akueg

2 hours ago, John Robinson said:

Akueg, you say you aren't a JW, but every single one of your talking points lines up exactly with what they teach.

Every. Single. One.

And that damnable heresy condemns both them, and you.

I'm going to repeat what I told someone else here that said the same thing,

Oh, because wearing tzitzit, tefillin, and head coverings for wives is SUCH as Jehovah's Witness thing? Or because saying the name of YHWH was the name of the angel, not directly the name of the Father, is SUCH a Jehovah Witness thing even though the whole premise of their religion is the Father's name is "Jehovah"? Clearly you did not understand, if you even read at all. I am not JW, nor have I ever been, and this much is obvious when you compare the teachings on their website, to my own. Just because I agree that consuming blood is sin just as they do does not make me JW. Did the command to abstain from blood originate from them, or did it originate from the command given to Noah recorded in Genesis, and also repeated throughout the Torah, and also by the apostles? Hellur?

1 hour ago, Yowm said:

It proves He is more than "the FIRST to be born among the dead INTO the new body of glory", He is the source of resurrection and life and therefore God.

 

No, it proves that THROUGH him is found the resurrection and the life, hence,

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. (John 14:6 [NIV])

Why? Because he is the REPRESENTATION of the Father. We worship the Father by worshiping his representation. By the mercies of God, PLEASE UNDERSTAND!

18 minutes ago, Yowm said:

Rather...

Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. 
(Joh 11:25a)
 

How does that negate "the FIRST to be born among the dead INTO the new body of glory"?

3 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

Yes, but "firstborn" simply refers to status,as it is used in Colossians 1: 15.   In 1:18, it is used to refer to Jesus as the firstborn from the dead, which defies the notion that Jesus was created or "born."    It simply refers to a status of preeminence.    In ancient times, you could be the "firstborn"  of anything.  It had nothing to do with being born, or coming into existence. 

 

He's the firstborn from the dead because he is the FIRST to be born among the dead INTO the new body of glory. Firstborn isn't just status, it is being FIRST, in a context. Yes, sometimes the rights of a firstborn son have been given to other sons who were not firstborn, such as Isaac, who was not Abraham's first born son, which was Ishmael. However, we are not dealing with a transference of firstborn rights with Jesus Christ. He is firstborn of creation because he was the FIRST to be born in creation. He is the firstborn of the dead because he is the FIRST TO BE RESURRECTED AMONG THE DEAD INTO THE NEW BODY OF GLORY. 

Again, you use say these words "firstborn", "son", "representation", "image" interchangeably because you have knowledge of them, but you really do understand what they actually mean.

Just now, Sojourner414 said:

I took some time to read your posts; Shiloh357 is right. Jesus is not "a god" or some created thing that is lesser than God. Scripture says: " Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am. " (John 8:58 NASB), and  "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. " (John 1 NASB)

What bothers me is your insistence on insisting Jesus is lesser than God.  Unless it was God's blood that redeemed mankind, we could not be redeemed at all.

We understand it just fine,  but it's not our problem if folks keep explaining to you that Scripture means what it clearly says, and you cannot accept that. Jesus is God, and no amount of hermeneutical gymnastics is going to work in order to "knock Him down" to the role you wish to relegate Him to. So, with that being the case, I would recommend you find somewhere then that caters to your particular "theology".

In other words: don't let the door hit you on the way out.

"You heard me say, 'I am going away and I am coming back to you.' If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I. (John 14:28 [NIV])

Jesus himself affirmed he is lesser. His words, not mine.

17 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

The term "firstborn of creation"  doesn't refer to being born or coming into existence. It is a old terms that simply means, "chief."   Jesus is the chief, in that he holds the highest place in creation.  

I didnt call you a heretic.  I called your teachings heresy.   You don't understand the Scriptures at all. 

I don't care if you speak to me at all.    But I will be here to counter what you teach so that no one is led astray by you and that no one agrees with or believes anything you say.  Whether you address me again or not, is irrelevant to my participation on this thread.

Who do you suppose was given a "chief" position in a family according to scripture? Hmmmmmmmmmmm.

5 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

In Hebrew the word "elohim"  can mean messenger or judge.  It is even used to refer to angels.   It is not saying that Moses was made a god in the sense that he was made a deity.  It means that he would speak for God to Pharaoh.

Jesus was not made a God.  Jesus always was God.  He has no beginning or end.   He is co-eternal with the Father meaning that in the dateless eternal past, Jesus was there with the Father.

Heresy.   Jesus always existed as God.  No true believer will accept or believe as you do.

I've heard that before. People in your position will call those who actually understand the scriptures "heretics", when it is they themselves who are the heretics who have alienated themselves from the actual teaching of scripture in favor of what they have been taught by their churches. Jesus Christ coming into existence in the beginning is the original teaching of scripture, hence "he is the firstborn of creation" and "the Father is greater than I". It was the catholic church that later on distorted sound teaching by promulgating their teaching of the trinity, which the protestant churches have subsequently borrowed. I have taken enough time out of my day to try to show you with scripture that you are wrong, but if you refuse to come to understanding, that is on you. Bye.

6 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

He is not saying that He will make Him deity.   In fact the Hebrew is better translated as, "I will make you as a god..."   The point of the passage is that Moses will be God's spokesman, He will speak for God to Pharaoh.

Jesus, being human, doesn't make Him finite.   Jesus has always existed; there is never a time that Jesus did not exist or will not exist.

But that does not make Jesus finite.   Jesus is God, co-eternal with the Father.  Roles may change, but nothing about who Jesus is will change.

 

You are confused about Jesus as God's representative.   Jesus isn't the representative of God;  He is the representation of God, and those are not the same thing.   Jesus is the representation of the nature and character of God in that He is showing us what the Father is like.   You're trying to put a time stamp or expiration date on that role of Christ, but the Bible doesn't. 

Most of your nonsense is just your own imaginings.

Even if you translate that verse as "make you as a god" as opposed to "make you as God", do you not understand the ramifications of God saying this to Moses, that God will make him a god? Hello?????????? You deliberately miss the whole meaning of that passage, because you want to refuse to understand that God making Moses a god RELATES to God making Jesus Christ a god. "a god", or "AS God", or "LIKE God", whatever you want to call it, it means the SAME THING, where God APPOINTS HIS REPRESENTATION TO ACT ON HIS BEHALF. 

Jesus Christ did not make himself God, nor has he always existed as God, he was GRANTED authority to be God, BY GOD, no different than Moses was, but in greater authority than Moses, over all heaven and earth. This also relates to why even Adam, who was also made in the REPRESENTATION OF GOD, was subsequently given authority to rule over the entire earth,

...let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth... (Genesis 1:26)

Because it relates to being the "image of God",

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. (Genesis 1:27 [ESV])

Where Jesus Christ is also the image of God,

The Son is the image of the invisible God... (Colossians 1:15 [NIV])

And because he is just an IMAGE of God, just as Adam was, this implies he too was created, just as Adam was, hence,

The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. (Colossians 1:15 [NIV])

He was born first before anyone else came into being. You do not understand how a son relates to a father. A father comes first, then a son, in relation to time, and since the Father never began, then the next order of existence for the firstborn of all creation would be in the beginning. As such, Jesus Christ came into existence in day one of creation. This is the original teaching of scriptures, believe it, or do not. I've argued this enough and shown you ample times that you are wrong.

Just now, shiloh357 said:

Jesus wasn't/isn't half man, half God.   Jesus is 100% man and 100% God.  Fully human and fully God. 

 

 

Jesus was not representation of God; Jesus was as representation of God the Father.   He could only be the representation of God the Father because they share the same eternal nature and character.

 

There is a difference in the rank that exists in the Godhead, and the submission that Jesus exhibited during His earthly ministry.   You are trying to attribute the submission of Jesus to the Father during his earthly ministry to His relationship  to the Father now, and that is false teaching.

Which again, as 100% human, it is implied he is finite. Whereas the 100% God aspect of him, does not take away that he is still finite, since he is still man, because we see in scripture EVIDENCES of other men, who are also finite, being MADE AS GOD,

Then the LORD said to Moses, "See, I make you as God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron shall be your prophet. (Exodus 7:1 [NASB])

Because it relates to BEING A REPRESENTATION OF GOD. Do you not know that the rulership of Jesus Christ will one day end? Read,

Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.
The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For he "has put everything under his feet." Now when it says that "everything" has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all. (1 Corinthians 15:24-28 [NIV])

Currently, Jesus Christ sits AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD, but one day he will no longer sit at the right hand of God, because this relates to having LIMITATION AS A REPRESENTATION OF GOD,

Of David. A psalm. The LORD says to my lord: "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet." (Psalm 110:1 [NIV])

Just now, shiloh357 said:

As God eternal, Jesus never had finite limitations.   Jesus as man had limitations, but that had no impact on Jesus' deity.  
 

No, the limitations don't apply any longer.   Jesus is eternally God, always was.  There is no time in history where Jesus was never God.   Jesus' took on human flesh and the limitations of humanity.   It was something Jesus made Himself.  It was not done TO Jesus, but rather, Jesus personally took upon humanity and the form of a servant.

So Jesus, even in His humanity was equal with God, but ministered as a man with the limitations of humanity.   He did that to model for us what the Christian life looks like.   Jesus represented God the Father to us, but was also our representative before the Father.

Jesus is no longer in subjection to the Father as He was on earth.  

There is no "half man" and "half God". Either you are man, or you are God. Either you are finite, or you are infinite. Either you are a representation, or you are not a representation. Christ is God because he is a representation of God, not because he himself is God as the Father is God, and this much is evident because Jesus Christ exhibited limited knowledge, and even mortality, where as the Father has no limit of knowledge, nor does he ever die.

Jesus Christ is STILL in subjection to the Father, just as a wife is in subjection to a husband,

But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. (1 Corinthians 11:3 [NIV])

8 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

Yes, but that was Jesus the man speaking.   In His humanity, Jesus had limitations.  Those limitations were voluntary and temporary.   None of that applies to Jesus, now.   Jesus is now super-exalted to the highest place in the universe.   He is no longer under the temporary limitations that He had during His earthly  ministry.

Again, you're proving my point. An infinite God NEVER had finite limitations, otherwise he was never "infinite" to begin with. Jesus Christ had limited knowledge not because he descended to earth, but because of the nature of who he is, A REPRESENTATION. Limitations STILL apply to Jesus Christ even after his resurrection, because SUBJECTION RELATES TO LIMITATION, where before and after his resurrection, he is still IN SUBJECTION TO THE FATHER, THE ONE TRUE GOD, hence,

Jesus said, "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, 'I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'" (John 20:17 [NIV])

1 minute ago, shiloh357 said:

But Jesus isn't finite.   Jesus is as eternally existent as the Father. 

He didn't know the hour of his own coming, 

"But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. (Matthew 24:36 [NIV])

Here you have an example of LIMITED knowledge, which implies FINITE.

Just now, shiloh357 said:

That's just complete nonsense.   Jesus is the moral representative of who the Father is.   Jesus has the same divine nature as the Father and that is why He is the visual representation of the invisible God.

A VISUAL representation is FINITE. The VISUAL body of Jesus Christ had a LIMITED amount of cells, which had a LIMITED amount of knowledge, hence why he did not know the hour of his own coming. And this relates to him being a REPRESENTATION of an UNLIMITED and INFINITE GOD. Stop hardening your heart and come to understanding.

Just now, shiloh357 said:

No, I said you are teaching heresy becuase you are misrepresenting the true nature of Christ as God.
 

The Father is greater than Jesus in authority at that time.   That changed when Jesus was exalted to the highest place, the place he was before His incarnation.  That inequality of authority was only temporary and only applied to period of Jesus' earthly ministry.

Paul said in Philippians 2 that Jesus, although equal to God the Father, did not exploit His equality with God to His own advantage. 

Jesus is the representation of the Father, but that does not preclude Jesus from also being God, co-eternal with the Father.

You've just proven my point, God never loses authority, nor gains authority, nor does he ever die, BUT A REPRESENTATION DOES. Jesus Christ is the highest representation of God, hence why ALL authority is given to him in EQUAL measure as God, but he himself is a REPRESENTATION of God who is in SUBJECTION to the Father.

26 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

Your OP at the start of the thread is chock full of false doctrines and true believers are well advised to avoid the nonsense you teach.   Jesus never came into existence.   Jesus has always existed and is just as much God as the Father is, as is the Holy Spirit.   You presented a twisting and perversion of Scripture.

Jesus doesn't just represent God.   Jesus is God in every way, in every way that the Father is God.  To deny that is to commit heresy.

No, to disbelieve what the scriptures teach is the heresy. You call me a heretic for believing precisely what the scriptures say?

"You heard me say, 'I am going away and I am coming back to you.' If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I. (John 14:28 [NIV])

The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven. (Hebrews 1:3 [NIV])

You can believe anything you want, but you will never get around what these scriptures actually teach, the Father is GREATER than Jesus Christ and that Jesus Christ is a REPRESENTATION of the Father, which relates to why he is called God. It's actually not difficult to understand.
 

5 hours ago, John Robinson said:

All my spidey senses go on Full Red Alert when we get a poster claiming "another gospel" outside established Biblical canon.  Anybody recall Charles Taze Russell, William Miller, Joseph Smith, David Koresh, and others? Yeah. Those guys thought they had a new revelation as well.

Pass. That way lay madness.

Somehow live humble lives by having little and devote your time in this body to the service of others by doing good works is cultic in relation to the people you just mentioned? All of which was commanded by Jesus Christ and the apostles? No one here has brought "another" gospel, I have simply presented the actual gospel found in the scriptures, which contradicts the "other" gospels many have. This is why I have made it such a point to have very few words of my own in my studies, and simply let the scriptures speak for themselves when I quote them extensively throughout my studies. The gospels teach, "sell your possessions...", and the early assemblies "sold their possessions and properties", and this is precisely what I have slapped unto my Statement of Faith, because it is found in this one gospel given by the apostles. Simply because I actually believe and listen to the scriptures, which puts me in a minority, does not make me wrong for being in a minority, for since when has what the majority believe ever been an indicator of truth? "Few are chosen, many called", "The Israelites have rejected your covenant, torn down your altars, and put your prophets to death with the sword. I am the only one left, and now they are trying to kill me too.", "So too, at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace." Now, if you are hesitant in believing that I am of this remnant, then do yourself a favor and look at the very scriptures I have quoted to indicate I am right. If I am wrong, let the scriptures indicate I am wrong, not what your churches have taught you. But if I am right, are you willing to forsake your churches for the sake of the truth? Maybe, maybe not.... it's very difficult for people to leave their tradition and everything they've been indoctrinated with. The saying is true, "its difficult to teach an old dog new tricks".

7 hours ago, Reinitin said:

I don't have time to study it all out. But at a quick glimpse i see one issue that may or may not be a twist in truth. just an open door to falsehood.

In the begining was the Word and the Word was With God and Was God. This Word was light and gave life to men. (Lisa Paraphrase so read john 1 For the actual eye witness of Christ's words and teaching). This is a statement of The One God diety of Father, Son and Holy Spirit over all creation.

It should not be confused with "a god", our "you are gods". The lower case g's in the bible are a completly different words with a completely different meaning. you wrote mans dominion authority with a capital G which we are not. We are One in the essence that Christ, The One Is in us and keeps us In the one God ( The One True God, the I Am) But We are not a god much less God if not grafted in and kept as one with him by Christ.

I have not denied the truth behind this statement, "In the begining was the Word and the Word was With God and Was God", for I have asserted,

Jesus Christ existed in the beginning, hence "In the begininng was the Word...".

Jesus Christ was thus with God, since we just asserted he existed in the beginning, hence "...the Word was With God...".

And Jesus Christ existed AS God, just as the Father is God, because he is the "REPRESENTATION" of God, hence "...Was God".

Being AS God does not mean being God, it means REPRESENTING God, which is why Moses was told, "see I have made you AS God to Pharaoh....", again, relating to REPRESENTATION, not that Moses himself was the Father. If you cannot understand representation, which is also called the "image of God", then you cannot understand how someone can be appointed to be God, while not actually being God.

An example would be a vice president and president in a company, while the vice president exercises all authority on BEHALF of the president, in REPRESENTATION of the president, he himself is NOT the president, and HIS AUTHORITY is not only GIVEN BY THE PRESIDENT, BUT IT CAN ALSO BE TAKEN AWAY BY THE PRESIDENT.

5 minutes ago, Reinitin said:

Why don't you break it down more. It's all over the place. It would take weeks, months to actually go through and truth test the word and the spirit of the proclomations your making, which is exactlly how falsehood or truth is established and false witness of God spreads. Who could say amen to all of it? Not Me. Have you gone through and read all the scriptures studied it out to make sure your not spreading falsehood before you posted it?

Where is the exaltion and witness to Christ Jesus who was resurected from the grave and ascended to the throne of God as The One Chosen and given all power and authority in heaven and on earth?

Where is The One who is worthy to sit on the throne of God and judge and rule over Gods Kingdom, in our being/heart and the Nations In all righteousness as King of kings? 

 

Its a Statement of Faith, its supposed to be "all over the place", hence why it is called a "Statement of Faith". I have broken down each statement into various studies. You're more than welcome to pick any point, and we can discuss.

20 hours ago, John Robinson said:

Akueg, from your long and wordy screed it's obvious you're a Jehovah's Witness. Just as obviously, your heretical "teaching" won't find any customers here.

But thanks for playing.

Oh, because wearing tzitzit, tefillin, and head coverings for wives is SUCH as Jehovah's Witness thing? Or because saying the name of YHWH was the name of the angel, not directly the name of the Father, is SUCH a Jehovah Witness thing even though the whole premise of their religion is the Father's name is "Jehovah"? Clearly you did not understand, if you even read at all. I am not JW, nor have I ever been, and this much is obvious when you compare the teachings on their website, to my own. Just because I agree that consuming blood is sin just as they do does not make me JW. Did the command to abstain from blood originate from them, or did it originate from the command given to Noah recorded in Genesis, and also repeated throughout the Torah, and also by the apostles? Hellur?

57 minutes ago, Yowm said:

Please keep in mind this is a ‘discussion board’, not a ‘lecture board’.

Does it matter what "this" is for the truth to be spoken? Again, stop your grumbling.

26 minutes ago, Yowm said:

I gave my advice, ‘way too long’;

you gave your advice, ‘don’t read’.

I’ll take your advice, will you take mine?

I'm not going to stop preaching to the truth, I took the time to condense much of what I know into a statement of faith, if even this is way too long for you, as opposed to giving you an entire study to cover just one point, then that is your problem. I find that people that complain just simply don't like what they're being told, whether its one sentence, or many sentences. Always something.

On 9/20/2017 at 2:13 PM, Yowm said:

WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY tooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo long.

If you want responses from us postmoderns, take it one section at a time. We are here to discuss, not be lectured to.

Then don't read. Shrugs.

3 minutes ago, Willa said:

Sorry rape victims are innocent, and your law demands that they be executed when they did not cry for help in the city, even if they were unable to.  I am sorry you have fallen into deception.

Gal 2:19 LITV For through Law I died to Law, that I might live to God. Gal 2:20  I have been crucified with Christ, and I live; yet no longer I, but Christ lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh, I live by faith toward the Son of God, the One loving me and giving Himself over on my behalf. Gal 2:21  I do not set aside the grace of God; for if righteousness isthrough Law, then Christ died without cause.  Gal 3:3  Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, do you now perfect yourself in the flesh?

Gal 3:10 ESV  For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, "Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them." Gal 3:11  Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for "The righteous shall live by faith." Gal 3:12  But the law is not of faith, rather "The one who does them shall live by them." Gal 3:13  Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree"—

Who are you to criticize the Law that is perfect?

The law of the LORD is perfect, refreshing the soul. The statutes of the LORD are trustworthy, making wise the simple. (Psalm 19:7 [NIV])

That even Paul says is good?

So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous and good. (Romans 7:12 [NIV])

Whoever discards the Law is LAWLESS, Greek word "anomia" (without the Law of Moses), and we know what will happen to the lawless,

And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’ (Matthew 7:23 [ESV])

Hear, you earth: I am bringing disaster on this people, the fruit of their schemes, because they have not listened to my words and have rejected my law. (Jeremiah 6:19 [NIV])

He that turneth away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer shall be abomination. (Proverbs 28:9 [KJV])

Therefore, as tongues of fire lick up straw and as dry grass sinks down in the flames, so their roots will decay and their flowers blow away like dust; for they have rejected the law of the LORD Almighty and spurned the word of the Holy One of Israel. Therefore the LORD’s anger burns against his people; his hand is raised and he strikes them down. The mountains shake, and the dead bodies are like refuse in the streets. Yet for all this, his anger is not turned away, his hand is still upraised. (Isaiah 5:24-25 [NIV])

Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5:19 [NIV])

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. (Matthew 5:17 [NIV])

For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. (Matthew 5:18 [NIV])

It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law. (Luke 16:17 [NIV])

21 minutes ago, Willa said:

I hope you don't trim the corners of your beard, and that you have a fence around the top of your house.    I hope you put to death rape victims who had a knife to their throats and failed to call out.  You keep every jot and tittle of the law?  We would be arrested.

We do not kill the lawless because it is not the appointed time to do so. When Jesus Christ comes, then will be the time for the lawless to be captured, and thrown into fire to to killed as the Law requires, putting to death whoever sins. This relates to why Paul says, "we are all worthy of death", but because God is merciful, we are not put to death as the Law requires. We are not treated as our sins deserve.

And yes, the command concerning edging a beard is still valid, as well as every single command of the Law, hence,

Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5:19 [NIV])

2 minutes ago, Willa said:

Akueg, your statement of faith differs quite a bit from the Christian faith.  The law is the schoolmaster that brings us to Christ.  It shows us our need of our Savior because we cannot keep it perfectly as the law demands.  Only Jesus is good and kept the law perfectly.  So He has fulfilled the law and the prophets.   Today we need only keep the law of love and thus fulfill the requirements of the law.  

Jesus was in the beginning with God as the Word, and He was born of God before all creation.  The Word was God.  The Word became flesh and dwelt among us.  We have never been and never will be gods.  God the Father and God the Son (Word) as well as the Holy Spirit were instrumental in creation.  

So while your beliefs are similar to Christianity, they differ in some very important areas.

Blessings,

Willa

Where do you suppose the commands of "love the Lord your God" and "Love your neighbor as yourself" come from? From the Torah. All commands of the Law hang on these two commands, which means that if you discard any command, then you are no longer in love by which that command hangs on.