The trinity is false - I have proof

[YoursTrue]

We worked from Torah directly, chapter by chapter, and then used multiple commentaries to help with understanding differing interpretations.

To go over this again, the synagogue I was associated with was a 'reform' synagogue. I had a good friend who was an Orthodox Jew and their customs are quite different from those of the reform branch of Judaism.

It would take too long to explain but let me just say that it was sort of a "calling" based on "premonitions" [I know that sounds crazy] I had for almost 2 years. It was VERY far from easy and very traumatic for me.

I can't speak about premonitions, however I gave up searching at a certain point because the world of religion is (or at least was) very confusing for me. So many bright people writing books about other ways of life, etc. I understand about the trauma, as I considered my entrance as what I consider a true Christian to have been traumatic. Nevertheless, I did so because of my belief that there is a God who cares and He cares what His people do.

No, it was more based on my studies that showed that Jesus could not be the Messiah if one took the Tanakh at the literalistic level. The irony is that I wasn't an still ain't a literalist, so I sort duped myself. However, I certainly have no problem going and davening there.

Now? ??

"Babylon the Great" was a reference to the Roman Empire, and the feminine form of "Babylon" in 1Peter:5 is a refence to the city of Rome.

That is another subject perhaps to be discussed another time. I'd have to do more research on it to say exactly how I view it. I will say this, however -- the Bible says that Jesus told his disciples to get out of Jerusalem when they saw the armies. Now I do believe the temple was ransacked and virtually destroyed in 70 CE by the Roman armies. There's more but I'd have to go over the time period and the evangelizing of the Christians at that time. And their problems (that's putting it mildly) with Rome.

 

[Sargonski]

It was emotional plea, not disobedience.

It was not stated that it was disobedience - in fact quite the reverse was told to you . That Jesus is subordinate to the will of the father .. that Jesus ends up doing the will of the father. You need to take a moment here recognize your strawman fallacy and explain (not to me but to self) the fact that you are on a completely different page .. having absolutely no understanding of what is happening in the story.

Of course Jesus obeys the Will of his Father .. Just as any son might obey his Father's command .. how was it that you somehow reversed this into Jesus is not obedient .. in an act of self deception ? or - just deception ? Either way the hand of the snake is in play .. listen to what the Prophet Say .. and not to the snake charmers with whome you like to play Brother Daniel .

So what is the point that for many posts you have avoided --- ?? The point is not that Jesus was disobedient .. as this is made up fantasy ... that is not what the story shows us. Jesus obeys the command of the Father .. the point is that he does not do so willingly .. Jesus is not happy about his being made a human sacrifice .. he agrees to do what ever commanded .. as any good Soldier or Son .. but he is not happy about it .. the will of Jesus is not the Will of the Father in this instance .. and later he calls out his Father for going through with the wretched plan .. and not saving him - the final words of Jesus berrating his Father for not saving him from the Sacrificial Alter like he did Issac .. first fruits of Abraham

In this version of the Story of Jesus the original version of the story - Jesus is adopted by a God at his Baptism by John the Baptist as a man of 30. There is no Virgen Birth - no lineage back to David - and no physical resurrection .. no stories of Jesus wandering around in the flesh after death.

The early 1rst century reader is falmiliar with stories of Gods Adopting humans .. be it Sargon of Akkad in 2300 BC .. in to the river in a basket .. later adopted by a God .. to Abe - also adopted by a God .. to Moses -- into the river in a basket .. goes on to found a great nation- .. the worlds first empire in the case of Sargon .. can we call the Israelites an Empire ?? maybe a small one .

The original story tells us that Jesus is a man of 30 .. nothing spectacular about him other than the prophecy of John that another anointed one of God will arrive .. and take us into an apocalypse of some kind .. the end times are near .. John was an "end times" preacher .. and obviously the 1rst century reader knows this. Unlike yourself .. and every other 21st century reader .. sans the enlightened

Jesus recieves the "God Spark" .. the "All-Spark" .. what ever we wish to call it when a God adopts a human and gives that human various gifts that go along with being semi-divine. Jesus recieves these gifts not at birth .. but at his baptism.

But - first, prior to actualizing his divinity .. the divine spark delivered to Jesu by the Holy Spirit at Baptism .. he must survive a ritual Trial .. where this man who has just been adopted by a God will be tested by another God .. the Tester of Souls .. Chief God over the earth.

and - no need to interject with anything at this piont .. because this is not about what you believe .. this is what our early first century Jewish reader believes .. as this is the only story he has to go on .. beloved Gospel of John will not hit the presses for another 50 years .. half a century later .. the reader of Mark knows none of that alternative version of the story .. he has only the original story ...

and in that story .. Jesus is a man adopted by a God .. and every early Christian is going to be an adoptionist in perspective .. This Man of 30 survives the testing .. and then goes on to proclaim the Good news .. is called Rabbi by the people and Prophet .. but not "God" never mind the "Most High God" .. that notion would be beyond absurd to our reader.. NOT what the story says..

What the story tells us is that not only do the disciples not know what to think of this fellow .. Yes he is great and wonderful teacher but beyond that .. anyone's guess - but, his own family does not think much of his teachings .. and he is not believed in his home town .. not believed that he is the Messiah .. annointed one of God .. King of the Jews. the claim for which Jesus is killed .. NOT .. claiming to be God .. Sorry.

Right to the end .. despite witnessing a number of wonder works .. the disciples doubt that Jesus is "the Messiah" ..the annointed son of God.
Thomas betrays Jesus .. Peter denies him 3 times. This is not a story trying to tell us that this Jesus fellow is God Most High.. to our first century reader such claim would be ridiculous nonsense... and simply false ..

The piont of Jesus praying to his God - El Elyon - Abba . The Father .. begging to be released from the task at hand -- is that Jesus and this God are two separate entities .. not the same .. not even close. We have "Big Cheese" and we have "Little Cheese" .. that these are separate entities is not in question .. that little cheese has far less power than Big Cheese .. not in question.. What is in question is how much power does little cheese have .. how divine .. what was the nature of the little piece of the all-spark that he got.

The larger point .. is that the Trinity is man made bunk .. a doctrine that defines itself as nonsense .. in a brilliant piece of doublespeak ... the work of author of confusion par excellance . an author you have yet to identify by the way .. speaking of "Thought stopping" .. "avoid the bad thought' exercise .

In the NT we have how many divinities /Gods/gods ? Lets make a list.. keeping in mind that there are many more in the OT that the people reading the NT will know of.

1) Chief God on Earth (Ha Satan) , 2) Chief God in the Heavens - God of Jesus ( El) 3) Lord YHWH -- while not mentioned directly by name .. is referred to as the God of the Pharisees .. their "Father the Devil" a terrible nasty God (Jesus words not mine) a premise on which early Christian sects were based - 4) The Holy Sprite - not sure about this contestent .. a divinity of sorts but how much power welds this God is undetermined .. more importantly whether or not this entity has its own will .. as opposed to being just an emanation from the Godhead. ..
5) Jesus -- the start - divinity undefined .. this god definitely has ints own will .. but how much power this divinity has is not well defined but clearly less than the Chief God on Earth .. and obviously less than Chief God in the Heavens .. and we can presume less than Son of God YHWH ..

So our Power rankings would then be 1) EL 2) Ha Satan 3) YHWH 4) Jesus ? - Holy Spirit ? we don't know who is the more powerful between the Holy Spirit and Jesus .

There are other condenders mentioned in Revelation but no need to complicate the matter further .. was we have already demonstrated that the Author of Confusion sold you a bill of monotheistic goods Brother Dan .. that the Trinity is from the hand of the snake charmer .. the hand of man .. the hand of original sin ... and in no way is related to "The Word" nor the divinity of the annointed one of God.

 

[Sargonski]

I have no problem understanding the definition given for the
Trinity.

LOL .. sorry friend but if you realized how ridiculous and self deprecatory your claim is .. you would have a chuckle too

The definition of the Trinity is nonsense -- no + sense.. the definition of the trinity is "Not Understandable" Not by anyone .. ot even God ..

like YHWH = I am that I am .. not even a name actually .. but never mind that .. the definition of the Triity is not understand that you not understand ..

Regardless -- understand or not .. The Trinity concept is not to be found in the origial story . sorry ..

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

I have no problem understanding the definition given for the
Trinity.

When I was a Christian, I believed in the hypostatic union, which is the theological belief that Jesus took on human nature yet remained fully God when he was a man. It encapsulates the belief regarding his humanity and divinity (two natures) in a single hypostasis and is in conjunction with the Trinity doctrine.

 

[metis]

the

the Roman Empire is long gone ,yet ''Babylon the great'' remains ,bigger and stronger then it was . her destruction, comes from the anger of the beast . when that happens the beast will go to far . at that point ,expect a serious one sided war , Armageddon !

I really don't believe in that kind of stuff [Armageddon, etc], so I'll pass.

 

[YoursTrue]

It was not stated that it was disobedience - in fact quite the reverse was told to you . That Jesus is subordinate to the will of the father .. that Jesus ends up doing the will of the father. You need to take a moment here recognize your strawman fallacy and explain (not to me but to self) the fact that you are on a completely different page .. having absolutely no understanding of what is happening in the story.

I conclude from the Bible that the Son was with the Father for eons before the earth came to be. And the Son (also known as the Word) learned everything he knew from his Father as a loving and devoted son would learn from his father. Although Jesus had much more time to observe the Father's works before he came to the earth. Therefore when Jesus said he and the Father are one and he does everything he sees the Father doing he did everything he learned out of love FOR his heavenly Father in the exact manner and temperament as he saw Him in heaven.

 

[YoursTrue]

I really don't believe in that kind of stuff [Armageddon, etc], so I'll pass.

If I had not studied the Bible I would also think it was a myth about Armageddon and understanding more about Babylon the Great. It's a detailed subject about Babylon the Great, but the song from Handel's Messiah comes to mind about the Day of God's Wrath, "who will abide" at the Lord's coming? When I sang it I had no idea whether it was true or not but thought maybe something was in the air. Even though I attended church services long ago (not as a worshiper, of course, you probably know that by now) there was no talk of Armageddon. Yet as I go about my daily activities people tell me in passing how difficult things are now. Once in a while I hear them say that they think the end is near even if they may not know what it means, but somehow that thought got across. And, from what I learn in the Bible, Jesus did say that for many things would appear as usual --

 

[Hockeycowboy]

And, from what I learn in the Bible, Jesus did say that for many things would appear as usual -

Yes, Jesus did say something similar to that, in describing the Last Days, at Matthew 24:37-39:

For just as the days of Noah were, so the presence of the Son of man will be. 38 For as they were in those days before the Flood, eating and drinking, men marrying and women being given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, 39 and they took no note until the Flood came and swept them all away, so the presence of the Son of man will be.”

Genesis 6:13 tells us the earth was “full of violence.”

Then why did people ‘take no note’ of it?
Because they’d been living with it, they had grown up with it! It was normal to them.

And Jesus compared the similarities between the Last Days of Noah’s world, with the Last Days today.

If Jesus said His presence / coming, aka the Last Days, would be marked by ‘wars, famines, disturbances, pestilences, & increasing of lawlessness’ (Matt.24:6-12; Luke 21:11), how could people be “eating and drinking….marrying” & ‘taking no note’?
How could people ‘take no note’ of wars, diseases, disturbances, increasing of lawlessness?
Because they have been living with it, they have grown up in it! It is normal to them.


The Apostle Peter wrote something similar, too….
“know this, that in the last days ridiculers will come with their ridicule, proceeding according to their own desires 4 and saying: “Where is this promised presence of his? Why, from the day our forefathers fell asleep in death, all things are continuing exactly as they were from creation’s beginning.”” — 2 Pet. 3:3,4

How could some people say “All things are continuing as they were from creation’s beginning “, when there has definitely been a rise in wars, diseases, disturbances, and increasing of lawlessness?
Because they have been living with it, they have grown up in it! It is normal to them.


We know Christ’s presence, aka the Last Days, began in 1914. All of society, with our (currently) limited average life-span of 70 to 90 years, has known nothing else!

Take care, my sister.

 

[Sargonski]

I conclude from the Bible that the Son was with the Father for eons before the earth came to be. And the Son (also known as the Word) learned everything he knew from his Father as a loving and devoted son would learn from his father. Although Jesus had much more time to observe the Father's works before he came to the earth. Therefore when Jesus said he and the Father are one and he does everything he sees the Father doing he did everything he learned out of love FOR his heavenly Father in the exact manner and temperament as he saw Him in heaven.

Your conclusion is correct -- sort of I think the term "eons" is funny but sure .. infinite time.

"Pre-Existence" = The idea that Jesus was Pre-Existent with God. As correctly inferred .. this idea comes to us in John 1:1. What is incorrect is the comment "known as the Word" this from an unfortunate .. albeit intentional mistranslation , but this does not affect pre-existence.

The actual word used for "Word" is the Greek term "Logos" Now logos could mean "words" in some instances but in a religious context the term means the conduit between man and God. The being that man can not iteract with God directly .. "No one has seen God's face" .. but through an intermediary. In this respect however Jesus is not "The Word" but "Gods Word" the physical representation of "The Word of God" - and the purpose of Jesus to bring us this word .. and with the word a covenant or rather this word is the covenant.

Now ... Pre - Existence !? -- what do we make of it ? While this idea clearly exists in John .. it is not found anywhere in the Synoptic Gospels .. certainly not in the original version of the story "Mark"

The problem with your conclusion is that this is not what the earliest Christians believed. .. later these beliefs change as with each retelling of the Story the divinity of Jesus grows. For example in Mark we have no virgin birth - no lineage back to David - no physical resurrection - Jesus wandering around in the flesh after death.... The Reader is left wondering what happened the body of Jesus which disappears ~65 BC

Sometime later 80-90AD version 2 comes out .. the author of Matt uses all of Mark except a few passages derogatory to Jesus and/or the disciples .. Up until this point Jesus is a Man of 30 .. adopted by a God at his Bapitism .. recieves the "All Spark" allowing him to speak the word of God through the Holy Spirit .. this not activated however until after the ritual trial by the "Tester of Souls" - Chief God over the Earth.

The author of Matt adds the virgin birth - lineage - and stories about Jesus wandering around in the flesh after death. I am of the believe that these stories were added to Matt later as we don't hear anything about a "Physical resurrection" until Ignatius ~ 110 AD .. around the time when John is being written. Clement - first pope 95-100AD knows nothing of these stories in Matt .. but he refers to Matt ... which is why I think the physical resurrection stories were not yet in Matt.

Regardless -- the divinity of Jesus grows with each retelling of the story .. While the divinity of Jesus grows in Matt and Luke .. Jesus has not yet reached Pre-existence .. we have to wait for John .. which comes ~ 6 decades after Mark and 8 decades after the death of Jesus. The Author of this Gospel is trying to expand the appeal of Christianity by using terminology and religious ideas and concepts that the Greek speaking gentiles are familiar with - and very smart in doing so but, also this complicates the question of Christs divinity more than clarifies in my assessment .. as the church wrestles with this concept for more than 200 years prior to the divinity of Jesus being elevated to full God Status but the equality with God is not what the author of John has in mind .. John 1 is not an expression of the Trinity .. a concept that does not exist until around 200AD - Tertullian but is regarded as heretical at that time .. slowly gained acceptance and then became Church Doctrine ~ 325 AD at the council of Nicea ... the term used was "Homoousios" .. Jesus became "Homoousios" = the same substance as the Father.

In the 700 year old school of Plato / Platonic Philosophy there were 2 kinds of substances .. 1) that which God was made of 2) that which everything else was made of .. so by saying Jesus was "Homoousios" = same substance as God = Jesus is God.

This is not something the Author of John had in mind .. Jesus was Pre-existent with God .. Jesus was "The Logos" .. the conduit between man and God .. not God himself .. not "The Father"

Jesus was not crucified for claiming to be The Father . .or God. as he never claims this in the original story .. he is crucified for claiming to be "The King of the Jews" -- the "annointed one of God" = The Messiah .. one of the qualities of which is "Pontifex Maximus" -- one who speaks for God .. but one need not be pre-existent to speak for God

Conclusion .. Pre-existence was not originally part of Church doctrine . certainly not by the Church of Jerusalem -- Church founded by the Jewish disciples .. Christianity spreads to the gentiles through brother Paul - but this is a separate branch of Christianity .. and within this branch you have a host of groups calling themselves Christian .. some very different from others as doctrine was very loose at this point .. Finally someone writes something down 3 decades after the Death of Jesus .. Christianity evolves over the next 50 years and with it the divinity of Jesus evolves. but at the same time being a highly contentious subject .. every Christian group has a different idea on the nature of Christs divinity .

The Author of John ( and I think it was probably more than one who contributed or at least edited the final copy) were trying to do something to standardize the doctrine .. and they did so using religious concepts of the day .. one of those concepts was "The Logos" .. which I think fits in very well with the stated purpose of Jesus .. who literally calls himself the Logos "pretty much" and very symbolicly .. allegorically. .. and so I think these authors hit the mark to a large degree .. but not to the point of pre-existence IMO .. for me I think this is a step too far away from what would have been previous doctrine .. but I do like the Logos concept in general .. just without the pre-existence part .. we could maybe claim that the all-spark that Jesus received was pre-existent .. and I would be OK with that .. and perhaps this is how the Authors meant it .. but not Jesus the man .. the myth .. the Legend .. in the Flesh .. Now .. was the soul of Jesus around uptown prior to coming to earth and in habiting the fleshy abode .. as we all were ... cause that is where souls come from .. and where we go after death.. sure .. I can go with that Logic ... but in heaven he is just another soul .. perhaps more special .. .. but this soul is not Jah Rastafa .. not the primordial Two Headed Dragon of Order-Chaos .. not the "Invisible Hand" .... NO .. Nyet .. Nema Nishta

 

[URAVIP2ME]

@YoursTrue , @cataway , @walt , @URAVIP2ME , @Eli G , we had an excellent meeting tonight, eh?

Yes, and meetings are survival classes for the coming time of 1st Thessalonians 5:2-3

 

[URAVIP2ME]

So what, I use the Bible to determine truth,...In fact.. I don't care about when the Greek or Hebrew word existed.. Respectfully I read what Jesus says and he says he is Gods Son and his Father is the only true God. John 3:16, 17:3; Matthew 16:13-17 and the apostles taught the same after Jesus went to heaven............................

Interesting saying ^ above^ about using the Bible to determine truth
Not just speaking about truth in general but religious truth as Jesus taught
After all, Jesus believed that Scripture is: religious truth at John 17:17
So, knowing what religious truth is; knowing what God likes and what God dislikes
What we really are, the inner person at heart - Psalm 26

 

[URAVIP2ME]

I really don't believe in that kind of stuff [Armageddon, etc], so I'll pass.

Whether one believes about Armageddon ( the war to end all wars - Psalm 46:9 ) does Not change what is written in the Bible

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Your conclusion is correct -- sort of I think the term "eons" is funny but sure .. infinite time.
"Pre-Existence" = The idea that Jesus was Pre-Existent with God. As correctly inferred .. this idea comes to us in John 1:1. What is incorrect is the comment "known as the Word" this from an unfortunate .. albeit intentional mistranslation , but this does not affect pre-existence.

...................................................................................................................................................
Now ... Pre - Existence !? -- what do we make of it ? While this idea clearly exists in John .. it is not found anywhere in the Synoptic Gospels .. certainly not in the original version of the story "Mark"..............................................................................
The problem with your conclusion is that this is not what the earliest Christians believed. .. later these beliefs change as with each retelling of the Story the divinity of Jesus grows. For example in Mark we have no virgin birth - no lineage back to David - no physical resurrection - Jesus wandering around in the flesh after death.... The Reader is left wondering what happened the body of Jesus which disappears ~65 BC ............................

Pre-human existence stems from Luke 1:31-33

John 1 does Not put pre-human Jesus ' before ' creation as Psalm 90:2 does for un-created God
Only God was ' before ' the beginning whereas Jesus was "IN" the beginning but never ' before ' the beginning as his God was
Mark chapter 4 is to show us Jesus is the promised 'seed' of Genesis 3:15

Jesus was resurrected back to his pre-human heavenly ' spirit ' body - see 1st Peter 3:18 Jesus was made alive in the spirit
Resurrected spirit Jesus used different materialized bodies - see Luke 24:13-43 - before he ascended - Acts 1:9

What happened to Moses body? Since God took care of it in the case of Moses then He could do that for Jesus' dead body

 

[URAVIP2ME]

This is the god of the Tanakh, whose history is heavy with human sacrifice, ................................................................

You mean human sacrifice as found at Jeremiah 32:34-35 __________
Or, Ezekiel 23:36-39, it's Not God, but the people sacrificing their children as food for their idol gods
At 2nd Chronicles 28:1-3 who did Not do what is right __________ See also 2nd Ch. 33:1-6 as to who is the who ___________

 

[Sargonski]

Pre-human existence stems from Luke 1:31-33

John 1 does Not put pre-human Jesus ' before ' creation as Psalm 90:2 does for un-created God
Only God was ' before ' the beginning whereas Jesus was "IN" the beginning but never ' before ' the beginning as his God was
Mark chapter 4 is to show us Jesus is the promised 'seed' of Genesis 3:15

Jesus was resurrected back to his pre-human heavenly ' spirit ' body - see 1st Peter 3:18 Jesus was made alive in the spirit
Resurrected spirit Jesus used different materialized bodies - see Luke 24:13-43 - before he ascended - Acts 1:9

What happened to Moses body? Since God took care of it in the case of Moses then He could do that for Jesus' dead body

No pre-existence in your luke passage .. and nor would that passage count if it did ... the point being that pre-existence was not part of christian believe until later .. Luke is Later .. and so it is no surprise that the divinity of Jesus has evolved .. same as in John. where in the "Original Story" .. there is no virgin birth .. Jesus is not Divine at Birth .. but recieves his divinity at Baptism ... when he is adopted by a God.

Quoting from Peter has absolutely nothing to do with this question. .. nor does Jesus asention. .. which never happened .. according to the Original Story .. the story ends with an empty tomb .. the reader left to wonder what happened to the Body .. the story does not seem to suggest that God took the Body as you hypothesize .. .. if we extend to Paul who is writing around the same time as Mark .. Paul only knows of a spiritual resurrection There are no stories of Jesus wandering around in the flesh talking to people . and we don't hear any of the early Church fathers mention these stories until Ignatius around 110 AD ... when John is being written. Clement knows nothing of any physical resurrection stories 95-100 AD .. but knows of Matt .. suggesting that if Matt was written ... it did not contain the Physial resurrection stories .. same with Luke .. these stories added later and like Mark were not part of the original text.

 

[YoursTrue]

We worked from Torah directly, chapter by chapter, and then used multiple commentaries to help with understanding differing interpretations.



It would take too long to explain but let me just say that it was sort of a "calling" based on "premonitions" [I know that sounds crazy] I had for almost 2 years. It was VERY far from easy and very traumatic for me.



No, it was more based on my studies that showed that Jesus could not be the Messiah if one took the Tanakh at the literalistic level. The irony is that I wasn't and still ain't a literalist, so I sort duped myself. However, I certainly have no problem going and davening there.



"Babylon the Great" was a reference to the Roman Empire, and the feminine form of "Babylon" in 1Peter:5 is a refence to the city of Rome.

Just to note, when I was studying later on, I went to the library in NYC that housed Talmud commentaries as well as speaking to rabbis and a Jewish Seminary and I worked hard to make sure of what I was learning as a Christian. Now remember -- Jesus gave a new commandment. I'm sure you remember what that is...John 13:34 - "A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another." Quite interesting, eh?

 

[YoursTrue]

Your conclusion is correct -- sort of I think the term "eons" is funny but sure .. infinite time.

Infinite only in the sense that WE, as human beings, do not know all about that, except for some of us to say and think it was a lonnnngggg lonnnggg time before God created the earth, and a 24-hour 'day' is not in the picture. Because Day in the Bible can mean a period of time, doesn't have to mean 24 hours. And yes, studies and reasoning shows the earth is much older than a few thousand years as some would have it. We do not know. So--glad you may agree and recognize that it was a long, long time before the heavens and the earth were created.

"Pre-Existence" = The idea that Jesus was Pre-Existent with God. As correctly inferred .. this idea comes to us in John 1:1. What is incorrect is the comment "known as the Word" this from an unfortunate .. albeit intentional mistranslation , but this does not affect pre-existence.

The actual word used for "Word" is the Greek term "Logos" Now logos could mean "words" in some instances but in a religious context the term means the conduit between man and God. The being that man can not iteract with God directly .. "No one has seen God's face" .. but through an intermediary. In this respect however Jesus is not "The Word" but "Gods Word" the physical representation of "The Word of God" - and the purpose of Jesus to bring us this word .. and with the word a covenant or rather this word is the covenant.

Now ... Pre - Existence !? -- what do we make of it ? While this idea clearly exists in John .. it is not found anywhere in the Synoptic Gospels .. certainly not in the original version of the story "Mark"

The problem with your conclusion is that this is not what the earliest Christians believed. .. later these beliefs change as with each retelling of the Story the divinity of Jesus grows. For example in Mark we have no virgin birth - no lineage back to David - no physical resurrection - Jesus wandering around in the flesh after death.... The Reader is left wondering what happened the body of Jesus which disappears ~65 BC

Sometime later 80-90AD version 2 comes out .. the author of Matt uses all of Mark except a few passages derogatory to Jesus and/or the disciples .. Up until this point Jesus is a Man of 30 .. adopted by a God at his Bapitism .. recieves the "All Spark" allowing him to speak the word of God through the Holy Spirit .. this not activated however until after the ritual trial by the "Tester of Souls" - Chief God over the Earth.

The author of Matt adds the virgin birth - lineage - and stories about Jesus wandering around in the flesh after death. I am of the believe that these stories were added to Matt later as we don't hear anything about a "Physical resurrection" until Ignatius ~ 110 AD .. around the time when John is being written. Clement - first pope 95-100AD knows nothing of these stories in Matt .. but he refers to Matt ... which is why I think the physical resurrection stories were not yet in Matt.

Regardless -- the divinity of Jesus grows with each retelling of the story .. While the divinity of Jesus grows in Matt and Luke .. Jesus has not yet reached Pre-existence .. we have to wait for John .. which comes ~ 6 decades after Mark and 8 decades after the death of Jesus. The Author of this Gospel is trying to expand the appeal of Christianity by using terminology and religious ideas and concepts that the Greek speaking gentiles are familiar with - and very smart in doing so but, also this complicates the question of Christs divinity more than clarifies in my assessment .. as the church wrestles with this concept for more than 200 years prior to the divinity of Jesus being elevated to full God Status but the equality with God is not what the author of John has in mind .. John 1 is not an expression of the Trinity .. a concept that does not exist until around 200AD - Tertullian but is regarded as heretical at that time .. slowly gained acceptance and then became Church Doctrine ~ 325 AD at the council of Nicea ... the term used was "Homoousios" .. Jesus became "Homoousios" = the same substance as the Father.

In the 700 year old school of Plato / Platonic Philosophy there were 2 kinds of substances .. 1) that which God was made of 2) that which everything else was made of .. so by saying Jesus was "Homoousios" = same substance as God = Jesus is God.

This is not something the Author of John had in mind .. Jesus was Pre-existent with God .. Jesus was "The Logos" .. the conduit between man and God .. not God himself .. not "The Father"

Jesus was not crucified for claiming to be The Father . .or God. as he never claims this in the original story .. he is crucified for claiming to be "The King of the Jews" -- the "annointed one of God" = The Messiah .. one of the qualities of which is "Pontifex Maximus" -- one who speaks for God .. but one need not be pre-existent to speak for God

Conclusion .. Pre-existence was not originally part of Church doctrine . certainly not by the Church of Jerusalem -- Church founded by the Jewish disciples .. Christianity spreads to the gentiles through brother Paul - but this is a separate branch of Christianity .. and within this branch you have a host of groups calling themselves Christian .. some very different from others as doctrine was very loose at this point .. Finally someone writes something down 3 decades after the Death of Jesus .. Christianity evolves over the next 50 years and with it the divinity of Jesus evolves. but at the same time being a highly contentious subject .. every Christian group has a different idea on the nature of Christs divinity .

The Author of John ( and I think it was probably more than one who contributed or at least edited the final copy) were trying to do something to standardize the doctrine .. and they did so using religious concepts of the day .. one of those concepts was "The Logos" .. which I think fits in very well with the stated purpose of Jesus .. who literally calls himself the Logos "pretty much" and very symbolicly .. allegorically. .. and so I think these authors hit the mark to a large degree .. but not to the point of pre-existence IMO .. for me I think this is a step too far away from what would have been previous doctrine .. but I do like the Logos concept in general .. just without the pre-existence part .. we could maybe claim that the all-spark that Jesus received was pre-existent .. and I would be OK with that .. and perhaps this is how the Authors meant it .. but not Jesus the man .. the myth .. the Legend .. in the Flesh .. Now .. was the soul of Jesus around uptown prior to coming to earth and in habiting the fleshy abode .. as we all were ... cause that is where souls come from .. and where we go after death.. sure .. I can go with that Logic ... but in heaven he is just another soul .. perhaps more special .. .. but this soul is not Jah Rastafa .. not the primordial Two Headed Dragon of Order-Chaos .. not the "Invisible Hand" .... NO .. Nyet .. Nema Nishta

You have a lot here and I usually only address one or two points at a time. The situation I understand and believe is that God Almighty, the Father of Jesus, did not have a pre-existence. He always was. Hard for us finite humans to comprehend. What I do know is that I am not aware of my birth. I believe I was cradled in my mother's arms, but do not remember it. I hope you understand. So -- in essence, what I mean by that is that "I" did not have a pre-existence. And let me put it to you this way, I hope not. I'm counting on it.

 

[Sargonski]

Infinite only in the sense that WE, as human beings, do not know all about that, except for some of us to say and think it was a lonnnngggg lonnnggg time before God created the earth, and a 24-hour 'day' is not in the picture. Because Day in the Bible can mean a period of time, doesn't have to mean 24 hours. And yes, studies and reasoning shows the earth is much older than a few thousand years as some would have it. We do not know. So--glad you may agree and recognize that it was a long, long time before the heavens and the earth were created.

You have a lot here and I usually only address one or two points at a time. The situation I understand and believe is that God Almighty, the Father of Jesus, did not have a pre-existence. He always was. Hard for us finite humans to comprehend. What I do know is that I am not aware of my birth. I believe I was cradled in my mother's arms, but do not remember it. I hope you understand. So -- in essence, what I mean by that is that "I" did not have a pre-existence. And let me put it to you this way, I hope not. I'm counting on it.

OK .. we are moving from the Bible to metaphysics .. which is fine .. I shall go point form

1) The only thing we know for sure is that we exist .. how we came to exist ... we know a little .. Matter and Energy (Stuff) came together in a certain configuration (you or me) that one day opened its eyes and became aware of its own existense

1a) Existence is infinite - From 1) we can deduce that there was a finite probability of this this event happening M+E = Awareness
1c) in an infinite amount of time - all finite probabilities happen./repeat an infinite number of times .. and thus Matter and Energy will once again combine in the same configuration as you ..

Thats it that is all .. the only thing we know for sure .. and one thing we can deduce from knowing .. the question we ask is where does the soul go in between cycles ? .. and is there an invisible hand at the wheel ?

2) Heaven -- the way station -- in between adventures. So when you die and your soul goes to heaven -- what is the song that will play upon your arrival through the pearly gates .. and who will be waiting for you

3) Rules - "What wait a minute .. not supposed to be Rules in heaven" --- relax in general that is true .. but even heaven has a few.

3a) Rule 1 - Absolutely no Praising of the Most High (Jah) - after the first trillion years - every entity Jah met .. doing nothing but blowing smoke up his arse .. 24/7 52 weeks a year got very repetative to the point of starting to drive Jah Rasta wacky. So if Jah happens by -- likely in Sandals with a corn cob pipe filled with Heavenly Hash .. just be cool .. do not fall to the ground crying out "Lord Lord" Matt 7:21

3b) Vacation Rule -- Now when you get settled in heaven -- see some old souls ..you can enjoy 1 billion channels on the TV. You can go to the Vacation channels .. like a reality TV show .. you can see what one of the billions of worlds is like .. and after hanging out in heaven for 1000 or so years .. you may wish to take a Vacation to one of these worlds.

3b1) The Blue Pill - Rule 2. So you book your vacation - the Travel agent will then give you a blue pill .. you will go back to your flat .. take the Pill .. lie down and will fall asleep. When you wake up .. you will be on vacation.. but Rule 2 is that you will not remember your past .. while on vacation .. as what would be the point ? Everyone .. everytime something went wrong .. knowing where they are going to end up .. will just jump off a bridge. .. Right .... Oops .. the wife walked out on me today ... "Poof" back to Heaven.

So this is why you have no memory of your past life .. you might get glimpses here and there in your dreams .. but in general you will not have access to your memories of previous vacations ... the hard drive is returned to you when you get back to heaven after vacation.

Notice that the Soul "The I AM" .. can not be capacitated by the fleshy abode until around 22 weeks .. when the wiring of the brain is completed. We can measure this with the EEG - Electroencephalogram .. the brain lights up like an xmas tree .. ..the "I Am" moment .. when the blob of Matter and Energy realizes it exists .. and that is all we know.

 

[metis]

If I had not studied the Bible I would also think it was a myth about Armageddon and understanding more about Babylon the Great.

That's really quite an insulting statement, and again you don't really get what "myth" actually means theologically. IOW, you know far less than you think, so maybe study and come back down to Earth with the rest of us peons.

 

[metis]

Whether one believes about Armageddon ( the war to end all wars - Psalm 46:9 ) does Not change what is written in the Bible

Not everything in ever book is accurate, and that includes the Bible, thus I personally don't make an idol out of it.