Do Jews and Christians worship the sa...

Sheilaa

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#185 Feb 16, 2013
Cisco Kid wrote:
<quoted text>
Very observant of you.
The title "son of God" was applied in the Old Testament to persons having any special relationship with God.
Angels, just and pious men, the descendants of Seth, were called "sons of God" (Job 1:6; 2:1; Psalm 88:7; Wisdom 2:13; etc.).
In a similar manner it was given to Israelites (Deuteronomy 14:50); and of Israel, as a nation, we read: "And thou shalt say to him: Thus saith the Lord: Israel is my son, my firstborn. I have said to thee: Let my son go, that he may serve me" (Exodus 4:22 sq.).
The title "the Son of God" is frequently applied to Jesus Christ in the Gospels and Epistles.
In the latter it is everywhere employed as a short formula for expressing His Divinity; and this usage throws light on the meaning to be attached to it in many passages of the Gospels.
The angel announced: "He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the most High... the Holy which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God" (Luke 1:32, 35).
Nathan, at his first meeting, called Him the Son of God (John 1:49).
The devils called Him by the same name, the Jews ironically, and the Apostles after He quelled the storm. In all these cases its meaning was equivalent to the Messiah, at least. But much more is implied in the confession of St. Peter, the testimony of the Father, and the words of Jesus Christ.
Read in Matthew 16:15-16:
"Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven."
The parallel passages have: "Thou art the Christ" (Mark 8:29), "The Christ of God" (Luke 9:20).
There can be no doubt that St. Matthew gives the original form of the expression, and that St. Mark and St. Luke in giving "the Christ" (the Messiah), used it in the sense in which they understood it as equivalent to "the incarnate Son of God".
I must be honest with you I don't believe that Jesus and God are one and the same. I have struggled with this issue for quite a while and have looked up all the references in relation to the various claims. I respect your opinion but I don't agree that they are one and the same. I could list so many proofs as to why Jesus isn't God, but my intention is not to try and change any one's mind. We all need to seek for ourselves. At the end of the day we can't turn to our judge and say well this is what so and so said.

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#186 Feb 16, 2013
Jesus Christ worshiped Allah.
Moses worshiped Allah

Both are the Prophets of Allah.

Jews believe in the One God. According to the Rabbis the Allah is the God who Moses worshiped.

Christian God is Trinity:- very confusing.

Information from www.muslimjesus.net
Cisco Kid

Columbia, CA

#187 Feb 16, 2013
Sheilaa wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you referring to the angels? Angels do not marry. Jesus tells us this clearly: "For in the resurrection they [humans] neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven" (Matthew 22:30; see Mark 12:25).
Angels cannot cohabit nor reproduce with women. Angels are spirit beings. Women are human beings. Angels and women, then, are two different kinds of being. Kind reproduces after kind, and different species cannot breed.
At one time that was not the case.
One of the main reasons for the Noachin flood was the inbreeding with human women and fallen angels, or Nephilim.

Gen.6:1-4;
"When human beings began to grow numerous on the earth and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw how beautiful the daughters of human beings were, and so they took for their wives whomever they pleased. Then the LORD said: My spirit shall not remain in human beings forever, because they are only flesh. Their days shall comprise one hundred and twenty years.

The Nephilim appeared on earth in those days, as well as later, after the sons of God had intercourse with the daughters of human beings, who bore them sons. They were the heroes of old, the men of renown."

Expansion writing on same subject- The apocryphal book of Enoch The Prophet;
Enoch was the great, great grandfather of Noah and was lifted up by God and did not suffer death.

" http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/bep/index.htm

Sheilaa

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#188 Feb 16, 2013
muslimjesus wrote:
Jesus Christ worshiped Allah.
Moses worshiped Allah
Both are the Prophets of Allah.
Jews believe in the One God. According to the Rabbis the Allah is the God who Moses worshiped.
Christian God is Trinity:- very confusing.
Information from www.muslimjesus.net
Neither Jesus nor Moses worshiped Allah and they were not Muslims. They worshiped YHWH. Allah wasn't even invented at the time of either of these prophets. Not all Christians believe in a trinity

Allah is a figment of a false prophet called
Cisco Kid

Columbia, CA

#189 Feb 16, 2013
Sheilaa wrote:
<quoted text>
I must be honest with you I don't believe that Jesus and God are one and the same. I have struggled with this issue for quite a while and have looked up all the references in relation to the various claims. I respect your opinion but I don't agree that they are one and the same. I could list so many proofs as to why Jesus isn't God, but my intention is not to try and change any one's mind. We all need to seek for ourselves. At the end of the day we can't turn to our judge and say well this is what so and so said.
Hang in there. The truth will reveal itself to you.
Christianity is not a sprint race, it is a marathon.
Dominus vobiscum

Sheilaa

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#190 Feb 16, 2013
* Mohammad
Cisco Kid

Columbia, CA

#191 Feb 16, 2013
Sheilaa wrote:
<quoted text>
Neither Jesus nor Moses worshiped Allah and they were not Muslims. They worshiped YHWH. Allah wasn't even invented at the time of either of these prophets. Not all Christians believe in a trinity
Allah is a figment of a false prophet called
Allah is the Arabic language name for God.
But you are spot on about Mohammed.

Sheilaa

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#192 Feb 16, 2013
Cisco Kid wrote:
<quoted text>
At one time that was not the case.
One of the main reasons for the Noachin flood was the inbreeding with human women and fallen angels, or Nephilim.
Gen.6:1-4;
"When human beings began to grow numerous on the earth and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw how beautiful the daughters of human beings were, and so they took for their wives whomever they pleased. Then the LORD said: My spirit shall not remain in human beings forever, because they are only flesh. Their days shall comprise one hundred and twenty years.
The Nephilim appeared on earth in those days, as well as later, after the sons of God had intercourse with the daughters of human beings, who bore them sons. They were the heroes of old, the men of renown."
Expansion writing on same subject- The apocryphal book of Enoch The Prophet;
Enoch was the great, great grandfather of Noah and was lifted up by God and did not suffer death.
" http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/bep/index.htm
If angels have/had the ability to sin God would not have given then immortality. That is the reason that he removed Adam and Eve from the garden so that they wouldn't eat of the tree of life. The role of angels is to do the work of God: to guide, give messages, protect deliver and destroy as ordered by God. The book of Enoch has been compared to a Jewish fairy tale and is not included in the current bible.

Sheilaa

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#193 Feb 16, 2013
Cisco Kid wrote:
<quoted text>
Allah is the Arabic language name for God.
But you are spot on about Mohammed.
So he is a false god, not the one and only God we know as YHWH

Sheilaa

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#194 Feb 16, 2013
Cisco Kid wrote:
<quoted text>
Hang in there. The truth will reveal itself to you.
Christianity is not a sprint race, it is a marathon.
Dominus vobiscum
..and with you!!!! I learnt latin at school being brought up as a Catholic but have forgotten most of it now
Cisco Kid

Columbia, CA

#195 Feb 16, 2013
Sheilaa wrote:
<quoted text>
If angels have/had the ability to sin God would not have given then immortality. That is the reason that he removed Adam and Eve from the garden so that they wouldn't eat of the tree of life. The role of angels is to do the work of God: to guide, give messages, protect deliver and destroy as ordered by God. The book of Enoch has been compared to a Jewish fairy tale and is not included in the current bible.
Don't be so sure without investigating.
Cisco Kid

Columbia, CA

#196 Feb 16, 2013
Sheilaa wrote:
<quoted text>
So he is a false god, not the one and only God we know as YHWH
I didn't say that. You did.

Sheilaa

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#197 Feb 16, 2013
Cisco Kid wrote:
<quoted text>
At one time that was not the case.
One of the main reasons for the Noachin flood was the inbreeding with human women and fallen angels, or Nephilim.
Gen.6:1-4;
"When human beings began to grow numerous on the earth and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw how beautiful the daughters of human beings were, and so they took for their wives whomever they pleased. Then the LORD said: My spirit shall not remain in human beings forever, because they are only flesh. Their days shall comprise one hundred and twenty years.
The Nephilim appeared on earth in those days, as well as later, after the sons of God had intercourse with the daughters of human beings, who bore them sons. They were the heroes of old, the men of renown."
Expansion writing on same subject- The apocryphal book of Enoch The Prophet;
Enoch was the great, great grandfather of Noah and was lifted up by God and did not suffer death.
" http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/bep/index.htm
The sons of God from the line of Seth mixed with the daughters of man from the line of Cain (the ungodly ones). God saw that the wickedness of MAN was great not of angels. That is my take on Genesis 6

Sheilaa

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#198 Feb 16, 2013
Cisco Kid wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't say that. You did.
So do you believe that they are the same, and if you do why did it take until 610AD for him to reveal himself to Mohammad?
Flygerian

Houston, TX

#199 Feb 16, 2013
Sheilaa wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you referring to the angels? Angels do not marry. Jesus tells us this clearly: "For in the resurrection they [humans] neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven" (Matthew 22:30; see Mark 12:25).
Angels cannot cohabit nor reproduce with women. Angels are spirit beings. Women are human beings. Angels and women, then, are two different kinds of being. Kind reproduces after kind, and different species cannot breed.
2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

3 And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually

How were giants there off the children of normal men? It is clearly angels. Theres nothing in scripture that says one is the seth line and the other cain. In fact in verse 1 it says that the men had daughters. Even go to Job

Job 1:6
Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.

Do you think that the sons of Seth came with Satan to see God Almighty? What about this?

Job 38
4 “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?
Tell Me, if you have understanding.
5 Who determined its measurements?
Surely you know!
Or who stretched the line upon it?
6 To what were its foundations fastened?
Or who laid its cornerstone,
7 When the morning stars sang together,
And all the sons of God shouted for joy?

Do you think this referring to the sons of Seth as well?

Sheilaa

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#200 Feb 16, 2013
Flygerian wrote:
<quoted text>
2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
3 And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually
How were giants there off the children of normal men? It is clearly angels. Theres nothing in scripture that says one is the seth line and the other cain. In fact in verse 1 it says that the men had daughters. Even go to Job
Job 1:6
Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.
Do you think that the sons of Seth came with Satan to see God Almighty? What about this?
Job 38
4 “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?
Tell Me, if you have understanding.
5 Who determined its measurements?
Surely you know!
Or who stretched the line upon it?
6 To what were its foundations fastened?
Or who laid its cornerstone,
7 When the morning stars sang together,
And all the sons of God shouted for joy?
Do you think this referring to the sons of Seth as well?
2 is referring to the line of Seth
3 yes God is referring to men
4 Mighty men does not indicate "giants"
5. Wickedness was great and God was talking about men not angels

I don't find it clear that they were angels

How do you explain a genetic aberration today, it is not due to angels

Satan if you believe in him was nothing more than an adversary. He was not one of the sons of God

The angels were with God when the foundations of the earth were laid. The sons of God is not restricted just to the angels as can be shown in the bible

The righteous line of Seth intermarried with the unrighteous line of Cain resulting in the corruption of society. This applies genetically, physically and spiritually.

In Hosea 1:10 the sons of God were not angels that were being referred to

Sheilaa

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#201 Feb 16, 2013
THESE ARE CURRENTLY THE 5 TALLEST PEOPLE IN THE WORLD THAT HAVE BEEN RECORDED: WHERE ARE THE ANGELS?

United States 2.72 m 8 ft 11 in Robert Wadlow Tallest person in recorded history confirmed by Guinness World Records.[1] 1918–1940

United States 2.67 m 8 ft 9 in John Rogan Second tallest male in recorded history. Weighed only 175 lb (79 kg). Unable to stand due to ankylosis. 1868–1905

United States 2.63 m 8 ft 7½ in John F. Carroll 2.44 m (8 ft 0 in) standing height, 2.64 m (8 ft 7¾ in) assuming normal spinal curvature 1932–1969

Ukraine 2.57 m 8 ft 5 in Leonid Stadnyk The tallest living person, though not officially recognized by Guinness World Records because he refuses to be measured according to their standards.[2] 1971–

Finland 2.51 m 8 ft 3 in Väinö Myllyrinne Recognized as the tallest living person from 1940 to his death in 1963. Said to have been 2.51 m in his thirties. 1909–1963

“God Loves Ilks!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#202 Feb 16, 2013
if you don't accept a mythological interpretation of Genesis 6, then that means you must believe that angelic beings literally mated with earthly women but, if you believe that, you've embraced a heresy that has been condemned by the Magisterium and several Church councils. In other words, Catholics do not believe that angels can father offspring because we do not believe that they have physical bodies. So, how, as a Catholic (if you don't mind sharing), do you reconcile these two things? I would think that this alone illustrates the untenable nature of interpreting Genesis literally.
Satan is "pure evil" isn't he? Presumably these angels were the fallen ones who were cast out of heaven with Satan. St. Peter tells us: For if God did not spare the angels when they sinned, but condemned them to the chains of Tartarus and handed them over to be kept for judgment; (2 Peter 2:4)
A couple things 1) The above interpretation comes, not from the original Hebrew understanding of Genesis 6, but from a Greek (Hellenized Jewish) understanding that these "sons of Heaven" did wrong by mating with the daughters of men. Yet, there is no hint of this in the older rabbinical traditions, nor in the text of Genesis itself. Rather, in the context of Genesis 6 itself, the offspring of the "sons of Heaven" (the Nephliim) are described as "heroes" or "mighty men"-that is, antedeluvian supermen (Hebrew versions of "Hercules"), who were seen as the product of Divine power being still-present in humanity (i.e., "My Spirit will not remain in man forever"). And, 2) Satan cannot create life. Only God can. Thus, Satan (or his minions) cannot father human children (or angel-human hybrids).
Here St. Peter uses "Tartarus" a word borrowed from Greek mythology. Tartarus is the lowest place of hell (Hades) where the most evil and vile are tormented.
Yes. And, again, St. Peter is drawing from a tradition among the Hellenized (Greek) Jews in order to illustrate a point. This was not the original (Hebrew) interpretation of Genesis 6, however, where there is not the slightest suggestion that these "sons of Heaven" did wrong by mating with the "daughters of men." Rather, the "intercourse" between these angels and human women is a parallel idea for God's Spirit remaining in (and then being withdrawn from) human flesh. That's all the passage is about. If it were otherwise, then the Genesis narrative would have had to continued to deal with the subject, and point out how God was specifically angry because of these angelic-human hybrids, and how the Flood specifically destroyed them, etc.(But that is all part of a, much later, Greek presumption ...which saw this passage as a challenge to monotheism, and thus an occasion of "evil"). Yet, we don't see any of this in the text. Rather, what we have is a poetic illustration of how God's Spirit was slowly withdrawn from antediluvian man (again, see the "decreasing" genealogies in Genesis 5), thus explaining why people cannot live past 120 today. In other words, Genesis 6 was drawing from a very well-established oral tradition (belonging to the pan-Semitic culture), and is using it here to illustrate a truth-that the former intimacy which existed between Heaven and earth before the Flood-i.e., that little which was left of a physical "Divine spark" after the Fall of Adam-was withdrawn and the Flood itself was the benchmark for this. That's all.
http://www.catholic-legate.com/Apologetics/Sc...

Sheilaa

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#203 Feb 17, 2013
Nettiebelle wrote:
if you don't accept a mythological interpretation of Genesis 6, then that means you must believe that angelic beings literally mated with earthly women but, if you believe that, you've embraced a heresy that has been condemned by the Magisterium and several Church councils. In other words, Catholics do not believe that angels can father offspring because we do not believe that they have physical bodies. So, how, as a Catholic (if you don't mind sharing), do you reconcile these two things? I would think that this alone illustrates the untenable nature of interpreting Genesis literally.
Satan is "pure evil" isn't he? Presumably these angels were the fallen ones who were cast out of heaven with Satan. St. Peter tells us: For if God did not spare the angels when they sinned, but condemned them to the chains of Tartarus and handed them over to be kept for judgment; (2 Peter 2:4)
A couple things 1) The above interpretation comes, not from the original Hebrew understanding of Genesis 6, but from a Greek (Hellenized Jewish) understanding that these "sons of Heaven" did wrong by mating with the daughters of men. Yet, there is no hint of this in the older rabbinical traditions, nor in the text of Genesis itself. Rather, in the context of Genesis 6 itself, the offspring of the "sons of Heaven" (the Nephliim) are described as "heroes" or "mighty men"-that is, antedeluvian supermen (Hebrew versions of "Hercules"), who were seen as the product of Divine power being still-present in humanity (i.e., "My Spirit will not remain in man forever"). And, 2) Satan cannot create life. Only God can. Thus, Satan (or his minions) cannot father human children (or angel-human hybrids).
Here St. Peter uses "Tartarus" a word borrowed from Greek mythology. Tartarus is the lowest place of hell (Hades) where the most evil and vile are tormented.
Yes. And, again, St. Peter is drawing from a tradition among the Hellenized (Greek) Jews in order to illustrate a point. This was not the original (Hebrew) interpretation of Genesis 6, however, where there is not the slightest suggestion that these "sons of Heaven" did wrong by mating with the "daughters of men." Rather, the "intercourse" between these angels and human women is a parallel idea for God's Spirit remaining in (and then being withdrawn from) human flesh. That's all the passage is about. If it were otherwise, then the Genesis narrative would have had to continued to deal with the subject, and point out how God was specifically angry because of these angelic-human hybrids, and how the Flood specifically destroyed them, etc.(But that is all part of a, much later, Greek presumption ...which saw this passage as a challenge to monotheism, and thus an occasion of "evil"). Yet, we don't see any of this in the text. Rather, what we have is a poetic illustration of how God's Spirit was slowly withdrawn from antediluvian man (again, see the "decreasing" genealogies in Genesis 5), thus explaining why people cannot live past 120 today. In other words, Genesis 6 was drawing from a very well-established oral tradition (belonging to the pan-Semitic culture), and is using it here to illustrate a truth-that the former intimacy which existed between Heaven and earth before the Flood-i.e., that little which was left of a physical "Divine spark" after the Fall of Adam-was withdrawn and the Flood itself was the benchmark for this. That's all.
http://www.catholic-legate.com/Apologetics/Sc...
Who is this post being addressed to?
Sir Doctor

San Jose, CA

#204 Feb 17, 2013
Nettiebelle wrote:
if you don't accept a mythological interpretation of Genesis 6, then that means you must believe that angelic beings literally mated with earthly women but, if you believe that, you've embraced a heresy that has been condemned by the Magisterium and several Church councils. In other words, Catholics do not believe that angels can father offspring because we do not believe that they have physical bodies. So, how, as a Catholic (if you don't mind sharing), do you reconcile these two things? I would think that this alone illustrates the untenable nature of interpreting Genesis literally.
Satan is "pure evil" isn't he? Presumably these angels were the fallen ones who were cast out of heaven with Satan. St. Peter tells us: For if God did not spare the angels when they sinned, but condemned them to the chains of Tartarus and handed them over to be kept for judgment; (2 Peter 2:4)
A couple things 1) The above interpretation comes, not from the original Hebrew understanding of Genesis 6, but from a Greek (Hellenized Jewish) understanding that these "sons of Heaven" did wrong by mating with the daughters of men. Yet, there is no hint of this in the older rabbinical traditions, nor in the text of Genesis itself. Rather, in the context of Genesis 6 itself, the offspring of the "sons of Heaven" (the Nephliim) are described as "heroes" or "mighty men"-that is, antedeluvian supermen (Hebrew versions of "Hercules"), who were seen as the product of Divine power being still-present in humanity (i.e., "My Spirit will not remain in man forever"). And, 2) Satan cannot create life. Only God can. Thus, Satan (or his minions) cannot father human children (or angel-human hybrids).
Here St. Peter uses "Tartarus" a word borrowed from Greek mythology. Tartarus is the lowest place of hell (Hades) where the most evil and vile are tormented.
Yes. And, again, St. Peter is drawing from a tradition among the Hellenized (Greek) Jews in order to illustrate a point. This was not the original (Hebrew) interpretation of Genesis 6, however, where there is not the slightest suggestion that these "sons of Heaven" did wrong by mating with the "daughters of men." Rather, the "intercourse" between these angels and human women is a parallel idea for God's Spirit remaining in (and then being withdrawn from) human flesh. That's all the passage is about. If it were otherwise, then the Genesis narrative would have had to continued to deal with the subject, and point out how God was specifically angry because of these angelic-human hybrids, and how the Flood specifically destroyed them, etc.(But that is all part of a, much later, Greek presumption ...which saw this passage as a challenge to monotheism, and thus an occasion of "evil"). Yet, we don't see any of this in the text. Rather, what we have is a poetic illustration of how God's Spirit was slowly withdrawn from antediluvian man (again, see the "decreasing" genealogies in Genesis 5), thus explaining why people cannot live past 120 today. In other words, Genesis 6 was drawing from a very well-established oral tradition (belonging to the pan-Semitic culture), and is using it here to illustrate a truth-that the former intimacy which existed between Heaven and earth before the Flood-i.e., that little which was left of a physical "Divine spark" after the Fall of Adam-was withdrawn and the Flood itself was the benchmark for this. That's all.
http://www.catholic-legate.com/Apologetics/Sc...
The RCC also says that homosexuality is as sinful and vile as sex with a dog.
http://www.catholic-legate.com/Apologetics/Sc...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Christian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Are Your Beliefs TRUE? 1 hr Taranis 278
breath of god, and how we come to light. 1 hr Taranis 108
Why did Christ come to Earth? (Oct '16) 1 hr Taranis 1,200
The False Teachings of the Hebrew Israelites, s... (Jan '14) 1 hr Taranis 1,944
Israel is anti christ, literally 7 hr 2all 259
Early Christianity (Dec '16) 9 hr Big Al 2,621
There is a National Rejection of God in America!! 9 hr Jake999 4
More from around the web