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.
Originally posted by pthena
reply to post by DISRAELI
If the Christian teaching is that Christ is both God and man, drawing attention to the human part of that combination gets you nowhere.
But yet, Christianity has focused on the human. Jesus once asked ""What do you think about the Christ? Whose son is he?" "The son of David," they replied. Matthew 22:42.
How many Christians would walk away from Jesus, if they suspected he was not "the son of David"? If any man, just a common bloke, as far as parentage went, heard a voice from heaven "You are my son" would people think he was special enough to think he might just be the Christ?
Was that David's voice speaking from heaven then? Or was it the voice who originally said such a thing to David? Psalm 2:7. If the OldTestament god could take David, of a non royal family and appoint him king and son, couldn't he do the same for another non-royal? After all, hadn't Saul of Benjamin been the LORD's anointed before David of Judah?
So, to answer the OPs question: It must have been David's voice. Otherwise Christianity and/or Messianic Judaism in general might not have caught on as the religion destined to militarily conquer the World (Psalm 110).
edit on 5-11-2012 by pthena because: (no reason given)
Jesus as the Son of God is greater than David, that is why David called him Lord.
John 4:25 The woman said to him, “I know that Messiah comes,” (he who is called Christ). “When he has come, he will declare to us all things.”
26 Jesus said to her, "“I am he, the one who speaks to you.”"
Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by EnochWasRight
Jesus was the image of God in the material. An image cannot tell the story of the one casting the image.
It seems to me, he told the story of the one "casting the image" and unfortunatly it doesn't line up with the God of the OT...
Yes there are certian things that line up... but don't christians also believe that Satan also reads and knows the bible even better then we do?
I would be more inclined to believe he inspired the OT... Not the true God Our Father
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
Now what does a person who seemingly already knows everything need with answers from people he would automatically disagree with anyway? Ah the counterproductivity of that, truly amazing.
I don't find it counter productive in the least... Look at the discussion brewing as we speak...
Do you believe it matters in the least that i disagree with Christian theology?
I find it rather amusing that i can't ask a simple question about Christian beliefs without having several Christians jumping all over me and accusing me of something sinister...
Just because my answers are not the same as yours might be... doesn't mean im looking for converts...
And if my threads sway peoples beliefs then it was meant to be either way... True Faith can not be swayed, and if it can.... then it can hardly be a solid foundation
My beliefs are never swayed... they are rock solid.
Unfortunatly i can't say the same about Christian theology... which is why i ask questions... As i've said, im curious as to why Christian beliefs are soooo far from my own when both Christians and myself believe in Jesus
reply to post by DISRAELI
The question in the OP arose because of the assumption that Akragon pretended to make about Christian beliefs, that God must be absent from heaven as long as he was on earth in the form of Jesus..
You completely missed the point...
I didn't assume God was Absent from Heaven when Jesus was on earth... How could that be possible if he spoke from "above"...
I draw attention to the seperation between him and his Father.... They are one... YET seperate entities...
Jesus did NOT say "I and my Father are one and the same"
And that is a Christian belief... correct?
edit on 5-11-2012 by Akragon because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Akragon
When i speak of the "Lord" of the OT im refering to the imposter posing as the true Father of creation...
The Lord is the Son being raised
John 8:23 He said to them, "“You are from beneath. I am from above. You are of this world. I am not of this world. 24 I said therefore to you that you will die in your sins; for unless you believe that I am he, you will die in your sins.”"
28 Jesus therefore said to them, "“When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he, and I do nothing of myself, but as my Father taught me, I say these things.
Why does Jesus speak so highly of this "impostor" and say that loving him is the first and greatest of all commandments?
It wasn't until almost 100 years after Christ's death that anyone who believed in Christ but dismissed the God of the Israelites appeared, and he was rooted in anti-Semitism.
I presume that you're not anti-Semitic, in spite of your statement there,
but how do you reconcile Christ's teaching with something that he fairly obviously did not teach?
You are speaking of yourself by the way. We are all cut from the same loaf and to cast judgment on the Lord is to point your finger at your reflection in the mirror
Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by EnochWasRight
I couldn't help but repond to this statement...
You are speaking of yourself by the way. We are all cut from the same loaf and to cast judgment on the Lord is to point your finger at your reflection in the mirror
When i look in the mirror i don't see someone that would kill innocent souls... I would not destroy life...
I am not a destroyer my friend, i seek peace and harmony...
I cast judgement on the OT God because he is the original biblical terrorist... a fraud posing as the true God to people that didn't know any better... and i have plenty of threads that back up that statement to prove it...
I might also add.... that if i looked in the mirror and saw anything even close to resembling the OT God... i would have mercy on the world and end my own life.
edit on 5-11-2012 by Akragon because: (no reason given)
IF Jesus was God in the flesh.... And God was apparently here on earth as the christian Faith dictates....
Who was this voice from above that was documented in all these cases?
Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by adjensen
Why does Jesus speak so highly of this "impostor" and say that loving him is the first and greatest of all commandments?
Simply put... he is not talking about the so called God of the OT... The God he speaks of... his father, is kind and merciful, forgiving and generous. The God of the OT makes these claims but shows nothing of the sort.
Considering there is nothing of Marcion's work that exists... That is automatically suspicious... All we have is reconstructions of his work... which were made by using the words of people that were already against him.
How do you claim Jesus was God when he said nothing of the sort, and clearly... even obviously did not say he was God... or teach that he was God?
Originally posted by adjensen
Except that, in the instance that we have where we have both the refutation of the early church fathers (the same ones that were against Marcion) and their original, unmodified by any Christian, works, the Gnostic Christians, we can see that the early church fathers were fairly well spot on -- they represented the views and writings of their foes accurately…
Originally posted by Joecroft
Take a look at what Bart Ehrman has to say…notably at 2:25-2:40
You mean the same God that killed the Pagans sacrificing children to Moloch, only to give them renewed life again in another generation? You mean the same souls that are now alive in a world where billions now live in peace? The same God that took 200 million souls and produced billions of new souls that adhere to some form of moral code and sentience that shares your values of right and wrong?
You are raising your own sense of moral justice over the God that brought you that sense of moral foundation. This is the very God that allowed this to be written on your heart from generations of life that came before.
Originally posted by pthena
I read Ehrman's Lost Christianities a couple of years ago. It seemed that he sort of lumped the gnostics together as if they all had the same worldview, which I don't think was the case. I'll have to try and catch up. It looks like Joecroft brought up some issues that I haven't read yet.
Acts 5
38 Therefore, in the present case I advise you: Leave these men alone! Let them go! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. 39 But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God.”
No matter what our aim in life, Paul was correct in this.
But you have this convenient detachment... Christ clearly is rooted in Torah based Judaism, he frequently quotes scripture from the Hebrew Bible, he taught it in the synagogues...
And yet he somehow thinks it's all bunk, and that the "real" God isn't the one portrayed in those books?
Either you dismiss those claims, or you have to throw out the whole of the New Testament, including the Gospels, and including the things that Jesus said, because he contradicts you all over the place.
So then what are you left with? Your own private "revelation," and nothing but your own word to hang it on.
Except that, in the instance that we have where we have both the refutation of the early church fathers (the same ones that were against Marcion) and their original, unmodified by any Christian, works, the Gnostic Christians, we can see that the early church fathers were fairly well spot on -- they represented the views and writings of their foes accurately (though they focused a bit heavily on the side of the GCs that taught that sins of the flesh didn't matter, because the body was evil anyway, which was a minority opinion.)
Which makes sense, after all. The critics were contemporary to Marcion and Valentinus, so it's not like people couldn't read Tertullian and then go look at Marcion's actual texts and say "wait a second, he didn't say that!"
To adopt that position, one needs to dismiss all of John's Gospel, parts of the other three and the Epistles, and the indisputable fact that early Christians, right after his death, were worshiping him as God.
There was no forced deification through the Doctrine of the Trinity -- that was developed centuries later to try and understand why he was so worshipped and what those passages in John meant.
Face it, the earliest Christians, those closest to Christ, believed in a much different and orthodox Christianity than you would prefer them to. It was only in the ensuing centuries that people with a nonexistent connection to Christ or the Apostles, like Marcion, Valentinus or yourself, popped up, saying "I don't like the church, so here's my view, which is obviously correct."