Jesus never claimed to be the Son of God or the Son of man. And the message among to his sayings aint even as these Christians claim it to be at all. So what's with the obvious lies?
"Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?" ^^"I said" surely is reffering to someone else that's doctrine of God/religious related. And even Jesus surely isnt quoting himself because we would have read near by Jesus saying "I am the Son of God". So clearly Jesus is not referring to himself as the Son of God at all. And it is interesting because now the reader of the gospel books has to get the term "I" straightened for every time Jesus even used such the term, if you ask me. For all you know, in certain part Jesus could be speaking in 3rd person in a sense you at first wouldnt grasp. As for the Son of Man... Concerning what I learned... Jesus out right reveals that aint him in Mark 13, Matthew 24, and Luke 17 because he foretold the coming of the Son of Man. The Son of Man is not yet till the fulfillment. But! But there are days of the Son of man which already be here. And again, those sons of men who are as days themselves are not Jesus. Clue you all in on the fulfillment of the Son of Man with one quote: Mark 13:34 For the Son of Man is as a man taking a far journey, who left his house, and gave authority to his servants, and to every man his work, and commanded the porter to watch. ^^Once the particular kind of who leaves it is then that the Son of Man is here alone without an ounce of who doesn't belong here. "; the one shall be taken, the other left." Who all ever is left will make up the Son of Man.
The motive that I keep concluding is that the lies serve to enrich, empower, and strengthen the positions of those who choose to use religion as their route to the top. One pope was quoted as saying, "this myth of Jesus has served us well.", another quote is, "keep the masses poor and ignorant", which of course would make controlling them easier. Yeshua Ben Joseph was Jewish, likely a Nazorean or Essene. He criticized the church leaders, but did not renounce his religion, and is called Rabbi three times, (to be a Rabbi, one had to be married.). These are some of my thoughts, I have a completely different take on the whole story than most. My readings of the book led me to these rare and eccentric conclusions, though, and they are more sensible to me than the common ones. Power, money, ego...........maybe that is why the lies.
It's only a trinitarian belief that Jesus is the son of God, a serperate person. Jesus is God. "And the the word was made flesh"... Who was made flesh? Jesus
God is within all creation, I feel. We are made up of God, and we are all connected through this common thread, I believe. I think that if others have completely different and contrary beliefs on what God is, or is not, from strong Atheism to fundamental religious fanaticism (excepting, of course, hatred, or harm towards others.), all of us can be and are right. For us, we're right, its true, its valid, and its real, and we can all differ and still be right just as we can all say we are all unique and no one can ever experience our reality.
why have you decided that jesus himself must be quoted in a book, written mostly by people who had little/no direct contact with him, dating back almost 2000 years, as saying that he is indeed the son of god in order for it to not be a "lie" when christians interpret him as such? there are contrasting and differing groups within christianity, who all in the end, view jesus as the messiah, but debate whether or not jesus knew he was the messiah. thus if you subscribe to the theory that he did not, then of course he would have never said he was. and what message are you talking about?
Matt 16. 16 -17. 'And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. 'And Jesus answered and said unto him Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona; for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in Heaven.' So on this basis, Jesus is saying He is the Son of God. Or at least affirming Peter's statement. If He wanted to, he could easily have said to Peter, 'no, I'm not the Son of God' but he agrees that He is, and that for Peter to know this means God has revealed it to Him. So, where is the lie?
I would assume that he probably didn't disagree because it is the christian belief that we are all children of god. If my memory serves me correctly.
Blessed art thou ^^^Jesus is implying Simon as the Christ/Son of the living God. ^^^Plus, Jesus said "I and my Father are one" so therefore Jesus revealed it to Simon that the Christ/Son of the living God is Simon. There is more I could tell you, but it might be too deep for you to grasp. It's like why do people act so blind upon seeing something clearly standing where it ought not?
"When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?" ^^And before any of you uses this I will have you know this: Know, you'd be going into Jesus' speaking in 3rd person. Plus, I can back what I say up with this: John 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. So that "that I the Son of man am?" isnt the self of Jesus. And to get a lil deep with you here you have to understand astral projection as something true as to what certain people can do. So "that I the Son of man am?" could be anyone astral body wise since those that astral project each are considered as God and as the angels of heaven and etc. I think it's time you all recognize the devil in general as those that can astral project. ^^And dont think I cant back this up with the very gospel. But just to give you all one clue of many: Mark 13:14 But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains: ^^^it is standing as God. And I tell you all a truth, this whole source, concerning what the world is made of, which includes your bodies too, is of the devil in general (if any devil standing as a human can astral project their spirit up in you to do whatever, then of course this source is corrupt). For this is the true source of the devil in general. This source is the Father and it's how come Jesus at the time truthfully said I and my Father are one. The same is true for each one of you reading this. And as the fulfillment happens when the Son of Man be solo...it's when 'the self' (the "I" of those who do not have souls of devils) will be taken and no longer will anyone who does not have a soul of a devil pass through here again! The ones left are those with souls of devils. "I have not a devil..."-Jesus ^Can't you see? "not" is being labeled as a devil. And I want you all to take heed to what I say because Jesus did mention: Mark 13:37 And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch. If you cant grasp how Jesus managed to blend right in to what would be religiouly followed to tell you all the actual truth (a truth even about God), then you are just as well asleep. Mark 13:36 Lest coming suddenly he find you sleeping. The master of the house has authority over God in general. So tell God in general, the abomination of desolation, to move on unto hell because that's what God in general goes unto. Yes! God, the elect, Christ, the Holy Ghost, the Son, and the angels of hevean, which are one in the same, go unto hell (hell at its finest is inside a star such as the sun). And that applies to anyone whose soul is as God which means it is a devil. And before anyone even gets a chance to breathe disagreement... If that's what you're going to do... Then explain to me what the abomination of desolation is that's standing where it ought not (or rather: in the holy place).
And since Jesus said "I and my Father are one" and said "but my Father which is in heaven" concerning the revealing... What's that right in your face tell you as to where heaven is? It is indeed among in this very realm as its electric/electromagnetic feild which is energy related. And remember talk about the kingdom of God being within? Luke 17:21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you. And if your soul is going to be left here after your human death as a 'ball of energy' (an 'angel of heaven') I'd hate to be you. Because this source is the holy place where the abomination of desolation is standing where it ought not. Matthew 24:40 Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. ^^Is your soul going to be taken or left in this abominable source which is in heaven?
~ mmmmm, and you "holy rollers" are NOT trinitarians? the "trinity" is the beleif that god has revealed himself to mankind as "father, son, and holy spirit"... what, you've never said "the apostles' creed"?
I may be dim, but I can't see how language can be interpreted in this way. Peter says - 'thou art the christ', Jesus agrees with him. Pretty clear cut, you might suppose. If peter had said 'I am the christ' then what you say might be correct, but he addresses Jesus and says it to Him and of Him, quite clearly not of himself. Jesus statement that 'I and my Father are one' does not imply at all that Peter is also one, with either Jesus or the Father. It only implies what it says - that Jesus was one with His Father. He also tells Peter, in effect, 'this knowledge that I, Jesus am the Christ, has come to you Simon Peter, from God the Father'. Not that Peter, Jesus and the Father are all one, but clearly stated to be separate entities between whom a process of communication of knowledge concerning one of their number has taken place. If Jesus had wanted to disagree when Peter said 'You are the Christ', presumably it was open to Him to do so, or to add, 'So are you Peter'. But he didn't. He accepted Peter's words as a sign of God's revelation of knowledge to Peter. But that doesn't make Peter the Christ.
Alright, first let's start by quoting the passage in it's context: 22Then came the Feast of Dedication at Jerusalem. It was winter, 23and Jesus was in the temple area walking in Solomon's Colonnade. 24The Jews gathered around him, saying, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly.” 25Jesus answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The miracles I do in my Father's name speak for me, 26but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. 27My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. 29My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand. 30I and the Father are one.” 31Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him, 32but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?” 33“We are not stoning you for any of these,” replied the Jews, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.” 34Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are gods’? 35If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came–and the Scripture cannot be broken– 36what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? First, we see the Jews asking Jesus to plainly state whether He's the Christ or not (keep in mind that "Christ" here is refering to a specific person). He answers them by stating that the miracles He does speaks for His orgin, but that they cannot understand this because they are not His sheep. He then concludes by stating that He and the Father are one. The Jews understood this to mean that He was equating Himself to God, and they sought to stone him: "We are not stoning you for any of these,” replied the Jews, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.” (stoning was the punishment for blasphemy) Next we get into your problem verse: 34Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are gods’? 35If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came–and the Scripture cannot be broken– 36what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Jesus starts out by quoting Psalm 82:6 "I said, 'You are "gods"; you are all sons of the Most High" Make note that the "gods" refers, more than likely, to the Judges; and the very next verse proclaims, "But you will die like mere men; you will fall like every other ruler." Jesus quotes this to the effect of "if these mere men were called 'gods' how much more qualified am I since I'm set apart as the Fathers very own sent into the world?" Remeber the context. Yes it should be fairly obvious that the "I said" (34Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are gods’?) was not Jesus' own words but a quote. Your bible's marginal notes will even tell you that this quote comes from Psalm 82:6. If you're having a hard time understanding the King James, perhaps you should switch to another version, since this seems the be the source of your confusion. You've lost me. What verse are you talking about here, and what relation does it have to verse 34? Agian, what verses are you refering to? And, you infer all this from Jesus quoting Psalm 82:6 in verse 34? Nonsense, Jesus flat out calls Himself the Son of Man. Read Matthew.
God DID reveal himself as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. For all three are manifestations of one God. Yet, some trinitarians believe that they are three different people. Some even speculate that the Holy Spirit could be a woman. The Holy Spirit is the spirit of the Lord. The spirit he gave up at the cross who lives inside his believers when they recieve the baptism of the Holy Ghost.
Yeah, and some christian hold rattlesnakes, speak in tounges, baptise their babies, think white people are superior, cast healing hands on eachother, see visions, etc...who's to say who's right? They all think they are. All people are the children of god, according to the bible. So Jesus could easily have been trying to push that message and maybe was taken too literally. We don't know, we can only interpet and speculate. I guess we might find out some day (not likely, in my opinion), but I personally don't believe that Jesus and God are the same, or that the holy spirit even exists, or that Jesus is the literal son of god.
If we are were made in the image of God wouldn't He had to of been born of another Man and a Woman? Why aren't they ever mentioned? Did God kill them? -- he certainly had violent tendencies back then. Also why couldn't have God made Adam a hermaphrodite? Self reproducing?
Speaking in tongues is in the Bible Baptising is in the Bible Laying hands on one another is in the Bible Visions are in the Bible Thinking that ones race is superior over another is not of God. Holding rattlesnakes falls under, "Don't tempt the Lord your God."
Yeah and no contact with menstruating women is in the bible, sanctioned selling of your children into slavery is in the bible too...among a lot of other crazy stuff
and the conjuring up of the spirits of the dead is in there too....Samuel's ghost to be specific. and that eating shellfish is an abomination and that it is wrong to spill your seed on the ground if your father asks you to impregnate your late brothers wife so his line will continue. That one is one of my faves.
