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 don't think what Jesse Owens was doing is the same at all as reported. I think they would know the difference and there seemed to be several witnesses

This is claimed to be other than Urban VIII-
St. Joseph of Cupertino's 17th-century levitations were witnessed by Pope Urban VIII,John Frederic and others leading to over 70 documented testimonies in his canonization records is supposed to be.

Now the Holy Spirit leviation is not a gift of the Holy Spirit mentioned in the Bible, but I think they can do many things more than those 8 listed at their discretion . Also, I was gifted a log by a church member who is eldery. Now, I took this home and just happened to bless it with some Holy water. I don't think the Holy water was necessary but the day after a print appeared on it to of a scence like from my life. Picture on there was a young girl with a mask on her face like with one of my conditions, autism-masking. This is great and shows that God can understand all. Although, I don't do masking, I sometimes do fun drama using characters of the Bible. This helped me understand though what was going on in my life. The Holy Spirit has different ways of helping people and they can inspire people with art as well. I have snapped a part of the print design.

I put the art on youtube, some people have it in person and observed it like my one of my neighbours, but some say they cannot see it, but it is definetly there and is light and was a plain log and it was done not by me, but by the Holy Spirit's authority. In parting I should probably gift it to the church or an art museum.

In some people music is probably inspired by the Holy Spirit as well I think when singing or playing the piano etc.
This person thinks that there art is inspired by the Holy Spirit.
https://www.premierchristianity.com/testimonies/my-art-is-a-miracle-its-inspired-by-the-holy-spirit/16548.article

Yup. You have gone from levitation to "God of the gaps"

Quote : "Quoting a few quotes from a astrophysics magazine 2023"

I have seen similar to what you quoted. Note this one you posted : " With its image of a single, dramatic moment of creation, it conforms to earlier mythological and religious accounts”.

That might be so, but not the Genesis creation myth. " Let there be light ". Nope, light did not come first with big bang theory. And a big issue with the Bible is that there are 2 creation myths, both different. Gen 1 and Gen 2.

The term "big bang" was coined by a Catholic Priest. Just as a matter of interest.

God of the gaps. This god is getting squeezed into an ever decreasing wee gap.

The irony is of course, that there might be a God... inside us.

We are social animals, and evolution being what it is, there is defo an evolutionary advantage for us the better we work together. We might have actually evolved a "God gene", an inner instinct that makes us susceptible to believing in a higher being, purely because of thousands of years of selective breeding.

So yup, God of the gaps. And God might just be there.... in a tiny bit of our DNA. And it might be there for the exact same reason collie dogs have an instinct for chasing sheep.

So instead of looking into big bang research for god, it would probably be better to look inwards. To our DNA.

Well, somebody said that they needed evidence in life and I was thinking and someone leviating is evidence to some, also I never mentioned about the Big bang. I kew about it though and I never raised it. I am responding to questions.
About the subject of the Holy Spirit, it is Jesus who gives people their gifts of the Holy Spirit, so proving that he is with us today.

@Justmerach

Interesting article below on the God gene.

I think this idea has a lot going for it.

Faith genes? Can DNA predispose us to religion and spirituality? - Genetic Literacy Project

I was thinking to myself today that I have heard that saying that we all have our own assignment to do from God on earth. I heard that on sky religion programme and I liked it. I thought of it today in view of the last year that one of conditions had been difficult and came to the conclusion that was not my assignment from God. It happened, but God helped me with it.

As for the gene-I think some people are called to ministry by God. I also think some are are expected simply to share their talents one way or another if able and then just follow what Christ asks in the Bible. I think those who are called to the ministry by Jesus specifically may have this assignment or so to speak in life. We have freedom.

As for a gene it is not proven but interesting. I can say that I was given a gift of the Holy Spirit at 17. Now, I am very sensitive, Level 2 tested and go higher than tested -God can bring light to a difference for his glory as he did with Paul at times. I looked at this before-somebody else who was not sensory-whose to say if our situations may be different with the same gift. They may be the same. Not enough research has been done on this, but research has shown as posted in this thread earlier that those who are autistic can have deeper sensory experiences, but some do not attribute them to a God. There are 8 gifts suited to different people and their needs.

May be people can have deeper experiences or be called which may seem as to a gene, but everybody's spirit is capable of praying to God in a way that is only understood by God and everyone can follow what Jesus asks us to do.

David Blaine and many other illusionists have been seen to levitate. I hardly think the evidence of an ancient saint also being able to do so is proof that the Holy Spirit exists.

@Justmerach

If I can quote you here :

"As for a gene it is not proven but interesting...."

Indeed. And look at the language I used, and the article I linked. It is an idea, a concept, a scientific proposition being examined and studied. And who knows, it might prove to be true, it might not.

Why can't you apply the same thinking to the bible ?

As to the other debate with my Mydoglovescheese I cannot say that I trust the work of illusionists to be legitimate.

About RedTagAlan's questiont, I had faith and God showed me because of faith and commitment some things of the Holy spirit in the faith and over decades through my life and others it is clear that the God is who is he says he is in Isaiah 44. Just those words in that Psalm are enough to convict me.

Some scripture was removed from the Bible previously as thought not to be inspired and I trust what we have now is the inspired word of God, although scriptures like Enoch I wonder why some was removed when he was a patriarch and accepted by God . I thought to myself recently that however God wants the Bible to be I am for that. You know some stories are symbols or literal and however God has wanted to be, I trust to him and for me it doesn’t matter so much and the Gospel's from the heart of Jesus and the Old Testatment is inspired by God. I wonder if some of you know what this is.

I just give that trust to God how his story is intended to be. Yes we can learn in life, but God as us to trust him which is what I do.

The Christian faith is simple and is not built on reading the entire Bible or understanding all of it and the stamp of a faith.

I meant in my last post that-

The Christian faith is simple and is not built on reading the entire Bible or understanding all of it and that is not the stamp of a faith

Please don’t patronise me. Who’s to say that Joseph Cupertino wasn’t an illusionist? They’ve been around for centuries and most people have no idea how they perform seemingly impossible tricks, such as levitation.

Your willingness to accept without question the legitimacy of the teachings of the Church (and Catholic Church in particular), and yet to summarily dismiss everyone who contradicts those teachings indicates either extreme naivety or arrogance on your part. We may not share your faith but we do have a right to express our opinions and to present alternative theories and research.

Also to add, I can’t believe that there are Christians who haven’t actually read the entire Bible. It is the foundation of their faith, surely reading it must be a prerequisite!

Please do not assume what I did not write.I was writing about the Bible and not the church as such. in the post above. You wrote about the illusionists and I said my view on it as well. The early christian church can be close to the Catholic faith and I found their views on the incarnation and how the Bible is written as quite sound. I had to say to others that could be reading to say that Christ was not rescurrected, was not part of the Christian faith. That is not saying that people cannot have a view. You claim to know my thinking when you don't.

These things are most important- Believing that Jesus is the Son of God, believing that he died for the forgiveness of sins and through that we can have eternal life. That we do his Commadments is asked of us. If we try to follow the Beatitudes this is good as well. The Trinity most believe as well. You accept to that the Bible is the word of God. After this learning is a gradual thing and you can be guided by the spirit to and that can come in time as well. The New Testatment, Genesis and Exodus is a good place to start and then to proceed to reading more when you are ready and if you are able to.

@Justmerach how do you reconcile the OT and the NT if they are both the word of God? They are quite different and contradictory.

I am just writing my views here.

How do I reconcile this. The Old Testament lets me see the heart of and the many faces of God (Psalm 18). It also lets me see to how holy God is. God is the legitimate authority and his actions are only made lawful at times through him. Sometimes God’s decisions are not always easy or pleasant, sometimes that can come with being in charge. God will give the opposition usually lots of chances to change but people wouldn’t and sometimes they would not listen to God to or his ministers.

God’s treatment of some of the Israelites of those who committed sin shows that it was not as difficult to have a spiritual relationship with him as some may think. He forgave some people who committed adultery and murder to which was against the 10 Commandments.

The Psalms I like many of the spiritual poetry. Some of the words are poetry in the Old Testament as well. Like fire and brimstone is not a fiery red sky but is judgement on wicked behaviour for example. God does not break peoples necks in reality, it is spiritual language of poetry often and spiritual warfare.
God’s laws were intended for the Israelites who were the chosen people –and all his laws didn’t apply to everyone. This was historical as well and to reach his Son to.

What is different about the New Testament really is there is no more blood sacrifice. I am glad for this change as I think it would have been difficult for me to go the Temples and see this.

Also, there is no more Lex Talions, an eye for an eye so it is about more about forgiveness.

I think today in a modern world that Christ can help to deal with spiritual wickedness, but as I found the Old Testament still has lessons how we should hold on and kept on battling.

I was pleased with what I saw of God in the Old Testament and the giving of his Son allowed us to have a closer relationship with him for the forgiveness of sins.

@Justmerach why do you need forgiveness for sins? I don’t believe in the concept and haven’t committed any anyway. I’m not asking anyone to forgive me.

I can speak my views. I think that God wants us to have a closer relationship with him and that he thinks this is possible through allowing us to have the forgiveness of sins. We live in a modern world that is often not spiritual and doesn't put God first, but our own desires and we can do things wrong before God and he offers us his Son’s blood through the Holy Communion so it will cleanse his believers from sin and we are meant to change from these behaviours.

@RedTagAlan I did some looking into Acts 5:2 and some people said the couple were not believers as they were a certain man named. I found it interesting that someone said this was against corruption as trying to buy favour by giving gifts to ministers at their feet. With that argument it makes it seem symbolic.

But ‘not putting God first’ is only a sin if you believe in that God. And the rest of the behaviour advocated by Christianity has no necessary spiritual dimension. Be kind, just, compassionate towards others. Take care of the vulnerable. Look after the world and its resources. You can do all that without any spiritual beliefs whatsoever.

I agree with you there-
I have meet many good people with all different faiths or none and particularly in the NHS.

Christian values can be defined in two strands-the occasional ceremony etc or taking on the values of the faith itself with no religious belief. I think at times this government seems to have Christian values like the NHS with free health care for all, the benefit system and more. Some countries are not so generous with this.

I would add that most countries are joined as human beings to the United Nations Declaration of Humans of Article 1.
“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood”.

Having a faith doesn’t mean that the individual is a better person, it means they can live their life without the rules and regulations imposed on them by having to do what god tells you to do. Life is much less complicated without a religion.

@Justmerach

Acts 5 appears to have you stumped. Even with your evangelical logic.

Quote : "** I did some looking into Acts 5:2 and some people said the couple were not believers as they were a certain man named. I found it interesting that someone said this was against corruption as trying to buy favour by giving gifts to ministers at their feet. With that argument it makes it seem symbolic."

Breaking that down " some people said the couple were not believers as they were a certain man named."

The Bible does not say they were not believers. That is YOU, or the "some people" you refer to, ADDING to the Bible. Is that not a sin ? The bolded part in what you said makes no sense at all,

This part, where you say " found it interesting that someone said this was against corruption as trying to buy favour by giving gifts to ministers at their feet. ". No mention of corruption. Bible being added to again. Another sin. And no buying gifts for favour. Wrong story. That story is Simon, in Acts 8:18.

This part :"With that argument it makes it seem symbolic.". You are not making as argument. And if it is symbolic, and thus not historical, then lets apply that to the whole book.

Now, the challenge for you is to explains acts 5 in terms of what YOU think it means. Not vague " other people".

How do you explain Acts 5 ?

For the casual reader, here is the story in acts 5, so no need to look it up again.

Ananias and Sapphira

Act 5:1 And a certain man, Ananias by name, with his wife Sapphira, sold a possession,and kept back of the pricehis wife also knowingand having brought a certain part, he laid [it] at the feet of the apostles.

And Peter said, "Ananias, why did Satan fill your heart, for you to lie to the Holy Spirit, and to keep back of the price of the place? While it remained, did it not remain yours? And having been sold, was it not in your authority? Why [is] it that you put this thing in your heart? You did not lie to men, but to God"; and Ananias hearing these words, having fallen down, expired, and great fear came on all who heard these things, and having risen, the younger men wound him up, and having carried forth, they buried [him].

And it came to pass, about three hours after, that his wife, not knowing what has happened, came in, and Peter answered her, "Tell me if for so much you sold the place"; and she said, "Yes, for so much." And Peter said to her, "How was it agreed by you to tempt the Spirit of the LORD? Behold, the feet of those who buried your husband [are] at the door, and they will carry you forth"; and immediately she fell down at his feet, and expired, and the young men having come in, found her dead, and having carried forth, they buried [her] by her husband; and great fear came on all the Assembly, and on all who heard these things. (LSV)

I have already wriiten my views on how I perceive the Bible. You can learn as I said from the scripture. I can discuss with others. If people walk away from something they do not understand it needs to be and try and understood.

No, I looked at it KJV and reflected and paused and knew that A certain man named meant something else. It was covering their name up. Somebody wrho is an evangelist...not me wrote that they prayed about it and their spirit gave them some input on this from the Holy Spirit. that reflects Jesus Christ ministry. They decided to share that information themselves. That is the only way it should be done if you share as public revelation post Christ unless in the church. Thoughts are still going on it. I do not struggle with it, but I like to find the true meaning to things cause dissent.

I started a thread here, I will ask my ministers views to and I linked to a post there to where I read about someone writing they were unbelievers-I have seen them preaching on the sky religion channel.

https://www.christianforums.com/threads/the-meaning-of-acts-5-1-ananias-with-sapphira.8342318/

Quotes from your post in italics and bold:

"You can learn as I said from the scripture. I can discuss with others. If people walk away from something they do not understand it needs to be and try and understood."

I am reading the same Bible as you, same as everyone else. OK, I prefer the literal standard version (LSV) over the KJV, but I can switch the that easy enough. And I am trying to understand what it means, I can read it and understand what it says, well this story anyway.

"A certain man named meant something else."

This is what it says : "Act 5:1 But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession, " (KJV)

How on earth can " a certain man" mean other than what is written ?

We can switch to the KJV with Strongs dictionary.

"Act 5:1 But G1161 a certain G5100 man G435 named G3686 Ananias, G367 with G4862 Sapphira G4551 hisG848 wife, G1135 sold G4453 a possession ,G2933 " (KJV)

Looking up the Greek:

certain: Strongs G5100 -" τὶς tìs, tis; an enclitic indefinite pronoun; some or any person or object:—a (kind of), any (man, thing, thing at all), certain (thing), divers, he (every) man, one (X thing), ought, + partly, some (man, -body, - thing, -what), (+ that no-)thing, what(-soever), × wherewith, whom(-soever), whose(-soever)."

man: Strongs G435 -" ἀνήρ, ἀνδρός, ὁ, a man, Latin vir. The meanings of this word in the N. T. differ in no respect from classic usage; for it is employed"

named G3686 -" ὄνομα ónoma, on'-om-ah; from a presumed derivative of the base of G1097 (compare G3685); a "name" (literally or figuratively) (authority, character):—called, (+ sur-)name(-d)."

So that line in the Bible means, " A certain man named..." No matter how you look at it, "A certain man named..", means "A certain man named..."

You said ""A certain man named meant something else."

What do you think it means ?

The forum you linked is blocked where I am.

For me when I say a certain someone and not someones name it means you may be trying to not say it-sometimes it means something is in part or all not litreal. As @Wapentake has taught English it would be interesting to know their views on this use of term.

These are some views (not mine) and it is still open
"The issue with the pair is found in the term below. They weren't required to give nor was a specific amount requested.

Grandstanding: the action of behaving in a showy or ostentatious manner in an attempt to attract favorable attention from spectators or the media"

".People don't realize that story is about how the church used to pool all the assets together and distribute it back out as needed so that no one was poor and that all were equal.

The modern church does not practice this anymore, and there's no punishment for something that was rejected by the church in the early fourth century"

".Literal - they publicly lied about personally taking part of the proceeds from the sale. Publicly misrepresented the truth. Such an event was hugely impacting on all who witnessed it - it is very unlikely to have been forgotten or made up.

There is a parallel from the defeat at AI after the great victory at Jericho. (Joshua 7) No one was to personally take the booty from the battle, the Spirit singled out the very family that hid stolen valuable items under the house. They experienced a similar fate.The common theme is a purging of His people from the corrupt acts"

This is the link that I mentioned-
.
https://www.josephprince.com/bible-questions/correction-and-chastisement/ananias-and-sapphira#

So you said "A certain man named meant something else."

I established , from the Greek. that it means exactly what it says.

I asked you what you think it means, and you replied:

"For me when I say a certain someone and not someones name it means you may be trying to not say it-sometimes it means something is in part or all not litreal."

But the name is there. Again, from KJV: "Act 5:1 But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession, "

His name is right there, Ananias.

You also say above :" These are some views (not mine) and it is still open"

You wrote that immediately after you wrote "For me when I say ....". So what is it ?

I am not bothered about the later Church or Joshua, I am talking about Acts 5. That short story in the totally infallible NT. And it looks like we might need to work through it one word at a time. The story here makes no reference to Joshua or the 4th century Church.

Do you agree that " "Act 5:1 But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession, .." means:

a certain man named Ananias

There was a man called Ananias

a fella called Ananias

A man by the name of Ananias

Someone called Ananias

etc .

?