Was Jesus aware of being Yahweh?

[ding]

" Discussions With Ass Clown Neophytes "

* Kid Gloves *

Everything is information. What better mechanism for information to become manifest than mind.
It seems that you are the one who is codependent upon physical state. I am free.

It is obvious that you have not attended to even an hour of computer science , because you do not understand the difference between data and information - Data vs Information - Difference and Comparison | Diffen .

Equally obvious is that you do not understand the requirements of sophisticated physical state required to garner information from data that parallels your witless conjectures about the homunculus and cognition from conception .

.

I guess taking FORTRAN Wat V in college doesn’t count?

https://arxiv.org/pdf/cond-mat/0501014.pdf

 

[ding]

What if all there is is information?

 

[luchitociencia]

" Dichotomy Of Non Falsifiable Belief "

* Codependency Contingency Upon Thoughts Of Others And Sophisticated Physical States *

I think therefore I am.

Not , I am therefore I think .

20 years ago I posted that quote in several forums.

Modesty apart, I exist, therefore I think, is my quote. It started in a forum of philosophy, when the discussion was why this branch of knowledge is becoming obsolete.

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Information Derived From Data Of Classical States "

* Not Because I Am Therefore I Think *

What if all there is is information

Data vs Information - Difference and Comparison | Diffen

What's the difference between Data and Information? There is a subtle difference between data and information. Data are the facts or details from which information is derived. Individual pieces of data are rarely useful alone. For data to become information, data needs to be put into context....

www.diffen.com

There is a subtle difference between data and information. Data are the facts or details from which information is derived.
Data is raw, unorganized facts that need to be processed. Data can be something simple and seemingly random and useless until it is organized. When data is processed, organized, structured or presented in a given context so as to make it useful, it is called information.

 

[luchitociencia]

Is this a discussion about out land dish hermitic boasting for an ability to control para normal affects ?

By no means.

This is about a simple question if Jesus thought (was aware)he was God the father, and the answer is, he didn't.

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Petty Trivialities "

* Like Claiming Foundry For Logic *

20 years ago I posted that quote in several forums.
Modesty apart, I exist, therefore I think, is my quote. It started in a forum of philosophy, when the discussion was why this branch of knowledge is becoming obsolete.

Nothing was plagiarized if that is what you are insinuating as i have zero recollection of every encountering such a response .

The response " Not , I am therefore I think . " is not mind boggling , rather it is an obvious and intuitive retort to fools who would allege in other sub forums that a fetus " thinks " from the point of conception .

 

[justinacolmena]

I have wondered how Christians rationalized Jesus' last words --- "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

If Yahweh said, "Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High" according to the Scripture, Psalms 82:6, then Jesus could well have asked this question of Pilate who condemned him, the disciples who fled, and the soldiers who did the deed and parted his garments. Or if the Romans themselves were gods or they worshiped other gods who were not faithful.

 

[ding]

" Information Derived From Data Of Classical States "

* Not Because I Am Therefore I Think *

What if all there is is information

Data vs Information - Difference and Comparison | Diffen

What's the difference between Data and Information? There is a subtle difference between data and information. Data are the facts or details from which information is derived. Individual pieces of data are rarely useful alone. For data to become information, data needs to be put into context....

www.diffen.com

There is a subtle difference between data and information. Data are the facts or details from which information is derived.
Data is raw, unorganized facts that need to be processed. Data can be something simple and seemingly random and useless until it is organized. When data is processed, organized, structured or presented in a given context so as to make it useful, it is called information.

In a logical universe everything is information.

 

[Newtonian]

R

" Information Derived From Data Of Classical States "

* Not Because I Am Therefore I Think *

What if all there is is information

Data vs Information - Difference and Comparison | Diffen

What's the difference between Data and Information? There is a subtle difference between data and information. Data are the facts or details from which information is derived. Individual pieces of data are rarely useful alone. For data to become information, data needs to be put into context....

www.diffen.com

There is a subtle difference between data and information. Data are the facts or details from which information is derived.
Data is raw, unorganized facts that need to be processed. Data can be something simple and seemingly random and useless until it is organized. When data is processed, organized, structured or presented in a given context so as to make it useful, it is called information.

Reminds me of the origin of life. While it is true that informational molecules are required for life, it is also true that there need to be translator and messenger molecules to help still other molecules use the information in functions required for life.

 

[Newtonian]

I have wondered how Christians rationalized Jesus' last words --- "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

If Yahweh said, "Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High" according to the Scripture, Psalms 82:6, then Jesus could well have asked this question of Pilate who condemned him, the disciples who fled, and the soldiers who did the deed and parted his garments. Or if the Romans themselves were gods or they worshiped other gods who were not faithful.

Well, Psalms 82:6 is using a specific definition of deity; "mighty ones." It is possible Jehovah was referring to human judges as the Targums read in Psalms 82:1 - though other manuscripts read angels. Either way - they were NOT worshiped. Jesus quoted Psalms 82:6 in his defense of his deity at John 12:34-36.

And Jesus never told us to worship him. Jesus revealed to us the greatest commandment in the Bible. It was to love who? (Mark 12:28-34 quoting Deuteronomy 6:4,5). Note, however, that many Bible translations remove the Divine Name in all of its 3 occurrences in this quote of the Hebrew text of Deuteronomy 6:4,5. These translators and copyists only remove God's name in their Bible translations - all other Bible names, including the name of false gods like Dagon, are retained - now why is that?.

For the nearly 7,000 times KJV removes the name Jehovah and substitutes Lord - see Strong's Exhaustive concordance under "Lord" and note how often Lord is substituted for H3068/Yehovah/Jehovah compared with how often the Hebrew text actually reads Lord (H113/adon and H136 adonay.

But, thankfully, KJV retains the Divine Name Jehovah 4 times - here is one example:

Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Psalm 83:18
King James Version
18 That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth.

 

[ding]

" Information Derived From Data Of Classical States "

* Not Because I Am Therefore I Think *

What if all there is is information

Data vs Information - Difference and Comparison | Diffen

What's the difference between Data and Information? There is a subtle difference between data and information. Data are the facts or details from which information is derived. Individual pieces of data are rarely useful alone. For data to become information, data needs to be put into context....

www.diffen.com

There is a subtle difference between data and information. Data are the facts or details from which information is derived.
Data is raw, unorganized facts that need to be processed. Data can be something simple and seemingly random and useless until it is organized. When data is processed, organized, structured or presented in a given context so as to make it useful, it is called information.

All that we know, including all our science, is in our consciousness. It is part, not of the superstructure, but of the foundations.

Mind stuff is deeply mysterious.

 

[justinacolmena]

Well, Psalms 82:6 is using a specific definition of deity; "mighty ones."

That cannot be so easily explained away per modern watchtower dogma. The "mighty ones" were the giants before the flood, perhaps they were injected with bovine growth hormone in utero and while growing up.

Genesis 6:4. There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

The "mighty men" before the flood were real bastards and they grew up to be registered sex offenders. They took wives of all they chose, whether the women were willing or not. And the women who got pregnant wouldn't have gotten pregnant by regular "men" — oh, no — it was the sons of God they were sleeping with.

Genesis 3:22. And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: […]

This verse is too significant to be explained away as the antediluvian "mighty men."

 

[GreatestIam]

Was Jesus aware of being Yahweh?

I have wondered how Christians rationalized Jesus' last words --- "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

Jesus seems unaware that he was God.

What did Jesus mean by forsaken?

The usual definition means abandoned or deserted.

How can one abandon or desert themselves?

If Jesus knew he was Yahweh, how did he feel about the poor reputation the Jews gave Yahweh?

Is that why the Jews tried to kill Jesus more than once before the cross got him?

Further.

Jesus also said that he and god were one, yet scriptures seem to show Jesus as Yahweh’s good side and Yahweh as the evil side.

If Jesus/Yahweh shared the some consciousness, which they would have to given that there is only one god in Christianity, why are they so different?

Regards
DL

Those weren't Jesus' last words. In his last utterance, he referred to God as his Father again. “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit!” (Lk 23:46).

Strange that there are two different sayings for his last words. Someone is lying.

That aside.

Jesus also said that he and the Father were one. If you have seen me, you have seen the father.

Into my hands I commit my spirit sounds funny. No?

Regards
DL

Strange that his last words were not, at any rate, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?". Yes, someone is lying.

That aside.

Jesus and the Father were one, yes, when they were one. Not when he was a curse.

There is another possibility. Was He actually forsaken? Or was that just the cry of His humanity as He was dying (giving up His spirit). In fact, it was a direct quote from Psalm 22--another proof that He was the promised Messiah.

Psalm 22:16-24 For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet. I may tell all my bones: they look and stare upon me. They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture. But be not thou far from me, O Lord: O my strength, haste thee to help me. Deliver my soul from the sword; my darling from the power of the dog. Save me from the lion's mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns. I will declare thy name unto my brethren: in the midst of the congregation will I praise thee. Ye that fear the Lord, praise him; all ye the seed of Jacob, glorify him; and fear him, all ye the seed of Israel. For he hath not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; neither hath he hid his face from him; but when he cried unto him, he heard.

If Jesus was not forsaken, then he was mistaken. That's not the way I see it.

His cry of dereliction on the Cross did not emanate from his physical torture; he had already suffered long painful agony by the time he cried out to God. He had already expected to suffer this miserable death; it was part of the divine plan, as evidenced in his prayers in Gethsemane. He cried out because he became a curse, redeeming his people from the curse of the law (Gal 3:10-13). “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Mt 27:46). Like David in his twenty-second Psalm, Jesus lost his connection to the tree of life. He called out not to his Father, but to God. He was a curse – not physically, unless we say that God erred in His creation of nature; on that cross, when he bore the sins of mankind, he was a spiritual curse. But then, as with David, the estrangement did not last.

While David may at times have been faithful and at times unfaithful, Jesus was resurrected.

I'm not sure what you mean by a spiritual curse. However -- there could well be other reasons for why Jesus spoke the words He did while on the cross. One of those reasons is the fulfilment of prophecy concerning Psalm 22 which spoke of the Messiah.

I don't believe you can separate His words from what comes later in the same Psalm.
The reassurance is there....neither hath He hid His face from him....

Psalm 22:24 For he hath not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; neither hath he hid his face from him; but when he cried unto him, he heard.

The fact that the fulness of the Godhead dwelt in Him bodily means He was well aware of the fact that He was not actually abandoned. In His humanity, though, I'm sure he was feeling the pain of the sin He bore in our stead.

The "fullness" was not unique to Jesus as trinitarians often assert. You have reference to Colossians 2:9 KJV btw. Note, for example:

(KJV+) Eph_3:19 AndG5037 to knowG1097 theG3588 loveG26 of Christ,G5547 which passethG5235 knowledge,G1108 thatG2443 ye might be filledG4137 withG1519 allG3956 theG3588 fulnessG4138 of God.G2316

You are correct about the 22nd Psalm - I also posted that point. Another example:

Psalms 22:18
They divide my garments among themselves,
And they cast lots for my clothing.+

Interesting that you quoted verse 24 on this thread - whom do you think Jesus cried out to - himself?

This is a good cross reference to your point - but note Jesus "learned obedience."

Hebrews 5:7-10
During his life on earth,* Christ offered up supplications and also petitions, with strong outcries and tears,+ to the One who was able to save him out of death, and he was favorably heard for his godly fear. 8 Although he was a son, he learned obedience from the things he suffered.+ 9 And after he had been made perfect,+ he became responsible for everlasting salvation to all those obeying him,+ 10 because he has been designated by God a high priest in the manner of Mel·chizʹe·dek.+

Oh, and Jehovah did abandon him to death as foretold in Isaiah chapter 53 which see. Btw, God cannot die, but Jesus died for our sins.

Your post consistently denies the fact that the man, Jesus Christ, is and was also God, the Creator of all things. Therefore, every point you made is based upon a faulty premise.

BTW - where do you see Jehovah abandoning Jesus in Isaiah 53?

You have the faulty faith based premise of thinking Jesus god and creator.

Prove it or be seen as the delusional one.

You cannot and are just another Christian who lies every time you say anything you cannot prove.

Regards
DL

 

[GreatestIam]

The disciples and even the Roman soldier -standing in front of the dead body- recognized Jesus as the Son of God.

I have no idea why people insist that Jesus was God himself.

It appears they suffer of reading comprehension problems or this is a fable invented by ignorance by new generations of believers.

You should read John 1. It is explained quite well. He is the Word who became flesh and dwelt among us. John 1:14. He is the Word -- who was WITH GOD and WAS GOD. John 1:1 GOD IS TRIUNE. The Word (God) became flesh and dwelt among us. He is called the Son of God because he was God and man...born of a woman. He created all things....therefore He is the Creator.

Jesus created the womb that grew her and the tit that fed her.

Interesting.

I wrote the above intentionally using "her", to remind you that if Jesus the Christ was born of a virgin, Jesus would have been biologically a female.

In reading, literally or not, we need to remember to use logos while reading mythos.

Regards
DL

Unfortunately you don't understand the Godhead and that causes you to make these kinds of errors. The premise that God became flesh and dwelt among us seems to elude you. God the Father, sent the Holy Spirit to impregnate a virgin, and the Son of God came into this world. He came to die for the sins of mankind. God is more than able to perform that miracle. It's the lack of faith in their Creator that keeps some men from believing God is ABLE to do exactly what He promised.

Thanks for telling me what I understand, from behind your supernatural shield where you can never be wrong, nor prove you are right.

I noted that you were a literalist who believes in all kinds of supernatural things that you claim are true, --- but cannot prove.

I will engage if you come out from behind your liars supernatural mythos, and want to use logos instead of lying.

Here is the intelligent way to talk of god.

I hope you can see how intelligent the ancients were as compared to the mental efforts that modern preachers and theists are using with the literal reading of myths.

What is God?

Further.
Bill Moyers Journal . Watch & Listen | PBS

Rabbi Hillel, the older contemporary of Jesus, said that when asked to sum up the whole of Jewish teaching, while he stood on one leg, said, "The Golden Rule. That which is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor. That is the Torah. And everything else is only commentary. Now, go and study it."

Please listen as to what is said about the literal reading of myths.

"Origen, the great second or third century Greek commentator on the Bible said that it is absolutely impossible to take these texts literally. You simply cannot do so. And he said, "God has put these sort of conundrums and paradoxes in so that we are forced to seek a deeper meaning."

Matt 7;12 So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

This is how early Gnostic Christians view the transition from reading myths properly to destructive literal reading and idol worship.



Regards
DL

 

[GreatestIam]

The fact that the Pharisees tried to stone Him for saying He was Jehovah straight out tells anyone paying attention that He does

You have no problem with Jesus asking himself why he forsook himself?

Regards
DL

 

[GreatestIam]

I have wondered how Christians rationalized Jesus' last words --- "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

If Yahweh said, "Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High" according to the Scripture, Psalms 82:6, then Jesus could well have asked this question of Pilate who condemned him, the disciples who fled, and the soldiers who did the deed and parted his garments. Or if the Romans themselves were gods or they worshiped other gods who were not faithful.

Your own quotes show how strange it would be for Jesus to doubt.

Regards
DL

 

[justinacolmena]

You have no problem with Jesus asking himself why he forsook himself?

While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The son of David. He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool? If David then call him Lord, how is he his son? And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions. [Matthew 22:41–46]

 

[GreatestIam]

You have no problem with Jesus asking himself why he forsook himself?

While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The son of David. He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool? If David then call him Lord, how is he his son? And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions. [Matthew 22:41–46]

If some fool answered me that way, I would not bother asking him anything else either.

Who was Jesus referring to? Or was he just talking about anointing?

You may not know what you are even quoting, but do try to explain.

Regards
DL

 

[ding]

The disciples and even the Roman soldier -standing in front of the dead body- recognized Jesus as the Son of God.

I have no idea why people insist that Jesus was God himself.

It appears they suffer of reading comprehension problems or this is a fable invented by ignorance by new generations of believers.

You should read John 1. It is explained quite well. He is the Word who became flesh and dwelt among us. John 1:14. He is the Word -- who was WITH GOD and WAS GOD. John 1:1 GOD IS TRIUNE. The Word (God) became flesh and dwelt among us. He is called the Son of God because he was God and man...born of a woman. He created all things....therefore He is the Creator.

Jesus created the womb that grew her and the tit that fed her.

Interesting.

I wrote the above intentionally using "her", to remind you that if Jesus the Christ was born of a virgin, Jesus would have been biologically a female.

In reading, literally or not, we need to remember to use logos while reading mythos.

Regards
DL

Unfortunately you don't understand the Godhead and that causes you to make these kinds of errors. The premise that God became flesh and dwelt among us seems to elude you. God the Father, sent the Holy Spirit to impregnate a virgin, and the Son of God came into this world. He came to die for the sins of mankind. God is more than able to perform that miracle. It's the lack of faith in their Creator that keeps some men from believing God is ABLE to do exactly what He promised.

Thanks for telling me what I understand, from behind your supernatural shield where you can never be wrong, nor prove you are right.

I noted that you were a literalist who believes in all kinds of supernatural things that you claim are true, --- but cannot prove.

I will engage if you come out from behind your liars supernatural mythos, and want to use logos instead of lying.

Here is the intelligent way to talk of god.

I hope you can see how intelligent the ancients were as compared to the mental efforts that modern preachers and theists are using with the literal reading of myths.

What is God?

Further.
Bill Moyers Journal . Watch & Listen | PBS

Rabbi Hillel, the older contemporary of Jesus, said that when asked to sum up the whole of Jewish teaching, while he stood on one leg, said, "The Golden Rule. That which is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor. That is the Torah. And everything else is only commentary. Now, go and study it."

Please listen as to what is said about the literal reading of myths.

"Origen, the great second or third century Greek commentator on the Bible said that it is absolutely impossible to take these texts literally. You simply cannot do so. And he said, "God has put these sort of conundrums and paradoxes in so that we are forced to seek a deeper meaning."

Matt 7;12 So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

This is how early Gnostic Christians view the transition from reading myths properly to destructive literal reading and idol worship.



Regards
DL

Gnostic Christians believed the God of Abraham was the evil God, dipshit.

You aren't a Gnostic Christian. You don't even know what Gnostic Christians believe.

 

[LittleNipper]

Understanding God as triune enlists the baptismal celebration phrasing in Matthew 28:19-20 (The Great Commission, as it is sometimes called). The invocation "in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit" uses the singular word "name" — onoma in Greek — rather than the plural word "names." Some will argue that onoma should be translated as "by the authority of," the primary meaning which credible Greek lexicons say this word had in New Testament times is absolutely "proper name" or "the name by which a person or thing is called."

Being baptized in the "name" of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit is a way of affirming the oneness that was in Peter's mind as he spoke of Jesus in Acts 4:12 and said: "There is no other name" by which we "must be saved."

True, the word "triune" or even trinity is not in the Bible. Those words are, however, useful in tying together what the First Century church understood about God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit without falling into a tritheism (a belief in three gods). The words Triune or Trinity conveniently wrap up into one word all the Biblical data that point to Jesus as Yahweh incarnate and to the Holy Spirit as God himself. While the word "trinity" is not actually in the Bible, the concept certainly is!

Does it seem rational to say that Yahweh expresses Himself in three separate persons, yet exists as one single entity? No, it doesn't seem rational to us human beings . . . but then the creation of an entire universe from nothing doesn't seem rational to human beings either.