What are the differences between God and Jesus Christ?

[Soapy]

When you say he was born of the holy spirit of God -- please explain what you mean by that.

I’m not sure that this should need explaining… The verse says it all:

• ‘The Holy Spirit will overshadow the virgin and therefore the child that will be born will be holy, and called the Son of God’ (paraphrased for convenience)

I really really can’t see where any explanation is required!!

But nevertheless: The child, who was to be named ‘Jesus’ (which is actually “Joshua”), is induced by the Holy Spirit of God (God’s Holy Spirit… the spirit of God, Gods active force).

Because the egg of the virgin is thus enlivened, the embryo is SINLESS, HOLY, RIGHTEOUS (I believe I said all this before!!) because the spirit of God is holy…

An egg enlivened by the spirit of the sperm of sinful man is likewise enlivening a child with inherited sin.

As I pointed out, Adam’s body (akin to the egg of the virgin) was enlivened by the spirit of God. Therefore Adam was enlivened Holy, Righteous and sinless… until he did sin!!

A human child of human parents is like all human beings, and because of Adam, sinful.

Adam and Jesus were not created from two human beings. They were created by means of the Holy Spirit of God… thus they were both Sons of God (Adam, until sin was found in him! Jesus, however remained sinless all his life - and beyond!)

The birth of Jesus fulfilled the scripture prophesy FROM GOD that salvation would come by way of the SEED OF A WOMAN…

What is the SEED of a woman?

The scriptures states that the child WILL BE (or more strongly, SHALL BE) called, ‘Son of God’. It did not say that the child ‘IS THE SON OF GOD’…!

To he proved as the Son of God, Jesus had to PERFORM in every way that affords that title. And he did… Jesus ‘Resisted sin and loved righteousness’.
He also did everything that his heavenly Father taught him and showed him to do…

THAT is the definition of a SON:

• ‘To do what his Father shows him to do: to do the works of his Father’…

And in Jesus’ case, his Father is GOD… YHWH!

Adam, likewise, until he sinned, carried out every works that God taught him and showed him and commanded him to do: A son of God.

More precisely: A human Son of God… because the heavenly, holy, righteous, and sinless angels are ALSO Sons of God… but precisely, Spirit Sons of God, Spirit Sons who do exactly and precisely what God commands them to do!

 

[YoursTrue]

The 3 synoptic Gospels.
Authors opinions are not authoritative, unless you make them so.
Who is John? The answer is, that we don't rightly know

Upon consideration, and possibilities of translational questions, I consider the holy scriptures to be as they say they are: inspired of God. So you believe the 3 synoptic gospels as accurate, but not that ascribed to John. ? I have not really looked into this matter, but then might I conclude that you believe the writings in the gospels of Matthew, Luke, and Mark, but not John, is that correct?

 

[YoursTrue]

I’m not sure that this should need explaining… The verse says it all:

• ‘The Holy Spirit will overshadow the virgin and therefore the child that will be born will be holy, and called the Son of God’ (paraphrased for convenience)

I really really can’t see where any explanation is required!!

Since he was born of holy spirit, and Mary was not impregnated by a man, tell me what you think that means insofar as being a son of God. I mean, you don't have to, of course, but it would be helpful if you would at least try to explain the meaning of that in reference to his birth. Thank you.

 

[YoursTrue]

A smart creator would’ve made it right the first time.

He did make it right. Adam and Eve had what is known as free will. God gave them the ability to choose, and they did.

 

[YoursTrue]

The 3 synoptic Gospels.
Authors opinions are not authoritative, unless you make them so.
Who is John? The answer is, that we don't rightly know

What do you think this means?
Colossians 1:14-17, referring to Jesus:
"who delivered us out of the power of darkness, and translated us into the kingdom of the Son of his love; 14 in whom we have our redemption, the forgiveness of our sins: 15 who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation"

 

[muhammad_isa]

..might I conclude that you believe the writings in the gospels of Matthew, Luke, and Mark, but not John, is that correct?

More or less..
John is of a very different style to the other 3. It includes a lot of opinions of the author, and follows a particular agenda. It is thought that it was probably written in order to refute other texts, such as the Gospel of Thomas, for example. It is sectarian in nature, although orthodox Christians don't see it as such, because they have been brought up to believe that the Bible is the complete truth.

God, the Most High, knows best. He guides whomsoever He wills, and leaves astray whomsoever He wills.
It is all about our intentions. G-d knows us better than we know ourselves. He is aware of what we proclaim and what we hide.
He is the Fairest of all Judges. It is incumbent on us to seek truth with sincerity. That is the main thing.

 

[muhammad_isa]

What do you think this means?
Colossians 1:14-17, referring to Jesus:
...
"who delivered us out of the power of darkness, and translated us into the kingdom of the Son of his love; 14 in whom we have our redemption, the forgiveness of our sins: 15 who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation"

Somebody asked me recently what this means..

5 Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus,
6 who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God,
7 but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men.
8 And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross.
-Phillipeans 2-

..and I replied "I don't know".
It looks like philosophical nonsense to me.

Some verses are difficult to interpret. In any case, much of the NT is ABOUT Jesus "according to Paul".
I have nothing against Paul, but he is not authoritative as far as I'm concerned. He was not a prophet or companion of Jesus.
He can be mistaken about some things. He was a Hellenistic Jew, albeit educated by Pharisees.

 

[YoursTrue]

The same could be said about Christians and Muslims.
Many of us don't pay heed to our religion. We just pay lip-service and attend wedding and funerals.

Why pick on Jews?
Ah .. yes. It is about the Sanhedrin and their persecution of Jesus, for example.

Look at the world today. Nothing changes .. does it?

i.e. the G7 .. The Group of Seven is an inter-governmental political forum consisting of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States.

..and we all know about the Book of Revelation, I assume..

9 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.
10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.
11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.
12 And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.
13 These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast.
14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.
15 And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.
16 And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire.
17 For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled.
18 And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.
-Bible Book of Revelation 17-

It's not that far off now..
The signs are all out. Nations are aligning themselves.
It is about libertarian [whore] v authoritarian [ beast ]

The believers are neither one or the other .. they will be the "chosen", the faithful, and fight with Jesus, peace be with him.

There is so much in the Bible that has helped me once I began to read and understand it.

 

[YoursTrue]

Somebody asked me recently what this means..

5 Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus,
6 who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God,
7 but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men.
8 And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross.
-Phillipeans 2-

..and I replied "I don't know".
It looks like philosophical nonsense to me.

Some verses are difficult to interpret. In any case, much of the NT is ABOUT Jesus "according to Paul".
I have nothing against Paul, but he is not authoritative as far as I'm concerned. He was not a prophet or companion of Jesus.
He can be mistaken about some things. He was a Hellenistic Jew, albeit educated by Pharisees.

Certainly Paul was not perfect. It seems clear to me from his writings that he met Jesus as he said on the road to Damascus. As an accurate account of his experience, it rings true, Paul's words are not made up even though he was accused of being insane during his lifetime as he recounted what happened. In certain matters, there is nothing to disprove certain things and many reasons to support them. P have every reason to believe Paul's writings are in harmony with realistic thinking about religion and his faith, before and after he had that miraculous encounter with Jesus, that is, the resurrected Jesus..
The scripture you quote from 2 Philippians, "Being in the form of God" doesn't mean that he IS God as we generally apply the word.
Notice how The American Standard Version translation puts it, which makes it different in application from the King James Version. "Who, existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped" He became - a man. He did not consider grasping or grabbing equality with God. As humans, we are limited. But Jesus was faithful unto death
Who Is Jesus Christ in the Bible? (jw.org)

 

[Soapy]

Since he was born of holy spirit, and Mary was not impregnated by a man, tell me what you think that means insofar as being a son of God. I mean, you don't have to, of course, but it would be helpful if you would at least try to explain the meaning of that in reference to his birth. Thank you.

The Bible scriptures tells us what this means. And I have outlined it twice now in this short dialogue with you.

Adam was born of the Holy Spirit … He was not a person born of humanity (Procreation) but of the pure spirit of the holy sinless and righteous God: YHWH. In being this born … and in following all the commands, directives, orders, requests, … the works of God, his spirit Father, he was therefore, SON OF GOD.


A ‘True’ Son is one who does the works of his Father. That is what it means be ‘SON’. Not like the Trinitarians try to portray : that being a Son just means he is LIKE his Father. ‘LIKE’ us a weak word which gives room for frailties. A true Son has no frailties… ‘He IS a Son…’

So Adam did all that God commanded him until he fell to sin. Falling to sin made him no longer human Son of God. He chose to go against his fathers commands and directives and his Father punished him for it …

The rest of the scriptures is concerning the redemption from Adam’s sin by the raising up of another Son of God. As it is said in the scriptures:

• ‘He taketh away the first and establishes a second’

And, indeed, Jesus is called, ‘The second (or explicitly, the LAST) Adam, because no other man in humanity would be born that way.

Can I ask if you agree with this so far.

So what of Jesus ’ birth?

Jesus was not born from humanity, a procreation. He was born supernaturally by the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit OF GOD.

This is a CREATION!!

Jesus was prophesied TO BE CALLED ‘Son of God’.
Why?

Why was Adam called, ‘Son of God’ (see above!)

Did Jesus do what was required to fulfil the role of ‘Son of God’?

Did he pass the test of temptation - and pass - in opposition to Adam who failed??

Why is this hard to understand?

Why is this hard to believe?

Where in Scriptures does it say Jesus pre-existed?

Who taught you that?

Nowhere in scriptures does it say Jesus pre-existed!!

Try to prove your claim??

And then align those ‘claims’ with the rest of scriptures…. It won’t fit…. You would have to start being disingenuous and ignoring righteous scriptures!

That, my friend, is called: ‘Grieving the Spirit of Truth’.

If you grieve truth…. There is no hope!!!

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

There is a big difference between creating something like a puppet and fathering something like a son. If a man made 100 puppets and told people he had 100 sons, he would be treated for mental illness. God created Adam God fathered Jesus. Jesus is God's son, Adam is not.

 

[Soapy]

There is a big difference between creating something like a puppet and fathering something like a son. If a man made 100 puppets and told people he had 100 sons, he would be treated for mental illness. God created Adam God fathered Jesus. Jesus is God's son, Adam is not.

‘God fathered Jesus’?

Where did you learn that from?

Spiritual fatherhood is a creation.

For sinful man to become Sons of God they must be reborn by the Holy Spirit … they are then a NEW CREATION …

Adam was the first created human.

Jesus is the replacement created human.

Jesus is the sinless prototype for which all sinful mankind must be recreated to conform to his prototype.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

‘God fathered Jesus’?

Where did you learn that from?

Spiritual fatherhood is a creation.

For sinful man to become Sons of God they must be reborn by the Holy Spirit … they are then a NEW CREATION …

Adam was the first created human.

Jesus is the replacement created human.

Jesus is the sinless prototype for which all sinful mankind must be recreated to conform to his prototype.

Where did I learn God fathered Jesus? I think the Bible says God's spirit came upon Mary and she became pregnant and gave birth to Jesus. When someone or something causes a woman to become pregnant, that is how a son is born. When someone or something creates a puppet or something, that is NOT how a son is born. God made Adam from the dust of the earth like a man might make a statue from clay. God did not have a son in Adam just like the statue is not the son of the person who made it.

 

[Soapy]

Where did I learn God fathered Jesus? I think the Bible says God's spirit came upon Mary and she became pregnant and gave birth to Jesus. When someone or something causes a woman to become pregnant, that is how a son is born. When someone or something creates a puppet or something, that is NOT how a son is born. God made Adam from the dust of the earth like a man might make a statue from clay. God did not have a son in Adam just like the statue is not the son of the person who made it.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

You have no idea what the word, ‘Father’, means.

You have no idea how the application of the word, ‘Father’, is applied Scripturally.

Just for the purpose of educating you, here is the definition of ‘Father’:

1. ‘He who creates [something that did not already exist]
2. ‘He that brings into being [that which was not previously in being]
3. ‘He that gives life [to something that did not previously have life]
4. ‘He that is the Head [of an organisation, group, society, or individuals]

Now check which of the explicit definitions apply in any situation.

A person who CREATES something new is said to be ‘The Father ….’ of that thing he created.

Alexander Graham Bell is said to be ‘The Father of the Telephone’. It doesn’t mean the telephone is a offspring of Graham… the telephone is not a living entity… let alone a human entity. But the saying still applies: He gave LIFE to the telephone.

A Father is HEAD of the household…

God created all things… He is the FATHER of all Fathers…!

Jesus is prophesied to be ‘The Eternal Father’ because at the end of time, at the judgement seat, it is he that will judge angels and mankind, and GIVE ETERNAL LIFE to those whom he deems worthy!!

Because he GIVES (eternal) LIFE to them, he is their ETERNAL FATHER!

He is also THE HEAD of all MANKIND… he will be their FATHER, and we will be his subjects.

We are all ‘children of God’ … GOD IS OUR FATHER!

However, We do not all conform to Sonship as we do not all ‘Follow the Spirit of the Father’, our Father, God in Heaven: YHWH. But we are called to aspire to be so… and his Son of humanity who does all he commands, Jesus, is the template and guide.

 

[muhammad_isa]

I think the Bible says God's spirit came upon Mary and she became pregnant and gave birth to Jesus. When someone or something causes a woman to become pregnant, that is how a son is born.

No. That is metaphorical. G-d is not a person, and did not father a child as in "had intercourse with Mary".
Being the "son of G-d" is not meant in that context.

 

[Soapy]

No. That is metaphorical. G-d is not a person, and did not father a child as in "had intercourse with Mary".
Being the "son of G-d" is not meant in that context.

I wouldn’t take that poster seriously. They are just being an annoying devils advocate!!… in my opinion.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

No. That is metaphorical. G-d is not a person, and did not father a child as in "had intercourse with Mary".
Being the "son of G-d" is not meant in that context.

Who gets to decide what context. Why is your belief better than anyone else. If Mary got pregnant, something or someone made her pregnant. Intercourse? God's power? What?

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

I wouldn’t take that poster seriously. They are just being an annoying devils advocate!!… in my opinion.

Alexander Graham Bell may be called the father of the telephone but no one would say that the telephone was his son. God is the father of Jesus and Jesus is his son because a woman named Mary had a baby. Anyone who can't see the difference might need a devil's advocate to teach him something.

 

[rational experiences]

Men. Humans think.

They want to practice science. As natural is not science.

They don't accept natural life.

They want invention and technology.

No natural human owned a choice as group bullies forced it upon life.

Is the human just a man scientists real answer

Then we ask him. What are their theists using life human and baby sacrificed for?

Jesus incidence he references as a thesis for science.

He says I will find my machine signals as a trace.

What machine signals?

My old pyramid signals with temple he says.

Oh. Was that Jesus life of man sacrificed?

No says the liar.

O earths is sciences practice first God. To build a machine.

First evil mans mind teaching God is not Jesus liar. God the stone is not a gas.

Then CH you know is an evaluated CH gas. A state

Is and does that gas own the body earths heavens? As natural status the body heavens?

No says our life destroyer.

So why did a scientist name the planet heavens the heavens for? Reasoned as it is not science. It is a huge body of Multi various reactions. Not just one state.

Holy heavens he preached is not a man's scientific thesis. 100 per cent ignored today by science.

What he is contemplating causing.

The difference between God and Jesus

Now ask consciousness of man why did you challenge the scientist with this question. Real answer as we know he is trying to destroy life.

 

[Soapy]

Alexander Graham Bell may be called the father of the telephone but no one would say that the telephone was his son. God is the father of Jesus and Jesus is his son because a woman named Mary had a baby. Anyone who can't see the difference might need a devil's advocate to teach him something.

So you are saying that God had sex with Mary and this produced a son, Jesus?