In the beginning was the Word, the Word was with God and the Word was God. and the Word became man. Christ, was God, but laid His divine being to one side. As a man He could be tempted, just as we can. He still had these powers, but did not use them accept the way the disciples used the powers He gave them, to heal, forgive sin Etc. The disciple could not forgive sin. He was not testing Himself. He was here to saved mankind. It had to be someone with no sin. Man inherited sin from Adam, no way could he could even saved himself. Col. Chp. 1 states God is an invisible Spirit, but Christ was the visible image, the first born of everything, and by Him everything that is was made.
-
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!
If Jesus was God, explain this verse...
- Thread starter Aamer
- Start date
Xian Catalyst
Member
Shermana
Heretic
kjw47
Well-Known Member
'Many translations in history had an a in the last line of John 1:1--a god( small g) Jesus is not the allmighty God--He serves the allmighty God- his Father=YHWH(Jehovah) John 20:17, rev 3:12) but I guess one has to believe Jesus over mens dogma to see the error filled trinity translations contradict Jesus' truth.
Prophet
breaking the statutes of my local municipality
I suspect that the story about the temptation in the wilderness was a fabrication like many stories about Jesus in the canonical gospels. However, mortal life, in itself, can be seen as a trial for all of God's children to be continually and repeatedly tested until they, too, experience a renewing of their minds and become fit for immortality.
Shermana
Heretic
Yeah God's totally cool with murder and rape and theft and false witness and cheating and adultery , he never takes offense to it whatsoever. He relishes in it instead.
This is the Scriptural debate page, if you want to try your New Age concepts, this is not the appropriate forum, unless you want to say that all of the scripture that indicates otherwise is wrong or interpolated, but even that's out of the scope of this forum.
Just helping you out.
John 1:1 Says, "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. verse 14 says "And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us. The Word who was with
God and who was God, was made flesh and dwelt among us. And this is Yeshua (Jesus in
English tranlation) And why was He tested despite being God? Coz God became human and nothing is impossible with Him.
God and who was God, was made flesh and dwelt among us. And this is Yeshua (Jesus in
English tranlation) And why was He tested despite being God? Coz God became human and nothing is impossible with Him.
Ken Brown
Well-Known Member
Hi Shermana and kjw47, I was hoping others would have chimed in about the "I AM" being a reference to Yahweh, and that Latuwr would have been debated, but as it stands, here is some evidence you both should consider.
First Shermana, you should consider that Yeshua would not have been speaking Greek when He referred to the "I AM," it would have been Hebrew, and the Jews hearing Him would have taken up stones to kill him because He was using the equivalent of the Hebrew name of Yahweh.
Secondly Shermana and kjw47, when the high priest rent his clothes, he was in violation to the Law of Moses, but an Oral Law superseded it. In the Mishna it states:
"He who blasphemes is liable only when he will have fully pronounced the Divine Name. Said R. Joshua ben Qorha, "on every day (of the trial) they examine the witnesses with a substituted name. When sentence was to be given they did not declare him guilty of death with the substituted name, but they put everyone out and ask the most important of the witnesses, saying to him, "Say, what exactly did you hear?" And he says what he heard. And the judges stand on their feet and tear their clothing, and they may not mend them again.(m.San. 7:5)"
In the above quote from the Mishna, witnesses who heard someone blaspheme and pronounce the Divine Name, would substitute a name when describing the blasphemy. But when sentence was to be given, the main witness would state exactly what he heard (pronouncing the Divine Name), and then the judges would rend their clothing. No further witnesses were needed once Yeshua pronounced the Divine Name.
Furthermore, the word used for "power" in Mat 26:64 was a way in which Yeshua was referring to Elohim, as Him sitting on the Right Hand of The Majesty (Divinity) also referred to in Heb 1:3 & 8:1.
Yeshua was THE Yahweh of the OT and He gave up His divinity (Phil 2), to become a man, and upon His resurrection, He was restored to that former Glory as Yahweh Elohim. KB
First Shermana, you should consider that Yeshua would not have been speaking Greek when He referred to the "I AM," it would have been Hebrew, and the Jews hearing Him would have taken up stones to kill him because He was using the equivalent of the Hebrew name of Yahweh.
Secondly Shermana and kjw47, when the high priest rent his clothes, he was in violation to the Law of Moses, but an Oral Law superseded it. In the Mishna it states:
"He who blasphemes is liable only when he will have fully pronounced the Divine Name. Said R. Joshua ben Qorha, "on every day (of the trial) they examine the witnesses with a substituted name. When sentence was to be given they did not declare him guilty of death with the substituted name, but they put everyone out and ask the most important of the witnesses, saying to him, "Say, what exactly did you hear?" And he says what he heard. And the judges stand on their feet and tear their clothing, and they may not mend them again.(m.San. 7:5)"
In the above quote from the Mishna, witnesses who heard someone blaspheme and pronounce the Divine Name, would substitute a name when describing the blasphemy. But when sentence was to be given, the main witness would state exactly what he heard (pronouncing the Divine Name), and then the judges would rend their clothing. No further witnesses were needed once Yeshua pronounced the Divine Name.
Furthermore, the word used for "power" in Mat 26:64 was a way in which Yeshua was referring to Elohim, as Him sitting on the Right Hand of The Majesty (Divinity) also referred to in Heb 1:3 & 8:1.
Yeshua was THE Yahweh of the OT and He gave up His divinity (Phil 2), to become a man, and upon His resurrection, He was restored to that former Glory as Yahweh Elohim. KB
kjw47
Well-Known Member
If Jesus returned to his former glory as Yahweh--then how is it that while sitting at the right hand of power--Jesus teaches that he has a God-rev 3:12? You would have to teach that God has a God.
And how is it at Daniel 7:13-14--that Jesus gained access to himself and was brought forth to himself( ancient of days) so that he could give himself a kingship?---Jesus is not Yahweh. The one he gained access to--the ancient of days is Yahweh--Jesus' God--John 20:17, rev 3:12
Ken Brown
Well-Known Member
Hi kjw47, Yeshua IS Yahweh, but Yahweh/Yeshua is not the Father. The Father is ALL of the Elohim, united as ONE, with Yahweh/Yeshua as the Head. Yeshua/Yahweh by Himself is not as Great as the All in All. Those who are predestined, and called, are also ONE with the Father as Yeshua is ONE with the Father. It is a FAMILY of ELOHIM. KB
Shermana
Heretic
No John 1:1c SHOULD say "And the word was a god", even prominent Trinitairans like Wallace and Moffat say it should read "Divine" as in "A divine being". The "Word was God" translation is simply more of a crowd pleaser for Trinitarians who want reconfirmation of their beliefs than anything close to grammatical accuracy. See the link provided above for more detail.
Anyone who thinks something can be WITH something they already are needs their logic license revoked.
Prophet
breaking the statutes of my local municipality
And thank you for whatever portion of that help was given with gracious motives. I endeavor to help you here as well.
It is my belief that time and circumstance have again set us on opposite sides through no fault of our own. Though you have forgone rational discussion of ideas with me at nearly every turn and have instead invariably turned to mockery, I believe yours is an attitude that no one would choose for themselves. I believe your refusal to engage in rational debate is the result of damage incurred to you by other damaged beings.
I wish to summarize the overarching conflict between our worldviews. While I could frame this any number of ways, I choose to see it in our concepts of what "good" is and where it comes from. You subscribe to a belief that God demands that we must act good lest he subject us to an eternal punishment. Furthermore, you see the message of the prophet Jesus as being in support of your belief that God takes offense to sin in this fashion. These are relatively traditional beliefs. I subscribe to a belief that God sees sinners as damaged beings who had little say in the time and circumstance of their existence. Even as sinners murder, rape, and disregard all reason and civility, I believe these sinners are to be pitied and suffer from pasts which, if judged honestly, wouldn't have left any of us in a much better condition.
Here is my view and my reasoning: Good is the selfless motive behind acts of goodness, not the acts themselves. When one performs acts of goodness for selfish gain, whether it be for reputation here or reward in the afterlife, the acts never rise above acting. Good cannot be motivated by fear of punishment. It can only be motivated by love.
Here is some Scriptural basis for my "New Age" beliefs:
-Matthew 5:38-48
I believe this passage from Matthew 5 is a clear admonition from Jesus Christ to follow God's eternal example of perfection by treating all with love, regardless of how good they are.
- 1 John 4:18
I believe this passage form 1 John 4 stands in stark contrast to your personal holiness model of fear of punishment inspiring good.
kjw47
Well-Known Member
Ken Brown
Well-Known Member
Hi kjw47, you are correct, you probably won't find many who understands as my post. Now, I would have to disagree with you about finding contradictions with it. What exactly contradicts anything Yeshua said? KB
kjw47
Well-Known Member
John 17:1-6--While praying to his Father, Jesus calls the Father-THE ONLY TRUE GOD- ( one who sent Jesus-John 5:30) verse 6 = YHWH(Jehovah)
Paul taught the same at 1 Corinthians 8:6)-- One God to all-the Father.
Jesus taught he has a God-his Father-YHWH(Jehovah)John 20:17, rev 3:12
Prophet
breaking the statutes of my local municipality
I am clearly arguing that you are the one taking hundreds of verses out of context.
Shermana
Heretic
That's nice, but it's clearly you who has no idea what he's talking about, since you have no actual response to what I said.
I would place my bets you have not actually read 1 John in its entirety. Or the Gospels for that matter. Or 2 or 3 John.
Perhaps one day you may take credibility seriously.