Did Jesus claim to be God in the bible?

[Cor_ad_Cor]

I have to disagree with this. When the bible was standardised at the council of Nicea in 325, bishops and church fathers from all over the world attended and discussed what was inspired and what was to be thrown out as outside the line of scripture. For me anything that is in the 73 chapters take precedence over any priest, bishop or church father. For deeper explainations we can study the commentry of the chapters but no other source should be used if it contradicts the bible.

So why does one decision of the magisterium rise above and potentially trump any other decision of the magisterium for you? We can show you at length that there aren’t contradictions on the fundamentals, but I think a larger issue might be making this or any singular decision/act more significant than others arbitrarily.

 

[dutchcatholic]

The reason why I believe the council of nicea holds as authority over all councils is because it was closer to Jesus’ time. Everything which was decided in 325 shapes the fundamentals of catholicism. The vast amount of information that was available back then we dont have a fraction of it now. For example the earliest manuscripts that we have today date back to around 4th or 5th centuries, surely the church fathers like eusebios had access to manuscripts earlier than what we have. Even if you read Dei verbum it predominately quotes the bible and provides a bit more detail. For me the bible is the highest authority for these reasons.

 

[Sirach2]

The reason why I believe the council of nicea holds as authority over all councils is because it was closer to Jesus’ time. Everything which was decided in 325 shapes the fundamentals of catholicism. The vast amount of information that was available back then we dont have a fraction of it now. For example the earliest manuscripts that we have today date back to around 4th or 5th centuries, surely the church fathers like eusebios had access to manuscripts earlier than what we have. Even if you read Dei verbum it predominately quotes the bible and provides a bit more detail. For me the bible is the highest authority for these reasons.

Think about this …
Who determined which manuscripts were compiled into the Bible? Yup - it was the Church who determined which were truly inspired.
Therefore, we go back to the Church who is the final authority on Truth and the final authority who faithfully interprets the “Bible” under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

What then are you saying? That **your **interpretation of scripture is more correct than Church teaching? And therefore, since you are unable to find a clearly manifested verse in scripture that Jesus claimed to be God, therefore, he isn’t? You would have us believe your version?

 

[Sirach2]

No need to answer my post, dutchcatholic. I sense an obstinance from you that is baiting other Catholics with no regard for their (name removed by moderator)ut.
Unsubscribing.

 

[snowwolf0111]

That is also something I do not agree with. the council of Nicea in 325. Christ teachings towards the disciples are much older than the council of Nicea. Some random men discussing the bible 300 years after Christ died. Nah, I believe Christ’s word over the councils !

The New Testament is like the CliffsNotes version of what Jesus left us. He didn’t write a book; He founded a Church. We have 2000 years of refinement of understanding Jesus.

I have to disagree with this. When the bible was standardised at the council of Nicea in 325, bishops and church fathers from all over the world attended and discussed what was inspired and what was to be thrown out as outside the line of scripture. For me anything that is in the 73 chapters take precedence over any priest, bishop or church father. For deeper explainations we can study the commentry of the chapters but no other source should be used if it contradicts the bible.

 

[tm21]

The New Testament is like the CliffsNotes version of what Jesus left us. He didn’t write a book; He founded a Church. We have 2000 years of refinement of understanding Jesus.

I have to disagree with this. When the bible was standardised at the council of Nicea in 325, bishops and church fathers from all over the world attended and discussed what was inspired and what was to be thrown out as outside the line of scripture.

Your history is wrong. The canon of scripture was not defined or “standardized” at the council of Nicea.

 

[PNEUMA]

Jesus never claimed to be God the Father himself, only a display of and embodiment of God the Father in this world. God the Father was in Jesus, what Jesus said and did showed that.

John 14:10 “Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own; but the Father who dwells in me does his works. Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; but if you do not, then believe me because of the works themselves.”

To think that Jesus is God the Father is a misconception, he only showed us the the Father, that no one has seen.

 

[dutchcatholic]

@sirach tell me one thing that I stated which is factually incorrect. I stated that at the council bishops, church fathers did decide what was inspired and what not. But the content of the gospels surely holds more authority than the catholic church?? Even in the dei verbum you will gospels quoted and elaborated. So i still hold my position strongly as to say that the bible holds more authority than the church. Unless anyone can give me a better reason.

 

[grannymh]

There is another way to approach this thread.

It is called common sense Catholicism or logical Catholicism. One difficulty here is that most CAF participants are too young to have been educated by the dead generation or they began life in a modern geographic location. Another difficulty is that some, not all, persons are so smart that they can ignore the beginning of human history.