Jesus is not God Almighty Himself

[Muffled]

Jesus is whatever we say he is, historical, mythical, God, not God, he is all these things or none of these, because none of what is said about Jesus should be taken seriously.

I believe Jesus is what God says He is. What people say is irrelevant.

 

[Muffled]

Jesus prays that we be one as he and the Father are one. So what do you think it means when he calls for us to be one? In what manner are we believers one?

We are one when the Holy Spirit is Lord of our lives. If we choose to run our own lives we are not one. The Holy Spirit is already one with the Father and the Son.

 

[Muffled]

Religion is a subjective exercise which is why we can only offer opinions as to what Christianity is, and it explains why opinions vary so much. It's like art, literary works of art, we can only offer opinions about what we are reading, anyways, that's my opinion, and I'm Walter Cronkite, telling it like it is.

I believe that is not how it should be. Each of us is capable of having the Holy Spirit reveal the truth to us and His truth does not vary.

 

[iam1me]

No, your argument is totally obscure. Neither Jews or traditional Christians, interpret the name used for God, in the Hebrew text, , for example, Genesis 1:26 to mean anything other than the Creator, whether pluralistic, or not. Which is the English Bible, name, God, in that context. God being used for more than one name, cross language wise.

Your argument is nonsense.

All traiditional Jews and Christians recognize that angels and men are called God and gods - and they know that the term "God" in these contexts is not to be interpreted literally. I don't know why you have such a hard time understanding this.

 

[Desert Snake]

False god
The god thor
As a god
Moses wasnt called god, no examples of men being called god, angels are called angels, not God, unless misinterpreted.
God gothic /english usage name and word that correlates to Biblical usage of the deific name.
The name and word, God, is contextual, as a word unto itself.
The word god isnt elohim, specifically, isnt el shaddai, specifically, isnt jesus, specifically, and does not refer to people, as a name.
The psalms verse is clearly referring to God, talking to angels, not men, because God, judgeth, the angels. That is why, God says, they will be cast down.

\\gods , other gods, gods of the nations, or simply 'angels', though my use of the word angels here is meaning "divine being", broadly.

 

[iam1me]

I don't think further discourse with you on this matter, at this point in time, is going to be very productive. You refuse to accept simple, irrefutable facts about what the scriptures say - we can't even get to interpretation. Like continuing to assert that Moses wasn't addressed as God despite Exodus 7:1 being given to you

 

[lukethethird]

I believe Jesus is what God says He is. What people say is irrelevant.

What people say [about Jesus] is irrelevant, we agree.

 

[user4578]

Moses wasn't addressed as God despite Exodus 7:1

The verse contains the phrase 'to Pharaoh', meaning that's what Moses appeared to be 'to Pharaoh', given the hierarchy of the dialogue between Moses and Pharaoh. Aaron his brother wasn't really Moses' prophet, but in the analogy he is said to be his prophet, because he is the one that relayed all of the words of Moses to Pharaoh(Exodus 4:16,7:2). Maybe you think Moses worshipped himself, but God told him otherwise(Exodus 3:12), and also he was called a servant of God(1 Kings 8:56, Nehemiah 10:28-29).

 

[iam1me]

The verse contains the phrase 'to Pharaoh', meaning that's what Moses appeared to be 'to Pharaoh', given the hierarchy of the dialogue between Moses and Pharaoh. Aaron his brother wasn't really Moses' prophet, but in the analogy he is said to be his prophet, because he is the one that relayed all of the words of Moses to Pharaoh(Exodus 4:16,7:2). Maybe you think Moses worshipped himself, but God told him otherwise(Exodus 3:12), and also he was called a servant of God(1 Kings 8:56, Nehemiah 10:28-29).

Hi user4578. No one is asserting that Moses is literally God himself. The point is that Moses is addressed as God - despite not literally being God. Rather, Moses was asserted to be God to Pharaoh (by God himself) because God was sending him as his representative, his mediator, his agent. The same reason that angels are called God (like the angel in the burning bush in Exodus 3) and the reason that the Jewish People are called gods (for it is through them that God has chosen to bring about his will, culminating in Christ).

So you see - the term "God" is much more liberally applied in scripture than how theologians, and Trinitarians specifically, have traditionally interpreted the term. The challenge to Trinitarians, then, is to not show that Jesus is addressed as God - but to show that when the term is used with Jesus it isn't being used in the same sense as the above when applied to other men and angels.

 

[user4578]

, Moses was asserted to be God to Pharaoh (by God himself) because God was sending him

This does not address the reasoning outlined above, but asserts an ideology not explicit in Exodus 7:1-2, the verses I was addressing.

 

[iam1me]

This does not address the reasoning outlined above, but asserts an ideology not explicit in Exodus 7:1-2, the verses I was addressing.

What I said is essentially the same thing you said - I didn't see any reason to specifically address your view of it as an analogy.

What is going on here is no different than a King sending a representative to others: that representative carries the power and authority of the one who sent him, and for all intents and purposes is to be regarded as the King himself - in so far as he is carrying out the King's will. And this is made clear when we look at the various instances where angels and men are called God or gods - this is a consistent theme running throughout.

 

[Oeste]

The verse contains the phrase 'to Pharaoh', meaning that's what Moses appeared to be 'to Pharaoh', given the hierarchy of the dialogue between Moses and Pharaoh. Aaron his brother wasn't really Moses' prophet, but in the analogy he is said to be his prophet, because he is the one that relayed all of the words of Moses to Pharaoh(Exodus 4:16,7:2). Maybe you think Moses worshipped himself, but God told him otherwise(Exodus 3:12), and also he was called a servant of God(1 Kings 8:56, Nehemiah 10:28-29).

Correct!

Moses was not made God or "a God". He was made "as" or "like" God to Pharaoh. Being "a God" and being "like a God" are vastly different things.

God stated Moses would be "as God" to Pharaoh. So Moses is likened to a God to Pharaoh, and Aaron as a mouth to Moses, or in current parlance, a simile.

A simile does not make Moses an actual God anymore that it makes Aaron an actual mouth. There is only one God, and any other God or Gods are bogus.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

You do realize that Jesus never said that, don't you? The Jews were accusing him of blasphemy, of saying that he was God (an indictable offense) because they wanted an excuse to have him killed.

In his defense, Jesus said....."If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing; it is My Father who glorifies Me, of whom you say, ‘He is our God’; 55 and you have not come to know Him, but I know Him; and if I say that I do not know Him, I will be a liar like you, but I do know Him and keep His word. 56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad.” 57 So the Jews said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham? Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.” 59 Therefore they picked up stones to throw at Him, but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple. ” (John 8:54-59 NASB)

Now if I take that quote from the Jewish Tanach where God told Moses his name in Exodus 3:13-15, it says....
"And Moses said to God, "Behold I come to the children of Israel, and I say to them, 'The God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they say to me, 'What is His name?' what shall I say to them?" יגוַיֹּ֨אמֶר משֶׁ֜ה אֶל־הָֽאֱלֹהִ֗ים הִנֵּ֨ה אָֽנֹכִ֣י בָא֘ אֶל־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵל֒ וְאָֽמַרְתִּ֣י לָהֶ֔ם אֱלֹהֵ֥י אֲבֽוֹתֵיכֶ֖ם שְׁלָחַ֣נִי אֲלֵיכֶ֑ם וְאָֽמְרוּ־לִ֣י מַה־שְּׁמ֔וֹ מָ֥ה אֹמַ֖ר אֲלֵהֶֽם:


14 God said to Moses, "Ehyeh asher ehyeh (I will be what I will be)," and He said, "So shall you say to the children of Israel, 'Ehyeh (I will be) has sent me to you.'" ידוַיֹּ֤אמֶר אֱלֹהִים֙ אֶל־משֶׁ֔ה אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה אֲשֶׁ֣ר אֶֽהְיֶ֑ה וַיֹּ֗אמֶר כֹּ֤ה תֹאמַר֙ לִבְנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה שְׁלָחַ֥נִי אֲלֵיכֶֽם:


15 And God said further to Moses, "So shall you say to the children of Israel, 'The Lord God [יְהֹוָ֞ה] of your forefathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.' This is My name forever, and this is how I should be mentioned in every generation. טווַיֹּ֩אמֶר֩ ע֨וֹד אֱלֹהִ֜ים אֶל־משֶׁ֗ה כֹּ֣ה תֹאמַר֘ אֶל־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵל֒ יְהֹוָ֞ה אֱלֹהֵ֣י אֲבֹֽתֵיכֶ֗ם אֱלֹהֵ֨י אַבְרָהָ֜ם אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִצְחָ֛ק וֵֽאלֹהֵ֥י יַֽעֲקֹ֖ב שְׁלָחַ֣נִי אֲלֵיכֶ֑ם זֶה־שְּׁמִ֣י לְעֹלָ֔ם וְזֶ֥ה זִכְרִ֖י לְדֹ֥ר דֹּֽר:"

Shemot - Exodus - Chapter 3 (Parshah Shemot)

God's name never was "I AM"....it is "I Will Be" (future tense). It is not a declaration of God's existence, but an declaration of his intentions towards his people...to "be" or to "become" whatever was necessary to fulfill his purpose.
Jesus was answering a question about his age, not his status. He was saying that before Abraham was born "I existed". So John 8:58 never was Jesus claiming to be God. There is no connection between his answer and Exodus 3:14-15 at all.

This is just bad translation by biased scholars.

Just thinking the problem I see with trinitarian is not understanding jesus is speaking for God in his comments from him.

But, I do think the point is easy to read in scriptures in English. It's very direct especially when understood English in its contextual use of grammar and message like idioms and how one person can speak for another without directly shifting that dialogue to the person speaking.

 

[Deeje]

Just thinking the problem I see with trinitarian is not understanding jesus is speaking for God in his comments from him.

But, I do think the point is easy to read in scriptures in English. It's very direct especially when understood English in its contextual use of grammar and message like idioms and how one person can speak for another without directly shifting that dialogue to the person speaking.

The pre-human Jesus was called the LOGOS which means "the Word".....he was God's 'spokesman'....he spoke God's words to others.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The pre-human Jesus was called the LOGOS which means "the Word".....he was God's 'spokesman'....he spoke God's words to others.

I can see that. I got it just from reading the bible. I dont know the greek terminology, and not really sure how quoting it makes the message different than in english unless the english version is wrong. shrugs.

(aka its a compliment)

 

[Deeje]

I can see that. I got it just from reading the bible. I dont know the greek terminology, and not really sure how quoting it makes the message different than in english unless the english version is wrong. shrugs.

(aka its a compliment)

Thank you, I appreciate that.

Quoting the reasons why I believe something is not always for the poster I am addressing, but for the benefit of others who might need to see something more concrete than a suggestion with nothing to back it up.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Thank you, I appreciate that.

Quoting the reasons why I believe something is not always for the poster I am addressing, but for the benefit of others who might need to see something more concrete than a suggestion with nothing to back it up.

Haha. Annoys the bajebees out of me. But, yeah. It's interesting. If I'm talking to a Christian they don't preface every sentence by scripture. "I love the Lord. God is good (verse 3.34) do you have the Lord. He saves us all (John 3:16) and did you know....

Now That would make an interesting convo.

But my comment was really to say not many understand jesus is speaking for his father. He always say something about his father before quoting him. I don't think it's a translation issue but just not reading the context just as is mentality.

 

[tayla]

Jesus is not God Almighty Himself

Yes, this is true.

There are only two possible correct and true understandings of the person of Jesus:

1. He was an apocalyptic prophet (like John the Baptist) who was accidentally crucified by the Romans, then later turned into the Jesus of Christianity.
2. He didn't exist at all.

 

[Katzpur]

Yes, this is true.

There are only two possible understandings of the person of Jesus:

1. He was an apocalyptic prophet (like John the Baptist) who was accidentally crucified by the Romans, then later turned into the Jesus of Christianity.
2. He didn't exist at all.

Why in the world would you say there are only two possible understandings of the person of Jesus, when the viewpoints expressed on this single internet forum clearly prove that there are many others?

 

[tayla]

Why in the world would you say there are only two possible understandings of the person of Jesus, when the viewpoints expressed on this single internet forum clearly prove that there are many others?

By "possible", I mean, "correct" or "true". There are always zillions of viewpoints possible for any topic.

I will change my post to say "possible correct". Thanks for pointing out the ambiguity.