Who is Jesus?

[Peterlag]

If Jesus is fully God, then we have a triune God...it's that simple

To have a man born of a woman that is clear to everyone and then after the child is out of diapers to begin calling him God is totally insane. It blows my mind that more than two people believe there would be a reason for God almighty to become a man. Would there be some reason for me to become a fly? Could it even be possible that I can become a fly? God can do a lot of stuff, but He cannot lie, die, or be something else.

 

[360watt]

To have a man born of a woman that is clear to everyone and then after the child is out of diapers to begin calling him God is totally insane. It blows my mind that more than two people believe there would be a reason for God almighty to become a man. Would there be some reason for me to become a fly? Could it even be possible that I can become a fly? God can do a lot of stuff, but He cannot lie, die, or be something else.

He had to deal with our sin. To do that He took on the form of a man. Taking the sin on our behalf.

The atonement.

It's what separates Christianity from every other religion. Sin is dealt with not by our good doings..but His payment..His atonement.

 

[Peterlag]

He had to deal with our sin. To do that He took on the form of a man. Taking the sin on our behalf.

The atonement.

It's what separates Christianity from every other religion. Sin is dealt with not by our good doings..but His payment..His atonement.

Where do you get this information from because it's not in the Bible...

Romans says a man (Adam) caused sin to enter into the world, and also that a man would have to redeem it from sin. Romans 5:15 says “For if many died through one man’s trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many.” Some theologians teach that only God could pay for the sins of mankind, but the Bible specifically says that a man must do it. The book of Corinthians makes the same point Romans does when it says “For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead” (1 Corinthians 15:21).

 

[mikesw]

Where do you get this information from because it's not in the Bible...

Romans says a man (Adam) caused sin to enter into the world, and also that a man would have to redeem it from sin. Romans 5:15 says “For if many died through one man’s trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many.” Some theologians teach that only God could pay for the sins of mankind, but the Bible specifically says that a man must do it. The book of Corinthians makes the same point Romans does when it says “For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead” (1 Corinthians 15:21).

For Peterlag, God cannot be anything but isolated from the universe. God would not have the ability or comprehension of a way of interacting with humanity through humanity. Although Rom 5:15 speaks of a man, Peterlag cannot realize that a common man never did bring grace to many. Then the quoting of 1 Cor 15:21 is ludicrous for Peterlag to use for calling Jesus simply a man. No man has the ability to resurrect people from the dead. I think Peterlag misses many elements that makes that resurrection possible through Christ. What does Peterlag even think is the ultimate nature of Christ? maybe just another nice man who gained notoriety? We never seem to get the full picture, just the denial of the divine nature of Christ.

 

[360watt]

For Peterlag, God cannot be anything but isolated from the universe. God would not have the ability or comprehension of a way of interacting with humanity through humanity. Although Rom 5:15 speaks of a man, Peterlag cannot realize that a common man never did bring grace to many. Then the quoting of 1 Cor 15:21 is ludicrous for Peterlag to use for calling Jesus simply a man. No man has the ability to resurrect people from the dead. I think Peterlag misses many elements that makes that resurrection possible through Christ. What does Peterlag even think is the ultimate nature of Christ? maybe just another nice man who gained notoriety? We never seem to get the full picture, just the denial of the divine nature of Christ.

Hey I'm Mike A W if you just took the first letters

But yea I'm also struggling to understand where Peterlag is coming from. He quotes NT scripture but then doesn't see the very verses he is using support Jesus' diety

 

[Olde Tymer]

.
From the information given by Ezek 1:1-28, I tend to think that maybe the
supreme being is a composite unity consisting of four dimensions instead of three;
and yet according to John 4:24 the supreme being is invisible, and according to
John 5:37 the supreme being is silent, and according to 1Tim 6:16 the supreme
being abides in seclusion; so I have to assume that everyone and everything we
know of as the supreme being, including the voice heard in Adam's garden, the
voice heard by Moses from within the burning bush, and the voice heard by Jesus
during his baptism, were theophanies and/or apparitions instead of the supreme
being's actual self in person.

You know: arguing over the supreme being's characteristics is sort of like a group
of blind men arguing over characteristics of an elephant judging by the part of its
body each man happens to be touching. I rather suspect that when all is said and
done, both sides of the aisle are going to be astonished to discover that the supreme
being has been active in our world in more forms than many among us thought possible.
For example:

● Acts 7:52-53 . .Which of the prophets have not your ancestors persecuted? And
they have slain them which showed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom
you have been now the betrayers and murderers: who have received the law by the
disposition of angels, and have not kept it.

Well; I've read, and I've re-read, the giving of the law to Moses in the Old
Testament and have thus far myself not been able to detect the participation of
celestial creatures anywhere in that event.

● Gen 48:15-16 . . And Jacob blessed Joseph, and said: God, before whom my
fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God which fed me all my life long unto this
day, the angel which redeemed me from all evil; bless the lads

Jacob experienced some contact with celestial creatures (Gen 32:2-3) but none of
them can be referred to as "the" angel because that particular distinction belongs to
the divine being whom Jacob first encountered in dreams (Gen 28:10-15, Gen
31:10-13) in visitations (Gen 35:9-13) and with whom Jacob later had a close
encounter of a third kind. (Gen 32:24-30) and also who Jacob identifies as "God,
before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God which fed me all my
life long unto this day"

I'm not trying to shoehorn Jesus into the Old Testament; my intent is to show that
the supreme being has a history of interacting with the human world by means of a
variety of forms and apparitions including but not limited to: smoke, fire, thunder,
trumpets, brilliant lights, clouds, voices, wind, earthquakes, and men. So when we
run across the "angel of the Lord" in our reading of the Old Testament, it would be
a good idea to stifle the impulse to assume the Bible is always talking about a
celestial creature.
_

 

[Peterlag]

The Jews would not have considered Jesus a threat, but insane if he had walked around saying he was God. But it was a threat for Jesus to claim to be the Messiah of God and also walk around doing miracles. Jesus had not been claiming to be God in the flesh and this is why the Jews never asked him at his trial if he was God in the flesh, but instead they asked him about what he had been claiming to be, which was the Messiah. Mark 14:61-62 records the High Priest asking “Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?" And Jesus said "I am.” The High Priest tore his garments and said he deserved to be put to death when Jesus stated he was the Messiah. So we see that the Jews correctly assessed that Jesus had been claiming to be the Christ, and that Jesus indeed said he was the Christ, and also that the Jews thought his claim was worthy of the death penalty.

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.

 

[360watt]

The Jews would not have considered Jesus a threat, but insane if he had walked around saying he was God. But it was a threat for Jesus to claim to be the Messiah of God and also walk around doing miracles. Jesus had not been claiming to be God in the flesh and this is why the Jews never asked him at his trial if he was God in the flesh, but instead they asked him about what he had been claiming to be, which was the Messiah. Mark 14:61-62 records the High Priest asking “Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?" And Jesus said "I am.” The High Priest tore his garments and said he deserved to be put to death when Jesus stated he was the Messiah. So we see that the Jews correctly assessed that Jesus had been claiming to be the Christ, and that Jesus indeed said he was the Christ, and also that the Jews thought his claim was worthy of the death penalty.

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.

Well since you don't believe scripture, then there is no point to this.

Jesus was very different in forgiving sin of those who hadn't offended Him personally. Having power over sin itself. I can't do that..you can't do that.

You can forgive, but you don't have power to cleanse sin.

That's just one thing that makes Jesus very different to the normal person.

He wasn't just going things by the Father's authority like the disciples. He was accepting the disciples worship of Himself.

 

[mikesw]

The Jews would not have considered Jesus a threat, but insane if he had walked around saying he was God. But it was a threat for Jesus to claim to be the Messiah of God and also walk around doing miracles. Jesus had not been claiming to be God in the flesh and this is why the Jews never asked him at his trial if he was God in the flesh, but instead they asked him about what he had been claiming to be, which was the Messiah. Mark 14:61-62 records the High Priest asking “Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?" And Jesus said "I am.” The High Priest tore his garments and said he deserved to be put to death when Jesus stated he was the Messiah. So we see that the Jews correctly assessed that Jesus had been claiming to be the Christ, and that Jesus indeed said he was the Christ, and also that the Jews thought his claim was worthy of the death penalty.

uh huh. And where do Jewish writers speak of a death penalty for anyone calling themselves a messiah?

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.

Funny how Peterlag goes on to demonstrate again how he fails to be able to conceive how God could be able to have divinity in the Son joined with humanity/creation in Christ Jesus. Peterlag also is somewhat wrong to say Jesus taught that he was God. If Jesus taught this, he would be quoted as saying "I am God who has come to you in the flesh." If Jesus taught so directly, he would have been so clearly being heard that way that people would have killed him for blasphemy. Instead he spoke with the "I am" wording such as "before Abraham was, I am." He also said "if you have seen me you have seen the Father." These of course contribute to pointing out the divinity of Christ as being the most apparent concept behind his words.

 

[Peterlag]

Well since you don't believe scripture, then there is no point to this.

Jesus was very different in forgiving sin of those who hadn't offended Him personally. Having power over sin itself. I can't do that..you can't do that.

You can forgive, but you don't have power to cleanse sin.

That's just one thing that makes Jesus very different to the normal person.

He wasn't just going things by the Father's authority like the disciples. He was accepting the disciples worship of Himself.

Is there a verse that says Jesus could not be worshiped as the Messiah, the son of God?

 

[360watt]

Is there a verse that says Jesus could not be worshiped as the Messiah, the son of God?

Son of God and Messiah are titles that are for someone who is fully God

'Son' meaning 'image', 'expression'

Messiah..is someone who can forgive sin. That's what Isaiah 53 predicted. If He can do that..that's fully God.


End.

 

[dwight92070]

Is there a verse that says Jesus could not be worshiped as the Messiah, the son of God?

Of course, Satan asked Jesus to worship him and Jesus quoted the law saying, "You shall worship the Lord your God and serve Him only." Matthew 4:10
So if God said to only worship Him, then obviously, if Jesus was not God, He should not be worshiped.
Any other elementary questions?

 

[Peterlag]

Of course, Satan asked Jesus to worship him and Jesus quoted the law saying, "You shall worship the Lord your God and serve Him only." Matthew 4:10
So if God said to only worship Him, then obviously, if Jesus was not God, He should not be worshiped.
Any other elementary questions?

What should I do with this verse? Rip it out of the Bible?

John 5:23
That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.

 

[Peterlag]

Son of God and Messiah are titles that are for someone who is fully God

'Son' meaning 'image', 'expression'

Messiah..is someone who can forgive sin. That's what Isaiah 53 predicted. If He can do that..that's fully God.


End.

What should I do with this verse? Rip it out of the Bible?

Matthew 9:6
But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins,...

 

[mikesw]

What should I do with this verse? Rip it out of the Bible?

Matthew 9:6
But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins,...

Peterlag might as well rip it out since he misunderstands who the Messiah is. He could join the Bahai faith with Pancho Frijoles.

 

[360watt]

What should I do with this verse? Rip it out of the Bible?

Matthew 9:6
But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins,...

Son of man still has meaning of being fully God. It's about God humbling Himself as a man. Check the surrounding context

 

[Peterlag]

Son of man still has meaning of being fully God. It's about God humbling Himself as a man. Check the surrounding context

The are no statements anywhere in the Bible that uses the langue that you use. No place do we find words like "God humbling" because God is a badass. Nobody ever beat Him up or spit on Him. You were dead if you even walked in the wrong room in the Temple or bumped into the Ark.

 

[synergy]

Nobody ever beat Him up or spit on Him.

Read up on what happened at the Cross.

 

[101G]

No place do we find words like "God humbling" because God is a badass.

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:" Philippians 2:8 "And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross."

101G

 

[dwight92070]

The Jews would not have considered Jesus a threat, but insane if he had walked around saying he was God. But it was a threat for Jesus to claim to be the Messiah of God and also walk around doing miracles. Jesus had not been claiming to be God in the flesh and this is why the Jews never asked him at his trial if he was God in the flesh, but instead they asked him about what he had been claiming to be, which was the Messiah. Mark 14:61-62 records the High Priest asking “Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?" And Jesus said "I am.” The High Priest tore his garments and said he deserved to be put to death when Jesus stated he was the Messiah. So we see that the Jews correctly assessed that Jesus had been claiming to be the Christ, and that Jesus indeed said he was the Christ, and also that the Jews thought his claim was worthy of the death penalty.

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.

So if Mary was His mother and God was His Father, how is it possible that He was just a man? Someone who is just a man does not need God to impregnate His mother.