Jesus Christ

"Let Us make man in Our image
Genesis 1:26

Originally posted by debbiejo
In the beginning it says that the spirit hovered over the waters also God said let US make man in our image. It says in scripture that Jesus is the image of the invisible God, and that all things were created for Him visible and invisible. All three were there as one in the beginning.

There. It is admitted that Genesis 1:26 implies plurality. But plurality simply means "more than one". Why limit the number to three and why involve the Son, or the Word and the Holy Spirit?

We should notice that nowhere in the verse does it state that the prnouns "us" and "our" refer to the "Word" or the "Holy Ghost" as you presumed. Let us bear in mind that God alone created all things (Gen.1;27; Is.44:24; 37:16).

Then whom was the LORD referring to with the pronouns "us" and "our"? Wasn't He referring to those who were already there in existense then?
Wasn't He referring to the Cherubs or the angels?
(Job 38:4-7; Gen.3:22, 24). 🙂

Originally posted by clickclick
Jesus is saying that they may know you, the only true god (didnt say what makes up god) and this would be opposed to all the fake Gods. Something that is spoken about numerous times in the bible.

For there is only one true God. The Father. 🙂

Originally posted by clickclick
Phil. 2:6-8

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 the human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death-even death on a cross.

This seems telling enough but should you require more speaking on this passage, I will oblige.

Philippians 2:6, KJV has this to say:

“Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God.”

The fact that the verse clearly states that He is “in the form of God” and “equal with God” is considered by many as a proof that Christ is God. That is not surprising.

But a closer inquiry reveals that the “form of God” spoken of in this verse could not have referred to God’s nature, for the simple biblical reason that God who is a spirit does not have the physical form that Christ has.

Apostles spoke of Christ’s being in the form of God and of His “equality” with God because of the qualities that were given to Christ by God. Christ knew only too well that those divine qualities were only given to Him by God and that He will eventually subject Himself to God so that God who put everything under Christ may be all in all. This is written in Corinthians 15:27-28:

“For he ‘has put everything under his feet’. Now when it says that ‘everything’ has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.”

This verse is so clear that it is indeed puzzling how anybody could fail to understand it. The verse states unequivocally that Christ will be made subject to God. If Jesus is God. Can this God be subject to another God? No, He cannot.

The true God is Almighty, all-powerful, and subject to no one, whereas the Son clearly subjects Himself to Someone.

The Son, Jesus Christ, is clearly distinguished from God.

Only one is the God who gave Christ His authority and has the power to command and send Christ and the Holy Spirit, and that one true God is the Father.

🙂

Now, although Christ is found in the "form of God", meaning "having qualities God gave Him"... Christ still remain in His very natural sense - His being human. This is the very best example of HUMILITY that every Christian should follow.

Originally posted by clickclick
Not only did he say that before Abraham was born he was. He was saying that in response to being asked how he SAW abraham. Jesus even says that he is the alpha and omega. Jesus Christ didnt get that name until he came to earth. That is another thing that is made clear in the bible.

Check.

Phil 2-9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under earth, and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

And as what I have emphasized before.... ALL AUTHORITIES... NAMES... POWERS that Christ had was given to Him by God.

🙂

By the way, up to this moment.. you didn't answer my original question:

Where in the Bible does it say that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are parts of one God?

The doctrine of the Trinity as commonly defined is not found in the Bible. For we assert that there are three persons in one God - a statement not found in Scripture.
Richard W. Chilson
Full Christianity: A Catholic Response to Fundamental Questions
p. 25

One devoted, professional Bible scholar already made his conclusion.
Maybe he missed to read the Bible.

And you?

Do you know what Jesus meant to say "before Abraham was born, I AM"? I answered it before. But I'll make a more deep explanation with it soon... of course, with the help of the Bible.

And as what I have emphasized before.... ALL AUTHORITIES... NAMES... POWERS that Christ had was given to Him by God.

smile

By the way, up to this moment.. you didn't answer my original question:

Where in the Bible does it say that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are parts of one God?

I read your explanation for that but as I pointed out, that was his response when asked how he SAW abraham. Of which you did not give an explanation.

The fact that the verse clearly states that He is “in the form of God” and “equal with God” is considered by many as a proof that Christ is God. That is not surprising.

But a closer inquiry reveals that the “form of God” spoken of in this verse could not have referred to God’s nature, for the simple biblical reason that God who is a spirit does not have the physical form that Christ has.

IM sorry but you cant choose bits and pieces of a scripture to respond to and take out of context.

I will start again and respond to this as is.

Phil 2:6-11

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

So lets see what it says in there. It says that he was in very nature God but made himself nothing and took the nature of a servant (as opposed to God). So he was made in human likeness and was found in appearance as a man. He HUMBLED himself and became obedient to DEATH.

So what are we being told? That he was in very nature God but humbled himself to be created as man and be a servant. Which should explain your questions as to why he was a servant.

Lets go back to John so we can see about the word becoming flesh.

John 1:1-5

In the begining was the Word, and the word was with God and the Word was God. He was with God in the begining. 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.

John 1:14 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.

I also recall that you have not spoken on the scripture of which states that the one and only God sat on the fathers right hand.

Now to speak about that passage from John. It tells us that HE but not it was with God. It tells us that he was God. This again tells us not only that the word was not only God but that he was at the begining. Which makes sense as Jesus says that he is the alpha and the omega and the bible says that he created everything. Through him again not it, all things were made by him and that nothing was made without him. His glory is of the One and Only.

Then again tells us that the word became flesh and he made his dwelling among us.

Now I recall you saying that he couldnt have the form of God because God is a spirit and Chris was a man. But you obviously didnt read the scripture well enough because it says that he went from that (being in nature of God or what you quoted as being in the form of) to becoming a man.

Originally posted by Philosophicus
clickclick, there's a reason why we have the number 3 and the number 1 - the two are not the same; 3 cannot become 1. 🤣 You are so illogical in your arguments and on top of that so proud of it - it's hilarious how you make a fool of yourself.

Thinking of an egg. We have the yoke, the white, and the shell, but it is still ONE egg.

Originally posted by clickclick
IM sorry but you cant choose bits and pieces of a scripture to respond to and take out of context.

Let us bear in mind that the words written in the Bible are in harmony... not contradictory. Using several verses of the Bible to support a particular verse is actually Biblical.

You cannot simply cite a verse and make an interpretation out of it. It should first conform with the rest of the Bible to maintain the "harmony".

Originally posted by clickclick
I will start again and respond to this as is.

Phil 2:6-11

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

So lets see what it says in there. It says that he was in very nature God but made himself nothing and took the nature of a servant (as opposed to God). So he was made in human likeness and was found in appearance as a man. He HUMBLED himself and became obedient to DEATH.

So what are we being told? That he was in very nature God but humbled himself to be created as man and be a servant. Which should explain your questions as to why he was a servant.

To sum it all, it didn't prove your allegation that Jesus Christ is a part of one God.

Originally posted by clickclick
John 1:1-5

In the begining was the Word, and the word was with God and the Word was God. He was with God in the begining. 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.

John 1:14 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.

I also recall that you have not spoken on the scripture of which states that the one and only God sat on the fathers right hand.

Now to speak about that passage from John. It tells us that HE but not it was with God. It tells us that he was God. This again tells us not only that the word was not only God but that he was at the begining. Which makes sense as Jesus says that he is the alpha and the omega and the bible says that he created everything. Through him again not it, all things were made by him and that nothing was made without him. His glory is of the One and Only.

Then again tells us that the word became flesh and he made his dwelling among us.

Before I go on, I would like to remind you that you didn't address the rest of my posts... even care to answer my original question.

The Bible is very clear. It was the "Word" (the Logos or the Verbo) that was said to be "in the beginning". It was the "Word" that was said to be "with God". It was the "Word" that was said to be "was God". And it was the "Word" that was said to be "made flesh".

I believe that Jesus Christ is called the "Word of God". But the Bible never made a single point that the "Word" in that particular passages is our Lord Jesus Christ Himself.

Now I recall you saying that he couldnt have the form of God because God is a spirit and Chris was a man. But you obviously didnt read the scripture well enough because it says that he went from that (being in nature of God or what you quoted as being in the form of) to becoming a man.

I am reminding you of the consistency on your part. Before, you said Jesus is not exactly God and now you are saying He was.

Which is which?

Jesus Christ indeed possesses many titles such as: Lord, Savior, Rock, Alpha and Omega, "Wonderful, Counsellor, The Mighty God, The Everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace", and all of which were also applied to God.

But the truth remains that Jesus Christ is different from God since these titles were given to Him by God. These titles are applied to the office, the government, and the authorities entrusted by God upon the shoulder of Jesus Christ.

I'll be back with the "I AM" soon. 🙂

Just to remind you... you didn't answer my question... you didn't even care to address my post regarding the Trinity. Anyway, I understand.

And by the way... what is your point now?

1. Jesus Christ is not exactly God,
2. Jesus Christ is part of God... or
3. Jesus Christ is God.

Make it clear first... for the sake of argument. 🙂

"Who can forgive sins but God alone?"
Mark 2:5-7
Response to ushomefree

When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic,
"Son, your sins are forgiven."
Now some teachers of the law were sitting there,
thinking to themselves, "Why does this fellow talk like that?
He's blaspheming!
Who can forgive sins but God alone?"
Mark 2:5-7 (NIV)

Ye. God is the only one who can forgive sins. But if Jesus is not God, how can He forgive sins?

Jesus Christ Himself clarifies such query in the succeeding verses.

Immediately Jesus knew in his spirit that this was what they were thinking in their hearts,
and he said to them, "Why are you thinking these things?
Which is easier: to say to the paralytic, `Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, `Get up, take your mat and walk'?
But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins...."
He said to the paralytic, "I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home."
Mark 2:8-11, (NIV)

As emphasized, Jesus Christ according to Himself, declared that He has the authority on earth to forgive sins.

How did He gain this authority?

Then Jesus came and spoke to them,
saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.
Matthew 28:18, (NKJV)

And who gave Him all the authority in heaven and on earth?

My Father has given me everything, and he is the only one who knows the Son.
The only one who truly knows the Father is the Son.
But the Son wants to tell others about the Father,
so that they can know him too.
Matthew 11:27 (Contemporary English Version)

Clearly, it is the Father (the only true God) who gave Christ the authority to forgive sins. If Jesus Christ is God, He don't need to be given such authority because all authorities are God inherently (the very sense of being omnipotent).

🙂

Let us bear in mind that the words written in the Bible are in harmony... not contradictory. Using several verses of the Bible to support a particular verse is actually Biblical.

You cannot simply cite a verse and make an interpretation out of it. It should first conform with the rest of the Bible to maintain the "harmony".

No, what you did was not biblical. You didnt simply "cite other verses". What you did was you took that passage out of context to respond to it and as such, left much unanswered and did not come even in the ballpark of sufficiently adddressing it.

Again, I already made an explanation regarding such thing with the help of the Bible.

To sum it all, it didn't prove your allegation that Jesus Christ is a part of one God.

No, you didnt. You are one again completely avoiding that passage. It is no wonder though as it makes it completely clear as to what im saying. Were this not the case, you would have addressed it.

Im still waiting........

Okay. As what I am repeatedly saying, I already had made my Biblical point of view regarding the "Word" that became "flesh".

Before I go on, I would like to remind you that you didn't address the rest of my posts... even care to answer my original question.

The Bible is very clear. It was the "Word" (the Logos or the Verbo) that was said to be "in the beginning". It was the "Word" that was said to be "with God". It was the "Word" that was said to be "was God". And it was the "Word" that was said to be "made flesh".

I believe that Jesus Christ is called the "Word of God". But the Bible never made a single point that the "Word" in that particular passages is our Lord Jesus Christ Himself.

Yes, the devine word of God. We know that. Now please, tell me when you are going to address the fact that the Word was being referred to as a HE, who DID things. What things? Who created everything that has been created. Who made himself into a servant. Who was the alpha and the omega.

Still waiting..... The word becoming flesh and then talking about Jesus was that, is not clear enough for you? Interesting, VERY.

So you are saying that Jesus Christ was God and later became human and dwelt among us. Meaning this one true God became a man in the person of Jesus Christ. Let me emphasize that we only have one God. When this one God became a man in the person of Jesus Christ, who was the One referred by Jesus as the Father and the only true God, who is in heaven, when He (Jesus) was still here on earth?

I am reminding you of the consistency on your part. Before, you said Jesus is not exactly God and now you are saying He was.

Which is which?

Well, who exactly is God? Thats what im saying, there are different manifestations of God. Was Jesus ever the father? No. But he was by very nature of Being, God.

You have to stop that lame arguing technique. Please by all means tell me how ive been inconsistent. I said Jesus wasnt exactly god, then came back saying that I wasnt sure. To which, I said no. To which later on you even said that I said I wasnt sure. Please, just stick to what ive said, be honest here. If you want to find those parts and post them where ive been "incosistent" please by all means do. Make sure to take nothing out of context but post it as a whole.

Anyway, Jesus is not the father nor is he the holy spirit. Ive mentioned that many times. So what then is he? Well Jesus Christ was a man, but obviously not just any man. So who was this man? Well its made quite clear in the bible who he was. He was the word that became flesh, he was by very nature God but made himself into a servant. Does this change the being of God? No. Jesus was the incarnation, he was, a man. The divinity of God remained the same.

Just to remind you... you didn't answer my question... you didn't even care to address my post regarding the Trinity. Anyway, I understand.

And by the way... what is your point now?

1. Jesus Christ is not exactly God,
2. Jesus Christ is part of God... or
3. Jesus Christ is God.

Make it clear first... for the sake of argument.

You are so full of it.

I didnt address your post regarding the Trinity? As in where does it mention that there is a Trinity? Ive already addressed that one aswell. I did that way back when I mentioned the Trinity.

This was my first response in this thread just so you can keep it in mind.

Its not that nobody can see God because he is a spirit, its that he is too holy for man to see.

"
Jesus is part of God, he came in the flesh, he was the word.

Before Jesus death, some could speak directly to God but they were also responsible for their sins. They had to sacrifice.

After Jesus died for man's sins (Jesus was the word before he came in the flesh) then he became the intermediate. Jesus is not exactly God, he is part of God, as is the Holy spirt."

As you can see, I havent altered what ive been saying. Though try as you may to indicate such.

When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic,
"Son, your sins are forgiven."
Now some teachers of the law were sitting there,
thinking to themselves, "Why does this fellow talk like that?
He's blaspheming!
Who can forgive sins but God alone?"
Mark 2:5-7 (NIV)

Ye. God is the only one who can forgive sins. But if Jesus is not God, how can He forgive sins?

Jesus Christ Himself clarifies such query in the succeeding verses.

Immediately Jesus knew in his spirit that this was what they were thinking in their hearts,
and he said to them, "Why are you thinking these things?
Which is easier: to say to the paralytic, `Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, `Get up, take your mat and walk'?
But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins...."
He said to the paralytic, "I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home."
Mark 2:8-11, (NIV)

As emphasized, Jesus Christ according to Himself, declared that He has the authority on earth to forgive sins.

How did He gain this authority?

Then Jesus came and spoke to them,
saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.
Matthew 28:18, (NKJV)

And who gave Him all the authority in heaven and on earth?

My Father has given me everything, and he is the only one who knows the Son.
The only one who truly knows the Father is the Son.
But the Son wants to tell others about the Father,
so that they can know him too.
Matthew 11:27 (Contemporary English Version)

Clearly, it is the Father (the only true God) who gave Christ the authority to forgive sins. If Jesus Christ is God, He don't need to be given such authority because all authorities are God inherently (the very sense of being omnipotent).

Sorry but ive already addressed this. refer back. He was by very nature God but made himself into nothing, a servant....

There you go again.

You said "Jesus is part of God"...

That's why I asked you where in the Bible does it say that Jesus is part of God. Which up to this moment you didn't even responded with the Biblical verse saying that Jesus is part of God.

Originally posted by clickclick
No, what you did was not biblical. You didnt simply "cite other verses". What you did was you took that passage out of context to respond to it and as such, left much unanswered and did not come even in the ballpark of sufficiently adddressing it.

It's up to you how you interpret your Biblical view... But what I did is obviously with Biblical proof. My answers come from the Bible. Unlike you, your concept of Trinity is unbiblical.

That's why I asked you where in the Biblie does it say that Jesus is part of God.

Originally posted by clickclick
No, you didnt. You are one again completely avoiding that passage. It is no wonder though as it makes it completely clear as to what im saying. Were this not the case, you would have addressed it.

Im still waiting........

Again... I already had made my side regarding that particular discussion... which you still deny that I did. You used the verse to support your claim (where up to this moment you didn't make a clear point what you really claim: is it Jesus is not exactly God, Jesus is God, or Jesus is part of God?). I answered it with Biblical explanation. You said I didn't. Well, it's up to you. I suggest read it again.