Top Ten Reasons to Believe that Jesus is God

[SpiritualSon]

If Jesus is not the Father, how come He called this woman daughter in three Gospels? He called her daughter because He is the Father.

Matthew 9:20-22 (King James Version)
20 And, behold, a woman, which was diseased with an issue of blood twelve years, came behind him, and touched the hem of his garment:

21 For she said within herself, If I may but touch his garment, I shall be whole.

22 But Jesus turned him about, and when he saw her, he said, Daughter, be of good comfort; thy faith hath made thee whole. And the woman was made whole from that hour.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark 5:24-34 (King James Version)

24 And Jesus went with him; and much people followed him, and thronged him.

25 And a certain woman, which had an issue of blood twelve years,

26 And had suffered many things of many physicians, and had spent all that she had, and was nothing bettered, but rather grew worse,

27 When she had heard of Jesus, came in the press behind, and touched his garment.

28 For she said, If I may touch but his clothes, I shall be whole.

29 And straightway the fountain of her blood was dried up; and she felt in her body that she was healed of that plague.

30 And Jesus, immediately knowing in himself that virtue had gone out of him, turned him about in the press, and said, Who touched my clothes?

31 And his disciples said unto him, Thou seest the multitude thronging thee, and sayest thou, Who touched me?

32 And he looked round about to see her that had done this thing.

33 But the woman fearing and trembling, knowing what was done in her, came and fell down before him, and told him all the truth.

34And he said unto her, Daughter, thy faith hath made thee whole; go in peace, and be whole of thy plague.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Luke 8:43-48 (King James Version)

43And a woman having an issue of blood twelve years, which had spent all her living upon physicians, neither could be healed of any,

44Came behind him, and touched the border of his garment: and immediately her issue of blood stanched.

45 And Jesus said, Who touched me? When all denied, Peter and they that were with him said, Master, the multitude throng thee and press thee, and sayest thou, Who touched me?

46 And Jesus said, Somebody hath touched me: for I perceive that virtue is gone out of me.

47 And when the woman saw that she was not hid, she came trembling, and falling down before him, she declared unto him before all the people for what cause she had touched him, and how she was healed immediately.

48 And he said unto her, Daughter, be of good comfort: thy faith hath made thee whole; go in peace.

Explain this one. I read King James Version only

Harry :fadein:

 

[SpiritualSon]

If Jesus is not the Father, how come He called this woman daughter in three Gospels? He called her daughter because He is the Father.

Matthew 9:20-22 (King James Version)
20 And, behold, a woman, which was diseased with an issue of blood twelve years, came behind him, and touched the hem of his garment:

21 For she said within herself, If I may but touch his garment, I shall be whole.

22 But Jesus turned him about, and when he saw her, he said, Daughter, be of good comfort; thy faith hath made thee whole. And the woman was made whole from that hour.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark 5:24-34 (King James Version)

24 And Jesus went with him; and much people followed him, and thronged him.

25 And a certain woman, which had an issue of blood twelve years,

26 And had suffered many things of many physicians, and had spent all that she had, and was nothing bettered, but rather grew worse,

27 When she had heard of Jesus, came in the press behind, and touched his garment.

28 For she said, If I may touch but his clothes, I shall be whole.

29 And straightway the fountain of her blood was dried up; and she felt in her body that she was healed of that plague.

30 And Jesus, immediately knowing in himself that virtue had gone out of him, turned him about in the press, and said, Who touched my clothes?

31 And his disciples said unto him, Thou seest the multitude thronging thee, and sayest thou, Who touched me?

32 And he looked round about to see her that had done this thing.

33 But the woman fearing and trembling, knowing what was done in her, came and fell down before him, and told him all the truth.

34And he said unto her, Daughter, thy faith hath made thee whole; go in peace, and be whole of thy plague.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Luke 8:43-48 (King James Version)

43And a woman having an issue of blood twelve years, which had spent all her living upon physicians, neither could be healed of any,

44Came behind him, and touched the border of his garment: and immediately her issue of blood stanched.

45 And Jesus said, Who touched me? When all denied, Peter and they that were with him said, Master, the multitude throng thee and press thee, and sayest thou, Who touched me?

46 And Jesus said, Somebody hath touched me: for I perceive that virtue is gone out of me.

47 And when the woman saw that she was not hid, she came trembling, and falling down before him, she declared unto him before all the people for what cause she had touched him, and how she was healed immediately.

48 And he said unto her, Daughter, be of good comfort: thy faith hath made thee whole; go in peace.

Explain this one. I read King James Version only

Harry :fadein:

 

[Bob666]

I have an Amiga computer which was built in the 1980's. It had three co-processors but were one computer. Just because one co-processor wasn't another co-processor doesn't mean that it wasn't part of the computer or just because the signal may have originated from a co-processor doesn't mean it isn't part of the CPU.

According the the doctrine of the Trinity, this analogy is false. Here is the reasons why:

In you Amiga computer there are three distinct co-processors. You can open you computer and see them. No one is suggesting that those three co-processors is actually one co-processor and at the same time three co-processors. You may get a signal from one, two, or all three depending on what program your running, but this is three processors co-opperating together while maintaining their seperateness.

The doctirne of the Trinity is something altogether different. It states that the father, the son, and the holy spirit are actually one. What the father does, the son and the holy spirit does also, and so goes for the son and holy spirit in relation to the father. It is not three seperate beings workng together, as in you co-procesors, but just one being acting alone. This one being is, of course, three. If this spins your head, don't worry, its confused the minds of people since its inception in the fourth century. This is the reason that if you do any research on the topic, you will find it labeled a "Mystery" by more than one author who is brave enough to tackle it.

 

[Imagican]

I see. Boy, you had me going there for a minute. Let me see if I can clear some of this up for you.

Without using 'trinity' for a reference SS, let's look at it from a 'completely' Biblical perspective.

Jesus is also called the Son of man. In the OT, there is reference to the Son's of God and the 'daughters of men'. I know that there is MUCH confusion by many concerning the meaning behind these statements. Let's see if there is NOT a 'different' interpretation of what you have offered from a 'trinitarian' perspective.

I call my wife MOM, quite often and it has become sort of a 'nickname' for her. She is the mother of a child and therefore she is Mom. Not my mother of course, but I still call her this as a 'nickname'. So, in this respect I could certainly call someone 'daughter' even though she were NOT MY daughter.

To further explain what I am offering. If Jesus is called the 'Son of man', and I TOO can become a child of God, we are ALL brothers and sisters. Yet while being brothers and sisters, we are also the 'children of God', (Sons and daughters), at the same time.

I will not deny that through Jesus, we were created. Him being considered the Head of man would certainly place Him in a 'Fatherly' position in regards to mankind. Note that I offer not THE FATHER, but, instead, a 'Fatherly Position' in regards to mankind. For anyone that 'creates' becomes a Father-like entity.

SS, When the Bible states in the Ten Commandments: Thou shalt NOT kill. Is this a literal LAW or a law that MUST be 'deeper' in its implications than that stated?

 

[Imagican]

2 Corinthians 11

1Would to God ye could bear with me a little in my folly: and indeed bear with me.

2For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.

3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

4 For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.

Firstly let me offer that Paul states here that 'he is jealous over the Corinthians with 'godly' Jealousy. Does this too make Paul God. By comparing Himself and his actions or feelings to God, does this indeed 'make him God also'? Of course not.

Now, here it is, plainly stated, that the Corinthians will MOST LIKELY be beguiled into believing something OTHER than what they were taught by Paul concerning Christ and the Spirit. Now, does any one of our learned Bible folks out there have any idea where Corinth is? This was NEVER stated in any other epistle that we have knowledge of. Yet to these alone was Paul concerned enough to voice his concerns through this epistle.

Read it folks, read it and understand it's SIMPLICITY. Here you have an apostle of Christ warning you NOT to accept ANY OTHER doctrine besides that taught by THEM!!!!! I don't think that there's even a 'trinitarian' out there that would argue against my aligations of 'trinity' being a 'man-made' doctrine, (no one but Thess that is). Yet here we have a perfect example of the knowledge of Paul that this WOULD happen.

And read HOW it would happen, 'lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty'. And this doesn't set off alarms in your hearts??????? so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. I have already been told by 'trins' that their doctrine is a 'mystery'. Not even they can adequately explain it. Yet, here we are told that our minds CAN be corrupted from the simplicity that IS JESUS CHRIST. Don't you get it????????? Plain and simple; Jesus Christ IS the Son of God. God IS God. It doesn't get ANY simpler than what we have been TOLD by Christ HIMSELF. And that being that HE IS THE SON OF GOD. God IS His Father. The Father IS GOD.

 

[Sothenes]

I have an Amiga computer which was built in the 1980's. It had three co-processors but were one computer. Just because one co-processor wasn't another co-processor doesn't mean that it wasn't part of the computer or just because the signal may have originated from a co-processor doesn't mean it isn't part of the CPU.

According the the doctrine of the Trinity, this analogy is false. Here is the reasons why:

In you Amiga computer there are three distinct co-processors. You can open you computer and see them. No one is suggesting that those three co-processors is actually one co-processor and at the same time three co-processors. You may get a signal from one, two, or all three depending on what program your running, but this is three processors co-opperating together while maintaining their seperateness.

The doctirne of the Trinity is something altogether different. It states that the father, the son, and the holy spirit are actually one. What the father does, the son and the holy spirit does also, and so goes for the son and holy spirit in relation to the father. It is not three seperate beings workng together, as in you co-procesors, but just one being acting alone. This one being is, of course, three. If this spins your head, don't worry, its confused the minds of people since its inception in the fourth century. This is the reason that if you do any research on the topic, you will find it labeled a "Mystery" by more than one author who is brave enough to tackle it.

Human models may never be perfect.

The processor was a 68000 Motorolo chip. There was a sound co-processor and a graphics co-processor. Without a signal from the other two, the other co-processors wouldn't work together so I think it would be safe to say they were one processor.

 

[SpiritualSon]

2 Corinthians 11

1Would to God ye could bear with me a little in my folly: and indeed bear with me.

2For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.

3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

4 For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.

Firstly let me offer that Paul states here that 'he is jealous over the Corinthians with 'godly' Jealousy. Does this too make Paul God. By comparing Himself and his actions or feelings to God, does this indeed 'make him God also'? Of course not.

Now, here it is, plainly stated, that the Corinthians will MOST LIKELY be beguiled into believing something OTHER than what they were taught by Paul concerning Christ and the Spirit. Now, does any one of our learned Bible folks out there have any idea where Corinth is? This was NEVER stated in any other epistle that we have knowledge of. Yet to these alone was Paul concerned enough to voice his concerns through this epistle.

Read it folks, read it and understand it's SIMPLICITY. Here you have an apostle of Christ warning you NOT to accept ANY OTHER doctrine besides that taught by THEM!!!!! I don't think that there's even a 'trinitarian' out there that would argue against my aligations of 'trinity' being a 'man-made' doctrine, (no one but Thess that is). Yet here we have a perfect example of the knowledge of Paul that this WOULD happen.

And read HOW it would happen, 'lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty'. And this doesn't set off alarms in your hearts??????? so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. I have already been told by 'trins' that their doctrine is a 'mystery'. Not even they can adequately explain it. Yet, here we are told that our minds CAN be corrupted from the simplicity that IS JESUS CHRIST. Don't you get it????????? Plain and simple; Jesus Christ IS the Son of God. God IS God. It doesn't get ANY simpler than what we have been TOLD by Christ HIMSELF. And that being that HE IS THE SON OF GOD. God IS His Father. The Father IS GOD.

By the "Son" is meant the Human of the Father. From these things it follows, that the Divinity and the soul of the Son of God, our Saviour, are not distinctly two, but one and the same. The Son of God is the Human of God the Father; for what else did Mary, the mother, bring forth than the Human in which was the Divine from the Father? Hence from nativity He was called the "Son of God;" for the angel Gabriel said to Mary

The Holy One that shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God,

The Holy One which was born from Mary was the Human that was the Father's Divine Human Form. Jehovah God the Father needed an arm to do the work of redemption, and a mouth to preach the Word. He didn't need a second person, with equal Divine Essence, as Him, to come down and redeem men. Another person or god with the same Divine Essence as Jehovah the Father is impossible.

Harry :fadein:

 

[Imagican]

Harry,

You're getting close. You are absolutely right. God didn't 'need' to do anything. He chose to out of love. And He didn't 'need' to die Himself, but instead offered His Son as a sacrifice while we were yet His enemies. For what purpose would it have served for God Himself to die? But, look at the amount of LOVE it took to allow His Son to die in our place.

And it is plainly spoken in the Bible that; 'God so loved the world that He sent His ONLY Son to die so that we wouldn't have to'. Isn't this PERFECTLY CLEAR? His ONLY BEGOTTEN SON. It does NOT say that God came to earth to die for our sins. It states what it states CLEARLY. And we are also told that there would be those that would find this TOO SIMPLE and create 'other' Christs. Can't you see that this HAS been done?


How about this: What purpose would it have served Satan to offer God ALL the kingdoms of this earth to bow down and worship Him. Do you really think that God or EVEN SATAN could have been so foolish. God, by allowing it to happen and be recorded, and Satan for thinking that He could tempt God to worship him in return for something which HE ALREADY Has dominion over. How could Satan POSSIBLY tempt God Himself. Don't you see? Satan tempted the Son of God to abandon His obedience to the Father and worship him instead. Christ stated Himself when Satan told him to cast Himself down from ahigh, Your Father will send His angels so that Jesus wouldn't even bruise His heel: Thou shalt not tempt God.

And why would the Spirit of God descend upon Jesus if He were already God Himself, or a 'voice from heaven state; For this is my beloved SON in whom I am well pleased?

How about this one: Why would Christ state; 'Father forgive them for they know not what they do?' Wouldn't He have simply forgiven them Himself if He WERE God?

And what does this mean: 'Not my will but thine be done?'

Or an even better one: When asked of the time of His return, His reply: Not angels nor even the Son Himself, but God ALONE knows the answer to this.

Christ states PLAINLY that the words that He spoke were NOT His own but from the Father.

The only reason 'trinity' was 'created' was to make it possible for those that 'believe' it to worship Christ AS God. Yet God Himself stated that there is ONLY ONE GOD that we are to worship. We are also told that Christ IS the Son of God. So, why would I trust men to tell me something different than what has been clearly offered by God, Christ and the apostles? For there is not ONE that is good, no, not one!!!

We are NOT to trust in men but in God and His Son. It is clear to see with just a tiny bit of research that 'trinity' was created by men long after the death of Christ and the apostles. And it took hundreds of years of drumming the doctrine into the minds and hearts of their followers to bring it to acceptance. And, even now, those that believe it still find it impossible to define it in any way that is understandable to even themselves.

Yet it is SO SIMPLE to understand that Jesus is the Son of God. For God Himself has stated that Christ is HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN. Christ prayed to the Father and when asked how we should pray, offered nothing any different.

We are plainly told that Christ now sits at the 'right hand of God'. It does NOT SAY that Christ IS the 'right hand', but dwells there. That would mean that even now God AND Christ abide in heaven. NO, NOT Christ AS God, but Christ AND GOD.

I also have found it interesting how difficult it is for 'trinitarians' to understand 'worship'. For they ALL insist that the ONLY thing that can be worshiped IS God. So far from the truth. Anything that we love or adore is WHAT WE WORSHIP. We were NOT told not to worship anything other than God. We were told NOT TO WORSHIP ANY OTHER GOD AS GOD. This lack of understanding is obviously a direct result of 'trinitarians' having to 'limit' worship in order to avoid the issue of worshipping a 'multiplicity' of gods. For even though they will deny that our love or adoration for those things that surround us is worship, and deny that their prayers to Mary and the apostles are worship, they indeed offer their bent knees to these and more in worship. Their churches, their pastors, and for most, the world itself.

And Harry, even though I started this post out directed at you specifically, please, by all means, I leave my questions open to any and all 'trinitarians' to answer.

One last question: Why is it that the Jews themselves know of NO 'trinity'? I mean these are His chosen people. He has revealed Himself to these over and over again. He revealed His Son to them. Why on earth would He hide this 'triune' nature were it to be of any effect. I mean to listen to 'trinitarians' tell it, one MUST accept this doctrine or they are LOST. Would a God of love 'truly' offer something so cryptic for us to 'just guess at'? Wouldn't a God of love reveal to us His 'true' nature so that we COULD KNOW HIM? So, why don't the Jews KNOW of His 'triune' nature? Why has He hidden this seemingly benign knowledge from those that He has been with for thousands of years?

 

[mutzrein]

Jesus spoke from His Divine Soul in Himself called the Father. He did not speak from another person outside Himself. Jesus Christ is the Father in Human Form. That's why He said, "Father, all Mine are Thine, and all Thine Mine John 17:10.""John 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
John 14:11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake. Did you know Jesus called a woman He healed from a blood disorder, daughter. He called her daughter. This means He is the Father. "Daughters" signify affections for good. "Son-in-law" signifies truth associated with affection for good.
"Daughter-in-law" signifies good associated with its truth. "Mother" signifies the Church in respect of truth, and the truth of the Church. "Father" the Church in respect of good, and the good of the Church. The Lord's "Father" signifies His Divine Good.

Harry :fadein:

Goodness gracious Harry where does that doctrine come from?

How come Protestants today believe in the nonsense they learn in sunday school? To the Catholics, how do you know what you learn in the catechism is true?

Harry

Harry. I can't recall going to Sunday School. I probably did at some point but I certainly don't remember what I was taught. So why did you ask that question?

 

[Imagican]

And Harry,

I would venture to say that most 'trinitarians' are exposed to their 'first' understandings of 'trinity' in 'Sunday school'. The 'churches' have been very good at starting children out early in their walk in a 'different' direction.

I have witnessed many that continue in their 'Sunday school' teaching even into the 'grave'. Having been taught the 'traditions' of the churches from an early age, only to carry this rudimentary understanding throughout their entrie lives, NEVER coming to the realization of the love that has been offered by God through His Son.

I, myself would ONLY consider myself to be a Protestant to the degree that I do NOT accept the teachings of the Catholic church. As far as mainstream Protestant denominations that exist in the present, I agree with them 'little more'. if anything, those could also consider me a Protestant against those teachings that they too follow that are 'man-made' instead of wholesome inspiration of the Word through the Spirit.

Eventually ANYONE truly led by the Spirit, (IMHO), will reject that which is contrary to the Word and realize that their Salvation is based NOT upon the teachings of men, but rather the teachings of God and His Son. A 'personal relationship, NOT a 'collective one' as taught by the churches. Shared with their brothers and sisters but certainly NOT 'led' by them. For we ARE to follow Christ to the Father and obey the teachings of HIS love, NOT the simple and incomplete understanding of men.

 

[thessalonian]

Imagican continues to put down tradition when the Apostle Paul certainly did not. "HOLD FAST TO THE TRADITIONS YOU HAVE RECIEVED WHETHER BY WORD OF MOUTH OR IN WRITING FROM US.".

Imagican says if the little neurons come up with the "truth" in your own head, it is better than the truth that is passed on in the Tradition of the Church. The individual and his Bible is Imagican's pillar and support of the truth. That is of course not what the Bible says. He sets up false dichotmies between the teachings of men and the teachings of the Bible. Jesus told his disciples "he who hears you hears me". Teachings of men are not neccessarily contrary to the word of God! The scriptures tell us, "I will give you SHEPHERDs after my own heart who will give you KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING". Does Imagican claim there was something wrong with the teachings that Paul said are to be taught one to another in 2 Tim 2:2? I believe it was imagican who told me once that we cannot know who the leaders spoken of in Heb 13:17 are. He choses to obsolete passages that don't fit his one man religion and one man truth.

Yes the understanding of the trinity is a tradition. It is one supported quite clearly by scripture. Imagican uses the false logic that tradition has to be opposed to scripture. He exalts himself in his posting of his own theologies of which he cannot be sure if they are true or not. The virtue in them however is that they are his own it would seem. So truth does not set us free but coming up with our own truths seems to be what he thinks sets us free.

Blessings

 

[SpiritualSon]

How does God dwelleth in the son and the son in the Father unless they are the same?

How does Christ abide in me and I in Him since I am not the same as Him?

Christ abide in a person, means the truth is in that person. This means this person understands what the Holy Word is saying. Man can receive nothing except it be given from heaven John 3:27. Only God gives understanding. Many churches do not understand what the Holy Word is saying. Their wisdom comes from man, not God.

Harry :fadein:

 

[Imagican]

Imagican continues to put down tradition when the Apostle Paul certainly did not. "HOLD FAST TO THE TRADITIONS YOU HAVE RECIEVED WHETHER BY WORD OF MOUTH OR IN WRITING FROM US.".

The Gnostic teachings that PREDATE your understanding could claim the 'same' claim that you make Thess. Would this be the correct thing to do. Follow 'that' tradition? And I DO hold FAST to the words and traditions that were wrought BY the apostles. I simply DON'T believe that 'your' church teaches ANY SUCH THING. They 'created' their OWN traditions that had NOTHING to do with what was brought to them by the apostles.

Imagican says if the little neurons come up with the "truth" in your own head, it is better than the truth that is passed on in the Tradition of the Church. NO NO my friend. There is a BIG difference between The Church and the church that you follow. The individual and his Bible is Imagican's pillar and support of the truth. That is of course not what the Bible says. He sets up false dichotmies between the teachings of men and the teachings of the Bible. Jesus told his disciples "he who hears you hears me". Teachings of men are not neccessarily contrary to the word of God! Yet you sit there and accuse me of offering an understanding that is. The scriptures tell us, "I will give you SHEPHERDs after my own heart who will give you KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING". Does Imagican claim there was something wrong with the teachings that Paul said are to be taught one to another in 2 Tim 2:2? I believe it was imagican who told me once that we cannot know who the leaders spoken of in Heb 13:17 are. He choses to obsolete passages that don't fit his one man religion and one man truth. Thess, We were NEVER told to follow ANY men whose teachings are contradictory to the Word. I have yet to meet but few others that teach anything BUT contradiction. From your perspective I guess I should just 'bow down to Satan' rather than seek out those that follow the 'truth'. Sorry my friend, but if given this choice, I WILL go it alone.
Yes the understanding of the trinity is a tradition. It is one supported quite clearly by scripture. Only in the minds and hearts of those that 'choose' to 'see' it. Imagican uses the false logic that tradition has to be opposed to scripture. NO, Thess, only that tradition that IS opposed to scripture. He exalts himself in his posting of his own theologies of which he cannot be sure if they are true or not. YOU may be confused about your 'theology' and that would be quite understandable, but please, I have offered NO indication that I am confused about what I understand. I offer it clearly without hessitation. The virtue in them however is that they are his own it would seem. So truth does not set us free but coming up with our own truths seems to be what he thinks sets us free.

Thess, as I have stated on numerous occasions in the past, I am NOT alone. If it makes you feel that it 'may' be true, then so be it. Continue in your false accusations and inuendo that leads NO where. But I don't NEED millions of others to TELL me what to do or NOT to do. I have a personal relationship with God through His Son, Jesus Christ and I NEED NO man to be 'my' mediator. I choose Christ as my mediator and trust NO man to offer ME Salvation.

You continue to insult rather than offer any substantial argument to ANYTHING that I post. Did you 'learn' this tradition from your church also? Or is this kind of behavior what you believe was offered by the apostles?
Blessings

 

[Klee shay]

Top Ten Reasons to Believe that Jesus is God
by Robert M. Bowman, Jr.

Hebrews 1 Other Scriptures
1. He speaks as God does (vv. 1-2a). John 1:1, 14; 8:43-47

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

This scripture would have to be the definitive scripture which is used by the Jesus is God doctrine, as irrifutable evidence. And why not...it appears to make sequential, logical sense to mankind - Jesus was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.

And yet Jesus Himself spoke in parables and praised God for revealing such things to babes - keeping them from the wise and the prudent.

John 1:1 is a spiritual scripture for those that seek God in Spirit; not those looking for a logical conclusion to define God through man's eyes. The Jews already tried that through the Word of God established in the Law he passed down to his own people. But instead they made Gods of themselves because they had the Law as their passport into righteousness.

Jesus warned that they were blind and he was the light of which Moses wrote about.

Why then after his resurrection do we think as a new "Christian" nation, that we can glean our own light by simply knowing "of" Jesus, rather than following every word which proceeded out of His mouth? Will we not come under the same condemnation as the Jews if we use our belief in Jesus as a passport into righteousness; while denying what he taught as truth?

If Jesus was the Word and the Word was God - Christians should believe Jesus when he said that God was greater than He. For how can God be greater than He while also being Jesus at the same time? The Lord does not minister confusion; he spoke the simple truth that God was God and He was the Son of God.

"Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life. I receive not honour from men. But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you. I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive." JOHN 5:39-43

How prophetic that even though Jesus was talking to the Jews which sought to kill him for the authority in which he taught - it could reach past that time and generation to foresee any which looked past Him to another which comes in his own name.

John came in the name of John and Paul came in the name of Paul; but Jesus came not testifying of himself but of God; and God testified that Jesus was His only begotton Son. So why then defy God and the Word of God and proclaim another truth via sequential, logical conclusions?

God is Spirit and we are to worship him in Spirit, otherwise we worship another that is not God. Not by might (majority) or by power (knowledge), but by spirit (God).

John 1:14 "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth."

The only begotten of the Father says it all really.

The Word was made flesh for this reason..."And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man." JOHN 5:27

Been given the authority to execute judgement however, does not make Jesus God because he also declared..."I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgement is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me." JOHN 5:30

Jesus obeyed what he asked mankind to do who chose to follow Him - he denied Himself to follow God. If Jesus was God, how could he possibly deny Himself when God himself is truth and righteousness? You see how complicated it starts to get when you call Jesus God?

There was an order put in place that we are to respect, so that we can worship the God Jesus came to testify of in light and in truth.

"For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God." JOHN 3:20-21

JOHN 8:43-47 is pretty long so I won't type it all out, but its a good example of how Jesus spoke with the authority God gave Him. The fact Jesus was able to speak with the same authority comes as no surprise however, as he declared he came to do his father' will and to give his life a ransom for many.

How does this make Jesus God? It certainly makes Jesus "one" with God as Jesus declared - but it's not irrifutable proof that Jesus IS God.

 

[Imagican]

Klee,

Interesting points.

How about this guys. I have an 'estate'. Servants, grounds keepers, maids, etc..... My wife and I have a Son. He grows from infant to adult. I and my wife go away for a vacation and leave our Son at 'home'. Now, is it NOT perfectly clear, that MY estate is HIS estate and HE is to be 'treated' as MYSELF as far as HIS POWER to RULE that estate is concerned.

We have examples of this VERY nature that fill history. Kings SONS ARE Princes, who, one day, become Kings themselves. Until this time though, their authority is second ONLY TO THE KING.