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.

 

Why Christ was NOT Yahweh of the Old testament

page: 7
1
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 09:52 AM
link   
-
37. "And the Father who authorized me testified on my behalf. You
neither hear his voice, nor recognize his presence*.
--

I think you are changing the message a little bit to much,
God was not seen by his aposteles at THAT time,
they didn't see god in jesus as glorified,
just as religion will not see it in the angels of this time,
and could not see his presence manifested through
the son of man who is all prophets,
at that time jesus.

After glorification jesus was an angel , god manifested in a human,
not by being jesus, but by being in salvation,
salvation means free, means one with gods will as one,
it is the father, but on his own conditions, in this world,
under the conditions of being human but from free will out.
God can blind himself as much he wants to do himself.
that is what glorification in this world still means.




[edit on 20-10-2009 by pasttheclouds]




posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 10:13 AM
link   
Just as adam is in all of us,
John is too,
and elijah is the result.

When john the baptist proclaimed the coming of the son of man,
he was still the woman of his duality.
None was ever bigger born out of woman then John,
because John is the prince, Michael, the human son in you
who will give birth to the son of man, which means glorified, which is elijah.

Glorified is the manifestation that was before, and still comes,
it is oneness that you grow in yourself by your duality,
the man is spirit, the woman created.
By leading the woman (which means bringing under authorisation)
you make her one with the man (adam) in you,
and grow the son, the kingdom in you.
The first son that comes out is a prince, it is a repenting
being in you that dies every day unto itself to bring forth
the king, the glorified being, a new son which is one
with the father.

The bible is simple, but difficult to understand,
there is a difference between being a son of god,
which we all are, and can grow,
and becoming the son of man,
which is god himself as elohim.

But the symbols are also played out in history by
acting roles. As Jesus was ELijah, also The last time
prophet will be elijah, and the sons will be john,
that will proclaim the REAL gospel of love, not of revenge,
and they also will become elijah, which is
the new jerusalem where god's name is written on all beings.

Glorification means the full seal of the prophet,
just as the quran describes, Mohammed was not the last
prophet, the last prophet is the glorified being,
which always was the only prophet, because it
is god.

It is not complicated, but before it truth can be seen,
the veil has to be broken by carrying cross.
That's why delusion is over the world,
so people can carry cross and fullfill their choice,
as growing son or ignorance.



[edit on 20-10-2009 by pasttheclouds]



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 10:22 AM
link   
Let's revisit John 1:1-2


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

2 The same was in the beginning with God.


Let's re-read it using the mental double think of Ronald Weinland.

1 In the beginning was the Mind of God, and the Mind of God was with God, and the Mind of God was God.

2 The same was in the beginning with God.
(so that...repeating verse 1)

In the beginning was the God, and the God was with Mind of God, and the God was Mind of God.

Such utter lunacy. This is simply a twisted version of the Trinity doctrine where you have The mind of God as one God, and God as another God both residing in the same body. Such nonsense.



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 10:26 AM
link   
it's because it is wrong translated,
the word is what ?
what is god ? truth yes ?
truth is all beliefsystems ?
in other words god exsists out of all beliefs, as one.

the truth is the living word, because truth as absolute is free.

our history is a 'thing', time is a belief,
it always exsists in god, at the same time.
we live through it as beings, reflection.
the manifestation always was, always will be,
even as this world is the pit of nothingness, it will not
be remembered where god is one.

1. In the beginning [of creation]
there was the Manifestation*;
And that Manifestation was with God;
and God was [the embodiment of] that Manifestation.
2. This was in the beginning with God.
3. Everything was within his power*,
[otherwise] nothing would ever exist.*
4. Through him [there] was Life*
and Life became the spark* of humanity
5. And that [ensuing] fire* lights the darkness
and darkness does not overshadow it.



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 10:35 AM
link   
the bible explain the paradox of truth,
the paradox of logic...

religions see their books as bringing one sided truth,
when truth has 2 sides integrated as one.

So the problem of religion is that they first
have to see contradictions before they can
make the two sides of god as one,
something that is simple and explainable.

Paradox, like a form of an '8'
that's how truth is.
but still it is one.

In other words, religion didn't pass the bridge
of honesty. Honesty will bring up contradictions,
and by avoiding this ignorance, you will
be able to see god's truth as one.

Why would there come an elijah ?
to build a literal temple,
or to destroy that what is not equal.
In God there is no temple anymore,
only a promised city,where all are one.
Just as Daniel promised. Misunderstood to be the antichrist
when it is the prince, the sons to come, the moon.



[edit on 20-10-2009 by pasttheclouds]



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by SirPaulMuaddib
You do realize, that Ronald Weinland is simply teaching a perverted version of the Trinity doctrine don't you? If "The Word" is the revelatory thought of God and was God, then this is simply a perverted version of the Trinity doctrine




(re Heb 1:1)
Yes this verse states quite plainly that God the Father spoke to the prophets of the old testament, and only in the days of the Apostles spoke through his Son.


You simply have not read the verse. You are reading the verse through a filter. If you had read the verse you would have recognized something important.

It DOES NOT SAY God spoke to either the fathers OR the prophets.
It says he spoke to the fathers THROUGH(by) the prophets.
There is a monumental difference.

Heb 1:1 God, who at many times and in many ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets,




No there isn't, He spoke to the fathers by the prophets. How many times doe the prophets say to the fathers, through either word or writting :"thus says the lord" or "the word of the lord came to me".



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by SirPaulMuaddib_2
Let's revisit John 1:1-2


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

2 The same was in the beginning with God.


Let's re-read it using the mental double think of Ronald Weinland.

1 In the beginning was the Mind of God, and the Mind of God was with God, and the Mind of God was God.

2 The same was in the beginning with God.
(so that...repeating verse 1)

Well doesn't it repeat what you believe also?


In the beginning was the God, and the God was with Mind of God, and the God was Mind of God.

Such utter lunacy. This is simply a twisted version of the Trinity doctrine where you have The mind of God as one God, and God as another God both residing in the same body. Such nonsense.


No, that is how you are interpreting my belief. I believe nothing of the sort. I believe the mind of God revealing God because the mind of God is God. The word "with" doesn't exactly mean this. Your belief has more ringing of the trinity, my belief says God was one and only one, until the resurrection of his son to eternal life. Your belief is a trinity minus one. Why won't you guys address why Paul stated that it wasn't Christ who glorified himself, but that it was the one speaking in the old testament who did this?


[edit on 20/10/09 by doctorex]



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 06:03 PM
link   
Post the specific verse you are referring too.



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 06:06 PM
link   
reply to post by SirPaulMuaddib
 


I have, numerous times during this thread alone.



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 06:30 PM
link   


HEBREWS 5:5 So also Christ glorified not himself to be made a high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, today have I begotten thee.

The above scripture plainly states that Christ did not glorify himself, but that he was glorified by YAHWEH!....proving once again that Christ was NOT Yahweh.


I see no problem with verse Hebrews 5:5.

For that matter, if you just re-read it, it's not speaking about being glorified by either the Father or Himself. If you just read the plain english, it says Christ did not glorify himself. That is all the verse states. In otherwords he was always humble. Of course glorification did come later on, and this is mentioned elsewhere, but in this verse it just says he didn't glorify himself....you know like Ronald Weinland did, when he claimed and appropriated the title of Prophet.

(even Christ did not do that see his answer to John the Baptist's question)

[edit on 20-10-2009 by SirPaulMuaddib]



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 07:34 PM
link   
It should be noted, that if Christ was just a man (albeit a special man), that He could only pay the penalty for one other human being.

The only one who could pay the penalty for all mankind, is if that being's worth was greater than mankind. This is only possible if their Creator was the one that was sacrificed.



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 07:40 PM
link   
God is one, it means at the end of paradise, his cross will be one too,
it means all will carry the same value.

The parable paying the servants shows this,
they all get the same salary, value even when they started
working at different times. It doesn't mean the crosses are different
it means they are one... the price of salvation is becoming one,
(with christ,) which means with god himself.

it means all crosses are paid by god. and this is what jesus teached the world.
take up YOUR cross. How later you start how more you will have to balance it out
later...now or in paradise...this is the real meaning of the last will be first, the first will be last.

After full glorification it is god who takes an extra cross, glorification means oneness, jesus as human jesus died at the moment of glorification. Glorification started before the literal cross. Jesus allready took a human cross before the literal cross.

[edit on 20-10-2009 by pasttheclouds]



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 10:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by SirPaulMuaddib


HEBREWS 5:5 So also Christ glorified not himself to be made a high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, today have I begotten thee.

The above scripture plainly states that Christ did not glorify himself, but that he was glorified by YAHWEH!....proving once again that Christ was NOT Yahweh.


I see no problem with verse Hebrews 5:5.

For that matter, if you just re-read it, it's not speaking about being glorified by either the Father or Himself. If you just read the plain english, it says Christ did not glorify himself. That is all the verse states



no it doesn't, continue the context, it continues by saying that he glorified not himself, but he that said unto him "Thou art my Son, today have I begotten thee", meaning the one who said this glorified him. It even continues this with the next verse...


6 As he saith also in another place, Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.

Who said both of these quotes? Yahweh.



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 10:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by SirPaulMuaddib
It should be noted, that if Christ was just a man (albeit a special man), that He could only pay the penalty for one other human being.

The only one who could pay the penalty for all mankind, is if that being's worth was greater than mankind. This is only possible if their Creator was the one that was sacrificed.



No, he was the passover, completely unblemished. He didn't die for his own sins.

[edit on 20/10/09 by doctorex]



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 08:53 AM
link   
reply to post by doctorex
 




You may say, oh that time it was God the Father speaking, but other times it was Christ, but that only confuses things, since how do you know who is speaking in what instance if both were Yahweh (and God says he is not the author of confusion) and that also doesn't clear up why Paul also stated that it was God the Father who spoke to the Prophets of the old testament, not Christ.



You must understand that interpreting Jesus as the Word of God simply implys that He's the spokesperson of the Father or the Family of God. So, the Father spoke through the prophets to the fathers of Israel is just as true saying Christ was the one speaking to the prophets. Christ spoke on behalf of the father. Analogy: "The White House released this statement today..." when in fact it was Robert Gibbs who spoke the words.



posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 12:23 AM
link   

Posted by Locoman8
You must understand that interpreting Jesus as the Word of God simply implys that He's the spokesperson of the Father or the Family of God. So, the Father spoke through the prophets to the fathers of Israel is just as true saying Christ was the one speaking to the prophets.


No it isn't, because that's not what Hebrews 1:1-2 says. It says God the Father spoke to the prophets, and it wasn't until the days of the Apostles that God began speaking through Christ. The word logos does not mean spokesman, the scriptures say the prophets were his spokesmen. John 1 says Christ was the word of God made flesh. Also Speaking of Christ Peter said.....

1Peter 1:20 Who verily was foreordained (proginosko) before the foundation of the world, but was manifest (phaneroo) in these last times for you,

G4267 - proginosko (prog-in-oce'-ko) : from 4253 and 1097; to know beforehand, i.e. foresee:--foreknow (ordain), know (before).

G5319 - phaneroo (fan-er-o'-o) : from 5318; to render apparent (literally or figuratively):--appear, manifestly declare, (make) manifest (forth), shew (self).

If Christ was around before the foundation of the world, why does scripture say that he was foreseen, foreknown, predestined, if he was already in pre-existence. That’s hardly God foreseeing something. And if he was around before the days of the Apostles, why was Peter saying he was only apparent, manifest, shown, declared, and appeared in their time? Remember, you believe that it was Christ who was declared, known to, shown to, apparent to the people during the days of the Old Testament, showing yet another contradiction in this belief.


Christ spoke on behalf of the father.


If you take your logic through to its logical conclusion (kind of hard though because it's rather circular), then let’s see what comes of it....

You say the one speaking in the Old Testament is not God the Father (which contradicts scripture (Heb 1:1-2) but was Christ. This contradicts scripture also, because Hebrews 5:5-6 says that Christ didn’t glorify himself, but it was the one who was speaking in the Old Testament. So you say "that's okay, because the one speaking in the Old Testament was Christ but he was simply speaking the words of the Father." So, now you say that what was spoken in the Old Testament now was not actually Christ’s words, he was just passing on the words of his Father, so what was written was actually the words of the Father. Well, let's look at what the Father had to say then....

ISAIAH 45:11 Thus saith the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker, Ask me of things to come concerning my sons, and concerning the work of my hands command ye me.
12 I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded.

So the Father says it was His hands that stretched forth the heavens, He created man, and Israel was the work of His hands, contradicting your belief that it was Christ who did this. Now you can’t turn around and say this was Christ saying this, because you’ve already told me he just passed on the words. Continuing.....

ISAIAH 45:5 I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me:
6 That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else.

So the Father said that there was no Elohim beside him, so where was Christ? And if you turn around again and say this was Christ speaking, then where was the Father. Either way, this person said he was Yahweh and there were none else, contradicting your belief that there were two Yahwehs. Some argue that this is only saying that God is speaking of worship here , which I disagree with, but still, then Christ is not worthy or worship, and therefore not Yahweh.


Analogy: "The White House released this statement today...” when in fact it was Robert Gibbs who spoke the words.


If this is what you believe, then you are confined to the fact that what was said in the Old Testament was stated by God the Father, and simply passed on by Christ (again contradicting Heb 1:1-2), but at least that makes things less confusing (even though it also contradicts your earlier statements). So what else does the Father have to say in his released statements....

Isaiah 42:5 Thus saith God the LORD, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:

Isaiah 45:8 Drop down, ye heavens, from above, and let the skies pour down righteousness: let the earth open, and let them bring forth salvation, and let righteousness spring up together; I the LORD have created it.
9 Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands?

Isaiah 45:18 For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed (H3335- Yatsar) the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.

H3335 - yatsar (yaw-tsar) : probably identical with 3334 (through the squeezing into shape); ((compare 3331)); to mould into a form; especially as a potter; figuratively, to determine (i.e. form a resolution):--X earthen, fashion, form, frame, make(-r), potter, purpose.

If this is God the Father’s words, then he is telling you that he made you, he formed you, just like a potter, he created the universe, there is none else, and if you say that he has no hands (saying he got Christ to do it), than you are striving with him! (Isaiah 45:9)

Since we are on the topic of God the Father being the potter, notice what Isaiah had to say to Yahweh...

Isaiah 64:8 But now, O LORD, thou art our father; we are the clay, and thou our potter; and we all are the work of thy hand.

Isaiah says that Yahweh was our potter, that we are all the work of his hand, and most importantly of all, he said Yahweh was our Father, and what did Christ say....

John 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

Matthew 6:9 After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.

I know I’ve said this before, I guess I’m stubborn
, but this will be the last post I make on this topic. I’ve said all I need to say, I’ve shown the contradictions in the belief that Christ was the creator of the physical universe, I’ve shown the contradictions in scripture and circular logic behind the belief that God spoke through Christ in the days of the old testament. The belief that Christ has also eternally existed contradicts scripture, and it is a remnant of the trinity belief that some have still yet to shake off. When you understand this fact, scriptures will blast out at you like you’ve never seen before, and it’s all so simple, no convoluted arguments, no contradictions, just pure simplicity and beauty, and a greater thankfulness and understanding about just how awesome our Father is, not just some guy giving orders to get other to do his work . People say this belief takes away from the awesomeness of Christ, but it does just the opposite, it too gives you greater understanding and thankfulness about just how tough Christ’s sacrifice for us was, knowing what he was about to face and how faithful he was, and how perfect he was, even though we still don’t understand to its full magnitude.



posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 07:38 AM
link   
the christ was in pureness after a certain time.
glorification - literal cross/ time - ascended to father, it doesn't have to be another place, it means full glorification.

the torah-symbol-law has timeperiods for the birth of a son, to obtain pureness for both mother (created) as son (created+spirit). 7+33 days for birth of a boy child, on the eight day circumcided. only after the 40th day entrance into sanctuary.

jesus showed himslf 40 days, after glorification. (dogmatic thinking doesn't have timeperiods right)

when he ascended he was fully one, and that what is one exsisted before our human history.

outside the father there is no clay, god created himself from himself.
He is both potter as clay. That's why clay can choose to leave him,
by ignorance.



[edit on 22-10-2009 by pasttheclouds]



posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 12:03 PM
link   
reply to post by pasttheclouds
 

the christ was in pureness after a certain time.

Heretic.
When was Christ not in pureness?

1 John 3:3 And everyone who has this hope focused on him purifies himself, just as Jesus is pure).

Is pure.
Not, became pure.



[edit on 22-10-2009 by jmdewey60]



posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 12:54 PM
link   
you think truth comes where doubt is avoided ?
real doubt is ignoring doubt and is being hypocrite between honesty and security.
honesty can give doubt but still contains no doubt about god being truth (honesty) and not being able to lie...truth does not lie and is a virgin, honest.

it's better to give practical care then to study scriptures if you are not open
to go the whole entire way of finding god in it. because god does not give it
to who divides him.

even the archangel Michael, when he was disputing with the devil about the body of Moses, did not dare to bring a slanderous accusation against him, but said, "The Lord rebuke you!"

Jesus was the one who was said to be the heretic,
it wasn't jesus screaming this without explination,
question or mercy to others.

when jesus was a baby,child, or in the dessert,
he was in repentance, growth = reflection.
Just as all children are from god for this reason.
But he wasn't in absolute yet.

When jesus became glorified he died his lies,
it means that what was glorified was god himself,
that lived in his rememberance of jesus,
he owns all memories, and will live your memory,
if you take your cross of forgiveness and growth.

God is one, all in him is pure,
but there is another side of god, the inversion,
and there your lies live as a person,
and that is not pureness.
Even when jesus was destined,
he first lived as human in growth. not in sin, which is ignorance,
but as not one yet, even when he was.

religions play wordgames they don't understand.
The holy is not found by dividing, but by making equal.

I know, i can't speak well, just as Zechariah before
the son out of him that was born came to take over the shout.


My last struggle is to repent my anger towards those that
throw verses without mercy, to those that throw judgement
without pleading with god for mercy for all...if god allows me there,
i can show you my total empathy. I just can't yet,
i become angry by those that think god judges himself.
God is one, what is one forgives himself,
what chooses not to be one, condemns himself out of God.
I admit, i wrote enough. I wish all could see the love of god for all,
the god of israël is not the halfgod most of judaism,christianity or islam still see.
he is so much more.
One means all.

[edit on 22-10-2009 by pasttheclouds]



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by pasttheclouds
 
You seem to have a philosophy that puts everything else in subordination to it, including God and Jesus.
You don't see that as a problem?
I'm not saying that you are alone in that.
Everyone seems to have a favorite saying that they incorporate into themselves to where they think it is part of themselves.
That is idolatry.
If you thought you had a special knowledge of God, and it was something that became ingrained into your thinking, to where all other thoughts were affected by it, that's idolatry.
God is to be worshiped, not your personal information about God.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join