Did Jesus say he was God???

[Shermana]

Yes, who thought he'd finally say it

I appreciate the fact that you demonstrate your ability to completely twist what I said by clipping out the context and everything after to make it say something I didn't mean. Do you honestly think that's what I meant in the way you are presenting it? Do you think I used the NLT translation to explain what I meant for no reason? What I should have said was "Acts 4:12 is talking about Jesus who was given by G-d". That would have cleared things up better, but I figured you'd understand what I meant by "Given" if I used the NLT. Apparently I was wrong.

 

[Mark2020]

Again, you made me quote your posts.
Here's what you said:

It's also rendered "God" for 2 Corinthians 4:4.

Really?

2 Corinthians 4:4 The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

I errored, it seems they all translate it as "the god" in fact. But the NLT has the correct context...

 

[Shermana]

You're welcome.
And thanks for your help.
ps. Don't keep asking useless pathetic questions.

Asking you to find 3 other examples where Calwell's rule would apply is apparently a useless, pathetic question for Trinitarians.

 

[Shermana]

I'm pretty sure I earlier mentioned the article in 2 Cor 4:4 and this was an issue of using "The God" instead of "The god" which I later realized was "The god". Either way, it's an articled theos. You misunderstand yet again. Can you please post the preceding posts before that to see if I really wasn't referring to an articled Theos? What page is it on?

 

[Mark2020]

I appreciate the ...

Not even that explains anything...

 

[Mark2020]

Asking you to find 3 other examples where Calwell's rule would apply is apparently a useless, pathetic question for Trinitarians.

Actually I quoted the question that I was referring to.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

matthew 27:11 Meanwhile Jesus stood before the governor, and the governor asked him, “Are you the king of the Jews?”
“You have said so,” Jesus replied.
Jesus acknowledges Pilates temporal authority to make a state declaration that Jesus is King of the Jews. "You have said so" is a rhetorical response to Pilates question, thats why Jesus didn't just say "yes". Pilate faces a huge dilemna. He doesn't want to kill him and he doesn't want to call him a king. Both happens. The events that followed changed the course of human history.

Incorrect. In Matther 27:11 he says (You said so). This is no acknowledgement. Think of it like this.....

Dirty Penguin, those people say "you are one cool guy".....

And then I answer...."Well that's what they say".....

It's not an acknowledgment at all. If he claimed to be (King of the Jews) he would have been dealt with right then and there because the Romans had dominion over the Jews and they would have seen him as challenging Roman rule. At this point, according to the book of Matthew, Yeshua remained silent. Here's what Pilate supposedly said at this point.

Matthew 27:18
For he knew that for envy they had delivered him.

Matthew 27:22
Pilate saith unto them, What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ? They all say unto him, Let him be crucified.

And the governor said, Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out the more, saying, Let him be crucified.

When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it.

Yeshua didn't acknowledge the title and Pilate wanted nothing to do with this situation and the people who seemed to making false accusation against an innocent man. But the mob was not satisfied and wanted him dead.
[FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica][/FONT]

 

[Mark2020]

Incorrect. In Matther 27:11 he says (You said so). This is no acknowledgement. Think of it like this.....

Wrong.
You can't apply your current understanding of English translation to that.
However, if waitasec does her homework, she should be able to answer this one.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Wrong.
You can't apply your current understanding of English translation to that.
However, if waitasec does her homework, she should be able to answer this one.

Show where Yeshua accepts the title of being called "King of the Jews"....

 

[Mark2020]

Show where Yeshua accepts the title of being called "King of the Jews"....

After she has done her homework, I'll show you.

 

[waitasec]

Don't keep asking useless pathetic questions.

very telling indeed...
if questions seem to be something you grapple with...you obviously don't know how to ask them or what the purpose of a question is...which tells me you've been told what to believe or you simply refuse to think for yourself.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

After she has done her homework, I'll show you.

You were quick to jump in even though my address was to kepha31, so now that you've taken it upon yourself to do that and saying I'm wrong then let's not wait for anyone else. How about you show where in that trial Yeshua said he was "King of the Jews"

 

[Mark2020]

very telling indeed...

Why don't you try to read the discussion before judging a single sentence?
Haven't I already answered tens of questions from you?

 

[Mark2020]

You were quick to jump in...

The original question was from waitasec. Try reading the discussion yourself...

 

[idav]

Y.... where in that trial Yeshua said he was "King of the Jews"

Always gotta read between the lines with the alleged words of Jesus. No wonder no one can pin him down on saying anything bad. At least there are some less ambiguous claims that show the humanity of christ which of course is ignored using the premise of the trinity to justify Jesus talking like a human.

 

[waitasec]

After she has done her homework, I'll show you.

you can't do it....

 

[waitasec]

Why don't you try to read the discussion before judging a single sentence?
Haven't I already answered tens of questions from you?

no you haven't. you're regurgitating what you've been told without applying a shred of critical thinking... i can relate, i used to be like that...it takes one to know one

look at the big picture.

why was jesus handed over to the authorities? jesus at that point should have at least admitted to being god...not continue with his ambiguous remarks. the jig was up...but he didn't say he was god...
what is more telling is that he didn't turn himself in knowing he was being sought after, knowing he would be betrayed...
but betrayed of what? did judas lie, wasn't jesus god?

 

[Dirty Penguin]

The original question was from waitasec. Try reading the discussion yourself...

Once again and pay close attention. My response was to what kepha31 said...not you or waitasec. I addressed his claims solely. You then took it upon your self to interject your opinion into our dialogue and claimed I was wrong in the process....so it is not "MY" job to reconcile your argument. If you believe that I'm wrong then post your scripture. It's not my job to dip back to a conversation I wasn't interested in.

My charge is there is nowhere in the trial of Yeshua him ever claiming to be "King of the Jews"....You said I was wrong so now it is on you to present the scripture that refutes my claim...otherwise move on to something else.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

no you haven't. you're regurgitating what you've been told without applying a shred of critical thinking... i can relate, i used to be like that...it takes one to know one

look at the big picture.

why was jesus handed over to the authorities? jesus at that point should have at least admitted to being god...not continue with his ambiguous remarks. the jig was up...but he didn't say he was god...
what is more telling is that he didn't turn himself in knowing he was being sought after, knowing he would be betrayed...
but betrayed of what? did judas lie, wasn't jesus god?

I'm finding this whole stint to be funny though. I'm searching and I can't find a charge of him claiming to be "God" or "King of the Jews"....The claim that one of their scriptures said is that there is a law that no one can claim to be the "son of God".....according to John 19:7.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Always gotta read between the lines with the alleged words of Jesus. No wonder no one can pin him down on saying anything bad. At least there are some less ambiguous claims that show the humanity of christ which of course is ignored using the premise of the trinity to justify Jesus talking like a human.

Correct.

That's why I like John 6:38 in these theological discussions.