Templar of Truth
Member
In case you ever were wondering if Jesus ever claimed to be God I found a really in depth website article that might help.
http://www.muslimhope.com/JesusIsGod.htm
http://www.muslimhope.com/JesusIsGod.htm
-
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!
Jesus is God.
- Thread starter Templar of Truth
- Start date
Jesus (pbuh) never claim to be, that's authors claims.
GOD after dozens of Prophets that He sent, why He should sent Him-self !
Last edited:
Templar of Truth
Member
Maybe you should read the article.
All of those statements can't be taken seriously because New Testament was written many years later so you can't really expect that those are accurate quotes of the Yeshua ﷺ.
Would you believe a group of people who claim that a human was god and picked by hand that which will be considered as the word of God or believe the actual word of God (hint: Quran) which states the opposite? I'm surprised that so many Christians can't see the issue in their belief - a "hybrid" of men & god, making statues of him and paintings then worship it (or either to visualise to what they are talking to, no much difference in my opinion), use pagan symbols (hint: cross was used by Rome who was pretty much pagan, fertility symbols for Easter, etc.), pray to people they claim to be holy and hold powers equal to God (e.g praying to St. Peter to help you with some sickness or to some other saint to protect you on your trip), let's skip the prayers to angels & archangels because that goes same for saints, etc.. etc... Trinity is not nature of God, it was made up by humans to fit their needs to make Yeshua a god and control the mass more easily. God is one, He stated that multiple times throughout the Torah & Quran.
Would you believe a group of people who claim that a human was god and picked by hand that which will be considered as the word of God or believe the actual word of God (hint: Quran) which states the opposite? I'm surprised that so many Christians can't see the issue in their belief - a "hybrid" of men & god, making statues of him and paintings then worship it (or either to visualise to what they are talking to, no much difference in my opinion), use pagan symbols (hint: cross was used by Rome who was pretty much pagan, fertility symbols for Easter, etc.), pray to people they claim to be holy and hold powers equal to God (e.g praying to St. Peter to help you with some sickness or to some other saint to protect you on your trip), let's skip the prayers to angels & archangels because that goes same for saints, etc.. etc... Trinity is not nature of God, it was made up by humans to fit their needs to make Yeshua a god and control the mass more easily. God is one, He stated that multiple times throughout the Torah & Quran.
Templar of Truth
Member
The book of James what's written as early as the year 45 AD.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
That's way too early. Many scholars put it at the end of the 1st or beginning of the 2nd century, and those scholars who feel it's earlier tend to feel it's closer to 70 c.e.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Also, let me just add that Jesus cannot be God because yet refers to "the Father" numerous times, and logically "the Father" cannot be "the Son". When dealing with a question about the "end of times", he says that only "the Father" knows for sure, not he. Also, if one believes that Jesus is "the final sacrifice", how can God be sacrificed to God?
45 AD is still a long period to claim 100% accurate quote of someone, you can't have 100% accurate quote if you weren't with a paper & ink 24/7 with someone and wrote at the moment they spoke. And someone's statement that someone is God isn't any kind of proof. Yeshua ﷺ might have been Jewish (the) messiah (but there's an issue since he didn't fulfil everything that the messiah was said he'll do) and since God isn't a trinity, we come to very logical statement that he was a prophet. Many corrupt people in Rome took the chance of Yeshua to create a religion with pagan beliefs which they couldn't give up on but still fresh enough to calm down the rebellious Jews of that time and gather the new mass for easier control on Empire.
That website does not represent Islam opinion on Jesus (pbuh).
In historical copies of the Bible, Jesus never even insinuates this relationship. He refers to God as his father, but by Christian conception that would be true for every human on the earth. He never says he is God, part of a trinity, or any such nonsense in the old texts. These things are only agreed upon in some way after the First Council of Nicea and that only happens 325 years after Jesus. 
Past that time, all Bibles were re-written to reflect these notions... In terms of authenticity, on a historical basis, they are just an outright lie. Jesus himself never made any claim to these things, and there is no biblical basis for the assertions except for the heavy editing and butchering of the original texts. So, if antiquity can prove Jesus is not God then any allusion that this is the case is some sort of delusion isn't it?
Christians are basically practicing idolatry and placing another God in front of Yahweh, in essence, directly breaking God's word. I can see where this would be a problem for non-Christian faiths who stem from Abrahmic roots.
Past that time, all Bibles were re-written to reflect these notions... In terms of authenticity, on a historical basis, they are just an outright lie. Jesus himself never made any claim to these things, and there is no biblical basis for the assertions except for the heavy editing and butchering of the original texts. So, if antiquity can prove Jesus is not God then any allusion that this is the case is some sort of delusion isn't it?
Christians are basically practicing idolatry and placing another God in front of Yahweh, in essence, directly breaking God's word. I can see where this would be a problem for non-Christian faiths who stem from Abrahmic roots.
In historical copies of the Bible, Jesus never even insinuates this relationship. He refers to God as his father, but by Christian conception that would be true for every human on the earth. He never says he is God, part of a trinity, or any such nonsense in the old texts. These things are only agreed upon in some way after the First Council of Nicea and that only happens 325 years after Jesus.
Past that time, all Bibles were re-written to reflect these notions... In terms of authenticity, on a historical basis, they are just an outright lie. Jesus himself never made any claim to these things, and there is no biblical basis for the assertions except for the heavy editing and butchering of the original texts. So, if antiquity can prove Jesus is not God then any delusion that this is the case is some sort of delusion isn't it?
Christians are basically practicing idolatry and placing another God in front of Yahweh, in essence, directly breaking God's word.
Awkward moment when druid* knows more about Yeshua ﷺ than a person who is Christian**.
*No insult was intended in any way with this statement, I just didn't expect for a druid to know this much about Christianity
** Conclusion based on username & previous threads
My interests are mostly academic in this case, but the errors of logic are quite obvious to anyone who would take the time to do some research. If scripture is used as the test for a certain type of belief then authentic scripture is important, and if such research yields information which invalidates a held notion then we should consider these changes as alterations of Jesus' original teachings and not the original work. Some people might prefer the new teachings to the old, but that doesn't mean they have credibility nor that they are legitimate. All beliefs must be honest with themselves, and I see that Christians probably have the most trouble with this. This is not such a problem with the Quran or Talmud where people have painstakingly done everything that they could to keep it unchanged. Most religions founded on certain books of wisdom will run into these problems unless someone is interested in preserving them, so it is not just a Christian problem.
Ultimately, it just comes down to how important the book is to your beliefs, but don't act like you speak for the teachings when you assert concepts which are not part of the originals.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Where are the artifacts at?
Historian Josephus tells us it was the High Priest Ananus ( Ananias ), a Sadducee, who was responsible for the death of 'James' by stoning.
This was after the death of the Roman governor Festus (@62CE) and before his successor Albinus took office. So, James wrote his letter before the year 62.
Since James addresses his letter from Jerusalem to the 'scattered' about tribes, then that would be a while after Pentecost for a required amount of time to pass and conditions to develop about which James wrote about. So, definitely after year 45 but before year 62.
Gospel writer John wrote at Revelation 1:5; Revelation 3:14 B - that Jesus is the beginning of the creation by God.
Since God is the un-created Creator and had No beginning - Psalms 90:2 - then only God was ' before ' the beginning.
Jesus was Not ' before ' the beginning as God was before the beginning.
Jesus was clear about who he was by his answer at John 10:36 that he is the Son of God.
Jesus taught that his Father is greater than all - John 10:29
and that his Father is greater than Jesus - John 14:28
And yet your comments are academically worthless.
Would you mind providing a reference to these 'originals'?
I have no interest in providing what one could Google if so desired. If I bothered to answer you the focus would be me rather than anything learned. Most of your posts are adversarial, so I will assume that is the only point of this one. Have a nice day.
firedragon
Veteran Member
Who do you think these two John's were? I would like to know your opinion and the reasoning behind it. Request.
Serenity Now
Member
The writing of the New Testament was actually vetted by the believers themselves and was written using first hand accounts. The Quran was written by one guy who was told the story supposively by an Angel. Sounds a lot like Joseph Smith to me. Its not even that original in that it rips off both the OT and NT.
It's a joke to complain about when the NT was written when the Quran was written more than 500 years later.
Serenity Now
Member
The NT was not rewritten at the council of Nicea and no respectable academic scholar would make that claim.In historical copies of the Bible, Jesus never even insinuates this relationship. He refers to God as his father, but by Christian conception that would be true for every human on the earth. He never says he is God, part of a trinity, or any such nonsense in the old texts. These things are only agreed upon in some way after the First Council of Nicea and that only happens 325 years after Jesus.
Past that time, all Bibles were re-written to reflect these notions... In terms of authenticity, on a historical basis, they are just an outright lie. Jesus himself never made any claim to these things, and there is no biblical basis for the assertions except for the heavy editing and butchering of the original texts. So, if antiquity can prove Jesus is not God then any allusion that this is the case is some sort of delusion isn't it?
Christians are basically practicing idolatry and placing another God in front of Yahweh, in essence, directly breaking God's word. I can see where this would be a problem for non-Christian faiths who stem from Abrahmic roots.