The Truth About Jesus

originally posted by: tamusan
a reply to: andy06shake

The bigger question aside of who are the sons plural of God, you can read these two ways. I choose to believe that Satan was called out as a member of the group of sons called before God.

Now it fell upon a day, that the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.—Job 1:6

Job 1:6 (NW)

Now the day came when the sons of the true God* [A Hebrew idiom that refers to angelic sons of God.] entered to take their station before Jehovah, and Satan also entered among them.

The topic of "the sons of God" (the angelic/spirit sons of God as meant at Job 1:6, angels are spirit beings, just like Satan and "his angels", i.e. demons, quoting Rev 12:9) is discussed in my last 3 comments about Jesus. In particular the first one, under the topic "Prehuman Existence." (last paragraph) And more precisely (or more detailed) under the topic: How he is the “only-begotten Son.”

In regards to the response you got from Andy right below your comment, and in particular his point about interpretation at the end (since it is misleading), I recommend this article (I'll quote about half of it, I'll skip the specific examples):

Is the Bible Open to Just Any Interpretation?

“YOU are just skipping around in the Bible, picking out the scriptures that fit your interpretation,” complained the lady to one of Jehovah’s Witnesses who was calling at her door.

But is referring to texts in different parts of the Bible actually a proof that a person is trying to interpret it to fit his own ideas? And if so, does this mean that the Bible is open to just any interpretation​—one being just as legitimate as any other?

Let the Author Have His Say

Whereas the Bible has only one Author, Jehovah God, it does have many writers. These some 40 Bible writers never contradict one another​—which, by the way, is a proof of God’s authorship—​yet no one Bible writer says all there is to say about any particular subject. So to understand what the Author of the Bible says about a subject, it is necessary to gather together all the scriptures germane to the subject under discussion. This is what the above-mentioned Witness was trying to do.

He was on sound footing. For instance, open your Bible to Romans chapter 9. Here you will find an outstanding example of how the faithful Christian Paul did the same thing. In this one chapter alone, Paul quotes 11 times from other parts of the Bible. Some critic might even charge that Paul does a considerable amount of “skipping around.” Starting with the first book of the Bible, he skips over to the 39th book, before continuing with the 2nd, the 28th, and finally, the 23rd book of the Bible.* [The quotations are found in Romans chapter 9, verses 7 (Genesis 21:12), 9 (Genesis 18:14), 12 (Genesis 25:23), 13 (Malachi 1:2, 3), 15 (Exodus 33:19), 17 (Exodus 9:16), 25 (Hosea 2:23), 26 (Hosea 1:10), 27, 28 (Isaiah 10:22, 23), 29 (Isaiah 1:9), and 33 (Isaiah 28:16).]

Of course, it would have been wrong for Paul to take scriptures out of their context and twist them to fit his own personal ideas. But Paul was not guilty of this. Apparently some early Christians were guilty, however, for the apostle Peter speaks of “things hard to understand, which the untaught and unsteady are twisting, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.”​—2 Peter 3:16.

“Things hard to understand” can easily be misunderstood. Even the works of famous writers like Shakespeare come in for various interpretations​—obviously not all of them accurate. Hence, it is not strange that this is true of the Bible. If Shakespeare were still alive, we could ask him: “Just exactly what did you mean?” Yet, this is not possible; neither is it possible for us to ask the writers of the Bible for further clarification. Happily, we can still ask its Author, for he lives! (Psalm 90:1, 2) And he has promised to give such spiritual guidance to men of faith who ask it of him.​—Luke 11:9-13; James 1:5, 6.

While in Egypt, God’s faithful servant Joseph recognized the importance of asking for divine guidance when he was called upon to interpret a dream that God had given to Egypt’s ruler. “Do not interpretations belong to God?” he had earlier asked. After Joseph gave the correct interpretation, Pharaoh was moved to say: “Can another man be found like this one in whom the spirit of God is?” And to Joseph he said: “Since God has caused you to know all this, there is no one as discreet and wise as you are.”​—Genesis 40:8; 41:38, 39.

The variety of contradicting interpretations we find today among so-called Christians is not the fault of the Bible’s Author, nor is it the fault of Bible writers. As God’s prophets, these “spoke from God as they were borne along by holy spirit.” (2 Peter 1:20, 21) It is the fault of Bible readers who have failed to follow the leadings of God’s spirit in allowing God to interpret his own Word. They have allowed personal ideas to becloud their view of what the Bible’s Author himself says. Let us take two examples. [whereislogic: I have discussed other ones in this thread such as the pagan Babylonian doctrine of the Trinity (a myth/false story) and the pagan Babylonian myth of the immortal immaterial soul (or the idea/philosophy that some invisible immaterial part of man survives the death of the physical body, as per the phrase: “Death was a passage to another kind of life.”—The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria, p. 556. Some call it the soul, some call it spirit, some call it energy, the latter being more popular in so-called "new age philosophy". Which is nothing new.).]

What Is the Punishment for Sin?

...

What Is Earth’s Destiny?

...

Why Not Open to Just Any Interpretation?

What would a housewife think of a recipe book that was open to just any interpretation? Or of what benefit would it be to spend money for a dictionary that allowed its reader to interpret the meaning of words just any way he chose? Is that the kind of guidebook we would expect God to give his creatures? Indeed, in such a case, would it even be proper to speak of it as a guidebook?

Honest, God-fearing persons are not interested in twisting the Scriptures “to their own destruction.” (2 Peter 3:16) To avoid doing this, they find all the scriptures dealing with the subject they are trying to understand. When scriptures are found that clearly contradict previously held views, those views are quickly discarded, as they cannot be correct.

Because of having this kind of meek attitude, millions of people who were formerly religiously divided have now achieved religious unity with Jehovah’s Witnesses. Instead of wanting to interpret the Bible to fit personal ideas, they have been willing to conform to the obvious interpretation made by the Bible’s Author himself.

How good it is to know that the Bible is not open to just any interpretation. When we allow its Author to interpret it for us, it is truly “beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness.” Then, and only then, will it make us “fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.”​—2 Timothy 3:16, 17.

originally posted by: GENERAL EYES
a reply to: chr0naut

I don't think he meant in the LITERAL sense, but rather how there is a duality at play during our time here on Earth.

Satan tempts people down the road of ruin and destruction, Jesus offers the path of redemption and everlasting life.

Kind of like the two faces of a coin.

RIght Hand Path, Left Hand Path.

Good versus Evil.

But after Jesus's birth Mary and Jospeh did have more children, so he has half-brothers and sisters out there.

And the Powerful Play Goes On.

In the gospels that were not included in the final edited version of the Bible, Jesus was all about duality (flesh/spirit) and was giving us explicit instructions as to how to achieve ascension, but just like Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden, some of us refuse to listen, acknowledge or follow the wisdom. We are God's creation and perhaps God's design or the true plan. Who are we to question that?

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: 19Bones79

I was just watching the Gospel of Mary and Jesus' secret teachings which showed me that early Christians had not cemented their teachings nor the true 'path'. Perhaps we need to go back and relearn how the early Christians grappled with the hard questions of life and faith.

Why You Can Trust the Biblical Gospels

“They have become a tremendous success. They have inspired films that cost millions . . . and best sellers . . . Christian sects have adopted them. They have given rise to religions and conspiratorial theories.”​—SUPER INTERESSANTE, A BRAZILIAN NEWS MAGAZINE.

WHAT was all the excitement about? The magazine was commenting on the recent popular interest and activities centered on a collection of pseudo gospels, epistles, and apocalypses discovered in the mid-20th century in Nag Hammadi and elsewhere in Egypt. These and other documents of this type have generally been referred to as Gnostic or Apocryphal writings. * [“Gnostic” and “Apocryphal” come from Greek words that can refer to “secret knowledge” and “carefully concealed” respectively. These terms are used to refer to spurious or uncanonical writings that attempt to imitate the Gospels, Acts, letters, and the revelations in the canonical books of the Christian Greek Scriptures.]

Was There a Conspiracy?

In an age when people generally are cynical about the Bible and orthodox religions, the Gnostic or Apocryphal writings seem to have struck a responsive chord. [whereislogic: hook, line and sinker; the Devil strikes and scores again. Catering to the crowd, 'tickling their ears' as per 2 Tim 4:3,4, telling them what they want to hear, catering/pandering to "their desires". “For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the wholesome* [Or “healthful; beneficial.”] teaching, but according to their own desires, they will surround themselves with teachers to have their ears tickled.* [Or “to tell them what they want to hear.”] They will turn away from listening to the truth and give attention to false stories.” (2 Timothy 4:3,4)] These writings have had a great influence on the way many view the teachings of Jesus Christ and Christianity itself. As one magazine stated: “The Gospel of Thomas and other apocryphal [works] speak to the heart of a group of people that continues to grow in modern times: those who are eager for spirituality but distrust religion.” It has been calculated that in Brazil alone “there are at least 30 groups whose beliefs are based on the Apocrypha.”

The discovery of these documents has popularized the theory that in the fourth century C.E., the Catholic Church conspired to cover up the truth about Jesus, that some accounts of his life presented in the Apocryphal writings were suppressed, and that the four Gospels found in modern Bibles were altered. Elaine Pagels, professor of religion, put it this way: “We now begin to see that what we call Christianity​—and what we identify as Christian tradition—​actually represents only a small selection of specific sources, chosen from among dozens of others.”

In the opinion of scholars like Pagels, the Bible is not the only source of Christian faith; there are other sources, such as the Apocryphal writings. For example, a BBC program entitled Bible Mysteries, “The Real Mary Magdalene” observed that the Apocryphal writings present Mary Magdalene as “a teacher and spiritual guide to the other disciples. She’s not just a disciple; she’s the apostle to the apostles.” [whereislogic: have you been feeding on the same poison for your mind? Regardless if you saw it on the BBC.] Commenting on the supposed role of Mary Magdalene, Juan Arias writes in the Brazilian newspaper O Estado de S. Paulo: “Today everything leads us to believe that the early Christian movement, founded by Jesus, was profoundly ‘feminist,’ since the first domestic churches were women’s houses, where they officiated as priests and bishops.”

For many, the Apocryphal sources seem to carry far more weight than the Biblical source. This preference, however, raises some important questions: Are the Apocryphal writings a legitimate source of Christian faith? When they contradict clear Bible teachings, which source should we believe​—the Bible or the Apocryphal books? Was there really a conspiracy in the fourth century to suppress these books and alter the four Gospels to exclude important information about Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and others? For answers to these questions, let us consider one of the four Biblical Gospels, the Gospel of John.

Evidence From John’s Gospel

A valuable fragment of John’s Gospel was found in Egypt at the turn of the 20th century and is now known as the Papyrus Rylands 457 (P52). It contains what is John 18:31-33, 37, 38 in the modern Bible and is preserved at the John Rylands Library, Manchester, England. This is the oldest manuscript fragment of the Christian Greek Scriptures in existence. Many scholars believe that it was written about 125 C.E., a mere quarter of a century or so after John’s death. The amazing thing is that the text of the fragment agrees nearly exactly with that in later manuscripts. The fact that a copy of John’s Gospel of such antiquity had already circulated to Egypt, where the fragment was discovered, supports the conclusion that the good news according to John was really recorded in the first century C.E. and by John himself, as the Bible indicates. The book of John is therefore the work of an eyewitness.

On the other hand, the Apocryphal writings all date from the second century on, a hundred years or more after the events they describe had taken place. Some experts try to argue that the Apocryphal writings are based on earlier writings or traditions, but there is no proof of this. Thus, the question is appropriate, Which would you put more faith in​—the testimony of eyewitnesses or that of people who lived a hundred years after the fact? The answer is obvious. * [Another difficulty as far as the Apocryphal writings are concerned is that very few copies remain. The Gospel of Mary Magdalene, alluded to above, survives only in two small fragments and a longer one with probably half of the original text missing. Moreover, there are significant variations between the available manuscripts.]

What about the assertion that the Biblical Gospels were altered in order to suppress certain accounts of Jesus’ life? Is there any evidence that the Gospel of John, for example, was altered in the fourth century to distort the facts? To answer this question, we need to bear in mind that one of the key sources of the modern Bible is the fourth-century manuscript known as Vatican 1209. If our Bible contains changes made in the fourth century, then these changes would be reflected in this manuscript. Happily, another manuscript that contains most of Luke and John, known as Bodmer 14, 15 (P75), dates from 175 C.E. to 225 C.E. According to experts, it is textually very close to Vatican 1209. In other words, no significant changes were made to the Biblical Gospels, and we have the Vatican 1209 to prove it.

There is no evidence, documental or otherwise, that proves that the text of John​—or of the other Gospels—​was altered during the fourth century. After examining a collection of manuscript fragments discovered at Oxyrhynchus, Egypt, Dr. Peter M. Head, of Cambridge University, writes: “In general terms these manuscripts confirm the text of the great uncials [manuscripts written in large capitals that date from the fourth century on] which forms the basis of the modern critical editions. There is nothing here which requires a radically new understanding of the early transmission of the NT [New Testament] text.”

What Can We Conclude?

The four canonical Gospels​—Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John—​were universally accepted among Christians at least as early as the mid-second century. Tatian’s widely used Diatessaron (a Greek term meaning “through [the] four”), compiled between 160 and 175 C.E., was based on only the four canonical Gospels and none of the Gnostic “gospels.” (See the box “An Early Defense of the Gospels.”) Also noteworthy is an observation by Irenaeus of the late second century C.E. He asserted that there must be four Gospels, as there are four quarters of the globe and four cardinal winds. Though his comparisons may be questioned, his point supports the idea that there were only four canonical Gospels at the time.

What do all these facts show? That the Christian Greek Scriptures​—including the four Gospels—​as we have them today have remained largely unchanged from the second century onward. There is no strong reason to believe that there was a conspiracy in the fourth century to change or suppress any part of the divinely inspired Scriptures. On the contrary, Bible scholar Bruce Metzger wrote: “By the close of the second century, . . . a high degree of unanimity concerning the greater part of the New Testament was attained among the very diverse and scattered congregations of believers not only throughout the Mediterranean world but also over an area extending from Britain to Mesopotamia.”

The apostles Paul and Peter were champions of the truth of God’s Word. Both of them strongly warned fellow Christians against accepting or believing anything other than what they had been taught. For example, to Timothy, Paul wrote: “O Timothy, guard what is laid up in trust with you, turning away from the empty speeches that violate what is holy and from the contradictions of the falsely called ‘knowledge.’ For making a show of such knowledge some have deviated from the faith.” Peter testified: “No, it was not by following artfully contrived false stories that we acquainted you with the power and presence of our Lord Jesus Christ, but it was by having become eyewitnesses of his magnificence.”​—1 Timothy 6:20, 21; 2 Peter 1:16.

Centuries ago, the prophet Isaiah was inspired to say: “The green grass has dried up, the blossom has withered; but as for the word of our God, it will last to time indefinite.” (Isaiah 40:8) We can have the same confidence that the One who inspired the Holy Scriptures also preserved them through the ages so that “all sorts of men should be saved and come to an accurate knowledge of truth.”​—1 Timothy 2:4.

...

Rather than “... having an appearance of godliness but proving false to its power . . . always learning and yet never able to come to an accurate knowledge of truth.” “Now in the way that Janʹnes and Jamʹbres opposed Moses, so these also go on opposing the truth. Such men are completely corrupted in mind, disapproved as regards the faith.”(2Tim 3:5,7,8)

a reply to: whereislogic

Why can't you trust the gospels that were discarded or what witnesses of other faiths, of that time, shared via their verbal/songs that were handed down generation to generation and then written down, such as in the Talmud, where Jesus' father was purported to a Roman solider, they even name him in their book. Yet, we can only trust the final version (after many revised versions) of the Christian Bible?

a reply to: quintessentone

You're not even reading are you? The answer to your first question is right there in the article. And also further elaborated on in the remark I now added with an edit at the end. Maybe it's more a 'listening' issue as the verb is used by Jesus below (see footnote), rather than a reading issue (as also explained in the prediction at 2 Tim 4:3,4 quoted in my commentary before, several times including as an added remark in the article I quoted from in my response to you*, and continuing to be demonstrated here, and thus proven to be accurate and reliable). *: my remarks are indicated with "[whereislogic: ...]", followed by the remark, all in between brackets. Note that I also add the footnotes from the article in between brackets, so that's why I do it that way for my remarks.

John 8:42-47

Jesus said to them: “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and I am here. I have not come of my own initiative, but that One sent me. 43 Why do you not understand what I am saying? Because you cannot listen to* [Or “accept.”] my word. 44 You are from your father the Devil, and you wish to do the desires of your father. That one was a murderer when he began, and he did not stand fast in the truth, because truth is not in him. When he speaks the lie, he speaks according to his own disposition, because he is a liar and the father of the lie. 45 Because I, on the other hand, tell you the truth, you do not believe me. 46 Who of you convicts me of sin? If I speak truth, why is it that you do not believe me? 47 The one who is from God listens to the sayings of God. This is why you do not listen, because you are not from God.” (by the way, the Talmud was also written by these children of the Devil. Why won't you listen to Jesus when he tries to warn you about them? Why won't you listen to and believe Jesus when he's telling you the truth? How much longer will you continue to listen to your father instead? He's lying to you, because he hates you and wants to destroy your mind and heart, your thinking and learning abilities as well as your attitude towards truth, in particular when that truth comes directly from Jehovah or His firstborn son, His spokesman, John 1:1, Jesus Christ. Or any of the Bible writers. He wants to draw your attention away from God's word, the Bible, and towards his "false stories/myths" and lies, “by means of the hypocrisy of men who speak lies, whose conscience is seared as with a branding iron.” 1 Tim 4:2)

Matthew 13:13-15

That is why I speak to them by the use of illustrations; for looking, they look in vain, and hearing, they hear in vain, nor do they get the sense of it. 14 And the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled in their case. It says: ‘You will indeed hear but by no means get the sense of it, and you will indeed look but by no means see. 15 For the heart of this people has grown unreceptive, and with their ears they have heard without response, and they have shut their eyes, so that they might never see with their eyes and hear with their ears and get the sense of it with their hearts and turn back and I heal them.’

“For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the wholesome* [Or “healthful; beneficial.”] teaching, but according to their own desires, they will surround themselves with teachers to have their ears tickled.* [Or “to tell them what they want to hear.”] They will turn away from listening to the truth and give attention to false stories.” (2 Timothy 4:3,4)

“So we should no longer be children, tossed about as by waves and carried here and there by every wind of teaching by means of the trickery of men, by means of cunning in deceptive schemes.” (Ephesians 4:14)

“And stop being molded by this system of things,* [ Or “this age.”] but be transformed by making your mind over, so that you may prove to yourselves the good and acceptable and perfect will of God.” (Romans 12:2)

“Look out that no one takes you captive by means of the philosophy and empty deception according to human tradition, according to the elementary things of the world and not according to Christ;” “We have much to say about him, and it is difficult to explain, because you have become dull in your hearing. For although by now* [Lit., “in view of the time.”] you should be teachers, you again need someone to teach you from the beginning the elementary things of the sacred pronouncements of God, and you have gone back to needing milk, not solid food. For everyone who continues to feed on milk is unacquainted with the word of righteousness, for he is a young child. But solid food belongs to mature people, to those who through use have their powers of discernment* [Or “their perceptive powers.”] trained to distinguish both right and wrong.” (Col 2:8; Hebrews 5:11-14)

“However, the inspired word clearly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to misleading inspired statements and teachings of demons, by means of the hypocrisy of men who speak lies, whose conscience is seared as with a branding iron.”(1 Timothy 4:1,2).

Knowledge (Insight on the Scriptures, Volume 2)

...
Knowledge (gno'sis) is put in a very favorable light in the Christian Greek Scriptures. 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) ...
... Thus Paul wrote about some who were learning (taking in knowledge) “yet never able to come to an accurate knowledge [...] of truth.” (2Ti 3:6, 7)

“Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to you, turning away from the empty speeches that violate what is holy and from the contradictions of the falsely called ‘knowledge.’ By making a show of such knowledge, some have deviated from the faith.

May the undeserved kindness be with you.” (1Ti 6:20,21)

...
How does God view the “wisdom” offered by human philosophy?

1 Cor. 1:19-25: “It is written: ‘I will make the wisdom of the wise men perish, and the intelligence of the intellectual men I will shove aside.’ Where is the wise man? Where the scribe? Where the debater of this system of things? Did not God make the wisdom of the world foolish? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through its wisdom did not get to know God, God saw good through the foolishness [as it appears to the world] of what is preached to save those believing. . . . Because a foolish thing of God [as the world views it] is wiser than men, and a weak thing of God [as the world may see it] is stronger than men.” (Such a viewpoint on God’s part is certainly not arbitrary or unreasonable. He has provided in the Bible, the most widely circulated book in the world, a clear statement of his purpose. He has sent his witnesses to discuss it with all who will listen. How foolish for any creature to think that he has wisdom greater than that of God!)

Source: Philosophy (Reasoning From the Scriptures)

“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!

Woe to those wise in their own eyes

And discreet in their own sight!” (Isaiah 5:20,21)

originally posted by: quintessentone

In the gospels that were not included in the final edited version of the Bible, Jesus was all about duality (flesh/spirit) and was giving us explicit instructions as to how to achieve ascension, but just like Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden, some of us refuse to listen, acknowledge or follow the wisdom. We are God's creation and perhaps God's design or the true plan. Who are we to question that?

Even Jehovah is a Peaceful/Wrathful Diety.

We are made in His image, after all.

Proverbs 30:12

There is a generation that is pure in its own eyes

But has not been cleansed from its filth.* [Lit., “excrement.”] (i.e. crap, and there's a lot of it in this thread, mental poison, see my signature)

Proverbs 29:1

A man who stiffens his neck* [Or “who remains stubborn.”] after much reproof

Will suddenly be broken beyond healing.

Fool (Insight on the Scriptures)

Rather than denoting a person who is lacking in mental ability, the word “fool,” as used in the Bible, generally refers to an individual who spurns reason and follows a morally insensible course out of harmony with God’s righteous standards. ...

... Isaiah said a fool, or senseless person, will speak “mere senselessness, and his very heart will work at what is hurtful, to work at apostasy and to speak against Jehovah what is wayward, to cause the soul of the hungry one to go empty, and he causes even the thirsty one to go without drink itself.” (Isa 32:6) The fool despises wisdom and discipline. (Pr 1:7) Instead of heeding counsel, the fool continues walking in a way he considers “right in his own eyes.” (Pr 12:15) He is quick to take offense and bursts out in disputing. (Ec 7:9; Pr 20:3) He says in his heart (his actions indicating what his lips may not say in so many words): “There is no Jehovah.”​—Ps 14:1.

Jesus Christ rightly referred to the scribes and Pharisees as “fools and blind ones,” that is, persons lacking wisdom and being morally worthless, for they had distorted the truth by man-made traditions and followed a hypocritical course. Moreover, Jesus backed up the correctness of this designation by illustrating their lack of discernment. (Mt 23:15-22; 15:3) ...

...

To become truly wise, a person must become a fool in the eyes of the world, “for the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God.” It is not the worldly wise but those looked down upon as persons without knowledge, fools, whom Jehovah has chosen to represent him. This has resulted in making the foolishness of this world even more apparent. Furthermore, this removes all reason for boasting on the part of the favored individual. Instead, all glory goes rightfully to the Source of wisdom, Jehovah.​—1Co 3:18, 19; 1:18-31.

Answering a fool in harmony with or “according to his foolishness” in the sense of resorting to his degrading methods of argument puts the one so doing in agreement with the fool’s unsound reasonings or ways. In order not to become like the fool in this respect, we are counseled by the proverb: “Do not answer anyone stupid according to his foolishness.” On the other hand, Proverbs 26:4, 5 shows that answering him “according to his foolishness” in the sense of analyzing his contentions, exposing them as being ridiculous, and showing that his own arguments lead to entirely different conclusions from those he has drawn can be beneficial.

One caveat concerning the lyrics below, you can interpret "his Majesty" as referring either to the King of eternity, Jehovah (1Tim 1:17), or his firstborn son, Jesus Christ, who was anointed and made King of God's Kingdom by Jehovah God (Acts 2:36). Not some guy (false prophet) from Ethiopia, as the fool Bob Marley and the fools that call themselves Rastafari was and have been tricked to believe in as a reliable source of information and even an incarnation of God (Jah, the shortened version of God's name Jehovah, also used in the Bible) or "the Second Coming of Jesus," "while others see him as a human prophet who fully recognised Jah's presence in every individual." (quoting from Wikipedia's page about Rastafari and their favorite "false stories/myths" "according to their desires", 2Tim 4:3,4. Which desires in this case are rather fueled by or based on racial pride, black pride to be exact; which is no better or less harmful than white pride, or any other form of racial pride. “Pride is before a crash, and a haughty spirit before stumbling. Better to be humble* [Lit., “lowly of spirit.”] among the meek than to share the spoil of the haughty.” Pr 16:18,19.)

a reply to: whereislogic

Forgive me and I'm really not trying to be rude or judgemental, but for some reason that struck me as a jab at the incel community who have a low opinion oof women, are usually virgins, and who do not a bathe or use deordant as frequenly as they should, but consider themselves intellectually superior to everyone else.

I've heard horror stories of their various conventions, but I know this is a hurtful stereotype and some things aren't their fault due to natural pheremones and so forth so Im gonna bow out now and hope those guys are having a nice day.

a reply to: whereislogic

Sometimes you need to add or remove something to a recipe because some people are allergic, or don't like the taste. Some things out of a recipe book you'll never have the time for to make or can be too expensive or rare. Recipes are open for interpretation and are simply just examples of possibilities. You can do what you want with them. You could even use half of the ingredients or double, but right, that wouldn't change the recipe.

Even a recipe made by 3 people can taste different without the intention for it to be so.

But you're right, understanding is the deeper meaning of the superficial.

originally posted by: GENERAL EYES

originally posted by: quintessentone

In the gospels that were not included in the final edited version of the Bible, Jesus was all about duality (flesh/spirit) and was giving us explicit instructions as to how to achieve ascension, but just like Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden, some of us refuse to listen, acknowledge or follow the wisdom. We are God's creation and perhaps God's design or the true plan. Who are we to question that?

Even Jehovah is a Peaceful/Wrathful Diety.

We are made in His image, after all.

This is reasoned correctly. When I was young my dad helped me to understand that anger usually comes from the feeling of injustice, either real or perceived. That is, a person's anger can be misplaced if they misunderstood a situation, but their feelings of anger come from a feeling of injustice being committed.

We are created in God's image, and part of that is of course being able to express love, and having a sense of justice. When that justice is impugned upon we feel wrath or anger, that is the same way God feels. It is thus a divine quality that we display.

But while God can and does use his anger perfectly and directs his anger and wrath perfectly humans are very different. We are imperfect and use anger imperfectly and perceive justice imperfectly. Thus the Bible wisely counsels us to be wrathful yet do not sin, have our say in our heart on our bed, that is to pray to Jehovah God about the matter and leave it in his hands. He sees all things, nothing being hidden from his sight, and takes all things into account. So his wrath, while full of mercy and temperance, when it is shown is just and always directed perfectly. His mercy and his loyal love are eternal, while his wrath is but momentary.

"Be agitated [wrathful], but do not sin.
Have your say in your heart, upon your bed, and keep silent."
-Psalm 4:4.

Meaning? Whatever has agitated, made you angry, given you feelings of wrath, have it, but do not sin. Pray to Jehovah God about the matter when you are alone in bed and let him take care of the matter. This goes well with the next scripture:

"Be wrathful, but do not sin; do not let the sun set while you are still angry; do not give the Devil an opportunity."-Ephesians 4:26-27.

Feelings of anger and resentment may fester in the heart leading to health problems and perhaps an erroneous course. So pray to God about the matter before the day is over and express your grief, and be comforted in the fact that he knows what happened and leave it in his hands to met out justice. Sometimes Jehovah's justice is mercy, as he knows all the extenuating circumstances, or it could be that we are just wrong in our own viewpoint. Whatever the case may be know that God's righteousness is greater than our own wrath and he will perfectly deal with each situation. And know that he is aware of every single act of injustice that has been committed and is being committed on earth:

"Do not avenge yourselves, beloved, but yield place to the wrath; for it is written: “‘Vengeance is mine; I will repay,’ says Jehovah.”-Romans 12:19.

While the world has an attitude of avenge yourself against anyone that slights you, a Christian is told to yield place to the wrath, for it is written: "Vengeance is mine. I will repay."

I have much more I want to write about such matters, but little time. But I will leave this final passage that comes after the previous quoted verse:

"But “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by doing this you will heap fiery coals on his head.” Do not let yourself be conquered by the evil, but keep conquering the evil with the good."-
Romans 12:20-21.

You heap "fiery coals" on your enemy's head, by returning acts of kindness for their acts of bad. Your kind manner in which you treat your enemy may soften their heart, and open them up to repenting from their wicked course. So it is with the aim of melting through the harsh exterior of the wicked man, and softening their heart and mind so that they may listen to the word of God and repent, and come believers and thus be saved! Thus a man of God goes on conquering the evil with the good.

Love is more powerful than hate, and good than evil.

Also:

"For the one who does not practice mercy will have his judgment without mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment."-James 2:13.

Jehovah God will justly give judgement toward the merciless without mercy. But he who extends mercy to others will justly be given mercy in the judgement. Thusly, mercy triumphs over judgement. Everyone should take this to heart. By being merciful toward others, you are opening God's justice up to extend mercy to you. (Mercy is not just forgiving. It can be taking pity on a needy person and providing for their needs, as one example.)

originally posted by: quintessentone
such as in the Talmud,

The Talmud is not divinely inspired scripture. It's just commentary and 'traditions of men'. The Jewish leaders had to do something about the growing movement towards Jesus, so they invented their anti-Jesus propaganda.

For crying out loud, the Talmud even says Jesus was roasting in Hell after death and that a sorcerer raised him from the dead with necromancy. What the Talmud says about Christ

It's hooey.

a reply to: FlyersFan


What constitutes Divinely Inspired Scripture?

Just your postings?

Come on, the fact that we have the abiity to commuicate with spoken language at ALL seems to speak of Diving Intervention.

And by the way, don't take my jab too seriously, it's all meant in Good Faith.

I appreciate your contributions here.

Scouts Honor.

I haven't been able to read the Talmud, but if I recall correctly, it's loaded with Sexists.

Much like parts of the Qu'ran.

Part of that Good and Evil and Duality of Man thing.

The Hero and the Advesary, the Devil and Jesus, the Patriarchal and the Matriarchal.

Which reminds me, I need to read up on the Apochryphia.

Gotta run.

Peace and hugs.

Sorry about the rude snark, I get a little touchy sometimes.

It's all about finding that Balance and I'm still on the path myself.

No hard feelings I hope, we're both cut from the same cloth.

originally posted by: GENERAL EYES
What constitutes Divinely Inspired Scripture?
Just your postings?

Kinda rude. Uncalled for.

"Divinely Inspired Scripture" would say something other than Jesus was in Hell and that necromancers raised Him from the dead using black magic. I'm going to go ahead with my gut on that and say that something like that wasn't divinely inspired. HOOEY.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: GENERAL EYES
What constitutes Divinely Inspired Scripture?
Just your postings?

Kinda rude. Uncalled for.

"Divinely Inspired Scripture" would say something other than Jesus was in Hell and that necromancers raised Him from the dead using black magic. I'm going to go ahead with my gut on that and say that something like that wasn't divinely inspired. HOOEY.

Are you Jesus?

Were you there?

Have you ever been in heavy combat alongside men?

Give me a break, Lady.

Your busybody high horse gets tiring sometimes.

I ever offered a peace offering and you threw it it my face.

What is this, SPARTA?

a reply to: FlyersFan

Commentary and traditions of men can be divinely inspired and as far as necromany and sorcery goes, God creates the darkness and the light.

a reply to: FlyersFan

Since you claim to know, you should write a bible.

originally posted by: GENERAL EYES
Are you Jesus?
Were you there?

Again ... my gut instinct tells me that anyone or anything that claims that Jesus was in hell and that he was resurrected by necromancy and black magic is NOT a story that is divinely inspired. I'm allowed to have that opinion and come to that conclusion.

Have you ever been in heavy combat alongside men?

I was in the army. Never in combat. That's irrelevant to my statement.

Give me a break, Lady.
Your busybody high horse gets tiring sometimes.

It's not 'busy body' nor 'high horse' to say that I think a book that contains language like that isn't 'divinely inspired'. The statement was polite and on topic. Unlike your snark and insults.

I ever offered a peace offering and you threw it it my face.
What is this, SPARTA?

Not really ... you posted a snotty comment when mine was just fine.
If you really wanted to be 'peaceful' you would have just deleted it.

So as to Jesus' conception, we have the Old Testament where Jesus was divinely conceived, then the Gospel of Luke where Jesus father was Joseph, then the Talmud where Jesus father was a Roman Solider, and where the source of that in the Talmud was originally heard from a Greek philosopher named Celsus. Celsus was a critic of Christianity back then, but does than automatically mean he should be dismissed today?

The reliance on miracles or divine interventions as explanatory tools in historical research would not only compromise the integrity of the analysis but also set a precedent for accepting similar claims across various religious and cultural traditions without critical scrutiny.

www.bartehrman.com...#:~:text=Celsus%2C%20a%202nd-century%20critic%20of%20Christianity%2C%20was%20one,more%20earthly%20and% 20scandalous%20explanation%20for%20his%20birth.

Was Celsus applying critical scrutiny or malicious disinformation?

In Galatians 4:4, Paul simply states that Jesus was born of a woman (ἐκ γυναικός), with no mention of a virgin birth, suggesting he may have been unaware of this concept.

It’s indicative that Paul doesn’t use the article before the noun “woman” suggesting that he doesn’t specify anything about her or Jesus’ birth. Commenting on this verse, Ronald Fung notes that “it’s perhaps unlikely that Paul does have the virginal conception in view”.

Similarly, the Gospel of Mark, considered the earliest Gospel, doesn't refer to a divine birth narrative. In fact, Mark 3:20-21, where Jesus' family seeks to restrain him, seemingly under the impression that he is out of his mind, raises questions. If his family knew of a divine birth, their surprise and concern at his miraculous deeds would seem incongruous.. If his family knew of a divine birth, their surprise and concern at his miraculous deeds would seem incongruous.

Jesus' own family didn't act as if he was of divine birth, rather thought he was out of his mind. (This again reinforces modern day psychiatric assessments of Jesus' behaviour showing mental illness.)

Regarding Jesus’ father, Helen Bond concludes: “The probability is that Jesus was the son of Joseph and was born in Nazareth, the small Galilean village where he grew up. Such a conclusion is generally held by most historical Jesus critics, including all those detailed in Chapter 1 (except N. T. Wright)."

a reply to: FlyersFan

Sorry, I thought I cleared that up in my post edit.

I apologize again.

I have a bit of a temper when it becomes a war of the sexes, long story I won't bore you with.

I thought my comment about being cut from that same cloth would have sufficed, but I see now you are silk and I am Muslin.

No hard feelings.

originally posted by: quintessentone
So as to Jesus' conception, we have the Old Testament where Jesus was divinely conceived,then the Gospel of Luke where Jesus father was Joseph, then the Talmud where Jesus father was a Roman Solider, and where the source of that in the Talmud was originally heard from a Greek philosopher named Celsus. Celsus was a critic of Christianity back then, but does than automatically mean he should be dismissed today?

The Jewish Talmud was written down around 400AD (+/-).
The are oral stories and 'traditions of men'.
The Christian Gospels were written down around 40AD
They are the written records based on eyewitness accounts.

By todays standards, neither one would be considered to be a reliable account of the Jesus events. However, the eyewitness accounts from 40AD are closer to the actual events than the oral stories of 400AD. I give them more credence.

The Jewish Talmud says that Jesus was a liar and a con, and that He rotted in Hell until He was risen from the dead through black magic. It also says that Jesus mother Mary was an adultress/liar slut.

The Christian gospels say that Jesus was God Himself, that He had a virgin birth and had no earthly father, and that He rose from the dead on His own power. It also says that His mother Mary was a holy woman and a virgin at the birth of Christ ... and half of Christianity believes that she was a virgin her whole life.

A person can not believe that the Talmud is authentic while believing that the Christian Gospels are authentic. The two are diametrically opposed. What they say theologically is the exact opposite of each other. The Talmud says Jesus was evil and so was His mother, and Jesus ended up in Hell. The Christian Gospels say that Jesus was holy, not of an earthly father, and was God Himself, and that He rules in Heaven.

A person can't believe in both. It's not possible. They have to pick one or the other ... or neither.