• 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!

Jesus is not God

Q

QuestioningMind

Well-Known Member
Ellen Brown said:
I don't intend to debate on this. What I state is my belief, and others are welcome to theirs, and I will defend their right to their beliefs.

In the OT, when Moses first encounters God, he is told that he can not look upon God and live. Later on, God allows Moses to see him and he comes out all bleached.

Yes, I know that in the NT Jesus says that "I and the Father are one", but I think that means, in context, that the Father and he agree. If Jesus were God, then no one could have looked at him, and people DID look at him, even after the resurrection.

I think that the "Jesus as God" idea came out of the folly of what became the early Catholic Church.

I'm not going to dig all the references out. We all claim to be out of diapers, so you can do it yourself.
Click to expand...

As an atheist I find it remarkable that we find this OP as well as the OP from yesterday titled:
Why do not some understand that the Bible teaches that Jesus is God?

It is yet another example of how the god of the bible is a phenomenally incompetent communicator. How is it possible that people who both read the same book can reach two completely contrary conclusions about what it says? Especially on something as vitally important as whether or not Jesus is God. You'd think that an all powerful all knowing creator god would be able to convey a clear precise message that everyone could understand and agree on. Almost makes one think that maybe the bible has nothing to do with any sort of fantastical god and was actually just written by fallible human beings.
 
BilliardsBall

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
Ellen Brown said:
I don't intend to debate on this. What I state is my belief, and others are welcome to theirs, and I will defend their right to their beliefs.

In the OT, when Moses first encounters God, he is told that he can not look upon God and live. Later on, God allows Moses to see him and he comes out all bleached.

Yes, I know that in the NT Jesus says that "I and the Father are one", but I think that means, in context, that the Father and he agree. If Jesus were God, then no one could have looked at him, and people DID look at him, even after the resurrection.

I think that the "Jesus as God" idea came out of the folly of what became the early Catholic Church.

I'm not going to dig all the references out. We all claim to be out of diapers, so you can do it yourself.
Click to expand...

Jesus also said the Pharisees would see Him coming to Earth in power, with the angels of Heaven, from God's right-hand position. They then killed Him for His obvious allusion to Armageddon and the Book of Daniel.

Jesus also said Torah demands two witnesses confirm a fact but that He didn't need anybody to confirm anything He had to say!
 
SugarOcean

SugarOcean

¡pɹᴉǝM ʎɐʇS
shunyadragon said:
Describing the Islamic, and the Baha'i belief as well, as Jesus Chriat was a 'mere' prophet is an editorial insult and inaccurate. Islam and the Baha'i Faith describe Jesus Christ as a Manifestation of God, and bearer of the Word of God.
Click to expand...
Bahai is irrelevant here. Islam is under discussion.
Prove your claim with Sura please.

Given the misuse of the OT citations as in Isaiah, your citations mainly describe Jesus Christ as a Manifestation of God, and the bearer of God's Word especially when ballance with the words of Jesus Christ denying he was God.

1. Matthew 24:36
No one knows about that day or hour, not even the Son, but the Father only.
Here Jesus makes a distinction between what he knows and what the Father knows.

2. Matthew 26:39
My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me, yet not as I will, but as Thou will.
Jesus’ will is likewise autonomous from God’s Will. Jesus is seeking acquiescence to God’s will.

3. John 5:26
For as the Father has life in Himself, so he has granted the Son to have life in himself.
Jesus received his life from God. God received his life from no one. He is eternally self-existent.

4. John 5:30
By myself, I can do nothing: I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who has sent me.
Jesus says, “by myself, I can do nothing.” This indicates that Jesus is relying upon his own relationship with God. He is not trying to “please myself” but rather is seeking to “please the one who sent me.”

5. John 5:19
The Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees the Father doing, because whatever the Father does, the Son does also.
Jesus declares that he is following a pattern laid down by God. He is expressing obedience to God.

6. Mark 10:18
Why do you call me good? No one is good, except God alone.
Here Jesus emphatically makes a distinction between himself and God.

7. John 14:28
The Father is greater than I.
This is another strong statement that makes a distinction between Jesus and God.

8. Matthew 6:9
Our Father, which art in Heaven.
He didn’t pray, Our Father, which art standing right here!”

9. Matthew 27:46
My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?
Inconceivable if he is God the Creator.

10. John 17:21-23
. . .that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. . ..that they may be one as we are one: I in them and you in me.
In this prayer Jesus defines the term “to be one.” It is clearly accomplished through the relationship of two autonomous beings. Christian believers are to model their relationship (to become one) after the relationship of God and Christ (as God and Christ are one). Notice that “to be one” does not mean to be “one and the same.”

11. 1 Corinthians 15:27-28
For he "has put everything under his feet." Now when it says that "everything" has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.
Paul declares that God put everything under Christ, except God himself. Instead God rules all things through Christ. (remember: “through him all things were made.”)

12. Hebrews 1:3
The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being.
Jesus is the exact representation of his being. I send my representative to Congress. He is not me, myself. He is my representative.

13. Hebrews 4:15 (compared with James 1:13)
For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet without sin.
Jesus has been tempted in every way, just as we are, yet he never sinned. See

James 1:13: When tempted, no one should say, God is tempting me. For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt.
Jesus was tempted in every way, but God cannot be tempted. This is why Jesus said, “don’t call me good, none are good, only God.”

14. Hebrews 5:7-9
During the days of Jesus' life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission. Although he was a son, he learned obedience from what he suffered and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him
Jesus had to walk a course of faith and obedience in order to achieve perfection. By achieving perfection, Jesus “became” the source of eternal salvation

. . . and in the OT:

Numbers 23:19 New King James Version (NKJV)
19 “God is not a man, that He should lie,
Nor a son of man, that He should repent.
Has said, and will He not do?
Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?
Click to expand...
No misuse of citations at all. Jesus was God. As he said so himself besides the scriptures that attest of that.
Naysayers are just that.
 
SugarOcean

SugarOcean

¡pɹᴉǝM ʎɐʇS
sooda said:
Or maybe it was borrowed.....

Revelation of John, the original Jewish version ...
historical-jesus.info/rjohn.html
The Jewish original version of Revelation (or Apocalypse) of John, much more coherent than the final one, was written very likely (in Greek) late 70 or 71 C.E. in Syrian Antioch by a temple of Jerusalem ex-priest named John. This work offered an explanation for the holocaust of 70 C.E., with the destruction of Jerusalem & its temple, all of that at the hands of the Romans, and also a badly needed hope for the …
Click to expand...

For readers information. The above link is a persons personal interpretation page of these writings.
As they note on their own site. "Note: all emphases are mine."
If you scroll all the way to the bottom of their page you'll see this note: Their claim of the original version without their own comments. "See here for the original Jewish version without comments"

If you click that link you'll be taken to the New King James Version Bible of scripture for Revelation of John, the original Jewish version without comments
Front page: Daniel and Revelation (with website search function)

If you click that link, "Front page..." You get this warning near the top of that page.
WARNING
This work is based on historical objectivity and critical research,
but not on faith.
"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for,
the evidence of things not seen."
Hebrews 11:1

Case in point, the New King James Version of these scripture are not the original version of Daniel or Revelation. (Their site also uses NIV . New International Version (NIV) - Version Information - BibleGateway.com) Again, not the original version of these scriptures.
The original version, are called "Autographs". We do not have those. What we have of any scripture in the bible are copies, of copies, of copies.

New King James Version (NKJV) - Version Information - BibleGateway.com
Version Information
Commissioned in 1975 by Thomas Nelson Publishers, 130 respected Bible scholars, church leaders, and lay Christians worked for seven years to create a completely new, modern translation of Scripture, yet one that would retain the purity and stylistic beauty of the original King James. With unyielding faithfulness to the original Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic texts, the translation applies the most recent research in archaeology, linguistics, and textual studies.

If you want to read the original version as we would know it today of John's Book of Revelation it would be in Greek.
https://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/gnt/rev.htm
For those who don't read Greek here is the Polyglot version: (multi-languages including English translation) https://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/poly/rev.htm

To learn about the Book of Daniel, which coincides with the later Book of Revelation, read here.
Daniel, Book of


https://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/poly/index.htm
https://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/poly/dan.htm
 
metis

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Hockeycowboy said:
You can't accept some parts of the Scriptures and ignore other parts. They explain each other.
Click to expand...
But they don't always see eye-to-eye, such as to how many many angels there were at Jesus' tomb, where were he/they located, what did he/they say, and what happened immediately afterward?

No two gospels agree on this.
 
sooda

sooda

Veteran Member
SugarOcean said:
For readers information. The above link is a persons personal interpretation page of these writings.
As they note on their own site. "Note: all emphases are mine."
If you scroll all the way to the bottom of their page you'll see this note: Their claim of the original version without their own comments. "See here for the original Jewish version without comments"

If you click that link you'll be taken to the New King James Version Bible of scripture for Revelation of John, the original Jewish version without comments
Front page: Daniel and Revelation (with website search function)

If you click that link, "Front page..." You get this warning near the top of that page.
WARNING
This work is based on historical objectivity and critical research,
but not on faith.
"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for,
the evidence of things not seen."
Hebrews 11:1

Case in point, the New King James Version of these scripture are not the original version of Daniel or Revelation. (Their site also uses NIV . New International Version (NIV) - Version Information - BibleGateway.com) Again, not the original version of these scriptures.
The original version, are called "Autographs". We do not have those. What we have of any scripture in the bible are copies, of copies, of copies.

New King James Version (NKJV) - Version Information - BibleGateway.com
Version Information
Commissioned in 1975 by Thomas Nelson Publishers, 130 respected Bible scholars, church leaders, and lay Christians worked for seven years to create a completely new, modern translation of Scripture, yet one that would retain the purity and stylistic beauty of the original King James. With unyielding faithfulness to the original Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic texts, the translation applies the most recent research in archaeology, linguistics, and textual studies.

If you want to read the original version as we would know it today of John's Book of Revelation it would be in Greek.
https://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/gnt/rev.htm
For those who don't read Greek here is the Polyglot version: (multi-languages including English translation) https://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/poly/rev.htm

To learn about the Book of Daniel, which coincides with the later Book of Revelation, read here.
Daniel, Book of


https://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/poly/index.htm
https://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/poly/dan.htm
Click to expand...

I am glad you can navigate a website.

There was no Daniel.. He was a character in north coast Canaanite literature about a thousand years earlier. Our Daniel was never in Babylon at all. Its a complete fiction.

Why would critical study be based on faith?
 
Ellen Brown

Ellen Brown

Well-Known Member
Musing Bassist said:
You outright call my faith folly, which is hardly the way to foster respectful dialogue. Whether or not you do so out of your own honest reading of Scripture, or instead out of an allegiance to the claims of a self-declared seventh century 'prophet' is neither here or there to me. The point is that you attack the beliefs of others whilst simultaneously implying that your opinions be taken for granted. Look it up yourself and you'll see that I'm right is hardly an argument for anything.
Click to expand...

I'll not truck with you.
 
74x12

74x12

Well-Known Member
Ellen Brown said:
I don't intend to debate on this. What I state is my belief, and others are welcome to theirs, and I will defend their right to their beliefs.

In the OT, when Moses first encounters God, he is told that he can not look upon God and live. Later on, God allows Moses to see him and he comes out all bleached.

Yes, I know that in the NT Jesus says that "I and the Father are one", but I think that means, in context, that the Father and he agree. If Jesus were God, then no one could have looked at him, and people DID look at him, even after the resurrection.

I think that the "Jesus as God" idea came out of the folly of what became the early Catholic Church.

I'm not going to dig all the references out. We all claim to be out of diapers, so you can do it yourself.
Click to expand...
Well, you can't just ignore every time God did indeed become visible to various people throughout the Bible. Manifestations of God have been visible to people since the beginning. Abraham walked, talked and ate with God. (Genesis 18) The people and Moses saw God manifest also. (Exodus 24:9-11) A manifestation of God is a revelation of the invisible God. That is a teaching or a lesson about God's nature. In what form He appears and what He says and does teaches us about God's nature.

Jesus was the revelation or manifestation of God in human flesh. That is God written in human flesh as it says in John chapter 1 "The Word was made flesh". So, the otherwise unseeable God was manifest in the flesh.

As for God destroying people if they look at Him. That's true, but that is the unveiled glory of God. Not a manifestation. There is a difference. The scripture claims that Jesus will "return in the glory of His Father" (Matthew 16:27) and that the wicked will be "consumed by the brightness of His coming". (2 Thessalonians 2:8) We know that 2 Thessalonians 2:8 speaks of Jesus because it is Jesus who has the sword coming out of His mouth. (Revelation 19:15) And it is Jesus who treads the wine-press of the wrath of God.

So, Jesus Himself is predicted to come in the glory of God that is able to destroy any flesh and blood person who looks at it.
 
sooda

sooda

Veteran Member
QuestioningMind said:
As an atheist I find it remarkable that we find this OP as well as the OP from yesterday titled:
Why do not some understand that the Bible teaches that Jesus is God?

It is yet another example of how the god of the bible is a phenomenally incompetent communicator. How is it possible that people who both read the same book can reach two completely contrary conclusions about what it says? Especially on something as vitally important as whether or not Jesus is God. You'd think that an all powerful all knowing creator god would be able to convey a clear precise message that everyone could understand and agree on. Almost makes one think that maybe the bible has nothing to do with any sort of fantastical god and was actually just written by fallible human beings.
Click to expand...

The texts were redacted and amended many time over long time periods. Its like trying to write a contract over an old template.. It becomes a hot mess.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top