Asking Jesus if He was the 'Son of God' was asking Jesus is He was equal to God.

Asking Jesus if He was the 'Son of God' was asking Jesus is He was equal to God.

This is a big difference between the Trinitarian view and my view.

Trinitarians believe asking Jesus if he is the "Son of God" is asking Jesus if he is "equal to God" (has the same SUBSTANCE as God in addition to his human nature).
In other words, to be "Son" of God means to be equal to God.

Whereas I believe asking Jesus if he is the "Son of God" is asking Jesus if he is "God incarnate" (Yahweh MANIFESTED as a human).
In other words, to be "Son" of God means to be God incarnate.

TRINITARIANS, to demonstrate our differences of what it means to be "Son" of God, please provide your answers...

Q1) If Jesus was asked if he is the "Son of God" he would say...
A) Yes since he IS God incarnate (and to be "Son" of God means to be God incarnate)
B) Yes since he IS equal to God (and to be "Son" of God means to be equal to God)
C) No since he is NOT God incarnate (and to be "Son" of God means to be God incarnate)
D) No since he is NOT equal to God (and to be "Son" of God means to be equal to God)

Q2) If the Holy Spirit was asked if he is the "Son of God" he would say...
A) Yes since he IS God incarnate (and to be "Son" of God means to be God incarnate)
B) Yes since he IS equal to God (and to be "Son" of God means to be equal to God)
C) No since he is NOT God incarnate (and to be "Son" of God means to be God incarnate)
D) No since he is NOT equal to God (and to be "Son" of God means to be equal to God)

My answers are A for Q1 and C for Q2 since Jesus IS God incarnate but the Holy Spirit is NOT God incarnate.

But TRINITARIANS, if the answer to Q1 is B, why wouldn't the answer to Q2 be B as well since Jesus and the Holy Spirit are BOTH "equal to God", right?

Or would you like to change your definition of what it means to be "Son of God"?


P.S.

Trinitarian Catholic Catechism 252 says...

The Church uses (I) the term "substance" (rendered also at times by "essence" or "nature") to designate the divine being in its unity, (II) the term "person" or "hypostasis" to designate the Father, Son and Holy Spirit in the real distinction among them, and (III) the term "relation" to designate the fact that their distinction lies in the relationship of each to the others.

So whereas Trinitarians believe God in its unity is a "substance", I believe God is "the only ONE WHO transcends all creations". Here is an overview of what I believe...

For this creation, YHWH God (the only one who transcends all creations) determined to create a universe with a kingdom of redeemed humans (living souls) for his glory where he would reign as a living soul himself. The Scriptures describe how God would accomplish his plan. In an instant, transcendent God (called God the Father) created the supernatural and space-time of this universe and also became immanent as a spirit (called the Spirit of God) and in the form of a living soul (called the Word of God) with a glorious body. God the Father then created all things within the universe by the power of the Spirit of God commanded by the Word of God. But whereas God created a human spirit and soul for each of us, God himself as the Word became the human spirit and soul of Jesus. At his conception, Jesus' glorious body was changed to a mortal body to be made like us so he could make reconciliation for our sins. At his resurrection, Jesus' mortal body was changed back to a glorious body and he will also give each of his elect a glorious body when he returns to reign in his kingdom forever.
 
My answers are A for Q1 and C for Q2 since Jesus IS God incarnate but the Holy Spirit is NOT God incarnate.

Are there any TRINITARIANS who can answer the questions from the OP...

Q1) If Jesus was asked if he is the "Son of God" he would say...
A) Yes since he IS God incarnate (and to be "Son" of God means to be God incarnate)
B) Yes since he IS equal to God (and to be "Son" of God means to be equal to God)
C) No since he is NOT God incarnate (and to be "Son" of God means to be God incarnate)
D) No since he is NOT equal to God (and to be "Son" of God means to be equal to God)

Q2) If the Holy Spirit was asked if he is the "Son of God" he would say...
A) Yes since he IS God incarnate (and to be "Son" of God means to be God incarnate)
B) Yes since he IS equal to God (and to be "Son" of God means to be equal to God)
C) No since he is NOT God incarnate (and to be "Son" of God means to be God incarnate)
D) No since he is NOT equal to God (and to be "Son" of God means to be equal to God)
 

OldShepherd

Active member
John 5:18
18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.
John 10:33
33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
 
John 5:18
18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.
John 10:33
33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
How about you prove then from the OT where the Jews ever got this idea that being called God's Son or calling God ones Father means that whoever this was applied to was equal unto God and of his same nature and ontology?


Sorry but David declared the decree of God first concerning himself in Psalm 2:7, and therefore David was called God's Son and by God himself, so did this mean that David was a literal Son of God's own substance and ontology like you trins and oneness falsely teach about this?

How about 2 Samuel 7:14 where God speaking of David's son Solomon also says of him, I will be a Father unto him and he shall be unto me a Son and by the way also, both Psalm 2:7 and 2 Samuel 7:14 were only later quoted concerning Jesus who was also David and Solomon's Son in Hebrews 1:5.

Therefore, those rebellious Jews didn't get this idea from the word of God at all but rather from the word of their real Father the Devil and just like Jesus said also.



John 8:44​

44 You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

Wow, the second sentence above sounds just like Donald J. Trump also and whom incidentally most in the mainstream churches voted for and still support also and even after hearing all of his lying, but that does figure nevertheless.
 
Last edited:
This is a big difference between the Trinitarian view and my view.

Trinitarians believe asking Jesus if he is the "Son of God" is asking Jesus if he is "equal to God" (has the same SUBSTANCE as God in addition to his human nature).
In other words, to be "Son" of God means to be equal to God.

Whereas I believe asking Jesus if he is the "Son of God" is asking Jesus if he is "God incarnate" (Yahweh MANIFESTED as a human).
In other words, to be "Son" of God means to be God incarnate.

TRINITARIANS, to demonstrate our differences of what it means to be "Son" of God, please provide your answers...

Q1) If Jesus was asked if he is the "Son of God" he would say...
A) Yes since he IS God incarnate (and to be "Son" of God means to be God incarnate)
B) Yes since he IS equal to God (and to be "Son" of God means to be equal to God)
C) No since he is NOT God incarnate (and to be "Son" of God means to be God incarnate)
D) No since he is NOT equal to God (and to be "Son" of God means to be equal to God)

Q2) If the Holy Spirit was asked if he is the "Son of God" he would say...
A) Yes since he IS God incarnate (and to be "Son" of God means to be God incarnate)
B) Yes since he IS equal to God (and to be "Son" of God means to be equal to God)
C) No since he is NOT God incarnate (and to be "Son" of God means to be God incarnate)
D) No since he is NOT equal to God (and to be "Son" of God means to be equal to God)

My answers are A for Q1 and C for Q2 since Jesus IS God incarnate but the Holy Spirit is NOT God incarnate.

But TRINITARIANS, if the answer to Q1 is B, why wouldn't the answer to Q2 be B as well since Jesus and the Holy Spirit are BOTH "equal to God", right?

Or would you like to change your definition of what it means to be "Son of God"?


P.S.

Trinitarian Catholic Catechism 252 says...

The Church uses (I) the term "substance" (rendered also at times by "essence" or "nature") to designate the divine being in its unity, (II) the term "person" or "hypostasis" to designate the Father, Son and Holy Spirit in the real distinction among them, and (III) the term "relation" to designate the fact that their distinction lies in the relationship of each to the others.

So whereas Trinitarians believe God in its unity is a "substance", I believe God is "the only ONE WHO transcends all creations". Here is an overview of what I believe...

For this creation, YHWH God (the only one who transcends all creations) determined to create a universe with a kingdom of redeemed humans (living souls) for his glory where he would reign as a living soul himself. The Scriptures describe how God would accomplish his plan. In an instant, transcendent God (called God the Father) created the supernatural and space-time of this universe and also became immanent as a spirit (called the Spirit of God) and in the form of a living soul (called the Word of God) with a glorious body. God the Father then created all things within the universe by the power of the Spirit of God commanded by the Word of God. But whereas God created a human spirit and soul for each of us, God himself as the Word became the human spirit and soul of Jesus. At his conception, Jesus' glorious body was changed to a mortal body to be made like us so he could make reconciliation for our sins. At his resurrection, Jesus' mortal body was changed back to a glorious body and he will also give each of his elect a glorious body when he returns to reign in his kingdom forever.
How about you prove then from the OT where the Jews ever got this idea that being called God's Son or calling God ones Father means that whoever this was applied to was equal unto God and of his same nature and ontology?


Sorry but David declared the decree of God first concerning himself in Psalm 2:7, and therefore David was called God's Son and by God himself, so did this mean that David was a literal Son of God's own substance and ontology like you trins and oneness falsely teach about this?

How about 2 Samuel 7:14 where God speaking of David's son Solomon also says of him, I will be a Father unto him and he shall be unto me a Son and by the way also, both Psalm 2:7 and 2 Samuel 7:14 were only later quoted concerning Jesus who was also David and Solomon's Son in Hebrews 1:5.

Therefore, those rebellious Jews didn't get this idea from the word of God at all but rather from the word of their real Father the Devil and just like Jesus said also.



John 8:44​

44 You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

Wow, the second sentence above sounds just like Donald J. Trump also and whom incidentally most in the mainstream churches voted for and still support also and even after hearing all of his lying, but that does figure nevertheless.
 
Last edited:

jamesh

Active member
How about you prove then from the OT where the Jews ever got this idea that being called God's Son or calling God ones Father means that whoever this was applied to was equal unto God and of his same nature and ontology?


Sorry but David declared the decree of God first concerning himself in Psalm 2:7, and therefore David was called God's Son and by God himself, so did this mean that David was a literal Son of God's own substance and ontology like you trins and oneness falsely teach about this?

How about 2 Samuel 7:14 where God speaking of David's son Solomon also says of him, I will be a Father unto him and he shall be unto me a Son and by the way also, both Psalm 2:7 and 2 Samuel 7:14 were only later quoted concerning Jesus who was also David and Solomon's Son in Hebrews 1:5.

Therefore, those rebellious Jews didn't get this idea from the word of God at all but rather from the word of their real Father the Devil and just like Jesus said also.



John 8:44​

44 You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

Wow, the second sentence above sounds just like Donald J. Trump also and whom incidentally most in the mainstream churches voted for and still support also and even after hearing all of his lying, but that does figure nevertheless.
Then why does the big time Jewish High Priest Caiaphas ask Jesus to swear as to His identity at Matthew 26:63? Here it is, "And the high priest said to Him/Jesus, I adjure You by the living God, (The high priest is asking Jesus to swear by the living God) that you tell us whether You are the Christ/Messiah, the Son of God."

So where did the high priest get the idea from that he based his question on? Why would Caiaphas want to know if Jesus is the Son of God? In fact, you yourself believe that Jesus is the Son of God? So why when Jesus says "yes" to both questions, are the Christ/Messiah and are you the Son of God Jesus is blaspheming and He was put to death for blasphemy. Btw, what was the blasphemy, do you know?

herman
 
Then why does the big time Jewish High Priest Caiaphas ask Jesus to swear as to His identity at Matthew 26:63? Here it is, "And the high priest said to Him/Jesus, I adjure You by the living God, (The high priest is asking Jesus to swear by the living God) that you tell us whether You are the Christ/Messiah, the Son of God."

So where did the high priest get the idea from that he based his question on? Why would Caiaphas want to know if Jesus is the Son of God? In fact, you yourself believe that Jesus is the Son of God? So why when Jesus says "yes" to both questions, are the Christ/Messiah and are you the Son of God Jesus is blaspheming and He was put to death for blasphemy. Btw, what was the blasphemy, do you know?

herman

Whose word is the OT scriptures, was it the Jewish High Priests word or was it the word of Almighty God Sir?


So then, where in the OT word of Almighty God, did the high priest get his idea that being called "Son of God" meant that the person being called this, is God's literal Son of his own substance, nature and ontology?

For as I have proven from the OT, no such thing is ever revealed in the OT at all.


For I have already revealed that David was called the Son of God by God himself in Psalm 2:7 and then after this, so was Solomon in 2 Samuel 7:14 and then these two passages were later applied to Jesus in Hebrews 1:5.

So then where does the blasphemy enter into this?

I will once again tell you were in came in and it didn't come in from the Jewish OT scriptures because being called the Son of God never meant that one was a literal Son of God for there is no such proof that it ever did in those scriptures.

Therefore his idea on this did not come from the word of God at all but rather from the lying word of his Father the Devil and just like Jesus revealed in the passage below also.

So then, whose word are you going to believe, the word of the Devil that the High Priest was also deceived by, or the word of God in the OT scriptures?

For whoever's word you believe, is whose child you actually end up making yourself to be.

John 8:44​

44 You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies.



So what caused the Jews to open their ears to the Devil instead of the word of God?


Their hatred for Jesus, because he exposed them in front of all the people of Israel in his 8 woes sermon against them and as the hypocrites they truly were.
 
Last edited:

jamesh

Active member
I'll be happy to address your question but I have the idea that you will not accept the answer and you will come up with some "excuse" that the Bible is wrong.

So here's the verse I would like you to explain, Isaiah 40:3. But wait, I want to address what you said. Whose word is the OT scriptures, was it the Jewish High Priests word or was it the word of Almighty God Sir?" by making the choice that it was the word of Almighty God that I choose.

Isaiah 40:3, "A voice is calling, Clear the way for the Lord in the wilderness; Make smooth in the desert a highway FOR OUR GOD." Now, who do you think this prophecy is referring to? What is the persons name that is clearly identified as "The God/Jehovah?" Do you think the father of lies gave this to Isaiah?

herman
 
I'll be happy to address your question but I have the idea that you will not accept the answer and you will come up with some "excuse" that the Bible is wrong.

So here's the verse I would like you to explain, Isaiah 40:3. But wait, I want to address what you said. Whose word is the OT scriptures, was it the Jewish High Priests word or was it the word of Almighty God Sir?" by making the choice that it was the word of Almighty God that I choose.

Isaiah 40:3, "A voice is calling, Clear the way for the Lord in the wilderness; Make smooth in the desert a highway FOR OUR GOD." Now, who do you think this prophecy is referring to? What is the persons name that is clearly identified as "The God/Jehovah?" Do you think the father of lies gave this to Isaiah?

herman

Why didn't you address the fact that God called David his Son first in Psalm 2:7 and then he also called Solomon his Son in 2 Samuel 7:14, for these two verses were only later applied to Jesus by the writer of Hebrews in Hebrews 1:5?

Where is this proof then that the High Priest had a valid reason for saying that Jesus blasphemed for calling himself God's Son and like you trins always do, for you have no proof of this from the OT and therefore if you tell others that the Jews understood this correctly, you are telling them a lie.

Tell me what do you do with these words directly from Jesus Christ himself in the below verses then?

John 17:3 "This is eternal life, that they might know you (Father) The Only True God and Jesus the Christ whom you have sent".

John 5:26, "For just as the Father has life in himself, so he has given unto the Son to have Life in himself also"

John 6:57 "For just as The Living Father has sent me and I live because of the Father, so he who eats of me shall live because of me"


For if Jesus was God like you claim he was, then he wouldn't need to receive life from another who is also God and not for himself or for any of us either.

For he would already have that life within his very nature by default being God Almighty himself, but Jesus very clearly told us that not only will we live because he received it from the Father to give to us but also that he himself also lives because of the Father likewise.

Concerning Isaiah 40:3 and the high way for our God, what you trins seem to forget is that "God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself ".

So absolutely through Jesus God visited the Temple and his people of Israel and John the Baptist prepared his way also and Jesus himself said the following to his disciples in
John 14:10, "the words that I speak unto you, I speak not of myself but it is the Father who is dwelling within me, he is doing the works".

Therefore being Jesus was the Temple of Yahweh God, wherever Jesus went, Yahweh went likewise, for he was inseparable from his living Temple in the body of Jesus Christ.

Therefore, no I don't believe the father of lies gave the prophecy to Israel but I do believe the Father of lies has convinced you of your idea about what it really means and that is why you cannot see the truth about it.

By the way, Jesus didn't quote this of himself to the Jews, so where is the proof then that he ever called himself Almighty God Sir?


There is none period, and the real problem is that your churches have fallen into apostasy and the way it happened, is by their substituting the knowledge of the scriptures by the discernment of the Holy Spirit with a knowledge of the scriptures by the carnal human reasoning and wisdom of men.



1 Corinthians 2:13-16

New American Standard Bible


13 We also speak these things, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words (or words by the Spirit).

14 But a natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.

15 But the one who is spiritual discerns all things, yet he himself is discerned by no one.

16 For who has known the mind of the Lord, that he will instruct Him? But we (who are truly led of the Spirit) have the mind of Christ.



1 Corinthians 3:1-2

New American Standard Bible



3 And I, brothers and sisters, could not speak to you as spiritual people, but only as fleshly, as to infants in Christ. 2 I gave you milk to drink, not solid food; for you were not yet able to consume it. But even now you are not yet able,

Matthew 11:25-26

New American Standard Bible

25 At that time Jesus said, “I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent, and have revealed them to infants. 26 Yes, Father, for this way was well pleasing in Your sight.

Notice in the above, that the truths of God, God has hidden from those who try to learn them by their intellect and it is because they have to be revealed and therefore God only reveals them to infants and which simply means "the weak and foolish things of this world" and who are willing to seek God to have them revealed unto them instead.

 

jamesh

Active member
Why didn't you address the fact that God called David his Son first in Psalm 2:7 and then he also called Solomon his Son in 2 Samuel 7:14, for these two verses were only later applied to Jesus by the writer of Hebrews in Hebrews 1:5?

Where is this proof then that the High Priest had a valid reason for saying that Jesus blasphemed for calling himself God's Son and like you trins always do, for you have no proof of this from the OT and therefore if you tell others that the Jews understood this correctly, you are telling them a lie.

Tell me what do you do with these words directly from Jesus Christ himself in the below verses then?

John 17:3 "This is eternal life, that they might know you (Father) The Only True God and Jesus the Christ whom you have sent".

John 5:26, "For just as the Father has life in himself, so he has given unto the Son to have Life in himself also"

John 6:57 "For just as The Living Father has sent me and I live because of the Father, so he who eats of me shall live because of me"


For if Jesus was God like you claim he was, then he wouldn't need to receive life from another who is also God and not for himself or for any of us either.

For he would already have that life within his very nature by default being God Almighty himself, but Jesus very clearly told us that not only will we live because he received it from the Father to give to us but also that he himself also lives because of the Father likewise.

Concerning Isaiah 40:3 and the high way for our God, what you trins seem to forget is that "God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself ".

So absolutely through Jesus God visited the Temple and his people of Israel and John the Baptist prepared his way also and Jesus himself said the following to his disciples in
John 14:10, "the words that I speak unto you, I speak not of myself but it is the Father who is dwelling within me, he is doing the works".

Therefore being Jesus was the Temple of Yahweh God, wherever Jesus went, Yahweh went likewise, for he was inseparable from his living Temple in the body of Jesus Christ.

Therefore, no I don't believe the father of lies gave the prophecy to Israel but I do believe the Father of lies has convinced you of your idea about what it really means and that is why you cannot see the truth about it.

By the way, Jesus didn't quote this of himself to the Jews, so where is the proof then that he ever called himself Almighty God Sir?


There is none period, and the real problem is that your churches have fallen into apostasy and the way it happened, is by their substituting the knowledge of the scriptures by the discernment of the Holy Spirit with a knowledge of the scriptures by the carnal human reasoning and wisdom of men.



1 Corinthians 2:13-16

New American Standard Bible

13 We also speak these things, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words (or words by the Spirit).

14 But a natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.

15 But the one who is spiritual discerns all things, yet he himself is discerned by no one.

16 For who has known the mind of the Lord, that he will instruct Him? But we (who are truly led of the Spirit) have the mind of Christ.



1 Corinthians 3:1-2

New American Standard Bible

3 And I, brothers and sisters, could not speak to you as spiritual people, but only as fleshly, as to infants in Christ. 2 I gave you milk to drink, not solid food; for you were not yet able to consume it. But even now you are not yet able,

Matthew 11:25-26

New American Standard Bible

25 At that time Jesus said, “I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent, and have revealed them to infants. 26 Yes, Father, for this way was well pleasing in Your sight.

Notice in the above, that the truths of God, God has hidden from those who try to learn them by their intellect and it is because they have to be revealed and therefore God only reveals them to infants and which simply means "the weak and foolish things of this world" and who are willing to seek God to have them revealed unto them instead.

You know, this post of yours is not even a good "dodge/excuse" to what I posted. My question is simple and it's based on Isaiah 40:3. The verse explicitly says, "Make smooth in the desert highway FOR OUR GOD." In Marks gospel it says in the very first three verses the following:

"The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, vs2, As it is written in Isaiah the prophet, (Mark is referencing Isaiah 40:3), Behold , I (who's the I?) send My messenger before your fact, Who will prepare Your way; vs3, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make ready THE WAY OF THE LORD, (who is the Lord here?) Make His paths straight."

You ask me the following: "Why didn't you address the fact that God called David his Son first in Psalm 2:7 and then he also called Solomon his Son in 2 Samuel 7:14, for these two verses were only later applied to Jesus by the writer of Hebrews in Hebrews 1:5? " The fact is that God calls us all "sons of God" including you and the Jews. What path has anybody prepared the way for you or them?

You also brought up David. Fine, Jesus brought up David as well at Matthew 22:41-46 and ask the Jews, (vs42). "What do you think about the Christ, whose son is He? They said to Him, "The Son of David." Vs43, "The how does David in the Spirit call Him Lord; saying, "The Lord said to said to My Lord "Sin on my right hand, until I put thine enemies beneath Thy feet?" Vs45, If David then calls Him Lord, how is he/David his Son?"

So what was the reaction of the Jews? Vs46, "And NO ONE WAS ABLE TO ANSWER HIM A WORD, nor did anyone dare from that day on to ask Him another question." So how are you going to explain this away? Secondly, if the Jews could not answer Jesus, how can you? The short answer is the fact that Jesus Christ is the Lord of David and the rest of us, that's the point Jesus was making.

In Him,
herman
 
You know, this post of yours is not even a good "dodge/excuse" to what I posted. My question is simple and it's based on Isaiah 40:3. The verse explicitly says, "Make smooth in the desert highway FOR OUR GOD." In Marks gospel it says in the very first three verses the following:

"The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, vs2, As it is written in Isaiah the prophet, (Mark is referencing Isaiah 40:3), Behold , I (who's the I?) send My messenger before your fact, Who will prepare Your way; vs3, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make ready THE WAY OF THE LORD, (who is the Lord here?) Make His paths straight."

You ask me the following: "Why didn't you address the fact that God called David his Son first in Psalm 2:7 and then he also called Solomon his Son in 2 Samuel 7:14, for these two verses were only later applied to Jesus by the writer of Hebrews in Hebrews 1:5? " The fact is that God calls us all "sons of God" including you and the Jews. What path has anybody prepared the way for you or them?

You also brought up David. Fine, Jesus brought up David as well at Matthew 22:41-46 and ask the Jews, (vs42). "What do you think about the Christ, whose son is He? They said to Him, "The Son of David." Vs43, "The how does David in the Spirit call Him Lord; saying, "The Lord said to said to My Lord "Sin on my right hand, until I put thine enemies beneath Thy feet?" Vs45, If David then calls Him Lord, how is he/David his Son?"

So what was the reaction of the Jews? Vs46, "And NO ONE WAS ABLE TO ANSWER HIM A WORD, nor did anyone dare from that day on to ask Him another question." So how are you going to explain this away? Secondly, if the Jews could not answer Jesus, how can you? The short answer is the fact that Jesus Christ is the Lord of David and the rest of us, that's the point Jesus was making.

In Him,
herman
Dude, the fact that David called Jesus Lord (adon) in Psalm 110:1 and in Jesus telling the Jews this, was only to reveal to them that he was a greater heir and human Son of God than was David his father of the flesh.

That is one of the reasons why John also called Jesus "The Only Begotten Son" of God because it means that Jesus is unique in that all the other heirs of God to rule his people from David's line of descendant would bow to Jesus as their king and including also the whole creation as well. It simply meant that Jesus was a Son of God even above David who was the first of God's promise to him to be begotten of God and as per Psalm 2:7.

Jesus is also called The Only Begotten and First Begotten because in God's plan (Logos) for creation and foreknowledge, Jesus the human image of the invisible God, was the model in his foreknowledge that God created all others to be conformed unto and you can see this is Romans 8:29 and also in Colossians 1:15-16.

Romans 8:29 For those whom he foreknew (all the saints including Abraham and David), them he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

He is called the firstborn as a human being and the way you can be sure of this, is because it also says that he was to be the first among many other human brethren, and so it is certainly speaking of Jesus the man in God's plan and foreknowledge of him before all creation.

In other words, Abraham and David only existed in God's plan because of Jesus Christ God's human Son and in fact that goes for the whole creation also and that is also what is meant by "for in him and through him were all things created".

This is because the human Son of God Jesus Christ was the purpose and reason for God creating any of them and therefore their coming into existence revolved around God's plan in Christ Jesus.

Going back to Isaiah 40:3, all that this means is that John the Baptist was sent to prepare the way of Yahweh through the coming of his Greatest Human heir to his throne and Son Jesus Christ.

For Jesus is the Temple of the glory of Yahweh being he is the image of his invisible being and therefore Yahweh now does everything only through his human Son and image Jesus Christ.

That is also why in Revelation it says that the New City will have no need of the light of the Sun because God will be its light and Jesus will be the lamp through which God lights it, for God's radiant glory is revealed only through Jesus Christ his Greatest human heir and Son from David's promised line of anointed descendants.

Therefore, Jesus had to communicate this to the Jews, for they were confused about it in thinking that David himself would fulfill it all and therefore he asked them "whose Son is the Christ", for David only existed in order for Jesus to come out of his line of descendants and not the other way around and the same goes for Abraham also.

For in God plan and foreknowledge, Jesus the man existed before both of them and that is also what Jesus was communicating in John 8:58, for he never moved from speaking of the vision that Abraham had seen of him and even though the Jews twisted his words about it.

For the vision of God concerning the coming of Christ in the first person present tense before those Jews and that Jesus told them that Abraham had seen, was before Abraham was in God's vision of his day and that is all that Jesus meant by what he said in John 8:58.

1 Peter 1:20 "Who truly was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was in these last days manifested unto you".


In fact, if Jesus ever did call himself Yahweh God or equal unto Yahweh God, he would have made himself what Paul called "the man of sin and son of perdition" in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 and by it, he also would have disqualified himself from being our savior, for God cannot accept the blood of a sinner on his alter.

That goes for the Sabbath law also and which many trins believe Jesus also broke and only because the Jews said that he did and which is also rubbish.

For the Sabbath law was written for man to have a day of rest from his secular work so that he could worship and serve God in God's work and Jesus was doing the work of God on the Sabbath just like the priests and not secular work and that is why he never broke any of the laws of Moses at all period.






.
 

OldShepherd

Active member
...Why didn't you address the fact that God called David his Son first in Psalm 2:7 and then he [God] also called Solomon his Son in 2 Samuel 7:14, for these two verses were only later applied to Jesus by the writer of Hebrews in Hebrews 1:5?

Where is this proof then that the High Priest had a valid reason for saying that Jesus blasphemed for calling himself God's Son and like you trins always do, for you have no proof of this from the OT and therefore if you tell others that the Jews understood this correctly, you are telling them a lie.

Tell me what do you do with these words directly from Jesus Christ himself in the below verses then?...
Wrong! The Jews thought they were justified in saying that Jesus blasphemed because, unlike David and Solomon, they did not have any scriptural evidence that Jesus was in fact the Son of God.
 

jamesh

Active member
Wrong! The Jews thought they were justified in saying that Jesus blasphemed because, unlike David and Solomon, they did not have any scriptural evidence that Jesus was in fact the Son of God.
I have to "humbly" disagree with you on this point. The Jews had plenty of evidence of who Jesus was, not only based on what Jesus said about Himself but they also did not believe the Scriptures concerning Him as the Messiah. Jesus even tells them at John 10:37-38, "If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me; vs38, but if I do them, though you do not believe Me, believe the works that you may know and understand that the Father is in Me; and I in the Father."

Also, at His trial the high priest Caiaphas specifically ask Jesus to swear as to His identity at Matthew 26:63. Here again, the Jews simply did not believe Jesus. Keep up the good work.

In Him,
herman
 

jamesh

Active member
Dude, the fact that David called Jesus Lord (adon) in Psalm 110:1 and in Jesus telling the Jews this, was only to reveal to them that he was a greater heir and human Son of God than was David his father of the flesh.

That is one of the reasons why John also called Jesus "The Only Begotten Son" of God because it means that Jesus is unique in that all the other heirs of God to rule his people from David's line of descendant would bow to Jesus as their king and including also the whole creation as well. It simply meant that Jesus was a Son of God even above David who was the first of God's promise to him to be begotten of God and as per Psalm 2:7.

Jesus is also called The Only Begotten and First Begotten because in God's plan (Logos) for creation and foreknowledge, Jesus the human image of the invisible God, was the model in his foreknowledge that God created all others to be conformed unto and you can see this is Romans 8:29 and also in Colossians 1:15-16.

Romans 8:29 For those whom he foreknew (all the saints including Abraham and David), them he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

He is called the firstborn as a human being and the way you can be sure of this, is because it also says that he was to be the first among many other human brethren, and so it is certainly speaking of Jesus the man in God's plan and foreknowledge of him before all creation.

In other words, Abraham and David only existed in God's plan because of Jesus Christ God's human Son and in fact that goes for the whole creation also and that is also what is meant by "for in him and through him were all things created".

This is because the human Son of God Jesus Christ was the purpose and reason for God creating any of them and therefore their coming into existence revolved around God's plan in Christ Jesus.

Going back to Isaiah 40:3, all that this means is that John the Baptist was sent to prepare the way of Yahweh through the coming of his Greatest Human heir to his throne and Son Jesus Christ.

For Jesus is the Temple of the glory of Yahweh being he is the image of his invisible being and therefore Yahweh now does everything only through his human Son and image Jesus Christ.

That is also why in Revelation it says that the New City will have no need of the light of the Sun because God will be its light and Jesus will be the lamp through which God lights it, for God's radiant glory is revealed only through Jesus Christ his Greatest human heir and Son from David's promised line of anointed descendants.

Therefore, Jesus had to communicate this to the Jews, for they were confused about it in thinking that David himself would fulfill it all and therefore he asked them "whose Son is the Christ", for David only existed in order for Jesus to come out of his line of descendants and not the other way around and the same goes for Abraham also.

For in God plan and foreknowledge, Jesus the man existed before both of them and that is also what Jesus was communicating in John 8:58, for he never moved from speaking of the vision that Abraham had seen of him and even though the Jews twisted his words about it.

For the vision of God concerning the coming of Christ in the first person present tense before those Jews and that Jesus told them that Abraham had seen, was before Abraham was in God's vision of his day and that is all that Jesus meant by what he said in John 8:58.

1 Peter 1:20 "Who truly was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was in these last days manifested unto you".


In fact, if Jesus ever did call himself Yahweh God or equal unto Yahweh God, he would have made himself what Paul called "the man of sin and son of perdition" in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 and by it, he also would have disqualified himself from being our savior, for God cannot accept the blood of a sinner on his alter.

That goes for the Sabbath law also and which many trins believe Jesus also broke and only because the Jews said that he did and which is also rubbish.

For the Sabbath law was written for man to have a day of rest from his secular work so that he could worship and serve God in God's work and Jesus was doing the work of God on the Sabbath just like the priests and not secular work and that is why he never broke any of the laws of Moses at all period.






.
Well "Dude," your just giving you opinion/understanding of what the verses mean to you. You have still not directly addressed the text of Scripture from Isaiah 40:3 and Mark 1:1-4. Just explain why the following does not mean what it says? "Make smooth in the desert highway FOR OUR GOD."

And at Mark 1:3, "Make ready THE WAY OF THE LORD, MAKE HIS PATHS STRAIGHT." Who is this person that is identified as "Our God" and "The Lord?" Do you want a hint? How about Matthew 1:23, "God with us." And your excuse that, "Well Jesus is not God, He may be Lord but that does not mean He is God."

You always interpret the New Testament in view of the Old Testament because the New Testament if the fulfillment of the Old Testament. Hence, "Make ready the way of the Lord at Mark 1:3 is directly from Isaiah 40:3, "Make smooth in the desert a highway FOR OUR GOD." There is no way out of this unless you do what you have been doing, trying to "jackhammer" another interpretation which is clearly contrary to what the verses say. In short, you have already made up your mind that Jesus Christ is not God incarnate, therefore every word to the contrary you will find a way to dispute. Why no try for a change to accept what the verses actually say?

In Him,
herman
 
John 5:18
18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.
John 10:33
33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

You did NOT answer the questions...

Q1) If Jesus was asked if he is the "Son of God" he would say...
A) Yes since he IS God incarnate (and to be "Son" of God means to be God incarnate)
B) Yes since he IS equal to God (and to be "Son" of God means to be equal to God)
C) No since he is NOT God incarnate (and to be "Son" of God means to be God incarnate)
D) No since he is NOT equal to God (and to be "Son" of God means to be equal to God)

Q2) If the Holy Spirit was asked if he is the "Son of God" he would say...
A) Yes since he IS God incarnate (and to be "Son" of God means to be God incarnate)
B) Yes since he IS equal to God (and to be "Son" of God means to be equal to God)
C) No since he is NOT God incarnate (and to be "Son" of God means to be God incarnate)
D) No since he is NOT equal to God (and to be "Son" of God means to be equal to God)

Are YOU able to answer the questions.

My answers are A for Q1 and C for Q2 since Jesus IS God incarnate but the Holy Spirit is NOT God incarnate.
 
Wrong! The Jews thought they were justified in saying that Jesus blasphemed because, unlike David and Solomon, they did not have any scriptural evidence that Jesus was in fact the Son of God.
However you trins say that the Jews understood him to be blaspheming by claiming equality with God and only because he called himself God's Son and that doesn't work because in the OT, both David and David's Son Solomon were also called God's Son in the singular as well.

Therefore when you teach this, you are teaching a lie and no matter whether you see it as a lie or not.

Furthermore, the Jews also were aware that Jesus was also considered to be David's descendant like Solomon and they were also aware of the promise that it would be one of David's descendants that would be the greatest heir over all of the others, so that answer doesn't work either.

The real truth is, that the Jews didn't want Jesus to be that King, because they hated him for revealing them as the hypocrites that they truly were in his sermon of the 8 woes about them in the hearing of all the people of Israel and also because they envied because of the crowds he drew to hear his words.


That is why when he rode through Jerusalem upon the donkey and which revealed who he was, those rebellious Jews wanted him to tell the people not to declare him to be that King from the descendants of David and according to the promise.
 
Well "Dude," your just giving you opinion/understanding of what the verses mean to you. You have still not directly addressed the text of Scripture from Isaiah 40:3 and Mark 1:1-4. Just explain why the following does not mean what it says? "Make smooth in the desert highway FOR OUR GOD."

And at Mark 1:3, "Make ready THE WAY OF THE LORD, MAKE HIS PATHS STRAIGHT." Who is this person that is identified as "Our God" and "The Lord?" Do you want a hint? How about Matthew 1:23, "God with us." And your excuse that, "Well Jesus is not God, He may be Lord but that does not mean He is God."

You always interpret the New Testament in view of the Old Testament because the New Testament if the fulfillment of the Old Testament. Hence, "Make ready the way of the Lord at Mark 1:3 is directly from Isaiah 40:3, "Make smooth in the desert a highway FOR OUR GOD." There is no way out of this unless you do what you have been doing, trying to "jackhammer" another interpretation which is clearly contrary to what the verses say. In short, you have already made up your mind that Jesus Christ is not God incarnate, therefore every word to the contrary you will find a way to dispute. Why no try for a change to accept what the verses actually say?

In Him,
herman
Nope, but rather the one giving his opinion is you, and I did address Isaiah 40:3 and Mark 1:1-4 but you are blind to the truth and therefore incapable of understanding the truth because God has hidden it from you, because you seek to know it by the wrong method.

John the Baptist prepared the way for Yahweh by preparing the way for the King and Messiah that Yahweh anointed and appointed and sent for himself to save and rule over his people and that is all those texts are revealing, but because of your pre programed false teachings on this, you are blind to the truth about it.


I don't suppose that you have payed any attention to the fact that in Malachi's account of this, the prophecy revealed that two would come to the Temple, and one was Yahweh and the other was the messenger of his covenant and which in this case was Jesus Christ.

So then, once again, Jesus was Yahweh's Living Temple and within whom Yahweh was dwelling in all of his fullness, "for God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself" and therefore when Jesus the messenger entered into the Temple, Yahweh also entered his Temple within Jesus his Living Temple.

So it means what it says for certainly, it just doesn't mean what it says the way you want it to mean what it says and according to the dictates of your fleshly mind about it.

I also don't suppose you realize that the name "Immanuel", was not applied to Jesus as the first fulfillment of that prophecy in Isaiah 7:14 but rather to Isaiah's second Son and whose literal name was "Immanuel" and even many of your own trin scholars will tell you the same thing also.


Furthermore, the Hebrew word translated as "virgin" can mean either a young woman or a real virgin young woman and therefore in the case of the first fulfillment of the prophecy concerning Isaiah's second Son "Immanuel" it refers to a young woman but in regards to it second and final fulfillment in Christ Jesus it refers to a literal virgin.


Nevertheless, this also proves that you cannot take the title "Immanuel" or "God is with us" to mean that Jesus was God any more than you could say that Isaiah's second Son who had this as his actual birth name is God either.


I would recommend that you go and get yourself an education about this and read Jeremiah 23:5-6 and then read Jeremiah 33:15-16 for both Jesus and his people of Judah and Jerusalem are called by the title of "Yahweh Our Righteousness" and "The Branch".

That is right, both are called by those titles, so go read it yourself and you will see this and the word "branch" refers to a righteous remnant from the people with Jesus as their head and also their connection to the Spiritual Fathers.
 
Well "Dude," your just giving you opinion/understanding of what the verses mean to you. You have still not directly addressed the text of Scripture from Isaiah 40:3 and Mark 1:1-4. Just explain why the following does not mean what it says? "Make smooth in the desert highway FOR OUR GOD."

And at Mark 1:3, "Make ready THE WAY OF THE LORD, MAKE HIS PATHS STRAIGHT." Who is this person that is identified as "Our God" and "The Lord?" Do you want a hint? How about Matthew 1:23, "God with us." And your excuse that, "Well Jesus is not God, He may be Lord but that does not mean He is God."

You always interpret the New Testament in view of the Old Testament because the New Testament if the fulfillment of the Old Testament. Hence, "Make ready the way of the Lord at Mark 1:3 is directly from Isaiah 40:3, "Make smooth in the desert a highway FOR OUR GOD." There is no way out of this unless you do what you have been doing, trying to "jackhammer" another interpretation which is clearly contrary to what the verses say. In short, you have already made up your mind that Jesus Christ is not God incarnate, therefore every word to the contrary you will find a way to dispute. Why no try for a change to accept what the verses actually say?

In Him,
herman
Let me ask you a question, "who does the Bible call "the way of Yahweh"?

The way of Yahweh is him whom Yahweh sent in order that through him, God could redeem men and restore them into fellowship with himself and Jesus is that way, the truth and the Life and that by God's appointment and anointing also.

In other words, "the highway for our God and the way, is Jesus Christ, and which means he is the path and means by which Yahweh gets to us and we get to Yahweh and that is all that is being revealed in these verses and not that Jesus is Yahweh God.

That is what the man Jesus being called God's mediator actually means also, for he is the way in which Yahweh comes to us and we come to him. .

This is what Mark 1:1-4 is revealing concerning Isaiah 40:3 and not that Jesus himself is Yahweh like you falsely take these passages to mean and in Malachi 3:1-2 it is the Adon that the people delight in who comes to the temple and it is Yahweh God who sends him also and that is how John the Baptist prepared Yahweh's way (Jesus Christ) before Yahweh.

You have to read all of the passages and not just focus on only one witness.
 
Last edited:

OldShepherd

Active member
However you trins say that the Jews understood him to be blaspheming by claiming equality with God and only because he called himself God's Son and that doesn't work because in the OT, both David and David's Son Solomon were also called God's Son in the singular as well.
Did you read my previous post?
Apples and potatoes. Scripture records that God, Himself, said that David and Solomon were His sons, but the T'nakh does not record that Jesus of Nazareth, Son of Mary, presumed to be son of Joseph, was God's son. Based on the scripture then available to the Jews they did not believe that Jesus was the Messiah and they understood Jesus was claiming to be God by saying that YHWH was His father..
 

OldShepherd

Active member
Nevertheless, this also proves that you cannot take the title "Immanuel" or "God is with us" to mean that Jesus was God any more than you could say that Isaiah's second Son who had this as his actual birth name is God either.
I would recommend that you go and get yourself an education about this and read Jeremiah 23:5-6 and then read Jeremiah 33:15-16 for both Jesus and his people of Judah and Jerusalem are called by the title of "Yahweh Our Righteousness" and "The Branch".
That is right, both are called by those titles, so go read it yourself and you will see this and the word "branch" refers to a righteous remnant from the people with Jesus as their head and also their connection to the Spiritual Fathers.
Show me where these vss. say "both Jesus and his people of Judah and Jerusalem are called by the title of "Yahweh Our Righteousness" and "The Branch"."
Jeremiah 23:5-6
5 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth.
6 In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.
Jeremiah 33:15-16
15 In those days, and at that time, will I cause the Branch of righteousness to grow up unto David; and he shall execute judgment and righteousness in the land.
16 In those days shall Judah be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely: and this is the name wherewith she shall be called, The LORD our righteousness.​
I will be glad to point out your misunderstanding.
 
Top