Jesus said this? That can only mean...

biblehub.com...

'I am coming quickly; hold fast what you have, so that no one will take your crown. 12'He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he will not go out from it anymore; and I will write on him the name of My God, and the name of the city of My God, the new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from My God, and My new name.

You will notice the use of "my God" in this verse.
What does this mean?

a reply to: waterLaw

That Jesus was not God incarnate.

*dodges stones thrown by Catholics and Trinitarians from all around*

He was the son of his Father, Yahweh, the One God.

It was hard to explain such things back then, but .. the early Catholic Church (Nicene Creed etc) made sure to add on everything that they needed to.

a reply to: waterLaw

I've stopped debating whether or not if Jesus was God manifested in the flesh, it's such a touchy subject. The are scriptures that prove both sides. But I do feel that there are more verse to support that he was then there are that he wasn't.

a reply to: waterLaw

Even if it weren't for the blatant contradiction presented if Jesus was the same entity as the OT gods, there's plenty of other reasons that just make it a difficult concept to place into the narrative.

For me, at least, it's hard to imagine Jesus murdering the world, asking for foreskin collections, tearing children apart with his minion bears, or asking for his disciples to rape the women and dash babies against rocks. If Jesus were the OT gods, it would mean he did all those things. The new testament paints an entirely different personality than that. It doesn't make sense.

There are sooo many reasons to doubt the singular nature of the OT gods and Jesus.

a reply to: waterLaw

Because Jesus was not God the same way the burning bush was not God and still spoke as God.

a reply to: Cuervo

Remember, while Jesus didn't break out the fire and brimstone often, He did entreat people over and over again to believe, reminding them that none come to the Father except through Him. The implication being over and over again that for those who do not believe in Him, they will face all the judgment of the Lord unstinting.

He even mentions that believers will not be appointed to wrath. Again, the implication is that those who do not believe must be so appointed.

People who think that Jesus was all touchy feely are reading the Gospels with only one eye open.

originally posted by: waterLaw
biblehub.com...

'I am coming quickly; hold fast what you have, so that no one will take your crown. 12'He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he will not go out from it anymore; and I will write on him the name of My God, and the name of the city of My God, the new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from My God, and My new name.

You will notice the use of "my God" in this verse.
What does this mean?

YHWH - God The Father.

Same as Matthew 27:46 and Mark 15:34

originally posted by: RealTruthSeeker
a reply to: waterLaw

I've stopped debating whether or not if Jesus was God manifested in the flesh, it's such a touchy subject. The are scriptures that prove both sides. But I do feel that there are more verse to support that he was then there are that he wasn't.

The Word Became Flesh

1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning. 3Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcomea it.

6There was a man sent from God whose name was John. 7He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all might believe. 8He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light.

9The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. 10He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. 11He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. 12Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.

14The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Cuervo

Remember, while Jesus didn't break out the fire and brimstone often, He did entreat people over and over again to believe, reminding them that none come to the Father except through Him. The implication being over and over again that for those who do not believe in Him, they will face all the judgment of the Lord unstinting.

He even mentions that believers will not be appointed to wrath. Again, the implication is that those who do not believe must be so appointed.

People who think that Jesus was all touchy feely are reading the Gospels with only one eye open.

That's the problem for me, though. I can respect a person who's religious beliefs command them to follow a deity like Jesus but I can't understand a person's moral compass who would willingly follow the OT gods.

If I were a Christian, I would always distance the two and view Jesus as the answer to the OT gods. It also seems as if Jesus's death was partially an act of redemption for what his father had done to the world. Humanity certainly wasn't guilty of crimes any worse than the OT gods so it's confusing that we would need forgiven for looking at the neighbor's wife but that their god didn't need forgiven for genocide, baby killing, or any of the other depraved acts that fill the old testament.

Separating the two sort of allows a person to believe in the goodness of Jesus.

originally posted by: ketsuko
People who think that Jesus was all touchy feely are reading the Gospels with only one eye open.

They're also the type who ask folks to "be more like Jesus," without taking into account all the sorcery and necromancy.

a reply to: waterLaw

Jesus (peace be upon him) was a prophet, the only thing that distinguished him from the other prophets is that he did not have a father. God, the creator of the heavens and the earth and all prophets (including Jesus pbuh) made it for Mary possible to become pregnant without her having to have intercourse. That is a miracle of God, the one who is capable of doing all things. This version of the story leads you to Islam.

The five major prophets according to the Quran are:

Noah
Abraham
Moses
Jesus
Muhammad
May Peace and Blessings of ALLAH (SWT) (swt) Be Upon Them All. Ameen

So this means that our beloved prophet Jesus was also an important prophet in Islam. But we never dare to call him how you call him.

If you are interested in what Islam has to say about Mary and Jesus (bpuh) you should definitely read it on:
www.islamreligion.com...

I hope God will guide you to the truth!

a reply to: waterLaw

Quite simple really...

A god, aka: God in the flesh, does not have his own God...

Christians never really figured that one out...

a reply to: ElectricFeel

So, if all those prophets had biological mothers and fathers, but Jesus only had a mother, wouldn't that make him stand out above the rest?

Who was Jesus' father again? You said it yourself, in a way. It was God.

Those other prophets you named? Not God.

Jesus is God.

a reply to: Blue Shift

Boy that Jesus sure was a crazy guy wasn't he ?

a reply to: waterLaw

If your only looking at the bible it doesn't matter. Because Hebrews tells us that God talks to us through his son. So they are essentially the same voice.

However, the only way to reconcile the NT with the Koran is to accept that Jesus is the son of God, not the father himself.

God said "Let there be Light", Jesus said I am the light of this world.

Jesus is litterly the Word spoken by God in the beginning. YHWH is Jesus and the physical creator of Adam. Jesus was with God in the beginning, Jesus is God, because he created Adam from the dust, which he also created according to the will of his father.

God has no beginning, but Jesus did.

There is no other way to reconcile the three testimonies. So Jesus is not God the father the creator of Spirit, but God the son creator of the flesh.

Also God cannot be tempted.
God is Love
Love does not leave the sinner

Jesus was tempted in everyway we are.
Jesus is the Light
The Light only shines in those who pursue him.

The father did not become the son so he could be tempted.

The father did not become the son. Jesus was begotten, not made, consubstantial with the father.

Jesus was not tempted, a better word would be "tested".

a reply to: Isurrender73

originally posted by: Cuervo
a reply to: waterLaw

Even if it weren't for the blatant contradiction presented if Jesus was the same entity as the OT gods, there's plenty of other reasons that just make it a difficult concept to place into the narrative.

For me, at least, it's hard to imagine Jesus murdering the world, asking for foreskin collections, tearing children apart with his minion bears, or asking for his disciples to rape the women and dash babies against rocks. If Jesus were the OT gods, it would mean he did all those things. The new testament paints an entirely different personality than that. It doesn't make sense.

There are sooo many reasons to doubt the singular nature of the OT gods and Jesus.

yes, this is one of the biggest reasons i left christianity despite being brainwashed so hard my father was literally whispering mantras into my ear when he put me to bed. but if you try to bring up these simple and obvious observations to christians, their brains just turn off and they say things like 'why are you so arrogant to try to understand god'. the obvious answer to that is, 'your whole belief system is based upon the idea of God coming down to try to make himself understood' but at that point you've lost them to the brainwashing and fear.

a reply to: elliotmtl

You left Christianity because you didn't understand God's actions in the OT?

Really? Seriously? That's your best reason? Lol. Most folks "give up" Christianity cuz they don't wanna change their lives and do what Jesus wants them to do. The lure of "the world" is too strong. It feels good, and dangit, if it feels good, well, then do it!!

Drop everything!? (Your will), and follow Jesus!? Nahhhh. I'll pass. I have a tee time.

1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning. 3Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.


This says to me in the beginning there nothing then there was a sound (big bang) (God's word) however you wish to describe it they say the same to me. Through him all things were made. well SOUND creates matter therefore through the word all things were made. in the word was the light of all mankind again I think big bang all the lights / galaxies came from Gods word or the big bang the darkness did not overcome it, well proof of that is that we are here maybe I am way off but I think science explains it pretty well.

originally posted by: Ignatian
The father did not become the son. Jesus was begotten, not made, consubstantial with the father.

Jesus was not tempted, a better word would be "tested".

a reply to: Isurrender73

Tested or tempted it doesn't matter. If he was only tested, then we are only tested. Since he was tested/tempted in ALL THE SAME WAYS we are.

God the father can be neither tested nor tempted. Jesus is not the father, he is the spoke word of God "Let there be LIGHT", "I am the LIGHT of the world"

New International Version
For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are--yet he did not sin.

New Living Translation
This High Priest of ours understands our weaknesses, for he faced all of the same testings we do, yet he did not sin.

Begotten is a bad translation, and many translations agree with me. Begotten is used to depect the act of procreation between a man and women. God did not have intercourse with Mary, which the literal definition of Begotten implies.

John 3:16

New International Version
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

New Living Translation
"For God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.

English Standard Version
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

New American Standard Bible
"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

Personally I believe Unique, or one of a kind, is the correct interpretation.

International Standard Version
"For this is how God loved the world: He gave his UNIQUE Son so that everyone who believes in him might not be lost but have eternal life.

Here is a link that explains how the word Monogenēs is typically used in the Greek language.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

Jesus was SPOKEN, since he is the WORD of God, which makes him one of a kind, UNIQUE.