Is Jesus God?

[Bowman]

i suppose that neither one of you get it because neither one of you have answered no,

mark 11.25 and when you stand and pray forgive anything you have against someone so that your farther in heaven will forgive the wrongs you have done.

mark 2.8 at once jesus knew what they where saying and thinking jesus said its easier to say to this man your sins are forgiven.

its not ok to tell person there sole is doomed phil , the enemy make a worried mind worry more, its not ok to frighten people that way, its not ok to say to some one your not a christian,

Jesus did...

You are from the Devil as the father, and the lusts ofyour father you desire to do.That one was a murderer from the beginning, and he has not stood in the truth, because there is notruth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own, because he is a liar, and the father of it. And because I speak the truth, you do not believe Me. (John 8.44 – 45)


Here we have Jesus, Himself, proclaiming to the unbelieving Jews, in no uncertain terms, that they are from the Devil.

Jesus said it like it was....2K years ago....what makes you think that telling it like it is today, is somehow 'politically incorrect'...?

you show unbelievers the scriptures if they still dont believe you ask them why, you talk some more, at no point should you tell them your not a christian or your sole is doomed, you can however talk about the many great things Jesus did,

only the farther can make the decision of who is IN who is out, when the day of redemption comes.

I wish you both well and i hope that you can both see that i am trying to help here,

No.

The unrighteous will have to answer to the Son on Judgment Day.

 

[curlyafropuff]

Man seems to be determined and persistent on forcing such a confession from all Christian believers. However, is such a confession of Jesus as God mandatory for salvation?

Better yet, perhaps the focus should be on what did God Almighty say that we believers should confess? Two things in particular come to mind: 1. Jesus came in the flesh 2. Jesus came in the flesh as the Son of God

Outside of those two parameters we should not lean to our own, nor to man's understanding and make any other confessions. Theses are the Biblical measuring rods the Bible says we are to use to try the spirits to see whether they are of God Almighty or not:

Confess that Jesus Christ came in the flesh. (1 John 4:2)
2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
Confess Jesus is the Son of God (1 John 4:15)
15 Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.

 

[kenisyes]

We begin with the grammatical structure of the text. This is a completely different ballgame. Our ideas and concepts do not come from the rationalization of human experience being forced onto the biblical text. They are generalized from the text and human experience is then weighed against that metric. This is not the same thing at all.

I agree that is a different ballgame. But not entirely so. Remember, the texts were chosen for inclusion in the Bible by human beings, upon experience with God. Not everyone agrees what texts should be included. Many people in the world reject the bible altogether.

Further, human language itself is determined by both the grace of God that allows humans to speak, and the life-experiences of a predominantly sinful world. Grammatical structures are chosen by an interaction of both. I do not see any conisderation of that fact in anything in the representational research website, or in how you are attempting to use the results. It would seem that any theory that analyzes how God alters His use of language to transcend human experience (and I agree that is what He does) would require that the alterations be compared to a baseline, using the same analytical technique.

It's the nature of the baseline that is causing our disagreement. If I understand our discussion so far correctly, you believe that the use of the word Elohim in Scripture has determined the baseline for that word, and I believe it has not. You point to the representation theory, and I point to the fact that most Jews do not believe in Jesus being the Messiah, and so have had no reason to incorporate God's definition of that word as expressed into Heb. 1:8 into the common language, and also that large numbers of new-agers have motivation not to allow the language to change according to God's interpretation of the word.

 

[oldhermit]

I agree that is a different ballgame. But not entirely so. Remember, the texts were chosen for inclusion in the Bible by human beings, upon experience with God. Not everyone agrees what texts should be included. Many people in the world reject the bible altogether.

This argument removes God from the process of preserving his own word. I do not for one moment believe that the canonization of scripture is the work of a council of men any more that the writing of the text itself was the product of the human mind. God controlled the process from beginning to the end.

Further, human language itself is determined by both the grace of God that allows humans to speak,

I very much agree. Language is an extended property of God that is pushed into the mind of man. We see this in the creation account and again in the account of the Tower of Babble.

and the life-experiences of a predominantly sinful world. Grammatical structures are chosen by an interaction of both.

I would have to agree since the evolution of language in human culture is a fact history.

I do not see any conisderation of that fact in anything in the representational research website, or in how you are attempting to use the results.

Since what they are doing and what we are doing are two entirely different things, why would you expect us to use their results? We do not even begin at the same point of reference. Naturally the results will not be the same.

It would seem that any theory that analyzes how God alters His use of language to transcend human experience (and I agree that is what He does) would require that the alterations be compared to a baseline, using the same analytical technique. It's the nature of the baseline that is causing our disagreement.

Indeed. We have chosen the mind of God as the base line rather than human experience. This is precisely what separates us from other representationalists.

If I understand our discussion so far correctly, you believe that the use of the word Elohim in Scripture has determined the baseline for that word, and I believe it has not.

The context of scripture must always serve as the only acceptable base line.

You point to the representation theory,

Please do not misunderstand. I am not pointing to a representational theory. We simply approach the text of scripture from a representational perspective.

most Jews do not believe in Jesus being the Messiah, and so have had no reason to incorporate God's definition of that word as expressed into Heb. 1:8 into the common language,

So what? Most Jews will never accept Christ in spite of how scripture uses language because their refusal of Christ is not rooted in textual grammar.

and also that large numbers of new-agers have motivation not to allow the language to change according to God's interpretation of the word.

So what does this tell you about the New Ager's approach to the text? There is a reason that scripture was written and preserved in dead languages.

 

[Quickfire]

Jesus did...

You are from the Devil as the father, and the lusts ofyour father you desire to do.That one was a murderer from the beginning, and he has not stood in the truth, because there is notruth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own, because he is a liar, and the father of it. And because I speak the truth, you do not believe Me. (John 8.44 – 45)


Here we have Jesus, Himself, proclaiming to the unbelieving Jews, in no uncertain terms, that they are from the Devil.

Jesus said it like it was....2K years ago....what makes you think that telling it like it is today, is somehow 'politically incorrect'...?







No.

The unrighteous will have to answer to the Son on Judgment Day.

you and phil have allready answered for god, you have also claimed here bowan that because Jesus did it makes it ok for you too ?? your thinking that you have the right to pass judgment in the way that god would on judgment day, quite clearly the both of you have said as much, may the lord forgive you you, ,I hope that he can,

1 Corinthians 5:12-13 Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.

Romans 16:17-18 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.


John 7:24

Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment.


Luke 6:37

“Judge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive, and you will be forgiven.
If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.


read the last one if you have done all your best and all your efforts have been n vain, because the unbeliever is still not believing, at no point does it say you are to give judgment the way god would on judgment day,
what it does say you can seperate from the person if you read between the lines,

And this is to protect the believer , why because some people are so afflicted that that get swollen with pride, that there unbelieving state will cause you or to lose faith.

STOP TRYING TO BE GOD BECAUSE YOUR NOT
get to know god because quite clearly you and phil do not.

 

[Bowman]

you and phil have allready answered for god, you have also claimed here bowan that because Jesus did it makes it ok for you too ?? your thinking that you have the right to pass judgment in the way that god would on judgment day, quite clearly the both of you have said as much, may the lord forgive you you, ,I hope that he can,

1 Corinthians 5:12-13 Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.

Romans 16:17-18 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.


John 7:24

Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment.


Luke 6:37

“Judge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive, and you will be forgiven.
If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.


read the last one if you have done all your best and all your efforts have been n vain, because the unbeliever is still not believing, at no point does it say you are to give judgment the way god would on judgment day,
what it does say you can seperate from the person if you read between the lines,

And this is to protect the believer , why because some people are so afflicted that that get swollen with pride, that there unbelieving state will cause you or to lose faith.

STOP TRYING TO BE GOD BECAUSE YOUR NOT
get to know god because quite clearly you and phil do not.

As you can verify for yourself, Jesus has no issue with saying things the way that they are.

Either, you take Him as your God & Savior, or you don't.

If you don't...then your father is the devil, as Jesus already said.

Now...if God has said this, who are you or I to disagree?

 

[Quickfire]

As you can verify for yourself, Jesus has no issue with saying things the way that they are.

Either, you take Him as your God & Savior, or you don't.

If you don't...then your father is the devil, as Jesus already said.

Now...if God has said this, who are you or I to disagree?

Quite clearly you just want to be herd and not listen, so to protect you and me i am separating my self from you on this matter, as the bible says to do, i am not turning my back on you and phil , because god wants all his children to be saved, im separating my self from you on this matter,

 

[silas42]

I have a problem with your statement That i hope you can clear up. your confessing something that only people that are guided by the holy spirit can say . My 72 year old wife mother in law confessed that she had never herd that jesus is god until just the other day and she had read the bible all her life, now you tell me is she not a christian too, she does however believe in the word

her church is church of England she has always believed if your church of england your a christian,

Mark 16:16

English Standard Version (ESV)

[SUP]16 [/SUP]Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

Please tell me where it says here whoever does not confess Jesus is god is not a christian,

Jesus is god is something you learn about later, like my mother in law.

Can you answer me now who ever does not confess this is not a christian,, think be for answer please.

Hi
I have been reading through this thread and I notice the point was made that ministers don't state from the pulpit you must believe Christ is God to be saved. So it doesn't surprise me your mother in law had never been told(or thought of) Jesus as God. Neither does it demand such a belief in scripture(as you correctly point out) for salvation.
It seems strange to me that if ministers in the churches don't demand it, neither does the bible that a few on the internet do(I have never personally met anyone who has). In fact many Christians I know simply see Christ as the son of God.
I have a hunch that all Christians would believe Christ has the nature of God, therefore any difference would only be in the title of Christ. The bible is clear as to the title that must be believed to inherit eternal life.
You have I believe written well in this debate, unfortunately many seem to have lost connection with the one who leads into truth and have instead relied on themselves and their studying to learn, a fatal flaw, I can think of no other reason they would condemn the innocent, it reminds me of the Pharisees in Jesus day
God Bless

 

[Bowman]

Quite clearly you just want to be herd and not listen, so to protect you and me i am separating my self from you on this matter, as the bible says to do, i am not turning my back on you and phil , because god wants all his children to be saved, im separating my self from you on this matter,

If you don't like the answers...then don't ask the questions...

 

[kenisyes]

1. I do not for one moment believe that the canonization of scripture is the work of a council of men any more that the writing of the text itself was the product of the human mind.

2. Since what they are doing and what we are doing are two entirely different things, why would you expect us to use their results? We do not even begin at the same point of reference. Naturally the results will not be the same.

3. Indeed. We have chosen the mind of God as the base line rather than human experience. This is precisely what separates us from other representationalists.

4. The context of scripture must always serve as the only acceptable base line.

5. So what? Most Jews will never accept Christ in spite of how scripture uses language because their refusal of Christ is not rooted in textual grammar.

6. So what does this tell you about the New Ager's approach to the text? There is a reason that scripture was written and preserved in dead languages.

1. Nor do I. But whose perspective should I accept? Here's a few: Apocrypha included, apocrypha not included, Koran included, Book of Mormon included, KJV inspired, only original texts inspired, only the early Hebrew alphabetic text inspired, Hebrew vowel points inspired... You still have the interaction between man and God as to what the text says occuring.

2. Maybe we need to go back to square one on this. I see you apparently using the 3 way model as an assumption. Whether that is one of their ideas, or yours, it requires more proof than I have seen from you or from them.

3. And how is the mind of God known? Without a baseline knowable in sufficient detail, we have no way to evaluate anything.

4. Thus I assume context of Scripture = the mind of God. It is clear people cannot agree on the context of many parts of Scripture, and we cannot know the mind of God without it.

5. But there are many Jews who do. Those who do begin knowing Jesus as Messiah, and as they grow, they discover that He is God. But if they cannot say it to their satisfaction in the Hebrew language, that still creates a reason used by those who wish to claim otherwise.

6. Greek was never dead. Hebrew is a living language since 1948. That's part of the reason the problem has surfaced now. Of course the New Agers are wrong. I Cor. 1:18 covers that nicely. But the New Agers, the Jews, the Moslems, the pagans, all are part of the world use of language, and all are making claims about the Bible that influence some Christians. And their input is what is affecting how everyone thinks about Scriptural context.

The method is fine for expressing what a given person sees in the Scripture, but I see no way to use it to determine a context of Scripture that will be agreed on by all people.

 

[oldhermit]

Would you agree that there is a difference between truth and error and that there is a right way and a wrong way to approach the reading of scripture?

 

[NiceneCreed]

Would you agree that there is a difference between truth and error and that there is a right way and a wrong way to approach the reading of scripture?

I don't know what specifically your comment addresses, but there definitely is a right and a wrong approach to reading Scripture.

(1) Correct Approach: Exegetical Interpretation

(2) Wrong Approach: Eisegetical Interpretation

(3) The Problem: No one can agree 100% on interpretation. This problem arises from the fact that we, as finite beings, often times interpret God's objective Word through subjective lenses on. So even when we believe we are exegetically interpreting God's Word, we may in fact be incorrectly interpreting it.

Thank God our receiving grace is not contingent upon a perfect theology. I do apologize for interrupting your conversation.

Grace and Peace!

 

[FromTheBible]

Only in the sense of their thrones, as it was with Pharaoh and Joseph. Just as Joseph was the expressed image (exact duplicate) of what made Pharaoh Pharaoh, Jesus is the expressed image of God's essence. Just as when Joseph spoke, it was as though the Pharaoh speaking. Only Pharaoh's throne separated Joseph as a separate person. Likewise, the only thing which separates Jesus from the Father is their thrones, there is no other distinction between them, as it was with Pharaoh and Joseph . In all what Joseph was to the Pharaoh, Jesus is to the Father. And, one day all things shall be returned back to the Father, just as it was returned to the Pharaoh.

But then we are left asking ourselves when all things are returned to the Father, "will Father degrade His Son when all things have been returned to Him?" Is He not the victorious King of kings and Lord of lords? Shall not the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb be the temple of the New Jerusalem? Shall He not be the Light of that city? Shall not the water of life proceed from the throne of God and the Lamb in that city?

As long as Joseph was alive, he was, in all essence, Pharaoh himself. Likewise, in all infinity, Jesus will continue being God Himself. Yet, even in that eternal kingdom, the only thing which separates them is their thrones. Long live our King!! Long live our Lord!! And from their thrones flow the water of life......

Sorry for the late reply i never saw your this message . Well First of all your whole entire reply did not quote even 1 scriptural backing but rather human reasoning , its hard to reply against somebody's ideas and reasoning because its based on opinion and not on facts but i will try :
How do you ignore the fact that Jehovah knew things that Jesus didn't “Concerning that day or the hour nobody knows, neither the angels in heaven nor the Son, but the Father.”
How do you ignore the fact that Jesus said “It is written, ‘It is Jehovah* your God+ you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.’”*+
How do you ignore the fact that Jesus prayed to his Father, saying: “Let, not my will, but yours take place.”
Ignoring evidence from the bible and changing the subject is not going to change anything.

 

[oldhermit]

I don't know what specifically your comment addresses, but there definitely is a right and a wrong approach to reading Scripture.

(1) Correct Approach: Exegetical Interpretation

(2) Wrong Approach: Eisegetical Interpretation

(3) The Problem: No one can agree 100% on interpretation. This problem arises from the fact that we, as finite beings, often times interpret God's objective Word through subjective lenses on. So even when we believe we are exegetically interpreting God's Word, we may in fact be incorrectly interpreting it.

Thank God our receiving grace is not contingent upon a perfect theology. I do apologize for interrupting your conversation.

Grace and Peace!

True. The question was actually directed to Kenisis as part of an ongoing discussion. However, your comment is certainly welcome.

 

[cfultz3]

Sorry for the late reply i never saw your this message . Well First of all your whole entire reply did not quote even 1 scriptural backing but rather human reasoning , its hard to reply against somebody's ideas and reasoning because its based on opinion and not on facts but i will try :
How do you ignore the fact that Jehovah knew things that Jesus didn't “Concerning that day or the hour nobody knows, neither the angels in heaven nor the Son, but the Father.”
How do you ignore the fact that Jesus said “It is written, ‘It is Jehovah* your God+ you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.’”*+
How do you ignore the fact that Jesus prayed to his Father, saying: “Let, not my will, but yours take place.”
Ignoring evidence from the bible and changing the subject is not going to change anything.

Because the Son was a man.

Likewise, God ordered all the angels to worship towards the resurrected Son.

Because the man we know as Jesus prayed to His Heavenly Father.

It was the Word who became flesh (human) who left His estate and while in that flesh He was human just as you and I.

P.S. Please show to me where I did not quote Scripture and I promise I will not reply in like manner of accusation nor will I accuse you of changing subject. I look forward to carrying on a conversation where one is not made to fell he is doing the work of the transducer.

 

[FromTheBible]

Because the Son was a man.

Likewise, God ordered all the angels to worship towards the resurrected Son.

Because the man we know as Jesus prayed to His Heavenly Father.

It was the Word who became flesh (human) who left His estate and while in that flesh He was human just as you and I.

P.S. Please show to me where I did not quote Scripture and I promise I will not reply in like manner of accusation nor will I accuse you of changing subject. I look forward to carrying on a conversation where one is not made to fell he is doing the work of the transducer.

You not quoting from the bible
For example : If you say that "As long as Joseph was alive, he was, in all essence, Pharaoh himself" , where can you back that up in the bible?.. I've mentioned several scriptures like Luke 22:42 , Hebrews 5:7, 8; 9:24 , Mark 13:32..I'm showing you from the bible why i am saying what i am saying .

If what you say is true , say that Jesus became flesh (human) who left hes estate and while in that flesh he was human just like you and i, then why after he died did he still show that the father was head over than him in 1 Corinthians 11:3 (note that this was after he got resurrected) "But I want YOU to know that the head of every man is the Christ;+ in turn the head of a woman is the man;+ in turn the head of the Christ is God.+" ??

[FONT=Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Droid Sans, Arial, Arial Unicode, Arial Unicode MS, sans-serif]Scripturally, then, Jehovah [/FONT]is God Almighty, and Jesus is his Son. The two of them were not equal before Jesus came to the earth or during his earthly life; nor did Jesus become equal to his Father after being resurrected to heaven.

 

[cfultz3]

You not quoting from the bible For example : If you say that "As long as Joseph was alive, he was, in all essence, Pharaoh himself" , where can you back that up in the bible?..

Pharaoh, not a personal name, but one which is defined as "ruler", and as such, ruler of Egypt, gave to Joseph the rule over his house (his country) and said to him, "according to your word shall my people be ruled (Gen 41:40)". If there is but one ruler (leader, dictator, president) over a country and that ruler himself, in having that authority, gave that rule over to another, then what made that Pharaoh (ruler) a ruler also made the one (Joseph) he gave that authority to a pharaoh. And from my understanding, one remained a pharaoh as long as he lived. And thus, Joseph was a pharaoh as long as he lived.

And from that same verse, we also see that the only thing which separated them was the "original" Pharaoh's throne. In like manner, in God having given to the Son all authority, just as Pharaoh did to Joseph, He left nothing out which was not given over to Him. Likewise again, as long as Joseph was alive, he was a pharaoh. And we understand that the Son shall never die again. And if He shall never die again, then He shall in indefinitely remain the expressed image of God's essence. And as to the Son's throne remaining forever and ever and ever, we have to but look in Revelation to see that the water of life PROCEEDS from both God's throne and the Son's throne in the new Kingdom.

P.S. I may not, just as those of Scripture, quote directly the book, chapter, and verse of what is presently being talked about, and see no harm in others when they choose to, but, as was once my signature: do not take my word for it, but go and search the Scriptures yourself. I can set here and present every man-made indicated verse of Scripture to someone and still be told I am twisting the meanings. It is like a catch 22, dang if I do, dang if I don't. What then are we left with? So, again, I say to all: go and search yourself. Do not take my word for it.

I've mentioned several scriptures like Luke 22:42 , Hebrews 5:7, 8; 9:24 , Mark 13:32..I'm showing you from the bible why i am saying what i am saying.

I, likewise, am showing others from the Bible.

Luke 22:42 : the Son, the One in the flesh, said this to His FATHER. But, never did the Word cease to being God, seeing that it was the Word who IS our CREATOR. There are many majestic titles for the Word and the title of Son is but of one of many. Just as Isaac was obedient to Abram, in that he was willing to lay down his life because his father had desired it so, Jesus was obedient to His Father. It would seem that this verse is the sentiments of Isaac, just as it was for the Son.

Hebrews 5:7-9: Yes, the Word took upon Himself flesh, and by such doings, became the Son. And this man we know learned the required obedience of the Law by ALL the things He underwent. And it was by this obedience to God's will, as it was to be in the Garden, that He, being the perfect second Adam, became the cause (author) of everlasting salvation for all those who OBEY Him. What a wonderful thing that God would come down from above and become like us so that He, by experience, would know our infirmities, and could be a true and faithful High Priest. Again, the Word never ceased being God, but as the Son, He perfectly kept the Law.

Hebrews 9:24 Yes, the Word became the Son who was sent to be our Messiah and as that Messiah, after having underwent those things He did so that He could become our High Priest, stands before God as such for us.

Mark 13:32 So said the Son. But, in Revelation, we know Jesus as the Alpha and the Omega, the same title used of God the Father. We also see that He is the One who searches the reins and hearts, again, an attribute only belong to God the Father. From other Scriptures, we also see that He is worshiped by angels, something which only belongs to God. So, we see that the Son, the man we saw, knew not, but surely, in having returned to His estate next to God the Father, He is God and is all-knowledgeable.

If what you say is true , say that Jesus became flesh (human) who left hes estate and while in that flesh he was human just like you and i, then why after he died did he still show that the father was head over than him in 1 Corinthians 11:3 (note that this was after he got resurrected) "But I want YOU to know that the head of every man is the Christ;+ in turn the head of a woman is the man;+ in turn the head of the Christ is God.+" ??

The Word became flesh, but I understand what you mean. As the Messenger of the Lord, the Word fulfills the desires (will) of the One we call Father of the Godhead. As such, the Word was sent out to accomplish that will and when all things have been subjected to Him, then all things will be returned to the One who sent Him. We understand the Word became the Son and was made for a little while lower than the angels for the sake of fulfilling that mission, and we also understand that when the Word went back to Heaven, He received this eternal Godly throne back as the incarnated Messiah. But, as to Jesus having been under the Father, that was temporarily true, but as the Word, we understand that though the Spirit and the Son operates in different administrations apart from God, that there is but ONE GOD who works all in all. (1Co 12:6) Indeed, the head of Christ is God, seeing that God is the One who sent the Word to fulfill that mission of being the Christ. If we would but look again in Revelation, we see that both thrones are in the new Kingdom and that both are worshiped, of which, only God is worshiped.

Scripturally, then, Jehovah isGod Almighty, and Jesusis his Son. The two of them were not equal before Jesus came to the earth or during his earthly life; nor did Jesus become equal to his Father after being resurrected to heaven.

It is true that Jah is God Almighty and that Jesus, the man, is the Son. But, it is also true that the Word is God our Creator. To say that the Word and God was not equal before He came in the flesh is to say that the Word does not hold up ALL THINGS BY HIS OWN POWER, that He is not the One who spoke all things into existence, that He is not the King of kings and LORD of lords.

To say that Jesus, the incarnated Word, did not become equal to His Father after being resurrected to Heaven is to say that the Father did not give His throne back to Him, that when the Father sent Him out on a mission it was really coup, that all things, and nothing having been excluded, which was handed over to Him to take care of as the Christ was nothing more than a mirror trick on the Father's side, in that He did not give all things to Him or that He will take all things back from Him, even His title of Creator, the Christ, the Son, the Word, etc.....Either the Word is God and shall always remain God or we have many Gods. P.S. I am not saying that you are implying any of what I just said, but that it can only be concluded from such.

 

[FromTheBible]

Pharaoh, not a personal name, but one which is defined as "ruler", and as such, ruler of Egypt, gave to Joseph the rule over his house (his country) and said to him, "according to your word shall my people be ruled (Gen 41:40)". If there is but one ruler (leader, dictator, president) over a country and that ruler himself, in having that authority, gave that rule over to another, then what made that Pharaoh (ruler) a ruler also made the one (Joseph) he gave that authority to a pharaoh. And from my understanding, one remained a pharaoh as long as he lived. And thus, Joseph was a pharaoh as long as he lived.

And from that same verse, we also see that the only thing which separated them was the "original" Pharaoh's throne. In like manner, in God having given to the Son all authority, just as Pharaoh did to Joseph, He left nothing out which was not given over to Him. Likewise again, as long as Joseph was alive, he was a pharaoh. And we understand that the Son shall never die again. And if He shall never die again, then He shall in indefinitely remain the expressed image of God's essence. And as to the Son's throne remaining forever and ever and ever, we have to but look in Revelation to see that the water of life PROCEEDS from both God's throne and the Son's throne in the new Kingdom.

P.S. I may not, just as those of Scripture, quote directly the book, chapter, and verse of what is presently being talked about, and see no harm in others when they choose to, but, as was once my signature: do not take my word for it, but go and search the Scriptures yourself. I can set here and present every man-made indicated verse of Scripture to someone and still be told I am twisting the meanings. It is like a catch 22, dang if I do, dang if I don't. What then are we left with? So, again, I say to all: go and search yourself. Do not take my word for it.


I, likewise, am showing others from the Bible.

Luke 22:42 : the Son, the One in the flesh, said this to His FATHER. But, never did the Word cease to being God, seeing that it was the Word who IS our CREATOR. There are many majestic titles for the Word and the title of Son is but of one of many. Just as Isaac was obedient to Abram, in that he was willing to lay down his life because his father had desired it so, Jesus was obedient to His Father. It would seem that this verse is the sentiments of Isaac, just as it was for the Son.

Hebrews 5:7-9: Yes, the Word took upon Himself flesh, and by such doings, became the Son. And this man we know learned the required obedience of the Law by ALL the things He underwent. And it was by this obedience to God's will, as it was to be in the Garden, that He, being the perfect second Adam, became the cause (author) of everlasting salvation for all those who OBEY Him. What a wonderful thing that God would come down from above and become like us so that He, by experience, would know our infirmities, and could be a true and faithful High Priest. Again, the Word never ceased being God, but as the Son, He perfectly kept the Law.

Hebrews 9:24 Yes, the Word became the Son who was sent to be our Messiah and as that Messiah, after having underwent those things He did so that He could become our High Priest, stands before God as such for us.

Mark 13:32 So said the Son. But, in Revelation, we know Jesus as the Alpha and the Omega, the same title used of God the Father. We also see that He is the One who searches the reins and hearts, again, an attribute only belong to God the Father. From other Scriptures, we also see that He is worshiped by angels, something which only belongs to God. So, we see that the Son, the man we saw, knew not, but surely, in having returned to His estate next to God the Father, He is God and is all-knowledgeable.


The Word became flesh, but I understand what you mean. As the Messenger of the Lord, the Word fulfills the desires (will) of the One we call Father of the Godhead. As such, the Word was sent out to accomplish that will and when all things have been subjected to Him, then all things will be returned to the One who sent Him. We understand the Word became the Son and was made for a little while lower than the angels for the sake of fulfilling that mission, and we also understand that when the Word went back to Heaven, He received this eternal Godly throne back as the incarnated Messiah. But, as to Jesus having been under the Father, that was temporarily true, but as the Word, we understand that though the Spirit and the Son operates in different administrations apart from God, that there is but ONE GOD who works all in all. (1Co 12:6) Indeed, the head of Christ is God, seeing that God is the One who sent the Word to fulfill that mission of being the Christ. If we would but look again in Revelation, we see that both thrones are in the new Kingdom and that both are worshiped, of which, only God is worshiped.


It is true that Jah is God Almighty and that Jesus, the man, is the Son. But, it is also true that the Word is God our Creator. To say that the Word and God was not equal before He came in the flesh is to say that the Word does not hold up ALL THINGS BY HIS OWN POWER, that He is not the One who spoke all things into existence, that He is not the King of kings and LORD of lords.

To say that Jesus, the incarnated Word, did not become equal to His Father after being resurrected to Heaven is to say that the Father did not give His throne back to Him, that when the Father sent Him out on a mission it was really coup, that all things, and nothing having been excluded, which was handed over to Him to take care of as the Christ was nothing more than a mirror trick on the Father's side, in that He did not give all things to Him or that He will take all things back from Him, even His title of Creator, the Christ, the Son, the Word, etc.....Either the Word is God and shall always remain God or we have many Gods. P.S. I am not saying that you are implying any of what I just said, but that it can only be concluded from such.

Well there are a few things that can be said after our conversation.
Firstly - SPIRITUALLY like ive said Jehovah is God Almighty, and Jesus his Son. The two of them were not equal before Jesus came to the earth or during his earthly life; nor did Jesus become equal to his Father after being resurrected to heaven , there is overwhelming evidence for this.You keep giving examples and illustrations but those illustrations they have no backup or basis , your illustrations about Pharoah and Joseph are your own ideas.
The title given to Jesus was simple - Jehovah has given him power "Almost 30 years after that Pentecost in 33 C.E., the apostle Paul confirmed that Christ had not yet taken full Kingdom power, but he was “at the right hand of God, from then on awaiting until his enemies should be placed as a stool for his feet.” (Hebrews 10:12, 13) Then, near the end of the first century C.E., the aged apostle John foresaw in a vision the Universal Sovereign, Jehovah, installing Christ Jesus as King of the newborn heavenly Kingdom" -
Secondly - I am most certainly not undermining Jesus's power at all, Jesus is the heir to the throne is and will be the KING - Rev. 20:4, 6 " And they came to life and ruled as kings+ with the Christ for a thousand years.*..note for a thousand years

I have been commanded to preach -(Matthew 24:14) And this good news+ of the kingdom+ will be preached* in all the inhabited earth* for a witness* to all the nations;+ and then the end*+will come.Jesus indicated that not everyone would listen. (Matthew 10:14)
"Wherever anyone does not take YOU in or listen to YOUR words, on going out of that house or that city shake the dust off YOUR feet.+"
So from my side ive shown you scriptually then the truth,but i am not going to argue about these things as that is not my desire and purpose.=)

Thank you for the discussion.

 

[cfultz3]

Well there are a few things that can be said after our conversation.
Firstly - SPIRITUALLY like ive said Jehovah is God Almighty, and Jesus his Son. The two of them were not equal before Jesus came to the earth or during his earthly life; nor did Jesus become equal to his Father after being resurrected to heaven , there is overwhelming evidence for this.You keep giving examples and illustrations but those illustrations they have no backup or basis , your illustrations about Pharoah and Joseph are your own ideas.
The title given to Jesus was simple - Jehovah has given him power "Almost 30 years after that Pentecost in 33 C.E., the apostle Paul confirmed that Christ had not yet taken full Kingdom power, but he was “at the right hand of God, from then on awaiting until his enemies should be placed as a stool for his feet.” (Hebrews 10:12, 13) Then, near the end of the first century C.E., the aged apostle John foresaw in a vision the Universal Sovereign, Jehovah, installing Christ JesusasKing of the newborn heavenly Kingdom" -
Secondly - I am most certainly not undermining Jesus's power at all, Jesus is the heir to the throne is and will be the KING - Rev. 20:4, 6 " And they came to life and ruled as kings+ with the Christ for a thousand years.*..note for a thousand years

I have been commanded to preach -(Matthew 24:14) And this good news+ of the kingdom+ will be preached* in all the inhabited earth* for a witness* to all the nations;+ and then the end*+will come.Jesus indicated that not everyone would listen. (Matthew 10:14)
"Wherever anyone does not take YOU in or listen to YOUR words, on going out of that house or that city shake the dust off YOUR feet.+"
So from my side ive shown you scriptually then the truth,but i am not going to argue about these things as that is not my desire and purpose.=)

Thank you for the discussion.

The Word is not Creator Himself?

Jesus never came to the Earth. It was the Word who was sent out to be born in flesh and was named Jesus. None of the Old Testament knew the name Jesus.

Again, Who holds up all things by HIS OWN POWER?

 

[cfultz3]

The Word is not Creator Himself?

Jesus never came to the Earth. It was the Word who was sent out to be born in flesh and was named Jesus. None of the Old Testament knew the name Jesus.

Again, Who holds up all things by HIS OWN POWER?

To say that the Word is not equal to God is not scriptural. The truth is, BOTH God Almighty and the Lamb will be the temple in the new Kingdom. BOTH will have the water of life proceeding from their thrones. Neither will die, thus Jesus is Lord and King forever and ever.