Is Jesus God, part of God or another God?

Not really and not according to Jesus but cherry pick as you like.

What's humorous is the fundamentalists who claim "NT replaced the OT" and then try to use OT Law.

 

I have the answer to this question and will make it available for jut $9.99. Send money order ... I mean praise offering ... to P.O. Box 26334, Abilene Texas 76909.

 

False. Most, if not all, early Church Fathers believed Jesus was subordinate to "The Father".

It is not some big secret that at, and prior to, the council of Nicea there were huge debates going on in the Church in relation to the nature of the divinity of Christ.

As usual, you are making up things as you go along and pretending they are true.

 

There one or two passages in the Bible (probably interpolations) that have been "interpreted" to mean that Jesus is God.

This is against a massive backdrop of evidence that clearly shows that Jesus nor the disciples, nor the early Church fathers thought Jesus was God.

 

You are wrong as usual, early church fathers mainly the first generations of Christians all accept and believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ they all believe Jesus and God is One. It was after all the first generation of Christians were gone when enemies of Christ could not longer stop Jews from accepting and worshiping Jesus but most of all when they started to see many gentiles were converting to Christianity that is when they started to flood the community with all sorts of false manuscripts and stories of Jesus and part of the story is just what you are claiming. Your claim is nothing new and just like the many heretics you got it all wrong. Up to this day every Christian be it Catholics, Coptic, Orthodox, Catholics, or Protestants we all believe and accept Jesus Christ divinity.

The Nicea council was only made possible thanks to Emperor Constantine decriminalizing Christianity it allows Christians to finally step forward come out of hiding to confront all those false claimants about Jesus Christ and to secure and preserve the sanctity and truth of Jesus Christ.

There is nothing to make things up for history has already been written and recorded.
Atheist kept flip flopping and kept turning to the Bible because they have nothing concrete of their own to proof they are correct.

 

Please prove your claim. Prior to this however I suggest you look up Subordinationism so you do not look silly and uninformed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subordinationism

In the link you will find quotes from many of the early Church fathers:

The first example is the fellow who is looked upon as the first Pope who was a subordiantionist.

 

The concept of the Holy Trinity is comparable to Windows Updates. Just as Microsoft tries to force people to move from older versions to newer versions by refusing to offer new tech support, Christianity tried to force people to move from an older version of God to the new version of God. We will keep the 10 commandments because they are like the start menu button everybody still wants, but otherwise resistance is futile. On other words, it is the oldest marketing strategy on earth. It is why we still have those pagan christmas trees--we are still playing old school Druids virtually like it was space invaders.

 

Actually, atheist, agnostics and heretics have already made themselves look silly and uninformed that is why the Church fathers compile, studied and research every available manuscript to make sure that Christians and the world will be properly inform as taught by Jesus and pass down to the Apostles that Jesus Christ is God.
As I said succeeding generations of Christians will be infiltrated with several heretics all introducing their own interpretation of Jesus Christ the Judaism, Islam, Arianism, Nestorians, all the heretics have their own interpretation of Jesus Christ. All these false claims about Jesus started with the religious leaders of Jews they saw that all their efforts to extinguish Jesus to stop Jews and gentiles from worshiping Jesus has all failed that is why you will notice that all the later false manuscripts and stories of Jesus came about sometime in the late 100 AD to early 200 AD and it got worse as centuries goes by.

St. Clement was one of the leading early church fathers who successfully brought the words of God to the gentiles and he was instrumental in countering mane heretical claims or false claims about Jesus.

St. Clement (42 and 44): "The Apostles received the Gospel for us from the Lord Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ was sent from God. So then Christ is from God, and the Apostles from Christ.

St. Clement adhere to the Apostles teachings that Jesus Christ is the Son of God not just mere human servant or messenger that heretical groups wanted to interpret. Every Christian churches the Catholic, Coptic, Orthodox, and Protestants accept Jesus Christ divinity only the atheist, agnostics and heretics believe other wise.

 

Hate to burst your bubble Wan but, "being sent from God" and "being God" are two completely different things.

2) We are not discussing what modern Christians believe .. the topic is what the early Church believed.

 

Pliny the Younger in a letter to the Emperor Trajan describing Christians.

"That they were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food but food of an ordinary and innocent kind."

Note the "As a god" line, not that they worshiped a god.

 

Sure sure ... Pliny was trying to figure out how Christians should be treated. Trajan responded with leniency and fairness.

You can find some one liners from some of the early church Father's here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subordinationism

They simply did not believe that Jesus was "God - God of Abraham". Sure they believed he was divine - and the nature of this divinity was the subject of much debate for the first 300 years and for centuries after Constantine (for Political reasons) tried to settled the issue at Nicea by making it doctrine that Jesus was God ... and then supplanting Jesus for himself as Pontifex Maximus - The Logos - the emissary between God and man.

 

Jesus Christ is God be it send from God or being God. Only the atheist, heretics and anti Christ are claiming it is not this is why they flood the community with their false, fraudulent claims and manuscripts to discredit Jesus Christ fortunately history has already been written.
Modern Christian beliefs are based on early Church the continuity is unbroken that Jesus Christ is the Messiah, the Son of God the God but most of all Jesus Christ is real so yes Gift don't be disappointed Jesus Christ is real and God is with us all.
[video=youtube;FStBkFIxu1U]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FStBkFIxu1U[/video]

 

I have not stated anything contrary to the above.

It is Religious scholars and Teachers of Christianity that tell us that the early Church Fathers debated the nature of the divinity of Christ.

Any respectable Seminary " Lutheran, Catholic, Orthodox" teaches their up and coming ministers about the debate with respect to the nature of Christ's divinity.

You have no clue what you are talking about once again.

 

The classical, orthodox formulation of the Trinity goes something like this: There is one God. Jesus (the Son) is God. The Father is God. The Holy Spirit is God. The Father is not the Son and the Father is not the Holy Spirit. The Son is not the Father and the Son is not the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is not the Father and the Holy Spirit is not the Son. They are separate, distinct persons, not "masks" of the same single-person God. You are one person; God is three people. To resolve this, Trinitarians typically appeal to the idea of some sort of "consubstantial" (not a Biblical concept) personhood.

Most of the theology that has gone into this has more to do with Aristotle than it does with the Bible, and the Bible never uses the word "Trinity" and never clearly spells out it's nature. Every analogy that you hear from a Trinitarian inevitably appeals to a version of the Trinity that was labelled a heresy in the early centuries of Christianity. The ice/water/steam analogy, for example, appeals to the Modalist/Sabellian heresy. And all formulations of the Trinity tend to ignore the fact that the Bible clearly and repeatedly states that Jesus/the Son is subservient to God/the Father. 1 Corinthians 8:6 should be the final nail in the coffin for the doctrine of the Trinity, as it clearly states that the only God is the Father.

To add more confusion to this whole mess, the Bible has no problem using words like elohim and theos to speak of people who are divine. Jesus quotes Psalms when he says that all followers of the law are gods. This is, in large part, due to the fact that there were no capital letters in Hebrew or in Koine Greek, so they didn't have the god/God distinction that we have in English. What they did have in Greek, however, is the use of a direct article. When they wanted to make sure that everyone knew they were talking about capital G God, they could (and did) use the direct article 'o or "the" in front of "God," without any subsequent preposition. In the Greek New Testament, only the Father is ever referred to in this way. Jesus is never called "the God."

Arianism preserved these sorts of distinctions while still teaching that Jesus was a divine being. The Arians (who, by the way, had a healthy popularity even after the Council of Nicea) still taught that Jesus was a divine being, the Son of God, and that he existed even before his birth as Jesus of Nazareth. They also taught, however, the Biblical notion that the Father is the one true God and that the Son is his servant. The Father precedes the Son both in time and in authority, in Arian thought.

This same teaching continued into modern times as Unitarianism. Fun fact: one of the most eloquent proponents of this doctrine was a man named Servetus, who was executed under the wishes of Protestant hero John Calvin. Two more famous Unitarians, Ferenc David and King John Sigismund of Hungary, issued one of the first edicts of religious freedom ever issued by a Christian (if you consider Unitarians Christians) government.

 

You may note that the Bible is almost always consistent in the times when it refers to one or the other "son of." There is a transition from Son of God to Son of Man, just as there is a transition from Abram to Abraham, Sarai to Sara, Jacob to Israel, and Joseph to .... etc. The son comes from God in Involution, and the son comes from man and heads back to God in Evolution.

 

Fantastic. LOL. Nice work.

 

How do hydrogen and oxygen fit into this equation?

 

Maybe canon alone is not sufficient. The best answer is recognition of a dynamic.

The Bible states that we are all gods, and it also states that we are all God’s children. Jesus was again born of the flesh as he was once before, as Elias, and once before that, as ..... (? I lost track of that info). His example showed us the way. We should not dwell on the notion that Jesus = God any more than saying that each of us = God.

The tragic atrocities inflicted upon one another in the conflicts between Christian factions feuding over literal (theological) aspects during the first few centuries A.D. could have been avoided if they had realized that their fervent actions were based on excessive emphasis on separation and dominance when they should have been striving towards growth and progression through integration and holism.

Various texts paint an ugly picture of formative Christianity. For a while the rivalry was stymied through persuasion to accept a partial blend of attributes, but the acceptance dissolved and the parties resumed their hostilities upon succession of leadership. One emperor and his wife sponsored a balance of power of sorts, each one supporting an opposing group. The larger history record of early centuries shows the prevailing view changing back and forth according to the leanings of successive popes or emperors and at times via lopsided councils where one side sometimes won because of the intimidating presence of militant monks backing them.

It’s a case of not being able to see the forest because of the trees. Grasping to find and settle on a version of consistency in a realistic factual scenario does not always yield fully satisfactory results. Metaphorical meanings must be then be given precedence. The gem to be sought is one or more inherent messages that point the way to ultimate truth.

The same difficulty arises in trying to pin down an understanding of the resurrection. Some say that Christ was rescued from the crucifixion and resuscitated. Some say that somebody else took his place. Some say that his spiritual alter ego stood by laughing at a vain attempt to destroy him. Then there’s the orthodox view that the dead body converted to the risen Christ and interacted in a natural way with witnesses before being taken up to heaven.

All such musings are dubious digressions. Interpretations of the death and resurrection of Christ should go in the direction of understanding spiritual development and progression. The theme is victory over death when successive reincarnations are no longer necessary.

Likewise, equating the process of salvation to a simple ticket to heaven is also questionable.

Jesus could have easily avoided or at least postponed arrest. He chose not to, and faced a festering, horrific menace head on.

The first message here is that an individual must face one’s own inner darkness, the personal shadow demons within in order to defuse them and become cleansed.

Due credit goes to Rob Bell, author of What we talk about when we talk about God.

The authorities cruelly tortured and exterminated Jesus because he was a threat to their privileged economic pyramid. More specifically, even though Jesus acquiesced to the economic jurisdiction of Caesar, his influence was considered to be destabilizing and hence jeopardy to a position responsible for maintaining order (the concern of Pilate) and the status quo (the concern of Caiaphas). The second message is that humanity must face the nightmare of its pervasive darkness, its abusive, oppressive, and divisive materialistic dominance enforced by the privileged few and supported by multitudes that are unaware or indifferent.

 

Correction: The previous incarnation of Jesus was Elisha, not Elias; prior to that he was Adam, the firstborn human (not "only begotten son"), based on the beliefs of the Essenes according to The Law of the Light by Lars Muhl, pages 22-23. Elias is another name for Elijah. Elijah is said to be an incarnation of John the baptist.