Since Jesus never explicitly stated he was God, and that God becoming man is a logical absurdity, shouldn't we take the "Jesus isn't Go...

Since Jesus never explicitly stated he was God, and that God becoming man is a logical absurdity, shouldn't we take the "Jesus isn't God" interpretation for all the verses that are used to support the idea that he's God, such as John 8:58?

In other words,
Should we take the "Jesus is God" interpretation of the verses and accept the logical absurdities (such as God being a man, Jesus being God and the Son of God, God sacrificing God to God, three persons who are God but there's only one God, etc), or take a metaphorical interpretation of his purported claims to Godhood and not have the logical absurdity problems?

A Conspiracy Theorist Is Talking Shirt $21.68

POSIWID: The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does Shirt $21.68

A Conspiracy Theorist Is Talking Shirt $21.68

  1. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Since Jesus never explicitly stated he was God
    If you read the Gospel of John in that way you're simply being disingenuous. The Logos was made flesh and is God, it's right there.
    >and that God becoming man is a logical absurdity
    >Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      >If you read the Gospel of John in that way you're simply being disingenuous. The Logos was made flesh and is God, it's right there.
      I'm talking about what Jesus said and did himself, not what other people say about him. But even so, what is said in the Gospel of John can be interpreted in some metaphorical way.
      >>Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
      In the Psalm that's referring to, the word "Elohim" can be translated as any type of supernatural being or earthly judges. And this translation makes sense not only because it would be polytheism if not so, but because Jesus goes on to say he's the Son of God.

      • 6 months ago
        Radiochan

        so uh
        what are your sources for the life of Jesus if not the Gospels?

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      >If you read the Gospel of John in that way you're simply being disingenuous. The Logos was made flesh and is God, it's right there.
      I'm talking about what Jesus said and did himself, not what other people say about him. But even so, what is said in the Gospel of John can be interpreted in some metaphorical way.
      >>Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
      In the Psalm that's referring to, the word "Elohim" can be translated as any type of supernatural being or earthly judges. And this translation makes sense not only because it would be polytheism if not so, but because Jesus goes on to say he's the Son of God.

      Lmao just saw a video on this verse among others.

      ?si=H7xyAXG994kyibkR

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      I'm too drunk but these 'actually' are getting annoying. Sunday schools ain't what they used to be.

  2. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    >before Abraham was, I AM
    >and the crowd sought to stone him

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      It's like these disingenuous buttholes expect to find "and jesus said: 'i am god lol' " and after failing to find that exact verse so they declare Jesus isn't divine according to the Bible

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah I mentioned that verse. what about it?

      so uh
      what are your sources for the life of Jesus if not the Gospels?

      When did I ever say the Gospels weren't a source?

      It's like these disingenuous buttholes expect to find "and jesus said: 'i am god lol' " and after failing to find that exact verse so they declare Jesus isn't divine according to the Bible

      You're missing the entire the point. The question is about if we should interpret the verses traditionally said to support Jesus's Godhood as metaphorical or in any other way, given that otherwise it leads to absurdities.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        >given that otherwise it leads to absurdities
        Why did the crowd want to stone him then

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          Because they thought he was demon possessed
          >“Now we know that You have a demon!” declared the israelites.
          And/or he was claiming to be greater than Abraham
          >Are You greater than our father Abraham?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Jesus was in fact posessed by Ba'al tho

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Was the a procedure in place to stone the demon possessed like there was to stone the blasphemer (and I believe there was a procedure in place to stone the blasphemer)?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Maybe, but even if he was just being stoned for blaspheming, it doesn't necessarily mean he's claiming to be God. Being greater than Abraham doesn't automatically mean you're God, there's still a gap in greatness between God and Abraham that Jesus could be in.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            You're not wrong. The intention to stone one for blaspheming and the intention to stone one for saying their are god are not necessarily one and the same.

      • 6 months ago
        Radiochan

        probably at that point where you seemed to deny the divinity of Christ

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      He could have just been saying the same sort of thing as Muhammad: he was the first created being, but is still just a created being. Not that it matters because "Yeshua bar Yosef was literally Yahweh, the israeli volcano demon, with a body" shows up so early that unless you believe the Apostles were fricking morons you have to accept that the "Yeshua said he was the volcano demon" reading as the correct one.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        'I AM' Is God's name, revealed to Moses in the burning bush episode (Yahweh).
        So Jesus goes all the time saying Yahweh (I AM), thus stating He is God.
        Happens often, other examples:
        During the storm in the sea: “Take courage! I AM. Do not be afraid.”
        When the guards and Judas come to arrest Him:
        Therefore when He said to them, “I am,” they went backwards and fell upon the ground.”
        Before the sanhedrim:
        “Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?”
        62“I AM,”said Jesus,“and you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Powerland coming with the clouds of heaven.”m
        63At this, the high priest tore his clothes and declared, “Why do we need any more witnesses?64You have heard the blasphemy. What is your verdict?”

        Sometimes the translations botch it, trying to make a sentence out of it. They use stuff like 'it is I'. But that ruins the proper sense.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      >obviously Jesus meant he was God. You can tell because that's the Pharisees interpreted it when they went to stone him and Pharisees are famously known for interpreting Jesus fairly and correctly.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        The problem is that John 5:18 has the writer of the gospel saying Jesus was making Himself equal to God, not the israelites saying it. If you believe John was inspired in uttering those words you basically refute yourself.

  3. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    If you take revelation as Jesus talking, then when He says, “I am the Alpha and the Omega”, He is claiming to be Iao, which is the Greek transliteration of the Tetragrammaton, so technically He’s claiming to be God there.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      In Greek, Jesus’ name (Iesous) was commonly shortened to just an iota, ‘I’, where the Greek word for Christ (Xhristos) was just an ‘X’, so Jesus Christ would be ‘IX’, but Jesus’ name without the title Christ would just be ‘I’.

      So in Revelation, Jesus saying He is the Alpha and the Omega would be seen as ‘I is A and O’, which is Iao, which is the Greek transliteration of YHWH.

      Jesus in Revelation is explicitly said to be YHWH by Himself. Unitarians must cope.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        This is some pilpul shit.

        Maybe you should just stick to the fact that Jesus used titles reserved only for God for Himself like the Alpha and the Omega and the Cloud Rider.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          John used pilpul in Revelation, he literally encodes secret messages in numbers.

          ‘I am the alpha and the omega’ literally just means Iao, it’s the divine name.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        So does this mean Revelation isn't canon?

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          Either the Unitarian denies scripture or they have to accept Jesus as YHWH. That’s the dilemma.

          >in Revelation
          Written by a schizo who never talked to Jesus

          >written by a schizo
          John of Patmos by tradition was the last disciple alive and hence knew Christ.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >by tradition
            Catholic mestizo schizo

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            By the tradition of the church fathers.

            >denies scripture
            The question is about if it's scripture or not. If there is absolutely no other way to interpret Revelation, and it unequivocally says Jesus is God, then does that mean it's not scripture?

            Why would it be non-canonical just because it says a doctrine you don’t like? It’s not inconsistent with other scriptures.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >It’s not inconsistent with other scriptures.
            Yes it is, that's the whole point. If Jesus is God as Revelation says, then how can he be the Son of God as said everywhere else in scripture? It says constantly that God sent Jesus, so did God send God to Earth as a sacrifice for God?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >If Jesus is God as Revelation says, then how can he be the Son of God as said everywhere else in scripture?
            You’re moronic and don’t understand even the Trinity as even Trinitarians see it. They don’t say Jesus is the ‘Son of Himself’, or was ‘sent by Himself’, they think that ‘God’ is a class that Jesus and the Father are both included under, it’s just that the Father is predicated this class first in a logical sequence while the Son is predicated it second in a logical sequence.

            Btw, Revelation isn’t the only book that calls Jesus God.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >They don’t say Jesus is the ‘Son of Himself
            But they believe that God sacrificed his only son Jesus...
            trinitarianism isn't present in Judaism because it's one of the many pagan imports into Christianity.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Trinitarianism isn’t present in Judaism
            You don’t know shit about Judaism. Stop listening to random israelites on Reddit and actually read their theology, pick up the Zohar and the Sefer Yetzirah.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >You don’t know shit about Judaism. Stop listening to random israelites on Reddit and actually read their theology, pick up the Zohar and the Sefer Yetzirah.
            Lol, you know that isn't at all saying that god is a trinity.
            Holy shit Christ-Tard...

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Lol, you know that isn't at all saying that god is a trinity.
            Jews believe in a mother, father, son, etc. in God that are really distinct from each other.

            https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partzufim

            Also that is actually saying God is a Trinity in that picture, it’s saying God is three-headed or three-rooted which is in the Zohar, and these three are the highest of the divine personas where the rest of the personas emanate.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Also that is actually saying God is a Trinity in that picture, it’s saying God is three-headed or three-rooted which is in the Zohar
            Wrong lol. Spectacularly wrong.
            Those are properties of the universe as designed by god.
            You have the 10 sefirot and 22 books...
            And no anon that doesn't represent the 10 identities of god himself lol.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Those are properties of the universe
            Which are emanated by God, and they ex within God as the first really distinct attributes. Additionally, there exists a tri-partite distinction between Ein, Ein Sof, and Ein Sof Ohr.

            >doesn’t represent the 10 identities of God
            They literally are able to speak distinctly and have sex with each other. The Shekinah has sex with Kether, which means they have an oppositional relation (passive vs active) which means they’re relatively distinct subsistences in Aristotelian terms.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Which are emanated by God
            Exactly, they aren't god.
            Boom. You have no argument.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Exactly, they aren't god.
            Yes they are moron, here’s Nachmanides saying the Shekinah is identical to God.
            >but muh hebrew
            If you can’t speak Hebrew you shouldn’t be speaking on Kabbalah.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >they think that ‘God’ is a class that Jesus and the Father are both included under,
            If two things both have the class of god, how many gods are there?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            If you reject the axiom of choice, one.

            https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amorphous_set

            Learn mathematics moron.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >If you reject the axiom of choice, one.
            >https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amorphous_set
            >Learn mathematics moron.
            Set theory is pure theoretical bullshit that isn't used in anything practical.
            It's just pseudo-intellectual day-dreaming over imaginary nothingness.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >set theory is [drivel not accepted by any mathematician]
            Concession accepted moron. Imagine getting filtered by math.

            Is the Father God?
            Is the Son God?
            Are they distinct?

            Yes.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Yes
            I accept your concession

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Not a concession, that’s just Trinitarianism.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Not a concession, that’s just Trinitarianism.
            Not in Judaism and something that makes no sense in Christianity.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Is the Father God?
            Is the Son God?
            Are they distinct?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Is the Father God?
            >Is the Son God?
            >Are they distinct?
            You're thinking about it too much...
            It only makes sense when you don't think.

            >Exactly, they aren't god.
            Yes they are moron, here’s Nachmanides saying the Shekinah is identical to God.
            >but muh hebrew
            If you can’t speak Hebrew you shouldn’t be speaking on Kabbalah.

            >Yes they are moron, here’s Nachmanides saying the Shekinah is identical to God.
            No he isn't anon...

            >Exactly, they aren't god.
            Yes they are moron, here’s Nachmanides saying the Shekinah is identical to God.
            >but muh hebrew
            If you can’t speak Hebrew you shouldn’t be speaking on Kabbalah.

            >If you can’t speak Hebrew you shouldn’t be speaking on Kabbalah.
            If you're Christian you are guaranteed to know nothing about Kabbalah...
            Or are you israeli anon?

            >set theory is [drivel not accepted by any mathematician]
            Concession accepted moron. Imagine getting filtered by math.
            [...]
            Yes.

            >Concession accepted moron. Imagine getting filtered by math.
            Name one practical use for set theory...
            I'm waiting...

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >No he isn't anon...
            He is literally saying it in the pic I sent you. It’s his commentary on Genesis 46:1.
            >guaranteed to know nothing about Kabbalah
            No one is guaranteed to know nothing about anything. What a moronic statement.

            >Not a concession, that’s just Trinitarianism.
            Not in Judaism and something that makes no sense in Christianity.

            Kether and the Shekinah are really distinct yet are both God.

            Also it makes total logical sense, you just don’t know anything about Aristotelian logic.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >He is literally saying it in the pic I sent you. It’s his commentary on Genesis 46:1.
            No, he's not anon.

            >No one is guaranteed to know nothing about anything. What a moronic statement.
            So you're a israelite?
            Yep, thought so.

            >Kether and the Shekinah are really distinct yet are both God.
            God creates them non...
            They aren't him...

            >Also it makes total logical sense, you just don’t know anything about Aristotelian logic.
            Are you saying that Aristotle wrote the Christian bible lol.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >No, he's not anon.
            Okay I’ll translate it for you since you’re so moronic.
            >The teachings of our Rabbis also contain many texts which indicate that the name Shechinah (Divine Presence) is identical with G-d, blessed be He. But all these subjects, of the Kabbalah known to Onkelos and Jonathan ben Uziel, and the secrets thereof are revealed to those who know the mystic lore of the Torah. Thus in the Revelation on Mount Sinai, wherever Elokim is mentioned in that section, Onkelos renders it as “the Glory” or “the Word of G-d,” but when Scripture mentions the Tetragrammaton he does not so render it. All this is done by Onkelos with extraordinary care and wisdom.

            >God creates them
            Ramban says they’re identical to God, so you’re wrong. Also you’re allowed to worship the ‘faces’ of HaShem in which the Shekinah is included, which would be impossible if they’re created energies.
            >Are you saying that Aristotle wrote the Christian bible lol.
            No, you’re moronic. I didn’t say that.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Okay I’ll translate it for you since you’re so moronic.
            It comes from god anon...
            Identical in the sense that you and I also come from god and thus are manifestations of god.

            >Ramban says they’re identical to God, so you’re wrong
            You're not even reading it right lol. And it doesn't even remotely line up with all the other numerology found in Judaism.

            >No, you’re moronic. I didn’t say that.
            That's what you're saying israelite anon.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Identical in the sense that [interpretation not found in Ramban]
            I’ll be honest, this is a state of disingenuity I haven’t seen in a long time. Saying the presence of God is identical to God is identical, in your mind, to saying we are identical to God (which is never said whatsoever by Ramban, or even the Rabbinate) due to us being created by God? Can we be worshiped by other people because we are ‘created’ by God too, then, because it’s said you can worship the Shekinah since it’s the face of God?
            >You're not even reading it right lol
            RAMBAN LITERALLY SAYS “THE NAME SHEKINAH IS IDENTICAL TO G-D” YOU moron.
            >it doesn’t even remotely line up… in Judaism
            Prove it, if you know more about Judaism than Rav Nachmanides.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >I’ll be honest, this is a state of disingenuity I haven’t seen in a long time.
            Said the israelite that's pretending to be Christian on Oyish and purposely misinterpreting his own religion to keep people in the dark lol.

            >RAMBAN LITERALLY SAYS “THE NAME SHEKINAH IS IDENTICAL TO G-D” YOU moron.
            No he doesn't irate friend
            You shouldn't anger at your own kind like this.

            >Prove it, if you know more about Judaism than Rav Nachmanides.
            ten this, six that, twenty two this etc...
            Great argument anon.

            >Judaism says the name of God is identical to God and can be worshiped as God
            >this homosexual: “okay but it just means it’s God like humans are God”
            ????

            says the name of God is identical to God and can be worshiped as God
            >>this homosexual: “okay but it just means it’s God like humans are God”
            ? So you don't think God created the universe?
            Sounds pretty stupid to me.

            The problem is that John 5:18 has the writer of the gospel saying Jesus was making Himself equal to God, not the israelites saying it. If you believe John was inspired in uttering those words you basically refute yourself.

            >The problem is that John 5:18
            You are never going to get rid of scriptural inconsistencies. The Abrahamics just choose an agreed upon interpretation and then stick with it.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >that's pretending to be Christian
            I’m not ‘pretending’ to be anything.
            >No he doesn't
            Yeah, I know you’re illiterate. Sorry.
            >ten this, six that, twenty two this etc...
            So you can’t prove it? I accept your concession.
            >So you don't think God created the universe?
            That’s not what was said. You’re just moronic for thinking you can call things identical to God and worship it as God because it was created by God. God literally says otherwise in the Torah, He says to not worship the sun and moon because He created it.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >I’m not ‘pretending’ to be anything.
            Said the israelite pretending to be a Christian on Oyish lol. Hilarious.

            >Yeah, I know you’re illiterate. Sorry.
            You're lying on purpose anon. I know...

            >So you can’t prove it? I accept your concession.
            Prove to you something you already know but refuse to admit? Nobody can win that game.

            >That’s not what was said. You’re just moronic for thinking you can call things identical to God and worship it as God
            I never said to worship things as god, merely that all things come from god and thus are extensions of god. It isn't that complicated.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            You can’t say the sun and moon are identical to God. If you’re a israelite, you know this. Otherwise, say the sun, moon, hasatan, edom, etc. are God.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >You can’t say the sun and moon are identical to God
            But they are god. Without a universe you would have no means of interacting with god.
            They merely aren't directly linked to god as Jesus is in Christianity.
            >If you’re a israelite, you know this
            I do know that god doesn't have a physical humanoid form like the Jesus of Christianity.
            Yet another reason why there is no trinity in Judaism.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >I do know that god doesn't have a physical humanoid form like the Jesus of Christianity.
            >Yet another reason why there is no trinity in Judaism.
            God appeared to Abraham in the form of a man.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >God appeared to Abraham in the form of a man.
            "in the form of", not "god is a man".
            This is god essentially operating a puppet.
            God himself didn't become a man.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >God himself didn't become a man.
            Could God become a man if He wanted?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Could God become a man if He wanted?
            Nope. He is a completely immaterial invisible entity.
            He merely creates, manipulates and operates the material world.
            His essence and identity is incapable of being directly expressed in a material form.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Nope.
            Then he's not omnipotent.
            Into the fire with you, heretic.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Then he's not omnipotent.
            >Into the fire with you, heretic.
            That doesn't follow at all.
            Asking for God to fully turn into matter is like insisting god was born and didn't always exist.

            It's impossible for god to be contained within our concept of time or our concept of existence.

            This is why Christians are wrong and have a Trinity. They reduce god to the material.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            You've reduced God to less than omnipotent.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >You've reduced God to less than omnipotent.
            How can an omnipotent god ever have a material essence?
            How can an omnipotent god ever have an age?
            You are attributing non-omnipotent characteristics to an omnipotent god.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >How can an omnipotent god ever have a material essence
            Whatever can be known, is known.
            Elohim know all that can be known.
            We are elohim.
            Nothing is unknown to us.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            So an omnipotent being can do anything, except become material?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >So an omnipotent being can do anything
            do anything that's possible*

            If you say omnipotence means the ability to do absolutely anything, then you run into paradoxes like God creating a stone he can't lift, which indicates there's an issue in your definition.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            I don't necessarily agree with that definition of omnipotence, but even then, you're not taking into account the possibility of God altering the universe to have properties that would allow him to exist as a being of flesh if he entered it.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >God altering the universe to have properties that would allow him to exist as a being of flesh if he entered it.
            The properties that would have to be altered are fundamental rules of logic and rationality, and to my knowledge these have always remained the same.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            So, you don't think God created the universe?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Yeah that's totally what I said

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            I don't see how if God is all powerful, he couldn't create a universe with rules where he would be flesh in it. The flesh would not work the same as our flesh.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >I don't see how if God is all powerful, he couldn't create a universe with rules where he would be flesh in it
            Again because that would lead to paradox and absurdity

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Why?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Dude he created the universe
            He heals laying his hands in the wounds

            Theres are some laws we don't know and theres are things right now happen and we don't know why they happen. Or some Hidden way we don't know to bend reality

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Theres are some laws we don't know and theres are things right now happen and we don't know why they happen. Or some Hidden way we don't know to bend reality
            These laws you're talking about are physical laws, not logical ones. Of course God can and does bend physical laws (such as "He heals laying his hands in the wounds"), but not logical ones.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Ah so You are wasting your time arguing if God can make a rock he can't lift cool

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Can he?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Judaism says the name of God is identical to God and can be worshiped as God
            >this homosexual: “okay but it just means it’s God like humans are God”
            ????

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            What other books call jesus god, in brief?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Hebrews. Read Hebrews 1:8-12, the Father calls Jesus ‘Ho Theos’ (O God) and says Jesus created the heavens and the earth, which Isaiah says God did alone.

            John also has Thomas calling Jesus ‘Ho Theos mou’ (the God of me) in chapter 20.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Hebrews 1:8-12
            Thank you. The verses before that Hebrews 1:1-4, I think, even more definitive, if what is look for proof from the New Testement that Jesus is as God the Father is:

            Long ago God spoke to our ancestors in many and various ways by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son,[a] whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom he also created the worlds. He is the reflection of God’s glory and the exact imprint of God’s very being, and he sustains[b] all things by his powerful word. When he had made purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs. (NSVR)

            "Exact imprint" and "As superior...as the name he has inherited is more excellent than..." are definitive statements I think. The only way they can be gainsaid is to gainsay their source, nothing else; Because the words are clear (at least to me).

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >denies scripture
            The question is about if it's scripture or not. If there is absolutely no other way to interpret Revelation, and it unequivocally says Jesus is God, then does that mean it's not scripture?

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        >in Revelation
        Written by a schizo who never talked to Jesus

  4. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    I take the most schizo take on it
    Jesus was the son of Satan and blasphemed against God

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Oh, so you're israeli?

  5. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    All other answers for the first part of John about the Word being God and the Word becoming flesh have never been satisfactory to me, so I am forced to conclude Jesus is God when pared with things like the "I am" stuff.

  6. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    >God becoming man is a logical absurdity
    God becoming man isn't a logical absurdity to me

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      >God becoming man isn't a logical absurdity to me
      Indeed because god is a myth created by man.

      I am YHWH your God, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourselves an idol, nor any image of anything that is in the heavens above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: you shall not bow yourself down to them, nor serve them, for I, YHWH your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and on the fourth generation of those who hate me, and showing loving kindness to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments.

      —Exodus 20:2-6 (WEB)

      Just a Jealous psychopath god created by psychopaths...

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Indeed
        Yes
        >because
        Letting you cook...
        >god is a myth created by man.
        a meal for someone else.

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Yes

          >Letting you cook...
          >>god is a myth created by man.
          >a meal for someone else.
          Lol, what in the absolute frick is that suppose to mean?
          See a psychiatrist anon.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            > what in the absolute frick is that suppose to mean?

            Think about it. This is a message board, nto a spoken conversation. You're free to reread it and apply your mind until you understand what you read.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Think about it. This is a message board, nto a spoken conversation. You're free to reread it and apply your mind until you understand what you read.
            So you had no argument and decided to just type random shit instead...
            You're a fricking nut job.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            Since when was I arguing with you in the first place? I wasn't.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Since when was I arguing with you in the first place? I wasn't.
            If you weren't than why do you care?
            Stop pretending to be stupid.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            There is a way of exchanging ideas, when one party things one thing is true about something and another party things something entirely different is true about that same thing, that isn't arguing.

            I had no intention of contending or arguing with you. I still don't. This is a message board, not an argue board. Just because you came ready to fight doesn't mean I have to fight you. <3

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >There is a way of exchanging ideas
            Abracadabra. There you go. I can "exchange" random nothingness too.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            > I can "exchange" random nothingness too.
            If we're doing the same thing, you're mad and I'm not. So you lose and I don't.

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            >If we're doing the same thing, you're mad and I'm not. So you lose and I don't.
            I know you're this guy...

            >God himself didn't become a man.
            Could God become a man if He wanted?

          • 6 months ago
            Anonymous

            That's not true. I'm the first one but not the second.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      >God becoming man isn't a logical absurdity to me
      Can God be tempted?

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        You mean can go be in the vicinity of someone saying to him "Do this and..." or "Do this or..."

        I genuinely believe the answer to that question, "Can god be tempted?", if that is what you mean, is yes.

        I believe that god is neither overbearing nor miserly. I believe that god is not a compeller of me. So...in what way could god not be tempted by someone walking up to him and presenting what they think he might want, through right guidance or wrong guidance?

  7. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    >accept the logical absurdities
    The bible is bullshit written by people...
    You will never get rid of the illogical inconsistencies.

  8. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Those "logical absurdities" aren't important. To reduce the Holy Trinity and God incarnate in the form of His Son down to human reasoning and logic is fundamentally the seed for hubris.

    If human reasoning and logic could explain all the phenomena of God and the Trinity it would by definition transcend it. If this had already been accomplished, high IQ Christians here on Oyish wouldn't be Christians.
    Worship and church would cease to function/exist since the ideal could be attained without it.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Those "logical absurdities" aren't important.
      The words of god aren't important lol.
      hahahahaaaaa
      Holy shit are Christ-tards stupid.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      >If human reasoning and logic could explain all the phenomena of God and the Trinity it would by definition transcend it.
      You can't even work out how to worship god properly because of how illogical the bible is.
      Why would god purposely give mankind a book that doesn't even explain how to worship him properly?
      It was made up by humans shithead.
      Same goes for the Talmud, Oral law, Koran, Hadiths and extra discarded books that didn't make it into the bible.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      I understand this, but how did you come to the conclusion that the Trinity and God incarnate is the truth?

      I assume you would say through the scriptures, but shouldn't you take the interpretation that doesn't allow for the logical absurdities?

  9. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    whats so hard to get about Jesus being divine but not the Father?
    angels are divine, but are not the Father

    Jesus was before creation, but was the first creation of God, it is written, the Father is God
    Jesus is divine, before creation but created

    and in gerarchy Jesus is second to God, and everything God created is under Jesus command, cause God allow it

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      >before creation but created
      This is impossible. You cannot be before x if you are in x.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        >This is impossible. You cannot be before x if you are in x.
        Abrahamics then argue that this is what separates god from all other things.
        God is the only X than can exist before X.

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        How does a sculpter sculpt?
        He doesn't manifest the rock.
        He takes the rock that is there, and removes what he does not want.
        That is how elohim create.

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Jesus was before creation, but was the first creation of God
      >Jesus is divine, before creation but created
      How does this make any sense?

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        Elohim create through division and definition.

        In the beginning, everything was void, until elohim started separating things and calling them good, and giving them names.

        You are elohim.

  10. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    >God becoming man
    God is the word
    The Bible is the book
    The Quran means to read and recite
    And Jesus is God manifesting in the flesh.

  11. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    Jacob was renamed Israel because he wrestled with GOD in human form.

  12. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    There are plenty of things that are said in scripture that Jesus never said.
    Sorry but Christianity is more then just the red text in the NT

  13. 6 months ago
    Anonymous

    He and the father are one.
    Jesus said : "I am".

    In the begining there was the truth....
    And by the end - numbers.
    "I am one."

    What do you think he is saying?
    Good game.
    I think it means : "I LIVE! I am alive. I am. Positive. True"

    • 6 months ago
      Anonymous

      Where as we live in a state of falsehood and deception. Never pausing to consider the bigger fish...

      • 6 months ago
        Anonymous

        Psychologists want you to "become one"......with your demons.

        "It's healthy."

        • 6 months ago
          Anonymous

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *