How is Jesus serving as High Priest to God if he is God?

[Soapy]

John’s Gospel in the first chapter has nothing to do with pleas, pigs, or demons. You’re really playing the No True Scotsman fallacy.

I didn’t say it had. I said that is how You are behaving!!

It means that you recognise you are in grave error and so you are pleading for leniency from me to let you off lightly due to your misunderstanding… to desire to run away (place your spirit into unclean bodies) and drown those bodily wrongs (pigs).

 

[pearl]

Seems like you had to go to great lengths to find anything that claimed a three way baptism … and what you found isn’t even in the scriptures.

What you fail to realize is that the written Gospels represent the final stage of the Jesus tradition, the authors of which are not the Apostles, but a 2nd generation. : first, what Jesus said and did; second, the churches passing down information about Jesus, selecting and adapting it for its own purposes; finally, the evangelists writing the gospels, drawing on traditional material but adapting, rearranging, and synthesizing it.
In what concerns the Gospels, fundamentalism ( uncritical literalism in reading the Bible) does not take into account the development of the Gospel tradition, but naively confuses the final stage of this tradition (what the evangelists have written) with the initial (the words and deeds of the historical Jesus).

 

[sojourner]

No it does not say that Jesus was with God and was God.

That’s what Trinitarians say.

John 1:1 says that the word of God was in the beginning with God.

And that the word of God was God.

It doesn’t say that the word of God is Jesus … because that’s not the purpose of the stanza poem.

Do you know what an adjective is?
Do you know what a superlative (adjective) is?

I guess not!

To be ‘God’ is a ‘superlative Adjective’:

• ‘A judge in his courtroom is GOD in that courtroom’
• ‘A judge in his courtroom is [the law, the rule giver and law upholder, the highest authority, the most powerful] in that courtroom’

‘God’ is also a TITLE… it is not a PERSON… it is a title (like Monarch, King, Magistrate) APPLIED to a person:

• ‘A Father in his household is GOD of that household’
• ‘A Father in his household is [the HEAD, the ruler, the final decision maker] in that household’

So, the word was God… The word that THE GOD of the Jews spoke in the beginning (Genesis 1:1) was an ALMIGHTY word!:

• ‘Let there be light!!!’

No one ever tries to persuade believers that the Father is God (Title)!

No one ever says that the Spirit of the Father is GOD (title)!

No one ever claimed that Jesus is God (deity/title). Not even the Jews… The nearest was they CLAIMED that Jesus was ‘calling himself / implying’ that he was ‘GOD’ (title) because he said: ‘God is my Father’!

And that doesn’t make sense either because nowhere else is there any accusation that having God as your Father made you God, also!!

After-all, the Jews all claimed GOD AS THEIR FATHER, too!!

What do you think?

Read further. John says (speaking of Jesus [the subject of the story]): “And the Word became flesh and lived among us.” He says further that John “bore witness” to Jesus. It’s very clear from the text that a) the Word was God, b) the Word became flesh, c) that being of flesh is Jesus.

 

[sojourner]

I didn’t say it had. I said that is how You are behaving!!

It means that you recognise you are in grave error and so you are pleading for leniency from me to let you off lightly due to your misunderstanding… to desire to run away (place your spirit into unclean bodies) and drown those bodily wrongs (pigs).

I’m not “pleading” with you for anything. I’m posing an argument. Stop gaslighting.

 

[Soapy]

Read further. John says (speaking of Jesus [the subject of the story]): “And the Word became flesh and lived among us.” He says further that John “bore witness” to Jesus. It’s very clear from the text that a) the Word was God, b) the Word became flesh, c) that being of flesh is Jesus.

Yes, GOD’s WORD became flesh!!!

What was GOD’s WORD?

Wasn’t God’s word that He would send a saviour?

When God sent a saviour, His word PUT ON FLESH… it’s an expression meaning:

• ‘Came True’ / ‘Came into fruition’

It’s the same as.

• ‘To put flesh on the bones’ of an uttering
• ‘I said I would do it and now I have done it’!

Yes, John bore witness to the SAVIOUR that God said He would send:

• “BEHOLD MY SERVANT IN WHOM I AM WELL PLEASED… I will put my spirit on him and he shall bring justice to the nations” (Isaiah 42:1)

What do you say?

Did YHWH send a His servant as a saviour?

Did YHWH place His Spirit upon this servant?

Did this servant bring justice to the nations (Jews and Gentiles, alike)?

Did YHWH put flesh on the bones of his declaration concerning THE SEED OF THE WOMAN?

 

[Soapy]

I’m not “pleading” with you for anything. I’m posing an argument. Stop gaslighting.

You are pleading… you know you are wrong so you won’t answer obvious questions that would highlight your wrongness…. Pleading the fifth!!

 

[sojourner]

Yes, GOD’s WORD became flesh!!!

What was GOD’s WORD?

Wasn’t God’s word that He would send a saviour?

Not according to John. According to John, the Word was God and became flesh in the person of Jesus.

“BEHOLD MY SERVANT IN WHOM I AM WELL PLEASED… I will put my spirit on him and he shall bring justice to the nations” (Isaiah 42:1)

This has nothing to do with Jesus.

 

[sojourner]

You are pleading… you know you are wrong so you won’t answer obvious questions that would highlight your wrongness…. Pleading the fifth!!

Stop gaslighting. It’s a poor substitute for an argument.

 

[Soapy]

Stop gaslighting. It’s a poor substitute for an argument.

You just scared you’ve been found out….
You won’t answer questions put to you and even what you do say is so far from the truth that it can only be inferred that you realise you were wrong in your thinking… otherwise you would prove your case…. But you cannot because your case is a false case and therefore has no validation from scriptures!

(what is gaslighting, anyway?)

 

[Soapy]

Not according to John. According to John, the Word was God and became flesh in the person of Jesus.


This has nothing to do with Jesus.

Really? You don’t think that Isaiah 42:1 is a prophecy about the saviour - the one anointed by God.. the one of whom God said:

• ‘This is my Son in whom I am well pleased’
• ‘My chosen one’
• ‘Today I have become your Father’

Really?

 

[rational experiences]

The book of Hebrews has chapter and verse to say this about the Lord Jesus Christ:

• “Now the main point of what we are saying is this: We do have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, and who serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by a mere human being.” (Hebrews 8:1-2)

When it is claimed by certain faction of ideological ‘Christian’ belief that ‘Jesus is almighty God’, it seems strange that the writings of the book of Hebrews should insinuate that Jesus IS NOT ALMIGHTY GOD (YHWH) by rather he is a SERVANT High Priest TO ALMIGHTY GOD.

Hebrews 7 shows Jesus being assigned the high priesthood BY GOD to serve in the ETERNAL spiritual capacity of the life limited version on earth.

Jesus is likened to the mysterious Melkizedek, to whom even Abraham paid tithes. Yet Melkizedek is not called ‘Almighty God’ since he serves in the capacity of ‘High Priest to the God most high’.

How is it then that Jesus Christ (which the book of Hebrews describes as being appointed to the high priesthood BY ALMIGHTY GOD) called ‘Almighty God’ even while Jesus Christ serves exactly in the capacity of high priest:

• “but he [Jesus Christ] became a priest with an oath when God said to him: “The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind: ‘You are a priest forever.’” (Hebrews 7:21)

Can it be so… can it be right… can it be true… that the Lord Jesus Christ is Almighty God AND a high priest to Almighty God?

Are there two Almighty Gods?

((Yet the ideological group of which I speak actually advocate that there are THREE ALMIGHTY GODS?))

Creation status.

Owned by God.

Theist who said God was God.

Men. Group scientific agreement.

O God bodies held created mass. From mass as God man achieved science.

Theist Phi thinker. Built designer machine. Puts god body into machine. Reacts Sion.

Priest scientist in temple theist gets life sacrificed as a son a baby man adult of his human father.

Human first father spiritual no scientist.

Father baby son who sacrificed life a son.