Name:seasickgirl •
Title: Conflict with Gospels? •
Date posted: 02/27/07 14:59
Q: How does this discovery relate to the written accounts as found in the Gospels, which descibe the burial, ressurection, and ascension of Jesus?
Name:followingchrist82 •
Date: 02/27/07 16:21
A: It absolutely conflicts. However, since I believe these "discoveries" to be money making assumptions based on no evidence whatsoever, it means nothing to me. This is not Jesus' family tomb and frankly, I feel Jacobovici and James Cameron are being disrespectful trying to make money off of something with no evidence. If you don't want to believe in Jesus, fine, but don't act like ossuaries that contain the most common names of First Century Judea as evidence that this is Jesus Christ's family tomb. What nonsense.
Name:unapimper •
Date: 02/27/07 16:28
A: followingchrist82, if you are so interested in making this documentary to be baloney, maybe you should tune in this sunday and watch it first. Many of your perceived "nonesense" are already addressed in the movie. Yes, Jesus, Mary, Mariamne, Matthew, Judah and james are all common names around that time, but what are the chances of them all being found TOGETHER in the SAME TOMB? Very very slim. FYI yes I've seen the movie in a prescreening in Toronto.
Name:jimmyhambone •
Date: 02/27/07 16:42
A: Would the odds that these names being found together increase or decrease if the commonality of the names is higher? Seems like, statistically, it was just a matter of time before a tomb, somewhere, would be discovered with these specific names. You should never trust a site with googles ads, from my experience, and their disclaimer says it all:
[i]Statements and opinions expressed in our forum, articles and elsewhere on this site are not necessarily those of JesusFamilyTomb.Com and should not be considered facts.[/i]
Name:followingchrist82 •
Date: 02/27/07 17:00
A: Unapimper,
Your statistics are rebutted quite nicely at www.extremetheology.com
They are based on several assumptions that are not evident. And I happen to be friends with Gary Habermas and Ben Witherington III, two of the most famous scholars concerning the historical Jesus and his resurrection. They have kept me up to date on their studies. They have already read all of the evidence and know, like me, it's just to make money.
Name:Peas •
Date: 02/27/07 17:37
A: There will always be plausable deniability for christians to discredit any finds regarding christianity and jesus.
Name:Tara •
Date: 02/27/07 17:44
A: This is to followingchrist82 I love reading and I am trying not to blindly take sides. I am a christian who is trying to find the truth within the bible, but also filter what man has done to it through time.
If you could share these facts that would be great, also it would really strengthen what your saying. There are so many angry people spewing hot air, it would be great if you seperated yourself from them.
Name:zulu •
Date: 02/27/07 18:07
A: jimmyhambone, stop trolling dude :-]
Name:AmyW •
Date: 02/27/07 18:21
A: I agree with Tara that if you present fact that irrefutably discredits the finding of these archaeologists please present them here. I would love to read them. There ARE discrepancies and contradictions in the Bible. This has been proven. The Bible, after all, was written by man taking dictation from God. Could it not be reasonably assumed that the people who wrote the books of the Bible could have made some huge mistakes in their dictation? These people WERE HUMAN. Humans are sinful by nature & certainly not perfect in anything that they do right? Another statement worth mentioning is the statement in the Proviso section of this website that states that "“The Lost Tomb Of Jesus” does not challenge the fact of the Resurrection. It does, however, ask viewers to consider the possibility that it occurred from another tomb.". I think that they key word here is CONSIDER. It would be very sad indeed if those narrow minded Christians were denied entrance into Heaven because they refused to open themselves up to the truth, albeit not the same truth as that taught over centuries of organized religion.
Name:AmyW •
Date: 02/27/07 18:41
A: Organized religion is that which has taken the original scriptures, texts, etc and discarded what they (ie Roman Catholic Church, Constantine,etc)did not acknowledge as palatable doctrine. The remaining texts have been translated in accordance to the ideals of the organization doing the translating. So in many cases original texts have been cast aside to make way for a mainstream religion that is acceptable to the masses. This has been occuring for centuries. So where does that leave God's people? Those who truly wish to know God's word? It leaves them ignorant of the truth and what God truly wants us to know. Many of these texts that have been cast aside are crucial documentation of our life's meaning and what we have been sent here to do. So then, what if God is allowing these archaeological finds so that he can bring his people back in line with his true teachings?
Name:AmyW •
Date: 02/27/07 19:00
A: One more comment and I will stop. Organized religion traps those who observe it inside of a virtual box whereby those people's conscious thoughts are those of the person who is preaching, teaching the concepts of the Bible. This box has no room for any modifications. Therefore it prevents traditional christians from ever contemplating the idea that mistakes could have been made in translations or certain ideas could have become skewed over time. Those who ascribe to organized religion refuse to accept what could possibly be the best proof of Jesus' existence ever found.
Name:NormaPorter •
Date: 02/27/07 19:24
A: I find it strange that with no physical proof people can believe anything they are told to. But, put some proof on the table, especially if it is not what they wanted to hear and they will agrue it to the death.
Name:Wolter •
Date: 02/27/07 19:27
A: Physical Proof as in Archaeological Proof? Judeo-Christianity has Archaeological Proof. In fact, I can take it further; you need look no further than the very earth itself created by God.
Name:MWAnderson •
Date: 03/01/07 3:25
A: Oh my. I guess at this point I just have ask...
Is there a Christian out there who understands and practices the art of logical debate?
Name:osirius608 •
Date: 03/01/07 21:26
A: MWAnderson: when it comes to logic and belief, it's like oil and water...
NormaPorter: I agree
followingchrist82: if it was being done for money, why tv? the money's in da movies, always has been
AmyW: keep an open mind, I agree with you
One last thought:
If a person was to be resurrected in the flesh, wouldn't that equate to reincarnation? And if that's true, isn't reincarnation impossible according to Christian doctrine? Hmmm, do I see contradiction here?
Name:roy •
Date: 03/04/07 16:39
A: I wrote from Istanbul Turkey.
Referring your topic related to James Cameron’s new documentary about Jesus Christ. I describe my ideas as the following;
Jesus was a human being who was created resembling creation as Adam, made as God‘s speacial envoy and word. He was subject to death and resurrection as all other humans at the dooms day.[3:59]
He was not killed or hanged but the scenery was recepted as if he was hanged. In reality, he was never hanged, the person who hanged was resembled to him in the views of the enemy Israelites.[4:157,158]
He was not killed by enemies but survived till the natural death. [19:33]God has taken his life. They were not defeated by the enemies but on the contrary him and his supporter disciples and israelites defeated the enemies.[61:14]
These are the statements written 1430 years ago by Quran. It is believed by heart by billions of muslims, as a prerequisite to be accepted into Islam. Maybe out of bias, or fear of sameness they prefer to ignore what is claimed. It is surprising that modern world is barely aware of this fact or they blind their eyes with superstition. Christ, he disciples and his followers were also muslims who were ordered with salat (prayer) and zekat ( voluntary wealth distribution).
The views above is supported with the related verses of Quran as below. Some of the ideas has been tought by various western writers,which are noted as well.
You may further make your research in english Quran at the link below.
For example ; word of “Christ” I found this link: http://www.kuranmeali.com/arama.asp?kelim-e=Christ&meal=yusufali&sure=hepsi
word- of “Jesus” I found this link:
http://www.kuranmeali.com/arama.asp?ke-lime=jesus&meal=yusufali&sure=hepsi
Sura- - 4 Women (Al-Nesaa')
[4:157] And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger - They slew him not nor crucified, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain,
[4:158] Instead, GOD raised him to Him; GOD is Almighty, Most Wise.
[4:159] Everyone among the people of the scripture was required to believe in him before his death. On the Day of Resurrection, he will be a witness against them.
[4:171] O people of the scripture, do not transgress the limits of your religion, and do not say about GOD except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was a messenger of GOD, and His word that He had sent to Mary, and a revelation from Him. Therefore, you shall believe in GOD and His messengers. You shall not say, "Trinity." You shall refrain from this for your own good. GOD is only one god. Be He glorified; He is much too glorious to have a son. To Him belongs everything in the heavens and everything on earth. GOD suffices as Lord and Master.
Sura - 19 Mary (Maryam)
[19:33] And peace be upon me the day I was born, the day I die, and the day I get resurrected."
[19:34] That was Jesus, the son of Mary, and this is the truth of this matter, about which they continue to doubt.
[19:35] It does not befit GOD that He begets a son, be He glorified. To have anything done, He simply says to it, "Be," and it is.
[19:36] He also proclaimed, "GOD is my Lord and your Lord; you shall worship Him alone. This is the right path."
*19:36 This is similar to the statement attributed to Jesus in the Gospel of John 20:17.
Sura - 5 The Feast (Al-Ma'edah)
[5:72] Pagans indeed are those who say that GOD is the Messiah, son of Mary. The Messiah himself said, "O Children of Israel, you shall worship GOD; my Lord and your Lord." Anyone who sets up any idol beside GOD, GOD has forbidden Paradise for him, and his destiny is Hell. The wicked have no helpers.
*Look at the sameness of Kuran: Sura - 5 ( The Feast ) Al-Ma'edah and Bible Matta 7:21-23
*5:72-76 In John 20:17, we see that Jesus taught that he was neither God, nor the son of God. Many theologians have concluded, after careful research, that today's Christianity is not the same Christianity taught by Jesus. Two outstanding books on this subject are "The Myth of God Incarnate" (The Westminster Press, Philadelphia, 1977) and The "Mythmaker" (Harper & Row, New York, 1986). On the front jacket of "The Mythmaker" we read the following statement:
" ...Hyam Maccoby presents new arguments to support the view that Paul, not Jesus, was the founder of Christianity....it was Paul alone who created a new religion through his vision of Jesus as a divine Saviour who died to save humanity."
Sura - 3 The Amramites ( Ali-'Imran)
[3:55] Thus, GOD said, "O Jesus, I am terminating your life, raising you to Me, and ridding you of the disbelievers. I will exalt those who follow you above those who disbelieve, till the Day of Resurrection. Then to Me is the ultimate destiny of all of you, then I will judge among you regarding your disputes.
[3:59] The example of Jesus, as far as GOD is concerned, is the same as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him, "Be," and he was.
[3:60] This is the truth from your Lord; do not harbor any doubts.
Sura - 61 The Column (Al-Suff)
[61:6] Recall that Jesus, son of Mary, said, "O Children of Israel, I am GOD's messenger to you, confirming the Torah and bringing good news of a messenger to come after me whose name will be even more praised (Ahmad)." Then, when he showed them the clear proofs, they said, "This is profound magic."
*Sameness of Sura - 61 The Column (Al-Suff) and Bible İsiah 45:21,22
Psalm 99:9 Timothy 1:17 good news fro sneding another prophet called Ahmad(Hz Mohammad) or Pheraklid (praised)= Ahmad
[61:14] O you who believe, be GOD's supporters, like the disciples of Jesus, son of Mary. When he said to them, "Who are my supporters towards GOD," they said, "We are GOD's supporters." Thus, a group from the Children of Israel believed, and another group disbelieved. We helped those who believed against their enemy, until they won.
Sura - 3 The Amramites ( Ali-'Imran)
[3:51] "GOD is my Lord and your Lord; you shall worship Him alone. This is the right path."
[3:52] When Jesus sensed their disbelief, he said, "Who are my supporters towards GOD?" The disciples said, "We are GOD's supporters; we believe in GOD, and bear witness that we are submitters / muslims."
*3:51 This is precisely what Jesus is quoted to say throughout the New Testament. See for example the Gospel of John 20:17, and the book "Jesus: Myths and Message" by Lisa Spray, Ch. 4 (Universal Unity, Fremont, CA 1992).
Name:GaryR54 •
Date: 03/05/07 5:49
A: followingchrist82 says: "since I believe these "discoveries" to be money making assumptions based on no evidence whatsoever, it means nothing to me."
Obviously, you haven't even seen the film, otherwise you'd know what the evidence is.
Name:KRS •
Date: 03/05/07 6:45
A: MWAnderson, yes, I do use logic in my arguments. However, I find that a lot of those who argue against Christianity on these types of issues have a hard time filtering between their presuppositions and their conclusions. Most non-Christians have built a superstructure of belief on development of the New Testament that is similar to the views expressed on this site, but they are as ideologically influenced as any Christian is in deriving those conclusions. If you want debate, check the point I made on the textual error underlying one of the key pieces of their evidence (I can't remember where I posted it at the moment). Since the difference between most reasonable members of the theological left and most conservative theologians on the date of the canonical gospels is only twenty years, and the amount of activity that must take place under the theological lefts model, I find this reconstruction very difficult to swallow logically.
As to the OP, this is a complete contradiction of the gospels, and requires one to "cherry pick" the evidence cited from the NT (a term used by literary scholars to cite what helps your case, and ignore what does not); IMO, thats one of the major problems in these types of films, books, etc. becaus the method they use is somewhat random.
Jimmyhambone, there are questions about the stats that I saw on another site, but as my background is in NT studies, I can't answer that completely, however, the reference to Mariamne is a major problem, becuase they are drawing this from a source that most credible scholars will find of questionable use in any study of first century Christianity, and the text crit argument I made elsewhere, when compared to this makes their statistical evidence useless.
AmyW, you are actually more closeminded than most Christians I know; I've met many believers (including other scholars) who have questioned all these things and come to the reasoned conclusion that Jesus is Who He said He is.
Name:Jim •
Date: 03/05/07 11:17
A: If Jesus had been moved to a family tomb, the Romans, with the steadfast push of the Rabbis, would have uncovered the plot. We know by the Gospel’s account that the reigning authority had already foreseen the possibility of removing the body to prove Jesus’ Messiahship:
Mt 27:62-64, “…the chief priests and Pharisees came together unto Pilate, Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again. Command therefore that the sepulchre be made sure until the third day, lest his disciples come by night, and steal him away, and say unto the people, He is risen from the dead: so the last error shall be worse than the first.”
The movie indicated that Jesus’ remains were taken (i.e., stolen) from the 1st tomb and relocated to one at issue. If I were a Pharisee, I would have traced the family records to the “family” tomb so that I could easily discredit the idea of the Christ. Jews were meticulous record keepers and they would have surely maintained an ongoing investigation into the whereabouts of His body. Also, the highly unique tomb graphics would have spurred some curiosity at the minimum, so if the disciples were trying to cover their tracks and hide a stolen body, why make a tomb stand out so obviously?
As to riding the makers of the movie, I give them credit for attempting such a magnificent feat! They were not in this endeavor to prove a point as much as they were to make some cash and I think they did a decent job of presenting their argument. One thing is clear, and that is how they manipulated the statistics to prove their case, which is what advertisers do around the world to sell their points of view. I liked the fact that the panel of experts (non Christian affiliation) easily saw through the ruse. From a Christian perspective, as with the Da Vinci Code, anyone wishing to evaluate the presented evidence needs to go to the Bible and read it from cover to cover to make an informed decision. Conversely, we Christians need to keep an open mind to very real possibilities. Contrary to popular belief, Christianity is not in opposition to valid scientific proof, but is actually substantiated by it. The laws of physics, archeology, and never-ending universe are testaments to Intelligent Design:
Rom 1:20, “For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, [even] his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:”
Where we often make mistakes is in the assumption that we must somehow protect our belief systems from question. Truth is truth and God’s word needs no defense. To try and stifle other possibilities leads one back into the Dark Ages, where “Christianity” was certain it was “Infallible,” the world was flat, and the solar system revolved around earth.
Name:Achaney •
Date: 03/09/07 8:24
A: There is a new book out called "Eloquent Shadows" on www.lulu.com written by a freemason. where secrets are revealed about Jesus and other things.
John the Baptist even questions if Jesus is the messiah. He sends his own disciples to ask Jesus in Mathew 11:5; Jesus adds extra words (the dead are raised up), which is not found in Isaiah 61:1 (which Jesus qoutes from as understood by christian scholars) or any old testament version such as the septuagint and masoretic text. But it was found in the Dead Sea scrolls, proving that he was an essene. Even Lee Strobel unknownignly admits this, that these extra words were only found in the Dead Sea Scrolls, proving his case that Jesus was the messiah in his book, "The Case for Christ", but all it proves is that Jesus had access to the Dead Sea Scrolls because he was one, an essene! Thats hilariously accurate!
Name:roy •
Date: 03/11/07 13:17
A: Why should God be so complex not to be understood by common man? Does He address only to the scholars? If so why He held the common responsible what He says and forbids? Is He so cruel to punish those from which reasons that common people has no clue to understand?
Islam has brought the most clear understanding of God and definition of Christ for whom who wants to find out or whom God wants to reveal and let him be.
Saying God is three in one context but, One made up of three, no one can realise what is going on… How is three agree on ruling on universe that there is no disagreement between them? If God decides to extinct Jesus and Virgin Marry who will stop Him from it? How three in spiritual and matter decided to come together to send somepart of three among those miniscule sized peasants and didnt guess one piece of God will be killed there by torture? Wasnt there any other way to save people from sins rather to sacrifice one piece of God? How was it done before Christ (are they only comunity to be saved as majority of jews also claim as favored nation)? One of gods gave up divine and such sort of things are just fables from the Greek mythology. Is there any difference with Zeus who hypothetically lived on Olympos, some other god had stolen fire from him, and such nonsence and complex stories. (Some Greeks gave rebirth a new religion on that belief and ask recognition by parliament in greece today.)
Please be simple and come to your senses to find real God in your heart with peace. It will calm you down if you found Him. Searching thousands of pages but not spending time on the most referred and read book ~Quran is so big loss for you.
Christian Church claims The gospels, most especially John, indicate that Christ was not taken because the "peasants" (actually the temple guard and probably some Roman soldiers as well) over powered Him, but because He went to his death willingly. “
Guard, soldier ect.. has no difference than peasant comparing with God as former are made up all from human. No matter what is the position of human ~ temple guard or Roman soldiers or even todays atomic powered soldiers may not possibly over power even small evidence of God let alone God himself.
“Going to his death willing” is another made-up story. Too unlogical to be devine. All science, philosophy, antropology, history, logic, nature, biolgy, cosmology, physics, theology (christianity except this incident) strives the essence of existance not extinction, natural selection, wish of living - not dieing.
On the contrary Christ must ask God to live on to save his people by preaching (He lived and won over non believers~Islamic view, otherwise no christians would have been mentioned today~my opinion). Moses, and Abraham has been saved by God with two miracles ( Red sea divide and fire becoming serene.)
If our prophet does something “going to his death willingly” we must wish the same thing as good followers. Why don’t you dare to wish some unlogical thing then?;
We will all go death willingly to save others!!
I only believe the brotherhood to be adhered by man of any race, wealth, religion or sex. Beause they are equal and only be better than other in terms of observing God’s wishes. The religions come from same God although Jewish and Christians refuse to accept it, Islam is saying similar things plus improvement open to scientific evidence and criticism of any sort (except depicting or dishonoring holy figures). Actually encouraging debate.
God does not need peoples recognition of the latest versions of what He says. That’s why He says keep your own faith as Christian or Jew but don’t commit sin of Trinity or false claims against Me or Jesus because I am the only One. He does not accept religions from those who curses Him in that Trias way, and will not forgive those (only sin NOT to be forgiven) .
If the trias is not accepted at Byzantene time Council 300 AD. It would have been less likely to get acceptance by plural gods greek society of that time and would have been difficult to unite them. Imperialism was on the scene that time, not now.
On the other hand if Church didnt defend their position strongly against other religions, there would have been no reason of existence of them and the priests and kings had to give up huge wealth and power over society. The latter religion forbids any devine class, rabbis, or super powered ruler, not to mention some papacy who claim to be the shadow and replica of God on earth! (another form of Imperialism)
I hope it helps the claims of Jesus was a dieable, marryable, child conceive causable and tomb burriable (yet to be proven) human with flesh and blood created by God’s word to Mary.
Name:Charles Turpin •
Date: 03/17/07 21:48
A: The Quran was established much,much later than Christianity and does not embrace the same biblical or theological understanding of the existance of God. In all do- respect for all religions, we cannot make such comparisons and the two must learn to coexist in the peace taught by the Prince of Peace. God may be using all this to bring us together.
Peace, Chas.
Name:BMillikan •
Date: 03/18/07 22:39
A: Charles:
That is foretold in the Bible that there will eventually be a one World religion that embraces all religions (even a watered down Biblical view, I imagine). Jews and true Christians will be the only one's left out of the one world religion. I believe in Peace as much as the next person, but I cannot believe there will ever be true Peace as Christians and Muslims do not agree in the accounts of Jesus (just as an example).
Name:Mark-Tao •
Date: 03/19/07 23:28
A: To answer the question posed by this thread, it's not the discovery but the interpretation of the discovery that differs from the accounts found in the Gospels. The tomb is still a tomb, even if you don't think the body of Jesus ever rested there. Someone's remains were discovered there.
I don't understand people who need to ascribe greed to the makers of the documentary. It is possible to be wrong about a thing and have the best of motives. Greed doesn't need to be a factor.
I'm not so convinced that you can dismiss the idea of a Jesus tomb simply by saying that the authorities would have discovered it if it existed. That may or may not be true. It's a loose assumption, and can not be the basis for a conclusion to the argument.
You could just as easily say that if Paul had been correct then Jesus would have already returned. He preached that you didn't really need to get married, unless you couldn't control your sex drive. He explained that Jesus would be returning soon, and that investing too much in this world was foolish. That was 2000 years ago.
Just think about it. If God has given us the freedom to create our own lives, why would he show up all of a sudden on a cloud and rule the world like a King. He seems to value freedom. I can't imagine that he would all of a sudden want to rule over human beings, like a very human king. I think he/she wants us (his/her children) to grow up and take care of each other and the planet we live on.
Name:sam •
Date: 03/27/07 23:52
A: Conflict with the Gospels?.
"How does this discovery relate to the written accounts as found in the Gospels, which descibe the burial, ressurection, and ascension of Jesus?".
The many discoveries in the past few decades, brought us much closer to the truth. we know now the truth about the story of Judas, and we understand more about the place that Mary Magdalene holds among the desciples and her relation to Jesus. and the discovery of the tomb, some accept it others deny it , is real and had the truth which been supported by scientific means.
But we should not forget that the side who deny every finding today, are the one who accept everything that comes to them from their early fathers in Rome, those who burned Gospels and people and try to cover the truth from the biginning.
The finding of this tomb should not be debated, by going back to the fathers and their chosen books or by the bible(OT) which has nothing to do with Jesus death or barrial, but to face those who brought the findings and supported by scientific methods, by going to the tomb themselves and do their work in a scientific way, and they had all the means to do that.
Of course, that will never happen, because they know for sure if they use that road (the logic & science), they will arrive to the same conclusion which the scintists found, so they will stick to their old methods and keep thing in suspend knowing that the time will be in their favor, and the truth of JESUS TOMB will disappear in time, great tactics, used before and worked for two thousand years, and it might work today.
IT MIGHT WORK TODAY!!!, WHY?, because people even today and in21st century still cannot speaks out the truth "afraid", and WHY AGAIN?, because there is a limit, 1- for political reason, 2- the side who brought this discovery do not want to come face to face with the churches and the christians, and bring a conflict at this time. That is why they say "this is what we found, and even we know it is true, we leave it for the others to decide the outcome of it.
The Christians they do not want to believe in things that can be seen and touched, but they do believe in many other stories, as:
"He was recieved up into heaven and sat down AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD", "He parted from them and was CARRIED UP INTO HEAVEN" . That is not real but came from imagination, but accepted as the truth!.
"And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which if they were written in detail, I SUPPOSE THAT EVEN THE "WORLD" ITSELF WOULD NOT CONTAIN THE BOOKS THAT WOULD BE WRITTEN !!!."
I do not think what John said can be accepted LOGICALLY, Jesus ministery lasted less than 3 years. All what is written by men since the writing began, and the millions of people who wrote up to date, and even all what will be written in the next hundred thousand years will not cover the world. that is the TRUTH.
Then we find ourself facing something behind any sort of Logic when this story told by Matthew and accepted by so many:
"Then Jesus was led up by the "SPIRIT" into the wilderness to be TEMPTED BY THE "DEVIL"!!!.
And the story goes on step by step to tell us at the end, that the DEVIL "took Him into the holy city and had Him stand on the pinnacle of the temple" then the DEVIL "took Him to a very high mountain and SHOW HIM ALL THE KINGDOMS OF THE WORLD AND THEIR GLORY!!!"
Jesus did not tell this story, and Matthew did not join them in that long trip not in the beginning when Jesus spent fourt y days and fourty night in the wilderness, and not at the end on top of the mountain, but all the conversation between Jesus and the Devil were recorded word by word!!!, Mayby Jesus was away for fourty days, and someone made up this story?.
Jesus words are the whole truth but, but the others word can be questioned specially when they mention such a stories.
Those stories are against the Holy Spririt and against Jesus, they are just sorts of blasphemy, and false witness, from all, the one who created it and the one who preached it and the one who accepte it, and those will be judged for it.
"YOU SHALL NOT TAKE THE NAME OF THE LORD YOUR GOD IN VAIN...."
"YOU SHALL NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS AGAINST YOUR NEIGHBOR."
If the false witness against a neighbor is a "SIN", then a false witness against the Holy Spirit, your God is a "GREATER SIN" which "shall not be forgiven not in this age or the age to come"
This story about the Devil cannot be accepted Logically except if the devil told the someone who told Matthew about it.
Reading those stories and many others in the Bible and the Gospel, make me accept what Bishop John S. Sponge wrotes when he said:
-" The Bible full of contradictions and errors."
-"The GOSPELS CANNOT BE TRUSTED TO BE RELIABLE."
SEASICKGIRL, for sure there are conflict with the Gospels when the truth comes, because the Gospels are written by men as you see in those stories, and were not told by Jesus, and they were written in Greece or Rome, long after Jesus death and after the events, which took place in the holy land. Knowing that all the original Gospels were burned, that by itself make doubt about the four chosen ones.
The truth might hurt some, but the truth is the truth and will never die. The many discoveries and after 2000 years is a proof.
God bless you.
Name:roy •
Date: 04/02/07 23:02
A: The quick history of Gospels are written below:
There are too many proofs that Bible was edited, added many false claims, manupulated according to politics, finally diverted from its true path. Muslims hadiths books were similar in their destiny. They were overly biased, lies alleged to Mohammad (sas) added, religion overburdened with unnecessary hardships, bigotry, bidat (added ruling, principles).
They took their toll to the extent that, they claimed Mohammad, as the imam of all prophets, for whom the earth was created for. In one hadith they claim he went several times between God and Moses to reduce repetition of prayer in a day from 50 times down to five times. It was claimed on some occasions inspired by christian faith, God had shank (God forbid! Never).
Early Christian belief was too much different than todays versions. I put down the historic events and different sects of Christians, some still in effect today, which have been very close to Muslim version of religion. It shows only one truth that God has sent several prophets, prescribing same religion at basic concepts ,ie.. pray one God only, give charity, not kill or commit adultry, etc.. I hope this will give a secular insight to our beliefs.
Roy’s script: Please bear in mind that the notes were written according to Biblical names, here Jesus was referred as son instead of prophet, many times. (it is misleading attribute as the true meaning should be God slave and Messenger according to muslim faith.)
NONTRINITARIANISM
Nontrinitarianism is any of various Christian beliefs that reject the doctrine that God is three distinct persons in one being, (the Trinity).
The notion of the Trinity is not of particular importance to most nontrinitarians. Persons and groups espousing this position generally do not refer to themselves affirmatively by the term, although some nontrinitarian groups such as the Unitarians have adopted a name that bespeaks of their belief in God as subsisting in a theological or cosmic unity. Modern nontrinitarian groups views differ widely on the nature of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.
Various nontrinitarian views, such as Arianism, existed alongside what is now considered mainstream Christianity before the Trinity was formally defined as doctrine in AD 325. Nontrinitarianism was very rare for hundreds of years. It surfaced again in the Gnosticism of the Cathars and in the Enlightenment and Restorationism.
Forms of Nontrinitarianism
ALL NONTRINITARIANS ARGUE THAT THE DOCTRINE OF THE EARLIEST FORM OF THE CHURCH WAS NOT TRINITARIAN. Typically, nontrinitarians explain that the Church was altered as a direct and indirect consequence of the edicts of Constantine the Great, which resulted in toleration of the Christian religion, and the eventual adoption of Trinitarian Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire. Because it was at this time of a dramatic shift in Christianity's status that the doctrine of the Trinity attained its definitive development, nontrinitarians typically find the development of the doctrine questionable. It is in this light that the Nicene Creed is seen by nontrinitarians as an essentially political document, resulting from the subordination of Church to State interests by the leaders of Catholic Church, so that the Church became, in their view, an extension of the Roman Empire.
Although Nontrinitarian beliefs of a great variety continued to multiply, and among some people (such as the Lombards in the West) it was dominant for hundreds of years afterward, the Trinitarians now had the immense power of the Empire behind them. NONTRINITARIANS TYPICALLY ARGUE THAT THE PRIMITIVE BELIEFS OF THE CHURCH WERE SYSTEMATICALLY SUPPRESSED (EVEN TO THE POINT OF DEATH), AND THAT THE HISTORICAL RECORD, PERHAPS ALSO INCLUDING THE SCRIPTURES OF THE NEW TESTAMENT, WAS ALTERED AS A CONSEQUENCE.
Nontrinitarian followers of Jesus fall into roughly four different groups.
• Some believe that Jesus is not God, instead believing that he was a messenger from God, or Prophet, or the perfect created human. This is the view espoused by modern day Unitarianism and ancient sects such as the Ebionites. A specific form of Nontrinitarianism is Arianism, which had become the dominant view in some regions in the time of the Roman Empire. Arianism taught the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit but held that the Son was not co-eternal with the Father. However, Arians did not consider worship of Jesus as wrong.[citation needed] Another early form of Nontrinarianism was Monarchianism.
• Others believe that the one God who revealed himself in the Old Testament as Jehovah revealed himself in his Son, Jesus Christ. This is a doctrine known originally as Sabellianism or modalism, although it is explained somewhat differently in the churches which hold these beliefs today. Examples of such churches today are Oneness Pentecostals and the New Church.
• Several denominations within Mormonism (including the largest, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) accept the divinity of Jesus, but believe the three persons of the Trinity to be separate. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints specifically holds that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are three separate and distinct individuals (D&C 130:22), but can and do act together in perfect unity as a single monotheistic entity (the "Godhead") for the common purpose of saving mankind, Jesus Christ having received divine investiture of authority from Heavenly Father in the pre-existence.
• Several denominations within the Sabbatarian Church of God and certain groups within Seventh-day Adventism accept the divinity of the Father and Jesus the Son, but do not teach that the Holy Spirit is a Being. The Living Church of God, for example, teaches, "The Holy Spirit is the very essence, the mind, life and power of God. It is not a Being. The Spirit is inherent in the Father and the Son, and emanates from Them throughout the entire universe". This view has historically been termed Semi-Arianism or Binitarianism.
kingdomready.org/topics/god.php
[ GOD IS 1 NOT 3 ]
Only the Father, Yahweh, is God. Jesus is the Son of God, His only begotten Son, the Messiah. The Bible emphatically and repeatedly sets forth Yahweh's supremacy and exclusivity. There are no other gods besides Him. God is all powerful, everywhere present, immortal, invisible, and all knowing. He did not become a man, His word (reason, intent, plan, self-expression) did. Jesus is the perfect human who always did what God wanted done and always spoke what God wanted said. In fact, it was Jesus who said that the Father is the only one who is truly God (John 17.3). Paul likewise confessed belief in a single deity when he said, "Yet, for us there is but one God, the Father...and one Lord, Jesus Christ..." (1 Corinthians 8.6). Below are resources that aim to describe what the Bible teaches not the philosophies of men.
Origins and basis for Nontrinitarianism
Nontrinitarians claim the roots of their position go back farther than those of their counterpart Trinitarians. The biblical basis for each side of the issue is debated chiefly on the question of the divinity of Jesus. Nontrinitarians note that in deference to God, Jesus rejected even being called "good", that he disavowed omniscience as the Son,[1] and that he referred to ascending unto "my Father, and to your Father; and to my God, and to your God", and that he said "the Father is the only true God." Additionally, Jesus quoted Deuteronomy 6:4 when saying in Mark 12:29 "The most important one (commandment)," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one."
Siding with nontrinitarians, scholars investigating the historical Jesus often assert that Jesus taught neither his own equality with God nor the Trinity (see, for example, the Jesus Seminar). Jesus Seminar is a research team of about 135 New Testament scholars founded in 1985 by the late Robert Funk and John Dominic Crossan under the auspices of the Westar Institute.[1][2] The seminar's purpose is to use historical methods to determine what Jesus, as a historical figure, may or may not have said or done. In addition, the seminar popularizes research into the historical Jesus. The public is welcome to attend the twice-yearly meetings. They produced new translations of the New Testament plus the Gospel of Thomas to use as textual sources. They published their results in three reports The Five Gospels (1993),[3] The Acts of Jesus (1998),[4] and The Gospel of Jesus (1999).[5] They also run a series of lectures and workshops in various U.S. cities.
The text of the Nicene Creed and the Trinity state that the three are "coequal". This is the term actually used in the Doctrine. One might consider co-owners of a business as being equal owners but with different roles to play in operating the business. But nontrinitarians point to a very important statement by Jesus that contradicts the use of the term equal or "coequal". It is a simple passage where Jesus stated his explicit subordinance to the Father: "for my Father is Greater than I(John 14:28)."
In addition, the Trinity and the Nicene Creed were doctrines established over 300 years after the time of Christ on Earth as a result of conflict within the early Church. It is curious to note that Jesus had forewarned the reader in Matthew "beware the doctrines of men".
Some nontrinitarians accept that Scripture teaches Christ is divine in some sense, and the son of God, but deny the personality of the Holy Spirit.
Main Points of Dissent
1. The Trinity as being irrational
Criticism of the doctrine includes the argument that its "mystery" is essentially an inherent irrationality, where the persons of God are claimed to share completely a single divine substance, the "being of God", and yet not partake of each others' identity. It is also pointed out that many polytheistic pre-Christian religions arranged many of their gods in trinities, and that this doctrine may been promoted by Church leaders to make Christendom more acceptable to surrounding cultures.
2. Possible lack of Scriptural support
The New Catholic Encyclopedia, for example, says, "The doctrine of the Holy Trinity is not taught [explicitly] in the [Old Testament]"[14], "The formulation 'one God in three Persons' was not solidly established [by a council]...prior to the end of the 4th century"[15], and The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia adds, "The doctrine is not explicitly taught in the New Testament". The question, however, of why such a supposedly central doctrine to the Christian faith would never have been explicitly stated in scripture or taught in detail by Jesus himself was sufficiently important to 16th century historical figures such as Michael Servetus as to lead them to argue the question. The Geneva City Council, in accord with the judgment of the cantons of Zürich, Bern, Basel, and Schaffhausen, condemned Servetus to be burned at the stake for this, and for his opposition to infant baptism.
3. Divinity of Jesus
For some, debate over the biblical basis of the doctrine tends to revolve chiefly over the question of the deity of Jesus (see Christology). Those who reject the divinity of Jesus argue among other things that Jesus rejected being called so little as good in deference to God (versus "the Father") , disavowed omniscience as the Son, "learned obedience" , and referred to ascending unto "my Father, and to your Father; and to my God, and to your God" .
They also dispute that "Elohim" denotes plurality, noting that this name in nearly all circumstances takes a singular verb and arguing that where it seems to suggest plurality, Hebrew grammar still indicates against it. They also point to statements by Jesus such as his declaration that the Father was greater than he or that he was not omniscient, in his statement that of a final day and hour not even he knew, but the Father , and to Jesus' being called the firstborn of creation and 'the beginning of God's creation,' which argues against his being eternal.
In Theological Studies #26 (1965) p.545-73, Does the NT call Jesus God?, Raymond E. Brown wrote that there are "texts that seem to imply that the title God was not used for Jesus" and are "negative evidence which is often somewhat neglected in Catholic treatments of the subject."
Trinitarians, and some non-Trinitarians such as the Modalists who also hold to the divinity of Jesus Christ, claim that these statements are based on the fact that Jesus existed as the Son of God in human flesh. Thus he is both God and man, who became "lower than the angels, for our sake" and who was tempted as humans are tempted, but did not sin .
Some Nontrinitarians counter the belief that the Son was limited only during his earthly life (Trinitarians believe, instead, that Christ retains full human nature even after his resurrection), by citing ("the head of Christ [is] God" [KJV]), written after Jesus had returned to Heaven, thus placing him still in an inferior relation to the Father. Additionally, they claim that Jesus became exalted after ascension to Heaven, and regarding Jesus as a distinct personality in Heaven, all after his ascension.
4. Possible un-Biblical terminology
Christian Unitarians, Restorationists, and others question the doctrine of the Trinity because it relies on non-Biblical terminology. The term "Trinity" is not found in scripture and the number three is never associated with God in any sense other than within the Comma Johanneum. Detractors hold that the only number ascribed to God in the Bible is One and that the Trinity, literally meaning three-in-one, ascribes a threeness to God that is not Biblical.
5. Many scriptural citations lack the Holy Spirit
It is also argued that the vast majority of scriptures that Trinitarians offer in support of their beliefs refer to the Father and to Jesus, but not to the Holy Spirit. This suggests that the concept of the trinity was not well-established in the early Christian community.
6. Whether it is truly monotheistic or not
The teaching is also pivotal to inter-religious disagreements with two of the other major faiths, Judaism and Islam; the former reject Jesus' divine mission entirely, the latter accepts Jesus as a human prophet just like Muhammad but rejects altogether the deity of Jesus. Many within Judaism and Islam also accuse Christian Trinitarians of practicing polytheism, of believing in three gods rather than just one. Islam holds that because Allah is unique and absolute (the concept of tawhid) the Trinity is impossible and has even been condemned as polytheistic. This is emphasized in the Qur'an which states "He (Allah) does not beget, nor is He begotten, And (there is) none like Him." (Qur'an, 112:3-4)
Scriptural texts cited as implying opposition
Among Bible verses cited by opponents of Trinitarianism are those that claim there is only one God, the Father. Other verses state that Jesus Christ was a man. Trinitarians explain these apparent contradictions by reference to the mystery and paradox of the Trinity itself. This is a partial list of verses implying opposition to Trinitarianism:
One God
• Matthew 4:10: "Jesus said to him, 'Away from me, Satan! For it is written: "Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only."'"
• John 17:3: "Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent."
• 1Corinthians 8:5-6: "For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many "gods" and many "lords"), yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live."
• 1Timothy 2:5: "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus"
The Son is subordinate to the Father
• Mark 13:32:"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father."
• John 5:19: "Jesus gave them this answer: "I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does."
• John 14:28: "You heard me say, 'I am going away and I am coming back to you.' If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I."
• John 17:20-23: "My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me."
• Colossians 1:15: "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation."
• 1stCorinthians 15:24-28: "Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For he "has put everything under his feet." Now when it says that "everything" has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all."
Jesus is not the old testament God
• John 2:16: And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father's house an house of merchandise.
• Acts 3:13: The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up...
• John 20:17: Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and [to] my God, and your God.
• Daniel 7:13: I saw in the night visions, and, behold, [one] like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.
• Psalms 110:1: Jehovah saith unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, Until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
Ontological Differences Between "God" and Jesus
• John 17:1-3 Jesus prays to God.
• Hebrews 2:17,18 Hebrews 3:2 Jesus has faith in God.
• Acts 3:13 Jesus is a servant of God.
• Mark 13:32 Revelation 1:1 Jesus does not know things God knows.
• John 4:22 Jesus worships God.
• Revelation 3:12 Jesus has one who is God to him.
• 1stCorinthians 15:28 Jesus is in subjection to God.
• 1stCorinthians 11:1 Jesus' head is God.
• Hebrews 5:7 Jesus has reverent submission, fear, of God.
• Acts 2:36 Jesus is given lordship by God.
• Acts 5:31 Jesus is exalted by God.
• Hebrews 5:10 Jesus is made high priest by God.
• Philippians 2:9 Jesus is given aurthority by God.
• Luke 1:32,33 Jesus is given kingship by God.
• Acts 10:42 Jesus is given judgment by God.
• Acts 2:24, Romans 10.9, 1 Cor 15:15 "God raised [Jesus] from the dead".
• Mark 16:19, Luke 22:69, Acts 2:33, Romans 8:34 Jesus is at the right hand of God.
• 1 Tim 2:5 Jesus is the one human mediator between the one God and man.
• 1 Cor 15:24-28 God put everything, except Himself, under Jesus.
Alternate views to the Trinity
There have been numerous other views of the relations of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit; the most prominent include:
• Arius believed that the Son was subordinate to the Father, firstborn of all Creation. However, the Son did have Divine status. This view is very close to that of Jehovah's Witnesses.
• Ebionites believed that the Son was subordinate to the Father and nothing more than a special human.
• Marcion believed that there were two Deities, one of Creation / Hebrew Bible and one of the New Testament.
• Modalism states that God has taken numerous forms in both the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament, and that God has manifested Himself in three primary modes in regards to the salvation of mankind.
• Swedenborgianism holds that the Trinity exists in One Person, the Lord God Jesus Christ. The Father, the Being or soul of God, was born into the world and put on a body from Mary.
• The Urantia Book teaches that God is the first "Uncaused Cause" who is a personality that is omniscient, omnipresent, transcendent, infinite, eternal and omnipotent, but He is also a person of the Original Trinity - "The Paradise Trinity" who are the "First Source and Center, Second Source and Center, and Third Source and Center" or otherwise described as "God, The Eternal Son, and The Divine Holy Spirit".
• The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, aka "Mormons," hold that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are three separate and distinct individuals (Covenant 130:22), but can and do act together in perfect unity as a single monotheistic entity (the "Godhead") for the common purpose of saving mankind, Jesus Christ having received divine investiture of authority from Heavenly Father in the pre-existence.
• Docetism comes from the Greek: δοκηο (doceo), meaning "to seem." This view holds that Jesus only seemed to be human and only appeared to die.
• Adoptionism holds that Jesus was chosen on the event of his baptism to be anointed by the Holy Spirit and became divine upon resurrection.
• Rastafarians accept Haile Selassie I, the former (and last) emperor of Ethiopia, as Jah (the Rasta name for God incarnate, from a shortened form of Jehovah found in Psalms 68:4 in the King James Version of the Bible), and part of the Holy Trinity as the messiah promised to return in the Bible.
• Islam's Holy Book, the Quran, denounces the concept of Trinity (Qur'an 4:171, 5:72-73, 112:1-4), also in nonstandard forms, a Trinity composed of Father, Son and Mary (Qur'an 5:116). Inclusion of Mary in the presumed trinity may have been due to either a quasi-Christian sect known as the Collyridians in Arabia who apparently believed that Mary was divine, or use of the title "Mother of God" to refer to Mary.
Theory of pagan origin and influence
Nontrinitarian Christians have long contended that the doctrine of the Trinity is a prime example of Christian borrowing from pagan sources. According to this view, a simpler idea of God was lost very early in the history of the Church, through accommodation to pagan ideas, and the "incomprehensible" doctrine of the Trinity took its place. As evidence of this process, a comparison is often drawn between the Trinity and notions of a divine triad, found in pagan religions and Hinduism. Hinduism has a triad, i.e., Trimurti.
Some find a direct link between the doctrine of the Trinity, and the Egyptian theologians of Alexandria, for example. They suggest that Alexandrian theology, with its strong emphasis on the deity of Christ, was an intermediary between the Egyptian religious heritage and Christianity.
Nontrinitarians assert that Catholics must have recognized the pagan roots of the trinity, because the allegation of borrowing was raised by some disputants during the time that the Nicene doctrine was being formalized and adopted by the bishops. For example, in the 4th century Catholic Bishop Marcellus of Ancyra's writings, On the Holy Church,9 :
Such a late date for a key term of Nicene Christianity, and attributed to a Gnostic, they believe, lends credibility to the charge of pagan borrowing. Marcellus was rejected by the Catholic Church for teaching a form of Sabellianism.
The early apologists, including Justin Martyr, Tertullian and Irenaeus, frequently discussed the parallels and contrasts between Christianity and the pagan and syncretic religions, and answered charges of borrowing from paganism in their apologetical writings.
Hellenic influences on Christian thought
Advocates of the "Hellenic origins" argument consider it well supported by primary sources. They see these sources as tracing the influence of Philo on post-Apostolic Christian philosophers - many of them ex-pagan Hellenic philosophers - who then interpreted Scripture through the Neoplatonic filter of their original beliefs and subsequently incorporated those interpretations into their theology. The early synthesis between Hellenic philosophy and early Christianity was certainly made easier by the fact that so many of the earliest apologists (such as Athenagoras and Justin Martyr) were Greek converts themselves, whose original beliefs had consisted more of philosophy than religion.
Controversy over Nontrinitarianism's Status
Most nontrinitarians identify themselves as Christian. In this regard The Encyclopedia Britannica states, "To some Christians the doctrine of the Trinity appeared inconsistent with the unity of God....They therefore denied it, and accepted Jesus Christ, not as incarnate God, but as God's highest creature by Whom all else was created....[this] view in the early Church long contended with the orthodox doctrine."This view (nonrtinitarian) “in the early church”, still supported by some Christians, generates controversy among mainstream Christians. Most members of mainstream Christianity considered it heresy not to believe in the Trinity.
Although some denominations require their members to profess faith in the trinity, most mainline denominations have taken a "hands-off" policy on the subject of the trinity, realizing that since personal study and free thought have been encouraged for years, it is not surprising that some of the conclusions reached would be nontrinitarian. The recognition here is that the trinity is tool for pointing to a greater truth. In other words, Christianity has historically sought to look beyond its doctrines (see Apophasis) to the greater truth they are intended to address, IE God. It is not uncommon for a Methodist, Presbyterian, or Anglican to profess non-trinitarian views, even among the clergy. The response from the governing bodies of those denominations is usually neutral, so long as the disagreement is voiced in respect.
Nontrinitarian Christian groups
• American Unitarian Conference
• Arian Catholicism
• Arianism
• Bible Students
• Christadelphians
• Christian Conventions a non-denominational group which publishes no dogmatic positions, but which a majority of observers classify as non-Trinitarian
• Church of Christ, Scientist
• Church of God General Conference (Abrahamic Faith)
• Church of the Blessed Hope (Church of God of the Abrahamic Faith)
• Creation Seventh Day Adventism
• Doukhobors
• Higher Ground Online
• Jehovah's Witnesses
• Living Church of God
• Living Hope International Ministries
• Molokan
• Monarchianism
• New Church
• Oneness Pentecostals
• Polish Brethren
• Socinianism
• The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church; see also Mormon)
• The Way International
• Unification Church
• Unitarian Christians
• Unitarian Universalist Christian Fellowship
• Iglesia ni Cristo
• True Jesus Church
Nontrinitarian people
• Natalius, ~200
• Sabellius, ~220
• Paul of Samosata, 269
• Arius, 336
• Eusebius of Nicomedia, 341, baptized Constantine
• Constantius II, Byzantine Emperor, 361
• Antipope Felix II, 365
• Aëtius, 367
• Ulfilas, Apostle to the Goths, 383
• Priscillian, 385, considered first Christian to be executed for heresy
• Muhammad, 632, see also Isa
• Ludwig Haetzer, 1529
• Juan de Valdés, 1541
• Michael Servetus, 1553, burned at the stake in Geneva under John Calvin
• Sebastian Castellio, 1563
• Ferenc Dávid, 1579
• Fausto Paolo Sozzini, 1604
• John Biddle, 1662
• Thomas Aikenhead, 1697, last person to be hanged for blasphemy in Britain
• John Locke, 1704
• Isaac Newton, 1727
• William Whiston, 1752, expelled from University of Cambridge in 1710
• Jonathan Mayhew, 1766
• Emanuel Swedenborg, 1772
• Benjamin Franklin, 1790
• Joseph Priestley, 1804
• Joseph Smith, 1805
• Thomas Paine, 1809
• Thomas Jefferson, 1826
• James Madison, 1836
• William Ellery Channing, 1842
• Robert Hibbert, 1849
• John Thomas (Christadelphian), 1871
• Ralph Waldo Emerson, 1882
• Benjamin Wilson, 18??
• James Martineau, 1900
• Charles Taze Russell, 1916
• Neville Chamberlain, 1940
• William Branham, 1965
• Herbert W. Armstrong, 1986
UNİTARİANİSM
Unitarianism is the belief in the oneness of God opposed to the Christian doctrine of the Trinity (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in one God). Unitarians believe in the moral authority, but not the deity, of Jesus.
Unitarianism as a system of Christian thought and religious observance has its basis, as opposed to that of orthodox Trinitarianism, in the unipersonality of the Christian Godhead, i.e. in the idea that the Godhead exists in the person of the Father alone. Unitarians trace their history back to the Apostolic age, claim for their doctrine a prevalence during the ante-Nicene period. A small number of Unitarians claim a continuity through Arian communities and individual thinkers to the present time.
ARİANİSM
God the Father ("unbegotten"), always existing, was separate from the lesser Jesus Christ ("only-begotten"), born before time began and creator of the world. The Father, working through the Son, created the Holy Spirit, who was subservient to the Son as the Son was to the Father. The Father was seen as "the only true God."
Arianism refers to the theological positions made famous by the theologian Arius (c. 250-336 AD), who lived and taught in Alexandria, Egypt, in the early 4th century. The controversial teachings of Arius dealt with the relationship between God the Father and the person of Jesus Christ, a relationship known as the doctrine of the Trinity.
While Arianism continued to dominate for several decades even within the family of the Emperor, the Imperial nobility and higher ranking clergy, in the end it was Trinitarianism which prevailed theologically and politically in the Roman Empire at the end of the fourth century. Arianism, which had been taught by the Arian missionary Ulfilas to the Germanic tribes, was dominant for some centuries among several Germanic tribes in western Europe, especially Goths and Longobards, but ceased to be the mainstream belief by the 8th Century AD. Trinitarianism remained the dominant doctrine in all major branches of the Eastern and Western Church and within Protestantism, although there have been several anti-trinitarian movements, some of which acknowledge various similarities to classical Arianism.
ANOMOEAN
In 4th century Christianity, the Anomœans, also known as Anomeans, Heterousians, Aetians, or Eunomians, were a sect of Arians who asserted that Jesus Christ (the Son) was of a different nature and in no way like to that of God (the Father).
The word is from Greek α(ν)- 'not' and όμοίος 'similar' i.e. "different; dissimilar".
In the 4th century, this was the name by which the followers of Aëtius and Eunomius were distinguished; they not only denied the consubstantiality of Jesus but even asserted that he was of a nature different from that of God. This was in contradistinction to the semi-Arians, who indeed denied the consubstantiality of Jesus, but believed at the same time that he was like the Father.
ARİANİSM İN THE EARLY MEDİEVAL GERMANİC KİNGDOMS
During the time of Arianism's flowering in Constantinople, the Gothic convert Ulfilas (later the subject of the letter of Auxentius cited above) was sent as a missionary to the Gothic barbarians across the Danube, a mission favored for political reasons by emperor Constantius II. Ulfilas' initial success in converting this Germanic people to an Arian form of Christianity was strengthened by later events. When the Germanic peoples entered the Roman Empire and founded successor-kingdoms in the western part, most had been Arian Christians for more than a century.
The conflict in the 4th century had seen Arian and Nicene factions struggling for control of the Church. In contrast, in the Arian German kingdoms established on the wreckage of the Western Roman Empire in the 5th century, there were entirely separate Arian and Nicene Churches with parallel hierarchies, each serving different sets of believers. The Germanic elites were Arians, and the majority population Nicene.
The Franks were unique among the Germanic peoples in that they entered the empire as pagans and converted to Nicene Christianity directly.
"ARİAN" AS A POLEMİCAL EPITHET
Like the Arians, many groups have embraced the belief that Jesus is not the one God, but a separate being subordinate to the Father, and that Jesus at one time did not exist. Some of these profess, as the Arians did, that God made all things through the pre-existent Christ. Some profess that Jesus became divine, through exaltation, just as the Arians believed. Drawing a parallel between these groups and Arians can be useful for distinguishing a type of unbelief in the Trinity.
Those whose religious beliefs have been compared to or labeled as Arianism include:
*Unitarians, who believe that God is one as opposed to a Trinity, and many of whom believe in the moral authority, but not the deity, of Jesus. Arianism is considered to be an antecedent of Unitarian Universalism.
*Jehovah's Witnesses, who do have some similar beliefs to Arius, namely, that Jesus had a pre-human existence as the Logos. However, Arius viewed the Holy Spirit as a person, whereas Jehovah's Witnesses do not attribute personality to the spirit. Jehovah's Witnesses also, unlike Arians, deny belief in a disembodied soul after death, eternal punishment in hell for the unrepentantly wicked, and episcopacy.
*Christadelphians, along with the Church of the Blessed Hope, believe that Jesus' pre-natal existence was a conceptual Logos, rather than a literal Logos.
*Mormons, followers of the various churches of the Latter Day Saint movement, who believe in the unity in purpose of the Godhead but that Jesus is a divine being distinct from, and created by, God the Father, but similar in every other respect (thus roughly Homoiousian rather than Anomoean). Thus, Jesus is literally (spiritually) the Firstborn of the Father. Also in line with Arianism, Mormons believe that the pre-incarnate Jesus (the Logos of John 1) created the Earth under the direction of the Father. In fact, they go further than most on this point, equating the pre-existent Jesus with Jehovah, the God of the Old Testament (perhaps as a spokesman for the Father, for whom they reserve the Old Testament title Elohim). Although the LDS Church views the doctrinal schisms of the late Roman Empire as a sure sign of the Great Apostasy, they do not officially claim any allegiance to Arius.
*Muslims, who believe that Jesus (generally called Isa), was a Messenger and Prophet of the one God, but not himself divine.
*Michael Servetus, a Spanish scholar and Protestant reformer, is viewed by many Unitarians as a founding figure. In 1553, he was sentenced to death and burned at the stake by his fellow reformers, including John Calvin, for the heresy of Antitrinitarianism, a Christology that may seem similar in some ways to Arianism. However, Servetus rejected Arius's teaching on the Son being a creature created by the Father, and his theology was actually closer to Sabellianism.
*Unpublished writings by Isaac Newton indicate that he held anti-Trinitarian beliefs and regarded the worship of Jesus Christ as God to be idolatrous.[2] He did not publicize these views, which could have cost him his fellowship at Trinity College, Cambridge, and has been described by modern scholars as a secret Arian.[3]
*Spanish liberation theologian Juan José Tamayo was accused in 2003 of defending "a renewed version of the old Arian error" which is "incompatible with the Catholic faith", by the Spanish Bishops' Commission for the Doctrine of the Faith, because of his theological positions published in several of his books about the relationship between Jesus and God the Father. Tamayo has up to now rejected the Bishops' demand to stop writing on this issue.[4]
THE THEOLOGİAN JUAN JOSE TAMAYO, ADMONİSHED BY İTS İNCOMPATİBLE İDEAS "WİTH THE CATHOLİC FAİTH"
ABC MADRID.
His book "God and Jesus", written by the secretary of the Association of Theologians and Theologians Juan XXIII, Juan Jose Tamayo Acosta, when considering that their conclusions "are incompatible with the catholic doctrine".
Frontal rejection of the tradition of the Church in its cristológicas definitions, arbitrary selection - not justified of passages of the New Testament with the express abandonment of others and interpretation of such according to confused criteria that do not specify ". In the same way,negation of the divinity of Jesus Christ, presentation of Jesus like a mere man, negation of the historical and real character of the resurrection, and this one like fundamental data of the Christian faith ".
THE THEOLOGICAL DEBATES REOPEN AFTER COUNCIL OF NICEA.
The Council of Nicea had not ended the controversy, as many bishops of the Eastern provinces disputed the homoousios, the central term of the Nicene creed, as it had been used by Paul of Samosata, who had advocated a monarchianist Christology. Both the man and his teaching, including the term homoousios, had been condemned by the Synods of Antioch in 269.
Hence, after Constantine's death in 337, open dispute resumed again. Constantine's son Constantius II, who had become Emperor of the eastern part of the Empire, actually encouraged the Arians and set out to reverse the Nicene creed.
Constantius used his power to exile bishops adhering to the Nicene creed, especially Athanasius of Alexandria, who fled to Rome. In 355 Constantius became the sole Emperor and extended his pro-Arian policy toward the western provinces, frequently using force to push through his creed.
As debates raged in an attempt to come up with a new formula, three camps evolved among the opponents of the Nicene creed.
The first group mainly opposed the Nicene terminology and preferred the term homoiousios (alike in substance) to the Nicene homoousios, while they rejected Arius and his teaching and accepted the equality and coeternality of the persons of the Trinity.
The second group also avoided invoking the name of Arius, but in large part followed Arius' teachings and, in another attempted compromise wording, described the Son as being like (homoios) the Father.
A third group explicitly called upon Arius and described the Son as unlike (anhomoios) the Father. Constantius wavered in his support between the first and the second party, while harshly persecuting the third.
The debates between these groups resulted in numerous synods, among them the Council of Sardica in 343, the Council of Sirmium in 358 and the double Council of Rimini and Selecia in 359, and no less than fourteen further creed formulas between 340 and 360, leading the pagan observer Ammianus Marcellinus to comment sarcastically: "The highways were covered with galloping bishops." None of these attempts were acceptable to the defenders of Nicene orthodoxy: writing about the latter councils, Saint Jerome remarked that the world "awoke with a groan to find itself Arian."
After Constantius' death in 361, his successor Julian, a devotee of Rome's pagan gods, declared that he would no longer attempt to favor one church faction over another, and allowed all exiled bishops to return; this had the objective of further increasing dissension among Christians. The Emperor Valens, however, revived Constantius' policy and supported the "Homoian" party, exiling bishops and often using force.
Valens died in the Battle of Adrianople in 378 and was succeeded by Theodosius I, who adhered to the Nicene creed. This allowed for settling the dispute.
Two days after Theodosius arrived in Constantinople, November 24, 380, he expelled the Homoian bishop. Theodosius had just been baptized, by bishop Acholius of Thessalonica, during a severe illness, as was common in the early Christian world. In February he and Gratian published an edict that all their subjects should profess the faith of the bishops of Rome and Alexandria (i.e., the Nicene faith), or be handed over for punishment for not doing so.
In 381, at the Second Ecumenical Council in Constantinople, a group of mainly Eastern bishops assembled and accepted the Nicene Creed of 381, which was supplemented in regard to the Holy Spirit, as well as some other changes, see Comparison between Creed of 325 and Creed of 381. This is generally considered the end of the dispute about the Trinity and the end of Arianism among the Roman, non-Germanic peoples.
Name:QuebecIndieAnna •
Date: 08/11/09 14:59
A: .
August 2009
Hello to this quiet site.
Hello all.
I am doing my rounds of this regretably silent site during my holidays in Quebec, Canada.
SeasickGirl does not post here anymore.
But her question above is basic, intelligent and central.
Sam, as usual, in his long post just above mine here, has given a comprehensive overview of how language specialists analyse ancient texts.
For a visual documentary on how the history of text analysis evolved,
the Youtube video by Dr. Beckford is well done.
It can be understood by most who have command of spoken English.
If you are aware that the Bible's portion called the
'New Testament' has 4 books which,
roughly,
present similar texts related to Jesus of Nazareth,
but texts having real differences,
and if you are interested in understanding how specialists of all
religions and countries try to unravel the PROCESS of how the texts
were put together,
then, watch the Youtube-Dr. Beckford video (2hours 20 minutes).
He travels to many countries and shows the viewere many sights
as he explains how ancient Bible texts were edited.
The method of text analysis used the world over, by all scholars of all faiths is called the historico-critical method of text analysis that we have.
The only other method we could use to surpass this method,
would be to resurrect the scribes and ask them how they edited the ancient texts.
The sooner people of all faiths come together on this single truth,
the sooner we can start solving other more pressing problems,
such as how to stop our intercultural tentions, get a handle on our population growth and population non-growth catastrophies and balance how we use this globe we all live on.
Indie
.
Name:QuebecIndieAnna •
Date: 08/11/09 15:12
A: .
http://www.n2yo.com/?s=25544
Hello again. The link above shows the path travelled by the ISS,
international space station.
When I think that the people working up there go around our globe every 90 minutes, it reminds me how linked we earthlings should be.
http://www.videosift.com/video/Dr-Robe-rt-Beckfords-Who-Wrote-The-Bible-107mins
Thi-s- 2nd link is to the 2h20min Youtube video on how ancient texts were edited.
http://www.youtube.com/w-atch?v=4BbkQiQyaYc&feature=related
Thi-s- 3rd link is an AMAZING show of how the globe's population growth is a important, but much ignored core cause of environmental problems.
