Who IS "The Only TRUE God"- as Jesus put it?

[smokydot]

I don't buy it. I'd have to see proof that one Hebrew word addresses both situations, and then see proof that that one word is there for a reason, and not just because of the limitations of the language.

So the NT is not good enough for you? Amazing. . .

1 Co 11:31-32: "But if we judged (rendered decision on) ourselves, we should not thus be judged (chastised by God).
But when we are judged, we are being chastised by the Lord that we may not be condemned with the world."

"are judged" = "being chastised"
They aren't judged (decision), then chastised (decision executed).
To be judged is to be chastised.
Judging (judgment) here is chastisement, which Paul quickly goes on to explain is not, in this case, an execution of wrath on the condemned, but discipline of a child so they will turn from their sin and not be condemned.

 

[smokydot]

Any religion that claims to be the one true way, isn't.

And you know that how?

 

[smokydot]

The idea of trinity is a remnant of an ancient esoteric idea describing a "ray of creation" that proceeds thought, word, and deed and describes creator god as process. In the beginning was the word and the word was with god and the word was god.

A "trinity" is the testimony of the NT.

 

[smokydot]

I did not bother reading through everything...but I read enough to see that the original question was not being answered. The question: Did Jesus have a God? is answered in the affirmative. He cried out when upon the cross, "My God, My God, why have YOU forsaken me?"

Jesus, in his human nature, had a God--his Father.
He experienced profound separation from his Father on the cross so we wouldn't have to for our sin. Therein was his agony.
The absence of his Father's closeness in which he had always lived was staggering.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Those other "manifestations" are not mentioned, either in the texts, or in the Tradition. Therefore, they are not cogent to your argument with regard to the Trinity.

Yes, they are mentioned in the Bible and they are very well known!

Both the Return of John the Baptist and the Return of Christ were promised and They returned already, and the promises are fulfilled!
The Bab is the return of the John the Baptist and Baha'u'llah is the return of the Messiah. Both of them returned in the 19th centaury, at the End of the Age. All the signs of the End time has passed already, you name it!

Note that when Bible promised the 'Return', it is meant the return of the same spiritual quality, which is the manifestation of the attributes of God in the promised One.

for example consider, the return of the Elijah which He appeared as John the Baptist 2000 years ago.
"Return" is a spiritual reality, not a physical reality! That's why, the Elijah had returned as John the Baptist.

I Offer these quotes:


"Say, O followers of the Son! Have ye shut out yourselves from Me by reason of My Name? Wherefore ponder ye not in your hearts? Day and night ye have been calling upon your Lord, the Omnipotent, but when He came from the heaven of eternity in His great glory, ye turned aside from Him and remained sunk in heedlessness.

Say, did ye not hearken to the Voice of the Crier, calling aloud in the wilderness of the Bayán, bearing unto you the glad-tidings of the coming of your Lord, the All-Merciful? Lo! He is come in the sheltering shadow of Testimony, invested with conclusive proof and evidence, and those who truly believe in Him regard His presence as the embodiment of the Kingdom of God. Blessed is the man who turneth towards Him, and woe betide such as deny or doubt Him.

I never passed a tree but Mine heart addressed it saying: ‘O would that thou wert cut down in My name, and My body crucified upon thee.’ We revealed this passage in the Epistle to the Sháh that it might serve as a warning to the followers of religions. Verily, thy Lord is the All-Knowing, the All-Wise. " Selected from the Most Holy Table - Baha'u'llah

 

[InvestigateTruth]

when the image of the Sun is reflected in mirror, then when you look at the mirror, you see the Sun and you can say that is the Sun, even though it's mirror.
For the image of the Sun to appear in the mirror, the Sun doesn't physically move to the mirror, but only it's image is reflected.

Same concept of the Sun and Mirrors is applied to all Manifestations of God, including but not limited to Jesus!
Jesus is the Mirror!

That's not Biblical.

It is Biblical. Jesus said, "who ever see Me has seen the father. Also He said that "the father is greater than I am."
That means that Jesus is not the father, but He is a perfect image of the father.

Also the concept of Image of God is from Bible:

In whom the god of this world hath blinded the
minds of them which believe not, lest the light of
the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image
of God, should shine unto them. 4:5 Cor.

In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the
forgiveness of sins: 1:15 Who is the image of the
invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 1:16 Colo

 

[AK4]

when the image of the Sun is reflected in mirror, then when you look at the mirror, you see the Sun and you can say that is the Sun, even though it's mirror.
For the image of the Sun to appear in the mirror, the Sun doesn't physically move to the mirror, but only it's image is reflected.

Same concept of the Sun and Mirrors is applied to all Manifestations of God, including but not limited to Jesus!
Jesus is the Mirror!

Wow those who are not blinded by the christian myths can see it so clearly. thumbs up !!! The same thing you said here is the same parable that is said in the scriptures about the sun and the moon and the moon turning to blood etc etc. Frugals

 

[AK4]

Jesus is son of God, but not the only one:

"But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God,

even to them that believe on his name" John 1:13​

Right on!!

 

[AK4]

Regarding leaven being poisonous, do you have a source for that?
What is the difference between leaven and yeast? Of what is leaven composed?
You indicated otherwise in post #537.But Jesus is describing the kingdom there, he is not describing God.

Don't you see, the parable is one of a couplet, and both symbolize the same characteristic of the kingdom of God--its growth (Lk 13:18-21).

The first symbolizes the external growth of the kingdom: though the kingdom will seem to have an insignificant beginning, like the huge tree produced by the small mustard seed, it will eventually spread throughout the world.**

The second symbolizes the internal growth of the kingdom: the powerful influence of God's kingdom (the Holy Spirit) permeates one's whole life from the inside, just as a small amount of yeast permeates the whole lump from the inside.
It is hidden, like the leaven, quietly making its influence felt, without force or violence, until one day it will come out into the open, to be seen by all.
This is particularly relevant to those who thought the Messiah would overthrow the secular government.

There are some manifest problems with your interpretation. The parable clearly links the kingdom to the leaven and to the mustard seed.
1) Your interpretation of leaven makes the parable link the kingdom to corruption and uncleannes.

2) In order to make your linkage fit, you have to do some wrestling with its clear language (God became corrupt). But it's not about God. . .and it's not that abstruse.

3) Your interpretation sheds no real light on the nature of the kingdom--its hidden, quiet, non-violent influence from within, correcting the false messianic hopes of the time.
__________

**Ps 104:16-17; Eze 17:22-23, 31-36; 1 Kgs 17:6

Amen!!!!:clap

 

[sojourner]

Regarding leaven being poisonous, do you have a source for that?
What is the difference between leaven and yeast? Of what is leaven composed?
You indicated otherwise in post #537.But Jesus is describing the kingdom there, he is not describing God.

Don't you see, the parable is one of a couplet, and both symbolize the same characteristic of the kingdom of God--its growth (Lk 13:18-21).

The first symbolizes the external growth of the kingdom: though the kingdom will seem to have an insignificant beginning, like the huge tree produced by the small mustard seed, it will eventually spread throughout the world.**

The second symbolizes the internal growth of the kingdom: the powerful influence of God's kingdom (the Holy Spirit) permeates one's whole life from the inside, just as a small amount of yeast permeates the whole lump from the inside.
It is hidden, like the leaven, quietly making its influence felt, without force or violence, until one day it will come out into the open, to be seen by all.
This is particularly relevant to those who thought the Messiah would overthrow the secular government.

There are some manifest problems with your interpretation. The parable clearly links the kingdom to the leaven and to the mustard seed.
1) Your interpretation of leaven makes the parable link the kingdom to corruption and uncleannes.

2) In order to make your linkage fit, you have to do some wrestling with its clear language (God became corrupt). But it's not about God. . .and it's not that abstruse.

3) Your interpretation sheds no real light on the nature of the kingdom--its hidden, quiet, non-violent influence from within, correcting the false messianic hopes of the time.
__________

**Ps 104:16-17; Eze 17:22-23, 31-36; 1 Kgs 17:6

You seem to be doing an awful lot of thinking about this. You can't seem to get your head around it. But you're ignoring one thing: The distaste you feel when told that God became corrupt for us.

That's the point of parables. Parables are not exercises for our minds. They are exercises for our gut. They aren't supposed to make us think. They're supposed to make us feel. I'd say the parable has done exactly what it's supposed to do: It's made you feel something, and you don't like it, so you try to explain it away.

 

[sojourner]

corruption did not overtake him, he was not subject to corruption.

Your opinion here is heresy. Jesus did die. It's Biblical. he died and he was put in a grave. God became obedient to death, as Philippians tells us. Death is corruption.

Jesus is not personally linked to corruption and uncleanness.

He is if he was subject to death.

The parable of the leaven does not personally link Jesus to corruption and uncleanness

Of course it does.

There is some serious contra-Biblical stuff being alleged here regarding the parable of the leaven.

The parable of the leaven does not link God to corruption and uncleanness.

this is really sticking in your craw, isn't it!
Good. Very good.

 

[sojourner]

So the NT is not good enough for you?

Not if the translation obfuscates the original meaning.

 

[sojourner]

Yes, they are mentioned in the Bible and they are very well known!

Both the Return of John the Baptist and the Return of Christ were promised and They returned already, and the promises are fulfilled!

With all due respect for your religion, The Bible does not say that John was reincarnated as the Bab. That's a layer your religion has placed on the text that just is not there.
That's OK. We all have our interpretations, but this just isn't exegesis in any sense of the word. The early Christians didn't think that way, and neither did the Church as it wrestled with the Trinity.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

With all due respect for your religion, The Bible does not say that John was reincarnated as the Bab. That's a layer your religion has placed on the text that just is not there.

Did the Old Testimony say, that Elijah was reincarnated as John the Baptist?

The answer is NO.

Then how come you accepted it?

Old testimony simply said Elijah will be sent again:
Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD" -Malachi 4:1-5

How come John the Baptist was not mentioned in the Old Testimony?
That's just a layer that your religion placed on Old Testimony text, that isn't just there (by the way, I'm just using your way of reasoning!, Not that I think this reasoning is correct)

 

[smokydot]

It is Biblical. Jesus said, "who ever see Me has seen the father. Also He said that "the father is greater than I am."
That means that Jesus is not the father, but He is a perfect image of the father.

Jesus has both a human nature and a divine nature (son of Mary and Son of God).
In his human nature, he is a perfect image.
That's because in his divine nature, he is the same being as the Father, although not the same person as the Father. In his divine nature, he is another person, the Son.

Also the concept of Image of God is from Bible:

In whom the god of this world hath blinded the
minds of them which believe not, lest the light of
the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image
of God, should shine unto them. 4:5 Cor.

In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the
forgiveness of sins: 1:15 Who is the image of the
invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 1:16 Colo

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Jesus has both a human nature and a divine nature (son of Mary and Son of God).
In his human nature, he is a perfect image.
That's because in his divine nature, he is the same being as the Father, although not the same person as the Father. In his divine nature, he is another person, the Son.

Human has 2 nature. physical (natural body) and spiritual.

The Physical body of Christ, was no different than yours or mine. He had eyes, feet, hand, etc. exactly as you and everyone else have.
What made Him different than normal people was His spiritual nature.
It was His spirituality that was a perfect image of God, not His physical body.

 

[smokydot]

You seem to be doing an awful lot of thinking about this. You can't seem to get your head around it. But you're ignoring one thing: The distaste you feel when told that God became corrupt for us.

That's the point of parables. Parables are not exercises for our minds. They are exercises for our gut. They aren't supposed to make us think. They're supposed to make us feel. I'd say the parable has done exactly what it's supposed to do: It's made you feel something, and you don't like it, so you try to explain it away.

Methinks the Pot is calling the Kettle black (you can't seem get your head around it).

And I really can't get my head around "parables are not for our minds, parables are for 'feeling'."
How's that for novelty?

Parables are analogies. Analogies are for the mind.

So about what "feeling" is the parable of the mustard seed?
Or the hidden treasure, or the pearl of great price (Mt 13:44-45)?
Or the four kinds of soil (Mt 13: 3-16)?
Etc., etc., etc.

Your human reasoning is taking you far afield of the plain meaning of the NT.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Jesus did die. God became obedient to death... Death is corruption.

Again, It wasn't God who died, it was Jesus who died!

" For I am the LORD, I change not" Malachi 3:6

If we say, God died, that is to say, that God changed! and that would contradict with Bible, for God does not change.

 

[Maimonides]

I could never understand the God metamorphises (spellcheck?) complex. If God transformed himself as Jesus then the nature of God is dualistic no?

 

[AK4]

Do you guys realise that the whole bible is one giant parable?