Contrary to beliefs of most Christians, the crucifixion of Christ is proof enough that he is not God. On the other hand, are you not risking yourself if you keep on insisting Jesus is God? Because by doing so, you are logically serving a FALSE GOD and forgetting the Entity who was with the Word (who became human being in the person of Christ) stated in John 1:1, which also stresses that ‘the Word was with God’.
Are you not scared if you forget God who was with the Word?
Also, are you trying to demote God by technically implying that humanity can crucify God, which is based on a ‘created crucified the Creator’ type of syllogism? Is it proper? Who are you by the way? Are you not very ambitious to imply technically that human can crucify God?
This article is a sequel to “Grammatical error in ‘Jesus is God’ doctrine“,which emphasizes the use of past tense indicative mood of be, which is “was’ in John 1:1 stating also that the Word was God. Said verse simply logically emphasizes that ‘the Word that became flesh’ is no longer God, when he lived among us.
This proposition was strengthened by John 1:14 which states that ‘the Word became a human being xxx”. In the absence of a qualifying verse alleging that he continued as God when he became human as noticed from the statements of John, it is not logical to believe that he was still God when he became human. In short, while it is true that he was God being the Word, he was no longer God when he became human.
Also, the main reason why the Christ was not God is because he was already transformed to human as the Son of God, when he lived among us.
What happened then, you may ask.
John’s statements on Word as God to Christ as human is similar to an ice-water transformation as both of them are part of creation. And just like ice-water relationship, the Word as God is not similar to Christ as human because they have their respective characteristics, which are not identical.
When God designed an ice to be solid and water to be fluid, can you you say that they are one and the same? Obviously, they are not one and the same. Now, when God designed the Word as God and Christ as human, can you similarly apply the relationship of ice to water to say that Christ is also God? Of course, if you apply the same principle in ice-water relationship, it’s logical to believe that Christ is not God because he’s human.
But when the Word was designed to accompany God in the beginning to create everything, can we apply also the said character to Christ as human? Obviously, no. In fine, what controls everything is God and when John used the term ‘was’ in ‘the Word was God’ in John 1:1, it could then be likened to saying ‘the water was ice’.
Thus, by believing that Jesus is God, obviously, the believer would be forgetting God who was with the Word in the beginning. Remember, there is only one God. Also, in case of conflict of opinion between the ‘Jesus is God” doctrine promoters and the statements of John, the latter would, security wise, prevail over the former. Besides, is it objectionable if believers are believing on the Father in heaven as God at the same time, believing on Christ as the Son of God?
- What is the “Word”?
- Characters in the “Word”
- The “Word” under Man’s Rules on Evidence
- The “Word” Translation: An Issue?
- Grammatical error in ‘Jesus is God’ doctrine