Is there any Biblical evidence that describes Jesus as God?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Walter
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 251
  • Views Views 33K
Dear Malayloveislam:
Peace everyone,

Excuse me for my curiosity Greenville, you seem like a protestant but your view represent those of ancient Christianity, well according to my view and my historical reading of Quranic Interpretation. What is your sect in Christianity? And is it considered as Christianity too? Thanks. A very nice thread, hope everyone enjoy discussing.

Your query has caused me to reflect. Thank you. Allow me to write my reflections both in response to your query, and for my own benefit.

From birth until 7 years, I attended a Baptist church with my parents, until we relocated and attended a Methodist church.

I was not a bad fellow. I was obedient to my parents, and gave no trouble in my community. I read the Bible and prayed from childhood, and yet, things seemed unclear to me. Every Bible story, and sermon, and ritual seemed to be another piece of the puzzle, but I did not know what the final picture was supposed to look like.

After 14 years of church attendance and following the various rituals and traditions, I visited a Pentecostal church and accepted that despite my relatively good behavior, I could never be good enough to earn God’s favor, love, and forgiveness. I realized that I needed God to forgive me for my wrong thoughts, motives, and actions. On 29 August 1979, I asked God to forgive me and accepted whatever Jesus did on the cross as sufficient to bring me closer to God. I felt wonderfully clean. The Bible was like a new book to me, and it seemed easily understandable.

I kept attending the Methodist church on Sunday mornings with my family, and with my parents permission, attended the Pentecostal church on Sunday evenings. A few months later at the Pentecostal church, I raised my hands in praise to God for perhaps the first time, and felt a sort of bubbling from within me which came from around my stomach region and out of my mouth. I spoke a language that I had not known, and I did not want to stop. When I returned home, I knelt by my bed to pray and tried it again, and found that I could speak this new language at will.

That Christmas, my grandparents gave me their first and only gift, a massive concordance, with a Hebrew and Greek dictionary, which my father taught me how to use. That began an almost 30 year study of the Bible, early civilizations, and history.

When I was 16 years old, my father wrote me a letter advising me to be true to myself. He also explained that God has given us tools to use, but it is our responsibility to sharpen those tools. Since that time, I have tried to honestly interpret any evidence, and be as conscientious looking for evidence that does not support my biased views as those that do.

I continued to attend the Methodist and Pentecostal churches for the next two years or so. When I was at university studying Engineering, I attended a Baptist church. For the past 5 years, I have attended, and continue to attend, a Wesleyan Church.

I have found that it is possible to spend your life believing things that are entirely false. That is OK, since there are many things, especially in the natural world, that we can only speculate about. However, the consequences of being wrong on some spiritual things can carry eternal consequences.

Determinations of spiritual matters used to be by evidence. God set the standard of verification very high. He said that prophets predictions must come to pass if He sent them. Therefore, their word was easily verifiable.

As time went on, God’s method of verification was abandoned, and people believed something to be true because someone said so, and enforced their belief with violence and property confiscation.

In the past two hundred years or so, we have returned to verifying assumptions through the scientific method, and the violent enforcement of most beliefs has subsided, at least in the Western world. We are free, to some extent, to investigate evidence and rigorously scrutinize opinions in our efforts to verify the assumptions upon which these opinions rest. We are free to do what God has asked of us, to test and investigate in order to know the truth.

Where there is insufficient evidence to verify the assumptions upon which opinions are based, then conclusive statements about those opinions should be avoided. This is true in every field of study.

We should never be afraid to present our beliefs to the light for scrutiny. Truth should always be able to withstand honest rigorous scrutiny. However, error generally finds comfort in darkness in order to avoid examination.

I have critically examined the Bible for over 30 years, and with the available evidence, I have found it to be true. I have rigorously examined the principal teachings of the Qur’an, and have found that they do not contradict those of the Bible. Therefore, it would seem that the Bible and the Qur’an have a common author.

I am fully aware that most Christians and Muslims do not share this view. I believe it is because their leaders teach their adherents that there are fundamental differences between the Bible and the Qur’an, which I have found not to be the case. Regrettably, there is still the tendency, by adherents, to resort to a violent reaction when their religious traditions are questioned. I am here to simply discuss the evidence.

Regards,
Grenville
 
Dear Follower:
Any muslim not just Imam - How does the Word of GOD become corrupt if the Word of GOD can not be corrupted?

Can you stay on-topic and post this question elsewhere?

Regards,
Grenville
 
Well for one thing the Quran never says the word Trinity it just says 3.

Imam - How does the Word of GOD become corrupt if the Word of GOD can not be corrupted?

Link to John 20:28 in Aramaic:
http://www.aramaicpe****ta.com/AramaicNTtools/Pe****tainterlinear/4_John/Yukhnch20.pdf

Follower,

you know that I have just realized why some members in the LI , somehow have a low opinion of you.

It is not that your posts necessarily flawed but the fact you mess the thread topic and your ideas are not consistent ....

I hope you accept my advice and improve your style by focusing on the matter under discussion as much as you can.....


peace
 
malayloveislam, Grenville has told you important parts of his story. We all have faith journeys, sometimes they take us interesting places. Sometimes our beliefs are the same as those places that we travel and sometimes they are not. I will let Grenville represent his own beliefs, but I do think you might want to compare what he says with what the groups he has identified himself as having been a part and see what they express for themselves as their sets of beliefs, for Grenville may or may not believe the same as them. For instance he says that he once attended the Methodist church, a group I know something about as a pastor of a United Methodist Church, and while some of his beliefs are in harmony with our teachings, there are many that are not.


From birth until 7 years, I attended a Baptist church with my parents

Southern Baptist Basic Beliefs

until we relocated and attended a Methodist church.

Foundational Documents of the United Methodist Church


I visited a Pentecostal church and I continued to attend the Methodist and Pentecostal churches for the next two years or so.

There are many different types of Pentecostal churches, some with affiliations with one another and some with no affiliation with any other church whatsoever. As Grenville did not specify any details regarding the Pentecostal church(es) he attended, I will not post a link to a spefice body lest I post incorrectly. There are some websites that provide a more generic understanding of Pentecostals but that doesn't mean that Grenville would relate to any one of them:
www.religioustolerance.org
Wikipedia article
article by Gary Gilley

he book that Grenville continually cites in the thread wherein he proposes a harmony between the Bible and the Qur'an is published by Word Aflame Press, which is the publishing house of the United Pentecostal Church International.
Correction: I was in error in listing this publisher. There are two different books by this title and the one that Grenville is refering to is a different one available on Amazon.com and, according to that link, published by iUniverse.com. I regret the error.

For the past 5 years, I have attended, and continue to attend, a Wesleyan Church.
Wesley Church core values & beliefs


Interestingly, the very first Article of Religion of the Wesleyan Church that Grenville presently attends is:
1. Faith in the Holy Trinity

We believe in the one living and true God, both holy and loving, eternal, unlimited in power, wisdom and goodness, the Creator and Preserver of all things. Within this unity there are three persons of one essential nature, power and eternity — the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

Gen. 1:1; 17:1; Ex. 3:13-15; 33:20; Deut. 6:4; Ps. 90:2; Isa. 40:28-29; Matt. 3:16-17; 28:19; John 1:1-2; 4:24; 16:13; 17:3; Acts 5:3-4; 17:24-25; 1 Cor. 8:4, 6; Eph. 2:18; Phil. 2:6; Col. 1:16-17; 1 Tim. 1:17; Heb. 1:8; 1 John 5:20.

Yet Grenville objects to this very understanding whenever I present it and he wants me to show him where it is found in scripture. Hint: Just check out the documents at the church you presently attend; they look pretty orthodox to me.
 
Last edited:
Dear Glo:

You have provided two important pieces of evidence. The first being Jesus’ admission to being the Son of God.

Is Jesus the Son of God?

There is no dispute among Christians that Jesus is the Son of God. It is explicitly and repeatedly stated in the Bible.

The problem arises, as it usually does, when we decide to exceed what the Bible has explicitly stated, and try to make a doctrine out of, not what the Bible explicitly states, but what we try to interpret it to mean. Especially when those assumptions are full of unverified assumptions.

The opinion of Jesus being God from this evidence is based on the unverified assumption that “Son of God” is equivalent to “God”.

The evidence to the contrary includes Jesus calling His disciples His brethren, and Paul confirming that we can also be sons of God. Since you and I are children of God, but not God, then Jesus being called the Son of God is insufficient evidence to conclude that “Son of God” is equivalent to “God”.

Thomas' Exclamation

Regarding Thomas’ exclamation “My Lord and my God.” The evidence is that Jesus did not correct him. The question is: Why not? There are several answers, including that there was nothing for Jesus to correct.

If Thomas was referring to God, the Father, as his Lord and God, or Jesus as his Lord and the Father as his God, then there would be nothing for Jesus to correct. We must remember that Thomas appeared to be in a state of shock, but whatever Thomas meant, the writer John does not dwell on it. Instead, he explains what he expects Christians to believe about Jesus.

And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name. (John 20:30-31)
Since you believe, as I, that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, then according to the Bible, we are children of God, and you are my sister. The Qur’an teaches that Jesus is the Christ, but Christian religious tradition has erected an unnecessary barrier of “Son of God is equivalent to God”. Thus we have put an unnecessary stumbling block before our Muslim brothers and sisters. Our traditions are not facilitating the reconciliation that Jesus desires.

And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd. (John 10:16)

Regards,
Grenville
 
The book that Grenville continually cites in the thread wherein he proposes a harmony between the Bible and the Qur'an is published by Word Aflame Press, which is the publishing house of the United Pentecostal Church International.

Oh dear me. Grace Seeker, you are entirely incorrect. You have been reading the wrong book. No wonder you think so ill of me. The correct one is called "Brothers Kept Apart" and can be seen at BrothersKeptApart.com. You can purchase it from Amazon.com or borrow it from your local library.

Regarding the various doctrines, the fundamental one is: the Lord is One, and we are to love God with all of our heart, mind, soul, and strength, and our neighbor as ourselves. Any religious belief that is supported by the Bible, I believe. Any that is not, I do not believe. It really is that simple.

Regards,
Grenville
 
Last edited:
Regarding Thomas’ exclamation “My Lord and my God.” The evidence is that Jesus did not correct him. The question is: Why not? There are several answers, including that there was nothing for Jesus to correct.

If Thomas was referring to God, the Father, as his Lord and God, or Jesus as his Lord and the Father as his God, then there would be nothing for Jesus to correct.
Oh, please. The text says explicitly (there's that word you are looking for) "Thomas said to him..." (John 20:28) and the antecedent to the pronoun him is the person that had just spoken to Thomas, i.e. Jesus. You are looking for a different answer in order to reject the clear and obvious one right before you if you don't see this as Thomas speaking to Jesus.

We must remember that Thomas appeared to be in a state of shock, but whatever Thomas meant, the writer John does not dwell on it. Instead, he explains what he expects Christians to believe about Jesus.

And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name. (John 20:30-31)
Right. John tells us that his gospel is a book full of signs. The testimony of Thomas was recorded purposefully as one of those signs. It wasn't something that John recorded as an aside, but set forth as an integral part of the church's understanding of who Jesus was and is.


Since you believe, as I, that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, then according to the Bible, we are children of God, and you are my sister. The Qur’an teaches that Jesus is the Christ.
Have you checked with our Muslim brethern here on that? Actually Islam does NOT teach that Jesus is THE Christ, and no where is he referred to that way in the Qur'an. Islam teaches that Jesus is a Christ (i.e. a Messiah, but not the only person who ever had that role). And while the term "Christ" is used to refer to Jesus in some English translations it is used as a name and not to designate Jesus position as THE Christ of God. To do so would exalt Jesus above Muhammad.

but Christian religious tradition has erected an unnecessary barrier of “Son of God is equivalent to God”. Thus we have put an unnecessary stumbling block before our Muslim brothers and sisters. Our traditions are not facilitating the reconciliation that Jesus desires.
Whether it is "unnecessary" I'll let others decide. But the religious tradition that equates the terms is not something that was invented by the Church. Rather it was that held and used in common parlance in Palestine in the first century that use of the term "Son of God" was indeed equivalent to a declaration of divine status.


And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd. (John 10:16)

Regards,
Grenville
Please don't tell me that you think this passage is an explicit reference to Muslims?
 
Grace Seeker said:
Have you checked with our Muslim brethern here on that? Actually Islam does NOT teach that Jesus is THE Christ, and no where is he referred to that way in the Qur'an. Islam teaches that Jesus is a Christ (i.e. a Messiah, but not the only person who ever had that role). And while the term "Christ" is used to refer to Jesus in some English translations it is used as a name and not to designate Jesus position as THE Christ of God. To do so would exalt Jesus above Muhammad.
tsk... tsk... tsk...
 
Stop going round in circles

FYI 3 > tri > trinity

Definitions of trinity on the Web:

  • three: the cardinal number that is the sum of one and one and one
  • the union of the Father and Son and Holy Ghost in one Godhead
  • trio: three people considered as a unit
    wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn


You understand that the symbol > means greater than?

So you are saying that the number 3 is greater than "tri" which is greater than trinity. Is that what you mean to say?
 
You understand that the symbol > means greater than?

So you are saying that the number 3 is greater than "tri" which is greater than trinity. Is that what you mean to say?
I use it as a pointer

P.S. would you like to tutor me on correct use of symbols and a way to describe word relationships?
 
Last edited:
Oh dear me. Grace Seeker, you are entirely incorrect. You have been reading the wrong book. No wonder you think so ill of me. The correct one is called "Brothers Kept Apart" and can be seen at BrothersKeptApart.com. You can purchase it from Amazon.com or borrow it from your local library.
Regards,
Grenville


When I make a mistake I will admit it. And indeed I did make a mistake. There is another book by this same name that I found by a different publisher. But the one the Grenville is referring to is NOT by Word Aflame. I apologize for my error.

(Sorry, this title is still NOT in my local library.)
 
I use it as a pointer
Glad I asked. It changes the whole understanding of what you wrote.


As I understand you now, what you assert would fit some of those definitions, but would not fit the second of those definitions which specfically states:

"the union of the Father and Son and Holy Ghost in one Godhead".

The cause of going around in circles is for someone to tell me not that they disagree with my concept with regard to God, but that they wish to change what I say my concept of God is (that God is just one) to something different than I actually believe (that there are three gods) and then tell me that I believe the latter. Until we Christians are allowed to define what we believe for ourselves, and not have someone else tell us what we mean when we speak of Trinity, we will continue to go round and round.
 
Re: Harmony between the Bible and the Qur'an

Hear Follower:

I am very sympathetic to your perspective. You appear to be a juvenile full of zeal, and that is a very good thing. I do not want to discourage you. The Bible teaches that God will give you as much wisdom as you ask Him for. Please ask for an abundance of wisdom, as I have done. I believe that you will be OK. Now to your post.

Grenville - If your heart is open to the truth all that should be needed is one statement or one action. There is the one statement yet you still do not see it. Plain and simple, you are not ready.

My acceptance comes more from the back door then a straight forward answer. The Jews wanted Jesus dead, because He was claiming to be GOD.

Either Jesus is GOD or He is a liar and nutcase. Actually I believe that literally Jesus is GOD's WORD made incarnate- I don't know how GOD did it but Jesus is GOD's WORD in the flesh. What better way to fulfill the LAW given to man then to make GOD's words come into the world as His SON, for only GOD can fufill His own LAW.

Why are you limiting your options? Why must Jesus be either God or a nutcase? Why can’t He simply be the Christ and Son of God as the Bible explicitly and repeatedly states that He is?

Your first evidence is John 19:7.

The Jews answered him, “We have a law, and according to our law He ought to die, because He made Himself the Son of God.” (John 19:7)
Since we both believe that Jesus is the Son of God, which is exactly how the Bible describes Him, then we are in agreement.

Your second evidence is John 5:18.

Therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God. (John 5:18)
The Jews made similar statements 5 chapters later:

The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.” (John 10:33)​
What is not in dispute is that Jesus is the Son of God. What is also not in dispute is that the Jewish religious leaders interpreted this statement to mean that Jesus was making Himself God. What is in dispute is whether the Jewish leaders’ interpretation is correct.

We should note two things.

Firstly, when the Jews accused Jesus of being God, Jesus appeared to correct them by stating “I am the Son of God”.

Secondly, examine your witnesses. You must be aware that Jesus disagreed with all but one of the Jewish leaders’ interpretations. He not only rejected their interpretations as false, but rejected them for misleading the Jewish people. Jesus’ harshest words were actually reserved for these same people whose testimony you are now offering as evidence. Remember this?

Brood of vipers! How can you, being evil, speak good things? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. (Matthew 12:34)

“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs which indeed appear beautiful outwardly, but inside are full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness. Even so you also outwardly appear righteous to men, but inside you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness. “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Because you build the tombs of the prophets and adorn the monuments of the righteous, and say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.’ “Therefore you are witnesses against yourselves that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers’ guilt. Serpents, brood of vipers! How can you escape the condemnation of hell? (Matthew 23:27-32)​
Are you sure that you want to build a doctrine upon the foundation of the interpretations of these people whose interpretations and character Jesus severely condemned? Are you sure that you want to do that Follower?

Regards,
Grenville
 
When I make a mistake I will admit it. And indeed I did make a mistake. There is another book by this same name that I found by a different publisher. But the one the Grenville is referring to is NOT by Word Aflame. I apologize for my error.

(Sorry, this title is still NOT in my local library.)

Thank you GS. Please send me a link to the library, either here or via PM, and I will facilitate their getting a copy.

Regards,
Grenville
 
Re: Harmony between the Bible and the Qur'an

Grenville - please fon't forget to link to the proof that Polycarp's and Ignatuis’ writings were forgeries.

Do you also believe that Polycarp was not martyered for his belief that Jesus was GOD?

Thanks.

Dear Follower:

I have already referred you to The Ante-Nicene Fathers, edited by Philip Schaff. It is a valuable a authoritative source which I would recommend to students of the Bible.

Regards,
Grenville
 
Dear Grace Seeker:
Oh, please. The text says explicitly (there's that word you are looking for) "Thomas said to him..." (John 20:28) and the antecedent to the pronoun him is the person that had just spoken to Thomas, i.e. Jesus. You are looking for a different answer in order to reject the clear and obvious one right before you if you don't see this as Thomas speaking to Jesus.

I am not disputing that Thomas was speaking to Jesus. However, it is possible that he was not referring to Jesus. For example:

When Grenville read Grace Seekers response, he said to him “My God Grace Seeker, how could you have misinterpreted the verse so completely!”.
You can either interpret the verse to mean that you are my God, or that the “My God” was an exclamation statement referring to someone else. Since you are not God, then you would have no need to object to that part of my statement.

Right. John tells us that his gospel is a book full of signs. The testimony of Thomas was recorded purposefully as one of those signs. It wasn't something that John recorded as an aside, but set forth as an integral part of the church's understanding of who Jesus was and is.

And what is the purpose of all of those signs?

And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name. (John 20:30-31)​
Have you checked with our Muslim brethren here on that? Actually Islam does NOT teach that Jesus is THE Christ, and no where is he referred to that way in the Qur'an. Islam teaches that Jesus is a Christ (i.e. a Messiah, but not the only person who ever had that role). And while the term "Christ" is used to refer to Jesus in some English translations it is used as a name and not to designate Jesus position as THE Christ of God. To do so would exalt Jesus above Muhammad.

My concern is not so much with what Islam teaches. I believe that Islamic religious tradition has simply reacted to the Christian religious barrier of Jesus being God. Therefore, they have misinterpreted the name and role of Messiah because they want to stay as far away as possible from even the appearance of polytheism, and rightly so.

Let us not concern ourselves with what Muslims believe, or what Islam religious tradition teaches, but what Muslims are supposed to believe, which is what is stated in the Qur’an.

The Qur’an describes only one person as the Messiah or Christ, and that person is Jesus, who was born of the virgin Mary.

Whether it is "unnecessary" I'll let others decide. But the religious tradition that equates the terms is not something that was invented by the Church. Rather it was that held and used in common parlance in Palestine in the first century that use of the term "Son of God" was indeed equivalent to a declaration of divine status.

Please see my response to Follower on this issue. I agree that the term “Son of God” was interpreted to be “God”, but it was the group of Jewish religious leaders who did so, and their interpretations and character were severely condemned by Jesus.

”And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd. (John 10:16)”
Please don't tell me that you think this passage is an explicit reference to Muslims?

I would say, not an exclusive reference to Muslims, but I believe that Muslims are included. Don’t you?

Regards,
Grenville
 
What about the beginning of Saint John?

'In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

The same was in the beginning with God.

All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made that was made.

In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.

The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.

He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.

That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name.

Which were born, not blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.' John 1: 1-14.

It says that in the beginning, ie before the world was formed there was the Word, and the Word was with God (the Father) and the Word was God (the Son). It says all things were made by him and nothing was made without him. It says he was in the world and the world was made by him but the world knew him not. And it also says that the Word (ie Jesus, ie God the Son) became flesh. The only way to dodge what the text says is to completely disregard it.
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top