Jesus denied being God

[Runningman]

Jesus was effectively saying..don't call me good..you don't know what you are saying..I am good...more than good.

Its a challenge to them to address Him in better terms than 'good teacher'.

Not that He isn't God. That He is more than what they say.

Jesus isn't the good teacher according to the Bible because God is Jesus' teacher. How can Jesus be the supreme teacher when he was clearly a student? Yes it's true that Jesus is good, but he did not suggest he desired to be exalted by people. In his teachings, he was quite humble regarding his personal opinion of himself and did not seek the glory that comes from men.

John 5
41I receive not honour from men.

 

[360watt]

Jesus forgave sin of those who had not directly sinned against Him.

That's the power of God. Forgiving sin itself.

He also sent the Holy Spirit. That's the power of God.

So you might say He is doing this by the Fathers power and not His own..

Well, Jesus claimed to have the power to raise up His own body after death. That's Gods power.

Also, again..agency then.. meant the agent's message was seen as having the same power as the originator.

The agent was effectively the originator. The agent was 'as the man themself'

Thats how the Pharisees and scribes saw what Jesus was doing. Putting Himself level with the Father.

So Jesus doing things by the Father isnt saying He is not God ...but the agent of God with equal authority and power.

Like a projected image of God. The image of God. That's what 'Son' is about. Not 'born out of', but 'image, expression ' of God.

 

[Runningman]

Jesus forgave sin of those who had not directly sinned against Him.

That's the power of God. Forgiving sin itself.

You are partially right, but if I may inject some Scripture into the matter (and not to ignore the rest of your comment - I just like to keep topics on one idea at a time) do you think it's possible God gave Jesus, and the men he was with, the power to forgive sins? There is a good passage that strongly suggests this.

Matthew 9
5For whether is easier, to say, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and walk? 6But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy,) Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thine house. 7And he arose, and departed to his house. 8But when the multitudes saw it, they marvelled, and glorified God, which had given such power unto men.

 

[360watt]

You are partially right, but if I may inject some Scripture into the matter (and not to ignore the rest of your comment - I just like to keep topics on one idea at a time) do you think it's possible God gave Jesus, and the men he was with, the power to forgive sins? There is a good passage that strongly suggests this.

Matthew 9
5For whether is easier, to say, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and walk? 6But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy,) Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thine house. 7And he arose, and departed to his house. 8But when the multitudes saw it, they marvelled, and glorified God, which had given such power unto men.

The difference with Jesus in comparison to the disciples, is He was putting Himself greater than them.

So His power to forgive sin..is beyond what the disciples had. The disciples would forgive sin of those who directly offended them. Not to actually forgive sin of someone they dont know. There is no example of that.

But Jesus... was doing that. Forgiving sin of those He wasnt actually directly harmed by.

Its on another level.

 

[Fred]

Paul wrote to the Corinthians and affirmed to them that a sin against another is a sin against Christ. (1 Corinthians 8:12)

When David sinned against more than 1 person he correctly claimed that he sinned against God alone (Psalm 51:4) in that all sin (which includes sin against others) are ultimately against God.

Notice how the use of alone in reference to God in the OT includes the Lord Jesus in the NT.

 

[atpollard]

There is a good passage that strongly suggests this.

Actually, it does not suggest “this” … who is THE SON OF MAN that has this power to forgive sin?

[Hint: “Daniel tells you” and that is why the Jews kept trying to stone Jesus for claiming He was the SON OF MAN.]

 

[Runningman]

The difference with Jesus in comparison to the disciples, is He was putting Himself greater than them.

So His power to forgive sin..is beyond what the disciples had. The disciples would forgive sin of those who directly offended them. Not to actually forgive sin of someone they dont know. There is no example of that.

But Jesus... was doing that. Forgiving sin of those He wasnt actually directly harmed by.

Its on another level.

Matthew 9:5-8 says that the previously mentioned power to forgive sins was what God gave to men. It's in the plural. There was no other power mentioned. There was no distinction mentioned regarding the the power Jesus had and what the other men had. It very directly reads like Jesus didn't have a different anointing that the others.

 

[Runningman]

Actually, it does not suggest “this” … who is THE SON OF MAN that has this power to forgive sin?

[Hint: “Daniel tells you” and that is why the Jews kept trying to stone Jesus for claiming He was the SON OF MAN.]

I would add that Jesus being the Son of man and having the power to forgive sin and God giving such power to men (plural) would require the consistent reading that being the Son of man does not indicate deity. Son of man means someone is a human in the Bible.

 

[Runningman]

Paul wrote to the Corinthians and affirmed to them that a sin against another is a sin against Christ. (1 Corinthians 8:12)

When David sinned against more than 1 person he correctly claimed that he sinned against God alone (Psalm 51:4) in that all sin (which includes sin against others) are ultimately against God.

Notice how the use of alone in reference to God in the OT includes the Lord Jesus in the NT.

And notice how in Luke 17:3 that sinning against a brother is not a sin against multiple people. While it's true that sinning against someone is possible, it is also true that sinning against a bother is not a sin against God. Here comes reading consistency into action. People are singular individuals and so is God. The only God is the Father.

As you have correctly pointed out, it's completely possible to sin against Christ without sinning against the Father.

 

[atpollard]

I would add that Jesus being the Son of man and having the power to forgive sin and God giving such power to men (plural) would require the consistent reading that being the Son of man does not indicate deity. Son of man means someone is a human in the Bible.

Not according to every OT scholar that studied Daniel’s prophetic vision defining the Son of Man.

[You should have taken the hint and read Daniel rather than ‘double down’ on your error.]

 

[Runningman]

Not according to every OT scholar that studied Daniel’s prophetic vision defining the Son of Man.

[You should have taken the hint and read Daniel rather than ‘double down’ on your error.]

Oh please quote some of them and of course I have already read Daniel. That's why I know there is not an error. The Son of Man and God are in no way the same person. Have you read this?

Daneil 7 (KJV)
13I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.

 

[atpollard]

Oh please quote some of them

To what end … your ears and mind are firmly closed to the truth. Fixing THAT problem is a job for GOD and way above my pay grade.

(You couldn’t even bother to acknowledge the context surrounding the verse you cherry picked from Daniel 7 where the Son of Man receives WORSHIP!)

 

[Runningman]

To what end … your ears and mind are firmly closed to the truth. Fixing THAT problem is a job for GOD and way above my pay grade.

(You couldn’t even bother to acknowledge the context surrounding the verse you cherry picked from Daniel 7 where the Son of Man receives WORSHIP!)

Already heard that argument before. Most versions and scholars don't agree he received worship. They, instead, say he was obeyed which is a completely different idea than worship. By the way... drop the arrogance. I am seasoned on trinity debates. Thank you!

 

[360watt]

Matthew 9:5-8 says that the previously mentioned power to forgive sins was what God gave to men. It's in the plural. There was no other power mentioned. There was no distinction mentioned regarding the the power Jesus had and what the other men had. It very directly reads like Jesus didn't have a different anointing that the others.

Jesus gives eternal life. No other person does.

'I give them eternal life and they shall never perish'

Jesus did numerous miracles that no one else could.

He is on a different level.

But i will stop here. You aren't gonna change your view. You are skimming over the surface, rather than really getting the context.

peace out

 

[Peterlag]

"Thomas answered and said unto Him..." (John 20:28)


So you are incorrect. The statement by Thomas is an address to Jesus.

Thomas is not writing to anyone or even addressing Jesus. It's not a complete statement. It's words of praise and surprise.

 

[mikesw]

Matthew 9:5-8 says that the previously mentioned power to forgive sins was what God gave to men. It's in the plural. There was no other power mentioned. There was no distinction mentioned regarding the the power Jesus had and what the other men had. It very directly reads like Jesus didn't have a different anointing that the others.

your interpretation sounds ludicrous and totally unfounded. How do show this to be a power that other men have?

 

[Peterlag]

As I said elsewhere the doctrine of the Trinity of God did not find its fullest expression until the advent of the Son (Jesus the Christ.)

This truth is in Scripture and it is hidden away until God determines its revelation:

25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,
26 But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:
27 To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever.
Rom. 16:25–27.

There was a great deal in the Hebrew Scripture that the apostles and other Jewish Christians had to study from those Scriptures to come to the knowledge of the truth of the New Covenant era Israel found itself in.

It is all written in the Hebrew Scripture and if we study it under the anointing as they did we would come to the same conclusions they did concerning the Deity of Jesus being the Son of God and member of the Godhead.

The mystery you are quoting from Ephesians 3 is That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel: It is not that Jesus is God.

 

[mikesw]

Thomas is not writing to anyone or even addressing Jesus. It's not a complete statement. It's words of praise and surprise.

no wonder you are stuck in heretical unitarianism. John 20:28 says that Thomas answered Jesus. There is no other person with the same name as Jesus. In this context it is an expression of Thomas's belief. It is also is true since neither Jesus nor the gospel writer has pointed out an error with what Thomas proclaimed.
Your arguments keep proving to be weak.

 

[mikesw]

Oh please quote some of them and of course I have already read Daniel. That's why I know there is not an error. The Son of Man and God are in no way the same person. Have you read this?

Daneil 7 (KJV)
13I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.

Do your homework.
We see that the testimony of the high priest that Jesus's quote of Dan 7:13 indicates Jesus claim to be God. Verse 14 is the more specific point about Jesus reigning over he nations. The kingdom of Christ is synonymous with the kingdom of God since Christ is God.

Mark 14:60–64 (NKJV)
60And the high priest stood up in the midst and asked Jesus, saying, “Do You answer nothing? What is it these men testify against You?”
61But He kept silent and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked Him, saying to Him, “Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?”
62Jesus said, “I am. And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.”
63Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, “What further need do we have of witnesses?
64You have heard the blasphemy! What do you think?” And they all condemned Him to be deserving of death.

The only way that the claim to be God could be nullified here is if Mark had said that the priest's claim was wrong. That surely would have been an appropriate comment for Mark to add if the priest was wrong.

 

[Fred]

And notice how in Luke 17:3 that sinning against a brother is not a sin against multiple people.

Which proves my point.

it is also true that sinning against a bother is not a sin against God.

Give one example.