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.

 

Is Yahweh/Jehova the God that Jesus referes to as 'My Father'?

page: 3
1
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 08:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Romantic_Rebel
If you don't seeing the truth then fine with me. The OT makes it clear God is not a human, he is eternal and above all. You can keep on ranting how the Trinity is in the Torah but it is not and that is the truth.


Of course it isn't. Christ is not a part of the Old Testament. But there is nothing in Torah which contradicts the Doctrine of the Trinity. Your ignorance of it doesn't cause any contradiction to exist (except in your mind, I suppose.)


I refuse to give the Christian New Testament a chance.


Christianity will do just fine without you, lol. You're an atheist, so you refuse to give the Jewish Old Testament a chance, either, apart from when it serves your purposes.

And we go from you claiming to know the Bible better than me to you now admitting that you've never even read it. Nice.




posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 08:32 PM
link   
Now I'm ignorant? I used the OT against your cause. Earlier you said Jesus was in the OT. Now you're saying he isn't. Which is it now?
www.jewfaq.org...
This link which supports the OT and is a Jewish website.
Clearly states that God is one Now who is right?
You need to read the links I have been posting instead of just using my Atheism against me.
Now I have proven Jesus can not be God or God cannot have a woman to have a child with here.
Jews do call themselves the children of God because of their beliefs.
Think about it! The Truth hurts.



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 08:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Romantic_Rebel
Earlier you said Jesus was in the OT. Now you're saying he isn't. Which is it now?


I never said that Jesus was in the Old Testament. I said that he existed since "the dawn of time".


This link which supports the OT and is a Jewish website.
Clearly states that God is one Now who is right?
You need to read the links I have been posting instead of just using my Atheism against me.


Get it through your head -- I am not Jewish. Your Jewish websites mean nothing to me. I'm not going to read them because they are irrelevant.


Now I have proven Jesus can not be God or God cannot have a woman to have a child with here.


You have proven no such thing.


Jews do call themselves the children of God because of their beliefs.
Think about it! The Truth hurts.


No, they call themselves that because they are God's chosen people from the first Covenant. You can't even get the part you claim to support right.



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 08:51 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


So these sites are irrelevant now? Then why are we arguing over the Bible? You have Faith! That's all you need to do in order to follow blindly. How can Jesus be here since the dawn of time and be no where in Genesis?
judaism.about.com...



God is incorporeal. In Judaism, God has no body, God is non-physical. Any mention of God's body is considered to be metaphorical. Any physical representation of God, such as the Golden Calf, is considered to be idolatry. As God has no body, He has no gender. While God is referred to in masculine terms and the Shechinah (Divine presence that fills the universe) is referred to in feminine terms, God is actually neither male nor female.


Trust me on this I'm using valuable sources here. Like how you can source your opinion from the OT I can source mine from the OT. I don't have to believe in it to debate it.

www.jewfaq.org...


G-d is Incorporeal Although many places in scripture and Talmud speak of various parts of G-d's body (the Hand of G-d, G-d's wings, etc.) or speak of G-d in anthropomorphic terms (G-d walking in the garden of Eden, G-d laying tefillin, etc.), Judaism firmly maintains that G-d has no body. Any reference to G-d's body is simply a figure of speech, a means of making G-d's actions more comprehensible to beings living in a material world. Much of Rambam's Guide for the Perplexed is devoted to explaining each of these anthropomorphic references and proving that they should be understood figuratively. We are forbidden to represent G-d in a physical form. That is considered idolatry. The sin of the Golden Calf incident was not that the people chose another deity, but that they tried to represent G-d in a physical form.


If I were you reading this I would be trembling in my boots.
"Hear, Israel: The L-rd is our G-d, The L-rd is one."
I don't see the Trinity in there. I only see God proclaiming himself as one and only one.



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Romantic_Rebel
So these sites are irrelevant now? Then why are we arguing over the Bible?


Who's arguing? You've simply demonstrated that you are ignorant of Christian beliefs and unwilling (or unable) to learn that they are, and your connection to Jewish beliefs is limited to copying other people's work without understanding it.

You are, of course, welcome to wallow in your ignorance all you like. The more ineffective evangelical atheists are those who attempt to use something they don't understand to make their point and just wind up, like you, looking foolish.



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 09:37 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


Yep totally hun? I'm using sources that are critical of Christian beliefs. I can't help but use sources that use Christian sources. I know you hate me for using these sources because I'm proving you wrong.
www.messiahtruth.com...
Of course you can hear it in one ear and let it come out the other. Still I would always be right and you would follow blindly.



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Romantic_Rebel
Yep totally hun? I'm using sources that are critical of Christian beliefs. I can't help but use sources that use Christian sources. I know you hate me for using these sources because I'm proving you wrong.

.. snip ..

Still I would always be right and you would follow blindly.


First, I don't hate you. I think that you are wrong, but you are entitled to your opinion, and you are no threat because your argument is weak and unreasoned. But I bear no ill will toward you.

Secondly, how can you, as an atheist, think that you "are right" by the writings of a Jewish scholar? To say that these points are correct is to say that you believe in Judaism, you are Jewish, and the God of the Old Testament is real.

Your words: "I would always be right" are either untrue, or a statement of belief in the Jewish God.



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


Well I don't see how you don't like me using the Jewish Old testament. But you can us it. I don't have to believe it to use it against you. The links I provided earlier disproved Jesus as anything you see him as. But you can continue to follow blindly that is you our way in life.



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Romantic_Rebel
reply to post by adjensen
 


Well I don't see how you don't like me using the Jewish Old testament. But you can us it. I don't have to believe it to use it against you. The links I provided earlier disproved Jesus as anything you see him as.


Are you twelve years old? I'm serious, you really seem to have a hard time understanding what the word "prove" means. Your claim is equivalent to someone claiming that Dr. Seuss' "The Cat in the Hat" disproves the fact that cats can't talk. The things that you cite are Jewish opinion, not fact, and are completely irrelevant to a Christian.

But, whatever, I'm done with this. Someone who claims "I don't have to believe something to use it" is clearly bereft of common sense and intellectual honesty.



posted on Sep, 12 2010 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


Fine I won the argument. I used your beloved Bible against you and you reject what's in the Bible.
I never knew there are people so blindly by what they read. But hey you follow the pastor regardless.
What you fear is that I'm right and that you're wrong for worshiping a man which in the Bible clearly states is idol worship. Name calling is not going to make you win the argument.
www.messiahtruth.com...
I would just leave you with this message.



G-d is One One of the primary expressions of Jewish faith, recited twice daily in prayer, is the Shema, which begins "Hear, Israel: The L-rd is our G-d, The L-rd is one." This simple statement encompasses several different ideas: 1. There is only one G-d. No other being participated in the work of creation. 2. G-d is a unity. He is a single, whole, complete indivisible entity. He cannot be divided into parts or described by attributes. Any attempt to ascribe attributes to G-d is merely man's imperfect attempt to understand the infinite. 3. G-d is the only being to whom we should offer praise. The Shema can also be translated as "The L-rd is our G-d, The L-rd alone," meaning that no other is our G-d, and we should not pray to any other.


www.jewfaq.org...




G-d is Incorporeal Although many places in scripture and Talmud speak of various parts of G-d's body (the Hand of G-d, G-d's wings, etc.) or speak of G-d in anthropomorphic terms (G-d walking in the garden of Eden, G-d laying tefillin, etc.), Judaism firmly maintains that G-d has no body. Any reference to G-d's body is simply a figure of speech, a means of making G-d's actions more comprehensible to beings living in a material world. Much of Rambam's Guide for the Perplexed is devoted to explaining each of these anthropomorphic references and proving that they should be understood figuratively. We are forbidden to represent G-d in a physical form. That is considered idolatry. The sin of the Golden Calf incident was not that the people chose another deity, but that they tried to represent G-d in a physical form.


Tell me how you feel after looking these claims from the Torah or what you call it the OT!



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 09:35 AM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 



Christians also cannot believe that good works, actions, and charity are enough to get you into Heaven. You have to accept Christ as your savior to get to Heaven. All those really nice, good people that you know that are "spiritual" and pray to God, and give to charity, and help out their neighbors, they are all going to Hell unless they give their lives over to Christ.


1. Being good will simply keep a person out of jail.

2. No one is save by giving their life over to Christ. People are saved by the redemption purchased by Jesus's life and death. Rejecting this redemption that was already purchased by his Son 2,000 years ago is an unforgivable sin.

3. No one is saved by what they do or don't do, but rather in trusting that Jesus has already done everything needed for us. That's the precise reason He exclaimed "It is finished!" on the cross at Calvary.

Good works are great if you already have the Lord as your savior, they are the reasonable service for Him once you've been saved. But imagine how you'd feel if you were God and you came to Earth as a man to redeem your most bitter enemies from a death they couldn't afford to pay by giving your life freely to save them and people basically said..

"Thanks but no thanks Jesus, I'm righteous on my own merits, I don't need your righteousness, I have plenty of my own, I don't need you as my god, I'm doing just fine myself. I don't need your payment for my sins, I can merit entry into heaven by my own rules and deeds."

I'd be pretty pissed at them too.



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 09:51 AM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 



Christ is not a part of the Old Testament.


HUH???

John 17:5 "And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began."

Luke 5:20-21 "When Jesus saw their faith, he said, 'Friend, your sins are forgiven.' The Pharisees and the teachers of the law began thinking to themselves, 'Who is this fellow who speaks blasphemy? Who can forgive sins but God alone?'"

John 1:1-3 "In the beginning was the Word (Jesus), and the Word (Jesus) was with God, and the Word (Jesus) was God. He (Jesus) was with God in the beginning. Through Him (Jesus) all things were made; without Him (Jesus) nothing was made that has been made."

John 1:14 "The Word (Jesus/God) became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen His (Jesus) glory, the glory of the One and Only (Yahweh), who came from the Father, full of grace and truth."

We can clearly see 2/3 persons of the Holy Trinity, and see that they are all eternal and pre-existed the world. Anytime God spoke to mankind in the OT (the Word), or visited mankind it was in the person of Jesus Christ. Remember Daniel in the fiery furnace??

Daniel 3:25 "He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God. (Jesus Christ)"



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 10:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by adjensen
 



Christ is not a part of the Old Testament.


HUH???


While Christ is prophesied in the Old Testament, and there are references to the Messiah, Jesus himself does not make an appearance in the text (arguments are made, of course, that the "us" and "we" ways that God is referred to in a few instances in Torah are indicative of Christ, but they are not direct references.)

As I said, he existed at the time, but he is not a part of the Old Testament in the sense that he is a part of the New. Contrast Old Covenant with the New. If one dismisses the New Testament (as Jews do, of course,) there is no textural evidence to indicate that the Messiah has yet appeared.


edit on 13-9-2010 by adjensen because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by adjensen
 



Christ is not a part of the Old Testament.


HUH???


While Christ is prophesied in the Old Testament, and there are references to the Messiah, Jesus himself does not make an appearance in the text (arguments are made, of course, that the "us" and "we" ways that God is referred to in a few instances in Torah are indicative of Christ, but they are not direct references.)

As I said, he existed at the time, but he is not a part of the Old Testament in the sense that he is a part of the New. Contrast Old Covenant with the New. If one dismisses the New Testament (as Jews do, of course,) there is no textural evidence to indicate that the Messiah has yet appeared.




But you can see Christ revealed on virtually every page in the OT books. All the ceremonies the Jews went through portray certain aspects of His life. I love to say the OT is Christ concealed and the NT is Christ revealed.

Even simple things like the red heifer, the bronze serpent on the pole, the passover story, etc all foreshadow something about Christ's death at Calvary. I can pull Christ out of everything in the OT. Isaiah is called the "5th Gospel", and Ezekiel could be called the 6th one.



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 



If one dismisses the New Testament (as Jews do, of course,) there is no textural evidence to indicate that the Messiah has yet appeared.


I do not agree whatsoever. If the messiah did not appear before 70 AD with the destruction of the Temple He will never appear based on the OT prophecies. Daniel tells the EXACT day the Messiah will ride into Jerusalem. So precise was his prophecy that for over 1,500 years Jews claimed Daniel must have been written after Jesus lived and died. The big "oooops" occurred when the book of Daniel was found with the other Dead Sea scrolls.

Daniel 9:25-26 "Know and understand this: From the issuing of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Annointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven 'sevens' and sixty-two 'sevens.' It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble. After the sixty-two 'sevens' the Annointed One will be cut off and will have nothing."

"This prophesy refers to weeks of years, or 483 biblical years. Beginning with the exact day on which Persian King Artaxerxes gave the decree to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem (March 5, 444BC), exactly 173,880 days later--Palm Sunday, March 30, AD33--Christ rode into Jerusalem the week before he was 'cut off' (crucified). This is the precise number of days spanning 483 biblical years, which were then measured as 12 months of 30 days each."

Who Is Jesus Really?

The OT prophecies also state the glory of the 2nd temple (Herod's) will surpass that of the first (Solomon's) because God will visit it Himself. Solomon's temple was MUCH more luxurious than Herod's temple, yuet the glory of Herod's was greater god said because He would visit it personally.

Only 1 man visited the 2nd temple and rode into Jerusalem on the exact day with people shouting "Hosana to the King" before 70 AD. His name is Jesus Christ. If Jesus, who was born of a virgin in Bethlehem is not the Messiah, then there never will be one. To look for a future Messiah would render certain prophecies, especially the one in Daniel 9:25-26 null and void.



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 12:52 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Again, you are misunderstanding me. As I said earlier, there is nothing in the Old Testament which contradicts the presence, teaching and nature of Christ, as described in the New Testament. But he was not manifested in physical form until the time of the New.

In other words, a Jew in 100BC would not have a complete view of the Christ, short of a lot of creative interpretation of the Torah and prophecies, much of which Jewish scholars would view as blasphemy. Without the hindsight of knowing what Jesus DID deliver, and understanding the nature of the New Covenant, the assumptive view would be that of a political Messiah, who would restore the state of Israel and the throne of David, which is what Jews are still waiting for.

The difference between Christians and Jews is both perceptive and the nature of the Covenant. The Jews hold to their view of a certain type of Messiah, one who has not yet come, while Christians hold that the Messiah has come, 2000 years ago, in the person of Jesus the Christ. The Jews remain tied to the Law, in Torah and the Talmud, though it is seemingly impossible to practice since the destruction of the Temple. The Christian Covenant is through Christ, not the law, so is not tied to any worldly item.



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


Jesus is not in the OT. Do you actually think I would be posting all these links if Jesus fulfilled a prophecy? No!
You're just as confused as the other Christians out there.
www.aish.com...



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 01:11 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


Dear God you are a liar. Simple as that. Jesus did anything he can against the Torah.
www.messiahtruth.com...


A true prophet sent by G-d will never preach a message contrary to even one of the Torah's precepts. If someone claiming Divine Inspiration, the Torah demands that this so-called prophet prove himself. In light of this, Jesus and Paul did some rather heinous things in their lifetimes. They completely vilified those who opposed their theologies, a crime from which stems two thousand years of Christian anti-Semitism. They did everything that a false prophet could do to loudly scream that he was false. Chapters 13 and 18 of Deuteronomy clearly define false prophets, and Jesus and Paul are the living incarnations of that definition.



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


You don't know what God is. God can only be one and never be a man.
www.jewfaq.org...



G-d is One One of the primary expressions of Jewish faith, recited twice daily in prayer, is the Shema, which begins "Hear, Israel: The L-rd is our G-d, The L-rd is one." This simple statement encompasses several different ideas: 1. There is only one G-d. No other being participated in the work of creation. 2. G-d is a unity. He is a single, whole, complete indivisible entity. He cannot be divided into parts or described by attributes. Any attempt to ascribe attributes to G-d is merely man's imperfect attempt to understand the infinite. 3. G-d is the only being to whom we should offer praise. The Shema can also be translated as "The L-rd is our G-d, The L-rd alone," meaning that no other is our G-d, and we should not pray to any other.





G-d is Incorporeal Although many places in scripture and Talmud speak of various parts of G-d's body (the Hand of G-d, G-d's wings, etc.) or speak of G-d in anthropomorphic terms (G-d walking in the garden of Eden, G-d laying tefillin, etc.), Judaism firmly maintains that G-d has no body. Any reference to G-d's body is simply a figure of speech, a means of making G-d's actions more comprehensible to beings living in a material world. Much of Rambam's Guide for the Perplexed is devoted to explaining each of these anthropomorphic references and proving that they should be understood figuratively. We are forbidden to represent G-d in a physical form. That is considered idolatry. The sin of the Golden Calf incident was not that the people chose another deity, but that they tried to represent G-d in a physical form.


I would prefer not to worship a man who was a con artist.



posted on Sep, 13 2010 @ 01:15 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


I think your mistaking yourself right there. Where was Jesus? Just random verses to prove this man is what? God? the Son of God? Don't Jews call themselves the children of God? Then they must be God too!
www.messiahtruth.com...
Jesus is not divine and no Jew has ever worshiped Jesus.
Should I give the Christian NT a chance? No!
www.messiahtruth.com...



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join