I have learned of a new theory; that the god of the old testament is not the same as the god of the new testament. According to this idea; the god of old was actually named "Elohim" and created man to be his slaves.
Christ's father, was supposed to be a different god, the "real" god. Supposedly, Jesus even said in the bible that his father was not the god of old, or something to that effect. It would certainly explain the discrepancy between the vengeful, wrathful god of old, and the peaceful god of the new testament....
Has anyone ever heard of this theory? Does anyone have any more information in regard to this?
2006-11-19
13:41:56
·
16 answers
·
asked by
Sean
2
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
Just wanted to add: I don't subscribe to this theory, nor do I have any proof, specifics, or any detailed info on it. Thats why I'm asking on here :)
2006-11-19
13:54:07 ·
update #1
It was the heresy of Marcion. It is not a new theory but about 1900 years old.
http://www.theologicalstudies.citymax.com/page/page/1573583.htm
http://www.christianorigins.com/marcion.html
2006-11-19 13:50:26
·
answer #1
·
answered by Aspurtaime Dog Sneeze 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
I have never heard of this theory and thank God you do not subscribe to it, for it is completely off. God have many names mentioned throughout that Bible (YHWH, Adonai, El Shaddai, Jehovah, Elohim etc.) They all refer to God but they have slightly different meanings, such as: one name may mean "merciful Lord" while another means "everlasting God". Additionally, the God mentioned in the Old and the New Testament are exactly the same (for in the Bible it states that God is eternal and does not change- excuse my memory xD). The reason that when God was mentioned in the Old Testament, he seemed seemed "wrathful" and when he was mentioned in the New Testament he seemed peaceful is because Jesus was explaining the eternal love of the everlasting God. Jesus is the son of God and there is only one God, therefore Jesus is son of the real God: Jehovah. His love is omnipresent; was and will always be present. I hope this answers your question.
~Monk :)
2006-11-19 14:17:15
·
answer #2
·
answered by fireknight_m 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
honestly, i'm not confident if people doubt if that is authentic, what maximum doubt is the relevance and the accuracy contained in the translations. even as Constantine keen to placed the bible mutually, he omitted some books as he felt they were not proper for the cases and he necessary the bible to regulate the lots and what they were believing. and that is truth from heritage. maximum of the information that archaeologists are looking help that the bible is authentic. besides the undeniable fact that, it also helps that the information exhibits that is authentic to the finest of the cases. which incorporates the flood and the Arc on the time replaced into outfitted in a small city in a low valley between severe plains. From the position Noah stood, it looked like the international had flooded because he purely knew the small area he lived in. purely as Columbus idea the international replaced into flat because he said not something diverse from the position he stood. The parting of the purple sea extremely is the REED see as there wasn't a observe for REED decrease back then to translate. i imagine perhaps taking a heritage lesson contained in the bible taught by a non believer might want to benefit you in looking the reality.
2016-11-29 07:15:34
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Gnosticism and Marcionism both maintained that the god of the Jews was actually a demiurge (lesser god) who had forgotten where he came from and thought he was the supreme being. He created an inferior, material universe of corruption and delusion, waging wars and demanding that people live by capricious and arbitrary rules known as Torah. The Gnostic solution was that the real supreme being was the Christian god, who's son appeared to show humanity the real way to salvation, which consisted of being as spiritually pure as possible, avoiding impure foods, sex and other corrupt, fleshly pursuits. Being divine, Jesus could not actually die and only appeared to be human. The Holy Spirit was another, feminine spirit, commonly called Sophia ("Wisdom"), Jesus' actual mother, who spent a great deal of time looking for him (similarly to Isis looking for her dead son Osiris).
Needless to say, Christian orthodoxy condemned all of this and eventually suppressed it. Otherwise, the Christian church might have looked very different today.
2006-11-19 16:18:19
·
answer #4
·
answered by skepsis 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Jesus used the name of God in reference to Himself. In an argument with the leaders of the Jews about the parentage of Jesus. At that time Jesus claimed to be God...
John 8:58
Jesus said unto them, Verily,verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I AM.
Unless He was crazy, or lying, this verse means that He is the God of the Old Testament..... Jim
2006-11-19 13:58:39
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
That is just another conspiracy theory,there is one God.Jesus never ever said such a thing.Jesus said "Forgive them Father they know not what they do" Jesus then came to earth to teach us our ways were wrong,
2006-11-19 14:01:06
·
answer #6
·
answered by gwhiz1052 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Of course there is more than one god, but the father is the one and only "almighty god". This title makes him different and unique than any other
2006-11-19 13:59:15
·
answer #7
·
answered by agentemm90 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Those are the beliefs of Gnosticism, which is essentially extinct (persecuted into oblivion by the "orthodox" Christians).
2006-11-19 13:59:41
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Matthew 12:31
Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.
2006-11-19 13:46:31
·
answer #9
·
answered by Robert K 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
PLEASE do not use YA as your source of spiritual guidance!
Read the Scripture & find out for yourself, or go to older, wiser people in your faith & converse with them.
What you're referencing smacks of the "Two House Theory".
2006-11-19 13:59:56
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋