For trinity believers: Does your world come unravelled if Jesus is not God,but ONLY Gods Son?

[Endure]

What is one , since you are so smart?

Huh?

 

[Trailblazer]

That I thought. Thanks for your honesty.
I can prove Jesus is God's Son, though; there is not comparison with your spiritual leader.

How can you prove that Jesus is God's Son? You cannot even prove that God exists.
If you could prove that Jesus is God's Son then it would be an established fact, in which case everyone would believe it.

Proof: evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement: https://www.google.com/search

Fact: something that is known to have happened or to exist, especially something for which proof exists, or about which there is information:
fact

You can no more prove that Jesus was God's Son than I can prove that Baha'u'llah was a Messenger of God.

Mmmmh, interesting.
Bahais first need to question BahaUllah under that premise. He is not superior to Jesus in absolutely anything.

I never claimed that Baha'u'llah is superior to Jesus.
It is Christians who are claiming that Jesus is superior to Baha'u'llah.

“Know that the attributes of perfection, the splendor of the divine bounties, and the lights of inspiration are visible and evident in all the Holy Manifestations; but the glorious Word of God, Christ, and the Greatest Name, Bahá’u’lláh, are manifestations and evidences which are beyond imagination, for They possess all the perfections of the former Manifestations; and more than that, They possess some perfections which make the other Manifestations dependent upon Them. So all the Prophets of Israel were centers of inspiration; Christ also was a receiver of inspiration, but what a difference between the inspiration of the Word of God and the revelations of Isaiah, Jeremiah and Elijah!”
Some Answered Questions, pp. 149-150

 

[Trailblazer]

That's what the Bible teaches.

No, the Bible does not teach that Jesus is God incarnate. Christianity teaches it.
The Bible teaches that Jesus was a Manifestation of God, not God.

1 Timothy 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

The verse above says that God was manifest in the flesh; it does not say that God became flesh. God cannot become flesh because God is everlastingly hidden from the eyes of men. No one has ever seen God (John 1:18, 1 John 4:12). Many people saw Jesus so that means that Jesus was not God.

Jesus manifested certain Attributes of God such as Good, Loving, Gracious, Merciful, Just, Righteous, Forgiving, and Patient, to name a few.

However, certain Attributes are unique to God. Only God is Unchanging, Impassable, Infinite, Omnipresent, Self-Existent, Self-Sufficient, and Immaterial, so nobody except God can have those attributes, and that means Jesus was not God.

 

[shunyadragon]

No , you need to present your evidence,since you claim that is from old sources.

You have not cited your scientific peer reviewed sources.

Most people assume that radiometric dating can find ages for almost anything.But that is not the case. It’s especially problematic for dating early human remains.

Most people?!?!!? Scientists do not consider it possible to date almost anything. Multiple dating methods are used today.

No, based on current multiple dating methods it is not problematic for dating early human remains. Actually these same methods have been used to date Biblical history.

Potassium Argon dating methods are another radiometric dating method used to data human remains and it is not subject to contamination like carbon dating and its range of dating is much older than carbon dating.

Argon-Argon Dating and Hominid Skulls in Herto, Ethiopia | Real Archaeology

pages.vassar.edu

Argon-Argon Dating and Hominid Skulls in Herto, Ethiopia​

Posted on September 22, 2018 by lhoban
Three fossilized hominid skulls were found near Herto, Ethiopia in 1997. The skulls were determined to be those of two adults and one child. The remains were too old to be dated using radiocarbon dating. In order to determine the age of the artifacts found at Herto (Figure 1), scientists performed argon-argon dating on volcanic rock that was found near the artifacts (Zielinski 2008).

Figure 1. A map showing the location of Herto, Ethiopia, the village the hominid skulls were found near.
There are multiple radiometric methods of dating artifacts. Some of these radiometric methods include radiocarbon dating, potassium-argon dating, uranium-series dating, and fission-track dating (Renfrew 2010:120-129). Potassium-argon dating, which measures the ratio of potassium-40 to argon-40, is one radiometric method, but this method of dating is not as precise as argon-argon dating. Scientists converted potassium-40 to argon-39. This allowed the scientists to use argon-argon dating. The volcanic rock analyzed by scientists at Herto were found to be around 154,000 to 160,000 years old (Zielinski 2008).

The hominid skulls found at Herto are important discoveries because at the time of their discovery, they were some of the oldest near-modern human remains on record (Graham 2003). Based on archaeological artifacts like the ones found at Herto, artists have created depictions of near-modern humans (Figure 2). The Homo sapiens remains found at Herto, which were distinct from Homo neanderthalensis remains, were given a subspecies name, Homo sapiens idaltu. Other artifacts from the same time period were found near the fossilized skulls. Some of these artifacts include stone tools and animal bones with marks from tools. Additionally, cut marks on the skulls are indicative of the mortuary practices and rituals of the early humans (Sanders 2003). These marks and tools, which include hand axes, help the people of today understand how Homo sapiens lived over 100,000 years ago.

Scientists claim the analysis of the Herto hominid skulls supports claims made by molecular anthropologists. Before the discovery of the Herto artifacts, molecular anthropologists have claimed modern humans evolved out of Africa (Sanders 2003). The discovery of near-modern human skulls in Herto, Ethiopia supports this Out of Africa hypothesis. Before the discovery of the Herto artifacts, other Homo sapiens remains had been discovered in Ethiopia and other African countries. The ages of these other remains range from 80,000 years old to 130,000 years old (Sanders 2003). Since the discovery of the Homo sapiens idaltu fossils near Herto, remains found in Jebel Irhoud, Morocco have been found to be about 315,000 years old, making them the oldest Homo sapiens remains on record (Callaway 2017). While the Herto remains may no longer be considered the oldest Homo sapiens remains on record, the discovery was important in the understanding of the origins of Homo sapiens and illustrates the importance and usefulness of radiometric dating methods like argon-argon dating.

Radiometric dating relies on three assumptions:

-We can reasonably reconstruct the conditions when the process started.
-The rate of change has stayed the same throughout the past.
-Nothing has happened to contaminate the process.

Roughly true. Yes if there is potential pf contamination then the radiometric dating is not considered valid.

An hourglass “clock” is a good analogy for understanding how all dating methods (not just radioactive decay) work using physical processes. They begin with three crucial assumptions. If the assumptions are wrong, then it doesn’t matter how accurate the measurements are ,the conclusion will still be wrong.

Addressed above.

*The original number of unstable atoms can be known. Scientists assume how many atoms appeared at the beginning based on how many parent and daughter atoms are left today.

*Scientists assume that radioactive atoms have changed at the same rate throughout time

This assumption is confirmed using multiple dating methods. Many years of research and comparative dating has confirmed beyond any reasonable doubt that radioactive decay is uniform over time.

A good example of the comparison of radiometric dating methods that cover over 100,000 years is the annual sediment varve deposits in a lake in Japan. These annual deposits each contain a seasonal pollen layer. Today we can objectively record a seasonal varve deposited every year. Radiometric dates of fossil plant materials are confirmed simply by counting the varves confirming consistent and predictable radioactive decay for more than 50,000 years of the sediments.

Your objection you propose dating to radiometric methods you appear to be objecting to the uniform nature of the geologic past in time as we measure things today. This is not a valid challenge. Like the above example of using different dating methods to confirm the age of fossils. There is absolutely no evidence that the natural laws and natural processes of geologic history life, the earth and the universe is not uniform over time.

There is a problem is that the negative view you have toward radiometric dating strongly resembles the bogus Answers in Genesis and the Discovery Institute rejected by 98%++ of all the scientists and the major academic universities of the world.

*The daughter atoms were all produced by radioactive decay. Scientists assume that no outside forces, such as flowing groundwater, contaminated the sample

This and other possibilities of error is taken into consideration by using comparative dating methodsand more advanced technology methods of dating.

These three assumptions can never be proven about rocks in the past. After all, who was there to continuously measure the rate to verify it stayed the same as today’s rate? Who witnessed the starting conditions? And who has continuously monitored the process to confirm that it was not contaminated? No one!

Science does not prove anything. Your making many false assumptions and lack of knowledge in current science of dating methods for this argument to be remotely valid.

I always chose to make an argument of the Theory of Evolution.

You have not presented a coherent argument either way. Considering your description of your view of the problems with radiometric dating I question your academic background in the related sciences like physics, chemistry and the different dating methods to make such claims.

I belive in what Darwin observed,but i am not sure that the mechanism of mutation and natural selection can bear all the weight that's put on it.
Like producing consciousness and so on.

Darwin was extremely good in his time, but his science is old and outdated.

Then please state on what grounds should we talk about truth and i will follow it.

I already stated my argument for making religious claims of "Truth." Too many diverse and conflicting subjective religious beliefs claim their beliefs represent "Truth." There is no objective way to determine which one is indeed "True."

 

[Brian2]

The point is the subjective nature of prophecies result in various conflicting interpretation, and your demands that the prophecies of the fulfillment of prophecies by Jesus are absolutely 'True' and others are absolutely false lacks independent subjective judgement as to how the different religions interpret prophecy.

Yes you say you believe the Bible is true, but that is a subjective statement, which includes the Jewish Torah, which is the Jews Book.

I realize the subjective nature of claims of the fulfillment of prophecy is to a degree subjective, and not what is absolutely 'True' or not.

Nonetheless the Baha'i view of prophecy has support from independent Christian sources in the West and a number of churches formed at theat time based on this belief such as Jehovah Witnesses and Seventh Day Adventists.

Your stoic demanding that your beliefs in scripture, prophecy and science remains a very egocentric narrow world view rejecting the reality of the diverse world we can objectively see without blindly relying on literal ancient beliefs.

So it seems that you are saying that people cannot understand the Bible and it's prophecies because there are a number of different views of the meaning of various prophecies.
And yes there are a variety of view of meaning for prophecies. That is to be expected amongst people and it is good that prophetic meaning is studied and there are a variety of meaning to choose from for various prophecies. We will find out the truth sooner or later.
But really what you want to do is to say that "therefore Baha'i interpretation might be right".
But no, once so called interpretation of the Bible involves denying the truth of scripture and claiming that a meaning diametically opposite the plain meaning of a passage might be correct, that is not really interpretation, it's just replacing what the Bible says with Baha'i teachings.
And that is true even if you can find some Christians groups that do the same thing.

 

[Brian2]

Modern science has a great deal to with the context of how ancient scripture is understood in the contemporary world. Ancient worldviews that assert literal interpretations are generally out of touch with the reality of a changing evolving world and the fallible nature of human interpretation of scripture.

I believe the more universal perspective of the Baha'i Faith, the harmony of science and religion, and recognizing the diversity of human experience over the hundreds of thousands of years of human experience is the fulfillment of the revelation of knowledge in the next age.

Human interpretation of scripture can indeed be wrong, as can the interpretations given by a false prophet and false Christ who says, "I'm the return of Christ, a Prophet of God, I can tell you what the scriptures mean. Believe me, even if I tell you the scriptures mean the opposite of what they read as."

Why would we believe someone is from God if they tell us that the scriptures are wrong but they are right?

 

[Brian2]

Again the problem remains that by the evidence of the subjective nature of prophecy, you cannot make such objective demands on how other religions interpret prophecy'

Again, again and again the Jews emphatically and totally consider Jesus a 'false prophet' based on their own book, language and prophecies. You have repeatedly ignored this problem by strictly demanded the 'Truth' of your own subjective beliefs, which is in contradiction with the reality of diverse interpretations of scripture..

The Jews of course deny Christian interpretations.
I'm a Christian, of course I believe Jesus fulfilled prophecy and is the Messiah.
I can be as convinced about that as a Jew is that they are right. I say the Christian interpretation is right, they say the Jewish interpretation is right. So?

 

[Brian2]

John 14:2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.
John 14:3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.

Jesus was addressing His disciples. Jesus said He was going to heaven to prepare a place for His disciples.

If Jesus came again it was not during the lifetimes of the disciples, we know that, so how could I will come again, and receive you unto myself be referring yo Jesus receiving His disciples on earth?
No, Jesus was going to receive His disciples in heaven, so that where Jesus was the disciples would be there also.

Jesus said that He would come back and get His disciples, just as 1Thess 4:13-18 shows us. What is the problem except that you don't want to believe what it says.
Jesus will come back and bring the souls of the dead Christians back and resurrect them into their resurrection bodies.
You have a different teaching that you want to impose on the Bible and deny the plain reading of the Bible.
Romans 8:22 For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now. 23 And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. 24 For in this hope we were saved.

You don't like the real resurrection because it is not a part of Baha'i teaching, so you have to deny what the Bible teaches about it.

Jesus is not the only one who was pierced. Baha'u'llah was also pierced, by heavy chains.

“Many prisoners did not survive the brutal conditions in Persian dungeons, either. In the Black Pit, for example, men were held underground in a dank, foul, fetid old cistern, bound together with massive, heavy chains and collars. Baha’u’llah, who had lived a life of privilege until his arrest, found himself shackled with two of the most galling of those huge chains, so feared and infamous they had names.”
The Message Baha’u’llah Received in the Black Pit

“Baha’u’llah was thrown into the Black Pit, an infamous dungeon in Tehran. A number of other Babis had also been arrested and were chained together with him in the dungeon.
Baha’u’llah was forced to wear constantly one or the other of two heavy chains. So great was their weight that they left him scarred for the rest of his life.”
The Black Pit: Violence, Torture and Gruesome Death

Rev 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

That verse cannot be about Jesus since Jesus clearly said we would see Him no more.

John 14:19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.

John 16:10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more.

Baha'u'llah was pierced by chains?,,,,,,,,,,,, hmmm.
Baha'u'llah freed us from our sins by his blood?
Every eye saw Baha'u'llah?
Baha'u'llah came in the clouds?
The world mourned because of Baha'u'llah's coming?

Interestingly you know that John 14:19 and John 16:10 have other simple explanations which do not make other passages into contradictions. But the integrity of the Bible is not worth preserving for a follower of Baha'i even though I can see that you do try in your own way to preserve it,,,,,,,,,,,,, even though in reality that is not possible for a follower of Baha'i.

Rev 22:20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

Your interpretation of that verse is incorrect. Even so, come, Lord Jesus is not John identifying Jesus as the one who will come, it is John beckoning Jesus to come. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

So John wanted Jesus to come even though John know that Jesus would never come back to earth.

Rev 22:20 He who testifies to these things says, “Surely I am coming soon.” Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!

From this site: https://parade.com/living/amen-meaning

What Is the Real Meaning of 'Amen'?​

"Amen" is defined as "so be it" or "certainly."

 

[Brian2]

Nowhere in the Bible does it say that.
That is just a Christian belief that came about by slapping many different verses together to form a belief.

Yep that's the way Christian beliefs happen.
You may not understand this, but for a Christian that is a better way to find the truth than to listen to what Baha'u'llah says is the truth.

 

[Brian2]

"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."

For the 1000th time, the verse does not say that they saw a body ascend. That is simply a Christian belief.

We start off with the idea that Jesus rose bodily from the dead, as the gospels stories tell us. Then we have the disciples and Jesus (in His resurrection body presumably) ascending in front of His disaiples and being hidden by cloud.
It's not complicated really. Just read it slowly and think about it as you do, I'm sure you will be able to see it. Give it a go.

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.”

Jesus never promised to return to earth, not once in the New Testament. As the Bible says Christ would return with a new name, so we know He would not be called Jesus.

Revelation 2:17 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.

Revelation 3:12-13 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name. He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

The new name means that the return of Christ would be another man. Christians do not bother to think about what these verses actually mean -- what the Spirit saith unto the churches -- yet they have completely disregarded what the Spirit said because they STILL believe that the same Jesus is going to come down from heaven on the clouds.

So as a Baha'i you have to interpret verses so that they contradict other verses,,,,, and you have to do that if you want the Bible not to disagree with Baha'u'llah.
That is because Baha'u'llah disagrees with the Bible.

 

[shunyadragon]

So it seems that you are saying that people cannot understand the Bible and it's prophecies because there are a number of different views of the meaning of various prophecies.

People can understand the Bible, but absolute claims concerning prophesies are problematic, because of the subjective nature of the claims.

And yes there are a variety of view of meaning for prophecies. That is to be expected amongst people and it is good that prophetic meaning is studied and there are a variety of meaning to choose from for various prophecies. We will find out the truth sooner or later.
But really what you want to do is to say that "therefore Baha'i interpretation might be right".

No, this is not my point. Because of the subjective nature of prophesies they all could well be wrong. Actually it is unlikely that we will find out any thing earth shaking significant sooner or latter, because the world goes on and on for thousands of years, and no likely occurrence of an apocalyptic event

But no, once so called interpretation of the Bible involves denying the truth of scripture and claiming that a meaning diametically opposite the plain meaning of a passage might be correct, that is not really interpretation, it's just replacing what the Bible says with Baha'i teachings.
And that is true even if you can find some Christians groups that do the same thing.

We have no plain reading of prophecies to base this claim on.

 

[Endure]

No, the Bible does not teach that Jesus is God incarnate. Christianity teaches it.
The Bible teaches that Jesus was a Manifestation of God, not God.

1 Timothy 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

The verse above says that God was manifest in the flesh; it does not say that God became flesh. God cannot become flesh because God is everlastingly hidden from the eyes of men. No one has ever seen God (John 1:18, 1 John 4:12). Many people saw Jesus so that means that Jesus was not God.

Jesus manifested certain Attributes of God such as Good, Loving, Gracious, Merciful, Just, Righteous, Forgiving, and Patient, to name a few.

However, certain Attributes are unique to God. Only God is Unchanging, Impassable, Infinite, Omnipresent, Self-Existent, Self-Sufficient, and Immaterial, so nobody except God can have those attributes, and that means Jesus was not God.

Oh you want to stick with Scripture only.

Okay.

Did Jesus say 'If you've seen Me, you've seen the Father'?

Yes or no?

If you refuse to answer, you are admitting that your premise is faulty.

 

[shunyadragon]

Oh you want to stick with Scripture only.

Okay.

Did Jesus say 'If you've seen Me, you've seen the Father'?

Yes or no?

If you refuse to answer, you are admitting that your premise is faulty.

Yes, because Jesus reflected the attributes of God

 

[Endure]

Yes, because Jesus reflected the attributes of God

Read the rules again.

Scripture only.

Show us where the Bible specifies that Jesus said 'If you've seen Me, you've seen the Father' because He was simply referring to the fact that He "acted" a lot like God.

Do you find anywhere in Scripture that if you've seen a Christian, you've seen God?

No. No you don't.

P.S. Your Judaism cannot define Christianity.

 

[shunyadragon]

Read the rules again.

Read the rules?!?!?! Any interpretation of rules you propose are to justify your agenda. Scripture only fails because . . .

ALL prophesies and most scripture is subjective and and ALL religions believe in contradictory and conflicting interpretations of "Scripture only.".

Your literal interpretations has a bad egocentric reputation. In other words you believe your always right even though you alike all us are fallible human beings.

 

[ElishaElijah]

When I asked you before how many
Father, Son and Holy Spirit, you said one and now you say 3?

This is what I said:
”For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily; and you are complete in Him, who is the head of all principality and power.“
‭‭Colossians‬ ‭2‬:‭9‬-‭10‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

There is 1 Godhead- 3 persons in the Godhead Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

 

[Endure]

Read the rules?!?!?! Any interpretation of rules you propose are to justify your agenda. Scripture only fails because . . .

ALL prophesies and most scripture is subjective and and ALL religions believe in contradictory and conflicting interpretations of "Scripture only.".

Your literal interpretations has a bad egocentric reputation. In other words you believe your always right even though you alike all us are fallible human beings.

The Bible and its Author are not fallible.

And Jesus is clearly God.

To claim He is not because your religion profoundly despises Him is not proof of anything - not about Jesus anyway.

 

[Endure]

This is what I said:
”For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily; and you are complete in Him, who is the head of all principality and power.“
‭‭Colossians‬ ‭2‬:‭9‬-‭10‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

There is 1 Godhead- 3 persons in the Godhead Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

You listed 3 gods.

Admit your human error.

 

[ElishaElijah]

How could the Holy Spirit be a person if the Holy Spirit has no body.

Notice how the Bible says “He” when talking about the Holy Spirit?

”Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you. And when He has come, He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: of sin, because they do not believe in Me; of righteousness, because I go to My Father and you see Me no more; of judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged. “I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you. All things that the Father has are Mine. Therefore I said that He will take of Mine and declare it to you.“
‭‭John‬ ‭16‬:‭7‬-‭15‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

 

[ElishaElijah]

Your post said 3 gods

Never said 3 Gods, you did and if you’re a believer in Jesus Christ and know Him, believe what the Bible says then you’ll have to explain how the Father in Heaven, who is on the throne, sent His Son who is God incarnate, The Word who is God and became a man as John 1 declares, died was buried and rose from the dead is at the right hand of the Father making intercession as our High Priest, sent The Holy Spirit as a guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession (believers).
So you can see there is 1 Godhead with 3 persons, the Father is not the Son and the Son isn’t the Holy Spirit.
So explain your position because you haven’t yet and while you’re at it have you been born again of the Holy Spirit? Would like to hear your testimony.