Jesus is God !

[Caino]

18Then answered the Jews and said unto him, What sign shewest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things? 19Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. 20Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? 21But he spake of the temple of his body. 22When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.

 

[Ben Masada]

Jesus definitely is God!

Our creator is God...“In these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe.”

Our God is a triune God! "Let's make man in OUR image!"

Most definitely not! Jesus was a Jew whose Faith was Judaism. According to Judaism, a man cannot be God and God is absolutely Monotheistic. (Deut. 6:4) The Lord is One and the Only Lord. Regarding His image, God has not image and cannot be compared to none. (Isa. 46:5; Deut. 4:15,16)

PERSONIFICATION OF ATTRIBUTES - GENESIS 1:26

"Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. Let them have dominion over... the whole earth."

The above passage of Genesis has been for years the trump card in the hands of Trinitarians to drop at the right time in the assumed thought that it will guarantee them to clean up the table, so to speak. Well, let them think again, because I have news. It's no longer that easy.

Elohim is incorporeal, and incorporeality reflects no image. But then again, how to harmonize the use of the pronouns in the plural form? The attributes of God, which are part of His essence, were impersonately involved in the formation of man.

Bear in mind that only in the creation of man was the statement issued: To make man in God's image. Since God has no visible image, and man does, it's only obvious that man's image would be according to God's attributes. Therefore, His attributes in a relative portion, were the active agent in the formation of man.

Now, it's imperative to focus on the pronouns used by the sacred writer, since the pronouns are anyways what Trinitarians use to think they have made their day. "Let US make MAN in OUR image and likeness. And let THEM have dominion over everything on earth."

Now, focus on the word MAN. It is in the singular form. Nevertheless, the purpose is for THEM to dominate the earth. If THEM were a reference to man, a clarification would be in order to explain the discrepancy in the Grammar. I mean, that it would be a reference to all men. This lack of clarification was not a lapse of the author, but intentional will to direct our minds to the attributes of God, which took part in the formation of man.

It's interesting and just convenient for Trinitarians to rapidly refer "us" and "our" to God Himself and hide any word of explanation on the plural pronoun "them," which could not be a reference to man. I hope they do not do this on purpose because it would be spiritual cruelty to hide the truth.

I hope we have settled this issue. Since "them" is not a reference to man but to the attributes of God, it's only obvious that "us" and "our" are not references to God Himself but to His attributes. Therefore, the Creator of the Universe is He Who has dominion over the whole of the Universe through man by way of His attributes.
Conclusion:

It's more than obvious that Israel could not uphold the banner of absolute Monotheism in God, and start the Scriptures with statements of plurality in God. The whole issue therefore, was personification of attributes.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

By the way folks, Freelight and Caino are a pair of, "UFO Cultists!" They
have rejected God's Grace and are trusting in the "Urantia Book" which
is known as a "UFO Cult!"

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Neither one of these "characters" trust in the Christ of the Bible!

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

There is NO doubt that, God came to earth in the flesh! We have; God the Father,
God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit! Yet, these three are ONE!!

 

[Nanja]

There is NO doubt that, God came to earth in the flesh! We have; God the Father,
God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit! Yet, these three are ONE!!

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

~~~~~

 

[Caino]

Most definitely not! Jesus was a Jew whose Faith was Judaism. According to Judaism, a man cannot be God and God is absolutely Monotheistic. (Deut. 6:4) The Lord is One and the Only Lord. Regarding His image, God has not image and cannot be compared to none. (Isa. 46:5; Deut. 4:15,16)

PERSONIFICATION OF ATTRIBUTES - GENESIS 1:26

"Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. Let them have dominion over... the whole earth."

The above passage of Genesis has been for years the trump card in the hands of Trinitarians to drop at the right time in the assumed thought that it will guarantee them to clean up the table, so to speak. Well, let them think again, because I have news. It's no longer that easy.

Elohim is incorporeal, and incorporeality reflects no image. But then again, how to harmonize the use of the pronouns in the plural form? The attributes of God, which are part of His essence, were impersonately involved in the formation of man.

Bear in mind that only in the creation of man was the statement issued: To make man in God's image. Since God has no visible image, and man does, it's only obvious that man's image would be according to God's attributes. Therefore, His attributes in a relative portion, were the active agent in the formation of man.

Now, it's imperative to focus on the pronouns used by the sacred writer, since the pronouns are anyways what Trinitarians use to think they have made their day. "Let US make MAN in OUR image and likeness. And let THEM have dominion over everything on earth."

Now, focus on the word MAN. It is in the singular form. Nevertheless, the purpose is for THEM to dominate the earth. If THEM were a reference to man, a clarification would be in order to explain the discrepancy in the Grammar. I mean, that it would be a reference to all men. This lack of clarification was not a lapse of the author, but intentional will to direct our minds to the attributes of God, which took part in the formation of man.

It's interesting and just convenient for Trinitarians to rapidly refer "us" and "our" to God Himself and hide any word of explanation on the plural pronoun "them," which could not be a reference to man. I hope they do not do this on purpose because it would be spiritual cruelty to hide the truth.

I hope we have settled this issue. Since "them" is not a reference to man but to the attributes of God, it's only obvious that "us" and "our" are not references to God Himself but to His attributes. Therefore, the Creator of the Universe is He Who has dominion over the whole of the Universe through man by way of His attributes.
Conclusion:

It's more than obvious that Israel could not uphold the banner of absolute Monotheism in God, and start the Scriptures with statements of plurality in God. The whole issue therefore, was personification of attributes.

Plural deity manifestation had been known before Adam but it is difficult to teach the oneness of plural deity when surrounded with pantheistic deity concepts among the competing tribes. So the Hebrew writers eventually eradicated plurality of manifestation from their beliefs. When the Son of God appeared in the flesh they were largly unprepared.

 

[keypurr]

18Then answered the Jews and said unto him, What sign shewest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things? 19Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. 20Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? 21But he spake of the temple of his body. 22When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.

Friend, your assuming. There are no words to show where he raised himself. If he died he could not do that.

 

[freelight]

The Power of resurrection...........

The Power of resurrection...........

Friend, your assuming. There are no words to show where he raised himself. If he died he could not do that.

Lets review the passage (John 2) -

Jesus Cleanses the Temple

13 Now the Passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 14 And He found in the temple those who sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers doing business. 15 When He had made a whip of cords, He drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen, and poured out the changers’ money and overturned the tables. 16 And He said to those who sold doves, “Take these things away! Do not make My Father’s house a house of merchandise!” 17 Then His disciples remembered that it was written, “Zeal for Your house has eaten[a] Me up.”

18 So the Jews answered and said to Him, “What sign do You show to us, since You do these things?”

19 Jesus answered and said to them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”

20 Then the Jews said, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?”

21 But He was speaking of the temple of His body. 22 Therefore, when He had risen from the dead, His disciples remembered that He had said this to them;[c] and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had said.

-NKJV

Besides he himself saying he would raise himself up (we have the claim of Jesus himself here,...did he mean to say something else?)...I don't see why if he had such power (remember his claim in this particular passage)...that it would be impossible for him to 'die', then to 'resurrect' himself, since that is what he claimed he would do....raise up his temple. I don't know what else that could mean,....since you have to 'destroy' (kill) the body first, in order to raise it up (to make it a true 'resurrection').

All the other passages about 'God' raising up Jesus hold in their own context, of course, (emphasis by doctrinal perspective)....yet it is still the power of the Almighty God, the Universal Father within him and upon him (by the Spirit)...that is doing the resurrecting, in any case. That one passage claims he raising himself up,...as a sign to the people,...shows he had some innate knowledge or ability of the power of resurrection, inherent within. Or this passage being a 'loner' account, could perhaps just be dismissed :idunno:

~*~*~

meta-tation:

We extend this further from an esoteric perspective, as shared previously,....'Christ' in us is the hope (or seed-potential) of 'glory' (our true divine nature and destiny)...so that that germ of immortality in us, is the 'Christ-life', the Spirit of Christ...who inspires in us the rebirth of the Spirit unto eternal life, so the power of resurrection by the Spirit of God within resides in all mortal sons of God in potential, as one qualifies himself to become a partaker of the divine nature, and PUT ON IMMORTALITY.



pj

 

[freelight]

tune in a little better.......

tune in a little better.......

That's what Urantia is: an idol.

Miss.

Its just the 'term' a group of celestials use to call our planet

As far as 'idols' go, these could be any number of our own 'images' or 'concepts' we have about 'God', that we wrongly worship as representations of 'God'.






pj

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Its just the 'term' a group of fictional characters use to call our planet.

Changed it for ya!

 

[Caino]

Friend, your assuming. There are no words to show where he raised himself. If he died he could not do that.

Didn't we discuss this before? There are words where Jesus said he would raise himself (he didn't say God the Father) he said "I".

He also said ""No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This commandment I received from My Father."


Jesus did lay it down and he did take it up again because Jesus is an eternal, divine spiritual being apart form the very temporary mortal body that he took on for 30+ years.

The body died, not the spirit. It's pretty straight forward, I get it, I can't do anything about your heavy bias Keypurr.

 

[Caino]

Changed it for ya!

Grosnick is pretending to be the talking donkey of the Hebrews stories.

 

[keypurr]

Didn't we discuss this before? There are words where Jesus said he would raise himself (he didn't say God the Father) he said "I".



He also said ""No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This commandment I received from My Father."





Jesus did lay it down and he did take it up again because Jesus is an eternal, divine spiritual being apart form the very temporary mortal body that he took on for 30+ years.



The body died, not the spirit. It's pretty straight forward, I get it, I can't do anything about your heavy bias Keypurr.

Show me the verse where Jesus did in fact raise himself up and I will believe you.
We must not assume anything that is not written in his book. I have no bias Caino, I just want whats in the book. Folks have rewritten scripture with their preconceived thoughts for many years. We all have been guilty of that, but lets be real, if it is not in the book, it is not true.

 

[keypurr]

Lets review the passage (John 2) -







Besides he himself saying he would raise himself up (we have the claim of Jesus himself here,...did he mean to say something else?)...I don't see why if he had such power (remember his claim in this particular passage)...that it would be impossible for him to 'die', then to 'resurrect' himself, since that is what he claimed he would do....raise up his temple. I don't know what else that could mean,....since you have to 'destroy' (kill) the body first, in order to raise it up (to make it a true 'resurrection').



All the other passages about 'God' raising up Jesus hold in their own context, of course, (emphasis by doctrinal perspective)....yet it is still the power of the Almighty God, the Universal Father within him and upon him (by the Spirit)...that is doing the resurrecting, in any case. That one passage claims he raising himself up,...as a sign to the people,...shows he had some innate knowledge or ability of the power of resurrection, inherent within. Or this passage being a 'loner' account, could perhaps just be dismissed :idunno:



~*~*~



meta-tation:



We extend this further from an esoteric perspective, as shared previously,....'Christ' in us is the hope (or seed-potential) of 'glory' (our true divine nature and destiny)...so that that germ of immortality in us, is the 'Christ-life', the Spirit of Christ...who inspires in us the rebirth of the Spirit unto eternal life, so the power of resurrection by the Spirit of God within resides in all mortal sons of God in potential, as one qualifies himself to become a partaker of the divine nature, and PUT ON IMMORTALITY.







pj

The dead know nothing, if he was really dead he could not raise himself.
If he was not really dead of faith is moot. He had to be dead. God raised him.
My faith is built on God raising his son from the dead.

 

[Caino]

The dead know nothing, if he was really dead he could not raise himself.
If he was not really dead of faith is moot. He had to be dead. God raised him.
My faith is built on God raising his son from the dead.

Therein lay the problem, you won't be able to be honest about what Jesus said and did because you built faith on the wrong thing.

The original gospel was built of faith in the Father, doing his will with a whole souled commitment. The revelation of the Son was an additional revelation of truth.

Its the Life not the Death.

The divine Son wasn't dead, only the flesh that he took on was dead.

 

[Aimiel]

Miss.

Its just the 'term' a group of celestials use to call our planet

As far as 'idols' go, these could be any number of our own 'images' or 'concepts' we have about 'God', that we wrongly worship as representations of 'God'.






pj

Like every book on your shelves. Only The Holy Scriptures contain Truth about God. The rest are cheap imitations, counterfeits and half-truth which all equal the same thing: WHOLE LIES.

 

[Caino]

Like every book on your shelves. Only The Holy Scriptures contain Truth about God. The rest are cheap imitations, counterfeits and half-truth which all equal the same thing: WHOLE LIES.

The scriptures were written by men about the doings of God as the understood them. They get better from beginning to end but mainly man made. As things improve and old superstitions are being abandoned for commen sense, people are moving away from biblical idolatry.

 

[keypurr]

Therein lay the problem, you won't be able to be honest about what Jesus said and did because you built faith on the wrong thing.

The original gospel was built of faith in the Father, doing his will with a whole souled commitment. The revelation of the Son was an additional revelation of truth.

Its the Life not the Death.

The divine Son wasn't dead, only the flesh that he took on was dead.

I know your thoughts but I do not agree with them.
Christ had to became flesh, he had to die.
If the divine son was not dead then where is out faith centered on? If he was not dead, he could not rise from the dead.

You forget that I see Christ as a created spirit. Man did not build the universe, God did through Christ.

 

[meshak]

You forget that I see Christ as a created spirit. Man did not build the universe, God did through Christ.

yes. It is simply stated in the Bible.