# Why Jesus is not God and can't be God. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 1, 2013, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-jesus-is-not-god-and-cant-be-god/665115 "2013-08-01T23:10:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Razncain](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9d8465/32.png) [@Razncain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Razncain)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2013, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-jesus-is-not-god-and-cant-be-god/665115/101 "2013-08-06T18:19:34Z")
Robert Ingersoll explained the [Trinity](http://www.angelfire.com/pa/greywlf/trinity.html) in his usual light-hearted humorous way. If you let some clergyman explain exactly like that in a Sunday setting, but just taking out his last sentence, would anyone even blink an eye? Whether one accepts the Trinity or not, that cite shows the dilemma Christians face. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2013, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-jesus-is-not-god-and-cant-be-god/665115/102 "2013-08-06T19:23:41Z")
> [@SirGalahad](#): > > This explains nothing. This clarifies nothing. What, multiple personality disorder? Exclaiming a contradictory bit of mysterious Canon just shows how ridiculous religious doctrines can be. > > The only meaning of “one but separate” I see is: one entity type … three different entities. Insisting on the Trinity Doctrine just forwards the concept of “Religion is enigmatic, God works in mysterious ways”. There is no message, no “Good News” if humanity can’t understand. The Trinity doctrine is necessary to resolve what would otherwise be contradictions in the Bible as a whole (of course, lots of people resolve those contradictions by declaring the whole thing false and walking away - and I’m not going to argue with that). For example: > [@](#): > > **John 1:** > 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. > 2 He was with God in the beginning. > 3 **Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.** > 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. > 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it. > > … > > 14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. So the this is talking about Jesus (I don’t think anyone disputes that), and it’s saying he was involved in making everything. But when we look in Genesis 1:1, we get: > [@](#): > > In the beginning \*\*God \*\*created the heavens and the earth. and in verse 24: > [@](#): > > Then God said, “Let \*\*us \*\*make mankind in \*\*our \*\*image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.” And in Isaiah 44:24, we have: > [@](#): > > I am the Lord, > the Maker of all things, > who stretches out the heavens, > who spreads out the earth **by myself** So on the one hand, it’s teamwork, on the other hand, God did it alone - singular, but also oddly plural. There are many other examples like this (not all about plurality) - and the Trinity doctrine is one way to resolve them. ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2013, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-jesus-is-not-god-and-cant-be-god/665115/103 "2013-08-06T19:26:59Z")
> [@SirGalahad](#): > > This explains nothing. This clarifies nothing. What, multiple personality disorder? Exclaiming a contradictory bit of mysterious Canon just shows how ridiculous religious doctrines can be. > [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > I readily admit that I can’t follow this at all. \ > > What would that even mean? As far as I can tell, the stuff I copy-and-pasted from you fits perfectly with mere polytheism; how is this not that? What it is, is the best the early church could come up with to explain the fact that sometimes in Scripture the Father, Jesus, and the Spirit seem to be different entities; yet all seem to be God and God is One. It’s essentially a big copout; the church fathers said “God is three, yet God is one. We don’t really understand it either.” In fact there is a famous story about St. Augustine walking along the beach deep in thought, trying to understand the how God can be Three in One. He comes upon a young boy carrying a pail of water from the sea to a hole he has dug in the sand. Augustine watches the boy go back and forth a few times and finally asks him what he is doing. “I’m putting the sea in this hole in the sand,” says the boy. Augustine protests: “The sea is much to large to fit! It’s impossible!” to which the boy replies, “So, too, is it impossible for your mind to hold the mystery of the Trinity!.” So even back then, theologians were kind of throwing up their hands. ---
**Author:** ![SirGalahad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/71c47a/32.png) [@SirGalahad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SirGalahad)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2013, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-jesus-is-not-god-and-cant-be-god/665115/104 "2013-08-06T20:15:53Z")
> [@Skammer](#): > > What it is, is the best the early church could come up with to explain the fact that sometimes in Scripture the Father, Jesus, and the Spirit seem to be different entities; yet all seem to be God and **God is One**. It’s essentially a big copout; the church fathers said “God is three, yet God is one. We don’t really understand it either.” > > In fact there is a famous story about St. Augustine walking along the beach deep in thought, trying to understand the how God can be Three in One. He comes upon a young boy carrying a pail of water from the sea to a hole he has dug in the sand. Augustine watches the boy go back and forth a few times and finally asks him what he is doing. “I’m putting the sea in this hole in the sand,” says the boy. > > Augustine protests: “The sea is much to large to fit! It’s impossible!” to which the boy replies, “So, too, is it impossible for your mind to hold the mystery of the Trinity!.” > > So even back then, theologians were kind of throwing up their hands. After you provide a Scriptural cite for “God is One”, I’ll point out that perhaps the Biblical author meant “God is one type of Supernatural entity, and all three of this type are essential identical”. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2013, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-jesus-is-not-god-and-cant-be-god/665115/105 "2013-08-06T21:48:37Z")
> [@SirGalahad](#): > > After you provide a Scriptural cite for “God is One”, I’ll point out that perhaps the Biblical author meant “God is one type of Supernatural entity, and all three of this type are essential identical”. Um, the cite is the most important prayer in Judaism. From the Shema wiki page > [@](#): > > Shema Yisrael (or Sh’ma Yisrael) (Hebrew: שְׁמַע יִשְׂרָאֵל‎; “Hear, [O] Israel”) are the first two words of a section of the Torah, and are the title (sometimes shortened to simply “Shema”) of a prayer that serves as a centerpiece of the morning and evening Jewish prayer services. The first verse encapsulates the monotheistic essence of Judaism: “Hear, O Israel: the LORD is our God, the LORD is one,” found in Deuteronomy 6:4. Observant Jews consider the Shema to be the most important part of the prayer service in Judaism, and its twice-daily recitation as a mitzvah (religious commandment). It is traditional for Jews to say the Shema as their last words, and for parents to teach their children to say it before they go to sleep at night. ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2013, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-jesus-is-not-god-and-cant-be-god/665115/106 "2013-08-06T22:36:55Z")
> [@ruben4ruben](#): > > Why Jesus is not God and can’t be God. Well, God’s a She, for one thing. Tall, grey eyes, fond of owls. ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2013, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-jesus-is-not-god-and-cant-be-god/665115/107 "2013-08-06T23:09:39Z")
> [@SirGalahad](#): > > After you provide a Scriptural cite for “God is One”, I’ll point out that perhaps the Biblical author meant “God is one type of Supernatural entity, and all three of this type are essential identical”. **Voyager** beat me to Deuteronomy 6:4. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2013, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-jesus-is-not-god-and-cant-be-god/665115/108 "2013-08-06T23:36:05Z")
> [@SirGalahad](#): > > After you provide a Scriptural cite for “God is One”, I’ll point out that perhaps the Biblical author meant “God is one type of Supernatural entity, and all three of this type are essential identical”. I get the impression you’re doing this to demonstrate a point, but I don’t get what that point could be. I don’t think anyone could be criticised for saying that the Bible seems sufficiently nebulous as to be amenable to many different and conflicting interpretations, but that’s not the same as saying _any_ interpretation fits, including those interpretations that are crafted with the express intent of being contrary to any kind of plain reading of the text. Also, in the above example, you’re applying a rule of English semantic convention - do you even know when you write “X is one type of Y” in Hebrew, if it looks remotely similar to when you write “X is one(singular/unique)” - I suspect it might not. ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2013, 12:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-jesus-is-not-god-and-cant-be-god/665115/109 "2013-08-07T00:31:53Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > So on the one hand, it’s teamwork, on the other hand, God did it alone - singular, but also oddly plural. There are many other examples like this (not all about plurality) - and the Trinity doctrine is one way to resolve them. Having multiple authors with different ideas, writing over a span of time without consultation or proofreading is another. ---
**Author:** ![SirGalahad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/71c47a/32.png) [@SirGalahad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SirGalahad)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2013, 4:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-jesus-is-not-god-and-cant-be-god/665115/110 "2013-08-07T04:30:41Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > I get the impression you’re doing this to demonstrate a point, but I don’t get what that point could be. > > I don’t think anyone could be criticised for saying that the Bible seems sufficiently nebulous as to be amenable to many different and conflicting interpretations, but that’s not the same as saying _any_ interpretation fits, including those interpretations that are crafted with the express intent of being contrary to any kind of plain reading of the text. > > Also, in the above example, you’re applying a rule of English semantic convention - do you even know when you write “X is one type of Y” in Hebrew, if it looks remotely similar to when you write “X is one(singular/unique)” - I suspect it might not. Why don’t you provide a cite that supports your suspicion? I can’t read Hebrew, but if God guides the hands of the writers of the Scriptures (and presumably the translators as well), then the English translations should contain sufficient accuracy to grasp the meaning of the authors. The meaning I grasp is that there are at least three Gods, or “Three of God”, if you will. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2013, 6:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-jesus-is-not-god-and-cant-be-god/665115/111 "2013-08-07T06:13:43Z")
> [@SirGalahad](#): > > Why don’t you provide a cite that supports your suspicion? I can’t read Hebrew, but if God guides the hands of the writers of the Scriptures (and presumably the translators as well), then the English translations should contain sufficient accuracy to grasp the meaning of the authors. The meaning I grasp is that there are at least three Gods, or “Three of God”, if you will. You’re the one making the positive assertion that the phrase ‘God is one’ has additional meaning about class, rather than entity. The onus is upon you to support that. ---
**Author:** ![SirGalahad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/71c47a/32.png) [@SirGalahad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SirGalahad)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2013, 11:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-jesus-is-not-god-and-cant-be-god/665115/112 "2013-08-07T11:11:52Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > You’re the one making the positive assertion that the phrase ‘God is one’ has additional meaning about class, rather than entity. The onus is upon you to support that. No, you’re mistaken. My cite is: any approved English translation of the Bible. I maintain the gist of the Scriptures is accurately conveyed by said translations, and I suspect that’s the position of most any Christian religious authority. If you challenge the accuracy of the various English translations, you’re the one with the responsibility to support that view. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2013, 11:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-jesus-is-not-god-and-cant-be-god/665115/113 "2013-08-07T11:27:53Z")
> [@SirGalahad](#): > > The meaning I grasp is that there are at least three Gods I don’t much care whether it’s three or thirteen or thirty, so long as the _Thou Shalt Have No Other Gods Before Me_ commandment remains intact. (See also: Deuteronomy 13.) ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2013, 11:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-jesus-is-not-god-and-cant-be-god/665115/114 "2013-08-07T11:44:59Z")
> [@SirGalahad](#): > > There’s your problem … I’m referring to the Trinity, not the Trinity Doctrine. I have limited interest in researching and debating Canon. I’m far more concerned with obvious Scriptural references that may be interpreted in ways that may fly in the face of Church dogma. My position is that the Truth in the Scriptures has been obscured by Men, to service their own agendas, and I maintain that many examples of seemingly confusing and contradictory passages can be clearly understood, but we must first ignore the spin put on them over these many centuries. It was written, called the word of God, and inspired by God by other human beings. so, I would guess there is no proof that Scriptures are any more from God than the Koran or any other writings. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2013, 11:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-jesus-is-not-god-and-cant-be-god/665115/115 "2013-08-07T11:52:25Z")
> [@SirGalahad](#): > > No, you’re mistaken. My cite is: any approved English translation of the Bible. I maintain the gist of the Scriptures is accurately conveyed by said translations, and I suspect that’s the position of most any Christian religious authority. If you challenge the accuracy of the various English translations, you’re the one with the responsibility to support that view. I don’t know what you’re talking about. I’m not challenging the accuracy of the English translations, I’m challenging your further English interpretation of them, in particular: > [@](#): > > After you provide a Scriptural cite for “God is One”, I’ll point out that perhaps the Biblical author meant “God is one type of Supernatural entity, and all three of this type are essential identical”. You’re extending the meaning beyond a plain reading the words - and I can’t see any particular reason to do that, or if so, to pull out _that particular extended meaning_, as opposed to many other possibilities. The onus is upon you to demonstrate that it is reasonable to extend the statement “God is one” to “God is one type of Supernatural entity, and all three of this type are essential identical”. ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2013, 11:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-jesus-is-not-god-and-cant-be-god/665115/116 "2013-08-07T11:53:10Z")
> [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > If God can create sub atomic particles that exist and do not exist at the same time, that vary in number depending on the position of the observer, etc., then God pretty much hasn’t bound his creation by the concepts of logic that theologians of every stripe have imposed on Him. And are these fundamental particles simpler or more complex than God Himself? > Scriptures of the Christian variety are inconsistent on the nature of God. They sometimes say have no other Gods before God, to put God before all other Gods, to there is only one God. On these things the Bible is not clear. > The Bible does state over 3,000 times that we are commanded to heal the sick and feed the poor. We are to love each other. God, in his infinite wisdom about human nature, probably understood that we would argue about useless stuff and ignore the huge task of feeding the poor and healing the sick. So he said it 3,000 times. And that still isn’t enough so that virtually every single person calling themselves a Christian ignores those commandments 24/7 in favor of disputes on what God is, rather than what needs to be done. > Don’t knock on my door to witness about monotheism and blood transfusions before making sure every sinner in town has had a meal and medical care. God talked about feeding the poor and healing the sick so much more than anything else because it is so much more important than anything else. If God created al things and is all knowing and loving, he doesn’t act like that according to the Scriptures He should have known Satan would rebel and humans would disobey, so the flaw of both must have been part of the nature God gave them. Too much written about God doesn’t ring true. Because some one wrote things and said they were from God is not necessarily true. ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2013, 12:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-jesus-is-not-god-and-cant-be-god/665115/117 "2013-08-07T12:00:56Z")
> [@Skammer](#): > > We are in the majority, so _we_ get to call _him_ the heretic. 😉 > > How about all the instances where Jesus refers to himself as I AM? Or calls himself the Good Shepherd? Or assumes the power to forgive sins? > This is what I meant when I said you don’t understand the doctrine of Trinity. God in _three persons_. The three persons interact with each other in communion as well as unity. See the account of Jesus’ baptism, when the Father’s voice is heard from heaven and the Spirit descends like a dove. You can list verse after verse where Jesus, God or the HS are mentioned separately and interacting with each other and it does not contradict the concept of Trinity because _that’s what the Trinity is_ - one God in three persons. One thing about the Trinity that stands out, is the father supposed to be Holy? ---
**Author:** ![SirGalahad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/71c47a/32.png) [@SirGalahad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SirGalahad)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2013, 12:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-jesus-is-not-god-and-cant-be-god/665115/118 "2013-08-07T12:02:58Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > I don’t much care whether it’s three or thirteen or thirty, so long as the _Thou Shalt Have No Other Gods Before Me_ commandment remains intact. > > (See also: Deuteronomy 13.) So, right there in Commandment 1., The Lord God clearly alludes to the existence of other Gods. Can you be more specific regarding Deut. 13? It’s a largely violence filled threat-fest, but I don’t see how it ties in to the existence of the Holy Ghost (the quiet, dangerous one) or Jesus, the Messiah. I propose that the Father (the jealous God) is the Old Testament spokesperson for the Triumvirate (a term I prefer to “Trinity”), that the Holy Ghost is the Black-Ops guy, and that Jesus is the media friendly “pretty face” who wants to change the brand from “Fire and Brimstone” to “Feed, Heal and Forgive”. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2013, 12:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-jesus-is-not-god-and-cant-be-god/665115/119 "2013-08-07T12:47:57Z")
> [@SirGalahad](#): > > Can you be more specific regarding Deut. 13? It’s a largely violence filled threat-fest, but I don’t see how it ties in to the existence of the Holy Ghost (the quiet, dangerous one) or Jesus, the Messiah. If someone shows up and says _“Hey, speaking of God the Father – the jealous God – he’s awesome, he’s terrific, yay, but, oh, by the way, there’s also this other person named Jesus who is also a God; let’s go and follow and worship him”_, then we (a) totally shouldn’t listen to that guy, and (b) are commanded by God the Father to execute the occasional rabble-rouser, regardless of whether the blasphemer happens to work wonders or foretell the future or excel at carpentry. ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2013, 12:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-jesus-is-not-god-and-cant-be-god/665115/120 "2013-08-07T12:59:09Z")
> [@SirGalahad](#): > > No, you’re mistaken. My cite is: any approved English translation of the Bible. I maintain the gist of the Scriptures is accurately conveyed by said translations, and I suspect that’s the position of most any Christian religious authority. If you challenge the accuracy of the various English translations, you’re the one with the responsibility to support that view. In truth, no. Maybe in some fringe traditions; but even most of the conservative/fundamentalist churches that subscribe to biblical inerrancy only claim the text to be inerrant in the original language, and allow for errors in translation. (Not all of them of course). As you move to more moderate and liberal churches, they all agree that the original text is, well, the original, and is authoritative over any translation. Although they differ on inerrancy, authority, etc. > [@monavis](#): > > One thing about the Trinity that stands out, is the father supposed to be Holy? I feel like you’re trying to set up a trap; but yes God is Holy - all three persons are Holy. > [@SirGalahad](#): > > I propose that the Father (the jealous God) is the Old Testament spokesperson for the Triumvirate (a term I prefer to “Trinity”), that the Holy Ghost is the Black-Ops guy, and that Jesus is the media friendly “pretty face” who wants to change the brand from “Fire and Brimstone” to “Feed, Heal and Forgive”. It sounds like you are setting up a pantheon rather than a unified God. A triumvirate is made of three different individuals; that is not orthodox Christianity. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-jesus-is-not-god-and-cant-be-god/665115.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-jesus-is-not-god-and-cant-be-god/665115.md?page=7)