• 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!

Did Jesus say he was God???

Shermana

Shermana

Heretic
Sure, I'll admit that maybe Eusebius just felt like shortening it to how its written in Acts each of those 21 times, so did Origen, but I won't say that it's likely. I'll also admit the possibility that Origen's works just all end there coincidentally without any possibility of editing by later redactors, but I won't say its' likely either. So will you admit now the possibility that he used another version?

It doesn't matter if 2 LATER versions of the Diatesseron agree, all the Latin versions of John's epistles agree with the Comma Johannum too. No need to discuss why they destroyed all the Syriac originals, that doesn't matter of course! Just like how there's no need to discuss all the manuscripts that got burned around 300, nothing to see here folks!

And there's also the issue that the formula appears as an interpolation in Ignatius's epistles in the "long form", that doesn't help your case either.
 
Last edited:
M

Mark2020

Well-Known Member
(Matthew 28:19 [KJV]) Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

"And after the passion, and the resurrection, and the ascension, Thaddæus went to Abgarus; and having found him in health, he gave him an account of the incarnation of Christ, and baptized him, with all his house. And having instructed great multitudes, both of Hebrews and Greeks, Syrians and Armenians, he baptized them in the name of the Father, and Son, and Holy Spirit, having anointed them with the holy perfume;"
Acts of the Holy Apostle Thaddæus

"Now concerning baptism, baptize as follows: after you have reviewed all these things, baptize “in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” in running water." Didache

"and baptize them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit" The Diatessaron

"Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." Ignatius of Antioch (ca. 35 or 50-between 98 and 117)

He commanded the eleven others, on His departure to the Father, to “go and teach all nations, who were to be baptized into the Father, and into the Son, and into the Holy Ghost.” Tertullian (c. 160 – c. 220 AD)

“Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” Hippolytus (170 – 235)

“All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.”
Cyprian (died September 14, 258)

"And what can the impious have to say if the Lord sends forth His disciples to baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit?" Saint Gregory of Neocaesarea, also known as Gregory Thaumaturgus or Gregory the Wonderworker, (ca. 213 – ca. 270 AD)

"Go ye, teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." Saint Victorinus of Pettau or of Poetovio (died 303 or 304),

"Baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost" St. Gregory of Nyssa (c 335 – after 394)

"Go ye, make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you;"John Chrysostom (c. 349–407)

"Just as in our times, now that the faith hath been revealed, which then was veiled, to all men that have been baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost"
Augustin (November 13, 354 – August 28, 430)

I have tens of other quotes if someone wants.
 
Last edited:
M

Mark2020

Well-Known Member
Now if someone ignores all HUNDREDS of translations + manuscripts + quotes, I don't think there will be something that would made them believe, they simply DO NOT want to believe and this is THEIR OWN PROBLEM. I couldn't care any less.
 
Shermana

Shermana

Heretic
II. History of the Controversy. The history of the controversy may be divided into three periods: (a) up to the discovery of the short recension in 1646; (b) between 1646 and the discovery of the Syriac recension in 1845; (c) from 1845 to the present day. In the first stage the controversy was theological rather than critical. The Reformation raised the question as to the authority of the papacy and the hierarchy. Roman Catholic scholars used the interpolated Ignatian Epistles very freely in their defense and derived many of their arguments from them, while Protestant scholars threw discredit on these Epistles. The Magdeburg centuriators expressed the gravest doubts as to their genuineness, and John Calvin declared that "nothing was more foul than those fairy tales (naeniis) published under the name of Ignatius!"
Click to expand...
EARLY CHURCH WRITINGS AND MODALISM

IGNATIUS

Ignatius equates Jesus with the One God so strongly that many historians called him modalistic. There are seven genuine letters from him remaining today, and six questionable ones from the fourth century and three questionable ones from the twelfth century.
It is told by Cyril Richardson (Early Christian Fathers) that the genuine letters are found in an abridged Syriac version, a long version splattered with fourth century interpolations, and a medium version which is most accurate.
The longer version, known to be full of interpolations, when compared with the Medium version always "corrects" statements which contradict most people's theology today, and adds statements that are more in line with their thoughts:
MEDIUM


  • Farewell in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ, our common hope (Ephesians 21)
  • Ye who have obtained the inseparable Spirit, who is Jesus Christ, (Magnesians 15)
  • Fare ye well in the grace of God (Smyrnaeans 13)
LONG VERSION (interpolated)
  • Fare ye well in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, our common hope, and in the Holy Ghost.
  • Ye who have obtained the inseparable Spirit, in Christ Jesus, by the will of God.
  • Fare ye well in the grace of God, and of our Lord Jesus Christ, being filled with the Holy Spirit.


Personally I agree with Calvin and the others that all the so-called "Ignatian Epistles" were forgeries to begin with, just more forgeries were added to the initial forgery later on.
 
Last edited:
M

Mark2020

Well-Known Member
Shermana said:
EARLY CHURCH WRITINGS AND MODALISM...
Click to expand...

That's useless and pathetic.

I gave like 10 quotes and I have tens others like them.
Whatever he wrote elsewhere is irrelevant.
What matters is the he wrote it like that:
"Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." Ignatius of Antioch (ca. 35 or 50-between 98 and 117)
You can make up your own stories/lies and believe them. It doesn't matter to me. And I don't think your tricking anyone else either, just yourself.
 
Shermana

Shermana

Heretic
I'm not done yet, each of those writers has interpolations added, including Cyprian for example"

Cyprian the churchman - John Alfred Faulkner - Google Books

You can pretend that there were no interpolations all you want, hopefully you're honorable enough to admit that Ignatius is debunked, and is a likely means to detect a pattern. If you had access to the original manuscripts of those Church Father writings, then you'd have a case. You can call it pathetic, but if you refuse to acknowledge that Ignatius has interpolations in him that match exactly that, you're the pathetic one here.

Also, anything after 300 A.D. doesn't really count in your case. Using Augustine and Crysostom doesn't help.
 
Last edited:
Shermana

Shermana

Heretic
I will openly say that all the early Church Father writings got molested by Roman hands. Eusebius's work probably stayed intact if only because of his closeness with the Arian-Imperial family.
 
Last edited:
Shermana

Shermana

Heretic
You're left defending Roman edit jobs.

Another example:

Magnesians 6:

  • Jesus was "with the Father before the beginning of time."
This alludes to John 1:1 where Jesus is the eternal Word. "With" translated from Greek is "PARA" in the dative case. Thayer says this "indicates that something is or is done either in the immediate vicinity of some one, or (metaph) in his mind." (Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, 477). Since it was not distinctly non-oneness, later theolgians CHANGED the words to read, "He, being begotten by the Father before the beginning of time of time, was God the Word, the only-begotten Son."
Archbishop Wake translated Vossius' 1646 Greek text of Magnesians 6 in a VERY MODALISTIC FASHION:

  • "Jesus Christ, who was the Father before all ages, and appeared in the end to us." (The Lost Books of the Bible and the Forgotten Books of Eden, 173)
Click to expand...
 
A

Awoon

Well-Known Member
So here's the real debate. God is Spiririt Being. God made an image of itself called Human Being.

And there you are. You, Jesus, Hitler, Me. Every Human Being is the image of the Spirit Being.

Now if yous gots a problem with it, then TOO BAD.

Change your Holy Books.
 
M

Mark2020

Well-Known Member
Shermana said:
You're left defending Roman edit jobs.
Another example:
Click to expand...
lol
Thanks for the laughs man.
Now all Romans are bad.

To summarize:
All translators are bad.
All writers are bad.
All Romans are bad.

I think if we go on for a while, you'll end up saying:
All the Universe is bad.
 
Shermana

Shermana

Heretic
Yeah, that's exactly what I said, all Romans are bad, every single person in Rome is bad, that's exactly what I said. Don't get me started on Florence!

You can't even interpret English properly?
 
Dirty Penguin

Dirty Penguin

Master Of Ceremony
Mark2020 said:
When I speak of solid proof, I mean the oldest manuscripts we have
Click to expand...

This isn't proof. We have Sumerian text literally written in stone as well as stories of the gods of Greece and Rome. History is not judge solely on the contents of the cultural writings and definitely not dogmatic writings. Like I said...as far as the scriptures are concerned the best is of the earliest known scripture even though all that has survived are no more than copies. Either the "Church" has access to some/most or all the originals or they have simply been lost. The second criteria for determining history is looking to the writings of the people of the time. It is quite possible Origen and Eusebius had access to a version of Matthew that was not the same as the surviving copies. Do you not agree? Eusebius cites Matthew 28:19 at least 18 times in his works from the year 300 to 336AD.

Mark2020 said:
all manuscripts actually, contain this verse.
Click to expand...

This means very little given the fact that we have nothing left from the time period other than copies and more than a dozen quotes of the verse outside of the most recent earliest "copy" that says otherwise thus giving anyone familiar with textual criticism pause to conclude there was a different rendering of that verse in circulation at the time. This is why it's not a problem striking out such interpolations such as (1John 5:7-8). Additionally this sets the tone for using extra-biblical documents for historical purposes (i.e. the works of Josephus to corroborate events as mentioned in the bible).


Mark2020 said:
What I said about NWT is that they would be most eager to remove such a verse but they couldn't, they couldn't find any support for that.
Click to expand...

I understood it but wasn't sure why it was addressed to me. I don't take my ques from NWT....:areyoucra.....The reference to them means nothing to me.


Mark2020 said:
Finding some people who quoted it in a way or another, even differently from each other as someone mentioned here, proves nothing.
Click to expand...

But historically speaking it can't be dismissed and gives the impression other versions existed. Given how it is written in the works of Eusebius and the events that preceded it in the book of Acts, Romans and 1Corinthians or even in (Luke 24:47) so it's not all that surprising that his quote would be the original.

Ultimately none of this "proves" the biblical Yeshua ever said he wad God.
 
Last edited:
M

Mark2020

Well-Known Member
.....
Mark2020 said:
(Matthew 28:19 [KJV]) Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

"And after the passion, and the resurrection, and the ascension, Thaddæus went to Abgarus; and having found him in health, he gave him an account of the incarnation of Christ, and baptized him, with all his house. And having instructed great multitudes, both of Hebrews and Greeks, Syrians and Armenians, he baptized them in the name of the Father, and Son, and Holy Spirit, having anointed them with the holy perfume;"
Acts of the Holy Apostle Thaddæus

"Now concerning baptism, baptize as follows: after you have reviewed all these things, baptize “in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” in running water." Didache

"and baptize them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit" The Diatessaron

"Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." Ignatius of Antioch (ca. 35 or 50-between 98 and 117)

He commanded the eleven others, on His departure to the Father, to “go and teach all nations, who were to be baptized into the Father, and into the Son, and into the Holy Ghost.” Tertullian (c. 160 – c. 220 AD)

“Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” Hippolytus (170 – 235)

“All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.”
Cyprian (died September 14, 258)

"And what can the impious have to say if the Lord sends forth His disciples to baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit?" Saint Gregory of Neocaesarea, also known as Gregory Thaumaturgus or Gregory the Wonderworker, (ca. 213 – ca. 270 AD)

"Go ye, teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." Saint Victorinus of Pettau or of Poetovio (died 303 or 304),

"Baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost" St. Gregory of Nyssa (c 335 – after 394)

"Go ye, make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you;"John Chrysostom (c. 349–407)

"Just as in our times, now that the faith hath been revealed, which then was veiled, to all men that have been baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost"
Augustin (November 13, 354 – August 28, 430)

I have tens of other quotes if someone wants.
Click to expand...
 
Shermana

Shermana

Heretic
And the Didache too.

What About The Didache? by Thomas Weisser - Christianity - Zimbio
The Didache is an ancient writing attributed to the Apostles. Since the discovery of an eleventh-century copy of it in 1875, it has been the subject of great controversy. Various dates have been ascribed to it and authorities have yet to agree on a date. The problem that we must consider is that some say it was written in the first century.


The particular part we are concerned with is Didache 7:


But concerning baptism, thus shall ye baptize. Having first recited all these things, baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit in living (running) water. But if thou hast not living water, then baptize in other water; and if thou art not able in cold then in warm. But if thou hast neither, then pour water on the head thrice in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.


Many Trinitarians claim this proves the Early Church was Trinitarian. Let us first consider that we are dealing with a forgery. Although it is ascribed to the Apostles they probably never saw it. Secondly, the internal evidence points to Didache 7 as an interpolation, or later addition. In Didache 9, which deals with communion, the writer says, "But let no one eat or drink of this eucharistic thanksgiving, but they that have been baptized into the name of the Lord; for concerning this also the Lord hath said: Give not that which is holy to the dogs."

Shortly after saying baptism should be performed in the titles Father, Son and Holy Spirit he states the absolute necessity of being baptized in the name of the Lord (i.e., Jesus-the same Greek word as in Acts 10:48). This represents an obvious contradiction and gives validity to the argument Didache 7 is an interpolation.


Thirdly, the writer's approval of baptism by pouring presents a problem with dating it in the first century. Bigg points out that this must have been written after A.D. 250. He argues that pouring was generally unacceptable in baptism as late as Cyprian (c.250). Therefore, Didache 7 could be no earlier than the late third century.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Muffled

Muffled

Jesus in me
Dirty Penguin said:
It's not a numbers game even though that's what you want it to be. I say he meant (one in purpose) and you are ill-equipped to refute that given the way his followers interpreted his teaching in 1John 4:12-13. Surely Yeshua didn't mean for his disciples to be one "God". No. He meant one in purpose.

Sure I've given context. I've given it throughout this thread. Your refusal to pay attention to it says more about you than me. Here's context right here....

John 17:22-23
And the glory which you gave me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one. I in them, and you in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that you have sent me, and loved them, as you loved me.

1John 4:12-13
No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwells in us, and his love is perfected in us. Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit.

Notes on the Bible by Albert Barnes
And the glory ... - The honor which thou hast conferred on me by admitting me to union with thee, the same honor I have conferred on them by admitting them to like union with me. May be one, even as we are one - Not in nature, or in the mode of existence - for this was not the subject of discourse, and would be impossible - but in feeling, in principle, in purpose.

People's New Testament
17:22,23 The glory which thou gavest to me I have given to them. God gave Christ the glory of Sonship and this resulted in their unity. So Christ gives to his disciples the glory of becoming the sons of God (Joh 1:12 1Jo 3:1). This glory, the adoption and gift of the Spirit, ought to effect that they may be one as we are one. We cannot pray this prayer of Jesus and have the party spirit or labor to build up sectarianism. In the spirit of love we should oppose it, and labor to destroy sectarian names, creeds, organizations and interests. As the Son and the Father are one, have one work, one kingdom, one spirit, one interest, so must all that are Christ's. We must keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace (Eph 4:3). There is one body and one Spirit, as there is one Lord (Eph 4:4,5).

Sure it is. At least when it comes to your scriptures it can.

Gen. 2:24
Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

This unity between Adam and Eve is not viewed as if it would be one person walking around but one is purpose.
Click to expand...

Again: It is impossible for you to read the mind of God and say what He meant. I believe He meant what He said.

I have to do a LOL. Do you even know the meaning of context? Since you think I don't maybe you can explain it to me in simple terms.

This in effect says we who have God dwelling in us are God.

Of course God is not substantive. That is why I don't say that Jesus is God because that would include the flesh as God but I say that Jesus is God in the flesh. However for identification purposes Jesus is God. However feeling, principle and purpose may fall short in defining God. It is much easier to smply say that God is the abiding Spirit in Jesus.

The things that ought to be and the things that are, tend to be quite different. We must have unity but the reality is far from what it should be.

You are in error. Parents become one flesh in their children. Children are rarely one in purpose with their parents. Even the parents often suffer from not being one in purpose. (I argue with my wife often)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top