How would you explain Genesis 16?
In Genesis 16, that is Jesus talking to the maidservant Hagar. Yet, at the end there, you clearly see authority and power stating to Hagar " I will greatly multiply your descendants...."
Hagar names the place she was in and says “You are the God who sees me,” for she said, “I have now seen the One who sees me.”
This of course, is before he became a living sacrifice.
Jesus is also the one who spoke to Abram (Abraham) Genesis 22 and Moses Exodus 3. Yet we all clearly know there is one God right? However you see in these instances Jesus making these claims as God. Nor does he correct those who call him God. All this before death at the cross. All this even though "Angel..." meaning messenger "of the Lord" and still claims he is God.
"2 There the angel of the Lord appeared to him in flames of fire from within a bush. Moses saw that though the bush was on fire it did not burn up. 3 So Moses thought, “I will go over and see this strange sight—why the bush does not burn up.”
4 When the Lord saw that he had gone over to look, God called to him from within the bush, “Moses! Moses!”
And Moses said, “Here I am.”
5 “Do not come any closer,” God said."
Because God is all powerful, I would hardly put it past his power to inhabit flesh (Jesus-aka angel of the Lord-aka God) and do all the things recorded for us.
Lastly, Jesus didnt have to verbally say he was God. The 4 Gospels are meant to witness because in Jewish culture you needed 2 or more and here we have 4. It was John who said:
(John testified concerning him. He cried out, saying, “This is the one I spoke about when I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’” (Jn 1:15)
Jesus didnt correct him. And the Old testament clearly labels Jesus, God. And here John is basically stating Jesus as God "he who comes after me...he was before me", yet Jesus never corrected him.
Would Jesus lead people into a lie about himself? Make people believe he is God, when according to some people here, he wasn't? Mind you, this is before he was baptized, that John made this claim.
Are people so stubborn they literally need him to come out and say it at certain times of scripture for them to believe it? "I see Jesus made these claims, it just wasnt at a time that I deem it necessary in scripture to believe Jesus was God in the flesh". Thats just silly.
Jesus said, "unleavened bread and fruit of the vine" to be used for the lords supper. Does that give any authority to use steak and soda? He never said we couldnt right?
Just because he never himself said it directly, at a certain time you deem it an idea you would accept, doesnt make it wrong.
Fact: The Word was in the beginning, the Word was God, and the word was with God. The word became flesh.
The opponents against Jesus as a man being deity think they have the upper hand, yet they also lack any meaningful direct scripture that states he was not God. I am not that blind to see in this entire thread, not once could they muster up such a verse, yet they chastise me and others for not coming up with one ourselves (in their opinion that is).
Its like the pot calling the kettle black. However, there is PLENTY of scripture that alludes/implies Jesus as God during his time as a man. There is no man that can go through life without a single sin. Yet Jesus, born of a woman walked sinless the entire time. Only deity can do something like that. God. Jesus the Son, who claims to be God Revelation 1:17-18, Isaiah 44:6.
It does not seem very logical to say, He was God, then he wasnt, then he was again. He either was, or he was not. which is it?
