Introduction
Introduction Statistics Contact Development Disclaimer Help
Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Love God Only
https://lovegodonly.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
Return to: Free for All
*****************************************************
#Post#: 33387--------------------------------------------------
Caiaphas
By: Kerry Date: March 27, 2023, 9:13 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps we need a thread dedicated to Caiaphas.
I was thinking about Caiaphas, and I began wondering where he
was when this prophecy was fulfilled. Was he still alive on the
earth, or had he died and gone to another place?
Matthew 26:64 Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless
I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on
the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
What date do we assign to the coming of Jesus? Is 70 AD right?
If so, would Caiaphas still been alive on the earth then? If
not, was he in Hades or Purgatory and saw it? Did Jesus rescue
him from Purgatory?
#Post#: 33390--------------------------------------------------
Re: Caiaphas
By: paralambano Date: March 28, 2023, 6:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Kerry - ^
Jesus was speaking to the priests, Caiaphas among them.
Jesus was telling them that they'd know he was Divine, that they
were wrong about him because they'd see him coming in God's
glory to judge the wicked and gather the faithful.
Caiaphas had died previously to this and would have been in
purgation. Where his soul is for his crime and redemption, God
knows.
Why did Caiaphas claim that Jesus blasphemed, Kerry? It can't be
because he was acting. John sets it up nicely in 11. However
unfairly Jesus was hastily tried, there were elements of
fairness in his trial like when the priests dismissed
conflicting testimonies. If they were hell-bent on having him
dead, they needed something from him at the trial to assuage
their guilt in wanting him dead. It still doesn't make them less
guilty. And Jesus gave it to them in spades.
They had already wanted him dead for blasphemy but that wasn't
why he was executed. What did the Romans care about that? A
total, superfluous charge if so.
Surely, Jesus hadn't lied about the destruction of Jerusalem.
Surely, Jesus hadn't lied about what he quoted of Daniel.
Surely, he hadn't lied to his disciples in his Olivet discourse
when he told them what he told Caiaphas but in greater detail,
all of which came to pass in that generation after he told them
about the end of the age. The "soon" passages of John, the
imminence passages of Paul. All would have had to be mistaken
back then if it's some today believe they're correct in their
futurist views. Futurists know better than Paul and John the
Revelator? It is to laugh. Irrational. It's for futurists and us
to see how it all went down.
para . . . .
#Post#: 33392--------------------------------------------------
Re: Caiaphas
By: Kerry Date: March 28, 2023, 8:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=paralambano link=topic=1531.msg33390#msg33390
date=1680002268]
Kerry - ^
Jesus was speaking to the priests, Caiaphas among
them.[/quote]So how many of them saw what Jesus said they would
see?
[quote]Jesus was telling them that they'd know he was Divine,
that they were wrong about him because they'd see him coming in
God's glory to judge the wicked and gather the faithful.
[/quote]You may find how the word "blaspheme" is used elsewhere
of interest since the Greek word does not necessarily mean
speaking against God Himself.
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g987/kjv/tr/0-1/
[quote]Caiaphas had died previously to this and would have been
in purgation. Where his soul is for his crime and redemption,
God knows.
Why did Caiaphas claim that Jesus blasphemed, Kerry? It can't be
because he was acting. John sets it up nicely in 11. However
unfairly Jesus was hastily tried, there were elements of
fairness in his trial like when the priests dismissed
conflicting testimonies. If they were hell-bent on having him
dead, they needed something from him at the trial to assuage
their guilt in wanting him dead. It still doesn't make them less
guilty. And Jesus gave it to them in spades.
They had already wanted him dead for blasphemy but that wasn't
why he was executed. What did the Romans care about that? A
total, superfluous charge if so. [/quote]Jesus did not give a
time. He could have meant he would personally upset the
priestly system run by the Sanhedrin and also the rule of the
Romans. If you believe the Sanhedrin was established by God,
Jesus' statement could be seen as a threat not only to the
Sanhedrin but to the authority of God to establish order.
[quote]Surely, Jesus hadn't lied about the destruction of
Jerusalem. Surely, Jesus hadn't lied about what he quoted of
Daniel. Surely, he hadn't lied to his disciples in his Olivet
discourse when he told them what he told Caiaphas but in greater
detail, all of which came to pass in that generation after he
told them about the end of the age. The "soon" passages of John,
the imminence passages of Paul. All would have had to be
mistaken back then if it's some today believe they're correct in
their futurist views. Futurists know better than Paul and John
the Revelator? It is to laugh. Irrational. It's for futurists
and us to see how it all went down.[/quote]There is the matter
of the "missing years" when we talk about Daniel's prophecy.
Some believe -- and I do -- that the Sanhedrin had altered
history by omitting several years in the chronology and knew
destruction would be coming rather soon. They feared unrest
among the people if they knew the 70 years were soon to be
finished. Jesus' Olivet discourse was seen as a threat then.
#Post#: 33397--------------------------------------------------
Re: Caiaphas
By: paralambano Date: March 28, 2023, 1:19 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Kerry - ^
[quote]So how many of them saw what Jesus said they would see?
[/quote]
Them? Do you mean just those there at Jesus' trial? I'd say all
saw him, even those who had passed on since Jesus had gone into
Hades during his time in the tomb. I understand all the tribes
meant those still extant living in the Land, not the entire
globe. The Land. In other words, it's not enough to say that
everybody "saw" it alone as if the emphasis is on just the
vision but that they understood what was happening, thus the
"wailing" or mourning over their sin. Jesus had prophesied
correctly.
[quote]You may find how the word "blaspheme" is used elsewhere
of interest since the Greek word does not necessarily mean
speaking against God Himself.
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g987/kjv/tr/0-1/[/quote]
But some priests had already claimed that Jesus makes himself
equal to God. They were already willing to stone him to death
the gospels report. Who shall I believe? The Gospel accounts or
what a 21st C opinion of blasphemy means? What Caiaphas and the
priests accuse Jesus of in that day or what 21st C opinion says
what was meant. When Jesus is accused of blasphemy, the threat
of violence and death followed, and eventually came.
No way out of it, Kerry. Jesus had either blasphemed or he
hadn't. If he hadn't, he was speaking the truth. He would come
as God to give blessings and curses. And, of course, he did.
Only God does this in TANAKH. Jesus comes back in Glory in the
Apocalypse.
Orthodox Jews don't accept the New Testament for these things.
If only he had stopped at saying that he was the Messiah for
those who don't believe he is God the Son. But he didn't. He
said more. He'd be coming back only as God comes to judge his
judges.
[quote]Jesus did not give a time.[/quote]
Not true, Kerry. He said that those there at his trial would see
him come in Glory. He gave all the signs to who? His disciples.
The "this generation", Jesus says "soon" to, gives his warnings
to the churches, Paul is urgent about (so much so that he tells
those prepared to leave off entirely from the flesh
[conjugal]).John sees a vision about it and writes about Jesus
being "at the door". The Apocalypse is a Revelation, not a
secret written for an audience in John's day. It was meant as a
warning that the "end" was upon them. This is why John is told
not to seal it. It was to be read then and there. Break glass,
take out canister, etc. . .
I gave a long exposition of Jesus' coming comparing it to Jewish
marriage rites to you a while back. The son returns to His
Father's house to build a "room" ("mansions") for his Bride and
when the Father is pleased with his Son the carpenter's work
(only the Father knows when), He sends His Son out for her
(parousia) with a shout to bring her back. This was clear to
those listening to Jesus about it because they knew the marriage
rites. Apparently for some, the Son is still toiling away for
two millennia and counting. Are you one of them, Kerry? I say
Jesus came back for his Church in a timely manner. He didn't
turn her into an old maid(en).
[quote]He could have meant he would personally upset the
priestly system run by the Sanhedrin and also the rule of the
Romans. If you believe the Sanhedrin was established by God,
Jesus' statement could be seen as a threat not only to the
Sanhedrin but to the authority of God to establish
order.[/quote]
Jesus had already pronounced the House desolate, Kerry.
Publicly. And indeed, Jesus was a threat to them spiritually.
They would wail at his coming. That's what he meant. They'd see
and understand that he was Divine. No skirting around it. What
they deny about him, his divinity as God, is true. Immanuel.
[quote]There is the matter of the "missing years" when we talk
about Daniel's prophecy. Some believe -- and I do -- that the
Sanhedrin had altered history by omitting several years in the
chronology and knew destruction would be coming rather soon.
They feared unrest among the people if they knew the 70 years
were soon to be finished. Jesus' Olivet discourse was seen as a
threat then. [/quote]
Of course it was a threat. But the idea was to have Jesus die to
avoid having a Messianic King who the people would follow
thereby riling Rome. Jesus would keep on getting popular.
Therefore, no King but Caesar! Get this Messiah dead to keep
Rome from stomping on them. Problem was the prophecy came true
but not the way they wanted it.
para . . . .
#Post#: 33401--------------------------------------------------
Re: Caiaphas
By: Kerry Date: March 29, 2023, 6:34 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=paralambano link=topic=1531.msg33397#msg33397
date=1680027595]
Kerry - ^
Them? Do you mean just those there at Jesus' trial? I'd say all
saw him, even those who had passed on since Jesus had gone into
Hades during his time in the tomb.[/quote]Yes, I meant everyone
present since they went along with Caiaphas. I checked the
Greek and couldn't tell if the "you" was plural or singular --
I'm not a good Greek scholar.
[quote]I understand all the tribes meant those still extant
living in the Land, not the entire globe. The Land. In other
words, it's not enough to say that everybody "saw" it alone as
if the emphasis is on just the vision but that they understood
what was happening, thus the "wailing" or mourning over their
sin. Jesus had prophesied correctly.[/quote]I figure it could
mean "the known earth" or it could mean the whole earth as we
know it today. I read it as the latter. Years ago I was
reading a secular book (on Greek literature I believe) which
stated that there was a global change in human consciousness.
They had no explanation, only noted it. Up to that change, most
people saw themselves as resembling puppets having their strings
pulled by the gods. The concept of the individual having free
will was unknown. That stands out if you study Greek
mythology and their literature -- they will say this god or that
goddess made someone do something. Humans were seen as pawns of
the gods.
I do not know enough about Greek to say that "see" can mean with
the physical eyes or with the imagination come to perceive a
truth. Every eye will see? I'd say some saw Jesus with
spiritual eyes while others saw his truth that they were not
pawns of the gods. It was as if a dark veil across the globe
was lifted.
[quote]But some priests had already claimed that Jesus makes
himself equal to God. They were already willing to stone him to
death the gospels report. Who shall I believe? [/quote]
What did Jesus answer?
John 10:30 I and my Father are one.
31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from
my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?33 The Jews
answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for
blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself
God.
34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said,
Ye are gods?
35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and
the scripture cannot be broken;
36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into
the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of
God?
Jesus did not claim to be God. He was claiming to be a god, I
would say; but then all Israel (those who were truly of Israel)
could also be called gods. The pagan gods were also gods, I
would say; but they fell into the error of desiring men to
worship them as individuals. This god or that wanted sacrifices
and so on. They had broken away from the Unity of God and set
themselves up to be worshipped as individual gods.
Most of the "gods" which were supposed to act as Guardian Angels
of the Gentile tribes had fallen. Jesus' role was to "supplant"
their authority just as Jacob supplanted Esau's status of
firstborn. Yet someday in the future, those fallen gods are
meant to be corrected and brought back into the Unity of God.
Until that day, the LORD God works to bring that about. The LORD
God is the god of Israel, not the god of the Gentiles.
Micah 4:1 But in the last days it shall come to pass, that the
mountain of the house of the Lord shall be established in the
top of the mountains, and it shall be exalted above the hills;
and people shall flow unto it.
2 And many nations shall come, and say, Come, and let us go up
to the mountain of the Lord, and to the house of the God of
Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his
paths: for the law shall go forth of Zion, and the word of the
Lord from Jerusalem.
3 And he shall judge among many people, and rebuke strong
nations afar off; and they shall beat their swords into
plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not
lift up a sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any
more.
4 But they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig
tree; and none shall make them afraid: for the mouth of the Lord
of hosts hath spoken it.
5 For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and
we will walk in the name of the Lord our God for ever and ever.
[quote]The Gospel accounts or what a 21st C opinion of blasphemy
means? What Caiaphas and the priests accuse Jesus of in that day
or what 21st C opinion says what was meant. When Jesus is
accused of blasphemy, the threat of violence and death followed,
and eventually came. [/quote]I doubt you checked out the link I
gave. Let me quote some of the New Testament passages which use
the same word which is often translated as blaspheme.
Mat 27:39 And they that passed by reviled him, wagging their
heads,
Mar 15:29 And they that passed by railed on him, wagging their
heads, and saying, Ah, thou that destroyest the temple, and
buildest it in three days,
Rom 3:8 And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as
some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come?
whose damnation is just.
1Co 4:13 Being defamed, we intreat: we are made as the filth of
the world, and are the offscouring of all things unto this day.
Jde 1:10 But these speak evil of those things which they know
not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those
things they corrupt themselves.
That being seen, it seems possible to me to believe Caiaphas saw
Jesus' remark as blasphemous since it could be interpreted as
speaking evil of the Sanhedrin.
[quote]No way out of it, Kerry. Jesus had either blasphemed or
he hadn't. If he hadn't, he was speaking the truth. He would
come as God to give blessings and curses. And, of course, he
did. Only God does this in TANAKH. Jesus comes back in Glory in
the Apocalypse. [/quote]He called himself the Son of God, not
God. Christians are also called sons of God -- because they
share the Divine Nature, not because each one of them is God.
[quote]Orthodox Jews don't accept the New Testament for these
things. If only he had stopped at saying that he was the Messiah
for those who don't believe he is God the Son. But he didn't. He
said more. He'd be coming back only as God comes to judge his
judges.[/quote]I do not see where he claims to be coming back as
God.
Manifesting in clouds? According to that idea, we might worship
rainbows as God.
[quote]Not true, Kerry. He said that those there at his trial
would see him come in Glory. He gave all the signs to who? His
disciples. The "this generation", Jesus says "soon" to, gives
his warnings to the churches, Paul is urgent about (so much so
that he tells those prepared to leave off entirely from the
flesh [conjugal]).John sees a vision about it and writes about
Jesus being "at the door". The Apocalypse is a Revelation, not a
secret written for an audience in John's day. It was meant as a
warning that the "end" was upon them. This is why John is told
not to seal it. It was to be read then and there. Break glass,
take out canister, etc. . . [/quote]I meant he did not specify a
time to Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin. Some of them already had a
good idea about it since many of the priestly caste knew years
had been subtracted from history in order to deceive people
about when Daniel's prophecy was to be fulfilled.
[quote]I gave a long exposition of Jesus' coming comparing it to
Jewish marriage rites to you a while back. The son returns to
His Father's house to build a "room" ("mansions") for his Bride
and when the Father is pleased with his Son the carpenter's work
(only the Father knows when), He sends His Son out for her
(parousia) with a shout to bring her back. This was clear to
those listening to Jesus about it because they knew the marriage
rites. Apparently for some, the Son is still toiling away for
two millennia and counting. Are you one of them, Kerry? I say
Jesus came back for his Church in a timely manner. He didn't
turn her into an old maid(en).[/quote]Is the Bride God? Should
there be a fourth Person in the Godhead?
[quote]Jesus had already pronounced the House desolate, Kerry.
Publicly. And indeed, Jesus was a threat to them spiritually.
They would wail at his coming.
Of course it was a threat. But the idea was to have Jesus die to
avoid having a Messianic King who the people would follow
thereby riling Rome. Jesus would keep on getting popular.
Therefore, no King but Caesar! Get this Messiah dead to keep
Rome from stomping on them. Problem was the prophecy came true
but not the way they wanted it.[/quote]
I think the Jewish leaders were so taken with their own worldly
authority that they couldn't conceive how it could be true when
Jesus said his kingdom was not of this world.
#Post#: 33402--------------------------------------------------
Re: Caiaphas
By: paralambano Date: March 29, 2023, 8:18 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Kerry - ^
[quote]What did Jesus answer?
John 10:30 I and my Father are one.
31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from
my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?33 The Jews
answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for
blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself
God.
34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said,
Ye are gods?
35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and
the scripture cannot be broken;
36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into
the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of
God?
Jesus did not claim to be God.[/quote]
Indeed he did by claiming to come in God's Glory to judge the
apostates. Caiaphas and the priests understood that Jesus, a
man, was making himself equal to the Creator. Take that to any
Orthodox Reb today and he will tell you what I've told you here.
Jesus is blaspheming for them.
[quote]He was claiming to be a god, I would say; but then all
Israel (those who were truly of Israel) could also be called
gods. The pagan gods were also gods, I would say; but they fell
into the error of desiring men to worship them as individuals.
This god or that wanted sacrifices and so on. They had broken
away from the Unity of God and set themselves up to be
worshipped as individual gods.
Most of the "gods" which were supposed to act as Guardian Angels
of the Gentile tribes had fallen. Jesus' role was to "supplant"
their authority just as Jacob supplanted Esau's status of
firstborn. Yet someday in the future, those fallen gods are
meant to be corrected and brought back into the Unity of God.
Until that day, the LORD God works to bring that about. The LORD
God is the god of Israel, not the god of the Gentiles. [/quote]
I had already written a response to you about this but got
silence in return. Jesus is quoting from a Psalm where God is
angry about His judges (gods) who don't judge righteously. Jesus
is having a dig at those who judge incorrectly about him by it
and his audience would have known the reference. Jesus isn't
giving a treatise about pagan gods but is exposing the priests'
unrightousness by their bad calls about him when he heals and
forgives sin. They even went as far as to call good evil on him
saying that he healed by evil.
[quote]Micah 4:1 But in the last days it shall come to pass,
that the mountain of the house of the Lord shall be established
in the top of the mountains, and it shall be exalted above the
hills; and people shall flow unto it.
2 And many nations shall come, and say, Come, and let us go up
to the mountain of the Lord, and to the house of the God of
Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his
paths: for the law shall go forth of Zion, and the word of the
Lord from Jerusalem.
3 And he shall judge among many people, and rebuke strong
nations afar off; and they shall beat their swords into
plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not
lift up a sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any
more.
4 But they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig
tree; and none shall make them afraid: for the mouth of the Lord
of hosts hath spoken it.
5 For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and
we will walk in the name of the Lord our God for ever and
ever.[/quote]
This is the spiritual kingdom (Consciousness) established by
Jesus in the latter days, that is, the time of the end of the
Mosaic age. All the nations will enter it, one-by-one.
[quote]I doubt you checked out the link I gave.[/quote]
I did check it.
[quote]Let me quote some of the New Testament passages which use
the same word which is often translated as blaspheme.
Mat 27:39 And they that passed by reviled him, wagging their
heads,
Mar 15:29 And they that passed by railed on him, wagging their
heads, and saying, Ah, thou that destroyest the temple, and
buildest it in three days,
Rom 3:8 And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as
some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come?
whose damnation is just.
1Co 4:13 Being defamed, we intreat: we are made as the filth of
the world, and are the offscouring of all things unto this day.
Jde 1:10 But these speak evil of those things which they know
not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those
things they corrupt themselves.[/quote]
And these have to do what with what Jesus tells Caiaphas?
[quote]That being seen, it seems possible to me to believe
Caiaphas saw Jesus' remark as blasphemous since it could be
interpreted as speaking evil of the Sanhedrin. [/quote]
He had already spoken badly of them I had given. A house of
desolation. Jesus said it would remain that way until they
cried, Blessed be he who comes in the Name of the Lord. In other
words, then they will see what's what. The stone they had
rejected has become the chief cornerstone of reality.
You dance around the issue, Kerry, to no avail. You say it's
this and that why the priests say Jesus blasphemes. But the
Gospels tell us why the wicked priests say so, and especially
Caiaphas. Jesus could have stopped with his "I am" in answer to
Caiaphas' having him by oath swear to, Are you the Messiah, Son
of God. But Jesus keeps talking. He tells Caiaphas that he,
Jesus, is Daniel's Son of Man, One who rides on God's Glory
Cloud there Who will return in like manner to judge them.
Caiaphas now has what he needs on top of all the other charges
of blasphemy. The final straw.
Either Jesus is claiming equality with God since it's only God
who rides the Cloud or Jesus is blaspheming saying that God
shares His Glory with another, a man, the creation equal to
Creator. This is why Caiaphas is enraged and Jesus is spit upon,
struck, blindfolded, and knocked about. If the wicked priests
had had their way, Jesus would have been long dead already.
[quote]He called himself the Son of God, not God. Christians
are also called sons of God -- because they share the Divine
Nature, not because each one of them is God. [/quote]
He is the only-begotten Son of God among men first of all. All
else in him are adopted sons scripture tells us. He is the
eternal Son of God with the same eternality as the Father the
before Abraham, etc . . . John's Apocalypse makes it more
explicit.
Second, Jesus told Caiaphas that he, Jesus, will return in a way
that the Jews understand God coming, that is, on a Cloud to
judge. Make no mistake here, Kerry. Caiaphas understood what
this meant and so do Orthodox Jews today. They don't accept what
Jesus says here. They lost their Temple over it to this very
day. It's blasphemy to them and the gospels make clear that
those in charge in Jesus' day were a wicked generation, the
"this generation" mentioned some 30-odd times in the NT.
[quote]I do not see where he claims to be coming back as God.
[/quote]
Don't make the mistake if you do of claiming like some do about
Jesus' repeated use of Son of Man in reference to himself
meaning that he was solely saying that he was human. The Son of
Man seen by Daniel is a Divine figure who rides on God's Glory
Cloud. No one does this but God. Jesus is referring to Daniel by
what he tells Caiaphas. Read Daniel 7:13, 14. Jesus applies this
to himself. He, Jesus, this Son of Man in Daniel, will come in
God's Glory, only as God does in the OT to judge the apostates.
He not only says this to Caiaphas but also tells his disciples
it.
Jesus defames God by it if he's lying because allegedly being
solely human by some, he is saying that the created can supplant
the Creator by doing only what the Creator coming in the
Creator's Glory judging does. Orthodox Jews will tell you only
God, I repeat, only God comes this way. If lying, Jesus
diminishes God by making God the same as creation, worshipping
the creation, not the Creator. So Jesus' claim is extraordinary.
And trins don't believe Jesus blasphemed because he was/is
Immanuel, God with us. And you write about bilocation!
[quote]I meant he did not specify a time to Caiaphas and the
Sanhedrin. Some of them already had a good idea about it since
many of the priestly caste knew years had been subtracted from
history in order to deceive people about when Daniel's prophecy
was to be fulfilled. [/quote]
Jesus told that crowd that they'd see him coming in God's Glory
to judge them. That would be in their generation. And they were
trying to stave off judgment by having Jesus killed but judgment
was already upon them. Jesus said all the blood of the prophets
falls on them. The cup was already full. The Kingdom was given
to others by the times of the Gentiles in that roughly 40 year
period prior to devastation.
[quote]Manifesting in clouds? According to that idea, we might
worship rainbows as God. [/quote]
Only God is in/on then Glory Cloud. He shares His Glory with no
one. Yet Jesus says that he, Jesus, does what God does this way
in applying Daniel 7 to himself.
What say you, Kerry? You do a lot of dancing around it. Did
Jesus blaspheme by it? If yes, then you call him a liar. If no,
tell the Orthodox Jews why they are mistaken about him.
[quote]Is the Bride God?[/quote]
Nope. The Bride's the Church from the protoevangelium on
forward.
[quote]Should there be a fourth Person in the Godhead?[/quote]
Not by scripture and what the Church understands. Some Jews
might believe it by the sephirot but even then it's the top
three which matter this way. So close, indeed.
[quote]I think the Jewish leaders were so taken with their own
worldly authority that they couldn't conceive how it could be
true when Jesus said his kingdom was not of this world. [/quote]
They were as stubborn as Pharaoh, blinded by themselves at
first, then by God.
And, they didn't want to see a King who is Divine, God the Son,
Who rules over all. Bilocation indeed.
ADD:
The ancient Israelite knew two Yahwehs�one invisible, a spirit,
the other visible, often in human form. The two Yahwehs at times
appear together in the text, at times being distinguished, at
other times not. Early Judaism understood this portrayal and its
rationale. There was no sense of a violation of monotheism since
either figure was indeed Yahweh. There was no 2nd distinct god
running the affairs of the cosmos. During the 2nd Temple period,
Jewish theologians and writers speculated on an identity for the
2nd Yahweh. Guesses ranged from divinized humans from the
stories of the Hebrew Bible to exalted angels. These
speculations were not considered unorthodox. That acceptance
changed when certain Jews, the early Christians, connected Jesus
with this orthodox Jewish idea. This explains why these Jews,
the first converts to following Jesus the Christ, could
simultaneously worship the God of Israel and Jesus, and yet
refuse to acknowledge any other god. Jesus was the incarnate 2nd
Yahweh. In response, as Segal�s work demonstrated, Judaism
pronounced the Two Powers teaching a heresy sometime in the 2nd
century AD.�
https://bloggingtheology.net/2016/09/09/bart-ehrman-two-powers-in-heaven/
para . . . .
#Post#: 33403--------------------------------------------------
Re: Caiaphas
By: meshak Date: March 29, 2023, 11:34 am
---------------------------------------------------------
rabbit chasing debate as usual, going nowhere.
#Post#: 33404--------------------------------------------------
Re: Caiaphas
By: paralambano Date: March 29, 2023, 11:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
meshak - ^
But you can't refute any of it. And then you copy what I wrote
of you a while back by saying "rabbit". Poor meshak. Hanging
around secretly reading.
Why did Caiaphas say Jesus blasphemed, meshak? This is your
Jesus who you don't defend. You must think then Jesus is a
blasphemer, yes?
At least Kerry has the courage to attempt to answer.
You? You act the bunny.
para . . . .
#Post#: 33405--------------------------------------------------
Re: Caiaphas
By: meshak Date: March 29, 2023, 12:09 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=paralambano link=topic=1531.msg33404#msg33404
date=1680108465]
meshak - ^
But you can't refute any of it. And then you copy what I wrote
of you a while back by saying "rabbit". Poor meshak. Hanging
around secretly reading.
Why did Caiaphas say Jesus blasphemed, meshak? This is your
Jesus who you don't defend. You must think then Jesus is a
blasphemer, yes?
At least Kerry has the courage to attempt to answer.
You? You act the bunny.[/quote]
Secretly???????
It seems you have something to hide or be ashamed of.
Why so offended for someone reading your argument??????????
para . . . .
[/quote]
#Post#: 33406--------------------------------------------------
Re: Caiaphas
By: paralambano Date: March 29, 2023, 1:05 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
meshak - ^
Hide? But you see how much I write openly on this board. LOL.
Offended? Why, not at all. It was you who complained about the
length of my responses.
Keep reading ;). I will make you victorious by it. No longer
will you have to tell a lie and condemn. You will actually be
able to use your mind as God intended it. You will be my sister
in Christ, good and proper. Your spankings will be over.
para . . . .
*****************************************************
Next Page
You are viewing proxied material from gopher.createaforum.com. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.