An apostle is one who is 'sent'. In the Catholic church there is a liturgical celebration, a memorial, honoring Mary Magdalene, that is now a 'feast' putting her on par with the apostles. She is 'the Apostle to the Apostles, first named as such by Thomas Aquinas.
-
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!
The Gospel of John Claims that Jesus is God
- Thread starter 74x12
- Start date
An apostle is one who is 'sent'. In the Catholic church there is a liturgical celebration, a memorial, honoring Mary Magdalene, that is now a 'feast' putting her on par with the apostles. She is 'the Apostle to the Apostles, first named as such by Thomas Aquinas.
RESOLUTION
Active Member
Was Adam and Christ created? Was God created?
King James Version
And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
Luke 1: 31 & 35
31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus.
32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.
24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.
26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.
27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.
28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.
Man tends to single out verses without reading the full content and text of everything. Where does God by his word create himself? God was not created and his word created all things. How do you given these teachings and the fact only God knew the time of Jesus second coming make Jesus God? 36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. God did his own work through Christ, Peter says:
Acts 10:38.38 How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him. God was with Jesus.
74x12
Well-Known Member
It's pretty simple; you're not understanding the difference between flesh and Spirit.
All things are for us and from God unto us through Jesus the Son of man.
Hebrews 10:5 makes it obvious enough that a body was prepared for Jesus and So we already know His flesh was created.
This body is the Lamb of God. The sacrifice for sin. The Priest of Melchizedek. The Son of God and the second Adam through resurrection power. The sure foundation and chief cornerstone of God's temple. All for you and me.
Jesus is the only Way. The resurrection and the Life.
But, John 1:1 is clear enough that in the very beginning was the Word. So we must understand that the Word is uncreated and existed before all things with God just as John says. So don't be afraid to believe the truth as God reveals.
John 1:1 is expanding on Genesis 1:1!
In the beginning God creates the skies and the land. And the land was without form and void.
In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.
So if you think the Word itself is created then explain how. Because God made all things through the Word. In John 1:3 we see that all things created were made through Him. So, you have no logical alternative but to admit that the Word was not made.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
The word "church" means "community", and a scattering of individuals is simply not in any way a "community".
gnostic
The Lost One
It would seem the apostles didn’t have very high opinions of her, because they didn’t believe her when she told them the news.
Probably had something to do with the 'legal' status of women and giving testimony.
gnostic
The Lost One
Most likely.
In the incomplete Gnostic Gospel of Mary, it highlighted how some of apostles (like Levi or Matthew) were more liberal than others...where the “others” (like Peter) were trying to put Mary down because she was a woman.
Around that time, equality was hard to come by.
But we gotten off-track.
I think that John 1 regarding to Logos or the Word, is nothing more than an allegory making use of simile, or analogy, never meant to be taken literally.
I think it illustrates the struggle of the infant church and the Christology of the NT authors in their attempt to make sense of Jesus/Christ and pass on a testimony of faith that would endure. Guess they did pretty good, 2000+ years still being discussed, studied etc. and it continues to both unite and divide.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
There is an eastern tradition, that the nature of Jesus,
Is both, G-d, and man, in the same being. In other words, as I understand this, these natures might be separate, however they are both present.
This does make sense, in the context of a manifested g-d, because, there is of course the idea that Jesus in man form, is different from Jesus in Spirit form.
This doesn't mean that Jesus, or Yeshua, isn't 'g-d', it just means that verses like
Philippians 2:7
Start to make sense
///anyways, the Jesus I'm always talking about, in a theistic sense, is the pre'existant Jesus, that the Bible talks about. The pre'existant Spirit Jesus.
Now, texts can be mistranslated. False verses added. Yet the spirit being, cannot be changed, in nature, like texts, or teachings.
Is both, G-d, and man, in the same being. In other words, as I understand this, these natures might be separate, however they are both present.
This does make sense, in the context of a manifested g-d, because, there is of course the idea that Jesus in man form, is different from Jesus in Spirit form.
This doesn't mean that Jesus, or Yeshua, isn't 'g-d', it just means that verses like
Philippians 2:7
Start to make sense
///anyways, the Jesus I'm always talking about, in a theistic sense, is the pre'existant Jesus, that the Bible talks about. The pre'existant Spirit Jesus.
Now, texts can be mistranslated. False verses added. Yet the spirit being, cannot be changed, in nature, like texts, or teachings.
Last edited:
gnostic
The Lost One
Yeah.
The thing is, however, I don’t think it was Jesus who taught this, regarding the Logos.
I think it was the author’s own initiative to write John 1 about the Logos, whoever this author may be (but I don’t think it was the apostle John who wrote it, which tradition has attributed to).
I think a lot of stuff that the anonymous authors to their respective gospels narrated, only include -
- some actual teachings of Jesus,
- some that were taught by Jesus’ disciples that were then passed down to the authors,
- and some that were fabricated by the authors themselves.
To give you another example of where the author might make up the story, like the Nativity episode, ie the pregnancy and birth.
The only truth in the Jesus’ birth that we can verify because the commonalities of both gospels is that Mary became pregnant and later gave birth to Jesus before Herod died in 4 BCE.
The rest of the details are all fabricated. The whole angels business (Gabriel and the angels that the shepherds witnessed), the killings in Bethlehem and fleeing to Egypt, the 3 wise men from East, the requirements travel to enrol in Roman census, etc, were all fabrication of the 2 different authors, writing their own versions.
The last example, regarding to Roman census. I think the census did take place, overseen by Publius Sulpicius Quirinius as governor of Syria, but they took place 10 years after Herod’s death, dated to 6 CE, when Augustus changed Judaea client kingdom status into Roman province.
Meaning, there was no Roman census before Herod’s death in 4 BCE.
Census will only take place when a country has been annexed as a “Roman province”, and Herod’s and Archelaus’ Judaea wasn’t a Roman province - Judaea was a client kingdom, while it was being ruled.
Quirinius was also serving as governor (6 to 4 BCE) and fighting war in Galatia and Cilicia (12 to 1 BCE), when Herod was still alive. Gaius Sentius Saturninus (9 - 7/6 BCE) and Publius Quinctilius Varus (7/6 - 4 BCE); Flavius Josephus wrote who served as governors and when. The only time Quirinius was governor of Syria was in 6 - 12 CE, when Judaea became a Roman province.
Either the author to the Luke’s gospel didn’t know this, or the author deliberately try to change history (hence lying).
The gospel of Matthew never mention either the Roman census or the governor of Syria. In fact, this version never mention Joseph and Mary travelling from Galilee to Bethlehem, nor of Jesus being born in manger. Matthew 1 seemed to indicate Joseph and Mary were already living in Bethlehem, not in Nazareth, Galilee. The only time Nazareth was mentioned, after Herod died and they were leaving Egypt.
Since Luke 2 & 3 never mentioned Egypt, the details in two versions about Mary’s pregnancy and Jesus’ birth are in conflict with each other, so which gospels are telling the truth?
I think both gospel authors fabricated large parts of the Nativity story. The only detail we can agree upon to be true, is that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, and the rest made up.
Likewise, I don’t think Jesus taught anything about Logos as told in John 1; that the Logos was all the author’s invention.
gnostic
The Lost One
The only way this could be true, if Jesus himself was the author and wrote everything down, but he wasn’t the author.
And what we do have now, were gospels written 2 generations or more (the gospel of Mark, might be considered a generation and a half), later, after Jesus’ supposed resurrection and ascension. And none of the authors were eyewitnesses, and the names given to respective gospels were given later in the 2nd century CE.
The names we have now - Matthew, Mark, Luke & John - are “attributes”, not actual “authors”. The only NT texts that we know were written by the author himself, is some of Paul’s epistles.
What we do have, is lot of the story that we have no way of verifying, such as the miracles.
And since they (only referring to the gospels here) were written somewhere between about 65 and 100 CE, verifying what actually happened is very difficulty, and some parts could be the inventions of the authors themselves, or distorting and embellishing.
As to your flesh and spirit. I don’t know. What I can say that there are many ways to view any given religions or belief, but it is not necessary to treat it as real - “real” in the sense of verifiably historical.
Last edited:
gnostic
The Lost One
I would like to add, Disciple of Jesus, in which the early Gnosticism (2nd and 3rd centuries CE) added a bit of complexity that went go beyond what the normal Pauline Christianity talk about.
The Sethian sect delved more deeply in what you would call “Eastern tradition” - the preexistent spirit or Christ form.
From 2004 to 2007, I developed interests in researching non-canonical texts, particularly from the Gnostic codices of Nag Hammadi.
If you aren’t intimidated by reading non-canonical texts, then I would suggest these two:
The Sethian sect delved more deeply in what you would call “Eastern tradition” - the preexistent spirit or Christ form.
From 2004 to 2007, I developed interests in researching non-canonical texts, particularly from the Gnostic codices of Nag Hammadi.
If you aren’t intimidated by reading non-canonical texts, then I would suggest these two:
- The Apocryphron of John (or the Secret Book of John)
- The Hypostasis of the Archons (or the Reality of the Ruler)
Last edited:
The three stages of Gospel compilation. The 'word of mouth', actual teachings of Jesus is lost. All we have are the witness of the Apostles handed on orally in post Resurrection faith, sort of like Monday morning quarterbacking without the aid of instant playback. How many different perspectives on a play might there be? The 'fabrication' referred is the narrative through which the gospel authors, a generation removed, convey the 'truth' of faith. They reflect what was believed by an already existing faith community and the worship and practice of that community of Christians. (Most scholars believe that John 1 was originally a hymn.) I believe it is only through credible scholarship that allows one to make sense of the Gospels, without which we are left with contradiction between knowledge and faith. I believe Scripture, both Hebrew and Christian, has endured through the ages because they are a literary masterpiece. Referring to the hymn in John 1, quoting Raymond Brown, "The background of this poetic description of the descent of the Word into the world and the eventual return of the Son to the Father's side (1:18) lied in the OT picture of personified Wisdom (especially Sirach 24 and Wisdom 9) who was in the beginning with God at the creation of the world and came to dwell with human beings when the Law was revealed to Moses. In agreement with the tradition that JBap's ministry was related to the beginning of Jesus', the Prologue is interrupted twice, viz., to mention JBap before the light comes into the world (1:6-8) and to record JBap's testimony to Jesus after the Word becomes flesh (1:15)."
Accurate, chronological history was not the author's purpose, but to testify to Jesus the Christ that following generations may believe as they addressed the needs of their particular community in time and place.
I think that is not true, because John says also:
This is eternal life, that they should know you, the only true God, and him whom you sent, Jesus Christ.
John 17:3
the Father is greater than I.
John 14:28
Jesus is like the ambassador of God, and he speaks in the name of God. That is why he can be called God on earth. However, it doesn’t mean that he is really the one and only true God. I think this could maybe help to understand why it could be said Jesus was God on earth:
Most assuredly I tell you, he who receives whomever I send, receives me; and he who receives me, receives him who sent me."
John 13:20
And about being one with God, also disciples of Jesus should be one with God:
I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, keep them through your name which you have given me, that they may be one, even as we are.
John 17:11
that they may all be one; even as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that you sent me.
John 17:21
kjw47
Well-Known Member
I didn't say what you answered to( just by twisting it)
I know exactly what was taught and by whom. I said Russell Erred , it wasn't the proper time to know, plus mortal errors have entered all throughout the bible. It is important to make correction when one is in error. And by making correction in front of the whole world, proved 100% -Gods truth is what was wanted and nothing else.
Errors entered right after Jesus died. In Peters book. Titus had to be left behind to correct error teachings. Satans#1job attack Jesus, seed. How easy is it to correct 1750 years of errors and errors of your own? At the proper time-Matthew24:45) then this would be a truth-Daniel 12:4) It is now.
kjw47
Well-Known Member
The greek word actually translates-congregation. in some cases.
Who said anything about scattering of individuals?
sooda
Veteran Member
You mean on the road to Damascus?
sooda
Veteran Member
Psalm 82
A psalm of Asaph.
1 God presides in the great assembly;
he renders judgment among the “gods”:
2 “How long will you[a] defend the unjust
and show partiality to the wicked?[b]
3 Defend the weak and the fatherless;
uphold the cause of the poor and the oppressed.
4 Rescue the weak and the needy;
deliver them from the hand of the wicked.
5 “The ‘gods’ know nothing, they understand nothing.
They walk about in darkness;
all the foundations of the earth are shaken.
6 “I said, ‘You are “gods”;
you are all sons of the Most High.’
7 But you will die like mere mortals;
you will fall like every other ruler.”
8 Rise up, O God, judge the earth,
for all the nations are your inheritance.
Yes.
74x12
Well-Known Member
Sure, as Paul said there be many called gods, but to us(the true church) there is But one God the Father.
John 1:1 is written by John an apostle. So he is claiming himself that the Word is God. There aren't two gods for the church or for John either.