Is God a man?

[I Am Hugh]

Your dogs are 2000 years old.

Would that make your dogs infants?

 

[YoursTrue]

I see. Science and theology are both imperfect efforts of mankind and both are often wrongly held as dogmatic by ideologues. The same as anything else really. The history of science and theology being viewed as contradictory, in my opinion, comes primarily from the ideological misunderstanding that both of them have "the answers to life, the universe and everything."

Well, all I can say now is (1 there is history of religion, (2) the details of the history of Adam leading up to Jesus and beyond (prophecy) have been nicely recorded, and (3) men are not perfect in their considerations of everything.

 

[YoursTrue]

Intentional ignorance of science based on an ancient religious agenda.

So then do you agree that you are stardust? (does science know?) IF you agree that you are stardust as someone here said, does stardust think? How about individual specks of dust, do they think? What does science say about that?

 

[jimb]

I understand it. Do I believe it? No, I do not. By the way, do you understand Judaism and why many do not believe Jesus is the Messiah?

a) Clearly, you do not understand the theory of evolution. Again, Organisms change by adapting to new environments and circumstances. Evolution means something evolves (or adapts) by changing to fit the environment.

b) Yes, being a Jew and having been Bar Mitzvah, I clearly understand Judaism. There are many people (not just Jews) who do not believe that Jesus is the Messiah. I can't give you a reason, because (again) I am a Jew who believes that Jesus is the Messiah.

 

[I Am Hugh]

a) Clearly, you do not understand the theory of evolution.

Why is it that whenever someone disagrees with evolution it can only ever be because they don't understand it.

Again, Organisms change by adapting to new environments and circumstances. Evolution means something evolves (or adapts) by changing to fit the environment.

Which isn't contradictory to the Biblical kinds in the Genesis account. We observe this every day. A variation in finch beaks, skin color, eye color. Grass seed produces grass, not honey badgers. Macroevolution, the alleged evolution from one Biblical kind to another has never been observed, never duplicated in a lab, isn't factual, it's speculation at best and not very good speculation at that.

b) Yes, being a Jew and having been Bar Mitzvah, I clearly understand Judaism. There are many people (not just Jews) who do not believe that Jesus is the Messiah. I can't give you a reason, because (again) I am a Jew who believes that Jesus is the Messiah.

I personally am not conversant on the subject of Judaism, having only a very basic knowledge, but the Christians I have had experiences with seem to know very little of the basic tenets of their own religion outside of a very basic understanding or their specific doctrine. Of course, that isn't a very informed opinion since I don't pay much attention to any of it, Judaism or Christianity.

 

[jimb]

Why is it that whenever someone disagrees with evolution it can only ever be because they don't understand it.



Which isn't contradictory to the Biblical kinds in the Genesis account. We observe this every day. A variation in finch beaks, skin color, eye color. Grass seed produces grass, not honey badgers. Macroevolution, the alleged evolution from one Biblical kind to another has never been observed, never duplicated in a lab, isn't factual, it's speculation at best and not very good speculation at that.



I personally am not conversant on the subject of Judaism, having only a very basic knowledge, but the Christians I have had experiences with seem to know very little of the basic tenets of their own religion outside of a very basic understanding or their specific doctrine. Of course, that isn't a very informed opinion since I don't pay much attention to any of it, Judaism or Christianity.

Why should anyone pay attention to you?

 

[jimb]

God was not created, God is a Spirit that can not be seen. The angels of heaven where created and could seen because they where created. When sin was created from Adam, God had to send his Son Jesus in the likeness of sinful man to take the fall and keep God total righteous.
Romans 8: 1 - 3

John 14:9, "Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you all this time, Philip, and you still do not know me? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?“

 

[jimb]

I never said I knew nothing about God. I simply stated that whatever he is, he is not a carbon based life form.

Jesus was a person -- a fully-formed human being -- so He was carbon-based. He was/is also God.

 

[I Am Hugh]

Why should anyone pay attention to you?

Why should they pay attention to anyone? People pay attention to whomever confirms their biases the most, which is usually no one. I don't promote anyone's biases inasmuch as I don't adhere to any groupthink. I don't let anyone, not even God, influence my thinking without reason. I'm not an ideologue which is why I'm apolitical and irreligious. No one should pay attention to me any more than they should you or anyone else.

 

[jimb]

Why should they pay attention to anyone? People pay attention to whomever confirms their biases the most, which is usually no one. I don't promote anyone's biases inasmuch as I don't adhere to any groupthink. I don't let anyone, not even God, influence my thinking without reason. I'm not an ideologue which is why I'm apolitical and irreligious. No one should pay attention to me any more than they should you or anyone else.

Some people have knowledge and/or wisdom. Intelligent people (of which I am one) pay attention to many different viewpoints, whether they confirm their opinions or not. That way, a person can a) enrich their knowledge and b) confirm, agree, or deny a previously held thought,

Claiming that you don't adhere to groupthink (which sounds Orwellian) is nonsense. Everyone is influenced to some degree by what others think, and often agree with them in part if not totally. From the way that you express yourself, I assume that you have at least some education, so you probably agree with the thinking of some group(s). (It is absurd to think that all your ideas came about in isolation.)

Merriam-Webster defines "an ideologue" as "a person who is strongly attached to a particular ideology or set of beliefs, often without considering other perspectives or evidence." Clearly that is what you do! If, as you claim, you are apolitical, that is a set of beliefs, as is being irreligious.

Even stating that "no one should pay attention to me" is a particular belief.

Why not consider the wisdom that comes from God? James 1:5, "If any of you lacks wisdom, you should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to you."

Become like Solomon! "God gave Solomon wisdom and very great insight, and a breadth of understanding as measureless as the sand on the seashore... [his] wisdom was greater than the wisdom of all the people of the East, and greater than all the wisdom of Egypt." 1 Kings 4:29-30

The queen of Sheba "said to the king [Solomon], “The report I heard in my own country about your achievements and your wisdom is true. 7 But I did not believe these things until I came and saw with my own eyes. Indeed, not even half was told me; in wisdom and wealth you have far exceeded the report I heard. 8 How happy your people must be! How happy your officials, who continually stand before you and hear your wisdom! 9 Praise be to the Lord your God, who has delighted in you and placed you on the throne of Israel. Because of the Lord’s eternal love for Israel, he has made you king to maintain justice and righteousness. And she gave the king 4.5 TONS of gold, large quantities of spices, and precious stones.” 1 Kings 10:6-10

... unless, of course, in your wisdom, you have no need of 4.5 tons (144,000 oz.) of gold. Today, that comes to about $344,500,000 dollars. And then no one would pay attention to you!

 

[Coder]

That doesn't mean that physical evidence can't be misinterpreted.

Agree. E.g. The validity of a human evolutionary process doesn't support atheism if atheists believe that it does. If God uses a process that happens over billions of years, that says nothing different about God as Creator.

(As far as the validity of evolution itself, at one point I think that a link was still missing, but I'm not sure about up to date research. Regardless, I don't deny evolution. It has no bearing on belief in God.)

 

[Coder]

I am a Jew who believes that Jesus is the Messiah.

If Jesus drove a change in era, the movement acquired much Roman-adaptive theology. Today, we are peeling away the Roman layers. The prophecies of Messiah, for all practical purposes are not fulfilled at this time.

One could argue that Christianity tamed the Roman empire to some extent. Still, even in 1500s, people were being killed, e.g. for not believing in trinity. Jacob Palaeologus (Dominican Friar, left the Church):

Jacob Palaeologus - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Messianic: Build temple
Romans: Destroyed the temple.

I believe Jesus as Christian Messiah was another attempt by Rome to bring one of the religions, Judaism, into the Roman unification.
Jesus is depicted as confirming Peter's declaration that Jesus is "son of God" and "Messiah"
"son of God" fits Greco-Roman "gods" and "sons of of gods" including emperors who were declared "divinity" and "divi filius"
"Messiah" fits Judaism needs
Tying both together in one, with Jesus as both, unites Greco-Roman and Jewish religion

 

[jimb]

If Jesus drove a change in era, the movement acquired much Roman-adaptive theology. Today, we are peeling away the Roman layers. The prophecies of Messiah, for all practical purposes are not fulfilled at this time.

One could argue that Christianity tamed the Roman empire to some extent. Still, even in 1500s, people were being killed, e.g. for not believing in trinity. Jacob Palaeologus (Dominican Friar, left the Church):

Jacob Palaeologus - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Messianic: Build temple
Romans: Destroyed the temple.

I believe Jesus as Christian Messiah was another attempt by Rome to bring one of the religions, Judaism, into the Roman unification.
Jesus is depicted as confirming Peter's declaration that Jesus is "son of God" and "Messiah"
"son of God" fits Greco-Roman "gods" and "sons of of gods" including emperors who were declared "divinity" and "divi filius"
"Messiah" fits Judaism needs
Tying both together in one, with Jesus as both, unites Greco-Roman and Jewish religion

You can't be serious! Jesus was/is the promised Jewish Messiah. a) He was born, lived, and died a Jew. b) By His sacrifice, He fulfilled all God's requirement for sin's penalties. c) He is both the son of God and God. (That has nothing to do with what Roman religion (or any other religion) believes.

I believe what the Bible clearly and unequivocally says. Period.

 

[Coder]

I believe what the Bible clearly and unequivocally says. Period.

I believe:

• Christian Bible not clear. People arguing for centuries.
• See Roman influence in Bible, then Bible becomes much more clear.
• Roman state religion, enacted by force. Destroyed Jewish and later Greco-Roman temples. Even in 1500s, people punished for not cooperating. Jewish people also treated unkindly for centuries.

Trust in God, not man. As shown in this thread, God is not a man that He should lie. Men lie.

Romans 3:7 "For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie,..."
Note Romans, note lie.
Note "truth of God". See past the fibs and parables, to the truth.

 

[YoursTrue]

a) Clearly, you do not understand the theory of evolution. Again, Organisms change by adapting to new environments and circumstances. Evolution means something evolves (or adapts) by changing to fit the environment.

b) Yes, being a Jew and having been Bar Mitzvah, I clearly understand Judaism. There are many people (not just Jews) who do not believe that Jesus is the Messiah. I can't give you a reason, because (again) I am a Jew who believes that Jesus is the Messiah.

Oh, you were born a Jew. From a Jewish mother I suppose. That alone, however, does not mean you "understand Judaism." So do you go to a synagogue with a rabbi that believes God is a trinity?

 

[YoursTrue]

You can't be serious! Jesus was/is the promised Jewish Messiah. a) He was born, lived, and died a Jew. b) By His sacrifice, He fulfilled all God's requirement for sin's penalties. c) He is both the son of God and God. (That has nothing to do with what Roman religion (or any other religion) believes.

I believe what the Bible clearly and unequivocally says. Period.

So you believe Jesus was a result of evolution?

 

[YoursTrue]

a) Clearly, you do not understand the theory of evolution. Again, Organisms change by adapting to new environments and circumstances. Evolution means something evolves (or adapts) by changing to fit the environment.

b) Yes, being a Jew and having been Bar Mitzvah, I clearly understand Judaism. There are many people (not just Jews) who do not believe that Jesus is the Messiah. I can't give you a reason, because (again) I am a Jew who believes that Jesus is the Messiah.

Sorry, I can tell you that as a music teacher I taught someone the portion of the Bar Mitzvah ceremony. He knew virtually nothing about Judaism--only to go through the ritual.

 

[Coder]

Jesus...He is both the son of God and God. (That has nothing to do with what Roman religion (or any other religion) believes.

I believe:

The Roman Christian creeds say that the Father is the one God Who is believed in.

Creed: "We believe in one God the Father..."
It does not say: "We believe in one God the trinity..."
If they really believe in a trinity, the "We believe in one God..." defining statement in the Creed is the time to say it.

Jesus is added as "begotten" and Spirit "proceeds". Jesus and Spirt are theologically dependent on Father. This language allows for later theological distance to improve monotheistic theology. This is happening now, e.g. "consubstantial" has a bit more of a meaning of "like God" as opposed to "one in being".

Zoroastrianism: "Holy Spirt": "source of life", "emanates"
Roman Christianity: "Holy Spirt": "giver of life", "proceeds"

This is also a hint of the theological direction:

https://www.vatican.va/jubilee_2000/magazine/documents/ju_mag_01021998_p-24_en.html

"Although in Jewish scripture the Holy Spirit is never presented as a person..."

1 Corinthians 15:24
"...he hands over the kingdom to his God and Father, ... then the Son himself will (also) be subjected to the one..."
Jesus serves a temporary theological role. Regardless of whether you believe that, and whatever role you believe that Jesus has, it is clear that it is not a permanent position. Notice that God the Father is the God of Jesus. No trinity of equals here.

This still stands: "We believe in one God the Father..."

 

[YoursTrue]

If Jesus drove a change in era, the movement acquired much Roman-adaptive theology. Today, we are peeling away the Roman layers. The prophecies of Messiah, for all practical purposes are not fulfilled at this time.

One could argue that Christianity tamed the Roman empire to some extent. Still, even in 1500s, people were being killed, e.g. for not believing in trinity. Jacob Palaeologus (Dominican Friar, left the Church):

Jacob Palaeologus - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Messianic: Build temple
Romans: Destroyed the temple.

I believe Jesus as Christian Messiah was another attempt by Rome to bring one of the religions, Judaism, into the Roman unification.
Jesus is depicted as confirming Peter's declaration that Jesus is "son of God" and "Messiah"
"son of God" fits Greco-Roman "gods" and "sons of of gods" including emperors who were declared "divinity" and "divi filius"
"Messiah" fits Judaism needs
Tying both together in one, with Jesus as both, unites Greco-Roman and Jewish religion

Clearly the Roman emperor made a political decision to go for the trinity. He did not want religious division within his province, if possible. Meantime he wasn't baptized at the time, got baptized by an "Arian" minister just before he died. I guess he wanted to make sure maybe he didn't burn in the misunderstood hellfire some might have talked about. Although he was the one to make the decision about the trinity, it took him many years after that to get baptized, and that he did by an Arian minister.

 

[YoursTrue]

John 14:9, "Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you all this time, Philip, and you still do not know me? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?“

Why didn't he include the holy spirit (or holy ghost) person? What do you think?