Did Jesus claim Divinity?

[Nadiine]

I will paste a website for my friends here.... examining the text given.....

http://www.scripturaltruths.com/jesus/firstlast/

What's significant to note about this page is that they're not taking into account that Isaiah calls them BOTH "YWHY" (LORD).
They SHARE names and titles; both Christ and the Father.
There's a long list of names & titles they both share - Is. claims that BOTH the LORD if Israel and LORD of Hosts (His / the Redeemer - CHRIST) claim to be first and last.

It is impossible that "one God" (ie. non trinity - where only the Father is God, the son Christ is not God) is both first and last with any other human or [lesser] god.

This goes to eternality - and we even see the Spirit in Genesis 1 at creation... and Christ IS Creator of all things. In the beginning at creation.
The problems are endless with nontrinitarian views.

What's important in this specific issue of Alpha & Omega is that 2 are claiming First and Last in one passage; therefore, we cannot rule it out elsewhere by manipulating some passages to suit our views.
It is stated in 1 text specifically.

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

I will paste a website for my friends here.... examining the text given.....

http://www.scripturaltruths.com/jesus/firstlast/

From the gate dude, there is only one first and one last . . . there are not two firsts and two lasts for that is illogical redundancy. Shot from the gate bruh.

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

Then what would be the conclusion for that......





That Jesus is the Christ (anointed one) and the Son of God... Amen....

The connection of context would lend directly to John's intention of supporting the deity of Christ . . . ergo, Jesus is the Messiah the Son of the Living God is to be interpreted in the light of Thomas' ascription of deity to Christ. Ergo, being the Son of God is an evidence of His deity. This is seen by the Jews understanding in seeing that calling Himself the Son of God made Him equal to God the Father.

John 10:31-33
31 The Jews picked up stones again to stone Him. 32 Jesus answered them, "I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?" 33 The Jews answered Him, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God."
NASU

John 10:36
36 do you say of Him, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, 'You are blaspheming,' because I said, ' I am the Son of God'?
NASU

Jesus' claim to Sonship of the Father is one of the evidences of His deity . . . and the Jews understood this.

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

Yeah it actually is fun!!

Trinitarians AFFIRM AND UPHOLD every verse a nontrinitarian uses to counter the Trinity with. Why? ALL OF THE ABOVE IS TRUE. Every verse is true - yours AND ours.
They all work together to teach one theme/one truth - you cannot remove any to biasly prove a view.

The Bible is simply pointing out the differences within the 3, relaying that they are separate and unique, YET One God. They aren't a one-eyed creature with 6 arms, 6 legs, 6 eyes, etc.
Rather He is one [mono] God as 3 separate, distinct and unique "persons" who comprise that Godhead. A Unity.

Like a husband and wife are ONE, yet you'll describe your spouse as separate than you, your spouse will have a different position in the relationship-household and different duties/functions, yet your spouse is EQUAL to you as a human being.[/quote]

Very well said Nadiine. I THINK I see what you are trying to say. While I dont agree that Jesus is God, You and everyone else have every right to. I feel (ya know, this has probably been said a thousand times in this thread). Eh, God the father, Jesus the son, and then they share the holy spirit. God gave Jesus power and so on. Lol if Scriptures and I are the only ones in the world that think God and Jesus are separate beings Im ok with that.
Bless[/quote]

Lion I appreciate the humility . . . you are to be commended for that. Kudos.

But what do you do with the Scriptures that do explicitly teach His deity? And then add to that the historical proof that He was worshiped as God from the very beginning by the early church?

 

[scriptures]

I'd urge you to read CF's statement of faith
http://christianforums.com/faq.php?faq=rules#faq_sof

This is also why the Nicene Creed was created - heretics were coming in with false teachings and they were formally confirming the standard of Christian belief.

http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/creeds/nicene.htm

Correction..... we are not heretics.... we affirm that Jesus is Christ and the Son of God.... Trinitarians are majority.... but majority does not mean anything.... only the Bible is the standard....false teaching are those that do not conform to the Bible.... It is not base on majority.....

 

[scriptures]

From the gate dude, there is only one first and one last . . . there are not two firsts and two lasts for that is illogical redundancy. Shot from the gate bruh.

just like there is only one God.... not one God in three personality,,,,,

 

[scriptures]

The connection of context would lend directly to John's intention of supporting the deity of Christ . . . ergo, Jesus is the Messiah the Son of the Living God is to be interpreted in the light of Thomas' ascription of deity to Christ. Ergo, being the Son of God is an evidence of His deity. This is seen by the Jews understanding in seeing that calling Himself the Son of God made Him equal to God the Father.

John 10:31-33
31 The Jews picked up stones again to stone Him. 32 Jesus answered them, "I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?" 33 The Jews answered Him, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God."
NASU

John 10:36
36 do you say of Him, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, 'You are blaspheming,' because I said, ' I am the Son of God'?
NASU

Jesus' claim to Sonship of the Father is one of the evidences of His deity . . . and the Jews understood this.

Wrong again..... Son of God does not mean equality and being God himself... Son of God means subordination and distinction from God YHWH....

(Luk 3:38 LITV) son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.

 

[Zebra1552]

Am I illogical because I believe that Jesus is Christ (anointed one of God) and Son of God?????

Is Apostle Peter illogical to you????

How you are trying to misrepresent the Bible is illogical to me. Red herring.

 

[Nadiine]

Correction..... we are not heretics.... we affirm that Jesus is Christ and the Son of God.... Trinitarians are majority.... but majority does not mean anything.... only the Bible is the standard....false teaching are those that do not conform to the Bible.... It is not base on majority.....

I'm well aware majority means little where truth is concerned; namely in Christianity - the issue is WHEN the majority held that view and WHO held it. That's where you have trouble w/ anti trinitarianism.

The truth is, the Bible outright makes the statements obvious - the people confirm it by their actions of trying to stone Jesus for blasphemy.
Since this is the case, and since Jesus never once made the denial (nothing written to correct their "wrong" perception of His statements), then you have a serious problem w/ your Bible being truth (according to your belief). It teaches heresy without Jesus denying He's God according to the people's understanding of His claims.

 

[Nadiine]

Wrong again..... Son of God does not mean equality and being God himself... Son of God means subordination and distinction from God YHWH....

Do you know what "Son Of" means in ancient language & custom?
It's a title. Son of means "of the order of" _________ [the father's name].

1 Kings 20:35 - sons of the prophets (of the order of the prophets)
Neh 12:28 Sons of the singers (of the order of singers)

Son of God meant "of the order of God Himself" and represents a direct claim of deity.

The Jews rightly understood this term and considered Him to be blaspheming

Again, Jesus is God by nature.
WE are of God by ADOPTION (thru Christ).

 

[Polycarp_fan]

Even Muslims of today realize the implications of the "Christian" Gospel. The claim that Jesus is God is plain. Jesus knew what He was saying and what was going to be the outcome. Anyone is free to reject Jesus as God, but the foundation of His deity is well established, "from" the Gospel witness.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

Do you know what "Son Of" means in ancient language & custom?
It's a title. Son of means "of the order of" _________ [the father's name].

1 Kings 20:35 - sons of the prophets (of the order of the prophets)
Neh 12:28 Sons of the singers (of the order of singers)

Son of God meant "of the order of God Himself" and represents a direct claim of deity.

The Jews rightly understood this term and considered Him to be blaspheming

Again, Jesus is God by nature.
WE are of God by ADOPTION (thru Christ).

Well said. God's ONLY begotten Son.

We are sons of Adam.

 

[Nadiine]

Well said. God's ONLY begotten Son.

We are sons of Adam.

(nice sig statement)

 

[Polycarp_fan]

(nice sig statement)

Nice bassett hound.

Kuh-chik, kuh-chik, kuh-chik, kuh-chik, when they walk.

I write how I feel. I've studied long enough to know.

 

[Nadiine]

Nice bassett hound.

Kuh-chik, kuh-chik, kuh-chik, kuh-chik, when they walk.

I write how I feel. I've studied long enough to know.

LOL that's exactly how he sounds when he walks!!

How funny!

 

[Polycarp_fan]

LOL that's exactly how he sounds when he walks!!

How funny!

I like the breed. Dear souls those little dogs. (Dogs are like children that don't ever have to grow up.)

Ever wondered how Jesus sounded when He walked? God clothed in a human body.

My mind goes to Him as a child running around, Mary listening to the feet of her little boy laughing and playing.

Probably no more beautiful a sound on earth than the happy feet "of a little child."

Then my mind flashes to those steps to Golgotha.

And Mary then.

How I love that man.

How I worship Him.

"In solemn truth I tell you that no one who does not receive the Kingdom of God like a little child will by any possibility enter it."

The way, the truth, and the life.

It's hard to wait for it.

But it is a promise, and, no matter what a person believes, they all want it. Ever noticed that?

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

just like there is only one God.... not one God in three personality,,,,,

Nice try to redirect . . . but I suppose that is what one gets when logic and Scripture cannot be refuted (yawn).

BTW, Trinitarians don't believ God has three personalities . . . that would be schizophrenia. It is three PERSONS . . . not personalities.

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

Wrong again..... Son of God does not mean equality and being God himself... Son of God means subordination and distinction from God YHWH....

I suggest that you study the ancient usage of "son" in the connection with the "father" . . . esp in Hebraic thought.

Sons and fathers were often NOT EVEN RELATED . . . they were only given this TITLE to refer to PURPOSE not ONTOLOGY.

Subordinate and distinction does not mean that they are not equal dude. Same in marriage. I am my wife's equal in everyway . . . yet God has called me to be the head of my home . . . there is NOT ontological difference between her and I. You have made a false dichotomy.

Similiarly, distinction does not necessitate SEPARATION. My pointer finger is distinct from my ring finger . . . yet still a finger . . . my right hand is distinct from my wrist . . . yet still a part of my arm . . . my head is distinct from my belly . . . yet still a part of my body.

You have created a false dichotomy. NOT ONE OF YOUR ASSERTIONS REFUTES TRINITY. Sorry.

 

[Nadiine]

Nice try to redirect . . . but I suppose that is what one gets when logic and Scripture cannot be refuted (yawn).

BTW, Trinitarians don't believ God has three personalities . . . that would be schizophrenia. It is three PERSONS . . . not personalities.

Which goes to support the claims we often make that alot of nontrinitarians don't even know what the Trinity is.

No wonder they would attack it; I'd attack the same definition if that's what they think it means.

Modalists (oneness) believe God has 3 "roles" or personalities. And it's easily refutable using a few scriptures.

 

[Gary51]

The expression of 'Eternally Begotten' - is just that - an expression - to explain:

1) Begotten

and

2) Eternity

But, it is an expression that does not exist in the Bible, therefore it is man-made.

It seems to me, that because traditional thought believes other than what the biblical writtings suggests, another word has to be added in order to discount the obvious meaning.

To a non-Trinitarian the term, "The only begotten Son of God" makes perfect sense and fits with their understanding of scripture.

What is coming across to me is that the term does not make sense to Trinitarians. It does not fit their understanding of scripture, so they add another word to the term to make it fit their understanding.

"The only eternally begotten Son of God" is not in the Bible, therefore it is unbiblical