Jesus Christ is God Almighty

Amujale:


There isnt one character or storyline present in all of Abrahamic religious text that can claim to being original.

Name one character or storyline contained inside their text and let me prove to you that they lack originality.

You are yet to prove any of your words above yet you want to prove my own words.

Learn to prove your own words first before disproving others. The discuss here is intellectual and you have to show you are capable of that by putting down your own explanation not gists.

Go and do a comprehensive study and then do explanation of all the claims you put above. It is clear that you dont even appreciate proper and diligent study for you to have mixed history together in this internet age where e-search will help you.

Stop this attitude of trying to prove and disprove without depth. You havent explained anything since than to be throwing shaded on other people's explanation. That isnt good for you.

hupernikao:


Thank you.
Like i said, this post is based on Scriptural correctness not the existence of Christianity. It is a good virtue and decency to stay within course of discuss and not derail. It is a strawman that leave discussion and struggle on straws via digression. So leave it to those who believe the scriptures. You can open another post to display your intelligence and knowledge about CAESAR Messiah.

The scriptures did not fell from the sky.

Again, if you believe someone can't talk about your bible because they don't believe it, then you have no right to talk about Jesus or the bible. The Messiah was promised to the Jews. Are you a Jewish man?

hupernikao:


You are yet to prove any of your words above yet you want to prove my own words.

Learn to prove your own words first before disproving others. The discuss here is intellectual and you have to show you are capable of that by putting down your own explanation not gists.

Go and do a comprehensive study and then do explanation of all the claims you put above. It is clear that you dont even appreciate proper and diligent study for you to have mixed history together in this internet age where e-search will help you.

Stop this attitude of trying to prove and disprove without depth. You havent explained anything since than to be throwing shaded on other people's explanation. That isnt good for you.

Your responses to my post are inconsequential.

You claim to want proof why Abrahamic religious text are fake, false and counterintuituve.

Again, for the unpteemth time name one character or storyline in all of Abrahamic text and let me prove to you that they are fake.

Who you think God created first?


Adam?

American?

Arab?

European?

Eve?

Jew?


Africans are the first people to arrive on planet earth.

Asumming you believe in God, then, when God created the first humans, it created the first Africans.

Another reason to conclude that their text is fake.

musicwriter:


The scriptures did not fell from the sky.

Again, if you believe someone can't talk about your bible because they don't believe it, then you have no right to talk about Jesus or the bible. The Messiah was promised to the Jews. Are you a Jewish man?

Stop exposing yourself abeg.
Just stay on course of the post if you want to discuss. As pointed earlier, the discussion here is to explain John 1:1 by examining Theon and Theos. If you have something to contribute on this do if not open another thread to showcase your own argument and anger skillfully.

Amujale:


Your responses to my post are inconsequential.

You claim to want proof why Abrahamic religious text are fake, false and counterintuituve.

Again, for the unpteemth time name one character or storyline in all of Abrahamic text and let me prove to you that they are fake.

Where did you get the bolded from
Abeg focus on the discussion here, explain how John 1:1 should be read. If you cant then go and open another thread for your discussion. If it worth it based on the depth and explanation, i will be ready to engage you there.

hupernikao:


Where did you get the bolded from
Abeg focus on the discussion here, explain how John 1:1 should be read. If you cant then go and open another thread for your discussion. If it worth it based on the depth and explanation, i will be ready to engage you there.

The Jesus character is a ficticious one.

The Jesus character is an invention of the Romans.

The concept of God is real and unaffected by the fakery of manufactured religions.

hupernikao:


Stop exposing yourself abeg.
Just stay on course of the post if you want to discuss. As pointed earlier, the discussion here is to explain John 1:1 by examining Theon and Theos. If you have something to contribute on this do if not open another thread to showcase your own argument and anger skillfully.

Theon or Theos is a Greek word that they used to define their reality in Greece. It has nothing to do with you as African because we didn't set the context for its definition. Note that when you allow a foreigner define things for you, you're being enslaved with language. Unfortunately, that's still the case in Africa.

musicwriter:


Of course, I also used to believe in Jesus when I was a fool. And if you really believe in the words in bold, then its arrogant of you talking about Jesus and the bible, instead of listening to the Jews who the Messiah were promised.

If you want to know why, who, when and where your bible came from and who wrote it, read the book Caesar's Messiah. It explains historically who wrote the bible. It was made into a documentary. See the documentary below.

CAESAR'S MESSIAH.
Origin of Christianity- The Flavian Dynasty Connection

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nYUJTRos5o&t=40s

Teach!

Amujale:

Teach!

How are you bro？Hope everything is fine.

musicwriter:


How are you bro？Hope everything is fine.

Im good bro & you?

Thank you.

Amujale:

Im good bro & you?

Very fine.

sonmvayina:


What is your name on Facebook, I want to show you a comprehensive material on why Jesus is just a Roman creation and has got nothing to do with God...

God is consciousness... Not a man or human being..

naira land is a place for inexistence of identity.

hupernikao:
EXPLANATION OF JOHN 1:1 (Theon and Theos)
Kindly read carefully.

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος (NLT)
En archē ēn ho Logos kai ho Logos ēn pros ton Theon kai Theos ēn ho Logos (KJV)
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (KJV)

THEON
The word Theon occurred in the New Testament Scriptures 148 times. It simply means A deity, especially the supreme Divinity.




John 1:18 King James Version (KJV)
18 No man hath seen God (Theon) at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

John 14:1 King James Version (KJV)
14 Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God (Theon), believe also in me.



THEOS
The word Theos occurred in the New Testament Scriptures 311 times. It is also simply translated as A deity, especially the supreme Divinity same as Theon.
Observe the following text usage of Theos

[
Observe that in the verses above God (almighty) was rendered as Theos and not Theon. It is also good to know that in the 311 times usage, Theos was referred to God almighty over 250 times without speaking about Jesus.
b]

God here is the Father, Almighty, yet Theos was used. That means the Greek did not used Theon as a reserved name for God almighty but used Theos likewise. As seen above, Theos (311 times) was used as twice as Theon (148 times) to refer to God in the scriptures.
The word Theos is a Noun - Nominative Masculine Singular

Now to John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God (Theon), and the Word was God (Theos). (KJV)
From above explanation it should be clear to you that Theos and Theon means God and not a variant of God. So, the question will be why was Theon and Theos used here. Let us do a little of word construction study.

[
Now, Back to our study.
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God (Theon), and the Word was God (Theos). (KJV)


The original Greek construction of the last part of the verse is "and God (Theos) was the Word." That makes it nominative.




As pointed out earlier do a word study on the usage of theos, you will see it was never used as something lesser than Theon. It is just sentence construction issue.




Hence John 1:1 usage of Theon and Theos is not a change of personalities. It is not referring to two personalities but one. [n this case Theon (The Word was God (Theon)). [/color]

will respond later

Amujale:
The Jesus chatacter is ficticious, takes after older religious icons and concepts from all acrross the globe; especially Buddha, Ela, Krishna and Horus.

This claim gets made on the Internet sometimes, but it's nonsense. People will list supposed "parallels" between Jesus and them, but if you actually do research you'll find out they're often outright made up. This site examines a lot of these supposed parallels and explains why they're inaccurate:
http://www.tektonics.org/copycathub.html

RandomGuy48:
This claim gets made on the Internet sometimes, but it's nonsense. People will list supposed "parallels" between Jesus and them, but if you actually do research you'll find out they're often outright made up. This site examines a lot of these supposed parallels and explains why they're inaccurate:
http://www.tektonics.org/copycathub.html

The tecktonics site makes a wrong and disingenous argument.

Everyone knows that Christianity was manufactured in the 1st century. Ancient Egypt mythology predates Christianity in years that amount in their hundreds and thousands.

The Jesus character was invented by the Romans

He takes out of various older characters, the most popular is Horus and this due to the striking characteristics they both possess.

The obvious one is the Mother-Child relationship,

Isis and Horus
Mary and Jesus

Then you have them using similar terminology:

"I am Horus in glory . . . I am the Lord of the Light . . . I am the victorious one . . . I am the heir of endless time . . . I, even I, am he that knoweth the path of heaven"


Then you have the "Ankh", according to Ancient Egyptians is supposed to be the symbol of re-birth or reincarnation. The one Horus is holding in the depiction below.

The authors of Abrahamic text plagerized Ancient Egyptian text and religious concepts as they did with various many others.

These similar pattern is also identified with relationships between Jesus and Krishna, Jesus and Buddha e.t.c

Hence, the reason one can readily conclude that Jesus is a ficticious character.

The character known as Jesus is a Roman invention, created out of many ancient icons like Budha, Ela, Horus, Krishna, Romulus e.t.c

Now lets explore the similarities between the Jesus chatacter and the Krishna one.

Christos is a common name in the Greek community aswell as another name for Krishna.

Let me expand on this further, the word 'Christ' is said to come from the Greek word 'Christos', which means "the anointed one".

'Krishna' in Greek is the same as 'Kristos' which means "the anointed one"

The list of pre-christianity divinities, heroes, kings and queens who claim to have been "born of a virgin" or miraculously birth includes the following:

Ra
Apis
Horus
Krishna
Buddha
Hetshepsut
Pharoah Amenophis III
Zoroaster
Melchizedek
Cyrus
Plato
Julius Caesar
Apollonius of Tyana
Taliesin
Merlin
Llew Llaw
Fohi
Lao-Kium


Even the story of the gifts from the kings and the "three wisemen" has been told before in ancient Egypt aswell as during the birth of Krishna.

Ancient Egyptian mythology predates Hinduism, Hinduism predates Christianity.

Krishna predates the invention of the Jesus character.

Another reason to conclude that Jesus is a fraudulent character invented by evilsic Romans.

Amujale:
The character known as Jesus is a Roman invention, created out of many ancient icons like Budha, Ela, Horus, Krishna, Romulus e.t.c

Now lets explore the similarities between the Jesus chatacter and the Krishna one.

Christos is a common name in the Greek community aswell as another name for Krishna.

Let me expand on this further, the word 'Christ' is said to come from the Greek word 'Christos', which means "the anointed one".

'Krishna' in Greek is the same as 'Kristos' which means "the anointed one"

The list of pre-christianity divinities, heroes, kings and queens who claim to have been "born of a virgin" or miraculously birth includes the following:

Ra
Apis
Horus
Krishna
Buddha
Hetshepsut
Pharoah Amenophis III
Zoroaster
Melchizedek
Cyrus
Plato
Julius Caesar
Apollonius of Tyana
Taliesin
Merlin
Llew Llaw
Fohi
Lao-Kium


Even the story of the gifts from the kings and the "three wisemen" has been told before in ancient Egypt aswell as during the birth of Krishna.

Ancient Egyptian mythology predates Hinduism, Hinduism predates Christianity.

Krishna predates the invention of the Jesus character.

Another reason to conclude that Jesus is a fraudulent character invented by evilsic Romans.

Are you joking?
Is this how you will prove a believe wrong?
Just by saying "everyone knows" (whatever this means), "Krishna", "Christos", "Character" etc

No single explanation, reference, historical evidence. It is obvious you arent even vast in the same error you proclaim. I have met people with great erroneous knowledge, convincing in being deceived and deceiving. I am yet to find any in all your discussion your dedication to diligent study and convincing explanation. All you do is to give sound bites. I love when people are grounded in a path they chose to follow.

My general advise for you, spend tie to study your path more, know more of your "truth" and be ready to give convincing explanation on what you believe.

Good morning.

hupernikao:


Are you joking?
Is this how you will prove a believe wrong?
Just by saying "everyone knows" (whatever this means), "Krishna", "Christos", "Character" etc 

Firstly, you misconscrue what has been said here. Let me put it into its proper perspective.

And maybe you wont misconcrue it yet again.

Amujale:

 
The tecktonics site makes a wrong and disingenous argument.

Everyone knows that Christianity was manufactured in the 1st century. Ancient Egypt mythology predates Christianity in years that amount in their hundreds and thousands.....

Amujale:

The character known as Jesus is a Roman invention, created out of many ancient icons like Budha, Ela, Horus, Krishna, Romulus e.t.c

Now lets explore the similarities between the Jesus chatacter and the Krishna one.

Christos is a common name in the Greek community aswell as another name for Krishna.

Let me expand on this further, the word 'Christ' is said to come from the Greek word 'Christos', which means "the anointed one".

'Krishna' in Greek is the same as 'Kristos' which means "the anointed one"

 

hupernikao:

No single explanation, reference, historical evidence.

 

musicwriter:

If you want to know why, who, when and where your bible came from and who wrote it, read the book Caesar's Messiah. It explains historically who wrote the bible. It was made into a documentary. See the documentary below.

CAESAR'S MESSIAH.
Origin of Christianity- The Flavian Dynasty Connection

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nYUJTRos5o&t=40s

Secondly, the image depicted below is that of Horus the son of Osiris and Isis. In his hand he holds an Ankh.

Those are not the spoken words of the Jesus character but that of Horus:

 

Amujale:


The Jesus character was invented by the Romans

He takes out of various older characters, the most popular is Horus and this due to the striking characteristics they both possess.

The obvious one is the Mother-Child relationship,

Isis and Horus
Mary and Jesus

Then you have them using similar terminology:

"I am Horus in glory . . . I am the Lord of the Light . . . I am the victorious one . . . I am the heir of endless time . . . I, even I, am he that knoweth the path of heaven"


Then you have the "Ankh", according to Ancient Egyptians is supposed to be the symbol of re-birth or reincarnation. The one Horus is holding in the depiction below.

Furthermore, assuming you are looking for evidence, then you have a catalogue of content that you ought to research upon.

Your comment about their being no evidence, explanation or historical reference is flawed and disengenuous.

Jesus is not God

God is God.

Similar to all the other Abrahamic religions, christianity is a manufactured religion, and the reason it was forced upon Africans was due to an ancient Eurocentric project known as the "World Order".

That project began by the Romans thousands of years ago.

Initially all of Europe and parts of Asia abide by the laws and moral code of Africa.

Then one Roman Emperor (see more on the Flavian connection) deviced a plan that would enable Europe to dominate the globe both militarily and spiritualy.

His plan was dubbed "The World Order", it was during these times that Libya was invaded as the first post-pharaonic military campaign ever launched by Europe on African soil under the stewerdship of Portugal and Spain with the so-called blessing of the then Pope.

Its important to note that Rome was never stationary, Rome moved its administrative capital on various occasions, the most commonly talked about being Constantinople that is the modern day Istanbul in Turkey.

Rome is actually a Eurocentric political concept. One that only allows for European and or their descendants domination of the world.

The "World Order" and the so-called "New World Order" are one and the same.

The adherents of the "World Order" spend hundred and thousands of years trying to nail down their unwitty claims of superiority over everyone else.

What happened was that the Romans use all the intellectual tools available to their Emperor and political class to lay their foundation of world domination.

They use psychological, sociological and military inteligence to reach their goals and objectives.

The Asians also caused havoc. Its argued that if the Asian war mongerers hadnt launched their crazy holy wars inside the continent, the Eurocentric Crusaders would never have made the military progress they achieved on the continent.

Neither the trans Atlantic slave trade nor Colonisation would never had taken place.

The argument that the Europeans won most of their crazy battles because of internal conflict is false.

Most of the internal conflicts at the time was created or exacerbated by the adherents of the "World Order"

The reason they made in roads was due to the earlier Arab wars and military campaigns combined with the Christian missionaries and Jewish missionaries that precede the crazy dash for African treasure. There was also some local traitors. They, the missionaries and traitors, were emmisaries and spies to Europe's political class and they reported much of the situation on the ground.

The scramble for Africa was a calculated campaign that involved the political classes from all over Europe, Eurocentric Royalists of the entire continent of Europe, Christian and Jewish adherents; multiple meetings and various conferences.


It's rummoured that if you visit the Madonna chapel at the Vatican there is a model of mother and child representation of African divinities,  some call it the "black Jesus", whilst some argue that it supppse to represent Isis and Horus as these was the Roman Empire's chosen religion at the time; the one that preceeded Roman Catholicism.

Amujale:
Jesus is not God

God is God.

Similar to all the other Abrahamic religions, christianity is a manufactured religion, and the reason it was forced upon Africans was due to an ancient Eurocentric project known as the "World Order".

That project began by the Romans hundred of thousands of years ago.

Initially all of Europe and parts of Asia abide by the laws and moral code of Africa.

Then one Roman Emperor (see more on the Flavian connection) deviced a plan that would enable Europe to dominate the globe both militarily and spiritualy.

His plan was dubbed "The World Order", it was during these times that Libya was invaded as the first post-pharaonic military campaign ever launched by Europe on African soil under the stewerdship of Portugal and Spain with the so-called blessing of the then Pope.

Its important to note that Rome was never stationary, Rome moved its administrative capital on various occasions, the most commonly talked about being Constantinople that is the modern day Istanbul in Turkey.

Rome is actually a Eurocentric political concept. One that only allows for European and or their descendants domination of the world.

The "World Order" and the so-called "New World Order" are one and the same.

The adherents of the "World Order" spend hundred and thousands of years trying to nail down their unwitty claims of superiority over everyone else.

What happened was that the Romans use all the intellectual tools available to their Emperor and political class to lay their foundation of world domination.

They use psychological, sociological and military inteligence to reach their goals and objectives.

The Asians also caused havoc. Its argued that if the Asian war mongerers hadnt launched their crazy holy wars inside the continent, the Eurocentric Crusaders would never have made the military progress they achieved on the continent.

Neither the trans Atlantic slave trade nor Colonisation would never had taken place.

The argument that the Europeans won most of their crazy battles because of internal conflict is false.

Most of the internal conflicts at the time was created or exacerbated by the adherents of the "World Order"

The reason they made in roads was due to the earlier Arab wars and military campaigns combined with the Christian missionaries and Jewish missionaries that precede the crazy dash for African treasure. There was also some local traitors. They, the missionaries and traitors, were emmisaries and spies to Europe's political class and they reported much of the situation on the ground.

The scramble for Africa was a calculated campaign that involved the political classes from all over Europe, Eurocentric Royalists of the entire continent of Europe, Christian and Jewish adherents; multiple meetings and various conferences.


It's rummoured that if you visit the Madonna chapel at the Vatican there is a model of mother and child representation of African divinities,  some call it the "black Jesus", whilst some argue that it supppse to represent Isis and Horus as these was the Roman Empire's chosen religion at the time; the one that preceeded Roman Catholicism.

You are not a student of history. You need to do more to study the history you want to debunk. Dont just pick book or random post online as evidence. There are plenty sources, discoveries, artifacts, archaeo readily available for you.

One of the basic rule of proving a believe or system wrong is to first study the believe/system well and observe the essence of such. You havent study much beyond some videos and documentaries. Take time to do personal reviews.

hupernikao:


You are not a student of history. You need to do more to study the history you want to debunk. Dont just pick book or random post online as evidence. There are plenty sources, discoveries, artifacts, archaeo readily available for you.

One of the basic rule of proving a believe or system wrong is to first study the believe/system well and observe the essence of such. You havent study much beyond some videos and documentaries. Take time to do personal reviews.

You are completely wrong here and your response is aswell inconsequential.

I dont see you refuting any of the evidence before you.

My advice to you is to go and research what has been said and re-educate yourself as per the real history of our world.

Amujale:


You are completely wrong here and your response is aswell inconsequential.

I dont see you refuting any of the evidence before you.

My advice to you is to go and research what has been said and re-educate yourself as per the real history of our world.

hupernikao:


Are you joking?
Is this how you will prove a believe wrong?
Just by saying "everyone knows" (whatever this means), "Krishna", "Christos", "Character" etc

No single explanation, reference, historical evidence. It is obvious you arent even vast in the same error you proclaim. I have met people with great erroneous knowledge, convincing in being deceived and deceiving. I am yet to find any in all your discussion your dedication to diligent study and convincing explanation. All you do is to give sound bites. I love when people are grounded in a path they chose to follow.

My general advise for you, spend tie to study your path more, know more of your "truth" and be ready to give convincing explanation on what you believe.

Good morning.

Indeed. It is a little amusing to post a link, and then see a bunch of claims thrown out against it... that are refuted by the very link I pointed to! The simple fact is, if you examine these supposed "parallels" closely, you'll find out they don't stand up and are in fact frequently outright made up. That is why people who advance them rarely give any actual source, and those that do only point to another person who doesn't give a source themselves!

Though in regards to Caesar's Messiah, it's a hardly a reliable book. Here are some critiques:
http://www.evidenceunseen.com/theology/book-reviews/a-critique-of-joseph-atwills-covert-messiah/ (fairly short)
http://www.tektonics.org/books/csmessrvw.php (longer and more detailed)

Heck, Caesar's Messiah is so weak that even atheists have harshly criticized it (as noted in the first link).

If lesser beings are called gods of this world why not the Greater Being who was part in creating them?

Amujale:
Jesus is not God

God is God.

Similar to all the other Abrahamic religions, christianity is a manufactured religion, and the reason it was forced upon Africans was due to an ancient Eurocentric project known as the "World Order".

That project began by the Romans hundred of thousands of years ago.

Initially all of Europe and parts of Asia abide by the laws and moral code of Africa.

Then one Roman Emperor (see more on the Flavian connection) deviced a plan that would enable Europe to dominate the globe both militarily and spiritualy.

His plan was dubbed "The World Order", it was during these times that Libya was invaded as the first post-pharaonic military campaign ever launched by Europe on African soil under the stewerdship of Portugal and Spain with the so-called blessing of the then Pope.

Its important to note that Rome was never stationary, Rome moved its administrative capital on various occasions, the most commonly talked about being Constantinople that is the modern day Istanbul in Turkey.

Rome is actually a Eurocentric political concept. One that only allows for European and or their descendants domination of the world.

The "World Order" and the so-called "New World Order" are one and the same.

The adherents of the "World Order" spend hundred and thousands of years trying to nail down their unwitty claims of superiority over everyone else.

What happened was that the Romans use all the intellectual tools available to their Emperor and political class to lay their foundation of world domination.

They use psychological, sociological and military inteligence to reach their goals and objectives.

The Asians also caused havoc. Its argued that if the Asian war mongerers hadnt launched their crazy holy wars inside the continent, the Eurocentric Crusaders would never have made the military progress they achieved on the continent.

Neither the trans Atlantic slave trade nor Colonisation would never had taken place.

The argument that the Europeans won most of their crazy battles because of internal conflict is false.

Most of the internal conflicts at the time was created or exacerbated by the adherents of the "World Order"

The reason they made in roads was due to the earlier Arab wars and military campaigns combined with the Christian missionaries and Jewish missionaries that precede the crazy dash for African treasure. There was also some local traitors. They, the missionaries and traitors, were emmisaries and spies to Europe's political class and they reported much of the situation on the ground.

The scramble for Africa was a calculated campaign that involved the political classes from all over Europe, Eurocentric Royalists of the entire continent of Europe, Christian and Jewish adherents; multiple meetings and various conferences.


It's rummoured that if you visit the Madonna chapel at the Vatican there is a model of mother and child representation of African divinities,  some call it the "black Jesus", whilst some argue that it supppse to represent Isis and Horus as these was the Roman Empire's chosen religion at the time; the one that preceeded Roman Catholicism.

Hundreds of thousands?

Bro, the other races are not that old.

9jaStarMedia:
ust study that verse. This is the verse in pure Greek (?ν ?ρχ? ?ν ? λ?γος, κα? ? λ?γος ?ν πρ?ς τ?ν θε?ν, κα? θε?ς ?ν ? λ?γος).

https://www.9jastarmedia.com/2019/08/jesus-is-not-god-reno-omokri.html

Can you write this well.in Greek so that I can read it properly
WhatsW with the question marks??
Or aren't you confident in your findings

KayceeBanks:


Hundreds of thousands?

Bro, the other races are not that old.

I agree with you my brother, thousands is probably more accurate. Post has been ammended accordingly.

Thank you for the correction.

Normally, Africans and virtuosness fit hand in glove.

Historically, Arabians and Eurocentrics are absolute warmongers.

Yet, they attempt to hide these truth from us by peddling fake history by means of their Abrahamic religious text.

In order to be presented with the real history of our world, one must have to disregard all Abrahamic religious related text.

Then, it becomes clearer that Arabia and Europe has two types of history running concurrently in the public domain.

(a) True Arabian and European history i.e looting, stealing, warmongery and desecrating sacred sites all around the globe.

(b) Fakery, Manufactured history. i.e Abrahamic religious text e.t.c

Jesus is the express image of God. God is invisible. If you want to see God, look at Jesus. He is the manifestation of God in the flesh. It is a mystery beyond human comprehension.

Like begat likes. He is in the same class as God. That you have a manager you report to doesn't make you a lesser human.

Jesus himself as God is subject to God the father. This does not reduce his divinity.

Even God called Jesus God as narrated by the book of Hebrews,

Hebrews 1:8-9.
8 But unto the Son he saith, THY THRONE, O GOD, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

TruthinAction:


@1)
. Jesus. He is the manifestation of God in the flesh. It is a mystery beyond human comprehension.

@2)

Like begat likes. He is in the same class as God. That you have a manager you report to doesn't make you a lesser human.



.

@1) FALSE.
Explain John5:37. John6:46. 20:17
Did Jesus create his God & Father?

@2
Is the Messenger the same as the Owner of his message? John 7:16.

Sophistry built on FRAUD.....
Is the Manager that same person working under him?
That is your claim @1, why shift the goalpost @2)?

hupernikao:


Call a Greek or one who is learned in the language, he will laugh seriously at the ignorance the man just displayed in explaining theon and theos. Sometimes it's good to avoid things you aren't well grounded in.

He just committed biblical suicide with that error he called interpretation.

Do you understand ancient Greek??