I just did.
-
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 Divinity of Christ
- Thread starter Dawnofhope
- Start date
I just did.
Daisies4me
Active Member
(quote)
Do you not think that Jesus referred to himself as a 'son of man' due to the fact that he was , in fact born as a human being on earth? His mother was fully human, as were her parents, and ancestors. So he was descended from 'man' (mankind), and was himself a man. He was referred to as 'the son of David', remember? ( that meant also, that he would ascend to the 'throne of David', the kingly lineage of the ones who had 'sat upon Jehovah's Throne' in the line of Kings that once represented Jehovah on earth before Jehovah took away His backing to any king or ruler on earth 'until the one comes who has the legal right' appeared and once again, would represent Jehovah on earth to His people--please read it at Ezekiel 21:27.
While on earth, who did Jesus say that He was? Remember when he asked Peter who he thought him to be? What did Peter say, and how did Jesus respond to Peter's answer? now, the Bible shows us that Jesus has a God, not that he himself is God- the one Jesus prayed to, taught about, made His Name known, and the same One who resurrected Jesus from the death state, is Jesus' God. Please read for yourself John 20:17, and see that it tells us that the same God that was Mary Magdalene"s God, was also Jesus' God. (also interesting it the fact that not once in the Bible do we find the Father addressing the Son as "my God"--food for thought)
Recall also, Malachi 3:6, which tells us that Jehovah God does not change. He was and is always Jehovah God the Almighty, as most older KJV translations clearly state at Psalms 83:18, and other places, as well. He is also found in the word Hallelujah-- the meaning of which is 'praise Jehovah'. you may have said that in your life, without truly understanding the meaning of the word?
How would you respond with Scripture, to these Scriptural teachings that show that Jesus was never Almighty God, nor has he ever been equal to God, but has always been God's Son, even after His resurrection from the dead by His God, Jehovah? (notice, please, Acts 2:32) Hebrews chapters 3-4 describe Jesus as the High Priest to God very well. Anyone doubting that fact , please, do that the time to read and meditate on what is stated therein. This is solid food, not milk. It may be difficult to understand to those who have been taught things that do not agree in fact with what the Bible really teaches. As John 17:17 shows, we must allow the Bible to interpret the Bible, in truth, rather than man-made doctrines.
Do you perhaps find anything helpful in these scriptures that do not support the trinity doctrine?
Daisies4me
Active Member
as per the word elohim. it can apply to men, angels, and false gods that are spoken of in the Bible. The Hebrew word elohim is used as a plural of majesty, dignity, or excellence. it is taken from the root word 'strong".or 'be strong'. when Elohim is applied to the God of Israel, it must rather be explained as as an intensive plural denoting greatness and majesty, according to the American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literature, vol. XXL , 1905, p. 208, in case anyone wishes to investigate the matter. It in no way is indicative of a triune godhead or trinity doctrine. sorry. (quote)
Rational Agnostic
Well-Known Member
Jesus allegedly stated "Trust in God, Trust also in me" implying that he and God are two separate entities. There is really no evidence in the New Testament that Jesus thought he was God. He also prayed to "God" frequently. If he understood himself to be God there would be no reason to pray to an external entity.
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
Hey Adrian009, I think I'll side more with you on this one. Jesus, the perfectly polished mirror, would reflect God so well, that he would virtually be God to any ordinary human. Problem is that Christians I think have verses that say he was in some way not created, but is eternal, and, therefore, is God. I hope one the Christians out there could comment on that. I think there is also a verse that says that was the first born of all creation. Whatever that means?
Nice to talk to you again. I've been around and having a few conversations started on another thread started by @loverofhumanity
How are these Great Beings explained?
I did notice there a couple of Baha'is that have joined us on RF so hopefully they will want to stick around.
Thank you for that. Sounds interesting.
Géza Vermes - Wikipedia
I'm looking at expanding the authors I read to assist make better sense of the bible. As you will appreciate Baha'is consider the bible authorative and authentic though this is relative and we need to into account context, including when books were written, by whom, and why.
Michael Sours is my favourite scholar at the moment as he provides excellent insights when comparing the revelations of Christ and Baha'u'llah.
Documents by Michael Sours
The Gospel of John appears to have been the last Gospel written. Casting out of demons needs to be considered in the light of few treatments available for either epilepsy and/or mental illness. We've discussed Christ's resurrection before and agreed on evidence this was not a physical phenomenon. These two occurrences bring into question taking the gospels as a literary account of history, rather embellished with allegorical stories that were passed on orally until the gospels were compiled.
A great match no doubt, but neither side likely to beat the mighty All-Blacks in a hurry.
The quality of discussion around Christian themes I've explored on RF has been a little disappointing to date. I live in hope.I must say that I do like the diplomatic and honest way in which Bahauallah delicately describes Jesus. The way I read it, he gently places Jesus amongst the Prophets without causing the slightest ripple upon the Christian waters. Now you just watch the replies to that
Daisies4me
Active Member
(quote)
May I have a go at it? Jesus being the first of all creation by God Alone. There was no one else in existence when Jehovah created the Angelic creature that later came to be named Jesus when born on earth as a human. Thus, Jesus as we now know him, was the firstborn son of all creation.
By means of him, (Jesus) all other things in heaven and on earth were created. (please note Proverbs 8:22-30.
He is the second greatest personage in the universe. Second only to His Father, the Almighty God, whose Name is Jehovah.
It is this son whom Jehovah sent to earth to give his life as a ransom for mankind, thus opening up the way to eternal life for those of Adam's offspring who would exercise faith. This same Son, restored to heavenly glory, now rules as King, with authority to destroy all the wicked, and to carry out his Father's original purpose for the earth.
The Hebrew form of the name Jesus means "Jehovah is Salvation"; Christ is the equivalent of the Hebrew Mashiach, or Messiah. which means "anointed One".
Does this shed any light on your question?
Last edited:
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
Jesus and god share the same divinity. Jesus isn't the creator.
Jesus is subordinate to god the father. Son meaning someone who depends on or is a child of his parent.
Jesus is subordinate to man/sin because of temptation. Given that's how he saves because he becomes man, he is called "the son of man."
Understand the nature of christ himself without mistaking his divinity for him being the creator himself. Also, understand christ place as the subordinate to god and servant of man which being the "son" is a good word to describe both stations.
I guess it depends. Abrahamic faiths more than likely. Eclecitics. Relativism faiths. Eastern faiths, no.
Thank you David. 'How' do you think the concepts of Divinity might be expressed in other faiths?
Is this who you mean?
Margaret Barker
According to the Psalms 82:6 we're all Elohim as well, Elohim means angels as it is plural; the God Most High (El Elyon) isn't ever plural, and doesn't ever appear in physical form.
So recognizing we're all fallen angels to me is applicable to all religions, as people are very confused about where we are within reality, without even real understanding of what happens in Heaven.
As for you still using the false text to make a theological case, find it a confusing methodology of making sense, to use faulty foundations to begin with.
Of course Psalms 82:6 becomes Jesus's defence in John 10:34-36 after allegedly claiming Divinity. He was nearly stoned to death on the spot.
Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
So what is the recognised school of Christian thought that would accept this? In making such a claim you can not expect peoples such as myself to all of a sudden drop most of the NT, anymore than I can expect Christians to suddenly accept Baha'u'llah. You have to meaningfully engage with people and understand their beliefs first if you hope to change theirs. You have to be willing to examine you own beliefs by the same standards you expect others to examine theirs.
The point from John 10:34-36 is how hard it can be to change peoples world views. The lesson from 82:6 is the Divinity in all of us. We are after all created by God, and reflections of His image as Christ was. That is where we start to have a more meaningful answer to 'who was Jesus?'
So why not stick with the title Jesus used to describe Himself, rather than add things with man made doctrine such as the Trinity that clearly contradicts scripture? Where is 'Trinity' mention in the bible. How can Jesus be 'God' when the scripture I quote in post #5 clearly states He is not?
Herein lies the problem. While all things are possible, it does not mean to say that anything is true, and we should just believe. For over a thousand years Christians believed the earth was the centre of the universe. While that could have been theoretically possible with an Omnipotent All-Powerful God it clearly contradicted observation of the phenomenal world and reason. In like manner we need to question the logic of history such as the world being created in six days, six thousand years ago. We need to question and reassess doctrine such as Jesus being literally God in the flesh.
I can see where you are going with this as a Jehovah witness.
That men may know that thou, whose name alone is Jehovah, art the most high over all the earth.
However I don't think it means what you think it means. It refers to the reality of God, not the name. Are you reading it literally, and coming to a conclusion that contradicts other scripture? If your view were true then why would have the other names of God in the Bible? It is these other names help us to understand the reality of One who is Unknowable except through His prophets.
Agreed.
Agreed in part. I would argue that Jesus being the 'Only begotten Son', 'The first born of creation', created in God's image, and wisdom personified as in Psalms although we designation for Jesus, were there simply to advance our understanding of who He was. They could also be applied at least in part to Moses as well. However the language God used through Moses was different to the language God used through Jesus reflecting the different capacity of understanding of a people after fifteen hundred years of experience as God's chosen people.
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
The same was in the beginning with God.
All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
John 1:1-3
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
John 1:14
No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
John 1:18
Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?
Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
John 8:57-58
I and my Father are one.
John 10:30
Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.
And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
John 20:27-28
For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
Colossians 1:16-17
For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:
Colossians 2:9-10
There are more but that's enough to get us started.
Hi Herbert,
I agree that Jesus and God are two separate entities as you say. As for biblical evidence, there is certainly enough for an argument for the contrary position and that is exactly why so many Christians believe that God is Jesus in the flesh. See post #33. While I have found ample biblical scripture to support the position we agree on in post #5 we also need to be able to provide meaningful alternative interpretations to the scripture provided in post #33 to seal the deal.
Unlike the resurrection, this is certainly an easier one to clarify. Both the resurrection and Jesus as God in the flesh provide images that make little sense if taken literally. The Jesus is God has a plethora of scripture to both clearly support and reject it if taken literally. We need to look more deeply into scripture to resolve the contradiction. The resurrection doesn't have such a set of clearly contradictory statements and they seem to be talking about historical fact as well as pointing in one direction.
As for the firstborn of every creation, do you mean:
Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell
Colossians 1:15-19
What do you think it might mean?
Agreed.
Agreed. I don't know if you have read my perspective on this.
A Baha'i perspective on Jesus as the 'Son of God'
Jesus is exalted over all men as evidenced by the other titles but was also a human like us. If He wasn't how could we walk in His ways?
Agreed.
With the Abrahamic Faiths. Yes. I believe with the Dharmic faiths too, but am unqualified to argue the case.
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
Yes it does, but you know the non-JW Christians will still find verses that'll make him God.
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
I don't think any NT writer doubted that Jesus was Divine. I don't like getting too deep into things like this, because my head starts spinning around uncontrollably, figuratively speaking of course. But the little I cared to research this, it seems like the early church Fathers [Where were the Mothers?] debated and came up with all those things about Jesus and God being the same substance or something, therefore Jesus is God along with the Father and the Holy Spirit.
Baha'is already make Jesus special, but they put him on an equal basis with all the other prophet/founders of other religions. So all of them are the "perfectly" polished mirrors reflecting God. The NT writers could care less about other religions except Judaism, though. And for them, Moses is not equal to Jesus. That's the great difficulty. To believe the NT as God's Word, it's hard not be believe Jesus is second only to God himself... if not, like some say... a part of a three-in-one God.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
A great match no doubt, but neither side likely to beat the mighty All-Blacks in a hurry...................
Hi again.....
I'll come back to your other points another time.
I'm being serious here.... What you wrote, above, is so theologically significant that I think of one player all the time when I am trying to find my way through the writings of the gospels.
I once read an account of a match where Jonah Lomu was a winger (?). I should have copied it. It read something like .....
'...took the ball and exploded into action...... flying along the wing..... burst through the -------------- pack like a tank ......... the unslain Goliath with the speed and agility of Achilles....... .............. kind of description.
You know....... you read the words, heard the commentaries.........
And then I read about how Jesus walked on water, or cured the blind man, or cast out the demons.........
Ah..... yes.
It was nearly 25 years ago when a friend invited me to watch the a provincial rugby match. My home team Otago and the lowly Counties. The only thing is counties had this rising star Jonah Lomu who scored two tries and won the match. It was incredible. I'm a believer for sure.