waitasec
Veteran Member
:rainbow1:
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Did Jesus say he was God???
- Thread starter Muffled
- Start date
:rainbow1:
Dirty Penguin
Master Of Ceremony
Definitely difficult to accept that considering this particular claim was not exclusive to him but was the norm before he arrived on the scene. Be that as it may, it's simply something that we try not to focus on here in this particular thread. We start with the assumption that Yeshua was a real person and we examine his life by the scriptural evidence given.
This could be said for any religion on the planet. Why aren't you a Jew or a Muslim? Why aren't you a Buddhist?...These are rhetorical questions of course.
Actually that's not why he was crucified. Additionally, this thought isn't even found in the four gospels
Why the contention to whether Jesus was God or not? A stumbling block maybe?
Do we not get it? Can any of you, or any one you know deliver the whole of mankind from the "lost Condition?
Before there can be a reconciliation in a marriage there must first be a failing, a trespass or simply, a change of partners leading to a divorce.
There was such a divorce in the creation of mankind.
In the story of Adam and Eve's expulsion out of the garden signified a change in masters.
Ref: Luk 16:13 No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
"mammon" is our selfish flesh. Either we serve God in heart or we serve ourselves in heart.
That is where the "Lost" condition came from in the story of Adam and Eve.
Now, if we can acknowledge our "lost" condition, then we can proceed to the road of redemption via reconciliation.
Since no man, born of the flesh with original Adams Spirit and the fleshly body (Male or female) of Eve, can find now power within it's self to reconcile self with God, will without the help of God be "lost" forever.
Enter: The second type of Adam. Born not of the spirit of the first Adam but of the spirit of God via the body of Eve (Fleshly) with life as his power.
Would it not be the right of God to redeem His whole mankind creation by sacrificing only one body of flesh, as God, to the sacrificing the whole of humanity and wind up with nothing for all His creation?
Now think about it, "God the creator and God the redeemer". Can you find mankind within that phrase?
Of course not, because it is all God's doing.
Can you now see the reason why Jesus had to be "as God"?
If it were not so, then you tell me, by what method do you propose to find life after this one?
Surely, your righteous living will not.
Ref: Rom 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
How then can we save ourselves? The answer is, having being created we have no power of our own to effect a change that God alone had created.
No amount of personal righteousness would work, hence as the verse above rightly states.
If not Jesus, then who?
I mean, God has clearly stated His works in the salvation of mankind, yet we find it easier to believe in our selves, our own mammon selves, rather than to believe in God's works.
Ref: Eze 34:4 The diseased have ye not strengthened, neither have ye healed that which was sick, neither have ye bound up that which was broken, neither have ye brought again that which was driven away, neither have ye sought that which was lost; but with force and with cruelty have ye ruled them.
Joh 12:47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
As God, He very well could and He did!
But like the verse states: paraphrasing, if you hear His world and believe Him not, He won't judge against you, for he came not to condemn you, but to save you.
Praaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaise God!
Blessings, AJ
Do we not get it? Can any of you, or any one you know deliver the whole of mankind from the "lost Condition?
Before there can be a reconciliation in a marriage there must first be a failing, a trespass or simply, a change of partners leading to a divorce.
There was such a divorce in the creation of mankind.
In the story of Adam and Eve's expulsion out of the garden signified a change in masters.
Ref: Luk 16:13 No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
"mammon" is our selfish flesh. Either we serve God in heart or we serve ourselves in heart.
That is where the "Lost" condition came from in the story of Adam and Eve.
Now, if we can acknowledge our "lost" condition, then we can proceed to the road of redemption via reconciliation.
Since no man, born of the flesh with original Adams Spirit and the fleshly body (Male or female) of Eve, can find now power within it's self to reconcile self with God, will without the help of God be "lost" forever.
Enter: The second type of Adam. Born not of the spirit of the first Adam but of the spirit of God via the body of Eve (Fleshly) with life as his power.
Would it not be the right of God to redeem His whole mankind creation by sacrificing only one body of flesh, as God, to the sacrificing the whole of humanity and wind up with nothing for all His creation?
Now think about it, "God the creator and God the redeemer". Can you find mankind within that phrase?
Of course not, because it is all God's doing.
Can you now see the reason why Jesus had to be "as God"?
If it were not so, then you tell me, by what method do you propose to find life after this one?
Surely, your righteous living will not.
Ref: Rom 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
How then can we save ourselves? The answer is, having being created we have no power of our own to effect a change that God alone had created.
No amount of personal righteousness would work, hence as the verse above rightly states.
If not Jesus, then who?
I mean, God has clearly stated His works in the salvation of mankind, yet we find it easier to believe in our selves, our own mammon selves, rather than to believe in God's works.
Ref: Eze 34:4 The diseased have ye not strengthened, neither have ye healed that which was sick, neither have ye bound up that which was broken, neither have ye brought again that which was driven away, neither have ye sought that which was lost; but with force and with cruelty have ye ruled them.
Joh 12:47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
As God, He very well could and He did!
But like the verse states: paraphrasing, if you hear His world and believe Him not, He won't judge against you, for he came not to condemn you, but to save you.
Praaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaise God!
Blessings, AJ
Shermana
Heretic
How about just going by the actual scriptures which describe the Suffering Servant as the Guilt Offering in Isaiah 53, and applying it to the same 2nd Temple "Logos Theology" Which the Nazarenes were said to adhere by. "An angel but created above the Archangels".
No need to invent ideas about how "only G-d can sacrifice Himself to satisfy his own system", the actual prophecies will do just fine.
Can you not give God any credit?
God did not sacrifice Himself as you think, He sacrificed a body, the soul of Jesus as the whole of humanity, and then rescued Him!
Ref: Psa 16:10 For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.
Act 2:27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.
Isa 14:15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.
Job 26:6 Hell is naked before him, and destruction hath no covering.
Psa 86:13 For great is thy mercy toward me: and thou hast delivered my soul from the lowest hell.
Psa 139:8 If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there.
Sacrifice, not at you think, but sacrifice one for all, is the love of God shown.
Someone, or all must die an eternal death. That is the way of creation.
Jesus died "a thousand deaths", a way of phrasing it, while we all are gifted life.
What's so hard about that?
God knew what He was doing and none of it is God sacrificing Himself, but simply sacrificing one instead of many, and then forgiving the one and all completely.
You find that mysterious, hard to fathom?
blessings, AJ
If God can live in His own created body, then He can live any where He pleases, whether it be here, there, heaven or hell.
God's soul does not die, but figuratively, Jesus soul became as like all of us, separated as we, and the reason for going to hell.
But you see, God knew what He was doing, read: Isa 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet,(Meaning red with the sins of the world) they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.
You see, Jesus still lives, for He was resurrected from a dead state.
We are in a dead state whether we be live here on earth or dead in hell (Meaning imprisoned) yet we have the option of reaching for the tree of life and eat of it for our gaining of eternal life.
It is in God (Jesus) that we can do that.
Blessings, AJ
Shermana
Heretic
Also read Isaiah 1:19
And read 1:20
As far as I'm concerned, most "Christians" resist and rebel the idea of obedience to the commandments, concocting all kinds of arguments against it like Jesus "Fulfilling" and "Abolishing" the Law. This would explain a lot...
Going on, Isaiah 1:21
The city was once righteous, but now its full of murderers. What does "Righteous" mean? It seems few "Christians" know what "righteousness" actually means in biblical terms.
Moving on, 1:23
This sounds like....corruption....lack of obedience to the commandments.
Moving on after saying its time to crush these heartless lawless corrupt people,
WHAT??? After all this happens, apparently, judges like the "DAYS OF OLD" will be restored, as at the beginning? What does that imply?
As you can see, that verse is not about proving G-d was Jesus incarnate but is talking about what will happen to the evil corrupt lawless people and how eventually, even 2000 years later possibly, the days of old with judges as at the beginning will be returned.
This is a common argument that presupposed that G-d requires "God" to be a Sacrifice while still not being himself while being himself at the same time, which is of course totally logical (cough).
Key word: Obedient. Your definition of "Obedient" differs from mine, which emphasizes the whole of the commandments. Those in Isaiah 66:17 who eat swine flesh will have a horrible death with everlasting fire and worms in 24.
Do you understand how the Sacrifice system works and what the point of Isaiah 53 is about, and why he even had followers who believed he was the Christ?
Yashua, according to the ancient beliefs, including much of the so-called "Pseudipigrapha" and ancient Jewish writings attest to the idea of the Highest of the Archangels (and this is written about by the "Church Fathers" as the "Heresies" the "Nazarenes" believed in) being made as an atonement for sin, how exactly I don't even know myself, but I know enough that it involves being a "Guilt Offering" in a time where there is no temple, therefore one must be "obedient" in order to even have faith in his sacrifice as a guilt offering to begin with.
And read 1:20
[/URL]
As far as I'm concerned, most "Christians" resist and rebel the idea of obedience to the commandments, concocting all kinds of arguments against it like Jesus "Fulfilling" and "Abolishing" the Law. This would explain a lot...
Going on, Isaiah 1:21
The city was once righteous, but now its full of murderers. What does "Righteous" mean? It seems few "Christians" know what "righteousness" actually means in biblical terms.
Moving on, 1:23
This sounds like....corruption....lack of obedience to the commandments.
Moving on after saying its time to crush these heartless lawless corrupt people,
[/URL]
WHAT??? After all this happens, apparently, judges like the "DAYS OF OLD" will be restored, as at the beginning? What does that imply?
As you can see, that verse is not about proving G-d was Jesus incarnate but is talking about what will happen to the evil corrupt lawless people and how eventually, even 2000 years later possibly, the days of old with judges as at the beginning will be returned.
This is a common argument that presupposed that G-d requires "God" to be a Sacrifice while still not being himself while being himself at the same time, which is of course totally logical (cough).
Key word: Obedient. Your definition of "Obedient" differs from mine, which emphasizes the whole of the commandments. Those in Isaiah 66:17 who eat swine flesh will have a horrible death with everlasting fire and worms in 24.
Do you understand how the Sacrifice system works and what the point of Isaiah 53 is about, and why he even had followers who believed he was the Christ?
Yashua, according to the ancient beliefs, including much of the so-called "Pseudipigrapha" and ancient Jewish writings attest to the idea of the Highest of the Archangels (and this is written about by the "Church Fathers" as the "Heresies" the "Nazarenes" believed in) being made as an atonement for sin, how exactly I don't even know myself, but I know enough that it involves being a "Guilt Offering" in a time where there is no temple, therefore one must be "obedient" in order to even have faith in his sacrifice as a guilt offering to begin with.
waitasec
Veteran Member
i couldn't help but notice that you didn't say realistically...
so is life a metaphor or is it real?
this doctrine has many many holes...
and the only way to reconcile the inconsistencies is through faith...faith in something that hasn't proven anything different from anything else other than being an excuse for good or bad behavior....
Dirty Penguin
Master Of Ceremony
Irrelevant ramblings. Your scriptures do not reveal Yeshua to be "God". It wasn't something he taught his followers. He explicitly said he had a god and we know this by the praying and begging he did to his god. Finally the "ascended" Yeshua is back in heaven, according to your scripture, professing numerous times he has a god. Chapters 4 and 5 of Revelation shows "God" and the Lamb (Yeshua) to be totally separate.......
javajo
Well-Known Member
Yes, there were others. I really like what Gamaliel warned the Pharisees who were persecuting the early church in Acts 5 about that. He talked of Theudas and also Judas of Galilee who said they were something and had followers and who all perished. He said, "Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought: 39But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God."
True. However, my conclusion from my studies is that Christianity is the most veritable. But that's just me.
Actually he was crucified for blasphemy in making himself equal to God because he forgave sins, something only God could do.
Dirty Penguin
Master Of Ceremony
The earliest of the gospels....the book of Mark held that Yeshua was silent at his trial. He was accused of many things but did not defend himself against the claims. Pilate asked him was he "King of the Jews" and instead of saying ('Yes I am')...he says (that's what you're calling me)....Pilate asked again if he had anything to say in regards to the accusations made against him and your scripture, Mark-the earliest known gospel, says he said nothing.
Even if you want to use the book of John for your claim......it would premature to assume that calling yourself "son of God" is saying you're equal to "God". This is why in the Muslim Quran they vehemently express that "God" does not have a son, a consort nor is there anything equal to "God". The law is to not associate anything or anyone with "God"....Not that you're saying this person IS "God" rather "God" would be above its creation. Unfortunately it seems moot as the earliest of your gospels are silent on the details of the trial but for some odd reason the latter of the four gospels is choc-full of details that weren't revealed in earlier writings.
javajo
Well-Known Member
It is true Jesus stood in silence before his accusers in fulfillment of scripture:
He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth. Isaiah 53:7.
But the excuse the Jewish religious leaders found to crucify him was that he forgave sins, and said that God was his Father, thus making himself equal with God:
And when he saw their faith, he said unto him, Man, thy sins are forgiven thee. And the scribes and the Pharisees began to reason, saying, Who is this which speaketh blasphemies? Who can forgive sins, but God alone? Luke 5:20-21 (also Mark 2:5-7)
Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God. John 5:18
In some of the arguments he had with the pharisees he was accused of insinuating he was equal to god but he never dealt with the claims just gave back witty remarks that could go either way. It is true that the crucifixion did not associate some of the earlier possibler claims of being equal to god but focused on the "king of Jews" aspect.
That logic doesn't follow. Sure they thought that might be what he meant but it was in there own heads as they really didn't like anything he was saying. Jesus never accepted there claims.
Shermana
Heretic
He didn't really break Sabbath, he showed situations where it was allowable in emergencies, it was an accusation against him just like how they accused him of breaking the tradition by not washing his hands.
Likewise, he didn't really declare himself Equal to the Father, that's why he specifically says "The Father is Greater than I" in 14:28 and the word for "Greater" doesn't just mean authority because it is also used for "One greater than Jonah is here".
Now here is a situation for the Trinitarian: Did Jesus give man the believers the power to forgive sins too? . The Ending of the Book of John is widely regarded to have seen a series of add-ons and historical-jesus.info concludes that it ended at 20:10. If so, that would completely dispel the whole "equal" thing in that regard since the Disciples are given the power to forgive sins in the traditional ending. If not, it still doesn't make him equal but a representative who can forgive.
Likewise, he didn't really declare himself Equal to the Father, that's why he specifically says "The Father is Greater than I" in 14:28 and the word for "Greater" doesn't just mean authority because it is also used for "One greater than Jonah is here".
Now here is a situation for the Trinitarian: Did Jesus give man the believers the power to forgive sins too? . The Ending of the Book of John is widely regarded to have seen a series of add-ons and historical-jesus.info concludes that it ended at 20:10. If so, that would completely dispel the whole "equal" thing in that regard since the Disciples are given the power to forgive sins in the traditional ending. If not, it still doesn't make him equal but a representative who can forgive.
javajo
Well-Known Member
Yes they were threatened by him as the people looked at him as their Messiah, which he was. But, when he told forgave people their sins, (corporate, not like we forgive someone) knowing only God can do that, that was saying he was God. He also use the title "I Am", which is a name for God. He said he came down from God, that he was the Son of God, and that he was one with the Father, that he was in the Father and he in him, etc. He told Peter that God revealed it to him when Peter said 'thou art the Christ (Messiah), the living Son of God. Jesus was God Incarnate and he knew it. (still does)...
Shermana
Heretic
He does not use the Title "I am", he says "I was". Besides, "I am" is not the actual meaning of "Ehyeh asher ayeh", and he doesn't use it as a title in any possible way of viewing the grammar. This is a common myth kept in perpetuation by unscrupulous translators who capitalize the "I AM" in a cheap gimmick off of the use of "LORD".
"Before Abraham was, I was" - An American Translation, Edgar Goodspeed.
Forutnately there are many honest translations to dispel this weasel use of "I am". The word used for "Before Abraham was" is also used for "Will be", the same way that the word "Am" is used for "Was" in other cases. French has somewhat similar use of "I am" for the past tense. It's the only way the sentence makes sense, and that's why they picked up stones, because Jesus declared to be existent before Abraham. That's the actual context and it fits with the "Logos Theology" which John's readers were well acquainted with.
"If you do not believe that I am" would have to read "If you do not believe that I am I am" for him to be using a title.
Are you seriously using the "We are one" thing? What about the disciples? "Let them be one as we are one".
"Before Abraham was, I was" - An American Translation, Edgar Goodspeed.
Forutnately there are many honest translations to dispel this weasel use of "I am". The word used for "Before Abraham was" is also used for "Will be", the same way that the word "Am" is used for "Was" in other cases. French has somewhat similar use of "I am" for the past tense. It's the only way the sentence makes sense, and that's why they picked up stones, because Jesus declared to be existent before Abraham. That's the actual context and it fits with the "Logos Theology" which John's readers were well acquainted with.
"If you do not believe that I am" would have to read "If you do not believe that I am I am" for him to be using a title.
Are you seriously using the "We are one" thing? What about the disciples? "Let them be one as we are one".
Last edited:
javajo
Well-Known Member
So, do you deny the Deity of Christ?
Shermana
Heretic
I would be classified as an Arian, the same way that the Nazoreans were written to have believed back in the 100s and 200s, that he was Created above the Angels but still an Angel. The firstborn of Creation, the "Logos" of Philos' writings that Anatolian Jews were familiar with.The personfied being of "Wisdom".
The word "Divinity" is up to dispute, since "Sons of G-d" which are angels are called "Divine beings". The word "Deity" as a Quality applies to "gods" of whom angels are called such as in Psalm 136:2 "god of the gods". It is a fact that angels are called gods.
When it says "Man was made a little lower than the gods", it doesn't mean "Man was made a little lower than G-d".
I believe that if you don't actually acknowledge what Jesus was as the Christ in Messianic prophecy, and you say he was G-d incarnate, that is antichrist doctrine. It does not actually acknowledge that the Messiah has come in the flesh but some post 150 A.D. manmade representation.
Last edited: