Why Jesus Is God, And Others Are Not

Is there evidence to conclude that Jesus is God and all others are not? You might be surprised to learn that we have the capacity today to prove that everything written about Jesus in the New Testament is accurate and reliable.

In recent years, a new group of Liberal Theologians have written books asserting that eighty-five percent of the things attributed to Jesus in the New Testament, He never said or did. These men and women argue that Jesus never claimed to be God, nor did He have the capacity to perform miracles.

When we investigate the evidence for ourselves we find just the opposite.

We discover that people sometimes have agendas. They write their words from a particular view with an intended purpose. We find out that before these books were written, people had already decided that God does not exist and therefore, miracles are not possible. It was for this reason that these men and women determined that what is written about Jesus cannot be true.

Some people have the idea that a person who has achieved a Ph.D. is a reliable source for true and accurate information. Most of us understands that people can make just about anything sound true, though the facts say something completely different.

The truth is, the evidence to support that Jesus is God and the things written about Him in the New Testament are true is overwhelming.

Why Is Jesus God And All Others, Not?

Quite simply, because the empirical evidence which has survived time and decay proves He is God.

You might be surprised by this statement. There are many people in the world today who believe there is no evidence to support the idea that God exists.

To the contrary, there exists a massive number of evidentiary proofs which fully validate Jesus as God—superior to all other gods. I have written  twenty-four books about this evidence, three of which are between 3-4,000 pages.

Let me be clear at the onset that the entire purpose for Jesus coming into the world was to prove that God exists. He ensured that we would be able to make this conclusion by leaving us with empirical facts to support our faith.

If we think that the New Testament is not reliable because it is of such great age and has been copied so many times that the words within are corrupted, we are misinformed.

If we believe the writers of the New Testament embellished their stories about Jesus or that He did not say or do the things written about Him, we are in error.

Writers like myself, who have spent their lives investigating the evidence which validates the authenticity of the New Testament, are certain the narratives about Jesus are true and reliable because the evidence supports this conclusion. This book is the result of my 43 years of research, writing, lecturing, and publishing evidence for the historical validity of Jesus in the United States, Europe, and Asia.

This book presents facts that most people have never heard or considered. This work was written for the purpose of giving you an intellectual, evidence-based reason to believe that Jesus is singular and transcendent above all others.

Previews Of “Why Jesus Is God And Others Are Not”

 


See Rob’s New Book: “Why Jesus Is God, And Others Are Not,” Now At Amazon, Just $4.99 for a limited time.




Categories: Agnostics and Skeptics, Archeological Confirmation, Atheists, Empirical Evidence for God, Evolution, Historical Validity of the New Testament, Jesus is God, Jesus is Good, Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus: Author of the Law, Literary authenticity of the New Testament, New Testament Manuscripts, No one is "good", One Way to Heaven, Origin of the Universe, Physical Constants, Prophecies Fulfilled by Jesus, Reliability of the New Testament, Religion vs. Relationship, Resurrection Proven by Secular Sources, Robert Clifton Robinson, Salvation is a free gift, Science and the Bible, Secular Sources for Jesus, The Compassion of Jesus, The Creation of the Universe, The Existence of God, The Four Gospels, The Historical Jesus, The Historicity of Jesus, The Miracles of Jesus, The Sovereignty of God, Transcendent Knowledge, Why God Allows Evil, Why Jesus Is God And Others Are Not

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

11 replies

  1. Hi. I am fully assured that the writings of the Apostles are true. And what they say about our Lord Jesus is true. I just happen to disagree with your conclusions. And this coming from a former Trinitarian. My question then is, what would be your criteria for proving that Jesus is not God?

    • Jose,

      I appreciate your comments. I am not sure I understands your question.

      “what would be your criteria for proving that Jesus is not God?”

      My new book is about proving that Jesus is God, not that he is not. In recent years, Liberal Theologians have claimed that the New Testament was written by men who made Jesus God when He never claimed this for Himself. I wrote this book in defense of the facts of history which prove that Jesus is God.

      Rob

    • Jose’ if I may speak a couple of things here as to Jesus being God. I have studied Pastor Rob for a couple of years now and have come to learn more and more about the bible and what it says because of him and Jesus speaking to my heart.

      I would make this point, GOD knew we could not look upon him directly.“You cannot see My face, for no man can see Me and live!” – Exodus 33:20. So in order for us to have salvation he had to communicate with man directly (apostles) and others.

      I believe he took human form as man ( Jesus ) so there would also be a history of him ( bible ) so as to come as the perfect human whom GOD would create within himself but as a human who would give his life for us on the cross. Only GOD could do this in human form that we can see and read about as GOD the son that man was able to look upon and testify to. Yes, he could have chosen to come to every man as a spirit which he does (Holy Spirit) or a burning bush but, he knew there had to be shed blood for our salvation and that was JESUS, GOD’S son in human form but GOD in all his glory as GOD in human flesh so man was able to see him and communicate directly with him. Hope this helps.

  2. I’m interested in becoming an apologist. I can do what you do, while confirming that Jesus is God’s Anointed One as the Apostles have proven. I don’t believe what trinitarians and binitarians believe about Jesus. So I guess that’s why my question was confusing. The Apostles proved that Jesus is the Anointed One, the Son of God. That’s what I proclaim.

    So as a former Trinitarian I pretty much know what Trinitarians put forth as proof, having used the same myself. But after being challenged I abandoned each of the arguments one by one. When conversing with someone who believe Jesus is God I get the same arguments I used which now seem invalid to me. So instead I asked what would the criteria look like for Jesus not being God. I’m only interested.

    • Thank You Jose,

      I understand now.

      The title of the book was misunderstood.

      I am not saying that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not God; this truth is taught by the clear text of the New Testament. The point of the book is that other religions and gods of the world are not the true God, Jesus is.

      Chapter 8, “Three Who Are One God,” explains this in detail.

      This book is written in response to Liberal Theologians who attempt to prove that the writers of the New Testament made Jesus God, while He never claimed to be God.

      It is surprising, the comments that are made as to why some can state that Jesus is not God. After writing about this subject for nearly 43 years, I can say with confidence that this view does not come by reading and studying the four Gospels. Jesus made it very clear in all four Gospels that He is God.

      This was the reason that I wrote: “Why Jesus is God, And Others Are Not.”

      I received a comment recently by someone who has read the book and they stated that after reading this book, “it is impossible to not believe that Jesus is God from reading the evidence that this book contains…”

      If you are able to download and read my book, I would appreciate your comments as a former Trinitarian. I think that your views would greatly help others who may also have questions.

      As far as arguments that are valid for why Jesus is not God, I have heard all of these and they are always based upon an insufficient knowledge of the New Testament text. In most cases, this misunderstanding can easily be cleared up by a simple exploration of the original Greek text, which clarifies terms such as “firstborn,” or “begotten.”

      What were the arguments that you formerly made against the idea that Jesus is God?

      Thank you Jose for your comments and observations.

      Blessings,

      Rob

  3. Thank you for the reply.

    Formerly as a Trinitarian I made arguments that Jesus is God. Ironically when I compared my arguments with other Trinitarians it was basically the same. Now I hear the same from Trinitarians. They use the same logic I used. Its almost 100% the same. Pretty much every proof text I used was out of context.

    I agree that the Apostles did not make things up about Jesus. What I don’t believe is that they said Jesus was the almighty God. They effectively proved that Jesus was the Anointed One, the Son of God. John wrote his account to confirm that our Lord was the Anointed One of God. So does all the other writers. This is true because they literally said it. And proved it. I guess we disagree on meaning. We don’t agree on what the Apostles actually meant. For instance, when studying the Greek I became more convinced against my former trinitarian belief, and on the other hand you also become more convinced in favour of it. We see things with different eyes. I don’t mind disagreement. I find it rather interesting instead.

    So for my original intend; I asked you (who believe Jesus is God) what would be evidence that Jesus is not God. For example, I don’t believe our Lord Jesus is the almighty God. So from my perspective what would it take to prove Jesus is God in order to be persuaded that he is. This is my criteria from scriptures as follows:

    “There is one God: ….” followed by definitely confirming Jesus as that one God, or a member of that one God. Nothing vague and ambiguous. Like Paul states: There is one God: The Father. This is the type of proof I’d expect.

    On the other hand. What I don’t consider proof is the following:

    “I and the Father are one”

    What does that mean. Nobody can tell except by looking at the context. This is because everything has context and the above verse can be one of many posibilites. When I was a trinitarian I automatically “knew” what Jesus meant. But how could I without context. I just projected my own point of view on these words.

    Now there is a distinction between the former and the latter verse. The first are definite, the second needs more elaboration. Yet as a Trinitarian I would simply take that verse as it is and fill in the rest with my personal belief.

    • Jose,

      I will present a section from the first chapter of my book: “Why Jesus Is God, And Others Are Not.”

      First, we must remember that the very reason Jesus was arrested by the religious leaders of Israel was for blasphemy.

      In the words of the Pharisees, Jesus was crucified because He, being a man, claimed to be God.

      In John 10:30-33, Jesus told the Pharisees, “I and My Father are one.

      Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, “Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?” The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.”

      The term, I and my father are one, is a clear statement where Jesus is claiming that God, whom He claims is His Father, and He are one and the same. We understand what Jesus meant by this statement in seeing how the Pharisees responded; they pick up stones to kill Jesus for Blasphemy.

      Jesus Faces the Sanhedrin In Matthew’s Gospel

      Matthew describes Jesus before the high priest as He is questioned about His true identity. The high priest uses an ancient Hebrew imperative to interrogate Jesus by placing Him under oath: are you the Christ, the Son of God?

      There is no ambiguity regarding what is being asked or asserted concerning Jesus. The high priest is demanding an answer from Jesus because it was well known by this time that He had, on several occasions, claimed to be the Son of God.

      And the high priest arose and said to Him, “Do You answer nothing? What is it these men testify against You?” But Jesus kept silent. And the high priest answered and said to Him, “I put You under oath by the living God: Tell us if You are the Christ, the Son of God!”Jesus said to him, “It is as you said.

      Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.”Then the high priest tore his clothes, saying, “He has spoken blasphemy! What further need do we have of witnesses? Look, now you have heard His blasphemy! What do you think?” They answered and said, “He is deserving of death.” ~Matthew 26:62-66

      Jesus answers in the affirmative that He is the Son of God, just as the high priest has said. Then Jesus uses two confirming scriptures from Daniel chapter 7 where the prophet describes the Messiah as the Son of Man, coming with the clouds.

      I was watching in the night visions, and behold, One like the Son of Man, coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of Days, and they brought Him near before Him. Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and His kingdom the one which shall not be destroyed. ~Daniel 7:13-14

      Daniel is the first to use the term Son of Man to describe the Messiah, and the only writer to use the phrase, coming with the clouds, in the Old Testament.

      John also writes in the Book of Revelation, that Jesus will be coming with the clouds when He returns.
      Behold, He is coming with clouds, and every eye will see Him, even they who pierced Him (Zechariah 12:10). And all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him. Even so, Amen. ~Revelation 1:7

      The term clouds is used in Hebrews 12:1 to describe those who are in heaven as witnesses, watching our progress here on earth. John said that when Jesus returns, these cloud of witnesses will be coming with Him to reign over the earth as Messiah.

      Therefore we also, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us. ~ Hebrews 12:1

      Here, Jesus applies both of Daniel’s terms, clouds and Son of Man, to Himself. Jesus also confirmed to the Pharisees in Matthew 26:62-66, above, that He is the Son of God.

      By these three declarations to the Pharisees, that He is the Son of God, The Son of Man, and Coming with the clouds, Jesus is confirming three things:

      1. He is God.
      
2. He Is Messiah.

      3. He Is coming again to rule over the kingdom promised to David that will never end.


      There is no mistake in what Jesus has told the Pharisees. We see by the response of the high priest in tearing his garments, that he clearly understood that Jesus was claiming to be God. It was upon this declaration that the high priest pronounces “blasphemy,” and declares that Jesus should be put to death.

      Did you also notice here that in addition to Jesus saying He is God and the Messiah, we also see that the Old Testament predicted the Messiah would be God?

      The 400 Prophecies of the Messiah, from the Old Testament, predict a Messiah who is God in human flesh, with the attributes that only God could possess: miracles, forgiving sin, raising the dead. I wrote two books about this subject.

      This book is filled with 785 pages of evidence that supports the truth that Jesus, claimed to be the Eternal God, the disciples believed and supported that Jesus is Jehovah-God, and the Pharisees sought Jesus’ death because He claimed to be God.

      Sincerely,

      Rob

  4. Rob,

    Thank you again for the reply. As I said before as a former Trinitarian this was exactly my points. Everything you said. Its like looking back at me in the past. You can pick any point and we can go into it in detail. I don’t agree Jesus claimed to be God. And the legal spectrum of blasphemy law is not just about claiming to be God. But I’d be happy to discuss one point in its entirety.

    Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, “Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?” The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.”

    The Jews did not understand. Jesus said they didn’t understand. They got it wrong. They did not believe its the works from God. Jesus further asserting those works were from God aggrevated them even further. Jesus’ works was “from [the] Father” which are confirmed by Peter that God performed those miracles and wonders and signs thru Jesus, similar to God parting the Red Sea thru Moses. Jesus is God’s Anointed One. Paul says Jesus will show in his appointed times who is the only Potentate (God the Father). He is God’s Anointed One. God made him Lord and Anointed One, that’s why he shows the qualities of God the Father. Its “from [the] Father” in Jesus’ own words. If the men to whom the word of God came are called gods how much more Jesus who is God’s Anointed One. And that’s his reply unto those Jews.

    Jesus performs miracles because its “from [the] Father”. He forgives sin because the authority is “from [the] Father “. He raises the dead because he is crowned with power and authority to do so “from [the] Father” who also raised him from the dead by His own glory.

    So again the points you show which I also put forth in the past I don’t regard as proof. And this is also my original point. The verses which needs more elaboration are put forth instead of more direct verses which clearly say that God is the Father.

    “To us (Christians) there is one God the Father” – 1 Cor. 8:6

    In the past I even claimed that the use of “LORD” for God in th Old Testament equated to the use of Lord for Jesus is the New Testament!

    “The LORD said unto my Lord.. .”

    The problem is “LORD” was used in place of God’s name Yahweh. And the use of the title Kurios for Jesus in the NT equates to the use of Adon for the anointed kings such as David in their respective generation. Only our Lord receives all power and authority unto all generations “from [the] Father”. Peter clearly states in Acts 2 that God made Jesus both Lord and Anointed One. Yet I still made the error that Lord used for Jesus equated to Yahweh (He who exists). That’s only one of many wordplay errors I made.

    What we can be 100% certain of when reading the Apostles is that Jesus is the Anointed One (Messiah/Christ). What he revealed was “from [the] Father”. The works and will he carried out was “from [the] Father”. We know that because that was the whole intend of Apostles to proclaim him. To bear witness that Jesus is the Anointed One. When we read Acts of the Apostles, that’s exactly their agenda. John confirms his account by clarifying that he wrote in order to confirm Jesus is the Anointed One, the Son of God. We know that for certain. As a trinitarian I believed “Son of God” meant “God, the Son” for no valid reason as far as I can see. But what we know for certain is that Jesus is proclaimed as the Anointed One, the Son of God.

    Sincerely,

    José

    • Jose,

      You are making an critical error in Apologetics, assumption. We can only deduce conclusions based on facts, not assumption or conjecture. You may not agree that the Pharisees didn’t understand, but by the evidence of their response, they did understand that Jesus was claiming to be God. We know that they understood that Jesus is claiming, Himself, to be God, not merely an arm of God. When they ask Jesus under the ancient Jewish imperative: Are You The Son Of God?”, Jesus answers Yes.

      1) This is the entire argument; whether Jesus claimed to be God and then exhibited evidence to prove this.

      John 10:30-33 “I and My Father are one.” Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, “Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?” The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.”

      The Pharisees did not misinterpret what Jesus said: “I and My Father are one,” they knew that Jesus was claiming to be Jehovah-God. We know this is true by their response; to stone Him for blasphemy.

      Since it is clear that Jesus believed Himself to be God, the question is, do we believe this or think Him a liar, or perhaps deluded? If a liar, a sinner, then how did He have the power to heal every disease, and raise the dead?

      2) Jesus said that no man has the power to take His life, it was He who chose to lay it down and to raise it up. Jesus is asserting that He has the power that only God Possess, to raise the dead. Jesus was not saying that God gave Him this power but that He had this power Himself.

      The reason that some people cannot understand Jesus submission to the Father as a Servant who came into the world to die for our sins, is because they don’t understand that Jesus willingly took the position of a servant, though He is God, to complete the Father’s will, in dying for us.

      Philippians 2:5-8 “Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross.”

      Jesus came into the world as both God and man, but set aside some of His rights as God in order to become a servant to the Father. While on earth, Jesus was acting as the agent of the Father to complete His will for our Salvation. This does not mean that Jesus was not God before He arrived, or that He ceased being God while He was here.

      3) Jesus forgave the sins of the paralyzed man and said that He had the authority as “The Son of Man,” to do so. the Pharisees objected because they said that only God had the power to forgive sins. To prove that He did have the power to forgive sins, because He is God, Jesus healed the man, something which could be seen, proving that He also had the power of God to forgive sins, which could not be seen.

      As I stated previously, the term: “Son of Man,” is an Old Testament reference to the Messiah, who is also God. Matthew calls Jesus “Son of Man,” 32 times in His Gospel. He did this so that the Jewish audience He was writing to would understand that Jesus is the Messiah.

      I think that one of you reasons for not understanding Jesus nature as fully God, is your unawareness of the facts of the Old Testament that makes it clear that Messiah will be Jehovah-God.

      4) Colossians 1, Paul calls Jesus the Creator of all that exists, verses 16-17

      In Genesis 1;1 it says that “in the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” If Jesus is the Creator, He is God who created the heavens and the earth.

      Jesus is called “God,” many places in the New Testament:

      Thomas called Jesus “My Lord and My God,” Jesus did not correct Thomas but accepted his statement as true.
      Paul called Jesus God in Hebrews 1
      Paul, in Titus 2:13, called Jesus “Our great God and Savior…”
      At the Jordan river, the Father called Jesus His Son, also God.
      Peter said that Jesus is the Christ (Messiah), the Son of God.

      5) When the Greek New Testament was translated into English, it was known at that time, by the Greek text, that Jesus is the same Yahweh, Yehovah, of the Old Testament. We see examples of this in Philippians 2:6-11. Paul used the same name, Jehovah, for Jesus as David used in Psalams 97:9; Jehovah, to describe Yahweh as exalted above all gods. Paul used this same term to describe Jesus as Yahweh, by quoting Psalams 97:9 in reference to Jesus as Jehovah-God.

      Psalms 97:9 is validated as a prophetic, Messianic scripture, which Jesus fulfilled in the New Testament. This scripture describes Messiah as exalted above all gods. The Old Testament term, LORD, is Yahweh. In the New Testament Greek, Jesus is frequently referred to as Lord or Yahweh.

      When Philippians 2:6-11 states that Jesus was exalted by God and given a name above all other names, this corresponds with the Messianic Prophecy of Psalms 97:9, Yahweh is exalted above all gods.

      For You, Yahweh, are most high above all the earth; You are exalted far above all gods. ~Psalms 97:9

      Therefore God also has highly exalted Jesus and given Him the name which is above every name. ~Philippians 2:9

      It is clear that the Messiah of Psalms 97:9, who is Yahweh, is Jesus of Philippians 2:9 who is Yahweh

      6), you are missing a further important piece of evidence: The Old Testamant predicts a Messiah who is also God.

      Jesus Confounded The Leaders Of Israel

      When the Pharisees gathered before Jesus to question Him, it was with the intent of publicly discrediting Him before all those who were listening. Instead, these men were themselves confounded. The text that the Pharisees used to trap Jesus was a well-known verse from Psalm 110:1a.

      In this portion of scripture, The LORD God is saying to the Messiah, “Sit at my right hand till I make your enemies my footstool.” The Pharisees believed that they already knew the answer to this question when they asked Jesus: “What do you think about the Christ (Messiah) Whose Son is He?” The Pharisees believed that the Messiah was the Son of David.

      The LORD said to my Lord, “Sit at My right hand, Till I make Your enemies Your footstool.” ~Psalms 110:1a

      Matthew Records This Event In His Gospel

      While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, saying, “What do you think about the Christ? Whose Son is He?” They said to Him, “The Son of David.” He said to them, “How then does David in the Spirit call Him ‘Lord,’ saying: ‘The LORD said to my Lord, “Sit at My right hand, Till I make Your enemies Your footstool” ’? If David then calls Him ‘Lord,’ how is He his Son?” ~Matthew 22:41-45

      Jesus asks the Pharisees, “If the Messiah is David’s son, then why did David also call Him “Lord?” In other words, how could the Messiah be both a human being (David’s son) and also Lord (God’s Son)?

      These men knew and understood that this verse of scripture that Jesus referred to was about the Messiah. Only the Messiah could sit at the right hand of God. Jesus believed these verses from Psalm 110:1 were inspired by God and were true—as did these leaders of Israel. Jesus asked these teachers of the law how Messiah could be both God and a human being?

      “If the Messiah is David’s son, how can He also be David’s Lord?”

      This is precisely what this prophecy from Psalms 110:1a is predicting.

      The Pharisees didn’t have an answer. They were bewildered, but not Jesus. The obvious answer to this question is that the Messiah will be both David’s Lord (God) and His, Son (a future human descendant), a fact that Jesus made repeatedly concerning Himself.

      The reality that Jesus is both David’s son and his Lord is confirmed by Jesus’ question which He asks of the Pharisees. For those who say that Jesus never claimed to be God, this is one of many places where He clearly asserts that He is God.

      When Jesus asks this question of the religious leadership of Israel, no one was able to answer Him. This is because it was generally accepted by the Jews that Psalms 110:1 was speaking of the Messiah who will also be God. If by David’s words, the Messiah is both a son and Lord, He must also be God and man.

      The idea that God could be dwelling within the person of Jesus Christ was a reality that was totally unacceptable to the leaders of Israel. Yet, this is precisely what David was predicting when he penned Psalms 110:1.

      Understanding this is true, how is it that anyone could miss this critical piece of evidence in stating that Jesus never claimed to be God?

      Here before the Pharisees, Jesus meticulously demonstrates from the Old Testament that His identity as God and Messiah is precisely what David predicted: A man who is both Messiah and God.

      You stated that Jesus was simply doing what the Father sent Him to do and therefore it is not Jesus as God who is doing the works, but the Father who is doing these miracles through Jesus. We see no indication by Jesus or any of the writers of the New Testament that this is true. In fact, all the writers make it clear that Jesus is God, Himself and all His miracles and works are because He is God.

      Early Gnosticism:

      The error of Cerinthus and his followers, who denied that Jesus is God, the Son, was the beginning of all those today who also deny that the New Testament teaches that Jesus is God in human flesh. This was a Gnostic teaching that has no foundation in the Bible but was merely the opinion of Cerinthus and those who also follow this teaching.

      The idea of Cerinthus is that Jesus is only the physical son of Joseph upon whom “the Eon Christ” descended at his baptism but left Jesus again at his crucifixion, so that only a man died on the cross, is heresy, unsupported by the Bible.

      Understanding this early heresy of Jesus, John speaks to correct and clarify the truth that Jesus is God in human flesh, always was God, always will be God. The Gospel is founded upon the certainty that Jesus is the Eternal God who came to us in the flesh of a man. If Jesus was only a man who died upon the cross, then His sacrifice for our sins was insufficient and we are not saved by trusting in Him. It is because Jesus is God, who took the body of a man (Hebrews 1), that His death is of infinite value, and adequate to be offered for the lives of all people, for all time.

      John makes it equally clear, every person who denies that Jesus is God in human flesh, is from the Antichrist”; τό refers to πνεῦμα, “the spirit of the Antichrist.”

      This same doctrine of denying the divinity of Jesus is present today in unsuspecting persons who receive this false teaching from churches like the Jehovah’s Witnesses, Gnostic teachers, and other heretical doctrine. It’s source is in the devil who always seeks to diminish and remove Jesus power for salvation.

      There is no support from the Bible that Jesus is only the physical Son of God. The entire body of scripture, both Old and New Testaments, support the certainty that God would come to the earth in the body of a man and die for the sins of the world.

      I appreciate and respect that this is your opinion, but we cannot make the case that Jesus neither claimed to be God, nor was He God, from the text of the New Testament.

      Sincerely,

      Rob

  5. It’s funny how much I used to agree with what you’re saying. Now I think its invalid. I see what your saying and see your critical error, assumption.

    “We know that they understood that Jesus is claiming, Himself, to be God, not merely an arm of God. When they ask Jesus under the ancient Jewish imperative: Are You The Son Of God?”, Jesus answers Yes.”

    Now isn’t it your assumption that Son of God means God Himself? And your assumption that blasphemy can only be a claim to be God? How does Son of God mean God Himself without assumption?

    Scripturally speaking Son of God is synonymous with Messiah, God’s Anointed One.

    Speaking to His Anointed One, God says, “You are my Son, this day have I begotten you”. (Psalm 2). Also, “I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a son.”

    By the time of Jesus on earth the Jews were well aware that the Anointed One is synonymous with Son of God. It meant the same thing. The chief priest asked Jesus “Are you the Anointed One, the son of the One most blessed”. This is classic Hebrew parallelism. Saying the same thing twice. Peter also does this during his confession, “You are the Anointed One, the Son of the living God. “. Luke understanding the language being communicated, contracts the two lines into one, “You are the Anointed One of God”, because he knows the parallel sentences means the same thing. Mark likewise in a clever way brings this out by leaving out the second line of Peter’s statement, but then parallel it with God the Father’s statement that “this is my Son”.

    Biblically speaking Messiah and Son are synonymous. Jesus is referred to as Son of God in many instances.

    1. He was the firstborn with God before creation itself.
    2. His human birth by the Spirit of God.
    3. His anointing at John’s baptism. Where he is also proclaimed Son of God.
    4. And finally at his resurrection. Where the same Spirit of anointing transformed his body.

    Now whenever Jesus is referred to as the Son of God, its almost always points 3 and 4. That’s how a Jew would have understood it. Jews would say of God that He is “Our Father” in the collective knowing that calling God “My Father” would be a messianic claim. Calling God my Father was basically saying your the Messiah and vice versa.

    Now for Trinitarians and Binitarians there is a fifth one. That is that Son of God means God. Isn’t this assumption?

    Isn’t it assumption that the blasphemy charge was claiming to be God, based on another assumption that Son of God means something other than what the Scriptures reveal? That the anointing is a birth from God. And when we become sons of God the same Spirit of anointing which now resides in the Son, will also reside in us, through which we will be begotten again by God the Father?

    When God’s name is misused or if someone speaks presumptuously in God’s name. That is blasphemy. Since Jesus as God’s Anointed spoke in His name, and the Jews refused his testimony it should be a no-brainer that Jesus was most certainly going to be accused of blasphemy any second. Jesus healed on the Sabbath day. To attribute that to God in their minds would immediately be seen as blasphemy. It was inevitable. But to attribute that to him saying he is the almighty God when he merely affirmed he was the Anointed One, the Son of God according to their actual Jewish understanding of these concepts are problematic and an assumption of your own belief.

    For everything written about Jesus, it should be no problem for an almighty God to ordain him for that very purpose. To say Jesus must be God because he did “x” does not make sense since God can authorise anyone he pleases to do so. To say that Jesus is God because he did miracles ignores the fact that God performed many miracles through many people. All the arguments that Jesus must be God, because x, y and z does not make sense. Even I did not use those arguments as a trinitarian.

    Another confusion is the use of messiah and lord. The actual Jewish understanding of the time would have been different than how trinitarians think it is. The problem today that we do not make a clear connection between the anointed kings of Israel and our Lord Jesus. Most versions of the Bible call David “master” and in the same version Jesus is called “Lord”. Also David is called “anointed one ” while Jesus is called Christ. Though these are the same the connection is lost to us mostly. But at the time of Jesus and the Apostles they would have and did understand it in its proper framework. They knew David was the anointed one (christ/messiah) of his own time. And they knew he was lord of Israel in his own generation. A man got angry at me once for saying this. But its true. All the past anointed kings were referred to as lord. This to many seem blasphemous, but its in the Scriptures. The Jews in Jesus’ time were looking for a messiah who would lead them in another exodus. They understood him to be lord of Israel. They did not think he was God himself. The claim that they thought he was LORD as in Yahweh (He who exist ) is simply a late conjecture. A projection. They knew that the coming Anointed One was Lord/master (ADON/KURIOS) and not Yahweh the almighty. Because David and his descends were respectively messiah and lord. As a trinitarian I would instead project the name of God on this messianic title Lord.

    They understood that the anointed king is the begotten of God. That is, the process of anointing of God is process of God giving birth. We know this from Scriptures. And virtually every time Jesus is referred to as Son of God its because he is the Anointed One. This was the understanding.

    In summary. To falsely represent God and to take up his name in vain is blasphemy. And Jesus was the Anointed One of God. Since many did not believe in him they would not believe he came in God’s name. Therefore it was inevitable for him to be accused of blasphemy. That could be the chief reason why he did not fully confirm he was the Anointed One until the appointed time of his death. Where he was accused of blasphemy. After healing on the Sabbath day they wanted to stone him. Then he said that it was the work of God (which sounded insane to them, because why would God heal on the Sabbath). So this further solidified in their minds that he is falsely using God’s name and character. Which lead them to the obvious (in their minds) charge of blasphemy. So yes, they lacked understanding. We know they did lack understanding and sight. They could not understand he was speaking truthfully in God’s name. So instead they accused him of blasphemy, because they did not understand. Its funny how even I used to say they DID understand when they did not. They thought he was a fake representative of God. A blasphemous position.

    Scripturally speaking, Messiah is the Son of God. This is clearly understood in Jesus’ time on earth. And finally lord and messiah are understood in the context of past anointed kings who were lords of Israel in their own times.

    “We know that they understood that Jesus is claiming, Himself, to be God, not merely an arm of God. When they ask Jesus under the ancient Jewish imperative: Are You The Son Of God?”, Jesus answers Yes.”

    No. But what they did understand that the Anointed One would refer to God as “my Father”. In accordance with the Scriptures. But they did not believe him. So their obvious conclusion was blasphemy (falsely representing God).

    The Jewish understanding of “Son of God” are clearly paralleled with Messiah (Anointed One ), according to the Scriptures and not the assumption that it means God.

    Hope this clarifies my point of view as I have studied. In the end we will not all agree.

    Sincerely,
    José

    • Jose,

      It’s funny how much I used to agree with what you’re saying. Now I think its invalid. I see what your saying and see your critical error, assumption.

      I am curious why you changed your mind about Jesus as God in human flesh? Who taught you this doctrine?

      “We know that they understood that Jesus is claiming, Himself, to be God, not merely an arm of God. When they ask Jesus under the ancient Jewish imperative: Are You The Son Of God?”, Jesus answers Yes.”

      Now isn’t it your assumption that Son of God means God Himself? And your assumption that blasphemy can only be a claim to be God? How does Son of God mean God Himself without assumption?

      no, this is not my assumption, it is because this is what the entirety of the Bible teaches. Beginning with the Old Testament, the Hebrews knew well that the Messiah would be God in human flesh. The fact that Jesus came and fulfilled exactly what the prophets predicted, was expected of Messiah. I wrote two books over 3,000 pages where I carefully document the surety that God predicted a Messiah who would be God. The reason this is true is that the Hebrews understood that Jehovah is salvation, not a man. A mere man did not have the power to save a world full of sinners as He would not possess a life of infinite value sufficient to redeem the lives of all human beings. As a mere man, though sent with the power of God, Jesus could not present a sacrifice of sufficient value. It was only as God dwelling within the body of a sinless man, who is one of us, a “kinsman reddemer,” that Messiah could save all sinner.

      The argument of a mere human savior cannot meet the strict demands of the sacrifice necessary to save from so many sins.

      Scripturally speaking Son of God is synonymous with Messiah, God’s Anointed One.

      The problem with this statement is in your lack of knowledge what the term “Son of God” means in the contest of Messiah. David well understood when he wrote Psalms 110:1 that Messiah would be God, the Son, and his future descendent.

      Paul confirmed this in Hebrews 1 where he quoted 2 Samuel 7:14. Paul refers to David’s statement that Messiah will be God’s Son, and in verse 6, the Father calls the Son, “God.”

      For to which of the angels did He ever say:
      “You are My Son,
      Today I have begotten You”? And again:
      “I will be to Him a Father,
      And He shall be to Me a Son”?
      6 But when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says:
      “Let all the angels of God worship Him.” 7 And of the angels He says:
      “Who makes His angels spirits
      And His ministers a flame of fire.” 8 But to the Son He says:
      “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
      A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom. ~Hebrews 1:5-8

      The term: “firstborn” is prototokos, which is first in order of importance. Jesus comes as the first to rise from the dead amongst all those who will rise from the dead because of His own resurrection. Prototokos never means created as in human origin.

      Speaking to His Anointed One, God says, “You are my Son, this day have I begotten you”. (Psalm 2). Also, “I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a son.”

      “begotten” does not mean, created as you are implying. Begotten: μονογενής monogenēs, uniqueness or singularity, the only one, monogenēs is never defined as “created.”

      By the time of Jesus on earth the Jews were well aware that the Anointed One is synonymous with Son of God. It meant the same thing. The chief priest asked Jesus “Are you the Anointed One, the son of the One most blessed”. This is classic Hebrew parallelism. Saying the same thing twice. Peter also does this during his confession, “You are the Anointed One, the Son of the living God. “. Luke understanding the language being communicated, contracts the two lines into one, “You are the Anointed One of God”, because he knows the parallel sentences means the same thing. Mark likewise in a clever way brings this out by leaving out the second line of Peter’s statement, but then parallel it with God the Father’s statement that “this is my Son”.

      So far, I agree…

      Biblically speaking Messiah and Son are synonymous. Jesus is referred to as Son of God in many instances.

      Not true, they are distinct, while represented by the same person…

      1. He was the firstborn with God before creation itself.

      This is not true, you try to force this definition by your misunderstanding of the term “firstborn,” which is common amongst those who teach others like yourself that Jesus is not God. In fact, Firstborn: πρωτοτόκος prōtotokos, first in order of importance, not as in a natural birth.

      2. His human birth by the Spirit of God.

      Correct, speaking only of Jesus’ human birth but not of His origin as God, eternal, from eternity as in Micah’s prophecy of the Messiah born in Bethlehem, coming from eternity. John echo’s this truth, describing Jesus in chapter one as the Logos who existed as God, and created all that exists, before He took the body of a man.

      3. His anointing at John’s baptism. Where he is also proclaimed Son of God.

      As a man, Jesus was anointed by the Holy Spirit, but He was already God, possessing the fulness of God’s Spirit. The anointing was necessary only for Jesus work as a man, who is Messiah, it was not necessary for Him as God. Don’t forget that Philippians described Jesus as setting aside His rights as God, to become a servant to the Father, so that He could accomplish the Father’s will and die for the sins of the world. Jesus entered human life as God, in a body that God prepared for Him, as Paul describes, also in Hebrews 1.

      4. And finally at his resurrection. Where the same Spirit of anointing transformed his body.

      It was only Jesus human body that died, for God cannot die. It was Jesus human body that He resurrected from the dead. Jesus said that no man had the power to take His life. Jesus said only He had power to lay down His life when He chose and He had power to raise it up again, powers that only God has.

      Now whenever Jesus is referred to as the Son of God, its almost always points 3 and 4. That’s how a Jew would have understood it. Jews would say of God that He is “Our Father” in the collective knowing that calling God “My Father” would be a messianic claim. Calling God my Father was basically saying your the Messiah and vice versa.

      Again, the same continuing problem; not understanding that Jesus was not the Son of God in terms of His humanity, but as God’s Son, equal to God. It was never the understanding of the Hebrew prophets that the Son of God was merely human. It was perfectly understood that when they wrote the term Son of God, that this meant He is God Himself.

      Now for Trinitarians and Binitarians there is a fifth one. That is that Son of God means God. Isn’t this assumption?

      Isn’t it assumption that the blasphemy charge was claiming to be God, based on another assumption that Son of God means something other than what the Scriptures reveal? That the anointing is a birth from God. And when we become sons of God the same Spirit of anointing which now resides in the Son, will also reside in us, through which we will be begotten again by God the Father?

      No, the Jews never said this or implied this. They understood perfectly by Jesus reference to “coming with the clouds, and sitting at the right hand of God,” that He was claiming to be God. The Pharisees would not have stoned Jesus for blasphemy for claiming to be a representative of God as His Son. It was only because Jesus claimed to be Jehovah-God they picked up stones.

      When God’s name is misused or if someone speaks presumptuously in God’s name. That is blasphemy. Since Jesus as God’s Anointed spoke in His name, and the Jews refused his testimony it should be a no-brainer that Jesus was most certainly going to be accused of blasphemy any second. Jesus healed on the Sabbath day. To attribute that to God in their minds would immediately be seen as blasphemy. It was inevitable. But to attribute that to him saying he is the almighty God when he merely affirmed he was the Anointed One, the Son of God according to their actual Jewish understanding of these concepts are problematic and an assumption of your own belief.

      In human terms we might use the term blasphemy when God’s name is missuded. This was not the intent of the Pharisees. They clearly stated that Jesus was committing blasphemy because Jesus “made Himself God.”

      For everything written about Jesus, it should be no problem for an almighty God to ordain him for that very purpose. To say Jesus must be God because he did “x” does not make sense since God can authorise anyone he pleases to do so. To say that Jesus is God because he did miracles ignores the fact that God performed many miracles through many people. All the arguments that Jesus must be God, because x, y and z does not make sense. Even I did not use those arguments as a trinitarian.

      This is your opinion, but not what the body of scripture teaches concerning a Messiah who is God dwelling in human flesh. This is what the Old Testament prophets predicted, and what Jesus fulfilled. The miracles of Jesus were necessary because the Messiah predicted by Isaiah and the other Hebrew prophets, required a Messiah with the power of God to perform miracles.

      Another confusion is the use of messiah and lord. The actual Jewish understanding of the time would have been different than how trinitarians think it is. The problem today that we do not make a clear connection between the anointed kings of Israel and our Lord Jesus. Most versions of the Bible call David “master” and in the same version Jesus is called “Lord”. Also David is called “anointed one ” while Jesus is called Christ. Though these are the same the connection is lost to us mostly. But at the time of Jesus and the Apostles they would have and did understand it in its proper framework. They knew David was the anointed one (christ/messiah) of his own time. And they knew he was lord of Israel in his own generation. A man got angry at me once for saying this. But its true. All the past anointed kings were referred to as lord. This to many seem blasphemous, but its in the Scriptures. The Jews in Jesus’ time were looking for a messiah who would lead them in another exodus. They understood him to be lord of Israel. They did not think he was God himself. The claim that they thought he was LORD as in Yahweh (He who exist ) is simply a late conjecture. A projection. They knew that the coming Anointed One was Lord/master (ADON/KURIOS) and not Yahweh the almighty. Because David and his descends were respectively messiah and lord. As a trinitarian I would instead project the name of God on this messianic title Lord.

      Again, this paragraph sounds like a teaching from a professor, but it is not what the Bible teaches. I think that this is the problem, Jose, that has occured. You need to go back to the Hebrew roots of this study in Messiah and learn what the Bible says and forget about what others have taught you, which is contrary to the stated principles of Messiah.

      When the New Testament was translated from Greek to English, the term “Lord,” as it was applied to Jesus, was understood by the translators as the same LORD of the Old Testament who is Yahweh.

      Anyone who was able to speak Greek during the time that Jesus was here on the earth would understand that the New Testament word Lord was the same as the Old Testament word Yahweh. The Lord of the New Testament was understood to be the Creator and Sustainer of all life described as Yahweh in the Old Testament.

      There are several places in the New Testament where this same translation of Lord from Jehovah is used to describe Jesus Christ. Clearly, the New Testament translators intended we understand that Jesus is the One called Yahweh in the Old Testament.

      Luke 2:11 For there is born to you this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ (Messiah) the Lord (Yahweh).

      A Jew who reads this Greek New Testament account of the angel’s announcement to Mary that her Son would be the Messiah, also known as Jehovah, would be shocked and amazed. Nevertheless, this is what the original language demands, as it is written:

      “Today, in the city of Bethlehem, the baby who has been born is the Messiah who is God Himself.”

      This is why the shepherds were so amazed at the angel’s statement.

      They understood that the anointed king is the begotten of God. That is, the process of anointing of God is process of God giving birth. We know this from Scriptures. And virtually every time Jesus is referred to as Son of God its because he is the Anointed One. This was the understanding.

      In summary. To falsely represent God and to take up his name in vain is blasphemy. And Jesus was the Anointed One of God. Since many did not believe in him they would not believe he came in God’s name. Therefore it was inevitable for him to be accused of blasphemy. That could be the chief reason why he did not fully confirm he was the Anointed One until the appointed time of his death. Where he was accused of blasphemy. After healing on the Sabbath day they wanted to stone him. Then he said that it was the work of God (which sounded insane to them, because why would God heal on the Sabbath). So this further solidified in their minds that he is falsely using God’s name and character. Which lead them to the obvious (in their minds) charge of blasphemy. So yes, they lacked understanding. We know they did lack understanding and sight. They could not understand he was speaking truthfully in God’s name. So instead they accused him of blasphemy, because they did not understand. Its funny how even I used to say they DID understand when they did not. They thought he was a fake representative of God. A blasphemous position.

      Scripturally speaking, Messiah is the Son of God. This is clearly understood in Jesus’ time on earth. And finally lord and messiah are understood in the context of past anointed kings who were lords of Israel in their own times.

      “We know that they understood that Jesus is claiming, Himself, to be God, not merely an arm of God. When they ask Jesus under the ancient Jewish imperative: Are You The Son Of God?”, Jesus answers Yes.”

      No. But what they did understand that the Anointed One would refer to God as “my Father”. In accordance with the Scriptures. But they did not believe him. So their obvious conclusion was blasphemy (falsely representing God).

      The Jewish understanding of “Son of God” are clearly paralleled with Messiah (Anointed One ), according to the Scriptures and not the assumption that it means God.

      If Jesus Is Not God, He Cannot Be Our Savior In order for anyone to be qualified as the Messiah, the Savior of the world, they must possess two immutable qualities:

      1. They must be a sinless human being.
      2. They must be God, with a life of infinite worth, sufficient to redeem all human lives.

      A Sinless Sacrifice Required: The principle of a perfect sacrifice being required by the law of God, makes it impossible that any other person, other than Jesus—or any religious organization, church, rite, or ritual—could qualify to remove our sins and grant us access to God.

      Since all other people who have been born on the earth are sinners, they cannot be our Savior; according to the principle established here in the Old Testament. If Jesus had not been born of a virgin, He would have inherited the sin nature that we have all inherited from Adam. He would have been disqualified as our perfect sacrifice. When someone wrongly claims that Jesus was not born of a virgin, what they are really saying is that He could not be the Savior of the world. The testimony of those who knew Jesus His entire life was that He was sinless.

      The Old Testament required a lamb without blemish before it could be offered for sins. Peter later said that Jesus fulfilled this requirement as He was perfect and without sin.

      Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male of the first year… ~Exodus 12:5

      …knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your aimless conduct received by tradition from your fathers, 19 but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot. ~1 Peter 1:18-19

      If Jesus would become the sacrifice for our sins He had to be Perfect, without any trace of sin whatsoever. If Jesus had sinned even once during His entire life He would have been disqualified as a sacrifice for our sins.

      Paul stated that Jesus was without sins. Jesus stated that He was without sin:

      For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin. ~Hebrews 4:15

      Jesus said…“Which of you convicts Me of sin?” ~John 8:46

      A Life Of Infinite Worth: Jesus is able to save us all because His life was perfect, without sin, and eternal—as the Son of God. Having an infinite life of eternal value, He could take our place at the judgment of God and bear the punishment we all deserve.

      If Jesus was merely a man, even though He was sinless, His life would be insufficient to save the lives of every person on earth. Only as God, taking the form of a man, and being sinless, could Jesus achieve the power necessary to save us. If Jesus were not God, He could not save us as a mere man.

      Hope this clarifies my point of view as I have studied. In the end we will not all agree.

      Sincerely,
      José

      I do appreciate your detailed and sincere response. Jose, I don’t think you are far from discovering the truth about Jesus. You must understand that the Jesus you are telling me about could not save us from our sins. If Jesus is only a man sent by God, he does not have the power necessary to save the world. The life of Jesus as a mere man is not sufficient to pay for the sins of all other men. Only if God was dwelling within the body of a sinless man, could Jesus present a sacrifice of sufficient worth.

      Throughout the Old Testament God make His case that He alone is capable of achieving man’s salvation. He made it clear to us that when He sent His Son, the Messiah, He would be God, coming with sufficient power to save us.

      It is with this in mind that Paul wrote in Hebrews 1 that God prepared a body for Jesus to inhabit as a man so that He could offer it for our sins. Jesus has always existed as God. He did not begin at Bethlehem. Micah made this clear that when He came to Bethlehem and was born as a baby, the One who would inhabit this body, had come from eternity.

      Even in the name of Jesus, the name the angel told Mary and Joseph to call Jesus, it’s definition tells us who He is: “Jesus” means: “Jehovah Is Salvation.” Jesus is Jehovah-God. Always was, Always will be.

      Blessings,

      Rob

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.