It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The pre-creation existence of Jesus

page: 1
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 01:05 AM
link   
Who was Jesus before His human birth?

The most definitive and clear statement about Jesus before His human birth is recorded in the first few verses of John's Gospel. John, Jesus' closest disciple, takes great care to explain that this Jesus is no ordinary man.

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" (John 1:1). Who was this "Word"? "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth" (verse 14). John goes on to explain that the Word who "became flesh and dwelt among us" was Jesus of Nazareth. He also gives us explicit and definitive statements containing important details about Jesus prior to His human birth.

"The Word" is Jesus and He was with God, and He was God. This language is unmistakable and can mean only one thing: There were two beings—God and the Word.

The Word "was in the beginning with God" (verse 2). The beginning of what?

Jesus existed before the beginning

Since John's Gospel begins with the words "In the beginning," it seems likely that John is alluding to Genesis 1:1. But while Genesis 1:1 continues with, "God created...," John begins his Gospel with, "In the beginning was the Word..." He tells us that the Word already existed "in the beginning."

In Genesis the creation of the universe and time itself marks "the beginning"; in John the existence of the Word precedes that beginning.

The Creator of the universe obviously existed before the universe because He caused the universe to come into being.

John explicitly says that it was the Word—Jesus Christ—through whom all things were created (John 1:3). Paul agrees completely with John in language that is unmistakable (Ephesians 3:9), adding, "He is before all things and in Him all things consist" (Colossians 1:16-17).

Paul makes the logical point that since Christ was the agent by whom all things were created, then He must have necessarily existed before the creation. Jesus also referred to His existing before the creation when, in praying to the Father, He spoke of "the glory I had with you before the world began" (John 17:5, NIV).

Jesus speaks of the relationship between Himself and the Father "before the foundation of the world" (verse 24), a phrase echoed by Paul in Ephesians 1:4.

The Word

The preexistent Jesus is characterized by the name or title "the Word." Perhaps one of the reasons the Greek word logos, translated "Word," is used is that this best describes one of the major roles of Christ—He was to reveal the Father. Logos means "the expression of thought" (Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, "Word").

Logos is used in the New Testament of a saying or statement of God, the word of God, the revealed will of God and direct revelation given by Christ, and could be spoken and delivered (ibid.). John applied this word as a personal title to the One who "became flesh and dwelt among us" (John 1:14).

What John is saying is that a personal Being, whom he calls the logos or "the Word," became incarnate—became a flesh-and-blood human being—in the person of Jesus Christ. The fact that the Word became a flesh-and-blood person implies that the Word was a specific individual being prior to His becoming a physical human baby born to Mary.

John also tells us that the Word is personally distinct from the Father, though He is at the same time one with the Father. They are the same, eternal, and are of the same nature and essence. The Word is God as truly as is the One with whom He exists in the closest union of being and life. As Jesus said, "I and My Father are one" (John 10:30).

The oneness between the Father and the Word has to do with their complete harmony and agreement in working together—not that they constitute only one Being as the Trinitarian theory mistakenly teaches.

Who and what is God?

John's simple but clear statements give us an understanding of God that was now made plain by the appearance of Jesus Christ. The language used expresses to us that there are two Beings, coexisting and called God—God and the Word who is also God.

If they existed in some other form than two self-existing beings, both the Greek and the English language are capable of describing something altogether different. But the language does not do this. It speaks clearly of two, together, both of whom are God. If there was only one, alone, then John wouldn't have said, "the Word was with God."

The question arises: If Jesus was the Word, and thus God, how could God who is infinite become finite? What happened to the Word at the moment He became an ovum begotten with life from the Father in the womb of Mary?

We don't know exactly how God performed this miracle, but it's evident from Scripture that God could become a physical human being and therefore become subject to a finite, physical existence—limited to time and space, subject to pain, suffering and death and to being tempted.

And Jesus did this. As Paul described it: "He, who had always been God by nature, did not cling to his privileges as God's equal, but stripped himself of every advantage by consenting to be a slave by nature and being born a man. And, plainly seen as a human being, he humbled himself by living a life of utter obedience, to the point of death, and the death he died was the death of a common criminal" (Philippians 2:6-8, New Testament in Modern English).

Jesus could die. Jesus could experience human emotion. Jesus could feel hunger and pain. He could agonize at the prospect of pain and death. Yes, God could die. But only if He were to become a physical human being. This He did. And who was He? He was the same person He had always been, even having memories of His past eternity with the Father.

Notice Jesus' prayer in John 17:5: "And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began" (NIV). Here He speaks straightforwardly of His past experiences and memories with the Father, confirming everything John wrote in the first few verses of his Gospel.

Yes, Jesus' sacrifice was one of virtually unimaginable proportions. And knowing who He was and what He willingly gave up should make all the difference to you and me when coming to terms with the enormous magnitude of His sacrifice.



This information was taken from the booklet "Jesus Chrsit: The Real Story" from www.ucg.org.




posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 01:19 AM
link   
Please read the above article carefully before commenting on this thread. I would love to get some opinions because I know there are trinitarian believers and this article disagrees with the trinity. God and Jesus co-existed together but acted as One before Jesus became flesh. The Holy Spirit is the oneness of God the Father and Jesus the Word of God. Both beings share the same spiritual power and since Christ died for our sins, this Spiritual power is available to all who accept it truthfully. It is not a trinity. God the Father, Jesus the Son are both separate beings with an essence of oneness due to Each One complimenting the Other. The Holy Spirit is not a separate being as the trinity teaches, but is the power of the Father and Son working in the lives of people.

Any thoughts on this?



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 01:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Locoman8
 



John also tells us that the Word is personally distinct from the Father, though He is at the same time one with the Father. They are the same, eternal, and are of the same nature and essence. The Word is God as truly as is the One with whom He exists in the closest union of being and life. As Jesus said, "I and My Father are one" (John 10:30).

The oneness between the Father and the Word has to do with their complete harmony and agreement in working together—not that they constitute only one Being as the Trinitarian theory mistakenly teaches.
Is this something you copied?
There is a deception here that you should be aware of regarding "nature", "essence", "unity", and "oneness".
All of these are code words and have meanings all their own and are each like a little book that is behind a few letters strung together.
The author of this phrasing is being very deceptive in how he is setting this forward.
It claims to be presenting something different from the trinity but it uses the identical words and concepts used under the auspices of the Roman Emperor, Constantine to formulate the orthodox Trinity dogma of the church that is otherwise called the anti-christ and the murderer of the Saints.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 02:28 AM
link   

by locoman earlier over on the bible versions thread:
Also, to add in with the other comments, I maintain that God and Jesus co-existed before creation. They both work as one but are both separate beings. God the Father and Jesus the Son. The God that spoke to the patriachs in the Old Testament and who claimed to be "I AM WHO I AM" to Moses was Jesus. Jesus was the Creator of all things on behalf of the Father. I will make a new thread concerning all of this in case you guys start to have a heart attack over such a bold claim of 2 divine powers at work before creation. Please hold your comments for this post for my new thread AFTER I post my proof. God bless you all.
Sorry to disappoint you but I am not having a heart attack over this because it is not anything startling and definitely nothing new.
There are writers of my own church (SDA) who make the same claims, ie Jesus = Jehovah.
It is based on the probably true concept that God has Angels who go around doing the actual physical acts that are considered to be "Acts of God" and that even though God appeared on Mt. Sinai it probably, in actuality was still really just an angel. OK, I can accept that, but they carry it a step further and speculate that since it must have been some very special being to be a stand-in for God, and Jesus is, somehow or in a certain sense, a representation of God, in that he reflects the personality of God in a way that is visible to ordinary humans; that this special god-double that we know of as Jehovah may very well, or on second thought, must be Jesus.
Well nice thought and everything, and you probably imagine that you are doing Jesus a favor by lifting him to such an elevated position.
Wrong. Jesus is a person, born from Mary who lived a more than just perfect life and was shown to all mankind as being sealed by God, in order to make sure everyone knows that he did the works of his Father and not his own.
Additional speculation about "Jesus" is pure bunk because "Jesus" did not exist, as a person, before he was born.
In my last post I mentioned code words. Add another to the list: "Person".



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 04:08 AM
link   
This is actually quite good.

Jesus is of God but not God. Right now i regret that i dont know the Bible to well.

But there is a telling in the Bible that is about Jesus and the people. Where the people bow down to worship Jesus or something like that. But Jesus then tells them not to worship him But God. If that is so. How can we say the Jesus is God! Even Jesus prayed to God.

The way i see it is that Jesus is a true copy of Adam but with a stronger love and stronger will for God. Jesus was tested in the same way as Adam and Eve was in the garden of Eden. Jesus was tested against the tree of knowledge in the same way.

Jesus had a role or a quest set by God. Jesus was sent to manifest the truth in flesh.


Jesus was born in flesh by Maria. And brought up by Joseph and Maria and the environment they lived in and by. Meaning Jesus would be thought and brought up by three different spirits plus the system around him. Joseph,maria,God and the system. Doesn't this really tell us that we are the same as Jesus but we rather lust for knowledge then the love of God. The only difference between us and Jesus is that he didn't sin by using his free will. Isn't there some truth in this if you understand the Bible.

The only difference is that We chose to live in sin. Jesus didn't. He chose to live in God. We have this choise every day. Every day we have the free will to sin or not. Its just a mater of will.

I see Jesus much like the 144 000 chosen once. But where Jesus is the one who didn't sin against God. Which will mean Jesus will be their teacher after the fall of the Antichrist and the false prophet.









[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 06:10 AM
link   
How about the opening verse in John? "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word WAS God. And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us."

Later John explains the Word being Jesus of Nazareth. If the Word was with God and the Word was God, then there's a proof of Jesus existing with God before creation. John 1:3 says, "All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made." this mentions Jesus, the Word or Revelator of God as being the Creator of all things.
It's also evident in Colossians 1:16-17, "For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist." So all things were created by Him. Also look closely at Hebrews 1:8-9, "But to the Son He says: 'Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; Ascepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; Therefore God, YOUR GOD, has anointed You With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.'"

So this author is calling Jesus "God". To clarify that line it would properly read "Therefore Jesus, Your God has anointed You with the oil of gladness more than Your companions."

Also verse 6 mentions the angels worshipping Him. "Let all the angels of God worship Him."

Ephesians 3:9 mentions God creating all things through Jesus, "and to make all see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God WHO CREATED ALL THINGS THROUGH JESUS CHRIST".

I can go on and on but I think what I just presented from the scripture easily states that Jesus Created all things on behalf of the Father and that Jesus was known as "God" but not God the Father. THis also shows that Jesus existed before creation because all things were created through Him.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 06:33 AM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


The way i see it is that Jesus is a true copy of Adam but with a stronger love and stronger will for God. Jesus was tested in the same way as Adam and Eve was in the garden of Eden. Jesus was tested against the tree of knowledge in the same way.
Not exactly. Jesus took on the role of Adam but actually was at a serious disadvantage, concerning the aspect of his nature which was human, because of the degeneration of the species in general, as a result of the deleterious affects of sin, not just on people, but the whole world.
I think the difference had to do with knowledge. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that there was something like an individual personality that was representative of a certain creative aspect of God, and it underwent some sort of transforming process, to germinate the womb of a particular woman and to not stop at that but to continue on as that germ, to ultimately become a human person; would he be tempted to do some unlawful thing in order to acquire some secret knowledge that would put him on a par with god?
I think the temptation of Jesus was to take whatever qualities that were at his disposal because of his inherent god-person relationship, to his own purposes.
What Jesus shared with pre-fallen Adam was his free will, because the nature of his incarnation circumvented the normal condition of slavery to sin that everyone else descended from Eve are subject to.
Paul says he chooses to do good but his fleshly nature prevents him from being able to put the will to do good, (which comes from a higher form of thought, derived from its interaction with God, on a spiritual level) into actual physical practice.
That does not mean we throw up our hands at our apparent inability to exercise a free will, and just indulge our baser desires. To do that is to deny the power of God for salvation and nullifies Christ's sacrifice for our forgiveness.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 06:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Locoman8
How about the opening verse in John? "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word WAS God. And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us."



In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word WAS God.

If i speak you hear my words. The words are mine. The word are from me.

The words are not really me but a finite. It's a sound i create which becomes something. This sound is also like Gods breath to give life to the flesh.

I have thought a lot about this.

A word is a creation made by God the word therefore becomes finite. The word cant be God him slef. But from God. It can only be a part of God.

Even if God makes a thought it still aint God but made by God. Thought up by God.

In theory God cant create him self.



[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 06:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by spy66
 


The way i see it is that Jesus is a true copy of Adam but with a stronger love and stronger will for God. Jesus was tested in the same way as Adam and Eve was in the garden of Eden. Jesus was tested against the tree of knowledge in the same way.
Not exactly. Jesus took on the role of Adam but actually was at a serious disadvantage, concerning the aspect of his nature which was human, because of the degeneration of the species in general, as a result of the deleterious affects of sin, not just on people, but the whole world.
I think the difference had to do with knowledge. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that there was something like an individual personality that was representative of a certain creative aspect of God, and it underwent some sort of transforming process, to germinate the womb of a particular woman and to not stop at that but to continue on as that germ, to ultimately become a human person; would he be tempted to do some unlawful thing in order to acquire some secret knowledge that would put him on a par with god?
I think the temptation of Jesus was to take whatever qualities that were at his disposal because of his inherent god-person relationship, to his own purposes.
What Jesus shared with pre-fallen Adam was his free will, because the nature of his incarnation circumvented the normal condition of slavery to sin that everyone else descended from Eve are subject to.
Paul says he chooses to do good but his fleshly nature prevents him from being able to put the will to do good, (which comes from a higher form of thought, derived from its interaction with God, on a spiritual level) into actual physical practice.
That does not mean we throw up our hands at our apparent inability to exercise a free will, and just indulge our baser desires. To do that is to deny the power of God for salvation and nullifies Christ's sacrifice for our forgiveness.




You put this in a better way then i could. Thanks.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 09:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Locoman8
 


So you are saying Jesus Christ and the Almighty God and Creator are two separate beings, but united as one in purpose and action?

John 1:1 can be compared to...
Genesis 2:24 (New International Version)
"24 For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh."

They are never literally the same flesh or one flesh, but they are suppose to be united in purpose.

If this is what you are saying I agree 100%.

On the Holy Spirit I disagree ever so slightly, this is a manifestation of God's
power, and yes as God's son Jesus has unlimited access to this power to draw on. The Holy Spirit is not alive. Best way to explain it is with electricity.
Electricity is very powerful yet largely unseen. God is the power plant that sends it, and we see the end results of it, just like you see a light work or any electrical device working. Holy Spirit is like electrical current, invisible.
But it can be tested at times and found to be working.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 12:57 PM
link   
I think we agree bluejay. I believe God and Jesus co-existed for a common purpose. I believe the Holy Spirit is not a separate being but the power of God. So I guess we can agree on this subject.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 01:09 PM
link   
You might also be interested in reading this book

Stephen K. Ray - St. John's Gospel (Google Books)

Quite a bit of this is discussed in detail here.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 09:56 PM
link   
Disclaimer: I'm a theist but not of the Abrahamic faiths. I have minor biblical scholar and scriptural skills. Also I am not a scientific/legal or medical expert in any field. Beware of my Contagious Memes! & watch out that you don't get cut on my Occams razor.All of this is my personal conjecture and should not be considered the absolute or most definitive state of things as they really are. Use this information at your own risk! I accept no liability if your ideology comes crashing down around you with accompanying consequences!

Explanation: 1stly the OP's A PRIORI bootstrap is long and has many tenuous points, many of which are not discussed at all in the OP. :shk: For example and I quote "The fact that the Word became a flesh-and-blood person implies that the Word was a specific individual being prior to His becoming a physical human baby born to Mary."....Fact?
Where the expletive deleted
was this conclusively established beyond a reasonable doubt. Not in the OP that's for sure! :bnghd: It's an UNSPOKEN PURE GIVEN! Now I have No problems with PURE GIVEN A PRIORI conditions, but I DO have big problems when the are either UNSPOKEN to begin with and or those PURE GIVENS are referred to AS FACT when this is clearly BOGUS!!! (as I will show below!)

2ndly the OP states and I quote "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" (John 1:1). Who was this "Word"? "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth" (verse 14). John goes on to explain that the Word who "became flesh and dwelt among us" was Jesus of Nazareth. He also gives us explicit and definitive statements containing important details about Jesus prior to His human birth.
"The Word" is Jesus and He was with God, and He was God. This language is unmistakable and can mean only one thing: There were two beings—God and the Word."...Well I have a couple of points to do with this....A) So the Word was "God" and YHVH was "God".....Well? what about this information (by DeBuhn) shown in this Thread (Bible Translations compared [by miriam0566]) and I quote it here "Chapter Eleven:

A discussion of John 1:1: "Surprisingly, only one, the NW, adheres to the literal meaning of the Greek, and translates "a god." "Translators of the KJV, NRSV, NIV, NAB, NASB, AB, TEV and LB all approached the text at John 1:1 already believing certain things about the Word... and made sure that the translations came out in accordance with their beliefs. ... Ironically, some of these same scholars are quick to charge the NW translation with "doctrinal bias" for translating the verse literally, free of KJV influence, following the sense of the Greek. It may very well be that the NW translators came to the task of translating John 1:1 with as much bias as the other translators did. It just so happens that their bias corresponds in this case to a more accurate translation of the Greek" "Some early Christians maintained their monotheism by believing that the one God simply took on a human form and came to earth -- in effect, God the Father was born and crucified as Jesus. They are entitled to their belief, but it cannot be derived legitimately from the Gospel according to John." "John himself has not formulated a Trinity concept in his Gospel." "All that we can ask is that a translation be an accurate starting point for exposition and interpretation. Only the NW achieves that, as provocative as it sounds to the modern reader. The other translations cut off the exploration of the verse's meaning before it has even begun."...According to the OP's statement that both are Gods then that would seem to validate what Debuhn is saying and that the NWT version is the most accurate translation of the bible or at least the NT or the book of John. The reason I bring this up is because the OP chops and changes versions at the drop of a hat (I personally use the KJV) and its my position that you should pick a single version and stick with it 100% as isn't it supposed to be PURE CANON i.e. WORD OF GOD? or junk that version as being totally tainted. And I made that pretty clear to a poster in another thread HERE!
And I'll quote myself from there ..."Look IMO its either the profound word of GOD dictated by YHVH and 100% accurate OR its the highly fallible word of imperfect men and is therefor NOT 100% accurate. I suggest that if the Bible is fallible its followers are misguided to the extent of those fallibilities!"

Will the OP agree to use a single version of the bible and if not why not. Also Does the OP agree with the premise that DeBuhn makes.
B) The whole of the OP is based on the unspoken PURE GIVE A PRIORI that Jesus is the ONLY begotten son of GOD/YHVH and I fully debunk both John and therefor Jesus concerning this issue at this THREAD
of mine. (Is Jesus Really "The only begotten son of GOD"?). I will bring up a point I make there..."IMO the apostle John was using a little to much artistic license with his writings but I qualify that so far I have only found it to be the case with this one vital linchpin thats not backed up by any other of Johns apostolic contemporaries! Anything found in this sort of scriptural isolation becomes immediately suspect in many different ways." (RE: The linchpin in this case is Jesus ONLY begotten status!). And this goes directly to John being the only NT author to push an agenda which other NT Authors clearly don't.

3rdly the OP states and I quote "The Word "was in the beginning with God" (verse 2). The beginning of what?

Jesus existed before the beginning"....And I suggest that the suppliers of this information read a dictionary concerning this word....HERE (freedictionary.com). Which is where I got this juicy piece of ammo specifically targeted to DENY this IGNORANCE and I quote with my BOLD for emphasis .... "beginning
Noun
1. a start
2. beginnings an early part or stage
3. the place where or time when something starts
4. an origin; source

Collins Essential English Dictionary 2nd Edition 2006 © HarperCollins Publishers 2004, 2006" and I ask the OP if they care to refute or endorse this FACT!

Continued next post below.....



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 09:57 PM
link   
Continued from above....

4th The OP states and again I quote "John explicitly says that it was the Word—Jesus Christ—through whom all things were created (John 1:3). Paul agrees completely with John in language that is unmistakable (Ephesians 3:9), adding, "He is before all things and in Him all things consist" (Colossians 1:16-17)."....And So we finally get to Paul the NOT Apostle. I debunk him in this post of mine HERE! (Can God make a stone so heavy that he can not pick it up? [by superevoman])
Once Again I will direct quote myself from that post..."Are you* (EDIT:-*referring in this case to miriam0566 who I was answering in that thread) willing to change your position with the near I feel overwhelming scriptural evidence to the 3 basic states of GOD and maybe admit St Paul might have got it wrong in the book of Titus therefor throwing doubt on any and all of his books or the entire bible canon in general. I don't expect you to convert or throw your faith away willy nilly but I hope you can answer my questions accurately without getting distressed at them to much. Basically who do you believe? St Paul or YHVH!". And so I also ask the OP of this thread those very same questions.

STOCKTAKE: So thats multiple biblical versions as being simultaneously valid shot down....

John debunked partially as I still got more lets call that partially
'ed.
Paul debunked partially and see my comments above about having more.

Jesus as ONLY begotten shot down
BUT WAIT! You Guessed it! I STILL HAVE MORE!

So far the OP has failed to impress me or destroy any of my core beliefs and yet thats four shots on target that I see so far.

5th I bring to your attention ANOTHER thread of mine (very recent and strangely, one might say a conspiracy of silence concerning it seems to be in effect as NO-ONE has SUCCESSFULLY tried to debunk it at ALL
(only 2 posters so far) and the threads gone sorta dead...hmmm maybe I should go join the ThreadKillers thread?) HERE!
Again I'll quote myself..."Are there any dissenting or contradictory Arguments and their respective Proofs:YES!
CAVEAT:-"What about the Prophet YHVH promised through Moses in the TORAH at Deut 18:15-22? Could he not of "added or taken away" from the law or at least be an author of the above Primary or Secondary Proofs for the OP's Secondary Argument?".

OP's reply: 1stly the OP has yet to fully ID this prophet but still fully contends that NO, he could not of "added or taken away" from the law specifically because of Deut 18:20-22 AND Deut 13:1-11 (specifically Deut 13:3 & 5) AND the existence of the Primary and Secondary Proofs (Canonical scriptures!) of the OP's Primary Argument.
2ndly Yes he could be an author, But must be vetted according to Deut 13:1-11 AND Deut 18:15-22. Example of a Failure is Ezekiel with his FALSE prophesy concerning the revival of Sodom and Gomorrah (Eze 16:55). At the moment the OP is leaning towards Ezra as who this prophet is but has not conclusively counted him IN or OUT as of yet! Please feel free to offer names and supply your proofs so as to DENY IGNORANCE!"". (All scriptures I provide here can be found on the blueletterbible website or linked directly via my Threads OP under bibliography!)
This Thread of mine basically junks all the biblical books written AFTER the TORAH as NOT CANONICAL! Care to refute or endorse this position?
The whole NT is a pack of lies...John=liar, Paul=liar, Peter who agreed with Paul= liar, Jesus= LIAR and here's my reasons WHY I AM 100% Correct
...
X) NONE of these Prophets/speakers for GOD/YHVH match up to GOD/YHVH's on standards as directly laid out in the TORAH in the scriptures provided above. Mainly because Jesus 2nd coming hasn't yet happened and that sorta puts a major dent in any argument that tries to validate any of them as TRUSTWORTHY! The NT authors and Jesus...I shall fear them not!

6th and finally a whole lot of scripture from the OT (I know I Debunked it as valid but just to prove a point) proving my arguments against the CANONICAL validity of Jesus and the NT authors.

Pro 8:22-30....As Solomon wrote Proverbs and he is speaking here about himself and declaring that he to was with GOD/YHVH before the world was created!
Wouldn't he have priority before Jesus due to having set a precedence way earlier. But just in-case you want to throw out Solomon I will throw you a bone as wasn't he supposedly a wizard and conjurer of spirits and demons...all of which are directly opposed to Deut 18:9-13. Solomon? I shall fear him NOT!

And now for the TORAH big gun scriptures (yes they're OT as well!) ....

Exd 15:11 Who [is] like unto thee, O LORD, among the gods? who [is] like thee, glorious in holiness, fearful [in] praises, doing wonders? [Huh?
why no mention of Jesus?)

Exd 20:3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me. [Huh?
If Jesus is "a" god (Note the little "g" in god) then shouldn't True Canon adherents just ignore Jesus and the whole of the NT on the basis of this scripture?]

Exd 23:13 And in all [things] that I have said unto you be circumspect: and make no mention of the name of other gods, neither let it be heard out of thy mouth. [Huh?
Can't call on the name of Jesus according to that because he is "a god"!)

Exd 23:24 Thou shalt not bow down to their gods, nor serve them, nor do after their works: but thou shalt utterly overthrow them, and quite break down their images. [Huh?
According to this I can't bow to Jesus, serve Jesus nor do after his works, But must utterly overthrow him (no probs..DID THAT ABOVE!
YHVH would be PLEASED!
) and break down their images....So no cross then! AMAZING!)

Exd 23:32 Thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor with their gods. [Huh?
So the born again covenant is a load of
and
business isn't it!?)

Exd 23:33 They shall not dwell in thy land, lest they make thee sin against me: for if thou serve their gods, it will surely be a snare unto thee. [Huh?
so Jesus is a snare set by YHVH to test whether I will serve Jesus or YHVH!)

Continued in next post below.....



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 09:57 PM
link   
Continued from above....

Exd 34:15 Lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land, and they go a whoring after their gods, and do sacrifice unto their gods, and [one] call thee, and thou eat of his sacrifice; [Huh?
So can't call on Jesus and can't eat his bread/flesh wine/blood sacrifice! ASTOUNDING!)

Exd 34:16 And thou take of their daughters unto thy sons, and their daughters go a whoring after their gods, and make thy sons go a whoring after their gods.[ Huh?
Ahhhh So this is where the rot starts!]

Num 25:1 And Israel abode in #tim, and the people began to commit whoredom with the daughters of Moab. [Backs up the above scripture!]

Num 25:2 And they called the people unto the sacrifices of their gods: and the people did eat, and bowed down to their gods. [Scriptural proof of the above scripture!]

Deu 4:28 And there ye shall serve gods, the work of men's hands, wood and stone, which neither see, nor hear, nor eat, nor smell.[ Huh?
Oh the cross....Hmmmm Does serving that cross of wood in cathedrals of stone ring any bells here???)

Deu 5:7 Thou shalt have none other gods before me. [ YHVH just reminding us HE MEANS BUSINESS! and again no mention of a caveat for Jesus! What say you?)

Deu 8:19 And it shall be, if thou do at all forget the LORD thy God, and walk after other gods, and serve them, and worship them, I testify against you this day that ye shall surely perish. [WHOA!
Death penalty extreme for worshiping Jesus! Hard Core!]

Deu 11:16 Take heed to yourselves, that your heart be not deceived, and ye turn aside, and serve other gods, and worship them. [Broken Record just for effect!]

Deu 11:28 And a curse, if ye will not obey the commandments of the LORD your God, but turn aside out of the way which I command you this day, to go after other gods, which ye have not known. [ Ahhh! A Curse plus the death penalty ..great...just great...YHVH with his overkill wrathful nature! Was Jesus known to the Israelites as Jesus, The only begotten son of GOD, as a god in his own right?]

Deu 13:2 And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; [ Goes directly to the scripture above. Because was Jesus known to the ancient Israelites? If Not then thats a spanner in the works isn't it!]

Deu 13:6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which [is] as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;
Deu 13:7 [Namely], of the gods of the people which [are] round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the [one] end of the earth even unto the [other] end of the earth;
Deu 13:13 [Certain] men, the children of Belial[*JESUS???], are gone out from among you, and have withdrawn the inhabitants of their city, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which ye have not known;
Deu 17:3 And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded;
Deu 18:20 But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die.
Deu 20:18 That they teach you not to do after all their abominations, which they have done unto their gods; so should ye sin against the LORD your God.
Deu 28:14 And thou shalt not go aside from any of the words which I command thee this day, [to] the right hand, or [to] the left, to go after other gods to serve them.
Deu 28:36 The LORD shall bring thee, and thy king which thou shalt set over thee, unto a nation which neither thou nor thy fathers have known; and there shalt thou serve other gods, wood and stone.
Deu 28:64 And the LORD shall scatter thee among all people, from the one end of the earth even unto the other; and there thou shalt serve other gods, which neither thou nor thy fathers have known, [even] wood and stone.

Sorta Nice big compiled in one place for convenience broken record of all that I have posted previously. If I could star and flag mMoses and the book of Deuteronomy I would!


Deu 29:26 For they went and served other gods, and worshipped them, gods whom they knew not, and [whom] he had not given unto them: [RE:- did YHVH give the ancient Israelites Jesus?
Where and When?]

Deu 31:16 And the LORD said unto Moses, Behold, thou shalt sleep with thy fathers; and this people will rise up, and go a whoring after the gods of the strangers of the land, whither they go [to be] among them, and will forsake me, and break my covenant which I have made with them.
Deu 31:18 And I will surely hide my face in that day for all the evils which they shall have wrought, in that they are turned unto other gods.
Deu 31:20 For when I shall have brought them into the land which I sware unto their fathers, that floweth with milk and honey; and they shall have eaten and filled themselves, and waxen fat; then will they turn unto other gods, and serve them, and provoke me, and break my covenant.

YHVH being Omniscient KNEW that Israel would sin and turn away to other god's .....My Proof is Christianity....Created by a bunch of Hebrew zealots.... NEED I say MORE?


Deu 32:16 They provoked him to jealousy with strange [gods], with abominations provoked they him to anger.
Deu 32:17 They sacrificed unto devils, not to God; to gods whom they knew not, to new [gods that] came newly up, whom your fathers feared not. [Check out the scripture that implicates Jesus as a son of Belial!]

Continued below...



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 09:57 PM
link   
Continued from above...

Deu 32:36 For the LORD shall judge his people, and repent himself for his servants, when he seeth that [their] power is gone, and [there is] none shut up, or left.
Deu 32:37 And he shall say, Where [are] their gods, [their] rock in whom they trusted,
Deu 32:38 Which did eat the fat of their sacrifices, [and] drank the wine of their drink offerings? let them rise up and help you, [and] be your protection.
Deu 32:39 See now that I, [even] I, [am] he, and [there is] NO god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither [is there any] that can deliver out of my hand.
Deu 32:40 For I lift up my hand to heaven, and say, I live for ever.


Well...You can't get a better witness than YHVH HIMSELF and he says THERE IS NO JESUS(a god) WITH HIM!

SO Final STOCKTAKE:- OMG it's like the WRATH OF GOD! Its amazing what Occams Razor can do in agile hands


Who Are You Going to believe???
YHVH through Moses and the TORAH or the NT and its authors and central protagonist (Jesus).

Personal Disclosure: It doesn't matter how hard you or others try to push the OP's Prima Facie excrement up hill, It still stinks to almighty and has no solid consistency whatsoever! Please Prove me wrong as I would love to find out where my Debunking went astray! Note all scripture I quote above is from the blueletterbible website and from the KJV but I am willing to use any ONE version you desire.
I was once told by a channeled Guru (Mafu....Eichay Master Mafu
) that one can only really bow in the presence of willful ignorance...So here to all you Abrahamic faiths followers who believe in more than just the TORAH after what I have shown clearly above....I
before your ability to willfully distort reality to fit your own agenda and thereby take on the mantle of being 100% Cognitively Dissonant. You Heroes....NOT! :shk: I hope you
's get the
justice you all deserve.
Feel lucky I'm NOT YHVH because I would
your 'ing hides way way harder than is laid out in the TORAH!
Because If You start from a PURE GIVEN A PRIORI that The bible is the infallible word of YHVH and bootstrap up from there, and then you ignore what is written in the Torah by Moses as dictated by YHVH, then what are you doing but promoting ignorance.



[edit on 21-1-2009 by OmegaLogos]



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 09:33 AM
link   
OmegaLogos WoW. You sure have thought a lot about this stuff. I enjoyed reading it. A lot of good pionts i can think about



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Locoman8
 

Hello Locoman8:

I have a few comments on your thread.

That there is one God who is a person and that the Father is that one person is allowed by all theists. Proof of the divinity and personality of the Father is therefore superfluous here in suppport of the doctrine of the Trinity. Also the personality of Christ is gererally admitted. That Christ is a person distinct from the Father has been shown by your posts.

The important and vital question concerns whether or not he is God in the highest sense of the term. If it can be shown from the Scriptures that Christ is divine and equal with the Father the real objection to the truth of the trinity is answered. That Christ was truly human was denied by the ancient Gnostics, but today almost all classes allow he was a man. The truth must be determined from by the words of Scripture.

One of the methods by which the Scriptures teach the divinity of Christ is be calling him by the various names of deity. Certain terms are commonly used in the Bible to denote the Divine Being and these are used of Christ in the SAME SENSE. Nothing can be more reasonable than to understand that his being called God implies that he is God. No more positive statement is possible than is found in the opening verses of John's Gospel (who was the disciple that Jesus loved most) "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him. (John 1:1-3) Here Christ not only is given the divine title "God" but the direct and positive affirmation is made that he is God. That the term "Word" or as it appears in the Greek, "Logos," is used to denote Christ is certain from verse fourteen, where it is said, "The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us." The opening words of the text affirm the preexistence and eternity of Christ. It does not state that in the beginning of created things, the Logos began to be or WAS created, but it affirms that "in the beginning WAS the Word." Yes, I believe he was already existing when time and creation began, becaue, as the text further states, "All things were made by him; and without him was not anything that was made." This statement ABSOLUTELY excludes the possibility of his having been created himself, by affirming that he made all that was made; and surely he could not have made himself, for he could not have acted before he existed. Therefore he is eternal, and because eternal, divine.

When the apostle Thomas, who had doubted the Lord's resurrection, saw the Master in his resurrected form he exclamed, "My Lord and my God" (John 20:28). These words of Thomas could not have been just addresed to no one, else they would have been profane. But that they were not profane, and that they were true of him and not a mistaken idea of Thomas, is is evident from Jesus' answer of approval which immediately follows: "But wnto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever" (Heb. 1:8) I think here the writer is endeavoring to show that Christ is superior to the angels, and therefore he quotes these words from the OT in which he is called God. "God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the World, received up into glory" (1 Tim. 3:16) This verse is trun only of Christ, not of the Father. Therefore Christ is here called God. "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder; and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, the everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace" (Isa. 9:6)

The ascription to Christ of the divine title "God" in the two next texts I believe is so clear that no comment is neccessary. "Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he [God] hath purchased wiwth his own blood" (Acts 20:28) Here it is said that the church is purchased with the blood of God. Therefore Christ is called God. "Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all. God blessed for ever" [Rom 9:5] This verse first affirms that Christ, as to his human nature, is descended from israel, but in antithesis to the words, According to the flesh" the Apostle says he is "over all," or the Supremen Being, and "God," who is "blessed forever." This is a clear affirmation that Christ is God, which was written to show that Jesus was not merely human.

Christ is called Jehovah- the name "Jehovah" is the highest and most distinctive name of the true God. It represents God as being the self-existing One. It is the name of himself God gave to Moses at the burning bush, and is commonly translated "Lord" in the English Authorized Version, but in the Revised Version is rendered "Jehovah." "And God spake unto Moses and said unto him, I am the Lord; and I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name Jehovah was I not known to them." [Exod. 6:2-3]. It is an appropriate name for the Deiy in that is expresses his attributes of eternity and immutability. But this name is used, not only of the Father, but also of Christ, showing he is divine in the highest sense.
"Behold, the days come, saith Jehovah, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and he shall reign as king and deal wisely, and shall execute justice and righteousness in the land. In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely; and this is his name whereby he sall be called: Jehovah our righteousness" [Jer. 23:5-6] Certainly this righteous Branch of David who was to save God's people and who was to be their righteousness can be no other than Christ...........And he was callled JEHOVAH.

"Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, before Abraham was, I am." [John 8:58] I believe Christ uses "I am" to show the Jews that he was not only fifty years old, which they denied; that he had not only seen Abraham, which they questioned; but that he is eternal.

"Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and today, and forever" [Heb. 13:8]. No language could more clearly affirm the unchangeableness of Christ. He is immutable as is the Father in the perfection of his nature and divine personality.

"And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teasch all nations.....and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen" [Matt.28:18-20]. He would be with his disciples to assist them wherever they went. This implies omnipresence on the part of Jesus.

"Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee" [John 21:17] "Now we are sure that thou knowest all things" [John 16:30] He is frequently spoken of as "perceiving the thoughts" of persons and as "knowing what is in man" Also Jesus said. "As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the father" [John 10:15] Only an omniscient being could possibly know the infinite Father as that omniscient Father knows him.

Omnipotence That Christ was possed of the attribute of almightiness is evident from the miraculous works of power recorded of him.

As I tried to show here, Christ has all the attributes of God, therefore he is God.

Very good thread!

Peace to you
Grandma



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 01:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Grandma
 


The ascription to Christ of the divine title "God" in the two next texts I believe is so clear that no comment is necessary. "Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he [God] hath purchased with his own blood" (Acts 20:28) Here it is said that the church is purchased with the blood of God. Therefore Christ is called God. "Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all. God blessed for ever" [Rom 9:5] This verse first affirms that Christ, as to his human nature, is descended from Israel, but in antithesis to the words, According to the flesh" the Apostle says he is "over all," or the Supreme Being, and "God," who is "blessed forever." This is a clear affirmation that Christ is God, which was written to show that Jesus was not merely human.
This is a new one to me, as an argument of the equivalency of "Jesus" with "God". It seems to me as an ambiguous statement and comes from a historian who at some point in his life had witness Paul saying this and eventually writing it down. Besides that, it may be somewhat difficult to interpret what he meant in the original language or how that was then changed to the type of language in which it was written down.
It may be instructive to look to the old Bible scholars who were well founded in the true faith of Jesus:

from the Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary:
to feed the church of God-or, "the Church of the Lord." Which of these two readings of the text is the true one, is a question which has divided the best critics. The evidence of manuscripts preponderates in favor of "THE Lord"; some of the most ancient Versions, though not all, so read; and Athanasius, the great champion of the supreme Divinity of Christ early in the fourth century, says the expression "Church of God" is unknown to the Scriptures. Which reading, then, does the internal evidence favor? As "Church of God" occurs nine times elsewhere in Paul's writings, and "Church of the Lord" nowhere, the probability, it is said, is that he used his wonted phraseology here also. But if he did, it is extremely difficult to see how so many early transcribers should have altered it into the quite unusual phrase, "Church of the Lord"; whereas, if the apostle did use this latter expression, and the historian wrote it so accordingly, it is easy to see how transcribers might, from being so accustomed to the usual phrase, write it "Church of God." On the whole, therefore, we accept the second reading as most probably the true one. But see what follows.

which he hath purchased-"made His own," "acquired."

with his own blood-"His own" is emphatic: "That glorified Lord who from the right hand of power in the heavens is gathering and ruling the Church, and by His Spirit, through human agency, hath set you over it, cannot be indifferent to its welfare in your hands, seeing He hath given for it His own most precious blood, thus making it His own by the dearest of all ties." The transcendent sacredness of the Church of Christ is thus made to rest on the dignity of its Lord and the consequent preciousness of that blood which He shed for it. And as the sacrificial atoning character of Christ's death is here plainly expressed, so His supreme dignity is implied as clearly by the second reading as it is expressed by the first. What a motive to pastoral fidelity is here furnished!
I think this excerpt on the topic has merit to say that this Bible passage was not intended to detract from Jesus by taking away the credit for his sacrifice and the validity of his Lordship.
This whole topic brings to mind something about knowing who God is. Moses and Aaron were speaking up in Egypt, and then in Sinai about God and what He was about and giving demonstration concerning His power. Then God spoke up for Himself within the hearing of the Israelites, so you would think that they knew something about God. They went right ahead and worshiped the golden calf despite that. Their problem was not that they did not know who God was but that they lacked faith.
God can be something very nebulous and out of focus and an unknown quantity because He is so far removed from us. Jesus had as one of his titles, "God With Us". He brought the idea of what God was into sharp focus by reflecting the character of God in a way that brings us understanding. He wanted to take our gaze and redirect it to the One he was pointing to so we could see something to have faith in. He says, "Though you do not see God directly, you see His hand at work and you hear His voice". How did Jesus know so much about God to speak with such authority? There was within him that knowledge and understanding that has to have been from first hand experience. Did Jesus have to be "God" to be that familiar with Him and to have been able to exist before there was an existence? There is a profound intimacy evident here, but I have to think that it exists at a level that is incomprehensible to grasp at a purely material level.
Jesus said, "Glorify me like I was before, when I existed with you in that place where you dwell." That glory was what brought about the ability of the Spirit to be given freely to ordinary men by believing in him. We do not need the golden calf to worship because Jesus was able to bring about a reality to the concept of God and we can focus on Him and look away from this world.


[edit on 23-1-2009 by jmdewey60]



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 02:13 PM
link   
very well put together, generally i agree. jesus and his father are one in that they are in harmony yet are 2 wholly distinct individuals

1 cor 8:[6] But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom (or from whom) are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom (or through whom) are all things, and we by him.

however, jesus is not equal to god. infact he stated the opposite on several occasions, instead he was god´s servant.

(god being greater than jesus)
john 14:[28] Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.

(jesus being god´s servant)
john 5:[19] Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.
john 6:[38] For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
john 7:[16] Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.
*apostles agreed that jesus was god´s servant (acts 4:30)

even when jesus was dying, he acknowledged his father´s authority over him
luke 22:[42] Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.

jesus, unlike god has limited knowledge.
mark 13:[32] But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.
heb 5:[8] Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
rev 1:[1] The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him,...

jesus was created. (col 1:15; rev 3:14) in this respect jesus could be called the ¨only-begotten¨ son of god (john 1:14; 3:16, 18; 1 john 4:9)

so while jesus was and is in a lofty position, second only to god, he is still second.


Originally posted by Locoman8
And Jesus did this. As Paul described it: "He, who had always been God by nature, did not cling to his privileges as God's equal, but stripped himself of every advantage by consenting to be a slave by nature and being born a man. And, plainly seen as a human being, he humbled himself by living a life of utter obedience, to the point of death, and the death he died was the death of a common criminal" (Philippians 2:6-8, New Testament in Modern English).


rendering ¨ουχ αρπαγμον ηγησατο το ειναι ισα θεω¨ as ¨did not cling to his privileges as God's equal¨ is probably the single worst translation job i have ever seen. lol

¨did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped,¨ would probably be a closer rendering.


Jesus could die. Jesus could experience human emotion. Jesus could feel hunger and pain. He could agonize at the prospect of pain and death. Yes, God could die. But only if He were to become a physical human being. This He did. And who was He? He was the same person He had always been, even having memories of His past eternity with the Father.


GOD cannot die. (hab 1:[12b] Art thou not from everlasting, O LORD my God, mine Holy One? ...

however jesus (who was a god) could.

so can satan, the ¨god of this world¨

so once again locoman we agree and yet disagree lol



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join