• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Jesus is fully God & fully man

Discussion in 'Controversial Christian Theology' started by Gunny, Oct 11, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. franklin

    franklin Sexed up atheism = Pantheism

    +218
    Atheist
    Private
    Jedi, I think you need to go back and review those passages again along with your answers in which you "think" you answered them. I think you need to follow the rules of rightly dividing the word of truth as is so poorly expressed in your answers.  Sorry, but your answers do not prove a trinity!  At least I admire you for your initiative in taking the time to answer them, that's more then what I can say for that other guy!  (not mentioning any names) 

    Actually J, it's you guys who have been jumping through all the hoops for the past number of centuries by trying to come up with one sorry explaination after another that has absolutely nothing to do with scripture!  That's almost laughable hearing you say that!  Your talking to a guy who has been deceived for many years from believing in traditional teachings and false doctrinal teachings such as the trinity and other false doctrines and I have employed the same old worn sterotyped arguments you and many others are always depending on as your defense!  I will get back to addressing your answers to the scriptures I posted recently as I am pressed for time right now.  So hang in air my good man!  See ya later.....    ;)

    FR

     
     
  2. Jedi

    Jedi Knight

    +137
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Republican
    My answering your objections was never intended to prove the trinity. That’s what the rest of my posts were targeted at. My answering your objections was precisely that: answering objections against the trinity.

    Oh, why thank you.

    * Sigh * The only way you could possibly say that scripture does not support the concept of the trinity is if you totally ignored and disregarded all the evidences I’ve pointed out.

    Then please, show me. I would very much like to see the thwarting of such evidences that some how disprove the concept that Jesus really is God.

    That’s cool, I know how that can be (being pressed for time and all). Like I said earlier, I greatly look forward to it. :)
     
  3. franklin

    franklin Sexed up atheism = Pantheism

    +218
    Atheist
    Private
  4. Jedi

    Jedi Knight

    +137
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Republican
    I see no problem here. What might make an easier read is the NIV (Besides, the KJV was compiled before the best and most reliable manuscripts were available). The NIV reads, “For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God gives the Spirit without limit. The Father loves the Son and has placed everything in his hands.”

    This is similar to your past objections. Jesus is clarifying that he isn’t a mere man, and that his authority is divine.

    Since most people here don’t speak Old English fluently, I’ll also provide what the NIV (a much more easier read) says: “Jesus said to them, ‘My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I, too, am working.’ For this reason the Jews tried all the harder to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making him equal with God. Jesus gave them this answer, ‘I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does. Yes, to your amazement he will show him even greater things than these. For just as the Father raises the dead and give them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it. Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the Son, that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father, who sent him. I tell you the truth, whoever hears any word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life.’”

    I still don’t see any problems here. Certain parts of the Godhead seem to have certain duties. For example, the Father planned salvation (John 3:16; Ephesians 1:4); the Son accomplished it on the cross (John 17:4; 19:30; Hebrews 1:1-2) and at the resurrection (Romans 4:25; 1 Corinthians 15:1-6), and the Holy Spirit applies it to the lives of the believers (John 3:5; Ephesians 4:30; Titus 3:5-7).

    NIV translation: “I have testimony weightier than that of John. For the very work that the Father has given me to finish, and which I am doing, testifies that the Father has sent me. And the Father who sent me has himself testified concerning me. You have never heard his voice nor seen his form, nor does his word dwell in you, for you do not believe the one he sent.”

    Still see no problems. When it says, “You have never heard his voice or seen his form,” it can be taken a number of different ways. Jesus points out that these people “do not believe the one he [God] sent,” and as a result, his word does not dwell in them. It is their disbelief that separates them from God and keeps them from seeing him. You also have to realize that Jesus is God in human form; not as he actually is in his full glory and majesty (And so his true voice, and form aren’t on full display here).

    NIV: “Jesus answered, ‘My teaching is not my own. It comes from him who sent me.’”

    Again, no problem. Christ is clarifying that his teaching is not human in origin, but has the very authority of God.

    NIV: “Then Jesus, still teaching in the temple courts, cried out, ‘Yes, you know me, and you know where I am from. I am not here on my own, but he who sent me is true. You do not know him, but I know him because I am from him and he sent me.’”

    Again, another example of Christ clarifying that his teaching and authority is that of Gods’, not mere man’s.

    NIV: “’I have much to say in judgment of you. But he who sent me is reliable, and what I have heard from him I tell the world.’ They did not understand that he was telling them about his Father. So Jesus said, ‘When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am the one I claim to be and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me; he has not left me alone, for I always do what pleases him.’ Even as he spoke, many put their faith in him.”

    Again, another clarification that the authority and teachings of Jesus do not come from mere man, but from God. Have you any other examples other than this sort?

    NIV: “’As it is, you are determined to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. Abraham did not do such things.’”

    This is yet another example of Jesus being both God and man. The God part of Christ works through the man part.

    NIV: “Jesus said to them, ‘If God were your Father, you would have loved me, for I came from God and now am here. I have not come on my own; but he sent me.”

    Yet again, a clarification of where his teaching & authority come from: God, not man. These people perceive Jesus as a mere man, and also perceived that he was leading people astray with flawed human teaching. This is simply Christ rebuking this idea.

    NIV: “’The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life—only to take it up again. 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.’”

    All of your evidences seem to fall along this single line, which is merely Christ clarifying that his authority and teaching are not human in origin, but divine.

    NIV: “So they took away the stone. Then Jesus looked up and said, ‘Father, I thank you that you have heard me. I knew that you always hear me, but I said this for the benefit of the people standing here, that they may believe that you sent me.”

    Do you read your own “evidences?” Jesus himself said “I said this for the benefit of the people standing here.” Again, he’s clarifying to the people where his teaching comes from: God or man. Here, he even states his purpose for saying aloud what he does.
     
  5. Jedi

    Jedi Knight

    +137
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Republican
    Believe in God (as all the Jews did), but also believe in the divine authority and teachings of Christ (Who is God in human form – Colossians 2:9).

    How convenient that you omit verses 8-9. I’ll post it all (including verses 8-9): “Philip said, ‘Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us.’ Jesus answered, ‘Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you are not just my own. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work.”

    Need I say more? Again, it’s the God part of Jesus working through the man part. The authority of Christ’s teachings don’t come from man, but from God.

    NIV: “’On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you.”

    I really don’t see what this has to do with the trinity.

    NIV: “’You have heard me say, ‘I am going away and I am coming back to you.’ If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.”

    This phrase is often taken out of its actual context to mean that the Father is greater in nature, but Jesus meant only that the Father is greater in office. This is evident from the fact that in this same Gospel (of John) Jesus claimed to be the “I Am” or Yahweh of the Old Testament (Exodus 3:14). He also claimed to be “equal with God” (John 10:30; 33). In addition, he received worship on numerous occasions (John 9:38; cf. Matthew 2:11; 8:2; 9:18; 14:33; 15:25; 28:9; 17; Luke 24:52). He also said, “He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him” (John 5:23).

    Further, when Jesus spoke of the Father being “greater,” it was in the context of his “going to the Father” (John 14:28). Only a few chapters later Jesus speaks to the Father, saying “I have completed the work you gave me to do” (John 17:4). But this functional difference of his role as Son in the very next verse reveals that it was not to be used to diminish the fact that Jesus was equal to the Father in nature and glory. For Jesus said, “And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory which I had with you before the world began” (John 17:5).

    NIV: “After Jesus said this, he looked up toward heaven and prayed: ‘Father, the time has come. Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you. For you granted him authority over all people that he might give eternal life to all those you have given him. Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent. I have brought you glory on earth by completing the work you gave me to do.” I’m going to throw in verse 5 as an extra bonus: “And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.”

    Did I not just talk about this? It really is quite convenient that all of your “evidences” fall along a single line of reasoning. All one would have to do is show how that single line of reasoning is flawed, and all your evidences crumble.

    As Jesus had a mission to fulfill, so do we. It’s not that hard, really.

    Still don’t see a problem here. The Father/Son are one in purpose/mission, and so should we (the church).

    The meaning appears to be that the ascension was still some time off. Mary would have opportunity to see Jesus again, so she need not cling to him. Alternatively, Jesus may be reminding Mary that after his crucifixion she cannot have him with her except through the Holy Spirit (see 16:5-16). When he says “to my God, and your God,” it’s just another way of saying “To the God we believe in.” God is, of course, going to believe in himself.

    And so we come to an end of all your “evidences,” which happened to mainly fall along a single line of reasoning (Which turns out to be merely Jesus clarifying that his authority isn’t from man, but is divine in origin).

    Instead of posting repeatedly the same sort of verses over and over again, how about you actually take a look at mine? I’d be very interested to see you refute the idea that Christ is God himself, as scripture clearly teaches. Even in this post of yours, you have not even attempted to refute a single point I made, but have only continued to elaborate on a line of reasoning I’ve already shown as incorrect. You have only avoided and ignored my proofs.
     
  6. drmmjr

    drmmjr Regular Member

    459
    +7
    Christian
    Jedi,

    As you have stated in your previous post:
    The things that Jesus said and did were from God. As you point out, Jesus clarifies that for his followers.

    Yes, Jesus was not a "mere" man, he was the Son of God. He was given power and authority by God to do the things that he did. He did not do those things on his own. If he was God, then he wouldn't have needed to be given authority, since he would have already had it. In fact, how could he give it to himself?
     
  7. Jedi

    Jedi Knight

    +137
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Republican
    He was the Son of God, but if you read Titus 2:13, and Romans 1:8, you’ll also find that the Bible directly, and bluntly calls him God, and that he’s God in the flesh (Colossians 2:9).

    He gave power to himself in that he’s now in the form of man, and not in his fullest splendor. All authority & power was given to this God man, Christ, since he’s the form God chose to come as. Again, you anti-trinity people seem to only focus on this single line of reasoning (Christ merely clarifying that his teaching is divine, and not merely human) instead of responding to the mountain of evidence I’ve provided. It’s as if I never posted those paragraphs of scripture references, since they are all being ignored by those who don’t wish to see them. Maybe you’ll respond to them if I copy and paste them once again (From post #58):

    Scripture does teach the doctrine of the trinity. The word “trinity” won’t be found in the Bible, of course, since it’s Latin, but that doesn’t mean the teaching is not there (I don't recall Jesus ever saying that he loves people, but that doesn't mean there's no evidence that he does). I’m sure we can all agree that the Father is Jehovah God (Father=God). Scripture definitely teaches the equation Jesus=God (read on, and you’ll see how).

    Jesus himself claimed to be Yahweh. He prayed, “And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began” (John 17:5). But Yahweh of the Old Testament said, “I will not give my glory to another” (Isaiah 42:8). Jesus also declared “I am the first and the last” (Revelation 1:17)—precisely the words used by Jehovah in Isaiah 42:8. Jesus said, “I am the good shepherd” (John 10:11), but the Old Testament said, “Yahweh is my shepherd” (Psalms 23:1). Further, Jesus claimed to be the judge of all people (Matthew 25:31f; John 5:27), but Joel quotes Jehovah as saying, “for there I will sit to judge all the nations on every side” (Joel 3:12). Likewise, Jesus spoke of himself as the “bridegroom” (Matthew 25:1) while the Old Testament identifies Jehovah in this way (Isaiah 62:5; Hosea 2:16). While the Psalmist declares, “The Lord is my light” (Psalms 27:1), Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12).

    Another claim Jesus made to be Yahweh is in John 8:58, where he says, “Before Abraham was, I am.” This statement claims not only existence before Abraham, but equality with the “I AM” of Exodus 3:14. The Jews around him clearly understood his meaning and picked up stones to kill him for blaspheming (cf. John 8:58, and 10:31-33). The same claim is made in Mark 14:62 and John 18:5-6.

    The Old Testament forbids worshiping anyone other than God (Exodus 20:1-4; Deuteronomy 5:6-9). The New Testament agrees, showing that humans refused worship (Acts 14:15), as did angels (Revelation 22:8-9). But Jesus accepted worship on numerous occasions, showing he claimed to be God. A healed leper worshiped him (Matthew 8:2), a group of Canaanite women (Matthew 15:25), the mother of James and John (Matthew 20:20), the Gerasene demoniac (Mark 5:6), all worshiped Jesus without a word of rebuke. The disciples worshiped him after his resurrection (Matthew 28:17). This could only be allowed by a person who seriously considered himself to be God. Not only did Jesus accept this worship due to God alone without rebuking those who gave it, but he even commended those who acknowledged his deity (John 20:29, Matthew 16:17).

    This is also not to mention very clear verses where Jesus is flat out addressed as God in such examples as Titus 2:13, and Hebrews 1:8.

    Now we have the equations Father=God & Jesus=God.

    Now we come to evidence for the divinity of the Holy Spirit. Acts 5:3-4 reads, “Then Peter said, ‘Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? Didn't it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn't the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied to men but to God’” (Bolds mine).

    So now you have Jesus=God & Father=God & Holy Spirit=God. Now we must ask ourselves: How many gods are there? Scripture is very clear: just one. Isaiah 43:10 reads, "'You are my witnesses,' declares the Lord, 'and my servant whom I have chosen, so that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me.'"

    So now we end up with Jesus=Father=Holy Spirit=God=1. It doesn’t get much more simple than that.

    Edit:  On a side note, it seems my computer has been having a bit of trouble lately.  I had to reboot to fix the problem, and that wiped everything out, including how I had the computer set up to gain access to the internet through my University.  I don't remember how, exactly, to set it up again like I had it, so I'll just have to talk to some computer Techs on campus come Monday.  That restricts my internet access to the University computer labs, and even then, they're closed on Sundays.  I had an Ethernet card installed into my laptop before I rebooted, so I'm hoping that it still remembers that the Ethernet card is there and what it's used for.  If not, gaining constant and convenient access to the internet might take a little longer to acquire.  :(
     
  8. drmmjr

    drmmjr Regular Member

    459
    +7
    Christian
    If you study the Old Testament, you will see that Jewish people don't believe in a "trinity" or any "group" that makes up God. They believe that God exists. That God is one and unique. There is only one God and He is a unity, single, whole, a complete indivisible entity. He cannot be divided into parts.

    Nowhere do they speak of a multiple faceted God.

    They believe that God will send a Messiah (or moshiach) to end all evil in the world, rebuild the temple, bring the exiles back to Israel, and usher in the world to come. This person is a MAN annointed by God. Who does this describe but Jesus.

    As for John 8:58, where he says, “Before Abraham was, I am.” If Jesus is speaking of himself, then "I am" cannot be the name of God as spoken to Abraham. If "I am" is used as being the name of God as spoken to Abraham, then Jesus can't be speaking of himself. It's simple. "Before Abraham was, I am (God)". That's not claiming to be God.

    Besides, nowhere does it clearly state in scripture that Jesus is God. But numerous verses state that Jesus is the Son of God.

    As to Titus 2:13:
    Titus 2:13 - Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;
    14 - Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.


    This doesn't say that Jesus is God, any more than when you say "Here comes Joe and Bob" means that Joe is Bob.

    Romans 1:8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.

    Here Paul is thanking God through Jesus Christ. Says nothing about them being the same.
     
  9. OldShepherd

    OldShepherd Zaqunraah

    +165
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Others
    Straw man! Christians do not believe in any “group” that makes up God. And if you study other Jewish sources, such as the Jewish Encyclopedia published in 1911, you will find that a Trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit existed in pre-Christian Judaism. What’s that you say? Orthodox Judaism rejected the Trinity. Sorry that is not a big selling point. These are the same guys who reject Jesus as the promised Messiah and even call Jesus a “mamzer” i.e. “b#stard” and Mary a prostitute, in the Talmud. Also just to set the record straight Trinitarians do not divide God into parts.

    • Trinity- In the Zohar.
      The Cabala, on the other hand, especially the Zohar, its fundamental work, was far less hostile to the dogma of the Trinity, since by its speculations regarding the father, the son, and the spirit it [i.e. The Zohar] evolved a new trinity, and thus became dangerous to Judaism. Such terms as "maṭronita," "body," "spirit," occur frequently (e.q., "Tazria'," ed. Polna, iii. 43b); so that Christians and converts like Knorr von Rosenroth, Reuchlin, and Rittangel found in the Zohar a confirmation of Christianity and especially of the dogma of the Trinity (Jellinek, "Die Kabbala," p. 250, Leipsic, 1844 [trans]. of Franck's "La Kabbale," Paris, 1843]). Reuchlin sought on the basis of the Cabala the words "Father, Son, and Holy Ghost" in the second word of the Pentateuch, as well as in Ps. cxviii. 22 (ib. p. 10), while Johann Kemper, a convert, left in manuscript a work entitled "Maṭṭeh Mosheh," which treats in its third section of the harmony of the Zohar with the doctrine of the Trinity (Zettersteen, "Verzeichniss der Hebräischen und Aramäischen Handschriften zu Upsala," p. 16, Lund, 1900). The study of the Cabala led the Frankists to adopt Christianity; but the Jews have always regarded the doctrine of the Trinity as one irreconcilable with the spirit of the Jewish religion and with monotheism.

      http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=338&letter=T

      Jesus of Nazareth

      It ought also to be added that many of the legends have a theological background. For polemical purposes, it was necessary for the Jews to insist on the illegitimacy of Jesus as against the Davidic descent claimed by the Christian Church.

      The earliest authenticated passage ascribing illegitimate birth to Jesus is that in Yeb. iv. 3. The mysterious phrase ("that man") cited in this passage as occurring in a family register which R. Simeon ben Azza is said to have found seems to indicate that it refers to Jesus (see Derenbourg in "R. E. J." i. 293), and here occur also the two expressions so often applied to Jesus in later literature- ynwlp ivya—(= "that anonymous one," the name of Jesus being avoided) and rzmm (="b#stard"; for which in later times wtwa ivya was used). Such a family register may have been preserved at Jerusalem in the Judæo-Christian community.

      http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=254&letter=J
    Straw man! No where does Christianity speak of a multiple faceted God either. The basic premise of Christianity is,

    • dxa hwhy wnyhla hwhy larvy [mv
      Hear O Israel YHWH our God YHWH is one.
    I’m not sure what you are saying here. You appear to be contradicting yourself in the last two sentences. Please read my previous post on, John 8:58
    Nowhere if you ignore John 1:1-14, Philippians 2:6, and John 20:28, and many others.

    John 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.

    Not exclamation! But direct address, “The Lord of me and the God of me.” I previously discussed Philip 2:6, Here and Here. Also see my discussion of “The Word was God”, from the Jewish Encyclopedia, Here

    English maybe. Greek grammar requires that in both Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1, Jesus Christ is being called “God. See discussion of Sharp’s rule at this link.

    • "Sharp's rule," has rightly been cited in support of understanding Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1 to be calling Jesus "God."

      In Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1, then, we have two singular personal nouns of the same case, "God" and "Savior" (theos and sôtêr), linked by kai, with the definite article appearing before the first noun but not before the second. Neither of these two nouns can be construed in either text as a proper name or as part of a compound proper name. Both of these texts, then, are evidently perfect examples of the construction governed by Sharp's rule.
      The case for interpreting these two texts — Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1 — as calling Jesus "God" does not rest merely on the grammatical principle of Sharp's rule. There is much contextual evidence for this conclusion as well, particularly in Titus 2:13.

      http://www.atlantaapologist.org/Sharp.html

    Other links which discuss “Sharp’s Rule” and the meaning of Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1.

    http://www.aomin.org/GRANVILL.html

    http://www.geocities.com/lasttrumpet_2000/theo/OP01.html

    http://www.watchman.org/jw/greekfeb.htm
     
  10. drmmjr

    drmmjr Regular Member

    459
    +7
    Christian
    Straw man? I have seen that term used several times. What does it mean?

    Please note that the Cabala (or Kabbalah) is a mystical group. And the Zohar is a writings of that group.

    Again, please note that the Cabala and their Zohar does not follow the Jewish religion. As I was pointing out in my post, the Jews do not beleive in a "trinity".

    When I said "multiple faceted" God, I'm saying that you have one God, but He is comprised of three parts, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Oh, you say that He is one God, but yet you have to clarify which part did what. Did God die on Calvary? The way I see it from your point of view He did, since you say it was God the son.

    When I said: As for John 8:58, where he says, “Before Abraham was, I am.” If Jesus is speaking of himself, then "I am" cannot be the name of God as spoken to Abraham. If "I am" is used as being the name of God as spoken to Abraham, then Jesus can't be speaking of himself. It's simple. "Before Abraham was, I am (God)". That's not claiming to be God. . The meaning of the last two sentences was that Jesus said "Before Abraham was, God". With the "I am" being replaced by "God". He was not saying that he was God. If he had, he would have said so plainly.

    "Sharp's rule". Interesting. Relying on someone's interpretation of scripture. But I won't hold that against you.
     
  11. Jedi

    Jedi Knight

    +137
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Republican
    Ah, computer's back up and running. Time to have some fun. :)

    And the trinity doesn’t make one God into three. It’s one God in essence, just as a triangle is one shape with three points.

    Had you studied any real theology at all, you would be familiar with a term called “progressive revelation.” As time goes by, God reveals more and more of himself to humanity.

    Hardly. The fact that Jesus chose the title "I AM" was that he attributed it to himself. Take it into context: Jesus was describing himself in response to the objection from some Jews in John 8:57. The people clearly understood what Jesus was saying, since they tried to kill him for claiming to be the great I AM from Exodus. This is supported by verses like Hebrews 1:8.

    Did you ignore all the evidence I’ve provided (again)?

    It might help to show what translation you’re using. The NIV states (Verses 13-14), “While we wait for the blessed hope—the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good.”

    Your analogy is flawed, since these are titles being attributed to Christ – not separate names. Throughout the entire passage, only one person is being spoken of (which these titles describe), and that is Jesus Christ.

    Ah, yes, silly me. Wrong book. Hebrews 1:8 is what I meant to type down. It reads, “But about the Son he says, ‘Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom’” (bolds mine).

    Nope, wrong again. Jesus was the messiah, but did you notice he never said anything as “plainly” as “I am the messiah?” Not only that, but what sense would it make for Jesus to say, “Before Abraham was, God?” The fact that he chose to use the phrase, “I am,” means that he attributed the title to himself (Since “I Am” speaks of oneself) as a reply to the Jews in describing himself in that he existed before Abraham. Again, the people around him clearly understood what he was claiming when they tried to kill him for blasphemy.

    I find it very interesting how you only responded to two of the many verses I posted in support of the deity of Christ. Did you ignore the rest (again), or did you disregard them due to an inability to thwart them?
     
  12. drmmjr

    drmmjr Regular Member

    459
    +7
    Christian
    Here's that multifaceted thing I was speaking about.

    John 8:57 - Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?

    All that they are asking here is that if Jesus had seen Abraham. This was their response to Jesus telling them that Abraham knew that someone would come who would be the salvation of Israel. Yes, Jesus was describing himself. He was telling them that he was that method of salvation.

    Again, do the scriptures clearly state that Jesus is God. They do not. But they clearly state that Jesus is the Son of God.

    And how is that different from the other? It is still speaking of two persons.

    As we can both agree, Jesus was the messiah, or "moshiach" which means annointed one.

    The moshiach will be a great political leader descended from King David (Jeremiah 23:5). The moshiach is often referred to as "moshiach ben David" (moshiach, son of David). He will be well-versed in Jewish law, and observant of its commandments. (Isaiah 11:2-5) He will be a charismatic leader, inspiring others to follow his example. He will be a great military leader, who will win battles for Israel. He will be a great judge, who makes righteous decisions (Jeremiah 33:15). But above all, he will be a human being, not a god, demi-god or other supernatural being. (referece: http://www.jewfaq.org/moshiach.htm)

    As you have pointed out, "Since "I AM" speaks of oneself", how can it speak of God. If Jesus used this to speak of himself, it can't be the title of God.

    That was done to keep these posts at a reasonable readable level. Until some verses are cleared, it's useless to discuss others, since they all are interpreted the same.
     
  13. Jedi

    Jedi Knight

    +137
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Republican
    So does this mean that since I’m a son, a brother, and a nephew, that I’m not one person? By golly, I’m more than one thing and described in more than one way, so I must be three separate persons.

    Well then, it’s good you’ve conceded on this point at least. But tell me, where does it say or even imply Jesus is talking about Salvation (from verses 54 to 59)? I'd very much like to know. His claim here is of divinity, not salvation.

    Hebrews 1:8 anyone? This is also not to mention the countless titles attributed to Christ that are due to only God himself. Funny how you’ve stayed completely away from those evidences.

    Nope. It’s the same as saying “our great God/savior, Jesus Christ…” These are titles describing one person, not names describing two different people.

    That’s pure bull. When did Jesus “win battles for Israel?” You’re talking about what the Jews expected the messiah to be: A great political leader to overthrow Rome, not what the messiah actually was. This is why Jews today don’t believe Jesus was the Messiah foretold about in prophecy.

    Funny thing is, Jesus has all sorts of prophecies backing his Messiahship up. He was:

    1. Born of a woman (Genesis 3:15; cf. Galations 4:4)
    2. Born of a Virgin (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:21)
    3. Cut off (would die) 483 years after the declaration to reconstruct the temple in 444 B.C. (Dan. 9:24f.; this was fulfilled to the year: See Hoehner, Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ, 115-38).
    4. The seed of Abraham (Genesis 12:1-3 and 22:18; cf. Matthew 1:1 and Galations 3:16)
    5. A Descendant of David (2 Samuel 7:12f.; cf. Matthew 1:1)
    6. Born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2; cf. Matthew 2:1 and Luke 2:4-7)
    7. Anointed by the Holy Spirit (Isaiah 11:2; cf. Matthew 3:16-17)
    8. Heralded by a messenger (Isaiah 40:3 and Mal. 3:1; cf. Matthew 3:1-2)
    9. A worker of miracles (Isaiah 35:5-6; cf. Matthew 9:35)
    10. Cleanser of the Temple (Mal. 3:1; cf. Matthew 21:12f.)
    11. Rejected by Jews (Psalms 118:22; cf. 1 Peter 2:7)
    12. Die a humiliating death (Psalms 22 and Isaiah 53; cf. Matthew 27:31f.). His death would involve: enduring rejection by his own people (Isaiah 53:3; cf. John 1:10-11; 7:5, 48), standing silence before his accusers (Isaiah 53:7; cf. Matthew 27:12-19), being mocked (Psalms 22:7-8; cf. Matthew 27:31), having hands and feet pierced (Psalms 22:16; cf. Luke 23:33), being crucified with thieves (Isaiah 53:12; cf. Mark 15:27-28), praying for his persecutors (Isaiah 53:12; cf. Luke 23:34), the piercing of his side (Zech. 12:10; cf. John 19:34), burial in a rich man’s tomb (Isaiah 53:9; cf. Matthew 27:57-60), the casting of lots for his garments (Psalms 22:18; cf. John 19:23-24).
    13. Being raised from the dead (Psalms 2:7 and 16:10; cf. Acts 2:31 and Mark 16:6).
    14. Ascending into Heaven (Psalms 68:18; cf. Acts 1:9)
    15. Sitting at the right hand of God (Psalms 110:1; cf. Hebrews 1:3).

    The fact that you seem to be resorting to what contemporary Jews have to say about the Messiah (even though they completely reject Christ as such) further worries me about what you accept as the truth.

    Again, you’re begging the question. It does speak of himself (as clearly Jesus is illustrating to the Jews), and it is a direct reference to the I AM of Exodus. Yet again, I point out that the Jews he was talking to clearly understood his claim to deity, as their response shows.

    By all means, let’s get it all out at once. I’ve addressed every single point brought up by you and others; why not return the favor? :)

    In conclusion, I agree with C.S. Lewis (one of the strongest of modern theologians) when he wrote, "I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish things that people often say about Him: 'I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept His claim to be God.' That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would rather be a lunatic--on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg--or else he would be the Devil of Hell" (Mere Christianity, 55-56).
     
  14. drmmjr

    drmmjr Regular Member

    459
    +7
    Christian
    I'm not saying that Jesus wasn't the messiah. The jews thought that the messiah would do all of those things then. They didn't realize that Jesus would do those things when he returns.
     
  15. Jedi

    Jedi Knight

    +137
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Republican
    Agreed. However, the fact that you posted the thoughts of modern Jews in an effort to give another source who denied the deity of Christ implies that you agreed with what you quoted them as saying (Although they also reject the messiahship of Christ, and scripture clearly teaches against them; thus they've lost a lot of credability. They didn't know the Messiah when he actually was here. Why would you listen to what they have to say about how the Messiah is when they, themselves, didn't recognize him?). Though that did make me rather curious, since if this were truly your stance, you would have contradicted yourself.

    Also, an interesting study I ran across by chance while surfing the web can be found at http://www.apologetics.com/default....the Doctrine of the Trinity: An Outline Study. It seems to go into great detail in proving the Biblical support of the doctrine of the trinity.
     
  16. fieldsofwind

    fieldsofwind Well-Known Member

    +7
    Christian
    drmmjr... perhaps you should read some dialogue between edpobre and the fieldsofwind. I will post some past paragraphs... if you would like to reply... and explain why you think otherwise... go for it.

    Posted by edpobre: "God ALONE created or MADE heaven and earth (Is. 37:16). That God is the Father (Is. 63:16; Is. 64:8) who CREATED us (Malachi 2:10)."

    Ed... of course there is only one God... and He alone created the heavens and the earth. This in no way indicates that Christ is not God who became like man to be able to become our sacrifice. Christ is not some separate entity apart from God. He is not a different person or 'another' God. If this were so, then all of the verses indicating Christ's Diety would contradict the fact that there is only one God. Christ is the Living God who subjected Himself to humility, even the humility of taking man's punishment (death) for us. He became subservient to the Father from whom He came. Every verse you quote indicates this. The plethora of verses describing Christ as God fit together perfectly with those describing Him becoming flesh. This is why you see Him praying to the Father. This is why you see Him being subservient to the Father. God became subservient, (Christ), while at the same time still being God the Father in Heaven. The Bible clearly indicates Christ's Diety.

    Posted by edpobre: "[John 1:1 is about God's "logos" or "wisdom" REGARDING the REDEMPTION of the world.The "WORD" in this verse is NOT Jesus.]"

    Ed... instead of getting "the bible according to edpobre"... lets see what it actually says

    John 1:1--"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning."

    You say that the Word here is "not Jesus". Unfortunately for you ed... Jesus says that He is the beginning! The verse says the "Word was God". Then it clearly goes right into saying "He was with God in the beginning"... now who do you suppose this 'He' is? So by saying A=B and B=C... one can say that A=C. (I'm using this because I noticed you used some 'math logic' a while back) So this 'He' is directly addressed as "was God". This fits in perfectly with Hebrews 1:5--For to which of the angels did God ever say, “You are my Son: today I have become your Father.” Hebrews 1:8 But about the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.” Hebrews 1:10 He also says, “In the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands.” (Notice at the beginning of this God says “TODAY… I have become your Father… indicating that He wasn’t always… while Christ says many times that He is the Beginning and the End… indicating the claim I AM)

    So ed... I think that anyone who simply reads what the Bible says without reading in "ed's" logic... will see that the Word = Christ.

    Posted by edpobre: "[The "WORD" in this verse has NOT become a human being or a MAN yet. "The WORD was God" is a description of the POWER of God's "wisdom" (plan) REGARDING the REDEMPTION of the world.]"

    Once again we have "the Bible accoriding to edpobre". The Bible does not say it is a 'description' of anything. It plainly states what it states... nothing more, nothing less. The Word, (who was God), became flesh. It says in verse 10 "He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him." This indicates the 'He' that we discussed above. It does not say that this 'He' is some kind of 'logos' or idea of God's... it says that "He" (the Word) was God and became flesh. The Word does not = "idea"/"logos"... The Word = God. This is straight from the Bible ed... no 'reading' anything into it.

    Posted by edpobre: "[John 1:14 is about the FULFILLMENT of God's "logos" or "wisdom" THROUGH the birth of Jesus, a MAN. Here, apostle John is saying that God's "logos" or "wisdom" has BECOME a MAN or human being. John 1:2-13 is about Jesus, the MAN who is the FULFILLMENT of God's "logos" or "wisdom"]"

    It is amazing how much one must 'force' into those verses when taken as "the Bible according to edpobre". We have already seen how this Word=God and that the Word is described as this 'He' who was with God in the beginning, and through whom all things were made. So by simply reading what is written we learn that this 'He' = God (the Word was God) and became flesh and made HIS dwelling among us. Once again... there is no "logos"/"idea"... it specifically says that the Word made HIS... (Indicating possession) dwelling among us. So it is the WORD itself, who was God, who became a man, that made HIS dwelling among us. Notice edpobre... that I do not use anything else but what is written in the Bible. I do not 'force' it to say what I want it to say. Believe!

    It is amazing to read about all of the things that the Bible says about this Jesus Christ. If Christ was only a man... (as edpobre asserts)... then how could God call Him God... and also call Him the Lord that made everything. How could this man... just a mere man and nothing more... say that He is the Beginning and the End... the First and the Last... and indeed the Alpha and the Omega? How could He say that He is the KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS? How could He say that when you see Him, you are seeing the Father as well? How could He pray to the Father (after He had become a like man) that He wants us (man) to be one even as He and the Father are one? If I am one with ben over here... are we not both human and equal? Then if we are one as Christ and the Father are one... is Christ not claiming equality with God? Christ obviously submitted Himself to being nothing for us. He became subservient to the Father... but as is indicated in Hebrews 9... this was necessary to become the sacrifice for our sins. It even clearly says... (no 'reading' anything into it)... that the one who made the covenant had to die. Well... here are some verses for those seeking the truth. Edpobre... believe!
     
  17. fieldsofwind

    fieldsofwind Well-Known Member

    +7
    Christian
    Number 17 is a new addition... check it out!

    1) 1 Corinthians 2:8-- None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

    2) (John 14:5-10) Thomas said to him, "Lord, we don't know where you are going, so how can we know the way?" Jesus answered, "I am the way the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him." Philip said, "Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us." Jesus answered: "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'? Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you are not just my own. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work."

    3) (John 1:1-5, 14) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it... The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

    4) (Revelation 19:13) He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God.

    5) (Phil 2:5-10) Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in APPEARANCE as a man, he HUMBLED HIMSELF and BECAME obedient to death--even death on a cross! Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, (Reminder: God will not give His glory to another... He is the LORD and Him alone), that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

    6) (Rev 19:16) On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS. (Isaiah 42:8--I am the LORD: that is my name! I will not give my glory to another or my praise to idols.)

    7) (Hebrews 9:14) How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God! (Hebrews 9:16-17) In the case of a will, it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it, because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while THE ONE WHO MADE IT is living. (Did God not make the covenant? These verses are very clear as to who had to die)

    8) Hebrews 1:5 For to which of the angels did God ever say, “You are my Son: today I have become your Father.” Hebrews 1:8 But about the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.” Hebrews 1:10 He also says, “In the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands.” (Notice at the beginning of this God says “TODAY… I have become your Father… indicating that He wasn’t always… while Christ says many times that He is the Beginning and the End… indicating the claim I AM)

    9) Revelation 22:13—(Jesus speaking) “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.”

    10) Colossians 2:9—For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form

    11) Titus 2:13—While we wait for the blessed hope—the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ

    12) John 20:28—Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!”

    13) John 18:3-6—So Judas came to the grove, guiding a detachment of soldiers and some officials from the chief priests and Pharisees. They were carrying torches, lanterns and weapons. Jesus, knowing all that was going to happen to him, went out and asked them, “Who is it you want?” “Jesus of Nazareth,” they replied. “I am he,” Jesus said. (And Judas the traitor was standing there with them.) When Jesus said, “I am he,” they drew back and fell to the ground.

    14) Revelation 5:11-14--Then I looked and heard the voice of many angels, numbering thousands upon thousands, and ten thousand times ten thousand. They encircled the throne and the living creatures and the elders. In a loud voice they sang: "Worthy is the Lamb, who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and strength and honor and glory and praise!" THen I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and on the sea, and all that is in them, singing: "To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be praise and honor and glory and power, for ever and ever! The four living creatures said, "Amen," and the elders fell down and worshiped. ------- Matthew 4:10--Jesus said to him, "Away from me, Satan! For it is written: Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only."

    15) Acts 3:15--You killed the author of life, but God raised him from the dead. We are witnesses of this. (Who is the author of life?)

    16) We recieved the Spirit of God correct? (Joel 2:28) (2 Cor 1:21-22--Now it is God who makes both us and you stand firm in Christ. He anointed us, set his seal of ownership on us, and put his Spirit in our hearts as a desposit, guaranteeing what is to come.) Then how is it that God's word also says that God sent the Spirit of Christ into us... unless Christ's Spirit is the Spirit of God? There are not two different Spirits within me, but one! Galatians 4:6--Because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, the Spirit who calls out, "Abba, Father."

    17) Titus 2:13--while we wait for the blessed hope--the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good. (notice that it says Christ was purifying a people for his very own... "purify for himself"... sounds like this is what God was doing doesn't it... indicates, once again, that they are one in the same)
     
  18. OldShepherd

    OldShepherd Zaqunraah

    +165
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Others
    To create a nonexistent argument. disprove the argument, and then claim that you have proven your opponent wrong when he/she never said it in the first place..
    For the most part they do and did. The were Jews, with a different view point. My point was that the Trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit came from pre-Christian Judaism.

    Again referring to the Jewish Encyclopedia.

    • Although some cabalists, such as Abulafia and the pseudonymous author of "Kanah," were not favorably disposed toward Talmudism, yet this exception only proves the rule that the cabalists were not conscious of any opposition to Talmudic Judaism, as is sufficiently clear from the fact that men like Naḥmanides, Solomon ibn Adret, Joseph Caro, Moses Isserles, and Elijah b. Solomon of Wilna were not only supporters of the Cabala, but even contributed largely to its development.

      The Cabala and the Talmud.
      As these men were the actual representatives of true Talmudic Judaism, there must have been something in the Cabala that attracted them. It can not have been its metaphysics; for Talmudic Judaism was not greatly interested in such speculations. It must be, then, that the psychology of the Cabala, in which a very high position is assigned to man, appealed to the Jewish mind. While Maimonides and his followers regarded philosophical speculation as the highest duty of man, and even made the immortality of the soul dependent on it; or, speaking more correctly, while immortality meant for them only the highest development of "active intellect" in man, to which only a few attained, the Cabalists taught not only that every man may expect a great deal in the future world, according to his good and pious actions, but even that he is the most important factor in nature in this world. Not man's intelligence, but his moral nature, determines what he is. Nor is he merely a spoke in the wheel, a small, unimportant fragment of the universe, but the center around which everything moves. Here the Jewish Cabala, in contrast to alien philosophy, tried to present the true Jewish view of life, and one that appealed to Talmudic Judaism.
      http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=1&letter=C
    The Christian God has no "parts". Remember me quoting the Great Sh'ma? Have you ever read isaiah 55:8-9? Is your God omipotent, capable of doing anything? Mine is.
    Jesus did very plainly say He was God. that is exactly how 1st century Jews understood the words "I Am" I see you didn't read any of my previous posts on this topic.
    Well let's see. Every language has rules. There are rules in English, for example, ""I" before "E", except after "C", and when pronounced "A" as in "neighbor" or "sleigh." So tell me when you write English in accordance with those rules are you "relying on someone's interpretation?" And since you imply that you don't, "rely on someone's interpretation of scripture" perhaps you can interpret this for me.

    • awf d[ $[rb hn[t-alw


    So when I cite, for example, "Sharp's Rule" or"Colwell's Rule" as it pertains to translating Greek I make the assumption that the Bible writers, in this case Paul, wrote very precisely, observing all the grammatical rules, so that they communicated precisely to their intended audiences who spoke and read Greek. They would not have violated those grammatical rules and communicated misinformation to their readers. So why don't you crack wise some more because it really impresses my socks off.
     
  19. drmmjr

    drmmjr Regular Member

    459
    +7
    Christian
    When the Jews rejected Jesus as the messiah, he went to the gentiles. Even though the Jews didn't recognize him while he was here doesn't change the fact.

    How would I have contradicted myself?
     
  20. drmmjr

    drmmjr Regular Member

    459
    +7
    Christian
    fieldsofwind,

    John 1:1--"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning."

    Actually, it is "the same was in the beginning with God".
    What does "logos" mean?

    logos (log'-os); from NT:3004; something said (including the thought); by implication a topic (subject of discourse), also reasoning (the mental faculty) or motive; by extension, a computation; specifically (with the article in John) the Divine Expression (i.e. Christ):
    KJV - account, cause, communication, X concerning, doctrine, fame, X have to do, intent, matter, mouth, preaching, question, reason, + reckon, remove, say (-ing), shew, X speaker, speech, talk, thing, + none of these things move me, tidings, treatise, utterance, word, work.
    (Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright (c) 1994, Biblesoft and International Bible Translators, Inc.)

    Does any of this say that "logos" = Jesus? No. But Jesus is the result of that "logos". Just like when someone plans to build something, the building is not physical when it is first though of. It is a thought that later becomes physical.

    OldShepherd,

    And how is a discussion about the trinity a nonexistent argument? And what did I claim was wrong that whoever I was discussing with never said?
    It may have come from some off shoot of Jews, but not from the majority. In fact, in Indian religion there is the Trinitarian group of Brahma, Vishna, and Shiva; in Egyptian religion there is the group of Kneph, Phthas, and Osiris. In Phoenicia the trinity of gods were Ulomus, Ulosuros, and Eliun. In Greece they were Zeus, Poseidon, and Aidoneus. In Rome they were Jupiter, Neptune, and Pluto. In Babylonia and Assyria they were Anos, Illinos, and Aos. Among Celtic nations they were called Kriosan, Biosena, and Siva, and in Germanic nations they were called Thor, Wodan, and Fricco.

    No, God was different from these other "gods". He is not a three parted being.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...