How Jesus became god'... from not being one. Bart Ehrman.

[bottlecap]

HE sent his SON, JESUS, to redeem mankind.

So, God and 'his son' aren't the same and 'the son' is subjugated to 'the father'.

There are certainly many verses in the Bible that imply that. Others might say that JESUS shed HIS Divinity when HE was born in a human body, so that HE could actually suffer as any other man or woman.

But you raise a good point as Christians have argued for centuries about the relationship between the FATHER and the SON, often violently. My position is that GOD is a Power so far beyond our comprehension that HIS relationship with HIS SON is not knowable. What I do know is that I am a sinner saved by GRACE.

 

[james bond]

He had a relationship with the Creator of existence then he didn't have a relationship with the Creator of existence. The book had nothing to do with it. It was human suffering he couldn't wrap his head around, not what was written in some book.

He's only one Bible scholar. I would think almost all do not become agnostic atheist. Basically, he's saying one cannot know about the presence of a deity due to no faith and then he claims to be an atheist due to faith in no God/gods. He sounds like a confused scholar.

I think he'd agree with the former but not the latter. Although you've managed to confuse me.

Let's talk about you since Mr. Ehrman isn't here to defend himself, answer questions, or give an account of himself. I did listen to his explanation of being an agnostic-atheist on youtube and his blog.

>> Is there a God that parted the Red Sea or came to earth to die for our sins? Those I'm 100% sure are false. That makes me an atheist. Ehrman explains himself differently but that is mine.<<

I would agree that you are an atheist because you do not believe in Jesus and how he came to Earth to save us. This is the most important fundamental belief to be saved. This is because you have no belief nor faith in the person Jesus and he as God and creator from the beginning.

Instead, you have faith that Jesus doesn't exist because of your belief. I don't think it goes that much further than a cursory examination of the Bible.

>> The book had nothing to do with it. It was human suffering he couldn't wrap his head around, not what was written in some book.<<

Next, you bring in human suffering which I think you are saying is what caused Mr. Ehrman to change his mind from being a believer. I don't think that was it. From what he says, it does sound that he wasn't a genuine believer. He was able to convert his family or rather lead them to his Christian beliefs when he was young. However, when he became "agnostic," they didn't follow him back. He called himself a liberal believer.

As for the reasons for you being agnostic, that sounds like you aren't sure of creation science nor evolution. Most people have read about it to generally have formed an opinion. Usually, it is based on their faith of whether they believe in God/gods or not.

 

[alang1216]

As for the reasons for you being agnostic, that sounds like you aren't sure of creation science nor evolution. Most people have read about it to generally have formed an opinion. Usually, it is based on their faith of whether they believe in God/gods or not.

No, you have it backwards. It is evidence that makes me an atheist. Based on the available evidence, I have absolutely no doubt that the Earth is 4.5+ billion years old and that all life evolved from a common ancestor. I don't see any evidence of an intelligence behind what has taken place in those years, the evidence I do see points to natural processes. That is why I consider myself an atheist.

What I don't know is what existed BEFORE the Big Bang. Since there is no evidence for either an eternal or a created universe I can't rule out a creator so that makes me an agnostic. The only faith I have is faith in myself and my ability to reason and examine evidence.

 

[james bond]

As for the reasons for you being agnostic, that sounds like you aren't sure of creation science nor evolution. Most people have read about it to generally have formed an opinion. Usually, it is based on their faith of whether they believe in God/gods or not.

No, you have it backwards. It is evidence that makes me an atheist. Based on the available evidence, I have absolutely no doubt that the Earth is 4.5+ billion years old and that all life evolved from a common ancestor. I don't see any evidence of an intelligence behind what has taken place in those years, the evidence I do see points to natural processes. That is why I consider myself an atheist.

What I don't know is what existed BEFORE the Big Bang. Since there is no evidence for either an eternal or a created universe I can't rule out a creator so that makes me an agnostic. The only faith I have is faith in myself and my ability to reason and examine evidence.

It only sounds backwards to you. You are one of those who says, "Show me the proof" first. You just cannot figure out how complex life is and how it started. Maybe you can understand based on an educated person's opinion or hypothesis better than what you claim to be looking for the evidence for God, the creator.

To become a true believer, learn how God exists, and let him into your life, it takes faith in Jesus first. There is no other way. He was the creator of the universe and life in it. Once a person believes, then God comes into their life and the Bible starts to come alive. I don't think whether one reads the Bible first or after makes that much of a difference, but I'm not sure.

So, that's how one eliminates atheism. Atheism is also based on faith or a belief in no God/gods. Then they cannot accept a Jesus and there is the Antibible of Evolution for them. It describes the science of atheism and it removed their competitors of those scientists who believed in God and creation science. It removed those scientists who were some of the greatest scientists in history before the 1850s and created a false science which we have today that leads people astray. When one hears these scientists and educated people, scholars like Bart Ehrman, then we may as well be listening to Satan talking through the snake in the garden. Unbeknownst to them, as Satan loves to hide, it is Satan who has come into their lives. He tempts them into doing his wishes.

Now, what about God and the atheist people? He still warns them about the path they are taking, but they do not listen or are oblivious to his warnings. He warns them they are going down the wrong path, but Satan continues to tempt and sways them to follow his path. It will ALWAYS be that way whether we are a genuine believer or genuine unbeliever.

 

[alang1216]

It only sounds backwards to you. You are one of those who says, "Show me the proof" first. You just cannot figure out how complex life is and how it started. Maybe you can understand based on an educated person's opinion or hypothesis better than what you claim to be looking for the evidence for God, the creator.

I'm not a mathematician so I don't demand proof, I do demand evidence. I understand life exists in various stages of complexity, that gives me no problem. I can imagine how it started, I just don't have much evidence to say which of the man theories is correct.

Who is this educated person?

To become a true believer, learn how God exists, and let him into your life, it takes faith in Jesus first. There is no other way. He was the creator of the universe and life in it. Once a person believes, then God comes into their life and the Bible starts to come alive. I don't think whether one reads the Bible first or after makes that much of a difference, but I'm not sure.

I agree.

So, that's how one eliminates atheism. Atheism is also based on faith or a belief in no God/gods. Then they cannot accept a Jesus and there is the Antibible of Evolution for them. It describes the science of atheism and it removed their competitors of those scientists who believed in God and creation science. It removed those scientists who were some of the greatest scientists in history before the 1850s and created a false science which we have today that leads people astray. When one hears these scientists and educated people, scholars like Bart Ehrman, then we may as well be listening to Satan talking through the snake in the garden. Unbeknownst to them, as Satan loves to hide, it is Satan who has come into their lives. He tempts them into doing his wishes.

I know nothing of Satan. If there is any faith in atheism it is faith in myself: my reason, my knowledge, and my experience.

Now, what about God and the atheist people? He still warns them about the path they are taking, but they do not listen or are oblivious to his warnings. He warns them they are going down the wrong path, but Satan continues to tempt and sways them to follow his path. It will ALWAYS be that way whether we are a genuine believer or genuine unbeliever.

Does Satan tell lies? If so how do you know anything you believe is true?

 

[james bond]

It only sounds backwards to you. You are one of those who says, "Show me the proof" first. You just cannot figure out how complex life is and how it started. Maybe you can understand based on an educated person's opinion or hypothesis better than what you claim to be looking for the evidence for God, the creator.

I'm not a mathematician so I don't demand proof, I do demand evidence. I understand life exists in various stages of complexity, that gives me no problem. I can imagine how it started, I just don't have much evidence to say which of the man theories is correct.

Who is this educated person?

To become a true believer, learn how God exists, and let him into your life, it takes faith in Jesus first. There is no other way. He was the creator of the universe and life in it. Once a person believes, then God comes into their life and the Bible starts to come alive. I don't think whether one reads the Bible first or after makes that much of a difference, but I'm not sure.

I agree.

So, that's how one eliminates atheism. Atheism is also based on faith or a belief in no God/gods. Then they cannot accept a Jesus and there is the Antibible of Evolution for them. It describes the science of atheism and it removed their competitors of those scientists who believed in God and creation science. It removed those scientists who were some of the greatest scientists in history before the 1850s and created a false science which we have today that leads people astray. When one hears these scientists and educated people, scholars like Bart Ehrman, then we may as well be listening to Satan talking through the snake in the garden. Unbeknownst to them, as Satan loves to hide, it is Satan who has come into their lives. He tempts them into doing his wishes.

I know nothing of Satan. If there is any faith in atheism it is faith in myself: my reason, my knowledge, and my experience.

Now, what about God and the atheist people? He still warns them about the path they are taking, but they do not listen or are oblivious to his warnings. He warns them they are going down the wrong path, but Satan continues to tempt and sways them to follow his path. It will ALWAYS be that way whether we are a genuine believer or genuine unbeliever.

Does Satan tell lies? If so how do you know anything you believe is true?

The educated people are many, who are agnostic or atheist, such as Peter Singer, Michael Martin, Kai Nielsen, Quentin Smith, or Daniel Dennett. Plenty more

We have the evidence of how the universe, Earth, and everything in it started in the Bible. It shows the steps and took six days with the seventh being rest. The evidence we find about the world scientifically backs up what the Bible states.

Satan was an angel called Lucifer first, but challenged God and wanted an equal position as him as he acquired much power and became top angel. Instead, he and his demons or followers were cast down upon Earth as soon as possible at the speed of light. He became Satan and is the masquerader of light. Jesus is also the light or visible light. Thus, he uses lies and trickery in order to fool humans into following him and doing what he wants. He also loves to hide, so the persons following him won't be aware that they are. I can't even make a good argument for Satan because of this power. I respect him for his power and treachery. He's just too smart for a human to challenge him. He is so powerful that trying to find evidence for Satan is not a winning argument. Even if you had irrefutable evidence, people would not believe you. Yet, one can just tell him to go away or get lost and he'll disappear, i.e. people will have to somehow want him to continue with his temptations. It would be better to argue for the evidence of Jesus or God.

Just having belief in your own powers won't be enough to avoid Satan's temptations. You have to not fall for his temptations (difficult to do because he knows your weaknesses) and tell him to get lost. I mean a person reading about evolution or Darwin isn't just going to stop reading about it because of being warned it is the devil's handbook.

Yes, Satan tells lies and one knows because Satan has a rebellious nature. Because of this he will contradict what God has said and commanded (Ten Commandments). Evolution is the perfect contradiction and throughout the history of humankind, we see the ten commandments being violated.

 

[alang1216]

It only sounds backwards to you. You are one of those who says, "Show me the proof" first. You just cannot figure out how complex life is and how it started. Maybe you can understand based on an educated person's opinion or hypothesis better than what you claim to be looking for the evidence for God, the creator.

I'm not a mathematician so I don't demand proof, I do demand evidence. I understand life exists in various stages of complexity, that gives me no problem. I can imagine how it started, I just don't have much evidence to say which of the man theories is correct.

Who is this educated person?

To become a true believer, learn how God exists, and let him into your life, it takes faith in Jesus first. There is no other way. He was the creator of the universe and life in it. Once a person believes, then God comes into their life and the Bible starts to come alive. I don't think whether one reads the Bible first or after makes that much of a difference, but I'm not sure.

I agree.

So, that's how one eliminates atheism. Atheism is also based on faith or a belief in no God/gods. Then they cannot accept a Jesus and there is the Antibible of Evolution for them. It describes the science of atheism and it removed their competitors of those scientists who believed in God and creation science. It removed those scientists who were some of the greatest scientists in history before the 1850s and created a false science which we have today that leads people astray. When one hears these scientists and educated people, scholars like Bart Ehrman, then we may as well be listening to Satan talking through the snake in the garden. Unbeknownst to them, as Satan loves to hide, it is Satan who has come into their lives. He tempts them into doing his wishes.

I know nothing of Satan. If there is any faith in atheism it is faith in myself: my reason, my knowledge, and my experience.

Now, what about God and the atheist people? He still warns them about the path they are taking, but they do not listen or are oblivious to his warnings. He warns them they are going down the wrong path, but Satan continues to tempt and sways them to follow his path. It will ALWAYS be that way whether we are a genuine believer or genuine unbeliever.

Does Satan tell lies? If so how do you know anything you believe is true?

The educated people are many, who are agnostic or atheist, such as Peter Singer, Michael Martin, Kai Nielsen, Quentin Smith, or Daniel Dennett. Plenty more

We have the evidence of how the universe, Earth, and everything in it started in the Bible. It shows the steps and took six days with the seventh being rest. The evidence we find about the world scientifically backs up what the Bible states.

Satan was an angel called Lucifer first, but challenged God and wanted an equal position as him as he acquired much power and became top angel. Instead, he and his demons or followers were cast down upon Earth as soon as possible at the speed of light. He became Satan and is the masquerader of light. Jesus is also the light or visible light. Thus, he uses lies and trickery in order to fool humans into following him and doing what he wants. He also loves to hide, so the persons following him won't be aware that they are. I can't even make a good argument for Satan because of this power. I respect him for his power and treachery. He's just too smart for a human to challenge him. He is so powerful that trying to find evidence for Satan is not a winning argument. Even if you had irrefutable evidence, people would not believe you. Yet, one can just tell him to go away or get lost and he'll disappear, i.e. people will have to somehow want him to continue with his temptations. It would be better to argue for the evidence of Jesus or God.

Just having belief in your own powers won't be enough to avoid Satan's temptations. You have to not fall for his temptations (difficult to do because he knows your weaknesses) and tell him to get lost. I mean a person reading about evolution or Darwin isn't just going to stop reading about it because of being warned it is the devil's handbook.

Yes, Satan tells lies and one knows because Satan has a rebellious nature. Because of this he will contradict what God has said and commanded (Ten Commandments). Evolution is the perfect contradiction and throughout the history of humankind, we see the ten commandments being violated.

So Satan is smarter than you, lies to you, is powerful and hides himself. How do you know you are not following Satan then and are not aware that you are? Could he appear to us in human form and we wouldn't even know it?

 

[james bond]

It only sounds backwards to you. You are one of those who says, "Show me the proof" first. You just cannot figure out how complex life is and how it started. Maybe you can understand based on an educated person's opinion or hypothesis better than what you claim to be looking for the evidence for God, the creator.

I'm not a mathematician so I don't demand proof, I do demand evidence. I understand life exists in various stages of complexity, that gives me no problem. I can imagine how it started, I just don't have much evidence to say which of the man theories is correct.

Who is this educated person?

To become a true believer, learn how God exists, and let him into your life, it takes faith in Jesus first. There is no other way. He was the creator of the universe and life in it. Once a person believes, then God comes into their life and the Bible starts to come alive. I don't think whether one reads the Bible first or after makes that much of a difference, but I'm not sure.

I agree.

So, that's how one eliminates atheism. Atheism is also based on faith or a belief in no God/gods. Then they cannot accept a Jesus and there is the Antibible of Evolution for them. It describes the science of atheism and it removed their competitors of those scientists who believed in God and creation science. It removed those scientists who were some of the greatest scientists in history before the 1850s and created a false science which we have today that leads people astray. When one hears these scientists and educated people, scholars like Bart Ehrman, then we may as well be listening to Satan talking through the snake in the garden. Unbeknownst to them, as Satan loves to hide, it is Satan who has come into their lives. He tempts them into doing his wishes.

I know nothing of Satan. If there is any faith in atheism it is faith in myself: my reason, my knowledge, and my experience.

Now, what about God and the atheist people? He still warns them about the path they are taking, but they do not listen or are oblivious to his warnings. He warns them they are going down the wrong path, but Satan continues to tempt and sways them to follow his path. It will ALWAYS be that way whether we are a genuine believer or genuine unbeliever.

Does Satan tell lies? If so how do you know anything you believe is true?

The educated people are many, who are agnostic or atheist, such as Peter Singer, Michael Martin, Kai Nielsen, Quentin Smith, or Daniel Dennett. Plenty more

We have the evidence of how the universe, Earth, and everything in it started in the Bible. It shows the steps and took six days with the seventh being rest. The evidence we find about the world scientifically backs up what the Bible states.

Satan was an angel called Lucifer first, but challenged God and wanted an equal position as him as he acquired much power and became top angel. Instead, he and his demons or followers were cast down upon Earth as soon as possible at the speed of light. He became Satan and is the masquerader of light. Jesus is also the light or visible light. Thus, he uses lies and trickery in order to fool humans into following him and doing what he wants. He also loves to hide, so the persons following him won't be aware that they are. I can't even make a good argument for Satan because of this power. I respect him for his power and treachery. He's just too smart for a human to challenge him. He is so powerful that trying to find evidence for Satan is not a winning argument. Even if you had irrefutable evidence, people would not believe you. Yet, one can just tell him to go away or get lost and he'll disappear, i.e. people will have to somehow want him to continue with his temptations. It would be better to argue for the evidence of Jesus or God.

Just having belief in your own powers won't be enough to avoid Satan's temptations. You have to not fall for his temptations (difficult to do because he knows your weaknesses) and tell him to get lost. I mean a person reading about evolution or Darwin isn't just going to stop reading about it because of being warned it is the devil's handbook.

Yes, Satan tells lies and one knows because Satan has a rebellious nature. Because of this he will contradict what God has said and commanded (Ten Commandments). Evolution is the perfect contradiction and throughout the history of humankind, we see the ten commandments being violated.

So Satan is smarter than you, lies to you, is powerful and hides himself. How do you know you are not following Satan then and are not aware that you are? Could he appear to us in human form and we wouldn't even know it?

I meant I recognize Satan is super powerful with his temptations is the reason my giving him such credit. That said, I know I'm not a follower of Satan because of my FAITH in Jesus; What I believe is the truth will always stay with me because the Holy Spirit is part of me and Jesus and what he did is in my heart now.

It's like you have faith in no God/gods as the sucka free, but are open minded enough to be given the evidence. However, this can't happen either .

 

[alang1216]

Thus, he uses lies and trickery in order to fool humans into following him and doing what he wants.

I meant I recognize Satan is super powerful with his temptations is the reason my giving him such credit. That said, I know I'm not a follower of Satan because of my FAITH in Jesus; What I believe is the truth will always stay with me because the Holy Spirit is part of me and Jesus and what he did is in my heart now.

Sounds like something someone being tricked by Satan would say.

 

[LittleNipper]

As for the reasons for you being agnostic, that sounds like you aren't sure of creation science nor evolution. Most people have read about it to generally have formed an opinion. Usually, it is based on their faith of whether they believe in God/gods or not.

No, you have it backwards. It is evidence that makes me an atheist. Based on the available evidence, I have absolutely no doubt that the Earth is 4.5+ billion years old and that all life evolved from a common ancestor. I don't see any evidence of an intelligence behind what has taken place in those years, the evidence I do see points to natural processes. That is why I consider myself an atheist.

What I don't know is what existed BEFORE the Big Bang. Since there is no evidence for either an eternal or a created universe I can't rule out a creator so that makes me an agnostic. The only faith I have is faith in myself and my ability to reason and examine evidence.

I believe the earth is only as old as GOD created it and you imagine it has to be...

 

[alang1216]

As for the reasons for you being agnostic, that sounds like you aren't sure of creation science nor evolution. Most people have read about it to generally have formed an opinion. Usually, it is based on their faith of whether they believe in God/gods or not.

No, you have it backwards. It is evidence that makes me an atheist. Based on the available evidence, I have absolutely no doubt that the Earth is 4.5+ billion years old and that all life evolved from a common ancestor. I don't see any evidence of an intelligence behind what has taken place in those years, the evidence I do see points to natural processes. That is why I consider myself an atheist.

What I don't know is what existed BEFORE the Big Bang. Since there is no evidence for either an eternal or a created universe I can't rule out a creator so that makes me an agnostic. The only faith I have is faith in myself and my ability to reason and examine evidence.

I believe the earth is only as old as GOD created it and you imagine it has to be...

There is evidence that Earth is 4.5 billion years old. If God created the Earth 6,000 years ago, why did he make it appear it is so much older? Why did he make stars that we can see so far away that their light should take millions of years to reach us. Why not have them just blink into view as their 6,000 year old light reaches us. Why do we need galaxies that we can see only with modern telescopes?

 

[Disir]

Startlingly, a lecture at the Atheist org.. Freedom From Religion Foundation/FFRF.. by one of thee most Renowned professor's of Religious Studies, Bart Ehrman.
One of the world's foremost experts on Christianity/NT.
Can't say he doesn't know his topic.
99% of the time he is invited to speak to religious groups.
But, as it turns out, he's an "Agnostic and an Atheist."
A good bit of the youtube on his 'new' book, 'How Jesus became God' [2014]
I've seen him several times on PBS'/other religious documentaries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bart_D._Ehrman

Bart D. Ehrman (1955) is an American New Testament scholar, currently the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.​

​

According to the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, he is one of North America's Leading scholars in his field, having written and edited 27 books, including three college textbooks.​

He has also achieved acclaim at the popular level, authoring five New York Times bestsellers.​

Ehrman's work focuses on textual criticism of the New Testament, the historical Jesus, and the development of early Christianity.​

[.....]​

`

I have owned a few of his books. I have also watched several of his debates. He's ok. I like a different writing style and prefer history of and, because I like the "history of", I have found a few discrepancies in his writing.

 

[james bond]

There is evidence that Earth is 4.5 billion years old. If God created the Earth 6,000 years ago, why did he make it appear it is so much older? Why did he make stars that we can see so far away that their light should take millions of years to reach us. Why not have them just blink into view as their 6,000 year old light reaches us. Why do we need galaxies that we can see only with modern telescopes?

C'mon, you keep blaming God for the contradictions when it's Satan.

The evidence of Earth as 4.5 B years old is not conclusive, but based on biased assumptions by the scientists of atheism. When one needs long time, it took a long time for them to get it for Darwin. Evolution needed around 4.5 billion of years for it to happen according to Darwin; he would not accept 3 billion years old Earth. Thus, Darwin was already dead when the atheist scientists came up with 4.5 billion years old Earth. Anyway, the Earth can be young based on time dilation of light from the distant light. In other words, your light years away is distance and not time.

 

[LittleNipper]

As for the reasons for you being agnostic, that sounds like you aren't sure of creation science nor evolution. Most people have read about it to generally have formed an opinion. Usually, it is based on their faith of whether they believe in God/gods or not.

No, you have it backwards. It is evidence that makes me an atheist. Based on the available evidence, I have absolutely no doubt that the Earth is 4.5+ billion years old and that all life evolved from a common ancestor. I don't see any evidence of an intelligence behind what has taken place in those years, the evidence I do see points to natural processes. That is why I consider myself an atheist.

What I don't know is what existed BEFORE the Big Bang. Since there is no evidence for either an eternal or a created universe I can't rule out a creator so that makes me an agnostic. The only faith I have is faith in myself and my ability to reason and examine evidence.

I believe the earth is only as old as GOD created it and you imagine it has to be...

There is evidence that Earth is 4.5 billion years old. If God created the Earth 6,000 years ago, why did he make it appear it is so much older? Why did he make stars that we can see so far away that their light should take millions of years to reach us. Why not have them just blink into view as their 6,000 year old light reaches us. Why do we need galaxies that we can see only with modern telescopes?

Because according to the molecular structure of the minerals and rocks and gases GOD created to sustain life, as HE wished it to be, those rocks, minerals, gases, etc., had to be as they were designed when they were needed. There are of course angelic beings who can enjoy the universe wherever it exists. It is an arrogant scientist who insists that what we see should appear different if the universe was younger. Such are not taking into account the obvious necessity of a healthy environment for man and animals in which to exist comfortably. When an artist paints a picture of a tree, does he start with an acorn, or does he simply design a finished tree as he sees fit? Would anyone suggest that the said artist was being misleading? Would Adam and Eve have navels? Adam was created from the dust: however, he was indeed a designed prototype for the human race. Adam had no "mother", yet it doesn't seem unreasonable that he would have had a navel. And if the universe began as a material revelation of GOD to HIS created beings, would HE not design and create something that surpasses human reasoning ---awesome in fact.

 

[buttercup]

He remained a liberal Christian for 15 years, but later became an agnostic atheist after struggling with the philosophical problems of evil and suffering.[1][2][5]

Now there's a great reason not to believe in a Creator.

Exactly. Of all the arguments against God, that is one of the weakest, if not the weakest of all, and easiest to disprove. So I can only conclude that that wasn't the actual reason, but it was something else entirely. As someone else said, I think it's because he was never actually saved in the first place. When one is a professed christian but still in their natural state, they will eventually fall away, since they never experienced spiritual regeneration and a true, transformative relationship with God.

The atheists here would not understand that, and I don't expect them to.

 

[ESay]

My position is that GOD is a Power so far beyond our comprehension that HIS relationship with HIS SON is not knowable.

Yes, that is the most common explanation I hear from Christians about the Trinity.

thers might say that JESUS shed HIS Divinity when HE was born in a human body, so that HE could actually suffer as any other man or woman

From here one more question arises I cant yet receive an answer - what was a 'need' for God to do that. What I hear, in short, - to make an ideal lamb for sacrifice on behalf of all humans.

But this explanation turns upside down the very idea of sacrifices - repenting the sins of someone who offers this sacrifice. In other words, the sacrifice is offered by the sinner to higher force. Not the other way around.

 

[bottlecap]

My position is that GOD is a Power so far beyond our comprehension that HIS relationship with HIS SON is not knowable.

Yes, that is the most common explanation I hear from Christians about the Trinity.

thers might say that JESUS shed HIS Divinity when HE was born in a human body, so that HE could actually suffer as any other man or woman

From here one more question arises I cant yet receive an answer - what was a 'need' for God to do that. What I hear, in short, - to make an ideal lamb for sacrifice on behalf of all humans.

But this explanation turns upside down the very idea of sacrifices - repenting the sins of someone who offers this sacrifice. In other words, the sacrifice is offered by the sinner to higher force. Not the other way around.

The righteous gap between God and man is FAR too great for any sacrifice from a human to be adequate to settle the score, or pay for the sins, of a single person. GOD'S SON could do that, not only for one person, but for the whole world in HIS time and in the future.

Also, on that point, GOD is actually helping out mankind here as CLEARLY the intervention of HIS SON in the affairs of mankind is a GIFT from heaven. Mankind fell at the hands of a very Powerful, Eternal Malignant Being, the fallen angel Lucifer, aka the Devil... so GOD sent HIS SON to earth, which levels the playing field.

 

[alang1216]

There is evidence that Earth is 4.5 billion years old. If God created the Earth 6,000 years ago, why did he make it appear it is so much older? Why did he make stars that we can see so far away that their light should take millions of years to reach us. Why not have them just blink into view as their 6,000 year old light reaches us. Why do we need galaxies that we can see only with modern telescopes?

C'mon, you keep blaming God for the contradictions when it's Satan.

The evidence of Earth as 4.5 B years old is not conclusive, but based on biased assumptions by the scientists of atheism. When one needs long time, it took a long time for them to get it for Darwin. Evolution needed around 4.5 billion of years for it to happen according to Darwin; he would not accept 3 billion years old Earth. Thus, Darwin was already dead when the atheist scientists came up with 4.5 billion years old Earth. Anyway, the Earth can be young based on time dilation of light from the distant light. In other words, your light years away is distance and not time.

You know less about Darwin, he thought the Earth was only a few hundred million years old, than you do about time dilation, a term you heard and threw in others were as ignorant of what it means as you are.

We have directly measured many natural processes (speed of light and distance to stars & galaxies, radioisotope decay, rates of sedimentation, speed of continental drift, rates of evolution, etc.) and they ALL point to a very old earth. Seems to me, either God is playing tricks on us or he has allowed Satan to play tricks on us. Personally, I'd say the buck stops on God's desk.

 

[alang1216]

As for the reasons for you being agnostic, that sounds like you aren't sure of creation science nor evolution. Most people have read about it to generally have formed an opinion. Usually, it is based on their faith of whether they believe in God/gods or not.

No, you have it backwards. It is evidence that makes me an atheist. Based on the available evidence, I have absolutely no doubt that the Earth is 4.5+ billion years old and that all life evolved from a common ancestor. I don't see any evidence of an intelligence behind what has taken place in those years, the evidence I do see points to natural processes. That is why I consider myself an atheist.

What I don't know is what existed BEFORE the Big Bang. Since there is no evidence for either an eternal or a created universe I can't rule out a creator so that makes me an agnostic. The only faith I have is faith in myself and my ability to reason and examine evidence.

I believe the earth is only as old as GOD created it and you imagine it has to be...

There is evidence that Earth is 4.5 billion years old. If God created the Earth 6,000 years ago, why did he make it appear it is so much older? Why did he make stars that we can see so far away that their light should take millions of years to reach us. Why not have them just blink into view as their 6,000 year old light reaches us. Why do we need galaxies that we can see only with modern telescopes?

Because according to the molecular structure of the minerals and rocks and gases GOD created to sustain life, as HE wished it to be, those rocks, minerals, gases, etc., had to be as they were designed when they were needed. There are of course angelic beings who can enjoy the universe wherever it exists. It is an arrogant scientist who insists that what we see should appear different if the universe was younger. Such are not taking into account the obvious necessity of a healthy environment for man and animals in which to exist comfortably. When an artist paints a picture of a tree, does he start with an acorn, or does he simply design a finished tree as he sees fit? Would anyone suggest that the said artist was being misleading? Would Adam and Eve have navels? Adam was created from the dust: however, he was indeed a designed prototype for the human race. Adam had no "mother", yet it doesn't seem unreasonable that he would have had a navel. And if the universe began as a material revelation of GOD to HIS created beings, would HE not design and create something that surpasses human reasoning ---awesome in fact.

Very unconvincing arguments. Can you explain why the "molecular structure of the minerals and rocks and gases GOD created to sustain life" had to look old or are you just exercising your circular logic and basically saying God did and it "surpasses human reasoning"? If if surpasses human reasoning how is it you can explain it?

That aside, can you explain why there are so many galaxies that were only visible to mankind since the invention of the telescope? What purpose do they serve?

 

[fncceo]

The title of the thread is problematic. 'How Jesus became a god' is sufficient.

If one becomes a god, it is implied that, at one point, he was not a god.

There is no need to say it.