If God became man

[clem456]

…
So God have also eternal Grace and Mercy.That eternal Grace and Mercy could forgive sins and exactly that attributes are for that. Grace and Mercy could be more certain. God loves His art and creatures but there is no reason for God to sacrifice Himself for salvation of human. The sacrifice is given from low to above and from weak to powerful. **But powerful do not give sacrifice to weak. **
…

Can you see that this is absurd?
If the powerful did not sacrifice for the weak, chaos would reign as every man protects his interests in the name of justice. The world would cease to turn if God did not sacrifice for his creation.
Creation itself is an act by the all-powerful God to give being (existence) to we who have no power whatsoever. The very fact that you exist proclaims God’s sacrificial love of your weakness.

If you do not believe that God sacrifices himself for us, in essence, you must believe that you are as powerful as God and do not need his condescension.

 

[friardchips]

Human nature of God! Human has a soul and that soul animate body. Now do you mean that the essence or soul of God settled in body?

vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p122a3p1.htm

*'III. TRUE GOD AND TRUE MAN

464 The unique and altogether singular event of the Incarnation of the Son of God does not mean that Jesus Christ is part God and part man, nor does it imply that he is the result of a confused mixture of the divine and the human. He became truly man while remaining truly God. Jesus Christ is true God and true man*.’

But the essence of God is eternal and an eternal entity do not settle in time and space!

The whole of existence is kept in being by the grace of our Creator.

Nothing is impossible for Him.

Or did God create a soul for the human nature and later united with that in any way? But with human nature Jesus is an apart person anymore so an another conflict emerge from that. First we should unite three divine entities in one personality! and later stick them a human nature. Whew I cannot coprehend and I should sing small.

*'IV. HOW IS THE SON OF GOD MAN?

470 Because “human nature was assumed, not absorbed”,97 in the mysterious union of the Incarnation, the Church was led over the course of centuries to confess the full reality of Christ’s human soul, with its operations of intellect and will, and of his human body. In parallel fashion, she had to recall on each occasion that Christ’s human nature belongs, as his own, to the divine person of the Son of God, who assumed it. Everything that Christ is and does in this nature derives from “one of the Trinity”. The Son of God therefore communicates to his humanity his own personal mode of existence in the Trinity. In his soul as in his body, Christ thus expresses humanly the divine ways of the Trinity:98*’

For God being man is very serious case and there should be many evidences and details for that. God to inform Himself sent many prophets and gave them miracles and scriptures. But there are no any annonated statements for that in the Bible. It can be concluded merely through strained interpretation. A crucial issue should not be so doubtful. And Jesus merely lived, behaved, talked with a human nature.

Again, look at: vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p122a3p1.htm

We have to choose Him. This is the point. You either choose Life Eternal or reject the Truth. We can’t have it both ways. Fortunately, our Creator is patient.

All right. But how that deducted and reasoned from Gospels? Just in that way:

There are such statements “Son of Father or God” for Jesus. That can interpreted in many ways

Not really. Read that Catechism page I posted.

God do not have a child. Until Jesus God never informed previous prophets about His Son. God always declared that He is one but not two or three.

So you think your Creator, who is bigger than space and time, than the universe itself, can’t have a Son?!!

The Hebrew Scriptures are sprinkled with prophecies all the way through.

When you look with eyes that can see, there the Creator is, in Scripture, speaking through Prophets, telling of a King to be born.

It is clear that the Third Person of the Trinity is present in the OT.

Also, our Creator walked past one of the prophets and showed the prophet His back because the prophet was not allowed to see His Glory (His face). Who do you think that was?

The trouble is, if you are reading other texts which are not in the Bible, then you might as well be reading upside-down. In order to see the Truth you have to read the Truth. Try with the Catechism as this has a lot of info. And this should keep you busy for the next few weeks or so. And may I advise praying before you read. Slowly. Ask our Creator who He really is. Have the courage to ask that question. More than once. Pray for your eyes to be opened.

Believers could be called as Chidren of God. But that does not mean God have an army of little gods. Jesus is called Son of God because Jesus was born without a father.

We cannot be true sons and daughters of our Creator unless we have eternal life in us. Our Lord, The Word, was made Flesh, and offered us Eternal life in Him. So He could save us from being slaves to Original Sin. That we become children of a new Creation.*

Jesus was word of God(Kalimatullah) and word of God is eternal. But that does not mean Jesus is eternal.

If our Lord is the Word, and the Word is eternal, then that means our Lord is eternal.

God say a word(be!) for something to happen and that thing happens immediatily. So God said “be” and Jesus was born without a father. That is so easy for God. So in the beginning was the “word” and the word became flesh.

You are thinking too much within the context of time. Think outside the box:

In the Beginning was the Word - this is before time. Before Creation.
The Word was spoken - creation came into being through the Word.
Lots of time passes here. Then we have the prophets talking about a King. Then…
The Word became flesh - our Lord, The Word, is born.
The Word is rejected by many, who want a strong-armed soldier King to get rid of the Romans, and cannot see how a local man who helps the poor and the rejected and the suffering can be a King. He says that His “Kingdom is not of this world”; IOW, He has come down from Heaven, which is His Kingdom.
The Word, human self, dies, is murdered, but is Resurrected. And has a new body.*
Now all of Creation, must come back through the Word, just as Creation came to be through the Word, so it must go back, to be “Eternal., like Him”. So we worship our Lord how He taught us. (Or try to). And this is by showing love and kindness to each other.

 

[hasantas]

If God is not love before and above all else, then consider an unavoidable fact of life:

You are -not- God. If God’s justice is not trumped by his love and mercy, then you and I deserve to be vaporized, because God is perfect, and we, by definition, are -not- perfect. It would be justice for us to be condemned for our imperfections before a perfect God. We can never perfect as God is perfect, so in your point of view, there is no hope. You can never satisfy God’s justice. There is a great chasm between you and God.

Christianity rejects this point of view. We believe God’s love bridges that chasm. God is love. Because he is love, he loves us as we are, and participates fully in our existence. We who deserve to be vaporized because we are not perfection, are perfected through his condescension and participation in our humanity.

Love pours itself out completely, with nothing held back. It does not bow to justice, or anything else. All else is contained in love, all else serves love. Justice serves love. God is love, and because he is love, he is also just.

Because justice serves love, a just God condescends to live and die and rise with us, as one of us, while we are still sinners. He is not afraid to dirty his hands with us. Any good father would take the place of his suffering children and bear their burdens. This is the awesome, all-powerful, love of God…not merely that he can do anything he wills, but that he wills to be one of us, to bear our mistakes and burdens. If God does not do this, then you and I are hopelessly condemned before God’s justice. Or do you claim that you can be God?

These are not merely debates over semantics about the nature of God, these are two radically different concepts of God with huge ramifications for human flourishing and dignity.

The eye of love is blind and it does not want to see imperfections. You treat the subject merely through love.

God sent prophets and that is God’s law. God’s is not bound of being man to forgive sins. Nobody bear other’s burdens mean nobody take other’s sins. Adam made a mistake and God forrgave Him due to repentance. Prophets are models for us so if we repent then God will forgive us too. Prophets do not commit sins but can make mistakes because they are human. If prophets were sinful how would they be able to lead human in thruth? Did you ever hear a prophet who commit adultery, thievery etc. God save them and prevent them from sins.

Even if we assume Adam commited a sin(mistake, because eating fruit is not a sin yet that fruit was not stolen etc ) but that sin concerned Him but not His descents. If that sin were a debit yeah it could be required from childs. But a child get not imprisoned because of father’s crime. If that would be so then there would be very serious injustice. But God is not injustice. Every child come to world as sinless but later he may commit sins or not by free will.

All these doctrines were established after Jesus by Church. The Church had a great power and authority over people by claiming to hold God’s command. And unfortunately Church abused that supposedly authority many times.

 

[adrift]

The eye of love is blind and it does not want to see imperfections. You treat the subject merely through love.

God sent prophets and that is God’s law. God’s is not bound of being man to forgive sins. Nobody bear other’s burdens mean nobody take other’s sins. Adam made a mistake and God forrgave Him due to repentance. Prophets are models for us so if we repent then God will forgive us too. Prophets do not commit sins but can make mistakes because they are human. If prophets were sinful how would they be able to lead human in thruth? Did you ever hear a prophet who commit adultery, thievery etc. God save them and prevent them from sins.

Even if we assume Adam commited a sin(mistake, because eating fruit is not a sin yet that fruit was not stolen etc ) but that sin concerned Him but not His descents. If that sin were a debit yeah it could be required from childs. But a child get not imprisoned because of father’s crime. If that would be so then there would be very serious injustice. But God is not injustice. Every child come to world as sinless but later he may commit sins or not by free will.

All these doctrines were established after Jesus by Church. The Church had a great power and authority over people by claiming to hold God’s command. And unfortunately Church abused that supposedly authority many times.

Adam’s sin was disobedience to God’s command.

Then he asked, “Who told you that you were naked? You have eaten, then, from the tree of which I had **forbidden **you to eat!”

15

3 I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; He will strike at your head, while you strike at his heel."

3 [15] He will strike . . . at his heel: since the antecedent for he and his is the collective noun offspring, i.e., all the descendants of the woman, a more exact rendering of the sacred writer’s words would be, “They will strike . . . at their heels.” However, later theology saw in this passage more than unending hostility between snakes and men. The serpent was regarded as the devil (⇒ Wisdom 2:24; ⇒ John 8:44; ⇒ Rev 12:9; ⇒ 20:2), whose eventual defeat seems implied in the contrast between head and heel. Because “the Son of God appeared that he might destroy the works of the devil” (⇒ 1 John 3:8), the passage can be understood as the first promise of a Redeemer for fallen mankind. The woman’s offspring then is primarily Jesus Christ.

 

[friardchips]

:angel1:

‘In short, there are three things that last: faith, hope and love; and the greatest of these is love.’

(1 Corinthians 13:13)

:grouphug:

 

[adrift]

Adam’s sin was disobedience to God’s command.Quote:
Then he asked, “Who told you that you were naked? You have eaten, then, from the tree of which I had forbidden you to eat!”

Quote:
15

3 I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; He will strike at your head, while you strike at his heel."

3 [15] He will strike . . . at his heel: since the antecedent for he and his is the collective noun offspring, i.e., all the descendants of the woman, a more exact rendering of the sacred writer’s words would be, “They will strike . . . at their heels.” However, later theology saw in this passage more than unending hostility between snakes and men. The serpent was regarded as the devil (⇒ Wisdom 2:24; ⇒ John 8:44; ⇒ Rev 12:9; ⇒ 20:2), whose eventual defeat seems implied in the contrast between head and heel. Because “the Son of God appeared that he might destroy the works of the devil” (⇒ 1 John 3:8), the passage can be understood as the first promise of a Redeemer for fallen mankind. The woman’s offspring then is primarily Jesus Christ.

Additionally Luke 2

Some scribes who were Pharisees saw that he was eating with sinners and tax collectors and said to his disciples, “Why does he eat with tax collectors and sinners?”

17

Jesus heard this and said to them (that), “Those who are well do not need a physician, 11 but the sick do. I did not come to call the righteous but sinners.”
1 Peter2
He himself **bore our sins **in his body upon the cross, so that, free from sin, we might live for righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed.

 

[hasantas]

=adrift;13113944]The problem is the old testament scripture does not say that prophets who speak what God does not want them to speak are blaspheming. They first ask Jesus if He is the Son of God which He directly answers I AM thereby being accused of blaspheming. That they would see Him coming on a cloud from heaven is only confirming that statement.

As we know Jews killed and tortured many prophets before Jesus because they did not believe in those prophets or they did not want to do what prophets informed. Most of Jews did not believe in Jesus as a prophet so they tortured and killed Jesus as it was ordered in OT.

We have already gone over this ground. Of course Jesus is Human, but He is also divine as He says I Am the Son of the Blessed. As has been established, the Blessed is God. Compare the other accounts of the trial. Your interpretation that it is Mary fails as it is illogical.

If Jesus is human so nobody could explain how also He can be God! Because essence of God is eternal and it do not settle in time and matter. What you say mean that God made eternal part of Himself to mortal! That is the blind point you cannot see.

Jesus said I Am so do you say He İs or They Are for your self?

Ofcourse the blessed is God but also God blessed Mary. They did not call mary as blessed because they did not believe in Her if she was pure. If they believed Mary was blessed so Mary should get be pregnant by God as a miracle. But they did not believe in that. So they thought Jesus was not born without a father and they believed in that Jesus was not a prophet. If Jesus say yes I am so Jesus claim to be born without a father which was wrong or a kind of blasphemy for them. They asked are you son of blessed one but they did not say son of God! They thought Mary was not blessed and did not bring a child without a man. Many people was in doubt about Mary.

And also we can interpret that in that way. If they meant God with the blessed one but the meaning do not change yet. Because Jesus was called Son of God because Jesus was born without a father as a miracle by God.

You can’t have it both ways. Now if you are going to say that Jesus didn’t say He was God directly than He isn’t God you must hold He is not a prophet because He didn’t say it directly. However, I have shown you many place Jesus said that He is God directly. He used the Name of God for himself “I AM”

But all doctrines were established by indirectly! So you can use indirect ways but I cannot! Indeed my way is not indirect but very directly. Because Jesus never said Son of God for Himself. Others call Him in that way because Jesus was born without a father. But when He talked about Himself He used the word of “prophet”. He implied that He was a prophet. But He never claimed such thing to be Son of God directly. Others ascribed Him such thing in a metaphorical way.

Why do you repeat this nonsense? They would not have called Mary the Blessed one. It is beyond ridiculous for you to keep repeating this as if I have not written that they would not have called a woman of the Man that they were trying to kill blessed. To them she was an ordinary woman hardly blessed. The Holy One is God to which Jesus stated I am. You have no basis to write again that this refers to Mary. It does not.

They would not call Mary the Blessed one because they did not believe She was blessed. The claim by Jesus to be son of the blessed one was a blasphemy for them. Mary was ever familiar by being pure and blessed. So they implied that that She was not so.

This does not show that they accused Him of being a false prophet. You have not been able to substantiate that it was blasphemy to be a false prophet. In what you have quoted blasphemy, a false prophet is blasphemy is not mentioned.
When you repeat the same nonsense without acknowledging the answer, as if none was given, wouldn’t you call it blind?

Claim of false prophet is blasphemy because false prophet ascribe God what God did not do or say. That is written in OT and God say to kill that false prophet as they tried to kill Jesus.

And Jesus was not accused to be God but Jesus was accused to be Son of the blessed one! If even we assume that the blessed one word was used for God but yet Jesus is not accused to be God but Son of God. We can interpret the son of God in many ways. For instance believers were used to be called children of God so were those believers little gods? Ofcourse they were not. Like that Jesus was called son of God because Jesus was born without a father as a miracle. Was not the birth of Jesus a miracle?

 

[adrift]

As we know Jews killed and tortured many prophets before Jesus because they did not believe in those prophets or they did not want to do what prophets informed. Most of Jews did not believe in Jesus as a prophet so they tortured and killed Jesus as it was ordered in OT.

We do? Many? Name the prophet the Jews killed? But that aside nowhere will you find that the prophets were labeled blasphemous.

If Jesus is human so nobody could explain how also He can be God! Because essence of God is eternal and it do not settle in time and matter. What you say mean that God made eternal part of Himself to mortal! That is the blind point you cannot see.

The blindness is on your part. As Jesus clearly said He was God. Your infinitesimal mind cannot understand God.

Jesus said I Am so do you say He İs or They Are for your self?

This question makes no sense. It is only trying to dismiss that fact that Jesus used the name of God for Himself and rightly so since that was indeed His name I AM.

Ofcourse the blessed is God but also God blessed Mary. They did not call mary as blessed because they did not believe in Her if she was pure. If they believed Mary was blessed so Mary should get be pregnant by God as a miracle. But they did not believe in that. So they thought Jesus was not born without a father and they believed in that Jesus was not a prophet. If Jesus say yes I am so Jesus claim to be born without a father which was wrong or a kind of blasphemy for them. They asked are you son of blessed one but they did not say son of God! They thought Mary was not blessed and did not bring a child without a man. Many people was in doubt about Mary.

This too makes no sense. You are trying hard to explain that they are referring to Mary. They did not know that Jesus did not have an earthly father. They thought Joseph was His father. Your explanation is invalid. They could not be referring to Mary no matter how hard you try to ignore this fact. Yes they did say Son of God. Jews never said the word God out of respect. They don’t do so even today. That is why they used the term Blessed. Are you the Son of the Blessed is asking are you the Son of God.

And also we can interpret that in that way. If they meant God with the blessed one but the meaning do not change yet. Because Jesus was called Son of God because Jesus was born without a father as a miracle by God.

Again this makes no sense. First no one knew at this time that Jesus’ birth was a miracle. They thought His father was Joseph.

Matthew 13:
55
Is he not the carpenter’s son? Is not his mother named Mary and his brothers James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas?

But all doctrines were established by indirectly! So you can use indirect ways but I cannot!

Don’t misquote me. What I said was that if you don’t allow ME to infer an indirect way don’t be a hypocrite by using an indirect way yourself.

Indeed my way is not indirect but very directly. Because Jesus never said Son of God for Himself.

On the contrary, you just dismiss it when He says it directly. No more direct than to say I AM.

Others call Him in that way because Jesus was born without a father.

Since they did not know how He was conceived than your statement is invalid. Furthermore Jesus has a Father just not an earthly one.

But when He talked about Himself He used the word of "prophet

".
Jesus is a prophet but not ONLY a prophet and you only have one scripture that He refers to Himself just as you have scripture that refers to Himself as God.

He implied that He was a prophet. But He never claimed such thing to be Son of God directly. Others ascribed Him such thing in a metaphorical way.

Again you ignore that He said I AM which is a direct claim of being God. I still don’t think you know what metaphorical means.

 

[adrift]

They would not call Mary the Blessed one because they did not believe She was blessed. The claim by Jesus to be son of the blessed one was a blasphemy for them. Mary was ever familiar by being pure and blessed. So they implied that that She was not so.

Do you realize how little sense this makes.

1. You claim when they ask are you the son of the blessed one it refers to Mary
2. You have now stated that they would not call Mary the blessed one because they would not believe she was blessed
   To that I agree
3. The claim by Jesus to be son of the blessed one was a blasphemy for them.
   Again I agree that it was blasphemy because He said He was the Son of God
   4.Mary was ever familiar by being pure and blessed. So they implied that that She was not so Now they are asking if He is the Son of the Blessed one to imply she is not pure. .

Claim of false prophet is blasphemy because false prophet ascribe God what God did not do or say. That is written in OT and God say to kill that false prophet as they tried to kill Jesus.

It was not considered blasphemy. I have asked that you document that it was blasphemy but all you do is say they were ordered by God to kill them but NOT for blasphemy. Show me something that says they were killed for that reason. You can’t because it doesn’t exist. Yes they Killed Jesus actually Jesus died for our sins including yours.

And Jesus was not accused to be God but Jesus was accused to be Son of the blessed one! If even we assume that the blessed one word was used for God but yet Jesus is not accused to be God but Son of God. We can interpret the son of God in many ways. For instance believers were used to be called children of God so were those believers little gods? Ofcourse they were not. Like that Jesus was called son of God because Jesus was born without a father as a miracle. Was not the birth of Jesus a miracle?

You have lost track You made the claim Jesus did not claim to be the Son of God.
We have already gone over where Jesus says He is God but one more scripture comes to mind

Luke 4:41

Demons also were coming out of many, shouting, “You are the Son of God!” But rebuking them, He would not allow them to speak, because they knew Him to be the Christ.

 

[clem456]

If Jesus is human so nobody could explain how also He can be God! Because essence of God is eternal and it do not settle in time and matter. What you say mean that God made eternal part of Himself to mortal! That is the blind point you cannot see.

I am curious how you can limit God in this way. On whose authority do you claim God does not “settle in” (not sure what that means…) time and matter.

You claim God to be eternal and omnipotent, but then claim he cannot take on flesh. This makes no sense whatsoever. If he cannot take on human flesh, then he cannot be omnipotent, by definition, because there is something you say he cannot do. God is either capable of anything, or he is not.

 

[hasantas]

We do? Many? Name the prophet the Jews killed? But that aside nowhere will you find that the prophets were labeled blasphemous.

.

At that time Herod, the ruler of Galilee, heard the reports about Jesus. 2 So he said to his servants, “Jesus is John the Baptist, who has risen from the dead. That is why he can work these miracles.”

3 Sometime before this, Herod had arrested John, tied him up, and put him into prison. Herod did this because of Herodias, who had been the wife of Philip, Herod’s brother. 4 John had been telling Herod, “It is not lawful for you to be married to Herodias.” 5 Herod wanted to kill John, but he was afraid of the people, because they believed John was a prophet.

6 On Herod’s birthday, the daughter of Herodias danced for Herod and his guests, and she pleased him. 7 So he promised with an oath to give her anything she wanted. 8 Herodias told her daughter what to ask for, so she said to Herod, “Give me the head of John the Baptist here on a platter.” 9 Although King Herod was very sad, he had made a promise, and his dinner guests had heard him. So Herod ordered that what she asked for be done. 10 He sent soldiers to the prison to cut off John’s head. 11 And they brought it on a platter and gave it to the girl, and she took it to her mother. 12 John’s followers came and got his body and buried it. Then they went and told Jesus. Matthew 14

St(Prophet) John was killed by Hirodias and He reasoned that by support(aspersions) of some Jews.

11:47 A curse is on you! for you make resting-places for the bodies of the prophets, but your fathers put them to death.
11:48 So you are witnesses and give approval to the work of your fathers; for they put them to death and you make their last resting-places.
11:49 For this reason the wisdom of God has said, I will send them prophets and teachers, and to some of them they will give death and cruel pains;
11:50 So that punishment may come on this generation for the blood of all the prophets which was given from the earliest days;
11:51 From the blood of Abel to the blood of Zachariah, who was put to death between the altar and the Temple. Yes, I say to you, It will come on this generation. Luke

Jews killed Zachariah because they did not believe Mary was pure. Mary was in good care of Zachariah but some Jews did not believe in that Jesus was born without a father and they aspered and libeled Zachariah and killed Him. Why would Jews not try to kill Jesus in same way because Jesus claimed to be son of blessed Mary without a father?

As you see killing a prophet was more usual for them and there is no need to be a claim by one to be son of God but to be prophet is enough as it was used to be.

 

[hasantas]

Can you see that this is absurd?
If the powerful did not sacrifice for the weak, chaos would reign as every man protects his interests in the name of justice. The world would cease to turn if God did not sacrifice for his creation.
Creation itself is an act by the all-powerful God to give being (existence) to we who have no power whatsoever. The very fact that you exist proclaims God’s sacrificial love of your weakness.

If you do not believe that God sacrifices himself for us, in essence, you must believe that you are as powerful as God and do not need his condescension.

I cannot understand what you exactly mean.

If God have to sacrifice Himself to forgive but isn’t God powerful enough to do that directly?

Or you mean we are so weak and we cannot do that by ourselves? Our weakness is our power. That weakness invites God’s power, mercy, grace and love. The authority of forgiving sins belong to God. God ask from us to repent for our sins and that is an enough reason for God to forgive us. If God burden us which we cannot abide and resist so isn’t God to be injustice? But God is not injustice and God do not burden us which we cannot tolerate. I mean God did not burden human and later saw that human could not endure so God should do it by Himself!

 

[hasantas]

vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p122a3p1.htm

*'III. TRUE GOD AND TRUE MAN

464 The unique and altogether singular event of the Incarnation of the Son of God does not mean that Jesus Christ is part God and part man, nor does it imply that he is the result of a confused mixture of the divine and the human. He became truly man while remaining truly God. Jesus Christ is true God and true man*.’

The whole of existence is kept in being by the grace of our Creator.

Nothing is impossible for Him.

*'IV. HOW IS THE SON OF GOD MAN?

470 Because “human nature was assumed, not absorbed”,97 in the mysterious union of the Incarnation, the Church was led over the course of centuries to confess the full reality of Christ’s human soul, with its operations of intellect and will, and of his human body. In parallel fashion, she had to recall on each occasion that Christ’s human nature belongs, as his own, to the divine person of the Son of God, who assumed it. Everything that Christ is and does in this nature derives from “one of the Trinity”. The Son of God therefore communicates to his humanity his own personal mode of existence in the Trinity. In his soul as in his body, Christ thus expresses humanly the divine ways of the Trinity:98*’

Again, look at: vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p122a3p1.htm

We have to choose Him. This is the point. You either choose Life Eternal or reject the Truth. We can’t have it both ways. Fortunately, our Creator is patient.

Not really. Read that Catechism page I posted.

So you think your Creator, who is bigger than space and time, than the universe itself, can’t have a Son?!!

The Hebrew Scriptures are sprinkled with prophecies all the way through.

When you look with eyes that can see, there the Creator is, in Scripture, speaking through Prophets, telling of a King to be born.

It is clear that the Third Person of the Trinity is present in the OT.

Also, our Creator walked past one of the prophets and showed the prophet His back because the prophet was not allowed to see His Glory (His face). Who do you think that was?

The trouble is, if you are reading other texts which are not in the Bible, then you might as well be reading upside-down. In order to see the Truth you have to read the Truth. Try with the Catechism as this has a lot of info. And this should keep you busy for the next few weeks or so. And may I advise praying before you read. Slowly. Ask our Creator who He really is. Have the courage to ask that question. More than once. Pray for your eyes to be opened.

We cannot be true sons and daughters of our Creator unless we have eternal life in us. Our Lord, The Word, was made Flesh, and offered us Eternal life in Him. So He could save us from being slaves to Original Sin. That we become children of a new Creation.*

If our Lord is the Word, and the Word is eternal, then that means our Lord is eternal.

483 The Incarnation is therefore the mystery of the wonderful union of the divine and human natures in the one person of the Word.

I need more much than mysteries!

 

[Bahman]

…
If God have to sacrifice Himself to forgive but isn’t God powerful enough to do that directly?
…

Very well said. People are able to make a good story when their belief are challenged. How he could die? Why he didn’t convinced Jew with a miracle that he is really son of God? And many other question.

 

[clem456]

I cannot understand what you exactly mean.

If God have to sacrifice Himself to forgive but isn’t God powerful enough to do that directly?

Or you mean we are so weak and we cannot do that by ourselves? Our weakness is our power. That weakness invites God’s power, mercy, grace and love. The authority of forgiving sins belong to God. God ask from us to repent for our sins and that is an enough reason for God to forgive us. If God burden us which we cannot abide and resist so isn’t God to be injustice? But God is not injustice and God do not burden us which we cannot tolerate. I mean God did not burden human and later saw that human could not endure so God should do it by Himself!

It’s a very simple proposition.
You accept that God is all powerful, and at the same time claim that God could not take on flesh.
If God is all powerful, he can do as he pleases for those he loves. Is he able to take on human flesh or is he not?

 

[clem456]

Very well said. People are able to make a good story when their belief are challenged. How he could die? Why he didn’t convinced Jew with a miracle that he is really son of God? And many other question.

Christ worked many miracles. We choose not to believe. It is our choice not to return his love.
Forcing someone to believe is akin to rape.

How could he die? People crucified him. Simple. Just as we murder each other all the time. He endured all that we endure. He also rises from the dead through his omnipotence, and we are called to participate in that resurrection with him.

Out of love, he took on the full human condition, including our death. If we say we love one another, we take on the burdens of one another to the fullest extent. Love is not from a distance. It is a full personal participation with the beloved. Love is unity with the beloved.

So God, who loves fully and perfectly, can do nothing else but become fully one with us, taking on our burdens, including our sins. In his omnipotence he willed to become one of us in love, not stand at a distance like a dictator.

 

[Bahman]

Christ worked many miracles. We choose not to believe. It is our choice not to return his love.
Forcing someone to believe is akin to rape.

How could he die? People crucified him. Simple. Just as we murder each other all the time. He endured all that we endure. He also rises from the dead through his omnipotence, and we are called to participate in that resurrection with him.

Out of love, he took on the full human condition, including our death. If we say we love one another, we take on the burdens of one another to the fullest extent. Love is not from a distance. It is a full personal participation with the beloved. Love is unity with the beloved.

So God, who loves fully and perfectly, can do nothing else but become fully one with us, taking on our burdens, including our sins. In his omnipotence he willed to become one of us in love, not stand at a distance like a dictator.

I just have a question from you: How Jews didn’t believe Jesus’s miracle considering the fact that they believed Mouses because of his miracles?

 

[clem456]

I just have a question from you: How Jews didn’t believe Jesus’s miracle considering the fact that they believed Mouses because of his miracles?

How do you come to the conclusion that Moses’ demonstration of God’s power convinced the Israelites of anything?? Maybe temporarily.

They were unconvinced of God’s power even after he worked awesome wonders before their eyes. Brought them out of slavery, parted the Red Sea, etc…They quickly went back to their old ways.

They didn’t believe in God because they were selfish and idolatrous, preferring themselves to God.
Same in Jesus’ time.
Same in our time.

 

[adrift]

Very well said. People are able to make a good story when their belief are challenged. How he could die? Why he didn’t convinced Jew with a miracle that he is really son of God? And many other question.

The Jews didn’t believe the miracle of His resurrection. Why weren’t they convinced? Hardness of heart, God doesn’t force anyone. I hope you realize that your statement that people are able to make a good story applies to you too.

 

[adrift]

---

St(Prophet) John was killed by Hirodias and He reasoned that by support(aspersions) of some Jews.

You base this on what? At any rate, John was not killed because he blasphemed but because he was a thorn to Herod.

The Jewish historian Flavius Josephus also relates in his Antiquities of the Jews that Herod killed John, stating that he did so, “lest the great influence John had over the people might put it into his [John’s] power and inclination to raise a rebellion, (for they seemed ready to do any thing he should advise), [so Herod] thought it best [to put] him to death.” He further states that many of the Jews believed that the military disaster that fell upon Herod at the hands of Aretas, his father-in-law (Phasaelis’ father), was God’s punishment for his unrighteous behavior.[3[/COLOR]]

11:51 From the blood of Abel to the blood of Zachariah, who was put to death between the altar and the Temple. Yes, I say to you, It will come on this generation. Luke

Just to be clear I do not dispute that the prophets were treated badly by their people. I wanted to see your response.

Jews killed Zachariah because they did not believe Mary was pure. Mary was in good care of Zachariah but some Jews did not believe in that Jesus was born without a father and they aspered and libeled Zachariah and killed Him. Why would Jews not try to kill Jesus in same way because Jesus claimed to be son of blessed Mary without a father?

As you see killing a prophet was more usual for them and there is no need to be a claim by one to be son of God but to be prophet is enough as it was used to be.

This is a curious statement. Are you referring to Zachariah the father of John? He did not take care of Mary (Joseph her husband did), He was not killed by the Jews, nor was he a prophet.

You still have not provided any evidence that they were persecuted or killed because they committed blasphemy.
Definition of blasphemy

1

a : the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for God

b : the act of claiming the attributes of deity

Why the Jews accused Jesus of blasphemy
Mt. 26:63-64;Mk. 14:61-62;Lk. 22:70;Jn. 10:30 - Jesus claims to be the Son of God.

Ex. 3:14 - In the Old Testament, God reveals His name as “I AM who AM”.

Jn. 8:24,58 - In the New Testament, Jesus says of Himself, “Before Abraham was, I AM”.
Mt. 2:2,11;8:2;14:33;28:9;28:17;Lk. 24:52;Jn. 9:38 – Jesus allows Jews to worship Him. Only God can be worshipped.

Mt. 9:2;Mk. 2:5;Lk. 5:20;7:48 – Jesus forgives sins. Only God can forgive sins.

Mt. 4:7;Lk. 4:12 – Jesus tells Satan, “you shall not tempt the Lord your God” in reference to Himself.

Mt. 12:8;Mk. 2:28;Lk. 6:5 - Jesus says that He is “Lord of the Sabbath.” He is the Lawgiver. He is God.
Jn 10:18 No man taketh it away from me: but I lay it down of myself, and I have power to lay it down: and I have power to take it up again.
Lk 10:22 All things are delivered to me by my Father; and no one knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and to whom the Son will reveal him.
Jn 6:40 And this is the will of my Father that sent me: that every one who seeth the Son, and believeth in him, may have life everlasting, and I will raise him up in the last day.
Jn 8:19 They said therefore to him: Where is thy Father? Jesus answered: Neither me do you know, nor my Father: if you did know me, perhaps you would know my Father also.
Jn 14:7,8:54 - If you know Jesus you know His Father who is God.

Note:
I realize that you say that Jesus says that your sins are forgiven and not I forgive your sins. If you are going to claim that Jesus didn’t forgive sins you are going to have to do better than say “Jesus was just saying your sins are forgiven not I forgive sins” Who is Jesus to say that your sins are forgiven.? Unless He was God because that is God’s providence only He can say who’s sins are forgiven. It is incorrect interpretation also because those around Him say “only God can forgive sins” They understand that Jesus is forgiving sins. To interpret the way you do ignores the context of the scripture. As I have mentioned before, Jesus gives the power to His apostles to forgive sins. Again showing He is God.