Jesus denied being God

[TomL]

Jesus said he was created.

Revelation 3
14“And to the angel of the church in Laodicea write: ‘The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of God’s creation.

No he does not

Revelation 3:14 (LEB) — 14 “And to the angel of the church in Laodicea write: “This is what the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the originator of God’s creation, says:

Revelation 3:14 (NIV) — 14 “To the angel of the church in Laodicea write: These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God’s creation.

Revelation 3:14 (NASB 2020) — 14 “To the angel of the church in Laodicea write: The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Origin of the creation of God, says this:

The fact all things were created by him shows he cannot be a created thing

Colossians 1:16 (KJV 1900) — 16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

 

[TomL]

You have showed absolutely nothing about the deity of Jesus that hasn't been bunked or properly exegeted.

sorry you are bearing false witness

The issue was john 1:1, and I showed the translations quoted supported it and most certainly did not support your claim the word was an impersonal thing

 

[TomL]

The context is only about Judgement. You dishonor him by distorting his words. Furthermore, honor doesn't mean what you are proposing it does. Grab a dictionary and read.

Wrong

John 5:19–23 (KJV 1900) — 19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise. 20 For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel. 21 For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will. 22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son: 23 That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.

The son does all that the Father does - raises the dead, gives life, judges

and the father loves the son

For all those reasons, you are to honor the son as you honor the Father

You do not do so and thus do not honor the father

 

[Runningman]

Jesus did not need to grasp at being equal because He already had it. Jesus was God in the Flesh. Jesus Christ was both fully God and fully man at the same time. From all eternity the Son has been enjoying the love and glory that He shares with God the Father as a member of the Trintiy. So it was not new to Him or something to grasp at.

the Bible identifies God the Son as the Creator of all things. Referring to Him as the Word, the apostle John writes “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God.

Hi Wilber, I don't believe I have had the chance to talk to you yet. Nice to meet you.

I am going to have to disagree with that. As Jesus himself said that the Father is greater than himself in John 14:28. Jesus also taught on the matter of he being the one the Father sent (John 17:1-3) while the one who is sent is not greater than the one who sent him (John 13:16).

There is also the fact that others did not think Jesus was equal to God. For example Paul, who wrote Philippians 2:6, taught that Jesus is not equal to God in 1 Cor. 15:27, saying "Now when it says that everything has been put under Him, this clearly does not include the One who put everything under Him." So it's possible that others may have had the same misunderstanding as you.

As I already tried to explain to @TomL, Philippians 2:6 is set in the context of what Paul was telling the church of Philippi. Paul was telling them to have the mind of Jesus then after that explained what the mind of Jesus is. It really depends which version you look at for Philippians 2:6 because this verse is actually one of those intensely debated verses. The Trins say that this verse supports the deity of Jesus while Unitarians like myself don't see it that way based on the evidence and Greek.

A few points to consider. The "form of God" is not the invisible God. Why would God consider equality with God if He is already equal and/or God? It only makes sense that someone who isn't God would need to consider something with God. Who is actually being called God since it's plainly not Jesus in this passage? Since, according to Trins, God is "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" then doesn't it mean that Jesus needed to consider equality with the Trinity? That would mean Jesus isn't in the Trinity. Seeing how what you're proposing doesn't make any sense?

Furthermore, a literal word-for-word rendering of Philippians 2:6 that follows the word order of the Greek actually completely debunks the idea of Jesus' being equal to God. No one believed Jesus is equal to God. Not even Jesus... he said so himself.

So Phil. 2:6 would literally translate as:
"Who, existing in the form of God, did not consider it a thing to be seized to be equal to God."

 

[synergy]

You're still here? You just admitted that only God can pour out the Holy Spirit then it says the Father was the one who poured out or sent the Holy Spirit in more places than one on Pentecost. I'm going to ride this. How are you going to save face after such a humiliating admission?


Acts 2:33 refers to the Father having poured out the Holy Spirit. This is mentioned in a few places that clarify exactly who did it.

Jesus needed to ask the Father to give the Spirit:

John 14
16And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever— 17the Spirit of truth...

Acts 1
4On one occasion, while he was eating with them, he gave them this command: “Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have heard me speak about. 5For John baptized with a water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.”

As you just admitted, we have you on record stating "Only God has the power to pour out the Holy Spirit" and it says the Father did it.

Game.
Set.
Match.

But we will continue anyway because I know from experience it's not enough to just debunk the deity once for a Trin.

Only God can pour out the Holy Spirit. Jesus, being God, explicitly did exactly that in the following verse:

Acts 2:33
Therefore being exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He poured out this which you now see and hear.

Since the Trinity always works as a unison then of course Jesus asked for the Holy Spirit, was given permission, but it was him who poured out the Holy Spirit.

 

[TomL]

You have one again addressed nothing I said but instead changed the subject. If you're going to debate, I expect you give my posts the same due diligence, time, and attention that I have given all of yours. Read it again and actually address the facts.

So Jesus was only a man then.

Acts 4:23-30 contradicts your bad theology concerning the Word. It says the Sovereign Lord they prayed to is the Creator. In that same prayer they refferred to Jesus as the Creator's servant. Therefore Jesus is not the Creator.

John 1 also doesn't call the Word the Creator.

Look at it again with fresh eyes:

John 1:1-2 says that the Word was with God in the beginning. Therefore the Word and God are not the same person. John 1:3 uses the "him" pronoun to refer to the closest noun which would be God, not the Word. Therefore, this verse says God is the Creator, not the Word.

John 1 (NIV)
2He was with God in the beginning. 3Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

John 1:9-10 repeats this. It uses the present tense to say the True Light was coming into the world after John the Baptist was already preaching. Since the True Light was coming into the world in the present tense, this would have placed Jesus at approximately 30 years old. Jesus had already been in the world for 30 years by the time the True Light was coming into the world. The world was made through the True Light, not the Word.

John 1 (NIV)
9The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. 10He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him.

The Bible contains no verses about Jesus being the Creator. When you're ready I hope you will start listening once you see the things I am pointing out to you are true.

Sorry you failed to correlate scripture

Colossians 1:14–16 (KJV 1900) — 14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: 15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

Ephesians 3:9 (KJV 1900) — 9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

completely ignoring those text

and completely misread john 1

John 1:1–10 (KJV 1900) — 1 IN the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. 6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe. 8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. 9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. He came unto his own, and his own received him not. 12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: 13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. 14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.


making multiple reading error

verse 10 for example states the world was made by him

and then failing to see the dominant noun/pronoun combination is about the word (he, his, the same)

 

[Runningman]

Only God can pour out the Holy Spirit. Jesus, being God, explicitly did exactly that in the following verse:

Acts 2:33
Therefore being exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He poured out this which you now see and hear.

Since the Trinity always works as a unison then of course Jesus asked for the Holy Spirit, was given permission, but it was him who poured out the Holy Spirit.

Then you have just admitted that Jesus is not God even though you don't realize it yet. The Scripture plainly states the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost came from the Father which is what Acts 2:33 is confirming this. Acts 2:33 says Jesus got his Holy Spirit from the Father so Jesus didn't pour it out on Pentecost.

As far as I am concerned, based on your admission, you have soundly refuted yourself.

 

[Wilber]

Hi Wilber, I don't believe I have had the chance to talk to you yet. Nice to meet you.

I am going to have to disagree with that. As Jesus himself said that the Father is greater than himself in John 14:28. Jesus also taught on the matter of he being the one the Father sent (John 17:1-3) while the one who is sent is not greater than the one who sent him (John 13:16).

There is also the fact that others did not think Jesus was equal to God. For example Paul, who wrote Philippians 2:6, taught that Jesus is not equal to God in 1 Cor. 15:27, saying "Now when it says that everything has been put under Him, this clearly does not include the One who put everything under Him." So it's possible that others may have had the same misunderstanding as you.

As I already tried to explain to @TomL, Philippians 2:6 is set in the context of what Paul was telling the church of Philippi. Paul was telling them to have the mind of Jesus then after that explained what the mind of Jesus is. It really depends which version you look at for Philippians 2:6 because this verse is actually one of those intensely debated verses. The Trins say that this verse supports the deity of Jesus while Unitarians like myself don't see it that way based on the evidence and Greek.

A few points to consider. The "form of God" is not the invisible God. Why would God consider equality with God if He is already equal and/or God? It only makes sense that someone who isn't God would need to consider something with God. Who is actually being called God since it's plainly not Jesus in this passage? Since, according to Trins, God is "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" then doesn't it mean that Jesus needed to consider equality with the Trinity? That would mean Jesus isn't in the Trinity. Seeing how what you're proposing doesn't make any sense?

Furthermore, a literal word-for-word rendering of Philippians 2:6 that follows the word order of the Greek actually completely debunks the idea of Jesus' being equal to God. No one believed Jesus is equal to God. Not even Jesus... he said so himself.

So Phil. 2:6 would literally translate as:
"Who, existing in the form of God, did not consider it a thing to be seized to be equal to God."

It all makes sense once you understand the Trinity.

 

[Peterlag]

We don't need your take to explain away scripture- these translations show He was equal with God- the Father.

Young's Literal Translation
who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal to God,

New International Version
Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;

New Living Translation
Though he was God, he did not think of equality with God as something to cling to.

English Standard Version
who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,

King James Bible
Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

Christian Standard Bible
who, existing in the form of God, did not consider equality with God as something to be exploited.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
who, existing in the form of God, did not consider equality with God as something to be used for His own advantage.

American Standard Version
who, existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped,

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
He who, while he was in the form of God, did not esteem this as a prize, that he was the equal of God,

These clearly show the Sons equality with the Father.

next fallacy

The verses you posted above say Jesus being the number 2 guy (like the way the devil was) thought it not something to be equal with God the way the other number 2 guy did who then became the devil.
...did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,

 

[Peterlag]

Unitarians have argued the word was an impersonal thing

Are you willing to reject that idea?

I have words. Are they a person? No. Can you separate me from my words? No. Are my words alive? No.

 

[Runningman]

It all makes sense once you understand the Trinity.
View attachment 961

Ok. What is the Trinity?

 

[Runningman]

I have words. Are they a person? No. Can you separate me from my words? No. Are my words alive? No.

I showed him Proverbs 8 where wisdom, an impersonal thing, is said to have understanding among other things. His reply was simply "This is not proverbs" after I quoted Proverbs.

Personification in Hebrew literature and poetry is a foreign concept to some it seems.

Give it up

This is not proverbs

See?

 

[Peterlag]

Many Trinitarians argue that this verse states that when Jesus said “I am,” he was claiming to be God, (i.e., Yahweh, the God who revealed Himself to Moses in the Old Testament). But saying “I am” does not mean a person is claiming to be God. The Greek that is translated as “I am” is egō eime (ἐγὼ εἰμί), and it was a common Greek way for a person to identify themself. For example, only ten verses after Jesus said, egō eime (“I am”) in John 8:58, the man who had been born blind identified himself by saying exactly what Jesus said; egō eime (“I am;” John 9:9). Thus, Jesus and the man born blind both identified themselves by saying egō eime (“I am”), only ten verses apart.

 

[Peterlag]

It all makes sense once you understand the Trinity.
View attachment 961

It might make sense to you. But there's no teaching on that anywhere in the Bible.

 

[TomL]

I showed him Proverbs 8 where wisdom, an impersonal thing, is said to have understanding among other things. His reply was simply "This is not proverbs" after I quoted Proverbs.

Personification in Hebrew literature and poetry is a foreign concept to some it seems.

See?

Phillipians 2:5 is clearly not proverbs

Philippians 2:5–8 (KJV 1900) — 5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

I see you guys are totally desparate

Did the Word not become flesh?

Was He not in the form of God before taking the form of a servant

How can an impersonal thing have a mind, think, show humility

 

[civic]

Phillipians 2:5 is clearly not proverbs

Philippians 2:5–8 (KJV 1900) — 5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

I see you guys are totally desparate

Did the Word not become flesh?

Was He not in the form of God before taking the form of a servant

How can an impersonal thing have a mind, think, show humility

amazing to see how they conflate scripture and rip things from their context and try to apply them somewhere else

 

[TomL]

I have words. Are they a person? No. Can you separate me from my words? No. Are my words alive? No.

So then deal with Phil 2:5

Philippians 2:5–8 (KJV 1900) — 5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

And stop running from it

Does an impersonal thing have a mind?

Does it have thoughts?

Demonstrate humility?

 

[civic]

It might make sense to you. But there's no teaching on that anywhere in the Bible.

Comparing the OT With the NT​

Another similar kind of enigma for some comes from comparing OT Scriptures to New Testament (NT) Scriptures. Closely compare the following sets of Scriptures to learn more about the true, hidden identity of Jesus of Nazareth:

The voice of one crying in the wilderness: Prepare the way of the LORD; Make straight in the desert a highway for our God (Isa. 40:3).

In those days John the Baptist came, preaching in the Desert of Judea and saying, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near.” This is he who was spoken of through the prophet Isaiah: “A voice of one calling in the desert, ‘Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for him’” (Mt. 3:1-3).

According to Matthew, the prophet Isaiah wrote about John the Baptist, who was to prepare the way for the Lord, or as Isaiah wrote the LORD (YHWH). Yet, it was John who prepared the way for Jesus:

I baptize you with water for repentance. But after me will come one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not fit to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire (Mt. 3:11).

John prepared the way for Jesus, according to Matthew, but Isaiah says John, who he called the voice, prepared the way for YHWH!

Lord of lords​

There is more for you to consider. In Dt. 10:17, we read:

For the LORD your God is God of gods and Lord of lords, the great God, mighty and awesome, who shows no partiality and accepts no bribes (Dt. 10:17).

Note: according to the OT Scripture, YHWH is not only God, but also Lord of lords. Yet in the NT we clearly read that Jesus is Lord of lords:

They will make war against the Lamb, but the Lamb will overcome them because he is Lord of lords and King of kings--and with him will be his called, chosen and faithful followers (Rev. 17:14).

Furthermore, the NT reveals that the King of kings and Lord of lords is God:

which God will bring about in his own time--God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords (1 Tim. 6:15).

Who then is the Lord of lords? The OT says YHWH is Lord of lords, but the NT claims the same for Jesus! Can there be two who are Lord of lords?

Was YHWH ever pierced?​

Next, let’s consider who was pierced. In the NT, we read the following about Jesus:

Instead, one of the soldiers pierced Jesus’ side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water. The man who saw it has given testimony, and his testimony is true. He knows that he tells the truth, and he testifies so that you also may believe. These things happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled: “Not one of his bones will be broken,” and, as another scripture says, “They will look on the one they have pierced” (John 19:34-37).

The only Scripture that John could have been referring to when he wrote, “... as another scripture says, ‘They will look on the one they have pierced’ ” is the following one:

And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. 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 (Zech 12:10).

YHWH spoke those words through the prophet Zechariah, as is apparent if we would read from Zech. 12:1 down through verse 10. Note: YHWH is speaking and uses the word me in conjunction to being the one that gets pierced. Yet the Apostle John referred to the same Scripture (Zech 12:10) and says that it was fulfilled when Jesus was pierced on the cross by the Roman soldier’s spear! Who was pierced, YHWH or Jesus? Since Jesus is YHWH this puzzle is solved, along with John 5:37.

A Stone That Causes Men To Stumble​

Another similar problem for some arises when we compare Isa. 8:13,14 to something that the Apostle Peter wrote! The following is the passage from Isaiah:

The LORD Almighty is the one you are to regard as holy, he is the one you are to fear, he is the one you are to dread, and he will be a sanctuary; but for both houses of Israel he will be a stone that causes men to stumble and a rock that makes them fall. And for the people of Jerusalem he will be a trap and a snare (8:13,14).

Question: Did Isaiah the prophet say that YHWH will be a stone that causes men to stumble and a rock that makes them fall? Clearly he did. Why then do we read the following about Jesus?

Now to you who believe, this stone is precious. But to those who do not believe, “The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone,” and, “A stone that causes men to stumble and a rock that makes them fall.” They stumble because they disobey the message--which is also what they were destined for (1 Pet. 2:7,8).

Is YHWH or Jesus a stone that causes men to stumble and a rock that makes them fall? Or why did the Apostle Peter refer to a Scripture that was written about YHWH Almighty and make it apply to Jesus? Are all these contradictions or is Jesus YHWH? d.corner

Conclusion:
Luke attributes Is 40:3 to the ministry of John the Baptist. The context of Luke 3 makes this plainly evident. John the Baptist acknowledges his fulfillment of the Is 40:3, in that, "the voice of one crying in the wilderness" is his voice. John 1:23 makes this evident: " He (John the Baptist) said, “I am the voice of one crying out in the wilderness, ‘Make straight the way of the Lord,’ as the prophet Isaiah said.”"

We know who the messenger/preparer of the Lord/LORD is. But who is the Lord/LORD spoken of?

Given the fact that Luke is a synoptic narrative account of the Son of God, we should be inclined to assume the obvious; that the incarnate Son is the Lord/LORD. John the Baptist supports this notion, because in the same context that he attributes 40:3 to himself, he also attributes the identity of that Lord to the person of the incarnate Son of God. This is evident in Luke 3:16, John 1:26-27, 1:30, Matt 3:11, Mrk 1:7. Therefore all four gospel authors attribute the name YHWH to the incarnate Son of God.

hope this helps !!!

 

[Wilber]

Ok. What is the Trinity?

I'm so glad you asked. This can explain it better than I ever could.

Making Sense of the Trinity, 3 Crucial Questions

In Making Sense of the Trinity, Millard J. Erickson demonstrates the biblical foundation, logic, and importance of the Trinity as he answers these three questions: - Is the doctrine of the Trinity biblical? - Does the doctrine of the Trinity make sense? - Does the doctrine of the Trinity make any difference?

 

[TomL]

amazing to see how they conflate scripture and rip things from their context and try to apply them somewhere else

It truly is. They will resort to any absurdity to deny Christ