"Before Abraham Was, I AM"

[Hiddenthings]

Hebrews states that Jesus is THE EXACT IMAGE OF GOD.

That being imaged can never be the actual substance.

I’m sorry that you have embraced these falsehoods, which were propagated even during the time of the Apostles but were fully established through the decisions of later councils of men.

If you knew a certain verse in Romans 8 you would never say you are the Lord Jesus Christ.

Leave it with you.

 

[XtraPercept]

His word brings division between truth & error, right & wrong, &c.

But the understanding of His Gospel brings unity in love to His singular earthly body.

 

[GodsGrace]

That being imaged can never be the actual substance.

I’m sorry that you have embraced these falsehoods, which were propagated even during the time of the Apostles but were fully established through the decisions of later councils of men.

If you knew a certain verse in Romans 8 you would never say you are the Lord Jesus Christ.

Leave it with you.

Who has embraced the falsehood?

The one who believes what the church has believed from the beginning...
or the one who believes some new idea from the past 200 years?

Again
1 Timothy 4:1
1 But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons,


It is the later times.
You are following deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons.
Doctrine NOT taught by the Apostles.

Personal insults come about when scripture cannot easily be replied to.

 

[GodsGrace]

That being imaged can never be the actual substance.

The above statement CLEARLY shows that you do not comprehend either the book of Hebrews
or the meaning of words.

And again,,,I'd keep away from the book of Hebrews if I were you.

I’m sorry that you have embraced these falsehoods, which were propagated even during the time of the Apostles but were fully established through the decisions of later councils of men.

If you knew a certain verse in Romans 8 you would never say you are the Lord Jesus Christ.

Leave it with you.

 

[GodsGrace]

How can I address what you dismiss upon my attempt to do so? Highlight my insult that I may apologize for it properly, as I meant no harm. If I inflicted some, it is my shame, as it is my intent to represent the God of truth, Whom I love because He loves me.

Apparently you missed my post no. 336.

I gave you 9 verses straight out of the NT.
Verses you apparently do not believe.

You could try to twist them any which way you may think to...
however, they state what they state.

They state that JESUS IS GOD and He has always existed.

The way to reply is to use scripture.

Instead YOU have resorted to:

1. Personal insults
2. Personal opinion


Bad theology causes bad reactions.

 

[XtraPercept]

I seek to bring peace. I seek to intercede and rectify. To what do you object but my efforts to assist in reconciling you both on the grounds that we all seek the same Foundation?

Why do you reject my words?

@GodsGrace , Quote my insult to you, please, as your words do not make sense.

 

[Hiddenthings]

Who has embraced the falsehood?

The one who believes what the church has believed from the beginning...
or the one who believes some new idea from the past 200 years?

Again
1 Timothy 4:1
1 But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons,


It is the later times.
You are following deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons.
Doctrine NOT taught by the Apostles.

Personal insults come about when scripture cannot easily be replied to.

My post addressed your inference: just as Jesus, the exact image of God, was perfected through obedience and suffering unto death, we too are being conformed into his image through the same process. The outcome will not permit anyone to claim to be Christ, no more than it allowed Christ to claim equality with God.

The point was missed by you, and you moved on to another idea without fully reflecting on the truth of what was being said. If I answered 1 Timothy 4:1 would you them move onto another verse? Where does this end?

 

[GodsGrace]

I seek to bring peace. I seek to intercede and rectify. To what do you object but my efforts to assist in reconciling you both on the grounds that we all seek the same Foundation?

Why do you reject my words?

@GodsGrace , Quote my insult to you, please, as your words do not make sense.

Go back and read your posts to me.

As to rejecting your words:
Your words are rejected because they are not truth.

 

[GodsGrace]

My post addressed your inference: just as Jesus, the exact image of God, was perfected through obedience and suffering unto death, we too are being conformed into his image through the same process. The outcome will not permit anyone to claim to be Christ, no more than it allowed Christ to claim equality with God.

Are you a mormon?
Do you think you're like God?
Are YOU going to the cross?

Try harder Hidden....

Let's look again:

JESUS IS THE EXACT REPRESENTATION/IMAGE/COPY of God.

YOU are not and you will NEVER be - not even in your glorified body.

The point was missed by you, and you moved on to another idea without fully reflecting on the truth of what was being said. If I answered 1 Timothy 4:1 would you them move onto another verse? Where does this end?

 

[GodsGrace]

My post addressed your inference: just as Jesus, the exact image of God, was perfected through obedience and suffering unto death, we too are being conformed into his image through the same process. The outcome will not permit anyone to claim to be Christ, no more than it allowed Christ to claim equality with God.

The point was missed by you, and you moved on to another idea without fully reflecting on the truth of what was being said. If I answered 1 Timothy 4:1 would you them move onto another verse? Where does this end?

Christ did not CLAIM equality with God...
He IS GOD.

How would YOU understand all the verses I posted in no. 336?

Do we just dismiss them from the NT?

 

[Hiddenthings]

They specifically asked Jesus a question (misunderstanding His words, when He said, "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad", speaking about looking down through time in faith in the word / promise given of the Messiah to come)), about "Thou are not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?" They specifically asked a question about pre-existence, about age ("years old"). Jesus truthfully responds to their inquiry about their point of age and in having seen Abraham (alive), in saying that, "Before Abraham was, I am."

Did you notice how you have only used Johns Gospel to force your pre-exitance doctrine?

Matthew and Luke, plainly present Jesus as beginning life as a baby in a manger. Luke 1:32 says, “He shall be great… shall be called the Son of the Most High,” and Luke 2:11 declares, “A Savior, which is Christ the Lord.”

Did Jeremiah preexist (Jer. 1:5)?
Did John the Baptist preexist (John 1:6)?
Were the saints foreknown before their birth (Eph. 1:4)?

Revelation 13:8 states, “the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.” Did Christ literally die before the world existed?

Of course not!

This language signifies only that it was God’s plan from the beginning that His Son would die in the future. Similarly, 1 Peter 1:19–20 says, “a lamb without blemish, foreordained before the foundation of the world, but manifested in these last days” foreordained in the beginning, yet not yet formed.

The idiom John uses is unique and not ordinary English. For example: “life…death” in 1 John 3:14; “beneath…above” in John 8:23; “overcome the world” in John 16:33. This style is not common in the other Gospels.

Consider also Christ’s fully human nature and his sacrifice: How could something immortal become mortal? How could Jesus be “tempted in all points like us, his brethren” if he retained memories of life in heaven?

And how could an eternal, preexistent God truly die?

1 Corinthians 15:46 clarifies: “first the natural, then the spiritual.” Christ was the firstfruits of this process, showing the pattern of life, obedience, and resurrection.

You are looking for pre-existence where there is actually pre-eminence, because you feel the need for this “evidence” to construct a man-made framework onto which you can attach the many non-biblical concepts that have developed over thousands of years.

When the truth of Christ origins is fully known you will behold the wonder of this verse in ways never imagined.

1 Corinthians 15:57 "But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ."

For now, you know not the Victory, but God willing you will.

 

[XtraPercept]

Where does this end?

Only with the final Authority.

Go back and read your posts to me.

As to rejecting your words:
Your words are rejected because they are not truth.

I've spoken no lie and issued no offense by intent, I have only sought to correct your assertion which detracts from the truth of my God. Your fruits are not of the Vine which is why you do not recognize Truth.

I am commanded to express Him as best I can, and if you are offended by me, it is only because I have told you His truth.

I am not hurt by your rejection, I tell you truth because you claim to be of Him while yet speaking confusion. His servants are eloquent and graceful and His regality is reflected in their tactfulness.

Your offense to my words is on your conscience alone. My God smiles upon me.

 

[Hiddenthings]

Only with the final Authority.

The longer I participate in this forum, the more I find myself longing for his return, when all our folly will finally be brought to silence. The one thing I truly appreciate is that I possess the original, unaltered Gospel, faithfully delivered by the Apostles, and for this I am deeply thankful!

 

[XtraPercept]

The longer I participate in this forum, the more I find myself longing for his return, when all our folly will finally be brought to silence. The one thing I truly appreciate is that I possess the original, unaltered Gospel, faithfully delivered by the Apostles, and for this I am deeply thankful!

I am here because I love to practice the Word. This statement applies universally to my existence. My God is the Absolute and the Best, truly the Absolute Best.

 

[Adventageous]

God cannot sin, it is impossible for Him to do so, whereas the Son of Man was tempted in every way. He was capable of sinning yet did not; instead, through suffering and death, he remained obedient and faithful.

So, you are not a Trinitarian, yet you believe in the pre-existence of Christ as a divine being, is that correct?

What is crucial is that John 1 and John 8 cannot be used to support the idea of Christ’s pre-existence; in both passages the context clearly points to pre-eminence, not literal pre-existence.

The reason it is so difficult to prove is that it is a false teaching, developed and codified through human councils rather than Scripture.

Col 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent.

Firstborn; first man to be granted immortality and to be exalted to the right hand of the Father on High.

Once your understanding aligns with the Apostles’ teaching, seeing Christ as the firstborn and the firstfruits of those who sleep...the wonder of his sacrifice and the principles of atonement truly come alive.

Deity (ie. God) does not sin. Correct. The "Son of man" (Dan. 7:13, Mat. 12:8, 16:13 KJB, &c.) is "God ... manifest in the flesh" (1 Tim. 3:16 KJB), as even John 1 clearly stated (previously cited, "the Word was God ... the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us ... the only begotten of the Father ... Jesus Christ ... the only begotten Son", "All things were made by him", "the world was made by him", "He came unto his own", &c.). The flesh that was taken was "in the likeness of sinful (ie., fallen) flesh" (Rom. 8:3), and not of the nature of the unfallen angelic heavenly hosts (Heb. 2:16 KJB), and in this way could die, for if it were unfallen flesh (as something like the nature of unfallen angelic hosts have; see 1 Cor. 15:39-40; Jud. 1:7; Heb. 2:16, &c.) it is not subject to death unless sin is present (as like unto the first Adam). Thus he could be tempted in all points. The temptation came through the sinful (fallen) flesh:

Mat_26:41 Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.​

Mar_14:38 Watch ye and pray, lest ye enter into temptation. The spirit truly is ready, but the flesh is weak.​

This is how the Son (being in nature Deity, and in nature human (with sinful (fallen) flesh) could be tempted. For with God, all things are possible.

This passage is not about pre-eminence:

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.​

Joh 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.​

Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.​

It is about pre-existence, even to the point of placing the Son of the Father at the creation of the earth, in Gen. 1, "In the beginning". Beginning is time, or chronology, not about pre-eminence or superiority.

I have already thoroughly addressed John 8 in several replies, even down to the very language itself.

I have not anywhere in my responses pointed to any "human councils", but I have continually addressed every response by the actual scripture, which exists before any such "human councils". I have not even brought up such "human councils" once in my replies. You have been the first to do so. Those "human councils" are non-sequitur (even a red-herring) to our discussion. I do not care what those "human councils" have in print. They are not relevant to my position, or responses. I am not a credalist. I do not adhere to any of the man-made creeds either (they all have their individual errors, and are again non-sequitur to our discussion).

Colossians 1:18 is about pre-eminence, no doubt (and never in question). However, I did not cite Col. 1:18. I cited, Col. 1:16:

Col 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:​

Which has nothing to do with pre-eminence, but pre-existence. Just because one passage (even in immediate context) is about one thing (say pre-eminence in matters of Resurrection), does not mean that the previous verses are of the same idea. Col. 1:16 is clearly stating that "him" (Jesus / Son) is the One Who "created" "all things", which automatically excludes Jesus from all created things. He is not in a category of "created things", since He was their creator. Those "things" were not merely created "by him", but also "for him", not merely in earth, but also in heaven.

What you are essentially doing (and merely pointing it out), is often what Islamicists (and sometimes atheists) will do. I point to a text on Jesus' eternal existing Deity. They point to a text on Jesus' finite humanity (as the human nature of the Son was "made"). The one does not negate the other, nor supercede the other. They are not antagonistic to each other. They are harmonious together. They both are required. To say that a text speaks of the pre-eminence of Jesus, does not negate, nor superceded the texts on His pre-existence. They are both required.

Firstborn in scripture has several meanings (which may be seen in this image here - Did The Mary Of Scripture Remain An Ever Virgin (Perpetual Virgin) As Romanism Says - NO : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive ), one of which means 'chief' (or pre-eminent one; and does not always mean first in chronological time). I may list the meanings as needful, requested, in this thread by any who ask for them. Never-the-less, Jesus was not the first man to be granted immortality in being resurrected. That falls to Moses:

Rom_5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.​

​

Luk 9:30 And, behold, there talked with him two men, which were Moses and Elias:​

Luk 9:31 Who appeared in glory, and spake of his decease which he should accomplish at Jerusalem.​

Moses was permanantly resurrected (even by Jesus, for it was by the LORD that Moses was buried in the first place; Num. 20:8-12, 27:13, 31:2; Deu. 4:21-22, 31:2,14,16, 32:51-52, 34:1-8; 1 Sam. 2:6; Mat. 17:1-12; Mar. 9:1-13; Luk. 9:27-36; Jhn. 11:25-26; Rom. 5:14; 2 Pet. 1:16; Jud. 1:9 KJB) long before Jesus' resurrection took place. However, as the text of Col. 1:18 shows, Jesus' resurrection is the pre-eminent one (it doesn't say first one, as in chronological in time), that was required for anyone to ever be resurrected, and that included Moses' permanent resurrection. Moses was permanently resurrected in the promise of Jesus' own death, burial and resurrection from Gen. 3:15,21. This is why Jesus' resurrection is the pre-emninent one, not the first in chronological time.

My understanding aligns perfectly with the Apostles doctrine, as demonstrated in my responses:

Act 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.​

​

Act_24:14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:​

 

[saved by grace 101]

My post addressed your inference: just as Jesus, the exact image of God, was perfected through obedience and suffering unto death, we too are being conformed into his image through the same process. The outcome will not permit anyone to claim to be Christ, no more than it allowed Christ to claim equality with God.

The point was missed by you, and you moved on to another idea without fully reflecting on the truth of what was being said. If I answered 1 Timothy 4:1 would you them move onto another verse? Where does this end?

Speaking as one who has in the past discussed this subject endlessly. Equal Trinitarians will not debate the scriptures you bring forth, they are only prepared to debate their own. Indeed, in this thread where someone refused to address what I wrote concerning Heb1:8&9, they proclaimed to people I had stated something different from what I obviously had stated concerning Heb1:8. So then sadly the bearing false witness started. They haven't got any verse in the entire bible that states you must believe Jesus is the one true God to inherit eternal life, but it doesn't stop them demanding it. Sadly, some peoples heads are so crammed full of theology there is no room left for discernment.

 

[Hiddenthings]

@Adventageous

Jesus did not say that he had seen Abraham; rather, Abraham saw his day. The Jews attempted to mock him, as if claiming he was over 2,000 years old!

Yet you align yourself with these double-minded believers and put words into Christ’s mouth to suggest otherwise?

John 1:30 "This is he of whom I said, ‘After me comes a man who ranks before me, because he was before me.’"

In the context of John 1:30, when John the Baptist says that Jesus “ranks before me, because he was before me,” the idea conveyed is one of preeminence in God’s plan rather than literal eternal pre-existence. John is emphasizing that God knew Jesus beforehand, and his role in salvation was foreordained.

Both John and Jesus affirm that the promised Messiah was foreknown, yet he came into existence as testified by Matthew, Mark, and Luke. The prophecies concerning the promised Son are numerous, with many detailed in Luke 1 and 2.

I am confident that, through prayerful reflection, you can come to understand both the Spirit of Christ and the teachings of John.

 

[XtraPercept]

What I see here practiced in abundance is religion. This is not the practice of the Word. The practice of the Word is that which aligns in every situation with the purpose and intent of Jesus, who is in perfect unity with the Father.

That one cannot perceive the offensive strike that is a slew of extracted Scriptures hurled toward opposition is already speaking volumes of the spirit from which these words arise.

But shining is just what a light does; darkness is powerless against it.

 

[Hiddenthings]

Deity (ie. God) does not sin. Correct.

Agree.

The "Son of man" (Dan. 7:13, Mat. 12:8, 16:13 KJB, &c.) is "God ... manifest in the flesh" (1 Tim. 3:16 KJB), as even John 1 clearly stated (previously cited, "the Word was God ... the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us ... the only begotten of the Father ... Jesus Christ ... the only begotten Son", "All things were made by him", "the world was made by him", "He came unto his own", &c.).

When we speak of Christ as the focal point of Yahweh’s spiritual work, he is the New Creation itself! Nothing exists without Christ!

The flesh that was taken was "in the likeness of sinful (ie., fallen) flesh" (Rom. 8:3), and not of the nature of the unfallen angelic heavenly hosts (Heb. 2:16 KJB), and in this way could die, for if it were unfallen flesh (as something like the nature of unfallen angelic hosts have; see 1 Cor. 15:39-40; Jud. 1:7; Heb. 2:16, &c.) it is not subject to death unless sin is present (as like unto the first Adam). Thus he could be tempted in all points. The temptation came through the sinful (fallen) flesh:

Mat_26:41 Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.​

Mar_14:38 Watch ye and pray, lest ye enter into temptation. The spirit truly is ready, but the flesh is weak.​

To add further weight!

Hebrews 2:17-18 "Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. For because he himself has suffered when tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted."

This immediately excludes hypostasis or any such duality of natures.

This is how the Son (being in nature Deity, and in nature human (with sinful (fallen) flesh) could be tempted. For with God, all things are possible.

Wow, now you contradict yourself because you turn to John 1 and force pre-existence not understanding how Christ became the Word made Flesh. It's so obvious surely you can see it!

This passage is not about pre-eminence:

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.​

Joh 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.​

Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.​

It is about pre-existence, even to the point of placing the Son of the Father at the creation of the earth, in Gen. 1, "In the beginning". Beginning is time, or chronology, not about pre-eminence or superiority.

No! This is about the Logos of God becoming the Word made flesh. The issue is that many misunderstand John’s concept of the Logos. God’s divine expression was fully revealed in and through the Son of Man, and by triumphing over sin in the flesh, he was exalted as the Son of God with power.

I have already thoroughly addressed John 8 in several replies, even down to the very language itself.

But you have failed to understand what was in the mind of Christ and how the listeners misunderstood his teaching in the same way you are now.

I have not anywhere in my responses pointed to any "human councils", but I have continually addressed every response by the actual scripture, which exists before any such "human councils". I have not even brought up such "human councils" once in my replies. You have been the first to do so. Those "human councils" are non-sequitur (even a red-herring) to our discussion.

If you hold to the idea of pre-existence, then your understanding is rooted in the decisions of the church councils, something that can be clearly demonstrated but this is really a side issue to the main topic.

I do not care what those "human councils" have in print.

Your personal feelings are irrelevant when it comes to the documented decisions of the councils upon which you have grounded your beliefs.

They are not relevant to my position, or responses. I am not a credalist.

However, if your beliefs align with theirs, your perspective becomes irrelevant.

I do not adhere to any of the man-made creeds either (they all have their individual errors, and are again non-sequitur to our discussion).

Colossians 1:18 is about pre-eminence, no doubt (and never in question). However, I did not cite Col. 1:18. I cited, Col. 1:16:

Col 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:​

This only confirms John & Christs teaching on the foreknowledge of Messiah and the Victory God achieved in Christ.

Which has nothing to do with pre-eminence, but pre-existence. Just because one passage (even in immediate context) is about one thing (say pre-eminence in matters of Resurrection), does not mean that the previous verses are of the same idea.

It matters because an inspired writer placed that word in a context which you would have otherwise forced pre-existence.

Col. 1:16 is clearly stating that "him" (Jesus / Son) is the One Who "created" "all things", which automatically excludes Jesus from all created things. He is not in a category of "created things", since He was their creator.

So you deny Christ as being the New Creation?

Those "things" were not merely created "by him", but also "for him", not merely in earth, but also in heaven.

Without Christ (Yahweh's Purpose and intent), there is no physical creation; the first creation is natural, not spiritual.

Here let me show you:

Revelation 1:18 "I am the Living One. I died (natural = first), and behold I am alive forever and ever (spiritual = second)! And I hold the keys of death and Hades (grave)."

Surely you must know this very simple principle?

What you are essentially doing (and merely pointg it out), is often what Islamicists (and sometimes atheists) will do. I point to a text on Jesus' eternal existing Deity. They point to a text on Jesus' finite humanity (as the human nature of the Son was "made"). The one does not negate the other, nor supercede the other. They are not antagonistic to each other. They are harmonious together. They both are required. To say that a text speaks of the pre-eminence of Jesus, does not negate, nor superceded the texts on His pre-existence. They are both required.

His finite, human nature existed first, just as ours does, which is why he is called the Son of Man.

My understanding aligns perfectly with the Apostles doctrine, as demonstrated in my responses:

Act 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.​

​

Act_24:14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:​

Nothing here for me to comment on really.

“Firstborn” and “firstbegotten” are terms that signify beginnings, something that God Himself does not possess.

Another significant issue arises with the matter of inheritance. All of Hebrews 1 becomes redundant if, as you believe, Jesus already possessed the name, title, eternal nature, and authority.

Even Revelation 1:18 loses its significance if, as you believe, Christ was always eternal. Its full impact is only realized if Christ was fully human, born of a woman, truly died, ceasing to exist for three days and was raised. Otherwise, it becomes a hollow display, a masquerade, rather than a genuine victory over sin’s flesh.

You have a lot to work through Advent!

 

[keithr]

Please clarify....

You said that later on in the scripture the word God is capitalized out of reverence to God.
THAT word is not referring to satan - however you did not specify which verse capitalized God out of reverence.

You need more clarification?! This is like teaching an infant! I was talking about just one verse - the expression "Consider 2 Corinthians 4:4" tells you that. It contains two occurrences of the Greek word theos, both of which are translated as god. The first occurrence is all lowercase and is referring to Satan. The second occurrence is capitalised and is referring to our heavenly Father, and Jesus' Father, almighty God YHVH.

Why should we accept what YOU believe... instead of accepting HOW the NT translates ANY word that means theos.

The New Testament doesn't translate words. What words that mean theos are you talking about? The translators of the King James Version of the Bible have translated the Greek word theos into the English word God 1320 times, into the word god 13 times, into the word godly 3 times, and into God-ward 2 times.

When speaking of God Almighty, the creator of the universe, the word God is always capitalized..... because it means GOD and not any other god.....

Yes, the translators chose to capitalise the word god when it is referring to YHVH. In the MKJV they also capitalise the word his and him when it's referring to God or Jesus - it's just what they chose to do. The WEB never capitalises his and him except in one verse - Psalm 24:6 - I've no idea why, it is probably a mistake! It goes without saying that I'm not talking about when these words are the first word in a sentence, because they will always be capitalised then of course; I only mention that because you seem to struggle to understand simple things!

Saying 'God means GOD' means nothing! It's like saying Wrong means WRONG - it's pointless. Capitalising a whole word is normally done to emphasise a word, or to indicate that the writer is shouting or angry, or that the word is an acronym, e.g. NASA or KJV. Capitalising a whole word is sometimes used in headlines, book titles, or in legal documents for emphasis, though this practice is often discouraged in professional contexts as it can be harder to read.

Jesus is GOD
not a god
and not god.

So Jesus is not God then. How do you harmonise "Jesus is GOD" with these verses (for example, there are more verses I can quote):

1 Corinthians 11:3 WEB

(3) But I would have you know that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.​

1 Corinthians 3:23 WEB

(23) and you are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s.​

John 14:28 WEB

(28) You heard how I told you, ‘I go away, and I come to you.’ If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, because I said ‘I am going to my Father;’ for the Father is greater than I.​

Jesus saying to God, his Father, John 17:3 WEB

(3) This is eternal life, that they should know you, the only true God, and him whom you sent, Jesus Christ.​