Is there any Biblical evidence that describes Jesus as God?

[Ramadhan]

No, there is none written exactly as you have written.

I rest my case.

 

[Grace Seeker]

I rest my case.

You never made a case. You asked a question. I could have just as easily have asked:

Is there a verse that unequivocally says loud and clear:
"I am Jesus, I am NOT God, do NOT worship me" ?

The answer to that question would also be: "NO, there is none written exactly as you have written."

So, then Jesus never unequivocally says loud and clear either one thing or the other. Therefore we must interpret what he meant by the things he said and did. In my opinion it is clear that he presented himself as God incarnate among us. But I recognize that others disagree and think it just as clear that he never did and intended just the opposite. Given that we have this disagreement, the only thing that then is really clear is that it not as uniquivocally loud and clear as we each tend to think it is.

 

[Ramadhan]

he presented himself as God incarnate

God incarnate?
interesting

 

[Humbler_359]

:argue:----:argue:----:argue:
I am not trying to be harsh here, it seems it is wasting our times and energy.

Christians, what are you trying to ACHIEVE here in dialogue? Are you telling us our Islam is wrong and even false ? What's your intention?

If YES, I would request you to leave this forum asap. It is pointless and debate here in to win arguments. If No, I request you to leave this forum as simple.

I think, you christian people should follow example of Amish, very devot /practical people if you wish. Please find old previous dialogues (with christians before), we don't need here to REPEAT REPEAT SAME TOPIC, SAME ARGUMENT, SAME ILLOGICAL, AND SAME NONSENSE.

:uuh:

I also request our Moderators to CLOSE THIS THREAD, please investigate it if it is trying to provoke, distract and deceive us. It is up to you.

 

[Uthman]

All members are welcome to stay, so long as their behaviour on the forum is in accordance with the rules. The thread will also continue to remain open for now.

Please direct any further issues towards the Helpdesk forum.

 

[Rabi Mansur]

Here are a couple of verses to consider:

Colossians 1:19 "For in him all the fulness of God was pleased to dwell."

Colossians 2:9 "For in him the whole fulness of deity dwells bodily."

I think it is fine to continue the dialogue. I would be interested in your thoughts about the above two verses. I'm here to learn, not to convince anyone that either Islam or Christianity may be mistaken, I'm interested in the evidence.

Peace.

 

[mkh4JC]

^Also to further elaborate on that passage in Colossians:

'Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in the earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.' Colossians: 1 15-18.

Paul says that the head of the church, that is--Jesus Christ--created all things.

What about Hebrews:

God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,

Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high.' Hebrews 1: 1-3

Pretty clear here that the writer is saying that God made the worlds or planets through his Son, Jesus Christ.

 

[Grace Seeker]

please investigate it if it is trying to provoke, distract and deceive us. It is up to you.

Though I am sure the moderators are already aware of it, I'll save you the frustration of not knowing and answer you directly.

This particular thread is not meant to provoke, distract or deceive Muslims nor anyone else for that matter. It arose out of the reality that two strong-willed persons here, myself and Grenville, were participating in a thread in which he made some comments about Jesus that I could not support as being true. We both identify ourselves as Christians, but we discovered that we have diametrically different views with regard to the nature of who the Jesus of the Gospels is. Rather than despoil the other thread, Grenville posted a new thread in which we could debate our respective points of view. Now Grenville's position regarding the diety of Jesus is very similar to that of most Muslims on this board, so of course there has been a lot of interaction of that kind as well. But the question was posed asking for evidence from the Bible, because this was actually a thread in which the differences were not between Muslim and Christian, but between the points of view held by people identifying themselves as belonging to the Christian community.

 

[Walter]

Hi Sojourn:

So if we only bothered to look and think we'd all believe as you do, eh? I guess that doesn't say much for us Christians, does it? But I think you're wrong. Many a brilliant mind has supported this Divine Doctrine, and had it not been True it would have dissapeared into the annals of history. The fact is my mind can more easily grasp an Arian concept of Christ as some sort of lesser diety, than the Three Persons being one in Being. But this is a case where what is easier to understand is wrong because it leads to what we know to be false, polytheism. The Trinity is true despite its mysterious character, and God has willed it to be held by the majority because He defends the Truth.

I cannot understand how you can make such statements if you are also aware of Church history. I will provide the following summary for your information; however, you can read the referenced details in ‘Brothers Kept Apart’.

Jesus taught the message of the kingdom of God. His first disciples, called apostles, described this message in their writings, and their documents comprise the New Testament section of the Bible.

The apostles’ disciples also wrote documents which referenced the documents of the apostles. However, by the 3rd generation of Church leaders, they started giving their personal opinions. If they were martyred, like Justin Martyr who was the first to explicitly state that Jesus was God, then their opinions took on greater significance, and sometimes became established Church teachings. Many Church leaders who could have provided some balance to the discussion, or could have refuted the speculative ideas, were killed during the Roman empire persecution of Christians – when it was a capital offence to be a Christian.

Emperor Constantine, ended the Roman Empire persecution of Christians, but following his reign, the Roman Catholic persecution of Christians was significant. Any discussion of any but the official Roman Catholic teaching was met with severe persecution. Some of the edicts follow.

We command that those persons who follow this rule shall embrace the name of Catholic Christians. The rest, however, whom We adjudge demented and insane, shall sustain the infamy of heretical dogmas, their meeting places shall not receive the name of churches, and they shall be smitten first by divine vengeance and secondly by the retribution of Our own initiative, which We shall assume in accordance with the divine judgment. (28 February 380 AD)

We bestow the right of assembly upon those persons who believe according to the doctrines which in the times of Constantius … If those persons who suppose that the right of assembly has been granted to them alone should attempt to provoke any agitation against the regulation of Our Tranquillity, they shall know that, as authors of sedition and as disturbers of the peace of the Church, they shall also pay the penalty of high treason with their life and blood. Punishment shall no less await those persons who may attempt to supplicate Us surreptitiously and secretly, contrary to this Our regulation. (23 January 386 AD)

There shall be no opportunity for any man to go out to the public and to argue about religion or to discuss it or to give any counsel. If any person hereafter, with flagrant and ****able audacity, should suppose that he may contravene any law of this kind or if he should dare to persist in his action of ruinous obstinacy, he shall be restrained with a due penalty and proper punishment. (16 June 388 AD)​

For the next 1,200 years, Christians were generally taught religious traditions rather than the teachings of the Bible; then came the reformation. Martin Luther objected to the religious traditions that conflicted with the Bible, and translated the Bible into German for the masses. William Tyndale tried to translate the Bible into English, but was forbidden. He eventually left England, translated the Bible into English and got it distributed in England. He was burnt at the stake by the religious leaders for this ‘crime’.

Sojourn, being deemed a heretic, denounced, accursed, excommunicated, exiled, impoverished, property confiscated, beaten, murdered, and having your writings burnt, and your opinions misconstrued does not effectively resolve conflicting ideas. Therefore, it is easy to see how unpopular teachings could forcibly become established traditions and doctrines.

If assumptions can be verified, and the interpretations upon which they are based are found to be supported by the evidence, then we have simply uncovered an alternate opinion. The problem starts when an opinion, which is unsupported by the evidence, becomes established as the unalterable truth.

Regards,
Grenville

 

[Walter]

Hi Grace Seeker:

So, then Jesus never unequivocally says loud and clear either one thing or the other. Therefore we must interpret what he meant by the things he said and did. In my opinion it is clear that he presented himself as God incarnate among us. But I recognize that others disagree and think it just as clear that he never did and intended just the opposite. Given that we have this disagreement, the only thing that then is really clear is that it not as uniquivocally loud and clear as we each tend to think it is.

I agree with you. There are good arguments to be made either way on whether Jesus is God. However, my consistent point has been that there is sufficient evidence for Christian religious tradition to make a doctrine out of this issue, especially with so much conflicting evidence.

Doctrines (mandatory beliefs) should be for issues where the evidence is explicit and does not lend itself to diverse interpretations. It is clear that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. However, the evidence supporting Jesus being God is weakened by the abundance of conflicting evidence.

As I have repeatedly mentioned. Jesus may well be God. But I repeat, there is insufficient Biblical evidence to establish this as a doctrine. It simply fails the doctrinal standard. Further, Jesus may well not be God as much of the Biblical evidence shows; therefore, this doctrine is likely to have been an unnecessary barrier dividing Christians and Muslims for the past 1,300 years.

Regards,
Grenville

 

[Walter]

Hi Grace Seeker:

Though I am sure the moderators are already aware of it, I'll save you the frustration of not knowing and answer you directly.

This particular thread is not meant to provoke, distract or deceive Muslims nor anyone else for that matter. It arose out of the reality that two strong-willed persons here, myself and Grenville, were participating in a thread in which he made some comments about Jesus that I could not support as being true. We both identify ourselves as Christians, but we discovered that we have diametrically different views with regard to the nature of who the Jesus of the Gospels is. Rather than despoil the other thread, Grenville posted a new thread in which we could debate our respective points of view. Now Grenville's position regarding the diety of Jesus is very similar to that of most Muslims on this board, so of course there has been a lot of interaction of that kind as well. But the question was posed asking for evidence from the Bible, because this was actually a thread in which the differences were not between Muslim and Christian, but between the points of view held by people identifying themselves as belonging to the Christian community.

A soft answer indeed. I concur with your assessment.

Regards,
Grenville

 

[Walter]

Hi Rabimansur:

Here are a couple of verses to consider:

Colossians 1:19 "For in him all the fulness of God was pleased to dwell."

Colossians 2:9 "For in him the whole fulness of deity dwells bodily."

I think it is fine to continue the dialogue. I would be interested in your thoughts about the above two verses. I'm here to learn, not to convince anyone that either Islam or Christianity may be mistaken, I'm interested in the evidence.

I am not only interested in the evidence, but in maintaining the integrity of the evidence, and examining the assumptions upon which the interpretations of this evidence are based.

The following evidence is taken to mean that Jesus is God.

For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily; (Colossians 2:9)​

This statement, and its purpose, was described in the previous chapter.

For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell, and by Him to reconcile all things to Himself, by Him, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross. (Colossians 1:19–20)​

It is also clarified in 2 Corinthians.

Now all things are of God, who has reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation, that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation. Now then, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were pleading through us: we implore you on Christ’s behalf, be reconciled to God. (2 Corinthians 5:18–20)​

Jesus also clarified that the Father was working in Him and through Him.

Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works. Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father in Me, or else believe Me for the sake of the works themselves. (John 14:10–11)​

So God was in Christ in order that a specific task should be accomplished, that of reconciling the world to Himself. The assumption made was that if God dwells in or fills someone to accomplish a task, then that person becomes or is God. In seeking to verify this assumption, we note that Jesus prayed that believers would be One with the Father, as Jesus was also One with the Father, in order that specific tasks could be accomplished.

Now I am no longer in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to You. Holy Father, keep through Your name those whom You have given Me, that they may be one as We are. (John 17:11)​

I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. (John 17:20–21)​

The Bible records that God filled other persons to accomplish specific tasks; however, they were not God.

Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying: “See, I have called by name Bezalel the son of Uri, the son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah. And I have filled him with the Spirit of God, in wisdom, in understanding, in knowledge, and in all manner of workmanship, to design artistic works, to work in gold, in silver, in bronze, in cutting jewels for setting, in carving wood, and to work in all manner of workmanship. (Exodus 31:1–5)​

But the angel said to him, “Do not be afraid, Zacharias, for your prayer is heard; and your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you shall call his name John. And you will have joy and gladness, and many will rejoice at his birth. For he will be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink. He will also be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother’s womb. And he will turn many of the children of Israel to the Lord their God.” (Luke 1:13–16)​

Therefore, God filling and working through someone is not evidence of that person being God.

Regards,
Grenville

 

[Sojourn]

Hi Sojourn:

Hi Grenville,

What did you make of Isaiah 9:6?

I cannot understand how you can make such statements if you are also aware of Church history.

"For our God, Jesus Christ, was conceived by Mary in accord with God’s plan: of the seed of David, it is true, but also of the Holy Spirit"
Letter to the Ephesians 18:2

From a man who lived before Justin Martyr and written shortly before his Martyrdom, St Ignatius of Antioch.


So what do you believe about Jesus?

 

[Walter]

Hi Sojourn:

"For our God, Jesus Christ, was conceived by Mary in accord with God’s plan: of the seed of David, it is true, but also of the Holy Spirit"
Letter to the Ephesians 18:2

From a man who lived before Justin Martyr and written shortly before his Martyrdom, St Ignatius of Antioch.

I see that you have recently joined this forum. Perhaps you could read this thread in its entirety, since many of your queries and comments have already been addressed. However, for your and others’ convenience, I shall address Ignatius of Antioch lest readers be misled.

Ignatius (30 AD–107 AD) was a student of the Apostle John. He wrote letters to the: Ephesians, Magnesians, Trallians, Romans, Philadelphians, Smyrnaeans, and to Polycarp. Ignatius generally identified Jesus and God as two separate persons. An example follows.

For the chief points are faith towards God, hope towards Christ, the enjoyment of those good things for which we look, and love towards God and our neighbor. For, “Thou shall love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and thy neighbor as thyself.” And the Lord says, “This is life eternal, to know the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom He has sent.” (Epistle to Smyrnaeans, Chapter 6)​

However, in Ignatius’ letter to the Ephesians, to which you have referenced, there were a few instances where some versions of this letter appeared to have been tampered with. In one version of Ignatius’ letter to the Ephesians, the following new verse was inserted in Chapter 15:

Our Lord and God, Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God, first did and then taught, as Luke testifies, “whose praise is in the Gospel through all the Churches.” (Epistle to the Ephesians, Chapter 15)​

In one version of Chapter 18 of Ignatius’ letter to the Ephesians, which you quoted, reads:

For our God, Jesus Christ, was, according to the appointment of God, conceived in the womb by Mary, of the seed of David, but by the Holy Ghost. He was born and baptized, that by His passion He might purify the water. (Epistle to the Ephesians, Chapter 18)​

However, in another version of this letter, Chapter 18 reads:

For the Son of God, who was begotten before time began, and established all things according to the will of the Father, He was conceived in the womb of Mary, according to the appointment of God, of the seed of David, and by the Holy Ghost. (Epistle to the Ephesians, Chapter 18)​

There appears to have been an attempt to show that the early church taught that Jesus is God by tampering with Ignatius’ letters. It is useful to note that several letters with the name “Ignatius” written as the author, have been universally acknowledged as obvious forgeries. The translators’ notes to these spurious documents are instructive:

“We formerly stated that eight out of the fifteen Epistles bearing the name of Ignatius are now universally admitted to be spurious. None of them are quoted or referred to by any ancient writer previous to the sixth century. The style, moreover, in which they are written, so different from that of the other Ignatian letters, and allusions which they contain to heresies and ecclesiastical arrangements of a much later date than that of their professed author, render it perfectly certain that they are not the authentic production of the illustrious bishop of Antioch.”

“The reader will have no difficulty in detecting the internal grounds on which these eight letters are set aside as spurious. The difference of style from the other Ignatian writings will strike him even in perusing the English version which we have given, while it is of course much more marked in the original. And other decisive proofs present themselves in every one of the Epistles. In that to the Tarsians there is found a plain allusion to the Sabellian heresy, which did not arise till after the middle of the third century. In the Epistle to the Antiochians there is an enumeration of various Church officers, who were certainly unknown at the period when Ignatius lived. (Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 1, Appendix, Alexander Roberts & James Donaldson, 1867)​

Therefore, it appears that Justin Martyr was the first person to explicitly state that Jesus is God, around 150 AD.

As previously noted, I have already addressed this issue in this thread, and I do not want to keep repeating myself. You may have noticed that Humbler-359 has already targeted this thread for closure, and he appears to be quite an influential fellow.

So what do you believe about Jesus?

I believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, sent to reconcile all people to God, the Heavenly Father, through His atoning sacrifice on the cross.

Regards,
Grenville

 

[Sojourn]

Ignatius generally identified Jesus and God as two separate persons. An example follows.

That's because God is Three Persons. The Father is the Font of Divinity and so He was primarily identified with the title of Theos (God), while the Son was primarily identified with Kyrios (Lord.) There is no contradiction in saying Jesus is God and with God.

However, in Ignatius’ letter to the Ephesians, to which you have referenced, there were a few instances where some versions of this letter appeared to have been tampered with. In one version of Ignatius’ letter to the Ephesians, the following new verse was inserted in Chapter 15:

You compare the two Greek versions, one shorter the other longer. Despite the differences in Greek translation, the substance is the same. To say Jesus is the Son of God, begotten before time began, is the same as saying Jesus is God.

There appears to have been an attempt to show that the early church taught that Jesus is God by tampering with Ignatius’ letters.

There is no doubt the early Church believed Christ to be God. When Pliny the Younger, governor of Bithynia (62-113AD) discovered a large segment of his citizens were practicing a new religion, he decided to inquisition several followers to discover what they believed. This is what he reported to the Emperor Trajan:

"They were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verse a hymn to Christ as to a god."

It is useful to note that several letters with the name “Ignatius” written as the author, have been universally acknowledged as obvious forgeries.

It's useful to reminder the letter to the Ephesians is among those recognized as authentic, lest readers be misled.

Therefore, it appears that Justin Martyr was the first person to explicitly state that Jesus is God, around 150 AD.

Why not just say the writings of Justin Martyr were tampered with?

I believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, sent to reconcile all people to God, the Heavenly Father, through His atoning sacrifice on the cross.

Why evade defining your beliefs? Heresy thrives in broad statements.

 

[Grace Seeker]

Grenville, a few questions:


Though you've answered it before, what is the reason that you believe that Thomas referred to Jesus as "my God"?


Who is "the Lord"?


What was the rationale for stoning Stephen or for Saul to seek letters against the followers of the Way from the Jewish high court?


Does God live in human beings? If so, is it God the Father or God the Spirit or God's spirit that lives in us? Or how would you term it? Or do you say that it is not God but something else from God/sent by God that lives in us? Or perhaps nothing lives in us at all?


Is the Gospel the gospel of Jesus Christ or the gospel of God? Or are they one and the same so that it doesn't matter whether you refer to it as the gospel of one or the other?


Are the grace of God and the grace of Jesus Christ the same or different?


Would the "Spirit of God" and the "Spirit of Christ" be one and the same Spirit or two different spirits?


When a person is sanctified, who is it that sanctifies him/here?


Is it proper to also refer to God as our Savior or is that only to be understood as the work of Jesus Christ?


Is it proper to refer to Jesus Christ as our Sovereign or is that only to be understood as God?


Is it proper to refer to God as the Lord?


We all agree there is one and only one God; but how many Lord's are there?


Who is "the One and Only" (John 1:14)?


Who is it that is at the Father's side and has made him known?


Would it be more correct to say that God is eternal life or that Jesus is eternal life?


Is it proper for priests to be priests of Jesus Christ, or must they only be priests of God?


Who would be king in the kingdom of Christ?


In whom do we have redemption in his blood?


In whom do we have the forgiveness of sins?


Who is it that makes things grow?


Who created the heavens and the earth?


Who created the ends of the earth?


Who is the Alpha and the Omega?


Who is the First and the Last?


Who is the beginning and the end?


When did God first become God the Father?




OK, it's a lot of questions. Take your time.

 

[Sojourn]

Peace Mustafa,

Looks like our entire discussion was lost during the restoration of the forum. I read your post earlier this week so I'll respond to the points I can remember.

"No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him."
John 1:18

Mustafa argued that this verse proves Jesus isn't Divine because it says "no one has seen God." And that since Jesus was seen by men, He can't be God. The problem is this very verse refers to Jesus as "the only begotten God," as do other verses in the introduction. A contradiction only exists if we understand "see" in a narrow and literal sense, such as to perceive something with our eyes, but God is immaterial and therefore can't be perceived with human eyesight. So "see" in this verse is a metaphor for understanding, or knowing. Even the English language uses "see" as a metaphor, as for example when we say, "Do you see what I'm saying?" So the meaning of the verse is that no human on earth can know God as He is, even the Just in Heaven who have a knowledge of the Essence of God, can't comprehend God because He is infinite. Only the Begotten God who is from the bosom of the Father can know God because He is God, and He has made God known to us in a way that was previously impossible.


"But about the Son he says, "Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever
Hebrews 1:8

The above verse has the Father saying to the Son, "Your throne, O God, will last for ever..." An explicit reference to Jesus' Divinity.


I think it's clear that the Bible does reveal Jesus to be Divine. If anyone doubts this, I suggest they start by reading the beginning of John's Gospel. I suggest using a conservative translation such as the NASB, which is available online for free.


Take care,
Sojourn

 

[Uthman]

Brother Mustafa's account has been disabled on his request, so unfortunately he will not be able to reply.

 

[Sojourn]

Brother Mustafa's account has been disabled on his request, so unfortunately he will not be able to reply.

That's unfortunate, hopefully he'll return.

 

[Walter]

Hi Grace Seeker:

In answering your responses, let us imagine that we are at opposite sides of a table and observing the same evidence in the middle of the table. The evidence is, of course, the Bible.

I am aware of your perspective of the evidence, for it is a view that I unquestionably held for decades. I am simply asking that you observe the same evidence from a different perspective.

Jesus stated that God was not only His Father, but also His God.

Jesus said to her, “Do not cling to Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, ‘I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God.’” (John 20:17)​

This understanding that God is our Heavenly Father, and is the God of Jesus is consistently stated by His disciples.

The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who is blessed forever, knows that I am not lying. (2 Corinthians 11:31)​

Given this explicit evidence, how could a contrary doctrine be established? What appears to have happened is that other evidence was misinterpreted. Jesus and His disciples were clear about Jesus’ role.

Jesus atoned for our sins that we may be reconciled to God. God temporarily gave Jesus authority over everything in Heaven and Earth, including the authority to judge us at the end of the age. At the end, Jesus will deliver the Kingdom to the God.

Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power. For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet. The last enemy that will be destroyed is death. For “He has put all things under His feet.” But when He says “all things are put under Him,” it is evident that He who put all things under Him is excepted. Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all. (1 Cor 15:24-28)​

Since Jesus is Lord, and taught us the way of God which He learnt from God, then we must learn from Him and become like Him. Essentially God is the head of Christ who is the head of Man.

But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. (1 Cor 11:3)​

Now let us examine your questions.

Who is "the Lord"?

“Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.” (Acts 2:36)​

What was the rationale for stoning Stephen or for Saul to seek letters against the followers of the Way from the Jewish high court?

People who are trying to learn the truth are not normally in personal conflict with likeminded persons. However, when people stop trying to learn the truth and instead try to defend their opinions, then if their opinions are not supported by the evidence, then history has shown that if they have influence, then they will attempt to persecute (even to death) any who question their opinion.

And Stephen, full of faith and power, did great wonders and signs among the people. Then there arose some from what is called the Synagogue of the Freedmen (Cyrenians, Alexandrians, and those from Cilicia and Asia), disputing with Stephen. And they were not able to resist the wisdom and the Spirit by which he spoke. Then they secretly induced men to say, “We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses and God.” (Acts 6:8-11)​

Does God live in human beings? If so, is it God the Father or God the Spirit or God's spirit that lives in us? Or how would you term it? Or do you say that it is not God but something else from God/sent by God that lives in us? Or perhaps nothing lives in us at all?

Jesus stated that the Kingdom of God is within believers. The Kingdom is where Jesus rules. Therefore, as we surrender more aspects of our lives to Jesus’ rule, then the Kingdom within us grows. I do not think that Jesus physically resides in us, any more than I believe that our national government physically resides in our home. However, as our household chooses to submit to the laws of our country, similarly, I choose to submit to Jesus, who has been made Lord by God.

Is the Gospel the gospel of Jesus Christ or the gospel of God? Or are they one and the same so that it doesn't matter whether you refer to it as the gospel of one or the other?

The Gospel, which is that all persons can be reconciled to God through the atoning sacrifice of Jesus, is the Gospel of God, Jesus, the Apostles and their disciples. Having been reconciles to God, it is also my Gospel and I hope that it is also yours.

Are the grace of God and the grace of Jesus Christ the same or different?

They are different.

Would the "Spirit of God" and the "Spirit of Christ" be one and the same Spirit or two different spirits?

Perhaps

When a person is sanctified, who is it that sanctifies him/here?

God, our Heavenly Father, sanctifies a person by faith in the atoning sacrifice of Jesus.

Is it proper to also refer to God as our Savior or is that only to be understood as the work of Jesus Christ?

God is our saviour and Jesus is our saviour.

Is it proper to refer to Jesus Christ as our Sovereign or is that only to be understood as God?

God gave Jesus authority, and made Him Lord.

Is it proper to refer to God as the Lord?

Yes.

We all agree there is one and only one God; but how many Lord's are there?

More than one Lord, but only one Lord Jesus Christ.

yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live. (1 Corinthians 8:6)​

Who is "the One and Only" (John 1:14)?

I do not see “one and only”; but the only begotten refers to Jesus.

And the Word became 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 1:14)​

Who is it that is at the Father's side and has made him known?

Jesus.

Would it be more correct to say that God is eternal life or that Jesus is eternal life?

Neither. Eternal life is a gift of God.

Is it proper for priests to be priests of Jesus Christ, or must they only be priests of God?

Both.

Who would be king in the kingdom of Christ?

Jesus, who will eventually deliver the kingdom to God.

In whom do we have redemption in his blood?

The blood is that of Jesus.

Regards,
Grenville