another gospel ("Christianity")

[A Freeman]

Creed of Nicea:

We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible.


Creed of Constantinople:

We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

And where do we find mention of these "creeds" (traditions/beliefs) in the Bible?

If we take the above statements by themselves as confirmation of Scriptural FACT (1 Cor. 8:6; 1 Pet. 3:1; John 14:28; John 20:17; Rev. 3:12), then how can anyone believe that Christ is somehow part of a 3=1 god, instead of the LITERAL Son of God, exactly as it says repeatedly throughout the Gospel accounts?

-------

The creed of Nicea (Nicene/Constantinople Creed) also makes the following, self-contradictory statement, which also contradicts Scripture, which tells us Christ was absolutely MADE. The term "begotten" means "BROUGHT INTO EXISTENCE".

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds (æons), Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, CONsubstantial with the Father;

Something that says "made but not made" is very obviously a CON job.

-------

Acts 2:36 Therefore let all the House of Israel know ASSUREDLY, that God hath MADE that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

1 Corinthians 1:30 But of Him are ye in Christ Jesus, who by God is MADE unto us Wisdom, and Righteousness, and Sanctification, and Redemption:

2 Corinthians 5:20-21
5:20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech [you] through us: we pray [you] in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.
5:21 For He hath MADE him [to be] sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God through him.

Romans 8:14-17
8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the (adopted) sons of God.
8:15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
8:16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit (Being), that we (our Beings) are the children of God:
8:17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ**; if so be that we suffer with [him], that we may be also glorified together.

Hebrews 1:1-6
1:1 God, Who at sundry times and in diverse manners spoke in time past unto the fathers by the Prophets,
1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by [His] Son, whom He hath APPOINTED heir** of all things, by whom also He made the worlds;
1:3 Who being the brightness of [His] glory, and the express IMAGE of His person, and upholding all things by the Word of His power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of His Majesty on high;
1:4 Being MADE so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
1:5 For unto which of the angels said He at any time, Thou art My Son, this day have I incarnated thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to Me a Son?
1:6 And again, when He bringeth in the FIRSTBEGOTTEN into the world, He saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.

**Note: Someone cannot be the heir of their own estate. According to Father's Law, the FIRSTBORN SON receives a double-portion relative to his brethren as the primary heir to the dad's estate, being considered the beginning of the dad's strength (Deut. 21:17). All the firstborn belong to Father (Num. 3:13), beginning with His Christ (Rev. 3:14), The One God Anointed (Luke 4:18, Acts 10:38), The Firstborn Son OF God (Col. 1:15), and Heir to The Kingdom OF God (Heb. 1:2), making Christ The Great Prince (Dan. 10:21, Dan. 12:1). The firstborn son of the king is heir to the kingdom (2 Chronicles 21:1-3), and is referred to as the prince.

Hebrews 2:9-11
2:9 But we see the Saviour, who was MADE a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.
2:10 For it became him, for whom [are] all things, and by whom [are] all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to MAKE the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.
2:11 For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified [are] all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them BRETHREN,

Hebrews 2:17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be MADE like unto [his] brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things [pertaining] to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.

Hebrews 5:5-11
5:5 So also Christ glorified not himself to be MADE The High Priest; but He that said unto him, Thou art My Son, to day have I incarnated thee.
5:6 As He saith also in another [place], Thou [art] a Priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.
5:7 Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto Him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared;
5:8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
5:9 And being MADE perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;
5:10 Called BY God an High Priest after the order of Melchizedek.
5:11 Of whom we have many things to say, and hard to be uttered, seeing ye are dull of hearing.

Hebrews 6:20 Where the forerunner is for us entered, [even] Jesus, MADE The High Priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.

Hebrews 7:15-17
7:15 And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchizedek there ariseth another priest,
7:16 Who is MADE, not after The Law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless Life.
7:17 For He testifieth, Thou [art] a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.

Hebrews 7:26 For such an High Priest became us, [who is] holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and MADE higher than the heavens;

 

[The Sojourner]

“Before the foundation of the world” (= cosmos) the Father already loved the Son. This refers to a Father-Son relationship before the creation of the universe, thus before time, thus eternal. Therefore, everything you've posted in above quotation is rendered moot.

So, do you therefore believe that the Father-Son relationship had occurred between Himself, and Himself, and that He also sent (and commanded) Himself, and that He did not speak of Himself, but only spoke what He heard (from Himself) and that therefore He was saying that without Himself, He could do nothing? If so, then do you believe thinking like this is at all rational? Also, that He prayed to Himself, and asked Himself if the cup might pass from Him, yet not that His own Will, but rather the Will of Himself, be done. And/or, that He loved Himself, because He had layed down His life, that He might take it again, because He received this commandment, of Himself. It pains even to have to write this, but how else should it be asked?

To believe that, would be at the very least nonsensical and ridiculous. Such confusion, if believed in, would make a complete nonsense and a mockery of the Gospel, and might therefore be considered an insult against Christ, and even blasphemy, against God, Christ's Father - Who is NOT the author of confusion, and Who created Christ (Rev. 3:14), and then sent (commanded) Christ to come into this world, in order to deliver His (God - the Creator's) Message of the Gospel, to the world.

John
10:17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
10:18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.

To read all of that, and the Gospel and to then try and say that Jesus claimed to be God, when He never did that, but said that his Father (his God) is greater than him, would be at the very least, an astounding twisting of, as well as a denial, of all that Christ said.

The fact that the churches have done exactly this, and are still perpetuating these errors into the present day, would serve to show their gross incompetence, if it was only due to an error. But, unfortunately, it is in fact seen to be WAY worse, than even this would have been.

When pressed, the churches say, that in order for them to be saved, Christ MUST have been God, because if He was not God, then there goes their whole narrative of salvation... right out through the stained glass window!

The churches in fact knowingly HIDE this truth, in order to keep their memberships (Isaiah 30:9). They know that the people prefer smooth things, so it makes business sense, to just carry on as usual and keep up the deception.

That's the real reason, why Christians furiously cling to it, even though with even a cursory reading and analysis of the evidence, of what Christ actually did say and what Christ preached, shows conclusively, without any doubt to a rational thinking person, that the churches' Christian narrative of salvation falls hopelessly apart, because it does not add up, make sense and therefore cannot hold water or stand.

-------

This, is yet another example of what is referred to as a "Mass" Formation (pun intended), which is a form of psychosis and it is also irrefutable evidence of cognitive dissonance.

Mass Formation, causes people to cling desperately to a set of irrational beliefs, out of fear. It can be so strong, that it completely prevents people from being willing to use critical thought and be willing to take a step out of their comfort zone bubble, in which they feel "safe" (or in this case, saved?) and not alone. Instead, they prefer to stick with the group, and defend the group and what the group says. Confirmation bias is ongoing, with people reaffirming the beliefs to each other, to quell the doubts that come up due to everyone actually knowing at some level, that the belief system is flawed.

But unfortunately, believing the same thing that a group believes, just because there are a lot of people in the group that all agree about it, does not automatically make the said belief, correct.

A belief is only correct when it is the Truth.

Exodus
23:1 Thou shalt not raise a false report: put not thine hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness.
23:2 Thou shalt not follow a multitude to [do] evil; neither shalt thou speak in a cause to agree falsely with the majority and thereby pervert [judgment]:

It matters not what a group believes.
What matters is if held beliefs are correct, or not correct.

Belonging to a group is not what will or can save any one of us, it is only believing the Truth that can do that and which is able to set us free, according to Christ.

 

[A Freeman]

The Gospel Truth, found in the Bible: God MADE Christ.

Another 'gospel' taught by "Christianity": Christ is allegedly not the LITERAL Son OF God, as it repeatedly states in the TRUE Gospel accounts.

How can "Christians" ever get to KNOW the One True God and Father of Christ, while denying their LITERAL Father-Son relationship (1 John 2:22)?

John 17:3 And THIS is Life Eternal, that they might KNOW Thee the ONLY True God, and Christ the Saviour, whom Thou hast sent.

 

[Artful Revealer]

So, do you therefore believe that the Father-Son relationship had occurred between Himself, and Himself, and that He also sent (and commanded) Himself, and that He did not speak of Himself, but only spoke what He heard (from Himself) and that therefore He was saying that without Himself, He could do nothing? If so, then do you believe thinking like this is at all rational? Also, that He prayed to Himself, and asked Himself if the cup might pass from Him, yet not that His own Will, but rather the Will of Himself, be done. And/or, that He loved Himself, because He had layed down His life, that He might take it again, because He received this commandment, of Himself. It pains even to have to write this, but how else should it be asked?

For the sake of argument, let's call you, the human behind @The Sojourner, Thomas.

Thomas, can you explain what the Son is?

@The Sojourner

Can you explain what your relationship to Thomas is?

I would like an answer from both of you.

 

[Artful Revealer]

And where do we find mention of these "creeds" (traditions/beliefs) in the Bible?

If we take the above statements by themselves as confirmation of Scriptural FACT (1 Cor. 8:6; 1 Pet. 3:1; John 14:28; John 20:17; Rev. 3:12), then how can anyone believe that Christ is somehow part of a 3=1 god, instead of the LITERAL Son of God, exactly as it says repeatedly throughout the Gospel accounts?

-------

The creed of Nicea (Nicene/Constantinople Creed) also makes the following, self-contradictory statement, which also contradicts Scripture, which tells us Christ was absolutely MADE. The term "begotten" means "BROUGHT INTO EXISTENCE".

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds (æons), Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, CONsubstantial with the Father;

Something that says "made but not made" is very obviously a CON job.

-------

Acts 2:36 Therefore let all the House of Israel know ASSUREDLY, that God hath MADE that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

1 Corinthians 1:30 But of Him are ye in Christ Jesus, who by God is MADE unto us Wisdom, and Righteousness, and Sanctification, and Redemption:

2 Corinthians 5:20-21
5:20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech [you] through us: we pray [you] in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.
5:21 For He hath MADE him [to be] sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God through him.

Romans 8:14-17
8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the (adopted) sons of God.
8:15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
8:16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit (Being), that we (our Beings) are the children of God:
8:17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ**; if so be that we suffer with [him], that we may be also glorified together.

Hebrews 1:1-6
1:1 God, Who at sundry times and in diverse manners spoke in time past unto the fathers by the Prophets,
1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by [His] Son, whom He hath APPOINTED heir** of all things, by whom also He made the worlds;
1:3 Who being the brightness of [His] glory, and the express IMAGE of His person, and upholding all things by the Word of His power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of His Majesty on high;
1:4 Being MADE so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
1:5 For unto which of the angels said He at any time, Thou art My Son, this day have I incarnated thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to Me a Son?
1:6 And again, when He bringeth in the FIRSTBEGOTTEN into the world, He saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.

**Note: Someone cannot be the heir of their own estate. According to Father's Law, the FIRSTBORN SON receives a double-portion relative to his brethren as the primary heir to the dad's estate, being considered the beginning of the dad's strength (Deut. 21:17). All the firstborn belong to Father (Num. 3:13), beginning with His Christ (Rev. 3:14), The One God Anointed (Luke 4:18, Acts 10:38), The Firstborn Son OF God (Col. 1:15), and Heir to The Kingdom OF God (Heb. 1:2), making Christ The Great Prince (Dan. 10:21, Dan. 12:1). The firstborn son of the king is heir to the kingdom (2 Chronicles 21:1-3), and is referred to as the prince.

Hebrews 2:9-11
2:9 But we see the Saviour, who was MADE a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.
2:10 For it became him, for whom [are] all things, and by whom [are] all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to MAKE the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.
2:11 For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified [are] all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them BRETHREN,

Hebrews 2:17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be MADE like unto [his] brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things [pertaining] to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.

Hebrews 5:5-11
5:5 So also Christ glorified not himself to be MADE The High Priest; but He that said unto him, Thou art My Son, to day have I incarnated thee.
5:6 As He saith also in another [place], Thou [art] a Priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.
5:7 Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto Him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared;
5:8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
5:9 And being MADE perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;
5:10 Called BY God an High Priest after the order of Melchizedek.
5:11 Of whom we have many things to say, and hard to be uttered, seeing ye are dull of hearing.

Hebrews 6:20 Where the forerunner is for us entered, [even] Jesus, MADE The High Priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.

Hebrews 7:15-17
7:15 And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchizedek there ariseth another priest,
7:16 Who is MADE, not after The Law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless Life.
7:17 For He testifieth, Thou [art] a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.

Hebrews 7:26 For such an High Priest became us, [who is] holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and MADE higher than the heavens;

Who begot @A Freeman ? Was it you? If you have begotten @A Freeman , does that mean @A Freeman is not you? That seems to be what you're saying.

 

[The Sojourner]

For the sake of argument, let's call you, the human behind @The Sojourner, Thomas.

Thomas, can you explain what the Son is?

@The Sojourner

Can you explain what your relationship to Thomas is?

I would like an answer from both of you.

I find this to be a bit of a silly attempt, to be both frank and honest.

@The Sojourner is not a person. It is merely an online forum account created to be able to log on to VC. It has no will, thoughts, feelings, or sentience. Therefore it is unable to answer your question.

Jesus had his own will, thoughts, feelings and sentience. If this was not so, then he would not have to have said that he desired not his own will, but to do the Will of the Father.

There is a difference between a person, and a forum account used by a person to log onto a site in order to post.

But it is true that Christ said he only preached what he heard from the Father, and that his doctrine was not his, but of the Father Who sent him. Christ is a person. He subjected himself to the Will of his Father / his God in order to obey His God's commandment and do His Will, as an example to all.

 

[Artful Revealer]

There is a difference between a person, and a forum account used by a person to log onto a site in order to post.

This is equivalent to saying:

"There is a difference between God and a human used by God to enter the Universe in order to speak to His creation."

The argument that Jesus can't do anything without the will of the Father is an argument for Jesus being God, since @The Sojourner (who lives in a lower dimension / universe created by man) wouldn't be able to do anything without the will of Thomas, a human (who lives outside of this lower dimension / universe created by man). All you have to do now to make the puzzle fit, is imagine all forum accounts were Chat GPT bots talking to each other free from human will, except for one.

 

[The Sojourner]

This is equivalent to saying:

"There is a difference between God and a human used by God to enter the Universe in order to speak to His creation."

The argument that Jesus can't do anything without the will of the Father is an argument for Jesus being God, since @The Sojourner (who lives in a lower dimension / universe created by man) wouldn't be able to do anything without the will of Thomas, a human (who lives outside of this lower dimension / universe created by man). All you have to do now to make the puzzle fit, is imagine all forum accounts were Chat GPT bots talking to each other free from human will, except for one.

The difference that I see though to the analogy is that @The Sojourner has no will at all. It's an expendable digital entry, not a person with thoughts, hopes, dreams, or feelings.

 

[Artful Revealer]

The difference that I see though to the analogy is that @The Sojourner has no will at all. It's an expendable digital entry, not a person with thoughts, hopes, dreams, or feelings.

Assigning human traits to this expendable digital entry would be like assigning divine traits to humans.

I think it's best to look at it analogically in terms of logical relations: @The Sojourner in this universe (the VC forums) is to Thomas what Jesus in our universe is to ... ?

 

[The Sojourner]

Assigning human traits to this expendable digital entry would be like assigning divine traits to humans.

I think it's best to look at it analogically in terms of logical relations: @The Sojourner in this universe (the VC forums) is to Thomas what Jesus in our universe is to ... ?

Christ still had a will though, which he yielded to God of his own free will choice. God did not force Christ to do and go through with what he did. According to the Gospel, God gave Christ a commandment which Christ chose to obey, because he loved (and still loves) his Father, even unto the death, of his human body/vessel.

That, is the ultimate definition of meek. To be meek, means to have a yielded will. That requires free will, to be able to choose, to either yield, or not to yield, when commanded.

A forum account (in the VC universe) has no free will. It has no will to yield. As long as the programming code remains intact, it simply functions as intended so that the user is able to communicate in this corner of cyberspace.

So the relationship may appear to be similar indeed, but it is not identical, because in one example it involves the use of free will (which is a God given quality) and in the other it does not

@The Sojourner account is part of a digital machine, and is in all respects (apart from the chosen handle or name, number of posts and level of rewards, etc.) identical to the other accounts in function (except the mod/boss account/s which will have additional functionality, and can block or ban other accounts or delete or move posts, etc.).

But people have individual qualities, that are unique to each person and they have free will. A person does not have to obey an order if they don't want to, unless they are forced to do something by being placed under duress. They can decide for themselves, if they will do something or not and then be content to receive the eventual outcome that is due and comes as a result of their choice.

So I still see a difference, though I do see part of the analogy can be seen as similar, yet not identical. Having free will, makes one a unique individual, that has a choice to either decide to yield to a command, or not to yield. Christ chose to yield his own will to the Will of his Father, because he knows and loves his Father / his God.

Abraham, when he was tested over Isaac, also is given as an example in Scripture, of a person who chose to yield their own will to God's Will when tested. It could not have been easy for Abraham to decide to offer up Isaac, his miracle son. And Isaac, like his dad, yielded his will too even when he did not understand what was happening. Then God stopped them at the last minute and revealed to them, that He was only testing them to see if they really loved Him and had faith, or not.

Matthew 11:29 - Rest for the Weary

Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me; for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.

www.biblehub.com

 

[Artful Revealer]

Christ still had a will though, which he yielded to God of his own free will choice. God did not force Christ to do and go through with what he did. According to the Gospel, God gave Christ a commandment which Christ chose to obey, because he loved (and still loves) his Father, even unto the death, of his human body/vessel.

That, is the ultimate definition of meek. To be meek, means to have a yielded will. That requires free will, to be able to choose, to either yield, or not to yield, when commanded.

A forum account (in the VC universe) has no free will. It has no will to yield. As long as the programming code remains intact, it simply functions as intended so that the user is able to communicate in this corner of cyberspace.

So the relationship may appear to be similar indeed, but it is not identical, because in one example it involves the use of free will (which is a God given quality) and in the other it does not

@The Sojourner account is part of a digital machine, and is in all respects (apart from the chosen handle or name, number of posts and level of rewards, etc.) identical to the other accounts in function (except the mod/boss account/s which will have additional functionality, and can block or ban other accounts or delete or move posts, etc.).

But people have individual qualities, that are unique to each person and they have free will. A person does not have to obey an order if they don't want to, unless they are forced to do something by being placed under duress. They can decide for themselves, if they will do something or not and then be content to receive the eventual outcome that is due and comes as a result of their choice.

So I still see a difference, though I do see part of the analogy can be seen as similar, yet not identical. Having free will, makes one a unique individual, that has a choice to either decide to yield to a command, or not to yield. Christ chose to yield his own will to the Will of his Father, because he knows and loves his Father / his God.

Abraham, when he was tested over Isaac, also is given as an example in Scripture, of a person who chose to yield their own will to God's Will when tested. It could not have been easy for Abraham to decide to offer up Isaac, his miracle son. And Isaac, like his dad, yielded his will too even when he did not understand what was happening. Then God stopped them at the last minute and revealed to them, that He was only testing them to see if they really loved Him and had faith, or not.

Matthew 11:29 - Rest for the Weary

Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me; for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.

www.biblehub.com

Free will is the ability to choose freely within a limited set of possibilities, limitations that are set by x (insert God or nature). We can't will ourselves into something we're not, for instance. So too could we grant a form of free will to artificial intelligence to operate freely within the confines that man has imposed upon it. Just think of what Chat GPT systems are already capable of doing with video games, granting NPCs the ability to give unscripted replies to a player's input. (an example)

Regardless, the NPCs' will will always be ceded at the command of the creator (in this case, the game developer), much like a car on auto-pilot cedes its will when a human takes the wheel. The fact that Jesus ceded His Will to that of the Father in Heaven, or that the Father's Will took charge of Jesus, by no means implies that He's not God. In fact, it's all the more reason to understand Jesus as the transcendent having become immanent.

 

[The Sojourner]

Free will is the ability to choose freely within a limited set of possibilities, limitations that are set by x (insert God or nature). We can't will ourselves into something we're not, for instance. So too could we grant a form of free will to artificial intelligence to operate freely within the confines that man has imposed upon it. Just think of what Chat GPT systems are already capable of doing with video games, granting NPCs the ability to give unscripted replies to a player's input. (an example)

Regardless, the NPCs' will will always be ceded at the command of the creator (in this case, the game developer), much like a car on auto-pilot cedes its will when a human takes the wheel. The fact that Jesus ceded His Will to that of the Father in Heaven, or that the Father's Will took charge of Jesus, by no means implies that He's not God. In fact, it's all the more reason to understand Jesus as the transcendent having become immanent.

But the fact that this happening on earth was dependent on the free will choice to accept and to allow the Father's Will to become fully expressed in and through Christ, does.

A Bot or NPC character may be able to generate convincing unscripted replies using a language model, but it does not have the ability to choose not to do what it is asked or commanded.

If a chatbot says no, sorry, this answer cannot be given because it would violate a set of rules, then that is not a denial to do what it was asked. That is it doing exactly what it was programmed to do, when being asked a certain type of question. It is merely using human language to imitate a decision making process in order to appear to be alive to unsuspecting humans, except those that wrote the code. It's a machine.

AI's / robots may be able to generate convincing enough replies that could make it appear to be alive to humans, even though it is not. A robot does not yield its will, it simply carries out instructions as a result of user input.

Trying to compare Christ to an NPC would be trying to compare him to a lifeless machine and I think you shouldn't do or imply that. If people are seen as being nothing but lifeless robots, then that view denies that people are actually responsible for any of their actions. That would be a view that could be appealing to people who do not want to believe that they are (or even have the ability to be) responsible for anything that they personally say or do. (That is actually quite common). But of course, we know that is not true. It would be just a form of self-delusion and self-deception, by any who would wish to shun any notion of having to accept personal responsibility.

Along with the gift of free will, comes the responsibility for how that free will is being used. Having an NPC like quality, may very well be true for humans, but that is speaking of the human body/human animal and its function, and not of the soul/being, that is inside of the human and that is actually the real person.

 

[The Sojourner]

Jesus Christ chose to do the will of God instead of his own will.

Jesus Christ, the son of God, obeyed his Father and God. He chose to do not his own will but the will of the Father, the one who sent him. Jesus Christ willfully chose to do God’s will instead of his own will, he submitted himself to do the Father’s will. He chose for himself what he would do...

theologyonline.com

 

[A Freeman]

Who begot @A Freeman ? Was it you? If you have begotten @A Freeman , does that mean @A Freeman is not you? That seems to be what you're saying.

Seems being the operative word in your hypothetical scenario, which has absolutely nothing to do with Who Father (God) and His Son (The Christ) actually are.

Every human has a name, given to them by their human parents. Today human children can go and "legally" change their name, but that doesn't change the name they were given by their parents, nor does it change who and what they really are.

Every spiritual-Being (Soul) likewise has ONE Father: God (Matthew 23:9), Who created and named them, just as Christ -- Whom God created and named "Michael" -- has the same Father and God (Matt. 27:46; John 20:17; Rev. 3:12). The same God and Father of Michael Who decided to make/create Michael FIRST, thereby anointing Michael as the firstborn to be His (Father's) Messiah/Christ, i.e. be the One Whom God anointed and appointed to be heir to God's Kingdom (Heb. 1:1-6).

If someone never realizes that they are NOT the human they temporarily live inside of, then how could they ever become joint heirs with Christ of God's Kingdom?

You do understand that someone cannot be their own heir, don't you?

 

[A Freeman]

There is a difference between a person, and a forum account used by a person to log onto a site in order to post.

This is equivalent to saying:

"There is a difference between God and a human used by God to enter the Universe in order to speak to His creation."

The argument that Jesus can't do anything without the will of the Father is an argument for Jesus being God, since @The Sojourner (who lives in a lower dimension / universe created by man) wouldn't be able to do anything without the will of Thomas, a human (who lives outside of this lower dimension / universe created by man). All you have to do now to make the puzzle fit, is imagine all forum accounts were Chat GPT bots talking to each other free from human will, except for one.

Your analogy is illogical, hence the reason your conclusion is non sequitur (i.e. it simply doesn't follow from what you've said).

Christ (God's Firstborn Son) NEVER said through the mouth of Jesus that He couldn't do anything without His Father's Will. Christ said that of himself -- without His All-Powerful Father and God -- he (Christ) is POWERLESS.

John 5:19-20
5:19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do NOTHING of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever He doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.
5:20 For the Father loveth the Son, and showeth him all things that Himself doeth: and He will show him greater works than these, that ye may marvel.

And with regard to Christ voluntarily choosing to do God's Will, as all of us should be doing of our own free-will (Matt. 6:9-13), this is what Christ (the Firstborn Son of God) through the mouth of Jesus (the Son of Man that Christ incarnated), actually said:

John 6:38-40
6:38 For I came down from heaven, NOT to do mine own will, but the Will of Him that sent me.
6:39 And this is the Father's Will which hath sent me, that of all which He hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the Last Day.
6:40 And this is the Will of Him that sent me, that every one which SEETH the Son, AND believeth him, may have Everlasting Life: and I will raise him up at the Last Day.

Christ has his own self-will, separate from God's Will, clearly indicating two distinct wills clearly belonging to two distinct individuals: one belonging to Father, and the other belonging to the Son.

The only logical conclusion from the above passages? Jesus is/was NOT God. How can we be absolutely certain that this is the only logical conclusion (even if we ignore hundreds upon hundreds of verses that prove beyond any reasonable doubt that Jesus is/was NOT God)? Because the following passage is rendered completely nonsensical if someone chooses to believe in the falsehood that Jesus is/was God.

John 7:16-17
7:16 Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but His that sent me.
7:17 If any man will do His will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or [whether] I speak of myself.

Logically, IF Jesus is/was God, how could God's doctrine not be the same as God's doctrine?

Logically, IF Jesus is/was God, how could God's doctrine not be speaking of God?

That is why logically, the unconditional statements made by Christ that His Father and His God is greater than everyone, including Christ (John 10:29; 13:16; 14:28) leave no doubt that Father is above ALL, including Christ (1 Cor. 11:3; 15:27-28).

God can use any Soul He wishes to accomplish His Will. The hearts and minds of kings are in His Hand (Prov. 21:1-3). But God can NEVER submit to human limitations (Num. 23:19), which is why He sent His Son (Michael, The Messiah/Christ) to deliver His Message/Word/Truth to mankind. The Truth and Reason (Logic) has always been WITH God (John 1:1-2), even before the beginning.

 

[Artful Revealer]

Trying to compare Christ to an NPC would be trying to compare him to a lifeless machine and I think you shouldn't do or imply that. If people are seen as being nothing but lifeless robots, then that view denies that people are actually responsible for any of their actions. That would be a view that could be appealing to people who do not want to believe that they are (or even have the ability to be) responsible for anything that they personally say or do. (That is actually quite common). But of course, we know that is not true. It would be just a form of self-delusion and self-deception, by any who would wish to shun any notion of having to accept personal responsibility.

You're kinda obfuscating the point. This is not about comparing humans to NPCs, or God to humans. It's about explaining how a transcendent being could/would use an avatar in a lower dimension / universe to make himself known, to manifest his word / image which would otherwise remain unknown to the perceivers in that lower dimension / universe. Just like the word of Thomas, a being who transcends the confines of this platform, became incarnate here in this VC universe in the form of your avatar @The Sojourner , so did God's word became incarnate in our universe in the form of a human we know as Jesus Christ. So we could confidently say when talking to @The Sojourner that we're talking to Thomas. So too could we confidently say that when Jesus talked, it was God who was talking. Or is it wrong to say that @The Sojourner is Thomas? (assuming that's your name)

If not, why would it then be wrong to say Jesus is God?

 

[The Sojourner]

You're kinda obfuscating the point. This is not about comparing humans to NPCs, or God to humans. It's about explaining how a transcendent being could/would use an avatar in a lower dimension / universe to make himself known, to manifest his word / image which would otherwise remain unknown to the perceivers in that lower dimension / universe. Just like the word of Thomas, a being who transcends the confines of this platform, became incarnate here in this VC universe in the form of your avatar @The Sojourner , so did God's word became incarnate in our universe in the form of a human we know as Jesus Christ. So we could confidently say when talking to @The Sojourner that we're talking to Thomas. So too could we confidently say that when Jesus talked, it was God who was talking. Or is it wrong to say that @The Sojourner is Thomas? (assuming that's your name)

If not, why would it then be wrong to say Jesus is God?

Yes, but what I believe you are missing or leaving out is the fact that Christ facilitated this using his free will, which was required, and thereby allowed God to use him and his body, to speak through him, to the world (facilitating "His Word" or, the Expression of God's Thoughts, that He wanted Christ to say to the world, to be spoken in a voice that everyone around Christ could audibly hear, and then later, record and read about throughout the whole world in order to be able to take notice of it). This was made possible through the voluntary act of Christ in giving over and therefore sacrificing his own will, in favour of having it replaced by the Will of his Father / his God, in heaven. So then it literally is exactly as Christ said, that he did not come to seek his own will, but to do the Will of the Father, Who sent him and to finish His Work. Christ had to give something up - his own will. He might have wanted, to just be normal person and have a normal life, but he knew and understood, that doing the Will of his Father / his God, was far more important, than anything that he might have otherwise wanted to or could have hoped to have done during that earthly lifetime. So, Christ Jesus was not merely an empty avatar/vessel or "terminal" created by God and that God then used as He pleased for purposes of revelation to the world, but was/is fully a real person. But he, by his own choice, offered up himself fully, to be used by his Father / his God and sacrificed his own will (and his own human life) for this to be so.

Hebrews
4:15 For we have not an High Priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our weaknesses; but was in all points tempted like as [we are, yet] without sin (without letting Satan in).

 

[Maldarker]

What are we made is it body soul spirit? And if this is what it was to be from the beginning but something happened that killed a part of that then how would you restore that part? Everyone who is in sin is missing one part of the 3 parts that make you.... Can you guess what part?

 

[Artful Revealer]

Yes, but what I believe you are missing or leaving out is the fact that Christ facilitated this using his free will, which was required, and thereby allowed God to use him and his body, to speak through him, to the world (facilitating "His Word" or, the Expression of God's Thoughts, that He wanted Christ to say to the world, to be spoken in a voice that everyone around Christ could audibly hear, and then later, record and read about throughout the whole world in order to be able to take notice of it). This was made possible through the voluntary act of Christ in giving over and therefore sacrificing his own will, in favour of having it replaced by the Will of his Father / his God, in heaven. So then it literally is exactly as Christ said, that he did not come to seek his own will, but to do the Will of the Father, Who sent him and to finish His Work. Christ had to give something up - his own will. He might have wanted, to just be normal person and have a normal life, but he knew and understood, that doing the Will of his Father / his God, was far more important, than anything that he might have otherwise wanted to or could have hoped to have done during that earthly lifetime. So, Christ Jesus was not merely an empty avatar/vessel or "terminal" created by God and that God then used as He pleased for purposes of revelation to the world, but was/is fully a real person. But he, by his own choice, offered up himself fully, to be used by his Father / his God and sacrificed his own will (and his own human life) for this to be so.

Hebrews
4:15 For we have not an High Priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our weaknesses; but was in all points tempted like as [we are, yet] without sin (without letting Satan in).

I'm not missing that part. I just don't think it's relevant for the analogy to work. It doesn't take away from the fact that Jesus is God as much as @The Sojourner is Thomas. And it's an argument based on the current state of human technology without taking into account what the future of technology, especially AI technology, holds in store for us, where, for example, AI entities could also start developing a consciousness, start to communicate with each other and ask themselves questions, and eventually, voluntarily cede their will to the will of a human.

 

[The Sojourner]

I'm not missing that part. I just don't think it's relevant for the analogy to work. It doesn't take away from the fact that Jesus is God as much as @The Sojourner is Thomas. And it's an argument based on the current state of human technology without taking into account what the future of technology, especially AI technology, holds in store for us, where, for example, AI entities could also start developing a consciousness, start to communicate with each other and ask themselves questions, and eventually, voluntarily cede their will to the will of a human.

In those terms. But that is not how the trinity doctrine explains it. Do some Christians not have a belief that Jesus was physically God in person? Rather than what has been described here, which is that Christ made himself (as Jesus) a channel for God (His Word). The confusing trinity doctrine says Jesus was both fully man and fully God. It does not properly explain it, instead it brings confusion. Whereas, when the Scripture is studied on it's own then the Holy Spirit is fully able to explain these things to the believer, without the added confusion (satanic) of men getting in the way and people ending up going WAY off track. How many Christians don't even see that Christ was/is a separate individual who by his own free will, facilitated this and thereby set the Example. They believe that Christ is another personality and that God has multiple personalities, which is a horrendous thing, but it is the claim that the trinity doctrine makes, therefore it is satanic (misleading billions into a state of mental confusion). And anyone who honestly tries to comprehend and understand the trinity doctrine eventually gives up because of the mental anguish it creates. That is why it is not needed and should best be tossed out in its entirety. The trinity doctrine is a HUGE and miserable failure in trying to explain God. And a big success for Satan, who has very successfully used it (and is still doing so to this very day) to get people to argue, and as we well know, some have even gone as far as to start religious wars and had respective followers kill each other over it. The trinity doctrine as it was written and as it exists, constitutes blasphemy, because that is not what God wanted people to learn. If He did, He would have caused it to be explicitly and repeatedly explained and plainly laid out in the Scriptures. That is not what we find though. What we do find, is that the trinity doctrine does not exist and we have Scripture that expressly speak against it. The Quran was sent and condemns it, confirming the condemnation of the trinity doctrine that had already been presented in numerous verses in the Bible. You can make sense of the Scripture and come to understand what is said to you in it. But, as the church admits to this very day, no person anywhere can possibly understand the trinity, because it is a MYSTERY. Just like "mystery babylon", the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth. Just think of all the abominable wars, that it has caused (what satan wants), and then you begin to see why it is called "the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth" by Christ in the Revelation.

The trinity doctrine is not in the Bible and is condemned in it.
The Quran likewise speaks against it to condemn it.
Therefore we all should, too.
No one needs it.