78 replies to this topic

[tonnyj]

Tonnyj,
Did you find a lot of answers (in the other thread) to the questions you asked me?
If not, there still there a-waitin' for you. They haven't run away anywhere.

Sure here I already find a problem. Here is from the link you posted. Workingman quoting off Mrs. J.

Jesus Christ him self clames to be God.

Luke 4:12 And Jesus answering, said to him: It is said: Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God. Matt 4:7 Jesus said to him: It is written again: Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

Why is this important. This occured durring Satans temptation of Christ in the desert durring his fasting.

Now is Jesus God? Well you seem to say so by referring to Luke 4:12 and Matthew 4:7. Okay that's settled. So what is God? Can God be tempted? According to the verses you give tells us God cannot be tempted.

Why not add to the foundation of this idea, lets look at James 1:13, "When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me.” For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone" Okay we have an understanding here. We can conclude that Satan cannot tempt God. This is pretty explicitly saying God's nature is not of temptation - he does not tempt nor does anyone tempt Him.

Now lets look at Matthew 4:1, "Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness [size=3]to be[using large font size is not allowed] tempted by the devil."

Huh? Jesus went to be tempted by Satan? Isn't Jesus supposed to be God? Isn't God unable to be tempted? How can Satan tempt God? If God is unable to be tempted according to your verses - how is it that Jesus was? If Jesus was tempted as the verse says - then he is not God. There must be someone else Matthew 4:7, Luke 4:12, and James 1:13 must be referring to. Because clearly Jesus went to be what? To be tempted by Satan. Not might be, or should of been, but was TO BE tempted. A definition TO BE is to take place; happen; occur (Dictionary(contact admin if its a beneficial link)). Temptation was taking place, happening, and occuring. So I say again - If it took place that Jesus was being tempted, he is not God. I dont need to look further in the post.

It does not have to be complex. On that note you seem to need a deeper explanation than what I am willing to write. This is why it is called faith.

Yes faith - I know this word. Not very complicated. It means 'willing to believe as something true regardless of the 5 senses to prove its true.' It would be 'blind belief' yes? See thats not so complicated to describe or understand. I didn't have to write a whole article to depict the whole meaning of this. Its straightforward plain and simple. So should our understanding be of God. With your whole analogy, things just get complicated.

Edited by tonnyj, 18 July 2011 - 01:03 AM.

[tom]

No matter how many times I post this, people just don't get it.
But, since it's a bad habit of mine, here it comes again ...

“For My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways”, says the Lord.
“For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways,
and My thoughts (higher) than your thoughts.” (Isaiah 55:8-9)

Tonnyj,
Did you find a lot of answers (in the other thread) to the questions you asked me?
If not, there still there a-waitin' for you. They haven't run away anywhere.

you may not realise it but the answers given dont seem to focus on the questions. for instance when i asked why jesus' not omnipotent when he and god the father supposedly are of the EXACT same nature? your instant reply should be "because . . . . ". but you didnt did you?

[Ameer7]

Tonnyj ... Is this all you have so far?

Who knows if God can be tempted or not? Ask Him. He does have free will like us, right?
Do I know everything? Am I God?

Jesus was a human called/named “Jesus”. So, we’re talking here about the man Jesus.
The reason for the Holy Spirit being Jesus’ Father was to produce this sinless man.
If Joseph had been Jesus’ father, Jesus would have had man’s sin nature.
This proves that the sin nature is passed down through the male sperm,
and it did not come through Mary (via her blood, or?).

Now, this sinless man had to prove to everyone that he always overcame temptation.
And because he did live a sinless life, he was qualified to be your substitute and die for your sins.

God's Plan-A was about producing a sinless man who could (and did) live “without sin”.
God’s Plan-B was for Jesus to also be “fully God”. And I don’t know the reason for Plan-B ...
except it sure makes everything more impressive that it actually was God who died for your sins.

Edited by Ameer7, 18 July 2011 - 08:12 PM.

[tonnyj]

Tonnyj ... Is this all you have so far?

Who knows if God can be tempted or not? Ask Him. He does have free will like us, right?
Do I know everything? Am I God?

It says in your own scriptures that God cannot be tempted. James 1:13, "When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me.” For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone" I’m not making this up, it’s in your bible. How can you say ‘who knows’?

Now, this sinless man had to prove to everyone that he always overcame temptation.
And because he did live a sinless life, he was qualified to be your substitute and die for your sins.

God's Plan-A was about producing a sinless man who could (and did) live “without sin”.
God’s Plan-B was for Jesus to also be “fully God”. And I don’t know the reason for Plan-B ...
except it sure makes everything more impressive that it actually was God who died for your sins.

So it was a person who was fully man (according to God's Plan A) and a person who was fully God (according to God’s Plan B) that was sacrificed? Does this make sense to you? How can both man and God be sacrificed at the same time? Even you dont know how this is possible (God’s Plan-B was for Jesus to also be “fully God”. And I don’t know the reason for Plan-B ...) If God was sacrificed – are you saying humans are capable of killing God? If just a man was sacrificed, then no God was sacrificed – just only a man.

So when the OT talks about humans offering sacrifices to God for forgiveness – would humans been saved had they refused? So now when God came to die for us – did he come to offer us a sacrifice? Wasn’t it the humans role to offer God a sacrifice? Wasn’t it the responsibility of human actions to find pleasure from the sight of God? Now God has to find pleasure in our eyes by making a sacrifice to us? Now God has to make a sacrifice to us to please us because he thinks we are gods? Is that why he offers a sacrifice to us?

Edited by tonnyj, 19 July 2011 - 02:27 AM.

[tonnyj]

Tonnyj ... Is this all you have so far?

Who knows if God can be tempted or not? Ask Him. He does have free will like us, right?
Do I know everything? Am I God?

James 1:13, "When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me.” For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone"

Why do you avoid the meaning of the verse and say 'who knows if God can be tempted or not? James 1:13 has a pretty explicit meaning as to tell you God cannot be tempted. Why do you seem to say that the only verses apply (Luke 4:12, Matthew 4;7) is valid as Jesus being God, but you seem to brush off James 1:13? So when it comes to Luke 4:12, Matthew 4:7 - 'o! we (christians) all know what this is talking about'. But for James 1:13 - its; 'o no! we (christians) dont know what your talking about'?

Edited by tonnyj, 19 July 2011 - 02:39 AM.

[Ameer7]

Tonnyj,

You’re correct about James 1:13 … God cannot be tempted by evil.
But, what about the "fully man" part of Jesus? Man can be tempted.

Jesus was “fully man” … as man was before A&E’s fall.
Everyone after that had the sin nature … except Jesus …
who did not inherit it from Joseph (because of the Holy Spirit).

In one sense, Jesus couldn’t be totally “fully God”
because He also was “fully man” who can be killed.

God didn’t need to be sacrificed … just a sinless man needed to be sacrificed.
The Triune God wanted to experience the totality of being a human.
That’s the one reason Jesus became “fully God”.
But, apparently there are other reasons as well (I’m struggling with these).

Re: sacrifices …
the OT is the Old Covenant, and there are differences in the New Covenant.
In the OT, they offered the most unblemished animals for sacrifice.
Later, God said He was weary of all of this killing of bulls and goats.
The New Covenant used an absolutely PERFECT Sacrifice.
Not only was it a human without sin, but “fully God” as well.
Unbelieveable.

The Sacrifice was not to us.
The Sacrifice was to God … for us (i.e. on our behalf).

[tonnyj]

Jesus was “fully man” … as man was before A&E’s fall.
Everyone after that had the sin nature … except Jesus …
who did not inherit it from Joseph (because of the Holy Spirit).

In one sense, Jesus couldn’t be totally “fully God”
because He also was “fully man” who can be killed.

God didn’t need to be sacrificed … just a sinless man needed to be sacrificed.
The Triune God wanted to experience the totality of being a human.
That’s the one reason Jesus became “fully God”.
But, apparently there are other reasons as well (I’m struggling with these).

What are you trying to say? In one statement you say Jesus is not 'fully God', then in another, you say he is 'fully God'. Does this seem like a game to you? How can you tell me what God's nature is when:
1) your statements are in contradiction
2) you dont even know how his nature works

The Sacrifice was not to us.
The Sacrifice was to God … for us (i.e. on our behalf).

Why does God need to make a sacrifice to himself? He made the universe and now he needs to make a sacrifice to himself? God doesn't need anything. Why should he need his own sacrifice?

Edited by tonnyj, 20 July 2011 - 02:35 AM.

[Ameer7]

What are you trying to say? In one statement you say Jesus is not 'fully God',
then in another, you say he is 'fully God'. Does this seem like a game to you?
How can you tell me what God's nature is when:
1) your statements are in contradiction
2) you dont even know how his nature works
Why does God need to make a sacrifice to himself?
He made the universe and now he needs to make a sacrifice to himself?
God doesn't need anything. Why should he need his own sacrifice?

A couple of weeks ago, I said I was struggling with "fully God" because Jesus
demonstrated His total dependence on the Father and on the Holy Spirit.
Since then, this has been cleared up! I thought I passed on the info here.

God the Son (name/title only) incarnated into a human called Jesus Christ.
This Jesus Christ was "fully man" and "fully God".
It was the perfect sinless "fully man" part of Messiah who was the sacrifice.
Because a sinless human HAD TO BE the sacrifice.
I'm still struggling with WHY he also needed to be "fully God".

No one ever said that God (e.g. the Triune God) was totally understandable.
Sorry that you expect me to be some kind of genius.
I'm a-doin' my best, pal.
.

[tonnyj]

Ok let me help you understand this concept of 'tri-une' God a little better.

I'm reading a book by a catholic theologian Hans Kung. He is a Swiss catholic priest (used to be). He was ordained after his studies of theology and philosophy at the Pontifical Gregorian University of Rome. In 1962 he was appointed by the Pope John XXIII, to serve as an expert theologian advisor to members of the Second Vatican Council.

So basically this guy is no joke. If your going to understand the bible and its history - then this is the guy. You can search up his bio in wiki.

Anyways, I'm reading his book, "Islam, Past, Present, & Future." In it he praises Islam for many aspects but is also critical in some other aspects. In this book he talks about Christianity to compare the religions. Here is what he says:

Any Christian theologian who does not just speculate uncritically on the basis of the Hellenistic development and of doctrine in the fourth and fifth centuries but who follows Protestant and Catholic theologians in thinking in the light of the New Testament will notice that, while there are many triadic formulae in the New Testament, there is not a word about the 'unity' of these three extremely different entities, that is, a unity on the same divine level. At one point in the First Letter of John there was a clause which was in the context of saying about the Spirit, the water and the blood, and went on to speak of the Father, the word and the spirit as being one. However, historical criticism has shown this statement to be a forgery which arose in North Africa or Spain in the third or fourth century and it did not help the Roman Inquisition at all by trying to defend the authenticity of the sentence at the beginning of the twentieth century, it would have done better to adopt the results of historical criticism. However, out of fear that it would have to correct much more, it has not been able to bring itself to do this, even now. (pg 509)

In the Bible they will quickly find that in Jewish Christianity, indeed throughout the New Testament, whereas there is belief in God the Father, Jesus the Son and in God's Holy spirit, there is no doctrine of a one God in three persons (modes of being), no doctrine of a 'tri-une God', a trinity. (pg509) (also quoted in, Hans Kung - Christianity: Essence, History, Future - Continuum, 2001 - Page 97).

So a man who knows alot about Christianity and Catholicism makes these statements. Now I see why the trinity is so confusing. Because there is no such thing. Maybe in another way of spirituality there is such thing as a Father, a son, and a holy spirit, but not on the same level of divinity. (as quoted from above) My guess is that the Father is one God and only One. The sons are everyone who follow Him. And the spirit is his guidance. But the trinity? That's a whole other thing.

I've done research on Christianity from people like Bart Erhman, Dr. Maurice Bucaille, and I have watched many lectures of debates between Christians and Muslims. I used to be a Christian - one who believed in the Bible. As I heard lectures from Muslims - I felt they were wrong and that Christianity was correct. (This is when I was naive and ignorant of Islam and its teachings) Slowly everything I ever believed in, was being knocked off the totem pole one section of belief after another. The 'truth shall set you free' as they say.

Now one of my major problems was the trinity. Something I once believed was now something I was starting to become truly aware of and as well critical of - the trinity mentioned in the Gospel of John as a forgery. 'Why would people say this I thought. Surely it's not true.' Over and over again people confirmed it as a forgery in lectures I watched and books I read. Now after reading from this man Hans Kung - to reaffirm this fact - left no doubt in my mind the trinity is a forgery. All I know is, I am never going to follow Christianity again. Even if all the religions of the world were untrue. There is too many confusing ideologies and theologies from Christianity. And now I see the reason why. It's built on many things that aren't true. So I'll stick with Islam for the time being. (Still a new convert) I know I got much to learn while doing my research to be 100% convinced that the Quran is truly the word of God, and that Islam, is truly the 'right way'. But I'm glad I'm doing as much as I can to be as close to the truth as much as possible. I'm glad I found many truths to the Quran and Islam on the way thus far.

Edited by tonnyj, 21 July 2011 - 01:12 AM.

[Ameer7]

Tonnyj,

No so-called "expert" theologian impresses me one iota.
Because intellect, education, logic, etc. have absolutely nothing to do with spiritual truth from God.
These fleshly things are the total opposite to spiritual things.

I've been working on this in my spare time (not finished yet) ...

First, it’s not necessary for the 3 "Persons" of the Triune God to all be in the same verse.
In seeing these passages in their true light, one needs to be aware of the many
other Scripture verses that reveal who these 3 "Persons" are.
I.E. Every passage cannot go into a detailed explanation of who the 3 "Persons" are,
and everything needs to be understood in the context of the entire Bible.

Isaiah 48:12-16
“Listen to Me, O Jacob, and israel, My called: I am He, I am the First, I am also the Last.
Indeed My hand has laid the foundation of the earth, and My right hand has stretched
out the heavens … I, even I, have spoken; yes, I have called him, I have brought him,
and his way will prosper.”
“Come near to Me, hear this: I (Jesus) have not spoken in secret from the beginning;
from the time that it was, I was there, and now the Lord GOD and His Spirit have sent Me.”
Note: Father God promises to come to His people in the form of His Servant Jesus

Matthew 3:16-17
“When He had been baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold,
the heavens were opened to Him, and He saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove
and alighting upon Him. And suddenly a voice came from heaven, saying,
‘his is My beloved Son, in whom I (the Father) am well pleased.’ ”

Matthew 28:19
“Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them
in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit …”

Luke 1:35
“The Holy Spirit will come upon you (Jesus), and the power of the Highest will overshadow you;
therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born will be called the Son of God.”

John 14:26
“But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My (Jesus) name,
He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.

John 15:26
“But when the Helper comes, whom I (Jesus) shall send to you from the Father,
the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me.”

Acts 2:38-39
“Then Peter said to them, ‘Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of
Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off,
as many as the Lord our God (the Father) will call.’ ”

Ephesians 4:4-6
“There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling;
one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is above all,
and through all, and in you all.”

Edited by Ameer7, 21 July 2011 - 08:42 PM.

[tonnyj]

Ameer7

This is sad. Firstly I'd like to say an expert theologian who came from the Vatican is much more knowledgeable than the average layman or Protestant theologian. I'm sure he doesn't have credit for also being a priest and professor at many universities because he doesn't know his way around manuscripts and the bible. Also who do you turn for the higher knowledge of the bible? Do you turn to yourself or experts? Is there Protestant theologians existing particularly for no reason at all? I'm sure your well informed and have manuscripts at your disposal to make your sound judgements. Let alone you can't even figure out how the nature of the trinity works.

Secondly, this is not the only person I've heard say this so he is not my only reference.

Some people just wont get it. Your scripts dont have a word that defines the unity of the Father, Jesus, and holy spirit as one. There is no word connecting all three on a divine level. So if there are differences, then there is no trinity!

In Psalm 2:7, an accession ritual, the Messiah king is explicitly addressed as 'son': 'You are my son; today I have begotten you.' In this verse, 'begotten' is a synonym for enthronement, exaltation. Neither in the Hebrew Bible nor in the New Testament is there any trace of a physical - sexual begetting as in the case of the Egyptian God-king and the Hellenistic sons of god, nor of a metaphysical begetting along the lines of the later Hellenistic ontological christology. ( "Islam, Past, Present, & Future" pg 493)

What did first Judaism and then the New Testament mean by 'son of God'? Regardless of how this was later defined by Hellenistic councils with Hellenistic terms, in the New Testament what is unquestionably meant is not the descent but an appointment to a position of justice and power in the Hebrew Old Testament sense. This is not a physical divine sonship, of the kind that occurs in Greek myths, which is often supposed and rightly rejected by Jews and Muslims, but and election and authentication of Jesus by God, completely in keeping with the Hebrew Bible, in which sometimes the people of israel can collectively be call 'son of God'. ("Islam, Past, Present, & Future" pg 493)

The begetting is not classified as God having a Son even metaphysically! (which exactly what this whole trinity thing is!) Nowhere in the Hebrew Bible or the New Testament is this present. So that means Jesus is just man. There was no metaphysical begetting nor physical divine sonship. You seem to just ignore facts and try to build your faith on straw sticks.

As a pious Jew, Jesus himself preached a strict monotheism. He never called himself God, on the contrary: 'Why do you call me good? No one is good save God alone.' According to the same Gospel, Jesus a answers a scribe's question about what is the highest commandment with israel's confession of faith, the 'shema israel': The greatest commandment is: 'Hear, israel, the Lord your God is one God.' There is no indication in the New Testament that Jesus understood himself as a second person in God and was present at the creation of the world. In the New Testament, God himself ('ho theos', 'the God', 'God') is always the one God and Father - not the Son. ( pg 492. Also check out Born before All Time. The Dispute over Christ's Origin, London and New York 1992 by K.-J. Kuschel.)

Okay what does this mean? That Jesus never existed in the beginning nor is he the 2nd person in God. But like I said, you must have many manuscripts at your disposal as well as being well educated in Catholicism and Christianity. I'm sure we can all turn to you for knowledge even though you dont know how to illustrate how God's nature works through the trinity.

Edited by tonnyj, 21 July 2011 - 09:28 PM.

[Ameer7]

Tonnyj,
We have verses such as these:
John 10:30 “I and My Father are one.”
John 10:38 “the Father is in Me, and I in Him.”
John 14:9 “He who has seen Me has seen the Father”
John 17:22 “We are one”
But, no one is forcing you to believe them.

Edited by Ameer7, 21 July 2011 - 11:33 PM.

[tonnyj]

As you say. I'm just putting out the facts. People can choose to believe or not.

[tom]

Tonnyj,
We have verses such as these:
John 10:30 “I and My Father are one.”
John 10:38 “the Father is in Me, and I in Him.”
John 14:9 “He who has seen Me has seen the Father”
John 17:22 “We are one”
But, no one is forcing you to believe them.

err i've yet to read the rest of the posts. been busy. anyhow i'm into this post.

so when jesus said 'i and father are one', trinitarians gonna say thats huge proof jesus is god. swell.
my question is if jesus is god why's he not omnipotent?
trinitarians gonna say 'cause he's dual character.
then i'm gonna say if jesus has dual character then god the father and god the holy spirit gotta have dual character too since trinitarians/church said these 3 have EXACTLY same character, that jesus = god the father = holy spirit.
this is where trinitarians/church remain silent. why the silence? they dont seem to have no answer to why jesus has dual character when the other two dont and despite the 3 supposedly of EXACTLY same character. right?

over to you mr AMEER7 and other trinitarians.

Edited by tom, 22 July 2011 - 11:34 PM.

[tom]

As you say. I'm just putting out the facts. People can choose to believe or not.

cant keep mum dude. me gotta say we gotta choose to believe with commonsense. god give us brain to think and not dependant on blind faith.

[The Shrew]

To the unitarians how about we just leave you to deal with your own heresy. You claim to beleave the Holy Bible. As it is said by Jesus Christ him self about him self in St. Matthew 10:33 [33] But he that shall deny me before men, I will also deny him before my Father who is in heaven.

God will be the final judge in the end.

In nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen

[tonnyj]

cant keep mum dude. me gotta say we gotta choose to believe with commonsense. god give us brain to think and not dependant on blind faith.

Ay~

Cept what do you mean by "cant keep mum dude." ?

[ParadiseLost]

Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’” [John 20:17]
Now if Jesus was God then God is saying He has a father and He has a God hmmm. There are many contradictions in the bible relating to this topic no wonder it is debated over and over. And when there are contradictions you can't help but question the truth.

Islam has a simple answer to this question:
Say He is Allah One and only
The Eternal and The Absolute
He begetteth not nor is He begotten (i.e. he doesn't have children or parents]
And there is none like unto Him [Surah Al Ikhlas]

Islam makes it simple: God is God. Jesus is a prophet who came with a message from God. Jesus is not God.

Edited by Lost_In_Paradise, 23 July 2011 - 07:47 AM.

[tonnyj]

ameen

[The Shrew]

Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’” [John 20:17]
Now if Jesus was God then God is saying He has a father and He has a God hmmm. There are many contradictions in the bible relating to this topic no wonder it is debated over and over. And when there are contradictions you can't help but question the truth.

Islam has a simple answer to this question:
Say He is Allah One and only
The Eternal and The Absolute
He begetteth not nor is He begotten (i.e. he doesn't have children or parents]
And there is none like unto Him [Surah Al Ikhlas]

Islam makes it simple: God is God. Jesus is a prophet who came with a message from God. Jesus is not God.

Now before I even adress above do you understand the dual nature of Christ? Not if you believe it but understand it. Islam flat out disregards historical fact about Jesus Christ. So I would not expect it to get Christs dual nature correct.