Did ANYONE In Scripture (Including Jesus), Claim Jesus IS God?

[David in NJ]

so now the questoin to be asked is , but what if one cometh to a version of JESUS
that testifies a lie unto them . WELL THE LONG ANSWER TO THAT IS , THEY NO CAME TO THE JESUS .
cause JESUS , THE SPIRIT , NEVER TESTIFIES OF A LIE but only TRUTH.
just something to ponder on my friend . If our jesus holds rainbows , overlooks and even accepts sins
and UNBELEIF , THEN IT AINT JESUS , IT AINT GOD , ITS gross darkness masquerading as light .
But if the light that be in one be darkness , THEN GREAT THAT DARKNESS IS .

CORRECT

So when someone says they were 'born-again' but not thru believing the Word of God, they be deceived.

And the HOLY SPIRIT is given to us to help us SEE the TRUTH and glorify the LORD Jesus Christ

 

[Scott Downey]

That's it right there = and why the jw's doctrine is of satan as well = "the Word was a god"

"the Word was a god"

Yet then they say Jesus is just a man?
Who is this other god?
They must then believe in more than one god. Logical inconsistence, shows the false doctrine.

Very strange doctrine they have.

 

[David in NJ]

"the Word was a god"

Yet then they say Jesus is just a man?
Who is this other god?
They must then believe in more than one god. Logical inconsistence, shows the false doctrine.

Very strange doctrine they have.

It is the spirit of error that guides their doctrines to un-deify the Word that was God.

Every attempt of satan is directed at God's Word in order to undermine the Truth that sets a man/woman FREE from religion/bondage

Same as the Garden account with the Serpent and Eve = twist God's words just a little.......a little turned into a BIG LIE & DEATH

 

[Nancy]

The way the Bible reveals the Deity of Christ is by cross referencing Jesus and/with God.

Like.

1.) "If you've seen ME.... You've seen the Father"

"I and my Father, are ONE"..

"Let US... .make man..........in OUR image"..

Reader.....See how the BIBLE, the word of God, connects them as being the same?

And you have for example.... God creating everything by the word of creation, and Jesus is ""the Word, who became flesh.""
So, Genesis (OT) said that God created the world, , and in John 1:10, (NT) it says that Jesus created the world.

2.) Here is another one for the Deity of Christ doubters to consider..

1 John 5 20...

Notice this part of the Verse :....= "He, is the true God, and Eternal Life".
Who is that?

Notice..>>"TRUE God"....

And who is Jesus?.........Jesus is..>>" I Am.. (and that is God's Name that God gave Moses).... THE Truth"... John 14:6

3. ) Now look at this part of the verse... "and Eternal Life".. is who "HE" is...

And Jesus says "All that believe in me, i give unto you, ETERNAL Life"... because that is who "HE" is....

John says.>>"you can know that you have = Eternal life" because Eternal life is .."""IN His Son"""...

Now, see how we see God and Christ again, being overlaid, interchangeable.. as the same??

4.) Here is one more..

"""God hath raised JESUS.. from the Dead""".....and Jesus said.. """I have the POWER to take up my LIFE"""... (after im dead).

See it?
There it is again........its the SAME

And what is Jesus doing by "taking up MY LIFE">.. .= That is Resurrection POWER.......that is Jesus saying "I AM THE RESURRECTION......and The Life".

See it?

We also cannot forget this one:

Isaiah 9:6
​

6 "For unto us a Child is born,
Unto us a Son is given;
And the government will be upon His shoulder.
And His name will be called
Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace."

 

[MA2444]

The fun you are having is being obtuse.

Another post where you reveal a rejection of embracing authoritative references. Perhaps this will help. https://www.montana.edu/rmaher/ee417/Authoritative References.pdf

Suppose you are a witness on a jury trial. You say you heard a rumor that the defendant did something. This is true in that you heard this rumor. However, your testimony would be rejected as here say. However, it if is also true that the defendant told you directly that they committed the crime, that would qualify your testimony as definitive, sufficient on its own merits to convict.

So, the question is; why would one lead with the less substantial evidence as you did with Enoch?

So, the question is; why would one lead with the less substantial evidence as you did with Enoch?

Because I wasn't trying to validate the book of Enoch as scripture and didn't make any reference to it in that way at all. We had a different line of talk going on than debating if the book is valid or not. You started drilling me about it. What are you expecting from me? Should I be reaching a particular conclusion about the book's validity? What testimony of mine are you trying to qualify as definitive?

I said, read if you want to. Don't read it if you don't want to. What now? You've taken the thread off topic brother. If you want to talk about the validity of the book of Enoch you should start a thread on that? I'll contribute my thoughts to that thread. I was saying that there was more going on there on the mount of transfiguration than the text reveals. I think that perhaps that is true because of the location that Jesus chose to transfigure for His disciples. The Lord doesn't do anything by accident, lol.

Why on Mt. Moriah?

 

[David in NJ]

So, the question is; why would one lead with the less substantial evidence as you did with Enoch?

Because I wasn't trying to validate the book of Enoch as scripture and didn't make any reference to it in that way at all. We had a different line of talk going on than debating if the book is valid or not. You started drilling me about it. What are you expecting from me? Should I be reaching a particular conclusion about the book's validity? What testimony of mine are you trying to qualify as definitive?

I said, read if you want to. Don't read it if you don't want to. What now? You've taken the thread off topic brother. If you want to talk about the validity of the book of Enoch you should start a thread on that? I'll contribute my thoughts to that thread. I was saying that there was more going on there on the mount of transfiguration than the text reveals. I think that perhaps that is true because of the location that Jesus chose to transfigure for His disciples. The Lord doesn't do anything by accident, lol.

Why on Mt. Moriah?

the location that Jesus chose to transfigure for His disciples. The Lord doesn't do anything by accident,

NAILED IT

 

[Wrangler]

We had a different line of talk going on than debating if the book is valid or not.

What testimony of mine are you trying to qualify as definitive?

A different line of talk going on?

The implied premise of your question below is the testimony of yours that I have disqualified as definitive by referring to the authoritative reference.

Riddle me this, didn't Jesus declare Himself to be God on the Mt. of Transfiguration? Isn't that what that was all about?

No, the precise opposite. An all powerful God does not need to be strengthened by dead prophets.

In response, you went from the authoritative reference to a red herring about the book of Enoch.

Apparently, Enoch does not reference the dead prophets. However, the authoritative reference does. Rather than pursue that line of thought, which answers your question in the negative, you went down the rabbit hole of Apocrypha.

Some of that I was talking about came from the book of Enoch though.

What is this thread about; the book of Enoch? No. It is about the lively topic previously forbidden, aka the trinity and the subset Jesus is NOT God.

It seems you want to talk about the Book of Enoch, in particular, and the Apocrypha, in general. Best to start a different thread if that's the case. I find it fascinating to understand the criteria for selecting what was included and excluded from Scripture. It's a topic I have not delved into yet but hope to one day.

My understanding of why some books were excluded from the Bible where based on these criteria:

1. Contained errors.
2. Less eloquent than other sources discussing the same topic.
3. Authorship could not be verified.

It is this last criteria that Enoch, Thomas and Mary primarily failed. As I said, Enoch is pre flood. Not too many records physically survived (as in none).

 

[RLT63]

"the Word was a god"

Yet then they say Jesus is just a man?
Who is this other god?
They must then believe in more than one god. Logical inconsistence, shows the false doctrine.

Very strange doctrine they have.

They say there are a lot of mistranslations, it seems like anything that contradicts their beliefs is a mistranslation

 

[Wrangler]

"the Word was a god"

Yet then they say Jesus is just a man?
Who is this other god?

What are the options besides the trinity?

We also cannot forget this one:

Isaiah 9:6​

6 "For unto us a Child is born,

Do you notice the present tense? Isaiah was written 500 years before Christ, referring to a child born in his day. Jesus is not called any of the things Isaiah then lists. Profound.

 

[David in NJ]

They say there are a lot of mistranslations, it seems like anything that contradicts their beliefs is a mistranslation

Glad you picked UP on this error.

They always cast doubt on the deity of Christ so that they can then interject their 'official' definition of the man called Jesus.

Whereas the FATHER says that HIS WILL will be done on earth as it is in Heaven - including the translation of Scripture

 

[Scott Downey]

Since God cannot lie then the scriptures can not be broken. God upholds all things by the word of His power. He wont be giving us a lie in His book given to us
HE will make sure HIs words are recorded correctly to be read by us. The truth will be witnessed to in more than one s scripture. Which it is.

 

[David in NJ]

Since God cannot lie then the scriptures can not be broken. God upholds all things by the word of His power. He wont be giving us a lie in His book given to us
HE will make sure HIs words are recorded correctly to be read by us.

The Holy Spirit will ONLY testify to the TRUTH

JESUS is "IAM the WAY the TRUTH and the LIFE"

Any translation that changes this, however slight, is untrust-worthy

 

[amigo de christo]

The Holy Spirit will ONLY testify to the TRUTH

JESUS is "IAM the WAY the TRUTH and the LIFE"

Any translation that changes this, however slight, is untrust-worthy

He even said I AM the RESSURECTION . And i say muhammed was an anti christ sent to decieve an entire peoples .

 

[CadyandZoe]

Incorrect-

John 1:1-14 (Textus Receptus)
John 1:1
"Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος, καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος."
In the beginning was the Word (Logos), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

This passage clearly identifies the Logos (Greek: Λόγος) as preexistent, distinct from God the Father, yet fully divine—"the Word was God."

I agree that the passage asserts that there was a pre-existent logos. However, I don't agree that the pre-existent logos was a person.

John 1:14
"Καὶ ὁ Λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο καὶ ἐσκήνωσεν ἐν ἡμῖν, καὶ ἐθεασάμεθα τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ, δόξαν ὡς μονογενοῦς παρὰ Πατρός, πλήρης χάριτος καὶ ἀληθείας."
And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
This further affirms the Logos as a person, as it is described as becoming flesh, a reference to the incarnation of Jesus Christ.

A word becomes flesh, when, for instance, a promise is fulfilled, a prediction comes true, or a wise oracle is proven true. John is not suggesting that a presumed second person of a Trinity became something else, which is contrary to the immutability of God.

The Logos is not an abstract principle or impersonal force but is revealed in a personal, incarnate form in Jesus.

The logos is always a product of the mind, e.g. "reason", "idea", "plan", "script", "argument", and things such as these.

Revelation 19:13

"Καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν χιτῶνα αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐπὶ τὴν μηροῦ αὐτοῦ ἔχει ὄνομα γεγραμμένον, Βασιλεὺς βασιλέων καὶ Κύριος κυρίων."
And He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God.

Here, the Logos is explicitly identified with Christ, who is portrayed as a person with a name and title. The connection between the Logos and Jesus as a personal, divine figure is clear.

Jesus is called "The word of God" because he is the fulfillment of a promise, his life satisfies a prediction, he spoke the message that God gave him to speak, and he stands as the image of God. Revelation is not claiming that Jesus existed as a second person of a Trinity.

Both scripture and scholarly writings affirm that the Logos is a person, specifically identified with Jesus Christ.

Scholars are not allowed to question the Trinity Doctrine. As a Bible teacher told me, "The Trinity Doctrine is like an electrified fence. If you get too close to it, you will die."

The Logos is not an impersonal force or concept but a distinct person within the Godhead, fully divine and fully revealed in the person of Jesus.

The Logos is a product of the mind. I never claimed it was a force.

This understanding is central to Christian theology, especially in explaining the nature of Christ and His relationship to God the Father.

I agree. The problem is, the explanation attempts to answer a problem that never should have been a problem in the first place. The debate was between Platonists who assumed that Plato's view of existence was correct. I don't agree with Plato, so am not obligated to believe Athanasius or the Council of Nicaea. As soon as one abandons the philosophical underpinnings of Platonism, one is free to believe the Biblical record.

 

[CadyandZoe]

I would rather quote the Scriptures-and even the Scriptures don't make sense to many.

J.

You quoted authorities in other posts.

 

[CadyandZoe]

You really have to make a stretch there. He goes on to say he created all things

The post was concerned with John's first epistle.

 

[MatthewG]

Hello @JLB,

The Word of God.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Good Morning,
Now serving fresh ground & brewed coffee.

Yes, when the Word became flesh and dwelt among us.

this is the Apostle John = same Apostle of the Gospel of John

John 1:1 - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 1:14 - The Word became flesh

1John1:1 - That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our own eyes, which we have gazed upon and touched with our own hands—this is the Word of life.
1 John1:2 - And this is the life that was revealed;

the Apostle John always places the Lord Jesus Christ as Eternal with the FATHER.

the ELOHIM = FATHER/WORD/HOLY SPIRIT = Creation has a Beginning and so did the God-on-earth Ministry of = Immanuel

Logos is a product of the mind: "reason", "word", "argument", "rationale", "plan", "script", "promise" and "prediction" are some examples. When logos becomes flesh it means that God's word has been proven true, a promise of God has been fulfilled, or a prediction of God has come true.

This is what John means by "the word became flesh", the promise and prediction of a coming savior, who was to serve as the light of life came true in the person of Jesus Christ.

 

[Wrangler]

Logos is a product of the mind: "reason", "word", "argument", "rationale", "plan", "script", "promise" and "prediction" are some examples. When logos becomes flesh it means that God's word has been proven true, a promise of God has been fulfilled, or a prediction of God has come true.

This is what John means by "the word became flesh", the promise and prediction of a coming savior, who was to serve as the light of life came true in the person of Jesus Christ.

IMO, the best way to understand your point is to read John's preamble through the prophecy that came true; namely, Deuteronomy 18:15-18:

5 Moses continued, “The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your fellow Israelites. You must listen to him. 16 For this is what you yourselves requested of the LORD your God when you were assembled at Mount Sinai.[a] You said, ‘Don’t let us hear the voice of the LORD our God anymore or see this blazing fire, for we will die.’​

​

17 “Then the LORD said to me, ‘What they have said is right. 18 I will raise up a prophet like you from among their fellow Israelites. I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell the people everything I command him.​

Clearly, the fulfillment of this is not YHWH incarnate but repeatedly emphasized a man, like Moses, a person among the Israelites. The expression "raise up" is akin to Anointed. Anointed by the LORD God. Raised up by the LORD God.

NOTE: The juxtaposition between the LORD God and this man among the people. The LORD God will put his words in this other persons mouth, aka 'the word of God became flesh' means YHWH's words will not be spoken in the uber intimidating way YHWH speaks (such as at Mt. Sinai, that made the listeners feel they were going to die) but a softer, gentler sound from a regular Joe.

Jesus confirms he is this man. John 12:49 I don’t speak on my own authority. The Father who sent me has commanded me what to say and how to say it. Every epistle confirms only the Father is God. Jesus is explicitly stating he is NOT speaking from his own authority, which God would do and does, of course.

Logos is the Greek word, were we get the word logic. Of course it is about the product of a reasoning mind and not a person distinct from the one forming the thoughts. It's so ridiculous but that is what trinitarians must stoop to in a vain attempt to support their doctrine, completely foreign to Biblical writers.

 

[Marvelloustime]

The LIGHT OF , GLORY OF GOD is HIS WORD , IS JESUS THE CHRIST .
and i saw no temple therein for the LORD GOD and CHRIST are the TEMPLE .
and there was no need of the light for the GLORY OF GOD DID LIGHTEN IT
and the lamb is THE LIGHT THEREOF . YES SIR scott . IF we read THE INSPIRED WORDS OF GOD
in that bible , it becomes only clearer and clearer to SEE . but if a man omits andtwists such words
that man ends in destruction . better we simply learn and believe them Words . AND I SURE
seen JESUS say I am alpha and omega and i sure know the only ONE WHO EVER DECLARED to be such
WAS GOD .

@amigo de christo