Why Jesus is not God and can't be God.

Great Debates
81

I’d never thought about it as applying only at the time it was written. That could work. And, while I’m sure you’re right and volumes have been written on it, I’ve only ever heard one analysis of it – and that was Harold Camping, who simply argued that the “Son” in that verse meant Satan, not Jesus. (!)

(Harold Camping is one of the more interesting theologians of our time. He is and was wrong as wrong can be, but I always found him to be honorable in intent. He was striving, as best he could, to defend a sola scriptura interpretation. This led him to repeated blunders in prophesying the exact date of the Second Coming, which, somehow, never actually happened on the days he said they would. These failures always amazed him. He really did believe he had figured out the Bible’s hidden numerology.)

“God as an author” comes, I think, from a Russian novelist of the Dostoevsky era, but who, I have never been able to learn.

82

ruben4ruben, I can’t help but notice that you have failed to respond to anyone who has pointed out the verses in Scripture that support a Trinitarian understanding. You’ve just called us heretics or worse.

Worse yet, you have confused and conflated Trinitarianism with polytheism. Which, understandably, is a common and easy mistake. But no one who worships the Trinity is going to recognize our God in your clumsy strawman caricature.

83

There has been an incredible evolution in Mormon belief about the nature of Jesus.

Joseph Smith started off with a fairly typical protestant belief, and the Book of Mormon, as it was originally published in 1830 reflected this. He seemed to have believed that God the Father and Jesus were one. Rather than type it all out, I’ll just quote this.

Smith’s views on the nature of God changed, so a number of passages in the Book of Mormon had to be revised. Interestingly, a number were not, so there still are parts of that book which teach classic trinity.

Smith later developed a radically different concept which has God the Father (called Elohim), Jesus and the Holy Ghost as three completely separate individuals, with Elohim and Jesus both as resurrected beings. In Smiths publicly taught doctrine, God had been a man previously and played the role of a Christ for his father god.

He then had spirit children with a Heavenly Mother and these spirits come down as you and I. Jesus was the first born spirit and Satan was one of our spirit brothers.

Brigham Young, the second prophet of the LDS branch of Mormonism, then continued this evolution of thought and taught the Adam-God doctrine in which Adam was the spiritual father of us, rather than Elohim. Elohim was above Adam in the hierarchy of the gods. This doctrine was taught for about 20 years and then it faded away once Young died.

Mormonism is officially back to where Smith publicly taught (there are questions to how much additional doctrine he shared his inner circle as he stated that there were things which he could not teach the public, and how much of that was the reason for Young’s changes). The LDS church seems to want to roll the doctrine back even further in time, which would become problematic for many people as this doctrine has been accepted and taught by all of the subsequent prophets.

One other interesting point is that Mormonism believes that it was Elohim who came down in the resurrected flesh and knew Mary in the biblical sense, making Jesus the physical as well as spiritual son of God.

84

But to be fair, you all are heretics, or worse, right?

85

[QUOTE=Prophet Isaiah, 9:6 KJV (Emphasis Mine)]
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
[/QUOTE]

Is this not a prophecy of the Messiah? If Jesus is the “mighty God” and the “everlasting Father”, how can he not be God? How many Gods are there?

[QUOTE=John, 8:56-59 KJV (Emphasis Mine)]
Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad. 57Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.
[/QUOTE]

The way I’ve had it explained to me was that Jesus is alluding to the name YHWH/Yahweh/Jehovah here, which comes from or is related to the Hebrew word for “to be”. So, in response to a question about how old he really is, he responds, “Before Abraham was, YHWH.” Clearly those around him did not approve of this statement as right afterwards, they started stoning him. That’s not exactly something you do to someone who mildly pisses you off. Clearly he was seen as doing something very offensive, such as claiming to be God.

86

Where is this story documented? I don’t think it’s in the Bible. Is it in one of the Babylonian epics? I’d like to read it.

Thanks,

87

If you pay attention, this is more or less the plot of

Tron

Flynn is a User, he has access to programming internals (miracles), and can survive being derezzed (resurrection). Also, “Tron”, the program who came before Flynn but who wasn’t a User himself, has a name that can be seen as a reference to “John”, who the Bible describes as the forerunner to the Light but who wasn’t the Light himself (John 1).

88

Dear Skammer,
I did respond to most verses i noticed so your statement is not entirely true. I’m sure did not pick up all of them, i’ll believe you on that without checking. The majority of verses i offered were ignored or picked up by an atheist. I felt a bit let down to be honest.

If you want me to answer what i might have missed then simply pick specific ones you want me to respond to. Point out wich ones i missed and i’ll answer. If you really want me to, that is.
Not to be misunderstood… i gave a very large amount of verses that were mostly totally ignored. How about that? Will YOU be so kind to trade with me comment for comment? I’ll answer what you pick and you answer what the other debaters ignored. Do we have a deal?
IF you accept my offer to trade…this is my first selection of questions that were ignored:
1: How can Christ hand over the kingdom to God in heaven and subject himself to God in heaven when they are a Trinity? Do you hand over things to yourself often?

2: Why does the bible praise “The God and Father” of our Lord Jesus Christ? You say they are one, that they are a trinity…so how can one be the GOD of the other??

3: Why did Jesus kneel with his face down pray to God, begging in anguish saying not my will but your will be done just before his arrest if he is GOD? What’s with this not my will but your will thing and the talking to himself thing?

4: Why does the bible depict Jesus sitting or standing next to God at His right hand in heaven? You claim they are a Trinity and say i’m confusing it with polytheism. Well then how do you explain this? They are continuously mentioned as 2 separate persons, one above the other in status. (The Holy Spirit does not even get mentioned) Please explain.

5: How can Jesus not know of the time of Armageddon? Why does the bible say Only the Father knows. (so that the Holy Spirit also does not know) Please kindly explain this part of only the Father knowing while you claim trinity. Note this was written after Jesus death, resurrection and ascension. You tell us please.
Please help me understand and guide me toward the correct path if i am wrong.
I’m willing to hear and think over what you have to say. If you can convince me, i’ll thank you and follow you.
To make up for any hurt feelings i’ll answer 7 questions for these 5 if i missed as many. Just point them out and quote them so i can check i did miss them.
Now if you are Catholic then you don’t have to answer my 5 questions at all. I’ll respect your official dogma of unexplainable mystery. But then we are done and i will use my time to start preparing my following topic.
Sorry if i hurt any feelings, i’m quite passionate about the bible and the sacrifice Jesus Christ made for us.

89

I, too, will be guilty of not addressing all of your points. In the interest of brevity (no one wants to read multiple full-screen responses!) I will just hit on the points that I think are most interesting, most promising, or (I’m a dilettante) most fun.

In fact, I do hand things over to myself! Often!

Sometimes, when I have a problem, I will “sleep on it.” Sometimes, I’ll “go with my instincts.” Sometimes, I’ll delegate a task to my unconscious mind, using a kind of self-hypnosis. (I’ll create a menmonic association, and use that as a kind of “alarm clock” to remind myself of something I meant to do.) Sometimes, I’ll jot down notes to myself, and read them later.

We humans can be multiple “persons” in ourselves.

Now, I don’t think this is what the Christian Trinity is based around. But, well, you asked a question, and the answer is, “Yes, I do!”

90

Unless it is your claim that you came up with these arguments all by yourself, then you are interpreting scripture according to a tradition, and/or the work of other scholars.

Are you in fact claiming that you have original insight into this?

91

In Mark 13 v61-63, you will note he separates himself from the God, The psalmists said (talking to other Jewish men)," I said you are gods and sons of the most high". If one looks back in history the word GOD had different meanings, It was more like a man with power, not as we think of it today. Jesus backs this up in John 10, He tells the priests and Pharisee’s "It says in YOUR LAW, You are gods, so why do you say I blaspheme because I call God my father, when your Fathers did?

This seems to indicate he didn’t think of himself any different than any other human. There are many things written by many different people so it is a matter of what one chooses to believe. The Pharaohs in Egypt named them selves God.

Many writings are contradictory, and many early writers were not included in the NT, the Roman and orthodox bishops decided what was inspired by God and what was not, that lasted for 700 years, until the Orthodox separated from Rome.

92

It Is a proven fact that the entire Bible was written by many different humans; it was also humans who decided what was of God and what was not. Muslims believe God dictated( through an angel) a whole book to Muhammad, and there is just as much a possibility that they are as right as any other Book.

It would seem that God changes his mind a lot!

93

The OP is on a loser here. It matters not how much ‘evidence’ he cites, the Trinity is an article of faith not fact. Most intelligent Christians concede that the doctrine of the Trinity evolved slowly over the first centuries of the Church (the disciples would have appalled by it and would have considered it blasphemous.) Arius and Athanasius were still at loggerheads over the definition of the Trinity in the 3rd century and their respective creeds would divide the faithful for centuries to come.

The point is that you can’t prove Jesus isn’t God any more than you can prove that he is. It’s a matter of belief. As Tertullian said of the Resurrection, “I believe it because it is impossible.”

94

As I see it, Jesus suffering was not as great a sacrifice as our service people make. Jesus seemed to know he would only be dead for about 36 hours, Not many can know that. And he was said to have chosen when he would return. There are people who suffer their whole lives and are uncertain of how long it will last. I would think to suffer for 3 hours was hardly a big sacrifice compared to our service people who have a long life of suffering ahead!

95

ruben4ruben, whether Jesus is God and Trinitarian concepts are expressed or not in the bible, it seems like either side can effectively argue their position by relying heavily on particular verses to support one view, while ignoring the other verses which would show the opposite. If they are aware of such scriptures that show the opposite, but can’t reconcile it, so chooses to ignore those, it’s also known as “sins of omission.” Others have shown how John makes a good case for Jesus being God, and in other places as well. One can’t have a non-Trinitarian concept without reconciling many of these verses here and elsewhere, and likewise, those with a Trinitarian view can’t do so either without reconciling the scriptures you have pointed out.

Isn’t the best way to view all of this is to realize that the bible was made up of some 40 main authors, which consists of hundreds of redactions and interpolations, so naturally shouldn’t one expect many different views expressed? Or do you think the bible is really special and is God’s word, and it has a unified message if only one is to understand it? And how do you feel about the NWT?

96

We are in the majority, so we get to call him the heretic. :wink:

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.

97

Mr. Deity, explaining the whole thing to [del]Jesse[/del]Jesus: “Thirty-six hours tops. Thirty-five if we do it on the weekend when the time changes!”

98

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.

99

I readily admit that I can’t follow this at all.

Imagine that I’m standing right in front of you while my father’s voice is heard from off in the distance. Imagine too that, on yet other occasions, my father and I are seen interacting with each other. Imagine as well that I’m quick to spell out that he knows things I don’t know. And now imagine someone points out that he and I are of course two men, at which point I patiently explain, uh, no, we’re one man in two persons.

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?

100

During the period of Christ’s physical incarnation, the separation is obvious. The standard answer is that, for thirty-three years, Jesus voluntarily set aside his god-ness, and took on a temporary aspect of man-ness.

So, yeah, from 1 AD to 33 AD (plus or minus) Jesus was “Not God.” That is supposed to have changed after the ascension to heaven. As noted above: it’s a story. It’s faith. The Bible says both yea and nay.