is jesus god ?

[Te Deum]

Those would be LDS Scriptures - probably the Book of Moses or Abraham from Pearl of Great Price.

Then those would not be part of the Canon of Scripture.
[SIZE=+1][/SIZE]
The Council of Hippo in 393 reaffirmed the canon put forth by Pope Damasus I...

Council of Hippo. "It has been decided that besides the canonical Scriptures nothing be read in church under the name of divine Scripture. But the canonical Scriptures are as follows: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua the Son of Nun, Judges, Ruth, the Kings, four books, the Chronicles, two books, Job, the Psalter, the five books of Solomon (included Wisdom and Ecclesiastes (Sirach)), the twelve books of the Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, Ezra, two books, Maccabees, two books."

Canon of Scripture

 

[blueman]

And yet why do you think He also pointed out that the Father was greater than He? Why did He refer to the Father as His God? Why did He pray to the Father? Why did He say He could do nothing except as directed by the Father?

Because He had a specific purpose to accomplish through His incarnation, Jesus was all God and all man as John makes reference to in John chapter 1. Jesus's specific purpose was to save us and show us how to live. His dependency on God The Father to guide him throughout His 3 1/2 ministry was to set the blueprint for mankind that we must rely on God. Only God can forgive sins and only God has rule over heaven and earth. This rule is given to the Son because He and the Holy Spirit are on a equal playing field with God The Father. They share the arrtibutes of divinity.

 

[blueman]

Oh, I totally agree that He was divine. I just don't believe that He is one of three different "manifestations" of the same divine being. I believe the first century Christians saw Him in a position that was subordinate to that of His Father, which is also how I see their relationship.

John, Paul, Peter and the rest of the disciples did not see Him in that light and they each had personal encounters with Jesus. Especially after His ressurection.

 

[Popeyesays]

Because He had a specific purpose to accomplish through His incarnation, Jesus was all God and all man as John makes reference to in John chapter 1. Jesus's specific purpose was to save us and show us how to live. His dependency on God The Father to guide him throughout His 3 1/2 ministry was to set the blueprint for mankind that we must rely on God. Only God can forgive sins and only God has rule over heaven and earth. This rule is given to the Son because He and the Holy Spirit are on a equal playing field with God The Father. They share the arrtibutes of divinity.

Was Jesus Divine? Yes. Was he God? No. Is the Holy Spirit God? Well, tell me is the light from a bulg inj a fixture the bulb? Of course it is not. The Holy SPirit has a Divine Source, but it is not God.

Regards,
Scott

 

[blueman]

Was Jesus Divine? Yes. Was he God? No. Is the Holy Spirit God? Well, tell me is the light from a bulg inj a fixture the bulb? Of course it is not. The Holy SPirit has a Divine Source, but it is not God.

Regards,
Scott

You sound so confident in your stance, but your belief truly does not align with ancient scripture. In Genesis 3, God The Father said let us make man in our own image (speaking with God The Son and God the Holy Spirit. One God, revealed in 3 distinct personalities.

 

[Popeyesays]

You sound so confident in your stance, but your belief truly does not align with ancient scripture. In Genesis 3, God The Father said let us make man in our own image (speaking with God The Son and God the Holy Spirit. One God, revealed in 3 distinct personalities.

man is a creature. Man cannot be in God's physical image without believing that God has a physical body.;

The "image" means that man is the only creature that has the ability to exercfise free will in any way at all. Only "man" puzzless over His own existence and faces the choice of whether to accept the will of God voluntarily.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Because He had a specific purpose to accomplish through His incarnation, Jesus was all God and all man as John makes reference to in John chapter 1.

Yeshua was given a task to complete by his god. He couldn't have been "all" God because he lacked knowledge and power. He confirms that these things were given to him. God can not be taught or given anything if he is the creator of all. Your reasoning that he is God is illogical and is most certainly proven by using the same scripture your list. You hold that "THE WRITER" of the book of John in chapter 1 shows that Yeshua is God. All that the writer shows is "HIS" opinion....what HE believed. The same writer begins to list quotes that Yeshua was supposed to have said and one of the earliest quotes by John (the baptist) lets us know right off the bat that Yeshua was sent. In order to be sent there must be a sender. This is what John "The Baptist" says about Yeshua;

John 3:34
[FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica]For he is sent by God. He speaks God's words, for God's Spirit is upon him without measure or limit.[/FONT]

No where in this does John (the Baptist) suggest Yeshua is God rather he was "sent" by God to represent God (be his ambassador). He further informs us that God gave Yeshua authority. If Yeshua is God then nothing would be able to be given to him. He would already have it since he would be the creator and sustainer of everything.

John 3:35
[FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica]The Father loves his Son, and he has given him authority over everything.[/FONT]

Now this is what was revealed to John but How did Yeshua view himself? Well let's see;

John 6:38
I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.

He shows us he existed in heaven and he was separate from his God. There's truly NO mystery in that statement.

Jesus's specific purpose was to save us and show us how to live. His dependency on God The Father to guide him throughout His 3 1/2 ministry was to set the blueprint for mankind that we must rely on God.

No problem here. I agree. But I must spotlight one thing you said....."His dependency on God"........Well, how does God depend on God if God is one and is all powerful, all knowing...."all God"????

Only God can forgive sins

So your rationality is that because Yeshua forgave sins he was God? You've forgotten what John (the baptist) said..."God has given Yeshua power over everything".....So God is not the only one to forgive sins because he allowed Yeshua to forgive sins and in turn Yeshua, who received power from his god, allowed his disciples to be able to forgive sins. Does this make his disciples God as well?

and only God has rule over heaven and earth.

I agree because that is exactly what Yeshua said in his prayer to his god....;

Matthew 11:25
......I thank you, O Father, Master of heaven and earth,.......

This rule is given to the Son because He and the Holy Spirit are on a equal playing field with God The Father.

Again, If Yeshua is God and God is (ONE) God then nothing could be "given" to him. In order to be given something there must be a giver. If God gives Yeshua anything then Yeshua isn't God........

They share the arrtibutes of divinity.

Well, divinity is not in question. What's in question is deity........and the scriptures show Yeshua not to be deity......

 

[obscurus]

Yeshua was given a task to complete by his god. He couldn't have been "all" God because he lacked knowledge and power. He confirms that these things were given to him. God can not be taught or given anything if he is the creator of all. Your reasoning that he is God is illogical and is most certainly proven by using the same scripture your list. You hold that "THE WRITER" of the book of John in chapter 1 shows that Yeshua is God. All that the writer shows is "HIS" opinion....what HE believed. The same writer begins to list quotes that Yeshua was supposed to have said and one of the earliest quotes by John (the baptist) lets us know right off the bat that Yeshua was sent. In order to be sent there must be a sender. This is what John "The Baptist" says about Yeshua;

Interesting points but this actually touches on the whole nature of the Holy Trinity in other words the nature between the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost/Spirit. There is a relationship between the Son and the Father which would explain how the Son was sent. In fact, it was the Son who took on human nature, not the Father nor the Holy Ghost. Also if one believes, which Christians have always believed (look at the Church Fathers which many seem to conveniently dismiss) one will see how there is great consistency in belief and when there is a consensus among these Church Fathers then there is a guarantee that the belief has an Apostolic origin. Also, the Incarnation can easily explain how Jesus makes statements (e.g. the Father is greater....) which seem to deny that Jesus is ONE, of the same essence as God and not merely a messenger or a prophet, since many times Jesus speaks concerning His human nature.

Jesus has a mission as the Messiah, as the God-Man, which in no way contradicts the 2,000 teaching that Jesus is God. Are you certain that your interpretation is free from error? St. Peter has this to say:

This, then, you must understand first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is made by private interpretation. 2 Peter 1:20

This is actually the more fundamental question in the debate amongst those who do believe in the veracity of the Bible. The Arians believed that Jesus Christ was the greatest creature of God but denied His Divine Nature by using scripture yet they were duly condemned by the Council of Nicea. If you posit that no Church authority is needed, no mechanism with which to interpret the Bible accordingly, then it simply leaves it up to the individual to believe as he pleases. If someone firmly believes that his interpretation of the Bible is correct, and they claim that God has inspired them, how could one deny their claims if there is no external authority which has been instituted by God to make sure that we do not twist the meaning of the Bible?

You need to take Tradition more seriously, you need to dig into the Church Fathers, the early Christian writers, the testimony of 2,000 years of teaching.

I want to say something about forgiving sins. Jesus forgave sins in his own name something that utterly baffled the Jews since as others have aptly said only God can forgive sins. Now it is true He gave the power to His Apostles to forgive sins but that is merely an extension of His own power so when the Apostles and their successors (bishops and priests) forgive sins they do so in the name of Christ since they participate in Jesus' priesthood and his divine prerogatives.

So Jesus as the God-Man is distinct from God the Father but they share the same ESSENCE. This touches upon two mysteries: The Incarnation and the nature of the Holy Trinity.

 

[obscurus]

I should define what Tradition is:

The sum of revealed doctrine which has not been committed to sacred Scripture (though it may have appeared in uninspired writing) but which has been handed down by a series of legitimate shepherds of the Church from age to age. As revelation it must have come to the Apostles directly from the lips of Christ or been handed down by the Apostles at the dictation of the Holy Ghost. More broadly the term is used for the sum of doctrine revealed either in Scripture or by word of mouth; so in 2 Thess. 2:14: "Hold by the traditions you have learned, in word or in writing, from us." - Editor, Donald Attwater, A Catholic Dictionary

 

[Popeyesays]

And just because tradition is tradition does not make tradition convincing. Some traditions may be valid and others ridiculous.
Just because your grandfather believ ed one thing to be true does not mean it is still true, or in fact that it was EVER true at all.

"Could they seek to justify themselves by saying: "We have clung to a certain tradition , and not having beheld the literal fulfilment thereof, we have therefore raised such cavils against the Embodiments of divine Revelation, and kept remote from the law of God?" Hast thou not heard that among the reasons why certain Prophets have been designated as Prophets "endowed with constancy" was the revelation of a Book unto them? And yet, how
could this people be justified in rejecting the Revealer and Author of so many volumes of verses, and follow the sayings of him who hath foolishly sown the seeds of doubt in the hearts of men"

Kitab' Iqan, p.220

Regards,
Scott

 

[Te Deum]

Was Jesus Divine? Yes. Was he God? No. Is the Holy Spirit God? Well, tell me is the light from a bulg inj a fixture the bulb? Of course it is not. The Holy SPirit has a Divine Source, but it is not God.

Regards,
Scott

This is complete heresy - it is completely against Christian Theology. I would like to point this out to anyone reading this thread.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Part 1

There is a relationship between the Son and the Father which would explain how the Son was sent. In fact, it was the Son who took on human nature, not the Father nor the Holy Ghost.

I agree. This is confirmed by scripture. God teaches Yeshua what needs to be taught before he sent him. It is without a doubt their nature and will is separate. This information is right there and from Yeshua;

John 6:38
I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.

This position is clear. Yeshua while in heaven was separate from God (a separate spirit) having his own will. He didn't come here because he decided to. He came because that was the will of his god who sent him. Again, in order to be sent you must be separate from that which sent you. God is God, the holy spirit is the power of God and Yeshua was his divine instrument through which God did his will. This in no way suggest that Yeshua was God but since he was sent by God with a task that God gave him. He is the closest representation of God we can identify with.....unlike any other prophet, prophetess or messenger.

Also if one believes, which Christians have always believed (look at the Church Fathers which many seem to conveniently dismiss) one will see how there is great consistency in belief and when there is a consensus among these Church Fathers then there is a guarantee that the belief has an Apostolic origin.

Their opinions, to me, are of no importance regarding deity. So what if the mighty powers that be told the unlearned masses that Yeshua is God. Their view was not the only view back then. There were plenty that taught that Yeshua was divine but not deity. This tradition you speak of is only one of many. It's no wonder we're finding scrolls buried inside of caves nestled on the sides of mountains. In order for these other traditions to be practiced I'm quite sure others had to go into hiding or travel a far in order to practice their way of life.

Also, the Incarnation can easily explain how Jesus makes statements (e.g. the Father is greater....) which seem to deny that Jesus is ONE, of the same essence as God and not merely a messenger or a prophet, since many times Jesus speaks concerning His human nature.

I believe this is nonsense. Yeshua does a great job informing us he and his god are separate. He left the information to show that before coming here he was not God. I believe that when he spoke of heavenly things he was delivering the word of God and other times he spoke of earthly things people could understand. All the prophets spoke this way. Consider the prophet Haggai. I don't see anyone running around saying "the prophet Haggai was God in the flesh....We know he wasn't but we can clearly see God spoke through him......

Jesus has a mission as the Messiah, as the God-Man, which in no way contradicts the 2,000 teaching that Jesus is God. Are you certain that your interpretation is free from error? St. Peter has this to say:

Yes I'm quite certain I'm not in error. It was the same Peter who rightfully called him "Yeshua the Messiah, the son of the living god." He knew Yeshua was not God in the flesh rather God's promised Messiah.

This is actually the more fundamental question in the debate amongst those who do believe in the veracity of the Bible. The Arians believed that Jesus Christ was the greatest creature of God but denied His Divine Nature by using scripture yet they were duly condemned by the Council of Nicea.

Actually I read somewhere that arians thought Yeshua to be divine but not deity. Regardless, This shows that there were other groups outside of trinitarians that held the position Yeshua was not God. Arians, Ebonites and host of others taught opposite that of the "church"...and their "traditions" reflect that.

If you posit that no Church authority is needed, no mechanism with which to interpret the Bible accordingly, then it simply leaves it up to the individual to believe as he pleases.

People are going to believe what they want whether they belong to a church or not. Wouldn't it be God who gave man the authority to decide for himself? The church is not needed in order to see this basic information laid out in the scripture. If you need the church and the traditions of men to enlighten you then so be it. I need none of these things to see the plain truth of it all.

If someone firmly believes that his interpretation of the Bible is correct, and they claim that God has inspired them, how could one deny their claims if there is no external authority which has been instituted by God to make sure that we do not twist the meaning of the Bible?

Your assumption is that the church in it of itself has not done what you suggest. I don't suggest that I'm inspired by God. I put forth a reasoning that is contrary to what others believe. I don't follow tradition or rely on preachers and pastors to do the work that I'm capable of doing myself. When I present information it can either be dis-proven or accepted. When I say Yeshua isn't God and give the information that shows this, if some one does not agree and is capable of proving he is then I'll entertain the information they put forth.

You need to take Tradition more seriously, you need to dig into the Church Fathers, the early Christian writers, the testimony of 2,000 years of teaching.

Why? Are the simple words of Yeshua not enough?

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

John 8:42
......I have come to you from God. I am not here on my own, but he sent me.

John 17:3
And this is life eternal, that they might know YOU, THE ONLY TRUE GOD, and YESHUA THE MESSIAH, whom YOU HAVE SENT.


John 20:17
........I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my god, and your god.


Do I need more interpretations to help me understand? What about the 2000 years of interpretation of those who teach he isn't God? I'm aware that there are many views about Yeshua. I simply don't agree with the trinitarian view. I think that view is a complete fabrication.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Part 2

I want to say something about forgiving sins. Jesus forgave sins in his own name something that utterly baffled the Jews since as others have aptly said only God can forgive sins.

Not only did they say that but they seriously doubted that he was the promised messiah. Since they didn't accept him as the messiah it was easy for them not to understand that it was God that had given him authority to forgive sins. Here's the context of the situation;

Mark 2:5-10
[FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica]Seeing their faith, Jesus said to the paralyzed man, "My son, your sins are forgiven."[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica]But some of the teachers of religious law who were sitting there said to themselves,[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica]"What? This is blasphemy! Who but God can forgive sins!"[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica]Jesus knew what they were discussing among themselves, so he said to them, "Why
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica]do you think this is blasphemy?[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica]Is it easier to say to the paralyzed man, `Your sins are forgiven' or `Get up, pick up your mat, and walk'?[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica]I will prove that I, the Son of Man, have the authority on earth to forgive sins." Then Jesus turned to the paralyzed man and said,[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica]"Stand up, take your mat, and go on home, because you are healed!"[/FONT]

It's without a doubt that Yeshua was "given" authority to do what he did by his god. Not only does John (the baptist) confirm this, but the writer of the book of John believed this as well as Yeshua taught his followers this.

For me, it is not as important as to who can forgive sins because it appears that God grants to who he wills. It is more interesting to me to want to know that if Yeshua is God, as some suggest, then who or what can give him anything? If he is fully man and/or fully God then who can give him anything if he created it all?

Now it is true He gave the power to His Apostles to forgive sins but that is merely an extension of His own power

See you asked the question of interpretation so I'm asking you, where does it say he gave them an "extension" of his power?

So Jesus as the God-Man is distinct from God the Father but they share the same ESSENCE.

Again, this is false or at the least, your interpretation. What we do know is that God and Yeshua share a oneness in purpose. This is not exclusive as we observe Yeshua's prayer to his god asking that we also be made one with them.

John 17:11
keep through your own name those whom you have given me, that they may be one, as (we) are.
17:22
And the glory which you gave me I have given them; that they may be one, even as (we) are one:

17:23
I in them, and you in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that you have sent me, and have loved them, as you have loved me.

One in purpose but not one in the same. This isn't some mere man speaking here. This is the heavenly Yeshua in the flesh of a man speaking to his god. This is the same Yeshua that existed in heaven before coming here (John 6:38). We know this by the phrase "you have sent me".....

 

[Dirty Penguin]

This is complete heresy - it is completely against Christian Theology. I would like to point this out to anyone reading this thread.

Not heresy to "ALL" christians.....Only to trinitarians......:sarcastic

 

[Yeshua_Lives]

God is everything and nothing. The Alpha and the Omega. God says, "Be" and it is.

 

[Lucian]

This is actually the more fundamental question in the debate amongst those who do believe in the veracity of the Bible. The Arians believed that Jesus Christ was the greatest creature of God but denied His Divine Nature by using scripture yet they were duly condemned by the Council of Nicea.

Actually I read somewhere that arians thought Yeshua to be divine but not deity. Regardless, This shows that there were other groups outside of trinitarians that held the position Yeshua was not God. Arians, Ebonites and host of others taught opposite that of the "church"...and their "traditions" reflect that.

We believe in one God,
the Father Almighty;
And in the Lord Jesus Christ, his Son,
who was begotten of him before all ages,
the Divine Logos,
through whom all things were made, both those in the heavens and those on the earth;
who came down and was made flesh;
and suffered;
and rose again;
and ascended to the heavens;
and shall come again to judge the quick and the dead.
And in the Holy Spirit;
and in the resurrection of the flesh;
and in the life of the world to come;
and in a kingdom of heaven;
and in one Catholic Church of God which extends to the ends of the earth.

:camp:

 

[Popeyesays]

This is complete heresy - it is completely against Christian Theology. I would like to point this out to anyone reading this thread.

Nestorian and Arian churches would have no trouble accepting it.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Dirty Penguin]

God is everything and nothing. The Alpha and the Omega. God says, "Be" and it is.

Some of my Muslim friends would definitely agree with what you said here. I know Scott (Popeyesays) would.....

Quran 19:35 (in part)
...........Glory be to Him! When He decrees a thing, He but says to it 'Be,' and it is.

 

[Popeyesays]

From Gleanings from the Writings of Baha`u'llah:

"`He is the One Who shall proclaim under all conditions, "Verily, verily, I am God, no God is there but Me, the Lord of all created things. In truth all others except Me are My creatures. O, My creatures! Me alone do ye worship."'

 

[Te Deum]

Nestorian and Arian churches would have no trouble accepting it.

Regards,
Scott

Because Arianism and Nestorianism are heresies, those who adhere to them are outside of the Church of God, unless they repent and forsake the heresies.

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Nestorius and Nestorianism
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Arianism

Pope Eugene IV: "The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church." (Cantate Domino, 1441.)