Originally posted by Sparko
View Post
I don't accept everything that I read in theNT.
Jesus claimed God was his Father in a direct way. As in he was the heir to the throne so to speak. He spoke to the Father and the Father spoke to him directly. You are ignoring the context.
Who do you think heard the 'unclean spirits' and do you believe in spirits?
Who heard what any soldiers said by the cross?....... Magadalene, Salome and some other women watched from afar, and I don't believe that Mary or Disciple John were anywhere ndear that event.
However, Jesus is reported to use the words 'Son of man' a dozen times, so firstly 'Son of God' was not used, and secondly, do you think that the author or the man whop told about those events would know tha\t 'Son of Man' was a special title?
I've read that 'Son of Man' was a general term used by those folks in a similar way that men (here today) might use words like 'This bloke, or this fella' ( This fella's going to the match tonight!'
No not "a" son of man but "THE" Son of Man. In Daniel 7 "the Son of Man" is a divine title given to the the Messiah. Jesus was claiming to be the Messiah (Christ in Greek) and divine.
No divine title, nor any links to the word 'Christ', nor did any of the other claims in those verses come to be.
You can't forgive someone's sin against someone else. Only against you. Jesus forgave all of their sins, against GOD. And yes he did return and will again. You have no logical reason to accept only the parts of the bible you want and dismiss the rest.
Who was Peter. Cephas is "Rock" in Aramaic, Peter is "Rock" in Greek (well "Petros" and Peter is the anglified version of that)
Since Jesus called Simon 'Cephas' why wouldn't you?
No I don't.
Comment