Jesus >A< Son of God, Not >The< Son of God

Originally posted by scratchmane
It would seem the Bible(NT) is divinely inspired because the vatican says it is. In other words I am required to believe the church and their say so, and that is the only authority the Bible hinges on.

forgive my daftness but are you being literal here ?
If so im afraid you just shot yourself in the foot if not i dont understand what you are saying, ooh i was brought up a catholic also i love the rituals and loosing myself in them i find it very meditative its just what they preach and have practiced over the last 1700 yrs or so i find disturbing as well as the breakaway orthodox churches also.

aha just re read forgive me iv just come off nights and am a little tired atm, in answer to this and your worries all i can say is if your child asked you an awkward question would you beat them and then sentence them to their rooms ? if your child made a mistake and came to a wrong conclusion would you also beat them and maybe oooh i dunno burn them in hellfire for all eternity the answer im hoping is no
for me G-d is a parent that will hold your hands for a short while as you learn to walk and then like any parent wish to see you grow so he will let go of your hands and you will do one of three things,

panic then sit and hold your arms out and cry for help. ( life on a silver platter type mentality )

panic and grab onto something to remain standing, ( rely on religious or scientific belief systems that are unmovable and orthodoxy )

or panic then think blimey now what do i do and try to start using your natural G-d given instincts and see what happens i.e. try walking ( a tough road because it means you will make many many mistakes and tumble and hurt yourself many times but hey you will learn from given time and practice )

Originally posted by weaverre

Originally posted by scratchmane
It would seem the Bible(NT) is divinely inspired because the vatican says it is. In other words I am required to believe the church and their say so, and that is the only authority the Bible hinges on.

forgive my daftness but are you being literal here ?
If so im afraid you just shot yourself in the foot if not i dont understand what you are saying, ooh i was brought up a catholic also i love the rituals and loosing myself in them i find it very meditative its just what they preach and have practiced over the last 1700 yrs or so i find disturbing as well as the breakaway orthodox churches also.

Heh, maybe I should say that the church/vatican is the final authority on interpretation of the Bible, and they are the authority because they say so.

Originally posted by weaverre
aha just re read forgive me iv just come off nights and am a little tired atm, in answer to this and your worries all i can say is if your child asked you an awkward question would you beat them and then sentence them to their rooms ? if your child made a mistake and came to a wrong conclusion would you also beat them and maybe oooh i dunno burn them in hellfire for all eternity the answer im hoping is no

for me G-d is a parent that will hold your hands for a short while as you learn to walk and then like any parent wish to see you grow so he will let go of your hands and you will do one of three things,

panic then sit and hold your arms out and cry for help. ( life on a silver platter type mentality )

panic and grab onto something to remain standing, ( rely on religious or scientific belief systems that are unmovable and orthodoxy )

or panic then think blimey now what do i do and try to start using your natural G-d given instincts and see what happens i.e. try walking ( a tough road because it means you will make many many mistakes and tumble and hurt yourself many times but hey you will learn from given time and practice )

edit on 24-9-2010 by weaverre because: addendum

Very aptly put, afaik that sounds about right.

reply to post by oliveoil


Appart from the text not nessasarily saying One and Only, but rather only or even lonely begotten and if you stay with me I give another interpretation at the bottom here.

The word is Monogenes, which comes from
Monos: alone (without a companion), forsaken, destitute of help, alone, only, merely
Ginomai: to become, i.e. to come into existence, begin to be, receive being
to become, i.e. to come to pass, happen
of events
to arise, appear in history, come upon the stage
of men appearing in public
to be made, finished
of miracles, to be performed, wrought
to become, be made

Sources:
www.biblestudytools.com...
www.biblestudytools.com...

Monogenes may simply mean that he was the result of virginbirth, ie. a son of God begotten by one person. It may also indicate how Jesjuah, like Ra or Mitra and many other classic deities were "self begotten" much the same word usage.

If you read the first three gospels, Jesus only calls himself the son of man, and never even inferes he might be God, only the servant of the Father.
In John, It is a total flip flop, always talking about himself and claims inferring Godhood.
John has the time of trial and execution different than the other three.
Day of last supper and execution on a different day.
90% of what is in john does not appear in the others.
The first and second century church did not recognize it because it was gnostic.
If this was a court of law, John would be removed, leaving the other three as credible.

SON OF MAN

Christianity and Islam were religions created by the Roman Catholic tyrants to ensure control of the populace. These 2 religions were derived from Hebrew Hedonism and mysticism (Christianity most notably being from the Cult of Mithras).

reply to post by scratchmane
In the english language we have one word with many different meanings which is why we have trouble interpreting the bible. A lamb is not the lamb, a son of God is not the Son of God. In other langauges a word has one meaning. In the days of Noah the sons of god came down and mated with the daughters of men. There ws a race of spiritual beings called the sons of god in the jewish tree of life. Think maybe the sons of gods were aliens and we are from this beginning race and this is why we became eternal from our alien inheritance. Say the word spirit and your evil to some but the bible uses the word spirit probably close to 500 times. What are they reading.

Originally posted by shoulda taken the blue pi
If you read the first three gospels, Jesus only calls himself the son of man, and never even inferes he might be God, only the servant of the Father.
In John, It is a total flip flop, always talking about himself and claims inferring Godhood.
John has the time of trial and execution different than the other three.
Day of last supper and execution on a different day.
90% of what is in john does not appear in the others.
The first and second century church did not recognize it because it was gnostic.
If this was a court of law, John would be removed, leaving the other three as credible.

SON OF MAN

edit on 24-9-2010 by shoulda taken the blue pi because: typo

The reason the tree first gospels tell the same story is basically that they are the same book told by three different scribes. They are called the synoptic gospels and all derive from one single Aramaic source, lost today, and often refered to as Gospel Quelle or simply Q. John is the mystical "gnostic" one, and I believe that eventhough it may be the latest written one, it is the only one which claims it's source to be a direct disciple of Jesjuah, commonly believed to be John of Sebbedeus, though there might be a code inside the gospel indicating that the source of the scribes who wrote it, would be Lazarus (Eleazar or אלעזר, Elʿāzār -- "God's assistance" or "God helped") since John 11:3 says "So the sisters sent word to Jesjuah, 'Lord, your beloved is sick.' " possibly identifying the source as being "the Disciple whom Jesjuah loved" or more commonly "the Beloved Disciple". Another possible source is Mary Magdalena (Greek Μαρία ἡ Μαγδαληνή), identified in the apocrypha as Jesjuah's girlfriend or wife.

reply to post by scratchmane
Scratchmane,

Mt 1:20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.

Joh 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

God is Spirit, also in the KJV Holy Ghost and this should answer the question.

Also you may want to consider this.

He was long before Bethlehem and the following verse reveals very much.

Isa 44:6 Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.

LORD in all caps means YHWH or Yahweh so we have Yahweh King of Israel and Yahweh of Hosts introduced here and then stated "beside me there is no God". The language is singular in the statement "I am the first, and I am the last and applies to both. Reason being they are one. Our Redeemer is one with the Father from all eternity, they are of one substance.

Joh 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

Consider also.

1Jo 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

That may clear up the question for you I hope.

Truthiron.

reply to post by scratchmane


This is not the first and only verse that declares Jesus Christ to be God's only begotten Son.

The evidence is overwhelming.

"Son of God" is a title and was understood as such, at the time of Jesus.
Nathanael, "You are the Son of God, you are the King of the Jews!"
The High Priest, “I charge you under oath by the living God, tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God.”
Pilate, "So, are you in fact the Son of God?"
These people were concerned about a predicted king who would usher in a time of blessings for the Jews.
"The" son would be the correct way of understanding the status of such a person, corresponding to the description of a position, one of ultimate authority on Earth as the representative of God. There would be no other, so "A' son would be an incorrect way to understand the title when referring to The Christ.
Sons of God would be correct when referring to those who are drawn close to God through belief in the one who represented the character of God while here on Earth.

yea,its kinda like if a person was every single persons father but only one child chose to understand the father,that child would be the favorite.