Bible Vs Doctrine
HomeDivine BirthsSon of GodGod's Word  Christ or CrossTrinity Truthsof Many NamesPromised OnesA New TempleBible Vs Doctrine EvolutionLinks & Searches

This website page was generated as a result of what was discovered durung this Bible study adventure. It seems there are a few rather glaring discrepencies between what many doctrines of mainstream churches offer as "truths" in praise of Jesus and what Jesus says about himself. Even within the same Gospel of John, Jesus is mentioned in one verse as being the Judge, while in another, Jesus claims God is the Judge. Church Doctrine claims Jesus is born in a manger while Jesus claims," I came down from heaven,". One Bible passage (end of Mark) that believers will perform miracles in the end times by taking up serpents while another says,"

The purpose here is not to argue about Bible authenticity as containing possibly even a frgamented Word of God. The point of this compilation is to show the questionable foundation for many core creeds of faith habitually passed down for generations and embellished over time. It has become quite evident in this search, and in talking to many believers, favorite scriptures are selected to support a particular doctrine while , even in a neighboring passage, meanings very different than what is expounded from the pulpit are revealed.

This is provided as a general outline. Links are provided as needed to related material throughout the site.

Jesus is often seen as begotten by God as fathered by an earthly woman.

But, Jesus himself teaches:

John 6:37-38 KJB  "All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.  6:38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me."

Jesus makes clear,  He is the Bread of Life that came down from Heaven (not born in a manger). His essence of Truth is the Word which is of heaven; not a physical man to be worshipped. Also, the Will of the Father is all important, not the specific name of Jesus. The last thing Jesus would have wanted is to be worshipped as substitute to the Father!

Luke 10:21-22 KJB "In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight."

Again; John 3:12-16 tells us," 12 If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things? 13 No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven. 14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, 15 that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. 16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. "

The passage," And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven." makes it clear that the Son of Man's reality is not of this world.

When the often quoted John 3:16 passage is seen in light of what John says in 3:13 it seems clear to me; The "begotten Son", being of heaven, could not be of  flesh and blood. The Son of God was "begotten" or "sent down" from heaven. God's only Son, the everlasting Word, the Spirit of Truth, is of heaven, as God is of heaven. He came down from heaven that we might be made aware of the Divine Word of His teachings, but, at the same time, his true reality is in heaven. Therefore, from the Gospel of John, it is made clear the Spirit of Christ cannot be the literal biological Son of God. Again, the true Son in itself, is of spiritual light, not of mankind. (click for more).  

Of interest, this seems very different than what John says in 2 John 1:7 ,"This is the commandment, That, as ye have heard from the beginning, ye should walk in it. 1:7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. 1:8 Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward." Indeed, They almost sound like two different authors. Yet, might John be differentiating between the spiritual reality of the Son of God Christ Word of God and the physical flesh and blood body of Jesus of Nazareth? Also, could this be a sign of the early onset of church doctrine creeping into what is taught about the reality and mystery of Jesus? for more on 2 John click here.

How many believers truly think the family last name of Jesus was "Christ"? Yet, "Christ" is understood to mean "anointed" in Greek much as "Messiah" is in Hebrew. From this, it would seem to be a fundamental mistake to address him as Jesus Christ. Rather, a more correct way of thinking is to see Jesus as Jesus of Nazareth, the anointed of the Christ, the Word of God. Through the generations though. the name "Jesus Christ" has led users of this name to see Jesus and Christ as one reality.

How do these Biblical explainations Jesus himself gives about His origin compare with the fundamental virgin Mary giving birth in a manger as given by the church?

For more on the mystery of the begotten Son of God check this out

Are we to worship the specific name of "Jesus" as some eternal unchanging holy rite of God?

A simple online search quickly shows Scripture throughout the Bible has revealed a long legacy of "my name" usage. Jeremiah, 1 Kings, Deuteronomy, 2 Chronicles are good example of how, around 600 years before Jesus, "my name" is seen as denoting or honoring God. See more

John 14:13 does not really stand apart from other Bible  references to "my name" especially if the words preached by Jesus are seen as not being authored by himself, but rather, the Word of Truth (God) that sent him; in other words, the Word of the Lord, not Jesus. As such "my name", as in other scriptures in the Old and New Testament alike, is also seen as addressing and honoring the Lord God Himself; again, not the flesh and blood Jesus of Nazareth. ( To see one of several phrases by John , as seen in 12:49 stating ," these words are not my own " For more on this topic see /many_names.htm

Old Testament examples where "My Name" is used in Scripture..

Of interest here, the term "my name" was in usage long before Jesus. Old Testement sources , including Deuteronomy, 1 Kings and Jeremiah all use " my name " in much the same way Jesus did. How then can " my name " refer to only Jesus? is their another meaning or other way this title can be interpreted? Could it be used for honoring someone?

Deuteronomy 18:18-20 KJB  "I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. 18:19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.

18:20 But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. (King James Bible, )

2 Chronicles 6:5-6 KJB  "Since the day that I brought forth my people out of the land of Egypt I chose no city among all the tribes of Israel to build an house in, that my name might be there; neither chose I any man to be a ruler over my people Israel: 6:6 But I have chosen Jerusalem, that my name might be there; and have chosen David to be over my people Israel."

Again, if "My Name" can be figuratively used about 600 years before Jesus' time, how can Jesus be "My Name"? Obviously, "My Name" nust be symbolic speech for an eternal God.

Another question about the Name of Jesus?

When Jesus says," I am the way, the truth and the life," from where does this come from; the Word of Jesus or the Word of God; there is a difference: Jesus in the Bible says so. See: I and my Father are one

I ask: is it beneficial to offer prayer in the specific name of Jesus? Given the above, I leave it to you to answer this question for yourself.

How about "Speaking in Tongues, "Faith Healing" and performing miracles in the name of Jesus?

Here there seems to be a contradiction. (see Mark 16:17 Mark 16:17 Vs Matthew 7:21) In other words, going through all the rituals does not gauruntee the performer a place in heaven; much as the Charismatic preachers would want you to believe. I wonder how often Matthew 7:21-22 is heard in these churches?

Mark 16:17-19 KJB "And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; 16:18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover. 16:19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.

Matthew 7:21-22 KJB " Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

Earlier in his Gospel Mark writes: 13:3 "And as he sat upon the mount of Olives over against the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately, 13:4 Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign when all these things shall be fulfilled? 13:5 And Jesus answering them began to say, Take heed lest any man deceive you: 13:6 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. (King James Bible, Mark)

Again it is said in Matthew: 4:5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. (King James Bible, Matthew)

some 600 years before Jesus, Jeremiah writes:  Jeremiah 14:14-15 KJB " 14:14 "Then the LORD said unto me, The prophets prophesy lies in my name: I sent them not, neither have I commanded them, neither spake unto them: they prophesy unto you a false vision and divination, and a thing of nought, and the deceit of their heart.14:15 Therefore thus saith the LORD concerning the prophets that prophesy in my name, and I sent them not, yet they say, Sword and famine shall not be in this land; By sword and famine shall those prophets be consumed."

Is there a recurring pattern here? Are both Jeremiah  and Matthew saying: Those who set themselves up as priests and self appointed prophets prophesying false vision and divination and not truly sent by God, are guilty of impersonation?"I wonder what is going on in the present day priesthood, as seen by the eyes of God? How do many modern church pastors compare with the Pharisees of yesteryear?

 

Resurrection Issues: Was Jesus literally raised bodily from the dead? What does the Biblw say?
 
 

 

Did Jesus literally atone for our sins through offering up his blood as a ransom payment on the cross?

Is this doctrine based on faulty translation?

This pivotal church doctrine,  lying at the heart of the belief paradigm of countless church-goers, is Biblically scrutinized.

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Many Christians believe that "God sacrificed His one and only Son as a ransom through which the sins of all who believe will be cleansed by the blood of the lamb". John 3:16 is often quoted as Biblical proof of Jesus being the physical begotten son of God. Looking at what is recorded from the teachings of Jesus himself is essential in attempting to understand the meanings behind "Son" and begotten".

Revelation 1:5 New King James Version (NKJV) "and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler over the kings of the earth. To Him who loved us and washed  [freed] us from our sins in His own blood, " Footnote:   [a] Revelation 1:5 NU-Text reads loves us and freed; M-Text reads loves us and washed.

Just what does this verse really mean? "washed " and "freed", in common usage, are two very different words. Yet these two words are used in different translations in the same location of an ancient text.

Could the word "life" be just as easily inserted instead of "blood"? Remember, "blood" symbolized life in ancient Hebrew thinking. Also, Revelations is not directly quoting Jesus. This could just as easily be a form of some early church doctrine. Now, does not "freed in the life" sound better than "bathed or washed by the blood? One sounds so barbaric and blood thirsty; the other, spiritually  enlightening.

Here is a  fundamental doctrine whose only real basis seems to be from the writings ands doctrine of Paul and a student of Paul.

1 Peter 2:24 New King James Version (NKJV) "who Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree, that we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness—by whose stripes you were healed."

Romans 5:8 New King James Version (NKJV) "But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us."

1 Thessalonians 5:9-10 King James Bible "For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, Who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him. Wherefore comfort yourselves together, and edify one another, even as also ye do."

1 Corinthians 15:3 King James Bible " For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 15:4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:"

The foregoing leads one to ask: Just what "scriptures" is Paul referring to in 1 Corinthians 15:3? Looking online, I found very little in this regard; just a lot of speculation and theory.

Note:  Only writings of Paul and Peter, such as found in Romans,1st Thessalonians and 1st Peter, on a computer search " died for us " or "bore our sins", were the only Biblical references for Jesus dying for our sins. Other searches yielded passages from, at most, one or two other Apostles. Yet. how often do we hear this," died for our sins," Doctrine preached, with strongest conviction, from the church pulpit?

To build a whole foundational theology based on a few lines of scripture; not recorded as having been said by Jesus himself but, authored by only three or four of His twelve Apostles!

I guess Apostolic Tradition is really what much of this is all about. As for myself, I would rather focus as much as possible on the direct teachings of Jesus himself than on the Apostles who were his followers, or students of his followers, as Ordained by Church Bishops under an ancient emperor; All books of the Bible being selected and Canonized as authors of an inerrant Word of God. Yes, eyewitness accounts notwithstanding, there does seem to be a big difference between Jesus and the understanding of His Apostles; especially in later years as various church politics and doctrines come into play.

Bible references to Jesus saying." these words I speak are not my own," or," Did we not do miracles and prophecy in your name?" wherein Jesus replies," Get away from me Satan," along with," Coming in a New Name...or, as a thief in the night," etc. are conveniently dismissed.

For more on Jesus and His sacrifice, click here:

Here is another example of the Apostles not understanding Jesus. What is being "Born Again"? How was Jesus begotten? Is the Christ's true reality of flesh and blood?

3:3 John records Jesus as saying to Nicodemus,"  Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." When Nicodemus did not understand,  Jesus explains in a different way, saying, 3:5 " Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." Jesus had to reiterate his meaning. The first attempt, as taken literally in light of the biological everyday meaning of being born, sounded like nonsense while," being reborn [ Baptized ] of "water and the spirit" brought new meaning.

Where did the Son of God come from? Was he born in a manger by an earthly woman? John 3:12 tells us,"  And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven." This makes it clear that the Son of Man's reality is not of this world. He came down from heaven that we might be made aware of the Divine Word of His teachings, but, at the same time, his true reality is in heaven. Therefore, from the Gospel of John, it is made clear Jesus cannot be the literal biological Son of God. Again, the true Son in itself, is of spiritual light, not of mankind.  (this seems very different than what John says in 2 John 1:7. for more on 2 John click here.) They almost sound like two different authors.

When this (3:16) passage is seen in light of what John says in 3:12 it seems clear to me; The "begotten Son", being of heaven, could not be of  flesh and blood. The Son of God was "begotten" or "sent down" from heaven. God's only Son, the everlasting Word, the Spirit of Truth, is of heaven, as God is of heaven. (click for more)

John 3:16 continues: "whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

A similar passage in John 3:3 reads," Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

On the surface, these two scriptures seem to almost contradict each other. But, if "him" in 3:16, is seen as the "Son" which is of the everlasting Spirit of Truth coming down from heaven and "believeth" understood as " born again", then, the two passages seem to agree quite nicely. One reinforces the other.

For more on what Jesus says about himself click here. You might want to contrast the teaching given by Jesus himself to some of the Apostolic letters etc. How does all this align itself with Church Doctrine?

 

Who is the Final Judge; Jesus or God?

Here are scriptures that seem to completely contradict each other. (John: 5:22 & 12:47)

First: John 5:22 says," God, the Father, judges no man but commits all judgement to the Son".

5:21 For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will. 5:22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son: 5:23 That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.

John repeats Jesus as saying: 5:25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live. 5:26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; 5:27 And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man.

5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 5:29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation. 5:30 I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me." (King James Bible, John)

Second: In John 12:47-49 God is clearly the judge; not Jesus.

12:46 I am come as a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness.12:47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. 12:48 He that rejecteth me, and  receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. 12:49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. 12:50 And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak." (King James Bible, John)

From this it seems clear, Jesus himself is not the judge but, rather, it is the Word of Truth spoken by Jesus that judges.

In addition: John writes: John 5:19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise. 5:20 For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel.

It would seem either the Son or God the Father has the power to give life (being born again) to anyone. With fairly equal power, they should both be honored equally. Yet, in other passages it is made clear Jesus can do nothing without the Father. Obviously, they cannot be equal.  Also Jesus "comes not to judge the world".

Surely, these are complex issues. For more go to: A direct Biblical contradiction?

 

 

A Rapture of a new earth of light and delight or a future of torment and hellfire, death and destruction? Which is it?

2 Peter 3:10  KJB " But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up."

I ask: How can one come as an unexpected "thief in the night" and yet create such devastation? For that matter, How does this "devastation" and "burning up" relate to Revelation 21:4 KJB "And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away."

The Rapture notwithstanding ( as taught by some churches), It does seem clear," Thy Kingdom Come, Thy Will be done on earth, as it is in heaven," ( Mattthew, 6:10) portends a future Kingdom of God right here on Earth.

As a short review:

A listing of  Promised Ones, A coming Redeemer, as mentioned in the following Faiths as covered above.

1. Zoroastrianism: Khshathra (Dominion), Desirable, a kingdom yet to come.

2. Hinduism: Vishnu Yasha; Sanskrit for "Glory of God".

3. Buddhism:  Maitreya Buddha, Amitabha “Source of Wisdom, Unbounded Light".

4. Judaism: Messiah, Emmanuel. Malachi  3:1 "Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the LORD, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts."

5. Christian: Glory of the Lord or Father, the Spirit of Truth: John 16: 12-16 “ I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. But when he, the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come."

6. Islam: The Great Announcement, Illustrious Messenger  Sura 3:81 "When Allah made (His) covenant with the prophets, (He said): Behold that which I have given you of the Scripture and knowledge. And afterward there will come unto you a messenger,"

Question:

Could this be an ongoing living Covenant between God and mankind that is alive, well and functioning as you read this?

Might this truly be a progressive phenomena spanning thousands of years upon which Mankind's evolutionary spiritual destiny is based?

Here is a link to something I found during a search in Bible prophecy about the rebuilding of the 3rd Temple on the Mount in Israel, According to prophecy, the Temple will be built only after the Jews have returned to their homeland of Israel. That stipulation pretty much limits this to near the present time. Click here and see what you think???