Matt 1 21 as evidence for the Trinity

This topic is empty.

Viewing 20 posts - 101 through 120 (of 199 total)

←1 2 3…567 8 9 10 →

Author
Posts

July 27, 2006 at 6:40 pm#22906

NickHassan

Participant

Hi Is 1.18,
Your quote
” The Roman Catholic Church, as we know it today, was not formed until the 11th century”

But according to your source:
Catholic goes back to Ignatius and of course
Roman goes back to Constantine's control.

Surely she is not defined by the fact of men leaving her as that continues to this day.

July 27, 2006 at 6:51 pm#22907

NickHassan

Participant

Hi E,
You speak of “progressive revelation”
You present scriptures that show that matters hidden in earlier verses are revealed by later ones. That is true.
But the matter ends at the end of Revelation.
The Holy Spirit does not speak on his own initiative. He takes us back to the teachings of Christ and reminds us of the Word. The Spirit of Christ inspired Moses and the prophets[1Cor 10, 1 Peter 1] and continues to reveal God through all of the Word.
Certainly Hebrews 1 shows the divine origins of Christ shown in the OT.

Psalm 45:6 says “Thy throne O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of uprightness is the scepter of Thy kingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated wickedness; Therefore God, Thy God, has anointed Thee.”

But he is shown to have a God, so any concept of equality with that God is proven to be false. Your “god the Son” trinity theory stumbles over this stumbling stone.

So what of those who teach that the Holy Spirit continues to bring up new revelation about God from outside scripture or that God came in the flesh? Those false messiahs are condemning themselves.

We are told in 2 Jn

” 7For (Q)many deceivers have ®gone out into the world, those who (S)do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh This is (T)the deceiver and the (U)antichrist.

8(V)Watch yourselves, (W)that you do not lose what we have accomplished, but that you may receive a full reward.

9Anyone who goes too far and (X)does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God; the one who abides in the teaching, he has both the Father and the Son.

10If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, (Y)do not receive him into your house, and do not give him a greeting;

11for the one who gives him a greeting (Z)participates in his evil deeds.”

July 27, 2006 at 6:56 pm#22908

NickHassan

Participant

Hi E,
As you know neither the New or the Old Testament teach about a trinity God. Jesus and the apostles and prophets made no such statements.

This is only taught by man from their derivations from scripture, and yet is taught as equivalent in validity to the Word of God itself.

Does this not remind us of the condemnation of such activities by Jesus in Mk 7? Your words below may look pretty but taste bitter in the mouth.
“Probably the best example of progressive revelation in the Bible is the doctrine of the trinity. The Old Testament only alluded to this truth, but the New Testament explains it more fully.”

July 27, 2006 at 7:04 pm#22909

NickHassan

Participant

Hi E,
Is Jesus God or an angel?

“So at this point there is somewhat of a question mark about how much one could know about the person of God. Not everything about His person was revealed. The revelation about the person of God continues over time through references to 'the Angel of the Lord' Many times deity is assigned to this angel”

Incredible.

Scripture shows Jesus is higher than the angels except “for a time”

You, yourself claim he is both God and somehow also equal to God [amazing] and yet here you claim he is only angelic servant/messenger.

You are seriously deceived and confused.

July 27, 2006 at 9:04 pm#22919

WhatIsTrue

Participant

epistemaniac,

Greetings! It has been a long time indeed! I have read much of the discussion over the past few days, and I must say that I admire your willingness to engage in this debate.

Nevertheless, I do strongly disagree with much of your logic and many of your conclusions. You have written far too much in the last few days for me to reasonably respond to everything in one post, so I would ask that you direct me specifically to any point that you believe has been unaddressed by others here. I will do my best to respond.

In the meantime, I would like to present you with a thought that you may or may not have heard before. In either case, I don't think that I have personally seen you address it.

Rather than hijack this thread, which is supposed to be about Matthew 1:21, I will post my thoughts in the never ending “Trinity” discussion thread.

See you there!

July 27, 2006 at 11:55 pm#22943

Cubes

Participant

Hi E,

Regarding your OP in which you assert Matt 1:21 as evidence that Salvation belongs to YHWH alone and Jesus saves so he must be YHWH.

My Refutation:

When God sent Moses to go and bring Israel out of Egypt, there was the red sea between them and safety, with the enemy following close behind. God equipped Moses with a Rod to part the red sea and let the people walk on dry ground to safety… you know the story. Salvation through Moses but by the Hand of YHWH alone.

When YHWH sent Jesus to save a sinful world, what was needed was forgiveness, and he equipped Jesus with power to forgive but also accepted the holy sacrifice that the son offered through his death on the cross for our sake. If forgiveness was not YHWH's to give or command, there should have been no need for Christ to be crucified. He could have as easily forgiven all believers throughout the ages while he yet lived making the cross unnecessary.

Therefore, Salvation belongs to YHWH alone and Jesus though is one with YHWH, as the body of which Jesus is head, Jesus is not YHWH.

If as you say, Jesus must be YHWH because he had the power to forgive sins as only YHWH can, then why did he as YHWH, also have to die? To satisfy whom? Who was receiving the atonement of the holy sacrifice? Remember, don't change the rules!

Jesus as the One GOD must remain consistly through according to your doctrine!

July 28, 2006 at 12:07 am#22945

Proclaimer

Participant

Quote (epistemaniac @ July 26 2006,13:36)

Quote (t8 @ July 22 2006,00:27)

The LORD is the only saviour. He sent his son and his son even asked for that cup to be removed if there was another way. But the son said “Not MY will but YOUR will”.

Even here we see that Jesus received our punishment because he did what his Father wanted, not necessarily what he wanted to do.

So the LORD saved us through his son. The son is the only mediator between man and God.

If God is the only saviour and he is invisible and no one has seen him, then how do you expect God to die on a cross.

Matt 1 21 as evidence for the Trinity is just a play on words and a huge stretch of the imagination to say that it is pointing to 3 persons that have lived together for eternity.

There are other legitimate saviours such as Moses and David who were sent by God. But in all cases they were sent by God, so it is God who is bringing salvation if his vessels are doing his will.

Likewise God is the only one that is good. So are we to conclude that all else is bad?

Mark 10:18
“Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God alone.

Yet it is also written:

Proverbs 12:2
A good man obtains favor from the LORD, but the LORD condemns a crafty man.

So epistemaniac. Can you answer this?

Are you good? Remember that only God is good.
Am I also to assume that some Men are God as they can be good, while respecting Jesus words that only God is good?

Now I am the one playing with words if only to show you your own reasoning.

ahhhh… so the sinless Jesus wasn't good then…. riiigghhhtttt

so much for the atonement

so much for your salvation

for you will die in your sins if there wasn't a “good” (perfect) sinless sacrifice to propitiate and expiate our sins such that we, unworthy sinners, may stand in the presence of God knowing that it was not we ourselves who could save ourselves but that we must be saved by our own works and not Christ's perfect sinless life, His dearth on the cross, His ascension and eternal intercession for His perfect Bride, for a salvation by works (which is a perverted gospel) is what your conclusion regarding Christ's goodness would HAVE to lead to if Christ Jesus the Messiah was not only “good”, but perfect….

blessings

Hi epistemaniac.

You are cleverly avoiding the words I quoted where Jesus said “no one is good, except God” by giving an explantion about how Jesus must have been sinless? Your avoidance of the question didn't pass by unnoticed however.

The answer is quite simple. Jesus was good, not because he himself is good, but because all that he says and does comes from God who is good. So the good is passed on and it can also be passed onto us if we do that which God wants us to do. Jesus was also sinless because he did that which his Father told him to do and he didn't do that which the god of this age and men told him to do.

Luke 22:42
“Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done.”

So if I am good, it is only because I allow God (who is good) to direct me by HIS will, not mine.

James 1:17
Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows.

So I ask you again. Are you good?

July 28, 2006 at 12:12 am#22947

Cubes

Participant

YHWH died on the cross to satisfy YHWH? Last I heard, he was going to scrap all of Israel and start over again with just Moses! Now he decided to have us kill him so that he can forgive us for killing him and redeeming us all back to glory? Gluey fly trap stickiness on the logic here.

July 28, 2006 at 7:02 am#22973

Proclaimer

Participant

Quote (epistemaniac @ July 26 2006,16:29)

sigh…. just because Rome believes one (or a thousand) wrong things, it does not follow that they were or are wrong on all things. So just because they have come up with the blasphemous doctrine of Mary as co-redemptrix (as well as the Mass and many otrher corruptions, mainly denying the gospel of salvation by faith alone), it does not follow that they got the Trinity wrong. So simple seminarian… so basic…. look, what you clearly need is a good course in logic, because you cannot seem to post a single post without committing some simplistic error in your thinking.

Hi epistemaniac,

Those who explore the possibilities with the Trinity doctrine to teach something, will teach confusion.

E.g., Jesus is Almighty God, therefore Mary gave birth to God.
Or God died.

Even prayer becomes out of order. “Dear God Jesus, thankyou Father.”

Um this confusion is wrought by the trinity doctrine alone. That is the point. The doctrine gives more fuel to those who wish to pervert the truth. The Catholics feel that many of their teachings are truth because it agrees with the Trinity doctrine. But we know that the template by which doctrines must match up to is not the Trinity doctrine, but scripture.

When one believes a false doctrine, then they are open to other false teachings that can be tacked on. The Trinity is a false foundation by which men have wrought much work in vain.

That building will fall, because the foundation is not true.

The wages of false teaching is not just wasting your precious time, but you are also responsible to anyone you lead astray.

The Catholics may have had more time to imagine the possibilities with the Trinity doctrine to create all kinds of madness, but other denominations do the same even if they have had less time to let that madness develop. But the root is still madness all the same.

July 28, 2006 at 12:03 pm#22983

epistemaniac

Participant

Quote (seminarian @ July 26 2006,23:32)

ALso E-Maniac,

Now you've got to stoop to posting someone else's long winded nonsense as a response? Son of God means just what it says and is NOT exclusive to our Lord Jesus. Read Luke 3:38 which lists ADAM as the Son of God. Christ is also referred to as the Last Adam. [1 Corn 15:45] You trinitarians have reversed the meaning and added “God the Son” to scripture. Never once is the Lord Jesus called God the Son in the Bible! Do you understand now or are you still confused?

It's what the scriptures say my friend, not what you are trying to add into them. No matter what,
the fact still stands that Jesus our Lord even in his exalted state in the book of Revelation says he has a God and Father. [Rev. 3:12] No where in scripture, as you have agreed, does it say the Father
has a god. SO you are denying the obvious. The Father and His Son are NOT co-equal parts of some so called trinity. You can't HAVE a GOD and BE GOD!

Now wasn't that simple? Still waiting for your comments on the history of the development of the trinity doctrine. Seems you keep wanting to take these little diversions instead, huh?

Tootles,

Semmy

lol… you want answered, you get answered, then you complain, and don't deal with the issues, but continue to chant a rather mindless mantra while putting your fingers in your ears, complaining that no one is responding to your questions!! ah well… whats a guy to do?

And not only is Hastings misrepresented on this issue, apparently it is fine for you to quote Hastings (over and over and over and….) as if it is the last and only word on this issue, but if anyone else quotes another source, you hypocritically complain about it.

I agree that we Christians, all true followers of God, are “sons of God”, however, there is an important difference in Jesus' relationship to the Father that is totally unique to He and His Father, versus that of everyone else's relationship to God the Father. Namely that the Son is so (a Son, or rather…. “the” Son) because of His very nature, while everyone else becomes a son through adoption. eg

(Gal 4:4-5 NASB) But when the fulness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law, {5} in order that He might redeem those who were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption as sons.”

(Eph 1:3-6 NASB) Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, {4} just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before Him. In love {5} He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will, {6} to the praise of the glory of His grace, which He freely bestowed on us in the Beloved.

semmy, you said “No where in scripture, as you have agreed, does it say the Father has a god.”

(Heb 1:6-8 NIV) And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says, “Let all God's angels worship him.” {7} In speaking of the angels he says, “He makes his angels winds, his servants flames of fire.” {8} But about the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.”

Here, in the above passage, God the Father addresses the Son as God.

blessings

July 28, 2006 at 12:09 pm#22984

Proclaimer

Participant

Quote (epistemaniac @ July 29 2006,08:03)

semmy, you said “No where in scripture, as you have agreed, does it say the Father has a god.”

Here, in the above passage, God the Father addresses the Son as God.

blessings

Do you have another 2 epistemaniac. Things come better in threes.

July 28, 2006 at 1:03 pm#22990

epistemaniac

Participant

Quote (Cubes @ July 27 2006,00:58)

Quote (epistemaniac @ July 27 2006,03:44)

Quote (Cubes @ July 26 2006,01:03)

Hi E,

Glad you are feeling much better today. To simplify things, as relates to your post on page 4 to me, do you mind answering the following questions?

1. Is YHWH able to send, authorize, empower and equip ANYONE to accomplish his purposes/will?
2. Are there such examples in scripture?
3. Did Jesus say that YHWH had sent, authorized, empowered and equipped him to do that will? (Not my will but thine be done?)
4. When such will [salvation] is accomplished by the power of God through his servants, would it be wrong to then say that God's will was done, or more specifically, that Salvation belongs to YHWH only? Will the fact that YHWH used someone else to do so make the statement less true?

1 yes
2 yes
3 yes
4 of course God's will was done, but this does not change the fact that attributes are said to belong to the Son that the Lord says are true exclusively of Himself. So the reasoning is really simple, no obscure philosophy, no over intellectualizing, something is said to belong to YHWH alone, then this same thing is said to belong to the Son. makes most say “huh…. YHWH will not share His glory with another yet Jesus is said to share in the glory of YHWH, that must mean that Jesus is God”. No big deal, really striaght forward.

blessings

Hi E,

Thanks for the responses. 3 out of 4. Not bad for starters.
Shall we focus on your response at #4 then?

1. Do you mind listing some of the attributes that Jesus shares with the Father for us?

2. When you say they share glory, do you mean to say they have the same glory?

3. When you say Jesus is God, just to be clear, do you mean that he is the Most High God?

4. And As three distinct persons in One, would you say God is a group practice then? Like a law or medical practice? Even there I am sure they have head attorneys and Chief physicians but I am trying to understand you better.
Is it fair to say that in glory, when we hopefully shall behold Father and Son, they shall be treated by all their subjects as equals and the same GOD? Does this represent your view of GOD and if not, please clarify.

I hope to focus on the glory aspect when I receive your responses to these priliminary questions.

Good health to you.

hey cubes…. hope all is well with you too

3 out of 4 ehhh! wow… that is just great, and just as soon as I believe just as you do, I will finally be right in all I believe!!! yay……

1. check out some of my other posts in this thread, and please respond to all of the following, when you have answered each of these issues correctly (that is, interpret the evidence the same way I do 😉 then let me know. 😉

In the same way, all other objectors to the Trinity need to respond properly and correctly, eg in exactly the same way I do….. to all of the following evidence. This post will be long, but this information is not just a link away, and is not, so far as I know, available on the net anywhere, so while on the one hand I apologize for the length of the post, on the other, while one person will complain about the length of the post, someone else is bound to complain that there questions were not answered, so just as an old song says, you can't please everyone, so ya got to please…. not yourself…. but the Lord.

Who did Jesus claim to be?

Claim to be Jehovah (Yahweh) Jehovah or, more properly, Yahweh is the special name given by God for Himself.

In the Hebrew Old Testament, it is written simply as four letters (YHWH) and was considered so holy that a devout Jew would not pronounce it. Those who wrote it would perform a special ceremony first. It is the name revealed to Moses in Exodus 3:14, when God said, “I AM WHO I AM,” and the meaning of the name has to do with God’s self-existence. While other titles for God may be used of men (adonai in Gen. 18:12) or false gods (elohim in Deut. 6:14), Yahweh is only used to refer to the one true God. Nothing else was to be worshiped or served (Ex. 20:5), and His name and glory were not to be given to another. Isaiah wrote, “Thus saith [Yahweh] … I am the first, and I am the last; and beside Me there is no God” (44:6, KJV) and, “I am [Yahweh], that is My name; and My glory I will not give to another, neither My praise to graven images” (42:8, KJV).

In light of this, it is no wonder that the Jews picked up stones and accused Jesus of blasphemy when He claimed to be Jehovah. Jesus said, “I am the Good Shepherd”
(John 10:11), but the Old Testament said, “[Yahweh] is my shepherd” (Ps. 23:1).

Jesus claimed to be the judge of all men (Matt. 25:31ff; John 5:27ff), but the Prophet Joel quotes Yahweh as saying, “For there I will sit to judge all the surrounding nations” (Joel 3:12). Jesus prayed, “Father, glorify Thou Me with Thine own Self with the glory which I had with Thee before the world was” (John 17:5, KJV). But Yahweh of the Old Testament said, “I will not give My glory to another” (Isa. 42:8).

Likewise, Jesus spoke of Himself as the “Bridegroom” (Matt. 25:1) while the Old Testament identifies Yahweh in this way (Isa. 62:5; Hosea 2:16). The risen Christ says, “I am the first and the last” (Rev. 1:17)—precisely the words used by Yahweh in Isaiah 42:8.

While the psalmist declares, “[Yahweh] is my light” (Ps. 27:1), Jesus said, “I am the light of the world” (John 8:12). Perhaps the strongest claim Jesus made to be Yahweh is in verse 58, where He says, “Before Abraham was born, I AM.” This statement claims not only existence before Abraham, but equality with the “I AM” of Exodus 3:14. The Jews around Him clearly understood His meaning and picked up stones to kill Him for blaspheming (cf. John 8:58; 10:31–33). The same claim is made in Mark 14:62 and John 18:5–6.

Overview of Jesus’ Claims
To be Yahweh—John 8:58
Equality with God—John 5:18
To be Messiah—Mark 14:61–64
Accepts worship—Matthew 28:17
Equal authority with God—Matthew 28:18
Prayer in His name—John 14:13–14

Claim to be equal with God
Jesus claimed to be equal with God in other ways too. He not only assumed the titles of Deity, but claimed for Himself the prerogatives of God. He said to a paralytic, “My son, your sins are forgiven” (Mark 2:5ff). The scribes correctly responded, “Who can forgive sins but God alone?” So, to prove that His claim was not an empty boast He healed the man, offering direct proof that what He had said about forgiving sins was true also.

Another prerogative that Jesus claimed was the power to raise and judge the dead:
“Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God; and those who hear shall live … and shall come forth; those who did the good deeds, to a resurre
ction of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment” (John 5:25–29). He removed all doubt about His meaning when He added, “For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son also gives life to whom He wishes” (v. 21). But the Old Testament clearly taught that only God was the giver of life (1 Sam. 2:6; Deut. 32:39); the One to raise the dead (1 Sam. 2:6; Ps. 49:15) and the only Judge (Joel 3:12; Deut. 32:35).

Jesus boldly assumed for Himself powers that only God has.
But Jesus also claimed that He should be honored as God. He said that all men should “honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father” (John 5:23). The Jews listening knew that no one should claim to be equal with God in this way, and again they sought to kill Him (v. 18).

Claim to be Messiah-God

The teaching of the Old Testament is clear that the coming Messiah who would deliver Israel would be God Himself. When Jesus claimed to be that Messiah, He was also claiming to be God. For example, the famous Christmas text (Isa. 9:6) calls the Messiah, “Mighty God, the everlasting Father.” The psalmist wrote of Messiah, “Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever” (Ps. 45:6; cf. Heb. 1:8). Psalm 110:1 records a conversation between the Father and the Son: “[Yahweh] says to my Lord, ‘Sit at My right hand.’ ” Jesus applied this passage to Himself in Matthew 22:43–44. In the great messianic prophecy of Daniel 7, the Son of man is called the “Ancient of Days” (v. 22), a phrase used twice in the same passage of God the Father (vv. 9, 13).

Throughout His ministry, the title Son of man was Jesus’ favorite way of referring to Himself, making clear illusion to this passage. But Jesus also quoted it directly at His trial before the high priest. When asked, “Are You the Christ [Greek for Messiah], the Son of the Blessed One?” Jesus responded, “I am; and you shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.” At this, the high priest tore his robe and said, “What further need do we have of witnesses? You have heard the blasphemy!” (Mark 14:61–64) There was no doubt that in claiming to be Messiah, Jesus also claimed to be God.

Claim by accepting worship

The Old Testament forbids worshiping anyone other than God (Ex. 20:1–5; Deut. 5:6–9). The New Testament agrees, showing that men refused worship (Acts 14:15) as did angels (Rev. 22:8–9). But Jesus accepted worship on numerous occasions. A healed leper worshiped Him (Matt. 8:2), and a ruler knelt before Him with a request (9:18). After He stilled the storm, “those who were in the boat worshiped Him saying, ‘Truly You are the Son of God’ ” (14:33, NIV). A group of Canaanite women (15:25), the mother of James and John (20:20), the Gerasene demoniac (Mark 5:6), all worshiped Jesus without one word of rebuke (cf. Rev. 22:8–9). A blind man said, “‘Lord, I believe.’ And he worshiped Him” (John 9:38). But Christ also elicited worship in some cases, as when Thomas saw the risen Christ and cried out, “My Lord and my God!” (20:28) This could only be done by a Person who seriously considered Himself to be God.

Claim to equal authority with God

Jesus also put His words on a par with God’s. “You have heard that the ancients were told.… But I say to you” (Matt. 5:21–22) is repeated over and over again. “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations” (28:18–19). God had given the Ten Commandments to Moses, but Jesus said, “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another” (John 13:34). Jesus said, “Until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the Law” (Matt. 5:18), but later Jesus said of His own words, “Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words shall not pass away” (24:35).

Speaking of those who reject Him, Jesus said, “The word I spoke is what will judge him at the last day” (John 12:48). There is no question that Jesus expected His words to have equal authority with God’s declarations in the Old Testament.

Claim by requesting prayer in His name

Jesus not only asked men to believe in Him and obey His commandments, but also He asked them to pray in His name. “Whatever you ask in My name, that I will do.… If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it” (John 14:13–14). “If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, ask whatever you wish, and it shall be done for you” (15:7). Jesus even insisted, “No one comes to the Father, but through Me” (14:6). In response to this the disciples not only prayed in Jesus’ name (1 Cor. 5:4), but prayed to Christ (Acts 7:59). Jesus certainly intended that His name be invoked both before God and as God in prayer.

So Jesus claimed to be God in several ways. He claimed equality with God in prerogatives, honor, worship, and authority. He claimed to be Yahweh of the Old
Testament by applying truths about Yahweh to Himself and by claiming to be the promised Messiah. Finally, He claimed to be the only way to approach God in prayer and requested prayer to Himself as God. The reactions of the Jews around Him show that they clearly understood these things to be blasphemous claims for a mere man to make. Any unbiased observer studying this historically reliable record of Jesus’ teaching must agree that He claimed to be equal with Yahweh of the Old Testament.

WHAT CLAIMS DID THE DISCIPLES MAKE ABOUT JESUS?

Along with Jesus’ own claims to be God, we should consider what His disciples believed about Him. It is one thing to claim to be God; it is quite another to get other monotheistic Jews to believe it. However, we find that the followers of Jesus believed in His deity very strongly.

THEY ATTRIBUTED TO JESUS THE TITLES OF DEITY

In agreement with their Master, the apostles called Him “the first and the last” (Rev. 1:17; 2:8; 22:13), “the true light” (John 1:9), their “rock” or “stone” (1 Cor. 10:4; 1 Peter 2:6–8; cf. Pss. 18:2; 95:1), the “Bridegroom” (Eph. 5:28–33; Rev. 21:2), “the chief Shepherd” (1 Peter 5:4), and “the Great Shepherd” (Heb. 13:20). He is seen as the forgiver of sins (Acts 5:31; Col. 3:13; cf. Jer. 31:34; Ps. 130:4) and “Saviour of the world” (John 4:42; cf. Isa. 43:3). The apostles also taught that “Jesus Christ … is to judge the living and the dead” (2 Tim. 4:1). All of these titles are given to Yahweh in the Old Testament and to Jesus in the New.

Claims of Jesus’ Disciples

Titles of Deity—Revelation 1:17
Messiah—Philippians 2:10
Powers of God—Colossians 1:16–17
Association with God—Galatians 1:3
Prayer to Jesus—Acts 7:59
Called God—Titus 2:13
Superior to angels—Hebrews 1:5–6

THEY CONSIDERED HIM TO BE MESSIAH—GOD

The New Testament opens with a passage concluding that Jesus is Immanuel (God with us), which refers to the messianic prediction of Isaiah 7:14. The very title “Christ” carries the same meaning as the Hebrew appellation “Messiah” (Anointed). In Zechariah 12:10, Yahweh says, “They will look on Me whom they have pierced.”

But the New Testament writers apply this passage to Jesus twice (John 19:37; Rev. 1:7) as predicting His crucifixion. Paul interprets Isaiah’s message, “For I am God, and there is no Other…. To Me every knee will bow, and every tongue will swear” (Isa. 45:22–23) as applying to his Lord, “at the name of Jesus every knee should bow … and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father” (Phil. 2:10–11). The implications of this are strong, because Paul says that all created beings will call Jesus both Messiah (Christ) and Yahweh (Lord).

THEY ATTRIBUTED THE POWERS OF GOD TO JESUS

Some things only God can do, but these very things are attributed to J
esus by His disciples. He is said to be able to raise the dead (John 11) and forgive sins (Acts 5:31; 13:38). Moreover, He is said to have been the primary agent in creating the universe (John 1:3; Col. 1:16) and in sustaining its existence (v. 17). Surely only God can be said to be the Creator of all things, but the disciples claim this power for Jesus.

THEY ASSOCIATED JESUS’ NAME WITH GOD’S
Their use of Jesus’ name as the agent and recipient of prayer has been noted (1 Cor. 5:4; Acts 7:59). Often in prayers or benedictions, Jesus’ name is used alongside God’s, as in, “Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ” (Gal. 1:3; Eph. 1:2). The name of Jesus appears with equal status to God’s in the so-called trinitarian formulas. For example, the command to go and baptize “in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit” (Matt. 28:19). Again this association is made at the end of 2 Corinthians, “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all” (13:14). If there is only one God, then these Three must be equated.

THEY CALLED HIM GOD DIRECTLY

Thomas saw His wounds and cried, “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:28) Paul calls Jesus, the One in whom “all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form” (Col. 2:9). In Titus, Jesus is called “our great God and Saviour” (2:13), and the writer to the Hebrews says of Him, “Thy throne, O God, is forever” (1:8). Paul says that before Christ existed in the “likeness of man,” which clearly refers to being really human, He existed in the “form of God” (Phil. 2:5–8). The parallel phrases suggest that if Jesus was fully human, then He is also fully God. A similar phrase, “the image of the invisible God,” is used in Colossians 1:15 to mean the manifestation of God Himself. This description is strengthened in Hebrews where it says, “He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power” (Heb. 1:3). The prologue to John’s Gospel states, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (1:1).

THEY SAID HE WAS SUPERIOR TO ANGELS

The disciples did not simply believe that Christ was more than a man; they believed Him to be greater than any created being, including angels. Paul said Jesus is “far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age, but also in the one to come” (Eph. 1:21). The demons submitted to His command (Matt. 8:32) and even angels that refused to be worshiped are seen worshiping Him (Rev. 22:8–9). The author of Hebrews presents a complete argument for Christ’s superiority over angels saying, “For to which of the angels did He ever say, ‘Thou art My Son, today I have begotten Thee’? … And when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says, ‘And let all the angels of God worship Him’ ” (Heb. 1:5–6).

There could be no clearer teaching that Christ was not an angel, but God whom the angels were to worship.

There is testimony from Jesus Himself and from those who knew Him that Jesus claimed to be God and that His followers believed Him. He claimed the titles, powers, prerogatives, and activities that are proper only to God for Himself, a carpenter of Nazareth. Whether or not this was the case, there is no doubt that this is what they believed and what Jesus thought of Himself. As C.S. Lewis observed, when confronted with the boldness of Christ’s claims, we are faced with distinct alternatives.

Lewis said: “I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish things that people often say about Him: “I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept His claim to be God.” That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of thing Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would rather be a lunatic—on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg—Or else he would be the Devil of Hell.”

WHAT EVIDENCE DID JESUS GIVE TO SUPPORT HIS CLAIMS?

To say that Jesus made such claims proves nothing by itself. The claims might not be true, in which case He was either a liar or a lunatic. The real question is whether or not there is any good reason to believe that the claims are true. What kind of evidence did Jesus offer to support His claims to Deity? He offered supernatural confirmation of His claims to be a supernatural Being. The logic of this argument goes like this:
1. A miracle is an act of God that confirms the truth of God associated with it.
2. Jesus offered three lines of miraculous evidence to confirm His claim to be God—His fulfillment of prophecy, His sinless life and miraculous deeds, and His resurrection.
3. Therefore, Jesus’ miracles confirm that He is God.

(hey, you asked )

2. see above

3. see above

blessings

July 28, 2006 at 1:10 pm#22991

epistemaniac

Participant

Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 27 2006,00:23)

Hi E,
A Deity surely is a being.
But you deny that the Son of God is a being who partook of flesh but say he is only a part of a greater trinity being.
Which is correct?

uhhhh… where did I deny that? The Son of God partook of flesh, He existed prior to His incarnation (literally “enfleshment”).

I think you spend too much time trying to twist people's words Nick. Questions are good, but not if you are not really interested in knowing someone's answer, and not if you change people's views in order to satisfy your need to try and come up with convulted questions, which, merely by their convulted nature, a situation that you created, you think the questions diffuclt or impossible to answer. But this is just a creation or difficulty you are creating for yourself Nick.

blessings

July 28, 2006 at 1:20 pm#22992

epistemaniac

Participant

Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 27 2006,00:47)

Hi E,

Your quote;
“The other objection to which importance attaches is the answer of Jesus to one who addressed Him as 'Good Master'—'Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God' (Mk 1018). It is not obvious why Jesus should have objected to be called ' Good Master,' such a mode of address being, one would suppose, a form of courtesy in which there was no harm; and this suggests the probability that the humour or irony of Jesus may have been at play ; so that it is dangerous to interpret Him too literally. What was it that He wished to turn the inquirer's attention to ? Stier's dilemma ought not to be forgotten : ' Either, There is none good but God; Christ is good; therefore Christ is God: or, There is none good but God; Christ is not God; therefore Christ is not good.'”

I would say that is was far more dangerous to not take seriously the living words of the Son of God. He tells us when he is speaking in parables and when he said that only the Father is good the made no such qualifying statements.

Surely he was using the word GOOD as an absolute rather than as a comparative word. Certainly we should not ignore the meaning that in this area as in all the others the Father is greater than him.

lol… ok Nick…. well then since the Bible does not say explicitly that the word “good” is simply a comparative statement or an absolute either….. so this complaint can be just as easily used against you….. its hypocritical to insist that whatever I say must be the words of the Bible, in their exact order in order to prove a point, when you proceed to turn around and give statements like these to try and prove your postiion when the exact words/phraseology you are using likewise is not found in the Scripture.

Secondly, if Jesus was not “good”, what was He Nick?

What kinds of words do you think properly describe a sinless being?

If being sinless, perfectly in accord with the Father's will does not count as being “good”, I confess I don't know what would.

blessings

July 28, 2006 at 1:30 pm#22993

epistemaniac

Participant

Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 27 2006,05:13)

Hi E,
Jn 1.18 says this

“18(A)No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him”

It also says the Son is the image of God.
He is obviously less than God as an image of the original but you say

“well one of the things you may first have to overcome is this; God is sui generis, ie one of a kind, unique, there is no other being like God. Wouldn't you agree to that?”

Surely the Son is less than God Himself but is the most mighty being under God

when Jesus says “when you have seen me, you have seen the Father”, what did He mean? Was He lying?

July 28, 2006 at 1:41 pm#22995

epistemaniac

Participant

Quote (Is 1:18 @ July 27 2006,09:44)

Quote (seminarian @ July 26 2006,18:04)

I can only recommend that you spend some time in a real library to see what those who
created the trinity doctrine, aka the Roman Catholic Church, did in the history of men.

Seminarian,
Please check your facts before writing your posts, this way you will do your own credibility some good and save us the time and effort of having to continually correct the basic errors you make.

– The trinity doctrine was first codified at the first Council of Nicaea in AD 325 (source)

– The Roman Catholic Church, as we know it today, was not formed until the 11th century (source)

So how could a doctrine originate from a source that proceeded it by the fat end of seven hundred years?

It cannot, can it Seminarian? So what you wrote is in fact untrue.

those are great points Is. 1:18….

despite the claims of the corrupt Roman church to be always having the same beliefs, you could say that not only were there different “Romes” in the time frames you gave, another important watershed for them was the Council of Trent in the mid 1500's… there, Rome solidified numerous doctrines including (presumably) permanantly locking itself into a body that has damned/anathematized all those who who adhere to salvation by grace through faith alone. A few of those anathemas are:

“Canon 9. If anyone says that the sinner is justified by faith alone, meaning that nothing else is required to cooperate in order to obtain the grace of justification, and that it is not in any way necessary that he be prepared and disposed by the action of his own will, let him be anathema.

Canon 10. If anyone says that men are justified without the justice of Christ, whereby Her merited for us, or by that justice are formally just, let him be anathema.

Canon 11. If anyone says that men are justified either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and the charity which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Ghost, and remains in them, or also that the grace by which we are justified is only the good will of God, let him be anathema.

Canon 12. If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in divine mercy, which remits sins for Christ's sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies us, let him be anathema.”

but, the main point here is exactly what you say, that one cannot simply say that Rome of today was necessarily the Rome of the past…….

blessings

July 28, 2006 at 1:51 pm#22996

epistemaniac

Participant

Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 27 2006,20:04)

Hi E,
Is Jesus God or an angel?

Incredible.

Scripture shows Jesus is higher than the angels except “for a time”

You, yourself claim he is both God and somehow also equal to God [amazing] and yet here you claim he is only angelic servant/messenger.

You are seriously deceived and confused.

lol…. this is a very simplistic view Nick… and what is really incredible is the shallowness of your belief system if you are unaware that the word “angel” does not always mean angelic beings like seraphim etc…. are you sure you should place yourself in a position to presume to treach others if you do not understand the Christian faith? Remember, those who teach false doctrines will be held especially accountable. Anyways…. the word “angel” means “messenger”, and in some cases can be said to apply to humans as well as to what we take to be theophanies and Christophanies….

“I. Definition and Scripture Terms
The word angel is applied in Scripture to an order of supernatural or heavenly beings whose business it is to act as God's messengers to men, and as agents who carry out His will. Both in Hebrew and Greek the word is applied to human messengers (1Ki_19:2; Luk_7:24); in Hebrew it is used in the singular to denote a Divine messenger, and in the plural for human messengers, although there are exceptions to both usages. It is applied to the prophet Haggai (Hag_1:13), to the priest (Mal_2:7), and to the messenger who is to prepare the way of the Lord (Mal_3:1). Other Hebrew words and phrases applied to angels are benē hā-'ĕlōhīm (Gen_6:2, Gen_6:4; Job_1:6; Job_2:1) and benē 'ēlīm (Psa_29:1; Psa_89:6), i.e. sons of the 'ĕlōhīm or 'ēlīm; this means, according to a common Hebrew usage, members of the class called 'ĕlōhīm or 'ēlīm, the heavenly powers. It seems doubtful whether the word 'ĕlōhīm, standing by itself, is ever used to describe angels, although Septuagint so translates it in a few passages. The most notable instance is Psa_8:5; where the Revised Version (British and American) gives, “Thou hast made him but little lower than God,” with the English Revised Version, margin reading of “the angels” for “God” (compare Heb_2:7, Heb_2:9); ḳedhōshīm “holy ones” (Psa_89:5, Psa_89:7), a name suggesting the fact that they belong to God; ‛īr, ‛īrīm, “watcher,” “watchers” (Dan_4:13, Dan_4:17, Dan_4:23). Other expressions are used to designate angels collectively: ṣōdh, “council” (Psa_89:7), where the reference may be to an inner group of exalted angels; ‛ēdhāh and ḳāhāl, “congregation” (Psa_82:1; Psa_89:5); and finally cābhā', cebhā'ōth, “host,” “hosts,” as in the familiar phrase “the God of hosts.”
In New Testament the word ággelos, when it refers to a Divine messenger, is frequently accompanied by some phrase which makes this meaning clear, e.g. “the angels of heaven” (Mat_24:36). Angels belong to the “heavenly host” (Luk_2:13). In reference to their nature they are called “spirits” (Heb_1:14). Paul evidently referred to the ordered ranks of supra-mundane beings in a group of words that are found in various combinations, namely, archaí, “principalities,” exousíai, “powers,” thrónoi, “thrones,” kuriótētes, “dominions,” and dunámeis, also translated “powers.” The first four are apparently used in a good sense in Col_1:16, where it is said that all these beings were created through Christ and unto Him; in most of the other passages in which words from this group occur, they seem to represent evil powers. We are told that our wrestling is against them (Eph_6:12), and that Christ triumphs over the principalities and powers (Col_2:15; compare Rom_8:38; 1Co_15:24). In two passages the word archággelos, “archangel” or chief angel, occurs: “the voice of the archangel” (1Th_4:16), and “Michael the archangel” (Jud_1:9)” (ISBE, read the full article for yourself before making such elementary mistakes Nick)

blessings

July 28, 2006 at 1:58 pm#22997

epistemaniac

Participant

Quote (t8 @ July 28 2006,01:07)