Would Jesus Have known what Modern Science knows?

Wildswanderer said:

John 8:58 “Jesus answered them: ‘I solemnly declare it:
before Abraham came to be, I AM.” [This was the name God gave himself when he first communicated with Moses, Exodus 3:14

Click to expand...

The gospel of John is (like Paul) gnostic. Paul's Jesus and the author of John's Jesus (unlike the synoptic Jesuses) pre-existed in heaven with God and created the material universe (1 Corinthians 8:6, John 1:3) in the role of the gnostic demiurge. So each of those versions of Jesus existed with God in heaven "before Abraham was". And as I showed you, each of those versions of Jesus is expressly NOT God. You can have more quotes on the point if you want them.
an

Wildswanderer said:

John 10: 30 ”The Father and I are one.”

Click to expand...

Yes, that's a constant part of John's message, and if you read John 17 you'll see that it's the same oneness that anyone can have if they accept Jesus as their intermediary.

Wildswanderer said:

Matt. 11: 27 “Everything has been given over to me by my Father. No one knows the Son but the Father, and no one knows the Father but the Son – and anyone to whom the Son wishes to reveal him.”

Click to expand...

That shows Jesus as subordinate to God.

Wildswanderer said:

Matthew 9: 5-7 “Which is less trouble to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven’ or ‘Stand up and walk?’ To help you realize that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive
sins” – he then said to the paralyzed man – ‘Stand up! Roll up your mat and go home.’ The man stood up and went toward his home.”

Click to expand...

Yes, Jesus heals them with God's power, not his own power.

Wildswanderer said:

John 10:37 + 38 “If I do not perform my Father’s works, put no faith in me. But if I do perform them, even though you put no faith in me, put faith in these works, so as to
realize what it means that the Father is in me and I in him.”

Click to expand...

See John 17 again (though the idea occurs elsewhere in John too).

Wildswanderer said:

Jesus always distinguished between his relationship with the Father and our relationship with the Father. For example: John 20: 17 John 1:1, 3, 14, 17, 18 “In the beginning was the Word; the Word was in God’s presence and the Word was God…. Through him all things came into being, and apart from him nothing came to be…. The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among
us, and we have seen his glory: the glory of an only Son coming from the Father, filled with enduring love…. For while the law was given through Moses, this enduring love came thorough Jesus Christ. No one has ever seen God. It is God the only Son, ever at the Father’s side, who has revealed him.”

Click to expand...

Nothing of that is a claim that Jesus is God. All of it is appropriate to Jesus as God's envoy.

Wildswanderer said:

John 20:28 “Thomas said in response, ‘My Lord and my God!’”

Click to expand...

As I said, Jesus never claims to be God ─ and John's Jesus is absolutely clear that he's not God.

Wildswanderer said:

John 21:17 [Peter said,] “Lord, you know everything….”

Click to expand...

The word translated as 'Lord' there is κύριος (kurios or kyrios in transcription) meaning 'lord, master, owner, ruler, boss, sir &c' and is a usual form of address to Jesus. As I quoted you, Paul in 1 Corinthians 8:6 says, "yet for us there is one God, the Father, (εἷς θεὸς ὁ πατήρ) from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ (εἷς κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστός ─ 'kurios' again), through whom are all things and through whom we exist."

Wildswanderer said:

Colossians 2:9 “In Christ the fullness of deity resides in bodily form.”
Colossians 1:15+16 “He is the image of the invisible God, the first born of all creatures. In him everything in heaven and on earth was created, things visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominations, principalities or powers; all were createdthrough him and for him….”

Click to expand...

Yes, Jesus as the gnostic demiurge again. The Jesus of Mark, by contrast, is born into an ordinary Jewish family and only becomes son of God when God adopts him after John the Baptist has baptized him. Matthew and Luke make no suggestion that their Jesuses pre-existed their coming into existence by divine insemination.

And so on.

We have many examples of Jesus saying "I am not God" ─ I've shown you just a few. Nowhere does Jesus ever say "I am God".

blü 2 said:

Nothing of that is a claim that Jesus is God. All of it is appropriate to Jesus as God's envoy.

Click to expand...

The Word was God.

blü 2 said:

According to the NT ─

The Jesus of Paul was not God.

1 Corinthians 8:6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.​

The Jesus of Mark was not God.

Mark 12:29 Jesus answered, “The first is, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one; [...]
32 And the scribe said to him, “You are right, Teacher; you have truly said that he is one, and there is no other but he;
​

The Jesus of Matthew was not God.

Matthew 20:23 He said to them, “You will drink my cup, but to sit at my right hand and at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by my Father.”

Matthew 24:36 “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only.”​

The Jesus of Luke was not God.

Luke 18:18 And a ruler asked him, “Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” 19 And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone.”​

And the Jesus of John was not God.

John 17:3 “And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.”

John 20:17 Jesus said to her, “[...] go to my brethren and say to them, I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.”
​

And no Jesus asserts that he is in fact God.

Is it your view that Jesus' denials that he's God are all lies?

It's true that in the fourth century CE the Trinity Doctrine was invented to elevate the central character of Christianity to God status; but on the one hand, as the churches admit, the Trinity doctrine is incoherent, and on the other the Trinity doctrine was a political response, giving the people what they wanted, despite what the NT says.

Click to expand...

Jesus referred to his divinity, not God absolute. This comparison was one of the reasons that the Jews had him killed.

Wildswanderer said:

The Word was God.

Click to expand...

That, as you doubtless know, depends on what the author of John intended to signify when he wrote ὁ λόγος (ho logos). In old Greek it can mean (and I quote my dictionary) ─


and it can have more mystical signification from Greek philosophy. So what the author of John intended is by no means clear. What is clear is that the author of John is very clear that Jesus is God's envoy, and is not God.

cOLTER said:

Jesus referred to his divinity, not God absolute. This comparison was one of the reasons that the Jews had him killed.

Click to expand...

Marilyn Monroe was often said to be divine too. Once again, it didn't end well.

Wildswanderer said:

Because it's literal. Christ in us isn't symbolism, the Holy Spirit literally indwells believers.

Click to expand...

Remember I said that symbolism points to something real?

But let me ask you this. How does Christ dwell in us literally? Explain that in literal terms. Is He connect to our cells? In side of our skin? If Christ and the HS as external entities, then how do they get inside of you? Where are they literally inside you? Floating between the cells?

My point is, literalism will slam you hard into a wall if you aren't able to understand these things symbolically. This isn't to say that Christ does dwell in you. Of course I believe that. But how? Literally speaking, how?

I'll be happy to explain my view on that, but I'm curious how that can be explained in literalistic terms first.

Wildswanderer said:

Faith in something that isn't real or what you think it is, is worthless. And again you are avoiding telling us if you believe in a literal resurrection.

Click to expand...

You didn't ask me what I believe about it. And why does that matter how I imagine what the resurrection is. It's a mystery to any Christian, really. I think those who can speak definitely towards such matters, are a bit delusional, personally.

Wildswanderer said:

Blah blah, nonsense. If they aren't real they are not any more valuable than Brahms fairy tales. You would reduce scripture to a myths with a nice moral.

Click to expand...

I see, you resort to insults now? That's unfortunate you feel you have to go there. Sad, really. Does that truly make you feel better? I doubt this. Sorry you don't understand what I've posted. Take some time with it, if you care to try to understand.

blü 2 said:

Marilyn Monroe was often said to be divine too. Once again, it didn't end well.

Click to expand...

The teachers that the Son sent before hand were also abused and even killed.

Windwalker said:

I see, you resort to insults now? That's unfortunate you feel you have to go there. Sad, really. Does that truly make you feel better? I doubt this. Sorry you don't understand what I've posted. Take some time with it, if you care to try to understand.

Click to expand...

I understand that you believe that the Bible is just mythology because that's what you have indicated.

Windwalker said:

You didn't ask me what I believe about it. And why does that matter how I imagine what the resurrection is. It's a mystery to any Christian, really. I think those who can speak definitely towards such matters, are a bit delusional, personally.

Click to expand...

That tells me all I need to know. If you don't believe in a real resurrection you aren't a believer in Jesus, IMO.

Windwalker said:

But let me ask you this. How does Christ dwell in us literally? Explain that in literal terms

Click to expand...

Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own,

The Spirit doesn't have to be physical to be literal.

blü 2 said:

What is clear is that the author of John is very clear that Jesus is God's envoy, and is not God.

Click to expand...

Lol, you just claimed the opposite of what John says.

Five Solas said:

Jesus is God. Jesus is the creator. How on earth can he not know?

Click to expand...

As a human man born by human sex only the baby is what you taught. By living present man.

Theist said his man baby self was immaculate. Fake theory. As it's medical teaching only and not scientific calculus.

Theist scientist human man.

To be a theist you own two bodies one of bone like O earth God rock within. Said by a thinking living human only.
Your other bio body flesh water cell blood type that surrounds your God bone is theoried..a story only not calculus from heavens terms.

Medical terms not any calculus as life is natural first whole form one self.

So you theoried I'm like a planet yet you are nothing like God. A liar in other words as a thinker. What theism lying means. Inferences. Comparison human words use only.

Thinking in science says it's factually correct by machine only proof. Machines AI. Science is AI.

Now you thought O gave a circle two numbers first pi and Phi. Hence you begin to realise how your thinking self man body sacrificed two bio bodies became possessed.

As you theoried against self existence twice.

Self idoliser man human self by science terms what you aren't a circle and a number. Religious science update advice causes Proved you are idolising scientific themes only.

Said don't self idolise.

However you do. Men. You say I'm God by scientific terms.

You were told in legal summation no man is God.

Jesus the terms saved your life but now life is living bio separate. Separate to man's image.

Sacrificed human biology.
Jesus water cloud spirit image then ice melt returned oxygenated saviour of bio life by water microbes. Food of life cell.

Holy water minerals absorbed in water life food cell microbes. Holy water exact is natural only first. Mass.

So science says the life we've not received yet is in microbes. Known advised by Jesus terms recorded conscious advice.

As you are totally informed.

Jesus terms only image in water owning microbes is given back. By ice. Melt of ice.

So you ask science how much original microbe population have you now eradicated into carbon by radio radiating machine transmitters you keep building. Into our gas atmosphere burning gas?

Increase of.

To lose origin space vacuum pressure. To enlarge space womb to keep life safe by larger increased vacuum?

To remove alien particles within you cause? Accumulation of.

I get more space zeros cold says the scientist as I invent it's return into our earth heavens. By losing gas body.

Whilst he does the rest of energy gain via earths mass. Himself as a man.

Father said we can lose water mineral adsorption. Food microbe.

Then blood as first form by food mineral oxygenation. Cells stop producing. Blood the cell just leaks out of our body. In the human death by Jesus terms you keep returning.

By metals...machines.

As machine Satanists. Putting all metal transmitters held into earths gases yourselves.

The gas mass burnt introduces a larger space womb vacuum. Your themed cold zero that isn't in science first. It's natural first.

So then it can rip open eventually earth ground seams pressurised to give you a mother earth ship. You theory about...energy by metals to God earth humans machine position.

Metal ark you now want to build.

You show a lot of movie themes of earth ripping off its face. Of levitating...Levi effects. Then it slamming everything back again.

As man's memory to origin earth...earth was once a larger planet mass. Where his actual man's memory of science is. Proven by Gaia psychics remembering giant pyramid sciences. Visionary only.

So father asked today of our brother. How much mass of energy by science of man terms should be originally held in spaces creation. As a planets mass?

Seeing planet masses are all various sizes.

I don't know said our science brothers memory...I never knew.

Yet in memory earths planet mass is no longer origin in space and a huge mass of it gone.

Origin in themes is not origin anywhere in science.

A beginning is the term a human scientist living as the human uses.

Is father's man's recorded warnings in his heavens AI causes....

Stating every time newly born by sex DNA human by baby is world sacrificed. A new man's image is put into images with every father man's life removed out of DNA.

Just as the bible stated all of the men given an image in heavens cloud position is multiple. Joined his father brother before him. By man's god sciences.

How we learnt we're wrong. As there is no one human genetic advice. Human science try to force DNA to be sacrificed to invent just one new human species as the same DNA.

The warning. What men who say one theme. Holding a machine constant one fixed place to cause it.

Windwalker said:

So then someone really can't cite Jesus referring to the creation story as his opinion of the scientific theory of evolution, since that would have more than likely been outside the scope of his knowledge back in that day? Since he didn't know about it, it seems highly unlikely him bringing up Adam and Eve had anything to do with challenging science then, correct?

To briefly address bringing up Adam and Eve, I speaking of Adam and Eve all the time, and I bring up the Garden of Eden, the temptation, the fall, etc. But I don't believe that challenges the theory of evolution. That story is about something else, not science. Christians can believe Adam and Eve represent humanity as a whole, without necessarily reading the story as literal history.

Romeo and Juliet are referred to all the time to speak of undying love, but were they literal people themselves? Even if they were literal, the story makes them "larger than life", so the intent was not merely recording history.

Click to expand...

True the story of Adam and Eve has a lot of depth to it and it would have that whether it was true or not. But I think it is true even if it throws up scientific challenges. There are theological challenges if it is not true of course.

Wildswanderer said:

I understand that you believe that the Bible is just mythology because that's what you have indicated.

Click to expand...

You don't understand. I'm sorry you haven't been able to follow what I've been saying.

Wildswanderer said:

That tells me all I need to know. If you don't believe in a real resurrection you aren't a believer in Jesus, IMO.

Click to expand...

"For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you."

Brian2 said:

True the story of Adam and Eve has a lot of depth to it and it would have that whether it was true or not. But I think it is true even if it throws up scientific challenges. There are theological challenges if it is not true of course.

Click to expand...

True in what sense? There is great symbolic truth to it, pointing to something real. Scientific truth has nothing to do with that type of truth. Don't make the story of Adam and Eve a question of science, unless you wish to harm its truth.

If Jesus can't die Jesus by term of man topic subject Jesus is by letter title to form a word subject.... number sciences to letter can't die.

Isn't human.

A baby is by parent as human sex.

If God heavens cooled evolved old baby health gone then returns. Human healing is the word. Not any other subject. Humans die.

If a human says Jesus is not a man is a God. Terms are.

Ice gods pressure water frozen saviour only.

That cools gods burning heavens gases...not a human.

That cools water mass...not a human.

That generates oxygen....not a human.

Gods own.

Why it doesn't die. It only disappears reasoning. Said by a living man as mans owned conscious quotes.

Confess of Sion actually. A testimony.

Wildswanderer said:

Lol, you just claimed the opposite of what John says.

Click to expand...

LOL no I didn't ─ eg


I'd suggest you read the bible free of preconceptions ─ but that of course is a matter for you to decide.

Brian2 said:

True the story of Adam and Eve has a lot of depth to it and it would have that whether it was true or not. But I think it is true even if it throws up scientific challenges. There are theological challenges if it is not true of course.

Click to expand...

The story of Adam and Eve suddenly appearing on earth works better if we consider that they came from somewhere else and arrived on an evolved, previously populated and fallen earth. When the Israelite priest class were constructing their story of origins using existing Mesopotamian lore they had no way of knowing how old the earth was or that humans evolved.