Jesus is not God

rockmass
rockmass: The Trinity is illogical and unscriptural.
9 months ago Report
0
rockmass
rockmass: There is an overwhelming amount of evidence that Jesus is not God. That is why the majority of religious people whether Jewish, Muslim, and some Christians do not agree with Trinitarianism. Plus Jesus says too many things to indicate he is not God. The reasons Trinitarians use to prove Jesus is God are the very same reasons that could be used to prove he is not God.
9 months ago Report
0
SandraLee62
(Post deleted by rockmass 9 months ago)
rockmass
rockmass: Please do not post insults.
9 months ago Report
0
rockmass
rockmass: 1 Timothy 1:17 - "Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen."
Qualities that apply to God
James 1:13 - "Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:"
God incapable of sin
Luke 4:2 - "where for forty days He was tempted by the devil. He ate nothing during those days, and when they had ended, He was hungry."
Jesus capable of sin
Luke 22:43 - "Now an angel from heaven appeared to Him, strengthening Him."
Jesus needs to be strengthened.
Isaiah 40:26 - "Lift up your eyes on high And see who has created these stars, The One who leads forth their host by number, He calls them all by name; Because of the greatness of His might and the strength of His power, Not one of them is missing."
God has the strength of all the stars in the universe (in other words endless strength)

Many people have similarities.
One difference can separate one from another.
Jesus has too many differences, that distinguish him from being God.

God - King Eternal
Jesus - Begotten
God - immortal
Jesus - mortal
God - invisible
Jesus - visible
God - incapable of sin
Jesus - capable of sin
God - endless strength
Jesus - needs strength

Jesus is not God.
9 months ago Report
0
SandraLee62
(Post deleted by rockmass 9 months ago)
rockmass
rockmass: Please do not post insults.
9 months ago Report
0
Zanjan
Zanjan: In John 7:16, Jesus is quoted as saying this:

"My teaching is not My own, It comes from Him who sent Me. If anyone desires to do His will, he will know whether My teaching is from God or whether I speak on My own.…

John 12:49, Jesus says:

"I have not spoken on My own, but the Father who sent Me has commanded Me what to say and how to say it."


This language indicates the existence of two separate entities. However, they're not partners because Jesus is utterly submissive to God, taking no personal credit. Jesus is merely God's tool, His Servant, His mouthpiece.


Acts 7:55 referring to the person of Jesus

"“Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.”

Hebrews 1:3 referring to the Christ (rank, which holds the keys to heaven and hell)

"He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,"

Hebrews 12: 2 referring to the person Jesus

"looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God."

Jesus doesn't sit on the throne of God; God sits there. This is because God's throne is the heart. The attributes of God are reflected in our hearts. Jesus has a different place - He stands, then sits on the right side of God's hand.

Traditionally, there are two forces, represented as God's "hands" - the left hand is the destroyer and the right hand is the builder. We have a juxtaposition where Jesus is not one of God's hands, but lives beside God's hand.

Again, not partners or equals. Jesus is a friend of God, like Moses was.
(Edited by Zanjan)
9 months ago Report
1
Zanjan
Zanjan: The confusion about the reality of Jesus Christ is a direct result of the clergy's doctrine of the Holy Trinity. If one were to view this visual *only* as representing the paths of spiritual love, it would have done no harm. The view:

Down: The first kind of love is that which comes from God and is received by the people.

Sideways: The second kind of love is that which comes from the people and is directed to other people.

UP: The third kind of love is that which comes from the people and is directed to God.

Alas, that visual became entangled in words. However, God gave them 3 chances to get it right. Three times the charm!

On reading scriptures, one notes the flux in utterance, from First person to Second to Third person. This indicates which entity is speaking at that moment. Therefore, God can't be a ventriloquist.

Christ is the Mediator - only His ear hears the Voice of God directly because no man could understand it or bear it. To speak to the people without them perishing, God uses a Filter. In effect, the Christ translates what God has said into a language the people can understand, and in accordance with their own capacity. He does so without losing its beauty and power.

While Jesus was a man, who submitted to God, He was also aware He wasn't like any other man. He had to wait until God spoke. (refer to the wedding Jesus was invited to) When God did speak, He knew His time to be the Mediator had come. He had no choice in the matter because God decided it.

God doesn't take a wife or husband. Yet the Christ is compared to the bridegroom and the Revelation is compared to the bride. Then Jesus is compared to the bridegroom, and the church is compared to his bride. These relationships were described in terms the people were familiar with in their own world.
(Edited by Zanjan)
9 months ago Report
1
Zanjan
Zanjan: In Hebrews 1:3, we find language has its limitations. How do you express the indescribable?

"imprint of his nature"

Technically, God doesn't have a "nature" because He's not natural. He has "ways", a word that conveys movements. If "nature" is used in the figurative sense, we're saying that, as surely as it's the nature of fire to burn, it's the nature of God to create. Therefore, God must always be creating.

We can recognize how He does things. Since He's pre-existent, there's no way for Him to incorporate Himself into His creation. That logic escaped the pantheists.

Can a painter merge into his painting? Can a carpenter become the wood cabinet? No, he remains outside of it but creates it with love, skill and knowledge. The crafter's technique and style can be so striking, we could identify the object's creator without the signage.

As long as we're familiar with God's methods, we have the means to track Him when and wherever He moves. We don't need to see the animal to know which animal has made the imprints in the snow.

No living thing exists except that which God created. They are each and all a sign from Him. That which has life reflects His attributes, not the essence. God is incomprehensible but anyone can see and understand His attributes - even His enemies.

That's because we, ourselves, can reflect those same attributes........rather poorly, mind you, but still detectable under the dust. Like a mirror, the deeper the dust, the less visible.

9 months ago Report
0
shadowline
shadowline: Belief in the Trinity happened as a response - a devout one - to close study of the New Testament. And it is hardly surprising that it did. What else could have been made of the fact that throughout the New Testament you are hearing about the "Father", the "Son", and the the "Holy Spirit", is rather hard to see. Believers in Christ were inevitably drawn to the conclusion that their Scriptures were telling them that there were three persons making up the Godhead, and that their Saviour was one of them. It was the fact of the Trinity that they saw there. It didn't take the term to see that.
9 months ago Report
1
Zanjan
Zanjan: You'd have to work at it really hard to even imagine the Holy Spirit is an entity, and a nameless one at that. No Revelator has ever taught this but Christians weren't into scriptures from other religions, aside from the Old Testament...where that isn't found.

The populations were largely illiterate. Even most of the literate didn't have a Bible.
So, what was it the clergy were studying? If one had to hear by oral conveyance, I don't think you can call that a study. Nevertheless, one should still be able to distinguish between a living person and a type of power.

You might say that errors in logic would be an almost decent defense for the congregations, considering they relied so much on their clergy to know what they were talking about - where's the excuse now??

Billions of people have done a close study of the New Testament in print - its not that long - and millions have disagreed on numerous items. They've not been able to reconcile their opinions so whatever they've derived is from human perspectives......a facet, a sliver from the whole wont tell us what the object looks like. God is ONE so, doesn't have a perspective.

If there is truth in scripture, then it will be consistently the same across ALL scriptures. After all, if God is speaking HE chooses the words and makes it happen. He wont tell you anything that can't be proven again and again. That's why a lot had gone unsaid in very ancient scriptures - the people didn't have the means to prove it.


(Edited by Zanjan)
9 months ago Report
0
shadowline
shadowline: Billions of people have indeed done a close study of the New Testament. And it so happens that by far most of them see a teaching in it that there are three persons in God. I don't think that happens for no reason at all. From the point of view of faith, God did a perfectly good job of communicating that fact to humanity.
9 months ago Report
1
Zanjan
Zanjan: Let's look at the stats (they're a bit old) :

In 2012, there was an estimated 2.4 billion Christians in the world. 1.2 billion of these are Catholics (414,313 of them are priests). Meanwhile, 800 million are Protestants - that leaves the rest being another colour of only God knows what. I doubt it's the number of non-active Christians since we know the active ones are just a small core in any congregation.

Couldn't find stats on Ordained Protestant Ministers - one can estimate there's 1 for every 250 people since most churches are small congregations.

So, out of 2.4 billion Christians in the world, there are only 20 influential Christian scholars. If I generously estimate that less than 1/16 of the laity are well-versed in the whole Bible, that's about 150 million Christians world wide - the most ever in history.

Of the 4.6 billion Non-Christians on earth, there are countless serious students of the Bible. For sure, 2 billion of these are familiar with the New Testament because they comprise sucessive religions that require them to study the Bible. They've weighed in - none of those believe in the trinity.

All that said, the majority can err as grossly as the few. Faith isn't founded on numbers.

(Edited by Zanjan)
9 months ago Report
0
shadowline
shadowline: I'm not sure what any of that means. I was referring to the fact that throughout the history of belief in Christ, by far most believers were convinced that the New Testament was telling them that there are three persons in the Godhead, and that Christ is one of them. And as your statistics show, that is still true today. It is very exceptional for a believer in salvation through Christ to take any other view. Any other view is an eccentric view. Like it would be an eccentric view if a small group of Baha'is representing about 1% of the whole, believed that the Bab was the seal of the prophets and Baha'u'llah was a fake. The view of the generality would be that that minority were misunderstanding the faith. The same thing is true of Christianity, particularly on this matter, where the eccentric view is so small.
9 months ago Report
1
Zanjan
Zanjan: Well, as I've previously illustrated, the New Testament couldn't have been telling them that. Records say their clergy were.

In the third century, the priest, Tertullian, battled unsuccessfully against another priest, Praxeas, over applying the Trinity concept to Christianity. The majority of Christians didn't support Terullian's proposal during his lifetime.

At the first Council of Nicea, the initial form of the Creed was adopted by clerical VOTE... one voter, who could have turned the results, was murdered by one of the voters.

After two more Councils, 3 Priests finished the final wording of the Creed we see today. Altogether, it took a couple hundred years to emerge from the pile of debates. However, the issue just went underground, where the debate continued to rumble and re-surface on occasion. If anyone imagines it's been settled, they ought to rethink that.

"“Take heed that no one deceives you. For many will come in My name . . . and will deceive many” (Matthew 24:4-5).

It didn't take long for corruption to enter the church. Even Paul had to deal with it (as noted in various verses) but couldn't resolve it. The idea of the Trinity was a pagan concept; to get the pagans converted, the Priests used that idea to lure them into the fold, presenting it as "common ground". Thus, they took over Rome.
(Edited by Zanjan)
9 months ago Report
0
Zanjan
Zanjan: "it would be an eccentric view if a small group of Baha'is representing about 1% of the whole, believed that the Bab was the seal of the prophets and Baha'u'llah was a fake."

Wrong comparison on two counts: 1. if a Christian rejected Christ, they'd be excommunicated; so would a Baha'i. 2. No "group" of eccentric views exists in the Baha'i Faith.

Eccentric views arise among Christians because they're not a unified people to begin with. They just don't seem to understand how unity works. If one objects to the teachings, why do they stay in this religion?

There's no way any two people will understand all the scriptures the same way as each other - impossible. So, there must be continuous education and hands on experience to learn, permitting individuals the freedom to have their own relationship with God.

Nevertheless, the line has to be drawn somewhere - you can't have idiots teaching the faith and causing disruptions and strife. When they do, action has to be taken - the right action is based on justice.

For Christians, "interpretation of scriptures" was the hill they chose to die on.

Whereas, the Baha'i Faith has a powerful New Covenant; it rests on obedience to the laws, delivered by Baha'u'llah. God forbids followers to interpret scriptures for others. Anyone who does and wont quit when reminded will be administratively disciplined. That means, they're no longer a member in good standing. Usually, they just renounce the Faith and that's ok.

Nothing becomes of those with eccentric views because the New Covenant prevents anyone from following anyone else; this eliminates confusion, doctrines and schisms.

(Edited by Zanjan)
9 months ago Report
0
The flying Squirrel
The flying Squirrel: so your a total Hypocrite then , If your Scriptures say it forbids Interpriting Scriptures for others Cos thats what you do all the Time ,


Blah blah Biblical scollars Its all you people go on with , If people accept jesus christ as there Saviour and repent ,, then they would study the bible for them selves and Not go off what, What every one else says
John 14:26
But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.


Always searching never comeing to any Knolage


9 months ago Report
0
Zanjan
Zanjan: "Interpretation" is claiming the text means "X" , saying it's the only correct meaning. That's a very crooked road, brother, taken only by crooked little people.

I've never done that because I don't fancy myself wearing God's shoes; I know the Word of God has multiple layers of meanings. When people lift a verse out of context, I offer solid facts. When they chop up the verse or misquote it from hearsay, I correct them by using the exact biblical quote. I do this to prevent misconceptions and deceptions.

John 14:26 - the actual quote

"But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you."

I shouldn't have to tell you the above is a prophecy; instead, I should remind you that it doesn't include a guarantee the recipient will respond appropriately.

There's nothing wrong with sharing a personal perspective.......as long as one understands that's what it is. Otherwise, the religious would have nothing to discuss.

(Edited by Zanjan)
9 months ago Report
0
The flying Squirrel
The flying Squirrel: No Your Claiming That X means what ever all Ive seen you Make Zanjan is wild Assumpions of what things mean ,

Its not a Prophacy , Its a gift The Holy sprit. So what ever Its pointless even Conversing ,
No there is no harm in discussing ones persional perspective , But I really ever hear that Its always what some one else has Said , Or what ever religion Teaches Religion is Man Made Case Closed
9 months ago Report
0
rockmass
rockmass: Eccentric views are good!
Matthew 7:13 - "Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it."

A lot of people believe religion is man made when there is clear evidence it is from God.
The majority of Christians believe the Trinity when there is clear evidence Jesus is not God.
So everyone needs to reexamine the evidence.
I mean really be open to every possibility, but analyze the evidence.

When people are closed minded, it is true they do not lose what they have, but they gain nothing. That is the very reason there are so many people going the wrong way.

2 Peter 1:20 - "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."

Let the Bible interpret the Bible.
There is too much evidence that points to God's existence, but man chooses to look at the evidence and says it points to something else. Man breaks his own laws of physics to do this. Cause and Effect. Life always comes from preexisting life.

There is too much evidence that the Bible is from God, but man chooses to look at the evidence and say it is from man. There is a prophecy in the Bible where it named the ruler who would defeat the world power, how he would do it, what year this will happen, and his orders after it would happen, all before he was born. What man can predict the future?

There is too much evidence Jesus is not God, but man chooses to look at the evidence and say God is three in one. Jesus constantly uses words the separate himself from God. He says he was "sent" if he was God he would say I "came". Jesus has to ask the Father for things. Jesus says his "will" is different from God's "will". Constantly calls the Father "My God". So Jesus is not God.

Nevertheless, despite the evidence that it is clear, the majority is on the wrong road.
Reexamine the evidence and open your mind to eccentric views, it might just save your life.

(Edited by rockmass)
9 months ago Report
0
Zanjan
Zanjan: "What man can predict the future?"

Actually, some of us can but the most common is in two phases of the short term - that is, within 2-3 years, and in one full generation. That gift can only come from God. We've all read or heard of some very inspired novels by famous writers that turned out to be right on the money, when it was impossible to have known it by any means.

The other type is a prediction, based on an excellent understanding of spiritual dynamics and patterns of human behaviour. That's fairly general though, no unique details.

However, it takes a special gift to see centuries or millennia down the road, with specific details. God bestows it for three reasons: 1. To prepare the people 2. Proof of God. 3. Understanding which can only arrive after the fact. Note: where there IS understanding, it can be backed up with actual facts.

Personally, the furthest ahead I've seen (it's NOT in scriptures) is 300 years. Obviously, none of us will be here to see that so it can't be used as proof to anyone who's alive today. Then what is the purpose? Well, it's for my own information and assistance only.

Should I share it? Maybe. The only thing I can think could come out of that is confirmation to someone else whose had the identical vision. The odds are phenomenal but if one person did, I expect another would as well, since that which has been created isn't necessarily visible to everyone.

(Edited by Zanjan)
9 months ago Report
0
Zanjan
Zanjan: " the majority is on the wrong road"

True, yet all roads eventually lead to the same place. The wrong road just takes longer to get there. Is speed important? Depends on the urgency of the issue. I think no issue today could be more important or urgent than the unity of mankind. It's time to get it together.

As H.G. Wells once said, "When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race."
(Edited by Zanjan)
9 months ago Report
0
Zanjan
Zanjan: If Jesus were God, you have to ask why God came to earth. What did Jesus do that Abraham and Moses didn't? Why didn't God descend to earth when they were here?

Don't tell me it's the resurrection - that theme is more than 10,000 years old. Truth is testable.

Why did Moses HAVE to say the next Promised One would be a man, like himself, from among other men (Jews)? Since Christians use the words of Moses to prove who Jesus was, then why didnt Moses say the next Promised One would be God?

Since God was able to get the Word out through Them, through their bodies, as He did through the body of Jesus, why would He have to add some magical twist that has no logistical difference? If God did descend to earth, then not a single human would be a disbeliever.

What possible advantage could there be in claiming that God was a human? Could Jesus levitate?Jesus told the fig tree to die but it would have died anyway. He calmed the storm but storms always pass.....then they return. Could He tell volcanoes to erupt and the seas to push a Tzunami over His enemies?

No, there is no evidence that Jesus is God, else He would have done that. Jesus never asked for this, just like Moses never asked for the seas to be parted or the earth to swallow up the tribes.

All that any of them knew is that those who didn't listen to God would perish. They all waited for God to decide how and when they would perish.
(Edited by Zanjan)
9 months ago Report
0
shadowline
shadowline: If it were true that Tertullian argued against the Trinity becoming Christian doctrine, it would hardly mean that "most" Christians did not accept that idea at the time. Tertullian was not "most" Christians.

As it happens though, you have the matter precisely backwards. Tertullian helped to formulate the doctrine of the Trinity, and helped to establish it as Christian belief. It isn't hard to find this out. Even Wikipedia is perfectly clear about it.
9 months ago Report
1
Zanjan
Zanjan: I think you misread my post- Tertullian posited the IDEA of the Trinity....and Praxeas opposed it. Praxeas won because most Christians also opposed it. Obviously, at the time, it wasn't a doctrine - just an idea. Hardly original - the Pagans owned that.

The idea was still floating around after Tertullian died. At the urging of King Constantine, it was brought to the Council of Nicea for a vote only by the priests - the body of believers had no input in the matter. It took 100 years of re-wording by other priests to get that assertion finalized into doctrine.

That's how you insidiously get the people used to a lie, abusing your position to embed it. The clergy alone are responsible for that blooper and we know their motivation behind it.
9 months ago Report
0
Page: 12345 ... Last