What if Jesus is the DECEPTION?

reply to post by GISMYS

BELIEVE GOD'S WORD or you will believe satan's lies=your choice!===JOHN 14:9-11Jesus said unto him, “Have I been so long a time with you, and yet hast thou not known Me, Philip? He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, ‘Show us the Father’?

10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak unto you I speak not of Myself; but the Father that dwelleth in Me, He doeth the works.

11 Believe Me that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me; or else believe Me for the very works’ sake.

OK . . so what does all of this mean?
Are you saying that "the word" tells us something in particular about Jesus and his relationship with "The Father"?
John here has Jesus saying that what he does is done through "The Father" dwelling in him. So how does that make Jesus and God the same person?
Jesus was telling his disciples that he was going away, and with the idea that he was going to "The Father". He says they can't go. Apparently, they thought that they could see "The Father" anyway, without having to go to wherever it was that they could not go to. If Jesus could see "The Father", then they should be able to see Him too.
Then Jesus has to explain to them that normal people are restricted to only being able to see "The Father" through His works.
'If you can't believe that, just because I said so, then think about the works themselves that I have been doing, how do you think that could have happened unless it was "The Father" working through me?'
Later, in verse 20, he says, "you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you." so this being "in" someone represents a close association with a reciprocal relationship. It does not mean that you are the same person, otherwise we would be God too.

reply to post by jmdewey60


I think there's far too many fanatics in this thread to discuss this issue rationally...

Nothing new presented either... just the same old arguments that hold no water...

reply to post by GISMYS

aRE YOU SAYING YOU DO NOT KNOW WHO JESUS is talking about when he says HE and the father are one?

Well, I don't even know what "[mo====" means. I tried to look it up, couldn't find it.

Google says "Saint Joseph: Jesus Christ, Father" Maybe Jesus was carrying Joseph after he died. It is said that Joseph was a "Master Craftsman", could be some high power stuff going on.

On the other hand, Jesus is said to have spoken much about Ouranos (Heaven Father). Sometimes using the plural form of the name. That should indicate some high degree of respect.

reply to post by EnochWasRight


You always come prepared which is why I enjoy reading your posts.



You are defined by your word, but judged by your deeds, so you will never escape the error of your ways. The best advice I offer you is to have a greater measure of good in your repertoire.

reply to post by GISMYS


(A take on Romans 1:20) For from the Worlds creation the invisible attributes are perceived, being understood in the hearts and minds of the articles made, both eternal power and divinity, so as to render each and every inexcusable.

Ponder this.

Jesus was historically executed in Jerusalem by Pontius Pilates some time between 26 and 36 A.D. while Pilates was serving as a Prefect of Judea for the Roman Empire. However, Jesus does not appear even in mention in any Roman documents or literature until almost a century later. Why is that?

The first mention is in 94 A.D. by Flavius Josephus in the book "Antiquities of the Jews"

The second mention was by Gaius Cornelius Tacitus in 116 A.D. in his written history "Annals" Book 15, Chapter 44. Tacitus was born 25 years after the death of Christ and wrote this account almost 100 years later.

Both texts only mention Jesus briefly. "Antiquities" mentions his name while talking about his brother James who was stoned to death by High Priest Ananus.

"Annals" only mentions Jesus as Christus. But it does not say that he was nailed to a cross specifically. It says:

Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus

------------
The earliest known manuscript of a book of the new testament wasn't written until around 70 A.D. (Book of Mark) Around 50 years after the death of Jesus and after Christianity had already been established. The majority of the New Testament wasn't written until a century later.
-------------
The letters of Paul are the oldest known Christian documents. He is believed to have written 13 of the 27 books of the New Testament. However, in the letters of Paul, he admits that he never actually met Jesus. And the letters contain almost no reference to Jesus at all. He only became a Christian after having a "vision" of Christ rising from the dead around 36 A.D. several years after the death of Jesus.
-------------
Between 170 A.D. and 325 A.D., the entire New Testament was heavily rewritten and many books were purged.
The New Testament as it exists today was formalized in 325 A.D. at the council of Nicaea, where those four gospels became the official dogma of the Roman Church and all other histories of Jesus were banned.

Irenaeus picked only a fraction of the available literature on Jesus. He excluded some of the most popular texts, such as the gospel of Thomas and the gospel of the Hebrews (by far the two most popular texts among early Christians).
---------
Luke and Mark, two other authors of the New Testament, were not eyewitnesses to the events of Jesus' life. They were followers of Paul. They never met Jesus or his disciples.

-----------------

So what does it all mean? That the New Testament was written by people who had never met Jesus many years after he and everyone else involved were already dead. And then it was rewritten and edited over the next 200 years into something else entirely by people who had never met Jesus or the people that wrote the books they were editing.

reply to post by allenidaho

The New Testament as it exists today was formalized in 325 A.D. at the council of Nicaea,

Nope... That didn't happen til about 40 some odd years later my friend...

The council of Laodicea

No worries though... it seems a lot of people make that mistake

reply to post by jmdewey60


John 1-1 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 He was in the beginning with God;
3 All things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made”.

Given the fact that basic keys for the construction of matter are given in the first sentence of Genesis, we may now have another look at the mythical story of Adam and Eve contained within Genesis. Let’s look at the basic building blocks of matter once more: Source

reply to post by allenidaho


NOPE

WRONG WRONG WRONG.

Lee Strobel's THE CASE FOR THE REAL JESUS

refutes those allegations re dates etc.

Propaganda is a poor excuse for scholarship and factual historical evidence.

the life and times of michael prince. everyone must read. all these posts conspiracies and such ufo's aliens underground cities and bases. its all there in a cohesive text. he says he was taught that we were taught to believe in "god" to ensure we stay imprisoned in our minds. definitely worth a look. he explains why.

www.concienciaradio.com...

reply to post by AfterInfinity


Thanks for clarifying that for me. You were really able to grasp who I truly was as a person from reading my reply to the OP's original post. Now that you've shown me the way, I will never return to that person. Thank you, you have truly set me free. BTW, your post was completely off topic and irrelevant to the conversation at hand. Hence this post.

reply to post by Americanist

3 All things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made”

If you look at the Greek word translated as "him" twice in this verse, it does not necessarily have to mean a person.
Most Christians accept it unquestioningly that it is talking about Jesus even though they have no reason to think so other than someone told them that was so.
Here is a verse using that same word, in the same form, where it means a thing,
Matthew 13:32,
Though it is the smallest of all seeds, yet when it grows, it is the largest of garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds come and perch in its branches."

where the "its" in the last couple words in the verse is the same Greek word and form as is translated as "his" in the verse in John.
I think that the subject of the first part of John, the Logos, is the power that God has of making things happen by saying so.
In this case, John the Baptist is playing the part foretold in prophecy of Elijah coming to warn the leaders of the temple to repent, before the judgment comes, which did come, later, when it was destroyed in 70 AD.

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by jmdewey60

 

I think there's far too many fanatics in this thread to discuss this issue rationally...

Nothing new presented either... just the same old arguments that hold no water...

Not much of a surprise really. The thread is claiming they are being deceived, so of course they're going to be up in arms about it. They don't like being told the truth.

The thread might as well be a Marvel "What If...." issue that is no different than the "What if God is the Devil?" threads since OP hasn't offered anything substantial to support his premise other than a mishmash of other philosophies/religions taken out of their original context and meaning which can be construed to represent anything and added a bit of paranoia by questioning the motivations of a man who died for his beliefs.

Speaking of motivation, to the people who question Paul, what power was Paul given for the work he did? How much money was he paid? What would he stand to gain? This isn't exactly Constantine we are talking about. When he wrote those letters and such I sincerely doubt he thought they would be canonized unless God had revealed that to him. I would say he held some power before all of this as a Zealot but forsake all of that.

What was Jesus motive when he basically allowed himself to be captured, tortured, and crucified? I don't know but most criminals who engage in deceit stand to gain something and I see no gain from a life lost.

We look at the people who engage in global deceit now and see they live extravagant lives at the expense or detriment of others. They control and manipulate people to exploit them. Jesus came to free humanity from its self imposed bondage. We can look at false prophets and charlatans of past and present and see that few have the gaul to die for a lie yet Christ walked the walk and talked the talk.

Judge the fruits. Don't judge based on the political institution known as the Catholic church but Judge the man based on his teachings. Find fault with his teachings for me. Show me the teaching from Christ that indicates that we should do anything but love God and each other. If you can show me that then we can have something to debate besides what if scenarios.

reply to post by borntowatch

Why did the Jews kill Jesus then.

You don't know this story?
Jesus was killed because of his heretical ideas. This was all part of the prophecy and he knew it. He dared to stand up against the church and show that one does not need the approval of the clergy to be one with God. The early church was more of a hindrance then help in this matter, much like it is today.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

The thread is claiming they are being deceived,

The premise is that the Old Testament is true and Jesus was leading away from the Old Testament. I agree with the leading away from the Old Testament part. It's the Old Testament is true part that I disagree with.

Here's a top Jewish scholar at USC. SimonPeter might want to read this too.

In ancient Canaan, the land out of which emerged the Land of Israel and the People of Israel, there were warrior gods with characteristics that parallel some of the martial characteristics of the biblical God of Israel. It must be noted, however, that the God of Israel is not merely a warrior deity, but in fact combines all traits and associations of the major deities, including sustenance, fertility and compassion. We concentrate on the martial aspects of the Israelite deity for the purposes of this article only. The god Yamm of Ugarit (broadly, in Canaan) had messengers who appear as flaming warriors with flaming swords, parallel to the cherubs and flaming turning sword put in place by the God of the Hebrew Bible in Gen.3:24 (see also Num.22:31, Josh.5:13, 2Sam. 24:16-17, 1Chron. 21:27-40), and the image of the God of Israel as warrior (Ex.15:3), storm god (Gen.7, Ex.14:21) and king (1Sam. 8) parallels that of the martial god of Canaan known as Ba`al. In most cases in the ancient Near East, the gods fought one another in the heavens just as their human followers fought one another below. In only one case known from the literature of Ugarit does a god fight human warriors as does the God of Israel, and this is the goddess Anat. It is theorized that Israel's rejection of the existence of gods aside from the God of Israel mitigated against the old presumption of gods fighting one another as their subject peoples fought one another, and necessitated the deity engaging directly in battles with the human enemies of Israel (Miller, 1973).
. . .
All scholars, however, maintain that the biblical war narratives do not depict the actual history of the events they portray, but rather a literary interpretation.

HOLY WAR IDEA IN THE HEBREW BIBLE

Presumably, that would include all of the Joshua stories about invading and occupying Canaan's land as literary device (mythology)

reply to post by pthena


That was nice but you should try to understand Joshua in its original context. That being God was raising a nation and wiping out the remnant of giants and their offspring that survived the flood. Has it occurred to you that these other "deities" like Baal were borrowing aspects of the true creator? It seems obvious considering the limited range of abilities these other gods had and the fact that they had 0 power to ensure the survival of their "people" that they are the false amalgamations you are speaking of.

The Bible tells us Man used to walk with god. Then the fall happened. We lost out spititual protection. Ever since we are unable to 'walk with god' as his power is too immense for our flesh bodies to take. God comes down in fire (energy) so strong we would die in his presence. So, he send down a piece of himself in the form of Man, Jesus. Called his 'son' because it is just a small piece of God and not the whole. He is still God though.

In the end the veil is lifted and we will witness God's power again, we will once again have the spiritual clothing (protection).

If Jesus was a deception, does that mean we must not love each other (he said we must). It makes much less sense to say he was not God, as the whole concept of the Bible and Christianity would be incorrect so not believing Jesus as God would mean not believing in the Biblical God, which some people choose to do.....free will. Believing in one and not the other makes little sense.

The Bible has not changed over time. There are more ancient texts associated with the bible than any other piece of literature known to man. Any changes would be obvious. The dead sea scrolls (oldest texts) showed us the original texts are no different to modern versions.

Originally posted by chr0naut

Originally posted by borntowatch
Where does Jesus call us to worship Him,. or even pray to Him?

Other issues I will question after an answer to this

edit on 9-7-2013 by borntowatch because: (no reason given)

Matthew 15 8:-9 "This people draws near to me with their mouth, and honors me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men".

John 14:13 "You can ask for anything in my name, and I will do it, so that the Son can bring glory to the Father."

So are you suggesting that Jesus is asking us to worship Him??
and as for prayer

Jesus teaches humanity the Lords Prayer as the ideal prayer.
Starts with Our Father in heaven....

You can dispute that if you like.
Yes ask God in Jesus name, I dont deny that.
I dont read anywhere Jesus asks us to pray to Him.

I dont think praying to Jesus is bad or a heresy or anything, scripturaly we are taught to pray to the Father.
No biggy though

reply to post by NihilistSanta

That being God was raising a nation and wiping out the remnant of giants and their offspring that survived the flood.

So you think that the character you call "God" succeeded in basically wiping out all of humanity in a vain attempt to kill giants and failed to kill the giants?

Has it occurred to you that these other "deities" like Baal were borrowing aspects of the true creator?

The idea used to be forced on me, but now it seems that the Baals and Els and such were around before Yahweh made any literary appearance. The Egyptian god Amun is the only ancient deity mentioned as having created what is out of nothing.

It seems obvious considering the limited range of abilities these other gods had and the fact that they had 0 power to ensure the survival of their "people" that they are the false amalgamations you are speaking of.

What? The Canaanites became Israel. They survived just fine until Assyrian god Ashur showed up with his army. Then Marduk.showed up with his Babylonian army.