What Language Does God Speak

[Zstar]

I’ve not studied the Mayan calendar thoroughly but are impressed with surface knowledge of an interlocking circle design of different Transits and Times.

Thanks smaneck for the information, I respect it and appreciate you helping me to understand the traditionally accepted scientific understanding in History - 'modern reconstruction’ – I like that term, I guess the Dead Sea Scrolls shed light on a lot of that hugh?

The tradition of Religion that our Prophets leave us is important and due respect. I just wonder about it all, it’s volumes thus leaves me questioning it all across all the belief systems and Religions.

As a Zoroastrian the Magi transmitting source Data in Texts to us that rhyme from Zoroaster – that at one time became illegible but they still transmitted it this adds another dimension to the Old Avestan script to me. See a Language holds the key to understanding a Faith and Religion. What Religions teach at the foundation for one must be inspiring, like the teachings of Jesus to me especially ‘Parrables’.

The authenticity of some such as Christianity and Islam with the tradition of the founders from what I understand known as illiterate being passed down by those that knew them makes them more reliable to me also .

I find it interesting how Culture influences ones Religious beliefs and are interconnected to Religion and understand the importance of Scriptures in some Religions. As a Christian this is where I find the Great Commission (see below) - the reason we are all here.

I believe in the Trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit as One God - the Creator God the Source of Creation - the Universe – we reside in. Creation is in our DNA being so connected to Space from the Earth and Sun and other Stars. The Magi legacy of Astrology and an Astrological ‘Star of Jesus’ may not be as bogus as some purport.


[16] Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them. [17] And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted.[18] And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.[19] Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:[20] Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

 

[ArmenianJohn]

.

 

[Robert Bee]

TRINITY In the KJV there are two texts that have no GREEK words. ! John 5:7-8.
Take great care as that is TRINITY and not of GOD.
Sure not three gods. just the FATHER is GOD. sure the other two are divine .GOD said this is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased"
JESUS said" I do everything through the father that sent me "
If JESUS was GOD he could not die on the cross. JESUS was thee WORD the son in the family of GOD just as"Let Us create man in our IMAGE ."
For now are we the sons of GOD !!!!!!
if you disagree that is HUMAN LOGIC for you .

 

[smaneck]

TRINITY In the KJV there are two texts that have no GREEK words. ! John 5:7-8.
Take great care as that is TRINITY and not of GOD.
Sure not three gods. just the FATHER is GOD. sure the other two are divine .GOD said this is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased"
JESUS said" I do everything through the father that sent me "
If JESUS was GOD he could not die on the cross. JESUS was thee WORD the son in the family of GOD just as"Let Us create man in our IMAGE ."
For now are we the sons of GOD !!!!!!
if you disagree that is HUMAN LOGIC for you .

Actually this is the one statement I've seen from you that is logical.

 

[Zstar]

TRINITY In the KJV there are two texts that have no GREEK words. ! John 5:7-8.
Take great care as that is TRINITY and not of GOD.
Sure not three gods. just the FATHER is GOD. sure the other two are divine .GOD said this is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased"
JESUS said" I do everything through the father that sent me "
If JESUS was GOD he could not die on the cross. JESUS was thee WORD the son in the family of GOD just as"Let Us create man in our IMAGE ."
For now are we the sons of GOD !!!!!!
if you disagree that is HUMAN LOGIC for you .

It all comes down to language – see – what one is saying…Jesus asked us to teach what he taught to other Nations – I think the closest we could come is the Parables in the Native Dialect…considering the tradition of Jesus leaving us the burden. I find it amazing the connection of Aramaic to Avestan mentioned in studies and how Saint Matthew mentions ‘Magi’ from the ‘East’.

 

[Zstar]

I find it fascinating how language makes us understand concepts. The ‘Baghdad battery’ and Alchemy, in relation to Science makes sense, explaining the exaltation of Pharmacia. Andromeda is calculated to collide with us – how far does one delve into these mysteries…embrace the moment…the Prophets were right – another Apocalyptic event is right around the corner…another object from space could collide with us at any time.

 

[Zstar]

Thinking about what you all said, thanks for the replies! What you all said is true and I agree God basically speaks those ways. I love the idea of Esperanto! Didn't imply anything before in my words God could even understand it just that God could communicate in any cultural dialog. Esperanto could help our planet break the language boundary - this would be good for common words all languages could understand - like God, that term would mean Ahura Mazda (Ohrmazd), Elohim, YWHW, Allah, ect. Some like Saint John say Jesus is the 'Word', I'm totally in love with his story and how a Creator outside of creation cared to reach out and become incarnate. I find it interesting the legends about Mary and her 'tomb', like Jesus and his so can relate to what Christians have at the core although like Jesus said not everyone can understand certain knowledge so Jesus taught in Parable. A Parable would be a type of language in sorts itself then huh?

After discovering a correspondence to all the other major Religions at the core to the Golden Rule it leads me to believe what I understand about the Bahia Faith personally - the 'Avatars' are right for the time and place out of respect for Religions. Which again brings me right back here to this language question, how can any Faith convey their message to the world except it be with understood terminology. Don't get me wrong in no way am I saying becoming obsessed with a certain language as if it's better than all others is the way, they are just tools to communicate. With that in mind basing ones faith on a word or two of a lengthy text doesn't sound like it's the way to do it. What if - like Peter smiting off the ear of the soldier, which Jesus healed but think ... after all that time with Jesus personally Peter's Religious background modified the language or meaning of the Parables to him warping it even to who the Messiah who led him to walk on the water stands for even the Kingdom concepts for that matter. Not like I do understand it neither from such source materials but I'm trying to piece it all together thinking the broad picture of several passages better to get an author and what they are saying instead hinging your doctrines on something written that might have been meant to say the opposite, like the concept unlimited can be transformed to something different by a couple letters missing or an author can color the message with their own ideas and background. No offense intended just writing ideas out.

I'm no longer motivated to debate or out to document I have proper error-less conclusions or promoting my way as the only right way - just trying to figure the way I see Truth out in being a seeker of the way it is meant to be understood. It's difficult for me to figure out all Religious Theology in all its complexity so I'm content to settle on the Golden Rule with a sprinkling of the Lord's Prayer and Supper. It amazes me the intellectual ability of some and makes me humble, I question about participating here at the forum at all sometimes. My field of study is Astrology and so not being so well received gets tiring after a while, perhaps to inspire someone along the path and share ideas. The Magi being the first to worship Jesus from my understanding inspires me and I know I don't need anyone nor Christianity or Zoroastrianism to tell me my path is in error - it fits for me. My website dedicated to the Magi does pull up on related Google searches for researchers so I'm not here to convert anyone - lol - just thinking about everything - bring any ideas to you? Reading your all's words has often helped me to learn and grow so I'm grateful. I need to start arranging all the fragments of knowledge at the data pages into their allocation perhaps instead of writing a post which is at best tolerated by others who believe differently at their foundation. Jesus and his Star I find such an amazing discovery, need to work on the mathematics for the Resurrection chart of Jesus - it's said to be Pi and Geocentric the 'Orbs' - tolerance for Aspects - I think is offsetting the alignments of my calculations.

I hope it's understood that I do care about my research and what I write - just thinking about it all a bit out loud here. When I finally started to take the eye-witness testimony of Saint Matthew above the rest of the claims and teachings of the Bible there was no going back because it became a betrayal issue for myself towards Jesus. Maybe the Age of Enlightenment can really begin early - maybe one day the 'Tower of Babel' we find ourselves in could be but a Legend of the peculiar things we as a race believed about God once. When the Astrological Age of Enlightenment is upon the Horizon more we will be able to understand the importance of such things and coming together in peace to help and support each other survive on this Planet - to dis-agree doesn't imply we engage a war.

I lean toward the concept God is outside the Creation, perhaps answering some of the questions brought up in a topic I seen here a few days ago about why to convert. Alchemy and how it ties into one's diet - such as antioxidant properties of vegetables in combination like onions and garlic are believed to enhance when combined. I wanted to major in chemistry and become a pharmacist but not at college prep grade level then went to work as a mechanic in the family business. So perhaps Alchemy could in a way help me fulfill something much better in theory - the science of how food and medicines work - especially studies of data so yea I'm busy with that and Astrology - perhaps come here to write something occasionally. The 'narrow' path is the one that leads forward being one that has direction, traveling without direction one may get lost, huh? I believe our beliefs and lives is a process of conversion so my Faith Icon sums it up for me - follower of Jesus seeking the truth - especially about him.

 

[Rubiks]

God is omniscient. He can understand and speak in any language out there. Saying you have to speak in a certain liturgical language is deifying something created by pure accent. Stay away from those pharisee-types.

 

[Rubiks]

TRINITY In the KJV there are two texts that have no GREEK words. ! John 5:7-8.
Take great care as that is TRINITY and not of GOD.
Sure not three gods. just the FATHER is GOD. sure the other two are divine .GOD said this is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased"
JESUS said" I do everything through the father that sent me "
If JESUS was GOD he could not die on the cross. JESUS was thee WORD the son in the family of GOD just as"Let Us create man in our IMAGE ."
For now are we the sons of GOD !!!!!!
if you disagree that is HUMAN LOGIC for you .

(1) Not true. All 3 members of the trinity are clearly stated in Matthew 28:19.
(2) Really? The trinity is the only way to make possible of all the material of the new testament. Although there is only one God, Jesus also has bears the same attributes and roles of God: sitting at the right hand of the father, judging the dead, sending out the angels, etc.)
(3) Christians believe in functional subordination of Jesus
(4) Search "hypostatic union"
(5) No, YOU disagree with human logic. Anti-trinitarians constantly spew the same straw men constantly. When we correct you and tell you what WE believe, it's always, "hurr durr that's impossible; hurr durr that makes no sense!" To you, our beliefs are not even considered an option.

 

[Ratiocination]

(1) Not true. All 3 members of the trinity are clearly stated in Matthew 28:19.

There are three titles mentioned there, its your understanding of those titles that is not mentioned there... Sorry!

(2) Really? The trinity is the only way to make possible of all the material of the new testament. Although there is only one God, Jesus also has bears the same attributes and roles of God: sitting at the right hand of the father, judging the dead, sending out the angels, etc.)

Not true, the NT makes even more sense without the trinity doctrine.

(3) Christians believe in functional subordination of Jesus

Such a teaching would be explained in the scriptures!

(4) Search "hypostatic union"

Which verse?

(5) No, YOU disagree with human logic. Anti-trinitarians constantly spew the same straw men constantly. When we correct you and tell you what WE believe, it's always, "hurr durr that's impossible; hurr durr that makes no sense!" To you, our beliefs are not even considered an option.

Infact, when you ask a trinitarian to explain the trinity using only scripture and no other terms or ideas not specifically used in the bible they stumble immediately! Why? Because such a teaching is clearly not the work of the divine author but the work of men...!

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

He can speak in whatever language he pleases.

It would seem so.

Remember this event at Penecost?

Acts 2:
4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit was giving them utterance.
5 Now there were Jews living in Jerusalem, devout men from every nation under heaven.
6 And when this sound occurred, the crowd came together, and were bewildered because each one of them was hearing them speak in his own language.…
8" And how is it that we each hear them in our own language to which we were born?
9 "Parthians and Medes and Elamites, and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia,…
10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the districts of Libya around Cyrene, and visitors from Rome, both Jews and proselytes,…
11 Cretans and Arabs-- we hear them in our own tongues speaking of the mighty deeds of God."…

.

 

[ananda]

Any information and thoughts…

God speaketh only Authorised King James English, some perchance saith.

 

[smaneck]

Infact, when you ask a trinitarian to explain the trinity using only scripture and no other terms or ideas not specifically used in the bible they stumble immediately! Why? Because such a teaching is clearly not the work of the divine author but the work of men...!

The Trinity is not in the Bible, that's true. But some of us don't believe God is limited to speaking through the Bible.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Infact, when you ask a trinitarian to explain the trinity using only scripture and no other terms or ideas not specifically used in the bible they stumble immediately! Why? Because such a teaching is clearly not the work of the divine author but the work of men...!

Kind of like the Biblical Canon. I've yet to find that place in Scripture that outlines which books are divinely inspired and which ones aren't, almost as though which books are Scripture was something that came about by Church tradition.

Because it was and is.

Which is, frankly, the massive hole that sinks every "Bible-only" argument.*

-CryptoLutheran

*I'm aware that I'm a Lutheran and we're kind of known for being the Sola Scriptura folk. Sola Scripture, not "Bible-onlyism". Sola Scriptura is about establishing a definite rule of faith, wherein Scripture alone serves as norma normans (the norm that norms) and thus is, in a sense, the final court of appeal. What Sola Scriptura is not is the idea that all Christian teaching, practice, and ideas must be found explicitly within the texts of the Christian Canon of Scripture. I find it necessary to explain what Sola Scriptura is, as actually understood by the Reformers and used within the historic churches of the Reformation, as opposed to modern hyper-Protestant Bible-onlyist positions.

 

[smaneck]

Which is, frankly, the massive hole that sinks every "Bible-only" argument.*

-CryptoLutheran

*I'm aware that I'm a Lutheran and we're kind of known for being the Sola Scriptura folk. Sola Scripture, not "Bible-onlyism". Sola Scriptura is about establishing a definite rule of faith, wherein Scripture alone serves as norma normans (the norm that norms) and thus is, in a sense, the final court of appeal. What Sola Scriptura is not is the idea that all Christian teaching, practice, and ideas must be found explicitly within the texts of the Christian Canon of Scripture. I find it necessary to explain what Sola Scriptura is, as actually understood by the Reformers and used within the historic churches of the Reformation, as opposed to modern hyper-Protestant Bible-onlyist positions.

I was about to point that out. But as Heiko Oberman taught me [Luther: Man Between God and the Devil] by sola scriptura what Luther intended scripture as it had been understood by the Church Fathers and theologians through the ages. What he was excluding was canon law.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I was about to point that out. But as Heiko Oberman taught me [Luther: Man Between God and the Devil] by sola scriptura what Luther intended scripture as it had been understood by the Church Fathers and theologians through the ages. What he was excluding was canon law.

I think that's a good and fair point--I'd add that also Luther was rejecting an idea that the Magisterium was gatekeeper and final arbiter of Christian truth. As though the powers that be in Rome, rather than the Scriptures themselves, had the final say as to what is and is not Christian.

It is absolutely true that Luther at no point intended to do away with 1500 years of Christian tradition, and in the Lutheran Confessions it is carefully pointed out that we have not rejected something simply because it wasn't in the Bible. For example the Augsburg Confession says explicitly that we have not done away with prayers for the dead and speak of it as an ancient and venerable practice of the ancient Church, what we did reject were things like having Mass for the dead, and with a rejection of Purgatory came also a rejection that we could somehow affect the length of time a soul experiences temporal suffering in order to be sufficiently prepared to enter heavenly bliss (a major point considering the abuses with indulgences, and the idea that a piece of paper could absolve sins or improve a person's posthumous state in Purgatory).

I think it is good to point out that Luther and the Reformers, in many ways, would likely find what Protestantism (and Protestant derivative movements) to be what they, at the time, termed radicals. And the Reformers were not only as opposed to the radicals as they were Rome, in many ways they were more opposed to the radicals than they were Rome. Luther, speaking of Ulrich Zwingli's doctrine of Memorialism said, "I would sooner drink blood with the Pope than mere wine with the Swiss."

-CryptoLutheran

 

[smaneck]

It is absolutely true that Luther at no point intended to do away with 1500 years of Christian tradition, and in the Lutheran Confessions it is carefully pointed out that we have not rejected something simply because it wasn't in the Bible. For example the Augsburg Confession says explicitly that we have not done away with prayers for the dead

As you know Luther did not write the Augsburg Confession, Philip Melancthon wrote it. I distinctly remember reading something where Luther condemned prayers for the dead. I was frankly shocked but all of the other students in the class were looking at me like "of course."

 

[ViaCrucis]

As you know Luther did not write the Augsburg Confession, Philip Melancthon wrote it. I distinctly remember reading something where Luther condemned prayers for the dead. I was frankly shocked but all of the other students in the class were looking at me like "of course."

Though it was only submitted to the Diet of Augsburg with Luther's approval. And later when Melanchthon altered it in order to make concessions with the Reformed it led to a major controversy between the Philippists on the one hand and Gnesio-Lutherans on the other, ultimately resulting in the drafting of the Formula of Concord and the Unaltered Augsburg Confession being the standard in Lutheran confessionalism.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Zstar]

God is omniscient. He can understand and speak in any language out there. Saying you have to speak in a certain liturgical language is deifying something created by pure accent. Stay away from those pharisee-types.

Yes. Difficult to do with Pharisee Paul if you rely on the Bible.

 

[Zstar]

Not true, the NT makes even more sense without the trinity doctrine.

To who?