1. 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!

Featured Who do YOU say Jesus is?

Discussion in 'General Religious Debates' started by Spartan, May 3, 2019.

  1. rrobs

    rrobs Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2018
    Messages:
    900
    Ratings:
    +205
    Religion:
    Christian
    Romans chapter 1 addresses that very issue. Basically, everybody, Jew and Gentile alike, has a sense of right and wrong and we don't always do what it right, so we do in fact all need Jesus.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  2. IndigoChild5559

    IndigoChild5559 Loving God and my neighbor as myself.

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2018
    Messages:
    1,952
    Ratings:
    +687
    Religion:
    Judaism
    The synoptic gospels do not support the idea of Jesus being God. The gospel of John, being written the latest in history, begins to hint at this. But it was actually hundreds of years in the future that true Trinitarianism was formulated. You simply don't find it in the Christian Bible.
     
  3. rrobs

    rrobs Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2018
    Messages:
    900
    Ratings:
    +205
    Religion:
    Christian
    Your subtitle, "Loving God and my neighbor as myself" is fulfilling the whole law. Good one to have and follow.

    Rom 13:10,

    Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love [is] the fulfilling of the law.​
     
  4. rrobs

    rrobs Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2018
    Messages:
    900
    Ratings:
    +205
    Religion:
    Christian
    Yes. And it was formulated by folks who'd kill those who didn't get on board with the idolatry of more than one God. Went that way until just a few hundred years ago. That in itself out to speak volumes to anyone trying to learn the character of Jesus. Of course, as you pointed out, the Bible is the final authority on the matter and it is clear that Jesus was the son of God. God the Son is a totally man made construct. I don't understand why so many miss it. I guess it's the power of tradition.

    Matt 15:6,

    And honour not his father or his mother, [he shall be free]. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.
    Imagine all the sincere Christians that make God's word of none effect by their tradition. It's incredibly sad.

    Take care...
     
  5. Oeste

    Oeste Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2015
    Messages:
    1,003
    Ratings:
    +385
    Religion:
    Christian
    Was he any good at using God's goodness?


    Of course...but he wasn't any good at it, right? After all, why would we call Jesus good? Only God is good.

    So was he good at this, kind of good. pretty good at it or since only God is good, just no good at all?

    The problem is we try and fail. Jesus could not fail. How do you do that if you're not good?

    Thank you Blü! I think you've outlined the problem very succinctly.

    I understand your rationale. It presents no problem for skeptics. They doubt the bible's veracity anyways, and if something doesn't make sense or is contradictory it's no big deal. It's like watching Game of Thrones and seeing a Starbucks' cup lying on a medieval table. You see it and move on.

    But for non-Trinitarian bible believers, who don't believe Jesus is God,it creates a HUGE problem. Jesus died for our sins, so he has to be good at everything you enumerated above. One slip up, one moment or instance where he doesn't follow the Father's advice, one lapse where he breaks a Law, and it's all over. You can't be kind of good or half-bad and die for mankind after all.It's like an "eye for an eye" and giving the guy a plastic eye to resolve your debt. Atonement just doesn't work that way.

    Jesus was the only one good enough, and the only one good is God.
     
  6. IndigoChild5559

    IndigoChild5559 Loving God and my neighbor as myself.

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2018
    Messages:
    1,952
    Ratings:
    +687
    Religion:
    Judaism
    But we have to remember which set of laws we are responsible to. Jews have a much narrower set of responsibilities in terms of Loving God and Loving Neighbor. After all, loving our neighbor as ourselves is a good starting point. But it begins the process of studying, so that we understand how to apply the principle. For example, the Jew is required to keep kosher and observe Shabbat, while the Gentile is not.
     
  7. KenS

    KenS Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2013
    Messages:
    6,969
    Ratings:
    +1,836
    Religion:
    Judeo/Christian
    LOL... well, for sure I'm Jewish now... a wild branch grafted into the Olive Tree. :D
     
  8. KenS

    KenS Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2013
    Messages:
    6,969
    Ratings:
    +1,836
    Religion:
    Judeo/Christian
    Great point. You said it much better than I did.
     
  9. IndigoChild5559

    IndigoChild5559 Loving God and my neighbor as myself.

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2018
    Messages:
    1,952
    Ratings:
    +687
    Religion:
    Judaism
    Being a Christian doesn't make you a Jew, sir.
     
  10. blü 2

    blü 2 Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2017
    Messages:
    4,221
    Ratings:
    +2,481
    Religion:
    Skeptical
    I can't fault your logic, but I suspect the Trinitarians would reply that by the Trinity Doctrine, each of the three persons of God is of [him]self 100% of God, so 'Son of God' is a rank inside the Trinitarian god.
    Right on the money! And not one I'd noticed.
    The snake, with perfect accuracy, said to Eve 'No, you won't die.' And there's the further point that at the moment each of Eve and Adam ate the fruit, they were, by God's design, without knowledge of good and evil, so it was impossible for either of them to form any sinful intention. Nor did God mention sin or disobedience when he gave his reasons for expelling them from the Garden.
    Indeed. But since Paul is mistaken as to the source of the idea of original sin, and since Ezekiel 18 passim (but take, say, Ezekiel 18:20 as a sample), rules out the idea that sin can be inherited, the idea is at best of dubious authenticity and more generally, a bald contradiction.
    We are born to compete for places in the peck order in our own tribe, and to compete with other tribes and all other animals for our resources; and we're also born to cooperate, and to have a sense of fairness and justness, and to be capable of civility and altruism (one rather ambiguous form of which is the warrior). We can be smart and stupid, generous and greedy, loving and hating, all these kinds of things are in us. Why not emphasize that we're born with a better nature?

    I recall the distress of our eldest coming home from kindergarten having been told for the first time what a vile and hell-bound lot we humans, including him, are (the general idea 'that for a worm a god should die'); and my wife very calmly told him that other people might think these things but that we don't, and that there was nothing to worry about. So he digested that and never looked back. On the positive side, we were able to protect the other two in a more timely manner.
    But standing back, the Garden story is just that, a story. If it's an allegory, then it would be one that says we start off as infants, protected by our parents, then we reach adolescence, the sexual imperatives in our nature emerge (nakedness / 'the knowledge of good and evil'), and shortly it's time for us to leave home, find a place of our own, get a job and repeat the cycle.
    It says that our sins are our own, not our parents', and not Adam's. Paul's take on this is a later invention ─ I seem to recall it's found in Alexandrian Jewish thought around the near end of the second century BCE.

    But for all our faults, I still argue against characterizing humans as 'sinful'. The idea leaves far too much out.
    But again, if you take one step back, you see that it's good for the world to have generational change, which the presence of one's numerous great-great-great &c forebears would stifle; and they'd own everything too. Death isn't good for the human, but it's essential for humans.

    As for belief in life after death, I can't see that either as a real, a credible possibility, or as a desirable thing in itself ─ why? to do what? or as the saying goes, eternity is very long, especially towards the end.

    But to you, and to people of goodwill generally, live long and prosper!
     
    #150 blü 2, May 7, 2019
    Last edited: May 7, 2019
  11. Oeste

    Oeste Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2015
    Messages:
    1,003
    Ratings:
    +385
    Religion:
    Christian
    For anyone who believes this is a logical deduction we can derive from a reasonable exploration of the Trinity, I have an exercise for you:

    Trisha is a substitute school teacher in a private Unitarian school which vehemently denies the Trinity. Today she has a bowl of apples to help illustrate math to her class.

    She notices a problem on the black board and decides to demonstrate a solution with some apples she brought in for the class.

    chalkboard-generator-poster.jpg

    “Let’s break a large problem into a smaller problem.

    For 3 x 3” she says “we can start by taking out 3 apples. But we multiply by 3, so we need to take out these 3 apples 3 times.” She shows 9 apples on the table. "But we’re not finished, because we also need to multiply what we have another 3 times, so we start with the 9 apples and we take those 3 times." She then pulls out another group of 9, and still another group until she reaches 27 apples. “So 3 x 3 x 3 is equal to 27, or 27 apples. As she replaces the apples she turns to the class and asks: Does everyone understand?”

    Her students nod enthusiastically, assuring her they do.

    She does the same for 2 x 2 x 2, starting with 2 apples, then taking another group for 4, and then another group of 4 until she has 8 apples on the table. She’s about to offer the apples to the class when little Johnny, who sits in the back raises his hand and asks “What about the 1’s?”

    For one 1 x 1 x 1, Johnny’s teacher pulls out one apple. “If we multiply one apple by one apple, it is one apple, and if we multiply it again by one it is still one apple”.

    “That’s not quite right!”, little Johnny exclaims. “You have one apple, but now it’s three times as big as it was before.”

    “Illustrate” says the teacher.

    With that, Johnny gets up, grabs some tape, and proceeds to the front of the class. "We tape all 3 apples together. So we have one apple, just like you said Mrs. Trish but now it's 3 times as big." Putting the finishing touches to his masterpiece he adds “This is your solution, and not that Trinitarian nonsense you were trying to teach us before.” The class nods approvingly as Johnny takes his seat.

    ScreenCap168.jpg

    Given the argument you’ve just presented, I see you and @rrobs siding with Johnny. If not, please discuss how you might present the apple so that Johnny and the rest of the class don’t see 1 x 1 x 1 apple as a single apple that’s now 3 times as big.

    Once you've done this I think you just may be able to explain the Trinity doctrine's math accurately and logically to yourselves and a lot of our work here will be done.
     
  12. blü 2

    blü 2 Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2017
    Messages:
    4,221
    Ratings:
    +2,481
    Religion:
    Skeptical
    In the verses I gave @Spartan, Jesus says, to take a few stark examples ─

    Luke 18:19 And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone.”

    John 5:30 “I can do nothing on my own authority; as I hear, I judge; and my judgment is just, because I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me.”

    John 10:25 Jesus answered them, “... 29 My Father ... is greater than all”.

    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 "... I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.”​

    and Paul chimes in with, for example ─

    Philippians 2:11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.​

    And not once, not anywhere, does Jesus say, "I am God" ─ which if he were indeed God, would not only be an odd omission but a deeply deceitful one.

    There's no getting through to you guys, is there. It's GOT to say there's a Trinity, even if the Trinity idea didn't exist back then, even if it's not only an incoherent doctrine but admittedly so, even if it leaves Jesus saying 'Me, me, why have I forsaken me?' and being his own father, and so on.
    Ah, God is easily frightened! How could I fail to see that!
    You did. You just forgot to read it.

    The memo reads,

    "The [Trinity] doctrine is held to be a mystery in the strict sense, in that it can neither be known by unaided human reason apart from revelation, nor cogently demonstrated by reason after it has been revealed"
    The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, under 'Trinity'
    If you go to the online Catholic Encyclopedia and look under both 'Trinity' and 'Mystery' you'll see that the RCC agrees.

    Now if something can't be known by reason, or shown to be correct by reason once it's known, what would be an appropriate name for that something? Beyond a doubt, 'an unreasonable thing'. 'A nonsense' would fit too. So would 'an incoherent thing'.
    What scripture is that, given that the Trinity is nowhere mentioned in the NT and Jesus expressly and repeatedly denies he's God?

    Give me just one place in the NT where Jesus says, "I am God". I've given you five above where Jesus says "I am not God". (Don't give quotes like, "I am" or "I am Alpha and Omega" or "I am Mr Ed the Talking Horse" ─ We're looking for where Jesus says, "I am God".
    It'd be very difficult, since they have no clear idea what God is, and even less if we require God to be real, to have objective existence. Not that I do, but then that's not my problem.
    But a 'mystery in the strict sense' is as defined above.
    That would to admit the obvious: that to speak of God is not to have the faintest idea what real thing or entity you're actually talking about.
    My Theory of Everything starts with three assumptions. I have to assume them, since they have in common that they can't be demonstrated to be correct without the prior assumption that they are correct.
    That a world exists external to the self;
    That our senses are capable of informing us of that world.
    That reason is a valid tool.​
    It seems to me that by posting here you demonstrate that you agree with the first two. If you disagree with the third, now would be a good time to say so.

    The rest is a matter of exploring, describing and seeking to explain what exists in the world external to the self ─ objective reality, nature, the realm of the physical sciences.

    And the way to do this is by reasoned enquiry. With the physical sciences this takes the form of scientific method.

    This also gives rise to our concept of truth. A statement is true to the extent that it conforms with / corresponds to / accurately describes objective reality. Since science proceeds by empiricism and induction, none of its conclusions is ever absolute, simply the best opinion for the time being. There are no absolutes outside this sentence.

    You, by contrast, have no definition of God appropriate to a real god, one sufficient to allow us to tell whether any real candidate is God or not. You don't even have a definition of 'godness', the real quality a real god has and nothing else does.

    If you did, I could test this keyboard I'm using and determine whether it's God or not; but you don't, so I'll never know.

    Meanwhile the only place that God is known to exist is as a concept, a thing imagined that has no objective counterpart, in individual brains.

    But if that's wrong, please supply me with those definitions. It might alter my relationship with this keyboard forever.
     
  13. blü 2

    blü 2 Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2017
    Messages:
    4,221
    Ratings:
    +2,481
    Religion:
    Skeptical
    So if X = (Jesus + Father) / Ghost

    what's the square root of X?

    Talk me through it, step by step.
     
  14. Samantha Rinne

    Samantha Rinne Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2018
    Messages:
    585
    Ratings:
    +206
    Religion:
    Follower (and Writer) of the Mune Shinri
    Horus
    Buddha
    Mithra
    Krishna
    Osiris

    John 1:2

    Jesus was NOT some carpenter's son. He was part of the Trinity well before his death and resurrection. He has always been the Savior.

    And he will return long after people try to kill off the last Christian.

    Jesus did not die to save us from sins. He died, so that we might know we are saved from sin.
     
  15. Spartan

    Spartan Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2019
    Messages:
    885
    Ratings:
    +118
    Religion:
    Christian
    You keep posting that fairy tale over and over again.

    Jesus said, "Before Abraham was born, I am!" You might not have a clue what that means but the Jews of his day did. They picked up stones to stone him with. They obviously believed he was claiming to be God.

    The OP links refute your "Jesus is not God" agenda. Recommend you read them again.

    The Deity of Jesus Christ in Scripture
    Jesus Must be Jehovah
     
  16. blü 2

    blü 2 Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2017
    Messages:
    4,221
    Ratings:
    +2,481
    Religion:
    Skeptical
    You keep offering me excuses.

    I've already pointed out to you that "Before Abraham was born, I am!" is NOT a claim to be God, simply to have existed with God in heaven.

    That explanation can be reconciled with eg

    John 6:38 “For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me

    John 8:42 “I proceeded and came forth from God; I came not of my own accord, but he sent me.”

    Yours, by contrast, is flatly contradicted by those statements, and by many others eg

    John 14:10 “The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority; but the Father who dwells in me does his works.”

    If Jesus is God, why does he need anyone else's authority?

    John 14:28 ... I go to the Father; for the Father is greater than I.

    If Jesus is God, how can the Father be greater than Jesus?

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

    If Jesus is God, how can the Father be the only true God?

    John 20:17 “I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.”

    If Jesus is God, how come he worships the Father?


    Oh, and please answer concisely in your own words. No cop-out links please.
     
  17. Spartan

    Spartan Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2019
    Messages:
    885
    Ratings:
    +118
    Religion:
    Christian
    That's wrong. The OP articles I posted refute you.

    You know, the Jehovah's Witnesses do the same thing you do - dredge up quotations of Jesus in his incarnated servant humanity, and fail to comprehend and acknowledge the HUNDREDS OF OTHER SCRIPTURES, TITLES, AND OTHER EXAMPLES THAT SHOW THE DEITY OF JESUS. PICK AND CHOOSE IS WHAT THEY DO.

    Because Jesus incarnated as a servant (Philippians 2) and the Father is in heaven and is due respect.

    Piece of cake.
     
  18. blü 2

    blü 2 Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2017
    Messages:
    4,221
    Ratings:
    +2,481
    Religion:
    Skeptical
    Other way round, ol' buddy.
    That's called 'projection' ─ accusing your colloquist of your own crime.

    You haven't come up with a single "I am God" said by Jesus. You only need one. But you don't have even one. Just all these limp little excuses, exactly the reason why apologetics is held is such contempt by honest folk.
    That's not what Jesus says. Who are we to believe should Paul and Jesus contradict each other.

    And Paul was perfectly clear that Jesus is not God ─ you haven't forgotten that in the same passage you're quoting, Paul said
    (Philippians 2): 11... and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

    Have you? And you forgot to tell me why Jesus worships the Father? And why he needs authority from the Father?

    (Answer: Because he's not only not God, but he doesn't pretend to be.)
     
  19. Spartan

    Spartan Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2019
    Messages:
    885
    Ratings:
    +118
    Religion:
    Christian
    Sure I do.

    [​IMG]
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  20. JJ50

    JJ50 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2015
    Messages:
    1,093
    Ratings:
    +585
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    If he really said any of that he was being silly, and had far too high an opinion of himself.
     
Loading...