Posted on 11/09/2002 6:46:06 PM PST by GoldenEagles
No, GoldenEagles - here is what is clear. What you say above is 100% non-scriptural. There is NO biblical basis from the bible for anything that you say above. What you have been led to believe is gobbledy-gook, probably from a cult.
I urge you now to stop and ask yourself WHY all this stuff that someone taught you is NOT in the bible?
You were led astray, and are attempting to lead others astray. This will be my final post on this topic. Please, for the sake of your salvation, stick to what God gave us as Truth -- and do NOT accept anything other than what is in the book that God gave us. If it is NOT there, it is a lie. PERIOD. That is ALL that you can be sure of on this Earth.
If I were to guess, you were not raised in a Christian family, but were indoctrinated into some following while attending college...am I correct?
Good luck, GoldenEagles, and may God bless you and grant you wisdom.
But, there are many things in the Bible, as noted above, that require interpretation if one is to come to a true sense of what is being spoken. And there are many many false interpretations masquerading as the gospel truth, being set forth as church doctrine, which are however, absolute falsehoods. Like the idea that Jesus Christ is the ONLY Son of God. Well, in regards to this, I must point out that we are all sons and daughters of God, relating to Jesus Christ in the same way an acorn relates to a full grown oak. God intends every acorn to grow into a full grown oak, and there are no exceptions to this rule.
It occurs to me, that if we understand exactly where this strange idea came from, that Jesus Christ is the ONLY son of God, it would be much easier to discard it for the falsehood that it is.
In the time of Jesus Christ, and the centuries that followed, the center of the political universe was Rome. Now, I believe that it is true that the Roman Emperors set themselves before the people as gods. And in as much as there could only be one Roman Emperor at a time, then it follows that there could only be one god at a time. And this idea permeated the minds of all peoples who lived under the boot of Rome, and her armies.
This basic idea was as common within the political and religious thinking of the people of that time, as was the idea that the sky was blue.
Of course theory can seldom work itself out in human affairs in a uniform manner. So, due to the various problems associated with political and military ambition of those who populated the upper crust of Roman society, i.e. the elites, there were times when the Roman Empire was split between eastern and a western halves, where one Emperor ruled one half, and another Emperor ruled the other half. But, each emperor no doubt maintained the idea, within his own mind, and the minds of those who were his supporters, that he was the only true god, that the other guy was a fraud, and needed to be destroyed, which eventually came to pass in most cases.
Now, Christianity, as a religion, really came into its own, when it was adopted as the official State religion of Rome, around 312 A.D. when the Emperor Constantine converted to Christianity, in as much as he believed that the "Christian God" gave him a victory in an important battle. Now, in as much as the Emperor was the State, his religion became the state religion.
At this juncture it is important to remember that age-old proverb, which holds that sausage may be a very delightful thing to eat, but you sure don't want to know anything about how it was made. If you did, you probably would never eat sausage again.
And so it goes with the development of Christian Doctrine under the guidance of Emperor Constantine. In as much as Constantine saw himself as the sole rightful emperor of the Roman Empire, and the only true representation of god to the people (well, with his conversion to Christianity, he had to give up this idea about being the sole representation of god to the people), nevertheless, in keeping with the way in which his mind worked, it is not surprising that he would see his new Christian God as the only true God, and his son Jesus Christ, as the only true son. He would admit of no challenges in this regard, and that doctrine, based on the ego-driven ambition of a Roman Emperor to be at the apex of everything in the entire world, whether it be social, political, military, or religious, has survived as church doctrine to this very day.
In other words, if he couldn't be god himself anymore, his own personal conception of God (who he did not know from Adam), would represent the apex of religious thought throughout the Empire. It was just about as ego inflating as the former situation. Instead of the people bowing down to him as their god, they would now bow down to his personal conception of God. He could live with that, as long as this "Christian God" was devoted to giving him military victories.
Now, in regards to the correlation between making sausage and Christian doctrine, it is clear, that those who believe that the content of the Bible is the purest rendition of God's Holy Word that has ever been released upon the planet, are also those that can be convinced that a hot-dog represents pure vegetarian fare. This is pure fantasy, based on a condition of enforced ignorance.
But the Internet will break those chains once and for all.
I challenge any person who thinks that the Bible represents the purest rendition of God's Holy Word that has ever been released to the people on this planet, to simply read early church history. Of course, prior to the "information age" this would require that a person get into his car, travel to a library, search for the right book, drive home, and then find time to read it. Significant barriers to enlightenment to be sure.
But that is not the case anymore. All of these barriers have collapsed, save the desire to remain in darkness. No amount of information can overcome that one.
Now, all I need to do is just give you a link, and that information will spill down your screen in front of your very eyes.
One example would be the Online Reference Book for Medievel Studies. Here, on this main index page you will find a link to Late Antiquity and the Early Church. Here you will find additional links to a summary of that history, and links to an exposition on each of the early church councils out of which the doctrine of the church emerged.
Now, I would not represent the works of these authors as final authorities on the subject. But, this is a good place to begin to get a general idea of how Church doctrine was crafted. And besides, there are links to additional information where you can go into the subject more deeply if you desire.
After the most cursory of examinations of this material, one can see how the adoption of this doctrine, or that doctrine, was not a matter of wisdom, but a matter of shear power. The people who had the most power, those are the ones who set the doctrine. That means, the people who were aligned with the power of the Roman Emperors, established the doctrine.
And we can go one layer deeper into this discussion here. Take for example the first policy setting council under the authority of Emperor Constantine in 325 AD. This is commonly referred to as the Council of Nicaea, and it appears that this is where Jesus was proclaimed "the" Son of God. This council was composed of a certain number of bishops summoned by the Emperor.
We need to ask, who were these bishops, and how were they chosen to be members of this council? You can be sure that only those bishops were chosen who had provided a clear track record of support for Constantine.
But the most important point about the membership of this council, has to do with the subject of fallen angels:
And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. (Revelation 12: 7-9)
Here we have the testimony of Jesus Christ, that rebel angels were thrown into the earth, and that they have been embodying among the Children of God since that day.
Given the manner in which fallen angels seek positions of power over the people, and given the fact that the position of Bishop, in those days, were positions of power, and not positions of religiosity, we can reasonably assume that the great majority of the individuals on that council were fallen angels, apple polishers all, unto the throne of power represented by the Emperor Constantine. These individuals knew nothing about God, other than in their souls, they hated his guts. To stand upon their proclamations, as to what constitutes truth, as if it were a rock, is simply foolish.
The children of God, in every generation, have more common sense in their little pinkies, than that entire council had in their entire heads.
The great challenge for our time, is for the Children of God to recognize that common sense, and throw off those false doctrines that are designed in no small part, to make the Children of God doubt the veracity of their own God-Given common sense.
Jesus Christ is not the ONLY son of God. God sent Jesus to show you and to show me, what we could become, what God expects us to become, if we would but enter into the process of change that Jesus described in his many sermons.
If it can't be said in three sentences, it's not worth listening to.
Golden Eagles sounds like an L. Ron Hubbard follower, with all this "Master" business. I've read, and heard, it ALL before.
Carolyn
There is an enormous amount of scriptural basis for the proposition that the Children of God need to learn to think for themselves. This is the only path that leads a soul to freedom, out of their present condition of bondage to fear based dogma. The fact that the Children of God within the Christian Church are not taught to think for themselves, but rather, to cling to this doctrine or to that doctrine, based on the fear of eternal damnation, or the fear of not being "saved", ought to provide some pause for any sober mind.
Good luck.
And I'll bet that it was a Caesar's salad that you were making.... ;~)
Carolyn
|
Let there be no mistake about this. I did not say that Jesus Christ was NOT a Son of God. I said that he is not the ONLY Son of God. And he was never supposed to be the ONLY Son of God. There is a huge difference here. When we say that Jesus Christ is the ONLY Son of God, we are saying that no person can share in his Sonship. When we say, that Jesus Christ is not the ONLY Son of God, we are saying that other people can share in that Sonship, and this fact does not diminish the Sonship of Jesus Christ. This idea, which represents truth, that other people can share in the Sonship that Jesus Christ enjoys, is fully supported in Scripture. I know I know I know that many people have been brought up believing this idea that Jesus Christ is the ONLY Son of God. But I would just ask you to entertain the possibility, that not everything that you have been taught from your earliest childhood, is actually true. After all, isn't it also true that millions of people were taught, in times past, that the earth was flat, and they believed this from the cradle to the grave, even though it was the most outlandish untruth that could ever be told about a round and spherical world? Take a few moments to consider the scriptural evidence, that shows, that indeed, Jesus Christ is not the ONLY Son of God. Take this series of passages from the Book of John:
“Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? 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. Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; 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? If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him. Therefore they sought again to take him: but he escaped out of their hand ... ” (John 10:32-39) Look closely at this argument that the Master Jesus Christ is using to support his own assertion of Sonship. And let us premise our examination of this argument, with the certain understanding, that Jesus Christ, a true Son of God, would only use the purest truth to support his assertions.
“Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? “ This phrase, “I said, Ye are gods.” is a direct quote from the Jewish Law, (Psalms 82:6.) The person who is speaking here, is God. The “I” in the “I said” is God. By quoting this, the Master Jesus Christ is affirming, that indeed, the person speaking here, in the Law, is God. This is the whole passage:
I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High. (Psalms 82:6.) Now, before proceeding, we must note that many have been confused in regards to how to interpret this statement in scripture. Is God saying that we are actually gods, in terms of our divine status? I mean, that we are actually to be considered gods, i.e. divine beings, with divine powers? Or is this statement to be taken as an expression of possession? In other words, is it to be understood that God is saying, that the people belong to him? This confusion is resolved, when we understand that if this were to be taken in the possessive sense, that the word “gods” would have to be capitalized. And given the fact that word “gods” has never been capitalized by any scholar who translates this passage from the original, we must take this to be a scholarly affirmation of this conclusion as well, that the word “gods” is not a reference to God Himself, i.e. the Father, the Creator. And moreover, for it to be taken in the possessive sense, the wording of the sentence would have to be different. This hinges on the presence of the prefix phrase, “I said.” If this prefix phrase is included, “I said, Ye are gods,” for it to carry the possessive meaning, it would have to be reworded like this, “I said, you are Mine.” Or “I said, you belong to Me.” The presence of the prefix, “I said,” because this identifies only the speaker and not the possessor, requires that in the second part of the sentence, that God would have to refer back to himself as the possessor. In other words, the possessor would have to be clearly identifiable as God. The speaker is clearly identified as God. And so too must the possessor, if this sentence is take on a possessive meaning. So, this statement “I said, Ye are gods,” is to be taken, from the very mouth of God, as a definition of divine being for every child of God. And that is the sense in which Jesus Christ is using it, and therefore, that is another indicator that this is the correct way to interpret it. Reasoning then from this premise in the Law, the Master Jesus continues:
If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; 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? In the three clauses of the first sentence, the Master restates the premise, which is threefold: “If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken ...” Who is “he”? This has to be God. Who is “them”? The people. And who is Jesus referring to here, “unto whom the word of God came”? This is a reverse reference to “them”, i.e. the people, the Children of God who were the original recipients of this Word of God. And in regards to “ ... and the scripture cannot be broken ...” is a reference to the divine assumption, which underlies the Law, that what God has spoken to his children in ancient times, applies to his children in the here and now. Now, in the mind of Jesus Christ, this threefold premise, when taken together, provides a complete and utter refutation of the allegation of blasphemy leveled upon him for the crime of referring to himself as the Son of God. The next statement is a reiteration of the false position of his accusers, which is juxtaposed to the truth of the preceding threefold premise:
“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?” The Master is juxtaposing truth, and falsehood, and it is important to understand that he does not go on to say, “Well therefore, you guys are wrong.” Or, he does not say, “Given my threefold premise, the allegation of blasphemy cannot stand.” He lets the statement stand by itself as a sufficient indictment. Which means that he intends that we draw that conclusion in our own minds. Isn’t that interesting. The Master expects the Children of God to employ the reasoning power of their own minds. Those that can do this, belong to his flock. Those that cannot, do not belong to his flock. And so, are his accusers part of his flock? Look what their next action is:
Therefore they sought again to take him: but he escaped out of their hand ... The minds of his accusers were not able to add two and two to get four. And why is that? It is because they did not give any amount of credence to what God said in the Law. They could have cared less. Now, the important conclusion for us to reach, in regards to the issue before us, which is the question of whether or not Jesus Christ is the ONLY Son of God, is that which leads us to understand that this divine logic applies equally to us today. When we say that Jesus Christ is not the ONLY son of God, that we are sons and daughters of God too, we can use the exact same logic to refute the accusation of blasphemy that is invariably hurled at us. For example,
If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; 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? Put yourself in the shoes of Jesus Christ, and speak those words in the face of those who are so quick to hurl stones at you for believing that God the Father lives in you, and you in Him. And you can see, that this logic, for you, as well as Jesus, refutes all accusations of blasphemy. God the Father sent each of us into this world, even in a sanctified form. Who could argue that every little child that is born into this world is not sanctified by God the Father? Look at the beauty, the purity, and the innocence of every little child. Where does that beauty, purity, and innocence come from? It comes from God. Every child born into this world is sanctified by God. This is one of the key scriptures, that if your mind can add two and two, and get four, will validate this truth, that we are all sons and daughters of God, that Jesus Christ is not the ONLY son of God. And of course, since Jesus Christ has placed his divine approval upon Psalm 82:6, this becomes yet another key scriptural passage. In this passage, God our Father is saying the we are “gods.” What does that mean? That means, that in God’s Mind, we are not mortal bound piles of sinful refuse, but rather, that we have monumental levels of divine potential to realize. Moreover, the term “gods” refers to a being with divine powers. And when he tells us furthermore, that we are all Children of God, I would ask all of you to take a look around the world that God has created for us. There are many children in this world, and when God uses the word “Children” he intends us to apply a definition to that word that is most familiar to all of us. In this regard, isn’t every child a son, or a daughter, of its particular parent? The term “Children” describes a large category of persons, which is further subdivided into sons and daughters. Now, do we all represent the stature of Sonship exhibited by Jesus Christ? It is very obvious that all of us are operating well below our potential in this regard. But is this a condition that the Master Jesus Christ wants to continue? Absolutely not. Look what he says here:
"Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." (Matthew 5:48) Does that sound like someone who expects us to operate below our true divine potential? I don’t think so. Take a look at this one:
"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father." (John 14:12) Does this sound like the Master is prophesying continued weakness, and powerlessness on behalf of his little brothers and sisters? It sounds like to me, that the Master is saying here that every one who believes in his example, and follows it, will be able to achieve the same stature of Sonship that he enjoys. Again, if your mind can add two and two to get four, that will be your conclusion as well. So, there is certainly a distinction to be made between sonship and Sonship, but it is only a matter of degree. There is no insurmountable barrier between the one, and the other. Any barrier that might exist between the sonship and daughtership that we all enjoy (as Children of God), and the Sonship exemplified by Jesus Christ, does not reside within the mind of Jesus Christ, but only in the minds of some very foolish men. And the Apostle John, one of Jesus’ most closest of disciples, probably the one who understood him the best, said this, and this is the clincher:
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name. (John 1:12) Some will immediately point out that the term “sons” is not capitalized here. This represents an error common to all scriptural translations. The first point in this regard, is the fact that in Psalms 82:6, we already have the affirmation that we are already “lower case” sons and daughters of God. Jesus Christ verified the veracity of Psalms 82:6 when he used it as a premise in his argument that we referred to above. So, no one has to give power to anyone to make us sons and daughters of God. God has already declared us to be that. Therefore, the only other possible interpretation for this passage, is that John, the writer of this gospel, meant for this reference to “sonship” to carry a capital “S” to signify that the Jesus Christ had the power to raise his little brothers and sisters into the same level of Sonship wherein he resided. And of course, we have already pointed out those statements by Jesus Christ, which indicate that he believed that he had that power, and that he was ready to use it, whenever anyone could come to actually believe that they could be so raised. But, since this ONLY Son of God falsehood has been around since the first Council of Niceae in 325 A.D., no bible translator would dare to make that a capital “Sons” fearing the inevitable career destroying label of heretic would be plastered onto his forehead. Anyway, this is the clincher (with the correction):
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the Sons of God, even to them that believe on his name. (John 1:12) Here we see, that in the expression of his own Divine Sonship, that Jesus Christ has the power, given to him by the Father, to lift his less developed brothers and sisters, into the full stature of Sonship that he enjoys. And this is the central truth behind this scripture:
"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father." (John 14:12) The truth is, that we are all Children of God. That makes us all sons and daughters of God as well. The Scripture verifies this. The only question is how to get from the sonship which defines a condition of divine potential, to the Sonship that is fully realized, and expressionable in this world. The truth is, that we are supposed to reach that level of fully expressionable Sonship. And this was what Jesus came to demostrate: that every lower case son and daughter, through the intercessory power given to him by the Father, could become an uppercase Son and Daughter of God, and use the power associated with that estate, to transform the world into the Kingdom of God. And the Scripture verifies this in the words of the Master Jesus Christ himself, as noted. Those who twist scripture all out of shape to deny this truth, are the ones who are denying to the world the great blessing that Jesus Christ intended to bring to this world, through his example for sure, but most importantly through the efforts of all of his followers to follow that example, and to fully realize that example. |
God uses better grammar.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.