If Jesus is God, can these verses be true?

Ed, you are one of the most tenacious men I know. I applaud you for it. I just wish you'd realize the truth of John 1.

Kevin

There is one God.

The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one God!

God can be all places at once. God can be Jesus on Earth and the Father in Heaven at the same time. God can be the Holy Spirit everywhere.

Do not deny the power of God, lest you insult Him with a false doctrine that denies His power.

ZoneChaos

You asked,
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Curious, why stop at verse 13?
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

I did finish with verse 14.

Macro11

jbenjesus

You wrote,
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Spare me and everyone else your "holier than thouness" and "I know it better than anyone else hereness". Your lack of class and lack of humility, here in this thread, is why no one else is listening to you and now have issues with at least 3 if not more people in this thread.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Wow, what a response! I don’t know what to say.


You wrote,
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
If you do not have the time to take into consideration everything that I have said, then I have no time nor care in defending the "straw-man" that you have built up that doesn't even exist.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

I am not sure to what straw-man you are referring. Are you saying you are not siding with the Pharisees when they accused Jesus of making Himself God or equal to God?

I guess I will never know. Oh, well.

Macro11

"Your little piece of research does show the words, “in the very nature God,” are not in the original. "

Umm..yeah it does. Do you not understand that word is a direct ansecestor of morph..or to change one thing into something else. Ie the Word became human. He was God and human. See John 1 for more details.

"Being in the form or appearance of God does not prove Jesus is God. "

*sigh* no adam was made in the image, Jesus was God coming to earth (see John chapter 1) This verse clearly is Paul stateing Jesus is God. Look at any translation you can find and they all say the same thing. Godhood was In Christ, Jesus was diety.

"About your *sigh*. Who is forcing you to deal with people who raise the same questions over and over again? "

As long as people ask the same question, I'll give the same right answer. Wouldn't you get tired when someone keeps asking you over and over again..hey..what's one plus one?

"If God has truly called you to teach correct doctrine on this list, make sure your words are about the doctrine and not about you. Leave the sighs out. "

Sorry, can't help it, but when addressing you I'll definatly try to remember that *SIGH* hehehe..just kidding

Originally posted by macro11
ZoneChaos

You asked,
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Curious, why stop at verse 13?
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

I did finish with verse 14.

Macro11

Click to expand...

You said:

"You are entitled to your opinion. However, I would like to ask a few questions. What is there, exactly, in John 1:1-13 which requires logos to be a person?"

I realize you went on later in the post, and talked about 14.. but why seperate them? If you read 1-14 together.. it is cleare that what ever "Word" is, became flesh... 14 says the Word became flesh (a man), and verse 1 says this Word was God.

"In the begining was the plan, and the plan was with God, and the plan was God? Fine then.. so we use plan instread of Word. in verse 14, that same "plan" that was God, became flesh. We still have God becoming man, in Jesus Christ.

If you read everything in blue and comprehended, you would know.

Originally posted by macro11
jbenjesus

You wrote,
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Spare me and everyone else your "holier than thouness" and "I know it better than anyone else hereness". Your lack of class and lack of humility, here in this thread, is why no one else is listening to you and now have issues with at least 3 if not more people in this thread.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Wow, what a response! I don’t know what to say.


You wrote,
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
If you do not have the time to take into consideration everything that I have said, then I have no time nor care in defending the "straw-man" that you have built up that doesn't even exist.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

I am not sure to what straw-man you are referring. Are you saying you are not siding with the Pharisees when they accused Jesus of making Himself God or equal to God?

I guess I will never know. Oh, well.

Macro11

Click to expand...

Never heard of a "straw-man" argument? Oh, well.

It's when you build up a case against someone saying they believe this and that wihtout listening to anything they are saying. Each this or that is a straw that builds up a man that doesn't exist. Instead of dealing with each individual and their comments or thoughts, you build up your own "straw-man" of what you believe he thinks or says and you end up defeating a "straw-man" that doesn't even exist. Feel victorious now?

Who is straw man?? And is HE saved...??
HEHEHH
GEL

Why do you think the Trinitarian doctrine does not support a monotheistic God?

ZoneChaos

You wrote,
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
"In the begining was the plan, and the plan was with God, and the plan was God? Fine then.. so we use plan instread of Word. in verse 14, that same "plan" that was God, became flesh. We still have God becoming man, in Jesus Christ.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

You made a great start. But you still don’t have the plan being a person until verse 14. You never did have logos being identified as God. You have logos having the character of God. You have God’s plan of salvation becoming man in Jesus Christ.

Macro11

jbenjesus

You wrote,
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
It's when you build up a case against someone saying they believe this and that wihtout listening to anything they are saying. Each this or that is a straw that builds up a man that doesn't exist. Instead of dealing with each individual and their comments or thoughts, you build up your own "straw-man" of what you believe he thinks or says and you end up defeating a "straw-man" that doesn't even exist. Feel victorious now?
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Thank you for the definition of a straw-man. My question was to what straw-man are you referring?

My whole dialog with you has been around the exaggeration of the religious leaders in John 5 and 10. You said they were not exaggerating. I was dealing with you as an individual and with your comments and thoughts. To me, the logical conclusion of your position is you are standing with the words of the Pharisees and against Jesus because He disproved their allegations in those texts. If you are referring to my conclusion as the non-existant straw-man, that’s fine. It is your prerogative to disagree. I don’t see my conclusion as a straw-man.

Macro11

Louis,

You wrote,
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Do you not understand that word is a direct ansecestor of morph..or to change one thing into something else. Ie the Word became human. He was God and human. See John 1 for more details.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

What Greek lexicon suggested the definition of “to change one thing into something else” as a definition for morphe? Remember the name, editor, publisher, and publication date would be helpful. I looked in the two very old dictionaries I have and neither of them have a definition for morph as you gave it. It really looks like you are making these things up. But, I am sure you can correct my understanding with the publication information I requested.


You wrote,
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
adam was made in the image, Jesus was God coming to earth (see John chapter 1)
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Please refer to my discussion with ZoneChaos about John 1.


You wrote,
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
As long as people ask the same question, I'll give the same right answer. Wouldn't you get tired when someone keeps asking you over and over again..hey..what's one plus one?
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Certainly, if the same person asked the same things time and time again, I would get tired. I probably wouldn’t respond to them at all after a while. I have had that happen. At the same time, I have had the same questions from different people. I give my very best effort to respond as if it is the first time I’d heard the question.

Macro11

You made a great start. But you still don’t have the plan being a person until verse 14.

Click to expand...

I will agree that the "plan" or Word wa not a man until verse 14.. but befoe that the Word was both with God (seperate from God in existance) and was also God. Thus, whatever the Word is, existed before the birth of Jesus Chrsit, ans existed as God, and existed with its own identity.

how can anything but person be "with God".

You never did have logos being identified as God.

Click to expand...

"Word was God" in verse 1. Hello?

You have logos having the character of God. You have God’s plan of salvation becoming man in Jesus Christ.

Click to expand...

Logos can't have anything. It has no will.

If the Wor dis just an idea.. then it can't be with God, nor can it be God.

"I looked in the two very old dictionaries I have and neither of them have a definition for morph as you gave it. It really looks like you are making these things up. But, I am sure you can correct my understanding with the publication information I requested.
"

*sigh* okay, Just wondering..do you know what the word morph means? Why don't you post what your "old books" say

"Please refer to my discussion with ZoneChaos about John 1. "

What thread?

Originally posted by Schrack
Why don't "Messianic Jews" just call themselves Christians?

Click to expand...

The disciples/apostles of Jesus never called themselves "Christians." Nor did Jesus ever say "a Jew who follows me is no longer a Jew."

Jews who accept Jesus are called "Messianic Jews" and rightfully so. They have accepted the Jewish Messiah. It's not a matter of coverting to another faith, because the Messiah is part of Jewish prophecy and Jesus the fulfillment thereof.

Very interesting - this "plan" was God, or rather, according to the Greek, God was the plan. .... I have heard that God is love, and that God is spirit...but I have never before heard that God is no more than a plan.

Tis true enough, I think, that the early Christians did not refer to themselves as Christians. In fact, for the most part they were wont to call themselves followers of the way. I don't recall that they termed themselves Messianic Jews, though.

And as Christianity is catholic ... they most certainly would NOT have termed themselves "Messianic Jews."

...have mercy on us!
Immaculate Heart of Mary; Pray for us!

Thus, I BELIEVE that ALL verses are TRUE. However, if there are verses that APPEAR (because of interpretation) to contradict OTHER verses, I follow what apostle Paul teaches in 1 Cor. 2:13 and COMPARE Scriptures to arrive at the TRUE interpretation.

Actually the Scriptures themselves rally against private judgement (such as 2nd Peter), but that is beside the point...let us take a look at the passages you cite.

Now, gioing to the subject at hand. IF Jesus is God, can these statements be true?

Of course they can, and I'll show you why.

Apostle John wrote that "NO ONE has EVER seen God at ANY time" (John 1:18 and 1 John 4:12). Yet we know that apostle John and about 500 others (1 Cor. 15:6) SAW Jesus during his lifetime and when he ASCENDED to heaven (Acts 1:11). Was John LYING when John said "NO ONE has ever SEEN God at ANY time?

I think context is important here, as is reading things in the order they're presented.

St.John 1:18 refers to prior to the Incarnation, the context clearly being that Christ coming into the world, is revealing that previously "remote" Lord. In addition, the earliest greek texts support the reading...

"No one has ever seen God. The only Son, God, who is at the Father's side, has revealed him." (St.John 1:18, NAB)

This is supported by the earliest greek texts available, which read "monogenes theos". This goes very well with a similar passage in the same chapter, John 1:1, which reads as follows (no matter which Bible you use, save the corrupt and dishonest Watchtower translation):

"In the Beginning was the Word, and the Woard was with God, and the Word was God."

St.John here, and in other places, St.John uses "God" as both a personal name to speak of God the Father, but also uses the term to speak of a substantial/essential unity between the Father and the Son...thus the Son is "God", with the Father. All throughout St.John's Gospel, we read that the Word Incarnate, the Lord Jesus Christ, reveals His Father, not simply as a Prophet reveals the Divine, but because He Himself shares in the glory of the Father (thus He frequently is portrayed speaking as being the "I AM" of Exodus chapter 3 [John 8:58, 13:19], or speaking to the unique unity He has with the Father; John 10:30, 10:38, 14:10, etc.)

In fact, Christ explicitly states, in St.John's Gospel, that SEEING Him is to encounter God; St.John 14:6-9. It is obvious from the context of every reference to Jesus that He and His Father are two Persons, BUT a statement like this indicates the sense that whatever it is HE is, in the flesh, so to is His Father. It is the only meaning that makes sense (given St.Philip's request), and other passages which clearly state that the Lord Jesus is of one essence with His Father.

As for 1st John 4:12, it would seem it is your interpretation which wishes to pit Scripture against Scripture, rather than see the harmony that the sacred authors intended. Obviously the sense of this is that no one in this world (as a rule) has seen, with their eyes, God's essence. It is speaking in a different sense; the author here is not trying to make a point about Christ uniquely manifesting God for us, but rather about having faith in the God Who we do not see with carnal eyes, but still believe in through the eyes of faith. It's not a metaphysical statement, but rather one about God dwelling with us through the bonds of charity.

Apostle John wrote that EVERYTHING he SAW and HEARD are TRUE (John 21:24). He HEARD Jesus SAY he is a MAN (John 8:40) and the FATHER is the ONLY true God (John 17:3). Did John TRULY hear Jesus SAY John 8:40 and John 17:3 or was Jesus LYING when he said he is a MAN and the FATHER is the ONLY true God?

Well the Lord Jesus also accepted worship (prostration, and the cry of being "My Lord and My God" in St.John 20:28, without offering any sort of correction), so obviously the sense of the above verses is not what you're making of them.

Keep in mind, the Catholic Church (the one and only Church Christ established, and from which all sects and denominations are a schism from) has never taught that Christ is NOT truly a man. In fact I'd submit, because of their many errors and being cut off from their Catholic roots, many nominally "Trinitarian" and "Christological orthodox" sects have in fact lost a good grasp on what the Scriptures and Fathers understood to be true about the Person of Jesus Christ.

For example, Christ is TRULY and REALLY a man. He in fact has a human soul, and even a human will; He is not simply a human looking mirage attached to a Divine Person. When Catholics talk about God becoming a man, they really mean it. Christ felt anguish, temptation, and pain. He felt hunger pains, and sleepiness.

That said, He not only viewed the first Person of the Blessed Trinity as His eternal Father, but also in so far as He emptied Himself out and became the "Servant of the Lord" of prophecy, and ransom for sinners, He truly and really lived out a life of humility in this world, as a man. Thus, given that His Humanity was created in time, and was real and full (united to His Divinity), it is created, a creature of God. Thus the references you cite are not in any sense scandalous. What they are scandalous to, is an incomplete or inaccurate knowledge of what the Church believes about Her Lord.

Apostle John HEARD Jesus say that God is SPIRIT (John 4:24). Did John TRULY hear Jesus say this or was Jesus LYING?

Yes, and this unfathomable God, truly and really took a human nature upon Himself, without confusion or mixture between the two, but still in a hypostatic union. That in no way contradicts what you've just quoted. We say that particulars of Christ's human nature (or in toto) are attributable to God (thus you could accuratly say "God's face" when speaking of Jesus's face), by way of possession, not confusion of essence. That is to say, the physical visage of Christ's human nature, and His human nature period, are now proper to His Divine Person, because He has Chosen to assume them permanently, for our salvation.

Apostle John HEARD from Mary Magdalene that Jesus calls them BROTHERS and to tel them that he (Jesus) is ASCENDING to HIS Father who is ALSO our Father and to HIS God who is ALSO our God (John 20:17). Did John HEAR Mary corectly or was Mary or Jesus LYING?

Nope. For the same reasons I mentioned above; in fact you're coming very close to an important part of the mystery of the Incarnation; WHY it happened in the first place. One big part was that Christ was joining Himself to humanity, by becoming like us...and in His sojourn through this valley of tears, that included becoming a servant among servants. Thus, why He prayed, why He suffered like us. Not because He had to...but He chose to.

Apostle Luke wrote that he HEARD Jesus say that a SPIRIT does NOT have FLESH and bones as he has (Luke 24:39). Did apostle Luke TRULY hear Jesus say this or was Jesus LYING?

Y'know, I'm beginning to wonder if you understand anything about context, or Christology for that matter. Not trying to insult you, just stating things as they plainly appear.

The Apostles thought they were seeing a ghost when they saw the Risen Lord. He was assuring them that He was in fact in tact, and gloriously so; He was risen from death.

The context doesn't have a thing to do with the point you're trying to make.

Apostle Luke wrote that he SAW Jesus ATE broiled fish AFTER God raised him from the dead. Did apostle Luke TRULY see Jesus EATING broiled fish or was he LYING?

Uh, no. No one's lying...though I think someone is misrepresenting the import of sacred scripture...

As you can see my friends, the doctrine that Jesus is GOD makes the authors of the Bible OR Jesus LIARS! And if we say EITHER of them is a LIAR, then we are telling God that He is a LIAR because the Bible is God's word.

Does anyone here think this is good for the soul?

Ah, nothing like bullying/guilting your opponents into agreement. Sadly the only guilt they'd ever have would be in agreeing with your blasphemy.

You have not proven your point, if anything I (let alone the other gazillion people who replied to you) have shown you simply don't understand what you're talking about.

Each of us is in possession of a will. God promises peace (and not worldly peace, but the peace of His Grace, and life ever lasting) to those who are of "good-will." It is such a good will that makes people receptive to truth, or will lead them to receive valid baptism and the infused virtues which will be the foundation upon which they are saved. Be of good will, pray earnestly, and you'll get the answers you need to save your soul.

Augustine


Ed [/B][/QUOTE]

Just for your information...'
Acts 11:26  And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.

GEL