All Claims of The Son's Deity

[Lions Mane]

If the Son is divine in the same way as the Father, then we would expect to find that the authors of the Old Testament give divine names, titles, and attributes to the Son. We also expect to find that He is described as doing divine works and that He is the object of divine worship.

So, the deity of the Son will be based on exactly the same kind of evidence that demonstrates the deity of the Father. If we deny the validity of the evidence for the deity of the Son, then, we must logically denied the validity of the evidence for the deity of the Father. What is valid for the One is equally valid for the Other.

I point this out because Unitarians will accept the validity of such evidence as divine names and titles only when such things are used to prove the deity of the Father. But, when the exact same evidence is used to prove the deity of the Son, they will claim that it is not acceptable.

The inconsistency of the Unitarians on this point is indicative of a lack of willingness to let the evidence lead you where it will.

 

[mikesw]

The last I looked, Hosea 12:4 was part of scripture ---- if you want to disregard Hosea 12:4, go ahead.
But scripture as a whole should fit together and harmonize.
In the womb he took his brother by the heel, and in his manhood he strove with God. He strove with the angel and prevailed;
he wept and sought his favor. [Hosea 12:3,4a] clearly says he strove with the angel and prevailed . . . God sending his angel to act as His agent - the angel fully represented God and was referenced as God - that is the only way to have the record in 1 Samuel and the record in Hosea harmonize.

Verse 3 says that the Angel is God. He struggled with God Yes he struggled with the Angel
So crazy that such simple explanations go unnoticed or glossed over.

 

[amazing grace]

I see your confusion. You first miss any logic for sharing Psalm 8:5-6. You essentially strip any significance of the quote. So you miss the specific relevance that Hebrews gives to this Psalm. You also miss that Jesus was brought low or humbled per Heb 2:9. That is a key point here. He has to be higher than angels to be brought low. You forget that God the Son took on humanity and therefore took on human characteristics. It is not as if God in his fullness was made lower than angels.

These unitarian goof ups show why lay people and improperly trained students have to be cautioned against coming against well-established doctrines. But if you happen to have an argument to deny the Triune God, you just have to make sure that argument has enough substance to it to be convincing to change Christian minds.

Yea, I see your confusion. You missed ANY logic or significance of why the author of Hebrews quoted Psalm 8:5,6. Any significant meaning or relevance is gone when Jesus is stripped of his humanity.

For it was not to angels that God subjected the world to come, of which we are speaking. It has been testified somewhere, “What is man, that you are mindful of him, or the son of man, that you care for him? You made him for a little while lower than the angels;
you have crowned him with glory and honor, putting everything in subjection under his feet.” . . . . NOW HAVING BEEN EXALTED TO THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death - He is no longer 'lower than the angels' and he is not ashamed to call us brothers.

Nope, I haven't forgotten that scripture nowhere identifies Jesus as 'God the Son'. So the 100% God wasn't lower than the angels but the 100% man (who was God in the flesh) was made a little lower than the angels. . . And the 100% God an immortal being suffered death but the 100% man, a mortal being suffered death . . . Okie dokie then.

 

[amazing grace]

Verse 3 says that the Angel is God. He struggled with God Yes he struggled with the Angel
So crazy that such simple explanations go unnoticed or glossed over.

The bad thing about it - GOD is NOT an angel - one of his messengers, one of his agents acting on his behalf or has that also been changed? God is now not only his earthly created beings but also his heavenly creations?

It's only crazy to people who don't understand the Jewish law of agency or even our Power of Attorneys today.

YES, it is also crazy how simple explanations are glossed over!!!

 

[mikesw]

Yea, I see your confusion. You missed ANY logic or significance of why the author of Hebrews quoted Psalm 8:5,6. Any significant meaning or relevance is gone when Jesus is stripped of his humanity.

haha. you argument is invalid since Jesus gains humanity rather than being stripped of it. Hebrews 2 again, for those who gloss over the text, says Jesus was brought below angels temporarily. That means he was above them. He had something he was humbled of and left lower than angels. How often will you just pretend that the verse does not say that?

For it was not to angels that God subjected the world to come, of which we are speaking. It has been testified somewhere, “What is man, that you are mindful of him, or the son of man, that you care for him? You made him for a little while lower than the angels;
you have crowned him with glory and honor, putting everything in subjection under his feet.” . . . . NOW HAVING BEEN EXALTED TO THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death - He is no longer 'lower than the angels' and he is not ashamed to call us brothers.

Great that the divine Son has included us. You are not providing any argument against the divine nature of the Son of God.

Nope, I haven't forgotten that scripture nowhere identifies Jesus as 'God the Son'. So the 100% God wasn't lower than the angels but the 100% man (who was God in the flesh) was made a little lower than the angels. . . And the 100% God an immortal being suffered death but the 100% man, a mortal being suffered death . . . Okie dokie then.

You should have stayed awake in algebra. I think the logic is shared there. The commutative property. 3 * 2 is equal to 2 * 3. The Son of God is God's Son. Then we know things remain of the same kind. So Jesus being the Son of God also has the divinity of the Father. Hence, we see the reason being the virgin birth. All this has to be denied in order to deny the divinity of Christ.

 

[mikesw]

The bad thing about it - GOD is NOT an angel - one of his messengers, one of his agents acting on his behalf or has that also been changed? God is now not only his earthly created beings but also his heavenly creations?

It's only crazy to people who don't understand the Jewish law of agency or even our Power of Attorneys today.

YES, it is also crazy how simple explanations are glossed over!!!

You can deny me but you should stop denying the passage you have tried to use against God. As is common to unitarians, you seem to miss that words have different usage depending on context. An angel is a messenger and can appear as a being in the physical realm. This is not an automatic denial of the divinity, especially when we see in Hosea 12:3-4 that the Angel is explicitly equated to God. I'm glad these verses have been shared since they reveal how desperately unitarians will deny the blatant reading of the text. I am more convinced now that there is no argument for unitarianism thanks to your help.

 

[Runningman]

I thought I would list my teachers...

E. W. Bullinger
Taught me how to understand the Bible with his book called How to enjoy the Bible.

Andrew Wommack
Taught me how to walk in the spirit.

John Sanders
Opened my eyes with his book called The God Who Risks.

Gregory Boyd
Shed a lot of light as did John Sanders with the book called God at War.

And Andew Farley with his videos on the Perfect You...

https://youtu.be/bOtcjkVJLl8?si=qhn3YB_a9PBBxmGy

And Jesus' teacher is God. The Son of God is a man who had to learn things he didn't already know.

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.
40But now you are trying to kill Me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. Abraham never did such a thing.

 

[Peterlag]

The Old Testament refers to the Messiah as “one like a son of man” and the phrase “son of man” was a Semitic idiom for a human being and it's used that way throughout the Old Testament. The phrase “son of man” also became a title of the Messiah when Daniel referred to him as “one like a son of man” (Daniel 7:13) and that explains why Jesus called himself “the son of man” many times. The use of the “son of man” in reference to the Messiah is one more piece of evidence that Jesus was fully human and one more reason that people were expecting the Messiah to be human. The New Testament teaches Jesus was a man and Jesus himself said he was “a man who has told you the truth” John 8:40. Jesus was not being disingenuous and hiding his “divine nature” but rather was making a factual statement that reinforced what the Jews were expecting of the Messiah—that he would be a fully human man.

The apostles also taught Jesus was a man and we see this when the Apostle Peter spoke in his sermon to the crowds gathered on the Day of Pentecost making a very clear declaration that Jesus was a man approved of God: “Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you…” (Acts 2:22). Here Peter clearly taught that Jesus was a man and that God did miracles “by him.” Paul also taught Jesus was a man and we can see that when he was in Athens teaching a crowd of unsaved Gentiles about Jesus Christ and said that God would judge the world “by the man whom He has appointed” (Acts 17:31). Paul never said or implied that Jesus was anything but a “man.”

 

[mikesw]

The Old Testament refers to the Messiah as “one like a son of man” and the phrase “son of man” was a Semitic idiom for a human being and it's used that way throughout the Old Testament. The phrase “son of man” also became a title of the Messiah when Daniel referred to him as “one like a son of man” (Daniel 7:13) and that explains why Jesus called himself “the son of man” many times. The use of the “son of man” in reference to the Messiah is one more piece of evidence that Jesus was fully human and one more reason that people were expecting the Messiah to be human. The New Testament teaches Jesus was a man and Jesus himself said he was “a man who has told you the truth” John 8:40. Jesus was not being disingenuous and hiding his “divine nature” but rather was making a factual statement that reinforced what the Jews were expecting of the Messiah—that he would be a fully human man.

The apostles also taught Jesus was a man and we see this when the Apostle Peter spoke in his sermon to the crowds gathered on the Day of Pentecost making a very clear declaration that Jesus was a man approved of God: “Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you…” (Acts 2:22). Here Peter clearly taught that Jesus was a man and that God did miracles “by him.” Paul also taught Jesus was a man and we can see that when he was in Athens teaching a crowd of unsaved Gentiles about Jesus Christ and said that God would judge the world “by the man whom He has appointed” (Acts 17:31). Paul never said or implied that Jesus was anything but a “man.”

it is the exclusion of the divinity passages and pre-existence behind Jesus that the unitarians disregard and thus fail to make a sufficient argument for their belief system. Maybe you have not heard that people believe not only his humanity but his divinity. It is called the process of accepting the whole testimony of scripture.

 

[amazing grace]

haha. you argument is invalid since Jesus gains humanity rather than being stripped of it. Hebrews 2 again, for those who gloss over the text, says Jesus was brought below angels temporarily. That means he was above them. He had something he was humbled of and left lower than angels. How often will you just pretend that the verse does not say that?

I haven't 'pretended' that the verse says more not less that what it says.

Great that the divine Son has included us. You are not providing any argument against the divine nature of the Son of God.

I may not be but at least I know God's not my brother.

You should have stayed awake in algebra. I think the logic is shared there. The commutative property. 3 * 2 is equal to 2 * 3. The Son of God is God's Son. Then we know things remain of the same kind. So Jesus being the Son of God also has the divinity of the Father. Hence, we see the reason being the virgin birth. All this has to be denied in order to deny the divinity of Christ.

Actually - I failed Algebra I know general math though and 1 does not = 3 nor does 3 = 1.
Yes, the Son of God is God's Son and God is his Father.
I think you are referring to science/biology:

And God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind, on the earth.” And it was so. The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed according to their own kinds, and trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. AND
And God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds—livestock and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds.” And it was so. And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds and the livestock according to their kinds, and everything that creeps on the ground according to its kind.

So what you are saying is since Jesus was the result of the Holy Spirit, the power of the Most High, for that reason, the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God, i.e. God produced God or a god?

 

[mikesw]

I haven't 'pretended' that the verse says more not less that what it says.

i guess blindness is your acceptable excuse. You laughed after the understanding of the passage that is obvious.

I may not be but at least I know God's not my brother.

Sad to hear. I hope you are not so isolated from Jesus as you claim to be

Actually - I failed Algebra I know general math though and 1 does not = 3 nor does 3 = 1.
Yes, the Son of God is God's Son and God is his Father.

Then you also fail at knowing Christ.

I think you are referring to science/biology:

And God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind, on the earth.” And it was so. The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed according to their own kinds, and trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. AND
And God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds—livestock and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds.” And it was so. And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds and the livestock according to their kinds, and everything that creeps on the ground according to its kind.

So what you are saying is since Jesus was the result of the Holy Spirit, the power of the Most High, for that reason, the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God, i.e. God produced God or a god?

I'm just saying that Jesus is as much God the Son in his divinity as he is human in his incarnation. You have to skip a bunch of scriptures to miss that.

 

[amazing grace]

i guess blindness is your acceptable excuse. You laughed after the understanding of the passage that is obvious.

I see no laughter anywhere.

Sad to hear. I hope you are not so isolated from Jesus as you claim to be

I have much joy in my relationship with Jesus, my Lord and Savior - that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ.

Then you also fail at knowing Christ.

Nope, I know who he is - “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.

I'm just saying that Jesus is as much God the Son in his divinity as he is human in his incarnation. You have to skip a bunch of scriptures to miss that.

Actually, what you mean to say is that Jesus is as much God, deity as he is human in his incarnation.

What you drop the topic of this subject which you brought up "Then we know things remain of the same kind."?

Yep, you have to skip a bunch of PLAIN, CLEAR scripture to miss that no one who had a close relationship to him and hung out with him thought he was God. The concept of Jesus being God did not come until MUCH MUCH later.

 

[mikesw]

I see no laughter anywhere.

see the laugh symbol you added to https://berean-apologetics.community.forum/threads/all-claims-of-the-sons-deity.2185/post-207255

I have much joy in my relationship with Jesus, my Lord and Savior - that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ.

We hope you can come to the true Christ then.

Nope, I know who he is - “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.

Good you can quote things at least at the level of knowledge before Christ's resurrection.

Actually, what you mean to say is that Jesus is as much God, deity as he is human in his incarnation.

I see you got my point confused into unitarian confusion. I maybe was not expressing the concept well enough for you.

What you drop the topic of this subject which you brought up "Then we know things remain of the same kind."?

Christ Jesus is of divinity after the "kind" of his Father and his pre-existence in heaven. Christ Jesus is also human through the "kind" of his mother. These points should not be neglected by anyone who wants to claim to be Christian

Yep, you have to skip a bunch of PLAIN, CLEAR scripture to miss that no one who had a close relationship to him and hung out with him thought he was God. The concept of Jesus being God did not come until MUCH MUCH later.

Right. It came up when Thomas acknowledged Jesus as Lord and God. But that was not much much later.

 

[Peterlag]

it is the exclusion of the divinity passages and pre-existence behind Jesus that the unitarians disregard and thus fail to make a sufficient argument for their belief system. Maybe you have not heard that people believe not only his humanity but his divinity. It is called the process of accepting the whole testimony of scripture.

I listed 4 verses to make my point. You listed none to make your point.

 

[Runningman]

The Old Testament refers to the Messiah as “one like a son of man” and the phrase “son of man” was a Semitic idiom for a human being and it's used that way throughout the Old Testament. The phrase “son of man” also became a title of the Messiah when Daniel referred to him as “one like a son of man” (Daniel 7:13) and that explains why Jesus called himself “the son of man” many times. The use of the “son of man” in reference to the Messiah is one more piece of evidence that Jesus was fully human and one more reason that people were expecting the Messiah to be human. The New Testament teaches Jesus was a man and Jesus himself said he was “a man who has told you the truth” John 8:40. Jesus was not being disingenuous and hiding his “divine nature” but rather was making a factual statement that reinforced what the Jews were expecting of the Messiah—that he would be a fully human man.

The apostles also taught Jesus was a man and we see this when the Apostle Peter spoke in his sermon to the crowds gathered on the Day of Pentecost making a very clear declaration that Jesus was a man approved of God: “Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you…” (Acts 2:22). Here Peter clearly taught that Jesus was a man and that God did miracles “by him.” Paul also taught Jesus was a man and we can see that when he was in Athens teaching a crowd of unsaved Gentiles about Jesus Christ and said that God would judge the world “by the man whom He has appointed” (Acts 17:31). Paul never said or implied that Jesus was anything but a “man.”

I would also add, the Greek LXX doesn't call Jesus "the son of man" but "a son of man" in Daniel 7, proving that the knowledgeable Jews who wrote it didn't understand it to carry the kind of theological weight that trinitarians often assign to Jesus' titles. The Jews believed a son of man in Daniel 7 was a human, a mortal. That's the very description Jesus laid claim to at his trial. Hence the Bible calls Jesus a man, a mortal, who himself has a savior who saved him from death according to Hebrews 5:7.

 

[Peterlag]

I would also add, the Greek LXX doesn't call Jesus "the son of man" but "a son of man" in Daniel 7, proving that the knowledgeable Jews who wrote it didn't understand it to carry the kind of theological weight that trinitarians often assign to Jesus' titles. The Jews believed a son of man in Daniel 7 was a human, a mortal. That's the very description Jesus laid claim to at his trial. Hence the Bible calls Jesus a man, a mortal, who himself has a savior who saved him from death according to Hebrews 5:7.

So what's wrong with @mikesw? Every amount of Scripture that I post he refers to none of it and just tells me I'm wrong and then says I display no biblical data. I even posted half a page and he commented on the photo I used with it. Nothing about what I wrote.

 

[Runningman]

So what's wrong with @mikesw? Every amount of Scripture that I post he refers to none of it and just tells me I'm wrong and then says I display no biblical data. I even posted half a page and he commented on the photo I used with it. Nothing about what I wrote.

He's just playing damage control. Just throwing something at the wall and hoping it'll stick. Can't use the Bible so he just spends his time posting denials.

 

[amazing grace]

see the laugh symbol you added to https://berean-apologetics.community.forum/threads/all-claims-of-the-sons-deity.2185/post-207255

Oh yeah, in response to the Jacob text nothing to do with the Hebrews text.

We hope you can come to the true Christ then.

Good you can quote things at least at the level of knowledge before Christ's resurrection.

thanks . . . yea, before Christ's resurrection he was made a little lower than the angels and after his resurrection-----after his exaltation to the right hand of God, he became much more superior to the angels - crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone. . . . he (Jesus) who sanctifies and those who are sanctified (us) all have one source - that one source being the Father, the only true God.

I see you got my point confused into unitarian confusion. I maybe was not expressing the concept well enough for you.

Christ Jesus is of divinity after the "kind" of his Father and his pre-existence in heaven. Christ Jesus is also human through the "kind" of his mother. These points should not be neglected by anyone who wants to claim to be Christian

Just to be clear ---- Did Jesus preexist as the Son or did the Son preexist as God?
God is Spirit so wouldn't his 'kind' would be spirit? . . . which is why we must be born again, i.e. born of the Spirit. Was Jesus Spirit?

I know he was human - made a little lower than the angels - I just believe he was fully human completely from his mother, a descendant of David according to his genealogy.

Right. It came up when Thomas acknowledged Jesus as Lord and God. But that was not much much later.

Right. . . . a little background . . .

Thomas said to him, “Lord, we do not know where you are going. How can we know the way?” Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you had known me, you would have known my Father also. From now on you do know him and have seen him.” [John 14:5-7]​

Philip said to him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.” Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does his works. Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else believe on account of the works themselves. . . . You heard me say to you, ‘I am going away, and I will come to you.’ If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, because I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I. [John 14:8-11,28] Jesus was claiming to represent God the Father . . . that is what Thomas acknowledged. NOT THAT JESUS WAS ALMIGHTY GOD HIMSELF!​

 

[mikesw]

Oh yeah, in response to the Jacob text nothing to do with the Hebrews text.

It has everything to do with the broad discussion. The Angel is Yahweh. That voids your whole perspective.

thanks . . . yea, before Christ's resurrection he was made a little lower than the angels and after his resurrection-----after his exaltation to the right hand of God, he became much more superior to the angels - crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone. . . . he (Jesus) who sanctifies and those who are sanctified (us) all have one source - that one source being the Father, the only true God.

I share this twice since you always miss details... The idea being "made" is about being humbled. If Jesus was just a human, he hardly would have to be humbled to be human.

Just to be clear ---- Did Jesus preexist as the Son or did the Son preexist as God?
God is Spirit so wouldn't his 'kind' would be spirit? . . . which is why we must be born again, i.e. born of the Spirit. Was Jesus Spirit?

Jesus indeed can be divine Son as the spirit of him while his flesh is incarnate. We see in scripture where the spirit of man is dead or empty and is made alive through Christ. Obviously Jesus is incarnate so not just spirit.
As far as saying "Jesus preexisted," that is not good wording if you mean somehow that his flesh pre-existed. But yes there was the preexistence that we will call the Son in all his divinity and became incarnate. I am uncertain if we call him a Son yet, but I think that is proper.

I know he was human - made a little lower than the angels - I just believe he was fully human completely from his mother, a descendant of David according to his genealogy.

The idea being "made" is about being humbled. If Jesus was just a human, he hardly would have to be humbled to be human. It is such makeshift arguments that unitarians share.

Right. . . . a little background . . .

Thomas said to him, “Lord, we do not know where you are going. How can we know the way?” Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you had known me, you would have known my Father also. From now on you do know him and have seen him.” [John 14:5-7]​

You convert Thomas recognition of what Jesus said and turn it into just a false lead, a nothing meaning.

Philip said to him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.” Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does his works. Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else believe on account of the works themselves. . . . You heard me say to you, ‘I am going away, and I will come to you.’ If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, because I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I. [John 14:8-11,28] Jesus was claiming to represent God the Father . . . that is what Thomas acknowledged. NOT THAT JESUS WAS ALMIGHTY GOD HIMSELF!​

you really hate anyone testifying that Jesus is God. You convert direct acknowledgment of Jesus as God into just being a representative or agent. You have no basis except your imagination.

 

[mikesw]

I listed 4 verses to make my point. You listed none to make your point.

You shared Dan 7:13-14 that reveals someone who is like a son of man. Jesus is like a son of man because he is first divine in the Godhead but then becomes physically as the Son of Man. These tie together in wonderful harmony that no Christian could miss.