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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
That's not an argument, and in the OP, I state that I believe that Jesus is a manifestation of the father. So, you are correct, He was never a ///separate god.
No, different. Those are 'humans'. Jesus as a 'man' is not literal, that is why He doesn't have a father, and is blessed from birth, as opposed to attaining divinity at His ''baptism'' by John , as some believe. His nature in 'man' persona is different as well, He is sinless. When Jesus teaches people, on earth, this is part of the ''man aspect'', but He always has His divinity, that is why people said He came from heaven. Came from heaven is not being poetic, it means that He is a Deity. In the religious paradigm of the Israelite monotheism, this means that He is God, in other words, the 'father', as the Deity is one in 'person'.
What do you mean by manististation if that doesnt mean He is deified?
When we talk about Esa, we are regarding His deific nature. He could very well have an Israelite, a 'man', however, his nature is that of a Deity. This is why He is regarded as G-d, by Xians. The non-Human form of Jesus, is also Jesus, yet we clearly know that He is Deific; so, ''real'', here is not what Jesus adherents would be completely focused on, we don't worship a man. We worship His Deific form, nature, regardless of Him being part man or a manifestation of G-d.
So you say. I think you have just as many verses to unscramble, as I might. Good thing I don't rely on the Xian Bible for my beliefs, it is merely stories relating to G-d.
Your belief is incongruent with the doctrine of the Trinity, yet assumes a Trinitarian identity. That's why it doesn't work. The doctrine clearly states that the Father and the Son are two different Persons. The Son is not a "manifestation" of the Father.
I don't know what ''Trinitarian identity'', is supposed to mean. If G-d is the father, and G-d is also Jesus, yet the ''father'' is not Jesus, how does that make sense? I noticed that you didn't explain that seeming contradiction.
You say that your belief is Trinitarian. But it isn't, because you don't fully embrace the doctrine. Think of "God" as one community instead of one being. Each "member" of the community is the community, itself, but is not the other people in the community. It's a level of perfection of community that we can -- as fully self-differentiated human beings -- never understand, until we become spiritually aware that, even with separate identities, we are still really one with everything else. Perhaps John Lennon put it best: "I am he, as you are he, as you are me, and we are all together."
What makes you say that Jesus is the Father?
Because He is G-d. Therefore, He has to be the father. I think that this is also backed by the various scripture that equates Esa to the father. We aren't supposed to be reading into the text that Jesus is a literal son of god, or just a Rabbi, when He is equated to the father.
Ok, heres the theology, lol. G-d, who is the father, incarnates, via Mary, as Esa. Esa is not 'literally' the son of G-d, He is an image, a manifestation, of G-d. //the father. That is why He is called both the son of god, and G-d. He is the ''son of G-d'', in a metaphoric sense, He is G-d, through Spirit.