Is Jesus truly God?

[URAVIP2ME]

It's a good question. The first thing to understand is that, Jesu is considered God by xians. That is a major aspect of the religious beliefs. The Bible, therefore, should be read in that light. So, we can surmise that Jesu is not saying these words completely literally, in fact, they are probably the words of a hymn or such. I have created a thread asking this same question, however the ''literal'' interpretation, is unlikely, imo, whatever the actual answer is. I simply avoid the issue altogether by only using a gospel that doesn't contain these words, as I believe they are confusing, and since unexplained in the text, not clear enough to be in my included Scripture.

First of all, it is Christendom ( so-called Christian but in name only ) who consider Jesus as God.
Gospel writer John wrote at Revelation 1:5; 3:14 that Jesus is the beginning of the creation by God.
God had No beginning - Psalm 90:2 - so Jesus was Not before the beginning as God was before the beginning.

By Jesus saying ' why have you God forsaken me ' shows that God was Not helping Jesus to lay down his life.
Jesus was laying down his life of his own free choice, his own free-will choice.
Jesus' words show that Jesus was Not being comforted by God, but that Jesus was really released or abandoned into the hands of his enemies dying completely out of love for us. Notice what was most important to Jesus according to John 12 vs 27,28,33

 

[URAVIP2ME]

There is No all upper-case I AM in Scripture. Just I am.
Neither I AM or I am is the Tetragrammaton - YHWH

 

[Desert Snake]

First of all, it is Christendom ( so-called Christian but in name only ) who consider Jesus as God.
Gospel writer John wrote at Revelation 1:5; 3:14 that Jesus is the beginning of the creation by God.
God had No beginning - Psalm 90:2 - so Jesus was Not before the beginning as God was before the beginning.

By Jesus saying ' why have you God forsaken me ' shows that God was Not helping Jesus to lay down his life.
Jesus was laying down his life of his own free choice, his own free-will choice.
Jesus' words show that Jesus was Not being comforted by God, but that Jesus was really released or abandoned into the hands of his enemies dying completely out of love for us. Notice what was most important to Jesus according to John 12 vs 27,28,33

I'm not going to follow an incorrect Rabbi fisherman. So, all of this is great, but it necessitates a disavowment of 'Jesus by those who believe in the verbal Torah.

 

[Desert Snake]

There is No all upper-case I AM in Scripture. Just I am.
Neither I AM or I am is the Tetragrammaton - YHWH

So, Jesus is another god/deity ?

 

[URAVIP2ME]

So, Jesus is another god/deity ?

As I think you already know ' God/god ' ( and Lord too ) are just titles, whereas the Tetragrammaton stands for a personal name.
According to 2nd Corinthians 4:4 Satan is the ' god ' of this world of badness.
Weren't the human judges of Psalm 82 also considered as ' gods ' ?
Not that they were God, but called gods because they were to judge by using God's judgment as the basis for their judgment.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

I'm not going to follow an incorrect Rabbi fisherman. So, all of this is great, but it necessitates a disavowment of 'Jesus by those who believe in the verbal Torah.

What was incorrect about Jesus? Since Jesus was considered a carpenter, then it would Not be Jesus as a literal fisherman.
Daniel 9 vs 25,26 wrote about Messiah coming.
The ' going forth ' to restore and rebuild Jerusalem - Neh. 2 vs 1,5,7,8 - the 70 weeks of years - Daniel 9:24 - places expectation of Messiah arriving on the 1st-century scene. That is why the 1st-century people were in ' expectation ' of Messiah's arrival as mentioned at Luke 3:15.

 

[Desert Snake]

As I think you already know ' God/god ' ( and Lord too ) are just titles, whereas the Tetragrammaton stands for a personal name.
According to 2nd Corinthians 4:4 Satan is the ' god ' of this world of badness.
Weren't the human judges of Psalm 82 also considered as ' gods ' ?
Not that they were God, but called gods because they were to judge by using God's judgment as the basis for their judgment.

Actually, 'G-d', the equivalent, is always specified in the Bible. People are not arbitrarily called 'gods'. I have asked for one instance of this, and it has never been answered. There is no 'vague' reference to G-d in the Bible. You realize that by your figuring, the 'god' in Genesis becomes vague? It could mean Zeus, or Herod, or whatever.

 

[Kolibri]

Actually, 'G-d', the equivalent, is always specified in the Bible. People are not arbitrarily called 'gods'. I have asked for one instance of this, and it has never been answered. There is no 'vague' reference to G-d in the Bible. You realize that by your figuring, the 'god' in Genesis becomes vague? It could mean Zeus, or Herod, or whatever.

ha-'Elohim' or ha-'El' and likewise ha-'Adhon' all have the idea that it is the [true] God/Lord. The references to the God in Genesis 1 (plural in a majestic sense), could not be Zeus or any other God. As the rest of Genesis makes clear that this God is the [true] God as early as Genesis 5:22,24 and references him by name, (the Tetragrammation) as early as Genesis 2:4.

Human judges are called gods in the 82nd Psalm. One of the Herods set himself up to be called a god right before he died from an angel striking with a case of carnivorous worms. (Act 12:21-23) In the first case, of the judges, the respect was appropriate considering the authority they had over other peoples lives. In the latter, the honor was garnered by theatrics and excessive - only serving to stoke Herod's pride.

 

[Desert Snake]

ha-'Elohim' or ha-'El' and likewise ha-'Adhon' all have the idea that it is the [true] God/Lord. The references to the God in Genesis 1 (plural in a majestic sense), could not be Zeus or any other God. As the rest of Genesis makes clear that this God is the [true] God as early as Genesis 5:22,24 and references him by name, (the Tetragrammation) as early as Genesis 2:4.

Human judges are called gods in the 82nd Psalm. One of the Herods set himself up to be called a god right before he died from an angel striking with a case of carnivorous worms. (Act 12:21-23) In the first case, of the judges, the respect was appropriate considering the authority they had over other peoples lives. In the latter, the honor was garnered by theatrics and excessive - only serving to stoke Herod's pride.

The main difference in the use of the 'god' title, is that we always know which 'god' it is referring to. When Jesus is called G-d, there is no explanation, no caveat, given, that would make us think that it means anything other than ''The God''. Later changes to spelling, etc., are all suppositional, based on belief. Notice how we know, when 'other' gods are being referred to? It works exactly the same in English; If I am talking to a pastor, and I say, "God", it is assumed that I am referring to JHVH, ''The God''. If otherwise, I would specify, 'the god Zeus', and so forth.
The issue, is that, if Jesus is some other deity, then it is polytheism, or, if Jesu is not worshipped, some odd Godhead arrangement, where the father gives power over heaven and earth, to another being. Why would G-d give power over to another being? What would be the purpose?

 

[Kolibri]

where the father gives power over heaven and earth, to another being. Why would G-d give power over to another being? What would be the purpose?

The second psalm was a good example of this..among others such as the 110th and the 45th. In the 2nd psalm Jehovah's anointed one (or Christ) is referenced as a king of God's choosing. It even refers to this king as God's son in the 7th and 12th stanzas.

As Jehovah is "holy" in a superlative sense, he uses a form of mediation between himself and imperfect mankind. (Isa 6:3; Re 4:8). Under the Law Covenant, Moses was used as a mediator and even he had angels that represented Jehovah in transmitting the Law. (Act 7:38; Galatians 3:19) Later, the New Covenant was mediated by Jesus and now he is the only mediator between God and men. (Hebrews 9:15; 1 Timothy 2:5) Since Jesus is the mediator between God and men, he can not be THE God. Instead he is the one that God chose to 'break up the works of the Devil.' (1 John 3:8) Jehovah crowned this one who had been made 'a little lower than angels' for a time, and 'appointed him over the works of [God's] hands,' subjecting 'all things...under his feet.' (Hebrews 2:7,8) The reason is partially mentioned in Hebrews 2:9 (that "he might taste death for everyone."), and verse 14 and 15, (that "he might bring to nothing the one having the means to cause death, that is, the Devil, and that he might set free all those who were held in slavery all their lives by their fear of death."), and in verse 17 ("so that he could becomes a merciful and faithful high priest in things relating to God, in order to offer a propitiatory sacrifice for the sins of the people.") Likewise, 1 Corinthians 15 shows Jesus as being God's representative "as king" who is used to bring all things back into subjection. And once all things are back under subjection, "the Son himself will also subject himself to the One who subjected all things to him." (verses 22-28)

The purpose is clear, Jehovah has set up a representative arrangement, an administration, to fulfill his purpose of fixing the problem started in the Garden of Eden. (Eph 1:8-10; 3:8-12).

 

[Wharton]

Jesus has a God just as we have a Human in the begetting process. Jesus, being begotten in the eternal now where there is no chronological time, has no beginning. Being begotten by God, he is God. Being begotten by a human, we are human.

The Father is the only 'stand alone' person in the Trinity.

 

[Kolibri]

Jesus has a God just as we have a Human in the begetting process. Jesus, being begotten in the eternal now where there is no chronological time, has no beginning. Being begotten by God, he is God. Being begotten by a human, we are human.

The Father is the only 'stand alone' person in the Trinity.

No chronological time where Jesus is now? How is that? It seems that time has meaning in the spiritual heavens.

1 Peter 1:12 talks about angels desiring to peer into things. A desire is something you have to wait to have satisfied. Waiting suggests a sense of time.
1 Peter 3:20 says that in Noah's day, "God was patiently waiting."

Or consider Act 1:7 - "[Jesus] said to them: 'It does not belong to you to know the times and seasons that the Father has placed in his own jurisdiction. (or "authority.")'"

Perhaps when Jehovah was alone in the universe before creation time had no meaning. But since then all things move forward in relation to another and time is certainly felt, even in the heavens.

 

[Shiranui117]

No chronological time where Jesus is now? How is that? It seems that time has meaning in the spiritual heavens.

1 Peter 1:12 talks about angels desiring to peer into things. A desire is something you have to wait to have satisfied. Waiting suggests a sense of time.
1 Peter 3:20 says that in Noah's day, "God was patiently waiting."

Or consider Act 1:7 - "[Jesus] said to them: 'It does not belong to you to know the times and seasons that the Father has placed in his own jurisdiction. (or "authority.")'"

Perhaps when Jehovah was alone in the universe before creation time had no meaning. But since then all things move forward in relation to another and time is certainly felt, even in the heavens.

We humans have a limited perception of time. God does not. God condescends to our limited understanding and puts things in a way that we can comprehend--this is why it is said that time is felt in Heaven.

 

[Wharton]

No chronological time where Jesus is now? How is that? It seems that time has meaning in the spiritual heavens.

1 Peter 1:12 talks about angels desiring to peer into things. A desire is something you have to wait to have satisfied. Waiting suggests a sense of time.
1 Peter 3:20 says that in Noah's day, "God was patiently waiting."

Or consider Act 1:7 - "[Jesus] said to them: 'It does not belong to you to know the times and seasons that the Father has placed in his own jurisdiction. (or "authority.")'"

Perhaps when Jehovah was alone in the universe before creation time had no meaning. But since then all things move forward in relation to another and time is certainly felt, even in the heavens.

Nope.

No 'future' in heaven. Only now. No time. Which is why Jesus didn't know the 'time' of the end of the world when asked. Only JW's seem to know that.

Even Albert Einstein grasped the concept of the eternal now: "The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once."

 

[Kolibri]

Nope.

No 'future' in heaven. Only now. No time. Which is why Jesus didn't know the 'time' of the end of the world when asked. Only JW's seem to know that.

Even Albert Einstein grasped the concept of the eternal now: "The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once."

Provide a scriptural basis for this idea please.
And I am not here to attack you. So please drop the antagonizing remarks about Jehovah's Witnesses.

 

[Wharton]

Provide a scriptural basis for this idea please.
And I am not here to attack you. So please drop the antagonizing remarks about Jehovah's Witnesses.

How many times have JW's predicted the end? How many left in 1975 after the end failed to appear? There's nothing antagonizing about the truth. You get to deal with the boo boos, not me.

 

[Kolibri]

How many times have JW's predicted the end? How many left in 1975 after the end failed to appear? There's nothing antagonizing about the truth. You get to deal with the boo boos, not me.

And how many times will you take the word of ex-Jehovah's Witnesses that spew hate over those that stuck around. We've mentioned over and over that 1975 was never as cut and dry promoted by anyone but a soon-to-be known apostate. Never was it boldly stated in print that the end would come in 1975. This is why I blocked seeing your posts for a time. Rather than discuss the topic at hand you would rather sling mud that only has the illusion of cohesiveness.