Who is Jesus?

In answering the question, “Who is Jesus?” we will consider what His enemies and friends said about Him and then what Jesus claimed for Himself.


· His enemies.
-Pilate: “I find no crime in this man.” (Luke 23:4, 14, 22)
-Judas: “I have sinned in betraying innocent blood.” (Matthew 27: 4)
-Pharisee: He is a blasphemer “because he not only broke the Sabbath but also called God his Father, making himself equal with God.” “You, being a man, make yourself God.”


· His Friends
-Angels to Shepherds: “A savior, who is Christ the Lord.” (Luke 2:11)
-Simeon: “The Lord’s Christ.” (Luke 2:26-32)
-Wisemen: “King of the Jews.” (Matthew 2:1-11)
-John the Baptist: “The lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world.” “This is the Son of God.” (John 1:29, 34)
-Andrew: “The Messiah.” (John 1:41)
-Peter: “The Christ, the Son of the living God.” “The Holy One of God.” “Lord and Christ.” (Matthew 16:16, John 6:68-69 and Acts 2:36)
-Paul: “The Son of God.” “… in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily.” (Acts 9:20, Romans 1:4 and Colossians 2:9)


· Jesus’ claims
- Equality with God – “I and the Father are one.” (John 10:30)
- Came from Heaven- “I have come down from Heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me.” (John 6:38)
- Always Existed- “Before Abraham was, I am.” (John 8:56-58)
- Only Way to God- “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me.” (John 14:6)
- Seeing Him Was Seeing God- “He who has seen me has seen the Father.” (John 14:9)
- Exclusive Knowledge of God- “No one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.” (Matthew 11:27)
- He Could Raise the Dead- “I am the resurrection and the life.” (John 11:25)
- Savior- “You will die in your sins unless you believe that I am he.” (John 8:24)
- Judge- “The Father… has given all judgment to the Son.” (Matthew 16:27)

---*Either He is who He claims to be or He is not. Either these statements are true or they are false. Some people, however, try to find a halfway position. The praise Jesus as a teacher but reject His divine claims.

· In a college English Literature course a student was asked to give a report on the influence of the Bible in English literature. The report concluded, “Either the Bible is a true revelation from God or it should be rejected as a false book. Either Jesus was the Son of God or He should be rejected as an imposter.” After students made several comments, the teacher said she did not go to church anymore, but she had gone to Sunday School as a child. Expressing her view of Christ, she said, “I don’t believe the miracles. I don’t believe Jesus was the Son of God, but I do think Jesus was a great moral teacher.”

The former atheist, C.S. Lewis, makes it clear why that view cannot be accepted:
“A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would be either a lunatic- on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg or else he would he the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice: Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and Kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”

So Jesus was either a
-Liar
-Lunatic
-Or God

[Thaddaeus]

I think this one ought to have been included also whom Jesus said that He was:

Mr 2:3And they come unto him, bringing one sick of the palsy, which was borne of four.Mr 2:4And when they could not come nigh unto him for the press, they uncovered the roof where he was: and when they had broken it up, they let down the bed wherein the sick of the palsy lay.Mr 2:5When Jesus saw their faith, he said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee.Mr 2:6But there were certain of the scribes sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts,Mr 2:7Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only?Mr 2:8And immediately when Jesus perceived in his spirit that they so reasoned within themselves, he said unto them, Why reason ye these things in your hearts?Mr 2:9Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk?Mr 2:10But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (he saith to the sick of the palsy,)Mr 2:11I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house.Mr 2:12And immediately he arose, took up the bed, and went forth before them all; insomuch that they were all amazed, and glorified God, saying, We never saw it on this fashion.

Son, thy sins be forgiven thee. one would think that only the Father would call someone son, plus also even the scribes knew that only God can forgive sins. the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, that sure sounds like God to me

[imoss]

Thank you for this thread...

[Mobius]

Hehe, behold the great Defintion_Christ, slayer of strawmen big and small.

[Mobius]

Mathew 16,"You are the Moshiach, the Son of the Living G-d"

As I've mentioned, before I really can't imagine how He could've expressed any greater a level of satsfaction with that answer. If it was good enough for Him, why is it not good enough for us?

Is it Messiah that's crazy? Of course not. What seems crazy to me is that we put the theories and explanations of man as being SO important, so that we defend tham as we would the Bible itself... That even a groupwide unity around the idea of His being divine, as explained in BIBLICAL terms, is not sufficient to "break bread" and have fellowship, one with the other.. that some people would still rather split hairs and draw lines in the sand, based on manmade constructs and terminology that don't appear in the Bible.

I've said it before, brethren, but since my view isn't represented on the poll, I'll take the opportunity to repeat myself-

You will never need non-biblical terms to explain a biblical idea. If the concept is TRULY from the Bible, then you can explain it using only the terms the Bible explains it in. And if we'd all simply stick to the way scripture says things, instead of trying to paraphrase it, it would become much more obvious that we are much more alike than we are different.

[Densetzu]

Technically he could be both Crazy and a Liar or Crazy and God.

I'd vote for Crazy and God--how else can you explain the platypus?

Unto us a child is born, unto us a child is given and the government shall be upon his shoulder and his name shall be wonderful, counselor, the mighty God and the Everlasting Father and the Prince of Peace. Isaiah 9:6

[Mobius]

Densatzu-

haha good answer. Of course the poll doesn't represent all the possibilities. I mean no disrespect to the original poster, but it seems to me that the poll was put up for the express purpose of dividing down the body of believers, in order to make it seem as if we are opposed to one another.

Let historians credit Alexander the so-called "great" with the tactics of "divide and conquer." We children of the book know better. That old serpent did it to us way back in the garden, and he's been doing it ever since.

Jezreel-

The devil quoted scriptures to Yeshua, too. But he was able to take their meaning out of context by sticking to short passages, instead of looking at the larger message. If you'll keep reading, up through chapter 11, you'll see that the subject of this sermon DOES in fact have a fear of L-rd, something which G-d would have no need of. G-d does not bow to another, He does not worship another, He does not fear another.

No relaying of events, or interpersonal dialogue breaks chapter 9 from 11. It is a single sermon, and despite the common interpretation, if we read the entire sermon, its meaning becomes clear.

[Arel]

Maybe it's just me, but this poll is extremely biased. It insinuates that if you don't believe Yeshua is G-d, you think he is either crazy or a liar.

[1Covenant]

Originally Posted by Mobius

If you'll keep reading, up through chapter 11, you'll see that the subject of this sermon DOES in fact have a fear of L-rd, something which G-d would have no need of. G-d does not bow to another, He does not worship another, He does not fear another.

Perhaps the point is this:
"Seeing then that we have a great High Priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin. Let us therefore come boldly to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need."
In the same manner that God dwelt in a tent while his people dwelt in a tent, that he dwelt in a house when His people dwelt in houses, He now dwells in the flesh because we dwell in the flesh.
He shows himself to be the condescending God who experiences on our behalf our plight so that we might have confidence that he is approachable. That our sin and doubt are no obstacle for his condescension into our heart.
Just Maybe...

[Densetzu]

Well yes, the possibility that Jesus' claims to be God were later interpolations by his overzealous followers usually does not occur to people who make such polls. Or if it does, they dismiss them outright because, duh, the Bible is infallible--I know this becasue the Bible said so.

Originally Posted by Jezreel

Unto us a child is born, unto us a child is given and the government shall be upon his shoulder and his name shall be wonderful, counselor, the mighty God and the Everlasting Father and the Prince of Peace. Isaiah 9:6

Actually, I typed that wrong, it should say after child is born that SON is given and the government shall be upon his shoulder and his name should be called, wonderful, counselor, the mighty God, and the everlasting Father and the Prince of Peace.

[Mobius]

What's always been funny to me, about trinitarians quoting Isaiah 9, is that really, IF we do clip something out of the middle, and just look at this one verse, instead of the entire sermon, it STILL would point more towards a "oneness" theology, rather than trinitarianism. Because they translate it as "father" instead of "source" trying to show Him to be G-d, and yet trinitarianism claims that Jesus is NOT the Father, but rather a SEPARATE part of the "godhead."

I am not a trinitarian. I believe that the Father spirit (not a person) and the spirit of Christ and the holy Spirit are the same spirit because there is only one spirit, not three. Jesus is the son of God and that is only time he was a person.

Originally Posted by Jezreel

I am not a trinitarian. I believe that the Father spirit (not a person) and the spirit of Christ and the holy Spirit are the same spirit because there is only one spirit, not three. Jesus is the son of God and that is only time he was a person.

You don't need to be a trinitarian to believe Jesus' words.

[MahogonySnail]

What's always been funny to me, about trinitarians quoting Isaiah 9, is that really, IF we do clip something out of the middle, and just look at this one verse, instead of the entire sermon, it STILL would point more towards a "oneness" theology, rather than trinitarianism. Because they translate it as "father" instead of "source" trying to show Him to be G-d, and yet trinitarianism claims that Jesus is NOT the Father, but rather a SEPARATE part of the "godhead

It's well known that 'father' has many uses in scripture and that "everlasting father" simply means "father of eternity" and refers to Christ's eternal nature (as always being with the Father before he was born) , and does not in any way make a case for Jesus being the same as the Father (God).

The bible says, "There is one God and one Father that is above all and in all and through all!! Praise Jesus!

Originally Posted by Mobius

What's always been funny to me, about trinitarians quoting Isaiah 9, is that really, IF we do clip something out of the middle, and just look at this one verse, instead of the entire sermon, it STILL would point more towards a "oneness" theology, rather than trinitarianism. Because they translate it as "father" instead of "source" trying to show Him to be G-d, and yet trinitarianism claims that Jesus is NOT the Father, but rather a SEPARATE part of the "godhead."

Just curious bro what are your beliefs on these following verses?

Isaiah 42:8
I am the LORD, that is My name; And My glory I will not give to another, Nor My praise to carved images.

John 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.

What was Jesus talking about man? God doesn't share His glory.. Jesus couldn't have been another God but could He have been the same God?

Isaiah 44:8
Do not fear, nor be afraid;
Have I not told you from that time, and declared it?
You are My witnesses.
Is there a God besides Me?
Indeed there is no other Rock;
I know not one.’”

Just curious what you think about that, also..

Isaiah 44:6
Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel, And his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: ‘ I am the First and I am the Last; Besides Me there is no God

Also the King of Israel does that go with Jesus being the King of the Jews or is that just irrelevant? (Just curious, trying to see if there is a connection between the two.)

I posted Isaiah 44:6 because in Revelation... Well....
Revelation 1
And when I saw Him, I fell at His feet as dead. But He laid His right hand on me, saying to me,“Do not be afraid; I am the First and the Last.
18 I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore. Amen. And I have the keys of Hades and of Death.

Those are the words of Jesus saying HE is the First and the Last.

What do you make of all those verses above?

I meant, I am just looking for your opinion on what they mean.

[AnRev]

This post is exactly like the on asking "Did God died on the cross."

Re: Is 9:6, mighty God. Definition: God. 'el (ale)

• 1. god, god-like one, mighty one
  • a. mighty men, men of rank, mighty heroes
  • b. angels
  • c. god, false god, (demons, imaginations)
  • d. God, the one true God Jehovah
• 2. mighty things in nature
• 3. strength, power

As you can tell, there is not set standard for the term used. A bible can be said to say mighty man, mighty God, mighty false god, mighty angel, mighty God-like man, mighty nature, mighty power, and so forth.

Tell me, which one would you use if you wanted people to believe a certain way? This verse does not confirm Jesus is God, or ever was God.

Yes, this tread is very biased.


The son of man has power to forgive because God gave him that power. "These things spake Jesus; and lifting up his eyes to heaven, he said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that the son may glorify thee: even as thou gavest him authority over all flesh, that to all whom thou hast given him, he should give eternal life." John 17:1-2

But I suppose that since most of you believe that Jesus is God that all of you are Jesus. "And he called the twelve together, and gave them power and authority over all demons, and to cure diseases." Luke 9:1 Since Jesus gave them power and power to any believer, I suppose you are saying that God did not Give Jesus power because he was God already, so like wise you are not given any power because you are also Jesus?

You are no more Jesus than Jesus is God. This is why rational people do not allow religion to be taught in schools. There is a difference between religion and truth.