Thomas... My Lord and my God

[mikesw]

Let's remember, dear readers, that Jews would have been RIGHT to consider blasphemous any person who claimed to be God.
No man could come claiming to YHWH, Adonai, The God of Abraham, Isaac of Jacob.
It does not matter how good that man could be, or what miracles he could make, or how wonderful messianic plans he could had.

Duh. The only reason Jesus could testify to his divinity without committing blasphemy is that he is of the Godhead. It would be very stupid for the accounts of scripture to even raise the issue of blasphemy here unless Christ Jesus is truly God. So you have made a clear and strong argument for Christ Jesus being God incarnate among us.
Your real point is that you do not trust scripture. You have stated that you do not accept the whole testimony of scripture. Just be honest and say that is your real point.

If any of you travelled in a time machine to Jerusalem in those days, you would have tried to persuade Jews to accept Jesus as their Messiah... not as their God!!!!

Did the apostles, after Pentecost, try to persuade their fellow countrymen to accept Jesus as the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of their ancestors? No! Never! They wanted to persuade them to accept Jesus as the Promised One, the Sent One, the Anointed One.

The divinity of Christ is inherent to prophecy. It certainly could be difficult to understand since much prophecy was like that. Those reading Daniel 7 could understand that the kingdom of God would be in God's hands but they did not know how that could also be through incarnation of Jesus who was among them.
You do not have to wonder why the apostles did not say Jesus is God. You just have to recognize that it is evident that he is. The need for the Jews to repent was the primary requirement of them. Obviously the kingdom of God is reigned by God as king. Jesus is designated as king with the words Christ and Messiah. Wow. There's lots of good stuff scripture has taught us. A basic logic or philosophy class would come in handy for many folk here.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

This is a list of 8 absurdities or inconsistencies that derive from thinking that Thomas was calling Jesus God.
There may be many more, but these 8 came to my mind.

ABSURDITY 1. Jesus did not really know who his disciples worshiped. He had just said to the woman (John 20:17) that The Father was the God of his disciples... the same God that Jesus had.

ABSURDITY 2. The woman did not bring Jesus message in John 20:17 to the apostles. So, they didn't realize that it was Father, and not Jesus, the One they should consider God.

ABSURDITY 3. Thomas was a dissident and didn't share the conviction of the disciples travelling to Emaus, who were concerned about Jesus being killed and his ministry aborted or defeated.

ABSURDITY 4. Thomas was not a dissident and share the conviction of the disciples travelling to Emaus, but these two disciples faked their sadness. They actually knew that Jesus was God so there was nothing to worry about in regard of Jesus being crucified and his mission aborted.

ABSURDITY 5. Even after Pentecost, Thomas did not share the conviction of Peter. Peter preached Jesus to the Jews as the Servant of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

ABSURDITY 6. Peter was a dissident and that's why he preached Jesus as the Servant of the God of Abraham. In contrast, Thomas was doing on the side the right thing: preaching Jesus as God. Why didn't Luke write about it? Perhaps Luke did not know it, or did not agree with Thomas, or did not give any relevance to the doctrine of Jesus deity in the apostle's preaching, as to write it down in the Book of Acts.

ABSURDITY 7. Paul either didn't get the memo from Thomas or chose to be a dissident. That's why, in every single instance in which He mentions the Father and Jesus within the same sentence, and wants to use the term "God" and the term "Lord", Paul assigns the title "God" to the "Father" and the title "Lord" to Jesus. If Paul would have agreed with Thomas, he would had leveraged every opportunity... or at least most of those opportunities, to use "God" and "Lord" to refer to Jesus.

ABSURDITY 8. Thomas was really Pagan in his heart of hearts: he believed that a god could take flesh, be touched and eat fish. A god, he thought, could be sent by another god, speak on behalf of another god and raised from dead by another god, let alone sit at the right of another god, and still be god. That's why he easily recognized Jesus as god when he saw it alive.

 

[Fred]

That's correct.
And in that statement Jesus does not claim to be God.

Yes, He did.

Because to be the proper recipient of prayer proves He is God.

 

[mikesw]

This is a list of 8 absurdities or inconsistencies that derive from thinking that Thomas was calling Jesus God.
There may be many more, but these 8 came to my mind.

Pancho Frijoles provides obvious examples of the absurdities of his absurdities. The more he lists the more absurd he sounds in his rejections.

ABSURDITY 1. Jesus did not really know who his disciples worshiped. He had just said to the woman (John 20:17) that The Father was the God of his disciples... the same God that Jesus had.

Number 1 almost has some sense to it. But Jesus can speak both from an incarnate perspective and being subject to God in that sense. More importantly he shares to Mary her status with God, as gaining this benefit in Christ.

ABSURDITY 2. The woman did not bring Jesus message in John 20:17 to the apostles. So, they didn't realize that it was Father, and not Jesus, the One they should consider God.

Number 2 just is an ignorant object by failing to distinguish the incarnate Son from the Father within the Godhead. Pancho provides no argument against the Trinity here

ABSURDITY 3. Thomas was a dissident and didn't share the conviction of the disciples travelling to Emaus, who were concerned about Jesus being killed and his ministry aborted or defeated.
Num

Number 3 does not make any sense about anything

ABSURDITY 4. Thomas was not a dissident and share the conviction of the disciples travelling to Emaus, but these two disciples faked their sadness. They actually knew that Jesus was God so there was nothing to worry about in regard of Jesus being crucified and his mission aborted.

Number 4 assumes that all the disciples were aware of the divinity of Christ. Pancho misses that the gospels' description of the Pharisees' readiness to stone Christ were recognized at by the disciples as a testimony to Jesus being part of the Godhead. Pancho's misreading is not grounds to reject the divinity of Christ.

ABSURDITY 5. Even after Pentecost, Thomas did not share the conviction of Peter. Peter preached Jesus to the Jews as the Servant of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

Number 5 sort of misquotes Acts 3:13. Jesus as incarnate came as a servant of God. This is also Jesus' example to the followers. This does not deny the deity of Christ. So we see another of the absurdities of Panchos absurdities.

ABSURDITY 6. Peter was a dissident and that's why he preached Jesus as the Servant of the God of Abraham. In contrast, Thomas was doing on the side the right thing: preaching Jesus as God. Why didn't Luke write about it? Perhaps Luke did not know it, or did not agree with Thomas, or did not give any relevance to the doctrine of Jesus deity in the apostle's preaching, as to write it down in the Book of Acts.

Number 6 does not identify why what Peter says has to reflect what Thomas noted. That does nothing to deny Thomas's mention of Jesus as God. Pancho assumes, without scripture support, that the deity of Christ is part of the salvific message. Christ's deity explains how the gospel has substance but does not tell people what to do to be reconciled with God.

ABSURDITY 7. Paul either didn't get the memo from Thomas or chose to be a dissident. That's why, in every single instance in which He mentions the Father and Jesus within the same sentence, and wants to use the term "God" and the term "Lord", Paul assigns the title "God" to the "Father" and the title "Lord" to Jesus. If Paul would have agreed with Thomas, he would had leveraged every opportunity... or at least most of those opportunities, to use "God" and "Lord" to refer to Jesus.

Number 7 again tries to nullify the testimony of Thomas and assume that everyone has to walk around and say Jesus is God. That is an absurdity of absurdities.

ABSURDITY 8. Thomas was really Pagan in his heart of hearts: he believed that a god could take flesh, be touched and eat fish. A god, he thought, could be sent by another god, speak on behalf of another god and raised from dead by another god, let alone sit at the right of another god, and still be god. That's why he easily recognized Jesus as god when he saw it alive.

Number 8 reflects the greatest absurd point shared. It should be obvious to anyone who studies scripture that the Trinitarian doctrine acknowledges God is one. The Trinitarian doctrine formed by recognizing multiple persons in the Godhead without disrupting that oneness. It is surprising that Pancho highlights his own absurdity statement by using red text.

Hopefully it is true that he does not actually represent the beliefs or position of the Baha'i Faith as he notes in his signature:

I'm a Baha'i. The views and opinions expressed in this post are solely my own and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Baha'i Faith or

I would hope they would disavow everything shared here.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Yes, He did.

No, in the statement being discussed here, the question and response of Jesus at the Sanhedrin), Jesus didn't.

Because to be the proper recipient of prayer proves He is God.

The statement being discussed here is not about prayer.

*****

As a Mediator between you (one singular personal being) and God (another singular personal being), Jesus (another singular personal being), can be a proper recipient of prayer. That's what mediators do.
So, your cherished theory has been refuted. Time to turn the page, Fred.

"For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus" 1 Tim 2:4-6

 

[atpollard]

In addition, Jesus said that they would see him coming on the clouds of heaven seated at the right hand of the Power.
Jesus did not claim to be "The Power", "The Blessed" (title used by Mark), God.

Kings invited those they wanted to honor to sit at their right hand. That's the origin of the metaphor, which is still used today.
God cannot sit at the right of anything or anyone else.

Please note something interesting in Psalm 110:

In VERSE 1, the SON [Lord] is at the right hand of the FATHER [LORD].
In VERSE 5, the FATHER [LORD] is at the right hand of the Son [Lord].

As in so many other places in the OT, God provided clear hints of the UNITY in PLURALITY of His nature. [Which John and Paul then went on to make EXPLICIT].

 

[atpollard]

Let's remember, dear readers, that Jews would have been RIGHT to consider blasphemous any person who claimed to be God.
No man could come claiming to YHWH, Adonai, The God of Abraham, Isaac of Jacob.

Unless He was!

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Unless He was!

Yes, but that requires a Pagan view of the world.

In a Pagan view of the world, a god can be sent by another god, become flesh, grow as a kid, eat, have sex with women, beget demigods, be killed and resurrected, and sit at the right of another god.
Under that view, you could try to persuade Greeks to believe in Jesus deity*

* NOTE: Although Paul didn't even try it: in talking to the Athenians, he bluntly explained that God cannot be contained in material things, and that God had raised "a Man", Jesus. I mean, Paul could have started from the story of Hercules to illustrate his point, if Paul had believed that Jesus was a God-Man. But he didn't.​

However, within a Jewish monotheistic view of the world, God can't become flesh, or wood, or metal, or stone. Cannot be sent by anyone else nor speak on behalf of anyone else. Does not need to receive authority from anyone else, and certainly cannot die. God cannot sit at the right of anyone else and cannot call another Being "My God".

Try the following experiment, my brother (the invitation for this experiment is for all readers):

Imagine you are transported in the time machine to those days and places, dressed accordingly, and given the gift of speaking Aramaic.
What arguments would you use to persuade those Jews that Jesus was God?

 

[mikesw]

Pancho Frijoles said
Let's remember, dear readers, that Jews would have been RIGHT to consider blasphemous any person who claimed to be God.
No man could come claiming to YHWH, Adonai, The God of Abraham, Isaac of Jacob.

Unless He was!

Indeed. If Jesus was not God incarnate, the Pharisees would have successfully stoned him. They had plenty of opportunities to do so.

 

[mikesw]

Yes, but that requires a Pagan view of the world.

In a Pagan view of the world, a god can be sent by another god, become flesh, grow as a kid, eat, have sex with women, beget demigods, be killed and resurrected, and sit at the right of another god.
Under that view, you could try to persuade Greeks to believe in Jesus deity (Paul didn't even try it: in talking to the Athenians, he bluntly explained that God cannot be contained in material things, and that God had raised "a Man", Jesus. I mean, Paul could have started from the story of Hercules to illustrate his point, if Paul had believed that Jesus was a God-Man. But he didn't).

However, within a Jewish monotheistic view of the world, God can't become flesh, or wood, or metal, or stone. Cannot be sent by anyone else nor speak on behalf of anyone else. Does not need to receive authority from anyone else, and certainly cannot die. God cannot sit at the right of anyone else and cannot call another Being "My God".

Try the folllowing experiment, my brother:
Imagine you are transported in the time machine to those days and places, dressed accordingly, and given the gift of speaking Aramaic.
What arguments would you use to persuade those Jews that Jesus was God?

So now Pancho wants to call Jews as Pagans. Although they have done idolatry preceding the time of Christ, we do not have to assume that they had some conception of continuity of God. Pancho also has to deny that other religions could include truths about God; isn't that what he wants us to believe anyhow? Pancho. Make up your mind whether you want these other religions to express truth or you are against it.

Pancho, you still have not realized the Two Powers in Heaven that was in debate in Judaism. So you also deny their perspectives. Do you wish to deny what they were debating?

The argument of Jesus as God is in Matthew and Daniel 7 in more obvious ways. What do you think Matthew was indicating about the Jewish claims of blasphemy? If the leaders did not recognize the deity of Christ, they suffered their own destruction because of that.

Pancho, I'm not sure what you hold as truth after denying Pagan concepts of God sending God among humanity. Then you deny God sending his Son to be incarnate among us. Isn't this something you should then embrace? You deny the testimony of scripture but you try to use your denial as arguments against what scripture says.

 

[atpollard]

Yes, but that requires a Pagan view of the world.

No, actually, it does not. It could be argued from a pagan worldview creating "Demi-gods" like Hercules or false gods (idols in the form of men: Romans 1:23). However, it could also be argued from both prior Divine Revelation [OT] and Natural Revelation (Romans 1:18-20).

In a Pagan view of the world, a god can be sent by another god, become flesh, grow as a kid, eat, have sex with women, beget demigods, be killed and resurrected, and sit at the right of another god.
Under that view, you could try to persuade Greeks to believe in Jesus deity*

* NOTE: Although Paul didn't even try it: in talking to the Athenians, he bluntly explained that God cannot be contained in material things, and that God had raised "a Man", Jesus. I mean, Paul could have started from the story of Hercules to illustrate his point, if Paul had believed that Jesus was a God-Man. But he didn't.

Therein lies the innate flaw in your worldview. The SON is not "another God", rather, the SON and the FATHER are ONE LORD ... one GOD. As Jesus said:

7 "If you had [really] known Me, you would also have known My Father. From now on you know Him, and have seen Him." 8 Philip said to Him, "Lord, show us the Father and then we will be satisfied." 9 Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you for so long a time, and you do not know Me yet, Philip, nor recognize clearly who I am? Anyone who has seen Me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father?' 10 "Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me? The words I say to you I do not say on My own initiative or authority, but the Father, abiding continually in Me, does His works [His attesting miracles and acts of power]. 11 "Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me; otherwise believe [Me] because of the [very] works themselves [which you have witnessed]. - [John 14:7-11 AMP]​

However, within a Jewish monotheistic view of the world, God can't become flesh, or wood, or metal, or stone. Cannot be sent by anyone else nor speak on behalf of anyone else. Does not need to receive authority from anyone else, and certainly cannot die. God cannot sit at the right of anyone else and cannot call another Being "My God".

You are SO CLOSE ... Jesus said and did all those things, not FROM God, but AS GOD ... therefore, CAN become flesh (because GOD DID: Read John 1). GOD can die and GOD can raise himself from the dead (John 10:18). GOD can and does sit at HIS OWN right hand and call HIMSELF "My God" (Psalm 110: 1, 5).

Try the following experiment, my brother (the invitation for this experiment is for all readers):

Imagine you are transported in the time machine to those days and places, dressed accordingly, and given the gift of speaking Aramaic.
What arguments would you use to persuade those Jews that Jesus was God?

[Genesis 1:26-27 AMP]

26 Then God said, "Let Us (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) make man in Our image, according to Our likeness [not physical, but a spiritual personality and moral likeness]; and let them have complete authority over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, the cattle, and over the entire earth, and over everything that creeps and crawls on the earth." 27 So God created man in His own image, in the image and likeness of God He created him; male and female He created them.​

1. God said Let US (plural).
2. Mankind was created in the image of God ... male and female.

God (plural) created man (plural) in HIS image (plural) ...

"For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and shall be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh." - [Gen 2:24 AMP]

... two are one flesh; unity coexiting in plurality. As it is with the CREATOR, so it shall be with His CREATION.

To the praise of HIS Glory!

 

[civic]

The Pharisees and priests testify that Jesus was equating himself with God. We see that these "leaders" interpreted the context of Daniel such that Christ Jesus was claiming to be divinity. Your speculation has little merit in the face of the testimony of scripture. It must be remembered that the gospel of Matthew was written to appeal to Jews and thus could not be effective if misconstrued by Matthew. Don't try so hard to deny the deity of Christ.

Yes scripture is clear that He claimed to be God and the Jews knew exactly that He claimed to be God.

It’s incredible to see the biased reading of Scripture where people make all the excuses in the works to deny He is God and claimed to be God.

 

[civic]

So now Pancho wants to call Jews as Pagans. Although they have done idolatry preceding the time of Christ, we do not have to assume that they had some conception of continuity of God. Pancho also has to deny that other religions could include truths about God; isn't that what he wants us to believe anyhow? Pancho. Make up your mind whether you want these other religions to express truth or you are against it.

Pancho, you still have not realized the Two Powers in Heaven that was in debate in Judaism. So you also deny their perspectives. Do you wish to deny what they were debating?

The argument of Jesus as God is in Matthew and Daniel 7 in more obvious ways. What do you think Matthew was indicating about the Jewish claims of blasphemy? If the leaders did not recognize the deity of Christ, they suffered their own destruction because of that.

Pancho, I'm not sure what you hold as truth after denying Pagan concepts of God sending God among humanity. Then you deny God sending his Son to be incarnate among us. Isn't this something you should then embrace? You deny the testimony of scripture but you try to use your denial as arguments against what scripture says.

If they were pagans then so is everyone else outside of Christianity that denies the Deity of Christ. It’s as simple as that.

They like to have their cake and it too but it doesn’t pass them smell test.

 

[Fred]

No, in the statement being discussed here, the question and response of Jesus at the Sanhedrin), Jesus didn't.

Yes, He did.

That the Son of Man is the proper recipient of prayer proves He is God.

 

[praise_yeshua]

It is difficult to have an intellectual honest discussion with any enemy of Jesus Christ. They are all liars without a thread of decency or morality.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Act 13:9 But Saul, who was also called Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, looked intently at him

Act 13:10 and said, “You son of the devil, you enemy of all righteousness, full of all deceit and villainy, will you not stop making crooked the straight paths of the Lord?

Act 13:11 And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon you, and you will be blind and unable to see the sun for a time.” Immediately mist and darkness fell upon him, and he went about seeking people to lead him by the hand

 

[Peterlag]

GINOLJC to all,
first you ERROR in your statement. Jesus the "Lord" is the "LORD" in the OT..... without flesh, without bone, and without blood. this is he who created all things by himself, for he was alone. see John 1:3 and Isaiah 44:24. so, the JESUS is CREATOR and MAKER of all things as LORD/Father, the Ordinal First.

and in Flesh, with bone, and with Blood he is REDEEMER, and SAVIOUR of all that he created and Made, as the Lors/Son, the Ordinal Last.

this is your mistake of IGNORANCE in not knowing the TRUTH of his ECHAD as one.

GL.

1O1G.

The Lord God was the Lord in the Old Testament until He made Jesus both Lord and Christ when He raised him out from among the dead.

 

[Peterlag]

The resurrection of Jesus is used in association with the fact that He is YHWH.

See Acts 2:21 (cf. 2:23-32) and Romans 10:13 (cf. 10:9).

Acts 2:21 does not say Jesus is God. It says... And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.
God made Jesus both Lord and Christ when He raised him out from among the dead.

Acts 2:36
Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

 

[Fred]

Acts 2:21 does not say Jesus is God.

F

Post in thread 'The Bible does not teach to pray to Jesus'

Sep 22, 2024

Acts 2:21 isn’t about Jesus

The "Lord" in Acts 2:21 is in reference to Jesus.
Acts 2:21
And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the Name of the Lord shall be saved.
Acts 2:38
Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized each one of you in the Name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Acts 4:12
Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is no other Name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.


When Luke uses the...

• Fred

• 

 

[101G]

The Lord God was the Lord in the Old Testament until He made Jesus both Lord and Christ when He raised him out from among the dead.

ERROR, listen closely, Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:" Philippians 2:7 "But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:"

who made who? .... HIMSELF. and as for who made or conceived that flesh in Mary womb? God, who is Jesus, the Holy Spirit.

now who raised up JESUS BODY.... answer again HIMSELF. Listen and Learn, John 2:18 "Then answered the Jews and said unto him, What sign shewest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things?" John 2:19 "Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." John 2:20 "Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?" John 2:21 "But he spake of the temple of his body." John 2:22 "When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said."

now pete, who raised up the Body of Jesus? yes, God, whom JESUS is. ....... Oh so simple if one JUST READ THE BIBLE WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT.

in Much GL.

101G.