So Jesus is not God?

[TrueBeliever37]

But we are debating in each response... what’s your problem. Just because the truth defeats you doesn’t mean I’m not worth debating with. The point is to teach you the truth - not fur you to evade it by crying off saying I’m can’t debate!

You are a poor debater. Unwilling and/or unable to provide scriptural proof for the things you say when asked for it. Being unable to do so, you have to resort to making trash comments. So I am done with you until you give answers instead of trash talk.

 

[Soapy]

You are a poor debater. Unwilling and/or unable to provide scriptural proof for the things you say when asked for it. Being unable to do so, you have to resort to making trash comments. So I am done with you until you give answers instead of trash talk.

No worries... I was getting bored with your wishywashy nonsense anyway.

I’m here to express the truth... if the reader decides to refute or ignore it then that is their affair with God.

God will judge him.

But once again: Jesus is not almighty God.

Almighty God is YHWH... the one who ‘is, was, and always will be.’ (Aka: Eternally alive)

Jesus says of himself: ‘I am he who was dead, but is now alive forevermore’.

Pssst... you cannot claim to be ETERNALLY ALIVE if you were DEAD at one time!!!

Jesus is the Lamb that stands in front of the throne.

YHWH is the one who SITS on the throne.

Psst... You can’t be STANDING in front of the throne if you are also SITTING on it at the same time...!!!

Yhwh is NEVER EVER said to be ‘Coming’ anywhere. It is Jesus Christ who is to Come (Return)!!!

YHWH GAVE Jesus the revelation to give to John via an angel.

YHWH TAUGHT Jesus what he was to say and do regarding the revelation....

If Jesus receives knowledge then how can he be almighty God?

Psst... God, or ‘A God’, even, is NOT TAUGHT... [a] God IS...!!!

What kind of ‘God’ is Jesus is he is taught by one who knows all things...

Jesus is GIVEN Power to rule for 1000 years ... Then he HANDS the rulership BACK to YHWH who gave it to him.

What was Jesus BEFORE he received rulership Power... What was Jesus AFTER he gave back the rulership power?

Jesus’ reward for his great sacrifice and redemption of mankind is to receive the ETERNAL RULERSHIP over the CREATED WORLD: ‘The spiritual Throne of his ancestor, King David’.

How is it a REWARD for an Almighty God (whom you say is Jesus Christ) to become RULER over a kingdom that he created within the GREATER kingdom he already ruled over? That is completely illogical and wrong!

I cannot understand your mode of thinking!!!

 

[TrueBeliever37]

No worries... I was getting bored with your wishywashy nonsense anyway.

I’m here to express the truth... if the reader decides to refute or ignore it then that is their affair with God.

God will judge him.

But once again: Jesus is not almighty God.

Almighty God is YHWH... the one who ‘is, was, and always will be.’ (Aka: Eternally alive)

Jesus says of himself: ‘I am he who was dead, but is now alive forevermore’.

Pssst... you cannot claim to be ETERNALLY ALIVE if you were DEAD at one time!!!

Jesus is the Lamb that stands in front of the throne.

YHWH is the one who SITS on the throne.

Psst... You can’t be STANDING in front of the throne if you are also SITTING on it at the same time...!!!

Yhwh is NEVER EVER said to be ‘Coming’ anywhere. It is Jesus Christ who is to Come (Return)!!!

YHWH GAVE Jesus the revelation to give to John via an angel.

YHWH TAUGHT Jesus what he was to say and do regarding the revelation....

If Jesus receives knowledge then how can he be almighty God?

Psst... God, or ‘A God’, even, is NOT TAUGHT... [a] God IS...!!!

What kind of ‘God’ is Jesus is he is taught by one who knows all things...

Jesus is GIVEN Power to rule for 1000 years ... Then he HANDS the rulership BACK to YHWH who gave it to him.

What was Jesus BEFORE he received rulership Power... What was Jesus AFTER he gave back the rulership power?

Jesus’ reward for his great sacrifice and redemption of mankind is to receive the ETERNAL RULERSHIP over the CREATED WORLD: ‘The spiritual Throne of his ancestor, King David’.

How is it a REWARD for an Almighty God (whom you say is Jesus Christ) to become RULER over a kingdom that he created within the GREATER kingdom he already ruled over? That is completely illogical and wrong!

I cannot understand your mode of thinking!!!

Psst... All talk no proof.

 

[Soapy]

Psst... All talk no proof.

I’m still not getting you. What ‘proof’ are you asking for that is not open and clear from the scriptures??

It seems that you are asking me and all others to prove the scriptures to you without you putting in any effort to seek for yourself.

You asked me about Revelation (aspects of) but you don’t seem capable of seeking your own knowledge in the scriptures regarding any of it. You disbelieve everything anyone says to you and forever saying: ‘PROVE IT,... PROVE IT.... shoe me the scripture verse and chapter...’

Who is sad? That COULD BE short for ‘Stupid And Daft’... but I’m saying nothing: just SAD?!

 

[TrueBeliever37]

I’m still not getting you. What ‘proof’ are you asking for that is not open and clear from the scriptures??

It seems that you are asking me and all others to prove the scriptures to you without you putting in any effort to seek for yourself.

You asked me about Revelation (aspects of) but you don’t seem capable of seeking your own knowledge in the scriptures regarding any of it. You disbelieve everything anyone says to you and forever saying: ‘PROVE IT,... PROVE IT.... shoe me the scripture verse and chapter...’

Who is sad? That COULD BE short for ‘Stupid And Daft’... but I’m saying nothing: just SAD?!

The first thing I have asked for repeatedly is for you to reference the verses you use.
The second thing I asked for at least twice, was for some kind of source proving your claim that "before" means "greater than" in Hebrew. You made that claim and I asked you to give proof for it. What is so hard to understand about that?

So in answer to your question. If you are incapable of understanding this, I think it would be you who is sad?

 

[Muffled]

I notice there is no response to the poster regarding:

• “Our Heavenly Father is one God. No other Gods beside him. Isaiah also says that.”

I always find that trinity supporters cherrypick their responses to questions regarding their belief. I understand, absolutely, why they should do this... questions that require trinity believers to admit their ideology is false are rarely answered with sincerity, integrity, and righteousness!

But in any case, I think the stating that:

• ‘ONLY God’

is wrongfully translated. There is no reason to claim a deity as being ‘ONE’... the same Hebrew word for ‘ONE’, is also the same word for ‘ONLY’. Thus:

• ‘ONLY God‘

This is because the deity the Israelites called their God (not the reference to ‘deity’!!) states that they were to believe that he was their ‘ONLY GOD’... not that he was ‘ONE’.

The Israelites were among tribes and nations who believed in many deities as their Gods. It was necessary to remind them that Israelites should believe that there was ONLY one deity they should believe in as their God. That this God was their ‘ONLY GOD’.

Saying ‘One God’ makes no linguistically sense. What is the linguistically alternative to ‘One God’??? ‘MANY GODS’... ‘Believe in me only... I am MANY GODS’....!!

Come on people,. Be sensible and stop talking trinity nonsense!! Yes, it is TRINITY that demands that we say, ‘Our God is ONE GOD’... but ‘MANY (three) PERSONS...’

And as for that over-misquoted verse in Isaiah...

“Everlasting Father’ pertains to the END OF TIME when Jesus raises the dead and gives EVERLASTING LIFE to those who he deems worthy of such.

The Title, ‘Father’ means:

• ‘He who gives life...’
• ‘He who brings into being...’
• ‘He who creates...’
• ‘He who is the head...’

Thus Jesus is ‘Father’ to those who he gives life to at the end of time... and since these will live everlastingly after, then naturally Jesus will be their ‘EVERLASTING FATHER’.

This ‘Fatherhood’ is SPIRITUAL... it does not mean Jesus procreates children... Spiritual procreation is like an Adoption:

• ‘This day I have BECOME to you, a Father. And you have BECOME to me, a Son’

Those of you who have read the scriptures will know these words spoken from Almighty God TO JESUS CHRIST....

If Jesus is ‘Almighty God’, why is GOD adopting him!!!?

And, regarding Isaiah, has any trinitarian ever answered to why Jesus is ONLY A PRINCE OF PEACE... why, if he is almighty God, isn't he ‘KING’ of peace???

And who wouldn’t say that Jesus BECAME a wonderful Counsellor ... see, all that Isaiah prophesied are things Jesus ‘SHALL BE CALLED’.

If Jesus was pre-existent, as trinity falsely claims, then Jesus would not be PROPHESIED to BECOME SO... it wouldn’t even need a prophesy. It would simply say that:

• ‘The son given IS .... .... ..... ......’

Trinitarians, don’t give up your day jobs!!

I believe the only everlasting Father is God and since Jesus is called that then He is God.

 

[Muffled]

To call the Son the Father is not Trinitarianism; it's Modalism.

BTW, this verse is not about the Messiah at all. It's historical and is about King Hezekiah. A much better translation is, "His name shall be called, A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the Everlasting Father is the Prince of Peace."

Christians have an overwhelming tendency to see messianic verses where there are none. Like I've heard some Christians say, "Jesus is on every page." This is obviously nonsense.

I believe Modalism is correct and Trinitarianism is idolatry. And I can tell you straight out that Jesus doesn't like it when you make up three gods. However it is not I that called Jesus the Father but it was God who said that. That being said He is not saying that Jesus is the Father but simply that He will be called that. For that reason it is not a matter of essence but of identity.

I believe the day you start calling Hezekiah the Everlasting Father you will burn in Hell. I figure that is the unforgivable sin of blaspheming against the Holy Spirit.

 

[Muffled]

Very insightful remarks thanks!

I believe that wasn't insight but simply bad theology usually coming out of the Dallas Theological Seminary.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I believe Modalism is correct and Trinitarianism is idolatry. And I can tell you straight out that Jesus doesn't like it when you make up three gods. However it is not I that called Jesus the Father but it was God who said that. That being said He is not saying that Jesus is the Father but simply that He will be called that. For that reason it is not a matter of essence but of identity.

I believe the day you start calling Hezekiah the Everlasting Father you will burn in Hell. I figure that is the unforgivable sin of blaspheming against the Holy Spirit.

The moment you say that Trinitarianism is three gods is the moment you reveal you don't understand Trinitarianism.

I completely reject Trinitarianism, but at least I understand what it is.

You didn't read me carefully, so here is your second opportunity. I didn't say that Hezekiah's name was the Everlasting Father. I said his name was "The Everlasting Father is the Prince of Peace." IOW his name says that God is the Prince of Peace, not Hezekiah.

 

[moorea944]

I believe the only everlasting Father is God and since Jesus is called that then He is God.

So are you basing your statement on belief or are you basing it on truth.... Truth has to come first. I know an apple is red. So if I see a red Volkswagen Beetle car on the side of the road, and I know a apple is red, that red car has to be an apple because the apple is red. That's what your doing........

Why is Jesus called an everylasting father in Isaiah 9? I gave this answer a few posts ago, so i'll just copy and paste again.

Jesus is most definitely a father without having to be Yahweh Himself. We understand the process and timing when Jesus becomes a father on the basis of Isaiah 53:10... when the Messiah makes himself an offering for sin he will see his seed (his descendants). It is on the basis of Christ sacrificing himself that he can have children. Aren't we born again through baptism, joining Jesus in his death and resurrection through the baptismal grave?!!

In this same context the saints will qualify as priests in the Kingdom Age, In the First Kingdom Age the priests had to be the sons of the High Priest (from Aaron down). Therefore the priests (immortal) of the restored Kingdom Age will also have to be the children of the High Priest Jesus told Nicodemus (John 3) that one has to be born again in order to enter the Kingdom. Well Jesus is the Father for this rebirth, on the basis of his sacrifice (as noted in Isaiah 53:10).

The fact that Jesus qualifies for the title of "Everlasting" Father is the fact that those born again through him will inherit everlasting life. The difference between Christ and God in the context of "everlasting" is that God is from everlasting and to everlasting. Jesus is only to everlasting, as he had an origin... but he will be the father of those who inherit everlasting life.

Abraham is also given the title "Father" as he is the Father of the faithful and those baptized into Christ are constituted his children on the basis of faith (Gal 3:27-29). Abraham will qualify as an "Everlasting Father" as well, as he will inherit everlasting life.

There is no reason why a son can't also be a father. I am both a son and a father. My father had a father. The difference is that Yahweh had no beginning. He has no father, unlike Jesus. I certainly have a father, but when (if) I am born again I will necessarily have a new father. That will be Jesus, who also had a father, but his Father didn't have a father.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

So are you basing your statement on belief or are you basing it on truth.... Truth has to come first. I know an apple is red. So if I see a red Volkswagen Beetle car on the side of the road, and I know a apple is red, that red car has to be an apple because the apple is red. That's what your doing........

I'm not commenting on his post, which I also have issues with, but that is another story.

I take issue with your logic.

1. You are trying to make a distinction between belief and truth. Apples and oranges are more alike than belief and truth. Belief is an action, whereas truth is an abstract thing. Hopefully we believe in the truth. Usually we do, because we base what we know as the truth on our experiences and sensory information. However, there are times when we choose to step out in faith, which means there is insufficient evidence to prove. It doesn't mean the object of our faith is untrue. It just means that we can't prove it.

2. The example you gave does not illustrate your point of belief and truth. It is instead an example of bad logic, where a person states two facts but reaches an unwarranted conclusion.

 

[moorea944]

I'm not commenting on his post, which I also have issues with, but that is another story.

I take issue with your logic.

1. You are trying to make a distinction between belief and truth. Apples and oranges are more alike than belief and truth. Belief is an action, whereas truth is an abstract thing. Hopefully we believe in the truth. Usually we do, because we base what we know as the truth on our experiences and sensory information. However, there are times when we choose to step out in faith, which means there is insufficient evidence to prove. It doesn't mean the object of our faith is untrue. It just means that we can't prove it.

2. The example you gave does not illustrate your point of belief and truth. It is instead an example of bad logic, where a person states two facts but reaches an unwarranted conclusion.

That's because you believe Jesus is God.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

That's because you believe Jesus is God.

I'm sorry, but that is a great (and amusing) misunderstanding. If you had checked my religious affiliation, you would have seen that I am a Jew. Not only do I not believe that Jesus is God, I also don't believe he is the messiah, or even a prophet. I reject allll these Christian claims.

 

[Soapy]

The first thing I have asked for repeatedly is for you to reference the verses you use.
The second thing I asked for at least twice, was for some kind of source proving your claim that "before" means "greater than" in Hebrew. You made that claim and I asked you to give proof for it. What is so hard to understand about that?

So in answer to your question. If you are incapable of understanding this, I think it would be you who is sad?

You are not looking for an answer. You are just claiming anything said to you is false. ANYONE can see that I add book, chapter and verse to anything relevant that I quote. I do it so no one can accuse me of misquoting. If I quote off the top of my head then I add ‘(Paraphrased) to the quote. How is it you accuse me of not quoting?

It is evident from your responses that you have no intention to understand anything said to you. It is also evident that you don’t know the scriptures if you need to have chapter and verse shown to you. Anyone reading the scriptures knows the verses I point out to you / therefore you are not a Christian nor have even read the bible.

Boohoo to you - Conmen are always found out!

 

[Soapy]

That's because you believe Jesus is God.

Jesus is not God.
Yahweh is God.
Jesus is the Son of God.
Jesus is Son and Yahweh is Father of the Son.
The Son ...becomes... the Father of HIS OWN family.
Jesus will ‘give eternal life’ to those who believe in him and HIS FATHER, Yahweh. Hence Jesus is classed as ‘Eternal Father’ to his (metaphorical) children.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

If I quote off the top of my head then I add ‘(Paraphrased) to the quote. How is it you accuse me of not quoting?

Unfortunately we cannot quote without citation when engaged in these sorts of debates. It bugs me too, because I know a good part of the Bible by heart, but for the life of me, can't remember where the verse I'm remembering is found. But for the sake of the debate, I do go and google the verse so that I can add the book, chapter and verse. It's just the fair and decent way to argue in a forum.

 

[Soapy]

Unfortunately we cannot quote without citation when engaged in these sorts of debates. It bugs me too, because I know a good part of the Bible by heart, but for the life of me, can't remember where the verse I'm remembering is found. But for the sake of the debate, I do go and google the verse so that I can add the book, chapter and verse. It's just the fair and decent way to argue in a forum.

Then I suggest you read more of the scriptures BECAUSE by the time you research what you don’t know you will have forgotten or lost thd thread of what the debate point was.

In any case, the paraphrase should be close enough to express what you should already know. ... else WHAT ARE YOU DOING DEBATING WHAT YOU DON’T KNOW???

Debating is looking at the FINER points of a belief (in this case). If you do not know the broader points then it is exactly why you don’t understand the and can never understand the finer points which are more fraught!

Here are a few things to contemplate:

1. A child is as good as a servant... tell me why?
   1. What does a servant seek towards his master?
   2. What does a child seek towards his Father?
   3. Nothing he has is his own... everything he has is given him by his Father / Master....
2. A FIRST BORN SON of a Father is also the FIRSTBORN son of the same Father - Fo you understand the difference between the two?
   1. A sinful FIRSTBORN son of a Father can be demoted in place of ANOTHER son who was NOT FIRST BORN of that Father. The promoted son becomes the father’s FIRSTBORN even though he was not the FIRST BORN!
   2. ‘Firstborn’ means ‘The most beloved of the Father’
   3. Apply that to humanity and see how many of the patriarchs fit this theme? Please .... this is not an idle request... I mean it... but not only humanity... try YHWH’s favoured nation and how IT SINNED and the firstborn-ship was passed to another (to wit: ALL Nations who BELIEVE in Yhwh and HIS CHRIST!)
3. What does the story of Joseph in Egypt prophesy?
   1. What is the purpose of the great famine?
   2. Who is made to SIT AS PHAROAH (note that Joseph is NOT PHAROAH but only sits AS Pharoah!)
   3. What is given to Joseph to rule AS PHAROAH?
   4. How long does Joseph rule AS Pharoah?
   5. What is the purpose of Joseph’s rule AS PHAROAH?
   6. What happens to Joseph AFTER the famine is over?
   7. Does scriptures foretell a similar spiritual role for Jesus Christ?
4. YHWH states that the throne of David will be an eternal throne and the one sitting on it will rule eternally.
   1. Why is it a prophecy if it is YHWH who is to rule eternally? We already know yhwh is eternal!!
   2. This throne is David is EARTHLY. Who better to rule on a human throne than a HUMAN KING...
   3. YHWH is eternally ruler over the SPIRIT KINGDOM so why Demoted himself to rule a fleshly, limited, physical kingdom when he is already ruler over a vastly greater unlimited kingdom of Heaven?
   4. Do you not see that when the MOST BELOVED child becomes ADULT, when he has shown he can command himself and those about him, he is NO LONGER a servant but is now a RULER in his own right!

Consider these aspects and get back to me?

thank you.

 

[moorea944]

I'm sorry, but that is a great (and amusing) misunderstanding. If you had checked my religious affiliation, you would have seen that I am a Jew. Not only do I not believe that Jesus is God, I also don't believe he is the messiah, or even a prophet. I reject allll these Christian claims.

Sorry my friend, i didnt check. Is there a reason why you reject Jesus? Are you looking for someone else to come? This kind of reminds me of the book of Romans (which you probably havent read then) where Paul is having a very hard time convincing the Jews that you now dont need that Law of Moses and that you are justified through the faith.

Plus, since your Jewish (which I have no problem with, I consider myself to be a spiritual Jew, Romans 11 ) and probably think that your still under the law, then you still do the animal sacrifices and things like that then? Correct? But dont your neighbors complain when they hear animals being slaughtered and sacrificed in your back yard or where ever you do that? Just curious since you dont believe in the messiah and you believe that your still under the law of Moses.

But what about the books in the OT that tell us that Jesus would be the coming Messiah? You have books like Psalms, Isaiah, the prophet books. So much info on the coming Messiah. Not really sure why you wouldnt believe in that. You should also read the book of Romans some night. Paul is explaining to the Jews (and Gentiles) that everything has now changed. I really think that would be an eye opener for you.

 

[wellwisher]

If you look at the Book of Revelations, which was written after the death of Jesus, Satan is thrown from Heaven. The historical timing of this symbolism in Revelations implies that Satan was still in Heaven, during the time of Jesus. Satan was not thrown from Heaven until some time after Jesus dies.

The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil was Satan's Tree in the book of Genesis. The tree of knowledge of Good and Evil, symbolizes law, with the Satan in the tree symbolism implying law is connected to Satan. Law and Satan were both condoned by God, when Satan was still in Heaven, before being thrown from heaven, in Revelations. When Satan does gets the boot, law was no longer valid, in terms of Heaven and God. The question is when did or will Satan get the boot?

God of the Old Testament was actually mediated through, Satan, via the law. The bible implies this. In Genesis, after God created the heaven and earth, God rested on the seventh day. This means God was not working, for an extended period of time, while he rested. Creation was on its own during the heavenly Sabbath. The work on earth, was being done by his CEO, Satan, who was in charge during the rest period. When Jews do the Sabbath, they are not allowed to work. However, they can have Gentiles do things for them such as buy take out food. Satan was like the Gentile of God, during God's rest period. Satan worked the earth, as God's CEO, as God rested.

When Jesus was tempted in the Desert, Satan appears to him with the authority to give Jesus the wealth and power of the world. As CEO during the divine and Heavenly Sabbath, God gave his CEO, Satan, the authority to act on his behalf, over the earth. Satan had a natural rapport with women and men so he was put in charge of them.

If Jesus has accepted Satan's offer, he would have become the expected Messiah of the Jews and of the Old Testament. Jesus, as Jew, would have all world's wealth, power and control. This is what the Jews expected of the Messiah. However, the price would be that Jesus needed to become the CEO for Satan. Satan would then be promoted higher in Heaven.

But denying Satan's offer, Jesus became something better. Jesus wanted Satan's job as CEO, to God the Father. By denying Satan's offer he superseded Satan=law. One was now saved by faith. After the transitional state of Jesus, Satan the CEO was in trouble, and he finally gets the boot. The Divine Sabbath was about to be over, and God was about to be back in business. A new Sunday was to begin; son.

In Revelations, someone who is similar to the Old Testament Messiah appears late in the drama. He is called faithful and True. He is normally attributed to the second coming of Jesus. However, he appears to be connected to the white horseman of the apocalypse. He is a Servant of Jesus. This is inferred by the golden crown on his head that symbolizes a marriage ring to God; faithful and true.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Unfortunately we cannot quote without citation when engaged in these sorts of debates. It bugs me too, because I know a good part of the Bible by heart, but for the life of me, can't remember where the verse I'm remembering is found. But for the sake of the debate, I do go and google the verse so that I can add the book, chapter and verse. It's just the fair and decent way to argue in a forum.

Soapy was claiming there was a Hebrew idiom where "before" means "greater than" - is that true?

I had simply asked him to provide proof. Is that unreasonable in a debate?