Did Jesus say he was God???

[Muffled]

Thanks for the quotes. Either God is lying when he says he will (NOT give his glory to another) or Yeshua is delusional when he requested God to glorify him with his glory HE HAD WITH GOD before the earth was. I don't think so. I see God in the scripture holding back his glory and giving it to whom he wants. Yeshua wouldn't had ask for God's glory if God had NEVER given his glory to some one.

Jeremiah 30:19 (NOTE: This scroll comes AFTER the scroll of Isaiah)
And out of them shall proceed thanksgiving and the voice of them that make merry: and I will multiply them, and they shall not be few; I will also glorify them, and they shall not be small.

Now the truth comes out. If God disagrees with you, it must be God who is in error.

This is a nice try but there is no mention of this glory being God's glory. There is a glory that belongs to men and God can provide that if He wishes.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Now the truth comes out. If God disagrees with you, it must be God who is in error.

Not at all and if you noticed I did say ("I don't think so"). God in the scriptures agrees with me totally. I merely stated that God does give glory. Jeremiah 30:19 is an example of that. Most of that chapter from the beginning up to that verse is what God is going to do....and in 30:19...glorify is something he says HE will do.

Jeremiah
30:17 For I will restore health unto thee, and I will heal thee of thy wounds, saith The Lord; because they called thee an Outcast, saying, This is Zion, whom no man seeketh after.

30:18 Thus saith The Lord; Behold, I will bring again the captivity of Jacob's tents, and have mercy on his dwellingplaces; and the city shall be builded upon her own heap, and the palace shall remain after the manner thereof.

30:19 And out of them shall proceed thanksgiving and the voice of them that make merry: and I will multiply them, and they shall not be few; I will also glorify them, and they shall not be small.

This is God's glory....no way around it. He says (I will do this and I will do that and I will glorify them)

This is a nice try but there is no mention of this glory being God's glory. There is a glory that belongs to men and God can provide that if He wishes. [/color]

That is incorrect. The glory he is going to give is to a future people (I will mutiply them and they shall not be few). That's the context of the chapter from 1 to 19. It was God doing something not man. The same is in the case of Yeshua. He prayed to God for God's glory....and God gave it to him. Anything else is conjecture on your part.

John 12:28
Father, glorify thy name. Then came there a voice from heaven, saying, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again.

Again, we see God is speaking from the heavens to Yeshua confirming glory HE will bestow. In 17 Yeshua once more is praying and asking God for glory. Look at how 12:28 connects to 17:1......God said he would glorify it AGAIN and then in 17:1 Yeshua says.... Father, the hour is come, glorify thy son, that thy son may glorify thee.

John 17:1
These words spake Yeshua, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:

17:2
As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.
17:3
And this is life eternal, that they might know thee, the only true God, and Yeshua the Messiah, whom thou hast sent.

This sounds just like what the muslims say.. (la ilaha ilalah Isa rasululah).. There is no god but God and Yeshua is his messenger.


17:4
I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.

17:5
And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was

From what I see God gives glory to who he wants. When Yeshua prayed to God, God answered his prayer and glorified Yeshua's name and said he would do it again. Yeshua understood that so when he was finished with the task that God gave him to do he prayed and told God that his time was now and he asked God for that glory. All this aside, we can cleary see in that prayer Yeshua is not God.....

 

[Muffled]

Tell me, do you ever run into your own back when you argue in such tight circles?

Regards,

Scott

I do not find a return to the premises in my conclusion. What I do find is that people who can't refute the logic bring up the circular logic argument (which they can't prove) when they can't refute the logic.

 

[Popeyesays]

I do not find a return to the premises in my conclusion. What I do find is that people who can't refute the logic bring up the circular logic argument (which they can't prove) when they can't refute the logic.

So so you excuse yourself when you run over your self from behind? Or can an excuse me be considered superfluous?

Regards,
Scott

 

[alexander garcia]

Hi, the name Jesus is less than 400 years old so who are you speaking of? Are you speaking of the Greek name IESOUS? Because the king of the Jews is not Greek!

 

[Popeyesays]

Hi, the name Jesus is less than 400 years old so who are you speaking of? Are you speaking of the Greek name IESOUS? Because the king of the Jews is not Greek!

But the name Yehoshua was indeed Syriac. And the Greeks turned that into Iesous, and the Italian and Spanish became Jesus/

Your point is ?

Regards,
Scott

 

[alexander garcia]

Hi again ,I disagree as to the origin of the Yehoshua, but as to the name Iesous if this is true why is the 6th book the book of Joshua ( in English ) not Jesus? If truly it is the same name the person Moses left to lead was named Jesus, but not even your Bible says that

 

[Muffled]

Hi again ,I disagree as to the origin of the Yehoshua, but as to the name Iesous if this is true why is the 6th book the book of Joshua ( in English ) not Jesus? If truly it is the same name the person Moses left to lead was named Jesus, but not even your Bible says that

As you ought to know the Book of Joshua was written in Hebrew and current translations consider the Hebrew more reliable than the Greek Septuagint which is a translation from the Hebrew into Greek. The Gospels are wriiten in Greek as the original language.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Hi again ,I disagree as to the origin of the Yehoshua, but as to the name Iesous if this is true why is the 6th book the book of Joshua ( in English ) not Jesus? If truly it is the same name the person Moses left to lead was named Jesus, but not even your Bible says that

You may have noticed lately I have been using the name Yeshua. My hebrew and greek are rusty but I nooticed you are Jewish. How would your transliteration of the name look?

I'm not sure if this image will come through so that you can read it. If it does then this is how I see the name spelled in hebrew all the time. Is Yeshua a correct pronunciation of that word? Is the rendering acceptable?

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Hi, the name Jesus is less than 400 years old so who are you speaking of? Are you speaking of the Greek name IESOUS? Because the king of the Jews is not Greek!

I would agree with you that the king of the Jews isn't greek. I know, for the most part, Jews don't consider Yeshua the Messiah but may regard him as a wise man.

The OP asserts Yeshua, as shown in the 4 gospels of the NT , is God in the flesh. I don't agree with him given the statements Yeshua made. The question to you would apply as well.

You may not consider him the Messiah or son of God.....but if you have read the gospels what conclusion have you drawn? I only ask this as to not get the debate thrown off course.

 

[Muffled]

I would agree with you that the king of the Jews isn't greek. I know, for the most part, Jews don't consider Yeshua the Messiah but may regard him as a wise man.

The OP asserts Yeshua, as shown in the 4 gospels of the NT , is God in the flesh. I don't agree with him given the statements Yeshua made. The question to you would apply as well.

You may not consider him the Messiah or son of God.....but if you have read the gospels what conclusion have you drawn? I only ask this as to not get the debate thrown off course.

Even if one did not accept the Gospel as coming from God, what way would a Jew have of knowing that Jesus is God in the flesh or the Messiah (Christ)? I think the answer lies in the way two people who recognized Him as such when He was only a baby hold the Key. The two people that I have read recognized Jesus were Simeon and Anna the prophetess. They had one thing in common. They both had a relationship with God and drew their information from Him instead of their own reasoning, the latter being the case with the Pharisees.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Even if one did not accept the Gospel as coming from God, what way would a Jew have of knowing that Jesus is God in the flesh or the Messiah (Christ)?

If he doesn't except Yeshua as Messiah then that is find. He can look upon the information contained in the four gospels to determine if Yeshua viewed himself as God or informed the people he was God. This is all that I asked. Just because he is jewish does not mean he can't gaze upon the information and draw his own conclusion and give his perspective.

I think the answer lies in the way two people who recognized Him as such when He was only a baby hold the Key.

I disagree. Maybe I missed something there with them but from what I can tell in the story they didn't view Yeshua as God either. You will have to point the reference.

Luke 2:26
And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Spirit, that he should not see death, before he had seen The Lord's Messiah.

He viewed him as the annointed one from God...not God in the flesh. Anna was in a similar situation. She was telling people of the Messiah's coming to all those who looked for redemption in Jarusalem. When she heard the child was born she came to see him just as Simeon did and when they both saw him they gave thanks to God for they had both seen the Messiah that God had sent to them. Simeon could now go in peace because he had seen the Messiah that God sent and Anna's mission of prophesizing the coming of the messiah was done and because they had seen him and gave God praise for sending him they were done and could return to Nazarith.

The two people that I have read recognized Jesus were Simeon and Anna the prophetess. They had one thing in common. They both had a relationship with God and drew their information from Him instead of their own reasoning, the latter being the case with the Pharisees.

Again, the only thing they recognized was that he was the Messiah. Neither of them looked upon Yeshua as God. Simeon could now go in peace because he had gazed upon the messiah that God sent and Anna was done prophesizing the coming of the messiah to the people. You will have to show me where they considered him to be God.

 

[Muffled]

[/color]

If he doesn't except Yeshua as Messiah then that is find. He can look upon the information contained in the four gospels to determine if Yeshua viewed himself as God or informed the people he was God. This is all that I asked. Just because he is jewish does not mean he can't gaze upon the information and draw his own conclusion and give his perspective.




I disagree. Maybe I missed something there with them but from what I can tell in the story they didn't view Yeshua as God either. You will have to point the reference.

Luke 2:26
And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Spirit, that he should not see death, before he had seen The Lord's Messiah.

He viewed him as the annointed one from God...not God in the flesh. Anna was in a similar situation. She was telling people of the Messiah's coming to all those who looked for redemption in Jarusalem. When she heard the child was born she came to see him just as Simeon did and when they both saw him they gave thanks to God for they had both seen the Messiah that God had sent to them. Simeon could now go in peace because he had seen the Messiah that God sent and Anna's mission of prophesizing the coming of the messiah was done and because they had seen him and gave God praise for sending him they were done and could return to Nazarith.




Again, the only thing they recognized was that he was the Messiah. Neither of them looked upon Yeshua as God. Simeon could now go in peace because he had gazed upon the messiah that God sent and Anna was done prophesizing the coming of the messiah to the people. You will have to show me where they considered him to be God.

I agree that they only recognized the Messiah but you will note from the OP that the prophet Isaiah said that the Messiah would be The almighty God and The Everlasting Father.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

I agree that they only recognized the Messiah but you will note from the OP that the prophet Isaiah said that the Messiah would be The almighty God and The Everlasting Father.

From my understanding this was describing Hezekiah.

All of my sources say this is past tesnse and in essence that verse from the KJV is mis-translated. I've been looking at a few hebrew to english translations from different sources and they all render the verse like this;

Isaiah 9:6 (Masoretic Text and the JPS 1917 Edition[FONT=&quot])
For a child has been born to us, a son given to us, and the authority is upon his shoulder, and the wondrous adviser, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, called his name, "the prince of peace."

[/FONT]Rashi, (Shlomo Yitzchaki, 1040-1105 C.E.), who wrote the definitive commentaries on the Hebrew Bible comments thusly:

For a child has been born to us: Although Ahaz is wicked, his son who was born to him many years ago [nine years prior to his assuming the throne] to be our king in his stead, shall be a righteous man, and the authority of the Holy One, blessed be He, and His yoke shall be on his shoulder, for he shall engage in the Torah and observe the commandments, and he shall bend his shoulder to bear the burden of the Holy One, blessed be He.

and… called his name: The Holy One, blessed be He, Who gives wondrous counsel, is a mighty God and an everlasting Father, called Hezekiah’s name, “the prince of peace,” since peace and truth will be in his days.

 

[Muffled]

[quote=DreGod07;983317]From my understanding this was describing Hezekiah.

All of my sources say this is past tesnse and in essence that verse from the KJV is mis-translated. I've been looking at a few hebrew to english translations from different sources and they all render the verse like this;

Isaiah 9:6 (Masoretic Text and the JPS 1917 Edition[FONT=&quot])[FONT=&quot]
For a child has been born to us, a son given to us, and the authority is upon his shoulder, and the wondrous adviser, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, called his name, "the prince of peace."

[/FONT][/FONT]Rashi, (Shlomo Yitzchaki, 1040-1105 C.E.), who wrote the definitive commentaries on the Hebrew Bible comments thusly:

For a child has been born to us: Although Ahaz is wicked, his son who was born to him many years ago [nine years prior to his assuming the throne] to be our king in his stead, shall be a righteous man, and the authority of the Holy One, blessed be He, and His yoke shall be on his shoulder, for he shall engage in the Torah and observe the commandments, and he shall bend his shoulder to bear the burden of the Holy One, blessed be He.

and… called his name: The Holy One, blessed be He, Who gives wondrous counsel, is a mighty God and an everlasting Father, called Hezekiah’s name, “the prince of peace,” since peace and truth will be in his days.[/quote]

This does not fit the context because Hezekiah was from Judea:
Isa 9:1 ¶ But there shall be no gloom to her that was in anguish. In the former time he brought into contempt the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali; but in the latter time hath he made it glorious, by the way of the sea, beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the nations.
2 The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light: they that dwelt in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shined.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

[quote=DreGod07;983317]From my understanding this was describing Hezekiah.

All of my sources say this is past tesnse and in essence that verse from the KJV is mis-translated. I've been looking at a few hebrew to english translations from different sources and they all render the verse like this;

Isaiah 9:6 (Masoretic Text and the JPS 1917 Edition[FONT=&quot])
[FONT=&quot]For a child has been born to us, a son given to us, and the authority is upon his shoulder, and the wondrous adviser, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, called his name, "the prince of peace."

[/FONT][/FONT]Rashi, (Shlomo Yitzchaki, 1040-1105 C.E.), who wrote the definitive commentaries on the Hebrew Bible comments thusly:

For a child has been born to us: Although Ahaz is wicked, his son who was born to him many years ago [nine years prior to his assuming the throne] to be our king in his stead, shall be a righteous man, and the authority of the Holy One, blessed be He, and His yoke shall be on his shoulder, for he shall engage in the Torah and observe the commandments, and he shall bend his shoulder to bear the burden of the Holy One, blessed be He.

and… called his name: The Holy One, blessed be He, Who gives wondrous counsel, is a mighty God and an everlasting Father, called Hezekiah’s name, “the prince of peace,” since peace and truth will be in his days.

This does not fit the context because Hezekiah was from Judea:
Isa 9:1 ¶ But there shall be no gloom to her that was in anguish. In the former time he brought into contempt the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali; but in the latter time hath he made it glorious, by the way of the sea, beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the nations.
2 The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light: they that dwelt in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shined.[/quote]


In the Tanakh it's Isaiah 8:23 but that's neither here nor there. Here is how jewish scholars render that verse.

Isaiah 8:23 (KJV and other s have it as 9:1)
23 For is there no gloom to her that was stedfast? Now the former hath lightly afflicted the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, but the latter hath dealt a more grievous blow by the way of the sea, beyond the Jordan, in the district of the nations.

I had to go back verses before 9:1 and back in chapter 8 and into chapter 9 I see nothing here that is describing future events. I'm reading from the Tanakh and even in the KJV when you're reading it, it is in a past tense form. In the NT it seems the "author" is making this connection. Is this supposed prohecy something Yeshua himself confirmed? I have seen nothing from your first post or the words of Yeshua himself to show he is God. There a multitude of verses from Yeshua where he shows us he isn't God.

 

[lew0049]

None of it is evidence of divinity. You cannot contain the ocean in a teacup, and God the Creator cannot be contained within all of Hisx Creation, much less the body of ONE human being.

The fact that Jesus was born of woman means He cannot have been God.

"The Father which sent me. . ." is just one more of dozens of opportunities Jesus took to keep Himself separate from God in the minds of His followers. At opportunity after opportunity Jesus calls Himself the Son of Man, not the Son of God.

My wife and I are one according to the Old Testament, that does not make my wife me, or me, my wife.

Jesus and God were one in purpose, one in Revelation (Jesus the mouthpiece, God Revealed Himself with). It can mean everything but "one and the same".

You prove your own assumption in your own lights and expect it to convince others? That's called "begging the question" or "Circular argument". It's not proof in any rational sense.

Regards.

Scott

The problem with your argument is that you are classifying the attributes of Jesus and God as being from this world. How is it supposed to make perfect sense when we are being told about something that is not from this world. I've used this example before but if someone described something to you in 6-D, would you be able to fully understand it? No. At most you might get a faint notion of it but thats it. Its like if someone tried to explain depth to someone who had no perception of depth - depth would have no meaning. Just because the Bible says Jesus and the Father does not mean that they are not one Being.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

The problem with your argument is that you are classifying the attributes of Jesus and God as being from this world. How is it supposed to make perfect sense when we are being told about something that is not from this world.

Then what's the point of his mission if he revealed things to us we couldn't possibly understand?

This is not how Yeshua taught his followers. Everytime he reveled something they could not understand and they informed him they didn't understand he had to reveal it a different way. if it was such a mystery he wouldn't have felt as though his followers were ready to go out to spread the word.

It is quite clear to me the things he said. When he says "MY GOD MY GOD why have YOU left me!" It is perfectly clear he is not talking to or about himself. I don't know why christians struggle with this and still presume to call Yeshua God.

I've used this example before but if someone described something to you in 6-D, would you be able to fully understand it? No. At most you might get a faint notion of it but thats it.

In the case of Yeshua he didn't reveal things this way. Sure there were some who did'n understand and he did his best to clear up any misunderstandings. None of his follerws viewed him as God. He was never called Immanuel nor was his mother intructed to name or call him that regardless of what the author of the NT books felt and wrote. He never said or portrayed himself equal to God..... but a servant of his who was GIVEN the ability to do the things he did.

Just because the Bible says Jesus and the Father does not mean that they are not one Being.

Then you going to have to prove this because I'm quite sure his followers didn't make the assumption he was God when he screamed out "MY GOD MY GOD why have YOU left me!" The centurion didn't say this man was truely God in the flesh. Yeshua didn't say John 20:17 I'm God your god. He said "MY GOD *AND* YOUR GOD....

But as Popeyesays.....there are DOZENS of quotes from Yeshua......not others....but Yeshua where he is flat out showing everyone that he is separate..but one in purpose as he hoped we'd be as well.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

This does not fit the context because Hezekiah was from Judea:
Isa 9:1 ¶ But there shall be no gloom to her that was in anguish. In the former time he brought into contempt the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali; but in the latter time hath he made it glorious, by the way of the sea, beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the nations.
2 The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light: they that dwelt in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shined.

In the Tanakh it's Isaiah 8:23 but that's neither here nor there. Here is how jewish scholars render that verse.

Isaiah 8:23 (KJV and other s have it as 9:1)
23 For is there no gloom to her that was stedfast? Now the former hath lightly afflicted the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, but the latter hath dealt a more grievous blow by the way of the sea, beyond the Jordan, in the district of the nations.

I had to go back verses before 9:1 and back in chapter 8 and into chapter 9 I see nothing here that is describing future events. I'm reading from the Tanakh and even in the KJV when you're reading it, it is in a past tense form. In the NT it seems the "author" is making this connection. Is this supposed prohecy something Yeshua himself confirmed? I have seen nothing from your first post or the words of Yeshua himself to show he is God. There a multitude of verses from Yeshua where he shows us he isn't God.

 

[Muffled]

In the Tanakh it's Isaiah 8:23 but that's neither here nor there. Here is how jewish scholars render that verse.

Isaiah 8:23 (KJV and other s have it as 9:1)
23 For is there no gloom to her that was stedfast? Now the former hath lightly afflicted the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, but the latter hath dealt a more grievous blow by the way of the sea, beyond the Jordan, in the district of the nations.

I had to go back verses before 9:1 and back in chapter 8 and into chapter 9 I see nothing here that is describing future events. I'm reading from the Tanakh and even in the KJV when you're reading it, it is in a past tense form. In the NT it seems the "author" is making this connection. Is this supposed prohecy something Yeshua himself confirmed? I have seen nothing from your first post or the words of Yeshua himself to show he is God. There a multitude of verses from Yeshua where he shows us he isn't God.

They didn't have a name for it back then? This is a description of a location but the sea that is mentioned can only be the sea of Gallilee. First of all it can't be the Meddituranean because Naphtali and Zebulon are land locked, Asher being on the west and the Medituranean. It can't be the dead sea because Naphtali and Zebulon are in the north and the Dead sea is in the south.

Jesus had this to say: Lu 10:13 Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works had been done in Tyre and Sidon, which were done in you, they would have repented long ago, sitting in sackcloth and ashes.

Yes, it is in past tense but it is also a prophecy. There is no person who could have fulfilled this in the past. At the time that Isaiah wrote his book the Northern Kingdom of Israel had alrady gone into captivity by the Assyrians.

Isa 9:2 The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light: they that dwelt in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shined.

Joh 8:12 Again therefore Jesus spake unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in the darkness, but shall have the light of life.