Is Jesus really God?

[Free]

Now, at WHAT POINT in Christianity did Jesus Christ become accepted, (or created), AS God? Answer me this and you will answer what this thread is ALL ABOUT. The WHO, and WHEN is TOTALLY relevant to 'the truth'. For, when we do but a cursory study of the History of Christianity, we QUICKLY find that this 'trinity' or 'Jesus IS God' was created NO LESS than hundreds of years AFTER HIS DEATH.

If you actually wanted to do an unbiased study, setting aside your more than obvious bias against the Church, you would find that the belief that Jesus was God can found in the first century, less than 100 years after the death of Christ. That's a problem with doing just a cursory study - you find what you want to find and think you have the answer.

Another piece of evidence concerning the validity of this 'trinity'. Would those that followed such a MAJOR revelation TRULY have been able to go out and torture and murder God's children IN THE NAME OF THIS "TRINITY"? Could these have been TRULY following the will of God?

Irrelevant.

Or perhaps you are sinless. Is that the case? Or are you just spiritually superior then they - your sins aren't as great as theirs, so your position must certainly be the correct one?

Thus, one of the most important changes that the CC offered is that of 'trinity' of which the word itself DOES NOT EVEN EXIST IN THE WORD.

As I have stated to you numerous times before, this is completely and utterly irrelevant.

They simply offer that 'THEY' know better than ANYONE ELSE what God wants us to 'know'. Pretty tricky stuff really, and used in almost EVERY 'man-made' religion that exists or has existed since the dawning of man. This 'I' know God and 'you MUST LISTEN TO ME' or 'God will punish you'. Neat stuff huh?

That is neat stuff, especially since it is very hypocritical. You are doing the exact same thing except that you are going against 2000 years of Church history and accepted orthodox belief.

In every debate regarding the deity of Christ you have failed to provide anything close to a satisfactory reason as to why Christ is not God.

 

[stranger]

Imagican" wrote:

I find it amusing that you could offer such a statement above and then FAIL to see what you YOURSELF have offered.

I accept EACH of these pieces of scripture AS OFFERED. What I DON'T accept is one 'attempting' to 'change them' through 'their' interpretation.

You need to read my earlier post in this tread where I made the same point - but here is a piece of it:

Scripture as revelation speaks of God in its own terms call it 'revealed language' if you will. The writings of the church seize upon these statements and develope, over time, various theological understandings and interpretations. Technically speaking if we say:

'the Son of God'
and 'God the Son'

you have two similar but not identical statements in inverted commas by way of example.

We can say that the second statement does not occur in scripture - the first statement may have been better expressed as: This is 'My beloved Son' or Thou art the Christ the 'Son of the Living God'. So no word search will come up with the exact phrase 'God the Son' in scripture. In the church writings this is common.

The two statements cannot be said to be identical - and this innocent transposition, is precisely the difference between a 'revealed fact' and a 're- interpretation of a revealed fact'.

Imagician, you have 'gotten' mileage out of this transposition in reference to the Son of God in your extensive arguments. You seem to be aware of this and in this 'strict mode' I agree with you (that it is not the same as saying God the Son). Hopefully others will not misconstrue what is being said here.

The last paragraph refers to how things are expressed and misconstrued. . if you check the responses to my post you will see this.

Let me explain;

EACH of these statements that you have offered above are EXACTLY MY POINT. Jesus IS The Son of God.

Yes

Yet 'you' and 'others' insist that such statements 'somehow' state that Jesus IS God. I am REALLY confused here. Jesus says, "I AM The Son of God'', and SOMEHOW 'trinitarians' use this, (ONLY in their OWN minds and hearts), to come up with ''Jesus IS God''.

I have not said 'Jesus is God' nor have I denied it - what I did say is that this exact expression word for word is not found in scripture. In fact that is why deep_thinkings OP goes nowhere.

Other issues are addressed in next post.

blessings: stranger

 

[stranger]

Imagician wrote:

Let me ask this in the hopes of sheading a bit of light on this subject.

What would my religion be if I were to 'pick' an angel and teach others that this angel, being a 'part of God' was indeed, GOD HIMSELF? I am quite sure that you would quickly offer that this would be a 'false religion', or at least one devoid of The Truth.

It would present a challenge as it did to the early church which responded with formulating definitions as counter measures.

Now, at WHAT POINT in Christianity did Jesus Christ become accepted, (or created), AS God? Answer me this and you will answer what this thread is ALL ABOUT. The WHO, and WHEN is TOTALLY relevant to 'the truth'. For, when we do but a cursory study of the History of Christianity, we QUICKLY find that this 'trinity' or 'Jesus IS God' was created NO LESS than hundreds of years AFTER HIS DEATH. Now, if this concept was SO important to 'TRUE CHRISTIANITY, (being born again), WHY did Christ NOT reveal this to His apostles in a way that they could DIRECTLY state to us that Jesus Christ IS God? WHY did it take hundreds of years and a people that DIDN'T even KNOW Christ to 'come up' with such an important piece of information concerning the relationship with God and His Son?

This one is traceable and an answer has been suggested.

Now that this is stated. Another piece of evidence concerning the validity of this 'trinity'. Would those that followed such a MAJOR revelation TRULY have been able to go out and torture and murder God's children IN THE NAME OF THIS "TRINITY"? Could these have been TRULY following the will of God? I mean, golly guys and gals, we have the EXACT example of WHAT God wants of us IN JESUS CHRIST. He wants children that not only love Him, but love PERIOD, ESPECIALLY EACH OTHER. Now, could someone TRULY be 'led by The Spirit' and go out and murder their brothers and sisters in the name of God OR Christ simply because one may NOT accept 'their teachings'?

Lots of horror has been perpetrated in the name of the church. Where the church is involved - weeds among wheat - no excuses offered.

I have offered MUCH evidence that what I have offered is FACT. Not so much in this thread, but through out those that deal with this matter. That many refute it is of NO consequence to The Truth.

It is a question of expressing things clearly so that the arguments can be weighed.

What has been revealed, (through The Word), has CERTAINLY been altered in our 'modern churches'. What the original Church taught was NOT what MOST have now learned to accept and follow. The Catholic faith and almost the entirety of the Protestant have opted instead of Truth, to follow the the 'truth of men'. Thus, one of the most important changes that the CC offered is that of 'trinity' of which the word itself DOES NOT EVEN EXIST IN THE WORD. Even though these produced the modern Bible with which we learn of God's Word, EVEN THEY did not have the audacity to 'alter' it enough to clearly even INDICATE this 'ALL IMPORTANT DOCTRINE' of 'trintiy'

They simply offer that 'THEY' know better than ANYONE ELSE what God wants us to 'know'. Pretty tricky stuff really, and used in almost EVERY 'man-made' religion that exists or has existed since the dawning of man. This 'I' know God and 'you MUST LISTEN TO ME' or 'God will punish you'. Neat stuff huh?
MEC.

Again, sola scripture is not understood as being scripture alone WITHOUT: commentaries, confessions and definitons of faith, theological works and associated literature, denominational persuasions etc which all contribute to Protestant 'tradition' (or catholic, orthodox or coptic tradition). Scripture has its own language and there is a crossing over into the technical jargon of theological terms with its long history of development in the church. The biggest danger in all this is eating from the wrong tree - the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and never knowing it.

blessings: stranger

 

[Imagican]

Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2007 12:23 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Imagican wrote:
Now, at WHAT POINT in Christianity did Jesus Christ become accepted, (or created), AS God? Answer me this and you will answer what this thread is ALL ABOUT. The WHO, and WHEN is TOTALLY relevant to 'the truth'. For, when we do but a cursory study of the History of Christianity, we QUICKLY find that this 'trinity' or 'Jesus IS God' was created NO LESS than hundreds of years AFTER HIS DEATH.

If you actually wanted to do an unbiased study, setting aside your more than obvious bias against the Church, you would find that the belief that Jesus was God can found in the first century, less than 100 years after the death of Christ. That's a problem with doing just a cursory study - you find what you want to find and think you have the answer.

My 'bias' as you call it, came NOT 'before' my being 'born again' but AFTER Free. So, nice try, but it doesn't wash. Previous to my acceptance of Christ into my heart, I knew NOTHING of any significance about the churches or scripture. So I HAD NO BIAS until coming to understanding.

Imagican wrote:
Another piece of evidence concerning the validity of this 'trinity'. Would those that followed such a MAJOR revelation TRULY have been able to go out and torture and murder God's children IN THE NAME OF THIS "TRINITY"? Could these have been TRULY following the will of God?

Irrelevant.

Or perhaps you are sinless. Is that the case? Or are you just spiritually superior then they - your sins aren't as great as theirs, so your position must certainly be the correct one?

Sinless? Hardly. No superiority here. But to simply dismiss my statement above because I am a 'sinner' does NOT invalidate my point. I have NOT gone out and attempted to 'force' my understanding upon ANYONE through torture and murder. And I have NOT done these 'things' IN THE NAME OF CHRIST. This is the discernent that 'makes the difference'. For you may CERTAINLY dismiss my understanding as 'wrong'. But, to make an attempt to dismiss the 'sins' of those that perpetuated them IN THE NAME OF CHRIST, through torture and murder is inexcusable and IMPOSSIBLE to achieve. And it was 'these' that 'created this 'trinity'.

And my point is NOT whether fr not I or anyone else is a 'sinner'. My point is that 'you' have bought into a 'faith' that was 'created' by NOT ONLY SINNERS, but those that would sink to ANY measure that they 'deemed' necessary to 'force' this 'faith' upon ALL under their control. If 'that' is The Spirit, then you MUST be right. For I do NOT follow such 'a' spirit and wouldn't understand it.

Imagican wrote:
Thus, one of the most important changes that the CC offered is that of 'trinity' of which the word itself DOES NOT EVEN EXIST IN THE WORD.

As I have stated to you numerous times before, this is completely and utterly irrelevant.


Only irrelevant to those that have 'bought into' this 'trinity'.

Imagican wrote:
They simply offer that 'THEY' know better than ANYONE ELSE what God wants us to 'know'. Pretty tricky stuff really, and used in almost EVERY 'man-made' religion that exists or has existed since the dawning of man. This 'I' know God and 'you MUST LISTEN TO ME' or 'God will punish you'. Neat stuff huh?

That is neat stuff, especially since it is very hypocritical. You are doing the exact same thing except that you are going against 2000 years of Church history and accepted orthodox belief.

I am NOT insisting that you 'listen to me' or accept what I have to offer. I am simply offering the 'truth' as I understand it. I am NOT able to 'change' the truth to suit myself anymore than ANYONE else is. The Truth IS The Truth. It's up to the individual to seek such and back it up with PROOF. This proof can ONLY come from The Spirit.

In every debate regarding the deity of Christ you have failed to provide anything close to a satisfactory reason as to why Christ is not God.

No, not to those that have 'bought into it'. You are absolutely RIGHT. For God Himself will offer 'strong delusion' so that they will 'have their PROOF' that what they follow IS truth, even if it is NOT. For wheat and tare WILL be separated AFTER, NOT before.
_________________
"The glory of God is man fully alive." St. Irenaeus

"When men cease to believe in God, they do not believe in nothing; they believe in anything. "--G.K. Chesterton

 

[Imagican]

stranger,

I have not attempted to 'attack' you. I have simply attempted to offer 'The Truth' as I understand it.

And it is these definitions and 'counter measures' that I debate. And not only their methods, but their 'spirit' as well. For these were presupposed to certain understandings PREVIOUS to their 'introduction' to Christ. And it being 'these' preconceptions that I question. For what was offered in 'the beginning' of Chirst's gospel WERE altered by those that gained control over the 'Christian faith'.

I don't personally KNOW these people and have NO hate in my heart towards them. I have simply questioned their motives and means. What I have come to conclusion concerning these is that they did NOT 'start over' with Christ as their Savior, but simply 'added' Him into their previous pagan religions. This is NOT a difficult thing to discover if one so chooses to do the research.

Now, since there are those that would argue this point, I ask them; Which denomination is the 'TRUTH'? Which church has simply accepted what The Spirit has to offer WITHOUT interjecting thier 'own' understanding SEPARATE from The Spirit?

I will await a reply for I am TRULLY interested in 'finding' this 'faith'.

MEC

 

[stranger]

stranger,
. . .
I will await a reply for I am TRULLY interested in 'finding' this 'faith'.
MEC

Imagician,

Allow me to respond to this 'faith'issue. Given the adjustment in time the faith you seek is the same as that which was exhibited by John or Paul in its pristine essence. You might say this faith is the well guarded apostolic faith that few enter into. It is the only faith capable of answering the question that Jesus asked: when I return shall I find faith upon the earth? Rest assured there will be many admixtures of this faith 'offered' as substitutes. . .

This apostolic faith while it is defined already in scripture and always has been, cannot be defined by those outside this faith.

So what I am 'offering' (as you put it) is only a glimpse of this faith because I have only managed to touch it, not grasp it nor enter into it in the full measure that it was/is 'offered' by God. Presently I am in 'exile' over this issue. I encourage you to reject what God rejects and accept what God accepts as 'faith'. But it does not come without a cost. (I leave room for the interjectors. . .? ? ?).

blessings: stranger

 

[jgredline]

Is Jesus really God?

yep

 

[Oscar3]

Deep
Sorry, I was forgetting about the debate. I shall go work on the mohammed part now.

 

[Atonement]

Sorry I been away for a little while, so I did not read through all 8 pages. However I will put this forth. In Isaiah 7:14 It reads

Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

I don't know of any other virgin birth in Scripture except that of Jesus Christ. Well what does Immanuel mean? You may do a search in both Greek and Hebrew and it will come close to either (with us is God) or (God is with us). Either way it was a foretold prophecy of Jesus Christ.

If this has already been discussed forgive my unawareness to this matter

 

[Imagican]

Atonement,

Naming the coming of Christ as 'God with us' is NOT calling Christ God Himself. Since Christ IS a 'part' of God, then Him being 'among us' does NOT make Christ God Himself, but simply 'a part'. Christ SPECIFICALLY stated that the words that He offered WERE NOT His own, but GIVEN Him by The Father. We KNOW that The Father IS GOD. So, His, (Christ's), presence among us represented God, it does NOT make Him God incarnate.

Much that is written in The Word is NOT literal. This is obvious to ANYONE that has ever read it. Much is symbolic. There IS a 'reason' for this. Much is hidden in symbolism so that one MUST be 'led by The Spirit' for understanding to 'take place'. I am NOT here to argue about 'who' is 'filled with The Spirit and 'who' is NOT. Just attempting to 'point out' that EVERYTHING written in The Word is NOT literal.

MEC

 

[Imagican]

Imagician,

Allow me to respond to this 'faith'issue. Given the adjustment in time the faith you seek is the same as that which was exhibited by John or Paul in its pristine essence. You might say this faith is the well guarded apostolic faith that few enter into. It is the only faith capable of answering the question that Jesus asked: when I return shall I find faith upon the earth? Rest assured there will be many admixtures of this faith 'offered' as substitutes. . .

This apostolic faith while it is defined already in scripture and always has been, cannot be defined by those outside this faith.

So what I am 'offering' (as you put it) is only a glimpse of this faith because I have only managed to touch it, not grasp it nor enter into it in the full measure that it was/is 'offered' by God. Presently I am in 'exile' over this issue. I encourage you to reject what God rejects and accept what God accepts as 'faith'. But it does not come without a cost. (I leave room for the interjectors. . .? ? ?).

blessings: stranger

I accept your response WHOLY. And this IS EXACTLY why I breech the subject AS I do.

SO MANY people are SO quick to insist that 'they KNOW' simply because they have developed FAITH. But faith does NOT make 'truth'. One can have faith in that which is false JUST as easily, or perhaps MORE easily than that which is truth. So the faith itself means LITTLE if it's NOT faith in 'The Truth'.

What I offer is that 'man-made' faith is NOT 'The Way' NO MATTER how much faith one has in it.

Now, I have YET to have the revelation of the apostles that Jesus Christ was ANYTHING other than The Son of God. Yet, in this 'man-made' faith there are those that INSIST that this 'has been revealed'. I have offered TONS of PROOF of the 'creation' of 'trinity' BY MAN, yet there is still 'so much faith' in this concept that those that 'believe in it' are unable to truly 'see' the 'truth of it'. So much for faith.

MEC

 

[PDoug]

Atonement,

Naming the coming of Christ as 'God with us' is NOT calling Christ God Himself. Since Christ IS a 'part' of God, then Him being 'among us' does NOT make Christ God Himself, but simply 'a part'.

The following came from this message.

Please note the following.

1 Corinthians 12

12 The body is a unit, though it is made up of many parts; and though all its parts are many, they form one body. So it is with Christ.
13 For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one bodyâ€â€whether Jews or Greeks, slave or freeâ€â€and we were all given the one Spirit to drink.
14 Now the body is not made up of one part but of many.
15 If the foot should say, "Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body," it would not for that reason cease to be part of the body.
16 And if the ear should say, "Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body," it would not for that reason cease to be part of the body.
17 If the whole body were an eye, where would the sense of hearing be? If the whole body were an ear, where would the sense of smell be?
18 But in fact God has arranged the parts in the body, every one of them, just as he wanted them to be.
19 If they were all one part, where would the body be?
20 As it is, there are many parts, but one body.
21 The eye cannot say to the hand, "I don't need you!" And the head cannot say to the feet, "I don't need you!"
22 On the contrary, those parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable,
23 and the parts that we think are less honorable we treat with special honor. And the parts that are unpresentable are treated with special modesty,
24 while our presentable parts need no special treatment. But God has combined the members of the body and has given greater honor to the parts that lacked it,
25 so that there should be no division in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each other.
26 If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it.
27 Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it.
28 And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, also those having gifts of healing, those able to help others, those with gifts of administration, and those speaking in different kinds of tongues.
29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles?
30 Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret?
31 But eagerly desire the greater gifts.
And now I will show you the most excellent way.

Ephesians 5

23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior.

John 17

20 My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message,
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.

The scriptures above are important, because they point to the nature of the Godhead. Now if Jesus (who is Christ) is the head of the Church, and the Church is the body of Christ, this means that Jesus, along with the entire Church, make up Christ. In other words, Christ is not a single entity, rather Christ is the multitude of beings composed from the Church – for which Jesus forms the head.

Also, if Christ is in a man, and that man becomes Christ by virtue of being a member of Christ, then if any man has a part of the Godhead in him, that man is a member of that part of the Godhead as well. Therefore if the Father is in a man, then that man is the Father, by virtue of the fact of the Father’s presence is in him. That is why Jesus said repeatedly that he and the Father are one: because members of the Father were in him, and those members of the Father and Jesus were one.

Therefore all men who have faith, are like Jesus. Each one is Christ, the Holy Spirit, and the Father. The Godhead therefore is not made up of 1 or 3 beings: the Godhead is made up of countless beings who make up the Father, the Holy Spirit, and the Son; and form a grand union and are hence all one.

If Jesus is the head of the body of Christ, doesn’t that mean that Jesus is only a part of Christ – and not the whole Christ? Therefore in as much as Jesus is called Christ (being only a part of Christ), a being is God if he is a member of the Godhead. Also, it makes no sense to say that the parts or members of God are not God, because that would imply without all the members of the Godhead, God does not exist. However, if a man loses his arm, would you say that man no longer exists? Given that that is not the case, each member of the Godhead must be God - even when it forms a subset of the Godhead.

Further, the following scripture makes it clear that by virtue of Jesus being a part or member of the Father (since he is in the Father – John 17:21) and the Holy Spirit, he is also them.

Isaiah 9

6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Also the scripture above clearly states that Jesus will be called Mighty God.

Christ SPECIFICALLY stated that the words that He offered WERE NOT His own, but GIVEN Him by The Father. We KNOW that The Father IS GOD. So, His, (Christ's), presence among us represented God, it does NOT make Him God incarnate.

Because the Father was in Jesus (John 17:21), this meant that members of the Father were in Christ. Now if the Father’s members and Jesus own members form a union, then Jesus is himself and the Father at the same time - because Jesus is himself, along with being one and the same as his Father's members.

 

[Imagican]

While 'your' explanation 'sounds' good, it by no means prevails. for IF what you state IS 'TRUTH', then WE TOO are God. For WE TOO are able to be a 'part' of God in that we WERE created in His image.

But what we DO KNOW is that 'we too' are able to BE the 'children' of God. That does NOT make us God Himself. We ARE able to be a 'part' of God but NOT God Himself. That is EXACTLY what brought the fall of Satan. His DESIRE to be 'his OWN God'. To BE God Himself.

And the scripture that you offered is what I would use to prove 'my' point. As WE are able to be a 'part' of Christ, (we and Christ ARE able to 'be one'), that does NOT make 'us Christ' any more than Christ and God being 'one' makes Christ God Himself.

MEC

 

[PDoug]

While 'your' explanation 'sounds' good, it by no means prevails. for IF what you state IS 'TRUTH', then WE TOO are God. For WE TOO are able to be a 'part' of God in that we WERE created in His image.

Please note the following.

John 10

34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are gods’?

Romans 9

1 I speak the truth in Christâ€â€I am not lying, my conscience confirms it in the Holy Spiritâ€â€
2 I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart.
3 For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, those of my own race,
4 the people of Israel. Theirs is the adoption as sons; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises.

But what we DO KNOW is that 'we too' are able to BE the 'children' of God. That does NOT make us God Himself. We ARE able to be a 'part' of God but NOT God Himself. That is EXACTLY what brought the fall of Satan. His DESIRE to be 'his OWN God'. To BE God Himself.

Isn’t the child of a human being in every way a human being? Isn’t the offspring of a horse in every way a horse? So why do you think a son of God is not God like his Father?

Lucifer tried to establish his own kingdom above and outside the kingdom of God, that is why he fell. Lucifer did not fall because he tried to be God. Lucifer was a part of God and was hence God. Lucifer simply thought he could become greater than God, and attempted to do so and failed.

And the scripture that you offered is what I would use to prove 'my' point. As WE are able to be a 'part' of Christ, (we and Christ ARE able to 'be one'), that does NOT make 'us Christ' any more than Christ and God being 'one' makes Christ God Himself.

MEC

If Jesus is a part of the body of Christ, and is Christ, it follows that anyone who has faith and is also a part of the body of Christ, is Christ as well.

 

[Imagican]

pdoug,

I have NEVER denied the 'deity' of Christ. What I offer is that Christ is BUT A "PART" of God and NOT God Himself. The Christ, Jesus Christ IS The Son of God and this we KNOW from HIS OWN WORDS.

And we KNOW that The Father IS God. Not a 'part' of God, BUT GOD HIMSELF. 'For a voice came from heaven stating that 'this is my BELOVED SON, in whom "I" am well pleased'. This WAS God, THE FATHER, making a statement concerning HIS SON, Jesus Christ.

A son IS a 'part' of his father. But 'I' AM NOT 'my father'. There is a MAJOR difference here.

And please note that the quote that you offered was spelled god NOT God. And there is NO doubt that we ARE able to BE our OWN gods. Just as it IS possible for us to 'carve' and worship gods of our OWN making. Or to make 'a god' out of ANYTHING that we so choose to worship AS SUCH.

But the 'point' is that there is ONLY ONE "TRUE" God.

But let me state this; If there were NO OTHER WAY than that which you have offered, I would READILY agree that what you have offered IS TRUTH. The problem with my agreement lies in the fact that there IS another way. And that way being that Christ IS exactly WHO and WHAT He stated that He IS; The Son of God, the Head of the Body just AS The Father IS the Head of Christ, and just as man IS the head of woman. See, I need NOT alter ANYTHING in order to accept the understanding offered.

MEC

 

[PDoug]

pdoug,

I have NEVER denied the 'deity' of Christ. What I offer is that Christ is BUT A "PART" of God and NOT God Himself. The Christ, Jesus Christ IS The Son of God and this we KNOW from HIS OWN WORDS.

And we KNOW that The Father IS God. Not a 'part' of God, BUT GOD HIMSELF. 'For a voice came from heaven stating that 'this is my BELOVED SON, in whom "I" am well pleased'. This WAS God, THE FATHER, making a statement concerning HIS SON, Jesus Christ.

Which creature or being you see around you is made up of one unit? Is a plant’s body made up of one unit, or a multitude of cells? Is an animal’s body made up of one unit or a multitude of cells? Is a man’s body made up of one unit or a multitude of cells? So why do you think the Father is a single unit, and not a multitude of beings that form a single entity? We know it is the case that the Father is made up of a multitude of beings, because he resides in Jesus and in all men who have faith. Therefore just as members of the Father (some of whom reside in men who have faith) are the Father individually and in unison, members of the Godhead are God individually and in unison as well.

A son IS a 'part' of his father. But 'I' AM NOT 'my father'. There is a MAJOR difference here.

If a man was to take his kidney and give it to his son, then his son’s body would become one and the same as his Father’s – from an important perspective. That is the way it is in the spiritual realm. All men who have faith are one and the same spiritually, because each one has members of the other in him (John 17:21).

And please note that the quote that you offered was spelled god NOT God. And there is NO doubt that we ARE able to BE our OWN gods. Just as it IS possible for us to 'carve' and worship gods of our OWN making. Or to make 'a god' out of ANYTHING that we so choose to worship AS SUCH.

But the 'point' is that there is ONLY ONE "TRUE" God.

Please note the following.

1 Corinthians 8

4 So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world and that there is no God but one.
5 For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many "gods" and many "lords"),
6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

From the scripture above, you see that God does not consider gods outside of the Godhead, real gods. Therefore it makes no sense for God to have referred to those who have faith as genuine gods (John 10:34), if they were not in fact so.

But let me state this; If there were NO OTHER WAY than that which you have offered, I would READILY agree that what you have offered IS TRUTH. The problem with my agreement lies in the fact that there IS another way. And that way being that Christ IS exactly WHO and WHAT He stated that He IS; The Son of God, the Head of the Body just AS The Father IS the Head of Christ, and just as man IS the head of woman. See, I need NOT alter ANYTHING in order to accept the understanding offered.

MEC

The problem is that you are ignoring all my reasoning, and you are ignoring the following scripture in which Jesus was plainly called, Mighty God.

Isaiah 9

6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

 

[Vic C.]

Isn’t the child of a human being in every way a human being? Isn’t the offspring of a horse in every way a horse? So why do you think a son of God is not God like his Father?

Lucifer tried to establish his own kingdom above and outside the kingdom of God, that is why he fell. Lucifer did not fall because he tried to be God. Lucifer was a part of God and was hence God. Lucifer simply thought he could become greater than God, and attempted to do so and failed.

If Jesus is a part of the body of Christ, and is Christ, it follows that anyone who has faith and is also a part of the body of Christ, is Christ as well.

:o

Forum, the above is solely the opinions and interpretations of just one person and is not to be considered Scriptural Truth, nor does it conform to the beliefs of this site.

 

[PDoug]

:o

Forum, the above is solely the opinions and interpretations of just one person and is not to be considered Scriptural Truth, nor does it conform to the beliefs of this site.

Why is what I said not to be considered the truth, if it is in harmony with the scriptures, and I bear the fruit of righteousness? By your reasoning, the Jews were correct to have rejected Christ, because what he did and said appeared to be in disharmony with their law. If you are going to contend that what I say is not the truth, please prove that what you say is so.

 

[Imagican]

pdoug,

Much of what you have offered is what 'I' would consider some kind of 'new age' thinking rather than that offered through scripture or The Spirit. We ARE NOT God. We are CERTAINLY a 'part of God' through His creation but we are NOT God Himself.

I DO understand your reasoning and I reject it. For I am NOT one to simply 'think up' understanding that 'suits myself', (even though there ARE many that will so accuse me), but accept what is offered through scripture and The Holy Spirit.

What you offer is NOT something that has been revealed to me and it CONTRADICTS MUCH of what HAS. Therefore I must accept it as I would a 'science fiction' story. A 'good' story, but filled with little truth and MUCH fiction.

I am NOT 'speaking down' to you in any way. Just trying to be as honest as possible considering the circumstances.

Furthermore, I do NOT believe that God IS capable of creating an entity with COMPLETE equality to Himself. If for NO OTHER reason than that He has TOLD us that HE is the ONLY TRUE GOD. For Him to create something EQUAL to Himself would be to have deceived us and I do NOT believe that this is possible.

MEC

 

[PDoug]

pdoug,

Much of what you have offered is what 'I' would consider some kind of 'new age' thinking rather than that offered through scripture or The Spirit. We ARE NOT God. We are CERTAINLY a 'part of God' through His creation but we are NOT God Himself.

I DO understand your reasoning and I reject it. For I am NOT one to simply 'think up' understanding that 'suits myself', (even though there ARE many that will so accuse me), but accept what is offered through scripture and The Holy Spirit.

What you offer is NOT something that has been revealed to me and it CONTRADICTS MUCH of what HAS. Therefore I must accept it as I would a 'science fiction' story. A 'good' story, but filled with little truth and MUCH fiction.

I am NOT 'speaking down' to you in any way. Just trying to be as honest as possible considering the circumstances.

Suit yourself.

Furthermore, I do NOT believe that God IS capable of creating an entity with COMPLETE equality to Himself. If for NO OTHER reason than that He has TOLD us that HE is the ONLY TRUE GOD. For Him to create something EQUAL to Himself would be to have deceived us and I do NOT believe that this is possible.

MEC

Are all humans equal to each other, or are some greater than others? The Godhead is a hierarchy of Gods, with members having ranges of roles, power, and authority. Not all Gods are omnipotent or omniscient. That is why e.g. Christ does not know the exact time of his second coming – but only his Father knows; and that is why a God in Genesis 18:20-21 had to go down himself and investigate outcries against Sodom and Gomorrah - for lack of direct knowledge of what was going on.