Is Jesus God?

[Trailblazer]

I believe an incarnation is a manifestation.

An incarnation and a manifestation are not exactly the same, as is explained below:

“The Christian equivalent to the Bahá'í concept of Manifestation is the concept of incarnation. The word to incarnate means 'to embody in flesh or 'to assume, or exist in, a bodily (esp. a human) form (Oxford English Dictionary). From a Bahá'í point of view, the important question regarding the subject of incarnation is, what does Jesus incarnate? Bahá'ís can certainly say that Jesus incarnated Gods attributes, in the sense that in Jesus, Gods attributes were perfectly reflected and expressed.[4] The Bahá'í scriptures, however, reject the belief that the ineffable essence of the Divinity was ever perfectly and completely contained in a single human body, because the Bahá'í scriptures emphasize the omnipresence and transcendence of the essence of God…..

One can argue that Bahá'u'lláh is asserting that epistemologically the Manifestations are God, for they are the perfect embodiment of all we can know about God; but ontologically they are not God, for they are not identical with God's essence. Perhaps this is the meaning of the words attributed to Jesus in the gospel of John: 'If you had known me, you would have known my Father also' (John 14:7) and 'he who has seen me has seen the Father (John 14:9)…..

The New Testament, similarly, contains statements where Jesus describes Himself as God, and others where He makes a distinction between Himself and God. For example, 'I and the Father are One (John 10:30); and 'the Father is in me, and I am in the Father (John 1038); but on the other hand, 'the Father is greater than I (John 14:28); and 'Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone (Mark 10:18; Luke 18:19). These statements do not contradict, but are complementary if one assumes they assert an epistemological oneness with God, but an ontological separateness from the Unknowable Essence.”

Jesus Christ in the Bahá'í Writings

 

[TiggerII]

If you put it that way I fully agree. The Father is in the Son.

Jesus was the Son of God, but the Son is not identical to the Father, even though the Father is in the Son.

John 14:11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.

John 17:21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

Jesus was like a clear mirror, and God became visible in the mirror. This is why Jesus said, “The Father is in the Son” (John 14:11, John 17:21), meaning that God is visible and manifest in Jesus.

“I and my Father are one” (John 10:30) means that Jesus and God are one and the same, so whatever pertains to Jesus, all His acts and doings are identical with the Will of God Himself. Jesus and God also share the same Holy Spirit, so in that sense they are one and the same. Jesus also shares the Attributes of God so in that sense they are one and the same. The verse below says that God was manifest in the flesh; it does not say that God became flesh.

1 Timothy 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

.....................................

1 Tim. 3:16
Although the KJV translates 1 Tim. 3:16 with “God”, nearly all other translations today use a word which refers, not to God, but to Jesus: “he” (NIV; RSV; NRSV; JB; NJB; REB; NAB [‘70]; AT; GNB; CBW; and Beck’s translation), “he who” (ASV; NASB; NEB; MLB; BBE; Phillips; and Moffatt), “who,” or “which.” Even the equally old Douay version has “which was manifested in the flesh.” All the very best modern NT texts by trinitarian scholars (including Westcott and Hort, Nestle, and the text by the United Bible Societies) have the NT Greek word ὃς (“who”) here instead of θεὸς (“God”). Why do the very best trinitarian scholars support this NON-trinitarian translation of 1 Tim. 3:16?

Noted Bible scholar Dr. Frederick C. Grant writes:

“A capital example [of NT manuscript changes] is found in 1 Timothy 3:16, where ‘OS’ (OC or ὃς, ‘who’) was later taken for theta sigma with a bar above, which stood for theos (θεὸς, ‘god’). Since the new reading suited …. the orthodox doctrine of the church [trinitarian, at this later date], it got into many of the later manuscripts ….” – p. 656, Encyclopedia Americana, vol. 3, 1957 ed. (This same statement by Dr. Grant was still to be found in the latest Encyclopedia Americana that I examined – the 1990 ed., pp. 696-698, vol. 3.)

For rest of study see post 155 above.

 

[CG Didymus]

The most important reason that Jesus must be God is that, if He is not God, His death would not have been sufficient to pay the penalty for the sins of the world (1 John 2:2). A created being, which Jesus would be if He were not God, could not pay the infinite penalty required for sin against an infinite God. Only God could pay such an infinite penalty. Only God could take on the sins of the world (2 Corinthians 5:21), die, and be resurrected, proving His victory over sin and death.
Is Jesus God? Why should I believe that Jesus is God? | GotQuestions.org

So we finally get to the bottom line. "Jesus must be God is that, if He is not God, His death would not have been sufficient to pay the penalty for the sins of the world." Christians had to make Jesus into God even though Jesus never claimed to be God!

Obviously, this is all a Christian doctrine, it is nothing that Jesus ever claimed to be and it is not supported by any Bible verses, unless one distorts the meanings of the verses attributing meanings that are simply not there.

Can't anyone see that these Christians who decided that Jesus is God had an agenda?
The sad thing is that they took all the other unsuspecting Christians down with them.

So many problems... mostly for Christians. They, the born-again Christians would explain it like this... The Law cannot save you. Plus, no one could follow the Law perfectly, so all were guilty. And the debt for sinning was something that was owed to God and had to be payed. Only a perfect sacrifice, Jesus, could pay that debt. Supposedly, Jesus conquered sin and death. Supposedly, his flesh didn't see corrupted. So somehow, Jesus came back to life, whether the same physical body or a "glorified" flesh/spirit body, who knows.

Supposedly, you say that Jesus never claimed to be God. But is it implied? If only going by what the NT said about Jesus would making him into being part of a trinitarian God make sense to them and answer a few questions for them. But, since people just like those that made Jesus God wrote the NT, then why didn't they made it more clear that Jesus was God? But other things, like Satan, like original or inherited sin because of Adam's fall, are also all part of this. And Baha'is say those things aren't true either. So, by the time we're finished... Jesus did not physically come back to life. So he didn't "conquer" death. And, since there is no Satan, he didn't defeat Satan either. Since Baha'is don't believe the story about Adam's fall as being literal, then we have no "inherited" sin. So do we really have a "sin" debt owed to God that only Jesus could pay for? What do Baha'is believe about that? I'd imagine that Baha'is believe that each individual is judged and is responsible for their own actions.

Anyway, whether Jesus is God is only a part of the complete Christian doctrine on why Jesus came and had to die and rise again. And is any of it true? If there was no fall of Adam, no Satan, and no physical resurrection, then there is no need for Jesus to be God. But, still I wonder, after we take away all those things, what was so important about Jesus? Baha'is have said, "The love," and the good things he did. What good things? What love? We don't know anything about him except what his followers said about him. And most of that we reject.

 

[Trailblazer]

Anyway, whether Jesus is God is only a part of the complete Christian doctrine on why Jesus came and had to die and rise again. And is any of it true? If there was no fall of Adam, no Satan, and no physical resurrection, then there is no need for Jesus to be God.

If there was no fall of Adam, no Satan, and no physical resurrection, there would still be a need for Christians to believe that Jesus is God, because that is how they justify a religion that rejects all the other religions. Trinitarians say that Jesus is God and the Messengers we believe in are just men.

But, still I wonder, after we take away all those things, what was so important about Jesus? Baha'is have said, "The love," and the good things he did. What good things? What love? We don't know anything about him except what his followers said about him. And most of that we reject.

After we take away all those false Christian doctrines then we have the spiritual teachings of Jesus as they were revealed in the New Testament. For example:

Matthew 16:24-26 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?

John 12:24-26 Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit. He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal. If any man serve me, let him follow me; and where I am, there shall also my servant be: if any man serve me, him will my Father honour.

Matthew 6:19-21 Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal; but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

Matthew 7:24-27 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.

John 14:2-3 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.

 

[Truthseeker]

So how big and how grand are spirits of Jesus and Baha'u'llah and the others? I don't imagine their spirits are confined to a spirit body are they? And if so, how do you confine spirit? Yet, however big and grand their spirits are, it did get crammed into a human body.

Well, it's not quite that their spirits get crammed into a human body. A soul is immaterial, it takes up no space, so it wouldn't have to be crammed into a body. We can't really comprehend the soul. There's no space and time for the soul, as I understand it. I can't imagine something with no time and space.

 

[Truthseeker]

An incarnation and a manifestation are not exactly the same, as is explained below:

“The Christian equivalent to the Bahá'í concept of Manifestation is the concept of incarnation. The word to incarnate means 'to embody in flesh or 'to assume, or exist in, a bodily (esp. a human) form (Oxford English Dictionary). From a Bahá'í point of view, the important question regarding the subject of incarnation is, what does Jesus incarnate? Bahá'ís can certainly say that Jesus incarnated Gods attributes, in the sense that in Jesus, Gods attributes were perfectly reflected and expressed.[4] The Bahá'í scriptures, however, reject the belief that the ineffable essence of the Divinity was ever perfectly and completely contained in a single human body, because the Bahá'í scriptures emphasize the omnipresence and transcendence of the essence of God…..

One can argue that Bahá'u'lláh is asserting that epistemologically the Manifestations are God, for they are the perfect embodiment of all we can know about God; but ontologically they are not God, for they are not identical with God's essence. Perhaps this is the meaning of the words attributed to Jesus in the gospel of John: 'If you had known me, you would have known my Father also' (John 14:7) and 'he who has seen me has seen the Father (John 14:9)…..

The New Testament, similarly, contains statements where Jesus describes Himself as God, and others where He makes a distinction between Himself and God. For example, 'I and the Father are One (John 10:30); and 'the Father is in me, and I am in the Father (John 1038); but on the other hand, 'the Father is greater than I (John 14:28); and 'Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone (Mark 10:18; Luke 18:19). These statements do not contradict, but are complementary if one assumes they assert an epistemological oneness with God, but an ontological separateness from the Unknowable Essence.”

Jesus Christ in the Bahá'í Writings

Robert Stockman wrote that! I took a Wilmette Institute course on the New Testament and if I remember right, I read that very article. He's an expert on the New Testament. I just read it again because my memory needs refreshing. One important takeaway that I also hold is that Jesus could be both the way, the truth and the life for just His time, and also when He says "I" that represents all the Manifestations of God. Robert Stockman today also runs the Wilmette Institute.

 

[Trailblazer]

Robert Stockman wrote that! I took a Wilmette Institute course on the New Testament and if I remember right, I read that very article. He's an expert on the New Testament. I just read it again because my memory needs refreshing. One important takeaway that I also hold is that Jesus could be both the way, the truth and the life for just His time, and also when He says "I" that represents all the Manifestations of God. Robert Stockman today also runs the Wilmette Institute.

I did not know all of that about him. It is good to know that he He's an expert on the New Testament because I often post excerpts from His article Jesus Christ in the Bahá'í Writings

 

[Truthseeker]

I do not know if Jesus really healed the sick or raised the dead. Probably He did. Do you know that Baha’u’llah also healed the sick or raised the dead? These are moracles His close followers knew about but Baha’u’llah did not want them to be known becaue He ddod not want people to believe in Him for His miracles: Famous Miracles in the Baha’i Faith

Another source you reference. I have a bookmark to that site, but hadn't seen that particular entry. I have many bookmarks to sites I don't look at hardly at all. I saw some stories I don't remember seeing. I read Priceless Pearl, but that was long ago, and my lousy memory doesn't remember those stories.

She has posted on Facebook, and I traced her posts to her website.

 

[Muffled]

An incarnation and a manifestation are not exactly the same, as is explained below:

“The Christian equivalent to the Bahá'í concept of Manifestation is the concept of incarnation. The word to incarnate means 'to embody in flesh or 'to assume, or exist in, a bodily (esp. a human) form (Oxford English Dictionary). From a Bahá'í point of view, the important question regarding the subject of incarnation is, what does Jesus incarnate? Bahá'ís can certainly say that Jesus incarnated Gods attributes, in the sense that in Jesus, Gods attributes were perfectly reflected and expressed.[4] The Bahá'í scriptures, however, reject the belief that the ineffable essence of the Divinity was ever perfectly and completely contained in a single human body, because the Bahá'í scriptures emphasize the omnipresence and transcendence of the essence of God…..

One can argue that Bahá'u'lláh is asserting that epistemologically the Manifestations are God, for they are the perfect embodiment of all we can know about God; but ontologically they are not God, for they are not identical with God's essence. Perhaps this is the meaning of the words attributed to Jesus in the gospel of John: 'If you had known me, you would have known my Father also' (John 14:7) and 'he who has seen me has seen the Father (John 14:9)…..

The New Testament, similarly, contains statements where Jesus describes Himself as God, and others where He makes a distinction between Himself and God. For example, 'I and the Father are One (John 10:30); and 'the Father is in me, and I am in the Father (John 1038); but on the other hand, 'the Father is greater than I (John 14:28); and 'Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone (Mark 10:18; Luke 18:19). These statements do not contradict, but are complementary if one assumes they assert an epistemological oneness with God, but an ontological separateness from the Unknowable Essence.”

Jesus Christ in the Bahá'í Writings

I can agree with that but we usually identify a person in the whole not in part. So the fact that God is in Jesus identifies Him as God.

 

[Trailblazer]

I can agree with that but we usually identify a person in the whole not in part. So the fact that God is in Jesus identifies Him as God.

This is how I see it...

Jesus was the Son of God, but the Son is not identical to the Father, even though the Father is in the Son.

John 14:11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.

John 17:21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

Jesus was like a clear mirror, and God became visible in the mirror. This is why Jesus said, “The Father is in the Son” (John 14:11, John 17:21), meaning that God is visible and manifest in Jesus.

“I and my Father are one” (John 10:30) means that Jesus and God are one and the same, so whatever pertains to Jesus, all His acts and doings are identical with the Will of God Himself. Jesus and God also share the same Holy Spirit, so in that sense they are one and the same. Jesus also shares the Attributes of God so in that sense they are one and the same. The verse below says that God was manifest in the flesh; it does not say that God became flesh.

1 Timothy 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

 

[thomas loebel]

Jesus is lord....is a deception because jesus is teacher of gods laws and lord is love found last has all three wise names that can be written that way and allowed because jesus [laws] evolves to become faith[christ] that crosses to lord[love] last so that the verse is true and not true as "jesus is lord because our spirit evolves from one end to the other as the same spirit.