Who identified Jesus for us?

[marco]

Many believe Jesus was chosen by God to wander around and say nice things. Many believe Jesus was God himself. The question is, on whose authority do people take Jesus to be anything other than a bachelor who lived till he as thirty, with his parents, then spouted the Scripture he'd been fed on?

Who says Jesus was special and what is their qualification for saying so?

And who said Jesus is God and on what basis did they make this claim? In this case, why didn't the claimants explain the problem of two Gods rolled into one?

[Clownboat]

Ok, and I say that Paul is also just a vehicle for teachings of Jesus.

Please show that this is the case. When I read about Paul, it is clear that Paul is telling us about a religion he is creating for the gentiles. His religion is based off of the Jesus character. Paul never met Jesus and therefore cannot be reliably teaching us about Jesus.

I never met Buddha. I can read about him and listen to stories that people tell me about him. I should not be tasked with creating a religion about him? Of course not!

The internet is like pages in a book. Paul is the source itself. Again, having never met Jesus, he cannot be relaying on behalf of Jesus (like the internet or pages in a book relay) because Paul is the source.

I am only saying; the fact is that Bible has no word Trinity in it. If Christian is truly a disciple of Jesus, he remains in the teachings of Jesus and he doesn’t need to have the idea of Trinity and he doesn’t have to defend that idea, because it is not given by Jesus.

No one claimed that the word Trinity is in the Bible.

For 2nd time, this was the claim that started the post that you replied to:
Earthscienceguy Post 29: "What human mind could come up with the concept of the trinity. There is nothing like it in all of human history it is unique to Christianity. Christianity does not accept the concept of the trinity out of convenience but because that is the way that the Bible describes God."

Sounds like you don't consider Earthscienceguy to be a disciple of Jesus. That is between you and him. (Personally, I agree with you).

Jesus therefore said to those Jews who had believed him, "If you remain in my word, then you are truly my disciples. You will know the truth, and the truth will make you free."
John 8:31-32

What 'word' was Jesus referring to? Surely not the future words of Saul/Paul!

[1213]

… Paul is the source itself. …

If we would believe what the Bible tells, we would believe Paul had Holy Spirit and his teachings are from the Holy Spirit and so essentially from God. And it is not really his teachings, at least not the part that can cause the change Paul was speaking of.

I think most of the teachings Paul has are the same Jesus had, but by little different words.

[Clownboat]

… Paul is the source itself. …

If we would believe what the Bible tells, we would believe Paul had Holy Spirit and his teachings are from the Holy Spirit and so essentially from God. And it is not really his teachings, at least not the part that can cause the change Paul was speaking of.

I think most of the teachings Paul has are the same Jesus had, but by little different words.

Ya, ya, ya... and Joseph Smith had golden plates and magic glasses.
Paul's Holy Spirit is Joseph Smith's magic golden plates/glasses.

Why believe one nonsensical justification for claimed authority over other humans but not the other?

The teachings of Paul are not the same as Jesus. The difference is more than words, but would need its own thread.

[1213]

…Paul's Holy Spirit is Joseph Smith's magic golden plates/glasses.

Why believe one nonsensical justification for claimed authority over other humans but not the other?

And what I have not believed about Joseph Smith? What about him makes no sense to you? And why?

By what I know, the golden plates are meaningless, they offer nothing useful, which is why I don’t care much about them.

[Clownboat]

…Paul's Holy Spirit is Joseph Smith's magic golden plates/glasses.

Why believe one nonsensical justification for claimed authority over other humans but not the other?

And what I have not believed about Joseph Smith?

His visions, including one in 1820 during which he saw "two personages" (presumably God the Father and Jesus Christ), and another in 1823 in which an angel directed him to a buried book of golden plates inscribed with a Judeo-Christian history of an ancient American civilization. In 1830, Smith published what he said was an English translation of these plates called the Book of Mormon. The same year he organized the Church of Christ, calling it a restoration of the early Christian church.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Smith

What about him makes no sense to you? And why?

The above for starters.
Does it make sense to you that God the Father and Jesus appeared to him in 1830?

By what I know, the golden plates are meaningless, they offer nothing useful, which is why I don’t care much about them.

Golden plates that an angel directed him to are meaningless!?!
I just don't understand you.

Would you please attempt to answer the question posed?
"Why believe one nonsensical justification (I met god in the desert) for claimed authority over other humans but not the other (compared to god directed me to golden plates)?"

Both stories are included in a holy book inspired by your God after all. So the believability of them should be equal. (Stronger for the Book of Mormon as we have claimed witnesses).

[1213]

…His visions, including one in 1820 during which he saw "two personages" (presumably God the Father and Jesus Christ), and another in 1823 in which an angel directed him to a buried book of golden plates inscribed with a Judeo-Christian history of an ancient American civilization. In 1830, Smith published what he said was an English translation of these plates called the Book of Mormon. The same year he organized the Church of Christ, calling it a restoration of the early Christian church.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Smith

What about him makes no sense to you? And why?

The above for starters.
Does it make sense to you that God the Father and Jesus appeared to him in 1830?

Yes, I have no problem in believing that God appears to someone. But, if that happens, and nothing meaningful is said, why should I care? Yes, golden plates are nice and shiny, but if there is no message, they are as good as any gold bar.

If the message is a restoration of the church, it makes it easier to know is the message from God. If the message is in line with earlier teachings of God, then it can be from the same source, if not, then it is not the Biblical God.

By what I know, the golden plates are meaningless, they offer nothing useful, which is why I don’t care much about them.

Golden plates that an angel directed him to are meaningless!?!
I just don't understand you.

Yes, without any meaningful content, they are meaningless.

Would you please attempt to answer the question posed?
"Why believe one nonsensical justification (I met god in the desert) for claimed authority over other humans but not the other (compared to god directed me to golden plates)?"

Both stories are included in a holy book inspired by your God after all. So the believability of them should be equal. (Stronger for the Book of Mormon as we have claimed witnesses).

It depends what is said. Speaking nonsense is not equal to speaking wisdom and truth.

[Clownboat]

…His visions, including one in 1820 during which he saw "two personages" (presumably God the Father and Jesus Christ), and another in 1823 in which an angel directed him to a buried book of golden plates inscribed with a Judeo-Christian history of an ancient American civilization. In 1830, Smith published what he said was an English translation of these plates called the Book of Mormon. The same year he organized the Church of Christ, calling it a restoration of the early Christian church.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Smith

What about him makes no sense to you? And why?

The above for starters.
Does it make sense to you that God the Father and Jesus appeared to him in 1830?

Yes, I have no problem in believing that God appears to someone. But, if that happens, and nothing meaningful is said, why should I care? Yes, golden plates are nice and shiny, but if there is no message, they are as good as any gold bar.

If the message is a restoration of the church, it makes it easier to know is the message from God. If the message is in line with earlier teachings of God, then it can be from the same source, if not, then it is not the Biblical God.

By what I know, the golden plates are meaningless, they offer nothing useful, which is why I don’t care much about them.

Golden plates that an angel directed him to are meaningless!?!
I just don't understand you.

Yes, without any meaningful content, they are meaningless.

Would you please attempt to answer the question posed?
"Why believe one nonsensical justification (I met god in the desert) for claimed authority over other humans but not the other (compared to god directed me to golden plates)?"

Both stories are included in a holy book inspired by your God after all. So the believability of them should be equal. (Stronger for the Book of Mormon as we have claimed witnesses).

It depends what is said. Speaking nonsense is not equal to speaking wisdom and truth.

No message in the claimed golden plates?!?!?!?!

I'm not willing to take the time to educate you about the Mormon religion. I trust that what I allude to is not lost on the readers here.

Be well.

[1213]

…No message in the claimed golden plates?!?!?!?!...

Sorry, no meaningful or useful message. And by what I know, what the plates have, are in contradiction with the Bible, therefore I think it is not from Bible God.

[Clownboat]

…No message in the claimed golden plates?!?!?!?!...

Sorry, no meaningful or useful message. And by what I know, what the plates have, are in contradiction with the Bible, therefore I think it is not from Bible God.

Bam!
By what I know, the religion Paul created contradicts the teachings reported by a Jesus.
Therefore, Paul is not from Bible God.

Copy/pasted:
"Would you please attempt to answer the question posed?
"Why believe one nonsensical justification (I met god in the desert) for claimed authority over other humans but not the other (compared to god directed me to golden plates)?"

Both stories are included in a holy book inspired by your God after all. So the believability of them should be equal. (Stronger for the Book of Mormon as we have claimed witnesses)."

[1213]

…By what I know, the religion Paul created contradicts the teachings reported by a Jesus.
Therefore, Paul is not from Bible God.

I have not seen any real contradiction in the Bible. The contradictions have always been in the interpretations or assumptions people have.