All Claims of The Son's Deity

[Peterlag]

Somebody needs to make me a poster that says...

• I can of mine own self do nothing (John 5:30).
• My Father is greater than I (John 14:28).
• Not my will, but thine, be done (Luke 22:42).
• There is but one God, the Father (1 Corinthians 8:6).
• I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God (John 20:17).
• There is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus (1 Timothy 2:5).

 

[Runningman]

So much for sweet, warm, and wonderful. The thing is I've read your posts here and you are just as bad if not worse than any other poster. And yet your narcissistic personality wants us to believe your all that and a pizza too. Get over yourself.

Narcissistic pizza disorder? You can't make this stuff up. Pure gold! Keep going.

 

[Capbook]

Is scrolls and scripts Old and New Testament?
Scrolls, Scripts, and Writings are other words for Bible. So don't say the word Bible is not in the Bible. The word Trinity would have been a very big deal and something that important would have been taught everywhere. And it is not taught anywhere. It would have been clearly stated in the Bible and in the earliest Christian creeds if the doctrine of the Trinity was genuine and central to Christian belief and especially if belief in it was necessary for salvation as many Trinitarians teach. God gave the Scriptures to the Jewish people, and the Jewish religion and worship that comes from that revelation does not contain any reference to or teachings about a triune God. Surely the Jewish people were qualified to read and understand it, but they never saw the doctrine of the Trinity,

1. Here, Jesus as "Son of man" as His mother is human Mary. Is He man or not?
2. And as Jesus the "Son of God" as His Father is God. Is He God or not? Why the honest and logical answer to the first question cannot be applied to the second one? Kindly explain.
1.) There's nothing in Scripture that says if Mary was his mother then he had to be born a mother.
2.) There's nothing in Scripture that says if God was his father then he had to be born a God.

Another simple logic, hope you will answer all these and not just evade it;
1. Jesus as in the "form of a servant," is He man or not?
2. Jesus as in the "form of God", is He God or not? Again why the honest and logical answer to the first question cannot be applied to the second? Explain again.

1.) Yes Jesus had the outward appearance of a servant. Not the essential nature of a servant.
2.) Yes Jesus had the outward appearance of God. Not the essential nature of a god.

So, you believe that a dog bears a cat?
As to your understanding, why Jesus was called as the "Son of man?"
And yes, Jesus acknowledged both as the "Son of man" and "Son of God."

Mat 26:63 But Jesus kept silent. And the high priest said to Him, "I adjure You by the living God, that You tell us whether You are the Christ, the Son of God."
Mat 26:64 Jesus *said to him, "You have said it yourself; nevertheless I tell you, hereafter you will see THE SON OF MAN SITTING AT THE RIGHT HAND OF POWER, and COMING ON THE CLOUDS OF HEAVEN."

 

[Runningman]

So, you believe that a dog bears a cat?
As to your understanding, why Jesus was called as the "Son of man?"
And yes, Jesus acknowledged both as the "Son of man" and "Son of God."

Mat 26:63 But Jesus kept silent. And the high priest said to Him, "I adjure You by the living God, that You tell us whether You are the Christ, the Son of God."
Mat 26:64 Jesus *said to him, "You have said it yourself; nevertheless I tell you, hereafter you will see THE SON OF MAN SITTING AT THE RIGHT HAND OF POWER, and COMING ON THE CLOUDS OF HEAVEN."

The Son of God is equal to the Son of Man. Different titles for the same human.

John 5
25Truly, truly, I tell you, the hour is coming and has now come when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. 26For as the Father has life in Himself, so also He has granted the Son to have life in Himself. 27And He has given Him authority to execute judgment, because He is the Son of Man.

 

[Peterlag]

So, you believe that a dog bears a cat?
As to your understanding, why Jesus was called as the "Son of man?"
And yes, Jesus acknowledged both as the "Son of man" and "Son of God."

Mat 26:63 But Jesus kept silent. And the high priest said to Him, "I adjure You by the living God, that You tell us whether You are the Christ, the Son of God."
Mat 26:64 Jesus *said to him, "You have said it yourself; nevertheless I tell you, hereafter you will see THE SON OF MAN SITTING AT THE RIGHT HAND OF POWER, and COMING ON THE CLOUDS OF HEAVEN."

Saying you are the son of God does not make you God. It does put you in the same family to whatever the Father has. If you're a king then the son would be a prince and therefore share in the kingdom on equal ground pertaining to the kingdom. If your dad is a business owner then it would put you on equal ground in the family business to share in the wealth and even run the business later on. The Jews understood that custom and even we do today in our country.

 

[Aeliana]

Or if your a liar. Whats the bible say about that?

44. You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. John 8:44

 

[mikesw]

The Son of God is equal to the Son of Man. Different titles for the same human.

John 5
25Truly, truly, I tell you, the hour is coming and has now come when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. 26For as the Father has life in Himself, so also He has granted the Son to have life in Himself. 27And He has given Him authority to execute judgment, because He is the Son of Man.

duh. christians do not say Jesus is two humans. but we note both his humanity and divinity. Son of Man ties him even more with divinity since this is how he is described in Daniel 7:13 -- this is why the High Priest tore his robes and said this was blasphemy. Some people like to deny that without providing sufficient argument against his divinity.

 

[Peterlag]

John 1:3 “Everything came to be through it.”

The logos is an “it” not a “him.”

Translators have deliberately chosen to use “him” because they wanted to emphasize that the Word was the male person we know as Jesus. This was a theological choice, not a linguistic one.

"Do not forsake wisdom, and she will protect you; love her, and she will watch over you” (Proverbs 4:6).

Is the Wisdom in Proverbs 4:6 a distinct divine person?

The "Word" is not literally a person for the same reason that "Wisdom" is not literally a person. Both are to be taken metaphorically.

Jesus is the personification of the Word because He speaks the words of God. To listen to Jesus equals listening to the Word of God.

 

[Runningman]

duh. christians do not say Jesus is two humans. but we note both his humanity and divinity. Son of Man ties him even more with divinity since this is how he is described in Daniel 7:13 -- this is why the High Priest tore his robes and said this was blasphemy. Some people like to deny that without providing sufficient argument against his divinity.

According to Scripture, Jesus the Son of God only ever was a human and still is a human. And I wouldn't recommend using Jesus' enemies, as blind as deaf as they were, for your spiritual compass. That probably explains a few things. Why do you not just believe Jesus instead? That's what Christians do.

 

[Bardon]

These Scriptures teach that,

The Quran, also romanized Qur'an or Koran, is the central religious text of Islam, believed by Muslims to be a revelation directly from God. It is organized in 114 chapters which consist of individual verses.

In Islam, Jesus, known as Isa, is revered as a major prophet and messenger of God, but not as the son of God. The Quran acknowledges Jesus's miraculous birth to the Virgin Mary, his ability to perform miracles, and his role as a prophet. However, it rejects the Christian doctrine of his divinity and the crucifixion. Muslims believe Jesus was a human prophet, sent to guide the Israelites, and that he will return before the Day of Judgment.

 

[Runningman]

These Scriptures teach that,

The Quran, also romanized Qur'an or Koran, is the central religious text of Islam, believed by Muslims to be a revelation directly from God. It is organized in 114 chapters which consist of individual verses.

In Islam, Jesus, known as Isa, is revered as a major prophet and messenger of God, but not as the son of God. The Quran acknowledges Jesus's miraculous birth to the Virgin Mary, his ability to perform miracles, and his role as a prophet. However, it rejects the Christian doctrine of his divinity and the crucifixion. Muslims believe Jesus was a human prophet, sent to guide the Israelites, and that he will return before the Day of Judgment.

Hello. Are you a Muslim? And welcome to the forum by the way.

 

[mikesw]

According to Scripture, Jesus the Son of God only ever was a human and still is a human. And I wouldn't recommend using Jesus' enemies, as blind as deaf as they were, for your spiritual compass. That probably explains a few things. Why do you not just believe Jesus instead? That's what Christians do.

Uh. Maybe we can trust Matthew to confirm the divinity of Christ that he says of himself. I trust Matthew's observations and lack of "correction" of the the High Priest as one of the hundreds of points of evidence of Christ's divinity. I think Matthew is better at leading people to truth than you are. That is why I do not trust unitarians.

 

[Runningman]

Uh. Maybe we can trust Matthew to confirm the divinity of Christ that he says of himself. I trust Matthew's observations and lack of "correction" of the the High Priest as one of the hundreds of points of evidence of Christ's divinity. I think Matthew is better at leading people to truth than you are. That is why I do not trust unitarians.

Wow a trinitarian who had the guts to leave his safe space of John 1:1.

Which of Matthew's alleged "points of evidence" are you referring to?

 

[Runningman]

Uh. Maybe we can trust Matthew to confirm the divinity of Christ that he says of himself. I trust Matthew's observations and lack of "correction" of the the High Priest as one of the hundreds of points of evidence of Christ's divinity. I think Matthew is better at leading people to truth than you are. That is why I do not trust unitarians.

Divinity and deity don't mean the same things. Actually, you won't find any sort of things by Matthew that John said in John 1. Matthew described Jesus as a human with a human genealogy and quite simply left it at that. Same thing in Luke.

 

[mikesw]

Divinity and deity don't mean the same things. Actually, you won't find any sort of things by Matthew that John said in John 1. Matthew described Jesus as a human with a human genealogy and quite simply left it at that. Same thing in Luke.

You need to get broader study done. There are details that people miss until they are pondering the right questions upon coming to various texts. Of course the genealogies also show that Jesus did not have an earthly father as a dna-donor, so we start to recognize that his divinity in the Godhead had to come from the Father, as shared earlier. Maybe it is clearer to share that his divinity was pre-existing but God is able to incarnate since he made creation and knows how to do intervene in it. But I know it is hard for mere human minds to comprehend God's ability.

 

[Runningman]

You need to get broader study done. There are details that people miss until they are pondering the right questions upon coming to various texts. Of course the genealogies also show that Jesus did not have an earthly father as a dna-donor, so we start to recognize that his divinity in the Godhead had to come from the Father, as shared earlier. Maybe it is clearer to share that his divinity was pre-existing but God is able to incarnate since he made creation and knows how to do intervene in it. But I know it is hard for mere human minds to comprehend God's ability.

Jesus isn't in a godhead with the Father. That's not stated anywhere in Matthew or the rest of the Bible. It seems you have not done a proper study of the Bible, but rather a study of trinitarian theology. Trinitarian theology isn't Scripture, I think everyone knows that at this point. Let's not pretend it is, even for the sake of discussion.

 

[mikesw]

Jesus isn't in a godhead with the Father. That's not stated anywhere in Matthew or the rest of the Bible. It seems you have not done a proper study of the Bible, but rather a study of trinitarian theology. Trinitarian theology isn't Scripture, I think everyone knows that at this point. Let's not pretend it is, even for the sake of discussion.

Duh. You state obvious things that have no meaning in the debate. You state Jesus is human when that is not rejected by Christians. But you fail to mention his divinity in the Godhead, as recognized by Christians. It is that divinity that is in scripture, not the philosophical distinctions of the Trinitarian doctrine that is scripture. We do not say Trinitarian elaboration is in scripture -- it is purely to help identify those who hold to heresies like modalism and arianism.

 

[Runningman]

Duh. You state obvious things that have no meaning in the debate. You state Jesus is human when that is not rejected by Christians. But you fail to mention his divinity in the Godhead, as recognized by Christians. It is that divinity that is in scripture, not the philosophical distinctions of the Trinitarian doctrine that is scripture. We do not say Trinitarian elaboration is in scripture -- it is purely to help identify those who hold to heresies like modalism and arianism.

I know what you believe and what the doctrine of the Trinity is. I have never had the main goal of discussing your doctrines with you. I am just showing you what the Bible says about God and it isn't saying He's a trinity anywhere either explicitly or by example. Trinitarianism suffers from extreme eisegesis. Sorry, but you got bamboozled by a smooth-talking trinitarian at one time or another. They said a bunch of this and that, probably quoted some verses, and you thought you saw the light, but by example there is not one single person in the Bible who believes what you do or says the same things as you do about God.

 

[mikesw]

I know what you believe and what the doctrine of the Trinity is. I have never had the main goal of discussing your doctrines with you. I am just showing you what the Bible says about God and it isn't saying He's a trinity anywhere either explicitly or by example. Trinitarianism suffers from extreme eisegesis. Sorry, but you got bamboozled by a smooth-talking trinitarian at one time or another. They said a bunch of this and that, probably quoted some verses, and you thought you saw the light, but by example there is not one single person in the Bible who believes what you do or says the same things as you do about God.

You still do not deal with the ambiguity showing the divinity of Christ who shares in the attributes of the Father. That is the gigantic failure of your arguments. The passages of the divinity of Christ is always glossed over by you unitarians. Those pesky verses just get in the way of your unitarian theory. Maybe you can get beyond the smooth-talking unitarians to get to the truth.
Remember that Jews dealt with the Two Powers in Heaven issues seen notably with the passages of the Angel of the Lord. The High Priest identified Jesus' claim of Dan 7:13-14 as blasphemy. The second century church was pushing for baptisms in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. They were worshiping Jesus too. This is not some incidental situation but is well known. These add to the passages of Christ's divinity -- like also in the virgin birth.

 

[Runningman]

You still do not deal with the ambiguity showing the divinity of Christ who shares in the attributes of the Father. That is the gigantic failure of your arguments.

I have never seen any of your kind man up and explain why Jesus doesn't share all of the divine attributes with God or all of the divine names and titles.

The passages of the divinity of Christ is always glossed over by you unitarians. Those pesky verses just get in the way of your unitarian theory. Maybe you can get beyond the smooth-talking unitarians to get to the truth.

Which ones?

Remember that Jews dealt with the Two Powers in Heaven issues seen notably with the passages of the Angel of the Lord.

The angel of the LORD and the LORD are speaking to each other in Zech. 1 because the angel of the LORD is not the LORD.

The High Priest identified Jesus' claim of Dan 7:13-14 as blasphemy.

They said Jesus was a sinner, demon possessed, a blasphemer, a sinner in general, etc. I hope you don't believe everything they say. Jesus said their father is the devil and that they do the works of their father, the father of lies. Why are you basing your beliefs on those of the children of the devil?

The second century church was pushing for baptisms in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Spirit.

Not according to Scripture. No one ever did that in Jesus' church.

They were worshiping Jesus too.

Not what Jesus taught to do in John 4:23,24.

This is not some incidental situation but is well known. These add to the passages of Christ's divinity -- like also in the virgin birth.

They were also doing several other heresies. Gnosticism was one of the earliest heresies, but docetism, sabellianism, proto-trinitarianism, and numerous other heresies all showed up around the same time. However, what you consider orthordox trinitarianism was not created until the 4th century; the early church fathers were heretics by today's standards of trinitarianism.

I also might add, most of the heresies that started early on are still around in the present day. So why did the heresy of trinitarianism become so prevalent? They had political support because trinitarianism was more palatable to polytheistic pagans around the Roman empire and they wanted it to replace their false gods.