Jesus is Not God - Truth in the Scriptures
In the Book of John there was a situation where the Jews sought to stone Jesus for blasphemy. Many Christians have been lead to believe that Jesus was claiming divinity, or saying that he was God, and that this was the accusation at hand.
John 10:33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
Here is the simplicity of it: Jesus not once claim to be God. Jesus was claiming to be the Son of God which he confirms in verse 36. When Jesus claimed to be the Son of God, the Jews knew this to mean that he was claiming to be the Messiah-God's chosen one.
The context of what the Jews said, "makest thyself God", should be read in the context of the passage. Jesus was claiming a title of divine appointment. This verse should be read with a lower case "god". This works perfectly with the following verse where Jesus quotes psalms 82, "ye are gods". The Jews never assumed that he was calling himself God and this is clear through the Scriptures.
Jesus wasn't claiming divinity; He was claiming divine appointment.
1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
Acts 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
You are quite correct. The Triune God which was officially adopted in 325 AD at the council of Nicea is of pagan origin. It made the Messiah God and the Pope the mediator between God and men... Yeshua/Jesus calls his father the only true God . (John 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.) The Angel Gabriel told Mary "That which is conceived in you is of the Holy Spirit". How can the Holy Spirit be a third person in some triune Godhead and still be the Father??
1 Cor 15:28 tells us that after the Messiah destroys death and subjects all enemies, he himself will be subject to God so that God may be all in all.
Thank you, The truth is clear throughout the Scriptures. Even in corruption God preserves the truth for those who seek. May God bless you.
You know the council of Nicea was called to specifically address the heresy of Arianism, right? Do you think all those bishops (under the authority of the bishop of Rome) actually got together and came up with a creed that didn't reflect the beliefs of the Church? I mean, read some of the writings of the early fathers, their writing does not conflict with what later became the Nicean Creed.
This was already the belief of the early church. There was nothing new foisted on the early Christians. In fact, it was a miracle that the Church even MADE it through Arianism. It was a heresy which almost destroyed the Church.
And now you guys want to revisit it!
Might as well just become Muslim. At least they have a solid political structure, and you wouldn't have to work so hard.
“You know the council of Nicea was called to specifically address the heresy of Arianism, right?”
No Actually, I believe the Council was called to make official the majority view held be the western churches at the time. What you call heresy, I call the truth of Christology. Arius was not the author of the doctrine for which he was credited, he only intensified its discussion in the Church. Arius was accused of “thinking too Jewish” which is ironic, since all the authors of scripture were Jewish.
Do you think theological thinking was somehow unchanged in 300+ years? 1 John tells us the spirit of antichrist was already at work and in the world in his day; the 1st century AD.
I fully understand how Athanasius might come to the conclusions he did. If you have a Platonic world view were an “immortal soul” is fundamental, then you must harmonize the Son of God with that understanding, which necessitates a preexistent immortal son coexisting with the Father. Unfortunately, the immortal soul doctrine is not correct nor scriptural. (Did you ever wonder why nothing was ever written concerning Lazarus’s four days in the grave? You would think he might have an interesting testimony after spending four days in some glorious heaven, not to mention his surprise at being yanked back into his difficult mortal existence)
If you want to make the argument that Arius was a heretic because he was in the minority, you might want to re-think that.
Matthew 7:14 - But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.
In regards to your comment, “Might as well just become Muslim.” I find it inflammatory and not consistent with the faith I’m sure you feel quite well versed in. I also find it ironic due to the fact that the only significant sect of Christendom who ever slaughtered their ideological adversaries are the ones whom with you align yourself doctrinally. Estimates of people killed by the Papacy throughout the middle ages ranges between 50 and 150 million. That sounds an awful lot like Jihad does it not?
Matt 7:15 "Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thorn bushes, or figs from thistles?
Finally, The Papacy made Christ into God, and the Pope into the mediator between God and men. They established a Church structured similar to the Gentile nations (pyramid structure) in direct disobedience to Christ. The list goes on and on.
1 Tim 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus.
Matthew 23:8–12
8 “But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have only one Master and you are all brothers. 9 And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven. 10 Nor are you to be called ‘teacher,’ for you have one Teacher, the Christ. 11 The greatest among you will be your servant. 12 For whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.
Yes, I am aware of the many Saints that were persecuted under the new Roman Catholic system. It would seem that you too would enjoy silencing out those who oppose you. You keep bringing up Muslims, but perhaps you have more in common with them than I.
True, they believe that God is one, but is that a reason to reject the idea? If you reject everything the Muslims believe you will end up rewriting the entire old Testament. As I said before, The Muslims have nothing to do with this. I'm sure there are Muslims here who would be happy to debate you if you so wish to go down that path. Maybe you should have said "Might as well just become a Jew", that would have been much closer.
I speak in love and wish no persecution on anyone. I just want to learn and share ideas with others. I want to glorify God. I pray and God leads me; This is where I have been lead.
If you only have insults and attacks, then depart from me.
I don't know what you are referring to. Do you call Arius a saint and blame the "new roman catholic system" for fighting and winning against his heresy?
I keep asking you, not in an insulting way, "What is your Bible tradition??" What translation do you use and why, and who has come before you in your thinking? Who is the apostle of your tradition?
You cannot simply say that you are returning to the roots of Christianity and then read the Bible in English and start telling 2000 years of unbroken, apostolic tradition that they are dead wrong.
I want to know who taught you. Are you self-taught, using only the Bible in English?
Islam
To the question of Islam: the best lies are 95% Truth. As are the most successful heresies.
I can reject everything Islam preaches, based on the source of that teaching. I don't have to parse through it to find the few pearls of truth. I can reject it outright yet at the same time acknowledge that there might be some truth in there, because fortunately, any truth that may be found in Islam is already found in Christianity.
I stand by my statement that your beliefs are closer to Islam than to Judaism or to Christianity.
There are plenty more parallels, but I just don't know how to approach you. You very forcefully come out with guns ablaze, railing against Trinitarian Christianity (ie CHRISTIANITY), and yet you use the Bible, passed down to you by the Roman Catholic Church. It is a paradox.
On the divinity of Christ
How do you feel about the 7 "I AM" statements in John's Gospel.
Surely you know that a Jew would never - ever - have spoken about himself using such provocative language, unless that person was claiming to be God. That is treading far too close to the unmentionable name of YHWH.
And what about when Jesus says, "Before Abraham was, I AM." THIS is the kind of language which caused the jewish authorities to rend their garments.
Doug, I have 2 questions for you. I am attempting to understand where you are coming from.
You seem to be playing off that tradition word quite a bit. Please don't mistake me to not follow any traditions. I am only referring to the man made traditions that corrupt the church. I am totally okay with tradition in general. I do follow traditions and am okay with others following tradition as well.
ok, then what is your Bible Tradition? What translation and why, and do you accept the traditional scriptural canon?
What did the Bible look like in 100 AD?
Well, I have two question for you that you can simply answer with yes or no:
Yes and yes.
Who is this spoken of according to the inspired writer of Hebrews in Hebr 1:8 by quoting and referring to Ps 102,26-28 in Hebr 1:10-12?
The writer of Hebrews quotes several old testament passages to make his point. I know of three interpretations of this Scripture. I will describe the one that I feel is best.
He is speaking of Christ in relationship to the New Creation using Psalm 102 illustrate and represent this point. It's poetic in a way. If we read a little further the writer explains of what he speaks.
Hebrews 2:5 For unto the angels hath he not put in subjection the world to come, whereof we speak.
To say that Jesus is being called God is here not even a question. The writer starts off by clearly demonstrating that Jesus is the son, who has been appointed heir of all things, who is sat down by the right hand of the Majesty on high, who is made so much better than the angels, who is the express image of his person. All of these descriptions cannot belong to the one called God. There is only one truth and many have chosen to follow traditions over this truth.
Sorry, this is not what the text is saying.
The inspired writer of Hebrews clearly identifies YHWH of Ps 102 with the Son. He describes him as the eternal Creator. He confirms Jesus' eternity in Chapter 7:3 by pointing to the way Melchizedek shows up in the OT: no beginning nor end of life.
That all is in accordance with Joh 1:3, where Jesus is called to be the one who created everything that was created (that of course excludes him of the things that had been created).
Also, there is an YHWH visible on earth and one invisible in heaven in Gen 19:24, what further confirms Hebr 1:8-12.
Your interpretation is clearly wrong, my friend. Refering to Hebr 2:5 doesn't help you. The Writer just keeps on with the theme where he stopped: the Son is greater than the angles. At Hebr 1:1 he started with the thought that the Son is greater than the prophets. In Chapter three he keeps on showing that the son is greater than Moses and Aaron. Hebr 1:8-12 and Hebr 7:3 ought to explain WHY he is greater, because he is the incarnated eternal one. who had glory by the Father before even the World was made (Joh 17,5).
Let me ask you another question:
Whose glory did Isaiah see according to Isa 6:1-5?
You are asking a lot of questions but it seems that you aren't interested in the answers. You should be asking yourself some very important questions since you are believing in something that the writers of the Bible did not believe in.
Everything you say is based on reading the Trinity into the Bible instead of reading what is there. He is greater because he was made greater. Do you really believe that God would cause so much confusion as to suddenly change the very understanding of His nature and not explain it anywhere. Do you honestly believe that we are meant to read between the lines to know who He is?
I was lost and God called me. I continued to be lost for many years until I finally began to understand. I prayed and I studied. I asked for answers and I asked for help. This is where God lead me. Do you deny His guidance? I prayed for understanding and I was given understanding. Let God be true and every man a liar.
My life has changed, my mind has changed. This isn't my own wisdom because I am no one. This is the work and truth of God. I do this because I am lead to do this. God is one and Jesus Christ is the one who will lead us to Him.
Actually I'm not asking a lot of questions. This was my third. :)
I'm also not reading between the lines and am not engaging in eisegesis. I just showed why Jesus is God as the Father God is.
Your experience and supposedly answered prayers don't count. They, as everything else, have to pass the test of truth, that is the bible. Your believe about a such a foundational matter as the being of God is clearly false. Jesus said in Joh 8:24 that he is I AM and if one doesn't believe that he will die in his sins.
This is why: Jesus had to become man just we are in order to be our substitute. But he also had to be eternal in order to be able to bear our sins against the eternal God with eternal consequences.
Would you please answer the question? Whose glory saw Isaiah in Isa 6:1-5 according to Joh 12:37-41?
This is where I found the truth, in the Bible. You though are not reading the Bible, you are adding to the Bible in a dangerous way. For example, in John 8:24 Jesus did not say that "he is I AM" as you put it, it actually reads, "I am he". That's a big difference and I can prove that you are wrong just by opening the Bible. Don't be like the Pharisees in Matthew 15. Give my good word to you a chance.