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.
The spirit may be "divine" in origin. But that does not make the human body "divine".
Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by Akragon
Is the creation "created" from nothing or created OF the creator?
Lets say you build yourself a table from materials that you own.
Is that table made of the same essence as you... just because you built it?
Or were you simply in a position to build a table because you owned the materials and knew how to make a table?
My point is all of reality is Gods property. God creates as He pleases.
source
Atoms are made up of 3 types of particles electrons , protons and neutrons. These particles have different properties. Electrons are tiny, very light particles that have a negative electrical charge (-). Protons are much larger and heavier than electrons and have the opposite charge, protons have a positive charge. Neutrons are large and heavy like protons, however neutrons have no electrical charge. Each atom is made up of a combination of these particles.
And all boils down to the Atom, of which all things are made and composed of. All one does to create is a simple, or complex manipulation of Atoms, and a vibratory arrangement of the charge within. It all begins with the Atom. Everything is made up from them, that coffe table in your living room, the Moon, everything in the universe is made from Atoms.
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Originally posted by MagnumOpus
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by MagnumOpus
While I am selling it? Do a simple history check... the virgin birth has been primary Christian doctrine for 2000 years now. And James and Jude were not older brothers for one, for two they were half brothers.edit on 7-8-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)
Prove they were half brothers and not older.
NO hand waving, show the precise citations from the Biblical records.
Sure
Now you show citations from the Biblical record that says Jesus's half brothers and sisters were older..
NO hand waving either.
Fine I will say it, a father is a creator, sorry.
Such a tangled web for those that practice deceil and engage in fantasy rather than reality seeking.
Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
Both are called "sons of God" in the bible. But only Jesus is said to be "the only begotten son of God" and "divine". Why do you suppose that is?
The title "son of God" can still apply to Jesus in the same way as it gets applied to Adam.
At what point in this thread did you come to that conclusion since the OP seems to argue against that?
Ignoring other key aspects of the NT and giving an artificial emphasis on one spot that was never meant to have that sort of theological significance is what supports your conclusion.
The one I just quoted above.
Come to what conclusion?
I don't think you ever establish that by your argument. In Luke 3:38, it is saying Adam originated from God, and not from some ordinary father. The fact that a genealogy is listed means Jesus had a genealogy, where Adam did not, other than who formed him, namely, God.
"The title "son of God" can still apply to Jesus in the same way as it gets applied to Adam."?
By saying, "Humans are not divine... and divinity is not born of humans.", it sounds like you are saying Jesus was a human creation.
How exactly does the OP argue against that?
I don't think you ever establish that by your argument. In Luke 3:38, it is saying Adam originated from God, and not from some ordinary father. The fact that a genealogy is listed means Jesus had a genealogy, where Adam did not, other than who formed him, namely, God.
By saying, "Humans are not divine... and divinity is not born of humans.", it sounds like you are saying Jesus was a human creation.
And how do you know that to be true? If it was, then we would all be "formed by God" then.
Adam is called "the son of God" because he was formed by God.
Based on what?
"Son of God" can only be a title.
According to what rule? Adam as far as I know was not referred to by that title, it was just a way of saying the genealogy ends at this point.
It cant mean something for one and something else for another.
The person who became Jesus was a god, and was not created inside Mary by God or anyone else. That she was pregnant was something caused by the spirit of God working, which is something different. It would have been an otherwise natural physical event but was timed in a particular way to coincide with the marriage of the parents, but in modern times we understand that it could take place by ordinary means, in this case by God rather than doctors and birth labs to bring the sperm and egg together to generate an embryo.
In the case of Christianity, Adam is understood as human..and Jesus is seen as "God"... despite both being created by God.
You seem to be saying everything human is a human creation, with this argument that concludes that is Jesus is God then Mary is the mother of God.
I am NOT saying Jesus was a human creation.
But it never says that. God created the circumstance that Mary became pregnant at a particular time, probably to avoid some activity between the parents that people back then considered to ne nasty.
I am saying Jesus was a divine creation.... I thought that was implied in the OP when I said "Jesus and Adam are both unique human beings being direct creations of God."
God created Jesus.... but Jesus was human nonetheless.
The person who became Jesus was a god,
and was not created inside Mary by God or anyone else.
In the case of Jesus... he is human. But was not created in the "human" way... rather he started miraculously growing in Mary.
Paul said Jesus was in the form of god. I think the only persons who would be "in the form of God" would be a god.
3. Sounds like personal speculation.