Watchtower: Jesus is not "a god"!

[rational experiences]

When I was being gas burnt brain irradiated head prickled. I saw black and brown wisping atmosphere outside.

It cooled and images of spirits appeared multi. Even Michael Jackson and Elvis.

Which proved it involved human controlled machine use. Recording transmitting.

Some images looked like stone statues some were just heads of men humans over various ages some aliens.

They emerged floated off disappeared. Some remained overlaid as a shadow on top of natural objects.

I dreamt I was myself a female in a brownish haze with a huge male penis swishing a tail.

I think I had a phenomena experience as why a human would write the bible as warnings to other humans.

A human is one self yet a holy life with god is by two for two babies. Two humans totally separate own create two separate human babies.

We are not one human...a theist one human thinking says otherwise. Men invented science.

Two by Two

I think you read the literature incorrectly myself.

O earth stone has to exist as we have bones like stone. Earth stone is not Phi two by two thesis. Stone is not Phi.

Type of info states science is a liar. A chosen human pondered state.

If men's body cells bled then one human man in science theories for two humans one whose womb the ovary from their man baby beginnings self bled.

String thesis man adult theist human thinking back first about human self to beginnings. As only babies have existed since first human parents of everyone are deceased.

Scientific fact the church said explicitly don't talk to dead or about dead.

With men seemingly converting into women today whilst one man science is practiced. Seemingly you have your evidence that proves you wrong.

As baby man beginnings your claim Jesus came from a woman's body historic pre bleeding from cells.

Reason for men of science sacrificing cell life and stigmata unnatural body bleeding. Introduced by science.

Why they lied.

God is natural. Science force changes God body. Natural changes living life health support. Science claim is direct science never did it he says. God natural had.

Was his used man's science excuse. Coercion. Why intelligence of science acts in human life as it does. Lies on behalf of the science practice.

Science never owned natural mass.

Science just a human belief never owned the eternal yet you discuss it as a science thesis which already proved you wrong.

You can't have the claim highest form when you are not living as a Human in the highest form.

We live inside a gas water heavens we don't live inside the eternal.

So our sensible brother who says and told you a human dies and is only a human. Is correct.

That we live and are personally conscious after the Christ status gases in the heavens so you could not claim you could think on behalf of the eternal.

Why particular teachings existed for humans versus self destructive human mind disorders.

The term God was not any Thesis analogy about why life was created by God it said we lived with God the stone philosophy.

To react a conversion it begins from nothing yet pre formed not named as nothing mass then converts by moving its mass through the space. Is a scientific thesis how to apply conversion to pre existing mass.

The bible written by men human about science conditions.

Men as humans live as humans only because creation formed pre exists. Ignored when the human theist isn't applying that type of thesis. Natural being self only acceptance.

They wanted to practice science.

To think says I own natural presence first.

Theist applies no presence I pretend I am the God creating all form. Does so everyday then tried to con us claiming no God told me how and why.

Who is God in that scenario a human hearing a human seeing a human hearing. Voice. Humans own the voice.

Men in science proclaimed they talked on behalf of god in science.

As their thoughts just consciousness never includes self bio man human presence living or owning life as they theory. As they aren't theorising for natural they theorise about why natural changed or how to change natural.

God was claimed by humans to own natural presence with no argument.

So arguing or theorising using the bible had been forbidden.

Men's science claim is I know why human life exists. And it is a human science claim.

Natural life with god said you are a human who exists first with no argument.

Science by human choice is the only argued. Human men.

Hence you have to ask humans why they argue about not being a human when you all claim the same human advice application. Not existing as humans.

Pretending when a human never existed when we do.

The argument was only ever human egotism to claim my personal human advice is correct as compared to your human advice.

In life's scenario only the scientist is wrong as we do own life and who cares for any of your stories it is just egotism.

The actual God real argument was earth had existed. It's heavens had existed and we live on our planet as humans.

Was once the only real acceptable scientific advice and no thesis allowed.

If science infers a formula for a human living then use that advice for a machine formula reaction as science the intention science was not to own any human life afterwards.

Human reasoning the science man knew we are a human by two. Not a human as one. Why science the female meant derisevly not to own life by the other one human. As two variant form human by two existed.

Ever ask why men demonstrated a personal hatred for an equal female life science is the answer.

When a mind says I am man the God then it is a human confession I never wanted human life to continue by his I inferred the female life in science.

As science a formula by the one mind and body claiming scientific self superiority. As compared to the other one human self the female.

Was the actual teaching.

 

[Soapy]

There is a gospel of Thomas. Its full form was not found until around 1945 in Egypt. Prior to that, all you had were bits and pieces. The fact it put a negative light on Mary, as she was a women, would not be well accepted by the Roman Catholics, who have put her in heaven by decree of their pope. Mary is not in heaven, nor is Peter standing by some gate. There is very little of any truth that can be found in the dogmas of the Roman Catholic church. That is why the Catholic church fought so long and hard to keep the bible out of the hands of the peasants. There isn't much good to say about Martin Luther, except that he helped get the bible, as imperfect as it is, into the hands of the unwashed in a language they could understand. Apparently, the Amish are the only ones using that bible in old German. Now the Amish forbid any bible that isn't written in old German, a language which very few even speak or read. They elect their pastors by lot, so don't be surprised to find their pastors/leaders, unable to read their own bible, and would be excommunicated if they used another bible which they could actually read. Not to say that the Amish are allowed to take a bible from their church to read at home. From there, anyone with a bible will have to separate the chaff from the wheat on their own, or seek the help of the Comforter.

Really not sure what you are saying except that there is a gospel of Thomas…

Hiwever, like false verses in the scriptures, as far as I have heard, the gospel of Thomas has been labelled as FAKE!!!

So, no answer to: Why isn’t there a VALID gospel of Thomas!!

 

[Soapy]

You use Thomas as the basis of your Trinity hypothesis, yet you reject quotes from what is taken from the gospel of Thomas. Your "scripture" does not match the "scripture" described by Yeshua in John 10:35, or what Paul referred to in 2 Timothy 3:15, in which he referred to as holy writings read from his childhood, which would not include your canon, which has not been universal accepted throughout the "Christian" sphere, and your canon was only first put in order in 367 AD, well after the falling away of the church (Matthew 24:10). Your term "Christian", is not a shield, and it will not save you from the coming Great Tribulation based on justice and truth, with respect to the judgment of God, not back stories from "fat" "shepherds" (Ezekiel 34), who are looking at their own judgment (Ezekiel 34:16).

Quotes from the gospel of Thomas???

You mean, ‘quotes from a FAKED gospel’?

Fake gospels or verses are INVALID for scriptural truth!!!

They should not even be put up for debate as it lends some aspect if credence to carry them to the discussion table:

• ‘Why do people debate FAKE evidence?’

 

[Clear]

Hi @Brian2


I apologize for not commenting on your question and response earlier. I am traveling and wanted to wait until I could use my computers keyboard rather than try to comment on a phones limited keyboard.

1) REGARDING "THE WAR IN HEAVEN" WHEN SATAN WAS "CAST DOWN LIKE LIGHTNING"
Brian2 mentioned : “There seemed to be some sort of trouble in heaven and with whatever governmental arrangements were set up there and rebellion was probably immanent.” (post #1308)

I agree that a rebellion had occurred. The Early Christian, Jewish and Islamic records are rarely in specific agreement, but all three early Abrahamic traditions agree on why Satan became angry and abandoned loyalty to God and became an enemy to God and to Adam and the rest of us. This is probably one of the reasons why a study of early Judeo-Christian beliefs are helpful.

The early beliefs provide context to the biblical written traditions that make the biblical text more understandable and coherent in most cases. Usually (for me), the earliest Christianity is more logical and rational than the later versions of Christianity that became popular and were adopted.

They also, as a whole, make more sense regarding why God placed Satan, (his enemy and the enemy of Adam, and the rest of us), in the Garden WITH Adam and Even while they were in a naive and innocent state.


2) SOMETHING IMPORTANT IS HAPPENING INSIDE MORTALITY

Brian2 said : “As with Job when Satan probably thought that he was getting the better of God in harming Job, but God had used the whole thing for Job's good even though it meant suffering for Job and others.” (post #1308)

I think your observation is an insightful and correct context for both Job and for the “fall” of Adam and the rest of us.

There is something happening in mortality that would not have happened had mankind not been introduced into mortality, but instead, had stayed ignorant of the moral knowledge and wisdom of understanding good and evil.


Brian2 said : “Satan may have thought he had the better of God and did what he did for his own purposes but God seems to be in the job of bringing good from what look to be bad and impossible situations and in the end good will come from all the suffering and evil in the world.”. (post #1308)

I very much agree.

Suffering is not to be either understood, nor can it be justified if it is viewed in the short term of a 70 year life.

However, if all of mankind are beings that will ultimately live forever, then a small moment of painful vaccination against a later, much worse moral disease can be justified and the knowledge and wisdom and insight gained can be an important characteristic in a being who is to ultimately, live in social harmony and joy with others in an eternal heaven.

Another point is that such individuals, willing to live celestial social laws and lives must be all willing to live those laws.

Those individuals who are not willing to live by those laws must be separated from such a society, else, a social heaven cannot be created or maintained.

There can be no oppressors, no liars, no thieves, no psycho or sociopaths in heaven or it cannot remained unified and joyful.


3) MANKIND ARE JUDGED FOR THEIR OWN SINS
Brian2 said : “I agree with you about people being judged for their own deeds only.” (post #1308)

I am glad we agree regarding this point



4) IS MORAL KNOWLEDGE NECESSARY BEFORE EITHER SIN OR EMBARRASSMENT FOR SIN?
Brian2 said : “Was the eating of the fruit sin?
It was certainly what God had said not to do.”
That law led to a wrong action and what seems to have been a self centred action and based on lack of trust in God, and just as a child can feel guilt after disobeying the parent, so Adam and Eve felt guilt and hid from God. (post #1308)

My tentative opinion is that the earliest concept of what happened is that Eve transgressed but did not consciously sin.

Once she was given knowledge of good and evil, only then was full awareness and understanding of moral good versus evil possible.

Only after Adam and Eve became aware of the good and evil, were they then embarrassed or ashamed similar to little children that are not ashamed of being naked until AFTER they have developed awareness.

While Eve’s eating is more simple. Adams eating of the fruit does not seem to me to have been a “self centered” action. He may have been simply making the best choice he was given.

Eve had already eaten of the fruit.

If Adam understood that she would then be cast out of the garden, Adam may have understood that he could not obey the first commandment he was given, that of “multiplying and replenishing the earth”. If he did not eat, he could stay in the garden, but not have children.

Tentatively, I do not think Adams’ eating of the fruit was a conscious sin, but a transgression.

In either case, I do not think the knowledge of Good and Evil and the acquiring of moral wisdom was ever evil and in fact, after eating of the fruit, in early traditions, God the sets about the task of making sure Adam DOES acquire knowledge of Good and Evil as per early Judeo-Christian literature and Dead Sea Scroll literature and biblical literature tells us.



4) IS MORTALITY A PUNISHMENT OR IS IT PART OF LEARNING MORAL WISDOM
Brian2 said : “God carried through with what He said and made sure they did not live forever and no access to the tree of life. In the wild outside the garden it was not a paradise. It is almost like the story of Israel being given the promised land conditionally.” (post #1308)

While Adam and Eve were made to live under mortal conditions and died, the promise God made to Adam in early Christianity was that he would also provide a savior who would provide an atonement and mechanism for Adam to be restored to his prior position of living forever AFTER having obtained the moral wisdom Adam gained and a resurrection would occur which would overcome the death of the body which was part of gaining moral wisdom.

Thus, Adam is restored to the same position as he was in before except now, the Adam that is to live forever has moral wisdom and has immense posterity with which he will live forever in harmony and Joy, having become more like God.



Brian2 said : “I suppose the suffering we endure is meant for our good and teaching at times but even when it teaches nothing, in the end God's purposes will be fulfilled.” (post #1308)

Yes, I agree with this except I do not think that this life ever “teaches nothing”, but that all experiences will have their own value and no experience is wasted and God’s purposes in setting up mortality the way he did will fulfill his ultimate purposes and mankind, at that point, will see that it was justified.

Something important is happening in mortality that could or would not have happened of they remained in the Garden of Eden.



Brian2 said : “I think I'll just stick to story we have in the Bible about A@E and not go into other versions............at the moment.” (post #1308)

Sure, this is fine.

Not all of us have the same specific curiosities regarding early Judeo-Christianity, it's early forms, and how it has evolved.

There are probably hundreds of different interpretations regarding discrete details about what happened in the Garden and before and what such things meant, I think the earliest versions and the early Christian interpretations seem to be more logical and coherent and morally just than many of the later versions and later interpretations adopted by the many different Christian movements.


In any case, good luck in coming to your own models and beliefs as to what these things mean to you. I hope your own spiritual journey is wonderful Brian2.


Clear
φυτωσινεακω

 

[Dogknox20]

You use Thomas as the basis of your Trinity hypothesis, yet you reject quotes from what is taken from the gospel of Thomas. Your "scripture" does not match the "scripture" described by Yeshua in John 10:35, or what Paul referred to in 2 Timothy 3:15, in which he referred to as holy writings read from his childhood, which would not include your canon, which has not been universal accepted throughout the "Christian" sphere, and your canon was only first put in order in 367 AD, well after the falling away of the church (Matthew 24:10). Your term "Christian", is not a shield, and it will not save you from the coming Great Tribulation based on justice and truth, with respect to the judgment of God, not back stories from "fat" "shepherds" (Ezekiel 34), who are looking at their own judgment (Ezekiel 34:16).

.
YES I reject the quotes from what is taken from the gospel of Thomas. They are NOT inspired words of God.

 

[2ndpillar]

.
YES I reject the quotes from what is taken from the gospel of Thomas. They are NOT inspired words of God.

Were the epistles, supposedly written by Paul, but were not, "inspired words of God". Were the Luke 1:1 compilation of hearsay stories the "inspired words of God"? Were the words of 2 Peter, written by someone other than Peter, the "inspired words of God". Were they written by an apostle, or a self professed apostle, or simply some unknown? Did the apostles choose James as their leader in Jerusalem, the home of Mount Zion? Did the Jews accept Paul in Jerusalem, or did they cause him to call on his lord Caesar, and his soldiers, to save his questionable soul? Did Peter, supposedly, with keys of David (Isaiah 22), stay at Zion, and rule the the congregation in Jerusalem, from the citadel of David? I think not, I think Peter was "cast" out into a "vast country", where he eventually died (Isaiah 22:18). I think your idea of "scripture", is a little warped. The "whore of Babylon", may try and go along with changing the law and the times (Daniel 7:25), but she has no power to dictate what is "scripture", and what is not. Her role is clearly laid out in "Scripture", and it is not a good one. On the other hand, Thomas was chosen as an apostle, and apparently carried out his ministry. Whereas Peter, Paul, and Judas Iscariot, carried out their ministry, which according to Zechariah 11, was not a virtuous one, and leads to the "slaughter" of the "flock doomed for slaughter", which is the Gentile flock as shown being initiated in Hosea 3, to stand in for "several days", while Israel got their selves straightened out.

 

[Dogknox20]

Were the epistles, supposedly written by Paul, but were not, "inspired words of God". Were the Luke 1:1 compilation of hearsay stories the "inspired words of God"? Were the words of 2 Peter, written by someone other than Peter, the "inspired words of God". Were they written by an apostle, or a self professed apostle, or simply some unknown? Did the apostles choose James as their leader in Jerusalem, the home of Mount Zion? Did the Jews accept Paul in Jerusalem, or did they cause him to call on his lord Caesar, and his soldiers, to save his questionable soul? Did Peter, supposedly, with keys of David (Isaiah 22), stay at Zion, and rule the the congregation in Jerusalem, from the citadel of David? I think not, I think Peter was "cast" out into a "vast country", where he eventually died (Isaiah 22:18). I think your idea of "scripture", is a little warped. The "whore of Babylon", may try and go along with changing the law and the times (Daniel 7:25), but she has no power to dictate what is "scripture", and what is not. Her role is clearly laid out in "Scripture", and it is not a good one. On the other hand, Thomas was chosen as an apostle, and apparently carried out his ministry. Whereas Peter, Paul, and Judas Iscariot, carried out their ministry, which according to Zechariah 11, was not a virtuous one, and leads to the "slaughter" of the "flock doomed for slaughter", which is the Gentile flock as shown being initiated in Hosea 3, to stand in for "several days", while Israel got their selves straightened out.

2ndpillar You ask a lot of questions.. The simple answer is.. "If it is in the bible it is then Inspired words of God"! IF..

If you find something OUTSIDE of the bible it might be interesting but you cannot take it for Inspired words of God!
The Manual of a Ford F 150 is NOT inspired words of God; It is NOT found in the scriptures!

 

[2ndpillar]

2ndpillar You ask a lot of questions.. The simple answer is.. "If it is in the bible it is then Inspired words of God"! IF..

If you find something OUTSIDE of the bible it might be interesting but you cannot take it for Inspired words of God!
The Manual of a Ford F 150 is NOT inspired words of God; It is NOT found in the scriptures!

The Ford manual, whether printed or digital, is the bible of many Ford mechanic. Without it, they may be looking at death, with it, they have a slight chance at life.

As for the current canon of the bible, tabulated by Athanasius in 367 AD, and used by a majority of daughters of Babylon, it is not universal. As for the bible compiled by Constantine, the Pontifex Maximus, there are no copies found, but early writings mention one of the books, and it is not found within the current canon. What you consider the "Word of God", and what Yeshua considered the "Word of God", does not correspond, except to the extent that the testimony of Yeshua, was considered the Spirit of prophecy (Revelation 19:10).

 

[Clear]

Hi 2ndPillar and Dogknox.

I only have a minute or two before I am leaving this hotel (I am traveling)

I noticed the conversation between you regarding a theoretical “canon” of scripture. I just wanted to make a single point.

You are speaking of historical use of texts which were seen as inspired by their users, Dogknox20 is speaking dogmatically of his modern, western text. Dogma and history rarely can stay in the same room together, much less coordinate.

Since Christianity is a historical religion then there are going to be some historical considerations.

For example, historically, the current version of the new testament did not exist in the earliest centuries. NONE of the individuals mentioned in the New Testament ever HAD a New Testament. We are dealing with Christianity of a different type and time than you are used to referring to.

Also, the specific use of the term “canon” is a relative and arbitrary term that is defined differently in various times and various places.

There is a difference between a list of "official books" and books from an "official list". There is also a difference between personal canons that individuals used (athenasius quotes from hermas multiple times) and the canons of organisations. There is a difference in canons in various time periods and places. The 4th century Uncial C. Sinaiticus included hermas and barnabas, etc. while the other 4 great uncials do not include them. There is a difference between modern canons geographically.

For example, most westerners on the forum have inherited and use a western “roman” based bible, while if the same individuals were born easterners such as the ethiopian orthodox (45 million in that congregation alone), they might inherit and use bibles that still include Enoch, jubilees, and Barnabas and other books in their larger canon of 81 books.

To this extent IF one is going to speak historically, then it helps to indicate which canon one is using.

got to go.


Clear
φυτωνεφυφυω

 

[Soapy]

Hi @Brian2


I apologize for not commenting on your question and response earlier. I am traveling and wanted to wait until I could use my computers keyboard rather than try to comment on a phones limited keyboard.

1) REGARDING "THE WAR IN HEAVEN" WHEN SATAN WAS "CAST DOWN LIKE LIGHTNING"
Brian2 mentioned : “There seemed to be some sort of trouble in heaven and with whatever governmental arrangements were set up there and rebellion was probably immanent.” (post #1308)

I agree that a rebellion had occurred. The Early Christian, Jewish and Islamic records are rarely in specific agreement, but all three early Abrahamic traditions agree on why Satan became angry and abandoned loyalty to God and became an enemy to God and to Adam and the rest of us. This is probably one of the reasons why a study of early Judeo-Christian beliefs are helpful.

The early beliefs provide context to the biblical written traditions that make the biblical text more understandable and coherent in most cases. Usually (for me), the earliest Christianity is more logical and rational than the later versions of Christianity that became popular and were adopted.

They also, as a whole, make more sense regarding why God placed Satan, (his enemy and the enemy of Adam, and the rest of us), in the Garden WITH Adam and Even while they were in a naive and innocent state.


2) SOMETHING IMPORTANT IS HAPPENING INSIDE MORTALITY

Brian2 said : “As with Job when Satan probably thought that he was getting the better of God in harming Job, but God had used the whole thing for Job's good even though it meant suffering for Job and others.” (post #1308)

I think your observation is an insightful and correct context for both Job and for the “fall” of Adam and the rest of us.

There is something happening in mortality that would not have happened had mankind not been introduced into mortality, but instead, had stayed ignorant of the moral knowledge and wisdom of understanding good and evil.


Brian2 said : “Satan may have thought he had the better of God and did what he did for his own purposes but God seems to be in the job of bringing good from what look to be bad and impossible situations and in the end good will come from all the suffering and evil in the world.”. (post #1308)

I very much agree.

Suffering is not to be either understood, nor can it be justified if it is viewed in the short term of a 70 year life.

However, if all of mankind are beings that will ultimately live forever, then a small moment of painful vaccination against a later, much worse moral disease can be justified and the knowledge and wisdom and insight gained can be an important characteristic in a being who is to ultimately, live in social harmony and joy with others in an eternal heaven.

Another point is that such individuals, willing to live celestial social laws and lives must be all willing to live those laws.

Those individuals who are not willing to live by those laws must be separated from such a society, else, a social heaven cannot be created or maintained.

There can be no oppressors, no liars, no thieves, no psycho or sociopaths in heaven or it cannot remained unified and joyful.


3) MANKIND ARE JUDGED FOR THEIR OWN SINS
Brian2 said : “I agree with you about people being judged for their own deeds only.” (post #1308)

I am glad we agree regarding this point



4) IS MORAL KNOWLEDGE NECESSARY BEFORE EITHER SIN OR EMBARRASSMENT FOR SIN?
Brian2 said : “Was the eating of the fruit sin?
It was certainly what God had said not to do.”
That law led to a wrong action and what seems to have been a self centred action and based on lack of trust in God, and just as a child can feel guilt after disobeying the parent, so Adam and Eve felt guilt and hid from God. (post #1308)

My tentative opinion is that the earliest concept of what happened is that Eve transgressed but did not consciously sin.

Once she was given knowledge of good and evil, only then was full awareness and understanding of moral good versus evil possible.

Only after Adam and Eve became aware of the good and evil, were they then embarrassed or ashamed similar to little children that are not ashamed of being naked until AFTER they have developed awareness.

While Eve’s eating is more simple. Adams eating of the fruit does not seem to me to have been a “self centered” action. He may have been simply making the best choice he was given.

Eve had already eaten of the fruit.

If Adam understood that she would then be cast out of the garden, Adam may have understood that he could not obey the first commandment he was given, that of “multiplying and replenishing the earth”. If he did not eat, he could stay in the garden, but not have children.

Tentatively, I do not think Adams’ eating of the fruit was a conscious sin, but a transgression.

In either case, I do not think the knowledge of Good and Evil and the acquiring of moral wisdom was ever evil and in fact, after eating of the fruit, in early traditions, God the sets about the task of making sure Adam DOES acquire knowledge of Good and Evil as per early Judeo-Christian literature and Dead Sea Scroll literature and biblical literature tells us.



4) IS MORTALITY A PUNISHMENT OR IS IT PART OF LEARNING MORAL WISDOM
Brian2 said : “God carried through with what He said and made sure they did not live forever and no access to the tree of life. In the wild outside the garden it was not a paradise. It is almost like the story of Israel being given the promised land conditionally.” (post #1308)

While Adam and Eve were made to live under mortal conditions and died, the promise God made to Adam in early Christianity was that he would also provide a savior who would provide an atonement and mechanism for Adam to be restored to his prior position of living forever AFTER having obtained the moral wisdom Adam gained and a resurrection would occur which would overcome the death of the body which was part of gaining moral wisdom.

.

got to go.


Clear
φυτωνεφυφυω

.


Clear
φυτωσινεακω

It seems an odd thing for YOU to be judging Adam (and Eve) and deciding that he did not sin but merely transgressed… transgression of God’s command IS A SIN!

Also, you belittle the ‘transgression’ that Adam committed when CLEARLY GOD DID NOT TAKE IT AS A MERE TRANSGRESSION!

God was VERY ANGRY with Adam because it was to Adam that he gave the command. Eve was a not given the command not to eat from the tree but it would/should have been taught to her by Adam.

God PUNISHED Adam with a great punishment, and Eve with a lesser punishment …

• “To the woman he said, “I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you. To Adam he said, “Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat from it,’ “Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat food from it all the days of your life.” (Gen 3:16-17)

but, all the same, SIN had now entered humanity. No longer would any any offsprings of the ‘Father’ in humanity be sinless… which is back to your ‘can a newborn be sinful?’ … Yes! Spiritually, ALL - from birth - are sinful… but you speak of actually sinning… born in sin, having sin in you, is different to actually sinning. AND that is why God gave man time to see if any of children of Adam could live WITHOUT SINNING… not live without having din in them! I guess you just don’t know the difference!

Stop being ‘God’ in this forum. You don’t understand the scriptures (hence you are RESEARCHING) but you end up dictating your ideas as though you know and all else know nothing.

You argue with everyone in this forum declaring their belief as bunkum while claiming you are researching using ‘Historical Data’… You still cannot see that nothing you come across concerning trinity belief (that you say was from the earliest church teachings) is ever going to show you the truth … because trinity is not truth.

You will end up disbelieving everything and turn into an agnostic or an atheist (or perhaps you already are) because of the confusion of all the myriad trinity beliefs.

I show you the truth and you claim what I say also is bunkum! You ask me for ‘historical data’ about creation of man … yet without ‘historical data’ you claim you know what Adam and Eve did and how GOD saw their SIN…!!!

A mere transgression… hmmm… let me see:

• “Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned—” (Romans 5:12)
• “Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a pattern of the one to come.” (Romans 5:14)

‘DEATH’… death to all mankind … that’s what the ‘mere transgression’ brought to mankind….

‘Adam’, “a pattern of the one to come.” … A SATAN! An opposer to God!! A person destined for purgatory!

If you really want to understand the scriptures do like Obiwan Kinobi said to Luke Skywalker:

• ‘@Clear, Let go your [Historical Data]… us the [Truth], @Clear’

I am speaking truth to you… the ‘I never heard your strange ideas before’ ideas.

The reason you never heard the truth before is because you have been listening and researching LIES all the time and believing it even as the ‘Historical Data’ has shown you that there is no truth in the trinity belief you found there!!!

You, Even you, should understand the lies that trinity claims that:

• Jesus being ‘equal to God’ means Jesus is God
• Jesus being anointed with power from God means he was already God
• Jesus created everything after he saw his Father create everything
• Jesus being able to do what his Father does means that Jesus is God
• Jesus is called YHWH
• Jesus is called ‘God’
• Jesus sat down next to God meaning he is God
• Jesus being born of the holy spirit means hd was preexistent before being born
• Jesus ‘gave up being God’ but remain being God even while hd was man
• Jesus veiled his good knowledge so he didn’t know things … while performing miracles that only God can perform … so he must be God
• Jesus died only in his body but God didn’t die in his body but god raised him up again

How many more examples???

 

[Dogknox20]

Hi 2ndPillar and Dogknox.

I only have a minute or two before I am leaving this hotel (I am traveling)

I noticed the conversation between you regarding a theoretical “canon” of scripture. I just wanted to make a single point.

You are speaking of historical use of texts which were seen as inspired by their users, Dogknox20 is speaking dogmatically of his modern, western text. Dogma and history rarely can stay in the same room together, much less coordinate.

Since Christianity is a historical religion then there are going to be some historical considerations.

For example, historically, the current version of the new testament did not exist in the earliest centuries. NONE of the individuals mentioned in the New Testament ever HAD a New Testament. We are dealing with Christianity of a different type and time than you are used to referring to.

Also, the specific use of the term “canon” is a relative and arbitrary term that is defined differently in various times and various places.

There is a difference between a list of "official books" and books from an "official list". There is also a difference between personal canons that individuals used (athenasius quotes from hermas multiple times) and the canons of organisations. There is a difference in canons in various time periods and places. The 4th century Uncial C. Sinaiticus included hermas and barnabas, etc. while the other 4 great uncials do not include them. There is a difference between modern canons geographically.

For example, most westerners on the forum have inherited and use a western “roman” based bible, while if the same individuals were born easterners such as the ethiopian orthodox (45 million in that congregation alone), they might inherit and use bibles that still include Enoch, jubilees, and Barnabas and other books in their larger canon of 81 books.
To this extent IF one is going to speak historically, then it helps to indicate which canon one is using.
got to go.
Clear
φυτωνεφυφυω

Clear Good to hear from you!
Right you are.. the current version of the new testament did not exist in the earliest centuries.
The Bible was NOT office Canon until 400 A.D.
I add... There is NO such a thing as theoretical “canon” of scripture. The CANON is closed!
The term “canon” is NOT a relative and arbitrary term that is defined differently in various times and various places. The Roman canon is CLOSED! (Nothing added nothing taken away)
If you want to talk about Christian beliefs:... Christians believe Jesus is GOD. Christian worship Jesus always have! The Bible is a book of the Church the One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church came before the Bible! The Apostles TAUGHT the people in person or by letter! These letters are the meat of the New Testament!

 

[2ndpillar]

Clear Good to hear from you!
Right you are.. the current version of the new testament did not exist in the earliest centuries.
The Bible was NOT office Canon until 400 A.D.
I add... There is NO such a thing as theoretical “canon” of scripture. The CANON is closed!
The term “canon” is NOT a relative and arbitrary term that is defined differently in various times and various places. The Roman canon is CLOSED! (Nothing added nothing taken away)
If you want to talk about Christian beliefs:... Christians believe Jesus is GOD. Christian worship Jesus always have! The Bible is a book of the Church the One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church came before the Bible! The Apostles TAUGHT the people in person or by letter! These letters are the meat of the New Testament!

The Book of Revelation was not accepted into the Armenian Bible until c. 1200 AD when Archbishop Nerses arranged an Armenian Synod at Constantinople. The Pe****a bible doesn't contain 2 Peter, etc. Development of the New Testament canon - Wikipedia Apparently the Arians didn't believe "Jesus" was God, and neither did the the early church. It was the later orthodoxy, followers of the false prophet Paul, who made that declaration, while putting down the followers of any other views. The "orthodox", Protestants and Roman Catholics have two different views. Protestants think that if you "believe" what the demons believe, that Yeshua is the son of God, then you are saved. Catholics think you have to follow the "worthless shepherd" (Zechariah 11:17), Peter, the rock, to be saved. Neither have been saved from death or even from sickness/sin. Yet here they are touting their supremacy of doctrine and canon. Half the books of Paul, were probably not written by Paul, and as a self professed "apostle", his declaration is "untrue" (John 5:31). The unified (catholic) church didn't get unified until 325 AD, under the supervision of the "beast with two horns like a lamb", the Roman emperor Constantine. It mostly became unified in dogma, doctrine, and tradition with the different bodies, including the pagan Mithraic religion at that time, to provide for a more unified Roman empire.

 

[Dogknox20]

It seems an odd thing for YOU to be judging Adam (and Eve) and deciding that he did not sin but merely transgressed… transgression of God’s command IS A SIN!

Also, you belittle the ‘transgression’ that Adam committed when CLEARLY GOD DID NOT TAKE IT AS A MERE TRANSGRESSION!

God was VERY ANGRY with Adam because it was to Adam that he gave the command. Eve was a not given the command not to eat from the tree but it would/should have been taught to her by Adam.

God PUNISHED Adam with a great punishment, and Eve with a lesser punishment …

• “To the woman he said, “I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you. To Adam he said, “Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat from it,’ “Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat food from it all the days of your life.” (Gen 3:16-17)

but, all the same, SIN had now entered humanity. No longer would any any offsprings of the ‘Father’ in humanity be sinless… which is back to your ‘can a newborn be sinful?’ … Yes! Spiritually, ALL - from birth - are sinful… but you speak of actually sinning… born in sin, having sin in you, is different to actually sinning. AND that is why God gave man time to see if any of children of Adam could live WITHOUT SINNING… not live without having din in them! I guess you just don’t know the difference!

Stop being ‘God’ in this forum. You don’t understand the scriptures (hence you are RESEARCHING) but you end up dictating your ideas as though you know and all else know nothing.

You argue with everyone in this forum declaring their belief as bunkum while claiming you are researching using ‘Historical Data’… You still cannot see that nothing you come across concerning trinity belief (that you say was from the earliest church teachings) is ever going to show you the truth … because trinity is not truth.

You will end up disbelieving everything and turn into an agnostic or an atheist (or perhaps you already are) because of the confusion of all the myriad trinity beliefs.

I show you the truth and you claim what I say also is bunkum! You ask me for ‘historical data’ about creation of man … yet without ‘historical data’ you claim you know what Adam and Eve did and how GOD saw their SIN…!!!

A mere transgression… hmmm… let me see:

• “Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned—” (Romans 5:12)
• “Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a pattern of the one to come.” (Romans 5:14)

‘DEATH’… death to all mankind … that’s what the ‘mere transgression’ brought to mankind….

‘Adam’, “a pattern of the one to come.” … A SATAN! An opposer to God!! A person destined for purgatory!

If you really want to understand the scriptures do like Obiwan Kinobi said to Luke Skywalker:

• ‘@Clear, Let go your [Historical Data]… us the [Truth], @Clear’

I am speaking truth to you… the ‘I never heard your strange ideas before’ ideas.

The reason you never heard the truth before is because you have been listening and researching LIES all the time and believing it even as the ‘Historical Data’ has shown you that there is no truth in the trinity belief you found there!!!

You, Even you, should understand the lies that trinity claims that:

• Jesus being ‘equal to God’ means Jesus is God
• Jesus being anointed with power from God means he was already God
• Jesus created everything after he saw his Father create everything
• Jesus being able to do what his Father does means that Jesus is God
• Jesus is called YHWH
• Jesus is called ‘God’
• Jesus sat down next to God meaning he is God
• Jesus being born of the holy spirit means hd was preexistent before being born
• Jesus ‘gave up being God’ but remain being God even while hd was man
• Jesus veiled his good knowledge so he didn’t know things … while performing miracles that only God can perform … so he must be God
• Jesus died only in his body but God didn’t die in his body but god raised him up again

How many more examples???

..
I reply...
Christians worship Jesus because Jesus is GOD! Christians have ALWAYS worshiped Jesus! Example.. Thomas the Apostle is a CHRISTIAN he worshiped Jesus!

THINK: Satan wants to be worshiped; he like you does NOT believe Jesus is God. Satan does NOT want people to worship Jesus so he starts these late comer churches Example.. Seventh Day,. Mormons, JWs etc... all preaching "Jesus is not God"! Scriptures warn about Anti-Christs coming attacking Christian belief! Arius fills the scripture prophesy, he was a False Teacher that was rejected by Christians.. Arius also taught "Jesus is NOT God"!. God warns us from AMONG Christians will come false teacher Heretics'! IF They do not believe as Christians believe then they are NOT Christians!

God with us!
Matthew 1:23 “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel” (which means “God with us”).

Clear The WORD became Flesh and lived among us!
1 John 18: No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.
CSB
1 John 18 No one has ever seen God. The one and only Son, who is himself God and is at the Father’s side—he has revealed him.
CJB
1 John 18 No one has ever seen God; but the only and unique Son, who is identical with God and is at the Father’s side — he has made him known.
CEV
1 John 18 No one has ever seen God. The only Son, who is truly God and is closest to the Father, has shown us what God is like.
DLNT
1 John 18 No one has ever seen God; the only-born God, the One being in the bosom of the Father— that One expounded Him.
ERV
1 John 18 No one has ever seen God. The only Son is the one who has shown us what God is like. He is himself God and is very close to the Father.
ESVUK
1 John 18 No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father's side, he has made him known.
GNT
1 John 18 No one has ever seen God. The only Son, who is the same as God and is at the Father's side, he has made him known.
etc
etc

 

[Dogknox20]

The Book of Revelation was not accepted into the Armenian Bible until c. 1200 AD when Archbishop Nerses arranged an Armenian Synod at Constantinople. The Pe****a bible doesn't contain 2 Peter, etc. Development of the New Testament canon - Wikipedia Apparently the Arians didn't believe "Jesus" was God, and neither did the the early church. It was the later orthodoxy, followers of the false prophet Paul, who made that declaration, while putting down the followers of any other views. The "orthodox", Protestants and Roman Catholics have two different views. Protestants think that if you "believe" what the demons believe, that Yeshua is the son of God, then you are saved. Catholics think you have to follow the "worthless shepherd" (Zechariah 11:17), Peter, the rock, to be saved. Neither have been saved from death or even from sickness/sin. Yet here they are touting their supremacy of doctrine and canon. Half the books of Paul, were probably not written by Paul, and as a self professed "apostle", his declaration is "untrue" (John 5:31). The unified (catholic) church didn't get unified until 325 AD, under the supervision of the "beast with two horns like a lamb", the Roman emperor Constantine. It mostly became unified in dogma, doctrine, and tradition with the different bodies, including the pagan Mithraic religion at that time, to provide for a more unified Roman empire.

.
The Armenian Bible is NOT closed.. It can change like the wind!
2ndpillar You have a lot of opinion and accusations... IF you could prove them you would but all you have is YOUR OPINION and accusation!
The scriptures are clear.. Jesus build his One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church ON ROCK not on sand! Jesus is ALWAYS with his Holy Church to the very end of time!
The Holy Spirit is guiding the Holy Catholic Church into ALL TRUTH... FOREVER Guiding Her!
The Church Jesus established is the Pillar and the foundation of Truth! None Other!

 

[JerryMyers]

..
I reply...
Christians worship Jesus because Jesus is GOD! Christians have ALWAYS worshiped Jesus! Example.. Thomas the Apostle is a CHRISTIAN he worshiped Jesus!

THINK: Satan wants to be worshiped; he like you does NOT believe Jesus is God. Satan does NOT want people to worship Jesus so he starts these late comer churches Example.. Seventh Day,. Mormons, JWs etc... all preaching "Jesus is not God"! Scriptures warn about Anti-Christs coming attacking Christian belief! Arius fills the scripture prophesy, he was a False Teacher that was rejected by Christians.. Arius also taught "Jesus is NOT God"!. God warns us from AMONG Christians will come false teacher Heretics'! IF They do not believe as Christians believe then they are NOT Christians!

God with us!
Matthew 1:23 “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel” (which means “God with us”).

Clear The WORD became Flesh and lived among us!
1 John 18: No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.
CSB
1 John 18 No one has ever seen God. The one and only Son, who is himself God and is at the Father’s side—he has revealed him.
CJB
1 John 18 No one has ever seen God; but the only and unique Son, who is identical with God and is at the Father’s side — he has made him known.
CEV
1 John 18 No one has ever seen God. The only Son, who is truly God and is closest to the Father, has shown us what God is like.
DLNT
1 John 18 No one has ever seen God; the only-born God, the One being in the bosom of the Father— that One expounded Him.
ERV
1 John 18 No one has ever seen God. The only Son is the one who has shown us what God is like. He is himself God and is very close to the Father.
ESVUK
1 John 18 No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father's side, he has made him known.
GNT
1 John 18 No one has ever seen God. The only Son, who is the same as God and is at the Father's side, he has made him known.
etc
etc

STILL rambling nonsense!! By nonsense I mean you cannot back up any of your claims with scriptural proofs that God Almighty or His prophet, Jesus, said or even implied that Jesus is God – PROVE ME WTONG!!

The words of John 1:18 (especially those you highlighted in red) are NOT the words of God Almighty or His prophet, Jesus – those are the words of the writer who wrote the Book of John. Heck, the writer of the Book of John does not even acknowledge Jesus miraculous birth from the womb of his mother, Mary, as did the writers of the earlier Synoptic Gospels.

Then again, time and time again, you have proven that your belief that Jesus is God is based on the words of other people, NOT on the words of God Almighty or His prophet, Jesus. You have no integrity if you CANNOT support your belief from the words of God Almighty or His prophet, Jesus. So, Dogknox20, STOP talking NONSENSE and show some integrity!!

 

[2ndpillar]

.
The Armenian Bible is NOT closed.. It can change like the wind!
2ndpillar You have a lot of opinion and accusations... IF you could prove them you would but all you have is YOUR OPINION and accusation!
The scriptures are clear.. Jesus build his One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church ON ROCK not on sand! Jesus is ALWAYS with his Holy Church to the very end of time!
The Holy Spirit is guiding the Holy Catholic Church into ALL TRUTH... FOREVER Guiding Her!
The Church Jesus established is the Pillar and the foundation of Truth! None Other!

The protestant churches, who also call themselves "Christian", apparently believes differently. They take Matthew 16:16-18 as believing that, "thou are Christ, the son of the living God", is the foundational rock (petra), in which the church is built. Both are wrong, but they both call themselves "Christian". The petra, that the church is built on, is the spirit of revelation/prophesy, in which, "blessed are you, Simon Bar Jonas, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.". (Matthew 16:17)

 

[Soapy]

Clear Good to hear from you!
Right you are.. the current version of the new testament did not exist in the earliest centuries.
The Bible was NOT office Canon until 400 A.D.
I add... There is NO such a thing as theoretical “canon” of scripture. The CANON is closed!
The term “canon” is NOT a relative and arbitrary term that is defined differently in various times and various places. The Roman canon is CLOSED! (Nothing added nothing taken away)
If you want to talk about Christian beliefs:... Christians believe Jesus is GOD. Christian worship Jesus always have! The Bible is a book of the Church the One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church came before the Bible! The Apostles TAUGHT the people in person or by letter! These letters are the meat of the New Testament!

The term, ‘Christian’, I believe , is defined as ‘Follower of Christ’.

But Christ [Jesus] did not teach that he was God!

Christ [Jesus] taught that The Father was:

• The only true God
• To be worshipped in Spirit and in truth
• ‘He who sat on the throne [in Heaven]’
• The creator and he [jesus] was the son of the creator unto whom all things created by the Father was [to be] passed onto
• The one who anointed HIM with power to do the Will of the Father
• The one who taught him what to say and do
• …

How do those of trinitarian belief justify the claim from the above points that Jesus IS ALMIGHTY GOD?

 

[Soapy]

1 John 18 No one has ever seen God. The only Son is the one who has shown us what God is like. He is himself God and is very close to the Father.

1. ‘No one has ever seen God’
2. ‘The only Son is the one who has shown us what God is like’
3. ‘He is, himself, God…. and is very close to the Father’

Any linguists around in this forum to show that these extracts show a load of nonsense!

If no one has ever seen God yet the Din is that very God that no one has seen but that son is CLOSE TO THE GOD THAT HE IS….???!!!!!

That God is close to God but there is only one God and no ind has seen him!!!!???

No one has seen the God that they see as Jesus… Thomas saw God whom no man has ever seen - yet ten other greater disciples did not see God standing in front of them in the upper room or roasting fish on the beach???

 

[Dogknox20]

STILL rambling nonsense!! By nonsense I mean you cannot back up any of your claims with scriptural proofs that God Almighty or His prophet, Jesus, said or even implied that Jesus is God – PROVE ME WTONG!!

The words of John 1:18 (especially those you highlighted in red) are NOT the words of God Almighty or His prophet, Jesus – those are the words of the writer who wrote the Book of John. Heck, the writer of the Book of John does not even acknowledge Jesus miraculous birth from the womb of his mother, Mary, as did the writers of the earlier Synoptic Gospels.

Then again, time and time again, you have proven that your belief that Jesus is God is based on the words of other people, NOT on the words of God Almighty or His prophet, Jesus. You have no integrity if you CANNOT support your belief from the words of God Almighty or His prophet, Jesus. So, Dogknox20, STOP talking NONSENSE and show some integrity!!

.
All the scriptures are the words of God... All of the scriptures are the Inspired words of God!
Christians have always worshiped Jesus because "Jesus is God"!

Matthew 28:9 Suddenly Jesus met them. “Greetings,” he said. They came to him, clasped his feet and worshiped him.
Jesus lets them worship him! Jesus never stops the worship of himself!

Matthew 14:13 Then those who were in the boat worshiped him, saying, “Truly you are the Son of God.”
Jesus lets them worship him! Jesus never stops the worship of himself!
Worship is ONLY FOR GOD!

Matthew 4:10 Jesus said to him, “Away from me, Satan! For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.’”

Christians rejected the man Arius because he taught Jesus is not God! Arius was NOT a Christian anymore he was removed from among Christians because of his False Teaching!
Christians have always worshiped Jesus because "Jesus is God"!

 

[Dogknox20]

The protestant churches, who also call themselves "Christian", apparently believes differently. They take Matthew 16:16-18 as believing that, "thou are Christ, the son of the living God", is the foundational rock (petra), in which the church is built. Both are wrong, but they both call themselves "Christian". The petra, that the church is built on, is the spirit of revelation/prophesy, in which, "blessed are you, Simon Bar Jonas, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.". (Matthew 16:17)

.
2ndpillar Right you are.... The PROTESTERS: They take a different meaning on many verses!
Each Protestant person is a Little pope onto themselves! They ALONE are the AUTHORITY to understand each verse thus you have a plethora of different interpretations! They believe in the: "Man Made Tradition of Scriptures ALONE are all we need"!
They these "DE-Formers" interpret the scriptures as they see fit.. You will drive yourself Whack-Oh if you try to understand them!

YES.. They Call themselves Christians! And YES Catholics call them Christians because they believe "Jesus is God" they also worship Jesus! Christians have ALWAYS worshiped Jesus!

"blessed are you, Simon Bar Jonas, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but my Father who is in heaven."
God; The Father from heaven... Kept Peter from error! God made sure Peter got it right.. God is watched over Peter and NOW FOREVER His One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church from heaven!
20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

God "I AM"!