What did jesus say he about himself?

[muhammad rasullah]

Many debates have been held concerning the divinity of jesus and who in reality Jesus was. Now the first logical thing one should is determine what did jesus say about himself? Who did jesus say he was? Did he claim to be God or not? Or did he claim something different? What I truly want to ask those who say and believe that jesus is God is if he ever said such a thing?

Of course this should be easy to find about someone so prominent in history. If he is God then he had to have claimed it somewhere because that would seem to be God's very nature.

So here is the debate, what did jesus say about himself? Did he say he was God or did others raise him to that status? Or did he simply say something different? I assume Jesus would know about himself better than others.

[PC1]

John 3:16 is a good example.

But as an aside, why do Muslims quote from the NT to support their positions? You always say the NT is flawed, and apparently Muhammad said that Jesus never died on a cross or something of the like? I've had this exact same discussion with a Muslim before, and when I started showing him verses to the contrary, he fell back on the "those verses don't count because they were distorted" bit. It just so happens that conveniently, the only verses that are "distorted" are the ones that contradict the Qu'ran, the others are quoted from by Muslims to support their position and try to show that Islam is something besides a man-made religion.

As to whether Jesus was a prophet:
In Matthew 11:9, Jesus, when speaking of John the Baptist claims that John the Baptist was not only a prophet, but more than a prophet. He goes on to say that "among those born among women there is none greater than John the Baptist." John the Baptist says, "After me will come one more powerful than I, the thongs of whose sandals I am not worthy to stoop down and untie." So we use a little deduction. John the Baptist > a prophet, and Jesus > John the Baptist. Jesus was much more than a prophet.

[muhammad rasullah]

John 3:16 is a good example.

But as an aside, why do Muslims quote from the NT to support their positions? You always say the NT is flawed, and apparently Muhammad said that Jesus never died on a cross or something of the like? I've had this exact same discussion with a Muslim before, and when I started showing him verses to the contrary, he fell back on the "those verses don't count because they were distorted" bit. It just so happens that conveniently, the only verses that are "distorted" are the ones that contradict the Qu'ran, the others are quoted from by Muslims to support their position and try to show that Islam is something besides a man-made religion.

As to whether Jesus was a prophet:
In Matthew 11:9, Jesus, when speaking of John the Baptist claims that John the Baptist was not only a prophet, but more than a prophet. He goes on to say that "among those born among women there is none greater than John the Baptist." John the Baptist says, "After me will come one more powerful than I, the thongs of whose sandals I am not worthy to stoop down and untie." So we use a little deduction. John the Baptist > a prophet, and Jesus > John the Baptist. Jesus was much more than a prophet.

Firstly, muslims use the NT and the rest of the bible to support their positions because this shows the christian the error that exists in their own holy scripture and it's not us who are concocting and making up these issues. The evidence is written large in the bible which refutes the claims and beliefs christians have about jesus being God, the existence of a trinity and jesus dying on the cross. None of this has any scriptural bases and if you do find it in the bible there is always a verse or two which contradicts the arguement the christian has. Most christians when they are presented with a verse about jesus quote another verse brushing aside the previous verse and not recognizing the contradiction. Besides it would be easy for muslims to just say my quran says this and that but the christian is more ablidged to listen if they are being quoted their own scripture.

Now as regards your post to the topic, the topic is what did jesus say about himself and I don't mean to negate your quotation yo used but those are not jesus's words. What you are trying to do is deduce from what is said and basically coming up with your own explanation or interpretation of things. Now just because John the baptist said jesus was greater than him doesn't ean he had to be God to be greater, it can be interpreted in many ways it could mean greater in purpose, or his mission. Jesus said he was a prophet Mat 13:57 And they were offended in him. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house. Mar 6:4 But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, but in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his own house.
So if Jesus is much more than a prophet what did he say he was? he couldn't have said he was God because Jesus said John 13:16 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him. So if Jesus is sent by God then he can't be God nor greater.
Did Jesus say he was sent? The answer is yes Jesus said John 7:16 Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.

So Jesus was sent therefore he is not God but a prophet as he said he was? would you like to comment or add anything to this?

[PC1]

Firstly, muslims use the NT and the rest of the bible to support their positions because this shows the christian the error that exists in their own holy scripture and it's not us who are concocting and making up these issues. The evidence is written large in the bible which refutes the claims and beliefs christians have about jesus being God, the existence of a trinity and jesus dying on the cross. None of this has any scriptural bases and if you do find it in the bible there is always a verse or two which contradicts the arguement the christian has. Most christians when they are presented with a verse about jesus quote another verse brushing aside the previous verse and not recognizing the contradiction. Besides it would be easy for muslims to just say my quran says this and that but the christian is more ablidged to listen if they are being quoted their own scripture.

Well, I'm not completely sure what every Christian believes regarding the trinity and Jesus as God. But me, I don't believe Jesus = God the Father. Jesus = the Son of God. When we say Son of God, we don't mean in a literal sense, that Jesus was literally God's Son in the way that you or I are sons of our fathers. But yes, we certainly do believe he was more than a prophet (the Christ, and the Son of God). We only believe in one God. We don't believe Jesus is a "second" God. As the NT says many times, Jesus sits at the right hand of the Father. I don't think Christians ever claimed the trinity to be something that is an object or worship, and have fully admitted it was not in the NT. The Nicene Creed is almost universally accepted by Christians and starts off by saying the following,

"We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, the Maker of heaven and earth, of all that is seen and unseen." The Son of God is in some ways a manifestation of God the Father.

The trinity is not a big part of Christianity, it's just a symbol representing the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, developed by the Catholic church early on. I'm very interested though to hear the evidence that Jesus never died on the cross, coming from the NT. I'd like to see that. Every gospel, and every letter hinges on this concept and says so bluntly.

Now as regards your post to the topic, the topic is what did jesus say about himself and I don't mean to negate your quotation yo used but those are not jesus's words. What you are trying to do is deduce from what is said and basically coming up with your own explanation or interpretation of things. Now just because John the baptist said jesus was greater than him doesn't ean he had to be God to be greater, it can be interpreted in many ways it could mean greater in purpose, or his mission. Jesus said he was a prophet Mat 13:57 And they were offended in him. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house. Mar 6:4 But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, but in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his own house.

Regarding John the Baptist I have to disagree, my own deduction is that Jesus is more than a prophet, which is what those verses confirm. What more, exactly? That doesn't matter. If he's anything more than a prophet it contradicts your position. But since the topic is "What did Jesus say about himself?" like you pointed out, I'll drop it.

In response to the verse where Jesus says, "only in his hometown is a prophet without honor" while alluding to himself, I don't believe that by saying that he automatically is saying that he is a prophet. He was saying that as a generalization of the treatment of God's past prophets, of which he is greater. But I'll look into this more.

So if Jesus is much more than a prophet what did he say he was? he couldn't have said he was God because Jesus said John 13:16 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him. So if Jesus is sent by God then he can't be God nor greater.
Did Jesus say he was sent? The answer is yes Jesus said John 7:16 Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.

Indeed Jesus never said he was God the Father, and I've never said he was either. He was the Son of God, who sits at the Father's right hand. Clearly, not the same as the Father. And I agree that Jesus was sent by God, and always have. Jesus was the Christ. The Christ came to fulfill scripture and be a savior to mankind. A prophet could not fill that role, as I'm sure any Jew would attest.

Now in regards to Jesus being the Christ and the Son of God, here are some verses in which he talks about himself:

He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. (John 3:18)

Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life. "Most assuredly, I say to you, the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God; and those who hear will live. (John 5:24-25)

But Jesus kept silent. And the high priest answered and said to Him, "I put You under oath by the living God: Tell us if You are the Christ, the Son of God!"
Jesus said to him, "It is as you said. Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven." (Matthew 26:64)

There are also numerous verses in which somebody else his disciples, the angels, the demons, and even Satan call him the Son of God and he does not object. Likewise, people come to worship him and he does not object. Also, the early church wholeheartedly believed he was the Son of God. Why would God allow such a travesty to flourish?

[Ilias Ahmad]

But as an aside, why do Muslims quote from the NT to support their positions?

Same reason Christian missionaries sometimes quote verses from Quran, even though they don't believe in it. This is normal in religious debates to quote from the books of the other religion or sect.

[muhammad rasullah]

Firstly, muslims use the NT and the rest of the bible to support their positions because this shows the christian the error that exists in their own holy scripture and it's not us who are concocting and making up these issues. The evidence is written large in the bible which refutes the claims and beliefs christians have about jesus being God, the existence of a trinity and jesus dying on the cross. None of this has any scriptural bases and if you do find it in the bible there is always a verse or two which contradicts the arguement the christian has. Most christians when they are presented with a verse about jesus quote another verse brushing aside the previous verse and not recognizing the contradiction. Besides it would be easy for muslims to just say my quran says this and that but the christian is more ablidged to listen if they are being quoted their own scripture.

Well, I'm not completely sure what every Christian believes regarding the trinity and Jesus as God. But me, I don't believe Jesus = God the Father. Jesus = the Son of God. When we say Son of God, we don't mean in a literal sense, that Jesus was literally God's Son in the way that you or I are sons of our fathers. But yes, we certainly do believe he was more than a prophet (the Christ, and the Son of God). We only believe in one God. We don't believe Jesus is a "second" God. As the NT says many times, Jesus sits at the right hand of the Father. I don't think Christians ever claimed the trinity to be something that is an object or worship, and have fully admitted it was not in the NT. The Nicene Creed is almost universally accepted by Christians and starts off by saying the following,

"We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, the Maker of heaven and earth, of all that is seen and unseen." The Son of God is in some ways a manifestation of God the Father.

The trinity is not a big part of Christianity, it's just a symbol representing the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, developed by the Catholic church early on. I'm very interested though to hear the evidence that Jesus never died on the cross, coming from the NT. I'd like to see that. Every gospel, and every letter hinges on this concept and says so bluntly.

Now as regards your post to the topic, the topic is what did jesus say about himself and I don't mean to negate your quotation yo used but those are not jesus's words. What you are trying to do is deduce from what is said and basically coming up with your own explanation or interpretation of things. Now just because John the baptist said jesus was greater than him doesn't ean he had to be God to be greater, it can be interpreted in many ways it could mean greater in purpose, or his mission. Jesus said he was a prophet Mat 13:57 And they were offended in him. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house. Mar 6:4 But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, but in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his own house.

Regarding John the Baptist I have to disagree, my own deduction is that Jesus is more than a prophet, which is what those verses confirm. What more, exactly? That doesn't matter. If he's anything more than a prophet it contradicts your position. But since the topic is "What did Jesus say about himself?" like you pointed out, I'll drop it.

In response to the verse where Jesus says, "only in his hometown is a prophet without honor" while alluding to himself, I don't believe that by saying that he automatically is saying that he is a prophet. He was saying that as a generalization of the treatment of God's past prophets, of which he is greater. But I'll look into this more.

So if Jesus is much more than a prophet what did he say he was? he couldn't have said he was God because Jesus said John 13:16 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him. So if Jesus is sent by God then he can't be God nor greater.
Did Jesus say he was sent? The answer is yes Jesus said John 7:16 Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.

Indeed Jesus never said he was God the Father, and I've never said he was either. He was the Son of God, who sits at the Father's right hand. Clearly, not the same as the Father. And I agree that Jesus was sent by God, and always have. Jesus was the Christ. The Christ came to fulfill scripture and be a savior to mankind. A prophet could not fill that role, as I'm sure any Jew would attest.

Now in regards to Jesus being the Christ and the Son of God, here are some verses in which he talks about himself:

He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. (John 3:18)

Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life. "Most assuredly, I say to you, the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God; and those who hear will live. (John 5:24-25)

But Jesus kept silent. And the high priest answered and said to Him, "I put You under oath by the living God: Tell us if You are the Christ, the Son of God!"
Jesus said to him, "It is as you said. Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven." (Matthew 26:64)

There are also numerous verses in which somebody else his disciples, the angels, the demons, and even Satan call him the Son of God and he does not object. Likewise, people come to worship him and he does not object. Also, the early church wholeheartedly believed he was the Son of God. Why would God allow such a travesty to flourish?

Sorry but it is not clear your position as to what you believe Jesus actually is? Do you believe in the father, son and holy spirit as a trinity? Because if Jesus wasn't God and just a prophet or something much more than a prophet being then son of God I don't see how him dying on the cross was enough from a christian point of view. Because it would seem more reasonable though not necessarily true for Jesus to have to be a God to bear the sins of all of mankind as a ransom. If it were any other ordinary person or prophets this would not make sense because past prophets were killed but not crucified supposedly as Jesus was. So just not any person will do, you can't just grab on german and kill him for the millions of Jews that were slaughtered by Hitler during the Holocaust. So do you see jesus as God dying on the cross or what was he when he died on the cross according to your belief.

In response to the verse where Jesus says, "only in his hometown is a prophet without honor" while alluding to himself, I don't believe that by saying that he automatically is saying that he is a prophet. He was saying that as a generalization of the treatment of God's past prophets, of which he is greater. But I'll look into this more.

The context of this verse is given In matthew 13 Jesus Is describing the Kingdom of heaven to the people and how one feels when it is received by them Mat 13:44 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto treasure hid in a field; the which when a man hath found, he hideth, and for joy thereof goeth and selleth all that he hath, and buyeth that field. Then after he is done in that city Jesus leaves and returns back to his own country he begans to preach and teach in their synagogues and the people began to question where he got his knowledge Mat 13:54 ...Whence hath this [man] this wisdom, and [these] mighty works? Then Jesus says to them Mat 13:54 And they were offended in him. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house.

Jesus is not referring to anyone but himself in the context of the verse he doesn't refer to any past prophets excluding himself but he including all the prophets and himself. A prophet.

The Christ came to fulfill scripture and be a savior to mankind. A prophet could not fill that role, as I'm sure any Jew would attest.

Where does jesus say that he came to be a savior to all of mankind?
From what I read Jesus says, Mat 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Okay I read the verse where it has jesus referring to himself as the son of God But in what context does it mean? If you are saying that he is the son of God meaning a righteous person a child of God then yes I can agree with that interpretation. But if you are saying that Jesus is the begotten son of God as you have quoted in John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
I have to disagree with this because begetting is an animal act Beget (esp. of a male parent) to procreate or generate (offspring). 2. to cause; produce as an effect: a belief that power begets power. To procreate means to produce offspring.
So by this definiton are you saying that Jesus is God's offspring because this is what a begotten son is?

There are also numerous verses in which somebody else his disciples, the angels, the demons, and even Satan call him the Son of God and he does not object. Likewise, people come to worship him and he does not object. Also, the early church wholeheartedly believed he was the Son of God. Why would God allow such a travesty to flourish?

[/quote]

God does what he wills you could ask this question about tons of things which happen throughout history but you'll never know that answer God Allows what he wills to happen but just because it happened doesn't deem it right or the correct way. Also there are numerous verses where Jesus is called a prophet, where he is simply regarded as a man approved by God doing miracles which God did by him that those who where there have witnessed. Even when Jesus performed his miracles he gave reverence to God. So if it is God doing these things by him how does that make Jesus greater than a prophet when other prophets have done miracles before. Jesus did those things so that they may know that he was sent by God. By the way Jesus is called the Son of Man 70 more times than he is called the Son of God in the NT. I would believe that this title should be given to him foremost before Son of God since he is recognized as that more frequently.

I'm very interested though to hear the evidence that Jesus never died on the cross, coming from the NT. I'd like to see that. Every gospel, and every letter hinges on this concept and says so bluntly.

As far as evidence of jesus not dying on the cross that statement was just a rambling but evidence can be shown and since you are interested maybe we can do a head to head debate instead about the crucifiction of Jesus? I'll leave that up to you since it is not related to the topic at hand.

[ken1burton]

QUR'AN 4:157 That they said in boast, "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Apostle of God"; but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no certain knowledge, but only conjecture to follow for of a surety they killed him not.

The Concept of Jesus which people have, and that is different in many ways, Did not die at Golgotha. Paul spoke of a man of sin to be revealed. Do you see Jesus on a Cross as that man whom committed every sin in the world? God could not even look upon Jesus as He was on the Cross.

People speak of a Sacrifice, The Goat was a sacrifice for sin, But first the sins were placed upon the Goat.

Isaiah 53:6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

All the Iniquity was upon Jesus, So when Moslems say that it was someone like Him, It was seeing Jesus differently. Habakukk had the same problem:

All visions are of the day of the Cross, and Habakukk is seeing Jesus as they are putting Him on the Cross, and can not understand how Can can be watching?

Habakkuk 1:13 Thou art of purer eyes than to behold evil, and canst not look on iniquity: wherefore lookest thou upon them that deal treacherously, and holdest thy tongue when the wicked devoureth the man that is more righteous than he?

God has no problem looking on the people the day of the Cross, They are all without sin, With ONE EXCEPTION. Upon ONE man God has placed the Iniquity of us all. God can not look upon Jesus, He can look on Herod, on Pilate, On Barabbas, But not on Jesus. So in a way, It was not Jesus who was crucified (Jesus as we see Jesus) But some one like Him.

Deuteronomy 24:16 The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

All sins had to BELONG to Jesus, as His OWN TRANSGRESSIONS, to fulfill the law. This is the Sacrifice Jesus had to make, To take our sins as His Own, and to be put to death for those sins, Thereby making an end of sins as Daniel 9:24 shows He does. Jesus paid for past and present sins then by “With His stripes, we are healed.� then took FUTURE sins to Golgotha.

As far as what can be presented under the “What Jesus said of Himself� concept:

John 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

The Old Testament prophecies TESTIFY to Jesus, As He spoke (The Father giving Him the words to speak) So any prophecy for Jesus, the Messiah, the Christ then can be noted.

Jesus becomes the “BEGOTTEN� Son of God the day of the Cross, it is a Prophecy, It is a testimony to Jesus. And the “BEGOTTEN� is referring to the Body of Christ, Born the day of the Cross, with mankind, in that Body.

Psalms 2:6 Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.
7 I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

And Jesus said what was written testified of Him, and that includes Psalms 2:6/7.

NOTE, This is becoming the “BEGOTTEN� Son of God by “DECREE�, Not by physical contact.

QUR'AN 3:47 She said: "O my Lord! how shall I have a son when no man hath touched me?" He said: "Even so: God createth what He willeth; when He hath decreed a plan, He but saith to it `Be', and it is!


God Decreed the Son of David, the physical son of David to be His own Son: This is the Promise God gave to David or raising his son, after David would be dead.

2-Samuel 7:12 And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom.
13 He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever.
14 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:


David then had a son, conceived outside wedlock with Bathsheba while she was still Uriah’s wife, That Child dies 7 days after Birth, All Babies go to God at death, Sent back 1,000 years later to be REBORN at Bethlehem. The Firstbegotten of the Dead as Revelation 1:5 shows Jesus to be. And a Prince of the Kings of the Earth, as all of King David’s sons were a prince.

So Jesus can say this PLAINLY:

John 16:25 These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs: but the time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but I shall shew you plainly of the Father.
26 At that day ye shall ask in my name: and I say not unto you, that I will pray the Father for you:
27 For the Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed that I came out from God.
28 I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world: again, I leave the world, and go to the Father.
29 His disciples said unto him, Lo, now speakest thou plainly, and speakest no proverb.


“AGAIN, I leave the World and go unto the Father.� and the AGAIN is plain. Jesus is David’s dead son, Which left the world and went to the Father seven days after his birth to David and Bathsheba, The SON OF DAVID.

Ken

[PC1]

Sorry but it is not clear your position as to what you believe Jesus actually is? Do you believe in the father, son and holy spirit as a trinity? Because if Jesus wasn't God and just a prophet or something much more than a prophet being then son of God I don't see how him dying on the cross was enough from a christian point of view. Because it would seem more reasonable though not necessarily true for Jesus to have to be a God to bear the sins of all of mankind as a ransom. If it were any other ordinary person or prophets this would not make sense because past prophets were killed but not crucified supposedly as Jesus was. So just not any person will do, you can't just grab on german and kill him for the millions of Jews that were slaughtered by Hitler during the Holocaust. So do you see jesus as God dying on the cross or what was he when he died on the cross according to your belief.

I believe Jesus was the Christ, prophesied about in the Old Testament. When God made a covenant with Abraham, he asked Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, his only son (Gen. 21:10 God says to get rid of the slave woman's son), and Abraham faithfully obeyed. Isaac was to be the covenant with Israel. I believe that the ultimate test of love would be to sacrifice your only son. And through the same line as Isaac, the only Son of God also came to be sacrificed. The Christ couldn't be a mere man, as you said, and indeed, Jesus claimed to be the Son of God. Personally, and I don't believe in the trinity in the way most Christians do. I do believe that there is only one God, but he is manifest also in the Son and the Holy Spirit, but I don't necessarily equate the three.

The context of this verse is given In matthew 13 Jesus Is describing the Kingdom of heaven to the people and how one feels when it is received by them Mat 13:44 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto treasure hid in a field; the which when a man hath found, he hideth, and for joy thereof goeth and selleth all that he hath, and buyeth that field. Then after he is done in that city Jesus leaves and returns back to his own country he begans to preach and teach in their synagogues and the people began to question where he got his knowledge Mat 13:54 ...Whence hath this [man] this wisdom, and [these] mighty works? Then Jesus says to them Mat 13:54 And they were offended in him. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house.

Jesus is not referring to anyone but himself in the context of the verse he doesn't refer to any past prophets excluding himself but he including all the prophets and himself. A prophet.

Yes, indeed he does refer to himself as being a prophet. However, I don't see why it means he was only a prophet. Just because he chose to call himself that in this instance, doesn't seem to me to exclude any other possibilities. In more places he calls himself the Son of God or the Christ. But this is an interesting point and I'll make sure to look into it more.

Where does jesus say that he came to be a savior to all of mankind?
From what I read Jesus says, Mat 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Yes. Jesus himself, while physically in the flesh, only ministered to the house of Israel. But he instructed his disciples and followers to preach his message of salvation to the Gentiles as well. In Matt. 28:19, shortly before his ascension, he says "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."

He also said:
John 12:47, "And if anyone hears My words and does not believe, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world."

Matthew 18:11 "For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost."

Luke 9:56, "For the Son of Man did not come to destroy men's lives but to save them."

So I answer, while his ministry was to house of Israel, the house of Israel was tasked to share it with the rest of the world, by him.

Additionally, in Old Testament prophecies regarding Jesus we find:
Isaiah 49:6, "It is too small a thing for you to be my servant to restore the tribes of Jacob and bring back those of Israel I have kept. I will also make you a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring my salvation to the ends of the earth."

Isaiah 53:4-11, Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth. By oppression and judgment he was taken away. And who can speak of his descendants? For he was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgression of my people he was stricken. He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death, though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth. Yet it was the Lord's will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the Lord makes his life a guilt offering, he will see his offspring and prolong his days, and the will of the Lord will prosper in his hand. After the suffering of his soul, he will see the light of life and be satisfied; by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities.

Okay I read the verse where it has jesus referring to himself as the son of God But in what context does it mean? If you are saying that he is the son of God meaning a righteous person a child of God then yes I can agree with that interpretation. But if you are saying that Jesus is the begotten son of God as you have quoted in John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
I have to disagree with this because begetting is an animal act Beget (esp. of a male parent) to procreate or generate (offspring). 2. to cause; produce as an effect: a belief that power begets power. To procreate means to produce offspring.
So by this definiton are you saying that Jesus is God's offspring because this is what a begotten son is?

Well, I don't believe he was literally begotten in the way you and I are, but I do believe he was the actual Son of God, more than just a righteous person.

God does what he wills you could ask this question about tons of things which happen throughout history but you'll never know that answer God Allows what he wills to happen but just because it happened doesn't deem it right or the correct way. Also there are numerous verses where Jesus is called a prophet, where he is simply regarded as a man approved by God doing miracles which God did by him that those who where there have witnessed. Even when Jesus performed his miracles he gave reverence to God. So if it is God doing these things by him how does that make Jesus greater than a prophet when other prophets have done miracles before. Jesus did those things so that they may know that he was sent by God. By the way Jesus is called the Son of Man 70 more times than he is called the Son of God in the NT. I would believe that this title should be given to him foremost before Son of God since he is recognized as that more frequently.

I agree that Jesus gave full reverence from God and clearly distinguished himself form God. He instructed his followers to pray to God, certainly not himself. Mainstream Christianity typically believes God the Father is the Creator and Almighty, the Son is the Savior, and the Holy Spirit is the Intercessor. They are all a manifestation of God, but three different persons. There is only one God though.

As far as evidence of jesus not dying on the cross that statement was just a rambling but evidence can be shown and since you are interested maybe we can do a head to head debate instead about the crucifiction of Jesus? I'll leave that up to you since it is not related to the topic at hand.

Well, as for right now I'll have to pass on that. I don't feel like putting in all that work, but I appreciate the offer.

[Ilias Ahmad]

When God made a covenant with Abraham, he asked Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, his only son (Gen. 21:10 God says to get rid of the slave woman's son), and Abraham faithfully obeyed.

You forgot to mention that Isaac wasn't sacrificed, he was about to be, but God intervened and saved his life.

Personally, and I don't believe in the trinity in the way most Christians do. I do believe that there is only one God, but he is manifest also in the Son and the Holy Spirit, but I don't necessarily equate the three.

What do you mean "personally"? Is that your "personal" opinion? The trinity happens to be the cornerstone of Christian theology. Could you show me one verse in the Bible, the words of Jesus himself and not anyone else, where he says he is a manifestation of God?

In more places he calls himself the Son of God or the Christ.

Actually, in most instances he refers to himself as the "Son of Man", it seems he was somehow emphasizing his humanity. Also, what do you make of the Numbers 23:19 passage which says God is neither a man, nor a son of a man? If Jesus is god, you have no choice but to admit Numbers 23:19 is somehow wrong.

Also, what do you make of the other "sons of God", namely Adam (Luke 3:38) and the entire nation of Israel is also called the firstborn son of God (Exodus 4:22)?

[PC1]

You forgot to mention that Isaac wasn't sacrificed, he was about to be, but God intervened and saved his life.

I know, I just meant Abraham was faithful to his word.

What do you mean "personally"? Is that your "personal" opinion? The trinity happens to be the cornerstone of Christian theology. Could you show me one verse in the Bible, the words of Jesus himself and not anyone else, where he says he is a manifestation of God?

The Trinity is just a way to describe a concept. I've attending many protestant and catholic churches in my life and the concept of the trinity is not a point of emphasis. I used the word "personally" as a precaution because I wasn't sure if my understanding of the trinity is the universally accepted one.

Actually, in most instances he refers to himself as the "Son of Man", it seems he was somehow emphasizing his humanity. Also, what do you make of the Numbers 23:19 passage which says God is neither a man, nor a son of a man? If Jesus is god, you have no choice but to admit Numbers 23:19 is somehow wrong.

What I meant was in more places he refers to himself as the Son of God when compared with the word prophet, not with Son of Man.

According to the NIV Numbers 23:19 says, "God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?"

So the two claims of significance are:
1) God is not a man
2) God is not a son of man

In regards to #1, Jesus took the flesh of a man, but that does not mean he was a man. It was impossible for the Christ to be a mere man, additionally he was born of a virgin. #2 can be answered similarly. Jesus was the Son of God in the flesh. That doesn't mean he was a man. He had no sin. A man is sinful and seperated from God due to that sin. Notice that it defines man as a liar and someone who changes his mind.

Also, what do you make of the other "sons of God", namely Adam (Luke 3:38) and the entire nation of Israel is also called the firstborn son of God (Exodus 4:22)?

In the lineage in Luke, Adam must be listed as a son of God because he was the first human, and had no paternal line, that was what the author Luke chose to say. That's a farcry from the "only begotten Son of God who has come to save humanity." In Exodus, God is referring to the Isrealites as a collective nation, I don't see that as being the same thing.

[Ilias Ahmad]

You forgot to mention that Isaac wasn't sacrificed, he was about to be, but God intervened and saved his life.

I know, I just meant Abraham was faithful to his word.

If I am not mistaken, you were trying to compare the sacrifice of Isaac with the supposed sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. But in one instance God intervened to save Isaac from being sacrificed, but according to Christianity, despite Jesus' fervent prayers to be saved from the cross, God did not intervene. Thus it is not an appropriate comparison, unless you believe that God intervened and saved Jesus from being crucified (which incidentally is what we Muslims believe).

In regards to #1, Jesus took the flesh of a man, but that does not mean he was a man.

According to orthodox Christianity (protestant, catholic, eastern orthodox, etc.) this is a major heresy, known as Monophysitism which was historically condemned at the Council of Chalcedon.

In the lineage in Luke, Adam must be listed as a son of God because he was the first human, and had no paternal line

Yes, Adam had no paternal line (or maternal line for that matter), so it was explained that he was simply the "son of God", metaphorically, meaning God made him, his origin lies with God, etc.

And like Adam, Jesus too didn't have a paternal line, why can't him being called "son of God" be understand in the same sense Adam is called "son of God"?