toldailytopic: Jesus, who is He?
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
- Status
torrent85
New member
You didn't anwser the question.
Does it really matter I'm sure if he wanted to he would have had them.
Do you think clothes make the man, or what he believes in?
Hello everyone,
Jesus may very well have had deep blue eyes, light colored skin, and auburn hair.
There is an unusual scripture that mentions special visible beings who looked like this. Just if this description refers to the created image that God used from time to time to manifest his presence visually within the creation, then this could be its only description.
The reason I think this could apply to God's personal image named LORD (Gen.1:26-27) (Exodus 34:6) (Exodus 6:3) is because I also believe that God used his ONE image repeatedly at time. He manifested IT as three Lords in Gen. 18 and 19 ... as the Father in Exodus 24:10 and again as the Son the NT.
How else could Jesus say: When you have SEEN ME ...you have SEEN THE FATHER.
I think that these verses describe the three Lords that appeared unto Abraham in Gen. 18 and 19, and since I believe they were three identical manifestations of the ONE image God personally uses to appear unto men... I think this describes HIS lordly image ... and therefore describes the presence of Jesus as Lord as well.
Lamentations 4:6 and Lamentations 4:7
For the punishment of the iniquity of the daughter of my people (the descendants of Israel) is greater than the punishment of the sin of Sodom, that was overthrown as in a moment (When the three lords worked in one accord to accomplish the destruction of Sodom), and no hands stayed on her (that city).
Her (Israel's) Nazarites were purer than snow, they were whiter than milk, they were more ruddy in body than (red) rubies, their polishing was of sapphire.
I ponder that this means that the lords had white skin, but it was the ruddy complexion of a red head ... while having shinny blue eyes.
I have a number of cousins that look just like this.
Since I believe that Jesus is the LORD come in flesh ... I believed he also looked just like these three lords of Gen.18 and 19.
Jesus may very well have had deep blue eyes, light colored skin, and auburn hair.
There is an unusual scripture that mentions special visible beings who looked like this. Just if this description refers to the created image that God used from time to time to manifest his presence visually within the creation, then this could be its only description.
The reason I think this could apply to God's personal image named LORD (Gen.1:26-27) (Exodus 34:6) (Exodus 6:3) is because I also believe that God used his ONE image repeatedly at time. He manifested IT as three Lords in Gen. 18 and 19 ... as the Father in Exodus 24:10 and again as the Son the NT.
How else could Jesus say: When you have SEEN ME ...you have SEEN THE FATHER.
I think that these verses describe the three Lords that appeared unto Abraham in Gen. 18 and 19, and since I believe they were three identical manifestations of the ONE image God personally uses to appear unto men... I think this describes HIS lordly image ... and therefore describes the presence of Jesus as Lord as well.
Lamentations 4:6 and Lamentations 4:7
For the punishment of the iniquity of the daughter of my people (the descendants of Israel) is greater than the punishment of the sin of Sodom, that was overthrown as in a moment (When the three lords worked in one accord to accomplish the destruction of Sodom), and no hands stayed on her (that city).
Her (Israel's) Nazarites were purer than snow, they were whiter than milk, they were more ruddy in body than (red) rubies, their polishing was of sapphire.
I ponder that this means that the lords had white skin, but it was the ruddy complexion of a red head ... while having shinny blue eyes.
I have a number of cousins that look just like this.
Since I believe that Jesus is the LORD come in flesh ... I believed he also looked just like these three lords of Gen.18 and 19.
And who do you think He is, and why?
elohiym
Well-known member
I know he's Lord, the Christ, God in the flesh.
The reason I know this is because of the evidence and my experience having received His life. Of course, that may sound too vague for many, so I'll elaborate a little bit.
I was born and raised an ethnic Jew. I heard about Jesus and asked my relatives who he was. All they would tell me is that he was just a good man, or something like that. As I got older I became interested in learning about Christianity. I started reading the Bible and found that based on numerous eyewitness testimonies that Jesus fulfilled all the prophecies that foretold of the coming messiah, the Christ.
As I studied more, I came to believe that the Christ was not merely a man who came to lead his people, but actually God incarnate come to save all men from sin. The scriptural evidence for that was overwhelming, and as I became more familiar with Bible and finally understood and accepted the gospel, I saw just how much it made sense that God incarnated in man.
Jesus might have been a man who existed a couple thousand years ago. The Bible says he did, science (more history really, but you know), has yet to prove that he existed. We don't have any first-hand documents, other than possibly the Bible, documenting his actions or even his existence.
I agree with MacGyvver . As a non-christian , I don't believe
that he was literally the son of a young girl who was chosen out of the blue by God 2,000 years ago to be impregnated by him in order to be brutally executed in order to redeem mankind.
But if he never existed, and is nothing but a fictitious character invented by the individuals who wrote the New Testament , I don't know what reason they would have had for doing this , so there may very well have been a historical Jesus who was executed by the Romans because they feared that he would incite the inhabitants of ancient Palestine to rebellion after having been an itenerant preacher for some time, and stirring up controversy of some kind .
And if there was an actual Jesus , it appears that many legends and myths spread about him after his death .
You know, the stories about miracles, walking on water, the resurrection, the virgin birth etc.
And the description of Mary as a virgin comes from a mistranslation into English and other European languages of the
Hebrew word Almah , which is what she is called in the Hebrew text. This simply means a young woman; it was mistranslated as virgin , which is not the same thing .
So the whole story about the virgin birth and God impregnating her was a complete fabrication .
No offense meant to believing Christinas. If they want to believe
this story , that's their right .
that he was literally the son of a young girl who was chosen out of the blue by God 2,000 years ago to be impregnated by him in order to be brutally executed in order to redeem mankind.
But if he never existed, and is nothing but a fictitious character invented by the individuals who wrote the New Testament , I don't know what reason they would have had for doing this , so there may very well have been a historical Jesus who was executed by the Romans because they feared that he would incite the inhabitants of ancient Palestine to rebellion after having been an itenerant preacher for some time, and stirring up controversy of some kind .
And if there was an actual Jesus , it appears that many legends and myths spread about him after his death .
You know, the stories about miracles, walking on water, the resurrection, the virgin birth etc.
And the description of Mary as a virgin comes from a mistranslation into English and other European languages of the
Hebrew word Almah , which is what she is called in the Hebrew text. This simply means a young woman; it was mistranslated as virgin , which is not the same thing .
So the whole story about the virgin birth and God impregnating her was a complete fabrication .
No offense meant to believing Christinas. If they want to believe
this story , that's their right .
Sozo again
New member
How many Lord's are there?
elohiym
Well-known member
Elevated him from what?
What was Jesus before he came in the flesh? :think:
Moses was a mediator, too. Different covenant.
OK big boy, here goes.
Jesus is the King of Israel. And I don't mean that S***hole over there in the middle east.
He was the Old Covenant King of Israel and rejected because he was not a man.
He was the New Covenant King of Israel and rejected because he was a man.
He is the Churches (spiritual Israel) King and they reject him because He does not have a physical body.
He just can't make anyone happy, can he?
genuineoriginal
New member
He is the Messiah, the Son of God, the only Salvation, and the only way to the Father.
When Jesus speaks in Revelation 3:21, he tells us the he will be seated with his Father. Is that two persons ? No the Father and Jesus are one (John 10:30) because the Father lives in Jesus. There is one God, one savior, one Father, one LORD, one throne, one King of Kings and Lord of lords...Jesus/Yeshua/Yehoshua.
Jesus is everything: He is God, savior, mediator, propitiation for sin, advocate, and comforter. Soon, he will be our rescuer, King and ruler.
Jesus is everything: He is God, savior, mediator, propitiation for sin, advocate, and comforter. Soon, he will be our rescuer, King and ruler.
:thumb:∅2L84U;2216672 said:
No.
Yes.
Thank you.∅2L84U;2216691 said:
You know I'm OV.
We know this.
Well, we know he doesn't like labels, but he has already confessed to believing as the MAD/OV crowd does in an open future and God knowing only what can be known, yet salvation being secure and eternal.
Most atheists do not doubt His historicity.
The Bible is unsurpassed as accurate historical narrative and divine revelation.
The real issue is who is Jesus and what are you going to do with Him based on His claims (Jn. 3:16; Jn. 14:6; Acts 4:12).
Your eternal destiny rides on this, so only a fool would not pursue the truth. I guess your first step would be to settle the existence of God issue (Psalm 14:1).
Mumbo jumbo dumbo....is He God or not?
Too generic...JWs, Mormons, former Armstrongites, Catholics, Evangelicals, etc. can claim the same thing, but JWs/Mormons, etc. have different views than historical Christians.
Modalism?
- Status