things that interest you that others dont care about probably thread

[uh-oh]

Originally Posted by veritas

Could he not be both? Could he not be both God manifest in the flesh who refused to go along with the rebellion because he had his own greater motives?

Fair?

its fair for you to believe whatever you wish.

to me there is no logic in this statement because the biblical god never operated like this, and i don't see what the point of it would be. the tone shift from the old testament to the new simply lends more to my point of view when looking at it from a place of logic and reason, removed from the desire of wanting to believe something. the new testament being the christian outlook of course.

but lets go with your line of thinking, if jesus was god manifest in the flesh who didn't go along with the uprising/rebellion, why did he act in violence against the moneychangers and such in the temple?