I came across this interesting debate: "I have been reading a lot recently about the life of Jesus, I wont bore anyone with the theological arguments, but I have come to believe that Jesus was just an man, not the divine son of any god. I think he was a very wise person that understood his fellow man. His current position of being seen as the 'Son of God' is due to an extremely clever re-branding by the Catholic Church, or was it Constantine that was the 'spin doctor'? either way, I think that the whole religion concept was (and still is) a control of the people. When a Pope can help bring about the collapse of Communism does that not show the POWER of religion. Am I alone in believing that Jesus is not divine (or anyone else) and that he was just a very wise man?"
Gary Stapleton
http://www.lastthursday.net
For your interest my response was as follows:
'Jesus was possibly an alien, not of the little green variety but a highly advanced extra-terrestrial being from another civilisation (one far more advanced than that on earth.) Such highly evolved beings have the ability to manipulate gravity with their minds ie: walk on water and have the power to heal using metaphysical energy. Some human beings can already perform the latter but we are generally primitive and consumed with doubt about our potential to perform such 'miracles'. Even the chariot of fire could have been a UFO. Any invention from the 21st century could appear miraculous to an unknowledgeable / primitive race. I imagine the answers to all our unresolved questions lie in a combination of science & spirituality. Apparently, we only use 10% of our brains at the moment so I imagine the possibilities for human evolution are infinite!!!'
“A Pope brought about the collapse of Communism? Surely it was Ronald Regan and Margaret Thatcher. At least that is what they claim/claimed!
Or was it just the power of the people which is what most others think. Finally they had realised that enough was enough and rose up.
No, you are not alone in thinking that Jesus was just a man – if he existed at all! Also, there was a good possibility he had a very dark skin with dark hair. Certainly not the blond haired, blue eyed, white skinned person we see in churches all over Europe.”
Robert Salter
http://www.rs-events.co.uk
“Belief and opinion …are obviously very personal things. There is no universal objective evidence for either side of this argument. Lack of unequivocal proof is not proof of non-existence and there is always the precautionary principle. There is some anecdotal evidence in the form of Luke’s gospel (the investigative reporter) but you need to believe some other things before you believe that.
In the end you either find Jesus and God a useful model of the Universe or you don’t. For me it works simply because I don’t expect to understand very much of reality anyway so I have little problem with faith. Science is forever showing us that our models are incomplete and often wrong – remember phlogistron and the phlat Earth.
Maybe our minds are just not equipped to perceive reality in the same way that our eyes are built for only a narrow part of the Electromagnetic Spectrum. The total perspective vortex drives people mad.
To study these very big questions is a valuable exercise of the mind. And the fact that highly intelligent and hugely educated souls are divided on the issue means to me that I will have to settle with faith because if they can’t get consensus on the question then I certainly won’t.
So I am happy to go on believing that God created the creation process and that Jesus is our intermediary with Him. Subjectively it is a comfortable notion based upon my experience and a bit more likely (IMHO) than the world being created by Great Baboon.”
Simon Morice
http://www.fmea-uk.com
“Am I alone in believing that Jesus is not divine (or anyone else) and that he was just a very wise man?
No, far from it.
But this is an old, old chestnut.
Jesus said, “Before Abraham was, I am.” (Abraham lived hundreds of years before Jesus was born). He clearly took the name “I am,” that as far as the Jews were concerned was God’s and God’s alone (He did this several times, in various contexts) and implied that He predated Abraham.
If Jesus was God in human form, then His statement is perfectly consistent. He has always existed, and for a brief period of 30 or so years took human form. He existed from well before Abraham’s time. And of course the divine name “I am” is rightfully His.
If He wasn’t God, there are only really two options. He was either lying – in the most obvious, absurd and laughably transparent manner – or He was barking mad. He was accused of both.
But there isn’t room for the “He was just a very wise man” conclusion.
Quote: there was a good possibility he had a very dark skin with dark hair.
I’d put money on it: He was a Jew!”
Adrian Higgs Copywriting
“To some people yes, to others no.
If you want to believe in something you will. I can look in the mirror and say “you are gorgeous” – I know many who would disagree. Because I believe something does not make it true.
Tony Blair believed invading Iraq was the right thing to do, George told him. He definitely uses faith as a prop for crap decisions. Notice the number of times he falls back on “I believe…”. It should be worrying but no-one will challenge peoples beliefs and faiths.
Personally I think it is a cult that grew up around someone who chose to think differently and via the “send reinforcements we are going to advance —-> send three and fourpence we are going to a dance” route i.e. word of mouth, became something else.
I believe governments should not sell power and influence…”
Jim Brotton
http://www.pmresource.co.uk
“I totally disagree Adrian. There are a number of ways of reading his statements. The main thing is that the historical Jesus made sufficient impact on a group of followers that his story and teachings were handed down. This takes a degree of greatness.
Furthermore, his sermon on the mount (if indeed it was his) is a great spritual statement. In a society and culture where the rich and the powerful were honored, “blessed are the poor” is indeed a sign of a great thinker.
Whether the Jesus as chracterised by the Bible actually existed, that remains open. However, some figure inspired the stories and I would say this figure would be ‘a very wise man’.”
David Chan
http://www.rarelist.co.uk
“I wasn’t taking issue with the conclusion that He was “a very wise man”. I agree wholeheartedly with that conclusion.
I was taking issue with the conclusion that He was “just a very wise man” – and not divine. The things He said do not allow us to draw that conclusion.”
Adrian
“Jen, I have another hypothesis for Jesus’s life that I might work into a novel some time in the future. I think from 18 to 30, Jesus travelled to India and was heavily influenced by the Buddhists! His teaching are not that far apart from Pure Land Buddhists sects!”
David Chan
http://www.rarelist.co.uk
“Quote: The things He said
Or rather, the things that are attributed to him. No proof he actual said these things or even existed other than in a book which is a rather good yarn in the same way that any of the other literature from that period is..”
Robert Salter
http://www.rs-events.co.uk
“In 2000 years time…what will be the proof that I existed or said this?
Edit {I do accept that probably in my case nobody will be bothered}”
Simon Morice
http://www.fmea-uk.com
“Divine! That’s a tricky one. He may have said those things in the sense the the Gnostics or the Sufis would say about themselves and the world.
I would prefer to see Jesus as a very wise man.”
David Chan
http://www.rarelist.co.uk
“I would prefer to see Jesus as a very wise man
Aha! And there I think you hit the nail on the head, David. May of us would prefer to see Jesus as a very wise man (and just a very wise man). That way we can position Him as just one of many religious leaders down the ages, from which we can pick one, some (all?) or none to follow.
In the social and religious context of His day I don’t see there could have been much doubt as to what He meant by “Before Abraham was, I am”. He was’t making a claim to be divine in the general sense. He deliberately (to the extent of apparently fouling up His tenses – although even that made sense given the claim He was making) employed the name that YHWH, the God of ancient Israel, had used for Himself back in Moses’ day. The Jews to whom Jesus was talking when He made this claim would have been under no illusions whatsoever as to the claim He was making – He was claiming to be YHWH – the God of the Old Testament. Indeed they picked up stones to stone Him as a result.
How we would prefer to see Jesus and the conclusions we can draw from what He said of Himself are two entirely different issues……
Proof is difficult – in any field.
There is however evidence from outside the Bible (which is, in many places, not so much a rather good yarn as exceedingly hard work) that Jesus existed, at the time the Bible suggests He did. Josephus, a secular historian of the day, refers to Him, for example.
One of the things that interests me is the fact that this discussion keeps coming up. As Timi points out elsewhere in this thread, you rarely hear heated discussions as to whether Mohammed existed. Nor for that matter Buddah, Julius Caesar or Charles I. They’re all important historical figures, and I think most of us would be hard pressed to prove that any of them existed, much less that the records we have of their sayings are accurate. But generally we all accept that they were there.
Heck, I’ve never met Tony Blair or George Bush (I should count my blessings, perhaps) and I think I’d be hard pressed to prove that they exist, or have said the things attributed to them.
So why all the fuss over one executed carpenter from tin-pot Nazareth?”
Adrian Higgs Copywriting
“Now if Jesus was the son of God, come to redeem mankind from the original sin, why wasn’t that predicted by all the prophets preceding him; that would certainly be one of the greatest events in religious history, many smaller events occasioned long ranting from prophets but not this. And why, if he was God, did he pray to God? And why did he say I have not come to bring a new religion?! Christianity certainly was a new religion.
And why did his disciples and the first “Christians”, the followers of his brother James and his “rock” Peter continue to worship as Jews, even to the point where they were considered to be stricter Jews than most? How about the middle ground? Jesus was not the son of God but was one of the great prophets and the Messiah promised to the Jews, as we Muslims believe. Jesus is given the same status as the prophet Mohammed or prophet Moses and Muslims follow his true teachings as part of their religion.”
Nisa Omar
http://www.turkishriviera.co.uk/
“It was predicted by the Prophets. And foreshadowed by the Law.
It constantly amazes me why Muslims claim to revere Jesus as a prophet when they don’t believe Him. If what He said was not true, what use is He as a prophet? In fact, I believe He told the truth. He said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.”
I know Muslims do not believe Him to be the Son of God, but both Old Testament prophecy and New Testament writings say so. Everyone is free to believe Him or not, now as then. I do.
He prayed continually, as well He might. He was in complete communion with God the Father. It is put in this way: “the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.” Disbelieve or mock, nothing new there then, but on your own heads be it.”
Maurice Poole
mpa systems
“I just used Google to define fact and truth. It was interesting. I can accept that a fact is an indisputable truth but then truth like time appears to be in its own definition.
This perhaps suggests that we have reached the limits of rational argument and from here on will just have to respect each other’s beliefs.”
Simon Morice
http://www.fmea-uk.com
“Whoever is your god and you believe in him/her, so be it. If you dont believe in a god, also so be it. A bit more tolerance and understanding from all sides and there would be less wars”
Robert Salter
http://www.rs-events.co.uk
“Why wasn’t it predeicted?
The coming of the messiah (“Anointed One” – meaning, probably amongst other things, “set aside for a specific task”) was predicted throughout the Old Testament. The whole tenor of the Old Testament story points to the coming of the messiah, from Genesis to Malachi. And Jesus fulfils all the prophecies about messiah.
Why if He was God did He pray to God?
This is a really meaty one. I don’t pretend to understand how it works, and nor should I: I am a mere man, limited by the tarnishing effect of evil. I have no hope of ever being able to understand God, in this life at any rate. However, here is my undersanding of the situation. Jesus was God living a human life in human form. God’s desire is that all men and women live in obedience to Him, putting their trust in Him, for all their needs, and for restoration from the evil we do and its effects. Jesus was God in human form doing exactly that – living in total dependence on God the Father. I can’t explain how God could be in Jesus and in heaven at the same time, but that’s what happened. The fact that I don’t understand it in no way means it can’t be true. (I don’t understand how my microwave works, but things still get hot in it.)
Why did he say I have not come to bring a new religion?
I don’t think he did. Can you point me to the reference? Actually, He had little to say about religion, apart from lambasting the religious leaders of His day for their hypocrisy and their grinding the general population down with myriads of religious laws. Jesus was much more interested in the relationship between God and the individual. His core call was for people to “repent and believe”. Repent – turn away from your current destructive way of life that leads away from God, and believe – put your trust in God. Nothing to do with religion or religious observance at all.
Why did his disciples and the first “Christians”, the followers of his brother James and his “rock” Peter continue to worship as Jews
Again, as far as I am aware, they didn’t. Would you cite your reference for this too? Certainly throughout the New Testament there are plenty of incidents that show this was not the case. God spoke to Peter in a dream, instructing him to get up, kill and eat all kinds of animals and birds considered unclean by the Jews – a far cry from strict Jewish observance. Jesus Himself is recorded as having declared all food clean – again, a far cry from strict Jewish observance. As an aside, Jesus referred to Peter as just ‘a rock’, not ‘His rock’ – He said, “You are Peter (which means rock) and on this rock I will build My church” (Biblically, the church is the community of believers, not a building or institution).
On another occasion, the leaders of the community of believers in Jerusalem wrote to the non-Jewish Christians to ‘lay on them no greater burden’ than to absatin from food offered to idols, blood, things strangled, and sexual immorality. Once again, a far cry from strict Jewish observance.”
Adrian Higgs Copywriting
“Billions of Muslims hold Jesus to be a revered prophet, who came to teach us the truth from God. They also believe that his Mother was a virgin when she conceived him. If you read The Qur’an you will notice that Jesus is afforded the same status as Moses and Mohammed, (peace be upon them).However Muslims do not believe in the need for any intermediary between themselves and God.
The only argument Muslims had with Christians, according to the Quran, was that Jesus never claimed to be son of God and that hence they had “invented a lie” against him. I did not start this blog and my intension was not to initiate a debate, bashing each others beliefs but to show how close Muslims and Christians are except for this one tenet.
We hold The Virgin Mary to be the first woman to enter paradise. She holds a very high status in Islam as the one who gave us the great prophet Jesus and he is referred to as the Son of Mary. In fact Mary is viewed as a link between Jesus and previous prophets, of the line of Imran, starting with Abraham (pbuh). This dispute, to be quite honest, will probably last until the second coming of Jesus (which Muslims believe in too).
Regarding questions from some of you,my husband Goran, who was a believing Christian before converting to Islam, and so has better knowledge of the life of Jesus would answer some of them, when he finds the time.
Salaam, Shalom, Peace”
Nisa Omar/ CEO Anatolia Properties Ltd.
And her husband said, “Maurice, If you have found it predicted by prophets that God would send His only begotten son to die on the cross to redeem the sins of man I would be fascinated to read it, because I have honestly searched in vain. Please direct me so that I may read it.
Muslims do not accept all that is written in the Bible, as it has undergone a number of changes in pertinent places, and also we believe it was not written by eyewitnesses (apostles) Believe me I do not mock nor disbelieve in Jesus, as in fact we Muslims follow most of his teachings. What we are not in full agreement on is what his teachings actually were.
I believe God is perfect and as such unchanging and every prophet has emphasized the uniqueness and oneness of God and Jesus also stressed the first commandment. It seems inconsistent for God to suddenly change such basics and introduce a co God and even a Trinity and if there’s anything I know about God it is that he is consistent.”
“We do have most things in common and if we sincerely believe and do our best we will all be rightly guided, God willing. The reason I left Christianity for Islam was frustration with the muddiness of Christian beliefs, as opposed to the clarity and logic in Islam. It connected all the prophetic teaching right through Noah, Abraham and Jesus.
Other than that I am happy for every one who believes in God and I feel much more connected to a believing Christian than a pagan or an atheist. Had mainstream Christianity been more like the original Christianity, described in the article below less people would leave the church I think.
For more info on the early church read article below
http://www.biblestudy.org/basicart/early-christianity1.html
Here’s an excerpt:
Unfortunately, for centuries the world had little access to historical information on the early church. Most Christian churches had to rely on the teachings of men who lived at least a century after Christ’s death. These men became known as the “church fathers,” whose writings wielded an enormous influence on Christian belief.
They undermined the influence and authority of the true founders of Christianity such as James, Peter, and John. The character of the church from the second century down to modern times was set by Justin Martyr, Origen, Tertullian, and many other uninspired men. Fortunately, the past four decades have seen a plethora of new information on what the primitive church was really like. It is amazing what scholars and historians have found!
‘He did not come bearing neither a new religion, nor even a new rite …Nor did he aim at changing either its creed or its Law or its worship. The central point of His teaching was the Messianic idea, which was common property to nearly all his compatriots as much as to him, and only his conception of it was his own” (Ancient Medieval and Modern Christianity, p. 44).”
Best Regards
Goran Omar
“If only Christians learn to put their faith only in Christ and not the activities of other men, and to take their wisdom from the bible and not what some funny scholars say about the bible, they will have no problem with their belief. But then if one has never had a personal encounter with Christ it is very easy to vaccillate – and even to backslide. If your life has never been specially touched by God you will not know that all human concepts about the person and character of God is complete nonsense – and He only reveals Himself to each one of us in the way which He wants us to see Him -At that particular moment. And when when we try to juxtapose faith with logic , such precious time might perhaps even be better spent in a drunken discussion in a pub-house.
I’ll leave you sir,: with an extract from what I personally call “The Most Dangerous Book In The Bible ” –
Ecclessiastes 12 : 11-13; ” Words of wisdom are like the stick a farmer uses to make animals move. These sayings come from God, our only shepherd, and they are like nails that fasten things together.
My child, I warn you to stay away from any teachings except these. There is no end to books, and too much study will wear you out.
Everything you were taught can be put into a few words: Respect and obey God! This is what life is all about.”
– I personally suggest that you read the whole book.”
Timi Ogunjobi
“A good man or the God-man? (that was clever I thought)
The Case for the Deity of Jesus by Bryce Klabunde and Larry Sittig
“Who do people say that I am?” (Mark 8:27)
Jesus asked this question two thousand years ago, and the answers are still coming in: a rabbi who preached compassion, a brilliant leader who touched the hearts of thousands, a misunderstood innovator who died as a martyr. His enemies said He was a devil, a rabble-rouser who deserved to die. His followers said He was the Messiah, the Son of God who deserved to be worshipped.
Which view is true? Most opinions about Jesus fit into one of two categories: Jesus was human or divine. Either He was a good man or the God-man, a remarkable historical figure or deity in the flesh. You may be near the edge of your own decision regarding Jesus, weighing the views on either side but uncertain which way to lean. How can you find the answer to the question — Who is Jesus?
The Claims of Jesus
A good place to begin is with Jesus’s own claims. What did Jesus say about Himself?
Jesus Claimed Equality with God
One of Jesus’s clearest self-identifying statements came in response to the Jewish leaders’ direct question: “How long will you keep us in suspense? If You are the Christ, tell us plainly” (John 10:24). Jesus called on His record to testify on His behalf:
“I told you, and you do not believe; the works that I do in My Father’s name, these bear witness of Me. But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep. My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; and I give eternal life to them, and they shall never perish; and no one shall snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given themto Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand. I and the Father are one.” (John 10:25-30)
According to some theologians, Jesus wasn’t claiming to be God when He said, “I and the Father are one.” He was simply saying that He was an ordinary human filled by an extraordinary power. Yet, if that was all He intended to say, why didn’t He clarify His meaning when the Jewish leaders threatened to stone Him for blasphemy? The rocks in their hands were hard proof of their understanding of His statement: ” For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God” (John 10:33).
If they had jumped to a wrong conclusion, Jesus had the opportunity to correct them, yet He didn’t. He was claiming to be God because He was God!
What did Jesus mean when He said that He was one with the Father? The Jews understood “the Father” to be their Creator who had sovereign control of their lives (Deuteronomy 32:6, Isaiah 64:8). Jesus wasn’t implying that He and the Father were the same person (we’ll discuss Jesus’s role in the Trinity later), but that He and the Father were of the same nature. They were equal in rights, authority, privileges, and power. So, in effect, Jesus was saying that He had complete and sovereign power over their lives — a claim that enraged the Jewish leaders.
Jesus Claimed Divine Authority
Throughout the gospels, Jesus declared His deity through His claims of authority. He announced, “I am the Good Shepherd” (John 10:11), a title the Old Testament ascribed to God (Psalm 23:1). He claimed to be the judge of all people (John 5:27), a task that only God performs (Joel 3:12). He called Himself the bridegroom (Matthew 25:1), a role God played with Israel (Isaiah 62:5). He forgave sins (Mark 2:5); only God can forgive sins. Of course, the Pharisees grasped the implication that Jesus was claiming to be God, and again they sought to kill Him for blasphemy (Mark 14:64-65).
Jesus put Himself on the same level as Yahweh — the “I AM” — of the Old Testament (John 8:58). He claimed to be Messiah (Mark 14:61-64) and taught that the Messiah was not simply David’s heir but David’s Lord (Luke 20:41). He assumed equal authority with God (Matthew 28:18) and even encouraged prayer in His name (John 14:13-14). Finally, He invited people to believe in Him for salvation (John 3:16; 6:29; 7:38). In the history of Israel, no prophet or king, priest or rabbi had ever offered salvation in their name. It would have been blasphemous for them to make such an appeal. Only Jesus made the seemingly audacious appeal of faith . . . because He was God.
Jesus Did What Only God Can Do
When people say they are God, we take them to a psychiatrist. They’re delusional! Without proof of His deity, Jesus’s claim would be empty; worse yet, it would be lunacy. So to show the world who He was, He performed deeds that only God could do.
He raised people from the dead. (Mark 5:41; John 11:38-44)
He healed people. (Matthew 9:35; 11:4)
He performed miracles, such as calming the storm and feeding thousands of people. (Mark 4:35-41; 8:1-9)
He exorcised demons and defeated Satan. (Mark 1:27; Luke 4:1-13)
He accepted worship. (Matthew 14:33)
He gave authority to His disciples to do miracles. (Matthew 10:1)
Each healing, miracle, or exorcism that Jesus performed provided additional testimony that He was the long-expected Son of God, the Savior of the world (Isaiah 35:5-6).
The Theology of Jesus’s Deity
For further evidence of Jesus’s deity, let’s turn from the words and deeds of Jesus to the pen of the apostles.
The Deity of Jesus in the New Testament
Paging through the rest of the New Testament, we see that the title of God (theos) is explicitly attributed to Jesus (John 1:1, 18, 20:28; Romans 9:5; Titus 2:13; Hebrews 1:8; and 2 Peter 1:1). In several passages, the authors refer to Jesus in ways that can only apply to God. They write that He is eternal (Revelation 1:17, compare with Micah 5:2), yet there is only one eternal God (Deuteronomy 6:4, 33:27). Christ created all things (John 1:3, Colossians 1:16), yet there is only one Creator (1 Peter 4:19). Christ is present everywhere (Matthew 28:20), yet there is only one omnipresent God whom we worship (Acts 17:27, 28). Christ receives worship from people and angels (Matthew 14:33, Philippians 2:10; Hebrews 1:6), yet the Old Testament forbids worshipping anyone other than God (Exodus 20:1-5; Deuteronomy 5:6-9). Since each of these characteristics can only be said of God, then Jesus must be God as well.
The Deity of Jesus and the Trinity
But how can Jesus be the Son of God and God at the same time? Because Jesus made a distinction between Himself and the Father, some people conclude that Jesus is not really God but a created being. To answer this issue, we have to take a look at how the members of the Trinity relate.
The Scripture identifies the Son, the Father, and the Holy Spirit as separate persons. Several verses describe the special roles that each Person in the Trinity plays. The Father elects (1 Peter 1:2), loves the world (John 3:16), and gives good gifts (James 1:17); the Son suffers (Mark 8:31), redeems (1 Peter 1:18), and upholds all things (Hebrews 1:3); the Spirit regenerates (Titus 3:5), empowers (Acts 1:8), and sanctifies (Galatians 5:22-23).
There are also many verses that describe how the Son, Father, and Spirit interrelate. The Father sends the Son and the Spirit. The Son submits Himself to the will of the Father, reveals the Father, and speaks the words of the Father (John 14:7-26). In theological terms, the relationship can be described like this:
(1) The Father begets the Son and is He from whom the Holy Spirit proceeds, though the Father is neither begotten nor does He proceed. (2) The Son is begotten and is He from whom the Holy Spirit proceeds, but He neither begets nor proceeds. (3) The Holy Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son, but He neither begets nor is He the One from whom any proceed. (Charles C. Ryrie, Basic Theology, Wheaton, Ill.: Scripture Press, Victor Books, p. 54)
The crucial issue is how to define the word, beget. Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses say that beget means “create.” In their view, at some point in eternity past, the Father created a being that did not already exist and filled that being with His essence. That being, the “son of God,” is not God but is indwelled by God and represents Him on earth.
The main problem with that view is if the Son is a created being, we should not worship Him. The Scripture consistently commands us to worship God alone and prohibits us from worshipping any created being (Romans 1:24-25). The Lord says through Isaiah, “I will not give My glory to another” (Isaiah 42:8). Jesus Himself rebuffed Satan’s temptation with the admonition of Scripture: “Worship the Lord your God and serve Him only” (Deuteronomy 6:13; Matthew 4:10).
Yet Jesus received worship as a baby (Matthew 2:8). He taught that His disciples should honor Him in the same way as they honor the Father (John 5:23). He received worship without deferring any praise to God (Matthew 14:33; 28:17; John 9:38). He even asked the Father to glorify Him with His glory (John 17:5).
How then can we understand this concept of “begetting” if it doesn’t mean “creating?” Hebrews 1:3 sheds the theological light we need:
The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word.
The Son proceeds from the Father like radiance from glory. Although one is distinct from the other, it is impossible for the one to exist without the other. There never was a time when glory existed without its radiance. Similarly, there never was a time when the Father existed without the Son. The two are one, just as light and radiance are one.
An early church father, Athanasius, used the metaphor of a fountain and stream to explain this verse. One is distinct from the other, yet they exist as one. The stream flows from the fountain, yet the stream is the fountain in essence. Similarly, a word flows from a thought, yet the word is the thought in essence. John was following this line of reasoning when he wrote: “The Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1). As a stream is to a fountain and a word is to a thought, so Jesus is to God. He flows from God and is God.
Hebrews 1:3 also says that the Son is the “exact representation of [God’s] being.” In this respect, the Son is unlike us. Humans are created in the image of God, while Jesus is the image of God. There’s a big difference. We may create a robot in our human image, but that creation is something less than human and never can be a person. If we “beget” something, however, it is necessarily the same as us. Our children are the exact representation of our humanness. They are humans. In the same way, the Father “begets” the Son. The Son is the exact representation of the Father’s God-ness — He is God. What God creates is a creation; what God begets is God.
The Deity of Jesus and Our Salvation
For Christians through the ages, these verses have added up to only one conclusion: Jesus is God. The nature of this truth prompted Paul to say,
Have this attitude in yourselves, which was also in Christ Jesus, who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. Therefore also God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those who are in heaven, and on earth, and under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father (Philippians 2:5-11)
These verses tell us that even though Jesus was God, He set aside the use of His divine attributes to take on human form, and in His human form, He died on the cross in our place. In that way, God sacrificed Himself for us. Yet, if God simply created a being, called it His son, and sent it to die for us, what kind of sacrifice would that be? No, God Himself became a man, felt our pain, touched our hearts, and died in our place.
Conclusion
At the heart of the doctrine of Christ’s deity is God’s loving self-sacrifice for us. Our salvation rests not in a man like us but in a God who became like us in order to redeem us from our sins.
After Jesus asked, “Who do people say that I am?” He asked an even more significant question, “But who do you say that I am?” (Mark 8:29). The answer to this question each person must decide for himself or herself. Who do you say Jesus is? Is He your Lord?”
Richard Osei-Anim
http://www.richardanim.com
“It is pointless arguing with people who are convinced that they are right. Faith is blind belief despite evidence to the contrary.
People who hold religious comvictions based fundamentally on faith cannot be persuaded through rational arguments and facts. To have faith is to suspend belief in your own judgement but to rely on the words of a prophet, book or teacher.
So you believe in the Holy Koran and other respondents believe in the New Testament of the Bible. Unless you agree a common basis, there is just no way you can resolve any disagreement. It all boils down to, “my book says this” and “your book says that”.
Timi and other Christians, please recognise that you have chosen to have faith in the Bible. Others may base their faith on other books, The Koran, The Book of Mormon, The Gnostic Gospels, The Diamond Sutra, The Communist Manifesto etc.
As Dave Allen use to say, “May your God go with you!””
David Chan
http://www.rarelist.co.uk
“We as ordinary human beings can not end thousands of years of strife between religious sects, I felt it was important to give first hand knowledge about Islam and the importance it gives to Jesus (pbuh), so that misunderstandings created by religious leaders, media and politicians can be cleared. Therefore we will finish with this verse of the Qur’an, Surah 29 – Verse 46
And dispute ye not
With the people of the book (i.e. Christian, Jews,
Sabeans etc. who received guidance by the books)
Except in the best way, unless
It be with those of them who do wrong.
But say “We believe in the revelation
which has come down to us and
in that which has come down to you;
Our God and your God is one;
And it is to Him we submit.”
Nisa Omar
“Quote: So you believe in the Holy Koran and other respondents believe in the New Testament of the Bible. Unless you agree a common basis, there is just no way you can resolve any disagreement. It all boils down to, “my book says this” and “your book says that.
I think you’re right on that – and we’re in danger of finding ourselves exactly there in this discussion! (As if I needed to point that out…)
From Nisa’s comments that Muslims revere Jesus, but that there are points of disagreement with Christians in terms exactly what He did or didn’t teach, the common basis would seem to be Jesus Himself.
That’s interesting, because I have been remiss in this discussion in failing to point out an absolutely fundamental issue. We have traded quotes and arguments, and really served only to highlight our differences, while the key is Jesus and who He is, which brings us full circle to Gary’s orginal post.
If Jesus is indeed God, then He is the only one who can convince anyone of that fact. Any of you who genuinely want to know who Jesus really is, and whether the Bible is trustworthy – ask Him to show you. If He is God, then He can and will speak for Himself.”
Adrian Higgs
“Goran & Nisa…..This is in response to your request:
“If you have found it predicted by prophets that God would send His only begotten son to die on the cross to redeem the sins of man I would be fascinated to read it, because I have honestly searched in vain. Please direct me so that I may read it.”
It is not my intention to knock anyone else’s beliefs, but I must say that they might be incompatible with my own, which by implication I state as true, not just because I believe them but because I find them in the Bible which I take to be authoritative. I would make plain that I quote from the “Authorised” or “King James Version”.
The question of whether New Testament happenings were the subject of Old Testament prophecy is of course only part of the whole picture. Both parts together form the Bible. But it is a perfectly valid question since it is said of the risen Christ, before the companions recognised Him, in Luke 24: 25-27: “Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.”
So I’ll point to some of those, confident that He could have used them, and my belief is that He probably did.
One of the clearest prophetic references to the sufferings and death of Christ, and why He would submit to it, is to be found in Isaiah. I suggest reading through from Isaiah 52:13 to 53:12. Note that it begins, “Behold, my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high.” Of which “servant” could God say that? In the New Testament He declares of Jesus, “This is my beloved Son…”, reported five times: in Matthew 3:17 and 17:5, and 2 Peter 1:17 adding, “…in whom I am well pleased” and in Matthew 17:5 (again), Mark 9:7 and Luke 9:35 adding, “hear (ye) him”.
Christ’s death for sin was foreshadowed by the sacrifice of beasts whenever that occurred in the Old Testament. This happened or was clearly implied in Genesis 3:21 – yes, at the earliest time it became necessary, or the sentence of death would have had to be carried out at once (which God was not willing to impose, see 2 Peter 3:9). Later explicit sacrifices include Abel’s offering that the Lord respected (see Genesis 4:4), Noah’s in Genesis 8:20 and in Genesis 21 when God tested Abraham; in the last case, he faithfully said, “God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering”, and when He did provide a substitute for Isaac it was a ram not a lamb – leaving the prophetic gap for John the Baptist to proclaim of Jesus in John 1:29, “Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world” and again the first clause in verse 36. The origin of the Passover in Exodus 12 has God’s promise in verse 13, “when I see the blood, I will pass over you” – which had immediate fulfilment, of course, but a prophetic application too, as they all have. In Exodus 29:36, “And thou shalt offer every day a bullock for a sin offering for atonement”, which makes it apparent that sins were not removed by the sacrifices because “atonement” means “covering” – so as the following will show God intended something better and permanent, which these things foreshadow. Large parts of the book of Leviticus deal with sacrificial offerings to which the same comments apply. Jesus’ grievous sufferings are described prophetically in Psalms 22 and 69.
The Epistle to the Hebrews displays respect to all those legal provisions in their context, but points to their limitations and the whole tenor of the book is the achievement and provision of something “better”, as it shows how they were indeed types and foreshadows of the death of Christ, whose personal sacrifice was complete, once and for all; see Hebrews 9 especially. Explanation is also provided in John 1:17: “For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.”
Now prophecy that He would die on the cross. In Numbers 21:8, “…the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live” and Jesus said in John 3:14-15, “…as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.” I wish you would read the following verses too, while looking up that passage, if you do. Later, in John 12:32, Jesus said, “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.” But it’s Old Testament prophecy you want, so see Zechariah 12:10 “…they shall look upon me whom they have pierced”, and 13:6 “And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.” Again shown by the statement of Jesus in John 1:11 “He came unto his own, and his own received him not.” This is another chapter I recommend to be read throughout.
I hope that answers the question. Sorry it has been so long coming.
Quote: It is pointless arguing with people who are convinced that they are right.
Like his good self indeed. So I will not argue with him. But whilst people that think in incompatible ways cannot all be completely right, we should all reflect that one of those points of view might be true.”
Maurice Poole
“Your statement is not as self evident as it appears. Why does only one point of view need be true. Could they not all be true for given values if true? Also, you might reflect that NONE of the points of views need be true.
As for His Good Self, it is disengenuous and perhaps a tad arrogant for anyone to claim that they have a ‘hotline’ to HIM. If HE (SHE is also valid too!) intended us to believe only one truth then why has he allowed us the option not to believe? Or is HE/SHE not omnipotent.?
For me, I respect all people who have genuinely held beliefs whatever creed or book. What I find unacceptable is someone claiming that their own beliefs are universally true for everyone and feel obliged to impose their beliefs on others. This is totalitarianism.
It would be ironic and a laugh if on death we don’t go Heaven or Pradise but end up ibn Valhalla or Hel?
So I still stick with my original statement, it is pointless to argue with people who are convinced they are right .”
David Chan
http://www.rarelist.co.uk
“I said I would not argue with one whose mind is made up as yours self-evidently is, but it does appear that I should explain. What I said was:
“people that think in incompatible ways cannot all be completely right.”
I fully accept that any and all of us can look at the world from different perspectives, and there will be an element of truth available to any of them. That means that the nearest we can approach to the truth is to learn from each other. That is my response to constructivism. I believe there is reality, but our view of it can be regarded as negotiated. However that is still the wisdom of this world, and we cannot shoe-horn divine things into it. 1 Corinthians 1:21 puts it thus:”…the world by wisdom knew not God” and it still applies.
However what I said did not in any case deny the possibility of discrete but possibly overlapping views where that is the case. Be careful about “incompatible” views – should I have said “irreconcilable”?
If I say God is, and an atheist says God is not, are we both right?
If I say Jesus is God’s eternal Son, and Judaism and Islam say He is not, can we all be right?
If I say He died for our sins, and others say He did not, can we all be right?
I could go on. Romans 3:3-4: “For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar”.
I do not see the employment of logical syllogism to the disagreements above to be anything like totalitarianism. We can agree to differ and I do not condone violence in language or action to impose my beliefs on anyone. What we cannot do is equate one thing to another when they do not agree. To try is to say that none of it matters anyway. You look as if that is exactly your position. It is not the position of everyone in this thread.”
Maurice Poole
“Surprise ! Just this morning I got an email from India which says “Google Is God”. !
Well I always knew Google was a very smart idea. I’m wondering if Yahoo will agree to this one however !!
Let’s face it, no one is able to observe God beyond their own particular capacity. Somewhere in the world today, there’s probably some poor blokes worshippping a grasshopper. I wouldn’t say condemn them, nor try to reason with them however.”
Timi Ogunjobi
“Quote: If I say God is, and an atheist says God is not, are we both right?
If I say Jesus is God’s eternal Son, and Judaism and Islam say He is not, can we all be right?
If I say He died for our sins, and others say He did not, can we all be right?
Yes, I believe both can be right (for a certain value of rightness). These logical constaructs are mutually contradictory if we assume there is an absolute frame of reference and some agreed procedure to establish rightness in that frame of reference agreed by both parties. If however, we allow the existence of two frames of reference that do not completely overlap, then both parties can hold their views validly according to their individual frame of reference! So it all boils down to whether you believe in Plato’s Absolute Truth or not.
An atheist and a theist will not agree whether God exists or not, whereas a Muslim and a Christian can agree that there is a universal and single God. Muslims and Christians may argue over Jesus’s exact exact status but they both start from a belief of a single God. I believe that the Muslim view of Jesus is just as valid for them as a Christian’s view of Jesus is for a Christian. Hindus may believe Jesus, like Buddha, is an avatar of Vishnu but they would be right from there own frame of reference.
I think there is an element of totalitarianism in anyone who claims to know the Truth in the absolute sense. This unstils an arrogance in that it makes others ‘wrong’. When this is translated into actions, this does tend towards totalitarianism.
As far as religion and beliefs are concerned, it is possible to exchange views and discuss each other’s insights. Where it becomes unhelpful is when one side uses their received wisdom (Bible, Koran, Book of Mormon, Thoughts of Chairman Mao, John Lennon’s lyrics etc) as authority to bolster their arguments. Even within each of the great religions there are schisms and sects who have differing beliefs. Who is to say which one is right? Perhaps, Jesus is just another manifestation of Baldur. Perhaps Jehovah and Odin are one? The Romans identified Jupiter with Zeus and Amun-Ra. It all depends on your frame of reference.”
David Chan
“Could they not all be true for given values if true?
I’m not clear on what you’re suggesting there, David – could you clarify? If you’re suggesting that all views on the nature of God can be simultaneously true, then surely you only need to look at this discussion to see that that can’t be the case. To take a specific example, I believe Jesus was born from a virgin’s womb. Others don’t. How can both positions be true? Either He was or He wasn’t. One or other of us is wrong, and no amount of flannel about “one truth for one person and another for another person” can change that. The two positions are mutually exclusive. Or did I miss something?
SHE is also valid too!
I suspect Nisa, for example, might take issue with the suggestion that God is female (though I may be wrong on that – Nisa?). Are you now going to accuse her, too, of insisting on only one truth?
Respecting people who have genuinely held beliefs does not preclude the possibility of those beliefs being incorrect. Presmably from your comment on this you respect me, despite the fact that you hold my beliefs to be incorrect. Nisa, no doubt, respects me despite the fact that we disagree on various issues. So why is is disrespectful of me, or any Christian, to say that we believe Jesus is God, simply because that hapens to be in disagreement with someone else’s beliefs?
I don’t see any evidence in this thread of anyone seeking to impose their beliefs upon others. I certainly hope I haven’t been guilty of that – and if I have, to whomever, please point it out. What I do see is a discussion between various people coming from various standpoints on some very key issues about the nature of God. I applaud such discussion, as I suggest should any thinking person.”
Adrian Higgs
“Yes I do respect your beliefs and I have no problem with anyone sharing their faith and their own insights. What I am trying to point out is that quoting from sources that others do not agree as authoratative does not advance the discussion or sharing. I contributed to this thread because I could see Nisa’s views on Jesus was being questioned and made ‘wrong’. I am not a Muslim but I can appreciate how Islam can respect Jesus as a prophet without believing he is the Son of God.
It is not disrespectful to other religions if a Christian states that he believes Jesus is the Son of God at all. This is a statement of belief. Similarly, I do not see that an Atheist denying the existence of God is being disrespectful to any of the World’s great religions. It is a statement of belief. It is when people take statements of belief as absolute truth universally applicable, that I wish to challenge. All you can say of a belief is that it is true for you at this moment of time. Like St Paul, you may have ‘a road to Damascus experience’ that may change your beliefs in the future.
No you have not been guilty of imposing your belifs at all Adrian. Your posts have been couched as a sharing of your own obvious faith. That is to be appluaded. All I am pointing out is that quoting from ‘authoritative’ sources be it the Bible or any other sacred texts does not reinforce arguments for or against unless the other party has agreed that the specific source is in actual fact authoritative.
See my 2:48 post for clarifiaction about absolute truth and frames of reference on how two contradictory beliefs can be held as ‘True’!
We all look at the world from a certain viewpoint or frame of reference with some basic assumptions. Change those basic assumptions and we see the world differently. This is what I would call a frame of reference. I hope the following example will illustrate this.
If I am someone who is a total materialist, I would see a red sunset as the result of diffraction of light by dust particles in the air. If I was a spritual person, I could see the beauty sunset as the manifestation of the love of God for the world. If I was an photographer, I might look at the sunset as a problem of choosing the right exposure, aperture and filters to capture an effect. In some senses all these viewpoints are true. That is why I say it all depends on your frame of reference and how you would define ‘right’.
There is an implicit assumption that there is one and only one ‘right’ viewpoint when two people hold opposing points of views. If both parties could agree some way of deciding which one was right then you just need to do it and plump for one statement or the other. If you can’t decide on how to resolve the conflict, then you need to extend your frames of reference and find a view of the world that accomodates both statements. All I am saying is that there may be frames of references where both viewpoints could be ‘right’.
In the case of monotheistic religions that have the commandment “Thous shalt have no other God before me”, there is an issue. If you can’t find a way of looking at the world that allows all such religions to be ‘true’ in some senses, then it will lead to arguments and perhaps conflict. One such frame of referernce is to say that there is not a way to resolve who is ‘right’ but we should all respect others beliefs. This is little different from a position where you do not believe there is an absolute Truth.
I say the ‘value of rightness’ because we need to know whether the assertion being made is universally applicable. If you claim, Jesus is the Son of God, is the absolute Truth, then you are making all people who do not hold this tenet of belief ‘wrong’. However, if you say, I as a Christian believe that Jesus is a Son of God, this limits how far you the statement applies. It is a statement of your beliefs rather than the absolute Truth. Hence the phrsae “value of rightness”.”
David Chan
I just wish to emphasize the great work on this weblog, has exceptional views as well as a clear vision of what you might be interested in.
I just saw this thing on TV about celeb Tom Truong up coming movie The Second Coming of Christ. It’s a movie about the son of God reborn to earth to save us from armageddon of December 21 2012.