• 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!

Matthew 27:46 anyone figure this out yet?

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
Of course Jesus, the son of Mary and her half-brother 'Joseph,' who were both sired by Heli=Alexander Helios, was the son of God, because we are assured that on the day he was baptized, the spirit of our Lord God and savior, descended upon him in the form of a dove, as the heavenly voice was heard to say; "You are my son, TODAY, I have begotten thee."
Nope!
So your whole argument is hinged on the title "Lord" as if no one else in the Bible can be identified by it?
1 Corinthians 8:6

The Bible tells you there is only 'One Lord', Jesus Christ.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
As for Acts 2:27, this is not about Christ Jesus, but about king David
Had you back up to Verse 25-27.
You would haved found Acts 2:27, is about king David and not about Christ Jesus.
Acts 2:24-32, is about king David and not about Christ Jesus.

Acts of the Apostles 2:34; Acts of the Apostles 13:36 is about David who did Not ascend from the grave - John 3:13.
In other words, God did Not resurrect David as per Acts of the Apostles 2:24. Verses 31 and 32 are about Jesus.
Acts of the Apostles 2:27 is in connection to Psalms 16:10 aka Jesus. So is Ephesians 4:9.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
1 Corinthians 8:6
The Bible tells you there is only 'One Lord', Jesus Christ.
1 Corinthians 8:6 lets us know there are two (2) persons:
One God ( that is the Father ) 'and' one Lord Jesus Christ.
The word ' and ' is a conjunction between two (2) persons.

At Psalms 110 there are two (2) LORD/Lord's mentioned.
The LORD in all BIG letters is the LORD God ( Tetragrammaton )
The Lord is some smaller letters stands for Lord Jesus. ( No Tetragrammaton )
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
1 Corinthians 8:6 lets us know there are two (2) persons:
One God ( that is the Father ) 'and' one Lord Jesus Christ.
The word ' and ' is a conjunction between two (2) persons.

At Psalms 110 there are two (2) LORD/Lord's mentioned.
The LORD in all BIG letters is the LORD God ( Tetragrammaton )
The Lord is some smaller letters stands for Lord Jesus. ( No Tetragrammaton )
2 Corinthians 6:18
'Lord almighty'.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
I am looking at John 1:18 (KJV) and it says 'only-begotten Son '
and it goes on to say that No man has seen God at any time - 1 John 4:12
People saw Jesus.
Any comments about John 6:46 __________
Right. However it seems you aren't reading the same Bible, because God, the Lord, was encountered previous.

That is why, either John, is talking about a 'different god', or it means, the manifestation, of Jesus, in Yisrael.

The verse actually says, Jesus 'reveals Him', previously unknown, that can't mean the God of the Bible I'm reading, because God was already known.

Again, the verse at least in english, Jesus is talking specifically to certain people, they may have been practicing a different 'religion'.
Otherwise, either, 'another god', or, means Jesus, 'previously unknown'.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
I am looking at John 1:18 (KJV) and it says 'only-begotten Son '
and it goes on to say that No man has seen God at any time - 1 John 4:12
People saw Jesus.
Any comments about John 6:46 __________
John 6:46 as a literal statement? Not in my religion. Not in my Bible. Not in my texts.


John 1:18
Is 'only begotten god', in original, the english does interpret verses.
 

The Anointed

Well-Known Member
Right. However it seems you aren't reading the same Bible, because God, the Lord, was encountered previous.

That is why, either John, is talking about a 'different god', or it means, the manifestation, of Jesus, in Yisrael.

The verse actually says, Jesus 'reveals Him', previously unknown, that can't mean the God of the Bible I'm reading, because God was already known.

Again, the verse at least in english, Jesus is talking specifically to certain people, they may have been practicing a different 'religion'.
Otherwise, either, 'another god', or, means Jesus, 'previously unknown'.

Disciple of Jesus wrote...….. The verse actually says, Jesus 'reveals Him', previously unknown, that can't mean the God of the Bible I'm reading, because God was already known.

The Anointed......… Correct! Jesus revealed ‘The Son of Man, who is the only begotten son of God, of who it is written in the book of Hebrews,10: 5; “For this reason, when ‘The Anointed One” was about to come into the world, he said to God; “You do not want sacrifices or offerings, but a body you have prepared for me, etc.”

The body that the MOST HIGH in the creation, had already prepared for his Son, was that of the man Jesus.

Hebrew 5: 7-10; “In his life on earth, Jesus made his prayers and requests with loud cries and tears to God who could save him from death. Because he was humble and devoted, God heard him. But even though he was ‘A’ son of God, [Not God’s son or THE Son of God, but ‘A’ son of God, check it out in the appendix of Strong’s Concordance, or The King James translation, the Amplified translation, or The Revised Standard translation. All Israelites are sons of God according to God’s word, see Psalms 82: 6; ‘You are gods,’ I said; ‘all of you are sons of the Most High.’) he (Jesus) learned through suffering to be obedient, when he was made perfect he became the only source through whom salvation could be gained from our Lord God and saviour, who rose Jesus from death and will raise all they, who are united to him also.

‘The Son of Man,’ who is the son that is currently developing within the great androgynous pregnant body of Eve [Mankind] which body will suffer great tribulations in giving birth to the Son of the present MOST HIGH in the creation, who has been evolving on the spirits of the righteous, who had paid the blood price for their inherited sin and any mistakes they may have made in life, who were then separated from the unrighteous dead, and gathered to the chosen cornerstone of Gods new glorious temple of Light, that cornerstone, being the evolving spirit of the Anointed one in the bosom of Abraham.

The body that the MOST HIGH had prepared for his Son, was the compilation of all those righteous spirits over whom the second death had no power on who, 'The Anointed One' had evolved up until some two thousand years ago, in his ascent to the ends of this cycle of universal activity.

When Jesus, the son of Mary and her half brother Joseph, who were both sired by Alexander Helios/Heli, was about 30, he was baptised by John the first cousin to his mother Mary, and it was then that the spirit of the Son of God the Most High, descended upon Jesus in the form of a dove, as the heavenly voice was heard to say, “You are my Son, [MY chosen heir and successor] TODAY I have begotten thee.

Spiritual beings do not have the animal power of reproduction, they choose their heir and successor.

This God, ‘The Son of Man’ is he who was chosen by Abraham, as his God. And it was to Abraham that he said, “In blessing I will bless you, and in multiplying, I will multiply you.

And it was this God, who is equal to The Father, who said to Moses in Deuteronomy 18: 18-19; “I will raise up for the a prophet just like you from among their own brethren; and I will put MY WORDS into his mouth, and I will punish anyone who does not Heed MY WORDS which he shall speak in MY NAME.”

So you were correct in saying that Jesus 'reveals Him', the God who was previously unknown.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
Disciple of Jesus wrote...….. The verse actually says, Jesus 'reveals Him', previously unknown, that can't mean the God of the Bible I'm reading, because God was already known.

The Anointed......… Correct! Jesus revealed ‘The Son of Man, who is the only begotten son of God, of who it is written in the book of Hebrews,10: 5; “For this reason, when ‘The Anointed One” was about to come into the world, he said to God; “You do not want sacrifices or offerings, but a body you have prepared for me, etc.”

The body that the MOST HIGH in the creation, had already prepared for his Son, was that of the man Jesus.

Hebrew 5: 7-10; “In his life on earth, Jesus made his prayers and requests with loud cries and tears to God who could save him from death. Because he was humble and devoted, God heard him. But even though he was ‘A’ son of God, [Not God’s son or THE Son of God, but ‘A’ son of God, check it out in the appendix of Strong’s Concordance, or The King James translation, the Amplified translation, or The Revised Standard translation. All Israelites are sons of God according to God’s word, see Psalms 82: 6; ‘You are gods,’ I said; ‘all of you are sons of the Most High.’) he (Jesus) learned through suffering to be obedient, when he was made perfect he became the only source through whom salvation could be gained from our Lord God and saviour, who rose Jesus from death and will raise all they, who are united to him also.

‘The Son of Man,’ who is the son that is currently developing within the great androgynous pregnant body of Eve [Mankind] which body will suffer great tribulations in giving birth to the Son of the present MOST HIGH in the creation, who has been evolving on the spirits of the righteous, who had paid the blood price for their inherited sin and any mistakes they may have made in life, who were then separated from the unrighteous dead, and gathered to the chosen cornerstone of Gods new glorious temple of Light, that cornerstone, being the evolving spirit of the Anointed one in the bosom of Abraham.

The body that the MOST HIGH had prepared for his Son, was the compilation of all those righteous spirits over whom the second death had no power on who, 'The Anointed One' had evolved up until some two thousand years ago, in his ascent to the ends of this cycle of universal activity.

When Jesus, the son of Mary and her half brother Joseph, who were both sired by Alexander Helios/Heli, was about 30, he was baptised by John the first cousin to his mother Mary, and it was then that the spirit of the Son of God the Most High, descended upon Jesus in the form of a dove, as the heavenly voice was heard to say, “You are my Son, [MY chosen heir and successor] TODAY I have begotten thee.

Spiritual beings do not have the animal power of reproduction, they choose their heir and successor.

This God, ‘The Son of Man’ is he who was chosen by Abraham, as his God. And it was to Abraham that he said, “In blessing I will bless you, and in multiplying, I will multiply you.

And it was this God, who is equal to The Father, who said to Moses in Deuteronomy 18: 18-19; “I will raise up for the a prophet just like you from among their own brethren; and I will put MY WORDS into his mouth, and I will punish anyone who does not Heed MY WORDS which he shall speak in MY NAME.”

So you were correct in saying that Jesus 'reveals Him', the God who was previously unknown.
There's a problem, if you are correlating the 'Lord', Deuteronomy, to every instance of 'Lord', in the Bible. Because those inferences, that Lord was known. In the aspect of 'Jesus', unknown, and perhaps, some prophecy or sacrifice aspect, yes "unknown".

However the verses in John, it 's very absolute, as in completely unknown it seems. Perhaps there is an argument, there.

If you are Jewish, not sure if that's your background, you might be inferring your statements directly from the way you are reading the texts, though.

So, it seems, how unknown are those verses meaning.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
Just...literally, we're going to derive a 'known', Lord...

Lord, Lord of Hosts...


Known, known, known...
 
Last edited:

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
It isn't just John. Because one might surmise, John was from a very reductionist , textually, background. Jesus is quoted, here, also. They seem to parallel, this concept of unknown.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
So, book of John, book of Yohanan, to me, reads very literalistic.

Unless John is contradicting himself, or something else is amiss, then John would or most likely be speaking in a literalistic manner. Book of John is also mystical, though, so literalism may be taking a non-literal form.

The basis of of the theism, here, seems important.
 

The Anointed

Well-Known Member
There's a problem, if you are correlating the 'Lord', Deuteronomy, to every instance of 'Lord', in the Bible. Because those inferences, that Lord was known. In the aspect of 'Jesus', unknown, and perhaps, some prophecy or sacrifice aspect, yes "unknown".

However the verses in John, it 's very absolute, as in completely unknown it seems. Perhaps there is an argument, there.

If you are Jewish, not sure if that's your background, you might be inferring your statements directly from the way you are reading the texts, though.

So, it seems, how unknown are those verses meaning.

So who do you believe, was the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God who said to Moses; "“I will raise up for the a prophet just like you from among their own brethren; and I will put MY WORDS into his mouth, and I will punish anyone who does not Heed MY WORDS which he shall speak in MY NAME.”

Remembering that Jesus said; "No man has ascended to heaven, EXCEPT and that one exception was the Son of Man, of who Enoch was the chosen cornerstone.

Genesis 5: 23; Enoch was 365 (In days---A calendar year: the one-year old sacrificial Lamb of God.) and had spent his life in fellowship with God when he disappeared because God had Taken him.

Hebrews 11: 5; “By faith Enoch was translated (To change from one form to another) so that he should not experience death; and he was not found, because God had Translated him.

The only man to have ascended to the ends of all time and was translated so as to never see death, and this man, plays absolutely no part in the belief of the universal/Catholic church of Constantine: “The Stone that the builder's rejected, has turned out to be the most important stone of all."

The great and glorious one who, clothed and girded in fire was anointed to serve God before the body of Adam=Mankind into all eternity, the heavenly Simulacrum of which Enoch was the chosen cornerstone, which simulacrum=blue-print, is the sin offering that God has prepared for us, the blueprint, of the new species of light beings that comes from mankind (THE SON OF MAN)

Enoch is the anointed successor to the throne of “THE MOST HIGH’ in the creation: Enoch is the CHRIST who stands, clothed and girded in fire, where he serves God before the body of Adam [Mankind] into all eternity.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
2 Corinthians 6:18
'Lord almighty'.

I find 2 Corinthians 6:16-18 is talking about God. There Lord Almighty stands the Tetragrammaton.
Just as Jesus says at John 5:43; John 10:25; John 12:28 he (Jesus) comes in his Father's name.
Not in Jesus' name, but that Jesus manifested God's name as per John 17:6; John 17:11-12; John 17:26.
So, at 1 Corinthians 8:6 we are reading about two (2) separate persons. One God, 'and' one Lord Jesus Christ.
God was never 'first born of all creation' as pre-human heavenly Jesus was - Colossians 1:15.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
I find 2 Corinthians 6:16-18 is talking about God. There Lord Almighty stands the Tetragrammaton.
Just as Jesus says at John 5:43; John 10:25; John 12:28 he (Jesus) comes in his Father's name.
Not in Jesus' name, but that Jesus manifested God's name as per John 17:6; John 17:11-12; John 17:26.
So, at 1 Corinthians 8:6 we are reading about two (2) separate persons. One God, 'and' one Lord Jesus Christ.
God was never 'first born of all creation' as pre-human heavenly Jesus was - Colossians 1:15.
John 10

If you are interested, reads like Jesus could be referring to Himself, the pater, father, or Shepherd.

In the english, not so much, again the nature of how they translated these verses.

Otherwise, an 'interpretation' is outside word inference, and in the verse in question, the word there is 'god', not abba or something else. You can ascribe that as a name for who you are calling 'father', the father of jesus, however you then cannot argue that it is just a 'title', so forth.

Nothing wrong with interpretation, however contradicting yourself, via that, just makes it a completely subjective interpretation.
• aside from that,
To have some sort of word basis here, are you claiming that 'father', always means, G- d, the father of Jesus? In the theistic inference?
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
John 6:46 as a literal statement? Not in my religion. Not in my Bible. Not in my texts.
John 1:18
Is 'only begotten god', in original, the english does interpret verses.

If John 6:46 is Not in your Bible/text then I would think 1 John 4:12 is also Not, besides Exodus 33:20 Not _____
The only-begotten 'god' Not God, but lower-case 'god' John 1:18.
At John 20:31 John writes that he believes Jesus is the Son of God.
Nathanael says at John 1:49 that Jesus is the Son of God.
Peter, as spokesman for the disciples, at John 6:69 says Jesus is Son.
Even the demons know who Jesus is according to Luke 4:41, so it is No wonder what Jesus said at John 10:36.
Martha says who Jesus is at John 11:27 that Jesus is Son...
So, it is No wonder that Jesus says at John 14:28 that his Father is greater than Jesus.
According to John 15 Jesus is the vine and his Father is __________
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
If John 6:46 is Not in your Bible/text then I would think 1 John 4:12 is also Not, besides Exodus 33:20 Not _____
The only-begotten 'god' Not God, but lower-case 'god' John 1:18.
At John 20:31 John writes that he believes Jesus is the Son of God.
Nathanael says at John 1:49 that Jesus is the Son of God.
Peter, as spokesman for the disciples, at John 6:69 says Jesus is Son.
Even the demons know who Jesus is according to Luke 4:41, so it is No wonder what Jesus said at John 10:36.
Martha says who Jesus is at John 11:27 that Jesus is Son...
So, it is No wonder that Jesus says at John 14:28 that his Father is greater than Jesus.
According to John 15 Jesus is the vine and his Father is __________
Basically, correct. Those verses not only in John, also similar in Matthew and other gospel text, cannot be referring to the known Biblical God, as I read the texts.
 

siti

Well-Known Member
IF the documents are contemporaneous to the period...
I presume you mean contemporaneous to the time they are supposed to relate to - in which case we know the answer - they are not...correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the earliest remotely reliable evidence for the existence of any of the Gospels (in anything like the form we know them in) dates to at least a century later (i.e. mid 2nd century and about a hundred years or more after Jesus reportedly died).

IF the document were not contemporaneous to the period, thousands of Jews would have seen them coming from a mile off, and NOT been converted...
And that one is even easier to answer - the vast majority of Jews were not converted - were they? I honestly doubt that there were more than a few thousand Jews that converted by the end of the 1st century and by then, I reckon the number of Gentile Christians had probably surpassed the number of Jewish Christians. For sure, Christianity spread like wildfire through the Roman Empire - but I don't think many of the earliest readers of the stories that became the "Gospels" would have ever set foot in Palestine let alone at the time Jesus was supposed to have been there. Anyway, you believe what you choose to believe...I'm sticking with my copied-from-the-Psalms theory until someone presents compelling reasons to doubt the most obvious explanation.
 

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
I presume you mean contemporaneous to the time they are supposed to relate to - in which case we know the answer - they are not...correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the earliest remotely reliable evidence for the existence of any of the Gospels (in anything like the form we know them in) dates to at least a century later (i.e. mid 2nd century and about a hundred years or more after Jesus reportedly died).

And that one is even easier to answer - the vast majority of Jews were not converted - were they? I honestly doubt that there were more than a few thousand Jews that converted by the end of the 1st century and by then, I reckon the number of Gentile Christians had probably surpassed the number of Jewish Christians. For sure, Christianity spread like wildfire through the Roman Empire - but I don't think many of the earliest readers of the stories that became the "Gospels" would have ever set foot in Palestine let alone at the time Jesus was supposed to have been there. Anyway, you believe what you choose to believe...I'm sticking with my copied-from-the-Psalms theory until someone presents compelling reasons to doubt the most obvious explanation.

Thanks, I will correct you where you're wrong. There is AMPLE evidence from archaeology, history and documents from before the close of the 1st century: https://www.amazon.com/Dont-Have-Enough-Faith-Atheist/dp/1581345615

And no, most Jews weren't born again, just like most Gentiles aren't... I hope you're not trying to use an ad populum argument, when the Bible says people have free will to choose in or out of Jesus Christ's salvation.
 
Top