WHY I BELIEVE THAT CHRIST IS GOD

[Subduction Zone]

I can only suggest to you to study physics, and you will easily understand that consciousness is irreducible to the laws of physics.
Best regards.

You clearly have no understanding of physics.

Your claim is bogus nonsense. And your argument does amount to "I don't understand, therefore God" .

 

[Subduction Zone]

42:9.5 Physical stability associated with biologic elasticity is present in nature only because of the well-nigh infinite wisdom possessed by the Master Architects of creation. Nothing less than transcendental wisdom could ever design units of matter which are at the same time so stable and so efficiently flexible. UB 1955

And more empty claims from a bogus source. Not very convincing.

 

[firedragon]

Jesus is our Creator Son, he is of origin in the Trinity which is Father, Son and Spirit. Jesus alluded to this just prior to retuning to heaven. He didn't say in the name of the Father, Christ and Holy spirit.

Yes, Jesus is a divine creator Son. The term "only begotten" is in reference to his uniqueness as a divine Son. God has many sons, we are all sons.

The Son by definition would be ancestral to the Father. We don't know when Christ Michael, aka Jesus of Nazareth had his beginning in the eternal past.

Because we are finite personality we can really only know God as One. They are All God.

Christ Michael?

I would like to understand where in the Bible Jesus is called Christ Michael since you earlier said "it is not said in the Bible" when it comes to the orthodox trinity.

Interesting.

 

[Colt]

Christ Michael?

I would like to understand where in the Bible Jesus is called Christ Michael since you earlier said "it is not said in the Bible" when it comes to the orthodox trinity.

Interesting.

The concept of Jesus being the second person of the Trinity emerged after Jesus left as believers sought to understand Jesus in light of Monotheism. Triads and Triune deity concepts were already in existence in the world.

Jesus isn't called "Christ Michael" in the Bible, in Johns revelation he just referred to him as Michael, at least what remains of the BOR.

 

[firedragon]

The concept of Jesus being the second person of the Trinity emerged after Jesus left as believers sought to understand Jesus in light of Monotheism. Triads and Triune deity concepts were already in existence in the world.

Jesus isn't called "Christ Michael" in the Bible, in Johns revelation he just referred to him as Michael, at least what remains of the BOR.

So you believe Michael referred to as the fighter with dragons was Jesus himself?

 

[Subduction Zone]

You are a bogus source and I wasn't replying to you.

And I was trying to help. A modern book of myth is no better than an ancient one.

 

[blü 2]

The fundamental reason why I believe that Christ is God, is that I find that the christian concept of God and of divine love is the highest possible concept. I find that the idea itself that God loves us so much that He chose to assume the human nature and accepted to suffer crucifission in order to save us, expresses such a high concept of God and of divine love that it can comes only from God and it is certainly a truth. This concept is fully convincing for me, it proves itself by itself and makes superfluous any other arguments . I believe that Chirst suffered His Passion to help us to have faith in Him and trust Him, to make us understand that God loves us infinitely, that God is good and mercifull and that God is near to us so that we may totally trust Him and open our heart to Him, be in communion with Him and be saved.
There are other religions teaching that God is love, but the problem is to define what the word “love” means, because by itself it could be only a vague and generic concept.
The christian faith is unique because it gives a very concrete and unique meaning to the concept of divine love: in fact God’s love actualizes in the acceptance of a terrible physical suffering; the God of the christian faith loves us so much that He is willing to suffer a painful death in order to save us. In the christian faith, love is not only a theoretical and vague concept; Christ’s Passion is a clear and concrete realization of the concept of divine love which teaches us what is the true meaning of love. I think that this christian idea of divine love is the highest possible concept of divine love and it is the fundamental reason why I believe that Christ is God.

First things first. I take it you're the same mmarco as was a Beliefnet poster in the past? On that basis, a hearty hail.

Second, your hypothesis above has a major technical problem in that the Jesus of Paul, and the Jesus of Mark, and the Jesus of Matthew, and the the Jesus of Luke, and the Jesus of John, each expressly deny they're God and never once claim to be God.

Nor does any of the resurrection accounts say that the risen Jesus was elevated to God status. The closest we get to such a thing is Matthew 28:18 where the risen Jesus says "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me" ─ a delegation and a promotion but not a deification,

Still, if that doesn't trouble you, no problem ─ who's to argue?

 

[Colt]

You're definitely the one with a horse in this race though. No denying that. I am not making affirmative claims like "God doesn't exist." You're the one who states (pretty emphatically I might add) that God does exist. All I say is "I don't believe you" and give my reasons.

I don't have a horse in the race. I Do Not. I just don't believe a single thing you say about God, and won't until the ideas are properly evidenced. Did you see that? The word "IDEAS?" That's key - because you need to realize that THAT'S ALL YOU HAVE. And it isn't good enough. Not by a long shot. Get evidence to go with the ideas and we can have a serious discussion. Until then, there is barely anything to discuss except to tell you again and again and again to go look for something that constitutes evidence. Go look for the deed to your bridge!

God is a reality that >you< have to experience for yourself. Only then will you understand and be able to share with others who have experienced God.

 

[Colt]

And I was trying to help. A modern book of myth is no better than an ancient one.

Have you read the Urantia Book?

 

[Colt]

So you believe Michael referred to as the fighter with dragons was Jesus himself?

Yes, the war in heaven is in reference to the Lucifer rebellion against the Creator Son Michael and the Universal Father. The dragon was the symbol of the devil. 9 "And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

The war in heaven is retrospective, it was terminated when Michael was anonymously on earth as "Jesus of Nazareth."

 

[mmarco]

First things first. I take it you're the same mmarco as was a Beliefnet poster in the past? On that basis, a hearty hail.

Actually, I do not remember if I have ever been in a forum called Beliefnet, but I don't think so.

Second, your hypothesis above has a major technical problem in that the Jesus of Paul, and the Jesus of Mark, and the Jesus of Matthew, and the the Jesus of Luke, and the Jesus of John, each expressly deny they're God and never once claim to be God.

This is not a problem at all. In fact my point is that it is the idea itself that God loves us so much that He chose to assume the human nature and accepted to suffer crucifission in order to save us, which expresses such a high concept of God and of divine love that it can comes only from God and it is certainly a truth. This concept proves itself by itself and makes superfluous any other arguments .
By the way, I think that in the New Testament the divine nature of Christ is clearly stated, but I am not interested in discussing those verses in this thread.

 

[firedragon]

Yes, the war in heaven is in reference to the Lucifer rebellion against the Creator Son Michael and the Universal Father. The dragon was the symbol of the devil. 9 "And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

The war in heaven is retrospective, it was terminated when Michael was anonymously on earth as "Jesus of Nazareth."

So the other Michael in the Revelations is the angel Michael or is it also Jesus?

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Another Appeal to Strawman. A good example is the basis for the greatest revolution of all time, the agricultural revolution. The only thing that made it possible was for men to understand - AND PREDICT - the sowing and reaping seasons.

Only a Spiritual Man, gazing into the heavens could connect the dots our Creator made for us.

What a bunch of crap. Crap crap, crappity crap. They didn't PREDICT at the outset... they observed, learned and then reacted appropriately. In other words, they used the scientific method. OTHERWISE (big DUH here) there wouldn't have ever needed to be an "agricultural revolution" - people would have just known what to do because "heaven" or whatever the hell dumb thing you said.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

God is a reality that >you< have to experience for yourself. Only then will you understand and be able to share with others who have experienced God.

No thanks. I'm good.

P.S. Find the deed. Otherwise realize you have NOTHING real to offer, unless you count a placebo as "real."

 

[Colt]

So the other Michael in the Revelations is the angel Michael or is it also Jesus?

The Michael of the Book of Revelation isn't the archangel Michael mentioned elsewhere in the scriptures. The Michael of the BOR is the Son of God who incarnate as Jesus of Nazareth.

 

[Colt]

No thanks. I'm good.

P.S. Find the deed. Otherwise realize you have NOTHING real to offer, unless you count a placebo as "real."

But I do have something real to offer, the God that is within you that's currently blocked by your egotism.

If you ever do want to know God he's waiting patiently for you to sincerely seek him.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

But I do have something real to offer, the God that is within you that's currently blocked by your egotism.

If you ever do want to know God he's waiting patiently for you to sincerely seek him.

I don't believe you. I have no good reason to believe you. No one does. The only reasons anyone can have to believe you is that they are predisposed to accept fantasy as reality for certain topics or under certain conditions. And this is because, for all the actual evidence you have, your God may as well be fictitious. Note - this is not me saying that your God doesn't exist. It is me saying that if your God exists, and is so fundamental to our lives and our reality, then the production of evidence should be an entirely simple endeavor. You faltering in this endeavor should give anyone and everyone pause when considering the truth-value of your claims.

Nothing you say should be accepted until you can back yourself up. You even likely (hopefully - I don't know, have you bought any bridges lately?) apply this to many other areas of thought and activity in your life. Yet for this one particular avenue, you leave the gates of gullibility WIDE OPEN. In fact, I wouldn't understand why you wouldn't just believe anything and everything anyone says if they tie it to scripture or provide really crappy evidence like that for their claims. Like a guy who starts talking like he's the second coming of Christ. Why wouldn't you believe that person? He will likely quote scripture, he may back himself up with prophecy, tell you that he meets certain esoteric requirements, etc. Why wouldn't you believe him? The only answer can be that you have some weird double-standard going on, whereby some things with extremely poor evidence you decide you're going to believe, and others that you are going to reject. Maybe because the items aren't "old" enough, or because they diverge from your, personal principles, or something. It's dishonest to yourself, is what it is, because you would claim you're not biased in any way when it comes to this "God" stuff. But my ideas right here (which I am sure hold true - that is, that you would reject many of the people I have come in contact with who want to claim themselves the second coming of Christ) would certainly display that you do have such biases in this arena. If anything, this idea displays that YOUR egotism is really what is at play here.

 

[firedragon]

The Michael of the Book of Revelation isn't the archangel Michael mentioned elsewhere in the scriptures. The Michael of the BOR is the Son of God who incarnate as Jesus of Nazareth.

Do you have any textual evidence for this?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Have you read the Urantia Book?

No, but I recognize nonsense when I see it.

 

[Colt]

No, but I recognize nonsense when I see it.

Then your opinion is from ignorance. Nothing new.