Data On The Trinity

[pierac]

Funny how your head is SO BIG everyone else is silly or getting a spanking. The early church did not believe Jesus's life began in Mary. None of those counsels you state had that on any agenda. When then did YOUR theology begin?

I'm still spanking your Theology.... As your still posting what your told... Yet... I see no new scripture to spank you with... in your post!

Silly Randy...
Being that I do not belong to any Church... Unlike you... My theology began when I asked God to show me the Truth...

The other Paul said.... 1Co 13:9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part; So... I took the time to seek out all the parts from the hundreds of different Christian Churches/Dominations...

Now you have me... a seeker of the Truth from all Christian/Dominations of your Bible... to spank you so easily...

Randy... You may hate me, but you know I speak the truth... For I can see what your Church does not allow you to see...

For example... You can not see Act 2:22... The beginning of The Church of our Christ/Messiah.

Randy the Trinity died at Act 2:22...
Act 2:22 "Men of Israel, listen to these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which God performed through Him in your midst, just as you yourselves know--

Thus, another spiritual spanking for you...
Paul

 

[for_his_glory]

You can stone me, hang me, ban me, or burn me at the stake. And none of that will change the fact that Jesus is not God.

And you have a good evening

 

[for_his_glory]

It was not John, but Bible teachers who attached the idea of a "divine person" to the Greek word "logos." The early meaning of "logos" meant reason of speech and not Jesus Christ.

Lot of talk, but no proof. Please name these teachers you speak of so we can go study this further.

Why do you deny all these scriptures below. Do you just black them out?

Scriptures that reference Jesus being referred to as God:
John 1:1-14; John 10:30; Romans 9:5; Colossians 2:9; Hebrews 1:8, 9; 1 John 5:7, 8, 20; 1 Corinthians 8:6; 2 Corinthians 3:17; 13:14; Isaiah 9:6; 44:6; Luke 1:35; Matthew 1:23; 28:19; John 14:16, 17; Genesis 1:1, 2 (cross reference John 1:1-14); 1 Corinthians 12:4-6; Ephesians 4:4-6; Colossians 1:15-17; John 14:9-11; Philippians 2:5-8; Rev 1:8

 

[Free]

You just rejected your own beliefs in your post... and are so clueless you don't even know why!!!

It is long past time you knock it off with calling people clueless or silly or other such names.

Now to the second phrase in Philippians 2 that causes a difficulty. It is the one that says Jesus Christ "did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself (v. 6-7). It is unfortunate that the Old King James version of the Bible translated this verse completely wrong. It reads that Jesus "thought it not robbery to be equal with God" and gives the impression that as the preexistent God, Jesus did not think there was anything wrong in being considered equal with God.

It ought to be clear by now that this is the exact opposite of what is meant. The whole context of the passage is about being humble, putting God's will and glory first, and serving others’ interest above one's own interest. Although he was in "the form of God" Jesus did not reckon his God-given status as something to be exploited.

This meaning contrast well with the conduct of Adam who unfortunately did consider equality with God anything to be grasped at. Adam wanted to be like God as Genesis 3:5 teaches. Adam tried to grasp at equality with God. But Jesus would not usurp God's authority for selfish advantage. He said, "I came to serve" (Matt. 20:28), not to snatch! At his arrest in the garden, he said, "Do you not think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and He will at once put at my disposal more than 12 legions of angels?" (Matthew 26:53). As the Messiah, God's appointed King, he had every right to call for divine protection. He "emptied himself" of all such Messianic privileges.

This has nothing to do with the KJV; it has everything to do with the Greek and the context, much of which I gave and you ignored. If you had even somewhat considered my points, you would see that much of your understanding does not at all fit the passage. Of course it's about being humble, I already stated that. But, there is no humility in a man not trying to be God and remaining the creature God made him.

As I stated, there is no greater example of humility than God leaving heaven and taking on human flesh to become one of his creatures, to die the most excruciating and humiliating death to atone for our sins. It is the ultimate example of humility, selflessness, and love.

"In the form of God" refers to his nature and "did not could equality with God a thing to be grasped" refers to his willingness to humble himself and become a man, that is precisely what verse 7 is speaking about. And notice that it contrasts "form of a servant" with "form of God." The latter cannot mean that "his God-given status," unless you want to make the nonsensical argument that his being human was also a God-given status.

Very clearly Paul is saying that Jesus took on the form of a human as compared to being in the form of God, which he emptied himself of. There was a most definite and serious change.

Therefore, it can be categorically stated that Philippians 2: 5-11 has nothing to do with Jesus Christ being God in a preexistence state.

Not at all. It has everything to do with Jesus being in nature God. That is precisely what makes his humility such an incredible example.

The importance is really very simple and very practical: how are Christians to conduct themselves in this world? Not by imitating the man Adam who forfeited everything by a grab for power and glory, but by imitating Jesus the Messiah (v.5) who through humility and obedience to God gained it all and more.

Your argument means that we should show humility by not trying to be like God. But that is clearly not what Paul is saying. He is addressing how we are to treat others--with love, doing "nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves;" looking "to the interests of others."

After all, if Jesus was already God, then verses 9 to 11 are nonsensical. There is no "Therefore also God highly exalted him, and bestowed on him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those who are in heaven, and on earth, and under the earth." If he was already God, he had this before his birth! No. It is clear that God has given him a new position, a new name (authority), and a new rank that he did not previously possess.

The Greek is very clear here: dio kai means (as in Luke 1:35) "for this reason precisely." Why has God exalted Jesus to His right hand? "Therefore, God has highly exalted him and given him the name above every other name because he is back where he was before as God"? Not at all! He is given the status as a reward for the precise reason that he humbled himself and died. His exalted status is a reward.

As the God-man, yes.

If we follow the last Adam's pattern, we too will be exalted by God when Christ returns. It is evident, then, that "this hymn does not contained what numerous interpreters seek and find in it: an independent statement about preexistence or even a Christology preexistence… No preexistence of Christ before the world with an independent significance can be recognized even in Philippians 2.

This is the creed of ALL Orthodox Christian Beliefs! All of them!


DEFINITION OF THE COUNCIL OF CHALCEDON (451 AD)

Therefore, following the holy fathers, we all with one accord teach men to acknowledge one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, at once complete in Godhead and complete in manhood, truly God and truly man, consisting also of a reasonable soul and body; of one substance with the Father as regards his Godhead, and at the same time of one substance with us as regards his manhood; like us in all respects, apart from sin; as regards his Godhead, begotten of the Father before the ages, but yet as regards his manhood begotten, bearer; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, recognized in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation; the distinction of natures being in no way annulled by the union, but rather the characteristics of each nature being preserved and coming together to form one person and subsistence, not as parted or separated into two persons, but one and the same Son and Only-begotten God the Word, Lord Jesus Christ; even as the prophets from earliest times spoke of him, and our Lord Jesus Christ himself taught us, and the creed of the fathers has handed down to us.


So pay close attention.... The Kenotic Doctrine claims that Jesus emptied himself of his deity. Well, you can simply read in the Chalcedon Creed that it defines Jesus’ nature as fully God and fully man at all times, without division, without separation. You cannot say that you believe in the Trinity and use this excuse. If you subscribe to the Kenotic Doctrine, then you have already rejected the Trinity. You cannot be both.

Jesus didn't empty himself of his deity; it is impossible for God to not be God.

You just denied the Trinity Mr Free!!! In Spades!!!

Shameful.... you should go to your pastor and repent and beg for forgivness for posting something that goes against your Church doctrine!!! Shameful... You don't even know your own docterine!!!

Paul

Maybe time to start posting in a more mature manner, yes?

 

[for_his_glory]

Your confirmation bias is so strong you slipped into cognitive dissonance. Even what you claimed is now unseen by you---its been replaced by a fabricated reality.

Below are your claims the only mystery in scripture concerns "Jew and Gentile being one body", and my refutation where I list various Scriptures proving the Holy Trinity is implicitly said to be a mystery because it is pertinent to Christ being "God manifest in the flesh" and the Incarnation of God which led to "Christ in us". We Christians have a fellowship in this mystery hidden in God who created all things through Jesus Christ. The mystery of the Holy Trinity is implicit in all these texts:

Peterlag>But the Bible does not say that the Trinity is a mystery or that any part of the New Testament is a mystery.

Peterlag> The only mystery that I can find was the one Paul made known which is that the Jews and the Gentiles would now be of the same body which is in Christ Jesus.

Peterlag>You just listed a whole bunch of verses that say the same thing that I said concerning the mystery. All talking about the mystery of the Jew and Gentile being one body.

The Following Scriptures are NOT about Jew and Gentile being one body. They concern the Being of God, God manifest in the flesh, God incarnate creating the fellowship of Christians by God who created all things through Christ:

And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in the flesh, Justified in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Preached among the Gentiles, Believed on in the world, Received up in glory. (1 Tim. 3:16-4:1 NKJ)

26 the mystery which has been hidden from ages and from generations, but now has been revealed to His saints.
27 To them God willed to make known what are the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles: which is Christ in you, the hope of glory.
28 Him we preach, warning every man and teaching every man in all wisdom, that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus. (Col. 1:26-28 NKJ)

8 To me, who am less than the least of all the saints, this grace was given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ,
9 and to make all see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God who created all things through Jesus Christ. (Eph. 3:8-9 NKJ)

Let a man so consider us, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God. (1 Cor. 4:1 NKJ)

meanwhile praying also for us, that God would open to us a door for the word, to speak the mystery of Christ, for which I am also in chains, (Col. 4:3 NKJ)

Peterlag and Alfred Persson

You might want to take your arguments to a private PM as your post are getting heated by the very large bold print, which represents yelling at each other to prove a point. Both of you are in violation of the ToS 1.1 and 1.3. If this behavior continues you will both be banned from this thread.

God's word is only a mystery to those who have no Spiritual knowledge, but only read with a carnal logical mind as all of God's word is revealed to those who have the indwelling of the Holy Spirt that teaches us all that God wants us to learn.

1Tim 3:14 These things write I unto thee, hoping to come unto thee shortly:
1Tim 3:15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.
1Tim 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

 

[Free]

There are a number of other New Testament verses that state Jesus was a man and we can see them in places like Romans that says a man (Adam) caused sin to enter into the world, and also that a man would have to redeem it from sin. Romans 5:15 says “For if many died through one man’s trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many.” Some theologians teach that only God could pay for the sins of mankind, but the Bible specifically says that a man must do it. The book of Corinthians makes the same point Romans does when it says “For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead” (1 Corinthians 15:21).

1 Timothy 2:5 says that it's the man Jesus, who was the mediator between God and men. “For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” This verse calls Jesus Christ a “man” even after his resurrection. Trinitarian doctrine tries to explain the verses that say Jesus was a man by saying that he was a man, but he was also 100% God at the same time. But there are problems with that such as there is no single verse that says Jesus was both God and man and that's why the God-man doctrine is built from many verses.

Of course Jesus was truly human, but you are ignoring the larger context of the NT which also includes many verses that speak of his divinity, even explicitly calling him God (John 1:1-18; 1 Cor 8:6; Phil 2:5-8; Col 1:16-17; etc.). What is your justification for ignoring those verses or making those about his humanity trump those that speak of his being deity?

There is no justification that can be given for doing so. It is only the doctrine of the Trinity that attempts to take all into account, without making the verses that speak of his divinity overrule those of his humanity or vice versa.

Furthermore, scholars admit that there are only about eight verses in the entire New Testament that can be understood to say that Jesus is God,

And yet you have not provided one name or quote or link to support this assertion.

and every one of them can either be translated in a way that supports the Biblical Unitarian position, or disputed textually, or can be explained from the use of the word “God” in the culture. In contrast, the clear verses where Jesus is said to be a “man” such as when Peter or Paul taught their audiences that Jesus was a man appointed by God are not disputed and in the context there does not seem to be any good reason those men would not have said Jesus was a God-man if in fact that is what he is.

But John and Paul very clearly speak of Jesus in terms that only God is spoken of, applying attributes, names, and titles that belong to God alone.

 

[pierac]

It is long past time you knock it off with calling people clueless or silly or other such names.


This has nothing to do with the KJV; it has everything to do with the Greek and the context, much of which I gave and you ignored. If you had even somewhat considered my points, you would see that much of your understanding does not at all fit the passage. Of course it's about being humble, I already stated that. But, there is no humility in a man not trying to be God and remaining the creature God made him.

As I stated, there is no greater example of humility than God leaving heaven and taking on human flesh to become one of his creatures, to die the most excruciating and humiliating death to atone for our sins. It is the ultimate example of humility, selflessness, and love.

"In the form of God" refers to his nature and "did not could equality with God a thing to be grasped" refers to his willingness to humble himself and become a man, that is precisely what verse 7 is speaking about. And notice that it contrasts "form of a servant" with "form of God." The latter cannot mean that "his God-given status," unless you want to make the nonsensical argument that his being human was also a God-given status.

Very clearly Paul is saying that Jesus took on the form of a human as compared to being in the form of God, which he emptied himself of. There was a most definite and serious change.


Not at all. It has everything to do with Jesus being in nature God. That is precisely what makes his humility such an incredible example.


Your argument means that we should show humility by not trying to be like God. But that is clearly not what Paul is saying. He is addressing how we are to treat others--with love, doing "nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves;" looking "to the interests of others."


As the God-man, yes.


Jesus didn't empty himself of his deity; it is impossible for God to not be God.


Maybe time to start posting in a more mature manner, yes?

I accept your apology... It takes courage to admit you were wrong...

So Glad you came to the Truth ...
Paul

 

[for_his_glory]

The Jews would not have considered Jesus a threat, but insane if he had walked around saying he was God. But it was a threat for Jesus to claim to be the Messiah of God and also walk around doing miracles. Jesus had not been claiming to be God in the flesh and this is why the Jews never asked him at his trial if he was God in the flesh, but instead they asked him about what he had been claiming to be, which was the Messiah. Mark 14:61-62 records the High Priest asking “Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?" And Jesus said "I am.” The High Priest tore his garments and said he deserved to be put to death when Jesus stated he was the Messiah. So we see that the Jews correctly assessed that Jesus had been claiming to be the Christ, and that Jesus indeed said he was the Christ, and also that the Jews thought his claim was worthy of the death penalty.

Scriptures that reference Jesus being referred to as God:
John 1:1-14; John 10:30; Romans 9:5; Colossians 2:9; Hebrews 1:8, 9; 1 John 5:7, 8, 20; 1 Corinthians 8:6; 2 Corinthians 3:17; 13:14; Isaiah 9:6; 44:6; Luke 1:35; Matthew 1:23; 28:19; John 14:16, 17; Genesis 1:1, 2 (cross reference John 1:1-14); 1 Corinthians 12:4-6; Ephesians 4:4-6; Colossians 1:15-17; John 14:9-11; Philippians 2:5-8; Rev 1:8

If you want to refute what Jesus said then have at it.

 

[Free]

I accept your apology... It takes courage to admit you were wrong...

So Glad you came to the Truth ...
Paul

What are you talking about? There is no apology and certainly no admittance to being wrong, especially since I showed that your understanding of Phil 2:5-8 is seriously deficient.

 

[pierac]

What are you talking about? There is no apology and certainly no admittance to being wrong, especially since I showed that your understanding of Phil 2:5-8 is seriously deficient.

What? Your saying you do not beleive in the Trinity???

DEFINITION OF THE COUNCIL OF CHALCEDON (451 AD)

Therefore, following the holy fathers, we all with one accord teach men to acknowledge one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, at once complete in Godhead and complete in manhood, truly God and truly man, consisting also of a reasonable soul and body; of one substance with the Father as regards his Godhead, and at the same time of one substance with us as regards his manhood; like us in all respects, apart from sin; as regards his Godhead, begotten of the Father before the ages, but yet as regards his manhood begotten, bearer; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, recognized in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation; the distinction of natures being in no way annulled by the union, but rather the characteristics of each nature being preserved and coming together to form one person and subsistence, not as parted or separated into two persons, but one and the same Son and Only-begotten God the Word, Lord Jesus Christ; even as the prophets from earliest times spoke of him, and our Lord Jesus Christ himself taught us, and the creed of the fathers has handed down to us.

Keep posting Phil 2:5-8 and I will keep showing you how you deny the Trinity...

The Kenotic Doctrine claims that Jesus emptied himself of his deity. Well, you can simply read in the Chalcedon Creed that it defines Jesus’ nature as fully God and fully man at all times, without division, without separation. You cannot say that you believe in the Trinity and use this excuse. If you subscribe to the Kenotic Doctrine, as you do... then you have already rejected the Trinity. You cannot be both.

You can let go of your ankles now... Your Biblical spanking is complete...
Paul

 

[for_his_glory]

by him were all things created does not mean the planets. The all things Paul is referring to are all thing pertaining to the new birth.

How do you understand the claim Jesus made in Rev 1:8?
Rev 1:8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

How about Isaiah 9:6
Isa 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

 

[Free]

What? Your saying you do not beleive in the Trinity???

DEFINITION OF THE COUNCIL OF CHALCEDON (451 AD)

Therefore, following the holy fathers, we all with one accord teach men to acknowledge one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, at once complete in Godhead and complete in manhood, truly God and truly man, consisting also of a reasonable soul and body; of one substance with the Father as regards his Godhead, and at the same time of one substance with us as regards his manhood; like us in all respects, apart from sin; as regards his Godhead, begotten of the Father before the ages, but yet as regards his manhood begotten, bearer; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, recognized in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation; the distinction of natures being in no way annulled by the union, but rather the characteristics of each nature being preserved and coming together to form one person and subsistence, not as parted or separated into two persons, but one and the same Son and Only-begotten God the Word, Lord Jesus Christ; even as the prophets from earliest times spoke of him, and our Lord Jesus Christ himself taught us, and the creed of the fathers has handed down to us.

Keep posting Phil 2:5-8 and I will keep showing you how you deny the Trinity...

The Kenotic Doctrine claims that Jesus emptied himself of his deity. Well, you can simply read in the Chalcedon Creed that it defines Jesus’ nature as fully God and fully man at all times, without division, without separation. You cannot say that you believe in the Trinity and use this excuse. If you subscribe to the Kenotic Doctrine, as you do... then you have already rejected the Trinity. You cannot be both.

I specifically said that "Jesus didn't empty himself of his deity; it is impossible for God to not be God." What is it that you don't understand about that? And, you need to get an understanding of just what kenosis is saying and not saying. Some might define it as Christ emptying himself of his deity, but many don't. The fact remains that he emptied himself of something, and that something your position cannot account for.

You can let go of your ankles now... Your Biblical spanking is complete...
Paul

Seriously, this type of language needs to stop, now. It is immature and exceedingly prideful and has no place in these forums.

 

[Alfred Persson]

Peterlag and Alfred Persson

You might want to take your arguments to a private PM as your post are getting heated by the very large bold print, which represents yelling at each other to prove a point. Both of you are in violation of the ToS 1.1 and 1.3. If this behavior continues you will both be banned from this thread.

God's word is only a mystery to those who have no Spiritual knowledge, but only read with a carnal logical mind as all of God's word is revealed to those who have the indwelling of the Holy Spirt that teaches us all that God wants us to learn.

1Tim 3:14 These things write I unto thee, hoping to come unto thee shortly:
1Tim 3:15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.
1Tim 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

Large print was clearly an antidote to confirmation bias, not heat or any personal attack.

Perhaps you should PM me if you have a problem with me. I'll never agree with your odd interpretations.

 

[for_his_glory]

Randy.... you can let go of your ankles now... Your biblical spanking is complete!

I have warned you about these derogatory remarks made to members will get you banned from this thread so now you are banned as you ignore the warning given to you. If you have a problem with this take it to TWTS.

 

[for_his_glory]

Large print was clearly an antidote to confirmation bias, not heat or any personal attack.

Perhaps you should PM me if you have a problem with me. I'll never agree with your odd interpretations.

ToS 2.6 part of the old ToS but still in force: Refrain from all caps and bold, large fonts unless it is used sparingly to emphasize a point.

You and pierac were not emphasizing points but arguing with each other. Bolding is fine when emphasizing a point, but large fonts are mostly considered yelling at another member like seeing who can yell the loudest. All I am asking is that you refrain from doing this as well as all of us.

 

[gordon777]

Are you guys ever going to wake up before it is judgement day and realize, there is only one point, that there is one God, but that is not enough to know.

Faith has to be in what God did( giving His life to save us fro selfish living then dying)


Who is the first to step up,and cease being selfish on a forum for no purpose other than to blaspheme the name of the Lord from all in the forum ?

If you ignore the reproof, it will only be ignored against yourselves. ( stop being vain man ?)




James 2:19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?


James 2:26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

 

[for_his_glory]

Are you guys ever going to wake up before it is judgement day and realize, there is only one point, that there is one God, but that is not enough to know.

Faith has to be in what God did( giving His life to save us fro selfish living then dying)


Who is the first to step up,and cease being selfish on a forum for no purpose other than to blaspheme the name of the Lord from all in the forum ?

If you ignore the reproof, it will only be ignored against yourselves. ( stop being vain man ?)




James 2:19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?


James 2:26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

gordon777
All forums are a place to discuss, give your views, give your understanding, to ask questions and hopefully to learn. Not everyone is going to agree with each other and it is the indifferences that we discuss as we are all learning. Just because someone does not agree with another's understanding does not mean they are right and everyone else is wrong, it just means that many are taught in many various ways. Some believe everything that comes from what their Pastor teaches without really studying for themselves and then you have others that are very studious in study scripture on their own.

Trinity is a hard thing for all of us to try and understand as I believe we can only know in part as to what God wants revealed to us. We can learn from others that have a greater Spiritual knowledge if we just open our minds without coming in with any preconceived ideologies and listen and take in consideration of what others are saying and go study the scriptures they give by asking the Holy Spirit to reveal all truths for after all the Spirit of God is our only teacher and works through others to teach us as we Spiritually discern what is being taught. Are we always right, no, are we always wrong, no, but we are ever learning.


2Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
2Timothy 2:16 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.

 

[Peterlag]

How do you understand the claim Jesus made in Rev 1:8?
Rev 1:8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

How about Isaiah 9:6
Isa 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

For you I will do both verses:

Isaiah 9:6
In the culture of the Bible, anyone who began anything or was very important to someone was called its "father." Jabal was the first one to live in a tent and raise livestock. The Bible says "... he was the father of those who live in tents and raise livestock" (Genesis 4:20). Jubal was the first inventor of musical instruments. And so he's called "... the father of all who play the harp and flute. (Genesis 4:21). Scripture is not using "father" in the sense of literal father or ancestor in these verses because both these men were descendants of Cain and all their descendants died in the flood. "Father" was being used in the cultural understanding of either one who was the first to do something or someone who was important in some way. Because the Messiah will be the one to establish the age to come, raise the dead into it, and rule over it is why he is called "the father of the coming age."

The phrase "Mighty God" can also be better translated. The word God in the Hebrew culture had a much wider range of application than it does in ours. Those familiar with semitic languages know a man who is acting with God's authority can be called a god. English makes a clear distinction between God and god. The Hebrew language which has only capital letters cannot. A better translation for the English would be "mighty hero" or "divine hero."
Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translate the phrase as divine hero in their Bibles.

Revelation 1:8 These words apply to God, not to Christ. The one, "... who is, and who was, and who is to come..." is clearly identified from the context. Revelation 1:4 and 5 reads: " Grace and Peace to you from him who is, and who was, and who is to come, and from the seven spirits before his throne, and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth..." The separation between "...him who is, and who was, and who is to come..." and Christ can be clearly seen. The one "...who is, and who was, and who is to come..." is God.

 

[Peterlag]

Scriptures that reference Jesus being referred to as God:
John 1:1-14; John 10:30; Romans 9:5; Colossians 2:9; Hebrews 1:8, 9; 1 John 5:7, 8, 20; 1 Corinthians 8:6; 2 Corinthians 3:17; 13:14; Isaiah 9:6; 44:6; Luke 1:35; Matthew 1:23; 28:19; John 14:16, 17; Genesis 1:1, 2 (cross reference John 1:1-14); 1 Corinthians 12:4-6; Ephesians 4:4-6; Colossians 1:15-17; John 14:9-11; Philippians 2:5-8; Rev 1:8

If you want to refute what Jesus said then have at it.

One at a time. Here's John 10:30
There is no reason to take this verse to mean that Christ was saying that he and the Father make up "one God." The phrase was a common one, and even today if someone used it, people would know exactly what they meant... he and his Father are very much alike. When Paul wrote to the Corinthians about his ministry there, he said that he had planted the seed and Apollos had watered it. Then he said, "... he who plants and he who waters are one..." (1 Corinthians 3:8 NKJV). In the Greek texts, the wording of Paul is the same as that in John 10:30, yet no one claims that Paul and Apollos make up "one being." Christ uses the concept of "being one" in other places, and from them one can see that "one purpose" is what is meant. John 11:52 says Jesus was to die to make all God's children "one." In John 17:11, 21 and 22, Jesus prayed to God that his followers would be "one" as he and God were "one." I think it's obvious that Jesus was not praying that all his followers would become one being in "substance" just as he and his Father were one being or "substance." I believe the meaning is clear: Jesus was praying that all his followers be one in purpose just as he and God were one in purpose.

 

[Peterlag]

Of course Jesus was truly human, but you are ignoring the larger context of the NT which also includes many verses that speak of his divinity, even explicitly calling him God (John 1:1-18; 1 Cor 8:6; Phil 2:5-8; Col 1:16-17; etc.). What is your justification for ignoring those verses or making those about his humanity trump those that speak of his being deity?

There is no justification that can be given for doing so. It is only the doctrine of the Trinity that attempts to take all into account, without making the verses that speak of his divinity overrule those of his humanity or vice versa.


And yet you have not provided one name or quote or link to support this assertion.


But John and Paul very clearly speak of Jesus in terms that only God is spoken of, applying attributes, names, and titles that belong to God alone.

I have commented on John 1 and yet you keep bringing it up like if I had not.