Sure

Post #2,228 by Fearless Freep 7/18/01 2:25:20 PM Reply	Sure Well saying "it is as you say" is pretty much saying it, isn't it? The accusation that he claimed to be the "Son Of God" was made against him, which would mean the death penalty, and he never denied it or defended himself. Anyway... Matthew 16:15-17 "But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?" Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. Peter calls Jesus the Son Of God and the Messiah and Jesus supports that statement John 8:58 I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!" What's missing in the English translation is that Jesus used the same phrase as is found in Exodus 3:15 when God tells Moses that he, God, is the "I AM. This is a phrase that linguistically cannot be used without actually claiming to be God. When God used that phrase in Exodus, he was making a statement about himself, when Jesus used it later on, he was saying the same thing Matthew 9:2-6 Some men brought to him a paralytic, lying on a mat. When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, "Take heart, son; your sins are forgiven." At this, some of the teachers of the law said to themselves, "This fellow is blaspheming!" Knowing their thoughts, Jesus said, "Why do you entertain evil thoughts in your hearts? Which is easier: to say, `Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, `Get up and walk'? But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins...." Then he said to the paralytic, "Get up, take your mat and go home." No one can forgive another except for what has been done to them. I can't forgive your wrongs against a friend of yours. I can only forgive your wrongs to me. Ultimately, all sin is against God, and therefore only God can forgive sins. Here Jesus is claiming to forgive the paralytics sins, not his sins against Jesus, but his sins in general. The teachers of the law recognized what this meant, that he was claiming to be able to forgive sins, something only God, the ultimate wronged party in all sins, could do. For Jesus to claim to have the power to forgive sins is Jesus claiming power reserved to God, thus making Jesus equal to God. So the charge of blasphemy was correct if Jesus was not indeed God.. This passage is mirrored in Mark. Jesus offering to forgive sins, and the stunned reaction of those around him who understood the implication, was repeated several times, include Like 7:48,49 There are more examples. Usually Jesus didn't go around and say "I am the Son Of God" but merely said thins and claimed things only God could say and claim. I can dig up some more if you'd like Incidentally, Jesus oftened called himself the "Son Of Man", which is an intersting term on the surface. What Jesus was using was the same term found in Daniel 7:13,14 "In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed. Not exactly a claim to be God but a very significant title for oneself, probably a claim to be the Messiah. Jay O'Connor "Going places unmapped to do things unplanned to people unsuspecting"
Post #2,246 by boxley 7/18/01 4:20:11 PM Reply	that was chuck's favorite phrase too. Man Son. We are all the sons and daughters of G_d and yes I may forgive your sins. You are forgiven. That does not break any law. I also was before adam. That is the metaphysical part of Judaism, not the practical speaking. You can claim to be the son of G_d because there is only ONE G_d not threesomes:). If you look at the 613 laws laid out in the old testament you will not find that forgiving sins and healing the sick is against any of them. Never claimed Jesus was not a prophet, he was a most important one and after the destruction of the temple and the rigid structure, his teachings were being taught by many in the diaspora. Blasphemy? Not hardly. Pissing in the face of the Officials? Yep death has been a sentence for a lot less. thanx, bill can I have my ones and zeros back?
Post #2,249 by Fearless Freep 7/18/01 4:47:03 PM Reply	Pretty far fetched First Jesus didn't claim to be the son of God, now he did, but it doesn't really mean that. Pretty flimsy reply The problem is...nobody who was actually there took what he said that way. John 5:17,18 Jesus said to them, "My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I, too, am working." For this reason the Jews tried all the harder to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God. emph. mine The people who heard Jesus knew exactly what he was saying. If they made such a profund misunderstanding of what Jesus was saying, then he was a very bad teacher. He also never corrected them, even though their interpretation of his words got him killed You are forgiven. You can say it, but do you mean it? Are you actually saying that you have forgiven my sins against God. That's what Jesus said Never claimed Jesus was not a prophet, I do. A Prophet was the last thing in the world Jesus could've been "Woe to me!" I cried. "I am ruined! For I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips, and my eyes have seen the King, the LORD Almighty." - Isaiah "I and the Father are one." - Jesus Blasphemy? Not hardly. Not according to those who heard him; "Yes, it is as you say," Jesus replied. "But I say to all of you: In the future you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven." Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, "He has spoken blasphemy! Why do we need any more witnesses? Look, now you have heard the blasphemy. - Matthew 26:64,65 (note: he uses the phrase "Son Of Man", again) but Jesus said to them, "I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?" "We are not stoning you for any of these," replied the Jews, "but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God." John 10:32,33 When Jesus saw their faith, he said, "Friend, your sins are forgiven." The Pharisees and the teachers of the law began thinking to themselves, "Who is this fellow who speaks blasphemy? Who can forgive sins but God alone?" - Luke 5:20,21 So even if you claim that Jesus was being metaphysical, the people who heard him took him very literally and killed him for it. He never disputed their claims, neither did he ever try to correct them Jay O'Connor "Going places unmapped to do things unplanned to people unsuspecting"
Post #2,270 by boxley 7/18/01 9:37:34 PM Reply	ya dont know too many mystics do ya I wasnt there either to here what was said but as a son of G_d I could sit at his right hand. That is where we come from and where we "hope" to return. But to be a messiah a couple of things need to happen, a few things in Jesus's case is missing. If he was the messiah how did the temple come to be destroyed? nonsense if he was the messiah he would be sitting there still in the temple opened for business. You are waiting for the mesiah to return I am waiting for the first appearance and it might even be the same entity but Jesus cannot be the son of G_d and G_d at the same time. There is only one G_d. On the cross he was adressing him as father, was he talking to himself? No he was clearly a separate entity. He also said he would not change the law until the end of time. He did not say I will not change the Law until my servant Paul gets here to straighten you out. That is why I beleive Jesus was/is a Jew and Paul wanted to hijack a religion. Please I enjoy talking about this but I do respect your beliefs and commend you for it. thanx, bill can I have my ones and zeros back?
Post #2,277 by Fearless Freep 7/18/01 10:26:42 PM Reply	Back on track? If he was the messiah ... Please keep in mind that I am not claiming Jesus is the Messiah in this discussion. (I think he is, you think he's not) My singular point in this discussion is that Jesus claimed to be God and it was for that that he was executed; and not only that but that based on what he said, if he wasn't the Messiah, then his execution was justified. No for some other points On the cross he was adressing him as father, was he talking to himself? You ever talk to your self in time of crisis :) He also said he would not change the law until the end of time. Actually, he just said "Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."[1] He also "I have come not to abolish the law but to fulfill it"[2] and then on the cross he said "it is finished"[3] See the connection. Like a contract that is in force until it's terms are complete. Jesus came not to terminate the contract prematurely but to fulfill it's terms. He did not say I will not change the Law until my servant Paul gets here to straighten you out. Interestingly, Peter was the first to break the Law. He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles of the earth and birds of the air. Then a voice told him, "Get up, Peter. Kill and eat." "Surely not, Lord!" Peter replied. "I have never eaten anything impure or unclean." The voice spoke to him a second time, "Do not call anything impure that God has made clean." This happened three times, and immediately the sheet was taken back to heaven. - Acts10:11-16 This was after Paul's conversion but before he had met Peter, or even started preaching Paul wanted to hijack a religion. As far as Paul and the Law, Paul goes on at length in "Romans" explaining that the Law is still in effect for those who have not accepted Jesus as Messiah "All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous." Here (Romans in general) and in other places (Galatians 3:25 is a good one) Paul presents a duality. You are either under Christ or under the Law. If you are under Christ, he Law no longer applies. If you are not under Christ, you are still subject, and will be judged by, the Law To clarify: I'm not saying Paul was right, I'm meerly saying that Paul's teaching on the law was more complex than to merely reject it. He actually argued for it under certain circumstances Please I enjoy talking about this but I do respect your beliefs and commend you for it. Hey, it keeps me on my toes...and is sorta fun as long as the conversation is kept polite [1]Matthew 5:18 [2]Matthew 5:17 [3]John 19:30 Jay O'Connor "Going places unmapped to do things unplanned to people unsuspecting"

Welcome to IWETHEY!