• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Bible declares that Jesus is God

Rick B

Active Member
Premium Member
Sorry, but I think that takes too much "reading in" (eisegesis) and not enough exegesis.

Really? Here is the pertinent section regarding the "brass snake" in Numbers:

21:6 The Lord sent fiery serpents among the people and they bit the people, so that many people of Israel died. So the people came to Moses and said, “We have sinned, because we have spoken against the Lord and you; intercede with the Lord, that He may remove the serpents from us.” And Moses interceded for the people. 8 Then the Lord said to Moses, “Make a fiery serpent, and set it on a standard; and it shall come about, that everyone who is bitten, when he looks at it, he will live.” 9 And Moses made a bronze serpent and set it on the standard; and it came about, that if a serpent bit any man, when he looked to the bronze serpent, he lived.

Jesus interpretation?

John 3:14 As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; 15 so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life.

16 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. 18 He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil. 20 For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. 21 But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God.”

I stated: "God offered the remedy of Israel's sin. Those who believed God's word and looked, in faith, at the serpent on the lifted staff (representing their sin) were healed. This was also a foreshadowing of a future event.

It appears that Jesus' exegesis of the event involving the bronze serpent and its foreshadowing of His crucifixion with the instrument of faith (belief) and the remedy of living (in the latter case eternally) is abundantly apparent to the open minded. My assessment clearly is in conformity to Jesus' interpretation.
 

Rick B

Active Member
Premium Member
I have not read this thread but I will.My reply for the first post and OP is this.There is a scripture that says if you confess is Lord you will be saved.tThat the only scripture that gives you actual words to say to save yourself.

There are many words the bible uses for Jesus Son of man Son of God Emanuel etc.

Why is it that when I run into you Christians like my sister insisting upon the fact the bible says Jesus is God you demand me and other Christians verbalize Jesus is God.

Is that a verbal ritual y'all use to feel like you've been saved.Requiring me to say Jesus is God is not in the bible.

I'm not arguing the dirty if Jesus but the fact y'all you have to verbally say Jesus is God to be saved


Find me a scripture outside of if you confess Jesus as Lord Lord isn't God.Find me one that specifically says I have to verbally say that.its a,made up ritual that's not biblical.You guys are imagining things.its a magical verbal incantation y'all make up

Please don't take this as a "demand". But if you are willing to let me know if you believe that Jesus is both fully human (sin excepted) and fully God?
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Really? Here is the pertinent section regarding the "brass snake" in Numbers:

21:6 The Lord sent fiery serpents among the people and they bit the people, so that many people of Israel died. So the people came to Moses and said, “We have sinned, because we have spoken against the Lord and you; intercede with the Lord, that He may remove the serpents from us.” And Moses interceded for the people. 8 Then the Lord said to Moses, “Make a fiery serpent, and set it on a standard; and it shall come about, that everyone who is bitten, when he looks at it, he will live.” 9 And Moses made a bronze serpent and set it on the standard; and it came about, that if a serpent bit any man, when he looked to the bronze serpent, he lived.

Jesus interpretation?

John 3:14 As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; 15 so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life.

I'm sorry you can't see it, but there is a very clear difference between "looking" (in Numbers) and "believing" (in John). It is in precisely this way -- muddying the patent meanings of fairly simple words -- that religious beliefs get invented and promulgated.

Exegesis is a process of trying to discover what the author meant by studying what the author actually said. Eisegesis always insists on adding something -- in your case, the subtle notion that there is not much difference between looking and believing.

And in this way, you make the Bible (including these two texts written some 1000 years apart) try to say something that neither of them actually says.
 

Rick B

Active Member
Premium Member
I'm sorry you can't see it, but there is a very clear difference between "looking" (in Numbers) and "believing" (in John). It is in precisely this way -- muddying the patent meanings of fairly simple words -- that religious beliefs get invented and promulgated.

Exegesis is a process of trying to discover what the author meant by studying what the author actually said. Eisegesis always insists on adding something -- in your case, the subtle notion that there is not much difference between looking and believing.

And in this way, you make the Bible (including these two texts written some 1000 years apart) try to say something that neither of them actually says.

It's pretty simple the ones who believed looked and lived. The looking was the demonstration of their belief. And I too am sorry you can't see it.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Really? Here is the pertinent section regarding the "brass snake" in Numbers:

21:6 The Lord sent fiery serpents among the people and they bit the people, so that many people of Israel died. So the people came to Moses and said, “We have sinned, because we have spoken against the Lord and you; intercede with the Lord, that He may remove the serpents from us.” And Moses interceded for the people. 8 Then the Lord said to Moses, “Make a fiery serpent, and set it on a standard; and it shall come about, that everyone who is bitten, when he looks at it, he will live.” 9 And Moses made a bronze serpent and set it on the standard; and it came about, that if a serpent bit any man, when he looked to the bronze serpent, he lived.

Jesus interpretation?

John 3:14 As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; 15 so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life.
I'm sorry you can't see it, but there is a very clear difference between "looking" (in Numbers) and "believing" (in John). It is in precisely this way -- muddying the patent meanings of fairly simple words -- that religious beliefs get invented and promulgated.

Exegesis is a process of trying to discover what the author meant by studying what the author actually said. Eisegesis always insists on adding something -- in your case, the subtle notion that there is not much difference between looking and believing.

And in this way, you make the Bible (including these two texts written some 1000 years apart) try to say something that neither of them actually says.
It's pretty simple the ones who believed looked and lived. The looking was the demonstration of their belief. And I too am sorry you can't see it.
Simple is the right word. If you don't believe, you don't look? So when somebody flashes something in front of your face and says "look at this," you only actually look if you already have a belief? I think -- knowing something about human nature -- that that is far, far from true.

I repeat what I said, you are reading something in which is not there, for the sole purpose of reinforcing what you wish to believe. And that's fine -- for you. I prefer reason.
 

Rick B

Active Member
Premium Member
I'm sorry you can't see it, but there is a very clear difference between "looking" (in Numbers) and "believing" (in John). It is in precisely this way -- muddying the patent meanings of fairly simple words -- that religious beliefs get invented and promulgated.

Exegesis is a process of trying to discover what the author meant by studying what the author actually said. Eisegesis always insists on adding something -- in your case, the subtle notion that there is not much difference between looking and believing.

And in this way, you make the Bible (including these two texts written some 1000 years apart) try to say something that neither of them actually says.

Simple is the right word. If you don't believe, you don't look? So when somebody flashes something in front of your face and says "look at this," you only actually look if you already have a belief? I think -- knowing something about human nature -- that that is far, far from true.

I repeat what I said, you are reading something in which is not there, for the sole purpose of reinforcing what you wish to believe. And that's fine -- for you. I prefer reason.

COMMENTARY ON THE BOOK OF NUMBERS
Critical and Explanatory
on the Whole Bible
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown. Published 1871
The severity of the scourge and the appalling extent of mortality brought them to a sense of sin, and through the intercessions of Moses, which they implored, they were miraculously healed. He was directed to make the figure of a serpent in brass, to be elevated on a pole or standard, that it might be seen at the extremities of the camp and that every bitten Israelite who looked to it might be healed. This peculiar method of cure was designed, in the first instance, to show that it was the efficacy of God‘s power and grace, not the effect of nature or art, and also that it might be a type of the power of faith in Christ to heal all who look to Him because of their sins (John 3:14, John 3:15; see also on 2 Kings 18:4).

Dr. J. Ligon Duncan III Chancellor & CE of Reformed Theological Seminary and John E. Richards Professor of Systematic and Historical Theology
So God in His mercy uses this trial to move the people to repentance and prayer. The fact that they acknowledge their sin, that they seek God's forgiveness, that they go to God's personally appointed mediator and ask him to intercede is an indication that God in His mercy has used even this trial for their spiritual well being. And so they respond in repentance and prayer. God has used the trial to press them to the point where they recognize their need; they have responded to their need in repentance for their sin; they specifically confess their sin; and they seek God's relief and forgiveness in prayer. Notice, they acknowledge their sin: “We have sinned”; they’re specific in their acknowledgement of their sin: “We have spoken against the Lord and against you”; and, they acknowledge that Moses is God's appointed mediator: “Pray to the Lord that He take away the serpents from us.” In that last phrase they acknowledge that only God can give them the relief that they need. So the Lord has used this trial in order to move them to repentance and prayer.

And He has pressed Israel so hard in this trial that they have run to Him–what they ought to have done in the first place. There would have been an easy way to do this. They didn't take the easy way. They took the hard way, but God in His mercy has led them to run to Him and look for help.

First of all, what's on the pole? Snake. OK. What are snakes doing here? They’re killing people. Why are snakes killing people? The judgment of God. What's the copper snake on the pole a picture of? It is a picture of God's just judgment on Israel for their sin.

Secondly, isn't it interesting that in other Hebrew sacrifices when the representative was being prepared to be slain in your place for your sin, what did the head of the family have to do? You had to touch the representative sacrifice. Here all they do is look. Just look. They look away from themselves and to this symbol, this sign God has provided. Can you imagine a more dramatic way to emphasize that Israel has nothing to do with the sparing, forgiving, saving power that God is going to display in the healing of them from the bites of these poisonous snakes? They are contributing zippo, zilch, nothing, nada! All they have to do is look! (That is, by the way, why we sang My Faith Looks Up to Thee.) Is this not the essential act of saving faith? Looking to Christ…looking away from ourselves, from our good deeds and our bad deeds, and looking to Him alone? Surely this is one of the reasons why Jesus will point to this passage when He's trying to explain faith to Nicodemus. You remember that this is the passage that Jesus goes to eventually when He's speaking to Nicodemus. Before He said,

“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes on Him should not perish, but have everlasting life”
…before He says that, Jesus says,

“[Nicodemus,] As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the son of man be lifted up, that whosoever believes in Him may have eternal life. For God so loved the world….”
In other words, Jesus says to Nicodemus just as the people had to look at that brass serpent, simply trust on God's word of promise that if you will look at the serpent you will be saved, so also we must look to Christ and Him crucified.

I'm in good company of believing Christian scholars with whom we all agree to the exegesis of the text. But of course you have your company of atheists who reject God and His written revelation and so what's to be expected but denial.

Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.
24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.
28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; 32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.
 

kjw47

Well-Known Member
Just because the Persons of the Trinity have specific actions they have chosen to perform in the realm of creation does not mean that there is no equality in those Persons unless, of course, one assumes unitarianism when reading the texts.


YHVH(Jehovah) a single being God is the only true living God.
 

kjw47

Well-Known Member
So, I take it that you perceive the Roman Catholic church was correct in its translating since you quote it.

I believe you have no way to determine that and it shows your hypocrisy.

I don't believe this is true but obviously it is what JW's must teach if you are saying it. JWs don't say anything on their own , do they?

I believe I have heard this mantra before. Our view is right because we interpret it as what Jesus says. That is nonsense.

I believe that is a nasty accusation that has no basis in truth. We don't believe JW nonsense because it is nonsense.


God will be showing all of us soon.
 

Oeste

Well-Known Member
No doubt it does. But you see, I happen to believe that if there is such a thing as "what He has to say,"

I don't believe there is such a thing as something God "has to say". I don't recall anything alluding to this from a scriptural standpoint. From my perspective I see us all living under grace and God speaking because He chooses to do so.

then it could not possibly be delivered in the way that religious messages are -- through revelation to very few with the expectation of perfect transmission to many.

I’m not sure what you mean by “revelation to very few”. Are you a Jehovah Witness or similar, who believes only a chosen few are allowed to understand what they read in the bible?

If there is a god (as I understand the term) and if that god wants me to know something important to both that god and me -- then I trust that I know it already.

So how does one apply your assertion to everyday life?

Let’s say I have a teacher, voted best teacher in the world by peers and students. This teacher want me to know a lesson plan important to her and me. Can I now "trust I know it already" simply because its important to both of us?

I agree it would be great to learn through osmosis but wouldn't I have to put time and effort into learning the lesson plan first?
 

Oeste

Well-Known Member
I'm sorry you can't see it, but there is a very clear difference between "looking" (in Numbers) and "believing" (in John).

Why insert differences when for all practical purposes there are none?

She looks to John for answers.

She believes John has answers.​

Can you explain the “very clear difference” between “look” and “believe” here?

It is in precisely this way -- muddying the patent meanings of fairly simple words -- that religious beliefs get invented and promulgated.

Or it is in precisely this way—muddying the patent meanings of fairly simple words—that bible skeptics get invented and promulgated.

For instance, it’s been often alleged the bible must be wrong because bats are not birds (even though they’re both winged creatures), brass snakes don’t cure snake bites (even though it’s patently clear God does the healing) or that “look” can’t possibly mean “believe” (when it clearly and obviously can).

Exegesis is a process of trying to discover what the author meant by studying what the author actually said. Eisegesis always insists on adding something -- in your case, the subtle notion that there is not much difference between looking and believing.

Or in your case, the not too subtle notion there are distinct differences where there are none.

And in this way, you make the Bible (including these two texts written some 1000 years apart) try to say something that neither of them actually says.

I'm not sure why two verses written a thousand years apart can't say essentially the same thing. Even more so since Christians consider scripture to be "God breathed".

I think Rick B. did a spectacular job explaining verses exactly as claimed while supporting his assertions through sound exegesis.
 

Rick B

Active Member
Premium Member
After all these posts that deny that the Bible declares that Jesus is God no one has yet attempted to engage the texts demonstrating Granville-Sharp's Rule. Texts such as Titus 2:13 "as we wait for the happy fulfillment of our hope in the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ."

This clear proclamation of the deity of Christ is affirmed in other passages in Titus.

Titus 1:3 "But now in his own time he has made his message evident through the preaching I was entrusted with according to the commandment of God our Savior. 4 To Titus my genuine son in a common faith. Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior."

Who is Savior in verse 3? - God
Who's commandment? - God our Savior
Who is Savior in verse 4 distinct from the Father? - Jesus
Therefore Jesus is God.

Just to clarify one point. Who commanded Paul to preach his message (the gospel)? God our Savior. In Acts 26:12-18 this same Paul says that it was Jesus.
Contradiction? No. Verification.
 

Magus

Active Member
So, God impregnated 'himself' into Mary, to create for himself, son-flesh, so he can sacrifice himself, to himself, to save mankind from himself, when he cursed Eve with Sin, cos she was tempted by a talking snake to eat a fruit.

I don't understand the logic behind it all.
 

Rick B

Active Member
Premium Member
So, God impregnated 'himself' into Mary, to create for himself, son-flesh, so he can sacrifice himself, to himself, to save mankind from himself, when he cursed Eve with Sin, cos she was tempted by a talking snake to eat a fruit.

I don't understand the logic behind it all.

Is this a response to my previous post?
 

Magus

Active Member
Can you refute the argument logically and directly?

This seems logical enough

God impregnated 'himself' into Mary, to create for himself, son-flesh, so he can sacrifice himself, to himself, to save mankind from himself, when he cursed Eve with Sin, cos she was tempted by a talking snake to eat a fruit.

Is this not your belief?
 

Rick B

Active Member
Premium Member
This seems logical enough

God impregnated 'himself' into Mary, to create for himself, son-flesh, so he can sacrifice himself, to himself, to save mankind from himself, when he cursed Eve with Sin, cos she was tempted by a talking snake to eat a fruit.

Is this not your belief?

Anyone familiar with debate understands that your reply is a non-sequitur non-response. To be a relevant response you must engage the proposition directly with a counter-argument that interacts with that specific proposition not avoid it by presenting rabbit-trails. When one does this they demonstrate (sometimes unwittingly) that they are unable to refute the proposition but in any case lose the argument.
 
Top