The Bible says Jesus isn't God. It's pretty hard to avoid because it's all over the Bible. Just how it is. If someone is talking about the Bible the topic of Jesus and God should come up almost immediately.
That does not address a single thing I said.
I would love to get into who one can be in Christ and and God's purpose for people today. We can be sons and daughters of God, brothers and sisters to Jesus, be glorified with him, and reign with him.
That does not relate to a single things I said, but surely does avoid it.
No one has wanted to talk about any of this yet. People are too busy trying to deify Jesus. Progress can't be made until that error is resolved and I am under not impression I can change anyone's mind. I know that quoting Jesus' denials of deity, all of the passages about Jesus not being God, etc will just result in people playing their hypostatic union card.
The title of the OP is Our Incomprehensible God. I believe you are one who hijacked the thread to the question of His deity for your own agenda, which is a violation of RULE 3. So how about you express your views of God's incomprehensibleness.
The hypostatic union is not a card. It is a part of traditional Christianity and is the name given to the triune nature of God. If it is being argued against, it must of necessity be apart of YOUR rebuttals against it, and of necessity be a part of the rebuttals to your rebuttal. DUH!!!
All it does it keep the goal posts moving... just when it's been proven Jesus isn't God then boom that's just his "human side" but when Jesus does a miracles people are saying he's God.
Perhaps you should give your definition of moving the goalposts since that is yet another phrase you picked up from posts made to you and liked the sound of it so now mimic it like a well trained parrot, and always when you have done that before, instead of finding out what it really means you give it your own definition.
"just when it's been proven Jesus isn't God" is a false assertion. You have never proven it and never will because it is not true. "then boom, that's just His human side" a nonsense statement.Why? Because Jesus' humanity is never referred to as His "human side" and "but when Jesus does a miracle people people are saying He is God" that is not what is being done at all. But you remark lays the foundation of moving the goal post to this:
Why hasn't anyone ever bothered to explained why every. single. last. miracle that Jesus did others also did? And why does no one talk about the fact that Jesus' power and authority are not exclusive to Jesus either? Maybe because allegedly being God and then Peter comes and walks on water, too, is a problem for the hypostatic union?
Your first question is based on something that is not even true. Neither is the second question. The third question assumes Peter walking on the water would be equated to him being equal to Jesus and it isn't.
As you may well know, there was not punctuation in the original Koine Greek. So when they translated Romans 9:5 and added all of those commas, those were added by the translators. They weren't actually in the original manuscripts because they didn't use punctuation in Greek.
Here's the correct version of Romans 9:5 from the RSV and it proves Jesus isn't God.
Romans 9
5 to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ. God who is over all be blessed for ever. Amen.
Wouldn't that mean that the RSV translators did the same thing? Added all the punctuation where they saw fit. Unless there should be a comma after Christ instead of a period, it makes nonsense. There would be no need for the word "who" following "God" and to leave it in makes an incomplete sentence unless it was answering a question that had been asked.
So what was the reason the RSV chose to change that punctuation from what we have in our standard Bibles? The answer is because it was a translation begun in 2000 if memory serves, and by Unitarians.
