God is Jesus; Jesus is God

reply to post by Akragon

*sigh*

I have nothing against mary... The point was she is human like the rest of us...

You're both just arguing for the sake of argument...

No, I am not. There are so many small pieces here that don't add up. People just ignore that by saying "But the broken glass is so pretty..."

What is the purpose of typing this post. If you are a christian why do you seek the vanity of having others read something well known for 2013 years.

reply to post by LastStarfighter


Because it is also well known that not everyone is a Christian. And that, I think, is their greatest bane.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Akragon

 

*sigh*

I have nothing against mary... The point was she is human like the rest of us...

You're both just arguing for the sake of argument...

No, I am not. There are so many small pieces here that don't add up. People just ignore that by saying "But the broken glass is so pretty..."

Well maybe you should make a thread on your issues instead of futher derailing this thread with arguements about mary and her eggs...

:shk:

reply to post by Akragon


Maybe you should be clearer about what you're saying. Don't make me out to be the bad guy here, because what's irrelevant to you is not irrelevant to me.

reply to post by Akragon

That is an interesting theory... but that would mean the trinity at that time consisted of Moses, Elijah, and Jesus... and honestly I've never heard that version of the trinity before...

I was reading a pretty profound break-down of the story in the book, Mark: Hermeneia, by Adela Yarbro Collins.
The "booths" that some translations call them, that were proposed by the disciples to be built, were more like the tabernacle tent that was the dwelling place of God according to the Old Testament 'wilderness' story.
That, and the similarity of the 'divine' presence and the 'divine' voice, with the OT story.

The disciples saw two men who they thought was Moses and Elijah but how would they know if it was them?
"Moses" could have been the 'old man' representing the Father.
"Elijah" could represent the spirit of prophecy.
The three of them could be the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.

reply to post by Arolexion

Okay thats just it though, the name of the Messiah got translater into greek THEN to english. Weird much? Also if you directly translate his name into english it DOESN'T equal jesus.

The name of Jesus in the Greek, as is found in the New Testament, which was originally written in Greek, is the same as the name for Joshua as found in the Greek, in the Greek version of the Old Testament, commonly called, the Septuagint.
Jesus and the disciples did not live in Judea but in what was called Gentile Galilee, which was known for it authors who wrote in Greek, though ethnically they were Jews.
Most Jews at that time, in the Roman Empire spoke Greek. Jesus was a popular name at the time, and was a Jewish name, the Greek version of Joshua, so there is no need to "translate" the name 'back' to Aramaic when "Jesus" was his 'real' name already.
This Aramaic nonsense goes hand and hand with another fallacy, which is that Aramaic is somehow 'Hebrew' and then is thought by these promoters as 'holy'. With the implication that Greek is somehow 'evil'. The next step would be to disavow the NT altogether as being 'pagan'.

reply to post by jmdewey60

I was reading a pretty profound break-down of the story in the book, Mark: Hermeneia, by Adela Yarbro Collins.
The "booths" that some translations call them, that were proposed by the disciples to be built, were more like the tabernacle tent that was the dwelling place of God according to the Old Testament 'wilderness' story.

does it not say in the OT(Isaiah 66:1)... what house can be built with mans hands that can hold God?

The disciples saw two men who they thought was Moses and Elijah but how would they know if it was them?
"Moses" could have been the 'old man' representing the Father.
"Elijah" could represent the spirit of prophecy.
The three of them could be the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.

That is an excellent point...

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Akragon

 

Maybe you should be clearer about what you're saying. Don't make me out to be the bad guy here, because what's irrelevant to you is not irrelevant to me.

edit on 1-4-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

Im not trying to... you came at me with questions that were already settled...

Re-read what you were replying to...

Jesus means the Essense of God is within him... He is the essence of his Father... Just as any child is the essence of his parents.

that would include Mary and her egg... ye know?

reply to post by Akragon

does it not say in the OT(Isaiah 66:1)... what house can be built with mans hands that can hold God?

Notice my wording, how I avoid endorsing the 'wilderness' story as factual, but it is in the Torah.

Isaiah is a much more recent book, having to do with the Babylonian 'captivity' period. I mentioned this in another thread, that Isaiah never uses the name Moses, or mention anything about him, which is a bit odd, unless you understand Isaiah as proposing a new exodus with a new 'Moses' to lead the Judeans out of Babylon and back to Jerusalem.
There was no temple at the time Isaiah was written (having been destroyed by the Babylonians) so the comment you quoted could be a case of 'sour grapes'.

If you encounter your own Higher Self, then the need for an outside savior diminishes significantly.

reply to post by Akragon


My post was directed to you actually. I never addressed him, and I have not argued.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


I am not one to judge God, I am not even fit to judge myself.

Originally posted by Arolexion
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Okay thats just it though, the name of the Messiah got translater into greek THEN to english. Weird much? Also if you directly translate his name into english it DOESN'T equal jesus.

More like Greek to Latin to German to English.

reply to post by MrLucky


I would not know.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


reply to post by LastStarfighter



You can call it vanity if you like, but I wanted to place a light in the midst of so much darkness. There is so much christian misinformation on this sight it is crazy. That is the reason for my last few posts.

"you do not place a lamp underneath a bed where its light cannot shine."

So I placed it on the table. It is not my ego, I am not the light, I only wish to serve the Light of all lights.

Originally posted by backcase
reply to post by Akragon

 

My post was directed to you actually. I never addressed him, and I have not argued.

Which post?

you said you didn't want to go off topic when i asked you to explain your last sentence then we got sidetracked and the topic turned to mary...

reply to post by Akragon


I think that Mary does have to do with this post. Did you read the thread addressed to you?

Originally posted by backcase
reply to post by Akragon

 

I think that Mary does have to do with this post. Did you read the thread addressed to you?

No I didn't see a point... but now I have, and I S&F'd your thread...

Not really my style of reading honestly... but I commend your effort put forth in that thread

Originally posted by backcase
reply to post by Dispo

 

Jesus the Man did not, Jesus the God did.

Jesus is one with the Father and the Holy Spirit.

Okay this line has never made any sense to me. I know who Jesus is. Who is the "Father"? God? Who is the "Holy Spirit"? How can Jesus be both the father and the son? It doesn't make sense. I think somewhere along the way Christians decided to proclaim that Jesus is God to make their religion seem more important than that of the Jews or Muslims.

To me it's all just mumbo-jumbo and lies. I'll never believe any of that crap from any religion. Garbage all of it.