• 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!

Colossians 1:16 Jesus the Almighty, [John 1:3, Jesus is God incarnated

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
The relationship between God and the demiurge resembles the relationship between Yahweh / the Father and Jesus. The idea that God is pure spirit fits with the author of John's various remarks about 'No man has seen God', leaving Jesus as the mediator:

John 1:18 No one has ever seen God; the only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known.

John 5:37 And the Father who sent me has himself borne witness to me. His voice you have never heard, his form you have never seen;

John 6:46 Not that any one has seen the Father except him who is from God; he has seen the Father.​

I can't think of an example of Paul putting it like that. There's:

1 Timothy 6:16 who alone has immortality and dwells in unapproachable light, whom no man has ever seen or can see. To him be honor and eternal dominion. Amen.​

but I Timothy is these days regarded as a pseudepigraph.
However these ideas do not represent the Yahweh found in the Old Testament, who is very personal. Your description of the demiurge, clearly matches Yahweh, so I'm not sure what you're getting at. Your idea requires some sort of gnostic variance, where we don't get that idea from traditional religion. You get that idea, the 'impersonal yahweh', concept, from much later religious morphology, it doesn't fit the scriptures, and even if it was a belief extant at the time, since the scriptures present a totally different yahweh, then you're talking about something abstract. The yahweh that this group believes in even though it isn't the g-d portrayed in scripture, at all.

Way too theoretical, and even odd for gnostics, who were literal.

Jesus says this, so forth. It's literal representation, not completely non'textual
 

Ellen Brown

Well-Known Member
The relationship between God and the demiurge resembles the relationship between Yahweh / the Father and Jesus. The idea that God is pure spirit fits with the author of John's various remarks about 'No man has seen God', leaving Jesus as the mediator:

John 1:18 No one has ever seen God; the only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known.

John 5:37 And the Father who sent me has himself borne witness to me. His voice you have never heard, his form you have never seen;

John 6:46 Not that any one has seen the Father except him who is from God; he has seen the Father.​

I can't think of an example of Paul putting it like that. There's:

1 Timothy 6:16 who alone has immortality and dwells in unapproachable light, whom no man has ever seen or can see. To him be honor and eternal dominion. Amen.​

but I Timothy is these days regarded as a pseudepigraph.

So, if Paul did not write 1 Timothy, who did?
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
However these ideas do not represent the Yahweh found in the Old Testament, who is very personal.
Even the youngest of the Tanakh's books were a couple of centuries or more old by the second half of the 1st century CE, and the religious culture had continued to evolve in various directions, just as in the Tanakh we see Yahweh develop from a tribal god in the Canaanite pantheon to Isaiah's monogod and among the Jews (admittedly more in Alexandria than in Jerusalem) the increasing influence of Greek culture on Jewish thought since Alexander's conquest of their territories in 320 BCE or so.
Your description of the demiurge, clearly matches Yahweh
In the Tanakh and in Jewish culture Yahweh created the world. But Paul expressly says that Jesus, son and servant of God, created the world, giving Jesus the demiurge role. As you know, the author of Mark, and after him the synoptic authors of Matthew and Luke disagreed, while the author of John was on Paul's side.

That is, there's not one Jesus in the NT, there are at least five, and that results in five Christologies, some of which are reasonably close to each other and some quite a way apart.
Your idea requires some sort of gnostic variance, where we don't get that idea from traditional religion.
I'm not telling you anything you can't check for yourself by reading Paul and the four gospels.
You get that idea, the 'impersonal yahweh', concept, from much later religious morphology,
It's not my idea. I have no wish at all that any of them should say particular things or not say them, only in what actually got written; and I've quoted you various relevant NT quotes accordingly.
it doesn't fit the scriptures, and even if it was a belief extant at the time, since the scriptures present a totally different yahweh, then you're talking about something abstract.
I'm not speaking as a believer but from an historical point of view. In other words, I don't require any particular shape to it or message from it, particularly any single message, and it would be idle to do that since there isn't one.
 

calm

Active Member
I understand that God Jehovah is nothing to do with a video game, nor does he exist in virtual reality....it is a very immature analogy IMO. I can only assume that you are young, even to accept that as a valid explanation. Believe me when I tell you that first century Christians would have never thought of such a thing.You have to think like a first century Jew.
If you were familiar with this topic you would notice the similarity.
Again:
A programmer creates a video game, thus he can create his own world with his own laws. He is the creator of a "world". It is the same with God and this world(the whole universe), we are a created "video game" and God is our "programmer". One day the programmer wanted to get into his own game, but since it's not possible for the programmer to get into his own video game, he created his own character. The character is the visible image of the invisible programmer. Anyone who sees the character of the programmer in the game sees in truth the programmer. The programmer is in his character and thus he is connected to his game through his character.
Don't you notice the similarity? The character is Jesus and the father is the programmer. Through Jesus God came into this world. God became man.

Maybe you've sat in front of a PC and played or at least watched a video game where you take on the role of a character in that game. A few examples are TES5: Skyrim, Borderlands 2, Garry's Mod, Battlefield 4,... So if the concept is completely alien to you, now would be the possibility to get a little understanding about it via a gameplay trailer or something like that. In the following I will explain everything else with the example of Battlefield 4.
Battlefield 4 (BF4) is a so-called first person shooter, where you fight from the perspective of a soldier with and against other players to achieve various types of goals. So when I play BF4 I am that soldier on the battlefield. If I'm lying on the ground (as the character) and playing with other people, one of whom is a paramedic who's close to me, I'll ask them if they can help me and not if they can help my character, because while we're in the game, as mentioned above, we're those soldiers on the battlefield. Similarly, while playing, I don't say "The soldier from whose perspective I play this game died," but "I died," even though I'm still alive as a real person.
This concept can now easily be transferred to the Trinity. So when it is said that God is Jesus, it means, similar to BF4, that God lives from the perspective of man Jesus (compared to BF4 "playing from the perspective of a soldier") and therefore can die in this form as in BF4, without this having a significant influence on his real being (compared to BF4, see above "Similarly, I do not say "the soldier from whose perspective I play this game died", but "I died", although I am still alive as a real person").
 
Last edited:

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
Just as a sidenote.....

John 1:18 No one has ever seen God; the only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known.

John 1 :18 is mistranslated here. I do not know exactly what translation you are using but many pro-trinitarian translations slaughter this verse to make it read like John 1:1.

In John 1:1 we see "theos" (without the definite article) used to insinuate that Jesus is God. John 1:18 being rendered "the only son" is a mistranslation of "theos" in this verse. "Theos" is "god" so John 1:18 should read...
"No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten god who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him."

If they translate "god" in verse 1, then they should also have "god" in verse 18.
If it is translated "son" in verse 18, then it should also be "son" in verse 1.

Even the Mounce has messed this one up trying to promote the trinity.

" No one oudeis has horaō ever pōpote seen horaō God theos. The only monogenēs Son , himself God theos, the ho one who is eimi in eis the ho bosom kolpos of the ho Father patēr, he ekeinos has made him known exēgeomai."

It does not say "The only son himself God" at all. "Monogenes" is translated "only begotten" but missing in the English translation you used...and "theos" is "god", so this should read "only begotten god" as it does in the NASB. Since God is not "begotten, then this "theos" is not the Almighty....but a lesser God-like one.
 

Hockeycowboy

Witness for Jehovah
Premium Member
At Psalms 110 there are two (2) LORD/ Lord's mentioned (KJV) (both are Lords)

Don’t forget that, actually, in the ancient manuscripts, there’s only one “Lord” written, the second one. The first “LORD” is YHWH (Yahweh).

That Jewish superstition of God’s name being “too holy to write”, substituting Adonai, has really led to so much confusion! And helped contribute to the rise of Trinitarian belief among many professed Christians.

They’re trying to use it right now!

That was a masterstroke by the Devil, getting people to remove God’s own Name from His own book.
Yahweh / Jehovah has put up with so much.
I believe It will only be when people come back to life in the Resurrection, that all will finally “know that I am Jehovah.”
— Ezekiel 38:23.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
Even the youngest of the Tanakh's books were a couple of centuries or more old by the second half of the 1st century CE, and the religious culture had continued to evolve in various directions, just as in the Tanakh we see Yahweh develop from a tribal god in the Canaanite pantheon to Isaiah's monogod and among the Jews (admittedly more in Alexandria than in Jerusalem) the increasing influence of Greek culture on Jewish thought since Alexander's conquest of their territories in 320 BCE or so.
In the Tanakh and in Jewish culture Yahweh created the world. But Paul expressly says that Jesus, son and servant of God, created the world, giving Jesus the demiurge role. As you know, the author of Mark, and after him the synoptic authors of Matthew and Luke disagreed, while the author of John was on Paul's side.

That is, there's not one Jesus in the NT, there are at least five, and that results in five Christologies, some of which are reasonably close to each other and some quite a way apart.
I'm not telling you anything you can't check for yourself by reading Paul and the four gospels.
It's not my idea. I have no wish at all that any of them should say particular things or not say them, only in what actually got written; and I've quoted you various relevant NT quotes accordingly.
I'm not speaking as a believer but from an historical point of view. In other words, I don't require any particular shape to it or message from it, particularly any single message, and it would be idle to do that since there isn't one.
No, the theory is abstract, because if they believed the demiurge to be J'---s, then they would not be praising, or considering J---s to be 'good', you would have a priestly sacrifice, J---s, would be 'bad', so forth.
 

moorea944

Well-Known Member
We're going by words, here. Not speculation.
Genesis 1:26
Being an example. You might have a 'theory', or a belief, that that verse was changed, or should say something else, however, it doesn't.
That's how we compare Biblical arguments, by what they say, as opposed to what we might believe was changed, or should say, or whatever.

In other words, I am making compromises in the arguments, outside of belief. That is how an argument is "presented". Then, we can explain the belief, or even just make a contextual argument, with references.

So, when we are using the Christian Bible, that includes the OT, the Gospels, and the Epistles, and contextually, the Apocrypha.

Therefore when you say 'Jesus is Adonai', a pre'existant Lord, so forth, then we follow that, with Jesus is the Adonai of the Bible, where it matches, or can be argued.
For example
Psalms 110

Matthew 22:37-46
'David calls me Lord', is what Jesus says,

Jesus says that David calls Him Lord. Now, there are two 'lords', in Psalms 110:1

We already know that Dovid calls Jesus Lord, the question, is which 'Lord', in Psalms 110:1 is Jesus referring to?

If Dovid is calling Jesus the second Lord, Adonai, then Psalms 110
Is obviously about Jesus, not David.

If David means the first 'Lord', that is Yahweh, and means that David is calling Jesus, Yahweh.

So, which is it? Which 'Lord' in Psalms 110:1 is David calling Lord?



First of all, David know his God. David NEVER called the coming Messiah Yahweh. David knew that the messiah would come from him. 2 Sam 7.

I really dont understand why you think that Jesus is Yahweh, our Creator, just because he's called Lord..... Lord is a title of authority. Again..... who else was called 'Lord" in scripture... Moses, Abraham, angels, etc..... Uggghhh!!
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
First of all, David know his God. David NEVER called the coming Messiah Yahweh. David knew that the messiah would come from him. 2 Sam 7.

I really dont understand why you think that Jesus is Yahweh, our Creator, just because he's called Lord..... Lord is a title of authority. Again..... who else was called 'Lord" in scripture... Moses, Abraham, angels, etc..... Uggghhh!!
You didn't answer the question, nor did I say that Dovid called Jesus, yahweh.

The question, again,

Psalms 110:1

Matthew 22:37-46
'David calls me Lord', Jesus says.

So which Lord, in Psalms 110:1

Is Jesus referring to, when He says, 'David calls me Lord'.
 

Ellen Brown

Well-Known Member
First of all, David know his God. David NEVER called the coming Messiah Yahweh. David knew that the messiah would come from him. 2 Sam 7.

I really dont understand why you think that Jesus is Yahweh, our Creator, just because he's called Lord..... Lord is a title of authority. Again..... who else was called 'Lord" in scripture... Moses, Abraham, angels, etc..... Uggghhh!!

I'm tired of this one. I'm leaving this nonsense conversation.
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
You didn't answer the question, nor did I say that Dovid called Jesus, yahweh.

The question, again,

Psalms 110:1

Matthew 22:37-46
'David calls me Lord', Jesus says.

So which Lord, in Psalms 110:1

Is Jesus referring to, when He says, 'David calls me Lord'.

From the Tanach....
Psalm 110:1-2
"Of David a psalm.
The word of the Lord to my master; "Wait for My right hand, until I make your enemies a footstool at your feet." אלְדָוִ֗ד מִ֫זְמ֥וֹר נְאֻ֚ם יְהֹוָ֨ה | לַֽאדֹנִ֗י שֵׁ֥ב לִֽימִינִ֑י עַד־אָשִׁ֥ית אֹֽ֜יְבֶ֗יךָ הֲדֹ֣ם לְרַגְלֶֽיךָ:

2The staff of your might the Lord will send from Zion; rule in the midst of your enemies. במַטֵּ֚ה עֻזְּךָ֗ יִשְׁלַ֣ח יְ֖הֹוָה מִצִיּ֑וֹן רְ֜דֵ֗ה בְּקֶ֣רֶב אֹֽיְבֶֽיךָ:"


The "Lord" is Yahweh. This is the word of Yahweh to David's "Master"...his Lord, not his God.

He was to 'wait at God's right hand till his enemies were placed as a stool for his feet'. According to Matthew 5:34-35, the earth is God's footstool, so it appears as if Jesus had to wait for a certain time period of time when the earth is ready for his coming to clean it all up. Just like the days of Noah, Jesus said. Are we there yet? I believe we are. (Matthew 24:37-39)

The "staff" indicating the Master's authority is given to the one who is sent by Yahweh, and David's Master was to rule "in the midst of [his] enemies", meaning that his rulership would not at first be peaceful. Jesus said he came to cause division even among families....to test people's loyalty to God. (Matthew 10:34-39) In these last days, the testing is almost complete.

The scripture you cited in Matthew 22:37-46 says....
"Now while the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them: 42 “What do you think about the Christ? Whose son is he?” They said to him: “David’s.” 43 He asked them: “How is it, then, that David under inspiration calls him Lord, saying, 44 ‘Jehovah said to my Lord: “Sit at my right hand until I put your enemies beneath your feet”’? 45 If, then, David calls him Lord, how is he his son?” 46 And nobody was able to say a word in reply to him, and from that day on, no one dared to question him any further."

What wonderful logic! Jesus' own reasoning on this proves that he is both David's son and "Lord" (Master) because of his lineage, and because of the authority bestowed upon him by his God. The only way that Jesus could be both a son and Master to David is if he is sent by God to teach David's people and lead them to God's Kingdom. Jesus fulfilled both of those requirements.
 
Last edited:

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
From the Tanach....
Psalm 110:1-2
"Of David a psalm.
The word of the Lord to my master; "Wait for My right hand, until I make your enemies a footstool at your feet." אלְדָוִ֗ד מִ֫זְמ֥וֹר נְאֻ֚ם יְהֹוָ֨ה | לַֽאדֹנִ֗י שֵׁ֥ב לִֽימִינִ֑י עַד־אָשִׁ֥ית אֹֽ֜יְבֶ֗יךָ הֲדֹ֣ם לְרַגְלֶֽיךָ:

2The staff of your might the Lord will send from Zion; rule in the midst of your enemies. במַטֵּ֚ה עֻזְּךָ֗ יִשְׁלַ֣ח יְ֖הֹוָה מִצִיּ֑וֹן רְ֜דֵ֗ה בְּקֶ֣רֶב אֹֽיְבֶֽיךָ:"


The "Lord" is Yahweh. This is the word of Yahweh to David's "Master"...his Lord, not his God.

He was to 'wait at God's right hand till his enemies were placed as a stool for his feet'. According to Matthew 5:34-35, the earth is God's footstool, so it appears as if Jesus had to wait for a certain time period of time when the earth is ready for his coming to clean it all up. Just like the days of Noah, Jesus said. Are we there yet? I believe we are. (Matthew 24:37-39)

The "staff" indicating the Master's authority is given to the one who is sent by Yahweh, and David's Master was to rule "in the midst of [his] enemies", meaning that his rulership would not at first be peaceful. Jesus said he came to cause division even among families....to test people's loyalty to God. (Matthew 10:34-39) In these last days, the testing is almost complete.

The scripture you cited in Matthew 22:37-46 says....
"Now while the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them: 42 “What do you think about the Christ? Whose son is he?” They said to him: “David’s.” 43 He asked them: “How is it, then, that David under inspiration calls him Lord, saying, 44 ‘Jehovah said to my Lord: “Sit at my right hand until I put your enemies beneath your feet”’? 45 If, then, David calls him Lord, how is he his son?” 46 And nobody was able to say a word in reply to him, and from that day on, no one dared to question him any further."

What wonderful logic! Jesus' own reasoning on this proves that he is both David's son and "Lord" (Master) because of his lineage, and because of the authority bestowed upon him by his God. The only way that Jesus could be both a son and Master to David is if he is sent by God to teach David's people and lead them to God's Kingdom. Jesus fulfilled both of those requirements.
In other words, that directly follows what Jesus may have meant,

Matthew 22:37-46

By J-sus saying that David calls Him Lord,

And, means that
Psalms 110,

Is about Jesus, [Adonai according to traditional belief.

You are not translating Adonai, correctly, though, it is Lord.

The question is why wasn't that basically derived answer presented, in the first place?

• now in traditional christian belief, Jesus, Adonai, is of course God,

'Adonai Elohim',
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
In other words, that directly follows what Jesus may have meant,

Matthew 22:37-46

By J-sus saying that David calls Him Lord,

And, means that
Psalms 110,

Is about Jesus, [Adonai according to traditional belief.

You are not translating Adonai, correctly, though, it is Lord.

The question is why wasn't that basically derived answer presented, in the first place?

• now in traditional christian belief, Jesus, Adonai, is of course God,


'Adonai Elohim',

:facepalm: Nobody twists scripture quite like you....

Yahweh speaks to David’s Lord (Master)....does God talk to himself?

I give up.....:confused:
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
:facepalm: Nobody twists scripture quite like you....

Yahweh speaks to David’s Lord (Master)....does God talk to himself?

Genesis 1:26
'Make man in our image, '
[So the answer would be yes, unless your entity is a pantheon of deities. According to your own definition of 'g-d', satan, beezlebub, zeus, etc are all included when you read 'g-d',
Like in Genesis 1:26
I give up.....:confused:
...
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
if they believed the demiurge to be J'---s, then they would not be praising, or considering J---s to be 'good', you would have a priestly sacrifice, J---s, would be 'bad', so forth.
We'll have to agree to disagree.

The gnostic ideas are present in Paul and in John, not in the others. The word 'demiurge' isn't used, but the relationship of Jesus to God as portrayed in Paul and John gives Jesus resemblances to the demiurge in the manner I've pointed out.

Likewise the bible is made up of different books written at different times and places by different people for different purposes and agendas. There's no single message in the bible; and in the NT there are at least five distinct and frequently incompatible biographies and Christologies of Jesus.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
We'll have to agree to disagree.

The gnostic ideas are present in Paul and in John, not in the others. The word 'demiurge' isn't used, but the relationship of Jesus to God as portrayed in Paul and John gives Jesus resemblances to the demiurge in the manner I've pointed out.

Likewise the bible is made up of different books written at different times and places by different people for different purposes and agendas. There's no single message in the bible; and in the NT there are at least five distinct and frequently incompatible biographies and Christologies of Jesus.
That's fine, a different type of gnostic belief.


Evening
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
Genesis 1:26
'Make man in our image, '
[So the answer would be yes, unless your entity is a pantheon of deities. According to your own definition of 'g-d', satan, beezlebub, zeus, etc are all included when you read 'g-d',
Like in Genesis 1:26

...
It is pointless explaining anything to someone who just can't read scripture because they have no idea of the other scriptures that prove them wrong.....You continue to take verses out of context and misapply the meanings of original language words.....where do you get your conclusions? Are they yours...or are you getting your information from someone equally ignorant of scripture? :shrug:

Genesis 1:26 is backed up by Proverbs 8:30-31 and also Colossians 1:15-17.
The pre-human Jesus was the "Master Worker" alongside his Father in Creation. Jesus is not the Creator...he is the fabricator of what God produced when he began his creative works. As @Hockeycowboy has affirmed, material creation came about a long time after creation in the spirit realm. Angels....myriads of them, were brought into existence long before the universe came into being.

Why do you adhere to so many erroneous conclusions....you appear to be completely uneducated in the topic you pretend to know so much about...you are entitled to your view, but IMO it is completely unsupported by the Bible.
 
Top