Thomas didn't believe Jesus is God

[Alfred Persson]

God taught Jesus. What Jesus repeated to others weren't his own teachings.

John 8
28So Jesus said, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am He, and that I do nothing on My own, but speak exactly what the Father has taught Me.

The Father wasn't incarnate in the flesh of Jesus when He said "they will be taught by God."

Christ revealed Himself plainly, over and over, and the scriptures testify to this but still you won't believe.

You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and pthese are they which testify of Me. But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life.

 

[Runningman]

The Father wasn't incarnate in the flesh of Jesus when He said "they will be taught by God."

The Father was not incarnate in the flesh. The Father was with Jesus beginning at his water baptism.

Acts 10
37You yourselves know what has happened throughout Judea, beginning in Galilee with the baptism that John proclaimed: 38how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power, and how Jesus went around doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, because God was with Him.

Christ revealed Himself plainly, over and over, and the scriptures testify to this but still you won't believe.

You are not believing that God is with Jesus as scripture testifies, bur rather the opposite.

You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and pthese are they which testify of Me. But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life.

The scriptures are prophecy. The Father's words, not Jesus', lead to eternal life because God taught Jesus what to say and Jesus repeated them to others.

John 12
49I have not spoken on My own, but the Father who sent Me has commanded Me what to say and how to say it. 50And I know that His command leads to eternal life. So I speak exactly what the Father has told Me to say.”

 

[Alfred Persson]

The Father was not incarnate in the flesh. The Father was with Jesus beginning at his water baptism.

Acts 10
37You yourselves know what has happened throughout Judea, beginning in Galilee with the baptism that John proclaimed: 38how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power, and how Jesus went around doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, because God was with Him.

You are not believing that God is with Jesus as scripture testifies, bur rather the opposite.


The scriptures are prophecy. The Father's words, not Jesus', lead to eternal life because God taught Jesus what to say and Jesus repeated them to others.

John 12
49I have not spoken on My own, but the Father who sent Me has commanded Me what to say and how to say it. 50And I know that His command leads to eternal life. So I speak exactly what the Father has told Me to say.”

Yes, Jesus and the Father are One. Therefore, when Jesus is teaching they were all taught by God.

The logic is elementary and precise.

Jesus is the True God and Eternal life also because He and the Father are One:

"I and My Father are one." (Jn. 10:30 NKJ)

And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us an understanding, that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life. (1 Jn. 5:20 NKJ)


Knowing that Jesus is God the Eternal Son is "eternal life" to the believer.

That Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, must be confessed publicly for salvation, as Peter did and therefore was blessed by God:

14 So they said, "Some say John the Baptist, some Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets."
15 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?"
16 Simon Peter answered and said, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."
17 Jesus answered and said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.
(Matt. 16:14-17 NKJ)


All scripture is inspired by God and beneficial for doctrine:

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, (2 Tim. 3:16 NKJ)

 

[Runningman]

Yes, Jesus and the Father are One. Therefore, when Jesus is teaching they were all taught by God.

No, when Jesus spoke he spoke what the Father taught him and spoke what the Father said because the Father has the words that lead to eternal life. Repeating the same words as someone else doesn't make someone become that person. John 8:28, 12:49,50

Being one with God doesn't make someone God since the disciples were also one with God according to Jesus.

John 17
21that all of them may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I am in You. May they also be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me.

The logic is elementary and precise.

Jesus is the True God and Eternal life also because He and the Father are One:

"I and My Father are one." (Jn. 10:30 NKJ)

the disciples were also one with God according to Jesus. John 17:21

And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us an understanding, that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life. (1 Jn. 5:20 NKJ)

The true God refers back to the previously mentioned God, the Father. The Father is always the true God in every context and Jesus is the True God's Son.

John 17
3Now this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent.

1 Thessalonians 1
9For they themselves report what kind of welcome you gave us, and how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God 10and to await His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead—Jesus our deliverer from the coming wrath.

Knowing that Jesus is God the Eternal Son is "eternal life" to the believer.

Not according to Scripture.

That Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, must be confessed publicly for salvation, as Peter did and therefore was blessed by God:

14 So they said, "Some say John the Baptist, some Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets."
15 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?"
16 Simon Peter answered and said, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."
17 Jesus answered and said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.
(Matt. 16:14-17 NKJ)

Correct, the Son of Man is the Son of God and the Messiah. It does not say that he is God the Son; this is not what God the Father in heaven.

All scripture is inspired by God and beneficial for doctrine:

Agreed.

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, (2 Tim. 3:16 NKJ)

Agreed and "God the Son" isn't scripture.

 

[Alfred Persson]

No, when Jesus spoke he spoke what the Father taught him and spoke what the Father said because the Father has the words that lead to eternal life. Repeating the same words as someone else doesn't make someone become that person. John 8:28, 12:49,50

Being one with God doesn't make someone God since the disciples were also one with God according to Jesus.

John 17
21that all of them may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I am in You. May they also be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me.


the disciples were also one with God according to Jesus. John 17:21

The true God refers back to the previously mentioned God, the Father. The Father is always the true God in every context and Jesus is the True God's Son.

John 17
3Now this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent.

1 Thessalonians 1
9For they themselves report what kind of welcome you gave us, and how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God 10and to await His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead—Jesus our deliverer from the coming wrath.

Not according to Scripture.


Correct, the Son of Man is the Son of God and the Messiah. It does not say that he is God the Son; this is not what God the Father in heaven.

Agreed.


Agreed and "God the Son" isn't scripture.

That misses the subtle nuance in the "future tense" "shall be (ἔσονται)", a dual connection John makes elsewhere, Christ's identity as "the True God" belief in which brings "eternal life":

45 "It is written in the prophets,`And they shall all be taught by God.' Therefore everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me.
46 "Not that anyone has seen the Father, except He who is from God; He has seen the Father.
47 "Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me has everlasting life. (Jn. 6:45-47 NKJ)

And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us an understanding, that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life. (1 Jn. 5:20 NKJ)

All taught in the past via the prophets, come to Jesus, to be "taught" (future tense looking from the past) = the prophecy is fulfilled, as Christ is teaching.

They were being taught by God and belief in that is eternal life:

@@@

Jesus' use of "ONE" isn't a unity of agreement, if that were all He claimed the Jews (who claimed for themselves the same thing), would not have picked up stones to stone Him:

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." (Jn. 10:30-33 NKJ)

Then, as a master "street preacher" confronted by a violent crowd, Jesus "takes the wind out of their sails" by confusing them:

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. 10:34-39 NKJ)

Jesus did NOT retract He was making Himself God. Never did He say, "Oh NO! You misunderstand, I say we are one just like you claim to be one with God!"

YOU are reading that into the context. I do not.

Jesus is God the Son, to the glory of God the Father:
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth,
11 and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Phil. 2:10-11 NKJ)

It's noteworthy that New World Translation renders "Lord" in the NT as "Jehovah" whenever it quotes the OT, didn't do so here. Why? Because then it reads:

"Jesus Christ is Jehovah, to the glory of God the Father"

The title "God the Father" as used here implies the existence of the title "God the Son".

 

[Runningman]

That misses the subtle nuance in the "future tense" "shall be (ἔσονται)", a dual connection John makes elsewhere, Christ's identity as "the True God" belief in which brings "eternal life":

45 "It is written in the prophets,`And they shall all be taught by God.' Therefore everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me.
46 "Not that anyone has seen the Father, except He who is from God; He has seen the Father.
47 "Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me has everlasting life. (Jn. 6:45-47 NKJ)

And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us an understanding, that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life. (1 Jn. 5:20 NKJ)

All taught in the past via the prophets, come to Jesus, to be "taught" (future tense looking from the past) = the prophecy is fulfilled, as Christ is teaching.

They were being taught by God and belief in that is eternal life:

@@@

Jesus' use of "ONE" isn't a unity of agreement, if that were all He claimed the Jews (who claimed for themselves the same thing), would not have picked up stones to stone Him:

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." (Jn. 10:30-33 NKJ)

Then, as a master "street preacher" confronted by a violent crowd, Jesus "takes the wind out of their sails" by confusing them:

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. 10:34-39 NKJ)

Jesus did NOT retract He was making Himself God. Never did He say, "Oh NO! You misunderstand, I say we are one just like you claim to be one with God!"

YOU are reading that into the context. I do not.

Jesus is God the Son, to the glory of God the Father:
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth,
11 and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Phil. 2:10-11 NKJ)

It's noteworthy that New World Translation renders "Lord" in the NT as "Jehovah" whenever it quotes the OT, didn't do so here. Why? Because then it reads:

"Jesus Christ is Jehovah, to the glory of God the Father"

The title "God the Father" as used here implies the existence of the title "God the Son".

What you should have gathered from my OP is that the context of John 20:17-28 is, in part, about who Jesus said is his God and his brothers' God. That would be the Father. It follows that when Thomas said "my God" that he's referring to the Father because Thomas is a disciple of Jesus. That means Thomas is an adherent to what Jesus taught.

It's eisegesis to read into the text something that isn't there and is otherwise contradicted by the body of scripture. "God the Son" is neither explicitly stated in the Bible, nor implied, and requires ignoring a ton of facts to the contrary to come to that conclusion.

 

[Delete_me]

“Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!” John 8:58
"He replied, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven." Luke 10:18


Both statements that understandably would have made Jews pick up stones to stone Him. I might have done the same. Thank God that Jesus is gracious, and instead of immediately annihilating me, He just holds me back by the elbow for a minute so He can prove it. He understands that it is none other than my misguided zeal for Him that made me pick up the rock. This was precisely why God showed Saul grace.


Last but not least: were Jesus not God, the Jews probably would have been successful.

 

[Runningman]

“Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!” John 8:58

If Jesus is actually the "I AM" then he would also be YHWH, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and not just His servant. Scripture says otherwise. I would begin with trying to take another look at who Jesus really is and then possibly the better translation John 8:58 could have; the one you provided doesn't harmonize with the Bible.

YHWH the I AM, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, how He is remembered forever:

Exodus 3​

14God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I AM has sent me to you.’ ”​

​

15God also told Moses, “Say to the Israelites, ‘The LORD, the God of your fathers—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob—has sent me to you.’ This is My name forever, and this is how I am to be remembered in every generation.​

Jesus not the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and therefore not YHWH or the I AM:

Acts 3​

13The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified His servant Jesus. ​

 

[Delete_me]

If Jesus is actually the "I AM" then he would also be YHWH, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and not just His servant. Scripture says otherwise. I would begin with trying to take another look at who Jesus really is and then possibly the better translation John 8:58 could have; the one you provided doesn't harmonize with the Bible.

YHWH the I AM, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, how He is remembered forever:

Exodus 3​

14God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I AM has sent me to you.’ ”​

​

15God also told Moses, “Say to the Israelites, ‘The LORD, the God of your fathers—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob—has sent me to you.’ This is My name forever, and this is how I am to be remembered in every generation.​

Jesus not the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and therefore not YHWH or the I AM:

Acts 3​

13The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified His servant Jesus. ​

You are basically saying the Bible has contradictions and has errors.

 

[Runningman]

You are basically saying the Bible has contradictions and has errors.

I wouldn't go as far as to say contradictions. If I had found them I would be sounding the alarm until everyone knew.

Translation errors? Yes, absolutely. One of them is John 8:58. You're using it because the way it's translated and printed in most Bible it looks like Jesus is saying he is the I AM, but upon closer inspection he isn't because Exodus 3:14,15 and Acts 3:13 rule that out.

What Jesus said in John 8:58 is Greek "ego eimi." In context, Jesus is basically saying "I am the man" or "I am he" or "I am the one" because that's how it's translated all over the New Testament and Jesus said he's a man in John 8:40.

Big clue is that in this sentence the primary clause is at the end of the sentence rather than the beginning and sounds a bit like how Yoda speaks; Jesus never speaks in this unconventional style. This is strong evidence of an extremely forced and botched translation. You may not be surprised to know that this is how Trinitarians translate that verse.

 

[Free]

Translation errors? Yes, absolutely. One of them is John 8:58. You're using it because the way it's translated and printed in most Bible it looks like Jesus is saying he is the I AM, but upon closer inspection he isn't because Exodus 3:14,15 and Acts 3:13 rule that out.

That's called fallaciously begging the question by presupposing that the Son isn't truly God, making him also YHWH. So, in no way do those passages rule out that Jesus claimed the name I Am. The Jews understood it correctly and falsely believed it was blasphemy, and so wanted to stone him for it.

What Jesus said in John 8:58 is Greek "ego eimi." In context, Jesus is basically saying "I am the man" or "I am he" or "I am the one" because that's how it's translated all over the New Testament and Jesus said he's a man in John 8:40.

Look what he says before that:

Joh 8:23 He said to them, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world.
Joh 8:24 I told you that you would die in your sins, for unless you believe that I am [he] you will die in your sins.” (ESV)

It's interesting that even Trinitarians still add "he" into the text, despite it not being in the Greek and despite Jesus having just clearly stated that he was "not of this world."

Big clue is that in this sentence the primary clause is at the end of the sentence rather than the beginning and sounds a bit like how Yoda speaks; Jesus never speaks in this unconventional style. This is strong evidence of an extremely forced and botched translation. You may not be surprised to know that this is how Trinitarians translate that verse.

And, yet, that is what the text says. In context, Jesus is answering the Jews' incredulity that Jesus claimed to have had contact with Abraham, even though he was much less than 50 years old, never mind the 2,000 years between the two of them. Jesus replies by contrasting Abraham's temporary existence with his timeless, absolute existence. It makes perfect sense, especially given John 1:1-18 and many other passages in John.

 

[Alfred Persson]

What you should have gathered from my OP is that the context of John 20:17-28 is, in part, about who Jesus said is his God and his brothers' God. That would be the Father. It follows that when Thomas said "my God" that he's referring to the Father because Thomas is a disciple of Jesus. That means Thomas is an adherent to what Jesus taught.

It's eisegesis to read into the text something that isn't there and is otherwise contradicted by the body of scripture. "God the Son" is neither explicitly stated in the Bible, nor implied, and requires ignoring a ton of facts to the contrary to come to that conclusion.

I got that, but it doesn't seem odd to me God the Son incarnate in human flesh, would declare the Father is His God also. He is both human and divine.

You believe its a contradiction the Word who was with God, would view the Father as God. But the Father also views the Son as God:

But to the Son He says: "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your Kingdom. (Heb. 1:8 NKJ)

 

[Runningman]

I got that, but it doesn't seem odd to me God the Son incarnate in human flesh, would declare the Father is His God also. He is both human and divine.

You believe its a contradiction the Word who was with God, would view the Father as God. But the Father also views the Son as God:

The Father does not view the Son as God.

But to the Son He says: "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your Kingdom. (Heb. 1:8 NKJ)

This isn't about the Son being God. It's quoted from Psalm 45 where the original context isn't even about Jesus. The author of Hebrews later applied it to Jesus. For example, in the original context, the king they are talking about isn't God.

 

[Alfred Persson]

The Father does not view the Son as God.


This isn't about the Son being God. It's quoted from Psalm 45 where the original context isn't even about Jesus. The author of Hebrews later applied it to Jesus. For example, in the original context, the king they are talking about isn't God.

God wrote scripture through men, but its God's Word, all of it inspired and beneficial for doctrine:

16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,
17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work. (2 Tim. 3:16-17 NKJ)

As my LORD Jesus said, "Scripture cannot be broken" even when you don't like what it says:

35 "If He called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), (Jn. 10:35 NKJ)

 

[Consecrated Life]

Thomas words "My lord and my God" are often misunderstood by some to be a declaration on Thomas' part about his belief Jesus is God. However, Jesus directly contradicted Thomas' words, saying that Thomas' God is the Father. Since the Father is the only true God (John 17:3) that means Jesus isn't God and no one in the Bible believed Jesus is God.

So when Jacob believed the man who wrestled with him was God , was he wrong on just one count , or two , in your opinion ?

Gen 32:30
And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.

 

[Runningman]

God wrote scripture through men, but its God's Word, all of it inspired and beneficial for doctrine:

16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,
17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work. (2 Tim. 3:16-17 NKJ)

As my LORD Jesus said, "Scripture cannot be broken" even when you don't like what it says:

35 "If He called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), (Jn. 10:35 NKJ)

Correct and we study so that we don't misunderstand something. I know I have read through the Bible more times than I can count. From when I first started, until now, I understand much more than when I first began.

 

[Runningman]

So when Jacob believed the man who wrestled with him was God , was he wrong on just one count , or two , in your opinion ?

Gen 32:30
And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.

Sorry, how is this related to my OP?

 

[Consecrated Life]

Sorry, how is this related to my OP?

Jacob faced the same decision Thomas did .
Is this man I am looking at God in the flesh or not ?
You don't think it is relevant to your OP to establish whether the biblical possibility to see God in the flesh even exists ?
Do you believe the bible asserts that the possibility of a man seeing God in flesh exists ?

Gen 32:30
.... I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.

 

[Runningman]

Jacob faced the same decision Thomas did .
Is this man I am looking at God in the flesh or not ?
You don't think it is relevant to your OP to establish whether the biblical possibility to see God in the flesh even exists ?
Do you believe the bible asserts that the possibility of a man seeing God in flesh exists ?

Gen 32:30
.... I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.

We should check this against the wisdom of the Bible. If that man who wrestled with Jacob was actually God, but worshipping or praying to a man as though they are God is idolatry then the man himself isn't God. Often this particular passage you're referring to is interpreted as Jacob having wrestled with an angel. We can avoid a lot of problems this way. I don't think God would perpetuate idolatry by taking on the form of a man.

 

[Alfred Persson]

Jacob faced the same decision Thomas did .
Is this man I am looking at God in the flesh or not ?
You don't think it is relevant to your OP to establish whether the biblical possibility to see God in the flesh even exists ?
Do you believe the bible asserts that the possibility of a man seeing God in flesh exists ?

Gen 32:30
.... I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.

Its amazing how the OT prepped the Jews to receive God in the Flesh, Jesus Christ. There are indications of it everywhere, including the text you cite. When Yahweh called down fire upon Sodom, FROM Yahweh in heaven another text in point:


Then YHWH rained brimstone and fire on Sodom and Gomorrah, from YHWH out of the heavens. (Gen. 19:24)