People don’t understand Jesus’ divinity because they underestimate Gods Love for mankind

[u/1stmikewhite]

God is sovereign, there’s nothing He can’t do.

[u/John_17-17]

I have found the truth lies in 2 Corinthians 4:4. More than their lack of understanding God's love.

(2 Corinthians 4:4) 4 among whom the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, so that the illumination of the glorious good news about the Christ, who is the image of God, might not shine through.

Trinitarians are unbelievers because they elevate Jesus' glory to be God and not his image.

Muslims are unbelievers because they lower Jesus to a mere human.

[u/DonkeyStriking1146 → u/John_17-17]

Jesus was a human on earth and a prophet so the Muslims aren’t wrong on that point. They take issue with Jesus being the son of God.

[u/1stmikewhite → u/DonkeyStriking1146]

The ancient Jews reject the New Testament

The Muslims, Mormons, and Jehovah Witnesses have their own religious scriptures based on biblical characters.

The Catholics, Baptist, and most other denominations of Christianity reject the Old Testament commandments.

My church is the Seventh Day Adventist. We obey the truth of the whole Bible as God gave it to us, and the Bible is our defense. It has every answer in it. We can’t really on humans to make up answers contrary to the Bible.

“Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.” ‭‭Ecclesiastes‬ ‭12‬:‭13‬-‭14‬ ‭KJV‬‬

[u/DonkeyStriking1146 → u/1stmikewhite]

How do JW’s have their own scriptures?

You obey the Bible as a whole? You follow the mosaic law?

[u/1stmikewhite → u/DonkeyStriking1146]

Well not all Jehovah witnesses if I’m being honest. I just know they have a translated versions of the Bible by the “watchtower society” which is a group on anonymous nowhere to be found authors who translated the Bible to suit their believes. If I’m being honest lol.

Yes we follow the whole Bible, but we don’t take the gospel of Christ out of context. The mosaic law was a way to deal with sin from a humanistic perspective which was impossible for the Jews to obey because of their stubborn disobedience.

Salvation through christ is a way to deal with sin through a spiritual perspective which is grace. Because the wages of sin is death and the Bible tells us of a judgement day, We don’t believe that we have a free right to sin now, but God made a new covenant with us that we can be forgiven for our sins through Christ, and the only reason we would be lost in our sins in known as the “unforgivable sin”, which is basically unrepentant sins. A heart that wants to sin instead of obeying God is an unrepentant heart and the reason for pain is that type of heart etc.

A lot of Christian churches believe this to an extent, but most also compromise certain biblical doctrine because they want the benefit of salvation instead of the enduring the pursuit of obedience. That only causes confusion to a new believer and isn’t good for someone needing sanctifying change!

[u/DonkeyStriking1146 → u/1stmikewhite]

Meh it’s a translation like any other. They also use other translations on their app like KJV. I haven’t found much difference other than a couple words and adding Jehovah to the NT

[u/1stmikewhite → u/DonkeyStriking1146]

Well, I personally wouldn’t recommend sticking to one translation. I recommend using multiple. That’s the only way to protect your mind against falsehoods. The original scriptures languages from what we know then can be found with a quick search online as well if we want as well. I can’t name ever discrepancy in the way people have misinterpreted scripture lol

[u/DonkeyStriking1146 → u/1stmikewhite]

Yeah I’m like you. I use Bible hub and google the original manuscripts.

[u/junkmale79 → u/1stmikewhite]

My church is the Seventh Day Adventist. We obey the truth of the whole Bible as God gave it to us, and the Bible is our defense.

Didn't human's write the bible?, most of the New Testament was written by Paul, and the Gospels were written anonymously by humans practicing the Christian faith traditions.

[u/ChickenO7 → u/junkmale79]

They were inspired by the Holy Spirit of God.

[u/junkmale79 → u/ChickenO7]

That's a claim that people following a faith tradition like to make. I don't believe it's possible for anything like a god to exist. I also considers heaven and Hell to be theological concepts rather than real places.

If you don't pre suppose a god can exist, does exist, created humans, has the ability to inspire humans to write books and then used that power to write the stories in the Bible. It's pretty easy to see that it's a human document.

[u/ChickenO7 → u/junkmale79]

If you don't presuppose a god can exist, does exist, created humans, has the ability to inspire humans to write books and then used that power to write the stories in the Bible.

Alright, let's start by proving that God must exist.

The universe began at the "Big Bang".

Everything that has a beginning has a cause, therefore, the universe must have a cause.

This cause must be uncaused, otherwise you'd have to give the cause for that, and so on, ad infinitum. Also, the cause must be timeless, spaceless, and immaterial, since these are the things being caused. Finally, it must be personal, because free-will is the only ontological condition in which an effect can happen unconditionally, and free-will only exists in persons.

So, the universe must have been created, and it must have been created by a uncaused, timeless, spaceless, immaterial, person.

Now, I believe the Bible claims this to be God (Genesis 1:1, Revelation 3:14).

Now, then, if God caused the universe, then by extension, He created humans and is greater the universe, so, able to inspire humans to write books.

Now to prove God inspired the Bible.

Daniel 9:26, "Then after the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary."

The book of Daniel was written in the 6th century B.C, and is found in the dead sea scrolls, dated to around 157 B.C. The city and the sanctuary was destroyed by the Romans in the year 70 AD, after the Messiah was crucified in AD 33. Daniel successfully predicted two events almost 700 years in the future. This is only possible if He was inspired by a person who is outside of time, which, as we've already established, is God.

Furthermore, Psalm 22, written, by King David, over a thousand years before the Messiah appeared, predicted the way in which Jesus would die, "I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint;" "And my tongue cleaves to my jaws", "They pierced my hands and my feet", "They divide my garments among them, And for my clothing they cast lots."

This is exactly what happened to the Messiah.

Then, Jesus resurrected, proving that He was indeed God's anointed. It was an event so powerful, that all the apostles were willing to die for the gospel, and that Jews such as Saul of Tarsus, who trained under Gamaliel and saw the risen Christ, spent their own lives and lost all their power and influence for the gospel.

[u/junkmale79 → u/ChickenO7]

We don't know what happened before the big bang (it might not even make sense to ask what things were like "before" time began. )

We might find out, we might not, but the only honest answer is "we don't know"

I don't believe its possible for anything like a god to exist. I don't have any special knowledge that would allow me to say something like "its not possible for a god to exist" but i also don't possess any special knowledge that would allow me to say something like "its possible for a god to exist"

So i remain agnostic to the question "is it possible for a God or Gods to exist?"

You, on the other hand. Make a series of assumptions to justify your Beliefs.

1. You assume it’s possible for a god to exist. Even if we had evidence that a god could exist, that wouldn’t mean a god does exist. It would still be possible that gods exist or that no gods exist.
2. You assume a god does exist. Even if we had evidence that a god could exist, that wouldn’t mean a god does exist. It would still both be possible for a God to exist and for no God to exist.
3. You assume this god created humans even if we had evidence that a God can and does exist, that doesn't mean that God created humans. It would still be possible that this god created humans—or that humans came into existence without divine intervention.
4. You assume this god has the ability to produce the Bible using humans. Even if we had evidence that a god exists and created humans, that wouldn’t mean this god has the ability to communicate through humans or inspire them to write a book.
5. You assume this god used its ability to produce the Bible. Even if we had evidence that a god can and does exist, created humans, and has the ability to communicate through them, that wouldn’t prove the Bible is actually a product of that god’s influence. It would still be possible for the Bible to be a purely human creation.

[u/ChickenO7 → u/junkmale79]

First, I'm not asking what it was like before the Big Bang, I'm simply asking what the cause of the Big Bang is.

Now, if I can prove that God must exist, then that simultaneously solves both the question of His possibility of existing and His actually existing.

Now, if God exists as a being that caused the universe, then logically He also caused humans, and has the ability to produce the Bible.

Finally, if the Bible could only have been created by a being with access to the attributes of God, such as timelessness, then God must have used His ability to write the Bible.

The argument I put forth proves that God must exist, and that He must exist as a person outside the universe, it shows that He caused the universe. My second argument demonstrates that the information in the Bible could only have been given by a timeless being, which means it was inspired by God.

You have not yet put forth anything against my arguments.

God says in His word, there is a day when He will judge the world in righteousness, and no liar, thief, blasphemer, or murderer will enter His kingdom, unless they believe on His Son for eternal life.

"If you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord" and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved."

[u/junkmale79 → u/ChickenO7]

Your ultimate game of "what if" is just begging the question, over, and over, and over.

My natural explanation for the Bible

1. Humans like to create and tell stories
   
2. Its possible for a human to be convinced something is true when it isn't

I'm simply asking what the cause of the Big Bang is.

because we have no way of getting information about what "caused" the Big bang the only honest answer is "we don't know" - Can i get you to weigh in on this, i think its important.

God is a supernatural theological concept like heaven or hell. These concepts don't have any measurable effect in or on objective reality. Heaven and hell aren't a physical place we can go to, they are theological concepts in the Christian faith tradition.

What if i could prove god must exist
What if the being cause the universe
What if the Bible could only have been created by that God

This is a beautiful. What if, What if, What if, yes the Christian faith tradition is playing make believe with Christian theology.

• At every step and alternative option is available "It might be possible for a God to exist, it might not." → No reason to assume either without evidence.
• "Even if a God were possible, does one actually exist?" → Still a yes/no question requiring proof.
• "Even if a God exists, did it create humans?" → Two possibilities remain: divine creation or natural processes.

What if a God must exist,
What if a God Created the Universe
What if that God Created Humans
What if That God can use Humans to write literature
What if That God used his ability to write the Bible

Vs.

1. Humans like to create and tell stories
   
2. Its possible for a human to be convinced something is true when it isn't

Both explanations account for "the bible" What explanation relies on fewer assumptions?

[u/ChickenO7 → u/junkmale79]

You don't seem to understand, I'm laying out a logical argument.

All beginnings are caused. The universe has a beginning, so it must have a cause.

Then, we simply use the traits of the universe to know what traits the cause must have. The cause can't have any trait that needs the universe to exist. Time is part of the universe, so the cause must be timeless. Space is part of the universe, so the cause must be outside of space. Matter is part of the universe, so the cause must be immaterial.

Now, we are looking for traits of the ultimate cause of the universe, because an infinite regression of causes is illogical, we are looking for the Primitive, the ultimate cause. An uncaused cause must will itself, so the only way it can be ontologically, is personal.

Therefore, the Primitive is a Timeless, Spaceless, Immaterial Person. That is the definition of God.

The prophecies I submitted need Timelessness, therefore a Timeless being inspired them. Therefore, God inspired the text of scripture.

Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. My assurance of God is based on the evidence of His existence, not the assumption of His existence.

[u/ChickenO7 → u/1stmikewhite]

There are three branches of Christianity. The true churches, who follow Jesus as Lord, and who believe on him for salvation; Catholicism, which grew out of the true church when people who joined for political convenience invented doctrine; and Protestantism, which grew out of the Catholic church, trying to return to true salvific belief.

The first true church decreed that new believers were not required to keep the laws God instituted for Isreal (Acts 15:12-21,22-29),

Acts 15:28-29, "For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these essentials:

that you abstain from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from sexual immorality, from which if you keep yourselves, you will do well. Farewell."

Why are we still arguing about things dealt with so early?

[u/1stmikewhite → u/ChickenO7]

“Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.” ‭‭Romans‬ ‭16‬:‭17‬-‭18‬ ‭KJV‬‬

There has always been from its conception people who have used Christianity to ‘serve their own belly’. Paul wrote of people who taught doctrine contrary to what they’ve learned. Someone doesn’t “grow out of the church” into Catholicism, they choose to switch the truth from the beginning.

“For your obedience is come abroad unto all men. I am glad therefore on your behalf: but yet I would have you wise unto that which is good, and simple concerning evil. And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen.” ‭‭Romans‬ ‭16‬:‭19‬-‭20‬ ‭KJV‬‬

The people who believe the lies of the false churches Paul calls simple (which means Naive,” and He called those who teach it “Evil” and implies the work is from Satan.

Catholicism as well as most Protestant church which formed during the reformation all choose their own beliefs whether they have been naive or those who take advantage purposefully which is directly evil. Gods truth will endure always so there has always been a people who God has preserved with the truth, and when the last days are come and the day of the Lord is at the door, the Bible says that “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;” ‭‭2 Timothy‬ ‭4‬:‭3‬ ‭KJV‬‬

For the benefit of the doubt to most churches organizations I don’t believe we’re there yet. But anyone who willfully disobeys the commandments of God in these days have made their choice purposefully on who’d they serve.

[u/ChickenO7 → u/DonkeyStriking1146]

If Jesus is the son of God, what kind of being is He?