Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Do you need to believe Jesus is God to be saved?

Jesus went to his disciples after he rose from the dead.

One of Jesus disciples name Thomas called Jesus "My Lord and My God" it did not take Jesus long at all to correct him. Jesus quickly scolded Thomas concerning his belief. Then Jesus ended by telling us what it is we should - we better believe. This is Jesus speaking from his own mouth (verse 31).

John 20:
28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.
30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:

31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.
 
One of Jesus disciples name Thomas called Jesus "My Lord and My God" it did not take Jesus long at all to correct him. Jesus quickly scolded Thomas concerning his belief. Then Jesus ended by telling us what it is we should - we better believe.

John 20:
28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.
30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:

31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.
Exactly where in this Bible quote do you get the idea the Jesus corrected Thomas assertion concerned Jesus: "My Lord and my GOD?
There's no correction here. Jesus just states that Thomas believed because he actually saw the risen Christ. Jesus then makes another statement.
 
Greetings again Fastfred0,
The verse says the the Father and the Son are in each other ... both God
Perhaps it is to better to read the whole passage, and instead of just quoting the very relevant verses I will highlight them:
John 17:6–23 (KJV): 6 I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word. 7 Now they have known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee. 8 For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me. 9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine. 10 And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them.
11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are. 12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled. 13 And now come I to thee; and these things I speak in the world, that they might have my joy fulfilled in themselves. 14 I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. 15 I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil. 16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. 18 As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world. 19 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.
20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; 21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. 22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: 23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

I already showed that the term SON OF GOD refers to deity.
This may be proof to you, but I believe that Jesus is a human born to Mary, and did not exist before his conception and birth. I find the following interesting, as to some extent it summarises the three qualities that I mentioned, but some Greek scholars play around with what they consider the "exact" meaning:
Romans 1:1–5 (KJV): 1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God, 2 (Which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,) 3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; 4 And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead: 5 By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name:

There's no correction here. Jesus just states that Thomas believed because he actually saw the risen Christ. Jesus then makes another statement.
I agree there is no correction. It is not Jesus that states what Thomas said, but the Apostle John. It is also John who summarises the whole purpose and theme of his Gospel record is to demonstrate that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. I consider the title here in this context of "The Son of God" in verse 31 is a greater title, role, meaning, status than the title "God" in verse 28. Verse 28 is saying that Jesus represents God, and this title also is given to the Angels and Judges. The title in verse 31 "The Son of God" is unique to Jesus and carries the full significance of his birth, character, resurrection and present status as the exalted King / Priest of God's creation.

Kind regards
Trevor
 
Last edited:
Hey All,
I would argue that, in heaven, there will be those who are saved, yet they did not know Jesus by name. They saw the witness of creation, and worshipped the Creator.
Well that's pretty farfetched.
How can I say that?

Revelation 14:6-7 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,
Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.

That word "every" is absolute. People who did not know Jesus by name, or by missionary, will figure it out; and will worship the true and living God. This is one of the reasons people who do hear and reject with knowledge, are without excuse.

Keep walking everybody.
May God bless,
Taz
 
Last edited:
Exactly where in this Bible quote do you get the idea the Jesus corrected Thomas assertion concerned Jesus: "My Lord and my GOD?
There's no correction here. Jesus just states that Thomas believed because he actually saw the risen Christ. Jesus then makes another statement.
For the sake of our salvation Jesus keeps telling us what we must believe which is that he is the Son of God. I know you may be thinking, but wait there is a large group of people who believe otherwise, yet that entity (whom I love dearly) is a stronghold, and stumbling block for the flock. For the sake of salvation their main confession is that Jesus is God. Where did they get that from? It did not come from God, Jesus, Peter, John, etc...? Man says one thing, but God says another.

Sir, please allow me to introduce two scriptural examples.

In Matthew 16:15-17
After Peter tells Jesus he is the Son of God, Jesus praises him; calls him Peter blessed. That is the "Blessed" belief. WHY??? Because Jesus says to Peter that is the belief that my Father has revealed to you. Calling Jesus God is the flesh and blood belief revealed by man-not by God.

Contrast that with Jesus reaction to Thomas' flesh and blood confession

John 28-31
After Thomas sees Jesus who has risen from the dead; he takes it upon himself to call Jesus that which he was never taught to call Jesus he says, "My Lord, My God" Jesus does not call Thomas "Blessed" for that confession, like he called Peter blessed for is confession of him being the Son of God. Thomas' confession was not a blessed confession. Jesus then goes on to scold Thomas as to why he is not blessed (v 29). Ending with verse 31, again the confession of both God and Peter, that Jesus is Christ, the Son of God.

31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.
 
If Christ claimed to be a "son of God" just as Jews claim to be "son of" whoever's principles they obeyed, the religious authorities wouldn't have considered it blasphemy:

Blessed are the peacemakers, For they shall be called sons of God. (Matt. 5:9 NKJ)

No one objected when Christ said this.

It is because Jesus literally meant He is the Son of God, that He was crucified:

70 Then they all said, "Are You then the Son of God?" So He said to them, "You rightly say that I am."
71 And they said, "What further testimony do we need? For we have heard it ourselves from His own mouth." (Lk. 22:70-23:1 NKJ)

A literal Son of Man is fully human just as Man is. Jesus' claimed to be both the "Son of Man" and the "Son of God", that is why they considered it blasphemous, it made Jesus God and also asserted He is fully human. [The doctrine of two natures in Jesus has this as its foundation.]


30 "I and My Father are one."
31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him.
32 Jesus answered them, "Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?"
33 The Jews answered Him, saying, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God."
34 Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your law,`I said, "You are gods "'?
35 "If He called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken),
36 "do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world,`You are blaspheming,' because I said,`I am the Son of God '?
37 "If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me;
38 "but if I do, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, that you may know and believe that the Father is in Me, and I in Him."
39 Therefore they sought again to seize Him, but He escaped out of their hand. (Jn. 10:30-39 NKJ)

Like a Master Street Preacher Christ stopped the crowd from stoning Him, by confusing them. Scripture did indeed call them "gods". But nothing in that diminished Christ's claim to be "one" with God, the "Son of God". He repeats the Father is in Him and He in the Father.

Many of them understood that. They still sought to seize Him. But their moment of opportunity to stone Christ had passed, and He escaped from their hand.

Calling Himself the "Son of Man" also implies He is more. What human being goes around claiming to be human, everyone assumes it without needing to say it.
 
Last edited:
Greetings cherithbrook and Greetings again Alfred Persson,
After Thomas sees Jesus who has risen from the dead; he takes it upon himself to call Jesus that which he was never taught to call Jesus he says, "My Lord, My God"
There is nothing wrong with the titles "Lord" and "God". Many in the O.T. are called "Lord" and the title "God" is also applied to both Angels and Judges. You seem to have been swayed by the Trinitarian propaganda.
Jesus does not call Thomas "Blessed" for that confession, like he called Peter blessed for is confession of him being the Son of God. Thomas' confession was not a blessed confession.
I suggest it was a very profound confession, revealing Thomas' realisation at last that Jesus had indeed risen from the dead, despite his severe previous reservations.
Jesus then goes on to scold Thomas as to why he is not blessed (v 29).
Jesus scolds Thomas because his faith in the actual resurrection was not awakened or fully realised until he had actually seen the risen Lord, and the evidence of his wounds in his hands and side.
Ending with verse 31, again the confession of both God and Peter, that Jesus is Christ, the Son of God.
31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.
Yes, Jesus is the Christ the Son of God, not God the Son.
If Christ claimed to be a "son of God" just as Jews claim to be "son of" whoever's principles they obeyed, the religious authorities wouldn't have considered it blasphemy:
Blessed are the peacemakers, For they shall be called sons of God. (Matt. 5:9 NKJ)
No one objected when Christ said this.
It is because Jesus literally meant He is the Son of God, that He was crucified:
70 Then they all said, "Are You then the Son of God?" So He said to them, "You rightly say that I am."
71 And they said, "What further testimony do we need? For we have heard it ourselves from His own mouth." (Lk. 22:70-23:1 NKJ)
Yes, Jesus is The Son of God, and Jesus claimed to be The Son of God, and that is why they crucified him. They did not crucify him because of their claim that he was God, nor the Trinitarian claim that Jesus is God the Son.
A literal Son of Man is fully human just as Man is. Jesus' claimed to be both the "Son of Man" and the "Son of God", that is why they considered it blasphemous, it made Jesus God and also asserted He is fully human. [The doctrine of two natures in Jesus has this as its foundation.]
No, the title "The Son of Man" goes back to Psalm 8 and speaks of the Descendant of Adam, the Woman's seed, the One who would fulfill the role forfeited by Adam because of his sin:
Psalm 8:3–6 (KJV): 3 When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained; 4 What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him? 5 For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour. 6 Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet:

Psalm 80:17 (KJV): Let thy hand be upon the man of thy right hand, upon the son of man whom thou madest strong for thyself.


Like a Master Street Preacher Christ stopped the crowd from stoning Him, by confusing them. Scripture did indeed call them "gods". But nothing in that diminished Christ's claim to be "one" with God, the "Son of God". He repeats the Father is in Him and He in the Father.
No, Jesus did not confuse them, he answered them clearly, and the leaders fully understood that they had been defeated. Nevertheless they tried to stir up the volatile crowd by picking up stones, but the common people could see through their duplicity, and how they wanted to kill Jesus.

The Trinitarians on the other hand are blind, and cannot understand these things, and side with the initial false accusation by the Jews. The Judges in Israel were called "Gods" or "Elohim" because they had received the Law from God's hand and were intended to represent God and administer this faithfully. Many did not, and the current members of the Sanhedrin blatantly failed to do this in their opposition to Jesus here. Jesus was calling them out in front of the crowd, and they did not not like this whatsoever. They were to be Judged and rejected as Psalm 82 states, and they knew what Jesus was saying.
Calling Himself the "Son of Man" also implies He is more. What human being goes around claiming to be human, everyone assumes it without needing to say it.
Yes, and the title "the Son of Man" carries over to Daniel 7, the man who would be elevated to sit at God's right hand after his resurrection.

Kind regards
Trevor
 
Greetings cherithbrook and Greetings again Alfred Persson,

There is nothing wrong with the titles "Lord" and "God". Many in the O.T. are called "Lord" and the title "God" is also applied to both Angels and Judges. You seem to have been swayed by the Trinitarian propaganda.

I suggest it was a very profound confession, revealing Thomas' realisation at last that Jesus had indeed risen from the dead, despite his severe previous reservations.
Hello Trevor,

It appears as if Thomas used some titles that did not garner him a "blessed" response from Jesus, instead he was scolded, and in verse 31 the message given is that Jesus is the Son of God. I would guess that the only thing wrong with titles is using them inappropriately and haphazardly. God gave Jesus the correct title "Son" man keeps disrespecting and adding to that.

We have to view it spiritually from Jesus standpoint, not from our own head space. What Jesus lets us know is that what is very important to him is, "Who do you say that I am?" That is where Thomas fail to say what is mentioned in verse 31. "Blessings"

31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.
 
Greetings again cherithbrook,
It appears as if Thomas used some titles that did not garner him a "blessed" response from Jesus, instead he was scolded, and in verse 31 the message given is that Jesus is the Son of God. I would guess that the only thing wrong with titles is using them inappropriately and haphazardly. God gave Jesus the correct title "Son" man keeps disrespecting and adding to that.
You seem to be locked into your ideas based on an erroneous reading of the whole incident and the clear words of John 20:24-31. Please reread what Jesus actually says.

John 20:24–31 (KJV): 24 But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. 25 The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.
26 And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you. 27 Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing. 28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God. 29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed. 30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: 31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

Jesus calls those individuals blessed, and that should include us, who have believed without actually seeing the resurrected Christ. Thomas was not in any way rebuked or corrected in what he said concerning being his "Lord" and "God". Your wrong assessment gives some credence to the Trinitarian claim.

Kind regards
Trevor

Kind regards
Trevor
 
@TrevorL

Christ’s Appearance to Thomas​

But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. So the other disciples were saying to him, “We have seen the Lord!” But he said to them, “Unless I see in His hands the imprint of the nails, and put my finger into the place of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe.” After eight days His disciples were again inside, and Thomas with them. Jesus came, the doors having been shut, and stood in their midst and said, “Peace be with you.” Then He said to Thomas, “Reach here with your finger, and see My hands; and reach here your hand and put it into My side; and do not be unbelieving, but believing.” Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!” Jesus said to him, “Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed.” Therefore many other signs Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name. (20:24–31)

Not all of the apostles had been present at Jesus’ first appearance. Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. Thomas was nicknamed Didymus, (“Twin”) for the obvious reason that he had a twin (who does not appear in Scripture). The Synoptic Gospels mention him only in the lists of the twelve apostles; the details of his character come from John’s gospel.

Thomas was the eternal pessimist. Like Eeyore in the Winnie the Pooh stories, he was a melancholy person, with an uncanny knack for finding the dark cloud in every silver lining. Thomas first appears in John’s gospel in connection with the story of the raising of Lazarus. Aghast that Jesus planned to return to the vicinity of Jerusalem, where the Jews had recently tried to kill Him (11:8), Thomas exclaimed fatalistically, “Let us also go, so that we may die with Him” (v. 16). But Thomas’s pessimism should not be allowed to obscure his courage; though he thought the situation was hopeless, he nonetheless was willing to lay his life on the line for the Lord. His love for Jesus was so strong that he would have preferred to die with Him rather than to be separated from Him.

Thomas next appears in the upper room. Jesus had just announced His imminent departure (14:2–3), and reminded the disciples that they knew where He was going. Heartbroken that Jesus was leaving, Thomas promptly contradicted Him, saying despondently, “Lord, we do not know where You are going, how do we know the way?” (14:5), suggesting such devotion that he seemed to think it would be better to die with his Lord than to try to find Him later. Such was his love for Christ.

It is too bad that Thomas missed the Lord’s appearance. Why was he not there? Was it due to his being negative, pessimistic, even melancholy? Was he off somewhere feeling sorry for himself because his worst fear had come true?

Thomas may have felt alone, betrayed, forsaken. His hopes may have been crushed. The One he had loved so greatly was gone and his heart was irreparably torn. He may not have been in a socializing mood. Maybe being alone seemed best. He could not be in a crowd, even with his friends.

But when Thomas returned from wherever he had been, the other disciples were exuberantly and eagerly saying to him, “We have seen the Lord!” But he would have none of it. Thomas was certain he would never see Jesus again. He refused to get his hopes up, only to have them dashed once more, so he announced skeptically, “Unless I see in His hands the imprint of the nails, and put my finger into the place of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe.” It was that remark that earned him the nickname “Doubting Thomas.” But the track record of the other ten apostles was no better; they too had scoffed at the initial reports of the resurrection (Mark 16:10–13; Luke 24:9–11) and failed to believe the Scriptures that predicted it (20:9; Luke 24:25–26). What made Thomas different was not that his doubt was greater, but that his sorrow was greater.

Thomas would soon be taken up on his skeptical offer. After eight days the disciples were again inside, but this time Thomas was with them. Once again, the doors had been shut, and once again that proved to be no deterrent to the risen Lord. As He had done eight days earlier, Jesus came in and stood in their midst. He immediately singled out Thomas. Ever the sympathetic High Priest (Heb. 4:15), Jesus gently, lovingly, compassionately said to him, “Reach here with your finger, and see My hands; and reach here your hand and put it into My side; and do not be unbelieving, but believing.” The Lord met Thomas at the point of his weakness and doubt, without rebuke because He knew Thomas’s error was connected to his profound love. In patient compassion, He gave Thomas the empirical proof he had demanded.

That was enough for the doubter; his melancholy skepticism dissolved forever in light of the irrefutable evidence in the person confronting him. Overwhelmed, he made perhaps the greatest confession of any of the apostles, rivaled only by Peter’s confession of Jesus as the Messiah (Matt. 16:16), exclaiming, “My Lord and my God!” Significantly, Jesus did not correct him, but accepted Thomas’s affirmation of His deity. Indeed, He praised Thomas for his faith, saying to him, “Because you have seen Me, have you believed?” But looking ahead to the time when the tangible, physical evidence Thomas had witnessed would no longer be available, the Lord pronounced those “blessed … who did not see, and yet believed” (cf. 2 Cor. 5:7; 1 Peter 1:8–9). They, who will never see physical evidence of Christ’s rising, will have a greater measure of the Holy Spirit to empower faith in the resurrection. This is the second beatitude in this gospel (cf. 13:17). Blessed does not just convey a condition of happiness, but also declares the recipient to be accepted by God.

It must be noted that our Lord’s words do not indicate anything defective about the faith of Thomas.

Thomas’s faith is not depreciated … “but for the fact that Thomas and the other apostles saw the incarnate Christ there would have been no Christian faith at all. Cf. 1:18, 50f.; 2:11; 4:45; 6:2; 9:37; 14:7, 9; 19:35” (Barrett, p. 573).… later believers come to faith through the word of the earlier believers (17:20). Blessed, then, are those who cannot share Thomas’ experience of sight, but who, in part because they read of Thomas’ experience, come to share Thomas’ faith. (D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991), 660)

Thomas’s confession and Christ’s response are a fitting lead in to John’s summary statement of his goal and purpose in writing his gospel: Therefore many other signs Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book (cf. 12:37; 21:25). Those who have not and will not see the Lord risen will depend on this gospel penned by John (as well as the other three) to provide the word concerning Christ by which the Spirit can give them regeneration and faith (Rom. 10:17).

And there are many more miraculous signs that Jesus did beyond the miracles recorded in chapters 2–12 (and the other Gospels), including the greatest sign—His resurrection—but they are not necessary because what has been written is sufficient. This statement establishes that this gospel of John is about the miraculous signs pointing to Jesus as Christ and Lord—for the purpose John explicitly expresses in the next statement.

But these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name. As has been said, to expand this verse one need only to go back through the whole gospel. This is the summary statement. To believe that Jesus Christ is God incarnate (1:1, 14), the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (1:29), and the resurrection and the life (11:25) is to believe that truth that when accepted provides forgiveness of sin and eternal life (3:16). John’s purpose is clearly evangelistic. Again, Carson aptly unifies the thought:

John’s purpose is not academic. He writes in order that men and women may believe certain propositional truth, the truth that the Christ, the Son of God, is Jesus, the Jesus whose portrait is drawn in this Gospel. But such faith is not an end in itself. It is directed toward the goal of personal, eschatological salvation: that by believing you may have life in his name. That is still the purpose of this book today, and at the heart of the Christian mission (v. 21). (John, 663. Italics in original.)[1]


[1] John F. MacArthur Jr., John 12–21, MacArthur New Testament Commentary (Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers, 2008), 383–386.
 
Greetings "electebyhim",
Christ’s Appearance to Thomas
Yes, that is a fairly well written and balanced article, except for the error of introducing the Trinity into the narrative as Jesus is a human, now exalted, and he is the Christ, the Son of god..

Kind regards
Trevor
 
Greetings "electebyhim",

Yes, that is a fairly well written and balanced article, except for the error of introducing the Trinity into the narrative as Jesus is a human, now exalted, and he is the Christ, the Son of god..

Kind regards
Trevor
Thanks, but I will trust the Bible and a Pastor who has an impeccable reputaion.

You are correct that Jesus is the Son of God.

During His trial before the Jewish leaders, the High Priest demanded of Jesus, “I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God” (Matthew 26:63). “‘Yes, it is as you say,’ Jesus replied. ‘But I say to all of you: In the future you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven’” (Matthew 26:64). The Jewish leaders responded by accusing Jesus of blasphemy (Matthew 26:65-66). Later, before Pontius Pilate, “The Jews insisted, ‘We have a law, and according to that law He must die, because He claimed to be the Son of God’” (John 19:7). Why would His claiming to be the Son of God be considered blasphemy and be worthy of a death sentence? The Jewish leaders understood exactly what Jesus meant by the phrase “Son of God.” To be the Son of God is to be of the same nature as God. The Son of God is “of God.” The claim to be of the same nature as God—to in fact be God—was blasphemy to the Jewish leaders; therefore, they demanded Jesus’ death, in keeping with Leviticus 24:15. Hebrews 1:3 expresses this very clearly, “The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of His being.”

Another example can be found in John 17:12 where Judas is described as the “son of perdition.” John 6:71 tells us that Judas was the son of Simon. What does John 17:12 mean by describing Judas as the “son of perdition”? The word perdition means “destruction, ruin, waste.” Judas was not the literal son of “ruin, destruction, and waste,” but those things were the identity of Judas' life. Judas was a manifestation of perdition. In this same way, Jesus is the Son of God. The Son of God is God. Jesus is God made manifest (John 1:1, 14).
 
Greetings again "electebyhim",
Thanks, but I will trust the Bible and a Pastor who has an impeccable reputaion.
Yes, many claim that they "trust the Bible" and believe the Trinity including such scholars as D.A. Carson, but I suggest that much of the Trinity reasoning came from Pagan and Greek Philosophy and the doctrine was developed in the 2nd and 3rd Centuries. Few Trinitarians have really properly examined the OT teaching concerning God and I have attempted to cover some of this in my thread "The Yahweh Name".

I am the Librarian for my meeting (almost retired due to sickness and age) but I also have a much larger personal collection, and as well as a large collection of our in house books, magazines and literature I used to go to book sales and purchase many reference books and fairly standard commentaries. One such purchase of the NT portion of The Expositor's Bible Commentary has DA Carson the writer for the Matthew portion and I have relied upon him for a few aspects of Matthew as he is a clear thinker and writes well. I also have that volume electronically running under my Logos8 Bible Program. The only book with him as Editor that I have purchased new is Commentary on the NT Use of the OT, and I purchased this because I am very interested in where the passages of The Psalms and Isaiah are quoted in the NT and often expounded and clarified as a result in both the OT and NT contexts.

So yes, rely on some of these scholars, but be careful of some of their doctrines.
You are correct that Jesus is the Son of God.
Yes, but the scope of our understanding of this expression is different, as you really believe that Jesus is God the Son.

Kind regards
Trevor
 
Greetings again "electebyhim",

Yes, many claim that they "trust the Bible" and believe the Trinity including such scholars as D.A. Carson, but I suggest that much of the Trinity reasoning came from Pagan and Greek Philosophy and the doctrine was developed in the 2nd and 3rd Centuries. Few Trinitarians have really properly examined the OT teaching concerning God and I have attempted to cover some of this in my thread "The Yahweh Name".

I am the Librarian for my meeting (almost retired due to sickness and age) but I also have a much larger personal collection, and as well as a large collection of our in house books, magazines and literature I used to go to book sales and purchase many reference books and fairly standard commentaries. One such purchase of the NT portion of The Expositor's Bible Commentary has DA Carson the writer for the Matthew portion and I have relied upon him for a few aspects of Matthew as he is a clear thinker and writes well. I also have that volume electronically running under my Logos8 Bible Program. The only book with him as Editor that I have purchased new is Commentary on the NT Use of the OT, and I purchased this because I am very interested in where the passages of The Psalms and Isaiah are quoted in the NT and often expounded and clarified as a result in both the OT and NT contexts.

So yes, rely on some of these scholars, but be careful of some of their doctrines.

Yes, but the scope of our understanding of this expression is different, as you really believe that Jesus is God the Son.

Kind regards
Trevor
Thank you for your comments.

I created this thread and it went sideways.

I also have contributed to derailing it.
 
Greetings again "electebyhim",
Do you need to believe Jesus is God to be saved?
IMO, No!!! It is definitely a disadvantage in understanding the correct Bible teaching, which is that there is One God, Yahweh, God the Father and that our Lord Jesus Christ is the Son of God, a human, now glorified and sitting at the right hand of God, in God the Father's Throne.

Kind regards
Trevor
 
Back
Top