Shermana
Heretic
Go ask the Judaism DIR whether the ancient Israelites believed in the existence of other gods.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Did Jesus say he was God???
- Thread starter Muffled
- Start date
Go ask the Judaism DIR whether the ancient Israelites believed in the existence of other gods.
Shermana
Heretic
It is in fact used for "Superior" when addressing Angels.
Zechariah 1:9 I asked, "What are these, my lord?" The angel who was talking with me answered, "I will show you what they are."
http://biblehub.com/zechariah/4-4.htm
Young's Literal Translation
And I answer and speak unto the messenger who is speaking with me, saying, 'What are these, my lord?'
Forgive me if I read what you said plainly when you said:
"How come when it straight us says Lord that is must mean something besides Christ or God especially when it can't mean many of the other uses for the term, like husband."
Last edited:
1robin
Christian/Baptist
That was not exactly my point. I know they went "in their words" went whoring after other Gods. The point is that in the final analysis are there supposed to actually be other God's in truth, looking back. God sure wore them out for believing there was and I thought they had learned their lesson to such an extent by late pre-AD times that they persecuted the slightest hint that it was being revived.
1robin
Christian/Baptist
My statement you included says that only the term husband was impossible. As I have stated I think the term Lord meaning Christ or God was more likely but it is possible that it meant superior being, etc... So My statements are accurate no matter what, but I wish to see if I agree with you in this last iteration but it will have to wait. I am leaving. I will evaluate this as soon as I can.
Shermana
Heretic
There's a difference between submitting to other gods and believing in their existence.
This same semantic issue of what "believe in" means rears its head when discussing the difference between "Polytheism" and "Henotheism".
I.S.L.A.M617
Illuminatus
Yes it does. It fit my interpretation better than it did yours, seeing as yours wasn't even part of the definition.
The definition of the word...
What more do I need?Every verse you gave me was just a different variation of the original "no other god beside me". They all used the same word...
Last edited:
1robin
Christian/Baptist
Let me ask it even more simpler than before. Do you believe there are other God's in actuality than "I am"? There is no simpler form left to use in asking.
Ex 3:13 And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? What shall I say unto them?
Ex 3:14 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
Explain these verses
I.S.L.A.M617
Illuminatus
What does God's refusal to tell Moses his name have to do with Jesus? That excerpt is completely irrelevant to the Trinity doctrine.
captainbryce
Active Member
I'd be perfectly happy to AFTER you answer my question!
captainbryce
Active Member
I think where he is going with this is that he's going to make a plea that Jesus once used the phrase "I am" to refer to himself, and that this somehow proves that he is God. That's usually why this example is brought up (flawed as it may be). But I don't want to put words in my mouth. The argument is easily defeated but I'm not even going to take it up until he makes some attempt to explain the anti-trinitarian scriptures I pointed out first.
Shermana
Heretic
Absolutely 100%. Are they more powerful than the "god of the gods"? Absolutely not. They are simply beings called "Elohim".
The use of the word "god" in English is a slippery semantic. The word "Elohim" in the Hebrew does not change definition, in fact, that's why "the god of the gods" has an article generally, THE god, when referring to him, to differentiate.
(Note: Some have said that "Elohim" can refer to human judges such as in the KJV-tradition, but this is not necessarily the case and disputable, but it can in fact refer to Human souls as well).
Even in the NT, Satan is called "the god of this age".
And for the record, the name is more or less "I shall be", the KJV-tradition of "I am" is a bit misleading since the word Ehyeh is not immediate present tense. So that kinda shoots down the common abuse of John 8:58 right there too.
Last edited:
Shermana
Heretic
Noting the number of hits this topic has generated. 600,000+.
Wouldn't you think this topic has an impact on humanity?
Definitely, a life changing experience wouldn't you say.......I mean....since two thousand years ago?
If there is sooooo much opposition to it, then there must be something to it that lends credibility to it?
It's very simple......it's either a yes, or a no answer. No in-betweens. Either, one is on one side or the other, no fence straddling.
Matter of choice.
One positive note about it.....regardless of one way or the other, God fixed it for all of us in the price of the purchase. Yea's and nay's all included.
That is my opinion.
Blessings, AJ
Wouldn't you think this topic has an impact on humanity?
Definitely, a life changing experience wouldn't you say.......I mean....since two thousand years ago?
If there is sooooo much opposition to it, then there must be something to it that lends credibility to it?
It's very simple......it's either a yes, or a no answer. No in-betweens. Either, one is on one side or the other, no fence straddling.
Matter of choice.
One positive note about it.....regardless of one way or the other, God fixed it for all of us in the price of the purchase. Yea's and nay's all included.
That is my opinion.
Blessings, AJ
I.S.L.A.M617
Illuminatus
Stupidest thing I've ever heard... Well, it's up there, at least. There's plenty of opposition to the assertion that the Holocaust was justified. Does that mean it was?
Subject in question is..."did Jesus say he was God...
Now, for over two thousand years has this not being a huge topic of debate?
Why so?
I mean if Jesus was just a man with no heavenly ties, then he'd be remembered and or forgotten, just like any other man.
This debate will never end as long as humanity exists.
It deals with the heart, the circumcision of the heart, which is the eye opener and the changer of life.
The debate is good, as it tugs at the strings of the heart. Note: Not a literal heart, but who you are. (I am)
Blessings, AJ
CONTRADICTORY EXTRAPOLATIONS?
Tell me, what is contradicting with these verses, and from what VERSES they are contradicting from?
The disciples came to see that Jesus was the long-expected Messiah of Israel (Matt 16:13-20; Mark 8:27-30).
It clearly says in these verses that Christ is the Son of God, the coming Messiah of Israel. Mt 16:16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ [The Messiah, the Anointed One], the Son of the living God.
EXTRAPOLATION? This verse is simply saying what it is saying without making another assumption or EXTRAPOLATION of what it is. It is not saying something else than what it actually does say. You can read IT literally because it simply says that Jesus is the Christ, the coming Messiah of Israel, the Son of God. This is a very simple deductive reasoning without analogical extrapolation.
Later after the RESURRECTION they understood that to be the Messiah, Jesus must also be God made man (see John 1:1-2, 14, 18; 20:28; Rom 9:5; Titus 2:13; Heb 1:8; 2 Peter 1:1). Thus doxologies were offered to him as God (Heb 13:20-21; 2 Peter 3:18; Rev 1:5-6; 5:13; 7:10).*
You have not disprove those verses YET, but you have already accused me of EXTRAPOLATION.
These two verses need not another analogy or deep philosophy to explain. Is this Extrapolation too?
Jn 12:41 These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him.
Isa 6:1 In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple.
Isaiah saw the glory of Christ.
captainbryce
Active Member
I have no intention of replying to ANY of your questions until you can provide an answer to mine. I asked you how you can reconcile a belief in Trinity with the specific scriptures I called out that flat out refute it, and you've ducked that question by ignoring those scriptures. So as far as I'm concerned, Trinity remains a concept that trinitarians can't reconcile with scripture. If you could, then you (or any trinitarian) would have done it by now. There is no trinity, because scripture denies it!
I.S.L.A.M617
Illuminatus
Way to completely dodge the question and continue to proselytize...
captainbryce
Active Member
But that's not what the debate is about. The issue is whether or not Jesus ever SAID he was God, not whether or not he has any heavenly ties.