Does this mean Jesus is God?

[Soapy]

Hypostatic Union, a theological term used with reference to the Incarnation to express the revealed truth that in Christ one person subsists in two natures, the Divine and the human. Hypostasis (upostasis) means, literally, that which lies beneath as basis or foundation. Hence it came to be used by the Greek philosophers to denote reality as distinguished from appearances (Aristotle, “Mund.”, IV, 21). It occurs also in St. Paul’s Epistles (II Cor., ix, 4; xi, 17; Heb., i, 3: iii, 14), but not in the sense of person. Previous to the Council of Nicaea (325) hypostasis was synonymous with ousia, and even St. Augustine (De Trin., V, 8) avers that he sees no difference between them. The distinction in fact was brought about gradually in the course of the controversies to which the Christological heresies gave rise, and was definitively established by the Council of Chalcedon (451), which declared that in Christ the two natures, each retaining its own properties, are united in one subsistence and one person (eis en prosopon kai mian upostasin) (Denzinger, ed. Bannwart, 148). They are not joined in a moral or accidental union (Nestorius), nor commingled (Eutyches), and nevertheless they are substantially united. For further explanation and bibliography See Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Monophysites and Monophysitism; Nature; Person.

Does anyone of trinity able to do simple mathematics?

1) God in trinity is three persons
2) Jesus in God is two persons (God and man)
3) Father and Son are one

If 3) then that means Jesus is the Father and therefore there are only TWO who are God.

But wait, if Jesus is two persons then the Father is two persons because the Father and son are one! So the Father must also be man!

Which means that GOD is God and Man!!!

Makes sense?

 

[Soapy]

I think I may have said it in previous post somewhere, but the Son of Gods purposefully lowered and humbled Himself when He became flesh in the Person of Jesus Christ. In others words, He chose to put limitations upon Himself while living a human life. So how does that negate His equality with His Father? Especially, if it was a mutual decision and part of the plan and mission to offer salvation to mankind?

God CANNOT LOWER HIMSELF.

Perfection cannot be made imperfect!

Adam was not ‘perfect’ - he was sinnable. And he did sin - He gave in to temptation from his wife.

Jesus was not ‘perfect’ - he was sinnable. But did not sin - he resisted the temptation to sin.

God CANNOT SIN.

To sin man’s to try to GAIN something that one does not already own. What is there that God can be tempted with? Nothing, because all things are his!

Was Jesus tempted? What was he tempted to gain?

If Jesus is God… how could he be tempted?

Even if Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, trinity says he was still 100% God…. So, again, what could Jesus be tempted with seeing that he was God who owned everything!

And… what was Jesus’ REWARD for his sacrifice and death? Was it not to GAIN the rulership of the kingdom of the world?

Why would GOD need to sacrifice himself to gain what he already owned?

 

[YoursTrue]

I think I may have said it in a previous post somewhere, but the Son of God purposefully lowered and humbled Himself when He became flesh in the Person of Jesus Christ. In other words, He chose to put limitations upon Himself while living a human life. So how does that negate His equality with His Father? Especially, if it was a mutual decision and part of the plan and mission to offer salvation to mankind?

It is obvious to me that Jesus chose to come to earth in human form. Whether you look at it this way or not, he gave up his privileges as a spirit person, even made a little lower than the angels, when he was born to Mary. Unless you think he was human in heaven as well before he came to be born to Mary. ? So I'll ask the question -- was he human in heaven before he came to be in Mary's womb?

 

[InChrist]

God CANNOT LOWER HIMSELF.

Perfection cannot be made imperfect!

Adam was not ‘perfect’ - he was sinnable. And he did sin - He gave in to temptation from his wife.

Jesus was not ‘perfect’ - he was sinnable. But did not sin - he resisted the temptation to sin.

God CANNOT SIN.

To sin man’s to try to GAIN something that one does not already own. What is there that God can be tempted with? Nothing, because all things are his!

Was Jesus tempted? What was he tempted to gain?

If Jesus is God… how could he be tempted?

Even if Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, trinity says he was still 100% God…. So, again, what could Jesus be tempted with seeing that he was God who owned everything!

And… what was Jesus’ REWARD for his sacrifice and death? Was it not to GAIN the rulership of the kingdom of the world?

Why would GOD need to sacrifice himself to gain what he already owned?

Don’t you know the reason for the sacrifice? Jesus ( Son of God/Son of man) did not sacrifice His life to gain anything for Himself. The sacrifice was to pay for the sins of the world, so that forgiveness, salvation, and eternal life could be available for all who place their faith in Him (Jesus Christ) as there Savior.

 

[InChrist]

It is obvious to me that Jesus chose to come to earth in human form. Whether you look at it this way or not, he gave up his privileges as a spirit person, even made a little lower than the angels, when he was born to Mary. Unless you think he was human in heaven as well before he came to be born to Mary. ? So I'll ask the question -- was he human in heaven before he came to be in Mary's womb?

No, I do not think the Son of God was human in heaven before He became flesh on earth. I believe He was/is God, remember? God is Spirit. God is eternal. That is what I believe about the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

 

[cataway]

In other words, He chose to put limitations upon Himself while living a human life.

fare more likely he said yes sir i will do that

 

[Dogknox20]

I am not an expert either, but I believe you are correct that the early manuscripts did not differentiate between upper and lower case. Nevertheless, I do think the scriptures always made a distinction between the One True God and false gods. Any god other than the true Creator God is classified by the Bible as a false god.

I add.. The JW's believe in "Many god's!" Christians believe in ONE God and Jesus is God!

There NWT bible has written ... In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. "The word was "a god" implies more then ONE!!

Christian scripture reads... In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

 

[InChrist]

I add.. The JW's believe in "Many god's!" Christians believe in ONE God and Jesus is God!

There NWT bible has written ... In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. "The word was "a god" implies more then ONE!!

Christian scripture reads... In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

I agree, according to the Bible, Jesus is God... not “a god “.

 

[Soapy]

I agree, according to the Bible, Jesus is God... not “a god “.

The word, ‘God’, means ‘mighty [entity]’.

Men who received the word of God were ‘Gods’…

THE GOD [of all Gods] said that of them in the scriptures - and scriptures cannot be broken!

They were ‘Mighty ones’ [in God’s word]…

In the beginning THE MIGHTY ONE OF HEAVEN spoke a MIGHTY word…. ‘Let there be light!’ And it was so!

The word of God was indeed GOD (mighty!)

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Jesus is not God the Father, Jesus is the Son of God the Father. So you misunderstand the Trinity by thinking that the Father is the Son also.
There are clear statements that Jesus is God however.

The very statements you made prove that the Trinity cannot be an accurate doctrine.

If Jesus is God
and the Father is God
and Jesus is not the Father

Well that means there would be more than one God. (So there has to be a different solution than a Trinity.) And the apostles sure didn't teach a Trinity.

 

[Muffled]

Why would God be restricted in the flesh. It doesn't make sense. He therefore was not, in any case, equal to his father. God.. was in Mary's womb? Was he a baby? Remember what someone said to the grown man Jesus about his mother's breasts feeding him? No, sorry, Jesus wasn't God equal to the other two supposed Godpersons. New International Version
"As Jesus was saying these things, a woman in the crowd called out, “Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you.” Luke 11:27 the other supposed Godpersons, do you think they were ever born as humans?

I believe that is because the flesh can't be everywhere at once.

I believe that is a non-sequitur. The conclusion does not follow from the premise.

I believe so.

I believe you may be sorry for your incorrect belief and your lack of logic.

I believe Jesus was the only one.

 

[Muffled]

As I am going over some of the definitions of force and energy, something makes those molecules change. (And grow perhaps?) Obviously something binds them together and/or makes them move, morph, grow, or evolve. The following is a little deep, but I appreciate the opportunity to go over it:
1 Corinthians 15:38-41:
But God gives it a body as He has designed, and to each kind of seed He gives its own body.39Not all flesh is the same: Men have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another, and fish another. 40There are also heavenly bodies and earthly bodies. But the splendor of the heavenly bodies is of one degree, and the splendor of the earthly bodies is of another. 41The sun has one degree of splendor, the moon another, and the stars another; and star differs from star in splendor.

I believe you missed the point.

 

[Soapy]

The very statements you made prove that the Trinity cannot be an accurate doctrine.

If Jesus is God
and the Father is God
and Jesus is not the Father

Well that means there would be more than one God. (So there has to be a different solution than a Trinity.) And the apostles sure didn't teach a Trinity.

Trinity in my opinion is not even a solution. It’s a non-starter.

Both of you (You and Brian2) are saying the same thing but arguing with each other over it… leastwise what you both wrote in your last posts.

Yes, Jesus, from my reading of the scriptures, is not God. Only the Father is God: Jesus even said so, himself!

The word ‘God’ just means like “Mighty One”… it is not a NAME of a person ….

The term, ‘God’ as a reference to a mighty person is not unique to Judaism or Christianity because …

… It is not a NAME… it is a TITLE.

It is a Title in the same way that ‘King’, ‘Prince’, ‘Lord’, ‘Master’, ‘General’, ‘Monarch’, etc, are TITLES … They are all linguistically followed by a designation or placement, E.g.:

• “God of Peace”
• “Prince of Darkness”
• “Lord of Hosts”
• “Master of the dance”
• “General of the Army”
• “Monarch of the Glen”
• …

Indeed, it is not blasphemy to say if a great HERO that such a person is:

• ‘God … of the fight!’ (Ggreat fighter! Heroic fighter! The very best of the all the fighters)

Our deity who is ENTITLED, ‘God’, is rightfully:

• “God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob”
• “YHWH, our almighty one, maker of Heaven and earth; YHWH our God’

but because we are all believers in THIS ONE DEITY we do not have to put a designation or placement on Him; we can just say ‘God’ and all know of whom we are speaking…. Fully, even, because of the Jewish fear of blaspheming His name, we do not even use His NAME in common circumstances and situations where it also may be abused because of its sacredness.

We say ‘God’ when speaking of the scriptures because we are encapsulating the DEITY that is our Heavenly one under the TITLE, ‘God’. This is no different to other belief systems who also have their ‘GOD’ (and Gods).

The difference: We believe in only ONE DEITY who’s heavenly position is the highest and most unique among all beliefs: That only one deity - only one GOD - made all things and sustains all things and is through all things. Other beliefs claim all these are through myriad numbers of deities (Gods).

There can only ever be ONE true ALMIGHTY ONE (God) of any system. Even in the Greeks belief they had Zeus as their ALMIGHTY GOD despite others biting at his heals…. This caused discordance in the Greek heavens belief - something OUR belief system does not entertain in respect of ultimate leadership (I’m not speaking of Satan’s opposition as Satan is a creation of God who turned bad rather than an offspring as in the Greek view!)

The great controversy over John 1:1 is easily resolved by seeing that the word, ‘God’ is used both as a reference to the title of the deity of our worship - and as a superlative adjective… (a what?!!)

And that’s the problem all over - you refuse to acknowledge the superlative adjective: ALMIGHTY ONE..

The word of God was God!!

The word that the might one spoke in the beginning was an almighty word….. leg there be light… it’s right there in Genesis 1:3.

• (1) In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. (2) Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. (3) And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.“ (Gen 1:1-3)

Nothing of this sort had ever happened before… this was the second greatest event in the creation of the world… and that’s a theme to look into (The first was not the greatest! Let them who have wisdom understand!) So think…

Yes, think! As the scriptures says - not as a man made creed sways you:

• How are you separating the Son out of an inseparable unity God to create the world?

Trinity claims are added to over years to try to cover the failure to join the dots of the fallacy: They say that the Father ordered the creation, the Son executed it, and the Holy Spirit (…did something… unsure what… uncertain how…!! Since they forgot that trinity meant three!. You will see that if you try to use John 1:1 to prove the TRINITY three god created by one member who is inseparable from the three supposed united immutable members)

In fact, you cannot linguistically claim the three are Members of God if they are exactly GOD since it is proved by trinity themselves that their God is NOT COMPOSED OF PARTS!! Members ARE PARTS!!

A CONUNDRUM, indeed!!

John 1:1 is not speaking of one member of a inseparable three doing something that is attributed to all three (Gen 1:1, 1:3, 1:4)

Moreover, God has ONE NAME which is His everlastingly: YHWH. Howbeit then that one inseparable member also has a name (Jesus) that is NOT that of the other two!?? And further, one member who does not even have a name???

And Trinity says this is equality … what equality need there be if the three ARE NOT PARTS … yet clearly trinity expresses a RANK ORDER among parts that are tautologically ‘100% Equal’!!?

 

[YoursTrue]

I believe that is because the flesh can't be everywhere at once.

I believe that is a non-sequitur. The conclusion does not follow from the premise.

I believe so.

I believe you may be sorry for your incorrect belief and your lack of logic.

I believe Jesus was the only one.

let me go over this again. You are saying the flesh is limited, right? Meaning it can't be everywhere at once. Right?

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Trinity in my opinion is not even a solution. It’s a non-starter.

Both of you (You and Brian2) are saying the same thing but arguing with each other over it… leastwise what you both wrote in your last posts.

I don't think we are saying the same thing. Since Brian2 believes in the Trinity while I don't.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Trinity in my opinion is not even a solution. It’s a non-starter.

Both of you (You and Brian2) are saying the same thing but arguing with each other over it… leastwise what you both wrote in your last posts.

Yes, Jesus, from my reading of the scriptures, is not God. Only the Father is God: Jesus even said so, himself!

The word ‘God’ just means like “Mighty One”… it is not a NAME of a person ….

The term, ‘God’ as a reference to a mighty person is not unique to Judaism or Christianity because …

… It is not a NAME… it is a TITLE.

It is a Title in the same way that ‘King’, ‘Prince’, ‘Lord’, ‘Master’, ‘General’, ‘Monarch’, etc, are TITLES … They are all linguistically followed by a designation or placement, E.g.:

• “God of Peace”
• “Prince of Darkness”
• “Lord of Hosts”
• “Master of the dance”
• “General of the Army”
• “Monarch of the Glen”
• …

Indeed, it is not blasphemy to say if a great HERO that such a person is:

• ‘God … of the fight!’ (Ggreat fighter! Heroic fighter! The very best of the all the fighters)

Our deity who is ENTITLED, ‘God’, is rightfully:

• “God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob”
• “YHWH, our almighty one, maker of Heaven and earth; YHWH our God’

but because we are all believers in THIS ONE DEITY we do not have to put a designation or placement on Him; we can just say ‘God’ and all know of whom we are speaking…. Fully, even, because of the Jewish fear of blaspheming His name, we do not even use His NAME in common circumstances and situations where it also may be abused because of its sacredness.

We say ‘God’ when speaking of the scriptures because we are encapsulating the DEITY that is our Heavenly one under the TITLE, ‘God’. This is no different to other belief systems who also have their ‘GOD’ (and Gods).

The difference: We believe in only ONE DEITY who’s heavenly position is the highest and most unique among all beliefs: That only one deity - only one GOD - made all things and sustains all things and is through all things. Other beliefs claim all these are through myriad numbers of deities (Gods).

There can only ever be ONE true ALMIGHTY ONE (God) of any system. Even in the Greeks belief they had Zeus as their ALMIGHTY GOD despite others biting at his heals…. This caused discordance in the Greek heavens belief - something OUR belief system does not entertain in respect of ultimate leadership (I’m not speaking of Satan’s opposition as Satan is a creation of God who turned bad rather than an offspring as in the Greek view!)

The great controversy over John 1:1 is easily resolved by seeing that the word, ‘God’ is used both as a reference to the title of the deity of our worship - and as a superlative adjective… (a what?!!)

And that’s the problem all over - you refuse to acknowledge the superlative adjective: ALMIGHTY ONE..

The word of God was God!!

The word that the might one spoke in the beginning was an almighty word….. leg there be light… it’s right there in Genesis 1:3.

• (1) In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. (2) Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. (3) And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.“ (Gen 1:1-3)

Nothing of this sort had ever happened before… this was the second greatest event in the creation of the world… and that’s a theme to look into (The first was not the greatest! Let them who have wisdom understand!) So think…

Yes, think! As the scriptures says - not as a man made creed sways you:

• How are you separating the Son out of an inseparable unity God to create the world?

Trinity claims are added to over years to try to cover the failure to join the dots of the fallacy: They say that the Father ordered the creation, the Son executed it, and the Holy Spirit (…did something… unsure what… uncertain how…!! Since they forgot that trinity meant three!. You will see that if you try to use John 1:1 to prove the TRINITY three god created by one member who is inseparable from the three supposed united immutable members)

In fact, you cannot linguistically claim the three are Members of God if they are exactly GOD since it is proved by trinity themselves that their God is NOT COMPOSED OF PARTS!! Members ARE PARTS!!

A CONUNDRUM, indeed!!

John 1:1 is not speaking of one member of a inseparable three doing something that is attributed to all three (Gen 1:1, 1:3, 1:4)

Moreover, God has ONE NAME which is His everlastingly: YHWH. Howbeit then that one inseparable member also has a name (Jesus) that is NOT that of the other two!?? And further, one member who does not even have a name???

And Trinity says this is equality … what equality need there be if the three ARE NOT PARTS … yet clearly trinity expresses a RANK ORDER among parts that are tautologically ‘100% Equal’!!?

The Messiah was God manifest in the flesh. But not a 2nd person in the Godhead like Trinitarians believe. The one and only God - YHWH - who is a Spirit made a body to dwell in and sacrifice for the sins of mankind. That body was the Son. The Father was the eternal Spirit of God that dwelled in that body. The Messiah was both the Son and the Father (Flesh and Spirit). It wasn't two different persons.

That was why he said I and my Father are one. And if you have seen me you have seen the Father. etc

Acts 20:28 ...feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

 

[YoursTrue]

The Messiah was God manifest in the flesh. But not a 2nd person in the Godhead like Trinitarians believe. The one and only God - YHWH - who is a Spirit made a body to dwell in and sacrifice for the sins of mankind. That body was the Son. The Father was the eternal Spirit of God that dwelled in that body. The Messiah was both the Son and the Father (Flesh and Spirit). It wasn't two different persons.

That was why he said I and my Father are one. And if you have seen me you have seen the Father. etc

Acts 20:28 ...feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

Not every translation for Acts 20:28 uses those words. For instance,
NET Bible: "Watch out for yourselves and for all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God that he obtained with the blood of his own Son."
(not with his own blood)
New Revised Standard Version
Keep watch over yourselves and over all the flock, of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God that he obtained with the blood of his own Son.
(Again, not with his own blood but rather with the blood of his own son)

 

[Soapy]

The Messiah was God manifest in the flesh. But not a 2nd person in the Godhead like Trinitarians believe. The one and only God - YHWH - who is a Spirit made a body to dwell in and sacrifice for the sins of mankind. That body was the Son. The Father was the eternal Spirit of God that dwelled in that body. The Messiah was both the Son and the Father (Flesh and Spirit). It wasn't two different persons.

That was why he said I and my Father are one. And if you have seen me you have seen the Father. etc

Acts 20:28 ...feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

The scriptures say that Jesus was a man in whom the Father chose to put His spirit into.

That’s what is shown in the man’s (Jesus) anointing at the river Jordan:

• ‘The Father was pleased that Jesus was filled with the fullness [of His Spirit]’ (paraphrased)

With the spirit of the Father in him this made Jesus’s spirit be in full agreement as that of the Father. This is what it means that Jesus and the Father are ‘ONE’ (are in agreement!)

It is clear that ‘See me’ is to ‘See the Father’ just means that everything Jesus did was just as the Father taught him to do. Jesus even contributed all the things he did TO THE FATHER working in him!
Here’s what Jesus is reputed to have said:

• Jesus gave them this answer: “Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does.” (John 5:19)

If Jesus were ‘God in a human body’ there would be a contradiction in whom is speaking these words and how the Father is showing the Son (but you say the Son is the Father!!) how to do something BEFORE the Son can do it’.

In fact, it shows the man, Jesus, as an independent soul who claims he is FOLLOWING (being led by) the spirit of God (spirit of the Father).

Indeed, a ‘Son’ in scriptural terms, is exactly a person who is ‘Led by the Spirit of God’ and therefore ‘Doing the works of God (the Father)’

 

[Soapy]

I don't think we are saying the same thing. Since Brian2 believes in the Trinity while I don't.

In regard to the specific post I responded to… yes you were!!

It may have been in your or his mind something different but the reality is that what you both wrote were exactly the same things.

 

[Fool]

John 8:29 says clearly to me that Jesus is not God. How about you? Does the following statement of Jesus at John 8:29 tell you that Jesus is God?
"The one who sent me is with me; he has not left me alone, for I always do what pleases him."

we are all god per psalms 82.

this would agree with genesis 1, john 1:3, and revelation 22 because self exists inside and not a apart/separate from it