Jesus was God? Debunked

Home Forums General & off-topic Jesus was God? Debunked

Viewing 6 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #167491
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >Jesus was God

      Debunked

      John 20:17
      Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my siss and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’”

      >Jesus is uncreated

      Debunked

      Colossians 1:15
      The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.

      >Jesus was an only child and Mary was an eternal virgin

      Debunked

      Mark 6:3
      This is the carpenter, the son of Mary and the sis of James, Joseph, Judas, and Simon, is it not? And his sisters are here with us, are they not?”

    • #167492
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Bible was corrupted

      • #167496
        Anonymous
        Guest
        • #167497
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >has-gods-written-word-been-changed
          no, of course the quran hasn’t been changed
          the bible isn’t the word of god, jesus is

          • #167500
            Anonymous
            Guest

            The Bible is God’s word because it came from him

            Jesus is called the Word because he acted as God’s spokesman

            >There’s no trinity in the Bible
            The Trinity is fairly clearly implied in the Bible.
            What there absolutely is not in the Bible, the Church Fathers or any early theologians either, is the conflation of Christ and an archangel. Yet you still posted a JW link.

            […]
            Christcuckcopekek destryoed !!!1!

            >The Trinity is fairly clearly implied in the Bible.

            It is an attempt to read into the Bible what clergymen of later times arbitrarily decided should be doctrine.

            Ask yourself: Why would the Bible only “imply” its most important teaching—who God is? The Bible is clear on other basic teachings; why not on this, the most important one? Would not the Creator of the universe author a book that was clear on his being a Trinity if that were the case?

            The reason the Bible does not clearly teach the Trinity doctrine is simple: It is not a Bible teaching. Had God been a Trinity, he would surely have made it clear so that Jesus and his disciples could have taught it to others. And that vital information would have been included in God’s inspired Word. It would not have been left to imperfect men to struggle with centuries later.

            When we examine texts offered by Trinitarians as evidence that the Bible “implies” a Trinity, what do we find? An honest appraisal reveals that the scriptures offered do not speak of Christendom’s Trinity. Instead, theologians try to force into the scriptures their preconceived ideas of a Trinity. But those ideas are not in the scripture texts. In fact, those Trinitarian ideas conflict with the clear testimony of the Bible as a whole

            >Church Fathers

            Why would you trust Greek philosophers that arrived 400 years after Jesus’ death ?

            • #167502
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >The Bible is God’s word because it came from him
              This is wrong. God’s word comes from prophets, not books. If the words of prophets are found in books, this does not mean those books are God’s words, as fallible men handled those books and put their own opinions in their concerning the prophets, who people always differed over after their souls left the earth. Such is the case of the garden gnomes with Moses, and Christians with Jesus, peace be upon them forever.

              • #167506
                Anonymous
                Guest

                >“All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.”—2 TIMOTHY 3:16, 17.

                Bible writers acknowledged that they wrote in the name of Jehovah, the one true God, and that they were guided by him. Prophets who wrote the Hebrew Scriptures proclaimed more than 300 times: “This is what Jehovah has said.” (Amos 1:3; Micah 2:3; Nahum 1:12) Other writers received God’s message through angels.—Zechariah 1:7, 9.

                >The Bible is God’s word because it came from him
                How you know?

                See:

                https://www.jw.org/en/library/videos/Good-News-From-God-Video-Series/video-bible-true/

                • #167507
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  >tells him fallible men compiled and were overseers of the books
                  >quotes book to show it wasnt by fallible men
                  im lost.

                  • #167508
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    What does Luke 1:37 say ?

                    • #167510
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      I agree, but again, if people say they wrote in the name of God, yet they lie about the prophets (with them writing that Lot is the father of a bastard race and that Abraham and Solomon were idolators and that Noah was an alcoholic and that Jesus is the son of god), it shows that something isn’t adding up here. It shows that the garden gnomes corrupted the scripture and then claimed it was from Allah.

                      >"So woe to those who write the "scripture" with their own hands, then say, "This is from Allah ," in order to exchange it for a small price. Woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they earn." (2:79)

                      • #167512
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        garden gnomes AND christcucks

            • #167504
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >The Bible is God’s word because it came from him
              How you know?

            • #167513
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >The Bible is clear on other basic teachings
              About God’s identity? Rarely. OT allows you to piece back God’s identity in a 10,000 piece puzzle of "and you will know my name is YHWH".
              >Would not the Creator of the universe author a book that was clear
              Flashback to fedoras complaining that Genesis can be read literally lol
              >Had God been a Trinity, he would surely have made it clear
              It was clear to most Christians since every other reading is inconsistent.
              >Why would you trust Greek philosophers that arrived 400 years after Jesus’ death ?
              You surely must be aware that the Bible itself was composed 400 years after Jesus’ death… in large part by Greek philosophers… yes?

              Your case rests entirely on a concept being too deep in the scripture to be true. Despite the fact the scripture itself asks you to dive deep to find divine concepts. Eh… beats grasping at monogenés to prove a point.

              • #167518
                Anonymous
                Guest

                >You surely must be aware that the Bible itself was composed 400 years after Jesus’ death… in large part by Greek philosophers… yes?

                the process of the recognition and collection began in the first centuries of the Christian church. Very early on, some of the New Testament books were being recognized.

                Paul considered Luke’s writings to be as authoritative as the Old Testament (1 Timothy 5:18; see also Deuteronomy 25:4 and Luke 10:7).

                Peter recognized Paul’s writings as Scripture (2 Peter 3:15-16). Some of the books of the New Testament were being circulated among the churches (Colossians 4:16; 1 Thessalonians 5:27).

                Clement of Rome mentioned at least eight New Testament books (A.D. 95). Ignatius of Antioch acknowledged about seven books (A.D. 115).

                Polycarp, a disciple of John the apostle, acknowledged 15 books (A.D. 108). Later, Irenaeus mentioned 21 books (A.D. 185). Hippolytus recognized 22 books (A.D. 170-235).

        • #167498
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >There’s no trinity in the Bible
          The Trinity is fairly clearly implied in the Bible.
          What there absolutely is not in the Bible, the Church Fathers or any early theologians either, is the conflation of Christ and an archangel. Yet you still posted a JW link.

          >no
          >nuh uh
          >wut?
          >[scrotespeak]
          truly the religion of scrotes and slaves

          Christcuckcopekek destryoed !!!1!

          • #167501
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >implying
            HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

        • #167511
          Anonymous
          Guest

          debunked ¿how? have you ever heard about the qumran texts and the codex sinaiticus?

          • #167515
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >debunked ¿how?

            See: https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/watchtower-no3-2020-sep-oct/has-gods-written-word-been-changed/

            >The Bible is clear on other basic teachings
            About God’s identity? Rarely. OT allows you to piece back God’s identity in a 10,000 piece puzzle of "and you will know my name is YHWH".
            >Would not the Creator of the universe author a book that was clear
            Flashback to fedoras complaining that Genesis can be read literally lol
            >Had God been a Trinity, he would surely have made it clear
            It was clear to most Christians since every other reading is inconsistent.
            >Why would you trust Greek philosophers that arrived 400 years after Jesus’ death ?
            You surely must be aware that the Bible itself was composed 400 years after Jesus’ death… in large part by Greek philosophers… yes?

            Your case rests entirely on a concept being too deep in the scripture to be true. Despite the fact the scripture itself asks you to dive deep to find divine concepts. Eh… beats grasping at monogenés to prove a point.

            >About God’s identity? Rarely. OT allows you to piece back God’s identity in a 10,000 piece puzzle of "and you will know my name is YHWH".

            we can discern God’s personality from the things he has made. For instance, the variety of fruits and flowers tells us of his love and wisdom. The size of the universe tells us of his power.—Read Romans 1:20.

            We can learn even more about God’s personality by reading the Bible. For example, it tells us what God likes and what he does not like, how he treats people, and how he reacts in different situations.—Read Psalm 103:7-10.

            >Flashback to fedoras complaining that Genesis can be read literally lol

            Most of it can be

            >It was clear to most Christians since every other reading is inconsistent.

            note what the Encyclopædia Britannica states: “Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament . . . The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies.”

            In fact, the God of the Bible is never described as being part of a Trinity. Note these Bible passages:

            >“Jehovah our God is one Jehovah.”—Deuteronomy 6:4.

            >“You, whose name is Jehovah, you alone are the Most High over all the earth.”—Psalm 83:18.

            >“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.

            >“God is only one.”—Galatians 3:20.

            • #167520
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >we can discern God’s personality from the things he has made
              >For instance, the variety of fruits and flowers
              Okay go look at fruit, I’ll try to read the Bible.
              >what God likes
              This is you present as a ‘clear’ teaching of God’s identity?
              >The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies
              Just like the Bible. I’m giving you a second chance to ignore this fact.
              >the process of the recognition and collection began in the first centuries of the Christian church
              I know. And it concluded with Greek philosophers finishing the Bible as you know it. You implied we shouldn’t trust those philosophers. That is inconsistent.
              Just like non-trinitarian readings.

              • #167525
                Anonymous
                Guest

                >Okay go look at fruit, I’ll try to read the Bible.

                Sure !

                >This is you present as a ‘clear’ teaching of God’s identity?

                Yes !

                >Just like the Bible. I’m giving you a second chance to ignore this fact.

                Nope !

                >I know. And it concluded with Greek philosophers finishing the Bible as you know it.

                Nope, the canon was made way before !

                • #167530
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  >>This is you present as a ‘clear’ teaching of God’s identity?
                  >Yes !
                  So… piecing identity from likes and dislikes is clear, but piecing identity from a person standing right there in front of you is too much?
                  >Nope, the canon was made way before !
                  Some of it was, some of it wasn’t. I’m giving you a third chance to ignore the fact that the Bible you claim to read is HEAVILY influenced by the people you claim to not trust.

                  the Bible became corrupted because the garden gnomes sold their religions for a small price (9:9) and they threw it behind their backs and acted like they did not know it (2:101) as they killed prophets (2:91) and worshipped shaytan and their rabbis (9:31). None of these things Christians deny but they still believe in the gnomish Bible because they have woke af their own innovations on it, so the corrupted book has become their rock which they will not abandon for the direct word of Allah, which is the Qur’an Al-Kareem.

                  >the Bible became corrupted because the garden gnomes sold their religions
                  And yet the scripts we find from 2000 years ago match contemporary Bibles with 99% accuracy? Are you claiming Quran offers 100% and is actually not just a dumbed down Bible? How?

                  • #167532
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    >So… piecing identity from likes and dislikes is clear, but piecing identity from a person standing right there in front of you is too much?

                    Think of someone you know well, such as a close friend. How did that friendship develop? Likely you got to know that person’s name, personality, likes and dislikes, as well as what he or she has done and plans to do, and more. This is what drew you to that person—you learned about him or her.

                    Knowing God better can add purpose and meaning to your life. (Acts 17:26-28) The closer you draw to God, the more he will love and help you. (James 4:8) Ultimately, having accurate knowledge of God can lead to unending life.—John 17:3.

                    >Some of it was, some of it wasn’t. I’m giving you a third chance to ignore the fact that the Bible you claim to read is HEAVILY influenced by the people you claim to not trust.

                    The writing of the Christian Greek Scriptures was completed during the time that the gifts of the spirit were operative on Christ’s followers. (Joh 14:26; Re 1:1) Some Christians had the gift of “discernment of inspired expressions.” (1Co 12:10)

                    Thus, they could, without referring the matter to a supposed church council, determine which of the letters the congregation received were inspired of God.

                    With the death of John, the last apostle, this reliable chain of divinely inspired men came to an end. Therefore, with the book of Revelation, John’s Gospel, and his three letters, the Bible canon was closed.

                    The testimony of later, noninspired writers is valuable only as an acknowledgment of the Bible canon, which God’s spirit had guided and authorized.

                    • #167537
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      >Likely you got to know that person’s name, personality, likes and dislikes, as well as what he or she has done and plans to do, and more.
                      Yes. Most of this from seeing them in front of me. Affirming that learning God’s identity from seeing it before you is a clearer way than you trying to piece it back from commandments. QED
                      >The writing of the Christian Greek Scriptures was completed during the time that the gifts of the spirit were operative on Christ’s followers. (Joh 14:26; Re 1:1)
                      Neither John 14:26 nor Revelations 1:1 claim this. Furthermore, the writing of Judas’ gospel was finished fairly early on as well, but the editorial choice to not include it in the Scripture… was made by people you claim not to trust. Inconsistency on your part.

                  • #167535
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    >And yet the scripts we find from 2000 years ago match contemporary Bibles with 99% accuracy?
                    lol

                    • #167538
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      >t. filtered

                    • #167539
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      He’s right

                      The character of Jesus in that of the Gospels is another forgery. A forgery quoting forgery means nothing.

                      Not only do I believe that God is capable of preserving his Word from corruption for all eternity, the facts also agree with this, since a comparison of all the ancient manuscripts show that the Bible has been faithfully passed down from generation to generation for centuries

                      When you have the time, please read this article !

                      https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/watchtower-no4-2016-july/original-bible-text/

                      You have all the facts in hands, now it’s your choice as to whether you want to believe and rrust in God or not

                      • #167540
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >whether you want to believe and rrust in God or not.
                        I have already believed and trusted in God, who has promised to preserve the Qur’an (His direct word and testimony), and has made no promises to keep the garden gnomes from corrupting their books (because keep in mind the torah was for the garden gnomes while the quran is for mankind). You are believing in promises Allah has never made to you, as He has only promised to preserve the Qur’an.

            • #167523
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/watchtower-no3-2020-sep-oct/has-gods-written-word-been-changed/
              So, your debunking is a part of the bible and then they just proceed to ignore the other differences.

              • #167527
                Anonymous
                Guest

                When the Dead Sea Scrolls were found in 1947, scholars could at last compare the Hebrew Masoretic text to what appeared in Bible scrolls that had been written more than a thousand years earlier. A member of the editorial team of the Dead Sea Scrolls concluded that one scroll “provides irrefutable proof that the transmission of the biblical text through a period of more than one thousand years by the hands of gnomish copyists has been extremely faithful and careful.”

                The Chester Beatty Library in Dublin, Ireland, features a collection of papyri that represents nearly every book of the Christian Greek Scriptures, including manuscripts dating from the second century C.E.—only about 100 years after the Bible was completed. “Although the Papyri supply a wealth of new information on textual detail,” The Anchor Bible Dictionary observes, “they also demonstrate remarkable stability in the transmission history of the biblical text.”

                Rather than corrupting the Bible text, the age and multitude of Bible manuscripts have actually improved it. “No other ancient book has anything like such early and plentiful testimony to its text,” wrote Sir Frederic Kenyon about the Christian Greek Scriptures, “and no unbiased scholar would deny that the text that has come down to us is substantially sound.” And regarding the Hebrew Scriptures, scholar William Henry Green stated: “It may be safely said that no other work of antiquity has been so accurately transmitted.”

                • #167531
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  that just proves the torah as correct. Not the jw bible

                  • #167534
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    What about it isn’t correct ?

                    • #167536
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      everything

                      • #167541
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        I disagree

                        >Yes. Most of this from seeing them in front of me. Affirming that learning God’s identity from seeing it before you is a clearer way than you trying to piece it back from commandments. QED

                        I have no idea what you’re talking about

                        >Neither John 14:26 nor Revelations 1:1 claim this. Furthermore, the writing of Judas’ gospel was finished fairly early on as well, but the editorial choice to not include it in the Scripture… was made by people you claim not to trust. Inconsistency on your part.

                        The first mention of the existence of a work called the “Gospel of Judas” is found in the writings of Irenaeus, a professed Christian author of the late second century C.E. In a work called Against Heresies, which is after Revelation was written

                      • #167544
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >I have no idea what you’re talking about
                        You claimed that understanding God’s identity from Jesus as a person of Trinity is less clear than understanding God’s identity from likes and dislikes.
                        The example you provided proves you wrong. You learn an identity by interacting 1:1, not by reading about a set of likes and dislikes.

                        >The first mention of the existence of a work called the “Gospel of Judas” is found in the writings of Irenaeus, a professed Christian author of the late second century C.E. In a work called Against Heresies, which is after Revelation was written
                        Yes. Second century C.E. is when the Scripture was being editorially formed. They could have included the Gospel of Judas and you trusted their choice to not do so.
                        You at once claim to trust them and distrust them. That is inconsistent.

            • #167545
              Anonymous
              Guest

              Convenient how your entire viewpoint is woke af on scrotebrained late XIXth century prottie retranslations of the Bible that were met with controversies in actual serious theologian circles

        • #167547
          Anonymous
          Guest

          Woke af. But maybe next time instead of just saying "debunked" and posting a jw.org link provide a brief explanation first along with Bible verses to back up your claims and add a jw link at the end so that people who actually want to learn more can read it.

      • #167546
        Anonymous
        Guest

        woke af

    • #167493
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >That Father is God debunks that Jesus is God
      Not how Trinity works.
      >"Monogenés" is a temporal statement of events
      Not how Trinity works.
      >Jesus was an only child
      …what?

      I swear muzzies and fedoras LOVE getting their ass whooped.

      • #167495
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >no
        >nuh uh
        >wut?
        >[scrotespeak]
        truly the religion of scrotes and slaves

      • #167542
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Mary never lost her virginity so yeah Jesus is an only child. At least ignoring like adoption but i dont think i’ve read about adopted siblings of Jesus before.

    • #167494
      Anonymous
      Guest

      NOOOOOOOOO YOU CAN’T JUST freaking NOOOOOOOOOOOOO AAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

    • #167499
      Anonymous
      Guest

      What’s the key for?

      • #167503
        Anonymous
        Guest

        my chastity cage

        • #167505
          Anonymous
          Guest

          Good.

    • #167509
      Anonymous
      Guest

      lara can you draw taft eating apple pie

    • #167543
      Anonymous
      Guest

      The word for firstborn is prōtótokos which means pre-eminent in greek. and in the rest of that passage it says that everything that exists was created through him. which would not make sense if you’re saying that christ was created because everything created was created through him.

      "For in Him all things were created, things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities. All things were created through Him and for Him"

      as for the siss of jesus, your close cousins in hebrew culture were considered your siss and sisters. Mary had a sister who was also named mary who married clopas

      Mary the wife of Clopas is mentioned by St. Matthew Matthew 27:56 as the mother of James the less and Joses. Jude describes himself(Jude 1:5 as the sis of James; and Simon, or Symeon, is mentioned in Eusebius as the son of Clopas

Viewing 6 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
startno id