That's nice. Prove it![QUOTE="EdwinWillers, post: 1075513315, member:
Jesus is no myth. He is real. He is alive. He is God. And He is coming again...
"The Word was a god," in an incorrect translation of the text in question. And it was so translated in the New World Translation for obvious reasons.Jesus Christ is the Son of God...
The phrase “the Word was a god” describes the divine or godlike nature that Jesus possessed before he came to earth. He can be described in this way because of his role as God’s Spokesman and his unique position as the firstborn Son of God through whom God created all other things.
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/502300113?q=a+god&p=sen
Lol - show us first - if science has not ruled out the possibility of God creation,
Science has neither ruled out nor affirmed it. Science doesn't deal with god/s or the supernatural. There is simply no evidence.Lol - show us first - if science has not ruled out the possibility of God creation,
A lack of belief is not a belief. And there is no objective, empirical evidence for any god.on what credible authority do you base your belief that there is no God!
Atheists generally do not claim there is no god. They are simply unconvinced there is one. So they do not bear the burden of proof. Theists on the other hand to make the affirmative claim for a god/ SO they do bear the burden of proof. And they usually dodge the challenge to prove it. The best theists come up with is along the lines of "god did it," which doesn't answer or explain anything. At least atheists or those who look at things objectively will honestly say "we don't know."That's been asked so many times - all you atheists do is................................... run away from it. Furthermore, it's not the only question you guys couldn't answer.
Identity of “the Word”?
Many Greek scholars and Bible translators acknowledge that John 1:1 highlights, not the identity, but a quality of “the Word.” Says Bible translator William Barclay: “Because [the apostle John] has no definite article in front of theos it becomes a description . . . John is not here identifying the Word with God. To put it very simply, he does not say that Jesus was God.” Scholar Jason David BeDuhn likewise says: “In Greek, if you leave off the article from theos in a sentence like the one in John 1:1c, then your readers will assume you mean ‘a god.’ . . . Its absence makes theos quite different than the definite ho theos, as different as ‘a god’ is from ‘God’ in English.” BeDuhn adds: “In John 1:1, the Word is not the one-and-only God, but is a god, or divine being.” Or to put it in the words of Joseph Henry Thayer, a scholar who worked on the American Standard Version: “The Logos [or, Word] was divine, not the divine Being himself.”
Jesus made a clear distinction between him and his Father
Does the identity of God have to be “a very profound mystery”? It did not seem so to Jesus. In his prayer to his Father, Jesus made a clear distinction between him and his Father when he said: “This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ.” (John 17:3) If we believe Jesus and understand the plain teaching of the Bible, we will respect him as the divine Son of God that he is. We will also worship Jehovah as “the only true God.”https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/wp20090401/is-jesus-god/
Is Jesus Christ a God, or not?
Hey, he turned the water into wine, didn't he?Eris says he's a a nice guy, but he doesn't like to party.
Kinda proves Jesus is God's Son now, don't it? He was WITH God from the beginning...
Kinda proves Jesus is God's Son now, don't it? He was WITH God from the beginning...
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the word was a god."And John chapter one says he was God in the beginning.
" In the beginning was the Word (Jesus), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." - John 1:1
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/b/r1/lp-e/nwtsty/43/1#study=discoverthe Word: Or “the Logos.” Greek, ho loʹgos. Here used as a title, it is also used at Joh 1:14 and Re 19:13. John identified the one to whom this title belongs, namely, Jesus. This title was applied to Jesus during his prehuman existence as a spirit creature, during his ministry on earth as a perfect man, and after his exaltation to heaven. Jesus was God’s Word of communication, or Spokesman, for conveying information and instructions to the Creator’s other spirit sons and to humans. So it is reasonable to think that prior to Jesus’ coming to earth, Jehovah on many occasions communicated with mankind through the Word, His angelic mouthpiece.—Ge 16:7-11; 22:11; 31:11; Ex 3:2-5; Jg 2:1-4; 6:11, 12; 13:3.
with: Lit., “toward.” In this context, the Greek preposition pros implies close proximity and fellowship. It also indicates separate persons, in this case, the Word and the only true God.
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/b/r1/lp-e/nwtsty/43/1#study=discoverthe Word was a god: Or “the Word was divine [or, “a godlike one”].” This statement by John describes a quality or characteristic of “the Word” (Greek, ho loʹgos; see study note on the Word in this verse), that is, Jesus Christ. The Word’s preeminent position as the firstborn Son of God through whom God created all other things is a basis for describing him as “a god; a godlike one; divine; a divine being.” Many translators favor the rendering “the Word was God,” equating him with God Almighty. However, there are good reasons for saying that John did not mean that “the Word” was the same as Almighty God. First, the preceding clause and the following clause both clearly state that “the Word” was “with God.” Also, the Greek word the·osʹ occurs three times in verses 1 and 2. In the first and third occurrences, the·osʹ is preceded by the definite article in Greek; in the second occurrence, there is no article. Many scholars agree that the absence of the definite article before the second the·osʹ is significant. When the article is used in this context, the·osʹ refers to God Almighty. On the other hand, the absence of the article in this grammatical construction makes the·osʹ qualitative in meaning and describes a characteristic of “the Word.” Therefore, a number of Bible translations in English, French, and German render the text in a way similar to the New World Translation, conveying the idea that “the Word” was “a god; divine; a divine being; of divine kind; godlike.” Supporting this view, ancient translations of John’s Gospel into the Sahidic and the Bohairic dialects of the Coptic language, probably produced in the third and fourth centuries C.E., handle the first occurrence of the·osʹ at Joh 1:1 differently from the second occurrence. These renderings highlight a quality of “the Word,” that his nature was like that of God, but they do not equate him with his Father, the almighty God. In harmony with this verse, Col 2:9 describes Christ as having “all the fullness of the divine quality.” And according to 2Pe 1:4, even Christ’s joint heirs would “become sharers in divine nature.” Additionally, in the Septuagint translation, the Greek word the·osʹ is the usual equivalent of the Hebrew words rendered “God,” ʼel and ʼelo·himʹ, which are thought to convey the basic meaning “Mighty One; Strong One.” These Hebrew words are used with reference to the almighty God, other gods, and humans. (See study note on Joh 10:34.) Calling the Word “a god,” or “a mighty one,” would be in line with the prophecy at Isa 9:6, foretelling that the Messiah would be called “Mighty God” (not “Almighty God”) and that he would be the “Eternal Father” of all those privileged to live as his subjects. The zeal of his own Father, “Jehovah of armies,” would accomplish this.—Isa 9:7.
But not all who claim to be Christian.You really should try reading at least a LITTLE about a religion before you make these threads. Look up the concept of the holy trinity. I'm not saying it's logical or real, but that is what most Christians will tell you when asked.
Of course, the rest of the Jews have a special name for people who claim to be Messianic Jews. We call them 'Christians'A great many Jews do believe in Jesus. They're known as Messianic Jews and have their own synagogues.
A great many Jews do believe in Jesus. They're known as Messianic Jews and have their own synagogues.
In the Tanakh, God appears as a man several times in scripture. It's called a theophany.
The Lord appeared as a man to Abraham, and also to Jacob. https://www.icr.org/article/theophanies-old-testament-creator
And contrary to your claim, Jesus didn't BECOME GOD, he was always GOD who for some 33 years took on the form of a servant.
Read Philippians 2:
Before Jesus incarnated, he was God. When he incarnated, he became a servant, although he did miracles by the power of the Holy Spirit. Afterwards, upon his resurrection, Jesus is God again with all his powers. So here's the scripture Muslims and skeptics avoid like the plague: From Philippians chapter 2: "In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:
6 Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
7 rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!"
So far you're 0-4, and you have not explained why God is seen as a multiple individual in Post #35 above. Are you going to explain that?
Also, where does it say in the Pentateuch that God is just a singular entity and not a multi-faceted God? The Jews may believe in a singular God but that's not supported in scripture, as I've noted.
Is Jesus Christ a God, or not?
Most in fact do not have any Jewish heritiage at all. Some might have Jewish ancestry, but were not brought up in a religious Jewish household.Messianic Jews are Jews in name only. They are basically just Christians who celebrate Jewish holidays, but their beliefs are heretical in Judaism.
Science has neither ruled out nor affirmed it. Science doesn't deal with god/s or the supernatural. There is simply no evidence.
"Science is not the only way of acquiring knowledge about ourselves and the world around us. Humans gain understanding in many other ways, such as through literature, the arts, philosophical reflection, and religious experience. Scientific knowledge may enrich aesthetic and moral perceptions, but these subjects extend beyond science's realm, which is to obtain a better understanding of the natural world."
"Scientists, like many others, are touched with awe at the order and complexity of nature. Indeed, many scientists are deeply religious. But science and religion occupy two separate realms of human experience. Demanding that they be combined detracts from the glory of each."
"Many religious persons, including many scientists, hold that God created the universe and the various processes driving physical and biological evolution and that these processes then resulted in the creation of galaxies, our solar system, and life on Earth. This belief, which sometimes is termed 'theistic evolution,' is not in disagreement with scientific explanations of evolution. Indeed, it reflects the remarkable and inspiring character of the physical universe revealed by cosmology, paleontology, molecular biology, and many other scientific disciplines."
A lack of belief is not a belief. And there is no objective, empirical evidence for any god.
Atheists generally do not claim there is no god. They are simply unconvinced there is one. So they do not bear the burden of proof. Theists on the other hand to make the affirmative claim for a god/ SO they do bear the burden of proof. And they usually dodge the challenge to prove it. The best theists come up with is along the lines of "god did it," which doesn't answer or explain anything. At least atheists or those who look at things objectively will honestly say "we don't know."
Where does science use the supernatural as explanations? What studies or experiments are performed on the supernatural? Science might acknowledge that people have such beliefs, but it doesn't use such beliefs as a logical explanation for anything.And yet, science had gone to the extent of talking about it, daring to go as far as they can, including it in a book that explains about their values as a science community.........and which is posted in an FAQ by another science body.
Faith is still wishful thinking and is not equivalent to fact.Preaching it, becomes mre than just that. It's become a faith!
What's the difference between you and those whom you call having faith for something they cant prove to exist?
Science cannot rule out god because such a position is logically indefensible just as ruling there is a god is.At least, they can claim that science has not ruled out the possibility of God, but in fact had shown to be open to its possibility!
Lol - otherwise, what's the point of that official statement about GOD?
Then there is no reason to take any claims of the supernatural seriously. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.You've got nothing. You simply insist there is no evidence!
Of course there isn't any physical evidence for something supernatural - which science isn't capable of observing!
When or if it does, then get back to me. Until then, science has no reason to accept such things.You think, 200 years ago - any scientists had seen the............................. universe stretching?
100 years ago, any scientists had seen.......................... water UNDER the ocean?
100 or 200 years from now - who knows, maybe science will have gained the capability to observe the supernatural too!
So you have objective, empirical evidence to present then?Thus - your reasoning about "there is no evidence," falls flat!
Show me the evidence. Are you open minded to the possibility that your beliefs/faith is wrong or that there may be no god at all?Just because it isn't happening in your lifetime - especially in YOUR lifetime, considering we already had seen what incredible things technology can do - there is no reason to think study of the supernatural wouldn't be possible!
It only shows and support the argument that .........................................atheism requires a closed mind.
Why can't you consider the possibility?
Because, as an atheist, you can't!
You have yet to present any objective, empirical evidence. Belief/faith is not evidence.Then, don't give a silly argument like, "there is no evidence for it!"
That's not even right!
There is no physical PROOF for God................................but, there are many evidences to support His existence!
Perhaps a dog and a cane for your blindness to the evidences for God might be of assistance for you.Where does science use the supernatural as explanations? What studies or experiments are performed on the supernatural? Science might acknowledge that people have such beliefs, but it doesn't use such beliefs as a logical explanation for anything.
Faith is still wishful thinking and is not equivalent to fact.
Science cannot rule out god because such a position is logically indefensible just as ruling there is a god is.
Then there is no reason to take any claims of the supernatural seriously. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
When or if it does, then get back to me. Until then, science has no reason to accept such things.
So you have objective, empirical evidence to present then?
Show me the evidence. Are you open minded to the possibility that your beliefs/faith is wrong or that there may be no god at all?
You have yet to present any objective, empirical evidence. Belief/faith is not evidence.
Objective, empirical evidence rather than mere belief, wishful thinking, or delusion would be more helpful and convincing.Perhaps a dog and a cane for your blindness to the evidences for God might be of assistance for you.
View attachment 67378019
yup......sure isIs Jesus Christ a God, or not?
First we have to define objectively what a god is, then determine if Jesus matches those criteria. But I don’t believe that any Christian, Jew, or Muslim would accept any objective definition of a god.Is Jesus Christ a God, or not?
It indicates that GOD being TRIUNE personified LOVE as ONE essence from eternity passed to eternity future.Kinda proves Jesus is God's Son now, don't it? He was WITH God from the beginning...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?