Is Jesus God?

[kepha31]

No, I won't prove it isn't true, and yes, Catholicism is FILLED with falsehoods and pagan rituals and beliefs.

What you mean is YOU CAN"T PROVE your false charges.

I was Catholic most of my early adulthood.

That does not mean you were a practicing Catholic, which is not the same as an ethnical Catholic. If you were, it isn't likely you would fall for so many lies.

The scriptures tell us one thing, and Catholicism tells us another.

Another headless chicken comment you refuse to substantiate.

Nothing Catholicism teaches can be found in the scriptures.

Nothing? Now you are just ranting hate speech.

The scriptures tell us that clergy are not valid, pagan rituals and beliefs are unclean and abhorrent, and that all religions started by man are false. That fits Catholicism like a hand in a glove. In fact, it fits most religions claiming to be Christian. Galations says any sect is false and is works of the flesh.

Another comment you refuse to substantiate.

 

[outhouse]

Another headless chicken comment

hey brother

easy up on the personal insults, its not welcome here.

 

[kepha31]

Let's get back on track. Jesus is God. FULLY. Jesus is human. FULLY.

WHOLE verses have been removed in the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"--whether in the text or placed in an appendix...OVER 47 in the New Testament alone ! ! !

"New World Translation" it says,
I John 5:7 "For there are three witness bearers,"
What are the NWT readers missing? What does the real Bible say?

"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."

Luke 1:28 - Vitally important phrase COMPLETELY removed. "blessed art thou among women"

Acts 8:37 -- COMPLETELY removed. What are the Jehovah's Witness missing?
"And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."
________________________________________________________

“We have also as a Physician the Lord our God, Jesus the Christ, the only-begotten Son and Word, before time began, but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin."
Ignatius of Antioch, To the Ephesians, 7 (A.D. 110).

"For if you had understood what has been written by the prophets, you would not have denied that He was God, Son of the only, unbegotten, unutterable God."
Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, 121 (A.D. 155).

 

[outhouse]

Jesus is God. FULLY.

You have some explaining to do on that one.

Why was the Emperor FIRST called "son of god" before Jesus was born? Who was the ruler of the world Jesus lived in, who places Antipas in power.

Why was that mortal man given divinity?

Why were the Roman Christians in the Diaspora proselytizing to the Emperors followers to come and join their movement and telling them to come worship the true god, the real son of god?


Its my opinion it was quite normal to deify mortal men. There is a pattern here.


Not only that you see in scripture as the mythology is layered, contradictions on what and how divine Jesus was, as well as we see an evolution of divinity growing from the beginning.

 

[outhouse]

What are the Jehovah's Witness missing?

What does it matter.

They are a later sect.


They have nothing to do with the historicity or divinity of the real man.

 

[kepha31]

hey brother

easy up on the personal insults, its not welcome here.

Noted. I made some deletions. If he can attack my heart felt beliefs with lies and hate, then there is nothing wrong with me attacking his ridiculous comments, I'm not attacking him.

 

[Deadtroopers]

Who cares what historians say? What matters is what God says.

And how do we know what God says? Has God spoken to you? No, you got it from a book, or heard it from someone who got it from a book, it was written by the hand of man; transcribing the speech or thought of man. Many people have claimed God spoke to them. The trouble is God never says the same thing twice; the majority have been certified loons. We have yet to devise a way of telling God from Lie or Lunacy.

 

[Kolibri]

"New World Translation" it says,
I John 5:7 "For there are three witness bearers,"
What are the NWT readers missing? What does the real Bible say?

"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."

6B “Three Witness Bearers”
“For there are three witness bearers, the spirit and the water and the blood, and the three are in agreement.”—1Jo 5:7, 8.

This rendering is in agreement with the Greek texts by C. Tischendorf (eighth ed., 1872); Westcott and Hort (1881); Augustinus Merk (ninth ed., 1964); José María Bover (fifth ed., 1968); United Bible Societies (third ed., 1975); Nestle-Aland (26th ed., 1979).

After “witness bearers” the cursive mss No. 61 (16th century) and No. 629 (in Latin and Greek, 14th to 15th century) and Vgc add the words: “in heaven, the Father, the Word and the holy spirit; and these three are one. (8) And there are three witness bearers on earth.” But these words are omitted by אABVgSyh,p.
6B “Three Witness Bearers” — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY
(ʼAleph) Codex Sinaiticus, Gr., fourth cent. C.E., British Museum, H.S., G.S.
A Codex Alexandrinus, Gr., fifth cent. C.E., British Museum, H.S., G.S.
B Vatican ms 1209, Gr., fourth cent. C.E., Vatican City, Rome, H.S., G.S.
Vg Latin Vulgate, by Jerome, c. 400 C.E. (Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem, Württembergische Bibelanstalt, Stuttgart, 1975).
Syh Philoxenian-Harclean Syriac Version, sixth and seventh cent. C.E.; G.S.
Syp Syriac Pe****ta, Christian Aram., fifth cent. C.E., S. Lee, London, 1826, reprint by United Bible Societies, 1979.

I am content with the proof that the verse fragment in question is spurious.

Luke 1:28 - Vitally important phrase COMPLETELY removed. "blessed art thou among women"

This didn't even make it out of the KJV into the ASV.

Acts 8:37 -- COMPLETELY removed. What are the Jehovah's Witness missing?
"And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."

P45 Papyrus Chester Beatty 1, Gr., third cent. C.E., Dublin, G.S.
P74 Papyrus Bodmer 17, Gr., seventh cent. C.E., Geneva, G.S.
(ʼAleph) Codex Sinaiticus, Gr., fourth cent. C.E., British Museum, H.S., G.S
A Codex Alexandrinus, Gr., fifth cent. C.E., British Museum, H.S., G.S.
B Vatican ms 1209, Gr., fourth cent. C.E., Vatican City, Rome, H.S., G.S.
C Codex Ephraemi rescriptus, Gr., fifth cent. C.E., Paris, H.S., G.S.
Vg Latin Vulgate, by Jerome, c. 400 C.E. (Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem, Württembergische Bibelanstalt, Stuttgart, 1975).
Syp Syriac Pe****ta, Christian Aram., fifth cent. C.E., S. Lee, London, 1826, reprint by United Bible Societies, 1979.

These all omit Acts 8:37.
These on the other hand have this verse.

It Old Latin Versions, Itala, second to fourth cent. C.E.; H.S., G.S.
Vgc Latin Vulgate, Clementine recension (S. Bagster Sons, London, 1977).
Arm Armenian Version, fourth to thirteenth cent. C.E.; H.S., G.S.

Which carries more weight? Act 8:37 - valid or spurious?
Seems spurious to me.

 

[truthofscripture]

What you mean is YOU CAN"T PROVE your false charges.

That does not mean you were a practicing Catholic, which is not the same as an ethnical Catholic. If you were, it isn't likely you would fall for so many lies.

Another headless chicken comment you refuse to substantiate.

Nothing? Now you are just ranting hate speech.

Another comment you refuse to substantiate.

Hypocrisy on your part will not make your case for you, it only weakens your credibility. You make a lot of rediculous unsubstantiated claims here. I never "rant" or make hate speech ever. I was a Catholic for many years, and when younger was an alter boy, went to Catholic schools, the whole enchilada. The last straw was a letter read by the priest, from the pope at that time, telling all Catholics not to pray to God any more, but to pray to the pope, and he would intercede in our behalf. The scriptures tell us to pray to NO ONE other than God the Almighty. Catholicism requires praying repeatedly by rote and the scriptures tell us never to do that. Catholicism uses idols and God says they're unclean. Catholicism requires praying to saints, Mary, and others while the scriptures say that we must render sacred service to God alone. Your defense of that false religion isn't based in truth or reality, but is based in emotion and playing follow the leader. The wrong leader at that.

 

[kepha31]

You have some explaining to do on that one.

Why was the Emperor FIRST called "son of god" before Jesus was born? Who was the ruler of the world Jesus lived in, who places Antipas in power.

I suppose it was a title denoting the highest honor. The Romans can call their emperor anything they want, it doesn't make it true. That takes us back to the 4 questions as to whether or not a real parallel exists.

Why was that mortal man given divinity?

I don't understand the question. Jesus was not "given" divinity.

Why were the Roman Christians in the Diaspora proselytizing to the Emperors followers to come and join their movement and telling them to come worship the true god, the real son of god?

It took 300 years, but there were so many Roman senators who became Christians, the laws governing their persecution of Christians became outdated, hence the Edit of Milan. The process of conversion was in the making before Constantine.The Roman empire opened itself to the Christian faith, the Christian faith did not impose itself on emperors.

Its my opinion it was quite normal to deify mortal men. There is a pattern here.

All sizzle and no steak. Just because a mortal is designated divine does not make it so. Let them do miracles and rise from the dead. Either Jesus was Whom He said He was, the Son of God, or he was a total wack job with a sophisticated special effects crew. Pick one.

Not only that you see in scripture as the mythology is layered, contradictions on what and how divine Jesus was, as well as we see an evolution of divinity growing from the beginning.

I don't see mythology in scripture. I see a variety of literary forms and if you can't tell one from the other, naturally you would come to that conclusion. I say that when you take scripture apart from the Church, it's no longer an inspired book.
There are no contradictions.
Divinity cannot evolve, it's outside of time and space. God revealed himself gradually, first to a family, then a tribe, then a nation, then the human race. That is not evolution of divinity, but a development of understanding.

 

[kepha31]

The last straw was a letter read by the priest, from the pope at that time, telling all Catholics not to pray to God any more, but to pray to the pope, and he would intercede in our behalf.

All the Pope's letters sent out are available on line, and no priest would say such a stupid thing. I hear these phony stories from embittered ex-Catholics about the priest-said-this and the priest-said-that. The priests' name is never given. The letter from the Pope is never named. It's all about what they THINK the priest said. Pray to the Pope? What a joke.
Be reminded that this thread is about Jesus being God. It's not a Catholic bash fest. If you want to discuss Catholicism, open a new topic in the Catholic DIR section.

 

[JM2C]

Difference is I study the cultural and social anthropology surrounding the text. You have not.

No, I use academia and universities to justify my position. Not faith.

You are not a scholar of anything man. You are just riding along with people’s idea like a parasite living at the expense of others. IOW, You are just sucking up to academia with your wiki’s C&P. You got no degrees or anything under your name. You're a hanger-on.

 

[JM2C]

Its not either or.

Some parts are historical while others are mythology, metaphor, and allegory, some are song and poem redacted to text.

So, “Some parts are historical” IOW, you can tell which one is real in the bible and which one is not. That is truly amazing. Now, show me which one is real and not real in the bible and then we go from there.

 

[JM2C]

No. The unknown authors of John wrote that. Jesus did not write that so we cannot be sure he even said that.

There is plenty of evidence in the NT for Jesus divinity. Just because the trinity slowly evolved hundreds of years later, does not mean there is no evidence in support.

So, this is not one the “plenty of evidence in the NT for Jesus divinity” because Mr. Academia says so. Tell me who wrote the gospel of John.

 

[JM2C]

Yes I know what the mythology states.

Anything Mr. Academia cannot understand is a myth.

 

[JM2C]

Honestly, What would you, as a non-greek reader-writer know about “natural word order” in ancient greek?

Ancient Greek, but before you are talking about Koine Greek.

Now, can you tell the difference between Ancient classical Greek from Koine Greek, so that the READERS may understand what you are talking about since you acknowledge your fluency of the Greek language.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Jesus is not God. There, case closed.
14 Bible Verses That Indicate Jesus Is Not God | Interfaith forums

Since Jesus is God's representative, of course whatever the Father says and does will be expressed through Jesus.

12. Hebrews 1:3
The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being.
Jesus is the exact representation of his being. I send my representative to Congress. He is not me, myself. He is my representative.

Since God can do whatever He wants, why would any trinity Christian deny Him the ability to give a human the right to stand up on His (the Father's) behalf and have the characteristics (sinlessness) of His Father while He is still human?

(God can't be tempted; Humans can. God doesn't need anyone to help Him cure the sick and raised the dead; Jesus could not do these things without His Father).

That doesn't devalue Jesus. He still saved Christians, as for His Father's Will not His own. Why would Jesus want to sacrifice Himself unless He was told by His Father to do so.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

If Jesus is God, could He do anything without His Father's help?

 

[JM2C]

This aside, “Θεος ην ο λογος” IS the word order John used (and there are no significant manuscript variations on this sentence). When I pointed out that "Ο λογος ην θεος." means exactly the same as "θεος ην ο λογος." I simply repeated the first version. Look back at my note.


2) JM2C said (post # 365) - My sentence means “The word was a God.”. Now, how did you end up with the “a god” if there was no indefinite article in Greek?


It is interesting that you, who cannot read nor translate accurate greek, are trying to teach forum members Greek. Have someone HELP you who CAN read greek.

My sentence means “The word was a God.” Specifically BECAUSE I left out the article. There IS NO “indefinite article in Greek. It doesn't exist.

You should stop man. You are embarrassing yourself. You cannot undo your mistake. Stop pretending you knew Greek because you simply don’t know anything about Greek language. There is only one person in this entire forum who knew Classical Greek, and that is, LegionOnomoi.

 

[JM2C]

One indicates indefiniteness in Greek by omitting the definite article.

The reason why John did not place a DEFINITE ARTICLE in front of “GOD/THEOS” in the 3rd clause is to indicate that “THE WORD” was NOT “THE GOD” in the 2nd clause where it says “AND THE WORD WAS WITH THE GOD”

YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND THIS WHY THERE WAS NO DEFINITE ARTICLE IN THE 3RD CLAUSE. THE ABSENT OF THE DEFINITE ARTICLE IN FRONT OF “THEOS” IN THE 3RD CLAUSE DOES NOT MEAN YOU SHOULD PLACE AN INDEFINITE ARTICLE IN FRONT OF “THEOS”.