The Absolute Oneness of God

[Ben Avraham]

Again, you are mischaracterizing what I've been saying, so I give up.

It is okay to give up. BTW, I have got used to a few other atheists' last word "I give up" as perhaps in place of a longer explanation that they don't have what it takes to discuss the existence of the Primal Cause with a Jew.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I am not too sure I can follow your thoughts about God in this post of yours above. As far as I am concerned, nothing in God exists apart from Him. Perhaps you have the results of His actions in your mind. The apparent distinction is in us, not in God. The absolute Oneness of God is not affected by His plurality of actions.

Sorry Ben, I may have misunderstood what you meant, for I agree totally with all you said above.

 

[metis]

It is okay to give up. BTW, I have got used to a few other atheists' last word "I give up" as perhaps in place of a longer explanation that they don't have what it takes to discuss the existence of the Primal Cause with a Jew.

I'm a scientist, and have been for roughly 50 years, so between science and what you've been putting out, I'll take the former.

You simply do not even begin to understand why most cosmologists lean towards the concept infinity, so let recommend you stick to theology. There simply is not one shred of evidence for a "Primal Cause", nor is there any science that affirms it in any way, nor can it be deduced through logic because there are other possibilities, such as the concept of "infinity".

Therefore, let me recommend you stick to theology because you simply are not operating from any kind of scientific paradigm whatsoever. As for myself, I lean in the direction whereas the objectively-derived evidence takes me-- not in fairy tales.

 

[Repox]

Debating with a Jew about the Oneness of God, you must make use of Logic. But you are speculating and, there is no place for Logic in assumptions. Assuming Jesus was God is good but only within the Christian realm of preconceived notions. Spirits are concepts which can be considered with bodies but only in vision or dreams.

I reject the Christianity view of Jesus being the son of God. Therefore, I reject Christianity. I also reject the idea of dreams being false, they are part of our everyday reality. On the topic of spirituality, we have no empirical evidence from Jewish OT prophets, just dreams and visions. Spiritual realities cannot be found in our empirical world, they are another dimension of reality, one which is true but unprovable.

If you dismiss visions and dreams, you must dismiss Jewish holy books.

 

[Ben Avraham]

I reject the Christianity view of Jesus being the son of God. Therefore, I reject Christianity. I also reject the idea of dreams being false, they are part of our everyday reality. On the topic of spirituality, we have no empirical evidence from Jewish OT prophets, just dreams and visions. Spiritual realities cannot be found in our empirical world, they are another dimension of reality, one which is true but unprovable. If you dismiss visions and dreams, you must dismiss Jewish holy books.

I don't reject the Christianity view of Jesus having been son of God. Of his being God, I do reject it to the utmost; but that he was son of God while he lived is perfectly natural if you read Exodus 4:22,23. Jesus was for 33 years part of Israel, and as part of Israel, he was son of God. Of course, he is so no longer because HaShem is not God of the dead but of the living only. Regarding dreams and visions, that's the way the Lord chose to reveal Himself to His servants the Prophets. (Numbers 12:6)

 

[Ben Avraham]

I'm a scientist, and have been for roughly 50 years, so between science and what you've been putting out, I'll take the former. You simply do not even begin to understand why most cosmologists lean towards the concept infinity, so let recommend you stick to theology. There simply is not one shred of evidence for a "Primal Cause", nor is there any science that affirms it in any way, nor can it be deduced through logic because there are other possibilities, such as the concept of "infinity". Therefore, let me recommend you stick to theology because you simply are not operating from any kind of scientific paradigm whatsoever. As for myself, I lean in the direction whereas the objectively-derived evidence takes me-- not in fairy tales.

There you go again with the atheistic typical statement that there is not one shred of evidence for the Primal Cause! If there is no shred of evidence for the existence of the Primal Cause, why don't you make use of your 50 years of scientific life experience to tell us what or who caused the Universe to exist? If you cannot persuade a theist of that much, couldn't it be that you might have wasted all those 50 years juggling with theories completely destitute of common sense? I am not asking you to make use of the theological approach to what caused the Universes to exist. Use Physics and Logic to tell us how the Universe has come about.

 

[Ben Avraham]

Sorry Ben, I may have misunderstood what you meant, for I agree totally with all you said above.

No problem pal! I was aware that two "ben's" could not be too far apart from each other.

 

[Repox]

I don't reject the Christianity view of Jesus having been son of God. Of his being God, I do reject it to the utmost; but that he was son of God while he lived is perfectly natural if you read Exodus 4:22,23. Jesus was for 33 years part of Israel, and as part of Israel, he was son of God. Of course, he is so no longer because HaShem is not God of the dead but of the living only. Regarding dreams and visions, that's the way the Lord chose to reveal Himself to His servants the Prophets. (Numbers 12:6)

if you research it, you find no historical records for Joseph or Mary. I propose the stories of Jesus's family are fictional. I believe God came into the world as Jesus. He popped into the world as a man.

 

[Ben Avraham]

if you research it, you find no historical records for Joseph or Mary. I propose the stories of Jesus's family are fictional. I believe God came into the world as Jesus. He popped into the world as a man.

God, the Primal Cause aka the creator of the Universe, did not need to pop into the world as a man. So, the idea that the Lord popped into the world as a man is as fictional as the records of Joseph and Mary. Too much has been written about Jesus, too much has been read about Jesus; it is impossible that every thing that has been said about him is fictional. And last but not least, you are making of yourself a paradox. You propose that Jesus' family is fictional and, by the same token you believe that God came into the world as Jesus.

 

[Repox]

God, the Primal Cause aka the creator of the Universe, did not need to pop into the world as a man. So, the idea that the Lord popped into the world as a man is as fictional as the records of Joseph and Mary. Too much has been written about Jesus, too much has been read about Jesus; it is impossible that every thing that has been said about him is fictional. And last but not least, you are making of yourself a paradox. You propose that Jesus' family is fictional and, by the same token you believe that God came into the world as Jesus.

It may be confusing, but it is consistent. If God came into the world as a man, why would he need a family to do it? The big problem is when he gave testimony, his chosen people rejected him. They wanted a great savior to delivery them from an evil world. With rejection of the real Jesus came a novel interpretation. Jesus became the son of God sent as a sacrificial lamb to save humankind. If you study prior gospels to the four NT gospels it is clear. The definition of Jesus changed from sage or wise man to the son of God. Also, if you study historical references about the crucifixion story, you discover it didn't come about until about 40 years after the death of Jesus. It took Jesus movement leaders a long time to come up with a good salvation story. It is all there in historical documents!

Based on historical documents, there were no saints back then. They were ambitious men willing to lie in order to promote their agenda. Well, I suppose you could say, they just got carried away. It had to happen that way! It sounds so good.

 

[Repox]

The Absolute Oneness of God

Isaiah says that, absolutely, God cannot be compared with anyone or anything, as we read Isaiah 46:5. "To whom will ye liken Me, and make Me equal to , or compare Me with, that we may be alike?"

Therefore, more than one God would have been unable to produce the world; one would have impeded the work of the other, unless this could be avoided by a suitable division of labor.

More than one Divine Being would have one element in common, and would differ in another; each would thus consist of two elements, and would not be God.

More than one God are moved to action by will; the will, without a substratum, could not act simultaneously in more than one being.

Therefore, the existence of one God is proved; the existence of more than one God cannot be proved. One could suggest that it would be possible; but since as possibility is inapplicable to God, there does not exist more than one God. So, the possibility of ascertaining the existence of God is here confounded with potentiality of existence.

Again, if one God suffices, a second or third God would be superfluous; if one God is not sufficient, he is not perfect, and cannot be a deity.

Now, besides being God absolutely One, He is incorporeal. If God were corporeal, He would consist of atoms, and would not be one; or he would be comparable to other beings; but a comparison implies the existence of similar and of dissimilar elements, and God would thus not be One. A corporeal God would be finite, and an external power would be required to define those limits.

I propose that Jesus was God, and God is a duality. I believe the two witnesses in Revelation 11 is the real story about Jesus. Referring to a verse in Daniel, Chapter 12:7, about end times. “It will be for a time, times and half a time. When the power of the holy people has been finally broken, all these things will be completed.” This translates into three and one half years, which is the time for the ministry of Jesus The same words are found in Revelation 12:14. “The woman (Jesus) was given the two wings of a great eagle, so that she might fly to the place prepared for her in the desert, where she would be taken care of for a time, times and half a time, out of the serpent’s reach.” One may interpret the “power of the holy people” in Daniel to refer to the testimony of the "two witnesses" in Rev. 11. The time for the two witnesses to give testimony is 1,260 days, or three and one half years. (Rev. 11:3). The times are the same, a perfect fit.

By duality, I do not mean both Gods can be seen at the same time, like two persons side by side. The two entities of God are part of the same whole. In heaven, angels interact with both Gods in a sphere. As an example, one God reacts with something an angel communicates or does. The other God pops up in the God sphere and reacts to what the other God did. These unique exchanges continue forever amusing and entertaining angels. When God was in the world as Jesus, the two entities of God were inside the body of Jesus. Based on my vision of two pearls, both Gods are equal and have never been separated. Before they created angels, they were their own companions. Angels have enjoyed interacting with the two Gods since they were created for God’s pleasure.

There is empirical evidence for God's duality in nature. There are many examples of duality: two wings on birds, two arms, two legs, two feet, two sides of the brain, two mating pairs, etc. There are many more examples of duality in our material world. As an example,, there is electricity (positive and negative charges), chemistry (opposites reacting), and physical laws (gravity and anti-gravity), etc. You cannot deny the importance of duality throughout the universe. Then, of course, we have mathematical formulas (odd and even division of numbers), balanced equations, etc. Examples of duality are too numerous to mention. Why wouldn’t nature reflect its creator?

 

[Ben Avraham]

It may be confusing, but it is consistent. If God came into the world as a man, why would he need a family to do it? The big problem is when he gave testimony, his chosen people rejected him. They wanted a great savior to delivery them from an evil world. With rejection of the real Jesus came a novel interpretation. Jesus became the son of God sent as a sacrificial lamb to save humankind. If you study prior gospels to the four NT gospels it is clear. The definition of Jesus changed from sage or wise man to the son of God. Also, if you study historical references about the crucifixion story, you discover it didn't come about until about 40 years after the death of Jesus. It took Jesus movement leaders a long time to come up with a good salvation story. It is all there in historical documents! Based on historical documents, there were no saints back then. They were ambitious men willing to lie in order to promote their agenda. Well, I suppose you could say, they just got carried away. It had to happen that way! It sounds so good.

Every time God came into the world as a man or an angel was in the dreams and visions of His Prophets. (Numbers 12:6) And as your question is concerned, you are right, He needed no family. So, it is not true that He ever came as a man.

 

[Ben Avraham]

I propose that Jesus was God, and God is a duality. I believe the two witnesses in Revelation 11 is the real story about Jesus. Referring to a verse in Daniel, Chapter 12:7, about end times. “It will be for a time, times and half a time. When the power of the holy people has been finally broken, all these things will be completed.” This translates into three and one half years, which is the time for the ministry of Jesus The same words are found in Revelation 12:14. “The woman (Jesus) was given the two wings of a great eagle, so that she might fly to the place prepared for her in the desert, where she would be taken care of for a time, times and half a time, out of the serpent’s reach.” One may interpret the “power of the holy people” in Daniel to refer to the testimony of the "two witnesses" in Rev. 11. The time for the two witnesses to give testimony is 1,260 days, or three and one half years. (Rev. 11:3). The times are the same, a perfect fit.

By duality, I do not mean both Gods can be seen at the same time, like two persons side by side. The two entities of God are part of the same whole. In heaven, angels interact with both Gods in a sphere. As an example, one God reacts with something an angel communicates or does. The other God pops up in the God sphere and reacts to what the other God did. These unique exchanges continue forever amusing and entertaining angels. When God was in the world as Jesus, the two entities of God were inside the body of Jesus. Based on my vision of two pearls, both Gods are equal and have never been separated. Before they created angels, they were their own companions. Angels have enjoyed interacting with the two Gods since they were created for God’s pleasure.

There is empirical evidence for God's duality in nature. There are many examples of duality: two wings on birds, two arms, two legs, two feet, two sides of the brain, two mating pairs, etc. There are many more examples of duality in our material world. As an example,, there is electricity (positive and negative charges), chemistry (opposites reacting), and physical laws (gravity and anti-gravity), etc. You cannot deny the importance of duality throughout the universe. Then, of course, we have mathematical formulas (odd and even division of numbers), balanced equations, etc. Examples of duality are too numerous to mention. Why wouldn’t nature reflect its creator?

Propose to a Christian that HaShem is a duality of gods and you will find many ready years to listen to you. Propose to a Jew and you will find only deaf ears to listen.

 

[Repox]

Propose to a Christian that HaShem is a duality of gods and you will find many ready years to listen to you. Propose to a Jew and you will find only deaf ears to listen.

It may be one of the best kept secrets about God. For humans, it is easier to think in terms of singularities as it relates to the human condition. It is interesting, however, to find scriptural verification (two witnesses) for the duality of God. I don't promote any particular religion, just what I know about God. None of what I know fits with any particular faith.

 

[Repox]

Every time God came into the world as a man or an angel was in the dreams and visions of His Prophets. (Numbers 12:6) And as your question is concerned, you are right, He needed no family. So, it is not true that He ever came as a man.

God uses angels to deliver messages to humans. In my dreams, angels have been the messengers. However, when I have had dreams about heaven, God communicates situations and interpretations. I am convinced Jesus was God. I understand some of my beliefs based on dreams and visions contradict most religions. That doesn't mean they aren't true. You reflect on what your religion states, I reflect on what my dreams and visions communicate. Some of what I know however has scriptural support. Can you refute my argument, as posted, about the two witnesses being Jesus (God)?

 

[Repox]

God, the Primal Cause aka the creator of the Universe, did not need to pop into the world as a man. So, the idea that the Lord popped into the world as a man is as fictional as the records of Joseph and Mary. Too much has been written about Jesus, too much has been read about Jesus; it is impossible that every thing that has been said about him is fictional. And last but not least, you are making of yourself a paradox. You propose that Jesus' family is fictional and, by the same token you believe that God came into the world as Jesus.

• I am a scholar, I know how to research historical documents. I have posted what I have discovered, and you have ignored it. You keep referencing questionable sources. Just because the Christian community believes the NT gospels doesn't mean they are accurate. Assuming you have an open mind about our discussion, here are some important references for you to read. The Missing Gospels by Darrell L. Bock, PH.D., The Lost Gospel Q by Burton L. Mack. The book by Mack is the most important. Using a brilliant analysis supported by the world's foremost biblical scholars, Mack traces the time line for the Jesus movement, documenting when Jesus movement leaders changed the Jesus narrative from Jesus the wise man to Jesus the son of God. If you reject his analysis, you must present a cogent argument.
• As a scholar, I have researched the Jesus family. There is absolutely no historical evidence for Joseph and Mary. What you find are what early church leaders wrote without historic affirmation. They, like NT authors, made up stories. Again, if you do serious research, you'll find prior gospels conflicting with NT gospels. Mostly, you don't find Jesus stories (narratives) in prior gospels.

I admit to having no evidence for Jesus being God, but neither do you have historical evidence for Jesus being the son God. Historical evidence supported by prior documents state Jesus was a wise man, not son of God.

As an explanation, examine human nature. Church leaders, anxious to promote their new religion, made up Jesus stories, including romantic family narratives.

Refute what I have posted with historical evidence.

 

[1137]

The Absolute Oneness of God

Isaiah says that, absolutely, God cannot be compared with anyone or anything, as we read Isaiah 46:5. "To whom will ye liken Me, and make Me equal to , or compare Me with, that we may be alike?"

Therefore, more than one God would have been unable to produce the world; one would have impeded the work of the other, unless this could be avoided by a suitable division of labor.

More than one Divine Being would have one element in common, and would differ in another; each would thus consist of two elements, and would not be God.

More than one God are moved to action by will; the will, without a substratum, could not act simultaneously in more than one being.

Therefore, the existence of one God is proved; the existence of more than one God cannot be proved. One could suggest that it would be possible; but since as possibility is inapplicable to God, there does not exist more than one God. So, the possibility of ascertaining the existence of God is here confounded with potentiality of existence.

Again, if one God suffices, a second or third God would be superfluous; if one God is not sufficient, he is not perfect, and cannot be a deity.

Now, besides being God absolutely One, He is incorporeal. If God were corporeal, He would consist of atoms, and would not be one; or he would be comparable to other beings; but a comparison implies the existence of similar and of dissimilar elements, and God would thus not be One. A corporeal God would be finite, and an external power would be required to define those limits.

I mean, there's not than one human, and some can work together quite well. The suffering and chaos inherent in this universe does not suggest some underlying unity, but rather much division.

 

[Repox]

I am not proposing that there are two separate Gods. There're two Gods in one. I know it's difficult to conceive of two Gods cooperating to create the universe. I had a vision about God's duality. There were two shiny pearls next to one another, they are never separate. It's a mystery beyond human understanding. Why not angels? If god has angels, why would he require a son? Angels are God's obedient servants. Before God created angels, He was his own companion.

I believe Jesus was God, and God is a duality. When Jesus spoke about himself he talked about his real identity, which caused gospel writers and Paul to invent son of God stories. I know there is no historical evidence for this assertion, but if it is true, it would put those stories into doubt. If you get a chance, read books by Bart D. Ehrman, a biblical scholarly. In his book on biblical fraud, he points out that the gospels were written by literate Creeks, not Jews or illiterate fishermen, who were not eyewitnesses. NT Gospels were written 35 to 70 years after the death of Jesus. It's also interesting that the gospels were written by men who did not claim authorship. Christians leaders several decades later provided names of the four gospel authors, who were all fictitious.

 

[Ben Avraham]

I am not proposing that there are two separate Gods. There're two Gods in one. I know it's difficult to conceive of two Gods cooperating to create the universe. I had a vision about God's duality. There were two shiny pearls next to one another, they are never separate. It's a mystery beyond human understanding. Why not angels? If god has angels, why would he require a son? Angels are God's obedient servants. Before God created angels, He was his own companion.

I believe Jesus was God, and God is a duality. When Jesus spoke about himself he talked about his real identity, which caused gospel writers and Paul to invent son of God stories. I know there is no historical evidence for this assertion, but if it is true, it would put those stories into doubt. If you get a chance, read books by Bart D. Ehrman, a biblical scholarly. In his book on biblical fraud, he points out that the gospels were written by literate Creeks, not Jews or illiterate fishermen, who were not eyewitnesses. NT Gospels were written 35 to 70 years after the death of Jesus. It's also interesting that the gospels were written by men who did not claim authorship. Christians leaders several decades later provided names of the four gospel authors, who were all fictitious.

As I can see, you have not read the thread "The Absolute Oneness of God." If you wanna give it a try, focus on Physics as you read it. Physics without anti-Jewish preconceived notions is the best argument to the absolute Oneness of God at Creation.

 

[Ben Avraham]

I mean, there's not than one human, and some can work together quite well. The suffering and chaos inherent in this universe does not suggest some underlying unity, but rather much division.

The impression you give me with this post of yours above is that humans were created at the time the Universe was caused to exist. Then the struggles of the beginning for survival, you are taking them literally. If you are an atheist, you must leave the Bible out of this. Allegories were used by the writers to give origin to Mankind, which took place millions of years before consciousness and spirituality.