How many Jesus' are there?

[darcy]

Hi Imagican,
According to some people Jesus was not the sone of mean. and God is not the Father of Jesus

 

[Imagican]

nadab

The real Jesus is subservient to his Father, for he clearly distinguished himself from God. For example, when speaking to the Jews, he said: "What I teach is not mine, but belongs to him that sent me. If anyone desires to do His will, he will know concerning the teaching whether it is from God or I speak of my own originality."(John 7:16,17) And the apostle Paul wrote of Jesus as having a Father, saying: "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ....(and) that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him:"(Eph 1:3,17; King James Bible)

The real Jesus is "God the Son"- the Son of God. There is a clear biblical testament to this fact. St. John writes "in the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word WAS God" "Ho Theos eyn Ho Logos" The God was the Word.

Jesus, God the Son, through the Incarnation voluntarily takes upon himself a subservient role. He is not subservient by nature, but for the sake of drawing all things to the Father from which both the Holy Spirit and the Son eternally proceed, he, as St. Paul wrote in Philippians, "did not consider equality with God as something to be grasped but humbled himself and made himself unto a servant".

The Son of God, God himself, becomes the Christ in order to direct all to God in His fullness. This is why every Christian participates in the Trinitarian life. We participate in God's own inner life! The Father moves us towards the Son,indeed, He sends the Son! The Son reveals to us the image of the Father, the Holy Spirit seals in us this faith in the Trinitarian God.

Christ is "the Word of God". The Word of God can not be anything but God himself, for the "Word" is the direct expression of the essence of the Father. Just as our words express our will, our intention and the innermost parts of our being, so does Jesus express these things of God. Our words, in some sense, become an extension of us. Yet God is unqiue in that he does not recieve his language or words from a society, he is not taught how to express himself or how to speak. God's Word is unique to Him in that God's Word is formed fully and totally by Him alone. Nothing outside of Him forms how this Word is expressed, as in the human case where we are taught to speak. God's Word is His Own Essence, undefiled and perfectly made clear.

Here's a little NEW 'food for thought nadab:

In the original versions of this scripture that you quote there WERE NO capitals used. The word Word was LATER capitalized to INDICATE Jesus in order to emphasize 'their belief' that Jesus WAS God Himself. Do yourself a favor and eliminate the capital W in Word and read the entire chapter again. See if it doesn't take on a NEW meaning.

MEC

 

[darcy]

Imagian, Are mormons christians?

 

[Free]

Here's a little NEW 'food for thought nadab:

In the original versions of this scripture that you quote there WERE NO capitals used. The word Word was LATER capitalized to INDICATE Jesus in order to emphasize 'their belief' that Jesus WAS God Himself. Do yourself a favor and eliminate the capital W in Word and read the entire chapter again. See if it doesn't take on a NEW meaning.

And taking your own advice:

John 1:1 in the beginning was the word and the word was with god and the word was god.

Does that take on a new meaning for you?

 

[darcy]

:-? Free, I can't tell if you are talking to me?

 

[Free]

darcy,

My reply is aimed at Imagican since they are the one I quoted -- "Imagican wrote:"

 

[darcy]

darcy,

My reply is aimed at Imagican since they are the one I quoted -- "Imagican wrote:"

Thanks but have a question what do you think: did god make sin. know hear me out I know what you thinking she is crazy. But if you think about it logicly God had to of made sin . He made Lucifur (Who is know named Satan) and God had to of given Lucifer the thought or thought copascity to feel that he could be better and greater than God!

 

[Imagican]

Devekut,

I am curious as to HOW you have come to the conclusion that 'the Son' was NOT 'created'? You make an obvious point of this belief in your post.

May I offer this: "In the beginning" does NOT need mean; in the beginning of TIME. It is most definitely referenced to 'the beginning of what WE know'. In other words, we have NO IDEA that there has EVER been a 'beginning' of God. The beginning refered to in The Word is in reference to that which pertains to MANKIND and the creation of our world.

With this in mind, there is absolutely NO REFERENCE in The Word as to the beginning of God OR His Son. And this being the case, the ONLY way that one could say that The Son was NOT created would be PURE speculation and speculation based OPPOSITE of the indicated FACTS. For IF there is a Son, there MUST be a Father FIRST. For the Son COMES from the Father.

Every indiciation in The Word is that God, (The Father), IS the creator of EVERYTHING previous to the creation of this world and mankind.

So, please explain how you have come to the conclusion that the Son was NOT created by His Father.

MEC

 

[Imagican]

Everyone speaks of Jesus as if there is ONLY ONE. Really? If someone talks of or teaches of a Jesus that is CONTRADICTORY to The Word, is this the SAME Jesus that IS the Son of God?

MEC

It depends on what foundational depiction you lay down first. If you refer to Jesus as the Messiah and the Son of God, born of the virgin Mary, then I'd say that you're speaking of the same Jesus that Christians believe. If you then assign to this Jesus some inaccurate attribute, then you're simply bearing false witness; you're still referring to the same Jesus. If you said this Jesus was the Messiah but was not the Son of God, then's when the questions come.

Ok Pack,

BUT, what if the 'false witness' that one commits is NOT simply a false witness but an honoring and worshiping of a 'false Jesus'. Example:

Jesus the Messiah that IS God, born of the MOTHER OF God, the Queen of Heaven, the perpetual virgin. Now, let us assume that this Jesus is the one that one worships. Is this the true Jesus?

In Jewish religious literature there is a reference to 'a Jesus' that was born through an adulterous affair by a mother named Mary. Not only born out of adultury but also born a 'nidda', (the product of a child conceived durring the time of the month that the mother is 'un-clean'). Now, do YOU believe that it is even CONCIEVABLE that the Jesus that is involved in this scenario could be the 'true Jesus'? That is the indication to those that wrote this story.

And further more, words ARE important. But, the NAME Jesus means NOTHING IN ITSELF. I have met numerous people named Jesus.

All this asside, let me ask you this: Can Satan MIMIC Christ. Can he PRETEND to BE CHRIST. Does he have the capability of duping one unlearned into worshiping HIM 'as The Christ'?

Before you answer let me add this: In the end there will be MANY that address Christ by pointing out ALL the wonderous things that they have done in His Name. His answer to them is: "Go away from me for I know NOT who you are". This is a PRIME indication that there WILL BE MANY that CLAIM to worship the 'true Christ' but in the end were worshiping SOMETHING ELSE. What do you suppose the 'something else' will be?

MEC

 

[Imagican]

Wow

 

[Imagican]

Nadab,

Its really quite simple, you are translating John 1 in your favor because you don't think the Trinity makes sense. Virtually no competent biblical scholar will translate it today in your favor. You should find sources that agree with you within this century.

Majority rules right? Hmmmm..... There is MORE than PLENTY of indication that 'in the end' Most of those that proclaim Christ as their Savior will have been DUPED into following a 'false Christ'. For Satan Himself will set Himself up AS CHRIST. And the MAJORITY of the world will worship him. So, if majority rules...................

I have personally NEVER read the referenced material that has been offered. I have simply read The Word and through it come to the conclusion that Jesus IS exactly WHO and WHAT that He stated He was/is. Jesus IS my Savior and without HIM, God could not even look upon me and my carnal nature. What a contradiction it would make for me to say that IF Jesus WERE God Himself.

And IF Jesus is NOT God as many believe, wouldn't worshiping Him as such make that God a 'false God'? Don't EVER forget what Satan did to become cast out. NOTHING has changed folks. He still has the SAME desire NOW that he did THEN.

MEC

 

[unred typo]

quote by darcy on Thu Dec 06:

Thanks but have a question what do you think: did god make sin. know hear me out I know what you thinking she is crazy. But if you think about it logicly God had to of made sin . He made Lucifur (Who is know named Satan) and God had to of given Lucifer the thought or thought copascity to feel that he could be better and greater than God!

Excellent question, even though it's not on topic.: I hope you don’t mind if I add my 2 cents. I have asked this one myself. This is the answer I found most satisfying:

God didn’t make sin, per se, but he made it possible to sin by giving men free will. If men did not have a real choice, they could never choose anything but God’s will. God allows us the opportunity to choose good or choose evil. If we have no choice but to choose only evil, then it is not our fault if we do so. But that is not true. God has made it so we can choose to do good or we can choose to do evil. Even if we are forced to do evil, such as rob a bank or our family will be killed, we are not responsible for the bank robbery. God only allows evil because it tests us and by allowing evil, he can see if we will follow him or satan.

 

[Imagican]

Imagian, Are mormons christians?

Darcy,

I can't answer that question with a simple 'yes' or 'no'. But I will attempt to answer it.

I, personally, have come to a point in my walk that I hessitate to even call myself a 'Christian'. The word has been so misused that I try to avoid it if I can. Let me explain:

Firstly: The word Christian was a word used to denote underlings or in essence, LOWLIFES, durring the time of Christ and thereafter. The Jews and Romans used this word in the same manner that the word 'Nigger' was/is used by some to denote a 'group' of people that are somehow 'lesser' in nature than 'the rest of us'. So, if for NO other reason, we should beware of what we call ourselves or allow others to call us so far as 'labels' are concerned.

Secondly: You ask IF Mormons ARE Christians. The closest I can come to an actual understanding of WHAT a Christian IS...............YES. If they CALL themselves Christians then I guess they are. Do they follow the TRUE CHRIST? Doubtful. Like MOST of the denominations, (if not ALL), they have learned to follow the teachings of men rather than follow Christ TO His Father. Instead of simply accepting The Word, they have created their OWN writtings and follow these INSTEAD of The TRUTH.

Am I a 'Christian'. I hope not. But I DO accept and believe that Christ DIED for my sins. I believe that Christ was/IS the Son of The ONE TRUE GOD. And I believe that it is MY JOB to do my best to emulate that example that was sent to us to follow.

I am NO member of a 'man-made' church or denomination. I AM a PART of THE BODY of Christ: The TRUE CHURCH. I do NOT give my money or gifts to a 'man-made' church. But I DO MY BEST to follow where I am led by The Spirit.

So, with these things in mind, in my opinion, the Mormons are as Christian as the JW's, The Catholics, the SDA, the Methodist, etc, etc, etc,,,,,,,,,,,,,, For from the conclusion that I have personally come to from studying them all: They are ALL 'man-made' churches. So what's the difference from one to the next? Each THINKS that it has come to some 'special knowledge' of The Truth. Each THINKS that it is 'the ONLY way'. And EACH INSISTS that without THEM all others are cults and lost.

MEC

 

[Imagican]

quote by darcy on Thu Dec 06:

Thanks but have a question what do you think: did god make sin. know hear me out I know what you thinking she is crazy. But if you think about it logicly God had to of made sin . He made Lucifur (Who is know named Satan) and God had to of given Lucifer the thought or thought copascity to feel that he could be better and greater than God!

Excellent question, even though it's not on topic.: I hope you don’t mind if I add my 2 cents. I have asked this one myself. This is the answer I found most satisfying:

God didn’t make sin, per se, but he made it possible to sin by giving men free will. If men did not have a real choice, they could never choose anything but God’s will. God allows us the opportunity to choose good or choose evil. If we have no choice but to choose only evil, then it is not our fault if we do so. But that is not true. God has made it so we can choose to do good or we can choose to do evil. Even if we are forced to do evil, such as rob a bank or our family will be killed, we are not responsible for the bank robbery. God only allows evil because it tests us and by allowing evil, he can see if we will follow him or satan.

GOOD answer unread. Let me add this:

We have the evidence that Satan IS The Father of lies. This would indicate that Satan was/is the CREATOR of sin. Why it happened we only know STARTED with disobedience. When? WAY before the creation of man. For there WAS war in heaven PREVIOUS to the creation of man.

When one begins to comtemplate ETERNITY they then are able to BEGIN to understand that the temporary lives that we live are relatively inconsequential in the BIG PICTURE. What we do or don't do here on earth durring our lifetimes has LITTLE bearing on the NATURE of eternity EXCEPT so far as WE as individuals are concerned. Our lives and the decisions that we make while here on Earth have LITTLE if ANY bearing on ETERNITY except what effect they have on US as individuals.

MEC

 

[Imagican]

Here's a little NEW 'food for thought nadab:

In the original versions of this scripture that you quote there WERE NO capitals used. The word Word was LATER capitalized to INDICATE Jesus in order to emphasize 'their belief' that Jesus WAS God Himself. Do yourself a favor and eliminate the capital W in Word and read the entire chapter again. See if it doesn't take on a NEW meaning.

And taking your own advice:

John 1:1 in the beginning was the word and the word was with god and the word was god.

Does that take on a new meaning for you?

Yes Free it does. For if one were to continue to read the ENTIRE chapter one is ABLE to SEE that the first chapter of John is NOTHING but a 'recap' of the relationship of God with man. A compact statement of time and events. God IS The Word. But you would insist that The Word IS Christ. ONLY in the respect that God's Word was BROUGHT to us by Christ His Son. Time can CERTAINLY offer differences in context.

And there is NO DOUBT that oft times things are stated that MUST be taken in CONTEXT. Christ IS a 'part of God'. So, even if the capital W was MEANT to be there: When we take ALL other scripture into consideration, then at this point we MUST accept that some statements that have been offered CANNOT truly MEAN what WE may interpret them to mean IF they contradict that which we DO KNOW for a FACT.

We KNOW that Christ stated that He was/ IS The Son of God. We KNOW that Christ stated that God was/IS His Father. We KNOW that Christ stated that the Father is GREATER than He. We KNOW that Christ prayed TO His Father. We KNOW that Christ asked His Father WHY He abandoned Him upon the cross. And we KNOW that The Father of Christ IS God.

So, it's quite simple to come to the conclusion that from what Christ stated and the stories that we have of His life written by His apostles that Christ was/IS The Son of God. And IF Christ WERE God Himself it would have been MUCH more CLEARLY given to us in the Word rather than offered in some cryptic lines that NEED be interpreted by MEN in order to be understood. To believe this is to fall into the trap created by the Catholics when they decided to hi-jack Christianity from the world.

The Word was given so that we COULD discern The Truth. But this can ONLY be accomplished through The Spirit. And you would attempt to 'teach' me that Father, Son and Holy Spirit are ALL God Himself. While I KNOW that; while all three are certainly 'parts' of God; just like my arm is a 'part of me', my arm is NOT ME. For I am SO MUCH MORE than a group of parts. I am STILL ME without the individual units that 'make up' my body. God is still God WITHOUT Christ. But God could NOT be The Father without A SON. And a son, no doubt heir to the Father, and certainly a 'part' of the Father, can NEVER BE the Father Himself.

MEC

 

[Imagican]

As per usual, those who argue against the Trinity focus only on half of the evidence. I can put together several verses which clearly show that Jesus is God. This is precisely why we have the doctrine of the Trinity - it simply provides the best explanation of Christ's nature given all that Scripture reveals about him.

I don't believe that your statement is the TOTAL truth. We have the 'trinity' because 'some' people chose to 'invent it' and they just happened to have enough POWER to enforce their 'creation' on ALL who claimed to be Christian. Enough power to actually be able to MURDER those that opposed their 'teachings' on 'trinity'.

Even with such power and influence those that created 'trinity' were STILL unable to alter the Word by adding it TO The Word. Their preconceived notions of 'trinity' certainly had an influence on their translations BUT they were STILL not able to add it to the Word.

IF 'trinity' WERE The TRUTH, please explain WHY Christ, His apostles or even God Himself didn't offer this us IN THE WORD. For something of such MONUMENTAL importance would have CERTAINLY been at LEAST mentioned. Yet we have absolutely NO evidence of this word or it's concept in The Word. Christ stated that He IS The Son of God. He NEVER stated that He WAS God. Now WHY would He leave those that recorded His ministry SO BLIND as for it to take THREE HUNDRED YEARS AFTER His death to 'discover' this 'trinity'?

As the beginning of John is used to 'verify' this 'trinity' to those that 'believe' it. So too do those that believe in 'speaking in tongues' use vague scripture to 'verify' it's existence. I have YET to find the Word describing tongues as ANYTHING other than an ability for those that speak to speak in a manner so that others of DIFFERENT languages can understand them. Yet because there is a sentence refering to 'the tongues of angels' there are those that USE this in an attempt to PROVE that 'gibberish' is tongues. Paul is making an inference NOT EVEN STATING that 'angels' have a 'specific tongue', (or language).

Christ DELIVERED The Word to mankind. He stated as much. He PLAIN OUT stated that the words that He offered were NOT HIS OWN but GIVEN HIM by The Father. To capitalize the word Word does NOT make it Christ. It is USED in this manner but NOT ORIGINALLY. Take the capital W off Word and the entire chapter takes on a whole NEW meaning.

He also stated that the Father IS greater than He. IF Christ WERE God then they would CERTAINLY BE EQUAL. And PLEASE explain to the 'good people' HOW God could POSSIBLY abandone Himself?

And Christ IS the Only Begotten OF God. NOT the ONLY BEGOTTEN GOD. For Christ IS The Son of God. Adam TOO was a Son of God. And WE TOO are able to be Son's of God. But Christ was/IS the ONLY begotten Son of God.

It is even described deeper in that 'man is the head of woman', and Christ IS the Head of man, and God IS the Head of Christ. Man and woman CAN be ONE, JUST as God and Christ ARE ONE. But even when man and woman ARE ONE, they are NOT THE SAME. Christ states openly that Our God is also His God. He NEVER states that He IS God.

MEC

 

[Imagican]

Everyone speaks of Jesus as if there is ONLY ONE. Really? If someone talks of or teaches of a Jesus that is CONTRADICTORY to The Word, is this the SAME Jesus that IS the Son of God?

MEC

Let me ask you a question, how many god's do you think there are? :smt017

There are MORE GODS than we have names for them. But, there is ONLY One TRUE God.

MEC

 

[Free]

There are MORE GODS than we have names for them. But, there is ONLY One TRUE God.

There is only one living God, who is the true God.

And again, your response to my post further proves my point that those who don't believe in the Trinity don't use the entirety of what Scripture reveals about God. You use half the evidence.

 

[Imagican]

Wavy,

the statement that 'Jesus pre-existed time' IS relative. For we have NO indication that Jesus 'has ALWAYS been'. Only in reference to 'mankind'. for what is written IS written in reference to mankind. We have NOT been given a COMPLETE history of the heavens. Therefore, in the beginning does NOT need mean; 'in the beginning PERIOD'. It is most likely a reference to that which has been revealed to US, (mankind). And OBVIOUSLY time IS relative as well. For the 24 hour rotational period of this planet may have absolutely NO relevance to God or heaven so far as we KNOW. To assume that the unit of time that we have chosen to use in reference to what is available ON THIS PLANET, (a creation of God), may have NO influence on TRUE time whatsoever. We simply don't know. For God is certainly not confined or controlled by our planets rotational period.

MEC

 

[bibleberean]

2 Corinthians 11:3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

2 Corinthians 11:4 For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.

Muslims believe and teach a false Christ and a false gospel. They have another spirit and that spirit is Satan.

The Mormon church promotes a Jesus that is a brother of Lucifer.

Rome has a "wafer" Jesus.

The list could go on and on.

There are many false Christs and false gospels.

It takes a prayerful bible believing person to find the true and living God.

Beware of false Christs, gospels, and prophets