Why do Christians accuse other religions of believing in false prophets?

[Rival]

People believed all sorts of things..
The church clergy "chose" what to believe, and it was endorsed politically by the Roman Empire.
They outlawed other creeds .. particularly those that were closer to Judaism.

Oh for.

The Gospels chosen were the earliest written and predated the Roman conversion to Christianity by over 200 years. The earliest Gospels, that is, the ones in the NT, affirm Jesus' divinity as I quoted above. No Roman figurehead had anything whatsoever to do with this.

 

[muhammad_isa]

The Gospels chosen were the earliest written and predated the Roman conversion to Christianity by over 200 years.

I don't agree with that argument.
The earliest Christians were all Jewish.

There were no Gospels [according to so-and-so] in the time of Jesus.

The earliest Gospels, that is, the ones in the NT, affirm Jesus' divinity as I quoted above.

You merely cherry-pick verses from the NT, interpreting them in light of a particular belief.
It is possible to cherry-pick verses that show that Jesus is NOT G-d.

..and then we have so-called synoptic Gospels and the seemingly 'gnostic' Gospel of John.
..we do no not know for sure who even authored the Gospels.

 

[Brian2]

Christ does not claim to be God. But He did say He was a Prophet and the Qur’an agrees with that.

Jesus said He is the Son of God and the Quran denies that even though it agrees with the virgin birth. The Quran seems inconsistent and confused about Jesus and who He is.

 

[Sand Dancer]

And then you wonder why Christians deny the claims of Bahaism?

Not all Christians see Jesus as Yahweh. He is the son of Yahweh.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Jesus said He is the Son of God and the Quran denies that even though it agrees with the virgin birth. The Quran seems inconsistent and confused about Jesus and who He is.

The Qur'an states that G-d has no mother and father, and no sons and daughters.
In the Bible, "son of G-d" is used in the OT in the sense of a person very close to G-d .. such as a prophet or saint.

..but Christians take "son of God" in a literal sense, and that is where the confusion arises.

 

[Kathryn]

You know what? All I can say is that I think we're all in for some serious surprises one day.

 

[Rival]

I don't agree with that argument.
The earliest Christians were all Jewish.

The scholarly consensus is that all the Gospels were written by the 1st century, with Mark possibly being pre-70. That means the author could have been contemporary with Jesus and probably was. If you want to argue with the first Gospel written that's up to you.

You merely cherry-pick verses from the NT, interpreting them in light of a particular belief.
It is possible to cherry-pick verses that show that Jesus is NOT G-d.

No I do not. I read the Gospels from a non-Christian POV (I'm not a Christian) and understand them in light of the Tanak. There's a reason the earliest Christians believed in Jesus' divinity - because the Gospels state clearly that this is the case. I don't know what more evidence people want. Jesus forgives sins, he raises the dead, he has control over the elements, he had a virgin birth, he's worshipped as a baby, he claims to be 'I Am', he 'teaches with authority, not like the scribes', he rises from the dead, he sends the Holy Ghost upon the disciples at Whitsun after he's dead, the Sanhedrin condemn him for blasphemously claiming to be God and Thomas full out calls Jesus 'my God'. By saying 'Before Abraham was, I Am' and walking on water (what prophet does that?) and saying 'I Am' Jesus is directly claiming divinity. Only people who are unfamiliar with the Tanak wouldn't know this, and those who are relying on translations without looking up the original Greek or going through commentaries. Even among scholars who don't believe the Synoptics portray Jesus as a pre-existent divine being, i.e., God, many do agree that Jesus was viewed as divine. See Ehrman on this:

Being adopted or born as the Son of God was a different way of being divine from being a pre-existent divine being made flesh. But it was still a highly exalted state of existence, above the human. And Jesus *is* that in the Synoptics. For years I had difficulty explaining features of the Synoptics that could be taken to point to his divinity in some sense. I certainly had explanations, but I was never completely satisfied with them. In these Gospels, for example, Jesus has the power to forgive sins, and he receives “worship.” These *can* be explained without thinking of Jesus as in any way divine, but it’s a little bit tricky, and at the end of the day, I think it’s easier to simply to say that these things are said of Jesus because the authors do think of him as in some sense an exalted divine being. It is not that he is equal with God (as in John), but that God has made him an exalted being, above a human character, divine.

In What SENSE is Jesus "God" in Matthew, Mark, and Luke? My Change of Mind | The Bart Ehrman Blog

In yesterday’s post I pointed out that if one asks about an early Christian text: “Does it portray Jesus as God,” then almost always if the answer is Yes (which it usually is), it has to be qualified: “Yes, in *some sense*. “ And the question is always, in *what*…

ehrmanblog.org

I disagree with much of what Ehrman says, but even he concedes that Jesus is clearly more than human, more than just a prophet, in the Synoptics.

..and then we have so-called synoptic Gospels and the seemingly 'gnostic' Gospel of John.
..we do no not know for sure who even authored the Gospels.

It doesn't matter who authored them, what matters is their theology; and their theology is high Christology, with Jesus as a divine being, however one wants to take that.

 

[Rival]

Not all Christians see Jesus as Yahweh. He is the son of Yahweh.

He is the Son in the sense that he is the 'only-begotten', but is also God-Himself. Those Christians who don't see Jesus as God are outside the mainstream, denying the earliest Creeds and Councils and I do not count those among Christians for the sake of my arguments; they are fringe groups and heretical sects that do not represent Christianity as understood by the vast majority of those who accept the Nicaean, Apostolic and Athanasian Creeds. If they are outside of those then I disclude them.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Even among scholars who don't believe the Synoptics portray Jesus as a pre-existent divine being, i.e., God, many do agree that Jesus was viewed as divine. See Ehrman on this:

..and that goes back to the so-called Arian controversy..
They did not believe in a pre-existent Jesus.

This is the argument of Trinitarians .. that Arians believed Jesus was divine, but not as divine as G-d.
It's rubbish, imo .. it implies that Arians believed in multiple divinities. I don't believe that. It is propaganda.

I disagree with much of what Ehrman says, but even he concedes that Jesus is clearly more than human, more than just a prophet, in the Synoptics.

"more than a prophet", could only mean Jesus is the One G-d, Yahweh.
What else could it mean?

Why would G-d pretend to be a man [one of His creation], when for thousands of years G-d sent prophets to teach His Oneness?

It doesn't matter who authored them, what matters is their theology; and their theology is high Christology, with Jesus as a divine being, however one wants to take that.

Gospel of John was included in the Bible due to its high Christology.
It starts off with philosophical prose, that Jesus was not reported to have said.
Jesus did not claim to have created the universe. Jesus worshiped "the Father" i.e. Yahweh

 

[muhammad_isa]

..they are fringe groups and heretical sects that do not represent Christianity as understood by the vast majority of those who accept the Nicaean, Apostolic and Athanasian Creeds. If they are outside of those then I disclude them.

You have learnt well. The Romans indoctrinated us all into thinking that non-Trinitarian beliefs are heretical.
I, for one, would rather not be infuenced by that, and feel free to be an "Arian".

 

[Rival]

You have learnt well. The Romans indoctrinated us all into thinking that non-Trinitarian beliefs are heretical.
I, for one, would rather not be infuenced by that, and feel free to be an "Arian".

Arians believe that Jesus is divine. Do you believe that?

 

[muhammad_isa]

Arians believe that Jesus is divine. Do you believe that?

Did you not read my previous post?

This is the argument of Trinitarians .. that Arians believed Jesus was divine, but not as divine as G-d.
It's rubbish, imo .. it implies that Arians believed in multiple divinities. I don't believe that. It is propaganda.

 

[Rival]

Did you not read my previous post?

This is the argument of Trinitarians .. that Arians believed Jesus was divine, but not as divine as G-d.
It's rubbish, imo .. it implies that Arians believed in multiple divinities. I don't believe that. It is propaganda.

A letter from the later fourth century Arian bishop of Milan, Auxentius (d. 374) still survives. It speaks of:

"One true God… alone unbegotten, without beginning, without end, eternal, exalted, sublime, excellent, most high creator, epitome of all excellence... who, being alone… did create and beget, make and establish, an only-begotten God [Christ].

Although Christ thus did not always exist with God the Father, he is nevertheless a pre-existent being, the Second Person of the Trinity, and the agent of creation. Christ is described as:

Author of all things [made to exist] by the Father, after the Father, for the Father, and for the glory of the Father... He was both great God and great Lord and great King, and great Mystery, great Light and High Priest, the providing and law-giving Lord, Redeemer, Saviour, Shepherd, born before all time, Creator of all creation.

Arianism - New World Encyclopedia

www.newworldencyclopedia.org

 

[muhammad_isa]

A letter from the later fourth century Arian bishop of Milan, Auxentius (d. 374) still survives..

Of course it does .. it supports the Trinitarian propaganda
..but what about all those documents that were ordered to be burnt..
..including Origen's original works.

There is no getting away from it. Arians were not Trinitarians.
They did not believe that Jesus is G-d.

 

[F1fan]

You know what? All I can say is that I think we're all in for some serious surprises one day.

Like Christians agreeing with each other? Or the Abrahamic religions unifying? Like religious texts making rational sense? These would be a surprise.

 

[Rival]

Of course it does .. it supports the Trinitarian propaganda
..but what about all those documents that were ordered to be burnt..
..including Origen's original works.

There is no getting away from it. Arians were not Trinitarians.
They did not believe that Jesus is G-d.

Of course they are not Trinitarians!

But, as the letter states, they believed Jesus is divine. I'm not sure you know what the Trinity is or how it works.

But I see nothing will convince you. Not even Arians themselves. There is no sect of Christianity that ever believed Jesus was just a prophet. Arians, Docetists, Eutyichans, Nestorians, Montanists, Pelagians, Gnostics, Sabellians, all believe Jesus is more than a prophet. You won't find otherwise.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Of course they are not Trinitarians!

Good, we agree on something.

But, as the letter states, they believed Jesus is divine. I'm not sure you know what the Trinity is or how it works.

I know all about the trinity, and how it "works"..

Perhaps you would like to tell us exactly HOW they believed Jesus is Divine..
..I mean, in what SENSE?

 

[Rival]

Good, we agree on something.


I know all about the trinity, and how it "works"..

Perhaps you would like to tell us exactly HOW they believed Jesus is Divine..
..I mean, in what SENSE?

Auxentius also preserved the creed that Ulfilas taught to his converts. It is likely that many of the Arian Christians among the Germanic tribes adhered to this confession, or something like it:

I believe that there is only one God the Father, alone unbegotten and invisible, and in His only-begotten Son, our Lord and God, creator and maker of all things, not having any like unto Him… And I believe in one Holy Spirit, an enlightening and sanctifying power...[who is] neither God nor Lord, but the faithful minister of Christ; not equal, but subject and obedient in all things to the Son. And I believe the Son to be subject and obedient in all things to God the Father."

That's how.

Arians also believe the Johannine Prologue, but believe Jesus was created. He is a created divine being; the first created being through which everything else was made.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Auxentius also preserved the creed that Ulfilas taught to his converts. It is likely that many of the Arian Christians among the Germanic tribes adhered to this confession, or something like it:

It is all polemic..
Trinitarians/Christians "preserved" what suited them, and destroyed that which didn't.
They had many centuries in which to enforce their creed.

As I previously remarked, I do not believe that Arians believed in multiple gods.
Trinitarians use that ploy, to denounce their enemy.
It is OBVIOUS that G-d is One, from the Bible .. and there were many, many so-called Arians .. even the term Arian
is used in a derogatory way. There is no reason to believe that Arian Christians were stupid!

..so they did NOT believe that Jesus is G-d, and they were NOT polytheist.
..so you do the math.

 

[Rival]

It is all polemic..
Trinitarians/Christians "preserved" what suited them, and destroyed that which didn't.
They had many centuries in which to enforce their creed.

As I previously remarked, I do not believe that Arians believed in multiple gods.
Trinitarians use that ploy, to denounce their enemy.
It is OBVIOUS that G-d is One, from the Bible .. and there were many, many so-called Arians .. even the term Arian
is used in a derogatory way. There is no reason to believe that Arian Christians were stupid!

..so they did NOT believe that Jesus is G-d, and they were NOT polytheist.
..so you do the math.

I don't think you know what Arianism is, but you know what you want it to be. I've literally quoted an Arian bishop. It's very convenient that all the 'pure' Arian material is now gone. Funny that. Arians believe in a divine Jesus and you're wrong here because of your Islamic bias. The Arians don't see themselves as polytheists either.

You're not even an Arian, you don't need to die on this hill.