Scripture to confirm that Jesus Christ is the Only true Son of God.,

[Justmerach]

Hi, I was following the “Do you believe in God thread” and it seems to have been closed. I read a post and wanted to reply to somebody who said that Jesus is not the Son of God. I just wanted to reply to them that why in Christianity in the scripture that we know that Jesus is the Son of God and explain why in my faith scripture supports that Jesus Christ is Only true Son of God.

Jesus is the Son of God but was also a prophet. He is also the redeemer to come as this post will explain.

Let me first say first in all three faiths we share much of the Old Testament and believe in the same God. I remember this topic right from my university days comparative studies between all three faiths.

I want to share a document about the Messiah prophecies about Jesus Christ to come that are in the Old Testament and commonly used online.

The Messiah prophecies have all be attached can be clicked on saved and enlarged. It comes in five images.

The word Christ and its Hebrew parallel means the anointed one which Christ is. Not added to that document above and to come to your attention-The Rod of Jesse in Isaiah 11 is also a prophecy of Jesus Christ to come. The Rod of Jesse/root of Jesse was the last rod for Jews and culminated with the Lord. Christians on this rod are his followers itself. God’s famous rods started with Aaron which placed which was placed in the arc of Covenant as a reminder and bore flowers as a promise of regeneration for the Jews. Jesus became as Christians our vine and we became him branches in the New Testament (John 15).

A photo of the Rod of Jesse from a church collection willl be attched in the next post.

It is Jesus the redeemer and heir to David who will redeem us all and the Jews to from exile-Jesus is from the offspring and roots of David (Revelation 22: 16). Some Jews believe that the Messiah prophecies are for David to come, but this is inaccurate and it is Jesus who will redeem them. "I will set up thy seed after thee (after King David), which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son (2 Samuel 7 12-13). God in this scripture also called David his servant and said that his Son was to come.

This scripture further points that Jesus Christ will be the one to redeem the Jewish people. Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth. In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he shall be called, the Lord our righteousness Jeremiah (23: 1-6). David will return in the new Jerusalem (Hosea 3:4-5).

Jesus is also known as the Prince of Peace and more attributes which do not point to who is to come as being a mere mortal being and this is mentioned in (Isaiah 9:6). “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.”

God also confirms in the New Testament Jesus as his only Begeotteon beloved Son –“this is my Beloved only son who I am well pleased" (John 3:16 ). Then in Luke Jesus was asked to this question if was the Son of God and Jesus said that yes he is the Son of God (Luke 22:70). He does not lie and the God the Father simply does not lie as well.

The miracles and healing he gave as we all saw in the New Testament that Jesus Christ ministry gave are well known in the New Testament around 40 in number they were as recorded in the Bible and I saw too with my own eyes in church and in my life, the healing that he gave me. I saw a child who could not walk once an after a few times of healing work at church he started to walk again. This was a miracle of Jesus Christ in our era. It is Jesus Christ who primarily who approves the gifts of the Holy Spirit this as he is the head of the church who appoints these gifts and roles of ministry (Ephesians 4:11).

The Church Body which are made of human beings are the members of the church and Jesus is also the head of the Church and we are part of this body (Ephesians 1:22-23). He promised to send believers a comforter after his resurrection Christ as a Christian gave me the spoken comforter which is the Holy Spirit (John 4:11)? The comforter is the Holy Spirit you receive when you are baptised of water and spirit..

The Son of God is an expression which indentified Jesus of Nazareth as the being who has had an eternal relationship to his Father (Psalm 2:7 ) "You are my Son; today I have become your Father." "You are my Son; today I have become your Father." Christ claimed to be the Son of God (Matthew 4:3; 8: 29; 27:54). (Matthew 4:3; 8: 29; 27:54). This too makes clear that Jesus is the Son of God (John 5:18). Also in the New Testament the term the Son of God appears in the New Testament almost 50 times. God also confessed that Jesus was his son at his baptism and at the transfiguration (Matthew 3:16, 17; 17: 5). Jesus also said that he is the Son of God (John 4:15) Revelation (2:18) (John 20:31) (Matthew 4:3) (II Corinthians 1:19) (Luke 8:28), the Jewish Sanhedrin condemned Jesus for blasphemy (Matthew 26: 63-66); (Mark 14 :61).

Jesus also was eighty times called the Son of Man which means God and the Messiah for humans in the New Testament. In Psalm 80 he was also called the Son of Man and was to called the Son of Man throughout Ezekiel to.

Jesus came to life as a mortal divine being through an Immaculate Conception. Angel Gabriel told Jesus' mortal mother to be Mary that she would overpowered by the Holy Spirit and receive a child and that would be God's Son.

This story is found in the Gospels- (Luke 1:26-38)-" And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David". The book of Luke is considered a highly reliable historical source which I know nearly all my life and it is the word of God.

I think in some countries more signs of Christ and the Holy Spirit presence will convince more people that Jesus is the Son of God and that eternal life is near and they will a season at least a while and will stay like young cubs parked with a lion on grass with him.

More history confirming Jesus Christ life is the Dead Sea Scrolls-
The Dead Sea scrolls contain (Isaiah 53) prophecy which is about Jesus Christ life to come. These scrolls were found in caves south of Jericho in the Dead Sea are and contain Biblical evidence the period of time between the end of the Old Testament and the beginning of the New Testament. There are two scrolls Isaiah, one being complete. To our understanding of the period of time between the end of the Old Testament and the beginning of the New Testament times, and to a better understanding of Hebrew and Aramaic.

We have done the 1st resurrection of Christ and are waiting for the Rapture (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18) which will happen in a twinkling of an eye (1 Corinthians 15:51-52) and then will come the 2nd judgement and second coming and judgement and then New Earth/Heaven.

We should be working in the field till he comes-"Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left." (Matthew 24:20).

I hate to point it out, but my 'undeveloped' cradle Catholicism seems to have left me with a lot more knowledge of the Bible than you have. Religious belief is not some kind of personal development course.

In the Christian faith we are told develop with the spirit and be guided by the spirit. I don't come here to write all I know about the Bible. Your manner at times can be difficult to read. Perhaps go and search where Jesus said this in the Bible.

@Justmerach, you have spent the entire thread posting reams of Bible verses, and the entire premise of your thread was scripture supporting the premise that Jesus was the son of God.

You say things like The book of Luke is considered a highly reliable historical source which I know nearly all my life and it is the word of God.

Well, no. There's still ongoing debate about the historicity of the synoptic gospels.

Nearly everyone agrees that there was a historical preacher called Jesus in first-century Galilee, but pretty much all they agree on is that he was baptised by John the Baptist and crucified during the governorship of Pontius Pilate. David Jenkins (former bishop of Durham and theologian) says 'There's absolutely no certainty in the New Testament about anything of importance.'

The gospels are biographies written by early Christians, with the obvious ideological colouring you'd expect from any biography, and their manifold differences being accountable for by them being based on oral tradition, with all that implies of inaccuracy, invention, misremembering, folk tradition etc. We don't even know who wrote them. They weren't given the attributions to Mark, Matthew, Luke and John till 200 years after the death of Jesus.

What's interesting to me is how uninterested Paul is in Jesus, despite being his almost exact contemporary. He first met Peter, one of the original apostles within a couple of years of the death of Jesus, so had access to an eyewitness account of his ministry, but he barely mentions the life of Jesus in any of his writing -- says only that he was 'born of woman' (hence not some kind of disembodied being), that he was Jewish, and that he died and was resurrected. What interested Paul was the idea that Jesus was the Jewish messiah and fighting it out with Peter about whether Gentile recruits to the new faith needed to be circumcised, and his missionary efforts.

Luke is still considered the most historcial accurate gospel and it is still considered and I was over vewing every thing about the faith and experiences when I wrote that the faith is real.

How can Luke be the most accurate when it was copied from Mark, and Mark was written years before ?

And if you say Luke is the most accurate, then the other 3 must be wrong ?

Think of it this way. In time terms, the Gospels are like me asking you to write a book about the Falklands war, from memory, without reading about it, googling it etc. Just put you in a room with paper and a quill... here, write a detailed history of the Falklands war.

"Based on scholarly analysis often supported within Church of England contexts, the Gospel of Luke (along with Acts) is highly regarded for its historical accuracy and intent. Luke-Acts is understood to be written in the tradition of Greek historiography, with the author claiming to base his work on investigation (Luke 1:1–4)"

Well, it's more like @Justmerach having met a few people who knew someone who'd served in the Falklands War, and then deciding to write a book on it on the basis of whatever he remembered of what they said about their experience many years on, because she really strongly believed in the rightness of the Falklands War.

Yes, @Justmerach, Luke is an expansion of Mark

And what is this accuracy based on ? What is the standard you are measuring it by ?

Do you have any links to scholarly papers that agree with your assertion ? Or is this another thing a minister told you ?

But what is your source for this??? You can't just cut and paste random stuff from the internet and think that proves something.

This is reminding me of when I used to teach first year undergraduates in the early 2000s, and would demonstrate the potential unreliability of online sources by posting, just before the lecture, a couple of different blog posts and editing an obscure Wiki entry to make references to the werewolf attacks in a particular small town.

This is what a Bible note say about the Gospel of Luke.

Oh, OP, you just have no notion of scrutinising your sources, do you?

For a start, declining numbers of scholars think that the author of what we know as Luke's gospel was Luke, Paul's companion and a doctor.

On the second entry, yes, it certainly tries to tidy up Mark's gospel and to write it in a much more elevated way. This does not make it any more 'historically accurate'. It makes its style fancier.

It is uniformly agreed it seems that Luke's Gospel is the most historical accurate version of the gospels and I cannot post the whole of the internet here.There is so much of it. So perhaps do some reading yoruself if interested further. I read sufficently to write this and it supports the Bible scripture. Everything scripture wise is accurate in the 2nd draft and this is what this mainly is about what does scripture actually say about Jesus Christ being the Son of God and it answered this.
This was the topic of the thread supported by information about the Holy Spirit as Jesus Christ is the one who appoints peoples gifts today so its confirms his existence with us still

Quote : " I cannot post the whole of the internet here.There is so much of it. So perhaps do some reading yoruself if interested further."

Yeah. You just have to post a link, and then we post a link from a biblical scholar who disagrees.

The Bart Ehrman website in ok. Lots of articles, many by guest historians, and the articles have embedded links too.

The Reliability of the Gospels: Are the Gospels Historically Accurate? (bartehrman.com)

A lot of us know this stuff BECAUSE WE DID READ ABOUT IT FURTHER.

How do you know the 2nd draft is accurate - who has checked it?

I have posted quite a few links and some people like yourself have made it clear you do not have interest. I am not here to discuss all about the Bible and all the the research. Some things I was getting myself from searching people were asking me at times, they could find themselves just as easily. It wasn't even about the question.

If anyone has a genuine interest me or may be others may be able to respond about the faith.

Check the scripture in the Bible, and there was one admendment that came under it..I am got going to answer this question. Check this against the Bible yourself.

Ok - still no evidence

This is based on the faith primarily and the scripture in the Bible which states that Jesus is the Son of God in the Bible. In the other Abrahamic faiths they do not consider Jesus to be the Son of God. This was more aimed at those groups showing them scripture that shows and explains that Jesus is the Son of God using the Bible and I have shown that.
Some Jews think David will be their redeemer and I posted scripture where God the Father has stated it is not David but someone from his own seed. It has went in a bit of a different direction.

Quote :"Some Jews think David will be their redeemer and I posted scripture where God the Father has stated it is not David but someone from his own seed."

It has already been pointed out that according to the Bible, Jesus has no seed, not David, not Adam, not Noah nor Abraham.

And that makes the 2 different genealogies given in Matt and Luke very odd.

As @Parker231 keeps asking you, how is a virgin birth possible. And to add a bit of icing to that, a virgin birth that somehow has a male ancestor ?

It is clear here and may be this is in a spiritual manner that God is speaking about and he said this about his Son which know as Jesus.. God called David a servant in this scripture and Jesus his son.

" Now therefore so shalt thou say unto my servant David...Thus saith the Lord of hosts,I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men:" (2 Samuel 7),

No mention of Jesus at all there.

And how can Jesus be related by male line from David anyway, if Mary was a virgin ?

The evidence points to this being Jesus Christ as we know him under different names for him and his ministry/attributes. You have raised this before. Also, I have written I cannot discuss the virgin birth in the way you want to here. This is a religion. You can post the research here yourselves, if the BBC is not doing this, the Vatician or the Anglican church or much anyone else I wouldn't want to touch that other than what I posted already on it three sources, one from the Vatician, BBC and Bible notes. I also posted a sermon about Joseph and the birth of Jesus. May be someone else willl take this up with you.

i will post some research here from the Old Testatment.

"This scripture further points that Jesus Christ will be the one to redeem the Jewish people. Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth. In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he shall be called, the Lord our righteousness Jeremiah (23: 1-6). David will return in the new Jerusalem (Hosea 3:4-5)"

Jesus is also known as the Prince of Peace and more attributes which do not point to who is to come as being a mere mortal being and this is mentioned in (Isaiah 9:6). “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace

"He the coming of the birth of Jesus conceived by a virgin was prphecied in the book of (Isaiah 7), "A virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel" and the prophecy in (Mark 1) was fulfilled."
.”

But Jesus could not be 'seed' of David if his male ancestor was God's ghost!

If he was a Davidian descendant, then he was conceived in the usual way by a Davidian man. You must have an answer for this glaringly obvious inconsistency?

The throne of his kingdom could be Christianity or it could be Israel.

If it's Christianity, and Christ is God's emanation, then God's talking nonsense about the 'bowels' of David.

If it's Israel, that could work. The lineage records were destroyed but, given the number of women David had - and then Solomon had a thousand wives & concubines - it's a safe bet that David's descendants are all over the world by now, much like Genghis Khan's.

Muhammad's supposed to be a product of Ishmael's male line, but most scholars think he was also a descendant of David through the female line.

Of course, if 'seed' includes female ancestors, Mary might have been a Davidian. That could make both Jesus and Muhammad contenders for the everlasting throne. We'll never know, because the patriarchs didn't bother recording women's genealogy.

So what the heck is God on about in this made-up confusing passage?

I like the looks of this explaination for (2 Samuel 7) and it reads well to me. It is comprised of several links that are difficult to post.

· "Out of Thy Will" (God's Will/Sovereignty): This refers to God’s plan and purpose, which are supreme. It connects to "Thy will be done," which is a prayer of submission to God’s divine, perfect, and loving purpose rather than one’s own desires.

· "God Seed" (The Seed of God): In Scripture, the "seed" is identified as the Word of God. The Word of God has the power to grow and produce fruit when planted in a willing heart (the soil). It also represents the "seed" of the kingdom or the "seed" of Abraham.

· "Jesus" (The Seed): Galatians 3:16 identifies Jesus Christ as the specific, singular "seed" of Abraham through whom the covenantal promises are fulfilled. In this context, Jesus is the ultimate, living Seed—the Word made flesh—that brings life and blessing to all nations.

Jesus as the Ultimate Branch/Root: Jesus is prophesied as a "shoot" or "branch" from the root of Jesse (Isaiah 11:1), representing new life emerging from a "dead" or dry ground.

The Word Made Flesh: As the Word of God is the "seed," Jesus, being the "Word made flesh" (John 1:14), is the ultimate fulfillment of that seed, proceeding from the Father's will to bring salvation.

The phrase describes that Jesus (the Seed) and the new life (Boughs/Fruit) proceed directly from the divine will of God (His Word). It highlights that salvation and spiritual growth are initiated by God and accomplished through the Word.

"Bowels" is often used metaphorically to describe the innermost parts of a person:
In 2 Samuel 7:12 and Genesis 15:4, God promises David that his successor will proceed "out of his bowels," meaning a direct blood descendant (son) to continue his lineage.
In essence, the phrase means that Jesus (the Seed) proceeds from the will of God to bring life and fulfill God's promises in the hearts of believers.

Your comment is not uncommon when challenged to an impossibility you believe in

A virgin birth in the Bible is a myth. It’s an impossibility (surely I don’t need to explain this). Human embryos need genetic material from both a sperm and an egg to develop properly.
.