christians

[Angelina]

@APAK -

Paul wrote to the Philippians under duress in prison. One of his key messages was for the believer to sustain themselves in Christ by having his mind. Paul was not writing to say that Jesus was God as many persist in preaching. He never considered this subject or this would-be astonishing news because he never thought that Jesus, the Son, was God his Father. His letters and messages would be all meaningless if he did. And I would wager he would have written this letter quite differently.

Brother, I also do not believe that Jesus is God the Father. IMO there exists an eternal Godhead which consists of God the Father, God his Son and God the Holy Spirit.

 

[Angelina]

@Aunty Jane I am open to try to understand your theology. Please continue but give me time to answer. ergo timezones, cultural differences etc Thank you

 

[Aunty Jane]

@Aunty Jane You may not enjoy using the AMP bible but I find it enlightening as it gives shades of meaning and intent to a paragraph or words and phrases. I am sure you are already aware that the Amplified bible is not adding to the Word of God as you have professed above. However, placing amplification in parenthesis, brackets or using italics in after key notes, clearly show that such words are not explicitly contained in the original texts. The amplified bible enables the reader to comprehend meaning which was understood by readers of the original language.

Yes, I understand that the additions are in parenthesis, but readers are none the less led in a certain direction in the reading. This is what I believe is dangerous. With what we have available as research tools today, there is no reason to study a Bible that provides every little detail along its own lines of thinking arbitrarily, without consultation with the rest of scripture.....I am sure we could have a very serious discussion about how some of those verses completely defy what the rest of the Bible teaches.

This approach actually teaches people to be lazy Bible students IMO...allowing others to interpret scripture without consulting the complete word of God to see if their view is correct. The whole Bible has to agree because it is God’s word...right?
The ancient Beroeans were commended for consulting the scriptures to make sure that they were being taught the truth (Acts 17:10-11)....we should check our beliefs regularly to see if they agree with the entirety of scripture too, not just in snatches or according to favourite ambiguous verses that are open to suggestion.

It is not a perfect bible to say the least but my intent was to point out to you that Jesus humbled himself by not taking up his position as a part of the Godhead and in all his humanity, took up the cross and died as a man. God the Father raised him up from the dead and now sits on the righthand of God [The Father]

The position of the Son was always at his Father’s side, but as to him being part of a “godhead”, that was never a Jewish belief...in fact it would have been a direct violation of the First Commandment.
Yahweh, the God of Israel was not a multiple God but a singular entity according the the Jewish Shema. (Deuteronomy 6:4) Monotheism is what made the Jewish religion stand out as different.

How can God be three different “persons” who talk to one another and can be in three different places at the same time? How can one pray to the other, or know things that the other doesn’t?
How come the other two “Abrahamic” faiths (Judaism and Islam) have no concept of a trinitarian god? There is no trinity taught in the Bible. It was an addition made into church doctrine over 300 years after Jesus died. No Jew would even have accepted a three headed god. Moses never spoke of such a god. Islam accepts the writings of Moses.

When Jesus returned to heaven, resuming his position at the right hand of his Father, it is also noteworthy that he calls his Father “my God” even in heaven. If there is equality, that makes no sense.....to return to heaven and still acknowledge the Father as his God does not fit the trinitarian model. (Revelation 3:12) One part of God cannot worship his equal self.

Your theology regarding Jesus as being created is not orthodox. Orthodox Christianity teaches us that "Jesus was personally identical with the eternally pre-existent Son of God or Logos. He did not come into existence as a new person around 5 BC but exists personally as the eternal Son of God. The first council of Niacea stated that - "there was never a time where he was not....

This is where a good knowledge of scripture comes in. When you realise that Catholicism was the culmination of hundreds of years of apostasy (foretold by Jesus and the apostles) and that it was their councils that made decisions about doctrine, can you see what advantage there was in that? The “church” forbade anyone to read the scriptures under penalty of death, which by the time of Constantine, meant that they had so much time to introduce all manner of pagan concepts disguised as “Christian” teachings, and they got away with it for many centuries because no one could check the scriptures to see if what they were being taught was correct. The church was “Roman” not Christian. If you look at images of Zeus you see a remarkable resemblance to the image they presented as Jesus. Roman sun worship is as obvious in the RCC today as it was back then. It is hiding in plain sight.

So, I t was the church who introduced the concepts of the trinity and hellfire and the immortality of the human soul......but the Jews had no such beliefs. We can’t forget that Jesus was Jewish...he lived as a Jew and died as one. Christianity cannot teach different concepts to what Jesus (as a Jew) taught his disciples, using only Jewish scripture. He did not come to introduce a new religion but to take God’s worshippers back to the truth. What the Pharisees taught was not from God. (Matthew 15:7-9) Christendom has done exactly the same thing.

These core beliefs permeate all of Christendom, but none of them are found directly mentioned by Jesus....on the contrary, if you examine the teachings of Jesus and his apostles there is a sound explanation for why none of these concepts were part of original Christianity. Looking at certain scriptures with a pre-conceived conditioning, can mask their true meaning.

I would love to discuss some of them with you when you have time.

What actually shocks me is the idea that someone who calls themselves a Christian does not believe that Jesus the Son of man, the Son of God, is just a good man...but not part of the Godhead????

I hope to be able to explain further using the scriptures.....but I appreciate that you have time constraints as we all do.

@Aunty Jane I am open to try to understand your theology. Please continue but give me time to answer. ergo timezones, cultural differences etc Thank you

That would be my pleasure.....as an explanation is worth examining, even just for understanding, if nothing else. I have been where many believers here are at present, so I understand completely why many are disturbed by anyone who dares to challenge “orthodoxy”....it is my experience however, that what was once “orthodox” gets replaced by a new and more widely promoted “orthodoxy”.....religion and medicine are the two main areas where this is very forcefully demonstrated. Also good for discussion....:)

Thank you for your time....

 

[APAK]

@APAK -

Brother, I also do not believe that Jesus is God the Father. IMO there exists an eternal Godhead which consists of God the Father, God his Son and God the Holy Spirit.

Angelina, I'm actually a little disappointed and annoyed in your response.

I did not expect you to duck my post entirely and just make hay out of my words regarding who Jesus was not (and it was not meant to be a exhaustive list) in my opening statements. This was not my main area of discussion. I was just comparing Jesus with his Father for a specific purpose. Remember, I was responding to your post that did not require a thorough and complete definition of a Godhead Angelina as you seem to be so preoccupied with and cannot get past. You never commented on the main body of my response.

So let me quickly make it clear for you on the only point you seem interested in, on the divinity.

There in no Godhead of three people. The only Godhood is the Father and not the Son. And even the Spirit is not a person besides the Father who owns it - one in the same. It is a vital attribute of the Father. This is scriptural.

I was really expecting you to comment on the essence of my post regarding Paul's message in Philippians Chapter 2. I was responding to your post and you never circled the wagon.....Did you agree or not with it? What is your take on possessing the mind of Christ from a believer's perspective as Paul wrote it? And what type of mind did Christ possess. I really would like you to do a redo of your response.

So now I see I need to finish here by clarifying and updating my opening statements of my previous post, eventhough I believe you really understood what I meant in the first place.
-----------------
"Paul wrote to the Philippians under duress in prison. One of his key messages was for the believer to sustain themselves in Christ by having his mind. Paul was not writing to say that Jesus was God as many persist in preaching. He never considered this subject or this would-be astonishing news because he never thought that Jesus was (a) God the Son, nor God his Father, or God of (a) Holy Spirit. His letters and messages would be all meaningless if he did. And I would wager he would have written this letter quite differently."

Thanks

 

[Angelina]

Angelina, I'm actually a little disappointed and annoyed in your response.

I did not expect you to duck my post entirely and just make hay out of my words regarding who Jesus was not (and it was not meant to be a exhaustive list) in my opening statements. This was not my main area of discussion. I was just comparing Jesus with his Father for a specific purpose. Remember, I was responding to your post that did not require a thorough and complete definition of a Godhead Angelina as you seem to be so preoccupied with and cannot get past. You never commented on the main body of my response.

So let me quickly make it clear for you on the only point you seem interested in, on the divinity.

There in no Godhead of three people. The only Godhood is the Father and not the Son. And even the Spirit is not a person besides the Father who owns it - one in the same. It is a vital attribute of the Father. This is scriptural.

I was really expecting you to comment on the essence of my post regarding Paul's message in Philippians Chapter 2. I was responding to your post and you never circled the wagon.....Did you agree or not with it? What is your take on possessing the mind of Christ from a believer's perspective as Paul wrote it? And what type of mind did Christ possess. I really would like you to do a redo of your response.

So now I see I need to finish here by clarifying and updating my opening statements of my previous post, eventhough I believe you really understood what I meant in the first place
-----------------
"Paul wrote to the Philippians under duress in prison. One of his key messages was for the believer to sustain themselves in Christ by having his mind. Paul was not writing to say that Jesus was God as many persist in preaching. He never considered this subject or this would-be astonishing news because he never thought that Jesus was (a) God the Son, nor God his Father, or God of (a) Holy Spirit. His letters and messages would be all meaningless if he did. And I would wager he would have written this letter quite differently."

Thanks

@APAK That is your opinion of course and you are most welcome to believe what you like. I however will believe what is true Blessings and Peace xox

 

[Angelina]

Yes, I understand that the additions are in parenthesis, but readers are none the less led in a certain direction in the reading. This is what I believe is dangerous. With what we have available as research tools today, there is no reason to study a Bible that provides every little detail along its own lines of thinking arbitrarily, without consultation with the rest of scripture.....I am sure we could have a very serious discussion about how some of those verses completely defy what the rest of the Bible teaches.

I use a variety of bibles including study bibles but you are going off topic with this conversation and majoring on the minors. Lets get back to the reason I joined in on this thread. Your quote: [We do not see Jesus as God incarnate because the very thought of it is ridiculous.
If Jesus was God, he could not die.....and if he did not die we are not saved.] Please define your meaning of incarnate. Thank you

 

[Angelina]

Your quote :[This approach actually teaches people to be lazy Bible students IMO...allowing others to interpret scripture without consulting the complete word of God to see if their view is correct. The whole Bible has to agree because it is God’s word...right?
The ancient Beroeans were commended for consulting the scriptures to make sure that they were being taught the truth (Acts 17:10-11)....we should check our beliefs regularly to see if they agree with the entirety of scripture too, not just in snatches or according to favourite ambiguous verses that are open to suggestion.]

Tell me @Aunty Jane, have you ever had a Holy Spirit encounter? Are you born again by the Holy Spirit who dwells within all believers? Just curious and not tryingto veer off anywhere....

 

[Aunty Jane]

I use a variety of bibles including study bibles but you are going off topic with this conversation and majoring on the minors. Lets get back to the reason I joined in on this thread. Your quote: [We do not see Jesus as God incarnate because the very thought of it is ridiculous.
If Jesus was God, he could not die.....and if he did not die we are not saved.] Please define your meaning of incarnate. Thank you

I think John 1:14 says it succinctly... “the Word became flesh and resided among us, and we had a view of his glory, a glory such as belongs to an only-begotten son from a father; and he was full of divine favor and truth.”
IOW the entity that was “with God” “in the beginning” became a human in order to redeem the human race. That entity was God’s “only begotten Son” who was divine, but he was not God. (John 1:1)

God’s law required equivalency, so a “life for a life” was demanded to cancel the debt that Adam left to his children. (Romans 5:12) But because Adam lost perfect sinless life for all of us, only a perfect sinless human could pay the “ransom” price. This why Jesus had to come from heaven and be born outside of the now defective human race. God gave him a perfect sinless body so that he could lay it down in sacrifice to die the same death that Adam did. This is why Jesus is called “the last Adam”.

The idea that God can die is nowhere mentioned in scripture. Jesus was 100% human, of divine origin, but he was not God incarnate. God is an immortal and so he cannot die in any manner....nor did he need to in order to save mankind. His “holy servant Jesus” did a wonderful job in that regard. (Acts 4:27; John 3:16)

The idea that humans have some kind of spiritual, invisible ‘self’ that is contained in a body, to depart for destinations unknown at death, is also not taught in any of the Hebrew or Christian Scriptures.
So did Jesus die? Or did his spirit immediately depart from his body to go somewhere else while he waited for the Father to resurrect him? Was Jesus dead or did his spirit continue to live on? What did he mean when he said....
“For just as Joʹnah was in the belly of the huge fish for three days and three nights, so the Son of man will be in the heart of the earth for three days and three nights.” ? (Matthew 12:38-40)

I do not believe that any of Christendom’s teachings are of biblical origin...yet its members are required to believe that Jesus was God, or it is assumed that they cannot be Christians........but there is not one verse in any part of the Bible that directly states that Jesus is equal to his Father in any way.

Tell me @Aunty Jane, have you ever had a Holy Spirit encounter? Are you born again by the Holy Spirit who dwells within all believers? Just curious and not tryingto veer off anywhere....

What do understand “born again” to mean @Angelina? Because I assure you that I will have a completely different understanding of that compared to what you believe it means....
Can you also provide scripture for your belief about this.....?