There's a question that causes debate among many believers, and that is the age old question... Are Jesus and God the same? Well, it does say that "for God so loved the world he gave his only begotten son", so naturally you would think the answer is a simple no.


On the contrary,

John 8:58

Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.

Jesus not only claimed to pre-exist Abraham, but He took the divine name, I am, for Himself:

Exodus 3:13-15

13Moses said to God, “Suppose I go to the Israelites and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ Then what shall I tell them?”

14God said to Moses, “I am who I am. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I am has sent me to you.’

The jews knew exactly what He was saying, which is the reason they were trying to kill Him

Jesus claimed to be equal with God:

John 5:17-18

17Jesus said to them, “My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I, too, am working.” 18For this reason the Jews tried all the harder to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God

And again:

John 10:30-34

I and my Father are one.

Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.

Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?

The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

Again, the jews were trying to kill Him because He claimed to be God.

Here again, Jesus claims the divine name for Himself:

Mark 12:35-37

And Jesus answered and said, while he taught in the temple, How say the scribes that Christ is the Son of David?

For David himself said by the Holy Ghost, The LORD said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool.

David therefore himself calleth him Lord; and whence is he then his son? And the common people heard him gladly.

Notice that He is referring to David as the "Lord" and Himself as the "LORD". The "LORD" is God.

Jesus often referred to Himself as the Son of Man..who is the Son of Man?

Daniel 7:13-15

In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed

The Son of Man is the rightful heir to the divine throne who will rule, forever, and only God receives worship:

Matthew 4:10

Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

Jesus received worship many times, never correcting them:

Matthew 2:2

Where is He who has been born King of the Jews? For we saw His star in the east and have come to worship Him.”

Matthew 14:33

And those who were in the boat worshiped Him, saying, “You are certainly God’s Son!

Matthew 28:9

And behold, Jesus met them and greeted them. And they came up and took hold of His feet and worshiped Him.

John 9:35-38

Jesus heard that they had put him out, and finding him, He said, “Do you believe in the Son of Man?”

36 He answered, “Who is He, Lord, that I may believe in Him?”

Scripture also declares that He is God:

John 1:1;14

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God...14And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth

John 20:28-29,

"Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!" 29 Jesus said to him, "Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed

Heb. 1:8, "But of the Son He says, 'Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever, and the righteous scepter is the scepter of His kingdom.'"

The reason God became a person is what the gospel is all about. If you're asking how, I think that would be a trivial thing for God to do. Jesus came as a man to reconcile men back to God. All men are sinners, and we have a corrupt nature predisposed to sin. We've all broken Gods laws, and the wages of our sin is death. Jesus, however lived a perfect, sinless life, which qualified Him to be a sacrifice for the sins of the world. He took all of our sins upon Himself and took the punishment that we deserved on the cross. In this, He reconciled the two natures. We have a sinful, corrupt nature which is separated from God..but He brought the righteousness of God into it by becoming a man and imbued into mans nature, so that we could once again have fellowship with God..but it is only through His righteousness that we are justified. That is why He is the way, the truth and the life.









>> ^lurgee

Why delude yourself into believing something you can't prove exists?
Does this comfort you? Are you scared of an inevitable end?
Do you need in imaginary story-book man to hold your hand as you face the end of your life-span?

I will never understand the trumped-up theory of religion.

God proves Himself through revelation. He revealed Himself to me, and He would do so with you, if you would just open the door to one of all the many times He has knocked upon it.

>> ^Sagemind:

What is so fucking hard about saying "I don't know."

The dilemma for you is, if you don't know, then how can you say that I don't know either? You assume that I don't, because you don't (and perhaps you assume that I can't). Obviously, it would be a trivial thing for God to reveal Himself to me in such a way as that I could know it, and Him, for certain. You seem rather closed minded to the idea for someone who doesn't know.

You want to believe in a creator? more power to you. I got zero problem with that. The problem comes when we have people of different faiths or non-faiths. We all have to live together on this mudball. So when a faith tries to claim moral authority, it tends to end in tears and bloodshed.

Bloodshed comes when evil men seize power over others and use something like religion as a pretense. Men have never been short of excuses for killing. Millions of Christians were exterminated under the atheistic state in communist Russia. The problem is when men claim moral authority and are a law unto themselves, instead of submitting to the God from whence all law and authority is derived.

Being a moral person is simple survival 101. I have a better chance of survival if I work together with people instead of against them. We can all do more, be more productive, and live happier lives if we're all healthy. We live happier, more productive lives if we don't steal from or kill each other.

There's your basic morality right there and it did not require god. It's that simple people.

Some people feel it is happier and more productive to steal from or kill each other. Who is right?

Scripture says that God has written His laws on our hearts. Everyone has a conscience that tells them right from wrong. Even psychopaths know right from wrong, they just ignore it.

I won't say god is dead however, BECAUSE I DON'T FUCKING KNOW! I don't have any grand insights into the inner workings of creation and what created life, the universe, and everything so I simply can't say and neither can you because in that regard, you're just like me.

I can't tell you how God did it, exactly, but I know that He is. I can tell you that because He has revealed Himself to me, personally. God gives revelation of His existence to anyone who wants to know Him. To those whose minds and hearts are closed to all the ways He tries to reach them, He keeps knocking, but it is their choice ultimately to open the door.

Revelation 3:20

Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me.

You could know God, but the question is, why don't you want to? Ask yourself why you are keeping that door shut.

>> ^VoodooV:

does it take more arrogance to assert divine creation or that "we don't know, we should investigate"?

I think it takes more arrogance to rule it out. Investigation is great; we have better evidence today of creation than we ever did before.

Question: If yahweh created everything? Who created yahweh?
If yahweh spontaneously created itself or existed forever without a precise beginning..

Why can't you just apply that to the universe itself and ShutTheFUUUUUUCKUp

No one created God, He is eternal. If you're fine with an eternal universe then you obviously don't have a problem with something being eternal. Your problem seem to come when that something is an eternal person. The reason I don't apply it to the Universe is because all of the evidence points to it having an absolute beginning.


>> ^GenjiKilpatrick

What is so fucking hard about saying "I don't know."

You want to believe in a creator? more power to you. I got zero problem with that. The problem comes when we have people of different faiths or non-faiths. We all have to live together on this mudball. So when a faith tries to claim moral authority, it tends to end in tears and bloodshed.

Being a moral person is simple survival 101. I have a better chance of survival if I work together with people instead of against them. We can all do more, be more productive, and live happier lives if we're all healthy. We live happier, more productive lives if we don't steal from or kill each other.

There's your basic morality right there and it did not require god. It's that simple people.

I won't say god is dead however, BECAUSE I DON'T FUCKING KNOW! I don't have any grand insights into the inner workings of creation and what created life, the universe, and everything so I simply can't say and neither can you because in that regard, you're just like me.

>> ^A10anis:
It is NOT a choice between "god and nothingness," It is a choice between childish myth, wishful thinking, and divine slavery based upon brain washing and fear, or the choice of reality, based upon logic, free thought, education and common sense. Faith is simply faith. After all, if god existed, faith would not be necessary, he would be fact.


That's a very unsophisticated analysis, A10anis, and very biased as well. It's really a big surprise that you've attributed rationality solely to your viewpoint. Based on what? You've made all sorts of claims here, but nothing to substantiate them.

It is a clear choice between a Universe that was created intentionally, with meaning and purpose, and a Universe that is a product of chance, without meaning and purpose. What other choices are there?

Another question is, how would you know which one you were in?

Faith is simply faith. After all, if god existed, faith would not be necessary, he would be fact.

That's a false dilemma, A10anis. A couple of them, actually. Clearly God can exist and require our faith at the same time.

OH MY GOD!

I deaded and discussed my own vid with posting the powers!

Too funny!

*notdead

I suppose it should really have been labeled anti-theist, since he's actively against the idea of gods in thie clip, not a "non-believer".

"Our Gods are dead. Ancient warriors killed them, because they were more trouble than they were worth". Seems pretty anti-god to me.

But yeah, Worf was more spiritual than the rest. Like Chakotay in Voyager... how I loathed him.

Oh gods, Kevlar, I'm going to have to recover before I decide if that is the best comment, in so many ways, I have ever read.

In reply to this comment by Kevlar:
>> ^Payback:

Is it just me or would these "firemen" be better off fighting the blaze than busting out the camera phone for the "oh gee whiz" moment?


Payback, let's say you've got kids and are about to feed your new baby some formula but for some reason it sprouts demon wings and is now circling the bedroom ceiling, its head turned sideways, shouting the chants of gods long dead. Do you shrug your shoulders, grab a stepladder and immediately shove the spoon into one of its 5 new mouths? Or do you stand back in stupefied wonder before coming up with a plan that may or may not involve a butterfly net and pruning shears?

My reading of your comment is that that people should not hesitate before aiming a hose at a tornado. I love your comments, but in this case I'd argue that the situation is truly and perversely fucked enough (and outside the realm of their normal experience) to make a slow response a little more understandable.

Actual LOL from me while in the office! You bastard.

In reply to this comment by Payback:
>> ^Kevlar:

Payback, let's say you've got kids and are about to feed your new baby some formula but for some reason it sprouts demon wings and is now circling the bedroom ceiling, its head turned sideways, shouting the chants of gods long dead. Do you shrug your shoulders, grab a stepladder and immediately shove the spoon into one of its 5 new mouths? Or do you stand back in stupefied wonder before coming up with a plan that may or may not involve a butterfly net and pruning shears?
My reading of your comment is that that people should not hesitate before aiming a hose at a tornado. I love your comments, but in this case I'd argue that the situation is truly and perversely fucked enough (and outside the realm of their normal experience) to make a slow response a little more understandable.


Oranges to apples. If one of YOUR imaginary kids suddenly proclaimed they were a demon and grabbed a pair of scissors and said their sister/brother must die. Would you go grab the camera or try to disarm them?

Any firefighter will have at least a passing knowledge of -albeit rare, but not undocumented- "fire whirls" which are observed mostly during wildfires.

I haven't found much on Google about Spontaneous Infant Demonification.

>> ^Kevlar:

Payback, let's say you've got kids and are about to feed your new baby some formula but for some reason it sprouts demon wings and is now circling the bedroom ceiling, its head turned sideways, shouting the chants of gods long dead. Do you shrug your shoulders, grab a stepladder and immediately shove the spoon into one of its 5 new mouths? Or do you stand back in stupefied wonder before coming up with a plan that may or may not involve a butterfly net and pruning shears?
My reading of your comment is that that people should not hesitate before aiming a hose at a tornado. I love your comments, but in this case I'd argue that the situation is truly and perversely fucked enough (and outside the realm of their normal experience) to make a slow response a little more understandable.


Oranges to apples. If one of YOUR imaginary kids suddenly proclaimed they were a demon and grabbed a pair of scissors and said their sister/brother must die. Would you go grab the camera or try to disarm them?

Any firefighter will have at least a passing knowledge of -albeit rare, but not undocumented- "fire whirls" which are observed mostly during wildfires.

I haven't found much on Google about Spontaneous Infant Demonification.

>> ^Payback:

Is it just me or would these "firemen" be better off fighting the blaze than busting out the camera phone for the "oh gee whiz" moment?


Payback, let's say you've got kids and are about to feed your new baby some formula but for some reason it sprouts demon wings and is now circling the bedroom ceiling, its head turned sideways, shouting the chants of gods long dead. Do you shrug your shoulders, grab a stepladder and immediately shove the spoon into one of its 5 new mouths? Or do you stand back in stupefied wonder before coming up with a plan that may or may not involve a butterfly net and pruning shears?

My reading of your comment is that that people should not hesitate before aiming a hose at a tornado. I love your comments, but in this case I'd argue that the situation is truly and perversely fucked enough (and outside the realm of their normal experience) to make a slow response a little more understandable.

If a courthouse had a display of a dozen different ancient law codes, and the ten commandments was one of them, I don't think it would be a problem for most atheists. The problem is when that is the ONLY one displayed, especially in the form of a 2.6-ton granite monument.

Atheists need to be more willing to acknowledge America's historical roots. America's formative underpinnings were always steeped in Judeo-Christian values. The 10 commandments are THE document that epitomizes the origins of both values and laws for that culture. Atheists need to lighten up in that respect. To have a courthouse want to pay homage to one of the most important documents in Judeo-Christian legal history is not a big deal.

That said - if the ONLY thing American courts ever displayed were the 10 commandments then atheists would have a point. But of course that is not true and never was. Courts, schools, and public locations frequently display a great variety of thoughts from many cultures. The 10 Commandments are simply the stock in a stew as far as that goes.

And if you take another look at the ten commandments, only two of them (murder and theft) are still against the law.

It's still the most important 'document' in regards to the historical origins of the values & rules that the courts hew towards. Honoring your parents, not coveting other people's property, telling the truth, and honoring your marriage vows are values very much pertinent today - atheist or not. The 10 commandments have a religious half (1st five) and a behavior half (2nd five). Atheists only have a problem with the 'I am your god, no idols, keep the Sabbath' bit.

And I also think it is highly unlikely that your local library would be able to post "God is dead." on the wall. But I'm glad to hear you would let it slide if they did.

I have never understood why people get so offended just by someone daring to have a different point of view. I'm not so insecure in my values that I dare not see the smack of some other value system. Are atheists so insecure that passing by a stone block 10 phrases on it is going to give them religious cooties? Are Christians really so weak that the sight of a billboard is going to turn all their kids into atheists? Feh!

Any person who demands that different points of view be 'removed' from their presence because they disagree with them is nothing but a coward. I was exposed to the beliefs of all kinds of philosophers, thinkers, and cultures at school. I didn't go around whining about it when I ran up against positions and ideas that I disagreed with, or that I thought were a load of hogwash. Oh no - someone is praying to Allah in my high-school! That's a violation of my 'rights' to be exposed to that! Pht - please - only a coward thinks that way.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
I disagree. The locations you mention have quotations & images of philosophers, historical figures, poets, authors, actors, atheletes, and public figures of all kinds. Some (not all) of those displays have origins in religion. The historical role of religion in government and law is important. It is part of our culture. For a modern court or school to give a nod & pay homage to that role is not a slap in the face of any particular belief system, nor is it 'advocating' any particular religion.
When a library somewhere puts up a pithy quote from Frued, Nietzsche, or some other sectarian it isn't a big deal to me - even if I disagree with the overall senitment. It doesn't make me want to 'join' an organization that respects the subject. They are just tipping a hat to 'good advice' and great people & events from our shared history. To suggest that some images/quotes/events/displays should be banned because they happen to have their origins in religion is censorship of the worst kind - and people who claim to be 'open minded' should be ashamed to have any part of it.


If a courthouse had a display of a dozen different ancient law codes, and the ten commandments was one of them, I don't think it would be a problem for most atheists. The problem is when that is the ONLY one displayed, especially in the form of a "2.6-ton granite monument".

And if you take another look at the ten commandments, only two of them (murder and theft) are still against the law. Well, two and a half, since bearing false witness is sometimes illegal. If you want to "give a nod" to it, fine, but others try to claim it's the "foundation" of our legal system (as in the article). Twenty five percent congruity is not a foundation, and I doubt there is a religion or philosophy where those actions aren't condemned. So "give a nod" to all of the other ones, too.

And I also think it is highly unlikely that your local library would be able to post "God is dead." on the wall. But I'm glad to hear you would let it slide if they did.

>> ^always:
I purchased The Downward Spiral for the first time in the summer of 1996, when I was thirteen. It was on audio cassette. I would listen to it on my Sony Walkman headphones in the dark after bedtime. Sometimes I would get so scared I'd have to turn it off without making it through both sides all the way to "Hurt." I hadn't ever taken church that seriously, and hearing Trent snarl "god is dead" just seemed to affirm my growing suspicions. I discovered a darkness in myself that summer, a darkness that remains with me to this day. I've since purchased it over a dozen times to give as a gift to friends or to replace my copy which had worn out

There it is. Fan boy gush gush. Hate if you want.


I can relate to your story, except that I was listening to Emperor's "In the Nightside Eclipse" during a bloodletting orgy with a blindfold on.