• 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???

Adonis65

Active Member
I can provide you a ton of contradictions.

Here's one. What were the last words of Jesus on the cross?
According to Mark it is "My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?"
According to Luke, "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit."
According to John, "It is finished."

Did it occur to you that He might've said all those things? I believe that is one reason why the four gospels were combined.


Here is a bonus one:

The thieves on the cross. Mark and Luke tell a different story. Did the thieves revile him or did only one?

According to the chief of priests in verse 31, they all reviled Him, but I think that was more about a bunch of triumphant hypocrites mocking the Savior, than it was about being accurate in their account of what actually happened. Again, we're getting diferent perspectives on the same story. There are no contradictions here... I'm sorry. :shrug:
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
These are not the only contradictions, they are just two examples.
When you combine all four Gospels together, and pick and choose what you want from those accounts, you are creating your own Gospel.
People assume only two thieves because that is what the Gospels tell you. It does not tell that later more thieves were brought, they tell you two thieves, one on either side.

But those two are Not contradictions because there are explanations.

Creating own Gospel by combining all four ? How ?

Where does it say only two thieves ?

Doesn't Luke plainly say [23v32] and there were 'ALSO' two 'OTHER' malefactors 'LED' with him to be put to death ?
So beside the two at Matt [27v44] there were at least also two others.

That is why there are five [5] crosses depicted at Cotes-du-Nord, Brittany.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
Apparent contradictions:
Why did you put the comma [,] before the word Today?
KJV inserted the comma [,] before today, but Jesus went to hell the day he died. Acts 2vs27,31,32. The comma [,] is in the wrong place.
Jesus was giving a future promise on that day to the one criminal.
[Daniel 12vs2,13; Acts 24v15]
When you put all 4 gospel accounts together they make one complete picture. So it is finished is the last.
The Romans had mass executions. People assume only three hanging together. One on one side of Jesus and one on the other side.
Some later thieves could have been brought there at that day.
Interesting there is a calvary to be seen at Ploubezere near Lamnion, in the Cotes-du-Nord, Brittany known as Les Cing Croix [the 5 crosses].
There is a high cross in the center with four [4] smaller crosses , two on each side. So those people concluded there were more than just two [2] with Jesus.

See again ^Above^ detailed reply to apparent contradictions.
 

Otherright

Otherright
But those two are Not contradictions because there are explanations.

Creating own Gospel by combining all four ? How ?

Where does it say only two thieves ?

Doesn't Luke plainly say [23v32] and there were 'ALSO' two 'OTHER' malefactors 'LED' with him to be put to death ?
So beside the two at Matt [27v44] there were at least also two others.

That is why there are five [5] crosses depicted at Cotes-du-Nord, Brittany.

Yeah, Luke says that. Those are the two that are being crucified with him. :facepalm:

I'm not sure if you know how the Gospel stories work, but they aren't one story, they are four separate accounts being told by four people. Matthew is Matthew's account of the story. Luke is Luke's and so on.

Besides, Luke didn't even witness any of it.
 

Yanni

Active Member
I disagree. Both Testaments are inspired of God.
Actually, according to Jewish doctrine and tradition, the entire Torah was dictated to Moses by God Himself on Mount Sinai (that is the Five Books of Moses). The Prophets and other parts of Scripture were written with Divine Inspiration. But to our firm belief, the Torah, in its entirety, was authored by God Himself. So there would be no margin for error there.
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
Actually, according to Jewish doctrine and tradition, the entire Torah was dictated to Moses by God Himself on Mount Sinai (that is the Five Books of Moses).
Not my doctrine, not my Rabbi's doctrine, and certainly not the doctrine of such respected institutions as the JTS and HUC.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
Please elaborate.

Hasn't there been? I don't study Biblical topics very much,
but that was my impression. Anyway, Christianity places
more emphasis on the NT, that's to be expected. As far as
the supposed 'contradictions', there are none that change
the overall message and meaning of Christianity.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Yanni

Active Member
Hasn't there been? I don't study Biblical topics very much,
but that was my impression. Anyway, Christianity places
more emphasis on the NT, that's to be expected. As far as
the supposed 'contradictions', there are none that change
the overall message and meaning of Christianity.
The only Rabbinic deliberations that existed were those of the great commentators on the Torah and the Oral Law (which defines and explains the different characteristics of the commandments written in the Written Law, a.k.a the Five Books of Moses). For example, Orthodox Jews wear something called Tefillin during morning prayers (those black boxes that we wear on our heads and arms; they contain parchment with certain passages from the Torah in them). But the Written Law doesn't describe what they are supposed to look like or how they are supposed to be made. The Oral Law (which was passed down orally from generation to generation from Mount Sinai, which God taught to Moses and had Moses teach it to the Jewish people) describes exactly what Tefillin is supposed to be made of and looks like, and it describes countless other commandments. The Rabbinic disputes came about when the Oral Law seemed to become more and more vague to the following generations, largely do to restrictions on teaching Torah that the Greeks and Romans imposed on us. The Oral Law was written down (which was technically not supposed to happen) in a series of organized topics of Jewish law called the Mishnah. Even that became vague over further generation lapses, and the Talmud was written to explain the Mishnah. The Talmud is largely made up of the Rabbinic deliberations as to what the Mishnah really means and why the Mishnah came to its conclusions about its laws. However, no Rabbinic deliberation ever questioned the Divine origin of the Written and Oral Law being dictated to Moses at Mount Sinai. All the deliberations were all about was trying to understand, as generations grew further and further away from the Giving of the Torah at Mount Sinai and persecution continued throughout those generations, what the details of the Torah's laws were.
 

Shermana

Heretic
It is interesting that Jesus mentions the Phylacteries and the Tekhlet (snail-dyed cloth strings, or "fringes" ), not in a way to disparage them but in the way their meaning had been lost to vain but trendy fashion statements, where people just wore them without seeking their true meaningful effect.
 

Yanni

Active Member
Well, I assure you that the Rabbis and many, if not most, of their students and followers knew precisely what the effect and meaning of these commandments were. But if Jesus did mention them, why did he not tell his followers (i.e. the Christians, and if the Messianic Jews don't wear them) that they must wear them?
P.S. Do Messianic Jews wear Tefillin (Pylacteries)?
 

InChrist

Free4ever
So, those Jews unfortunately were influenced by deceit. Just because some Jews accepted him doesn't mean that all Jews should have? No one is perfect. Some people are gifted at deceiving others. But as I pointed out above, if Jesus told someone to go against the Torah command of burying his dead, then he couldn't have been sent from God (or God Himself).



[FONT=&quot]I don’t think the point of what Jesus was saying was meant to encourage commandment breaking, nor was He actually instructing people not to honor or bury the dead. There are two examples given in these verses below where He calls each man to follow Him and they both have excuses and something they want to do first. I believe the point He was making was that when the Lord calls, a person should respond and follow immediately because compared to anything else in life salvation and the kingdom of God takes priority.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Then He said to another, “Follow Me.”
But he said, “Lord, let me first go and bury my father.” Jesus said to him, “Let the dead bury their own dead, but you go and preach the kingdom of God.” And another also said, “Lord, I will follow You, but let me first go and bid them farewell who are at my house.”
But Jesus said to him, “No one, having put his hand to the plow, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God.” Luke 9:59-62[/FONT]



 

Shermana

Heretic
[FONT=&quot]I don’t think the point of what Jesus was saying was meant to encourage commandment breaking, nor was He actually instructing people not to honor or bury the dead. There are two examples given in these verses below where He calls each man to follow Him and they both have excuses and something they want to do first. I believe the point He was making was that when the Lord calls, a person should respond and follow immediately because compared to anything else in life salvation and the kingdom of God takes priority.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Then He said to another, “Follow Me.”
But he said, “Lord, let me first go and bury my father.” Jesus said to him, “Let the dead bury their own dead, but you go and preach the kingdom of God.” And another also said, “Lord, I will follow You, but let me first go and bid them farewell who are at my house.”
But Jesus said to him, “No one, having put his hand to the plow, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God.” Luke 9:59-62[/FONT]




I agree the context here is that he is using "Dead" to first mean metaphorical and contrasting it with the literal. i.e. "Let the (spiritually) dead (the non-believing members of your family) go bury him, your job is to preach". It is not a universal command to the self-professed believer to leave bodies rotting.
 

Shermana

Heretic
Well, I assure you that the Rabbis and many, if not most, of their students and followers knew precisely what the effect and meaning of these commandments were. But if Jesus did mention them, why did he not tell his followers (i.e. the Christians, and if the Messianic Jews don't wear them) that they must wear them?
P.S. Do Messianic Jews wear Tefillin (Pylacteries)?

I don't think Jesus ever said you weren't supposed to or didn't have to. He said anyone who preached to not follow the Least of the commandments shall be called the Least in the Kingdom, meaning anyone who says its okay to not obey even a seemingly "least" command for example like Tekhlet and Tefellin will be called among the "Lowliest", the "least honorable" in the Kingdom of Heaven.

Whether I or any claimed "Messianic Jew" wears them consistently and correctly has no bearing on the fact that we are to obey even the Least of the laws, so yes it is SUPPOSED to be binding, and anyone who says otherwise will be called among "The least".
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
Did Jesus say he was God? No, not according to the flesh, he was the son of man. However, what was within Jesus, yes, that was God.

2 Corinthians 5:19 For God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, not counting people's sins against them. And he gave us this wonderful message of reconciliation.

God is not God according to the flesh.

That makes Jesus God in the flesh and identifies Him as God.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
Maybe this was already said, but there are too many posts in this thread to go through. I don't think Jesus said this specifically, but his followers thought that he was.

Written before he came to earth:
Isaiah 7:14 "Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel."

Written after he left earth (but referred to the time when he was physically on earth):
Matthew 1:23 “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel (which means “God with us)."

Immanuel refers to Jesus in this instance, and Immanuel means God with us.

Another Example:
Mark 10:18 “Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God alone.

His disciples call him good (just before the scirpture above). Jesus is basically saying that no one is good except God (who is in him). That doesn't mean that this is definitive proof and he doesn't specifically say "I am God". This particular passage is open to interpretation. However, He does imply that he is a King to Pilot, Son of God, is referred to as Immanuel (God with us) by his diciples, and Messiah.

It would make interesting reading if you had a few hours. There is a lot of repetition but I try to say something new.

Perhaps you could evaluate the OP in relation to your statement.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
So did God and Jesus have separate minds too? Did the Teacup have a totally separate will and mind? Or was it the same mind?

This is more complicated than it looks on the surface. Each person has a spirit and that spirit has an intellectual capacity that we tend to think of as mind. The Spirit of God is in Jesus with the mind of God. However every person also has a physical mind and Jesus had one also. So the answer is that Jesus just like any other fleshly person had two minds.

It is almost impossible to separate mind and spirit once they are joined. Granted there are times when the mind thinks that it is independent but the spirit works in subtle ways to control the mind.
 

waitasec

Veteran Member
This is more complicated than it looks on the surface. Each person has a spirit and that spirit has an intellectual capacity that we tend to think of as mind. The Spirit of God is in Jesus with the mind of God. However every person also has a physical mind and Jesus had one also. So the answer is that Jesus just like any other fleshly person had two minds.

huh? :confused:
 
Top