If Jesus is God why doesn't the Bible say so?

[SethZaddik]

Often it is taken for granted that Jesus (p) is God. 2,000 years of tradition has taken precedent over the actual words of the Bible and the Word himself.

I am going to post the verses used to "prove" Jesus (p) is God, show how they do the exact opposite and thus prove with the evidence used pro Jesus being God it actually proves the opposite. It is not at all difficult.

Then I will post the verses that directly contradict the theory that Jesus is equal to God, and if he is not equal he is not God.

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word(Logos), and the Word was with God (Tontheos) and the Word was God (theos, which means Divine or A god, NOT God).

This is obviously not saying that Jesus is God in the original Koine Greek, it is saying that God's Word is Divine, borrowing from Platonic/Philonic philosophy (Logos) for a Hellenistic audience.

14: And the Word became flesh and lived amongst us.

Jesus was created BY the Word of God (virgin birth), as such he is CALLED the Word, even in Islam. Also because he was GIVEN authority to speak FOR God and clarify the Torah, which had been corrupted by tradition.

It is interesting that John is the only book that is used of all Gospels as an offer of proof, I have seen people TRY using the other 3 but it is not worthy of refutation being so ridiculous. Feel free to offer evidence to the contrary.

John 8:58

" Truly I tell you, before Abraham was, I am."

Because God says to Moses "I am that I am" it is ASSUMED Jesus means to say "I AM I am" but he doesn't say that AT ALL.

Punctuation was non existent, it could just as easily be "Before Abraham, was I am (God)."

But I will give the benefit of the doubt, besides, Muslims actually do believe in the preexistence of Jesus.

Which is ALL he was saying, before Abraham was, I am(prexistent, immortal, not God though).

John 10:30

"I and my Father are one."

Out of context I can see why people misinterpret this verse. Let's see what Jesus says right after this when he is about to be stoned:

"I have shown you many good works FROM THE FATHER."

His Father, our Father, the Father. Clearly Jesus is not saying he himself is God THE FATHER, and that his good works are FROM the Father and not of his doing alone.

Which is why he says, 10:29 "What my Father has GIVEN me is greater than all else, and no one (not even Jesus) can snatch it out of the Father's hand. THE Father and I are one."

A metaphor for a united will. God's will is Jesus will, not visa versa.

John 21:25 Judah Thomas exclaims excitedly:

"My lord and my God!"

Perhaps the most dishonest of "proofs" used to try supporting the Nicene Creed, Thomas, here an Apostle is in doubt that Jesus has ressurected until he touches him, odd scene because Mary Magdalene was not allowed to touch him because he had "not yet Ascended."

Nevertheless, Thomas didn't call Jesus "My lord AND my God." Despite Lord being commonly translated from YHVH, YHVH doesn't mean Lord and humans are called lord in the Bible all the time, by Hebrews. God is YHVH-Elohim or El Shaddai, El Elyon, etc.

Maybe he is calling Jesus his lord, but it is far from obvious or clear. He definitely is not calling him Elohim/God though, as he knows he is not God, Jesus talks ABOUT God but never says he IS God and neither does Thomas. "My God!" is an understandable response to seeing a dead man (reportedly, only Peter actually saw the crucifixion, little known fact that it is he denies Jesus because he is "stalking" the Messiah and while doing so is asked repeatedly if he is one of his disciples).

Now the proof that Jesus is not God or equal.

Mt. 24:36
"But about that day and hour no one knows, not angels in Heaven, nor the son, but ONLY the Father."

This destroys the theory of equality between God and Jesus

Mt. 26:39 "My Father, if possible, let this cup pass from me....Yet not what I want but what you want."

Jesus is asking if it is possible and His will, let him out of this situation he doesn't want to be in, but will nevertheless go through with it if GOD wills it so. It is clear who is the Power, God.

Mark 10:18
"Why do you call me good? No one is good but God ALONE."

That is an outright denial that Jesus is God in the flesh. If God alone, not Jesus the Messiah, is good and Jesus rebuked someone who called him good on that account, denying being good even, he can't possibly be God. Because God IS good, ALONE, not Jesus (who is obviously good, but he is making a point, specifically, save the praises for the One Who deserves them, God).

I feel I have proven my point and will leave you with the knowledge that John 5:19,29, 30; 14:28 & 17:21-23 also prove it if you want to look them up. I just don't want this to be too long.

Peace be upon Jesus and the 12 Apostles.

Peace be with you all/Salaam.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Also, as the apostle John penned at Revelation 1:5; Revelation 3:14 B that the pre-human heavenly Jesus was the beginning of the creation by God.
God is Un-created. God is from everlasting according to Psalms 90:2
So, only God was 'before' the beginning. Jesus was Not before the beginning as God was before the beginning.

John also believed that No man can see God according to John 1:18; 1 John 4:12
Which is in harmony with Exodus 33:20. People saw Jesus and lived. People can't see God and live.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Also, as far as John 20:28 is concerned, the resurrected Jesus earlier already stated that his God was his Father at John 20:17 which is in harmony with Revelation 3:12 that the heavenly Jesus still thinks he has a God over him.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Jesus knew he and his Father are one according to John 10:30, but according to John 17:11; John 17:21-22 Jesus prayed his followers would also be one as he and his Father are one.

Jesus was Not praying they all be God, but that they could all be one in faith, belief, harmony, will, purpose, goal, union, objective, etc.

 

[SethZaddik]

Also, as the apostle John penned at Revelation 1:5; Revelation 3:14 B that the pre-human heavenly Jesus was the beginning of the creation by God.
God is Un-created. God is from everlasting according to Psalms 90:2
So, only God was 'before' the beginning. Jesus was Not before the beginning as God was before the beginning.

John also believed that No man can see God according to John 1:18; 1 John 4:12
Which is in harmony with Exodus 33:20. People saw Jesus and lived. People can't see God and live.

Excellent point. I had not even considered Revelation, but it is in line with the prexistent but not God quote about Abraham and I believe most Islamic theology as well which agrees with but adds to what Revelation says about the second coming.

I would have to look and I will, for the Sunnah I read that said Jesus was created first, if I am not mistaken, with the "Light." Not celestial orbs that give light but Light, Wisdom to see with, so to speak.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

The word "god" is like the word "family". You can have one family but more than one member of that family. Many people use the word "god" to mean the Heavenly Father. Jesus is certainly not the same as the Father. But both of them make up "God".There is only one God but Jesus and the Father are both part of that "God".

 

[SethZaddik]

Jesus knew he and his Father are one according to John 10:30, but according to John 17:11; John 17:21-22 Jesus prayed his followers would also be one as he and his Father are one.

Jesus was Not praying they all be God, but that they could all be one in faith, belief, harmony, will, purpose, goal, union, objective, etc.

Right, because "I and my Father are one." is a metaphor, they are two in substance, if God was made of a substance, but are united in will, or one.

That was one point that I left out, that he was obviously not saying he wanted his disciples to become God, but I got lazy so thanks for doing it.

 

[SethZaddik]

The word "god" is like the word "family". You can have one family but more than one member of that family. Many people use the word "god" to mean the Heavenly Father. Jesus(p) is certainly not the same as the Father. But both of them make up "God".There is only one God but Jesus(p) and the Father are both part of that "God".

God is God (and good, according to Jesus) ALONE.

He is not co-god with Jesus, Jesus(p) is just plain not God, as Divine as he is he is not a part of God, he is a seperate entity and less powerful, subordinate.

God doesn't require "family" like humans. God is above that. He has no equals or wife or children, even "He" is unnecessary as God is not male or female either.

Incomprehensible is what God is.

 

[SethZaddik]

The word "god" is like the word "family". You can have one family but more than one member of that family. Many people use the word "god" to mean the Heavenly Father. Jesus is certainly not the same as the Father. But both of them make up "God".There is only one God but Jesus and the Father are both part of that "God".

I won't deny you your right to opinion but there is no Biblical support for the statement "The word 'God' is like 'family.'

That is akin to translating Elohim, "God's" a legitimately plural word that means God in the singular and is always translated as such when referring to YHVH-Elohim and not foreign gods, sometimes it is used in reference to God's angels, but they are not gods any more than Jesus, and Satan is an angel too, so we know that angels aren't gods.

That God is one God is repeated throughout the Bible even into the last book.

 

[SethZaddik]

I wanted to add that if Jesus (p) is "A High Priest according to the Order of Melchizedek" he is a "High Priest" of God, not himself.

If he is a High Priest he serves God and no High Priest has ever been God, all are servants.

Likewise God has never been a Priest, High Priest or High Priest like Melchizedek.

Melchizedek was High Priest of El Elyon/God Most High. And King of Salem(Peace).

God is God over all Kings and Priests, Annointed One's (Messiahs, like David and Cyrus) angels, everyone and everything.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

You just admitted that "Elohim" is a plural word.So why can't the one and only "God" consist of the Heavenly Father and His Son? When you say "God" do you mean just the Father? If my father's last name was Jones and my last name is Jones then we are separate person but part of one Jones family. If the Father's last name is God and Jesus last name is God then they are separate persons but part of one God.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Excellent point. I had not even considered Revelation, but it is in line with the prexistent but not God quote about Abraham and I believe most Islamic theology as well which agrees with but adds to what Revelation says about the second coming.
I would have to look and I will, for the Sunnah I read that said Jesus was created first, if I am not mistaken, with the "Light." Not celestial orbs that give light but Light, Wisdom to see with, so to speak.

The one speaking at Proverbs 8:22 is said to be created, and Proverbs 8:31 mentions that his delight was with the sons of men. Often Proverbs 8:22-31 is made in connection to the coming Jesus. Jesus as wisdom personified.

Proverbs 30:4 ending part also asks an interesting question as to what is God's name and what is His Son's name.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Right, because "I and my Father are one." is a metaphor, they are two in substance, if God was made of a substance, but are united in will, or one.
That was one point that I left out, that he was obviously not saying he wanted his disciples to become God, but I got lazy so thanks for doing it.

You're welcome, and glad you afforded me the opportunity to build upon your thoughts by using John 17:11; and John 17:21-23

 

[URAVIP2ME]

You just admitted that "Elohim" is a plural word.So why can't the one and only "God" consist of the Heavenly Father and His Son? When you say "God" do you mean just the Father? If my father's last name was Jones and my last name is Jones then we are separate person but part of one Jones family. If the Father's last name is God and Jesus last name is God then they are separate persons but part of one God.

I never read in Scripture that Jesus last name was God, but Jesus referred to as Jesus Christ ( Not Jesus God )
The word ' us ' indicates plural as 'we ' means more than ' me'.
So, to me the ' us ' at Genesis 1:26 is our Creator God speaking to another separate heavenly person.
Whereas, God is Un-created - Revelation 4:11 - as a singular Creator.

I like Arius point of reasoning: that God is Un-begottten and without a beginning (Psalms 90:2)
The Son, because he is begotten cannot be God in the sense that the Father is.
The Son did Not exist from all eternity but was created ( begotten ) and exists by the will of the Father.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

The word "god" is like the word "family". You can have one family but more than one member of that family. Many people use the word "god" to mean the Heavenly Father. Jesus is certainly not the same as the Father. But both of them make up "God".There is only one God but Jesus and the Father are both part of that "God".

In a family, is the father in the same position as his son or sons.
To me, Jesus has ' spiritual ' brothers - Matthew 25:40.
Aren't brothers equals, whereas the Father is Not an equal to his sons ( and daughters ).

Deuteronomy 6:4 KJV Bibles says the LORD our God is one LORD.
JKV such as also at Psalms 110 uses LORD in all upper-case letters.
Where LORD is in all capital letters is where the Tetragrammaton stands ( YHWH )
Whereas Lord (in some lower-case letters ) at Psalms 110 stands for the Lord Jesus, and Not LORD God.

 

[SethZaddik]

The one speaking at Proverbs 8:22 is said to be created, and Proverbs 8:31 mentions that his delight was with the sons of men. Often Proverbs 8:22-31 is made in connection to the coming Jesus. Jesus as wisdom personified.

Proverbs 30:4 ending part also asks an interesting question as to what is God's name and what is His Son's name.

Proverbs is associated with David and/or Solomon as is Psalms, such as in Pslams when God says, "You are my son, this day I have begotten you." (I am pretty sure it's in Psalms)

So it makes perfect sense, the Messiah of David is Jesus (p), David was first of all "Annointed (Messiahs)." (Nimrod was a rebel/false Messiah though)

Early MSS. of Luke have that statement at his Baptism instead of "...in whom I am well pleased" or whatever it says.

The most interesting thing about that fact is though it is merely assumed Luke, a Sryian/Greek(?) 'friend' of Paul, wrote the Gospel called "of Luke" but this is not so.

I find Luke to be the LEAST of the essentially all non-Pauline (in theology, anti even) Gospels. Not that the Gospels agree with Paul in any regard, they really don't.

But "You are my son, this day I have begotten you." is from the Tanakh but is used in the 'lost' (except for quotes) "Gospel of the Hebrews" used by Ebionites and Nazarenes in the first five centuries. (a complicated subject)

This is at what point the Ebionites and Nazarenes (who come from Qumran's famous Dead Sea Scrolls originally, Ebionim (Ebionites) is a popular name for at least a segment of "The Way" as they also referred to themselves, they also had 12 leaders and 3 "pillars" like the Apostles and another overall leader like James) consider Jesus (p) to have been begotten as the "Son of God" but only in the same way as David.

They must have used it in Luke and then realized that to draw attention to the fact that David was ALSO a "begotten son of God" according to the Tanakh made the claim that Jesus was "ONLY begotten son" VOID. Ebionites and Nazarenes did not believe in the Virgin birth because it is not prophecied in Hebrew/Aramaic Isaiah or even the LXX, "virgin" is a mistranslation and the child is Cyrus, this was never a David Messianic prophecy and had been fulfilled in Cyrus' redemption of the Hebrews.

 

[SethZaddik]

I never read in Scripture that Jesus last name was God, but Jesus referred to as Jesus Christ ( Not Jesus God )
The word ' us ' indicates plural as 'we ' means more than ' me'.
So, to me the ' us ' at Genesis 1:26 is our Creator God speaking to another separate heavenly person.
Whereas, God is Un-created - Revelation 4:11 - as a singular Creator.

I like Arius point of reasoning: that God is Un-begottten and without a beginning (Psalms 90:2)
The Son, because he is begotten cannot be God in the sense that the Father is.
The Son did Not exist from all eternity but was created ( begotten ) and exists by the will of the Father.

Arrius had logic on his side.

If the Father precedes the Son, there was a time (before the creation of the Son) when Jesus (p) did not exist.

God always existed/exists and has no beginning or end.

Non equality means the Trinity is not composed of 3 equals in one.

Nice comment. Few people bring up Arrius ever, they side with Athanasius who never got the Catholic Trinity according to his writings but taught it regardless. I think it was Athanasius at least, there are a lot of Church Fathers in the Ante Nicene library.

 

[SethZaddik]

You just admitted that "Elohim" is a plural word.So why can't the one and only "God" consist of the Heavenly Father and His Son? When you say "God" do you mean just the Father? If my father's last name was Jones and my last name is Jones then we are separate person but part of one Jones family. If the Father's last name is God and Jesus last name is God then they are separate persons but part of one God.

Elohim is spelled plurally but is not, "Plural of Majesty" is what most call it, and in the early days of Ugarit/Canaan it was plural for "Host of Heaven" or "Sons of El/God", Illhim.

But in the finalized Bible and for millennia it has referred to YHVH as His alternative to it, Elohim, translated to "God" because that is what it means, YHVH is translated to Lord but that is a substitute for Jehovah, and unrelated.

Elohim being a plural word in Hebrew, or looking like a plural word to be more accurate, doesn't help your argument that the word "God" is like "family" my point was that it is like saying "God" MEANS "Gods", literally, and because of the word Elohim looking plural even though it refers to One God, factually speaking.

Because they sure don't translate Elohim as "Gods" as it is not truly plural, it is spelled that way only.

So if you had tried to use that as evidence it would have been incorrect, I didn't think you would actually misinterpret it and try and use it, you missed my point.

Maybe I was not clear enough but this should clarify.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Arrius had logic on his side.
If the Father precedes the Son, there was a time (before the creation of the Son) when Jesus (p) did not exist.
God always existed/exists and has no beginning or end.
Non equality means the Trinity is not composed of 3 equals in one.
Nice comment. Few people bring up Arrius ever, they side with Athanasius who never got the Catholic Trinity according to his writings but taught it regardless. I think it was Athanasius at least, there are a lot of Church Fathers in the Ante Nicene library.

I don't see how equality could be composed of 3 non-equal parts.
Including that God's spirit is in the neuter sense at Numbers 11:17 and Numbers 11:25 as the neuter " it ".
God and Jesus are always in the masculine gender but God's spirit is Not always in the masculine.
Greek grammar rules allow for a neuter ( it ) to be used in the masculine sense.
Even in English we speak of a car or a ship as a "she" even through they are neuter " it's ".
KJV used " itself " in connection to God's spirit at Romans 8:16 and Romans 8:26, but often modern translators chose to change the neuter to the masculine gender himself so to make it appear that God's spirit ( it ) is male.
That is one reason false clergy can teach their flock that God's spirit ( pictured as a bird 'dove' ) is a male person.

 

[SethZaddik]

I don't see how equality could be composed of 3 non-equal parts.
Including that God's spirit is in the neuter sense at Numbers 11:17 and Numbers 11:25 as the neuter " it ".
God and Jesus are always in the masculine gender but God's spirit is Not always in the masculine.
Greek grammar rules allow for a neuter ( it ) to be used in the masculine sense.
Even in English we speak of a car or a ship as a "she" even through they are neuter " it's ".
KJV used " itself " in connection to God's spirit at Romans 8:16 and Romans 8:26, but often modern translators chose to change the neuter to the masculine gender himself so to make it appear that God's spirit ( it ) is male.
That is one reason false clergy can teach their flock that God's spirit ( pictured as a bird 'dove' ) is a male person.

It's illogical, no question. Once equality is proven impossible like the Gospels do, the doctrine of the Catholic Trinity is at least as polytheist as Hinduism.

Unless I am mistaken, Brahma is the "Most High" of the Trinity and Hindu Pantheon, save Parabrahm, the En Sof/Zurvan of Hinduism. Not a God but a concept before God was God, of force, there are different views.

If I am mistaken the Christian Trinity is more polytheistic, either way if there are 3 Gods, calling them one is redundant, they are still 3.

I think Arrius was a Monotheist trying to convince men of little logic that the Trinity was ridiculous but the Catholic Church was pressured and influenced by powerful Alexandria and the Egyptian tradition of Trinities, being so long a part of Egyptian religion.

That is just a theory though. Making Jesus (p) a God was a historical blunder that is too engrained in tradition.

Tradition replacing the Scripture was Jesus (p) biggest issue too!