Jesus is not God.

[Aletheia4u]

But he may be " A God", I am not sure. Only A God could have done the things he has done, like create this world, John 1:3, " All things were made by him." Only " A God" could have made all things, but Jesus is NOT the Father God, nor is he equal to his Father. Notice;


http://mit.irr.org/28-biblical-passages-which-explicitly-teach-there-only-one-god

In Isaiah 45:21 God himself speaks on the matter; "I am the Lord, there is no other God besides me!. Vs. 22, " I am God, there is none else!" When God said there is no other God besides him, Jesus was sitting right besides him, as he always is.

Its academic, Jesus is not God, but he may well be an individual God himself. They are both individuals, but only the Father is uncreated and has never died; Jesus has died before, and God cannot die!

There can only be one God. A god is the One that controls everything in all levels. Jesus is the emotion of God that shows both weakness and sternest. You noticed that God is now forgiving as we forgive. No more an eye for an eye... It is because He is now has given authority of this emotion to rule over His soul.


Isaiah 54:8 In a surge of anger I hid my face from you for a moment, but with everlasting kindness I will have compassion on you,” says the Lord your Redeemer.

John 14:9 Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?

Romans 1:20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

Colossians 1:15 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.

Colossians 1:16 For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him.

John 1:3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

 

[hobelim]

base that claim on a few verses where Jesus said something vague about his relationship with God which are not claims to divinity ..........
written in the gospels that became compulsory beliefs after 325.c.e..

Jesus said? Or is it actually the early Church using the image to say the words Eusebius forged into text?
Our news media constantly adds it's own words or clever word play to elude to a new narrative that fits theirs. Biblical interpretation and writings fall into this same word play game.

The gospels were written at least a century before Eusebius was even born.

There goes that theory....


The gospels speak of the keys to the secrets of the kingdom of heaven but never reveal what they are.

Such things were held back from the laypeople just as the hidden meaning of the law was withheld from public knowledge.

Once those who held the keys to such secrets were killed all the enemy had left were fantastical stories written on scrolls that they could never comprehend without the keys to understanding, whether after the first or second temple destruction.

No, there's a few changes like In John where earlier copies read different then later copies. If you read about what Eusebius (called the great liar) did, you'd understand how precepts can change through the Church making changes that fit their new narrative.
JOHN 9:35
In the KJV, the verse reads thus:
"Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God?"
All of the earliest codices and papyri, however, read thus:
"Jesus heard that they had cast him out, and having found him he said, Do you believe in the Son of man?"
While the first reading is supported by the majority of manuscripts after the fifth century, the latter reading is supported by all of the second through fourth century manuscripts of John's gospel, including the oldest extant papyri, P75 and P66, as well as the earliest codices, including Aleph, B, D, W, and other witnesses.

No doubt that subtle changes were made in scripture as well in belief and practice to fit their narrative after the roman church usurped authority over all of Christianity. Not to mention the destruction of all other documents and sects that did not seem to support their perverse views.

Even so, that fact demonstrates the existence of an earlier narrative and an earlier set of beliefs and practices different than and even opposed to church dogma about an edible mangod, the echoes of which remain preserved in the documents that did survive concealed by the figurative language of the prophets that the superstitious could never grasp much less alter or repress..

Thats why even the Pope doesn't know that Jesus was teaching a new way to interpret kosher law that had been lost to time since the death of Moses when he said, eat my flesh. The command to eat my flesh, bread from heaven, seems to support the the beliefs and practices of partaking in the divine nature of Mithras by eating consecrated bread by those who for centuries had already used their severe austerity as a basis for a false claim to moral authority.

Thats why they didn't suppress all of the gospels.

 

[HaShev]

base that claim on a few verses where Jesus said something vague about his relationship with God which are not claims to divinity ..........
written in the gospels that became compulsory beliefs after 325.c.e..

Jesus said? Or is it actually the early Church using the image to say the words Eusebius forged into text?
Our news media constantly adds it's own words or clever word play to elude to a new narrative that fits theirs. Biblical interpretation and writings fall into this same word play game.

The gospels were written at least a century before Eusebius was even born.

There goes that theory....


The gospels speak of the keys to the secrets of the kingdom of heaven but never reveal what they are.

Such things were held back from the laypeople just as the hidden meaning of the law was withheld from public knowledge.

Once those who held the keys to such secrets were killed all the enemy had left were fantastical stories written on scrolls that they could never comprehend without the keys to understanding, whether after the first or second temple destruction.

No, there's a few changes like In John where earlier copies read different then later copies. If you read about what Eusebius (called the great liar) did, you'd understand how precepts can change through the Church making changes that fit their new narrative.
JOHN 9:35
In the KJV, the verse reads thus:
"Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God?"
All of the earliest codices and papyri, however, read thus:
"Jesus heard that they had cast him out, and having found him he said, Do you believe in the Son of man?"
While the first reading is supported by the majority of manuscripts after the fifth century, the latter reading is supported by all of the second through fourth century manuscripts of John's gospel, including the oldest extant papyri, P75 and P66, as well as the earliest codices, including Aleph, B, D, W, and other witnesses.

No doubt that subtle changes were made in scripture as well in belief and practice to fit their narrative after the roman church usurped authority over all of Christianity. Not to mention the destruction of all other documents and sects that did not support their perverse views.

Even so, that fact demonstrates the existence of an earlier narrative and an earlier set of beliefs and practices different than and even opposed to church dogma, the echoes of which remain preserved in the documents that did survive concealed in figurative language that the superstitious could never grasp, change, or repress..

But if they didn't remove text and change text there would/should be no NT at all.
Reason I say this, is because nobody gets to see The removed portion of Luke that matches the left out Doubting Thomas whereby Luke admits he's no longer a believer follower in admitting Jesus
wasn't who they'd hoped him to be (when he failed liberating them). John 6:66 eludes to all (or many) of them giving up on him as well. Therefore no new text based on him over God and his laws would or should have ever been scribed, especially in those apostles names they are written in "WITHOUT PERMISSION".

Like I always say in an analogy:
This is liken to David Koresh followers dying before having a chance to admit David wasn't who they thought he was when he got his flock slain & later Davidians writing in their name for them.
Or survivors admitting he wasn't the one and someone having the nerve writing in their name much later after they die as if they still were devotees and all was & is well.

 

[hobelim]

base that claim on a few verses where Jesus said something vague about his relationship with God which are not claims to divinity ..........
written in the gospels that became compulsory beliefs after 325.c.e..

Jesus said? Or is it actually the early Church using the image to say the words Eusebius forged into text?
Our news media constantly adds it's own words or clever word play to elude to a new narrative that fits theirs. Biblical interpretation and writings fall into this same word play game.

The gospels were written at least a century before Eusebius was even born.

There goes that theory....


The gospels speak of the keys to the secrets of the kingdom of heaven but never reveal what they are.

Such things were held back from the laypeople just as the hidden meaning of the law was withheld from public knowledge.

Once those who held the keys to such secrets were killed all the enemy had left were fantastical stories written on scrolls that they could never comprehend without the keys to understanding, whether after the first or second temple destruction.

No, there's a few changes like In John where earlier copies read different then later copies. If you read about what Eusebius (called the great liar) did, you'd understand how precepts can change through the Church making changes that fit their new narrative.
JOHN 9:35
In the KJV, the verse reads thus:
"Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God?"
All of the earliest codices and papyri, however, read thus:
"Jesus heard that they had cast him out, and having found him he said, Do you believe in the Son of man?"
While the first reading is supported by the majority of manuscripts after the fifth century, the latter reading is supported by all of the second through fourth century manuscripts of John's gospel, including the oldest extant papyri, P75 and P66, as well as the earliest codices, including Aleph, B, D, W, and other witnesses.

No doubt that subtle changes were made in scripture as well in belief and practice to fit their narrative after the roman church usurped authority over all of Christianity. Not to mention the destruction of all other documents and sects that did not support their perverse views.

Even so, that fact demonstrates the existence of an earlier narrative and an earlier set of beliefs and practices different than and even opposed to church dogma, the echoes of which remain preserved in the documents that did survive concealed in figurative language that the superstitious could never grasp, change, or repress..

But if they didn't remove text and change text there would/should be no NT at all.
Reason I say this, is because nobody gets to see The removed portion of Luke that matches the left out Doubting Thomas whereby Luke admits he's no longer a believer follower in admitting Jesus
wasn't who they'd hoped him to be (when he failed liberating them). John 6:66 eludes to all (or many) of them giving up on him as well. Therefore no new text based on him over God and his laws would or should have ever been scribed, especially in those apostles names they are written in "WITHOUT PERMISSION".

Like I always say in an analogy:
This is liken to David Koresh followers dying before having a chance to admit David wasn't who they thought he was when he got his flock slain & later Davidians writing in their name for them.
Or survivors admitting he wasn't the one and someone having the nerve writing in their name much later after they die as if they still were devotees and all was & is well.

Jesus was only a failed messiah to those who failed to grasp what he was liberating people from, the burden of the law, which is the death and hellish experience of life consequent for failing to comply with the laws demands because the people had been taught since birth to conform to the law in the wrong way. Just like you with a fancy robe and a fancy knife who can't wait for another temple to be built and can't be trusted to be alone with sheep.

Jesus and his disciples never expected to avoid death or defeat the enemy with military might.

They were preparing for themselves a place in the world to come, the reward of the righteous, just like Eleazer of 2 maccabees who found a painful death preferable to an easy life of pretense.

 

[RodISHI]

No doubt that subtle changes were made in scripture as well in belief and practice to fit their narrative after the roman church usurped authority over all of Christianity. Not to mention the destruction of all other documents and sects that did not seem to support their perverse views.

Even so, that fact demonstrates the existence of an earlier narrative and an earlier set of beliefs and practices different than and even opposed to church dogma about an edible mangod, the echoes of which remain preserved in the documents that did survive concealed by the figurative language of the prophets that the superstitious could never grasp much less alter or repress..

Thats why even the Pope doesn't know that Jesus was teaching a new way to interpret kosher law that had been lost to time since the death of Moses when he said, eat my flesh. The command to eat my flesh, bread from heaven, seems to support the the beliefs and practices of partaking in the divine nature of Mithras by eating consecrated bread by those who for centuries had already used their severe austerity as a basis for a false claim to moral authority.

Thats why they didn't suppress all of the gospels.

Spirit and spiritual hosts cannot be justified with those that have a carnal mindset. I was going back through my notes doing a few small corrections and additions in defining historical finds of Ashteroth, manna (corn to make the bread/wafers that taste like honey from heaven) and nuts (Nu Nut) fit right in the whole if you can grasp it. Lots of fun stuff looking at it all as it confirms what I have seen in the spirit.

To a carnally minded human still living in a garden of their own pleasures (eden) it sounds and looks something like this;

 

[hobelim]

No doubt that subtle changes were made in scripture as well in belief and practice to fit their narrative after the roman church usurped authority over all of Christianity. Not to mention the destruction of all other documents and sects that did not seem to support their perverse views.

Even so, that fact demonstrates the existence of an earlier narrative and an earlier set of beliefs and practices different than and even opposed to church dogma about an edible mangod, the echoes of which remain preserved in the documents that did survive concealed by the figurative language of the prophets that the superstitious could never grasp much less alter or repress..

Thats why even the Pope doesn't know that Jesus was teaching a new way to interpret kosher law that had been lost to time since the death of Moses when he said, eat my flesh. The command to eat my flesh, bread from heaven, seems to support the the beliefs and practices of partaking in the divine nature of Mithras by eating consecrated bread by those who for centuries had already used their severe austerity as a basis for a false claim to moral authority.

Thats why they didn't suppress all of the gospels.

Spirit and spiritual hosts cannot be justified with those that have a carnal mindset. I was going back through my notes doing a few small corrections and additions in defining historical finds of Ashteroth, manna (corn to make the bread/wafers that taste like honey from heaven) and nuts (Nu Nut) fit right in the whole if you can grasp it. Lots of fun stuff looking at it all as it confirms what I have seen in the spirit.

To a carnally minded human still living in a garden of their own pleasures (eden) it sounds and looks something like this;

You would do better to accept your carnal nature and give up your spiritual delusions.

How do you ever expect to find peace in this world by cutting yourself in half?

 

[RodISHI]

No doubt that subtle changes were made in scripture as well in belief and practice to fit their narrative after the roman church usurped authority over all of Christianity. Not to mention the destruction of all other documents and sects that did not seem to support their perverse views.

Even so, that fact demonstrates the existence of an earlier narrative and an earlier set of beliefs and practices different than and even opposed to church dogma about an edible mangod, the echoes of which remain preserved in the documents that did survive concealed by the figurative language of the prophets that the superstitious could never grasp much less alter or repress..

Thats why even the Pope doesn't know that Jesus was teaching a new way to interpret kosher law that had been lost to time since the death of Moses when he said, eat my flesh. The command to eat my flesh, bread from heaven, seems to support the the beliefs and practices of partaking in the divine nature of Mithras by eating consecrated bread by those who for centuries had already used their severe austerity as a basis for a false claim to moral authority.

Thats why they didn't suppress all of the gospels.

Spirit and spiritual hosts cannot be justified with those that have a carnal mindset. I was going back through my notes doing a few small corrections and additions in defining historical finds of Ashteroth, manna (corn to make the bread/wafers that taste like honey from heaven) and nuts (Nu Nut) fit right in the whole if you can grasp it. Lots of fun stuff looking at it all as it confirms what I have seen in the spirit.

To a carnally minded human still living in a garden of their own pleasures (eden) it sounds and looks something like this;

You would do better to accept your carnal nature and give up your spiritual delusions.

How do you ever expect to find peace in this world by cutting yourself in half?

No halving to it. It is rather like being made whole again after spending years knowing something was missing but not knowing what all exactly it was that wasn't wholly there in the past.

 

[whirlingmerc]

But he may be " A God", I am not sure. Only A God could have done the things he has done, like create this world, John 1:3, " All things were made by him." Only " A God" could have made all things, but Jesus is NOT the Father God, nor is he equal to his Father. Notice;


http://mit.irr.org/28-biblical-passages-which-explicitly-teach-there-only-one-god

In Isaiah 45:21 God himself speaks on the matter; "I am the Lord, there is no other God besides me!. Vs. 22, " I am God, there is none else!" When God said there is no other God besides him, Jesus was sitting right besides him, as he always is.

Its academic, Jesus is not God, but he may well be an individual God himself. They are both individuals, but only the Father is uncreated and has never died; Jesus has died before, and God cannot die!

The problem with your argument is that it does not rule one one God who is a Trinity
it actually rules out the Jesus is 'a God' yet another but smaller God argument

I see Jesus as the Good Shepherd who laid down his life, the King..
Psalms book 1: David's first book of Psalms

 

[whirlingmerc]

I see in Isaiah the foretelling of 'the mighty God' El Gibbor... obviously pointing to Jesus
in the next page 'El Gibbor' is said to be 'the God of Jacob'

 

[RodISHI]

Here ya go hobelim a behemoth described by carnal precepts....

 

[hobelim]

No doubt that subtle changes were made in scripture as well in belief and practice to fit their narrative after the roman church usurped authority over all of Christianity. Not to mention the destruction of all other documents and sects that did not seem to support their perverse views.

Even so, that fact demonstrates the existence of an earlier narrative and an earlier set of beliefs and practices different than and even opposed to church dogma about an edible mangod, the echoes of which remain preserved in the documents that did survive concealed by the figurative language of the prophets that the superstitious could never grasp much less alter or repress..

Thats why even the Pope doesn't know that Jesus was teaching a new way to interpret kosher law that had been lost to time since the death of Moses when he said, eat my flesh. The command to eat my flesh, bread from heaven, seems to support the the beliefs and practices of partaking in the divine nature of Mithras by eating consecrated bread by those who for centuries had already used their severe austerity as a basis for a false claim to moral authority.

Thats why they didn't suppress all of the gospels.

Spirit and spiritual hosts cannot be justified with those that have a carnal mindset. I was going back through my notes doing a few small corrections and additions in defining historical finds of Ashteroth, manna (corn to make the bread/wafers that taste like honey from heaven) and nuts (Nu Nut) fit right in the whole if you can grasp it. Lots of fun stuff looking at it all as it confirms what I have seen in the spirit.

To a carnally minded human still living in a garden of their own pleasures (eden) it sounds and looks something like this;

You would do better to accept your carnal nature and give up your spiritual delusions.

How do you ever expect to find peace in this world by cutting yourself in half?

No halving to it. It is rather like being made whole again after spending years knowing something was missing but not knowing what all exactly it was that wasn't wholly there in the past.

Did you read the gospels and come to the conclusion that Jesus was some sort of austere self-loathing wonder worker with his head in the clouds and detached in every way from what you would call the carnal minded world?

Even though he spent a lot of time eating and drinking and partying with sinners and prostitutes scoffing at the established ideas of holiness while keeping company with all sorts of bad characters... according to the story that is.

 

[hobelim]

Here ya go hobelim a behemoth described by carnal precepts....

lol... awesome!


Matty told Hatty that's the thing to do
Get you someone pretty to pull the wool with you.


Do you want to do the wooly bully ?

 

[RodISHI]

No doubt that subtle changes were made in scripture as well in belief and practice to fit their narrative after the roman church usurped authority over all of Christianity. Not to mention the destruction of all other documents and sects that did not seem to support their perverse views.

Even so, that fact demonstrates the existence of an earlier narrative and an earlier set of beliefs and practices different than and even opposed to church dogma about an edible mangod, the echoes of which remain preserved in the documents that did survive concealed by the figurative language of the prophets that the superstitious could never grasp much less alter or repress..

Thats why even the Pope doesn't know that Jesus was teaching a new way to interpret kosher law that had been lost to time since the death of Moses when he said, eat my flesh. The command to eat my flesh, bread from heaven, seems to support the the beliefs and practices of partaking in the divine nature of Mithras by eating consecrated bread by those who for centuries had already used their severe austerity as a basis for a false claim to moral authority.

Thats why they didn't suppress all of the gospels.

Spirit and spiritual hosts cannot be justified with those that have a carnal mindset. I was going back through my notes doing a few small corrections and additions in defining historical finds of Ashteroth, manna (corn to make the bread/wafers that taste like honey from heaven) and nuts (Nu Nut) fit right in the whole if you can grasp it. Lots of fun stuff looking at it all as it confirms what I have seen in the spirit.

To a carnally minded human still living in a garden of their own pleasures (eden) it sounds and looks something like this;

You would do better to accept your carnal nature and give up your spiritual delusions.

How do you ever expect to find peace in this world by cutting yourself in half?

No halving to it. It is rather like being made whole again after spending years knowing something was missing but not knowing what all exactly it was that wasn't wholly there in the past.

Did you read the gospels and come to the conclusion that Jesus was some sort of austere self-loathing wonder worker with his head in the clouds and detached in every way from what you would call the carnal minded world?

Even though he spent a lot of time eating and drinking and partying with sinners and prostitutes scoffing at the established ideas of holiness while keeping company with all sorts of bad characters... according to the story that is.

Nah, I'll leave all that to the naysayers. One has to actually walk through at least a portion of that fire to get a good line on why it exist here in this world. If one didn't how would they know the difference when truth comes? Rod has always told me better the man go to some of those places rather than the maiden. Talk about some wild ass experiences he has witnessed them both good and bad. Did I tell you I took the leader of the Hell's angels and some of his most faithful men to church when I was eleven year old? He and I had a very in-depth talk about Jesus prior to my invitation to him to come speak for himself at the little community church. To every thing a time and a season and a purpose under the sun.

 

[RodISHI]

Here ya go hobelim a behemoth described by carnal precepts....

lol... awesome!


Matty told Hatty that's the thing to do
Get you someone pretty to pull the wool with you.


Do you want to do the wooly bully ?

I am afraid I would be lousy at doing the "wooly bully" but the song sure does make me laugh.

 

[hobelim]

Here ya go hobelim a behemoth described by carnal precepts....

lol... awesome!


Matty told Hatty that's the thing to do
Get you someone pretty to pull the wool with you.


Do you want to do the wooly bully ?

I am afraid I would be lousy at doing the "wooly bully" but the song sure does make me laugh.

What? too old to dance?

or were you thinking about something else?

You have a very filthy mind!

 

[RodISHI]

Here ya go hobelim a behemoth described by carnal precepts....

lol... awesome!


Matty told Hatty that's the thing to do
Get you someone pretty to pull the wool with you.


Do you want to do the wooly bully ?

I am afraid I would be lousy at doing the "wooly bully" but the song sure does make me laugh.

What? too old to dance?

or were you thinking about something else?

You have a very filthy mind!

Filthy? Nah, I have not danced in years. The ole' bode ain't what it used to be and it is getting sort of fragile these days. Dancing takes a body not damaged by years of wear and tear. We can still listen to the music things though and even see the works were in the making way back when. Can you picture the musician angels thinking what fun it would be to go play rock'n'roll when their turn came?

 

[HaShev]

But he may be " A God", I am not sure. Only A God could have done the things he has done, like create this world, John 1:3, " All things were made by him." Only " A God" could have made all things, but Jesus is NOT the Father God, nor is he equal to his Father. Notice;


http://mit.irr.org/28-biblical-passages-which-explicitly-teach-there-only-one-god

In Isaiah 45:21 God himself speaks on the matter; "I am the Lord, there is no other God besides me!. Vs. 22, " I am God, there is none else!" When God said there is no other God besides him, Jesus was sitting right besides him, as he always is.

Its academic, Jesus is not God, but he may well be an individual God himself. They are both individuals, but only the Father is uncreated and has never died; Jesus has died before, and God cannot die!

The problem with your argument is that it does not rule one one God who is a Trinity
it actually rules out the Jesus is 'a God' yet another but smaller God argument

I see Jesus as the Good Shepherd who laid down his life, the King..
Psalms book 1: David's first book of Psalms

So you would hire a shepherd who scattered his sheep and got many of them killed?
I guess for every person firing a bad employee, another one without background checking is hiring the bum.

 

[RodISHI]

Here's another one for you hobelim. Who is the wolf devouring the prey in the morning and dividing the spoil at night?

 

[hobelim]

Here's another one for you hobelim. Who is the wolf devouring the prey in the morning and dividing the spoil at night?

I give up, who?

your hubby?

 

[RodISHI]

Here's another one for you hobelim. Who is the wolf devouring the prey in the morning and dividing the spoil at night?

I give up, who?

your hubby?

Could be something along those lines....

but the verse that one along with the toons reminds me of is here Genesis 49:27 (KJV).





Edit:
For those who are lacking in understand that haven't found wisdom yet,

John 10:12 But he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep.