Why was Jesus born?

[BreezeWood]

When it comes to Jesus, He only left us with two choices; He is who He says He is or He is a bad man. There are no other logical choices.

.

Only Jesus makes the claim that He is God. He compels you to make a choice.

When it comes to Jesus, He only left us with two choices; He is who He says He is or He is a bad man. There are no other logical choices.

there are a multitude of other choices for the 1st century martyr the least of which would be the one made up in the 4th century for political gain.

 

[ding]

To his credit Muhammad never claimed he was divine. Only Jesus did.

 

[BreezeWood]

To his credit Muhammad never claimed he was divine. Only Jesus did.

.

He was posthumously granted the title Divus Iulius or Divus Julius (the divine Julius or the deified Julius) by decree of the Roman Senate on 1 January 42 BC.


... did you forget Julius

 

[HaShev]

1) none of the christs claimed to be God.
Neither is Moshiach to be more then a man.
The compiled image was made a god.
2) The character is teaching son of man as another (3rd perspn tense) they say comes in his own new name. Which CLAIMED Christ is this??
How would we know if people spike and wrote for him like Breezewood pointed put his deification came from Constantine.
3) You sound like Pastor Hagee, but he went further and exclaimed in front of his huge crowd while broadcasted on TV that either Jesus was who he claimed to be or the biggest nut job. Of course Pastor Hagee doesn't take into account the other choices:
A eglomaniac con, another was the con who claimed his identity after he died to claim he had risen (remember they didn't recognize him as the same figure they had known) thus this figure who offered him popularity called satan (adversary)got his way after all making him popular by faking resurrection or by writing the acct through Baal's death scene.
Or most proven: A created character by BAD MEN (ROME=ADVERSARY'S OF ISRAEL)who are Proven to do theses things TO MANY CULTURES AND their MYTHOLOGIES and we have proved; DID CREATE THIS CREATED IMAGE THROUGH PLAGIARIZATION AND COMPILING.

Jesus is not the only compiled figure, Peter, Paul, John, Salome, Judas, James are as well. Furthermore most Christians agree the church fabricates the immaculate nature of Mary therefore they are subject to admit the same for the Jesus image. athe Christ that was Mary's son is 100bc figure proving Jesus is compiled of many with simple additional evidence pointing to that conclusion.

 

[ding]

To his credit Buddha never claimed he was divine. Only Jesus did.

 

[HaShev]

Then you are admitting only Jesus can be Lucifer the only prophet that would claim to be God.

 

[hobelim]

To his credit Buddha never claimed he was divine. Only Jesus did.

You are mistaken.

If Jesus claimed to be divine, he was insane. Its as simple as that. There is another rational way to interpret what he said that doesn't make him out to be a false prophet. You are in effect believing what he was falsely accused of by his enemies to discredit him, claiming equality with God. Even in the first century, just like today, anyone who would claim to be the living God was unquestionably mentally ill.



"But go and tell my brothers that I am ascending to my Father and their Father, my God and their God."


By saying that his God is our God Jesus effectively eliminates the possibility that he either thought of himself as God or claimed to be God.

 

[ding]

To his credit Buddha never claimed he was divine. Only Jesus did.

You are mistaken.

If Jesus claimed to be divine, he was insane. Its as simple as that. There is another rational way to interpret what he said that doesn't make him out to be a false prophet. You are in effect believing what he was falsely accused of by his enemies to discredit him, claiming equality with God. Even in the first century, just like today, anyone who would claim to be the living God was unquestionably mentally ill.



"But go and tell my brothers that I am ascending to my Father and their Father, my God and their God."


By saying that his God is our God Jesus effectively eliminates the possibility that he either thought of himself as God or claimed to be God.

There is no question as to His claim. He is either who He said He is or He is a bad man.

 

[ding]

To his credit Confucius never claimed to be divine. Only Jesus made this claim.

 

[BreezeWood]

To his credit Buddha never claimed he was divine. Only Jesus did.

You are mistaken.

If Jesus claimed to be divine, he was insane. Its as simple as that. There is another rational way to interpret what he said that doesn't make him out to be a false prophet. You are in effect believing what he was falsely accused of by his enemies to discredit him, claiming equality with God. Even in the first century, just like today, anyone who would claim to be the living God was unquestionably mentally ill.



"But go and tell my brothers that I am ascending to my Father and their Father, my God and their God."


By saying that his God is our God Jesus effectively eliminates the possibility that he either thought of himself as God or claimed to be God.

There is no question as to His claim. He is either who He said He is or He is a bad man.

.

There is no question as to His claim. He is either who He said He is or He is a bad man.

sure, if all you have is a 4th century agenda and no one is going to follow without being scared or schenangled to believe there is merit where there is non. ...


He said He is or He is a bad man

even if they said they were God obviously they were not a bad "man", only 4th century christians who try to fool people would be heart to be forced to acknowledge the truth.

 

[ding]

To his credit Buddha never claimed he was divine. Only Jesus did.

You are mistaken.

If Jesus claimed to be divine, he was insane. Its as simple as that. There is another rational way to interpret what he said that doesn't make him out to be a false prophet. You are in effect believing what he was falsely accused of by his enemies to discredit him, claiming equality with God. Even in the first century, just like today, anyone who would claim to be the living God was unquestionably mentally ill.



"But go and tell my brothers that I am ascending to my Father and their Father, my God and their God."


By saying that his God is our God Jesus effectively eliminates the possibility that he either thought of himself as God or claimed to be God.

There is no question as to His claim. He is either who He said He is or He is a bad man.

.

There is no question as to His claim. He is either who He said He is or He is a bad man.

sure, if all you have is a 4th century agenda and no one is going to follow without being scared or schenangled to believe there is merit where there is non. ...


He said He is or He is a bad man

even if they said they were God obviously they were not a bad "man", only 4th century christians who try to fool people would be heart to be forced to acknowledge the truth.

No, if He claimed He were God and it were not true, He would be a bad man. That's why He compels a choice. Good or bad. No in between.

 

[OZman]

"Very truly I tell you," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!"

Sounds familiar.
Aham Brahmasmi - वेद Veda

 

[BreezeWood]

To his credit Buddha never claimed he was divine. Only Jesus did.

You are mistaken.

If Jesus claimed to be divine, he was insane. Its as simple as that. There is another rational way to interpret what he said that doesn't make him out to be a false prophet. You are in effect believing what he was falsely accused of by his enemies to discredit him, claiming equality with God. Even in the first century, just like today, anyone who would claim to be the living God was unquestionably mentally ill.



"But go and tell my brothers that I am ascending to my Father and their Father, my God and their God."


By saying that his God is our God Jesus effectively eliminates the possibility that he either thought of himself as God or claimed to be God.

There is no question as to His claim. He is either who He said He is or He is a bad man.

.

There is no question as to His claim. He is either who He said He is or He is a bad man.

sure, if all you have is a 4th century agenda and no one is going to follow without being scared or schenangled to believe there is merit where there is non. ...


He said He is or He is a bad man

even if they said they were God obviously they were not a bad "man", only 4th century christians who try to fool people would be heart to be forced to acknowledge the truth.

No, if He claimed He were God and it were not true, He would be a bad man. That's why He compels a choice. Good or bad. No in between.

.

No, if He claimed He were God and it were not true, He would be a bad man. That's why He compels a choice. Good or bad. No in between.

we are speaking of Jesus not your 4th century book that is guilty of your portrayal that you simply ignore out of greed for an insatiable appetite to do harm. otherwise your statement is wholly without merit.

 

[ding]

"Very truly I tell you," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!"

Sounds familiar.
Aham Brahmasmi - वेद Veda

Similar but not the same. Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!" Jesus was answering the same way God first answered it, by declaring that He is existence. "I am Brahman" is speaking in the third person.

I enjoyed that website though. It was awesome. I bookmarked it. Thanks.

 

[HaShev]

posting about Abraham is problematic because Abraham learned about Shalem through Melchizedek the High Priest of Shalem. PROBLEMATIC IN MANY WAYS BECAUSE;
a)Jesus claimed to be the nemesis of Shalem (Evening Star) by claiming himself the Morning Star in Rev 22:16.
b)The NT claims Jesus is lower then the Malakhs and after the order of Melchizedek. (Book of Hebrews)
c)Melchizedek stems from:
Melchi(King) and
Zadok comes from the word,
"tsadqek" = (your righteousness)
"Melchizedek " comes from the word
"Mal_khiy-tzehthehq"
Mal_'ahkh & tsadqek is the foundation of the name or term, Mal_khiy-tzehthehq
The word "mal'akh" used in scripture, later translated to Greek "agellos", which simply means messenger. They were not messengers in the beginning of time, but "mirrored reflections," and "faint suggestions," and "vague indications". Transgressions or forbidden portaits of angels is so not to make form out of meaning of such words in context of scripture-like with "tsadqek" (meaning your righteousness).
The heritage of St Michael was the dynasty of high Zadok priests, a heritage that prevailed in the continuing Messianic line... thus the term malakh/zadok=Melchizedek.
( Hebrews 5:5 &5:6) &6:20 to 7:28.
5:10 (refers to Jesus)being designated *by God* a high priest after the order of Melchiz'edek. Melchi(king) of Righteousness
(thus Jesus can't be God, can't be Michael, and can't be over Michael the arch (MAIN) Malakh, but also can't be KING (Melchi).

Wah wah wahhhhh! Sorry no parting gifts.

You can't get past this so what did you do, instead of Teshuva you decided to repeat it knowing it was problematic=habitual in your deceptive practices. Keep top posting and flooding your own posts against forum rules, you just expose how disobedient and destructive you are.

You are as repetitive and anoying as this Breaking Bad character.

 

[ding]

To his credit, Moses never claimed he was divine. Only Jesus did that.

 

[HaShev]

See You are merely repeating your post from Yesterday at 4:38 PM.
You do so breaking forum rules about top posting and flooding. The same way you break all the simplest commands. Because you think rubbing the foot of an idol medalion will clear your sins and yet your behavior persists and you complain about the messed up world this ideology created thro7gh neglect and lack of Teshuva.

As I replied before:
You just admited Jesus was Lucifer aka son of perdition of Ezekiel 28, the only prophet claimed anointed(christ) cherub(nazarene) perfect(sinless) and a god who died by the hands of the seas(Rome)& the only one created as an image of a man.
BINGO, WE HAVE A WINNER!
NO OTHER PROPHET CAN BE DEEMED LUCIFER BUT JESUS, (WHO CAME FIRST)PERIOD!

 

[ding]

To his credit, Abraham never made the claim that he was divine. Only Jesus did that.

 

[HaShev]

So you are saying Abraham was sane then as per Hobelims point that ZOOOM went over your head.

Abraham, Moses, never made a claim they were Lucifer.
Only Jesus did that.-Rev 22:16
Brilliant!

 

[ding]

To his credit Jacob never claimed he was divine. Only Jesus did that.