It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
In the Gospel of John, there is no crying out, and the reciting of a line from Psalms 22 is replaced by the telling of his clothes being divided up.
A truly deep question is why Christ cried out in the last moments "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" It's my belief that that's the moment the world's past and future sin entered the sin free environment (as stated), and God left (can't contain sin), then the sin died and He gave up the Ghost. (All three were present prior to - God, the Spirit and the Messiah as one.) The loneliness and pain must of been so great for the remaining Human - so great He cried out then, and not before (during physical pain).
No, I did not go into how the "trinity" anything.
Originally posted by Pearj
Originally posted by jmdewey60
... I would prefer to go with the Bible that there are multiple gods. ...
I stopped reading there - although I'm willing to bet you went on to describe the Trinity as "multiple gods".
That's a pretty bent thing to "read into" the Bible, best to just stick with what it actually says... Compare scripture with scripture so you know what they're actually saying - and use context. (First two rules in Theological study.) I don't want to debate what the Bible says with someone who mis-quotes it, so my input to you ends as well.
No offense meant, I just don't see it being productive.
Jesus did not say that. He was asked, and he replied by asking the other person how they understood it, and they provided that answer, not Jesus.
When Jesus was asked which of the commandments was the most important, he said that we were to love God with all our heart and our neighbor as ourselves. If we do that then the little details and misunderstandings become irrelevant to salvation.
Abraham had multiple concubines from which he had children, who Isaac was only one. The promises were to all the descendants and that includes Esau, and the descendants of Ishmael and who knows how many other people and was not just to a select few. According to the myth, there was a select few who were to be the priesthood, and this is where you have the nation of Israel coming out of Egypt.
All of God's promises were made to the House of Israel. Even the Son was sent only to the lost sheep of the House of Israel; so they are neither Jewish nor Christian.
The apostasy will be those who relinquish their previous religious ideas to be obedient to God the Father and thus form the twigs of the Fig Tree which will be known as Israel. It will be a religious nation that is worldwide and not a geographical one. It will include natural Jews, natural Israelite and naturalised [foreigners - previously of any sect or religion] who cleave to the LORD.
God's purpose was outlined in Exodus 19:5 & 6 and the Son was lauded by the 24 Elders for having achieved just that in Revelation 5:9 & 10. God is after priests who will form a holy nation; not a congregation.
Originally posted by jmdewey60
No, I did not go into how the "trinity" anything.
Originally posted by Pearj
Originally posted by jmdewey60
... I would prefer to go with the Bible that there are multiple gods. ...
I stopped reading there - although I'm willing to bet you went on to describe the Trinity as "multiple gods".
That's a pretty bent thing to "read into" the Bible, best to just stick with what it actually says... Compare scripture with scripture so you know what they're actually saying - and use context. (First two rules in Theological study.) I don't want to debate what the Bible says with someone who mis-quotes it, so my input to you ends as well.
No offense meant, I just don't see it being productive.
What you should do is actually read the Bible, then you would know there are gods, and not one god with multiple personalities, which is not in the Bible, and is a man made invention.
If anyone is "bent", as you say, it would be the people you apparently listen to with their philosophy of a schizophrenic God, and that is no exaggeration on my pert. What it is, was an attempt by the ancients to bring their theology in line with the philosophy of the time, which meant there had to be a singularity of God which existed before anything else and then could be considered as the creator of the universe.
I don't feel the necessity at this time to throw in all that rhetoric since we are not dealing with a influential base of pagan philosophy that we need to overcome in order to show the legitimacy of the Christian concept, so we can drop the pretense for this artificial monotheism and all the mental and logical gymnastics required to uphold it.
I would suggest to you that you do some serious, independent study outside the cultish atmosphere you apparently are being subjected to, so that it would be possible to have a "productive" discussion on these matters. And you should get an attitude adjustment about running away from the slightest adversity. You really show a bad example for being spineless, in my opinion.edit on 2-12-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by AQuestion
As for what I believe, I believe what I wrote. It was pretty simple and used direct examples. Moses was Jewish, he did not know the name of Jesus and Moses was saved. Is that really that hard to understand? Your misunderstanding of Christian beliefs is easy to understand when there are so many who profess to believe, yet, do not know what the bible says.
When Jesus was asked which of the commandments was the most important, he said that we were to love God with all our heart and our neighbor as ourselves. If we do that then the little details and misunderstandings become irrelevant to salvation.
The original question is silly because it starts from incorrect premises. It is like asking a man if he is still beating his wife. If the answer is that he never beat her at all, you say that he didn't answer the question. That is flawed logic and insincere.
You don't have to look any further than the commandments given in the Sinai myth, Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
Jmdewey60, I think there may be a communication error and misunderstanding here. Your original statement clearly made it sound like you were saying that the Bible confirms that there are multiple gods, when I think you meant to say that the Bible mentions the worship of multiple gods going on in that time period, but Jesus told them there was only one God.
Originally posted by Razimus
If you stumped a pastor with that easy question he must have not been very well educated with the Bible.
Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by Deetermined
You don't have to look any further than the commandments given in the Sinai myth, Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
Jmdewey60, I think there may be a communication error and misunderstanding here. Your original statement clearly made it sound like you were saying that the Bible confirms that there are multiple gods, when I think you meant to say that the Bible mentions the worship of multiple gods going on in that time period, but Jesus told them there was only one God.
Jesus would imply that there are more than one God and even said there were many gods, and so did Paul. The old Testament starts right out in Genesis with the Elohim and he was talking to other gods when he said the people had become like them.
I think you are by throwing out a red herring.
I think you're starting to confuse people.
Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by Deetermined
I think you are by throwing out a red herring.
I think you're starting to confuse people.
All idols are false gods, but that says nothing about other gods. The other gods by definition would be gods, while wood and stone statues carved by men are obviously not real gods.
You can use grammatical arguments concerning the Elohim (contrary to what some people think, the books of the Old Testament were changed a lot over time and they could have done something to the verb where they did not want to tamper with the god name)but obviously YHWH was talking to others of his kind, so if you elevate YHWH to the status of a god, then you need to also elevate a whole host of other gods like him.
If you want to say YHWH was an angel, as he is described in Exodus, meeting with Moses, and when he met with Abraham and with Adam and others, then you could say no, there are not multitudes of gods.
Originally posted by Reprobation
reply to post by Deetermined
You said "Reprobation, you may want to look up the history of when the Bible was written and when Muhammad was born before claiming that Islam existed before Judaism or Christianity. Which might explain why the Qu'ran is similar to the Bible in some of it's statements.
Yes, Christians believe in the Creator by the same definition that you have, not some other.
As far as I know, Muhammad didn't die on a cross or come back to life in order to prove that he was sent by God. He only made statements based on what he claims were "visions" from God.
Did Muhammad perform any miracles? According to this, he only CLAIMED to take a spiritual journey and claimed the Qu'ran as his one true miracle.
www.rasoulallah.net...
So, you might want to study the life and background of Muhammad and ask yourself if his life was really a good model worth truly following."
Yeah...I know he was born after the bible...but Adam was Muslim...and so was Eve, as I stated. The Prophet Muhammad renewed the call to Islam; Adam, Noah, Jesus, Moses were all Muslim. Christians may say that they believe in The Creator in which the definition I gave, but they don't truly believe, they just say they do, and I displayed that in my initial post. Yes, he did perform miracles - thousands. One of which was the water springing forth from between his fingers. His companions didn't have much water, so God enabled water to protrude from between his fingers. The Prophet Muhammad is the paragon.