Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
No the conclusion is that the resurrected ANOINTED ONE OF GOD cause Thomas to call Him (Jesus) O THEOS MOU . . . THE GOD of me. Nuff said. You can argue with John . . .
"God," in this time period, referred to the father, as you affirm it still only does. If Jesus had said "I am God," he would have said he was the father, which is wrong by all accounts, trinitarian and non-trinitarian. You expect him to say it if you are to accept the trinity, but if He did say, it, it would disprove the trinity and prove modalism. He couldn't have said anything short, concise, and pithy to explain the nature of the Godhead, because technical language had not yet been created to destcribe it. Accordingly, all we have are statements that seem to conflict, like "The father is greater than I" and "I and the father are one," which do the job that we would use more technical language for.
Thomas knew full well that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God and he knew full well, just like all the disciples that Jesus was not God!!!
Well no, the OP does not assume the account true. That's why they are basically asking, how do Christians come to that conclusion. The name of the thread is Did Jesus claim divinity, which is not a claim, it's a question and their follow on threads take issue with the claim. So no, they are not assuming the account true either.
Don't know what you mean by "compatible" but the John Gospel lays out a complete different Jesus then the others. That is why even Theological seminary school academics seperate the other three Gospels from John. That is why they are considered "Synoptic" as in a similar Jesus. That is my point so I guess all those devout Christians who understand the vast difference in Jesus from the synoptics to John are disengenuous too.
I have. I have said it is not a direct claim and stated why it is not a direct claim.
No....it's not. A play on words used indirectly is a claim given the iterature, but it is still an inference claim. On it's face it's an odd claim. It requires the antagonist to infer the "I AM" statement is in reference to the "I AM THAT I AM" from Exodus, and needs the reaction of the antagonists to make the inference known. These three aspects to decifer a claim is by no means a direct claim.
You know, I did not say that Jesus said I am God word for word. I said that he said 'I am' which is what I was asking you to explain.
Then you just admitted that Jesus thought He was God. Thus, Jesus' 'I am' statements mean the same thing as 'I am God' given their cultural reference and Scriptural reference to Exodus where God tells Moses 'I AM'. Please be more consistent in your posts, you might confuse people.The Jews' wanted to stone Jesus for making himself equal to God!
Hm... That was the exact point - to demonstrate for you that not ONLY Christians made the claim that Jesus was divine - but EVEN non-Christians have observed and reached that conclusion: that early Christians looked upon Jesus as divine...
I'm sorry to see that you find my provision of evidence as "useless". You should instead be grateful that I care to back up my claims by providing not only Biblical evidence, but also historical one - which being non-Christian can not be thought to contain bias of any Christian theological party.
Pliny was simply not a Christian and he watched the Christians of his time and wrote down what he saw them do (no doubt he considered Christians and their likes as simple scum).
Yes, the Father is the allmighty God, and above I gave evidence from non-Christian sources to back up what the Bible already has spoken about several times.
Best,
Disippelen
Well brother, I don't see anything wrong with what you posted today.
You cannot expect anyone to take you seriously if you do not do your homework to back your claims. I thank God for critical thinking more than I do free will.
Why would I expect someone with an opposing opinion to take me seriously?
After all, I don't take you seriously, but I don't carp on about it as you do!
Take a chill pill.
If I was not taking you seriously I would not have the decency to point out the flaws in your arguments and claims. If I was not taking you seriously, I would do you disrespect and simply laugh at them, mock them, ignore them, or start attacking your character- all of which are immature choices. What is your choice?Why would I expect someone with an opposing opinion to take me seriously?
After all, I don't take you seriously, but I don't carp on about it as you do!
Take a chill pill.
