Jesus is God?

[imaginaryme]

I've been avoiding this heading because, for all of my contentiousness, I ain't out to hurt nobody. Feel free to ignore me (that happens a lot, no matter) but I have a simple thought that might save Christians a lot of grief down the road. Quantum theory. Once god is "seen anywhere," god cannot "exist everywhere." Despite the endless argument, my research indicates the one known as "Jesus Christ" never existed...

No, hold on; don't get crazy until you consider all the facts. There's Josephus, an obvious fraud - and a Flavian to boot - so his agenda is obvious; and three others - but they only mention "Christus," which, as you know, is a title; not necessarily a name. Forming "a new modality" in Christianity that Jesus was only symbolic allows for "Jesus to be God in the quantum sense" - not a bad deal, all things considered - and also removes the "the threat of false prophets taking up the mantle of a man who never existed" - and this new modality may be just the thing to evolve Christianity past the coming troubles...

But, you guys figure it out. I'm all Antichristainity now - I don't accept the concept of hell in any form - but I have never been anti-Christian.

 

[Muffled]

yrgo (#538):Was "the man Christ Jesus" (a) an Incarnation of THE FATHER HIMSELF (b) or was "the man Christ Jesus" an incarnation of a Being OTHER THAN THE FATHER (c)?
(a) 1Ti 2.5; cf. Ac 2.22
(b) "human body + Spirit of God" (#523)
(c) a human body + a Being other than the Father + "the Spirit of . . . [the] Father" (Mt 10.20)
　
Muffled (#539):
a) 18:19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, even God.
b) Heb 4:15 For we have not a high priest ["IN SERVICE TO GOD" (Heb 2.17, modified NIV)] that cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but one that hath been in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

Muffled's point (according to yrgo):"Jesus said, 'Don't call me good. Only God is good, and I am NOT He.'" (Lk 18.19, yrgo's Audacious Version) HOWEVER,
　
Jesus is NOT BAD (Heb 4.15), which, to Muffled's way of thinking, means that Jesus is PHENOMENALLY GOOD, PREEMINENTLY GOOD IN HIS OWN RIGHT.
　
NOTE:
　
If only God is SUPREMELY, SUPERLATIVELY GOOD, and Jesus is NOT BAD, then Jesus IS God.
　
yrgo's Amazement:
　
Muffled, "'Do you not know? Have you not heard? Has it not been told you from the beginning? Have you not understood since the earth was founded?" (a)

It was only "THROUGH THE ETERNAL SPIRIT" (b) that Jesus was able to offer "Himself WITHOUT BLEMISH" (c), to offer "himself unblemished TO GOD"! (d)

It was only "because GOD WAS WITH . . . [Jesus]" (e) and had "anointed Jesus . . . with the Holy Spirit and power" (e) that Jesus was able to go around "doing good." (e)

(a) Isa 40.21, NIV
(b) Heb 9.14
(c) Heb 9.14, modified NASB
(d) Heb 9.14
(e) Ac 10.38, modified NIV

yrgo (#538):
　
If God were to anoint a human being "with the Holy Spirit and power" (Ac 10.38, NIV),

WOULD THAT HUMAN BEING ACTUALLY BE GOD?　

Muffled (#539):

This is the case with Christians. We are God in the flesh also but to varying degrees because of our imperfection. So the answer is no becasue we are not capable of being as good as God.
　
yrgo:
　
Asked if a human being anointed BY GOD "with the Holy Spirit and power" would actually BE GOD, you answered "no" and called attention to the fact that human beings "are not capable of being as good as God."

Asked the same question, yrgo, too, would answer in the negative, perhaps adding some comment to the effect that "this all-surpassing power is FROM GOD and not from us." (2Co 4.7, modified NIV; cf. 2Co 3.5)

Both responses would be correct, Muffled, but you will not be at all surprised to learn that a certain expression you used is setting off some alarm bells.
I am, of course, referring to the phrase "We are God in the flesh."
As you probably know, a "predicate nominative" is a NOUN (or pronoun) that comes after a verb and renames the subject of the verb.
"We are God in the flesh," you wrote.
The word "We" is the subject, and the word "God" is the predicate nominative renaming US!!!

((( )))

In connection with your statement, the scripture that comes to mind is 2 Corinthians 5.19.

In the NASB, that verse says "that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself . . . "

In the apostle Paul's place, would you have chosen to write instead "that Christ WAS GOD reconciling the world to Himself"?

You could, I suppose, justify (just barely) such a shuddersome wording—perhaps by citing JOHN 14.8-10 [= Ro 8.11; 1Jn 3.24 (Eph 2.22)] OR COLOSSIANS 2.9 (= Jn 3.34)—but such language would surely put you at serious risk of being GROSSLY MISUNDERSTOOD.

yrgo (#538):
　
If God were to anoint a human being "with the Holy Spirit and power,"

WOULD GOD HIMSELF ACTUALLY BE A HUMAN BEING?

Muffled (#539):

Yes and no. Yes, God is a human being in the sense that He has a human body but no, because if you are talking about the eseential nature of God rather than temporal nature, He is spirit.

yrgo:

" . . . God is a human being . . . "?
" . . . God . . . has a human body . . . "?

"Verily, verily, I say unto thee" (a), such language is ALTOGETHER TOO IMPRECISE, Muffled.

"The God and Father of the Lord Jesus" (b) IS NOT "a human being" and DOES NOT have "a human body."

(a) Jn 3 (KJV)
(b) 2Co 11.31　

All the best to you!

yrgo's version is incorrect. Jesus did say He is good: Joh 10:11 I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd layeth down his life for the sheep.

What is your point? If Jesus is God then He is the Holy Spirit in the flesh.

No I would not because there are always those who confuse the body with God when it is the Spirit of God that is God.

Neither of those verses supports your postellation in any way.

Spiritual things are spiritually discerned. Words work on the mind. Lets discuss this from our perspective. We can recognize that we have human bodies. However we also recognize that the human bodies only stay alive for 120 years or so. THe human body is not a permanent state for us but it does have a reality for the time it exists. The same is true of God. For the time that His body is alive He has one but when that body no longer lives He returns to His original state. The difference with God is that His omnopresence allows Him to be in both states at once but a dichotomy can be made between God in the body and God outside the body. Outside the body is The Father. Inside the body is Jesus.

To return to the difference between someone anointed by God and God Himself, David was anointed by God to be king but he sinned. The Holy Spirit can come upon someone like Saul but he sinned. The Holy Spirit comes upon Christians but they still sin. Jesus did not sin and only God can keep from sin.

Does the anointing of God provide sinlessness? Yes. However human beings do not allow themselves to be totally controlled by the Spirit of God so the perfection is only temporary. Eventually a human being sins. That is why the Bible says:
Joh 3:34 For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for he giveth not the Spirit by measure.

 

[Muffled]

I've been avoiding this heading because, for all of my contentiousness, I ain't out to hurt nobody. Feel free to ignore me (that happens a lot, no matter) but I have a simple thought that might save Christians a lot of grief down the road. Quantum theory. Once god is "seen anywhere," god cannot "exist everywhere." Despite the endless argument, my research indicates the one known as "Jesus Christ" never existed...

No, hold on; don't get crazy until you consider all the facts. There's Josephus, an obvious fraud - and a Flavian to boot - so his agenda is obvious; and three others - but they only mention "Christus," which, as you know, is a title; not necessarily a name. Forming "a new modality" in Christianity that Jesus was only symbolic allows for "Jesus to be God in the quantum sense" - not a bad deal, all things considered - and also removes the "the threat of false prophets taking up the mantle of a man who never existed" - and this new modality may be just the thing to evolve Christianity past the coming troubles...

But, you guys figure it out. I'm all Antichristainity now - I don't accept the concept of hell in any form - but I have never been anti-Christian.

I only ignore people who think that a diatribe is a discussion, lol.

I am going to use an inexact similitude for you. The ocean is filled with drops of water. If I see a drop of ocean water at Hampton Beach in NH (most likely place for me) I don't say the ocean is only at Hampton Beach. Actually I have been to Lynn Beach (MA) and the ocean is there too. God is everywhere and so it is not so strange
to see God in any place and multiple people can see Him in multiple places at the same time.

If I punch you in the mouth do you really have a choice to be punched or not punched. NO! You have no choice to accept or not accept. You simply find yourself with a bloody lip. However there are discussions about this and one persistent in General Debates.

 

[lockyfan]

I've been avoiding this heading because, for all of my contentiousness, I ain't out to hurt nobody. Feel free to ignore me (that happens a lot, no matter) but I have a simple thought that might save Christians a lot of grief down the road. Quantum theory. Once god is "seen anywhere," god cannot "exist everywhere." Despite the endless argument, my research indicates the one known as "Jesus Christ" never existed...

No, hold on; don't get crazy until you consider all the facts. There's Josephus, an obvious fraud - and a Flavian to boot - so his agenda is obvious; and three others - but they only mention "Christus," which, as you know, is a title; not necessarily a name. Forming "a new modality" in Christianity that Jesus was only symbolic allows for "Jesus to be God in the quantum sense" - not a bad deal, all things considered - and also removes the "the threat of false prophets taking up the mantle of a man who never existed" - and this new modality may be just the thing to evolve Christianity past the coming troubles...

But, you guys figure it out. I'm all Antichristainity now - I don't accept the concept of hell in any form - but I have never been anti-Christian.

what the?

I dont accept the concept of hell and I believe that
A Jesus came to the earth and died for us
B THat he did and does stil lexist

 

[Muffled]

what the?

I dont accept the concept of hell and I believe that
A Jesus came to the earth and died for us
B THat he did and does stil lexist

It is not a question of what you accept. Are you in a body? It doesn't matter whether you accept that or dont it is your reality for now. The same is true for Hell. If you are not there now it is not a reality for you now. Concepts on the other hand have their own reality whether you accept them or not. However it is quite possible for concepts to be false. For instance the concept that a person would be physically tormented in Hell is false. As in cremation the body turns to ashes in the fires of Hell or if in a hot enough place it turns to magma.

 

[Harshtotem]

it i imporant for the owner of this thread o clarify his statement towards christ- as for YHWH- did not christ speak of My father in heaven- he would not have said this if there was not another one-

whse name has not been uttered nder the heavens and earths of this deficiency-

 

[lockyfan]

It is not a question of what you accept. Are you in a body? It doesn't matter whether you accept that or dont it is your reality for now. The same is true for Hell. If you are not there now it is not a reality for you now. Concepts on the other hand have their own reality whether you accept them or not. However it is quite possible for concepts to be false. For instance the concept that a person would be physically tormented in Hell is false. As in cremation the body turns to ashes in the fires of Hell or if in a hot enough place it turns to magma.

There is no such place as hell. The bible does not speak of it as a place of eternal torment and the few scriptres that people say are that actualy mean something else if read correctly

There is no such this as hell. It is a sick concept created through hte traditions of men

 

[sojourner]

I've been avoiding this heading because, for all of my contentiousness, I ain't out to hurt nobody. Feel free to ignore me (that happens a lot, no matter) but I have a simple thought that might save Christians a lot of grief down the road. Quantum theory. Once god is "seen anywhere," god cannot "exist everywhere." Despite the endless argument, my research indicates the one known as "Jesus Christ" never existed...

No, hold on; don't get crazy until you consider all the facts. There's Josephus, an obvious fraud - and a Flavian to boot - so his agenda is obvious; and three others - but they only mention "Christus," which, as you know, is a title; not necessarily a name. Forming "a new modality" in Christianity that Jesus was only symbolic allows for "Jesus to be God in the quantum sense" - not a bad deal, all things considered - and also removes the "the threat of false prophets taking up the mantle of a man who never existed" - and this new modality may be just the thing to evolve Christianity past the coming troubles...

But, you guys figure it out. I'm all Antichristainity now - I don't accept the concept of hell in any form - but I have never been anti-Christian.

Except that the best scholars' research indicates that Jesus did exist (albeit not in quite the mythic way portrayed in the NT). Crossan believes there is sufficient evidence for Jesus' existence, that we was, indeed crucified, but that his body was either buried in a common grave, or thrown to the dogs.

 

[Muffled]

it i imporant for the owner of this thread o clarify his statement towards christ- as for YHWH- did not christ speak of My father in heaven- he would not have said this if there was not another one-

whse name has not been uttered nder the heavens and earths of this deficiency-

There are many fathers. I have a father (not living as my father).

Mark 12:29 Jesus answered, The first is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God, the Lord is one:
30 and thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength.
31 The second is this, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.
32 And the scribe said unto him, Of a truth, Teacher, thou hast well said that he is one; and there is none other but he:

 

[lockyfan]

So Jesus said that we must love the "Lord our God" (in your translation)( and "Jehovah our God"in mine) so Jesus said this?

But he didnt say love ME with all your strength soul mind. he said God. ah ha!

So this already tells us that he is NOT god by saying that alone.

He then was asked ÿou said He is one and there is no other" so this guy was asking Jesus About something Jesus sad about God.

Therefore Jesus cannoit be God because he was answering a question about a different being.

 

[Muffled]

So Jesus said that we must love the "Lord our God" (in your translation)( and "Jehovah our God"in mine) so Jesus said this?

But he didnt say love ME with all your strength soul mind. he said God. ah ha!

So this already tells us that he is NOT god by saying that alone.

He then was asked ÿou said He is one and there is no other" so this guy was asking Jesus About something Jesus sad about God.

Therefore Jesus cannoit be God because he was answering a question about a different being.

Nice try. He would not have to say love God and love me because it would be redundant.

Joh 8:19 They said therefore unto him, Where is thy Father? Jesus answered, Ye know neither me, nor my Father: if ye knew me, ye would know my Father also.

Joh 14:7 If ye had known me, ye would have known my Father also: from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.

Joh 15:23 He that hateth me hateth my Father also.

 

[lockyfan]

you keep underlining MY father. Thus you have proved my point yourself.

That jesus is the SON OF GOD not God Himself.

So if your idea or belief were true it would read "Ye know neither me, nor myself: if ye knew me, ye would know myself also" instead of "Ye know neither me, nor my Father: if ye knew me, ye would know my Father also"

 

[Muffled]

you keep underlining MY father. Thus you have proved my point yourself.

That jesus is the SON OF GOD not God Himself.

So if your idea or belief were true it would read "Ye know neither me, nor myself: if ye knew me, ye would know myself also" instead of "Ye know neither me, nor my Father: if ye knew me, ye would know my Father also"

You can't be serious. Would you ever say that about youself?

This satement is true of course, and implies a father. However this is not the normal father/son relationship where there are two physical persons. I can't say when you see me you have seen my father because there is a decided age difference and we are different persons. We are not only different physical persons but also different spiritual persons. With Jesus, there is not a physical person to compare to wich leaves the spiritual person. In other words Jesus is saying if you see His spirit you have seen the Father's spirit, ie there is only one spirit as stated in Eph 4:4. Since knowing Jesus means knowing the Father there is only one spiritual person.

The difference between the Father and the Son is that of the discernment of the hearer. A person viewing Jesus would say, "He is just another human being like me." He would not discern God just by looking at the physical body because God is not a physical body. Howeve Jesus had already referred to the Father as Heavenly Father so the hearer knew something about him, ie that the Father is God. Now to bring the hearer into an understanding of who Jesus is, He tells them that He and the Father are one. By doing so He is saying that He is God.

 

[Composer]

. . . . . . . . Now to bring the hearer into an understanding of who Jesus is, He tells them that He and the Father are one. By doing so He is saying that He is God.

1. Jesus said, "I and my Father are one' but the Jews misunderstood him, thinking he was claiming to be equal with God. (vs. 33). Trinitarians make the same mistake. The oneness referred to, is not a declaration by Christ that he is "Very God", but rather unity of purpose. Consider the evidence:
   1. Jesus subsequently prayed for his disciples, "that they may be one, as we are." (John 17:11, 21). These words require that the unity referred to, be also extended to the disciples. Obviously the unity is not that of the powers of the Godhead but unity resulting from sanctification through the word of God. (John 17:14, 17, 18).
   2. See also John 17:22, 23: ". . . that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one . . ." Likewise, these words require a relationship between the disciples and Christ which exists between the Son and his Father - a unity, or perfection with the divine purpose.
2. Elsewhere in John's gospel, Jesus clearly affirms that he is not co-equal with the Father: "The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do." (John 5:19); "I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me." (John 5:30); "My Father is greater than I." (John 14:28). (Source: John 10:30, wrestedscriptures.com)

 

[Dirty Penguin]

1. Jesus said, "I and my Father are one' but the Jews misunderstood him, thinking he was claiming to be equal with God. (vs. 33). Trinitarians make the same mistake. The oneness referred to, is not a declaration by Christ that he is "Very God", but rather unity of purpose. Consider the evidence:
   1. Jesus subsequently prayed for his disciples, "that they may be one, as we are." (John 17:11, 21). These words require that the unity referred to, be also extended to the disciples. Obviously the unity is not that of the powers of the Godhead but unity resulting from sanctification through the word of God. (John 17:14, 17, 18).
   2. See also John 17:22, 23: ". . . that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one . . ." Likewise, these words require a relationship between the disciples and Christ which exists between the Son and his Father - a unity, or perfection with the divine purpose.
2. Elsewhere in John's gospel, Jesus clearly affirms that he is not co-equal with the Father: "The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do." (John 5:19); "I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me." (John 5:30); "My Father is greater than I." (John 14:28). (Source: John 10:30, wrestedscriptures.com)

I've tried presenting this many, many times in two different threads and it results in the same circular logic and reasoning by all parties. I say (ALL) because I'm including myself. I argue just as you do above and trinitarians argue as they do.....Eventually you'll see the thread just go on and on forever.....Occasionally going off topic... but when it comes back on topic....it's like the same argument just start over.....

Case in point (http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/religious-debates/61330-did-jesus-say-he-god.html)

 

[Composer]

I've tried presenting this many, many times in two different threads and it results in the same circular logic and reasoning by all parties. I say (ALL) because I'm including myself. I argue just as you do above and trinitarians argue as they do.....Eventually you'll see the thread just go on and on forever.....Occasionally going off topic... but when it comes back on topic....it's like the same argument just start over.....

I appreciate that, I've had 50 years personal experience on and off the Internet, however there are those ' lurkers / bystanders ' that say little openly but often have contacted me saying they agree with me but are not prepared to speak openly on the Internet for they won't tolerate the verbal abuses trinitarians especially make against them.

I taught classes for ten years comprising of those who realised they had been cheated by their various religions. I might start again in my new location one day.

Cheers!

 

[Composer]

I've tried presenting this many, many times in two different threads and it results in the same circular logic and reasoning by all parties. I say (ALL) because I'm including myself. I argue just as you do above and trinitarians argue as they do.....Eventually you'll see the thread just go on and on forever.....Occasionally going off topic... but when it comes back on topic....it's like the same argument just start over.....

Case in point (http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/religious-debates/61330-did-jesus-say-he-god.html)

In my 50 years of bible study and teaching how it is NOT to be trusted, both on and off the Internet there are many ' lurkers / bystanders / listeners ' who contacted me privately to say they agree with me but don't want to openly say so because they don't like being bullied and abused especially by trinitarians.

I taught classes for 10 years and the students were those dissilusioned by their past religions that had deceived them. I might start classes again in my new location. So my efforts have been worthwhile and many a trinitarian especially and in particular, has seen the error of their past teachers.

Cheers!

BTW: Your Link I get ' Page Not found '?

 

[Dirty Penguin]

In my 50 years of bible study and teaching how it is NOT to be trusted, both on and off the Internet there are many ' lurkers / bystanders / listeners ' who contacted me privately to say they agree with me but don't want to openly say so because they don't like being bullied and abused especially by trinitarians.

I taught classes for 10 years and the students were those dissilusioned by their past religions that had deceived them. I might start classes again in my new location. So my efforts have been worthwhile and many a trinitarian especially and in particular, has seen the error of their past teachers.

Cheers!

BTW: Your Link I get ' Page Not found '?

Sorry bout that. I had it in brackets and that's what fouled it up.

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/religious-debates/61330-did-jesus-say-he-god.html

It's just the thread before this one Muffled started...by throwing out random biblical quotes that supposed to prove a point but sadly...it didn't. One famous quote is John 8:58. It's in inflated quote by trinitarians and the like who have taken it way out of its intended context. That's even "if" the book, considering how late it is and its esoteric claims, are to be taken seriously.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

The difference between the Father and the Son is that of the discernment of the hearer. A person viewing Jesus would say, "He is just another human being like me." He would not discern God just by looking at the physical body because God is not a physical body. Howeve Jesus had already referred to the Father as Heavenly Father so the hearer knew something about him, ie that the Father is God. Now to bring the hearer into an understanding of who Jesus is, He tells them that He and the Father are one. By doing so He is saying that He is God.

Are Jesus followers God?_____ At prayer [John 17:11,21-23] Jesus asks God that his followers be 'one' just as they are one. Jesus was not praying they all be God but be one in purpose, goal, unity, belief, etc.

John 14:28 Jesus already taught that his Father is greater than I [Jesus].

Decades after Jesus was resurrected by God to heaven at Revelation 2:18 Jesus still refers to himself, not as God, but as the Son of God.
At Revelation 3:12 Doesn't Jesus still believes he still has a God over him, and Jesus refers to himself at Rev 3:14 B as the beginning of the creation by God.

Colossians 1:15 says Jesus is 'firstborn' in the heavens.
God had no beginning or birth, but is from everlasting.
God was before the beginning. Jesus was not before the beginning.

Paul also mentions the glorified heavenly Jesus, at 1st Corinthians 11:3 B, as the head of Christ being God.

 

[AK4]

I know that there are a good many christians out their who believe that those who follow the jewish religion need to be saved because they do not worship Jesus. So, quick question:

Jesus is God(YHWH). It seems to me that we are worshipping the same deity. Am I correct? Why or why not?

Yes but no. Heres an example. Say God [the Father] made you first before making anything else and through you He created everything else. Now you are like God to everything you created. Now if the things you created (tried to) worshipped the God that created you and didnt give you any credit or glory or thanks for what you did or even acknowledge that even your God created you to create them or that you even exist, now you, as their creator, are you being worshipped?

So in doing this your creation denies you and in denying you they also deny your God and all that He accomplished in you. If they "worship" your God and say you dont exist or that it is impossible for God to create something like you, are they not denying not only you but also your God and the power of your God?