Total Posts:91|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Who is God?

anonymouswho
Posts: 431
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2015 10:59:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I would like to discuss with my brothers and sister who the One True God is, as well as His Son, Yeshua the Messiah.

There are many things we can discuss:

Is God a trinity?

Is the Holy Spirit a person?

Is Yeshua God?

Is Yeshua Michael the archangel?

Is Yeshua a man?

If there are any other questions, or anything you'd like to add, please feel free to do so. I do ask that we remain respectful and loving towards one another. Remember, there are nonbelievers reading this as well.

Thank you all and God bless you.
tstor
Posts: 1,467
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2015 11:40:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/27/2015 10:59:49 PM, anonymouswho wrote:
I would like to discuss with my brothers and sister who the One True God is, as well as His Son, Yeshua the Messiah.

There are many things we can discuss:

Is God a trinity?

Is the Holy Spirit a person?

Is Yeshua God?

Is Yeshua Michael the archangel?

Is Yeshua a man?

If there are any other questions, or anything you'd like to add, please feel free to do so. I do ask that we remain respectful and loving towards one another. Remember, there are nonbelievers reading this as well.

Thank you all and God bless you.
I am actually preparing for a debate on this very topic this weekend. Specifically on the doctrine of the Trinity. To put this as simply as I can, I believe as 1 Corinthians 8:6 says:
"yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live." (NIV)
"The afternoon came down as imperceptibly as age comes to a happy man. A little gold entered into the sunlight. The bay became bluer and dimpled with shore-wind ripples. Those lonely fishermen who believe that the fish bite at high tide left their rocks, and their places were taken by others, who were convinced that the fish bite at low tide." (John Steinbeck; Tortilla Flat, 1935)
talmud
Posts: 154
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2015 11:49:36 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/27/2015 11:40:55 PM, tstor wrote:
At 7/27/2015 10:59:49 PM, anonymouswho wrote:
I would like to discuss with my brothers and sister who the One True God is, as well as His Son, Yeshua the Messiah.

There are many things we can discuss:

Is God a trinity?

Is the Holy Spirit a person?

Is Yeshua God?

Is Yeshua Michael the archangel?

Is Yeshua a man?

If there are any other questions, or anything you'd like to add, please feel free to do so. I do ask that we remain respectful and loving towards one another. Remember, there are nonbelievers reading this as well.

Thank you all and God bless you.
I am actually preparing for a debate on this very topic this weekend. Specifically on the doctrine of the Trinity. To put this as simply as I can, I believe as 1 Corinthians 8:6 says:
"yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live." (NIV) : :

Add these scriptures to your debate that God is the one true Father, Lord and Savior. There is no triune god. That is a pagan myth that some Christians believe in.

Deuteronomy 6
4 Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord:
5 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might

Zechariah 14
9: And the LORD will become king over all the earth; on that day the LORD will be one and his name one.

Hosea 13
4: I am the LORD your God from the land of Egypt; you know no God but me, and besides me there is no savior.

Isaiah 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.

Isaiah 44
24 Thus saith the Lord, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the Lord that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;
tstor
Posts: 1,467
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2015 11:52:14 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/27/2015 11:49:36 PM, talmud wrote:

Add these scriptures to your debate that God is the one true Father, Lord and Savior. There is no triune god. That is a pagan myth that some Christians believe in.

Deuteronomy 6
4 Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord:
5 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might

Zechariah 14
9: And the LORD will become king over all the earth; on that day the LORD will be one and his name one.

Hosea 13
4: I am the LORD your God from the land of Egypt; you know no God but me, and besides me there is no savior.

Isaiah 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.

Isaiah 44
24 Thus saith the Lord, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the Lord that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;
Thank you, I will note them. If you want to add me as a friend, I can PM you a draft of my opening debate.
"The afternoon came down as imperceptibly as age comes to a happy man. A little gold entered into the sunlight. The bay became bluer and dimpled with shore-wind ripples. Those lonely fishermen who believe that the fish bite at high tide left their rocks, and their places were taken by others, who were convinced that the fish bite at low tide." (John Steinbeck; Tortilla Flat, 1935)
anonymouswho
Posts: 431
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2015 11:59:41 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/27/2015 11:40:55 PM, tstor wrote:
At 7/27/2015 10:59:49 PM, anonymouswho wrote:
I would like to discuss with my brothers and sister who the One True God is, as well as His Son, Yeshua the Messiah.

There are many things we can discuss:

Is God a trinity?

Is the Holy Spirit a person?

Is Yeshua God?

Is Yeshua Michael the archangel?

Is Yeshua a man?

If there are any other questions, or anything you'd like to add, please feel free to do so. I do ask that we remain respectful and loving towards one another. Remember, there are nonbelievers reading this as well.

Thank you all and God bless you.
I am actually preparing for a debate on this very topic this weekend. Specifically on the doctrine of the Trinity. To put this as simply as I can, I believe as 1 Corinthians 8:6 says:
"yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live." (NIV)

Thank you for the reply my friend. Could you please explain how you interpret John 1:1?

I see in your profile you follow the teachings of Charles Taze Russell. Do you believe Yeshua is Michael?

I look forward to discussing this with you. Thank you.
tstor
Posts: 1,467
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2015 12:06:22 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/27/2015 11:59:41 PM, anonymouswho wrote:

Thank you for the reply my friend. Could you please explain how you interpret John 1:1?
Absolutely, my brother. It is hard to discuss John 1:1 without relating it to passages such as John 10:31-39, however I will do my best.

In John 1:1, we read:
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." (NIV)
However, in the NWT and other translations we read:
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god."

Well, which is it? If we go with what the NIV says, then we are lead to believe that the Word (Christ) is God. However, back it up a little and we read that "the Word was with God," Huh? How does that make sense? Are we now saying that God was with Himself? John did not say that the Word was with the Father. John said "God", or "thaos". So if you believe that John 1:1 states that the Word is indeed God, then you have to admit that God was with Himself as well. This leaps some logical barriers. However, we can look at John 1:1 as it is rendered in the NWT and it makes sense. The Word was not God, but a god. In fact, this is in harmony with verses such as 1 Corinthians 8:6, which reads:
"yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live."

Let's also consider something typically overlooked, which is first century Greek. For anyone who knows the language, they know that there were no indefinite articles. Does that really matter? Absolutely, because if there are no indefinite articles, then there cannot be a clear distinction between "God" and "a god" by simply observing the Greek. So what do we do? I prefer to look at the Sahidic Coptic Bible, which has grammar similar to that of English. This was rendered in the third century, note that it is prior to the Trinity in the fourth century, and it renders the verse as "a god".

I see in your profile you follow the teachings of Charles Taze Russell. Do you believe Yeshua is Michael?
I do indeed believe that Christ is indeed none other than Michael.

I look forward to discussing this with you. Thank you.
No problem, if you have any further questions please feel free to ask.

I will also leave you with this: http://www.dawnbible.com...
I find that to be a very good source for finding information about our Lord and Savior.
"The afternoon came down as imperceptibly as age comes to a happy man. A little gold entered into the sunlight. The bay became bluer and dimpled with shore-wind ripples. Those lonely fishermen who believe that the fish bite at high tide left their rocks, and their places were taken by others, who were convinced that the fish bite at low tide." (John Steinbeck; Tortilla Flat, 1935)
bulproof
Posts: 25,255
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2015 12:14:54 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Umm you've got the wrong god.
Read another book.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
tstor
Posts: 1,467
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2015 12:26:12 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/28/2015 12:14:54 AM, bulproof wrote:
Umm you've got the wrong god.
Read another book.
This thread is not about which god is true, it is about the nature of the God of the Bible.
"The afternoon came down as imperceptibly as age comes to a happy man. A little gold entered into the sunlight. The bay became bluer and dimpled with shore-wind ripples. Those lonely fishermen who believe that the fish bite at high tide left their rocks, and their places were taken by others, who were convinced that the fish bite at low tide." (John Steinbeck; Tortilla Flat, 1935)
bulproof
Posts: 25,255
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2015 12:55:19 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/28/2015 12:26:12 AM, tstor wrote:
At 7/28/2015 12:14:54 AM, bulproof wrote:
Umm you've got the wrong god.
Read another book.
This thread is not about which god is true, it is about the nature of the God of the Bible.
Oh you mean the genocidal despot?
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
anonymouswho
Posts: 431
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2015 12:55:40 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/28/2015 12:06:22 AM, tstor wrote:
At 7/27/2015 11:59:41 PM, anonymouswho wrote:

Thank you for the reply my friend. Could you please explain how you interpret John 1:1?
Absolutely, my brother. It is hard to discuss John 1:1 without relating it to passages such as John 10:31-39, however I will do my best.

In John 1:1, we read:
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." (NIV)
However, in the NWT and other translations we read:
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god."

Well, which is it? If we go with what the NIV says, then we are lead to believe that the Word (Christ) is God. However, back it up a little and we read that "the Word was with God," Huh? How does that make sense? Are we now saying that God was with Himself? John did not say that the Word was with the Father. John said "God", or "thaos". So if you believe that John 1:1 states that the Word is indeed God, then you have to admit that God was with Himself as well. This leaps some logical barriers. However, we can look at John 1:1 as it is rendered in the NWT and it makes sense. The Word was not God, but a god. In fact, this is in harmony with verses such as 1 Corinthians 8:6, which reads:
"yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live."

Let's also consider something typically overlooked, which is first century Greek. For anyone who knows the language, they know that there were no indefinite articles. Does that really matter? Absolutely, because if there are no indefinite articles, then there cannot be a clear distinction between "God" and "a god" by simply observing the Greek. So what do we do? I prefer to look at the Sahidic Coptic Bible, which has grammar similar to that of English. This was rendered in the third century, note that it is prior to the Trinity in the fourth century, and it renders the verse as "a god".

I see in your profile you follow the teachings of Charles Taze Russell. Do you believe Yeshua is Michael?
I do indeed believe that Christ is indeed none other than Michael.

I look forward to discussing this with you. Thank you.
No problem, if you have any further questions please feel free to ask.

I will also leave you with this: http://www.dawnbible.com...
I find that to be a very good source for finding information about our Lord and Savior.

Thank you. I would like to go ahead and give a link to an original Greek interlinear of John 1:

http://biblehub.com...

Here is the Greek transliteration of John 1:1 and 2 as well:

En arche en ho Logos kai ho Logos en pros ton Theon kai theos en ho Logos
Houtos en en arche pros ton Theon

Here is a literal translation with the Greek and English mixed:

In beginning was the Logos and the Logos was with THE THEON and Theos was the Logos
He was in beginning with THE THEON

There is always a debate about the article missing for Theos, so this shows that not only is the article missing, but for all other instances the article is present. Theos is also spelled differently when describing the Father as opposed to the Logos.

I do not believe that Yeshua is Michael, however, I completely understand how you've reached this conclusion. Arius taught that Yeshua was the first created being, but he did not believe that Yeshua was Michael. Perhaps if he was not killed he would have reached a similar conclusion.

I believe Yeshua was 100% man. He has a God and a Father that is likewise our God and Father. I believe God has a separate purpose for angels than He has for mankind. Mankind was subjected to the Law, and it took a Man to fulfill the Law and Prophets.

Thus, Yeshua fulfills the purpose of mankind:

"And God said, Let us MAKE man in our IMAGE, after our LIKENESS: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth." Genesis 1:26

For which of the angels did God ever say:

"When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained;
What is MAN, that thou art mindful of him? and the SON OF MAN, that thou visitest him?
For thou hast made him a little LOWER than the angels, and hast CROWNED him with glory and honour.
Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet" Psalm 8:3

Yeshua is the fulfilled Image of God:

"Who is the IMAGE of the invisible God, the FIRSTBORN of every creature:
For in him were ALL things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created through him, and FOR him:
And he is before all things, and in him all things consist.
And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the FIRSTBORN FROM THE DEAD; that in ALL things he might have the PREEMINENCE.
For it pleased him (the Father) that in him should ALL FULNESS DWELL" Colossians 1:15

I'm very excited to discuss this with you. Thank you and God bless you my friend.
tstor
Posts: 1,467
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2015 12:57:41 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/28/2015 12:55:19 AM, bulproof wrote:

Oh you mean the genocidal despot?
I am not sure if you even read the original post at this point.
"The afternoon came down as imperceptibly as age comes to a happy man. A little gold entered into the sunlight. The bay became bluer and dimpled with shore-wind ripples. Those lonely fishermen who believe that the fish bite at high tide left their rocks, and their places were taken by others, who were convinced that the fish bite at low tide." (John Steinbeck; Tortilla Flat, 1935)
anonymouswho
Posts: 431
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2015 1:02:04 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/28/2015 12:55:19 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 7/28/2015 12:26:12 AM, tstor wrote:
At 7/28/2015 12:14:54 AM, bulproof wrote:
Umm you've got the wrong god.
Read another book.
This thread is not about which god is true, it is about the nature of the God of the Bible.
Oh you mean the genocidal despot?

Hey bulproof. Do you have anything you'd like to add to this discussion? I'm sorry, this post is not about genocide. However, to clear up any misconceptions, which genocidal act are you speaking of? The Scriptures say God killed many, many people. In fact, God has killed every human being that has ever lived. If I die tomorrow, it is because God had determined it was time for me to die. If my wife says "the Lord took my husband", she would not be lying. The Scriptures say that God is going to Resurrect ALL men, and He will teach them ALL Righteousness. So I'm not really sure what your point is. Thank you my friend.
tstor
Posts: 1,467
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2015 1:02:08 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/28/2015 12:55:40 AM, anonymouswho wrote:

Thank you. I would like to go ahead and give a link to an original Greek interlinear of John 1:

http://biblehub.com...

Here is the Greek transliteration of John 1:1 and 2 as well:

En arche en ho Logos kai ho Logos en pros ton Theon kai theos en ho Logos
Houtos en en arche pros ton Theon

Here is a literal translation with the Greek and English mixed:

In beginning was the Logos and the Logos was with THE THEON and Theos was the Logos
He was in beginning with THE THEON

There is always a debate about the article missing for Theos, so this shows that not only is the article missing, but for all other instances the article is present. Theos is also spelled differently when describing the Father as opposed to the Logos.

I do not believe that Yeshua is Michael, however, I completely understand how you've reached this conclusion. Arius taught that Yeshua was the first created being, but he did not believe that Yeshua was Michael. Perhaps if he was not killed he would have reached a similar conclusion.

I believe Yeshua was 100% man. He has a God and a Father that is likewise our God and Father. I believe God has a separate purpose for angels than He has for mankind. Mankind was subjected to the Law, and it took a Man to fulfill the Law and Prophets.

Thus, Yeshua fulfills the purpose of mankind:

"And God said, Let us MAKE man in our IMAGE, after our LIKENESS: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth." Genesis 1:26

For which of the angels did God ever say:

"When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained;
What is MAN, that thou art mindful of him? and the SON OF MAN, that thou visitest him?
For thou hast made him a little LOWER than the angels, and hast CROWNED him with glory and honour.
Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet" Psalm 8:3

Yeshua is the fulfilled Image of God:

"Who is the IMAGE of the invisible God, the FIRSTBORN of every creature:
For in him were ALL things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created through him, and FOR him:
And he is before all things, and in him all things consist.
And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the FIRSTBORN FROM THE DEAD; that in ALL things he might have the PREEMINENCE.
For it pleased him (the Father) that in him should ALL FULNESS DWELL" Colossians 1:15

I'm very excited to discuss this with you. Thank you and God bless you my friend.
I completely respect and understand your interpretations of the scriptures. I am very open to other views in general, but specifically on the topic of Jesus and Michael. Mainly because my conclusion comes from inferences rather than a direct verse. I can give those to you if you wish.

I can't say I am familiar with Arius, but I will read more into him. However I have to prepare for bed as it is getting late here. I will be open to discuss in the morning and if you want to add me as a friend we can exchange through PM.

God bless.
"The afternoon came down as imperceptibly as age comes to a happy man. A little gold entered into the sunlight. The bay became bluer and dimpled with shore-wind ripples. Those lonely fishermen who believe that the fish bite at high tide left their rocks, and their places were taken by others, who were convinced that the fish bite at low tide." (John Steinbeck; Tortilla Flat, 1935)
anonymouswho
Posts: 431
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2015 1:08:30 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/28/2015 1:02:08 AM, tstor wrote:
At 7/28/2015 12:55:40 AM, anonymouswho wrote:

Thank you. I would like to go ahead and give a link to an original Greek interlinear of John 1:

http://biblehub.com...

Here is the Greek transliteration of John 1:1 and 2 as well:

En arche en ho Logos kai ho Logos en pros ton Theon kai theos en ho Logos
Houtos en en arche pros ton Theon

Here is a literal translation with the Greek and English mixed:

In beginning was the Logos and the Logos was with THE THEON and Theos was the Logos
He was in beginning with THE THEON

There is always a debate about the article missing for Theos, so this shows that not only is the article missing, but for all other instances the article is present. Theos is also spelled differently when describing the Father as opposed to the Logos.

I do not believe that Yeshua is Michael, however, I completely understand how you've reached this conclusion. Arius taught that Yeshua was the first created being, but he did not believe that Yeshua was Michael. Perhaps if he was not killed he would have reached a similar conclusion.

I believe Yeshua was 100% man. He has a God and a Father that is likewise our God and Father. I believe God has a separate purpose for angels than He has for mankind. Mankind was subjected to the Law, and it took a Man to fulfill the Law and Prophets.

Thus, Yeshua fulfills the purpose of mankind:

"And God said, Let us MAKE man in our IMAGE, after our LIKENESS: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth." Genesis 1:26

For which of the angels did God ever say:

"When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained;
What is MAN, that thou art mindful of him? and the SON OF MAN, that thou visitest him?
For thou hast made him a little LOWER than the angels, and hast CROWNED him with glory and honour.
Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet" Psalm 8:3

Yeshua is the fulfilled Image of God:

"Who is the IMAGE of the invisible God, the FIRSTBORN of every creature:
For in him were ALL things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created through him, and FOR him:
And he is before all things, and in him all things consist.
And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the FIRSTBORN FROM THE DEAD; that in ALL things he might have the PREEMINENCE.
For it pleased him (the Father) that in him should ALL FULNESS DWELL" Colossians 1:15

I'm very excited to discuss this with you. Thank you and God bless you my friend.
I completely respect and understand your interpretations of the scriptures. I am very open to other views in general, but specifically on the topic of Jesus and Michael. Mainly because my conclusion comes from inferences rather than a direct verse. I can give those to you if you wish.

Yes, we can definitely discuss the verses that have led you to your interpretation. I've read several articles about Yeshua being Michael, but I've never had the chance to discuss this with anyone.

I can't say I am familiar with Arius, but I will read more into him. However I have to prepare for bed as it is getting late here. I will be open to discuss in the morning and if you want to add me as a friend we can exchange through PM.

God bless.

Arius was a true brother as far as I am concerned. I highly recommend studying him, but unfortunately most of his work was destroyed.

That sounds great my friend. I usually can't write during the day, but I will still be awake in the morning and I will be back tomorrow night. Thank you and God bless you.
talmud
Posts: 154
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2015 1:32:10 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/27/2015 11:52:14 PM, tstor wrote:
At 7/27/2015 11:49:36 PM, talmud wrote:

Add these scriptures to your debate that God is the one true Father, Lord and Savior. There is no triune god. That is a pagan myth that some Christians believe in.

Deuteronomy 6
4 Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord:
5 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might

Zechariah 14
9: And the LORD will become king over all the earth; on that day the LORD will be one and his name one.

Hosea 13
4: I am the LORD your God from the land of Egypt; you know no God but me, and besides me there is no savior.

Isaiah 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.

Isaiah 44
24 Thus saith the Lord, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the Lord that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;
Thank you, I will note them. If you want to add me as a friend, I can PM you a draft of my opening debate. : :

We will always be friends for eternity.
tstor
Posts: 1,467
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2015 6:17:21 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/28/2015 1:08:30 AM, anonymouswho wrote:
Alright, so here is why I believe that Jesus is none other than The Archangel Michael. If you recall, at times individuals are known by more than one name. Whether you recognize that from the Bible or even modern cultures around the world. Take for example the patriarch Jacob who is also known as Israel. Or the apostle Peter as Simon.

Michael is clearly an outstanding angel. For example, in the book of Daniel, Michael is described as fighting wicked demons on behalf of us. (Daniel 10:13; 12:1) In the letter of Jude, Michael confronts Satan in a dispute over Moses' body. (Jude 9) The book of Revelation shows that Michael wars with Satan and his demons and hurls them out of heaven. (Rev. 12:7-9) No other angel is known to fight God's enemies. We can assume that is why he (Michael) has the title "the archangel", or "the chief angel". There is no other angel referred to as "archangel", hence why Michael is THE archangel. So we can reasonably conclude that God placed Michael as the authority over all angels.

Consider this: other than God Himself, who else has any authority over angels? Christ Jesus, of course. (Matt. 13:41; 16:27; 24:31)

With that in mind, take a look at these verses:
In 1 Thessalonians 4:16, the apostle Paul prophesied: "For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first." (NIV)
Who is the Lord? Well, it is Christ Jesus, as we see in 1 Corinthians 8:6:
"and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ" (NIV)
Notice that the Lord, Christ, has the voice of an archangel.

In Rev. 12:7 we read that Michael is the leader of an army of faithful angels, similar to that of Rev. 19:14-16. However, in 2 Thessalonians 1:7, Jesus also has powerful angels. Though the Bible never mentions there being more than one army of angels.
"The afternoon came down as imperceptibly as age comes to a happy man. A little gold entered into the sunlight. The bay became bluer and dimpled with shore-wind ripples. Those lonely fishermen who believe that the fish bite at high tide left their rocks, and their places were taken by others, who were convinced that the fish bite at low tide." (John Steinbeck; Tortilla Flat, 1935)
anonymouswho
Posts: 431
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2015 8:39:45 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/28/2015 6:17:21 PM, tstor wrote:
At 7/28/2015 1:08:30 AM, anonymouswho wrote:
Alright, so here is why I believe that Jesus is none other than The Archangel Michael. If you recall, at times individuals are known by more than one name. Whether you recognize that from the Bible or even modern cultures around the world. Take for example the patriarch Jacob who is also known as Israel. Or the apostle Peter as Simon.

Michael is clearly an outstanding angel. For example, in the book of Daniel, Michael is described as fighting wicked demons on behalf of us. (Daniel 10:13; 12:1) In the letter of Jude, Michael confronts Satan in a dispute over Moses' body. (Jude 9) The book of Revelation shows that Michael wars with Satan and his demons and hurls them out of heaven. (Rev. 12:7-9) No other angel is known to fight God's enemies. We can assume that is why he (Michael) has the title "the archangel", or "the chief angel". There is no other angel referred to as "archangel", hence why Michael is THE archangel. So we can reasonably conclude that God placed Michael as the authority over all angels.

Consider this: other than God Himself, who else has any authority over angels? Christ Jesus, of course. (Matt. 13:41; 16:27; 24:31)

With that in mind, take a look at these verses:
In 1 Thessalonians 4:16, the apostle Paul prophesied: "For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first." (NIV)
Who is the Lord? Well, it is Christ Jesus, as we see in 1 Corinthians 8:6:
"and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ" (NIV)
Notice that the Lord, Christ, has the voice of an archangel.

In Rev. 12:7 we read that Michael is the leader of an army of faithful angels, similar to that of Rev. 19:14-16. However, in 2 Thessalonians 1:7, Jesus also has powerful angels. Though the Bible never mentions there being more than one army of angels.

Thank you for sharing that. A lot of people think it is very strange to believe Yeshua is Michael, but I don't find it anymore strange than any other interpretation. Actually I find it much more valid than trinitarianism or modalism. The name Michael even means "who is like God". There are many similarities between Yeshua, Michael, and the Angel of YHVH, but I believe Yeshua was a man. Here is a good website that explains why Yeshua had to be a man to fulfill the Law:

http://www.angelfire.com...

Thank you my friend and God bless you.
bulproof
Posts: 25,255
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2015 9:31:00 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/28/2015 1:02:04 AM, anonymouswho wrote:
At 7/28/2015 12:55:19 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 7/28/2015 12:26:12 AM, tstor wrote:
At 7/28/2015 12:14:54 AM, bulproof wrote:
Umm you've got the wrong god.
Read another book.
This thread is not about which god is true, it is about the nature of the God of the Bible.
Oh you mean the genocidal despot?

Hey bulproof. Do you have anything you'd like to add to this discussion? I'm sorry, this post is not about genocide. However, to clear up any misconceptions, which genocidal act are you speaking of? The Scriptures say God killed many, many people. In fact, God has killed every human being that has ever lived. If I die tomorrow, it is because God had determined it was time for me to die. If my wife says "the Lord took my husband", she would not be lying. The Scriptures say that God is going to Resurrect ALL men, and He will teach them ALL Righteousness. So I'm not really sure what your point is. Thank you my friend.

And you consider that scripture (only yours) has some authority because men have told you that the scriptures written by other men have some authority.
Your god relies entirely on the support of men, without them he doesn't even exist.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
DaGreek
Posts: 30
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2015 10:22:12 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/27/2015 10:59:49 PM, anonymouswho wrote:
I would like to discuss with my brothers and sister who the One True God is, as well as His Son, Yeshua the Messiah.

There are many things we can discuss:

Is God a trinity?

Is the Holy Spirit a person?

Is Yeshua God?

Is Yeshua Michael the archangel?

Is Yeshua a man?

If there are any other questions, or anything you'd like to add, please feel free to do so. I do ask that we remain respectful and loving towards one another. Remember, there are nonbelievers reading this as well.

Thank you all and God bless you.

Thank you for starting this forum! This is a very interesting issue and I am going to go down the route of the Trinity. Firstly, I am going to show that the Trinity is present in scripture and secondly, I am going to show that a Unitarian God (one God, one person) is incoherent. I am going to assume for the sake of the forum that everyone understands the concert of the Trinity. If not, I am happy to clarify.

The first time we see mention of the Trinity is in Genesis 1:26, "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness." In this verse we see one God (and God said) and plural persons (let us). This either means that there is one God and multiple persons or many gods. As others on this forum have pointed out, the Bible says that there is only one God. This means that Genesis 1:26 refers to one God with multiple persons.

Next, we see the Trinity in Geneis 18:1-3, "And the Lord appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day; and he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him: and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground, and said, My Lord, if now I have found favor in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant:" Abraham sees God as three men, indicating the Trinity. Keep in mind that when Abraham addresses the three, he refers to them as Lord not in the plural and not as if they where mere humans.

Finally, I want to jump to Isaiah 48:16, "Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord, and his Spirit, hath sent me." The I/me is a divine figure, we know this because all of Isaiah 48 is God speaking to the house of Jacob. This is curious though because you have the Lord mentioned (divine) and one called the Spirit who is personal. The Spirit is personal because He is performing an action (sending). In this passage we see three divine figures but as we know, there is only one God. This leaves us to the conclusion that there is one God but three persons.

Now I want to move onto to discussing a Unitarian God. We would all agree that God is all-loving. It is apart of the definition of God. We also would agree that God is changeless, He is the same today as He was yesterday. This, however provides a problem for the Unitarian. If God is all-loving and changeless, that means that He was all-loving before creation. What was there for God to love? Himself. The only thing that God could love would be Himself. After creation humans appear, and God is said to love them/us. This is impossible for a Unitarian God though. Since before creation God loved Himself, He could not change His love because He is changeless. When you look at it, a Unitarian is self-contradictory and only a Trinitarian God could be all-loving and changeless.
R37;
DaGreek
Posts: 30
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2015 10:58:00 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I am actually preparing for a debate on this very topic this weekend. Specifically on the doctrine of the Trinity. To put this as simply as I can, I believe as 1 Corinthians 8:6 says:
"yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live." (NIV) : :

Add these scriptures to your debate that God is the one true Father, Lord and Savior. There is no triune god. That is a pagan myth that some Christians believe in.

Deuteronomy 6
4 Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord:
5 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might

Zechariah 14
9: And the LORD will become king over all the earth; on that day the LORD will be one and his name one.

Hosea 13
4: I am the LORD your God from the land of Egypt; you know no God but me, and besides me there is no savior.

Isaiah 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.

Isaiah 44
24 Thus saith the Lord, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the Lord that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;

Hello, you made some interesting points that I would like to respond to. Also, thank you for your input on such an important issue.

First you quote Duetronomy 6:4-5. At first look, it seems that this points to a Unitarian (one God, one person) but it actually could be seen as evidence for the Trinity. The word "one" in this verse in Hebrew is "echad". Echad is used for a compound unity. It is the same word used in Genesis 2:24 and Geneiss 11:6. To give you a picture, let's look at the latter, "And the Lord said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do." One here (echad) is used to show multiple people as a compound unity. Since it is the same word, we can apply it to Deutronomy 6:4-5. Once we do this, we get one God but multiple persons. The Trinity.

Secondly, Zechariah 14 is mentioned. This is in the same boat as Deutronomy, the wording used "echad". Since it refers to compound unity, it does not support a Unitarian and is really evidence for the Trinity.

Next, Hosea 13:4 says, "I am the LORD your God from the land of Egypt; you know no God but me, and besides me there is no savior." The doctrine of the Trinity says that there is only one God. This is 100% compatible with the doctrine of the Trinity. I will take this time to include a link to a diagram of the Trinity. I highly recommend you take a look. http://generationword.com...

The following two passages fall under the same catagory ad above.

In conclusion, none of the verses quoted disprove the Trinity or show a Unitarian. I recommend that you look at my post of why God is s Trinity.
dee-em
Posts: 6,474
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2015 1:26:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/28/2015 12:55:40 AM, anonymouswho wrote:
At 7/28/2015 12:06:22 AM, tstor wrote:
At 7/27/2015 11:59:41 PM, anonymouswho wrote:

Thank you for the reply my friend. Could you please explain how you interpret John 1:1?
Absolutely, my brother. It is hard to discuss John 1:1 without relating it to passages such as John 10:31-39, however I will do my best.

In John 1:1, we read:
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." (NIV)
However, in the NWT and other translations we read:
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god."

Well, which is it? If we go with what the NIV says, then we are lead to believe that the Word (Christ) is God. However, back it up a little and we read that "the Word was with God," Huh? How does that make sense? Are we now saying that God was with Himself? John did not say that the Word was with the Father. John said "God", or "thaos". So if you believe that John 1:1 states that the Word is indeed God, then you have to admit that God was with Himself as well. This leaps some logical barriers. However, we can look at John 1:1 as it is rendered in the NWT and it makes sense. The Word was not God, but a god. In fact, this is in harmony with verses such as 1 Corinthians 8:6, which reads:
"yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live."

Let's also consider something typically overlooked, which is first century Greek. For anyone who knows the language, they know that there were no indefinite articles. Does that really matter? Absolutely, because if there are no indefinite articles, then there cannot be a clear distinction between "God" and "a god" by simply observing the Greek. So what do we do? I prefer to look at the Sahidic Coptic Bible, which has grammar similar to that of English. This was rendered in the third century, note that it is prior to the Trinity in the fourth century, and it renders the verse as "a god".

I see in your profile you follow the teachings of Charles Taze Russell. Do you believe Yeshua is Michael?
I do indeed believe that Christ is indeed none other than Michael.

I look forward to discussing this with you. Thank you.
No problem, if you have any further questions please feel free to ask.

I will also leave you with this: http://www.dawnbible.com...
I find that to be a very good source for finding information about our Lord and Savior.

Thank you. I would like to go ahead and give a link to an original Greek interlinear of John 1:

http://biblehub.com...

Here is the Greek transliteration of John 1:1 and 2 as well:

En arche en ho Logos kai ho Logos en pros ton Theon kai theos en ho Logos
Houtos en en arche pros ton Theon

Here is a literal translation with the Greek and English mixed:

In beginning was the Logos and the Logos was with THE THEON and Theos was the Logos
He was in beginning with THE THEON

There is always a debate about the article missing for Theos, so this shows that not only is the article missing, but for all other instances the article is present. Theos is also spelled differently when describing the Father as opposed to the Logos.

I do not believe that Yeshua is Michael, however, I completely understand how you've reached this conclusion. Arius taught that Yeshua was the first created being, but he did not believe that Yeshua was Michael. Perhaps if he was not killed he would have reached a similar conclusion.

I believe Yeshua was 100% man. He has a God and a Father that is likewise our God and Father. I believe God has a separate purpose for angels than He has for mankind. Mankind was subjected to the Law, and it took a Man to fulfill the Law and Prophets.

Thus, Yeshua fulfills the purpose of mankind:

"And God said, Let us MAKE man in our IMAGE, after our LIKENESS: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth." Genesis 1:26

For which of the angels did God ever say:

"When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained;
What is MAN, that thou art mindful of him? and the SON OF MAN, that thou visitest him?
For thou hast made him a little LOWER than the angels, and hast CROWNED him with glory and honour.
Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet" Psalm 8:3

Yeshua is the fulfilled Image of God:

"Who is the IMAGE of the invisible God, the FIRSTBORN of every creature:
For in him were ALL things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created through him, and FOR him:
And he is before all things, and in him all things consist.
And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the FIRSTBORN FROM THE DEAD; that in ALL things he might have the PREEMINENCE.
For it pleased him (the Father) that in him should ALL FULNESS DWELL" Colossians 1:15

I'm very excited to discuss this with you. Thank you and God bless you my friend.

I hate to interrupt this love-fest but it always amuses me how uncritical theists are of their scripture. You guys just accept it as revelation and proceed from there without any further investigation or thought.

Like everything else in Christianity, the Logos (Word) is a concept borrowed from another culture. In this case it was Greek philosophy.

https://en.wikipedia.org...

Later Philo of Alexandria (a contemporary of Jesus ironically, but who never heard of him), a hellenized Jew, took this concept further by suggesting that the Logos was an intermediary between God and the world of man. He was the one who coined the phrase "The First Born of God" or the "Son of God" for this non-human being. All of this was in relation to Judaism, before Christianity had appeared.

https://en.wikipedia.org...

Philo thought that God created and governed the world through mediators. Logos is the chief among them, the next to God, demiurge of the world. Logos is immaterial, an adequate image of God, his shadow, his firstborn son.[16] Being the mind of the Eternal, Logos is imperishable.[17] He is neither uncreated as God is, nor created as men are, but occupies a middle position. He has no autarkic power, only an entrusted one.[18]

The Johnny-come-lately Christians then appropriated the concept of the Logos from the ancient Greeks and from Philo and, lo and behold, the Logos became Jesus, the Son of God. Far from being revelation, the verse in John 1 is outright plagiarism (as is much of the New Testament).
anonymouswho
Posts: 431
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2015 2:54:10 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/29/2015 10:22:12 AM, DaGreek wrote:
At 7/27/2015 10:59:49 PM, anonymouswho wrote:
I would like to discuss with my brothers and sister who the One True God is, as well as His Son, Yeshua the Messiah.

There are many things we can discuss:

Is God a trinity?

Is the Holy Spirit a person?

Is Yeshua God?

Is Yeshua Michael the archangel?

Is Yeshua a man?

If there are any other questions, or anything you'd like to add, please feel free to do so. I do ask that we remain respectful and loving towards one another. Remember, there are nonbelievers reading this as well.

Thank you all and God bless you.

Thank you very much for joining us my friend. This is very interesting. We can now have a discussion for all three positions: was Yeshua a Man, is Yeshua Michael, or is Yeshua a triune God? I hope we can all have a reasonable and respectful conversation about this.

Thank you for starting this forum! This is a very interesting issue and I am going to go down the route of the Trinity. Firstly, I am going to show that the Trinity is present in scripture and secondly, I am going to show that a Unitarian God (one God, one person) is incoherent. I am going to assume for the sake of the forum that everyone understands the concert of the Trinity. If not, I am happy to clarify.

The first time we see mention of the Trinity is in Genesis 1:26, "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness." In this verse we see one God (and God said) and plural persons (let us). This either means that there is one God and multiple persons or many gods. As others on this forum have pointed out, the Bible says that there is only one God. This means that Genesis 1:26 refers to one God with multiple persons.

I have to disagree with this proposition because of several reasons. First, if Arius was right and Yeshus is the first created being, then God could have been talking to Him. There are also several other interpretations of who exactly God was speaking with. It could have been the Angels, as we are not told when they came to exist. There are other interpretations that many trinitarians have proposed. God is talking to His Wisdom. God is talking to His creation. Regardless, there is nothing that indicates that God is a multi personal being, and there is definitely nothing here to imply a three-in-one god.

Next, we see the Trinity in Geneis 18:1-3, "And the Lord appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day; and he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him: and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground, and said, My Lord, if now I have found favor in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant:" Abraham sees God as three men, indicating the Trinity. Keep in mind that when Abraham addresses the three, he refers to them as Lord not in the plural and not as if they where mere humans.

Yes, Abraham did meet God, as well as two other entities. These other two entities could not have been Yeshua and the Holy Spirit. They were Angels, and in the next chapter we are told that these same Angels meet Lot in Sodom and Gomorrah.

"And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground" Genesis 19:1

Finally, I want to jump to Isaiah 48:16, "Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord, and his Spirit, hath sent me." The I/me is a divine figure, we know this because all of Isaiah 48 is God speaking to the house of Jacob. This is curious though because you have the Lord mentioned (divine) and one called the Spirit who is personal. The Spirit is personal because He is performing an action (sending). In this passage we see three divine figures but as we know, there is only one God. This leaves us to the conclusion that there is one God but three persons.

I can see where you get the correlation that this is Yeshua speaking about God sending Him, but in the context of what Isaiah is saying, there is a perfectly rational explanation. Remember, Hebrew has no verses or chapters, so when we go to the very next chapter, we see who is speaking in this verse:

"Listen, O isles, unto ME; and hearken, ye people, from far; The LORD hath called ME from the womb; from the bowels of MY mother hath he made mention of MY name.
And he hath made MY mouth like a sharp sword; in the shadow of his hand hath he hid ME, and made ME a polished shaft; in his quiver hath he hid ME;
And said unto ME, Thou art my servant, O ISRAEL, in whom I will be glorified."

Now I want to move onto to discussing a Unitarian God. We would all agree that God is all-loving. It is apart of the definition of God. We also would agree that God is changeless, He is the same today as He was yesterday. This, however provides a problem for the Unitarian. If God is all-loving and changeless, that means that He was all-loving before creation. What was there for God to love? Himself. The only thing that God could love would be Himself. After creation humans appear, and God is said to love them/us. This is impossible for a Unitarian God though. Since before creation God loved Himself, He could not change His love because He is changeless. When you look at it, a Unitarian is self-contradictory and only a Trinitarian God could be all-loving and changeless.
R37;

This is a very interesting idea that I have not heard before. I don't see how this makes God a trinity, but it does make me think about what God did "before" He created Time. Such a thought is incomprehensible anyways. Either way, this does not seem to imply a triune God, but rather many eternal gods. If Yeshua is God, and God is God, then based on your idea, God still must have loved Himself for eternity. I do have a question though. Was Adam the first Man, or has Yeshua existed as 100% man and 100% God for all of eternity?

I hope I have not offended you. I get really nervous when talking to fellow Christians, because I hate to offend anyone. Thank you again for joining us and God bless you my friend.
anonymouswho
Posts: 431
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2015 3:13:17 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/29/2015 9:31:00 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 7/28/2015 1:02:04 AM, anonymouswho wrote:
At 7/28/2015 12:55:19 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 7/28/2015 12:26:12 AM, tstor wrote:
At 7/28/2015 12:14:54 AM, bulproof wrote:
Umm you've got the wrong god.
Read another book.
This thread is not about which god is true, it is about the nature of the God of the Bible.
Oh you mean the genocidal despot?

Hey bulproof. Do you have anything you'd like to add to this discussion? I'm sorry, this post is not about genocide. However, to clear up any misconceptions, which genocidal act are you speaking of? The Scriptures say God killed many, many people. In fact, God has killed every human being that has ever lived. If I die tomorrow, it is because God had determined it was time for me to die. If my wife says "the Lord took my husband", she would not be lying. The Scriptures say that God is going to Resurrect ALL men, and He will teach them ALL Righteousness. So I'm not really sure what your point is. Thank you my friend.

And you consider that scripture (only yours) has some authority because men have told you that the scriptures written by other men have some authority.

This is true. However, it was when I was a child that I was told the Scriptures have authority, and I blindly believed what I was told. When I started questioning everything, this paradigm Caused me to turn to the Scriptures. It was full of interesting stories that kept me entertained, so I continued reading. By the time I had finished Revelation, I had decided that the Scriptures were true based solely on the fact that I read them and found nothing false.

Your god relies entirely on the support of men, without them he doesn't even exist.

I would like to respectfully ask that you keep your replies relevant to the thread. Dee-em is also an Atheist, but He always replies with questions regarding the OP. I don't want to ignore you bulproof because I love you and I find you quite humorous sometimes, but I would really appreciate it if I could talk to my fellow Christians about this topic. If you have any questions regarding the OP, I'd be more than happy to address them.

Thank you my friend.
tstor
Posts: 1,467
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2015 3:13:48 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/29/2015 1:26:15 PM, dee-em wrote:

I hate to interrupt this love-fest but it always amuses me how uncritical theists are of their scripture. You guys just accept it as revelation and proceed from there without any further investigation or thought.

Like everything else in Christianity, the Logos (Word) is a concept borrowed from another culture. In this case it was Greek philosophy.

https://en.wikipedia.org...

Later Philo of Alexandria (a contemporary of Jesus ironically, but who never heard of him), a hellenized Jew, took this concept further by suggesting that the Logos was an intermediary between God and the world of man. He was the one who coined the phrase "The First Born of God" or the "Son of God" for this non-human being. All of this was in relation to Judaism, before Christianity had appeared.

https://en.wikipedia.org...

Philo thought that God created and governed the world through mediators. Logos is the chief among them, the next to God, demiurge of the world. Logos is immaterial, an adequate image of God, his shadow, his firstborn son.[16] Being the mind of the Eternal, Logos is imperishable.[17] He is neither uncreated as God is, nor created as men are, but occupies a middle position. He has no autarkic power, only an entrusted one.[18]

The Johnny-come-lately Christians then appropriated the concept of the Logos from the ancient Greeks and from Philo and, lo and behold, the Logos became Jesus, the Son of God. Far from being revelation, the verse in John 1 is outright plagiarism (as is much of the New Testament).
Do you ever consider that, as Christians, we have already addressed these things in our own faith?
"The afternoon came down as imperceptibly as age comes to a happy man. A little gold entered into the sunlight. The bay became bluer and dimpled with shore-wind ripples. Those lonely fishermen who believe that the fish bite at high tide left their rocks, and their places were taken by others, who were convinced that the fish bite at low tide." (John Steinbeck; Tortilla Flat, 1935)
tstor
Posts: 1,467
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2015 3:17:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/29/2015 8:39:45 AM, anonymouswho wrote:
At 7/28/2015 6:17:21 PM, tstor wrote:
At 7/28/2015 1:08:30 AM, anonymouswho wrote:
Alright, so here is why I believe that Jesus is none other than The Archangel Michael. If you recall, at times individuals are known by more than one name. Whether you recognize that from the Bible or even modern cultures around the world. Take for example the patriarch Jacob who is also known as Israel. Or the apostle Peter as Simon.

Michael is clearly an outstanding angel. For example, in the book of Daniel, Michael is described as fighting wicked demons on behalf of us. (Daniel 10:13; 12:1) In the letter of Jude, Michael confronts Satan in a dispute over Moses' body. (Jude 9) The book of Revelation shows that Michael wars with Satan and his demons and hurls them out of heaven. (Rev. 12:7-9) No other angel is known to fight God's enemies. We can assume that is why he (Michael) has the title "the archangel", or "the chief angel". There is no other angel referred to as "archangel", hence why Michael is THE archangel. So we can reasonably conclude that God placed Michael as the authority over all angels.

Consider this: other than God Himself, who else has any authority over angels? Christ Jesus, of course. (Matt. 13:41; 16:27; 24:31)

With that in mind, take a look at these verses:
In 1 Thessalonians 4:16, the apostle Paul prophesied: "For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first." (NIV)
Who is the Lord? Well, it is Christ Jesus, as we see in 1 Corinthians 8:6:
"and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ" (NIV)
Notice that the Lord, Christ, has the voice of an archangel.

In Rev. 12:7 we read that Michael is the leader of an army of faithful angels, similar to that of Rev. 19:14-16. However, in 2 Thessalonians 1:7, Jesus also has powerful angels. Though the Bible never mentions there being more than one army of angels.

Thank you for sharing that. A lot of people think it is very strange to believe Yeshua is Michael, but I don't find it anymore strange than any other interpretation. Actually I find it much more valid than trinitarianism or modalism. The name Michael even means "who is like God". There are many similarities between Yeshua, Michael, and the Angel of YHVH, but I believe Yeshua was a man. Here is a good website that explains why Yeshua had to be a man to fulfill the Law:

http://www.angelfire.com...

Thank you my friend and God bless you.
I do not believe that Jesus was both 100% human and 100% divine. Take into consideration Hebrews 2:9:
"But we do see Jesus, who was made lower than the angels" (NIV)
"The afternoon came down as imperceptibly as age comes to a happy man. A little gold entered into the sunlight. The bay became bluer and dimpled with shore-wind ripples. Those lonely fishermen who believe that the fish bite at high tide left their rocks, and their places were taken by others, who were convinced that the fish bite at low tide." (John Steinbeck; Tortilla Flat, 1935)
anonymouswho
Posts: 431
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2015 3:47:25 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/29/2015 3:17:30 PM, tstor wrote:
At 7/29/2015 8:39:45 AM, anonymouswho wrote:
At 7/28/2015 6:17:21 PM, tstor wrote:
At 7/28/2015 1:08:30 AM, anonymouswho wrote:
Alright, so here is why I believe that Jesus is none other than The Archangel Michael. If you recall, at times individuals are known by more than one name. Whether you recognize that from the Bible or even modern cultures around the world. Take for example the patriarch Jacob who is also known as Israel. Or the apostle Peter as Simon.

Michael is clearly an outstanding angel. For example, in the book of Daniel, Michael is described as fighting wicked demons on behalf of us. (Daniel 10:13; 12:1) In the letter of Jude, Michael confronts Satan in a dispute over Moses' body. (Jude 9) The book of Revelation shows that Michael wars with Satan and his demons and hurls them out of heaven. (Rev. 12:7-9) No other angel is known to fight God's enemies. We can assume that is why he (Michael) has the title "the archangel", or "the chief angel". There is no other angel referred to as "archangel", hence why Michael is THE archangel. So we can reasonably conclude that God placed Michael as the authority over all angels.

Consider this: other than God Himself, who else has any authority over angels? Christ Jesus, of course. (Matt. 13:41; 16:27; 24:31)

With that in mind, take a look at these verses:
In 1 Thessalonians 4:16, the apostle Paul prophesied: "For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first." (NIV)
Who is the Lord? Well, it is Christ Jesus, as we see in 1 Corinthians 8:6:
"and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ" (NIV)
Notice that the Lord, Christ, has the voice of an archangel.

In Rev. 12:7 we read that Michael is the leader of an army of faithful angels, similar to that of Rev. 19:14-16. However, in 2 Thessalonians 1:7, Jesus also has powerful angels. Though the Bible never mentions there being more than one army of angels.

Thank you for sharing that. A lot of people think it is very strange to believe Yeshua is Michael, but I don't find it anymore strange than any other interpretation. Actually I find it much more valid than trinitarianism or modalism. The name Michael even means "who is like God". There are many similarities between Yeshua, Michael, and the Angel of YHVH, but I believe Yeshua was a man. Here is a good website that explains why Yeshua had to be a man to fulfill the Law:

http://www.angelfire.com...

Thank you my friend and God bless you.
I do not believe that Jesus was both 100% human and 100% divine. Take into consideration Hebrews 2:9:
"But we do see Jesus, who was made lower than the angels" (NIV)

I know you don't. You believe Yeshua is Michael the archangel, and DaGreek believes Yeshua is 100% man and 100% God. I'm sorry if there is a misunderstanding.

I'm glad you brought up this verse. This is why I don't believe Yeshua is God or Michael. This verse is taken from one of the Psalms:

"When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained;
What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him?
For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour.
Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet" Psalm 8:3

Thus, the writer of Hebrews is telling us that it is not the angels that God has given this authority to, it is a Man:

"For unto the angels hath he not put in subjection the world to come, whereof we speak.
But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him?
Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands:
Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him.
But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for EVERY man." Hebrews 2:5

Also in Hebrews, we are told:

"For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.
And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.
BUT unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. Hebrews 1:5

And another time it says:

"But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool?
Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them WHO shall be heirs of salvation?" Hebrews 1:13

I have to go to bed now. Thank you for continuing to discuss this with me. God bless you my friend.
Mike.com
Posts: 91
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2015 3:51:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/29/2015 10:22:12 AM, DaGreek wrote:
At 7/27/2015 10:59:49 PM, anonymouswho wrote:
I would like to discuss with my brothers and sister who the One True God is, as well as His Son, Yeshua the Messiah.

There are many things we can discuss:

Is God a trinity?

Is the Holy Spirit a person?

Is Yeshua God?

Is Yeshua Michael the archangel?

Is Yeshua a man?

If there are any other questions, or anything you'd like to add, please feel free to do so. I do ask that we remain respectful and loving towards one another. Remember, there are nonbelievers reading this as well.

Thank you all and God bless you.

Thank you for starting this forum! This is a very interesting issue and I am going to go down the route of the Trinity. Firstly, I am going to show that the Trinity is present in scripture and secondly, I am going to show that a Unitarian God (one God, one person) is incoherent. I am going to assume for the sake of the forum that everyone understands the concert of the Trinity. If not, I am happy to clarify.

The first time we see mention of the Trinity is in Genesis 1:26, "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness." In this verse we see one God (and God said) and plural persons (let us). This either means that there is one God and multiple persons or many gods. As others on this forum have pointed out, the Bible says that there is only one God. This means that Genesis 1:26 refers to one God with multiple persons.

Next, we see the Trinity in Geneis 18:1-3, "And the Lord appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day; and he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him: and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground, and said, My Lord, if now I have found favor in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant:" Abraham sees God as three men, indicating the Trinity. Keep in mind that when Abraham addresses the three, he refers to them as Lord not in the plural and not as if they where mere humans.

Finally, I want to jump to Isaiah 48:16, "Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord, and his Spirit, hath sent me." The I/me is a divine figure, we know this because all of Isaiah 48 is God speaking to the house of Jacob. This is curious though because you have the Lord mentioned (divine) and one called the Spirit who is personal. The Spirit is personal because He is performing an action (sending). In this passage we see three divine figures but as we know, there is only one God. This leaves us to the conclusion that there is one God but three persons.

Now I want to move onto to discussing a Unitarian God. We would all agree that God is all-loving. It is apart of the definition of God. We also would agree that God is changeless, He is the same today as He was yesterday. This, however provides a problem for the Unitarian. If God is all-loving and changeless, that means that He was all-loving before creation. What was there for God to love? Himself. The only thing that God could love would be Himself. After creation humans appear, and God is said to love them/us. This is impossible for a Unitarian God though. Since before creation God loved Himself, He could not change His love because He is changeless. When you look at it, a Unitarian is self-contradictory and only a Trinitarian God could be all-loving and changeless.
R37;

With respect, you and others always think they know the mind of God and all his attributes. You say God is all loving and yet he thinks nothing of telling Samuel to tell Saul to go and kill all the men, women and children and commits genocide all across the conquests.

God cannot be a trinity or have a son as he is not human and a son is a human construct. How can a holy spirit that is God have a son etc? Of course the bible is a human construct as well and so anyone can have whatever view they want of who God is and more likely to be 99% wrong about everything. I don't know that God is a spirit but he is certainly not human like us and so we can't have been made in his image as we are mammals and primates like the Chimpanzee and still not evolved as that is a continuous process. Who knows how we will look like in a billion years time?

To me God is the Creator, he is in every living thing until it dies and is then no more. That includes our bodies that won't be resurrected. IF Jesus was Michael, how easy it was for God to have inspired someone to actually tell us that and to call him Michael not Jesus at his birth. Jesus calling Simon, and changing someone's name from something he had known by for decades was nonsense.

Unto us a Saviour is born and that will be when the Romans occupy Jerusalem and his name will be called Michael as he is my Arch Angel and I will cause him to be crucified to atone for the sins of the whole world and by believing that, you shall receive everlasting life. Those that don't, hard luck, you can go and clean the toilets for eternity.

NOW, that written in Isaiah would have been more useful don't you think?
tstor
Posts: 1,467
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2015 3:57:41 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/29/2015 10:22:12 AM, DaGreek wrote:

Thank you for starting this forum! This is a very interesting issue and I am going to go down the route of the Trinity. Firstly, I am going to show that the Trinity is present in scripture and secondly, I am going to show that a Unitarian God (one God, one person) is incoherent. I am going to assume for the sake of the forum that everyone understands the concert of the Trinity. If not, I am happy to clarify.
I do not doubt that a handful of verses, if interpreted with the trinity in mind, could lead you to believe they are evidence. The problem is, there is an overwhelming amount of evidence against the trinity, so we have to interpret these verses in harmony with the rest of the Bible that denounces an idea of the trinity.

The first time we see mention of the Trinity is in Genesis 1:26, "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness." In this verse we see one God (and God said) and plural persons (let us). This either means that there is one God and multiple persons or many gods. As others on this forum have pointed out, the Bible says that there is only one God. This means that Genesis 1:26 refers to one God with multiple persons.
The plural in the verse does not inherently mean that there is a trinity. God could be referring to his angels, specifically Michael (Jesus). In fact, this is in harmony with what is said later in the Bible:
Genesis 1:26: "'Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness,'" (NIV)
Colossians 1:15: "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities"all things have been created through Him and for Him." (NIV)

Next, we see the Trinity in Geneis 18:1-3, "And the Lord appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day; and he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him: and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground, and said, My Lord, if now I have found favor in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant:" Abraham sees God as three men, indicating the Trinity. Keep in mind that when Abraham addresses the three, he refers to them as Lord not in the plural and not as if they where mere humans.
We have to render this interpretation based on what is already directly told about God in the rest of the Bible, specifically that He is one. (Mark 12:19; Deu. 6:4; John 17:3) Take into consideration John 1:18:
"No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known." (NIV)

I don't particularly care for the NIV rendition of this verse, but it gets the point across. (I am even surprised you did not use it in your own evidences of the trinity) No one has ever seen God other than Christ Jesus. Well, no one on earth that is. So how can we interpret this verse in light of John 1:18? It is simple really, God appears to man through other ways. God sends himself through angels typically. Or even as a cloud:
"By day the LORD went ahead of them in a pillar of cloud to guide them on their way and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light, so that they could travel by day or night." [NIV] (Exodus 13:21)

Finally, I want to jump to Isaiah 48:16, "Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord, and his Spirit, hath sent me." The I/me is a divine figure, we know this because all of Isaiah 48 is God speaking to the house of Jacob. This is curious though because you have the Lord mentioned (divine) and one called the Spirit who is personal. The Spirit is personal because He is performing an action (sending). In this passage we see three divine figures but as we know, there is only one God. This leaves us to the conclusion that there is one God but three persons.
Notice in Isaiah 48:16, we read:
"And now the Sovereign Lord has sent me," (NIV)
Who is "the Sovereign Lord"? Obviously it is the Father. So we can see the clear distinction between persons.

Also we can consider this point here. Bible writers often spread the dialog of one person with statements by others. When doing so, they often don't identify the new speakers. So we see that very often they appear to be comments by Isaiah himself.

Is this the case here? We can confirm that it is because when we do it becomes in harmony with the rest of the Bible and proves these modern Bible translations: The RSV and the NIV Bibles show by quotation marks and indenting that Isaiah himself made the final comment in Isaiah 48:16.

Now I want to move onto to discussing a Unitarian God. We would all agree that God is all-loving. It is apart of the definition of God. We also would agree that God is changeless, He is the same today as He was yesterday. This, however provides a problem for the Unitarian. If God is all-loving and changeless, that means that He was all-loving before creation. What was there for God to love? Himself. The only thing that God could love would be Himself. After creation humans appear, and God is said to love them/us. This is impossible for a Unitarian God though. Since before creation God loved Himself, He could not change His love because He is changeless. When you look at it, a Unitarian is self-contradictory and only a Trinitarian God could be all-loving and changeless.
R37;
This is a weak argument at best. Saying that God does not change is not scriptural. For example, when God sent a judgment message to the people of ancient Israel, he said: "Perhaps they will listen and each will turn from their evil ways. Then I will relent and not inflict on them the disaster I was planning because of the evil they have done." [NIV] (Jeremiah 26:3) Some translations such as the NWT, NLT, ISV, etc. render it literally as "change my mind". Those renditions make more sense when considering the KJV says that God will "repent". If God "repents", then He would have made a mistake. However, God is unchangeable in that his personality and standards of love and justice never alter.
"The afternoon came down as imperceptibly as age comes to a happy man. A little gold entered into the sunlight. The bay became bluer and dimpled with shore-wind ripples. Those lonely fishermen who believe that the fish bite at high tide left their rocks, and their places were taken by others, who were convinced that the fish bite at low tide." (John Steinbeck; Tortilla Flat, 1935)
DaGreek
Posts: 30
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2015 3:58:51 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Thank you very much for joining us my friend. This is very interesting. We can now have a discussion for all three positions: was Yeshua a Man, is Yeshua Michael, or is Yeshua a triune God? I hope we can all have a reasonable and respectful conversation about this.

Thank you for your response. I will happy to discuss the other two issues late but right now, let's focus on the Trinity.

The first time we see mention of the Trinity is in Genesis 1:26, "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness." In this verse we see one God (and God said) and plural persons (let us). This either means that there is one God and multiple persons or many gods. As others on this forum have pointed out, the Bible says that there is only one God. This means that Genesis 1:26 refers to one God with multiple persons.

I have to disagree with this proposition because of several reasons. First, if Arius was right and Yeshus is the first created being, then God could have been talking to Him. There are also several other interpretations of who exactly God was speaking with. It could have been the Angels, as we are not told when they came to exist. There are other interpretations that many trinitarians have proposed. God is talking to His Wisdom. God is talking to His creation. Regardless, there is nothing that indicates that God is a multi personal being, and there is definitely nothing here to imply a three-in-one god.

I would say that Jesus (I am going to use English for the time being) was not the first created being. We see evidence of this in Revelation 1:8,1:11 and 1:17.

Revelation 1:8, "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End."
Who is this?

Revelation 1:11, "I am the Alpha the Omega, the First and the Last".
Who is this? The same person as in 1:8 right?

Revelation 1:17, "And when I [St. John the theologian] saw Him, I fell at His feet as dead. But He laid His right hand on me, saying to me, "Do not be afraid; I am the First and the Last. I am He who lives, and was dead and behold, I am alive forevermore."

Who was dead but came back to life? That's right, Jesus. Jesus is the Alpha and the Omega. As we see in these three verses, Jesus was not created and is one with the Father.

You then offer up that God may have been talking to angels, creation or His Wisdom. I say that He could not have been talking to His angels because only God has the ability to create. God is the creator, we never see angels creating life in the Bible. God talking to creation does not make sense. Why would God talk to non-personal entities in context with the non-personal entities being co-creators. Non-personal entities cannot create. We do not ever see a pencil, for example, draw a picture by itself or create another picture.

Finally, God talking to His wisdom does not make sense. God's wisdom is His all-knowing-ness. God's wisdom is one of His attributes. That would be like me talking to my height while I was typing this. Furthermore, God's attributes do not and cannot create. Only God can create. God's omnipotence does not create things, again we see it nowhere in scripture and it is not logical.

Yes, Abraham did meet God, as well as two other entities. These other two entities could not have been Yeshua and the Holy Spirit. They were Angels, and in the next chapter we are told that these same Angels meet Lot in Sodom and Gomorrah.

Remember that Abraham referred to the three Men/Angels as Lord, not just one of the Men or Angels. Look, you say that one of the Men/Angels is God, but deny the other two. You give no backing for why one of the Men/Angels is somehow different than the others. I am afraid you are just stating something as fact.

I can see where you get the correlation that this is Yeshua speaking about God sending Him, but in the context of what Isaiah is saying, there is a perfectly rational explanation. Remember, Hebrew has no verses or chapters, so when we go to the very next chapter, we see who is speaking in this verse:

But Hebrew does have verses and chapters my friend. We can see this in Orthodox Jewish Bibles because they are divided into verses and chapters. Also, in the dead sea scrolls there are many OT books. In the scrolls, there are chapters and verses. The dead sea scrolls go back hundreds of years before Jesus' time. Since the Hebrew is divided, each chapter is concerning different subjects.

Now I want to move onto to discussing a Unitarian God. We would all agree that God is all-loving. It is apart of the definition of God. We also would agree that God is changeless, He is the same today as He was yesterday. This, however provides a problem for the Unitarian. If God is all-loving and changeless, that means that He was all-loving before creation. What was there for God to love? Himself. The only thing that God could love would be Himself. After creation humans appear, and God is said to love them/us. This is impossible for a Unitarian God though. Since before creation God loved Himself, He could not change His love because He is changeless. When you look at it, a Unitarian is self-contradictory and only a Trinitarian God could be all-loving and changeless.
R37;

This is a very interesting idea that I have not heard before. I don't see how this makes God a trinity, but it does make me think about what God did "before" He created Time. Such a thought is incomprehensible anyways. Either way, this does not seem to imply a triune God, but rather many eternal gods. If Yeshua is God, and God is God, then based on your idea, God still must have loved Himself for eternity. I do have a question though. Was Adam the first Man, or has Yeshua existed as 100% man and 100% God for all of eternity?

This little argument does not make God a Trinity. Is does make the concept of one God, one person incoherent though. By this argument alone, God could be one God, two persons, one God, three persons, one God, four persons... My point is that the concept of one God, one person is logically incoherent.

This does not point to many eternal gods though. Apart from many gods being anti-Biblical, it is also logically flawed. I dare say that one can disprove multiple gods. This is a very risky statement, but I will try to justify. There is a principle in philosophy called Ockam's Razor. It states that we should not add multiplicity beyond necessity. To illustrate this, imagine that mom came home and found little George with cookie crumbles over his face and the cookie jar empty. By Ockahm's Razor, we can deduce that it is more probable that little George ate the cookies and ninjas didn't steal the cookies and frame little George. We can do the same with multiple gods. Only one God is required to create the universe, create life and so on, therefore we should not posit multiplicity/many gods.

After we discuss the Trinity, I will address your other questions. I am sorry that you feel nervous talking to other Christians. This should not be the case. I hope that you feel discussing these topics with me.
Mike.com
Posts: 91
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2015 3:59:53 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Just to say that when the text says Let us make man in our image, its easy...That was a mistake, God meant to say in MY image as the other way was to suggest that all the angels or who ever they were looked like God himself. But we know now that we are not made in the image of God unless you think God was a chimp at one time.

Of course profoundly IF every living thing has the spirit of the creator, then that in itself makes every living thing made in his image. So that could fit but believers think that God is human like we are. Was Frankenstein the creator or the Monster? ;)