(1) The definite article in Greek can mean a lot of different things; as used before the title KURIOS, it usually means that KURIOS is being used to designate a person specifically as Lord "of" someone or "of" a group. Jesus is therefore said to be "the Lord of us". (Rom 1:4; 5:1; 1 Cor 1:9; 9:1) The Lord of us Jesus, is not "God" as can be seen from 2 Cor 1:3; Eph 1:3; 1 Pet 1:3.
I am not with the JWs; nor do I deny Christ's deity as that deity is revealed in the Bible. However KURIOS is not a translation is actually NOT a "translation" of God's Holy Name from the Hebrew. Rather, it actually changes God's Holy Name to KURIOS, a noun, while EHYEH and YAHWEH are both verbs.
You're SO arrogant. And yeah, if my Christology wasn't heard of until the 300s, was denied by people the apostles taught, and was so LAME that Almighty God couldn't care LESS about it that he let it go belly up for nearly 1000 years, yeah I'd be arrogant about it too!
I wouldn't be ashamed of how lame it was and be thinking twice about whether or not it was true. Nope. Not at all.
@TheGenuineChristian Oooh, can't wait. No pompocity in your family, Yuratchka, you've got it all. Yep, your heresy is SO irrefutable, that's why all you could do was laugh off my Psalm 90:2-John 8:58 connection without refuting it.
You've got yourself one pathetic buffoon of a 'god,' Arian boy, and one bucktoothed idiot miscommunicator of a 'messiah,' Arian-boy.
@msm1876 ....MSM......Did God allow the Roman Catholic Faith to "go belly up"???????Did God "not care less about her for all these years?... Is that why YOU left her?
@52VEKAJ Huh? Who are you? God kept His truth alive since the apostolic age on. There was never a time that Christ's death for mankind's sins wasn't preached. The RCC added on a lot of spurious traditions and made them binding dogma, and slapped the label of "oral apostolic traditions" onto them to make it look like they were first century revelation. Thus, a Reformation was needed.
That's why I'm certainly a catholic Christian, but not a Roman Catholic one.
@msm1876 1Cr 8:5 For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many "gods" and many "lords{g2962 kyrios} 6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father..
1Ti 6:15 which God will bring about in his own time--God(Father), the blessed and only[monos alone (without a companion)] Ruler, the King of kings and Lord{g2962 kyrios} of lords,
@JesusTheMonotheist Is this CristoYCruz? Sounds like him. Please quote the rest of 1 Cor 8:6...there is ONE LORD, Jesus Christ. Being that the Greek traslation of the Shema reads, The Lord your God, the Lord is One...HMMMM.
@msm1876 Forget about him he doesn't debate anymore worry about me.
1Cr 8:6 [one God, the Father ((of whom))] -- [one Lord Jesus Christ, ((through whom))] "The one God the Father is the one God and Father of the one Lord Jesus Christ. Jhn 20:17
Paul said, many "lords{g2962 kyrios}, you would have to assume they all are included in the Shema. Jesus is excluded from the Shema.
The Father our Lord and King is greater than all[1Ti 6:15; Jhn 10:29].
@JesusTheMonotheist LOL! Cruzie, this is **SO** you! You aren't fooling anyone, least of all me. Same style of rhetoric! Your new username is stuff you said under your old one: I'm a monotheist like Jesus. BTW, you're a henotheist, not a monotheist.
>>>Jesus is excluded from the Shema.
The Lord your God is One Lord.
How many Lords does the Christian have according to 1 Cor 8:6?
@msm1876 Said: How many Lords does the Christian have according to 1 Cor 8:6? --- yet to us there is one God, ...and one Lord, Yeshua the Messiah..
Why are you inserting the one Lord, Yeshua the Messiah in Mark 12:29? Jesus makes it very clear both in V 29 and V 32 referencing his Father only and affirming him to be the Lord is one only, Jesus excluded himself from his Lord. Jesus made his statement of faith of his Lord as being one.
@JesusTheHenotheist >>>his Father only and affirming him to be the Lord is one only
And yet Paul said that Christian had **ONE** Lord, Jesus Christ. We have a contradiction.
Or do we? When Jesus quoted the Shema, read the whole passage. And read the Shema in it's context. In fact, read the New Jewish Publication Bible and see how they translate it. It's about allegiance to YHWH, and not false gods, not a formula for unitarianism.
@msm1876 Jesus wasn't Trinitarian, he being a Jew his belief was Monotheistic quoted from the Torah said: Hear, Yisra'el: the LORD ((is)) **our**(HIS) God; the LORD is one: "In Mark 12:32 the scribe affirms and agrees with Jesus that their God is One, and guess who it is? their Father. Jhn 20:17<---OOops
@msm1876 The Bible is not henotheist, since it recognizes only one Supreme Being, who is the source of all power, strength, might. The basic meaning of the Hebrew word for "God" means strength, might, It is applied to many others than Yahweh; if believing what the Bible says on this means henotheism, then this would be saying that the Bible is henotheist.
@msm1876 I answered that briefly in one my earlier posts. The "one Lord" through whom the :"one God" does "the all" is that same one whom the "one God" anointed and made to be both lord and christ (anointed one). -- Ex 3:14,15; Deut 18:15-20; Psa 110:1; Isa 61:1; Mat 28:18; John 3:35; 5:22; 10:29; 13:3; 17:2,7; Acts 2:32-36; 3:13-26; 17:31; Eph 1:3,17-22; 1 Cor 15:27; Phil 2:9-11; Heb 1:13.
@msm1876 There is to the Christian "one God", who is the source of "the all" (ta panta), and there is the one Lord who is the servant of the "one God", through whom God performs the all (ta panta).
@msm1876 The "one Lord" who is the servant of the "one God" is never spoken of in scriptures as being the one Yahweh of Deut 6:4: "Hear, Israel: Yahweh is our God; Yahweh is one." (World English)
@msm1876 Revelation 11:15 relates to Psalm 2:2 - The kings of the earth take a stand, And the rulers take counsel together, Against Yahweh, and against his anointed. Christ means anointed, or anointed one, It is the Lord Yahweh who has anointed his anointed one. (Isa 61:1) The Lord Yahweh is not the Lord Jesus whom the Lord Yahweh has anointed, nor is the Lord Yahweh the "one Lord" through whom are "the all" of 1 Cor 8:6.
@msm1876 The Lord Yahweh (Isa 61:1) is "one God" of 1 Cor 8:6, and as the source of the all, he is also Lord, but he is NOT the "one lord" through whom are "the all", nor is the one Lord through whom are the all the "one God" who is the source.
@msm1876 The one God of 1 Cor 8:6 is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus (Eph 1:3; 1 Pet 1:3), and it is this one God who is the source of the all; Jesus is not the source, but he is "one lord" through whom the source provides the all.
@msm1876 "to us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we to him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we through him." - 1 Cor 8:6, World English
@msm1876 Rev 11:15 is further related to Ps 2:7,8, which has the Messiah, the anointed of Yahweh, saying: (Young's): I declare concerning a statute: Jehovah said unto me, `My Son Thou [art], I to-day have brought thee forth. 8 Ask of Me and I give nations -- thy inheritance, And thy possession -- the ends of earth. Thou dost rule them with a sceptre of iron, As a vessel of a potter Thou dost crush them.'
@reslight I just read through all your points...and I went back and looked @ Revelation 11:15, and the saints in heaven, strangely enough, still call God the Father "Our Lord!" And so you either have a contradiction between 1Cor 8:16 and that verse, or Christ's Lordship doesn't exclude God's Lordship, and God's Deity doesn't exclude Christ's.
Also, surely you don't hold that the NT once contained the Divine name? Because all throughout it, the Father is "The Lord."
@msm1876 (1) There is no contradiction! Psalm 2:2 - "The kings of the earth take a stand, And the rulers take counsel together, Against Yahweh, and against his anointed (World English)." Our Lord Yahweh (Neh 10:29; Ps 8:1,9; Isa 61:1) is not the anointed one of our Lord Yahweh! Our Lord Jesus Christ is the anointed one of our Lord Yahweh! They are not the same Lord, nor is there anything in 1 Cor 8:16 that gives any reason to think that they are the same Lord.
@msm1876 Our Lord Yahweh is the "one God" of 1 Cor 8:6, who is the source of "the all"; Our Lord Jesus is not the "one God" of 1 Cor 8:6, because our Lord Jesus is not the source of all.
@msm1876 Our Lord Yahweh is not the "one Lord" of 1 Cor 8:6, because he is not the one anointed by the "one God", nor is "the all" (ta panta) through the our Lord Yahweh, the "one God" of 1 Cor 8:6.
@msm1876 The Lordship that belongs only the "one God" is not the Lordship that is given to the "one Lord" through whom are the all, since the "one Lord" of 1 Cor 8:6 is not the source, for it says: "there is one Lord, *through* (dia) whom are all things (ta panta, the all)."
@msm1876 Strong says that the word "dia" means: "a primary preposition denoting the channel of an act." The One God, our Lord Yahweh, is the "source"; Our Lord Jesus, is the one lord who is the channel. There is no other "lord" whom the "one God" has anointed to be that channel. The "one God" did not anoint himself to be that channel; He anointed someone who is not Himself to be that channel.
@msm1876 Of course, I believe that Jesus and the writers of the NT used God's Holy Name. If they joined with the disobedient Jews in changing his eternal Holy Name (Ex 3:14,15) to another name, then Jesus was a false prophet, since he did not actually come in the name of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. See my site * name reslight net *.
@reslight >>>Of course, I believe that Jesus and the writers of the NT used God's Holy Name.
Then you just caused me to distrust the entire new testament. If wicked scribes could change that, and there not be a TRACE of evidence in the Manuscripts of it happening, then how can I be sure that other stuff wasn't changed between the autographs and the earliest manuscripts?
@msm1876 There indeed would be need to distrust the entire NT if Jesus and the NT writers did change God's eternal Holy Name. There is evidence, however, that the name was removed by Christians shortly after the death of apostles in an effort to keep the Jews from destroying the NT writings.
@msm1876 Strictly speaking, if no one changed the name in the New Testament, when the New Testament writers quote the Old Testament scriptures that contain the Holy Name, we would find the Holy Name in those New Testament scriptures. That is not what we find.
@msm1876 What we find in the extant NT manuscripts, however, is that the Holy Name has been changed to words, such as forms of Kurios, Theos, Dunamis, etc. Thus it is self-apparent that the Holy Name has been changed in the New Testament and changed with other words that are not God's Holy Name, nor do they even reflect the meaning of the Holy Name.
@msm1876 Nevertheless, with the thousands of variations that exist in the various extant manuscripts, we still have faith that God has preserved the NT, although we may have to use spiritual judgment regarding what has been and what has not been corrupted. This is simply a fact.
@msm1876 A video made by another, entitled, "The Tetragrammaton in the New Testament", mentions this evidence. That evidence, of course, does not at all give anyone any reason to think that the NT writers changed God's Holy Name to Kurios (Lord), Dunamis (Power), Theos (God), etc.
@msm1876 The video I spoke of was evidently prepared by a JW; I do not necessarily agree with absolutely all conclusions given; I have doubts that the earlier manuscripts referred to as being of the LXX were actually a part of the LXX, although that is the general assumption.
@msm1876 I would suggest that you not just "read over" what I have written; take time to look up the scriptures and note the usage of the Holy Name. The Messiah was to come in the name of another than Himself; if the Messiah is Yahweh, then the Messiah came in his own name. -- Ex 3:14,15; Deut 18:19; John 5:43; Acts 3:13-26; Heb 1:1,2.
@msm1876 In the NT, it becomes obvious that the Holy Name has been changed to forms of THEOS, KURIOS, DUNAMIS, DESPOTES, and possibly even in some places to pater (father). This does not mean that every time one sees a form of these words in the NT that is means the Holy Name.
@msm1876 The father is one God "of whom are all things"; Jesus is the "one Lord" appointed by the one God through whom are all things. Scripture shows that Jesus is not the one God, but that the "one God" is the source, while the "one Lord" appointed by the one God is the means by which the "one God" does "all things."
@msm1876----->If Jesus was less than God Almighty...
Jhn 13:16 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord{g2962 kyrios}; neither he(Jesus) that is sent greater than he(Father) that sent him(Jesus).======>Mat 11:25 At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord{g2962 kyrios} of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.
In their own Kingdom Interlinear on page 722 it reads at the bottom of the page there is a note talking about Rom 10:9 "For if you publicly declare that word in your own mouth that Jesus is Lord,[a]..."
At the bottom of the page it says... "9a Lord=kurios (kyri-os), (ha A-don), J12,13,14,16-18, Not "Jehovah".
Now go back and re watch Mike's video again to the quote from thier 1962 NWT.
The way JW are taught to read the Word of God is sad. They ALWAYS make God's words "SYMBOLIC" or "SPIRITUAL", denying clear declarations of the very God JWs claim to witnesses of:
NWT Isa40:10 "Look! The Sovereign Lord Jehovah himself will come...Look! His reward is with him, and the wage he pays is before him. 11 Like a shepherd he will shepherd his own drove. With his arm he will collect together the lambs, and in his bosom he will carry [them]. Those giving suck he will conduct [with care]."
"Here is YOUR God" Look! The Sovereign Lord Jehovah himself will come"Isa40:1-11
"Prepare the way of Jehovah,YOU people...THEN JESUS CAME"Mt3:1-3,11-13
"But I tell YOU that something greater than the temple is here...For Lord [Jehovah] of the sabbath is what the Son of man is.”Mt12:6-8
“The sabbath came into existence for the sake of man, and not man for the sake of the sabbath; hence the Son of man is Lord [Jehovah] even of the sabbath.”Mk2:27-28
Talk about words coming back to haunt you. The society for years banked on the idea that followers would just take their word for it and not check things out. Most still do. I know individuals that would not believe any evidence you put before them. They have let themselves be blinded from seeing the real truth. The organization has become their salvation in their eyes. Good video!
(2) It is Yahweh who made Jesus both lord and christ (anointed one), not only "of" the church, but the whole creation. -- Isa 61:1; Acts 2:36.
Yahweh is distinguished from Jesus, the Lord of me in Ps 110:1; Mat 22:44; Mark 12:36.
reslight 4 weeks ago
(1) The definite article in Greek can mean a lot of different things; as used before the title KURIOS, it usually means that KURIOS is being used to designate a person specifically as Lord "of" someone or "of" a group. Jesus is therefore said to be "the Lord of us". (Rom 1:4; 5:1; 1 Cor 1:9; 9:1) The Lord of us Jesus, is not "God" as can be seen from 2 Cor 1:3; Eph 1:3; 1 Pet 1:3.
reslight 4 weeks ago
I am not with the JWs; nor do I deny Christ's deity as that deity is revealed in the Bible. However KURIOS is not a translation is actually NOT a "translation" of God's Holy Name from the Hebrew. Rather, it actually changes God's Holy Name to KURIOS, a noun, while EHYEH and YAHWEH are both verbs.
reslight 4 weeks ago
This video is so laughable that nothing else is really need be said about it.
TheGenuineChristian 2 months ago
@TheGenuineChristian Way to refute it, Yuratchka!
You're SO arrogant. And yeah, if my Christology wasn't heard of until the 300s, was denied by people the apostles taught, and was so LAME that Almighty God couldn't care LESS about it that he let it go belly up for nearly 1000 years, yeah I'd be arrogant about it too!
I wouldn't be ashamed of how lame it was and be thinking twice about whether or not it was true. Nope. Not at all.
msm1876 2 months ago
@msm1876 Just fyi, I will be making videos again, mainly about my improved irrefuteable flavor or Arian theology.
You take care. =)
TheGenuineChristian 2 months ago
@TheGenuineChristian Oooh, can't wait. No pompocity in your family, Yuratchka, you've got it all. Yep, your heresy is SO irrefutable, that's why all you could do was laugh off my Psalm 90:2-John 8:58 connection without refuting it.
You've got yourself one pathetic buffoon of a 'god,' Arian boy, and one bucktoothed idiot miscommunicator of a 'messiah,' Arian-boy.
msm1876 2 months ago
@msm1876 You fail. =)
TheGenuineChristian 2 months ago
@msm1876 ....MSM......Did God allow the Roman Catholic Faith to "go belly up"???????Did God "not care less about her for all these years?... Is that why YOU left her?
52VEKAJ 2 months ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@52VEKAJ Huh? Who are you? God kept His truth alive since the apostolic age on. There was never a time that Christ's death for mankind's sins wasn't preached. The RCC added on a lot of spurious traditions and made them binding dogma, and slapped the label of "oral apostolic traditions" onto them to make it look like they were first century revelation. Thus, a Reformation was needed.
That's why I'm certainly a catholic Christian, but not a Roman Catholic one.
msm1876 2 months ago
@msm1876 1Cr 8:5 For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many "gods" and many "lords{g2962 kyrios} 6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father..
1Ti 6:15 which God will bring about in his own time--God(Father), the blessed and only[monos alone (without a companion)] Ruler, the King of kings and Lord{g2962 kyrios} of lords,
1Cr 11:3..and the head of Christ is God.
JesusTheMonotheist 2 months ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@JesusTheMonotheist Is this CristoYCruz? Sounds like him. Please quote the rest of 1 Cor 8:6...there is ONE LORD, Jesus Christ. Being that the Greek traslation of the Shema reads, The Lord your God, the Lord is One...HMMMM.
msm1876 2 months ago
@msm1876 Forget about him he doesn't debate anymore worry about me.
1Cr 8:6 [one God, the Father ((of whom))] -- [one Lord Jesus Christ, ((through whom))] "The one God the Father is the one God and Father of the one Lord Jesus Christ. Jhn 20:17
Paul said, many "lords{g2962 kyrios}, you would have to assume they all are included in the Shema. Jesus is excluded from the Shema.
The Father our Lord and King is greater than all[1Ti 6:15; Jhn 10:29].
JesusTheMonotheist 2 months ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@JesusTheMonotheist LOL! Cruzie, this is **SO** you! You aren't fooling anyone, least of all me. Same style of rhetoric! Your new username is stuff you said under your old one: I'm a monotheist like Jesus. BTW, you're a henotheist, not a monotheist.
>>>Jesus is excluded from the Shema.
The Lord your God is One Lord.
How many Lords does the Christian have according to 1 Cor 8:6?
msm1876 2 months ago
@msm1876 Said: How many Lords does the Christian have according to 1 Cor 8:6? --- yet to us there is one God, ...and one Lord, Yeshua the Messiah..
Why are you inserting the one Lord, Yeshua the Messiah in Mark 12:29? Jesus makes it very clear both in V 29 and V 32 referencing his Father only and affirming him to be the Lord is one only, Jesus excluded himself from his Lord. Jesus made his statement of faith of his Lord as being one.
JesusTheMonotheist 2 months ago
@JesusTheHenotheist >>>his Father only and affirming him to be the Lord is one only
And yet Paul said that Christian had **ONE** Lord, Jesus Christ. We have a contradiction.
Or do we? When Jesus quoted the Shema, read the whole passage. And read the Shema in it's context. In fact, read the New Jewish Publication Bible and see how they translate it. It's about allegiance to YHWH, and not false gods, not a formula for unitarianism.
msm1876 2 months ago
@msm1876 ------->And yet Paul said that Christian had **ONE** Lord, Jesus Christ. We have a contradiction.
And yet Paul said that Christian and the one Lord Jesus Christ had **ONE** God the Father, who is the Lord is **ONE** "We have a contradiction.
JesusTheMonotheist 2 months ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@msm1876 Jesus wasn't Trinitarian, he being a Jew his belief was Monotheistic quoted from the Torah said: Hear, Yisra'el: the LORD ((is)) **our**(HIS) God; the LORD is one: "In Mark 12:32 the scribe affirms and agrees with Jesus that their God is One, and guess who it is? their Father. Jhn 20:17<---OOops
JesusTheMonotheist 2 months ago in playlist Uploaded videos
This has been flagged as spam show
@msm1876 Pleassssse can you offer one bible passage where Jesus is being worshiped as God?
JesusTheMonotheist 2 months ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@msm1876 That's what you're trying to make it say--->Yeshua answered, "The greatest is, 'Hear, Yisra'el, one Lord, Yeshua the Messiah..
Can you offer one bible passage where Jesus is being worshiped as God?
JesusTheMonotheist 2 months ago
@msm1876 The Bible is not henotheist, since it recognizes only one Supreme Being, who is the source of all power, strength, might. The basic meaning of the Hebrew word for "God" means strength, might, It is applied to many others than Yahweh; if believing what the Bible says on this means henotheism, then this would be saying that the Bible is henotheist.
reslight 4 weeks ago
@msm1876 How many Gods does the Christian have according to 1 Cor 8:6? Who does Paul identify as the "one God" of the Christian?
reslight 4 weeks ago
@reslight The "One God?" Sure. The Father. But hang on...
Who according to that passage...is the "One Lord?"
And then square that with Revelation 11:15, if you're gonna read this as some kind of "One excludes the other passage."
msm1876 4 weeks ago
@msm1876 I answered that briefly in one my earlier posts. The "one Lord" through whom the :"one God" does "the all" is that same one whom the "one God" anointed and made to be both lord and christ (anointed one). -- Ex 3:14,15; Deut 18:15-20; Psa 110:1; Isa 61:1; Mat 28:18; John 3:35; 5:22; 10:29; 13:3; 17:2,7; Acts 2:32-36; 3:13-26; 17:31; Eph 1:3,17-22; 1 Cor 15:27; Phil 2:9-11; Heb 1:13.
reslight 4 weeks ago
@msm1876 There is to the Christian "one God", who is the source of "the all" (ta panta), and there is the one Lord who is the servant of the "one God", through whom God performs the all (ta panta).
reslight 4 weeks ago
@msm1876 The "one Lord" who is the servant of the "one God" is never spoken of in scriptures as being the one Yahweh of Deut 6:4: "Hear, Israel: Yahweh is our God; Yahweh is one." (World English)
reslight 4 weeks ago
@msm1876 Revelation 11:15 relates to Psalm 2:2 - The kings of the earth take a stand, And the rulers take counsel together, Against Yahweh, and against his anointed. Christ means anointed, or anointed one, It is the Lord Yahweh who has anointed his anointed one. (Isa 61:1) The Lord Yahweh is not the Lord Jesus whom the Lord Yahweh has anointed, nor is the Lord Yahweh the "one Lord" through whom are "the all" of 1 Cor 8:6.
reslight 4 weeks ago
@msm1876 The Lord Yahweh (Isa 61:1) is "one God" of 1 Cor 8:6, and as the source of the all, he is also Lord, but he is NOT the "one lord" through whom are "the all", nor is the one Lord through whom are the all the "one God" who is the source.
reslight 4 weeks ago
@msm1876 The one God of 1 Cor 8:6 is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus (Eph 1:3; 1 Pet 1:3), and it is this one God who is the source of the all; Jesus is not the source, but he is "one lord" through whom the source provides the all.
reslight 4 weeks ago
@msm1876 "to us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we to him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we through him." - 1 Cor 8:6, World English
reslight 4 weeks ago
@msm1876 Rev 11:15 is further related to Ps 2:7,8, which has the Messiah, the anointed of Yahweh, saying: (Young's): I declare concerning a statute: Jehovah said unto me, `My Son Thou [art], I to-day have brought thee forth. 8 Ask of Me and I give nations -- thy inheritance, And thy possession -- the ends of earth. Thou dost rule them with a sceptre of iron, As a vessel of a potter Thou dost crush them.'
reslight 4 weeks ago
@msm1876 Yes, in 1 Cor 8:6, the one does exclude the other. The one Lord through whom is the all is not the one God who is the source of the all.
reslight 4 weeks ago
@reslight I just read through all your points...and I went back and looked @ Revelation 11:15, and the saints in heaven, strangely enough, still call God the Father "Our Lord!" And so you either have a contradiction between 1Cor 8:16 and that verse, or Christ's Lordship doesn't exclude God's Lordship, and God's Deity doesn't exclude Christ's.
Also, surely you don't hold that the NT once contained the Divine name? Because all throughout it, the Father is "The Lord."
msm1876 4 weeks ago
@msm1876 (1) There is no contradiction! Psalm 2:2 - "The kings of the earth take a stand, And the rulers take counsel together, Against Yahweh, and against his anointed (World English)." Our Lord Yahweh (Neh 10:29; Ps 8:1,9; Isa 61:1) is not the anointed one of our Lord Yahweh! Our Lord Jesus Christ is the anointed one of our Lord Yahweh! They are not the same Lord, nor is there anything in 1 Cor 8:16 that gives any reason to think that they are the same Lord.
reslight 4 weeks ago
@msm1876 Our Lord Yahweh is the "one God" of 1 Cor 8:6, who is the source of "the all"; Our Lord Jesus is not the "one God" of 1 Cor 8:6, because our Lord Jesus is not the source of all.
reslight 4 weeks ago
@msm1876 Our Lord Yahweh is not the "one Lord" of 1 Cor 8:6, because he is not the one anointed by the "one God", nor is "the all" (ta panta) through the our Lord Yahweh, the "one God" of 1 Cor 8:6.
reslight 4 weeks ago
@msm1876 The Lordship that belongs only the "one God" is not the Lordship that is given to the "one Lord" through whom are the all, since the "one Lord" of 1 Cor 8:6 is not the source, for it says: "there is one Lord, *through* (dia) whom are all things (ta panta, the all)."
reslight 4 weeks ago
@msm1876 Strong says that the word "dia" means: "a primary preposition denoting the channel of an act." The One God, our Lord Yahweh, is the "source"; Our Lord Jesus, is the one lord who is the channel. There is no other "lord" whom the "one God" has anointed to be that channel. The "one God" did not anoint himself to be that channel; He anointed someone who is not Himself to be that channel.
reslight 4 weeks ago
@msm1876 Of course, I believe that Jesus and the writers of the NT used God's Holy Name. If they joined with the disobedient Jews in changing his eternal Holy Name (Ex 3:14,15) to another name, then Jesus was a false prophet, since he did not actually come in the name of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. See my site * name reslight net *.
reslight 4 weeks ago
@reslight >>>Of course, I believe that Jesus and the writers of the NT used God's Holy Name.
Then you just caused me to distrust the entire new testament. If wicked scribes could change that, and there not be a TRACE of evidence in the Manuscripts of it happening, then how can I be sure that other stuff wasn't changed between the autographs and the earliest manuscripts?
msm1876 3 weeks ago
@msm1876 There indeed would be need to distrust the entire NT if Jesus and the NT writers did change God's eternal Holy Name. There is evidence, however, that the name was removed by Christians shortly after the death of apostles in an effort to keep the Jews from destroying the NT writings.
reslight 3 weeks ago
@msm1876 Strictly speaking, if no one changed the name in the New Testament, when the New Testament writers quote the Old Testament scriptures that contain the Holy Name, we would find the Holy Name in those New Testament scriptures. That is not what we find.
reslight 3 weeks ago
@msm1876 What we find in the extant NT manuscripts, however, is that the Holy Name has been changed to words, such as forms of Kurios, Theos, Dunamis, etc. Thus it is self-apparent that the Holy Name has been changed in the New Testament and changed with other words that are not God's Holy Name, nor do they even reflect the meaning of the Holy Name.
reslight 3 weeks ago
@msm1876 Nevertheless, with the thousands of variations that exist in the various extant manuscripts, we still have faith that God has preserved the NT, although we may have to use spiritual judgment regarding what has been and what has not been corrupted. This is simply a fact.
reslight 3 weeks ago
@reslight >>>with the thousands of variations that exist in the various extant manuscripts, we still have faith that God has preserved the NT,
That evidence you just cited gives me the same confidence that God was referred to as "The Lord" in the NT as well. It's in all the Manuscripts.
msm1876 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
reslight 3 weeks ago
@msm1876 A video made by another, entitled, "The Tetragrammaton in the New Testament", mentions this evidence. That evidence, of course, does not at all give anyone any reason to think that the NT writers changed God's Holy Name to Kurios (Lord), Dunamis (Power), Theos (God), etc.
reslight 3 weeks ago
@msm1876 The video I spoke of was evidently prepared by a JW; I do not necessarily agree with absolutely all conclusions given; I have doubts that the earlier manuscripts referred to as being of the LXX were actually a part of the LXX, although that is the general assumption.
reslight 3 weeks ago
@msm1876 I did not present or cite the actual evidence. I hope to present a video later that will do this.
reslight 3 weeks ago
@msm1876 Yahweh never authorized anyone to change His Holy Name to another name does not even mean the same.
reslight 4 weeks ago
@msm1876 I would suggest that you not just "read over" what I have written; take time to look up the scriptures and note the usage of the Holy Name. The Messiah was to come in the name of another than Himself; if the Messiah is Yahweh, then the Messiah came in his own name. -- Ex 3:14,15; Deut 18:19; John 5:43; Acts 3:13-26; Heb 1:1,2.
reslight 4 weeks ago
Comment removed
reslight 4 weeks ago
@msm1876 In the NT, it becomes obvious that the Holy Name has been changed to forms of THEOS, KURIOS, DUNAMIS, DESPOTES, and possibly even in some places to pater (father). This does not mean that every time one sees a form of these words in the NT that is means the Holy Name.
reslight 4 weeks ago
@msm1876 The father is one God "of whom are all things"; Jesus is the "one Lord" appointed by the one God through whom are all things. Scripture shows that Jesus is not the one God, but that the "one God" is the source, while the "one Lord" appointed by the one God is the means by which the "one God" does "all things."
reslight 4 weeks ago
@msm1876----->If Jesus was less than God Almighty...
Jhn 13:16 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord{g2962 kyrios}; neither he(Jesus) that is sent greater than he(Father) that sent him(Jesus).======>Mat 11:25 At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord{g2962 kyrios} of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.
JesusTheMonotheist 2 months ago in playlist Uploaded videos
Good video Mike.... George Howard even doubted his own theory. He did not cling to it in the same way that the Jw's do.
21crosscheck21 2 months ago
In their own Kingdom Interlinear on page 722 it reads at the bottom of the page there is a note talking about Rom 10:9 "For if you publicly declare that word in your own mouth that Jesus is Lord,[a]..."
At the bottom of the page it says... "9a Lord=kurios (kyri-os), (ha A-don), J12,13,14,16-18, Not "Jehovah".
Now go back and re watch Mike's video again to the quote from thier 1962 NWT.
pretoshohmoofc 2 months ago
Wicked scribes ALSO took out the word "Trinity" from John 1:1. Prove me wrong.
pretoshohmoofc 2 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@pretoshohmoofc """Wicked scribes ALSO took out the word "Trinity" from John 1:1. Prove me wrong."""" Yeah.......... I'll be using hat A LOT :')
21crosscheck21 2 months ago
The way JW are taught to read the Word of God is sad. They ALWAYS make God's words "SYMBOLIC" or "SPIRITUAL", denying clear declarations of the very God JWs claim to witnesses of:
NWT Isa40:10 "Look! The Sovereign Lord Jehovah himself will come...Look! His reward is with him, and the wage he pays is before him. 11 Like a shepherd he will shepherd his own drove. With his arm he will collect together the lambs, and in his bosom he will carry [them]. Those giving suck he will conduct [with care]."
barbsinclair 2 months ago
JWs:
"Here is YOUR God" Look! The Sovereign Lord Jehovah himself will come"Isa40:1-11
"Prepare the way of Jehovah,YOU people...THEN JESUS CAME"Mt3:1-3,11-13
"But I tell YOU that something greater than the temple is here...For Lord [Jehovah] of the sabbath is what the Son of man is.”Mt12:6-8
“The sabbath came into existence for the sake of man, and not man for the sake of the sabbath; hence the Son of man is Lord [Jehovah] even of the sabbath.”Mk2:27-28
"a sabbath to Jehovah your God"Deu5:14
barbsinclair 2 months ago
Good one....so many biblical proofs and still they are blinded...jesus I pray to you, give me the knowledge to help witness you Amen
krstinmre 2 months ago
Talk about words coming back to haunt you. The society for years banked on the idea that followers would just take their word for it and not check things out. Most still do. I know individuals that would not believe any evidence you put before them. They have let themselves be blinded from seeing the real truth. The organization has become their salvation in their eyes. Good video!
earnestlyseeking 2 months ago
One More Reason Why I left! ThANKS! Great vids You do Brother!
SteeleHorse45 2 months ago
@SteeleHorse45 Thanks so much for your kind words! God Bless you, and merry pagan saturnailia season! =)
msm1876 2 months ago