Is Jesus God?

Your claim is that Jesus is god. Except for one small problem. You're doing what I said you were-ignoring the context as well as the surrounding verses. It clearly states the first and the last, was dead. Really? God died? Obviously, Jesus is refering to something else. Remember, your claim is that the First and Last is the Father, god. Yet the verse you gave states the first and last, died.Again, you ignore the previous scriputures and focus on one or two verses.Rev 1: 5and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loveth us, and loosed us from our sins by his blood;So it already explains what the "first" is. Jesus was the first to be brought back to life by god and not die again. He is also the last. No one else will ever accomplish this. No, I just follow context. You've been forcefed for so long that Jesus is god, you accept anything thrown your way. How many times now have I corrected you using the surrounding verses? Another great example of you ignoring context. A story does not revolve around one or two lines. Read back to chapter 14:5Thomas said to him, "Lord, we don't know where you are going, so how can we know the way?"
6Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. 7If you really knew me, you would know[b] my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him."8Philip said, "Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us."9Jesus answered: "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'? 10Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you are not just my own. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work. 11Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the miracles themselves. 12I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. 13And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Son may bring glory to the Father. 14You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it.What does Jesus say to Thomas and the others. God is in him. If you see Jesus, you see the Father.CONTEXT. CONTEXT. CONTEXT.

You're ignoring my previous post. Its about Hezekiah. Chapter 10 explains chapter 9. Did you even bother to read them? I also gave a list of names in the Bible that one could easily state are also god...in which they are not. I also pointed out Jesus is not the father, he makes the crystal clear. So now you're ignoring the NT scripture. Jesus is the son. He has a father. He states god is the father. The reason is that it states it! Chapter 10 mirrors chapter 9 and gives the time frame! Wow. You are completely ignoring the context. Chapter 10 tells you the time frame. Not only that, the Tanach clearly states its a past event. Not a future one. Basically, you're ignoring what the scripture actually states and putting your symbolic spin on it to make it say what you want.Its a past event. How do we know? Bc it states it is! I already gave you how its written in the Tanach. I showed you that Chapter 10 mirrors chapter nine, giving a time frame.All you are doing is focusing on the names given, to show it could only refer to Jesus. Yet I have given you a small list of many, that show the same implication. Why what? Are any of these people god?Moses is called god.
Gabriel also means "Strong God".
Ezekiel means "Strong God".
Elzaphan means "God is Protector"
Eliakim means "God raises".
Elisha means "God is Salvation".
HAZAEL means "God sees"You would answer no. Yet their names could easily be used to show they are god. Yet you dismiss them all, except Isa 9, bc you want it to be about Jesus. You keep dancing around every issue I bring up. John 14 states nothing about Jesus being equal to god. In fact, its another example of the opposite. Jesus states he is going TO the father. Jesus says hes going to bring glory to the father. Jesus will ASK the father. Jesus even states the father is great then himself and that the father commands him!Jay, you are so wrapped up in believing that Jesus must be god, that you never seem to actually read what is being stated. This is a perfect example. You brought up John 14 to show Jesus is god, yet it states the opposite.You are doing more preaching than actually giving any evidence to support your claims.You keep bringing up Isa 9 over and over, yet you refuse to actually read what it states. You take a few verses, ignore the context and surounding scripture and stay with your erroneous conclusion.Isa 7 isnt even about Jesus. Start reading from Isa 7 to chapter 10. Slowly. Focus on the time frames given. Its quite clear.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------You're ignoring my previous post. Its about Hezekiah. Chapter 10 explains chapter 9. Did you even bother to read them? I also gave a list of names in the Bible that one could easily state are also god...in which they are not. So you are admitting even though chapter 9 is in past tense and that Chapter 10 refers back to chapter 9 and explains the scenario...you could care less due to the fact you want Isa 9 to be about Jesus.So in other words, regardless of the evidence, who cares?Gotcha. Hate to break it to you. The Bible is full of prophecies that have fallen short. Only by destroying the context and making excuses can apologists make it work.Show me once in the NT where Jesus is ever called those names. Remember, you've states quite clearly those names refer to Jesus.. So please give the scripture where Jesus is called just one of those names.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The reason is that it states it! Chapter 10 mirrors chapter 9 and gives the time frame! You're doing exactly as I said you would. Dual meanings. You're ignoring the immediate context and applying your own. Jesus is never called any of those names. Not one.In fact, you want Jesus to be called the Prince of Peace, when he himself states he did not come to bring peace but a sword. On top of that, he is to lead the charge in Revelation, warfare galore!So I can easily state this name cannot apply to him. Naturally, you'll twist it just as I can with Hezekiah if I wished. This is exaclty why I am trying to avoid the names but to focus on the actual context.---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Its a past event. How do we know? Bc it states it is! I already gave you how its written in the Tanach. I showed you that Chapter 10 mirrors chapter nine, giving a time frame.
All you are doing is focusing on the names given, to show it could only refer to Jesus. Yet I have given you a small list of many, that show the same implication. I see. Its weak bc chapter ten tells you what chapter 9 is about so you dismiss it?I deleted most of your post bc its preaching, not dealing with the actual topic. We are looking for evidence to support your position and mine. So far you haven't given any for Isa 9 except that good ol Hez falls short of the prophecy. I suppose if you stand on the notion that all prophecies are true....then there isnt any way I can change your line of thinking. Yeah, I could point out numerous prophecies that failed...but you'll just dismiss them. So we have to look at the context. First, Jesus is never called those names. Second, other names in the Bible also refer back to god. Third, chapter 10 explains chapter 9. Fourth, you cannot just take a few verses and ignore everything else around it. A story is being told, of the time of the the Assyrians. Not at all. I accept that Jesus is quite unique. But I go where the evidence leads me. A great example is that god stated he is not man. Yet you dismiss this and say god changed him mind. God also told the Jews to beware of false prophets and that he would send the messiah with certain signs. Yet Jesus arrived without any of these signs. Christians change them to end time which is not found in the OT. Its the evidence that and common sense you dismiss to make Jesus fit what you want him to be.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------Moses is called god. Moot point. You do this often. Focus on the topic. You believe Isa 9 has to be about Jesus based upon the names. I have given you a few example of names throughout the OT where one could say those individuals were god. Moses is not god. Yet he is called god. This is evidence that one can have a name that implies one is god...and not be.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------Gabriel also means "Strong God". Jay, you're creating one strawman after another. It does not matter who Gabriel is, it matters what his name states. His name means "strong god". Now we both know he is not god, yet his name calls him that. Which backs up my point. Isa 9 states Mighty god...and you automatically assume it must be about Jesus, that it cannot refer to a person. I have shown you such names can, either to humans or angels.Are you understanding this yet? We are discussing what names mean.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------You keep dancing around every issue I bring up. John 14 states nothing about Jesus being equal to god. You're missing the context again. You're taking one verse and ignoring the surrounding verses. Jesus states over and over he is sent by god, to do gods bidding. That his message is gods. That he is going gods work. By believing in Jesus, you are believing what god has sent him to do. His very message. No difference??? Jesus throughout the gospels states there is a difference! He is not all powerful. He is a man, sent by god. He is only the messenger. That all power comes not from him but from god. That god is greater than he. He is not all knowing. I could go on....but geez Jay.....this is stated over and over in the gospels. I covered this. Why would he? Thomas did not call Jesus god.Please stop preaching and focus on the issues. You keep bringing up scripture which has nothing to do with the issues at hand.Let me ask you some questions then.Jesus prays to god. Are you suggesting he was praying to himself?Wouldnt it make more sense that Jesus is not god,hence why he is praying to god?When Jesus is on the cross he cries out to god. Wouldnt it make more sense that Jesus is not god, hence why he is screaming out to him?Jesus claims that the Father is god, and that he/Jesus has a god?
How does this make sense then if Jesus is god?Jesus, while in heaven/ Revelation, states he has a god. If Jesus is god, why would he state that?Why didnt Jesus ever state he is god. Not once does he say this?

Jay,I missed a very crucial part. We seem to be stuck on Isa 9. Lets say it is about Jesus. The problem being...it does not show Jesus is god.Remember, there were many names throughout scripture that meant "god".So even if it refers to Jesus, it by no means is evidence that Jesus was god. They could all be names to refer back to god.Also, Jesus is never called any of those names in the NT.So lets move beyond Isa 9. I asked a few questions in my previous post. Answer those and then how about you give another example of Jesus "as god".Thanks.