[arcura]

Aliena,
Take the bible's word for it. Jesus is God the Son.
Thomas said ot clearly about Jesus, "My lord and my God."
That is but one of many places in the bible that tell us that Jesus is God the Son, the eternal Word of God made flesh through who all things were created.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

[Aliena]

I have not copied in on internet but I took it from a 'sacred' book and I don't think it's a waste of time because I want to know your opinion about it.but when Jesus came on earth,he was asking for help,if he is the Father's son,and is equal to him,he should have process at least some power.but why he was referring and praying to his Father?he could have done some miracles by himself without the permission of his Father because he is also God and God is the most powerful one.

[Tj3]

i have not copied in on internet but i took it from a 'sacred' book and i don't think its a waste of time because i want to know your opinion about it.but when Jesus came on earth,he was asking for help,if he is the Father's son,and is equal to him,he should have process at least some power.but why he was referring and praying to his Father?he could have done some miracles by himself without the permission of his Father because he is also God and God is the most powerful one.

The reason is simple. To come to earth and be a perfect man also meant that He had to live as a man, and submit Himself to the Father as a man. That what we are told in scripture in Philippians:

Phil 2:5-8
5 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, 7 but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. 8 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.
NKJV

He subsequently ascended back up into heaven and resumed the glory that He had with the Father from before the creation of the world, as we read that he said in the gospel when He prayed to the Father:

John 17:3-5
4 I have glorified You on the earth. I have finished the work which You have given Me to do. 5 And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.
NKJV

This is summarized in 1 Timothy:

1 Tim 3:16
16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness:
God was manifested in the flesh,
Justified in the Spirit,
Seen by angels,
Preached among the Gentiles,
Believed on in the world,
Received up in glory.
NKJV

So in summary, Jesus is God, shared the same glory as God with the Father from before the beginning of the world, willingly set aside His glory to come to earth manifest in the flesh as a man to be humbled and live as one of us so that He could die on the cross in our place, in payment for our sins, and subsequently ascended back into heaven to retake His rightful place on the throne of God.

[arcura]

Tj3,
Yes, you answered that very well.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

[Aliena]

Ooh! if God has the power,why sent his Son on earth to take everybody's sins?he could simply forgive us.why to make his son pay for people's mistake.his permission itself would be enough to forgive.

[Tj3]

ooh!!if God has the power,why sent his Son on earth to take everybody's sins?he could simply forgive us.why to make his son pay for people's mistake.his permission itself would be enough to forgive.

Because God told Adam and Eve that the penalty for sin is death. As a result, blood must be shed for the remission of sins:

Heb 9:22
22 And according to the law almost all things are purified with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no remission.
NKJV

Without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sins. In Ancient Israel, a perfect lamb was sacrifice for sin, but that was not a sacrifice that could take away sin - it was prophetic of the perfect sacrifice of Jesus on the cross:

Heb 10:1-7
10:1 For the law, having a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who approach perfect. 2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? For the worshipers, once purified, would have had no more consciousness of sins. 3 But in those sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year. 4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins.

5 Therefore, when He came into the world, He said:

"Sacrifice and offering You did not desire,
But a body You have prepared for Me.
6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin
You had no pleasure.
7 Then I said, 'Behold, I have come--
In the volume of the book it is written of Me--
To do Your will, O God.' "
NKJV

Further, not just any sacrifice would do. A sacrifice already tainted with sin (us) cannot take away sin, anymore than filthy water can clean your hands. It had to be a perfect sacrifice. Jesus.

Could God have simply wiped away all sin? If He did, He would have cheapened what it means to be Holy. God is Holy which means that he cannot abide sin in His presence.

[adam7gur]

Aliena
I will try to take things one by one,not to convience you but simply explain.
Is the Father a human being?To answeaar that we have to understand what a human being is.We humans according to what God Himself says are gods.God says '' ye are gods'', the only thing that makes us different from the Father is the flesh.
God wanted to create a being that would be like Him,in His image, but how could that be when He has no image, no shape of any kind?He gives birth to His Son,the Word and gives Him a form, a shape and then His Son, the Word creates us humans in His image(the Son's image) ,which is the image of His unseen Father.And if like this is not enough for us , His Son,the Word became flesh Himself,in the person of Jesus.
You are right about not being absolutely sure about everything that is written in the Bible.There are things lost or mistreated in the word of God,because of the variety of men that mixed it with their beliefs.From translation to translation the word of God was violated and today our Bible is not the same as the original.That's why God tells us that He is going to write His law in our hearts and that He is going to be our teacher and that we will not need someone else to teach us because we will all be His students.How is this going to happen?Well, it is already happening, through the baptism in the Holy Spirit,the same way that it happened on the Pentecost day.So today , we humans have The Spirit of God inside us , teaching us His truth.
The name of God is in Hebrew YHVH, and Jesus which in Hebrew is Yeshoua,simply means that Ya(YHVH)is the savior,so all the glory goes to the Father through His Son,that's why everything here on earth is done in the name of Jesus.
I do not wish to make feel uncomfortable here in any way , if I am I apologise.I just try to explain what I believe.
God bless you!

[Akoue]

ooh!!if God has the power,why sent his Son on earth to take everybody's sins?he could simply forgive us.why to make his son pay for people's mistake.his permission itself would be enough to forgive.

This is certainly a very good question, and one that goes right to the heart of Christian belief. First off, I'd like to say that you are right, that God in his omnipotence could have forgiven us, purified us, and healed us without sending his Son to die on the cross. There was no power forcing God to do one thing rather than another.

And this is what makes your question such a good one. Since nothing can compel God, and since, because of that, he could have redeemed us in some other way, why did he choose to become flesh and die? I very much doubt that any fully satisfactory answer to such a deep question can be given on an internet forum, but I'd like to offer some food for thought which may help you to see the matter in a somewhat different light. I can only hope it is of some value to you.

Christians sometimes talk about the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus as if the work of redemption began on Golgotha and ended at the empty tomb. This is a mistake, for the work of redemption really began with the Incarnation. When God became human, the second Person of the Trinity, the Son or Word, emptied himself in order to become fully human. The ancient Greek word for this emptying is "kenosis", and I mention it because it is not uncommon to hear people talk about it using this word. This is important because it means that the Word truly became flesh, the second Person of the Holy Trinity didn't just appear to be flesh but really was flesh. In an act of profound humility, God mingled his divinity with human nature, with humanity. This was both humbling for God and magnifying for humanity, because in taking on our fallen, wounded humanity, stained by sin, God sanctified it. This is why I say that the work of redemption began with the Incarnation of the Word.

Why go through all this if God could redeem us with a word? Well, the answer is, in part, that he did redeem us with a word, His Word, the second Person of the Trinity. Jesus was at once fully human and fully divine, and it is this mingling of humanity and divinity that sanctified humanity. But, at the same time, God chose to redeem us not from his lofty heavenly heights, as he surely could have, but down here, on earth. He chose to draw near to us, to live as we live, to know joy and pain and friendship and betrayal--just as we do. He did this in part to show us that he is not a remote God, but rather a God who is near and who wants us to participate in his divinity (just as humanity participated in divinity in the person of Jesus Christ). By humbling himself to become human, God ennobled humanity at the same time, giving us all a powerful example of humility and love (love of one another and love of God). As a result, God knows what it feels like to be human: He knows what it feels like to be thirsty and hungry and sad and lonely. He even knows what it feels like to feel abandoned by God.

Christ's sacrifice on the cross was a pure sacrifice because Christ was without sin. He gave himself up to death not simply in order to settle a debt, as if the Father were in heaven keeping score of who owes him what. God is not an angry judge seeking justice in the form of human sacrifice. That isn't to say that the crucifixion didn't matter, only that--as you have said--God could have done it another way. God knows what it is like to suffer injustice, because he has been its victim. Christ was wrongly executed, he was an innocent man who was put to death by the state. Since Christ was fully human and fully divine, the spilling of his blood was the spilling of innocent human blood and his death was the death of an innocent human being. This liberated us from the old notion that we had to atone for our sins with blood sacrifices. God sanctified humanity by becoming human, he broke the hold that sin has over us by living a sinless human life, and liberated us from death by rising from the dead. He united himself to us and our experience and in doing so he transformed it.

So, when we ask ourselves why God chose to send his Son to die and rise again, the answer, ultimately, has to be: because he is a loving God; because although he could have accomplished the same thing from heaven, he chose instead to accomplish it here with us; because he wanted us to have tangible proof, in the form of a living breathing human being, that he is with us and cares for us. And by uniting his divinity to our humanity he brought us closer to him just as he drew still closer to us, showing us the way home, the way to union with him.

[Fanspoman]

There is ample Bible evidence for a thinking, intelligent person to completely discredit the ridiculous, false, and god-dishonoring teaching of the "trinity" or that Jesus is God.

(1) Revelation 3:14, in speaking of Jesus, calls him "the beginning of the creation by God". - So in clear terms it says that Jesus is a created being; in fact Jesus is the very first thing and the only thing (hence his "only begotten" title) DIRECTLY created by Almighty God himself. Thus, Jesus cannot be God if he was created by Him.

(2) Matthew 28:18. Here Jesus said: "“All authority has been given me in heaven and on the earth." - Now, trinity supporters love to make the claim that while on earth Jesus was both God and man. If that were even remotely true, then as the "part God", there would logically be no need for him to be given "all authority" since he would already have it. But in this verse, Jesus openly acknowledges that he received his authority (something he didn't have) from a separate individual and one who was obviously superior to Jesus as they had the authority they were giving to Jesus.

(3) John 20:31 says "But these have been written down that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God, and that, because of believing, you may have life by means of his name." - Another thing that trinitarians like to point at is the account of Jesus appearing in the upper room with his followers, including Thomas, where Thomas made the exclamation "My Lord and my God!". Now THIS verse, just quoted, is a mere 2-3 verses after that account of Jesus and Thomas, and note how the verse does NOT call Jesus "Almighty God", but it clearly makes it known that Jesus is "the Son of God". It didn't say "God the Son" or any such nonsense like that, but very clearly "the Son of God". In other words, those things were written in the Bible that we may have faith in Jesus as the Son of God, and not as God himself.

(4) Matthew 24:36 states: "“Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father." - This particular verse is very telling concerning the nature of the relationship between God and Christ. Here, Jesus openly and plainly acknowledges the fact that his own God and Father knows something that he, Jesus, does not. Jesus, as the Son, does not know the exact day and hour in which the end (Armageddon) will come about. That is information only Almighty God himself is privy to. Again, this shows that God is the superior one, the one with all knowledge, and that Jesus is the subordinate, separate Son that is not given all of the knowledge that the Father has.

(5) John 20:17. Here Jesus, speaking to Mary Magdalene said: "“I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.” - In no ambiguous, uncertain terms here can a logical person see that Jesus was ascending to heaven to be with his Father who is also his God. And as "my God", that is the superior being that Jesus himself directs his worship and devotion to, in full acknowledgment of the sovereign position and authority that Jesus did not have.

(6) Revelation 1:1. Here it says: "A revelation by Jesus Christ, which God gave him, to show his slaves the things that must shortly take place. And he sent forth his angel and presented [it] in signs through him to his slave John" - How much plainer and simpler can it be? The revelation that John received originated with God, who then gave it to his Son, Jesus, who gave it to an angel, who presented it to John. The chain of command is very clearly spelled out here. The revelation belonged to the one whom it originated with, which was NOT Jesus. It was with Almighty God alone, who then GAVE it to Jesus. If Jesus was God, or was part of God, just how much sense would it make for him to come up with the revelation and then give it to himself? The clear answer: None.

(7) In Matthew 8:28-34, we have the account of Jesus coming across the man possessed by the "Legion" of demons. Notice what the demons said to Jesus (in verse 29) in full recognition of who he was (since, after all, the demons had originated in heaven and at one time were God's faithful angels): "And, look! They screamed, saying: “What have we to do with you, Son of God? Did you come here to torment us before the appointed time?” - Interesting, isn't it, that even Jesus' own enemies, the demons openly acknowledged Jesus as being God's son, and not as being God himself. If even Jesus' enemies didn't deny the fact that Jesus was only God's Son and not God himself, who are any of us today to try and put Jesus on equal footing with God? It's blasphemy to do so.

(8) 1 Timothy 2:6, in speaking of Jesus, states that he is a "corresponding ransom". - The obvious question is, "corresponding to whom? (or what)". Jesus, also known in the scriptures as "the last Adam" offered the corresponding ransom of his perfect human life to buy back for obedient mankind what the perfect man Adam lost......that of eternal life here on the earth. In order to perfectly balance the scales of justice, a perfect human life had to be given to buy back what the perfect human life of Adam lost. Now if Jesus were "part God/part man" as trinitarians state, then that would most definitely have NOT been corresponding to Adam. Thus, Jesus was completely human in his time on the earth, and as he had repeatedly stated, he was sent to the earth by his Father. What he had taught was from his father and not that of himself. Jesus himself said "my food is to do the will of him who sent me". Jesus always humbly acknowledged that he was and is subordinate to his own God and Father, never accepting any credit or praise upon himself. If he were God then there would be no problem with him accepting the worship and praise that were due him, but since Jesus IS NOT and CANNOT be God, he would never take something like that which did not rightfully belong to him. And he never did.

[Akoue]

There is ample Bible evidence for a thinking, intelligent person to completely discredit the ridiculous, false, and god-dishonoring teaching of the "trinity" or that Jesus is God.

(1) Revelation 3:14, in speaking of Jesus, calls him "the beginning of the creation by God". - So in clear terms it says that Jesus is a created being; in fact Jesus is the very first thing and the only thing (hence his "only begotten" title) DIRECTLY created by Almighty God himself. Thus, Jesus cannot be God if he was created by Him.

(2) Matthew 28:18. Here Jesus said: "“All authority has been given me in heaven and on the earth." - Now, trinity supporters love to make the claim that while on earth Jesus was both God and man. If that were even remotely true, then as the "part God", there would logically be no need for him to be given "all authority" since he would already have it. But in this verse, Jesus openly acknowledges that he received his authority (something he didn't have) from a separate individual and one who was obviously superior to Jesus as they had the authority they were giving to Jesus.

(3) John 20:31 says "But these have been written down that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God, and that, because of believing, you may have life by means of his name." - Another thing that trinitarians like to point at is the account of Jesus appearing in the upper room with his followers, including Thomas, where Thomas made the exclamation "My Lord and my God!". Now THIS verse, just quoted, is a mere 2-3 verses after that account of Jesus and Thomas, and note how the verse does NOT call Jesus "Almighty God", but it clearly makes it known that Jesus is "the Son of God". It didn't say "God the Son" or any such nonsense like that, but very clearly "the Son of God". In other words, those things were written in the Bible that we may have faith in Jesus as the Son of God, and not as God himself.

(4) Matthew 24:36 states: "“Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father." - This particular verse is very telling concerning the nature of the relationship between God and Christ. Here, Jesus openly and plainly acknowledges the fact that his own God and Father knows something that he, Jesus, does not. Jesus, as the Son, does not know the exact day and hour in which the end (Armageddon) will come about. That is information only Almighty God himself is privy to. Again, this shows that God is the superior one, the one with all knowledge, and that Jesus is the subordinate, separate Son that is not given all of the knowledge that the Father has.

(5) John 20:17. Here Jesus, speaking to Mary Magdalene said: "“I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.” - In no ambiguous, uncertain terms here can a logical person see that Jesus was ascending to heaven to be with his Father who is also his God. And as "my God", that is the superior being that Jesus himself directs his worship and devotion to, in full acknowledgment of the sovereign position and authority that Jesus did not have.

(6) Revelation 1:1. Here it says: "A revelation by Jesus Christ, which God gave him, to show his slaves the things that must shortly take place. And he sent forth his angel and presented [it] in signs through him to his slave John" - How much plainer and simpler can it be? The revelation that John received originated with God, who then gave it to his Son, Jesus, who gave it to an angel, who presented it to John. The chain of command is very clearly spelled out here. The revelation belonged to the one whom it originated with, which was NOT Jesus. It was with Almighty God alone, who then GAVE it to Jesus. If Jesus was God, or was part of God, just how much sense would it make for him to come up with the revelation and then give it to himself? The clear answer: None.

(7) In Matthew 8:28-34, we have the account of Jesus coming across the man possessed by the "Legion" of demons. Notice what the demons said to Jesus (in verse 29) in full recognition of who he was (since, after all, the demons had originated in heaven and at one time were God's faithful angels): "And, look! they screamed, saying: “What have we to do with you, Son of God? Did you come here to torment us before the appointed time?” - Interesting, isn't it, that even Jesus' own enemies, the demons openly acknowledged Jesus as being God's son, and not as being God himself. If even Jesus' enemies didn't deny the fact that Jesus was only God's Son and not God himself, who are any of us today to try and put Jesus on equal footing with God? It's blasphemy to do so.

(8) 1 Timothy 2:6, in speaking of Jesus, states that he is a "corresponding ransom". - The obvious question is, "corresponding to whom? (or what)". Jesus, also known in the scriptures as "the last Adam" offered the corresponding ransom of his perfect human life to buy back for obedient mankind what the perfect man Adam lost......that of eternal life here on the earth. In order to perfectly balance the scales of justice, a perfect human life had to be given to buy back what the perfect human life of Adam lost. Now if Jesus were "part God/part man" as trinitarians state, then that would most definitely have NOT been corresponding to Adam. Thus, Jesus was completely human in his time on the earth, and as he had repeatedly stated, he was sent to the earth by his Father. What he had taught was from his father and not that of himself. Jesus himself said "my food is to do the will of him who sent me". Jesus always humbly acknowledged that he was and is subordinate to his own God and Father, never accepting any credit or praise upon himself. If he were God then there would be no problem with him accepting the worship and praise that were due him, but since Jesus IS NOT and CANNOT be God, he would never take something like that which did not rightfully belong to him. And he never did.

Very interesting. So what do you make of the prologue of the fourth Gospel?

[arcura]

Akoue,
Marvelous.
Fred

[Fanspoman]

Very interesting. So what do you make of the prologue of the fourth Gospel?

John 1:1, you ask? It's very interesting that not all Bible translations render it in the way trinity supporters want it to, i.e. "....and the Word was god".

My personal belief lies with what other scriptures in the Bible state as to the nature of Jesus and God, that they are not one and the same and that Jesus is the very first of God's creations. Simple logic dictates to me that someone who clearly was created is NOT equal to the one that created them. But I did read an interesting article which I will copy below that serves to solidify my faith that Jesus and God are not the same:

Was the Word “God” or “a god”?

THAT question has to be considered when Bible translators handle the first verse of the Gospel of John. In the New World Translation, the verse is rendered: “In the beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.” (John 1:1) Some other translations render the last part of the verse to convey the thought that the Word was “divine,” or something similar. (A New Translation of the Bible, by James Moffatt; The New English Bible) Many translations, however, render the last part of John 1:1: “And the Word was God.”—The Holy Bible—New International Version; The Jerusalem Bible.
Greek grammar and the context strongly indicate that the New World Translation rendering is correct and that “the Word” should not be identified as the “God” referred to earlier in the verse. Nevertheless, the fact that the Greek language of the first century did not have an indefinite article (“a” or “an”) leaves the matter open to question in some minds. It is for this reason that a Bible translation in a language that was spoken in the earliest centuries of our Common Era is very interesting.
The language is the Sahidic dialect of Coptic. The Coptic language was spoken in Egypt in the centuries immediately following Jesus’ earthly ministry, and the Sahidic dialect was an early literary form of the language. Regarding the earliest Coptic translations of the Bible, The Anchor Bible Dictionary says: “Since the [Septuagint] and the [Christian Greek Scriptures] were being translated into Coptic during the 3d century C.E. the Coptic version is based on [Greek manuscripts] which are significantly older than the vast majority of extant witnesses.”
The Sahidic Coptic text is especially interesting for two reasons. First, as indicated above, it reflects an understanding of Scripture dating from before the fourth century, which was when the Trinity became official doctrine. Second, Coptic grammar is relatively close to English grammar in one important aspect. The earliest translations of the Christian Greek Scriptures were into Syriac, Latin, and Coptic. Syriac and Latin, like the Greek of those days, do not have an indefinite article. Coptic, however, does. Moreover, scholar Thomas O. Lambdin, in his work Introduction to Sahidic Coptic, says: “The use of the Coptic articles, both definite and indefinite, corresponds closely to the use of the articles in English.”
Hence, the Coptic translation supplies interesting evidence as to how John 1:1 would have been understood back then. What do we find? The Sahidic Coptic translation uses an indefinite article with the word “god” in the final part of John 1:1. Thus, when rendered into modern English, the translation reads: “And the Word was a god.” Evidently, those ancient translators realized that John’s words recorded at John 1:1 did not mean that Jesus was to be identified as Almighty God. The Word was a god, not Almighty God.

[Tj3]

(1) Revelation 3:14, in speaking of Jesus, calls him "the beginning of the creation by God". - So in clear terms it says that Jesus is a created being; in fact Jesus is the very first thing and the only thing (hence his "only begotten" title) DIRECTLY created by Almighty God himself. Thus, Jesus cannot be God if he was created by Him.

The term used here in the text does not referring to Jesus being created but rather to Jesus being the "first" or the head over all creation.

(2) Matthew 28:18. Here Jesus said: "“All authority has been given me in heaven and on the earth." - Now, trinity supporters love to make the claim that while on earth Jesus was both God and man. If that were even remotely true, then as the "part God", there would logically be no need for him to be given "all authority" since he would already have it. But in this verse, Jesus openly acknowledges that he received his authority (something he didn't have) from a separate individual and one who was obviously superior to Jesus as they had the authority they were giving to Jesus.

Keep in mind that while Jesus was on earth, He was God, but chose specifically tio humble Himself as a man, to be a perfect man, a perfect sacrifice.

Phil 2:5-8
5 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, 7 but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. 8 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.
NKJV

(3) John 20:31 says "But these have been written down that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God, and that, because of believing, you may have life by means of his name." - Another thing that trinitarians like to point at is the account of Jesus appearing in the upper room with his followers, including Thomas, where Thomas made the exclamation "My Lord and my God!". Now THIS verse, just quoted, is a mere 2-3 verses after that account of Jesus and Thomas, and note how the verse does NOT call Jesus "Almighty God", but it clearly makes it known that Jesus is "the Son of God". It didn't say "God the Son" or any such nonsense like that, but very clearly "the Son of God". In other words, those things were written in the Bible that we may have faith in Jesus as the Son of God, and not as God himself.

Heb 1:8
8 But to the Son He says:
"Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
NKJV

(4) Matthew 24:36 states: "“Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father." - This particular verse is very telling concerning the nature of the relationship between God and Christ. Here, Jesus openly and plainly acknowledges the fact that his own God and Father knows something that he, Jesus, does not. Jesus, as the Son, does not know the exact day and hour in which the end (Armageddon) will come about. That is information only Almighty God himself is privy to. Again, this shows that God is the superior one, the one with all knowledge, and that Jesus is the subordinate, separate Son that is not given all of the knowledge that the Father has.

(5) John 20:17. Here Jesus, speaking to Mary Magdalene said: "“I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.” - In no ambiguous, uncertain terms here can a logical person see that Jesus was ascending to heaven to be with his Father who is also his God. And as "my God", that is the superior being that Jesus himself directs his worship and devotion to, in full acknowledgment of the sovereign position and authority that Jesus did not have.

Again, Jesus humbled Himself as a man. As a man, to be sinless, He had to submit Himself to God the Father. the fact that Jesus did not know the time, does not take away from the fact that God, being Father, Son and Holy Spirit DID know.

(6) Revelation 1:1. Here it says: "A revelation by Jesus Christ, which God gave him, to show his slaves the things that must shortly take place. And he sent forth his angel and presented [it] in signs through him to his slave John" - How much plainer and simpler can it be? The revelation that John received originated with God, who then gave it to his Son, Jesus, who gave it to an angel, who presented it to John. The chain of command is very clearly spelled out here. The revelation belonged to the one whom it originated with, which was NOT Jesus. It was with Almighty God alone, who then GAVE it to Jesus. If Jesus was God, or was part of God, just how much sense would it make for him to come up with the revelation and then give it to himself? The clear answer: None.

Rev 22:12-16
12 "And behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to give to every one according to his work. 13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last." 14 Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city. 15 But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie. 16 I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things in the churches.
NKJV

Isa 44:6
6 "Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel,
And his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts:
'I am the First and I am the Last;
Besides Me there is no God.
NKJV

(7) In Matthew 8:28-34, we have the account of Jesus coming across the man possessed by the "Legion" of demons. Notice what the demons said to Jesus (in verse 29) in full recognition of who he was (since, after all, the demons had originated in heaven and at one time were God's faithful angels): "And, look! They screamed, saying: “What have we to do with you, Son of God? Did you come here to torment us before the appointed time?” - Interesting, isn't it, that even Jesus' own enemies, the demons openly acknowledged Jesus as being God's son, and not as being God himself. If even Jesus' enemies didn't deny the fact that Jesus was only God's Son and not God himself, who are any of us today to try and put Jesus on equal footing with God? It's blasphemy to do so.

Phil 2:5-7
Jesus, 6 who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God,
NKJV

(8) 1 Timothy 2:6, in speaking of Jesus, states that he is a "corresponding ransom". - The obvious question is, "corresponding to whom? (or what)". Jesus, also known in the scriptures as "the last Adam" offered the corresponding ransom of his perfect human life to buy back for obedient mankind what the perfect man Adam lost......that of eternal life here on the earth. In order to perfectly balance the scales of justice, a perfect human life had to be given to buy back what the perfect human life of Adam lost. Now if Jesus were "part God/part man" as trinitarians state, then that would most definitely have NOT been corresponding to Adam. Thus, Jesus was completely human in his time on the earth, and as he had repeatedly stated, he was sent to the earth by his Father. What he had taught was from his father and not that of himself. Jesus himself said "my food is to do the will of him who sent me". Jesus always humbly acknowledged that he was and is subordinate to his own God and Father, never accepting any credit or praise upon himself. If he were God then there would be no problem with him accepting the worship and praise that were due him, but since Jesus IS NOT and CANNOT be God, he would never take something like that which did not rightfully belong to him. And he never did.

John 17:1-5
17:1 Jesus spoke these words, lifted up His eyes to heaven, and said: "Father, the hour has come. Glorify Your Son, that Your Son also may glorify You, 2 as You have given Him authority over all flesh, that He should give eternal life to as many as You have given Him. 3 And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. 4 I have glorified You on the earth. I have finished the work which You have given Me to do. 5 And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.
NKJV

Jesus had the glory of God with the father before creation. That is because Jesus is from everlasting - not created:

Mic 5:2
2 "But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah,
Though you are little among the thousands of Judah,
Yet out of you shall come forth to Me
The One to be Ruler in Israel,
Whose goings forth are from of old,
From everlasting."
NKJV

[Tj3]

John 1:1, you ask? It's very interesting that not all Bible translations render it in the way trinity supporters want it to, i.e. "....and the Word was god".

My personal belief lies with what other scriptures in the Bible state as to the nature of Jesus and God, that they are not one and the same and that Jesus is the very first of God's creations. Simple logic dictates to me that someone who clearly was created is NOT equal to the one that created them. But I did read an interesting article which I will copy below that serves to solidify my faith that Jesus and God are not the same:

Was the Word “God” or “a god”?

The same passage reads as follows from the NKJV:

John 1:1
1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
NKJV

The key portion of this passage that we need to focus on is the part which states "..the Word was God.".

Let's look at the passage in the original Greek. The original passage in Greek reads:

kai theos en ho logos.

The definite article applies to the subject, which is this case is the Word. The Word is the subject, not God. Second thing to understand about Greek is that the word order may vary, but is important for the purposes of emphasis. In the original Greek, theos is the first person or item mentioned, and though the words may be in any order, the word which is put first is placed in that position for emphasis. The "word" comes later in the sentence. Thus, in Greek, it would read, "What God was, the Word was". In English, we translate this to "The Word was God".

The Jehovah witnesses translate this to read "the Word was a god" based upon a mis-translation of the Greek, making the assumption that "ho" translates to "a" in English as definite article while when "theos" does not have an definite article, it should be assumed to have an indefinite article (Greek does not have an indefinite article). Without trying to get into details of Greek translation, we can demonstrate that this is not correct by simply showing that in Greek, the one true God is referred to elsewhere in the New Testament by the term "theos" without the definite article. Examples:

Matt 1:23
23 "Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel," which is translated, "God with us."
NKJV

Matt 15:4
4 For God commanded, saying, 'Honor your father and your mother'; and, 'He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.'
NKJV

Mark 2:7
7 Why does this Man speak blasphemies like this? Who can forgive sins but God alone?"
NKJV

Luke 20:38
38 "For He is not the God of the dead but of the living, for all live to Him."
NKJV

There are many more examples throughout the New Testament which could be given. In each example given, the Watchtower Society New World Translation translates the word "God" with the exception of Luke 20:38 where they translate it as "a God" (note the capital "G"). The problems with this are numerous. First and foremost, this creates two gods and yet scripture is abundantly clear throughout that there is only one true God (Deut 6:4, Zech 14:9 and many others).

[Fanspoman]

"The term used here in the text does not referring to Jesus being created but rather to Jesus being the "first" or the head over all creation."

- In reference to Revelation 3:14, you are incorrect. The term is, in a crystal clear manner, referring to Jesus being the "beginning" of God's creations. It doesn't say the "beginning" of his creations, it says the "beginning", meaning the start of God's creations, or the first thing (person, object, or otherwise) that God created.

"Keep in mind that while Jesus was on earth, He was God, but chose specifically tio humble Himself as a man, to be a perfect man, a perfect sacrifice."

- With all due respect, keep in mind that whether Jesus was in heaven before coming to earth, whether he was on the earth as a man, and whether Jesus ascended back to heaven after his death.....he NEVER has been and never will be God. In his prehuman existance, as the first of God's creations, Jesus was in a position of great glory and power......after all he was, and is, the second-most powerful being in all the universe. But Jesus himself even acknowledged to Mary that he was returning to heaven to "my God", which very clearly indicates that Jesus himself gives his worship to a higher personage than himself.

"Again, Jesus humbled Himself as a man. As a man, to be sinless, He had to submit Himself to God the Father. the fact that Jesus did not know the time, does not take away from the fact that God, being Father, Son and Holy Spirit DID know."

- Jesus did humble himself. He humbled himself in being willing to forsake his glorified position in the heaven to be send to the earth to be born and live as a lowly human and live perfectly and offer that perfect human life as a sacrifice. The fact remains that Jesus, neither in his time in heaven or in his time on earth, knew when the end would come. Almighty God is ONE God......not the ridiculous "three in one" teaching that is prevalent in false religion the world over. The fact that God alone knows something that Jesus does not, which Jesus readily acknowledged, shows that Jesus recognize his lesser position in relation to his father. Jesus recognized this lesser position both while in heaven and while on earth.

"5 And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was. "

- All this scripture does is continue to offer the proof that Jesus had a prehuman existance in the heavens before he accepted the assignment to come to earth to sacrifice his perfect life. As the first of God's creations, which Revelation 3:14 makes very clear, Jesus' creation occurred before the earth was created, which harmonizes with John 1:3 which stated "All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence." thus, Jesus is NOT from everlasting. After Jesus was created by God, God endowed him with the ability to bring all other things into being.

[Fanspoman]

The same passage reads as follows from the NKJV:

John 1:1
1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
NKJV

The key portion of this passage that we need to focus on is the part which states "..the Word was God.".

Let's look at the passage in the original Greek. The original passage in Greek reads:

kai theos en ho logos.

The definite article applies to the subject, which is this case is the Word. The Word is the subject, not God. Second thing to understand about Greek is that the word order may vary, but is important for the purposes of emphasis. In the original Greek, theos is the first person or item mentioned, and though the words may be in any order, the word which is put first is placed in that position for emphasis. The "word" comes later in the sentence. Thus, in Greek, it would read, "What God was, the Word was". In English, we translate this to "The Word was God".

The Jehovah witnesses translate this to read "the Word was a god" based upon a mis-translation of the Greek, making the assumption that "ho" translates to "a" in English as definite article while when "theos" does not have an definite article, it should be assumed to have an indefinite article (Greek does not have an indefinite article). Without trying to get into details of Greek translation, we can demonstrate that this is not correct by simply showing that in Greek, the one true God is referred to elsewhere in the New Testament by the term "theos" without the definite article. Examples:

Matt 1:23
23 "Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel," which is translated, "God with us."
NKJV

Matt 15:4
4 For God commanded, saying, 'Honor your father and your mother'; and, 'He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.'
NKJV

Mark 2:7
7 Why does this Man speak blasphemies like this? Who can forgive sins but God alone?"
NKJV

Luke 20:38
38 "For He is not the God of the dead but of the living, for all live to Him."
NKJV

There are many more examples throughout the New Testament which could be given. In each example given, the Watchtower Society New World Translation translates the word "God" with the exception of Luke 20:38 where they translate it as "a God" (note the capital "G"). The problems with this are numerous. First and foremost, this creates two gods and yet scripture is abundantly clear throughout that there is only one true God (Deut 6:4, Zech 14:9 and many others).

Really?


No Conflict

DOES saying that Jesus Christ is “a god” conflict with the Bible’s teaching that there is only one God? No, for at times the Bible employs that term to refer to mighty creatures. Psalm 8:5 reads: “You also proceeded to make him [man] a little less than godlike ones [Hebrew, ’elo‧him′],” that is, angels. In Jesus’ defense against the charge of the Jews, that he claimed to be God, he noted that “the Law uses the word gods of those to whom the word of God was addressed,” that is, human judges. (John 10:34, 35, JB; Psalm 82:1-6) Even Satan is called “the god of this system of things” at 2 Corinthians 4:4.
Jesus has a position far higher than angels, imperfect men, or Satan. Since these are referred to as “gods,” mighty ones, surely Jesus can be and is “a god.” Because of his unique position in relation to Jehovah, Jesus is a “Mighty God.”—John 1:1; Isaiah 9:6.
But does not “Mighty God” with its capital letters indicate that Jesus is in some way equal to Jehovah God? Not at all. Isaiah merely prophesied this to be one of four names that Jesus would be called, and in the English language such names are capitalized. Still, even though Jesus was called “Mighty,” there can be only one who is “Almighty.” To call Jehovah God “Almighty” would have little significance unless there existed others who were also called gods but who occupied a lesser or inferior position.
The Bulletin of the John Rylands Library in England notes that according to Catholic theologian Karl Rahner, while the‧os′ is used in scriptures such as John 1:1 in reference to Christ, “in none of these instances is ‘theos’ used in such a manner as to identify Jesus with him who elsewhere in the New Testament figures as ‘ho Theos,’ that is, the Supreme God.” And the Bulletin adds: “If the New Testament writers believed it vital that the faithful should confess Jesus as ‘God’, is the almost complete absence of just this form of confession in the New Testament explicable?”
But what about the apostle Thomas’ saying, “My Lord and my God!” to Jesus at John 20:28? To Thomas, Jesus was like “a god,” especially in the miraculous circumstances that prompted his exclamation. Some scholars suggest that Thomas may simply have made an emotional exclamation of astonishment, spoken to Jesus but directed to God. In either case, Thomas did not think that Jesus was Almighty God, for he and all the other apostles knew that Jesus never claimed to be God but taught that Jehovah alone is “the only true God.”—John 17:3.
Again, the context helps us to understand this. A few days earlier the resurrected Jesus had told Mary Magdalene to tell the disciples: “I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God.” (John 20:17) Even though Jesus was already resurrected as a mighty spirit, Jehovah was still his God. And Jesus continued to refer to Him as such even in the last book of the Bible, after he was glorified.—Revelation 1:5, 6; 3:2, 12.
Just three verses after Thomas’ exclamation, at John 20:31, the Bible further clarifies the matter by stating: “These have been written down that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God,” not that he was Almighty God. And it meant “Son” in a literal way, as with a natural father and son, not as some mysterious part of a Trinity Godhead.
Must Harmonize With the Bible
IT IS claimed that several other scriptures support the Trinity. But these are similar to those discussed above in that, when carefully examined, they offer no actual support. Such texts only illustrate that when considering any claimed support for the Trinity, one must ask: Does the interpretation harmonize with the consistent teaching of the entire Bible—that Jehovah God alone is Supreme? If not, then the interpretation must be in error.
We also need to keep in mind that not even so much as one “proof text” says that God, Jesus, and the holy spirit are one in some mysterious Godhead. Not one scripture anywhere in the Bible says that all three are the same in substance, power, and eternity. The Bible is consistent in revealing Almighty God, Jehovah, as alone Supreme, Jesus as his created Son, and the holy spirit as God’s active force.

[Tj3]

-In reference to Revelation 3:14, you are incorrect. The term is, in a crystal clear manner, referring to Jesus being the "beginning" of God's creations. It doesn't say the "beginning" of his creations, it says the "beginning", meaning the start of God's creations, or the first thing (person, object, or otherwise) that God created.

You are reading it in English. The Greek word is arche, which carries with it the meaning of position or rank.

- With all due respect, keep in mind that whether Jesus was in heaven before coming to earth, whether he was on the earth as a man, and whether Jesus ascended back to heaven after his death... he NEVER has been and never will be God. In his prehuman existence, as the first of God's creations, Jesus was in a position of great glory and power... after all he was, and is, the second-most powerful being in all the universe. But Jesus himself even acknowledged to Mary that he was returning to heaven to "my God", which very clearly indicates that Jesus himself gives his worship to a higher personage than himself.

So do you feel that God erred in Heb 1:8 calling Jesus "God"?

- Jesus did humble himself. He humbled himself in being willing to forsake his glorified position in the heaven to be send to the earth to be born and live as a lowly human and live perfectly and offer that perfect human life as a sacrifice. The fact remains that Jesus, neither in his time in heaven or in his time on earth, knew when the end would come. Almighty God is ONE God... not the ridiculous "three in one" teaching that is prevalent in false religion the world over. The fact that God alone knows something that Jesus does not, which Jesus readily acknowledged, shows that Jesus recognize his lesser position in relation to his father. Jesus recognized this lesser position both while in heaven and while on earth.

Yes, Almighty God is one God, but in three persons. Look at Is 48:17 and tell me who the Redeemer is.

When you say that Jesus is "a god" in John 1:1, then you have established a second lesser God to Almighty God. So you are not arguing for one God, but at least 2 gods.

- All this scripture does is continue to offer the proof that Jesus had a prehuman existence in the heavens before he accepted the assignment to come to earth to sacrifice his perfect life. As the first of God's creations, which Revelation 3:14 makes very clear, Jesus' creation occurred before the earth was created, which harmonizes with John 1:3 which stated "All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence." thus, Jesus is NOT from everlasting. After Jesus was created by God, God endowed him with the ability to bring all other things into being.

Micah 5:2 says that Jesus is from everlasting.

[Fanspoman]

"You are reading it in English. The Greek word is arche, which carries with it the meaning of position or rank."

- And that still lends to support to how it reads in English. As the beginning of God's actual creations, that puts Jesus in the unique position or rank of being first.

"So do you feel that God erred in Heb 1:8 calling Jesus "God"?"

- Re: Hebrews 1:8: RS reads: “Of the Son he says, ‘Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever.’” (KJ, NE, TEV, Dy, JB, NAB have similar renderings.) However, NW reads: “But with reference to the Son: ‘God is your throne forever and ever.’” (AT, Mo, TC, By convey the same idea.)
Which rendering is harmonious with the context? The preceding verses say that God is speaking, not that he is being addressed; and the following verse uses the expression “God, thy God,” showing that the one addressed is not the Most High God but is a worshiper of that God. Hebrews 1:8 quotes from Psalm 45:6, which originally was addressed to a human king of Israel. Obviously, the Bible writer of this psalm did not think that this human king was Almighty God. Rather, Psalm 45:6, in RS, reads “Your divine throne.” (NE says, “Your throne is like God’s throne.” JP [verse 7]: “Thy throne given of God.”) Solomon, who was possibly the king originally addressed in Psalm 45, was said to sit “upon Jehovah’s throne.” (1 Chron. 29:23, NW) In harmony with the fact that God is the “throne,” or Source and Upholder of Christ’s kingship, Daniel 7:13, 14 and Luke 1:32 show that God confers such authority on him.
Hebrews 1:8, 9 quotes from Psalm 45:6, 7, concerning which the Bible scholar B. F. Westcott states: “The LXX. admits of two renderings: [ho the‧os′] can be taken as a vocative in both cases (Thy throne, O God, . . . therefore, O God, Thy God . . . ) or it can be taken as the subject (or the predicate) in the first case (God is Thy throne, or Thy throne is God . . . ), and in apposition to [ho the‧os′ sou] in the second case (Therefore God, even Thy God . . . ). . . . It is scarcely possible that [’Elo‧him′] in the original can be addressed to the king. The presumption therefore is against the belief that [ho the‧os′] is a vocative in the LXX. Thus on the whole it seems best to adopt in the first clause the rendering: God is Thy throne (or, Thy throne is God), that is ‘Thy kingdom is founded upon God, the immovable Rock.’”—The Epistle to the Hebrews (London, 1889), pp. 25, 26.


"Yes, Almighty God is one God, but in three persons."

- According to the false doctrine of the trinity, that may be the case, but according to God's Word, the Bible, that is most definitely NOT true.

"When you say that Jesus is "a god" in John 1:1, then you have established a second lesser God to Almighty God. So you are not arguing for one God, but at least 2 gods."

- I've already addressed that issue.

"Micah 5:2 says that Jesus is from everlasting."

- And Revelation 3:14 and Colossians 1:15 say that Jesus was created, and in fact, is the "beginning" of God's creations. Micah 5:2 is merely making reference to Jesus' prehuman existance. It is unknown how long a period of time he spent in heaven alongside his God and Father before coming to the earth.

“From Early Times”
Among the old papers available to first-century Jews were the writings of God’s prophet Micah, recorded some seven hundred years previously. These pinpoint the Messiah’s birthplace. “You, O Bethlehem Ephrathah, the one too little to get to be among the thousands of Judah, from you there will come out to me the one who is to become ruler in Israel, whose origin is from early times, from the days of time indefinite.” (Micah 5:2) True to these words, Jesus was born in the Judean village of Bethlehem in what is now called the year 2 B.C.E. But how could his origin be “from early times”?
Jesus had a prehuman existence. In his letter to the Christians in Colossae, the apostle Paul described Jesus as “the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.”—Colossians 1:15.
Jehovah, the Source of wisdom, created his first Son as his ‘earliest achievement,’ to use the inspired expression recorded by King Solomon in the book of Proverbs. After Jesus’ sojourn on earth and his return to heaven, he testified that he was indeed “the beginning of the creation by God.” As wisdom personified, the prehuman Jesus declared: “When [Jehovah] prepared the heavens I was there.”—Proverbs 8:22, 23, 27; Revelation 3:14.
From the start, God’s Son received a unique assignment, that of being “master worker” alongside his Father. What joy this brought to Jehovah! “I came to be the one he [Jehovah] was specially fond of day by day,” notes Proverbs 8:30, adding, “I being glad before him all the time.”
Jehovah later invited his firstborn Son to share in the creation of humankind. “Let us make man in our image,” he declared, “according to our likeness.” (Genesis 1:26) As a result, another fondness developed. “The things I was fond of,” explained the prehuman Jesus, “were with the sons of men.” (Proverbs 8:31) At the beginning of his Gospel, the apostle John acknowledged Jesus’ prehuman role in creation: “All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence.”—John 1:3.

[Tj3]

Really?


No Conflict

First, let me comment that copying and pasting articles is inappropriate unless you give credit to the source and in fact illegal unless you abide by their copyright provisions. (BTW, I have a copy of that CD)

DOES saying that Jesus Christ is “a god” conflict with the Bible's teaching that there is only one God? No, for at times the Bible employs that term to refer to mighty creatures. Psalm 8:5 reads: “You also proceeded to make him [man] a little less than godlike ones [Hebrew, 'elo‧him′],” that is, angels. In Jesus' defense against the charge of the Jews, that he claimed to be God, he noted that “the Law uses the word gods of those to whom the word of God was addressed,” that is, human judges. (John 10:34, 35, JB; Psalm 82:1-6) Even Satan is called “the god of this system of things” at 2 Corinthians 4:4.

The word Elohim basically has many possible meanings, but typically refers to mighty ones. As to whether there are any other real Gods, let's let God speak to that one:

Ex 23:13
13 And in all that I have said to you, be circumspect and make no mention of the name of other gods, nor let it be heard from your mouth.
NKJV

Isa 45:21
Who has told it from that time?
Have not I, the LORD?
And there is no other God besides Me,
A just God and a Savior;
There is none besides Me.
NKJV

All references to other gods in scripture is to false gods and idols. You mentioned Psalm 82, which refers to unjust judges and to John 10:34-35 which refers to unsaved men who wanted to stone Jesus to death (look in John 10:26 to see that these men are unsaved). Look at the description of the evil judges in Ps 82. And then you make reference to Satan.

Are these the gods that you compare Jesus to?

Jesus has a position far higher than angels, imperfect men, or Satan. Since these are referred to as “gods,” mighty ones, surely Jesus can be and is “a god.” Because of his unique position in relation to Jehovah, Jesus is a “Mighty God.”—John 1:1; Isaiah 9:6.
But does not “Mighty God” with its capital letters indicate that Jesus is in some way equal to Jehovah God?

The term “Mighty God” is indeed used in scripture to refer to Jehovah:

Jer 32:17-18
18 You show lovingkindness to thousands, and repay the iniquity of the fathers into the bosom of their children after them--the Great, the Mighty God, whose name is the LORD of hosts.
NKJV

Isa 10:21-23
21 The remnant will return, the remnant of Jacob, To the Mighty God.
22 For though your people, O Israel, be as the sand of the sea, A remnant of them will return, The destruction decreed shall overflow with righteousness.
23 For the Lord GOD of hosts Will make a determined end In the midst of all the land.
NKJV

Gen 49:24
24 But his bow remained in strength, And the arms of his hands were made strong By the hands of the Mighty God of Jacob (From there is the Shepherd, the Stone of Israel),
NKJV

It is interesting to note that the term “Mighty God” is used in scripture 4 times, 3 times clearly referring to Jehovah, and the fourth is prophetic of Jesus.

[Fanspoman]

"First, let me comment that copying and pasting articles is inappropriate unless you give credit to the source and in fact illegal unless you abide by their copyright provisions. (BTW, I have a copy of that CD)"

- Happy day for you and your opinion. Mine happens to be different from yours.