Nicene Creed

originally posted by: WeLovePutin
I'm thinking of becoming a Christian, but still pray to God himself just in case...

Welcome to the club who's Christ is just copied from an entity sharing the same charateristics 1,500 years before he was born.

a reply to: UnBreakable

The entire movie is thought provoking and entertaining. I don't agree with his absolute way of holding on to his extreme opinion, but I enjoyed the whole "documentary/opinion piece"thing.

But Jews have the Shekhina, Metatron and Hashem/God and they don't say ''Trinity."

Serious ish Metatron is the Jewish Heavenly Jesus, operates in much the same way and with the Shekhina/Presence who is also Ruh haKodesh the Holy Spirit.

No Trinity and they seriously consider Christians idol worshippers and not just to break stones like I do they actually have a law they don't use here and Israel called the Noahide laws that they forced the first Bush administration to pass under the veil of "Education day" but read it and it says 7 Noahide laws that are the oldest known to man essentially.

It's from the Talmud and allows for the execution of idol worshippers meaning Christians and they still sold out in the Christian Zionist denominations which outnumber Jewish Zionists and give billions so they can rebuild Herods Temple and "bring the Messiah" even though "Only the Father knows times", etc apparently they actually believe they can MAKE Jesus pbuh come, force the second coming.


Even though they believe Jesus will kill 2/3 of Jews forcing the rest to accept him and say this is prophecied in Revelation....


Israel takes the $$$$.

They know that rebuilding Herods Temple isn't going to force Jesus pbuh to return as nobody knows when that will happen and despite that fact everyone says we live in the end of Days.

Only because they want to and are insane as Armageddon isn't good and the rapture prophecy failed with Paul and he died with it unfulfilled and prophesied it so it's a garbage prophecy from a false prophet.

originally posted by: Disturbinatti


This is for the Christian.

I have been repetitive because it's so effective but I have also been diverse in providing evidence to prove my point.

Right here I will quote 3 passages that refute the notion Jesus pbuh is God, twice.


And that "Only begotten son" is a lie. David pbuh was also "begotten this day."

Psalms 2:7

I will tell of the decree of YHVH:

He said to me, " 'You are my son; today I have BEGOTTEN YOU. 8. Ask of me and I will make the nations your inheritance,....'


11. Serve YHVH with fear, with trembling kiss his feet,

Or He will be angry, and you will perish in the way;
for His wrath is quickly kindled.

Happy are all who take refuge in Him."


Psalms is so old scholars have found it shares much style with hymns of Ugarit Canaanite mythology. It is traditionally ascribed to David pbuh but you never know, scholars date the Torah to around the time of Ezra the scribe.


This matters because Luke borrowed the exact same phrase as ancient authorities read in:

Luke 4:8

"Jesus answered him, 'It is written,

Worship the Lord your God, and serve ONLY HIM.' "


Oh sorry wrong verse but I am leaving it. You know why.

Luke 3:22

And a voice came from Heaven, "You are my son, today I have begotten you.''

Now, if Jesus pbuh is God, so is the Old Testament Messiah (I realize few Christians ever know this, it is true though. Cyrus, too, was called Messiah or God's Annointed, which is a Messiah by definition and pretty much why David pbuh should be the ancestror of the future Hebrew Messiah. I will guess why Magi bring gifts, Magi is a Persian Priestly tribe that in Persian Empire days also encompassed Chaldeans and they are called Magi too but I don't think they are Chaldeans religously because they are star worshippers, pagans, and Zoroastrians are Monotheistic, worship God and are accepted as People of the Book in Islam, Zoroaster a Prophet pbuh.

"You are my son, this day I have begotten you."

Psalms 2:7, Luke 21:22.

Just prove deception is afoot, " You are my son, the Beloved; with you I am well pleased."

Doesn't sound natural and it seems pretty obvious that a later scribe realized it and that's why MSS. vary later on.

This right here proves that "son of God" is metaphorical.

The Holy Spirit was called "Mother" in Gospel of the Hebrews too and it was not taken literally so, can't have a double standard .

In case anyone brings uo the lord=God fallacy again:.

No it doesn't. YHVH is what is translated as "Lord" but the actual words are Baal or Adon or even Rabban, all HUMAN titles in the OT and NT.

Kyrios was put where the untranslated YHVH was in the LXX and papyrus with IUAU and Jesus, exorcism spells, have been found so we know Greeks used the Tetragrammaton/Hashem.


The obviously got rid of the Tetragrammaton for the purpose of linguistic deception. Replace it with Kyrios and boom Lord is God.

Hocus pocus

a reply to: Disturbinatti

It's really not rocket science. The suffering is important and no less noble, because that's how selfish spoiled brats force their daddy to get them what they want.
Like
"Okay I cut my beautiful young body in pieces, because signs of self-loathing get rewarded".
That's how we humans as a collective try to force god to come back and save us.
He owes us. He created us.
Problem is, maybe he didn't?
I see a lot of god in the creation around me, not much if any in humans.
Maybe not all of us...?
Hm....
Again god, if he's real gets forced to provide proof one way or another. Pick a side again... we already had that problem, right?
ISIS is doing the same. In a way. They're one "subconsciousness team".
This is one of many social/cultural tipping point moment we all feel it in the air.
"God? Are you there? Which child is your favourite?"
Two important questions.

a reply to: Peeple



Buddy take a hint I don't like you you lied ironically by calling me a liar and you are basically obsessed after I said I am done talking with you.

Wow dude I am sorry if you are having problems but don't be pathetic it won't help.

I will never say anything you have a chance of correcting me on, an error, because I know facts from not facts and how not to lie or speak without knowing.

Call a friend or go on Facebook something. This is just creepy.

a reply to: Peeple

How many times is it going to take for you to realize you have no more credibility and I don't desire conversation with you?

4 more times.

Just keep reading this message until you understand.

a reply to: Disturbinatti

Sorry it's not about you, I just think the topic is interesting.
You get intimidated by questions, I understand.
Bye then.

originally posted by: Disturbinatti
a reply to: EasternShadow



Thing is they invented enforcing as law.

Which is worse. Paul actually didn't teach Trinity.

I can't stand Paul but they invented the Nicene Creed. Not Paul. Trinity goes back probably to Iranaeus or Ignatius, Polycarp, one of those guys. Maybe Justin.

Iranaeus ( 130 AD - 202 AD ), Ignatius ( c. 35 – c. 107 ), Polycarp ( 69 AD - 155 AD ), Justin Martyr ( 100 AD - 165 AD )
Those people arrive at late stage when trinity was already developing.

I've tried to track down the earliest sign of diversion from traditional Jews views. In mid 50s AD. Paul wrote a letter to the church in Corinth. He concluded this epistle in the following way:

I, Paul, write this greeting with my own hand. Let anyone be accursed who has no love for the Lord. "marana tha" ( Our Lord, come! ) The grace of the Lord Jesus be with you. My love be with all of you in Christ Jesus (1 Cor 16:21-24).

Paul write his letters in Greek, but "marana tha" is not a Greek word. It's an Aramaic Phrase.Why is it important?
1. Aramaic Speaking Jews is approximately 40s AD or 30s AD. No other evidence is earlier than that.
2. the word “Lord” in Aramaic (mar) had a variety of meanings. It could be used as a term of respect for a human being. But it was also the word used by Aramaic-speaking Jews when they spoke to the LORD God.
3. Lord God refered to Jesus because 1 Cor 16:21-24 is contextualy about Jesus.

Conclusion, as early as 30s AD - 40s AD the christians had already viewed Jesus as God. There was only one person who teach the Gentiles that early. It's Paul and by Paul own evidence. The Bishops of Nicea couldnt possibly arrive that early. Some are not even born yet.

a reply to: EasternShadow



Mar is Syriac Aramaic not Hebrew-Aramaic.

Regardless it's a human title.

Mar Jacob, Mara bar Serapion, etc.

Martha is the female version.


You also don't have evidence of trinity before the people I mentioned.

For a simple reason I wasn't incorrect in saying what I did. Might want to accept that because you don't have proof and the Bible wasn't written in Syriac until Tatian probably.


Diatesseron was the Syriac Gospel.

originally posted by: Disturbinatti
a reply to: EasternShadow



At least in a Christian context.

Ebionites and Nazarenes rejected both divinity of Jesus pbuh and Paul, according to Epiphanius were one group and Symmachus had disciples from both.

Probably Homilies and Recognitions comes from them it's the only Aramaic MSS. in Syriac in all of Christianity from its time, 410 it was dated.

Oldest dated MS in the world.

The first followers of Jesus didn’t consider him to be divine, but only an inspired man. The earliest Christians were, after all, monotheistic Jews who didn’t go around divinizing people. Things were just change when Paul started his self appointed Gentiles apostle.

a reply to: EasternShadow


I just said that.

Are you joking?

originally posted by: EasternShadow

originally posted by: Disturbinatti
a reply to: EasternShadow



At least in a Christian context.

Ebionites and Nazarenes rejected both divinity of Jesus pbuh and Paul, according to Epiphanius were one group and Symmachus had disciples from both.

Probably Homilies and Recognitions comes from them it's the only Aramaic MSS. in Syriac in all of Christianity from its time, 410 it was dated.

Oldest dated MS in the world.

The first followers of Jesus didn’t consider him to be divine, but only an inspired man. The earliest Christians were, after all, monotheistic Jews who didn’t go around divinizing people. Things were just change when Paul started his self appointed Gentiles apostle.

I said the Nazarenes and Ebionites didn't worship Jesus pbuh and they WERE the first Christians.

Remember when I said they rejected Paul... Epiphanius...ringing a bell???


How does this even relate to the comment it's in response to?

And your devolving into rhetoric now be careful.

Divinizing? Not my word.

a reply to: EasternShadow


If you want I can make a mistake just to satisfy your desire to correct me on anything.

Seriously, I am sorry. Somewhat.

I spend my life reading so that's why I know this stuff in depth. You are trying very hard but not coming close to success. Few people have the time I do or the desire to read obscure Apocryphal books.

I am also very careful about what I say and fact check everything.


I almost feel like you don't understand what the importance of my comments are and focus on the mundane.

My Apocrypha collection is almost complete I actually have the Diatesseron from Armenian and Arabic, but in English.

It's a harmony Gospel.

originally posted by: Disturbinatti
a reply to: EasternShadow
Mar is Syriac Aramaic not Hebrew-Aramaic.

Regardless it's a human title.

Mar Jacob, Mara bar Serapion, etc.

Martha is the female version.

We are talking about the passage in Corinthians 1. What is that has to do with other people names? Paul isnt talking about human title, he is talking about Jesus. And Paul is a Jews, not Syrian. Obviously he is speaking Armaic Jews.

originally posted by: Disturbinatti
You also don't have evidence of trinity before the people I mentioned.

For a simple reason I wasn't incorrect in saying what I did. Might want to accept that because you don't have proof and the Bible wasn't written in Syriac until Tatian probably.


Diatesseron was the Syriac Gospel.

Unless you stop taking away evidence out of context then we will never have any evidence. If you read the Council of Nicea properly, it's main purpose was to resolve dispute among Arianism and Homoousianism, which mean the trinity has long been established before that.

a reply to: EasternShadow


Because lord IS a human title.

Not God.

Baal, Adon. Those words mean lord.

YHVH doesn't but is translated to it anyway.

Oy vey! You are trying to prove something that's not true because YOU DIDN'T fact check.

originally posted by: Disturbinatti
I said the Nazarenes and Ebionites didn't worship Jesus pbuh and they WERE the first Christians.

Remember when I said they rejected Paul... Epiphanius...ringing a bell???


How does this even relate to the comment it's in response to?

And your devolving into rhetoric now be careful.

Divinizing? Not my word.

Because you are implying trinity just pop out from Jesus mouth. It didnt. The Jews are monotheism. They didnt view Jesus as God. So someone else must have started it. The question is who? And that is all my post is about. Paul.

a reply to: Disturbinatti

One more question: if akhenaten was the one inventing monotheism to make people praise him, why are we still building monuments for the wealthy?
Welding some magical power over us? A deadly spell, like money.
While Jesus said: it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdoms of god.

If you only value his word, Jesus, not the semi-deadly institutionalised and therefore by definition out-dated churches dogmas and sh1t. Which are not god. Not speaking for god, they can at best assume what the other rulers assume, if they only would still speak to them. The 9-1 whatever is your favourite assumption of what lies behind the veil.

*which is not me judging your opinion, just reporting where it collides with my personal experience of "god".
**and you could work on the "controlling your passion", not to be bitchy, just interested but you have a tendency to overdo the fiery part.
You lion/stallion whatever your favourite pet is.