[vacath]You claim to be using just the Scriptures, but then you reach out and grab “emanations” and “incorporeal being” and other concepts that you can’t find in Scripture and then defy us to refute these non-Scriptural concepts using Scripture.
[Ben]Can you tell me that spirit has body? No, you cannot. Therefore, spirit is incorporeal.
[Ben]Jesus says that God is Spirit, and in spirit, we ought to worship Him. (John 4:24) That’s scriptural proof for incorporeality in God.
Agreed on both points.
[Ben]Number 12:6 says that if there is a Prophet among the Israelites, the medium for God to communicate with him or her is through visions and dreams. That’s scriptural proof for emanation, considering that you are aware of the definition of emanation.
Not agreed. The verse is not a declaration of how God will speak henceforward. God is asking Aaron and Miriam why they feel emboldened to rebel against Moses with whom God spoke face to face. The verse suggests that God has revealed his personality to Moses and that Aaron and Miriam by contrast know him only through what you are calling emanations but which the text calls dreams and visions.
Also, you must define emanation and show how it is supposed to circumscribe reading of Scripture. This I think cannot be done with reference to Scripture, which does not use the word.
[Ben]Christians love to bring to our attention, that God is no respecter of people because of the psychological jealousy that God might have elected the Jewish People to be His special People.
Not me. I believe that the Jews are the chosen people. But then, it’s self-serving, as many of my ancestors are Irish, and everyone knows they were God’s second choice.
[Ben]If the Incorporeal had personality, the election of the Jewish People could be really claimed of God. I, personally, don’t put up that claim because God is not personal.
Ok I’m consistent, and I think more highly of Jewishness than you. Don’t worry, I won’t hold it against you
[Ben]Psychoanalitic Logic dictates that personality cannot reside in incorporeality. The personal issue that goes on between God and man is from man to God and not from God to man.
Neither of the two points above are in or supported by Scripture.
[Ben]Don’t forget the Biblical text about God not being respecter of people.
This does not preclude personality or the Jews being the chosen people.
[vacath]Also, I do not concede that the New Testament writers didn’t understand Judaism.
[Ben]In that case, you are the one who either must have never read about Judaism, or the NT. I could write a fifth gospel only about the lack of knowledge of Judaism by the writers of the gospels.
I do not concede the point, and I sense polemics rather than evidence is behind it.
[Ben]I don’t remember to have claimed that Jesus was not son of God because he broke the Sabbath. But you don’t have to waste your time looking for a post that does not exist.
Sorry, I must have misunderstood you.
[Ben]I tell you now, that Jesus did not have to break the Sabbath to lose his title of son of God. He was not son of God because there is no such a thing in Judaism as Greek Mythology.
Now, now. Name calling is unnecessary. I recognize that there was no precedent in Judaism for God the Son such as Christians proclaim, which makes sense because it is a unique event. It happened only once and will never happen again. (The Second Coming will be a fulfillment of what happened 2,000 years ago in Nazareth, the Annunciation).
[Ben]Besides, I personally believe that he did not break the Sabbath, because he declared that he came to confirm every commandment down to the letter. (Mat. 5:19) If he had broken the Sabbath, he would be not only breaking a commandment, but also lying to his declaration in Matthew 5:19.
It seems you consider Jesus a a very special prophet. Here, here!
[Ben]The Pharisees never picked on Jesus. That’s Pauline conspiracy.
And that can be proven how?
Paul was the target for the Pharisees; not Jesus. Therefore, throughout his life he fed a hateful grudge against the Pharisees for having been pivotal in preventing him from building a church in Israeli soil.
I don’t buy it. I’ve read his letters, and I haven’t picked up hate from them. The closest he comes is in Galatians, where he is angry with people who want to impose circumcision on Gentile Christians. But I don’t think that quarrel was with the Pharisees. Paul had many quarrels with others, but none of them seemed focused on a desire to build a church in Israeli soil. I realize that this narrative helps you to make sense of things, but it has no basis in the historical facts available to us.
The New Testament narrative that Jesus attracted large crowds and so made the religious leaders of his day jealous has much more explanatory power for me. Especially since it has replicated itself in the Catholic Church many times, from Joan of Arc to Oscar Romero.
