Did Jesus say he was God???

[AK4]

You need to read your bible. Jesus never once said he was the only begotten son. That was said by the anonymous author of John.

Was you there? Wheres your proof that He didnt say this? You are making an assumption that the writer wasnt an eyewitness to what was said and you are making an assumption of what "scholars" are saying as true.

Well, he wasn't omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent etc. How about you give me 1 quality to qualify Jesus as being God.

Easy. Does it not say He was the creator of all things? If He is your creator then He is your God.

Well, I've never said Jesus was like any other man but to address dying for everyone's sins? Jesus never said that either. That's something Paul wrote in his letters. Whoever would think God would kill someone else for our sins and not hold us accountable. How ridiculous.

Lets see, you have John the baptist say it. I guess Him saying He has to suffer doesnt count because He didnt directly say He was dying for everyones sin? Ludicris. And i believe somewhere in the OT it mentions He would be an offering for the peoples sin. Ah its in Isaiah 53. Oh i guess offering doesnt mean dying for them. So for you, do you read your bible?

 

[AK4]

Tell you what. I'll give you 1 and when can explain it sufficiently I'll give you another, and we'll keep going like that. You'll be an expert by the time we're finished because there are alot. Here's the first:

In John(2:13-16) Jesus clears the temple merchants at the beginning of his ministry.
In Mt(21:12-13), Mk(11:15-18), and Lk(19:45-46) Jesus clears the temple merchants at the end of his ministry.

This is laughable. As mentioned here Apologetics Press - Chronology and the Cleansing of the Temple this i one you skeptics favorite "discrepencies"

 

[AK4]

He's never quoted as saying that. The author of the book of John said that. The book of Mark, the supposed earliest known of the four gospels, is completely silent on that classification....as is the later Matthew and Luke.

This kills me. Where you there also? the author of John is John as said so at the end of the book, yet you guys dont beleive it. Paul puts his signature on his writings too yet "these are not his either".

Was John to wrtie the exact same thing as the other writers? Should we four exactly the same gospels composed in one book? Some of the prophets in the OT wrote some of the same things as other prophets and yet also brought in new stuff. Shall we discredit what those say also?

 

[AK4]

What do you mean...?

Do you mean the fact that he said he wasn't and always placed himself subservient to his god before his god sent him to Earth, while he was on Earth and after his supposed ascension to heaven?

Does that disqualify Him? Now if all things were created by Him and the Father did all this through Him, in otherwords if the Father through Him made everything then how does that disqualify Him as God? Dont forget "no man has seen or heard God [the Father] at anytime". So in His [the Fathers] stead Jesus represents God as God

This escapes me I guess because I'm not sure Yeshua said he was sent to the (whole world) nor am I'm convinced he said he said he came to die for ("man's) sins. The book of John 1:29 makes the claim that John the baptist said he was. But we don't find this remark, as important as ALL Christians believe Jesus' primary role to be, in any of the other gospels. Remember, Matthew and Luke drew from Mark. John probably pulled some from all of them, considering his gospel came later....but there appears to be a lot of Ad-libbing in John's gospel

I refer you to Isaiah, especially ch 53. It says He will come to be an sin offering for the people. Jesus later says all flesh has be given to Him and all that was given to Him He shall give life. I know the argument of all not meaning all but this is not what the thread is about.

 

[AK4]

I have no idea. Doesn't it make it sound like Yeshua was a liar considering there were plenty in your OT that actually heard "Gods" voice?......But what we have is what you are reading from John. In the other books Yeshua is baptized by John the baptist and at this point "God's" voice is heard from the heavens. So either no one has heard "God's" voice or they actually did hear his voice.....Seems to me others have heard "God's" voice.

Tell me, does it say Gods voice or A voice? And if its A voice and no man can hear God then it has to be a messenger or angel speaking for the Father. I know, the "My" in that verse. This is still something speaking for the Father.

But he isn't saying that at all. It's your interpretation of the passage that he is.

The main jist of that passage i quoted that was to be focused on was the glory part. Thats why i showed strongs definition of that word used.

First your emphasis on certain words of his prayer to his god is lacking because you leave out other important words indicating he's not "God". Let me first tackle what I highlighted above in red and just first off say that this statement make no sense at all. If Yeshua declares his god is the "only" god then there's no reason for anyone to assume that "God" has a god. Ask any Jew here and they will say that's blasphemous. Nowhere in the OT is "God" ever described as having a god and no one ever preached, taught or believed this.

What was one of Jesus' purposes? To come to reveal/unfold the Father. The Jews before Jesus didnt know anything of the Father. This is the major point i keep showing and a major truth for you to understand who is Jesus and who is the Father. If Jesus words are true "no man has seen or heard God at anytime" then who did the prophets hear? Who did the some of the people [Moses, Jacob and others] see? It cannot be God right? But wait you have God saying stuff in the very beginning and people hearing Him. Who talked to Adam and Eve in the garden? Remember "no man has seen or heard God at anytime". So who is the Us in "they have become like one of Us"? The jews to this day dont believe that that was Jesus who the prophets were hearing and some of the patriarchs were seeing. They still dont realise He was/is the Lord God.

Let's finish it though...take a look....

"that they may know YOU, the only true God, and Jesus (Christ whom You have sent.)"

This is Yeshua right here in his prayer to his god showing explicitly that he's not "God". He outright declares his god as the only god and it was his god that sent him. The rest of the prayer...is even more clarification to a lot of misconceptions given in this thread.

Only TRUE God. Yes, the Father is the only true God. Jesus was humble to know that He didnt recieve His "position or title" on His own but only by His God. This still doesnt take away from God the Father creating a God [Jesus]

In the book of John Yeshua is quoted as saying (he came here not of his own will but of the will of the father who sent him). Who was the father? his god that's who. Here he's telling you he existed in heaven with the his god, as did plenty of heavenly host as discribed in your bible, and he had his own SEPARATE will. At the end of the bible in the book of Revelation Yeshua says it at least three times he has a god. This is supposedly AFTER his ascension. Go check it. God is sitting on the throne receiving praise from the heavenly host saying that he ("God") is worthy of prays...but then they ask who will open the 7 seals. It then says "NONE" was worthy in heaven nor on or in the earth to open the seals. When the "Lamb" enters he is deemed worthy of opening the seals. So from your very own scripture "God" would not be opening the seals but it would be Yeshua (The Lamb). But if Yeshua is "God" then what's the point of the theatrics? There are none. Your scriptures are quite clear in defining the positions and rolls of all involved.

Yes i am very aware of what Revelation says. Notice the Lamb is praised also. Only God is to be praised right? Well now you have a dilemma.

As far as "theatrics" it is written in the proverbs "it is the glory of God to conceal a thing, but the honor of kings to search out a matter". To understand who is Jesus and who is the Father is one of those things.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

This kills me. Where you there also?

No need to be snide or sarcastic. I don't mind answering your questions. So let's see, No I wasn't there but you have to understand that I am familiar with what scholars say about the authorship of these scriptures and it's known that some of these scriptures that bare a name may not have been written by said person.

the author of John is John as said so at the end of the book,

What verse? Chapter 21:24 does not reveal the name of the author.

yet you guys dont beleive it. Paul puts his signature on his writings too yet "these are not his either".

The difference is scholars actually do know and can tell in the linguistic stylization that not all the letters etc. supposedly written by Saul/Paul may not have actually been written by him.

Was John to wrtie the exact same thing as the other writers? Should we four exactly the same gospels composed in one book?

What we see out of John is a more esoteric view of Yeshua that were not prevalent in the earlier gospels. Remember, Mark was supposedly the older of the gospels and it is completely silent on many issues, situations concerning Yeshua. In "John's" gospel Yeshua is written in a way making him appear more magical or god-like. The other gospel writers fail to write Yeshua this way. There are even some events that are described to have happened that are completely silent in the other gospels. I suspect that the writer of John made up a great deal about Yeshua (IMO).

Some of the prophets in the OT wrote some of the same things as other prophets and yet also brought in new stuff. Shall we discredit what those say also?

We could if that were the focus of this debate but it's not.

 

[arimoff]

What was one of Jesus' purposes? To come to reveal/unfold the Father. The Jews before Jesus didnt know anything of the Father. This is the major point i keep showing and a major truth for you to understand who is Jesus and who is the Father. If Jesus words are true "no man has seen or heard God at anytime" then who did the prophets hear? Who did the some of the people [Moses, Jacob and others] see? It cannot be God right? But wait you have God saying stuff in the very beginning and people hearing Him. Who talked to Adam and Eve in the garden? Remember "no man has seen or heard God at anytime". So who is the Us in "they have become like one of Us"? The jews to this day dont believe that that was Jesus who the prophets were hearing and some of the patriarchs were seeing. They still dont realise He was/is the Lord God.


Cut the BS man, none of what you said makes any sense, we were good enough for you to copy or believes but yet we don't know what G-D is loool.

We know what Moses and Jacob heard but you DON'T, and instead of making statements why don't you go study and then come back and read your post again.

There is no need to reveal the father, G-D revealed Him self at Mt' Sinai and everything you want to know about Him is in the Torah, only lazy idiots claim He is unknown, thats why they created Jesus for them selfs to distance them selfs from everything G-D obligates one to do in the Torah.

You want salvation? start with your self, become a human being rather then have a man sacrifice him self for you but yet you remain unchanged.

there is absolutely no point in addressing the rest of your post, you sound childish there is no way a grown man can go in circles with his thoughts.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Does that disqualify Him?

It sure does. Especially when he's giving clear examples that he's not "God"....

Now if all things were created by Him and the Father did all this through Him, in otherwords if the Father through Him made everything then how does that disqualify Him as God?

If "God" did things thorough Yeshua then Yeshua was not God. If he did them through you...would that make you "God"...?

Dont forget "no man has seen or heard God [the Father] at anytime". So in His [the Fathers] stead Jesus represents God as God

But do know that this verse in John contradicts other gospel writings.

2Peter 1:17-18
For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.

This is referring to;

Mark 1:1
And there came a voice from heaven, saying, Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

I refer you to Isaiah, especially ch 53. It says He will come to be an sin offering for the people.

Isaiah 53 has absolutely nothing to do with the biblical Yeshua. Isaiah 53 is referring to Israel's suffering. To understand this you have to read the chapter before it to get the context of what is going on.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Tell me, does it say Gods voice or A voice? And if its A voice and no man can hear God then it has to be a messenger or angel speaking for the Father. I know, the "My" in that verse. This is still something speaking for the Father.

Yea, you ansewered your own question but it does appear, reading your bible, that people did hear "God's" voice.

2Peter 1:17-18
For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.

This is referring to;

Mark 1:1
And there came a voice from heaven, saying, Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

The main jist of that passage i quoted that was to be focused on was the glory part. Thats why i showed strongs definition of that word used.

No matter. The OT shows your god give and receives glory. "Glory" was not exclusive it seems.

This still doesnt take away from God the Father creating a God [Jesus]

Yea, this makes no sense at all. Sounds more like polytheism.

Yes i am very aware of what Revelation says. Notice the Lamb is praised also. Only God is to be praised right? Well now you have a dilemma.

You missed the point. The heavenly host were praising God before Yeshua (the lamb) entered. So even after the ascension, per the bible, Yeshua is completely separate and has a god.....as he described in the gospels...

 

[301ouncer]

Can I ask the Thread owner if i could jump in to ask a Question?

 

[dogsgod]

Can I ask the Thread owner if i could jump in to ask a Question?

No you can't, no one can question the great thread owner.

 

[301ouncer]

No you can't, no one can question the great thread owner.

Ok maybe then you all can come and answer the question I need answering that is related to my research. The question is in Unitarian Christiannity and islam. Thank you for you help.:slap:

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Ok maybe then you all can come and answer the question I need answering that is related to my research. The question is in Unitarian Christiannity and islam. Thank you for you help.:slap:

Well....What's your question?...You're free to ask it here. If it is in reference to the UU then you may have to take a dip over there and ask them. But I don't know what your particular question is....but go ahead and ask it......

 

[Muffled]

What does it mean to be the Son of God? Does that make him a God?

Not automatically. Any created being ie Adam and Jesus could be called the son of God. However in Adam's case a spirit was breathed into him and he became a living soul but in the case of Jesus The Holy Spirit was breathed in so that this son is God Himself.

 

[Muffled]

Can I ask the Thread owner if i could jump in to ask a Question?

I suppose I could claim part ownership but if I remember right my thread was combined with another persons thread but feel free to ask anything since the OP is defintely mine.

 

[arimoff]

Not automatically. Any created being ie Adam and Jesus could be called the son of God. However in Adam's case a spirit was breathed into him and he became a living soul but in the case of Jesus The Holy Spirit was breathed in so that this son is God Himself.

 

[AK4]

No need to be snide or sarcastic. I don't mind answering your questions. So let's see, No I wasn't there but you have to understand that I am familiar with what scholars say about the authorship of these scriptures and it's known that some of these scriptures that bare a name may not have been written by said person.

Sorry my bad. Not saying all, but do you realise how much nonsense has been taught into the world but these scholars. Alot of the stuff they take from scriptures and then make it unscriptural. I am very skeptical of scholars and theologians. When you come the truth you will see what i mean.

What verse? Chapter 21:24 does not reveal the name of the author.

The bible is like a giant jigsaw puzzle. It wasnt written so everyone could understand it easily. Just like most things in it, the writer left clues to figure it out. Also in other books written by others we get more clues. Heres one clue, whether you believe it not is on you--verse 20-24 speaks of a disciple [another clue, follow this disciple throughout the gospels] who wont die until He see Jesus coming in His glory. When did this disciple see Jesus in his lifetime before he died? Glad you asked. Its the same one who saw Jesus coming in His glory on the isle of Patmos. Now if you dont understand what this coming is about, then maybe ill explain it to ya if ya want.

The difference is scholars actually do know and can tell in the linguistic stylization that not all the letters etc. supposedly written by Saul/Paul may not have actually been written by him.

Maybe its just me, but i know overtime my style of writing changes, sometimes not even over time, but as quickly as my mood can change so can my style, yet this couldnt be with those apostles? Its just not that believable to me what the scholars say.

What we see out of John is a more esoteric view of Yeshua that were not prevalent in the earlier gospels. Remember, Mark was supposedly the older of the gospels and it is completely silent on many issues, situations concerning Yeshua. In "John's" gospel Yeshua is written in a way making him appear more magical or god-like. The other gospel writers fail to write Yeshua this way. There are even some events that are described to have happened that are completely silent in the other gospels. I suspect that the writer of John made up a great deal about Yeshua (IMO).

I dont see why. Just for the moment i will agree that John may have had some stories from the other gospels to look at when he was writing. Me personally would see that some stories wouldnt need to be retold unless i had something to add to them that the others missed. I would also try to write something little different that the others didnt display in theirs to further enlighten all that reads it would get an even wider view of whatever i was writing about when you combine them with the others. I would write it with just enough difference to make it different but i would also write it so it didnt contradict any of the others. Maybe thats just me.

 

[AK4]

Cut the BS man, none of what you said makes any sense, we were good enough for you to copy or believes but yet we don't know what G-D is loool.

Ha, the problem was they [as Christ calls them the wolves in sheeps clothing] did copy yall and brought yall same heresies into the new covenant and distorted the real truth.

And the proofs right there. You guys wont even spell out God. The word God is a title. The same word used by the pagans yet you cant spell it out because you think its blasphemy.LOL. Throughout the tanak it is said to call on the name of the Lord. What do yall do, call out "g" "dash" "d"? Come now...and yall are supposed to "know what God is"

We know what Moses and Jacob heard but you DON'T, and instead of making statements why don't you go study and then come back and read your post again.

I can show you how much i studied, and i can show you how much you havent. Okay, you dont consider Jesus to be your Lord and God, fine. How about a great prophet. No lets just say prophet. Now if you agree with that then and you say that Moses and Jacob heard God, then you say Jesus, a prophet, lied numerous times when He said no man has seen or heard God at anytime. Now if you believe a true prophet of God could be a liar then you MUST throw out all of your tanak and OT. Now try to answer that intelligently and scripturally and without contradiction.

There is no need to reveal the father, G-D revealed Him self at Mt' Sinai and everything you want to know about Him is in the Torah, only lazy idiots claim He is unknown, thats why they created Jesus for them selfs to distance them selfs from everything G-D obligates one to do in the Torah.

Oh so you follow all that is in the torah right? So how many have you put to death for blaspeming God? or for not following one of those 600 odd ordinances? None? Well well well, dont we have a conumdrum here

You want salvation? start with your self, become a human being rather then have a man sacrifice him self for you but yet you remain unchanged.

You been spying on me? How do you know since coming to God i havent changed?

there is absolutely no point in addressing the rest of your post, you sound childish there is no way a grown man can go in circles with his thoughts.

Keep typing and i will show you whos going in circles

 

[AK4]

It sure does. Especially when he's giving clear examples that he's not "God"....

He is trying to make a distinction between Him and the Father. Trinitarians just dont see this

If "God" did things thorough Yeshua then Yeshua was not God. If he did them through you...would that make you "God"...?

If i was the first of all His creation and i was given all power and authority and i began creating everything else after me, yes i would be a god to whatever i created.

But do know that this verse in John contradicts other gospel writings.

2Peter 1:17-18
For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.

This is referring to;

Mark 1:1
And there came a voice from heaven, saying, Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

Notice "when there came such a voice" and "And there came a voice from heaven" now where does that say that this voice was Gods? It is designated a voice, it says nothing about it being Gods voice. So no contradiction

Isaiah 53 has absolutely nothing to do with the biblical Yeshua. Isaiah 53 is referring to Israel's suffering. To understand this you have to read the chapter before it to get the context of what is going on.

Soin which way has israel ever fulfilled this prophecy in verse 9

9 His grave was assigned with wicked men,
Yet He was with a rich R2210 man in His death,
Because R2211 He had done R2212 no violence,
Nor was there any deceit in His mouth.​

Please tell me you dont actually believe israel never did violence and never had deciet in their mouth

 

[AK4]

No matter. The OT shows your god give and receives glory. "Glory" was not exclusive it seems.

Who before Jesus, in their lifetime, recieved glory?

Yea, this makes no sense at all. Sounds more like polytheism.

Answer this. Can God create another God? Or can God give birth to another God? Is this out of the realm of possibilities for God? Where does it say that God the Father couldnt do this and isnt doing the same thing with His children?

You missed the point. The heavenly host were praising God before Yeshua (the lamb) entered. So even after the ascension, per the bible, Yeshua is completely separate and has a god.....as he described in the gospels...

Yes we agree they are not the same "entity" and that He has a God, but what you are not seeing is that the Antipas was made by His Father to be a God to His creation.



[FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Strong's Number: 493[/FONT]encodedOriginalWord[FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Original Word[/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Word Origin[/FONT] Ἀντιπᾶς [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]contracted for a compound of (473) and a derivative of (3962)[/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Transliterated Word[/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Phonetic Spelling[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Antipas[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]an-tee'-pas[/FONT]

[FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Parts of Speech[/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]TDNT[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Noun Masculine[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]None[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Definition[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Antipas = "like the father"

1. a Christian of Pergamos who suffered martyrdom

[/FONT]
Heres something for ya

WHO IS ANTIPAS?

​

"I know your works and where you DWELL, even where SATAN’S SEAT [throne] is: and you hold fast My name, and have not denied My faith, even in those days wherein Antipas was my faithful martyr [Gk: ‘witness’], who was slain among you, WHERE SATAN DWELLS" (Rev. 2:13).
​

But how do we know that this is Jerusalem, and not the literal city of Pergamos to whom this message is addressed?
Because God gives us the same proof as when He tells us that,

"their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, WHERE also our Lord was crucified" (Re. 11:8).
​

And "where" was that? Jerusalem.
Where ever "Antipas" was martyred, is where Satan dwells and has his throne. But just who is Antipas? "Antipas" is not translated. It is the same word in the Greek Manuscripts. It is a compound word: "antee" and "pas." Antee carries the meaning of being ‘in place of another,’ and pas is from pater meaning ‘father.’ And so Antipasis speaking of one who is here in the place of his father. Who might that be?

"I came forth FROM the Father…" (John 16:28).
"Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into His hands, and that He was come FROM God, and went to God" (John 13:3).
"But now I go My way to Him that SENT ME..." (John 16;5).
"No man has seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is IN THE BOSOM of the Father, he has declared [unfolded or revealed] Him" (John 1:18).
"Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, you would love Me; for I PROCEEDED FORTH AND CAME FROM God; neither came I of Myself, but He sent Me" (John 8:42).
"God… has in these last days SPOKEN UNTO US BY HIS SON…" (Heb. 1-1-2).
​

It is absolutely Scripturally clear that it is Jesus Christ who came "in the place of" His Father to reveal His Father to us. Jesus Christ is the Antipas.

​

​

The phrase "faithful martyr" is a proper translation, however the word translated "martyr" is from the Greek martus and is translated martyr only three times, but is translated "witness" twenty-nine times, for that is what its meaning is—a witness.

​

​

So Antipas, has come in the place of the Father. And Antipas is God’s faithful witness. And Who does the Scripture tell us is the "faithful witness" of God?Answer:

"And from JESUS CHRIST, Who IS THE FAITHFUL WITNESS…" (Rev. 1:5).
​

And Antipas, Jesus Christ, was martyred IN JERUSALEM. Satan’s throne and dwelling place is in JERUSALEM

​

​

​

​