Keep it real... God shares his glory and worship with nothing...nothing. Notice the angel's response to John in revelation 19:10. How then can John say to Honor the Son, just as you honor the Father. You really dont have to be a greek major to see the Trinity unfold. Genesis Let Us creat man in Our image. Isaiah 6 Whom shall I send,And who will go for Us? According to any other belife, God changed at some point and decided to share His glory with a creature. Hello folks! Father Son Spirit = God
the oldest known translation of john 1:1 was the coptic translation. ϨΝ ΤЄϨΟΥЄΙΤЄ ΝЄϤϢΟΟΠ ΝϬΙ ΠϢΑϪЄ ΑΥШ ΠϢΑϪЄ ΝЄϤϢΟΟΠ ΝΝΑϨΡΜ ΠΝΟΥΤЄ ΑΥШ ΝЄΥΝΟΥΤЄ ΠЄ ΠϢΑϪЄ -- Sahidic Coptic text Transliterated Hn te.houeite ne.f.shoop ngi p.shaje Auw p.shaje ne.f.shoop n.nahrm p.noute Auw ne.u.noute pe p.shaje Literally, the Sahidic Coptic says: In the beginning existed the word And the word existed in the presence of the god And a god was the word.
@TheMessianicGentile John 1:1 is clear that the word was eternal with God but an even more explicit statement about the eternal nature of the Son is John 8:58 where the JW's purposely distort the translation to say "Before abraham was, I have been". This is a laughable translation. "Ego Eimi" is used over and over by John and it always means "I am" usually used before a statement of who Jesus was "I am the good shepherd" "I am the way..." etc..
@TheMessianicGentile "early Christian writers such as Justin Martyr 103AD-165AD believed these texts, specifically Proverbs 8:22, referred to Christ in his prehuman existence"
Brother Samuel, for someone who denies being a JW (and I believe you) you certainly like to use their arguments.
1. Col 1:15 First born does NOT mean first one born literally. It means preeminent. See Col 1:18
2. Rev 3:14 does NOT mean first one created when God began to create. The word "arche" in Greek can be translated as: Ruler, Prince, origin, source... as you well know because we have been over this before.
There is NO scripture showing the Logos was created! GBU
Go define what proskuneo means i.e. worship...To pay homage is one of the definitions....4352 in the Greek and to HONOUR ranks right up there with paying homage and or even adoration.
My point is that just like they thought they were only dealing with the Spirit of Peter as a man but they were dealing with the Spirit of GOD within him...
So if GOD Almighty can be worshipped as GOD ALMIGHTY then of course it is biblical to pay homage & or honour the person whom GOD just moved IN or through.
"So if GOD Almighty can be worshipped as GOD ALMIGHTY then of course it is biblical to pay homage & or honour the person whom GOD just moved IN or through." -maybe, but that is a FAR cry from calling someone your God, as Thomas did. "They shall look on me whom they pierced"-Zech. 12:12, the speaker is Yh/wh, John's Gospel relates that to Christ on the Cross. In John's mind, Jesus is God. The Logos of God, is by definition one and insepareble from Him.
Please understand that Messiah is coming in the wrath of YHWH & if it is YHWH prophesying HIS COMING wrath then don't mistake YHWH for saying HE was the one that was pierced when clearly it is the Messiah that is coming in the warth (NAME) of YHWH i.e. Rev.19:11-16 once again SHAMA. so it is YHWH foretelling HIS wrath being carried out by Messiah "the pierced one"
Proof that YHWH will ref. HIMself when sending someone is Gen.19.
Why not? You are not listening to the context & you refuse to accept the Biblical fact that YHWH sends messengers to say on His behalf in other places & yet HE HIMSELF not GO & yet it references Him going!!!
For instance Gen.18:21 "I will go and see" etc. Now tell me how why the scriptures show the angels going down to look upon Sodom & Gomorah? & also why the angels say we will destroy this place Gen.19:13 but yet Gen.13:10 says the LORD did?
Manuaim-what you mean to say to me is "SHMA", that is the imperative form of the root you were trying to mention "shama". I am not trying to be rude, but saying one word incorrectly does not mean that you understand the language, do you now see my point? You are very ignorant about our language, context, and usage. I apologize if I sounded angry before-as the son of a Holocaust survivor I tent to get...angry at comments like that, but I won't argue with you anymore and do apologize-
According to the Strongs concordance it is shama thus I expressed the corcordance number along with it i.e. 8085...And Hebrew language may be a language that you speak but it is NOT an original Jewish language Jew-ish no matter how you put it!
And I will not mock the Holocaust but the number of deaths come nowhere near to number of deaths that happened from slavery....5 years max from a Holocaust compared to at least 200 years in America alone for so-called African Americans....
5 years? I am sorry, the persecution of my people has gone on far longer then 200 years-but why are you even confusing the issue, all injustice is evil, why are you demeaning the suffering of both our peoples? Nor did I falsely quote Scriptures, I quoted them in thier context, Yh/wh says he was pierced, John relates this to Christ on the Cross-
If you would dare say that the Jewish persecution can come anywhere near the so-called African American persecution then you are really deceived......
But we will see what happens when Messiah comes we will see WHO the TRUE JEWS are Rev.3:9....We will see then. None of the Jewish people were ever mistaken for Africans/Egyptians...
Your ppl's visage is not black as coals Lam.4:8...& your ppl's do not have hair that can form 7 natural locks like Samson & even have locks like Ezekiel....
"Yeah freezingstill you have quoted scriptures without getting an understanding of the passage."-if that is the case why are you working so hard to explain away clear passages? I'm sorry, I don't have anymore time for this shtiut (a Hebrew word, meaning 'nonsense'-us 'fake' Jews are so amazing eh, we are the ones who preserved Hebrew when the 'real' Jews as you say don't seem to have any awareness of it)-done.
freezingstill your argument is lame. You know how many people on youtube I know alone that speak Hebrew that are not Jewish and they know they are Hebrews? More than 5 people....
It is not a great number of ppl who even have come across the Biblical Revelation that the Jewish ppl are converts to Judaism i.e. Jew-like by faith & not by heritage...
But as I said Messiah will judge who the Real Jews are Rev.3:9.....
Zec.12:10-And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, AND THEY SHALL MOURN *FOR HIM, as one mourneth for his only son, AND SHALL BE IN BITTERNESS *FOR HIM. as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.
Now...
2 Cor.11:31-The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is blessed for evermore, knoweth that I lie not.
That interpretation is mental gymnatistics, in the text it is Yh/wh himself saying he will be pierced-. But as I said, I do apologize if the tone became angry and do this one thing, commend you to sincere study of the languages and the Text and to the Grace of God-because with respect, your knowledge is not even basic-that is not meant to be rude but honest. Thank you for the conversation, and I am sorry for losing my temper.
I was never offended by your tone because what you said about the Bible is NOT valid.
I don't study the Hebrew language besides words that are written in the Bible so I can't argue about Hebrew linguistics etc. I can only quote from the Dictionary & Concordance
& it is NOT saying YHWH himself will be pierced you are falsely exegeting the scriptures. All through out the Hebrew Scriptures it makes a difference between YHWH & Messiah.
Pt.2~Freezingstill: Remember Gen.18 & 19... Now though when it comes to Gen.18 I am studying this passage more because I am not sure if these are angels in the name of YHWH or if this is Messiah in the name of YHWH either or it makes me no difference because YHWH sends ppl in HIS NAME...(Now If you dare to say this is YHWH himself then I would like to hear your exegesis of Gen.18)
In Gen.18:21: You see "I will go down" but in Gen.19 we know that angels went down but it was YHWH's wrath.
I've heard that: "and the Word was divine" or godlike? I think John was fixated on the divinity of Christ that he was made god, as a position in the universe to have. I mean, what was he? The king? The president? The god? But I can also see the nature, that both were gods, that is, ones with powers and authority, like a co-rulership, where both have the same position, like father and son king co-rulers. Even so the play on words certainly would otherwise be confusing.
In communication WORDS take a back seat to CONTEXT.if Jesus is a "god" and even the elect are "gods" (2Thes 2:4) then other "GOOD gods" are recognized. It's about how the word "god" is used in a certain context, added to the fact that "God" becomes a unique title of the Father. That's why other scriptures, not John 1:1 must define the Christ. His being a SON being the most direct understanding of that relationship. But SON is ignored as a critical descriptive by some but fits ARCHANGEL.
2 Thes 2:4 has absolutely NOTHING to say about the elect being gods. Son fits ARCHANGEL?? Iguess you have been hanging out with Jehovah's Witless, ehhh? LOL
Thanks for the explanation of John 1:1. But the fact is, if John wanted to say that the Father and the Christ were the same entity he would have used "ho theos" a second time. But this is all rather elementary since if we want to inquire of the Bible the precise relationship between Jesus and God we need only refer to that very fundamental description, which is FATHER and SON. Why do we violate that very fundamental concept to make them equal, co-eternal? A SON is younger than the father.
You obviously do not pay attention to the video. John specifically leaves out the definite article so that the Word would NOT be the same person He was with and yet would be the same God. This makes theos a quality. The Word shared the very nature of God but was also WITH God and NOT the exact same person.
Blog: I think John wanted us to know that Jesus was "god" as far as being powerful and with authority in the greatest way with the exception of the Father, so he notes he was "WITH" God to let us know he was not the only god. Hebrews 1 gives us the utterance by the Father at his creation: "Today you become my son" which makes it clear he was created, besides he is called God's SON, not his twin brother, so. Other angels are called the "sons of god"..sons are usually created or begotten...?
"This day I have begotten thee"does NOT say "this day I have CREATED" Thee. The phrase "I have begotten you" FOLLOWS the phrase "You are my Son." It does NOT imply creation but the sending forth in physical form of a pre-existent Son.
Don't forget Hebrews 1:8 where the Father says to the son "Thy throne O God is forever and ever." Why would an eternal Son imply, logically, an eternal twin brother? This foolish argument has been used by Jehovah"s Witless for eons. Have you been slumming?
You keep on saying eternal son....where are you getting this from? No passage in the Bible says Jesus is Eternal! You have to assume that he is Eternal.
Rev.3:14 explains that Messiah WAS created. What do you think beginning of the creation of God mean? or firstborn of EVERY CREATURE in Col.1:15...
& Heb.1:8 comes from Ps.45:6 & Messiah is simply being called an Elohiym-430-God by HIS ELOHIYM-GOD & the next verse makes that clear...
#1. I keep on saying eternal because we have to use the gray matter God gave us and logic when interpreting the Bible. It doesn't say blogrich55 is a sinner in the Bible but I have logically deduced that from the text.
\
You obviously have been studying with Jehovah's Witless. Rev 3:14 is an OLD Witchtower lie in which they pathetically change creation of to creation by to preach their heretical nonsense. Jesus is called the arche here which means origin or source of the creation of God.
#2. As for the term first born, even a cursory examination of the phrase as it is used in the Bible untainted by the toxic theology of the Witchtower would quickly reveal what you will find in verse 18 of the chapter-- pre-eminent.
Of course Jesus had a God He worshipped during the incarnation. Duhhhh! You really need to quit slumming with the Jehovah's Witless and do a bit of studying for yourself dude.Oh and start by comparing Rev 2:23 with Jeremiah 17:10 and tell me WHO searches the heart
Blogrich55 even as the LORD lives you are a liar & anyone with the Spirit of the LIVING GOD who spends time in prayer can easily see that you are using the JW's punchline to subconsciencely sway & manipulate those who are reading the comments! Your tactics come from the root of evil EVEN the same spirit that was behind the Inquistion & I stand b4 Messiah & the Father & as they listen in front of them both I say "YOU" are a liar & you are lying against me & the identity of the Messiah!
And I stand before YHWH and announce that YOU are a heretic who will die in his sins if you do not repent and believe Jesus is the Lord God Almight and I Am who spoke to Moses from the burning bush. Quit using their assinine arguments if you don't want people to think you haven't been hanging around with them.
Let us let the biblical community publicly see who is LYING...
You said I have to believe that Jesus is the Lord God Almighty and I am who spoke to Moses from the burning bush.....OR I will die in my sins i.e. IF I don't repent and believe this...
1Jn.5:13-These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.
Let's see if I have to believe Jesus is GOD ALMIGHTY?!?!?!
Jn.3:18-He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten SON OF GOD.
Jn.9:35-Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the SON OF GOD?
Jn.11:27-She saith unto him, Yea, Lord: I believe that thou art THE CHRIST, THE SON OF GOD, which should come into the world.
Jn.20:31-But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, THE SON OF GOD; and that believing ye might have life through his name.
Acts 8:37-And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ IS THE SON OF GOD.
Paul did what?!?!?!
Acts 9:20-And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the SON OF GOD.
The only way anyone can say Messiah is God the Son is if they are saying he is Elohiym the Son.
Not GOD ALMIGHTY THE SON!
Blogrich you know why you won't answer the simple question I asked you bcuz it destroys your Trinity.
Why do you think I asked you HOW MANY God's/gods are there? Once you give me the answer if you answer wrong I'll just prove you study only in the vein of trinitarianism vs. being a student of the bible.
Once again can you tell me how many God's/gods there are?
Try reading the Bible for yourself MANUAIM. If you don't know the answer to the question that is. I would sugesst Deuteronomy 6:4 and 1 Cor 8:5-6 now how this goes to destroy the Holy Trinity you will not be able to say. It does NOT logically do so. God exists in 3 distinct simultaneous persons. Deal with it.
Pt.1- Blogrich: You still don't have a revelation of what God means. Once again Theos when used to repeat passages from the Hebrew Scriptures translates from Elohiym.
In John 10:34-35 Messiah himself taught there God-Theos called them gods-theos when His word came to them.
1Cor.8:5 says there are many gods and lords...v.6 is saying that the Father is ONLY GOD ALMIGHTY....Just like when Messiah said the Father is the ONLY True GOD in Jn.17:3...This is what it means.
God exist in more then 3 persons....God existed in all of the Apostles & every other believer that has received the Baptism of the Holy Spirit & don't TRINITARIANS say GOD THE HOLY SPIRIT was in Peter in Acts 5?
God exist in 3 persons, what a joke GOD exist in a countless amount of believers alone without us even getting n2 the amount of angels there are.
Now Jesus said the Father is the ONLY TRUE GOD what does that mean when we know there is more than 1 Elohiym?
"You guys were taught Hebrew by the Masorites who learned from Israelites prior to the Babylonian exile.."-why would the Masorets teach us, if we arn't Jews? We do we alone know it? You have NOTHING historically to prove that. The fact is we are the descendents of the Masorets-WE preserved OUR language and YOU know it from US and us ALONE, and if you don't know it well enough to speak it, you don't know it well enough to tell me anything about it.
The Bible is the History that is needed to prove the fact that the JewWISH ppl are not original Hebrews they are the descendants of people who converted to Judaism.
What I will do is this....I will study more about the Masoretes and then I will come back and tell you. Because as of now what I understand is the even the Masoretes were strangers & converts to Israelite camps & they were taught the langauge by Israel & when Israel were captives the Masoretes preserved what they were taught.
2Cor.1:19-For THE SON OF GOD, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by us, even by me and Silvanus and Timotheus, was not yea and nay, but in him was yea.
Hebrews 4:14-Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus THE SON OF GOD, let us hold fast our profession.
1 Jn.5:5-Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the SON OF GOD?
Who is Jesus, once more tell me? THE SON OF GOD!!!!
Of course I honor the Messiah even as I honor the Father. But you are still missing the point.
That was spoken in light of the fact that the Father has committed the judgment into the hand of the Messiah..Read the context & don't try to falsely exegete the passage!
Jesus is NOT Greater than the Father at all in any shape form or fashion....The Father is GREATER in every facet....Messiah is LESSER....He that is SENT is NOT greater than he that sent him...Jn.13:16.....
Blogrich let's see if you block me or erase my comments bcuz I posted the Bible!
Will you make up an excuse for my posting or something like that (when I directly responded to YOUR COMMENT) let's see if YOU have biblical integrity or do you have trinitarian integrity only?
I have clearly proven that you are WRONG & nowhere in the Bible has Jesus ever told people to believe He is the Lord God Almighty or they will die in their sins & go to Hell?
Blogrich okay so you will not block a friend...Bless you! But Jn.8:24 is not saying that you have to believe he is the " I AM of Ex.3:14" Go to the context he was telling them to believe he was the Messiah.
And I already sent you a message showing you that saying "I am" is NOT declaring anything besides saying what you are. In other words I am a fulltime student....
Trinitarians take the "ego~I" "eimi~am" statements out of context!
BlogRich55 the only studying I have ever in my whole entire life did with JW's was when I was a 9-12 yr old kid one time & Rev.3:14 was never brought up & another time when I tried to convince a JW's that
1Pet.3:18-20 destroys their "death" doctrine on what Jesus was doing while he was IN the Grave!
So bringing up JW's is an immature strawman as I have said b4!
& I never ever got Rev.3:14 from JW's I got out of the KJV so OBVIOUSLY you just lied saying I have been studying with the JW's.
I never tried to change creation of to creation by so why are you bringing that up?
Why are you bringing what they teach vs. what I just said. We only have 500 characters why waste my time bringing the JW's up?
One thing is sure any believer who has studied the Bible & continue to refute the Trinity all you guys say is "O the JW's use that" etc.etc. dude it is getting old..
Your lack of integrity concerning contextual biblical discourse sucks......
JWs and you don't include another meaning for "theos" which is as a POSITION, like the position of KING. Thus John 1:1 is merely saying there are two kings, or both the Father and Christ hold the same position in the universe as "gods." When "god" is understood as a position or rank, then John 1:1 should be translated as it occurs: "..and the word was god" (not "a god" per WTS!) Confusion comes when "God" is also a personal title.
Confusion comes when people like to play word games and ignore the entire rest of the Bible. This short video is NOT concerned with God as a position or any of that. It is merely showing why BOTH the Apostolics or Jesus Only crowd of Pentecostals are wrong in making the Word the same person as the Father and why the JWs are wrong in demoting Him to a lesser, little god.
I know you are a Trinitarian...I'm not oneness or trinitarian...I just believe in Messiah Jn.14:6 etc.
But what I don't understand is why *STUDIED BELIEVERS will not admit that Col.1:15 & Rev.3:14 does NOT have anything to do with while Jesus was in the earth & the reason I say so is bcuz both of the context of each verse take us to the context of origin! Rev.3:14=The *Beginning of the CREATION of GOD & Col.1:15=*Firstborn of EVERY CREATURE! Both R b4 all other things CREATED!
So I don't see how believers (Trinitarians & Oneness) can use Col.1:16-17 for Jesus & say the context is the CREATION of The worlds & other created things & Jn.1:1-3 is almost exact in concept to Col.1:16-17 & we both know there is a context b4 Jn.1:1-3 & Col.1:16-17 in which this *video states so...
The context b4 Jn.1:1-3 is Jn.17:5 & b4 Jn.17:5 is Rev.3:14...& b4 Col.1:16-17 is Col.1:15 where it says He (Messiah) is the *FIRSTBORN of every CREATURE/ CREATION i.e. Rev.3:14 i.e.1Cor.8:6
I used 1Cor.8:6 to see if you can see the difference between this: OF WHOM-1537 are all things...vs. BY WHOM-1223 are all things...
Can you see the concept of how 1st the FATHER did something & then the SON did something as a direct connecting result of what the Father did?
& the definition of logos in the end of itself REFUTES that the logos is ETERNAL reason being is bcuz the logos came as a result of GOD 1st thinking then discussing within himself then speaking.
First of all, I am NOT God and neither are you. No, I think about things but discussion is something that takes place between more than one perso. You are writing like an open theist.
Period point blank does God change as in does he change himself or was there once a time where GOD did this & HE doesn't anymore?
Come on....Your question is toooooooo broad....Narrow it down to a context or you leave me to say yes & apply it to a biblical context & say no & apply it to a biblical context!
The very fact that you THINK about the things is the discussion of IT! What do you think the mental facilitation aspect of logos means?!?!? Study it!
This is a standard Watchtower argument. Obviously they and YOU do NOT understand the Greek in Apocalypse 3;14 which says Jesus is the arche or origin or source of the creation of God. It in NO WISE can be twisted to teach He had a temporal beginning or point of origin. He is the BEGINNER of the creation of God. Arche is also a rich Greek philosophical term.
Firstborn does NOT mean or imply The Son had a beginning or was a created being. First born means preeminent. See Col 1:18 etc...
Pt.1-I am *NOT a Jehovah's Witness & I'm beginning to think Trinitarians ONLY bring the JW's up as a strawman so with me let's stick to the KJV!
& Let's see if you stick to your initial declaratoin of Arche "I"ll quote you from time to time"
arche ar-khay' from 756; (properly abstract) a commencement, or (concretely) chief (in various applications of order, time, place, or rank):--beginning, corner, (at the, the) first (estate), magistrate, power, principality, principle, rule.
In Pt.1 I defined Arche from the Strongs Hebrew Lexicon...
Now look at the definitions of arche & tell me Messiah is 1st in rank over YAHWEH i.e. the Father! You said Messiah is the source but there is NOT ONE biblical passage (if there is show me) I have ever seen where it shows Messiah 1st in place/rank/or order when the Father is in the picture! Jesus always get things 2nd hand HE is NOT the source of origin! He was GIVEN all power & he was SENT (under orders) from the FATHER!
Arche in the end of itself does not declare something ETERNAL but rather it points to one's SOURCE of origin! It says corner right..Okay so let's tie this to a biblical passage: Messiah being the CHIEF CORNERSTONE right i.e. Isa.28:16
4416-prototokos pro-tot-ok'-os from 4413 and the alternate of 5088; first-born (usually as noun, literally or figuratively):--firstbegotten(-born).
And if you define 5088~tikto or 4413~protos it is still going to be contrary to Messiah being the SOURCE of origin. He is the ONLY BEGOTTEN SON of GOD & he was begotten b4 he ever came into the world 1Jn.4:9
Bro. I am tired of believers not being honest EVEN when their doctrines are refuted!
Manuaim, So, when the Talmud calls God the firstborn of the world, you think it means God has a begining? As Hebrew speaking Jew, I say Blogrich is completly correct re. this, and his understanding of logos as 'reason' is also correct Greek. If you like, I would be happy to continue the conversation on in Hebrew.
I don't even adhere to the Talmud so I find NO authority in the Talmud at all! And for some strange reason I never seen this comment in my inbox or I would have been replied.
Now first off GOD ALMIGHTY has never had a beginning in that of EXISTENCE or this would mean The Most High was created! His beginning is in light to creation.
But Messiah came forth from Everlasting...He came FROM YAHWEH Micah 5:2 is clear that HE came FROM El Elyon...& v.4 says Messiah has a LORD & GOD....
Micah 5:2 "Whose goings forth are rom of old, from everlasting." The passage does NOT say He came forth from everlasting. Perhaps you need new reading glasses hmmmm?
I do not speak Hebrew or Greek....I study the Bible and I look up the Hebrew and Greek words that were translated into English.
I'm sure we can find someone to mediate the Hebrew & Greek if you insist on believing that the Hebrew and or Greek Lexicon/Concordance does not properly translate the passages.
You are using a basic Dictionary, the fact is this is beyond them-all lingustic commentaries which I know of say this-if you can't read the language don't bother responding about Greek and Heb. words to people who have spent their live in study. Your views about the Jewish people are too cracked to be taken seriously with your 13th tribe nonsense-if we are not real Jews why did we keep our language and suffer for it? Why don't you speak Hebrew? Antisemitic Crackpotism.
Though I am not using a basic dictionary (unless you are ref. the Strong's & or Hebrew /Greek Lexicon) anyhow I would like to find a non-bias Hebrew Greek Dictionary so that I can read definitions *without any assumptive biblical interpretation vs. finding trinitarian or speculation within the definition.
I don't speak Hebrew bcuz I have not studied Hebrew to speak it, ONLY studied it in light of words that were used in the scriptures & shouldn't you have said Anti*shemitc vs. Antisemitic?
So let me get this strait-we arn't really Jews, but you are using Hebrew, which WE alone preserved and without us you would know nothing about it against us?
So the Jewish ppl in Israel can be mistaken for Ancient Egyptians huh? Or Paul was a European/Russian Jew huh and mistaken to be an Egyptian in Acts 21:38-39 huh?
Oh...or The Russian Jewish ppl oops the Jewish ppl in Israel they can grow seven natural locks in their heads huh....
If the Jewish ppl are the Real Hebrews then explain why in Acts 13 Simeon was called Niger/Black & since this was factual why is it now that the Jewish ppl have decided to say O there *may be Eithiopian Jews..LOL
Fyi so you know, Egyptians don't look like Eithiopians-and Eithiopian Jews don't accuse us of being fake Jews-and to be very very clear, the Khazars were not "white", and my mothers family were "Russian" Jews as you say, they had black hair and dark skin-none of your anti-semetic nonsense at any point is rational but is filled with ignorance, misinformation and lies. You learnt Hebrew from us, and then had the gall to saw we arn't the real Jews-some will believe anything.
Bro. ppl want to restrict Messiah being firstborn to the resurrection from the dead but if he had to have preeminence over all things (CREATED) then why leave out he is the firstborn of every creature-Col.1:15 (not just from the dead but from & since the beginning)...
If Jesus says he comes from GOD then how do we get over it Jn.8:42 & Trinitarians mock the ONENESS point of view in Jn.17 & ask was he praying 2 himself but you guys say he came from himself! Jesus has a GOD Rev.3:12
BlogRich I believe it is clear that the passage shows us that in the beginning...Which for me this lets me know prior to that beginning there was AN EXISTENCE....& we do have Messiah saying he had glory with the FATHER before the world was...Jn.17:5 which means b4 CREATION of the WORLD...
However what about Rev.3:14 & Col.1:15 where 1 says He (Messiah) is the beginning of the CREATION of GOD..& 1 says He is the 1st born of EVERY CREATURE (same as creation)...This clearly explains b4 Jn.1:1
"Which for me this lets me know prior to that beginning there was AN EXISTENCE"-actually, that is a self refuting statement-except the creator alone.The begining is the begining, nothing had been created at that point, and all 'things' came into existence via him.This is kind of a simple matter of E=mc2.Without space and time, how can you measure the existence of created things? Fyi, since the sub. of Heb. words came up, in Jewish though,a man's davar and ruach are one and inseperable from him.
Jn.17:5 is proof that there was an existence prior to the Creation of the Worlds. Now the fact that Messiah says He is the beginning-746 of the creation-2937 of God then how do you get around saying Messiah was not the 1st in rank/position i.e. even as the chief cornerstone *that was LAID? How do you get around Messiah himself saying He is the beginning of the CREATION of God? Rev.3:14!
What is or what can be seperated from El Elyon Elohiym? Acts 17:28
"Begining" is in the pregnant sence, all linguistic commentaries I know state this, it means "Ruler" of God's creation. Re. firstborn, you should care about what the Talmud says, because it is the Jewish culture, the same culture that Paul, John, etc. wrote in, and if God is called the firstborn, then it does not mean first created, but rather a place of primacy. The whole theological outlook of John's Gospel is the Diety of Christ "the Logos was God" "My Lord and my God"-
I must explain that further, it is a common way of teaching in the Nt (and other Lit.), to sandwhich ideas between a diologue. Jn. Starts off with the assertion that the Logos is God-then ends off with Thomas confession "My Lord and My God"-in John's mind the ideantity of Jesus is clear-God. Same with Matt. begins calling him Immanuel (God is with us), ends with the promise of Jesus "I am with you all the days..."ie, it begins and ends with the idea to highlight it.
Does Jesus have a LORD and GOD? Yes or No? I'll answer it for you YES. Ps.110:1/Mk.12:36 & Jn.20:17~Rev.3:12...
Now once again by definition it is impossible for the Logos to be God Almighty when the Logos came as a result of God Almighty i,e, every thought has a thinker & every reasoning has a reasoner behind it..
Jesus *can be called Lord & God though, I see Thomas here honoring GOD IN Christ!
Your Mt.1:23 interpretation proves you should study more.
"Jesus *can be called Lord & God though, I see Thomas here honoring GOD IN Christ!"-that is not what the text says, it says Thomas called Him, ie Jesus, his God. "Your Mt.1:23 interpretation proves you should study more."-so, speak to me in Hebrew or Greek, if I am so ignorant about my own culture.
The old and trite dodge about Thomas honoring God in Christ was touted by Yuratchka and soundly refuted by myself in 2 videos and Mark Aponte in another as well. Perhaps it is time to re-do and relaunch them.
It is a theological tissue that quickly falls apart and illogical and eisegetic. If Thomas could worship the Father in Christ, he could also have worshipped the Father in Peter. IIf Thomas could do so, you and I can worship the Father in other believers. What a farse this idea presents!
Blogrich: How many God's/gods are there? I can't wait (though I guess I have to for you to answer this?)
Now Jn.20:28 rather Thomas was calling Jesus Elohiym and Lord it makes no difference THOUGH I see him honoring GOD IN CHRIST! The reason it makes no difference is bcuz Jesus has a GOD & LORD, so obviously Thomas was not calling Jesus THE GOD of Gods/gods & LORD of Lords/lords...
Jesus has a GOD though he is a Elohiym HE is NOT the Highest! But rather the Son of the Highest Lk.1:32
What a load of eisegetic rubbish. You read a LOT into the text. You paint yourself into a corner. You should really stop for a second and ask yourself what clearer words could Thomas have used to convey the concept that Jesus was Kurios (used to translate Jehovah) and God?
It's funny (when you catch the Trinitarians in a lie while they are trying to exegete passages.)
Go to Ps.110:1 it will show you that LORD is 3068 YHVH & Lord is adown-113...Why is it when you go to Mk.12:36 which is supposed to be the same as Ps.110:1 that it is using kurios for both YHVH & Messiah? See how they changed it?
They could have used another word to translate but they didn't THOUGH it matters not because Jesus was made Lord by HIS LORD Acts 2:36. Kurious was used for man also!
Blogrich is it NOT the Trinitarian argument that when the man and his wife died in Acts 5 it was because they LIED to GOD via His Holy Spirit in Peter?( I know you guys say God the Holy Spirit)...
& yes you can honor GOD in Christ. & the fact that many believers have come to other men of God & thanked God is blameless.
Do you know how many Greek and Hebrew speaking non-believers there are? Many in the hundred thousands if not clearly in the Millions...
Next you seem to think speaking Hebrew & or Greek though I do not knock it signifies that you have studied the Bible? You are fooling yourself. By all means if you can speak Hebrew & Greek I applaud you...But this does not signify automatic biblical exegeting.
Acts 10:38 is clear and I see you did not respond to this passage but went around it...Why?
I really didn't feel it was the time or place nor did I feel a need to go into an explanation of the kenosis theory of the incarnation so Act 10:38 was not dealt with. I will do a video on it and others like it if you want. I aim to please.
Pt.1-Blogrich the "Kenosis Theory" is what you should say is a load of eisegetic rubbish. So if you answer with Christ's humanity & attempt to justify the repression of [your declaration of his 100% GOD ALMIGHTY-ness] then how is that integrity at all?
You guys say He was BOTH 100% MAN & 100% GOD. In other words you believe that Jesus is GOD ALMIGHTY yet you say He emptied himself from being GOD ALMIGHTY? Yet you say in the flesh He was GOD ALMIGHTY 100%?
So I have heard of the "Kenosis Theory" before & guess what it FACTUALLY BOILS down to???
Trinitarians that believe that Jesus told the Truth as a man but yet as GOD ALMIGHTY He lied, though it is not a lie at all to you guys bcuz He emptied hiimself & became a man 100% yet even though He is GOD ALMIGHTY (according to You guys) whatever he emptied himself of. it was not enough to disqualify the Hypostatic Union (100% GOD ALMIGHTY % & 100% Man)
You need a crash course in logic sir! It does NOT follow logically to imply that for a person who has 2 natures to speak from one of them and not the other that it would mean the other nature is lying. If Jesus spoke as a man and as man did NOT know something it does NOT mean His God nature is lying because it does know.
You are such an impressive at being a jokester. Blogrich are you listening to yourself?
I am a Son to my parents & Husband to my wife & Father to my children & Brother to my siblings...
Now if I was asked a question concerning was I Son.Husband, Father, & Sibling all in one question: i.e. Hey Manuaim do you have a wife? Any children? A Brother or Sister? Any Children? If I said NO I would be LYING period point blank.
You guys make Jesus out to be a lie....When Heb.4:15 is clear!
So I am an impressive joker? You come up with this meaningless analogy of the functions of a mere man and somehow to your deluded mind it shows Jesus is a liar if He is both God and man?
I wonder if you have EVER cracked open a book on simple logic? Might I suggest Copi, Hurley, Barker, Beasley, or Clark? If you will check your puny attempts at reasoning against the rules of logic you will soon see it is YOU who is the joker.
God existing as 3 person in one being is NOT a contradiction.
First off you keep on leaving out key aspects of my argument Blogrich come on...
First off once again I will repeat myself...I believe Jesus is a God i.e. Jesus is a Elohiym...I do not believe in MORE than 1 as in the number one "GOD ALMIGHTY" He is Jesus' Father also known as the Most High God i,e. Most High Elohiym
*IF Jesus *knew the answer & said he did not know then this is a clear LIE & I DO NOT believe Jesus is a liar i.e. Heb.4:15..So I believe Jesus did NOT know just like he said.
"You are just as full of double talk as the rest of the Trinitarians."..."You are such an impressive at being a jokester. Blogrich are you listening to yourself?"-Manuaim, are you listening to yourself? "You guys make Jesus out to be a lie"-no, we have just quoted the Scriptures, and you deny thier clear words "My Lord and My God"..."and they shall look upon me, whom they have pierced".
Since there are 3 persons in the ONE BEING known as ALMIGHTY GOD or YHWH, it IS He who says ME whom they have pierced. Deal with it!
Now did the Father send the Son? Of course! You foolishly think the mention of one person somehow denies the existence of the other. Yuratchka similarly thinks the mention of one nature of Christ negates the existence of the other. Gee, I guess if I point out I am a white man, the mention of being white will negate the fact that I am a man?
I didn't skip over anything-YOU are skipping over the clear Word of God "they will look to me whom they have pierced"-this isn't even a matter of exegeses, it is the plain reading of the text. "your argument is lame."-since when is quoting a text an argment?..."Messiah will judge who the Real Jews are"-right, you are not Jesus, and you have no historical link to your nonsence.
The Bible is the historical link you need. Joseph's own brothers could not tell the difference between him and the other Egyptians i.e. Africans Gen.41-45..Moses' wife Zipporah thought Moses was an Egyptian Ex.2....The visage of the Israelites in Captivity were black Lam.4:8..The Prophet Simeon was called Niger=Black Acts 13:1 & Paul was mistaken to be an Egyptian Acts 21:38-39
Now how could all these Israelites be mistaken for Africans if they were not people of color??
Was Simon Niger a Jew? The fact that he is called Niger, as opposed to the rest, suggests he was differnt. Lam 4:8 is linking them to corpses-not Africans, and again you miss the obvoius-EGYPTIANS ARE NOT BLACK-again, let me point out the obvious, my mothers family were "Russian" Jews, they were black haired and dark skin-again obvouis, the KHAZARS were NOT white.
Simeon was a Jew....Read the context they were Prophets & Elders....You also forgot that the Romans laid Messiah's cross on a man from North Cyrene i.e. Africa..Why would they do this?
Too many passages that prove this...& the lie that the Egyptians were not black is absurd...Egypt was called the Land of Kemet...
And I don't care what color the Khazars were they NOR the Jewish ppl in Israel are in Biblical Jews...& Lam.4:8 shows the color of their faces in famine...Get over it...Rev.3:9
"And I don't care what color the Khazars"-really? Why is that? Because you would lose your argument? Re. Simon-he was from Cyrene-so, was he a Jew? I suggest it is you who must get your story strait. Re. Egyptians being black-really, my neibour and several of my teachers are Coptics, they are not black-nor are any of the Middle Easterners black-this is only a problem for you because it is devastating to YOUR argument. Re. Lam. you are arguing against the text.
Lets see, are people from Iraq black? What about Iran? No, so why would the Israelites be black if Avraham came from Ur, ie Bavel? Oh, its a conspiracy, right-a conspiracy with no evidence...uh huh...I TOTALLY get it now. Manuaim, I am praying for you, you are following very great deceptions contrary to ALL evidence.
All Historians know that the Ancient Egyptians were black. The fact that the biblical Jews were mistaken for Egpytians in several passages proves that the Biblical Israelites were people of color.
Samson had dreadlocks...So did Ezekiel....Natural locks...these are simple concepts that you need to understand...
But I still believe Messiah is going to show us who the True Jews are Rev.3:9....
"All Historians know that the Ancient Egyptians were black"-lie. "Samson had dreadlocks"-the text doesn't say that, but for that matter my mothers family had locks as well, we called them payis. "Rev.3:9"-that passage is talking about the Jews who did not accept Christ and persecuted the Jews and non Jews who did-I thought you were a person who cared about context-truth-etc.?
What do you think locks are? You guys deny too many passages about the features of the Israelites!
We will see....Who Messiah says the true Jews are...
I personally believe that the NOW status of salvation is based upon faith in Messiah but it still remains the fact that the Jewish ppl in Israel are descendants of identity stealers...
Show me from a historical perspective when the Jewish ppl as a NATION went into Egypt by ships into slavery? Show me....
"What do you think locks are?"-in Hebrew locks can refer to a few things, curls, braids (which is how that passage is traditionaly understood as, btw), and as I just stated most Hassidim whom I know have locks-we call them payis. But for that matter I know white people with dreadlocks-and irronically, most Jews I know have curly hair, not strait. If there are identiy stealers, it is you. The world hates us this much, they called us cursed, now they try and steal our identity-Deut 28? Its us.
I have to remind you, the whole point of the identity argument is based on the Jewish quote that God is the "firstborn of the world". But lets for argument sake say that we are not the real Jews-we are the ones who preserved Hebrew and the traditions-since that is the case, and it is, how can you still not acknowledge the simple fact that firstborn in the "Hebrew" language does not mean primacy? Our knowledge of Hebrew is good enough for you to use, except when it contradicts your opinions?
Now in the Bible the word "firstborn" in the Hebrew is 1060 bkowr bek-ore' from 1069; firstborn; hence, chief:--eldest (son), firstborn(-ling).
1069 bakar baw-kar' a primitive root; properly, to burst the womb, i.e. (causatively) bear or make early fruit (of woman or tree); also (as denominative from 1061) to give the birthright:--make firstborn, be firstling, bring forth first child (new fruit).
There is also another word but ONLY used for women.
Manuaim-you actually just proved my point, "make firstborn", "causatively) bear or make early fruit (of woman or tree)"do you understand what causitive means? It is a pregnant sence and means owner/creator/"chief" was one of the words you quoted. The fact is, God is called the firstborn of the world in Heb. Lit.-meaning ruler, and this is what Rev means when it calles Jesus the arche of God's creation-it does not mean 'first created'. David is called the"firstborn", but he Jess's first literly.
freezingstill...I did not just prove your point. You are just another person that is willing to deny the definitions of the concordance.
By the way these are all definitions in the Hebrew...Not in the book of Hebrews these not not greek definitions...
I am still trying to find out how GOD ALMIGHTY in any shape form or fashion can be born when clearly the definition of borns deals with something being created and OR fashioned brought forth etc....
You did prove my point, you yourself said it is Causitive-unless you don't understand what that means. If it was irreleant why did you bother looking it up? Now that you're wrong it's irrelevant? Btw, yeh, I think Hebrew had some imporatance to the writer of "Hebrews"-everyone who reads Nt Greek knows the Heb. worldview influenced them and is full of Hebraisms. Re. Jesus being sent, we explained it already, the Trinity.
One theologian whose name escapes me once expressed his opinion that the book of Hebrews was an exposition of Psalm 110:1 I don't know personally but it is an interesting thought. BTW anyone have any theory about who wrote it and why they think that person wrote it? Just curious.
Well Ps 110 certainly is included in the major themes. Though it is not a poplar view, I believe it is Pauline in origen. Though the book lacks his usual autograph and prologue, and though the Greek is more presise then usual, it deals with ideas which are certainly Pauline, faith, new covenant, and mentioned some people who were affilliated with Paul. Some say Luke or Barnabas wrote it.
Re. why it was written, the question of to whome it was written must also be asked. I think based on the quote "our fathers", and the entire arguing for Christ out of the Ot shows that the audiance must have been Jewish Christians. Most people think, and I would agree, that it was written to those who were feeling presured to leave the Church and go back to Judaism. It is strange that 2000 years later, there are so many 'Judaizers' still around trying hard to argue against the book itself.
Personally I have always felt Apollos wrote it. The Greek is different from Paul's and he had a following. When they claimed to be of Apollos it was probably for a reason. Just speculation on my behalf. I was shocked to find out Luther thought the same thing.
I never said it was irrelevent first off...I am just sick of going back and forth with someone who is not willing to study the words of Messiah (I say this because if you think that your Trinity is valid ONCE Messiah already explains he that is SENT is *NOT greater then HE that sent him NOR is the servant [Messiah-Isa.42/Isa.53] greater than His LORD i.e. Ps.110:1/Acts 2:36....
So Messiah said the Father is GREATER where is a CO-EQUAL Trinity at??? In your non-biblical superstitious exegesis!
You really are sadly blind. How many times have I heard your childish rhetorical tactics from Jesus Only Apostolic Pentecostals to prove Jesus was the Father incarnate. They deny the Holy Trinity too but for different reasons.
As Christ had TWO NATURES the old polemic dodge is to focus on ONE OF THEM and either ignore the OTHER or use the one to try to somehow argue against the other or disprove it.
Jehovah's witless are masters of this nonsense. Quote humanity ignore deity. Ho hum!
Pt.1-Blogrich..IN HEAVEN Jesus was no longer flesh & blood this was AFTER the incarnation....He was in heaven saying He has a God i.e. Rev.3:12...
Then the funny thing is that you act as if I don't understand the Hypostatic Union YET the Trinitarian theory of it is NOT consistent in light of the Hypostatic Union.
1 minute Jesus is 100% GOD ALMIGHTY
*AND 100% Man but yet the Kenosis Theory is that He emptied himself of his Deity *when he became a man but yet he's still 100% GOD ALMIGHTY?!?!?
Christ is Elohim, but he is not The Father, and you dual nature non-sense is basically stating that Christ was schizo or bi-polar. Every man has spirit and flesh. Every man can walk in the fullness of YHWH. This does not makle everyone YHWH nor does it make Christ YHWH.
halfie25...LOL the Hypostatic Union i.e. Dual Nature i.e. 100% GOD ALMIGHTY & 100% Man doctrine *IS non-sense & full of SUPERSTITION.
1st off they deny the 100% GOD ALMIGHTY nature they Christ is in Mk.13:32 & they say he only spoke as a man..Well in the same sentence Christ says the Father ONLY knows which means He remembered this much about the Father...But yet I guess He himself as GOD ALMIGHTY 100 % according to them did not KNOW? Well if he is EQUAL to the FATHER in GODSHIP how come?
MANUAIM, I never knew the term for schizo, bi-polar "Jesus", but thanks for hooking me up with the terminology. This is just a classic case of Greek and Roman pagan mythology getting mixed in with Christianity. The funnyt hing is we look at mythical Gods in light of YHWh and realize how silly dual natured triune gods are, yet people like our buddy Blog want to throw that very same stigma on YHWH on High. It's borderline blasphemy.
halfie25 You are gracious by saying borderline blasphemy. Blogrich is wiser than this foolishness but for some strange reason he doesn't want to side with Messiah who even of himself said that He does not know in Mk.13:32....
On top of this Blog believes Jesus existed b4 coming to the earth ( I do to) yet when Messiah explains He that is SENT is NOT greater then He that sent him i.e. Jn.13:16...
My question would now be well WHO SENT Jesus from Heaven? Answer: YHWH 1Jn.4:14..
Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him.
Now simply ask: Was Jesus sent? Answer: Yes= Jn.3:17~Jn.3:34~Jn.4:34~Jn.5:23-24~Jn.5:30~Isa.42~Isa.53 etc
Does Jesus have a LORD? Answer: Yes= Ps.110:1/Mk.12:36~Acts 2:34-36 which references 1Cor.15:24-28 & 1Cor.12:3 explains He is Lord by the Spirit of the LORD i.e. Holy Spirit
Any and all autority was given to Yahowshua by YHWH Himself. Which hints the fact that he is at the right hand of YHWH. Now dualist's will say the right hand is symbolic of Christ being YHWH because right hand actaully means sitting in YHWH's thrown since he was given the authority by YHWH Himself... LOL. Bottom line Yahowshua serves YHWH. Therefore he can not be YHWH Himself.
halfie 25 not only that but check it out...Who is the High Priest? Yahushua is the High Priest if YHWH himself was the High Priest then who would be refraining YHWH from releasing His Wrath on all of us?
You are right Bottomline Messiah is under instructions & this was another reason why He marvelled at the Ceturions faith in Mt.8 because he was in awe at the faith of the Centurion understanding Messiah himself was a man likewise under authority also...It is extremely clear...Mt.16:16-17
Yeah Blogrich. That's right Halfie. As in half black and half white. The fact that I get that and appearently you didn't just goes to show I understand who I am and more over who you are. Show me in the Bible where Yahowsua says "praise me as much as the Father. Or where he says The father and I are equal (not one). YOU CAN"T!!! If I'm right than it's ok because I still give the Father all the glory (as did Christ).
If you are right than I am ok because the Father still gets all the glory, but if you are wrong YHWH will charge you with idolitary. For putting another God on high, and if you've read the Tenakh you would no that only YHWH is on high. You can not argue that either... So either way i will not be charged with blasphemy, but you could be. make sure you study the scripture as well as you fake it!
Though I may be of Jewish ancestory I have not read the Tenakh. I have been studying the scripture longer and deeper than you. Sadly you seem to be determined to be argumentative. That's okay. I am a bit pugnacious myself. However, I will deal with you in more detail later. For now I have to run. Take care.
Babble on dude! I am not a mind reader and had NO WAY of knowing you were biracial instead of bipolar. LOL Well I am NOT concerned with your ethnic background but your religious opinions.
I have a new video you may find interesting on the deity of Christ. I hope to have it up in a couple of days. I will send it to you.
Can't wait to see your video. I do not deny Christ is Elohim, but then again so are Moses and many others... There is only on God on High though. That is YHWH. I'm not trying to be arguementative, but let me ask you this. have you looked at any of the scripture people like MANUAIM have sent you? yet you are still convinced Christ is the Father... To argue or even debate someone like you may be the same as a brick wall. The truth is right in front of you.
PLEASE-- do NOT accuse me of the damnable Apostolic Oneness or Jesus Only heresy that teaches Jesus is the Father. If you want to comment here, you should at least watch a couple of my videos. Most are on apologetics. This is usually aimed at disproving the cults.
The Apostolics who teach that concept are one of my prime targets. I will not get angry because I believe you commented without knowing anything about me. NO, I NEVER have and NEVER will believe that lie of the devil!
And yet you believe Yahowshua should be praised just as YHWH is praised? You believe Christ had a dual nature, and please don't tell me you're a Trinitarian...
Blog actually...Everybody who professes faith doesn't know about Trinitarians and Oneness points of views. I know because I grew up around lots of Oneness believers who when we would go outreaching I found out The Trinitarian Doctrine was like an arch rival.....And I was like dude....what's going on etc.etc....
I am not positioned against the Trinity or Oneness Doctrine for any reason but the fact that they EXALT Messiah to a position he was never given by the Father i.e. GOD ALMIGHTY
halfie25 they do not want to even discuss what you said...i.e. " I do not deny Christ is Elohim" Dude they will not dare get into that discussion....
Trinitarians hate to hear anything about there being more than 3 Elohiym that equal one Elohiym...
I have asked about 3 to 4 times maybe more asking how many Elohiym are there I don't remember getting an answer.....Trinitarians do not like to discuss how many Elohiym there are..
They fail to realize there is an INUMMERABLE amount!
LOL... MANUAIM when I first heard it, it offended me, but I realized that some angels are Elohim which made lineing up the profits and YHWH's son as Elohim a little bit easier. I'm just glad YHWH finally revealed His truths to me. I always knew there was something twisted about "American westernized Chritianity". When YHWH revealed the truths about the falseness I believed in I repented, and also threw out every doctrine i had in the equation. I have never had so much peace!
Blog seriously I think you fail to realize that the Nicaean Creed was instituted by ppl who wanted to gather the church as one BUT yet just for the sake of false peace. Messiah said he would divide & set a man at variance etc. You Trinitarians pledge to a creed made up of men who were NOT appointed by Messiah or the Apostles...They were appointed by a religious convert who wanted the church & the world government to be "ONE".
Know ye not the INQUISITION is a result of the Council of Nicaea!!!
By the way...I will do more historical studying but I know of NO TRINITARIANS that were killed during the Inquisition!!! That alone proves to me that the Inquistion was a Trinitarian Movement and this is one of the sole reasons Trinitarians have that "accusing spirit" FOR INSTANCE: "If you don't believe in the Trinity you are worthy of death or you are going to Hell" this is the decree of about 7 or 8 out of 10 Trinitarians I dialouge with but the epistle of 1st John alone makes them all liars!
Keep it real... God shares his glory and worship with nothing...nothing. Notice the angel's response to John in revelation 19:10. How then can John say to Honor the Son, just as you honor the Father. You really dont have to be a greek major to see the Trinity unfold. Genesis Let Us creat man in Our image. Isaiah 6 Whom shall I send,And who will go for Us? According to any other belife, God changed at some point and decided to share His glory with a creature. Hello folks! Father Son Spirit = God
Lukelovesthelord 5 days ago
Was talking craps and nonsenses he diesn't dont know nothing about greek
raitasorin 2 weeks ago
@raitasorin "Was talking craps and nonsenses he diesn't dont know nothing about greek"
Would you mind telling us who you are talking about? A correct sentence requires a subject (^_^)
Blogrich55 2 weeks ago
pixcomputer 1 month ago
προς (pros) should be translated as "to" or "toward" because με (may) usually means with.
ultimatemaijn 2 months ago
@TheMessianicGentile John 1:1 is clear that the word was eternal with God but an even more explicit statement about the eternal nature of the Son is John 8:58 where the JW's purposely distort the translation to say "Before abraham was, I have been". This is a laughable translation. "Ego Eimi" is used over and over by John and it always means "I am" usually used before a statement of who Jesus was "I am the good shepherd" "I am the way..." etc..
agnostaxian 3 months ago
@TheMessianicGentile
You seem to like using their tired, disproved, arguments a lot.
Blogrich55 3 months ago
@TheMessianicGentile "@4.00 I agree that The God and The logos are two distinct beings."
The Father and the Son (Logos) are NOT two distinct Beings. They are two distinct Persons. I have NOT said they were two distinct Beings.
Blogrich55 3 months ago
@TheMessianicGentile "My conclusion is we agree that The creator (The God) and The Logos (The son) are two distinct being"
No Brother Samuel, they are the SAME Being.
Blogrich55 3 months ago
@TheMessianicGentile "early Christian writers such as Justin Martyr 103AD-165AD believed these texts, specifically Proverbs 8:22, referred to Christ in his prehuman existence"
Why should we have to agree with Justin Martyr?
Blogrich55 3 months ago
@TheMessianicGentile
Brother Samuel, for someone who denies being a JW (and I believe you) you certainly like to use their arguments.
1. Col 1:15 First born does NOT mean first one born literally. It means preeminent. See Col 1:18
2. Rev 3:14 does NOT mean first one created when God began to create. The word "arche" in Greek can be translated as: Ruler, Prince, origin, source... as you well know because we have been over this before.
There is NO scripture showing the Logos was created! GBU
Blogrich55 3 months ago
Go define what proskuneo means i.e. worship...To pay homage is one of the definitions....4352 in the Greek and to HONOUR ranks right up there with paying homage and or even adoration.
My point is that just like they thought they were only dealing with the Spirit of Peter as a man but they were dealing with the Spirit of GOD within him...
So if GOD Almighty can be worshipped as GOD ALMIGHTY then of course it is biblical to pay homage & or honour the person whom GOD just moved IN or through.
MANUAIM 2 years ago
"So if GOD Almighty can be worshipped as GOD ALMIGHTY then of course it is biblical to pay homage & or honour the person whom GOD just moved IN or through." -maybe, but that is a FAR cry from calling someone your God, as Thomas did. "They shall look on me whom they pierced"-Zech. 12:12, the speaker is Yh/wh, John's Gospel relates that to Christ on the Cross. In John's mind, Jesus is God. The Logos of God, is by definition one and insepareble from Him.
freezingstill 2 years ago
Pt.1:
Freezingstill shama okay shama-8085:
Please understand that Messiah is coming in the wrath of YHWH & if it is YHWH prophesying HIS COMING wrath then don't mistake YHWH for saying HE was the one that was pierced when clearly it is the Messiah that is coming in the warth (NAME) of YHWH i.e. Rev.19:11-16 once again SHAMA. so it is YHWH foretelling HIS wrath being carried out by Messiah "the pierced one"
Proof that YHWH will ref. HIMself when sending someone is Gen.19.
See Pt.2
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Jehovah says they will on HIM who they have pierced.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Did he say they will mourn for ME? No....
Why not? You are not listening to the context & you refuse to accept the Biblical fact that YHWH sends messengers to say on His behalf in other places & yet HE HIMSELF not GO & yet it references Him going!!!
For instance Gen.18:21 "I will go and see" etc. Now tell me how why the scriptures show the angels going down to look upon Sodom & Gomorah? & also why the angels say we will destroy this place Gen.19:13 but yet Gen.13:10 says the LORD did?
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Manuaim-what you mean to say to me is "SHMA", that is the imperative form of the root you were trying to mention "shama". I am not trying to be rude, but saying one word incorrectly does not mean that you understand the language, do you now see my point? You are very ignorant about our language, context, and usage. I apologize if I sounded angry before-as the son of a Holocaust survivor I tent to get...angry at comments like that, but I won't argue with you anymore and do apologize-
freezingstill 2 years ago
According to the Strongs concordance it is shama thus I expressed the corcordance number along with it i.e. 8085...And Hebrew language may be a language that you speak but it is NOT an original Jewish language Jew-ish no matter how you put it!
And I will not mock the Holocaust but the number of deaths come nowhere near to number of deaths that happened from slavery....5 years max from a Holocaust compared to at least 200 years in America alone for so-called African Americans....
MANUAIM 2 years ago
5 years? I am sorry, the persecution of my people has gone on far longer then 200 years-but why are you even confusing the issue, all injustice is evil, why are you demeaning the suffering of both our peoples? Nor did I falsely quote Scriptures, I quoted them in thier context, Yh/wh says he was pierced, John relates this to Christ on the Cross-
freezingstill 2 years ago
If you would dare say that the Jewish persecution can come anywhere near the so-called African American persecution then you are really deceived......
But we will see what happens when Messiah comes we will see WHO the TRUE JEWS are Rev.3:9....We will see then. None of the Jewish people were ever mistaken for Africans/Egyptians...
Your ppl's visage is not black as coals Lam.4:8...& your ppl's do not have hair that can form 7 natural locks like Samson & even have locks like Ezekiel....
MANUAIM 2 years ago
"Yeah freezingstill you have quoted scriptures without getting an understanding of the passage."-if that is the case why are you working so hard to explain away clear passages? I'm sorry, I don't have anymore time for this shtiut (a Hebrew word, meaning 'nonsense'-us 'fake' Jews are so amazing eh, we are the ones who preserved Hebrew when the 'real' Jews as you say don't seem to have any awareness of it)-done.
freezingstill 2 years ago
freezingstill your argument is lame. You know how many people on youtube I know alone that speak Hebrew that are not Jewish and they know they are Hebrews? More than 5 people....
It is not a great number of ppl who even have come across the Biblical Revelation that the Jewish ppl are converts to Judaism i.e. Jew-like by faith & not by heritage...
But as I said Messiah will judge who the Real Jews are Rev.3:9.....
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Pt.1:
Zec.12:10-And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, AND THEY SHALL MOURN *FOR HIM, as one mourneth for his only son, AND SHALL BE IN BITTERNESS *FOR HIM. as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.
Now...
2 Cor.11:31-The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is blessed for evermore, knoweth that I lie not.
Now who is the God of Jesus?
MANUAIM 2 years ago
That interpretation is mental gymnatistics, in the text it is Yh/wh himself saying he will be pierced-. But as I said, I do apologize if the tone became angry and do this one thing, commend you to sincere study of the languages and the Text and to the Grace of God-because with respect, your knowledge is not even basic-that is not meant to be rude but honest. Thank you for the conversation, and I am sorry for losing my temper.
freezingstill 2 years ago
I was never offended by your tone because what you said about the Bible is NOT valid.
I don't study the Hebrew language besides words that are written in the Bible so I can't argue about Hebrew linguistics etc. I can only quote from the Dictionary & Concordance
& it is NOT saying YHWH himself will be pierced you are falsely exegeting the scriptures. All through out the Hebrew Scriptures it makes a difference between YHWH & Messiah.
Mashiach has a LORD Ps.110:1 & Acts 2:36
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Pt.2~Freezingstill: Remember Gen.18 & 19... Now though when it comes to Gen.18 I am studying this passage more because I am not sure if these are angels in the name of YHWH or if this is Messiah in the name of YHWH either or it makes me no difference because YHWH sends ppl in HIS NAME...(Now If you dare to say this is YHWH himself then I would like to hear your exegesis of Gen.18)
In Gen.18:21: You see "I will go down" but in Gen.19 we know that angels went down but it was YHWH's wrath.
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Of course it was a theophany or the manifestation of all 3 persons of the Holy Trinity.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
I've heard that: "and the Word was divine" or godlike? I think John was fixated on the divinity of Christ that he was made god, as a position in the universe to have. I mean, what was he? The king? The president? The god? But I can also see the nature, that both were gods, that is, ones with powers and authority, like a co-rulership, where both have the same position, like father and son king co-rulers. Even so the play on words certainly would otherwise be confusing.
Larsinger58 2 years ago
You speak of gods? What are you an atheist or a Mormon? LOL
Blogrich55 2 years ago
In communication WORDS take a back seat to CONTEXT.if Jesus is a "god" and even the elect are "gods" (2Thes 2:4) then other "GOOD gods" are recognized. It's about how the word "god" is used in a certain context, added to the fact that "God" becomes a unique title of the Father. That's why other scriptures, not John 1:1 must define the Christ. His being a SON being the most direct understanding of that relationship. But SON is ignored as a critical descriptive by some but fits ARCHANGEL.
Larsinger58 2 years ago
2 Thes 2:4 has absolutely NOTHING to say about the elect being gods. Son fits ARCHANGEL?? Iguess you have been hanging out with Jehovah's Witless, ehhh? LOL
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Thanks for the explanation of John 1:1. But the fact is, if John wanted to say that the Father and the Christ were the same entity he would have used "ho theos" a second time. But this is all rather elementary since if we want to inquire of the Bible the precise relationship between Jesus and God we need only refer to that very fundamental description, which is FATHER and SON. Why do we violate that very fundamental concept to make them equal, co-eternal? A SON is younger than the father.
Larsinger58 2 years ago
You obviously do not pay attention to the video. John specifically leaves out the definite article so that the Word would NOT be the same person He was with and yet would be the same God. This makes theos a quality. The Word shared the very nature of God but was also WITH God and NOT the exact same person.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Blog: I think John wanted us to know that Jesus was "god" as far as being powerful and with authority in the greatest way with the exception of the Father, so he notes he was "WITH" God to let us know he was not the only god. Hebrews 1 gives us the utterance by the Father at his creation: "Today you become my son" which makes it clear he was created, besides he is called God's SON, not his twin brother, so. Other angels are called the "sons of god"..sons are usually created or begotten...?
Larsinger58 2 years ago
"This day I have begotten thee"does NOT say "this day I have CREATED" Thee. The phrase "I have begotten you" FOLLOWS the phrase "You are my Son." It does NOT imply creation but the sending forth in physical form of a pre-existent Son.
Don't forget Hebrews 1:8 where the Father says to the son "Thy throne O God is forever and ever." Why would an eternal Son imply, logically, an eternal twin brother? This foolish argument has been used by Jehovah"s Witless for eons. Have you been slumming?
Blogrich55 2 years ago
You keep on saying eternal son....where are you getting this from? No passage in the Bible says Jesus is Eternal! You have to assume that he is Eternal.
Rev.3:14 explains that Messiah WAS created. What do you think beginning of the creation of God mean? or firstborn of EVERY CREATURE in Col.1:15...
& Heb.1:8 comes from Ps.45:6 & Messiah is simply being called an Elohiym-430-God by HIS ELOHIYM-GOD & the next verse makes that clear...
Jesus has a GOD that He WORSHIPS.
Jn.4:22~Rev.3;12
MANUAIM 2 years ago
#1. I keep on saying eternal because we have to use the gray matter God gave us and logic when interpreting the Bible. It doesn't say blogrich55 is a sinner in the Bible but I have logically deduced that from the text.
\
You obviously have been studying with Jehovah's Witless. Rev 3:14 is an OLD Witchtower lie in which they pathetically change creation of to creation by to preach their heretical nonsense. Jesus is called the arche here which means origin or source of the creation of God.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
#2. As for the term first born, even a cursory examination of the phrase as it is used in the Bible untainted by the toxic theology of the Witchtower would quickly reveal what you will find in verse 18 of the chapter-- pre-eminent.
Of course Jesus had a God He worshipped during the incarnation. Duhhhh! You really need to quit slumming with the Jehovah's Witless and do a bit of studying for yourself dude.Oh and start by comparing Rev 2:23 with Jeremiah 17:10 and tell me WHO searches the heart
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Blogrich55 even as the LORD lives you are a liar & anyone with the Spirit of the LIVING GOD who spends time in prayer can easily see that you are using the JW's punchline to subconsciencely sway & manipulate those who are reading the comments! Your tactics come from the root of evil EVEN the same spirit that was behind the Inquistion & I stand b4 Messiah & the Father & as they listen in front of them both I say "YOU" are a liar & you are lying against me & the identity of the Messiah!
MANUAIM 2 years ago
And I stand before YHWH and announce that YOU are a heretic who will die in his sins if you do not repent and believe Jesus is the Lord God Almight and I Am who spoke to Moses from the burning bush. Quit using their assinine arguments if you don't want people to think you haven't been hanging around with them.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Let us let the biblical community publicly see who is LYING...
You said I have to believe that Jesus is the Lord God Almighty and I am who spoke to Moses from the burning bush.....OR I will die in my sins i.e. IF I don't repent and believe this...
1Jn.5:13-These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.
There are many more passages & YOU are lying!
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Let's see if I have to believe Jesus is GOD ALMIGHTY?!?!?!
Jn.3:18-He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten SON OF GOD.
Jn.9:35-Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the SON OF GOD?
Jn.11:27-She saith unto him, Yea, Lord: I believe that thou art THE CHRIST, THE SON OF GOD, which should come into the world.
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Blogrich I am not finish let's see?!?!?!
Jn.20:31-But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, THE SON OF GOD; and that believing ye might have life through his name.
Acts 8:37-And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ IS THE SON OF GOD.
Paul did what?!?!?!
Acts 9:20-And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the SON OF GOD.
Who is Jesus? SON OF GOD!
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Yes, the Son of God and God the Son.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
The only way anyone can say Messiah is God the Son is if they are saying he is Elohiym the Son.
Not GOD ALMIGHTY THE SON!
Blogrich you know why you won't answer the simple question I asked you bcuz it destroys your Trinity.
Why do you think I asked you HOW MANY God's/gods are there? Once you give me the answer if you answer wrong I'll just prove you study only in the vein of trinitarianism vs. being a student of the bible.
Once again can you tell me how many God's/gods there are?
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Try reading the Bible for yourself MANUAIM. If you don't know the answer to the question that is. I would sugesst Deuteronomy 6:4 and 1 Cor 8:5-6 now how this goes to destroy the Holy Trinity you will not be able to say. It does NOT logically do so. God exists in 3 distinct simultaneous persons. Deal with it.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Pt.1- Blogrich: You still don't have a revelation of what God means. Once again Theos when used to repeat passages from the Hebrew Scriptures translates from Elohiym.
In John 10:34-35 Messiah himself taught there God-Theos called them gods-theos when His word came to them.
1Cor.8:5 says there are many gods and lords...v.6 is saying that the Father is ONLY GOD ALMIGHTY....Just like when Messiah said the Father is the ONLY True GOD in Jn.17:3...This is what it means.
See Pt.2
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Pt.2-Blogrich: Now....
God exist in more then 3 persons....God existed in all of the Apostles & every other believer that has received the Baptism of the Holy Spirit & don't TRINITARIANS say GOD THE HOLY SPIRIT was in Peter in Acts 5?
God exist in 3 persons, what a joke GOD exist in a countless amount of believers alone without us even getting n2 the amount of angels there are.
Now Jesus said the Father is the ONLY TRUE GOD what does that mean when we know there is more than 1 Elohiym?
MANUAIM 2 years ago
"You guys were taught Hebrew by the Masorites who learned from Israelites prior to the Babylonian exile.."-why would the Masorets teach us, if we arn't Jews? We do we alone know it? You have NOTHING historically to prove that. The fact is we are the descendents of the Masorets-WE preserved OUR language and YOU know it from US and us ALONE, and if you don't know it well enough to speak it, you don't know it well enough to tell me anything about it.
freezingstill 2 years ago
The Bible is the History that is needed to prove the fact that the JewWISH ppl are not original Hebrews they are the descendants of people who converted to Judaism.
What I will do is this....I will study more about the Masoretes and then I will come back and tell you. Because as of now what I understand is the even the Masoretes were strangers & converts to Israelite camps & they were taught the langauge by Israel & when Israel were captives the Masoretes preserved what they were taught.
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Blogrich more heresy for you huh?
2Cor.1:19-For THE SON OF GOD, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by us, even by me and Silvanus and Timotheus, was not yea and nay, but in him was yea.
Hebrews 4:14-Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus THE SON OF GOD, let us hold fast our profession.
1 Jn.5:5-Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the SON OF GOD?
Who is Jesus, once more tell me? THE SON OF GOD!!!!
MANUAIM 2 years ago
John 5:23
"that all should honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him."
Do YOU honor the Son the same as the Father or is Jesus a lesser being or 2nd class heavenly citizen?
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Of course I honor the Messiah even as I honor the Father. But you are still missing the point.
That was spoken in light of the fact that the Father has committed the judgment into the hand of the Messiah..Read the context & don't try to falsely exegete the passage!
Jesus is NOT Greater than the Father at all in any shape form or fashion....The Father is GREATER in every facet....Messiah is LESSER....He that is SENT is NOT greater than he that sent him...Jn.13:16.....
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Blogrich let's see if you block me or erase my comments bcuz I posted the Bible!
Will you make up an excuse for my posting or something like that (when I directly responded to YOUR COMMENT) let's see if YOU have biblical integrity or do you have trinitarian integrity only?
I have clearly proven that you are WRONG & nowhere in the Bible has Jesus ever told people to believe He is the Lord God Almighty or they will die in their sins & go to Hell?
So REPENT for lying to me...
MANUAIM 2 years ago
John 8:24--
"Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am [he] you will die in your sins." Jesus Christ
Note the word he is NOT in the text but supplied by the translators. You will die in YOUR sins if you do NOT believe He is the I AM of Exodus 3:14
Just because you reject trinitarian doctrine does NOT mean I have lied in presenting it. Why would I block a friend?
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Blogrich okay so you will not block a friend...Bless you! But Jn.8:24 is not saying that you have to believe he is the " I AM of Ex.3:14" Go to the context he was telling them to believe he was the Messiah.
And I already sent you a message showing you that saying "I am" is NOT declaring anything besides saying what you are. In other words I am a fulltime student....
Trinitarians take the "ego~I" "eimi~am" statements out of context!
Paul used ego eimi at least 7 times...
MANUAIM 2 years ago
BlogRich55 the only studying I have ever in my whole entire life did with JW's was when I was a 9-12 yr old kid one time & Rev.3:14 was never brought up & another time when I tried to convince a JW's that
1Pet.3:18-20 destroys their "death" doctrine on what Jesus was doing while he was IN the Grave!
So bringing up JW's is an immature strawman as I have said b4!
& I never ever got Rev.3:14 from JW's I got out of the KJV so OBVIOUSLY you just lied saying I have been studying with the JW's.
MANUAIM 2 years ago
BlogRich: Here you are again lying.
I never tried to change creation of to creation by so why are you bringing that up?
Why are you bringing what they teach vs. what I just said. We only have 500 characters why waste my time bringing the JW's up?
One thing is sure any believer who has studied the Bible & continue to refute the Trinity all you guys say is "O the JW's use that" etc.etc. dude it is getting old..
Your lack of integrity concerning contextual biblical discourse sucks......
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Nice presentation and great music. Thanks. But...
JWs and you don't include another meaning for "theos" which is as a POSITION, like the position of KING. Thus John 1:1 is merely saying there are two kings, or both the Father and Christ hold the same position in the universe as "gods." When "god" is understood as a position or rank, then John 1:1 should be translated as it occurs: "..and the word was god" (not "a god" per WTS!) Confusion comes when "God" is also a personal title.
Larsinger58 2 years ago
Confusion comes when people like to play word games and ignore the entire rest of the Bible. This short video is NOT concerned with God as a position or any of that. It is merely showing why BOTH the Apostolics or Jesus Only crowd of Pentecostals are wrong in making the Word the same person as the Father and why the JWs are wrong in demoting Him to a lesser, little god.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
BlogRich
I know you are a Trinitarian...I'm not oneness or trinitarian...I just believe in Messiah Jn.14:6 etc.
But what I don't understand is why *STUDIED BELIEVERS will not admit that Col.1:15 & Rev.3:14 does NOT have anything to do with while Jesus was in the earth & the reason I say so is bcuz both of the context of each verse take us to the context of origin! Rev.3:14=The *Beginning of the CREATION of GOD & Col.1:15=*Firstborn of EVERY CREATURE! Both R b4 all other things CREATED!
MANUAIM 2 years ago
So I don't see how believers (Trinitarians & Oneness) can use Col.1:16-17 for Jesus & say the context is the CREATION of The worlds & other created things & Jn.1:1-3 is almost exact in concept to Col.1:16-17 & we both know there is a context b4 Jn.1:1-3 & Col.1:16-17 in which this *video states so...
The context b4 Jn.1:1-3 is Jn.17:5 & b4 Jn.17:5 is Rev.3:14...& b4 Col.1:16-17 is Col.1:15 where it says He (Messiah) is the *FIRSTBORN of every CREATURE/ CREATION i.e. Rev.3:14 i.e.1Cor.8:6
MANUAIM 2 years ago
BlogRich...
I used 1Cor.8:6 to see if you can see the difference between this: OF WHOM-1537 are all things...vs. BY WHOM-1223 are all things...
Can you see the concept of how 1st the FATHER did something & then the SON did something as a direct connecting result of what the Father did?
& the definition of logos in the end of itself REFUTES that the logos is ETERNAL reason being is bcuz the logos came as a result of GOD 1st thinking then discussing within himself then speaking.
Shalom
MANUAIM 2 years ago
So, uhhh, God discusses stuff with Himself? Hmmmmm?
Blogrich55 2 years ago
BlogRich...Think about what you just asked...Does GOD discuss things with himself?
While you are thinking about what you just asked me let me pose the same question with different words so we can get a biblical answer...
Does GOD take thought within himself PRIOR to doing something?
So now...Ask me the question again & look forward to me posting at least 10 passages where GOD thought to do something prior to doing it!
Please define & study logos & do you discuss stuff with yourself?
MANUAIM 2 years ago
First of all, I am NOT God and neither are you. No, I think about things but discussion is something that takes place between more than one perso. You are writing like an open theist.
Does God change?
Blogrich55 2 years ago
In what vein do you mean change?
Period point blank does God change as in does he change himself or was there once a time where GOD did this & HE doesn't anymore?
Come on....Your question is toooooooo broad....Narrow it down to a context or you leave me to say yes & apply it to a biblical context & say no & apply it to a biblical context!
The very fact that you THINK about the things is the discussion of IT! What do you think the mental facilitation aspect of logos means?!?!? Study it!
MANUAIM 2 years ago
This is a standard Watchtower argument. Obviously they and YOU do NOT understand the Greek in Apocalypse 3;14 which says Jesus is the arche or origin or source of the creation of God. It in NO WISE can be twisted to teach He had a temporal beginning or point of origin. He is the BEGINNER of the creation of God. Arche is also a rich Greek philosophical term.
Firstborn does NOT mean or imply The Son had a beginning or was a created being. First born means preeminent. See Col 1:18 etc...
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Pt.1-I am *NOT a Jehovah's Witness & I'm beginning to think Trinitarians ONLY bring the JW's up as a strawman so with me let's stick to the KJV!
& Let's see if you stick to your initial declaratoin of Arche "I"ll quote you from time to time"
arche ar-khay' from 756; (properly abstract) a commencement, or (concretely) chief (in various applications of order, time, place, or rank):--beginning, corner, (at the, the) first (estate), magistrate, power, principality, principle, rule.
SeePt.2
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Pt.2:
In Pt.1 I defined Arche from the Strongs Hebrew Lexicon...
Now look at the definitions of arche & tell me Messiah is 1st in rank over YAHWEH i.e. the Father! You said Messiah is the source but there is NOT ONE biblical passage (if there is show me) I have ever seen where it shows Messiah 1st in place/rank/or order when the Father is in the picture! Jesus always get things 2nd hand HE is NOT the source of origin! He was GIVEN all power & he was SENT (under orders) from the FATHER!
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Pt.3-BlogRich
Arche in the end of itself does not declare something ETERNAL but rather it points to one's SOURCE of origin! It says corner right..Okay so let's tie this to a biblical passage: Messiah being the CHIEF CORNERSTONE right i.e. Isa.28:16
Ps.118:22~Rom.9:33~1Pet.2:6...
But WHO laid that stone? Who? The FATHER laid that stone Job.38:6!
Jesus has a GOD & FATHER Jn.20:17 & Rev.3:12 but who is YAHWEH's GOD & FATHER? No one...HE is the God of Gods/gods & Deut.10:17
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Pt.4-Your definition of firstborn is wrong!
4416-prototokos pro-tot-ok'-os from 4413 and the alternate of 5088; first-born (usually as noun, literally or figuratively):--firstbegotten(-born).
And if you define 5088~tikto or 4413~protos it is still going to be contrary to Messiah being the SOURCE of origin. He is the ONLY BEGOTTEN SON of GOD & he was begotten b4 he ever came into the world 1Jn.4:9
Bro. I am tired of believers not being honest EVEN when their doctrines are refuted!
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Manuaim, So, when the Talmud calls God the firstborn of the world, you think it means God has a begining? As Hebrew speaking Jew, I say Blogrich is completly correct re. this, and his understanding of logos as 'reason' is also correct Greek. If you like, I would be happy to continue the conversation on in Hebrew.
freezingstill 2 years ago
I don't even adhere to the Talmud so I find NO authority in the Talmud at all! And for some strange reason I never seen this comment in my inbox or I would have been replied.
Now first off GOD ALMIGHTY has never had a beginning in that of EXISTENCE or this would mean The Most High was created! His beginning is in light to creation.
But Messiah came forth from Everlasting...He came FROM YAHWEH Micah 5:2 is clear that HE came FROM El Elyon...& v.4 says Messiah has a LORD & GOD....
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Micah 5:2 "Whose goings forth are rom of old, from everlasting." The passage does NOT say He came forth from everlasting. Perhaps you need new reading glasses hmmmm?
Blogrich55 2 years ago
If you disagree, care to speak to me in Hebrew or Greek?
freezingstill 2 years ago
I do not speak Hebrew or Greek....I study the Bible and I look up the Hebrew and Greek words that were translated into English.
I'm sure we can find someone to mediate the Hebrew & Greek if you insist on believing that the Hebrew and or Greek Lexicon/Concordance does not properly translate the passages.
MANUAIM 2 years ago
You are using a basic Dictionary, the fact is this is beyond them-all lingustic commentaries which I know of say this-if you can't read the language don't bother responding about Greek and Heb. words to people who have spent their live in study. Your views about the Jewish people are too cracked to be taken seriously with your 13th tribe nonsense-if we are not real Jews why did we keep our language and suffer for it? Why don't you speak Hebrew? Antisemitic Crackpotism.
freezingstill 2 years ago
Though I am not using a basic dictionary (unless you are ref. the Strong's & or Hebrew /Greek Lexicon) anyhow I would like to find a non-bias Hebrew Greek Dictionary so that I can read definitions *without any assumptive biblical interpretation vs. finding trinitarian or speculation within the definition.
I don't speak Hebrew bcuz I have not studied Hebrew to speak it, ONLY studied it in light of words that were used in the scriptures & shouldn't you have said Anti*shemitc vs. Antisemitic?
MANUAIM 2 years ago
So let me get this strait-we arn't really Jews, but you are using Hebrew, which WE alone preserved and without us you would know nothing about it against us?
freezingstill 2 years ago
You guys were taught Hebrew by the Masorites who learned from Israelites prior to the Babylonian exile....
You can't fool me....The Hebrew Language was preserved because it is the original language and YAHWEH did not want it to be diminished in the earth.
The descendants of Edom were the ones who also gathered while Jacob's seed went into Bondage and waited to retrieve the birthright that they sold.....
You don't fool me...Jewish ppl do not fit the prophecy of Deut.28 prove it! Show me
MANUAIM 2 years ago
So the Jewish ppl in Israel can be mistaken for Ancient Egyptians huh? Or Paul was a European/Russian Jew huh and mistaken to be an Egyptian in Acts 21:38-39 huh?
Oh...or The Russian Jewish ppl oops the Jewish ppl in Israel they can grow seven natural locks in their heads huh....
If the Jewish ppl are the Real Hebrews then explain why in Acts 13 Simeon was called Niger/Black & since this was factual why is it now that the Jewish ppl have decided to say O there *may be Eithiopian Jews..LOL
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Fyi so you know, Egyptians don't look like Eithiopians-and Eithiopian Jews don't accuse us of being fake Jews-and to be very very clear, the Khazars were not "white", and my mothers family were "Russian" Jews as you say, they had black hair and dark skin-none of your anti-semetic nonsense at any point is rational but is filled with ignorance, misinformation and lies. You learnt Hebrew from us, and then had the gall to saw we arn't the real Jews-some will believe anything.
freezingstill 2 years ago
Pt.5
Bro. ppl want to restrict Messiah being firstborn to the resurrection from the dead but if he had to have preeminence over all things (CREATED) then why leave out he is the firstborn of every creature-Col.1:15 (not just from the dead but from & since the beginning)...
If Jesus says he comes from GOD then how do we get over it Jn.8:42 & Trinitarians mock the ONENESS point of view in Jn.17 & ask was he praying 2 himself but you guys say he came from himself! Jesus has a GOD Rev.3:12
MANUAIM 2 years ago
BlogRich I believe it is clear that the passage shows us that in the beginning...Which for me this lets me know prior to that beginning there was AN EXISTENCE....& we do have Messiah saying he had glory with the FATHER before the world was...Jn.17:5 which means b4 CREATION of the WORLD...
However what about Rev.3:14 & Col.1:15 where 1 says He (Messiah) is the beginning of the CREATION of GOD..& 1 says He is the 1st born of EVERY CREATURE (same as creation)...This clearly explains b4 Jn.1:1
MANUAIM 2 years ago
"Which for me this lets me know prior to that beginning there was AN EXISTENCE"-actually, that is a self refuting statement-except the creator alone.The begining is the begining, nothing had been created at that point, and all 'things' came into existence via him.This is kind of a simple matter of E=mc2.Without space and time, how can you measure the existence of created things? Fyi, since the sub. of Heb. words came up, in Jewish though,a man's davar and ruach are one and inseperable from him.
freezingstill 2 years ago
freezingstill....
Jn.17:5 is proof that there was an existence prior to the Creation of the Worlds. Now the fact that Messiah says He is the beginning-746 of the creation-2937 of God then how do you get around saying Messiah was not the 1st in rank/position i.e. even as the chief cornerstone *that was LAID? How do you get around Messiah himself saying He is the beginning of the CREATION of God? Rev.3:14!
What is or what can be seperated from El Elyon Elohiym? Acts 17:28
MANUAIM 2 years ago
How? Because beginning is the Greek word arche and means origin or source. Quite simple really.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Yes, and even Barclay agrees with you.
freezingstill 2 years ago
"Begining" is in the pregnant sence, all linguistic commentaries I know state this, it means "Ruler" of God's creation. Re. firstborn, you should care about what the Talmud says, because it is the Jewish culture, the same culture that Paul, John, etc. wrote in, and if God is called the firstborn, then it does not mean first created, but rather a place of primacy. The whole theological outlook of John's Gospel is the Diety of Christ "the Logos was God" "My Lord and my God"-
freezingstill 2 years ago
I must explain that further, it is a common way of teaching in the Nt (and other Lit.), to sandwhich ideas between a diologue. Jn. Starts off with the assertion that the Logos is God-then ends off with Thomas confession "My Lord and My God"-in John's mind the ideantity of Jesus is clear-God. Same with Matt. begins calling him Immanuel (God is with us), ends with the promise of Jesus "I am with you all the days..."ie, it begins and ends with the idea to highlight it.
freezingstill 2 years ago
Pt.1-freezingstill:
Does Jesus have a LORD and GOD? Yes or No? I'll answer it for you YES. Ps.110:1/Mk.12:36 & Jn.20:17~Rev.3:12...
Now once again by definition it is impossible for the Logos to be God Almighty when the Logos came as a result of God Almighty i,e, every thought has a thinker & every reasoning has a reasoner behind it..
Jesus *can be called Lord & God though, I see Thomas here honoring GOD IN Christ!
Your Mt.1:23 interpretation proves you should study more.
See Pt.2
MANUAIM 2 years ago
"Jesus *can be called Lord & God though, I see Thomas here honoring GOD IN Christ!"-that is not what the text says, it says Thomas called Him, ie Jesus, his God. "Your Mt.1:23 interpretation proves you should study more."-so, speak to me in Hebrew or Greek, if I am so ignorant about my own culture.
freezingstill 2 years ago
The old and trite dodge about Thomas honoring God in Christ was touted by Yuratchka and soundly refuted by myself in 2 videos and Mark Aponte in another as well. Perhaps it is time to re-do and relaunch them.
It is a theological tissue that quickly falls apart and illogical and eisegetic. If Thomas could worship the Father in Christ, he could also have worshipped the Father in Peter. IIf Thomas could do so, you and I can worship the Father in other believers. What a farse this idea presents!
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Blogrich: How many God's/gods are there? I can't wait (though I guess I have to for you to answer this?)
Now Jn.20:28 rather Thomas was calling Jesus Elohiym and Lord it makes no difference THOUGH I see him honoring GOD IN CHRIST! The reason it makes no difference is bcuz Jesus has a GOD & LORD, so obviously Thomas was not calling Jesus THE GOD of Gods/gods & LORD of Lords/lords...
Jesus has a GOD though he is a Elohiym HE is NOT the Highest! But rather the Son of the Highest Lk.1:32
MANUAIM 2 years ago
What a load of eisegetic rubbish. You read a LOT into the text. You paint yourself into a corner. You should really stop for a second and ask yourself what clearer words could Thomas have used to convey the concept that Jesus was Kurios (used to translate Jehovah) and God?
Blogrich55 2 years ago
It's funny (when you catch the Trinitarians in a lie while they are trying to exegete passages.)
Go to Ps.110:1 it will show you that LORD is 3068 YHVH & Lord is adown-113...Why is it when you go to Mk.12:36 which is supposed to be the same as Ps.110:1 that it is using kurios for both YHVH & Messiah? See how they changed it?
They could have used another word to translate but they didn't THOUGH it matters not because Jesus was made Lord by HIS LORD Acts 2:36. Kurious was used for man also!
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Blogrich is it NOT the Trinitarian argument that when the man and his wife died in Acts 5 it was because they LIED to GOD via His Holy Spirit in Peter?( I know you guys say God the Holy Spirit)...
& yes you can honor GOD in Christ. & the fact that many believers have come to other men of God & thanked God is blameless.
What does 1Cor.14:24-25 say?
Who is being honored if someone comes to any believer & they say " I really truly THANK GOD for you"?
Who is being honored there?
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Do you know how many Greek and Hebrew speaking non-believers there are? Many in the hundred thousands if not clearly in the Millions...
Next you seem to think speaking Hebrew & or Greek though I do not knock it signifies that you have studied the Bible? You are fooling yourself. By all means if you can speak Hebrew & Greek I applaud you...But this does not signify automatic biblical exegeting.
Acts 10:38 is clear and I see you did not respond to this passage but went around it...Why?
MANUAIM 2 years ago
I really didn't feel it was the time or place nor did I feel a need to go into an explanation of the kenosis theory of the incarnation so Act 10:38 was not dealt with. I will do a video on it and others like it if you want. I aim to please.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Pt.1-Blogrich the "Kenosis Theory" is what you should say is a load of eisegetic rubbish. So if you answer with Christ's humanity & attempt to justify the repression of [your declaration of his 100% GOD ALMIGHTY-ness] then how is that integrity at all?
You guys say He was BOTH 100% MAN & 100% GOD. In other words you believe that Jesus is GOD ALMIGHTY yet you say He emptied himself from being GOD ALMIGHTY? Yet you say in the flesh He was GOD ALMIGHTY 100%?
Yet this is not rubbish? See Pt.2
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Pt.2-Blogrich:
So I have heard of the "Kenosis Theory" before & guess what it FACTUALLY BOILS down to???
Trinitarians that believe that Jesus told the Truth as a man but yet as GOD ALMIGHTY He lied, though it is not a lie at all to you guys bcuz He emptied hiimself & became a man 100% yet even though He is GOD ALMIGHTY (according to You guys) whatever he emptied himself of. it was not enough to disqualify the Hypostatic Union (100% GOD ALMIGHTY % & 100% Man)
See Pt.3....
MANUAIM 2 years ago
You need a crash course in logic sir! It does NOT follow logically to imply that for a person who has 2 natures to speak from one of them and not the other that it would mean the other nature is lying. If Jesus spoke as a man and as man did NOT know something it does NOT mean His God nature is lying because it does know.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
You are such an impressive at being a jokester. Blogrich are you listening to yourself?
I am a Son to my parents & Husband to my wife & Father to my children & Brother to my siblings...
Now if I was asked a question concerning was I Son.Husband, Father, & Sibling all in one question: i.e. Hey Manuaim do you have a wife? Any children? A Brother or Sister? Any Children? If I said NO I would be LYING period point blank.
You guys make Jesus out to be a lie....When Heb.4:15 is clear!
MANUAIM 2 years ago
So I am an impressive joker? You come up with this meaningless analogy of the functions of a mere man and somehow to your deluded mind it shows Jesus is a liar if He is both God and man?
I wonder if you have EVER cracked open a book on simple logic? Might I suggest Copi, Hurley, Barker, Beasley, or Clark? If you will check your puny attempts at reasoning against the rules of logic you will soon see it is YOU who is the joker.
God existing as 3 person in one being is NOT a contradiction.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
First off you keep on leaving out key aspects of my argument Blogrich come on...
First off once again I will repeat myself...I believe Jesus is a God i.e. Jesus is a Elohiym...I do not believe in MORE than 1 as in the number one "GOD ALMIGHTY" He is Jesus' Father also known as the Most High God i,e. Most High Elohiym
*IF Jesus *knew the answer & said he did not know then this is a clear LIE & I DO NOT believe Jesus is a liar i.e. Heb.4:15..So I believe Jesus did NOT know just like he said.
MANUAIM 2 years ago
"You are just as full of double talk as the rest of the Trinitarians."..."You are such an impressive at being a jokester. Blogrich are you listening to yourself?"-Manuaim, are you listening to yourself? "You guys make Jesus out to be a lie"-no, we have just quoted the Scriptures, and you deny thier clear words "My Lord and My God"..."and they shall look upon me, whom they have pierced".
freezingstill 2 years ago
Yeah freezingstill you have quoted scriptures without getting an understanding of the passage.
You keep on saying YHWH was saying He was pierced when too many passages let's us know the Father i.e. YAHWEH sent Messiah i.e. The Son!
What does Isa.53 say? What does Isa.42 say? What did Messiah say in Jn.13:16?
Does Jesus have a LORD?
Yes or No?-->Ps.110:1~Acts 2:36~1Cor.15:24-28
Does Jesus have a GOD?
Yes or No?-->Jn.17:3~Jn.20:17~Rev.3:12Eph.1:3~Eph.1:17
Now interpret Zec.12:10
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Since there are 3 persons in the ONE BEING known as ALMIGHTY GOD or YHWH, it IS He who says ME whom they have pierced. Deal with it!
Now did the Father send the Son? Of course! You foolishly think the mention of one person somehow denies the existence of the other. Yuratchka similarly thinks the mention of one nature of Christ negates the existence of the other. Gee, I guess if I point out I am a white man, the mention of being white will negate the fact that I am a man?
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Who is "him" that is mentioned in Zec.12:10? Since you are trying to skip over that.....i.e. mourn for *him & be in bitterness for *him....
Exegete that....
MANUAIM 2 years ago
I didn't skip over anything-YOU are skipping over the clear Word of God "they will look to me whom they have pierced"-this isn't even a matter of exegeses, it is the plain reading of the text. "your argument is lame."-since when is quoting a text an argment?..."Messiah will judge who the Real Jews are"-right, you are not Jesus, and you have no historical link to your nonsence.
freezingstill 2 years ago
The Bible is the historical link you need. Joseph's own brothers could not tell the difference between him and the other Egyptians i.e. Africans Gen.41-45..Moses' wife Zipporah thought Moses was an Egyptian Ex.2....The visage of the Israelites in Captivity were black Lam.4:8..The Prophet Simeon was called Niger=Black Acts 13:1 & Paul was mistaken to be an Egyptian Acts 21:38-39
Now how could all these Israelites be mistaken for Africans if they were not people of color??
Simple concept
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Was Simon Niger a Jew? The fact that he is called Niger, as opposed to the rest, suggests he was differnt. Lam 4:8 is linking them to corpses-not Africans, and again you miss the obvoius-EGYPTIANS ARE NOT BLACK-again, let me point out the obvious, my mothers family were "Russian" Jews, they were black haired and dark skin-again obvouis, the KHAZARS were NOT white.
freezingstill 2 years ago
Simeon was a Jew....Read the context they were Prophets & Elders....You also forgot that the Romans laid Messiah's cross on a man from North Cyrene i.e. Africa..Why would they do this?
Too many passages that prove this...& the lie that the Egyptians were not black is absurd...Egypt was called the Land of Kemet...
And I don't care what color the Khazars were they NOR the Jewish ppl in Israel are in Biblical Jews...& Lam.4:8 shows the color of their faces in famine...Get over it...Rev.3:9
MANUAIM 2 years ago
"And I don't care what color the Khazars"-really? Why is that? Because you would lose your argument? Re. Simon-he was from Cyrene-so, was he a Jew? I suggest it is you who must get your story strait. Re. Egyptians being black-really, my neibour and several of my teachers are Coptics, they are not black-nor are any of the Middle Easterners black-this is only a problem for you because it is devastating to YOUR argument. Re. Lam. you are arguing against the text.
freezingstill 2 years ago
Lets see, are people from Iraq black? What about Iran? No, so why would the Israelites be black if Avraham came from Ur, ie Bavel? Oh, its a conspiracy, right-a conspiracy with no evidence...uh huh...I TOTALLY get it now. Manuaim, I am praying for you, you are following very great deceptions contrary to ALL evidence.
freezingstill 2 years ago
All Historians know that the Ancient Egyptians were black. The fact that the biblical Jews were mistaken for Egpytians in several passages proves that the Biblical Israelites were people of color.
Samson had dreadlocks...So did Ezekiel....Natural locks...these are simple concepts that you need to understand...
But I still believe Messiah is going to show us who the True Jews are Rev.3:9....
By the way what color was the first man?
MANUAIM 2 years ago
"All Historians know that the Ancient Egyptians were black"-lie. "Samson had dreadlocks"-the text doesn't say that, but for that matter my mothers family had locks as well, we called them payis. "Rev.3:9"-that passage is talking about the Jews who did not accept Christ and persecuted the Jews and non Jews who did-I thought you were a person who cared about context-truth-etc.?
freezingstill 2 years ago
What do you think locks are? You guys deny too many passages about the features of the Israelites!
We will see....Who Messiah says the true Jews are...
I personally believe that the NOW status of salvation is based upon faith in Messiah but it still remains the fact that the Jewish ppl in Israel are descendants of identity stealers...
Show me from a historical perspective when the Jewish ppl as a NATION went into Egypt by ships into slavery? Show me....
MANUAIM 2 years ago
"What do you think locks are?"-in Hebrew locks can refer to a few things, curls, braids (which is how that passage is traditionaly understood as, btw), and as I just stated most Hassidim whom I know have locks-we call them payis. But for that matter I know white people with dreadlocks-and irronically, most Jews I know have curly hair, not strait. If there are identiy stealers, it is you. The world hates us this much, they called us cursed, now they try and steal our identity-Deut 28? Its us.
freezingstill 2 years ago
I have to remind you, the whole point of the identity argument is based on the Jewish quote that God is the "firstborn of the world". But lets for argument sake say that we are not the real Jews-we are the ones who preserved Hebrew and the traditions-since that is the case, and it is, how can you still not acknowledge the simple fact that firstborn in the "Hebrew" language does not mean primacy? Our knowledge of Hebrew is good enough for you to use, except when it contradicts your opinions?
freezingstill 2 years ago
Let's see if you are right???
Now in the Bible the word "firstborn" in the Hebrew is 1060 bkowr bek-ore' from 1069; firstborn; hence, chief:--eldest (son), firstborn(-ling).
1069 bakar baw-kar' a primitive root; properly, to burst the womb, i.e. (causatively) bear or make early fruit (of woman or tree); also (as denominative from 1061) to give the birthright:--make firstborn, be firstling, bring forth first child (new fruit).
There is also another word but ONLY used for women.
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Manuaim-you actually just proved my point, "make firstborn", "causatively) bear or make early fruit (of woman or tree)"do you understand what causitive means? It is a pregnant sence and means owner/creator/"chief" was one of the words you quoted. The fact is, God is called the firstborn of the world in Heb. Lit.-meaning ruler, and this is what Rev means when it calles Jesus the arche of God's creation-it does not mean 'first created'. David is called the"firstborn", but he Jess's first literly.
freezingstill 2 years ago
freezingstill...I did not just prove your point. You are just another person that is willing to deny the definitions of the concordance.
By the way these are all definitions in the Hebrew...Not in the book of Hebrews these not not greek definitions...
I am still trying to find out how GOD ALMIGHTY in any shape form or fashion can be born when clearly the definition of borns deals with something being created and OR fashioned brought forth etc....
It's okay Jesus was SENT right? Jn13:16
MANUAIM 2 years ago
You did prove my point, you yourself said it is Causitive-unless you don't understand what that means. If it was irreleant why did you bother looking it up? Now that you're wrong it's irrelevant? Btw, yeh, I think Hebrew had some imporatance to the writer of "Hebrews"-everyone who reads Nt Greek knows the Heb. worldview influenced them and is full of Hebraisms. Re. Jesus being sent, we explained it already, the Trinity.
freezingstill 2 years ago
One theologian whose name escapes me once expressed his opinion that the book of Hebrews was an exposition of Psalm 110:1 I don't know personally but it is an interesting thought. BTW anyone have any theory about who wrote it and why they think that person wrote it? Just curious.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Well Ps 110 certainly is included in the major themes. Though it is not a poplar view, I believe it is Pauline in origen. Though the book lacks his usual autograph and prologue, and though the Greek is more presise then usual, it deals with ideas which are certainly Pauline, faith, new covenant, and mentioned some people who were affilliated with Paul. Some say Luke or Barnabas wrote it.
freezingstill 2 years ago
Re. why it was written, the question of to whome it was written must also be asked. I think based on the quote "our fathers", and the entire arguing for Christ out of the Ot shows that the audiance must have been Jewish Christians. Most people think, and I would agree, that it was written to those who were feeling presured to leave the Church and go back to Judaism. It is strange that 2000 years later, there are so many 'Judaizers' still around trying hard to argue against the book itself.
freezingstill 2 years ago
Personally I have always felt Apollos wrote it. The Greek is different from Paul's and he had a following. When they claimed to be of Apollos it was probably for a reason. Just speculation on my behalf. I was shocked to find out Luther thought the same thing.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
I never said it was irrelevent first off...I am just sick of going back and forth with someone who is not willing to study the words of Messiah (I say this because if you think that your Trinity is valid ONCE Messiah already explains he that is SENT is *NOT greater then HE that sent him NOR is the servant [Messiah-Isa.42/Isa.53] greater than His LORD i.e. Ps.110:1/Acts 2:36....
So Messiah said the Father is GREATER where is a CO-EQUAL Trinity at??? In your non-biblical superstitious exegesis!
MANUAIM 2 years ago
You really are sadly blind. How many times have I heard your childish rhetorical tactics from Jesus Only Apostolic Pentecostals to prove Jesus was the Father incarnate. They deny the Holy Trinity too but for different reasons.
As Christ had TWO NATURES the old polemic dodge is to focus on ONE OF THEM and either ignore the OTHER or use the one to try to somehow argue against the other or disprove it.
Jehovah's witless are masters of this nonsense. Quote humanity ignore deity. Ho hum!
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Pt.1-Blogrich..IN HEAVEN Jesus was no longer flesh & blood this was AFTER the incarnation....He was in heaven saying He has a God i.e. Rev.3:12...
Then the funny thing is that you act as if I don't understand the Hypostatic Union YET the Trinitarian theory of it is NOT consistent in light of the Hypostatic Union.
1 minute Jesus is 100% GOD ALMIGHTY
*AND 100% Man but yet the Kenosis Theory is that He emptied himself of his Deity *when he became a man but yet he's still 100% GOD ALMIGHTY?!?!?
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Christ is Elohim, but he is not The Father, and you dual nature non-sense is basically stating that Christ was schizo or bi-polar. Every man has spirit and flesh. Every man can walk in the fullness of YHWH. This does not makle everyone YHWH nor does it make Christ YHWH.
halfie25 2 years ago
halfie25...LOL the Hypostatic Union i.e. Dual Nature i.e. 100% GOD ALMIGHTY & 100% Man doctrine *IS non-sense & full of SUPERSTITION.
1st off they deny the 100% GOD ALMIGHTY nature they Christ is in Mk.13:32 & they say he only spoke as a man..Well in the same sentence Christ says the Father ONLY knows which means He remembered this much about the Father...But yet I guess He himself as GOD ALMIGHTY 100 % according to them did not KNOW? Well if he is EQUAL to the FATHER in GODSHIP how come?
MANUAIM 2 years ago
MANUAIM, I never knew the term for schizo, bi-polar "Jesus", but thanks for hooking me up with the terminology. This is just a classic case of Greek and Roman pagan mythology getting mixed in with Christianity. The funnyt hing is we look at mythical Gods in light of YHWh and realize how silly dual natured triune gods are, yet people like our buddy Blog want to throw that very same stigma on YHWH on High. It's borderline blasphemy.
halfie25 2 years ago
halfie25 You are gracious by saying borderline blasphemy. Blogrich is wiser than this foolishness but for some strange reason he doesn't want to side with Messiah who even of himself said that He does not know in Mk.13:32....
On top of this Blog believes Jesus existed b4 coming to the earth ( I do to) yet when Messiah explains He that is SENT is NOT greater then He that sent him i.e. Jn.13:16...
My question would now be well WHO SENT Jesus from Heaven? Answer: YHWH 1Jn.4:14..
& the
MANUAIM 2 years ago
halfie25: Slight typo so I'll explain.
Jesus taught a principle in Jn.13:16:
Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him.
Now simply ask: Was Jesus sent? Answer: Yes= Jn.3:17~Jn.3:34~Jn.4:34~Jn.5:23-24~Jn.5:30~Isa.42~Isa.53 etc
Does Jesus have a LORD? Answer: Yes= Ps.110:1/Mk.12:36~Acts 2:34-36 which references 1Cor.15:24-28 & 1Cor.12:3 explains He is Lord by the Spirit of the LORD i.e. Holy Spirit
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Any and all autority was given to Yahowshua by YHWH Himself. Which hints the fact that he is at the right hand of YHWH. Now dualist's will say the right hand is symbolic of Christ being YHWH because right hand actaully means sitting in YHWH's thrown since he was given the authority by YHWH Himself... LOL. Bottom line Yahowshua serves YHWH. Therefore he can not be YHWH Himself.
halfie25 2 years ago
halfie 25 not only that but check it out...Who is the High Priest? Yahushua is the High Priest if YHWH himself was the High Priest then who would be refraining YHWH from releasing His Wrath on all of us?
You are right Bottomline Messiah is under instructions & this was another reason why He marvelled at the Ceturions faith in Mt.8 because he was in awe at the faith of the Centurion understanding Messiah himself was a man likewise under authority also...It is extremely clear...Mt.16:16-17
MANUAIM 2 years ago
Man thanks for busting out all the scripture to back your claims! Most do not... YHWH blessings to yuo for spreading is truth!
halfie25 2 years ago
Bipolar? You are the one called halfie LOL Oh BTW do YOU honor the Son the same as you do the Father or are YOU the blasphemer??
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Yeah Blogrich. That's right Halfie. As in half black and half white. The fact that I get that and appearently you didn't just goes to show I understand who I am and more over who you are. Show me in the Bible where Yahowsua says "praise me as much as the Father. Or where he says The father and I are equal (not one). YOU CAN"T!!! If I'm right than it's ok because I still give the Father all the glory (as did Christ).
halfie25 2 years ago
If you are right than I am ok because the Father still gets all the glory, but if you are wrong YHWH will charge you with idolitary. For putting another God on high, and if you've read the Tenakh you would no that only YHWH is on high. You can not argue that either... So either way i will not be charged with blasphemy, but you could be. make sure you study the scripture as well as you fake it!
halfie25 2 years ago
Though I may be of Jewish ancestory I have not read the Tenakh. I have been studying the scripture longer and deeper than you. Sadly you seem to be determined to be argumentative. That's okay. I am a bit pugnacious myself. However, I will deal with you in more detail later. For now I have to run. Take care.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Babble on dude! I am not a mind reader and had NO WAY of knowing you were biracial instead of bipolar. LOL Well I am NOT concerned with your ethnic background but your religious opinions.
I have a new video you may find interesting on the deity of Christ. I hope to have it up in a couple of days. I will send it to you.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Can't wait to see your video. I do not deny Christ is Elohim, but then again so are Moses and many others... There is only on God on High though. That is YHWH. I'm not trying to be arguementative, but let me ask you this. have you looked at any of the scripture people like MANUAIM have sent you? yet you are still convinced Christ is the Father... To argue or even debate someone like you may be the same as a brick wall. The truth is right in front of you.
halfie25 2 years ago
PLEASE-- do NOT accuse me of the damnable Apostolic Oneness or Jesus Only heresy that teaches Jesus is the Father. If you want to comment here, you should at least watch a couple of my videos. Most are on apologetics. This is usually aimed at disproving the cults.
The Apostolics who teach that concept are one of my prime targets. I will not get angry because I believe you commented without knowing anything about me. NO, I NEVER have and NEVER will believe that lie of the devil!
Blogrich55 2 years ago
And yet you believe Yahowshua should be praised just as YHWH is praised? You believe Christ had a dual nature, and please don't tell me you're a Trinitarian...
halfie25 2 years ago
If you don't realize I am a trinitarian by now dude, there is NO hope for you LOL
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Blog actually...Everybody who professes faith doesn't know about Trinitarians and Oneness points of views. I know because I grew up around lots of Oneness believers who when we would go outreaching I found out The Trinitarian Doctrine was like an arch rival.....And I was like dude....what's going on etc.etc....
I am not positioned against the Trinity or Oneness Doctrine for any reason but the fact that they EXALT Messiah to a position he was never given by the Father i.e. GOD ALMIGHTY
MANUAIM 2 years ago
So do you believe in the Trinity as Tertullian did (the very man who coined the doctrine)? Or as the modern chruch does?
halfie25 2 years ago
I believe in the doctrine of the Holy Trinity as plainly laid out in God's word the Bible.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
halfie25 they do not want to even discuss what you said...i.e. " I do not deny Christ is Elohim" Dude they will not dare get into that discussion....
Trinitarians hate to hear anything about there being more than 3 Elohiym that equal one Elohiym...
I have asked about 3 to 4 times maybe more asking how many Elohiym are there I don't remember getting an answer.....Trinitarians do not like to discuss how many Elohiym there are..
They fail to realize there is an INUMMERABLE amount!
MANUAIM 2 years ago
LOL... MANUAIM when I first heard it, it offended me, but I realized that some angels are Elohim which made lineing up the profits and YHWH's son as Elohim a little bit easier. I'm just glad YHWH finally revealed His truths to me. I always knew there was something twisted about "American westernized Chritianity". When YHWH revealed the truths about the falseness I believed in I repented, and also threw out every doctrine i had in the equation. I have never had so much peace!
halfie25 2 years ago
Chunked 'em right out the window ehhhh halfie? Darn old doctrines just get in the way huh? LOL you know what they say dude..... ignorance is bliss.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Blog seriously I think you fail to realize that the Nicaean Creed was instituted by ppl who wanted to gather the church as one BUT yet just for the sake of false peace. Messiah said he would divide & set a man at variance etc. You Trinitarians pledge to a creed made up of men who were NOT appointed by Messiah or the Apostles...They were appointed by a religious convert who wanted the church & the world government to be "ONE".
Know ye not the INQUISITION is a result of the Council of Nicaea!!!
MANUAIM 2 years ago
By the way...I will do more historical studying but I know of NO TRINITARIANS that were killed during the Inquisition!!! That alone proves to me that the Inquistion was a Trinitarian Movement and this is one of the sole reasons Trinitarians have that "accusing spirit" FOR INSTANCE: "If you don't believe in the Trinity you are worthy of death or you are going to Hell" this is the decree of about 7 or 8 out of 10 Trinitarians I dialouge with but the epistle of 1st John alone makes them all liars!
MANUAIM 2 years ago