- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Is God a man? Yes, his name is Jesus.
************************************Reading this scares me. It puts a bit of fear in me because I know it's a lie. It is not written. God is not a man. John 1:1 can not be understood this way. Why? Because it would contradict other places where God says he is not a man. Where God says he does not change. God does not change his mind. If he did, who could trust him?
Jesus is the Son of God.
Tim, do you have a son? Is he you, too? In what way? In the same way, Jesus is his Father. Not that you are your son. Not that your son is you. But that your seed (in addition to your wifes egg) produced your boy. Why cannot it be this simple for the Son that the Father had?Hi not3,
The beloved monogenes Son was sent into the World.[1jn4]
He who was above the angels but less than his God
became less than the angels for a time[heb]Quote You tell lies again David. I was discussing with you and then you ran away. –Cult Buster
PLeeeeeeeeaaaaase!!!!! I spent pages begging you to disucss that subject with me.
Your responce was that you are a busy guy. Do you want me to find that for you?
You are ridiculous. I'm sorry, but you are. You actually can't have “conversations” with people. I've asked you for this so many times. I've asked you this because you post your same posts over and over in the same thread and then when questioned on them, you repost that post. You don't actually converse. You can't. You're far too busy for that. I understand. But don't tell me I ran away from you on any subject. That is laughable in the extreme.I'll post this one more time, Cult Buster. Please answer it:
“If we don't know what the word “god” means then we don't know what it means when it says that Jesus is God.
No one seems to want to touch the question of what that word means except for Tim2 who keeps repeating that “God” means YHWH which of course it doesn't. Substitute “YHWH” in every instance where the word “God” is and a lot of things will simply be wrong. Those words are not interchangeable. (The KJV did substitue “LORD” or “GOD” for most of the instances where “Jehovah” occurs, because Jehovah is God. But you can't take the word “god” or “God” wherever it occurs and substitue “Jehovah” because THAT WORD HAS A WIDER BIGGER MEANING than “Jehovah.” We know this because it is applied to ones that clearly aren't Jehovah.)
Moses, for example, because of the situation that existed was called the God of Pharoah and also the God of Aaron.
Did this mean that Moses was Jehovah? No, because the word God doesn't mean Jehovah.So what does it mean, in this case, and in every case?”
How often is Jesus called the “son of God” or even the “son” meaning the son of God?
He's called the “son of God” about 40 times and “God's son” about 8 times.
These occurances would seem to suggest….no, they tell us that Jesus is related to God in a certain way and therefore, not God himself.
More specifically, he is the “Son of” God, and hence, by every form of logic, not God himself.So what does it mean that he's called God?
Either logic makes no sense when referring to this subject and therefore there is no point in discussing any of this, or we don't really understand the word “god.”
Look at Jesus' early life. He was the carpenters son. Yet, he was a carpenter himself.
Now, we have no problem understanding this. We don't think that he was himself. Without knowing anything about Jesus, if we just read those two sentences, we would understand that he is separate from his Father who is also a carpenter.
Imagine that his Father was the greatest builder, the greatest creator, the greatest carpenter ever–“the” carpenter. Compared to him, no one else can really even be called a carpenter. Let's say that you lived in that town and when you said you were going to the carpenter, everyone just knew what you meant, that you were going to Jesus' Father.
Would a person still understand the meaning? Would they now assume that the Son and the Father are the same being? No.
Even though others are called carpenters, such as Moses, etc, we understand that there is only one true carpenter.The problem is that people have taken aside the actual word “god” because it is so often used of Jehovah God and forgotten the actual meaning. They think it means only “Jehovah God.” The word “God” applies to Jehovah more than anyone, and by far. But this doesn't mean that anyone else that is called “God” is Jehovah.
david
I ask this again because I think it belongs here and because no one has really attempted to answer it to any significant extent:
JOHN 19:7
“The Jews answered him: “We have a law, and according to the law he ought to die, because he made himself God’s son.””If these people wanted him dead (as they clearly did) and if they were willing to do anything to meet that end (which they clearly were; breaking all sorts of laws in their trial of him) then why oh why oh why oh why, didn't they accuse him of the much greater charge: Of claiming to be God himself? ? ? ?
Anyone?
If Jesus claimed to be God Almighty, I think the Jews who wanted him dead must have missed it. Surely they would have used this much greater charge to hav him executed. They were willing to bring forth false witnesses and to bend the law however it suited them. Why wouldn't they accuse him of being God Almighty? Why only accuse him of claiming to be God's son?
This makes no sense to me if he was God Almighty.I know that if I claimed to be the prince of England, people would attack that claim. If I claimed to be the Queen, people would also attack that claim. But which claim would you use if you wanted to bring me down? I'd use the more crazy claim. And to the unbelieving Jews who wanted Jesus dead, you'd have to think they would have thought that claiming to be God himself was more outrageous than claiming to be his son.
I suppose david, that had Jesus said he was God, and the Jews that wanted him dead used this as evidence, then it would have been a slam-dunk case for the death sentence and where is the sport in that? So they took the more challenging path and said that he claimed to be the son of God instead.
Seriously though that must be the conclusion for those who think that Jesus claimed to be God. What else is there?
Good points david,
The fear of deception is a prison for the deceived.
They cannot communicate lest they learn.
Tradition is fossilised and cannot learn.Quote (david @ April 10 2007,19:48) I ask this again because I think it belongs here and because no one has really attempted to answer it to any significant extent: JOHN 19:7
“The Jews answered him: “We have a law, and according to the law he ought to die, because he made himself God’s son.””If these people wanted him dead (as they clearly did) and if they were willing to do anything to meet that end (which they clearly were; breaking all sorts of laws in their trial of him) then why oh why oh why oh why, didn't they accuse him of the much greater charge: Of claiming to be God himself? ? ? ?
Anyone?
If Jesus claimed to be God Almighty, I think the Jews who wanted him dead must have missed it. Surely they would have used this much greater charge to hav him executed. They were willing to bring forth false witnesses and to bend the law however it suited them. Why wouldn't they accuse him of being God Almighty? Why only accuse him of claiming to be God's son?
This makes no sense to me if he was God Almighty.I know that if I claimed to be the prince of England, people would attack that claim. If I claimed to be the Queen, people would also attack that claim. But which claim would you use if you wanted to bring me down? I'd use the more crazy claim. And to the unbelieving Jews who wanted Jesus dead, you'd have to think they would have thought that claiming to be God himself was more outrageous than claiming to be his son.
Hi David,Well, if you start from the assumption, “the Son of God is not God,” then you're right, the Jews weren't claiming that He was God.
But the whole point of Trinitarianism is that the Son of God is God (just as the son of man is man, the son of a dog is a dog, and so on in all creation). And you reply, “How can God be His own Son?” Again, ignoring what we've been saying, that God is not one person. I understand if this is new to you how it might be confusing, but I get the feeling most of the people on this sight have studied Trinitarianism in depth, so why don't you start arguing with what we're actually saying? Sorry but it's really frustrating when we're trying to discuss/debate and people don't even acknowledge our position.
And there is no doubt that the Jews accused Jesus of being God. This is exactly what they did in John 10:33. And that being the Son makes Jesus equal with God is explicitly stated in John 5:18.
Tim
Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 11 2007,07:02) Good points david,
The fear of deception is a prison for the deceived.
They cannot communicate lest they learn.
Tradition is fossilised and cannot learn.
Hi Nick,The fact that millions of saints have agreed with us for the past 2000 years is a mark against us? How many people have agreed with your doctrine of God? Does the fact that no one agrees with a doctrine support it or hurt it?
Tim
Hi Tim2,
Why defend trinitarianism?
Scripture does not need embellishment.
Do you not have truth as a greater master?Hi Tim2,
Really?
There is no trinity in the bible.
Where is God's own spirit said to be a separate person from God Himself?Hi Nick,
The Spirit is shown to be a person in John 14:26 and Acts 13:2, among other places.
Where does it say that God is only one person?
Tim
Quote (Tim2 @ April 11 2007,09:36) Hi Nick, The Spirit is shown to be a person in John 14:26 and Acts 13:2, among other places.
Where does it say that God is only one person?
Tim
1Cor.8:6…nevertheless for us there is one God, the Father,…Blessings.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
