Is Jesus God or the Son of God?

Jesus is

God	1.5%	[ 2 ]
The Son of God	24.8%	[ 34 ]
Both	38.7%	[ 53 ]
Neither	32.8%	[ 45 ]
Huh, who is Jesus?	2.2%	[ 3 ]
Total Votes:			[ 137 ]

[Pseudo-Onkelos]

Majnooni

[do read my edit above also to the last post, I hoped to finish it before you replied, not that it's that important]

Ok, I will try to explain as best I can how I understand it. In the beginning and eternally there was the word. The word is the creative energy of God, therefore a part of God. The word is what created everything in creation, not as a person, but as a kind of force you might say ( force sounds very Star Wars but I don't really know what other word to use to describe it). Jesus the person is literally that word in human form, but it/he was not a person until Jesus was conceived on earth.

Also, to say that trinitarians believe or don't believe something... I'm not sure whether we agree or not, you tell me, but even if we disagree, not all trinitarians believe the same things.

That's a unitarian view you presented. It is incompatible with trinitarianism.

I understand both views. I have studied Christian theology, and the Trinity was one of the first things I spent my time studying. I am no longer a Christian, though.

[Victoria of Gallifrey]

That is perhaps the greatest deterrant for my potential acceptance of Christianity. Accepting Jesus as being God has never settled well with me. I have prayed about it and read into it, and I just feel it's not right. I feel there is certain truth to his words, but I cannot interpret them as him being God. I may be wrong, but it definitely doesn't set well with me at all.

[The Catfish Blues]

Jesus is worm food.

[Majnooni]

Pseudo-Onkelos

Majnooni

[do read my edit above also to the last post, I hoped to finish it before you replied, not that it's that important]

Ok, I will try to explain as best I can how I understand it. In the beginning and eternally there was the word. The word is the creative energy of God, therefore a part of God. The word is what created everything in creation, not as a person, but as a kind of force you might say ( force sounds very Star Wars but I don't really know what other word to use to describe it). Jesus the person is literally that word in human form, but it/he was not a person until Jesus was conceived on earth.

Also, to say that trinitarians believe or don't believe something... I'm not sure whether we agree or not, you tell me, but even if we disagree, not all trinitarians believe the same things.

That's a unitarian view you presented. It is incompatible with trinitarianism.

I understand both views. I have studied Christian theology, and the Trinity was one of the first things I spent my time studying. I am no longer a Christian, though.

It suddenly occurs to me that there may be a confusion of terms, entirely my fault. When we were discussing "persons", I was thinking of it in the English sense of the word "person" which seems necessarily linked to humanity. I know some people who think that Jesus the person was just hanging out with God until God sad "hey son, go to Earth"... so that's what I was sort of thinking of with when I said that it was not a person before.

However, I guess generally the parts of the Trinity are referred to as persons from "persona" in the Latin sense, which I understand to be more similar to the Greek "hypostasis". I believe that the logos was an individual reality, along with the Father and the Holy Spirit, but not a person in the English sense, which again seems to give it human qualities that it did not necessarily have.

[Xiam]

As far as I'm concerned... Jesus is about as much God and the Son of God as you or I am.

Your positions on what that means for you will change according to your religion.

Here's the way I see the history of it though. The Messiah was never supposed to be God or the Son of God. He was supposed to be a Warrior King who would smite the enemies of Israel and deliver them to freedom and whatnot. In the period of the Roman occupation, this was a major issue.

Enter Jesus of Nazareth, who took up the cause after his mentor, John the Baptist. He preached many of the same things, Kingdom of Heaven and all that, and mostly went for the lower social castes that many wouldn't touch. He also never seemed to talk much about the whole rebellion thing.

Jesus' father was Joseph, a sort of handyman if I'm not mistaken. I recall something about him being called the "son of a carpenter," and we have not one, but two (conflicting) genealogies leading from King David down to Joseph. These lists of lineage were supposed to show how Jesus fulfilled a requirement of the Messiah - that he was a descendant of David and rightful heir to the throne.

As far as I recall of his statements about God = Father, though, it was always in the sense that we are all God's children. "Our Father, who art in Heaven..."

I don't understand how that grew into "Jesus is God," but if I'm not mistaken, Jewish tradition holds that as something of a blasphemy. No one is supposed to state that they or anyone else is God. That's idolatry, that is. The exact kind of thing Christians go on about other religions about. "False gods," and such.

I suppose other people have said some of this already, but I would rather not wade my way through all of the thread and confuse myself and forget what I was going to say. xp

Jesus was a teacher, a philosopher, a rabbi, and perhaps even a prophet, who knows. Maybe even a spiritual healer, if some of those stories are true. But he was human.

[Pseudo-Onkelos]

Majnooni

Pseudo-Onkelos

Majnooni

[do read my edit above also to the last post, I hoped to finish it before you replied, not that it's that important]

Ok, I will try to explain as best I can how I understand it. In the beginning and eternally there was the word. The word is the creative energy of God, therefore a part of God. The word is what created everything in creation, not as a person, but as a kind of force you might say ( force sounds very Star Wars but I don't really know what other word to use to describe it). Jesus the person is literally that word in human form, but it/he was not a person until Jesus was conceived on earth.

Also, to say that trinitarians believe or don't believe something... I'm not sure whether we agree or not, you tell me, but even if we disagree, not all trinitarians believe the same things.

That's a unitarian view you presented. It is incompatible with trinitarianism.

I understand both views. I have studied Christian theology, and the Trinity was one of the first things I spent my time studying. I am no longer a Christian, though.

It suddenly occurs to me that there may be a confusion of terms, entirely my fault. When we were discussing "persons", I was thinking of it in the English sense of the word "person" which seems necessarily linked to humanity. I know some people who think that Jesus the person was just hanging out with God until God sad "hey son, go to Earth"... so that's what I was sort of thinking of with when I said that it was not a person before.

However, I guess generally the parts of the Trinity are referred to as persons from "persona" in the Latin sense, which I understand to be more similar to the Greek "hypostasis". I believe that the logos was an individual reality, along with the Father and the Holy Spirit, but not a person in the English sense, which again seems to give it human qualities that it did not necessarily have.

Actually, hupostasis would be the Greek variant of the Latin word substantia. Both words translate into English as "substance". It's prosopon and persona that are similar. Originally when describing the Trinity, Athanasius, I believe, used the word hupostasis to mean "substance" while the Cappadocian Fathers used ousia to mean "substance".

Hupostasis has changed in meaning over time. It meant to "stand under", like the foundation of a building. You refer to it as an "individual reality", and it can be understood as "actual existence" or "reality". I believe the purpose was to combat against the idea that the three persons of the Trinity were nominal. In other words, doctrines like Sabellianism said the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were names for the same person.

[Ameixah7]

[BATCATGIRL]

Its quit confusing but how it goes is that God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit are one.
To put it simple
You know how Snow melts, first its solid then its snowy soft and its liquid.
Well that is how God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit is.
God = Solid Snow Jesus = soft snow Holy Spirit = liquid they are all one but the same thing.
I don't expect for any one to get this. I came to myself its be on our human knowledge to understand.

[The Forbidden Soul]

moo538

Hajde

he's gods slave 3nodding

how can you say he is gods slave!!!??? that is not true, god loves all people, he wouldnt treat them as his slaves!!! scream

Pfffffft hahaha!

[typhorium]

Because of the Trinity, it is both.

[stealthmongoose]

Oh, i get it, it's like in that one comic book where this guy is peter parker, spider man, and venom!

Oh wait, that was a work of fiction.

I did like the water thing though, even though water isn't sentient on any detectable level and as such can freely change between states without dying as it's inanimate.

The Trinity seems to be more of a clever way of consolidating religious power within the community than an appeal to anything demonstrably divine.

[Wraith of Azrael]

According to Orthodxy, it is both however not in the form that you may think.

There are three distinct personas but one essence.
The essence ofcourse being the essence of G-d.
And the personas being that of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

[Pseudo-Onkelos]

AmeixaNeko

Some believe Jesus is God in flesh.

For this to be biblical, "God" must refer to the person called "God", since "God" is not used as another word for "divine nature".

Wraith of Azrael

According to Orthodxy, it is both however not in the form that you may think.

There are three distinct personas but one essence.
The essence ofcourse being the essence of G-d.
And the personas being that of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

When is "God" ever understood as an essence in the Bible?

Why should the holy spirit be understood as a distinct person from the Father, since no one thinks the spirit of Elijah is another person distinct from Elijah?

[Wraith of Azrael]

Pseudo-Onkelos

AmeixaNeko

Some believe Jesus is God in flesh.

For this to be biblical, "God" must refer to the person called "God", since "God" is not used as another word for "divine nature".

Wraith of Azrael

According to Orthodxy, it is both however not in the form that you may think.

There are three distinct personas but one essence.
The essence ofcourse being the essence of G-d.
And the personas being that of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

When is "God" ever understood as an essence in the Bible?

Why should the holy spirit be understood as a distinct person from the Father, since no one thinks the spirit of Elijah is another person distinct from Elijah?

shrug* I'm just describing Orthodox dogma that is all, I'm not describing what's actually in the Bible just the dogma of the EOC.

[Hello Honey Lemon]

Depends on your view of religion.

In Christianity, he is both human and divine. He is God and the Son of God because Joseph isn't his father, because Jesus was put into Mary via the Holy Spirit, which is the third part of the Trinity.

The Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit are all God.

Now that's if you're Christian, but if you're not than that's not what you believe, but this is what Christians believe.