Is Jesus God?

[humble_maid]

**Thank you Humble Made, I love you too, although of humble, you have only the name. I could happily welcome you, but instead of knocking at the door, you broke it down. Of all your post above, I would like to tell you something about your last sentence. The one you state that Jesus died for all of us including myself. Since you claim that everything I say are fabrications and not sound theories, I would like to give you some scriptures, so that you should entrust them to your memory. They all say the same thing. They are: Deuteronomy 24:16; II Kings 14:6; Jeremiah 31:30 and Ezekiel 18:4. They all say that,

“Only for his own guilt shall a man be put to death.” **

Humble Made, I did not write those texts. Therefore, they are not my fabrications. They are Scriptures. The only Scriptures that Jesus used to handle. The only Scriptures that Jesus used to call them Word of God. They say that Jesus was not put to death for our sins. They say that only for his own guilt shall a man be put to death. So, please, don’t get so mad at me. At least, tell me that what you don’t want is that those pages be open and those quotations be heard. Okay, I’ll do that, but don’t say they are my fabrications. They are the Word of God.

Life is too precious to harbor hate, malcontent, disdain, or fear. I do not hate you. I care for every soul especially those who are lost. Do not take my confidence in my faith as pride. Nonetheless, I always ask the Good Lord for humility. If I hurt you it was not my intent; but I will remain firm in my convictions. I pray sincerely for you Ben.

It is unfortunate to say the least, when one speaks out against the Lamb of God who is without blemish. His death was not a punishment for his sins but that of all humanity. He was put to death for our transgressions not his. Please read Isaiah 53:1-12. If you believe the validity of the scriptures you quote and use against us then it goes without saying that the very scriptures we (catholic) quote to prove His innocence and His divinity are valid. I can offer you more scriptures if you are sincere enough to deliberate on them.

The truth can only be comprehended by those the Father chooses to reveal it to. Each one of us is free to believe or not to.

God Bless.
newadvent.org/bible/isa053.htm#vrs12

 

[JP_Marat]

Other than in John’s Gospel, written between 95 and 110 AD, where does Jesus say he was God?

Why does it have to be any place else? <<<

RESPONSE:

Because Matthew, Mark, Luke, and Acts report otherwise.

Your incorrect. They do not contradict in any manner that which John wrote. Who is Lord? <<

RESPONSE:

Really? Matthew: “Why do you call me good. No one is good but God himself”

Acts 2:22 "You who are Israelites, hear these words. Jesus the Nazorean** was a man commended to you by God with mighty deeds, wonders, and signs, which God worked through him **in your midst, as you yourselves know. [As supposedly did through prophets]

This man, delivered up by the set plan and foreknowledge of God, you killed, using lawless men to crucify him.

But God raised him up, releasing him from the throes of death, because it was impossible for him to be held by it Raised like Lazarus. Jesus did not “rise” anywhere in the snyoptics. Only in John.

 

[adrift]

Really? Matthew: “Why do you call me good. No one is good but God himself”

But God raised him up, releasing him from the throes of death, because it was impossible for him to be held by it [Raised like Lazarus. Jesus did not “rise” anywhere in the snyoptics. Only in John.

Not true. You are using the NAB which is not the best of translations. I don’t care if it is from the US bishops. I believe there is a new translation in the works. However, if you go to the Greek you will find
Matt
FOR HE IS RISEN

Mark
he is risen

Luke

but is risen

This was all hashed out in another thread. When I asked our priest who is from Poland he said that what was in the NAB was a bad translation and it wasn’t translated like that in his language. In his polish bible, it was what I posted above for that is the correct
[/quote]

 

[JesuisSean]

Is Jesus God?

There are two sides to reality.

One is this side that you are aware of, and the other is the after life side.

God retains truth. Truth exists on both sides.

Thus God must be present on both sides to retain truth on both sides.

One can not experience and protect truth on this side unless one is here!

Thus at some point in time God must exist here in flesh.

outersecrets.com/real/biblecode2.htm

How do I know of this?

By the way, there is no such things as good and evil on the other side. You see, if there was, then the " Other side " would share components of this side. But this can not be be, for these are two separate sides.

What does exist on the other side, is beyond good. But unfortunately the negative half of the other side is beyond evil. Thus it is to be appreciated what beyond evil you have been protected from.

 

[choy]

a lot of those who don’t believe in the Trinity uses Jesus’ interaction with God the Father as proof that Jesus is not God. simply by their reasoning if Jesus is the One God, why does he need to openly communicate to The Father and in a way that The Father is addressed as a different person

i don’t know how to address this question, maybe you guys can help me explain this.

thanks!

 

[JesuisSean]

a lot of those who don’t believe in the Trinity uses Jesus’ interaction with God the Father as proof that Jesus is not God. simply by their reasoning if Jesus is the One God, why does he need to openly communicate to The Father and in a way that The Father is addressed as a different person

i don’t know how to address this question, maybe you guys can help me explain this.

thanks!

Yes, when one speaks to one’s self before one knows one is speaking to one’s self, is an interesting experience indeed.

" Why have I forsaken me" ?

The outcome of the entirety of reality itself depends upon what God, as Christ, can do while here on this side of reality.

How do I know?
outersecrets.com/real/biblecode2.htm

 

[NotWorthy]

a lot of those who don’t believe in the Trinity uses Jesus’ interaction with God the Father as proof that Jesus is not God. simply by their reasoning if Jesus is the One God, why does he need to openly communicate to The Father and in a way that The Father is addressed as a different person

i don’t know how to address this question, maybe you guys can help me explain this.

thanks!

The answer is found in the raising of Lazarus.

So they took away the stone. And Jesus raised his eyes and said, “Father, I thank you for hearing me. I know that you always hear me; but because of the crowd here I have said this, that they may believe that you sent me.”

Jesus and the Father are One, but Jesus openly speaks to the Father so that others may believe.

 

[adrift]

Lord

Title commonly used of God in the Old Testament (Adonai), and commonly applied to Christ in the New Testament (Kyrios). In the Vulgate it is used in place of Yahweh. The consistent way that St. Paul and other New Testament writers use the term of Christ indicates that they regarded Him as God.

Matthew 3:3
This is he who was spoken of through the prophet Isaiah: "A voice of one calling in the desert, ‘Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for him.’ "

Luke 1:43

And how does this happen to me, that the mother of my **Lord ** should come to me?

 

[ready]

Hi Ready,
i am really grateful for your explanation in regards to my post.
Your sharing has made it real easy for me to see where you are coming from.

For me i believe if a man wrongs another and acknowledges it and is truly repentant than My Father will show him mercy as the sinner does to others.
This is without necessity of a third party IE priest.

Hi Steven!

St. Therese of Lisieux would - like you - argue that if one had commited all the sins of the world (mortal sins and all) true repentance would be enough. I think I understand you, especially in light of what she says. But wouldn’t you and Therese go to confession, just the same, if you commited a mortal sin, as it is what is prescribed by our Church, Christ’s voice on earth? You are right we are to be commited to the spirit of Christ, not to some spirit of the Church, but doesn’t she (our Church) govern us well and shouldn’t we trust in her when she exorts us to do certain things, like to confess all of our mortal sins?

This subject is very interesting to me. Thank you for bringing it up.

Yours in Christ,
ready

 

[Steven_John]

Hi Steven!

St. Therese of Lisieux would - like you - argue that if one had commited all the sins of the world (mortal sins and all) true repentance would be enough. I think I understand you, especially in light of what she says. But wouldn’t you and Therese go to confession, just the same, if you commited a mortal sin, as it is what is prescribed by our Church, Christ’s voice on earth?

Dont know lots about “the saints” I am not very well educated so am not real bright and dont consume large amounts of info, still learning so much from scripture and prayer. Prise be to My Father for His goodness in “the saints”.
I guess you say i trust Him to guide me. My relationship with others including ordained priests is a blessings that i can share Him from you. I dont know how the church differentiates sins to me sin is sin even the little things like driving my car and killing planet 4 your kids planet as bad as is murder. Would i forgive a murderer even if he killed on of the kids, if he / she was truly repentant i would desire to be so and faith in My Father to send me strength.

If there is difference in sins My Father will be just according to His mercy we have shown unto others. The action in my heart will be the same. The Law is the Law.

When i sin it does not take long to see it, it never used to be that way, i had lots of mental tricks to stash sins away.
Now days if my words even slip in a conversation ie saying lots in place of many, if i dont get it straight away i may feel it in prayer.

Take appropriate action ie submit to their justice, making clarification and sincerely try to make a menz. Discuss with My Father all the way He puts me straight with it and i am blessed with peace.

If i am unsure of my situation and want prayer help, alternative view point i will seek an accountability partner normally selected by the appropriateness of gifts My Father has given them He has shown me.

You are right we are to be commited to the spirit of Christ, not to some spirit of the Church,

but doesn’t she (our Church) govern us well and shouldn’t we trust in her when she exorts us to do certain things, like to confess all of our mortal sins?

If she tells me to confess my sins she is on the money, even the non believers know this.
I thought the word governed us and the church was a place we came together being every where as one body. My Father calls me to submit to Him not other parts of the body, Yeshua (pbwh) witness living My Fathers word, Yeshua (pbwh) My King…

This subject is very interesting to me. Thank you for bringing it up.

Nay Bro no thank to me, thank that is good My Father if this is good 4 u.
Yeshua (pbwh) has bee narrated to have told you none is good save G-d
Thank and praise be to My Father if bringing this up for you, He loves you so much He wants you well fed. For in us He is doing greater things than He did in Our Brother Yeshua (pbwh). I seek to do as My Father sows me.

Dear Brother Ready, by His will may you and yours be blessed and guide by Him as youes submit unto Him

• i will be who i will be, you have free choice as to who you see*

 

[NotWorthy]

If there is difference in sins My Father will be just according to His mercy we have shown unto others. The action in my heart will be the same. The Law is the Law.

St. John tells us that some sins are deadly and even prayer doesn’t help them. So yes, there are sins and there are SINS.

If she tells me to confess my sins she is on the money, even the non believers know this.
I thought the word governed us and the church was a place we came together being every where as one body. My Father calls me to submit to Him not other parts of the body, Yeshua (pbwh) witness living My Fathers word, Yeshua (pbwh) My King…

Then you haven’t read much of Acts and St. Paul’s Epistles. They are full of times where the Church is guiding the people, setting up rules ("… what you bind on earth is bound in heaven") and even unmaking the rules they set up ("… what you loose in earth will be loosed in heaven")

 

[JP_Marat]

Adrift posted:

JPM posted:
:
Obviously, the Jews would have never have allowed them to if they had claimed Jesus was himself divine. When they began to claim this, they were anathamatized from the Jewish synagogues as apostates. (See John’s Gospel)

The Jews ordered them not to talk about Jesus see Acts.<<

RESPONSE:

They had not yet began to claim Jesus was divine.

? ? ? reread the post this answers nothing and it is a false statement.<<

RESPONSE:

THen please present evidence of any claim that Jesus was divine in Acts of the Apostles.

"And Jesus said to him: Why dost thou call me good? None is good but God alone. "(Luke 18:19)

This prove what? <<

RESPONSE:

That Jesus did not condiser himself to be GOD, obviously.

It prove no such thing as you are taking it out of context.<<

RESPONSE:

And your evidence that Jesus didn’t really mean what he said is what exactly?

Quote:

From the New American Bible (USCCB) Introduction to Hebrews:

“Among the reasons why Pauline authorship has been abandoned are the great difference of vocabulary and style between Hebrews and Paul’s letters, the alternation of doctrinal teaching with moral exhortation, the different manner of citing the Old Testament, and the resemblance between the thought of Hebrews and that of Alexandrian Judaism. The Greek of the letter is in many ways the best in the New Testament.”

There is much debate regarding the notes in the NAB and their validity. I for one do not have a high regard for them. Compare what their notes say as compared to the Encylopedia. The NAB pales in comparison. <<

RESPONSE:

The American bishop’s Confreternity for Christian Doctrine is the authority behind the NAB, it has the imprimatur, the Catholic University of America and the Catholic Biblical society produced it, and Pope Paul VI wrote the foreword approving it.

I’m sorry you don’t agree with them.

Please evidence the “debate” you are claiming. Or can we dismiss your claim as an assertion without evidence?

I already have cites a source. You didn’t post this from the NAB<<

Quote:
As early as the end of the second century, the church of Alexandria in Egypt accepted Hebrews as a letter of Paul, and that became the view commonly held in the East. Pauline authorship was contested in the West into the fourth century, but then accepted. In the sixteenth century, doubts about that position were again raised, and the modern consensus is that the letter was not written by Paul. There is, however, no widespread agreement on any of the other suggested authors, e.g., Barnabas, Apollos, or Prisc(ill)a and Aquila. The document itself has no statement about its author. <<

RESPONSE:

That was in earlier centuries. What is the conclusion today?

You have a misunderstanding of what an imprimatur is<<

RESPONSE:

Really? And what is your evidence for this assertion?

 

[adrift]

JP Marat

Please use the quote features it is very hard to follow you.

THen please present evidence of any claim that Jesus was divine in Acts of the Apostles.

Acts 1:6
So when they met together, they asked him, “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?”
Acts 1:21
Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus went in and out among us,
Acts 2:20
The sun will be turned to darkness and the moon to blood before the coming of the great and glorious day of the Lord.
Acts 2:21
And everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved
Acts 5:14
Nevertheless, more and more men and women believed in the Lord and were added to their number.
Acts 7:59
While they were stoning him, Stephen prayed, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.”

 

[adrift]

And your evidence that Jesus didn’t really mean what he said is what exactly?

Post 441 has a link to a previous discussion. It answers your question.

That was in earlier centuries. What is the conclusion today?

It depends on which camp you listen to. You have modernist who dismiss out of hand previous opinions and you have those who still believe those opinions are valid. It will ALWAYS be debatable. I would suggest you READ the Catholic Encyclopedia. It provides credible discussion and incidentally it does not say that Paul wrote it.

Really? And what is your evidence for this assertion?

The American bishop’s Confreternity for Christian Doctrine is the authority behind the NAB, it has the imprimatur, the Catholic University of America and the Catholic Biblical society produced it, and Pope Paul VI wrote the foreword approving it.

 

[choy]

The answer is found in the raising of Lazarus.

Jesus and the Father are One, but Jesus openly speaks to the Father so that others may believe.

but Jesus said that The Father sent Him. another fuel for those who denies the Trinity and Jesus being part of One God

i want to offer an irrefutable argument to some people who don’t believe in the Trinity and that Jesus is God. their main contentions are:

a. Jesus communicates with The Father as a separate person showing they are separate and not one
b. The Father sent Jesus, again to them this is another one of their “proof” that they are separate

 

[JP_Marat]

JP Marat

Please use the quote features it is very hard to follow you.

Acts 1:6
So when they met together, they asked him, “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?”
Acts 1:21
Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus went in and out among us,
Acts 2:20
The sun will be turned to darkness and the moon to blood before the coming of the great and glorious day of the Lord.
Acts 2:21
And everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved
Acts 5:14
Nevertheless, more and more men and women believed in the Lord and were added to their number.
Acts 5:14
While they were stoning him, Stephen prayed, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.”

Acts 1.6. Yes. The messiah was suppose to restore political control to Israel. Jesus didn’t.

Acts 1:21 Jesus was regarded as the messiah, not God.

Acts 2:21 What are you trying to say?

Acts 5:14 Yes. The original followers of Jesus in the Jerusalem community remained “zealous” for Mosaic law. No second divine person would be tolerated!

Acts 5:14(?) Yes. Jesus was in heaven awaiting his imminent second coming.

 

[JP_Marat]

but Jesus said that The Father sent Him. another fuel for those who denies the Trinity and Jesus being part of One God

i want to offer an irrefutable argument to some people who don’t believe in the Trinity and that Jesus is God. their main contentions are:

a. Jesus communicates with The Father as a separate person showing they are separate and not one
b. The Father sent Jesus, again to them this is another one of their “proof” that they are separate

RESPONSE:

I communicate with the Father as a separate person too. But I’m not a member of the Trinity.

They are separate persons. “The Father is greater than I.”

 

[JP_Marat]

Post 441 has a link to a previous discussion. It answers your question.

It depends on which camp you listen to. You have modernist who dismiss out of hand previous opinions and you have those who still believe those opinions are valid. It will ALWAYS be debatable. I would suggest you READ the Catholic Encyclopedia. It provides credible discussion and incidentally it does not say that Paul wrote it.

RESPONSE:

Do you always answer question by refering to some article but not telling the readers what you claim was said? Why is that?

 

[JP_Marat]

Not true. You are using the NAB which is not the best of translations. I don’t care if it is from the US bishops. I believe there is a new translation in the works. However, if you go to the Greek you will find
Matt
FOR HE IS RISEN

Mark
he is risen

Luke

but is risen

This was all hashed out in another thread. When I asked our priest who is from Poland he said that what was in the NAB was a bad translation and it wasn’t translated like that in his language. In his polish bible, it was what I posted above for that is the correct

RESPONSE

Anyone who is raised from the dead is “risen.”

“…translated like that in his language”? A Polish priest’s language is probably Polish, not English which is the language of the New American Bible.

And always trust a priest from Poland, not the Pope, not the American bishops, not Catholic University of America, not the Catholic Biblical Association.

 

[adrift]

Acts 1.6. Yes. The messiah was suppose to restore political control to Israel. Jesus didn’t.

Acts 1:21 Jesus was regarded as the messiah, not God.

Acts 2:21 What are you trying to say?

Acts 5:14 Yes. The original followers of Jesus in the Jerusalem community remained “zealous” for Mosaic law. No second divine person would be tolerated!

Acts 5:14(?) Yes. Jesus was in heaven awaiting his imminent second coming.

Your answer is meaningless since it misses what I am saying. Post 446 gives the definition of Lord.