Jesus is not God
Debate Rounds (5)
I want to thank my opponent for this debate. Now lets go over some scriprure you may have overlooked. All translations used are from the King James Version.
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God. 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. 1:4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men. 1:5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. 1:6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 1:7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe. 1:8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. 1:9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. 1:10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. 1:11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not. 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. 1:15 John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.
Please explain the meaning of verses 1-14. From my understanding using logical deduction: Word = God, Word made flesh = Jesus, therefore Jesus = Word = God.
John 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
John 10:30 I and my Father are one. 10:31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. 10:32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? 10:33 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.
These scriptures show that the Jews of Jesus day understood that Jesus was indeed Special and Holy AND that he equalled himself with God. By their own admission, they did not want to stone him for being special, holy, or any good works,instead they wanted to stone him because he claimed he was God. Please note that Jesus was not stoned because he claimed to be the messiah, rather he was stoned because the Jews understood his claims of being equal with God. This is blasphemy to Jews because God is one and has no equal.
John 12:44 Jesus cried and said, He that believeth on me, believeth not on me, but on him that sent me. 12:45 And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me.
John 14:5 Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way? 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. 14:7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him. 14:8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us. 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
Hmmm, is your real name Philip? If not please explain John 14:9.
You're very welcome, con. Thank you and God Bless.
Re: John 1:1,14: Please do not forget that it was the "Word" which became flesh and not God himself. Therefore John 1:1,14 does not in anyway teach or support the pre-existence of Christ as a divine being or that Christ is God or another God. Or that God became a Man or that God is Christ incarnate.
In the third clause of John 1:1, it says “and the logos [word] was God.” By equating the term logos with the term Christ, Trinitarians render the clause to read something like, “and Christ was God.” This assertion stems from the wrong understanding that the term God in the third clause functions as a noun. The word “God” 2316: Θεa2;ς - theos in the third clause of John 1:1 is not functioning as a noun but as an adjective.
And this is attested to by Greek grammarians, such as R. H. Strachan. In his book The Fourth Gospel: Its Significance and Environment, Strachan explains: “The closing words of v. I should be translated, ‘the Logos was divine’. Here the word theos has no article, thus giving it the significance of an adjective” (p. 99).
William Barclay, another Greek grammarian, agrees with Strachan in classifying the term theos in the third clause of John 1:1 as an adjective. In his book The Gospel of John he points out: “Finally John says that the word was God. This is a difficult saying for us to understand, and it is difficult because Greek, in which John wrote, had a different way of saying things from the way in which English speaks. When Greek uses a noun it almost always uses the definite article with it. The Greek for God is theos and the definite article is ho. When Greek speaks about God it does not simply say theos; it says ho theos. Now when Greek does not use the definite article with a noun that noun becomes much more like an adjective. (p. 39).
The same understanding could be gleaned from the book The Person of Christ written by Vincent Taylor. He testified that the term God in John 1:1c should be translated as divine: “The Word, he says, was ‘in the beginning’, distinguished from God (‘with God’) and divine…” (Θεa2;ς but not a2; Θεa2;ς) (p. 109).
Even Bible translators recognized that the term Θεa2;ς in the third clause of John 1:1 is an adjective as reflected in their translations. Below are some English translations that rendered the verse as: In the beginning the Word existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was divine” (Goodspeed’s Translation). “The Logos existed in the very beginning, the Logos was with God, the Logos was divine” (Moffatt’s Translation).
What does it mean that the logos or the Word was divine? Since the term Θεa2;ς is an adjective, it modifies the term logos (word).
So why does it say that the logos was divine? Because theword of God is with power (Luke 1:37, American Standard Version) and the true God who has spoken the word is powerful (Gen 35:11).
Since God is Almighty, He alone has the ability to plan something and the power to bring it to completion as He testified in Isaiah 46:11: “Truly I have spoken; truly I will bring it to pass, I have planned it, surely I will do it” (NASB).
God’s plan of bringing His Son into the world was fulfilled when Jesus was born of his mother Mary. His birth is the fulfillment of what John wrote that “the Word was made flesh” (John 1:14, King James Version). Contrary to what some have postulated that Christ took a different form, i.e., from being God into being human, Christ never transformed Himself from being a pure spirit into an infant. He was conceived in Mary’s womb through the agency of the Holy Spirit.
Luke the Evangelist reports: “And Mary said to the angel, ‘How can this be, since I am a virgin?’ And the angel answered and said to her, ‘The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy offspring shall be called the Son of God” (Luke 1:34-35, NASB).
The angel said that it is through the power of the Most High [God] that Mary shall conceive and bear a child. The angel did not say that God will turn Himself into a human being in the person of Jesus Christ.
Re: John 1:18: If no man has seen, God. Then who is Jesus? (Consider my explanation for "the Word" in Jn 1:1)
Re: John 10:30: In John 10:31 we see that the Jews misunderstood what Jesus had meant by "I and my Father are one." (John 10:30). And in John 10:33 they accused him of blasphemy. Why did Christ say, I and my Father are one?" In what way are they one? The preceding verse states: 28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any [man] pluck them out of my hand. 29 My Father, which gave [them] me, is greater than all; and no [man] is able to pluck [them] out of my Father's hand. (Jn 10:28-19 KJV)
Christ made the affirmation that He and His Father are one in context of caring for the flock. Just as no one can pluck the sheep out of Christ's hand so also no one can pluck the sheep out of the Father's hand. Thus, Christ and His Father are one in the sense that they are united. And in John 10:33 they accused him of blasphemy.
This brings us to the ineluctable conclusion that according to the Bible, Christ is not and never has been the true God. He is the Son of God, the Savior, the Head of the Church, the Mediator, the Lord, and everything that God made Him to be, but He is a man. The true Christ is a man, not a God. There is no biblical verse where Jesus explicitly claimed that He is God.
Re: John 12:44 In what sense? In character? In state of being? John quoted Jesus' God is "spirit" (Jn. 4:24) Luke the evangelist quotes Jesus, for a spirit has no flesh and bones, as you see me have" - Luke 24:39. Jesus = flesh / God = spirit no flesh.
Re: John 14:9: Philip the Apostle asked Jesus to show them the Father. He answered Philip, “Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father.” The verses that followed explained why Jesus said “He who has seen Me has seen the Father.” He said, “How can you say, 'Show us the Father'? Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me?”
Jesus said that “He who has seen Me has seen the Father” not because Jesus is the Father, but because He is in the Father and the Father is in Him. Also, when Jesus said “It is the Father living in me, who is doing His work” also further explains why He said “he who has seen Me has seen the Father.” Who has seen Jesus has seen the Father, not because Jesus is the Father, that Jesus is God, but because the Father is in Him, the Father is living in Him, and the Father is doing His work in Him. Why did the Lord Jesus said that the Father is doing His work in Him? Apostle Peter explained this: “Listen to these words, fellow Israelites! Jesus of Nazareth was a man whose divine authority was clearly proven to you by all the miracles and wonders which God performed through him. You yourselves know this, for it happened here among you.” - Acts 2:22 TEV
The Father is doing His work in Jesus because the Father (God) performed many miracles, wonders and signs THROUGH Jesus Christ. Thus, this is the reason why Jesus said that “He who has seen Me has seen the Father.” Because the miracles, wonders and signs seen in Christ, it is God who performed it through Him. Indeed, the Bible attests that the invisible God can be seen through the things He made:
Romans 1:20 TEV
“Ever since God created the world, his invisible qualities, both his eternal power and his divine nature, have been clearly seen; they are perceived in the things that God has made. So those people have no excuse at all!”
God did many miracles, signs and wonders THROUGH Jesus Christ. Thus, when Philip asked Jesus to show them the Father, He replied “Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'? Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me?…it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work.”
lefillegal1 forfeited this round.
kaleiapuno forfeited this round.
My apologies for the last round. In order to be fair i will not respond in my last round. Okay back to the debate.I wont argue translations but I will point out that "divine" is an "adjective" reserved for God. For to say that something is divine is to say that something is God or Godlike. That is, possesive of a quality "exclusive" to any given diety.
"Re: John 10:30:...Thus, Christ and His Father are one in the sense that they are united. And in John 10:33 they accused him of blasphemy."
Not only blashemy, AND being a man making himself God. While you gave a lengthy explanation of WHY the Jews misunderstood, it does NOTHING to contradict their(the jews) own reasoning as to why they themselves said he made himself God. I might also add that Jesus never refuted this accusation. In fact, as you pointed out, he went on to say that "ye are Gods" also. Obviously if their(jews) fathers are Gods, these Jews have no reason to stone Jesus for stating he was just "a" God, but they would have reason to stone him for stating he IS God. Whether stated explicity or inexplicity, the results are the same, ANY claims to be God call for stoning according to the Jews of Jesus day. The translators of our day may claim differently but the Bible records that those Jews state the exact reason why they wanted to stone Jesus.
"This brings us to the ineluctable conclusion that according to the Bible, Christ is not and never has been the true God. He is the Son of God, the Savior, the Head of the Church, the Mediator, the Lord, and everything that God made Him to be, but He is a man. The true Christ is a man, not a God."
Which Bible are you referring to? One without the book of Isaiah perhaps?
Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
The mighty God? The everlasting Father? Was Isaiah confused?
Or perhaps it is missing Hebrews?
Hebrews 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
Being the "expressed image of his person" seems to imply "in human form" but im sure you have a better explanation.
Hebrews 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
Well there you have it! As seen in verse 1:8, God (the father) calls the son God. Would the God of the Jews( who is also a jealous God) give his glory to another? Or whose throne is forever besides his own?
And lastly, is Colossians missing also?
Colossians 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
ALL the fulness? So NO PART is left out, right? So logic follows, wherever the fullness of God is, there also MUST be God. Therefore wherever God is Jesus is, and wherever Jesus is God is, leading us to conclude God is Jesus and Jesus is God.
Unlike the "FIBle" you read, NO PART is left out of the one ive read, which as ive shown, does record Christ as God
"The Father is doing His work in Jesus because the Father (God) performed many miracles, wonders and signs THROUGH Jesus Christ. Thus, this is the reason why Jesus said that “He who has seen Me has seen the Father.” Because the miracles, wonders and signs seen in Christ, it is God who performed it through Him."
"God did many miracles, signs and wonders THROUGH Jesus Christ."
God also did many miracles, signs and wonders THROUGH prophets and servants, yet they never state that those who have seen them, have seen the father. Neither do any of the apostles which, as you mentioned, were very aware that God was working through them. No where in scripture,(outside of Christ) does anyone claim that if youve seen them perform the fathers work, then youve seen the father. No not from Moses to John the Baptist. Nor from Peter to the Apostle Paul, does anyone equate seeing themself as with seeing God. If by your account "it was God working THROUGH him" that Jesus was referring to, then the father should be seen in Moses, all prophets, and the apostles. Yet none stated that. Jesus stated if you have seen Me (not miracles or signs) then you have seen the Father. Lets not forget the Jews and their fathers had seen/witnessed plenty of miracles and signs. That would have been nothing new to them, what was new, was the fact that Jesus claimed "ONENESS" with God because of these miracles and signs. No one prior or afterward made this claim of "oneness" with God, although they did perform miracles and signs. And contrary to translators attempt to downplay this fact it stands. The jews understood jesus as making himself God, so while it may be inexplicit to us (the readers), it was VERY EXPLICIT to them (jews). We can know this to be true, because the manner in which they reacted, provide enough context to show that they felt justified in "interpreting" Jesus statement into a "proclamation" of being God. And for this "proclamation" they went to stone him.
kaleiapuno forfeited this round.
lefillegal1 forfeited this round.
kaleiapuno forfeited this round.
lefillegal1 forfeited this round.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.