Job Bautista: Misunderstandings Christ Divinity and Deity

I would like to post his hypocrite comments under his criticism and see how Job Bautista is not just a Bigot but also a hypocrite. I will post two of his comments. 

Let's go ahead and see his first post - 

Jerry Nuñez Bustillo 

According this cult defender his bigotry reasoning ( palusot lang ) just to evade the main issue of his topic he'd raised according to him that Jesus and God is equal in deity & divinity ? According to me? Really? When did I say that it's just a reason to evade the main issue? So much of you lying and deceiving, and it seems like your lying got extremely on a different level. I think you need to talk to your superior or minister to get over to that kind of attitude. You need to change the way you conversed with someone and you need a life and change or for good. Seriously? When did I say that? 

I don' t want to attack you personally but let us focus on the issue . Okay, good let's take some note about it and see if you can keep it. 

Is Jesus equal to God ? This is a good topic and let's use actual Greek Koine text to prove that. Let's get to that topic after my comments to your pretty words. 😆 LOL!

NKJV Bible. John 13:16

[16]Most assuredly, I say to you, a servant is not greater than his master; nor is he who is sent greater than he who sent him.

This scripture he tries to reference says something about the difference between Servants and Master. There are no questions about it and it has nothing to do with Christ's Divinity or Deity the context was all about Christ's example of service even though he was addressed as Master. Let's try reading the context to know about it -

John 13
12 So after he had washed their feet, and had taken his garments, and was set down again, he said unto them, Know ye what I have done to you?
13 Ye call me Master and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am.
14 If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye also ought to wash one another’s feet.
15 For I have given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you.
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.
17 If ye know these things, happy are ye if ye do them.

Mr. Little bit Harder , who is the servant mention in this verse? I think your question means who was the Master in this verse? The servant Jesus Christ taught was his disciples and he was called Master according to the context. But I think you need to rephrase that using the word who sent him in verse 16. I would answer it directly as his Father and the Father is always be the God of All Spirit, his the Father of all the Children in this World and that include Christ and us. But to think this disqualifies Christ Deity was so insane or ridiculed. Christ was sent and he already exists alongside the Father and was with the father during the Creation. This has been discussed the last time, but This Job Bautista makes so much of his excuse and bigotry. 

Perhaps our readers identify who is the loser this time ? Yeah, of course, they do. And you don't understand the context of that scripture. So, who do you think was the Loser? Loser!

And let's go-ahead to his second Post and see his claim of so much bigotry.

Jerry Nuñez Bustillo 

According to this cult defender that Jesus is co-equal of God of His divinity & deity? Yeah, cult defender, I'll make a note with that attacking personally. This seems too much hypocrisy. Anyway, let's dive ahead to see much of his failure. 

Let us study Mr Little bit Harder. You can do better than that Job Bautista. And it seems this hypocrisy is so familiar with INCult Doctrine and teachings. Nothing new. So, yeah try a little bit harder and make it double. 

Is Jesus is equal the divinity and deity of God ? As I have said this is a good topic. But let's go ahead and see how you understand it. Let's try and see how do you use the scripture and twist it.

NKJV Bible. 1 Corinthians 11:3

[3]But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.

Using this scripture seems very poor to defame Christ's Divinity. You are too slow to understand the Scriptures and yet you manage to twist it. 1 Corinthians 11 was all about the confusions of the church of God in Corinth and Paul made some examples of unity and of honoring the head, or should we say the author of the church comparing it with Man and Woman. He seems unfamiliar with it not knowing what happens ahead of that verse. Let's go and take a look - 

11 Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.
12 For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God.

Yes, we all know that the man is the head of the household. But that doesn't mean that a woman doesn't have any used or should not make decisions in the household under the direction of the husband. They are both parts of the household and there could be no perfection without the other who complete the harmony of the household. So, what does this verse says?... for the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman... And it seems that the man and the woman were to treat equally to the Lord. And he thinks nothing more about it but rather a hierarchical structure of the Church, which means they are certain level and if you're below, there's not a chance to aim higher. As Christ was the head and God was above Christ. Yes, in a sense that he is the Father of Christ, so of course he needs to be humble under the direction of the Father. This guy doesn't care about it because of his bigoted teachings. But rather there is a hierarchy in Deities. And it seems like Christ is below angels on their teachings, which means there's not a chance for Christ to sit on God's throne. 

Now, cult defender who is the head of Jesus ? Are they equal in divinity and deity? And let's talk about it as a promise that it is a good topic to discuss. Okay so let's get to it - (see topic after Job Bautista's third post) 

For an update, he made additional hypocrisy of his so-called I don't want attack personally and yet too much ad Hominem and Fallacy. So this is his third strike and let's go ahead will take a look - 

Jerry Nuñez Bustillo. Third address and let's try to see the message

Ayon sa kulto defender na ito na magkapantay lang daw ang pagka Diyos ni Panginoong Jesus at ng Ama? Cult Defender, you say? Have you looked at yourself in the mirror? You can't prove anything about your so-called cult defender, I do defend the truth and nothing else, not a Bigot like you who tries to insist on the INCultic doctrine, That has nothing to do about Christ Church. Try again Job Bautista. Make it harder this time. 🤣🤣🤣 

Mr. Little bit Harbet pwde ba buksan mo rin ang iyong isipan at mukhan kapit na kapit sayo si Sator na dumaya sayo! Rev. 12:9 and there goes the Red Herring Fallacy. You try to insert your Satur teachings that have nothing to do with the topic and you can't even define it. You may try again using that scripture to prove your claim. But if you can't, then there's no reason for you to insist on your Red Herring Fallacy. 

A red herring is something that misleads or distracts from a relevant or important question. It may be either a logical fallacy or a literary device that leads readers or audiences toward a false conclusion. A red herring may be used intentionally, as in mystery fiction or as part of rhetorical strategies (e.g., in politics), or may be used in argumentation inadvertently. - Wikipedia

Magkapantay nga ba si Panginoong Jesus at ang Ama? Sure let's answer that see the end of this commentary below to know the answers. 

NKJV Bible. 1 Corinthians 15:27-28

[27]For “He has put all things under His feet.” But when He says “all things are put under Him, ” it is evident that He who put all things under Him is excepted.

[28]Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all. Effects of Denying the Resurrection

There's another verse he thinks will disqualify Christ's Divinity. I have proven to you already in our previous discussion that you don't even attempt to answer. The verses you use are simply God's manifestation as the father of all living in which Christ is also the Son, which of course under the direction of the Father, or should we say the Father's right hand. Your understanding of the Scripture was too obvious that you don't know fully about Christ. See our previous discussions about this below - 

https://truth-reflects.blogspot.com/2021/09/job-bautista-poor-responses-and-weak.html?m=1

Pagkatapos mo nabasa ang talata Mr. Little bit Harber Jerry Bustillo. Okay, so what are you trying to say here? I had read everything and your selection of Scripture that you think is helpful for you to cover up your INCult doctrine. 

MAGKAPANTAY BA SI PJC AT ANG Ama ? Oh yeah sure, let's answer your plea Job Bautista, and to think you got the right choice in selecting some verses to misinterpret the scripture. Then you're wrong, and you'll never learn the truth. You need to ask someone to help you grow mature in your life. All but lamebrain. Sorry, was that an attack on you? And that's what you are, dolt.

Here let me give you my answer and understand it without hypocrisy and bigotry.

Divinity of Christ

Does the scripture say something about the divinity of Christ? 

Christ was the Eternal I Am. 

John 8

58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

59Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.

What would be the very reason why the people attempt to Stone the Christ? The answer is clear and simple, Christ claimed he was the Eternal I am, which is crossed referenced to Exodus 3:14 - 

And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.

Furthermore, here's an additional reference for you - 

• https://www.bibleversestudy.com/johngospel/john8-before-abraham-was-i-am.htm
• https://www.cornerstonecascade.com/sermons/before-abraham-was-i-am
• http://bibleone.net/WDCM-06.htm
• https://www.ligonier.org/learn/devotionals/abraham-was

Christ equal with God?

Job Bautista never included this even how the Jews sought to kill Christ and How did he introduce himself to them as the Son of God who is also a God. So, these verses will lead us to know how Christ helps the Jew understand his divine calling and Deity. Let's go ahead and read it -

John 5
17 ¶ But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.

18Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.

20 For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel.

21 For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will.

22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son:

23 That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.

This verse clearly shows that the Jews understand Christ's proclamation, that he was with the father before he was sent to earth and became human. He maketh himself Equal with God the Father. The Jews dispute him of his words and attempt to stone him for blasphemy. He (Christ) never said any correction of their wrong understanding, but rather explain it much deeper until the Jews got mad at his words. On the other hand, Christ also, saw what the Father did and do it even the same. Sounds unfamiliar, but that's what the Bible said. The Father loved him so he committed all the judgment and honor to his Son. Not new, but it is Christ's divine calling that proves his deity. 

The second verse is much relevant and it is even a testimony of Christ's deity. Let's follow Paul's words about it.

Philippians 2

5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:

6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:

10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;

11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

These simple words from Paul remind us of how Christ is obedient to the Father and came into this world in a form of a servant. But did Paul misuse the word about Christ Deity, in which he said clearly “it not robbery to be equal with God“. What was the Greek usage of that? Let's try Nestle Arland - 

NA28 - Philippians 2:6 ὃς ἐν μορφῇ θεοῦ ὑπάρχων οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο τὸ εἶναι ἴσα θεῷ,

The text (μορφῇ θεοῦ) "morphē Theou" or Form of God obviously was used as to denotes Christ Divinity and was followed Shortly with (εἶναι ἴσα θεῷ) "einai isa Theō" which means to be equal with God. See the table image for your reference Job Bautista.

The word robbery was not included in the Greek text, see some of the commentaries to learn from it below in the next Paragraph - 

Let's try to see a commentary from Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

6. Who] in His pre-existent glory. We have in this passage an N.T. counterpart to the O.T. revelation of Messiah’s “coming to do the will of His God” (Psalm 40:6-8, interpreted Hebrews 10:5).

being] The Greek word slightly indicates that He not only “was,” but “already was,” in a state antecedent to and independent of the action to be described. R.V. margin has “Gr. originally being”; but the American Revisers dissent.

in the form of God] The word rendered “form” is morphê. This word, unlike our “form” in its popular meaning, connotes reality along with appearance, or in other words denotes an appearance which is manifestation. It thus differs from the word (schêma) rendered “fashion” in Php 2:8 below; where see note. See notes on Romans 12:2 in this Series for further remarks on the difference between the two words; and cp. for full discussions, Abp Trench’s Synonyms, under μορφή, and Bp Lightfoot’s Philippians, detached note to ch. 2.

Here then our Redeeming Lord is revealed as so subsisting “in the form of God” that He was what He seemed, and seemed what He was—God. (See further, the next note below, and on Php 2:7.) “Though [morphê] is not the same as [ousia, essence], yet the possession of the [morphê] involves participation in the [ousia] also, for [morphê] implies not the external accidents [only?] but the essential attributes” (Lightfoot).

thought] The glorious Person is viewed as (speaking in the forms of human conception) engaged in an act of reflection and resolve.

robbery] The Greek word occurs only here in the Greek Scriptures, and only once (in Plutarch, cent. 2) in secular Greek writers. Its form suggests the meaning of a process or act of grasp or seizure. But similar forms in actual usage are found to take readily the meaning of the result, or material, of an act or process. “An invader’s or plunderer’s prize” would thus fairly represent the word here. This interpretation is adopted and justified by Bp Lightfoot here. R.V. reads “a prize,” and in the margin “Gr. a thing to be grasped.” Liddell and Scott render, “a matter of robbery,” which is substantially the same; Bp Ellicott, “a thing to be seized on, or grasped at.”—The context is the best interpreter of the practical bearing of the word. In that context it appears that the Lord’s view of His Equality (see below) was not such as to withstand His gracious and mysterious Humiliation for our sakes, while yet the conditions of His Equality were such as to enhance the wonder and merit of that Humiliation to the utmost. Accordingly the phrase before us, to suit the context, (a) must not imply that He deemed Equality an unlawful possession, a thing which it would be robbery to claim, as some expositors, ancient and modern, have in error explained the words (see Alford’s note here, and St Chrysostom on this passage at large); (b) must imply that His thought about the Equality was one of supremely exemplary kindness towards us. These conditions are satisfied by the paraphrase—“He dealt with His true and rightful Equality not as a thing held anxiously, and only for Himself, as the gains of force or fraud are held, but as a thing in regard of which a most gracious sacrifice and surrender was possible, for us and our salvation.”

The A.V., along with many interpreters, appears to understand the Greek word as nearly equal to “usurpation”; as if to say, “He knew it was His just and rightful possession to be equal with God, and yet” &c. But the context and the Greek phraseology are unfavourable to this.

to be equal with God] R.V., to be on an equality with God, a phrase which perhaps better conveys what the original words suggest, that the reference is to equality of attributes rather than person (Lightfoot). The glorious Personage in view is not another and independent God, of rival power and glory, but the Christ of God, as truly and fully Divine as the Father.

Let us remember that these words occur not in a polytheistic reverie, but in the Holy Scriptures, which everywhere are jealous for the prerogative of the Lord God, and that they come from the pen of a man whose Pharisaic monotheism sympathized with this jealousy to the utmost. May it not then be asked, how—in any, way other than direct assertion, as in John 1:1–the true and proper Deity of Christ could be more plainly stated?

The word “God” on the other hand is here used manifestly with a certain distinctiveness of the Father. Christian orthodoxy, collecting the whole Scripture evidence, sees in this a testimony not to the view (e.g. of Arius, cent. 4) that the Son is God only in a secondary and inferior sense, but that the Father is the eternal, true, and necessary Fountain of the eternal, true, and necessary Godhead of the Son.—For this use of the word God, see e.g. John 1:1; 2 Corinthians 13:14; Hebrews 1:9; Revelation 20:6; Revelation 22:1.

For more of this commentary just go directly to https://biblehub.com click on that link to learn more for yourself. It goes directly to the topic, click on it and you'll see a separate window of the link.

Another reference of Christ Divinity - 
For sure you won't answer this blog post as it shows on the previous blog. But maybe it will help you something for additional insights. I will not use too much time in research for your homework, but I will just give some simple advice to read the scripture transparently not a bigot of a one-sided cult.

John 10
28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand.

30 I and my Father are one.

31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.

32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?

33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

Christ Deity as “with the father God“ caught all the Attention to Jewish belief of just one God the Father, but Christ proclaimed he is United with The Father, for he and the Father are(plural) One. This makes the issue even more complicated to Jewish traditions or teachings. They had concluded that Jesus Christ must be punished for blasphemy a sin worthy of death. Yet Christ manage to expound the scripture and quote it somewhere in Psalm 82 to prove his thoughts and teachings are inclined in the Laws and the Prophets. The word “I“ in the “I said, Ye are gods" has a divine equivalent which also shows his existence before the laws. "I" was not used in the scripture he quoted in Psalm 82, but he proclaims his divinity and existence. 

Another scripture I would like to add for our friend Job Bautista is the words from the prophet Isaiah. See the verses and let's expound it a little to our friend Job Bautista.

Isaiah 7:14

Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

Isaiah 8:8

And he shall pass through Judah; he shall overflow and go over, he shall reach even to the neck; and the stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy land, O Immanuel.

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, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

How much of our friend Job Bautista does know about it? Okay, but since I make some long words about this topic I would like to keep this Isaiah's Prophecies as a different topic for It would cost a lot of paper works to complete the discussion. Just leave it there Job Bautista for a Moment and Please Answer those posts above if you think you're good enough to debunk the Scripture with your INCultic Teachings.

Job Bautista: Misunderstandings Christ Divinity and Deity

I would like to post his hypocrite comments under his criticism and see how Job Bautista is not just a Bigot but also a hypocrite. I will post two of his comments. 

Let's go ahead and see his first post - 

Jerry Nuñez Bustillo 

According this cult defender his bigotry reasoning ( palusot lang ) just to evade the main issue of his topic he'd raised according to him that Jesus and God is equal in deity & divinity ? According to me? Really? When did I say that it's just a reason to evade the main issue? So much of you lying and deceiving, and it seems like your lying got extremely on a different level. I think you need to talk to your superior or minister to get over to that kind of attitude. You need to change the way you conversed with someone and you need a life and change or for good. Seriously? When did I say that? 

I don' t want to attack you personally but let us focus on the issue . Okay, good let's take some note about it and see if you can keep it. 

Is Jesus equal to God ? This is a good topic and let's use actual Greek Koine text to prove that. Let's get to that topic after my comments to your pretty words. 😆 LOL!

NKJV Bible. John 13:16

[16]Most assuredly, I say to you, a servant is not greater than his master; nor is he who is sent greater than he who sent him.

This scripture he tries to reference says something about the difference between Servants and Master. There are no questions about it and it has nothing to do with Christ's Divinity or Deity the context was all about Christ's example of service even though he was addressed as Master. Let's try reading the context to know about it -

John 13
12 So after he had washed their feet, and had taken his garments, and was set down again, he said unto them, Know ye what I have done to you?
13 Ye call me Master and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am.
14 If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye also ought to wash one another’s feet.
15 For I have given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you.
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.
17 If ye know these things, happy are ye if ye do them.

Mr. Little bit Harder , who is the servant mention in this verse? I think your question means who was the Master in this verse? The servant Jesus Christ taught was his disciples and he was called Master according to the context. But I think you need to rephrase that using the word who sent him in verse 16. I would answer it directly as his Father and the Father is always be the God of All Spirit, his the Father of all the Children in this World and that include Christ and us. But to think this disqualifies Christ Deity was so insane or ridiculed. Christ was sent and he already exists alongside the Father and was with the father during the Creation. This has been discussed the last time, but This Job Bautista makes so much of his excuse and bigotry. 

Perhaps our readers identify who is the loser this time ? Yeah, of course, they do. And you don't understand the context of that scripture. So, who do you think was the Loser? Loser!

And let's go-ahead to his second Post and see his claim of so much bigotry.

Jerry Nuñez Bustillo 

According to this cult defender that Jesus is co-equal of God of His divinity & deity? Yeah, cult defender, I'll make a note with that attacking personally. This seems too much hypocrisy. Anyway, let's dive ahead to see much of his failure. 

Let us study Mr Little bit Harder. You can do better than that Job Bautista. And it seems this hypocrisy is so familiar with INCult Doctrine and teachings. Nothing new. So, yeah try a little bit harder and make it double. 

Is Jesus is equal the divinity and deity of God ? As I have said this is a good topic. But let's go ahead and see how you understand it. Let's try and see how do you use the scripture and twist it.

NKJV Bible. 1 Corinthians 11:3

[3]But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.

Using this scripture seems very poor to defame Christ's Divinity. You are too slow to understand the Scriptures and yet you manage to twist it. 1 Corinthians 11 was all about the confusions of the church of God in Corinth and Paul made some examples of unity and of honoring the head, or should we say the author of the church comparing it with Man and Woman. He seems unfamiliar with it not knowing what happens ahead of that verse. Let's go and take a look - 

11 Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.
12 For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God.

Yes, we all know that the man is the head of the household. But that doesn't mean that a woman doesn't have any used or should not make decisions in the household under the direction of the husband. They are both parts of the household and there could be no perfection without the other who complete the harmony of the household. So, what does this verse says?... for the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman... And it seems that the man and the woman were to treat equally to the Lord. And he thinks nothing more about it but rather a hierarchical structure of the Church, which means they are certain level and if you're below, there's not a chance to aim higher. As Christ was the head and God was above Christ. Yes, in a sense that he is the Father of Christ, so of course he needs to be humble under the direction of the Father. This guy doesn't care about it because of his bigoted teachings. But rather there is a hierarchy in Deities. And it seems like Christ is below angels on their teachings, which means there's not a chance for Christ to sit on God's throne. 

Now, cult defender who is the head of Jesus ? Are they equal in divinity and deity? And let's talk about it as a promise that it is a good topic to discuss. Okay so let's get to it - (see topic after Job Bautista's third post) 

For an update, he made additional hypocrisy of his so-called I don't want attack personally and yet too much ad Hominem and Fallacy. So this is his third strike and let's go ahead will take a look - 

Jerry Nuñez Bustillo. Third address and let's try to see the message

Ayon sa kulto defender na ito na magkapantay lang daw ang pagka Diyos ni Panginoong Jesus at ng Ama? Cult Defender, you say? Have you looked at yourself in the mirror? You can't prove anything about your so-called cult defender, I do defend the truth and nothing else, not a Bigot like you who tries to insist on the INCultic doctrine, That has nothing to do about Christ Church. Try again Job Bautista. Make it harder this time. 🤣🤣🤣 

Mr. Little bit Harbet pwde ba buksan mo rin ang iyong isipan at mukhan kapit na kapit sayo si Sator na dumaya sayo! Rev. 12:9 and there goes the Red Herring Fallacy. You try to insert your Satur teachings that have nothing to do with the topic and you can't even define it. You may try again using that scripture to prove your claim. But if you can't, then there's no reason for you to insist on your Red Herring Fallacy. 

A red herring is something that misleads or distracts from a relevant or important question. It may be either a logical fallacy or a literary device that leads readers or audiences toward a false conclusion. A red herring may be used intentionally, as in mystery fiction or as part of rhetorical strategies (e.g., in politics), or may be used in argumentation inadvertently. - Wikipedia

Magkapantay nga ba si Panginoong Jesus at ang Ama? Sure let's answer that see the end of this commentary below to know the answers. 

NKJV Bible. 1 Corinthians 15:27-28

[27]For “He has put all things under His feet.” But when He says “all things are put under Him, ” it is evident that He who put all things under Him is excepted.

[28]Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all. Effects of Denying the Resurrection

There's another verse he thinks will disqualify Christ's Divinity. I have proven to you already in our previous discussion that you don't even attempt to answer. The verses you use are simply God's manifestation as the father of all living in which Christ is also the Son, which of course under the direction of the Father, or should we say the Father's right hand. Your understanding of the Scripture was too obvious that you don't know fully about Christ. See our previous discussions about this below - 

https://truth-reflects.blogspot.com/2021/09/job-bautista-poor-responses-and-weak.html?m=1

Pagkatapos mo nabasa ang talata Mr. Little bit Harber Jerry Bustillo. Okay, so what are you trying to say here? I had read everything and your selection of Scripture that you think is helpful for you to cover up your INCult doctrine. 

MAGKAPANTAY BA SI PJC AT ANG Ama ? Oh yeah sure, let's answer your plea Job Bautista, and to think you got the right choice in selecting some verses to misinterpret the scripture. Then you're wrong, and you'll never learn the truth. You need to ask someone to help you grow mature in your life. All but lamebrain. Sorry, was that an attack on you? And that's what you are, dolt.

Here let me give you my answer and understand it without hypocrisy and bigotry.

Divinity of Christ

Does the scripture say something about the divinity of Christ? 

Christ was the Eternal I Am. 

John 8

58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

59Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.

What would be the very reason why the people attempt to Stone the Christ? The answer is clear and simple, Christ claimed he was the Eternal I am, which is crossed referenced to Exodus 3:14 - 

And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.

Furthermore, here's an additional reference for you - 

• https://www.bibleversestudy.com/johngospel/john8-before-abraham-was-i-am.htm
• https://www.cornerstonecascade.com/sermons/before-abraham-was-i-am
• http://bibleone.net/WDCM-06.htm
• https://www.ligonier.org/learn/devotionals/abraham-was

Christ equal with God?

Job Bautista never included this even how the Jews sought to kill Christ and How did he introduce himself to them as the Son of God who is also a God. So, these verses will lead us to know how Christ helps the Jew understand his divine calling and Deity. Let's go ahead and read it -

John 5
17 ¶ But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.

18Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.

20 For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel.

21 For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will.

22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son:

23 That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.

This verse clearly shows that the Jews understand Christ's proclamation, that he was with the father before he was sent to earth and became human. He maketh himself Equal with God the Father. The Jews dispute him of his words and attempt to stone him for blasphemy. He (Christ) never said any correction of their wrong understanding, but rather explain it much deeper until the Jews got mad at his words. On the other hand, Christ also, saw what the Father did and do it even the same. Sounds unfamiliar, but that's what the Bible said. The Father loved him so he committed all the judgment and honor to his Son. Not new, but it is Christ's divine calling that proves his deity. 

The second verse is much relevant and it is even a testimony of Christ's deity. Let's follow Paul's words about it.

Philippians 2

5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:

6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:

10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;

11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

These simple words from Paul remind us of how Christ is obedient to the Father and came into this world in a form of a servant. But did Paul misuse the word about Christ Deity, in which he said clearly “it not robbery to be equal with God“. What was the Greek usage of that? Let's try Nestle Arland - 

NA28 - Philippians 2:6 ὃς ἐν μορφῇ θεοῦ ὑπάρχων οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο τὸ εἶναι ἴσα θεῷ,

The text (μορφῇ θεοῦ) "morphē Theou" or Form of God obviously was used as to denotes Christ Divinity and was followed Shortly with (εἶναι ἴσα θεῷ) "einai isa Theō" which means to be equal with God. See the table image for your reference Job Bautista.

The word robbery was not included in the Greek text, see some of the commentaries to learn from it below in the next Paragraph - 

Let's try to see a commentary from Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

6. Who] in His pre-existent glory. We have in this passage an N.T. counterpart to the O.T. revelation of Messiah’s “coming to do the will of His God” (Psalm 40:6-8, interpreted Hebrews 10:5).

being] The Greek word slightly indicates that He not only “was,” but “already was,” in a state antecedent to and independent of the action to be described. R.V. margin has “Gr. originally being”; but the American Revisers dissent.

in the form of God] The word rendered “form” is morphê. This word, unlike our “form” in its popular meaning, connotes reality along with appearance, or in other words denotes an appearance which is manifestation. It thus differs from the word (schêma) rendered “fashion” in Php 2:8 below; where see note. See notes on Romans 12:2 in this Series for further remarks on the difference between the two words; and cp. for full discussions, Abp Trench’s Synonyms, under μορφή, and Bp Lightfoot’s Philippians, detached note to ch. 2.

Here then our Redeeming Lord is revealed as so subsisting “in the form of God” that He was what He seemed, and seemed what He was—God. (See further, the next note below, and on Php 2:7.) “Though [morphê] is not the same as [ousia, essence], yet the possession of the [morphê] involves participation in the [ousia] also, for [morphê] implies not the external accidents [only?] but the essential attributes” (Lightfoot).

thought] The glorious Person is viewed as (speaking in the forms of human conception) engaged in an act of reflection and resolve.

robbery] The Greek word occurs only here in the Greek Scriptures, and only once (in Plutarch, cent. 2) in secular Greek writers. Its form suggests the meaning of a process or act of grasp or seizure. But similar forms in actual usage are found to take readily the meaning of the result, or material, of an act or process. “An invader’s or plunderer’s prize” would thus fairly represent the word here. This interpretation is adopted and justified by Bp Lightfoot here. R.V. reads “a prize,” and in the margin “Gr. a thing to be grasped.” Liddell and Scott render, “a matter of robbery,” which is substantially the same; Bp Ellicott, “a thing to be seized on, or grasped at.”—The context is the best interpreter of the practical bearing of the word. In that context it appears that the Lord’s view of His Equality (see below) was not such as to withstand His gracious and mysterious Humiliation for our sakes, while yet the conditions of His Equality were such as to enhance the wonder and merit of that Humiliation to the utmost. Accordingly the phrase before us, to suit the context, (a) must not imply that He deemed Equality an unlawful possession, a thing which it would be robbery to claim, as some expositors, ancient and modern, have in error explained the words (see Alford’s note here, and St Chrysostom on this passage at large); (b) must imply that His thought about the Equality was one of supremely exemplary kindness towards us. These conditions are satisfied by the paraphrase—“He dealt with His true and rightful Equality not as a thing held anxiously, and only for Himself, as the gains of force or fraud are held, but as a thing in regard of which a most gracious sacrifice and surrender was possible, for us and our salvation.”

The A.V., along with many interpreters, appears to understand the Greek word as nearly equal to “usurpation”; as if to say, “He knew it was His just and rightful possession to be equal with God, and yet” &c. But the context and the Greek phraseology are unfavourable to this.

to be equal with God] R.V., to be on an equality with God, a phrase which perhaps better conveys what the original words suggest, that the reference is to equality of attributes rather than person (Lightfoot). The glorious Personage in view is not another and independent God, of rival power and glory, but the Christ of God, as truly and fully Divine as the Father.

Let us remember that these words occur not in a polytheistic reverie, but in the Holy Scriptures, which everywhere are jealous for the prerogative of the Lord God, and that they come from the pen of a man whose Pharisaic monotheism sympathized with this jealousy to the utmost. May it not then be asked, how—in any, way other than direct assertion, as in John 1:1–the true and proper Deity of Christ could be more plainly stated?

The word “God” on the other hand is here used manifestly with a certain distinctiveness of the Father. Christian orthodoxy, collecting the whole Scripture evidence, sees in this a testimony not to the view (e.g. of Arius, cent. 4) that the Son is God only in a secondary and inferior sense, but that the Father is the eternal, true, and necessary Fountain of the eternal, true, and necessary Godhead of the Son.—For this use of the word God, see e.g. John 1:1; 2 Corinthians 13:14; Hebrews 1:9; Revelation 20:6; Revelation 22:1.

For more of this commentary just go directly to https://biblehub.com click on that link to learn more for yourself. It goes directly to the topic, click on it and you'll see a separate window of the link.

Another reference of Christ Divinity - 
For sure you won't answer this blog post as it shows on the previous blog. But maybe it will help you something for additional insights. I will not use too much time in research for your homework, but I will just give some simple advice to read the scripture transparently not a bigot of a one-sided cult.

John 10
28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand.

30 I and my Father are one.

31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.

32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?

33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

Christ Deity as “with the father God“ caught all the Attention to Jewish belief of just one God the Father, but Christ proclaimed he is United with The Father, for he and the Father are(plural) One. This makes the issue even more complicated to Jewish traditions or teachings. They had concluded that Jesus Christ must be punished for blasphemy a sin worthy of death. Yet Christ manage to expound the scripture and quote it somewhere in Psalm 82 to prove his thoughts and teachings are inclined in the Laws and the Prophets. The word “I“ in the “I said, Ye are gods" has a divine equivalent which also shows his existence before the laws. "I" was not used in the scripture he quoted in Psalm 82, but he proclaims his divinity and existence. 

Another scripture I would like to add for our friend Job Bautista is the words from the prophet Isaiah. See the verses and let's expound it a little to our friend Job Bautista.

Isaiah 7:14

Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

Isaiah 8:8

And he shall pass through Judah; he shall overflow and go over, he shall reach even to the neck; and the stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy land, O Immanuel.

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, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

How much of our friend Job Bautista does know about it? Okay, but since I make some long words about this topic I would like to keep this Isaiah's Prophecies as a different topic for It would cost a lot of paper works to complete the discussion. Just leave it there Job Bautista for a Moment and Please Answer those posts above if you think you're good enough to debunk the Scripture with your INCultic Teachings.