Is Jesus Christ God?

Originally posted by checkbaitor
How so?

While this is directly in response to checkbaitor, I intend this post to also serve response to the other responses to my earlier post.


My statement is purely within the context of the Christian theology. If one is a believer of the rest of the bible, then the matter of whether or not Christ was the messiah is of pinnacle importance. This is the deciding factor towards whether or not there exists salvation by grace via the Christian doctrine. If Christ was not God, then there is no salvation by grace, and people are still under the covenant of the OT. While I must confess that I think to believe the rest of the bible and not the NT, or to contend that what Christ said and whas not what he meant, is just plain silly. That is just my point of view though, and I respect if other people do not share my perception.

A non-Christian theist need not concern himself with the issue, as it is completely a moot point to them.

Further, and specifically to checkbaitor, in regards to your post about the fallacy of the triune God I simply disagree upon the premise of omnipotence. If God is inherently omnipotent, then he can and must exist in many places, in many forms, at the same time. You are welcome to disagree if you like. I do not intend to argure the matter, but am happy to discuss it if you are open to a converse perception.

Best Regards,
Omnislash

Originally posted by Omnislash
While this is directly in response to checkbaitor, I intend this post to also serve response to the other responses to my earlier post.


My statement is purely within the context of the Christian theology. If one is a believer of the rest of the bible, then the matter of whether or not Christ was the messiah is of pinnacle importance. This is the deci ...[text shortened]... t am happy to discuss it if you are open to a converse perception.

Best Regards,
Omnislash

Further, and specifically to checkbaitor, in regards to your post about the fallacy of the triune God I simply disagree upon the premise of omnipotence. If God is inherently omnipotent, then he can and must exist in many places, in many forms, at the same time. You are welcome to disagree if you like. I do not intend to argure the matter, but am happy to discuss it if you are open to a converse perception.

I'm not sure why you'd think God would have to be in many forms?
I do believe God is everywhere, the universe as vast as it is cannot
contain Him, there is no where God is not, and I believe God is not
only every where he is everywhere in His comleteness, with all His
knowledge, all His power, and with all His understanding as my words
fail to desribe Him well.
Kelly

Originally posted by Omnislash
While I must confess that I think to believe the rest of the bible and not the NT, or to contend that what Christ said and whas not what he meant, is just plain silly. That is just my point of view though, and I respect if other people do not share my perception.

With all respect to your point of view, if onen does not believe in the NT as truth then what Jesus said is completely unknown so there is no matter of believing that he is not what he said he is, or what he said was not what he meant. He is simply out of the question, except perhaps as a symbol, an icon created by his followers in later generations.

... --- ...

Originally posted by KellyJay
[b]Further, and specifically to checkbaitor, in regards to your post about the fallacy of the triune God I simply disagree upon the premise of omnipotence. If God is inherently omnipotent, then he can and must exist in many places, in many forms, at the same time. You are welcome to disagree if you like. I do not intend to argure the matter, but am happy to ...[text shortened]... dge, all His power, and with all His understanding as my words
fail to desribe Him well.
Kelly

What you have said is akin to what I intended to express. 🙂

Originally posted by thesonofsaul
With all respect to your point of view, if onen does not believe in the NT as truth then what Jesus said is completely unknown so there is no matter of believing that he is not what he said he is, or what he said was not what he meant. He is simply out of the question, except perhaps as a symbol, an icon created by his followers in later generations.

... --- ...

Exactly. Again, what I intended to express. 🙂

I began to wonder...

Did Jesus have legs? Not once, as far as I know did Jesus ever say, "I have legs." I've always assumed He did, because it seems He walked a lot (even on water)(pretty good for a 'not god'😉. But now Nemesio has me wondering. Maybe all of the references to his mobility can somehow be explained away. Maybe there is some sect of amputees who are inclined to doubt that Jesus would be upright when they are low down and so would lay out a list of counterpoints to the 'Jesus had legs' crowd.

People are people (to quote the muppet movie), and there always have been and always will be people who argue for and against any proposition; especially the ones that really matter to claims on their souls! But at the end of the day there still stands THE Truth. One side of the 'Is Jesus God' argument is right, and one is wrong. The idea that Jesus' deity can not be absolutely upheld by scripture does not mean that someone can't be convinced, rationally, that He is. I am convinced that He had legs, and I am convinced that He is God.

If I was inclined to avoid the apparent meaning, and opt for some unlikely meaning that can be scrounged out of every verse, then I too would doubt that Jesus was God.

(Of course, then the real battle would begin. I would somehow have to explain the undeniable uniqueness and world changing impact of His short life and obscure death. )

Originally posted by lucifershammer
...though I think the "plainest" meaning is the divinity of Christ...

It is my opinion that our hermeneutic -- one where we essentially begin with
the assumption in mind as a reasonable probability -- taints our ability to
evaluate rationally.

That is: We have a certain normative skepticism towards extraordinary claims,
like 'X is a Prophet.' If I were to fill in X with such names as, 'Nemesio' or
'George Bush' or 'Paris Hilton,' everyone would start with the presumption of
falsity. If I gave such names as 'Joe Smith' or 'Richard Johnson' or 'Jane
Doe,' (that is, people you don't know), you would also begin with a presumed
disbelief. Why? Because it is reasonable to assume that at person isn't
a prophet until the demonstrate that they are.

I think just about everyone would agree with this.

However, back in the 1st century, there was a greater 'prophet receptivity,'
since there were all kinds of people claiming to be prophets, many of whom had
all manner of followers (consider the great number of 'false' messiahs which
preceded and followed Jesus). So, within our ability to understand their
hermeneutic, we need to adopt it. Clearly, there was less skepticism back then.

However, claims of Divinity were things that were regarded with significant
skepticism, and even hostility. The Jewish people were greatly resistant
to calling anything but God 'God,' as their willingness to be discriminated and,
often, killed showed; recall that, in all of the Roman Empire, the Jews were
(I think) alone exempt from giving homage to the Caesar, who was considered
by all to be divine.

So, we must also recall this hermeneutic: the Jews didn't call anyone
God except God.

Given, that the authors of the NT documents were Jewish, we need to adopt their
hermeneutic, one which was established in them before Jesus came on the scene:
they were receptive to the notion that someone could be a prophet (moreso than
we are), but they were very resistant to any claims that a person might make about
their supposed divinity.



Nearly all the major Church Fathers I can think of (Ignatius, Iranaeus, Clement) - not to mention Paul - were very direct in their affirmation of the divinity of Christ.

I don't know that they were or weren't (I don't know what letters they are citing),
but I do know that many of their letters were composed with the intent of compelling
people towards their belief. That is, if Ignatius did indeed write a letter or a passage
of a letter that said, 'Jesus is God,' with a great deal of explanation about why he
believed such a thing, you can bet it is because there was some other writer who said
the opposite.

Paula Fredricksen goes into this stuff, partially, in 'From Jesus to Christ,' which traces
this development in the NT period only (she doesn't touch the earliest Church Fathers,
as I recall). She recently redid the book, I think (Jesus the King of the Jews, I think is
the title). John Dominc Crossen goes into this stuff in excruciating detail (I find him to
be difficult to read, frankly) in 'The Birth of Christianity.' Both talk about the evolving
perspectives of Jesus from Man to God to one degree or another. I can poke through my
library for other books if you are interested.

As for references from the Catholic Encyclopedia, in the past 90 years since it was published,
there have been astounding discoveries which have repainted the picture of the past. The
scholarship is solid in the CE for its time, but we've long since picked up a lot more
pieces of the puzzle. The CE, frankly, has a way of painting history that points to a RC
interpretation as the most logical (that is, wherever controversy on a topic may appear,
the CE will give the most credence to Orthodox RC interpretation). A careful scholar must
be very suspicious of such a document -- not that the facts would be presented are false, but
that the facts are manipulated in such a way that they lead the reader to a single conclusion.

This is why I always strive to read arguments from both sides (and strive to suspend my faith
throughout); it allows one to make one's own conclusions, rather than accepting what is being
written as...ahem, Gospel Truth (yuk, yuk).

Nemesio

. If one is a believer of the rest of the bible, then the matter of whether or not Christ was the messiah is of pinnacle importance. This is the deciding factor towards whether or not there exists salvation by grace via the Christian doctrine. If Christ was not God, then there is no salvation by grace, and people are still under the covenant of the OT. While I must confess that I think to believe ...[text shortened]... t am happy to discuss it if you are open to a converse perception.

Best Regards,
Omnislash[/b]

Jesus Christ was and is the Messiah. This I believe...but it does not make him God...I am confused by your thinking here...God is the author of salvation, it was His plan all along, Jesus was the instrument that He used. But along with this plan, He "highly exalted Jesus ", for his obedience unto death. Jesus was sinless, being of the seed of God, and "taking part" of the seed of Mary. He did not inherit the "sin nature"...making him the perfect lamb for sacrafice.
Heb 2:14-18
14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
15 And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.
16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
18 For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.
(KJV)

Notice also that Jesus was tempted bit did not sin, where in James, it says God cannot even be tempted>

Originally posted by checkbaitor
I don't think so...The bible calls Him the son of God. Never mentions a trinity, nor godman, nor does it imply that 3=1.

Jesus was a prophet and self proclaimed son of god at a time when there were many prophets and self proclaimed sons of god, for one reason or another his name lives on......obviously not bbecause he's god because there is no god 🙂

Originally posted by Serendipity
Jesus was a prophet and self proclaimed son of god at a time when there were many prophets and self proclaimed sons of god, for one reason or another his name lives on......obviously not bbecause he's god because there is no god 🙂

Well, at least you believe in yourself...that's religion.

Originally posted by checkbaitor
Well, at least you believe in yourself...that's religion.

Yea its called...nochoiceism

Originally posted by Omnislash
Exactly. Again, what I intended to express. 🙂

I also believe the whole bible is truth. Given by revelation from God in the old testament and Jesus Christ in the New Testament. This still does not make Jesus God. As I said, God highly exalted him and gave a name above all other names, sits at God's right hand and has made him head of the church. But remember, Jesus only does what his Father does. He is just LIKE God.
Joseph was a "Type" or forshadowing of Christ. Here is a little of that section, but it would behoove you to read the whole record of Joseph and the similarities between him and Jesus Christ.

Gen 41:39-44
39 Then Pharaoh said to Joseph, "Inasmuch as God has shown you all this, there is no one as discerning and wise as you.
40 "You shall be over my house, and all my people shall be ruled according to your word; only in regard to the throne will I be greater than you."
41 And Pharaoh said to Joseph, "See, I have set you over all the land of Egypt."
42 Then Pharaoh took his signet ring off his hand and put it on Joseph's hand; and he clothed him in garments of fine linen and put a gold chain around his neck.
43 And he had him ride in the second chariot which he had; and they cried out before him, "Bow the knee!" So he set him over all the land of Egypt.
44 Pharaoh also said to Joseph, "I am Pharaoh, and without your consent no man may lift his hand or foot in all the land of Egypt."
(NKJ)

Gen 41:46
46 Joseph was thirty years old when he stood before Pharaoh king of Egypt. And Joseph went out from the presence of Pharaoh, and went throughout all the land of Egypt.
(NKJ)

Originally posted by Serendipity
Yea its called...nochoiceism

Yes, but what a sad life it must be! To be without hope and without God. The movie "The Matrix" was very interesting to me. It is in some ways like life here on earth. The difference is that instead of a computer directing all our lives, here it is Satan. And the sad part is that unbelievers are clueless as to what is happening to them. They are influenced by satan and they are unaware...
I Jn 5:19
19 We know that we are of God, and the whole world lies under the sway of the wicked one.
(NKJ)

To get out from under this rut, we are desperately in need of Jesus Christ.
Eph 2:1-19

1 And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins,
2 in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience,
3 among whom also we all once conducted ourselves in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, just as the others.
4 But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,
5 even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),
6 and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,
7 that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God,
9 not of works, lest anyone should boast.
10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.
11 Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh-- who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands--
12 that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.
13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.
14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation,
15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace,
16 and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity.
17 And He came and preached peace to you who were afar off and to those who were near.
18 For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father.
19 Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God,
(NKJ)

God IS Good!

Originally posted by checkbaitor
Yes, but what a sad life it must be! To be without hope and without God. The movie "The Matrix" was very interesting to me. It is in some ways like life here on earth. The difference is that instead of a computer directing all our liv ...[text shortened]... saints and members of the household of God,
(NKJ)

God IS Good!

Yes, but what a sad life it must be! To be without hope and without God.

how do you know that you yourself are not 'without God'? if it happens to be that God doesn't exist, then i would say you are without Him just as much as the atheist. can you provide an argument that demonstrates it is sufficiently likely that He exists? i would really like to know why you are so sure of His existence. but i can tell you that your usual MO of parroting scripture isn't going to cut it.

The difference is that instead of a computer directing all our lives, here it is Satan.

how do you know this? in terms of rational justification, i don't see why your assertion that satan exists and runs the show is any more justified than the assertion that we are all just living in a computer program, such as in the Matrix. i don't think you can prove/disprove either claim based on rational argument. and i doubt occam's razor would champion either position: they are both riddled with unsupported assumptions. in that sense, both views are rather arbitrary, aren't they? if i said that magical, invisible elves direct all of our lives, how would this claim be any less justified than your claim that satan directs our lives? i find it very irksome how you peddle this drivel around as absolute truth.

And the sad part is that unbelievers are clueless as to what is happening to them. They are influenced by satan and they are unaware...

in the words of the Dude, "That's, like, your opinion, man."

i would like to see you provide some evidence for your views (and maybe some original thought would be nice too), rather than just citing the bible like a fundamentalist robot.

your letter grade is slipping because you are not demonstrating improvement as the grading period progresses: it's down to C- now.

Originally posted by checkbaitor
Jesus Christ was and is the Messiah. This I believe...but it does not make him God...I am confused by your thinking here...God is the author of salvation, it was His plan all along, Jesus was the instrument that He used. But along with this plan, He "highly exalted Jesus ", for his obedience unto death. Jesus was sinless, being of the seed of God, and ...[text shortened]... also that Jesus was tempted bit did not sin, where in James, it says God cannot even be tempted>

I see what you are saying and why you do not believe in the triune God concept. I understand this.

As opposed to reiterating my points, I think our discussion will be more fruitfull if I could ask you a few things. This will help me establish why you understand it as you do, and thusly will facillitate a more productive discussion between us.

Let us take it as you have said. Jesus is not God. Jesus is a man created by God who led a sinless life. How does this validate his claim to be the saviour (i.e. how doe this make him the instrument of Gods salvation for man kind?) and how does this validate his other statements and "God like" abilities?

You do not necessarily need to quote the scriptures, but are quite welcome to. I am just looking for how you find that a man who was nothing more than a man restructured the covenant between man and God (i.e. salvation).