• 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???

outhouse

Atheistically
You should worry about you before you get banned for personal attacks


All you can do when you dont agree is attack. 10,9,
 

outhouse

Atheistically
I quote wiki links for material I already know. I dont change or alter what I copy, because you cannot refute it and do not like it does not mean it is dishonest.


You constantly dig to take what I type out of context because you dont have the knowledge to refute it. you dont even try because you cannot.
 
Last edited:

Protester

Active Member
"There is no need to criticize the authenticity of the Scriptures when we can know that God was behind the scenes directing and guiding men in what to record."

because it says so in the text. well wow, that's what I call water tight reasoning. good to know some people put actual effort into presenting an intellectually honest argument... "got questions?" not originally, but the sophistry of that site does raise a few...

and how come god isn't "behind the scenes" directing the research into the origins of scripture?

I would suggest that you read the article with the same name, How We Got Our Bible

I would have hope somewhere, I have put this short article about How does archaeology support the Bible? and equally short ones such as How and when was the canon of the Bible put together? ,How do we decide which books belong in the Bible since the Bible does not say which books belong in the Bible?,
and finally, How do we know that the Bible is the Word of God, and not the Apocrypha, the Qur’an, the Book of Mormon, etc.? another short one which answers the questions for conservative Baptists, anyway.
 
Last edited:

outhouse

Atheistically
I would suggest that you read the article with the same name, How We Got Our Bible

I would have hope somewhere, I have put this short article about How does archaeology support the Bible? and equally short ones such as How and when was the canon of the Bible put together? ,How do we decide which books belong in the Bible since the Bible does not say which books belong in the Bible?,
and finally, How do we know that the Bible is the Word of God, and not the Apocrypha, the Qur’an, the Book of Mormon, etc.? another short one which answers the questions for conservative Baptists, anyway.


All of those links are pretty much worthless for real history and only offer a biased view only supported by theist
 

Shermana

Heretic
Gotquestions.org is pretty worthless and that's from a Theist point of view.

If it does have worth, it's to show how much intellectual dishonesty and dodging and ignoring critical parts and twisting the "Establishment" is capable of.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
One particular difference with John (and a reason why more than one scholar thinks the ending was forged) is that the Disciples meet Jesus at a different place than in Matthew and thus John directly clashes with Matthew. So John 20:28 is suspect. For those who think John 20:28 is an authentic verse, the question is: Where did Jesus meet the Disciples?

Where's home?

Matthew says go to Galilee [Matt 28v10].
Verse 16 has the eleven as went to Galilee [where Jesus had appointed them] Wasn't Capernaum in Galilee?

John [20v10] says the disciples went back home [to their own homes]
Verse 19 says the disciples were assembled.
Could that place of assembly be where their homes were?

Verse 26 shows more than a week passes by, and on th 8th day they meet again but doesn't specify where indoors?
Could that indoor place be in Galilee ?
 

Shermana

Heretic
It says they were in the same house,

"A week later his disciples were in the house again"
but anyways.
"Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go."
To the mountain. Locked rooms and Pharisee Patrols in the mountains?

but some doubted
Who else doubted besides Thomas in John's account?

And in Luke's account,this takes place in Jerusalem, which is not exactly in Galilee.
 
Last edited:

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
It says they were in the same house,
but anyways.
To the mountain. Locked rooms and Pharisee Patrols in the mountains?
Who else doubted besides Thomas in John's account?
And in Luke's account,this takes place in Jerusalem, which is not exactly in Galilee.

But the discipled did not live all together in the same house.
They were each then in their own home. -John 20v10.

Galilee into the mountain. Weren't they afraid because of all that had transpired? The account doesn't say that Jesus set up that mountain gathering because of the apostles' fears.

Who else doubted? Do you have a verse in mind? [Luke 24v41]
The disciples did not comprehend the significance of the empty tomb so they did not believe the women's report.
Isn't that a reason why later on Sunday Cleopas and another disciple leave or Emmaus ?
Not til they arrive in Emmaus does Jesus reveal himself.
Then they go back to Jerusalem to join the other apostles.
There are 5 appearances by Jesus.
Thomas is missing.
It isn't until 8 days later [the 6th appearance] when Thomas is with the others.

Luke [24v28] has them first in a [?] village. Then in verse 33 Jesus has them returning to Jerusalem. Verse 49 Jesus has them waiting in the city. Then, in verse 50 Jesus leads them two miles from Jerusalem to Bethany. [Acts 1v9].
[Bethany being the eastern slope of the Mount of Olives.]

Before being led out to Bethany, John [21v1] has the disciples in Galilee at the Sea of Tiberias. Now Jesus makes a 7th post-resurrection appearance before his ascending to heaven. [Luke 24vs49-52]
Matthew [26v32; 28vs7,10] says: after Jesus would be risen that Jesus would go before them into Galilee.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
jesus and god were not one but in one accord
big difference.

:eek:
what an awful thing...

It isn't that big a difference if you could prove it. The problem is that you can't prove it and haven't even attempted to prove it.

You are correct in your appraisal. It would be much better if people could run their own lives without sin. I believe that God would like that also. For that reason God is willing for the world to suffer while we go through the learning process just as a parent must be prepared for a child to fall off his bicycle while learning to ride it. I just happen to be one of those children that has no desire to fall during the learning process and will only want Him to let go when I am am totally confident that I won't.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
Please help me out here. I only converted to Christianity a month ago. Before that I was a Mormon. As a Mormon I believed that Jesus was the son of God but not actually God incarnate.

I'm struggling with what I now believe which is that I don't know what to believe.

I see nothing in the above list convincing me Jesus is God. I'm open to the concept but I see Jesus still as a sort of demi-God. Which I know is through the lens of Mormonism but I have nothing else but 40 years as a Mormon.

Also, is it really that important? Can't I just accept Jesus as my savior and just not worry about his nature?

Thank you.

That isn't totally innapropriate. John 14:11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works’ sake.
The idea is that you are aware of the saving ability of Jesus from what He has said and done and don't need to know the source. That is called faith. However it is easy to misplace faith such as in Jim Jones. As Jesus said "only God is good." Then why would I wish to follow Jesus unless He were good also (as He said).

What does that actually mean that Jesus is the Son of God? God is a spirit. A spirit does not have sons. If you say that God could incarnate and have a son by way of the body then why is there no physical Father in the conception of Jesus?


 
Last edited:

Muffled

Jesus in me
How about considering the fact that the word "one" has multiple legitimate meanings. Even if the Father and the Son were not "one" in substance, they could still be "one" in everything that really matters. Aren't perfect, absolute, incomprehensible unity of will, purpose, mind, heart, power and glory enough? Why is a Son who is physically distinct from His own Father in some way a heresy, even when the Bible makes this relationship absolutely clear? The word “one” has a number of meanings, one of which is "united." Trinitarians insist that “one” must be understood to mean a numerical unit, a single "substance," instead of granting that it is much more reasonable, not to mention scripturally consistent, to understand it as meaning "united."

Consider the following verses:

Exodus 24:3 ...and all the people answered with one voice, and said, All the words which the LORD hath said will we do.

Acts 4:32 And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul…

Romans 15:6 That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

In each of these verses, we can see that the word "one" is used to denote unity, as opposed to an actual number of units.


"united" is not scriptually consistent with the statement by Jesus that seeing Him you have seen the Father.

However the Spirit of God (His essential nature) is in Jesus and is one substance with the Father. The body is not God and definitely not one substance with the Father. However for identification purposes one does not merely recognize the body but also the spirit that dwells within.
 

waitasec

Veteran Member
It isn't that big a difference if you could prove it. The problem is that you can't prove it and haven't even attempted to prove it.
i made my point....and i provided biblical support
john 17:21
that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you


You are correct in your appraisal. It would be much better if people could run their own lives without sin. I believe that God would like that also. For that reason God is willing for the world to suffer while we go through the learning process just as a parent must be prepared for a child to fall off his bicycle while learning to ride it. I just happen to be one of those children that has no desire to fall during the learning process and will only want Him to let go when I am am totally confident that I won't.
apparently god would have preferred it if people were unaware of their wrong doing... ignorance is bliss.
 
Top