Is Jesus God?

quote:

---

John 20:21 Just as the Father has sent me forth, I also am sending YOU. 22 And after he said this he blew upon them and said to them: Receive holy spirit. 23 If YOU forgive the sins of any persons, they stand forgiven to them; if YOU retain those of any persons, they stand retained.

​

I really dont think you can use the fact that Jesus had authority to forgive sins to proclaim that he is God. But lets say you still want to stick to your view, think about this:

​

If Jesus is God as you say, then he certainly would have the authority to forgive sins and being God he must also have the authority to give the apostles the same authority..... but now you have a problem.... If the apostles have authority to forgive sins, then perhaps they are also God?

​

I think that puts this idea in a bit of a quandry.

---

Good question. This is a difficult passage. Yes, some branches of Christendom (e.g. Catholic, Orthodox) believe that apostles and church leaders actually have the authority to forgive sins. But I don't believe this is the case.Let's look at a couple of other translations of John 20:23: The Greek tenses are interesting in this verse. The word "forgive" is in the aorist tense, while "forgiven" is in the perfect. The word "retain" is in the present, with "retained" again in the perfect. I would translate it something like, "If you forgive anyone’s sins, they have been forgiven; if you are retaining anyone’s sins, they have been retained.NET Bible has a study note which is helpful: In other words, the sense of this passage (like Mt 16:19 and Mt 18:18) is: "If you forgive anyone’s sins, they have already been forgiven; if you are retaining anyone’s sins, they have already been retained. God is the one who forgives; the disciples' responsibility was to proclaim what God had already done.

quote:

---

KB,
Does Psalms 45 say that the messiah will be god?

---

Yes, I believe this is the implication.

quote:

---

so what you are saying is that i should start by assuming that Jesus IS God and then i will find truth?

​

and how is that NOT circular reasoning?

---

Of course not. If you want to find the true answer to your question "Is Jesus God?", you cannot start by assuming either conclusion--you must keep an open mind. Maybe Jesus is God and maybe He isn't. Then let the literary context tell us who is speaking in Rev 22:13. I think the most reasonable conclusion, from a literary standpoint, is the the same person is speaking in verses 7, 12-13, and 16.

Ok,so why are you not applying this conclusion to the account where Jesus says to the paralytic man "your sins are forgiven"If "the power of proclaiming this forgiveness" could be entrusted to the disciples, why is it not possible that God gave the same power of proclaiming forgiveness to the Messiah?besides this, forgiveness was foretold to come thru the Messiah...therefore anyone who put faith in the Messiah would have a means to forgiveness of their sins,so if the Messiah is the means of forgiveness, why could he not also have 'authority' to forgive as Jesus stated?

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KB,
Does Psalms 45 say that the messiah will be god?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hello again. Before I go over each verse, just a simple question. The Jews believed the messiah was to be a man. You're claiming the Hebrews stated the messiah will be god. This would be utter blasphemy to the Jews. Why would this book be included? Wouldnt there be an uproar amongst the Jews? Ok, its more than one question, but you get the idea.

Wreg pites: Philipians 2:5-11 writes:
5 Keep this mental attitude in YOU that was also in Christ Jesus,6 who, although he was existing in God’s form, gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God.7 No, but he emptied himself and took a slave’s form and came to be in the likeness of men.
8 More than that, when he found himself in fashion as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient as far as death, yes, death on a torture stake.
9 For this very reason also God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every [other] name,
10 so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend of those in heaven and those on earth and those under the ground,
11 and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.What translation is this anyway, you did not list it. I noticed that it says , "although he was existing in Gods form". I wonder what that means from your translation. I wonder if WAS, meant before and during his incarnation. Every translation I see makes him God in some form, even yours.It appears that your translation is saying, that he did not think it necessary to maintain Gods nature, or sieze it, because he needed to empty himself of it to accomplish his earthly ministry.Your interpretation of the verse makes little sense, for if he is not equal wtih God, he cannot EMPTY himself of something he does not have in the first place, HE CANNOT LET GO, UNGRASP, some thing he does not ALREADY have in the first place, correct?The verse would make no sense and the rest of the passage would make little sense, unless in his God in the first place, correct?And finally, why mention that he is not God and not equal with God in the first placehere it is is from the NIV: Phil: 2 This passage is amazing to me because it explains who he is and what he did. As I stated before, I would not believe it either if not for such passages and others that make it abundanty clear.If God is the only good entity, how is it that Christ was not good? Hmmm?Here it is from the ASV. Here is another point. If the writer is not making the claim that he is equal with God, why would he say it is not a thing to be grasped and what did he emptyhimself of?After describing Christ, the rest of the passsage would make no sense, if was not God to begin with. IOW, why reinforce that he is not God, if it was clear to everyone in the first placeIf Christ is not God, why would the writer need to make that point in the first place.Again Peg your problem is, that while you believe he is a created being, NOT A PART OF GOD, there are absolutley no other allusions to created beings that appear to have the qualities of God , as the scriptures make it clear that Christ did. Lucifer, Michael, Gabriel, etc.Again, the scriptures make it so clear that he is on a par with God, that one really has to work hard to make it otherwise. Since Heritic, chose not toanswer the question, perhaps you can.In what way was Christ not completely GOOD, which ofcourse would make him God.EAMEdited by MEA, : No reason given.Edited by MEA, : No reason given.Edited by MEA, : No reason given.Edited by MEA, : No reason given.Edited by MEA, : No reason given.

A simple question: Could god have created a person who was the perfect sacrifice? Yes or no. I responded to Mea (same letters are your "name" but I'm assuming a different person? Mea stated Jesus was perfect. I asked where in scripture it states Jesus was perfect. I was given verses which state he was sinless instead. They are not the same. I'm also at a loss with your belief that an all poweful god could NOT create a perfect being.Job 1:1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.Did Job have free will? Paul makes no such statement that Jesus is equal with god.Corinthians 11:3
Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.1 Corinthians 15
28
And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.Colossians 3
1
Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. You have yet to give a single scripture that states Jesus was equal with god though. I never suggested he was not more than man. I stated he was not god. Jesus prayed to god. He cried out on the cross for god to save him. Hardly the acts of god.Satan offers Jesus the world...would he do that if Jesus was god? Jesus on the cross offers up his spirit to god, yet you're claiming he is god? Im sorry, Im having a hard time following you. Where does it state Jesus always existed? Where did I state a created being is equal to god?Let me rehash what the Bible claims.Jesus is the messiah, granted powers by god, sent by god to preach his message. Nowhere does it state god humbled himself and became human. So god, now human according to you, still god, prays to himself, not to die? Doesnt make a lot of sense. It makes more sense to state Jesus, a man, the messiah prayed to his father (whom he claims is his god).I'm sure you're aware of the three verses in the OT which claim god is not a man.Let me ask you this. I aleady gave the scripture, but in Revelation, Jesus (no longer a man) claims to have a god. How is that possible unless he is not god? Does god sit next to himself? Ok, I'm new here, so I'm not sure if MEA and EMA are the same person. I addressed this to MEA, you responded, so on that alone I'm going to conclude you are. If not, my apologies.If you are one and the same..You are ignoring them because there isnt a single verse in scripture where it states what you are claiming.You believe god is all powerful. God became Jesus. God then limited his own powers.Where does it state this? How does it change the fact that Jesus claimed he was not all powerful? He still would be even if he decided to limit his powers. Can he unlimit his limited powers? If yes, hes still all powerful! Same applies to Jesus not all knowing, etc.Jesus claimed not to have all the answers. So you're suggesting god limited his own knowledge so he wouldnt have all the answers? Does that make any sense? It does not state Jesus was perfect in respect to being perfect like god. It states he was perfect at the task he was given, to shed his blood so that mankind may attain salvation. But again, even if it does claim Jesus was perfect, how does this make him god? Again I ask, can an all powerful god create a being that is perfect in his tasks and sinless?Does Jesus ever claim to be completely perfect? How does one who does not have all the answers, perfect?John 15:2 "My Father takes away every branch in me that bears not fruit; he purges it; that it may bring forth more fruit."I would say Jesus admits he is not perfect. How can a perfect being admit this? If Christ stubbed his toe, he was not perfect. You stub your toe bc you were not paying attention. But again, he could be the perfect sacrfice, but it does not mean he is god. I can see what you're trying to get at, but "context" means everything. Yes, I could say that if Jesus was sinless he most certainly was good. But thats you and I using that term. Jesus, apparently used it in a difference sense. God was good, Jesus himself was not. Jesus also claimed his followers were one with him. Does that make them god? They were "one" in unity and purpose.But to get to your verse above, I forgot about that one. Lets take a look.Some translations have it as "claim to be A god". Of course, there has been much debate as to the correct translation. So lets take a look at the rest of the verses and see the context.33 The Jews answered him, For a good work we stone thee not, but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, ye are gods?Wait a second...why would Jesus respond that all men are gods, when Jesus was called God himself (as per the those accusing him)? How does this help his argument? Its not even a correct response to what is he is being accused of.Think about it.Jews: You are claiming to be Yahweh!
Jesus: But scripture states all men are gods (lower case, refering to beings less than Yahweh himself).It appears it makes more sense if this is the translation:Jews: You are claming to be a god!
Jesus: But scripture states all men are gods.Lets assume that your translation is correct; Jesus after being accused of being god, again does not come out and actually state that he is. Jesus claims again he is the SON of god. Then, Jesus runs away again! God runs away from man?But you didnt actually address my question. If Jesus was actually claiming to be god, when confronted by the high priests and council, NOT ONE suggested Jesus was making this claim. It would have been a piece of cake to get their wish of death, they only had to suggest Jesus claiming to be god. Yet all they accused him of was making the claim of the messiah. Many translations have it as "he" was manifest, refering back to Jesus. This makes more sense than suggesting God was justified in the spirit? Huh? God was seen of angels? It makes more sense if it refers to Jesus being justified in spirit and seen by angels. God received up in glory? Makes no sense at all unless its refering back to Jesus.There are so many verses which clearly show Jesus is not god. A few more:John 5:19 "Verily, verily I say unto you, the Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do..."John 5:30 "I can of myself do nothing. As I hear, I judge; and my judgment is righteous, because I do not seek my own will but the will of the Father who sent me."John 8:42 "Jesus said to them, 'If God were your Father, you would love me, for I proceeded and came forth from God; I came not of my own accord, but He sent me.' "Whew. I'm wiped out. If you respond, give me a day or two. Thanks.

I have read that in the oldest translations, Alpha and Omega are not even in the texts. It should read:Revelation 1:11 11 saying, "Write what you see in a book and send it to the seven churches, to Ephesus and to Smyrna and to Per'gamum and to Thyati'ra and to Sardis and to Philadelphia and to La-odice'a." (RSV)Have you ever heard of this?

Peg writes:but in this instance Peg, christ's response is in response to a direct question, about who can forgive sins. jesus responds to that question directly, which was, are you saying you are God.He did not go into a discourse about what the law said and required about priest, delegation and the such like. His response was to an indirect implication that he was claiming to be God. he had the opportunity in that instance as in so many others to dispel the idea that he was claiming to be God, HE DID NOT. As a matter of fact he used an illustration that indicated he was God."Which is it easier to do, tell the man his sins are forgiven or take up your bed and walk". In this instance he did not call on the name of the father or appeal to God beforehand.Surely this would have been a good opportunity to dispel any mistakes in that connection.the deciples always proceeded thier actions by an appeal to god or jesus Christ power and authority.Jesus reference to authority of the Son of Man and the power to forgive sins CAME AFTER THE FACT. This is one of the reasons the leaders were disurbed, by stating who is thisd MAN that he can forgive sins.notice no one ever accused the Apostles of making themselves equal with God because the always made it clear what the source of thier authority was and was not.Here Christ does it after to the fact.jesus' usage of the Son of Man is due to the fact that they refered to him as a man. here is what transpired. Jesus did this of this own authority (as God) in this instance, then after the fact responded to a direct question about being a man. In which he said, if you must know fellas even the Son of Man has power to forgive sins here on earth. Had they never asked the question refering to God and man, he would of course never responded to the INDIRECT IMPLICATION, and he would have left the impression that he indeed was Godthere is good reason the Apostles were never accused of being God and NOWWATCH THIS, and when it was implied by being worshiped at times, they VERY QUICKLY dispeled the very ideaEAMEdited by EMA, : No reason given.

No not a different person I was at another persons house trying to respond on a diiferent computer and when I requested the password it gave me MEA, for some reason. If sinless is not perfection from a moral standpoint what in the heck is it. Perfect in scripture does not mean, one does not stump thier toe, it means complete or a level of maturity. Then where the idea of SINLESSNESS is attached it enhances the idea of perfection to level of moral superiority. Christ was morally superior to Noah and Job, evenif they were muture in thier settings. Noah was generally a moral person in a world where everyone elses mind and imagination was continually evilYes Job and Noah were said to be perfect in thier generation, but the hierarchy of scripture does not attribute sinlessness to them as it does Christ.Romans states that ALL HAVE SINNED AND COME SHORT OF THE GLORY OF GOD". Now if thier is a passage that says that Noah and Job never commited one sin, then this would apply to them as well, it does not.now there are scriptures that say Christ is an exception to this rule. Therefore those passages are trumped by the passages that say he never committed sin Yes. But certainly you understand that the word perfection in scripture carries with it the idea of completness and maturity, not that no mistakes were ever made. Sinlessness means morally perfect. Job and Noah were not candidates for the Messiahship, not even Abraham Sorry but he did. Phil 2:1-5 Now H take these scriptures in conjunction with Phil 2 and see what you come upwithYes he sits in this position from a standpoint of position and authority, God doesnt actually sit anywhereIronically the very same verse that states that Jesus is equal to God, Phil 2:1-6,explains these verse in thier proper context.When Jesus (God) emptied himself of his position, he then became a servant to God or the father, still being God in the flesh. As a human son as God with us, he was all the things these verses you quote suggest.After Paul explains that he is EQUAL with God, he explains at another place, that ALL THE FULNESS OF THE GODHEAD, DWELT (PRESENT TENSE) IN him while he was in the flesh.He could not empty himself of his deity or Godship, if he did not posses it in the first place Phil 2 states in no uncertain terms that Jeus is equal to God. the verse makes no sense otherwise.Hey Herictic, Satan tried to overthrow God in heaven alledgedly. Now my question is where did he think he would hide to plot it out. Hes not the brightest crayon in the box Herictic Jesus did not limit his powers he limited his status and took on the form of a servant.Have you seen that new reality tv show called UNDERCOVER CEO. here the CEO steps down temporarily AND SERVES IN A WORKERS POSITION, TAKING ORDERS AND WORKING FROM A WORKERS POSITION. he takes ORDERS from those TEMPORARILY above him, FOR A PURPOSE. he has lost no authority or powerChrist as Paul states was equal eith God, but made allittle lower than the angels for our salvation. Only God is sinless, only God can provide salvation. "Blessed is the man to whom GOD does not imput sin". That is charge to his account.Conclusion Christ was God doing these things
EAM If God the father was in charge from a position of authority, then nothing lost in the form of answers. correct? Gods purpose was fulfilled in him stepping downto take on the form of a servantEAMEdited by MEA, : No reason given.Edited by MEA, : No reason given.Edited by MEA, : No reason given.Edited by MEA, : No reason given.Edited by MEA, : No reason given.Edited by MEA, : No reason given.

This is a continuationof the last Heritic post from my other MEA designation. We are one and the same, no pun intended We do not know that he stubbed his toes, but we do know he was sinless, which is good by any standard. What else would be left, to be considered good?now you have even claimed that jesus was not good. In what way was jesus not good, since we know from scripture he committed no sin. According to 1John 3:4, sin is transgression of the lawJesus was not using it in any different sense than that I have described. if there is another sense, then present it. This is why i asked you if jesus was not good how was he not good you claim God is perfect, yet people dont believe in him, people disobey him and some will eventually be lost from him.Do you still want to use this as a standard of Perfect? Lets try this one more time. I have agreed with jesus' statement that all men (ok lets go ahead and include women, since they do do small things for us like give us life, ha ha) are gods, we are created in the image of God and have a spirit that will live on.this is how we are godsNowhere however, is it claimed by an inspired writer that a creature, created human, either existed before they were born or that they were equal with God Phil 2. further no created human being is declared to be sinless, if fact all are said to have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. conclusion, we are not God in the same way jesus is, even if we are designated as such.again I am not avoiding your verses I am answering them in substance and context. if you feel I have not addressed one, I will be happy to review it from this standpoint. they do not show that he IS NOT GOD, they explain what Paul meant in Phil 2, in his servant stateBy the way are you paying any attention to my specfic arguments?EAMEdited by EMA, : No reason given.Edited by EMA, : No reason given.Edited by EMA, : No reason given.

what is Gods form?Im sure you would agree that his form is in 'spirit'. So Jesus was also in Gods form, a spirit, before he came to earth. The angels also exist in Gods form...they are also spirits. This does not mean he was God himself, only that he existed in the same 'form' as God....just as you exist in the same 'form' as every other human. the Greek word translated in my bible as 'seizure' is har‧pag‧mon′
and the The Expositor’s Greek Testament says: So, No. Jesus did not 'possess' the form of God in the sense that you are thinking. This word carries a negative connotation to it...it means to take something illegally. Paul is saying that Jesus did not try to make himself 'equal' to God. Jesus did not even consider that he was equal to God. And this is in harmony with his own words found at John 14:28 where he said The Father is greater than I. even your' own translation does not say that he is God in this passage.
All it says is that Jesus did not consider himself equal to God. 5Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:
6Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be graspedIf Jesus was God then he was also equal to God, yet Paul is saying that Jesus did not consider himself equal to God. Thats a terrible contradiction to make if Jesus was infact equal to God. this verse was mentioned earlier, but it doesnt imply that Jesus is God himself. It implies that Jesus view is that God alone is the standard for goodness. Jesus did not view himself as the one who set that standard, If Jesus was God, then his comment of reproof would make no sense at all. Mark 10:17 Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit everlasting life? Jesus said to him: Why do you call me good? Nobody is good, except one, God.Jesus never objected to being identified as the leader or the master or teacher, but he did object when someone addressed him with titles. He really showed his view of the matter by indicating that only God was deserving of such title....this puts a damper on the trinity teaching because if only God should be called good, what about the holy spirit and the son who are supposed to all be one and the same??? there are many examples of others being identified as being good and it didnt mean that they were God.cornenlius the roman army officer was called good
Acts 11:24 "for he was a good man and full of holy spirit and of faith"in one of Jesus parables, he calls the slave good
Mathew 25:21 "Well done, good and faithful slave! You were faithful over a few things."Jesus also said that among mankind there are good people
Matthew 5:45 "for he makes his sun shine upon the good and upon the wicked"Joseph of Aramathea was called a good man
Luke 23:50 "And, look! a man named Joseph, who was a member of the Council, a good and righteous man..."So there are plenty of people who are described as being good, however, none of these scriptures are giving them the 'title' of Good. This is what the rich young ruler did with Jesus, he gave him a title rather then accept the title, which he would have if he was God, he rejected such a title because as he said "none is Good but God"Only God can carry the title of Good because he sets the standard for goodness, no one else sets that standard.

Jesus could declare sins forgiven but just as easily he could heal people of their infirmities...he could do this because he was given the authority to do both as they are linked.sickness and death are the result of sin and because the Messiah's role is to remove sickness and death, his role must also involve the forgiveness of sins.Its in perfect harmony with Jesus telling his diciples that he has been given 'all authority'

No i havnt. the hebrew scriptures use the term 'first and last'
Verse 8 says that God Almighty is the Alpha and Omega which is another way of saying 'first and last' in greek.if you look at Isaiah 44: 6 it reads This is what Jehovah has said, the King of Israel and the Repurchaser of him, Jehovah of armies, ‘I am the first and I am the last, and besides me there is no God"Because this expression is applied to God Almighty several times in its unlimited sense, it would be illogical to apply it to Jesus just because the text in revelation does not specifically indicated that it is refering to God Amighty. This is what Trinitarians are doing with the verses in Revelation. They try to show it is used indiscriminately for either God or Christ, and in this way show God and Christ are the same.

I'm really not sure where you are going with this. I never claimed Jesus was not morally superior. I never suggested Jesus was not more than man. I have no problem with this. But it does not change anything. Christ may have been sinless, may be morally superior to anyone in the Bible, but this does not automatically make him god. I agree. But as Job states: How can one born of woman be pure?Wouldnt that negate Jesus being god? It states the opposite. Peg covered this.Corinthians 11:3
Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.
1 Corinthians 15
28
And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.Colossians 3
1
Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. Exactly what I have said. Jesus isnt god. Paul clearly states in Phil 2 Jesus is not equal to god. Paul also states Jesus is subject to god and that god is above Jesus.Add that all up, Jesus is not god. Now thats funny. But you're missing the point. If Jesus was god, he already had everything. How can Satan offer Jesus the world, if god already owns it? Satan may be devious and power hungry, but thats just plain ridiculous. But it makes perfect sense if Jesus was not god, with Satan trying to sway him. You're ignoring scripture. Jesus clearly states he is not all powerful. He is not all knowing. If he is god, then this makes no sense. You gave a great example...which proves my point. The CEO has not lost any power. He still has it. Jesus though, claims he does NOT have this power. He states he is not all knowing. If god decided to go down to earth as a man, he would still have all his power. He could choose not to use it in certain circumstances, but that is not what Jesus states.Jesus states authority has been GIVEN to him by god. Not that its his own authority.Jesus claims the message he tells was GIVEN to him.Jesus claims he is not all knowing, not all powerful.Jesus prays to god (himself according to you).Jesus cries to god to save him. Using your "logic", hes crying to himself to save himself. I did not claim Jesus was not good. There are many aspects of good. Again, Peg covered this. Jesus did not want to be called good. He was called by many names. God to him, should be the one called good, not himself. Jesus corrects the man, then the man addresses him again, but without the "good". The man understood what Jesus was refering to. Do not call him good, that should be reserved for god alone.John 15:2 "My Father takes away every branch in me that bears not fruit; he purges it; that it may bring forth more fruit."
I would say Jesus admits he is not perfect. How can a perfect being admit this? Again you lost me. What does someone not accepting god have to do with him being perfect or not. The fact is, the verse above clearly has Jesus stating he is not perfect. Phil 2 does not claim Jesus was equal to god. It states the opposite! Jesus, existed before mankind, was sent by god to convey a message. Even if Jesus was perfect, in any sense, it makes no difference. God can create anything he chooses. But the fact remains, nowhere does it states Jesus was perfect like god, only sinless and perfect in his mission.