• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Jesus is the one true God?

Tanngrisnir said:
You are. Odd that a non-Christian like you would choose that very moment to chime in.

I really wish you'd consider turning over your burdens to Christ.
Click to expand...

I think you know that he's a priest...so I also think you know what you're doing here.
 
nota bene said:
No, I didn't know that you think that, and it's not a justification anyway.
Click to expand...

OK.

You do now. I also notice a distinct lack of Christ-like behavior on his part, among other things that aren't worth going into here.

When I see somone trying to take up the mantle of a teacher like, say, Christ, and then utterly disregarding it in his/her own actions or words, I speak up.

Hypocrisy, arrogance, ignorance.

Ugly things. I'm sure you agree.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
OK.

You do now. I also notice a distinct lack of Christ-like behavior on his part, among other things that aren't worth going into here.

When I see somone trying to take up the mantle of a teacher like, say, Christ, and then utterly disregarding it in his/her own actions or words, I speak up.

Hypocrisy, arrogance, ignorance.

Ugly things. I'm sure you agree.
Click to expand...

I see you sitting in judgment, mocking someone else and deliberately trying to cause offense and then sitting back and pretending that you're some latter-day Diogenes.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
OK.

You do now. I also notice a distinct lack of Christ-like behavior on his part, among other things that aren't worth going into here.

When I see somone trying to take up the mantle of a teacher like, say, Christ, and then utterly disregarding it in his/her own actions or words, I speak up.

Hypocrisy, arrogance, ignorance.

Ugly things. I'm sure you agree.
Click to expand...

This is as good an example of projection you are likely to find. ^

"Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others. For example, a person who is habitually rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude. It incorporates blame shifting."

I may very well be all of those things you say, but you are so blind to your own faults that you don't see yourself in your constant criticism of me, and everybody sees it except you. It's actually kind of funny and yet disturbing at the same time.

You are like a lot of the people I encounter. They have the same reaction to me that they would have to a cop or a public official or a judge. They feel inferior to us because of our station, vocation, or job and in order to make themselves feel better they have to immediately find fault with us. Some of the people in this dump purposely try to provoke me into some kind of response so they can say "See? See?", but give the same thing back to them and they immediately act like they are the injured party. Do you think THAT kind of dishonesty and hypocrisy are "Christlike"?

You need to get the splinter out of your own eye and come to grips with the fact that Christ's teachings are for YOU, and if you spent your time working out your own salvation you wouldn't have time to worry about mine.

On the other hand, if you don't believe any of his teachings where do you get off criticizing anyone else?
 
it's just me said:
This is as good an example of projection you are likely to find. ^
Click to expand...

I love irony. The only projection going on here is coming from you, by attempting to portray others as doing what you have done. And, to be honest, are known for.
"Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others. For example, a person who is habitually rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude. It incorporates blame shifting."
Click to expand...

Yup. That's you in a nutshell.
I may very well be all of those things you say, but you are so blind to your own faults that you don't see yourself in your constant criticism of me, and everybody sees it except you. It's actually kind of funny and yet disturbing at the same time.
Click to expand...

LOL! Unlike you, I don't promote the conceit that I follow the teachings of Christ and try and pattern my life and behavior to the supposedly higher example of conduct attributed to him in the bible. You, however, do and in your case it's clearly simply a fiction.
You are like a lot of the people I encounter. They have the same reaction to me that they would have to a cop or a public official or a judge. They feel inferior to us because of our station, vocation, or job and in order to make themselves feel better they have to immediately find fault with us. Some of the people in this dump purposely try to provoke me into some kind of response so they can say "See? See?", but give the same thing back to them and they immediately act like they are the injured party. Do you think THAT kind of dishonesty and hypocrisy are "Christlike"?
Click to expand...

Yet more irony. And I particularly love your delusion that anyone would feel inferior to you based on your station. I know, it's your way of self-validating and excusing your boorish behaviour and anger issues, but it's crystal clear to anyone familiar with your history that it's all a charade.
You need to get the splinter out of your own eye and come to grips with the fact that Christ's teachings are for YOU, and if you spent your time working out your own salvation you wouldn't have time to worry about mine.
Click to expand...

I'm not at all 'worried' about yours. I'm simply pointing out your rabid hypocrisy, dishonesty, anger management issues and utterly unbelievability in trying to pass yourself off as a Christian.
On the other hand, if you don't believe any of his teachings where do you get off criticizing anyone else?
Click to expand...

When I see hypocrisy and dishonesty like yours, I consider it a public service.
 
nota bene said:
I see you sitting in judgment, mocking someone else and deliberately trying to cause offense and then sitting back and pretending that you're some latter-day Diogenes.
Click to expand...

You see what you need to see, I suppose.

I don't pretend to follow a higher calling and standard like the individual I was addressing, who apparently has you fooled.

And Diogenes? Please. I'm a skeptic, not a cynic.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
I love irony. The only projection going on here is coming from you, by attempting to portray others as doing what you have done. And, to be honest, are known for.

Yup. That's you in a nutshell.

LOL! Unlike you, I don't promote the conceit that I follow the teachings of Christ and try and pattern my life and behavior to the supposedly higher example of conduct attributed to him in the bible. You, however, do and in your case it's clearly simply a fiction.

Yet more irony. And I particularly love your delusion that anyone would feel inferior to you based on your station. I know, it's your way of self-validating and excusing your boorish behaviour and anger issues, but it's crystal clear to anyone familiar with your history that it's all a charade.

I'm not at all 'worried' about yours. I'm simply pointing out your rabid hypocrisy, dishonesty, anger management issues and utterly unbelievability in trying to pass yourself off as a Christian.

When I see hypocrisy and dishonesty like yours, I consider it a public service.
Click to expand...

Now you're projecting your projections!

And I have never written that I try to pattern my life after the teachings and conduct of Christ, for one simple reason, I AM NOT CHRIST! Of course we all try to do our best, but as I said, insecure people often consider it a challenge to find something wrong with me to make themselves feel better, smarter, or otherwise superior, but you do that to others, too.
 
it's just me said:
Now you're projecting your projections!
Click to expand...

You're welcome to your delusions. I'll stick w/reality, thanks.
And I have never written that I try to pattern my life after the teachings and conduct of Christ, for one simple reason, I AM NOT CHRIST! Of course we all try to do our best, but as I said, insecure people often consider it a challenge to find something wrong with me to make themselves feel better, smarter, or otherwise superior, but you do that to others, too.
Click to expand...

No one ever claimed you were Christ. Utterly besides the point.

I'm sorry you suffer under the fantasy that forces you to believe anyone who addresses your hypocrisy and dishonesty is somehow, magically, actually confessing to their own character flaws.

But I'm glad that brings you some degree of comfort.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
You're welcome to your delusions. I'll stick w/reality, thanks.

No one ever claimed you were Christ. Utterly besides the point.

I'm sorry you suffer under the fantasy that forces you to believe anyone who addresses your hypocrisy and dishonesty is somehow, magically, actually confessing to their own character flaws.

But I'm glad that brings you some degree of comfort.
Click to expand...

And I am sorry you suffer from the delusion that the faults you find in others are not your own faults.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
You see what you need to see, I suppose.

I don't pretend to follow a higher calling and standard like the individual I was addressing, who apparently has you fooled.

And Diogenes? Please. I'm a skeptic, not a cynic.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry that you're coming from the place you are. I won't pretend to understand it or why you assume that I must be credulous. I frequently PM with It'sJustMe about matters of importance to both of us, and given both what I know about him and his activities, I don't doubt that he is a member of the clergy.

Perhaps you haven't known many clergy. I have and well, enough to tell you that they are all very human and with feet of clay. If you'd like to put them on pedestals so that you can enjoy "cleverly" knocking them down, have your "fun" meeting what I think is an unseemly and sad need.
 
nota bene said:
I'm sorry that you're coming from the place you are. I won't pretend to understand it or why you assume that I must be credulous. I frequently PM with It'sJustMe about matters of importance to both of us, and given both what I know about him and his activities, I don't doubt that he is a member of the clergy.
Click to expand...

I'm coming from the 'place' of dispassionate observation.
Perhaps you haven't known many clergy. I have and well, enough to tell you that they are all very human and with feet of clay. If you'd like to put them on pedestals so that you can enjoy "cleverly" knocking them down, have your "fun" meeting what I think is an unseemly and sad need.
Click to expand...

I've known plenty, thanks, and have no 'need' to place anyone on any pedestal just to knock them off.

I call 'em like I see 'em. That displeases some people.

Oh, well.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
I'm coming from the 'place' of dispassionate observation.

I've known plenty, thanks, and have no 'need' to place anyone on any pedestal just to knock them off.

I call 'em like I see 'em. That displeases some people.

Oh, well.
Click to expand...

You aren't "dispassionate" at all. Malice requires impetus.
 
nota bene said:
I'm sorry that you're coming from the place you are. I won't pretend to understand it or why you assume that I must be credulous. I frequently PM with It'sJustMe about matters of importance to both of us, and given both what I know about him and his activities, I don't doubt that he is a member of the clergy.

Perhaps you haven't known many clergy. I have and well, enough to tell you that they are all very human and with feet of clay. If you'd like to put them on pedestals so that you can enjoy "cleverly" knocking them down, have your "fun" meeting what I think is an unseemly and sad need.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Nota, you said it better than I did. I am as human as the next guy but being human is not a luxury most people will permit. On the other hand, I don't understand what it is that causes some people to get defensive before I've said a word. It's almost as if when you meet a cop you say "I didn't steal anything". Guilty conscience, it happens.
 
I recently decided to compile a list of some of the earliest Christian sects, especially regarding their differences regarding Christology (the true nature of Jesus). One is simply astounded at how much they diverged and were confused about what to believe about Jesus. Again, I compiled this myself it is not copy and paste:

1. Ebionism – They regarded Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah while rejecting his divinity and insisted on the necessity of following Jewish law and rites, and that Joseph is the natural father of Jesus and that Mary and Joseph conceived Jesus in the way that all parents conceive children.

2. Helvidianism – Antidicomarians (lit. ‘opponents of Mary’). Helvidius author of a work written prior to 383 against the belief in the perpetual virginity of Mary taught that Mary was a virgin at Christ’s birth, but after the birth of Christ, she and Joseph engaged in marital relations and conceived a number of children.

3. Valentinianism – taught that Holy Spirit deposited the Christ Child in her womb and that Mary was the a surrogate mother, but not truly Christ’s genetic mother. Valentinian the Gnostic (d. 180?) taught that the Son of God passed through Mary like water through a straw.

4. Collyridianism – early Christian heretical movement in pre-Islamic Arabia, from the Greek word κολλυρις meaning “bread roll” since adherents offered quasi-Eucharistic bread sacrifice to the Blessed Virgin Mary. Heresy that holds that Mary is a divine goddess worthy of the worship of adoration. Their strongest opponent, Epiphanius of Salamis, who wrote about them in his Panarion of about 375.

5. Nestorianism – a Christological doctrine advanced by Nestorius (386–450) that emphasizes a distinction between the human and divine natures of the divine person, Jesus. A form of dyophysitism. Nestorianism holds that Christ had two loosely united natures, divine and human: “the Word, which is eternal, and the Flesh, which is not, came together in a hypostatic union, ‘Jesus Christ’, Jesus thus being both fully man and God, of two ousia ‘substance’ but of one prosopon ‘person’.

6. Anomoeanism – In 4th century, followers of Aëtius and Eunomius believe that Jesus Christ was not of the same nature (consubstantial) as God the Father nor was of like nature (homoiousian), as maintained by the semi-Arians, but rather ‘different’ and ‘dissimilar’. The Word had not only a different substance but also a will different from that of the Father. Also Heteroousianism.

7. Homoiousianism – 4th-century theological party which held that God the Son was of a similar, but not identical, substance or essence to God the Father. Proponents of this view included Eustathius of Sebaste and George of Laodicea. The Son is “like in substance” but not necessarily to be identified with the essence of the Father.

8. Homoeanism – the Son is similar to God the Father, without reference to substance or essence. The father is so incomparable and ineffably transcendent that even the ideas of likeness, similarity or identity in substance or essence with the subordinate Son and Holy Spirit are heretical and not justified by the Gospels. They held that the Father is like the Son in some sense but that even to speak of ousia is impertinent speculation. The Acacians, also known as the Homoeans, a sect which first emerged into distinctness as an ecclesiastical party some time before the convocation of the joint synods of Rimini and Seleucia Isauria in 359. The sect owed its name and political importance to Acacius, Bishop of Caesarea.

9. Sabellianism (also known as modalism, modalistic monarchianism, or modal monarchism) from Sabellius, who was a theologian and priest from the 3rd century is the nontrinitarian or anti-Trinitarian belief that the Heavenly Father, Resurrected Son, and Holy Spirit are three different modes or aspects of one monadic God, as perceived by the believer, rather than three distinct persons within the Godhead—that there are no real or substantial differences among the three, such that there is no substantial identity for the Spirit or the Son. Known as patripassianism (from Latin patri- father and passio suffering), because the teaching required that since the God the Father had become directly incarnate in Christ, that God literally sacrificed Himself on the Cross.


 

10. Adoptionism – The first known exponent of Adoptionism in the 2nd century is Theodotus of Byzantium. Also known as dynamic monarchianism denies the eternal pre-existence of Christ, and although it explicitly affirms his deity subsequent to events in his life. A nontrinitarian theological doctrine which holds that Jesus was adopted as the Son of God at his baptism, his resurrection, or his ascension.

11. Subordinationism – asserts that the Son and the Holy Spirit are subordinate to God the Father in nature and being.

12. Macedonianism – Founded by Macedonius a Greek bishop of Constantinople from 342 up to 346, they denied the Godhood of the Holy Ghost, hence the Greek name Pneumatomachi or 'Combators against the Spirit'.

13. Apollinarism or Apollinarianism – was a view proposed by Apollinaris of Laodicea (died 390) that Jesus could not have had a human mind; rather, Jesus had a human body and lower soul (the seat of the emotions) but a divine mind.

14. Eutychianism – derived from the ideas of Eutyches of Constantinople (c. 380 – c. 456). The human nature of Christ was overcome by the divine, or that Christ had a human nature but it was unlike the rest of humanity. One formulation is that Eutychianism stressed the unity of Christ's nature to such an extent that Christ's divinity consumed his humanity as the ocean consumes a drop of vinegar. Eutyches maintained that Christ was of two natures but not in two natures: separate divine and human natures had united and blended in such a manner that although Jesus was homoousian with the Father, he was not homoousian with man.

15. Novatianism – an Early Christian sect devoted to Novatian. Lapsed Christians, who had not maintained their confession of faith under persecution, may not be received again into communion with the church. It held a strict view that refused readmission to communion of Lapsi, those baptized Christians who had denied their faith or performed the formalities of a ritual sacrifice to the pagan gods, under the pressures of the persecution sanctioned by Emperor Decius, in 250.

 
16. Donatism – Christian clergy are required to be faultless for their ministrations to be effective and for the prayers and sacraments they conduct to be valid. Rigorists, holding that the church must be a church of "saints", not "sinners", and that sacraments, such as baptism, administered by traditores were invalid.

17. Monophysitism – the Christological position that, after the union of the divine and the human in the historical Incarnation, Jesus Christ, as the incarnation of the eternal Son or Word (Logos) of God, had only a single "nature" which was either divine or a synthesis of divine and human. Jesus Christ, who is identical with the Son, is one person and one hypostasis in one nature: divine.

18. Monothelitism or monotheletism – formally emerged in Armenia and Syria in 629. Jesus Christ has two natures but only one will.

19. Miaphysitism sometimes called henophysitism – the person of Jesus Christ, Divine nature and Human nature are united (μία, mia - "one" or "unity") in a compound nature ("physis"), the two being united without separation, without mixture, without confusion, and without alteration.

20. Docetism – the doctrine that the phenomenon of Christ, his historical and bodily existence, and above all the human form of Jesus, was mere semblance without any true reality. Jesus only seemed to be human, and that his human form was an illusion.

21. Marcionism – was an Early Christian dualist belief system that originated in the teachings of Marcion of Sinope at Rome around the year 144. Jesus was the savior sent by God, and Paul the Apostle was his chief apostle, but he rejected the Hebrew Bible and the God of Israel. Marcionists believed that the wrathful Hebrew God was a separate and lower entity than the all-forgiving God of the New Testament.

22. Paulicianism –

23. Arianism – is a Christological concept which asserts the belief that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who was begotten by God the Father at a point in time, is distinct from the Father and is therefore subordinate to the Father. Arian teachings were first attributed to Arius (c. 256–336), a Christian presbyter in Alexandria, Egypt. the Son of God did not always exist but was begotten by God the Father.

24. Montanism – an early Christian movement of the late 2nd century, later referred to by the name of its founder, Montanus, believing in new revelations and ecstasies, unapproved by the wider Church. It was a prophetic movement that called for a reliance on the spontaneity of the Holy Spirit

25. Bonosianism – Antidicomarian sect. Bonosus was a Bishop of Sardica in the latter part of the fourth century, who taught against the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary. They affirmed the purely adoptive divine filiation of Christ. However, they differed from the Adoptionists in rejecting all natural sonship, whereas the Adoptionists, distinguishing in Christ the God and the man, attributed to the former a natural, and to the latter an adoptive sonship.

26. Jovinianism – Antidicomarian sect founded by Jovinian (c. 405).

27. Photinianism – Photinus (d. 376)

28. Origenism – Origen Adamantius (184/185 – 253/254).

29. Psilanthropism – understands Jesus to be human, the literal son of human parents.

30. Manichaeism – Founded in 210–276 by Mani (claimed to be Paraclete)

31. Priscillianism – in the 4th century by Priscillian.

32. Sethianism –

33. Ophitism or Ophianism –

34. Antinomianism –

35. Audianism – Anthropomorphism, a sect of Christians in the fourth century in Syria and Scythia, named after their founder Audius, who took literally the text of Genesis, i, 27, that God created mankind in his own image.
 
So from your list of ancient cults, is there any conclusion we can or should draw regarding the statement "Is Jesus the one true God" ?
 
John Prewett said:
"And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent"

John 17:3
Click to expand...

Just one of many scriptures that give evidence Jesus and God are two separate entities...
 
John Prewett said:
So from your list of ancient cults, is there any conclusion we can or should draw regarding the statement "Is Jesus the one true God" ?
Click to expand...

They only prove what Jesus warned would happen, did indeed come true, as early as early as the first century after his death...Matt. 7:15-20
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom