Did Jesus say he was God???

[1robin]

The word "Elohim" is translated as "Angel" in the Septuagint and in the Book of Hebrews, so......

Neither book is common ground of accepted inspired literature between us so they are not applicable in the context of a debate between us.

 

[1robin]

Wait, are you denying that lord is used to address beings of a higher rank? Lord is even used for husband.

Are you suggesting that they were calling angels their husbands? Or people of higher rank? I can provide the reasons from scholars and common sense again why it is most likely either Christ or God they are calling Lord if you wish? Do you have any academic reason to think it was not this case?

 

[1robin]

Are you saying it's highly unlikely that the word Lord is used for husbands and kings?

In those verses, yes. Do you really not understand what I am claiming?

 

[1robin]

They said "beside" not "besides". Subtle difference, yet enough to create another definition. Again, I'm just playing devil's advocate here; I don't believe in any gods, but that is what the Scriptures literally say.

Hold the phone a second. Neither one of those words are original. Before we get into what words were actually used I wish to know why the dropping of an s is meaningful for you claims, then we will get into what words were used and their meanings if you desire it.

 

[eelpc]

Yes but he isnt referred to as "The son" , he is referred to as "The son of God".

There was a Jewish girl, Mary, who was married to Joseph. There was a holy ghost who came to Joseph and told him he couldn't have sex with her. He was sent by god to impregnate her and after she gave birth he could then have sex with his wife. Joseph agreed to this and Mary became pregnant. About nine months later they were traveling to Bethlehem and the inn where they stopped didn't have room so they stayed in the barn. The Holy Ghost knew that this was going to happen because he had gone to three wise men from afar and told them to get on their camels and get to the Inn on the 25th of December and to bring gifts for the new child that was going to be born there. They traveled for long times to arrive there. Looks like to me if the Holy Ghost knew he was to be born there he would have made reservations at the inn for Joseph and Mary. I mean this Holy Ghost was smart and empowered so it wouldn’t have been a big deal to do that. Anyhow, the child was born much in the same fashion as the Old Testament had referred to in several other instants and then nothing was heard of the child for about 30 years and he came forward and revealed himself as the son of God. Just like several others in the Old Testament he also was able to heal the sick, make wine from water, walk on water and do miracles like several different ones had done in the earlier ages. We really wouldn't have known anything about this if it hadn't been from the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John that came about several hundred years after he died. I think the real miracle was how they were able to discover this with no TV, Radio, Printing presses, computers, or anything other that word of mouth spread out over hundreds of years. A lot of their writings were in biblical babblings and hard to interpret so after hundreds of years, King James of England commissioned numerous scholars of his choosing to re-write the New Testament and make changes that could fit the times and be more understandable. This is the bible we now are ask to accept and the written word of God.

 

[InChrist]

There was a Jewish girl, Mary, who was married to Joseph. There was a holy ghost who came to Joseph and told him he couldn't have sex with her. He was sent by god to impregnate her and after she gave birth he could then have sex with his wife. Joseph agreed to this and Mary became pregnant. About nine months later they were traveling to Bethlehem and the inn where they stopped didn't have room so they stayed in the barn. The Holy Ghost knew that this was going to happen because he had gone to three wise men from afar and told them to get on their camels and get to the Inn on the 25th of December and to bring gifts for the new child that was going to be born there. They traveled for long times to arrive there. Looks like to me if the Holy Ghost knew he was to be born there he would have made reservations at the inn for Joseph and Mary. I mean this Holy Ghost was smart and empowered so it wouldn’t have been a big deal to do that. Anyhow, the child was born much in the same fashion as the Old Testament had referred to in several other instants and then nothing was heard of the child for about 30 years and he came forward and revealed himself as the son of God. Just like several others in the Old Testament he also was able to heal the sick, make wine from water, walk on water and do miracles like several different ones had done in the earlier ages. We really wouldn't have known anything about this if it hadn't been from the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John that came about several hundred years after he died. I think the real miracle was how they were able to discover this with no TV, Radio, Printing presses, computers, or anything other that word of mouth spread out over hundreds of years. A lot of their writings were in biblical babblings and hard to interpret so after hundreds of years, King James of England commissioned numerous scholars of his choosing to re-write the New Testament and make changes that could fit the times and be more understandable. This is the bible we now are ask to accept and the written word of God.

Is this your personal perspective? Just wondering because you didn't indicate so. Or are you just mocking those who hold to biblical faith and talking at people telling them how it is?

 

[1robin]

There was a Jewish girl, Mary, who was married to Joseph. There was a holy ghost who came to Joseph and told him he couldn't have sex with her. He was sent by god to impregnate her and after she gave birth he could then have sex with his wife. Joseph agreed to this and Mary became pregnant.

Well let's unpack this stuff. So far you have posted nothing to which you have the slightest idea how to apply a probabilistic argument to and no reason to think that if God exist he could not have done any of this so lets move on. I also don't think your instructions to Joseph about what he could or could not do are accurate but it makes no difference.

About nine months later they were traveling to Bethlehem and the inn where they stopped didn't have room so they stayed in the barn. The Holy Ghost knew that this was going to happen because he had gone to three wise men from afar and told them to get on their camels and get to the Inn on the 25th of December and to bring gifts for the new child that was going to be born there. They traveled for long times to arrive there.

We got a bunch of stuff not in the Bible used to point out how silly the Bible is so far and a bunch of stuff that has no capacity to indicate inaccuracy.

Looks like to me if the Holy Ghost knew he was to be born there he would have made reservations at the inn for Joseph and Mary. I mean this Holy Ghost was smart and empowered so it wouldn’t have been a big deal to do that. Anyhow, the child was born much in the same fashion as the Old Testament had referred to in several other instants and then nothing was heard of the child for about 30 years and he came forward and revealed himself as the son of God.

We have some other stuff here that implies you have the capacity to tell God what he should have done without any reason to think that you are qualified to do. Only if you had the slightest hint of a reason to think God's purpose was Mary and Joseph's to have the accommodations you in your omniscience demand they have is there anything here of value. Every indication there is suggests their winding up in a cave was intentional. It was to demonstrate the humble condition of our savior. Have you read the book your butchering and judging?

Just like several others in the Old Testament he also was able to heal the sick, make wine from water, walk on water and do miracles like several different ones had done in the earlier ages. We really wouldn't have known anything about this if it hadn't been from the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John that came about several hundred years after he died.

There are more than substantial indications that they existed before that as well as other writings. For the love man we have actual existing fragments from them within less than 100 years. Only the most biased of scholars give dates consistent with yours. The average of even secular scholarship is far earlier and Paul is within a dozen years. There also must be an additional dozen texts that record Jesus miracles that are not considered apostolic in nature and so did not make it into the Bible. You must first demonstrate why one witness in Caesar's case can write a book that flatters himself, that the earliest copy we have is 950 years after the original is taught as factual history in colleges all over the planet yet 4 authors are not enough for you concerning only God and who's testimony has been deemed reliable by he greatest experts in history on testimony and evidence (Simon Greenleaf and Lord Lyndhurst).

I think the real miracle was how they were able to discover this with no TV, Radio, Printing presses, computers, or anything other that word of mouth spread out over hundreds of years.

A greater miracle would be proving the evidence they did was wrong. That effort is what convinced many to convert even among legendary scholars like Lewis and Chesterton. The Bible is well established as to converting it's most ardent criticism, of which your is not one.

A lot of their writings were in biblical babblings and hard to interpret so after hundreds of years, King James of England commissioned numerous scholars of his choosing to re-write the New Testament and make changes that could fit the times and be more understandable. This is the bible we now are ask to accept and the written word of God.

The rest is just wrong. So wrong it does not merit bothering with. I would not have wasted so much time contending so ineffectual of claims based on so flawed and shallow scholarship if you were not new to me and I wanted to see what you will do. Good luck.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I am having difficulty construing what you mean by expression. I beleive God is one, so there is no disparity of expression as far as I can see. Now if one were talking about the body; that is not God and it can't be everywhere or know everything.

No I do not accept that interpretation. I believe although Jesus is in the flesh now He will not be when the world is extingushed an so will not know that day because he will not be here to know it. However He obviously knows of it because He is talking about it.

Fine, thank you Muffled, nothing more to be said at this time, God bless, Ben D. :namaste

 

[Shermana]

I don't know to what you are referring to but I don't believe Jesus acquires revelation.

It straight up says he received revelation.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

Hold the phone a second. Neither one of those words are original. Before we get into what words were actually used I wish to know why the dropping of an s is meaningful for you claims, then we will get into what words were used and their meanings if you desire it.

"Beside", meaning no god that ranks as high as he does. Think an Olympic medal stand; first place is always the highest up and nobody is standing beside the other person.

"Besides" meaning "other than".

 

[1robin]

It straight up says he received revelation.

How come when it straight us says Lord that is must mean something besides Christ or God especially when it can't mean many of the other uses for the term, like husband.

 

[1robin]

"Beside", meaning no god that ranks as high as he does. Think an Olympic medal stand; first place is always the highest up and nobody is standing beside the other person.

"Besides" meaning "other than".

God is not standing on a podium receiving medals with other God's. Give me the academic not the layman reason beside means more than one, please. Then we will get to the words that were actually used when first recorded.

 

[BornAgain]

Why was he told by the "Angel" that he was a fellow prophet?

That is what it is, just a fellow servants of the Lord Jesus Christ.

“Angel”?

If you are thinking that the “Angel” here is the Lord Jesus Christ, think again.

Rev 1:1 The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

Rev 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

Five links in the chain of authorship of “Rev 1:1 The revelation of Jesus Christ” [though the whole bible is so; for all revelation comes through Christ and all centers in him; and especially in these last days God has spoken to us by his Son]: God, Christ, his angel, his servant John, and the servants in the churches.

But look at the difference between God and Christ and His/Christ’s angel.

Rev 1:17 And when I saw him/Christ, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last: [Rev. 2:8, 22:13]
Rev 1:18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.

Rev 22:12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.
Rev 22:13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

Christ said, “I am Alpha and Omega” and “First and the Last” and in Revelation 1:8 God said, “I am Alpha and Omega” [See Isaiah 44:6, 48:12]

But to the angels God said,

Heb 1:6 And then, when he presented his honored Son to the world, God said, “Let all the angels of God worship him.”
Heb 1:7 God calls his angels “messengers swift as the wind, and servants made of flaming fire.”

Heb 1:13 And God never said to an angel, as he did to his Son,
“Sit in honor at my right hand
until I humble your enemies,
making them a footstool under your feet.”
Heb 1:14 But angels are only servants [LIKE JOHN]. They are spirits sent from God to care for those who will receive salvation.

BUT TO THE SON GOD SAYS

Heb 1:8 But to his Son he says,
“Your throne, O God, endures forever and ever. Your royal power is expressed in righteousness.
Heb 1:9 You love what is right and hate what is wrong.
Therefore God, your God, has anointed you,
pouring out the oil of joy on you more than on anyone else.”

 

[Shermana]

Did you even bother reading my quote that you snipped one line from? Apparently not, because nowhere did I imply it was Jesus Christ.

And by the way, Revelation 22:13 is an Angel speaking, of a message from the Father, not the Son. Those who don't understand this demonstrate irrefutably that they have not actually read Revelation but rely on a handy list of cherry picked quotes that they don't even know what the context is.

 

[Shermana]

How come when it straight us says Lord that is must mean something besides Christ or God especially when it can't mean many of the other uses for the term, like husband.

Oh yeah, you're the one denying that Lord is ever used for Kings and husbands. "Can't?" Please. Try actually reading the text before you bother replying.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

God is not standing on a podium receiving medals with other God's. Give me the academic not the layman reason beside means more than one, please. Then we will get to the words that were actually used when first recorded.

I'll just jump to the original language and deny you the satisfaction of pretentiously building it up. Here is the translated definition of the original Hebrew word used ("al")

prep
upon, on the ground of, according to, on account of, on behalf of, concerning, beside, in addition to, together with, beyond, above, over, by, on to, towards, to, against

It's a pretty ambiguous word overall... From the definition given though, it sounds like God is saying no god should be worshiped as being just as great as God (on the ground of, together with, beside, against). I understand grammar is not your cup of tea, but it's pretty evident that the Hebrew word "al" does not mean "other than" or "besides", as you are implying it does.

 

[Shermana]

Yes, no god shall be BEFORE Him. None shall be regarded as equal or better.

 

[1robin]

Oh yeah, you're the one denying that Lord is ever used for Kings and husbands. "Can't?" Please. Try actually reading the text before you bother replying.

I have said over and over and over again that I do not deny it. In fact I have said it is used that way. Just as I have said it could not have possibly been used to mean husband, or earthly superior in the cases we were discussing just as it is far more reasonable that it meant God or Christ than the other meanings. If after I say the same thing over and over again you claim I never did (I will get the quotes if necessary). It does not inspire confidence in your being intellectually honest about less obvious things.

 

[1robin]

I'll just jump to the original language and deny you the satisfaction of pretentiously building it up. Here is the translated definition of the original Hebrew word used ("al")

It's a pretty ambiguous word overall... From the definition given though, it sounds like God is saying no god should be worshiped as being just as great as God (on the ground of, together with, beside, against). I understand grammar is not your cup of tea, but it's pretty evident that the Hebrew word "al" does not mean "other than" or "besides", as you are implying it does.

No stealing of thunder allowed. However even granting the ambiguity that does not help what you stated. You must have a way to know what you claimed is true. What is it? You do also realize that I gave more than one verse (half dozen I believe) and many more exist that you have no even touched?

 

[1robin]

Yes, no god shall be BEFORE Him. None shall be regarded as equal or better.

Where are these other God's? This is the first I have heard of a Jew, Christian, or Muslim that believed other God's exist. Are they redundantly Omni-beings like the father or simply unnecessary lesser beings? I think the verse implied you shall have no other God's (false ones in fact even if we believe the exist).