Originally posted by Fiery Eyes
Using the bible is showing proof that he exist, which is not what I was trying to prove anyway, this thread is trying to establish rather or not Jesus and God are one, and using the bible is how you would establish that. It's clear that no one has anwers to what I asked, cuz NO one is answering any of them lol
There are other sources that prove the existence of a historic Jesus.
The Bible cannot provide evidence for the proposition that Jesus and God are one because that very concept is contained within the premise of The Bible itself. Again, this is like trying to define a word using the word itself in the definition.
Perhaps if you asked more relevant questions, people would feel compelled to address them.
Is God and Jesus the same person?No, it is more or less a fact that a man named jesus or something like that lived in todays Israel around 2000 years ago. So jesus is an historical figure, but thats were it ends. I aint buying any of him being a son of a god nor that jesus is divine. So to answer the original question NO
Originally posted by Jury
[b]“IN the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” (NKJV)Those who believe that Christ is God assume that Christ is the “Word” mentioned in this verse. However, it is quite plain that the name “Christ” is not even mentioned in this verse. Neither does the verse say that Christ is God nor does it say that Christ preexisted in the beginning as God. The verse simply states that “IN the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God”
But isn’t it true that Christ is the fulfillment of the “Word” mentioned in John 1:1? He is indeed the fulfillment of the “Word” in that verse. Hence, the “Word” was about Christ. But take note that this is not the same as saying that the “Word” was Christ Himself who existed in the beginning as an independent being.
Then why did the verse say that “IN the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”? In I Peter 1:20, this is written:“Who was foreknown indeed before the foundation of the world,…” (Revised Version)
The “Word,” which was about Christ, is said to be “in the beginning” and “with God” because Christ was in the mind of God before the creation of the world. He was not yet a being then but only a thought in the mind of God. The “Word” in John 1:1 was not a being existing on its own, independent of God, but was simply a thought or a word in the mind of God. Thus, the verse states that “the Word was with God,” being in the mind of God.
Why is it wrong to interpret the “Word” in John 1:1 as Christ, pre-existing in the beginning as God? The verse clearly states that “the Word was with God.” So if, aside from God, the “Word” were another God, then there would be two Gods: one God with another God. That would be absolutely unscriptural for the Bible introduces only one true God.
Did the “Word” remain in the mind of God? Did it remain a thought or a plan in God’s mind? The Bible has these to say:“Which He promised before through His prophets in the Holy Scriptures, concerning His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh.” (Romans 1:2-3, NKJV)
“So the LORD God said to the serpent: ‘Because you have done this, You are cursed more than all cattle, And more than every beast of the field;… And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise your head, And you shall bruise His heel’.” (Genesis 3:14-15, NKJV)
“And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.” (Genesis 17:7, KJV)
“Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.” (Galatians 3:16, KJV)
Christ is the Seed of Abraham. When God made an everlasting covenant with Abraham, He said, “I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed.” And that was an everlasting covenant that God would be God unto Abraham and to his Seed. Take note that the covenant stipulates that Abraham and his Seed shall deify God: God shall be God unto them, both to Abraham and his Seed, who is Jesus Christ. Far from being a God, Christ is someone who was destined to recognize the true God. As early as the time that the good news about Jesus Christ was being foretold, He was already distinguished from God.
So there was no pre-existent Christ. There was no Christ prior to the fulfillment of the plan of God concerning Him. What was there with God in the beginning was the word or the thought or the plan concerning Christ.
“and the Word was God.”
Then why is it stated in John 1:1 that the “Word was God”? It is because the “Word” or the plan concerning Christ comes from God. Since the “Word” is of God, it shares the quality of God.
“For no word from God shall be void of power.” (Luke 1:37, Revised Version)
The word of God is powerful. As God is powerful, so also is His word. So, the “Word” was God (in John 1:1) in the sense that it has the quality of God but not in the sense that the “Word” was another God.
The term “God” in the phrase “the Word was God” is used to modify the term “Word”. It is not used as a noun but as an adjective. If it were a noun it would have an article in the Greek text, not just theos (God), but ho theos (the God).
So the term “God” in the phrase “the Word was God” indicates the quality of the “Word”. The use of the term “God” here is analogous to the use of the term “gold” in the statement “Time is gold.” “Gold” is not used here as a noun; it functions as an adjective modifying the term “time,” to emphasize its value, i.e., golden.
More deeper explanation comes later. 🙂 [/B]
If God had a plan, and Jesus was the fulfilment of that plan, then Jesus=God due to his omnipresence. If you look at a mirror then you see your reflection, but God would see himself- he is every aspect of himself, every bit. If something is Godlike, it is God (though if a picture is you like, it is still a picture). If it isn't, it isn't. Jesus was Godlike, a part of God's personality, a beingkiss. The word is separate from God but bonded like with marriage (or like your hand).
Also, one could interpret the covenant as the protection God offered to the Jews. Like when he sent David to beat up Goliath. Not as a person several millennia later.
Originally posted by Jury
[b]“IN the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” (NKJV)Those who believe that Christ is God assume that Christ is the “Word” mentioned in this verse. However, it is quite plain that the name “Christ” is not even mentioned in this verse. Neither does the verse say that Christ is God nor does it say that Christ preexisted in the beginning as God. The verse simply states that “IN the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” [/B]
But it says later in that chapter "The Word became flesh and made His dwelling among us." (1:12) Which means that this Word IS Christ.
Originally posted by Jury
[b]“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God”But isn’t it true that Christ is the fulfillment of the “Word” mentioned in John 1:1? He is indeed the fulfillment of the “Word” in that verse. Hence, the “Word” was about Christ. But take note that this is not the same as saying that the “Word” was Christ Himself who existed in the beginning as an independent being.
John 1:3 "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." Christ was with God in the beginning.
John 8:58 "'I tell you the truth,' Jesus answered, 'before Abraham was born, I am!'"
Originally posted by Jury
[b][u]Then why did the verse say that “IN the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”? In I Peter 1:20, this is written:“Who was foreknown indeed before the foundation of the world,…” (Revised Version)
The “Word,” which was about Christ, is said to be “in the beginning” and “with God” because Christ was in the mind of God before the creation of the world. He was not yet a being then but only a thought in the mind of God. The “Word” in John 1:1 was not a being existing on its own, independent of God, but was simply a thought or a word in the mind of God. Thus, the verse states that “the Word was with God,” being in the mind of God.
The verse says that Christ was foreknown; it didn't say after that "And Christ existed as thought in the mind of the Almighty" or something like that. "The Word was with God" because the Word is God, which the first verse of John says.
Originally posted by Jury
[b][u]Why is it wrong to interpret the “Word” in John 1:1 as Christ, pre-existing in the beginning as God? The verse clearly states that “the Word was with God.” So if, aside from God, the “Word” were another God, then there would be two Gods: one God with another God. That would be absolutely unscriptural for the Bible introduces only one true God.
It says in the same verse that the Word IS God.
Originally posted by Jury
[b][u]Did the “Word” remain in the mind of God? Did it remain a thought or a plan in God’s mind? The Bible has these to say:“Which He promised before through His prophets in the Holy Scriptures, concerning His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh.” (Romans 1:2-3, NKJV)
What does that verse have to deal with Christ "being in the mind of God"?
Originally posted by Jury
[b][u]“So the LORD God said to the serpent: ‘Because you have done this, You are cursed more than all cattle, And more than every beast of the field;… And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise your head, And you shall bruise His heel’.” (Genesis 3:14-15, NKJV)
What does that verse have to deal with Christ "being in the mind of God"?
Originally posted by Jury
[b][u]“And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.” (Genesis 17:7, KJV)
What does that verse have to deal with Christ "being in the mind of God"?
Originally posted by Jury
[b][u]“Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.” (Galatians 3:16, KJV)
What does that verse have to deal with Christ "being in the mind of God"?
Originally posted by Jury
[b][u]Christ is the Seed of Abraham. When God made an everlasting covenant with Abraham, He said, “I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed.” And that was an everlasting covenant that God would be God unto Abraham and to his Seed. Take note that the covenant stipulates that Abraham and his Seed shall deify God: God shall be God unto them, both to Abraham and his Seed, who is Jesus Christ. Far from being a God, Christ is someone who was destined to recognize the true God. As early as the time that the good news about Jesus Christ was being foretold, He was already distinguished from God.
Abraham and his seed, that doesn't prove anything like Christ and God are two different beings.
Originally posted by Jury
[b][u]Then why is it stated in John 1:1 that the “Word was God”? It is because the “Word” or the plan concerning Christ comes from God. Since the “Word” is of God, it shares the quality of God.
You just contradicted yourself.
Originally posted by Jury
[b][u]“For no word from God shall be void of power.” (Luke 1:37, Revised Version)The word of God is powerful. As God is powerful, so also is His word. So, the “Word” was God (in John 1:1) in the sense that it has the quality of God but not in the sense that the “Word” was another God.
Yes, not in the sense that the Word was another God but the same indeed.
Originally posted by Jury
[b][u]The term “God” in the phrase “the Word was God” is used to modify the term “Word”. It is not used as a noun but as an adjective. If it were a noun it would have an article in the Greek text, not just theos (God), but ho theos (the God).
God is a noun, whether as "God" or "the God" they're both nouns.
The man was human. Human sounds like a noun to me.
Originally posted by Jury
[b][u]So the term “God” in the phrase “the Word was God” indicates the quality of the “Word”. The use of the term “God” here is analogous to the use of the term “gold” in the statement “Time is gold.” “Gold” is not used here as a noun; it functions as an adjective modifying the term “time,” to emphasize its value, i.e., golden.
"Time" isn't a noun.
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God
But it says later in that chapter "The Word became flesh and made His dwelling among us." (1:12) Which means that this Word IS Christ. EXACTLY
Jesus was made flesh, so he could endure the same temptations that we all face and die on the cross for everyone's sins. Why is it that he didn't sin, but we have a difficult time at times not sinning?? I believe it's becuz Jesus knew who HE was, HE knew who HIS FATHER was, if WE would come to the same conclusion and reconize WHO we are in Christ, it wouldn't be as difficult. I don't see how GOD and JESUS could be the same.
Why would God send himself to earth, pray to himself, talk to himself (Mat 3:17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased), why would he LIE and tell everyone he was the Son of God?
Originally posted by Ytaker
If God had a plan, and Jesus was the fulfilment of that plan, then Jesus=God due to his omnipresence. If you look at a mirror then you see your reflection, but God would see himself- he is every aspect of himself, every bit. If something is Godlike, it is God (though if a picture is you like, it is still a picture). If it isn't, it isn't. Jesus was Godlike, a part of God's personality, a beingkiss. The word is separate from God but bonded like with marriage (or like your hand).Also, one could interpret the covenant as the protection God offered to the Jews. Like when he sent David to beat up Goliath. Not as a person several millennia later.
I believe that Jesus Christ has indeed "Godlike" qualities... but it doesn't prove any sense that He is the God Himself. God's quality is His originally... unlike Jesus "Godlike" qualities, which came from God. 🙂
Concerning God's and Christ's qualities, the Bible has this to say.
“Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God.” Philippians 2:6,
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. 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.” (NIV)
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. Can the true 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.
Originally posted by ska57
But it says later in that chapter "The Word became flesh and made His dwelling among us." (1:12) Which means that this Word IS Christ.John 1:3 "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." Christ was with God in the beginning.
John 8:58 "'I tell you the truth,' Jesus answered, 'before Abraham was born, I am!'"
The verse says that Christ was foreknown; it didn't say after that "And Christ existed as thought in the mind of the Almighty" or something like that. "The Word was with God" because the Word is God, which the first verse of John says.
It says in the same verse that the Word IS God.
What does that verse have to deal with Christ "being in the mind of God"?
What does that verse have to deal with Christ "being in the mind of God"?
What does that verse have to deal with Christ "being in the mind of God"?
What does that verse have to deal with Christ "being in the mind of God"?
Abraham and his seed, that doesn't prove anything like Christ and God are two different beings.
You just contradicted yourself.
Yes, not in the sense that the Word was another God but the same indeed.
God is a noun, whether as "God" or "the God" they're both nouns.
The man was human. Human sounds like a noun to me."Time" isn't a noun.
🙂 I suggest.. that you read that post all over again.
But, what's the use? You haven't understood it the first time you read. 🙄
And sorry... the word "time" is a noun. Don't you have dictionary? 🙄
Originally posted by Jury
I believe that Jesus Christ has indeed "Godlike" qualities... but it doesn't prove any sense that He is the God Himself. God's quality is His originally... unlike Jesus "Godlike" qualities, which came from God. 🙂Concerning God's and Christ's qualities, the Bible has this to say.
“Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God.” Philippians 2:6,
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. 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.” (NIV)
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. Can the true 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.
Actually, if Jesus possesses Godlike qualities, then he is God. If he is God, then they are original. They are not copies; they are God's attributes.
Concerning Jesus’ powers...
1. He can forgive. If I swore for two pages at you, it wouldn't mean a thing if Omega said "I forgive you". God can though, because sin is foremost a defiance of him and his laws.
For instance, David says in Psalm 51, 1-4 Be gracious to me, God, according to Your faithful love; according to Your abundant compassion, blot out my rebellion. Wash away my guilt, and cleanse me from my sin. For I am conscious of my rebellion, and my sin is always before me. Against You You alone I have sinned and done this evil in Your sight. So You are right when You pass sentence; You are blameless when You judge.
Omega is not going to get something like that from me. 😄
Jesus is also the only good person in history that can say with a straight face "which of you can convict me of sin". You can see any truly good person fighting of lusts, fighting immorality in themselves continually, and people recognise that and say "there goes a good person." They can still convict them of their little faults, whilst they cannot Jesus. That makes him omnibenevolant (Not sure how to spell that) a characteristic identical to only God.
All those other omni things aren't required if he had a kenosis, or an emptying, where the powers became dependant on God for access. Not that he'd ever be refused them, but that he wouldn't use them for non-human purposes. He's a human, and isn't in the glory of heaven any more.
Next, was Jesus a lesser God?
Lets look at some of my passages. John 14v 28 If you loved me, you'd be glad for my sake when i say I'm going away, because ***the father is greater than I***". That means that Jesus is returning to his true glory, they'll know the true Jesus, and love him in the appropriate way, as he goes to the realm where he's greater.
If I said, "Britney Spears is greater than me" I wouldn't mean that she is an ontologically (the nature of the being) better than me, just that she can sing better, make better songs, is prettier. She's a human being, and so am I.
Suppose I said, "A being with infinite power, knowledge, goodness, wisdom, and love is greater than me". Suppose I tried to convince you of that for the next two days. A rather pointless, and meaningless waste of time. So, Jesus would be making a worthless statement if he meant that. It's only useful if they're on the same playing field.
Jesus is limited by the incarnation, by death, by the cross- but after he gets back into the glory he had with God before the world began he won't be. It isn't a denial of divinity. The context makes that clear.
You are quoting some Bible verses, so I would assume you believe in the Bible. 🙂
Now, when the Bible says there is only one God, then there is truly one God.
When Bible says this one God is the Father, then it must be the Father.
No more, no less.
The Father is the only true God... and no other Gods before Him.
Jesus Christ is His Son as He proclaimed.
When Bible says that God is powerful, then God is indeed powerful.
When Bible says Jesus Christ is powerful because God made Him powerful, then Jesus Christ is powerful because God indeed made Him powerful. God has given Him the authority to exercise all authority.
By the word "given" alone, we can obviously distinguish that these persons are two different persons --- not ONE.
Granting without accepting that the Father and Jesus Christ are both Gods... then there will be two Gods. Can the Bible accept such premise? Definitely NOT. Because according to God Himself, there is only one God. According to Jesus Christ Himself, His Father in heaven is the ONLY TRUE GOD. According to the prophets of old and to the Apostles, there is only one God, who is the Father in heaven.
Therefore, there is only ONE God, and this God is definitely the Father, NOT the Son, NOT the Holy Spirit. 🙂
Originally posted by Jury
You are quoting some Bible verses, so I would assume you believe in the Bible. 🙂Now, when the Bible says there is only one God, then there is truly one God.
When Bible says this one God is the Father, then it must be the Father.
No more, no less.
The Father is the only true God... and no other Gods before Him.
Jesus Christ is His Son as He proclaimed.
When Bible says that God is powerful, then God is indeed powerful.
When Bible says Jesus Christ is powerful because God made Him powerful, then Jesus Christ is powerful because God indeed made Him powerful. God has given Him the authority to exercise all authority.
By the word "given" alone, we can obviously distinguish that these persons are two different persons --- not ONE.
Granting without accepting that the Father and Jesus Christ are both Gods... then there will be two Gods. Can the Bible accept such premise? Definitely NOT. Because according to God Himself, there is only one God. According to Jesus Christ Himself, His Father in heaven is the ONLY TRUE GOD. According to the prophets of old and to the Apostles, there is only one God, who is the Father in heaven.
Therefore, there is only ONE God, and this God is definitely the Father, NOT the Son, NOT the Holy Spirit. 🙂
The Holy Trinity is the central Mystery of the Christian Faith. God has however given us some clues in regards to this mystery by what is seen in creation. The best example I feel, would be the Sun.
The Sun could be seen as the Father, the light that is begotten from the Sun can be seen as Christ, as he says I am the light of the world, and the heat from the sun and light which proceeds from them both, can be seen as the Holy Spirit who proceeds from both the Father and the Son as the creed says. So you have them sharing in the exact same essence or substance, yet different in relation to one another and in function.
Yet the Sun, Light, and Heat have one common purpose to nurture the earth as do the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit have the one common purpose of sharing its glory with mankind and bringing us into relationship with the Godhead.
The Father begets the Son as the Sun begets the light, and the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son as heat proceeds from the Sun and the light.
The Sun we see high in the sky, and we see the Sun through its light. In the same way, as we behold the Father through the Son, and heat is something we feel, and the Holy Spirit is the Comforter, he is the presence we feel that supports us and gives us consolations and gifts.
Therefore the one Sun shows itself as triune, sunlight and heat yet one substance or essence, as its splendid in its unity and oneness. How much more the Creator of the sun is splendid and One in his unity and oneness in his triune being.
We therefore believe in One God in three divine persons, great is the mystery of this unity. Its beyond unity, its more higher than what we can conceive as unity.
But as Saint Augustine says, if we could fully understand God he would cease to be GOD.
Michael DeAngelo
Well, our true God says... He is only one true God.
Understandable enough... because God revealed it to His chosen people.
.. and there is no "mystery" whatsoever involved when we would like to come to the full knowledge of God.
.. and I don't believe in the Trinity... and even your so called "saint". 🙂
.. I believe in God and in His words written in the Bible. 🙂
Originally posted by Ytaker
The Holy Trinity is the central Mystery of the Christian Faith. God has however given us some clues in regards to this mystery by what is seen in creation. The best example I feel, would be the Sun.The Sun could be seen as the Father, the light that is begotten from the Sun can be seen as Christ, as he says I am the light of the world, and the heat from the sun and light which proceeds from them both, can be seen as the Holy Spirit who proceeds from both the Father and the Son as the creed says. So you have them sharing in the exact same essence or substance, yet different in relation to one another and in function.
hey that was a really good example. thumbup I like it!
Originally posted by Jury
P.S.... the Trinity is the Central Mystery of Roman Catholicism and Protestantism... and never been the original principle of the true Christians. 🙂
Humanity is far more advanced than before. But you should always remember that somebody else thought of it first. The idea of black holes was presented first in the late eighteen hundreds, I believe, and was ignored for more than a century. People say that somebody like Athanasius, or another bloke proposed it in the third century; the chances are that people believed that beforehand. Otherwise it would be rejected as blasphemy.
Ideas are rarely original when they're first patented. They would understand what I was saying, as they spoke with the bloke who said the facts. You have nought but your faith, I have logic, and a really pretty picture of a sunset. Give up. You fell behind our level of game a long time ago.
Originally posted by Jury
P.S.... the Trinity is the Central Mystery of Roman Catholicism and Protestantism... and never been the original principle of the true Christians. 🙂
OK 😕 i might have missed it between u and Ytaker arguing but if the Trinity was never the original principle of Christians, what was?