Irrefutable proof that Jesus is God.

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

Let's face it Barney...you doubt Thomas, don't you?

He said Jesus is God and you say he is not.

Don't be a Thomas doubter, Barn.

You face the fact that you lack the faith that it was Gods Holy Spirit that inspired men to write down the many texts that Jesus stated about the kind of relationship that is between him and God, which was and is a Father and Son relationship. Even after Jesus was resurrected by God a life giving Spirit who was given immortality and inherited incorruption the kind of relationship that Gods Holy Spirit inspired men to write down is that Jesus has and is a Father and Son relationship. You have no faith that it was the Only Begotten Son of God that God sent to the world of mankind, you have no faith that it was the Only Begotten Son of God who sacrificed his human life for the world of mankind, you have no faith that it was Gods Only Begotten Son that God resurrected the third day after his death a life giving Spirit who then was given immortality and who then inherited incorruption from his Father who is God. It's only your fault that you lack such faith.

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

God's name is Jesus, Barney.

Hebrews 1:4 says Jesus INHERITED his name.

This means he got God's name given to him too....Jesus.

It can be seen that, while Jesus’ death on a torture stake plays a vital part in human salvation, acceptance of this is by no means all that is involved in ‘putting faith in the name of Jesus.’ (Ac 10:43) 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) So while 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) However the scriptures show that Jesus name isn't more excellent or glorious than the person whose name is Jehovah. The name Jesus Christ as glorious and excellent that God has made his Sons name isn't more excellent or glorious than his own name. Jehovah is the name of the Only True God who has an Only Begotten Son whose name Jesus has been made more excellent and more glorious than every other name in heaven and on Earth the only exception is the person who made his name more excellent and more glorious than any other name in heaven or on Earth that person whose name is Jehovah the Father and God of Jesus.

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

Justbyfaith, The way you interpret John 5:18 you put yourselves on the side of Jesus enemies. No where in John 5:18 does God Holy Spirit inspire John to say that Jesus was guilty of breaking the Sabbath just because the Pharisees said he was. Also at John 5:18 God's Holy Spirit inspired John to write that because Jesus said God was his Father the Pharisees were accusing Jesus of making himself equal to God. Gods Holy Spirit didn't inspire John to say that Jesus was saying he was equal to God. God's Holy Spirit at John 5:19 inspires John to write that Jesus can't do nothing by himself. He can do only what he sees his Father doing. In other words Jesus is dependent on his Father Jehovah God. The True God Jehovah isn't dependent on anybody.

At John 14:28 Jesus is stating very clearly that his Father who is God is greater than him. The True God has no equal much less someone greater than him. The True God Jehovah isn't dependent on anyone, his Only Begotten Son Jesus however is dependent on his Father Jehovah who is God.

You can read John 5:18,19 how you wish. The True God allows us to choose how we are going to believe. I disagree with how you read John 5:18 however. I can see for myself that the Holy Spirit inspired John to write that it was the Pharisees who said that Jesus had broken the Sabbath. God's Holy Spirit didn't inspire John to say that Jesus did break the Sabbath. The restrictive and harsh way the Pharisees reasoned concerning the Sabbath was never to be reasoned in such a harsh and restrictive manner, which shows us that the Sabbath that the Pharisees taught wasn't the Sabbath God intended. The Pharisees had reasoned so harshly and restrictively concerning the Sabbath that a person couldn't do any kind of good deed on the Sabbath. God has never influenced anyone to reason that restrictively or harshly concerning the Sabbath day law. Their reasoning concerning the scriptures was flawed. Their reasoning also was flawed when they said Jesus was making himself equal to God when Jesus said God was his Father. God's Holy Spirit inspired John to write down that Jesus said that God was his Father not that Jesus said he was equal to God. It was Gods Holy Spirit that inspired John to write down that it was the Pharisees who reasoned that Jesus was making himself equal to God. You put yourself on the side of people whose reasoning on the scriptures are flawed. God's Holy Spirit showed us how flawed the Pharisees reasoning on the scriptures were. We're not supposed to agree with their flawed reasoning of the scriptures.

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

Justbyfaith said:
Jehovah (the LORD) is called "the Mighty God" in Psalms 50:1 (kjv).

Yes, Jehovah and Jesus are said to be Mighty Gods. But nowhere in scripture ever is Jesus said to be the Almighty God, that title belongs to Jehovah God alone.

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

Justbyfaith said:
That Jesus is the Son of God indicates to me that He is also the everlasting Father according to Isaiah 9:6. In order to deny this truth of holy scripture, you have to change the wording of the passage, not once, but twice.

To us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called . . . Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there will be no end.” Isaiah 9:6, 7, New International Version.

A righteous government and peace what glorious prospects! But note that this government was foretold to be on the shoulders of a prince—the “Prince of Peace” this reveals that the King over all, Almighty God, entrusts such rulership to His Son. So Jesus repeatedly called this government of which he would be Ruler “the kingdom of God.”—Luke 9:27, 60, 62.

Before the first man, Adam, fathered children, he succumbed to sin. A rebel angel, who came to be called Devil and Satan, succeeded in causing him to disobey God. As a result, Adam lost his relationship as God’s son, as God said he would if he disobeyed. Thus, Adam suffered the consequences. He became imperfect, grew old, and eventually died.—Genesis 2:15-17; 3:17-19; Revelation 12:9.

Describing the effect that Adam’s disobedience had on all of us, his descendants, the Bible explains: “Through one man [Adam] sin entered into the world and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men because they had all sinned.” (Romans 5:12) Sadly, we all inherited sin from our forefather Adam, along with its dire consequences, namely aging and death.—Job 14:4; Romans 3:23.

Release from such consequences could only be realized by having a perfect father, one who had not inherited sin and its dreadful consequences. Consider how that new father, comparable to the perfect Adam, was provided.

The promised “Prince of Peace,” as you will remember, is also called “Everlasting Father.” (NIV) His human birth was foretold this way: “The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son.” (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:20-23, NIV) Jesus did not have a human father, nor did Adam, the first man. In tracing Jesus’ lineage back to the beginning of human history, the Bible historian Luke shows that Adam came into existence as a “son of God.” (Luke 3:38) But, as we have learned, Adam lost that relationship as God’s son—for himself and for all of his offspring. So we all need, as it were, a new father who is perfect—one like Adam when he was created.

God sent his Son from heaven to be that new Adam to replace the first one. The Bible says: “‘The first man Adam became a living soul.’ The last Adam became a life-giving spirit. The first man is out of the earth and made of dust; the second man is out of heaven.” (1 Corinthians 15:45, 47) Jesus, “the last Adam,” is like “the first man Adam” in that He was a perfect man, capable of fathering perfect offspring, who could live forever in perfection on earth.—Psalm 37:29; Revelation 21:3, 4.

Jesus, who fathered no children, remained faithful to God until his death, despite every attack of Satan. The perfect human life of integrity that Jesus sacrificed, or gave up, is called the ransom. “We have the release [from the sin and death inherited from Adam] by ransom through the blood of [Jesus],” the Bible explains. It also says: “Just as through the disobedience of [Adam] many were constituted sinners, likewise also through the obedience of [Jesus] many will be constituted righteous.”—Ephesians 1:7; Romans 5:18, 19; Matthew 20:28.

If we exercise faith in Jesus, he will become both our “Everlasting Father” and our “Savior.” He will exercise his princely rule in a marvelous way as he serves as Ruler of his Father’s Kingdom. Luke 2:8-11.

 

[ChristisGod]

Justbyfaith said:
Jehovah (the LORD) is called "the Mighty God" in Psalms 50:1 (kjv).

These passages in Revelation make it clear that Jesus is God. Remember it is Jesus in the NT who is Coming back to earth that every eye will see. It was Jesus who was pierced on the cross for our sins. John is clearly once again calling Jesus God!!!!!!! The Coming and the coming in the clouds never refers to the Father in the NT but always to Jesus who is the Lord God, the Almighty below:


Revelation 1:7-8
7 BEHOLD, HE IS COMING WITH THE CLOUDS, and every eye will see Him, even those who pierced Him; and all the tribes of the earth will mourn over Him. So it is to be. Amen.
8 "I Am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, "who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty."


We know from Revelation 1:8 that Alpha and Omega is the Almighty. So we can see that Christ is the Almighty


Revelation 1:17
17And when I saw Him, I fell at his feet as dead. And He laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I Am the first and the last:


We know from Revelation 1:17-18 that the first and the last is He that lives, was dead but is alive forevermore is Christ.


Revelation 2:8
"To the angel of the church in Smyrna write: These are the words of him who is the First and the Last, who died and came to life again.


Revelation 22:12-13
12 "Behold, I Am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to render to every man according to what he has done. 13 "I Am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end."


We know from Revelation 22:13 that the first and the last is the Alpha and Omega.

Revelation 22:16,20
16 "I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star."
20 He who testifies to these things says, "Yes, I Am coming quickly." Amen. Come, Lord Jesus.


The immediate text clearly tells us that it was Jesus who was pierced and who is Coming in the clouds. This person coming in the clouds is God(Jesus-the Son of Man),

hope this helps !!!

 

[101G]

The distinctions of the Trinity apply to the one God in different ways before and after the Incarnation. If they are before the Incarnation, Deity is expressed as God yet to become flesh. "And they shall look upon me" reflects the reality as if Christ was looking backwards at a time when he has neither been born nor killed.

So the words are a prophetic projection, certainly not as if Jesus yet existed as a man, but rather, as he existed as the Word of God. God and the Word are not part of the Trinitarian formulation after the Incarnation, and so, Deity can be flexibly applied as Creator, Word, and Spirit. But when Jesus actually became a man, the Trinitarian formula began to be expressed as Father, Son, and Spirit.

So technically, it was neither the Father nor the Son that was speaking, but rather a prophetic projection of God becoming the Son, creating the Trinitarian distinction between Father and Son.

GINOLJC, to all.
first thanks for the reply, second, cannot buy that excuse, and here's why. A. if this was, as you say, " God becoming the Son". then the Son according to you did not exist until he came, correct? which says it was never three in the beginning. so plesse explain.
B. and if is was neither the Father nor the Son that was speaking, according to you, it was the Holy Ghost, because if this is prophetic, listen,
2 Peter 1:21 "For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."
so now according to you, this prophetic projection was of the Holy Ghost, (if it was not the Father nor the Son, according to you), who the one was pierced was the Holy Ghost, because the speaker said, " and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced" ME is referring to the speaker of the prophecy. now you have the Holy Ghost coming as the Son. but you said the Father is coming as the Son. so which is it?
C. the only prophetic projection came from the Holy Spirit, according to 2 Peter 1:21. now you have another proplem, and here it is listen carefully,
1 Peter 1:10 "Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:"
1 Peter 1:11 "Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow." HOLD IT, the Spirit of Christ was in them, meaning in the Prophet, but according to 2 Peter 1:21 it was the Holy Spirit who moved them, meaning was in then. well please this also.

now either you're saying that the apostle Peter is lying, meaning God, (God forbid), because it is God who gave Peter those words to write. or you're in error. so please explain A,B, and C please. thanks in advance.

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

PS please read 2 Peter 1:21 and 1 Peter 1:10 & 11.

 

[Truther]

You face the fact that you lack the faith that it was Gods Holy Spirit that inspired men to write down the many texts that Jesus stated about the kind of relationship that is between him and God, which was and is a Father and Son relationship. Even after Jesus was resurrected by God a life giving Spirit who was given immortality and inherited incorruption the kind of relationship that Gods Holy Spirit inspired men to write down is that Jesus has and is a Father and Son relationship. You have no faith that it was the Only Begotten Son of God that God sent to the world of mankind, you have no faith that it was the Only Begotten Son of God who sacrificed his human life for the world of mankind, you have no faith that it was Gods Only Begotten Son that God resurrected the third day after his death a life giving Spirit who then was given immortality and who then inherited incorruption from his Father who is God. It's only your fault that you lack such faith.

Do you doubt the Apostle Thomas that was the first Apostle to say Jesus was God? Yes or no?

 

[Truther]

It can be seen that, while Jesus’ death on a torture stake plays a vital part in human salvation, acceptance of this is by no means all that is involved in ‘putting faith in the name of Jesus.’ (Ac 10:43) 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) So while 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) However the scriptures show that Jesus name isn't more excellent or glorious than the person whose name is Jehovah. The name Jesus Christ as glorious and excellent that God has made his Sons name isn't more excellent or glorious than his own name. Jehovah is the name of the Only True God who has an Only Begotten Son whose name Jesus has been made more excellent and more glorious than every other name in heaven and on Earth the only exception is the person who made his name more excellent and more glorious than any other name in heaven or on Earth that person whose name is Jehovah the Father and God of Jesus.

No, it says the Jesus inherited God's name in Hebrews 1:4.

So, when the angel said "thou shalt call his name Jesus...", he was giving the name of God to the son.

 

[Randy Kluth]

GINOLJC, to all.
first thanks for the reply, second, cannot buy that excuse, and here's why. A. if this was, as you say, " God becoming the Son". then the Son according to you did not exist until he came, correct?

No, using inexact vocabulary is what caused a lot of the Trinitarian confusion in the Early Church. When men asserted that the Son had an eternal origin, it referred to the eternity of his Deity. When you and I are here referred to "God becoming flesh" and marking Trinitarian distinctions, we are not talking about his *eternal origin in deity,* but rather, about God revealing Himself, through his Word, in humanity, marking new Trinitarian distinctions. And marking new Trinitarian distinctions does not obliviate the eternal deity of the Son.

The "Son" implies God becoming a man, but it does not obliviate this man having had eternal origins as the Word of God. So you're confusing the terms with respect to this Trinitarian argument. The Son is eternal as far as his divine identity. But the Son is not eternal as far as his having been a man from eternity!

No, my argument is not an excuse, but an effort to get you to see that Trinitarianism is complicated, and can be easily confused by the mixed use of words. By the way, GINOLJC to you, as well! :) But I would, of course, have to assume that your Lord Jesus Christ is the same as mine, that he was true man and true God, and that as true man he was distinct, temporally, from God, and identified, eternally, with the person of God. ;)

which says it was never three in the beginning. so plesse explain.
B. and if is was neither the Father nor the Son that was speaking, according to you, it was the Holy Ghost, because if this is prophetic, listen,
2 Peter 1:21 "For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."

The Holy Spirit is the divine means by which the Word of God activated God's work in the temporal sphere of creation. God, being omnipotent and omnipresent, had to, in a sense, reduce His activities to the limited sphere of the universe in order to display Himself in a less than infinite context.

He did so by the Holy Spirit, which is God's appearance in finite locations. He also did so by the use of His Word, which connects the infinite God with finite activities.

But the personhood of the Holy Spirit is not here being presented in the description of Trinitarian distinctions, but rather, as the means by which God acts within finite creation. The identity of God encompasses all 3 Persons of the Trinity. When we make Trinitarian distinctions their different roles can be expressed beyond their mere identity as God. But their Trinitarian distinctions comes *after* the Incarnation, or is merely projected, ambiguously, before the Incarnation, through prophecy.

so now according to you, this prophetic projection was of the Holy Ghost, (if it was not the Father nor the Son, according to you), who the one was pierced was the Holy Ghost, because the speaker said, " and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced" ME is referring to the speaker of the prophecy. now you have the Holy Ghost coming as the Son. but you said the Father is coming as the Son. so which is it?

No, this is your projection. I never mentioned the Holy Ghost, as if this was describing Him using a Trinitarian description. You are saying that.

God--Father, Son, and Holy Spirit--are all encompassed in what God did in the OT Scriptures. A Trinitarian description is not being depicted there--it is only depicted after the Incarnation, as I said, or projected as such through biblical prophecy.

C. the only prophetic projection came from the Holy Spirit, according to 2 Peter 1:21. now you have another proplem, and here it is listen carefully,
1 Peter 1:10 "Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:"
1 Peter 1:11 "Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow." HOLD IT, the Spirit of Christ was in them, meaning in the Prophet, but according to 2 Peter 1:21 it was the Holy Spirit who moved them, meaning was in then. well please this also.

now either you're saying that the apostle Peter is lying, meaning God, (God forbid), because it is God who gave Peter those words to write. or you're in error. so please explain A,B, and C please. thanks in advance.

Again, you are arguing against your own false use of terminology--not my use of the terminology. You are using the Holy Spirit not as an identifier of Deity but rather as a Person of the Trinity.

The Holy Spirit clearly operated in the OT, but is not described as a 3rd Person of the Trinity. The Son has not yet been manifested in the flesh, marking the 2nd Person of the Trinity. All 3 persons of the Trinity had an eternal origin in God, but are not distinguished as 3 persons until after the Incarnation.

The Holy Spirit had operated, separately, in the OT, but had not be depicted in the Trinitarian formulation--the Son had not yet been revealed as a man. But becoming a man was forecast in a mysterious, ambiguous way. You should therefore stop trying to produce an OT Trinitarian formulation--it doesn't exist until after the Incarnation, or by projection mysteriously.

As I said, the Holy Spirit is expressed, separately, in the OT Scriptures. And that's because, as I said, the infinite God is sort of reducing His appearance down to the level of a finite environment, where He actually appears to exist in many different locations. God is actually in *all* of those places, since He is omnipresent.

But after the Incarnation the Son also appears in a finite location, though only in one place, where he exists in the form of the flesh. Now he appears to compete with the Holy Spirit for a place within the finite universe. This then requires the Holy Spirit and the Son to be distinguished, thus marking a need for new Trinitarian distinctions. You won't be able to go back into the OT Scriptures to get this--it only takes place *after* the Incarnation.

 

[APAK]

No, it says the Jesus inherited God's name in Hebrews 1:4.

So, when the angel said "thou shalt call his name Jesus...", he was giving the name of God to the son.

Truther....not quite...

Yah-shua means YHWH (Yah saves). YHWH gave his Son the special and unique honor of being our Saviour through his actions to, and after the Cross, and thus his name was given for this purpose/mission. Not that Jesus/Yahshua was given the title of God at all, and especially not as being the Father. That would be blasphemy, for sure. Yahshua did not inherit God's Spirit and his divinity at all. That is wishful thinking and not scriptural at all. He was given it for use and empowerment. At best, Yahshua is the Father's proxy and the 'front-man' and 'face' of his Father for us, and to us. He filled his Son with his power of his own Spirit as he desires for his OWN purpose. YHWH is still in charge, and his divinity is his own, forever. There is only one, YHWH, that has a divine purpose and raison d'etre, and it does not originate from his Son, Yahshua

APAK

 

[101G]

The "Son" implies God becoming a man, but it does not obliviate this man having had eternal origins as the Word of God. So you're confusing the terms with respect to this Trinitarian argument. The Son is eternal as far as his divine identity. But the Son is not eternal as far as his having been a man from eternity!

first thanks for the reply, second, if he's eternal, and there is only ONE who is ETERNAL, According to 1 Timothy 6:16 "Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen." AND YOU DO KNOW WHAT ONLY MEANS RIGHT, now this "ONLY" ETERNAL ONE is the Lord Jesus. THAT"S "ONLY" ONE PERSON. and being ONE person, if you say God became a man was it all of the ETERNAL ONE who became a man or was it 1/3 of God who is Spirit that became God. remember you said this, "

The Holy Spirit clearly operated in the OT, but is not described as a 3rd Person of the Trinity. The Son has not yet been manifested in the flesh

IF THE HOLY SPIRIT IS NOT A THIRD PERSON, AND THE "SON" HAS NOT YET MANIFESTED AS A MAN, SO THEN THERE WAS ONLY ONE PERSON THEN. SO IF THE SON BECAME A MAN, AND AS YOU SAID THE HOLY SPIRIT IS NOT A THIRD PERSON, QUESTION AGAIN, WAS THAT 1/3 OF THE SPIRIT/GOD THAT BECAME A MAN OR WAS IT ALL OF GOD THAT BECAME A MAN?

WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THIS ONE STEP AT A TIME.

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[justbyfaith]

God's Holy Spirit at John 5:19 inspires John to write that Jesus can't do nothing by himself. He can do only what he sees his Father doing. In other words Jesus is dependent on his Father Jehovah God. The True God Jehovah isn't dependent on anybody.

Jesus subjected Himself to dependence on the Father as an example to us...for that is what is required of us. Jesus made Himself like us in every way in order that He might show us the way.

The restrictive and harsh way the Pharisees reasoned concerning the Sabbath was never to be reasoned in such a harsh and restrictive manner, which shows us that the Sabbath that the Pharisees taught wasn't the Sabbath God intended.

In Exodus 20:10, it should be clear that the Pharisees were interpreting the scriptures literally and correctly, to say that a man ought not to do any work on the sabbath days.

The Pharisees had reasoned so harshly and restrictively concerning the Sabbath that a person couldn't do any kind of good deed on the Sabbath. God has never influenced anyone to reason that restrictively or harshly concerning the Sabbath day law.

Jesus came to change the sabbath day law (Hebrews 7:12) so that a man can now do well on the sabbath days (Mark 2:28, Matthew 12:12).

God's Holy Spirit inspired John to write down that Jesus said that God was his Father not that Jesus said he was equal to God.

It was John's estimation under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost that Jesus' statement that God was His Father meant that He was (and is) equal to the Father.

 

[justbyfaith]

@BARNEY BRIGHT,

Apparently you don't have the confidence in your own posts to be able to subject them to scrutiny by allowing the quote feature to be used on them. Thus you have placed your responses in quotes so that i cannot use the quote feature. I believe this means that you don't want me to respond because you know that your position will be defeated if I do. This, in itself, shows the faultiness of your position. So, I will not respond to what you have placed inside of the quote feature; and let this testimony be the proof that your position is faulty.

 

[justbyfaith]

I also wanted to ask all of those who deny Christ's Deity:

What possible reason could you have in your hearts for wanting to do so?

Because the testimony in scripture is clear that Jesus Christ is the Lord God.

So there must be some internal, emotional or psychological reason why you are denying the truth of holy scripture that Jesus is God.

If you can search your hearts and figure out what that reasoning is, I believe that you may even be able to overcome that reasoning and come to the knowledge of the truth.

Pro 20:27, The spirit of man is the candle of the LORD, searching all the inward parts of the belly.

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

Christophany said,
These passages in Revelation make it clear that Jesus is God. Remember it is Jesus in the NT who is Coming back to earth that every eye will see. It was Jesus who was pierced on the cross for our sins. John is clearly once again calling Jesus God!!!!!!! The Coming and the coming in the clouds never refers to the Father in the NT but always to Jesus who is the Lord God, the Almighty below

Revelation 1:7-8 doesn't contradict Revelation 1:5-6 where it says Jesus has a Father and God.
Also there at Revelation 1:7 where it talks about all eyes will see Jesus, it's not talking about literal eyes. The fact the scripture says that those who pierced Jesus would see him shows that these eyes are symbolic eyes.

This goes along with what Jesus himself told his disciples before he was put to death. Jesus told his disciples at John 14:19- a little longer and the world will behold me no more, but you [Jesus’ faithful apostles] will behold me, because I live and you will live.” True to Jesus words after Jesus was resurrected the only humans who saw Jesus were his disciples. No unbelieving human saw him. Not even the guard who was guarding the place where they had layed Jesus after his death. The guard saw the Angel who moved the stone but he didn't see Jesus. After Jesus had went into heaven no one has seen him since. Those disciples of Jesus who will be in heaven with Jesus they will see Jesus when they are resurrected. The eyes that will see Jesus at armageddon are not literal eyes. The world will know that Jesus has returned and that God is destroying through his Son Jesus by them seeing all the destruction going on around them all over the globe.

Do you doubt the Apostle Thomas that was the first Apostle to say Jesus was God? Yes or no?

Do you doubt the person greater than Thomas, yes or no

 

[Randy Kluth]

first thanks for the reply, second, if he's eternal, and there is only ONE who is ETERNAL, According to 1 Timothy 6:16 "Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen." AND YOU DO KNOW WHAT ONLY MEANS RIGHT, now this "ONLY" ETERNAL ONE is the Lord Jesus. THAT"S "ONLY" ONE PERSON. and being ONE person, if you say God became a man was it all of the ETERNAL ONE who became a man or was it 1/3 of God who is Spirit that became God. remember you said this, "

IF THE HOLY SPIRIT IS NOT A THIRD PERSON, AND THE "SON" HAS NOT YET MANIFESTED AS A MAN, SO THEN THERE WAS ONLY ONE PERSON THEN. SO IF THE SON BECAME A MAN, AND AS YOU SAID THE HOLY SPIRIT IS NOT A THIRD PERSON, QUESTION AGAIN, WAS THAT 1/3 OF THE SPIRIT/GOD THAT BECAME A MAN OR WAS IT ALL OF GOD THAT BECAME A MAN?

WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THIS ONE STEP AT A TIME.

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

Words mean different things in different contexts. "Person" means one thing as applied to the one God than it means as applied to the persons of the Trinity. There is one Divine Person, and there are three divine persons who express the same Divine Person. One God and three persons is the Trinitarian formula. Three Persons and one Divine Substance.

I didn't express things as you characterized it. I didn't say the Holy Spirit wasn't a 3rd Person. I just said that the Holy Spirit was not expressed in the Trinitarian formula until after the Incarnation. Clearly, the Holy Spirit was distinct, as a person, in the OT Scriptures. However, the Holy Spirit and the one God were both the one God. In this case, one God and two persons. Or, one divine substance and two persons.

It becomes a little more complex in the OT Scriptures, however, because God also revealed Himself in theophanies and in anthropomorphisms. God clearly expressed Himself as the one God in a number of different personal revelations. That is, He appeared in numerous personages, including the Holy Spirit and angelic/human appearances.

Again, as a man the Son did not always exist. But the man Jesus had always existed as the eternal God. So when we talk about the "eternal God," we are talking about the eternal deity of Father, Son, and Spirit, despite the fact the Son had not appeared as a man until the Incarnation.

There is one eternal Person--God. But this is with a big "P." God is infinite and incorporates into His character the ability to reveal His personhood within the finite realm of the created universe. He does this by the infinite capacity of His word, enabling Him to reveal Himself within the created universe. He is thus able to assume finite forms while still retaining His infinite origin.

It is as if we drew a picture of ourselves, and enabled the picture to assume our own personality as the artist. The drawn figure thus becomes another version of ourselves, and yet having its own distinct personality. Only God is infinite and capable of doing this.

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

No, it says the Jesus inherited God's name in Hebrews 1:4.

So, when the angel said "thou shalt call his name Jesus...", he was giving the name of God to the son.

Now see that's an interpretation which says something completely opposite than what God's Holy Spirit inspired men to write down. You want people to believe that when the scriptures say that Jesus has a Father and God that it's not true. It's shown even after Jesus had been resurrected that Jesus has a Father and God and Jesus was immortal and incorruptible when he said he had a Father and God.

So like I said 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) So 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)

 

[101G]

Words mean different things in different contexts. "Person" means one thing as applied to the one God than it means as applied to the persons of the Trinity. There is one Divine Person, and there are three divine persons who express the same Divine Person. One God and three persons is the Trinitarian formula. Three Persons and one Divine Substance.

Error, your doctrine states each person is separate, and distinct. the Father is not the Son who is not the Holy Spirit, who is not the Father. so you just denied your trinity doctrine.

There is one eternal Person--God. But this is with a big "P." God is infinite and incorporates into His character the ability to reveal His personhood within the finite realm of the created universe. He does this by the infinite capacity of His word, enabling Him to reveal Himself within the created universe. He is thus able to assume finite forms while still retaining His infinite origin.

again you deny your doctrine of the trinity. if it's "ONE" eternal person then ther are no sub persons. so again you're in error of the trinity. for in it it declare three person as God. meanin one Spirit.

now Randy if what you said is true, then is it the same person in John 1:3 the same person in Isaiah 44:24 who "MADE ALL THINGS", yes or no?

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

Justbyfaith said:
Jesus subjected Himself to dependence on the Father as an example to us...for that is what is required of us. Jesus made Himself like us in every way in order that He might show us the way.

Here at John 5:19 Jesus was answering the Jews who had accused him of making himself equal to God. He was telling them that he was dependent on his Father who is God, helping the Jews know that he wasn't trying to make himself equal with God. Jesus wasn't doing this just to be some example to us. He was letting the Jews understand that just as he wasn't guilty of breaking the Sabbath he wasn't guilty of trying to make himself equal to God.