Did Jesus say he was God???

[cablescavenger]

I have been asked to produce evidence of the divinity of Jesus. This is not just good evidence, it is overwhelming evidence.

This would have read better:

I have been asked to produce evidence of the divinity of Jesus. This is not just good evidence, it is overwhelming evidence.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Originally Posted by jasonwill2
Technically speaking Jesus claimed to be God...





Lione D' ea: Let us read John 10:30-31, 33 it say's:

I and my Father are one.

31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.

33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. (King James Version)

Lione D' ea: If it does not mean that Christ said I am not God, why is he stoned by the Jews and said in being a man, makest thyself God.?


(end.)

Again, this is (Anarthrous Theos) just like we read at Acts 28:6. They sought to stone him because they thought he was making himself out to be a god. But instead of confirming their thoughts Yeshua counters and quotes the Psalms to them.

John 10:33
ἀπεκρίθησαν αὐτῷ οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι· περὶ καλοῦ ἔργου οὐ λιθάζομεν σε ἀλλὰ περὶ βλασφημίας, καὶ ὅτι συ ἄνθρωπος ὢν ποιεῖς σεαυτὸν θεόν.

The Jews answered him saying For a good work we stone thee not but for blasphemy and because that thou being a man makest thyself God.

Acts 28:6
οἱ δὲ προσεδόκων αὐτὸν μέλλειν πίμπρασθαι ἢ καταπίπτειν ἄφνω νεκρόν. ἐπὶ πολὺ δὲ αὐτῶν προσδοκώντων και θεωρούντων μηδὲν ἄτοπον εἰς αὐτὸν γινόμενον μεταβαλόμενοι ἔλεγον αὐτὸν εἶναι θεόν.

Howbeit they looked when he should have swollen or fallen down dead suddenly but after they had looked a great while __ and saw no harm come to him they changed their minds and said that he was a god.

They charged Yeshua with trying to make himself (a god) which is why the appropriate response Yeshua gave was...

John 10:34
Jesus answered them Is it not written in your law I said Ye are gods?

Dirty Penguin's Rendering.
[FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica] The Jews replied, "Not for any good work, but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, have made yourself a god."[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica]Jesus replied, "It is written in your own law that "I say, you are gods."

This is a much better flow.
[/FONT]

 

[jasonwill2]

Just cuse someone says their god doesnt make it true.

 

[1robin]

Just cuse someone says their god doesnt make it true.

No but several billion people saying that in believing that he is God they were granted a religious or spiritual experience with a being that God raised from the dead for the sole pupose of demonstrating that which you are questioning is pretty close.

 

[jasonwill2]

No but several billion people saying that in believing that he is God they were granted a religious or spiritual experience with a being that God raised from the dead for the sole pupose of demonstrating that which you are questioning is pretty close.

It's called a self-full filling prophecy and has been done with many religions the world over, not just Christianity.

a gods influence and the group conciousness of his followers is not proof he is the creator god... infact may gods come out of group conciousness as entites that only exist in the said collective imagination of the people at hand. Santa isn't real but hes had real effects on people and esp kids who believe in him. Religious experiences on their own do not constitute the truth of a scripture of any kind as the source of connection could be anything. Who says god can't speak to people in many ways? God is beyond all our feeble religions its not even funny no one comes close to understanding whta god esp not Jesus or even you or me. God is the source and all, he is beyond defining him into one religion... god is universal, not specific to any one faith as he was here before ALL of them and founded none of his own. If he did it wouldnt be in doubt but here we are disagreeing on religion. proof that god didnt create a religion and that all religion's are man's best guesses.

 

[Shermana]

No but several billion people saying that in believing that he is God they were granted a religious or spiritual experience with a being that God raised from the dead for the sole pupose of demonstrating that which you are questioning is pretty close.

What kind of "religious or spiritual experience"s would these be exactly? How do they confirm that they are being shown what is supposed to be a sign that they are right?

 

[LioneDea]

Understandable but as I've said....the thought that "God" himself is talking to Ahaz is incorrect. The context tells you "God" is not speaking in the third person.

Lione D' ea: The passage did not tell you there was a third person which God talking to, the person which God who talking beside Isaiah is Ahaz in chapter 7:10 you read it already didn't you. Let us read Isaiah 7:10 it say's:

"Moreover the LORD spake again unto Ahaz, saying,"

Lione D' ea: It testify that it is Ahaz which God conversing and not Isaiah, that is the opinion of the Bible not mine so your incorrect in your own opinion brother that is my answer.

Actually what you're saying is that every theologian and biblical scholar including laymen such as myself has it all wrong and Isaiah is not the one talking on behalf of "God". See your own example below and my response.....:sarcastic


It's without a doubt that you're under the misguided impression that ("God" - "The Lord") is speaking to Ahaz and since you think this you'll have to explain the following....

Yeshayahu - Chapter 7 - Tanakh Online - Torah - Bible
And the Lord continued to speak to Ahaz, saying,

"Ask for yourself a sign from the Lord, your God: ask it either in the depths, or in the heights above."

And Ahaz said, "I will not ask, and I will not test the Lord."


And he said, "Listen now, O House of David, is it little for you to weary men, that you weary my God as well?

If this is "God" speaking to Ahaz directly then it would make no sense because at the end here it says...."is it little for you to weary men, that you weary my God as well?"


This can't be "God" speaking because "God" doesn't have a god. So we know from the context here it is some one else speaking. Since Isaiah was the one charged with delivering the prophecy we know it is Isaiah speaking continuously on behalf of "God"


Therefore, the Lord, of His own, shall give you a sign; behold, the young woman is with child, and she shall bear a son, and she shall call his name Immanuel.

"God" is not speaking in the third person to Ahaz. If "God" was speaking here it wouldn't say "The Lord of His own shall give you a sign." It would say something such as ('Behold, I give you a sign')...similar to what we see at (Gen. 1:29, 6:13, 17:20...etc...etc....)

Lione D' ea: Then so Let me read Isaiah 7:10 and forward:


And the Lord continued to speak to Ahaz, saying,

11. "Ask for yourself a sign from the Lord, your God: ask it either in the depths, or in the heights above."

Lione D' ea: Did you notice the little period in that paragraph it means to us the word of God is finished here in that passage and what it happened let us continue to read?

And Ahaz said, "I will not ask, and I will not test the Lord."

13. And he said, "Listen now, O House of David, is it little for you to weary men, that you weary my God as well?


Lione D' ea: It is not God who speak in this verse it was Ahaz which had carry a news for in the House of David. And there is a GAP involved between the understanding of time from man if the Lord God spoke in His servant. And that Lord God which mention in that passage which Ahaz spoke nor Isaiah is the messenger of God and you know now who is that. Guess it if you understand what Isaiah meant His scripture. Thank you for your sarcastic that is my answer to you.

STOP IT..!!! STOP IT....Right now. You frustrate me so much I want to scream because you're a typical Christian who has no idea what his bible says. It is without ANY doubt Ahaz was a heathen.


Divrei Hayamim II - Chapter 28 - Tanakh Online - Torah - Bible
Ahaz was twenty years old when he became king, and he reigned for sixteen years in Jerusalem, and he did not do that which was proper in the eyes of the Lord like his father David.

And he went in the ways of the kings of Israel, and he also made molten images for the baalim.

And he sacrificed and burnt incense in the high places and on the hills and under every leafy tree.

And he burnt incense in the valley of Ben Hinnom, and he burnt his sons in fire, like the abominations of the nations whom the Lord had driven out from before the Children of Israel.

So YES...He was a Heathen, pagan worshiping, non-believing king.

Lione D' ea: Wrong brother. Because first there are no verses we can prove that Ahaz is Pagan. The only we know Ahas do was he doing a sin in the eyes of the Lord God and the truth is even Solomon do like Ahaz worshiping the idols known as god, does that mean Solomon is Pagan...I think not because despite of Solomon do a sin he believe in true God like also with Ahaz, that is my answer.

Like I said....even if I concede and say "the young woman will become pregnant" it does not refute Isaiah 8:1-4 where the child that was to be born was the son of Isaiah. You have failed to address why this son was so important to the prophecy.

Lione D' ea: That is False brother because the child mention in Isaiah 7:14 is God while in Isaiah 8:1 is not God, the child there is a man proving Isaiah 7:14 is God in chapter 9:5 Read:

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."


Lione D' ea: That is the interpretation of the Bible the child mention in Isaiah 7:14 is God to solid prove it is God let us read in Micah 5:1 it say's:

And you, Bethlehem Ephrathah-you should have been the lowest of the clans of Judah-from you [he] shall emerge for Me, to be a ruler over Israel; and his origin is from of old, from days of yore.


Lione D' ea: Did you see the differences between the child mention in Isaiah 7:14 and 8:1. The child mention in Isaiah 8:1 is a man not while in Isaiah 7:14 not because that God which I refer is from of old He is from everlasting, do not harden your heart brother my answer had bases that is my answer.

 

[LioneDea]

Yes you can. You opened the door on this previously. Eve wasn't a young woman, she wasn't a maiden, she wasn't a girl.....and yet she was a virgin. She was a virgin in the explicit sense. She was a (bethulah) and not an (almah). The reason why is as I just stated and the fact that the word (almah) does not fully convey virginity.

Lione D' ea: Speaking nature Bible disprove your allege because the young woman mention in Isaiah 7:14 is His servant meaning His people, and in that particular time the young woman is under the Law of Moses which God given to Israel. Not because it was not LETTER there as (bethulah) you can conclude she is not virgin you are wrong, the fact is in in time of the creation Eve didn't letter in Bible as bethulah doesn't mean she is not virgin, what is my point... not because it was not letter there as bethulah in passage you can conclude she is not virgin you are wrong there. The possibility the young woman mention in Isaiah is virgin is she hadn't intercourse and she hadn't husband. Concern of I can separate the virgin in to young woman I reject it maybe for man it can but for God cannot remember Bible is a book of God Isaiah 34:16 Read:

Seek ye out of the book of the LORD, and read: no one of these shall fail, none shall want her mate: for my mouth it hath commanded, and his spirit it hath gathered them. (King James Version)


Lione D' ea: Then so you cannot separate the fact, that is my answer.

Actually you're not making yourself clear here. Eve is either and (almah) or a (bethulah). I think we can agree she was not a (girl, young woman or maiden) considering you said she was a (ishsha - woman). Since she was a (ishsha - woman) and not and (young woman - almah) but still a virgin then she was a (bethulah).

Lione D' ea: Let us read Genesis 2:23 Read:

And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.

Lione D' ea: In the Bible the only Eve was not achieve is being title as young woman but woman why is that. Because according the passage itself she shall be called Woman meaning she will be wife of Adam that is why in verse 24 it say's:

Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Lione D' ea: This is Bible say's Eve will be wife of Adam, so how we testify Eve is virgin in verse 25 it say's:

25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.


Lione D' ea: Did you see both them are innocent Eve is virgin in that particular time. When Bible says Eve was not found as virgin when Adam knew her let us read Genesis 4:1 Read:

And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.

Lione D' ea: The word knew is intercourse therefore Eve is not virgin here according in this passage that is my answer.

 

[LioneDea]

And all of this is wrong. There is no scriptural precedent set that agrees with this. The majority of the areas in the bible where (with child) is used expresses the fact that the woman is pregnant. Example: Gen. 16:11, 19:36, 38:25, Ex. 21:22, 1Sam. 4:19...etc....etc).

Lione D' ea: Did you see all the passage you were given have nature involved I not refute that fact. You answer you own question.


(end.)

 

[LioneDea]

Again, this is (Anarthrous Theos) just like we read at Acts 28:6. They sought to stone him because they thought he was making himself out to be a god. But instead of confirming their thoughts Yeshua counters and quotes the Psalms to them.

John 10:33
ἀπεκρίθησαν αὐτῷ οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι· περὶ καλοῦ ἔργου οὐ λιθάζομεν σε ἀλλὰ περὶ βλασφημίας, καὶ ὅτι συ ἄνθρωπος ὢν ποιεῖς σεαυτὸν θεόν.

The Jews answered him saying For a good work we stone thee not but for blasphemy and because that thou being a man makest thyself God.

Acts 28:6
οἱ δὲ προσεδόκων αὐτὸν μέλλειν πίμπρασθαι ἢ καταπίπτειν ἄφνω νεκρόν. ἐπὶ πολὺ δὲ αὐτῶν προσδοκώντων και θεωρούντων μηδὲν ἄτοπον εἰς αὐτὸν γινόμενον μεταβαλόμενοι ἔλεγον αὐτὸν εἶναι θεόν.

Howbeit they looked when he should have swollen or fallen down dead suddenly but after they had looked a great while __ and saw no harm come to him they changed their minds and said that he was a god.

They charged Yeshua with trying to make himself (a god) which is why the appropriate response Yeshua gave was...

John 10:34
Jesus answered them Is it not written in your law I said Ye are gods?

Dirty Penguin's Rendering.
[FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica] The Jews replied, "Not for any good work, but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, have made yourself a god."[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica]Jesus replied, "It is written in your own law that "I say, you are gods."

This is a much better flow.
[/FONT]

Lione D' ea: The verses are true but your understanding in the scripture is false why. Let us read Acts 28:6 Read:

Howbeit they looked when he should have swollen, or fallen down dead suddenly: but after they had looked a great while, and saw no harm come to him, they changed their minds, and said that he was a god.

Lione D' ea: Who is this god mention of this people in verse 3-5 Read?

And when Paul had gathered a bundle of sticks, and laid them on the fire, there came a viper out of the heat, and fastened on his hand.

4 And when the barbarians saw the venomous beast hang on his hand, they said among themselves, No doubt this man is a murderer, whom, though he hath escaped the sea, yet vengeance suffereth not to live. 5And he shook off the beast into the fire, and felt no harm.

Lione D' ea: It was Paul. so is there a violation in the Law of the scriptures if Paul is god what Christ say this matter in John 10:33-34 Read:

Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

Lione D' ea: Even Jews call as gods why is that in verse 35 it say's?

35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

Lione D' ea: Paul speaks of God's word therefore he is god. So is Jesus Christ TRUE GOD let us read the whom which author this book in I John 5:20 Read:

And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.

Lione D' ea: Wherefore it is true Apostle John tesitify Jesus Christ is God that is why Christ said

I and my Father are one.

Lione D' ea: Apostle John wrote what Christ said.


(end.)

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Lione D' ea: The passage did not tell you there was a third person which God talking to, the person which God who talking beside Isaiah is Ahaz in chapter 7:10 you read it already didn't you. Let us read Isaiah 7:10 it say's:

"Moreover the LORD spake again unto Ahaz, saying,"

Lione D' ea: It testify that it is Ahaz which God conversing and not Isaiah, that is the opinion of the Bible not mine so your incorrect in your own opinion brother that is my answer.

First of all ("in the third person") means a person is talking but talking as if he or she is quoting themselves. Example: "Therefore the lord of his own shall give you a sign"....That would be a person talking (in the third person). We know that this type of speech is incorrect concerning Isaiah because of verse 13. 7:13 is not Ahaz because this in the beginning of the prophecy given to the house of David. We know it's not "God" speaking because of the question asked at the end of that sentence. The only person this could be is Isaiah who was the one delivering the prophecy.

Yeshayahu - Chapter 7 - Tanakh Online - Torah - Bible
"is it little for you to weary men, that you weary my God as well?"

Whose god do you think this is talking about? It wasn't Ahaz talking here because verses 12-25 are part of the prophecy. It was Isaiah speaking on behalf of "God".

I will give up this line of reasoning if you can present scholars that say it was "God" talking directly to Ahaz. I'm confident you can't because Jewish scholars, theologian, Christian scholars and Christian theologians all agree with me on this point.

Isaiah 7:14 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Isaiah 7:14 is a verse of the Book of Isaiah in which the prophet Isaiah, addressing king Ahaz of Judah....

And the Lord continued to speak to Ahaz, saying,

11. "Ask for yourself a sign from the Lord, your God: ask it either in the depths, or in the heights above."

Lione D' ea: Did you notice the little period in that paragraph it means to us the word of God is finished here in that passage and what it happened let us continue to read?

And Ahaz said, "I will not ask, and I will not test the Lord."

13. And he said, "Listen now, O House of David, is it little for you to weary men, that you weary my God as well?


Lione D' ea: It is not God who speak in this verse it was Ahaz which had carry a news for in the House of David.

No it's not. You know nothing about the book of Isaiah it seems. Find me a scholar or theologian that says that's Ahaz speaking. Remember now, 7:13 continues to the end of that chapter so it's not Ahaz speaking here. He was receiving the prophecy from Isaiah here.



Isaiah 7:13 - John Gill's Exposition of the Bible, New Testament Commentary

And he said
That is, the Prophet Isaiah; which shows that it was by him the Lord spoke the foregoing words: hear ye now, O house of David;
for not only Ahaz, but his family, courtiers, and counsellors, were all of the same mind with him, not to ask a sign of God, nor to depend upon, his promise of safety, but to seek out for help, and provide against the worst themselves. Some think that Ahaz's name is not mentioned, and that this phrase is used by way of contempt, and as expressive of indignation and resentment: [is it] a small thing for you to weary man;
meaning such as himself, the prophets of the Lord; so the Targum,

``is it a small thing that ye are troublesome to the prophets;''​

disturb, grieve, and vex them, by obstinacy and unbelief: but will ye weary my God also?
the Targum is,

``for ye are troublesome to the words of my God;''​

or injurious to them, by not believing them; or to God himself, by rejecting such an offer of a sign as was made to them.



As I have said before John Gil was a trinitarian but as you can see from the above he rightfully points out that it is Isaiah doing the talking....Not "God" only and certainly not Ahaz.

Lione D' ea: Wrong brother. Because first there are no verses we can prove that Ahaz is Pagan.

I just gave them two you. It's right there is 2 Chronicles 28 as well as 2 Kings 16. Here's what it says in the NKJV by Thomas Nelson Publishers Inc.
The NKJV Study Bible: Second Edition - Thomas Nelson Publishers - Google Books

Look at the commentary below in this link for what it says about 16:3, 4 and 16:5.

The only we know Ahas do was he doing a sin in the eyes of the Lord God and the truth is even Solomon do like Ahaz worshiping the idols known as god, does that mean Solomon is Pagan...I think not because despite of Solomon do a sin he believe in true God like also with Ahaz, that is my answer.

Sure we know he was a pagan king who was an idol worshiper. Look at that same commentary for 2 Kings 16:10 then go and actually read 16:10. Ahaz wasn't a devout follower of "God" considering it seems he worshiped many gods.

Lione D' ea: That is False brother because the child mention in Isaiah 7:14 is God while in Isaiah 8:1 is not God, the child there is a man proving Isaiah 7:14 is God.

8:1-4 is describing 7:14 that's what the bible in it's context is talking about.

Lione D' ea: Did you see the differences between the child mention in Isaiah 7:14 and 8:1.

There is no difference. The child in 8:1 was the sign to the people of Judah that their god was still with them throughout their tribulations.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Lione D' ea: The verses are true but your understanding in the scripture is false why. Let us read Acts 28:6 Read:

Howbeit they looked when he should have swollen, or fallen down dead suddenly: but after they had looked a great while, and saw no harm come to him, they changed their minds, and said that he was a god.

Lione D' ea: Who is this god mention of this people in verse 3-5 Read?

And when Paul had gathered a bundle of sticks, and laid them on the fire, there came a viper out of the heat, and fastened on his hand.

4 And when the barbarians saw the venomous beast hang on his hand, they said among themselves, No doubt this man is a murderer, whom, though he hath escaped the sea, yet vengeance suffereth not to live. 5And he shook off the beast into the fire, and felt no harm.

Lione D' ea: It was Paul. so is there a violation in the Law of the scriptures if Paul is god what Christ say this matter in John 10:33-34 Read:

Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

Lione D' ea: Even Jews call as gods why is that in verse 35 it say's?

35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

Lione D' ea: Paul speaks of God's word therefore he is god. So is Jesus Christ TRUE GOD let us read the whom which author this book in I John 5:20 Read:

And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.

Lione D' ea: Wherefore it is true Apostle John tesitify Jesus Christ is God that is why Christ said

I and my Father are one.

Lione D' ea: Apostle John wrote what Christ said.


(end.)

Basically you missed the whole point about Greek Grammar. It's OK seeing as though you barely understand the Hebrew so I I won't fault you for not speaking to the Greek Grammar itself.

Translator's Handbook on the Gospel of John by trinitarians Newman and Nida insists that "a god" would not be "in keeping with the theology of John" and the charge of blasphemy by the Jews, but, nevertheless, also admits:

"Purely on the basis of the Greek text, therefore, it is possible to translate [John 10:33] 'a god,' as NEB does, rather than to translate God, as TEV and several other translations do. One might argue on the basis of both the Greek and the context, that the Jews were accusing Jesus of claiming to be `a god' rather than 'God.' "- p. 344, United Bible Societies, 1980.

So my rendering is perfectly acceptable and fits perfectly with the tone of the situation as well as Yeshua citing the Psalms.

Dirty Penguin's Rendering.
[FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica] The Jews replied, "We are not stoning you for any good work, but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, have made yourself a god."[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica]Jesus replied, "It is written in your own law that "I say, you are gods."

This is a much better flow.[/FONT]

 

[Muffled]

Just cuse someone says their god doesnt make it true.

That is of course a different issue.

Jesus performed supernatural acts which either indicates that He is working under the auspices of God or the devil. If it were the devil one would expect him to raise an army or take over the government or religious heirarchy. Jesu acted like God making it more likely that He was telling the truth.

 

[Muffled]

No. He never said that he is God because he was aware of the fact that he is a messenger of Almighty Allah who created him and send him to tell others that Allah is the only one and no one can be compared with him.

Just saying no doesn't cut it. Saying no just repeats erroneous teaching. God is technically not a messenger for Himself. A messenger is usually another person saying what God has told him. Jesus doesn't do that He speaks with authority. He never says "God said." He says "I say."

 

[Shermana]

Just saying no doesn't cut it. Saying no just repeats erroneous teaching. God is technically not a messenger for Himself. A messenger is usually another person saying what God has told him. Jesus doesn't do that He speaks with authority. He never says "God said." He says "I say."

Luke 11:49

http://niv.scripturetext.com/luke/11.htm

New International Version (©1984)
Because of this, God in his wisdom said, 'I will send them prophets and apostles, some of whom they will kill and others they will persecute.'

Jesus mentions that he's not carrying out his own will but of the "one who sent him".

John 5:30.

[URL="http://esv.scripturetext.com/john/5.htm"]English Standard Version

(©2001)
“I can do nothing on my own. As I hear, I judge, and my judgment is just, because I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me.

[/URL]

 

[Aabraham ben Azar]

Luke 11:49



Jesus mentions that he's not carrying out his own will but of the "one who sent him".

John 5:30.

[URL="http://esv.scripturetext.com/john/5.htm"]

I agree with what you said 200%

 

[URAVIP2ME]

I agree with what you said 200%

Besides John 5 v 30 also John 4 v 34 and John 6 v 38 agrees.

-Matt. 26 v 39
-Mark 14 v 36 B
-Luke 22 v 42

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Just saying no doesn't cut it.

Really...So if Yeshua said it, it's OK to ignore it?

God is technically not a messenger for Himself.

Then obviously Yeshua wasn't "God" considering he (implicitly) said he was a messenger.

John 17:8

A messenger is usually another person saying what God has told him. Jesus doesn't do that.

Wrong..!

John 17:8
For I have given to them the words which you gave me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came from you, and they have believed that you did send me

John 8:28
......I do nothing of myself; but as my Father has taught me, I speak these things.

He speaks with authority. He never says "God said." He says "I say."

Wrong..!

John 12:49 (NIV)
I don't speak on my own authority. The Father who sent me has commanded me what to say and how to say it.

John 14:10
[FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica] Don't you believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words I say are not my own, but my Father who lives in me does his work through me.[/FONT]

:sad:

 

[arthra]

This is an amazingly old thread and I doubt I posted on it in all that time.. but to the question did Jesus say He was God allow me to suggest a few things..

Looking at the scriptures cited in the opening post I'll explain the Baha'i view in italics..

John 14:9 ... he that hath seen me hath seen the Father

Jesus as a Manifestation of God would be an "image" of God reflect in the pure mirror of His being... So one looking at Him would see God in HIm... but the Mirror is not identical with God..not the same.

John 14:10 ... the words that I say unto you , I speak not from myself but from the Father abiding in Me doeth His works

Here Jesus is saying He does not speak from HIs own identity which would be a human person but God in Him as an image reflecting God is speaking... God is speaking through Him. Jessu is then a Mediator and not God as such.

John 14:11 ... I am in the Father and the Father in Me

Jesus is saying God is in Him and can be "seen" in Him..

John 10:30 I and My Father are one

Jesus in saying the Father and He are one is not necessarily saying He is God ... He could be saying He and God are one in goals..at one in aims and purpose...

 

[Muffled]

This is an amazingly old thread and I doubt I posted on it in all that time.. but to the question did Jesus say He was God allow me to suggest a few things..

Looking at the scriptures cited in the opening post I'll explain the Baha'i view in italics..

John 14:9 ... he that hath seen me hath seen the Father

Jesus as a Manifestation of God would be an "image" of God reflect in the pure mirror of His being... So one looking at Him would see God in HIm... but the Mirror is not identical with God..not the same.

John 14:10 ... the words that I say unto you , I speak not from myself but from the Father abiding in Me doeth His works

Here Jesus is saying He does not speak from HIs own identity which would be a human person but God in Him as an image reflecting God is speaking... God is speaking through Him. Jessu is then a Mediator and not God as such.

John 14:11 ... I am in the Father and the Father in Me

Jesus is saying God is in Him and can be "seen" in Him..

John 10:30 I and My Father are one

Jesus in saying the Father and He are one is not necessarily saying He is God ... He could be saying He and God are one in goals..at one in aims and purpose...

The Baha'i's have a different view of Jesus from others but that doesn't mean it isn't flawed. However I like tohave different views to debate.

I am surprised that you didn't include Baha'i text.

This is an interesting metaphor that doesn't work. A mirror can't talk walk or heal and neither can an image.

No doubt the mind of the body has its own ego and identity that is separate from the identity of God who resides within. Any physical identity is temporal ie it is gone when the body dies but the spiritual identity continues on. For instance, I have lived many lives but the mind in each of those lives died, however my spiritual inelligence lives on and therfore I consider that, my real identity and not all those identities from physical lives. An image can't control the mind, only a spirit can control the mind and cause the body to speak that which the spirit wishes.

Your comment does not expilcate but only reiterates.

And He could be saying that you are going to Hell but He didn't say that either.