Jesus is equal to God

[rrobs]

It seems to me there is a pattern, in the gospels, of Christ wanting his disciples to make the final leap for themselves, rather than being spoon-fed. I think there is some value in contemplating why this might have been so.

God is not trying to trick anybody. He wants people to know. Therefore He speaks plainly; so much so that even a fool can understand (Is 35:8, Prov 15:19, et.al.)

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

God is not trying to trick anybody. He wants people to know. Therefore He speaks plainly; so much so that even a fool can understand (Is 35:8, Prov 15:19, et.al.)

I wonder why so many people disagree on what God has said. It must not be as clear as you seem to think. Otherwise everyone would follow the same religion. Christ said He spoke in parables so everyone would NOT understand.

 

[onewithhim]

John 5:18 is a stock verse used by trinitarians to prove Jesus is God. But is that what it really says?

John 5:18,

Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal [isos] with God.
​

First of all, if God wanted to make Jesus God, then why didn't he just say, "...making himself God" instead of, "making himself equal with God?" Seems like this would have been an excellent opportunity for God to have settled the trinity question once and for all. I for one would absolutely believe Jesus were God had He omitted the words "equal with," but we must assume He included them for a good reason. The word equal is the Greek word isos from which we get our word isosceles triangle. An isosceles triangle is so called because it has 2 equal length sides. Now to make these two sides somehow the same side is not using language in any meaningful way. It has two separate sides that are simply of equal length. It by implication makes the two sides unique and separate, e.g. side 1 and side 2.

This word isos is used in Matthew chapter 20 where Jesus spoke the parable about the property owner paying helpers who worked a few hours the same as those who labored all day. The latter of course protested it as unfair, feeling they should have received more. As part of their plea to the land owner they said,

Matt 20:12,

Saying, These last have wrought [but] one hour, and thou hast made them equal [isos] unto us, which have borne the burden and heat of the day.
​

Could this be construed as saying that the ones who worked all day were the same ones who came later in the day? Of course not! Two separate people here. Why should the same usage of isos in John 5:18 be any different?

There is another usage of isos I will point out in the Book of Revelations.

Rev 21:16,

And the city lieth foursquare, and the length is as large as the breadth: and he measured the city with the reed, twelve thousand furlongs. The length and the breadth and the height of it are equal.
​

Does this say the length and breath are in fact one thing and not two? No! Length is the length and width is the width; again, two distinctly different things. Making them equal [isos] simply means the two have the same length.

One more for the record.

In Mark 14 the Pharisees were trying to get a few people to give false testimony against Jesus so they could do what they did to him on the cross. They had a problem getting multiple "witnesses" to come up with the same story.

Mark 14:59,

But neither so did their witness agree [isos] together.
​

So, had they agreed together, would that have then made them one person? I think the trinity struck out here also.

It would be a good study to find out exactly what John 5:18 meant when it said Jesus was equal [isos] to God. As always, any biblical research is best done by using the Bible itself and not tradition as a source of truth.

By the way, it should be noted that Jesus himself didn't claim to be God in John 5:18.

John 5:18,

Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal [isos] with God.
​

He claimed, and rightfully so, to be God's son. Never said, "I am God" anywhere in the scriptures.

You are absolutely right on this, and I am amazed that so many people don't see the truth of the matter. Even if Jesus' detractors had said that he was making himself God, that wouldn't have meant that Jesus really WAS claiming to be God. They ACCUSED him of this, and that didn't make it so! They were wrong. As you have so succinctly stated, Jesus NEVER claimed to be God or even equal to Him.

 

[exchemist]

God is not trying to trick anybody. He wants people to know. Therefore He speaks plainly; so much so that even a fool can understand (Is 35:8, Prov 15:19, et.al.)

Who is talking about "tricks"?

When Jesus (Matthew 16) asks the disciples who they say he is and Peter replies, "You are the Christ, the son of the living God", Jesus says it is his father in heaven who has revealed this to Peter. Notice he has not said to them "I am the Christ". He leaves them to work it out for themselves.

That's what I mean about Christ apparently taking his followers so far but leaving them to make the final leap of faith. It is a pattern.

Teachers do this.

 

[rrobs]

I wonder why so many people disagree on what God has said. It must not be as clear as you seem to think. Otherwise everyone would follow the same religion. Christ said He spoke in parables so everyone would NOT understand.

Or it could be that the church has done a bang up job of brain washing over the years? That would be my guess. Being burned at the stake was a sure fire way (excuse the pun) of convincing people of anything they wanted to tell them. Somehow they even convinced the people that they were not qualified to understand the Bible for themselves, that the priests had to do it for them. After that, anything goes. They don't even make any apology for saying that church writings as well as tradition (never mind Matt 15:3) take precedence over the Bible.

You and I are both writing in a very simple, unambiguous way. Our sentences are simple and easy to understand. We understand each other without having some third party "interpret" what we are saying to each other. That is the way we read almost everything we read except for the Bible. That is because we have been led to believe by the aforementioned church that we can't really understand it, and that despite God saying over and over again He wants us to know who He is. He does not want us ignorant. Jesus can't be God on one hand and not God on the other. It has to be one way or the other or the book is worthless as a guide to life and godliness. The churches say Jesus is God and the Bible says he isn't. It's just a matter of who to believe.

 

[exchemist]

Or it could be that the church has done a bang up job of brain washing over the years? That would be my guess. Being burned at the stake was a sure fire way (excuse the pun) of convincing people of anything they wanted to tell them. Somehow they even convinced the people that they were not qualified to understand the Bible for themselves, that the priests had to do it for them. After that, anything goes. They don't even make any apology for saying that church writings as well as tradition (never mind Matt 15:3) take precedence over the Bible.

You and I are both writing in a very simple, unambiguous way. Our sentences are simple and easy to understand. We understand each other without having some third party "interpret" what we are saying to each other. That is the way we read almost everything we read except for the Bible. That is because we have been led to believe by the aforementioned church that we can't really understand it, and that despite God saying over and over again He wants us to know who He is. He does not want us ignorant. Jesus can't be God on one hand and not God on the other. It has to be one way or the other or the book is worthless as a guide to life and godliness. The churches say Jesus is God and the Bible says he isn't. It's just a matter of who to believe.

It is people indulging in amateur interpretations of the bible for themselves that has led to so many disagreements, of course. Hundred of sects, all reinventing the wheel, some round, some square, some elliptical....and all fervently convinced they are right and everyone else has got it wrong. And of them, on principle, ignoring the 2000 years of scholarly thought and theology that has gone before them

 

[rrobs]

Who is talking about "tricks"?

When Jesus (Matthew 16) asks the disciples who they say he is and Peter replies, "You are the Christ, the son of the living God", Jesus says it is his father in heaven who has revealed this to Peter. Notice he has not said to them "I am the Christ". He leaves them to work it out for themselves.

That's what I mean about Christ apparently taking his followers so far but leaving them to make the final leap of faith. It is a pattern.

Teachers do this.

No comment on Isaiah 35:8 and Proverbs15:19 regarding the simplicity of the Bible? I would be curious as to how you think they fit in with the typical church belief that the Bible is somehow vague and hard to understand.

Peter only knew Jesus was the Christ because of the scriptures. Had the scriptures been vague on the subject, Peter would not have known. So God apparently gave enough knowledge via the scriptures, including the living word (Jesus), for Peter to know who Jesus was. He didn't have to guess. I guess he had to work it out for himself in the same sense that you have to work out what the evening newspaper means. Usually it's pretty simple, and the Bible is especially so. We just have to read it and believe it; or not.

 

[rrobs]

It is people indulging in amateur interpretations of the bible for themselves that has led to so many disagreements, of course. Hundred of sects, all reinventing the wheel, some round, some square, some elliptical....and all fervently convinced they are right and everyone else has got it wrong.

I don't think I'm right and everybody else is wrong. There are plenty of Christians waking up to the truth of who Jesus is. I was once Catholic and believed in the trinity (despite it not making any sense at all to me). One day someone came to me and said, "I know the church says Jesus is God, but is that really what the Bible says?" That got me thinking and researching and I found out for myself that the church was wrong. I'm certainly not smart enough to dream up for myself who Jesus is. I was taught it, and I verified it for myself from the scriptures (ala Act 17:11), quite apart from the catechism.

Somebody has to be right unless everybody is wrong, but we can't have different interpretations and claim they are both from God. God knows who He is and He is not holding back in communicating His true nature to his children.

 

[exchemist]

No comment on Isaiah 35:8, Proverbs15:19 regarding the simplicity of the Bible? I would be curious as to how you think they fit in with the typical church belief that the Bible is somehow vague and hard to understand.

Peter only knew Jesus was the Christ because of the scriptures. Had the scriptures been vague on the subject, Peter would not have known. So God apparently gave enough knowledge via the scriptures, including the living word (Jesus), for Peter to know who Jesus was. He didn't have to guess. I guess he had to work it out for himself in the same sense that you have to work out what the evening newspaper means. Usually it's pretty simple, and the Bible is especially so. We just have to read it and believe it; or not.

I am guided mainly by the New Testament, i.e. the mission and teaching of Christ - my background is Christian, after all. (The OT has its moments but you can get all kinds of conflicting stuff out of it, some not very illuminating at all, so I don't waste my time poring over it.)

My sole point is that Jesus did not spoon-feed his disciples. He wanted them to find the answer for themselves. This I think is abundantly clear in the Gospels.

 

[exchemist]

I don't think everybody else is wrong. There are plenty of Christians waking up to the truth of who Jesus is. Somebody has to be right unless everybody is wrong, but we can't have different interpretations and claim they are both from God. God knows who He is and He is not holding back in communicating His true nature to his children.

On the contrary, we all see through a glass darkly. I suspect we all have glimpses of the truth and no more than that.

Anyone who has studied literature will know that there are multiple facets to a wrk of literature. The different interpretations of a Shakespeare play for instance may all shed light, in different ways, on the messages about human experience that it contains. I do not think the bible is any different. There is a lot in there, but it strikes me as silly to claim that any single interpretation is the only right one and that all the others must be wrong.

 

[rrobs]

I am guided mainly by the New Testament, i.e. the mission and teaching of Christ - my background is Christian, after all. (The OT has its moments but you can get all kinds of conflicting stuff out of it, some not very illuminating at all, so I don't waste my time poring over it.)

My sole point is that Jesus did not spoon-feed his disciples. He wanted them to find the answer for themselves. This I think is abundantly clear in the Gospels.

You are totally correct in applying the New Testament to yourself. God speaks to different people at different times. The whole book is not written to any one group of people. God mentions Jews, Gentiles, and the church of God (1 Cor 10:32). What He said to Israel in the desert was not meant for the Gentiles. The he Church of God did not even exist at that time, so He never gave us any commandments in Mount Sinai. They were for Israel. The Gentiles were simply out of luck (Eph 2:12).

The NT, specifically the 7 church epistles written by Paul, say that because of Jesus' death and resurrection God has made one new man, the Church of God, from both Jew and Gentile. There is not longer any difference between Jew and Gentile. You've probably read all of that in Romans. The church epistles were written specifically to the church and they tell us what the score is in this age of grace. It is certainly different than the age Moses lived in. Things changed just a bit with the death and resurrection of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ.

Having said that, the OT does hold some relevance to us in this day and time.

Rom 15:4,

For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.
​

Even though the things that happened to Israel don't apply directly to the Christian of today, we can nonetheless learn from them. The OT was the only guide Jesus had as to who he was and what he had to do. Seems like it would be worthwhile knowing about that in more detail. It helps to know the background of what God had to do to redeem mankind through His son Jesus Christ. It actually helps a whole bunch!

 

[exchemist]

You are totally correct in applying the New Testament to yourself. God speaks to different people at different times. The whole book is not written to any one group of people. God mentions Jews, Gentiles, and the church of God (1 Cor 10:32). What He said to Israel in the desert was not meant for the Gentiles. The he Church of God did not even exist at that time, so He never gave us any commandments in Mount Sinai. They were for Israel. The Gentiles were simply out of luck (Eph 2:12).

The NT, specifically the 7 church epistles written by Paul, say that because of Jesus' death and resurrection God has made one new man, the Church of God, from both Jew and Gentile. There is not longer any difference between Jew and Gentile. You've probably read all of that in Romans. The church epistles were written specifically to the church and they tell us what the score is in this age of grace. It is certainly different than the age Moses lived in. Things changed just a bit with the death and resurrection of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ.

Having said that, the OT does hold some relevance to us in this day and time.

Rom 15:4,

For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.
​

Even though the things that happened to Israel don't apply directly to the Christian of today, we can nonetheless learn from them. The OT was the only guide Jesus had as to who he was and what he had to do. Seems like it would be worthwhile knowing about that in more detail. It helps to know the background of what God had to do to redeem mankind through His son Jesus Christ. It actually helps a whole bunch!

Oh sure, Jesus was a Jew after all, and preached to Jews, so spoke from the culture, theology, law and teaching of Judaism. So one needs some understanding of it to understand the teaching of Jesus. But the point of the NT is that, for the Christian, it supersedes the OT.

 

[rrobs]

On the contrary, we all see through a glass darkly. I suspect we all have glimpses of the truth and no more than that.

Anyone who has studied literature will know that there are multiple facets to a wrk of literature. The different interpretations of a Shakespeare play for instance may all shed light, in different ways, on the messages about human experience that it contains. I do not think the bible is any different. There is a lot in there, but it strikes me as silly to claim that any single interpretation is the only right one and that all the others must be wrong.

The context of the dark glass regards our future in paradise. That is indeed hard to grasp because it will beyond what our puny human brains can comprehend. But it is not talking about the entire Bible. Otherwise there would be a contradiction between verses Isaiah 35:8, Proverbs15:19 and the dark glass verse (1 Cor 13:12). Understanding the context clears up the contradiction and the word of God once again agrees with itself as it should.

I think God is really Satan. That's the message I get from the Bible and all other Christians must honor my belief. Of course, I'm kidding. But according to the feeling that everybody's interpretation is right, I could say God is Satan and I would have to be accepted into any congregation without reservation. Where would such logic end? I guess that's kinda how we have the trinity.

Why is it so hard to grasp that God is a certain way and it is not dependent upon varied interpretations of the Bible?

 

[exchemist]

The context of the dark glass regards our future in paradise. That is indeed hard to grasp because it will beyond what our puny human brains can comprehend. But it is not talking about the entire Bible. Otherwise there would be a contradiction between verses Isaiah 35:8, Proverbs15:19 and the dark glass verse (1 Cor 13:12). Understanding the context clears up the contradiction and the word of God once again agrees with itself as it should.

I think God is really Satan. That's the message I get from the Bible and all other Christians must honor my belief. Of course, I'm kidding. But according to the feeling that everybody's interpretation is right, I could say God is Satan and I would have to be accepted into any congregation without reservation. Where would such logic end? I guess that's kinda how we have the trinity.

Why is it so hard to grasp that God is a certain way and it is not Dependant upon our varied interpretations of the Bible?

Saying there are different interpretations because we do not see clearly does NOT mean there are multiple realities.

 

[rrobs]

Oh sure, Jesus was a Jew after all, and preached to Jews, so spoke from the culture, theology, law and teaching of Judaism. So one needs some understanding of it to understand the teaching of Jesus. But the point of the NT is that, for the Christian, it supersedes the OT.

Very few Christians even understand that. You are definitely in the minority on that, but I'm right there with you brother!

 

[rrobs]

I am guided mainly by the New Testament, i.e. the mission and teaching of Christ - my background is Christian, after all. (The OT has its moments but you can get all kinds of conflicting stuff out of it, some not very illuminating at all, so I don't waste my time poring over it.)

My sole point is that Jesus did not spoon-feed his disciples. He wanted them to find the answer for themselves. This I think is abundantly clear in the Gospels.

What if I suggested to you that the Gospels were still OT? The personal presence of Jesus was to give Israel another chance to believe and establish the promised kingdom. Jesus specifically said he came for Israel only (Matt 15:24).

You might consider that the NT really began on the day of Pentecost when the new birth finally became available. Paul's epistles explain the NT but the Gospels are finishing out the OT. Don't let the big font NEW TESTAMENT in the Bible right before Matthew fool you. God didn't put that there.That was man's idea and a bad one it was!

 

[rrobs]

Saying there are different interpretations because we do not see clearly does NOT mean there are multiple realities.

You're right. In fact the idea of multiple realities is an oxymoron.

I do believe that reality is defined in the Bible and that all of man's ideas that go counter to God is therefore not reality.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

God is the Uncreated Creator.
Jesus was a created human being, prophet and messenger of God.

Yes, I agree God is the Un-created Creator as per Revelation 4:11.
However, in Scripture Jesus tells us who he is at John 10:36 that he is the Son of God.
In other words, God sent His pre-human heavenly Son Jesus to Earth to be born as a sinless human.

 

[onewithhim]

Who is talking about "tricks"?

When Jesus (Matthew 16) asks the disciples who they say he is and Peter replies, "You are the Christ, the son of the living God", Jesus says it is his father in heaven who has revealed this to Peter. Notice he has not said to them "I am the Christ". He leaves them to work it out for themselves.

That's what I mean about Christ apparently taking his followers so far but leaving them to make the final leap of faith. It is a pattern.

Teachers do this.

Jesus never said, "I am God," but he DID say plainly that he was the Messiah (John 4:25,26) and that he was the Son of God (John 10:36; Matthew 27:43). I'm sure that if he was God, he would have said so. Yet he never did, and he even went so far as to say that his FATHER was "the only true God." (John 17:3) This is what his disciples believed, as is evident from what they wrote. (John 20:31; Acts 3:13-15; I Corinthians 8:5,6; I Corinthians 11:3)

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word WAS God. The Word was later sent to earth to be born as Jesus. The Word was God, the Word became Jesus, therefore Jesus is God.