The misuse and abuse of John 17:3 by Unitarians to promote Unitarianism.

[synergy]

Let's get into the time machine, type "30 AD" and "Jerusalem" in the keyboard, and bring with us a device that translates our thoughts into Aramaic automatically.

What arguments would you use to convince a Pharisee that Jesus was God? Not "a god", since they are monotheists, but the God of Israel they worshiped.

The Apostles already recorded the event in Greek. The Apostles saw fit to do that in Greek. If that's not good enough for you then that's your problem.

 

[101G]

The spirit of Christ communicates with all Christians who have their spiritual ears on. I may be able to help if you want to learn since I wrote it all down here... https://walking-by-the-spirit.com

while reading your book ..... right off the bat, you said, "This starts to make a little bit of sense when we start to realize why Jesus Christ referred to
himself as the “bread of life.” Food must be eaten, digested, and assimilated to become part of our life that will give strength to our physical bodies. is written that man shall not live by bread alone. Part of the reason this was written is because the Word of God is food for our spiritual life, and it operates along the same principle as our physical body that needs bread to sustain growth".

101G agree with the concept. so, a question, is this the same one person. scripture, John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:2 "The same was in the beginning with God." John 1:3 "All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made."

now, this, Isaiah 44:24 "Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;"

digest both of these scriptures. and let 101G know if this the same one person in both verses' references who "MADE ALL THINGS?", yes or no.

remember in Isaiah 44:24 the LORD said he, he, he, was "Alone", and "By himself".

101G.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

The Apostles already recorded the event in Greek. The Apostles saw fit to do that in Greek. If that's not good enough for you then that's your problem.

Aramaic was not relevant for my question, so let's change the terms of the scenario: let's imagine you do it in Greek.
There were very educated Pharisees, so several could have held a conversation with you in Greek.
What arguments would you present to a Pharisee to convince him that Jesus is God?

 

[synergy]

Well, I didn't pick the "wrong passage". The passage I quote in John 10 fits perfectly Dayer's description and it perfectly explains how Jesus managed the situation of being accused by blasphemy for declaring Himself God. In contrast, the narrative of John 8 does not tell us how Jesus managed the situation or what he replied. So, John 10 is much richer and better suited for the discussion.

Perhaps you mean that I picked one of the passages Jay Dayer is referring to.
So thanks for calling my attention to John 8 as well. I will comment on that.

I have no problem addressing John 10 also. Give me a moment and I'll respond to your comments. It's lunch time here.

 

[101G]

The Shema and the Oneness of God
Begin by affirming the Shema (Deuteronomy 6:4: "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one"), which was central to Pharisaic belief. Rather than introducing Jesus as a separate or competing deity, highlight that He embodies and reveals the fullness of Yahweh in a unique way. Isaiah 9:6 speaks of the coming Messiah as the “Mighty God, Everlasting Father,” which implies that Yahweh’s presence could be uniquely manifested in the Messiah without compromising divine unity. This framing addresses any concern that Jesus would violate monotheism.

you said, "which implies that Yahweh’s presence could be uniquely manifested in the Messiah without compromising divine unity." can you elaborate on this manifestation of divine ... "UNITY", when Philippians 2:6 clearly states that this Spirit was God himself. "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:" and God is a, a, a, a, (single), Spirit.

101G

 

[synergy]

Aramaic was not relevant for my question, so let's change the terms of the scenario: let's imagine you do it in Greek.
There were very educated Pharisees, so several could have held a conversation with you in Greek.
What arguments would you present to a Pharisee to convince him that Jesus is God?

Beyond what Jesus did in John 8:58? Jay Dyer mentions quite a few things in his video. First and foremost is the Theophanies of the Preincarnate Jesus.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Hi, Johann

Good to interact with you again. Let me put in the shoes of a Pharisee replying to your arguments.
To make my reply more fun, let's say I am Nicodemus.

The Shema and the Oneness of God
Begin by affirming the Shema (Deuteronomy 6:4: "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one"), which was central to Pharisaic belief. Rather than introducing Jesus as a separate or competing deity, highlight that He embodies and reveals the fullness of Yahweh in a unique way. Isaiah 9:6 speaks of the coming Messiah as the “Mighty God, Everlasting Father,” which implies that Yahweh’s presence could be uniquely manifested in the Messiah without compromising divine unity. This framing addresses any concern that Jesus would violate monotheism.

I can understand that the Messiah will "embody" and "reveal" Yahweh's power, as He will be the Anointed of Yahweh. That's natural.
But being Yahweh Himself? Which prophet says that? The sole thought sounds blasphemous to me!

In regard to the name in Isaiah, isn't it true that most babies in Israel, since the time of Our Fathers, get dozens of names that display Jah or El, the name of God? That doesn't make them Adonai! In addition, this Jesus speaks of His Father as a separate being, so Jesus could not be the "Father". Finally, this term "Father" in Hebrew is more "Chief", "Leader", than "Father".

Messianic Prophecies of Divine Presence
A Pharisee would know the messianic prophecies in Isaiah, such as Isaiah 7:14: “The virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel” (meaning "God with us"). Highlight that Isaiah prophesied the coming of Yahweh Himself to His people, rather than just another prophet. The Messiah would embody God's presence directly, fulfilling this prophetic expectation.

The name of this Rabbi from Nazareth is Yeshua, not Immanuel. Have you ever heard someone calling him Immanuel?
Besides, as I have explained, most babies in Israel get names with the name of God in them (Jah- El-). That doesn't mean they are gods!
When I talked to Jesus, I called him "Rabbi", I told him I believed He had come from God. He didn't correct me or assumed to have another identity.

The Son of Man in Daniel 7
Daniel 7:13-14 describes a “Son of Man” who comes “with the clouds of heaven” and is given “dominion, glory, and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him.” Here, the Son of Man is given an eternal kingdom and is worshiped, something that only God could receive within strict monotheistic Judaism. Jesus referred to Himself as the Son of Man, claiming this divine role and pointing to His rightful place as the one worthy of worship alongside God.

We have studied Daniel for some few generations, we all know that the Son of Man is the Messiah to come, but NOBODY, NOBODY of us has ever thought that the Son of Man is YHWH!
The King to come, the Anointed, the Son of Man, will have everlasting dominion. He will restore Israel and bring the Kingdom of God, which will never end. Through Him, the nations of the earth will come to Jerusalem and worship the God of Israel.
All messiah who have emerged these years have never claimed to be God. John the Baptist didn't announce a God coming.
I have talked to this Rabbi, Yeshua, and He didn't tell me He was God. On the contrary, He told me He had been sent by God.
He told me that God loved the world so much that He had sent his only Begotten Son to save anyone who believes in Him. He always spoke about God in third person.

Yahweh’s Exclusive Authority over Forgiveness and Sabbath
Pharisees held that only Yahweh could forgive sins (Isaiah 43:25: “I, even I, am He who blots out your transgressions, for my own sake”) and that Yahweh alone was Lord of the Sabbath (Exodus 31:13). Jesus’ forgiveness of sins (e.g., Mark 2:5) and His declaration of being “Lord of the Sabbath” (Mark 2:28) positioned Him in Yahweh’s exclusive domain. The Pharisees themselves were shocked by these claims, recognizing that Jesus was placing Himself in a position that only Yahweh could occupy.

Well, then this Rabbi Yeshua is either blasphemous, and therefore a false Messiah, or he speaks with the authority of God, because He comes from God, and therefore He is The Messiah and can declare to be Lord over all our rituals and symbols.
Didn't you know that Moses could declare who would die and who would be spared by doing work on Sabbath? Israel took his words as the words of Adonai Himself. Moses exerted full lordship over the Sabbath.
If Yeshua is The Messiah, as I believe, He cannot be God. God does not eat or sweat or defecate or get diseases... but the Messiah does.
The Scriptures never said that God would be transformed into a man. That would be blasphemous!

The “I AM” Statements and Yahweh’s Name
In John 8:58, Jesus says, “Before Abraham was, I AM,” using the divine name ἐγώ εἰμί (ego eimi), aligning Himself with Yahweh’s self-revelation to Moses in Exodus 3:14 (“I AM WHO I AM”). The Pharisees recognized this as a direct claim to divinity, as shown by their attempt to stone Him for blasphemy (John 8:59). This statement directly equates Jesus with the God of Israel, asserting His existence as timeless and self-existent.

No. They got mad because we all uphold Abraham as our father, and He implied he was older and greater than Him.
But He had told them "If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing. It is My Father who glorifies Me, of whom you say that He is your God."
So, He clearly stated that the God of our Fathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God we have all worshiped for generations, was the one who glorified Him... God is a different person, not him! Otherwise, how God can glorify God?

Messiah as the Suffering Servant Who Redeems
Pharisees were familiar with Isaiah 53 and the concept of the suffering servant, a figure whose suffering brings atonement for Israel’s sins. Pointing to Jesus’ sacrificial death and resurrection would emphasize that He fulfills this role uniquely as God Himself stepping into human history to accomplish redemption, something that would require both divine authority and love. Only the God of Israel could bear the iniquities of humanity in such a way.

I have read Isaiah since I was a child and I keep reading it. Isaiah never says that God Himself would step as a man in human history!
Isaiah calls the Messiah a Servant. How can a Servant of God be God? Are you out of your mind? God is no Servant of anyone!

Fulfillment of Messianic Miracles
According to rabbinic tradition, specific miracles were reserved for the Messiah alone, including healing lepers, casting out mute demons, and restoring sight to the blind (Isaiah 35:5-6). Jesus performed these miracles, fulfilling messianic expectations and demonstrating divine power in ways no other prophet had. The Pharisees’ own knowledge of these messianic signs could be used to emphasize Jesus’ identity as Yahweh Himself intervening in history.

Didn't the prophets of God opened the Red Sea, and stopped the movement of the sun, and turned sticks into snakes, and healed the lepers, and made fire descend from heaven, and brought men to life? Did all these miracles made them God?
The Messiah can do miracles because He comes with the power of God, as the ancient prophets... not because the Messiah is God!
Besides, I heard Him tell his disciples that they would do miracles even greater than his... so, are they all Adonai? Please stop this foolishness!

Psalm 110 and the Lordship of the Messiah
In Matthew 22:41-45, Jesus cites Psalm 110:1, where David calls the Messiah “my Lord,” a title that implies superiority. If the Messiah is David’s “Lord” and seated at the right hand of God, then He must share in God’s authority and be more than a mere human descendant of David. This shows that the Messiah, Jesus, is identified with God’s own authority and existence.

Which country do you come from? You said "South Africa"? I have heard about Ethiopia... is that south enough? Well, perhaps in your country is different, but here and in most countries known from here, sitting on the right of a king does not mean to be the king, but to be honored by the king. If the Anointed is at the right hand of God, it is precisely because He is not God! Otherwise, how God could sit at the right hand of Himself?

Take this dates and olives. Eat them. Yeah, and drink a bit of goat milk. I don't know what you eat and drink in South Africa in 2024, but it is damaging your head !

(Please take these comments with a pinch of salt. I am playing the role of Nicodemus and teasing you a bit)

 

[synergy]

Just a comment about what Jay Dyer says in his video at 1:40
This guy says that Jews tried to stone Jesus because He had said (or implied, somehow) He was God, and that Jesus "didn't correct their oponents". Well, that's not true! Has Jay Dyer read the passage he is making a comment on?
The passage says:

The Feast of the Dedication[a] was at Jerusalem, and it was winter. 23 Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon’s Porch. 24 Then the Jews surrounded Him, saying, “How long will You keep us in suspense? If You are the Christ, tell us plainly.”​

​

25 Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you did not believe. The works that I do in My Father’s name bear witness of Me. 26 But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you. 27 My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. 28 I give them eternal life. They shall never perish, nor shall anyone snatch them from My hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all. No one is able to snatch them from My Father’s hand. 30 My Father and I are one.”​

​

Again the Jews took up stones to stone Him. 32 Jesus answered them, “I have shown you many good works from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?”​

​

33 The Jews answered Him, “We are not stoning You for a good work, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, claim to be God.”​

​

34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, “You are gods”[b]’? 35 If He called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came, and the Scripture cannot be broken, 36 do you say of Him, whom the Father has sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You blaspheme,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’? 37 If I am not doing the works of My Father, do not believe Me. 38 But if I do them, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, that you may know and believe that the Father is in Me, and I in Him.” 39 Again they tried to seize Him, but He escaped from their hands.​

What do we find here?

1. Those wanting to stone Jesus were the enemies of Christ. They were making false accusations so they could kill him.
2. Jesus was saying He did the works of his Father. In other passages, that He spoke the words of His Father.
3. The question being discussed (verse 24) was if Jesus was The Messiah (The Christ). The deity of Jesus was not in the question, and the deity of Jesus was not in the answer!

It was John 8:58 where Jesus was claiming to be God.

1. Jesus had not declared Himself God. He had been saying (as the gospel of John attests over and over) that He did the works and spoke the words of His Father. That it was His Father who had given him their sheep. That it was His Father who bear witness of Him. He had been saying He came from God, not that He was God!!
2. When Jesus is accused for blasphemy, Jesus DID defend Himself! He did correct them! He didn't "hold his ground" on being God!. All the contrary. He responded: "Why all this fuss is about? In the Tanakh, men are called "gods"... so why would it be inappropriate to use the title "Son of God" if I am the Messiah?"

That's because the subject was Messiahship. The Unitarians were dead set against any of Jesus' Deity claim.

1. Jesus explains in verse 38 that He and his Father are One because He does the works of His Father.

In conclusion:

• Jesus was claiming to be the Messiah ("Son of God" was a messianic title), doing the works of His Father. That's why He could say He and His Father were One.
• Whether Jesus was the Messiah or not was the topic addressed in the question, and the topic addressed in the answer. No deity on debate.
• That Jesus had made Himself God was an accusation of his ENEMIES, and not surprisingly, a false one.
• Jesus DID defend Himself from the FALSE accusation. Jesus DID correct his opponents. He show them that if "gods" was a title applied to men, so it was more than justified for Him to claim the title "Son of God". He never admitted He had said He was God.
• Jay Dyer has been refuted.

For the audience's information: The correct passage is John 8:58.

As for these passages, Deity was not the subject here. The subject was Messiahship. Even when the Unitarians tried to switch the topic to Jesus' Deity, Jesus did not deny that fact but actually elevated their minds to the fact that many were called "gods". So if they're called gods then why not call God the Messiah who does miracles and is standing right in front of them?

Jay was perfectly correct in everything he said in the video.

 

[Peterlag]

while reading your book ..... right off the bat, you said, "This starts to make a little bit of sense when we start to realize why Jesus Christ referred to
himself as the “bread of life.” Food must be eaten, digested, and assimilated to become part of our life that will give strength to our physical bodies. is written that man shall not live by bread alone. Part of the reason this was written is because the Word of God is food for our spiritual life, and it operates along the same principle as our physical body that needs bread to sustain growth".

101G agree with the concept. so, a question, is this the same one person. scripture, John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:2 "The same was in the beginning with God." John 1:3 "All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made."

now, this, Isaiah 44:24 "Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;"

digest both of these scriptures. and let 101G know if this the same one person in both verses' references who "MADE ALL THINGS?", yes or no.

remember in Isaiah 44:24 the LORD said he, he, he, was "Alone", and "By himself".

101G.

The Word of God is His Word just as your word is your word. Both the quote from my book and John 1:1 is talking about the word of God. The Lord in Isaiah is God because Jesus had not yet been born.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

For the audience's information: The correct passage is John 8:58.

No, it is not.
Dear readers. In his video (1:40) Jay Dyer is referring to John 10:22-39.

Jay Dyer claims that Jesus was going to be stoned for having claimed divinity.
Chapter 8 does not indicate why Jews were going to stone him. Chapter 10 does (see below). So, Dyer is talking about John 10:22-39, and the refutation I have written in my post 51 is valid. My post is here:

https://berean-apologetics.community.forum/threads/the-misuse-and-abuse-of-john-17-3-by-unitarians-to-promote-unitarianism.2195/post-128729

JOHN 10:31-33. Again the Jews took up stones to stone Him. Jesus answered them, “I have shown you many good works from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?” The Jews answered Him, “We are not stoning You for a good work, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, claim to be God.” ​

​

JOHN 8:57-59. Then the Jews said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old. Have You seen Abraham?” Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly I say to you, before Abraham was born, I AM.” Then they took up stones to throw at Him. But Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple. Going through their midst, He passed by.​

​

Jay Dayer shows both ignorance and arrogance in declaring that people who do not see that Jesus claims to be God "over and over" across the gospel of John, must be "obtuse and blind" and "have never read the gospel of John".

Well, Jay, I have read many times the gospel of John. I'm not obtuse nor blind. At least, not deliberately, and no more than you or any other.
I have been a Trinitarian. I know your arguments, I have used them... and as many scholars and brilliant theologians of all times, now I affirm that the Father is the Only and True God. Specifically, the God Jesus worshiped.

What I read in the gospel of John is that Jesus "over and over and over" declares to be the One Sent by God, The Son of God, the One who precedes Abraham, the Messiah... NEVER GOD. Not a single time.
What I read in Jesus own words in the gospel of John, are things incompatible with being God, such as:

• His teachings are not his, but the ones He got from the Father (7:16)
• He speaks the words that His Father asked Him to speak (8:28)
• He does nothing of himself, but does the works His Father asked Him to do (8:28)
• He did not come from his own authority, but was sent by God (8:42) (So, He is not God)
• He is the One sent by God, while His Father is The Only and True God (17:1-3)
• He has a personal God, which is the same God of the Israelites: The Father (20:17)

Nothing of this is remotely compatible with being God.

God does not need to be conferred authority or power. He is the Source of Power and Authority.
God does not need to be said what to do or speak.
God is the Source of Revelation, not the Spokesman of somebody else.
God is not the Servant of anyone else.
God does not have anyone else as His God.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Jesus did not deny that fact

Of course Jesus denies the accusation.
He defends himself from the charge of blasphemy.
He had claimed to be The Son of God, not God.
If the Bible had given imperfect men the title of "gods", why couldn't He take an even lower title, which is "Son of God"?

but actually elevated their minds to the fact that many were called "gods". So if they're called gods then why not call God the Messiah who does miracles and is standing right in front of them?

You should have asked: Why not call "Son of God" the Messiah who stand right in front of them?
This is what the passage says.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

EXAMINING JOHN 8:39-59

This is the passage (Modern English Version). Please read it completely, and compare it with the analysis I did for John 10.
In contast with John 10, the passage in John 8 does not say why Jews wanted to stone Jesus, but for me, it is evident when reading the whole passage: Jesus was calling them evil, and taking away their highest source of pride: to be children of Abraham and children of God among all nations. We will examine this further in the next posts... probably tomorrow if I don't have to do it today.

​

​

39 They answered Him, “Abraham is our father.”​

​

Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham’s children, you would do the works of Abraham. 40 But now you seek to kill Me, a Man who has told you the truth which I heard from God. Abraham did not do this. 41 You are doing the works of your father.”​

​

Then they said to Him, “We were not born of sexual immorality. We have one Father: God.”​

​

42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I came from God and proceeded into the world. I did not come of My own authority, but He sent Me. 43 Why do you not understand My speaking? Because you cannot bear to hear My word. 44 You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45 Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe Me. 46 Which of you convicts Me of sin? If I speak the truth, why do you not believe Me? 47 He who is of God hears God’s words. Therefore, you do not hear them, because you are not of God.”​

​

48 The Jews answered Him, “Do we not rightly say that You are a Samaritan and have a demon?”​

​

49 Jesus answered, “I do not have a demon. But I honor My Father, and you dishonor Me. 50 I do not seek glory for Myself. There is One who seeks it and judges. 51 Truly, truly I say to you, if anyone keeps My word, he shall never see death.”​

​

52 Then the Jews said to Him, “Now we know that You have a demon. Abraham and the prophets died, and You say, ‘If a man keeps My word, he shall never taste death.’ 53 “Are You greater than our father Abraham, who died? The prophets are dead! Who do You make Yourself out to be?”​

​

54 Jesus answered, “If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing. It is My Father who glorifies Me, of whom you say that He is your God. 55 Yet you have not known Him, but I know Him. If I say, ‘I do not know Him,’ I shall be a liar like you. But I know Him and keep His word. 56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day. He saw it and was glad.”​

​

57 Then the Jews said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old. Have You seen Abraham?”​

​

58 Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.” 59 Then they took up stones to throw at Him. But Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple. Going through their midst, He passed by.​

 

[synergy]

The Word of God is His Word just as your word is your word. Both the quote from my book and John 1:1 is talking about the word of God. The Lord in Isaiah is God because Jesus had not yet been born.

Does your book mention the fact that "the Word was God" (John 1:1)? Also, does it mention that Jesus claimed that he is the "I Am" God of the OT who existed before Abraham was born (John 8:58)?

 

[synergy]

No, it is not.
Dear readers. In his video (1:40) Jay Dyer is referring to John 10:22-39.

Jay Dyer claims that Jesus was going to be stoned for having claimed divinity.
Chapter 8 does not indicate why Jews were going to stone him. Chapter 10 does (see below). So, Dyer is talking about John 10:22-39, and the refutation I have written in my post 51 is valid. My post is here:

https://berean-apologetics.community.forum/threads/the-misuse-and-abuse-of-john-17-3-by-unitarians-to-promote-unitarianism.2195/post-128729

JOHN 10:31-33. Again the Jews took up stones to stone Him. Jesus answered them, “I have shown you many good works from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?” The Jews answered Him, “We are not stoning You for a good work, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, claim to be God.” ​

​

JOHN 8:57-59. Then the Jews said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old. Have You seen Abraham?” Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly I say to you, before Abraham was born, I AM.” Then they took up stones to throw at Him. But Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple. Going through their midst, He passed by.​

In both cases Jesus claimed Deity. The Pharisaic Unitarians took exception to that and tried to stone him. Present day Unitarians have the similar thought patterns as their Pharisaic Forefathers had.

​

Jay Dayer shows both ignorance and arrogance in declaring that people who do not see that Jesus claims to be God "over and over" across the gospel of John, must be "obtuse and blind" and "have never read the gospel of John".

Well, Jay, I have read many times the gospel of John. I'm not obtuse nor blind. At least, not deliberately, and no more than you or any other.
I have been a Trinitarian. I know your arguments, I have used them... and as many scholars and brilliant theologians of all times, now I affirm that the Father is the Only and True God. Specifically, the God Jesus worshiped.

You conveniently overlooked John 1:1, John 8:58, and many other verses. Jay Dyer is correct in his assessments of Judaizing Pharisaic Unitarians.

What I read in the gospel of John is that Jesus "over and over and over" declares to be the One Sent by God, The Son of God, the One who precedes Abraham, the Messiah... NEVER GOD. Not a single time.
What I read in Jesus own words in the gospel of John, are things incompatible with being God, such as:

• His teachings are not his, but the ones He got from the Father (7:16)
• He speaks the words that His Father asked Him to speak (8:28)
• He does nothing of himself, but does the works His Father asked Him to do (8:28)
• He did not come from his own authority, but was sent by God (8:42) (So, He is not God)
• He is the One sent by God, while His Father is The Only and True God (17:1-3)
• He has a personal God, which is the same God of the Israelites: The Father (20:17)

Nothing of this is remotely compatible with being God.

That is when he was on Earth, being our Exemplar. Now in Heaven, Jesus who sits on His Father's Throne and along with the Father receives prayers and worship from the entire Heaven. As for Muhammad, he is dust trampled upon and pooped on by pigs and dogs. Who do you think manifests the Father the best?

 

[synergy]

Of course Jesus denies the accusation.
He defends himself from the charge of blasphemy.
He had claimed to be The Son of God, not God.
If the Bible had given imperfect men the title of "gods", why couldn't He take an even lower title, which is "Son of God"?

You should have asked: Why not call "Son of God" the Messiah who stand right in front of them?
This is what the passage says.

John 10:33 The Jews answered Him, saying, We do not stone you for a good work, but for blasphemy, and because you, being a man, make yourself God.
John 10:34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your Law, "I said, You are gods?"
John 10:35 If He called those gods with whom the Word of God was, and the Scripture cannot be broken,
John 10:36 do you say of Him whom the Father has sanctified and sent into the world, You blaspheme, because I said, I am the Son of God?
John 10:37 If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me.
John 10:38 But if I do, though you do not believe Me, believe the works so that you may know and believe that the Father is in Me, and I in Him.
John 10:39 Then they again sought to seize Him, but He went forth out of their hand.

Jesus calling himself "Son of God" was tantamount to calling himself God according to the Pharisaic Unitarians. Jesus did not correct them on that. Why? Because he is God. What Jesus did try to do was to elevate their minds to the fact that many were called "gods" already. So if they're called gods then why not call him "Son of God" or God (John 8:58) as he has shown that he can do the miracles of his Father?

 

[101G]

The Word of God is His Word just as your word is your word. Both the quote from my book and John 1:1 is talking about the word of God. The Lord in Isaiah is God because Jesus had not yet been born.

ERROR, Jesus the Christ was not yet BORN. but JESUS the Spirit is eternal.

now once more, is the Person, (THE SPIRIT), not the body, is the same "Person/Spirit" in each verse John 1:1-3 is the same Spirit/Person in Isaiah 44:24? YES or NO.

101G.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

In both cases Jesus claimed Deity.

In none of the two instances Jesus claimed Deity.

The Pharisaic Unitarians took exception to that and tried to stone him. Present day Unitarians have the similar thought patterns as their Pharisaic Forefathers had.

Pharisees were right in being monotheistic.
Those who wanted to stone Jesus in John 8 and 10 were not Pharisees, or at least that is not mentioned in the sacred text. Where did you get that idea from?

You conveniently overlooked John 1:1, John 8:58, and many other verses.

I have never ever overlooked any verse presented by you or anybody.
I have commented on John 1:1 and John 8:58.
. If you disagree, show me one I have overlooked.

Jay Dyer is correct in his assessments of Judaizing Pharisaic Unitarians.

Pharisees were RIGHT in being monotheistic.
Jesus worshiped the same God they were supposed to worship.

That is when he was on Earth, being our Exemplar. Now in Heaven, Jesus who sits on His Father's Throne and along with the Father receives prayers and worship from the entire Heaven.

As for Muhammad, he is dust trampled upon and pooped on by pigs and dogs. Who do you think manifests the Father the best?

I believe Muhammad is a Messenger of God.
I honor Him with the same honor I give to Jesus. Be it known to every member of this Forum.
Dear readers: Every time our brother @synergy feels trapped in the mediocrity of his exegesis, He resorts to insults to Muhammad, even when Islam is NOT THE SUBJECT IN DISCUSSION
This disrespectful and repugnant behavior is evidence of his dispair.

From now on, For every insult he publishes against Muhammed, I will publish praise to Jesus Christ and to Muhammed. Both of them Servants of the Only and True God.

 

[synergy]

In none of the two instances Jesus claimed Deity.

Prove it. On my side I have a direct accusation from Pharisaic Unitarians and a direct quote from Jesus who declared that he is the "I Am" OT God who preexisted Abraham.

Pharisees were right in being monotheistic.
Those who wanted to stone Jesus in John 8 and 10 were not Pharisees, or at least that is not mentioned in the sacred text. Where did you get that idea from?

It says Pharisees in John 8:13. All those who think like them are Pharisaic Judaizing Unitarians. That's the term I'm using now.

I have never ever overlooked any verse presented by you or anybody.
I have commented on John 1:1 and John 8:58.
. If you disagree, show me one I have overlooked.

I tried to be nice and not use the word "blind" but you leave me no choice. Tell me how you are not blind to "the Word was God" and to "Truly, truly, I say to you, Before Abraham came into being, I AM!"

Pharisees were RIGHT in being monotheistic.
Jesus worshiped the same God they were supposed to worship.

Did I say anything about their monotheism? I'm talking about their Pharisaic Judaizing Unitarianism. There is a difference between monotheism and unitarianism.

I believe Muhammad is a Messenger of God.

He is the one all Muslim Unitarians pray to daily with the Shahada even though he is dust trampled upon and pooped on by pigs and dogs.

I honor Him with the same honor I give to Jesus. Be it known to every member of this Forum.
Dear readers: Every time our brother @synergy feels trapped in the mediocrity of his exegesis, He resorts to insults to Muhammad, even when Islam is NOT THE SUBJECT IN DISCUSSION
This disrespectful and repugnant behavior is evidence of his dispair.

Unitarianism is the subject here and all unitarians (Muslims, JWs, Judaizers, etc...) are open targets for discussion.
Notice how you are so afraid of telling us who manifests the Father the best, Jesus or Muhammad.
Islam is one more form of Pharisaic Judaizing Unitarianism.

From now on, For every insult he publishes against Muhammed, I will publish praise to Jesus Christ and to Muhammed. Both of them Servants of the Only and True God.

Jesus was our Exemplar on Earth. Now in Heaven, Jesus who sits on His Father's Throne and along with the Father receives prayers and worship from the entire Heaven. As for Muhammad, he is dust trampled upon and pooped on by pigs and dogs.

 

[Peterlag]

ERROR, Jesus the Christ was not yet BORN. but JESUS the Spirit is eternal.

now once more, is the Person, (THE SPIRIT), not the body, is the same "Person/Spirit" in each verse John 1:1-3 is the same Spirit/Person in Isaiah 44:24? YES or NO.

101G.

There's no spirit called a person. Nor has there ever been anything addressed to the spirit. Nobody ever prayed to or ask the spirit anything.

 

[Peterlag]

Does your book mention the fact that "the Word was God" (John 1:1)? Also, does it mention that Jesus claimed that he is the "I Am" God of the OT who existed before Abraham was born (John 8:58)?

Jesus is not God and it seems you still think he is even after all I posted showing there's never been a teaching on the trinity anywhere in the bible. Bits and pieces of words and half verses scattered all over the Bible are not a teaching. A teaching would be a couple of paragraphs or a chapter or two and there's nothing like that anywhere in the entire Bible.