Support NeoGAF

[Sabotage]

That doesn't contradict anything. God was responsible for all creation even if he used his son as a master worker. I think of it as the difference between the construction company and the foreman given responsibility for the construction.

The analogy does not work, what does the verse say....

Isaiah 44:24
Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh ALL THINGS; that stretcheth forth the heavens ALONE; that spreadeth abroad the earth BY MYSELF;

What does ALL THINGS, ALONE, BY MYSELF mean?

The LORD is the construction company and the foreman

 

[Fernando Rocker]

Proverbs 13:10 "Where there is strife, there is pride, but wisdom is found in those who take advice."

On a different subject can I ask for you all to pray for my wife and I. I put my testimony on the situation earlier in this thread (a page or two back). She left me 6 months ago and after a lot of me coming closer to God she came back. Now she is struggling again and wants to get over me. It is a little humiliating to post this on a public forum; however, I have to come to my fellow brothers and sisters in Christ when I need spiritual help. Please pray that I have the selflessness required to be a Godly husband and that my wife looks towards God in everything. Above all though, Gods will be done.

As a matter of fact, does anyone else here have any prayer requests. If I can do nothing else I can at least pray for you.

That sounds like a good idea.

In fact, I really like this thread (I know, I know) because it feels like a mini-community of people who has one thing if common: Christ.

And I don't think it would be a bad idea to pray for the people commenting in this thread or to pray for the people who comes to this thread that still have doubts.

 

[JGS]

The analogy does not work, what does the verse say....

Isaiah 44:24
Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh ALL THINGS; that stretcheth forth the heavens ALONE; that spreadeth abroad the earth BY MYSELF;

What does ALL THINGS, ALONE, BY MYSELF mean?

The LORD is the construction company and the foreman

Well, the analogy isn't really meant to be literal, just a way for me to grasp how there can be a creator, an inventor, and one who does the work. It's not to say that God can't do it or didn't do it, but he is the designer.

But let's say there is no fitting analogy at all inlcuding my incorrect one.

Are you saying that the verses I quoted are wrong, misinterpretted, or are trumped by Isaiah? I think the go in harmony with each other, but if it's different, it would be nice to know your take on it.

 

[Herpes Reasons]

Well, the analogy isn't really meant to be literal, just a way for me to grasp how there can be a creator, an inventor, and one who does the work. It's not to say that God can't do it or didn't do it, but he is the designer.

But let's say there is no fitting analogy at all inlcuding my incorrect one.

Are you saying that the verses I quoted are wrong, misinterpretted, or are trumped by Isaiah? I think the go in harmony with each other, but if it's different, it would be nice to know your take on it.

bold is correct. let's end it at that.
GOD is the sum of all 3, but a clear separate distinction of the individual 3.
i do believe jesus never referred to the Father as "GOD".
something to think about.

 

[JGS]

bold is correct. let's end it at that.
GOD is the sum of all 3, but a clear separate distinction of the individual 3.
i do believe jesus never referred to the Father as "GOD".
something to think about.

There's nothing to think about with that statement. You say that as if it makes sense.

Maybe a modern day analogy better than mine could fix that and I hope this doesn't come off as arrognant as yours.

In any event, Jesus often referred to him as his Father. What do you call your dad?

EDIT: I've been explained the trinity enough times to know that God is not the sum of the three which would make the individual parts a third of God. Each part is 100% God. In any event, neither seem logical to me.

 

[ServBotPhil]

EDIT: I've been explained the trinity enough times to know that God is not the sum of the three which would make the individual parts a third of God. Each part is 100% God. In any event, neither seem logical to me.

That would make Jesus's death irrelevant.

 

[JGS]

That would make Jesus's death irrelevant.

Agreed

I said this several posts back.

Quite frankly, Jesus being Yahweh in any degree invalidates the sacrifice because, as you mentioned, he was never really a man.

I just wiki'd the definition of trinity and it matches up with discussion mentioned in the past. However, if you think that each part is a 3rd of God, I'm glad to be corrected about it since it makes a little more sense that way.

 

[ServBotPhil]

Agreed

I said this several posts back.

Quite frankly, Jesus being Yahweh in any degree invalidates the sacrifice because, as you mentioned, he was never really a man.

I just wiki'd the definition of trinity and it matches up with discussion mentioned in the past. However, if you think that each part is a 3rd of God, I'm glad to be corrected about it since it makes a little more sense that way.

Not a third, but separately, equally, God. We will never understand why Jesus spoke the way He did. It only shows how futile we are to be confused so easily. That's why G-d is so amazing. He knows everything.

 

[JGS]

Not a third, but separately, equally, God. We will never understand why Jesus spoke the way He did. It only shows how futile we are to be confused so easily. That's why G-d is so amazing. He knows everything.

This is what frustrates me the most.

For some reason I am a heretic, a cultist, a non-reader of the Bible, a non-Christain, Jewish, & flat out wrong on the basis of something that is admittedly confusing.

My feelings aren't hurt because I have confidence that God favors knowledge over confusion for his worshippers, but I don't understand why there are so many hurt feelings over the admittedly confusing issue of the trinity?

 

[midramble]

Not fully undestanding God should never be a reason to outcast anyone ever. God is a mystery. Far too vast to ever be defined by us. How can we expect to conceptualized a being that created reality and thus exists above and beyond it. The trinity is confusing and debated because it is a futile battle to try and define God. It so easily confuses us because the parts of it that are translated to us from wherever in the bible are words for humans, which will never be able to fully discribe God. This may be a part of why, when God was asked to describe himself, he said. I am that I am.

 

[ServBotPhil]

This is what frustrates me the most.

For some reason I am a heretic, a cultist, a non-reader of the Bible, a non-Christain, Jewish, & flat out wrong on the basis of something that is admittedly confusing.

My feelings aren't hurt because I have confidence that God favors knowledge over confusion for his worshippers, but I don't understand why there are so many hurt feelings over the admittedly confusing issue of the trinity?

Not believing Jesus is God is anti-Christianity. You never admit what denomination you are a part of, so people think you are a JW, but you deny it.

 

[JGS]

Not fully undestanding God should never be a reason to outcast anyone ever. God is a mystery. Far too vast to ever be defined by us. How can we expect to conceptualized a being that created reality and thus exists above and beyond it. The trinity is confusing and debated because it is a futile battle to try and define God. It so easily confuses us because the parts of it that are translated to us from wherever in the bible are words for humans, which will never be able to fully discribe God. This may be a part of why, when God was asked to describe himself, he said. I am that I am.

Honestly though, God is not a mystery. We know who is based on how he is personally described to us and how he is presented to us by the perfect reflection of him - Jesus. The only way to salvation is taking in knowledge of him. He's an open book. He wants to be known.

The only reason people have any love for God right now is because of what they know about him. From Exodus 3, when God says I am what I am, that's meant to instill confidence not shroud him in mystery. What we usually can't grasp without reflection is how he is able to accomplish what he does this since we aren't anywhere near his level. We are however made in his image, so we know God. We just don't have the ability to imitate him perfectly.

You never admit what denomination you are a part of, so people think you are a JW, but you deny it.

This does not matter because there are Christian denominations who don't believe the trinity.

JW's, for example, have more to say about Jesus than you ever will apparently since he's unknoweable to you. If I were a JW, I would admit it. There's no reason not to.

 

[midramble]

The only way to salvation is taking in knowledge of him. He's an open book. He wants to be known.

Yes. I didn't say we don't know anything. Proverbs is filled with the fact that a person that seeks knowledge is after Gods own heart and that the begining of knowledge is from and of God. He is infinite in all aspects though so, though we will always be able to learn, while we are in this form we will never be able to understand all of him.

I feel like this thread has lost a lot of peace.

 

[JGS]

Yes. I didn't say we don't know anything. Proverbs is filled with the fact that a person that seeks knowledge is after Gods own heart and that the begining of knowledge is from and of God. He is infinite in all aspects though so, though we will always be able to learn, while we are in this form we will never be able to understand all of him.

This is true and sorry if I misunderstood. I get tired of the lord works in mysterious ways mantra though. Not saying you did it.

I feel like this thread has lost a lot of peace.

I think it lost a bit of tolerance.

EDIT: Change the subject and it will be back to normal. However, it's not realistic to expect someone who is Christian to accept a label of non-Christian without responding to it. It's pretty insulting and condescending.

 

[midramble]

Pride is the only thing that causes a person to be offended.
EDIT: Sin also causes a christian to be offended. Offended at the sin not the sinner.

EDIT: You are also right about tollerance

 

[JGS]

Pride is the only thing that causes a person to be offended.

Not true but not connected. I'm not offended as the wrong views of others is irrelevant to me (Same thing I say to non-believers actually).

Insults and unfounded condemnations are from the haughty and arrogant. Those are qualities which probably aren't part of the fruitages of the spirit.

 

[midramble]

Though, will you pray for my wife and I? Our struggle is less of one of high theological debate and more of a basic following of Gods will.

 

[Sabotage]

Are you saying that the verses I quoted are wrong, misinterpretted, or are trumped by Isaiah? I think the go in harmony with each other, but if it's different, it would be nice to know your take on it.

It's simple....

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

Genesis says God created the heavens and the earth

Isaiah 44:24
Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;

Isaiah confirms Gen 1, and says God makes all things - the heavens and the earth, but then he adds that God does these things ALONE, and BY MYSELF.

So, how can you say the Son was involved with creation when God did it alone, and by himself?

I know you quoted Colossians, but thats the problem, Paul attributes creation of all things to Christ, but in Isaiah it says God did it alone, by himself.

It makes no sense, unless Christ is God.

 

[JGS]

It's simple....

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

Genesis says God created the heavens and the earth

Isaiah 44:24
Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;

Isaiah confirms Gen 1, and says God makes all things - the heavens and the earth, but then he adds that God does these things ALONE, and BY MYSELF.

So, how can you say the Son was involved with creation when God did it alone, and by himself?

I know you quoted Colossians, but thats the problem, Paul attributes creation of all things to Christ, but in Isaiah it says God did it alone, by himself.

It makes no sense, unless Christ is God.

Genesis 1 also has God discussing creation with at least one other person.

Based on your words, you assume that Moses knew who Jesus was. You assume that Isaiah knew more about creation than Solomon or Paul. Also, you assume that just because someone is used for creation, that means they are the creator.

Personally I don't find a contradiction in any of those verses. God deservedly takes credit for creation because that is where the knowledge, power, & direction come from. Jesus follows that direction. Jesus would not be able to create without the power and authority that emanates from God- just like Jesus himself says. On top of that, God created Jesus which means he is ultimately responsible for creation anyway.

Regarding the possible trinity connection, that process is similar to the resurrections. For us, dead is dead. However, not only Jesus, but Elijah, Elisha (Even while dead himself!), & Paul raised people from the dead. Did they do that or God- the Lifegiver? The answer should be obvious.

 

[ServBotPhil]

There is a difference between being a follower of Him and being a student of His teachings.

 

[Velti]

There is a difference between being a follower of Him and being a student of His teachings.

Only God knows the heart of man. I suggest you drop the matter for now. I think the heart of your debate with JGS is a miscommunication of some sort, but anyway...

I'll do my best to keep you in mind, MidRamble.

 

[midramble]

Thank you and God bless

 

[Amir0x]

This is what frustrates me the most.

For some reason I am a heretic, a cultist, a non-reader of the Bible, a non-Christain, Jewish, & flat out wrong on the basis of something that is admittedly confusing.

My feelings aren't hurt because I have confidence that God favors knowledge over confusion for his worshippers, but I don't understand why there are so many hurt feelings over the admittedly confusing issue of the trinity?

Don't be afraid to voice your confusion. The idea of the trinity is one that has been intrinsic to the biblical scholarship question for years - specifically because one of the primary scriptures typically quoted to suggest the God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are one and the same was never in the original, earliest best manuscripts. That's 1st John 5:7... the so-called "Comma Johanneum". The Bible goes through dramatic pains to almost always explicitly avoid stating that Jesus, God and the Holy Spirit are one and the same - it was almost certainly not the standard belief of the earliest Christians who write these books. It was added entirely by later Christians who, when translating, modified the scripture to fit their own belief systems.

Don't allow people to try to paint you as anti-Christian for failing to believe in the Trinity. It's one of the largest on-going debates in Biblical scholarship and it almost certainly was not supported by early Christians.

 

[Fernando Rocker]

Thank you and God bless

I'm in too... would you share your names/nicknames?

 

[ServBotPhil]

Quite frankly, Jesus being Yahweh in any degree invalidates the sacrifice because, as you mentioned, he was never really a man.

Whoa, buddy. Hypostatic Union.

 

[midramble]

I'm in too... would you share your names/nicknames?

I'm Robert. My wifes name is Marisa.

 

[Sabotage]

Genesis 1 also has God discussing creation with at least one other person.

That's right, there's a plurality there, different persons.... like in a trinity.

Also, you assume that just because someone is used for creation, that means they are the creator.

The problem is, the creator said he works alone

On top of that, God created Jesus which means he is ultimately responsible for creation anyway.

How can Jesus be created when he created all things? All means all, he can't create himself

Colossians 1:16For by him were ALL THINGS CREATED, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

Isaiah 44:24Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that MAKETH ALL THINGS; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;

Lets break it down....

...I am the LORD that maketh all things
...For by him were all things created

I am the LORD that makes all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone
For by him were all things created, that are in heaven

I am the LORD that makes all things; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself
For by him were all things created, that are in earth

Who made all things? Was is God or Christ?

Since God creates alone, by himself; there is no room for Christ

Unless Christ is God.

Did they do that or God- the Lifegiver? The answer should be obvious.

It is obvious, the person who created all things is the Lifegiver

 

[Chaplain]

Don't allow people to try to paint you as anti-Christian for failing to believe in the Trinity. It's one of the largest on-going debates in Biblical scholarship and it almost certainly was not supported by early Christians.

That is not true. One of the tenants of the Christian faith is that Jesus is God. Isaiah prophesied that the Messiah would be God in Human Flesh (Matthew quotes this verse). The opening of John's Gospel says Jesus is God:

"In the beginning the Word already existed.
The Word was with God,
and the Word was God." John 1:1

Later in 1st John, John goes into more detail on who they (the Apostles) lived with for three years:

"We proclaim to you the one who existed from the beginning, whom we have heard and seen. We saw him with our own eyes and touched him with our own hands. He is the Word of life. This one who is life itself was revealed to us, and we have seen him. And now we testify and proclaim to you that he is the one who is eternal life." 1 John 1:1-3

That is why the Apostle Paul said:

"Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are their ancestors, and Christ himself was an Israelite as far as his human nature is concerned. And he is God, the one who rules over everything and is worthy of eternal praise! Amen." - Romans 9:5

"For God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, no longer counting people’s sins against them. And he gave us this wonderful message of reconciliation." - 2 Corinthians 5:19

For a person to say the Bible does not proclaim that Jesus is God, just means that they are ignoring what the writers proclaimed about Jesus. John 1:1 opens with it. There is no way to say the Bible doesn't say Jesus is God, unless they ignore what the Bible says.

Do I understand how any of this is possible? No! Neither did Paul:

"And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness:
God was manifested in the flesh,
Justified in the Spirit,
Seen by angels,
Preached among the Gentiles,
Believed on in the world,
Received up in glory." - 1 Tim 3:16

 

[Chaplain]

Biblical answers to various questions about Christianity in five minute video form:

What is the Central Message of the Bible?

Why Did Jesus Come to Earth?

What Did Jesus Claim about Himself?

What is the Gospel?

Is the Exclusivity of Christ Unjust?

Does John 1:1 Teach that Jesus is a God?

Logos: Why is John 1:1 So Important?

What Does Jesus Have to Do with My Problems Today?

What Does It Mean for God to Love Us?

Is the Virgin Birth Important?

How Were the Old Testament Saints Saved?

Is Belief in the Bible Necessary for Salvation?

What is the New Birth?

What Is Reconciliation?

What Does It Mean to Abide in Christ?

How Does a Christian Resist Temptation?

Why Is Obeying Scripture So Important?

Is Baptism Necessary for Salvation?

What Was the Importance of the Transfiguration?

What Happened on the Day Jesus Died?

Has Science Buried Religion?

What Is a Disciple?

Why Did Jesus Say "My God, My God ..."?

Hate Your Own Family?

Wise as a Serpent, Innocent as a Dove?

 

[JGS]

OK, I can tell some of you like a challenge and aren't really interested in letting this go. Let's spend a few more pages (j/k) on it to get it out of our system to focus on more important stuff.

That's right, there's a plurality there, different persons.... like in a trinity.

So you're saying that God only talks to himself and not to others?

You say like in a trinity as if there is another example of one not tied to religion. How many trinities have been documented in the wild so that it qualifies as aan example beyond the teaching?

The correct comparison is he was talking to someone as if he is conversing with someone nearby which happens every single day billions of times.

The problem is, the creator said he works alone

As oppposed to other Gods that people worship. Isaiah 44 is condemning idolatry which is not the case when following his annnointed son.

To take a slant that God gets help from no one would ignore his use of Moses, David, Solomon, Joshua, Abraham, Daniel, tons of other prohets, the angels Michael & Gabriel, the angels flying in midheaven to assist us, Jesus disiples, Paul, mother nature, other nations, and who knows what else to carry out his purpose.

How can Jesus be created when he created all things? All means all, he can't create himself

Several verses including ones in John 1 disagree with you. Begotten by definition means birth. Non-begotten would be more accurate but is never used to describe Jesus. There's no way around the fact that Jesus came after God even if a trinity is true. Basically, Scripture from a trinitarian view would still acknowledge evolution into a trinity not it being that way for God's entire existence.

Colossians 1:16For by him were ALL THINGS CREATED, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

This verifies my view and expanding out to more of the chapter discounts the trinity.

15 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 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. 17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. 19 For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.
21 Once you were alienated from God and were enemies in your minds because of[g] your evil behavior. 22 But now he has reconciled you by Christ’s physical body through death to present you holy in his sight, without blemish and free from accusation— 23 if you continue in your faith, established and firm, and do not move from the hope held out in the gospel. This is the gospel that you heard and that has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven, and of which I, Paul, have become a servant.

Isaiah 44:24Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that MAKETH ALL THINGS; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;

Lets break it down....

...I am the LORD that maketh all things
...For by him were all things created

I am the LORD that makes all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone
For by him were all things created, that are in heaven

I am the LORD that makes all things; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself
For by him were all things created, that are in earth

Who made all things? Was is God or Christ?

Since God creates alone, by himself; there is no room for Christ

Unless Christ is God.

You first breakdown one verse while ignoring the the context of the rest of the chapter You are merely creating a loophole for my argument without actually explain the loophole.

You say that God and Jesus are the same but can't explain why Jesus is responsible for creating stuff in some places but God is responsible in others. You can't explain why Jesus creates stuff as God prior to the prophets knowledge of him in the OT even though they knew a Messiah was coming. You als can't explain why he would get credit alongside God in the OT as well. You can't explain why he would get credit instead of God in the NT or why he would need to. In short you can't explain your explanation and all the typing basically has you saying that Jesus is God because that's the only way your argument works. However, your argument appears flawed.

Now, this is right around the time that someone explains to me that it's not important to understand all of this since God (As trinity) is unknoweable which is the part I instinctually agree with. Hopefully you will be the exception. The more verses the better.

It is obvious, the person who created all things is the Lifegiver

Exactly and yet he saw fit to use imperfect people to accomplish resurrections. Holy Spirit is an amazing thing.

 

[JGS]

That is not true. One of the tenants of the Christian faith is that Jesus is God. Isaiah prophesied that the Messiah would be God in Human Flesh (Matthew quotes this verse). The opening of John's Gospel says Jesus is God:

It is not a tenet of Christianity. It is not something Jesus nor the apostles required as a requirement for worship. It's that simple.

Ironically, you quoted the great mystery in your response. The mystery is Jesus coming to earth and dying for us- something that most of the planet to this day, including some Christians, don't care a lick about despite, as mentioned in 16, verification of happening by the disciples and the angels.

For reference look at Ephesians 1:1-9

Ephesians 1
1 Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God,

To God’s holy people in Ephesus,[a] the faithful in Christ Jesus:

2 Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
3 Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ. 4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love 5 he predestined us for adoption to sonship[c] through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will— 6 to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves. 7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God’s grace 8 that he lavished on us. With all wisdom and understanding, 9 he[d] made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, 10 to be put into effect when the times reach their fulfillment—to bring unity to all things in heaven and on earth under Christ.

It's only a mystery to ones who refuse to see or show an interest. It is not tied to understanding who we should worship which would be beyond crazy and is actually an example of a cruel god who would punish those who can't understand just because he refuses to explain it.

 

[Fedos]

That's one of the better explanations. However, the three parts of man aren't combined and sentient are they?

Genesis tells me that God had help in creation which later verses verify was his son Jesus.

As an aside, this also ties into why Jesus and not any old perfect angel would do for sacrifice.

No, the three parts of man aren't sentient. The soul is basically the mind, will, and emotions. The body needs no explanation. The spirit would then be that makeup of man that God created so we have fellowship with him, and it is also in your most inward being, the center of your being.

But I came to this realization pretty much when I first accepted
Christ (mainly that God is triune and still one just as we are made in his image and are triune and are still one). And I have, since coming to this realization, heard others say the same thing, mainly Adrian Rogers of Love Worth Finding.

 

[Herpes Reasons]

Don't be afraid to voice your confusion. The idea of the trinity is one that has been intrinsic to the biblical scholarship question for years - specifically because one of the primary scriptures typically quoted to suggest the God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are one and the same was never in the original, earliest best manuscripts.

the earliest copies date back around 70CE. that being the letters of mark.
here's the strong's concordance to the original greek;word for word.
show me any where or any one of the oldest codex that jesus wasn't the father, and vice versa.
and for the record, there are no original Manuscripts that have been found in NT so there is no certainty that alleged revisions/additions are not in the original manuscript.

It is not a tenet of Christianity. It is not something Jesus nor the apostles required as a requirement for worship. It's that simple.

from what i've read here, its not about worship or prayer. its the debate on their identity.
i agree the term trinity is a noncannonical word, but the NT does explicitly say to pray and have communion with all 3.

 

[Alpha-Bromega]

I have a question for many Christians; do you recognize probable tampering with manuscripts or manipulations of translations to fulfill the certain worldviews or aims of the churches?

This doesn't delegitimate Jeshua as Messiah in any way, but i think it's important to note the hands and laws of men masquerading as Gods, ya know?

for instance, the Gospels have a clear anti-Jewish stance and Pro-Roman one, obviously altered to make the Gospels more palatable to the new Roman Christians and not to the original Jewish readers.

-Pontius Pilate being an unwilling perpetrator of the will of bloodthirsty Jews
-Judas being the evil evil traitor, whose name literally means "Jew"
-The Centurion who for no reason was guarding a criminal, was the first to recognize Christ as Messiah
-many translations have often white washed Jeshua's Jewish identity, like removing references to being a Rabbi, for instance
-Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's clearly legitimates the Sovereignty of the Empire

 

[Ketchup Boy]

Raised Catholic, but I don't go to Church and I don't know if God exists. Sometimes I wish we could see the truth already. I don't want to wait until I die. But yeah, I grew up with Catholic values and I don't know, I'm super polite and always believed in doing the right thing. I don't know if that comes from being super Catholic up until 7th grade or it was my love of super heroes from watching like Dragon Ball Z. lol

 

[CornBurrito]

Raised Catholic, but I don't go to Church and I don't know if God exists. Sometimes I wish we could see the truth already. I don't want to wait until I die. But yeah, I grew up with Catholic values and I don't know, I'm super polite and always believed in doing the right thing. I don't know if that comes from being super Catholic up until 7th grade or it was my love of super heroes from watching like Dragon Ball Z. lol

Just pointing out that if there is indeed no such thing as a soul, and consciousness ends after death then you won't see the answer when you die. You'd no longer be self aware.

I also wanted to say that I admire JGS for standing his(her?) ground.

 

[Knox]

This is probably a Christianity 101 question, but I've asked it to friends and they've never really had an answer. Why does God have to send Jesus to die for our sins? This has always made it sound like sin has some power outside of God, like a sacrifice had to be made and God was just going by the rules. Obviously there's a problem there. The other way I look at it is that it was a gesture by God to show how much he doesn't like sin, but that's never how it's presented. Can anyone clear this up for me?

 

[hellclerk]

Raised Catholic, but I don't go to Church and I don't know if God exists. Sometimes I wish we could see the truth already. I don't want to wait until I die. But yeah, I grew up with Catholic values and I don't know, I'm super polite and always believed in doing the right thing. I don't know if that comes from being super Catholic up until 7th grade or it was my love of super heroes from watching like Dragon Ball Z. lol

Well, I'd say something along the lines of "You'll likely never see the 'truth' because there may be no 'truth' to see. Don't see your doubt as weakness, but rather strength because knowing the 'truth' isn't really valuable, but having faith that there is such a truth and that things will turn for the best is most important." But from one Catholic to another, this isn't really the best thread for Catholics. The most prolific posters in the thread are pretty hardcore protestant, and while I've tried to engage them to gain Catholic legitimacy in the thread, I was... unfruitful. Well, we are all schismatics after all, eh?

 

[JGS]

This is probably a Christianity 101 question, but I've asked it to friends and they've never really had an answer. Why does God have to send Jesus to die for our sins? This has always made it sound like sin has some power outside of God, like a sacrifice had to be made and God was just going by the rules. Obviously there's a problem there. The other way I look at it is that it was a gesture by God to show how much he doesn't like sin, but that's never how it's presented. Can anyone clear this up for me?

Sin doesn't operate outside of God. In fact, the reason we needed to be removed from sin is sin is within and way beneath God's standard for approval. To ignore sin would be a sign of imperfection on God's part (Particularly lying) even if the result is technically benefit to us.

So when he said if you disobey (sin) you die, he couldn't say just kidding. Adam & Eve paid the price for sin and lost the ability to create perfect children.

If God had killed them immediately, the question Satan raised would still go unanswered- God's creation could live perfectly fine without God. It would look like God was part of a cover-up. Since sovreignty is the issue (Not our life, not our happiness, but God's sovreignty), then that is what the question of sin deals with. If one feels Adam & Eve is allegorical, the issue still remains the same- we cannot attain perfection on our own because perfection requires obedience to God.

So in order to live forever/be saved, Jesus' sacrifice as a perfect man was necessary for us to measure up to God's unchangeable standard of perfection. Otherwise, nothing else, whether plant, animal, or another imperfect human would ever equate to perfect. Jesus was the very best pick to accomplish this.

Throughout this whole time, there are basically two groups to respond to this question - one who believe what Satan said (Even if they don't believe in any of this) & those who believe that God is necessary for happiness. The wicked and the righteous. One is outnumbering the other by a very large degree.

Although it seems odd to think that death without God is preferable to life with God, it's pretty clear that many do indeed choose death. Plus the goal for most of the "wicked" is always to live just as we were supposed to under God - perfect life, never dying, in peace with all, etc... Biblical evidence (And some would say current events at any point in time) indicate this is impossible to accomplish.

I'm rambling and probably still missing out a bunch of stuff, but in short, Jesus died for our sins because we were incapable of being sinless on our own

 

[JGS]

for instance, the Gospels have a clear anti-Jewish stance and Pro-Roman one, obviously altered to make the Gospels more palatable to the new Roman Christians and not to the original Jewish readers.

I'm not thinking there is a clear anti-Jewish stance. After all, the Gospels focus almost entirely (With a little side trip to Samaria) on preaching to the Jews since they were the ones on the lookout. Basicallly Jesus had a special responsibility to get as many Jews as possible to become Christians since it was supposed be the entire nation to become Christians first (Although it was prophesied they would fail at this).

Jesus was brutal to the Jewish leaders because instead of pointing people to the messiah, they spent the whole time trying to keep staus quo- to the point of finally blasphemy since they realized Jesus was the Messiah but tried to kill him anyway.

-Pontius Pilate being an unwilling perpetrator of the will of bloodthirsty Jews

They were both guilty. The religious leaders for egging the people (Just the previous day Jews were trying to make Jesus king) and Pontius for being a weak kneed ruler who was willing to kill a man he knew was guilty of nothing.

As an aside, this reminds me of a SNL skit http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=raNW4fnLE5I

-Judas being the evil evil traitor, whose name literally means "Jew"

But the rest of the apostles were Jewish (plus Jesus) too and a large portion of Christians in the NT were Christians.

-The Centurion who for no reason was guarding a criminal, was the first to recognize Christ as Messiah

Many recognized Jesus as the Messiah including the Jewish leaders

-many translations have often white washed Jeshua's Jewish identity, like removing references to being a Rabbi, for instance

This might very well be true, but Bibles that stick to the earliest manuscripts usually will acknowledged Jesus Jewish roots.

-Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's clearly legitimates the Sovereignty of the Empire

This is true too from the standpoint of recognizing the Roman Empire as the ones ruling over the physical nation of Israel. Also, even his apostles were hoping for a deliverance from the Roman Empire and Jesus told them on that end it would only get worse.

However, this was helping them to see that the time of physical recognition of a givernment was not necessary because Christian was going worldwide.

 

[funkmasterb]

Boom.

 

[SRG01]

Don't be afraid to voice your confusion. The idea of the trinity is one that has been intrinsic to the biblical scholarship question for years - specifically because one of the primary scriptures typically quoted to suggest the God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are one and the same was never in the original, earliest best manuscripts. That's 1st John 5:7... the so-called "Comma Johanneum". The Bible goes through dramatic pains to almost always explicitly avoid stating that Jesus, God and the Holy Spirit are one and the same - it was almost certainly not the standard belief of the earliest Christians who write these books. It was added entirely by later Christians who, when translating, modified the scripture to fit their own belief systems.

Don't allow people to try to paint you as anti-Christian for failing to believe in the Trinity. It's one of the largest on-going debates in Biblical scholarship and it almost certainly was not supported by early Christians.

Much of the doctrinal arguments for the trinity was established hundreds of years later, culminating in the Nicene creed, as well. Personally and from what I've read, much of the early debate was more of finding suitable doctrinal differences between Judaism and early Christianity.

In fact, I would say that Christianity has transformed more throughout the centuries than most people think. From the creeds to the various schisms, to the reformation and the now non-trinitarian movements...

I wouldn't say that one form of Christianity is more "true" or "right" than the other. They're merely expressions of faith through time.

 

[Knox]

Sin doesn't operate outside of God. In fact, the reason we needed to be removed from sin is sin is within and way beneath God's standard for approval. To ignore sin would be a sign of imperfection on God's part (Particularly lying) even if the result is technically benefit to us.

So when he said if you disobey (sin) you die, he couldn't say just kidding. Adam & Eve paid the price for sin and lost the ability to create perfect children.

If God had killed them immediately, the question Satan raised would still go unanswered- God's creation could live perfectly fine without God. It would look like God was part of a cover-up. Since sovreignty is the issue (Not our life, not our happiness, but God's sovreignty), then that is what the question of sin deals with. If one feels Adam & Eve is allegorical, the issue still remains the same- we cannot attain perfection on our own because perfection requires obedience to God.

So in order to live forever/be saved, Jesus' sacrifice as a perfect man was necessary for us to measure up to God's unchangeable standard of perfection. Otherwise, nothing else, whether plant, animal, or another imperfect human would ever equate to perfect. Jesus was the very best pick to accomplish this.

Throughout this whole time, there are basically two groups to respond to this question - one who believe what Satan said (Even if they don't believe in any of this) & those who believe that God is necessary for happiness. The wicked and the righteous. One is outnumbering the other by a very large degree.

Although it seems odd to think that death without God is preferable to life with God, it's pretty clear that many do indeed choose death. Plus the goal for most of the "wicked" is always to live just as we were supposed to under God - perfect life, never dying, in peace with all, etc... Biblical evidence (And some would say current events at any point in time) indicate this is impossible to accomplish.

I'm rambling and probably still missing out a bunch of stuff, but in short, Jesus died for our sins because we were incapable of being sinless on our own

Thanks for your response, it was quite helpful, though I'm still a little fuzzy on a couple things. I guess the biggest one is the significance of Jesus' sacrifice. To me, given that Jesus lived a perfect life and is spending an eternity in heaven, dying on Earth seems trivial. His time on Earth would be a blink of an eye compared to the span of eternity. So, what makes dying on Earth significant? I mean, God sends us all to Earth to die.

Was living a perfect life the actual "sacrifice"? The way I understand it, God had a standard for us, and Jesus was the only one to reach it. Why does Jesus meeting that standard give the rest of us a pass into heaven?

Thanks for helping me understand.

 

[Fernando Rocker]

Please, guys... show some respect (specially to the guy who posted the "funny" image).

This thread is to discuss things related to Christianity, God, Jesus... it is not to discuss about the existence of God - if we are in this thread, it's because we do believe in Him.

If you guys want to debate about that, here are some links to some of those threads:

Atheism vs Theism |OT|

The Official Religion Thread

Please, don't derail this thread.

 

[JGS]

Thanks for your response, it was quite helpful, though I'm still a little fuzzy on a couple things. I guess the biggest one is the significance of Jesus' sacrifice. To me, given that Jesus lived a perfect life and is spending an eternity in heaven, dying on Earth seems trivial. His time on Earth would be a blink of an eye compared to the span of eternity. So, what makes dying on Earth significant? I mean, God sends us all to Earth to die.

It was trivial in the grand scheme of things. However, his being perfect was extremely important for mankind, not important at all to him ([EDIT]- To clarify, it was imprtant for him to be sinless, but not something that was required for him to go through (Jeez). However, Jesus still benefitted by being annointed a heavenly king). This is why the sacrifice is so significant- because it was completely voluntary and soley at cost to himself because of his love for us which is the same love his father has.

However, living life perfectly is difficult when there is nothing perfect around. There was very little chance of Jesus failing, but that doesn't mean it was easy either which was proven by the way he died.

Was living a perfect life the actual "sacrifice"? The way I understand it, God had a standard for us, and Jesus was the only one to reach it. Why does Jesus meeting that standard give the rest of us a pass into heaven?

Thanks for helping me understand.

Because God is a god of equivalencies. So in most cases, what's done is usually repayable. A common verse in scripture refers to an eye for an eye. Taking that one step further, if you killed someone, you would die as the equivalency for that lost life. You couldn't trade 2 bulls for that murder, you had to die under the law covenant.

Since no one has ever stayed perfect, a perfect life was more valuable than all the imperfect lives out there. Basically, you could add all the lives of all the people who ever lived and it still wouldn't measure up to one perfect life. Perfection = infinity. Perfection is the only real way to reconcile a pure relationship with God.

So Jesus' sacrifice as a perfect man was both the only way to redeem us and also just enough to do the job. Any less and we're still doomed, anymore and you don't have equivalencies and you have over-valued man- equating to a spiritual being aka God and angels. This is why Jesus couldn't just come down and redeem us without becoming a man first.

 

[Knox]

Please, guys... show some respect (specially to the guy who posted the "funny" image).

This thread is to discuss things related to Christianity, God, Jesus... it is not to discuss about the existence of God - if we are in this thread, it's because we do believe in Him.

If you guys want to debate about that, here are some links to some of those threads:

Atheism vs Theism |OT|

The Official Religion Thread

Please, don't derail this thread.

I apologize if either of my posts were unfit for this thread. I'm not trying to debate anything, I just thought this thread would be the best place to ask questions about Christian beliefs. If the thread is more of a Christian-GAF community thing I understand.

EDIT

Thanks again JGS, I think I have good understanding now.

 

[hellclerk]

I apologize if either of my posts were unfit for this thread. I'm not trying to debate anything, I just thought this thread would be the best place to ask questions about Christian beliefs. If the thread is more of a Christian-GAF community thing I understand.

EDIT

Thanks again JGS, I think I have good understanding now.

No, your question was appreciable. It was a specific question concerning Christian theology. Though I'm gonna throw out the caveat, what JGS communicated isn't necessarily what every Christian believes. For example Catholics would have a slightly different interpretation than JGS's, one I don't really have the time or energy to write out today.

 

[ServBotPhil]

Why would it be called Christianity if Christ wasn't G-d.

 

[hellclerk]

Why would it be called Christianity if Christ wasn't G-d.

Christian comes from the Greek word Christos which simply means "anointed one". Technically, you could put that qualifier on many different individuals in Hebrew history before Jesus. The line of kings immediately comes to mind, David and Solomon for example. There was alot of craziness in the early church as to the question of Jesus as God. Really, in the end it just means "That of Christ". There are even some sects that don't believe Jesus is God at all. They are still, by technical definition, Christian.

 

[JGS]

I apologize if either of my posts were unfit for this thread. I'm not trying to debate anything, I just thought this thread would be the best place to ask questions about Christian beliefs. If the thread is more of a Christian-GAF community thing I understand.

EDIT

Thanks again JGS, I think I have good understanding now.

No problem.

Also, a belated thanks to Amir0x. Encouragement comes from the strangest places sometimes lol.

No, your question was appreciable. It was a specific question concerning Christian theology. Though I'm gonna throw out the caveat, what JGS communicated isn't necessarily what every Christian believes. For example Catholics would have a slightly different interpretation than JGS's, one I don't really have the time or energy to write out today.

This is true although I'm not sure of the other beliefs so was wholly unqualified to comment.

Plus I'm positive that belief in the trinity would call into question what I picked up reading through the Bible. I hate unanswered questions though, but expect others to jump in with their view.

Why would it be called Christianity if Christ wasn't G-d.

Because we follow Christ's direction. This doesn't diminish God's status as Universal Sovreign and Almighty since following Christ requires acknowledgement of that.

It's similar to being called Americans because of citizenship. That's why it didn't mean much that the Jews were called Jews but still worshipped God without his name in it.

Also, Jesus last name wasn't Christ. It was his title. So we are followers of the Annointed One. Who annointed him? God/Jehovah/Yahweh.