A query no Christian has ever been able to provide a satisfactory answer for [Archive]

JoeT777

Aug 13, 2008, 01:21 PM

N0help4u

Aug 13, 2008, 01:35 PM

revdrgade

Aug 13, 2008, 01:59 PM

God's word makes it clear that "God raised Him from the dead". Answer A.

Rom 1:1-4
1:1 Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God— to the gospel he promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures 3 regarding his Son, who as to his human nature was a descendant of David, 4 and who through the Spirit of holiness was declared with power to be the Son of God by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord.
NIV

It was by God's power that the Son of God was raised.

It is by that resurrection that He is declared to be the Son of God.

It is in the resurrection of the Son that all other who are raised to life will be able to be raised to life.

1 Cor 15:21-22
21 For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. 22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.
NIV

*******************************************

What you are MISSING is that the Son of God, being the Son of God with all power and authority of God RAISED HIMSELF!
Read carefully:

John 10:16-18, 28-30
17 The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life — only to take it up again. 18 No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father." .....

28 "I give them eternal life , and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand. 30 I and the Father are one."
NIV.

Contrary to you proposition, the resurrection of Jesus the Christ PROVES the truth that Jesus is God who took on the flesh of man in order to redeem us from the power of the devil and our own sin.

"Simple logic" has to conclude that if it God Who raised Jesus the Christ... and Jesus the Christ says that He raised Himself... that Jesus the Christ MUST BE God.

JoeT777

Aug 13, 2008, 01:59 PM

Joe777
Then why does the Bible say Jesus said "My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?" Matthew 27:46
Does the Bible show that God was with Jesus when he went to preach to the dead in the place you call Purgatory or that he wasn't?

God never rejected Jesus but it does show that he did turn his back on him just as when
Adam and Eve sinned they were SEPARATED from the closeness they had had doesn't say that God rejected them just that they were separated for a time.

5…For even in the case of transgressions a certain man is said to have asked of God, and not to have been hearkened to for his good. For privations of this world had inspired him to prayer, and being set in temporal tribulations he had wished that temporal tribulations should pass away, and there should return the flower of grass; and he says, My God, my God, why have You forsaken me? The very voice of Christ it is, but for His members' sake. The words, he says, of my transgressions I have cried to You throughout the day, and You have not hearkened: and by night, and not for the sake of folly to me: that is, and by night I have cried, and You have not hearkened; and nevertheless in this very thing that You have not hearkened, it is not for the sake of folly to me that You have not hearkened, but rather for the sake of wisdom that You have not hearkened, that I might perceive what of You I ought to ask. For those things I was asking which to my cost perchance I should have received. St. Augustine, Exposition on Psalm 54

And:

But when has the Father forsaken the Son, or the Son the Father? Are not Father and Son one God? Whence then, My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me, save that in the Flesh of infirmity there was acknowledged the voice of a sinner? For as He took upon Him the likeness of the flesh of sin, Romans 8:3 why should He not take upon Him the voice of sin? St. Augustine, Exposition on Psalm 50

JoeT

N0help4u

Aug 13, 2008, 02:05 PM

I have a hard time understanding the trinity.
I understand all the explanations but get confused when it comes to where was God when Jesus was in Mary's womb or when he was crucified and asked God where art thou?

I understand what Rev is saying but then would that mean God was confined to where Jesus was geographically and not in heaven during Jesus time on earth?

xaiegen

Aug 13, 2008, 02:11 PM

a)So what I'm hearing is if one's grandparent died, they are only your grandfather and nothing else? They can't have been a father or a husband, a brother or a child at one point? Each label having it's own set of responsibilities?

b) Another thing is you are open to the option of your grandfather's death being meaningless, did the life he lead while alive mean anything? Your grandfather could have been a TRUE hypocrite and followed the Jews of the time, not helping the sick on Sabbath, not curing poisonous food, not suggesting earth treasures be given up to follow God (one earth treasure is the very body he was and you are in). So, human sacrifice is forbidden by the Torah, but you forget the Romans could care less, Jesus was not destroying their ways, Jesus was destroying the Jewish practice of the time. Who felt threatened? The pharisees did, meaning the very same Jewish priests who condemned him to die just went against Torah law. Yay *clap to the true hypocrites once again*.

c)I will agree with pnkrkmama on this one. Taking a philosophical/psychological instead of theological approach, you seem the sort of person who has to believe with his eyes. Let me say that understanding using sensory perception does not make it truth. If I gouged your eyes out and ate it, will you stop believing the world has colors? Where do you place your faith in if you were similar to Helen Keller? Should you limit yourself due to your disability, which at this point is your inability to comprehend the full nature of a Divine being? If you can't understand create a neutrino metaphor (from science) or a -i (from math) to complete your faith.

What is logically incompatible about saying you don't know? Socrates did it, you can too. For that matter, him being God, why couldn't he resurrect himself? Don't forget he hated to leave the life he created for himself, hence him crying during prayer and his disciples sleeping through it.

You are trying to discredit his work, his life, his soul (Holy Spirit), his family (God the father, the son, the holy spirit). What do you want to support?

N0help4u

Aug 13, 2008, 02:20 PM

Me I am willing to go by faith, but when asked about the trinity it does get my head thinking.
The OP I don't think they want to support anything other than why they do not believe.

ZachZ

Aug 13, 2008, 03:03 PM

Also first you have to establish if the Bible MEANS or says that Jesus is fully God and/or fully man and not each simultaneously.

Some people say it is more like where the Bible says a husband and wife are one and they have a child then that is three and they are the Jones family which makes them 1.

This response fails because if a man is a husband and a father, then if you kill the husband, the father dies at the same time and is not available to resurrect the husband.

ZachZ

Aug 13, 2008, 03:05 PM

WOW you have a very warped view of things. I was raised with both parents having Masters in Theology. Jesus did not come to save our brains and give us infinite understanding He died for our soul/spirits. Therefore, if you try to approach this question and filter the infinite concept of God and man and the crucifiction through our limited understanding and mental capacity we will always end up in the dark and confused. The act of dying on the cross for our sins and bringing our souls to Himself in heaven and giving us an advocate, the Holy Spirit, is for your spirit to understand, grasp, and accept...yes, there is such a thing as spiritual understanding....Shutting your heart and allowing your head take over is only to YOUR detriment.. "For now we see in a miror dimly but soon face to face."

Why so hard and mad?

Your response is Answer C--"It's a mystery." You admit the logical impossibility but refuse to deal with it.

Perhaps your two parents with Masters degrees in Theology could answer this question?

ZachZ

Aug 13, 2008, 03:08 PM

If Christ was a man, he had both body and soul. If he was God, He IS. Therefore, both Jesus the man and Jesus the God were crucified. If it would be one or the other you have the conundrum referred to in the question. Our being consists of both body and soul. A being having both body and soul is why God promises us new bodies in heaven – we aren’t complete as beings without our bodies as spiritual beings.

JoeT

You don't answer the question -- DID GOD DIE? If so, who resurrected him? If not, what extraordinary sacrifice was there?

ZachZ

Aug 13, 2008, 03:14 PM

God's word makes it clear that "God raised Him from the dead". Answer A.

Rom 1:1-4 ...
What you are MISSING is that the Son of God, being the Son of God with all power and authority of God RAISED HIMSELF!
Read carefully:
...
"Simple logic" has to conclude that if it God Who raised Jesus the Christ.....and Jesus the Christ says that He raised Himself.........that Jesus the Christ MUST BE God.

Thank you for your genuine and honest attempt to resolve the dilemma.

Do you not see from your own answer that you contradict yourself?

How can a God who has been killed exist to 'raise himself'? If this God were still in existence, he was not truly killed, and therefore there was no sacrifice.

And when you say that "God raised Jesus the Christ" then you have made a material separation between the actor (God) and the object (Jesus) -- evidencing a separation between God and Jesus, effectively declaring that Jesus is not the same thing as God.

Along all these lines, your theology falls apart.

ZachZ

Aug 13, 2008, 03:16 PM

I have a hard time understanding the trinity.

ME TOO!! :p

N0help4u

Aug 13, 2008, 03:18 PM

So you have to have an answer for everything or you do not believe it
That is what I figured.
You are forgetting one thing though.
As far as death and dying, the husband dies therefore the father dies but the point is that their spirits never die are you including that in your reasoning to find an answer to a spiritual aspect??

Can you or anybody reason everything that you DO know that exists?

savedsinner7

Aug 13, 2008, 03:26 PM

Job 36:26
“Look, God is greater than we can understand.

Isaiah 40:21
Haven't you heard? Don't you understand?Are you deaf to the words of God—the words he gave before the world began?Are you so ignorant?

Isaiah 40:28
Have you never heard?Have you never understood?The Lord is the everlasting God,the Creator of all the earth.He never grows weak or weary.No one can measure the depths of his understanding.

Luke 8:10
He replied, “You are permitted to understand the secrets of the Kingdom of God. But I use parables to teach the others so that the Scriptures might be fulfilled:'When they look, they won't really see.When they hear, they won't understand.'

Romans 10:3
For they don't understand God's way of making people right with himself. Refusing to accept God's way, they cling to their own way of getting right with God

Unless you are seriously seeking to find God, you will never understand His ways.

De Maria

Aug 13, 2008, 03:32 PM

Here's a question I've been asking that no Christian has ever been able to provide a satisfactory answer for that does not clearly violate simple rules of logic, or trinitarian Christian theology. I truly believe it's the kernel of truth that has the power to crack apart trinitarian Christianity.

Any Christian out there want to take a shot at it?

Sure. But before we do so, lets talk logic. Do you know the definition of a "loaded question"?

In other words, the question you have asked is not designed to obtain a true answer but devised in such a fashion that every answer which you can possibly conceive will justify or confirm your presupposition.

A very clear cut example is the question, "have you stopped beating your wife?"

Obviously, if you answer, "yes". You are guilty of beating your wife in the past.
And if you answer "no", you are guilty of still beating your wife.

How does one get out of such a dilemma when a loaded question is directed to them?

The way I do it is by going back to the beginning and redefining the question. For instance, if asked, "Have you stopped beating your wife?" I will answer, "I've never beaten my wife."

Lets review your question:

The question is:

"If Jesus is supposed to be fully man and fully God, and died on the cross... then WHO resurrected him?"

Answer A) is:
If you say "God the father resurrected him" then you prove that Jesus was NOT God in full because a separate God entity did the resurrecting. This violates the 'trinity.'

Answer B) is:
If you say "The God nature left Jesus" then you are essentially saying that God did NOT die, and the death of Jesus was no important sacrifice at all. A human man was tortured for a weekend and died. How is this supposed to atone for all the sins of humanity?

Not to mention that human sacrifice is explicitly forbidden by Torah, and the manner of death runs afoul of at least a dozen laws regarding kosher sin sacrifice: The death wasn't by kosher shecht (slaughter), the offering was not made at the Temple, the offering wasn't made by Temple priests, the body wasn't without physical blemish, etc. This makes Christianity a religion based upon an unkosher, human sacrifice.

Answer C) is:
If you say "It's a mystery" or "With God all things are possible" you are basically saying you have no answer and give up. You recognize the inherent contradiction but choose to pull the wool over your own eyes, and hope your brain never rejects the obvious, glaring logical incompatibility.

All 3 choices - A, B and C - crack apart the foundation of Christianity.

Now see, not only have you loaded the question but you've limited the possible number of responses you thought possible. However you are wrong because you know neither the power of God nor the Scriptures.

First of all, you have ignored the definition of death. What does it mean? If you die, what happens?

Well, your spirit separates from your body and you are dead because your body is no longer animated by your spirit.

But is your spirit dead? According to Catholic doctrine, your spirit continues to live in the after life. You are either:

1. In the presence of God in heaven. Heaven is known as the abundant life.
2. In the presence of God in Purgatory. Purgatory is a postponement of the abundant life, while your soul is purified.
3. Or in the absence of God in hell. Hell is called death because of the absence of God in your afterlife.

But your spirit continues to live and perceive the condition in which it exists.

So, what happened to Jesus on the Cross?

Jesus died because His body was no longer animated by His Spirit. Yet His Spirit continued to live and preached to the disobedient souls in prison. Therefore, God the Son died and yet could sustain the Universe. Because the death of a man is only the death of his body, not of his spirit.

Then His Body was glorified, joined to His Spirit and Resurrected.

I hope that helps.

Sincerely,

De Maria

xaiegen

Aug 13, 2008, 03:33 PM

Death is an ending for mortal beings, hence God killed the mortal portion of himself. As only a Divine being who set up the rules for death and why death was made necessary, only He can fix the wrongs by placing himself in our shoes and understanding us enough to go through the very process of dying we all must face one day.

When a snake sheds its skin, do you ignore the fact it did the act of shedding? No, it still shed nonetheless. When a God sheds it's human portion, do you ignore the fact he went through pain and sacrificed his human existence? No, he still sacrificed himself. Does he not leave a part of him behind, and transcends into a different more cleaner existence?

Questions to ask, what is death to an immortal being? Does it cheapen his act of dying because he has the ability to transcend past death and you, the mortal, does not? Couldn't God just abolish the very rules he made up and not deal with the idea of dying by extending himself in human form? On this yes it's possible he could, but then he wouldn't be playing fair in the game of Good v. Evil then would he?

N0help4u

Aug 13, 2008, 03:37 PM

Yeah De Marie explained better what I was saying about spirit continuing.

JoeT777

Aug 13, 2008, 04:00 PM

You don't answer the question -- DID GOD DIE? If so, who resurrected him? If not, what extraordinary sacrifice was there?

Death is a separation of body and soul. Christ the God, “Divinity which could not die, even still lay hid in the flesh of Him rising.” The body becomes corrupted: as it were "from dust to dust." Only that which is corruptible can die, God is not corruptible and as such cannot die in the sense of becoming corrupt. Christ's soul slept. Lazarus had died; his body started the process of corruption, as soul slept. As an example, Jesus explained that, “Lazarus our friend sleepeth: but I go that I may awake him out of sleep.” John 11:11. Upon being resurrected, Chist's body's was re-united with the soul. Thus, both died, God and man,

But flesh had risen, because flesh had been dead: Divinity which could not die, even still lay hid in the flesh of Him rising. Form could be seen, limbs held, scars handled: the Word by whom all things were made, who does see? who does hold? who does handle? And yet the Word was made flesh, and dwelled among us. John 1:14 And Thomas, that was holding Man, understood God as he was able. For when he had handled the scars, he cried out, My Lord, and my God. Yet the Lord was showing that form, and that flesh, which they had seen upon the Cross, which had been laid in the sepulchre. He stayed with them forty days....But what was said to Thomas handling? Because you have seen, you have believed; blessed are they that see not, and believe. John 20:29 We are foretold. That world called from the rising of the sun unto the going down sees not, and believes. Hidden then is the God of gods, both to those among whom He walked, and to those by whom He was crucified, and to those before whose eyes He rose, and to us who believe in Him in heaven sitting, whom we have not seen on earth walking. But even if we were to see, should we not see that which the Jews saw and crucified? It is more, that not seeing we believe Christ to be God, than that they seeing deemed Him only to be man. They in a word by thinking evil slew, we by believing well are made alive. St. Augustine, Exposition on Psalm 50

The extraordinary sacrifice was for a God who is all good to have taken on and experience sin (death of the soul). But, not just the sin of one man, Adam. He took on and experienced the totality of sin. That's why St. Augustine said took on the same abandonment caused by death. To paraphrase St. Augustine, He received what I (we) ought.

JoeT

N0help4u

Aug 13, 2008, 04:07 PM

Okay another question is if Jesus is fully God and God fully Jesus then where does the 3 come in other than the three distinct *functions* they represent?

De Maria

Aug 13, 2008, 04:09 PM

N0help4u agrees: I DO have to give you a greenie for the LOADED question explanation!

Gee thanks! I live for greenies!

savedsinner7

Aug 13, 2008, 04:19 PM

Okay another question is if Jesus is fully God and God fully Jesus then where does the 3 come in other than the three distinct *functions* they represent?
Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God, The Truth of Jesus, in every place, living in His followers, advancing the Kingdom of God.

Fr_Chuck

Aug 13, 2008, 04:31 PM

You are correct it is beyond human logic, but then God is all powerful and to be honest does not have to fit into any mold or rules that man wants to put on him. So how can he be, he can because he is,

Sorry if you can't merely accept this truth, but then if you can have no problem with raising from the dead, ( which is against all human understanding) the trinity has little trouble being believed.

cogs

Aug 13, 2008, 05:00 PM

Jesus had the power to raise the dead. He also kept repeating that he had a father.
Also, Jhn 4:24 God [is] a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship [him] in spirit and in truth.
And, Jhn 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, [even] the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:

So, something more than jesus is going on: a father who is a spirit, and a power that can resurrect the dead through jesus, and a comforter who is the spirit of truth that proceeds from the father, that's given to us.
So there's something that involves jesus, but is apart from him at the same time. So it seems that, when jesus died, a part still existed. That tells me that flesh can die, but an intelligent direction of power never dies. We do not know what spirit is, yet:
Jhn 3:8 The wind bloweth where it will, and thou hearest the voice thereof, but knowest not whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

ZachZ

Aug 13, 2008, 06:11 PM

jesus had the power to raise the dead. he also kept repeating that he had a father.
also, Jhn 4:24 God [is] a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship [him] in spirit and in truth.
and, Jhn 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, [even] the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:

so, something more than jesus is going on: a father who is a spirit, and a power that can resurrect the dead through jesus, and a comforter who is the spirit of truth that proceeds from the father, that's given to us.
so there's something that involves jesus, but is apart from him at the same time. so it seems that, when jesus died, a part still existed. that tells me that flesh can die, but an intelligent direction of power never dies. we do not know what spirit is, yet:
Jhn 3:8 The wind bloweth where it will, and thou hearest the voice thereof, but knowest not whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

You then admit that Jesus is not "fully God." If there are Divine elements that exist outside Jesus, in your theology, God is not ONE but is split up into pieces and parts spread out over several "persons." According to mainstream trinitarian Christianity, you are a heretic.

ZachZ

Aug 13, 2008, 06:11 PM

Will address other posts soon...

cogs

Aug 13, 2008, 06:26 PM

You then admit that Jesus is not "fully God." If there are Divine elements that exist outside Jesus, in your theology, God is not ONE but is split up into pieces and parts spread out over several "persons." According to mainstream trinitarian Christianity, you are a heretic.
I don't mind being called names by any sect.
Jesus had no sin, because he was a perfect, unblemished sacrifice, just like in the old testament. Except he was human, and no human was an acceptable sacrifice for the world's sin, like jesus.
I don't see a split in god's being, because his spirit is able to permeate even our flesh. Jesus sent god's spirit to live in us. In us is within. He didn't become another spleen or something, but it's spiritual, with the power to not only change us, but in jesus, the power to heal.
Again, there's an intelligent direction of power that's always there. I don't know where god ends and jesus begins, but I'm more concerned with the purposes of god, which is to bring us to himself. Not only that, but since jesus was a sinless sacrifice, then he was pure. I believe that's why he sent his spirit in us, to purify us. I think this is what god requires of us. Thank god that that power is available, else we'd never be able to please god.

revdrgade

Aug 13, 2008, 11:23 PM

Thank you for your genuine and honest attempt to resolve the dilemma.

Do you not see from your own answer that you contradict yourself?

How can a God who has been killed exist to 'raise himself'? If this God were still in existence, he was not truly killed, and therefore there was no sacrifice.

And when you say that "God raised Jesus the Christ" then you have made a material separation between the actor (God) and the object (Jesus) -- evidencing a separation between God and Jesus, effectively declaring that Jesus is not the same thing as God.

Along all these lines, your theology falls apart.

No, I see no contradiction at all. Jesus said in one of the passages I sent to you that He and the Father were one and that He, Jesus Christ, raised Himself... as God, not an avatar nor an "actor", but God Himself.

He was never separate from the Father but whole fullness of the Godhead dwelt in Him:

Col 2:9-10

9 For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, 10 and you have been given fullness in Christ, who is the head over every power and authority.
NIV

Do you agree that God alone is the head over every power and authority? Or does your logic allow there to be two heads?

The One we call the Son of God was always God. But as promised in Isaiah. The child Who is born of a woman and thus has a human nature and Who is the Son given by the Father in whom His whole Deity dwells bodily. Notice He is also called "Mighty God" and even "Wonderful Couselor" = the Holy Spirit of God that Jesus promised would be sent when He, Jesus, ascended back into heaven.

Isa 9:6-7
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.
7 Of the increase of his government and peace
there will be no end.
He will reign on David's throne
and over his kingdom,
establishing and upholding it
with justice and righteousness
from that time on and forever.
The zeal of the Lord Almighty
will accomplish this.
NIV

There is no contradiction in my argument. It is in perfect agreement with God's Word that the Son of God came from God in order to save sinners and having accomplished this in His death and resurrection, He returned to Heaven that His glory which He set aside in taking on human flesh might be complete again.

John 1:14
14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father , full of grace and truth.
NIV

John 16:27-28
27 No, the Father himself loves you because you have loved me and have believed that I came from God. 28 I came from the Father and entered the world; now I am leaving the world and going back to the Father."
NIV

1 John 4:1-3
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.
NIV

2 John 7
7 Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh , have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist.
NIV

cogs

Aug 13, 2008, 11:32 PM

I can understand your dilemma in the seeming division of jesus and god. We're not going to find out how jesus was resurrected, so we'll have to take that one on faith, until god provides that answer. Lol thomas was shown the nail scars, so the fact that jesus was resurrected is quite enough. When jesus did his miracles, I'm sure he didn't want people obsessing over how they were done, but jesus always pointed them to his message, with the signs following. In other words, don't get caught up in it, see the miracle and accept its message.

N0help4u

Aug 14, 2008, 06:46 AM

Look at it as a spiritual oneness and God is omni present and Jesus was his bodily form.
God in a sense is even IN us.

ZachZ

Aug 14, 2008, 07:35 AM

Death is a separation of body and soul.
This is interesting. So what use does God have for a 'soul'? A soul is something that only humans need.

Christ’s soul slept.
This indicates again that Jesus was not God. Only humans have souls. God has no need for a soul.

The extraordinary sacrifice was for a God who is all good to have taken on and experience sin (death of the soul). But, not just the sin of one man, himself. He took on and experienced the totality of sin.
You are saying Jesus sinned?

N0help4u

Aug 14, 2008, 07:53 AM

This indicates again that Jesus was not God. Only humans have souls. God has no need for a soul.

You are saying Jesus sinned?

That is no different than saying God did not need flesh to come to earth as a human through Jesus.

Why would that be saying Jesus sinned? Do you know what a soul is?

ZachZ

Aug 14, 2008, 08:36 AM

No, I see no contradiction at all.
Perhaps in time you will see.

Jesus said in one of the passages I sent to you that He and the Father were one and that He, Jesus Christ, raised Himself....as God, not an avatar nor an "actor", but God Himself.

This is Answer B: No true Divine sacrifice; un-kosher human sacrifice. And doesn't the question even enter your mind: "How can something which has supposedly died resuscitate itself? If it can, was there ever a true 'death' in the first place?"

Do you agree that God alone is the head over every power and authority? Or does your logic allow there to be two heads?

God is ONE. Not two, not three, no multi-headed "Godhead". God is ONE, period.

But as promised in Isaiah...

I don't wish to de-rail this thread by going off on well-worn tangents about common misunderstandings and misapplications of the writings in Nevi'im and Ketuvim.

There is no contradiction in my arguement. It is in perfect agreement with God's Word that <snip> John ... <snip>

This is a whole other topic with its own problems, but irrelevant to this thread.

Can you please address the contradiction in the OP.

JoeT777

Aug 14, 2008, 08:39 AM

The extraordinary sacrifice was for a God who is all good to have taken on and experience sin (death of the soul). But, not just the sin of one man, himself. He took on and experienced the totality of sin.

You are saying Jesus sinned?

I’m at work and can only pilfer a few minutes at a time. I’ll respond one question at a time. I’ll start with the last because I didn’t make my meaning clear (my fault).

The comment “not just the sin of one man” was made in context of St. Augustine’s Exposition on Psalm 54. It was meant to be quantitative, not qualitative. I understand St. Augustine to be saying that any man, any one man, experiencing temporal tribulations, will cry out “My God, my God, why have You forsaken me.” So, wouldn’t Christ, the man, (sinless) suffer total abandonment just for the quantity of one man’s sin; how much more abandonment would he suffer for all of mankind’s sin?

In that regard if possible I’ll revise that sentence to read, ”But, not just the sin of one man, Adam” to mean any man numbering one.

JoeT

ZachZ

Aug 14, 2008, 08:40 AM

That is no different than saying God did not need flesh to come to earth as a human through Jesus.

A CORRECT and ACCURATE statement!

Why would that be saying Jesus sinned? Do you know what a soul is?

This was a follow-up to the person who said that the 'sacrifice' was that God experienced sin, which the poster defined as separation of the soul. This indicates 1) Jesus was not God because he had a soul, something God has no need for; 2) Jesus sinned -- If the 'sacrifice' was that God experienced sin, and the claim is made that Jesus was God, then this is the same thing as saying "Jesus sinned."

Show me how I am not correct.

JoeT777

Aug 14, 2008, 10:47 AM

Death is a separation of body and soul.
This is interesting. So what use does God have for a 'soul'? A soul is something that only humans need.

Christ’s soul slept. This indicates again that Jesus was not God. Only humans have souls. God has no need for a soul.

I think I can resolve both these objections with one explanation. Once again, your objection is probably my failure for not being clear.

In my first post I stated that Christ was a Man and as such had both a body and a soul. I also said that God IS. I don’t think I’ve got the wherewithal to define God – nor does anybody.

The Man that was, is, and always will be, Christ died; by definition of death, it entailed a separation of the body from the soul. For three days the body continued in corruption. The soul descended into Sheol for the same three days, a place Jewish faith holds to be a waiting place for souls. Descending to Sheol was always referred to in Scripture as being asleep.

We take Christ’s soul to be rather different in that it was pure and in perfect communion with God. Nevertheless, Christ’s soul went to Sheol until the resurrection where it was re-united with the body. Upon the ascension, the resurrected Man called Christ, body and soul, re-established its communion with God; who is a Triune of three persons, God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit. Christ sat at the right hand of God.

So, yes only humans have souls as did Christ who was human. The second person of the Trinity has, among other things, a human soul. I’m assuming you’re not denying Christ his humanity? I don’t believe I implied that God (the fist person in the Triune) had a soul, what was said was that God IS.

"Therefore, both Jesus the man and Jesus the God were crucified."

JoeT

N0help4u

Aug 14, 2008, 10:50 AM

Yes soul does not equal sin Adam and Eve had a soul before they sinned.

defining spirit, soul, and body (http://www.gesher.org/spirit%20soul%20and%20body/The%20Release%20of%20the%20Spirit.html)

JoeT777

Aug 14, 2008, 11:01 AM

Yes soul does not equal sin Adam and Eve had a soul before they sinned.

defining spirit, soul, and body (http://www.gesher.org/spirit%20soul%20and%20body/The%20Release%20of%20the%20Spirit.html)

You lost me.

N0help4u

Aug 14, 2008, 11:06 AM

OP seems to think soul = sin

wildandblue

Aug 14, 2008, 12:23 PM

Jesus is a separate person from God. He is God's son, He is not God. Genesis tells how Jesus was created by God as the first fruit of His Creation, how God was especially fond of him, but as for Jesus, his thoughts were with {he was fond of} the humans God created on Earth. The angels in heaven are also called God's sons, Jesus, his firstborn, is also the Archangel Michael. When Adam and Eve sinned in the Garden of Eden, eating the fruit off God's tree of Knowledge, in order to prevent them from also eating from the tree of life God put them out of the garden. Jesus calls Himself the tree of life. Was He actually there in the garden at the beginning of creation too? When Abram was tested, he offered up his son as a sacrifice. Did God kill his son? No, he basically said, that's all right, I will accept this ram caught in the thornbushes as your sacrifice. When God offered up His own son, what did man do? He killed God's son. In the Old Testament David is called God's son, God says I will become his father, and he will become my son. David at this point had already been born, so how could he now have a different father? It was similar to the born again arrangement, David was to become a new person entirely.

pnkrkmama

Aug 14, 2008, 12:31 PM

ZachZ

Aug 14, 2008, 12:40 PM

Jesus is a seperate person from God. He is God's son, He is not God.

You are either declaring your polytheism, or you admit that Jesus is not God here -- I am not sure which, your response is unclear. Either response puts you outside the stated beliefs of normative Christianity, and so you're not addressing my original question.

ZachZ

Aug 14, 2008, 12:46 PM

Zach you are ignoring what the point of my response was. You are trying to logically understand something that is spiritual. Maybe you never operate on a spiritual level which is truly sad. You can't answer a spiritual question with the physical mind which you are apparently proud to be stifled by

The 'point' of your response seems to be: I admit my beliefs are illogical and self-contradictory, but because this is a "spiritual" subject, logic does not apply. You are still saying: Answer C: My beliefs are self-contradictory and illogical.

This may be satisfactory for you, but not for me or any other sensible person who doesn't feel that one must abandon all logic and reason when studying Torah. God gave me a sharp, inquisitive and logical mind, and I see no reason to throw away these gifts that God gave me when my thoughts turn to Him and His Torah.

wildandblue

Aug 14, 2008, 12:50 PM

Read sentence three of my original response--Jesus is not God. He is God's son. Once resurrected, He sat down at the right hand of the Father. Told, sit at my right hand, I will make a footstool out of your enemies for you to rest your feet on. Was God looking in a mirror here? Was He talking to Himself? Of course not. God sent His perfect son as a ransom sacrifice for the sin of the imperfect man Adam. This is all in the Bible. How does pointing this out not make me a Chistian? I was trying to help, not annoy you. Sorry for any misunderstanding.

ZachZ

Aug 14, 2008, 12:53 PM

I think I can resolve both these objections with one explanation. Once again, your objection is probably my failure for not being clear.

In my first post I stated that Christ was a Man and as such had both a body and a soul...

You are still providing Answer B: No sacrifice. Without the death of God, what true sacrifice was there? The entirety of the Christian idea of 'grace' is that God died for your sins. The narrative you provided shows that God did NOT die, for any purpose. All that can be said is that God created a human being (at no expense to Himself) and sent this human being to die in an un-kosher manner for a purpose prohibited by Torah. Such a 'sacrifice' is invalid and meaningless.

N0help4u

Aug 14, 2008, 12:54 PM

The closest I can make sense of the trinity is like a triangle with three dots within it.
It is ONE triangle yet three dots.

0rphan

Aug 14, 2008, 12:59 PM

Your right I don't have an answer... but then I don't feel the need

There are many things in life that I as a mere mortal do not understand.

Our brains cannot comprehened all things... I personnaly don't think we are meant to

But for the Grace of God...

ZachZ

Aug 14, 2008, 01:03 PM

Your right i don't have an answer...Our brains cannot comprehened all things

Thank you for your honest answer.

fixxs

Aug 14, 2008, 01:14 PM

Well first of all jesus is all things
He is god the father the son therefor when he died on the cross for our sins he did actually die for our sins
All together he is one and so that means that he resurected himself because as I said he is everything the father and the son

fixxs

Aug 14, 2008, 01:15 PM

I don't know for a fact but that is what I think and to tell you the truth I think you need to just believe and take it as that

ZachZ

Aug 14, 2008, 01:24 PM

Sure. But before we do so, lets talk logic. Do you know the definition of a "loaded question"?

I sure do! And I am happy to talk logic! I feel we sure could use some here. So let's get started:

...every answer which you can possibly conceive will justify or confirm your presupposition.

My question is only "loaded" problematically IF I am making an incorrect assumption. Such as in your example:

"have you stopped beating your wife?"

the question can only be shown to be "loaded" and therefore invalid if the underlying assumption--that the person you are asking is indeed beating his wife--can be shown to be untrue.

Therefore my question back to you is: What is the underlying assumption in my question that you can demonstrate not to be true?

RE: definition of death:

your spirit separates from your body and you are dead because your body is no longer animated by your spirit.

I have no problem with your definition, let's use it.

your spirit continues to live in the after life

fine...

So, what happened to Jesus on the Cross? Jesus died because His body was no longer animated by His Spirit. Yet His Spirit continued to live ...

You are still providing Answer B: No sacrifice. God sent a man He created to go get himself killed. No negative effects reached God Himself. So what real sacrifice was there? No true sacrifice = no atoning death possible.

If mine is a 'loaded question' you still have to show me what my incorrect underlying assumption is.

ZachZ

Aug 14, 2008, 01:25 PM

i dont know for a fact but that is what i think and to tell u the truth i think u need to just believe and take it as that

Answer C: Willful self-delusion.

fixxs

Aug 14, 2008, 01:45 PM

It seems to me nothing is going to please u so if u really want a good and true answer why not go and ask your paster

N0help4u

Aug 14, 2008, 01:48 PM

It seems to me nothing is going to please u so if u really want a good and true answer why not go and ask your paster
__________________
Fixxs

Exactly what I was getting ready to say. With some people even God himself in person face to face would not convince them.

JoeT777

Aug 14, 2008, 03:05 PM

You are still providing Answer B: No sacrifice. Without the death of God, what true sacrifice was there? The entirety of the Christian idea of 'grace' is that God died for your sins. The narrative you provided shows that God did NOT die, for any purpose. All that can be said is that God created a human being (at no expense to Himself) and sent this human being to die in an un-kosher manner for a purpose prohibited by Torah. Such a 'sacrifice' is invalid and meaningless.

No the entire idea of Christianity is that Christ (second person) died for our sins. Why do you want to keep killing God (first person)?

Begotten not made. When Christ was conceived his soul was infused with the 2nd person of the Trinity. Chrsit was not created.

I'll still stand with my response.

JoeT

Galveston1

Aug 14, 2008, 04:04 PM

According to the origianal post, you seem to be trying to disprove trinitarian doctrine, in favor of what? I'm sure you know this, but will post it anyway, as it seems to have relevance to the question.

430 'elohiym (el-o-heem');(Found in Genesis many times.)

plural of 433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative:

KJV-- angels, X exceeding, God (gods)- dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty.

ZachZ

Aug 14, 2008, 04:42 PM

According to the origianal post, you seem to be trying to disprove trinitarian doctrine, in favor of what?

In favor of the truth of the ONE God of Israel--ONE as enumerated in Torah.

I'm sure you know this, but will post it anyway, as it seems to have relevance to the question.

430 'elohiym (el-o-heem');(Found in Genesis many times.) ...

plural of 433

You are quoting Strong's concordance numbers, which is a concordance of the Hebrew to the 1611 Christian King James translation. These numbers prove nothing other than what the 1611 Christian King James translators were thinking. They are of no use when studying Torah itself.

However this is actually a side-track from my original question, which highlights the internal contradiction of Christian explanation of the resurrection. If you'd like to discuss 'Elohim' and how we know its use to be purely and exclusively SINGULAR when referring to God, please open up a thread about that in the Jewish forum.

cogs

Aug 14, 2008, 06:35 PM

The narrative you provided shows that God did NOT die, for any purpose. All that can be said is that God created a human being (at no expense to Himself) and sent this human being to die in an un-kosher manner for a purpose prohibited by Torah. Such a 'sacrifice' is invalid and meaningless.

Mat 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? That is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

Psa 22:1 [To the chief Musician upon Aijeleth Shahar, A Psalm of David.] My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? [why art thou so] far from helping me, [and from] the words of my roaring?

Do not these two verses look similar? Could jesus, a human, have been quoting the old testament psalm, written by david, hundreds of years before? Isn't the rest of the psalm similar to the circumstances around jesus' crucifixion? Why is that? Perhaps david prophesied jesus' crucifixion, without even knowing he had done so. Perhaps jesus knew this was about himself, and repeated it for remembrance. Perhaps jesus WAS sent by god, and was a sacrifice for mans' sin. Perhaps we should accept the old testament as an account of the coming savior god planned.
Jhn 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
Italics mine.

ZachZ

Aug 14, 2008, 06:54 PM

Mat 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

Psa 22:1 [To the chief Musician upon Aijeleth Shahar, A Psalm of David.] My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? [why art thou so] far from helping me, [and from] the words of my roaring?

do not these two verses look similar? could jesus, a human, have been quoting the old testament psalm, written by david, hundreds of years before?

Yes, if Jesus were a Jew, he surely would have been instructed by his teachers in the Psalms and so he would have known that psalm and could have quoted it. Just as YOU have been taught verses of your sacred texts and can quote them here. I see nothing remarkable about this.

isn't the rest of the psalm similar to the circumstances around jesus' crucifixion?

This is going off into another irrelevant tangent. We can argue about the subject of Psalm 22 in a different thread, including "like a lion" and the similarities (or lack thereof) to crucifixion. But I don't see how this psalm addresses in any way the inherent internal contradiction surrounding the Christian explanation of the resurrection.

Ironically enough, perhaps -- the quote Matthew echoes from the Psalm emphasizes the SEPARATION of the character Jesus from God. How can God forsake Himself? This is more evidence from the Greek writings themselves that Jesus cannot be God.

Look forward to you addressing my original question.

N0help4u

Aug 14, 2008, 07:06 PM

A bit of topic but in reply to your conclusion above

Tenakh/Hebrew Scriptures (http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/messiah.htm)

Old Testament prophecies of Jesus Christ (http://www.cynet.com/Jesus/PROPHECY/ntquoted.htm)

cogs

Aug 14, 2008, 07:06 PM

Yes, if Jesus were a Jew, he surely would have been instructed by his teachers in the Psalms and so he would have known that psalm and could have quoted it. Just as YOU have been taught verses of your sacred texts and can quote them here. I see nothing remarkable about this.
This is going off into another irrelevant tangent. We can argue about the subject of Psalm 22 in a different thread, including "like a lion" and the similarities (or lack thereof) to crucifixion. But I don't see how this psalm addresses in any way the inherent internal contradiction surrounding the Christian explanation of the resurrection.
Ironically enough, perhaps -- the quote Matthew echoes from the Psalm emphasizes the SEPARATION of the character Jesus from God. How can God forsake Himself? This is more evidence from the Greek writings themselves that Jesus cannot be God.
Look forward to you addressing my original question.

Jhn 5:38 And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he sent, him ye believe not.
Jhn 5:39 Ye search the scriptures, because ye think that in them ye have eternal life; and these are they which bear witness of me;
Jhn 5:40 and ye will not come to me, that ye may have life.

Jesus here, was speaking to the jews who did not accept him as messiah. As far as your op, I am answering to the intent behind it, which I believe I know. You are being like the jews here, that's why I posted the previous scripture, as well as this. If you won't accept jesus' mission that god sent him for, then you do not want to know why we think jesus is god. You only want to disprove that he was sent as the messiah, by couching it in doubt of his divinity. I'm not mad at you. Just trying to convert you.

ZachZ

Aug 14, 2008, 07:29 PM

... by couching it in doubt of his divinity. i'm not mad at ya. just trying to convert you.

Not taking it as anger at all, don't worry. I can't accept any kind of philosophy that has the obvious internal contradiction I pointed out in the OP. If your intent is to 'convert' you'd have to be able to address it. Can you? If you can't address it, how can you believe in such a lie?

cogs

Aug 14, 2008, 07:31 PM

Not taking it as anger at all, don't worry. I can't accept any kind of philosophy that has the obvious internal contradiction I pointed out in the OP. If your intent is to 'convert' you'd have to be able to address it. Can you? If you can't address it, how can you believe in such a lie?
do you not doubt that in the old testament, jesus' atonement for mans' sin is prophesied?

cogs

Aug 14, 2008, 07:44 PM

Let me take a more proactive approach: the old testament predicts a messiah. That is the reason in the new, the jews had so much trouble believing jesus was that predicted messiah. They reasoned that no messiah could come out of galilee. On these technicalities of scripture, they erred, even when they saw jesus doing miracles, which required power from somewhere. They decided that he was from the devil, because they couldn't accept the alternative. This was ironic, because the one purpose of all of their religious life, was in front of them. It's like not seeing the forest for the trees. So they cut off their nose to spite their face, so to speak. They carried out the very prophesy they thought they knew so well, through scripture study. How did this happen? The same way that it's happening between you and I. you're really missing the point of scripture if you deny jesus is the messiah predicted in the scripture you study.

savedsinner7

Aug 14, 2008, 07:56 PM

Jesus was both fully God and fully man. He was the Father sent to the Earth to take our place. He who was sinless took our sins upon Himself and took the separation from the Father at death to give us the way to the Father. If you are looking to tear apart the Word you will never be able to find the Truth. If you seek Him with all your heart, He will be found.

John 8:18-20 (New King James Version)
18 I am One who bears witness of Myself, and the Father who sent Me bears witness of Me.”
19 Then they said to Him, “Where is Your Father?”
Jesus answered, “You know neither Me nor My Father. If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also.”

Matthew 11:27
All things have been delivered to Me by My Father, and no one knows the Son except the Father. Nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and the one to whom the Son wills to reveal Him.

John 10:30
I and My Father are one.”

John 17:20-22 (New King James Version)
Jesus Prays for All Believers
20 “I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will[a] believe in Me through their word; 21 that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. 22 And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one:

1 Corinthians 8:6
Yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live.

Ephesians 2:18
For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father.

ZachZ

Aug 14, 2008, 07:56 PM

do you not doubt that in the old testament, jesus' atonement for mans' sin is prophesied?

I'll answer this if you can show how it addresses my original question... otherwise this is off-topic, although I'd be happy to take it up in another thread.

ZachZ

Aug 14, 2008, 08:00 PM

let me take a more proactive approach:

I can absolutely address every point you brought up, but again -- off topic from the original question. Can you answer the OP?

N0help4u

Aug 14, 2008, 08:10 PM

Start a new post I would look forward to seeing it.

ZachZ

Aug 14, 2008, 08:14 PM

Jesus was both fully God and fully man. He was the Father sent to the Earth to take our place. He who was sinless took our sins upon Himself and took the separation from the Father at death to give us the way to the Father.

You are being unclear! You use the word 'He' a lot without clarifying who you're talking about. How can I understand your explanation? And you don't address the resurrection at all, which was the central subject of my original question. Can you not answer the question?

None of the quotes you provided from the Greek scriptures seem to address the resurrection at all either.

If you are looking to tear apart the Word you will never be able to find the Truth. If you seek Him with all your heart, He will be found.

You say that intense bible study is NOT the way to understand Torah? I disagree.

Why must "seeking Him with all my heart" EXCLUDE careful reading of the Torah?

Why is the only Christian answer ever "Don't try to understand it"! Can't ANYONE address my question? :(

cogs

Aug 14, 2008, 08:14 PM

so what's the point of your religion? Why even follow the bible if you cannot prove god exists, that you actually are forgiven of sin by animal sacrifice, that the miracles happened, that the bible was even written by men inspired of god? How much more than the whole point of scripture being jesus himself?

N0help4u

Aug 14, 2008, 08:22 PM

You say that intense bible study is NOT the way to understand Torah? I disagree.

Why must "seeking Him with all my heart" EXCLUDE careful reading of the Torah?

:(

I don't get that out of this,

Originally Posted by savedsinner7
Jesus was both fully God and fully man. He was the Father sent to the Earth to take our place. He who was sinless took our sins upon Himself and took the separation from the Father at death to give us the way to the Father.

In fact I get that she IS saying to do an intense bible study
By tearing it apart means to do a really through Bible study.

ZachZ

Aug 14, 2008, 08:22 PM

so what's the point of your religion? why even follow the bible if you cannot prove god exists, that you actually are forgiven of sin by animal sacrifice, that the miracles happened, that the bible was even written by men inspired of god?

This is not a problem that Christians can attack Jews on, because both Jews and Christians agree that the Tanakh is the word of God. You cannot be a Christian without taking the Tanakh as true first, just as Jews do. The problem comes when Christians try to "deform" the meaning of the Tanakh and introduce internally contradictory concepts like trinity and the resurrection and claim the Tanakh supports them. When Christians get called on it, the answer seems to be either to deny the trinity (as several have here), or claim "unfathomable mystery" (as the others have). Occam's razor: There is no point to introduce a novel "unfathomable mystery" that is unsupported by Tanakh when a much simpler explanation suffices: God is ONE, and no man is God (plain meanings, straight out of Torah).

cogs, seriously ask yourself: Why must you adhere to a faith that requires you to believe in the inherently illogical?

ZachZ

Aug 14, 2008, 08:24 PM

in fact I get that she IS saying to do an intense bible study
by tearing it apart means to do a really through Bible study.

She actually said the opposite. She said "If you are looking to tear apart the Word you will never be able to find the Truth." (emphasis mine).

cogs

Aug 14, 2008, 08:54 PM

This is not a problem that Christians can attack Jews on, because both Jews and Christians agree that the Tanakh is the word of God. You cannot be a Christian without taking the Tanakh as true first, just as Jews do. The problem comes when Christians try to "deform" the meaning of the Tanakh and introduce internally contradictory concepts like trinity and the resurrection and claim the Tanakh supports them. When Christians get called on it, the answer seems to be either to deny the trinity (as several have here), or claim "unfathomable mystery" (as the others have). Occam's razor: There is no point to introduce a novel "unfathomable mystery" that is unsupported by Tanakh when a much simpler explanation suffices: God is ONE, and no man is God (plain meanings, straight out of Torah).

cogs, seriously ask yourself: Why must you adhere to a faith that requires you to believe in the inherently illogical?
Yes, we agree that the tanakh is the word of god, and it's written first anyway, so it should support the latter, as a foundation. Yes, no man is god. Also, thank you for your question, and I'll answer it: I think that the old testament supports a coming messiah, because there has to be a purpose to sacrifices, and we have to begin to live according to god. As far as miracles, both testaments have them. It just shows how powerful god is. I cannot understand how to live your faith, without an end to sacrifices for sin. And to accept the new testament, with books like revelation and john, that are supported by old testament books like daniel and isaiah, seems good to me.

pnkrkmama

Aug 14, 2008, 09:09 PM

ZachZ its blatantly apparently that you asked a question which you DO NOT Truly want an answer to. It seems that you get off on yourself righteous and rather annoying attempts to entrap well meaning christians in a game of semantics. Therefore, Im over it.
May God give you clarity.

pnkrkmama

Aug 14, 2008, 09:14 PM

Zach it is blatantly apparent that you DO NOT Truly want an answer to this question. It seems that you get off on entrapping well meaning Christians in yourself righteous and rather annoying game of semantics. Therefore I'm done. May God give you clarity

ZachZ

Aug 15, 2008, 05:22 AM

Zach it is blatantly apparent that you DO NOT TRUELY want an answer to this question. It seems that you get off on entrapping well meaning Christians in your self righteous and rather annoying game of semantics. Therefore I'm done. May God give you clarity

Actually I really, truly do want an answer. Why can't an answer be provided? How is exposing such a fundamental internal contradiction about such a fundamental cornerstone of your faith an "annoying game of semantics"?

I can only show you the way back, you have to walk down it.

May God indeed grant you clarity, too.

mountain_man

Aug 15, 2008, 10:00 AM

Actually I really, truly do want an answer. Why can't an answer be provided? How is exposing such a fundamental internal contradiction about such a fundamental cornerstone of your faith an "annoying game of semantics"?

I can only show you the way back, you have to walk down it.

May God indeed grant you clarity, too.

Zach Z
if you want the truth and answers than you have to be willing to hear everything that is being said not defend or retaliate against everything being said.

The answers to your questions have already been given to you and they are the answers that reference certain text of the Bible. If you are familiar with the Bible remember Pilate talking to Jesus right before handing him over to be crucified in John 18

"37 Pilate said, “So you are a king?”

Jesus responded, “You say I am a king. Actually, I was born and came into the world to testify to the truth. All who love the truth recognize that what I say is true.”

Those that truly seek to know the Truth will hear it and understand it.

N0help4u

Aug 15, 2008, 10:11 AM

ZachZ

Aug 15, 2008, 10:16 AM

Those that truly seek to know the Truth will hear it and understand it.

How can we be sure that we're not hearing lies dressed up as truth? One the ways we can tell is when what's being said contradicts Torah. Another way is when what's being said contradicts itself! You believe God requires belief in self-contradictory concepts? Thank goodness Torah teaches otherwise.

N0help4u

Aug 15, 2008, 10:26 AM

In your case I would say start by answering do you believe there is a supreme being WHOEVER He may be? Can you accept that the supreme being created the universe and work on what you can find believable about a creator and go from there.
If you are an Atheist skeptic we can never come up with answers that will suit you.
If you are searching for answers because you do want to believe then you have to take the basics you do believe and maybe build on that to the extent you are able to believe.

ZachZ

Aug 15, 2008, 10:26 AM

The Bible says that God's ways are higher than our understanding and we can not begin to fathom the spiritual because it is beyond our mental capabilities. Just like a kid has to trust its parents even though he can't understand and piece together the way things are because he doesn't understand doesn't make what he doesn't comprehend not so.
You have to look at things from a spiritual concept and that is about impossible to do if you do not even believe in spiritual things. Like how is a skeptic to believe ghosts exist until they encounter one themselves. If you want to understand you first go beyond your comprehension and have to open your spiritual eyes and heart

You seem to be another person who thinks that belief in God requires total disengagement of the brain, and abandonment of logic and reason.

Often-quoted from Isaiah 1: "Come now, and let us reason together, says the LORD". God does not requirement abandonment of all reason. Can any religion that hinges on such a requirement be true?

ZachZ

Aug 15, 2008, 10:28 AM

In your case I would say start by answering do you believe there is a supreme being WHOEVER He may be?

Of course I do! If for some reason it hasn't become clear yet: I believe in God -- the ONE God of Israel.

mountain_man

Aug 15, 2008, 10:30 AM

How can we be sure that we're not hearing lies dressed up as truth? One the ways we can tell is when what's being said contradicts Torah. Another way is when what's being said contradicts itself! You believe God requires belief in self-contradictory concepts? Thank goodness Torah teaches otherwise.

We can be sure we are not hearing lies because of a personal relationship with God.

Do you have a personal relationship with the god represented in the Torah? If so, how?

Also, if you are basing all "contradictions" against the Torah then why are you posting and needing to know so vehemently the question in the OP. Does that question even matter if you know what the Torah teaches as being true? Just something to consider

N0help4u

Aug 15, 2008, 10:42 AM

How can we be sure that we're not hearing lies dressed up as truth? One the ways we can tell is when what's being said contradicts Torah. Another way is when what's being said contradicts itself! You believe God requires belief in self-contradictory concepts? Thank goodness Torah teaches otherwise.

OKAY I wasn't sure cause some of the things you say are just like skeptics and atheists say.

Can you tell me then, since you believe in the Torah, how you rationalize why God would demand sacrifices of animals? Can you tell me the logic in that in order to please God and whatever significance it has to you that makes sense?

ZachZ

Aug 15, 2008, 10:49 AM

We can be sure we are not hearing lies because of a personal relationship with God.

This is a subjective answer that is easily proven unsatisfactory: Catholics believe they have a valid, personal relationship with God, and pray to Mary. Mormons believe they have a valid, personal relationship with God, and believe we can all become gods. Muslims believe they have a valid, personal relationship with God, and deny the trinity. Zoroastrians believe they have a valid, personal relationship with God... Heck, even the Heaven's Gate cult who committed mass suicide at the approach of comet Hale-Bopp in 1997 believed they had a valid, personal relationship with God! Are they ALL right because they "feel" they are? The Jewish bible warns against exactly this sort of subjective "feeling" as justification for your religion: 1 Kings 18:

In the 18th chapter of I Kings, the Bible relates that when Elijah had challenged 450 priests of Baal to bring a sacrifice to their gods and see if their offering would be miraculously accepted with fire, there was a peculiar spectacle which followed. It seemed as though there was no doubt in the minds of these pagan worshipers that Baal would hear their supplications and consume their bullock with a heavenly fire. The Bible vividly recounts how they enthusiastically entreated Baal and prayed fervidly for a miracle all day. They even climbed on top of the altar and began to prance beside their sacrifice, and when that failed to secure a response from their gods, in their frantic zeal they used knives and lancets to slice away flesh from their bodies. These prophets of Baal were on fire for their gods. Regardless of their unyielding zeal for their idols, they were commanded to turn away from these abominations.

So we know that 'feeling' is not enough. There are externally-verifiable requirements. I have pointed out an internal contradiction in Christian dogma. I have shown that 'feeling' is not enough. Can you not address the point of the OP?

ZachZ

Aug 15, 2008, 10:52 AM

OKAY I wasn't sure cause some of the things you say are just like skeptics and atheists say.

Can you tell me then, since you believe in the Torah, how you rationalize why God would demand sacrifices of animals? Can you tell me the logic in that in order to please God and whatever significance it has to you that makes sense?

Yes, but that would be going down yet another tangent path. It should suffice for me to point out that there is nothing internally contradictory about understanding the plain Torah text regarding sacrifices at face value. This is not a parallel concept to the explanation of the resurrection, which does have that problem.

N0help4u

Aug 15, 2008, 11:00 AM

But it still is something you have to take by faith of why God would do something like that.
It is something that really doesn't make much sense in a human reasoning so I would think if you can take that leap of faith. Also the Torah does teach in the three and you believe in the three just not the way Christians do. I take it you are a Jew and God says he loves the Jew first and then the gentile so maybe you don't even need to worry about the trinity being one. I don't know.

mountain_man

Aug 15, 2008, 11:08 AM

This is a subjective answer that is easily proven unsatisfactory: Catholics believe they have a valid, personal relationship with God, and pray to Mary. Mormons believe they have a valid, personal relationship with God, and believe we can all become gods. Muslims believe they have a valid, personal relationship with God, and deny the trinity. Zoroastrians believe they have a valid, personal relationship with God... Heck, even the Heaven's Gate cult who committed mass suicide at the approach of comet Hale-Bopp in 1997 believed they had a valid, personal relationship with God! Are they ALL right because they "feel" they are? The Jewish bible warns against exactly this sort of subjective "feeling" as justification for your religion: 1 Kings 18:

So we know that 'feeling' is not enough. There are externally-verifiable requirements. I have pointed out an internal contradiction in Christian dogma. I have shown that 'feeling' is not enough. Can you not address the point of the OP?

"Jesus is the way the truth and the light NO ONE comes to the Father except through Him"

ZachZ

Aug 15, 2008, 11:10 AM

Jesus is the way the truth and the light NO ONE comes to the Father except through Him"

I'll take that as your inability to come up with a relevant response.

N0help4u

Aug 15, 2008, 11:13 AM

This is a subjective answer that is easily proven unsatisfactory: Catholics believe they have a valid, personal relationship with God, and pray to Mary. Mormons believe they have a valid, personal relationship with God, and believe we can all become gods. Muslims believe they have a valid, personal relationship with God, and deny the trinity. Zoroastrians believe they have a valid, personal relationship with God... Heck, even the Heaven's Gate cult who committed mass suicide at the approach of comet Hale-Bopp in 1997 believed they had a valid, personal relationship with God! Are they ALL right because they "feel" they are? The Jewish bible warns against exactly this sort of subjective "feeling" as justification for your religion: 1 Kings 18:

So we know that 'feeling' is not enough. There are externally-verifiable requirements. I have pointed out an internal contradiction in Christian dogma. I have shown that 'feeling' is not enough. Can you not address the point of the OP?

You are right that 'feeling' or putting your faith in a denomination is not enough.
I do not trust religions because they give you man made formulas.
That is why I said to ask God to open your spiritual eyes and heart and ask him to reveal himself to you. The Bible says pray and seek the truth and study the word and he will lead you.

mountain_man

Aug 15, 2008, 11:19 AM

ZachZ to answer the OP...

He (Jesus) is fully God and fully Man like you said and He came back to life after 3 days... who did that, He did, He is fully God and fully man.

That is fairly easy for me to understand, to try to explain it in some deeply theologolical way would be to discredit that fundamental tenant of the faith

mountain_man

Aug 15, 2008, 11:20 AM

I'll take that as your inability to come up with a relevant response.

You asked if they were all right and I posted my response, that to me is a relevant response

ZachZ

Aug 15, 2008, 11:21 AM

You are right that 'feeling' or putting your faith in a denomination is not enough.
I do not trust religions because they give you man made formulas.
That is why I said to ask God to open your spiritual eyes and heart and ask him to reveal himself to you. The Bible says pray and seek the truth and study the word and he will lead you.

Who says my spiritual 'eyes' are not already open? Who says He has not already revealed Himself to me? Who says I do not already wear kippah, tallis and tefillin and pray daily?

If you claim that because I do not 'feel' what you think you feel, you're back to arguing against what you yourself just agreed with!

ZachZ

Aug 15, 2008, 11:25 AM

ZachZ to answer the OP...

He (Jesus) is fully God and fully Man like you said and He came back to life after 3 days....who did that, He did, He is fully God and fully man.

Thank you for addressing the OP:

Are you saying Jesus resurrected himself? Then he did not truly "fully die" as "fully man and fully God", and therefore: no sacrifice.

Are you saying Jesus did 'fully die', and was resurrected by "something else"... then this shows that Jesus was not fully God, as SOMETHING outside of the fully dead Jesus had to be around to do the resurrecting.

Show me where I'm wrong!

N0help4u

Aug 15, 2008, 11:27 AM

I didn't meant that you aren't. I am not meaning they are not open, I always ask God to show me in my spirit (opne my eyes and my heart to your truth), even so, it is just good to ask God in your spirit on a continuous basis like a refresher or reminder. God says those who seek shall find and you are seeking so trust that he will continue to lead you in all truths,

ZachZ

Aug 15, 2008, 11:30 AM

God says those who seek shall find and you are seeking so trust that he will continue to lead you in all truths,

How can I tell when someone tells me something if it's the "gospel truth" or if it's a deceitful message from Satan sent to test me?

mountain_man

Aug 15, 2008, 11:39 AM

Thank you for addressing the OP:

Are you saying Jesus resurrected himself? Then he did not truly "fully die" as "fully man and fully God", and therefore: no sacrifice.

Are you saying Jesus did 'fully die', and was resurrected by "something else"... then this shows that Jesus was not fully God, as SOMETHING outside of the fully dead Jesus had to be around to do the resurrecting.

Show me where I'm wrong!

OK... this is what I believe and will be quoting and pulling from the Bible so bear with the trail of reasoning and how difficult this is to explain on the computer.

On the cross Jesus cried out "Lord (His Father) why do you forsake me" and died. God the Father, the Son, or the Holy Spirit cannot die so clearly Jesus at that moment died as fully man. From there where He went for the next three days is unclear and not part of the OP. His body was buried but His soul/spirit was elsewhere. ON the third day His spirit re-entered His now new body (fully God) Remember He appeared to the three on the road and they didn't recognize Him so had to have been given a new body but when they realized they immediately knew it was Him, so even though the fully man had died the fully God was still very much there and never changed.

So to specifically say WHO raised Him from the dead, the spirit part of Him that is enjoined with God and the Holy Spirit never died but was just absent from the body

ZachZ

Aug 15, 2008, 11:55 AM

OK...this is what I believe and will be quoting and pulling from the Bible so bear with the trail of reasoning and how difficult this is to explain on the computer.

On the cross Jesus cried out "Lord (His Father) why do you forsake me" and died. God the Father, the Son, or the Holy Spirit cannot die so clearly Jesus at that moment died as fully man. From there where He went for the next three days is unclear and not part of the OP. His body was buried but His soul/spirit was elsewhere. ON the third day His spirit re-entered His now new body (fully God) Remember He appeared to the three on the road and they didn't recognize Him so had to have been given a new body but when they realized they immediately knew it was Him, so even though the fully man had died the fully God was still very much there and never changed.

So to specifically say WHO raised Him from the dead, the spirit part of Him that is enjoined with God and the Holy Spirit never died but was just absent from the body

Thank you...

Bear with me here, before I can make a follow-up point I need you to clarify something.

Can you please tell me that when Christians say "Jesus died for our sins", what exactly is involved in the sacrifice this describes? By definition, a 'sacrifice' is something valuable that is given up in order to obtain something better. There are four parts to a sacrifice:

1) Someone offering the sacrifice
2) The thing being sacrificed, which must be of value to the one offering it in 1)
3) The thing the sacrifice is being directed toward
4) The "something better" obtained in return for the subject of 1)

Can you clearly identify each of these four parts for me as Christians see it in the "sacrifice of Jesus on the cross".

Thanks.

N0help4u

Aug 15, 2008, 11:57 AM

How can I tell when someone tells me something if it's the "gospel truth" or if it's a deceitful message from Satan sent to test me?
See if it lines up with the Torah or even the Bible.
If people have to use word games to twist the meaning then be cautious.

Like some of the main denominations and cults will add the word LIKE to a verse and say that makes it mean something different. Or they will add or take away the word IF from the verse and say it means something different. They will say the founders of their Church were guided or inspired and it proves Jesus was an angel or that we ourselves become angels or gods when we die. Those are all false. Anybody that tries to complicate scriptures by a bunch of Church doctrine is most likely deceptive. Church doctrine should back up the Toran and the New Testament not add to it or take away from it.
I would go into more details and examples but I don't want to get an argument started here over religion. If you have any specific questions post them here.

ZachZ

Aug 15, 2008, 12:05 PM

See if it lines up with the Torah or even the Bible.

A GREAT answer.

So if I can find teachings or concepts in, say, the Quran... or the Greek gospels... that don't line up with Torah, I am justified in rejecting those books as false, correct?

N0help4u

Aug 15, 2008, 12:11 PM

Yes if it doesn't line up with the Torah or the New Testament then it isn't of God.
Like say you hear Jesus is an angel and related to Lucifer (the fallen angel Satan) like the Mormons believe where can you find it in the Torah or the New Testament to prove it or back it up without twisting the meaning?

mountain_man

Aug 15, 2008, 12:14 PM

Thank you ...

Bear with me here, before I can make a follow-up point I need you to clarify something.

Can you please tell me that when Christians say "Jesus died for our sins", what exactly is involved in the sacrifice this describes? By definition, a 'sacrifice' is something valuable that is given up in order to obtain something better. There are four parts to a sacrifice:

1) Someone offering the sacrifice
2) The thing being sacrificed, which must be of value to the the one offering it in 1)
3) The thing the sacrifice is being directed toward
4) The "something better" obtained in return for the subject of 1)

Can you clearly identify each of these four parts for me as Christians see it in the "sacrifice of Jesus on the cross".

Thanks.

1). God the Father sent His son into this world to spread the Word and ultimately offer Himself up to be sacrificed
2) obviously His one and only Son (which means a ton if you have children of your own)
3). We are all full of sin and fall short of the glory of God and this is the final sacrifice to wipe those sins clean (if we believe we are sinners in need of a saviour)
4). If you believe in Jesus (and his sacrifice for you) you shall not perish but have everlasting life

Look forward to your response

N0help4u

Aug 15, 2008, 12:19 PM

A question I have always wondered is why if Jews do not believe Jesus was the sacrifice then why do they not sacrifice animals any more like in the Torah and why when Jesus died did the veil tear? What was the significance of the temple veil being torn in two when Jesus died? (http://www.gotquestions.org/temple-veil-torn.html)

If you know the answer and maybe want to start another topic for it I would appreciate it.
If you can't answer that it is okay.

Did you look at this link I gave you previously?

Tenakh/Hebrew Scriptures (http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/messiah.htm)

mountain_man

Aug 15, 2008, 12:30 PM

A question I have always wondered is why if Jews do not believe Jesus was the sacrifice then why do they not sacrifice animals any more like in the Torah and why when Jesus died did the veil tear? What was the significance of the temple veil being torn in two when Jesus died? (http://www.gotquestions.org/temple-veil-torn.html)

If you know the answer and maybe want to start another topic for it I would appreciate it.
If you can't answer that it is okay.

Did you look at this link I gave you previously?

Tenakh/Hebrew Scriptures (http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/messiah.htm)

The veil tore because that separated the holy from the Holy of Holies (where the only direct communication between you and God could have existed) in the temple
It is a significant illustration showing that Christ's death makes it possible for us to go directly to God with anything; making the relationship very personal instead of having a go between (pastor, priest, etc)

N0help4u

Aug 15, 2008, 12:34 PM

mountain_man

Aug 15, 2008, 12:42 PM

I know but why don't the Jews take that as significant to Jesus death?
Jesus died and the separation of the holy from the Holy of Holies (where the only direct communication between you and God could have existed) in the temple was torn meaning no more separation.

I don't know for sure but don't they still operate under OT law with the notion the Messiah has not come yet and that Jesus was only a prophet. That is how I understand it?

N0help4u

Aug 15, 2008, 12:50 PM

Exactly. That is why I have always wondered why they don't see the significance.

ZachZ

Aug 15, 2008, 01:19 PM

Several interesting but not on-topic questions for Jews here that should be brought to the Judaism board.

Shabbos soon, if I don't get a chance to respond before then, I wish everyone a good weekend.

N0help4u

Aug 15, 2008, 01:21 PM

Yes that is why I asked if you cared to do another post. I would post it to the Judaism board but I have run into too much antagonism with someone with a couple questions I asked before.
If ETWolverine was still here I would PM him.

Criado

Aug 16, 2008, 11:11 AM

I should say none of the choices because both the question and the choices have erroneous content as far as biblical facts are concerned. BUT choice A is bit nearer to biblical facts.

Peter Wilson

Aug 17, 2008, 12:38 AM

The trinity may have been a mystery for many, but as usual, God's foolishness is greater than men's wisdom.
1 Corinthians 1

Christ the Wisdom and Power of God
18For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
19For it is written:
"I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;
the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate."
20Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?
21For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.
22Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom,
23but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles,
24but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.
25For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.

As is most revelation from God, when you see it, you wonder why everybody didn't see it in the first place!
So here we go,

I believe that the Holy Spirit is God the Father's Spirit and Jesus Spirit, come together to make one Spirit.
As we are made in His image, and how the figure of marriage is constantly used for the union of Jesus and the Church, even though two separate entities, come together as one.
This is why in Genesis 2 it says -

23 The man said,
"This is now bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called 'woman, '
for she was taken out of man."

24 For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.

If we are MADE in the image of God, the emphasis is on the Made.
Eve was always a part of Adam, she was taken from him and made a helper for him.
When they come together, they form another person, or spirit.
A man, before he is married, has his own way of doing things, as does a woman.
If they continue in doing things to satisfy their own desires and needs and not those of each other, then that marriage is not very stable and will probably fail.
If the husband and wife choose to enjoy each others company and forego their previous life styles, then they will grow closer and closer together, eventually even finishing off each others sentences sometimes.
Their spirits truly become one and a new spirit is born, (so to speak), and wherever one or the other is, the spirit of the other is there with them.
I believe that this is the image God is talking about, "Man" in Genesis 5, is man AND woman, not just Adam.
"MAN is made in God's image," if that is the case, if it were a mirror persay, then God is made in man's image. (I say this just to make a point, not that God is made in OUR image, for those that may take this out of context)
I believe that Jesus was taken from God, as Eve was taken from Adam, and made a separate person with a separate Spirit.
He then came together with God the Father and their Spirits form the Holy Spirit, even though that still retain their own Spirits.
So, wherever the Holy Spirit is, Jesus is there; and so is the Father.
That is why Jesus is called the Firstborn of all creation, and in Revelation 3

14And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;

I believe that the Holy Spirit, could come upon men in the Old Testament, but could not stay, as man's spirit was not yet able to contain it as the perfect sacrifice had not yet come. ( Jesus)
When the Son of God took on flesh, the Holy Spirit was now part man, in the Spirit of Jesus.
After Jesus death and resurrection, He perfected all those that would accept His sacrifice for sins as their own and now the Holy Spirit could dwell in men.
This is the short answer, but it just about covers it.

Does that make sense to you? It was what I believe, God revealed to me a few years ago, after I pestered Him for the explanation of the Trinity for at least 15 years.
I would stand to be corrected if you could show that I was wrong, but as it is, it's a great story to tell the Jehova's Witnesses, they are shocked as the trinity is their favorite weapon against the Christian Church.
It shakes their doctrine to it's very core, they believe that Jesus is Michael the Archangel, not the true Son of God.
It's their best hook for taking people out of the Catholic church as Catholics have no explanation and little knowledge of the scriptures.
Once you agree with them on one point, it's easy for them to get you to agree on another, then another, then another.
Jehova's Witnesses have a seven step program for getting people into their church, but that's another story.
Just like the devil, he uses something small, like smoking or swearing when we are children, then slowly adds more and more rebellion until some commit murder or turn to drugs or suicide.
No-one decides to become a murderer overnight, or rob a bank overnight, it's a small step at a time.
I will say one thing for satan, he knows his business! And he knows our weakness!

ZachZ

Aug 18, 2008, 01:12 PM

As is most revelation from God, when you see it, you wonder why everybody didn't see it in the first place!

Agreed! It still astounds me that so many people try to get around using every rationalization in the book, no matter how specious! The Tanak says: God is not a man, No likeness of God was seen, God changes not, God is ONE. Why do you disagree?

...If they continue in doing things to satisfy their own desires and needs and not those of each other, then that marriage is not very stable and will probably fail.

You are saying the separate 'persons' of God have separate wills and it is (theoretically) possible for them to disagree with each other?

wherever the Holy Spirit is, Jesus is there; and so is the Father.

OK which one of the three was killed on the cross? Which one did the resurrecting?

Does that make sense to you?

I understand you believe it, but people believe all sorts of crazy, anti-biblical things.

It was what I believe, God revealed to me a few years ago, after I pestered Him for the explanation of the Trinity for at least 15 years.

It is clear to me that it wasn't God you were listening to when you chose to embrace these ideas.

Based on your answers, it appears that you are a polytheist. You believe in separate god-'persons' with individual wills. That makes 3 gods.

cogs

Aug 18, 2008, 03:51 PM

I understand your point: the apparent contradiction of jesus dying, then saying he resurrected himself, and us believing his word, which would make our thinking as illogical as jesus'. Again, I don't know how it happened, or how jesus did his miracles. I also don't know how god parted the sea for the israelites, or went as a cloud and a pillar of fire before them. I don't know how all the plagues against pharaoh happened. There's so many things in the bible that require faith, and the putting aside human logic. I mean, we could say anything, and attempt to believe it, whether it fits with physics or not.
So I look elsewhere for a reference point. I begin to look to the creation, and its purpose. To believe it just 'happened' to me, takes just as much faith as biblical miracles. There's too much organization and purpose to not believe we came from an intelligence. I then look to history for any evidence of that intelligence interacting with creation. The closest thing I have found that coincides with my questions about the meaning of life, and my purpose here, is the ancient scriptures of god.
Now for the jump in logic: if his words that were recorded point to a future event that will impact my spiritual development, or purpose, I would have to accept jesus as the closest event to the prophecy found in the ancient scriptures. Since I cannot prove god's interaction with humans over time, I have to take many things on faith, and look at the overall purpose. Finally, if I'm to spiritually mature, I have to have some verification that I'm on the right path, and the bible says that the spirit of god is available to me. So outside of scripture, I must accept a way to communicate to my creator, that the bible says is only available if I believe in jesus' atonement for my sin. In fact it says jesus is the way to god. So, although there's things in the bible that go beyond the physics I see everyday, I believe it still, because I need meaning to my life that I cannot find anywhere else. And back to the original thought, if I am created, what other miracles can this intelligence accomplish, that I cannot understand, and go beyond physics? Especially in the area of a loving sacrifice that serves god the only purpose of bringing us closer to himself, even for eternity where he resides?

JoeT777

Aug 18, 2008, 04:24 PM

It's their best hook for taking people out of the Catholic church as Catholics have no explanation and little knowledge of the scriptures.

I would suggest that Catholic's have an objective view of Christ based on Scriptures and Church Tradition and thereby resist subjecting God's will and God's salvation to their own purpose.

JoeT

ScottRC

Aug 19, 2008, 10:56 AM

I would suggest that Catholic’s have an objective view of Christ based on Scriptures and Church Tradition and thereby resist subjecting God’s will and God’s salvation to their own purpose.
On the money as usual Joe.

While Mr. Wilson's statement certainly was true in years past, I do think the last 100 years or so has lead to a profound appreciation and emphasis on Biblical understanding... and this may actually be a "fruit" of the Reformation and our non-Catholic brothers and sisters wonderful devotion to the Word of God.

But unfortunately, I think a lack of education on the history of the Christian faith is a detriment to those outside the RCC... ZachZ's questions were answered more than a thousand years ago by the Ecumenical Councils (http://www.piar.hu/councils/)... and if more Christians were educated about this part of their history, I think it would be a lot easier to explain our faith to someone who has tough questions like his.

wildandblue

Aug 19, 2008, 10:57 AM

ZachZ its blatantly apparently that you asked a question which you DO NOT TRUELY want an answer to. It seems that you get off on your self righteous and rather annoying attempts to entrap well meaning christians in a game of semantics. Therefore, Im over it.
May God give you clarity.
Duhhh this is me slapping myself in the forehead. Of course. You are the oracle with the unanswerable question. If these Christians come along and answer it, you are not. Which is why me telling you in my original response none of your answers are true led to you telling me I am not a Christian, which I couldn't quite see the reason for at the time.:rolleyes:

wildandblue

Aug 19, 2008, 11:14 AM

If you say "God the father resurrected him" then you prove that Jesus was NOT God in full because a separate God entity did the resurrecting. This violates the 'trinity.'

Answer B)

Not to mention that human sacrifice is explicitly forbidden by Torah, and the manner of death runs afoul of at least a dozen laws regarding kosher sin sacrifice: The death wasn't by kosher shecht (slaughter), the offering was not made at the Temple, the offering wasn't made by Temple priests, the body wasn't without physical blemish, etc. This makes Christianity a religion based upon an unkosher, human sacrifice.

Any Christian out there want to take a shot at it?
Look at Judges 11:29--40, Deuteronomy 23:21--23, and Leviticus 27:26--29 they all mention human sacrifices under the law. St. Paul's letter to the Romans 11:19--36 is also helpful in understanding this issue.

ZachZ

Aug 19, 2008, 12:32 PM

A question I have always wondered is why if Jews do not believe Jesus was the sacrifice then why do they not sacrifice animals any more like in the Torah and why when Jesus died did the veil tear?

I had heard about this story of the Temple curtain (actually called the parochet) before but didn't know much about it. This turns out to be because the story of its tearing only seems to appear in the Greek writings. I found no references to it in any authentic Jewish historical documents. It is not in Josephus' Antiquities. It in fact only appears in one of the so-called 'synoptic gospels'--the story about it is curiously absent from the other three.

So what do Jews believe about the significance of this story? There is none, it's another uncorroborated, made-up story in the Greek writings.

If I had to invent a meaning for it, though, here it is: God is indeed mourning the death of His first-born son: Israel (as Israel is mentioned by name as His first-born son in Exodus 4:22). God saw the impending destruction of the Temple, expulsion of His chosen people from their homeland, and the invention of a new death-mythos religion centered around an apostate man-god that will account for the apostasy and deaths of millions of His children for centuries to come.

Why wouldn't this explanation be at least as satisfactory as yours?

But again -- this is off topic.

mountain_man

Aug 19, 2008, 12:38 PM

JoeT777

Aug 19, 2008, 01:05 PM

I had heard about this story of the Temple curtain (actually called the parochet) before but didn't know much about it. This turns out to be because the story of its tearing only seems to appear in the Greek writings. I found no references to it in any authentic Jewish historical documents. It is not in Josephus' Antiquities. It in fact only appears in one of the so-called 'synoptic gospels'--the story about it is curiously absent from the other three.

So what do Jews believe about the significance of this story? There is none, it's another uncorroborated, made-up story in the Greek writings.

If I had to invent a meaning for it, though, here it is: God is indeed mourning the death of His first-born son: Israel (as Israel is mentioned by name as His first-born son in Exodus 4:22). God saw the impending destruction of the Temple, expulsion of His chosen people from their homeland, and the invention of a new death-mythos religion centered around an apostate man-god that will account for the apostasy and deaths of millions of His children for centuries to come.

Why wouldn't this explanation be at least as satisfactory as yours?

But again -- this is off topic.

In all of Antiquities this is the only statement made of Christ; seems impressive to me that Josephus was scared to call him a man. So you should make a point that he doesn’t say “and the veil was torn”?

3. Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, (9) those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; (10) as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day Antiquities of the Jews Book 18, Chapter 3.

cogs

Aug 19, 2008, 02:26 PM

...ZachZ's questions were answered more than a thousand years ago by the Ecumenical Councils (http://www.piar.hu/councils/).... and if more Christians were educated about this part of their history, I think it would be a lot easier to explain our faith to someone who has tough questions like his.
I didn't even know they were something to study until now. One reason, is that I'm not catholic, so I only study the bible, or other ancient books.
When someone starts quoting anything other than the bible to support their view, I read it as only a curiosity, because those things are doing what we are, interpreting what the ancient books say, or contain. So catholics, or any religion, who reference their religion's 'guides to understanding', do not convince me of anything concerning my faith.

JoeT777

Aug 19, 2008, 03:06 PM

i didn't even know they were somthing to study until now. one reason, is that i'm not catholic, so i only study the bible, or other ancient books.
when someone starts quoting anything other than the bible to support their view, i read it as only a curiosity, because those things are doing what we are, interpreting what the ancient books say, or contain. so catholics, or any religion, who reference their religion's 'guides to understanding', do not convince me of anything concerning my faith.
Cogs:

Let me recommend that you read just one or two of the “Fathers” of the Catholic Church. The ones listed as “Doctor” are theological doctors. These are usually the works relied on for Church Doctrine. Their writings go back to the very dawn of Christendom – some authors were likely to have known and communicated with the Apostle John.

St. Augustine of Hippo is my favorite – the City of God.

With Augustine, probably the most important is St. John Chrysostom. The issues some have been beating me about the head and shoulders were discussed in great detail – and they are Scripturally supported. So when a Catholic gives, as an example, a citation of St. Chrysostom they assume you understand there is a complete scriptural treatise behind the statement.

And if nothing else, it will broaden the base of your knowledge.

I recommend this particular site only because many of the Scriptures cited are linked to Scripture, Book and verse.
CHURCH FATHERS: Home (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/)

JoeT

cogs

Aug 19, 2008, 03:25 PM

Lol, when I try to say thanks, it gives me this:

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to JoeT777 again.

But thank you. In the blue letter bible online, I read the commentaries, mostly by matthew henry 1706-1714. I suppose that's what you gave me, commentaries that go way back. Thank you.

JoeT777

Aug 19, 2008, 06:48 PM

lol, when i try to say thanks, it gives me this:

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to JoeT777 again.

but thank you. in the blue letter bible online, i read the commentaries, mostly by matthew henry 1706-1714. i suppose that's what you gave me, commentaries that go way back. thank you.

Well that's OK, my reputation is bad enough around here - I seem to rub against the nap somehow.

No, its not quite the same thing - its more a understanding the "roots" thing. But if that works for you, that's fine all the same. If it's the Catholic site that bothers you, there are others that carry it. Just Google it.

Thanks,

JoeT

arcura

Aug 19, 2008, 11:09 PM

ZackZ,
All three person in the trinity are of infinite and eternal attributes that includes power, wisdom, knowledge, understanding, ability, and much more.
Therefore God (the Father, or the Holy Spirit) could have raised Jesus, God the Son, from the dead.
The bible simply says that God raised Jesus from the dead not mentioning which person of the trinity did it.
From my point of view and that of the bible, that satifactorily answers your question.
:) Peace and kindness,:)
Fred (arcura)

Peter Wilson

Aug 20, 2008, 07:10 AM

"]Agreed! It still astounds me that so many people try to get around using every rationalization in the book, no matter how specious! The Tanak says: God is not a man, No likeness of God was seen, God changes not, God is ONE. Why do you disagree?

Moses saw God face to face, so some-one did see the likeness of God.

Exodus 33:11

11 The LORD would speak to Moses face to face, as a man speaks with his friend. Then Moses would return to the camp, but his young aide Joshua son of Nun did not leave the tent.

How-ever, I was making the point that we may not necessarily look like God, but we are MADE like Him.
In Genesis, God said,

26 Then God said, "Let US make man in our likeness in our image, , and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

Notice God said "Our" not "My", and "Us" not "Me".

Again in Genesis 11
5 But the LORD came down to see the city and the tower that the men were building.
6 The LORD said, "If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them.
7 Come, [B]let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other."

Again, God is talking to the Son and in agreement in the Spirit, go down as one.

You are saying the separate 'persons' of God have separate wills and it is (theoretically) possible for them to disagree with each other?

God is perfect, there is no shadow of turning, so no, it is impossible for Jesus or God the Father to disagree.
Each love to please each other and this is what they are trying to teach us.

OK which one of the three was killed on the cross? Which one did the resurrecting?

Why would you ask such an obvious question, you know who died for your sin, if you don't, then you will have to give account, standing on your own righteousness.

In John 10

14"I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me—
15just as the Father knows me and I know the Father—and I lay down my life for the sheep.
16I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd.
17The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life—only to take it up again.
18No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father."

Jesus lay down His own life in obedience to the Father, in doing this, God gave him the authority to take it up again.
Even though, ultimately, it was God's power that raised Jesus from the dead,
it was the authority over death, that Jesus, as a man, won back for mankind, the very authority that Adam forfeited to the devil.
Jesus, Himself now has the keys to death and Hades.

Revelation 1:18

18I am the Living One; I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades.

I understand you believe it, but people believe all sorts of crazy, anti-biblical things.
It is clear to me that it wasn't God you were listening to when you chose to embrace these ideas.

How is it clear to you, you don't even seem to believe in God, how do you know how He reveals Himself to His people.
God is Spirit, therefore He is supernatural.
In the Old Testament, He revealed Himself in darkness and thunder and smoke and fire and various other ways.
If God actually shows up in the supernatural these days, no-one believes it.
If those that practice the occult have dreams or visions, then this is widely accepted and people chase after it.
I choose to believe God, I have seen the other side and inquired of it for years.
I even lived with a lady that was famous for her fortune telling, she read my cards one day, and told me that I would meet a girl with red hair, there would be a child, but it wouldn't be mine.
Her name would be "The dark one" and we would never be married.
I did meet a girl, called Kerry, this name means "the dark one".
She had red hair and she did have a child, she fell pregnant to some-one else while we were engaged, I was going to kill the other guy.
Twice I attempted it, the first time, an angel stopped me, the second time, God spoke to me in an audible voice and told me to "NOW,GO AND GET BAPTIZED"
Guess what, I did, and that's when I started to follow Jesus in truth.

Based on your answers, it appears that you are a polytheist. You believe in separate god-'persons' with individual wills. That makes 3 gods.

What I believe in is that there is a Father , a Son who have separate personalities, and are separate people.
They have individual wills, but they join together as one will, and this is The Spirit of God,
Though the Spirit is much more, it is the joining together of all that is in the Father with all that is in the Son, thereby making a third person, truly God and truly Jesus.
Just as you and your wife are one, (if you have a wife, that is), you both have individual wills, but after marriage, come together to have the same will and desires.
God's idea for marriage is the relationship that He shares with His Son.
And the one that His Son wants to share with us.

John 17

9I pray for them. I am not praying for the world, but for those you have given me, for they are yours.
10All I have is yours, and all you have is mine. And glory has come to me through them. 11I 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.

Jesus Prays for All Believers

20"My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message,
21that 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.
22I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one:
23I 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.
24"Father, I want those you have given me to be with me where I am, and to see my glory, the glory you have given me because you loved me before the creation of the world.
25"Righteous Father, though the world does not know you, I know you, and they know that you have sent me.
26I have made you known to them, and will continue to make you known in order that the love you have for me may be in them and that I myself may be in them."

Cheers.:)

arcura

Aug 20, 2008, 08:41 AM

Peter Wilson,
Please don't use the light green color.
I can not read it.
Thanks.
Peace and kindness,
Fred (arcura)

0rphan

Aug 20, 2008, 12:25 PM

arcura, I'm so glad you said that( green) I thought my eye sight was failing for a minute there... phew!

Blessings

arcura

Aug 20, 2008, 08:50 PM

0rphan,
I'm happy that what I said may be of help for you and others who could not read that light green writing.
Peace and kindness,
Fred (arcura)

ZachZ

Aug 22, 2008, 12:32 PM

Look at Judges 11:29--40, Deuteronomy 23:21--23, and Leviticus 27:26--29 they all mention human sacrifices under the law.

WHAT?????

Are we reading the same bible??

First off:

You may cause a gentile to take interest, but you may not cause your brother to take interest, so that Hashem, your God, will bless you in your every undertaking on the Land to which you are coming, to possess it. When you make a vow to Hashem, your God, you shall not be late in paying it, for Hashem, your God, will demand it of you, and there will be a sin in you.

No mention of human sacrifice. Did you quote the wrong verse or something.

However, a firstborn that will become a firstling for Hashem among livestock, a man shall not consecrate it; whether it is of oxen or of the flock, it is Hashem's. If among the unclean animals, he shall redeem it according to the valuation and add a fifth to it; and if it is not redeemed it shall be sold for its valuation.

However, any segregated property that a man will segregate for the sake of Hashem (חֵרֶם אֲשֶׁר יַחֲרִם אִישׁ לַיהוָה--cherem asher yacharim ish l'Adonay), from anything that is his -- whether human, animal, or the field of his ancestral heritage -- may not be sold and may not be redeemed, any segregated item may be most holy to Hashem.

Any condemned person [this is speaking of a criminal sentenced with a death penalty] who has been banned from mankind(חֵרֶם אֲשֶׁר יָחֳרַם מִן-הָאָדָם--cherem asher yochoram min-ha'adam) shall not be redeemed; he shall be put to death.

No mention of human sacrifice.

As for Judges 11:29-40, this is God teaching the stupid Yiftach a lesson: Don't play games with God. The offering he will make is unknown to him at the time he makes it? Show me how this is accordance with the rules of sacrifice in Leviticus. The chronicles in Sofrim--especially one this indistinct--CANNOT override TORAH! If you want to find out about acceptable sacrifices, you look FIRST to TORAH, and then to Prophets. You may then read Judges with that understanding.

Even the Christian commentaries I read on this describe Yiftach as semi-pagan, for example:

Bred up as he had been, beyond the Jordan, where the Israelitish tribes, far from the tabernacle, were looser in their religious sentiments, and living latterly on the borders of a heathen country where such sacrifices were common, it is not improbable that he may have been so ignorant as to imagine that a similar immolation would be acceptable to God.

And finally, I am not even sure why I have to argue this, because this chapter clearly isn't even an example of a sin sacrifice in the first place!

Let me be VERY clear: HUMAN SACRIFICE IS CLEARLY CIRCUMSCRIBED BY JUDAISM.

St. Paul's letter to the Romans 11:19--36 is also helpful in understanding this issue.

Nothing from the Greek writings can be helpful.

ZachZ

Aug 22, 2008, 12:33 PM

I know there are some older posts I still am committed to respond to, and I apologize for not getting to them quicker, but BS"D I shall.

It is nearly Shabbos, good weekend to you.

msrandolph

Aug 22, 2008, 12:45 PM

How about the holy ghost, isn't that what landed on him when he was baptised by John the Baptist in the form of a Dove. Or the Holy spirit.

wildandblue

Aug 22, 2008, 12:58 PM

Yes the holy ghost is the third part of the triangle, sort of God's active force. Was supposed to have come on the Apostles at Pentecost and that is what is passed on to priests etc by the laying on of hands.

In Sorrow

Aug 24, 2008, 08:22 AM

Well this is the way I interpete it, now mind you I am no Bible Scholar but from what they are saying, God the Father, God the Son, & God the Holy Spirit are 3 divine beings in one which they call the Trinity. God says only through my " Son " can you enter the kingdom of heaven. Which means Jesus is a Separate being from his Father. But he works though the father like a Meidator from human to God, As Christ is our Adovacte and though his blood we are saved and shall not perish. So God Sent his only Son Down to us, so that we may have a Chance for eternal life, God did not send down himself, but his Son. And God is the one who Rose his son from the grave, but one does not work without the other, so it is called the Trinity.

wildandblue

Aug 24, 2008, 11:25 AM

WHAT?????

Are we reading the same bible???

No mention of human sacrifice. Did you quote the wrong verse or something.

Nothing from the Greek writings can be helpful. Yes I meant Dt 23:22-24
Well if you want to throw out the whole New Testament why even talk about Jesus then, He's not in the Old Testament since He hadn't been born. The verse from Romans I added not because I thought you needed it but because I don't want to open my inbox and find a lot of hate mail from people telling me what a jerk I am. My friends and relatives are in charge of telling me that.
The scriptures I hunted down, show that if you make a vow to God, you can't take it back. I would think the commandment not to kill would supercede a vow but apparently it doesn't. See Ez 3:3-5 Nm 30:2-3 I Sm 14:24-46, 15: 1-35 And once again New Testament Mt 5:33

(Even 2 Sm6:6-7 shows that God's law not to touch the Ark was true even though the man was only trying to protect it.)
These scriptures show that God's law and the Old Testament said not to be misled by false prophets Dt 13:1-10 Dt 18:15-22
Crimes against the Temple, Ez 6:11-12 and Mt 26:57-68, 27:11-26
So why "blame" the Jews if they were only doing exactly what they'd been told, and if they hadn't, would have been put to death themselves. That is the point of Romans chapter 11.
As others have said all this was figured out a long time ago, but if you want help with it I'm sure there are people here who would explain it all again. But if you just want to debate endlessly Christians are cautioned against that sort of thing.

arcura

Aug 24, 2008, 07:57 PM

wildandblue,
There are a lot of people who believe Jesus IS in the Old Testament but not with the Name of Jesus which was given to Him just before he was born.
I am one of those who believes God the Son, also now as the Word of God is in the Old Testament.
Peace and kindness,
Fred (arcura)

ZachZ

Aug 25, 2008, 06:08 AM

ZachZ

Aug 25, 2008, 07:54 AM

In all of Antiquities this is the only statement made of Christ; seems impressive to me that Josephus was scared to call him a man. So you should make a point that he doesn’t say “and the veil was torn”?

These references are forgeries, most modern scholars reject them as such. They were added to Josephus' original words centuries later by Christian scribes pushing their agenda. The church has a long history of editing and redacting Jewish documents, this is no different--you must be aware of this, right? There's no sound evidence Josephus thought this man was a messiah or god.

ZachZ

Aug 25, 2008, 08:08 AM

Are you of strict Jewish faith and if so do you still sacrifice as required?

I am a Jew. My personal level of success or failure in my observance isn't relevant, as far as I can tell. Without a Temple standing, I am forbidden by Torah from attempting to bring a sacrifice to any other location. So I do the same thing now that Hashem instructed through prophet Hosea. Read Hosea 14:2-3. In these two verses, Hosea reveals to his beloved nation how they are to replace the sacrificial system during their protracted exile. The prophet declares that the Almighty wants us to "render for bulls the offering of our lips." Prayer is to replace the sacrificial system.

This was what the Jews did after the destruction of the first Temple, and it's what we do now after the destruction of the second. If you think it invalidates Judaism, then you have to say Jesus was no proper Jew, because his own ancestors were decades without a Temple and forbidden from bringing sacrifices too. When the true Messiah comes and the third Temple is rebuilt, sacrifices will once again resume as before.

Galveston1

Aug 25, 2008, 09:03 AM

John 5:39
39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
(KJV)

John 15:26
26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
(KJV)

ZachZ

Aug 25, 2008, 09:55 AM

Well this is the way i interpete it, now mind you i am no Bible Scholar but from what they are saying, God the Father, God the Son, & God the Holy Spirit are 3 divine beings in one which they call the Trinity. God says only through my " Son " can you enter the kingdom of heaven. Which means Jesus is a Seperate being from his Father. But he works though the father like a Meidator from human to God, As Christ is our Adovacte and though his blood we are saved and shall not perish. So God Sent his only Son Down to us, so that we may have a Chance for eternal life, God did not send down himself, but his Son. And God is the one who Rose his son from the grave, but one does not work without the other, so it is called the Trinity.

3 'beings' = 3 gods. If I were to ask a polytheist about his beliefs, he would say he believed in 3 'beings' which are 3 different gods. How is your view any different from a polytheist?

I am quickly coming to the conclusion that people get around the problem of the 'trinity' by simply not believing in it! I've seen several responses now from people who claim to defend the trinity but actually show themselves to be 'oneness' believers and modalists and closeted polytheists. Not even Christians seem to really understand what their own 'trinity' claims to be!

mountain_man

Aug 25, 2008, 11:13 AM

I am a Jew. My personal level of success or failure in my observance isn't relevant, as far as I can tell. Without a Temple standing, I am forbidden by Torah from attempting to bring a sacrifice to any other location. So I do the same thing now that Hashem instructed through prophet Hosea. Read Hosea 14:2-3. In these two verses, Hosea reveals to his beloved nation how they are to replace the sacrificial system during their protracted exile. The prophet declares that the Almighty wants us to "render for bulls the offering of our lips." Prayer is to replace the sacrificial system.

This was what the Jews did after the destruction of the first Temple, and it's what we do now after the destruction of the second. If you think it invalidates Judaism, then you have to say Jesus was no proper Jew, because his own ancestors were decades without a Temple and forbidden from bringing sacrifices too. When the true Messiah comes and the third Temple is rebuilt, sacrifices will once again resume as before.

Thanks for answering my question. So just for my clarification, in your belief, the new testament is invalid? And if so what does that make Jesus.

You also say "when the true messiah comes" so if He has not come then how are you assurred salvation if you were to die today.

All this is not to set you up just for my education. Thanks

JoeT777

Aug 25, 2008, 11:38 AM

These references are forgeries, most modern scholars reject them as such. They were added to Josephus' original words centuries later by Christian scribes pushing their agenda. The church has a long history of editing and redacting Jewish documents, this is no different--you must be aware of this, right? There's no sound evidence Josephus thought this man was a messiah or god.

No, I was totally unaware that they were considered forgeries. Can you validate that Josephus' comments to this regard as being forgeries? You do know that most scholars in this field don't hold this view.

But, let me point out that Josephus was first quoted by you. Is it only a forgery when his statements seem to support Christendom?

JoeT

Wondergirl

Aug 25, 2008, 11:54 AM

Not even Christians seem to really understand what their own 'trinity' claims to be!
No, we don't. It's a mystery and beyond our human understanding. Logic can't explain it. It comes down to faith.

ZachZ

Aug 25, 2008, 12:41 PM

the new testament is invalid?

Correct. Although the Greek writings are a hugely popular and influential group of books, they are invalid as authoritative scripture like the Jewish bible indeed is.

And if so what does that make Jesus.

One of many, many failed messiahs and false prophets:

If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a miraculous sign or wonder, and if the sign or wonder of which he has spoken takes place, and he says, 'Let us follow other gods' (gods you have not known) 'and let us worship them,' you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The Lord your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul. It is the Lord your God you must follow, and him you must revere. Keep his commands and obey him; serve him and hold fast to him. That prophet or dreamer must be put to death, because he preached rebellion against the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt and redeemed you from the land of slavery; he has tried to turn you from the way the Lord your God commanded you to follow. You must purge the evil from among you

I think this is a pretty good description of him and his fate.

Did Abraham, Isaac and Jacob direct their prayers to Jesus? Or to HaShem (the 4-letter Name of God)? Jesus was a god unknown to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. My forefathers did not pray to Jesus, and so I don't either.

You also say "when the true messiah comes" so if He has not come

It will be a "he" and not a "He". The Jewish messiah is not God or any kind of deity or part of a deity. He will be a normal human man, born of natural human parents. This man will fulfill ALL of the messianic prophecies (oversee the rebuilding of the third Temple, bring world peace, universal knowledge of God, etc.. -- all the things Christians relegate to the '2nd coming' box) in his own lifetime. Because these things are unfulfilled, we know he has not come yet.

how are you assurred salvation

Salvation from what?

if you were to die today.

Christians seem to have a peculiar notion that all God wants is for you to have a certain thought in your mind at the moment of your death. This dogma is in stark contrast to the teaching of Torah.

ZachZ

Aug 25, 2008, 12:43 PM

No, we don't. It's a mystery and beyond our human understanding. Logic can't explain it. It comes down to faith that allows one to believe it is possible.

Yours is Answer C. It is sad that you think God wishes you for you to shut down the intelligent, inquiring mind He gave you.

Wondergirl

Aug 25, 2008, 01:05 PM

Yours is Answer C. It is sad that you think God wishes you for you to shut down the intelligent, inquiring mind He gave you.
How do you figure? You understand everything in your life? What about chukim?

De Maria

Aug 25, 2008, 02:30 PM

I sure do! And I am happy to talk logic! I feel we sure could use some here. So let's get started:

Ok.

My question is only "loaded" problematically IF I am making an incorrect assumption. Such as in your example:

Ok.

the question can only be shown to be "loaded" and therefore invalid if the underlying assumption--that the person you are asking is indeed beating his wife--can be shown to be untrue.

Not exactly. Whether the person is beating his wife is beside the point. The question is loaded because there is no way for the individual to answer the question without implicating himself, whether he is guilty or not.
Loaded question - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_many_questions)

Therefore my question back to you is: What is the underlying assumption in my question that you can demonstrate not to be true?

As I explained before. You presupposed only three answers to your question. And you then gave those three answers your own interpretations leading to your false underlying assumption that that Jesus is not God and that God is not a Trinity.

So, lets dissect your three answers:

Answer A) is:
If you say "God the father resurrected him" then you prove that Jesus was NOT God in full because a separate God entity did the resurrecting. This violates the 'trinity.'

This violates the 'trinity.'

Not at all. The Trinity is defined as three Persons in one God. The three Persons share the
One Divine nature.

There is only one Divine Nature. Otherwise there would be three "eternal" Gods and that is impossible by definition. There is only one Eternal God, therefore the three Persons of the Trinity share the one and only God nature.

In other words, each Divine Person is God.

If you say "God the father resurrected him" then you prove that Jesus was NOT God in full because a separate God entity did the resurrecting.

Not at all. A nature, such as a human nature is shared by many. You and I are both human and share a human nature. But the Divine nature is eternal. Therefore there is only one because there is only One God.

But a person is a character with separate characteristics which are not shared by other persons. As it pertains to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, their personhood is relational. The Father is in the Son, but the Father is not the Son. The Son is in the Father but the Son is not the Father. The Holy Spirit is in the Father and the Son but the Holy Spirit is not the Father or the Son.

Therefore it is perfectly logical to say that the "Father resurrected Him" since the Father is a separate person but fully God.

God the father resurrected him

Again, what do you mean by God the Father resurrected Him? If you mean that God the Father resurrected God, then you don't understand the meaning of death. As I have shown, death in a man is death of the physical body. Even in you and I, when we die, my Church and even Jewish teaching says that our spirit will live.

Therefore when the human body of Jesus Christ was no longer animated by His Spirit, Jesus Christ is said to have died. But Jesus' Divine nature continued to sustain the world. God rules supreme over death.

I'll continue with dissecting your presupposed answers in separate messages as this one is getting quite long.

Sincerely,

De Maria

De Maria

Aug 25, 2008, 06:34 PM

Answer B) is:
If you say "The God nature left Jesus" then you are essentially saying that God did NOT die, and the death of Jesus was no important sacrifice at all. A human man was tortured for a weekend and died. How is this supposed to atone for all the sins of humanity?

Not to mention that human sacrifice is explicitly forbidden by Torah, and the manner of death runs afoul of at least a dozen laws regarding kosher sin sacrifice: The death wasn't by kosher shecht (slaughter), the offering was not made at the Temple, the offering wasn't
made by Temple priests, the body wasn't without physical blemish, etc. This makes Christianity a religion based upon an unkosher, human sacrifice.

If you say "The God nature left Jesus" then you are essentially saying that God did NOT die,

That is false. Jesus is God and Jesus died. Here's the logical syllogism.

1. Jesus is God.
2. Jesus died on the Cross.
3. God died on the Cross.

But again, what does death mean?

Spirits are said to die when they are separated from God. But that is not true death, just a manner of speaking. They in fact, continue to exist, they are not exitinguished. And since spirit is a synonym for life that means they continue to live.

Only physical bodies die. And they die only when their animating spirits no longer animate their bodies. But their spirits are not extinguished. Therefore, when someone or something dies, it is because their spirit no longer animates their bodies. But the spirit continues to exist. It is not extinguished and therefore continues to live.

God, the Supreme Spirit, is never extinguished. God is eternal.

Therefore, when we logically deduce that God died on the Cross, we mean that Jesus' human body was no longer animated by His Spirit. But His Spirit was never extinguished.

and the death of Jesus was no important sacrifice at all. A human man was tortured for a weekend and died. How is this supposed to atone for all the sins of
humanity?

That is false.

Jesus is either God or He is a liar or a maniac. Anyone who has ever read the Scriptures knows that Jesus claimed to be God. One example will suffice:

John 8 58 Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say to you, before Abraham was made, I am.

And Jesus provided the evidence to prove that He is God by raising the dead, healing the sick, multiplying the fish and the loaves and turning water to wine. These things were testified by many witnesses. And His followers, many of them could also perform such miracles as he empowered them to perform.

So, if Jesus was simply a man as you claim and he was killed on the cross. Then his sacrifice amounted to a mad man or a liar who died for a lie. And the sacrifice does not atone for all the sins of humanity.

But, If Jesus is God as He claimed and proved by His miracles, then His sacrifice on the Cross amounts to exactly what Scripture says it does:

Isaias 53 5 But he was wounded for our iniquities, he was bruised for our sins: the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and by his bruises we are healed.

And these Old Testament prophecies can only refer to one person:

Wisdom 2 12 Let us therefore lie in wait for the just, because he is not for our turn, and he is contrary to our doings, and upbraideth us with transgressions of the law, and divulgeth against us the sins of our way of life. 13 He boasteth that he hath the knowledge of God, and calleth himself the son of God. 14 He is become a censurer of our thoughts. 15 He is grievous unto us, even to behold: for his life is not like other men's, and his ways are very different.

16 We are esteemed by him as triflers, and he abstaineth from our ways as from filthiness, and he preferreth the latter end of the just, and glorieth that he hath God for his father. 17 Let us see then if his words be true, and let us prove what shall happen to him, and we shall know what his end shall be. 18 For if he be the true son of God, he will defend him, and will deliver him from the hands of his enemies. 19 Let us examine him by outrages and tortures, that we may know his meekness and try his patience. 20 Let us condemn him to a most shameful death: for there shall be respect had unto him by his words.

Not to mention that human sacrifice is explicitly forbidden by Torah,

That is correct. Therefore the Jews violated the commandment of God when they used the Romans to murder Jesus on the Cross.

John 11 49 But one of them, named Caiphas, being the high priest that year, said to them: You know nothing. 50 Neither do you consider that it is expedient for you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not. 51 And this he spoke not of himself: but being the high priest of that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for the nation. 52 And not only for the nation, but to gather together in one the children of God, that were dispersed. 53 From that day therefore they devised to put him to death.

John 18 14 Now Caiphas was he who had given the counsel to the Jews: That it was expedient that one man should die for the people.

and the manner of death runs afoul of at least a dozen laws regarding kosher sin sacrifice: The death wasn't by kosher shecht (slaughter), the offering was not made at the Temple, the offering wasn't made by Temple priests, the body wasn't without physical blemish, etc. This makes Christianity a religion based upon an unkosher, human sacrifice.

Not so. It is on the Cross that Jesus fulfilled the entire Jewish law. It is on the Cross that the shortcomings of the Jewish law of works are highlighted. The Christian religion is based upon a higher standard than the Jewish religion. Because it is based on the law of love.

John 15 13 Greater love than this no man hath, that a man lay down his life for his friends.

The Jews decided to sacrifice Jesus for the good of the people and Jesus honoring the Jewish authority permitted this to happen:

Matthew 23 2 Saying: The scribes and the Pharisees have sitten on the chair of Moses. 3 All things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do: but according to their works do ye not; for they say, and do not.

Jesus obeyed unto death.

And God revealed even in the Old Testament that He didn't want sacrifices:

Jeremias 6 19 Hear, O earth: Behold I will bring evils upon this people, the fruits of their own thoughts: because they have not heard my words, and they have cast away my law. 20 To what purpose do you bring me frankincense from Saba, and the sweet smelling cane from a far country? your holocausts are not acceptable, nor are your sacrifices pleasing to me.

God wants a contrite heart and a humble spirit. That is the sacrifice He has always wanted:

Jeremias 7 22 For I spoke not to your fathers, and I commanded them not, in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning the matter of burnt offerings and sacrifices. 23 But this thing I commanded them, saying: Hearken to my voice, and I will be your God, and you shall be my people: and walk ye in all the way that I have commanded you, that it may be well with you. 24 But they hearkened not, nor inclined their ear: but walked in their own will, and in the perversity of their wicked heart: and went backward and not forward, 25 From the day that their fathers came out of the land of Egypt, even to this day. And I have sent to you all my servants the prophets from day to day, rising up early and sending.

And it is Jesus who offered the perfect sacrifice:

Romans 12 1 I BESEECH you therefore, brethren, by the mercy of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, pleasing unto God, your reasonable service.

And we are to follow in His steps:

Matthew 16 24 Then Jesus said to his disciples: If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.

1 Peter 2 21 For unto this are you called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving you an example that you should follow his steps.

Sincerely,

De Maria

De Maria

Aug 25, 2008, 06:44 PM

Answer C) is:
If you say "It's a mystery" or "With God all things are possible" you are basically saying you have no answer and give up. You recognize the inherent contradiction but choose to pull the wool over your own eyes, and hope your brain never rejects the obvious, glaring logical incompatibility.

If you say "It's a mystery" or "With God all things are possible" you are basically saying you have no answer and give up.

Not so. It is a mystery of love. Why did God do something He didn't need to do. Why did He become incarnated and join the human race? Why did He enter Creation?

It is a mystery which is beyond human comprehension. But Scripture is clear that God did just that:

Philippians 2 5 For let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 Who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men, and in habit found as a man. 8 He humbled himself, becoming obedient unto death, even to the death of the cross. 9 For which cause God also hath exalted him, and hath given him a name which is above all names: 10 That in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those that are in heaven, on earth, and under the earth:

You recognize the inherent contradiction but choose to pull the wool over your own eyes, and hope your brain never rejects the obvious, glaring logical incompatibility.

What illogical incompatibility? Are you saying that it isn't possible for God to become man?

Well that is simply a statement made against the evidence.

1. That God would enter Creation and take the form of a man is prophecied in the Old Testament as previously shown.
2. That the Godman would be tortured and sacrificed for the sins of humanity is also prophecied in the Old Testament.
3. That Jesus fulfilled those prophecies is also documented by eyewitness testimony.
4. That Jesus produced many miracles to prove His Divine nature is also documented by eyewitness testimony.

So, your statement is simply an opinion against the evidence. Evidence which would hold up in court.

Sincerely,

De Maria

De Maria

Aug 25, 2008, 06:51 PM

To continue with your message:

RE: definition of death: I have no problem with your definition, let's use it.

Ok.

You are still providing Answer B: No sacrifice. God sent a man He created to go get himself killed. No negative effects reached God Himself. So what real sacrifice was there? No true sacrifice = no atoning death possible.

As shown in my previous message addressing answer B directly, Jesus is either God or a mad man or worse, a liar. If Jesus is not God, then you are correct:

1 Cor 15:13 But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen again. 14 And if Christ be not risen again, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. 15 Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God: because we have given testimony against God, that he hath raised up Christ; whom he hath not raised up, if the dead rise not again.

16 For if the dead rise not again, neither is Christ risen again. 17 And if Christ be not risen again, your faith is vain, for you are yet in your sins. 18 Then they also that are fallen asleep in Christ, are perished. 19 If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.

However, the evidence of Scripture and the evidence of history which I did not address shows that Jesus was indeed God and that the eyewitnesses to His deeds believed He is God and went to their deaths proclaiming His Divinity.

And His Teachings are universally accepted as the wisest of teachings. Therefore, we believe that He is God and have literally bet our eternal souls on that fact.

If mine is a 'loaded question' you still have to show me what my incorrect underlying assumption is.

I hope I have done so adequately.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Lilmkiss

Aug 25, 2008, 07:16 PM

Here's a question I've been asking that no Christian has ever been able to provide a satisfactory answer for that does not clearly violate simple rules of logic, or trinitarian Christian theology. I truly believe it's the kernel of truth that has the power to crack apart trinitarian Christianity.

The question is:

"If Jesus is supposed to be fully man and fully God, and died on the cross... then WHO resurrected him?"

Answer A) is:
If you say "God the father resurrected him" then you prove that Jesus was NOT God in full because a separate God entity did the resurrecting. This violates the 'trinity.'

Answer B) is:
If you say "The God nature left Jesus" then you are essentially saying that God did NOT die, and the death of Jesus was no important sacrifice at all. A human man was tortured for a weekend and died. How is this supposed to atone for all the sins of humanity?

Not to mention that human sacrifice is explicitly forbidden by Torah, and the manner of death runs afoul of at least a dozen laws regarding kosher sin sacrifice: The death wasn't by kosher shecht (slaughter), the offering was not made at the Temple, the offering wasn't made by Temple priests, the body wasn't without physical blemish, etc. This makes Christianity a religion based upon an unkosher, human sacrifice.

Answer C) is:
If you say "It's a mystery" or "With God all things are possible" you are basically saying you have no answer and give up. You recognize the inherent contradiction but choose to pull the wool over your own eyes, and hope your brain never rejects the obvious, glaring logical incompatibility.

All 3 choices - A, B and C - crack apart the foundation of Christianity.

Any Christian out there want to take a shot at it?

I will say one thing. The Trinity! The Trinity is three beings in one God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. Throughout scripture these are all represented of three individuals but of the same spirit (similar characteristics but different roles, sorry I had to define it as similar spirit but truly there is no other way to explain it, that I can think of anyway.) When Jesus cried out Father why have you forsaken me this shows a relationship such as a father and son relationship (This has to be two people not one!) therefor the answer is simple it was not God the Son who resurrected himself but God the Father who resurrected Jesus. (And just to finish the trinity after Jesus went to be with his father he sent God the Holy Spirit again this is not God the Father or God the Son but totally a different entity but of the same spirit. )

PS. If you would like scripture to show what I have just said to be true to scripture, I have tons of verses. (used in context; usually I will use the hole chapter and highlight the subject verse as not to take it out of context.)

Lilmkiss

Aug 25, 2008, 07:23 PM

No, we don't. It's a mystery and beyond our human understanding. Logic can't explain it. It comes down to faith.

There is a very simple logic to this. With your children if you have them or not think of this. If a person gave you the choice of either you taking the bullet in your head or in your child's head which would you chose. (sorry son but it will only hurt a little bit) or (Son no matter what happens know that I love you, now please turn away.) And this is what God did for us! He took the bullet and I find it funny how we blindly turn our heads and do not acknowledge this. And this is the base at which we should look at the trinity there is a logic to it and it is very simple just like this but we as humans try to make it more complicated then it has to be(I like the KISS factor myself! :) )

I answerd the Trinity on the other part but I will repeat it in a simple term that they are three different entitys but of the same Spirit.

Ps. (using the term of the same spirit was also used in the bible to describe ilisha who was of similar spirit (likeness) to his master.)

arcura

Aug 25, 2008, 07:36 PM

ZachZ ,
Regarding your statement about God being three beings = 3 gods. I offer a different view.
The trinity is believed to be three PERSONS in ONE GOD.
That is very similar to we humans being a trinity of three.
We are one being made up of body, mind, and spirit.
Another way of looking at it I am a being who is a husband, father, and grandfather.
Indeed these are over simplifications of the Divine Trinity, but they do give a person a somewhat idea of the triune God.
I hope that is some help for your understanding of that.
Shalom,
Fred (arcura)

Lilmkiss

Aug 25, 2008, 07:48 PM

arcura

Aug 25, 2008, 08:12 PM

Lilmkiss

Aug 25, 2008, 08:31 PM

Lilmkiss,
I have difficulty understanding your question.
It must mean something more that the obvious I memtioned as an example.
It was three persons in one individual.
That is the point I was trying to make.
A more complex on is the fact that we humans are a trinity of mind body and spirit.
All work together in one individual to accomplish many different tasks.
Try cooking a nice breakfast without your mind, or body, or spirit working.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

.

My question was very simple being one indifidual (single/one person) how can they have the Father/Son Relationship? This requires 2 indiviuals in the relationship not 1 and this is scripturaly shown in many place's in the bible matthew being one of them.

Matthew 28
The Resurrection
1After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb.
2There was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it. 3His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow. 4The guards were so afraid of him that they shook and became like dead men.

5The angel said to the women, "Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. 6He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay. 7Then go quickly and tell his disciples: 'He has risen from the dead and is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him.' Now I have told you."

8So the women hurried away from the tomb, afraid yet filled with joy, and ran to tell his disciples. 9Suddenly Jesus met them. "Greetings," he said. They came to him, clasped his feet and worshiped him. 10Then Jesus said to them, "Do not be afraid. Go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee; there they will see me."

The Guards' Report
11While the women were on their way, some of the guards went into the city and reported to the chief priests everything that had happened. 12When the chief priests had met with the elders and devised a plan, they gave the soldiers a large sum of money, 13telling them, "You are to say, 'His disciples came during the night and stole him away while we were asleep.' 14If this report gets to the governor, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble." 15So the soldiers took the money and did as they were instructed. And this story has been widely circulated among the Jews to this very day.
The Great Commission
16Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in[a] the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

and in luke

Jesus Prays on the Mount of Olives
39Jesus went out as usual to the Mount of Olives, and his disciples followed him. 40On reaching the place, he said to them, "Pray that you will not fall into temptation." 41He withdrew about a stone's throw beyond them, knelt down and prayed, 42"Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done." 43An angel from heaven appeared to him and strengthened him. 44And being in anguish, he prayed more earnestly, and his sweat was like drops of blood falling to the ground.[c]
45When he rose from prayer and went back to the disciples, he found them asleep, exhausted from sorrow. 46"Why are you sleeping?" he asked them. "Get up and pray so that you will not fall into temptation."

How can the same person have two different wants / wills and still be the same person this clearly shows two different people having a relationship and the son is submiting himself to his fathers will. Hence these are two different people. (one can not submit to him self)

Wondergirl

Aug 25, 2008, 08:32 PM

then please do explain to me how one can have a relationship with himself? such as a father and son relationship?
Fred was trying to say that a person may fill multiple roles and still be just one person. For instance, Bob can be a father to Melissa and Billy. Bob can also be a husband to Gayle. Bob can be grandfather to Jimmy, Suzie, and Billy.

arcura

Aug 25, 2008, 08:57 PM

Lilmkiss,
In my case a father son relationship does require 2 individuals one being the Father the other being the son in a family relationship.
In the case of the of the Triune God they the Father and The Son are 2 different individuals but they are in one being.
Some theologians think of the three persons on the Trinity are a divine family of three.
As the bible says, "with God all things are possible."
I do believe that.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

maje3

Aug 26, 2008, 07:04 AM

maje3

Aug 26, 2008, 07:06 AM

God the Father is a spirt which manifested Himself into man through a woman. The spirit of God resurrected Jesus. You can find this in the book of John chapter 1 verses 1-5 and verse 14.

De Maria

Aug 26, 2008, 07:28 AM

then please do explain to me how one can have a relationship with himself? such as a father and son relationship?

You just explained it. A father has a relationship of love with his son. That one statement explains the Trinity.

God the Father loves God the Son and the Love that they have for each other is God the Holy Spirit.

De Maria

Aug 26, 2008, 07:32 AM

My question was very simple being one indifidual (single/one person)

You are mistaken. The three persons consist in one God.

how can they have the Father/Son Relationship? This requires 2 indiviuals

It requires to persons.

in the relationship not 1 and this is scripturaly shown in many place's in the bible matthew being one of them.

Matthew 28
The Resurrection
1After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb.
2There was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it. 3His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow. 4The guards were so afraid of him that they shook and became like dead men.

5The angel said to the women, "Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. 6He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay. 7Then go quickly and tell his disciples: 'He has risen from the dead and is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him.' Now I have told you."

8So the women hurried away from the tomb, afraid yet filled with joy, and ran to tell his disciples. 9Suddenly Jesus met them. "Greetings," he said. They came to him, clasped his feet and worshiped him. 10Then Jesus said to them, "Do not be afraid. Go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee; there they will see me."

The Guards' Report
11While the women were on their way, some of the guards went into the city and reported to the chief priests everything that had happened. 12When the chief priests had met with the elders and devised a plan, they gave the soldiers a large sum of money, 13telling them, "You are to say, 'His disciples came during the night and stole him away while we were asleep.' 14If this report gets to the governor, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble." 15So the soldiers took the money and did as they were instructed. And this story has been widely circulated among the Jews to this very day.
The Great Commission
16Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in[a] the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

and in luke

Jesus Prays on the Mount of Olives
39Jesus went out as usual to the Mount of Olives, and his disciples followed him. 40On reaching the place, he said to them, "Pray that you will not fall into temptation." 41He withdrew about a stone's throw beyond them, knelt down and prayed, 42"Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done." 43An angel from heaven appeared to him and strengthened him. 44And being in anguish, he prayed more earnestly, and his sweat was like drops of blood falling to the ground.[c]
45When he rose from prayer and went back to the disciples, he found them asleep, exhausted from sorrow. 46"Why are you sleeping?" he asked them. "Get up and pray so that you will not fall into temptation."

How can the same person have two different wants / wills

Jesus has a human will and a Divine will. How He has it is a mystery. It is a truth revealed by Divine revelation.

and still be the same person this clearly shows two different people having a relationship and the son is submiting himself to his fathers will. Hence these are two different people. (one can not submit to him self)

No, it shows two different Persons. People are human beings by definition. However, persons may human or divine.

Sincerely,

De Maria

wildandblue

Aug 26, 2008, 11:33 AM

Please answer me this -- Is it valid to vow a sacrifice to HaShem that is clearly against His Torah? What if I were to say "I vow to steal $1,000 from my neighbor and dedicate it to HaShem." We all agree that stealing violates Torah commandments--at least two, clearly: Exodus 20:15, and Deut. 5:19. Is my offering acceptable? No. Is my vow valid? No.

Agreed, and agreed!!

I don't think you or any other Christian is a jerk for being Christian, I just think you're misguided.Your original question mentions Jesus all over it. That is what I was referring to. You ask a Q referring to Jesus, then say you can't accept any reasons based on the New Testament. That's why I asked so what are we talking about Jesus for if New Testament has to be disregarded, and He is not in the Old Testament. The argument seems circular.
The scriptures I cited, the whole gist of my last communication is my reply to your question. Apparently making a vow to God trumps other laws. Why, I have no idea, God tells me what to do, I don't tell Him
Apparently in complicated matters the priest would stand before God with Ummim and Thumin to decide these things? Also the Old Testament often says, "in those days there was no king in Israel, a man would do whatever was good in his own eyes"

cogs

Aug 26, 2008, 02:19 PM

The tie between jesus the son and god the father is the spirit of god. We don't know what spirit is, because we can't see it. But it must have power, because jesus could do things no other human being could do. He attributed his power to god the father, so they interacted intimately, on a spiritual basis. God's spirit of power rose jesus from death, so some would say his sacrifice was meaningless, if god didn't die. Whatever importance god placed on jesus' sacrifice, we know was worth the payment for all of the sins of mankind. So that death was very important. And the resurrection was the continuation of a plan for mankind's eternity. God also speaks of jesus as a stumblingblock, or stumblingstone. If we get caught up in the impossibility of jesus' miracles, instead of the importance of his atonement and love, we're stumbling at something that will ultimately lead to vanity.

maje3

Aug 26, 2008, 06:24 PM

arcura

Aug 26, 2008, 06:40 PM

De Maria,
Very correct responses.
Fred

Lilmkiss

Aug 26, 2008, 09:20 PM

Jesus did die. He went into hell for three days to overcome death and the devil so that we can have eternal life. He rose from the dead 3 days later. The blood of Jesus is what washes our sins away which is what the sacrafice was for. Jesus was said to be the cornerstone, not a stumbling stone. ephesians 2:20, 1 peter 2:6, isaiah 28:16, which is saying Jesus is the foundation. Cogs, I like your philosophy of the stumblingstone. It is not scriptual but it does make sence. Faith is believing the things we can not see, the things we think are impossible. God said lean not to our own understanding, but in all ways acknowledge Him and He will direct our path.

NEVER, NEVER did Jesus go to hell! He went to the waiting place for those that where going to heaven and preached to them. At no point in the bible did Jesus ever, ever go to hell. This is only taught by the roman catholic church and was introduced by the apostles creed which again is only used in the roman catholic church.

arcura

Aug 26, 2008, 09:29 PM

Lilmkiss,
The Catholic Church agrees with "the waiting place" you mentioned.
It is called Purgatory.
Fred

Lilmkiss

Aug 26, 2008, 09:37 PM

You are mistaken. The three persons consist in one God.

It requires to persons.

Both of these sentences where meant to be read together not apart and it was a question to show that to say that there is only one person but he just plays the three different roles is a very inacurate and oversimplification is not the right way to say it except that it is 100% wrong. That's what this was meant to say

Jesus has a human will and a Divine will. How He has it is a mystery. It is a truth revealed by Divine revelation. it is no mystery " with God all things are posible" you are right that we may not be able to understand why, but look where we live, we are in a close minded society that inhibits thinkers or new ideas. (we could go in deaper to this but we would have to make a different form to desucs my idea's on our society.)

No, it shows two different Persons. People are human beings by definition. However, persons may human or divine.

I am sorry but I see no diffrence between people/person, beings/being or individuals/individual (they do have their context but please they mean the same thing I won't argue simatics)

Sincerely,

De Maria

De Maria

Aug 27, 2008, 06:14 AM

both of these sentences where meant to be read together not apart and it was a question to show that to say that there is only one person but he just plays the three different roles

Sorry, but that is not the doctrine. There are THREE Persons in ONE God.

is a very inacurate and oversimplification is not the right way to say it except that it is 100% wrong. That's what this was meant to say

Well, the Catholic Church has been around for 2000 years and She teaches that doctrine. The Catholic Church is called the Pillar of Truth in Scripture and is therefore infallible.

I believe the Catholic Church.

it is no mystery " with God all things are posible" you are right that we may not be able to understand why, but look where we live, we are in a close minded society that inhibits thinkers or new ideas. (we could go in deaper to this but we would have to make a different form to desucs my idea's on our society.)

Exactly! Look around. The culture has changed from a culture who understood ABSOLUTE Truths to one who prefers to believe whatever is between their ears. This is a RELATIVISTIC Society.

I am sorry but I see no diffrence between people/person, beings/being or individuals/individual

Apparently you are going by the secular definition. However, you are on a Christian forum and we are discussing the Theological definition of Person and God.

(they do have their context but please they mean the same thing I won't argue simatics)

As they say at Burger King, "Have it your way!";)

Sincerely,

De Maria

Lilmkiss

Aug 27, 2008, 06:12 PM

Lilmkiss,
The Catholic Church agrees with "the waiting place" you mentioned.
It is called Purgatory.
Fred

Hee if you read the bible they went to heaven/Paridice afterward no one waits anymore they where waiting for Jesus to come before they entred heaven hence now that he has come there is no more need to wait. (I am not getting back into this with you I have given your scripture in context and found no proof for your asumptions that pergatory exists.)

arcura

Aug 27, 2008, 06:19 PM

Lilmkiss
Sorry, I believe what the bible says.
Several passages indicate that Purgatory exists.
I have posted them before.
Fred

Lilmkiss

Aug 27, 2008, 06:45 PM

Sorry, but that is not the doctrine. There are THREE Persons in ONE God.

If you read what I said in context I SAID that they are thee persons in one God. I was making a retorical question that already had an answer it was NOT and i repeat NOT my point of veiw but simply showing acura that it was a convoluted point of view. This is all.

Well, the Catholic Church has been around for 2000 years and She teaches that doctrine. The Catholic Church is called the Pillar of Truth in Scripture and is therefore infallible.

No he founded the Church NOT the catholic church. The catholic church was created by by the Ceaser after Jesus had already created the church (which was a Juish comimunity not and I repeat not a Roman community aka the Roman Catholic church was NOT the first church). And since the Roman Catholic church was created by man and run by man and man is falible there fore the Roman catholic church is Falible!

I believe the Catholic Church.

So you believe man over God. Personaly I believe the bible not people (the pope is not infalibel

Exactly! Look around. The culture has changed from a culture who understood ABSOLUTE Truths to one who prefers to believe whatever is between their ears. This is a RELATIVISTIC Society.

Yay we agree on something!

Apparently you are going by the secular definition. However, you are on a Christian forum and we are discussing the Theological definition of Person and God.
(God uses man never does he use person beings or otherwise these are words we added, he never said he made people in his own image he said that he made man in his own image) so by Definition you me and anyone who uses these words are saying harisy so on and so fourth (dont argue simaticts what's the point take the message NOT individual words, OK this detracts from what others say so if anything discuss the concept IN context and not to dirive meanings that where never inteded that includes in Theology.

As they say at Burger King, "Have it your way!";) (Wow strong attack :p if you want to attack me go below the belt and prove me wrong with scripture please. )

Lilmkiss

Aug 27, 2008, 06:47 PM

Lilmkiss
Sorry, I believe what the bible says.
Several passages indicate that Purgatory exists.
I have posted them before.
Fred

I have shown everything you have in context to the verses before and after and have discredited your clames and others as well have done so if you want post these verses again and I will do the same.

arcura

Aug 27, 2008, 06:56 PM

Lilmkiss
That is your opinion.
I saw no discredit of those verses, only attempts to do so.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

maje3

Aug 27, 2008, 06:59 PM

NEVER, NEVER did Jesus go to hell! He went to the waiting place for those that where going to heaven and preached to them. At no point in the bible did Jesus ever, ever go to hell. This is only taught by the roman catholic church and was introduced by the apostles creed which again is only used in the roman catholic church.

Ephesians 4:9 "Now that He ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?"

Before the death of Christ both the lost and the saved went to Hades (Sheol) although it was divided into the place of torment and the paradise of God (also called Abraham's bosom.) Luke 16:19-31

You can also refer to Rev 1:18. Jesus has the keys to hell and death.

Lilmkiss

Aug 27, 2008, 07:11 PM

Ephesians 4:9 "Now that He ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?"

Before the death of Christ both the lost and the saved went to Hades (Sheol) although it was divided into the place of torment and the paradise of God (also called Abraham's bosom.) Luke 16:19-31

You can also refer to Rev 1:18. Jesus has the keys to hell and death.

It also Sais in Rev that the gates to hell will be opened once and closed once therefor if Jesus went into hell the it would have been opend twice and closed twice no?

Ephesians 4
Unity in the Body of Christ
1As a prisoner for the Lord, then, I urge you to live a life worthy of the calling you have received. 2Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love. 3Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. 4There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to one hope when you were called— 5one Lord, one faith, one baptism; 6one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.
7But to each one of us grace has been given as Christ apportioned it. 8This is why it[a] says:
"When he ascended on high,
he led captives in his train
and gave gifts to men." [B]9(What does "he ascended" mean except that he also descended to the lower, earthly regions[c]? 10He who descended is the very one who ascended higher than all the heavens, in order to fill the whole universe.) 11It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, 12to prepare God's people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up 13until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.

14Then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming. 15Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ. 16From him the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work.

I am sorry but this is talking about Jesus comeing to Earth not hell note the Earthly reagons meaning EARTH not HELL anyway this was not a question but a statement that to assend he first had to desend to our level.

Lilmkiss

Aug 27, 2008, 07:12 PM

Lilmkiss
That is your opinion.
I saw no discredit of those verses, only attempts to do so.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

If you want to start this post the scripture and I will be more then willing to put it into context I emplore you to do so.

maje3

Aug 27, 2008, 07:21 PM

Lilmkiss,
It says he descended into the Lower parts of the earth, not the earth. What are you referring to in Revelation about the gates of hell being open and closed once?

Lilmkiss

Aug 27, 2008, 07:35 PM

Lilmkiss,
It says he descended into the Lower parts of the earth, not the earth. What are you referring to in Revelation about the gates of hell being open and closed once?
Just give me a moment I had my bible in my room but I can't find it I have had this desuction more then once I will post it up tonight

maje3

Aug 27, 2008, 07:47 PM

O.K. I'll read it tomorrow. Have a good night.

arcura

Aug 27, 2008, 07:49 PM

Lilmkiss

Aug 27, 2008, 08:07 PM

Lilmkiss,
Jesus informs us that the Gates of hell cannot stop The Church from saving soules.
Thus...
Matthew 16: 16. And Simon Peter answered and said, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.''
17. Jesus answered and said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.
18. "And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.
19. "And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.''
Gates are a battlement to keep people out not to prevent people form leaving.
Peace and kindness,
Fred (arcira)

And on this rock I will build My church (This is speeking about the Base that he Built this is not speeking about Peter being the rock of the Church; this has been explained by many people other then me)

Second

Revelation 3

To the Church in Philadelphia
7"To the angel of the church in Philadelphia write:
These are the words of him who is holy and true, who holds the key of David. What he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open. 8I know your deeds. See, I have placed before you an open door that no one can shut. I know that you have little strength, yet you have kept my word and have not denied my name. 9I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars—I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you. 10Since you have kept my command to endure patiently, I will also keep you from the hour of trial that is going to come upon the whole world to test those who live on the earth. 11I am coming soon. Hold on to what you have, so that no one will take your crown. 12Him who overcomes I will make a pillar in the temple of my God. Never again will he leave it. I will write on him the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which is coming down out of heaven from my God; and I will also write on him my new name. 13He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.

Meaning that when he shuts the doors of hell they will not be opend for anyone when he shuts it it is shut no one will come through plain and simple.

JoeT777

Aug 27, 2008, 09:13 PM

and on this rock I will build My church (This is speeking about the Base that he Built this is not speeking about Peter being the rock of the Church; this has been explained by many people other then me)

second

Revelation 3

To the Church in Philadelphia
7"To the angel of the church in Philadelphia write:
These are the words of him who is holy and true, who holds the key of David. What he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open. 8I know your deeds. See, I have placed before you an open door that no one can shut. I know that you have little strength, yet you have kept my word and have not denied my name. 9I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars—I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you. 10Since you have kept my command to endure patiently, I will also keep you from the hour of trial that is going to come upon the whole world to test those who live on the earth. 11I am coming soon. Hold on to what you have, so that no one will take your crown. 12Him who overcomes I will make a pillar in the temple of my God. Never again will he leave it. I will write on him the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which is coming down out of heaven from my God; and I will also write on him my new name. 13He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.

Meaning that when he shuts the doors of hell they will not be opend for anyone when he shuts it it is shut no one will come through plain and simple.

Matt 16 13 20 The Primacy of Peter (The first, Simon who is called Peter Matt 10:2)

18. Et ego dico tibi, quia tu es Petrus, et super hanc petram ædificabo Ecclesiam meam, et portæ inferi non prævalebunt adversus eam. (That thou art Peter)

The Catholic Church has always understood the Scripture to give Primacy to Peter. This was illustrated in a letter written by Pope Clement I (third in succession to Peter and had personally known Peter) to the Corinthians (circa) 95 AD claiming authority over Corinth. St. Irenaeus tells the second hand account from St. Polycarp where John was heard to say “the faithful wo are everywhere must agree with this Church (Rome) because of its more important principality.” During the Councils and Synods surrounding the early heresies the Popes decision settled the matter. This is illustrated in 431 AD. Where the Bishops responded to Pope Celestine's decision, “He [Peter] lives even to this time, and always in his successor's gives judgment.”

Only after 1520 some have asked why this reference is only found in one Gospel and not the others, Warren Carroll suggest the rather simple answer: “Why are Christ's words to Peter found only in Matthew, and not in the other gospels? Because Mathew was there, with Peter and the Twelve, on the road to Caesarea Philippi in the summer of 29 A.D.: he heard the dialogue himself, in his own Aramaic language. Mark the Evangelist was not there; his information came from Peter, and we have very early testimony that out of humility Peter did not include Christ's praise of him in his catechesis. John had the other gospels before him as he wrote, and rarely repeated what they had already reported.. . “ That the words don't appear in Mark's Gospel was influenced by Peter's humility. It would be easy to suggest this as speculation however Victor of Antioch, the first commentator of Mark, mentions it as does Eusebius of Caesarea. Warren H. Carroll, A History of Christendom Vol 1, 1985, pg 338. (see also footnote 139)

In the Douay Rheims the verse reads as follows:

13 And Jesus came into the quarters of Cæsarea Philippi: and he asked his disciples, saying: Whom do men say that the Son of man is? 14 But they said: Some John the Baptist, and other some Elias, and others Jeremiah, or one of the prophets. 15 Jesus saith to them: But whom do you say that I am? 16 Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God.

In the way of setting the scene; Caesarea Phillippi is in the valley of Lebanon below Mount Hermon as mentioned in Josh 11:17 or Baal Hemon as mentioned in Judg 3:3. Of particular interest is a land feature of a massive rock face. One of the tributaries for the Jordan River flows through the area. The area was liberated by the Maccabean revolt in 167 B.C. In 4 B.C. one of Herod the Great s three sons, Philip, built the Roman Grecian of Caesarea Philippi to honor the Roman emperor.

You can imagine Jesus with this huge rock wall as a backdrop, asking twice (not once but twice), “Whom to they say that I am?” No other disciples could give the answer but Simon. Simon confessed Jesus as being both the Messiah and the “Son of the Living God.” God had revealed to Simon what no other man on earth knew; Christ was the Second Person of the One Devine God.

17 And Jesus answering said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

I can't claim any significance to the number of times “blessed art thou” is used in the New Testament. However, it is used only three times, twice in Luke 1: 42 And she cried out with a loud voice and said: Blessed art thou among women... 45 And blessed art thou that hast believed, because those things shall be; and once in Matthew 16:17. It's only used once by Jesus. (this holds true in the NKJV also) In my estimation, like Mary, God seats Peter in a special Chair for our salvation; the first of 266 whose “successor's gives judgment,” St. Peter, St. Linus, St. Anacletus, St. Clement I, St. Alexander I, St. Sixtus I, St. Telesphorus, St. Hyginus… Benedict XVI

In plain language of today, the simple meaning of the verse 18 becomes: because this was revealed to you by God, I will call you Rock and on this Rock I will build my church; hell won't prevail against it.

19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

The “keys” are the keys to the kingdom of heaven, similar to the “keys” mentioned in Isaiah 22. With the transfer of the keys, one to another, power and authority is also transferred; Christ gives Peter the supreme authority over the Church and to bind and loose, both in heaven and on earth.

“In regard to the Petros Kepha argument made by some, “the play of words involved in naming Simon “Rock” is as clear in Aramaic as in English, if we use the literal translation “Rock” for the Aramaic Kepha rather than “Peter” which is derived from the Greek Petros. In Greek the noun for rock is feminine. Therefore it is unsuitable for a man's name, and Peter is named Petros while the precise word for rock is petra, making the meaning a little less clear. But Christ's words to Peter were spoken in Aramaic and first recorded in Armaic in Matthew's Gospel; furthermore, we know that Peter was later often called Kepha or Cephas as well as Petros.” “Warren H. Carroll, A History of Christendom Vol 1, 1985, pg 349 footnote 135

Mat 16:15 Jesus saith to them: But whom do you say that I am? 16 Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. 17 And Jesus answering said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

In verse 17 Jesus is obviously pleased seeing that this knowledge didn't come from human reason, but rather the knowledge was a Grace from Aba (I'm told, that Christ was the first to refer to God as Aba [Father] – did you know that? Interesting isn't it). So as a reward, or as acknowledgement, you would have Jesus say, Woe to you Peter... you have not gained access, yet you have stopped those who wished to enter! And thereafter say I will build a church on your faith to which the gates of hell will not prevail. Excuse me for finding this impossible to swallow. It doesn't even meet you definition of “scripture interprets scripture.”

It's interesting that you should bring up the book of Revelations. Matt 16:15-19; especially, the Key of David that the Holy One opens and no man shuts. Rev 3:7 And to the angel of the church of Philadelphia write: These things saith the Holy One and the true one, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth and no man shutteth, shutteth and no man openeth: 8 I know thy works. Behold, I have given before thee a door opened, which no man can shut: because thou hast a little strength and hast kept my word and hast not denied my name. The key of the House of David relate to the same earthly keys given Eliacim, son of Helcias. "the key of the house of David" is conferred upon Eliacim, the son of Helcias, as the symbol of full and unlimited authority over the Kingdom of Juda. This too would be a direct reference to the Primacy of authority, a very good reason to accept St. Peter as the Prince of the Church Militant. But I would suggest it wasn't the set of keys conferred on St. Peter, the keys to heaven the right to bind or loose in heaven and earth. The reason is that these keys are located in heaven, held by an angel church that is using the keys to keep open the door, presumably the door of holy righteousness. Another reason I don't think they are the same keys is because we see three sets of keys in sacred Scripture, the Keys of Heaven, the Key of the bottomless pit (hell), and the Keys of the House of David. Rev 9:1 And the fifth angel sounded the trumpet: and I saw a star fall from heaven upon the earth. And there was given to him the key of the bottomless pit. But in Revelations, where John is escorted through God's Kingdom in Heaven, we don't hear of the Key's of Heaven. Are we to presume that there are Keys to earthly kingdoms, hellish kingdoms, but no keys to heaven in heaven? And the reason, the Keys to Heaven reside with the Successors of St. Peter.

JoeT

arcura

Aug 27, 2008, 09:29 PM

JoeT777

Aug 27, 2008, 09:32 PM

arcura

Aug 27, 2008, 09:51 PM

JoeT777
Yes you did, but I wanted to say it a bit differently to hopefully make if more clear and give a bit different way of understanding it.
Peace and kindness,
Fred (arcura)

maje3

Aug 28, 2008, 07:01 AM

Revelation 3

To the Church in Philadelphia
7"To the angel of the church in Philadelphia write:
These are the words of him who is holy and true, who holds the key of David. What he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open. 8I know your deeds. See, I have placed before you an open door that no one can shut. I know that you have little strength, yet you have kept my word and have not denied my name. 9I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars—I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you. 10Since you have kept my command to endure patiently, I will also keep you from the hour of trial that is going to come upon the whole world to test those who live on the earth. 11I am coming soon. Hold on to what you have, so that no one will take your crown. 12Him who overcomes I will make a pillar in the temple of my God. Never again will he leave it. I will write on him the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which is coming down out of heaven from my God; and I will also write on him my new name. 13He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.

Meaning that when he shuts the doors of hell they will not be opend for anyone when he shuts it it is shut no one will come through plain and simple.[/QUOTE]

HI Lilmkiss,
This scripture is saying that when God shuts a door no one can open it and when he opens a door no one can shut it. It's not talking about the doors of hell.
In other words what God has for you is for you.

JoeT777

Aug 28, 2008, 10:46 AM

Revelation 3

To the Church in Philadelphia
7"To the angel of the church in Philadelphia write:
These are the words of him who is holy and true, who holds the key of David. What he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open. 8I know your deeds. See, I have placed before you an open door that no one can shut. I know that you have little strength, yet you have kept my word and have not denied my name. 9I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars—I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you. 10Since you have kept my command to endure patiently, I will also keep you from the hour of trial that is going to come upon the whole world to test those who live on the earth. 11I am coming soon. Hold on to what you have, so that no one will take your crown. 12Him who overcomes I will make a pillar in the temple of my God. Never again will he leave it. I will write on him the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which is coming down out of heaven from my God; and I will also write on him my new name. 13He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.

Meaning that when he shuts the doors of hell they will not be opend for anyone when he shuts it it is shut no one will come through plain and simple.

HI Lilmkiss,
This scripture is saying that when God shuts a door no one can open it and when he opens a door no one can shut it. It's not talking about the doors of hell.
In other words what God has for you is for you.

We can see that the suggestion for the keys to "bind and loosen" are conferred on every Christian is terribly illogical. We see in John 17:11 that Christ prays for us to be ONE: And now I am not in the world, and these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep them in thy name whom thou hast given me: that they may be one, as we also are. If we are to be ONE and we all have the key to bind and loosen, then what I bind you can loosen (and vice versa); which of course isn't being ONE.

Matt 16 very clearly confers the responsibility, and the means to carry out the responsibility, i.e. authority, to Peter.

JoeT

sndbay

Aug 28, 2008, 11:33 AM

Lilmkiss,
If you seriously read the entire episode about The Rock with an open mind you will see that Jesus was talking to Peter and about Peter bing The Rock.
Jesus gave Simon the new name of Rock (that is Peter).
It is obvious that Peter IS The Rock on which Jesus built His Church.
The bible says it and history prove it.
That is a fact.
Peace and kindness,
Fred (arcura)

May God reveal the Truth to each reader. When Peter is called the rock, it is because Peter is baptized and walks in Perfect Faith, believing in Christ Jesus as Our Lord and Saviour.
Those that are baptized walk in Christ and with Christ, believing in the Saviour of the World.

Peter was asked by Jesus...

1.Peter, Do you love Me? Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee.

2. Peter, Do you love Me? Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee.

3. Peter, Do you love Me? Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee

We now walk as Peter did, in Christ... Do you Love Christ? YES Lord, above all.

By choice in mind and heart of Free Will... Who do you follow? Christ Jesus, The Rock

Galatians 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

1 Sam 2:2 There is none holy as the LORD: for there is none beside thee: neither is there any rock like our God.

Choice? Do you believe Our Father's Word?

(John 21:15 John 21:16 John 21:17)

De Maria

Aug 28, 2008, 03:02 PM

Wondergirl

Aug 28, 2008, 03:17 PM

Therefore, Jesus installed Peter as the Rock of His Church.
No. It is the belief of the Catholic Church that Peter was the rock. No Protestant church body agrees with that. Protestants believe the Church is founded on Jesus Christ, the Rock.

De Maria

Aug 28, 2008, 04:07 PM

No. It is the belief of the Catholic Church that Peter was the rock. No Protestant church body agrees with that. Protestants believe the Church is founded on Jesus Christ, the Rock.

But your Protestant belief goes against Scripture. Because Jesus said:

Matthew 16 18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Wondergirl

Aug 28, 2008, 04:19 PM

But your Protestant belief goes against Scripture. Because Jesus said:

Matthew 16 18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Sincerely,

De Maria
No, the Catholic belief goes against Scripture. Yes, Jesus said:

Matthew 16 18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Jesus was referring to Himself as "this Rock." Otherwise He would have said "upon thee." Jesus knew grammar perfectly.

Matthew 16 18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock [points to Himself] I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

JoeT777

Aug 28, 2008, 04:47 PM

May God reveal the Truth to each reader. When Peter is called the rock, it is because Peter is baptized and walks in Perfect Faith, believing in Christ Jesus as Our Lord and Saviour.
Those that are baptized walk in Christ and with Christ, believing in the Saviour of the World.

Peter was asked by Jesus...

1.Peter, Do you love Me? Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee.

2. Peter, Do you love Me? Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee.

3. Peter, Do you love Me? Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee

We now walk as Peter did, in Christ... Do you Love Christ? YES Lord, above all.

By choice in mind and heart of Free Will... Who do you follow? Christ Jesus, The Rock

Galatians 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

1 Sam 2:2 There is none holy as the LORD: for there is none beside thee: neither is there any rock like our God.

Choice? Do you believe Our Father's Word?

(John 21:15 John 21:16 John 21:17)

It seems to me that breaking down Matthew 16:16-19 into their essential elements we have the following bits of fact:

1. Christ was the authority
2. Christ knew Peter’s revelation that Jesus was God, recognizing the supernatural source of his faith
3. Christ named Simon Bar-Jona to “Rock” The title of Peter's office.
4. Peter was handed the authority and designated as the “foundation” on which Christ builds his Church.
5. The gates of hell won’t prevail over the Church
6. The keys to bind and loosen where given to Peter.

In this we see the classic transfer of power from a more authoritative source to a lesser authority. Christ has the authority to give Peter a subservient role. In so doing, Peter is given a title, “the Rock” on which he can rely on. Such as when the boss walks though the office, decides the firm has grown large enough that he needs a manager for the clerical staff. He has the authority, (in this case, the pay check). Giving them a title, he names somebody the “office manager”. The only thing left is the wherewithal to accomplish the goal, founding and building a Church. This is done with the keys. In the keys are the powers with which Peter needs to accomplish his assigned goals; the power to bind and loosen – in heaven or on earth. Just as our “office manager” must have the wherewithal to run the clerical department, the key is the paychecks for the clerks (the clerk not following the guidelines of the manager finds himself without a check).

I took the long way to explain the elements of any chain of command. The authority must designate who has power, the extent of that power, and must provide the wherewithal to accomplish the goals. We see all of this in Matthew 16.

Thus, Peter was given a title of for his office, a mission to accomplish, and the wherewithal to achieve his goal. Only the most convoluted logic can come to any other conclusion from this passage. Peter was our first Pope!

JoeT

Wondergirl

Aug 28, 2008, 05:17 PM

Peter was our first Pope!
That's very nice. He wasn't ours.

jakester

Aug 28, 2008, 06:17 PM

ZachZ -

You seem like someone who likes to understand how things work, etc. What puzzles me though is, for a person who clearly thinks Christianity is foolish (or at least Christians are for believing it), why do you really care what they believe? So you think they are dumb for not seeing the "glaring logical incompatibility" of the resurrection, etc. So let them be dumb and not worry about it.

It seems to me that you really have an unchecked ego and are very proud of the intellectual ability that you have. It's OK to be confident in one's ability but to then turn on others and attempt to belittle them and at the same time exalt yourself is hardly an attribute to be proud of.

I guess in one sense I truly appreciate your willingness to be critical in your thinking but in another sense I truly fear that your disdain for God and Jesus Christ is so glaringly apparent that perhaps you have already dug your grave. Truly, I hope that you do not remain hard in your heart and "crucify afresh the Son of God."

arcura

Aug 28, 2008, 06:56 PM

maje3

Aug 28, 2008, 07:34 PM

Wondergirl, you are cracking me up with your last comment.

Wondergirl

Aug 28, 2008, 07:44 PM

Wondergirl, you are cracking me up with your last comment.
Thanks for acknowleging me. (At least ONE person noticed I'm in the room.)

JoeT777

Aug 28, 2008, 08:00 PM

No, the Catholic belief goes against Scripture. Yes, Jesus said:

Matthew 16 18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Jesus was referring to Himself as "this Rock." Otherwise He would have said "upon thee." Jesus knew grammar perfectly.

Matthew 16 18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock [points to Himself] I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Ok, let’s look at the plan language of the verse. In the plain language of today, the simple meaning of the verse 18 becomes: because this was revealed to you by God, I will call you Peter (which means rock) and on this Rock of faith I will build my church; hell won’t prevail against it. And because my identity as the Messiah was revealed to you by God I’ll give you the key to heaven.

Now we’ll redo in plain language of today with Christ as a Rock: because this was revealed to you by God, I will call you Peter (which means rock) and on ME (or on My Faith) I will build my church; hell won’t prevail against it. And because my identity as the Messiah was revealed to you by God I’ll give you the key to heaven.

The second rendition just doesn’t make plain sense, its contorted. Why would Christ build a Church on Himself because Peter had a revelation from God as to Christ's identity? Secondly, again in the second version, why would Christ build a Church on Himself and give Peter the Keys? Thirdly, if the intent was for Christ to build a Church, why not say, I’m the Messiah as it was revealed to you Simon, therefore I’m building a Church - why even mention turning Simon into a Rock?

JoeT

Wondergirl

Aug 28, 2008, 08:08 PM

Ok, let's look at the plan language of the verse
"on this Rock of faith I will build my church" -- yes, on faith on Him, on Jesus Christ.

Peter had denied Jesus thrice, not a good bet for church building.

The Church is built on Jesus Christ. Yes, please do look at the plain language of the verse. Then get back to me.

maje3

Aug 28, 2008, 08:18 PM

Peter may be meant by the rock, but he is not the exclusive foundation. For the twelvefold foundation of the apostles of the church, see Ephesians 2:20 and Revelation 21:14. The rock or foundation of the church is the confession ( ultimately the doctrine ) of the apostles, which became normative for the true church. Notice Jesus called Peter the rock after He asked him who he is.

JoeT777

Aug 28, 2008, 08:24 PM

De Maria,
When I was a Protestant I did not believe many things about the Catholic Church.
When I started seriously studying it and why they believed as they did compared to the bible I became convinced that the Catholic Church was right time after time again.
My story is not unusual. Since I converted over 30 years ago I have met many people whose story is very similar and some of them are former Protestant ministers.
Peter IS the Rock on which Jesus built His Church and though many over the years have tried to stop it, it continues to grow worldwide.
Peace and kindness,
Fred.

Great comments.

I don’t know if you’re a Chesterton fan; but he seems to be able to explain how the conscientious man attempting to be just to the Church finds himself trapped with the truth of it all. I’ve been Catholic all my life- except for a few crazy years as a young adult. But, never the less I’ve found that the “trap” works on cradle Catholics too.

“It is impossible to be just to the Catholic Church. The moment men cease to pull against it they feel a tug towards it. The moment they cease to shout it down they begin to listen to it with pleasure. The moment they try to be fair to it they begin to be fond of it. But when that affection has passed a certain point it begins to take on the tragic and menacing grandeur of a great love affair. The man has exactly the same sense of having committed or compromised himself; of having been in a sense entrapped, even if he is glad to be entrapped. But for a considerable time he is not so much glad as simply terrified. It may be that this real psychological experience has been misunderstood by stupider people and is responsible for all that remains of the legend that Rome is a mere trap. But that legend misses the whole point of the psychology. It is not the Pope who has set the trap or the priests who have baited it. The whole point of the position is that the trap is simply the truth. The whole point is that the man himself has made his way towards the trap of truth, and not the trap that has run after the man. All steps except the last step he has taken eagerly on his own account, out of interest in the truth; and even the last step, or the last stage, only alarms him because it is so very true. G.K. Chesterton

JoeT