Is Jesus God, or is the whole trinity thing bunk?

He was the Lord God, look at some of these passages.


Phillipians 2:6-7

" Who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal wit God: But
emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeess ofman, and in habit found
as a man "


That would explain why Jesus said I am not good. This is a lesson to us who are not good on our own merrit, but our goodness comes from
the grace of God.



1 Thessalonians 3:13


" To confirm your hearts without blame, in holiness, before God and our Father, at the coming of
our Lord Jesus Christ, with all (his) saints. Amen. "




Matt 12:8

" For the son of man is Lord even of the sabbath "



Mat 28:18


" And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and on earth "




John 20:28


" Thomas anwered, and said to him: My Lord, and my God "




He was also the only man alive that never sinned.

Peter 2:22
John 8:58



There are many other passages.
peace.

Originally posted by Truth

He was the Lord God, look at some of these passages.


Phillipians 2:6-7

" Who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal wit God: But
emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeess ofman, and in habit found
as a man "


That would explain why Jesus said I am not good. This is a lesson to us who are not good on our own merrit, but our goodness comes from
the grace of God.



1 Thessalonians 3:13


" To confirm your hearts without blame, in holiness, before God and our Father, at the coming of
our Lord Jesus Christ, with all (his) saints. Amen. "




Matt 12:8

" For the son of man is Lord even of the sabbath "



Mat 28:18


" And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and on earth "




John 20:28


" Thomas anwered, and said to him: My Lord, and my God "




He was also the only man alive that never sinned.

Peter 2:22
John 8:58



There are many other passages.
peace.

Why then did he pray? Just wondering...why would a god pray to itself....

When he prayed before crucifiction?

That was a message to us that nomatter what the task in front of us holds, to put Gods will above ours, he was teachings us that.


Remember he came as a servant, or in theform of a servant, so his mission on earth was to teach us to be servants of God through himself being in the form of one.

Originally posted by Truth


When he prayed before crucifiction?

That was a message to us that nomatter what the task in front of us holds, to put Gods will above ours, he was teachings us that.


Remember he came as a servant, or in theform of a servant, so his mission on earth was to teach us to be servants of God through himself being in the form of one.

Makes since to me..good enough

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
Why do you pretend to seek anwers when the only answers you want are those that agree with your position?

The trinity was a philosophical context conceived at least 75 years after Jesus died, argued by the church fathers for centuries more, where the winners had the ear of Constantine and moved to silence all debate and writings from the detractors. 600 years later they finally managed to defeat by extreme force the imposition of this so called divine truth.

Is that how it works for you? Stifle others by force, destroy their works, and tell the masses they have God's wisdom?

I say again, the trinity is a farce. It never was truth and never will be. It is the creation of ignorant men.




[edit on 2/1/05 by SomewhereinBetween]

If this is so then why did Peter tell ananias and his wife that they lied to God when they lied to the Holy Spirit? Why did Thomas, a jew, call Jesus God when he appeared after his ressurection, and bowed down to worship him. The Holy Spirit is not spoken of as a thing but as a person with intellect and personhood.

Originally posted by HailthekingoflightsIf this is so then why did Peter tell ananias and his wife that they lied to God when they lied to the Holy Spirit?

It absolutely fascinates me to read the NT and see how Christians of today show such naivety toward the violent events during the time of Christ to the extent they give the impression some fellow was walking the streets of Galilee and Jerusalem singing praises of peace. You might look to Josephus for a glimpse into the violent oppression of the Jews by the Romans all the while Jewish sects each jockeying for power warred against each other, acted as barbarians and robbed the masses.

The answer to your question is simple, but first I want to answer below since it is relevant:

According to Acts these are Peter’s words: ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you…” He continues: “Whom God hath raised up,…

These supposedly are the words of man placed in charge by Jesus. Peter has made a very clear distinction here between God and Jesus; the man Jesus who was given the approval of God, where God raised Jesus from death and not that Jesus raised Jesus. But Peter chooses to issue forth a whole bunch of propaganda later on this issue of Jesus being risen, an event supposedly seen only by a few men, and Peter expects the audience to believe this is so by reaching back to OT prophecy and saying; see, they predicted it and we tell you it has come to pass. I could not help but notice the irony in the double speak Jesus used as he was quoted by another above with the churlish response issued by Jesus that he can’t make a high priest believe and he is here only for his sheep, so what is the point? It is as if to say, I am God buddy, and you deny me? Fine! To hell with you in X number of years. Yet, from acts onward to this day, the Christian churches are rife with threats that you are to believe in him or else. Then he does the godly thing and escapes from them. This man who supposedly came to die for everyone’s sins, and is supposed to be God himself, cared not one wit to perform a God-like miracle such as issuing a thunderbolt from his hand to show this man that he was indeed who he was. All throughout his discourse, he complains that he is not believed, that he is questioned to prove he is who he says he is. His claim to fame comes in the form of Doug Henning trickery witnessed by the same handful of select. The names may seem different, but they are all the same few.

Now your answer on Ananias. We are led to believe that these men were all pious, peaceful people out to change the world for some man, and so we are presented with pieces intended to instil sympathy for them as they portray themselves as unjustly persecuted. Yet those of today who take no interest in the political and religious wars of that day, pay no need to why Simon Peter was picked up by the Sadducees to whom he gave his speech. For that you need turn to Acts5:35 (remember the name Gamaliel *a) and the message within won’t seem a mystery anymore. They were picked up as thieves, robbers and seditionists. For that is what Theudas, and Judas of Galilee did, and these two lived in the days of Jesus. Seditionists, stealing from Jews of other sects to finance their ways.

Peter then tried to seduce the citizenry, and utilizing the prose of Poe, verse 4:32, insinutates that the people should be discarding their wealth to follow in the name of God, at the feet of the apostles. Not being satisfied that Ananias and his wife don’t part with it all, Peter kills them, and appeals to the audience to believe that God actually killed two people for offering up all but a part of their wealth. I don't think so!

What do you think these apostles did with all these riches? Bury them? Sold them and gave the money to charity? These same apostles who are supposedly men of peace, yet every time I have seen someone post the fact that this man of love, virtue and fill of the holy ghost pulled out his sword and whacked off a centurion’s ear, I hear the collective gulp of the defenders of the Jesus is God myth as they ignore the blatant barbarity and arming of these apostles.

They found a great way to rob people of their possessions, bamboozle them with stories of a risen God etc. etc. This fact is right before your eyes, but disguised once more by prose:

And the multitude of them that believed…And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection…

Add to that the words of the prince of peace: Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I come not to send peace but the sword.

Strange isn’t it that No one knows what crime sent Peter and Paul to their deaths? Even stranger that with all the disciples named as saints the early church fathers had, not one of them even speaks of why, and when?

There is more pertinent information to your question, but in another post. This one though is best left with this question…have you ever read the autobiography of Flavius Josephus? Whether or not you have, you should, for it actually tells the story of the man Jesus, but not at all in a flattering manner. All of the principal characters are there, and you can even chronologically trace the pertinent events to the NT. One can even argue that NT is nothing but a play or fable fashioned after Josephus’ works.
www.ccel.org...

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween

Originally posted by HailthekingoflightsIf this is so then why did Peter tell ananias and his wife that they lied to God when they lied to the Holy Spirit?

It absolutely fascinates me to read the NT and see how Christians of today show such naivety toward the violent events during the time of Christ to the extent they give the impression some fellow was walking the streets of Galilee and Jerusalem singing praises of peace. You might look to Josephus for a glimpse into the violent oppression of the Jews by the Romans all the while Jewish sects each jockeying for power warred against each other, acted as barbarians and robbed the masses.

The answer to your question is simple, but first I want to answer below since it is relevant:

According to Acts these are Peter’s words: ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you…” He continues: “Whom God hath raised up,…

These supposedly are the words of man placed in charge by Jesus. Peter has made a very clear distinction here between God and Jesus; the man Jesus who was given the approval of God, where God raised Jesus from death and not that Jesus raised Jesus. But Peter chooses to issue forth a whole bunch of propaganda later on this issue of Jesus being risen, an event supposedly seen only by a few men, and Peter expects the audience to believe this is so by reaching back to OT prophecy and saying; see, they predicted it and we tell you it has come to pass. I could not help but notice the irony in the double speak Jesus used as he was quoted by another above with the churlish response issued by Jesus that he can’t make a high priest believe and he is here only for his sheep, so what is the point? It is as if to say, I am God buddy, and you deny me? Fine! To hell with you in X number of years. Yet, from acts onward to this day, the Christian churches are rife with threats that you are to believe in him or else. Then he does the godly thing and escapes from them. This man who supposedly came to die for everyone’s sins, and is supposed to be God himself, cared not one wit to perform a God-like miracle such as issuing a thunderbolt from his hand to show this man that he was indeed who he was. All throughout his discourse, he complains that he is not believed, that he is questioned to prove he is who he says he is. His claim to fame comes in the form of Doug Henning trickery witnessed by the same handful of select. The names may seem different, but they are all the same few.

Now your answer on Ananias. We are led to believe that these men were all pious, peaceful people out to change the world for some man, and so we are presented with pieces intended to instil sympathy for them as they portray themselves as unjustly persecuted. Yet those of today who take no interest in the political and religious wars of that day, pay no need to why Simon Peter was picked up by the Sadducees to whom he gave his speech. For that you need turn to Acts5:35 (remember the name Gamaliel *a) and the message within won’t seem a mystery anymore. They were picked up as thieves, robbers and seditionists. For that is what Theudas, and Judas of Galilee did, and these two lived in the days of Jesus. Seditionists, stealing from Jews of other sects to finance their ways.

Peter then tried to seduce the citizenry, and utilizing the prose of Poe, verse 4:32, insinutates that the people should be discarding their wealth to follow in the name of God, at the feet of the apostles. Not being satisfied that Ananias and his wife don’t part with it all, Peter kills them, and appeals to the audience to believe that God actually killed two people for offering up all but a part of their wealth. I don't think so!

What do you think these apostles did with all these riches? Bury them? Sold them and gave the money to charity? These same apostles who are supposedly men of peace, yet every time I have seen someone post the fact that this man of love, virtue and fill of the holy ghost pulled out his sword and whacked off a centurion’s ear, I hear the collective gulp of the defenders of the Jesus is God myth as they ignore the blatant barbarity and arming of these apostles.

They found a great way to rob people of their possessions, bamboozle them with stories of a risen God etc. etc. This fact is right before your eyes, but disguised once more by prose:

And the multitude of them that believed…And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection…

Add to that the words of the prince of peace: Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I come not to send peace but the sword.

Strange isn’t it that No one knows what crime sent Peter and Paul to their deaths? Even stranger that with all the disciples named as saints the early church fathers had, not one of them even speaks of why, and when?

There is more pertinent information to your question, but in another post. This one though is best left with this question…have you ever read the autobiography of Flavius Josephus? Whether or not you have, you should, for it actually tells the story of the man Jesus, but not at all in a flattering manner. All of the principal characters are there, and you can even chronologically trace the pertinent events to the NT. One can even argue that NT is nothing but a play or fable fashioned after Josephus’ works.
www.ccel.org...

Look dude, I don't want to hear your rhetoric or your personal vedetta against the bible. What proof do you have to verify your claims that the Apostles were theives. How could they continue to show their faces in public if they were doing this, considering the Roman's were salavating at the chance to kill them. I have heard of Josephus' work but never actually had the chance to read it yet. But proof is not the issue because I have plenty enough to believe for myself, the issue at hand is your faith. What do you put your faith in, because every man has it. We just invest it into different things, whether it be our jobs, out intelligence, our country, or whatever. Where is your faith? Because the Lord left us just enough evidence where we would havea a valid choice. He didn't want to overwhelm us, He could just appear out of the sky right now so the whole world can see him. You know why he doesn't, because it would be just fear that drove us to him. Not an honest and sincere love for him like he wants.

There are people out there in the world that knows without a doubt that he exist but they choose to be rebelious and follow after Satan, thinking that he can get the upper hand against God. Then there are those who have enough proof to add to there faith, but they're to stuck in their worldy ways to want to forsake relying on their monies, their intelligance, their everyday way of life for God. I know it's people on here who try to act like they have all the scientific answers, and that they don't need God but really in the back of their minds they know that their are some questions that still lurk.

They know that the bible is the only thing that answers that, but oooh, what would darwin think, what would my physics/chemistry professor think. What would the scientific community think, if I don't act like I have all the answers, if I put my faith in something that they can't see. God forbid that I go to hell for what someone else can't see or believe.

Oh boy....here we go again.....You can not come to a conspiracy board and tell people your religion is the only religion and the only truth anymore than he can state absolutely that it is not. This is not a religious board and if you can't prove it, don't state it as absolute.....if you must do that, then go to a religious site, The very nature of this site dictates the "prove it" attitude. Also.....you may end up with a warning for excessive quoting....from what I read...no where did he tell you that what he believed was absolute...and it doesn't matter how much it may bother you...he has every right here at this site to state it! This is a conspiracy site where we all can state what we believe......but if your going to state it as absolute, you better be able to prove it!! As to the bible, it can be proven that it has been added to, deleted from and mistranslated...that's just history that anyone can reaeach...it is fact!

EDIT: I'm thinking about saving that somewhere so I don't have to type it every time we have new religious members to the board LOL

[edit on 2/2/2005 by LadyV]

Originally posted by LadyV
Oh boy....here we go again.....You can not come to a conspiracy board and tell people your religion is the only religion and the only truth anymore than he can state absolutely that it is not. This is not a religious board and if you can't prove it, don't state it as absolute.....if you must do that, then go to a religious site, The very nature of this site dictates the "prove it" attitude. Also.....you may end up with a warning for excessive quoting....from what I read...no where did he tell you that what he believed was absolute...and it doesn't matter how much it may bother you...he has every right here at this site to state it! This is a conspiracy site where we all can state what we believe......but if your going to state it as absolute, you better be able to prove it!! As to the bible, it can be proven that it has been added to, deleted from and mistranslated...that's just history that anyone can reaeach...it is fact!

EDIT: I'm thinking about saving that somewhere so I don't have to type it every time we have new religious members to the board LOL

[edit on 2/2/2005 by LadyV]

First, don't even come to me like that. Second you don't see the word absolute or religion no where in my post. I just ask the man where his faith was and I told him where mine was. If that offends you then thats your problem. I didn't break any rules, so just get off of it. I also think you need to read the title of this post , because that's what i'm discussing. You don't have to come into this post if you don't want to. So you need to gone on with all that mess, and realize what post you are in.

I beg your parden...but I can most certainly go into any post I wish to and you ahve no say what-so-ever about it! And what do you mean "don't come to me like that" like what?

people out there in the world that knows without a doubt that he exist but they choose to be rebelious and follow after Satan, thinking that he can get the upper hand against God.

Sounds pretty absolute to me.

Look dude, I don't want to hear your rhetoric or your personal vedetta against the bible

Too bad! This site allows us to state our "opinion" whether you like it or not! So what "you" don't want to hear....is irrelevant!

I also think you need to read the title of this post

You know as well I do, or you should anyway, that a thread will veer into many directions and not stay specifically on "topic"
what i'm discussing

I didn't break any rules, so just get off of it.

You are no one to tell me to get off anything...and yes you did....excessive quoting! I know casue I have been warned for it, for less than you have there.


[edit on 2/2/2005 by LadyV]

Originally posted by HailthekingoflightsLook dude, I don't want to hear your rhetoric or your personal vedetta against the bible.

That would be dudess to you, and you are not hearing it, you willingly read my words, quoted them and asked me to questions. If you do not like the answers because you cannot defend them, then do not read my words, for they are sure to continue to offend you.

What proof do you have to verify your claims that the Apostles were theives. How could they continue to show their faces in public if they were doing this, considering the Roman's were salavating at the chance to kill them.

More proof than you have that Jesus was the messiah, God or a part of any make believe trinity. Here is but a sampling from your good book: He was captured, tried and crucified, a punishment left only to those commiting serious crimes against the Romans or the people. The proof of that punishment resides in the Roman legislation. These pious men carried swords, and used them. They roamed from town to town to hide. Jesus hid, Peter hid, they all hid. They had so much faith in him, they ran and hid when he was arrested, they did not even show their faces at his crucifixion, why? because they were wanted men. Seek and you shall find that. Peter was crucified, in fact they were all executed.

And one more, because it is obvious that you have no desire to know anything other than what you know, but you should read Josephus such that because the samaritans would not allow Jesus to their town, James and John wanted him to issue fire from heaven and burn the place down. Luke 9. You will find a most disturbing side to this story in Josephus' works, where in fact the samaritan town was burned to a crisp.

What do you put your faith in, because every man has it....

And woman. I do not need a faith built by a crutch as you depict in the rest of your mantra. I do not need to have men tell me they are appointed by Jesus to annoint me with oil and therefore his presence, and I do not need them to tell me how I should behave toward humans, because my faith came with me when God gave me life, and my faith rests with being a decent person, knowing the difference between right and wrong, staying away from the wrong, feeling sincere remorse and or shame when I am wrong and mindful to not wanting to feel shame again. God, not Jesus, and not any man, instilled this within me as he did with all humans, and he gave us the ability to tap into this of our own accord, he did not rob anyone of this and give men the ability to tell us we don't have it and they have to preach to us how it works. He made me, and it is to him I pray and give thanks, and I have absolutely no reason to believe that he has placed intermediaries between himself and his children. When you come to understand this you will open your eyes and stop being dependent on others to set your moral values for you. If you need this crutch, then understand that you need it because you defy your own God: I, even I, am the Lord; and beside me there is no saviour.

Now, for you and because of your temper tantrum, I will end this post to you with one word, a word you know so well but do not understand, a word you utter to the very God you have come to believe is pagan and not your God.

Amen.

Trinity = a perversion of YHWH

Y = El the Father
H = Asherah the Mother
W = He the Son
H = Anath the Daughter

Does anyone else find it ironic that the Trinity includes the father, the son and a 'Holy Ghost' but not a Mother. Is it merely coincidence that the Roman church is entirely misogenistic?

The Trinity - from the people who brought you a church without female ministers...

woah this just took a violent u-turn. The fact of the matter is the apostle and Jesus were not criminals. If you believe that Jesus attacked the roman army on the passover then you are sorely mistaken. When Jesus is in front of Pontius Pilot, Pontius Pilot says he has commited no crimes against rome. I'm pretty sure that attacking the army would be a huge crime. Like i said earlier, listening to Amadeus was like listening to Adolf Hitler... a man with a HUGE AGENDA. Now, im not saying he was going to kill people, lol, and i dont mean to make light of Hitlers attrocious crimes, im just trying to show how unresonable it was to listen to him. Not because Amadeus didn't know what he was talking about, because he knew a lot more than 99% of the people here, but he wasnt honest with what he spoke. He twisted it to fit whatever his agenda was. But oh well, lets get off Amadeus and trying to act like these people were criminals, that is just trying to find flaw where there isn't any.

Back to the original question, is there a holy trinity is it just crap. As i am reading ACTS i am finding more and more references to Jesus NOT being God, but who knows. The question must be asked if God knew we would worship Jesus as God, why didn't he do something to change it, as in have Jesus say he wasn't God specifically, or did he have him say that?

Originally posted by Ryanp5555
The question must be asked if God knew we would worship Jesus as God, why didn't he do something to change it

He did. He sent Quran to Mohammad.
Quran tells the exact same basic story of Jesus like the Bible, but without the Son of God and Trinity part. It refers to Jesus as prophet and God's creation.

i believe the correct spelling is YHVH. there is no W in hebrew. im not a scholar. it could be YHWH.
www.torahofmessiah.com...

www.blueletterbible.org...
if mary was concieved by the holy ghost/spirit, does that mean that the Holy Ghost is the Father? how are they at all seperate?

more than likely the Holy Spirit is the Word of God (or the breath of god as spirit = ruach or pnuema). as It is the word / breath of God that is life and IMO not a person (the Word of God Is comforting), that explains John 1. Jesus being filled with the Holy Spirit of God, only spake the words of the Father.

By the Word of God, was mary impregnated.
so IMO not a trinity.

YHVH is the Hebrew name of God (transliterated into Roman letters). It has it's roots in "I AM" from the scene of Moses and the burning bush.

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by Ryanp5555
The question must be asked if God knew we would worship Jesus as God, why didn't he do something to change it

That is where this little problem of "free will" comes in. The bible was very much guarded by the Church in the dark ages. It wouldn't be so much of a problem for a few people to remove certain parts of the Bible, and entire books even (labelling them heretic). Even now there are just as many passages in the bible that emphasis Jesus's mortality as they do his divinity.

Hey I am sorry if I came off as a zealot intent on changing the whole worlds mind or dying, but I'm not im a human being that doesn't have all the answers. So how can yo believe part of what the bible is saying, as in the part about the disciples running, peter cutting the gaurds ear, etc..., but you will not take into account the transforming of the disciples into apostles. So if you believe in God, you know that God requires a sacrifice for sins. Have you cut the throats of any spotless lambs recently? What about cattle and goats have you done that?

Do you have a secret temple with the arc and the spirit of God in it that the rest of the world doesn't know about. Or are you telling me you believe in a god that you have created for your own personal needs, albeit trangressing the first commandment. Your equation is not equaling up here, so please clear this up for me so I can know what God you are talking about. Because if you're talking about El of the bible then you can't be forgiven without sacrifice.

And if you are, then you're going to hell because God allowed the temple to be destroyed . So how are you going to sacrifice, for forgivens. Or maybe God allowed the temple to be destroyed because his Son was an efficient sacrifice for the whole world. I'm just saying, I mean it makes sense to me. But hey, maybe I missed something. If I have, someone please enlighten me on why a God who requires the shedding of blood for the remission of sins would allow the very temple needed for the sacrifices to be destroyed right after the Jesus guy who people say isn't, God or his Son , was crucified.

I'm not a detective or anything but thats some pretty compelling evidence. The veil ripping in half, could that be found in Josephous' writings also. Or is that just bible hogwash, I don't know I guess I will have to look for myself. But please someone clear me up if I am wrong.

i think you have a very good point hailofkings.... tooo much coincidence for it not to be on purpose.

Well, as was mentioned earlier, the Trinitarian view became the offical view after the Council of Nicaea, which said that the followers of Arrius were wrong in their beliefs. The only Christians following Arrius (which is now called the "Arian Heresy" are the (surprise!) Unitarians.

The Mormons believe that God the Father and Jesus Christ are two separate guys, although united in purpose, and the Holy Spirit is a sort of emanation; but Jesus is the physical Son of God (probably with Mrs. God, although neither the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and Pearl of Great Price, as far as I know, go into details).

But the Mormons are henotheists, anyway, and lot of the more hard-shell Christians don't consider them (or the Unitarians or the Jehovah's Witnesses) to be "Real Christians".

FWIW, I think all who confess Jesus Christ as Saviour will get to Heaven, and probably will a bunch of other folks; but the Lutherans will probably get the best seats.

[edit on 4-2-2005 by Off_The_Street]