Jesus ? "Not God" ? Savior ?
Comments
-
@Wolfgang Your false assumption is that man cannot be without sin ... and yet, the first man, Adam, was obviously without sin, NOT a sinner, and he also was NOT God. Man is NOT born a sinner ... man BECOMES a sinner when he commits sin, which all except Jesus have done (cp Rom 5:12 --- "all HAVE SINNED"! Note carefully => the text does not say "all are sinners (from birth and before they even were able to discern good and evil)"!
@Wolfgang Jesus DID NOT COMMIT sin ... thus he remained without sin.
Psalm 58:3 (ESV) The wicked are estranged from the womb; they go astray from birth, speaking lies.
As I mentioned above ... you falsely assume that man is born wicked and a sinner. You disregard what Rom 5:12 says, and you thus misunderstand and misapply what Psa 58:3 says.
God's human design for human children includes sin nature inheritance from male sperm.
So then God planned something sinful ? Hmn ... and when He took a look at His creature, that sin-nature human being was very good?
Matthew 1:18-25 describes Jesus conception by Holy Spirit so Jesus did not inherit sin nature from Adam. In human flesh, The Word (God) choose to keep Loving God first, which included becoming the sinless sacrifice for all humanity.
See above ... your idea contradicts the plain truth of Scripture that there is no such thing as a "God designed passing on of sin nature" ...
Jesus was both fully God and fully Man: literal fulfilment of John 1 where The Word (God) became flesh and dwelt among us.
This is another error to which your earlier error leads ... now you claim that God -- Who (according to Jesus' own words) IS SPIRIT -- became a human being ... and since that can't really be the case (which you don't dare to admit, since you just claimed the opposite) you revert to the sly and sneaky "way out" of claiming that Jesus was "both fully God and fully Man".
In fact, the blood of Jesus could be substantially different than all other humans who have 23 pairs of chromosomes. Holy blood of Jesus could have a total of 24 chromosomes: 1 pair with 22 singles from Mary (with special programming to allow 22 singles to be used)
And the fantasy continues ...
-
My apologies for proving my human words still need improvement. Humanly praying & trying to write Truth in Love using kind words along with being gracious and interesting for everyone, which is challenging (some posted ideas reflect personal thoughts, which in turn reflects the person).
Observation: while being reminded about "What is Christian Debate?" guidelines, noticed focus on phrase "criticize ideas, not people" while not mentioning the rest of guideline context:
Be Agreeable, Even When You Disagree
You may wish to voice a contradictory opinion. That’s fine, but remember to criticize ideas, not people. Please avoid:
* Name-calling
* Ad hominem attacks
* Reacting to a post’s tone rather than responding to its content
A lessson learned from earlier CD discussions is avoiding YOU (or your ...) as the sentence subject, which has tendency for an Ad hominem attack (happening recently in this thread and others: e.g. The Guns Of Hate). Suspect my "hurting heart" reactions to tone of public CD posts were not anticipated when guidelines were created. Sadly remember many angry "flame" wars in Logos community discussions that provided reason for CD creation. Thankful for Jan creating a new CD after the one setup by Faithlife stopped working.
Hypothesis: if study scripture with focus on word snippets (while ignoring context), then conclusion can be whatever human wants to see (so choice of word snippets to study provides "justification" for belief conclusion).
Matthew 4:5-6 (NLT) Then the devil took him to the holy city, Jerusalem, to the highest point of the Temple, and said, “If you are the Son of God, jump off! For the Scriptures say, ‘He will order his angels to protect you. And they will hold you up with their hands so you won’t even hurt your foot on a stone.’ ”
Psalm 91:11-12 (NLT) For he will order his angels to protect you wherever you go. They will hold you up with their hands so you won’t even hurt your foot on a stone.
Our spiritual advisary, the father of lies, knows scripture text better than any human. During temptation of Jesus, a Psalm 91:11 phrase is missing. Jewish love of all God's words would have brought to mind the rest of Psalm 91 (while my reading of Matthew 4:5-6 years ago did not notice missing snippet).
Jesus rebuked Jews in His own hometown for being deeply offended by Him and refusing to believe in Him (using culturally correct words for unbelievers to understand). An ongoing valuable lesson from Fee & Stuart's "How to read the Bible for All its Worth" is different genre styles have different contextual boundaries for engaging text. Ancient Jewish culture understood unified thought & action (hear & obey), which is different than Western way of thinking that ideas are separate from action.
@Bill_Coley This information from you does not change the truth of my original claim: that Jesus self-identified as a prophet in Matthew 13.57.
Parable self-identification as a prophet in Matthew 13.57 is an inference from hometown. Yet Jesus spoke as God in human flesh who did not need a phrase like "Thus says The Lord" to provide Godly authority for His Words.
Scripture study suggestion is "greater" for more inferences by Jesus about who is Jesus. For example, what makes the Temple Holy ? After praying for God to open eyes to understand His Word, please compare Matthew 12:1-8 with Matthew 23:1-36 while looking for "greater" and "temple"
@Bill_Coley In the verses from Matthew 7 that you quoted, note that Jesus indeed refers to himself as "Lord," but then specifies that it is his Father's will, NOT his own will, that people must do to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. In my view, in so doing, Jesus distinguishes between himself and God. (see Matthew 12.48-50 for basically the same distinction)
Concur with distinction while differing on amount of separation. From my faith perspective of a plural unified God, distinction reflects role separation within One God's commUnity of Love. Incredibly intense is the Love relationship between The WIll (Father) and The Word (Son) so humans can lovingly live on every Word from One God to do God's Will. Thankful for Love description in 1 Corinthians 13, which shows in the Words by Jesus: Love is patient and kind. Love is not jealous or boastful or proud or rude. It does not demand its own way.
CD discussions have included many verses, which has yet to show me one whose most reasonable interpretation is clearly that Jesus is not God.
What is the "truth" criteria for most reasonable ?
@Bill_Coley When in Acts 2.22-24 Peter tells his audience that Jesus is a "man" to whom "God" attested by doing "mighty works and wonders and signs" "through him," what is the most reasonable interpretation of whether Peter himself believes Jesus is God?
If only consider Acts 2:22-24 snippet in the middle of Peter's speech in Acts 2, then concur Jesus is only a "man" (while the rest of Peter's speech proves belief Jesus is God using Jewish expression, which included scripture prophetic fulfillment)
@Wolfgang Your false assumption is that man cannot be without sin ... and yet, the first man, Adam, was obviously without sin, NOT a sinner, and he also was NOT God. Man is NOT born a sinner ... man BECOMES a sinner when he commits sin, which all except Jesus have done (cp Rom 5:12 --- "all HAVE SINNED"! Note carefully => the text does not say "all are sinners (from birth and before they even were able to discern good and evil)"!
@Wolfgang Jesus DID NOT COMMIT sin ... thus he remained without sin.
Psalm 58:3 (ESV) The wicked are estranged from the womb; they go astray from birth, speaking lies.
@Wolfgang As I mentioned above ... you falsely assume that man is born wicked and a sinner. You disregard what Rom 5:12 says, and you thus misunderstand and misapply what Psa 58:3 says.
Assertion "the first man, Adam, was obviously without sin, NOT a sinner" disagrees with Romans 5:12 "sin came into the world by one man and death by sin and so death spread to all men because all sinned" since Adam chose to sin (by disobeying & blaming God as recorded in Genesis 3). Adam was created without sin that included free will to choose. Eve was fashioned out of Adam's bone without sin along with free will. In the Garden of Eden, Adam & Eve experienced immediate spiritual death after their choice to sin (became sinners) followed later by physical death.
God's human design for human children includes sin nature inheritance from male sperm.
@Wolfgang So then God planned something sinful ? Hmn ... and when He took a look at His creature, that sin-nature human being was very good?
God's design for sin nature inheritance predates Adam & Eve becoming sinners (while being before they had children). Inheritance design by One God also included Holy redemption plan from sin so The Word (God) could humble dwell in human flesh without inherting sin nature from Adam.
More intriguing question is: since God knew Adam & Eve would choose to sin, did God sin by creating them sinless with free will ?
Matthew 1:18-25 describes Jesus conception by Holy Spirit so Jesus did not inherit sin nature from Adam. In human flesh, The Word (God) choose to keep Loving God first, which included becoming the sinless sacrifice for all humanity.
@Wolfgang See above ... your idea contradicts the plain truth of Scripture that there is no such thing as a "God designed passing on of sin nature" ...
Generational sin describes children inheriting from their parents the desire to repeat parent's iniquity (sins).
Exodus 20:3-6 (ESV) You shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments.
Exodus 34:6-7 , Numbers 14:17-19 , Deuteronomy 5:6-10 are similar about generational inquity (sin) while Deuteronomy 23:1-8 excludes generational sin from assembly of the Lord (yet King David was the grandson of a Moabite woman who loved God).
Jesus was both fully God and fully Man: literal fulfilment of John 1 where The Word (God) became flesh and dwelt among us.
@Wolfgang This is another error to which your earlier error leads ... now you claim that God -- Who (according to Jesus' own words) IS SPIRIT -- became a human being ... and since that can't really be the case (which you don't dare to admit, since you just claimed the opposite) you revert to the sly and sneaky "way out" of claiming that Jesus was "both fully God and fully Man".
Thankful for The Word (God) providing the only way to worship The Father (God) in Spirit and Truth. Both The Father and The Word (Son) are One God, who intensely share one name, one heart, one soul, one strength. Jesus is literal fulfillment of Genesis 3:15 seed of the woman prophecy.
John 4:21-24 (ESV) Jesus said to her, “Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father. You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews. But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father is seeking such people to worship him. God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.”
John 14:6-14 (ESV) Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you had known me, you would have known my Father also. From now on you do know him and have seen him.”
Philip said to him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.” Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does his works. Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else believe on account of the works themselves.
“Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I am going to the Father. Whatever you ask in my name, this I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask me anything in my name, I will do it.
In fact, the blood of Jesus could be substantially different than all other humans who have 23 pairs of chromosomes. Holy blood of Jesus could have a total of 24 chromosomes: 1 pair with 22 singles from Mary (with special programming to allow 22 singles to be used)
@Wolfgang And the fantasy continues ...
Search internet and see for non-biblical information: may learn the blood of Yeshua landed on the west side of the mercy seat (on top of the ark of the covenant, which was not inside the second Temple). Thankful for an Israel research lab experiencing their Messiah's blood being alive.
FYI: frequent use of first person pronoun "I" reminds me of Isaiah 14:12-15 (learned long ago to test "I" thoughts due to spiritual adversary)
@Wolfgang Does this explanation have something to do with your somewhat particular style of writing by which you always omit "I" at the beginning of sentences ??? perhaps you do not
Astute observation for my typical writing style.
Keep Smiling 😀
-
Assertion "the first man, Adam, was obviously without sin, NOT a sinner" disagrees with Romans 5:12 "sin came into the world by one man and death by sin and so death spread to all men because all sinned" since Adam chose to sin (by disobeying & blaming God as recorded in Genesis 3). Adam was created without sin that included free will to choose.
When Adam came into being, became a living soul, he was WITHOUT sin and was NOT a sinner ... just as you also later write. And just as with Adam, it is with other man also => they start their life without sin and are not sinners and not wicked. Just as was the case with Adam, man commits sin and with such act becomes a sinner and is then under condemnation of eternal death ... as Rom 5:12 states.
Note carefully, Rom 5:12 does NOT say that "death spread to all men because Adam sinned, but because all committed sin. There is no such thing in Scripture as inherited sin, sin passed on via male seed, etc ....
-
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus postSmiling
My apologies for proving my human words still need improvement. Humanly praying & trying to write Truth in Love using kind words along with being gracious and interesting for everyone, which is challenging (some posted ideas reflect personal thoughts, which in turn reflects the person).
I appreciate your candor.
A lessson learned from earlier CD discussions is avoiding YOU (or your ...) as the sentence subject, which has tendency for an Ad hominem attack (happening recently in this thread and others: e.g. The Guns Of Hate). Suspect my "hurting heart" reactions to tone of public CD posts were not anticipated when guidelines were created. Sadly remember many angry "flame" wars in Logos community discussions that provided reason for CD creation. Thankful for Jan creating a new CD after the one setup by Faithlife stopped working.
My observation is that "you" functions well in compliments and assertions of objective fact. It functions poorly and unwisely in expressions of criticism, almost always, as you suggest, leading to personal commentaries. I will note, however, that personal commentaries don't require the word "you." We can easily cross the "criticize ideas, not people" line without the inclusion of particular pronouns.
Hypothesis: if study scripture with focus on word snippets (while ignoring context), then conclusion can be whatever human wants to see (so choice of word snippets to study provides "justification" for belief conclusion).
We agree that context matters. We perhaps disagree as to what constitutes a text "snippet." For example, Acts 2.22-24, which I cited in my previous post, in my view reflects a complete thought from Peter. Any suggestion in other parts of his sermon to the Jerusalem crowd that Jesus is God would directly contradict the clear meaning of those verses. I don't think it's logically or linguistically possible to say in one part of a presentation Jesus is a man through whom God did great things, and then in another part of the same presentation say, Jesus is God. Such assertions are mutually exclusive. Fortunately, in my view, nothing in Peter's Acts 2 presentation (or in his Acts 4 presentation!) contradicts the substance of Acts 2.22-24.
Our spiritual advisary, the father of lies, knows scripture text better than any human. During temptation of Jesus, a Psalm 91:11 phrase is missing. Jewish love of all God's words would have brought to mind the rest of Psalm 91 (while my reading of Matthew 4:5-6 years ago did not notice missing snippet).
I don't understand the relevance of these comments to the question of Jesus' divinity. Please explain.
Parable self-identification as a prophet in Matthew 13.57 is an inference from hometown. Yet Jesus spoke as God in human flesh who did not need a phrase like "Thus says The Lord" to provide Godly authority for His Words.
I have never denied that Jesus spoke with "Godly authority." In my view, however, Godly "authority" is NOT the same as Godly identity.
My point about Jesus' self-identification as a prophet is that for his audience, prophets were human spokespeople for God and God's message; they were NOT God. Jesus clearly, directly self-identified as a prophet, but never did he self-identify as God.
Your claim that "Jesus spoke as God in human flesh" reflects what you call your "faith perspective" or "filter," but in my view, it's a claim that is not at all supported by Scripture.
Scripture study suggestion is "greater" for more inferences by Jesus about who is Jesus. For example, what makes the Temple Holy ? After praying for God to open eyes to understand His Word, please compare Matthew 12:1-8 with Matthew 23:1-36 while looking for "greater" and "temple"
I don't understand your point about "greater" and "temple," or that point's relevance to our discussion of the divinity of Jesus.
In Matthew 12.1-8, it's worth noting that the ESV, the NRSV, and the Lexham Bible, among others, do not capitalize the word "lord" in v.8. So, Jesus is the "lord" of the Sabbath.
Concur with distinction while differing on amount of separation. From my faith perspective of a plural unified God, distinction reflects role separation within One God's commUnity of Love. Incredibly intense is the Love relationship between The WIll (Father) and The Word (Son) so humans can lovingly live on every Word from One God to do God's Will. Thankful for Love description in 1 Corinthians 13, which shows in the Words by Jesus: Love is patient and kind. Love is not jealous or boastful or proud or rude. It does not demand its own way.
Again you make faith claims that in my view aren't supported by Scripture. I affirm and applaud the faithful passion with which you embrace and write about a "plural unified God;" I'm glad that image encourages and inspires you. But in my view, it's simply not supported by Scripture.
In my reading of the text, the words in 1 Corinthians 13 are the words of the Apostle Paul, not the words of Jesus.
If only consider Acts 2:22-24 snippet in the middle of Peter's speech in Acts 2, then concur Jesus is only a "man" (while the rest of Peter's speech proves belief Jesus is God using Jewish expression, which included scripture prophetic fulfillment)
Please cite the specific verses within Peter's Acts 2 (or 4) sermon(s) that contradict the clear meaning of the "snippet" I cited, that Jesus was a human through whom God did great and mighty things.
-
Thankful for The Word (God) providing the only way to worship The Father (God) in Spirit and Truth. Both The Father and The Word (Son) are One God, who intensely share one name, one heart, one soul, one strength. Jesus is literal fulfillment of Genesis 3:15 seed of the woman prophecy.
- you speak of TWO Gods => ("the Word" & "the Father")
- then you boldly claim that the two Gods are "One God"
- you claim the Two share "one name" ... this is a plainly false assumption
- you claim the Two share "one heart, one soul, one strength" ... because of Jesus' complete and perfect obedience to God, he was indeed of the same mind, same heart" as God, and God gave to him authority, power and strength
- Jesus is indeed the fulfillment of the statement in Gen 3:15 ... and clearly, a woman can NOT conceive and give birth to God, but only to a human being.
Do you not realize how your own words disprove and contradict what you otherwise assert and claim to be the case???
-
Assertion "the first man, Adam, was obviously without sin, NOT a sinner" disagrees with Romans 5:12 "sin came into the world by one man and death by sin and so death spread to all men because all sinned" since Adam chose to sin (by disobeying & blaming God as recorded in Genesis 3). Adam was created without sin that included free will to choose.
@Wolfgang When Adam came into being, became a living soul, he was WITHOUT sin and was NOT a sinner ... just as you also later write. And just as with Adam, it is with other man also => they start their life without sin and are not sinners and not wicked. Just as was the case with Adam, man commits sin and with such act becomes a sinner and is then under condemnation of eternal death ... as Rom 5:12 states.
Please provide scripture verse(s) for assertion "other man also => they start their life without sin and are not sinners and not wicked."
Scripture verses with implication that every human is born (conceived via natual sperm) spiritually dead:
Romans 3:10-12 (ESV) as it is written: “None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.”
Psalm 14:2-3 (ESV) The Lord looks down from heaven on the children of man, to see if there are any who understand, who seek after God. They have all turned aside; together they have become corrupt; there is none who does good, not even one.
Psalm 51:6 (ESV) Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.
Psalm 58:3 (ESV) The wicked are estranged from the womb; they go astray from birth, speaking lies.
Isaiah 64:6 (ESV) We have all become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous deeds are like a polluted garment. We all fade like a leaf, and our iniquities, like the wind, take us away.
If humans born of the flesh are without sin, then John 3:1-21 conversation between Jesus and Nicodemus makes no sense: especially verse 6 (ESV) "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit."
Scripture lacks verses for what happens to a soul who is murdered or dies before they can discern good or evil. Conceptually One God is Holy, Righteous, Just, Love, Merciful, ... that includes intimately knowing every human at the time of conception (seems sperm & egg unification takes time to pray/worship before exploding into rapid human growth). One God does not take pleasure in any soul going to hell for eternal torment (resulting from individual sin choices). Non-biblical book => Heaven is for Real Movie Edition: A Little Boy's Astounding Story of His Trip to Heaven and Back has "Two Sisters" chapter that includes Heaven destination following a miscarriage (baby girl died in mommy's tummy).
My faith understanding of Romans 5:12 reflects subsequent contextual repetitions/expansions about the effect of Adam's one sin upon all humans (conceived via natural sperm), especially Romans 5:16-19
Romans 5:12-21 (ESV) 12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned— 13 for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. 14 Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.
15 But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man’s trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. 16 And the free gift is not like the result of that one man’s sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. 17 For if, because of one man’s trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ.
18 Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. 19 For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous. 20 Now the law came in to increase the trespass, but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, 21 so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through righteousness leading to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Searching scripture for verses that have third and fourth generation finds a number of results, including:
Exodus 20:3-6 (ESV) You shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments.
Exodus 34:6-7 , Numbers 14:17-19 , Deuteronomy 5:6-10 are similar about generational inquity (sin) while Deuteronomy 23:1-8 excludes generational sin from assembly of the Lord. King David was the grandson of a Moabite woman, Ruth, who loved Jewish people and God. When God sent Nathan to confront David with a parable (following Bathseba affair and putting Uriah to death), then King David responded the man must pay four-fold. Subsequently four of King David's children died. Psalm 51 was written from a hurting heart seeking righteous restoration.
A lessson learned from earlier CD discussions is avoiding YOU (or your ...) as the sentence subject, which has tendency for an Ad hominem attack (happening recently in this thread and others: e.g. The Guns Of Hate). Suspect my "hurting heart" reactions to tone of public CD posts were not anticipated when guidelines were created. Sadly remember many angry "flame" wars in Logos community discussions that provided reason for CD creation. Thankful for Jan creating a new CD after the one setup by Faithlife stopped working.
@Bill_Coley My observation is that "you" functions well in compliments and assertions of objective fact. It functions poorly and unwisely in expressions of criticism, almost always, as you suggest, leading to personal commentaries. I will note, however, that personal commentaries don't require the word "you." We can easily cross the "criticize ideas, not people" line without the inclusion of particular pronouns.
Simple suggestion is avoiding personal pronouns when not expressing compliment(s). What is objective to one faith view can be received as personal commentary by a different faith view. Concur "criticize ideas, not people" line can be crossed while not using pronouns. My spiritual age is approaching 16 years of growth in One God's commUnity of Love, which includes my desire to imitate God & Be Holy because He is Holy (healing from any sin). Teenagers have opportunity for saying/writing silly stuff: e.g. Growing older has its opportunities. Some of them squeek.
Hypothesis: if study scripture with focus on word snippets (while ignoring context), then conclusion can be whatever human wants to see (so choice of word snippets to study provides "justification" for belief conclusion).
@Bill_Coley We agree that context matters. We perhaps disagree as to what constitutes a text "snippet." For example, Acts 2.22-24, which I cited in my previous post, in my view reflects a complete thought from Peter. Any suggestion in other parts of his sermon to the Jerusalem crowd that Jesus is God would directly contradict the clear meaning of those verses. I don't think it's logically or linguistically possible to say in one part of a presentation Jesus is a man through whom God did great things, and then in another part of the same presentation say, Jesus is God. Such assertions are mutually exclusive. Fortunately, in my view, nothing in Peter's Acts 2 presentation (or in his Acts 4 presentation!) contradicts the substance of Acts 2.22-24.
Thank you for confirming snippet study scripture hypothesis using Acts 2 as an example, which suggests a subsequent snippet corollary: belief conclusion becomes a faith filter for ignoring/bypassing "contradictory" scripture snippets (not believe logically or linguistically possible).
Noticed identification about diety of Jesus in the end of Acts 2:24 (NLT) ... for death could not keep him in its grip. (that contrasts with Hebrews 9:27 And just as each person is destined to die once and after that comes judgment). Acts 2:24 is a corollary to idea "God cannot die" since death could not keep God in its grip. Holy One of Israel would not be left there after one sacrifice for the sins of all humans.
From my faith perspective, Acts 2 message by Peter has a three part complimentary outline: a) Holy Spirit (Joel 2:28-32), b) Jesus was a man, c) Jesus is Lord יהוה God. By the way, Jewish cultural setting for the Festival of Weeks (Shavu˓ot) commerates God giving Torah (teaching) to Moses.
a) Holy Spirit (Ghost) outpouring fulfilled Joel 2:28-32 prophecy, which included foreign languages being spoken & heard to proclaim the good news about belief in the man Jesus as Lord יהוה God is the way to worship Lord יהוה God (Father & Son & Ghost) in Spirit and Truth. Believe in human heart that all of Lord יהוה God (Father & Son & Spirit) raised Jesus from the dead plus confess with mouth that Jesus is Lord יהוה God => salvation. Agreeing with One Lord יהוה God about sins (confession) results in God's forgiveness, cleansing, and Holy healing.
b) The phrase "as you well know" in Acts 2:22 (NLT) explains second part of sermon not needing many words. This Jewish audience had celebrated many yearly festivals with Jesus, which included ~9 months earlier experiencing great Joy at the Temple with Jesus speaking John 7:37 (plus many had experienced Jesus teaching as a traveling Jewish Rabbi plus could testify about many miracles done by God). Many, if not all, of Acts 2 Jewish audience had been shouting "Crucify Him!" eight weeks earlier when Pilate was asking them what to do with Jesus (crowd had asked for blood of Jesus to be upon them & their children in Matthew 27:25), which is confirmed in Acts 2:23 (NLT) With the help of lawless Gentiles, you nailed him to a cross and killed him.
c) Peter expands on Acts 2:24 "death could not keep him" by quoting Psalm 16:8-11 for prophetic fulfillment that the Messiah (God) must rise from the dead. According to Jewish tradition, King David died on Shavu˓ot and his tomb is still with us (albeit what is called "King David's tomb" in modern Israel is different than the tomb of David destroyed during the Bar Kokhba revolt in 135 CE). Recorded in Psalm 132:11 & 2 Samuel 7:12-13 is God promising King David that one of his physical descendants would sit on his throne (so prophesied about the Messiah's resurrection about 1,000 years earlier). Powerful is Acts 2:32 "God raised Jesus from the dead and we are all witnesses" so over 3,000 people could testify Jesus is Alive!! (tomb lacks a crucified body). Exalted Jesus (on One God's throne) provides reason for Joel 2:28-32 prophecy fulfillment followed by Psalms 110:1 fulfillment about Jesus. From my faith perspective, Acts 2:36 is the most important verse in the Acts 2 message with command to let everyone know that Jesus is Lord יהוה God and Messiah, which is consistent with Great Commission in Matthew 28:16-20
Our spiritual advisary, the father of lies, knows scripture text better than any human. During temptation of Jesus, a Psalm 91:11 phrase is missing. Jewish love of all God's words would have brought to mind the rest of Psalm 91 (while my reading of Matthew 4:5-6 years ago did not notice missing snippet).
@Bill_Coley I don't understand the relevance of these comments to the question of Jesus' divinity. Please explain.
Contemporary corollary to "Yea, hath God said ?" is "Did the man Jesus really claim to be God ?" Our spiritual adversary has the ongoing goal to disrupt love relationship between human and God (using any means possible, which includes denying diety of Jesus to steal joy of salvation)
Parable self-identification as a prophet in Matthew 13.57 is an inference from hometown. Yet Jesus spoke as God in human flesh who did not need a phrase like "Thus says The Lord" to provide Godly authority for His Words.
@Bill_Coley I have never denied that Jesus spoke with "Godly authority." In my view, however, Godly "authority" is NOT the same as Godly identity.
@Bill_Coley My point about Jesus' self-identification as a prophet is that for his audience, prophets were human spokespeople for God and God's message; they were NOT God. Jesus clearly, directly self-identified as a prophet, but never did he self-identify as God.
@Bill_Coley Your claim that "Jesus spoke as God in human flesh" reflects what you call your "faith perspective" or "filter," but in my view, it's a claim that is not at all supported by Scripture.
From my faith understanding of a plural unity God, Words spoken by Jesus identify Him being Lord יהוה God (while not boasting about being Lord יהוה God along with One God's commUnity of Love being Father,Son,Spirit). Human prophets used a phrase like "Thus says The Lord" to provide authority for what the Lord said through them. The crowd sent to arrest Jesus had a human reaction after self-identification of Jesus by speaking God's divine name: John 18:6 (NLT) As Jesus said “I Am he,” they all drew back and fell to the ground!
Luke 5:20-24 (NLT) Seeing their faith, Jesus said to the man, “Young man, your sins are forgiven.” But the Pharisees and teachers of religious law said to themselves, “Who does he think he is? That’s blasphemy! Only God can forgive sins!” Jesus knew what they were thinking, so he asked them, “Why do you question this in your hearts? Is it easier to say ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or ‘Stand up and walk’? So I will prove to you that the Son of Man has the authority on earth to forgive sins.” Then Jesus turned to the paralyzed man and said, “Stand up, pick up your mat, and go home!”
As Lord יהוה God, Jesus has the authority to forgive sins against One Lord יהוה God's commUnity of Love (Father,Son,Spirit). Searching scriptures for blasphemy finds unbelieving Jewish humans clearly understanding Jesus saying that He is Lord יהוה God in human flesh. Hence unbelieving Jews wanted to kill Jesus for blasphemy as instructed by God in Leviticus 24:15-16 (NLT) Say to the people of Israel: Those who curse their God will be punished for their sin. Anyone who blasphemes the Name of the Lord must be stoned to death by the whole community of Israel. Any native-born Israelite or foreigner among you who blasphemes the Name of the Lord must be put to death.
Jewish legal crime for Jesus to be crucified was blasphemy based on self-identification by Jesus. Believing no human flesh is righteous per Psalm 14:2-3, Psalm 51:6, Psalm 51:6, Isaiah 64:6, ... the idea of Lord יהוה God in human flesh is blasphemy, which deserves death. Searching scripture for Messiah or "Anointed One" finds first occurence in Daniel 9 (prophecy about timing of Anointed One dying, which was fulfilled in Jesus).
Scripture study suggestion is "greater" for more inferences by Jesus about who is Jesus. For example, what makes the Temple Holy ? After praying for God to open eyes to understand His Word, please compare Matthew 12:1-8 with Matthew 23:1-36 while looking for "greater" and "temple"
@Bill_Coley I don't understand your point about "greater" and "temple," or that point's relevance to our discussion of the divinity of Jesus.
What does the self-identification of Jesus as one greater than the Temple mean ?
While prayerfully considering reply, was reminded about Hanukkah (dedication) miracle in 165 BCE when one day's worth of oil burned for eight days until a new kosher supply of oil was ready for the eternal light. The Temple had been cleansed by the Maccabees and a new alter was being dedicated to God, whose presence makes the Temple Holy. Deuterocanonical books 1st & 2nd Maccabees include historical information.
If only consider Acts 2:22-24 snippet in the middle of Peter's speech in Acts 2, then concur Jesus is only a "man" (while the rest of Peter's speech proves belief Jesus is God using Jewish expression, which included scripture prophetic fulfillment)
@Bill_Coley Please cite the specific verses within Peter's Acts 2 (or 4) sermon(s) that contradict the clear meaning of the "snippet" I cited, that Jesus was a human through whom God did great and mighty things.
If Jesus is not God, please explain the end of Acts 2:24 (NLT) for death could not keep him in its grip.
If Jesus is not God, please explain Acts 4:9-10 explanation for perfect healing in the powerful name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene (while being consistent with Acts 19:13-16 where just saying the name does not have power).
Acts 4:11 "man" is followed by Psalm 118:22 fulfillment (cornerstone of faith in One God), which is also quoted in Luke 20:17 conclusion following the parable of evil farmers and in 1 Peter 2:4-7. Salvation in no one else is consistent with Isaiah 43:10-13
Thankful for The Word (God) providing the only way to worship The Father (God) in Spirit and Truth. Both The Father and The Word (Son) are One God, who intensely share one name, one heart, one soul, one strength. Jesus is literal fulfillment of Genesis 3:15 seed of the woman prophecy.
- you speak of TWO Gods => ("the Word" & "the Father")
- then you boldly claim that the two Gods are "One God"
- you claim the Two share "one name" ... this is a plainly false assumption
- you claim the Two share "one heart, one soul, one strength" ... because of Jesus' complete and perfect obedience to God, he was indeed of the same mind, same heart" as God, and God gave to him authority, power and strength
- Jesus is indeed the fulfillment of the statement in Gen 3:15 ... and clearly, a woman can NOT conceive and give birth to God, but only to a human being.
Do you not realize how your own words disprove and contradict what you otherwise assert and claim to be the case???
Assertions 1 & 2 about TWO Gods are incorrect from my faith perspective in a plural unified God.
Assertions 3 & 4 are likewise incorrect if "gods" is assumed after Two. My faith understanding of a plural unified God recognizes roles (voices) within One God's commUnity of Love. Incredibly intense is the Love relationship between The WIll (Father) and The Word (Son) so humans can lovingly live on every Word from One God to do God's Will.
Assertion 5 is correct about fulfillment of Genesis 3:15 and that a human woman can only give birth to a human being. From my faith view, am Thankful for a righteous woman, Mary, who gave birth to a human son, Jesus, who was fully God (The Word) in spirit dwelling inside a human body. Jesus did not inherit sin nature from Adam so was Holy (spiritually alive) at time of conception plus Jesus choose to never sin, which allowed Him to express Love for every human by brutally executed on the cross for our sins.
Keep Smiling 😀
-
Please provide scripture verse(s) for assertion "other man also => they start their life without sin and are not sinners and not wicked."
I already did ... Rom 5:12 says that consequences of sin come on all men because THEY ALL SIN (COMMIT SIN). Only after a human has comitted a sin are they sinners and are under condemnation of sin and in need of redemption from sin.
Scripture verses with implication that every human is born (conceived via natual sperm) spiritually dead:
I will only point out the first two verses you mentioned as support and proof of your claim, and it will be obvious that these verses do NOT say what you make of them
Romans 3:10-12 (ESV) as it is written: “None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.”
Note what the text says as to why none of these is righteous => all HAVE TURNED ASIDE .... they HAVE BECOME worthless ... no one DOES GODD ... Their own actions, their own acts of sin have made them unrighteous and sinners ... there is nothing about all were born wicked and sinners because Adam sinned.
Psalm 14:2-3 (ESV) The Lord looks down from heaven on the children of man, to see if there are any who understand, who seek after God. They have all turned aside; together they have become corrupt; there is none who does good, not even one.
Here again => they HAVE all TURNED ASIDE ... HAVE BECOME CORRUPT ....none IS DOING GOOD ... Plainly and clearly, each one's actions are what makes them to be sinners. Again, there is nothing about inheriting sin via male sperm and being sinners and under condemnation from birth.
My faith understanding of Romans 5:12 reflects subsequent contextual repetitions/expansions about the effect of Adam's one sin upon all humans (conceived via natural sperm), especially Romans 5:16-19
The problem is that your "faith understanding" is not in harmony with what these scriptures plainly state.
Note carefully, just because someone claims "faith understanding" does NOT make such understanding to be true and in agreement with what Scripture states ... just because a viewer claiming his faith understanding is that a picture shows a round table - when the picture shows a square table - does not make the square table round.
-
1 you speak of TWO Gods => ("the Word" & "the Father")
2 then you boldly claim that the two Gods are "One God"
3 you claim the Two share "one name" ... this is a plainly false assumption
4 you claim the Two share "one heart, one soul, one strength" ... because of Jesus' complete and perfect obedience to God, he was indeed of the same mind, same heart" as God, and God gave to him authority, power and strength
5 Jesus is indeed the fulfillment of the statement in ... and clearly, a woman can NOT conceive and give birth to God, but only to a human being.
Do you not realize how your own words disprove and contradict what you otherwise assert and claim to be the case???
Assertions 1 & 2 about TWO Gods are incorrect from my faith perspective in a plural unified God.
Your faith perspective is incorrect .... because the plain facts of these 2 statements do not agree with your faith perspective does not make the plain facts incorrect but rather should cause you to re-think your conclusions and your faith perspective.
Assertions 3 & 4 are likewise incorrect if "gods" is assumed after Two. My faith understanding of a plural unified God recognizes roles (voices) within One God's commUnity of Love. Incredibly intense is the Love relationship between The WIll (Father) and The Word (Son) so humans can lovingly live on every Word from One God to do God's Will.
Again, you base your claims on your faith, rather than base your faith on what the plain facts stated in Scripture.
Assertion 5 is correct about fulfillment of Genesis 3:15 and that a human woman can only give birth to a human being.
Finally, a plain facts statement is acknowledged as correct. Now, let's see what happens next ....
From my faith view, am Thankful for a righteous woman, Mary, who gave birth to a human son, Jesus, who was fully God (The Word) in spirit dwelling inside a human body. Jesus did not inherit sin nature from Adam so was Holy (spiritually alive) at time of conception plus Jesus choose to never sin, which allowed Him to express Love for every human by brutally executed on the cross for our sins.
Once again, you divert and twist the plain facts in order to accommodate your "faith view"
Note also, in your faith view you all of a sudden speak of a "RIGHTEOUS WOMAN" .... when only a few paragraphs earlier in your post your faith perspective claim was that all (men and women) were born unrighteous because of inheriting sin via male sperm of their fathers, going back to Adam.
Your various "faith views/perspectives" are self-contradictory .... and in need of correction if they are to agree with the plain facts of Scripture.
-
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus postSmiling
My spiritual age is approaching 16 years of growth in One God's commUnity of Love, which includes my desire to imitate God & Be Holy because He is Holy (healing from any sin). Teenagers have opportunity for saying/writing silly stuff: e.g. Growing older has its opportunities. Some of them squeek.
Squeaking opportunities. An apt description of aging's opportunities and pitfalls!
Thank you for confirming snippet study scripture hypothesis using Acts 2 as an example, which suggests a subsequent snippet corollary: belief conclusion becomes a faith filter for ignoring/bypassing "contradictory" scripture snippets (not believe logically or linguistically possible).
To be clear, I confirm only that text "snippets" are possible - some that correctly reflect their larger contexts, and others that don't. I contend that Acts 2.22-24 accurately reflects its larger context.
If contradictory Scripture "snippets" don't exist in Peter's presentations in Acts 2 and 4 - as I contend they don't - then I can't be "ignoring /bypassing" them.
Once again I tell you - for perhaps the third or fourth time in our exchanges - that my beliefs and conclusions about the Bible come AS A RESULT OF, and NOT in advance of my engagement with, the Bible.
Noticed identification about diety of Jesus in the end of Acts 2:24 (NLT) ... for death could not keep him in its grip. (that contrasts with Hebrews 9:27 And just as each person is destined to die once and after that comes judgment). Acts 2:24 is a corollary to idea "God cannot die" since death could not keep God in its grip. Holy One of Israel would not be left there after one sacrifice for the sins of all humans.
Having just said - in the SAME SENTENCE! - that "God" raised him from the dead, and having asserted three sentences earlier that God attested to Jesus through the great and mighty works God did "through" him, it is neither linguistically nor logically possible for Peter's closing phrase in Acts 2.24 to report that Jesus was God. Instead, in my view, the clear meaning of Acts 2.24, especially in its context, is that the resurrection of Jesus fulfilled God's promise to David. To wit...
- Acts 2.25-28 - Peter quotes from Psalm 16, a passage that includes the psalmist's conviction that God will not "allow [God's] Holy One to rot in the grave." Peter clearly believes Jesus is God's "Holy One," not God. Importantly, in its original Psalm 16 context, the one God will not let rot in the grave is NOT a person to be born in the distant future, but the psalmist himself! In Acts 2 Peter claims the psalmist wrote about someone other than himself (i.e. Jesus) but in the psalm, clearly it is the psalmist himself whom the psalmist believes God will not let rot. (see Psalm 16.8-11)
- Acts 2.29-31 - Peter argues that in those words the psalmist was not talking about himself, but was rather "saying God would not leave [God's "Holy One"] among the dead or allow his body to rot in the grave." (Acts 2.31) That is, God would raise God's "Holy One."
- Acts 2.32 - God raised Jesus from the dead... in fulfillment of the psalmist's word.
- Acts 2.33 - God exalted Jesus to "God's right hand" and "gave him the Holy Spirit to pour out on us," in fulfillment of the psalmist's conviction that the one whom God did not leave to "rot in the grave" would in fact "sit in the place of honor at [God's] right hand."
- Acts 2.36 - God has made Jesus - the one they crucified - to be both Lord and Messiah. Peter cannot be saying God made one whom he believed was God to be Lord.
In the context created by those verses, Acts 2.22-24 clearly refers to the resurrection as God's action of which Jesus is the recipient, not the cause. Death could not hold Jesus because, as the psalmist reported centuries earlier, God had promised death would not hold God's "Holy One."
From my faith perspective, Acts 2 message by Peter has a three part complimentary outline: a) Holy Spirit (Joel 2:28-32), b) Jesus was a man, c) Jesus is Lord יהוה God. By the way, Jewish cultural setting for the Festival of Weeks (Shavu˓ot) commerates God giving Torah (teaching) to Moses.
I respect that in your "faith perspective" Peter declares Jesus as Lord God in his Acts 2 presentation. In my view, however, the text of Acts 2 does not support your claim. Instead, the text clearly and repeatedly (see above) supports the view that God raised Jesus, which in Peter's mind means Jesus could not have been God.
a) Holy Spirit (Ghost) outpouring fulfilled Joel 2:28-32 prophecy, which included foreign languages being spoken & heard to proclaim the good news about belief in the man Jesus as Lord יהוה God is the way to worship Lord יהוה God (Father & Son & Ghost) in Spirit and Truth. Believe in human heart that all of Lord יהוה God (Father & Son & Spirit) raised Jesus from the dead plus confess with mouth that Jesus is Lord יהוה God => salvation. Agreeing with One Lord יהוה God about sins (confession) results in God's forgiveness, cleansing, and Holy healing.
The Acts 2 text does not support your rendering of it. Peter sees the speaking in tongues in Jerusalem as fulfillment of Joel's "Day of the Lord" prophecy about "the last days" in which God would pour out God's Spirit. There is nothing in Peter's quotation about a "Father & Son & Spirit" manifestation of God, or of the resurrection of anyone from the dead.
b) The phrase "as you well know" in Acts 2:22 (NLT) explains second part of sermon not needing many words.
According to the verse, what Peters asserts that his audience knows well is that God attested to Jesus by doing great and mighty things through him. Peter makes no assertion of Jesus' divine identity.
c) Peter expands on Acts 2:24 "death could not keep him" by quoting Psalm 16:8-11 for prophetic fulfillment that the Messiah (God) must rise from the dead. According to Jewish tradition, King David died on Shavu˓ot and his tomb is still with us (albeit what is called "King David's tomb" in modern Israel is different than the tomb of David destroyed during the Bar Kokhba revolt in 135 CE). Recorded in Psalm 132:11 & 2 Samuel 7:12-13 is God promising King David that one of his physical descendants would sit on his throne (so prophesied about the Messiah's resurrection about 1,000 years earlier). Powerful is Acts 2:32 "God raised Jesus from the dead and we are all witnesses" so over 3,000 people could testify Jesus is Alive!! (tomb lacks a crucified body). Exalted Jesus (on One God's throne) provides reason for Joel 2:28-32 prophecy fulfillment followed by Psalms 110:1 fulfillment about Jesus. From my faith perspective, Acts 2:36 is the most important verse in the Acts 2 message with command to let everyone know that Jesus is Lord יהוה God and Messiah, which is consistent with Great Commission in Matthew 28:16-20
Once again I contend the text doesn't support your rendering of it:
- There is no indication in Peter's words or his quotation from Psalm 16 that the Messiah is "God."
- People indeed witnessed Jesus alive after the resurrection, but Peter makes no claim that their witness conveyed proclamation of, or had any bearing on, Jesus' divinity.
Contemporary corollary to "Yea, hath God said ?" is "Did the man Jesus really claim to be God ?" Our spiritual adversary has the ongoing goal to disrupt love relationship between human and God (using any means possible, which includes denying diety of Jesus to steal joy of salvation)
I reject your assertion that my reading of the biblical witness about Jesus and God is the product of "our spiritual adversary['s]... ongoing goal to disrupt" anything. My reading of the biblical witness about Jesus is the product of my reading of the biblical witness. [NOTE: Your baseless assertion here is disappointing evidence that we don't need to use the pronoun "you" in order to cross the "criticize ideas, not people" line.]
From my faith understanding of a plural unity God, Words spoken by Jesus identify Him being Lord יהוה God (while not boasting about being Lord יהוה God along with One God's commUnity of Love being Father,Son,Spirit). Human prophets used a phrase like "Thus says The Lord" to provide authority for what the Lord said through them. The crowd sent to arrest Jesus had a human reaction after self-identification of Jesus by speaking God's divine name: John 18:6 (NLT) As Jesus said “I Am he,” they all drew back and fell to the ground!
Again I respect the product of your "faith understanding." But also again I must note that the biblical text does not support your view. Jesus not once identifies himself as "being Lord God." In its context, the "I am" of your current example, John 18.6, is not a declaration of divinity, but rather an acknowledgement of personal identity.
- In John 18.4, Jesus asks whom they're looking for.
- In John 18.5, they say "Jesus of Nazareth."
- In John 18.6, Jesus acknowledge that he is Jesus of Nazareth.
- After a repeat of his question about whom they seek, in John 18.8 Jesus again acknowledges that he is Jesus of Nazareth, and asks that the others present - those who are not Jesus of Nazareth - be allowed to leave.
There is no declaration of divinity in that text. (Note the NLT is one of a VERY small number of translations that capitalize the "am" in those verses. The vast majority of translations render the verses as to acknowledgement of personal name that it is: i.e. "I am...")
As Lord יהוה God, Jesus has the authority to forgive sins against One Lord יהוה God's commUnity of Love (Father,Son,Spirit). Searching scriptures for blasphemy finds unbelieving Jewish humans clearly understanding Jesus saying that He is Lord יהוה God in human flesh. Hence unbelieving Jews wanted to kill Jesus for blasphemy as instructed by God in Leviticus 24:15-16 (NLT) Say to the people of Israel: Those who curse their God will be punished for their sin. Anyone who blasphemes the Name of the Lord must be stoned to death by the whole community of Israel. Any native-born Israelite or foreigner among you who blasphemes the Name of the Lord must be put to death.
In the Luke 5 text to which you refer, Jesus does NOT claim to be God; he claims to have the "authority" to forgive sins, authority he clearly believes comes from God. (cf. John 5.16-30, esp. John 5.16 and John 5.30) The conflict in the text is that the crowd believes only God can forgive sins, while Jesus asserts that one whom God authorizes may also forgive.
Jewish legal crime for Jesus to be crucified was blasphemy based on self-identification by Jesus. Believing no human flesh is righteous per Psalm 14:2-3, Psalm 51:6, Psalm 51:6, Isaiah 64:6, ... the idea of Lord יהוה God in human flesh is blasphemy, which deserves death. Searching scripture for Messiah or "Anointed One" finds first occurence in Daniel 9(prophecy about timing of Anointed One dying, which was fulfilled in Jesus).
In the text, Jesus does NOT self-identify as God or as "God in human flesh."
What does the self-identification of Jesus as one greater than the Temple mean ?
In the text, Jesus' assertion of his being greater than the temple is used to justify his disciples' eating grain on the Sabbath. David and his crew ate bread from the temple when they were hungry. Jesus is greater than the temple (and also David) which means his authorization to his followers to eat on the Sabbath is greater than the commands against doing so. In keeping with this view, Jesus concludes the scene with a claim that he is lord - i.e. greater than - the Sabbath (or the rules about it). There is no indication in the text that the comparison to the temple is a declaration of divinity.
If Jesus is not God, please explain the end of Acts 2:24 (NLT) for death could not keep him in its grip.
Explained above. In the context of the Acts 2 text, death could not keep Jesus in its grip because the resurrection is for Peter a fulfillment of the psalmist's declaration that God would not allow God's "Holy One" to "rot in the grave."
If Jesus is not God, please explain Acts 4:9-10 explanation for perfect healing in the powerful name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene (while being consistent with Acts 19:13-16 where just saying the name does not have power).
In my view, there is nothing in the Acts 4 text that declares Jesus to be God. Instead, the text declares the power of - NOT the divinity of - the name of Jesus. In the Acts 19 scene, the problem is not with the name of Jesus, but rather with the one employing it.
Acts 4:11 "man" is followed by Psalm 118:22 fulf1illment (cornerstone of faith in One God), which is also quoted in Luke 20:17 conclusion following the parable of evil farmers and in 1 Peter 2:4-7. Salvation in no one else is consistent with Isaiah 43:10-13
The Acts text declares the salvific power of Jesus' name, a power that comes from God's authorization. (Acts 4.12) The Acts 4 text does NOT declare Jesus to be God. In Acts 4.10, Peter extols the power of Jesus' name, BUT ALSO specifically distinguishes between Jesus and God when he calls Jesus "the man [they] crucified, but God raised from the dead."
As for 1 Peter 2, notice...
- 1 Peter 2.4: Christ, the living cornerstone of God's temple, was "rejected by people," but "chosen by God for great honor." A clear distinction between God and the one God chose.
- 1 Peter 2.5: Through the "mediation of Jesus Christ," we offer sacrifices that please God. Another clear distinction.
- 1 Peter 2.6: The verse contains a version of Isaiah 28.16, in which God speaks and is the one who places the cornerstone in Jerusalem. God is NOT the cornerstone, but rather the one placing the cornerstone.
- 1 Peter 2.7: God has given Jesus honor. The one honored is not the one who gives the honor.
In NT verse after verse and passage after passage, the meaning is clear: Jesus is not God. Jesus is exactly what Peter said he is: The "man" "chosen" and "raised from the dead" by God. Nothing you have posted so far in our exchange has demonstrated the error of that simple and biblical declaration.
-
Please provide scripture verse(s) for assertion "other man also => they start their life without sin and are not sinners and not wicked."
@Wolfgang I already did ... Rom 5:12 says that consequences of sin come on all men because THEY ALL SIN (COMMIT SIN). Only after a human has comitted a sin are they sinners and are under condemnation of sin and in need of redemption from sin.
Appears Paul implies two words in Romans 5:12 (ESV) 12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned— (in Adam)
Adam is the one man cause for sin entering the world. Romans 5:12 lacks words for assertions "other man also => they start their life without sin and are not sinners and not wicked." and "Only after a human has comitted a sin are they sinners and are under condemnation of sin and in need of redemption from sin."
My faith understanding of Romans 5:12 reflects subsequent contextual repetitions/expansions about the effect of Adam's one sin upon all humans (conceived via natural sperm), especially Romans 5:16-19
@Wolfgang The problem is that your "faith understanding" is not in harmony with what these scriptures plainly state.
@Wolfgang Note carefully, just because someone claims "faith understanding" does NOT make such understanding to be true and in agreement with what Scripture states ... just because a viewer claiming his faith understanding is that a picture shows a round table - when the picture shows a square table - does not make the square table round.
Concur careful note applies to all CD participants.
Noticed lack of comments about highlighted text in Romans 5:13-21 (plainly shows effect of one man's sin). Personal learning was the number of repetitions/expansions about the effect of Adam's one sin upon all humans (conceived via natural sperm) in Romans 5:12-21
Thankful for silent confirmation of scriptures implying every human is born (conceived via natural sperm) spiritually dead. Also silently confirmed generational sin has scriptural basis.
From my faith view, am Thankful for a righteous woman, Mary, who gave birth to a human son, Jesus, who was fully God (The Word) in spirit dwelling inside a human body. Jesus did not inherit sin nature from Adam so was Holy (spiritually alive) at time of conception plus Jesus choose to never sin, which allowed Him to express Love for every human by brutally executed on the cross for our sins.
@Wolfgang Once again, you divert and twist the plain facts in order to accommodate your "faith view"
@Wolfgang Note also, in your faith view you all of a sudden speak of a "RIGHTEOUS WOMAN" .... when only a few paragraphs earlier in your post your faith perspective claim was that all (men and women) were born unrighteous because of inheriting sin via male sperm of their fathers, going back to Adam.
@Wolfgang Your various "faith views/perspectives" are self-contradictory .... and in need of correction if they are to agree with the plain facts of Scripture.
For plain facts of scripture, please provide relevant verse(s) for correction consideration.
Mary was conceived & born unrighteous, but had chosen to become righteous (the servant of the Lord) => Luke 1:38 (ESV) And Mary said, “Behold, I am the servant of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word.” And the angel departed from her.
Seem to remember human debating tactic when know your own position is weak (or faulty), then attack person rather than idea (with purpose to discredit person, which implies their ideas are faulty). Another debate tactic is taking opponent's word(s)/argument(s) to extreme (trying to show/prove silliness). The continuation of using personal pronouns in a non-complimentary manner after recent guideline reminder in this thread is proving truth of my faith (especially when no scripture alternate is given for correction consideration) while not necessary liking truth (nor wanting to believe the truth). Recently heard "Truth is Truth whether you believe it or not" spoken by Neil Anderson in Bondage Breakers.
Plain fact of scripture question is: What verse(s) best declare the man Jesus is not God ?
Keep Smiling 😀
-
Appears Paul implies two words in Romans 5:12 (ESV) 12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned— (in Adam)
Not at all ... Paul clearly stated that ALL SINNED ... it is YOUR action that makes you a sinner, not Adam's action. You do not sin "in Adam", you sin "in yourself" in that you give in to your desires (cp. Jam 1:14 "But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.")
Adam is the one man cause for sin entering the world.
Yes, but that does not say that all men without their doing (such as would be the case with a newborn baby !!) are sinners because of Adam. Sin CAME INTO THE WORLD with Adam's sin ...
Romans 5:12 lacks words for assertions "other man also => they start their life without sin and are not sinners and not wicked." and "Only after a human has comitted a sin are they sinners and are under condemnation of sin and in need of redemption from sin."
Rom 5:12 does not need to state this truth in the words I used ... see above.
The one individual man - Adam - with his sin made possible for sin to exist in the world. The on individual man - Jesus - with his sacrifice for sin made possible for redemption from sin to exist in the world.
Now, please note carefully:
The one man's - Jesus' - action did not make saved sinners of all men without men themselves doing something, for only those who put their trust in and believe in him are saved and receive eternal life.
Neither did the one man's - Adam's - action make sinners of all men without men themselves doing something and committing sin (cp. "all sinned").
-
Plain fact of scripture question is: What verse(s) best declare the man Jesus is not God ?
The plain simple answer is: All the verse which speak of (1) GOD and (2) the man Jesus as TWO who are distinct from each other (@Bill_Coley has provided many such verses in recent posts).
"God raised Jesus from the dead" ... God did NOT raise Himself from the dead since God can't even die. Since tha man Jesus did die, he obviously could not be God. Since God did something (raise from the dead) to someone else (the man Jesus, who had died) it should be very plain that all those verses which declare this plain truth that God raised Jesus from the dead declare that the man Jesus is not God.
Do you realize that in your scripture question you imply that a man actually is God, whereas Scripture is plain and clear that God is not a man??
-
Every human always has two sources of thoughts: their own & spiritual adversary (1 Peter 5:8-9 is consistent with Jeremiah 17:9). Since spiritual adversary does not want any human choosing God's Holy Love, he builds a hidden fortress in human hearts as a sin anchor against God.
Stupid humans have asked for more spiritual adversary presence (possesion), which results in lots of bad voices in their heads (e.g. Legion). Hidden fotress receives demonic spirit protection (evil spirits include spirit guides, channelling, Kandulini, Ba'al, "ascended master", guru, ...).
Belief God raised Jesus from the dead & Jesus is Lord יהוה God provides three sources of thought: Holy יהוה God, personal, & adversary.
Smart humans know Jeremiah17:10 (& other verses) about God searching hearts so can humbly ask God to search out their hidden fortress (with intense hurts and sin) for Holy dismantling and healing. John 8:31-32 (NLT) Jesus said to the people who believed in him, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to my teachings. And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”
My apologies since my words cannot adequately express magnitude of freedom to Love as God Loves every human. Thankful for God changing my vision to see the image of God in every person so know God Loves each individual immensely & intensely 😍while humanly appreciating that no human can be forced to Love God (must be their own free will choice - God did not create humans as robots for automatic obedience). Thankful for God helping me to become Holy as God is Holy, which includes dismantling adversary holds (hurts) in me. Thankful for many worship songs, which includes "Oceans" (by Hillson United) and "Are you washed in the blood ?" (by Elisha A. Hoffman in 1878)
Sadly smart humans can become stupid by no longer believing Jesus is Lord יהוה God, which allows spiritual advisary to rebuild hidden fortress in their heart, which is more resistant to God's Truth (Thankful for 2 Timothy 2:23-26 change possibiity, which would be followed by immense Love).
@Bill_Coley Once again I tell you - for perhaps the third or fourth time in our exchanges - that my beliefs and conclusions about the Bible come AS A RESULT OF, and NOT in advance of my engagement with, the Bible.
What value does personal belief/conclusion history have for current "idea" discussion ? (from my perspective, the assertion "third or fourth time" seems a bit boastful about personal study results while not providing information about study approach nor methodology - public CD replies prove belief conclusion filters are a form of spiritual blindness that cannot "see" nor "recognize" who Jesus is in many scriptures)
Noticed identification about diety of Jesus in the end of Acts 2:24 (NLT) ... for death could not keep him in its grip. (that contrasts with Hebrews 9:27 And just as each person is destined to die once and after that comes judgment). Acts 2:24 is a corollary to idea "God cannot die" since death could not keep God in its grip. Holy One of Israel would not be left there after one sacrifice for the sins of all humans.
@Bill_Coley Having just said - in the SAME SENTENCE! - that "God" raised him from the dead, and having asserted three sentences earlier that God attested to Jesus through the great and mighty works God did "through" him, it is neither linguistically nor logically possible for Peter's closing phrase in Acts 2.24 to report that Jesus was God.
Thanks for confirming hypothesis snippet corollary about ignoring/bypassing "contradictory" scripture (so sadly asserts a sentence clause Jesus is God should not be near one about Jesus is man).
@Bill_Coley Instead, in my view, the clear meaning of Acts 2.24, especially in its context, is that the resurrection of Jesus fulfilled God's promise to David. To wit...
- Acts 2.25-28 - Peter quotes from Psalm 16, a passage that includes the psalmist's conviction that God will not "allow [God's] Holy One to rot in the grave." Peter clearly believes Jesus is God's "Holy One," not God. Importantly, in its original Psalm 16 context, the one God will not let rot in the grave is NOT a person to be born in the distant future, but the psalmist himself! In Acts 2 Peter claims the psalmist wrote about someone other than himself (i.e. Jesus) but in the psalm, clearly it is the psalmist himself whom the psalmist believes God will not let rot. (see Psalm 16.8-11)
- Acts 2.29-31 - Peter argues that in those words the psalmist was not talking about himself, but was rather "saying God would not leave [God's "Holy One"] among the dead or allow his body to rot in the grave." (Acts 2.31) That is, God would raise God's "Holy One."
- Acts 2.32 - God raised Jesus from the dead... in fulfillment of the psalmist's word.
- Acts 2.33 - God exalted Jesus to "God's right hand" and "gave him the Holy Spirit to pour out on us," in fulfillment of the psalmist's conviction that the one whom God did not leave to "rot in the grave" would in fact "sit in the place of honor at [God's] right hand."
- Acts 2.36 - God has made Jesus - the one they crucified - to be both Lord and Messiah. Peter cannot be saying God made one whom he believed was God to be Lord.
@Bill_Coley In the context created by those verses, Acts 2.22-24 clearly refers to the resurrection as God's action of which Jesus is the recipient, not the cause. Death could not hold Jesus because, as the psalmist reported centuries earlier, God had promised death would not hold God's "Holy One."
From my perspective, "Holy One of God" is part of a plural unified God (so demons correctly identified Jesus in Mark 1:23-24 & Luke 4:33-34)
Assertion "Peter cannot be saying God made one whom he believed was God to be Lord." plainly contradicts scripture text in Acts 2:36 (and verse summary: "God has made Jesus - the one they crucified - to be both Lord and Messiah.")
Jewish audience responded in Acts 2:37-41 by 3,000+ Jewish believers in Jesus as Lord יהוה God being baptized to identify with the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus for the forgiveness of their sins.
Notably missing from "To wit..." analysis is Acts 2:34-35 where King David prophetically wrote about Jesus being Lord יהוה God in Psalm 110:1
From my faith understanding of a plural unity God, Words spoken by Jesus identify Him being Lord יהוה God (while not boasting about being Lord יהוה God along with One God's commUnity of Love being Father,Son,Spirit). Human prophets used a phrase like "Thus says The Lord" to provide authority for what the Lord said through them. The crowd sent to arrest Jesus had a human reaction after self-identification of Jesus by speaking God's divine name: John 18:6 (NLT) As Jesus said “I Am he,” they all drew back and fell to the ground!
@Bill_Coley Again I respect the product of your "faith understanding." But also again I must note that the biblical text does not support your view. Jesus not once identifies himself as "being Lord God." In its context, the "I am" of your current example, John 18.6, is not a declaration of divinity, but rather an acknowledgement of personal identity.
- In John 18.4, Jesus asks whom they're looking for.
- In John 18.5, they say "Jesus of Nazareth."
- In John 18.6, Jesus acknowledge that he is Jesus of Nazareth.
- After a repeat of his question about whom they seek, in John 18.8 Jesus again acknowledges that he is Jesus of Nazareth, and asks that the others present - those who are not Jesus of Nazareth - be allowed to leave.
@Bill_Coley There is no declaration of divinity in that text. (Note the NLT is one of a VERY small number of translations that capitalize the "am" in those verses. The vast majority of translations render the verses as to acknowledgement of personal name that it is: i.e. "I am...")
Thankful for another confirmation of snippet study hypothesis with corollary about belief conclusion filter for ignoring/bypassing "contradictory" scripture. Noticed "John 18.6, Jesus acknowledge that he is Jesus of Nazareth." does not mention nor explain the human worship reaction to God's divine Name being spoken by Jesus, which foreshadows Philippians 2:9-11 (especially "every knee shall bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth"). When Hebrew was translated to Greek (~200 years before Jesus), Exodus 3.14 includes God's name in answer to Moses: "Ἐγώ εἰμι" (I, I AM) that was spoken by Jesus in John 18:6 "Ἐγώ εἰμι" (I, I AM), which was followed by human worship of Jesus as Lord יהוה God before the unbelieving crowd was allowed by God to arrest Jesus. FYI: personally capitalize I, I AM to show my Love of Lord יהוה God 😍
What does the self-identification of Jesus as one greater than the Temple mean ?
@Bill_Coley In the text, Jesus' assertion of his being greater than the temple is used to justify his disciples' eating grain on the Sabbath. David and his crew ate bread from the temple when they were hungry. Jesus is greater than the temple (and also David) which means his authorization to his followers to eat on the Sabbath is greater than the commands against doing so. In keeping with this view, Jesus concludes the scene with a claim that he is lord - i.e. greater than - the Sabbath (or the rules about it). There is no indication in the text that the comparison to the temple is a declaration of divinity.
Who created the Sabbath and established the rules ? Exodus 20:8-11, Exodus 31:12-18, Leviticus 23:3, Deuteronomy 5:12-14
@Bill_Coley As for 1 Peter 2, notice...
- 1 Peter 2.4: Christ, the living cornerstone of God's temple, was "rejected by people," but "chosen by God for great honor." A clear distinction between God and the one God chose.
- 1 Peter 2.5: Through the "mediation of Jesus Christ," we offer sacrifices that please God. Another clear distinction.
- 1 Peter 2.6: The verse contains a version of Isaiah 28.16, in which God speaks and is the one who places the cornerstone in Jerusalem. God is NOT the cornerstone, but rather the one placing the cornerstone.
- 1 Peter 2.7: God has given Jesus honor. The one honored is not the one who gives the honor.
@Bill_Coley In NT verse after verse and passage after passage, the meaning is clear: Jesus is not God. Jesus is exactly what Peter said he is: The "man" "chosen" and "raised from the dead" by God. Nothing you have posted so far in our exchange has demonstrated the error of that simple and biblical declaration.
Contrasting view is NT verses declaring Jesus is Lord יהוה God in a number of ways: so far nothing posted in CD has given me reason to consider denying diety of Jesus so looking forward to falling on my knees at God's throne to declare Jesus is Lord יהוה God in three languages 😍
- 1 Peter 2.4 (NLT) You are coming to Christ, who is the living cornerstone of God’s temple. He was rejected by people, but he was chosen by God for great honor. (Thankful for Christ, The Annointed One, Messiah, being part of a plural unified God)
- 1 Peter 2:5 (NLT) And you are living stones that God is building into his spiritual temple. What’s more, you are his holy priests. Through the mediation of Jesus Christ, you offer spiritual sacrifices that please God. (Thankful to be a living stone fitted into God's spiritual temple plus Thankful for Holy Spirit confirming me doing things to Glorify God so humbly praying for God to keep growing me for His Holy use)
- 1 Peter 2:6 (NLT) As the Scriptures say, “I am placing a cornerstone in Jerusalem, chosen for great honor, and anyone who trusts in him will never be disgraced.” (Thankful for my trust in Jesus as Lord יהוה God, spiritual cornerstone, that will never be disgraced)
- 1 Peter 2:7 (NLT) Yes, you who trust him recognize the honor God has given him. But for those who reject him, “The stone that the builders rejected has now become the cornerstone.” (Thankful for Godly honor given to Jesus)
- 1 Peter 2:8 (NLT) And, “He is the stone that makes people stumble, the rock that makes them fall.” They stumble because they do not obey God’s word, and so they meet the fate that was planned for them. (Thankful for repentance & change in many people so they are no longer heading to previously planned fate while praying for God to send dreams/visions so believers can grow in fatih and others choose to change their ways)
Keep Smiling 😀
-
Every human always has two sources of thoughts: their own & spiritual adversary (1 Peter 5:8-9 is consistent with Jeremiah 17:9). Since spiritual adversary does not want any human choosing God's Holy Love, he builds a hidden fortress in human hearts as a sin anchor against God.
This "spiritual adversary" has "religion" as a main force to have people deceive themselves away from the plain truth of Scripture that was revealed and communicated from God by His Son and His prophets ... A "three person God" in place of the Scriptural "one person God" has been a very successful religion deception
With your "two sources of thoughts" mentioned above, you leave out the one source for truth => God-inspired Scripture, which incidentally Jesus used as his means to withstand temptation ... remember "It is written: ....."
Belief God raised Jesus from the dead & Jesus is Lord יהוה God provides three sources of thought: Holy יהוה God, personal, & adversary.
A mix of truth and error, with error determining the overall direction does not provide correct thoughts concerning the true God.
YES, Scripture statement that God raised the man Jesus of Nazareth from the dead is true ... and in itself this Scripture statement by itself proves that your further idea that Jesus is LORD God is false. Your "religion" makes two Gods ... no matter how you want to label it.
Smart humans know Jeremiah17:10 (& other verses) about God searching hearts so can humbly ask God to search out their hidden fortress (with intense hurts and sin) for Holy dismantling and healing. John 8:31-32 (NLT) Jesus said to the people who believed in him, “You are truly my disciples if you remain faithful to my teachings. And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”
And why is it that your idea and religion contradicts what Jesis himself taught? why is it that you do not even seem to notice that?
Sadly smart humans can become stupid by no longer believing Jesus is Lord יהוה God, which allows spiritual advisary to rebuild hidden fortress in their heart, which is more resistant to God's Truth (Thankful for 2 Timothy 2:23-26 change possibiity, which would be followed by immense Love).
I would say, very sadly, sincere and seeking humans can be so deceived and become self-deceived into a false premise (e.g. two or three are only one God) that they flat out contradict the very words of Jesus which they read in Scripture ...and do not even notice it, most likely due to some emotional experience clouded as "spiritual".
-
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus post:
Sadly smart humans can become stupid by no longer believing Jesus is Lord יהוה God, which allows spiritual advisary to rebuild hidden fortress in their heart, which is more resistant to God's Truth (Thankful for 2 Timothy 2:23-26 change possibiity, which would be followed by immense Love).
As one of the "smart humans" who in your view apparently has "become stupid," I confidently assert that the "spiritual adversary" has not rebuilt a "hidden fortress in [my] heart."... But then again, if said "fortress" is truly "hidden," I might not be able to tell! ... But if I can't tell there's a fortress there, perhaps it doesn't matter! ... So confusing!
FWIW, I don't think you have "become stupid" because you have reached conclusions about the divinity of Jesus different from mine.
What value does personal belief/conclusion history have for current "idea" discussion ? (from my perspective, the assertion "third or fourth time" seems a bit boastful about personal study results while not providing information about study approach nor methodology - public CD replies prove belief conclusion filters are a form of spiritual blindness that cannot "see" nor "recognize" who Jesus is in many scriptures)
I've felt compelled three or four times to remind you of the fact that for me, Bible study precedes my conclusions about the Bible because on at least that many occasions in our exchanges, you have asserted - falsely - that my "filters" or "faith perspective" determined my interpretation of the texts at issue in our discussion. If the time ever comes when you accept as truthful my testimony about my approach to Bible study, I will have no further need for such reminders.
As one of the "smart humans" who in your view has apparently "become stupid," I confidently assert that I may well suffer from forms of "spiritual blindness ," but not when it comes to "see[ing]" or "recogniz[ing] who Jesus is in many scriptures."
Thanks for confirming hypothesis snippet corollary about ignoring/bypassing "contradictory" scripture (so sadly asserts a sentence clause Jesus is God should not be near one about Jesus is man).
I don't really know what this sentence means, but I will respond as best I can:
- I did not and do not confirm any "snippet corollary about ignoring/bypassing 'contradictory' scripture." If you revisit my previous post, you'll notice I actually said that in my view, such snippets don't exist in the Acts 2 text, which means I could not possibly have ignored or bypassed them.
- I posted nothing about the proximity of "a sentence clause 'Jesus is God'" to "one about Jesus is man."
From my perspective, "Holy One of God" is part of a plural unified God (so demons correctly identified Jesus in Mark 1:23-24 & Luke 4:33-34)
You're welcome to your point of view, but in my view, the text does not support your claim. The "Holy One of God," by its very wording, refers to someone other than God. I am the brother of my siblings. Does that mean I am my siblings? Of course not. I am the pastor of my church. Does that mean I am my church? Of course not. Likewise, the Holy One of God is not God.
Assertion "Peter cannot be saying God made one whom he believed was God to be Lord." plainly contradicts scripture text in Acts 2:36 (and verse summary: "God has made Jesus - the one they crucified - to be both Lord and Messiah.")
Again we do not communicate. Peter says God made Jesus to be Lord and Messiah. My point was that Peter does NOT say God made God to be Lord and Messiah, in part, I believe, because it would not make sense for Peter to say God made one who was already God to be Lord and Messiah.
Jewish audience responded in Acts 2:37-41 by 3,000+ Jewish believers in Jesus as Lord יהוה God being baptized to identify with the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus for the forgiveness of their sins.
The text does NOT say the audience believed in "Jesus as Lord God." The text quotes Peter as directing the crowd to turn to God and to be baptized in the name of Jesus. There is NO indication in Peter's words to the crowd that he believed Jesus was God. In fact, it's clear from the sermon Peter delivered that he saw Jesus as the "man" through whom God did great and mighty works, and whom God raised from the dead. (Acts 2.22-24) That is, two distinct identities.
Notably missing from "To wit..." analysis is Acts 2:34-35 where King David prophetically wrote about Jesus being Lord יהוה God in Psalm 110:1
"Notably missing" from your post is ANY substantive engagement with my exegesis of Acts 2.25-36, and its conclusion that for Peter, the resurrection is fulfillment of the psalmist's prediction, but the psalmist himself believed the "Holy One" whom God would not let rot in the grave would be the psalmist himself.
As for Acts 2.34-35, if you revisit my post, you'll see that I engaged the central theme of those verses when of Acts 2.33 I wrote, "God exalted Jesus to "God's right hand" and "gave him the Holy Spirit to pour out on us," in fulfillment of the psalmist's conviction that the one whom God did not leave to "rot in the grave" would in fact "sit in the place of honor at [God's] right hand."
As for your claim that King David wrote "prophetically" about Jesus being Lord, there is no support for your claim in the Psalm text. I remind you again of Psalm 16.8-11 in which the psalmist makes clear that his prediction is about himself, not about somebody who will live 900 years in the future.
Thankful for another confirmation of snippet study hypothesis with corollary about belief conclusion filter for ignoring/bypassing "contradictory" scripture. Noticed "John 18.6, Jesus acknowledge that he is Jesus of Nazareth." does not mention nor explain the human worship reaction to God's divine Name being spoken by Jesus, which foreshadows Philippians 2:9-11 (especially "every knee shall bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth"). When Hebrew was translated to Greek (~200 years before Jesus), Exodus 3.14 includes God's name in answer to Moses: "Ἐγώ εἰμι" (I, I AM) that was spoken by Jesus in John 18:6 "Ἐγώ εἰμι" (I, I AM), which was followed by human worship of Jesus as Lord יהוה God before the unbelieving crowd was allowed by God to arrest Jesus. FYI: personally capitalize I, I AM to show my Love of Lord יהוה God 😍
As I laid out, verse-by-verse, in my previous post, the text does not support your view. You're welcome to your view, of course! But the text does not support it.
Who created the Sabbath and established the rules ? Exodus 20:8-11, Exodus 31:12-18, Leviticus 23:3, Deuteronomy 5:12-14
Again, as I made clear in my previous post, when Jesus claims to be "lord of the Sabbath" he is saying he is greater than the rules surrounding the sabbath. He is NOT saying he is God. And, it's STILL worth noting that the ESV, the NRSV, and the Lexham Bible, among others, do not capitalize the word "lord" in v.8. So, Jesus is the "lord" of the Sabbath.
Contrasting view is NT verses declaring Jesus is Lord יהוה God in a number of ways: so far nothing posted in CD has given me reason to consider denying diety of Jesus so looking forward to falling on my knees at God's throne to declare Jesus is Lord יהוה God in three languages 😍
As one of the "smart humans" who in your view apparently has "become stupid," I confidently assert that you and I reach different conclusions about the divinity of Jesus.
......................................................................................................................................................................................................
NOTE: Over the course of our many exchanges, I have issued to you several pleas to conform your posts to the "criticize ideas, not people" expectation of these forums. In response, on several occasions you have issued apologies for your word choices, and what I thought were promises to improve. Your most recent post in this thread makes it clear to me that you have not improved your word choice - if anything, your posts have become more personally critical, not less. So much so that I must now tell you that I feel irritated to the point of suspending my role in our exchanges if you intend to continue to post as you did in your most recent post. So here's my notice to you: On the occasion of your next post that contains critiques of my intelligence (as your most recent one does) or faith or allegiance to Christ, I will reply only that I am suspending my participation in our exchanges until such time as I feel confident that you have changed your ways. I am NOT telling you that you have to change the content of your posts!!! I'm telling you that if you don't change that content, I will no longer engage you in CD threads.
-
@Bill_Coley wrote in reply to @Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus
Again we do not communicate. Peter says God made Jesus to be Lord and Messiah. My point was that Peter does NOT say God made God to be Lord and Messiah, in part, I believe, because it would not make sense for Peter to say God made one who was already God to be Lord and Messiah.
Also, neither does any text say that "God made Jesus to be God ..", nor does it say "God made Himself to be a human", nor does it say "God made Himself - or part of Himself or a second personality of Himself - to be Lord or Messiah" ....
When Hebrew was translated to Greek (~200 years before Jesus), Exodus 3.14 includes God's name in answer to Moses: "Ἐγώ εἰμι" (I, I AM) that was spoken by Jesus in John 18:6 "Ἐγώ εἰμι" (I, I AM), which was followed by human worship of Jesus as Lord יהוה God before the unbelieving crowd was allowed by God to arrest Jesus. FYI: personally capitalize I, I AM to show my Love of Lord יהוה God 😍
Your claim about the words Ἐγώ εἰμι in Exo 3:14 is only partly true in that those words were indeed used and translated as "I" and "am" ....these two words were not the "name" or "designation" for GOD/YHWH/LORD .... those words were ὁ ὤν, the full expression being Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν (I am The One Who Is / the I AM). The words Ἐγώ εἰμι which Jesus spoke at various occasions have absolutely nothing to do with the "I AM" In Exo 3:14.
-
Thankful for God drawing me closer into One God's commUnity of Love while preparing for Spiritual Warfare to effectively deal with hurt in another person (whose past includes being a luciferian with purpose to disrupt faith in believers). Thankful for the Joy of the Lord being my strength while cognizant of Proverbs 25:20 (a heavy heart cannot receive God's Joy so interprets Joy as cheerful singing, which stings a lot).
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus post:
Who created the Sabbath and established the rules ? Exodus 20:8-11, Exodus 31:12-18, Leviticus 23:3, Deuteronomy 5:12-14
@Bill_Coley Again, as I made clear in my previous post, when Jesus claims to be "lord of the Sabbath" he is saying he is greater than the rules surrounding the sabbath. He is NOT saying he is God. And, it's STILL worth noting that the ESV, the NRSV, and the Lexham Bible, among others, do not capitalize the word "lord" in v.8. So, Jesus is the "lord" of the Sabbath.
Who does Jesus think He is ? (from words spoken by Jesus)
- Spoke as God in human flesh (never said a phrase like "Thus says the Lord")
- Lord of the Sabbath (created by God with Holy rules for observance)
- Greater than the Temple
- Greater than human prophet Jonah
- Greater than King Solomon (and God's wisdom in Solomon)
- Greater works than these that ye may marvel
- Greatest way to show love for friends is to die for them
- Take up my yoke and learn from me, because I am lowly and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.
- Equal with God (while choosing to humbly obey The Father's will as an immense expression of Love)
- I Am the Bread of Life.
- I Am the Bread that came down from Heaven.
- I Am the Light of the world.
- I Am the one who testifies about myself, and the Father who sent me testifies about me.
- I Am from above. You are of this world. I am not of this world.
- Truly I tell you, before Abraham was, I Am.
- I Am the Gate for the sheep.
- I Am the Good Shepherd. The Good Shepherd lays down His life for the sheep.
- I Am the Son of God.
- I Am the Resurrection and the Life.
- I Am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No comes to The Father except through me.
- I Am the True Vine, and my Father is the Gardener.
- I Am the Vine; you are the branches. The one who remains in me and I in him produces much fruit, because you can do nothing without me.
- Fear not; I Am the First and the Last
- I was dead, but look - I Am alive forever and ever, and I hold the keys of death and Hades.
- Then all the churches will know that I Am the one who examines minds and hearts, and I will give to each of you according to your works.
- I Am the Alpha and Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.
- I Am the Root and Descendant of David, the Bright Morning Star.
- I Am coming soon ...
From my faith perspective, Jesus is fully God's Spirit in human flesh (did not have/inherit a human spirit from God's breath of life into the Adam). Yet One God is more than Jesus so God (The Father, Will) was ruling on His throne in Heaven when human body of Jesus died as a Holy sacrifice for sin (God's Spirit did not die, but descended into hell - humanly not know about "reception" since Jesus died as a substitutionary sin sacrifice). Great Joy when all of One God resurrected Jesus 😍
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus post:
Sadly smart humans can become stupid by no longer believing Jesus is Lord יהוה God, which allows spiritual advisary to rebuild hidden fortress in their heart, which is more resistant to God's Truth (Thankful for 2 Timothy 2:23-26 change possibiity, which would be followed by immense Love).
@Bill_Coley As one of the "smart humans" who in your view apparently has "become stupid," I confidently assert that the "spiritual adversary" has not rebuilt a "hidden fortress in [my] heart."... But then again, if said "fortress" is truly "hidden," I might not be able to tell! ... But if I can't tell there's a fortress there, perhaps it doesn't matter! ... So confusing!
@Bill_Coley As one of the "smart humans" who in your view has apparently "become stupid," I confidently assert that I may well suffer from forms of "spiritual blindness ," but not when it comes to "see[ing]" or "recogniz[ing] who Jesus is in many scriptures."
@Bill_Coley FWIW, I don't think you have "become stupid" because you have reached conclusions about the divinity of Jesus different from mine.
During 20 years of self-afflicted drug addiction, I repeatedly chose sinful stupidity (felt natural after awhile so my fortress was hidden in plain sight so I could not "see" God in many ways = my spiritual blindness). My heart, thoughts, and actions provided a Holy Righteous God reason to blot my name out of His Book of Life. Thankful God can change salt that has lost its saltiness back to being salty 😍plus God answers prayers 🙏
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus post:
What value does personal belief/conclusion history have for current "idea" discussion ? (from my perspective, the assertion "third or fourth time" seems a bit boastful about personal study results while not providing information about study approach nor methodology - public CD replies prove belief conclusion filters are a form of spiritual blindness that cannot "see" nor "recognize" who Jesus is in many scriptures)
@Bill_Coley I've felt compelled three or four times to remind you of the fact that for me, Bible study precedes my conclusions about the Bible because on at least that many occasions in our exchanges, you have asserted - falsely - that my "filters" or "faith perspective" determined my interpretation of the texts at issue in our discussion. If the time ever comes when you accept as truthful my testimony about my approach to Bible study, I will have no further need for such reminders.
Is human Bible study infalliable ? (lacking from reply is information about study approach and/or methodology)
Thankful for peaceful teaching of Holy Spirit (in One God's commUnity of Love) to revisit/revamp my human lessons learned many years ago. Logos wiki => Bible Translation Spectrum includes S.O.A.P. Bible Study approach.
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus post:
Thankful for another confirmation of snippet study hypothesis with corollary about belief conclusion filter for ignoring/bypassing "contradictory" scripture. Noticed "John 18.6, Jesus acknowledge that he is Jesus of Nazareth." does not mention nor explain the human worship reaction to God's divine Name being spoken by Jesus, which foreshadows Philippians 2:9-11 (especially "every knee shall bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth"). When Hebrew was translated to Greek (~200 years before Jesus), Exodus 3.14 includes God's name in answer to Moses: "Ἐγώ εἰμι" (I, I AM) that was spoken by Jesus in John 18:6 "Ἐγώ εἰμι" (I, I AM), which was followed by human worship of Jesus as Lord יהוה God before the unbelieving crowd was allowed by God to arrest Jesus. FYI: personally capitalize I, I AM to show my Love of Lord יהוה God 😍
@Bill_Coley As I laid out, verse-by-verse, in my previous post, the text does not support your view. You're welcome to your view, of course! But the text does not support it.
Missing from verse-by-verse in earlier post and this reply is John 18:6 insight about human reaction to God's divine Name being spoken by Jesus.
@Wolfgang Your claim about the words Ἐγώ εἰμι in Exo 3:14 is only partly true in that those words were indeed used and translated as "I" and "am" ....these two words were not the "name" or "designation" for GOD/YHWH/LORD .... those words were ὁ ὤν, the full expression being Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν (I am The One Who Is / the I AM). The words Ἐγώ εἰμι which Jesus spoke at various occasions have absolutely nothing to do with the "I AM" In Exo 3:14.
Assertion about God's Name does not explain John 18:6 human reaction of worship after Jesus spoke Ἐγώ εἰμι
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus post:
Notably missing from "To wit..." analysis is Acts 2:34-35 where King David prophetically wrote about Jesus being Lord יהוה God in Psalm 110:1
@Bill_Coley "Notably missing" from your post is ANY substantive engagement with my exegesis of Acts 2.25-36, and its conclusion that for Peter, the resurrection is fulfillment of the psalmist's prediction, but the psalmist himself believed the "Holy One" whom God would not let rot in the grave would be the psalmist himself.
Psalmist body rotted in the grave while the human body of Jesus did not. Psalm 51:5 sin shows psalmist knew "Holy One" was not himself.
......................................................................................................................................................................................................
@Bill_Coley NOTE: Over the course of our many exchanges, I have issued to you several pleas to conform your posts to the "criticize ideas, not people" expectation of these forums. In response, on several occasions you have issued apologies for your word choices, and what I thought were promises to improve. Your most recent post in this thread makes it clear to me that you have not improved your word choice - if anything, your posts have become more personally critical, not less. So much so that I must now tell you that I feel irritated to the point of suspending my role in our exchanges if you intend to continue to post as you did in your most recent post. So here's my notice to you: On the occasion of your next post that contains critiques of my intelligence (as your most recent one does) or faith or allegiance to Christ, I will reply only that I am suspending my participation in our exchanges until such time as I feel confident that you have changed your ways. I am NOT telling you that you have to change the content of your posts!!! I'm telling you that if you don't change that content, I will no longer engage you in CD threads.
Please dialogue with God in prayer about irritations (please seek God's explanation). God continues to faithfully Love you 😍
Keep Smiling 😀
-
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus postSmiling
Spoke as God in human flesh (never said a phrase like "Thus says the Lord")
Lord of the Sabbath (created by God with Holy rules for observance)
Greater than the Temple
et al....
Notably missing from your list of 28 alleged assertions of who Jesus thinks he is, is the assertion that Jesus thinks he's God. That assertion is missing from your list, of course, because Jesus never made it.
As for the particulars of your list:
- Spoke as God in human flesh (never said a phrase like "Thus says the Lord") Jesus never claimed to speak as God in human flesh.
- Lord of the Sabbath (created by God with Holy rules for observance) Jesus claimed to be the "lord" - not the "LORD" - of the Sabbath, and this claim contains no claim of divinity.
- Greater than the Temple - In context, this is not a claim of deity.
- Greater than human prophet Jonah - In context, this is not a claim of deity.
- Greater than King Solomon (and God's wisdom in Solomon) - In context, this is not a claim of deity.
- Greater works than these that ye may marvel - In context, this is not a claim of deity.
- Greatest way to show love for friends is to die for them - You get the picture....
From my faith perspective, Jesus is fully God's Spirit in human flesh (did not have/inherit a human spirit from God's breath of life into the Adam). Yet One God is more than Jesus so God (The Father, Will) was ruling on His throne in Heaven when human body of Jesus died as a Holy sacrifice for sin (God's Spirit did not die, but descended into hell - humanly not know about "reception" since Jesus died as a substitutionary sin sacrifice). Great Joy when all of One God resurrected Jesus 😍
As always, I respect the product of your faith perspective. We disagree as to whether the biblical text supports your views.
During 20 years of self-afflicted drug addiction, I repeatedly chose sinful stupidity (felt natural after awhile so my fortress was hidden in plain sight so I could not "see" God in many ways = my spiritual blindness). My heart, thoughts, and actions provided a Holy Righteous God reason to blot my name out of His Book of Life. Thankful God can change salt that has lost its saltiness back to being salty 😍plus God answers prayers 🙏
I respect your personal and spiritual journey, but it's important to note that my journeys have been different from yours. Primary among the consequences of that reality is that you can't project your life's experiences and conclusions onto my life any more than I can project mine onto yours.
Is human Bible study infalliable ? (lacking from reply is information about study approach and/or methodology)
Thankful for peaceful teaching of Holy Spirit (in One God's commUnity of Love) to revisit/revamp my human lessons learned many years ago. Logos wiki => Bible Translation Spectrum includes S.O.A.P. Bible Study approach.
Is ANY human-implemented engagement with the Bible "infallible"? Do you claim that the "S.O.A.P." approach to Bible study is infallible? I believe God has abundantly blessed my study of Scripture over the years. Not to the point of perfection, which is neither possible nor necessary. I hope and trust that God has blessed your study, as well.
Missing from verse-by-verse in earlier post and this reply is John 18:6 insight about human reaction to God's divine Name being spoken by Jesus.
There is no indication in the text of the John 18 scene either that a) Jesus spoke "God's divine Name" when he responded to the soldiers' and guards' inquiry, or b) that the soldiers and guards fell down because they believed they had heard "God's divine Name" spoken by Jesus. You're welcome to read those observations into the text, but they're not there without your help.
Psalmist body rotted in the grave while the human body of Jesus did not. Psalm 51:5 sin shows psalmist knew "Holy One" was not himself.
Psalm 51.5 does NOT show that the psalmist did not believe himself to be the "Holy One" of Psalm 16.10. Again, you're welcome to read that observation into the text, but it doesn't get there without your help.
It is the text of Psalm 16.7-11 that makes clear who the psalmist believes the "Holy One" is: (emphasis added)
7 I will bless the LORD who guides me;
even at night my heart instructs me.
8 I know the LORD is always with me.
I will not be shaken, for he is right beside me.
9 No wonder my heart is glad, and I rejoice.
My body rests in safety.
10 For you will not leave my soul among the dead
or allow your holy one to rot in the grave.
11 You will show me the way of life,
granting me the joy of your presence
and the pleasures of living with you forever.
Tyndale House Publishers. (2015). Holy Bible: New Living Translation (Ps 16:7–11). Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers.
- The psalmist says HIS body rests in safety.
- The psalmist says God will not leave HIS soul among the dead
- The psalmist says God will show HIM the way of life and the joy of God's presence "forever"
In the middle of THAT context, the psalmist's reference to God's "Holy One" - as it is, in a quasi-appositive phrase in v.10 - can only refer to the psalmist.
In that context, as well, the reference to rotting in the grave is not about the deterioration of physical remains, but rather another reference to the soul of the psalmist, which he claims will live forever in God's presence.
Please dialogue with God in prayer about irritations (please seek God's explanation). God continues to faithfully Love you 😍
If God had written and apologized to me for several CD posts, I would dialogue with God about my "irritations." But because YOU, not God, wrote and apologized for those several posts, I will dialogue with you about them.
-
@Wolfgang Your claim about the words Ἐγώ εἰμι in Exo 3:14 is only partly true in that those words were indeed used and translated as "I" and "am" ....these two words were not the "name" or "designation" for GOD/YHWH/LORD .... those words were ὁ ὤν, the full expression being Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν (I am The One Who Is / the I AM). The words Ἐγώ εἰμι which Jesus spoke at various occasions have absolutely nothing to do with the "I AM" In Exo 3:14.
Assertion about God's Name does not explain John 18:6 human reaction of worship after Jesus spoke Ἐγώ εἰμι
You are reading into the text what the text does not say ...If I identified myself to someone saying that they are looking for Wolfgang and I would say "I am",, would I be using the name of God or would I be claiming to be God? Obviously not. Are you perhaps convinced that by using the words "I am" regarding myself I would be using the name if God in vain? Is that thereal reason for your somewhat sztrange manner of writing starting sentences ??
The context of John 18:6 explains rather clearly what happened and that no one there thought that Jesus was God. Or are you trying to tell us that first the soldiers worshiped Jesus as God and then with their further actions the soldiers then took God captive ????
-
This is an important observation, Wolfgang. If the soldiers fell down before Jesus in reverence, why did they complete their arrest of the one whom they believed was God?
-
Assertion about God's Name does not explain John 18:6 human reaction of worship after Jesus spoke Ἐγώ εἰμι
@Wolfgang You are reading into the text what the text does not say ...If I identified myself to someone saying that they are looking for Wolfgang and I would say "I am",, would I be using the name of God or would I be claiming to be God? Obviously not. Are you perhaps convinced that by using the words "I am" regarding myself I would be using the name if God in vain? Is that thereal reason for your somewhat sztrange manner of writing starting sentences ??
@Wolfgang The context of John 18:6 explains rather clearly what happened and that no one there thought that Jesus was God. Or are you trying to tell us that first the soldiers worshiped Jesus as God and then with their further actions the soldiers then took God captive ????
@Bill_Coley This is an important observation, Wolfgang. If the soldiers fell down before Jesus in reverence, why did they complete their arrest of the one whom they believed was God?
Concur that any of us humans speaking Ἐγώ εἰμι would cause no reaction in other humans (as none of us are God in human flesh). Personally not know if any in the crowd sent to arrest Jesus were believers (a previous arrest attempt had servants reporting "No man ever spoke like this!" in John 7:46). Reaction to Jesus speaking Ἐγώ εἰμι had humans stepping back and falling to the ground (worship), which was followed by Jesus being arrested and disciples scattering (fulfilling prophecy). Reaction to Jesus speaking Ἐγώ εἰμι implies identity recognition of God in human flesh (while John does not record if any in the arresting crowd changed their belief after hearing Jesus speak and their worship reaction).
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus post:
Who does Jesus think He is ? (from words spoken by Jesus)
@Bill_Coley Notably missing from your list of 28 alleged assertions of who Jesus thinks he is, is the assertion that Jesus thinks he's God. That assertion is missing from your list, of course, because Jesus never made it.
While remembering Abraham lived over 2,000 years before Jesus, please explain "I am" self-identification in "Truly I tell you, before Abraham was, I Am." in John 8:58 (followed by unbelieving Jews picking up stones to kill Jesus for blasphemy since they clearly understood diety declaration).
All 28 assertions by Jesus have implied diety declarations with some of them clearly interpreted by unbelieving Jewish audience as blasphemy. Another example is comparing Isaiah 43:10-13 with John 10:27-30, especially deliver (snatch) out of God's hand, which has Jesus declaring "I and The Father are One." while remembering Isaiah 43:11 "I - I am the Lord. Beside me there is no Savior." Time to restate thread assertion: If Jesus is not Lord God, then he is not savior for anyone. If Jesus and Lord God are two separate (distinct) entities, then Jesus is not savior for anyone.
@Bill_Coley Is ANY human-implemented engagement with the Bible "infallible"?
Any human-implemented engagement with the Bible that is not hearing & obeying God's Holy Spirit is fallible. Our spiritual adversary is the master of deception, the father of lies, who desires a little lie (leaven) to fester in us with result of disrupting our love relationship in God. An example is preaching verse-by-verse that has snippets of scripture showing Jesus is a man (while neglecting overall context of God's Love story and prophecy timing established by God). Another deception is interpreting Jesus using modern culture conventions instead of ancient Jewish.
By the way, chapter and verse numbers are a human addition to scripture during concordance creation in the 1500's. Many scripture numbers lack correspondence with underlying original language discourse boundaries (so numbering interrupts original "idea" expression in scripture).
Keep Smiling 😀
-
Concur that any of us humans speaking Ἐγώ εἰμι would cause no reaction in other humans (as none of us are God in human flesh).
So now you are telling us that Jesus of Nazareth was not a man, a human being. Hmn ... doesn't Scripture rather plainly and clearly state that Jesus of Nazareth was A MAN (a male human being) ??
According to you, the soldiers in fact arrested God ??
-
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus postSmiling
Concur that any of us humans speaking Ἐγώ εἰμι would cause no reaction in other humans (as none of us are God in human flesh).
With whom are you concurring? Neither Wolfgang nor I made any point about how "other humans" might react to humans speaking Ἐγώ εἰμι.
Personally not know if any in the crowd sent to arrest Jesus were believers (a previous arrest attempt had servants reporting "No man ever spoke like this!" in John 7:46). Reaction to Jesus speaking Ἐγώ εἰμι had humans stepping back and falling to the ground (worship), which was followed by Jesus being arrested and disciples scattering (fulfilling prophecy). Reaction to Jesus speaking Ἐγώ εἰμι implies identity recognition of God in human flesh (while John does not record if any in the arresting crowd changed their belief after hearing Jesus speak and their worship reaction).
Assuming for the moment that you're correct to infer "identity recognition of God in human flesh" from the guards' physical reaction to Jesus' words (though there is no textual support for your view) in this paragraph of your post you have done nothing but restate the circumstances that beg the question Wolfgang and I ask: If the guards recognized Jesus as God, why did they complete the arrest?
While remembering Abraham lived over 2,000 years before Jesus, please explain "I am" self-identification in "Truly I tell you, before Abraham was, I Am." in John 8:58 (followed by unbelieving Jews picking up stones to kill Jesus for blasphemy since they clearly understood diety declaration).
In this thread back in May I addressed the John 8 sayings this way:
- I think it significant that we encounter "I am" sayings only in John's Gospel. His is a more mature and stylized Christology than we find in the earlier accounts of the Synoptics. My guess is that the I am sayings are at least in part a reflection of the added years available to the development of John's Christology.
- The "I am" verses cannot be read in isolation. They must be read in concert with the many other Johannine and synoptic verses that make what I think is a clear an inescapable distinction between Jesus and God. I've raised those verses in multiple previous posts, basically never to any substance response from those who dispute my Christology. For the moment, let's focus on the most recent verses you didn't engage, John 7.16-18, and for good measure throw in John 17.3 (emphasis added): "And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent." (And notice John 17.11,13 - Jesus says he is "coming" to the one he calls "Father." Jesus does NOT say he "coming back" to the one he calls "Father.)
- And then there are the dozens of verses in the Synoptics that point to the distinction Jesus makes between himself and God.
I stand by that response.
I don't know what John means by including the "I AM" phrase in his Gospel. But I DO know the phrase is incongruent both with any imagery to describe Jesus employed other than in John, and with other imagery about and from Jesus found in John's Gospel.
All 28 assertions by Jesus have implied diety declarations with some of them clearly interpreted by unbelieving Jewish audience as blasphemy.
My point was that not once does Jesus self-identify as God. The best your efforts can achieve is a collection of actions and responses from which you infer (they do not "imply") self-identification. If Jesus thought himself to be God, why did he never directly say it? He directly called himself the "lord of the Sabbath," the "teacher and Lord" of the disciples, and "the Son of Man" who will one day return. But he never directly called himself God. Why not? A claim to divinity sounds foundational to me, and yet he NEVER made it. Why not?
And as I have responded in the past, just because one or more people believed something Jesus did or said was blasphemous does NOT mean it actually WAS blasphemous.
Another example is comparing Isaiah 43:10-13 with John 10:27-30, especially deliver (snatch) out of God's hand, which has Jesus declaring "I and The Father are One." while remembering Isaiah 43:11 "I - I am the Lord. Beside me there is no Savior."
The Isaiah text is God's assertion to the returning exiles of God's position, power, and uniqueness. The John 10 text is what I think you would call a "snippet." Given your objections to Scripture "snippets" when you contend I raise them, I'm struck by your decision not to reference the context of the cited verses.
- John 10.25 - Jews in the temple ask Jesus to state "plainly" that he is the Christ, if in fact he is.
- John 10.26 - Jesus says he already has told them, that the "works [he does] in [his] Father's name bear witness about [him.]"
- John 10.27-30 - Cited by you
- John 10.32 - Jesus asks for which of the "many good works from the Father" that he has shown them they intend to stone him. - Notice that it's not HIS OWN works Jesus which believes he has shown the Jews; it's his Father's works.
- John 10.33 - The Jews say they intend to stone him for blasphemy, for making himself to be God.
- John 10.34 - Jesus cites Psalm 82.6, in which God calls all "children of the Most High" "gods."
- John 10.35-36 - Jesus asks why they consider it blasphemous for him to claim to be "the Son of God." - Notice he does NOT say he claims to be God.
- John 10.37-38 - Jesus asks them to believe in his works, if not in him, if he is doing the works of his Father. - Again it is NOT his own works, but his Father's works to which Jesus draws attention.
- John 10.38 - The Father is in Jesus and Jesus is in the Father. - What does that mean? See John 17.20-23 (esp. John 17.21). Being "in" another is an expression of intimacy, NOT divinity. (cf. John 15.4-7)
Time to restate thread assertion: If Jesus is not Lord God, then he is not savior for anyone. If Jesus and Lord God are two separate (distinct) entities, then Jesus is not savior for anyone.
In my view, God can issue salvation to anyone through anyone. To say God cannot issue salvation to humanity through a human is to restrict God's saving power. In addition - and more importantly - the NT makes clear that God DID issue salvation to the world through a human, the one Peters calls "the man" Jesus.
Any human-implemented engagement with the Bible that is not hearing & obeying God's Holy Spirit is fallible.
Does this mean you believe the S.O.A.P. approach to Bible study is not infallible?
Our spiritual adversary is the master of deception, the father of lies, who desires a little lie (leaven) to fester in us with result of disrupting our love relationship in God. An example is preaching verse-by-verse that has snippets of scripture showing Jesus is a man (while neglecting overall context of God's Love story and prophecy timing established by God). Another deception is interpreting Jesus using modern culture conventions instead of ancient Jewish.
What kind of "lie" or "leaven" or "deception" is it when you neglect verse after verse, passage after passage that Wolfgang and I cite, verses and passages to which your most frequent response is to label them "snippets" without any substantive engagement with their content? The fact of the matter - one to which you have yet to respond in any consequential manner - is that the VAST majority of applicable texts in the NT make clear that Jesus is NOT God. If Jesus IS God, then why are there SO MANY verses and passages to the contrary, and why is there not AT LEAST ONE that directly says Jesus is God?
Let's try one example, and please address this directly, without evasion or "snippet" labeling: If Peter is correct when in Acts 2.22 he claims that Jesus is a "man" "through" whom God did "mighty works and wonders," how can Jesus be God? If Peter believed Jesus was God, then why did he choose those particular words, that Jesus was a "man" "through" whom God did things? He HAD to have known those words would give people the impression that Peter thought Jesus was a human being through whom God worked, and not God Godself.
-
I don't know what John means by including the "I AM" phrase in his Gospel. But I DO know the phrase is incongruent both with any imagery to describe Jesus employed other than in John, and with other imagery about and from Jesus found in John's Gospel.
I would say that the rather plain and simple answer about what John means with Jesus' words "I am" is what I would say Jesus meant with those words, namely "I" (Gr. Ἐγώ) is the personal pronoun "I" and means "I", and "am" (Gr. εἰμι.) is a form of "to be" and means "am".
The context then clarifies what he says ...either (a) Jesus says what he claims to be (such as in "I am the good shepherd", "I am the vine ...", etc). or (b) identifies himself as the person others speak about (such as soldiers looking for Jesus of Nazareth, and he tells them that he is that person)
-
Time to restate thread assertion: If Jesus is not Lord God, then he is not savior for anyone. If Jesus and Lord God are two separate (distinct) entities, then Jesus is not savior for anyone.
Both these assertions are incorrect. Th eopposite would be true => if Jesus were God, he could not be the sacrifice for sin and thus not be the savior for anyone. Only if Jesus and God are two entities -- which they are => God is the Father, Jesus is the Son; God is SPIRIT, Jesus is a man, etc -- can Jesus be the savior who gave his life a ransom.
-
@Wolfgang posted:
I would say that the rather plain and simple answer about what John means with Jesus' words "I am" is what I would say Jesus meant with those words, namely "I" (Gr. Ἐγώ) is the personal pronoun "I" and means "I", and "am" (Gr. εἰμι.) is a form of "to be" and means "am".
My previous post in this thread was woefully imprecise as to which "I AM" I referred. I certainly agree with your view of most of Jesus' "I am" sayings, namely that in them he expresses identity or state of being. In my view, that's not as quite as clear in John 8.58, where the "I AM" phrase expresses a different kind of time frame. My comment in my previous post about John's inclusion of "I am" phrases had only to do with John 8.58.
(It's worth noting that the NLT is among the very few translations that present the word "am" in all-caps. Most translations render the phrase "I am.")
-
Again, I would refer to context in order to understand Jesus' words as recorded in Joh 8:58
Joh 8,58 (AV)
Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
First, one should note the change of tense in Jesus' words => "Before Abraham was" => past tense, "I am" => present tense. In addition, Jesus' statement about himself is incomplete "I am {who ? or what?} ".
From a comparison of the Greek text of Joh 8:58 ( and Exo 3:14, it is clear that Jesus was not saying the name if God (the One Who is, the I AM, etc), but rather was simply stating something about himself "I am ..."
The immediate context indicates that Jesus' listeners apparently got all railed up about what Jesus had said concerning Abraham, indicating that he was that one who had been promised by God to come of Abraham's line. Thus, it may well be that Jesus' statement about himself was thus interrupted and is not complete ....
Another point of interest is that there is a different option for translating the phrase ... A possible translation could be, "Abraham was before, I am [now] ..."
If Jesus had wanted to make a statement about having been alive before Abraham's time, he would have had to use the past tense (Before Abraham was, I was " ... BUT that is not what Jesus is recorded to have said.
If Jesus had meant "God" with his words "I am", the statement would simply mean "before Abraham was God" ... with no reference to Jesus himself. Of course, God was before Abraham, but is such a statement what makes sense in the context? why would the audience get so angry then?
There is absolutely no textual indication or reason to understand Jesus' words as a declaration in which he claimed to be God.
-
Concur that any of us humans speaking Ἐγώ εἰμι would cause no reaction in other humans (as none of us are God in human flesh).
@Bill_Coley With whom are you concurring? Neither Wolfgang nor I made any point about how "other humans" might react to humans speaking Ἐγώ εἰμι.
Concuring/expanding on Wolfgang's pondering of Ἐγώ εἰμι usage for an "Obviously not." point.
Roman centurion used Ἐγώ εἰμι to declare "I am a man under authority" in Matthew 8:9 and Luke 7:8
Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard has master of the house saying "Ἐγώ εἰμι generous" in Matthew 20:15
Zachariah and Gabriel used Ἐγώ εἰμι for self-identification in Luke 1:18-19
John the Baptist used Ἐγώ εἰμι to declare "I am not the Messiah" in John 1:20 & John 3:28
Negative particle was used with Ἐγώ εἰμι when disciples were asking Jesus who was to betray Him in Matthew 26:22 & Matthew 26:25
Personally not know if any in the crowd sent to arrest Jesus were believers (a previous arrest attempt had servants reporting "No man ever spoke like this!" in John 7:46). Reaction to Jesus speaking Ἐγώ εἰμι had humans stepping back and falling to the ground (worship), which was followed by Jesus being arrested and disciples scattering (fulfilling prophecy). Reaction to Jesus speaking Ἐγώ εἰμι implies identity recognition of God in human flesh (while John does not record if any in the arresting crowd changed their belief after hearing Jesus speak and their worship reaction).
@Bill_Coley Assuming for the moment that you're correct to infer "identity recognition of God in human flesh" from the guards' physical reaction to Jesus' words (though there is no textual support for your view) in this paragraph of your post you have done nothing but restate the circumstances that beg the question Wolfgang and I ask: If the guards recognized Jesus as God, why did they complete the arrest?
Arrest was completed because the time had arrived for Jesus to voluntarily lay down His human life (as a Holy sin sacrifice). Jewish priests had ordered arrest (for purpose of putting Jesus to death) so disobeying priests had its own death penalty for the guards per Deuteronomy 17:8-13
Romans had similar attitude for their guards: if your prisoner escapes, you die (Acts 12:6-19)
In Matthew 22:31-32, God's name is Ἐγώ εἰμι while Mark 12:26 has Ἐγώ with implied εἰμι and Luke 20:37 has κύριον (Lord) for God
Jesus warned about deceivers: many will come in my name Ἐγώ εἰμι Matthew 24:5, Mark 13:6, Luke 21:8 (Jesus & God share one name)
Jesus speaking Ἐγώ εἰμι in Mark 14:62 was also followed by Jewish blasphemy response to kill Jesus (same as John 8:59).
@Wolfgang Again, I would refer to context in order to understand Jesus' words as recorded in Joh 8:58
Joh 8,58 (AV)
Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
@Wolfgang First, one should note the change of tense in Jesus' words => "Before Abraham was" => past tense, "I am" => present tense. In addition, Jesus' statement about himself is incomplete "I am {who ? or what?} ".
Jesus statement about Himself is complete as "I Am" Ἐγώ εἰμι expresses a state of being diety, who existed before Abraham was.
John 4:26 in NLT “I Am the Messiah!” begins like stilted, literal translation: "Ἐγώ εἰμι, the one speaking to you" (yet John does not record woman at the well physically reacting to Jesus speaking Ἐγώ εἰμι so something special happened among those sent to arrest Jesus)
After disciples were terrified of dying during a violent storm on the Sea of Galilee, they were glad to hear Jesus speak: "Have Courage. Ἐγώ εἰμι Do not be afraid." as Jesus walked on stormy water to their boat in Matthew 14:27 & Mark 6:50 (John 6:20 has: "Ἐγώ εἰμι Do not be afraid.")
Luke 24:39 See my hands and my feet, that Ἐγώ εἰμι myself.
Matthew 28:20 And remember, Ἐγώ εἰμι with you always, to the end of the age.
@Wolfgang I would say that the rather plain and simple answer about what John means with Jesus' words "I am" is what I would say Jesus meant with those words, namely "I" (Gr. Ἐγώ) is the personal pronoun "I" and means "I", and "am" (Gr. εἰμι.) is a form of "to be" and means "am".
Greek εἰμι is translated as "I am" in Mathew 8:8, Matthew 11:29, Matthew 18:20, Matthew 27:43, Mark 1:7, Luke 5:8, Luke 7:6, Luke 15:19, Luke 15:21, John 1:21, John 1:27, John 3:28, John 9:5, John 10:36, John 13:13, John 14:9, John 16:32, John 18:17, John 18:25, John 19:21 where Ἐγώ does not occur in the numbered verse. Luke 3:16, John 13:33 and John 17:11 also translate εἰμι as "I am" while having Ἐγώ elsewhere in the verse.
All 28 assertions by Jesus have implied diety declarations with some of them clearly interpreted by unbelieving Jewish audience as blasphemy.
@Bill_Coley My point was that not once does Jesus self-identify as God. The best your efforts can achieve is a collection of actions and responses from which you infer (they do not "imply") self-identification. If Jesus thought himself to be God, why did he never directly say it? He directly called himself the "lord of the Sabbath," the "teacher and Lord" of the disciples, and "the Son of Man" who will one day return. But he never directly called himself God. Why not? A claim to divinity sounds foundational to me, and yet he NEVER made it. Why not?
What was the purpose of Jesus teaching in parables ?
John 8:54 (NLT) Jesus answered, “If I want glory for myself, it doesn’t count. ...
Luke 8:26-39 about Legion being cast out of a man ends with (NLT): 'But Jesus sent him home, saying “No, go back to your family, and tell them everything God has done for you.” So he went all through the town proclaiming the great things Jesus had done for him.'
Luke 17:11-19 (NLT) As Jesus continued on toward Jerusalem, he reached the border between Galilee and Samaria. As he entered a village there, ten men with leprosy stood at a distance, crying out, “Jesus, Master, have mercy on us!”
He looked at them and said, “Go show yourselves to the priests.” And as they went, they were cleansed of their leprosy.
One of them, when he saw that he was healed, came back to Jesus, shouting, “Praise God!” He fell to the ground at Jesus’ feet, thanking him for what he had done. This man was a Samaritan.
Jesus asked, “Didn’t I heal ten men? Where are the other nine? Has no one returned to give glory to God except this foreigner?” And Jesus said to the man, “Stand up and go. Your faith has healed you.”
John 4:9-10 (NLT) The woman was surprised, for Jews refuse to have anything to do with Samaritans. She said to Jesus, “You are a Jew, and I am a Samaritan woman. Why are you asking me for a drink?”
Jesus replied, “If you only knew the gift God has for you and who you are speaking to, you would ask me, and I would give you living water.”
Another example is comparing Isaiah 43:10-13 with John 10:27-30, especially deliver (snatch) out of God's hand, which has Jesus declaring "I and The Father are One." while remembering Isaiah 43:11 "I - I am the Lord. Beside me there is no Savior."
@Bill_Coley The Isaiah text is God's assertion to the returning exiles of God's position, power, and uniqueness.
Isaiah 39 is prophecy from Lord God through Isaiah to Hezekiah about Babylon carrying off the southern Kingdom from Hezekiah's descendants. Isaiah 40 to 44 is good news (gospel) prophecies about God's redemption plan, which includes the Lord being the only savior. All the Gospels include John the Baptist, who fulfilled Isaiah 40 path preparation prophecy for Lord God. Isaiah 45 starts with prophecy for Cyrus (King of Persia for returning exiles from Babylon carrying away) plus future conversion of Gentiles (as Paul mentions in Romans 11 about wild branches being grafted into olive tree's richness while some native branches were broken off due to unbelief). Isaiah has four servant song prophecies: 42:1-9, 49:1-13, 50:4-11, and 52:13-53:12
Stilted literal translation of John 10:30 is "I and The Father One are (being continually)" that reflects intense intimacy in One God's commUnity of Love. Parsing verb ἐσμεν shows present, active, indicative, first person, plural form of εἰμι (present tense has continual action).
Time to restate thread assertion: If Jesus is not Lord God, then he is not savior for anyone. If Jesus and Lord God are two separate (distinct) entities, then Jesus is not savior for anyone.
@Bill_Coley In my view, God can issue salvation to anyone through anyone. To say God cannot issue salvation to humanity through a human is to restrict God's saving power. In addition - and more importantly - the NT makes clear that God DID issue salvation to the world through a human, the one Peters calls "the man" Jesus.
From my faith perspective, broad & easy is the way that leads to destruction while narrow & hard is the way that leads to life (see Mt 7.13)
Jesus said: "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last" (Rv 22.13) while the Lord said: "I am the First and the Last; there is no other God." (Is 44.6)
Jesus also said: "I am the way, the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father except through me." (Jn 14.6)
If Jesus and Lord God are two separate (distinct) entities, How can "the man" Jesus be the only way to God the Father ?
While prayerfully pondering Acts 2 message by Peter, Thankful for Acts 2:22 eulogy purpose of phrase "the man" Jesus to bring back good memories about Jesus working on earth to glorify God (as you well know). The rest of the story in Acts 2 declares who Jesus is in One God's commUnity of Love 😍
Any human-implemented engagement with the Bible that is not hearing & obeying God's Holy Spirit is fallible.
@Bill_Coley Does this mean you believe the S.O.A.P. approach to Bible study is not infallible?
S.O.A.P. approach is fallible when a human heart chooses iniquity (sin) over loving God first (see Ps 66:18).
Keep Smiling 😀
-
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus posted:
Concuring/expanding on Wolfgang's pondering of Ἐγώ εἰμι usage for an "Obviously not." point.
I may not speak accurately for Wolfgang, but I think our point is that Jesus' "I am" expression in John 18 serves exactly the same role as it does for those other people. Hence, that the guards fell down is very likely not a response of worship.
Arrest was completed because the time had arrived for Jesus to voluntarily lay down His human life (as a Holy sin sacrifice). Jewish priests had ordered arrest (for purpose of putting Jesus to death) so disobeying priests had its own death penalty for the guards per Deuteronomy 17:8-13
Romans had similar attitude for their guards: if your prisoner escapes, you die (Acts 12:6-19)
I take your point about other factors contributing to the guards' decision, but it remains the case, in my view, that there is no textual support for your claim that they inferred a God identity in Jesus.
What was the purpose of Jesus teaching in parables ?
The purpose of parables notwithstanding, my question was why does Jesus never directly claim to be God if it's so central to his identity?
John 8:54 (NLT) Jesus answered, “If I want glory for myself, it doesn’t count. ...
Read further in the John 8 scene: (emphasis added) "“If I want glory for myself, it doesn’t count. But it is my Father who will glorify me. You say, ‘He is our God,’ 55 but you don’t even know him. I know him. If I said otherwise, I would be as great a liar as you! But I do know him and obey him."
It's the perfect opportunity to claim his Godhood! Jesus could say, "You say, 'He is our God...' well, I'm your God!" But he doesn't say that. Instead he says God is one he knows and obeys. Giving them and us NO indication of self-identification as God.
I like to ask, what did the audience of a sermon or scene walk away believing from their experience? What did Peter's audiences think he was trying to tell them about Jesus and God? What did the crowd in John 8, having heard Jesus say God is one he knew and obeyed, think Jesus had told them as to whether he thought himself to be God? I think the answer is clear.
Luke 8:26-39 about Legion being cast out of a man ends with (NLT): 'But Jesus sent him home, saying “No, go back to your family, and tell them everything God has done for you.” So he went all through the town proclaiming the great things Jesus had done for him.'
We know from Luke 8.28 that the demon-possessed man thinks Jesus is NOT God, but rather "the Son of the Most High God." So his telling people what "Jesus" did for him cannot be a designation of deity. We also know from the sum of Jesus' teachings that he credits God for everything he does (e.g. John 5.19,30) so it's not surprising to hear Jesus tell the man to tell people what "God" had done for him.
Luke 17:11-19 (NLT) As Jesus continued on toward Jerusalem....
The man returns to thank Jesus, but praise God. Again, we know Jesus himself credits God for his (Jesus') powers.
John 4:9-10 (NLT) The woman was surprised, for Jews refuse to have anything to do with Samaritans. She said to Jesus, “You are a Jew, and I am a Samaritan woman. Why are you asking me for a drink?”
Jesus replied, “If you only knew the gift God has for you and who you are speaking to, you would ask me, and I would give you living water.”
The critical part of this scene is John 4.21-26: (emphasis added) 21 Jesus replied, “Believe me, dear woman, the time is coming when it will no longer matter whether you worship the Father on this mountain or in Jerusalem. 22 You Samaritans know very little about the one you worship, while we Jews know all about him, for salvation comes through the Jews. But the time is coming—indeed it’s here now—when true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and in truth. The Father is looking for those who will worship him that way. 24 For God is Spirit, so those who worship him must worship in spirit and in truth.”
25 The woman said, “I know the Messiah is coming—the one who is called Christ. When he comes, he will explain everything to us.”
26 Then Jesus told her, “I AM the Messiah!”
Three important outcomes:
- Jesus says "we Jews know all about [God.]" He includes himself among those who know about God. He does NOT include himself among those who ARE God.
- He says God (the one he calls "Father") is spirit, which in effect excludes himself from the woman's consideration as God.
- He self-defines as "the Messiah," God's chosen one, and NOT as God.
Isaiah 39 is prophecy from Lord God through Isaiah to Hezekiah about Babylon carrying off the southern Kingdom from Hezekiah's descendants....
In my view, nothing in Isaiah - written 700 years before the time of Jesus - demonstrates, or even tries to demonstrate, that Jesus is God.
From my faith perspective, broad & easy is the way that leads to destruction while narrow & hard is the way that leads to life (see Mt 7.13)
Jesus said: "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last" (Rv 22.13) while the Lord said: "I am the First and the Last; there is no other God." (Is 44.6)
Jesus also said: "I am the way, the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father except through me." (Jn 14.6)
If Jesus and Lord God are two separate (distinct) entities, How can "the man" Jesus be the only way to God the Father ?
Notice that in the three quotations you draw from the words of Jesus is NOT one in which Jesus says "I am God." Again, given the gravity and magnitude of an assertion of divinity, why does Jesus NOT ONCE directly claim it?
The meaning and implications of John 14.6 are many and worthy of threads of their own. For this moment, I note only that God can make whatever and whomever to be the means of access.
While prayerfully pondering Acts 2 message by Peter, Thankful for Acts 2:22 eulogy purpose of phrase "the man" Jesus to bring back good memories about Jesus working on earth to glorify God (as you well know). The rest of the story in Acts 2 declares who Jesus is in One God's commUnity of Love 😍
Eulogy or not, not once in his presentation or in the whole of Acts 2 does Peter or anyone else declare Jesus to be God.
S.O.A.P. approach is fallible when a human heart chooses iniquity (sin) over loving God first (see Ps 66:18).
In my view, all enterprises in which humans are involved - including methods of Bible study - are fallible. That means your and my approaches - blessed and well-intended though they are - are both fallible.
-
@Wolfgang First, one should note the change of tense in Jesus' words => "Before Abraham was" => past tense, "I am" => present tense. In addition, Jesus' statement about himself is incomplete "I am {who ? or what?} ".
Jesus statement about Himself is complete as "I Am" Ἐγώ εἰμι expresses a state of being diety, who existed before Abraham was.
John 4:26 in NLT “I Am the Messiah!” begins like stilted, literal translation: "Ἐγώ εἰμι, the one speaking to you" (yet John does not record woman at the well physically reacting to Jesus speaking Ἐγώ εἰμι so something special happened among those sent to arrest Jesus)
After disciples were terrified of dying during a violent storm on the Sea of Galilee, they were glad to hear Jesus speak: "Have Courage. Ἐγώ εἰμι Do not be afraid." as Jesus walked on stormy water to their boat in Matthew 14:27 & Mark 6:50 (John 6:20 has: "Ἐγώ εἰμι Do not be afraid.")
Luke 24:39 See my hands and my feet, that Ἐγώ εἰμι myself.
Matthew 28:20 And remember, Ἐγώ εἰμι with you always, to the end of the age.
It appears to me that the only sensible thing to reply to what you wrote here about "I am" in light of the verses you quoted as supposed proof of your ideas is to acknowledge that my basic knowledge of English which I acquired during 9 years of German equivalent of high school and some college classes in the USA is quite different from what you make of plain and simple English words and sentences.
Therre is a fundamental difference between us in how we read even the most simple sentences. It is also obvious that what we read is contrary to each other and thus one (or maybe both) of us must be wrong.
@Wolfgang I would say that the rather plain and simple answer about what John means with Jesus' words "I am" is what I would say Jesus meant with those words, namely "I" (Gr. Ἐγώ) is the personal pronoun "I" and means "I", and "am" (Gr. εἰμι.) is a form of "to be" and means "am".
Greek εἰμι is translated as "I am" in Mathew 8:8, Matthew 11:29, Matthew 18:20, Matthew 27:43, Mark 1:7, Luke 5:8, Luke 7:6, Luke 15:19, Luke 15:21, John 1:21, John 1:27, John 3:28, John 9:5, John 10:36, John 13:13, John 14:9, John 16:32, John 18:17, John 18:25, John 19:21 where Ἐγώ does not occur in the numbered verse. Luke 3:16, John 13:33 and John 17:11 also translate εἰμι as "I am" while having Ἐγώ elsewhere in the verse.
From my basic knowledge of Greek, I know about the rather detailed and distinct forms of verbs for their grammatical use in regards to number, tense, case and about verbs being often used without a pronoun being necessary to indicate whether the meaning - for example - is "I go", or "you go" or "he goes" or "they go". When translating into English (or other languages which do not have such varied distinct forms) it is necessary to add the pronoun for a sentence to be complete.
Again, there seems no sense in further discussing matters when we differ as we do in knowledge and understanding of basic simple language matters.
I do see absolutely no reason to 😀 in such matters, rather recognize it as 😪
![[Deleted User]](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/fcddec765be35f238a0844bd23f54b59/?default=https%3A%2F%2Fvanillicon.com%2F8ce8323767a20f0f45db140c4cd2cea1_200.png&rating=g&size=200)
