fallingblood
Agnostic Theist
Not quite. the Son of God does not imply God. The Christian idea is that there are three in one, but no, Son of God does not imply God.:yes:--Which is God, correct?
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Not quite. the Son of God does not imply God. The Christian idea is that there are three in one, but no, Son of God does not imply God.:yes:--Which is God, correct?
But Jesus said both the Christ and the Father are one. Wouldn't the nature of God among men be God?Not quite. the Son of God does not imply God. The Christian idea is that there are three in one, but no, Son of God does not imply God.
Can you give a verse? Also, the Gospels don't fully agree on his divinity. As in they don't all say the same thing.But Jesus said both the Christ and the Father are one. Wouldn't the nature of God among men be God?
Can you give a verse? Also, the Gospels don't fully agree on his divinity. As in they don't all say the same thing.
And Paul says we're one with Christ. Does that mean that we're God?But Jesus said both the Christ and the Father are one. Wouldn't the nature of God among men be God?
Isnt it also said that we are the image and likeness of God?And Paul says we're one with Christ. Does that mean that we're God?
Yup. And not a very patient one, if the gospels are to be believed.Just a teacher, that is if he was not fiction.
Wow.And I blame Christians for that agnostic version of the Christian claim that Jesus was son of God. Since there is no such a thing in Judaism, I have no choice but to side with Joe's point of view above.
= The Alleged Sons of God =
According to an ancient Roman policy, any able-bodied man from the conquered lands, who joined the Roman Army, would obtain authomatic citizenship. And if he was lucky enough to reach retirement age, he could choose where he would like to spend the rest of his life, and he would be granted a piece of land or farm as severance pay for his services to the Empire. Rome excluded.
When the Roman Legions arrived in the Middle East, under Pompey, and conquered Sidon, a man called Pantera applied to join the Army and was accepted. Then, he was conscripted into the Roman Legion which got stationed in Syria. When he reached retirement age, he chose to return to Sidon and got his farm there to live for the rest of his life.
According to Josephus, in the year 4 BCE, there was a local revolt in Israel against Herod. It became known as the Revolt of the Pharisees. It was so strong that it was threatening to depose him. Herod appealed to Rome for help and Caesar gave orders to the Legion stationed in Syria to cross over into Israel and put down the revolt.
Thousands of Roman soldiers came over and the task was quite easy. They crucified a few thousand Jews, and decided to stay for some time to make sure the discontent were subdued. In the meantime, the Roman soldiers would rape young Jewish ladies almost daily.
As it was to expect, many children were born as a result of those rapes. Since the unfortunate mothers were not to blame for promiscuity, the religious authorities forbade to ostracize them or to consider their children as mamzerim or ba$tards. But they grew up with the epithet of "sons of God." (From a Lecture on the "Historical Jesus" at Stanphord University)
Since Jesus was born just about that time, I am of the opinion that's much more prudent and less embarrassing to acknowledge that he was a biological son of Joseph's than to run the risk that Jesus might have been one of those sons of God.
Now, regarding Mark 7:24, I have here with me two different Bible translations. One is the Catholic New American version of the Bible wherefrom I read that when Jesus went to Sidon, he would retire into a certain house and wanted no one to recognize him in there. The other translation is the King James version, wherefrom I read that when Jesus went to Sidon, he would enter into a certain house and would have no man know it.
Although I am not assuming anything, everyone of us has all the right in the world to speculate about such a shouting evidence and to think that there was something fishy going on for Jesus to insist on secrecy about his being in Sidon or in that certain house. At that time Joseph had been long dead. Could it be that jesus knew about his real origins and was interacting with his real father? Everything is possible, but if you ask me, I am still in favour that he was rather a biological son of Joseph's.
What's your reaction to all the above?
Jn 10:30
I'm not supporting the idea that Jesus was a prophet. However, I doubt anyone could really say for sure either way.sorry to tell u folks jesus was merely a false prophet! not that he was evil or anything like that? when rome was in rule and the israelites were being oppressed they( israelites) wanted the" messiah" to come and restore israel to glory. jesus tried to be the "messiah"but if you are the"messiah" you would build the 3rd temple, gather all israelites back home, usher in an era of peace when man will not know war and a few other things that jesus never accomplished! plus the " messiah Will be born of normal parents and poses no super powers! he will be a mighty warrior and he will defeat evil 1s and for all. christians complain that jesus promised to do these things when he returns?but G-D never mentioned this in the TORAH and christians read the TORAH too right? SHALOM!
One in purpose but not one in the same. He basically repeats that in his prayer to his god in John 17.
Doesn't he say that he is one with God? Isn't being one, also be one in desire which would also be one in purpose with God?
But one in purpose does not mean one in the same. He prayed to his god asking for that same oneness in John Chapter 17.
you have to think of God as a family name. the head of the family is the Father and Jesus is the Son. they are separate beings but both part of the same family so they can both use the family name God
And Paul says we're one with Christ. Does that mean that we're God?