Jesus is God !

[Right Divider]

The Church came before the Bible.

Which church? This one? Act 7:38

The Church GAVE you the Bible.

That baloney is just part of RCC propaganda.

The Church under Pope Damasus I in the late 4th century ratified the 27 books of the New Testament. You would know that if you studied Christian history.

How do you know that I have not studied Christian history?

The Church decided on the divinity of Christ before it even put together the New Testament!

The divinity of Christ is NOT based on the RCC.

Your entire outlook on how the faith is handed down and where teaching authority lies is all bitched up.

But that discussion is for another thread not this one.

Councils of Nicaea

Nicaea, COUNCILS OF, respectively the First and Seventh Ecumenical Councils, held at Nicaea in Bithynia (see above). I. THE FIRST COUNCIL OF NICAEA (First Ecume...

www.catholic.com

THE FIRST COUNCIL OF NICAEA, held in 325 AD, on the occasion of the heresy of Arius (see Arianism).

 

[Trump Gurl]

Which church?

I am not having that discussion with you. You discuss rudely with me and insult me like you did in that other thread. Maybe politics, okay, but not religion, not with you.

 

[Right Divider]

I am not having that discussion with you.

You never do. You're too indoctrinated to discuss anything in the Bible.

I show you scripture and you cry. Why?

There was a CHURCH in the wilderness LONG be the RCC tried to steal the term.

You discuss rudely with me and insult me like you did in that other thread. Maybe politics, okay, but not religion, not with you.

Cry me a river.

 

[Trump Gurl]

Cry me a river.

See? Rude.

 

[Right Divider]

See? Rude.

See? Cry baby.

 

[Trump Gurl]

See? Cry baby.

Now you are just being stupid. Pointing out your rudeness is not "crying", it is simply pointing out your rudeness.

Now I see why you do not understand the Bible. How can you when you cannot understand basic English

Feel like replying? Talk to the hand

 

[Right Divider]

Now you are just being stupid. Pointing out your rudeness is not "crying", it is simply pointing out your rudeness.

Now I see why you do not understand the Bible. How can you when you cannot understand basic English

Feel like replying? Talk to the hand

I wonder why you will not discuss the BIBLE itself?

 

[Trump Gurl]

How Can Jesus be Both God and Human?
From Bishop Barron's "Faith Clips" DVD

How Can Jesus be Both God and Human?
From Bishop Barron's "Faith Clips" DVD

 

[Trump Gurl]

What is the Trinity?
From Bishop Barron's DVD "Faith Clips"

What is the Trinity?
From Bishop Barron's DVD "Faith Clips"

 

[Trump Gurl]

The proof of Jesus’ divinity is in the last two chapters of the book of Revelation. According to Revelation 21:6-7, Almighty God reveals himself to us in plain terms: “And he said to me, ‘It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. To the thirsty I will give from the fountain of the water of life without payment. He who conquers shall have this heritage, and I will be his God and he shall be my son.’”

But then, in Revelation 22:6, 13, 16, we find Jesus revealing himself to be “the Alpha and the Omega . . . the beginning and the end”:

And he said to me, “These words are trustworthy and true. And the Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, has sent his angel to show his servants what must soon take place . . . I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end . . . I Jesus have sent my angel to you with this testimony for the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, the bright morning star.”

Jesus is God

Jesus refers to himself with the divine name I am in several places. This “I am” formula is a reference back to the Divine Name revealed to Moses in Ex. 3:14. Not only does Jesus refer to himself as “I am” four times in John’s Gospel (see John 8:24; 58; 13:19 and 18:5-6), but when he does so in John 8:58, the Jews to whom he was speaking understood his meaning because they immediately wanted to stone him for blasphemy!

Jesus places his word on the same level as the word of God—the Old Testament. “You have heard it said . . . but I say to you . . .” (see Matt. 5:21-28). This is in sharp contrast to the prophets of old who always made clear the word they were speaking was not their own: “The word of the Lord came unto me, saying . . . ” (cf. Jer. 1:11; Ezek. 1:3, etc.). Only God possesses this kind of authority.

Jesus is referred to as “equal” with God by both John and Paul. In John 5:18, the author comments on why the Jews wanted to kill Jesus: “Because he called God his Father, making himself equal with God.” Paul refers to Jesus when he was “in the form (Gk. morphe; in Greek usage this word means the set of characteristics that makes a thing what it is) of God” thinking “his equality with God” not something to be grasped onto, but emptying himself and becoming man (cf. Phil. 2:6-10). Paul assumes his readers already knew Jesus to be equal with God, the Father.

Jesus is referred to in the New Testament with the title Lord as it is uniquely applied to Yahweh in the Old Testament. Jesus calls himself “the Lord of the Sabbath” in Mark 2:28. The Sabbath is referred to as the “Sabbath of Yahweh” in the Old Testament (cf. Ex. 20:10; see also Is. 8:13, referred to in 1 Peter 3:15; and Joel 2:31-32, quoted both in Acts 2:20-21 and in Rom. 10:13).

Jesus is God.

John 1:1-3: “In the beginning was the Word, the Word was with God, and the Word was God . . . All things were made by him: and without him was made nothing that was made.”

Jesus (the Word before his Incarnation) is revealed to be “God” and the Creator of all things that were created. Genesis 1:1 tells us, “In the beginning God created . . .” The conclusion is inescapable: Jesus is God!

 

[Lonster]

You either have truth or you don't, most here don't.

And your particular opinion isn't important. You've had PLENTY long enough to state ANY kind of biblical case and you've failed miserably (means you aren't doing anything particularly compelling on TOL, just wasting time arguing for what you think, rather than know). MOST, likely 99.9% of all scholars, are in fact, Triune. You lost before you started as one who has never been in that league.

My thoughts are not held hostages any church like yours are.

Mine are (Your sentence is missing an important adverb or pertinent punctuation)! 2 Corinthians 10:5 5 We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.

As I said, every scholar worth any salt is Triune. You are making lame and shallow claims as befitting one with a lot of lack of knowledge. Did you actually think anybody on TOL would go to you for truth before going to one of these scholars? The only reason anybody listens to me is because I've learned a bit perhaps they haven't from these scholars and have taken time to read languages. You literally (literally) have nothing for your family or to offer on TOL. Do you realize that (I don't think you do, you seem to think you are contributing in some meaningful way).

Many things I am stupid in, but not theology.

Well, partial delusion then. NOBODY thinks that about you on TOL. Aren't they the actual ones who 'should' give that assessment? I'm pretty sure I know what most on TOL would say about my prowess: "Lon makes theology easier to understand so I read him. He isn't the most brilliant scholar but he has certainly studied. I disagree with him on a number of theological points but believe he is in the faith."

Something along those lines, I may not have hit all they'd hit upon, but I'm pretty sure I'm not delusional but am fairly accurate. You just aren't seen as having a ton of theological prowess, Keypurr, ESPECIALLY when the ONLY theology you seem to erringly know anything about is this single issue one-trick pony of Unitarian thought. I've never seen you post in any other theology thread, that's how unmemorable. You really DON'T know theology when the only thread you post in is "Jesus is not God" for 20 years.

I love the God of my Lord Jesus Christ. You still need to learn that and distance yourself from churches that do not teach the importance of God's Ten Commandments.

You are mistaken. You really DON'T understand trinitarian thought/theology if you think that. You've never bothered to learn what we believe. There is ONLY one God. Isaiah 9:6? Never heard of it?

Is not Christ coming back for those who keep them? Who's Sabbath do you keep Lon?

Hebrews 2. Simply making shallow statements/soundbytes isn't really seen as academic or scholarly (means nobody but you thinks you are good at theology or faithful in Bible reading).

 

[Lonster]

He is a created form of God, Phil 2.

Prove it. Show ANY scripture (ANY) that says Jesus is created. Show it. "You have prepared a body for me" is NOT creating Him! Find ANY scripture that says so. No? Means you are "Making it up as you go" Keypurr. You 'think' you are good at theology with this kind of rationalization mess from human minds, not God's? You are arrogant and attempting to take His place. Its a sin, frankly. You've said, here and now "created" and have literally (literally) no scripture that says He is. THAT, is not only not good theology, it isn't scholastic either. You go beyond scripture with 'rationality' thus elevating YOUR thoughts above those revelations of God. That idolatrous man is you!

He can't. The son is the image of the Father, as such, he had a beginning. And he is a creature.

"Thus saith Keypurr." There is NO scripture that says this. It is rather YOUR math answer. While some math is very simple, scripture gives Jesus with Algebraic terms. There is no way you can simplify "was God" AND "was with God." NO way. You tried, but 'simplistic' is wrong (let alone you being 'good' at math or theology). :nono:

If you found a verse that says he is God show us.

:yawn: "I and the Father are One." "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was 1) with God and the Word 2) WAS God." "The Word (Jesus) 'became' flesh and dwelled among us." I have a whole thread on this with scripture after scripture. JudgeRightly JUST posted another. Did you read it???

Why would he say he has a God if he is God?

BECAUSE John 1:1 says He both "was with" AND 'was' --> GOD! Doesn't make sense? Good! Listen to Him even if you can't! This much is CRYSTAL clear and you are remiss for not listening to Him, going off on a tangent of YOUR rationalization rather than His revelation AND ignoring/trampling scriptures with your 'theories.' Theories are proven wrong yet you cling to them as if they are gold. : Plain:

He came to do the will of his Father

Yes He did (was 'with' AND 'was' Keypurr! Pay attention!).

Am I asking for to much Lon?

No, you are LEAVING the rest of us intelligent beings and going off on your own thus make many mistakes for your mavericking. You just are NOT this good. I am pretty savvy yet I'd never go it alone. Galatians 6:6 YOU ignored/are ignorant of this directive scripture from God! You went ahead and didn't bother to have anybody correct you. That isn't 'brilliant' its shallow and delusional. ALL you have to do is ask, like you did above AND listen to the answer. Nope, Keypurr is exactly this arrogant, he and .01% of the Christendom steeped in cultism actually, arrogantly, thinks he is that .01% superior and "THE REST OF US" are idiots. Yes you do! You just said so, arrogantly, that you are sensational at theology implying the rest of us are slouches. : Plain: You are audacious, Keypurr. You know that, right? Do you REALLY not see yourself how the rest of us think of you? Do you really not?

 

[Lonster]

Yes, I agree with this, but there is not much more for me to comment on in the rest of your post.

Kind regards
Trevor

Gotcha.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Trump Gurl and JudgeRightly,

But you also do not agree with 2,000 years of all Christianity believing he is God.
Basically, you have created your own personal Jesus with the attributes that you personally want him to have.

Sorry. Christianity does not work that way.

Absolute impudence, out-and-out effrontery, the unmitigated gall that some of you Cretins have is just unbelievable.
TWO THOUSAND YEARS of Christianity, teachings of the great saints and theologians, preaching of the great bishops, writings of the great doctors of the church, and most of all the Holy Spirit within BILLIONS of Christians spanning two millennia. . . . .

I am very conscious of the history of the RCC and the gradual development of many of her doctrines. There has always or often been a minority who have believed differently to the RCC and at some times these have been severely persecuted by the RCC. God has blessed us today in limiting the persecuting power of the RCC, partly by the French Revolution. My present espousal of the concept that there is One God the Father and that our Lord Jesus Christ goes back to my youth and upbringing in an environment that has been established since the 1840s, but even this relies on earlier teachings from individuals throughout the centuries. Perhaps you could also study the history of the Waldenses and the Anabaptists (who were also persecuted by the Protestants) and individuals such as Sir Isaac Newton, who personally did not accept the Trinity.

Either Jesus was claiming to be God, or He was blaspheming God. THERE ARE NO OTHER POSSIBILITIES.

Correct. There is no middle ground there.

Yes, there is another possibility. Yes, we need to accept the uniqueness of the way that Jesus spoke by comparison to the prophets “Thus saith the LORD”, but I repeat that Jesus spoke God the Father’s words, and these were given to him by God, that is, the One God the Father. Jesus is the Son of God.
Deuteronomy 18:15,18 (KJV): 15 The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken; 18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Right Divider]

Who raised Jesus from the dead?

Joh 2:19-21 KJV Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. (20) Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? (21) But he spake of the temple of his body.

Act 3:26 KJV Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.

Act 4:10 KJV Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.

Act 5:30 KJV The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.

Do you anti-trinitarians believe that Jesus was a liar?

 

[JudgeRightly]

Yes, there is another possibility.

No, Trevor, there is not.

Either Jesus is God, or He is not God. Law of Excluded Middle. A or Not-A.

Yes, we need to accept the uniqueness of the way that Jesus spoke by comparison to the prophets “Thus saith the LORD”, but I repeat

Repeating your position doesn't magically make it come true, Trevor. And in fact, it does little, if anything, to support your position, seeing as I already told you that such is the PREMISE of MY POSITION. In other words, I fully agree with what you're saying. But I'm telling you that you're not going far enough with your reasoning, and it's causing you to reject the One who made you.

that Jesus spoke God the Father’s words,

WE AGREE! Now let's go FURTHER!

He does more than just speak God's words, Trevor. HE CLAIMS THEM AS HIS OWN simply by uttering the phrase, "I say unto you" instead of "Thus says the Lord."

Why are you so stubborn to even address my point of contention here, Trevor? You're stuck on the "Jesus spoke God's words" bit.

and these were given to him by God, that is, the One God the Father. Jesus is the Son of God.
Deuteronomy 18:15,18 (KJV): 15 The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken; 18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.

Kind regards
Trevor

Again, not the point of contention!

The point of contention is that Jesus is either God or not God, and the Bible says that Jesus claims God's words as His own. According to YOUR position, that's blasphemy, because you say Jesus is not God, and therefore DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to claim God's words as His own. Why do you think, if Jesus is not God, that that makes Him any different than the prophets of old, where they were ALSO given God's words to speak, but yet NOT. ONCE. did ANY of them claim them as their own. If your position is correct, what's the difference between Jesus and one of the prophets of old, and why does He get special permissions, where they do not? The problem is that your position DESTROYS any specialness that Christ had, not because He spoke God's words, but BECAUSE. HE. IS. GOD.

According to my position, however, it's NOT blasphemy for Jesus to claim God's words as His own, because Jesus IS IN FACT God, and therefore has every right to claim God's words as His own BECAUSE THEY ARE HIS WORDS!

Trevor, Answer this:

Did Jesus, by using the phrase, "I say unto you," claim God's words as His own?

 

[Trump Gurl]

And your particular opinion isn't important

Opinions are like . . . . well, you know.

 

[Trump Gurl]

No, Trevor, there is not.
Either Jesus is God, or He is not God. Law of Excluded Middle. A or Not-A.

That's right. No A-minus in this class.

I am very conscious of the history of the RCC . . . .

Obviously you are not, because the east west schism did not happen until the end of the first millennia, in 1054 AD.

From 1 AD to 1054 AD there was one church, ONE. All the greatest councils happened when the Church was ONE. The councils that defined the divinity of Christ, the Trinity, defined Mary as Theotokos, that defined the creed, that defined the canon of the New Testament, and much more, all happened before your "RCC" acronym.

In fact, I saw a great thread in here that you should see:

It's "Catholic Church" not "RCC"

In this forum you will often see the acronym RCC tossed about. Sometimes it is done in innocence, but very often it is done out of malice by people who know better. The Catholic Church is the "Catholic Church", not the Roman Catholic Church. Within the Catholic Church, there are many "Rites"...

theologyonline.com

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Trump Gurl,

That's right. No A-minus in this class.

I hope to answer JudgeRightly soon and he has given a thorough answer on this aspect.

Obviously you are not, because the east west schism did not happen until the end of the first millennia, in 1054 AD. From 1 AD to 1054 AD there was one church, ONE. All the greatest councils happened when the Church was ONE. The councils that defined the divinity of Christ, the Trinity, defined Mary as Theotokos, that defined the creed, that defined the canon of the New Testament, and much more, all happened before your "RCC" acronym.

I am conscious of this part of the history of the Catholic Church. Perhaps the definitions found in wiki and Britannica are helpful. Quoting only two paragraphs from each:
Wiki: “The Catholic Church, sometimes referred to as the Roman Catholic Church, is the largest Christian church, with approximately 1.3 billion baptised Catholics worldwide as of 2018.
Catholic (from Greek: καθολικός, romanized: katholikos, lit. 'universal') was first used to describe the church in the early 2nd century.”

Britannica: “Roman Catholicism, Christian church that has been the decisive spiritual force in the history of Western civilization. Along with Eastern Orthodoxy and Protestantism, it is one of the three major branches of Christianity.
The Roman Catholic Church traces its history to Jesus Christ and the Apostles. Over the course of centuries it developed a highly sophisticated theology and an elaborate organizational structure headed by the papacy, the oldest continuing absolute monarchy in the world.”

In fact, I saw a great thread in here that you should see:

Quoting the first sentence from the Post you referenced: “In this forum you will often see the acronym RCC tossed about. Sometimes it is done in innocence, but very often it is done out of malice by people who know better.”
I was not using RCC in malice, but to me it describes the Church centred in Rome with the Pope as the Head of this Church. I am a bit reticent to fully endorse “Catholic” because I suggest that this is part of their claim that they are the true Universal Church, and perhaps that the Eastern Orthodox have broken-away, and the Protestants are renegades, and the fellowship that I represent are heretics.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again JudgeRightly,

No, Trevor, there is not. Either Jesus is God, or He is not God. Law of Excluded Middle. A or Not-A.

Yes, there is, Jesus is the Son of God.

WE AGREE! Now let's go FURTHER! He does more than just speak God's words, Trevor. HE CLAIMS THEM AS HIS OWN simply by uttering the phrase, "I say unto you" instead of "Thus says the Lord." Why are you so stubborn to even address my point of contention here, Trevor? You're stuck on the "Jesus spoke God's words" bit.

For a start he had so absorbed God’s words that they were completely his own thoughts and thus when he spoke they were both his words and God the Father’s thoughts and words. One example of this flow is given in the following:
Isaiah 55:8–11 (KJV): 8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. 9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. 10 For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater: 11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.
In the above God’s spoken word takes on a semi-personification and accomplishes God’s purpose and is depicted as returning to Him. This is a good introduction in understanding how the Word that is spoken about in John 1:1 finding its continuity and focalisation in the birth, development and ministry of Jesus.

The point of contention is that Jesus is either God or not God, and the Bible says that Jesus claims God's words as His own. According to YOUR position, that's blasphemy, because you say Jesus is not God, and therefore DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to claim God's words as His own.

No, it is not blasphemy, as God’s words had become his own thoughts and words.

Why do you think, if Jesus is not God, that that makes Him any different than the prophets of old, where they were ALSO given God's words to speak, but yet NOT. ONCE. did ANY of them claim them as their own. If your position is correct, what's the difference between Jesus and one of the prophets of old, and why does He get special permissions, where they do not? The problem is that your position DESTROYS any specialness that Christ had, not because He spoke God's words, but BECAUSE. HE. IS. GOD.

Jesus was and is very special as he is the only one that is THE Son of God in all of its full meaning. The prophets of old quite often did not fully understand the Word of God that was given them and therefore they were not really all their own words, but they were the messengers of God's words:
1 Peter 1:10–12 (KJV): 10 Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: 11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. 12 Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Spirit sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.
Some of the exhortations and denunciations were also in effect their own words. To some extent they became what they taught.

I started a thread called “The Yahweh Name” and I did a search and it only ran from May 11 2018 to May 15 2018. This is part of my understanding of the continuity of God the Father’s revelation in and through Jesus, The Son of God. This is partly based upon the understanding that Exodus 3:14 should be translated as “I will be”, not “I AM”. God the Father was to become revealed in a Son, Jesus, the Son of God, to be born of Mary, with God the Father as the father of the child, who would in his ministry be revealed as being full of grace and truth. No prophet before shows this fullness of revealing God the Father.

Trevor, Answer this: Did Jesus, by using the phrase, "I say unto you," claim God's words as His own?

Yes. They were also his own thoughts and words and we have the expression "Great minds think alike".

Kind regards
Trevor