Bible Discussion Thread

Jesus said he is the Son OF God and was accused of Blasphemy for saying that .

Jesus never said I AM GOD you people can not enter into just what the Son of God means ! Are you really that blind ?

Jesus was Born OF God . He had unique wisdom , relationship and power from God that no man ever had , John the Baptist the greatest of all prophets stated he was not worthy to loose his shoes .

Many said that the things Jesus did proved that God was with him !

So true how do you miss this ?

They never said oh He is GOD and Jesus never said that either, nor anywhere in the Bible .

Why even God never said this Jesus is me when God spoke at his baptism, So if Jesus really is GOD then the voice from heaven lied .

Do you not see how crazy this claim is that Jesus is part of a Godhead ?

These are just a few examples of so many more that could be said .

Rob, I'm not sure which version of the Bible you use but have a read of John 10:32-38 again, just to clarify what blasphemy is & what Jesus was accused of being.

And when you get to verse 36, consider, "of whom (Jesus) the Father hath sanctified & SENT into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?" So, if one needs to be a stickler on the definition of Son of God as being a Son from birth only & not 'out of God's Being', another can then correctly say that Jesus was SENT into the world; why should Jesus use the word 'sent' as if He came from somewhere to go somewhere? Wouldn't it be more correct then to say, 'The Father hath specially created me to be born at Bethlehem & gave me a special ministry & finally to given my life for the world'?

And while we're examining the Scriptures, what about John 8:56-58? Abraham rejoicing to see "his day"! Are you so mad to say that you've seen Abraham? the Jews retorted. "Even before Abraham existed, I AM". Again, notice Jesus' choice of words to describe Himself.

And Colossians 1:15-17? "For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him". That whole passage cited, is speaking of Jesus, not God.

Do even these few portions of Scripture cause us to think that we have here, Someone Who is more than a separate creation born into the world to fulfil God's Plans. Someone who was involved in the creation of all things, visible & invisible, One existing before Abraham & One even sent by God from somewhere to somewhere (the World)? I know that you are well aware of these Scriptures, but I remain perplexed as to how some other interpretation can be given other than understood as read.

Jesus was BORN OF GOD . And was also a man .

First of His kind ever.

BORN OF GOD . Able do and things and know things that no other man could ever do with such authority.

Why ? Because God was with him .

He never claimed to be or say IAM God . He said that the father whom he prayed to was greater ....

Simple to me but the spirit of error keeps people in the dark , because they can not see the truth of Gods word .

Satan blinds the minds of men and does he ever .

If you seek me with your whole heart then you will find me , God said to those in days gone by , but it still holds true for today .

Rob, I doubt if any one would disagree with you about the Sonship of Jesus & even how He sometimes referred to Himself, as the Son of man. And you are well aware of where we differ in this matter by the Scriptures we've cited.

The essential point is that, in the volume of Scriptures you quote to support the idea that Jesus was a specially created Being by God & not coming out of the Essence of God to be a man, what do you, as a student of God's Word, do with the other Scriptures as we have given you, to show otherwise?

I knew someone, not a believer but an ardent reader of the Bible. He knew & believed that God was a God of Love but just could not understand why false writings were put into the Bible showing God sending Israel out to the Promised Land to utterly kill every living thing there. He just could not reconcile God 'instigating & encouraging murder'. So he carefully proceeded to rip out those 'erroneous' pages from the Bible so that his further reading of it would be in line to his understanding of the Doctrine of God. I'm certainly not suggesting that you have done as such - I think much better things of you - but your reservation to explain away these Scriptures we bring to you to show the Divinity of Christ, both pre & post incarnation, is notable.

You can certainly keep on writing that Jesus is only God's Son revealed on Earth & nothing before this, but one would have to wonder what you are doing to those other Scriptures that show otherwise. Do you re-interpret them, avoid them, obliterate them, etc.? In love & concern, we long to learn from where you get your ideas from - & I'm assuming that you're not a JW (as I would approach this discussion differently). If your ideas come from reading the Word, the same one we all read from, then what happens to the other Scriptures that also give us an added view of the pre-incarnate existence of Christ? This is unavoidable - we are constrained to deal with them as the Word of God.

Chris the very simple explanation for the Godliness Of Christ is ; he was Born of God . Yes God is infinite and he comes from God by Birth . So he has qualities that came from God that no

Man ever had . You must except Gods witness. And not add to it . If we do not hear the word of God correctly we are open to a sea of interpretations , yet only one truth is all the there ever will be . Gods .

There is a famine in the land and it's the hearing of the word of God . So many false interpretations is what I see .

Dark days indeed we are in .

I thank God very much the the Word is open to me , we only get it by obeying what we know , or the light starts going out .

Rob, just to accept that "Jesus was Born of God" would be fine for all of us, except for the fact that we still have to deal with the other Scriptures that also expand on this. Are we then interpreting those 'other Scriptures' incorrectly, or maybe they shouldn't even be there, is what we're suggesting? And how do you deal with them? How do you interpret them. If I focus only on Jesus' Birth as a fresh creation of God, albeit from a special, holy Seed, I still have to, as an extensive Bible reader & believer, deal with these other Scriptures. If I choose not to do so, then I would be living in a bubble of my own doing. If I want to understand a teaching from the Word, I endeavour to consider all Scriptures pertaining to it & then establish its meaning (of course, the proper "dividing of the Scriptures" is essential). I don't come the other way: first decide what a doctrine or teaching should mean & then find the Scriptures to support my belief. To me, this leads to error & then often, to multiple errors.

The classic one is on God's election of mankind to salvation. As you know, there are some views on this, all supposedly based on Scripture. The bottom line is, what basis does God use to grant salvation to one person & not another. Should we all then adopt the hyper-Calvinistic approach & leave the matter with God & not preach the Gospel since the one elected to salvation will come to Him regardless of any effort from us? Or is there another answer when we search the Scriptures? There may be nothing conclusive to be found, but a determination is made based on what we learn, & so the Gospel is still preached so that all men (both elected or not) may hear & decide. God does not tell us that in His foreknowledge He makes his determination & we may never conclusively say it is so, except we might use what Peter concludes in 1 Peter 1:2. Now, is that sufficient for us to rest our understanding on, or do we disregard it since it did not come from the "Mouth of God"?

One explanation for how to read the scriptures is like this .

If you truly hear and understand a truth like ( the wages of sin is death ) for example . Then it's absolutely unchanging. Gods word endures for ever never changes Just like God never changes .

So no matter what other scriptures you may read you can not change this truth or alter it . It's unchangeable just like God is unchangeable .

So you use the light of this truth to understand more truth . If you add to the truth it becomes a lie . That's how Satan works he says hath God said ? And adds more to what God clearly said .

Often I see people changing truth , because they never heard it correctly to begin with .

Jesus said to him that hears shall be given more .

It's all about having ears to hear what God says .

This is child like faith in trusting the word of God because Gods understanding is in searchable and infinite. The spirit of truth is spiritual , and wicked people will never understand.

The real issue today is all the false doctrines and interpretations that have had many years to deceive people

One of my most earnest prayers have been don't let me be deceived, as Jesus said in Matthew 24 , beware lest any man deceive you . I do believe what he said . I'm not deceived ether . He answers my prayers .

That's an interesting explanation you've given: "No matter what other scriptures you may read you can not change this truth or alter it. It's unchangeable just like God is unchangeable. So you use the light of this truth to understand more truth. If you add to the truth it becomes a lie."

So we have Mt 14:33, "Of a truth thou art the Son of God." And Luke 1:32, "be called the Son of the Highest."

According to your understanding, using these verses to the exclusion of any other verse that could add to the understanding that Jesus is the Christ, the One born of God & called the Son of God, we would have to overlook portions such as John 1:1-14 as 'secondary' & unworthy for inclusion into the primary meaning & understanding of Jesus Christ. So if you consider the John 1 portion as changing or altering the Truth about the Son of God, then how do you arrive at that conclusion? And if it indeed does so, & we thereby do disservice to the Word by including it with God's Son, then I ask, what do we actually do with such Scriptures? Could this Word of God, both very God & with God & then becoming flesh to dwell on the Earth, not actually pertain to Jesus? Then to whom & how are we to read this & understand this? I've tried looking at with all the possibilities I can, but still it hits me as I read it. Even if I don't understand how this can happen, do I have to conclude that this portion has some other meaning?

Using your Romans 6:23 example: "For the wages of sin is death" as all we need to know about this Truth. So if I then read Isaiah 59:2, telling me that my iniquities have separated me from God only, but not consigned me to death, I would be perplexed.

Or Mark 9:43-47: for me to escape hell fire for my sins, all I have to do is to remove my hand or eye or foot that consigns me to hell. Rather, to help me understand further that my sins result in death (both physically & spiritually), it helps to know that I'm separated & also to deal with the trigger for my sin.

It does say in the New Testament

There are those that are ever learning but not able to come to the truth .

What is the truth ? Exactly what God said . How simple can it be ? You hear it believe it receive it , keep it . Amen .

Thanks Rob - I see where you're coming from. I've tried my hardest to get you to give some explanation to some of these other verses that speak more of Jesus, God's Son, but you have refrained & instead gave me the answer: "There are those that are ever learning but not able to come to the truth." Well, we are ever learning but we do have Truth, & increasing we trust, to hold onto, but it would be awful to be in a position of rejecting other Scriptures so that a particular belief can be supported. I won't bother you again - thank you for your time Rob. Blessings.