No I don't speak for Jesus, never said I do. Please keep the insults and belittling to yours Abra. I never once said I know it all. I think out loud with questions/thoughts I have on here in hopes to either show the truth or be corrected so I myself knows. This is a DISCUSSION forum, it is not a preaching board or anything of such. So once again, I ask that you keep the belittling to yourself.

Christians believe that Jesus is the MEDIATOR of the

New Covenant, and that his blood shed at the crucifixion is the

REQUIRED BLOOD of the covenant. As all covenants between God and man

described in the Bible, the New Covenant is considered "a bond in

blood sovereignly administered by God." [4] The connection between

the blood of Jesus and the New Covenant is seen at the Last Supper

where Jesus institutes the rite of Communion saying "this cup that

is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood". [5]


Quick explanation of Covenent from Wikipedia .... gets right to the

point.

About the new covenant....The following is also

brief and right to the point:


..............Question: "What is the New Covenant?"..............


Answer: The new covenant is spoken about first in the book of Jeremiah. The old covenant that God had established with His people required obedience to the Old Testament Mosaic law. Because the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23), the law required that people perform rituals and sacrifices in order to please God and remain in His grace. The prophet Jeremiah predicted that there would be a time when God would make a new covenant with the nation of Israel.



"'The day will come,' says the Lord, 'when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and Judah. . . . But this is the new covenant I will make with the people of Israel on that day,' says the Lord. 'I will put my law in their minds, and I will write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people'" (Jeremiah 31:31, 33). Jesus Christ came to fulfill the law of Moses (Matthew 5:17) and create a new covenant between God and His people. The old covenant was written in stone, but the new covenant is written on our hearts, made possible only by faith in Christ, who shed His own blood to atone for the sins of the world. Luke 22:20 says, "After supper, [Jesus] took another cup of wine and said, 'This wine is the token of God's new covenant to save you – an agreement sealed with the blood I will pour out for you.'"



Now that we are under the new covenant, we are not under the penalty of the law. We are now given the opportunity to receive salvation as a free gift (Ephesians 2:8-9). Through the life-giving Holy Spirit who lives in all believers (Romans 8:9-11), we can now share in the inheritance of Christ and enjoy a permanent, unbroken relationship with God. Hebrews 9:15 declares, “For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that He has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first
covenant.”

I agree with you MorningSong that this is indeed the claims that are being made by the authors of the New Testament.

My question at this point is not one of "What is the religion trying to say?". Clearly I can already see what they are attempting to claim. I am not confused about what the story is attempting to claim. I understand perfectly.

So now comes a far more important question,...

Do I believe that these claims actually came from an all-wise God? Or does it make far more sense to me that these claims were made-up by men in an effort to create a religion that claims to have the ultimate authority of God?

Well, after many years of considering these things I've concluded that it makes far more sense to me that this religion is the devious scam of men, and cannot possibly represent the actual ideas, thoughts, or plans of any supposedly all-wise God.

So for me, the problem does not reside in understanding the religion. I understand it perfectly. I simply don't believe that any all-wise supreme being would create such a "foolish" situation.

And yes, I do believe that this situation is indeed utterly foolish. That's precisely why I reject the idea that it came from any supposedly all-wise God.

The whole thing flies in the very face of what this God is supposed to be like.

First off this God is supposed to be unchanging and therefore dependable. Yet this religion requires that God has changed his covenant with mankind. So that's already a major contradiction of what this God is supposed to be like.

The argument the apologists give is that this was always God's plan, and therefore does not constitute a 'change' in God's character. I disagree with that line of thinking. That's just a truly feeble excuse to try to support an unsupportable religion, IMHO.

I disagree with the behavior that has been attributed to this God the Old Testament stories. A God who "punishes" women with painful and sorrowful childbirth as a form of "punishment".

That is not wise, IMHO, and therefore cannot have been the action of an all-wise God, IMHO. Moreover, that "punishment" would have served no good purpose. Not only would it have been futile, but even according to these stories themselves it didn't serve to "teach" woman any lessons.

Punishment via physical pain is simply a "stupid" form of dealing with problems, IMHO. Therefore in order for me to believe that God would punish women with painful childbirth requires that I also believe that God is utterly stupid.

I also disagree with the idea of an all-wise all-powerful God having mere mortal humans judge each other and stone each other to death for their sins. Why bother? If God is omniscient and all-powerful he could deal with sinners far more easily than having mere mortal humans judging each other. Only God would know what's in the hearts of men. Other mortal men cannot know. So it would be far more WISE for an all-powerful omniscient God to simply deal with sinners himself. He could just give them a heart attack, or stroke, or just wave them out of existence with his magic wand.

It's totally absurd, IMHO, to think that a God would have "fallen humans" judging each other and stoning each other for being "sinners" when according to this story all humans are sinners anyway!



With all due respect to anyone who supports these stories, surely they can see the WISDOM in rejecting them as being utterly absurd and filled with impossible problems and contradictions.

Anyone who questions these stories as I do should be totally respected for rejecting these stories on the grounds that I reject them. I have extremely sound and sane reasons for rejecting these stories.

The entire old testament is filled with absurdities that I feel could have never been the choice of any truly all-wise supreme being. The choices and actions that have been attributed to the Old Testament God simply aren't wise, IMHO, and therefore cannot possibly be the choices and behavior of any all-wise God.

Even modern day Christians do not like the teachings of the Old Testament. We're basically talking about behaviors that are more akin to the practice of people like the Taliban, and the Christians would be the first people to renounce the moral values of the Taliban. Yet the behavior of the old testament Israelites was very much along the lines of what the Taliban believe.

Women were treated as property to be under the rule of the men (which was also part of God's Punishment to women if you read carefully). So that line of thinking actually comes from these Abrahamic tales. This was God's decree!

I also don't personally agree with God's treatment of the Canaanites. And I especially don't see where it would have been wise for him to have his chosen people mass murder the Canaanites when he's trying to teach them "Thou Shalt Not Kill".

To me that would be truly stupid for a creator to become involved in such utterly mixed messages.

It makes far more sense to me to just dismiss these tales as the superstitious writings of men, no different from the myths of Zeus, Thor, Odin, Athena, Apollo, or any other man-made image of a God. These Hebrews weren't any different from anyone else. They just made up their own superstitious tales that weren't any more wise nor more intelligent than any of the other tales.

So the entire Old Testament holds no value to me as having come from any supposedly "all-wise" God. It simply doesn't contain wise tales.

So then we come to Jesus and the New Testament. Well, to accept that Jesus is the sacrificial lamb of the God of the Old Testament would require that I actually believe in the God of the Old Testament. But I see no wisdom there to believe in.

Also, if you read these stories closely you'll clearly see that God promised to hand the throne of David over to the "messiah" (or "The Christ")

But clearly that never happened with Jesus. Jesus was never officially handed the throne of David. The Jews pointed this out way back in the days when these New Testament rumors were being started, and they rejected the New Testament rumors point blank for good reason, Jesus could not have been the promised "messiah" because he did not fulfill the prophecy of becoming the King of the Jews. So there's no question about it. It's a done deal right there.

I agree with the Jews completely on that account.

However, I go a step further and dismiss the original stories of the God of Abraham as well as being nothing more than Zeus-like myths, that are indeed very unwise in many places.

~~~~

So then the question arises, "Well what about Jesus? Did he truly exist? If so what did he actually teach? And how did he become the central figure of the New Testament as "The Christ"?

Well, I have practical answers for all those questions.

Jesus probably did exist (or at least some guy existed that gave rise to these rumors that he was "The Christ")

Based on my knowledge of both the New Testament and Mahayana Buddhism, I've come to the conclusion that Jesus was most likely a Jewish Mahayana Buddhist. Everything Jesus is said to have taught in terms of moral values fits in far better with the values of Buddhism than it does with anything that had been taught in the Torah (or Old Testament).

Jesus taught, "I and the Father are one". That's Buddhism.

When confronted on charges of blaspheme for having said this Jesus responded, "Is it not written in your law?, I have said, ye are Gods"

Again this shows a deep-seated believe in a pantheistic nature of spiritually. Jesus was actually saying, "We" and the Father are all ONE. That's the Buddhist view.

So he wasn't attempting to claim to be the "only begotten son" of any external jealous Godhead.

Jesus also renounced many of the teachings of the Torah. He renounced the seeking of revenge that had been taught as "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" and instead replaced that with the Buddhist notion of non-involvement. Turn the other cheek, forgive and forget. Don't dwell on revenge, it serves no one any good.

Jesus renounced the stoning to death of sinners by cleverly proclaiming that only he who is without sin should cast the first stone. He also renounced the judging of other people, and instead replaced that with the Buddhist notion of non-involvement. Judge not lest you be judged. This is a principle of karma.

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

Put out the karma that you wish to receive in return.

Jesus was clearly teaching the spiritual wisdom of the Mahayana Buddhists, and NOT the nasty ignorance that had previously been taught in the Torah.

The reason people are so attracted to Jesus is not because he supposedly died to pay for their sins, but because he taught true wisdom and love! He taught the spiritual values of Mahayana Buddhism, and not the utterly stupid ignorance of the Torah.

~~~~~

It's crystal clear to me that Jesus could not have been the "son", nor the actual incarnation of the "God" of the Old Testament. Jesus had a totally different character that was the complete opposite of what had been described in the Torah or Old Testament.

~~~~~

So it makes far more sense to me to recognize Jesus as a mortal (albeit highly spiritual) man. If Jesus was in touch with any God, it wasn't the God of the Torah, but rather the God of the Buddhists. The eternal spirit of the Universe itself.

~~~~~~

So what about all these outrageous claims that have been made in the New Testament? And what about some of the things that Jesus supposedly said that appear to potentially support this idea that he was "The Christ"?

Well, first off, we need to realize that once we recognize that Jesus was not the only begotten son of God, then there is no reason to trust the words of the New Testament to be accurate or verbatim.

Jesus was not even alive when the New Testament was written and he did not contribute a single solitary word to it himself. There is really no reason why we should trust the authors of the New Testament to have quoted Jesus perfectly correctly. They could have, and probably did, twist his words to suit their own agenda to make out like Jesus was "The Christ".

That was clearly their agenda. They start by proclaiming that Jesus was "born of a virgin" who was purposefully impregnated by a God.

They go on to ignore the important things that Jesus did NOT fulfill in prophesy, (like being handed the throne of King David), and instead proclaim that a whole lot of little unverifiable things had been fulfilled. Things that they could have easily just written into the story for the sake of "fulfilling" these prophecies. After all, they had the old prophecies right there in front of them, it would be extremely easy for them to write into their stories things which seem to fulfill those prophesies. And they clearly had the agenda to do just that.

~~~~~

It's far easier for me to believe that the New Testament was the work of men who had an agenda to make out like Jesus was "The Christ", than it is for me to actually believe in the whole biblical story.

The very idea than an all-wise super intelligent God would send his son into a crowd to CHANGE his previous laws, when that very God had commanded people to KILL anyone who disagrees with God's Word, would be utterly stupid.

Even if Jesus was crucified for blasphemer that blood would be on God's hands in these stories because God is the very person who instructed people to MURDER HEATHENS. Anyone who was in that mob and being incited by the pharisees to support the crucifixion of Jesus for blaspheme would have only been going along with their very own religious leaders who were supposedly carrying out the very directives and commandments of the God of Abraham anyway.

~~~~~~

The story as held out by the New Testament makes no sense, and cannot be made to work, IMHO.

It would be a story of a God who shoots himself in his own foot.

There would be nothing all-wise or intelligent about it. Not to mention that this God would need to be appeased by blood sacrifices in the first place, which IMHO, is already an "ungodly" trait that belongs solely to the fictions man-made versions of gods.

No genuinely all-wise supreme being would be that crude and ignorant in the first place.

That my reason for rejecting this stories as being the actions and 'Word' of any God.

They simply aren't wise enough. And the idea that Jesus was a Jewish Mahayana Buddhist resolves all issues, and brings the entire historical event into a sound practical perspective.

~~~~~~~~~~

So this is a very valid and respectable view of the story of Jesus, and should not be taken as an "attack" against Christianity. It's just one human's view of how these rumors came to be.

People need to start to realize that a "disbelief" in Christianity is just as respectable as a "belief" in the religion.

It's not a "rejection of God" or any other such nonsense. It's just a sound legitimate conclusion that has been arrived at by some of humanities brightest minds; Albert Einstein, Isaac Newton, Richard Feynman, Carl Sagan, Stephen Hawking, and so on and so forth.

It's absurd to think that all those men were "rejecting God". What they were rejecting is a collection of stories that they feel are far too ignorant and unwise to have ever come from any God.

They are calling the Hebrew tales on the carpet right along with the Greek tales of Zeus. That's all.

He renounced all the laws of the Torah, cause that covenant was being completed and he was giving and setting forth a new covenant. Jesus is the judge in the new covenant, thus we no longer are in need of stoning sinners for that which they did, Jesus will do the judging. The new covenant gives one day when judgement is going to be made, so again no need for a judgement by the peers of when the crime is committed.

I reject that claim because, IMHO, it can't be made to work.

The curse of painful childbirth was part of the Old Covenant, and if the Old Covenant was being replaced by a new covenant, then this too would need to change.

Christians are also quite hypocritical about this in far too many ways. For example the idea that God hates homosexuality come from the old covenant, and NOT from the teachings of Jesus. Yet this religion uses Jesus as an excuse to support the ignorance and bigotries of the old Testament.

Besides, this would be a portrait of a God who changes drastically, from having mortal men judge each other and condemn each other to death, to putting an entirely different system in place.

It's wrought with contradictions and absurdities, IMHO.

The explanation that Jesus was actually a mortal man who rejected the teachings of the Torah and replaced them with the wisdom of Buddhism makes far more sense and contains no inconsistencies or problems.

In other words, to accept your version of things I would need to believe in a truly confused God who changes his ways and basically loses the vast majority of souls that he creates. He also solves all of his problems using violent gory methods not the LEASE of which would be having his son crucified to appease his need for brutal punishments to "atone" for disobedience, etc.

The whole things is founded on a God who solves his problems using low-mentality ideas of physical punishments, etc.

Accepting my conclusions about Jesus requires none of that.

In my scenario Jesus was just a mortal man who spoke out against the horrible ways of the Taliban and tried to teach them better moral values. He was crucified by this mob, and then made into an idol image to actually support the very things that he himself had rejected.

Jesus was a VICTIM of this religion. Not a demigod who came to change a covenant from a God who is appeased by blood sacrifices, including the sacrifice of his very own son. That makes no sense right there.

Jesus basically spoke out against this horrid religion and was crucified for his efforts.

And how else was he suppose to punish us? Spank us? Put us in time out?

God looses nothing, it is the disobedient people whom are at the loss.

God didn't have his son crucified, our sins and disobedience got him there.

No Jesus didn't explicitly talk against homosexuality, but he did tell how the family/relationships were suppose to be. If someone wants you to turn left, do they have to tell you not to turn right?

“Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ “and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh?’” (Matt. 19:4.

Im a jew, and so is jesus. I choose to live in a heaven, I dont want to burn in hell. Living here on earth has been hell enough for me thank you!

An all-wise God wouldn't need to "punish" anyone at all. The very mentality that punishment has any positive value is an ignorant idea to begin with.

The only reason that humans resort to such ignorant methods is precisely because they aren't all-wise nor omniscient.

In fact, there are actually quite a few mortal humans who have already recognized the utter stupidity of using crude and harmful punishments as a means of trying to teach anyone anything. There are far more intelligent methods for teaching people positive things.

So the very notion of a God who thinks that punishment is an intelligent method of dealing with anything is already a flawed idea, IMHO. Such a God would be far from "all-wise" and that flies in the very face of what this God is supposed to be.

Therefore these fables are necessarily false.

It's really quite simple.

~~~~~~

If there was absolutely no punishment, how was he to keep us from doing certain actions?

He rewards us if we do obey and punishes us for disobedience.

What would be the correct way to go about in your views then?

..............Jesus did NOT come to REJECT the Law, but to FULFILL the Law!!!!..............






In what way did Jesus FULFILL the law?

A.

How?


Jesus was a Jew born under the Old Covenant, under the law. If He was to fulfill the law, He had to keep it perfectly, which He did. But when He died, the law was fulfilled. The Old Covenant and its law then ended. We fulfill a contract by completing what we are obliged to do under the contract. Once we do this, we have fulfilled the contract, and it is ended.


Suppose I am an artist, and I am engaged to paint a mural in the city hall. A contract is drawn up detailing the obligations of all parties involved. Once I have completed the painting and fulfilled my obligations to the city, and they have fulfilled their obligations to me, the contract is fulfilled and ended. It no longer has a legal hold over me or the city. It is fulfilled. But suppose, before I fulfill my obligation in the contract, the state government steps in, reviews the contract, and says there is something about it that is contrary to state law. They then use their authority, or the authority of the court, to end the contract, to declare it void, to abolish or destroy the contract before it is fulfilled.



Jesus was saying in Matthew 5:17-18 that He had NOT come with the authority of God to DESTROY the law before it was fulfilled, but that He was going to FULFILL the law right down to every jot and tittle. Once He did that, the law would END because all obligations in the contract would have been FULFILLED!!!


The law changed when the Old Covenant law was FULFILLED by Christ and REPLACED by New Covenant law, the law of Christ. This is what William Gadsby called, "the gospel of His grace, which is the law from Zion, called the law of faith, the law of liberty, and the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus.”


With the Old Covenant law NOW FULFILLED, for anyone to come along and say that we MUST still keep it is Judaizing or LEGALSIM!!!

Whatever reason anyone may give for saying this does not matter ,because there is now no valid reason for teaching that we must keep the Old Testament law.

Judaizing is often condemned in the Bible, and in Galatians it is called "another gospel: which is not another" (Galatians 1:6-7; see also Galatians 2:16-21; 3:1-14; 5:1-4; and Acts 15:1-5, 24). It is not really another gospel because "gospel" is not a proper word to describe it. "Gospel" means "good news," but this other message that legalists promote is bad news. This OTHER MESSAGE FROM LEGALISTS says that we are still under the law, and, therefore, Jesus did not fulfill it as He said He would. It implies that when Jesus said, “It is finished,” He lied.

It says, therefore, that Jesus did not do in the flesh everything that He was supposed to do. Thus, those who promote it fall into the category of antichrists and deceivers according to 1 John 4:2-3 and 2 John 1:7. Paul said, "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed" (Galatians 1:8).



Fulfilled in Two Ways

Make no mistake about it. Jesus did not come to destroy the law before He had fulfilled it. But He DID FULFILL AND END IT!!!

He fulfilled the law in two ways. First, He lived under the law perfectly. He obeyed every bit of the law. And His perfect righteousness is imputed to us.

Secondly, He paid our legal, penal obligations by DYING in our stead. Because of our transgressions, because we have all sinned, our obligation was to die and spend eternity in hell. Jesus fulfilled that obligation for us by what He went through on the Cross.

AGAIN....Jesus did NOT destroy the law, but by FULFILLING the law, He removed us from being under legal obligations.



And what commandments did Jesus mean when He said, “Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven”? (Matthew 5:19).

Most assume that he meant the Ten Commandments. But He never says this. To properly understand, we must look to the context. And the context shows us that Jesus must be referring to the commandments He is about to give, the commandments of the NEW COVENANT—commandments that, by the way, are continued through the rest of the New Covenant and are summed in one word, LOVE.
And LOVE is something that ONLY GOD works in us.


It is often said that in Matthew 5, Jesus amplified many Old Covenant laws and thus magnified or “filled to the full” the Old Covenant law. But the Old Covenant had no provision for such change. Although Jesus may have used what the people knew of the Old Covenant law as a springboard in His teaching, when He said, “But I say unto you,” Jesus was giving His New Covenant law that entirely replaced the Old Covenant.


And how can our righteousness exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees (Matthew 5:20)?

There is only ONE WAY. Jesus Christ was perfect. He embodied perfect righteousness. This is the way that He “magnified the law” (Isaiah 42:21).

Not by amplifying the outdated and completed Old Covenant law, but by being righteousness personified. And His perfect righteousness is imputed to us if we BELIEVE on Him alone as our Savior. That is the only way to exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees.

We know that in this life we do not perfectly keep Jesus’ commandments because our carnality does not allow us to perfectly and consistently love. But JESUS CHRIST IS OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS, and, that being so, it is impossible for us to be condemned.

As John says, “Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin( sin willingly that is, without grievng the Holy Spirit...but if one does slip into sin, he will cry out to God to get right again,simply because he IS NOW born of God, and CANNOT continue in sin) , because he is born of God” (1 John 3:9).

There is NO CONDEMNATION to them which are IN CHRIST JESUS, as Romans 8:1 says. We always remain perfectly righteous when we are ROBED with the IMPUTED RIGHTEOUSNESS OF JESUS CHRIST who FULFILLED THE LAW PERFECTLY FOR US!!!
(But God WILL chastise , however).


There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
Romans 8:1-4



Copyright © 2009 Peter Ditzel. Permissions Statement.

Amen, very well put.

But remember now, Jesus did NOT RENOUNCE the

Law , in order to give us a new covenant...




Jesus FULFILLED the Law and then gave us a new covenant....

Yes very true. Jesus didn't come to destroy the law, or change it. He came to fulfill it and give us a new covenant to replace the old fulfilled covenant.

Simonedemidova, the jewish people are God's chosen

people...please forgive and overlook some of the

"sad" remarks on here...

And obviously, Cowboy,you need to study more...cause

the words below went right over your head:

1 John 4:10
This is LOVE:

not that we loved God, but that HE LOVED US

and

SENT HIS SON

AS AN ATONING SACRIFICE FOR OUR SINS[/color.....


because right after this was all explained and shown to you ,

You ONCE MORE come up with this staement of yours,below:

God didn't have his son crucified, our sins and disobedience got him there.

Oh......one more thing, you SAY you are SINCERE in

WANTING to LEARN, each time someone corrects you.....YET...you

come back with the same erroneous remarks...


which clearly reveals to me , the real truth of your

heart....which is that of a very clever and deceptive

young man...hidden under the quise of Someone PRETENDING TO

WANT TO LEARN ,and is just "innocently

lacking in the knowledge of God's Word"......

when the

REAL truth is......you are just out on a

mission to spread a false gospel.

Nothing more.

No desire to learn really at all....because you have already

been deceived into thinking you know it all...



How sad.



I will be praying, regardless.


Take care now......

Because this is so very Important to Grasp and

Understand, I am posting on the Deity of Christ One more time:



.......................The Deity of Jesus Christ.....................


The subject of the deity of Jesus Christ is not just an academic issue. If Jesus Christ is not the Son of God, equal with the Father, then Christianity’s special significance crumbles.

The deity of Jesus Christ is vital to all that He did. If He is not the unique Son of God, equal with the Father, then His work at Calvary loses its redemptive significance.

“To deny the deity of Jesus demotes the Son of God to the level of ordinary men. He was truly a great Teacher, He performed great miracles, He lived a great life; but He was more than a teacher or miracle-worker; He was God in flesh.”


The doctrine of the deity of Jesus Christ states that Jesus possesses all the divine attributes of God. These special characteristics include His omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence, immutability, and eternality.

“The attributes of God the Father are those distinguishing characteristics of the nature of God which are inseparable from the idea of deity and which contribute the basis and ground for His various manifestations to His creatures.” This is why Jesus was able to say, “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father” (John 14:9).




Omnipotence is a word which the American Heritage Dictionary defines as “having unlimited power or authority.” John 5:19 states, “The Son can do nothing of himself, but what He sees the Father do; for whatever He does, the Son also does in like manner.” “During Christ’s ministry on earth, He subjected Himself to the will of God, and though done in the power of the Spirit, His miracles are cited as proof of His deity.”



Omniscience is having total knowledge, knowing everything.” Jesus knew the history of the Samaritan woman (John 4:29), the thoughts of men (Luke 6:8, 11:17), and the one who would betray him (John 6:70). John 2:24-25 reads, “… because he knew all men, and needed not that any should testify of man; for he knew what was in man.” Jesus knew the secret thoughts and the hearts of men. The Samaritan woman, after her conversation with Jesus, in speaking to the men of the city, related, “Come, see a man, who told me all things that ever I did. Is not this the Christ?” Jesus had access to all information. But in keeping with His role as Son of Man He denied Himself certain divine prerogatives, exclusive rights and privileges that belong to God alone, which caused Him to rely on the Father during His earthly life. We should not be misled to think Jesus was a mere man because He often stated that the Father revealed things to Him (John 12:49-50). If the Father temporarily withheld information from Him it was so that Jesus could fulfill His role as Savior and friend to His people (John 15:15).



Christ is also omnipresent, as He declared in Matthew 18:20, “For where two or three are gathered together in My name, there am I in the midst of them,” and Matthew 28:20, “… and, lo, I am with you always….” “He was in heaven while on earth (John 3:13) and is on earth while he is in heaven (Matthew 18:20, 28:20). He fills all (Ephesians 1:23).”



He is also immutable and eternal. God never changes. Christ’s divine characteristics are eternal. In His Incarnation He added human flesh to become the perfect Savior. “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and today, and forever” (Hebrews 13:8). Before He took on flesh He existed eternally, “And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was” (John 17:5).



Not only did Jesus possess the divine attributes, but He also occupied divine offices which only God Himself could fill. “For instance, creation and the preservation of that which is created, the forgiveness of sins, raising the dead, giving eternal life to believers, divine judgment.” Colossians 1:16-17, “For by Him were all things created,” and Hebrews 1:2, “… upholding all things by the word of His power”, speak of His divine office of Creator. Jesus had power to forgive sins (Matthew 9:6): “But that you may know that the Son of Man has power on earth to forgive sins”—then He said to the paralytic, “Arise, take up your bed, and go to your house.” He is the author of eternal life: “And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand” (John 10:28). He is resurrection to life (John 11:25): “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me though he may die, he shall live.” And He is the judge with the divine right to pass judgment on all (2 Timothy 4:1-2): “I charge you therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom. Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching.”



The use of divine names for Jesus also proves the deity of Christ. “And his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, the Everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace” (Isaiah 9:6). “Christ is called Wonderful because He is so. God the Father never gave His Son a name which he did not deserve.” In John 8:58, Jesus takes the name of the Jehovah God of the Old Testament, “Before Abraham was, I Am.” The unbelieving Jewish leaders present understood what He said and regarded it as blasphemy.



The name we most often use, Jesus, means Savior or salvation. Joseph was told in Matthew 1:21, “And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for He will save his people from their sins.” It was important that the Son be given a divine name at His birth. “Christ” was His kingly title, and “Lord” means master. “Lord” is also the New Testament name for the Old Testament name for “Jehovah”. “The preeminent name during the days of the flesh was Jesus; during His high-priestly ministry, it is Christ, and during His messianic reign, it will be Lord. Hence, his prophetic ministry is suggested by the name Jesus; His high-priestly office is suggested by His divine title, Christ; His kingly office is suggested by his name, or title, Lord.” And in Matthew 1:23 He is called Immanuel: “According to Hebrew usage the name does not represent a title but a characterization, as in Isaiah 1:26 and 9:6. The name “Immanuel” shows that He really was “God with us.” Thus the deity of Christ is stressed at the beginning of Matthew.”



Christ was called the Alpha and Omega, the first and the last letters of the Greek alphabet. “These names as applied to Christ suggest that He is the first and the last, the Lord Who is and was and is to come, Jehovah’s eternity.” The use of these various names shows the deity of Christ clearly. “Certainly it would be impossible to couple the name of any finite creature with that of the sovereign God.”



Many Old Testament statements referring to God are applied to Christ Jesus in the New Testament. We could compare Psalm 102:24-27 with Hebrews 1:10-12; Isaiah 40:3-4 with Matthew 3:3; and Psalm 44:22 with Romans 8:36. As an example, in the Old Testament the name “Lord” refers to Jehovah God, and in the New Testament it refers to Christ Jesus, except when the preceding verses or the context of the passage indicate otherwise. “Jehovah, Lord of the Old Testament, and Jesus, Lord of the New Testament are one God.” And finally, as Lawlor summarized in his book When God Became Man, “The writers of Scripture have used every conceivable form of terminology in setting forth the deity of the One Who came down from heaven to take away our sins. The doctrine of Christ’s deity is diffused throughout all the Scriptures, and we should never think of Him or speak of him without remembering this.”



Jesus showed Himself to be Son of God in the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies concerning the Messiah and God’s Son. The birth, life, death, and resurrection of Christ fulfilled every detail of the prophecy of the Old Testament Scriptures. There are hundreds of Old Testament prophecies that speak about the Messiah that were, or will be, fulfilled in Jesus Christ. Following are fifteen prophecies:


•Isaiah 9:6-7 with John 1:1-3, 14
•Isaiah 7:14 with Matthew 1:20-23
•Isaiah 37:31 with Matthew 1:1-2, 16
•Isaiah 11:10 with Matthew 1:1-2a, 5-6, 16
•Micah 5:2 with Matthew 2:1
•Hosea 11:1 with Matthew 2:14-15
•Isaiah 53:3 with Luke 23:26-41
•Zechariah 11:12 with Matthew 26:14-15
•Zechariah 11:12-13 with Matthew 27:3-10
•Psalm 22:16 with John 20:25
•Isaiah 53:5-6 with Romans 4:25
•Psalm 22:17 with John 19:33, 36a
•Isaiah 53:8, 11 with Matthew 28:2, 5-7, 9
•Isaiah 53:9 with Matthew 27:57, 59060
•Psalm 22:18 with Matthew 27:35

Especially significant are those prophecies that were fulfilled that were beyond Jesus’ possibly manipulative control—  Born in Bethlehem  Born of a virgin  Descended from Judah  Descended from Jesse  Descended from David  Come out of Egypt (as a young child)  Be from Nazareth  Betrayed by a friend  Betrayed for exactly 30 pieces of silver  30 pieces of silver returned  30 pieces used to buy the potter’s field  No bones broken  Pierced with a spear  Resurrection



Jesus Himself claimed to be God and allowed men to worship Him. “Had He been a just man, a great teacher, a worker of great miracles, had He not been divine, it would have been blasphemy to allow men to worship Him because God is the only One worthy of worship.” Not once, but many times, Jesus received the worship of men, an act of unspeakable blasphemy if Jesus was not divine, a shocking violation of the first commandment if he was not Son of God as claimed to be. John 8:58 records Jesus saying, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, before Abraham was, I AM,” and John 14:6-7, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No man comes to the Father except through Me. If you had known Me, you would have known my Father also; and from now on you know Him, and have seen Him.”



Jesus claimed His deity in many other passages in Scripture. A few of those passages follow: John 6:47—“He who believes in Me has everlasting life.”


John 8:12—“I am the light of the world He who follows Me shall not walk in darkness, but have the light of life.”

John 8:19—If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also.”

John 8:23—“You are from beneath; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world.”

John 8:42—“If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and came from God; nor have I come of Myself, but He sent Me.”

John 10:7—“Most assuredly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep.”

John 10:30—“I and My Father are one.”

John 10:36—“I am the Son of God.”


The gospels are filled with Jesus’ claims to deity. There is no doubt that Jesus claimed equality with God the Father.



The world must know there are only two options. Jesus is the Son of God, equal with the Father, or He is a blasphemer. Scofield frames it well: “Either Jesus was the Son of God or He, the only sinless Being of Whom any record has come down to man, was a conscious imposter, a blasphemous wretch or a deluded enthusiast. That a sinless Being would consciously, deliberately commit the most flagrant of all sins in the violation of the First Commandment, “Thou shall have none other gods before me” (Deuteronomy 5:7), could be explained only on the ground of insanity.”



The deity of Christ is CENTRAL to Christianity. The witnesses to His deity are MANY .
“History declares His deity. Prophecy accents His deity. Christianity testifies of His deity. Philosophy reasons of His deity. Literature writes about His deity. And music sings of His deity.” And this writer adds that the honest human heart longs for His deity. For without a divine Savior there is no redemption! The Christian’s redemptive hope rests in the personal involvement of God Himself in our salvation. We can rely on the Son of God and His work, we do not have to do it ourselves.




http://www.craom.net/deityofchrist.htm

Actually Joy4gud, PART of Cowboy's statement above is

true, and part is not.


Joy4gud, I think what you are "hearing" in that statement

is entirely different from what Cowboy meant:



Yes.. our sins and disobedience was the REASON God offered up

His son" , as an atoning sacrifice for our sins.


Cowboy, however, does NOT mean his statement to mean that at

all.....

Cowboy does NOT believe God even offered up His son AT ALL ,as

an atoning sacrifice for our sins .

(notice, he said , "God did NOT sacrifice His son").


BIG DIFFERENCE from what you were "hearing" Joy4gud.....and what

Cowboy actually meant......

and again..that statement can

SOUND like it is saying one thing..but means

another thing entirely.


Just like a person can "sound" like a christian, but not

actually be a christian at all.