IS JESUS GOD?

[quietthinker]

Much of the bible and Jesus' words are told in parables and metaphors which makes it hard to interpret at times. It's easy to pick out bible phrases to support one side or the other

In recent years Cristo, I can think of no parables and metaphors Jesus used that present a problem. It hasn't always been the case. In my younger years I wrestled with them trying to fit them into a particular paradigm.

Looking back I wonder why and what I've come up with is that, how I thought didn't jive with Jesus' objective although I would never have admitted that at the time.

 

[Cristo Rei]

In recent years Cristo, I can think of no parables and metaphors Jesus used that present a problem. It hasn't always been the case. In my younger years I wrestled with them trying to fit them into a particular paradigm.

Looking back I wonder why and what I've come up with is that, how I thought didn't jive with Jesus' objective although I would never have admitted that at the time.

What I mean is that people tend to dismiss quotes as being metaphors. Like when Jesus says he is God, his probably talking metaphorically, not literally.

But for me it comes down to this.
Who was Christ praying to in the garden?
He can't be praying to himself.
He must be praying to our Lord.

 

[bbyrd009]

"like when Jesus says He is God?" hmm

Jesus does the will of the Father, his works are good. He also has been glorified and sits at the right hand of God and acts with power from God the Father. If you don't believe he is part of God then you should believe he is the Son of God, which makes him the direct descendant of God. That seems to say he is a god at some level.

well, to that i would say that God said you are a god too

 

[Brakelite]

As Christo pointed out, Jesus spoke to God.
That God spoke back, proclaiming loud and clear and Jesus was His Son.
And Jesus said God was His Father.
Clearly we have two distinct personal entities here.
My son is human. How can God's true Son not be God?
We all know that before the incarnation Jesus had an existence, sharing His Father's glory. We know that Jesus created all things in cooperation with His Father.
The Creator, Judge, Resurrection and Life not God? The Son of God inherited attributes that were not of the Father, but something, someone else?? Sure, Jesus was subject to the Father in all things, but shouldn't all sons everywhere be subject to their fathers? Why would the Son of God be any different?
Now I don't know about the trinity. To my mind any attempt to formulate the sovereign of the universe and encapsulate His nature into any creedal terms and demand others accept it is a step too far.
We know God is one. How the Father and Son are one we are not told. And neither should we try to explain it.

 

[Brakelite]

is a "Holy" Bible diff from the norm one?
anyway, Why do you call Me good? No one is good but God (theos) suggests that Jesus is not even good!

Yet elsewhere we are told He was good in every sense of the word. So that makes Him...

 

[Aunty Jane]

Cristo, watch out for these JWs, they are unitarians and dont believe in the doctrine of the Trinity, they deny Christ is God. And that could be a serious issue concerning their salvation.

But what if the issue is blasphemy by putting two other "gods" in the Father's place?

What if Jesus is not Almighty God and you are all breaking the "first Commandment"......(Exodus 20:3)
You think God is going to overlook that?

We acknowledge the divinity of Christ but nowhere is he called a deity. The scripture that you all adhere to (John 1:1) does not say in Greek what is translated into English.....the omission of one small word, changes the whole meaning of that verse.

Here it is in a Greek Interlinear....
"In en the beginning archē was eimi the ho Word logos, and kai the ho Word logos was eimi with pros · ho God theos, and kai the ho Word logos was eimi God theos."

So firstly, "in the beginning" never pertains to the existence of God who is an Eternal Being and had no "beginning". All "beginnings" with God are about his creation. (Revelation 3:14)
Secondly, the word "theos" (according to Strongs Concordance) means "a god or goddess, a general name of deities or divinities"...so it is not a word that pertains only to Yahweh. Jesus can be divine without being a deity. Satan is called "theos" in 2 Corinthians 4:4, and so are the judges in Israel who judged Israel under God's authority (John 10:31-36).....the only way to distinguish the Almighty in Greek (because the Jews had ceased to utter his name) was by using the definite article "ho" (the).

So look at the Greek again, and see that there are two "gods" spoken about in that verse......one is "ho theos" but the other is just "theos"...one is Yahweh and the other is not....The Word (ho logos) is divine, and divinely authorized, but he is not "ho theos".

 

[Cristo Rei]

As Christo pointed out, Jesus spoke to God.
That God spoke back, proclaiming loud and clear and Jesus was His Son.
And Jesus said God was His Father.

That's right.
Even God said Jesus is His son.
He said it at Christ's baptism and
He said it at the transfiguration.

 

[bbyrd009]

Yet elsewhere we are told He was good in every sense of the word. So that makes Him...

an enigma?
but i am for anarchy, and
jesus of nazareth = john doe, from nowhere…

 

[Brakelite]

an enigma?

No. It makes Him good in every sense of the word.
KJV 2 Corinthians 5:21
21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

 

[bbyrd009]

No. It makes Him good in every sense of the word.
KJV 2 Corinthians 5:21
21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

ha well ok but then you are left with why Jesus said what He did, i guess

fwiw something that is made to be something doesnt necessarily actually have to be that, prolly; hence why it must be "made to be" i think

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

Cristo, watch out for these JWs, they are unitarians and dont believe in the doctrine of the Trinity, they deny Christ is God. And that could be a serious issue concerning their salvation.

The scriptures say that it was the only begotten Son of God that God sent to the world and those exercising faith in that are the ones who will get eternal life. Those who don't exercise faith that God sent his only begotten Son to the world of mankind are the ones who will not get eternal life.
So anyone who denies John 3:16, who deny that it was the Only Begotten Son of God that God sent to the world of mankind, they will not get eternal life.

 

[bbyrd009]

There is only One Immortal...

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

There is only One Immortal...

Jesus Christ who is the Only Begotten Son of God was given immortality and inherited incorruption when he was resurrected. All those born again who will be in heaven with Jesus when resurrected will be given immortality and inherit incorruption.

 

[bbyrd009]

Jesus Christ who is the Only Begotten Son of God was given immortality and inherited incorruption when he was resurrected. All those born again who will be in heaven with Jesus when resurrected will be given immortality and inherit incorruption.

well barn, to that i would say dont be too surprised when your divinings here dont work out like you planned
we do not yet know what we will become; except for barney?

but since you prolly are not in a position to hear that right now, i might point out your apparent confidence in your statements of absolute truth up there, notice that? Generally a (dead) giveaway, i think. Now i could post lotta Script to refute your statements, No one has ever gone up to heaven etc, but to what end? Point is one can apparently only ever tell a half-truth, which equals a half lie, i guess
the kingdom of heaven is within

 

[bbyrd009]

No. It makes Him good in every sense of the word.
KJV 2 Corinthians 5:21
21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

and really i came back here not to pointlessly debate with gnostics, but to kinda point out the same thing to you; notice how this saying “no” might prevent you from approaching any closer to “truth,” emphasis on the “might” part.

 

[Aunty Jane]

well barn, to that i would say dont be too surprised when your divinings here dont work out like you planned
we do not yet know what we will become; except for barney?

but since you prolly are not in a position to hear that right now, i might point out your apparent confidence in your statements of absolute truth up there, notice that? Generally a (dead) giveaway, i think. Now i could post lotta Script to refute your statements, No one has ever gone up to heaven etc, but to what end? Point is one can apparently only ever tell a half-truth, which equals a half lie, i guess
the kingdom of heaven is within

I for one would love to hear your scriptural refutations.....I personally love “a lotta Script” myself.

 

[bbyrd009]

I for one would love to hear your scriptural refutations.....I personally love “a lotta Script” myself.

the point i meant to make is not whether he is "right" or not, or i am right or not, so much as since neither of us knows for sure, a bit more circumspection might be called for. But you are welcome to start on those three

 

[Aunty Jane]

the point i meant to make is not whether he is "right" or not, or i am right or not, so much as since neither of us knows for sure, a bit more circumspection might be called for. But you are welcome to start on those three

You have to be specific about what "three" you are referring to.....

I'll start with this one..."No one has ever gone up to heaven etc, but to what end?"
My approach to scripture is..."who said it"....."what is the context of what they said"....and "how does it relate to the rest of scripture?"

So John 3:13 in context, was Jesus' conversation with the Pharisee, Nicodemus....after explaining what it means to be "born again" Jesus said to this confused man....(V12-15)
"If I have told you earthly things and you still do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things? 13 Moreover, no man has ascended into heaven but the one who descended from heaven, the Son of man. 14 And just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so the Son of man must be lifted up, 15 so that everyone believing in him may have everlasting life."

So what was the purpose of this statement that "no man has ascended into heaven but the one who descended from heaven"?
Jesus was clearly stating that he would be the first to go to heaven when he died......after his resurrection, he would return to where he was before, (John 6:62) at his Father's side in the heavenly realm. (Psalm 110:1-2) So this begs the question...."if Jesus was the first human to die and be resurrected in spirit form and go to heaven...where did all the other men and women of faith go when they died?"

Jesus also related his death to the copper serpent sent to the complaining Israelites in the wilderness....so what did he mean?

What would you say, using just the scriptures?

 

[bbyrd009]

So this begs the question...."if Jesus was the first human to die and be resurrected in spirit form and go to heaven...where did all the other men and women of faith go when they died?"

well, our spirit will return to Yah, Who gave it, too, i guess; but most believers are consumed with getting their life/soul into heaven i think? Completely diff concept

Jesus also related his death to the copper serpent sent to the complaining Israelites in the wilderness....so what did he mean?

that He is being used as Nehushtan was--and what we still go to people with snakes on their lapels for today, incidentally--a remedy for bad behavior; a palliative to treat a symptom (rather than addressing the cause iow) So, a sacrifice has been provided bc people believe they need a sacrifice, not bc Yah needs one
It's Esau/Jacob told a diff way, basically; Esau needs red stew or he "will die," and Jacob makes the red stew (but does not eat any)

 

[Brakelite]

ha well ok but then you are left with why Jesus said what He did, i guess

All the elders, the rulers, and scribes of the Jews hated Jesus and utterly rejected His claims as being the Son of God. They were jealous, and sought ways to destroy Him. They saw Jesus as a threat, not just to their positions as elders of Israel, but to the nation itself. They were very comfortable having Caesar as their king. They would eventually choose Barabus rather than have this upstart rule over them.
So when any of them came to challenge our question Jesus, He challenged them in return by going straight to the problem. "Hey good master...."
'Master? Good? Why callest thou Me good?" said Christ, "there is none good but One, that is, God." Jesus desired to test the ruler's sincerity, and to draw from him the way in which he regarded Him as good. Did he realize that the One to whom he was speaking was the Son of God? What was the true sentiment of his heart?