• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

‘Jesus was WITH GOD’ therefore Jesus WAS GOD?

Sargonski

Well-Known Member
that's all 101G need to Know. the term sons of God in the bible only refer to humans. and no one else. so your question is irrelevant. if you can find just one verse that the sons of God that do not refer to human, .... DIRECTLY, without metaphoric mentioning, then101G will answer you.

now before you open your mouth concerning Job 38:7 "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" the morning stars here, in Job 38 are the actual stars in the heavens, and the sons of God here, in Job 38 are the actual Sun and moon metaphorically spoken of.

so, just one verse concerning the sons of God that are not human. post book chapter and verse please.

101G.

You running around making up unsupported nonsense about claims the Bible .. does not make such claims true mate. Not only are the stars in the heavens rejoicing .. and the earth the moon the peoples of the earth and everything else the author can think of .. .. but the Sons of God as well. the passage does not say or imply in any way shape or form that the stars are the sons of God.. this is ridiculous, fallacious and unsupported nonsense on your part.

Sorry G - at the end of the day it matters not what you think Son's of God means .. nor some fundamentalist apologist site "got questions" for example - telling you lies. Do you not understand ? What matters is what the Israelites singing Psalm 82 in Church in 1000 BC thought .. and all the Isratelites at that time believed in a divine Pantheon .. and that YHWH was a Son of the Elohim.

Further -- your claim that the Stars in the sky came down and had sex with human women is obvious nonsense --- and this is what you are inferring .. whether or not you realize it .. The Sons of God came down and mated with the daughters of men--- not the moon and the stars.
 

Sargonski

Well-Known Member
Hi @Sargonski and @101G

I don't really want to enter into your debate other than to make a specific and single point regarding "the Sons of God" in psalms 82 that you two are discussing.

You seem to be talking apples and oranges.

For example, Sargonski seems to be referring to a historical Judeo-Christian definition where the Sons of God ARE Sons of God just as the scripture alludes to while 101G seems to be referring to a personal, and modern metaphorical interpretation where "Sons of God" are "actual stars in the heavens".

Thus while Sargonski has historical Judeo-Christian Literature (e.g. Dead Sea Scroll thanksgiving psalms, Ancient heavenly council literature, etc. ) on his side, 101G is left to create a very strange metaphor where inanimate stars are able to "shout for joy".

The point is that Sargonski seems to be using a historical Judeo-Christian definition, 101G is using a personal and modern definition.

So, if you ask religious textual historians of the period who is correct, they will obviously vote for Sargonski (who seems to have some historical background). If you ask 101G if he is right, who know who will vote in favor for his definition other than himself, and perhaps a scattered group of non-historians.

Thus, 101Gs personal interpretive theory must remain OUTSIDE religious history, his personal interpretation can survive in the world of dogma but it cannot survive in the world of ancient sacred Judeo-Christian historical literature while Sargonski's claim is perfectly comfortable in the world of ancient historical literature such as the thanksgiving psalms.

In any case, good luck in coming to your own individual understanding of such references.

Clear
ακτζνεω

Good Post - It is the perspective that matters --- the Fundamentalist wishes to fit the narrative into the box they have constructed for God - making the meaning of the text conform to some story they have concocted about God.

I say who cares about my perspective, my "Personal interpretation" -- what did this mean to the audience for which it was created - what did the box these folks have for God Look like .. what was their Personal interpretation .. - and we now have a pretty good idea what these folks believed - from the history - archaelology .. texts from the other peoples at the time .. what their religious beliefs were .. linguistic relationships .. such as Hebrew is derived from Canaanite ..

and the funny thing .. is that the Bible conforms perfectly with what we find - now some of these ancient stories make sense .. can be made sense of ..

"Bne e-aliem" Sons of the Elohim -- Sons of the Gods actually .. or God depending on Context .. this Phrase used quite a number of times in the Bibe ---each time there are many Gods in the Picture .. which is perfectly fine because the Israelites believed in many Gods .. but this did not make them polytheistic .. as they were only to worship one. ... and this is what YHWH is Jealous of .. those other Gods .. who he battles throughout the OT. One of the Sons of El -- duking it out for El's position as Cheif God on Earth --- El fades into the background .. still "most high" in the heavens though .. Still head of the Divine Council .

Now in reality - not only did the Israelites believe in these other Gods .. they spent most of their time worshiping these other Gods .. never engaging in Sole YHWH worship for any length of time. "THE BIBLE TELLS US SO" That is the story the Bible tells us . completely conforming to the history/archaeology .. happilly sacrificing children -- or unhappilly but doing it never the less .. Just as the Bible Tells us -

When you went to a YHWH temple .. "back in the Day" .. you would find Asherah Poles .. Standing Stone (which represented the God - YHWHs consort in this case) along with the requisite Male and Female Temple Prostitutes .. and should the necessity arise .. needing to defeat an enemy God .. a "High Place" should a sacrifice of the first Fruits be required.


that's all 101G need to Know. the term sons of God in the bible only refer to humans.

101G.

NO G -- The "Council of EL" was not a council of human magistrates .. to the Israelites - This is not God standing in the midst of .. and defeating some Human Judges --

" You are Gods -- Sons of the Supreme one" Says YHWH -- addressing those present in the Divine Assembly of the Gods ?

How on earth does one figure that these are human magistrates .. being referred to as "Sons of the Supreme one" ? The same ones that are supposedly up in heaven .. attending some function with the Most High" -- Satan happening to be among these Sons of the Elohim .. and now you are claiming that Satan was a human as well ? these Sons of God .. up in the heaven .. having cordial chit chat with "The Most HIgh" .. are Human magistrates .. .. some of whome had the power to bring fire down from the sky -- is this seriously what you think the Israelites believed ?

Who is the Supreme one in this story > Obviously "EL -- is the Council of El .. but if we suppose it is YHWH -- and has to be one or the other .. then who are all these Sons of YHWH .. that YHWH ends up destroying ?

"God stands in[b] the assembly of El;[c] in the midst of the gods[d] he renders judgment"

Every Israelite - and every nation around Israel -- Knows what the Assembly of El is. Even if you don't . YHWH is not standing in the midst of some human magistrates .. he is standing in the midst of the Gods .. as the "Divine Council of EL" is not made up of Mortals .. not located on Earth .. according to these folks.

So even if you don't understand what the Divine Council was ... The Israelites did not suffer the same affliction .. and there were no Humans among the "Bne e-aliem" according to the Israelites. that wrote the song
 
Last edited:

Soapy

Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
can U READ? I said before I answer, let's set the terms for the sons of God so that there be no excuses. .... READ BEFORE U SPEAK.

101G.
A ‘Son of God’ is anyone that carries out the commands of God in God’s full satisfaction.

Holy Angels are such ones in Heaven.

Jesus Christ is the only one of mankind who fits the definition of ‘Son of God’ therefore, in terms of humanity, Jesus Christ is the ‘Only Son of God’… as scriptures says.
——————————————

Answer me these questions:

Jesus Christ said that he was going away and he was going to prepare a place for the saints in his fathers house - a room in his fathers house.
But you say that Jesus is the Father.

Is that right?
———————

Jesus says that he is going to the Father.
But you say Jesus is the Father.

Is that right?
———————

Jesus says that the Father will send another Advocator to the saints.
But you say Jesus is both that same other Advocator as well as the Father who sends the other Advocator AND the Jesus that is going away to himself.

Is that right?
 
Last edited:

Hermit Philosopher

Selflessly here for you
This should be a very short debate:
  • If Jesus was ‘WITH God’ how could he ‘BE GOD’?
  • Who is ‘GOD’ that Jesus was ‘WITH’?
Apparently, not a so short debate.

I’d say that it is not quite right to think of Jesus as God, because Jesus posses the perspective of the Son, whiles God has the overall outlook of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

God, if you will, is the “full picture” perspective.

Humbly,
Hermit
 

Soapy

Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
Apparently, not a so short debate.
It was a tongue-in-cheek remark!!
I’d say that it is not quite right to think of Jesus as God, because Jesus posses the perspective of the Son, whiles God has the overall outlook of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

God, if you will, is the “full picture” perspective.

Humbly,
Hermit
Can you expand on what you mean. There are many ideologies expressed in this forum that I have never heard before. It sounds like you have yet another trinitarian-based ideology yet still correct that Jesus is not God!

The part that flummox me is how it is said that God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

What are you saying?
 

Hermit Philosopher

Selflessly here for you
It was a tongue-in-cheek remark!!

Can you expand on what you mean. There are many ideologies expressed in this forum that I have never heard before. It sounds like you have yet another trinitarian-based ideology yet still correct that Jesus is not God!

The part that flummox me is how it is said that God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

What are you saying?
I don’t know your background so it will be difficult to choose words and parables that make sense to you, but I can try.

May I first ask what age you are roughly,
which country you grew up in, and what line of work you are in or what your schooling is? Just to give me an idea of which concepts to use regarding The Trinity.

Humbly,
Hermit
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
that's all 101G need to Know. the term sons of God in the bible only refer to humans. and no one else. so your question is irrelevant. if you can find just one verse that the sons of God that do not refer to human, .... DIRECTLY, without metaphoric mentioning, then101G will answer you.

now before you open your mouth concerning Job 38:7 "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" the morning stars here, in Job 38 are the actual stars in the heavens, and the sons of God here, in Job 38 are the actual Sun and moon metaphorically spoken of.

so, just one verse concerning the sons of God that are not human. post book chapter and verse please.

101G.
What about Job 1:6?
 

101G

Well-Known Member
Thus, 101Gs personal interpretive theory must remain OUTSIDE religious history, his personal interpretation can survive in the world of dogma but it cannot survive in the world of ancient sacred Judeo-Christian historical literature while Sargonski's claim is perfectly comfortable in the world of ancient historical literature such as the thanksgiving psalms.

In any case, good luck in coming to your own individual understanding of such references.

Clear
thanks for entering the discussion.
Maybe you was not listing to what 101G said. in Job 38:7 "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" now, 101G said that this is Metaphorical. let 101G prove his point.

here in Job 38 God almighty are using metaphors. Example, Job 38:4 "Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. Job 38:5 "Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? Job 38:6 "Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof”. We know that the earth has no foundation or corner stone physically. How do we know this? right in the same book of Job it states this, Job 26:7 "He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing”. God himself is what keep the earth where it is. Understand, God is giving metaphors to Job and us to understand what he did in creation, again, Job 38:8 "Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had issued out of the womb?”. We all know that there are no actual physical doors holding back the water of the seas, the almighty do that himself. But God is using metaphors to give Job and his friends, as well as US, understanding about creation. Now we will solve the “morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?”. First the morning stars. Remember 101G said that the morning stars are the actual stars in the heavens. Let’s go to the book of James first. Follow and understand. James 1:17 "Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning”. The almighty is called the “Father” of lights, and lights here is plural, and is the Greek word, G5457 φῶς phos (fōs') n. which means luminousness. Now hold that thought and go to Thayer's Greek Definitions or the blue letter bible online, and look up G3962 πατήρ pater, (Father)
- Transliteration: Pater
- Phonetic: pat-ayr'
- Definition:
1. generator or male ancestor
a. either the nearest ancestor: father of the corporeal nature, natural fathers, both parents.
THIS IS WHAT MOST PEOPLE THINK WHEN THEY HEAR THE WORD “FATHER”.

but we are interested in the 3rd definition, and here it is, listen.
3. God is called the Father
a. of the stars,
the heavenly luminaries, because he is their creator, upholder, ruler


God is the Father of the “STARS”, and the heavenly luminaries. Yes, the literal stars in the sky. google the word stars, please add the “s” to the end of stars, for Job said, morning “stars” not morning “star”, but stars. A star is a luminous sphere of plasma held together by its own gravity. The nearest star to Earth is the Sun. Many other stars are visible to the naked eye from Earth during the night, appearing as a multitude of fixed luminous points in the sky due to their immense distance from Earth. Again, the stars are the actual stars in the heavens. Now, go to dictionary.com, or the free dictionary, or any dictionary and look up luminaries in the plural: a celestial body, as the sun or moon. Now let’s see this sun and moon and the actual stars and what they did in Job 38:7. Remember the Almighty said that they sang and shouted for joy. Let’s see this metaphor clearly. Psalms 148:1 "Praise ye the LORD. Praise ye the LORD from the heavens: praise him in the heights. Verse 2 Praise ye him, all his angels: praise ye him, all his hosts. 3 Praise ye him, sun and moon: praise him, all ye stars of light. 4 Praise him, ye heavens of heavens, and ye waters that be above the heavens. 5 Let them praise the name of the LORD: for he commanded, and they were created”. Now what do the word praise mean here? It is the Hebrew word, H1984 הָלַל halal (haw-lal') v. which can be translated as “sing”, or “shine”. understand the stars, the sun and the moon sang or praised God by shining their lights. One more, Psalms 65:13 "The pastures are clothed with flocks; the valleys also are covered over with corn; they shout for joy, they also sing”. The pastures, and valleys also praising God? Yes, how? by shouting for joy and singing. It’s all a metaphor. Do we now understand?.

the actual Stars in heaven in creation praised God by SINGING, meaning shining their Light. likewise, the sun and moon.

now clear, if you do not agree ... prove 101G in ERROR, else you own 101G an apology.

know and ....... UNDERSTAND your bible.

101G.
 

101G

Well-Known Member
You running around making up unsupported nonsense about claims the Bible .. does not make such claims true mate. Not only are the stars in the heavens rejoicing .. and the earth the moon the peoples of the earth and everything else the author can think of .. .. but the Sons of God as well. the passage does not say or imply in any way shape or form that the stars are the sons of God.. this is ridiculous, fallacious and unsupported nonsense on your part.

Sorry G - at the end of the day it matters not what you think Son's of God means .. nor some fundamentalist apologist site "got questions" for example - telling you lies. Do you not understand ? What matters is what the Israelites singing Psalm 82 in Church in 1000 BC thought .. and all the Isratelites at that time believed in a divine Pantheon .. and that YHWH was a Son of the Elohim.

Further -- your claim that the Stars in the sky came down and had sex with human women is obvious nonsense --- and this is what you are inferring .. whether or not you realize it .. The Sons of God came down and mated with the daughters of men--- not the moon and the stars.
see post #149. ...... (smile).

101G.
 

101G

Well-Known Member
Good Post - It is the perspective that matters --- the Fundamentalist wishes to fit the narrative into the box they have constructed for God - making the meaning of the text conform to some story they have concocted about God.

I say who cares about my perspective, my "Personal interpretation" -- what did this mean to the audience for which it was created - what did the box these folks have for God Look like .. what was their Personal interpretation .. - and we now have a pretty good idea what these folks believed - from the history - archaelology .. texts from the other peoples at the time .. what their religious beliefs were .. linguistic relationships .. such as Hebrew is derived from Canaanite ..

and the funny thing .. is that the Bible conforms perfectly with what we find - now some of these ancient stories make sense .. can be made sense of ..

"Bne e-aliem" Sons of the Elohim -- Sons of the Gods actually .. or God depending on Context .. this Phrase used quite a number of times in the Bibe ---each time there are many Gods in the Picture .. which is perfectly fine because the Israelites believed in many Gods .. but this did not make them polytheistic .. as they were only to worship one. ... and this is what YHWH is Jealous of .. those other Gods .. who he battles throughout the OT. One of the Sons of El -- duking it out for El's position as Cheif God on Earth --- El fades into the background .. still "most high" in the heavens though .. Still head of the Divine Council .

Now in reality - not only did the Israelites believe in these other Gods .. they spent most of their time worshiping these other Gods .. never engaging in Sole YHWH worship for any length of time. "THE BIBLE TELLS US SO" That is the story the Bible tells us . completely conforming to the history/archaeology .. happilly sacrificing children -- or unhappilly but doing it never the less .. Just as the Bible Tells us -

When you went to a YHWH temple .. "back in the Day" .. you would find Asherah Poles .. Standing Stone (which represented the God - YHWHs consort in this case) along with the requisite Male and Female Temple Prostitutes .. and should the necessity arise .. needing to defeat an enemy God .. a "High Place" should a sacrifice of the first Fruits be required.




NO G -- The "Council of EL" was not a council of human magistrates .. to the Israelites - This is not God standing in the midst of .. and defeating some Human Judges --

" You are Gods -- Sons of the Supreme one" Says YHWH -- addressing those present in the Divine Assembly of the Gods ?

How on earth does one figure that these are human magistrates .. being referred to as "Sons of the Supreme one" ? The same ones that are supposedly up in heaven .. attending some function with the Most High" -- Satan happening to be among these Sons of the Elohim .. and now you are claiming that Satan was a human as well ? these Sons of God .. up in the heaven .. having cordial chit chat with "The Most HIgh" .. are Human magistrates .. .. some of whome had the power to bring fire down from the sky -- is this seriously what you think the Israelites believed ?

Who is the Supreme one in this story > Obviously "EL -- is the Council of El .. but if we suppose it is YHWH -- and has to be one or the other .. then who are all these Sons of YHWH .. that YHWH ends up destroying ?

"God stands in[b] the assembly of El;[c] in the midst of the gods[d] he renders judgment"

Every Israelite - and every nation around Israel -- Knows what the Assembly of El is. Even if you don't . YHWH is not standing in the midst of some human magistrates .. he is standing in the midst of the Gods .. as the "Divine Council of EL" is not made up of Mortals .. not located on Earth .. according to these folks.

So even if you don't understand what the Divine Council was ... The Israelites did not suffer the same affliction .. and there were no Humans among the "Bne e-aliem" according to the Israelites. that wrote the song
see post #149. ...... (smile).

101G.
 

101G

Well-Known Member
What about Job 1:6?
sure, what about Job 1:6 .... LOL, LOL, LOL. Oh my. well let's look at Job 1:6 "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them."

#1, the sons of God who came and present themselves before the LORD is A, human, and B. they presented themselves before the LORD here on EARTH, and NOT IN HEAVEN..... Listen and learn.
A. "the sons of God who came and present themselves before the LORD". this is nothing new. and yes, it was here on heath. supportive scripture.
Joshua 24:1 "And Joshua gathered all the tribes of Israel to Shechem, and called for the elders of Israel, and for their heads, and for their judges, and for their officers; and they presented themselves before God”. this presenting of the heads of Israel was on earth, and not in heaven. Likewise, the sons of God in Job 1:6, and 2:1 was “earth born” men/sons of God who presented themselves before God here on PLANET EARTH. One very important scripture also in the book of Job as to who a son of God is was revealed to us clearly, Job himself and his faithful friends. listen, Job 1:3 "His substance also was seven thousand sheep, and three thousand camels, and five hundred yoke of oxen, and five hundred she asses, and a very great household; so that this man was the greatest of all the men of the east”. if one will read, starting at Job 1:1 we would know that this is speaking of the man Job. in verse 3 the word “Men” there, is the Hebrew word, H1121 בֵּן ben (bane), which means sons as in Genesis 6. but one might say these are not sons of God “Ben HaElohim". Let’s stop here and think about something. What is the subject here? Job and his friends presenting themselves before God. Is this strange that Satan came among them? No, it has happened before. Scripture, Genesis 3:1 "Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?”. Here Adam and Eve are the children of God, H1121 בֵּן ben (bane) which means sons, for Eve is an Adam also. But what’s so interesting is the use of words in expressing who Job was. Notice the verse states, “so that this man was the greatest of all the men of the east”. Here “man”, and “men” are used in the same verse. Why didn’t the bible use the Hebrew word, H582 אֱנוֹשׁ 'enowsh (en-oshe') n-m. for men? It means,
אֲנָשִׁים 'enowsh (en-oshe') [plural]
1. (properly) a mortal (and thus differing from the more dignified H120).
2. (hence) a man in general (singly or collectively).

Looking at definition #1, was not Job a mortal man? And why not use H376 אִישׁ 'iysh (eesh) n-m or אִישִׁים 'iysh (eesh) plural for men of the east instead of “sons”/ H1121 בָּנִים baniym (ba-neem') in the plural. H376 אִישׁ 'iysh means a man as an individual or a male person. It is the contracted for H582, Which simply means a mortal or a man in general. STOP, THIS JUST TOLD US JOB NOR HIS FRIENDS WERE NOT JUST MORTAL MEN IN GENERAL. By using the definition of H1121, instead of H582 אֱנוֹשׁ 'enowsh, that without a doubt is saying something and making a statement about Job and his friends that is not made by men in general. No, this man Job is a son of God, let’s see it clearly. Romans 5:14 "Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come”. there were some men “AFTER” Adam who did not sin as he did. Now I wonder who some of those men were, maybe just maybe the Children Adam and Eve had in the Garden before falling into sin? or in offspring of Job and his friends? I am convinced without a doubt that some of these men are Job and his friends/brothers/sons of the east, who are sons of God. Righteous, as said .... "PERFECT"/

Here is my proof that Job was a son of God. In the very first verse it states that Job is a Man, and the word used there is H376 אִישׁ 'iysh (eesh) n-m. meaning, a man as an individual or a male person. But in verse 3 the proper use of men here should have been, אִישִׁים 'iysh (eesh) the plural of man, which is “men”. but No, God used H1121 בָּנִים baniym (ba-neem') in the plural, meaning “sons”, as in Genesis chapter 6.

conclusion, clearly God is telling us that Job and these other men of the EAST are not men in general, ..... mortal yes, but these men have a title, “sons of God”. This title is given to men and women who life God is pleased with. Job and his friends was reprove of God which is one of the qualification of a son of God, scripture, Hebrews 12:6 "For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. 7 "If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? 8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye ********, and not sons”. This is what the whole book of Job is all about, if God didn’t love these men/sons then they are ********, and not sons as Hebrews points out.

Job 1:8 "And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil?”. This verse says it all.

Job was a NATURAL HUMAN, with the title "son of God", yes human. we suggest one read the Book of Job for your edification.

101G,
 

Soapy

Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
I don’t know your background so it will be difficult to choose words and parables that make sense to you, but I can try.

May I first ask what age you are roughly,
which country you grew up in, and what line of work you are in or what your schooling is? Just to give me an idea of which concepts to use regarding The Trinity.

Humbly,
Hermit
Sorry, I do not believe in a trinity and the rest is irrelevant.

What I believe is that Jesus was a man born holy and sinless and was endowed with the spirit of God (often called, ‘[the] Holy Spirit’, Chosen by God as a true servant as per Isaiah 42:1 and Acts 10:37-38.

This Jesus [Christ] is the replacement for the first created man, Adam (as per the reference: ‘The last Adam’, ‘Last’ because no other sinless man (an ADAM) would ever be created.

God created a physical world to be occupied by physical entities and ruled over by a physical IMAGE of Himself. If Jesus is God then that point is perfectly pointless since if Jesus is God, Jesus is ALREADY RULER over the FAR greater kingdom of Heaven - a kingdom not restrained by physical laws like the physical world. Also, for Jesus (as God) to become ruler (See Temptation by Satan in the wilderness) over the whole world he would effectively be DEMOTING HIMSELF.

But how can God DEMOTE himself from being GOD? How can one PART (person) of God be different from the other two as Trinitarians confusingly claim? Afterall, GOD is IMMUTABLE!!! And what does ‘Immutable’ mean?

To try to claim God as immutable yet one person of the trinity God goes through MANY CHANGES including BEING DEAD and having to be resurrected again by ‘GOD’?! Trinitarians claim that Jesus had TWO IDENTITIES… which itself is a disjointed claim since it still doesn’t show how ONE PART OF GOD could be flesh and yet DID NOT CHANGE!

But NEITHER the Father nor the Spirit of God ever changes - they are both unchanging - and why? Because the spirit of God is just that - an ATTRIBUTE of God - of the Father. The Father never changes therefore His Spirit never changes . Indeed, if God ever changed it would mean that God was not fully ALMIGHTY yet we declare Him to be so!

Jesus, on the other hand, was born, was taught, grew, aged, was obedient to parents and laws of men but not diverting the laws of God, though he was, until called into service BY GOD, was never TESTED to subvert them - testimony of which is shown when, after returning from the temptation in the wilderness, (or was it before he was anointed?? I’ll check in that!) he declared in the synagogue that the ‘Year of the Lord’ had been realised ‘IN HIM’. The people hearing him were astonished because they had known him as just a humble compliant child/man who was a carpenter in the household of, son of, the man, Joseph.

Now, regarding Jesus task that GOD SENT HIM TO DO (How did God send him if he WAS GOD?). The ‘Sending’ was AFTER Jesus was anointed BY GOD. Trinitarians translators inserted the words ‘from Heaven’ into the scriptures wherein Jesus said:
  • ‘No one has ever ascended into Heaven who didn’t first descend [FROM HEAVEN]’
Jesus, here, means that in order to enter Heaven a man must FIRST DIE… like he told Nicodemus that to see Heaven a man must first be REBORN… and that for a seed to grid if must FIRST DIE… if these analogies don’t wash then the issue is between the unbeliever, and Jesus Christ who spoke it and the spirit of God (the Spirit of Truth) that enables it.

And witness that Jesus never says that he is going BACK to the Father. He only ever says that he is ‘Going TO the Father’… ‘Going TO HIS GOD’.

So Jesus lives for a few years delivering the TESTIMONY OF the FATHER… then dies to save mankind from the eternal death brought by the first Adam. This eternal death had meant that all mankind, regardless of their adherence to the laws of God, were destined to eternal death in the spirit - total annihilation! God had spoken that in order to waylay this eternal death a sinless man, like the yearly sacrifice of a pure and meek lamb, should be slaughtered. Unless this was fulfilled no salvation was possible:
  • ‘For by one sinful man sin came unto the world - and thus eternal death to all… so also salvation from eternal death must come by the sacrifice of one sinless man‘ (paraphrased)
And so, the reward for this selfless act is that such a sinless man should take the place of the sinful man (Adam) in becoming RULER over ALL CREATED THINGS; to be the greatest love of the Father; the most beloved of God… the ‘FIRSTBORN’ of the Father.

  • This ‘Firstborn’ is not to be confused with ‘FIRST BORN’, which is a chronological term. The ‘Firstborn’ is a term used to denote the first in line of the love of the Father. This does not have to mean the first male born from the womb. Scriptures tells of firstborn who were not first born in many of the children of the Israelites and even before and after:
  • Cain: Abel / Seth
  • Ishmael: Isaac
  • Esau: Jacob
  • … : Joseph
  • … : David
  • … : Solomon
and:
  • Adam: Jesus
————————————

So, now you know!
 

101G

Well-Known Member
Sorry, I do not believe in a trinity and the rest is irrelevant.

What I believe is that Jesus was a man born holy and sinless and was endowed with the spirit of God (often called, ‘[the] Holy Spirit’, Chosen by God as a true servant as per Isaiah 42:1 and Acts 10:37-38.

This Jesus [Christ] is the replacement for the first created man, Adam (as per the reference: ‘The last Adam’, ‘Last’ because no other sinless man (an ADAM) would ever be created.

God created a physical world to be occupied by physical entities and ruled over by a physical IMAGE of Himself. If Jesus is God then that point is perfectly pointless since if Jesus is God, Jesus is ALREADY RULER over the FAR greater kingdom of Heaven - a kingdom not restrained by physical laws like the physical world. Also, for Jesus (as God) to become ruler (See Temptation by Satan in the wilderness) over the whole world he would effectively be DEMOTING HIMSELF.

But how can God DEMOTE himself from being GOD? How can one PART (person) of God be different from the other two as Trinitarians confusingly claim? Afterall, GOD is IMMUTABLE!!! And what does ‘Immutable’ mean?

To try to claim God as immutable yet one person of the trinity God goes through MANY CHANGES including BEING DEAD and having to be resurrected again by ‘GOD’?! Trinitarians claim that Jesus had TWO IDENTITIES… which itself is a disjointed claim since it still doesn’t show how ONE PART OF GOD could be flesh and yet DID NOT CHANGE!

But NEITHER the Father nor the Spirit of God ever changes - they are both unchanging - and why? Because the spirit of God is just that - an ATTRIBUTE of God - of the Father. The Father never changes therefore His Spirit never changes . Indeed, if God ever changed it would mean that God was not fully ALMIGHTY yet we declare Him to be so!

Jesus, on the other hand, was born, was taught, grew, aged, was obedient to parents and laws of men but not diverting the laws of God, though he was, until called into service BY GOD, was never TESTED to subvert them - testimony of which is shown when, after returning from the temptation in the wilderness, (or was it before he was anointed?? I’ll check in that!) he declared in the synagogue that the ‘Year of the Lord’ had been realised ‘IN HIM’. The people hearing him were astonished because they had known him as just a humble compliant child/man who was a carpenter in the household of, son of, the man, Joseph.

Now, regarding Jesus task that GOD SENT HIM TO DO (How did God send him if he WAS GOD?). The ‘Sending’ was AFTER Jesus was anointed BY GOD. Trinitarians translators inserted the words ‘from Heaven’ into the scriptures wherein Jesus said:
  • ‘No one has ever ascended into Heaven who didn’t first descend [FROM HEAVEN]’
Jesus, here, means that in order to enter Heaven a man must FIRST DIE… like he told Nicodemus that to see Heaven a man must first be REBORN… and that for a seed to grid if must FIRST DIE… if these analogies don’t wash then the issue is between the unbeliever, and Jesus Christ who spoke it and the spirit of God (the Spirit of Truth) that enables it.

And witness that Jesus never says that he is going BACK to the Father. He only ever says that he is ‘Going TO the Father’… ‘Going TO HIS GOD’.

So Jesus lives for a few years delivering the TESTIMONY OF the FATHER… then dies to save mankind from the eternal death brought by the first Adam. This eternal death had meant that all mankind, regardless of their adherence to the laws of God, were destined to eternal death in the spirit - total annihilation! God had spoken that in order to waylay this eternal death a sinless man, like the yearly sacrifice of a pure and meek lamb, should be slaughtered. Unless this was fulfilled no salvation was possible:
  • ‘For by one sinful man sin came unto the world - and thus eternal death to all… so also salvation from eternal death must come by the sacrifice of one sinless man‘ (paraphrased)
And so, the reward for this selfless act is that such a sinless man should take the place of the sinful man (Adam) in becoming RULER over ALL CREATED THINGS; to be the greatest love of the Father; the most beloved of God… the ‘FIRSTBORN’ of the Father.

  • This ‘Firstborn’ is not to be confused with ‘FIRST BORN’, which is a chronological term. The ‘Firstborn’ is a term used to denote the first in line of the love of the Father. This does not have to mean the first male born from the womb. Scriptures tells of firstborn who were not first born in many of the children of the Israelites and even before and after:
  • Cain: Abel / Seth
  • Ishmael: Isaac
  • Esau: Jacob
  • … : Joseph
  • … : David
  • … : Solomon
and:
  • Adam: Jesus
————————————

So, now you know!
you're really backward, oh Dear.... HELP..... (smile)... LOL.

101G.
 

Soapy

Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
you're really backward, oh Dear.... HELP..... (smile)... LOL.

101G.
Perhaps it is you running backwards that give the illusion that everyone else is running backwards. Try turning around - you might see right then.
 
Top