|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 1:32 am
okay, so this is a rather odd question. Take it seriously if you wish, or take it as a joke. I do not care. It just kinda popped into my head one day.
"If Jesus is god's one and only son, but we are all children of god, then does that mean that the rest of us are all daughters of god?"
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 1:37 am
So you're asking if everyone else but jesus are women???
It makes sense.. In a wierd way...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 9:20 pm
i read it, laughed, read it again, laughed harder, read it a third time, and thought it made sense.
in a way, it makes sense, but it's obviously yet another contradiction of the bible to its self. such is the idiocracy of the religion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2007 11:18 am
every time I have attempted to confuse religious ppl with this, I always seem to get the same answer. Apparently, the rest of us are his adoptive children. xp rolleyes xp
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2007 10:38 pm
I never thought of that before, but it would appear that you're right. Gotta love random thoughts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 7:57 am
if this is true i will be REALLY PISSED OFF and as you said Quote: every time I have attempted to confuse religious ppl with this, I always seem to get the same answer. Apparently, the rest of us are his adoptive children. i rather be adopted than a daughter of god
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 11:20 am
Son/Daughter here is not in reference to gender, but that Women have been treated as less than men for most of history. We are daughters of god in that Jesus was better than us, we cannot possible hope to achieve the same splendor that he did. (There is another message in that even though women are treated as the lessors of men, they still go out & accomplish things that men could never do)
No offense to anyone intended, including both: God & Jesus
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 11:03 am
Lol, I'm not really that christian myself, but I do know a few bits from the bible.
See, though in some parts of the bible it says Jesus is god's only son, in many parts of the bible it also states that Jesus is "the son of man". And also, according to specifics in the bible, god did not create us, but instead made Adam and Eve out of the Earth (and in Eve's case, Adam). So, really, he did not BORN mankind as his sons/daughters, but instead CREATED them. So therefore, we are not his sons or daughters, but instead beings that just follow in his wake.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 12:15 am
- The Dying Messiah - Lol, I'm not really that christian myself, but I do know a few bits from the bible. See, though in some parts of the bible it says Jesus is god's only son, in many parts of the bible it also states that Jesus is "the son of man". And also, according to specifics in the bible, god did not create us, but instead made Adam and Eve out of the Earth (and in Eve's case, Adam). So, really, he did not BORN mankind as his sons/daughters, but instead CREATED them. So therefore, we are not his sons or daughters, but instead beings that just follow in his wake. but it is still said that we are children of god...........
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:17 pm
If one actually believes in God/Jesus then yeah that would make sense due to Jesus being God's only son so then we'd either be its or daughters of God...disturbing albeit interesting at the same time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Khalida Nyoka Vice Captain
|
Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:48 pm
We are all gods children in the sense that we were born from his own creation.
Jesus was god's only son because god, somehow, impregnated Mary.
Jesus was the only son because god has never done that ever again (to our knowledge).
On another note though, I am kinda amused.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 2:22 am
I too am ammused. i am ammused at the fact that random gaians, of who-knows-what-ages can give me a better answer than any religious figure or person I've asked in real life.......LOL
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 10:59 am
well ,,, i dont really think that the rest of us are daughters,although i am a female..,gender doesnt matter as long as in God's eyes,were his children..i guess .?? sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 7:20 am
That's just one of the many hypocritial things that exist in the bible, Something I think alot of people don't see or understand is that the bible was written by humans, not by God, and that it was originally written in Hebrew. Through many centuries of translations, many things have been altered and mis-translated. For instance, and even some Jewish Rabi's will atest to this, it was not the Red Sea that Moses passed through, but the Sea of Reeds which lies at the Nile Delta which was actually a marshland. And it was not hundreds of thousands of unarmed slaves, but a few thousand, and many of them were armed. Plus it has been proven by archeology and science that the first born son of Ramses II, the pharoah of the Exodus, was killed in his early to mid 30's by the backside of a sword to the back of the head at the Sea of Reeds, not killed as a child by the hand of God as our bibles claim. I'm not saying everything in the Bible is wrong, but one shouldn't think that it is perfect
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 9:15 am
King Robert Silvermyst That's just one of the many hypocritial things that exist in the bible, Something I think alot of people don't see or understand is that the bible was written by humans, not by God, and that it was originally written in Hebrew. Through many centuries of translations, many things have been altered and mis-translated. For instance, and even some Jewish Rabi's will atest to this, it was not the Red Sea that Moses passed through, but the Sea of Reeds which lies at the Nile Delta which was actually a marshland. And it was not hundreds of thousands of unarmed slaves, but a few thousand, and many of them were armed. Plus it has been proven by archeology and science that the first born son of Ramses II, the pharoah of the Exodus, was killed in his early to mid 30's by the backside of a sword to the back of the head at the Sea of Reeds, not killed as a child by the hand of God as our bibles claim. I'm not saying everything in the Bible is wrong, but one shouldn't think that it is perfect Than how to you attest to the fact of a large amount of chariot wheels and other parts being found in the red sea? and how do you attest to the fact that when the dead sea scrolls where found that there were no major translational differences or differences in doctrine? Please don't pass on information that was told to you orally. It doesn't matter who it is. Individuals make much more mistakes that a large amount of people. The bible doesn't say which pharaoh was killed in the red sea. If even if one was. It just says his army was annihilated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
