Do Christians desire to replace God with Jesus?

[radhead]

You can't replace God with Jesus; Jesus is God.

Christians who say that are getting very close to Atheism. Which is the reason I can't call myself a Christian.

 

[Strong in Him]

Christians who say that are getting very close to Atheism. Which is the reason I can't call myself a Christian.

What??
Jesus is God, this is a Scriptural statement.
The Jews crucified him for blasphemy; they knew he was claiming to be God.

How can that be " very close" to saying that there is no God?

 

[radhead]

What??
Jesus is God, this is a Scriptural statement.
The Jews crucified him for blasphemy; they knew he was claiming to be God.

How can that be " very close" to saying that there is no God?

That is verging on both Atheism and anti-Semitism. I believe the New Testament is the primary source of that.

I don't mind saying that man wrote the Bible. But to completely replace the One God with human beings means that a person must have a corrupted image of God to begin with.

 

[Aryeh Jay]

What??
Jesus is God, this is a Scriptural statement.
The Jews crucified him for blasphemy; they knew he was claiming to be God.

How can that be " very close" to saying that there is no God?

The penalty for blasphemy in Judaism is stoning, not being crucified. So I guess it was the Romans that crucified Jesus.

 

[Strong in Him]

The penalty for blasphemy in Judaism is stoning, not being crucified. So I guess it was the Romans that crucified Jesus.

I know it is.
The Jewish leaders had no power to put Jesus to death - as they were an occupied country. That is why they accused Jesus of treason against Caesar. Roman soldiers carried out the crucifixion after false charges were brought by the Jewish leaders.

But Jesus came to die for the sins of the world. Offering his perfect life as a sacrifice for our sin, was in the plan of God.
If you're asking who was ultimately responsible for Jesus' death, it was mankind. If there hadn't been any sin in the world, we wouldn't have needed a Saviour.

 

[Strong in Him]

That is verging on both Atheism

How can saying that Jesus is God, be "on the verge of " saying that there is no God at all?

and anti-Semitism.

Ok, let me rephrase that.
Some of the Jewish leaders wanted Jesus to be put to death for blasphemy. As the country was occupied by the Romans, they had no power to do this, so they told the Roman authorities that he was guilty of treason.
That is not anti semitism, that is fact.

But see my previous answer; Jesus came to die for the sins of the world. Both Roman and Jewish authorities played a part in this, but so did every one of us - we are all sinners.

I don't mind saying that man wrote the Bible. But to completely replace the One God with human beings means that a person must have a corrupted image of God to begin with.

Firstly, men wrote the Bible under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
No one replaced God with a human being. God himself came to earth and was born as a human being - man, and yet still God.

 

[cloudyday2]

If you're asking who was ultimately responsible for Jesus' death, it was mankind. If there hadn't been any sin in the world, we wouldn't have needed a Saviour.

I would say it was the fault of Jesus. The gospels made it clear that everybody including the disciples knew that it would be very dangerous for Jesus to attend the Passover in Jerusalem, but Jesus attended and disrupted the money changers in the Temple. Jesus can't blame anybody but Himself IMO (unless He argues that He was mentally ill and therefore not responsible for His actions).

EDIT: I don't mean to be disrespectful to the followers of Jesus, but I think if you are honest with yourselves you would agree that Jesus brought about His own death. Maybe Jesus had good reasons for His actions, but the Roman and Jewish authorities were only doing their jobs.

 

[Strong in Him]

I would say it was the fault of Jesus.

You might say it was the fault of Jesus - if you reject the idea that God was in control, that Jesus predicted his own death and even said he had come to die, that his death is prophesied in the OT, many years before Jesus was born and that the voluntary death of a perfect, and innocent, man was the only thing that could reconcile mankind to God.

The gospels made it clear that everybody including the disciples knew that it would be very dangerous for Jesus to attend the Passover in Jerusalem,

Yes - because they were looking at it from a human point of view.
Jesus was doing God's will. It was God's plan that Jesus would die for our sin.

Jesus can't blame anybody but Himself IMO

Jesus wasn't blaming anyone at all.
Quite the opposite - he prayed for the soldiers, as they hammered nails into his hands, that God would forgive them.

EDIT: I don't mean to be disrespectful to the followers of Jesus, but I think if you are honest with yourselves you would agree that Jesus brought about His own death.

When Jesus was on the cross he said that he could pray to his Father and he would send 12 legions of angels to help him.
In John 10, Jesus spoke of himself as the Good Shepherd who willingly gave his life for the sheep. He said that no one could take it from him; he had authority to lay it down.

If it had not been God's will for his Son to die, no one could have touched him. They tried to stone him earlier in his ministry; and failed.
As you say, he didn't have to go to Jerusalem and overturn the tables. If he had been intent on preserving his own life, he wouldn't have said anything controversial or upset the leaders in any way.

Maybe Jesus had good reasons for His actions,

Yes! Like saving the world from sin, reconciling us to God and making it possible for you and I to be his children and go to heaven.

 

[radhead]

I know it is.
The Jewish leaders had no power to put Jesus to death - as they were an occupied country. That is why they accused Jesus of treason against Caesar. Roman soldiers carried out the crucifixion after false charges were brought by the Jewish leaders.

You make it sound like the Romans were puppets in the hands of these powerful Jews. That's insane. That is not how the gospels are supposed to be read (literally). And that false claim is why we can know with 100% certainty that the gospels were fiction.

 

[Ygrene Imref]

Their imagery is one of the son of the king seated at the right hand of the king. In this case it is Jesus seated next to the Father. The natural conclusion is that Jesus will one day replace the Father in heaven.

Personally, I never felt any fear of God. Not until I first heard the dogma of evangelical Christianity. Before that my image was of a loving God.

Do Christians really desire to kill/remove/replace the image of God so much? Isn't it possible that their image of God is FALSE?

Why do they seem to want God to be removed from his position?

Maybe because the paradox of the Word of God actually existing simultaneously as God the Father - yet having different rank/class/function - is a bit too confusing. Every time you see when God spoke to people (especially when people saw Him without being disintegrated upon gaze,) it was Christ/The Word of God. They are the same.

If I had the power to make my literal words become human - it would literally and absolutely be my son. It is the power of my will and intellect incarnate into a human. It is me.

I would also have no problem giving my son all the power I had - because it is me. It is the power of my will and intellect incarnate into a human.

However, the will comes from me. The power comes from me. The intelligence comes from me. Yet, because this incarnate entity is me, it will be perfectly in unity with my power, will and intelligence. The fine line of authority comes from my arbitration, but my incarnate logos is my son with my full power, will and intelligence.


That is why it is more consequential that The Word of God - also known as Christ - is God. Yet, He still requires authority from His Father to do something. Did He want to be tortured in his flux between humanity and Deity? Well, the pain was bad and even before He conversed with His Father that he could do it another way. Yet, He did what His Father desired.

That was all (paradoxically) still God - which is why Christ said if you see Him, you have seen the Father. He is, and always has been loving beyond loving.

 

[Strong in Him]

You make it sound like the Romans were puppets in the hands of these powerful Jews. That's insane.

Not in the case of Pilate it wasn't.

When the Jews said to the authorities, "this man is committing blasphemy and doing ......", the Romans said that it was a religious, and local, matter and they should sort it out among themselves. So they told the Romans that Jesus was claiming to be king, (as he had spoken of his kingdom.) But even Herod could find no reason to put him on trial, or that he had done wrong. As he didn't know what to do, he handed Jesus back to Pilate.
Pilate needed to keep the Romans happy, as he had been made governor and could have lost his position, and also wanted to keep the Jews happy. He had already upset them by taking troops into the temple, and caused upset in other ways, and the Roman powers were cross with him because of it. The last thing they wanted was rebellion/uprisings in one of their occupied territories.
Pilate agreed to release Barabbas and have Jesus put to death, which pandered to the Jews and prevented an uprising, which pacified the Roman officials.

That is not how the gospels are supposed to be read (literally). And that false claim is why we can know with 100% certainty that the gospels were fiction.

Saying that one statement proves beyond all doubt that all the Gospels are fiction, is what is insane.

I know with 100% certainty that the Gospels are true.

 

[radhead]

Saying that one statement proves beyond all doubt that all the Gospels are fiction, is what is insane.

I know with 100% certainty that the Gospels are true.

No, it's just a very convenient way for Christians to be anti-Semitic because if the Bible says it, it must be true. It's no different than being anti-woman or homophobic. You can wash your hands of that and say, it's not me, it's God who believes these horrible things. It's sick.

 

[RDKirk]

No, it's just a very convenient way for Christians to be anti-Semitic because if the Bible says it, it must be true. It's no different than being anti-woman or homophobic. You can wash your hands of that and say, it's not me, it's God who believes these horrible things. It's sick.

I think your point to this thread is merely to argue that Christians are anti-Semitic.

 

[Strong in Him]

No, it's just a very convenient way for Christians to be anti-Semitic

Nonsense.

Jesus was a Jew. The disciples, early church and Paul were Jews. Christianity sprang from Judaism.
All of them had only the Jewish Scriptures, from which they quoted and read - as we do today. These Scriptures are our OT; if we went to a Jewish synagogue, we'd all be reading from the same Scriptures.

Personally, I have books on Judaism, have been to a synagogue and supported Jewish charities.

You can wash your hands of that and say, it's not me, it's God who believes these horrible things. It's sick.

What is sick is you implying that I am anti-Semitic because I stated that in Jesus' time, some of the Jewish leaders opposed him and wanted him out of the way. That is a fact.
Jesus was a Jew. So it was one of their own people who was claiming not only to be the Messiah, but to be God. Some of them didn't like that so they planned to arrest him and have him killed. That is a fact.
Other Jews loved Jesus, followed him and believed in him; but not all of them.

Anti-Semitic would be saying, "Jesus was a Jew and I hate Jews so I'm having nothing to do with him." Or, "Jesus was an Englishman and ALL the Jews killed him, so we hate ALL the Jews."

Would you say that the person who shot Kennedy was anti American, or the people who killed Caesar were anti Roman? I doubt it.
It could be that, in their minds, they believed that they were doing the right thing for the good of the country - same with the Pharisees.

 

[radhead]

I think your point to this thread is merely to argue that Christians are anti-Semitic.

Maybe that is the message that God intended for people to hear. But it was definitely not my original point. My original point was that some Christians may have an overly judging and harsh view of God.

 

[radhead]

What is sick is you implying that I am anti-Semitic because I stated that in Jesus' time, some of the Jewish leaders opposed him and wanted him out of the way. That is a fact.

I'm sorry you took it that way, but I was not thinking that. I was just pointing out that the gospels have been a great source of anti-Semitism.

I looked at my post and said "you" but I didn't mean it to sound that way. It wouldn't have, if we had been having a real life conversation.

 

[Strong in Him]

I'm sorry you took it that way, but I was not thinking that. I was just pointing out that the gospels have been a great source of anti-Semitism.

Yes, I'm sure.
If people decide to hate the Jews, they will find things to prove their point. Or if they want to turn against Christans, they could accuse us of hating the Jews.

I looked at my post and said "you" but I didn't mean it to sound that way. It wouldn't have, if we had been having a real life conversation.

No problem.
Maybe I'm oversensitive; sorry.

 

[gadar perets]

Their imagery is one of the son of the king seated at the right hand of the king. In this case it is Jesus seated next to the Father. The natural conclusion is that Jesus will one day replace the Father in heaven.

The natural conclusion is that Almighty YHWH granted His Son the power to rule as well, but not to replace His rule.

Isn't it possible that their image of God is FALSE

Yes. Not willfully false, but incorrect due to a variety of reasons.

Why do they seem to want God to be removed from his position?

I don't think they want Him removed, but I do believe they are taking glory away from Him. For example, to say it was the Son that parted the Red Sea is to detract from the glory of YHWH. That is simply a negative side effect of a faulty interpretation of Scripture.

 

[gadar perets]

...For example, to me it is pretty clear that "son of man" refers to someone of the lower working classes. That image of him being so highly honored was a quite new idea, compared to classic religious gods who were always more like members of the ruling classes.

The Son's exaltation from a lower position to a highly exalted position fulfills the type of the life of Joseph who went from a slave to second in command in Egypt. The life of Joseph is an uncanny parallel to the life of Yeshua.

 

[gadar perets]

What??
Jesus is God, this is a Scriptural statement.
The Jews crucified him for blasphemy; they knew he was claiming to be God.

Please quote a verse where Scripture says, "Jesus is God". Just because some Jews erroneously claimed that does not make it so. The Jews were constantly misunderstanding Yeshua's words.