Tell me where in the Bible does Jesus clearly say that he's God

[Shermana]

Jesus called himself a prophet. Just saying.

 

[sojourner]

The New Testament makes it very clear that Jesus is The Son of Man.

Here are some verse's to back up my argument (Unlike you):

"And Jesus saith unto him, The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head" (Matthew 8:20).

"But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy,) Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thine house" (Matthew 9:6).

"For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day" (Matthew 12:8).

"Let these sayings sink down into your ears: for the Son of man shall be delivered into the hands of men" (Luke 9:44).

"Saying, The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be slain, and be raised the third day (Luke 9:22).

"And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man" (John 5:27).

The Old Testament tells us not to put our trust in the son of man:

Psalms 146:

1. Praise ye the LORD. Praise the LORD, O my soul.
2. While I live will I praise the LORD: I will sing praises unto my God while I have any being.
3. Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help.

So note, Jesus is the son of man, the OT tells us not to put our trust in the son of man; therefore we cannot place our trust in Jesus so he cannot be God.

The OT is basically saying that you shouldn’t put your trust in men as you do with God, so hence we cannot put our trust in Jesus in the same way we do with God since Jesus is just a man, and he cannot really save us.

So hence Jesus cannot be God.

1. Jesus is the son of man
2. We cannot put our trust in Jesus as we do with God
3. The OT tells us not to put our trust in the son of man
4. Jesus is not God

So if we can't put our trust in the son of man, and Jesus IS the son of man, then that would basically mean that we can't put our trust in Jesus. Thus, Jesus is not God.

the caveat here is that Jesus is also God, just as he is fully human. Therefore, he can be trusted.

 

[gnostic]

Whose inspiration exactly? Texts can't be authentic thru inspiration.

What if I said that I can fly when no one's looking? Would that make my statement authentic? Would it be true if I wrote it in a book and claimed that it was authentic thru the inspiration of watching Superman? Would you believe me? It's the same logic as yours after all.

I'm not defending the bible with regarding to the authenticity of the bible (or to equating Jesus with God), but what a delicious irony your statements is.

Muhammad made many claims and among those claims that he received the words of God (Qur'an) from Allah...via from the angel Gabriel...and yet there are no ways to verify the Qur'an come from God or that Muhammad received these angelic visitations. And yet people believe his claims wholeheartedly when nothing can be verify or authenticated.

How are Muhammad's claims any different from the authors of individual books or letters from the Bible through divine inspirations? Or any different from claim of alien abduction or of Big Foot, the Loch Ness monster or fairies?

I have seen many claims from Muslims that the Bible to be corrupted in RF forums, and yet not a single Muslim can show me which verses or books or letters to be corrupted, and those same Muslims making those claims, sometimes use the allegedly "corrupted" bible to quote from the bible being prophecies of Muhammad's coming. Examples - the prophecy of new prophet (Deuteronomy 18:14-22); something about Muhammad's name being revealed in Song of Solomon (don't remeber the exact verse(s), sorry); the Comforter or the Spirit of Truth in the Gospel of John (again, don't remember the exact chapter or verses).

So why used these verses from the Bible if this Bible is supposedly corrupted?

How do you know which verses haven't been "corrupted" and which have? The Qur'an doesn't specifically state which books or verses have been corrupted.

It would be laughable if I didn't know that Muslim claimants were deadly serious about those claims.

And about the new prophet in Deuteronomy 18. I find it strange that Muslims would use this prophecy, when this entire book was never written by Moses, because the Deuteronomy wasn't written until 8th or 7th century BCE, hence centuries before Moses and the Exodus.

 

[Animevox]

I am the bread of life. (Jn 6:35)
I am the good shepherd. (Jn. 10:11)
I am the way, the truth, and the life. (Jn. 14:6)

This is the same John who declared that, In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God... and the word became flesh and lived among us...

What more do you need?

To address your "I am the bread of life" verse. This does not mean that Jesus is God. Yes, Jesus can indeed perform many miraculous wonders such as this, but that does not make him God.

Remember, Jesus was GIVEN this power and authority, he did not own it.

“Very truly I tell you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread from heaven, but it is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven" (John 6:32).

"For the bread of God is the bread that comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.” (John 6:33).

So as we can plainly see, Jesus was GIVEN everything he had! This include's all miracle's, doctrine's, etc...

Basically, Jesus did not do anything of his own, he never performed a miracle by his own power, he was given the miracle. He never taught anything of his own, rather, he was taught by God and spoke what God told him to speak.

As for the "I am the good shepherd" verse. In NO WAY does this mean Jesus is God. It plainly means that Jesus is the protector of the sheep, and that he is simply following his father's command to guard the sheep with his life:

"I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd" (John 10:16).

"No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father" (John 10:18).

Last but not least, the "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me" verse also doesn't mean he's God.

It simply means that if you follow the teachings of Jesus Christ (pbuh), you will enter paradise and have eternal life.

In other words, it means that Jesus is the messenger. Same with all other prophets. At the time of Moses (pbuh), he was The Way, The Truth, and The Life. At the time of Jesus (pbuh), he was The Way, The Truth, and The Life.

Now finally, at the time of Muhammad (pbuh), he was The Way, The Truth, and The Life.

 

[Animevox]

So... you can't trust your prophet? Is that what you're saying?

That's not what I said. I said that we can't trust in man in the sense that there God. Way to take what I said out of context.

 

[Animevox]

the caveat here is that Jesus is also God, just as he is fully human. Therefore, he can be trusted.

Jesus isn't God. Never was. You can use as much verse's detailing what Jesus said and did to prove that Jesus is God, but as I've already told you, he did not speak anything on his own, neither perform any miracle's on his own.

"Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me" (John 7:16).

"For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak" (John 12:49).

"I have many things to say and to judge of you: but he that sent me is true; and I speak to the world those things which I have heard of him" (John 8:26).

"He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father which sent me" (John 14:24).

So everything Jesus had was from God, from the Gospel to his miracle's. God needs no one to give him power, and God needs no one to tell him what to do, therefore Jesus is not God.

I challenge any Christian such as yourself to bring me one single miracle Jesus performed on his own, just one. You'll never be able to meet this challenge.

 

[sojourner]

So as we can plainly see, Jesus was GIVEN everything he had! This include's all miracle's, doctrine's, etc...

In both cases clearly by the Father -- not "God." Remember, Jesus emptied himself, according to Paul, so the power would have had to have come from the Father.
Your rebuttal changes nothing.

Basically, Jesus did not do anything of his own, he never performed a miracle by his own power, he was given the miracle. He never taught anything of his own, rather, he was taught by God and spoke what God told him to speak.

See above.

At the time of Moses (pbuh), he was The Way, The Truth, and The Life.

Nope. Not according to either the bible or Judaic Tradition.

Now finally, at the time of Muhammad (pbuh), he was The Way, The Truth, and The Life.

Nope. Neither for the Jews or for the Christians.
Sorry. Your attempt to usurp Jesus has failed.

 

[sojourner]

That's not what I said. I said that we can't trust in man in the sense that there God. Way to take what I said out of context.

But we can trust Jesus, because Jesus is God. Can something be trusted to be what it is?

 

[sojourner]

Jesus isn't God. Never was.

You haven't shown that to be the case.

as I've already told you, he did not speak anything on his own

So? That's not proof of your claim, as I've already pointed out long, long ago.

neither perform any miracle's on his own.

Well, DUH! Since he was without sin, of course he acted in concert with the Father.

God needs no one to give him power

well, I guess God does, if God has emptied God's Self...

and God needs no one to tell him what to do, therefore Jesus is not God.

Acting in accordance with God isn't the same thing as you state here.

I challenge any Christian such as yourself to bring me one single miracle Jesus performed on his own, just one. You'll never be able to meet this challenge.

Don't need to, as I stated above.
Your attempted usurpation of Jesus has failed.

 

[Animevox]

In both cases clearly by the Father -- not "God." Remember, Jesus emptied himself, according to Paul, so the power would have had to have come from the Father.
Your rebuttal changes nothing.

See above.

Nope. Not according to either the bible or Judaic Tradition.

Nope. Neither for the Jews or for the Christians.
Sorry. Your attempt to usurp Jesus has failed.

You're becoming really desperate right now, aren't you?

The verse's are very clear to me. But you seem to be interpreting the verse's with your own pre-determined agenda, why not just take the verse for what it says?

"For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak" (John 12:49)

Everything referring to Jesus being a creature of God is laid down CLEARLY in the Bible, there's no need to look past them for a different interpretation, it's as clear as it gets.

But if you really think that there's another meaning behind these verse's, than that's fine, but I can still prove that there isn't.

I do think it's very strange though that when we read the Bible, we find that Jesus was sent to preach to a specific nation only, not mankind.

One would expect to find Jesus being sent to all of mankind if he was God, rather, what we find is that Jesus just like all the other prophets, was sent to a specific nation only:

"But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Matthew 15:24).

So as we can see, Jesus was sent only for the lost sheep of Israel. His main duty was for them, not the gentiles or the world.

Christian's often like to say Jesus told his disciples to go preach to the gentiles, however, this doesn't change anything.

Jesus's real mission as we see, was for the children of Israel, not the gentiles, the verse I posted cannot be refuted.

The verse is very clear, Jesus IS SENT for the lost sheep of Israel, not the Gentiles. Jesus saying 'Go preach to Gentiles' does not mean he was sent for gentiles.

The reason Jesus went to preach to the children of Israel was to cure this misunderstanding that he was God, not to preach to the gentile's.

Therefore, looking for another interpretation is futile. Just take the verse's for what they are. Your gospels clearly show that Jesus was a prophet, human servant, and messenger of God.

 

[Animevox]

You haven't shown that to be the case.

So? That's not proof of your claim, as I've already pointed out long, long ago.

Well, DUH! Since he was without sin, of course he acted in concert with the Father.

well, I guess God does, if God has emptied God's Self...

Acting in accordance with God isn't the same thing as you state here.

Don't need to, as I stated above.
Your attempted usurpation of Jesus has failed.

I've show plenty factual example's. You just refuse to accept them.

If Jesus is really God like you say he is, then one would at least expect him to admit that he's good in the sense that God is good, meaning perfect.

However, when we read the Bible, we see that Jesus denies being good in the sense that God is good, which is to be perfect. Here are the passages:

"And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?" (Matthew 19:16).

"And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments" (Matthew 19:17).

So note, the man calls Jesus good, and then Jesus tells the man that there is no good but God. Obviously Jesus referred to "God" as someone else, which also proves Jesus isn't God.

However, the main importance of the passages is that Jesus denies being Good in the way that God is good, which is to be perfect.

This is irrefutable evidence here.

 

[Animevox]

But we can trust Jesus, because Jesus is God. Can something be trusted to be what it is?

I do trust Jesus for what he is, a prophet and messenger of God.

 

[Animevox]

the caveat here is that Jesus is also God, just as he is fully human. Therefore, he can be trusted.

No, that would just be a contradiction because God says in the Bible not to put our trust in the son of man. We must believe him.

 

[Animevox]

Don't need to, as I stated above.

Yes, I think you need to, as I've already stated, there isn't a single miracle that Jesus performed on his own without the help from God.

I'm still waiting for you to prove me wrong though. Give me just one verse where Jesus performs a single miracle on his own. Exactly, you can't, because he isn't able to.

 

[sojourner]

I've show plenty factual example's.

You've shown plenty of examples of eisegesis...

If Jesus is really God like you say he is, then one would at least expect him to admit that he's good in the sense that God is good, meaning perfect.

But if Jesus is fully human, as I say he is, then why would he admit to being perfect, since no human being is perfect?

the main importance of the passages is that Jesus denies being Good in the way that God is good, which is to be perfect.

See above. That patently is not the "main importance" of that passage.

This is irrefutable evidence here.

Of what? Your ability to eisegete with the worst of them? Very well!

 

[sojourner]

I do trust Jesus for what he is, a prophet and messenger of God.

That's a start. You're about halfway to being a proper Christian. We put that kind of trust in him, as well.

 

[sojourner]

No, that would just be a contradiction because God says in the Bible not to put our trust in the son of man. We must believe him.

Another example of eisegesis. That's not the "son of man" the OT passage is talking about. It doesn't refute Jesus' Divinity in the least. Although you'd like us to think it does.

 

[sojourner]

Yes, I think you need to, as I've already stated, there isn't a single miracle that Jesus performed on his own without the help from God.

I'm still waiting for you to prove me wrong though. Give me just one verse where Jesus performs a single miracle on his own. Exactly, you can't, because he isn't able to.

What you "think" is immaterial. I don't need to prove you wrong, since the fact that Jesus worked miracles isn't evidence that he's God Incarnate. Moses worked miracles. In fact, every saint since Peter has worked miracles. None of them are God Incarnate -- and none of them worked miracles "on their own." Working miracles has nothing to do with being God Incarnate.


At all.

 

[Animevox]

You've shown plenty of examples of eisegesis...

But if Jesus is fully human, as I say he is, then why would he admit to being perfect, since no human being is perfect?

See above. That patently is not the "main importance" of that passage.

Of what? Your ability to eisegete with the worst of them? Very well!

I love how you ignored everything else I said.

 

[Animevox]

You've shown plenty of examples of eisegesis...

But if Jesus is fully human, as I say he is, then why would he admit to being perfect, since no human being is perfect?

See above. That patently is not the "main importance" of that passage.

Of what? Your ability to eisegete with the worst of them? Very well!

No, nothing is wrong with my interpretation. This "eisegesis" you're speaking of is nothing more than your own pre-determined agenda. I take the verse's for what they are, you obviously can't handle that.

If Jesus says that God is greater than he is, and that he can't do anything on his own, and that only God is good, and that he follows all his commandments, then I think it's pretty freaking clear that Jesus isn't God.

Now there may be some verse's alluding to God being more than one, but there simply just isn't enough evidence to support it, while there are PLENTY of verse's saying that God is One.

So I think I'm gonna believe the explicit verse's over the allusive one's.