Did Jesus claim Divinity?

[Gary51]

He said no-one has seen the Father except the Son

More proof that no one is in heaven!

 

[Disippelen]

I think that Milk, Scriptures and Gary should offer explanations and evidence instead of simply rejecting the triniatarian ideas. So far, those of us who're in support of Jesus' divinity have given lots of biblical evidence for it. Clinging to mere speculations like Gary does at some points isn't very convincing. Concerning trinity etc. it's known that supporters of this idea don't claim to have understood everything it contains. There are many mysteries which are still unknown or only partly known to us about the nature of God.


Best,
Disippelen

 

[Zebra1552]

With regard to those who think Thomas called Jesus, God....

Lets face it, Thomas wasn't the sharpest tool in the box, was he?

He'd seen Jesus turn water into wine, walk on water, give sight to the blind, feed five thousand with a hand full of fish and bread, raise Lazarus from the dead, and yet he still doubted that Jesus stood before him...

I have already extrapolated, and stated the most likely truth, in post #105.

Praise Jesus the only begotten Son of God...

Praise the Father for sending His Son.

You have stated nothing but speculation and are continuing to do so. Provide evidence and you will be more convincing.

 

[Gary51]

You have stated nothing but speculation and are continuing to do so. Provide evidence and you will be more convincing.

Please provide evidence to back up your denial.

The problem with the likes of traditional Christians is that when proof is placed before them, proof that is quite clear, if that proof does not agree with their preconceived doctrinal brainwashed ideas, they say "Oh it really doesn't mean what it says, it really means this and that instead"

Lets try a simple straightforward quote from the lips of Jesus, and see it what happens....

John 3:13 "No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven - the Son of Man"

Really quite simply... no one is in heaven...

Simple truth from scripture, which I accept... bet you can't.

 

[Gary51]

I think that Milk, Scriptures and Gary should offer explanations and evidence instead of simply rejecting the triniatarian ideas.

And that is what it is ... an idea, a pagan idea at that.

So far, those of us who're in support of Jesus' divinity have given lots of biblical evidence for it.

There is no biblical evidence for a trinity... just missunderstood interpretation.

Clinging to mere speculations like Gary does at some points isn't very convincing.

If anyone is clinging to anything it is you. You are clinging to pagan beliefs... I as a seeker of truth, am free of man made doctine.

Concerning trinity etc. it's known that supporters of this idea don't claim to have understood everything it contains.

That's because it makes no sense!

There are many mysteries which are still unknown or only partly known to us about the nature of God.

There is no mystery in things that don't exist, like a trinity.

 

[Disippelen]

Hi again Gary, what a sympathetic post of you...

I will deal with this when I get back.


Best,
Disippelen

 

[Epiphoskei]

With regard to those who think Thomas called Jesus, God....

Lets face it, Thomas wasn't the sharpest tool in the box, was he?

If Thomas made a mistake, John would not have included it. It's that simple, really. When parchment costs it's weight in gold (figuratively speaking) you don't just throw in everything for the sake of being complete. Everything which you write you write for a reason.

Your argument in 105 that he said my lord to Jesus and my God to the Father is pure supposition and eisegesis without the slightest proof.

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

With regard to those who think Thomas called Jesus, God....

Lets face it, Thomas wasn't the sharpest tool in the box, was he?

He'd seen Jesus turn water into wine, walk on water, give sight to the blind, feed five thousand with a hand full of fish and bread, raise Lazarus from the dead, and yet he still doubted that Jesus stood before him...

I have already extrapolated, and stated the most likely truth, in post #105.

Praise Jesus the only begotten Son of God...

Praise the Father for sending His Son.

Problem is that Jesus doesn't rebuke him . . . so if Thomas' statement were errant . . . you could be sure that Jesus, as a good rabbi, would certainly have corrected Thomas' errant theology.

As is . . . Jesus does NOT do this . . . He accepts the ascription with no qualms.

The declensions in the Greek do not allow for your conclusions in your posited explanation. You need that class! LOL

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

theanthropos???? high sounding.... but unbiblical.......

Nice try . . . strawman

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

This is interesting. I haven't heard this position before. With all the amazing supernatural powers Satan has, I would think he would know that Jesus was God - especially if many mere mortals understood that Jesus was God. I would also assume that Satan was fairly familiar with Jesus - seeing that he was with him (the triune God) in heaven and tried to overthrow him. Wouldn't he be familiar with Jesus?
So, if we assume Satan didn't know who Jesus really was, you would agree that tempting Jesus (God) is a ridiculous concept? It was simply a misunderstanding on Satan's part.

Thank you for the cordiality of the post.

Satan is NOT omnipotent as God is (See Job) . . . so inspite of all the power he does have . . . he is not omniscient either.

As for familiarity with Christ as the 2nd person of the Godhead . . . certainly. But as the man Jesus . . . no. This is not requisite. The entity Jesus the Christ as the incarnate 2nd person of Trinity is something He never was before . . . namely man and God in one. There is no requisite for Satan to have known Him as such prior to the incarnation.

 

[Milk]

it's known that supporters of this idea don't claim to have understood everything it contains. There are many mysteries which are still unknown or only partly known to us about the nature of God.

Trinitarian theology is not laid out in the Bible. How can you have any confidence that the Christians who formulated the creed got it right? You're basically saying that supporters don't claim to fully understand the Trinity, but at the same time you fully believe that the underlying theology is accurate. There is no basis for this.

Back to the temptation issue: It sounds like most of you are saying that it makes sense because Jesus' human nature was tempted to take the world from Satan. This is really damaging to his God-nature. Unless he just has a memory lapse and forgets that he is God, your solution is untenable. Introducing a concept of %100 human and %100 God gets so complicated that you should have no confidence that it is correct.

 

[Milk]

I think that Milk, Scriptures and Gary should offer explanations and evidence instead of simply rejecting the triniatarian ideas.

Here are just a few:

Num 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind.

Jam 2:19 You believe that God is one. You do well

1 Tim 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus

John 17:3 Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

You have to remember that the idea that God was ONE was SO central to Jewish theology and there is no indication that this idea has been overturned. This would be such a radical change to theology. God is one: this should be your starting point. There are plenty of statements that continue this idea in the NT. I agree there are a few verses that don't fit neatly into this concept, but this has to be the starting point. Instead people have invented "mysterious" or illogical formulations like: the Father is 100% God, the Son 100% God and 100% human, the Holy Spirit is also 100% God, but at the same time there is only one God, but they are separate persons. This is so complicated it makes no sense to the human mind. If this were true, it is unthinkable that the Bible would not explicitly make a note of this. Instead there is no indication whatsoever that there has been an interruption of strict monotheism. There is no indication that the definition of who and what God is has been radically altered. This would be major. For me, this is terribly strong evidence that Trinitarian theology is not accurate. I don't see how Trinitarians can hold any confidence that this unexplainable mystery has been accurately interpreted. Also, they should by no means think that salvation depends on subscribing to it.

 

[Epiphoskei]

You say that for Jesus to be tempted he would have had to forget that he was God. No, he wouldn't. That's not how temptation works.

You need to completely divorce reason from temptation. Jesus didn't need a memory lapse to be tempted, because temptation doesn't appeal to his mind in any way. It does not appeal to the reason of the mind, and moreover, reason cannot prevent it.

If Jesus is God and He knew He was God and knew he is Heir of Creation (which, as I said before, he still is whether he is God or not) all of that knowledge does not come into play at all during temptation, because temptation has nothing to do with anything that can be called either knowledge or ignorence. Knowledge of or ignorance of anything is irrelevant to temptation.

 

[Epiphoskei]

Oh, and it's downright blasphemy to accept or reject any revelation based on if it "makes sense" to you. Where were you when God laid the foundations of the earth? Let's stick to what has been revealed, and there is a discussion we can have here on what has been revealed. But statment's to the effect that "that's illogical, therefore it's untrue" are blasphemy. You are not God, that you have the authority to make those kinds of calls.

 

[Gary51]

Problem is that Jesus doesn't rebuke him . . . so if Thomas' statement were errant . . . you could be sure that Jesus, as a good rabbi, would certainly have corrected Thomas' errant theology.

As is . . . Jesus does NOT do this . . . He accepts the ascription with no qualms.

The declensions in the Greek do not allow for your conclusions in your posited explanation. You need that class! LOL

Jesus does not rebuke him, because Thomas was not addressing Jesus, he was either addressing the Father or talking to himself... you know, like if you came across something amazing you may say, "Oh my God"

If Jesus thought that Thomas was addressing him, He would have certainly rebuked him... Yes, He would have put him straight, as He did with others by making quotes like, "The father is greater than I" or "Why do you call me good, only the Father is good".... that kind of thing.

As for needing a class in Greek... if Greek was needed to understand the Bible, then it would have remained in Greek and not have been translated into English.

Thanks anyway... I know you want to help.

 

[Milk]

Oh, and it's downright blasphemy to accept or reject any revelation based on if it "makes sense" to you. Where were you when God laid the foundations of the earth? Let's stick to what has been revealed, and there is a discussion we can have here on what has been revealed. But statment's to the effect that "that's illogical, therefore it's untrue" are blasphemy. You are not God, that you have the authority to make those kinds of calls.

My whole point is that I don't believe Trinitarian theology was revealed. I think it is a human-construct - an illogical interpretation of scripture.

 

[Epiphoskei]

As for needing a class in Greek... if Greek was needed to understand the Bible, then it would have remained in Greek and not have been translated into English.

Balderdash. If you're going to nitpick, you need to nitpick the original text. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to put the Bible in the common tongue.

My whole point is that I don't believe Trinitarian theology was revealed. I think it is a human-construct - an illogical interpretation of scripture.

And my point is that the first part of this kind of statement, that you don't believe trinitarian theology is revealed, is a topic we can discuss. The second part, that it is wrong because it is illogical, is blasphemy. We aren't God that we should judge what is revealed, though we may disagree about what has been revealed. The decision of what has been revealed should not be based on our judgements of what is reasonable or not.

"It can't be true becasue it's not logical to me" is not a valid argument.

 

[Disippelen]

Hi Gary, I'll try to give you some answers now.

And that is what it is ... an idea, a pagan idea at that.

An idea doesn't need to be a Pagan idea, it can very well be a Christian idea. The reason why I used the word "idea" is because I very well know the the term "trinity" as such wasn't coined when the New Testament was written. I look upon it as a useful tool to understand the nature of God. Since the NT was written in Greek, the Latin word "trinity" must necessarily have been of later age.

For myself, I was also suspicious of the "trinity" for some years. Still, after reading the Bible over and over again, I noticed that there are material in it which may suggest such a view of God's nature. Still, I want to stress that it is with humility that I approach the word of God. Even Paul the apostle said that we know in part (1Cor13:9), perhaps this statement would appeal to all of us here at CF to a certain degree? One significant point regarding the debate over trinity or not trinity is that we as mere humans hardly can be completely certain about the nature of the supreme God - and yes, also trinitarians are strictly monotheists - if you had any other idea about that...

Your very brief and slogan-like answer doesn't help to depict yourself as a person who wants to reason and debate. I believe that you have a great potential regarding this.

There is no biblical evidence for a trinity... just missunderstood interpretation.

Well, how can you know that the majority of Christians misunderstand so many verses? There are also sometimes hard to properly define what's "evidence" and "interpretation", don't you agree? Well, I'll try to give you some interesting Biblical material on the trinity-concept anyway.

---

Isa 9:6:
"6 For to us a child is born,
to us a son is given,
and the government will be on his shoulders.
And he will be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace."

Let's look on this verse, which is a prophecy of Jesus Christ. I believe that it's possible to establish traces of a trinity concept in these words. I have color-coded parts of the verse and these colors will re-appear below in order to underline what I see as parallels.

John 14:26 (NIV):
26But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.
(See also John 14:16-7, 15:26, 16:7-15).

Genesis 49:10 (AB):
"10The scepter or leadership shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff from between his feet, until Shiloh [the Messiah, the Peaceful One] comes to Whom it belongs, and to Him shall be the obedience of the people."

Well, concerning the Father as God, we agree I guess.

As you can see from Isa9:6 and the other verses quoted, God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Why else would the prophet say that this child/son would be called "Mighty God" and "Everlasting Father"?

---

Jesus' use of God's titles and names is another good example.

Isaiah 44:6:
""This is what the LORD says— Israel's King and Redeemer, the LORD Almighty: I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God." (See also Isa48:12).

Revelation of John:

1:8 (God speaks):
8"I am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, "who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty."

21:6a (God speaks):
6He said to me: "It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End."

22:13 (Jesus speaks):
13"I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End." (See also 2:8).

As you can see, Jesus uses all the three titles of God in his statement at the end of the Revelation. Why would Jesus do this if he knew that these names were strictly God's - and he wasn't of the being of God?

---

And let's see at another special example, which may show us the trinity concept from a contrasting perspective. Have you ever heard of the Satanic trinity? If you read Revelation 13 you might be surprised to find much material which suggest such a construction. let's start with the first verses and examine how they may seem to imitate the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit in a cruel and blasphemous way (and now I use the same color codes for the Satanic units):

-

2The beast I saw resembled a leopard, but had feet like those of a bear and a mouth like that of a lion. The dragon gave the beast his power and his throne and great authority.

Matthew 28:18:
18Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me." (Given by the Father).

As you can see, Satan instantly tries to imitate God. The likeness is impossible to miss. Of course, his imitation is only a blasphemous one, which only seeks to cause destruction and suffering for humans.

-

3One of the heads of the beast seemed to have had a fatal wound, but the fatal wound had been healed. The whole world was astonished and followed the beast.

Luke 24:46-7:
46He told them, "This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, 47and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem."

Again we see the cruel irony of Satan. The beast SEEMED to have a fatal wound, but it was "healed"... Christ died and rose again. The beast of the sea imitates Christ in its cruel play. Christ's sacrifice is to be told to all people - but when the Devil plays his game, the WHOLE world follow him instantly...

It comes to mind (Matthew 12:39):
39He answered, "A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a miraculous sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah."

John 4:48:
"Unless you people see miraculous signs and wonders," Jesus told him, "you will never believe."

And (John 19:29):
"29Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."

The cruelty of the Devil is indeed harsh...

-

4Men worshiped the dragon because he had given authority to the beast, and they also worshiped the beast and asked, "Who is like the beast? Who can make war against him?"

Luke 24:52-3:
"52Then they worshiped him and returned to Jerusalem with great joy. 53And they stayed continually at the temple, praising God."

As you can see, the disciples worshiped Jesus, and God. And the units of the Satanic trinity do the same, in the ironical blasphemy.

"Who is like"? The beast?
Or as in Ex15:11, Salm35:10, 89:6,8, 113:5, Jer49:19, 50:44 - GOD?

-

7He was given power to make war against the saints and to conquer them. And he was given authority over every tribe, people, language and nation. (Authority given by the dragon).

Salm 2:
7 I will proclaim the decree of the LORD :
He said to me, "You are my Son ;
today I have become your Father.

8 Ask of me,
and I will make the nations your inheritance,
the ends of the earth your possession. 9 You will rule them with an iron scepter ;
you will dash them to pieces like pottery."
(See also Rev2:27, 12:5, 19:15).

-

8 All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast—all whose names have not been written in the book of life belonging to the Lamb that was slain from the creation of the world.

Philippians 2:10:
"10that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father."

-

11Then I saw another beast, coming out of the earth. He had two horns like a lamb, but he spoke like a dragon.

John 16:13:
"13But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come."

The Holy Spirit speaks God's words. The beast of the earth (the Satanic imitation) speaks like the dragon (Satan).

-

12He exercised all the authority of the first beast on his behalf, and made the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast, whose fatal wound had been healed.

John
14:26:
"26But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you."
15:26:
"26"When the Counselor comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father, he will testify about me."
16:14:
"14He will bring glory to me by taking from what is mine and making it known to you."

-

13And he performed great and miraculous signs, even causing fire to come down from heaven to earth in full view of men.

Acts 2:3-4:
"3They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. 4All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them."

Who performed and still performs miraculous signs? God throughout the Old Testament, Jesus in the New Testament, and Christians in the world today by the power of the Holy Spirit.

The ironic imitation of the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost is really revealing here. The beast of the earth is an imitation of the Holy Spirit.

-

16He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead

Ezekiel 9:4,6a:
"4 and said to him, "Go throughout the city of Jerusalem and put a mark on the foreheads of those who grieve and lament over all the detestable things that are done in it."
6 "Slaughter old men, young men and maidens, women and children, but do not touch anyone who has the mark."

Ephesians 1:13-4:
"13And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, 14who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession—to the praise of his glory."

2Corinthians 1:22-3:
"21Now it is God who makes both us and you stand firm in Christ. He anointed us, 22set his seal of ownership on us, and put his Spirit in our hearts as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come."
(See also Eph4:30, 2Tim2:19).

Revelation of John 7:3:
"3"Do not harm the land or the sea or the trees until we put a seal on the foreheads of the servants of our God."

Again we see how the Devil in his blasphemy imitates God. This time, it is the mark of the beast which will guarantee peoples' place in the new Satanic world system. But our God uses his mark, the Holy Spirit, to establish who is saved.

If anyone is clinging to anything it is you. You are clinging to pagan beliefs... I as a seeker of truth, am free of man made doctine.

So now I'm a Pagan? Isn't that both rude and unnecessary of you to say? (Have you forgotten the forum rules?)

As I noted earlier, your comments here serve you little honor when it comes to depicting yourself as a seeker of truth. Why would a seeker of truth be so shy of real debate, and turn to slogans and accuse co-debaters of being Pagans?

Instead of answering like you did above, you should strive to establish why (if possible) your earlier arguments weren't mere speculations (I trust that you know of which parts I speak). You don't seem to want that, and you instead sacrifice your opportunity to run a civil discussion in favor of sloganism. I trust that you're able to to much better Gary.

After running debates with Christians of different denominations, New Agers, Atheists, Muslims, Jehova's Witnesses, Mormons and many others the last years, I've spotted at least one interesting aspect of a debater's nature: People who easily get angry, turn to attacks on other debaters, or seek for opportunities to get/feel insulted, are pre-dominantly those who are in lack of sound arguments and/or knowledge.

That's because it makes no sense!

Well, I trust that I have given you some worthy material about this on the second point.

There is no mystery in things that don't exist, like a trinity.

I refer to the second point again. Concerning mysteries, there are more of them than we're able to grasp. Facing a supreme God no one can stand with perfect knowledge. The Apostles also admitted this...

But if you're so knowledgeable, you should go to the General Apologetics section and feed your answers to non-believers (and believers) who're in great wonder and confusion over several aspects of Christian faith and the Bible.


Well, those are my answers for now.


Best,
Disippelen

 

[Milk]

You say that for Jesus to be tempted he would have had to forget that he was God. No, he wouldn't. That's not how temptation works.

You need to completely divorce reason from temptation. Jesus didn't need a memory lapse to be tempted, because temptation doesn't appeal to his mind in any way. It does not appeal to the reason of the mind, and moreover, reason cannot prevent it.

If Jesus is God and He knew He was God and knew he is Heir of Creation (which, as I said before, he still is whether he is God or not) all of that knowledge does not come into play at all during temptation, because temptation has nothing to do with anything that can be called either knowledge or ignorence. Knowledge of or ignorance of anything is irrelevant to temptation.

I think I understand what you are saying, but I don't agree that you can take logic out of the equation. You say reason is irrelevant, but I think temptation is irrelevant in this situation. If someone offers me the chance to marry my wife, I would just laugh at them. I wouldn't be tempted because I'm already married to her. If someone offers me my own flat screen TV, it wouldn't make sense because I already own it.

 

[Epiphoskei]

Those examples, however, aren't appealing to the flesh, so they're not really temptations. They're just offers. They aren't actually offering you any carnal satisfaction.

While Jesus owned the earth (and as I have said before, as "Heir of Creation," He owned the earth either way, God or not), Satan was offering him instant gratification, instead of going the route which he was traveling. Think about it. If you were the heir of the entire earth, but had to be crucified, killed, and raised from the dead before you actually behave as king of the earth, wouldn't you seriously consider an offer to get what's coming to you instantly without all that?