Was Jesus 100 % GOD and 100% man when he walked the earth?

[Greg]

First of all, I am NOT here to deny the divinity of Jesus. After years of scripture reading and study I believe the Caledonian creed established in 451 AD is in error. I would like to go through scripture to explain my point of view.
1) If Jesus was 100 % God he would have known the end of the age.
MARK13:32 ..but of that day and hour no one knows, no man, not the angles in heaven, NEITHER THE SON, but the Father only.
If Jesus was 100 % God then all those around him would be burnt up.
EXODUS 33:20 you can't see my face for no man shall see me and live.
Remember this is Jehovah talking to Moses.
If Jesus was 100 % God then he would have all authority in heaven and earth.
MARK 20:23 And he said to them, you shall indeed drink of my cup and be baptized that I am baptized with but to sit on my right hand and on my left is NOT MINE TO GIVE but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared by my Father.
He was 50% man because he had no earthly Father. He was sinless. He had no earthly Father.he had just the flesh of man, and the flesh only. PSALMS 132:11The Lord has sworn a truth to David, he will not turn from it; of the FRUIT of the body will I set up my throne.

He was an ombudsman, a mediator, a go between God (the Father) and us.
He was the perfect mediator.
Also the belief the Jesus was 100 % God and 100% man violates ROMANS 1:20
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen being understood, by the THINGS THAT ARE MADE, even his eternal power and Godhead, so they are without excuse.
There is nothing in this world that is 200 %.
Please keep in mind that the Caledonian creed is a Roman Catholic teaching. Passed on to the protestant churches.
One more thing: Jesus did not have the fullness of God in him until after he arose from the dead (not before)
CLOSSIANS 1:19 For it pleased the Father that in him shall all fullness dwell.
Thank you may God bless those who read this!

 

[David]

First of all, I am NOT here to deny the divinity of Jesus. After years of scripture reading and study I believe the Caledonian creed established in 451 AD is in error. I would like to go through scripture to explain my point of view.
1) If Jesus was 100 % God he would have known the end of the age.

I’m going to speak plainly because this is not a light matter. You are not just offering a different perspective. You are redefining who Jesus Christ is, and that crosses the line this forum is set to guard.

Our rules are not complicated. Scripture is the authority. Scripture interprets Scripture. And anything that contradicts the clear teaching of the Word is not permitted.

Right now, you are stepping outside of that. You are taking a few verses and using them to deny what other passages state plainly. The Bible says, “the Word was God… and the Word was made flesh” ~John 1:1,14. It says, “in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily” ~Colossians 2:9. It calls Him “our great God and Saviour” ~Titus 2:13. Those are not difficult verses. They are direct.

But instead of submitting to them, you are reasoning around them. You bring in this idea that nothing can be “200%.” That is not Scripture. That is human thinking sitting in judgment over God’s Word. And that is exactly what this forum does not allow.

You appeal to Mark 13:32, but you ignore the full testimony about Christ. You appeal to Exodus, but you do not reconcile it with what Jesus Himself said, “he that hath seen me hath seen the Father” ~John 14:9. That is not handling the Word faithfully.

And let me be very clear with you. When you deny that Christ is fully God, you are not making a minor mistake. You are striking at the very heart of the gospel. Because the Scripture says, “beside me there is no saviour” ~Isaiah 43:11, and yet it declares Jesus as that Savior.

So this is where it stands. You are welcome here, but not to promote doctrine that contradicts the clear teaching of Scripture about Christ. That violates the purpose and rules of this forum.

You need to go back, lay your reasoning down, and come under the authority of the Word. Not part of it. All of it. Because a Christ shaped by human logic cannot save. Only the Christ revealed in Scripture can.

 

[Greg]

What you claim to be scripture is nothing but interpretation by the Catholic church and the Caledonian creed. Not Scripture ! Now show me where it says that Jesus was100 % God and 100 % man in scripture. And your quote, about Jesus and the fullness of God in him is after the resurrection. After Jesus arose from the dead then and only the did he say all authority has been given to me. Matt 28 :18
He never said before the resurrection. And the reason for saying right after He arose is because he complete God's will and purposed. Do not get locked in by man's traditions. If your going to go by scripture, be accurate and quote the scripture that proves me wrong. Not you religious training nor your gut feelings.
One more thing. I never ever denied the diety of Jesus at any time. If fact if you carefully reed my opening statement I clearly express that I was not denying the divinity of Jesus. I am also aware that there were many who use knostic interpretation try to claim he wasn't God.
You based your accusation about me denying Jesus not being devine, not on facts, but religious training. I don't blame you, however maybe you should carefully read what is written by me before your judge.
I am an old man and have been to many Christian churches and they all seem to get on edge when I present my belief. Instead of hearing what I have to say they all go back to the founing fathers of the church as if they were perfect. Let me make ir plain and simple. The were human and like us all, we are subject to make mistakes. I may not be a deacon but I am an elder and respect should be given.wether you agree or not. Better is a rebuke from a friend than the lying lips of an enemy.
Concerning Jesus statement about if you have seen me you have seen the Father. He was talking about recognizing the Father in him. Obviously his is not the Father. Jesus himself said in John 5 37-38 you have neither seen him at anytime nor seen his shape.

 

[Yesua888]

First of all, I am NOT here to deny the divinity of Jesus. After years of scripture reading and study I believe the Caledonian creed established in 451 AD is in error. I would like to go through scripture to explain my point of view.
1) If Jesus was 100 % God he would have known the end of the age.
MARK13:32 ..but of that day and hour no one knows, no man, not the angles in heaven, NEITHER THE SON, but the Father only.
If Jesus was 100 % God then all those around him would be burnt up.
EXODUS 33:20 you can't see my face for no man shall see me and live.
Remember this is Jehovah talking to Moses.
If Jesus was 100 % God then he would have all authority in heaven and earth.
MARK 20:23 And he said to them, you shall indeed drink of my cup and be baptized that I am baptized with but to sit on my right hand and on my left is NOT MINE TO GIVE but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared by my Father.
He was 50% man because he had no earthly Father. He was sinless. He had no earthly Father.he had just the flesh of man, and the flesh only. PSALMS 132:11The Lord has sworn a truth to David, he will not turn from it; of the FRUIT of the body will I set up my throne.

He was an ombudsman, a mediator, a go between God (the Father) and us.
He was the perfect mediator.
Also the belief the Jesus was 100 % God and 100% man violates ROMANS 1:20
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen being understood, by the THINGS THAT ARE MADE, even his eternal power and Godhead, so they are without excuse.
There is nothing in this world that is 200 %.
Please keep in mind that the Caledonian creed is a Roman Catholic teaching. Passed on to the protestant churches.
One more thing: Jesus did not have the fullness of God in him until after he arose from the dead (not before)
CLOSSIANS 1:19 For it pleased the Father that in him shall all fullness dwell.
Thank you may God bless those who read this!

Greg

As I see it, Jesus is part of the Trinity which is called God ... God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.

This "triad" concept has always been difficult to understand, and I still battle today on Whom to place most importance, during my daily prayers. Jesus did tell his disciples that when He was gone, to pray to the Father (and how to pray), so I keep reminding myself about this fact.

The following may not necessarily address your argument ...

Praying to The Father, in Jesus Name:
As I am still grappling with this, I felt a need to study this aspect further:

John 14:13–14, Jesus says, “And whatever you ask in My name, that I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. I think I am getting this now, "that the Father may be glorified in the Son" being the highlight ...
I see that viewing things in isolation can be "dangerous", leading many to believe that if we pray to the Father in Jesus' name, "that I will do", may fulfil personal desires. This could be a mis-interpretation, and wishful thinking. Praying in "Jesus Name" may not be translated literally, instead should we not be praying in Jesus' name, as He would have prayed to the Father.

Jesus’ own prayer in Gethsemane, Luke 22:42: “Not my will, but Yours be done”, models what it means to pray in submission to the Father. A reason to study the bible ... because reading verses in isolation can lead to mis-interpetation.

"If you ask anything in My name, I will do it.” This instruction underscores that prayer is directed to God the Father, but it is made possible and effective through Jesus Christ, who is the mediator between God and humanity. 1 Timothy 2:5 states: "For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." now this may be addressing your argument, and I am unable to comment on the correct meaning.

Jesus consistently modeled this by praying to the Father during His earthly ministry. As stated in Matthew 6:6, “When you pray, go into your room, shut the door, and pray to your Father who is in secret.” This highlights the personal, intimate nature of prayer to the Father—yet always in the name of Jesus.

I am endeavouring to show my mis-understanding, of reading a verse, and hanging onto my interpretation, even though it may be incorrect.

Having done this little study, I have certainly learned the error in my "belief" about "praying in Jesus Name"

 

[Smidge]

What you claim to be scripture is nothing but interpretation by the Catholic church and the Caledonian creed. Not Scripture ! Now show me where it says that Jesus was100 % God and 100 % man in scripture. And your quote, about Jesus and the fullness of God in him is after the resurrection. After Jesus arose from the dead then and only the did he say all authority has been given to me. Matt 28 :18
He never said before the resurrection. And the reason for saying right after He arose is because he complete God's will and purposed. Do not get locked in by man's traditions. If your going to go by scripture, be accurate and quote the scripture that proves me wrong. Not you religious training nor your gut feelings.
One more thing. I never ever denied the diety of Jesus at any time. If fact if you carefully reed my opening statement I clearly express that I was not denying the divinity of Jesus. I am also aware that there were many who use knostic interpretation try to claim he wasn't God.
You based your accusation about me denying Jesus not being devine, not on facts, but religious training. I don't blame you, however maybe you should carefully read what is written by me before your judge.
I am an old man and have been to many Christian churches and they all seem to get on edge when I present my belief. Instead of hearing what I have to say they all go back to the founing fathers of the church as if they were perfect. Let me make ir plain and simple. The were human and like us all, we are subject to make mistakes. I may not be a deacon but I am an elder and respect should be given.wether you agree or not. Better is a rebuke from a friend than the lying lips of an enemy.
Concerning Jesus statement about if you have seen me you have seen the Father. He was talking about recognizing the Father in him. Obviously his is not the Father. Jesus himself said in John 5 37-38 you have neither seen him at anytime nor seen his shape.

I thought things were up for debate on forums. I agree. Jesus is everything God is but God the Father is yet more. He represented the Father in every way. But he was not the Father. In fact the writer of Hebrews says Jesus was fully man in every way. By letting scripture interpret itself I would have to say Jesus was divine and fully man. It is a Catholic devised doctrine - a Church many Protestants call Babylon the Great and associate it with the harlot of Babylon.

"Hebrews 2:17 For this reason he had to be made like them,[k] FULLY HUMAN IN EVERY WAY, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people. 18 Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted."

Jes

 

[David]

I thought things were up for debate on forums. I agree. Jesus is everything God is but God the Father is yet more. He represented the Father in every way. But he was not the Father. In fact the writer of Hebrews says Jesus was fully man in every way. By letting scripture interpret itself I would have to say Jesus was divine and fully man. It is a Catholic devised doctrine - a Church many Protestants call Babylon the Great and associate it with the harlot of Babylon.

"Hebrews 2:17 For this reason he had to be made like them,[k] FULLY HUMAN IN EVERY WAY, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people. 18 Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted."

Jes

Yes, this is a forum, and discussion happens here. But this isn’t a free-for-all where every idea gets equal footing. The ground we stand on is Scripture, not opinion. Once God has spoken, the conversation doesn’t sit in debate mode, it moves to submission. “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth” ~John 17:17.

Now on your point, you’re right to say Jesus was fully man. The Word says it plain. “He had to be made like his brethren in every respect” ~Hebrews 2:17. He stepped into our shoes, felt what we feel, faced what we face, yet without sin.

But you can’t stop there and call it complete.

The same Word says, “In the beginning was the Word… and the Word was God” and then, “the Word was made flesh” ~John 1:1,14. That’s not a man becoming divine later. That’s God stepping into flesh from the start.

And it doesn’t water it down. “In him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily” ~Colossians 2:9. Not partial. Not symbolic. Fullness.

So when you say He is divine and fully man, that part lines up with Scripture. But calling that a man-made doctrine misses the source. That truth didn’t come from a church. It came from the Word.

You don’t get to take one side of what God revealed and set it against the other. You hold both, because Scripture holds both.

This forum doesn’t run on who argues best.

It runs on what God actually said.

 

[Smidge]

Yes, this is a forum, and discussion happens here. But this isn’t a free-for-all where every idea gets equal footing. The ground we stand on is Scripture, not opinion. Once God has spoken, the conversation doesn’t sit in debate mode, it moves to submission. “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth” ~John 17:17.

Now on your point, you’re right to say Jesus was fully man. The Word says it plain. “He had to be made like his brethren in every respect” ~Hebrews 2:17. He stepped into our shoes, felt what we feel, faced what we face, yet without sin.

But you can’t stop there and call it complete.

The same Word says, “In the beginning was the Word… and the Word was God” and then, “the Word was made flesh” ~John 1:1,14. That’s not a man becoming divine later. That’s God stepping into flesh from the start.

And it doesn’t water it down. “In him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily” ~Colossians 2:9. Not partial. Not symbolic. Fullness.

So when you say He is divine and fully man, that part lines up with Scripture. But calling that a man-made doctrine misses the source. That truth didn’t come from a church. It came from the Word.

You don’t get to take one side of what God revealed and set it against the other. You hold both, because Scripture holds both.

This forum doesn’t run on who argues best.

It runs on what God actually said.

I know that you don't like the interlinear. Let's look at this.

Verse 1 goes like this, "In the original was the saying word and the saying word was toward the God and God was the saying word." What this is saying is that in the beginning GOD'S speech/saying word was all there was.

However verse 2 goes, "this was in original toward the God."

The word firstborn implies a beginning. To claim Jesus the same person as God the Father - yet not the same person makes no sense to most people and it literally drives people away from Jesus. Here's one big problem...

Consider this...

We know that God cannot be tempted and cannot sin. IF Jesus WAS God, that means he's a fraud because that means he could not have been tempted to sin anyway making him a complete fraud and the cross a complete hoax!

Hebrews 2:17 KJV
"Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people

 

[Smidge]

This forum doesn’t run on who argues best.

It runs on what God actually said.

Numbers 23:19 KJV
God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?

1 Samuel 15:29 KJV
And also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent: for he is not a man, that he should repent

Hosea 11:9 KJV
I will not execute the fierceness of mine anger, I will not return to destroy Ephraim: for I am God, and not man; the Holy One in the midst of thee: and I will not enter into the city.

Job 9:32 KJV
For he is not a man, as I am, that I should answer him, and we should come together in judgment.

Hebrews 6:18
So that by two unchangeable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled for refuge might have strong encouragement to hold fast to the hope set before us.

Numbers 23:19 KJV
God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?

1 Samuel 15:29 KJV
And also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent: for he is not a man, that he should repent

Hosea 11:9 KJV
I will not execute the fierceness of mine anger, I will not return to destroy Ephraim: for I am God, and not man; the Holy One in the midst of thee: and I will not enter into the city.

Job 9:32 KJV
For he is not a man, as I am, that I should answer him, and we should come together in judgment.

Hebrews 6:18
So that by two unchangeable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled for refuge might have strong encouragement to hold fast to the hope set before us.

If they are equal, why did Jesus say in John 14:28

"Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: FOR MY FATHER IS GREATER THAN I."

Why did he say in John 10:29,

"My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand."

And why did Jesus say in John 13:16

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him."

 

[OceanLilly]

First of all, I am NOT here to deny the divinity of Jesus. After years of scripture reading and study I believe the Caledonian creed established in 451 AD is in error. I would like to go through scripture to explain my point of view.
1) If Jesus was 100 % God he would have known the end of the age.
MARK13:32 ..but of that day and hour no one knows, no man, not the angles in heaven, NEITHER THE SON, but the Father only.
If Jesus was 100 % God then all those around him would be burnt up.
EXODUS 33:20 you can't see my face for no man shall see me and live.
Remember this is Jehovah talking to Moses.
If Jesus was 100 % God then he would have all authority in heaven and earth.
MARK 20:23 And he said to them, you shall indeed drink of my cup and be baptized that I am baptized with but to sit on my right hand and on my left is NOT MINE TO GIVE but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared by my Father.
He was 50% man because he had no earthly Father. He was sinless. He had no earthly Father.he had just the flesh of man, and the flesh only. PSALMS 132:11The Lord has sworn a truth to David, he will not turn from it; of the FRUIT of the body will I set up my throne.

He was an ombudsman, a mediator, a go between God (the Father) and us.
He was the perfect mediator.
Also the belief the Jesus was 100 % God and 100% man violates ROMANS 1:20
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen being understood, by the THINGS THAT ARE MADE, even his eternal power and Godhead, so they are without excuse.
There is nothing in this world that is 200 %.
Please keep in mind that the Caledonian creed is a Roman Catholic teaching. Passed on to the protestant churches.
One more thing: Jesus did not have the fullness of God in him until after he arose from the dead (not before)
CLOSSIANS 1:19 For it pleased the Father that in him shall all fullness dwell.
Thank you may God bless those who read this!

One of my favorite chapters in the New Testament is John 1. For me it encapsulates all that God is in Jesus.

Then there are other passages wherein Jesus reiterates he is the Father. "I and the Father are one".

And also,in the Old Testament prophecy of Jesus birth to Mary.
Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel.
Isaiah 7:14

Matthew 21:22-23
Now all this took place to fulfill what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet: “Behold, the virgin shall be with child and shall bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,” which translated means, “God with us.”

 

[Smidge]

One of my favorite chapters in the New Testament is John 1. For me it encapsulates all that God is in Jesus.

Then there are other passages wherein Jesus reiterates he is the Father. "I and the Father are one".

And also,in the Old Testament prophecy of Jesus birth to Mary.
Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel.
Isaiah 7:14

Matthew 21:22-23
Now all this took place to fulfill what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet: “Behold, the virgin shall be with child and shall bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,” which translated means, “God with us.”

I don't think you have Mathew 21:22-23 quoted right. "I and the Father are one" implies they are on the same page, they think and act alike NOT that Jesus is the same person - yet not the same person as God the Father.

 

[Smidge]

The facts...

Jesus became God in AD 325 at the council of Nicaea.

The holy spirit became God in AD 381 at the council of Constantinople.

151 years after Jesus became God, he acquired two natures....

Then, because the Bishops of Rome could not resolve multiple "CO-EQUAL' contradictions, they overcame those contradictions in AD 451 under Pope Leo the Great. That's when Jesus acquired TWO NATURES...the ultimate Trinitarian cop-out.

It took the bishops of Rome over 200 years to develop the Trinity doctrine.

 

[David]

I know that you don't like the interlinear. Let's look at this.

Verse 1 goes like this, "In the original was the saying word and the saying word was toward the God and God was the saying word." What this is saying is that in the beginning GOD'S speech/saying word was all there was.

However verse 2 goes, "this was in original toward the God."

The word firstborn implies a beginning. To claim Jesus the same person as God the Father - yet not the same person makes no sense to most people and it literally drives people away from Jesus. Here's one big problem...

Consider this...

We know that God cannot be tempted and cannot sin. IF Jesus WAS God, that means he's a fraud because that means he could not have been tempted to sin anyway making him a complete fraud and the cross a complete hoax!

Hebrews 2:17 KJV
"Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people

No. This stops here.

You are not asking a question anymore. You are redefining who Jesus is and presenting it as truth. That is not allowed here.

That “interlinear” rendering you’re pushing is not what the text teaches. Scripture says plainly, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God… and the Word was made flesh” ~John 1:1,14. That is not “God’s speech.” That is a Person who is God and became flesh.

You’re also misusing “firstborn.” Scripture defines it by context. “For by him were all things created… all things were created by him, and for him” ~Colossians 1:16. If He created all things, He is not created. “Firstborn” speaks of rank, not origin.

Then you claim that if Jesus is God, His temptation was fake. That is not what Scripture says. “God cannot be tempted with evil” ~James 1:13, and at the same time, “the Word was made flesh” ~John 1:14. Jesus took on real humanity. “He was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin” ~Hebrews 4:15. Both are true because Scripture holds both. You don’t cancel one to make your logic work.

“God was manifest in the flesh” ~1 Timothy 3:16. That is the truth you are pushing against.

And now understand this clearly.

This forum is not a place where foundational truth about Christ is up for debate. The rules are clear:
Forum Rules & Purpose

Scripture is the final authority here, not personal interpretations that replace it. “Not to think… above that which is written” ~1 Corinthians 4:6.

There is no open question on whether Jesus is God. He is. The Word has already spoken.

You have now been corrected multiple times directly from Scripture. Continuing to push a redefined Christ that contradicts what is plainly written will be treated as false teaching under forum rules.

If you continue past this point, it will no longer be treated as discussion. It will be treated as promoting false teaching, and action will be taken under forum rules.

 

[David]

Numbers 23:19 KJV
God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?

1 Samuel 15:29 KJV
And also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent: for he is not a man, that he should repent

Hosea 11:9 KJV
I will not execute the fierceness of mine anger, I will not return to destroy Ephraim: for I am God, and not man; the Holy One in the midst of thee: and I will not enter into the city.

Job 9:32 KJV
For he is not a man, as I am, that I should answer him, and we should come together in judgment.

Hebrews 6:18
So that by two unchangeable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled for refuge might have strong encouragement to hold fast to the hope set before us.

Numbers 23:19 KJV
God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?

1 Samuel 15:29 KJV
And also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent: for he is not a man, that he should repent

Hosea 11:9 KJV
I will not execute the fierceness of mine anger, I will not return to destroy Ephraim: for I am God, and not man; the Holy One in the midst of thee: and I will not enter into the city.

Job 9:32 KJV
For he is not a man, as I am, that I should answer him, and we should come together in judgment.

Hebrews 6:18
So that by two unchangeable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled for refuge might have strong encouragement to hold fast to the hope set before us.

If they are equal, why did Jesus say in John 14:28

"Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: FOR MY FATHER IS GREATER THAN I."

Why did he say in John 10:29,

"My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand."

And why did Jesus say in John 13:16

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him."

No. You’ve already been warned, so this is direct.

You are taking verses out of context and using them to deny what Scripture clearly says about Jesus.

Those passages you quoted about “God is not a man” are not saying God could never take on flesh. They are saying God is not like sinful, lying, changing men. You are forcing them to say something they do not say.

Scripture already settled this. “The Word was God… and the Word was made flesh” ~John 1:1,14. “God was manifest in the flesh” ~1 Timothy 3:16. That is not unclear.

Your use of John 14:28, John 10:29, and John 13:16 is the same problem. You are ignoring context. Jesus is speaking in the role of the One sent, having taken on the form of a servant ~Philippians 2:6–7. That does not deny who He is.

The same Jesus said, “I and my Father are one” ~John 10:30. You don’t get to ignore that to make your argument work.

You’ve now been corrected multiple times from Scripture, and you continue to push a position that contradicts what is plainly written.

This is no longer discussion. This is promoting false teaching.

If you continue, you will be removed.

 

[David]

One of my favorite chapters in the New Testament is John 1. For me it encapsulates all that God is in Jesus.

Then there are other passages wherein Jesus reiterates he is the Father. "I and the Father are one".

And also,in the Old Testament prophecy of Jesus birth to Mary.
Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel.
Isaiah 7:14

Matthew 21:22-23
Now all this took place to fulfill what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet: “Behold, the virgin shall be with child and shall bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,” which translated means, “God with us.”

No. That is not what Scripture says.

Jesus did not say He is the Father. You’re misquoting the meaning. He said, “I and my Father are one” ~John 10:30, but in the same book He says, “I will pray the Father” ~John 14:16. He speaks to the Father, not as the same person, but as distinct.

So no, He is not the Father. That’s not what the text teaches.

Now the part you quoted about “Immanuel… God with us” ~Matthew 1:23 is true. That affirms His deity. But you’re mixing that truth with a wrong conclusion.

This is the problem. You’re blending correct verses with incorrect interpretation.

Stick with what is actually written. Jesus is God in the flesh, but He is not the same person as the Father.

 

[David]

The facts...

Jesus became God in AD 325 at the council of Nicaea.

The holy spirit became God in AD 381 at the council of Constantinople.

151 years after Jesus became God, he acquired two natures....

Then, because the Bishops of Rome could not resolve multiple "CO-EQUAL' contradictions, they overcame those contradictions in AD 451 under Pope Leo the Great. That's when Jesus acquired TWO NATURES...the ultimate Trinitarian cop-out.

It took the bishops of Rome over 200 years to develop the Trinity doctrine.

Jesus did not “become God” in AD 325. Scripture already declared who He is long before any council existed. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” ~John 1:1. Not became. Was. And “all things were made by him” ~John 1:3. If He made all things, He is not a created being and He did not become God later.

Thomas looked at the risen Christ and said, “My Lord and my God” ~John 20:28. Jesus did not correct him. He received it. That settles it.

The Father Himself says of the Son, “Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever” ~Hebrews 1:8. That is God calling the Son God. That didn’t start in 325. That’s in the text.

You say the Holy Spirit “became God” later. Scripture says otherwise. “Why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost… thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God” ~Acts 5:3–4. Lying to the Holy Spirit is lying to God. That’s not a council. That’s Scripture.

And this idea that the truth was “developed” by men is exactly what Scripture warns about. “Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth” ~2 Timothy 3:7.

You call it a “cop-out.” God calls it revelation. “Great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh” ~1 Timothy 3:16. Not invented. Revealed.

The real issue is this. You’re trying to replace what is written with a historical narrative so you can dismiss the plain teaching of Scripture.

But the Word of God was already settled before any council ever met. “For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven” ~Psalm 119:89.

You are not exposing error. You are repeating it.

Jesus Christ is God. The Spirit is God. That is not up for debate here because Scripture has already spoken.

Anything that denies that is false.

 

[OceanLilly]

No. That is not what Scripture says.

Jesus did not say He is the Father. You’re misquoting the meaning. He said, “I and my Father are one” ~John 10:30, but in the same book He says, “I will pray the Father” ~John 14:16. He speaks to the Father, not as the same person, but as distinct.

So no, He is not the Father. That’s not what the text teaches.

Now the part you quoted about “Immanuel… God with us” ~Matthew 1:23 is true. That affirms His deity. But you’re mixing that truth with a wrong conclusion.

This is the problem. You’re blending correct verses with incorrect interpretation.

Stick with what is actually written. Jesus is God in the flesh, but He is not the same person as the Father.

I am sticking with what is written. Thanks.

 

[David]

I am sticking with what is written. Thanks.

Ok, show me where this is said in the bible without you changing it: "He is the Father."