Father, Son, and Holy Spirit makes ONE God (Jesus Christ) like Mind, Body, and Spirit makes ONE Man

a reply to: DISRAELI

There are two language points puzzling you, I think. One is the language which implies subordination. But even in Trinitarian theory, the Father has a degree of priority, because he originates the other two. For that reason alone, the Son would be giving way. The other is the language which applies the word "God" simply to the Father. To me, that is just force of habit (Paul's original education being Jewish), and not consciously following through the logic which makes it legitimate for us to use the word "God" more broadly. His insistence that Christ is "Lord" has the same effect, especially when it is expanded to the Old Testament term "Lord of glory" (1 Corinthians ch2 v8).

Thanking you again DISRAELI. Exactly as my teacher has confirmed. It has become clear and you were right in that it did lay in the language used. With all respect I thank you again. lol

a reply to: whereislogic

I agree with you Jesus did not pray to another part of himself, he did not ask help form himself. A Father is not his son.

Most assuredly, I say to you, whatever you ask the Father in My name He will give you. Until now you have asked nothing in My name. Ask, and you will receive, that your joy may be full.” (John 16:23-24)

And whatever you ask in My name, that I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask anything in My name, I will do it.” (John 14:13-14)

a reply to: lightofgratitude

Jesus says that He and The Father are ONE (John 10:30), NOT TWO. He says that The Father dwells in Him

he dwells in all who are his. We are also one with God if we do his will.

originally posted by: lightofgratitude
a reply to: EmmanuelGoldstein

God is everywhere. You don't need to join a stupid club to get it.

Yes, God is everywhere, but it is through Faith that God can appear to you as a Person, that you can experience The Love of God personally, as a person.


It isn't complicated, it's simple.


One Man = Mind, Body, Spirit.

One God "Jesus Christ" = Mind of The Father, Body of The Son, and The Holy Spirit.


God made it Simple, by making us in His Image and Likeness. Whoever denies The Holy Trinity (Father, Son, Holy Spirit), is denying that Man was made in His Image (Mind, Body, Spirit).

Torah has multiple dimensions that only rabbi's could interpret for their advanced students. If you study some early religious texts many classed the masculine as our spiritual nature and femininity as our earthly nature. So "MAN in His own image" implies that the "spiritual nature" of humans is made in GOD's image.

If you can get your mind to half accept the following .... Aristotle say: “Jews are derived from the Indian philosophers; they are named by the Indians Calami, and by the Syrians Judaei, and took their name from the country they inhabit, which is called Judea.”

Then Hinduism might offer a little more light (pun intended) into our nature, Atman is our inner self or soul. Brahman is the Creator. The Atman is the individualised state of the Universal Brahman. Only when we witness the emptiness in the Atman can we witness the Brahman.

No one can know the Brahman but the Atman
No one can know the Father but the Son.

The Revelation of John describes the process of awakening through the four worlds of ascension into the central column, Tree of Life which resides within each one of us.

If you believe any of what I wrote you must be crazier than me

a reply to: glend


"This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;

Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created." - Genesis 5:1-2


Man means a member of mankind. It doesn't mean a male. It says, God created Man in His Image and Likeness. Male and female, He created them and called them Adam. Adam means man in Hebrew.

originally posted by: glend

If you can get your mind to half accept the following .... Aristotle say: “Jews are derived from the Indian philosophers; they are named by the Indians Calami, and by the Syrians Judaei, and took their name from the country they inhabit, which is called Judea.”

Aristotle - Wikipedia

Along with his teacher Plato, he is considered the "Father of Western Philosophy".

These people follow the teachings of men. Or behaving like those who, as quoted before from the Bible, were: “a stubborn people . . . walking in the way that is not good, following their own thoughts”. (Isa 65:2) Aristotle was basically Plato's protegé.

It is not wise to fill your mind with their crap. Their influence on the masses is tremendous. Exactly as described and warned for in many Bible texts. What they (and those following suit) have to offer is neither insight, nor understanding, nor enlightenment, nor knowledge, nor wisdom.

Essentially, knowledge means familiarity with facts/truths/certainties acquired by personal experience, observation, or study. The Bible strongly urges the seeking for and treasuring of right knowledge, recommending it rather than gold. (Pr 8:10; 20:15) Jesus stressed the importance of truly knowing him and his Father, and knowledge is repeatedly emphasized in the books of the Christian Greek Scriptures.​—Joh 17:3; Php 1:9; 2Pe 3:18.

However, not all that men may call “knowledge” is to be sought, because philosophies and views exist that are “falsely called ‘knowledge.’” (1Ti 6:20)

The Greek word phi·lo·so·phiʹa means, literally, “love of wisdom.” In modern usage the term relates to human endeavors to understand and interpret through reason and speculation the whole of human experience, including the underlying causes and principles of reality. Most philosophers however employ chiefly speculative means rather than observation in a search for truth.

In his inspired letters Paul emphasized a number of times that the wisdom and falsely called knowledge of the world is foolishness with God and is to be avoided by Christians.​—1Co 1:18-31; 2:6-8, 13; 3:18-20; 1Ti 6:20.

...
What is the origin of human philosophies?

They come from people who have limitations: The Bible informs us: “It does not belong to man who is walking even to direct his step.” (Jer. 10:23) History testifies that trying to ignore that limitation has not produced good results. On one occasion, “Jehovah proceeded to answer Job out of the windstorm and say: ‘Who is this that is obscuring counsel by words without knowledge? Gird up your loins, please, like an able-bodied man, and let me question you, and you inform me. Where did you happen to be when I founded the earth? Tell me, if you do know understanding.’” (Job 38:1-4) (Humans by nature have limitations. Additionally, their experience in life is relatively brief and is usually confined to one culture or one environment. The knowledge they possess is thus restricted, and everything is interconnected to such an extent that they constantly find aspects that they had not adequately considered. Any philosophy that they originate will reflect these limitations.)

They are developed by humans who are imperfect: “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” (Rom. 3:23) “There exists a way that is upright before a man, but the ways of death are the end of it afterward.” (Prov. 14:12) (Because of such imperfection, human philosophies often reflect a basic selfishness that leads perhaps to momentary pleasure but also to frustration and much unhappiness.)

They are influenced by demonic spirits: “The whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one.” (1 John 5:19) “The one called Devil and Satan . . . is misleading the entire inhabited earth.” (Rev. 12:9) “You at one time walked according to the system of things of this world, according to the ruler of the authority of the air, the spirit that now operates in the sons of disobedience.” (Eph. 2:2) (Philosophies that encourage people to disobey God’s wholesome and upright requirements reflect such an influence. No wonder that, as history testifies, human philosophies and schemes have often brought grief to large segments of humankind.)

Why is it an evidence of clear thinking to study the teachings of Jesus Christ instead of human philosophy?
...

Source: Philosophy: Reasoning From the Scriptures

a reply to: lightofgratitude

Man means a member of mankind. It doesn't mean a male. It says, God created Man in His Image and Likeness. Male and female, He created them and called them Adam. Adam means man in Hebrew.

Person, man, human being. The root of the names is אדמ, just like the root of the word “ground” or “earth”. According to the Biblical account, God used earth to create man. איש, גבר, בן-אדם. שורש השם הוא א' ד' מ', כמו השורש של המילה "אדמה". לפי הסיפור המקראי, אלוהים ברא את האדם מאדמה.
source - hebrewname.org...

But that was before the earth was cursed. Adam and Eve were of the earth that was cursed and became corrupt through the curse of earth the same as the entire universe. All earth must eventually perish because of the curse. This also changed the likeness to God that was enjoyed before the curse. After the curse of earth, the humans that were procreated from Adam and Eve are not in the likeness of God.

a reply to: whereislogic

Its not only the word of Aristotle but also similarities between Judaic and Vedic texts that gives weight to Aristotle testimony.

Abraham and his wife Sarai = Brahma and his wife Sarasvati
Hagar was Sarai’s maidservant = Sarasvati River in India includes a tributary known as the Ghaggar
Adam and Eve = Adama and Havyavati
Noah flood story = Nyuha flood story

There are hundreds more similarities between Torah and Vedic texts that have convinced even Rabi's that there must be a link. Of cause they claim vedic texts derived from Judaism.

But should it really matter to those that seek spirituality where Abraham was born.

You might want to believe that the only truth exists in Christian texts but even Paul admitted he would use underhanded methods to persuade the masses to become Christian ....

"I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more. And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; To them that are without law, as without law, that I might gain them that are without law. ... I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. And this I do for the gospel's sake" (1 Cor. 9.19-23).

My feeling is that we can never find the absolute truth in any words written by man because truth remains relative to that persons frame of reference (Truth Relativism). To find spirituality, we need rise above all dogmatic religious and cultural baggage that promote fear and confusion. We instead need surrender ourselves to spirituality by promoting love and caring in our heart for all others, regardless a persons religious or cultural background.

Jesus said, "The Father's kingdom is like a merchant who had a supply of merchandise and found a pearl. That merchant was prudent; he sold the merchandise and bought the single pearl for himself. So also with you, seek his treasure that is unfailing, that is enduring, where no moth comes to eat and no worm destroys."

That in effect tells us that we need introspect ourselves, all our personal needs and wants. Ask ourselves is that really helping our spiritual path or is it yet another roadblock to our goal. Egoism is the snake that wants me to believe that my religion is better than yours, that I deserve this and that, that I am wiser than you.

In our world of materialism the snake has grown incredibly strong.

Yet Jesus proved that it can be conquered.

a reply to: lightofgratitude

I am suggesting that Torah is far more richer than you suspect, Deep with rabbinic polysemy and pluralism. Texts like Coptic Gospel of Thomas offer a clue as to how words were sometimes played....

Simon Peter said to them, "Make Mary leave us, for females don't deserve life."
Jesus said, "Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven."

Male = spirit
Female = earth.

Why they wrote text like this is unclear. But I suspect the priestly caste wanted to remain in control so hid deeper knowledge in symbolism etc. Similarly Roman Church for many centuries prohibited Christians reading the New Testament on their own. It had to be in Church,

a reply to: glend
Truth isn't relative. That philosophy about truth combines well with the agnostic code (see video I shared earlier). “What Is truth?” That question was cynically posed to Jesus by the Roman Governor Pontius Pilate. He was not interested in an answer, and Jesus did not give him one. Perhaps Pilate viewed truth as too elusive to grasp.​—John 18:38.

This disdainful attitude toward truth is shared by many today, including religious leaders, educators, and politicians. They hold that truth​—especially moral and spiritual truth—​is not absolute but relative and ever changing. This, of course, implies that people can determine for themselves what is right and what is wrong. (Isaiah 5:20, 21) It also allows people to twist things and give it their own spin, especially obvious among politicians where that word “spin” is commonly used to describe the tricks they're using.

Isaiah 5:20,21

20 Woe to those who say that good is bad and bad is good,

Those who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness,

Those who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!

21 Woe to those wise in their own eyes

And discreet in their own sight!

The statement that prompted Pilate’s question is worth noting. Jesus had said: “For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, that I should bear witness to the truth.” (John 18:37) Truth to Jesus was no vague, incomprehensible concept. He promised his disciples: “You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”​—John 8:32.

Where can such truth be found? On one occasion, Jesus said in prayer to God: “Your word is truth.” (John 17:17) The Bible, written under divine inspiration, reveals truth that provides both reliable guidance and a sure hope for the future​—everlasting life.​—2 Timothy 3:15-17.

Pilate indifferently rejected the opportunity to learn such truth. What about you?

Pilate, of course, was not really seeking the truth. If anything, his question revealed his skeptical or cynical attitude. Apparently, to Pilate truth was whatever a person might choose or was taught to believe; there was really no way to determine what is truth (and as a typical politician he would have both an advantage and experience with promoting this agnostic philosophy and benefitting from its popularity or people believing this is the case). Many today feel the same way. Because this is a very useful tool for spin and propaganda (marketing and selling ideologies and philosophies, religious, political or otherwise), and thus a very useful tool by the one referred to as “the god of this system of things” “who is misleading the entire inhabited earth”. (2 Cor 4:4; Rev 12:9) He's been very busy promoting it in an effort to obscure the truth, especially the truths about God and His purpose for mankind, to figuratively veil it with a fog of darkness making everything appear more vague and unclear, keeping people in the dark and ignorant, as per the agnostic code and the resulting behaviour of giving up on trying to figure it out (see ending of that code). It's one of his main brainwashing and indoctrination tools, that's why I called it a "doozy" before, in the context of the scene from Groundhog Day regarding the first step (think spiritual path, pathways of thinking, a logical pathway). Here's another version of that somewhat agnostic philosophy that, in the case below, uses the marketing label "science" or "scientific" to promote it as the more intellectual position or openminded view of truth or knowledge/science, ie. that which is true/factual/certain/absolute/correct, without error or a familiarity with it (all synonyms that demonstrate that philosophy to be wrong/incorrect):

'there is no such thing as absolute certainty in science' (quoting Alexander Vilenkin and many others, including variations such as 'science does not deal with absolutes')

If you think it through regarding the meaning of the word "science" (from the Latin "scientia" meaning "knowledge", which is also still a synonym for "science" in English), you could realize what utter nonsense such statements are (see for example how I defined knowledge before as a familiarity with facts/truths/certainties, i.e. things that are factual/true/absolute/certain/correct, without error). And they are promoted by the most prominent scientists, that says a lot about the supposed 'wisdom of the world' (foolishness really). As mentioned before:

In his inspired letters Paul emphasized a number of times that the wisdom and falsely called knowledge of the world is foolishness with God and is to be avoided by Christians.​—1Co 1:18-31; 2:6-8, 13; 3:18-20; 1Ti 6:20.

Even when they call it "science" instead of "knowledge". Cause that's pretty much implying the same thing. The KJV actually uses the word "science" there at 1Ti 6:20 (the Latin translations would have "scientia").

a reply to: whereislogic

An ego that wants this and that for its own benefit, will never see anything but a relative point of view. Our spiritual self isn't polluted with an ego so witnesses everything in the absolute. Jesus viewed the world in the absolute because he had conquered his ego.

Spiritual morality is absolute but moral laws written by man are relative (Leviticus 20:9 totally unacceptable today etc).

Pilate indifferently rejected the opportunity to learn such truth. What about you?

Matthew 5:20 ... "For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the Kingdom of Heaven".

Yet no-where does the bible list the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees. The first Syrian christians (Nazoreans and Ebionites) were far different to those we would consider Christians today. So its likely that christian teachings were adapted to suit the cultural and spiritual paradigms of the roman people

So I disagree that the bible rewards its followers heaven. It has to be earned.

The truth we seek is in prayer.