Jesus as Christ

[Redemptionsong]

If you mean by corruptible that Jesus could die, then yes.
God resurrected Jesus back to his pre-human heavenly body, not in a corruptible body.
Jesus (Like Adam - Genesis 2:7 ) was a soul.
Jesus did Not possess a soul or have a soul but was a 'living soul' or person like Adam until he died.
Jesus said at Luke 11:13 B.... how much more so will the Father in Heaven give holy spirit to those asking Him.
So, yes, Jesus asked for God's spirit and Jesus had God's spirit.
Jesus became Messiah at his baptism when God's spirit in the from of bird came down upon Jesus.

Do you not believe that every human is born a body, soul and spirit? [1 Thessalonians 5:23]

If, as you say, Jesus was born as a body without a soul, and that God's Spirit descended at baptism (when Jesus was aged about 30), what was Jesus from birth to baptism? Was he only a body, without soul and spirit?

 

[Redemptionsong]

LOL! You were the one that said that he could refute them. I have not checked the context so it may not be one You must have searched for a while to find one that you could refute. Why didn't you refute it?

You asked me to pick one from the list! I have. All I want to know before explaining the difficulty is whether you agree with the site that this is a contradiction.

 

[Trailblazer]

In Isaiah 61:1-2, which Jesus quoted in the synagogue in Nazareth [Luke 4:18,19], there was no mention by Jesus of 'the day of vengeance of our God'. This was something reserved for the return of Christ. Did Baha'ullah, therefore, bring about 'the day of vengeance of our God'?

I do not know what you mean by vengeance, but Baha'is believe that were are living in The Day of Judgment and if you read what is on that link it explains what the judgment is, citing the Bible.

This is an example of what Baha'u'llah wrote about the judgement:

“Grieve thou not over those that have busied themselves with the things of this world, and have forgotten the remembrance of God, the Most Great. By Him Who is the Eternal Truth! The day is approaching when the wrathful anger of the Almighty will have taken hold of them. He, verily, is the Omnipotent, the All-Subduing, the Most Powerful. He shall cleanse the earth from the defilement of their corruption, and shall give it for an heritage unto such of His servants as are nigh unto Him.” Gleanings, p. 208

“Say: There is no place of refuge for you, no asylum to which ye can flee, no one to defend or to protect you in this Day from the fury of the wrath of God and from His vehement power, unless and until ye seek the shadow of His Revelation. This, indeed, is His Revelation which hath been manifested unto you in the person of this Youth. Glorified, then, be God for so effulgent, so precious, so wondrous a vision.” Gleanings, p. 257

 

[blü 2]

Let me begin by saying that magic is not the same as a miracle.

Magic is the alteration of reality independently of the rules of reality, and miracles are a subset of magic.

Miracles, on the other hand, are seen as signs and wonders from God.

If you admit God can do magic then you must accept all the other claims of magic attributed to gods and humans down the ages and across the nations.

To deny that God has the power to intervene in human affairs is the same as suggesting that God cannot create, or rearrange, natural phenomenon.

Please show me an authenticated example of God ─ indeed, any god ─ intervening in human affairs.

Meanwhile, science cannot explain the origins of the universe, except to admit there was a beginning.

While that's true, at least science is looking for the answer. to the point where the question can be framed with considerable precision. The churches are not looking, saying instead that God did it; but that explains nothing unless and until we have a suitable explanation of what real (not-imaginary) thing God is and how exactly [he] does things.

And by this admission, philosophers have concluded that time and space could not have existed before the 'singularity' of the Big Bang. Scientists are, therefore, hard pushed not to admit to miracles, given that 'something' appeared without rational explanation!

That's incorrect. What science has actually said is that on our present knowledge there's no way that we can access information about what if anything existed before the singularity of the Big Bang. The hypothesis that the universe formed from energy and matter pre-existing in some metaverse is still open. (I see no basis for the alternative, that absolutely nothing pre-existed the Big Bang ─ there would be neither time nor space in which anything could happen. It makes far more sense to me that time and space are effects or qualities of matter and energy, not vice versa.)

In demonstrating that all the scriptures of the Bible are inspired by God [2 Timothy 3:16]

This is the only such claim in the bible, and refers only to the Tanakh, there being no NT when it was written. Since the Tanakh itself makes no such claims, this claim is at best one writer's opinion, and doesn't itself even have the benefit of his claim. Nor is it a claim of infallibility ─ which is just as well.

Speaking of the Tanakh, Jesus said, 'Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away, till all things be accomplished' [Matthew 5:17-18] Since the expression, 'the law and the prophets' meant the entire Hebrew Bible, we can feel certain that Jesus himself did no doubt the inspiration of the whole of scripture.

This is Matthew's Jesus. None of the other four say anything like that.

But if it's correct then the covenant of circumcision still applies regardless of Paul, slavery is still fine as long as you stick to the rules, you must not suffer a witch to live, you must not keep company with menstruating women, the penalty for razzing your parents is death, you must sacrifice your first-born male child to God as required by Exodus 29-30 ─ and so on.

 

[rational experiences]

Tell me, Rational Experiences, is Jesus Christ the truth?

A human being human is our only truth. An equal life human.

We are born by two human parents.
We live in an equal living condition water oxygen the same for all nature.

Natural light is in a vacuum and science never owned it.

Sex removes mutations it allows new mutations to be expressed as gas burning spirit fallout by science man continues to mutate life. Irradiated heavy metals.

I look at my family and quote they are not being saved. We see with our own eyes life is not saved it is still sacrificed dying unnaturally.

So I think.
I hear recorded man science machine encoded AI data. It speaks about sciences of man's behalf. Why men of science believed they had mind control by status Ai.

Computer data is man's owned science questions and answers. By thought man to design machines.

It told me Jesus man image in cloud occurred once in first life in earth after all life on earth was destroyed.

Massive earth cooling reformed clouds image emerged after the event. Man left in cloud image the event. Cloud amassing part of saving.

Water once used on the ground gone forever out of life to own clouds presence.

Why Jesus is placed as man's identified reason before CH Rist CH gases as the status did not save life.

CH gases are first holy body in science status. Natural only.

As Phi is etched onto melted stone ground it ends. It is atop of living crops vice versa. Where it finished.

Science applied Phi in machine status theirselves.

Jesus is just a theme why life was sacrificed.

The saviour ice is end of year rebirth that melts that saves life by putting a higher human used water body back into earths atmosphere. The saviour states saved life.

Clouds own water mass. Water mass and oxygen saved us.

A human father human begets a human son a baby from human sex. Humans save and return their own lives by sex. Human. Babies born mutated are sacrificed.

God acts science statement were evil.

The loving life was human owned by humans looking at humans.

The term Jesus owns multi reasoning in science status why life survived as a human and was saved.

Being sacrificed had never stopped.

The teaching never said the sacrifice witnessed in new life was saved from non existing. It said the actual body form witnessed attack had stopped.

As the teaching involved the type of sacrifice as a stigmata crucifixion of blood and body cell.

The science status said life to live as a human had been saved.

Why we quote we are not Jesus. It happened to.one man only.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Faith does not mean 'without evidence'.

Except that it does.
This is why nobody has "faith" in gravity.

Faith is for things you hope to be true. Not for things you know to be true.

'Faith comes by hearing', and one needs to hear the truth of the Gospel to believe. IMO.

The spiritual man places his faith in the Creator, not the creation. There's a difference between placing one's faith in temporal things and things that last forever.

Where does your treasure lie?

I have no idea what you are on about.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Faith is confidence in the teachings of Jesus Christ as found in the Bible.

When you drive somewhere to see a friend you have faith/confidence that friend will be there.
One does Not say I have ' No evidence and I am gullible ' because I believe I will see my friend.

Confidence in mundane, verifiable, commonly observable reality is not at all the same as religious faith.

I know my friend exists.
I know his house exists.
I don't know if he's at his house.

If I pop in there at a random time, then he might be there or he might not be there. I don't know.
If I have an appointment with him, the chances are higher that he'll be there, although how likely it is would depend on previous experience with the dude - how trustworthy he is etc.

So what we have here, are rather reasonable expectations based on precedents / evidence.

This is not at all the same as your "faith" in your undemonstrable, unverifiable, unsupportable, unobservable, undetectable supernatural magical deity.

Again, one of these is a reasonable expectation. The other is gullibility.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

People have faith/confidence George Washington existed besides people of ancient history.

We don't need faith. We have enormous amounts of solid independent evidence that George Washington existed.

We have never seen those people but through writings we know they existed.

We have much more evidence then just mere testimony and hearsay.

Misplaced is: you don't know whether or not your friend is where you are going

How is not knowing something "misplaced"?
The thing that is misplaced is to pretend to know those things that you don't, by putting beliefs in stuff without proper justification.

... Bible isn't going anywhere.
Verified the friend is there... Bible is always there.

The bible is the claim.

We can communicate with God at any time because His Word (Bible) is always there. Texts chosen to represent God because the Bible is full of harmonious cross-reference or parallel verses and passages.
That is why Jesus could use logical reasoning on the old Hebrew Scriptures as the basis for his teachings.

This is just preaching and adds nothing to the point at hand.

 

[Redemptionsong]

Why don't you pick one to start with. We will see if you have a valid explanation or just apologetics. Apologetics is a loss.

Did Jesus baptise anyone?
The better question would have been, Did Jesus ever baptise anyone with water?

The answer to the question is, No. Jesus never baptised anyone with water.

It says in John 3:22, 'After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.'

One could be forgiven for thinking that John 3:22 indicates that Jesus himself did the baptising with water, but, if one takes the trouble to read on, we arrive at John 4:1,2 where it says, 'When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)', and we have our answer. Jesus accompanied the disciples but was not personally involved in baptising with water. The passage in parenthesis has been inserted to emphasise this point. Why did Jesus not baptise with water? Because, if one looks back to the record of John's water baptism we read [John 1:33], 'And I [John] knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.'

The scripture is very precise. Jesus was never meant to baptise with water, because his mission was to baptise with the Holy Spirit. Water baptism demonstrates man's repentance, whilst the baptism in the Holy Spirit is God's grace from above. Jesus Christ came from God, and his testament is a promise of grace.

So, IS THERE A CONTRADICTION? Most definitely not. In fact, if this is an example of the site's contradictions then one might as well ignore the site completely because it demonstrates only ignorance and poor scholarship.

 

[Redemptionsong]

I do not know what you mean by vengeance, but Baha'is believe that were are living in The Day of Judgment and if you read what is on that link it explains what the judgment is, citing the Bible.

This is an example of what Baha'u'llah wrote about the judgement:

“Grieve thou not over those that have busied themselves with the things of this world, and have forgotten the remembrance of God, the Most Great. By Him Who is the Eternal Truth! The day is approaching when the wrathful anger of the Almighty will have taken hold of them. He, verily, is the Omnipotent, the All-Subduing, the Most Powerful. He shall cleanse the earth from the defilement of their corruption, and shall give it for an heritage unto such of His servants as are nigh unto Him.” Gleanings, p. 208

“Say: There is no place of refuge for you, no asylum to which ye can flee, no one to defend or to protect you in this Day from the fury of the wrath of God and from His vehement power, unless and until ye seek the shadow of His Revelation. This, indeed, is His Revelation which hath been manifested unto you in the person of this Youth. Glorified, then, be God for so effulgent, so precious, so wondrous a vision.” Gleanings, p. 257

'Vengeance', 'vindication', and 'judgment' are used of the second coming of Christ. To believe that this has already come to earth seems odd to me. Where is the evidence of Christ's appearance to destroy the nations that come against Jerusalem as prophesied by Zechariah [Zech.12:9-14]?

 

[Redemptionsong]

Except that it does.
This is why nobody has "faith" in gravity.

Faith is for things you hope to be true. Not for things you know to be true.



I have no idea what you are on about.

One arrives at faith through a process of reasoning based on evidence. Once one finds a person, in this case Jesus Christ, worthy of trust, it is possible to follow obediently.

When asked to justify one's faith in Jesus Christ, one is then required to return to the reasons that led to faith. Trying to explain a life of faith to those who have no faith is not an easy task!

 

[rational experiences]

If a human says we came from the eternal spirit you would expect a discussion of how and why.

It was given yet ignored as science states science owns the eternal.

So if I challenge you your claim science the science says is energy and always existed.

Yet you theory I can invent energy by a light constant. A formula a human scientist taught.

Earth heavens voids vacuum earths gas alight constant.

Earth stone is not alight.

So you argue.

As you want the eternal to be scientific.

Humans know life continuance owns a sex or propagation condition. Dinosaurs cannot bare little babies.

Science says I have no thesis actually. As ice also never existed then. So you have to coerce instead.

The diction ary said Phi sophism is a cunning contrivance.

Men made that claim.

So we argue using words. Science uses science stating all spiritual conditions can be quantified.

Why do you experiment then?

He builds machine as it's designer. His man's conscious thoughts controls what he commands the machine to perform.

He says I contacted human consciousness by machines. Why he secretly claims he is right. What a lot of you don't realise in argument. He thinks we are machine transmissions.

So you ask him okay brother did machines by machine conditions invent my presence. As your belief I have the eternal?

If we came from the highest status manipulated into change as highest. Highest cannot just change as the state to own the highest supports the highest.

Then humans state a conscious being caused it.

Humans use human words for human descriptions. The highest would not be human nor use our words.

So we cannot talk on its behalf when science a human claims science by his science status speaks on behalf.

I had a glimpsed memory between our father and then our mother that proved an unconditional loving being caused us to leave. Hence there is no explanation after that status.

As we inherited choices ourselves just as humans.

If you think that type of being wanted change I think you would be mistaken.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Did Jesus baptise anyone?
The better question would have been, Did Jesus ever baptise anyone with water?

The answer to the question is, No. Jesus never baptised anyone with water.

It says in John 3:22, 'After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.'

One could be forgiven for thinking that John 3:22 indicates that Jesus himself did the baptising with water, but, if one takes the trouble to read on, we arrive at John 4:1,2 where it says, 'When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)', and we have our answer. Jesus accompanied the disciples but was not personally involved in baptising with water. The passage in parenthesis has been inserted to emphasise this point. Why did Jesus not baptise with water? Because, if one looks back to the record of John's water baptism we read [John 1:33], 'And I [John] knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.'

The scripture is very precise. Jesus was never meant to baptise with water, because his mission was to baptise with the Holy Spirit. Water baptism demonstrates man's repentance, whilst the baptism in the Holy Spirit is God's grace from above. Jesus Christ came from God, and his testament is a promise of grace.

So, IS THERE A CONTRADICTION? Most definitely not. In fact, if this is an example of the site's contradictions then one might as well ignore the site completely because it demonstrates only ignorance and poor scholarship.

You are almost right. It is not a case of the site's poor composition. It is an example of the Bible's poor composition. This is arguably an example of that. The Bible is a poorly written bbok. Such "contradictions" would not exist if the Bible were well written.

 

[Redemptionsong]

You are almost right. It is not a case of the site's poor composition. It is an example of the Bible's poor composition. This is arguably an example of that. The Bible is a poorly written bbok. Such "contradictions" would not exist if the Bible were well written.

I beg to differ. The scriptures are like a tapestry of words, and it takes patience and dedication to understand the things that God wishes to reveal. Some ideas are plain to see, others are hidden intentionally, blinding those that do not have the heart to learn.
IMO.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I beg to differ. The scriptures are like a tapestry of words, and it takes patience and dedication to understand the things that God wishes to reveal. Some ideas are plain to see, others are hidden intentionally, blinding those that do not have the heart to learn.
IMO.

You just admitted that it is a product of poor composition. It should not take such a burden since it is possible to have formed a well written book that does not have such errors instead. Now you are using apologetics, that is more than stretching the truth for Jesus.

I gave a quick reply, but it is the middle of the night. Even so you did not have a proper answer for the poor composition of the Bible. You appear to have hunted for a poor example. Later on I will find a better one.

 

[wellwisher]

Jesus was called the second Adam. The first Adam along with Eve, lost paradise for humans, because they ate of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. This tree is symbolic of learned cultural knowledge of right and wrong, in general, and law in particular. Paradise was more about natural instinct; inner voice, instead of the outer voice of culture. The inner voice o instinct does not create conflict like two salesmen outside you telling the opposite things to learn.

The symbolism of the tree of knowledge of good and evil showed that such knowledge of good and evil and law is associated with Satan. It was considered taboo to God, who warned Adam and Eve not to downgrade, compared to their natural instinct and paradise; tree of life. Eve, then Adam sided with Satan, which implied humans chose law and therefore were to be ruled by Satan.

As an example of law, woke culture is trying to force everyone to obey their rendition of good and evil. This is not a divine source of objective data but based on learned knowledge from humans seeking power. This causes problems since this system of good and evil is subjective and self serving and not objective. All suffering on earth appears from this dynamics of subjective good and evil. This is different from natural instinct; tree of life, which is objective based on long periods of testing and time; natural selection.

Jesus's job, as the second Adam, was to restore humans back to before the fall; system restore, by getting rid of law and knowledge of good and evil in favor of faith. The natural animal does not have to learn their instinct, but rather they use faith when any instinct acts.

This change is anticipated in Revelations, where Satan is thrown from heaven and thereby loses his divine control over humans. When Satan was in Heaven his rule was sanctioned by heaven and was a divine part of human education. But when he is thrown from heaven, his contract was broken.

Many humans, through centuries of habit, continued to obey their master; Satan, who they sell as God the Father. But after the boot Satan is not sanctioned. Jesus is now the new CEO, in charge of humans, but law of good and evil prevents this from being accepted and conscious in many. That sets up the dynamics of the end of time, where Jesus is finally installed as the new caretaker of the humans, leading them back to paradise; natural.

Revelations and the idea of Satan being thrown from heaven, was written decades after Jesus died. It implied that Satan was condoned by heaven and God up to a time decades after the death of Jesus. The death of Jesus was the trigger for a political power struggle in heaven. Revelations does not say when the boot will occur so Satan and law is still thought to be condoned in heaven. Based on current even law is now used to hurt people such as in Washington political gaming. It has outlived it usefulness; criminal rights?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

One arrives at faith through a process of reasoning based on evidence.

No, that's how you arrive at knowledge and reasonable expectations.

"faith" is what you need when you don't have knowledge and reasonable expectations, yet wish to believe anyway.

Once one finds a person, in this case Jesus Christ, worthy of trust, it is possible to follow obediently.

You didn't find this person. You merely believe this person is there. There is a difference.
This is why you need "faith" for jesus, but not for gravity.

When asked to justify one's faith in Jesus Christ, one is then required to return to the reasons that led to faith.

And the responses you'll get will consist of emotional arguments, hearsay, unverifiable anecdotes and more "faith".

Trying to explain a life of faith to those who have no faith is not an easy task!

It's very easy if you just tell the truth.
It's a life of believing on no, or bad, evidence.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I beg to differ. The scriptures are like a tapestry of words, and it takes patience and dedication to understand the things that God wishes to reveal. Some ideas are plain to see, others are hidden intentionally, blinding those that do not have the heart to learn.
IMO.

You'ld think that the all powerful perfectly intelligent creator of the universe would be capable of making his wishes understood in a more straightforward manner instead of through this semantical scavenger hunt which requires you to set reason aside....

 

[Trailblazer]

Faith is for things you hope to be true. Not for things you know to be true.

Faith is for things we know to be true. That is why we have faith in them.
There is more than one way to know something is true.

Definition of know

transitive verb

1a(1): to perceive directly : have direct cognition of (2): to have understanding of importance of knowing oneself(3): to recognize the nature of : discernb(1): to recognize as being the same as something previously known(2): to be acquainted or familiar with (3): to have experience of

2a: to be aware of the truth or factuality of : be convinced or certain of b: to have a practical understanding of knows how to write

Definition of KNOW

 

[URAVIP2ME]

It gives one contradiction under the question, 'Did Jesus baptise anyone?' [John 3:22; John 4:2]
So, tell me, is this a contradiction?

I'd like to add my two cents and say that since Jesus did No baptising then baptising was done under his direction.
Kind of like today when a secretary writes a letter which was dictated by the boss. Boss did No actual writing.
At that time frame the significance of that baptism was a symbol forJew's repenting of sins against the Law.
Then ' after ' Jesus' resurrection Jesus instructs baptising that would then have a different significance because 'Christian baptism' is a symbol of a person's dedication to serve God.