Irrefutable proof that Jesus is God.

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

Why didn't Jesus correct Thomas if he called him "God" unjustly?

Would you have stepped in and corrected Thomas, since nobody else did?

you doubt what Jesus said at John 20:17 obviously, you would step up to Jesus and call him a liar, because that's what you're doing now. Thomas didn't believe Jesus was a liar, he was there when Jesus prayed to his Father who was God John 17:3, when Jesus was resurrected Jesus told Mary Magdalene to go tell his brothers including Thomas that, " he was ascending to his father and their father and his God and their God at John 20:17. So Thomas knew that his Father and God was the same Father and God that Jesus had.

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

I better quote the verse...


4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

... inherited his name from whom?

Following his resurrection, Jesus informed his disciples, “All authority has been given me in heaven and on the earth,” thereby showing that he heads a government of universal domain. (Mt 28:18) The apostle Paul made clear that Jesus’ Father has “left nothing that is not subject to him [Jesus],” with the evident exception of “the one who subjected all things to him,” that is, Jehovah, the Sovereign God. (1Co 15:27; Heb 1:1-14; 2:8) Jesus Christ’s “name,” therefore, is more excellent than that of God’s angels, in that his name embraces or stands for the vast executive authority that Jehovah has placed in him. (Heb 1:3, 4) Only those who willingly recognize that “name” and bow to it, subjecting themselves to the authority it represents, will gain life eternal. (Ac 4:12; Eph 1:19-23; Php 2:9-11) They must, sincerely and without hypocrisy, line up with the standards Jesus exemplified and, in faith, obey the commands he gave.—Mt 7:21-23; Ro 1:5; 1Jo 3:23.

 

[justbyfaith]

Less than two weeks previously before Thomas expressed ,"My Lord and My God," he had heard Jesus pray to his heavenly Father and say: “This is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.” (John 17:3, AV)

The Greek word for "and" in John 17:3 is "kai" which can be translated "even".

On the fourth day after that prayer, or on his day of resurrection, Jesus sent a special message to Thomas and the other disciples by means of Mary Magdalene. “Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not, for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. Mary Magdalene came and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and that he had spoken these things unto her.” (John 20:17, 18, AV)

That God has a God is evident in Hebrews 1:8-9. That God has a Father is evident in Revelation 1:6 (kjv). This should give you a hint that Jesus is still God even in light of your scriptures.

So from Jesus’ prayer and from this message through Mary Magdalene, Thomas knew who his own God was. His God was not Jesus Christ, but his God was the God of Jesus Christ. Also his Father was the Father of Jesus Christ. Thus Thomas knew that Jesus had a God whom he worshiped, namely, his heavenly Father.

Jesus was in the Father and the Father was in Him (John 14:7-11). I would suggest that you read over that scripture slowly, in your kjv, a few times. You just might get a revelation of who Jesus really is.

John was there and heard Thomas exclaim: “My Lord and my God," after that did God's Holy Spirit inspire John to write down that Jesus was God, “the only true God” whose name is Jehovah? (Ps. 35:23, 24) Here would have been an excellent place for John to explain John 1:1 and say that Jesus Christ, who was the Word made flesh, was God himself, that he was “God the Son, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity.” But is that what Gods Holy Spirit inspired John to write down, no what God's Holy Spirit inspired John to write down is, That Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.”—John 20:29-31.

In saying that Jesus was the Son of God, John was saying that He is the everlasting Father; for Isaiah 9:6 would have been a well-known verse to all of those who would be the audience of John's letter.

There are way too many scriptures that show Jesus has a Father and God.
John 14:28, John 17:3, John 20:17, Even after Jesus had gone back into heaven the Apostles continued to say Jesus has a God at Rev.1:1, Rev.3:12, 1Peter 1:3,1John 4:9,10, 1Cor.11:3;15:20,24-28

There are verses that show that God has a Father and God (Hebrews 1:8-9, Revelation 1:6 (kjv)).

Who is this God who has a Father and a God?

 

[justbyfaith]

All of this you're texting is about that new covenant that Jesus did institute with his Apostles but didn't become active until Jesus sacrificed his human life for the world of mankind. The old covenant didn't change until Jesus was put to death. There's nothing in these scriptures that even suggest that any law was changed before Jesus sacrificed his human life.

The verses in question do not exclude the possibility that Jesus changed the law within His lifetime; for it was by virtue of His priesthood that the law was changed: and it should be clear that Jesus was High Priest according to the order of Melchizedec even while He walked the earth.

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

You keep going down the path you're in which you're denying the Only Begotten Son of God came to the world of mankind.

Truther, are you deliberately trying to make it look like I believe the Word is God when that isn't what I believe. At post 416 you texted "BARNEY BRIGHT said," then there's text under neath my name that makes it look like I texted that I believe the Word is God. I don't believe that. I don't know if you deliberately meant to do that but delete it, I have never said something like that.

 

[Truther]

what I see is so many people cling desperately to this Scripture and ignoring all the other many scriptures that


Less than two weeks previously before Thomas expressed ,"My Lord and My God," he had heard Jesus pray to his heavenly Father and say: “This is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.” (John 17:3, AV) On the fourth day after that prayer, or on his day of resurrection, Jesus sent a special message to Thomas and the other disciples by means of Mary Magdalene. “Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not, for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. Mary Magdalene came and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and that he had spoken these things unto her.” (John 20:17, 18, AV) So from Jesus’ prayer and from this message through Mary Magdalene, Thomas knew who his own God was. His God was not Jesus Christ, but his God was the God of Jesus Christ. Also his Father was the Father of Jesus Christ. Thus Thomas knew that Jesus had a God whom he worshiped, namely, his heavenly Father.

John was there and heard Thomas exclaim: “My Lord and my God," after that did God's Holy Spirit inspire John to write down that Jesus was God, “the only true God” whose name is Jehovah? (Ps. 35:23, 24) Here would have been an excellent place for John to explain John 1:1 and say that Jesus Christ, who was the Word made flesh, was God himself, that he was “God the Son, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity.” But is that what Gods Holy Spirit inspired John to write down, no what God's Holy Spirit inspired John to write down is, That Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.”—John 20:29-31.

There are way too many scriptures that show Jesus has a Father and God.
John 14:28, John 17:3, John 20:17, Even after Jesus had gone back into heaven the Apostles continued to say Jesus has a God at Rev.1:1, Rev.3:12, 1Peter 1:3,1John 4:9,10, 1Cor.11:3;15:20,24-28

Now you now what I am saying all along. Jesus was not made God until AFTER the resurrection, which Thomas realized, when he called Jesus God for the first time Jesus was ever called God.

 

[Truther]

you doubt what Jesus said at John 20:17 obviously, you would step up to Jesus and call him a liar, because that's what you're doing now. Thomas didn't believe Jesus was a liar, he was there when Jesus prayed to his Father who was God John 17:3, when Jesus was resurrected Jesus told Mary Magdalene to go tell his brothers including Thomas that, " he was ascending to his father and their father and his God and their God at John 20:17. So Thomas knew that his Father and God was the same Father and God that Jesus had.

Thomas called Jesus God AFTER he resurrected, which time the Col 2:9 effect occurred on Jesus' new spirit body.

 

[Truther]

Following his resurrection, Jesus informed his disciples, “All authority has been given me in heaven and on the earth,” thereby showing that he heads a government of universal domain. (Mt 28:18) The apostle Paul made clear that Jesus’ Father has “left nothing that is not subject to him [Jesus],” with the evident exception of “the one who subjected all things to him,” that is, Jehovah, the Sovereign God. (1Co 15:27; Heb 1:1-14; 2:8) Jesus Christ’s “name,” therefore, is more excellent than that of God’s angels, in that his name embraces or stands for the vast executive authority that Jehovah has placed in him. (Heb 1:3, 4) Only those who willingly recognize that “name” and bow to it, subjecting themselves to the authority it represents, will gain life eternal. (Ac 4:12; Eph 1:19-23; Php 2:9-11) They must, sincerely and without hypocrisy, line up with the standards Jesus exemplified and, in faith, obey the commands he gave.—Mt 7:21-23; Ro 1:5; 1Jo 3:23.

You mentioned nothing about the INHERITED name(Heb 1:4). I saw that.

Your entire post was a dodge. Deal with it.

 

[Truther]

Truther, are you deliberately trying to make it look like I believe the Word is God when that isn't what I believe. At post 416 you texted "BARNEY BRIGHT said," then there's text under neath my name that makes it look like I texted that I believe the Word is God. I don't believe that. I don't know if you deliberately meant to do that but delete it, I have never said something like that.

I don't know what you are talking about.

I did not do that.

There must be a typo or something.(I will look).

 

[Truther]

You keep going down the path you're in which you're denying the Only Begotten Son of God came to the world of mankind.

Michael the archangel is the word?
The archangel(word) became flesh?
Aaah, c'mon Barn![/QUOTE]


Here it is Barney. What is wrong with it?

 

[APAK]

Thomas called Jesus God AFTER he resurrected, which time the Col 2:9 effect occurred on Jesus' new spirit body.

Why do you deliberately ignore the context of John 20 once again? In particular verse 31, a few verses forward of 28, that implies direct context because of its close proximity. It really explains Thomas' revelation upon seeing Christ's transformation. John, the inspired writer of these words said in verse 31, "these are written that you may (continue) to believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God...."

John is really reiterating in what Thomas meant and said in verse 28. John would violently disagree with you that Thomas meant Jesus is God, ever after his resurrection; as all other disciples would also concur and agree with John if you take the time to review scripture on this subject.

John never changed his view of Christ before his transformation and afterwards. He is still the Son of God, the Christ.

Don't you think this explains it better, John's words over yours? And by allowing scripture to interpret itself rather than adding into scripture your own wishes and theories?

Just saying, ignoring context and with the temptation of adding our own touch, is destructive to understanding scripture. All of us must be alert to it.

APAK

 

[Truther]

Why do you deliberately ignore the context of John 20 once again? In particular verse 31, a few verses forward of 28, that implies direct context because of its close proximity. It really explains Thomas' revelation upon seeing Christ's transformation. John, the inspired writer of these words said in verse 31, "these are written that you may (continue) to believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God...."

John is really reiterating in what Thomas meant and said in verse 28. John would violently disagree with you that Thomas meant Jesus is God, ever after his resurrection; as all other disciples would also concur and agree with John if you take the time to review scripture on this subject.

John never changed his view of Christ before his transformation and afterwards. He is still the Son of God, the Christ.

Don't you think this explains it better, John's words over yours? And by allowing scripture to interpret itself rather than adding into scripture your own wishes and theories?

Just saying, ignoring context and with the temptation of adding our own touch, is destructive to understanding scripture. All of us must be alert to it.

APAK

The context in John 20 is AFTER Jesus resurrected, which he was for the first time in 33 years of his life, called "God" by someone(Thomas).

 

[APAK]

The context in John 20 is AFTER Jesus resurrected, which he was for the first time in 33 years of his life, called "God" by someone(Thomas).

Did you read what I just wrote?....it does not matter when it was written.....before or afterwards..it does not change a thing.

Also your meaning of context is a VERY BROAD ONE..and therefore meaningless...as in this case you said the context is after......that is not context my friend.

If you don't want to see what I've written, and addressed the true form and identification of context, that I've now written about in a few posts of this thread, then I'm off this subject with you for now...

Great Day...APAK

 

[Truther]

Did you read what I just wrote?....it does not matter when it was written.....before or afterwards..it does not change a thing.

Also your meaning of context is a VERY BROAD ONE..and therefore meaningless...as in this case you said the context is after......that is not context my friend.

If you don't want to see what I've written, and addressed the true form and identification of context, that I've now written about in a few posts of this thread, then I'm off this subject with you for now...

Great Day...APAK

You said..... John would violently disagree with you that Thomas meant Jesus is God, ever after his resurrection; as all other disciples would also concur and agree with John if you take the time to review scripture on this subject.


...AKA, they all doubted Thomas.

Not cool.

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

The Greek word for "and" in John 17:3 is "kai" which can be translated "even".



That God has a God is evident in Hebrews 1:8-9. That God has a Father is evident in Revelation 1:6 (kjv). This should give you a hint that Jesus is still God even in light of your scriptures.



Jesus was in the Father and the Father was in Him (John 14:7-11). I would suggest that you read over that scripture slowly, in your kjv, a few times. You just might get a revelation of who Jesus really is.



In saying that Jesus was the Son of God, John was saying that He is the everlasting Father; for Isaiah 9:6 would have been a well-known verse to all of those who would be the audience of John's letter.



There are verses that show that God has a Father and God (Hebrews 1:8-9, Revelation 1:6 (kjv)).

Who is this God who has a Father and a God?

At John 17:3 translating kai in that Scripture as even would grammatically incorrect.

The True God has no one who is older than him which the word father suggests, so this is explicit proof that Jesus isn't God. To think anyone would even suggest that the True God has a God it's just unreasonable.

Now you now what I am saying all along. Jesus was not made God until AFTER the resurrection, which Thomas realized, when he called Jesus God for the first time Jesus was ever called God.

What i see is that you can' understand the concept that the True God Jehovah doesn't have a Father or a God. I'm saddened that you can't understand that.

 

[Truther]

At John 17:3 translating kai in that Scripture as even would grammatically incorrect.

The True God has no one who is older than him which the word father suggests, so this is explicit proof that Jesus isn't God. To think anyone would even suggest that the True God has a God it's just unreasonable.


What i see is that you can' understand the concept that the True God Jehovah doesn't have a Father or a God. I'm saddened that you can't understand that.

There ya go debunking the KJV again.

C'mon Barn!

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

Thomas called Jesus God AFTER he resurrected, which time the Col 2:9 effect occurred on Jesus' new spirit body.

Jesus after he was resurrected, said he has a Father and God. As I will continue telling you this fact, the True God doesn't have a Father and a God

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

You mentioned nothing about the INHERITED name(Heb 1:4). I saw that.

Your entire post was a dodge. Deal with it.

I didn't dodge it you just don't recognize the name he actually did inherit. Jesus inherited authority to his name that no other person in heaven or Earth had or would have. Every person and all authority has been subjected to Jesus with the exception of the one who he inherited that authority from his Father and God Jehovah.

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

There ya go debunking the KJV again.

C'mon Barn!

I'm not debunking any Bible I'm disagreeing with people who looking at scripture incorrectly.

 

[APAK]

@BARNEY BRIGHT ...the person @Truther is not to be reasoned with. He is now twisting and adding for me, as if they are my own conclusions that are purely his own creation, as witnessed by his last post to me. All of the disciples including Thomas were all in accord, that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. The other disciples never doubted Thomas in what he meant in his words. Thomas was just a late in believing that Jesus was truly the Christ the Son God. Before that time of transformation, all the disciples at some point doubted who Jesus was, until Peter piped up....

You cannot reason with him also because of at least 2 reasons. He blindly ignores yours and my words and 2. he is relentless to prove to others that he has found a tie between Col 2: 9 and John 20:28. I believe he has a misaligned and mangled meaning of both Col 2:9 and John 20:28 and is trying to make them fit his own creative hypothesis with you and me and others....APAK