Zone1 why do some Protestants think that only they are Christians and the Catholics are not?

[hobelim]

Because it has absolutely nothing to do with the timing of when Jesus was worshipped as God.

When Christians started to worship Jesus as if he was a mangod, God in the flesh, derp, is irrelevant since Jesus made it abundantly clear that he didn't think of himself as or claim to be God according to the gospel of John.

"tell my brothers, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father ; My God and your God." Jn 20:17

By saying "My Father and your Father; My God and your God" Jesus effectively eliminated any possibility that he either thought of himself as or claimed to be God." Thats the way the cookie crumbles.


You are just wrong. Jesus is not God and he made it clear he did not think of himself as or claim to be God.

If you don't have the faith to admit the TRUTH of what to everyone else with eyes that see is as obvious as a white boulder in the middle of a plowed field then you are, with your own words, exposing yourself as an actor and lying fraud. The fact that some early Christians "believed" Jesus was a triune mangod doesn't make it true.

Dingbat.

 

[ding]

When Christians started to worship Jesus as if he was a mangod, God in the flesh, derp, is irrelevant since Jesus made it clear that he didn't think of himself as or claim to be God according to the gospel of John.

"Go and tell my brothers, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father ; My God and your God." John 20:17

By saying "My Father and your Father; My God and your God" Jesus effectively eliminated any possibility that he either thought of himself as or claimed to be God."


You are just wrong. Jesus is not God and he made it clear he did not think of himself as or claim to be God.

If you don't have the faith to admit the TRUTH of what to everyone else with eyes that see is as obvious as a white boulder in the middle of a plowed field then you are, with your own words, exposing yourself as an actor and lying fraud. The fact that some early numbskulls thought Jesus was a mangod doesn't make it true.

Dingbat

When do you believe Christians first started worshipping Jesus as God and why?

 

[hobelim]

When do you believe Christians first started worshipping Jesus as God and why?

I'll tell you that, when and why, just as soon as you admit that they were wrong to do so.

 

[hadit]

When Christians started to worship Jesus as if he was a mangod, God in the flesh, derp, is irrelevant since Jesus made it abundantly clear that he didn't think of himself as or claim to be God according to the gospel of John.

"tell my brothers, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father ; My God and your God." Jn 20:17

By saying "My Father and your Father; My God and your God" Jesus effectively eliminated any possibility that he either thought of himself as or claimed to be God." Thats the way the cookie crumbles.


You are just wrong. Jesus is not God and he made it clear he did not think of himself as or claim to be God.

If you don't have the faith to admit the TRUTH of what to everyone else with eyes that see is as obvious as a white boulder in the middle of a plowed field then you are, with your own words, exposing yourself as an actor and lying fraud. The fact that some early Christians "believed" Jesus was a triune mangod doesn't make it true.

Dingbat.

As usual, you ignore large portions of Scripture to allow yourself to focus on a small, out of context quote.

5: In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:
6: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
7: rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.
8: And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to death—even death on a cross!

Then, of course, we have where Jesus explicitly took for Himself one of God's titles, "I am", something for which the Jews around Him wanted to kill Him. Naturally, you will ignore that as well.

 

[hobelim]

Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;

There is only one true living God, one God who is Spirit, incorporeal, who has no visible shape or material form, and there is no other God in existence that is either above, below, or equal to him. This precludes any possibility of the existence of a coequal trinity that diddled a virgin to become a sacrificial Jewish man. DUH.

If Jesus claimed to be God then he was insane. I showed you in his own words that Jesus didn't claim to be God.

You cite a few verses from a letter of Paul, Paul, the same rabid anti Christian persecutor present and in agreement with the stoning of Stephen, the first martyr, the same Roman shill who exhorted early Christians to submit to worldly government authorities when Nero was caesar to refute what Jesus said about himself? WTF

Pathetic.

 

[BreezeWood]

and how the romans failed to respond by rearresting the survivor of their torment to resubmit the event over again without an ambiguous outcome. pilate surly would have been curious or have made mention of the subject. not to mention the jews who demanded their crucifixion to not clarify its outcome.

And if that were true would have been recorded by the non-Christian historians which it was not.

which only can have a single conclusion - there was not a resurrection ... if not for the above but for the non recording of the event as having never happened.

jesus knew their fate from the beginning.

 

[hadit]

There is only one true living God, one God who is Spirit, incorporeal, who has no visible shape or material form, and there is no other God in existence that is either above, below, or equal to him. This precludes any possibility of the existence of a coequal trinity that diddled a virgin to become a sacrificial Jewish man. DUH.

If Jesus claimed to be God then he was insane. I showed you in his own words that Jesus didn't claim to be God.

You cite a few verses from a letter of Paul, Paul, the same rabid anti Christian persecutor present and in agreement with the stoning of Stephen, the first martyr, the same Roman shill who exhorted early Christians to submit to worldly government authorities when Nero was caesar to refute what Jesus said about himself? WTF

Pathetic.

There you go again, picking and choosing the pieces of Scripture you honor and what you ignore.

And, as expected, you completely ignored what Jesus said about Himself. The Jews of His day knew immediately exactly what He was claiming when He took for Himself one of God's titles and tried to kill Him for it. Then He had the audacity to forgive sins, something only God can do. Basically, you're saying that the Jews of that day didn't know their own Law and that you know it better than they did. Not really surprising.

 

[ding]

I'll tell you that, when and why, just as soon as you admit that they were wrong to do so.

I don’t think you will ever say when you believe Christians began worshipping Jesus as God because you know I would destroy your argument.

 

[there4eyeM]

Jesus said he and the father were one. He also said the father was greater than he. It would appear that this argument misses something.

 

[hobelim]

There you go again, picking and choosing the pieces of Scripture you honor and what you ignore.

But isn't that what you are doing ? Ignoring the most fundamental truth about God? Thats he is one, not three?

And most definitely not human.

God is not a man, so he does not lie; he is not human so he does not change his mind.

 

[hobelim]

Jesus said he and the father were one. He also said the father was greater than he. It would appear that this argument misses something.

Being one with the Father is being of one accord. Jesus was in agreement with the judgments and wisdom of God as revealed in the Law. The Father being greater than Jesus just shows that he did not claim to be God.

 

[hobelim]

I don’t think you will ever say when you believe Christians began worshipping Jesus as God because you know I would destroy your argument.

The point is moot since Jesus was not God. He may have revealed in words exactly what he leaned from God and so to learn from Jesus amounts to learning from God but that doesn't make him God anymore than a student who repeats what they learned from a teacher makes them that teacher, the source of that teaching.

 

[hobelim]

Basically, you're saying that the Jews of that day didn't know their own Law and that you know it better than they did. Not really surprising.

No.

I am saying that most Jews of that day didn't know the hidden meaning of the Law, just like many still don't know the hidden meaning to this day, which was being withheld by a few elite from everyone including the Jewish laity.

On the appointment of presbyters.

When these men have undergone, with blamelessness of conduct, a two year preparation in the fundamentals of the community, they shall be segregated as especially sacred among the formal members of the community. Any knowledge which the expositor of the Law may posses but which may have to remain arcane to the ordinary layman, HE SHALL NOT KEEP HIDDEN FROM THEM; for in their case there need be no fear that it might induce apostasy.


On religious discussion.

No one is to engage in discussion or disputation with men of ill repute; and in the company of froward men everyone is to abstain from talk about (KEEP HIDDEN) the meaning of the Law.

Dead Sea Scrolls, manual of discipline.



Thats why Jesus said, "No one lights a candle and then hides it under a bushel. They put it on the lamp stand so everyone in the room can see" And thats why some exclaimed,"Where did he get this teaching!" not because it was unknown, never heard before, but because it was supposed to be kept secret especially from froward men of ill repute like Jesus who was a "sinner" always in bad company. And they were right. Jesus was a "sinner" but only according to the most perverse superficial literal interpretation of the words used in the Law possible.

 

[hadit]

But isn't that what you are doing ? Ignoring the most fundamental truth about God? Thats he is one, not three?

And most definitely not human.

God is not a man, so he does not lie; he is not human so he does not change his mind.

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2: The same was in the beginning with God.
3: All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
4: In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
5: And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

You are not comprehending.

 

[hobelim]

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2: The same was in the beginning with God.
3: All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
4: In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
5: And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

You are not comprehending.

In Greek the word for God is Ho Theos. Theos without the definite article Ho before it means godlike or like God.

Therefore the proper translation would be,

In the beginning was Logos, (the Word) Divine reasoning, and the Word (logos) was with God (Ho Theos) and the Word was theos, (like God).

In him was life; and the life was the light of men. Life being the promise for fulfilling the Laws demands.

The light that shines in the darkness is the Law, a light to the nations, and the darkness has never mastered it,



Not to worry!

I have.

 

[BreezeWood]

when ... Christians began worshipping Jesus as God

the 4th century when they, the crucifiers madeup christianity to begin with ...

 

[BreezeWood]

As usual, you ignore large portions of Scripture to allow yourself to focus on a small, out of context quote.
....

Then, of course, we have where Jesus explicitly took for Himself one of God's titles, "I am", something for which the Jews around Him wanted to kill Him. Naturally, you will ignore that as well.

it's called - setting up the innocent itinerant - by both (we) and judaism to remain unblemished for their own agenda.

 

[hadit]

In Greek the word for God is Ho Theos. Theos without the definite article Ho before it means godlike or like God.

Therefore the proper translation would be,

In the beginning was Logos, (the Word) Divine reasoning, and the Word (logos) was with God (Ho Theos) and the Word was theos, (like God).



The light that shines in the darkness is the Law, a light to the nations, and the darkness has never mastered it,



Not to worry!

I have.

"Before Abraham was, I AM". You don't lightly take one of God's titles as your own.

 

[there4eyeM]

Jesus said he and the father were one. He also said the father was greater than he. It would appear that this argument misses something.

Isn't this "God" one? Can this "God" be divided up? Did Jesus say, "the father and I agree", or were his words as quoted above? Is ordinary language and its uses able to encompass "God"?

 

[hobelim]

Did Jesus say, "the father and I agree"

Yes.