Christians break Gods first commandment by believing that Jesus is God.

In Luke 17:21 Jesus tells the Pharisees that the Kingdom of God is within you. He is not telling them that he is God or that he, 'God and the Spirit are one in the same.' In 1 Corinthians 2:16 Paul asks the rhetorical question, 'For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ.' Assuming that when Paul writes 'the Lord' he means God, (in reference to Isaiah 40:13-14) can we positively assert that this verse is evidence that God and Jesus are one of the same? This verse is actually good evidence that God and Jesus are not one and the same. If Paul wanted to convey in this verse that God (the Lord) and Christ (Jesus) were one and the same then the verse would make no scenes; it would contradict its self. Allow me to replace 'the Lord' and 'Christ' with 'God' in order to illustrate my point. 'For who hath known the mind of God, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of God.' I am sure we can agree that in the first instance Pauls rhetorical question is stated in order to demonstrate that we do not know the mind of God. If Paul then writes that we have the mind of God then clearly this would make no scenes and would completely contradict what he just said. Let us now gain clarification from other scriptures written by Paul to assert if he did actually believe that Jesus is God. 'For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus' (1 Timothy 2:5) 'That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him' (Ephesians 1:17) Interoperating 1 Corinthians 2:16 to mean that Jesus and God are one and the same is ambiguous at best. Personally I think it is an illogical and nonsensical interpretation. The two verses that I provided above written by Paul are unambiguous, they clearly state that Jesus and God are not one and the same and that Jesus is not God. John 3 - You say that John was describing Jesus within the context of the block of text. The text is a conversation between Jesus and Nicodemus. In John 3:4 Nicodemus asks Jesus "How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?" In verse 6 Jesus explains to Nicodemus what it means to be born again through baptism/spirit rather than the physical birth/flesh. In verse 16 Jesus goes onto say "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." He is telling Nicodemus that if he believes in him then he will not perish but have eternal life. What is Jesus asking him to believe other than what he just told him? Did Jesus just tell him that he is God? No. So why should Nicodemus, you or anyone else believe such a thing if it is not what Jesus said? John is not alluding to anything, you are. John is simply documenting the conversation between Jesus and Nicodemus. Isaiah 9:6 - Christians do not believe that Jesus is the everlasting Father. Isaiah referred to Eliakim as 'a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah (Isaiah 22:21). Isaiah wrote this about Eliakim figuratively. When he writes that the Messiah will be called 'The everlasting Father' he clearly is writing this figuratively, referring to him representing the Father because the Messiah is never actually called 'The everlasting Father'. Yahweh is the Hebrew word used exclusively for God. El is not exclusively used for God it can also be attributed to men. Was Jesus a might man that represented the Father God? Yes, of course. The Hebrew speaking Rabbis never interpreted this verse to mean that the Messiah will be God. He was (and still is) expected to be human, not God. The First Epistle of Peter is a letter addressed to various churches in Asia Minor suffering religious persecution. In chapter 3 verse 17 Peter writes 'For it is better, if the will of God be so, that ye suffer for well doing, than for evil doing.' In the following verse that you have provided Peter explains that Jesus also suffered, that he was put to death and his spirit was brought back to life. Peter writes that he did so to bring us closer to God, he does not write that Jesus is God. In 1 Corinthians 5:14 Paul writes that Jesus 'was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures'. Verse 15 states that God raised up Christ. Nowhere in this chapter, any other chapter in Corinthians or any other book in the Bible does it state that the resurrection of Jesus was evidence of him being God. Matthew 10:8 describes Jesus instructing his disciples to resurrect people and the Bible tells us of numerous people being resurrected. After Jesus was Resurrected he said "I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God." These words spoken by Jesus explicitly state that he is not God. You assert that Jesus is God because his Mother is human but his Father is God. What about Adam and Eve? Their Mother and Father was God. If avoiding being conceived via intercourse renders one free from original sin then what about those born from In vitro fertilisation (IVF). According to your logic they too must be free from original sin. You have still provided absolutely no Biblical evidence that Jesus, God and the Spirit are 'one in the same.' Where is your acknowledgement of the Biblical evidence that I submitted clearly stating that God cannot be a man? "Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve" (Mathew 4:10). If sufficient and unambiguous Biblical evidence cannot be provided of Jesus being God then Christians are guilty of breaking the first commandment. So far it is not looking good.