Servant_of_the_One1
Well-Known Member
I did, trust me. Jesus never claimed to be god. This is only claims invented by Paul and his followers.
-
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!
Is Jesus God?
- Thread starter Orbit
- Start date
I did, trust me. Jesus never claimed to be god. This is only claims invented by Paul and his followers.
Servant_of_the_One1
Well-Known Member
When Jesus went to the mountain to worship God, clearly he denied to be God. How can god worship himself? Or how can satan say to jesus if he is god: worship me and u get the earth.
Obviously Jesus was servant of God.
Unification
Well-Known Member
I understand what you're saying, in essence of God being a single physical male guy in the flesh. . Which you are correct.
I am saying Jesus is personified as wisdom, good knowledge, and understanding of God. The Spirit and literal life dwelling bodily in the human.
Consciousness. This physical body that we reside in, it's not ours.
The Christ isn't a single fleshly figure. It's the literal seeds of light (wisdom,knowledge, and understanding of God). (The Word/Spirit of God) The Christ is the Spirit of God residing inside humans'.
kepha31
Active Member
Jesus claimed to be God, it's all over the Bible, and He rose from the dead. The Islamic replacement theory doesn't hold up to scrutiny. There is no point in discussing this with someone who denies the bible insofar as it is history, along with everything in it. One of the rules of historical documentary evidence is that a manuscript that was written or copied 50 years after the actual event or after the original autograph is most likely to be more accurate than a copy made 500 years late.
The oldest extant manuscript we have of Plato was a copy made 900 years after Plato's death. In actuality we cannot possible know for sure if those writings are actually Plato's, but the critics, the cults, the skeptics, the false religions and the atheists never question the extant manuscripts of Plato...but when it comes to the Bible, the rules of historical documentary evidence go flying out the window.
With the New Testament writings we have extant copies only a few decades from the original autographs. This is POWERFUL evidence that the Bible we have today is indeed the accurate writings of the Apostles. Servant_of_the_One1, you are saying the Apostles are scheming dishonest liars, men who valued honesty and integrity, where there were enough people around that a deception would have been exposed. Jesus rose from the dead and you don't even need the Bible to prove it. Only God can raise Himself from the dead under his own power.
Chapter and verse, please.
Chapter and verse, please. Besides, He doesn't need to. You are confused. Jesus wants us to share his divine life with us as sons and daughters of God, not robots.
Matt. 4:7; Luke 4:12 - Jesus tells satan, "you shall not tempt the Lord your God" in reference to Himself.
John 10:30 - Jesus says, "I and the Father are one." They are equal. The Jews even claimed Jesus made Himself equal to God. Jesus' statement in John 14:28, "the Father is greater than I," cannot contradict John 10:30 (the Word of God is never in conflict). Jesus' statement in John 14:28 simply refers to His human messianic role as servant and slave, which He, and not the Father or the Holy Spirit, undertook in the flesh.
I hope one day you will wake up to the fact that you have been misguided.
Last edited:
katiemygirl
CHRISTIAN
Ohhh I see. So we can't trust the apostle Paul's writings either? How about John who tells us Jesus is God? I suppose you think he invented that also? What you're really saying is that we should trust YOU instead, to decide for us what is true and what is not.
Thanks, but I'll stick to God's word instead, all sixty-six books of it!
katiemygirl
CHRISTIAN
You must be Muslim. All you do is repeat their phony claims, which are found all over the internet. It is obvious that you have no understanding of our triune God or His word.
katiemygirl
CHRISTIAN
"Pride goeth before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall." Prov. 16:18
JM2C
CHRISTIAN
Either one denies the Trinity. “and the Word was the God” AND “and the Word was a god” are all Unitarians, from the Jews, Muslims, Arians/jw, Modalist, Sabellianism they all denied the Trinity.
The predicate nominative in the 3rd clause is the word “theos/God” and the linking verb is the word “en/was” and the subject is the “ho logos/the Word”. Think of the linking verb “was/en” as an equal sign. Then it would read like this: “and the Word = God”.
IOW, John made it “Clear” in the 3rd clause that the “Word” is NOT an “a god” as the 1st clause suggested that “In the beginning was the Word”, and NOT “the God” as the 2nd clause suggested “and the Word was with God” and therefore John’s conclusion in the 3rd clause can only be “and the Word was God”.
There is no other logical conclusion in the 3rd clause but “and the Word was God”.
You can’t argue from this if you can only read the whole verse and not just the 3rd clause like all these Unitarians have done for hundreds of years.
truthofscripture
Active Member
Sorry, but arguing correct grammer isn't going to prove your point. Every scripture MUST be in harmony with every other scripture. The concept of a trinity destroys that harmony. The trinity isn't supported in the scriptures, and Jesus isn't God.
JM2C
CHRISTIAN
How do you/jw harmonize your/jw alteration/adulteration of John 1:1c “and the Word was a god” to this verse?
JN 12:41 These things Isaiah said because he saw His glory, and he spoke of Him.
This is a reference to Isaiah 6:1-4.
In John 12:41 John clearly expressed the Lord Jesus Christ ties to “Yahweh” [H3378] in Isaiah 6:1-4.
In Isaiah 6:1 Isaiah says he saw the Lord [H3378], the Sovereign Lord [H151] and John identified this Sovereign Lord [H151] with or as the Lord Jesus Christ in John 12:41.
How do you harmonize these two verses, John 12:41 and Isaiah 6:1, without falling apart?
JM2C
CHRISTIAN
An appeal to ignorance.
If you are here just to draw people to agree with your rhetorical arguments then you going to get the same people and those are, ignorant like you, arguing from ignorance.
The words “ignorance” and “ignorant” are not insult and not meant to offend anyone it’s just lack of knowledge.
JM2C
CHRISTIAN
What if I say something like that to your prophet? What would you do?
truthofscripture
Active Member
Notice the capitalization of God, and the lower case god as well. They're very important. It refers to God the Almighty, and God's only begotten son as being "as a god", not "as a God".
One must be careful to take in ACCURATE knowledge daily of God and His written word, the inspired scriptures. Taking in INACCURATE translations of those scriptures, most certainly does not allow us to take in accurate knowledge. King James, and almost 38 other translations are filled with mistranslated words, leading the reader to the wrong conclusions. This was deliberately done, first, in about 325 a.d. by a PAGAN emperor, Emperor Constantine. He was creating a bible for his new "state religion", the Roman Church. It is from this original bible, a mixture of pagan and Christian writings, that all of our modern day English translations of the scriptures came. There's only a few accurate translations that exist. Three to be exact, and two of them aren't completely true to the original intent of God's inspired words. So it's not a "jw alteration", it's a pagan alteration that you're reading, and thinking that the NWT isn't the correct one, when it's the only correct English translation that is accurate word for word. Your Bible is missing God's personal name, over 6,000 times (and I don't mean His title, God). Does that sound accurate to you?
Isaiah 6:1 In the year that King Uz·ziʹah died, I saw Jehovah sitting on a lofty and elevated throne, and the skirts of his robe filled the temple.
John 12:41 Isaiah said these things because he saw his glory, and he spoke about him.
Isaiah 6:1-4
6 In the year that King Uz·ziʹah died, I saw Jehovah sitting on a lofty and elevated throne, and the skirts of his robe filled the temple. 2 Seraphs were standing above him; each had six wings. Each covered his face with two and covered his feet with two, and each of them would fly about with two.
3 And one called to the other:
“Holy, holy, holy is Jehovah of armies.
The whole earth is filled with his glory.”
4 And the pivots of the thresholds quivered at the sound of the shouting, and the house was filled with smoke.
Clear asked (post #278) : M2C :
How would one write the words “The Word was THE God” in clear koine greek?
How would one write the words : “The Word was A God” in clear koine greek?
Which result matches what John wrote? (Pick any word order you want for the translation of this simple phrase since it doesn't matter in Greek)
JM2C replied (post #288) Either one denies the Trinity. “and the Word was the God” AND “and the Word was a god” are all Unitarians, from the Jews, Muslims, Arians/jw, Modalist, Sabellianism they all denied the Trinity. The predicate nominative in the 3rd clause is the word “theos/God” and the linking verb is the word “en/was” and the subject is the “ho logos/the Word”. Think of the linking verb “was/en” as an equal sign. Then it would read like this: “and the Word = God”. IOW, John made it “Clear” in the 3rd clause that the “Word” is NOT an “a god” as the 1st clause suggested that “In the beginning was the Word”, and NOT “the God” as the 2nd clause suggested “and the Word was with God” and therefore John’s conclusion in the 3rd clause can only be “and the Word was God”. There is no other logical conclusion in the 3rd clause but “and the Word was God”. You can’t argue from this if you can only read the whole verse and not just the 3rd clause like all these Unitarians have done for hundreds of years.
JM2C :
Nothing in your post answered the very, very, simple question I asked, but instead, your post simply restates your position with irrelevant, confused and incorrect Jargon that is not actual koine Greek grammar. (ην is NOT the same as an equal sign") Creating incorrect rules to support your theory does not enlighten, but confuses readers.
JM2C, The greek involved is very, very, very simple.
I asked you :
How would one write the words “The Word was THE God” in clear koine greek?
How would one write the words : “The Word was A God” in clear koine greek?
Readers can then simply compare with their own eyes, the resulting sentences to what John wrote and see simply and clearly what Johns sentence says. If you need help with this, ask someone you trust who actually can read greek to help you with these two five-word sentences.
FORUM READERS
If the religious context is becoming a stumbling block for others of you, then pick any words without religious bias and plug them into the greek and see what the results are.
For example : Pick ANY greek nouns you want and plug it into this sentence and the result is the same.
Instead of translating "The Word was A God." and "The Word was THE God.", try translating "The dog was A friend" and "The dog was THE friend",
or "The man was A brother" versus "The man was THE brother.",
or "The pencil was A tool." versus "The pencil was THE tool."
Then, simply match the result to Johns usage and you will see if John 1:1 can or should mean "The word was A God.", or "The word was THE God." when it is not forced by a specific theological context.
If you switch nouns in all three clauses, the result is the same. For example, : "In the beginning was the "Pencil", and the "Pencil" was with God, and the "Pencil was a God." Pick any noun you want, the results will be the same. This is a very, very, very simple point. It does not require support from confusing irrelevant and incorrect and confusing jargon to see the point.
When JM2C provides us all with a correct answer of the simple question of translation I asked him to provide, you will see that this is correct.
Clear
εινεδρει
How would one write the words “The Word was THE God” in clear koine greek?
How would one write the words : “The Word was A God” in clear koine greek?
Which result matches what John wrote? (Pick any word order you want for the translation of this simple phrase since it doesn't matter in Greek)
JM2C replied (post #288) Either one denies the Trinity. “and the Word was the God” AND “and the Word was a god” are all Unitarians, from the Jews, Muslims, Arians/jw, Modalist, Sabellianism they all denied the Trinity. The predicate nominative in the 3rd clause is the word “theos/God” and the linking verb is the word “en/was” and the subject is the “ho logos/the Word”. Think of the linking verb “was/en” as an equal sign. Then it would read like this: “and the Word = God”. IOW, John made it “Clear” in the 3rd clause that the “Word” is NOT an “a god” as the 1st clause suggested that “In the beginning was the Word”, and NOT “the God” as the 2nd clause suggested “and the Word was with God” and therefore John’s conclusion in the 3rd clause can only be “and the Word was God”. There is no other logical conclusion in the 3rd clause but “and the Word was God”. You can’t argue from this if you can only read the whole verse and not just the 3rd clause like all these Unitarians have done for hundreds of years.
JM2C :
Nothing in your post answered the very, very, simple question I asked, but instead, your post simply restates your position with irrelevant, confused and incorrect Jargon that is not actual koine Greek grammar. (ην is NOT the same as an equal sign") Creating incorrect rules to support your theory does not enlighten, but confuses readers.
JM2C, The greek involved is very, very, very simple.
I asked you :
How would one write the words “The Word was THE God” in clear koine greek?
How would one write the words : “The Word was A God” in clear koine greek?
Readers can then simply compare with their own eyes, the resulting sentences to what John wrote and see simply and clearly what Johns sentence says. If you need help with this, ask someone you trust who actually can read greek to help you with these two five-word sentences.
FORUM READERS
If the religious context is becoming a stumbling block for others of you, then pick any words without religious bias and plug them into the greek and see what the results are.
For example : Pick ANY greek nouns you want and plug it into this sentence and the result is the same.
Instead of translating "The Word was A God." and "The Word was THE God.", try translating "The dog was A friend" and "The dog was THE friend",
or "The man was A brother" versus "The man was THE brother.",
or "The pencil was A tool." versus "The pencil was THE tool."
Then, simply match the result to Johns usage and you will see if John 1:1 can or should mean "The word was A God.", or "The word was THE God." when it is not forced by a specific theological context.
If you switch nouns in all three clauses, the result is the same. For example, : "In the beginning was the "Pencil", and the "Pencil" was with God, and the "Pencil was a God." Pick any noun you want, the results will be the same. This is a very, very, very simple point. It does not require support from confusing irrelevant and incorrect and confusing jargon to see the point.
When JM2C provides us all with a correct answer of the simple question of translation I asked him to provide, you will see that this is correct.
Clear
εινεδρει
Last edited:
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Jesus is God, in human form. He manifested as part human via Mary in order to be among us.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Yes He did. Jesus used the 'word' or title for the father to describe Himself. If He wasn't God, He wouldn't have done that. Jesus is part of the Godhead, He is the man form, in Israel, and in Deity He is one with ''the father''. The father manifested as Jesus, though, that means, it's the same Deity.
Unification
Well-Known Member
Spirit residing bodily. Manifesting via the heart/mind in order to be within us.
Servant_of_the_One1
Well-Known Member
The bible verses is very clear guys.
Jesus never accepted divinity, he was pure monotheist and a prophet. The lies of Paul cannot corrupt the pure message of Jesus pbuh.
Jesus never accepted divinity, he was pure monotheist and a prophet. The lies of Paul cannot corrupt the pure message of Jesus pbuh.
outhouse
Atheistically
isn't this just like saying muhammad's followers invented the claim he is a prophet?
outhouse
Atheistically
is this the same as the possible lies of muhammad?