Is jesus his own father?

[Riverwolf]

You are in error. I find the Paraclete to be quite personal.

The Impersonal Reality is the Force that Moves Us and Through Us. Descriptions I've heard and read of the Holy Spirit match this description.

You are in error on this as well. The Bibile is not a testimony of man but a testimony of God which is proof enough of its reality. Mythology is folklore passed down through the ages with no known means to authenticate the events.

I'm afraid that if you cannot prove this then I am forced to remain in error in your eyes. I've read the several of the Biblical books, and I see nothing to indicate that it is the direct testimony of God; no book I've ever read has felt like that.

Besides, I've never heard of the Bibile.

 

[Riverwolf]

the bible is proff that men of old could wright. and thats it, if all othere holy books a crap, then the bible is crap too.

I disagree. The Biblical canon is a treasure trove of great wisdom. The men of old couldn't just write; they could THINK. They knew what they were talking about in their own context. I think it's quite clear that several stories in the Tanakh were never meant to be taken literally, such as the stories of Genesis.

 

[Riverwolf]

Trinity conforms to Hinduism.

Brahman=Holy Spirit. Paramatman=Father Bhagavan=Son

^_^

The Triune Godhead of Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva has no equivalent in Christianity as far as I know.

 

[OneThatGotAway]

IS JESUS GOD?

IS THE GODHEAD INSEPERTABLE?

SO WHEN A PART OT THE GODHEAD DOES SOMETHING, DO THEY ALL TAKE 1/3 PART IN IT?

DID THE HOLY SPERIT OVERSHADOW "CONGIGATE" "IMPART SEED" WITH MARY, JESUS'S MOTHER.:sarcastic

THEN THEREFORE DID JESUS NOT IMPRAGNATE HIS MOTHER?:yes:

God has only ONE head not three. Any being with more than one head is a freak. And you will find no such words in the Holy Bible. Jesus never claim to be God; instead, he only claim to be the SON of God.

Most Christians bought into the Catholic tradition without really reading the Holy Scriptures for themselves. All other Christians with different opinions on the subject were silence with threats.

And the Holy Spirit mention during that event was NOT Jesus impregnating Mary. Instead, it was God's Spirit providing life conduit for Jesus to be born inside Mary as a baby.

There is and have been a "God The Son"; There has and ever shall be: God and then the Son of God.

The Bible kept is simple and so should we. :yes:

 

[sky cake]

And the Holy Spirit mention during that event was NOT Jesus impregnating Mary. Instead, it was God's Spirit providing life conduit for Jesus to be born inside Mary as a baby.

no mattter how you want to view it god impregnated mary, which is creepy, claiming that jesus is not god to get out of the problem does not stop the problem, when it get down to it god does not need jesus to forgive sin, god is god and could just forgive it. man demands a sacrofice, religion demands a sacrofice, the bible offers the ideal that a father god impreginated a virgin to produce the sacrofice for mans sin. this concept is not new, jesus was not the first story, of a virginal birth, or a son od god bing the sacrofice to men. with all the effort that you, and all christion reject those storys that predate jesus's i reject your version. if god in anyway caused mary to become pregant then that is sexual reproduction. and that means if jesus is god, he is is own father. it the trinity is wrong and it is then we need to adress why god even needed jesus anyway.

 

[sojourner]

is it magic?

No. it's a mystery. There's a big theological difference.

 

[sojourner]

the bible is proff that men of old could wright. and thats it, if all othere holy books a crap, then the bible is crap too.

My, you're just full of venom, aren't you!

 

[Mr Cheese]

People believe what they want about Jesus

or as Kahlil Gibran said
"We see things as we are
Not as they are"

....

The Gospel of Philip tells us:

Jesus took them all by stealth, for he did not appear as he was, but in the manner in which they would be able to see him. He appeared to them all. He appeared to the great as great. He appeared to the small as small. He appeared to the angels as an angel, and to men as a man. Because of this, his word hid itself from everyone. Some indeed saw him, thinking that they were seeing themselves, but when he appeared to his disciples in glory on the mount, he was not small. He became great, but he made the disciples great, that they might be able to see him in his greatness.

Gospel of Thomas has similar sentiment:

Jesus said to his disciples, "Compare me to something and tell me what I am like."
Simon Peter said to him, "You are like a just messenger."
Matthew said to him, "You are like a wise philosopher."
Thomas said to him, "Teacher, my mouth is utterly unable to say what you are like."
Jesus said, "I am not your teacher. Because you have drunk, you have become intoxicated from the bubbling spring that I have tended."
And he took him, and withdrew, and spoke three sayings to him. When Thomas came back to his friends they asked him, "What did Jesus say to you?"
Thomas said to them, "If I tell you one of the sayings he spoke to me, you will pick up rocks and stone me, and fire will come from the rocks and devour you."

.............

Of course the discussion in this thread has lasted over a thousand years
To pretend that it can be concluded online, in a discussion forum....is ironic, mornic and hilarious

 

[Mr Cheese]

no its "loosing my religion by R.E.M":clap

loosing my religion?

if its tight...does thsi mean this is a thread about oil, jello or maybe chocolate mousse?

 

[sky cake]

loosing my religion?

if its tight...does thsi mean this is a thread about oil, jello or maybe chocolate mousse?

you cut me cheese!

 

[Mr Cheese]

you cut me cheese!

please read:

Of course the discussion in this thread has lasted over a thousand years
To pretend that it can be concluded online, in a discussion forum....is ironic, mornic and hilarious

That's the bottom line: This discussion has occured for 2000 years (approx)
and frankly the best anyone in this forum can do, is offer opinions(of their own or due to the doctrine/dogma of a group). There is no way you'll get an actual answer or anythign approaching it.

 

[sky cake]

i am sorry that the rubish that religion is, allowes for folks to except a lie as the truth. were hope and faith are the very same thing. your religion allowes for its own errors, if jesus nevers comes back your religion still has an out. sadly as the world becomes less christian you already have it woven in to your myth story. as the great falling away.

 

[Mr Cheese]

i am sorry that the rubish that religion is, allowes for folks to except a lie as the truth. were hope and faith are the very same thing. your religion allowes for its own errors, if jesus nevers comes back your religion still has an out. sadly as the world becomes less christian you already have it woven in to your myth story. as the great falling away.

Simplistic geralisations (such as those found in this post)
Typically only allow for simplistic conclusions.

May I humbly suggest, if you dislike Christianity that much
You actually inform yourself a bit better, lest you appear like one who is ignorant

 

[sojourner]

man demands a sacrofice, religion demands a sacrofice, the bible offers the ideal that a father god impreginated a virgin to produce the sacrofice for mans sin.

But that's not the only theology it offers. Jesus' purpose can just as legitimately be seen, not as a sacrifice, but as a reconciler.

with all the effort that you, and all christion reject those storys that predate jesus's i reject your version.

I don't reject those stories. And I fall into the set of "Christians."

if god in anyway caused mary to become pregant then that is sexual reproduction. and that means if jesus is god, he is is own father.

"Sexual reproduction" includes the act of insemination. To my knowledge, no semen was produced (which is why it is a miraculous birth), so, not "sexual reproduction." Additionally, Jesus is God, as the Father is God. Same God -- two separate persons. One person cannot be "his own father." The Father is the Father. The Son is the Son.

it the trinity is wrong and it is

No, it isn't.

 

[sky cake]

But that's not the only theology it offers. Jesus' purpose can just as legitimately be seen, not as a sacrifice, but as a reconciler..

your doging the question, spliting hairs, its reall simple god did not allow human sacrofice, jesus= human sacrofice, you religion is wrong, you are wrong.

I don't reject those stories. And I fall into the set of "Christians.".

you belive in mirthos?

"Sexual reproduction" includes the act of insemination. To my knowledge, no semen was produced (which is why it is a miraculous birth), so, not "sexual reproduction." Additionally, Jesus is God, as the Father is God. Same God -- two separate persons. One person cannot be "his own father." The Father is the Father. The Son is the Son..

look virus, bacteria both pass dna that is not sperm, not like animals, but it still is sexual reproducation, simple, did mary give birth to gods son? yes? yes? ok what ever magic or mystery pased between her and god was gods sperm, and her being inpreginated by god was sexual reproduction. sorry you are wrong again.

No, it isn't.

yes, yes it is.

 

[sojourner]

your doging the question, spliting hairs, its reall simple god did not allow human sacrofice, jesus= human sacrofice, you religion is wrong, you are wrong.

I'm not dodging the question. "Human sacrifice" = an atonement effected through a non-voluntary act of aggression. That's not what the crucifixion was. The crucifixion was an act of terrorism on the part of the Roman Empire, to which Jesus freely subjected himself.
You are wrong, both about me and about my religion.

you belive in mirthos?

No, but I believe that Mithros was a legitimate expression for another culture.

look virus, bacteria both pass dna that is not sperm, not like animals, but it still is sexual reproducation

Mary is neither a virus, nor a bacterium. She is human, and humans sexually reproduce via the introduction of sperm.

simple, did mary give birth to gods son? yes?

Yes.

ok what ever magic or mystery pased between her and god was gods sperm, and her being inpreginated by god was sexual reproduction.

Spirit does not = sperm. That's why the event is miraculous, and not sexual. You seem to be the one who's wrong here.

yes it is.

Whatever. Since you're neither a Christian, nor a believer in God's existence, it really isn't within your purview you to dictate what is, or is not, "correct" with regard to God's nature in the Christian POV.

 

[Beaudreaux]

no mattter how you want to view it god impregnated mary, which is creepy, claiming that jesus is not god to get out of the problem does not stop the problem, when it get down to it god does not need jesus to forgive sin, god is god and could just forgive it. man demands a sacrofice, religion demands a sacrofice, the bible offers the ideal that a father god impreginated a virgin to produce the sacrofice for mans sin. this concept is not new, jesus was not the first story, of a virginal birth, or a son od god bing the sacrofice to men. with all the effort that you, and all christion reject those storys that predate jesus's i reject your version. if god in anyway caused mary to become pregant then that is sexual reproduction. and that means if jesus is god, he is is own father. it the trinity is wrong and it is then we need to adress why god even needed jesus anyway.

Spell Check - Free software downloads and software reviews - CNET Download.com. Just a thought.

 

[sky cake]

I'm not dodging the question. "Human sacrifice" = an atonement effected through a non-voluntary act of aggression. That's not what the crucifixion was. The crucifixion was an act of terrorism on the part of the Roman Empire, to which Jesus freely subjected himself.
You are wrong, both about me and about my religion..

jesus said that no man could take his life, but that he choose to lay it down, that is a self stated sucide,

look, does god want human sacrofices? does god want you to offer your children up to the fires of molach? were they sacroficed there first born. human sacrofice ie the human dies for the transgressions of others, why is it not ok for man to do that but its ok for god? you and call the cross a act of procitcheation, attonement, rescensilment, reconection to god, or any othere many fancy religious term that makes human sacrofice go down better. it still does not change, that god told the jews that man is not to sacrofice other men to him. you can clam that you have a new covenet with god, but god says that the sacrofices covent is for ever. and if you say diffrent your the lier not god. "hint you get to go to hell for that"

i am not wrong about you or your religion. you are making it up as you go. i use to be apart of your religion. part of you defence is that there are so many diffrent kinds of christian that you can claim "well thats not me" but it is. the body of christ is broken, lost, and mean. its a zombie, attempting to eat the brains of mankind.

No, but I believe that Mithros was a legitimate expression for another culture..

look i belive that jesus was a legitimate expression for another culture,too. i think that both have there place but neather is real. look the lords supper is baced on the wrightings of miithros, thats were they get the blood drinking from. so do you belive that mithros was the massiah?

Mary is neither a virus, nor a bacterium. She is human, and humans sexually reproduce via the introduction of sperm..

ok sparky, look mary is not a bacterium, or a virus, she is human. and you agree that god "caused" her to become pregnate,:yes: therfore howerver that happened is gods way of having sex. do you get it? no really? come on man. call it magic, call it a myestery, call it vodo. but god had sex with mary and she gave birth. own up to it. there is no way around it. look if merical are not the reason to belive then why tell them? why even have mary to begin with? why did god need mary? its all one big lie. your god keeps puting his own foot in his mouth:foot:

Yes..

no,sorry

Spirit does not = sperm. That's why the event is miraculous, and not sexual. You seem to be the one who's wrong here..

do you also belive that when jesus was born that marys hyman was not broken? how stupid is that? the bible spends half of it time down grading women, belittling them, making sex a sin and evil thing. and for what? all the wile your belife in a redemptive savior starts with a insestious relationship, with a 12 virgin who is someones wife, that with out a human father he has no conection to a jewish tribe, all this to get to a human sacrofice/sucide to keep god from sending you to a hell he made, because os sin he made, one inwhich he could forgive, but will not, and he calles that love. and i am the "lost" one. your god is stupid and evil:slap:

Whatever. Since you're neither a Christian, nor a believer in God's existence, it really isn't within your purview you to dictate what is, or is not, "correct" with regard to God's nature in the Christian POV.

so god is magical and i dont matter hun? i am just glad the christians cant get away will killing nonbelivers any more. we need to fix the muslems next. i hope as religions wane that want ever replaces them acts kinder to you and the christians than the christians have to mankind. :shout

 

[Mr Cheese]

dude this has been argued for nearly 2000 years

with your poor grasp of the english language, coupled with the nature of this medium of communication...............

getting reasonable answers to this subject is practically impossible...but I think (hope) you're very young

 

[sojourner]

jesus said that no man could take his life, but that he choose to lay it down, that is a self stated sucide,

Suicide is an act of depression/mental illness.
Self-sacrifice for one's principles isn't.

why is it not ok for man to do that but its ok for god

It's not OK for God to do that -- and I don't believe that's what God did.

you and call the cross a act of procitcheation, attonement, rescensilment, reconection to god, or any othere many fancy religious term that makes human sacrofice go down better.

Reconciliation has little to do with the crucifixion. It has everything to do with the Incarnation.

it still does not change, that god told the jews that man is not to sacrofice other men to him.

And so we don't do that -- never have.

you can clam that you have a new covenet with god, but god says that the sacrofices covent is for ever.

Who says "God says?" The Bible? Which you put down as complete crap? If you believe the Bible is crap, then it does not serve your purposes as evidentiary. Therefore, God may not have said..." Which would make you the liar here, if, indeed, a liar there be.

i am not wrong about you or your religion.

You are. Sorry.

you are making it up as you go.

BZZZZT! Thanks for playing! We have some lovely parting gifts for you, including the home version of our game.

part of you defence is that there are so many diffrent kinds of christian that you can claim "well thats not me" but it is.

No, it isn't. Perhaps you're projecting...

the body of christ is broken, lost, and mean. its a zombie, attempting to eat the brains of mankind.

But you're not bitter...
The Body of Christ is One. Parts of it may be mean. Mine isn't. Zombies are living dead. The Church is not dead. We do not eat brains. We eat living Bread.

look i belive that jesus was a legitimate expression for another culture,too. i think that both have there place but neather is real.

Oh? Perhaps you'd like to back up that rather unconsidered opinion with some proof?

look the lords supper is baced on the wrightings of miithros, thats were they get the blood drinking from.

Not cogent here.

so do you belive that mithros was the massiah?

If I did, would I call myself "Christian?"

therfore howerver that happened is gods way of having sex.

No, it isn't. "Having sex" involves the use of sexual organs. Since sexual organs were not used, no sex took place.

call it magic, call it a myestery, call it vodo. but god had sex with mary and she gave birth.

Nope. Sorry.

own up to it.

Not going to own up to what's not there.

look if merical are not the reason to belive then why tell them?

Miracles aren't reasons. They're vehicles.

why even have mary to begin with?

So that God could become Incarnate.

its all one big lie.

Whatever.

your god keeps puting his own foot in his mouth:foot:

God has no foot and no mouth. You're projecting. Again.

no,sorry

Yes. And, BTW, why would you possibly care?

do you also belive that when jesus was born that marys hyman was not broken?

Not particularly. I don't waste too much time pondering that eventuality.

bible spends half of it time down grading women, belittling them

An exaggerated misrepresentation.

making sex a sin and evil thing.

No, it doesn't.

all the wile your belife in a redemptive savior starts with a insestious relationship, with a 12 virgin who is someones wife, that with out a human father he has no conection to a jewish tribe, all this to get to a human sacrofice/sucide to keep god from sending you to a hell he made, because os sin he made, one inwhich he could forgive, but will not, and he calles that love. and i am the "lost" one.

Except I don't believe any of that.

your god is stupid and evil

You like to project, don't you?