Why Jesus is a God

[King Phenomenon]

Jesus must be a God. Who else was going to complete the word of God, if not God Himself?

Also, Jesus was flawless. John the Baptist saw this. Is there in history a being more compassionate than Jesus?

Lastly, the message Jesus brought (Love) cannot be trumped by other theories.

My question is, is there a reason Jesus is NOT God?

Yeah because you have God then you have Jesus and you have the Holy Spirit which is the relationship between the two of them

 

[TrueBeliever37]

There are plenty of proof that Jesus was only a man sent by God to the people of Israel. Jesus is not God:

God is All Knowing... Jesus was not

When speaking of the Day of Judgment, Jesus clearly gave evidence of a limitation on his knowledge when he said, "But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in Heaven, neither the son, but the father." (Mark 13:32, and Matt. 24:36) But God knows all. His knowledge is without any limitations. That Jesus, of his own admission, did not know when the day of judgment would be, is clear proof that Jesus is not all-knowing, and that Jesus is therefore not God.

God is All-Powerful... Jesus was not

While Jesus performed many miracles, he himself admitted that the power he had was not his own but was derived from God when he said, "Verily, verily I say unto you, the Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the father do..." (John 5:19) Again he said, "I can of mine own self do nothing: As I hear I judge, and my judgment is just because I seek not mine own will but the will of the Father which has sent me." (John 5:30) But God is not only All-Powerful, He is also the source all power and authority. That Jesus, of his own admission, could do nothing on his own is clear proof that Jesus is not all-powerful, and that therefore Jesus is not God.

God does not have a God ?

God does not have a God....But Jesus did have a God. God is the ultimate judge and refuge for all, and He does not call upon nor pray to any others. But Jesus acknowledged that there was One whom he worshipped and to Whom he prayed when he said, "I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God." (John 20:17) He is also reported to have cried out while on the cross, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" (Matt. 27:46) If Jesus were God, then couldn't this be read, "Myself, myself, why hast thou forsaken me?" Would that not be pure nonsense? When Jesus prayed the Lord's Prayer (Luke 11:2-4), was he praying to himself? When in the garden of Gethsemane he prayed, "O my father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: Nevertheless, not as I will but as thou wilt." (Matt. 26:36-39) Was Jesus praying to himself? That Jesus, of his own admission and by his own actions, acknowledged, worshipped, and prayed to another being as God is clear proof that Jesus himself is not God.

God is Invisible

According to the Bible, God is an invisible spirit.... But Jesus was flesh and blood. While thousands saw Jesus and heard his voice, Jesus himself said that this could not be done with God when he said: "No man hath seen God at any time." (John 1:18) "Ye have neither heard His voice at any time nor seen His shape." (John 5:37) He also said in John 4:24: "God is a spirit and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth." That Jesus would say that no one had seen or heard God at any time, while his followers both saw and heard him, is clear proof that Jesus was not God.

No one is Greater than GOD

No one is greater than God and no one can direct him....But Jesus acknowledged someone greater than himself whose will was distinct from his own. Perhaps the clearest indication we have that Jesus and God are not equal, and therefore not one and the same, come again from the mouth of Jesus himself who said in John 14:28: "My Father is greater than I." When someone referred to him as good master in Luke 18:19, Jesus responded: "Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is God..." furthermore, Jesus drew clear distinctions between himself and God when he said, "I proceeded forth and came from God, neither came I of myself but He sent me." (John 8:42) Jesus gave clear evidence of his subordination to God, rather than his equality with God, when he said in Luke 22:42, "not my will but Thine be done" and in John 5:30, "I seek not mine own will but the will of the Father which has sent me." That Jesus would admit that he did not come into the world on his own initiative but was directed to do so, that he would acknowledge another being as greater than himself, and that he would negate his own will in deference to affirming the will of another, give clear proof that Jesus is not the Supreme One and therefore Jesus is not God.

My conclusion is that the Church recognizes the Bible as the primary source of knowledge about God and Jesus. But since the Bible makes it clear that Jesus is not the Supreme Being and the Supreme Being is not Jesus, upon what basis have you come to believe otherwise?

My brother or sister, the belief that the Supreme Being is a Trinity is false and completely inconsistent with the words of Jesus as presented in the Bible. God is one, not three. He is a perfect unity. If you are interested in the truth about God and your relationship to Him, we invite you to investigate the true religion of Jesus.

You are correct that the Trinity is false. However your other conclusions are inaccurate.

The statement about the son not knowing, is based on additions made to the scriptures, which are not in the original. Different Greek manuscripts say different things.

YHWH didn't have blood to shed for man's sin. So, he took on a fleshly body to dwell in and sacrifice. That fleshly body was weak and could be tempted. The Spirit of God dwelling in the body could not be tempted. So all the times when he prayed, it was just that fleshly body calling on the Spirit for strength and help. The flesh could die, the Spirit could not die. Once the goal of being a perfect sacrifice was accomplished. The body was resurrected a glorified spiritual body, and he ascended and took the throne. Before he ascended he said I have all power in heaven and in earth. That means he is the Almighty.

The body was called the Son - because the eternal Spirit was the Father of that body. Yes, the Spirit of God dwelling in that body was invisible. The Spirit dwelling in the body was greater than the fleshly body. Father and Son is not two different persons. It is a distinction between the Spirit and the flesh.
So he was the one and only God appearing in a body.

You would want us to believe that he wasn't even crucified - correct?

 

[Duncan]

Hello, welcome and thank you for your comment. I do not believe in Jesus peace be upon him as a God or son of God and more importantly, I do not believe in the crucifixion and for various reason, the first one because The God of Jesus peace be upon him told us in his last revelation the Quran:"That they (Jews) said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah"; - but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them" (Surah 4, Ayah 157).

The other reasons are the various contradictions in the Bible itself. I mean didn't God gave us a brain to question and find the answer instead of following blindly.

Christians say that "GOD LOST His only son to save us". To whom did God lose Jesus if he owns the whole universe?

If it was agreeable with God’s Majesty to have sons, He could have created a million sons the like of Jesus. So what is the big clear deal about this only son?

Why does the Bible say that Jesus wanted to die on the cross, when the one on the cross was shouting "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" according to Matthew 27:45 and Mark 15:33?

If God had wanted to save us, couldn’t He have done that without sacrificing Jesus?

God is Just, and justice requires that nobody should be punished for the sins of others, nor should some people be saved by punishing other people. Doesn’t the claim that God sacrificed Jesus to save us because He was Just, contradict the definition of justice?

People sacrifice things they have to get something they don’t have when they can’t have both. Christians say that "God SACRIFICED His only son to save us". We know that God is Almighty; to whom did He sacrifice Jesus?

A real sacrifice is when you can’t get back what you have offered , so what would be the big deal about such a sacrifice if God could recover the same offering? (according to the Christians’ terminology)?

How come the Bible says that ALL Israel is saved although they don’t believe in Jesus? Doesn’t that contradict the claim in the Bible that the only way to heaven is through Jesus?

Try and answer to those questions if possible, now regarding the crucifixion The last words of Jesus on the cross are very confusing. First, there are four different versions of the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. This raises major questions about the accuracy of recording a Holy Book. These verses are part of a Christian doctrine of divine inspiration. If God had inspired these four gospel writers, why did God inspire them to record different words? These verses are not just different words, but totally different concepts. It seems that the closest statement should be the one that Jesus said in his own Aramaic language:

"Jesus cried with aloud voice saying Eli, Eli, lama sabachtani? That is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46, & Mark 15:34, though it is Eloi instead of Eli in Mark.) Which means God, God, why have you abandoned me?
Well!! every time I ask some of my friends that "OVER HERE JESUS (pbuh) DOES NOT EVEN WILL TO DIE FOR OUR SINS" If he will to die for our sins, he should have said that "Myself myself I am ready to die for the sins of the whole mankind." He would have used myself myself coz he is a God according to Christianity. When we ask them about such things, they reply to us that "You just have to believe it", close your mind, and accept Him.

It is hard to believe that Jesus said that God abandoned him. There are three possibilities:

- He said that. Then, why did the son of God think that his father abandoned him? Jesus told the disciples that he would die and rise from the dead in three days. He knew that he would die and be resurrected, so how can that be called abandonment? If he is the son of God that came to save humanity with his blood, so how can that be called abandonment? If he knew his mission in life, so how can that be called abandonment? This statement simply contradicts all the New Testament. Many Christian scholars have the same trouble justifying this statement.

- He did not say that. This means that Matthew and Mark were not accurate, and God did not inspire the Gospels, because God would not allow any inaccuracies.

- The man on the cross was not Jesus! This may seem at first sight as an unreasonable idea. But if we know that the same sentence, word for word, exists in the songs of David, Psalm 22.1, one may be tempted to suggest that the man on the Cross was a Jew asking God for help from his Old Testament.

It is interesting to note that Christian theologians introduced a branch called Apologetics to provide answers to criticisms against Christian beliefs. Apologetics started early in Christian history to resolve many contradictions in the New Testament. It is no secret that the word Apologetics came from the Latin word "apology", and the Greek origin "Logos." Some apologists suggest that Jesus said all the above versions. This is in spite of the fact that no single Gospel included all the four versions. Analyzing the Apologetics reasoning of the above four versions of Jesus′ last word does not present a satisfactory argument. Also, recent Apologetics advocates that historical and archeological evidences support early Christian history. That is a fair statement. However, historical and archeological evidences support the historical Jesus only, and cannot be extended to support the Christian belief about the nature of Jesus. In the New Testament, Jesus always presented himself as the "son of man." He never said that he was the son of god. Forty years later, Paul made him the "Son of God," and in the first Ecumenical Council of Churches, 325 AD, Athanasius made Jesus of the same Divine "substance" as that of God.

I also invite you to read he Gospel of Barnabas which differs from the Biblical Gospels in the following basics of the Christian religion:

Jesus is not the Son of God. He was a great prophet.
Jesus was not crucified. The one that was crucified in Jesus place was Judas by another miracle of God.
and more ....

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Duncan,

You need to do something about your posts. It makes it look like I said the things you said.

The very fact that your book says he wasn't crucified, shows me I can't accept what it says as being accurate.

We would be wasting time to discuss it any further, because I know you are not going to accept my explanations, since you don't really believe the Bible.

 

[Duncan]

Duncan,

You need to do something about your posts. It makes it look like I said the things you said.

The very fact that your book says he wasn't crucified, shows me I can't accept what it says as being accurate.

We would be wasting time to discuss it any further, because I know you are not going to accept my explanations, since you don't really believe the Bible.

sorry about that brother, I m new here and not yet familiar with the posts I asked questions tho you havent answered to any which is fine.

the Bible? which one? the made man one? the one that change every year? I believe in the Books that God sent upon David, (psalm), the book that he sent upon moises( torah) and the book that he sent upon Jesus ( evangile) and the scripture of Abraham peace be upon them all.

Now the bible you are talking about is a book full of contradictions, and I know what I am talking about I studied it, Christian Scholars Recognize Contradictions in the Bible.

“Then woe to those who write the book with their own hands and then say: ‘This is from God’, to traffic with it for a miserable price. Woe to them for what their hands do write and for the gain they make thereby.” (Quran 2:79)


“And when there came to them a messenger from God, Confirming what was with them, a party of the people of the book threw away the book of God behind their backs as if (it had been something) they did not know.” (Quran 2:101)

and the Bible say the same thing:

“Ye shall not add unto the word which I (God) command you, neither shall ye diminish [ought] from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.” (Deuteronomy 4:2)

Let me start from the beginning. No Biblical scholar on this earth will claim that the Bible was written by Jesus himself. They all agree that the Bible was written after the departure of Jesus peace be upon him by his followers. Dr. W Graham Scroggie of the Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, a prestigious Christian evangelical mission, says:

“..Yes, the Bible is human, although some out of zeal which is not according to knowledge, have denied this. Those books have passed through the minds of men, are written in the language of men, were penned by the hands of men and bear in their style the characteristics of men….It is Human, Yet Divine,”

Another Christian scholar, Kenneth Cragg, the Anglican Bishop of Jerusalem, says:

“...Not so the New Testament...There is condensation and editing; there is choice reproduction and witness. The Gospels have come through the mind of the church behind the authors. They represent experience and history...”

“It is well known that the primitive Christian Gospel was initially transmitted by word of mouth and that this oral tradition resulted in variant reporting of word and deed. It is equally true that when the Christian record was committed to writing it continued to be the subject of verbal variation. Involuntary and intentional, at the hands of scribes and editors.”

“Yet, as a matter of fact, every book of the New Testament with the exception of the four great Epistles of St. Paul is at present more or less the subject of controversy, and interpolations are asserted even in these.”

Dr. Lobegott Friedrich Konstantin Von Tischendorf, one of the most adamant conservative Christian defenders of the Trinity was himself driven to admit that:

“[the New Testament had] in many passages undergone such serious modification of meaning as to leave us in painful uncertainty as to what the Apostles had actually written”

After listing many examples of contradictory statements in the Bible, Dr. Frederic Kenyon says:

“Besides the larger discrepancies, such as these, there is scarcely a verse in which there is not some variation of phrase in some copies [of the ancient manuscripts from which the Bible has been collected]. No one can say that these additions or omissions or alterations are matters of mere indifference”

Throughout this book you will find countless other similar quotations from some of Christendom’s leading scholars. I will suffice with these for now.

Let me tell you something, christians are, in general, good and decent people, and the stronger their convictions the more decent they are. This is attested to in the noble Quran:

“...and nearest among them (men) in love to the believers will you find those who say ‘we are Christians’: because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant. And when they listen to the revelation received by the messenger (Muhammad), you will see their eyes overflowing with tears for they recognize the truth: They pray: ‘Our Lord! we believe; write us down among the witnesses.’” (Quran 5:82-83)

All biblical “versions” of the Bible prior to the revised version of 1881 were dependent upon the “Ancient Copies” (those dating between five to six hundred years after Jesus). The revisers of the Revised Standard Version (RSV) 1952 were the first biblical scholars to have access to the “MOST ancient copies” which date fully three to four hundred years after Christ. It is only logical to concur that the closer a document is to the source the more authentic it is. Let me share with you what is the opinion of Christendom with regard to the most revised version of the Bible (revised in 1952 and then again in 1971):

“The most accurate and close rendering of the original” - (The Times)
“A completely fresh translation by scholars of the highest eminence” - (Times literary supplement)
“The finest version which has been produced in the present century” - (Church of England newspaper)
...... and more and more.

Let me now share with you what these thirty two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations have to say about the Authorized Version (AV), or as it is better known, the King James Version (KJV). In the preface of the RSV 1971 we find the following:

“...Yet the King James Version has GRAVE DEFECTS..”

They go on to caution us that:

“...That these defects are SO MANY AND SO SERIOUS as to call for revision”

I mean I give you here an exemple in John 3:16 - AV(KJV) we read:

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life..”

[…] this fabrication “begotten” has now been unceremoniously excised by these most eminent of Bible revisers. However, humanity did not have to wait 2000 years for this revelation.

In the quran chapter called Maryam(19):88-98 of the noble Quran we read:

“And they say ‘God Most Compassionate has begotten a son!’ Indeed you have put forth a thing most monstrous! The skies are ready to burst (at such a claim), and the earth to split asunder, and the mountains to fall down in utter ruin. That they should ascribe a son to the Most Compassionate. But it is not befitting [the majesty of] the Most Compassionate that He should beget a son. Not one of the beings in the heavens and the earth but must come to the Most Compassionate as a slave. He has taken account of all of them and has numbered them all exactly. And every one of them will come to him singly on the day of judgment. On those who believe and work deeds of righteousness, will God most gracious bestow love. Verily, We have made this [Quran] easy in your tongue [O Muhammad] that you might deliver glad tidings to those who seek refuge [in God] and warn with it a people who are contentious. And how many a generation before them have we destroyed! Can you find a single one of them or hear from them so much as a whisper?”

I mean listen I can go on and on and on, you will never believe it even if you see, And you dont need to convince I believe in Jesus peace be upon him more than you do and Follow his steps more than you do believe me on that. And also my friend I am not trying to convince you but only to share with you the true reality.

 

[Muffled]

Yeah because you have God then you have Jesus and you have the Holy Spirit which is the relationship between the two of them

I believe that is false The Holy Spirit is not the relationship between God and Jesus.

I believe that is not so. When you have Jesus, you have God.

 

[Muffled]

me thinks some one has yet to realize that Jesus is an agent of God

I believe that is not true. Prophets are agents of God but since Jesus is God in the flesh there is no need for an agent. I am not an agent for Him either. He speaks through me not me speaking for Him.

 

[Muffled]

Some other Christians say that Jesus will return to rule with a rod of iron, bringing the sword to unbelievers, and Old Testament floggings, stonings and public executions to criminals. They tell me that Jesus is God and that the whole Bible is his word including Paul's rants etc.

They demand that Jesus was about truth before love. That's why I think that folks are walking away from churches today, all those Christian maniacs, as I describe.

But I don't think Jesus is God because he was just a man who picked up the Baptist's mission and tried to carry it forward.

I don't believe you have any evidence to support that concept. It is just fantasy n your part.

 

[King Phenomenon]

I believe that is false The Holy Spirit is not the relationship between God and Jesus.

I believe that is not so. When you have Jesus, you have God.

That's cool

 

[cataway]

I believe that is not true. Prophets are agents of God but since Jesus is God in the flesh there is no need for an agent. I am not an agent for Him either. He speaks through me not me speaking for Him.

a agent of God is some one that speaks for God for he is a representative of God.

 

[oldbadger]

I don't believe you have any evidence to support that concept. It is just fantasy n your part.

OK. If that is what you think.
But I have come to that decision after careful study of the gospels.

If the Gospel of Mark is reviewed, less the Christian additions and manipulations, it tell the story of an angry group of Galilean Jews who joined with the Baptist in his mission to help the peasantry whilst cutting off funds to the corrupt priesthood, temple and Jerusalem people by offering free cleansing and redemption in the Jordan river.......... for nothing!

And Apostle John? Why, he was not the disciple, was not even there...... imo.

 

[King Phenomenon]

I believe that is false The Holy Spirit is not the relationship between God and Jesus.

I believe that is not so. When you have Jesus, you have God.

Who Is the Holy Ghost?

 

[TheTruthReaper]

Jesus must be a God. Who else was going to complete the word of God, if not God Himself?

Also, Jesus was flawless. John the Baptist saw this. Is there in history a being more compassionate than Jesus?

Lastly, the message Jesus brought (Love) cannot be trumped by other theories.

My question is, is there a reason Jesus is NOT God?

That which was in Jesus was flawless.
His body was not flawless.

 

[TheTruthReaper]

Who Is the Holy Ghost?

The Spirit of God.

 

[Milton Platt]

Jesus must be a God. Who else was going to complete the word of God, if not God Himself?

Also, Jesus was flawless. John the Baptist saw this. Is there in history a being more compassionate than Jesus?

Lastly, the message Jesus brought (Love) cannot be trumped by other theories.

My question is, is there a reason Jesus is NOT God?

Because the evidence is unconvincing, untestable, unfalsifiable and rests on claims from anonymous books?

 

[cataway]

i have no problems with calling Jesus A god . the grave error comes when you say he is The God .that is a title that only applies to the most high God Jehovah.