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.

 

You Are God!

page: 3
3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by texastig
 


Sorry, he answered them, saying ye are gods, not so-and-so that holds an office. I don't see a single thing about office-holders.

I know you Christians all have your own twists and turns on what every passage that is confusing to you must mean, by inserting your own words that aren't there, but Jesus understood what the OP was getting at. You don't.

"God" is a word. Your understanding does not go beyond words, apparently. Your understanding is very shallow.

[edit on 13-10-2009 by bsbray11]




posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
reply to post by texastig
 


Sorry, he answered them, saying ye are gods, not so-and-so that holds an office. I don't see a single thing about office-holders.

I know you Christians all have your own twists and turns on what every passage that is confusing to you must mean, by inserting your own words that aren't there, but Jesus understood what the OP was getting at. You don't.

"God" is a word. Your understanding does not go beyond words, apparently. Your understanding is very shallow.

[edit on 13-10-2009 by bsbray11]


You can't have God saying one thing and then Jesus contradicting God.
It stands to reason that the word doesn't mean "God" but "gods", seated as judges in an office.
That's why there's a little "g" and that's not shallow.
Have you studied the Jewish history back then?

You have to stay in context in which you didn't.

Are you a unbeliever or a believer in Christ?


[edit on 10/13/2009 by texastig]



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by texastig
You can't have God saying one thing and then Jesus contradicting God.


You mean you can't.

I realize the truth: that the book we are talking about was written by various men, with various understandings of the reality around them.


It stands to reason that the word doesn't mean "God" but "gods", seated as judges in an office.


So then is Jesus saying he is just the son of someone in office?
Is that what he's talking about???


Are you a unbeliever or a believer in Christ?


I don't "believe," I understand.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by texastig
You can't have God saying one thing and then Jesus contradicting God.


You mean you can't.

I realize the truth: that the book we are talking about was written by various men, with various understandings of the reality around them.


It stands to reason that the word doesn't mean "God" but "gods", seated as judges in an office.


So then is Jesus saying he is just the son of someone in office?
Is that what he's talking about???


Are you a unbeliever or a believer in Christ?


I don't "believe," I understand.


The Jews accepted the statement from their own law that described God's appointed judges among his people as "gods" (Psa. 82:6). Jesus reminds his opponents of this (it is significant to note that he says the book of Psalms belonged to their "law" (cf. Rom. 3:19, 10-18). Jesus stated what his Jewish opponents conceded. Namely, that it stood written in the law (i.e., it was firmly established by the binding nature of God's law) that God said of men "Ye are gods" (John 10:34-35). Then, Jesus affirmed the authoritative force of Scripture by saying, "The scripture cannot be broken" (John 10:35). Inspired scripture cannot be deprived of its binding authority by the whims of men. All individuals are obligated to harmonize their beliefs and practices to the authority of God's writings (2 Tim. 3:16-17; 1 Cor. 14:37; Col. 3:17).

Not only did the Jews reject the evidence of Jesus' works, in their charge of blasphemy they also failed to respect the authority of Scripture. In Psalms 82:6, the judges of Israel were called "gods" because of their representative position of authority and responsibility among the people. These judges were God's representatives, charged with executing fair and impartial judgments in Israel (82:2-4). To go before the judges was to go before God (cf. Exod. 21:6; 22:8-9, 28), for they were charged with rendering God's judgments (Dent, 1:16-17), The 82nd Psalm depicts God rebuking these "gods" (the unjust judges) for their corruption of justice. Because they failed to judge righteously, God would now judge them (82: 1, 7-8). Even so, because of their God-given position of power, the psalmist called the unrighteous judges "gods." (Please note, these "gods" are on the earth judging among the poor, fatherless and needy).

The above comes from:
www.watchmanmag.com...

[edit on 10/13/2009 by texastig]



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 07:30 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Hmmmmm,.. interesting. Apparently you are ignorant to the First Law of Thermodynamics:

"The law of conservation of energy states that the total amount of energy in a closed system remains constant. A consequence of this law is that energy cannot be created nor destroyed. The only thing that can happen with energy in a closed system is that it can change form, for instance kinetic energy can become thermal energy."



Hummmm...... Geeeze, Perhaps I was wrong when I said YOU create matter and energy every time YOU think a thought. Maybe it would be better if I had said, "I create matter and energy matter every time I think a thought"

It was a bit out of line for me to suggest you to create anything, or to even think for that matter.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 08:16 PM
link   
reply to post by useless eaters
 


Which part of; "A consequence of this law is that energy cannot be created nor destroyed." is beyond your level of comprehension?

Do you need a link to the definition of cannot?



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by psusa2
 


“I corrected you because you were wrong. You don't like it? Then get your references straight.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why the antagonism?

I admitted at the start of this thread I did not have the exact the exact reference. You are boasting about correcting me yet I don’t see where you have, please show me.

__________________________________________________________
“ One way to do that is to read what His enemies had to say. The Babylonian Talmud is a good source for that.”
____________________________________________________________
Please stay on topic. I am not even sure “he” ever existed. This thread is not going to be hijacked into an endless discussion of “his” alleged existence.


_------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“How is that different from what animals do?

You don't create anything that hasn't already been created. All you can do is modify the creation to suit your needs. Animals can do as much.”
_______________________________________________________________
The mechanics is the same, regardless of if we are talking humans, animals, or even plants!

I don’t modify anything to suit my needs. I don’t have to! When I think a thought, I “create” and since the thought is totally new and was not borrowed from something already created, it qualifies as a creation. I cannot make it any more simpler than this.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“You're mad because I used the word "crock"? I thought I was treating you with kid gloves.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Once again, this thread is not going to be used as a podium for you to dramatize your intolerance for anything outside your box. If you have a legitimate question relating to this thread, I will try to answer it. If you’re here for other reasons, you will do well to just leave.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


"Which part of; "A consequence of this law is that energy cannot be created nor destroyed." is beyond your level of comprehension?

Do you need a link to the definition of cannot?"


Listen up! Last time, I am not going to re-answer your question. There is nothing wrong with my "comprehension" or anything else for that matter. I have already answered your question, spamming it will not make me answer it differently.

You are NOT going to disrupt this thread because it doesn't agree with your line of thinking.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by texastig

Originally posted by bsbray11
Here is "Jesus" speaking:


John 10

33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?


Since we know that there cannot be another God from Isaiah, the passage in John 10:34 looks like a contradiction to it but it isn't.
The judges of Psalm 82 were called "gods" because in their office they determined the fate of other men. Also, in Exodus 21:6 and 22:8-9, God calls earthly judges "gods."
Jesus is saying "If God gives these unjust judges the title ‘gods’ because of their office, why do you consider it blasphemy that I call Myself the ‘Son of God’ in light of the testimony of Me and My works?"

That takes care of that contradiction and it proves that humans cannot become a God.


What Judges of Psalm 82?



Psalm 82

1God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.

2How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah.

3Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy.

4Deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hand of the wicked.

5They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course.

6I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.

7But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.

8Arise, O God, judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all nations.



It's not talking about a position of "judges" at all. Not even close. It's saying how long will you make bad judgments and accept the wicked.

No title, no offices, nothing like that. You just completely and 100% just made up your response to fit your pre-existing beliefs, and completely changed what is said.

What is shown in your response is you prove Psalm 82. You have accepted the wicked, you have accepted what people tell you, you have accepted church doctrine, and thus you do not understand. You are fatherless - not realizing the father within you, and why it is said "ye are gods", and you walk in darkness.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 10:26 PM
link   
reply to post by useless eaters
 


'Question'?? What question? I didn't ask you a question in our earlier posts, so how did you answer my question?? I made a STATEMENT of fact concerning the inability to create energy and matter, to which you claimed was not true. to which I posted the First law of Thermodynamics which prove your claim invalid.

And that's why you are ignorant to such, someone claimed they were the Creator, i.e. God, the only deity in the universe who is capable of Creating time, matter, and energy, HGod did so in Genesis with a single spoken sentence.. "Let there be..". Only God can violate the First Law of Thermodynamics, not you, not I, not anyone else. We and every other person in the universe are under said laws of Physics, not superior to them.

Yet he "claimed" he created energy when he thought something in his mind, I proved this impossible. He did not "create" energy as he states, that's impossible as the First law clearly states. So therefore his brain simply transferred energy already present from one part of his brain to another.

Thus, this proves my original assertion that "we are the creation, not the Creator." Your inability to grasp this does not make it false.

Thanks for your imput though.




:bnghd:

[edit on 13-10-2009 by NOTurTypical]



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 07:48 AM
link   
reply to post by useless eaters
 


Hmmm. Let's go through this line by line, post by post, shall we?

You said:




“I corrected you because you were wrong. You don't like it? Then get your references straight.” --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why the antagonism? I admitted at the start of this thread I did not have the exact the exact reference. You are boasting about correcting me yet I don’t see where you have, please show me.


There is no antagonism. If there was, believe me, you'd know it.

You said man was created a little lower than angels. I showed scripture that shows Jesus was. I was right, you were wrong, deal with it and learn from it.



You show me your so called jesus did all those things.


I provided you with an answer. It's not the only answer, but it's the best one I can think of, off hand. If you want to balance what one group says, look at what the antagonists say. They accuse him of sorcery. They know he did these things, but they have to supply an answer as to how He did them.

But I guess you didn't like my answer. That's not my problem, unless I wasn't clear.



“ One way to do that is to read what His enemies had to say. The Babylonian Talmud is a good source for that.” ____________________________________________________________ Please stay on topic. I am not even sure “he” ever existed. This thread is not going to be hijacked into an endless discussion of “his” alleged existence.


If you're not sure, that's fine. I'm powerless to convince you.




How is that different from what animals do? You don't create anything that hasn't already been created. All you can do is modify the creation to suit your needs. Animals can do as much.” _______________________________________________________________
The mechanics is the same, regardless of if we are talking humans, animals, or even plants! I don’t modify anything to suit my needs. I don’t have to! When I think a thought, I “create” and since the thought is totally new and was not borrowed from something already created, it qualifies as a creation. I cannot make it any more simpler than this.


OK, lay around all day, stay and bed and "create". See how far that gets you.

It is not "totally new" and it is "borrowed from something already created". Unless you imagine things that are so off the wall that your sanity is in question, but even then you are modifying an existing (image) creation. The only thing you can "create" are images, but those images already exist. You aren't creating something out of nothing, you are just modifying an existing (image) creation.




“You're mad because I used the word "crock"? I thought I was treating you with kid gloves.” -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Once again, this thread is not going to be used as a podium for you to dramatize your intolerance for anything outside your box. If you have a legitimate question relating to this thread, I will try to answer it. If you’re here for other reasons, you will do well to just leave.


I'm not the one being "intolerant" here.

You are the one that made an assertion and it is up to you to back it up. Your whining doesn't help your case any.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 08:00 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Yeah. We're coming at this from different angles, but you are right.

In fact, your angle might be better than mine, since it involves actual science. That seems to be the only thing they respect. Unless, of course, it goes against what they believe... Ironic, huh?



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 08:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by useless eaters
 


'Question'?? What question? I didn't ask you a question in our earlier posts, so how did you answer my question?? I made a STATEMENT of fact concerning the inability to create energy and matter, to which you claimed was not true. to which I posted the First law of Thermodynamics which prove your claim invalid.

And that's why you are ignorant to such, someone claimed they were the Creator, i.e. God, the only deity in the universe who is capable of Creating time, matter, and energy, HGod did so in Genesis with a single spoken sentence.. "Let there be..". Only God can violate the First Law of Thermodynamics, not you, not I, not anyone else. We and every other person in the universe are under said laws of Physics, not superior to them.

Yet he "claimed" he created energy when he thought something in his mind, I proved this impossible. He did not "create" energy as he states, that's impossible as the First law clearly states. So therefore his brain simply transferred energy already present from one part of his brain to another.

Thus, this proves my original assertion that "we are the creation, not the Creator." Your inability to grasp this does not make it false.

Thanks for your imput though.




:bnghd:

[edit on 13-10-2009 by NOTurTypical]



Hell, maybe your right, maybe you cannot create anything. Maybe you just use other thoughts recycled from others that think, I guess that’s what your trying to tell me. If you feel that strongly about, who am I to argue with you?



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 09:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by badmedia
What Judges of Psalm 82?


Psalm 82:6

What I don't understand about you is this. Your unbeliever and your trying to convince a believer that he's wrong when you don't even believe or even know Jewish history.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by psusa2
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Yeah. We're coming at this from different angles, but you are right.

In fact, your angle might be better than mine, since it involves actual science. That seems to be the only thing they respect. Unless, of course, it goes against what they believe... Ironic, huh?




The conservation of energy (the idea that matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed, in a closed system) I guess is what you are talking about. does have it's rightful place in physics. So, does the concept of no two energies or objects can occupy the same space. Every energy or object holds a space and time unique and exclusive to that particular energy or object. The energy or object has a source point, a point of origin. This point of origin Called, "god", "the prime mover, unmoved", as well as other names, extends from source point to effect point (create, perceive) the action of doing this creates the space. And the measurement of this distance (from source to effect) is what we time.

This ability to create belongs exclusively to an individual. When I say "create" I mean as it is when formed in the mind when it is subjective then formed in the objective which is what we call "reality".

This right belongs exclusively to an individual, No group has ever created anything. All a group can do is manufacture what is created by the individual. This is manifest in the physical universe by every energy or object having it’s own unique space and time, because it comes from an individual, which as in itself unique to the physical universe.

So, the physical universe as awesome as it is, is reducible down to matter, energy, space, and time. More correctly, space, time, and energy because all matter is ,is energy condensed.

The conservation of energy has it’s rightful place as long as we postulate a closed system as the definition correctly explains. But to say energy cannot be created or destroyed is incorrect as everything in this physical universe has a beginning and an end . That’s why it is called a finite rather than an infinite universe.

The individual creates the components of the universe when he thinks a thought. It is real and can be measured. This measurement is of course microscopic but real none the less.

Once again, this concept is not new and is as old as man. Thoughts contain matter space and time. Some thoughts have more mass than others. Such as those thoughts dealing with regret. Regret is the emotion of sin.. Something ancient peoples knew all to well. The Egyptians for example, in their famous, book of the dead, shows the deceased’s soul being placed on a balanced scale with a feather on the opposite end. If the soul was found to be heavier than the feather, he was subject to the laws of return (reincarnation). If his soul was as light as a feather, he was granted heaven instead. This process was called “Maat” a word meaning truth, or, living in an optimum manner.

The individual does create and is accountable for what he creates. And it can be measured. This is where the idea of a “heavy heart” comes from.

There are several cults prevalent in our society who are all to willing to point out man is evil man is, and they even say, that man because he was born from a woman in inherently evil because of the sins of Adam. Meaning you have no choice in the matter from birth you are evil. This stupid piece of philosophy has justified more killing and mistreatment of mankind than any other. It’s OK to murder and plunder mankind with no fear of consequences because some Holy book says so. Because something called “god” says it’s OK . What you are doing is making man responsible without allow him to be responsible. This means you hate mankind

What really bugs the hell out of me is there are some who can find nothing at all wrong with the idea that man is basically evil because of some fictitious as&ho#e named adam. Therefore Man should be controlled used and subjugated, even murdered. They see nothing at all wrong with this “philosophy” at all. But when it comes to the formally common idea that man is god or came from God or is part of god, the screeching , lying name calling , hysteria begins. And I am sure if they could they would hag me or burn me alive. All because I am willing to view man at a higher level than they. I am not the one who holds man in contempt, you are. I am not the one who fears man, you do. That’s why I wish there really were a place called “hell”.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by texastig
Psalm 82:6

What I don't understand about you is this. Your unbeliever and your trying to convince a believer that he's wrong when you don't even believe or even know Jewish history.


You completely avoided and did not answer the question or address the points.

But tell me this - How can you claim to be a believer, when you don't even understand what it is you claim to believe. To the point where you are simply making things up in response to make the bible fit your own views.

Bottom line is this - I showed you where Jesus quoted the same exact verse in response saying the same things.




[edit on 10/14/2009 by badmedia]



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by useless eaters
 



Most of that I can agree with, in a way, but with some major differences in a few points you try to make. I wont address everything I disagree with though.

When you say "What you are doing is making man responsible without allow him to be responsible. This means you hate mankind" then you make a big mistake when you say that this is what I believe, You don't know how wrong you are.

It's the difference between accountability and responsibility.

You and I are accountable for our actions. We know what is right and what is wrong. But as a Christian, I know that I am not responsible for being created weak, in the exact same way everyone else was created weak. We are weak because we know what is right, but we don't do it. You've heard the saying "the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak"? It's absolutely true.

We were made this way. I can prove that through scripture, but if you don't value that then there is no point. But proving it by using scriptures totally disproves what the "churches" are teaching.

I don't "hate mankind". There really is no reason for hating mankind. What I hate is people lording it over me. They are constantly butting in where they are not welcome. It's not the common everyday people that do this, but the "leaders" and their idiotic blind but oh-so-wise (!) lackeys. Everyone else just wants to be left alone to live out their lives in peace, no matter what religious beliefs they hold, or no religious beliefs.

Another thing I hate is people using religion as a means of getting personal power and wealth. Just turn on the boob tube and watch them begging for more money. Yeah, I hate THEM. I despise them more than words can express.

It's not the atheists I hate. It's the "christian leaders" that know better that I hate.



Meaning you have no choice in the matter from birth you are evil. This stupid piece of philosophy has justified more killing and mistreatment of mankind than any other.


I agree with that, with a small addition. I'd add "by those in power" after the word "mankind".

The theologians know better. They really do. Theology is just the study of how to twist and add to / delete scriptures to the point that they are meaningless. They always do this to reach a predetermined conclusion, and that conclusion is "how will this make me richer and give me more power?



All because I am willing to view man at a higher level than they.


I think you are trying to elevate man to a position that is not deserved.
It;s one thing to say that "we are of God", and quite another to say that "we are God".



I am not the one who holds man in contempt, you are. I am not the one who fears man, you do.


Nope. Neither one is right.

Oh heck, I'll just post this one scripture that proves my point about us being made weak, for a reason. There's others, but this is a good one:

Romans 8:20
For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,


[edit on 14-10-2009 by psusa2]



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by badmedia

Originally posted by texastig
Psalm 82:6

What I don't understand about you is this. Your unbeliever and your trying to convince a believer that he's wrong when you don't even believe or even know Jewish history.


You completely avoided and did not answer the question or address the points.

But tell me this - How can you claim to be a believer, when you don't even understand what it is you claim to believe. To the point where you are simply making things up in response to make the bible fit your own views.

Bottom line is this - I showed you where Jesus quoted the same exact verse in response saying the same things.




[edit on 10/14/2009 by badmedia]


Our topic is the word "gods". So please stay on topic. The rulers were "as" gods in the sense of judging. That doesn't make people Gods.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 04:30 PM
link   
reply to post by texastig
 


I haven't posted off topic.



The rulers were "as" gods in the sense of judging. That doesn't make people Gods.


But that is not what Jesus is saying that verse means when he quotes it in John 10. He quotes Psalm 82 in response to people accusing him of blasphemy because:



John 10

33The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

34Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?


So, are you saying Jesus is wrong here? Jesus wasn't a judge, or any of the things you say that verse means.

You are doing the same thing the Jews did to him. Meaning, if Jesus was here today, you would be in the same place as those Jews, telling him that he was wrong etc.

It's all about the father and son relationship in understanding what it means when it is said "ye are gods". It doesn't mean you are the creator and the father, or what one would call "God". It's about the bit of divinity within you(your soul) which is the father within.

If you look at me, are you seeing the father/god? No. Because what is "me" in the physical is not "me", nor is it what I am referring to when it is talking about here. What is being recognized is the soul within, and the father which owns all souls.

It is because the father within you that you are able to do things like understanding, to reason, to experience, to observe and to know what it means to be. If the father was not in you, then you would be like a robot etc. Which is incapable of these things, as they have no free will and only do as they are programmed.

How do you define yourself? Can you do it without naming a possession? Like, you have "your" body? "Your brain", "your soul". All possessions. Even the more materialistic people define themselves with other possessions. My job/career, my house, my family and so on. But these are all possessions. What is it that is actually possessing them? There is nothing physical or anything which "you" can define yourself as without it being a possession of yours.

Because what is truly "you" is not physical at all. Even a soul is a possession. It's an individual consciousness within the father. My soul. What possesses it only "is", it is that which is the "I am" of you and so forth.



John 3

5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

6That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

7Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.


It is not the flesh that is being called "god" here, it's the spirit within that is. The flesh will return to the earth from which it came.



John 3

8The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

9Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be?

10Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?

11Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.


From the father that spirit came, and to the father it will return. We can see the people here on earth, but we do not see from where the spirit within them came, or where it goes.

Being born of the spirit is described in John 14. Then on that day, you will know the father is within you, and also what it means when it is said "ye are gods". John 14:20, it speaks of a day. That is specific thing that happens to someone - an experience.

That is why it is said the kingdom is within. You have to look within to find the father, within yourself. Jesus crawls over the pharisees, saying they do not enter and do not allow others to enter. This is what it is talking about.

So yes, you are god - but the father is much greater than you. Are you able to understand? Are you able to make good judgments? Do you know what it means to be? If so, then you are god. Only because the father is within someone are these things possible. Without the father, you would not be capable of such things. The bible also talks about these things.

Why do you think Jesus says call no man father?



Matthew 23:9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.


Because what Jesus says of himself in regards to being a son of god is also true of you. Which brings us back full circle to Psalm 82, ye are gods, which he quotes when pressed about saying he is god.

I'm not a believer because I don't need to believe. I learned from the father, and what is called the holy spirit, not the bible. I know Jesus is telling the truth because I can see the father within him and because I understand, not because I believe. I use to be an atheist/agnostic, until I found the father. I couldn't believe what the bible was saying and how I never understood it before then, and the most disappointment I have felt is that Christians themselves do not understand the book they claim is the word of god. They say oh it's the word of god and yadda yadda yadda, but then understand none of it.



Hosea 6:6 For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 05:32 PM
link   
reply to post by badmedia
 


Thanks, badmedia, you nailed it.


The whole context of the passage makes it obvious what Jesus is, and maybe more importantly in this case, is not referring to when he is responding to the Jews' accusation of him blaspheming. People today just do not understand anymore. They have lost the real connection they always profess to have.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join