The Reasons Jews Do Not Believe Jesus Was G-d....

[SnakeLord]

Could you please locate chapter and verse on Melchizedek?

Hebrews 7:3 -

'Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, like the Son of God he remains a priest forever.
Just think how great he was: Even the patriarch Abraham gave him a tenth of the plunder!'

Christ is a type of Melchisedek, but also the only begotten son.

A type of Melchizedek.. Ok, that's fair enough - and yet Melchizedek clearly outdoes jesus because jesus was born, (and nurtured from a crying baby etc), and has exactly the same job title as jesus.

Perhaps you guys should sit down and change it from trinity to a quadrinity?

Yeah it's a real mystery how God is both firstborn and everlasting God but He is.

But who says he is? The whole trinity nonsense came about when, and who came up with the idea?

In Hebrews god clearly states that jesus is a priest forever, (just like Melchizedek). god does not tell himself, (jesus), that himself, (god and jesus), is a priest forever. No siree, god makes an oath that jesus, (who you claim is himself), is a priest forever, (which means god is making an oath that he is a priest like melchizedek forever). A bizarre situation.

"The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind: 'You are a priest forever.' "

There you go.. god's not a god anymore, just a priest. Should I start worshipping the guy up the road? He's a priest too. Perhaps you should change trinity to millioninity.

So you are saying there was a time when Jesus did not exist.

Most certainly. There's no mention of him before his birth, whereas Melchizedek is mentioned even in the early OT and the bible clearly states that jesus is born, (to a normal flesh and blood woman {Making him a demi-god}).

Well how can God be the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and still be one God?

Perhaps because your mathematics skills are not up to scratch? "father, son and holy spirit" = 3, whether you like it or not. You're all polytheists desparately wishing you were as cool as monotheists.

 

[Woody]

S/L says:

A type of Melchizedek.. Ok, that's fair enough - and yet Melchizedek clearly outdoes jesus because jesus was born, (and nurtured from a crying baby etc), and has exactly the same job title as jesus.

Phil 2:9-11

Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Melchizedek is a great guy no doubt, maybe even your hero (snicker snicker), but he still bows down when Jesus is around.

 

[SnakeLord]

Melchizedek is a great guy no doubt, maybe even your hero (snicker snicker), but he still bows down when Jesus is around.

While I enjoy discussion and debate, is there any possible chance we could leave the stupidity out of it? (namely the worthless comments with the (snicker snicker))?

Besides which, your quote doesn't really focus on my post. Kindly try again.

 

[Woody]

S/L

Melchizedek is a great guy no doubt, maybe even your hero (snicker snicker),

While I enjoy discussion and debate, is there any possible chance we could leave the stupidity out of it? (namely the worthless comments with the (snicker snicker))?

A Freudian slip on my part. I've been to a lot of funerals, and an atheist's funeral is the absolute worst. I hope I never go to another.

I'm reminded of the last atheist's funeral I went to. The poor preacher did his best to soften the blow to the family. When the preacher said the gentleman in some way served God's purpose on the earth, a few chuckles broke out in the crowd. Anybody that knew the dead guy knew the real story, and the preacher's kind comments were odviously stretching the truth. I don't fault him for trying to make things easier -- he was struggling, and there just wasn't much he could say.

The hymnal singing was about the most pitiful thing I've heard.

When an atheist dies, why don't they skip the funeral service and just bury them in the ground?

 

[SnakeLord]

I've been to a lot of funerals, and an atheist's funeral is the absolute worst.

I suppose that's all about perspective. I would personally assume that the death of the person is generally so overwhelmingly tragic that not too many people would honestly give a shit about funeral pleasantries - such as the arrangement of flowers, songs sung or anything else of such nature.

Then again, judging from your own statements, it wouldn't seem you would really go so far as to even like anyone that considered themselves atheist. Undoubtedly a fine example of true christian tolerance.

I'm reminded of the last atheist's funeral I went to

Quite a bizarre statement. You could have said: "I remember the last friend/loved one/family member's funeral that I went to", but you instead chose to use the term "atheist", as if that somehow makes the person less than human, or indeed the death of the person any less tragic.

When an atheist dies, why don't they skip the funeral service and just bury them in the ground

Quite often the deceased does not get a say in the matter, (because he's dead) - but suffice it to say you can have non-religious funerals. My wife is well aware of my wishes, and as such would ensure that they took place - but certain people are unaware of others wishes, or assume they have the say in the matter, (such as youngsters parents). Of course we must also understand that the majority of people do not intend to die, and thus rarely do they get around to making their own funeral plans.

P.S Why are you talking about funerals? Does it have relevance to anything I said?

 

[Medicine*Woman]

A Freudian slip on my part. I've been to a lot of funerals, and an atheist's funeral is the absolute worst. I hope I never go to another.

I'm reminded of the last atheist's funeral I went to. The poor preacher did his best to soften the blow to the family. When the preacher implied the gentleman in some way served God's purpose on the earth, a few chuckles broke out in the crowd. Anybody that knew the dead guy knew the real story.

And the hymnal singing was about the most pitiful thing I've heard.

When an atheist dies, why don't they skip the funeral service and just bury them in the ground?

*************
M*W: Funerals are for the living, not the deceased. I can only imagine the funeral services for the atheist were imposed by his non-atheist relatives, and I can understand the chuckles you heard in the crowd. The chuckles weren't intended to make a mockery of his atheism, they were meant as a mockery to his family (or whoever planned the services). Obviously, his own family didn't know about or approve of his atheism. A preacher should not have led the services but, again, the services were for the living who didn't give a rat's ass about what their departed relative would have wanted.

 

[Woody]

S/L said:

Quite a bizarre statement. You could have said: "I remember the last friend/loved one/family member's funeral that I went to", but you instead chose to use the term "atheist", as if that somehow makes the person less than human, or indeed the death of the person any less tragic.

The man was a former boss that fired me a year earlier because of my faith. I put my job on the line to share Christ with him. He was a brilliant man. I remember us talking about evolution and he said, "Four and a half billion years still isn't enough time."

The last thing I remember him telling me was that it just wasn't professional for me to tell somebody they're going to hell. Haunting words --and he died so soon after that -- creepy.

but you instead chose to use the term "atheist", as if that somehow makes the person less than human, or indeed the death of the person any less tragic.

It's a terrible tragedy when an atheist dies, and the funeral is hopeless.

MW said:

The chuckles weren't intended to make a mockery of his atheism, they were meant as a mockery to his family (or whoever planned the services).

His divorced wife made the funeral arrangements, and they went with a traditional funeral (southern USA style). I don't know if she had any religious beliefs, and it was her second divorce.

 

[SnakeLord]

The man was a former boss that fired me a year earlier because of my faith. I put my job on the line to share Christ with him.

Perhaps, and I can only offer the advice, you should not preach to people - or try to get them to believe exactly what you do, but instead adopt a "live and let live" kind of attitude and allow them the rights to their own beliefs?

Of course you can try with me, simply because I come to a forum to discuss these issues, but is work really a good place to preach?

He was a brilliant man. I remember us talking about evolution and he said, "Four and a half billion years still isn't enough time."

Suffice it to say, 4.5 billion years was enough time, but I must ask if that apparent statement he made is why you considered him 'brilliant', or was it perhaps because he fired you?

Of course, you also make it sound like evolution has now finished. A bizarre notion and then some.

The last thing I remember him telling me was that it just wasn't professional for me to tell somebody they're going to hell

Well at least we all now know why you lost your job. Again it's just advice, but perhaps you shouldn't have been such a dick.

and the funeral is hopeless

Is that all atheist funerals or just the one or two you have attended?

P.S Btw, just out of interest, I am still waiting for a response to the post I made that was actually related to our discussion and am still waiting for you to explain to me how talking about your boss and funerals is of any relevance to it.

It is somewhat apparent that you've shifted the discussion onto this unrelated, (dare I say), bollocks, simply because you have nothing to say concerning the actual relevant posts.

 

[Woody]

S/L

P.S Btw, just out of interest, I am still waiting for a response to the post I made that was actually related to our discussion and am still waiting for you to explain to me how talking about your boss and funerals is of any relevance to it.

OK, Here's your answer:

1) Jesus is the firstborn.

2) Col vs 16,17 says about Jesus: All things were created by him and for him, and He is before all things and by him all things consist.

3) All things created were created by Jesus. This include, angels, man, the universe, and time.

4) Therefore Jesus existed before time existed.

5) Conclusion: there never was a time when Jesus did not exist because he was there to create time. Therefore, Jesus has always existed.

AS they say in Geometry: QED

Let's see you outfigure this one. It puts you in the realm of metaphysics. Good luck explaining metaphysics with conventional scientific wisdom! lol

In the realm of metaphysics, logic is supreme over all. We can argue the Law of exclusive middles, which has a whole thread devoted to it on this forum: Origin of the Universe. I started the thread and nobody could disprove it.

 

[Medicine*Woman]

The man was a former boss that fired me a year earlier because of my faith. I put my job on the line to share Christ with him. He was a brilliant man. I remember us talking about evolution and he said, "Four and a half billion years still isn't enough time."

The last thing I remember him telling me was that it just wasn't professional for me to tell somebody they're going to hell. Haunting words --and he died so soon after that -- creepy.

It's a terrible tragedy when an atheist dies, and the funeral is hopeless.

MW said:

His divorced wife made the funeral arrangements, and they went with a traditional funeral (southern USA style). I don't know if she had any religious beliefs, and it was her second divorce.

*************
M*W: Why do you consider it to be a "terrible tragedy" when an atheist dies? Why do you think atheist funerals are hopeless? As I said, funerals are for the living, not the dead. I'm quite familiar with funeral services in the South. It's the Bible Belt. Religious fervor is what's expected. Why have a preacher come in for the eulogy? That makes no sense to me. People have no respect for the dead. It doesn't surprise me that his ex-wife made the arrangements. The funeral industry is a big money-making institution. You'd think they would be able to accommodate funerals for all people, not just the religionists. The funeral industry should not mistakenly be assumed to be a part of the religion industry. There's no connection. In fact, if anything, I'd bet that those who are in the funeral business would most likely be atheists, since death is the end -- at least when the funeral gets paid off.

 

[SnakeLord]

1) Jesus is the firstborn.

K. So there was nothing, (except for melchizedek), and then jesus was born. jesus then went about creating everything for his own benefit and amusement - as seen in 2:

2) Col vs 16,17 says about Jesus: All things were created by him and for him, and He is before all things and by him all things consist.

Except for melchizedek of course who "had no beginning". melchizedek is eternal, jesus was born before anything else was born and then got busy creating things as seen in 3:

3) All things created were created by Jesus. This include, angels, man, the universe, and time.

Thus jesus created everything, except for melchizedek who "had no beginning".

4) Therefore Jesus existed before time existed.

But not before melchizedek who "had no beginning". At some stage after the eternal melchizedek had been around, jesus was born. Who knows, maybe melchizedek was jesus daddy.

5) Conclusion: there never was a time when Jesus did not exist because he was there to create time. Therefore, Jesus has always existed

An inaccurate statement considering it clearly states jesus was born. You could change the sentence to say melchizedek always existed because, unlike jesus, melchizedek "had no beginning".

You can't argue against the bible Woody. If it tells you jesus was born and melchizedek had no beginning, you better believe it.. because it's true.

 

[Silas]

The last thing I remember him telling me was that it just wasn't professional for me to tell somebody they're going to hell. Haunting words --and he died so soon after that -- creepy.

Not only was it unprofessional, Woody, it was un-Christian. Matthew 7:1; Luke 6:37; Job 40:6-9; John 8:7.

 

[Woody]

S/L says:

Except for melchizedek of course who "had no beginning". melchizedek is eternal, jesus was born before anything else was born and then got busy creating things as seen in 3:

Mechizedek didn't create anything, you are just assuming something that isn't in the bible.

Show me a verse in the bible that says Mechizedek created something.

The bible says Jesus created all things.
That includes Mechizedek, and time and space.

Therefore, Jesus existed before time, and there has never been a time when Jesus did not exist. The logic is irrefutable, unless you can prove that Jesus did not create time.

QED

By the way, some Christians believe Jesus came to Earth at various times before the New Testament, including once as Melchizedek himself.

 

[SnakeLord]

Mechizedek didn't create anything, you are just assuming something that isn't in the bible

If you read my quote, you'll see I assumed no such thing. I never stated nor implied that Melchizedek was a creator, but merely that he out-exists jesus as the bible clearly states.

Therefore, Jesus existed before time, and there has never been a time when Jesus did not exist

But there has: before he was born. He was born after all, as the bible clearly states. Melchizedek was never born, as the bible clearly states.

 

[The Devil Inside]

jesus didnt create time.
that is ridiculous.
btw: if jesus was all so important, why isnt he mentioned before the new testament?
oh, thats right!! cuz he was just a random jewish guy that had some good ideas, thats why.

 

[Woody]

S/L

If you read my quote, you'll see I assumed no such thing. I never stated nor implied that Melchizedek was a creator, but merely that he out-exists jesus as the bible clearly states.

"out-exists means there was a time before Jesus existed. However, Jesus existed before time existed because he created time. How can something exist before him if there was no such thing as "before."

You are also assuming they (Melchisedec and Jesus) aren't the same person, and that Jesus never came to earth under any other alias as well.

You don't have an argument unless you prove Jesus did not create time according to the bible.

 

[Woody]

jesus didnt create time.
that is ridiculous.
btw: if jesus was all so important, why isnt he mentioned before the new testament?
oh, thats right!! cuz he was just a random jewish guy that had some good ideas, thats why.

The New Testament, which you have shown no knowledge of, says that Jesus created all things (Colossians).

So when you say it's ridiculous, is this a personal opinon of yours? Or are you saying you don't accept the New Testament? The bible includes both old and new testaments, and you claim to be a bible scholar.

 

[SnakeLord]

"out-exists means there was a time before Jesus existed. However, Jesus existed before time existed because he created time. How can something exist before him if there was no such thing as "before."

"Time" is just a human constuct. For melchizedek, (a being that has always been), time doesn't mean anything. You should know that when we're talking infinity, time has no meaning whatsoever. So jesus gets born and then creates time. Whoopie doo.

Not to mention, the bible doesn't say jesus created time anyway.

You are also assuming they (Melchisedec and Jesus) aren't the same person

Afraid it isn't an assumption. Hebrews clearly shows they are not the same person. Better luck next time.

You don't have an argument unless you prove Jesus did not create time according to the bible

Points shown above - A) It doesn't say jesus created time, (and time must have existed before given that he was born, whereas melchizedek has always been), and B) Time doesn't mean anything to an eternal being, (such as melchizedek).

Why not try and refute melchizedeks eternal existence?

 

[Woody]

S/L

Not to mention, the bible doesn't say jesus created time anyway.

Good try, but if he created matter and energy from nothing, it is not a stretch to assume he could do the same with space and time, as well as all the laws that govern them.

About Melchizedek as explained to the Hebrew people in Hebrews:

He didn't have the pedigree papers to be a priest but he was anyway, just like Jesus didn't have the pedigree papers (coming from the tribe of Judah instead of Levi). That is the point being made.

HEBREWS 7:1 For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him, 2 to whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all, first being translated "king of righteousness," and then also king of Salem, meaning "king of peace," 3 without father, without mother, without genealogy [agenealogetos]1, having neither beginning of days nor end of life2, but made like [aphomoiomenos] the Son of God, remains a priest continually3. (NKJV)

The belief that Melchizedek was Christ rests on three erroneous assumptions about Hebrews 7:3, shown by the superscripted numbers in the passage above.

The first is the argument that since Melchizedek is said to be without father, mother, and genealogy, he has to be eternal and therefore the Son of God. However, many have failed to see that the author does not use the terms "without father" (apatoor), "without mother" (ametoor), and "without genealogy" (agenealogetos) literally in this passage.

The concept presented by the author is not that Melchizedek lacked an actual father, mother, or family tree, but that there is no record of his parents and lineage. The Mosaic law required that all priests be descendants of the tribe of Levi. Those who were not Levites could not be priests under the law. Melchizedek is introduced in Genesis 14:18-20 as priest of the Most High God, but no details are given about him. Under the law, he was not qualified to be a priest.

The second mistaken assumption is that Melchizedek had no beginning or end, and therefore must be the immortal Son of God. The term "beginning of days and end of life" refers to the lack of information in the Scriptures regarding his origin or demise.

Well that makes sense enough to me anyway. Melch was a great guy, but he didn't precede christ. The OT Jews never saw him as immortal, so Snakelord, you are the only one that buys the argument you propose.

 

[The Devil Inside]

The New Testament, which you have shown no knowledge of, says that Jesus created all things (Colossians).

because i believe it is fallacy to use the very subject you intend to discredit as the source of argument.

So when you say it's ridiculous, is this a personal opinon of yours? Or are you saying you don't accept the New Testament? The bible includes both old and new testaments, and you claim to be a bible scholar.

beyond that, you have never responded to me quoting deuteronomy 13 as an argument against pretty much all of the new testament writings, and jesus himself.

if you want to dance, lets dance. but remember that you asked me to start in on your new testament.