Starts Now The Deity of Jesus Christ True or False?

[Red Baker]

God is the Father of many in the Bible and those sons of God are not themselves God. See Adam in Luke 3:38, the angels in John 1:6, Job 28:7, and believers in Romans 8:14.

Not in the sense that he was the Father of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Lord Jesus was God "only" begotten Son in the manner in which the Highest begot his Son in the womb of teh virgin.

John 3:18​

“He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.”

John 1:18​

“No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.”

1st John 4:9​

“In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.”

John 3:16​

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”

There's more, but enough. Isaac was considered Abraham's only begotten son, yet he too had another son and later more sons, yet Isaac was considered Abraham's only begotten son being the son of God's promises to him.

Hebrews 11:17​

“By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,”

Did Abraham have other sons? Yes, but not by Sarah, not by God's promise of grace to him. It was the manner in which he was begotten. Much more so is this true of Jesus Christ.

No one in the Bible ever said that this verse is about Jesus.

You folks have a bold, spirit, having no fear of corrupting God's word. Isaiah 9:6 could not be speaking of any person taht has ever lived other than the Lord Jesus Christ. You have less understanding than the poor eunuch had when reading Isaiah 53!

We can actually fact check this verse against the things Jesus was called. For starters, since the son was born then he isn't any eternal being.

Guess what, I fully agree that the person Jesus of Narareth had a beginning! I do not hold to the eternal Sonship heresy which actually plays into your heresy!

Please consider carefully: Eternity is that which has no beginning, nor stands in reference to time ~ Son supposes time, generation, and father; time is also antedent to such generation ~ therefore, the conjunction of the two terms: Son and eternity ~ is absolutely impossible as they imply different and opposite ideal. Words must have meaning, or else, how can we communicate with each other on a level where we can understand each other? I understand eternity and I also understand the word son, and so do my readers, and we should know how to use each word properly, without confusing the meaning of either.

If Jesus Christ be the eternal Son of God, or if he was eternally begotten/generated, according to his Divine nature, then he CAN NOT be the Eternal God that inhabiteth eternity, yet HE IS.

The reason why is this: "son" implies a father; and father in reference to a son, precedency in time, if not in nature as well. Father and son imply the ideal of generation ~ generation implies a time, in which it was effected, and time is also antecedent to such generation.

The Word which was God, join Himself to the Tabernacle of His Son and lived in this word for around thirty three plus years. This made Jesus Christ a complex person, fully man, made in the likeness of sinful flesh; and fully God, by the fact that God conceived his Son, and thereby joined his tabernacle with his full image, likeness, etc. This is the mystery of godliness. Only the wisdom and power of God could conceived and carry out this work of redemption and still be a Spirit that lives in eternity. To reject this truth is to reject God and his Son, the Lord Jesus Christ.

the Son is not the Father.

Jesus Christ in his Deity IS the Everlasting Father, per the prophet, and I think he knew better than you. Isaiah 9:6

The rest I have dealt with. I have a meeting, coming back very soon after the meeting.

 

[Administrator]

Here are the debaters

Side A

1. Peterlag
2. Runningman
3. keiw1

Side B

1. Red Baker
2. 360watt
3. DavidTree

If you are not on this list, please do not post in debate.

 

[Red Baker]

@Keiw1

All who know Jesus, believe Jesus over dogmas.

Except the Jehovah Witnesses and other off shoot of that false cult. You folks refuse to acknowledge Jesus Christ as the Lord Jesus Christ, there are many Jesus', but only ONE Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Living God.

1st Corinthians 8:6​

“But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.”

 

[Red Baker]

The word "logos" (Word) denotes (I) "the expression of thought" as embodying a conception or idea. λόγος "logos" is something said (including the thought). So the word "logos" means an expression of thought. It makes perfect sense if we use this understanding everywhere the word "logos" is used. So in John 1:1 the Word is not Jesus, but rather it became flesh, which is God's expression of thought or plan that became flesh with the coming of Jesus Christ.

What a mess you are making of John 1:1 trying your best to escape what the scriptures is clearly teaching. Without saying much, on this wonderful scripture for now, we will just add a couple of thoughts.

1) The Word was MADE flesh. The Word which the apostle John said was God, was made flesh.

You said: "So in John 1:1 the Word is not Jesus" Which we agree, but the Word WAS God. period, without any qualifications. So, Jesus was God by the very fact the Word which was God, was made flesh in the person of God's Son, the Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[Red Baker]

@Peterlag

The trinity does not come from Scripture...

The trinity comes from the doctrine of devils that the churches teach. And in most cases it's the first thing they teach and then they begin to look for Scripture that supports such a concept. They do this by taking the verses out of context, or not understanding how the words were used in the culture they were written in, or from a bad translation.

There's reasons why the Bible does not teach the trinity in one whole paragraph in a few different places or a whole chapter or two on it. There's reasons why there's no teaching on why God would come to the earth as a man. There's reasons why there was never a debate about the trinity in Scripture like we see with justification by works or who should be circumcised. Such an important subject matter like the trinity and the Bible is silent on all of it.

And there's the spinning and twisting from the trinitarians who can't come up with one verse in the Bible that says we should believe or confess that Jesus is God. Trinitarians who can't come up with one verse that says why God would come to the earth as a man. Trinitarians who have to make up their own words that are not in the Bible. Words like trinity, deity, and incarnated.

If any of this nonsense was true and since it's so important and a huge subject to Christianity and is necessary for salvation like many teach. Then it would have been taught by someone somewhere. And it is not.

The concept of the the Trinity is clearly taught in the scriptures.

The Trinity of the Bible is superior to the speculative Trinity of the Nicene Creed and followers. The Bible makes all three Persons without any distinction in their nature whatsoever. The Bible knows nothing of “God of God” and other philosophical speculations of men. The Bible knows nothing of a begotten god, which confuses the Trinity into paganism.

Scripture teaches one God. There is only one Supreme Being ( Deuteronomy6:4; Isaiah 43:10; 44:6,8; 1st Corinthians 8:3)

God is self-subsistent and independent of others; He is eternal in both directions (Exodus 3:14; Psalm 90:2) The nature of God is that complete collection of attributes that makes Him distinctly God (Galatians 4:8) ).

Three Persons participate in this single Divine nature without any degree of difference whatsoever. The three Persons are the Highest, the Word, and the Spirit (Luke 1:32; John 1:1; Isaiah 48:16) And the three Persons are the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost (Matthew 3:16,17; 28:19,20; 2nd Corinthians 13:14)

And they are Spirit, Lord, and God (1st Corinthians 12:4-6), or Ancient of Days and Son of man (Daniel 7:14).

The doctrine of a three-in-one God is revealed plainly in Scripture.... 1st John 5:7.... (according to the work of redemption for God's elect,) though begotten god advocates deny this glorious testimony in their annual Holy Bible sequels.

The Word and Spirit are wholly “I AM THAT I AM.” The Word is not what the Father begat! The Word, Who became flesh in the Lord Jesus Christ, was fully God (John 1:1 cp. Colossians 2:9)

 

[Red Baker]

@Peterlag

The supposed “dual nature” of Christ is never stated in the Bible and contradicts the Bible and the laws of nature that God set up. Nothing can be 100% of two different things. Jesus cannot be 100% God and 100% man, and that is not a “mystery” but it's a contradiction and a talk of nonsense. A fatal flaw in the “dual nature” theory is that both natures in Jesus would have had to have known about each other. The Jesus God nature would have known about his human nature, and (according to what the Trinitarians teach) his human nature knew he was God, which explains why Trinitarians say Jesus taught that he was God. The book of Hebrews is wrong when it says Jesus was “made like his brothers in every respect” if Jesus knew he was God (Hebrews 2:17). Jesus was not made like other humans in every way if Jesus was 100% God and 100% human at the same time. In fact, he would have been very different from other humans in many respects.

Never? Then consider:

John 1:48​

“Nathanael saith unto him, Whence knowest thou me? Jesus answered and said unto him, Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee. Nathanael answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel.”

So, who saw Nathannael under the fig tree before Phillip called him? Not his flesh as Jesus of Narareth. His deity as God saw him. Then Nathanael's confession of him being the Son of God proves that by the very fact God was his Father that MADE HIM EQUAL TO GOD!

John 4:6​

“Now Jacob's well was there. Jesus therefore, being wearied with his journey, sat thus on the well: and it was about the sixth hour.”

What got wearied by his long journey? Not his Deity, but his flesh. We ahve coved this more in detail from the very post you are quoting from.

 

[Runningman]

Neither verse regards eternal salvation.

The second passage regards God humbling Himself.. as harmonizing with the likes of Phillipians 2:6.

The first passage:

Salvation can just mean...plain deliverance from trouble. The context determines which.

For eg..Matthew 24 regarding 'he who endureth to the end shall be saved "..the context is not eternal salvation but deliverance from trials and tribulation during the end of end times.

Yes they are about the eternal life Jesus received. He didn't inherently have it, hence he died, and was resurrected by God. He isn't God nor did he resurrect himself.

 

[Runningman]

@Peterlag

Every word Christ spoke was before Acts 2, so your reasoning is meaningless. Let us hear straight from Christ as to why he spoke in parables.

And every word Jesus spoke was after he was born too. You will not find any quotes by Jesus before his birth. Pretty much destroys any idea of an incarnation.

Peter, you, and @Runningman @Studyman @Keiw1 have purposely closed you eyes to the scriptures concerning Jesus Christ's Deity, of all doctrines, the most serious doctrine to not humble yourself unto and receive God's testimony/witness concerning His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, the savior of sinners. I have noticed that you men and women, for the most part, very seldom used the Lord Jesus Christ when referring to God's Son, you used for the most part only Jesus, to avoid using Christ, which speak of his Deity, and Lord, which speak of him being the only Potentate; so, moving forward with you deniers of Christ's Deity, I will only used his full titles when speaking of him. @Studyman favorite phrase when speaking of the Lord Jesus Christ, is "the Jesus of the bible", which by the time he's finished ranting using vain jangling, he's clearly preaching "another jesus".

This part isn't debate material. It's a hit piece against us because you disagree. Don't bring this thread down into the mire. We all know how to make it personal, but just stick with the Scripture, or else it'll get ugly fast.

 

[Runningman]

Not in the sense that he was the Father of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Lord Jesus was God "only" begotten Son in the manner in which the Highest begot his Son in the womb of teh virgin.

John 3:18​

“He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.”

John 1:18​

“No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.”

1st John 4:9​

“In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.”

John 3:16​

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”

There's more, but enough. Isaac was considered Abraham's only begotten son, yet he too had another son and later more sons, yet Isaac was considered Abraham's only begotten son being the son of God's promises to him.

Hebrews 11:17​

“By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,”

Did Abraham have other sons? Yes, but not by Sarah, not by God's promise of grace to him. It was the manner in which he was begotten. Much more so is this true of Jesus Christ.

You folks have a bold, spirit, having no fear of corrupting God's word. Isaiah 9:6 could not be speaking of any person taht has ever lived other than the Lord Jesus Christ. You have less understanding than the poor eunuch had when reading Isaiah 53!

Guess what, I fully agree that the person Jesus of Narareth had a beginning! I do not hold to the eternal Sonship heresy which actually plays into your heresy!

Please consider carefully: Eternity is that which has no beginning, nor stands in reference to time ~ Son supposes time, generation, and father; time is also antedent to such generation ~ therefore, the conjunction of the two terms: Son and eternity ~ is absolutely impossible as they imply different and opposite ideal. Words must have meaning, or else, how can we communicate with each other on a level where we can understand each other? I understand eternity and I also understand the word son, and so do my readers, and we should know how to use each word properly, without confusing the meaning of either.

If Jesus Christ be the eternal Son of God, or if he was eternally begotten/generated, according to his Divine nature, then he CAN NOT be the Eternal God that inhabiteth eternity, yet HE IS.

The reason why is this: "son" implies a father; and father in reference to a son, precedency in time, if not in nature as well. Father and son imply the ideal of generation ~ generation implies a time, in which it was effected, and time is also antecedent to such generation.

The Word which was God, join Himself to the Tabernacle of His Son and lived in this word for around thirty three plus years. This made Jesus Christ a complex person, fully man, made in the likeness of sinful flesh; and fully God, by the fact that God conceived his Son, and thereby joined his tabernacle with his full image, likeness, etc. This is the mystery of godliness. Only the wisdom and power of God could conceived and carry out this work of redemption and still be a Spirit that lives in eternity. To reject this truth is to reject God and his Son, the Lord Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ in his Deity IS the Everlasting Father, per the prophet, and I think he knew better than you. Isaiah 9:6

The rest I have dealt with. I have a meeting, coming back very soon after the meeting.

Thank you for confessing that Jesus was begotten. God's sons are also begotten, hence they are offspring. Others are God's sons/daughters in the same sense as Jesus.

Acts 17
29Therefore, being offspring of God, we should not think that the Divine Being is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by man’s skill and imagination.

The fact that God has offspring other than Jesus, you lose a valuable point in your effort to deify Jesus based on the title "Son of God."

 

[Red Baker]

@Peterlag

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,

The righteous among the Jews understood that that their God was one Lord God, yet would come in the flesh in the person of his Son, Jesus Christ, this they fully knew and looked for. (Luke 2:25-39)

Micah 5:2
"But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting."

So here we have a son given whose going forth have been from everlasting! Which could only be true of his Deity. So, in order for this to come to pass, there had to be a Father, a Son and the Spirit of perform this miracle. And still the three would be ONE. (Isaiah 7:14; 9:6)

 

[Runningman]

@Keiw1

Except the Jehovah Witnesses and other off shoot of that false cult. You folks refuse to acknowledge Jesus Christ as the Lord Jesus Christ, there are many Jesus', but only ONE Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Living God.

1st Corinthians 8:6​

“But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.”

1 Corithnains 8:6 proves that the one God is the Father. This is widely considered to be a check mate.

 

[Runningman]

What a mess you are making of John 1:1 trying your best to escape what the scriptures is clearly teaching. Without saying much, on this wonderful scripture for now, we will just add a couple of thoughts.

1) The Word was MADE flesh. The Word which the apostle John said was God, was made flesh.

You said: "So in John 1:1 the Word is not Jesus" Which we agree, but the Word WAS God. period, without any qualifications. So, Jesus was God by the very fact the Word which was God, was made flesh in the person of God's Son, the Lord Jesus Christ.

In the Bible, when something is "made" or "became" something else, it is used with 100% consistency to describe a creation. Based on standard Bible hermeneutics, when the "Word became flesh" it means Jesus was created. There is no word for "incarnation" or a description of an incarnation in any Biblical prophecy or other precedent.

 

[Red Baker]

Thank you for confessing that Jesus was begotten. God's sons are also begotten, hence they are offspring. Others are God's sons/daughters in the same sense as Jesus.

Acts 17
29Therefore, being offspring of God, we should not think that the Divine Being is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by man’s skill and imagination.

The fact that God has offspring other than Jesus, you lose a valuable point in your effort to deify Jesus based on the title "Son of God."

Address my point when I said Jesus Christ was God's ONLY begotten Son in the manner in which he was begotten,

You said: Others are God's sons/daughters in the same sense as Jesus.

Impossible! I bear the image of my earthly Father through whom I was begotten, that is, my being became a living soul. I'm God's son through the new birth by being raised from the dead to life in Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ became flesh and blood through the power of the Highest over shallowing Mary and conceiving in her a male child.

 

[Runningman]

@Peterlag

The concept of the the Trinity is clearly taught in the scriptures.

The Trinity of the Bible is superior to the speculative Trinity of the Nicene Creed and followers. The Bible makes all three Persons without any distinction in their nature whatsoever. The Bible knows nothing of “God of God” and other philosophical speculations of men. The Bible knows nothing of a begotten god, which confuses the Trinity into paganism.

Scripture teaches one God. There is only one Supreme Being ( Deuteronomy6:4; Isaiah 43:10; 44:6,8; 1st Corinthians 8:3)

God is self-subsistent and independent of others; He is eternal in both directions (Exodus 3:14; Psalm 90:2) The nature of God is that complete collection of attributes that makes Him distinctly God (Galatians 4:8) ).

Three Persons participate in this single Divine nature without any degree of difference whatsoever. The three Persons are the Highest, the Word, and the Spirit (Luke 1:32; John 1:1; Isaiah 48:16) And the three Persons are the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost (Matthew 3:16,17; 28:19,20; 2nd Corinthians 13:14)

And they are Spirit, Lord, and God (1st Corinthians 12:4-6), or Ancient of Days and Son of man (Daniel 7:14).

The doctrine of a three-in-one God is revealed plainly in Scripture.... 1st John 5:7.... (according to the work of redemption for God's elect,) though begotten god advocates deny this glorious testimony in their annual Holy Bible sequels.

The Word and Spirit are wholly “I AM THAT I AM.” The Word is not what the Father begat! The Word, Who became flesh in the Lord Jesus Christ, was fully God (John 1:1 cp. Colossians 2:9)

The way exegesis works is that there would be a statement, description, or sample data of the Trinity in the Bible and then after that there would be supporting verses about the afforementioned Trinity. There are no statements, examples, or descriptions of the Trinity in the Bible. What you have done is begin with a premise that is not stated in the Bible and then you are deocorating your premise with things you feel support it.

The error is that you still have not proved the Trinity exists at all in the first place. This is textbook eisgesis and it has been done repeatedly by Trintarians, not only in this thread, but throughout this whole board. The hypostatic union isn't stated in the Bible, but Trintiarians find verses to attach to it. The incarantion of Jesus isn't stated in the Bible, but Trinitarians find verses to attach to it, the Trinity is not stated in the Bible, but you still keep attaching verses to it.

This essentially means, contrary to the the verses you quote, that there isn't a first-cause. God was not ever said to be a trinity in the first place, not said to be three persons in one God, or any such similiar statements. Therefore, this argument for the Trinity is entirely circular.

However, Unitarianism is not circular at all. We begin with the premise "The one and only true God is the Father." After that, we can show where this is plainly the case in John 17:3, 1 Corinthians 8:6, and Ephesians 4:6. These are the clearest verses, but there are a lot more where it is plainly described.

Since we begin with the explicit Scriptural fact that the only true God is the Father, we effortlessly confirm that Unitarainism is the real version of Christianity. Scripture teaches to pray to only the Father in Matthew 6:6,9, Scripture teaches to only worship the Father in John 4:23,24 yet there are no explicit instructions or commandments to worship or pray to Jesus in the Bible. I could write a book on this very topic, but you see where it is going.

The idea of a three-in-one God is Biblical fiction.

 

[Red Baker]

1 Corithnains 8:6 proves that the one God is the Father. This is widely considered to be a check mate

I believe that God is ONE Lord God, manifesting himself as three "ONLY" according to the work of redemption. I went into this a few pages. look for it, if you cannot find it, then I will.

Be back later...

 

[Red Baker]

@Runningman

However, Unitarianism is not circular at all. We begin with the premise "The one and only true God is the Father." After that, we can show where this is plainly the case in John 17:3, 1 Corinthians 8:6, and Ephesians 4:6. These are the clearest verses, but there are a lot more where it is plainly described.

Since we begin with the explicit Scriptural fact that the only true God is the Father, we effortlessly confirm that Unitarainism is the real version of Christianity. Scripture teaches to pray to only the Father in Matthew 6:6,9, Scripture teaches to only worship the Father in John 4:23,24 yet there are no explicit instructions or commandments to worship or pray to Jesus in the Bible. I could write a book on this very topic, but you see where it is going.

I'll give you credit, you do a much better job than the other three ~ that being said, you also used cunning craftiness more than they do. Some of what you have posted above is correct, but you are using sleight of hand doing so. (Ephesians 4:14)

It is more about what you are leaving out where your deceit is seen. Consider:

You said: "However, Unitarianism is not circular at all."

It is just a flat our corruption of God's word concerning his Son, the Lord Jesus Christ.

You said: "The one and only true God is the Father." After that, we can show where this is plainly the case in John 17:3, 1 Corinthians 8:6, and Ephesians 4:6. These are the clearest verses, but there are a lot more where it is plainly described."

John 17:3​

“And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.”

Runningman, we all know the Arians and Unitarians urge this text, against the true and proper deity of our Lord Jesus, and his equality with the Father, but without success; since the Father is called the only true God, in opposition to the many false gods of the Heathens, but "not" to the exclusion of the Son; for Christ is also styled the one Lord, and only Lord God, but not to the exclusion of the Father; yea the true God and eternal life; was he not, he would never, as here, "join himself" with the only true God; and besides, eternal life is made to depend as much upon the knowledge of him, as of the Father. The reason of this different mode of expression, is owing to the character of Christ in his humanity, who is said to be sent by the only true God, about the business of man's salvation. Nor is it of any moment what the Jew objects, that Jesus here confesses, that the true God is only one God; nor does he call himself God, only the Messiah sent by God; and that the apostle Paul also asserts the unity of God...............

1st Timothy 1:17​

“Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.”

Christ and his Father, the only true God, are one; and that he is the one true God with his Father, he tacitly suggests here by joining himself with him; and what the Apostle Paul says of the one and only wise God, may as well be understood of Christ, the Son of God, as of the Father; since all the characters in the text agree with him, and of him he had been speaking in the context.

I just looked at 1st Cor. 8.

Ephesians 4:6​

“One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.”

Who is above all? Philippians 2:9-11. Who is in God's children?

Colossians 1:27​

“To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:”

They are one in essence and can not be separated as far as the Godhead goes, only in Christ's humanity can they, but in no other sense are they.

You said: "We effortlessly confirm that Unitarainism is the real version of Christianity."

There are so many scriptures you will soon be put to test on more than you have thus far, and then we shall see just how effortlessly you will prove them wrong, as a matter of fact, we have already given you a few, your only come back ..."Cool" whatever that means?? Nor have the others have even made an attempt to prove us wrong. But, I'm a patience man, I still have some post to answer I believe, and I do and I want to answer every single one of them.

 

[Peterlag]

@Peterlag

The righteous among the Jews understood that that their God was one Lord God, yet would come in the flesh in the person of his Son, Jesus Christ, this they fully knew and looked for. (Luke 2:25-39)

Micah 5:2
"But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting."

So here we have a son given whose going forth have been from everlasting! Which could only be true of his Deity. So, in order for this to come to pass, there had to be a Father, a Son and the Spirit of perform this miracle. And still the three would be ONE. (Isaiah 7:14; 9:6)

The most righteous was considered the High Priest along with all the other top dogs and they killed him. Did they deliberately pick a fight with God?

 

[Peterlag]

@Peterlag

Never? Then consider:

John 1:48​

“Nathanael saith unto him, Whence knowest thou me? Jesus answered and said unto him, Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee. Nathanael answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel.”

So, who saw Nathannael under the fig tree before Phillip called him? Not his flesh as Jesus of Narareth. His deity as God saw him. Then Nathanael's confession of him being the Son of God proves that by the very fact God was his Father that MADE HIM EQUAL TO GOD!

John 4:6​

“Now Jacob's well was there. Jesus therefore, being wearied with his journey, sat thus on the well: and it was about the sixth hour.”

What got wearied by his long journey? Not his Deity, but his flesh. We ahve coved this more in detail from the very post you are quoting from.

The word of the Lord came unto me when I was in Kansas letting me see a room I never saw before. I had already seen the room the night before when I had walked in it the next morning. Am I God?

 

[Peterlag]

@Peterlag

The concept of the the Trinity is clearly taught in the scriptures.

The Trinity of the Bible is superior to the speculative Trinity of the Nicene Creed and followers. The Bible makes all three Persons without any distinction in their nature whatsoever. The Bible knows nothing of “God of God” and other philosophical speculations of men. The Bible knows nothing of a begotten god, which confuses the Trinity into paganism.

Scripture teaches one God. There is only one Supreme Being ( Deuteronomy6:4; Isaiah 43:10; 44:6,8; 1st Corinthians 8:3)

God is self-subsistent and independent of others; He is eternal in both directions (Exodus 3:14; Psalm 90:2) The nature of God is that complete collection of attributes that makes Him distinctly God (Galatians 4:8) ).

Three Persons participate in this single Divine nature without any degree of difference whatsoever. The three Persons are the Highest, the Word, and the Spirit (Luke 1:32; John 1:1; Isaiah 48:16) And the three Persons are the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost (Matthew 3:16,17; 28:19,20; 2nd Corinthians 13:14)

And they are Spirit, Lord, and God (1st Corinthians 12:4-6), or Ancient of Days and Son of man (Daniel 7:14).

The doctrine of a three-in-one God is revealed plainly in Scripture.... 1st John 5:7.... (according to the work of redemption for God's elect,) though begotten god advocates deny this glorious testimony in their annual Holy Bible sequels.

The Word and Spirit are wholly “I AM THAT I AM.” The Word is not what the Father begat! The Word, Who became flesh in the Lord Jesus Christ, was fully God (John 1:1 cp. Colossians 2:9)

There's no verse in the Bible that says we should believe or confess that Jesus is God.

 

[Peterlag]

What a mess you are making of John 1:1 trying your best to escape what the scriptures is clearly teaching. Without saying much, on this wonderful scripture for now, we will just add a couple of thoughts.

1) The Word was MADE flesh. The Word which the apostle John said was God, was made flesh.

You said: "So in John 1:1 the Word is not Jesus" Which we agree, but the Word WAS God. period, without any qualifications. So, Jesus was God by the very fact the Word which was God, was made flesh in the person of God's Son, the Lord Jesus Christ.

John 1:1 is not a teaching on the trinity or that we should believe or confess that Jesus is God. It seems difficult for people to understand that John 1:1 is introducing the Gospel of John, and not the Book of Genesis. The topic of John is God (the Father, the only God) at work in the ministry of the man Jesus of Nazareth, not the creation of rocks, trees and stars.

Jesus Christ is not a lexical definition of logos. The verse does not say "In the beginning was Jesus." The "Word" is not synonymous with Jesus, or even the "Messiah." The word logos in John 1:1 refers to God's creative self-expression... His reason, purpose and plans, especially as they are brought into action. It refers to God's self-expression or communication of Himself. This has come to pass through His creation and especially the heavens. It has come through the spoken word of the prophets and through Scripture. Most notably it has come into being through His Son. The logos is the expression of God and is His communication of Himself just as a "word" is an outward expression of a person's thoughts. This outward expression of God has now occurred through His Son and thus it's perfectly understandable why Jesus is called the "Word." Jesus is an outward expression of God's reason, wisdom, purpose and plan. For the same reason we call revelation "a word from God" and the Bible "the Word of God."

If we understand that the logos is God's expression... His plan, purpose, reason and wisdom. Then it's clear they were with Him "in the beginning." Scripture says God's wisdom was "from the beginning" and it was common in Hebrew writing to personify a concept such as wisdom. The fact that the logos "became" flesh shows it did not exist that way before. There is no pre-existence for Jesus in this verse other than his figurative "existence" as the plan, purpose or wisdom of God for the salvation of man. The same is true with the "word" in writing. It had no literal pre-existence as a "spirit-book" somehow in eternity past, but came into being as God gave the revelation to people and they wrote it down.