Deity of Christ but not Trinitarian

It says the Word "was" God in the past tense. Fail. God isn't a past tense God. You're missing the point of this chapter. It's already been explained and you didn't believe.
Incorrect. YOU are failing.


In the beginning (en archēi). Archē is definite, though anarthrous like our at home, in town, and the similar Hebrew be reshith in Gen_1:1. But Westcott notes that here John carries our thoughts beyond the beginning of creation in time to eternity. There is no argument here to prove the existence of God any more than in Genesis. It is simply assumed. Either God exists and is the Creator of the universe as scientists like Eddington and Jeans assume or matter is eternal or it has come out of nothing.

Was (ēn). Three times in this sentence John uses this imperfect of eimi to be which conveys no idea of origin for God or for the Logos, simply continuous existence.

Quite a different verb (egeneto, became) appears in Joh_1:14 for the beginning of the Incarnation of the Logos. See the distinction sharply drawn in Joh_8:58 “before Abraham came (genesthai) I am” (eimi, timeless existence).

The Word (ho logos). Logos is from legō, old word in Homer to lay by, to collect, to put words side by side, to speak, to express an opinion. Logos is common for reason as well as speech. Heraclitus used it for the principle which controls the universe. The Stoics employed it for the soul of the world (anima mundi) and Marcus Aurelius used spermatikos logos for the generative principle in nature. The Hebrew memra was used in the Targums for the manifestation of God like the Angel of Jehovah and the Wisdom of God in Pro_8:23. Dr. J. Rendel Harris thinks that there was a lost wisdom book that combined phrases in Proverbs and in the Wisdom of Solomon which John used for his Prologue (The Origin of the Prologue to St. John, p. 43) which he has undertaken to reproduce. At any rate John’s standpoint is that of the Old Testament and not that of the Stoics nor even of Philo who uses the term Logos, but not John’s conception of personal pre-existence. The term Logos is applied to Christ only in Joh_1:1, Joh_1:14; Rev_19:13; 1Jn_1:1 “concerning the Word of life” (an incidental argument for identity of authorship). There is a possible personification of “the Word of God” in Heb_4:12. But the personal pre-existence of Christ is taught by Paul (2Co_8:9; Php_2:6.; Col_1:17) and in Heb_1:2. and in Joh_17:5. This term suits John’s purpose better than sophia (wisdom) and is his answer to the Gnostics who either denied the actual humanity of Christ (Docetic Gnostics) or who separated the aeon Christ from the man Jesus (Cerinthian Gnostics). The pre-existent Logos “became flesh” (sarx egeneto, Joh_1:14) and by this phrase John answered both heresies at once.

With God (pros ton theon). Though existing eternally with God the Logos was in perfect fellowship with God. Pros with the accusative presents a plane of equality and intimacy, face to face with each other. In 1Jn_2:1 we have a like use of pros: “We have a Paraclete with the Father” (paraklēton echomen pros ton patera). See prosōpon pros prosōpon (face to face, 1Co_13:12), a triple use of pros. There is a papyrus example of pros in this sense to gnōston tēs pros allēlous sunētheias, “the knowledge of our intimacy with one another” (M.&M., Vocabulary) which answers the claim of Rendel Harris, Origin of Prologue, p. 8) that the use of pros here and in Mar_6:3 is a mere Aramaism. It is not a classic idiom, but this is Koiné, not old Attic. In Joh_17:5 John has para soi the more common idiom.
And the Word was God (kai theos ēn ho logos).

By exact and careful language John denied Sabellianism by not saying ho theos ēn ho logos. That would mean that all of God was expressed in ho logos and the terms would be interchangeable, each having the article. The subject is made plain by the article (ho logos) and the predicate without it (theos) just as in Joh_4:24 pneuma ho theos can only mean “God is spirit,” not “spirit is God.” So in 1Jn_4:16 ho theos agapē estin can only mean “God is love,” not “love is God” as a so-called Christian scientist would confusedly say. For the article with the predicate see Robertson, Grammar, pp. 767f. So in Joh_1:14 ho Logos sarx egeneto, “the Word became flesh,” not “the flesh became Word.” Luther argues that here John disposes of Arianism also because the Logos was eternally God, fellowship of Father and Son, what Origen called the Eternal Generation of the Son (each necessary to the other). Thus in the Trinity we see personal fellowship on an equality.
Robertson.
1730478716743.png

Note the Imperfect Tense-no "past tense" Theos!

J.
 
Your theology of the Word contradicts John 1:1 where the Word was God and in Colossians 1:15 the Word isn't God, but rather the image of the invisible God. Therefore he isn't God. 1 Timothy 1:17 says the only God is invisible.
Incorrect!

Isaiah 9:6 — "Mighty God" and "Everlasting Father"
Text: "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given... and His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace."
Hebrew: "כִּי־יֶלֶד יֻלַּד לָנוּ בֵּן נִתַּן לָנוּ... וַיִּקְרָא שְׁמוֹ פֶּלֶא יוֹעֵץ אֵל גִּבּוֹר אֲבִי עַד שַׂר־שָׁלוֹם"
Analysis:
The phrase אֵל גִּבּוֹר (El Gibbor, "Mighty God") directly links the child with a title that is commonly associated with Yahweh. El (God) with Gibbor (mighty, heroic) is used in contexts for God’s supreme strength (e.g., Isaiah 10:21).
אֲבִי עַד (Avi Ad, "Everlasting Father") suggests a role that transcends time, again an attribute typically reserved for God alone. While “father” here can imply originator or source, the phrase together suggests the child is not merely a human ruler but possesses divine qualities.

2. Psalm 110:1 — A Dialogue between Yahweh and Adonai
Text: "The LORD said to my Lord, 'Sit at My right hand, till I make Your enemies Your footstool.'"
Hebrew: "נְאֻם יְהוָה לַאדֹנִי שֵׁב לִימִינִי עַד־אָשִׁית אֹיְבֶיךָ הֲדֹם לְרַגְלֶיךָ"
Analysis:
יְהוָה (YHWH), the personal name of God, is speaking to אֲדוֹנִי (Adoni), a title used respectfully for superiors or divinely appointed figures. The term "Adonai" is often a reference to a divine figure, and this verse has been interpreted in rabbinic and Christian tradition as addressing the Messiah, indicating a status coequal with God.
The right hand (לִימִינִי, limini) is a place of authority, often associated with divine rule. In ancient Near Eastern contexts, sitting at the right hand is a position reserved for a co-regent or one who shares the ruling authority with the sovereign.

3. Isaiah 7:14 — Immanuel, “God with Us”
Text: "Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel."
Hebrew: "לָכֵן יִתֵּן אֲדֹנָי הוּא לָכֶם אוֹת הִנֵּה הָעַלְמָה הָרָה וְיֹלֶדֶת בֵּן וְקָרָאת שְׁמוֹ עִמָּנוּ אֵל"
Analysis:
The name עִמָּנוּ אֵל (Immanuel, "God with us") implies the physical presence of God among His people. While some argue this is a symbolic name, its usage elsewhere strongly suggests divine presence, implying the child born will embody God’s presence directly.
The prophecy’s structure emphasizes God’s intervention through the miraculous birth and further reinforces the concept of a tangible, divine presence on Earth.

4. Zechariah 12:10 — Yahweh Speaks of Being Pierced
Text: "And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced."
Hebrew: "וְשָׁפַכְתִּי עַל־בֵּית דָּוִד וְעַל יֹשְׁבֵי יְרוּשָׁלִַם רוּחַ חֵן וְתַחֲנוּנִים וְהִבִּיטוּ אֵלַי אֵת אֲשֶׁר דָּקָרוּ"

The speaker is clearly Yahweh, as indicated by the use of אֵלַי (elai, "to Me"). Yahweh states that He Himself will be “pierced,” which has been interpreted as a reference to the suffering of the Messiah, who shares in the divine nature.
The form דָּקָרוּ (daqaru, "pierced") is in the plural, showing that the piercing is done by the people, but the one “pierced” is the singular, divine figure, Yahweh, pointing to a shared identity between the Messiah and God.

J.
 
Just so I can be understand some views that may fit a narrow theme, I am wondering who has found the divinity of Christ to be true but not within the Trinitarian concept. Any takers?
Deity: This term typically refers to Jesus as God Himself, the full essence and identity of God. When Christians say that Jesus possesses "deity," they affirm that He is of the same essence as God the Father, being fully and truly God. This belief is often referenced in scriptures like John 1:1 ("the Word was God") and Colossians 2:9 ("For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily"). Deity thus implies Jesus's inclusion in the Godhead, sharing in God's eternal, uncreated essence, and deserving of worship as God.

Divinity: "Divinity" can refer to the nature of being divine or godlike but does not always imply that the individual is God Himself. In philosophical and theological contexts, "divinity" sometimes speaks more broadly of possessing divine attributes, such as holiness, eternity, or a close relationship with God. When used for Jesus, divinity often describes His attributes and actions reflecting God’s nature, affirming that He is "of God" or has a divine origin and purpose. However, Christians also hold that Jesus’s divinity is equivalent to His deity, given that His divine attributes demonstrate His full identity as God (as in Hebrews 1:3, where Jesus is called "the radiance of God’s glory").

In the New Testament Context:

John 1:1, 14 and Philippians 2:6 affirm both Jesus’s deity and divinity, showing that Jesus is in very nature God and that He existed "in the form of God" before His incarnation.

In Colossians 1:15-17 and Hebrews 1:3, Jesus’s divinity is shown through His divine actions (creating, sustaining all things) and His relationship with the Father, which reflects His deity as the exact representation of God’s being.
To sum up, Jesus’s divinity and deity are unified in Christian doctrine—while divinity can refer to divine nature and qualities, deity specifically affirms that Jesus is God. In most Christological contexts, therefore, the divinity of Jesus is understood to mean His deity as the second person of the Trinity.

J.
 
Deity: This term typically refers to Jesus as God Himself, the full essence and identity of God. When Christians say that Jesus possesses "deity," they affirm that He is of the same essence as God the Father, being fully and truly God. This belief is often referenced in scriptures like John 1:1 ("the Word was God") and Colossians 2:9 ("For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily"). Deity thus implies Jesus's inclusion in the Godhead, sharing in God's eternal, uncreated essence, and deserving of worship as God.

Divinity: "Divinity" can refer to the nature of being divine or godlike but does not always imply that the individual is God Himself. In philosophical and theological contexts, "divinity" sometimes speaks more broadly of possessing divine attributes, such as holiness, eternity, or a close relationship with God. When used for Jesus, divinity often describes His attributes and actions reflecting God’s nature, affirming that He is "of God" or has a divine origin and purpose. However, Christians also hold that Jesus’s divinity is equivalent to His deity, given that His divine attributes demonstrate His full identity as God (as in Hebrews 1:3, where Jesus is called "the radiance of God’s glory").

In the New Testament Context:

John 1:1, 14 and Philippians 2:6 affirm both Jesus’s deity and divinity, showing that Jesus is in very nature God and that He existed "in the form of God" before His incarnation.

In Colossians 1:15-17 and Hebrews 1:3, Jesus’s divinity is shown through His divine actions (creating, sustaining all things) and His relationship with the Father, which reflects His deity as the exact representation of God’s being.
To sum up, Jesus’s divinity and deity are unified in Christian doctrine—while divinity can refer to divine nature and qualities, deity specifically affirms that Jesus is God. In most Christological contexts, therefore, the divinity of Jesus is understood to mean His deity as the second person of the Trinity.

J.
Sure. I use whichever word flows best while trying to keep it clear enough that I refer to Christ as in the Godhead. Around these discussions, I usually use the phrase "the divinity of Christ in the Godhead." Runningman seems to focus on every Christian becoming a god or divine -- in a fashion much higher than scripture may convey.
 
Sure. I use whichever word flows best while trying to keep it clear enough that I refer to Christ as in the Godhead. Around these discussions, I usually use the phrase "the divinity of Christ in the Godhead." Runningman seems to focus on every Christian becoming a god or divine -- in a fashion much higher than scripture may convey.
You do realize he is totally wrong?

J.
 
And it’s clear from many OT passages the Messiah is Divine and identified as YHWH.
It is a partial argument for incarnation that is shared when mentioning Moses' viewing of the back of God and of the three men whom Abraham entertained. That makes it harder to deny the actual incarnation of Jesus. But many of the the multiple-persons accounts were shown a bit more strong than other videos I watched recently. The video also shared non-Christian Jewish views about the multiple persons involved in various encounters.
 
Incorrect!

Isaiah 9:6 — "Mighty God" and "Everlasting Father"
Text: "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given... and His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace."
Hebrew: "כִּי־יֶלֶד יֻלַּד לָנוּ בֵּן נִתַּן לָנוּ... וַיִּקְרָא שְׁמוֹ פֶּלֶא יוֹעֵץ אֵל גִּבּוֹר אֲבִי עַד שַׂר־שָׁלוֹם"
Analysis:
The phrase אֵל גִּבּוֹר (El Gibbor, "Mighty God") directly links the child with a title that is commonly associated with Yahweh. El (God) with Gibbor (mighty, heroic) is used in contexts for God’s supreme strength (e.g., Isaiah 10:21).
אֲבִי עַד (Avi Ad, "Everlasting Father") suggests a role that transcends time, again an attribute typically reserved for God alone. While “father” here can imply originator or source, the phrase together suggests the child is not merely a human ruler but possesses divine qualities.
This verse, in the format and theology you've provided, actually debunks Trinitarianism. If Jesus is the Everlasting Father than then the Son is the Father. However, while on Earth, Jesus said to call no one on earth their father (Matthew 23:9). So Jesus taught to not call him father therefore the role you're suggesting does not apply to Jesus.

Furthermore, I would like to draw your attention to Isaiah 9:7 which proves that, contextually and theologically, that the one being spoken of in Isaiah 9:6 isn't Lord God (YHWH) Almighty, but rather YHWH will accomplish what is said in Isaiah 9:6-7

Isaiah 9 (NIV)​
7Of the greatness of his government and peace​
there will be no end.​
He will reign on David’s throne​
and over his kingdom,​
establishing and upholding it​
with justice and righteousness​
from that time on and forever.​
The zeal of the Lord Almighty
will accomplish this.

The reason this passage is a difficult one for Trinitarianism is that it both proves the Son is not YHWH and it contradicts Trinitarianism. Here are some better, more Scripturally compatible, versions of Isaiah 9:6,7.

Isaiah 9 (Brenton's Septuagint Translation)​
6For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, whose government is upon his shoulder: and his name is called the Messenger of great counsel: for I will bring peace upon the princes, and health to him.​
7His government shall be great, and of his peace there is no end: it shall be upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to establish it, and to support it with judgement and with righteousness, from henceforth and forever. The seal of the Lord of hosts shall perform this.​

Yeshayahu (Isaiah) - Chapter 9 (CJB)​
5For a child has been born to us, a son given to us, and the authority is upon his shoulder, and the wondrous adviser, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, called his name, "the prince of peace."​
6To him who increases the authority, and for peace without end, on David's throne and on his kingdom, to establish it and to support it with justice and with righteousness; from now and to eternity, the zeal of the Lord of Hosts shall accomplish this.​
 
2. Psalm 110:1 — A Dialogue between Yahweh and Adonai
Text: "The LORD said to my Lord, 'Sit at My right hand, till I make Your enemies Your footstool.'"
Hebrew: "נְאֻם יְהוָה לַאדֹנִי שֵׁב לִימִינִי עַד־אָשִׁית אֹיְבֶיךָ הֲדֹם לְרַגְלֶיךָ"
Analysis:
יְהוָה (YHWH), the personal name of God, is speaking to אֲדוֹנִי (Adoni), a title used respectfully for superiors or divinely appointed figures. The term "Adonai" is often a reference to a divine figure, and this verse has been interpreted in rabbinic and Christian tradition as addressing the Messiah, indicating a status coequal with God.
The right hand (לִימִינִי, limini) is a place of authority, often associated with divine rule. In ancient Near Eastern contexts, sitting at the right hand is a position reserved for a co-regent or one who shares the ruling authority with the sovereign.
This verse places YHWH and Jesus beside each other in the same context. YHWH speaks to Jesus, but didn't find prophetic fulfillment until after Jesus was taken up to heaven (Acts 2:34,35) and thus proves that God and the Son are not the same person. (Hebrews 1:13)
 
3. Isaiah 7:14 — Immanuel, “God with Us”
Text: "Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel."
Hebrew: "לָכֵן יִתֵּן אֲדֹנָי הוּא לָכֶם אוֹת הִנֵּה הָעַלְמָה הָרָה וְיֹלֶדֶת בֵּן וְקָרָאת שְׁמוֹ עִמָּנוּ אֵל"
Analysis:
The name עִמָּנוּ אֵל (Immanuel, "God with us") implies the physical presence of God among His people. While some argue this is a symbolic name, its usage elsewhere strongly suggests divine presence, implying the child born will embody God’s presence directly.
The prophecy’s structure emphasizes God’s intervention through the miraculous birth and further reinforces the concept of a tangible, divine presence on Earth.
This verse from Isaiah 7 proves that Immanuel is not God since the context describes a fallible human who needed time to learn to reject evil and chose good. This proves that Immanuel didn't inherently possess a quality of God, but rather proves that he was a human who needed time to grow, spiritually develop, and be perfected like all others.

Isaiah 7 (NIV)​
14Therefore the Lord himself will give you c a sign: The virgin d will conceive and give birth to a son, and e will call him Immanuel. 15He will be eating curds and honey when he knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right,
Luke 2 (NIV)
52And Jesus grew in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man.
Hebrews 5 (NIV)
9And having been made perfect, He became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey Him
 
4. Zechariah 12:10 — Yahweh Speaks of Being Pierced
Text: "And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced."
Hebrew: "וְשָׁפַכְתִּי עַל־בֵּית דָּוִד וְעַל יֹשְׁבֵי יְרוּשָׁלִַם רוּחַ חֵן וְתַחֲנוּנִים וְהִבִּיטוּ אֵלַי אֵת אֲשֶׁר דָּקָרוּ"
Zechariah 12:10 is written from the perspective of the experience of the one who was pierced rather than the speaker describing his experience of being pierced in the first-person perspective. This is why this section of Zechariah 12:10 is written in the third-person perspective as opposed to the first-person perspective: "They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son."

We know from Scripture that YHWH was not the one who was pierced.

Isaiah 53 (NIV)​
10Yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer,​
and though the Lord makes his life an offering for sin,​
he will see his offspring and prolong his days,​
and the will of the Lord will prosper in his hand.​
 
Zechariah 12:10 is written from the perspective of the experience of the one who was pierced rather than the speaker describing his experience of being pierced in the first-person perspective. This is why this section of Zechariah 12:10 is written in the third-person perspective as opposed to the first-person perspective: "They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son."

We know from Scripture that YHWH was not the one who was pierced.

Isaiah 53 (NIV)​
10Yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer,​
and though the Lord makes his life an offering for sin,​
he will see his offspring and prolong his days,​
and the will of the Lord will prosper in his hand.​
We apologists hear every fable, myth, and tall tale regarding theology that anyone could ever imagine. I've heard for more than 30 years that “the Bible never says that Jesus is God.” In fact, one of my first research projects in the early 1980s, after I started taking up apologetics (back in my evangelical days), was to collect biblical passages that provide evidence for the Holy Trinity and deity, or divinity, of Jesus Christ.

I've compiled this information in one of my books, called Theology of God (if anyone is looking for a handy guide on the issue). Here, I’d like to highlight a few of the more obvious, undeniable, plain passages, in order to counter those who make such negative claims.



John 1:1, 14 — In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ... And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have beheld his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father.
This is one of the most well-known “proof texts”. Jesus is eternal (here, “beginning” means “eternity past”). He was with God the Father, and is God the Son. To make sure that the reader has no misunderstanding, John (v. 14) reiterates that the “Word” referred to is the Son, and notes that he “became flesh” (the incarnation). Only the Son has a body. The Word = Jesus = God.



John 10:30 — I and the Father are one.
Jesus' hearers, unbelieving Jews, certainly understood his intent in saying this, because they tried to stone him, as the next verse informs us, since they didn't believe his claim, which, if indeed untrue, would be intolerable blasphemy. John 10:33 informs us that they tried to stone him because (in their words) “you, being a man, make yourself God.”



John 20:28 — Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!”
This had to do with the famous “Doubting Thomas” incident. Thomas didn't believe Jesus had risen, so Jesus appeared for his sake and told him to touch the wound in his side. Then Thomas believed and said this. If it were untrue, Jesus would have corrected him, but he didn't; He commended Thomas because he “believed.”



Colossians 1:19 — For in him all the fulness of God was pleased to dwell.
In context, it is the Son who is being described (1:13); he is eternal (1:15, 17-18), the Creator (1:16), and the unifying principle of the universe (1:17; cf. Heb 1:3): all attributes true only of God. Paul makes the notion even more explicit in the next chapter:

Colossians 2:9 — For in him the whole fulness of deity dwells bodily ...
2 Peter 1:1 — ... our God and Savior Jesus Christ ...
St. Paul uses the same phrase in Titus 2:13 as well.



Hebrews 1:8 — But of the Son he says, ‘Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever, the righteous scepter is the scepter of thy kingdom.’
This is a remarkable passage, in which God the Father calls his Son “God.” It is a reference to the Old Testament passage, Psalms 45:6-7.

In Hebrews 1:6, God the Father also says that all the angels should worship God the Son. Worship can only be rightly applied to God, as we know from Exodus 34:14 and Deuteronomy 8:19. Yet Jesus accepted worship of himself on many occasions (e.g., Matthew 14:33; 28:9) and stated that he should be honored equally with the Father (John 5:23). In Revelation 5:8, 12-13 and Colossians 2:6-7, we find that Jesus is worshiped in every way that the Bible specifically describes worship of God the Father, with all the same words used (see: Revelation 4:9-11, 5:13; 7:11-12, and Romans 11:33).

Jesus is omnipotent (possesses all power):

Philippians 3:20-21 — ... the Lord Jesus Christ, who will change our lowly body to be like his glorious body, by the power which enables him even to subject all things to himself.
Jesus is omniscient (all-knowing):

Colossians 2:2-3 — ... Christ, in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.
Jesus is omnipresent (present everywhere):

Ephesians 1:22-23 — ... the Church, which is his body, the fulness of him who fills all in all. (cf. Colossians 3:11)
Another astonishing passage along these lines is one where Jesus speaks about historical events described as being done by God the Father in the Old Testament. He casually applies them to himself (what might be called “the Divine ‘I’”):

Matthew 23: 34, 37 — Therefore I send you prophets and wise men and scribes, some of whom you will kill and crucify, and some you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from town to town. ... O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killing the prophets and stoning those who are sent to you! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not!
Many attributes that are said to belong only to “God” are applied to Jesus in Scripture. God the Father said, “besides me there is no savior” (Isaiah 43:11; cf. 1 Timothy 4:10). Yet Jesus is called the “savior” of mankind in passages like Luke 2:11 and many others.

God the Father stated, “To me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear” (Isaiah 45:23). The same exact description is also applied to Jesus (Philippians 2:10-11).

The Bible teaches that “God” is judge (1 Samuel 2:10; Psalm 50:6; Ecclesiastes 12:14; many others). But so is Jesus (John 5:22, 27; 9:39; Acts 10:42; 2 Timothy 4:1). Therefore he is God.

God the Father sits on his throne in heaven (1 Kings 22:19; Psalm 11:4; 47:8). Jesus is on the same throne, too (Revelation 7:17; 22:1, 3).

At every turn in the Bible, only one conclusion is possible, to make sense of all these statements, taken together as a whole: Jesus is God the Son. He is the eternal, all-powerful, all-loving, self-existent Creator God.


J.
 
Jesus made another statement claiming to be God when He said, “Very truly I tell you, . . . before Abraham was born, I am!” (John 8:58). The Jews, upon hearing Him, clearly understood that He was claiming preexistence and, more than that, to be Yahweh, the great “I AM” of Exodus 3:14. On this occasion, too, they tried to stone Him for blasphemy.

The Gospel of John begins with a statement of Jesus’ deity: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1, emphasis added). In verse 14, John identifies the Word: “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.” John is affirming that the Word (Jesus) is God, and He left heaven to come to earth in the form of a man to live with men and display the glory of God the Father.

The disciples of Jesus distinctly heard Him declare His deity. After Jesus’ resurrection, Thomas the doubting disciple finally understood Jesus’ deity, declaring Him to be “my Lord and my God” (John 20:28). If Jesus were not Lord and God, He would have corrected Thomas, but He did not; Thomas spoke the truth. After seeing Jesus walking on the water, His disciples worshipped Him (Matthew 14:33). When He appeared to them after the resurrection, they fell at His feet and worshipped Him (Matthew 28:9). The disciples were well aware of the Mosaic Law’s penalty for blasphemy, yet they worshipped Him as God, and Jesus accepted their worship. Jesus never rebuked people for worshipping Him, accepting their worship as good and proper.

Jesus’ deity is recognized throughout the New Testament. Paul eagerly awaited “the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ” (Titus 2:13) and encouraged us to do the same. Both Paul and John declared that Jesus created the universe (John 1:3; Colossians 1:16–17), yet Genesis 1:1 clearly says that God created the heavens and the earth. This can only mean that Jesus is God. Even God the Father referred to Jesus as God: “About the Son he says, ‘Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever’” (Hebrews 1:8, quoting Psalm 45:6).

Did Jesus say He was God? Yes, in many ways, including applying the names and attributes of God to Himself. He made it clear that He was God incarnate, proving it by His words, by His miracles, and finally by His resurrection from the dead. Although they doubted at first, those who were finally convinced of His deity understood why He had to die on the cross. If He were a mere man, His death would have been only sufficient to pay for His own sins, but because He was God in the flesh, His sacrifice was infinite and holy and able to pay for all the sins of the world.
 
This verse from Isaiah 7 proves that Immanuel is not God since the context describes a fallible human who needed time to learn to reject evil and chose good. This proves that Immanuel didn't inherently possess a quality of God, but rather proves that he was a human who needed time to grow, spiritually develop, and be perfected like all others.
Does the New Testament turn a mere man into God? This is what New Testament critic Rabbi Daniel Asor thinks:

“The Bible rejects pagan idolatry that revolves around human-like gods, men as gods.”

Correct. In the pagan cultures of the East, gurus climb up a religious ladder until they get to the highest step of becoming a god. This is idolatry without a doubt.
But is that what the Bible and the New Testament teach? Of course not! But the rabbis want you to think it is.
According to the OT, God is not human. Rather, God is spirit. However as we’ve already mentioned in another video, God can choose to reveal himself in whatever form he pleases. This is what he did throughout the whole Bible. The NT doesn’t dream up something new. It clarifies what the OT has presented already in its entirety. Namely that God will reveal himself to us in the person of the Messiah.
Rabbi Tovia Singer mocks this idea:

“Whoever thinks that God came down to us, manifested as anything, whether as cottage cheese or Jesus, such a person is going to the eternal fire of hell.”

Let’s put the rabbis aside for a minute, take a deep breath, and with unbiased eyes look at the what the OT itself teaches, what Judaism during the time of the second temple believed, and even what the Sages believed regarding the deity of the Messiah.

METATRON
Did you know that according to the book of the Zohar and the writings of the Sages, Metatron1, described as the prince of the world and power of God, has the characteristics of God himself? He is the highest being in the celestial hierarchy. Just like God himself, he too sits on God’s throne of glory. And on his head he wears the crown through which the universe was created. His attire is God’s light and is called “the little God”. Professor Idel, head of the department in Jewish thought at Hebrew University describes Metatron’s nature and position as “Half man, half God… he fixes the problem of human sin and fulfills humans actual purpose.”
The book of the Zohar continues describing the character and nature of Metatron as one carrying the image of God, representing God to his creation. He’s described as the angel of the covenant, as the son of God. As the small God, as God’s firstborn. As mediator to God. As overseer to the tree of life, as the King’s representative, responsible for the whole creation, and more.
It’s interesting enough, that whoever reads the NT will discover that Jesus the Messiah is defined in the exact same way. But the NT was written a long time before the Zohar and the rest of the Sages’ literature was written.
Even though the Sages did understand that God does reveal himself to humanity, they chose not to recognize Jesus, the God-sent Messiah. And therefore, they made for themselves a substitute for him: Metatron.

THE IDEA THAT GOD REVEALS HIMSELF TO HUMANITY IN THE LIKENESS OF MEN IS BASED ON THE JEWISH SCRIPTURES
The OT is full of examples and prophecies that the promised Messiah will be God himself. In his love he’ll reveal himself to us, suffer with and for us. He will die and bring a perfect sacrifice for our sins. We’ve created videos on the topic of the suffering Messiah.
Now we’d like to go through some examples to show that the God of the OT does reveal himself in the likeness of men, coming as the Messiah.Let’s start with Genesis 3.

“And they heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden. Then the Lord God said to the woman, “What is this that you have done?” The woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”

This means that Adam and Eve are talking to and are physically with God who’s walking in the Garden.
In Genesis 18 we read about Abraham our father.

“And the Lord appeared to him by the oaks of Mamre, as he sat at the door of his tent in the heat of the day. He lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, three men were standing in front of him. When he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them and bowed himself to the earth and said, “O Lord, if I have found favor in your sight, do not pass by your servant.” Genesis 18:1-3

Further into the chapter, in verse 22, the text says explicitly:

“So the men turned from there and went toward Sodom, but Abraham still stood before the LORD.”

While the angels are leaving God stayed with Abraham.

“YHWH”, THE LORD, HE IS THE ONE WHO APPEARED TO ABRAHAM.
And Abraham indeed identifies one of the angels as God. For this reason he bows before him and invites him to eat with him. The Talmud acknowledges this too. In the tractate Bava Metzia 76 God himself comes to visit Abraham. Rabbi Steinsaltz interprets the passage:

“He came out and saw the Lord, stand in the entrance. He who said: “Lord, if I have found favor in your sight, do not pass by your servant.” Let’s continue to read: In verse 13 God, who is eating with Abraham, asks him a question: “The LORD said to Abraham, ‘Why did Sarah laugh…'”

These verses cannot be understood in a different way: One of the three is identified as God himself. And he promises Abraham to come back in a year after a son has been born to Sarah. Sarah hears that and laughs and God answers her. There is no other way in which this chapter can be understood. Abraham, Sarah and God took part in this dinner and conversation, being physically present.

This chapter is pretty amazing. It states explicitly that Abraham and Sarah met God and spoke with him face to face. God appeared to them in human likeness with dust on his feet and all that.

And after Abraham served him butter and milk and beef for sure some of it got caught in his beard, like it happens to Moti. No doubt, if these verses were written in the NT instead of in the OT the rabbis would mock us and call these verses idolatry. And for sure they would laugh and ask us if God gained weight after the dinner. For these are the typical claims with which the rabbis attack the idea that God revealed himself in Jesus the Messiah when he took on flesh. If God appears to Abraham in flesh and blood for several hours what would stop him from taking on flesh in the person of the Messiah for several years?
Let’s continue.
Did you ever hear the term “Messiah King”? The prophecy about the Messiah King is found in Jeremiah 23:

“Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will raise up for David a righteous Branch, and he shall reign as king and deal wisely, and shall execute justice and righteousness in the land. In his days Judah will be saved, and Israel will dwell securely. And this is the name by which he will be called: ‘The Lord is our righteousness.’” (Jeremiah 23:5-6)

“Branch” is a common term for the Messiah. Jeremiah prophesies that this branch from the line of David will bring salvation to Israel.

AND WHAT WILL BE HIS NAME? THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.
In the OT no one except for God himself is called YHWH, (LORD) but here the Messiah receives the name “the LORD our righteousness”. As opposed to names like Daniel (the LORD is my judge) or Elinadav (My LORD is gracious) here, the explicit name of God is mentioned. Y-H-W-H.
To make sure you can’t accuse us of using a missionary-christian interpretation let’s see how the Sages interpreted this passage.
In the Midrash Proverbs section 19 it says:

“Rav Huna says: the 7 names of the Messiah are Ynon, the Lord our righteousness, Branch, Consoler, David, Shilo and Elijah.”

And in Midrash Lamentations 1 the passage is interpreted:

“What is the name of the Messiah King? Rabbi Abba Bar Kahana says: ‘The Lord’ is his name, and this is what they will call him: ‘The Lord our Righteousness’.”

According to Rabbi Johanan bar Nappaha the Messiah will be called by the name of God.

“Rabbi Johanan said: ‘Those three will be called by God’s name: The righteous ones, the Messiah and Jerusalem… the Messiah, as it is written (Jeremiah 23) and this is the name that they will call him: The Lord our Righteousness.

Minor tractate, Soferim 13, Halakha 12:

“We … God our Lord in Elijah the prophet, your servant and in the kingdom of David your Messiah soon he will come and appear to his sons and on his throne will sit no one else and he will give his glory to no other. Because by your holy name you promised him that his lamp will not be put out forever. ‘In his days Judah will be saved and Israel will dwell securely, and this is the name he will be called: the Lord our Righteousness.’ Blessed be you, o Lord, who raises up a horn of salvation for his people Israel.”

Also here, the Messiah is being identified with “The Lord our Righteousness,” referring to Jeremiah 23.

“When they both confessed their deeds Judah was side by side with Ruben. Since: to one who orders his way rightly I will show the salvation of God Judah confessed and therefore inherited the kingdom and from him will come the Messiah that will save Israel as it is written: ‘In his days Judah will be saved.'” (Tzror Hamor, Genesis Vayechi)

The commentator explains that Judah acted rightly since from him the Messiah will come. He bases this on Jeremiah 23, verse 6. In other words, he too sees in this verse a messianic prophecy that predicts that the Messiah will be God.
In ‘Midrash Tehillim’ it says that God calls the Messiah by his name. And what is his name? The answer is “the Lord of Hosts” and the Messiah we will call “and this is the name he will be called: The Lord our righteousness.”

Therefore, the messianic prophecy found in Jeremiah 23 teaches us that the Messiah will be God himself. The Sages themselves understood and taught this passage in the same way.

By the way, some within the Chabad movement claim that Rabbi Schneerson was the King Messiah, God taking on flesh, based on this passage. Let’s continue.

FROM EVERLASTING, ANCIENT OF DAYS
This time we look at Micah who prophesied that the Messiah will be born in Bethlehem and that his origins are from everlasting.

“But you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah, who are too little to be among the clans of Judah, from you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel, whose coming forth is from of old, from ancient days.” (Micah 5:2)

Rabbi David Kimhi interprets the passage.

“His origins are from old, everlasting. In his time they will say that he is from everlasting… and this is God who is from old, from everlasting.” (RaDaK on Micah 5:2)

This means, that the Messiah always existed.
He’s eternal.
He is God.

PIERCING GOD
Let’s go to the book of Zechariah. We actually made a video on Zechariah chapter 12.
But in brief, in Zechariah 12 God tells the house of David that one day in the future “they will look upon me, whom they have pierced.”

How can God be pierced? Only if he came to us in flesh and blood.

See how even the Babylonian Talmud connects this passage with the Messiah.

“It is said about the Messiah, Son of Joseph, that he will be killed, as it is written in Zechariah 12: ‘They looked on me, whom they have pierced, they shall mourn for him, as for an only child.'” Tractate Sukkah, ch. 5

Let’s continue, our last example: Daniel.

THE SON OF MAN COMING IN THE CLOUDS OF HEAVEN
Here, God comes down in the clouds and appears before us as a man. To him the nations bring sacrifices, him they worship.

“I saw in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one like a son of man, and he came to the Ancient of Days and was presented before him. And to him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed.” (Daniel 7:13-14)

The most interesting conclusions about this passage can be drawn from old writings. Scroll 4Q246, one of the Qumran scrolls, found at the Dead Sea, is dated back to the 3rd century BC. Long before Jesus and the NT. In this scroll, the messianic expectations of the Jews of that time are described. Back then, according to the prophecy of Daniel 7 the Messiah was expected to be the son of God. That means, that according to early Judaism the Messiah was God. And those Jews cannot be labeled as “christian missionaries.”

ONLY GOD CAN SAVE
If seen from a philosophical and theological point of view the Messiah has to be God himself. Since it is the Messiah’s main purpose to bring salvation, the OT tells us that God alone can save.

“I, I am the Lord, and besides me there is no savior.” Isaiah 43:11

“And there is no other god besides me, a righteous God and a Savior; there is none besides me.” Isaiah 45:21

“But I am the Lord your God from the land of Egypt; you know no God but me, and besides me there is no savior.” Hosea 13:4

Hence, God alone can save. And if salvation is the purpose of the Messiah there is either a contradiction here or the Messiah indeed is God himself, the savior. We could go on and quote endless examples on how God reveals himself to us in the form of a man and especially in the person of the Messiah. These quotes are in the OT but also in the writings of the Sages. But for sure, you’ve already got the idea.
This is not some pagan, idol worshiping concept… it’s not even ‘Christian’.
You’ve got to admit to the idea that (according to God himself) the Creator of the universe loves us so much that he willingly humbled himself and appeared to us as a human, that He lived, suffered and died for us – is simply an amazing thought. It should make us grateful on one hand, and humble us in how we interact with others on the other hand.
If God is perfect and gave his life for us imperfect beings, then how much more should we, imperfect people, be willing to make sacrifices for others?

JESUS CLAIMED TO BE GOD IN THE FLESH
For example:

“Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.” John 8:58

Or:

“I and the father are one.” John 10:30

Also the rest of the NT carries that idea when describing the life of Jesus. Paul, for example, writes in his letter to the Colossians:

“He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities— all things were created through him and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together.” Colossians 1:15-17

And:

“For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily…” Colossians 2:9

When it comes to Jesus’ claim that he is God coming in the flesh, there are only two possibilities: It is either true, or a lie.
If he told the truth the prophecies of the OT were fulfilled and God revealed himself to us in the flesh, in the person of the Messiah. And all that we need to do is to receive him and his authority. Or to reject him. If his claim is not true we are confronted with two possibilities.

Either he knew that he was lying, and therefore was a cheater, or he was crazy.

If Jesus was a liar, a selfish and corrupt cheater, how could he pretend to be the most pure and noble character that humanity ever knew from the beginning of his life until the end?
It would be hard to explain his morally profound teachings, the high standards, that he taught and the fact that he always based his words on the law and the prophets. An interesting reaction to all this comes, believe it or not, from the atheists.
John Stuart Mill, a well-known philosopher, admits:

“Jesus’ life and teachings carry a seal of personal authenticity, and give a uniquely deep insight. He stood in the first row next to some of the greatest people that the human race could look up to. His incredible genius is mixed with the virtues of a man who as it seems is the moral ideal and the holiest of all that ever walked on this earth. And therefore, it is not a mistake to see in this man the ideal representative and leader of humanity. Even those who don’t believe in him will have a hard time finding a better way than that of Jesus, a way that will enable to put in practice moral principles from words to actions.” John Stuart Mill

So was Jesus a lunatic thinking that he is God?
A person who thinks that he is God within a Jewish, monotheistic society like the one Jesus was living in, and dares to tell others that their eternal destiny depends on their faith in him? This would be more than a weird fantasy – it would be thoughts of a person who has gone completely insane. But does Jesus’ life and ministry fit into the description of such a person?
The famous Napoleon said:

“I know people. And I tell you that Jesus is not a mere man. Everything about Jesus amazes me. His spirit instills fear in me and his will astonishes me. One cannot compare him to anyone else in this world. He is truly one of a kind. It is impossible to explain his ideas and opinions, the truth that he taught, his ability to convict others… The more I draw closer, the more carefully I examine things. All this is way over my head, it remains something huge, enormous and supernatural. His faith is a revelation whose origin lays in reason whose source is undoubtedly not in men. It is impossible to find anything like his life, apart from him. I searched in history for someone who comes close to Jesus, to no avail. Or something comparable to the Gospel. But neither history, nor humanity, neither seasons nor nature, could offer something that could compare to Jesus. Neither could they explain him. Everything about him is simply extraordinary.”

Also the author of the “Narnia” books, Prof. C.S. Lewis, wrote:

“The historical challenge to explain Jesus’ life, words and influence is exceedingly great. The contradiction between the depth, clarity and sharpness of his moral teaching and between the madness of grandeur that has to be hidden somewhere in his theological teachings. Unless he truly is God, his teaching has not been explained yet satisfactorily.” (C.S. Lewis)

One of the most convincing claims for the deity of Jesus which humanity has faced for 2,000 years now is Jesus’ resurrection from the dead.
To summarize, the answer you give to the question “who is Jesus?” will be taken very seriously. You cannot put Jesus on the shelf with all the others as if he’s some kind of Guru. There are only three options:
He’s either a liar, crazy or God’s glorious revelation to human kind as written by John:

“But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah the Son of God and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:31).

1. On the issue of “the Metatron” – I do not believe in the Metatron nor that he exists. I only see him as a fictional character, an imaginary mythical figure who I only refer to, as a rabbinic myth. The only purpose in referring to this concept is to show Orthodox Jews that the concept of “the son of God” exists in their literature as well, and therefore the concept of Yeshua, the Son of God is not a “pagan non-Jewish” one, as most rabbis today will claim against Christianity.

J.
 
Back
Top Bottom