Jesus' message: Not what you would expect.

[ATAT]

<so if you just dont' judge you're already saved? Nope, sorry, you're taking those verses out of context bud.>

They are in context.

If you claim they are not, please show how.

They are in context.



<<There are no capital letters in Hebrew. ">

*sigh* if you really understood it you would know that it shows the significance of the title reflected in the hebrew... >

The title is always used to contrast man from God.

Many verses on this point.



<<"Psalms 2 is referring to King David. Proof: ">

LOL, no its, not. Read the whole passage. David never ruled on "zion" now did he?>

Wasn’t he King of Israel?

Acts 4:25-26 quotes the Psalm 2 showing the closeness of King David and God.
Acts 13 is false. It proves the NT is false. The book of Hebrews is also false, easy to prove by the way. At no point, however, does the false NT claim that Jesus is God.
Jesus denied it, and the NT writers did not believe it.

John 1:1 is talking about the literal word of God. Jesus studied that word and embodied it.

The first part of the chapter is written symbolically:

Example:John 1:5The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.
There’s no way to understand verse 5 literally. Therefore, it is clear that even verse 1 is symbolic.



<Sure, is God the Father flesh? Can he be tempted? If not then he can't relate to humans at all.>

Contradicted by:

Hosea 3:1
The Lord said to me, "Go, show your love to your wife again, though she is loved by another and is an adulteress. Love her as the Lord loves the Israelites, though they turn to other gods and love the sacred raisin cakes."

And many other places.


<Umm..not same of the word "savior". >

If I recall, Olive Oil called Popeye her ‘savior.’

This English word is generic.

<<"I’m going to want to compare your passage to similar passages of Elijah’s raising of the dead. " >

Did Elijah raise himself? If not its not applicable. >

This will be a learning opportunity for me:

Where does it say that Jesus ‘raised himself’ from the dead?

John 2
19Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days."

In this quote, Jesus is talking about the Temple as a symbol for his body.

But whenever we read the thirty or fifty accounts of what actually happened, it says that God did the raising of Jesus, not that Jesus raised himself (so for as I could determine, if you have a contradicting verse, let me know).


Acts 5:30
The God of our fathers raised Jesus from the dead–…

Acts 10:40
but God raised him from the dead on the third day and caused him to be seen.



Acts 13:30
But God raised him from the dead,



Acts 13:34
The fact that God raised him from the dead, …


Acts 13:37
But the one whom God raised from the dead did not see decay.


Jesus in verse John 2:19 is teaching that God will act through us.

For more detail on what Jesus believed on this, see where he talks about it in detail:

Talking to others:
Matthew 17:20
He replied, "Because you have so little faith. I tell you the truth, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there' and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you."[

Matthew 21:21
Jesus replied, "I tell you the truth, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig tree, but also you can say to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and it will be done.


Mark 11
21Peter remembered and said to Jesus, "Rabbi, look! The fig tree you cursed has withered!"
22"Have faith in God," Jesus answered. 23"I tell you the truth, if anyone says to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it will be done for him.

Luke 17:6
He replied, "If you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mulberry tree, 'Be uprooted and planted in the sea,' and it will obey you.

Jesus doesn’t think we will be God, too, does he?

Thank you for your post.

You clearly put some thought into it, it was on point, and thanks for that.

 

[ATAT]

LouisBooth

John 8:58 Is Jesus speaking as a prophet of God after defining his role as such.

Ref:
29 The one who sent me is with me; he has not left me alone, for I always do what pleases him."
54 Jesus replied, "If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me.
55 Though you do not know him, I know him. If I said I did not, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and keep his word.

John 1:1&amp;14 is not talking about Jesus directly, rather, Jesus studied the words of God and embodied them. It’s symbolic, as proven by the symbolic verse 5.

John 10:30 I and the Father are one." Is merely Jesus being ‘with’ God with the same goals. Not that he is God.

Similar use at:



John 17:11
I will remain in the world no longer, but they are still in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, protect them by the power of your name–the name you gave me–so that they may be one as we are one.


John 17:21
that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.


John 17:22
I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one:

Either Jesus is not claiming to be God, or he is asking for his followers to merge into one being. Reductio ad absurdum (reduced to the absurd to prove that can not be his meaning).

At John 20:28, Thomas does not say, ‘You are God.’ He is exclaiming out. Just like someone who sees a Ghost and says ‘My husband! My God!’ (this hasn’t actually happened to me)

Jesus does not claim to be God at John 20

Colossians 2

9For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form,

‘in’

Compare to:

John 17:21 that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: 23 I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

Are the followers God, too?

Philippians 2
5 Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:

= We should do just what Jesus did

6 Who, being in very nature God,

= characteristics of God. Love, etc.

did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,

= an argument that Jesus was not equal. It’s ‘not something to be grasped’

7 but made himself nothing,

= not a claim to be God.

taking the very nature of a servant,

= not a claim to be God.

being made in human likeness.

= not a claim to be God.

8 And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death-- even death on a cross!

= not a claim to be God.

9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,

= God referred to as a separate party.

10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,

= not a claim to be God

11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.

= two separated classes. The word ‘Lord’ is not calling Jesus ‘God’.

Hebrews 1:
8 But about the Son he says,
"Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever,

It is about the future man messiah, but he will not be ‘God’:


Taken from:

2 Samuel 7


13 He is the one who will build a house for my Name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. 14 I will be his father, and he will be my son. When he does wrong, I will punish him with the rod of men, with floggings inflicted by men.

That can not be a literal reference to God. Unless you think that God l’havdil can do wrong and get punished.

Proof that Jesus is talking symbolically, not that he is really God at John 1:

1 John 4
2 This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God,
3 but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world.
4 You, dear children, are from God and have overcome them, because the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world.
5 They are from the world and therefore speak from the viewpoint of the world, and the world listens to them. 6 We are from God,

We can see two things:

1. Being ‘from’ God is not to BE literally God.
2. Having God or Jesus ‘in’ us does not make us God or Jesus.

Jjohn 8
2 4 I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be, you will indeed die in your sins."

= if they did not trust Jesus was from God, they might not forgive others, then they wouldn’t be forgiven

25 "Who are you?" they asked.
26 "Just what I have been claiming all along,"

= Jesus certainly has not been claiming to be God all along. So Jesus must be something else. How about a ‘SON’ of God / or a ‘SON’ of man’?



Jesus replied. "I have much to say in judgment of you. But he who sent me is reliable, and what I have heard from him I tell the world."

= Jesus obviously a man of God. Not God himself.

27 They did not understand that he was telling them about his Father.

= a common mistake.

28 So Jesus said, "When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am the one I claim to be and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me.
= Jesus clearly speaking on BEHALF of God, not claiming to be God.

29 The one who sent me is with me; he has not left me alone, for I always do what pleases him."

= Jesus is never ‘alone’ even though God IS.

<HE title="" 3:14 Exodus quoting by divine the claiming was>
Or he was speaking on behalf of God as a prophet, as he just finished claiming to be.



<THE the <br includes: Christ of deity Doctrine>The Trinity - There is one God who exists in three persons: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. They are all coeternal, and of the same nature.&gt;

I’m glad you admit it is from Doctrine and not compelled by any biblical verse.

Odd that so many books can’t be troubled to say it clearly once.
Unless it isn’t the case.



<THE the <br Christ of world sins for pay to sufficient completely is sacrifice>As God - Jesus must be God to be able to offer a sacrifice of value greater than that of a mere man.
He had to die for the sins of the world (1 John 2:2). Only God could do that.&gt;

Well, let’s see if all those arguments hold up from your verse:

1 John 2:
2 He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

= that could mean that he was literally the sin atonement sacrifice you claim him to be, or it could be that it is symbolic in that he gave up his life to teach that you have to forgive others, treat them as equals, do not look down on others in condemnation.

Let’s see if the context will choose for us which is correct:


3 We know that we have come to know him if we obey his commands.

= what commands? Jesus never commanded us to rely upon him as a literal sin atonement sacrifice.
He did say we could not judge, condemn others, and that we must forgive them to be forgiven.


4 The man who says, "I know him," but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
5 But if anyone obeys his word, God's love is truly made complete in him. This is how we know we are in him:
6 Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did.

= What has this got to do with a literal sin atonement sacrifice?
On the other hand, if you walk as Jesus did, having compassion on the low man, forgiving him, seeing the merit in his search of God, then you are walking as Jesus did.


7 Dear friends, I am not writing you a new command but an old one, which you have had since the beginning. This old command is the message you have heard.

= The only thing we’ve heard so far from Jesus is that we have to forgive others.


8 Yet I am writing you a new command; its truth is seen in him and you, because the darkness is passing and the true light is already shining.

= So what is this ‘new’ command?

9 Anyone who claims to be in the light but hates his brother is still in the darkness.

= not a statement about believing Jesus is a sin atonement sacrifice. Actually, it sounds like a restatement of the ‘old command’, only that you must love your brother…

10 Whoever loves his brother lives in the light, and there is nothing in him to make him stumble.

= NOTHING??&nbsp; What about all those who love their brother but don't believe that Jesus is God... if this verse is correct, then they are in good shape.


11 But whoever hates his brother is in the darkness and walks around in the darkness; he does not know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded him.

Now, why didn’t the writer spell out having to believe in Jesus as a sin atonement sacrifice? Jesus never said to rely on any sacrifice, he argued to the contrary quoting Hosea 6:6.

Here, we think we’re supposed to be getting the requirement - for the first time - to believe Jesus is a LITERAL Temple style sin atonement sacrifice, and yet the context immediately becomes a re-statement of Jesus’ central theme.


So what, with context, does

1 John 2:
2 He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

mean?

With context, it means he sacrificed his life so that we could hear his message.
His message was on how to atone for our sins.

How?


Mat 6
12Forgive us our debts,
as we also have forgiven our debtors.
13 And lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from the evil one.'
14 For if you forgive men when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you.
15 But if you do not forgive men their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.


Luke 6:37 "Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven.

That’s what Jesus’ commands are.

On 1 Tim. 2:5For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,

That’s not a claim for Jesus to be God. That’s a statement that there is ‘one’ God.
That’s a statement that Jesus is the ‘one’ man mediator.

Thank you for your post.

Perhaps you could bring the text of any verses you bring in the future so I can be sure you are engaged in the verses you bring? I’m not saying you, but I’ve had people bring me lists of verses and expect me to get into them all.

Then, when I spend two or four hours on looking them up, examining them in context, then usually they don’t even reply at all to more than half of them.

If you could actually look up the verses you bring and bring the text, that is one indication that you are at least partially engaged to the subject matter / verses that you introduce. As a former Christian, I found it unlikely that anyone would want to look up a verse that I didn’t even bother to look up for them.

Thank you for your post.

Looking forward to your reply on all the many points and verses you brought up.

ATAT

 

[LouisBooth]

"If you claim they are not, please show how. "

*sigh* Just did. If you never judge anyone you won't be judged. that is a wrong statement but one that you make. According to the bible, all will be judged, thus you have misinterpreted these verses and taken then out of context.

"The title is always used to contrast man from God. "

NO, it doesn't. Son of God is not used to contrast man to God. That is why they went to stone Christ when he called himself that.

"The first part of the chapter is written symbolically: "

LOL, I just quoted Acts 13..do you not believe Paul now? *hands you some siccors* go ahead and cut that verse out *rolls eyes*


"Hosea 3:1
The Lord said to me, "Go, show your love to your wife again, though she is loved by another and is an adulteress. Love her as the Lord loves the Israelites, though they turn to other gods and love the sacred raisin cakes."

And many other places. "

This verse doesn't show God relating to humans at all, just an statement to us to be more God-like. Not God being more "human-like".

"This English word is generic. "

If you think so then find in the NT God is called savior then we can talk (other then that verse, for it shows the linkage to Christ explicitly).

"Where does it say that Jesus ‘raised himself’ from the dead? "

I just quoted you the verse..aren't you keeping up? aren't you reading what you're writing?

"John 2
19Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days."

In this quote, Jesus is talking about the Temple as a symbol for his body. "

thus Jesus raised HIMSELF from the dead.

"But whenever we read the thirty or fifty accounts of what actually happened, it says that God did the raising of Jesus, not that Jesus raised himself "

Exactly, because Jesus is God. He says I will raise myself and other verses say God raised him..so is Christ a liar or is he God? Hint: Christ is God.

"Jesus doesn’t think we will be God, too, does he? "

*chuckles* no but christ didn't say, "if I have faith."
Christ did said, I will. Period. He makes the power raising himself. In those verses you quote christ says Have faith in (ie implict saying, Have faith in God to do it or fufill your request). In John 2 Christ makes it clear HE is the motivating power, not faith in God the father.

 

[LouisBooth]

"Either Jesus is not claiming to be God, or he is asking for his followers to merge into one being. "


*sigh* you clearly dont understand this verse. Is the church two different things? NO, it is one thing, just as Christ and the Father are ONE God. I guess you don't understand that but its clearly implied in the passage.

"Compare to:

John 17:21 that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: 23 I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

Are the followers God, too?
"

LOL, so now we are not taking the context of the book into account are we? Before Paul makes this statement he makes it CLEAR that he is making a theologic statement used to battle against philophy (ref col 2:8). He then simply says, Christ is God in a body. No kidding around. Christ is God. That's what Paul says *hands you siccors* go ahead get to cutting.


"6 Who, being in very nature God,

= characteristics of God. Love, etc. "

NO, you fail to take the greek into account the word used for essence is 3444 morphe {mor-fay'}

perhaps from the base of 3313 (through the idea of adjustment of
parts); TDNT - 4:742,607; n f

AV - form 3; 3

It plainly says Christ was God. *hands you some siccors* get to cutting.


"Jesus never commanded us to rely upon him as a literal sin atonement sacrifice.
"

LOL..yes he did. Let me quote, "I am the way, the truth and the life, NO ONE gets to the father except THROUGH ME." Jesus commanded and tells us exactly that. Making that verse 1john 2 quite applicable to what I quoted.


"With context, it means he sacrificed his life so that we could hear his message. "

LOL..keep twisting the scriptures. it plainly says he was the sacrifice as evidenced by JOhn (in chapter 1) calling him the lamb of God, which has HUGE significance. Christ himself was the passover lamb. He was the sin sacrifice. Not his teachings, HE WAS.



"I’m not saying you, but I’ve had people bring me lists of verses and expect me to get into them all. "

I did that. See my previous posts (the ones you didn't even address. You asked I gave, now you're saying I didn't give? *sigh*

 

[ATAT]

I am currently occupied with a project.

Anyone who wants a personal reply:

at8080@yahoo.com

 

[LouisBooth]

Hope you're doing well with your project.

 

[SimpleChristian]

Yea....and all we need for eternal life is to offer a stranger a glass of water....YEP....Jesus said it so those exact words must be the ONLY thing that he meant.

Why is it that most people never even seem to have heard of the word 'context'?

 

[MatthewDiscipleofGod]

Great stuff LouisBooth. I applaud your work in this thread.

 

[Othniel]

Originally posted by ATAT
[The greatest irony in history is that Jesus... [/B]

I disagree.&nbsp; The greatest irony in history is that atheists are more evangelical about their beliefs than most Christians.&nbsp; They spend constant hours researching their beliefs.&nbsp; They are never afraid to share their beliefs.&nbsp; And they vigorously defend their belief at nearly all costs.&nbsp; If only Christians could be so steadfast in their own faith...sin is definitely a boggling phenomenon.

&nbsp;

Peace to all who seek it,

&lt;&gt;&lt;

 

[Othniel]

BTW... no intention to take away from the exemplory work of Lou here. Keep it up, but...

"ever hearing, they will not understand"...

Peace to all who seek it,
<><

 

[Freodin]

ATAT, an atheist? Where did you get this notion?

 

[LouisBooth]

"Othniel"

yeah, I agree, some just dont' wanna hear or simply plain can't hear. I still pray for them.

 

[Thinker]

I think I like this ATAT guy.

With regard to the `son of god' stuff, in the jewish culture of the time, it was a honorific, *NOT* a literal claim. About a century prior to the time of Jesus, it was bestowed upon Honi the Circle Drawer, a famous magician; I believe a rabbi or three of Pauls time claimed the title without conflict; essentially the person claiming it was saying he was favored of God. The `Son of God' thing goes way back into the bible; the literal translation of Moses, for example, is `Son of' or `Servant of'; and was almost invariably combined with the name of a God (Ptahmoses, Ramses). Mesha, king of the Moabites, identifies himself as `Son of Chemosh' on the Moabite stone (as well as giving his mortal fathers name).

Drat. Is that Louis headed this way with a torch and a pile of firewood?

*scurries off.*

 

[LouisBooth]

"Drat. Is that Louis headed this way with a torch and a pile of firewood?
"

*laughs* not my job. You're right about the honorific thing. Pslams 2. It was a term to talk about first born, ie authority. See jewish culture.

 

[foolsparade]

He that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness.
- Mark 3:29

And by him that believe are justified from all things.
- Acts 13:39

 

[ATAT]

I'm back with more time if anyone has a point to make on this topic.

 

[Evangelion]

Hey, ATAT! Long time no see!

Still giving the Christians something to think about, eh?

Good stuff!

 

[Evangelion]

Louis, just a minor point here, because I don't want to interrupt ATAT - who is doing a splendid job already:

NO, you fail to take the greek into account the word used for essence is 3444 morphe {mor-fay'}

*ahem*

Unfortunately for Trinitarians, morphe is not the Greek word for "essence" at all. If Paul had intended to convey the idea of "essence" or "nature", he would, at the very least, have used a word like &#966;&#965;&#769;&#963;&#953;&#962; (phusis), or perhaps even &#965;&#960;&#959;&#769;&#963;&#964;&#945;&#963;&#953;&#962; (hupostasis.) If he had wanted to say that Christ possessed a divine nature before being "humbled", he would have used the word &#952;&#949;&#959;&#769;&#964;&#951;&#962; (theote&#772;s.)

But he doesn't use any of these terms. Instead, he uses &#956;&#959;&#961;&#966;&#951;&#769; (morphe&#772;), which means something else entirely.

Read your Bible carefully, and you will discover what that "something" actually is...

 

[ATAT]

Total Thread Recap:

My bible, you know, the one with the four Gospels, has this fellow, 'Jesus' preaching that to be forgiven we have to forgive others.

Very nice.

Oh. by the way. It destroys modern Christianity.

Right?

Right?

Hello?

Anybody think that's wrong??

 

[brewmama]

Since it has always been a tenet of the Christian faith to forgive our enemies, I don't really see your point. Forgiveness is nothing new. Even refugees fleeing for their lives from Muslim murderers say they forgive their tormentors. (Saintly people!)