Did Jesus say he was God???

[Shermana]

So Jesus is a false god, if a lower case g is to be used?

No, the word "False god" means what it means, something purporting to be THE God, like the "gods of the nations". Nonetheless, once again, angels are called "gods", clearly, in the Psalms. God is called "The god of the gods". Where does it say that Satan is a "false god"? Why does Paul clearly call him "The god of this world" if his context was aout false gods?

 

[Pegg]

Will try to come back to this tomorrow night. It is getting past my bedtime and morning comes early when you have 5 little ones and need to go to the grocery store

yes I know what you mean, i have 4 myself

 

[Yanni]

No, the word "False god" means what it means, something purporting to be THE God, like the "gods of the nations". Nonetheless, once again, angels are called "gods", clearly, in the Psalms. God is called "The god of the gods". Where does it say that Satan is a "false god"? Why does Paul clearly call him "The god of this world" if his context was aout false gods?

The Hebrew word "Elo-him" (I can't write out the Name without a dash in the middle) literally means "God." The passage in Psalms that you're referring to means "God of the heavenly powers." Literally it means "God of the gods," but since there is no god but HaShem, the One True God, then it can't possibly mean "God of the gods." Without an explanation on the meaning of the verse, of course there's an opening for mistranslation or misinterpretation.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Yepp, it does mean Godhood which means deity!

Godhead (5 Occurrences)

Only from a trinitarian perspective. An online dictionary gives a simple definition to the word ("divinity" ......Godhood - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary). Divinity and deity can be two separate things. One can be divine without being deity. Basically its roots are in "god like". "Godhood" is not exclusive to Christianity, Islam or Judaism. The attributes existed in Greek/Roman culture as well as before them.

Nope it does not mean this at all! The flesh Christ Jesus was given power, but as God he had all power!

Oh come now. This is what your scriptures say. This is what the biblical Yeshua said. He said all authority in heaven and on Earth has been given to him (Matthew 28:18). The key is understanding that while in heaven he was given authority. This would also mean he didn't originally posses authority. Since we are told by all three religions who profess their belief in "God" that nothing can be added or subtracted from "God" then it makes no sense that Yeshua, either before being sent or while on Earth did not already posses authority.

Also, the Father in Christ Jesus was omnipresent!

I can agree to this because it was your Yeshua that said....

John 14:24 (in part)
......"These words you hear are not my own; they belong to the Father who sent me"

This would denote that he is not the god that sent him. At best he is an ambassador who is speaking on behalf of his god. That's what John (The Baptist) believed.

John 3:34 (in part)
For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God......

Think of it this way....He whom the President has sent speaks the words of the President. The ambassador is not the President but the information delivered is on behalf of the President who sent him.

Yes!! It was given to the man Christ Jesus!

Yeshua said "All authority was given to me in heaven....." which means he, while in heaven, he did not have complete authority but it was something his god granted him. We can clearly see in your scripture that before the biblical Yeshua was sent by his god, while on Earth and when he returned to heaven he was a completely separate entity from his god.

Yes it is! Because if you are baptized in the name of Jesus you invoked that name, which goes against scripture if you believe Jesus is not Yahweh!

Your question is not relevant to this theological discussion. Whether I'm Christian, Muslim, Jew or Atheist means nothing. We are arguing on pure theological and philosophical grounds. There are a plethora of Christians baptized in your faith who do not agree with the scriptural interpretation the biblical Yeshua is "God". The only thing different between a trinitarian and an non trinitarian within the faith of Christianity is their interpretation of the scripture.

 

[Shermana]

The Hebrew word "Elo-him" (I can't write out the Name without a dash in the middle) literally means "God." The passage in Psalms that you're referring to means "God of the heavenly powers." Literally it means "God of the gods," but since there is no god but HaShem, the One True God, then it can't possibly mean "God of the gods." Without an explanation on the meaning of the verse, of course there's an opening for mistranslation or misinterpretation.

What is an "Angel" ("Messenger") in terms of its physical state and being? What does "Son of God" mean in Job 2? If the word "gods" means "Heavenly powers", then the word "god" still means "heavenly powers", and the "heavenly powers" are thus called "gods".

 

[Yanni]

What is an "Angel" ("Messenger") in terms of its physical state and being? What does "Son of God" mean in Job 2? If the word "gods" means "Heavenly powers", then the word "god" still means "heavenly powers", and the "heavenly powers" are thus called "gods".

You should know that the entire Jewish nation is called "Banim Atem LaShem Elokeichem," which means "You are children to HaShem, your God." There are many instances when God calls either the Jewish people or specific people His son; the Jewish people are called HaShem's firstborn son. So "Son of God" is not to be taken literally as God actually having a son. That is purely a pagan concept. An angel is not subject to the physical universe; it is purely spiritual, yet can take human form when God so chooses; but God never did, nor ever will, take human form to do anything; He has messengers for that.

 

[Shermana]

The "Sons of God" in Job 2 are the "Angels", the "Heavenly powers", who are called "Elohim" but not in the Majestic form.

There is a difference between the metaphorical "Children of God" which is an adopted sense, and the actual "Sons of God" who are the Angels themselves, though both contexts are used. This was one of the concepts Jesus was saying. Why do you suppose he tells them that the Angels do not marry?

 

[Pegg]

Why do you suppose he tells them that the Angels do not marry?

that would be because they are genderless

 

[Blackdog22]

that would be because they are genderless

Do angels like... Have both parts or something? How did they come down and have sex with the humans?

 

[Shermana]

that would be because they are genderless

Not necessarily, they went against the Father's will when they went down lured by the beautiful tempting daughters of man in the First age.

 

[Pegg]

Do angels like... Have both parts or something? How did they come down and have sex with the humans?

they materialize fleshly bodies to do that...their spirit bodies dont have parts

 

[Yanni]

Not necessarily, they went against the Father's will when they went down lured by the beautiful tempting daughters of man in the First age.

You know, I always wonder how someone who associates himself with Judaism can rightfully call himself that if he has views that are so alien to Torah Judaism. THE Judaism of the past was the only type of Judaism before people started making their own interpretations of the Torah. There was no Conservative, Reform, Traditional, Messianic, Reconstructionist, etc. at the Giving of the Torah at Mount Sinai. Never in Orthodox (Torah) Judaism has there been a concept of angels having free will. Heavenly powers having sex with humans is a purely pagan concept. You cannot associate yourself with Judaism. Call yourself a "messianic Christian," or just a "messianic." But please explain to me why you call yourself a messianic Jew?

 

[Shermana]

You know, I always wonder how someone who associates himself with Judaism can rightfully call himself that if he has views that are so alien to Torah Judaism. THE Judaism of the past was the only type of Judaism before people started making their own interpretations of the Torah. There was no Conservative, Reform, Traditional, Messianic, Reconstructionist, etc. at the Giving of the Torah at Mount Sinai. Never in Orthodox (Torah) Judaism has there been a concept of angels having free will. Heavenly powers having sex with humans is a purely pagan concept. You cannot associate yourself with Judaism. Call yourself a "messianic Christian," or just a "messianic." But please explain to me why you call yourself a messianic Jew?

"Blah blah blah you're not a Jew blah blah angels don't mate with humans blah blah". Well guess what, the same account in Enoch of the fallen Angels mating with the daughters of man to produce giants is accounted for by much of the early Jewish literature, and is an accepted position among Rabbis. Do you think it simply means "the children of Cain"?

 

[Yanni]

"Blah blah blah you're not a Jew blah blah angels don't mate with humans blah blah". Well guess what, the same account in Enoch of the fallen Angels mating with the daughters of man to produce giants is accounted for by much of the early Jewish literature, and is an accepted position among Rabbis. Do you think it simply means "the children of Cain"?

Yes; at that time, incest was not strictly forbidden, and to allow the human race to exist, God allowed incest at that time between the children of Adam. And I don't know which Rabbis you claim this position is accepted by; it's definitely not the Orthodox Rabbis who follow Toras Moshe to this very day.

 

[jah59]

John 1:3 is defined by Colossians 1:15-17, and might require a knowledge of Philo's description of the Jewish concept of the "Logos" which predated its usage in John. It can be difficult making sense of Anatolian Jewish writings without knowing common ideas and terms. Jesus, as the "Firstborn of all Creation" was basically the "Demiurge", the Chief foreman creator of the angels. When it is said "Let us make man in our image", the "US" is the Angels.

Interesting that you would say that John 1:3 is defined by Colossians 1:15-17, but you only quote a small portion of it. The phrase "Firstborn of all Creation" (better translated in the NIV as "Firstborn over all Creation") is clearly defined by the next word "because" and the phrase following it. The word "because" (Greek oti) introduces an explanation for the phrase before it. Notice in verse 16 that the reason he is called the Firstborn over all creation is "because by him all things were created..."Even if the imagined [other] used by the NWT, which is not in the original Greek, were correct you should be able to recognize that this does not mean First-created, as you suppose, because if it did then it would be written as First-created and not Firstborn. Firstborn here is used in the same way as it is in Exodus 4:22, where the meaning is "preeminent".

 

[Shermana]

Yes; at that time, incest was not strictly forbidden, and to allow the human race to exist, God allowed incest at that time between the children of Adam. And I don't know which Rabbis you claim this position is accepted by; it's definitely not the Orthodox Rabbis who follow Toras Moshe to this very day.

Nephilim

Genesis 6:1–2 relates that the "sons of gods," i.e., divine or angelic beings, took mortal wives; verse 4 continues, "It was then, and later too, that the Nephilim appeared

 

[Shermana]

Interesting that you would say that John 1:3 is defined by Colossians 1:15-17, but you only quote a small portion of it. The phrase "Firstborn of all Creation" (better translated in the NIV as "Firstborn over all Creation") is clearly defined by the next word "because" and the phrase following it. The word "because" (Greek oti) introduces an explanation for the phrase before it. Notice in verse 16 that the reason he is called the Firstborn over all creation is "because by him all things were created..."Even if the imagined [other] used by the NWT, which is not in the original Greek, were correct you should be able to recognize that this does not mean First-created, as you suppose, because if it did then it would be written as First-created and not Firstborn. Firstborn here is used in the same way as it is in Exodus 4:22, where the meaning is "preeminent".

Did I not post about Philo's writings about what the Jews considered the "logos" to be?

Pre-eminent may imply above all, but the word Prototokos can also and usually does mean "First" and it still implies "first among". Romans 8:29 clearly uses it as such as "Firstborn among his brothers". As does Luke 2:7.

Even if the connotation is "Pre-eminent" it's metaphorical because it's like "adopted first son". And in Revelation 1:5 he is the "Firstborn among the dead', what does that mean?

And any way you spin it "Pre-eminent among Creation" still has the "among/of creation" part.

 

[Yanni]

Nephilim

I don't know if you believe in the Oral Law which explains the Torah (Written Law), but the Oral Law (which God gave to the Jewish Nation at Mount Sinai together with the Written Law) explains that the word "Elo-him," as in that verse, refers to a position of authority. In fact, human judges are called "Elo-him." Accordingly, the Oral Law explains that the word "Elo-him" in that verse refers to the sons of the lords and judges of that time, not angelic beings.

 

[Shermana]

I don't know if you believe in the Oral Law which explains the Torah (Written Law), but the Oral Law (which God gave to the Jewish Nation at Mount Sinai together with the Written Law) explains that the word "Elo-him," as in that verse, refers to a position of authority. In fact, human judges are called "Elo-him." Accordingly, the Oral Law explains that the word "Elo-him" in that verse refers to the sons of the lords and judges of that time, not angelic beings.

Human judges are indeed called Elohim, in the same Psalm that refers to Angelic beings as "Elohim" to compare them to.

Strangely, Samuel's soul is called an Elohim by the Witch of Endor.

Can you cite the Talmud verse where you say this is defined?

 

[Dirty Penguin]

THE Judaism of the past was the only type of Judaism before people started making their own interpretations of the Torah.

Heavenly powers having sex with humans is a purely pagan concept.

And yet.....the notion that the "sons of God" to come down and have sex with the daughters of man and bore children are found in your scripture. Does this mean the Torah contains elements of pagan practice and rituals in it as a norm?

Gen. 6:2,4

The sons of God saw that the daughters of man were good, and they took themselves wives from whomever they chose.

Vayir'u beney ha'Elohim et-benot ha'adam ki tovot henah vayikchu lahem nashim mikol asher bacharu.



The titans were on the earth in those days and also later. The sons of God had come to the daughters of man and had fathered them. [The titans] were the mightiest ones who ever existed, men of renown.

Hanefilim hayu va'arets bayamim hahem vegam acharey-chen asher yavo'u beney ha'Elohim el-benot ha'adam veyaledu lahem hemah hagiborim asher me'olam anshey hashem.



It might sound alien and strange to you but this is what is recorded in your scripture.