Did Jesus teach he was GOD himself?

FYI again Jesus is Both fully God ( the Word in John 1:1 & Isaiah 9:6 - Mighty God ) and fully human as a Man ( the Flesh of John 1:14 & the child/son given in Isaiah 9:6! He is the " Everlasting Father " of creation as per John 1:3/Col.1:16 in conjunction with Isaiah 9:6!
Jesus didn't father himself. Tanakh is clear the Father spoke the words of creation.

He is not the Father of His human body, as it was God the Holy Spirit & God the Father that caused His conception ( they provided the "Y " chromosome need for a male baby - His Flesh of John 1:14 ) with one of Mary's eggs ( " X " Chromosome ) in her womb as per Matt.1:20 & Luke 1:34-35! Joseph was His step or Foster Father because Jesus had NO Biological human father! That's why only He is called " the only Begotten Son of God ( the Father & Holy Spirit ) in John 1:18 & 3:16+18!
Since God created everything, you've admitted to an exception here for Jesus. You've debunked your own position.

BTW, God isn't physical nor created, so to say He has DNA is ridiculous. Even Jesus told Peter God isn't flesh and blood.

Those NT scriptures in no way conjtradicts Isaiah 9:6 in the OT! They complement it!j The one True GOD of the scriptures is a TRINITY ( FSHS of Matt.28:19 ), and that is exactly why He said " US & OUR " in Gen.1:26! Case closed!
God spoke singularly in v26, and to nature when He created man. The same way He spoke to nature in Gen 1:1-25.
 
There are two Jerusalems - on earth which is compared to Hagar, the Bondwoman. There is Jerusalem which is above:

Gal 4:
22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the servant, and one by the free woman.

23 However, the son by the servant was born according to the flesh, but the son by the free woman was born through promise.

24 These things contain an allegory, for these are two covenants. One is from Mount Sinai, bearing children to bondage, which is Hagar.

25 For this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and answers to the Jerusalem that exists now, for she is in bondage with her children.

26 But the Jerusalem that is above is free, which is the mother of us all.

27 For it is written, “Rejoice, you barren who don’t bear. Break out and shout, you who don’t travail. For the desolate have more children than her who has a husband.”

See the difference between the two Jerusalems. The earthly Jerusalem pertains to the Old Covenant and Jews/Israelites without the Messiah are still in bondage to this earthly Jerusalem which is compared to Hagar and her children through Yishmael.

Those who Jews/Israelites who believe in Yeshua Messiah are in a new Covenant and are children of the free woman Sarah compared to the spiritual Jerusalem.

What makes you say Israel wasn't dispersed? Israel as a political nation was formed only in 1948. Where were the so called Jews before going back to political Israel ? Of course they were in dispersion.

James 1: 1 Jacob, a servant of God and of the Lord Yeshua the Messiah, to the twelve tribes which are in the Diaspora: Greetings.

1Pet 1: 1 Peter, an emissary of Yeshua the Messiah, to the chosen ones who are living as foreigners in the Diaspora in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia.

You don't believe in the NT but the OT says only Jews returned from Babylonian captivity but the majority of 10 tribes didn't return from their Assyrian captivity. They are still in dispersion and will remain dispersed and the chosen in Yeshua Messiah will not return to political Israel because they believe the earthy Jerusalem is like a Bondwoman Hagar.

Many of the Christendom is also deceived into believing that they are a different people other than Israel. But the true believers know that their OT fathers were Israelites with scriptures witnessing to their hearts. There is no other salvation plan. There cannot be a new group of people that can be under the new Covenant apart from having historical fathers under the old covenant. The old covenant still witnessing to us in our flesh nature where by sin results. Apostle Paul mentions of this in Romans 7.

The Torah is distinguished between sin/death AND the Ruach of Life in Yeshua Messiah - Rom 8:1.

That's the difference between earthy Jerusalem and the heavenly Jerusalem.

Luke 19:2 And see, a man called Zakkai! And he was a chief tax collector, and he was rich,
9 Yeshua said to him, “Today, salvation has come to this house, because he also is a son of Abraham.

10 For the Son of Man came to seek and to save that which was lost.”

Yeshua Messiah came to seek for the lost sheep of the house of Israel - promised children of Abraham.

Mat 15:24 But he answered, “I wasn’t sent to anyone but the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”

Jewry without Yeshua Messiah is empty.
I'm sorry. Unless you support with Tanakh, your words are empty to me.
 
Better in what way?
Obedience doesn't require a sacrifice.

Without a sacrifice, there is no forgiveness of sin.
This is false. There are several examples of forgiveness without blood. For instance, David was forgiven after the issue with Batsheba, 2 Samuel 12:13; Incense, Numbers 16:46; Money, Exodus 30:16; Isaiah 6:6-7; Hosea 14:2; 1 Kings 8:46-50.

With no forgiveness, all is lost.
True. Forgiveness doesn't always require blood. Daniel's generation survived without it.
 
Last edited:
Obedience doesn't require a sacrifice.


This is false. There are several examples of forgiveness without blood. For instance, David was forgiven after the issue with Batsheba, 2 Samuel 12:13; Incense, Numbers 16:46. There are other instances if you need them.


True. Forgiveness doesn't always require blood. Daniel's generation survived without it.

Interesting response for a Jew. I guess Passover and Yom Kippur were never that important.
 
Interesting response for a Jew. I guess Passover and Yom Kippur were never that important.
It's interesting that you didn't reply on the verses provided.

I never said the festivals weren't important, so why bring it up?

BTW, did Jesus' blood make it on the altar in Jerusalem according to the law? Or is that not important?

Is human sacrifice in the law permissible, or is that not important?
 
Last edited:
It's interesting that you didn't reply on the verses provided.

An exception doesn't make a rule.

I never said the festivals weren't important, so why bring it up?

Because, they aren't festivals; they're sacrifices. But then again, the Jews stopped following God's command to Sacrifice for the last 2000 years.

BTW, did Jesus' blood make it on the altar in Jerusalem according to the law? Or is that not important?

The type points to the true sacrifice, not the other way around. The true sacrifice was aways the giving of a son, the ram, and other animals, were always a substitute. Remember, Issac.

Is human sacrifice in the law permissible, or is that not important?

Issac? The first born of Egypt? The setting aside of Levi? The purging of Canaan? Are these not human sacrifices? Maybe, just maybe, you don't really understand why human sacrifice was not allowed in Levitical law. It's not that a human sacrifice wasn't necessary to forgive sins; it was. It's just that the only human sacrifice acceptable was that of Jesus. So, the sacrifices of animals were given to point to the ultimate sacrifice of God's Son, The Son of Man from Daniel 7, the Memra of God, the commander of the army of the LORD. Need I go on?

God Bless
 
An exception doesn't make a rule.
Wow. They're several exceptions. I guess your blanket statement that sacrifices are required was wrong.

At least admit you were wrong here.

Because, they aren't festivals; they're sacrifices. But then again, the Jews stopped following God's command to Sacrifice for the last 2000 years.
Well, when a temple doesn't exist, then you go with the alternatives. Which is what has happened.

BTW, if you want to point out how Jesus fulfilled every law regarding the Passover and Yom Kippur sacrifices, please do. You'll fail, but I don't mind seeing how you're spiritualize away the commandments to fulfill the commandments. It's contradictory and hypocritical, but go for it. ;)

The type points to the true sacrifice, not the other way around.
Rotfl... Sorry, if you want to play the game of following the commandments, then Jesus failed to apply his blood on the altar per the commandments.

Ironically, you're arguing your Messiah breaks the commandments to fulfill the commandments. Need I go on? ;)

The true sacrifice was aways the giving of a son, the ram, and other animals, were always a substitute. Remember, Issac.
That's funny. I don't recall a son being sacrificed for sins in all of Tanakh, except in cases of idolatry. Remember? ;)

Issac? The first born of Egypt? The setting aside of Levi? The purging of Canaan? Are these not human sacrifices?
Rotfl... not for atonement of sins.

Maybe, just maybe, you don't really understand why human sacrifice was not allowed in Levitical law.
It was pretty clear why. ;)

It's not that a human sacrifice wasn't necessary to forgive sins; it was.
That isn't specified anywhere. So make it up? ;)

It's just that the only human sacrifice acceptable was that of Jesus. So, the sacrifices of animals were given to point to the ultimate sacrifice of God's Son, The Son of Man from Daniel 7, the Memra of God, the commander of the army of the LORD. Need I go on?
Not really. You have no support for any of this. ;)

God Bless
Likewise
 
Last edited:
I am speaking from the position that Jesus is not God as you claim he is. Neither does Jesus teach that he is God.
Your position really doesn’t matter.
John’s position is Jesus God’s Son is God.
John declares that Jesus, like His heavenly Father, has always existed since the beginning of time. Jesus was with God in the beginning because He is God, and He always has been. John 1-14
Echad God.
 
Jesus was never called Mighty God nor any of the other names.


The Hebrew elohim is used here. So if God can be pierced as you say, then these judges are God as well.
Oh yes indeed Jesus is the prophesied Child/Son to be given in Isaiah 9:6 and yes it says He will be called " Mighty God "! Only God the Word's ( of John 1:1 ) body " Flesh " ( of John 1:14 ) was pierced! He is BOTH God and Man as per John 1:1+14 & Heb.1:6+8! He came on the scene to be cut off ( Crucified ) EXACTLY when Daniel said He would in Dan.9:24-26! The math ( starting from the decree issued to Nehemiah by King Artaxerxes in the 20th year of his reign which was Nissan of 444 BC ) works out perfectly for those 1st 69 sevens of prophetic years! It adds up to Nissan of 33 AD in our solar calendar when you divide those prophetic days ( 360 ) by 365.25 to get those solar days in a year! Case Closed!
 
Jesus didn't father himself. Tanakh is clear the Father spoke the words of creation.


Since God created everything, you've admitted to an exception here for Jesus. You've debunked your own position.

BTW, God isn't physical nor created, so to say He has DNA is ridiculous. Even Jesus told Peter God isn't flesh and blood.


God spoke singularly in v26, and to nature when He created man. The same way He spoke to nature in Gen 1:1-25.
100% WRONG again! Jesus is both God and man and Isaiah in the OT tells us that in Isaiah 6:9 ( Child/Son called Mighty God ) ! Then we have John 1:1+14 in the NT that also tells us that, as well as Heb.1:6+8! All three ( FSHS of Matt.28:19 - the Trinity ) were involved with creation! God said " US & Our in Gen.1:26 because they are 3 in one ( FSHS )! Case closed!
 
100% WRONG again! Jesus is both God and man and Isaiah in the OT tells us that in Isaiah 6:9 ( Child/Son called Mighty God ) ! Then we have John 1:1+14 in the NT that also tells us that, as well as Heb.1:6+8! All three ( FSHS of Matt.28:19 - the Trinity ) were involved with creation! God said " US & Our in Gen.1:26 because they are 3 in one ( FSHS )! Case closed!

 
I am speaking from the position that Jesus is not God as you claim he is. Neither does Jesus teach that he is God.
FYI, John 1:1+14 & Heb.1:6+8 Proves that He is " God " as well as a man! He claimed ( in John 8:58 ) to be God the " I Am " of exodus 3:14 as Proof that He " was God " the Word of John 1:1 in order to have known Abraham before Abraham was born! Case closed on your Twisted view ( 2 Peter 3:16 ) that He is not God in the flesh!
 
The passage also says the word was with God. Does this mean two Gods? Is that not teaching multiple Gods?
You are concluding that either the word was his father before he became his own son or that there are two individual Gods in the passage. There is no mention of a God-man in the scripture are you saying that Jesus was a hybrid? A cross between God and man. Half man half God?. Jesus was a man who died.

That is like saying the son Jesus was his father God. If there is only one God you cannot say God the Son and God the Father and God the HS. That is three Gods.

You have not rebuked anything. Jesus cannot be God if his Father id God.
FYI again GOD is a Trinity ( FSHS of Matt.28:19 )! Yes each of those that make up the Godhead ( Trinity ) can be called " God " as John 1:1 ; Acts 5:3-4 & Heb.1:8 shows us! Each part of a human ( body, soul, & spirit - 1 Thess.5:23 Newbirth ) can also be called human without actually being 3 humans ( human body, human soul, & human spirit )! Same with GOD ( FSHS ) - God the Father, God the Son, & God the Holy Spirit! Case closed as I posted the AS IS scriptures that tells us that Fact! Thus you are actually arguing with GOD's as is scriptures and not me! I go by those posted scriptures and NOT your say so ( man's word ) Newbirth!
 
Your position really doesn’t matter.
John’s position is Jesus God’s Son is God.
No, unfortunately you don't understand at best the thought that he is the anointed one, as all Davidic kings are anointed.

It would help you to understand how the terms elohim, theos, is used, for the nondivine.

John declares that Jesus, like His heavenly Father, has always existed since the beginning of time. Jesus was with God in the beginning because He is God, and He always has been. John 1-14
Tanakh is clear who the Creator is. I go with original.

Echad God.
Yes, exactly one and alone.
 
No, unfortunately you don't understand at best the thought that he is the anointed one, as all Davidic kings are anointed.

It would help you to understand how the terms elohim, theos, is used, for the nondivine.


Tanakh is clear who the Creator is. I go with original.


Yes, exactly one and alone.

Jesus Christ's God.
 
100% WRONG again! Jesus is both God and man and Isaiah in the OT tells us that in Isaiah 6:9 ( Child/Son called Mighty God ) ! Then we have John 1:1+14 in the NT that also tells us that, as well as Heb.1:6+8! All three ( FSHS of Matt.28:19 - the Trinity ) were involved with creation!
Jesus didn't father himself/create himself, so he isn't the Creator of all.

God said " US & Our in Gen.1:26 because they are 3 in one ( FSHS )! Case closed!
I explained this already. God spoke singularly. Nothing is said of 3 persons.

Bye bye
 
Back
Top