Does the Apostle Paul claim that Jesus Christ, the holy anointed man, is Almighty God?

[Trailblazer]

What else would the Only Son of God be, but God? He wasn’t a human or created something in eternity. Human fathers have a human son with human nature. God’s Son is God with God Nature.

Jesus had a spiritual nature in which He was divine, but Jesus also had a physical nature in which He was human.
Jesus cannot be God, since God is ONLY spirit, not flesh.
I just explained this in post #100.

 

[Trailblazer]

False, those who acknowledge Jesus Christ as God must do so in humility acknowledging their need for God to save them and that there is salvation in no other name under heaven, but Jesus Christ, through whom one must be saved.

That's true, but Jesus did not have to be God in order to offer salvation.
Jesus was a Manifestation of God so Jesus perfectly reflected God's Attributes and God's Will.
It was God's Will that we be saved and that is what Jesus came to do, among other things.

 

[Trailblazer]

That is true... in that he was made flesh

But in the resurrection Thomas said,
John 20:28
Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!”

That does not prove that Jesus was God.

And there are a multitude of other scriptures that support that position

There are a multitude of scriptures that support the position that Jesus was not God.

#1800 Trailblazer
#1801 Trailblazer

Logic also supports the position the Jesus is not God.

According to the Bible God is: Eternal, Holy, Unchanging, Impassable, Infinite, Omnipresent, All-Powerful, All-Knowing, All-Wise, Infallible, Self-Existent, Self-Sufficient, Sovereign, Immaterial, Good, Loving, Gracious, Merciful, Just, Righteous, Forgiving, and Patient.

According to the Bible Jesus is: Holy, Good, Loving, Gracious, Merciful, Just, Righteous, Forgiving, and Patient, but Jesus is not Eternal, Unchanging, Impassable, Infinite, Omnipresent, All-Powerful, All-Knowing, All-Wise, Infallible, Self-Existent, Self-Sufficient, Sovereign, or Immaterial.

And that is why Jesus cannot be God, since Jesus only has SOME of the Attributes of God, not ALL of the Attributes of God.

 

[rational experiences]

Man's not God.

Man's age in biology science says by a number is how old he is. Newly born said testimony.

Creation might be billions upon billions of years old as held mass not removed to give it an age by body presence.

When your conscious mind body gets attacked. Then heavens space mother stops the sacrificed body mass.

Human life biology animals bodies nature garden body earths mass was saved.

Is a review done only because man of science caused it.

Were you first a science mind who thought about earths mass as scientific man had?

No. I never used to think about it.

But you're innocent you get attacked so infer all reasons science caused change?

Yes.

Why they said ..no man is God.

As humans are not given names they named themselves just as science wasn't named man named it.

Ignored just because you do.

So after Jesus event. Falling star burning science caused to ignite by heating earths space in heavens. Hit again many times. Resacrifycing life as a victim.

Men said God did it. As God Rock stone earth or star was created in space.

You retell your story but say like Jesus terms laws space saved life. Yet it's nothing like Jesus you just reference it.

Newly written lots of books. Used as a testimonial legal proof no man is God. Legally stated against human scientists.

 

[101G]

Jesus was not God in the flesh because the Form/NATURE of God is Spirit (John 4:24), and that means that God is not flesh.

well, let's see what the bible say,
Phil 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God". if the Lord Jesus is in the "FORM" of God, just as you posted, then he's Spirit, as you said, (John 4:24a). now, let's see what God did, the next two verse,
Phil 2:7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men BINGO, (God in Flesh).
Phil 2:8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
FASHION here is
G4976 σχῆμα schema (schee'-ma) n.
1. a figure (as a mode or circumstance).
2. (by implication) external condition.
[from the alternate of G2192]
KJV: fashion
.
and FIGURE is
G5179 τύπος tupos (tï '-pos) n.
1. a die (as struck).
2. (by implication) a stamp or scar.
3. (by analogy) a shape, i.e. a statue.
4. (figuratively) style or resemblance.
5. (specially) a sampler (“type”), i.e. a model (for imitation) or instance (for warning).
[from G5180]
KJV: en-(ex-)ample, fashion, figure, form, manner, pattern, print
Root(s): G5180
Rom 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

conclusion: that Fashion, that Figure is the Flesh God came in. just as Phil 2:8a STATES, "And being found in fashion as a man".

so there is no doubt that God came in Human Flesh.

don't argue with 101G, argue with the Word of God.

101G.

 

[101G]

Now, a question to all. if Jesus (who is God) was in that body AT "BIRTH", (which he was), and he was in a G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō') v. STATE of existence. made LOWER than the Angels,
1. to make empty.
2. (figuratively) to abase, neutralize, falsify.
[from G2756]
KJV: make (of none effect, of no reputation, void), be in vain
Root(s): G2756

my Question is this. "if Jesus is the second person in the Godhead, and all three persons are to be equal as "ONE" Spirit, how much of the "ONE" Spirit was G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō'). MADE EMPTY to accommodate the second person while in that Flesh body according to Phil 2:7 "But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men":

was it 1/3rd of the Spirit that was G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō') for the Son to be in Flesh? since God is not DIVIDED, (THINK) or was it all of God in that Flesh in a G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō') state. if so, then who was running or upholding the universe then?

but remember, before you give an answer, Phil 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God" and the "Form" of God is his NATURE, Spirit.

will be looking for some answers.

101G.

 

[YoursTrue]

Jesus was not a mediator among the three equal Persons of the Godhead.
He was and is the Mediator between God and human beings… because He became flesh/human. He lowered Himself, but did not, nor could not lose His eternal Godhood. Jesus Alone is the only Being, as fully God and fully human, Who has the capacity to be Mediator.

I see no reason to think that Jesus praying or communicating with His Father in heaven makes Him lesser.

I see what you're saying. But -- a mediator is not equal to the parties he is mediating for. A mediator is like a middleman between two opposing parties, in this case, God and men.

 

[YoursTrue]

Oh boy, that’s a great one….

Didn’t Jesus say that Peter was the rock?

And doesn’t the name, Peter, mean, ‘The Rock’?

So… it was Peter, that was in the wilderness??

The Greek word for Peter is Petros. And it is technically considered a SMALL STONE. Not like Petra, which is much larger, like a boulder. Not all explanations of the Greek have it right.
I'll leave it up to those concerned to pray over this and look it over as Jesus meant it.

 

[Truthseeker]

False, those who acknowledge Jesus Christ as God must do so in humility acknowledging their need for God to save them and that there is salvation in no other name under heaven, but Jesus Christ, through whom one must be saved. This is the opposite of self-importance. Such humility, nor acknowledgement of Jesus as God and one’s need of a Savior did not lead to the crusades or other atrocities in history. Such violent behavior is always the result of rejecting God’s Word and arrogantly using God as a means for political gain and power. Again, the opposite of humility before God.

That very statement "there is salvation in no other name under heaven", suggests a lack of humility about your faith. You may be humble before Jesus as God, but what about people of other religions?Are you humble before them? I don't know you at all personally, but please answer the question. The question is not a rhetorical one.

You may be right about the crusades, the Pope used his position to sick the Chrstians on the Muslims, but isn't there an underlying atmosphere among the Christians that he was taking advantage of? No one in power acheives his results alone, and Hitler showed that when he took advantage of the prejudices and grievances that the people of Germany had.

 

[Trailblazer]

What does "born of the Holy Spirit" mean?
What do you think?

What I meant when I said that Jesus was "born of the Holy Spirit" is that He had no human Father, so Jesus came into existence through the Spirit of God.

1637. Christ, Virgin Birth of

"First regarding the birth of Jesus Christ. In light of what Bahá’u’lláh and ‘Abdu’l-Bahá have stated concerning this subject it is evident that Jesus came into this world through the direct intervention of the Holy Spirit, and that consequently His birth was quite miraculous. This is an established fact, and the friends need not feel at all surprised, as the belief in the possibility of miracles has never been rejected in the Teachings. Their importance, however, has been minimized."

(From a letter dated December 31, 1937 written on behalf of the Guardian to an individual believer)

1639. Bahá’í Teachings in Agreement with Doctrines of Catholic Church Concerning the Virgin Birth

"With regard to your question concerning the Virgin Birth of Jesus: On this point, as on several others, the Bahá’í Teachings are in full agreement with the doctrines of the Catholic Church. In the 'Kitáb-i-Íqán' (Book of Certitude) p. 56, and in a few other Tablets still unpublished, Bahá’u’lláh confirms, however indirectly, the Catholic conception of the Virgin Birth. Also ‘Abdu’l-Bahá in the 'Some Answered Questions', Chap. XII, p. 73, explicitly states that 'Christ found existence through the Spirit of God' which statement necessarily implies, when viewed in the light of the text, that Jesus was not the son of Joseph."

(From a letter dated October 14, 1945 written on behalf of the Guardian to an individual believer)

Lights of Guidance/Christ - Bahaiworks, a library of works about the Bahá’í Faith

What came from the Father to earth ended up a man. The physical body is part of the humanity of Jesus. Jesus was born of Mary.

That's true, but the other part of Jesus is the spiritual part, which was born of the substance of God Himself.

Jesus, before He took on the nature of a servant only had the nature of God. (see Phil 2) Anyone who has only the nature of God is God. The Son has always been the Son of the Father and has always had that divine nature.

Anyone who has the nature of God is divine by nature, but that does not mean He is actually God incarnate.
That means He is a Manifestation of God who has a divine nature and a human nature.

As Phil 2 says, He was equal to God and stepped down to become a man, part of the creation, even though not created.

But in other verses Jesus says that God was greater than He.

John 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I..

More Baha'u'llah double talk imo. Essence, attributes, what do those words mean to us?
Whatever Jesus was before becoming a man, was what He remained as a man. He may not have been living in and using His omnipotence, omnipresence etc etc, but He would have had them still and as I said
"being in nature God" is what He remained as a man, which you seem to agree with. (Phil 2)
He was both God and man. If someone is God then they have the essence of God or are the essence of God. You can't be God without the essence of God surely. If you are only a manifestation, some sort of copy of God then maybe not but Jesus was not that, Jesus was the real thing, the Son of the Father, God from God, one in essence with the Father.

I do not think you understand what I mean by Essence, and actually it is very difficult to explain. When a Baha'i says we do not know the Essence of God I think it means we can never know the intrinsic nature of God. All we can know is that God is spirit and we can know God's attributes that describe God.
Since Jesus was born of the Spirit of God I think he has the Essence of God in that sense.

It is interesting that Baha'u'llah says that the manifestation of God is God but does not mean that.

“Know thou of a certainty that the Unseen can in no wise incarnate His Essence and reveal it unto men. He is, and hath ever been, immensely exalted beyond all that can either be recounted or perceived. From His retreat of glory His voice is ever proclaiming: “Verily, I am God; there is none other God besides Me, the All-Knowing, the All-Wise. I have manifested Myself unto men, and have sent down Him Who is the Day Spring of the signs of My Revelation. Through Him I have caused all creation to testify that there is none other God except Him, the Incomparable, the All-Informed, the All-Wise.” He Who is everlastingly hidden from the eyes of men can never be known except through His Manifestation, and His Manifestation can adduce no greater proof of the truth of His Mission than the proof of His own Person.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 49

People often misunderstand that passage. Baha'u'llah was quoting God when He said “Verily, I am God; there is none other God besides Me, the All-Knowing, the All-Wise." God is referring to Baha'u'llah when God says "I have manifested Myself unto men, and have sent down Him Who is the Day Spring of the signs of My Revelation. Through Him I have caused all creation to testify that there is none other God except Him, the Incomparable, the All-Informed, the All-Wise.”

That is correct. Jesus remained in the form of God (in the nature of God) when He took the nature of a servant and was made in the outer likeness of a human.

That's true, since Jesus did not lose His divine nature when, as a human, he took on the nature of a servant.

 

[Trailblazer]

It is only a pretense that Baha'is believe the Bible. Belief in the teachings of Baha'u'llah mean that you must deny parts of the Bible. Belief in Baha'u'llah comes first for a Baha'i and so you actually believe you believe the Bible while denying it.

No, it only means that we interpret the Bible differently than you do, but since all Christians interpret the Bible differently, what's the difference?

Not all Christians believe that everything in the Bile is literally true, but they believe in Jesus and that is what makes them Christians.

Many liberal and some mainline Christian leaders believe that Jesus died during the crucifixion, did not resurrect himself, and was not bodily resurrected by God. At his death, his mind ceased to function and his body started the decomposition process. Returning to life a day and a half later would have been quite impossible. The story of having been wrapped in linen and anointed with myrrh seems to have been copied from the story of the death of Osiris -- the Egyptian God of the earth, vegetation and grain. The legend that he visited the underworld between his death and resurrection was simply copied from common Pagan themes of surrounding cultures. One example again was Osiris. "With his original association to agriculture, his death and resurrection were seen as symbolic of the annual death and re-growth of the crops and the yearly flooding of the Nile." 1

They also believe that Paul regarded the resurrection to be an act of God in which Jesus was a passive recipient of God's power. Paul did not mention the empty tomb, the visit by a woman or women, the stone, the angel/angels/man/men at the tomb, and reunion of Jesus with his followers in his resuscitated body. Rather, he believed that Jesus was taken up into heaven in a spirit body. It was only later, from about 70 to 110 CE when the four canonic Gospels were written, that the Christians believed that Jesus rose from the grave in his original body, and by his own power.

Later, perhaps after Paul's death, there was great disappointment within the Christian communities because Jesus had not returned as expected. They diverted their focus of attention away from Jesus' second coming. They studied his life and death more intensely. Legends without a historical basis were created by the early church; these included the empty tomb and described Jesus returning in his original body to eat and talk with his followers.

In previous centuries, almost all Christians believed in miracles as described in the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament). These included creation, the story of Adam and Eve, a talking serpent, the great flood of Noah, the drying up of the Red/Reed sea, a prophet riding on a talking ***, the sun stopping in the sky, etc. From the Christian Scriptures (New Testament), they believed in the virgin birth, the Christmas star, angels appearing to the shepherds, Jesus healing the sick, etc. Many, perhaps most, liberal Christians now believe that these stories are not to be interpreted literally as real events. Their faith has not been damaged by losing faith in the reality of these events. A growing number of liberals are now taking the final step by interpreting the stories of Jesus' resurrection and his appearances to his followers and to Paul as other than real events. Retired bishop John Shelby Spong commented:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/resur_lt.htm

 

[Trailblazer]

That very statement "there is salvation in no other name under heaven", suggests a lack of humility about your faith. You may be humble before Jesus as God, but what about people of other religions?

There is really no answer to that except that all the other religions are false, and of course we all know that Christians believe they are the only true religion which means that all other religions are false, so why mince words?

Even if we are a Baha'i who believes that Jesus offered salvation, that is not good enough for a Christian, because Christians have to believe that Jesus is The Only Way and all humanity ever needed or will ever need.

 

[Trailblazer]

so there is no doubt that God came in Human Flesh.

God cannot come Human Flesh, since God is spirit.
God manifested Himself in Human Flesh, He did not become Human Flesh. There is a difference.

“The Christian equivalent to the Bahá'í concept of Manifestation is the concept of incarnation. The word to incarnate means 'to embody in flesh or 'to assume, or exist in, a bodily (esp. a human) form (Oxford English Dictionary). From a Bahá'í point of view, the important question regarding the subject of incarnation is, what does Jesus incarnate? Bahá'ís can certainly say that Jesus incarnated Gods attributes, in the sense that in Jesus, Gods attributes were perfectly reflected and expressed.[4] The Bahá'í scriptures, however, reject the belief that the ineffable essence of the Divinity was ever perfectly and completely contained in a single human body, because the Bahá'í scriptures emphasize the omnipresence and transcendence of the essence of God…..

One can argue that Bahá'u'lláh is asserting that epistemologically the Manifestations are God, for they are the perfect embodiment of all we can know about God; but ontologically they are not God, for they are not identical with God's essence. Perhaps this is the meaning of the words attributed to Jesus in the gospel of John: 'If you had known me, you would have known my Father also' (John 14:7) and 'he who has seen me has seen the Father (John 14:9)…”
Jesus Christ in the Bahá'í Writings

don't argue with 101G, argue with the Word of God.

You can cherry-pick certain verses and interpret them to your liking but that does not represent the entire Word of God. There are just as many verses that contradict those verses. How lovely is the Word of God.

 

[Soapy]

The name Peter/ Petros does mean rock or little stone. Yet, the NT scriptures are abundantly clear that Jesus is the only foundation and head of the church: Acts 4:11,12 ; 1 Corinthians 3:11; Ephesians 2:20, 5:23; 1 Peter 2:6,7.

So when Jesus said Peter was the rock He was referring to Peter’s understanding and testimony concerning Himself as the Savior/ Messiah in the previous verse. The testimony/confession of faith which is the bedrock upon which the church is built; Jesus Christ the foundation and Rock.

…Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.
Matthew 16:16

Again, the scriptures are clear that Jesus Christ was the Rock in the wilderness…

…and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ.
1 Corinthians 10:4

God the Son; revealed as YWHW in the OT
and Jesus Christ in the NT, Who came as the Savior of the world.

Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood. Acts 20:28

Squirming won’t help you - on the last day!

But you still have time to alter your ideology.

The thread title asks a pertinent question to which the answer is ‘No! Paul doesn’t claim Jesus is almighty God’.

And neither does anyone else in scriptures. It is those outside of scriptures, to wit, those who aspire to the teachings of the ‘Holy (!?) Roman Catholic’ faith of which trinitarianism is its base teaching. The warning is clear:

• “Then I heard another voice from heaven say: “’Come out of her, my people,’ so that you will not share in her sins, so that you will not receive any of her plagues;” (Rev 18:4)
• There will be a cry out: “’Woe! Woe to you, great city, dressed in fine linen, purple and scarlet, and glittering with gold, precious stones and pearls!” (Rev 18:16)

The Roman Catholic Church came into ‘Church Law’ when it was underwritten by the Roman Emperor Constantine.

Trinitarianism states that Jesus is God and was before creation. But the truth is that this is not true. I am not claiming that Arianism was true either… two opposing ideologies, one found to be untrue… DOES NOT mean that the other MUST BE TRUE!!

But let’s ignore Arianism as it has all but disappeared and taught only by Jehovah Witnesses (I’m thinking correct me if not!!)

Trinitarianism is dictated by creeds… I am really happy that no one has chosen to include any of it as their ‘proof’ that Jesus is God since creeds are manmade - Yes, please stick to scriptures to try (unsatisfactorily) to make your claims.

The problem with trinity claims is that when the protagonist is shown that the claim is false, they just ‘move on’ and have no regard to what else might be untrue.

This attitude actually demonstrates how deep the fallacy is dug into Trinitarians. They cannot see over the precipice so they remain in the ditch that they think they know.

The verse referred to in the O.P. is clearly a modification of what the apostle Paul actually said.
No one in his time had any thought of a Three-person-God. No one ever thought of the man they walked and talked and suffered with (though Paul, himself, only came about after Jesus was raised up to Heaven BY GOD… the GOD trinity claims was Jesus Christ!!) was almighty God.

Trinitarians cannot express a totality of the quest of Jesus in the name of God, his Father. They just keep cycling and recycling the same old same old fallacies taught to them by false teachers of the gospels.

 

[Brian2]

That's true, but the other part of Jesus is the spiritual part, which was born of the substance of God Himself.

To me that is saying that the spiritual part was born of the essence of God Himself.

Anyone who has the nature of God is divine by nature, but that does not mean He is actually God incarnate.
That means He is a Manifestation of God who has a divine nature and a human nature.

If a Manifestation has a divine nature that means to me that they are God.

But in other verses Jesus says that God was greater than He.

John 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I..

Greater in this instance means imo that the Father had more authority that Jesus, that He was in a higher position and was not a humble man roaming the earth.
They have the same nature, the glory of God shines out of Jesus (not a reflection) The Son is exactly like His Father. A father has authority over a son and a good son submits to that authority, as did Jesus.

I do not think you understand what I mean by Essence, and actually it is very difficult to explain. When a Baha'i says we do not know the Essence of God I think it means we can never know the intrinsic nature of God. All we can know is that God is spirit and we can know God's attributes that describe God.
Since Jesus was born of the Spirit of God I think he has the Essence of God in that sense.

So we agree.
Was Baha'u'llah born of the Spirit of God, has Baha'u'llah the Essence of God?

“Know thou of a certainty that the Unseen can in no wise incarnate His Essence and reveal it unto men. He is, and hath ever been, immensely exalted beyond all that can either be recounted or perceived. From His retreat of glory His voice is ever proclaiming: “Verily, I am God; there is none other God besides Me, the All-Knowing, the All-Wise. I have manifested Myself unto men, and have sent down Him Who is the Day Spring of the signs of My Revelation. Through Him I have caused all creation to testify that there is none other God except Him, the Incomparable, the All-Informed, the All-Wise.” He Who is everlastingly hidden from the eyes of men can never be known except through His Manifestation, and His Manifestation can adduce no greater proof of the truth of His Mission than the proof of His own Person.”

Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 49

People often misunderstand that passage. Baha'u'llah was quoting God when He said “Verily, I am God; there is none other God besides Me, the All-Knowing, the All-Wise." God is referring to Baha'u'llah when God says "I have manifested Myself unto men, and have sent down Him Who is the Day Spring of the signs of My Revelation. Through Him I have caused all creation to testify that there is none other God except Him, the Incomparable, the All-Informed, the All-Wise.”

So God is saying that through Baha'u'llah he has caused all creation to testify that there is none other God except Him (Baha'u'llah)

That's true, since Jesus did not lose His divine nature when, as a human, he took on the nature of a servant.

That means to me that Jesus was God while a man.

 

[Brian2]

No, it only means that we interpret the Bible differently than you do, but since all Christians interpret the Bible differently, what's the difference?

For a start Baha'is are talking about belief in a false Christ.
Acts 1:9 After he said this, he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight.
10 They were looking intently up into the sky as he was going, when suddenly two men dressed in white stood beside them. 11 “Men of Galilee,” they said, “why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven.”

Yes right, you believe the above passage but just interpret it differently.
You interpret "this same Jesus" to mean "someone else". You interpret "who has been taken from you into heaven" to mean "who was not taken from you into heaven". You interpret "will come back" as "will come".
You interpret "in the same way you have seen him go into heaven" as "in a different way that you saw Jesus go into heaven---- and really you did not see Jesus go into heaven because he was a spirit".
This is not an interpretation, it is a denial of and a change to the Bible's meaning.

Not all Christians believe that everything in the Bile is literally true, but they believe in Jesus and that is what makes them Christians.

Many liberal and some mainline Christian leaders believe that Jesus died during the crucifixion, did not resurrect himself, and was not bodily resurrected by God. At his death, his mind ceased to function and his body started the decomposition process. Returning to life a day and a half later would have been quite impossible. The story of having been wrapped in linen and anointed with myrrh seems to have been copied from the story of the death of Osiris -- the Egyptian God of the earth, vegetation and grain. The legend that he visited the underworld between his death and resurrection was simply copied from common Pagan themes of surrounding cultures. One example again was Osiris. "With his original association to agriculture, his death and resurrection were seen as symbolic of the annual death and re-growth of the crops and the yearly flooding of the Nile." 1

They also believe that Paul regarded the resurrection to be an act of God in which Jesus was a passive recipient of God's power. Paul did not mention the empty tomb, the visit by a woman or women, the stone, the angel/angels/man/men at the tomb, and reunion of Jesus with his followers in his resuscitated body. Rather, he believed that Jesus was taken up into heaven in a spirit body. It was only later, from about 70 to 110 CE when the four canonic Gospels were written, that the Christians believed that Jesus rose from the grave in his original body, and by his own power.

Later, perhaps after Paul's death, there was great disappointment within the Christian communities because Jesus had not returned as expected. They diverted their focus of attention away from Jesus' second coming. They studied his life and death more intensely. Legends without a historical basis were created by the early church; these included the empty tomb and described Jesus returning in his original body to eat and talk with his followers.

In previous centuries, almost all Christians believed in miracles as described in the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament). These included creation, the story of Adam and Eve, a talking serpent, the great flood of Noah, the drying up of the Red/Reed sea, a prophet riding on a talking ***, the sun stopping in the sky, etc. From the Christian Scriptures (New Testament), they believed in the virgin birth, the Christmas star, angels appearing to the shepherds, Jesus healing the sick, etc. Many, perhaps most, liberal Christians now believe that these stories are not to be interpreted literally as real events. Their faith has not been damaged by losing faith in the reality of these events. A growing number of liberals are now taking the final step by interpreting the stories of Jesus' resurrection and his appearances to his followers and to Paul as other than real events. Retired bishop John Shelby Spong commented:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/resur_lt.htm

Are you trying to say that denying parts of the Bible and believing as some heretics and liberal Christians do, that much of the Bible and gospels are myth is OK and Baha'is can claim to believe the Bible if they do that?

 

[Soapy]

That is true... in that he was made flesh

But in the resurrection Thomas said,
John 20:28
Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!”

And there are a multitude of other scriptures that support that position

Wow, Kenny!!!

Jesus had only just told Thomas “I AM NOT A SPIRIT. Touch me and see: I have flesh and bone that a spirit does not have’

God is Spirit ONLY… does not have flesh and bone as Jesus has.

How do you say that Thomas saw and touched ALMIGHTY GOD?

And yet the other TEN disciples did not react in anyway towards seeing ‘their MIGHTY GOD whom no man has ever seen’ right there in front of them!

In fact, a short time later, they were all back doing their ‘day jobs’ like nothing had happened…!

Is that what ‘Seeing God’ meant to the disciples?

 

[Soapy]

To me that is saying that the spiritual part was born of the essence of God Himself.



If a Manifestation has a divine nature that means to me that they are God.



Greater in this instance means imo that the Father had more authority that Jesus, that He was in a higher position and was not a humble man roaming the earth.
They have the same nature, the glory of God shines out of Jesus (not a reflection) The Son is exactly like His Father. A father has authority over a son and a good son submits to that authority, as did Jesus.



So we agree.
Was Baha'u'llah born of the Spirit of God, has Baha'u'llah the Essence of God?




So God is saying that through Baha'u'llah he has caused all creation to testify that there is none other God except Him (Baha'u'llah)



That means to me that Jesus was God while a man.

They have the same nature, the glory of God shines out of Jesus (not a reflection) The Son is exactly like His Father. A father has authority over a son and a good son submits to that authority, as did Jesus.

The Glory of God shines through Jesus… yes.

Brian, is your linguistic ability so skewed that you cannot understand basics infant school language?

• “God’s glory” shines through Jesus…

• “The Father’s glory” shines through the true Son…

• “I and the Father are one”

If you want to say that Jesus is God then you also need to say that Jesus is the Father. But the Father is not the Son - and the Son is not the Father … isn’t that what trinity says?

And the Son most definitely is a REFLECTION of the Father… An image is the reflection of the source. The Father is the source of all things… Jesus Christ is the reflection of that source; the reflection of his Father God.

One who is like another — is not THE ONE whom he is like!!

And your forked tongue also said that the Father has authority over the Son… True! Yet you say that the Son is equal to the Father. The two are counter intuitive in reasoning…. A False reasoning!

Is the Father EQUAL TO THE SON? Your answer is ‘No!’. Yet the Son is equal to the Father? How do you claim such an obvious miscarriage of sensibility as your ideology of the one true God almighty:Yahweh, and his high priest and Christ: Jesus of Nazareth?

So there are problem with the trinity claim - conundrums - Contradictions … enigmas. And these are only three of many of such in trinity!

 

[Soapy]

To me that is saying that the spiritual part was born of the essence of God Himself.



If a Manifestation has a divine nature that means to me that they are God.



Greater in this instance means imo that the Father had more authority that Jesus, that He was in a higher position and was not a humble man roaming the earth.
They have the same nature, the glory of God shines out of Jesus (not a reflection) The Son is exactly like His Father. A father has authority over a son and a good son submits to that authority, as did Jesus.



So we agree.
Was Baha'u'llah born of the Spirit of God, has Baha'u'llah the Essence of God?




So God is saying that through Baha'u'llah he has caused all creation to testify that there is none other God except Him (Baha'u'llah)



That means to me that Jesus was God while a man.

That means to me that Jesus was God while a man.

“I am not a man”, says the one true God of the Israelites.

Ok, I’m understanding you, Brian2.

I’m understanding only now that you are not claiming the one true God of the Israelites is your God, but rather, like the pagans, you believe in a God-Man. There were a number of beliefs in the time of Jesus that made claims of a ‘God in the flesh’.

Can I ask: Do you read a lot of comic books; watch a lot of fantasy movies, especially about Greek mythology or do you do a lot of pagan worship?

 

[Soapy]

That's true, but Jesus did not have to be God in order to offer salvation.
Jesus was a Manifestation of God so Jesus perfectly reflected God's Attributes and God's Will.
It was God's Will that we be saved and that is what Jesus came to do, among other things.

Yes, what you say is true.

But, adding to that: Jesus was a man born holy by the spirit of God. That means he was the same as Adam, the first man in creation, also Holy, sinless, righteous in all his ways…
But then, this:

• “For just as through the disobedience of the one man (Adam) the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man (Jesus Christ) the many will be made righteous.” (Romans 5:19)

Man caused sin to be in the ‘genes’ of humanity. Everyone born from a son of Adam is affected by the ‘sin gene’. Therefore, after a long era of testing if such a man could be found without sin (just a doctor tests a hypothesis and finds no solution), a NEW SINLESS MAN, was created in the fashion of the first: a Second Adam… and since no other Adam would ever be created, the LAST ADAM:

• “And the angel answered [Mary], “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God.” (Luke 1:35)
  • ‘Note that the ’holy one’ to be born… the child is holy, sinless, righteous!
  • Note that the child ‘WILL BE CALLED’ The Son of God. The Angel did not say that the child ‘IS’ THE SON OF GOD!
• “So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being"; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit.” (1 Cor 15:45)
  • The last Adam is Jesus Christ who was granted to be judge over creation at the end of time giving everlasting LIFE to those whom he deems worthy:
    • “As the Father has life in him so he has GRANTED the Son to ALSO have life in him”- Which is twofold:
    1. Jesus is to be granted life through his resurrection
    2. Jesus in turn is to resurrect and give life to the faithful