What Makes Jesus The Son Of God.The Son Of God Theory.

[Popeyesays]

Popeye, have a can of spinach, you sound as if you need it..........

Canned spinach? Yuck! Fresh spinach, Yum!

Did God create Jesus as a man would? Or was the conception simply a product of His will?
One is ridiculous, the other is the point. If He was begotten by the will of God, Christians and Muslims have one less thing to argue about, for one thing.

Regards,
Scott

 

[joeboonda]

I must agree with Blueman, I believe from reading the Bible, in the Deity of Christ, and that his goings forth are from everlasting. He is not a created being, he is the only begotten son of God. John 3:16, he was in the beginning with God, and he was God and by all him all things were made that were made,John 1:1... and by him all things consist, and he is above all things.Colossians ch.1... He said that before Abraham was, I AM. He made himself equal with and one with God, and the Bible says he was God, "Without controversy great is the mystery of Godliness, GOD was manifest in the flesh...I Timothy 3:16

But I think this thread has strayed off topic a bit.

 

[joeboonda]

Please understand that I do believe the Word is made flesh in Jesus, but I believe the same Word was made flesh in Abraham, Moses, Krshna, Zoroaster, Buddha, Muhammed, the Bab and Baha`u'llah (and others as well - some lost in history).

All these people did NOT teach the same things, they taught differently about major issues, like all Budhists do not believe in God, Muhammad spread his religion by the sword, and his God does not have the same attributes as the Chrisian God, and they do not believe that Christ was crucified for our sins, they all believe very differently on important doctrines and ideas. I do not believe they are all right, and I believe a person can know the truth from error if he is willing to learn. Jesus is the way and the truth and the life, no man comes to the Father but by him, that is either true or false, no inbetween.

 

[blueman]

I think you meant "moot" point, a mute point would be one that no one has presented or spoken.

Please understand that I do believe the Word is made flesh in Jesus, but I believe the same Word was made flesh in Abraham, Moses, Krshna, Zoroaster, Buddha, Muhammed, the Bab and Baha`u'llah (and others as well - some lost in history).

Now, do you belive that God's DNA was transmitted to Mary and made Jesus?
Main Entry: be·get
Pronunciation: bi-'get
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): be·got /-'gät/; also be·gat /-'gat/; be·got·ten /-'gä-t&n/; or -got; -get·ting
Etymology: Middle English begeten, alteration of beyeten, from Old English bigietan -- more at [size=-1]GET[/size]
1 : to procreate as the father : [size=-1]SIRE[/size]
2 : to produce especially as an effect or outgrowth
- be·get·ter noun

So, which is it, sperm or God's will?

Regards,
Scott

In the beginning was the Word (Jesus) and the Word (Jesus) was with God and the Word (Jesus) was God.

The Word became flesh and dealt among us. That was speaking to the incarnation of God The Son to dwell amongst the people in the flesh. The comparison to Abraham, Moses and others is not an apples to apples comparison. Far from it.

 

[Popeyesays]

In the beginning was the Word (Jesus) and the Word (Jesus) was with God and the Word (Jesus) was God.

The Word became flesh and dealt among us. That was speaking to the incarnation of God The Son to dwell amongst the people in the flesh. The comparison to Abraham, Moses and others is not an apples to apples comparison. Far from it.

Here's the actual quote from the Gospel of John.

1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
1:4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
1:5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
(King James Bible, John)

There is no "Jesus" in quotes in the Gospel of John at this point. What was the "Word"?
I believe the Word was the Primal Cause for all Creation, God's command "BE!". And that Word has been renewed each time it is made flesh.

""The Word was with God." The Christhood means not the body of Jesus but the perfection of divine virtues manifest in Him. Therefore, it is written, "He is God." This does not imply separation from God, even as it is not possible to separate the rays of the sun from the sun. The reality of Christ was the embodiment of divine virtues and attributes of God. For in Divinity there is no duality. All adjectives, nouns and pronouns in that court of sanctity are one; there is neither multiplicity nor division. The intention of this explanation is to show that the Words of God have innumerable significances and mysteries of meanings -- each one a thousand and more.""
(Abdu'l-Baha, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 155)
"Through them are manifested the signs of sanctity in the realities of all things and the tokens of oneness in the essences of all beings. Through them are revealed the elements of glorification in the heavenly realities and the exponents of praise in the eternal essences. From them hath all creation proceeded and unto them shall return all that hath been mentioned. And since in their inmost Beings they are the same Luminaries and the self-same Mysteries, thou shouldst view their outward conditions in the same light, that thou mayest 34 recognize them all as one Being, nay, find them united in their words, speech, and utterance."
(Baha'u'llah, Gems of Divine Mysteries, p. 33)

I understand that a Christian is devoted to Christ, and that's proper, but the "light" is the "light" from whatever lamp it may shine.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Popeyesays]

All these people did NOT teach the same things, they taught differently about major issues, like all Budhists do not believe in God, Muhammad spread his religion by the sword, and his God does not have the same attributes as the Chrisian God, and they do not believe that Christ was crucified for our sins, they all believe very differently on important doctrines and ideas. I do not believe they are all right, and I believe a person can know the truth from error if he is willing to learn. Jesus is the way and the truth and the life, no man comes to the Father but by him, that is either true or false, no inbetween.

Many Buddhists believe in God, but the importance in Buddhism is individual enlightenment, not God.

Muhammed forbade spreading His religion by the sword.
"Verily, we cause to live, and we cause to die. To us shall all return.
On the day when the earth shall swiftly cleave asunder over the dead,
will this gathering be easy to Us.
We know best what the infidels say: and thou art not to compel them.
Warn then by the Koran those who fear my menace." Surah 50, Rodwell Tr.

"Let there be no compulsion in Religion. Now is the right way made
distinct from error. Whoever therefore shall deny Thagout and believe in God -
he will have taken hold on a strong handle that shall not be broken: and God
is He who Heareth, Knoweth.
God is the patron of believers: he shall bring them out of darkness
into light."
(The Qur'an (Rodwell tr), Sura 2 - The Cow)

"Verily, of the people of the Book are some who do believe in God, and in what has been revealed to you, and what was revealed to them, humbling themselves before God, and selling not the signs of God for a little price. These shall have their reward with their Lord; verily, God is quick at reckoning up."
(The Qur'an (E.H. Palmer tr), Sura 3 - Imran's Family)

Regards,
Scott


Those who allowed themselves to compell anyone to follow Muhammed were violating the teachings of Muhammed, much as those who claim to make war in the name of Jesus are violating the commandments of Jesus. One cannot judge the prophet by the misdeeds of His followers.

 

[Deut 13:1]

A lot of people think there were five authors at different times who produced the Pentateuch: one who is called "J" because he is associated with the individual who uses YHVH as the name of God, another, "E" who routinely names God "Elohim", a third, "D" the author of Deuteronomy, a fourth, "P" who wrote material of interest to the priesthood, and a fifth' "R" who redacted the whole work in the second century BCE.

Do you have some link as to someone who thinks this? This seems pretty idiotic and made up...

There are multiple tellings of the same story, twice for the Creation,[/quote]Let's start here... two different creation stories? What is the 2nd?

I believe that Isaiah referred tomore than one instance of the birth of "Emmanuel" one historically associated with Ahaz POSSIBLY, because there is not much mention of this wondrous son of Ahaz afterwards, and the other referring to the birth of Jesus.

What evidence in scripture supports this? Isaiah is clearly talking to ONE person about a sign that the L-rd shall give HIM, a sign that symbolizes that King Ahaz no longer needs to fear Israel and the other country that are about to attack.

The Gospel, the Qur'an, the Qayyum'l Asma and the Kitab`i Iqan all tell me that He was conceived by the will of God upon Mary. SO I have no doubt. I do not believe all the prophecies of Isaiah were fulfilled by Christ, many of the referred to Baha`u'llah.[/quote]Never read them, but do you believe everything that has 4 different sources?

 

[spacemonkey]

Muhammad spread his religion by the sword

Are you trying to say Christians are not guilty of this?

 

[Pah]

Do you have some link as to someone who thinks this? This seems pretty idiotic and made up...

Karen Armstrong in History of God. No link unless you consider a trip to the library a link.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_tora.htm
"..there is hardly a biblical scholar in the world actively working on the [authorship] problem who would claim that the Five Books of Moses were written by Moses." R.E. Friedman. 2

"...it has long been recognized that...[Moses] cannot have been the author, and that the Pentateuch is in fact anonymous." D.J.A. Clines. 3

http://mb-soft.com/believe/txs/genesis.htm
Although Moses has traditionally been considered the author of Genesis, modern scholars generally agree that the book is a composite of at least three different literary strands: J (10th century BC), E (9th century), and P (5th century). The interpretation of the book has led to many controversies. One of the most difficult problems has been distinguishing historical fact from symbolic narration intended to convey a religious message.

J J M Roberts

http://mb-soft.com/believe/txs/genesis.htm * "J", named for the Yahwist tradition who referred to God as Yahweh (translated "the Lord" in English). (The J comes from Yahweh sometimes being referred to as Jehovah.)

J seems to be a writer who focuses on humanity in his writing. His writing shows much greater sensitivity towards women than does E. He regularly used "Yahweh" as God's name. He describes God in anthropomorphic terms: God forms Adam from clay; he waked and talked with Adam and Eve in the garden; he spoke to Moses.

J lived in the southern kingdom of Judah, during an early period of Israel's history when many followed a nature/fertility religion. He may have been a member of the Judean court. He wrote a more or less complete story of the history of the Israelites from a Judean perspective. J was probably written between 848 BC (when King Jehoram gained power in Judah) and 722 BC when the Assyrians destroyed the northern kingdom Israel and took its people into exile. Some scholars date J to the 10th century BC.

* "E", named for the Elohist tradition who referred to God as Elohim, which was derived from the name of the Canaanite God El (translated as "God" in English)

E was a writer who writes about religious and moralistic concerns. He consistently used "Elohim" as God's name. He lived in the northern kingdom of Israel. He wrote a more or less complete story of the history of the Israelites from the perspective of the northern kingdom. E probably wrote between 922 and 722 BC. He may have been a priest from Shiloh who viewed Moses as his spiritual ancestor.

* "P", named for the Priestly class who were primarily concerned with history, genealogies, etc.

P was a writer who focused his writings on God. He added material from a priestly perspective. It discusses priests' lives, religious rituals, dates, measurements, chronologies, genealogies, worship and law. He was a priest who identified Aaron as his spiritual ancestor. He views God as a distant, transcendent deity, less personal than in J and E. P is sometimes harsh and critical. The words "mercy," "grace" and "repentance" do not appear in his writing; they appear about 70 times in J, E, and D. P was displeased with the work of J and E and wrote P as an alternative history.

P rejected the concepts of angels, dreams and talking animals that are seen in J and E. He believed that only Levites who were descended from Aaron could be priests. He lived after J, E and D because he was aware of the books of the Prophets which were unknown to the others. Lived when the country's religion reached a priestly/legal stage, before the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BC. He patterned his writing after the topics in J and E.

Two of the additional authors are:

* "D", the author of the book of Deuteronomy.

D was a writer who lived well after J and E, because he was familiar with later developments in Israel's history. He lived at a time when the religion of ancient Israel was in its spiritual/ethical stage, about 622 BC. He wrote almost all of the Book of Deuteronomy, as well as Joshua, Judges, 1 & 2 Samuel and 1 & 2 Kings. A second writer edited the original text after the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians in 587 BC. This writer added the last two chapters to 2 Kings and inserted short passages elsewhere to reflect the change in circumstances brought about by the Babylonian attack.

D lived in Judah - probably in Jerusalem. He was probably a Levitical priest - perhaps Jeremiah.

* "R", was a redactor who was an Aaronid priest. He joined the writings of J, E, P and D together into the present Pentateuch.

R.E. Friedman

Just a few short minutes with Google.

 

[Popeyesays]

Do you have some link as to someone who thinks this? This seems pretty idiotic and made up...

There are multiple tellings of the same story, twice for the Creation,

Let's start here... two different creation stories? What is the 2nd?

What evidence in scripture supports this? Isaiah is clearly talking to ONE person about a sign that the L-rd shall give HIM, a sign that symbolizes that King Ahaz no longer needs to fear Israel and the other country that are about to attack.

The Gospel, the Qur'an, the Qayyum'l Asma and the Kitab`i Iqan all tell me that He was conceived by the will of God upon Mary. SO I have no doubt. I do not believe all the prophecies of Isaiah were fulfilled by Christ, many of the referred to Baha`u'llah.[/quote]
Never read them, but do you believe everything that has 4 different sources?[/QUOTE]
No, but I accept Jesus, I accept Muhammed, I accept the Bab. I accept Baha`u'llah. They all tell me that Jesus is a Manifestation of God, therefore = to me at least - He is.

 

[Popeyesays]

Two Creation Stories in Genesis?
"
IN THE BEGINNING....TIMES TWO!

Major biblical scholars agree that there are two creation accounts found in the first two chapters of Genesis. One of the indicators that there indeed are two stories is the fact that both accounts describe similar events but in a different order. Additionally, in the first account the creator is always referred to as Elohim. In the second version, the creator is referred to by his personal name, Yahweh. The first version is very cosmic in scope, whereas the second is much more "down to earth." The first version is a self-contained narrative that begins with Genesis 1:1 and ends at Genesis 2:4a. The second version is also completely self-contained and begins at Genesis 2:4b. As this article continues, we will elaborate on the evidence that supports the hypothesis that two stories by two different authors are found in these opening chapters of Genesis."
http://members.aol.com/bbu85/nous.htm

 

[joeboonda]

Jesus made it very clear, he said he was the only way to heaven, he said he that believes in him has eternal life and he who does not goes to eternal punishment. He left no room for any other way to be saved. He told the disciples to go to all the world and tell them the good news that he paid for our sins and offers salvation as a free gift to anyone who believes in him. Those who reject him will have to pay for their own sins. Jesus as an infinite being only had to suffer a finite amount of time, and as he was sinless, death had no power over him. We being finite beings must pay for and infinite amount of time for our sins, if we do no accept his payment. This is his teaching, it is him or nothing.

 

[Deut 13:1]

Let's start here... two different creation stories? What is the 2nd?

What evidence in scripture supports this? Isaiah is clearly talking to ONE person about a sign that the L-rd shall give HIM, a sign that symbolizes that King Ahaz no longer needs to fear Israel and the other country that are about to attack.

The Gospel, the Qur'an, the Qayyum'l Asma and the Kitab`i Iqan all tell me that He was conceived by the will of God upon Mary. SO I have no doubt. I do not believe all the prophecies of Isaiah were fulfilled by Christ, many of the referred to Baha`u'llah.

Never read them, but do you believe everything that has 4 different sources?[/QUOTE]No, but I accept Jesus, I accept Muhammed, I accept the Bab. I accept Baha`u'llah. They all tell me that Jesus is a Manifestation of God, therefore = to me at least - He is.[/QUOTE]Do you accept the Torah? Isaiah? ect... Because they all say that Jesus didn't fullfill what he claimed.

 

[spacemonkey]

Jesus made it very clear, he said he was the only way to heaven, he said he that believes in him has eternal life and he who does not goes to eternal punishment. He left no room for any other way to be saved. He told the disciples to go to all the world and tell them the good news that he paid for our sins and offers salvation as a free gift to anyone who believes in him. Those who reject him will have to pay for their own sins. Jesus as an infinite being only had to suffer a finite amount of time, and as he was sinless, death had no power over him. We being finite beings must pay for and infinite amount of time for our sins, if we do no accept his payment. This is his teaching, it is him or nothing.

I'm sorry, but that is not the teachings of Jesus, nor is it on the topic of this thread. Jesus taught of peace, love, and tollerance, not of punishment and damnatiton.

 

[Popeyesays]

Never read them, but do you believe everything that has 4 different sources?

No, but I accept Jesus, I accept Muhammed, I accept the Bab. I accept Baha`u'llah. They all tell me that Jesus is a Manifestation of God, therefore = to me at least - He is.[/QUOTE]Do you accept the Torah? Isaiah? ect... Because they all say that Jesus didn't fullfill what he claimed.[/QUOTE]
No. I do believe that Jesus was speaking truth when He took the mantle of a Manifestation of God. I believe that Muhammed was correct when Muhammed confirmed that station to Jesus. I believed the Bab when He confirmed the mantle of Jesus. I believed Baha`u'llah when He confirmed it as well. Do you want quotes?

I believe in Moses as well . . . and Abraham . . . and accept the confirmation offered by the successive Manifestations of God.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Deut 13:1]

Two Creation Stories in Genesis?
"
IN THE BEGINNING....TIMES TWO!

Major biblical scholars agree that there are two creation accounts found in the first two chapters of Genesis. One of the indicators that there indeed are two stories is the fact that both accounts describe similar events but in a different order. Additionally, in the first account the creator is always referred to as Elohim. In the second version, the creator is referred to by his personal name, Yahweh. The first version is very cosmic in scope, whereas the second is much more "down to earth." The first version is a self-contained narrative that begins with Genesis 1:1 and ends at Genesis 2:4a. The second version is also completely self-contained and begins at Genesis 2:4b. As this article continues, we will elaborate on the evidence that supports the hypothesis that two stories by two different authors are found in these opening chapters of Genesis."
http://members.aol.com/bbu85/nous.htm

My understanding is that the "second" explains the first in more detail. There are no differences. Rabbi Rav Assi explained the "apparent" contradiction in Bereishis (genesis) 2:5. On the third day the herbs and seeds and trees started to grow, simply because of the fact that Hashem had commanded them to do. However, they didn't break the ground of the soil because Adam needed to pray for them. Furthermore, once he did pray, the rain fell and the trees, seeds, herbs, ect... finished their growth.

Here is what I want you to do: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0899060145/102-0273663-9357740?v=glance&n=283155&s=books&v=glance

Go buy that, it explains 99% of your "contradictions", it will save both of us a lot of time. Furthermore, the JPS also does a good job. It also translates the Hebrew more accurately in most places, in my opinion then the KJV or the NIV or the other Christian ones that translate with the mindset that everything has to do with Jesus. For example, they can't translate the word Lamo (plural) as Lo (singular) in Isaiah 53. There are tons of other places that they translate words wrong that I constantly here certain Christians throw around as proof that Jesus is something special.

 

[Deut 13:1]

No. I do believe that Jesus was speaking truth when He took the mantle of a Manifestation of God. I believe that Muhammed was correct when Muhammed confirmed that station to Jesus. I believed the Bab when He confirmed the mantle of Jesus. I believed Baha`u'llah when He confirmed it as well. Do you want quotes?

Let's stick to the TNK, as I'm not interested in what the Quaron has to say. (Please don't take offense...Although I'm not interested in what Jesus said either as from what I've seen.) You know, I used to think Christianity was like a father-son of Judaism, where one came from the other, but the more I read, it seems like it is distant 3rd cousins...

I believe in Moses as well . . . and Abraham . . . and accept the confirmation offered by the successive Manifestations of God.

Regards,
Scott

Do you believe in re-incarnation???

 

[Popeyesays]

Let's stick to the TNK, as I'm not interested in what the Quaron has to say. (Please don't take offense...Although I'm not interested in what Jesus said either as from what I've seen.) You know, I used to think Christianity was like a father-son of Judaism, where one came from the other, but the more I read, it seems like it is distant 3rd cousins...

Do you believe in re-incarnation???

Well, you won't find confirmation of Jesus, Muhammed, the Bab or Baha`u'llah in the Tanakh. Indications, hints, prophesies - yes, confirmation no.

But if you are going to ask me what I believe and why I believe it, be prepared for quotations from other sources.

Do I believe that you or I will be re-incarnated? No. But the Manifestations of God have more than one Station: In one Station they are identical, in another, each is a seperate human living at different times. The fact remains, that the same spirit illumines them all. So, in that one single, instance - yes, you might consider it reincarnation in some ways.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Deut 13:1]

Well, you won't find confirmation of Jesus, Muhammed, the Bab or Baha`u'llah in the Tanakh. Indications, hints, prophesies - yes, confirmation no.

But if you are going to ask me what I believe and why I believe it, be prepared for quotations from other sources.

Do I believe that you or I will be re-incarnated? No. But the Manifestations of God have more than one Station: In one Station they are identical, in another, each is a seperate human living at different times. The fact remains, that the same spirit illumines them all. So, in that one single, instance - yes, you might consider it reincarnation in some ways.

Regards,
Scott

Well, if Jews believe in reincarnation, why would Jesus change this belief when Duet 13:1-7 clearly says that if someone adds or subtracts the SMALLEST thing, he is a false prophet?

 

[joeboonda]

I'm sorry, but that is not the teachings of Jesus, nor is it on the topic of this thread. Jesus taught of peace, love, and tollerance, not of punishment and damnatiton.

I have read the new testament for since I was child, I am 40 now. Jesus warned about Hell more than he talked about Heaven. He said He that believes on him has eternal life, and he that does not, is condemned already because he has not believed in him, see John 3:16-end of chapter. He made it clear that he must die for our sins, and that by trusting him as saviour his righteousness is imputed unto us, otherwise we must stand before God in our own righteousness which is as filthy rags, and we shall not get into heaven. Read what he says, he is very clear about it.