is not even a translation at all, but rather a kind of "trick/technique/etc" to provide a term to use in a Bible translation ...
Nowadays, it has become common practice in the translation field to not translate proper names at all but to leave them as they are (except perhaps for transliterating the letters into the appropriate alphabet.@Dave_L said:
“It will so happen that everyone who calls on the name of the LORD will be delivered. For on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there will be those who survive, just as the LORD has promised; the remnant will be those whom the LORD will call.” (Joel 2:32)
Were these wrong to call on the name of Jesus?Since Jesus was acting in everything he said and did as told by God, YHWH, the person who would "call on Jesus" (that is, loo for him and his accomplishments to receive God's promise and blessing) would in effect - in a transferred or extended sense - be calling on YHWH, God.
None of it, makes Jesus to be God / YHWH.
-
If Jesus was not God (YHWH), wouldn't people be worshipping and trusting in a man instead of God for their salvation. Was he just another Pope in your opinion?
-
@Dave_L said:
If Jesus was not God (YHWH), wouldn't people be worshipping and trusting in a man instead of God for their salvation.now what would be so terribly wrong for someone to worship the man Christ Jesus (cp 1Ti 2:5 ) as Messiah and mediator between God and man and as the one whom they have confessed to be their lord in accordance with Rom 10:9,10 ??
I am far more concerned that people worship the man Christ Jesus as YHWH GOD ....@Dave_L said:
Was he just another Pope in your opinion?I don't think silliness is asked for in a serious and honest exchange about the topic at hand.
-
If what you say is true, then Jesus was just another Pope. A Vicar of God on earth.
-
@Wolfgang said:
@GaoLu said:
Frankly, the Deity of Jesus Christ is the main point of the New Testament. If that point isn't true, the rest is pretty useless.The point of the NT is not that Jesus is God, but that Jesus is that man, the Messiah, whom God had promised to come in order to accomplish man's redemption and salvation.
At a minimum the Gospel of John is to prove the Deity of Christ.
-
@Wolfgang said:
@Dave_L said:
If Jesus was not God (YHWH), wouldn't people be worshipping and trusting in a man instead of God for their salvation.now what would be so terribly wrong for someone to worship the man Christ Jesus (cp 1Ti 2:5 ) as Messiah and mediator between God and man and as the one whom they have confessed to be their lord in accordance with Rom 10:9,10 ??
You are kidding right? It is sin to worship anyone but God.
-
@Dave_L said:
If your Jesus is not ...., he is not the biblical Jesus.The Jesus we read about in Bible is the Biblical Jesus!
However. all the following terms are not found in the Biblical text: Trinity, Trinitarianism, Successive modalism, simultaneous modalism, Tritheism, Binitarianism, Swedenborgianism. While those terms are not biblical, they do however represent some of the various ways people have tried to make sense of theology.
-
@Mitchell said:
@Dave_L said:
If your Jesus is not ...., he is not the biblical Jesus.The Jesus we read about in Bible is the Biblical Jesus!
However. all the following terms are not found in the Biblical text: Trinity, Trinitarianism, Successive modalism, simultaneous modalism, Tritheism, Binitarianism, Swedenborgianism. While those terms are not biblical, they do however represent some of the various ways people have tried to make sense of theology.
If not trinitarian, then you are short changing people in your description of Christ. And preaching another Jesus.
-
The Biblical Jesus needs proper understanding. Every cult claims the "biblical" Jesus.
-
@Mitchell said:
@Dave_L said:
If your Jesus is not ...., he is not the biblical Jesus.The Jesus we read about in Bible is the Biblical Jesus!
However. all the following terms are not found in the Biblical text: Trinity, Trinitarianism, Successive modalism, simultaneous modalism, Tritheism, Binitarianism, Swedenborgianism. While those terms are not biblical, they do however represent some of the various ways people have tried to make sense of theology.
But what is explicitly found is that Jesus is God.
@Dave_L said:
@Mitchell said:
@Dave_L said:
If your Jesus is not ...., he is not the biblical Jesus.The Jesus we read about in Bible is the Biblical Jesus!
However. all the following terms are not found in the Biblical text: Trinity, Trinitarianism, Successive modalism, simultaneous modalism, Tritheism, Binitarianism, Swedenborgianism. While those terms are not biblical, they do however represent some of the various ways people have tried to make sense of theology.
If not trinitarian, then you are short changing people in your description of Christ. And preaching another Jesus.
Don't pick fights that do not exist. He is saying the words are not in Scripture.
-
@Dave_L said:
If what you say is true, then Jesus was just another Pope. A Vicar of God on earth.So you really believe that the Pope is a vicar of God on earth ???? I don't !!
-
@Wolfgang said:
@Dave_L said:
If what you say is true, then Jesus was just another Pope. A Vicar of God on earth.So you really believe that the Pope is a vicar of God on earth ???? I don't !!
@Wolfgang said:
@Dave_L said:
If what you say is true, then Jesus was just another Pope. A Vicar of God on earth.So you really believe that the Pope is a vicar of God on earth ???? I don't !!
That is what you are arguing though. He was just a man, just a prophet, yet we should worship him?
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
At a minimum the Gospel of John is to prove the Deity of Christ.The gospel of John was written so that those who read it might believe that Jesus is THE SON of God ... it was not written to prove and actually nowhere says that Jesus was God.
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Wolfgang said:
now what would be so terribly wrong for someone to worship the man Christ Jesus (cp 1Ti 2:5 ) as Messiah and mediator between God and man and as the one whom they have confessed to be their lord in accordance with Rom 10:9,10 ??You are kidding right? It is sin to worship anyone but God.
I am dead serious!! And I suggest that you inform yourself better concerning the word "worship" and its actual meaning and how it is used in different contexts.
I'll reveal a secret from my private life => I worship my wife as the queen of my heart!
You want to call that a sin ?? -
@Wolfgang said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
At a minimum the Gospel of John is to prove the Deity of Christ.The gospel of John was written so that those who read it might believe that Jesus is THE SON of God ... it was not written to prove and actually nowhere says that Jesus was God.
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Wolfgang said:
now what would be so terribly wrong for someone to worship the man Christ Jesus (cp 1Ti 2:5 ) as Messiah and mediator between God and man and as the one whom they have confessed to be their lord in accordance with Rom 10:9,10 ??You are kidding right? It is sin to worship anyone but God.
I am dead serious!! And I suggest that you inform yourself better concerning the word "worship" and its actual meaning and how it is used in different contexts.
I'll reveal a secret from my private life => I worship my wife as the queen of my heart!
You want to call that a sin ??Actually yes. That is what I am saying.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Mitchell said:
However. all the following terms are not found in the Biblical text: Trinity, Trinitarianism, Successive modalism, simultaneous modalism, Tritheism, Binitarianism, Swedenborgianism. While those terms are not biblical, they do however represent some of the various ways people have tried to make sense of theology.But what is explicitly found is that Jesus is God.
Where in the Bible? There is no such statement found in the Bible, nor is there anywhere an expression like "God the Son".
-
I've already proven Jesus IS God beyond doubt from scripture. But you challenge the pros in their translations of scripture saying they do not know what they are doing. But I would like to know the history behind your particular group and what level of education any might possess.
![[Deleted User]](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/fcddec765be35f238a0844bd23f54b59/?default=https%3A%2F%2Fvanillicon.com%2F8ce8323767a20f0f45db140c4cd2cea1_200.png&rating=g&size=200)
