Did Jesus claim to be God?
- Thread starter TonyChanYT
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
- Status
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
Why cant you just address the questions asked of you? Is this how you defend what the Bible really teaches?…..by not defending your beliefs once shown to be in error?
There is nothing “out of context”, or in opposition to the true doctrines of the NT…..and you know it.
If there was, you would have answers….but your posts are just insults….there is a ditch all right….
You cannot address the clear statements in scripture because your doctrine will not let you….you are in shackles, but someone has offered you a key to be released from enslavement to beliefs that are false….yet like the first century Jews you deny the uncomfortable truth to stick to the comfortable lies…..that’s why we only get one shot at salvation when God finally brings the curtain down on this evil world of the devil’s making…..his servants have been sounding the warning now for over 100 years…..and still people prefer the lies to the truth. Some things never change….that is why history repeats…..
I think it's 100 percent. I might be wrong. It could be 99 percent of the time in the end people on here attack me personally or make the biblical post about me. People say you lost the argument when you get off the issue and attack the other person personally.
Waiting on him
Well-Known Member
According to my understanding the bosom of God would be a place of eternal rest.
The bosom of Abraham according to Jewish understanding I would guess would be a place awaiting the rest of God.
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
Since the Jewish understanding of this word is the most important one and, since Jesus and all his apostles were Jewish, we have to understand what Jesus’ exclusively Jewish audience understood this word to mean.
The word is used in a manner very similar to the usage of breast, although it often has reference to the fold in the upper part of the robe, rather than to the breast itself. It was where a shepherd might put a young lost lamb to keep it safe and warm.
The bosom was designated in Hebrew by “chehq” (1 Kings 1:2), “choʹtsen” (Neh 5:13) and the dual form of “dadh” (Ezekiel 23:3).
In Greek, it is “kolʹpos”. (John 13:23) A dearly beloved or cherished one would be held close to one’s bosom. (chest….heart).
In Bible times, the custom of reclining at meals, meant that the one in front of the bosom of another was in a position of intimacy with him, generally the favored position. (John 13:23)
Jesus employed this well-known custom in illustrating Lazarus as being in “the bosom position of Abraham,” signifying favor with God. (Luke 16:22-23)
The apostle John described Jesus as being ‘in the bosom position with the Father,‘ as the intimate of Jehovah, the one person who could explain God to a fuller and more thorough extent than any other. (John 1:18)
Your original comment then….
“It’s almost laughable, Lazarus was also in the bosom of Father Abraham. I guess by his theological stance Lazarus would also be God?” ……Doesn’t fit with what scripture says about “the bosom of Abraham”.
The “Lazarus” of Jesus’ parable was a representation of a group of people in Jesus’ day. The rich man was also pictorial of another group….. Jesus said that both died and actually changed places. With the appearance of the Messiah, the place of favor (Abraham’s bosom) once occupied by the Pharisees, was now the possession of the spiritually poor beggars…..”the lost sheep of the house of Israel“ to whom Jesus was sent…..the ones who accepted Jesus. Taken literally, this parable makes no scriptural sense.
Are heaven and hell in speaking distance to one another? And can a drop of water on a man’s finger cool the tongue of someone burning in flames? That is ridiculous.
This story has nothing to do with a literal heaven or hell scenario, since no such scenario exists in the Bible.
The dead are not in a conscious condition. (Eccl 9:5, 10) The characters in the story are fictitious. Lazarus was a very common name.
Waiting on him
Well-Known Member
Maybe since Eliezer/ Lazarus of Damascus was the first servant in father Abraham’s house, the story is about Jesus’s spiritual state?
I also note that Jesus was also arrayed in purple and fine linen - rich toward God.
Last edited:
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Brilliant! I look forward to the erudite reply but would be surprised if an Ad Homenim rejoinder awaits.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Only if eisegesis is allowed. It is strong evidence against a 3-in-1 God.
Imagine that there are 3 owners to a company. Odd it would be if one owner acknowledged only the existence of one other owner in being "the owners" of the company.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Appeal to Strawman. I've heard it said that a certain man is his own man but that is not what we are talking about is it? There is no verse in all 66 books where it says God has a God or, as you put it, is his own God.
It is a Circular Reference, akin to the Royal We.
Much in Scripture IS NOT SAID in the words of men.
Much Understanding IS NOT REVEALED in Scripture.
Isa 40:
[12] Who hath measured the waters in the hollow of his hand, and meted out heaven with the span, and comprehended the dust of the earth in a measure, and weighed the mountains in scales, and the hills in a balance?
[13] Who hath directed the Spirit of the LORD, or being his counseller hath taught him?
[14] With whom took he counsel, and who instructed him, and taught him in the path of judgment, and taught him knowledge, and shewed to him the way of understanding?
Gen 1:
[26a] And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness…
There are numerous “gods”..
But ONLY One Heavenly Lord God Almighty, Creator and Maker (ie “us’, “our” in Gen 1:26) WHO counsels Himself, Establishes His own Laws, Made Himself, by His Will, His Word, His POWER, subject to His own Laws, essentially MAKING HIMSELF His OWN God.
Created human men can, “make” their own will, their own word, their own power; THEMSELVES their own “god”….ya think God Himself CANNOT do that?
Ofcourse He can…and did.
He has PUT upon Himself, by His own Will, WORD, POWER….things that which HE CAN DO and prohibitions of things that which HE CAN NOT DO….
No one but per Gods OWN Counsel, (us/our)
Established Gods OWN PURPOSE, Capabilities, and Prohibitions that HE MUST comply with.
God IS the Master, and AT TIMES CAN present Himself as the SERVANT as AGREEABLE, with HIS Counsel (ie us/our)
Not my PLACE to Understand FOR YOU.
It is God’s PLACE to GIVE His Understanding TO WHOM He has revealed that Gods Understanding IS apportioned to.
Glory to God,
Taken
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Nope....John 5:18...
“For this reason therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God.”
“but also was calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.” This verse shows us that Jesus knew who he was and what he was doing. Some theologians teach that Jesus either never claimed to be the promised Messiah, or that he only took on the role of Messiah when he realized that the people thought he was the Messiah. But the truth is that Mary and Joseph knew Jesus was the Messiah and raised Jesus that way, and every indication in Scripture is that Jesus knew he was the Messiah, taught that to his disciples, and lived his life in obedience to the will of his heavenly Father.
Some Trinitarians claim that John 5:18 is evidence that Jesus was God, because it speaks of Jesus making himself equal with God. But that is not what the verse is saying. The people in the time and culture of the Bible knew that children often carried the authority of the family. For example, the son of a king had great authority. The Jews knew that if Jesus was claiming that God was his Father, then he was also claiming to be the Messiah, and had authority both in this age and in the age to come. The Jews correctly caught Jesus’ meaning, but incorrectly ascribed some kind of independent authority to him, which likely came from their own desire to be out from under any authority.
Actually, John 5:18 is unsupportive of the doctrine of the Trinity. It accurately records that Jesus was saying that “God” was his father, not that he was himself God, or that he was “God the Son.” Jesus’ authority came from the fact that he was the Son of God, not God Himself.
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
This is what creates confusion…..when people say…”maybe this means ‘this or that“, without taking the rest of what the scriptures teach into account. This is what leads people who are bound and determined to perpetuate this lie, to suggesting all kinds of scenarios to force a verse or a passage to support their doctrine, no matter how many ways they want to twist it to fit.
The Bible is self explanatory for those who study it with an open heart and mind. We have to allow the spirit that inspired the Bible to teach us it’s meaning. It is one story, with one author, written by selected secretaries over many centuries, so getting a handle on the overall theme and narrative allows only one picture to emerge, not many versions based on different interpretations. All scripture has to be in harmony with itself. There are no contradictions in God’s word, only errors in interpretation and translation.
In his parable of the “wheat and the weeds”, Jesus tells us plainly that “the devil” was going to sow “weeds” of counterfeit “Christianity” in “the world”. The weeds are powerful (as every gardener knows) and can take over a garden or field in a very short space of time if those seeds receive plenty of water and fertilizer. The best fertilizer is of course, manure….which is not much use for anything else. Used in a wrong way it can cause contamination and disease, so we need to pay close attention to the details recorded in the Bible and understand all of Christ’s teachings in the light of a Jewish mindset, not the way Christendom (imitation or counterfeit Christianity) interprets things with a strong agenda…to promote doctrines of their own making.
We only have to look back at “church” history from the second century onward to see how quickly that corruption took place once the apostles had passed away. That apostasy was foretold….yet Christendom denies that it happened. (2 Thess 2:1-12)
This is an interesting comment because “fine linen” was used in the Bible as a symbol of righteousness. We recall these words in the Revelation to John….
”Let us rejoice and be overjoyed and give him glory, because the marriage of the Lamb has arrived and his wife has prepared herself. 8 Yes, it has been granted to her to be clothed with bright, clean, fine linen—for the fine linen stands for the righteous acts of the holy ones.” (Rev 19:7-8)
As for the purple…..from ancient times it has been used as a symbol of imperial or regal power. It was Christ’s enemies who mocked him with the purple garment at his trial.
Note that it does not say that the Lamb’s wife decks herself with purple and fine linen, even though the marriage is with the “King of kings.” No! She does not declare herself righteous, like the Pharisees, but, as appropriately expressed, “it has been granted to her to be arrayed in . . . fine linen.”…divinely authorized.
Who today deck themselves in purple and scarlet ?…..trying to portray themselves as something they never were?
Do we see the first Christians displaying this kind of pomp and ceremony, dressed in distinctive clothing and with high sounding titles, singling out one man (as sinful as all others) to lead the entire church?
These are described in Rev 17:3-5… in vision, the apostle John saw….
“a woman sitting upon a scarlet-colored wild beast that was full of blasphemous names and that had seven heads and ten horns. And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet, and was adorned with gold and precious stone and pearls and had in her hand a golden cup that was full of disgusting things and the unclean things of her fornication. And upon her forehead was written a name, a mystery: ‘Babylon the Great, the mother of the harlots and of the disgusting things of the earth.’”
So these colors are now associated with the counterfeit “Christian” church, who bear no resemblance to the original Christianity that Jesus began in the first century. They have adopted all manner of false teachings, along with a host of pagan customs and traditions, that have no place in a Christian’s life. (2 Cor 6:14-18) These not only “touch“ spiritually “unclean” things, but embrace and promote them.
We are told in no uncertain terms, with regard to “Babylon the great”……to ”get out of her my people, if you do not want to share with her in her sins, and receive part of her plagues”. (Rev 18:4-5)
Unless you know what “Babylon the great” is, you will remain in her and go down with her.
The “church” has many daughters, all equally as guilty as their mother for promoting her central doctrines, taken along when they “left home” at the Reformation.
When the judgment comes, only those who have removed themselves completely from that corrupt counterfeit “Christianity” will be spared the punishment that God has in store for her. This is the warning given by God himself…
We are to obey God and completely detach ourselves from the counterfeit, which today has literally thousands of expressions...yet all retaining a central core of false doctrines….the trinity…immortality of the soul….and hellfire…none of which finds its origins in scripture.
We all have choices, but they must be informed choices…..those who want to censor information are taking away free will…and stifling free speech.
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
I couldn’t agree more…..as soon as they turn it into personal insults, you know that they have run out of valid arguments……attack is the weakest form of defense. They are proclaiming defeat by their own responses (or lack of them).
1 Peter 3:13-16….NASB….
”Who is there to harm you if you prove zealous for what is good?
But even if you should suffer for the sake of righteousness, you are blessed. AND DO NOT FEAR THEIR INTIMIDATION, AND DO NOT BE TROUBLED, but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence; and keep a good conscience so that in the thing in which you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ will be put to shame.”
We surely can discuss our beliefs in a civil way, as all are equally accountable for what we accept as truth.
We prove by our demeanor that we have self-control and that we can discuss even provocative topics with the fruits of God’s spirit. Those who cannot, prove who they are.
How about you concede your point then we can both have a laugh at something that actually occurred?
It's nothing new. Goes back many years. I like to do what Martin Luther did when debating with the Catholics. Luther would only answer the Catholics if they used words that were in the Bible. So Luther would put out a verse and the Catholics would say well, you're an idiot. And Luther would only respond if they had a verse to talk about. I do that here even greater than Luther since I know more than he did. I do make exceptions and a couple of times I defended myself and then they came back on here with see you only talk about your self and not the Scriptures. I know a great deal more than Luther because I was never a Catholic priest. Luther saw some very screwed up doctrine the Catholics were teaching, but he still brought much of that Catholic stuff with him into the churches that we have today. Much of the Roman Catholic doctrine was assimilated into Protestantism and is still being passed along as Christian groups continue to split off from one another. In a nutshell that is why even the independent church in your neighborhood today most probably believes that there is a trinity, dead people are alive, God is in control of everything that happens, the Four Gospels are written to Christians, and water baptism is relevant. And then there's everything that you know about our sin nature was taught to you by them.
Waiting on him
Well-Known Member
Which part did I lie about, that Eliezer of Damascus was the first servant in father Abraham’s house or that the Hebrew word for Lazarus is Eliezer?
Or was it that the rich man was arrayed in fine linen?
Did it bother you that I said that Jesus was rich toward God?
Waiting on him
Well-Known Member
I believe I understand now, what I posted didn’t come directly from you men teachers, and I understand that is important too you! Try and understand that it means nothing too me.
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
It is to be noted that Luther did not want to leave Roman Catholicism…he simply wanted the church to clean up its act and get rid of its clearly unbiblical teachings and actions…..it took great courage to pin his thesis to the church door….outlining the way the church was indulging itself in unchristian doctrines and teachings. He knew that the hierarchy were behaving like Pharisees and he wanted change to begin with them….it never did, but it did at least one good thing…..it put God’s word back into the hands of the people so that they could at least follow through in their own studies like the ancient Boereans and check out the teachings for themselves in God’s word. (Acts 17:10-12) Having that advantage gives the church members no excuse for the cultivated ignorance that permeates the church, even today.
It is by and large a performance based religion that makes sure that no one asks the hard questions and follows through by simply turning up to Mass and taking the wafer...trusting that these church leaders are actually who they say they are….”by their fruits” Jesus said we would recognize his true disciples.
The fruitage of this church system is appalling…..the majority of the so called “Christians” can be homeless and starving on the streets and no one knows or cares for them. That is NOT the “Christianity” that Jesus promoted….
Paul wrote at 2 Cor 8:12-15…
”For if the readiness is there first, it is especially acceptable according to what a person has,
For if the readiness is there first, it is especially acceptable according to what a person has, not according to what a person does not have. 13 For I do not want to make it easy for others, but difficult for you; 14 but that by means of an equalizing, your surplus at the present time might offset their need, so that their surplus might also offset your deficiency, that there may be an equalizing. 15 Just as it is written: “The person with much did not have too much, and the person with little did not have too little.”
Christianity is a brotherhood where those who believe come together as a family, united in worship. Those who take the lead in the congregation “know” the sheep and are under instruction from God and his Christ to care for every one of them…..if a lamb is lost they were instructed by Jesus to leave the 99 and go search for that lost one and bring them home…..
Rhere could be no poverty threatening any Christian’s life because their brother would make sure that they had enough to eat…even going without themselves to share what little they had. This is how you identify genuine Christianity…..not just by how they treat their neighbors, but how much they do for those related to them in the faith. (Gal 6:10)….so that “The person with much did not have too much, and the person with little did not have too little.”
If only people could see the deception…..it goes way back….
There is no excuse for anyone today NOT to know more than an indoctrinated Catholic priest did in the 16th century.
So many versions of “Christianity”….but common sense tells us that they cannot all be correct…there can only be ONE TRUTH…..there cannot many correct versions of it.
In “the time of the end”, just before he was to come as judge, Jesus said he would appoint a “faithful and discreet slave” who would feed his fellow slaves, their “food at the proper time”….(Matt 24:45) interestingly, Jesus introduces this “slave“ by asking “who then is this faithful slave”? So we must first identify “him” and then sit at his table to feed with all the other slaves…..the same “food” served at “the proper time”. It’s not a buffet where we can serve ourselves, but a complete spiritual meal that all enjoy together with no one refusing any of it as not provided through the Master’s appointed slave. “He” is under instruction from his Master to serve the same food to all. That is what unites the. (1 Cor 1:10)
Jesus said that his “food” was doing the will of his Father….(John 4:34)
Last edited:
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
Can you please clarify your comment here as I do not wish to misunderstand you….
can you rephrase what you said here….?
- Status
Similar threads
