YoelBenYsryael read John 10:11 I am the GOOD shepherd but in mark he said nobody is good but GOD. its the same GOOD nobody is GOOD but GOD Yahshua say he was good and shepherd is the name of GOD read ISAIAH 40:10-11 after that REV 22:12
part 2 - ...Yahoshua(Jesus) was a man, the Son of His Father. The words from Him were also the words of His Father, though, as he was one with the same Holy Spirit Who inspired the Prophets. The Word of God IS = I AM...if the Word(Jesus) is speaking that statement, "I AM." He's telling them that He, the Word, IS. Word of God was spoken out of the burning bush also. He IS. If my father was not God and i said that statement i am...i would be in big trouble because I'm just a man.
If you are referring to the term "eigo eime" and attempting to connect the usage of that term to saying "I AM" as the Father used it at the burning bush... I would beg to differ with you. the term Eigo Eime or I AM is also used by the blind man that was healed by Yahoshua... does that make him The Father too?
Yahoshua was a man... and the words and works He did were not of Himself but of The Father who sent Him. He made that very clear.
Yahoshua really is the I AM from the burning bush. He is The Word of God. Words of God were emanating from the burning bush. By saying I AM, He also says The Word of God IS. In the book of John, Jesus says I AM at the beginning of many sentences, then following says various other things like...the Light of the World...or The Bread of Life. By speaking we send our words out into the world. A word proceeds from me or you and is uniquely begotten by us.
Original poster, how do you explain this verse away?!
"I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me." John 14:6
You are treading on a slippery slope YoelBenYsryael. You are stating truth mixed with convoluted thoughts of your interpretation of scripture.
You are on still on the path just like everyone else is, to make an absolute statement about YHVWH like the one you made in this video is irresponsible.
respectfully and without the "Christian Condescension" you put forward in your commentary... John 14:6 certainly does not prove Yahoshua is YHWH. It simply means what it says... unless you follow what he teaches and emulate those qualities he possessed you can never understand or serve The Father correctly or know Him. The only convolution I see here is your brainwashed man/God theology... which finds its origins in paganism.
Yeshua lived a perfect life and fulfilled the commandments that we couldn't or wouldn't keep. Therefore He is good. So when Yeshua said there is none good but God....He is saying he is God.
If you study the tabernacle you see in visable form symbols of Yeshua. The gate or door, the alter or FIRE. Jer. 23:29 the lavier, WATER, Jn 3:5,Rev.1:15, manorah,LIGHT Jn9:5, BREAD,Jn6:35,
Insense, FIRE AND CLOUD of smoke as it burns you also see this outside of the tabernacle. Ark-THE PRESENCE OF GOD.
What you describe are "types and shadows". These things were begotten of gnosticism. Personally, I choose to simply follow Yahoshua's own words than to try and deduce who and what He is.
Numbers 23:19 YHWH is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?
Read up on the Peshitta. Yeshua=Alaha. The Greek kurious does not distuinguish between LORD and lord. The aramaic does. Yeshua is called both Maran (lord) and MARYA (YHWH=true LORD)
41 The Jews, therefore, were murmuring at him, because he said, 'I am the bread that came down from heaven,'
42 and they said, 'Is this not Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we have known? how then saith this one --- Out of heaven I have come down?'
43 Jesus answered, therefore, and said to them, 'Murmur not one with another;
44 no one is able to come unto me, if the Father who sent me may not draw him,and I will raise him up in the last day;
obviously they knew who he was and who his parents were. Some choose to believe that he pre-existed in heaven using this verse... and that is fine. If one actually studies all of His words however they will see that he is implying no such thing.
Jhn 17:14 I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
I suppose then them not being of this world would mean they came down from heaven too.
We had this discussion about being of the world alredy. You are correct that stating that one is not of this world does not mean that one is asserting that one is from heaven. However, I in the verses we are discussing now, he is stating that he came down from heaven.
No. That is metaphor meaning that he is nourishment to the spirit as manna is nourishment to the body. It works because both are nourishment and each came down from heaven (directly from Our Father).
exactly. Metaphor. This is why I say people should read ALL of his words instead of one passage as often times things are explained in their proper context.
Jhn 17:18 As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.
He did not send them from physical heaven into the world and He makes it clear that as He had been sent... so were they. There is a difference between mystical and spiritual.
Yes, Yo'el. John 17:18 has the exact meaning that you ascribe to it. However, in the verses to which I was referring, I believe that when The Master says, I came down from heaven, that is not a metaphor. When he says, I am the bread of life, that is a metaphor.
45 it ishaving been written in the propehts, And they shall be all taught of GOD; every one therfore who heard from the Father, and learned, cometh to me;
46 not that any one hath seen the Father, except he who is from GOD, he hath seen the Father.
47 'Verily, verily, I say to you,He who is believing in me, hath life age-during;
If you choose to take it literally then yes you are absolutely right. If you choose to read carefully ALL of his words and understand what He means... then it is apparent that He made no such claim.
If Jesus was not God, where does the resurrection fit into all of this? Why did Jesus have to die? Was there really a battle in hell over death? What books do you recommend concerning the lost books?
all very good questions. This is why we are to be SEEKING the truth instead of believing everything we hear or just following the storylines given to us. I'll respond in an email as there are a lot of questions lol
In John 1, it says in the beginning was the Word and the word was God and was with God in the beginning, then it goes on through verse 14 saying "the Word became flesh"
Does this just simply mean Jesus is His Word manifested from the spoken Word of God's will that man could see, touch, talk with and fulfill His previous from the OT and complete it?
I could say, 'let there be an icecream cone' if should one come, it doesn't make it me but a manifestaion
Well for me personally Yahoshua was the living example of how we should serve the Most High. For starters, He couldn't be much of an example if He was divine... as humans we cannot hope to emulate the divine. Secondly, people use the Ego Eime argument to prove his divinity... when He plainly says Himself that He is doing the will of the Father. So being the living example He was the living breathing epitome of a man who keeps the Words of the Most High.
As He is perfect He makes no mistakes. As such things such as Matthews reference to Isaiah 7 being a messianic prophecy is incorrect as Immanuel was to be for a sign to King Ahaz roughly 700 years BEFORE Yahoshua was born. If one simply read the chapter in context they would see that. Not to mention Paul's conflicting Damascus stories... to name a few.
I did a few videos on Paul and the information is better laid out there in my 13th Apostle playlist. Im only referring you to the videos because all of the scriptural references are listed and visible side by side
the verses that you quote do not pertain to jesus not claiming deity. Also, there are far more verses in john where he claims himself to be God. As a matter of fact, the Pharisees were upset because of his claim of being God in the flesh (immanuel=God with us). This claim leads to the prophesied death of the Messiah who is called Mighty God wonderful, etc. in Isa. 9:6
The actions of Jesus,that you pointed out are some examples of how we should be when we have a relationship with the father.
Jhn 8:54 Jesus answered, If I honor myself, MY HONOR IS NOTHING: IT IS MY FATHER THAT HONORETH ME; of whom ye say, that HE is your God:
Jhn 8:55 Yet ye have not known HIM; BUT I KNOW HIM: and if I should say, I know HIM not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know HIM, and keep HIS saying.
He was not schizophrenic. He made it clear that He was not "God" but instead that He KNEW "God" and kept His sayings.
You must understand the way Jesus spoke and the true meanings of these words. Father is symbolic. for you to be the son of some,you are claiming that very nature.Jesus spoke of spiritual things.Spiritual things cannot be discerned with our natural mind.
Read to the end of that chapter you quoted.Jesus plainly states,"before Abraham,I Am." then they to stone him. The claim to be eternal was a claim to be divine. We both know only God is.Thus,in the eyes of the Jews He was guilty of blasphemy.
I will agree that his words were spiritual but I will also assert that there is a difference between spiritual and mystical. The man-god dichotomy is mystical and predates Christianity. Furthermore He sent the spirit of truth which leads into ALL truth, therefore His words are not difficult or incomprehensible to those with the spirit of truth. Lastly, to say that "Father" is symbolic is incorrect. He made it clear He was referring to an entity that was not Himself...
The word Father in English is more symbolic if one doesn't understand The Greek or the reason behind him saying father. There is no such thing as a man-god, i agree, but we do not worship the flesh that he occupied. God can and has revealed him self in a physical form. One of the earliest times was to Abraham while he was resting under a tree. And the attempt to stone was because of breaking the law. To them he committed blasphemy.
I understand the Greek and consequently the Hebrew just fine. You assertion that Father is symbolic is simply that... an assertion and not verifiable by any biblical usage. In scriptural context and not in type and shadow gnosticism He identified the Father as a separate and divine entity from which He himself was both separate from and subservient to. Additionally He never broke the law. He kept it the way it was supposed to be kept and not in the way they decided it should be kept.
There was confusion over the blind man's identity, therefore he claimed to be the one (blind begger). Jesus claimed to be The I Am, same as in Ex 3:14 . If you are familiar with Greek and Hebrew, why are you missing it? Actually that is besides the point. You are right he didn't break the law. He didn't lie about being who he was. There are many verse throughout the entire bible that will tell you that Jesus is God,from the old to the new. Do you believe the bible is true or contradicts itself?
The blind man didn't say "the one" he said Ego Eime just like Yahoshua said. If you are asserting that Yahoshua saying Ego Eime asserted that He was in deed the Father... then by that logic the blind man saying Ego Eime was making the same assertion. Given the history of the Bible and having actually RESEARCED it instead of taking someones word on it, Its a proveable fact that The words of the Most High are IN the Bible... but there are words in it that are not His as well.
Jhn 8:40But now ye seek to kill me, A MAN that hath told you the truth, which I HAVE HEARD of God: this did not Abraham. The Jews did not understand His words: Jhn 8:43 Why do ye not understand my speech? [even] because ye cannot hear my word.
As such it is folly to come to the conclusions that they did regarding what He meant by any statements He made... like He was claiming to be God.
They attempted to stone Him after he "disrespected" their favored patriarch by claiming preeminence to him.
These verses are the arguement that led up to him plainly having to state I AM. The reason they did not understand his speech was because they had already rejected him as the scriptures said in Isa. 53. In the next verses, Jesus tells them why they do not understand "that their father was the devil". For this reason of allowing their flesh to take over, they could not receive the truth that he was speaking.
Again you are jumping out of the context of the scripture to prove doctrine. I AM or Ego Eime is also used by the blind man in John 9:9... by the "I AM" usage then He was claiming to be God as well.
They didn't try 2 stone YAHSHU'A 4 claiming divinity, The Pharisees were angry at being exposed as liars thru a series of events that led 2 the I am incident and tried 2 stone Yashu'a (Illeagally) When he was brought up on charges Where were the witnesses 2 his offense?. They're were none.John18:19-31. They knew HE was the sent 1 of I am ,BUT They served YAH with their minds, BUT in there flesh NOTHING GOOD DWELLETH like Paul/Saul they knew the LAW BUT did not KEEP/OBEY the LAW. They were FALSE
Don't you think it could be that Jesus came down as God's son and I'm sure everyone agrees on that, but after His resurrection He became one with Christ? I mean look everything you quoted was before He died and rose again and you think that Paul and Jesus's testimonies are 2 different things but why is it not possible for you to see that Paul's is simply the follow up of Jesus's? Well its up to you to think but personally I believe in the Holy Trinity: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.
In Isaiah Emmanuel was born as a sign to King Ahaz... to show him that the two nations who were coming to take over Jerusalem would not succeed... roughly seven hundred years before Yahoshua. A sign is best seen when a person is still alive and Ahaz did not live that long.
As such, the entire addition to Matthew claiming Isaiah was talking about Yahoshua is false.
Yes. Isaiah 7 when read in context has nothing to do with Yahoshua whatsoever. Historically, the original Hebrew book of Matthew that was taken from Ebionites... and subsequently hidden away in the Vatican or destroyed completely did not contain this story or the Genealogy that is in the Greek versions and consequently our English bibles.
research. The "Church Fathers" first and foremost agreed that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew and translated to Greek. Secondly it was because of these omissions and other beliefs of the Ebionites that they were called "heretics" and those things that did not agree with Christianity were often outlined by the Christians who were writing against their "heresies".
The Ebionites or Evyonim are known as "the poor". They are sometimes mixed in with Essenes Gnostics Nazarenes... usually by Judaic sources... and called a "cult". Study of them will reveal they were simply followers of Yahoshua who would not conform to Pauline Christianity or Talmudic Judaism... and in turn were hated and persecuted by both. As such, they were in possession of the Hebrew copy of Matthew... until it became a "heresy" and confiscated by the rising Christian Church.
They were often mocked and called heretics and "the poor of understanding" by Pauline Christianity... mainly because they did not believe Yahoshua was "God" or a "God man". They also did not take communion or follow christian practices as ritual... and they believed in repentance not human sacrifice... as a means of salvation. Their beliefs were directly opposed to Pauline Christianity... and they were harrassed and attacked... sometimes violently because of those beliefs.
finally, according to Josephus, of the three main groups in Jerusalem: The Pharisees, Sadduces, and Essene/Ebionites... only the Essene/Ebionites were "Jews" or Yahudim by birth. Meaning they were actually the only real Israelites by blood and not conversion or dominion in Jerusalem according to Josephus. Makes sense when Yahoshua said he came to the lost sheep of Israel.
u should be more specific with your labels. the christian church could mean alot of things. in paul's time there was only one. after the apostles there were differing ideologies creeping in. platonic philosophy began to infect some.
so when u say the christian church, im not sure if u mean the real one, or a fake one.
well for me its pretty simple. Paul started "the church" as we know it today. The apostles of Yahoshua (the ecclessia) were not "Christians". That terminology began in Antioch after Paul took it over. The Ebionites/Essenes followed "the way" as they called it and they were not an "institution" but different scattered groups of believers. When I say church it refers strictly to the institutions begun by Paul and maintained as "Christianity" to the present day.
Just stopping by. I am a christian and applaude the civil dialogue between Fandera and YoelBenYsrael.
This shows how much hope there is. War will never be the way. Keep the dialogue open even if traditions have kept us apart, or did they? It seems not.
If we are indeed to worship in Spirit and Truth there will be a unity within our voices when we speak most accurately about God. It is not possible to speak a mere opinion or belief in a public forum without in some way teaching. I'm glad that we have no animosity but it will not be possible for me to simply reject your beliefs when they are being posted publicly which is why I commented and questioned as I did. Thanks for your responses and the civil dialogue. The God of Peace keep you.
well that depends on what one deems to be an accurate depiction of the Most High... one based on doctrine or one based solely on scripture. We will disagree on the definition of teaching... as no one enrolls or is forced to believe what I say... and my main goal is to get people to look it up for themselves... not force feed doctrine to them. In any case... our disagreements aside... I also pray that the Most High shines his light and keep all who seek him.
You have interpreted based on your own knowledge of Torah and have judged the interpretation of Mark as incorrect. That's all I needed to know. You are near and yet far in some ways. My heart races reading the nearness and farness you exhibit. I will pray in the name of Jesus (y'shua) that I will be taught and you will be taught by the same Spirit and will be brothers. It may mean we both have a distance to travel, but if we do so by abiding in Him we will both have hope.
well that is not an unexpected response. The fact that I read scripture based on what it SAYS instead of what other people dictate it to MEAN... well that's just terrible. Wisdom is justified of her children. We must worship in spirit and also in truth. I will pray... as Yahoshua taught us... to the Father that we will all learn to hear him and see the narrow road to life... and see Him in peace.
I think your view of Scripture is somehow limited to what you yourself determine. The writing of Mark is somehow incorrect and yet his recording of Jesus' words are. I cannot see anywhere where this view of the Torah or the prophets is allowed so I do not understand how you are so comfortable teaching this method. Be careful what you teach to others as we both know Jesus' words to teachers. I do apologize for how patronizing my last reply sounded. It's hard to communicate love with despair.
No problem we simply disagree and that happens sometimes. The record of Mark plainly show that he is addressing the traditions of the Pharisees. He scolds them and even cites passages from the Law.. so it is highly unlikely that he is lauding the law in one scripture and doing away with the food section in another. Secondly, I am not teaching anything. I say what I believe and everyone has a choice to listen and research for themselves or reject what I believe.
Those foods were forbidden in Torah yes. And no his reference was not to foods. In context his reference was to the ritual of washing of hands... which he reiterates with likening them to bowls which need cleansing from the inside and not just outside.
How do you deal with Jesus calling himself "Yahweh" - "ego eime" - "I Am". This leads us to the argument of C.S. Lewis that Jesus does not leave us the option to call Him a good guide or teacher. If He is not God how can He ask us to believe in Himself, even to share our faith (pistuete) between God to Jesus (John 14:1). Further, in John 14, Jesus claims that the Father is known by knowing Jesus. If Jesus is not God He is, in the words of Lewis, either a Liar (charlatan) or Lunatic.
well again... I don't deal with "arguments" especially of the ilk of C.S.Lewis. People made him to be what he was not and never claimed to be. One could suppose the blind man was claiming to be YHWH by that logic.
Do you really think that the Jews in the temple on that day were so foolish as to mistake what Jesus meant? Do you think Jesus Himself was making a mistake or just using some "interesting grammar" or something of that sort? I think you have put so much effort into many of your videos and your own "arguments" but you are unwilling to really think of the perspectives of others. At the least you can answer: what did Jesus mean and what did the Jews in the Temple perceive His meaning to be?
To your first question... yes I do. Yahoshua said that they would not understand his words.
Mat 15:14 Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.
I was a christian who was taught from the age of NINE that "Jesus was God"... so those arguments are redundant to me. I choose to let the Father teach as Yahoshua told us to. Others choose to listen to other men.
Its a choice we all make. Paul's doctrine or Yahoshua's. simple
There is another perspective worth considering: maybe you are making Him to be something He was not and never claimed to be. It seems that the Jews in the time of Jesus, the early Ecclesia and Jesus Himself knew what Jesus' words about Himself meant - that He was claiming equality with God. Maybe it is you that has stumbled into making Him a guide rather than Lord. I'm sure this will never be posted, but is it not worth considering? And if not, why not?
again... I spent the greater part of my life listening to man made doctrines and other peoples opinions.
Neither you nor any other person will be accountable for what I know or don't know on judgment day. It is most certainly your prerogative to follow men's doctrines on what is true and what is not... I simply choose not to... which is mine.
Yes you do. You follow your own prerogative and in so doing have declared, with the help of others no doubt, the words of Paul, John, Peter and the like to be merely men's arguments. It would do me no good to argue against any of Scripture, but based on your understanding and pension to discredit Biblical writers, could we not throw many more into that mix - even Isaiah and Moses?? I would not, but your logic leaves that all open. How do you take the "red letters" out of the pen of John??
So I should be following Paul's perogative instead? A man who came preaching his own gospel? Spirit and truth dictates that you find out what is true... not what is popular. I take Yahoshua's word as truth and it is in accordance with the Law and the prophets. Paul's is not. Constantines Nicean additions to appease pagans do not appeal to me either. So again I follow Yahoshua... who are YOU following?
I'm glad you looked at John 10:30, but this isn't the only, nor the most compelling, verse where Jesus asserts His equality with God. John 8:58 says: "'I tell you the truth,' Jesus answered, 'before Abraham was born, I am.'" At this the Jews present at the temple picked up stones to kill Him. He was not claiming a united purpose with God, but claiming Yahweh as His own name. The Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT) has "ego eime" in Exodus 3:14 - the same words in John's epistle in 8:58.
Jhn 7:28 Then cried Jesus in the temple as he taught, saying, Ye both know me, and ye know whence I am: and I am not come of myself, but he that sent me is true, whom ye know not.
Eigo Eime is also used by the blind man in John here:
Jhn 9:9 Some said, This is he: others [said], He is like him: [but] he said, I am [he].
Ehyah Asher Ehyah... a little study will reveal that the Hebrew word "Asher" does not mean "that"
So then have you ever seen and studied using what is called the "wheel of prophesy" you can find it in Yahoo images... it shows parallel attributes of the Messiah and the creator.. some which are attributed to each solely and individually but said of each in different places... I don't accept the Trinitarian explanation.. knowing it comes from the RC, but also have problems with the Oneness doctrine.. the godhead is a mystery, which I no longer profess to wholly understand.
ecc. 11:5 you cannot undertstand the work of god the maker of all things so stop trying your argument is not special its been herd before often used by muslims please spare everyone you mid as well be an athiest
its a matter of common sense. He was not talking to Himself. and by the way.. an argument doesn't have to be special to be right. Obviously it isn't me here between us with the problem of understanding. So spare us the arrogance... its not special or unique either.
Don't get hung up on a "J" & "Y". My name is different in other toungues. Your problem is you either follow a Jesus who is God in flesh, or one who blasphemed. You deny Jesus as God in flesh, so you follow a blasphemer, not the true Jesus. You completely miss the point Jesus made in the verses point to. Why were the Jews going to stone Him?
so because the Jews did not understand his words... just has he said they wouldn't... we should believe that they understood who He was? kinda backwards. He never made the claim to be God. He instructed us to pray to the Father not to him. Perhaps you should spend more time listening to what HE said instead of believe other peoples doctrines or opinions about him.
No, because YOU misunderstand His words you twist Him into not being God in the flesh. John 1:1 & 1:14 attest to it. The Jews present, were Pharisees, quite educated and not idiots. The knew EXACTLY that He had claimed to be God. You have been given over to a reprobate mind and cannot see it.
riiight so because I actually BELIEVE Him when he said of HIMSELF Jhn 6:38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. and oh maybe... Jhn 8:28 Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am [he], and [that] I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things... you know His OWN words about himself and not some doctrine made up about him Im the reprobate one? riiiiight.
He was doing the will of His father simply because He was not being dependent on His divine nature while here on Earth (Phil 2:5-8). The problem with your view is that you make God a liar. In 1Jn 4:12 we are told no man has seen God. Yet in Genesis 17 & 18 we read different, and these are not the only places. It is GOD there in the tent. This is no problem with the Triune God of the bible because you could see one (Jesus) without seeing God in all His glory. Your view makes God a liar.
Just what I thought. Now who is twisting... and theorizing? Im going off of His Words not some triune doctrine. If He were Yah then He would have instructed His followers to pray to HIM not the Father. You all make it up as you go because you refuse to believe that every word in your canon... put together by Constantine is true and untampered with. If I have a choice to follow Yahoshua's words or Your triune "doctrine"... I'll stick with His words.
now show me WHERE in those two scriptures... and I can provide more if you would like... did I twist ANYTHING? Those are HIS words... quoted exactly as they are written in scripture.
Mat 11:25 At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.
apparently their supposed wisdom blinded them from understanding.
Now I get it!!! When Rasta Bob Marley said a blessin' unto somebody he said "Jah bless", so now i understand that "Jah" is "Yah", right? Or i am still confused!¨=P
Read the penteuch (Tora) and psalms (Tehilim), there is only ONE TRUE G-D for all of humanity - learn about the nature of your creator and the signifigance of the 1st and most important commandment. Key word = Monotheism :) May you find meaning and fulfilment and come closer to his majesty, king of kings, HASHEM YITBARACH, amen.
Dear Brother Yoel, messianic judaism and believing in the true message of christ is a stepping stone for humanity to examine their faiths and beliefs and discover the true message of the old testament and Yeshuah Hanotzri (Jesus of Nazareth)-which can be summed up in 1 sentence as "love thy brother as you love thyself" or in hebrew "veahavta lereacha kamocha".
Shalom Amanita. I believe He summed it up as FIRST loving The Most High with all of our hearts souls and minds and then loving our neighbor as ourselves. I agree that it was His message of inner man/spiritual behavioral modification just like the Most High stressed to Moses that is the most importance.
1. His name was not JESUS it was Yashua which actually MEANS salvation. There is no "J" or J sound in the Hebrew/Aramaic languages. It was not invented until the 1700's by Greeks. Mat 21 says the virgin birth scenario was in accordance to Isaiah 7... which is false if you actually READ the entire chapter of Isaiah 7. Furthermore those who KNEW Him did not believe He was born of an immaculate conception...
not to mention that the child born in Isaiah was born nearly 700 years BEFORE Yashua as a sign to King Ahaz... and Yashua was not named Immanuel.
2. Logos is a gnostic term. If John meant to say "in the beginning was Yashua..." he would have said that. Logos means the word of Yah that brings into existence. It means Yah is His word... the very same words given to Yashua and all of prophets before Him. Moses foretold of His coming and that the words of the Father would be spoken by Him.
"Jesus" is an English translation of a Latin translation of a Greek translation of the Hebrew name Yashua. If you were to go back in time and ask a Hebrew to speak to "Jesus"... they wouldn't know who you were talking about. There isn't any "J" sound in the entire Hebrew alphabet even TODAY.
Im not sure what your point is BUT I will point out that Yahshua was never called Immanuel. Secondly, Immanuel was born as a sign to King Ahaz roughly 700 before Yashua's birth.
virgin almah vs. be'tulah one meaning woman of marrying age and the other meaning woman who has never known a man. Isaiah used the former not the latter... which he did use in other scriptures.
If you are making the point that there are additions to the scriptures that were not placed there by Yah then I agree.
Umm this was supposed to be a 'sign'. Saying that a woman of marrying age would give birth, is not a 'sign'. Saying a virgin who has not been with a man would give birth is a sign. Do you want the truth or to be right? I only wanted the YWHW's side.
the truth is always best... but to your question to me... perhaps you should ask it of yourself. A sign is meant to be seen by the person it is given to. In the context of Isaiah 7, the whole chapter and not just the two scriptures people love to yank out and use to prove this virgin birth scenario... the sign was for King Ahaz... again... 700 years before the birth of Yashua. Kinda hard to see a sign meant for you when it happens 700 years after you die now isn't it?
Immanuel meant "God with Us" meaning He was with them and Judah would not be taken over by the two kingdoms that had allied themselves against Judah. I know its unpopular... but it just happens to be true IF one actually reads scriptures in the context they were given by Yah... instead of trying to prove religious doctrines created by men.
So you're saying Mary was NOT a virgin and that she either fornicated with a stranger which is why Joseph wanted to put her away OR you are saying she fornicated with Joseph and they concocted the whole story about the Holy Spirit miraculously implanting Messiah Yeshua in her.
So if Yeshua has an earthly father and He is FULLY man, God's NOT His father, then Yeshua was sinful and His sacrifice was tainted by His own sinful nature. You believe He was NOT the PERFECT sacrifce but tainted.
nope. I don't believe He was a sacrifice at all. Son of God simply means one who does the will of God not literal divine offspring. The sacrifice He made was to give us the words the Father gave Him even though He knew He would suffer and die for it. The Pauline sacrifice theology is actually derived in pagan mythology and nowhere is it found in the teaching of Yashua.
There are several other examples of people seeing God face to face and yet scripture says that no man can see God and live. God is Spirit. Hmmm...sounds like there is more to God than mere man can understand. He's not like you or me.
I agree... however... it doesn't shape my belief system one way or another. I simply adhere to the Words of Yashua and the Law. Simple and uncomplicated. Again, if you are trying to prove the point that there are some conflicting points of view in the Bible... I agree. Luckily, I don't worship the Bible, I worship the Father... and adhere to the words of Yashua... whose words were the words of the Father.
well first of all... His name was not The Lord Jesus Christ. The J sound is not present in the Hebrew language... nor is an equivalent of the letter J. His correct Hebrew name was Yahshua... which... wonder of wonders contains the name Yah. (Psalms 68:14).
Isaiah9:6 in its proper Hebrew is Pele-joez-el-gibbor-Abi-ad-sar-shalom meaning: Wonderful in counsel is God the Mighty, the Everlasting Father, the Ruler of Peace. These are ATTRIBUTES of Yah. Many prophets were named after His attributes
but that did not make THEM Yah. For example Isaiah's name ALSO means Yah is salvation.
Secondly... If you are still following the teaching of Paul... I suggest you actually compare his teachings to Yahshua's. If you are still believing the KJV translation is error proof... you REALLY need to step back and compare the virgin birth story in Matthew to Isaiah 7 in its entirety.
I know his name was in Hebrew. Common sense. God though created all languages.
Isaiah 9:6 in its proper context says "For unto us a child is born... and his name shall be called...". Its pretty simple.
Before Abraham was, I AM.
I find it very interesting when people have to discredit Biblical books to support their beliefs. You would have to discredit John, Paul, and Luke in the least.
interesting. By your admission, we can call him anything we wish... maybe even Buddha or Confucius... seeing as all languages were created by Him. Good luck with that.
Common sense says we don't just believe everything we are taught but that intelligent people actually study. In doing so, one would actually find that while the words of the Most High are IN the Bible... every word in the Bible is not from the Most High.
Is Buddha an English transliteration of Yahshuah Hamaschiach? Didn't think so.
Given the historical facts, we can see that Paul, Luke, Peter and James were not rivals as Protestant theologeans suggest. Paul's teachings on salvation were the same as those Peter taught to the Jews.
Acts 2:38: Repent, be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins, and you shall receive the Gift of the Holy Ghost
Well then it really DOES matter what we call Him now doesn't it.
Given the historical facts, JESUS is not His name.
As to Peter wasn't it him who also said...
Act 2:22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a MAN approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:
Furthermore isn't it a bit counter-productive to mention historical fact yet continue to call Him by a name that isn't His
Counter-productive? How so? Name one way. One viable way. Has it prevented anyone from casting out demons? Has it prevented anyone from healing the sick? It didn't prevent me.
Again, to backup your theology you have to discredit a good few books in the Bible. All of Paul, Luke, and John's writings.
All the Gospels reveal that Jesus was closest to James, John, and Peter during his 3 and 1/2 year ministry. YET, you have to throw away John's Gospel to back up your beliefs.
for starters it is counterproductive to call Him by a name that isn't His because it means you haven't really taken the time to know Him or His word... and He in turn doesn't know them. Many will make that mistake.
Mat 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
You assume much by saying I "throw away" John's book. I asked you about Paul not John.
to back up my "theology" I simply read the words in red... just as He told us to. Unlike some, I don't worship books of the Bible... I worship the Creator and the one He sent to reiterate His Word.
Todah Anchi...great video. some of these people will never get this. They will forever learn but never come to the knowledge of the truth. It is truth that makes one free. Too bad many of us want to remain in bondage. Nevertheless, keep bringing the word of truth! Shalom!
Deu 18:18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.
Deu 18:19 And it shall come to pass, [that] whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require [it] of him.
Hebrews 1:8: But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom (the Father called the Son "God").
Revelation 1:7-8: BEHOLD, HE IS COMING WITH THE CLOUDS, and every eye will see Him, even those who pierced Him; and all the tribes of the earth will mourn over Him. So it is to be. Amen. I am the Alpha and the Omega, says the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.
If you believe Hebrews over Yahshua HIMSELF... I cant help ya.
Mat 10:32 Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also BEFORE MY FATHER which is in heaven.
Luk 9:26 For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of my words, of him shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he shall come in his own glory, AND [in his] Father's, and of the holy angels.
YAH is the creator Yahshua was the anointed one sent to lead us to salvation.
Do we even know who wrote Hebrews or Revelations for sure? Yahshua said beware of ANYONE teaching a new gospel. If he didn't say it while he was here on earth, I'm not following it.
We are sure John wrote the Revelation. And it was Paul who said if anyone brings a different gospel not to listen to them. The gospel is defined as Jesus dying, being buried and rising on the third day, according to the scriptures or prophecies. Neither Hebrews or Revelation refute this or another gospel.
last I checked He didn't command them according to His death burial and or resurrection. He taught them to observe the Law, He taught them how to pray, He taught them how to treat their neighbors and their enemies. He taught the same behavioral requirements that Yah gave Moses... but somehow someway... what He taught and how He lived His LIFE... has taken a backseat to Paul's opinion of His death... not unlike Mithraism and all of the other sun worship religions since Nimrod in Babylon.
Yeshua NEVER contradicted YWHW. Yeshua IS the physical embodiment of the law, the perfect living example of the teaching/instruction aka Torah. Yeshua SAID the scriptures speak of HIM. The scriptures say He would die, be buried and rise again. This is according to scripture/according to the feasts. Therefore this is the gospel which is just a word meaning good news. It has nothing to do with Paul. People twist what Paul said to their own destrution according to Peter.
I agree. Yashua never contradicted Yah... but that did not make Him Yah.
Secondly, it is historical fact that the book of Peter, while they MAY have contained some of his notes, was not written BY Peter. It was written by Silvanus... follower of Paul.
Oddly enough, it was written around the same time Paul and several of his books were rejected by the congregations in Asia.
Halleluyah Our Father..Matthew 21:33-46 who is the tenants, the chief priests and the pharisses.. who is the servants, the prophets. who is the son, Yahshua. who is the landowner, Our Father Yah. Halleluyah.. Matthew 22:41-46.. Matthew 16:13-20... Your video could have been 3 hours long there are so many places that tell Yahshua is the son of God. Thank you brother for the Truth..
Joh 10:31 Again the Yehudim picked up stones to stone Him.Yahushua answered them, Many good works I have shown you from My Father. Because of which of these works do you stone Me? The Yehudim answered Him, saying, We do not stone You for a good work, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself Elohim.
It's clear what was understood with these words. Moments later He would clarify: "so that you know and believe that the Father is in Me, and I in Him."
Jhn 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. HOLY FATHER, keep through thine own name those whom THOU hast given me, that they may be one, AS WE [are].
Would the apostles then be The Father too? No. If you are claiming Yahshua is the Father... you are calling Him a liar as HE states he was SENT by The Father. He didn't send Himself.
Doesn't say one in "purpose", and every pious Jew in attendance thought they were "one in purpose" with God, so why was it different when this Jew came along and said He was one in purpose with God? It was so obscene to them, it couldn't possibly just mean one in "purpose". It was so obscene, they wanted to stone Him.
Rev 2:8 And to the messenger of the assembly in Smurna write, This says the First(protos - foremost in time and place, the most important and influential, the first in rank and honor) and the Last(eschatos - the extreme of space-time, the uttermost), who became dead, and came to life:
Yahushua is confirming that He is eternal- infinite in the dimension of time.I could give you more if needed. Plus, Yahuweh declares in Isaiah that He will accomplish His mission as "God existing as man".
yep... that is why the lion of Judah, Yahshuah, later on in the same vision... is not seated on the throne. In fact... by that trinitarian logic... He walked up to HIMSELF and took the book out of His own hand. I think not.
The Messiah was never prophesied as God-man. That is pagan theology and misinterpretation of the prophets. If you don't understand that Yah is ONE and that Yahshua was not HIM or you believe otherwise that is totally up to you. I won't argue further.
Nor do I want to debate with you brothers. I appriciate what you brothers do. Brothers, So you admit that Christ is King? Yes He is as in Hebrews King and Priest. Also, Christ said all power has been given unto Me. I am learning and praying and studying the Word. I do not want to fight, I love my brothers
I love all who love the Most High so we are definitely at peace bro! As always... I never advocate that any take my word for anything. I state what I believe based on the words of The Master. Everyone else should do the same and listen to what the Spirit teaches them.
Many blessings and may Yah bless you on your quest for truth.
Im not here to prove it to you. If you choose to believe the Christ was actually The Creator.. that is up to you. I believe He was The Messiah... meaning the anointed one... come in the flesth... NOT The Father. They were one in PURPOSE. He made it clear that he was SENT by the Father. He made it clear that his words WERE NOT HIS but the FATHERS.
I don't mean to "dissapoint" you but the only opinion I care about is the Fathers.
YoelBenYsryael read John 10:11 I am the GOOD shepherd but in mark he said nobody is good but GOD. its the same GOOD nobody is GOOD but GOD Yahshua say he was good and shepherd is the name of GOD read ISAIAH 40:10-11 after that REV 22:12
hardnard5 1 year ago
part 2 - ...Yahoshua(Jesus) was a man, the Son of His Father. The words from Him were also the words of His Father, though, as he was one with the same Holy Spirit Who inspired the Prophets. The Word of God IS = I AM...if the Word(Jesus) is speaking that statement, "I AM." He's telling them that He, the Word, IS. Word of God was spoken out of the burning bush also. He IS. If my father was not God and i said that statement i am...i would be in big trouble because I'm just a man.
sydfan526 2 years ago
If you are referring to the term "eigo eime" and attempting to connect the usage of that term to saying "I AM" as the Father used it at the burning bush... I would beg to differ with you. the term Eigo Eime or I AM is also used by the blind man that was healed by Yahoshua... does that make him The Father too?
Yahoshua was a man... and the words and works He did were not of Himself but of The Father who sent Him. He made that very clear.
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
Yahoshua really is the I AM from the burning bush. He is The Word of God. Words of God were emanating from the burning bush. By saying I AM, He also says The Word of God IS. In the book of John, Jesus says I AM at the beginning of many sentences, then following says various other things like...the Light of the World...or The Bread of Life. By speaking we send our words out into the world. A word proceeds from me or you and is uniquely begotten by us.
sydfan526 2 years ago
Again, He made it quite his words were not "uniquely begotten by himself"
Jhn 12:49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.
What you suggest is a schizophrenic Creator who tells Himself what to say... as if He is two people. Obviously, I disagree.
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
Original poster, how do you explain this verse away?!
"I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me." John 14:6
You are treading on a slippery slope YoelBenYsryael. You are stating truth mixed with convoluted thoughts of your interpretation of scripture.
You are on still on the path just like everyone else is, to make an absolute statement about YHVWH like the one you made in this video is irresponsible.
rippin187 2 years ago
respectfully and without the "Christian Condescension" you put forward in your commentary... John 14:6 certainly does not prove Yahoshua is YHWH. It simply means what it says... unless you follow what he teaches and emulate those qualities he possessed you can never understand or serve The Father correctly or know Him. The only convolution I see here is your brainwashed man/God theology... which finds its origins in paganism.
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
Yeshua lived a perfect life and fulfilled the commandments that we couldn't or wouldn't keep. Therefore He is good. So when Yeshua said there is none good but God....He is saying he is God.
If you study the tabernacle you see in visable form symbols of Yeshua. The gate or door, the alter or FIRE. Jer. 23:29 the lavier, WATER, Jn 3:5,Rev.1:15, manorah,LIGHT Jn9:5, BREAD,Jn6:35,
Insense, FIRE AND CLOUD of smoke as it burns you also see this outside of the tabernacle. Ark-THE PRESENCE OF GOD.
2tires 2 years ago
What you describe are "types and shadows". These things were begotten of gnosticism. Personally, I choose to simply follow Yahoshua's own words than to try and deduce who and what He is.
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
Excellent presentation of Scriptural Truth.!May many eyes be opened to understand .
Shalom Aki
tesrivah 2 years ago
Numbers 23:19 YHWH is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?
turkeyfrank 2 years ago
If Jesus is the only begotten son of god, How is Israel the Firstborn son of god?- Exodus 4:22
btuck2 2 years ago
Read up on the Peshitta. Yeshua=Alaha. The Greek kurious does not distuinguish between LORD and lord. The aramaic does. Yeshua is called both Maran (lord) and MARYA (YHWH=true LORD)
Rungold315 2 years ago
The Greek Kurios doesn't distinguish between Yahshua and YHWH, but the term "KURIOS THEOS" does.
turkeyfrank 2 years ago
John 6:38. Proof of his pre-existance?
aboutCHRIST 2 years ago
not according to John 6:42
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
???
John 6:41-44
41 The Jews, therefore, were murmuring at him, because he said, 'I am the bread that came down from heaven,'
42 and they said, 'Is this not Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we have known? how then saith this one --- Out of heaven I have come down?'
43 Jesus answered, therefore, and said to them, 'Murmur not one with another;
44 no one is able to come unto me, if the Father who sent me may not draw him,and I will raise him up in the last day;
aboutCHRIST 2 years ago
obviously they knew who he was and who his parents were. Some choose to believe that he pre-existed in heaven using this verse... and that is fine. If one actually studies all of His words however they will see that he is implying no such thing.
Jhn 17:14 I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
I suppose then them not being of this world would mean they came down from heaven too.
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
We had this discussion about being of the world alredy. You are correct that stating that one is not of this world does not mean that one is asserting that one is from heaven. However, I in the verses we are discussing now, he is stating that he came down from heaven.
aboutCHRIST 2 years ago
yup and he also states that he is bread. Did that mean he literally wanted people to eat him?
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
No. That is metaphor meaning that he is nourishment to the spirit as manna is nourishment to the body. It works because both are nourishment and each came down from heaven (directly from Our Father).
aboutCHRIST 2 years ago
exactly. Metaphor. This is why I say people should read ALL of his words instead of one passage as often times things are explained in their proper context.
Jhn 17:18 As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.
He did not send them from physical heaven into the world and He makes it clear that as He had been sent... so were they. There is a difference between mystical and spiritual.
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
Yes, Yo'el. John 17:18 has the exact meaning that you ascribe to it. However, in the verses to which I was referring, I believe that when The Master says, I came down from heaven, that is not a metaphor. When he says, I am the bread of life, that is a metaphor.
aboutCHRIST 2 years ago
I should be clear. I am not equating pre-existence in heaven with being GOD.
aboutCHRIST 2 years ago
I hear you. I just think both ideas can exist together without negating or changing the meaning of the other. Love you!
aboutCHRIST 2 years ago
John 6:45-48
45 it ishaving been written in the propehts, And they shall be all taught of GOD; every one therfore who heard from the Father, and learned, cometh to me;
46 not that any one hath seen the Father, except he who is from GOD, he hath seen the Father.
47 'Verily, verily, I say to you,He who is believing in me, hath life age-during;
48 I am the bread of life;
aboutCHRIST 2 years ago
If you choose to take it literally then yes you are absolutely right. If you choose to read carefully ALL of his words and understand what He means... then it is apparent that He made no such claim.
It's really up to you.
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
great vid my brother i dont forget what it says in rev 3:12.
anthothiyah 2 years ago
If Jesus was not God, where does the resurrection fit into all of this? Why did Jesus have to die? Was there really a battle in hell over death? What books do you recommend concerning the lost books?
symone244 2 years ago
all very good questions. This is why we are to be SEEKING the truth instead of believing everything we hear or just following the storylines given to us. I'll respond in an email as there are a lot of questions lol
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
I have a question concerning the "I AM".
In John 1, it says in the beginning was the Word and the word was God and was with God in the beginning, then it goes on through verse 14 saying "the Word became flesh"
Does this just simply mean Jesus is His Word manifested from the spoken Word of God's will that man could see, touch, talk with and fulfill His previous from the OT and complete it?
I could say, 'let there be an icecream cone' if should one come, it doesn't make it me but a manifestaion
petshaw2009 2 years ago
Well for me personally Yahoshua was the living example of how we should serve the Most High. For starters, He couldn't be much of an example if He was divine... as humans we cannot hope to emulate the divine. Secondly, people use the Ego Eime argument to prove his divinity... when He plainly says Himself that He is doing the will of the Father. So being the living example He was the living breathing epitome of a man who keeps the Words of the Most High.
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
yes yahsuwah is the spoken word of yah, isaih says that yah spoken hin into exsitance called him from his mother womb. isiah 49 chapter.
anthothiyah 2 years ago
may I send you an email of those verses?
monilove5 2 years ago
I am familiar with those verses... very familiar in fact. We disagree on their interpretation is all.
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
words that are not His?
monilove5 2 years ago
As He is perfect He makes no mistakes. As such things such as Matthews reference to Isaiah 7 being a messianic prophecy is incorrect as Immanuel was to be for a sign to King Ahaz roughly 700 years BEFORE Yahoshua was born. If one simply read the chapter in context they would see that. Not to mention Paul's conflicting Damascus stories... to name a few.
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
I can somewhat see the Is 7. But please elborate on the Paul's road to Damascus
monilove5 2 years ago
I did a few videos on Paul and the information is better laid out there in my 13th Apostle playlist. Im only referring you to the videos because all of the scriptural references are listed and visible side by side
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
the verses that you quote do not pertain to jesus not claiming deity. Also, there are far more verses in john where he claims himself to be God. As a matter of fact, the Pharisees were upset because of his claim of being God in the flesh (immanuel=God with us). This claim leads to the prophesied death of the Messiah who is called Mighty God wonderful, etc. in Isa. 9:6
The actions of Jesus,that you pointed out are some examples of how we should be when we have a relationship with the father.
monilove5 2 years ago
Jhn 8:54 Jesus answered, If I honor myself, MY HONOR IS NOTHING: IT IS MY FATHER THAT HONORETH ME; of whom ye say, that HE is your God:
Jhn 8:55 Yet ye have not known HIM; BUT I KNOW HIM: and if I should say, I know HIM not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know HIM, and keep HIS saying.
He was not schizophrenic. He made it clear that He was not "God" but instead that He KNEW "God" and kept His sayings.
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
You must understand the way Jesus spoke and the true meanings of these words. Father is symbolic. for you to be the son of some,you are claiming that very nature.Jesus spoke of spiritual things.Spiritual things cannot be discerned with our natural mind.
Read to the end of that chapter you quoted.Jesus plainly states,"before Abraham,I Am." then they to stone him. The claim to be eternal was a claim to be divine. We both know only God is.Thus,in the eyes of the Jews He was guilty of blasphemy.
monilove5 2 years ago
I will agree that his words were spiritual but I will also assert that there is a difference between spiritual and mystical. The man-god dichotomy is mystical and predates Christianity. Furthermore He sent the spirit of truth which leads into ALL truth, therefore His words are not difficult or incomprehensible to those with the spirit of truth. Lastly, to say that "Father" is symbolic is incorrect. He made it clear He was referring to an entity that was not Himself...
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
The word Father in English is more symbolic if one doesn't understand The Greek or the reason behind him saying father. There is no such thing as a man-god, i agree, but we do not worship the flesh that he occupied. God can and has revealed him self in a physical form. One of the earliest times was to Abraham while he was resting under a tree. And the attempt to stone was because of breaking the law. To them he committed blasphemy.
monilove5 2 years ago
I understand the Greek and consequently the Hebrew just fine. You assertion that Father is symbolic is simply that... an assertion and not verifiable by any biblical usage. In scriptural context and not in type and shadow gnosticism He identified the Father as a separate and divine entity from which He himself was both separate from and subservient to. Additionally He never broke the law. He kept it the way it was supposed to be kept and not in the way they decided it should be kept.
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
There was confusion over the blind man's identity, therefore he claimed to be the one (blind begger). Jesus claimed to be The I Am, same as in Ex 3:14 . If you are familiar with Greek and Hebrew, why are you missing it? Actually that is besides the point. You are right he didn't break the law. He didn't lie about being who he was. There are many verse throughout the entire bible that will tell you that Jesus is God,from the old to the new. Do you believe the bible is true or contradicts itself?
monilove5 2 years ago
The blind man didn't say "the one" he said Ego Eime just like Yahoshua said. If you are asserting that Yahoshua saying Ego Eime asserted that He was in deed the Father... then by that logic the blind man saying Ego Eime was making the same assertion. Given the history of the Bible and having actually RESEARCED it instead of taking someones word on it, Its a proveable fact that The words of the Most High are IN the Bible... but there are words in it that are not His as well.
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
Jhn 8:40But now ye seek to kill me, A MAN that hath told you the truth, which I HAVE HEARD of God: this did not Abraham. The Jews did not understand His words: Jhn 8:43 Why do ye not understand my speech? [even] because ye cannot hear my word.
As such it is folly to come to the conclusions that they did regarding what He meant by any statements He made... like He was claiming to be God.
They attempted to stone Him after he "disrespected" their favored patriarch by claiming preeminence to him.
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
These verses are the arguement that led up to him plainly having to state I AM. The reason they did not understand his speech was because they had already rejected him as the scriptures said in Isa. 53. In the next verses, Jesus tells them why they do not understand "that their father was the devil". For this reason of allowing their flesh to take over, they could not receive the truth that he was speaking.
monilove5 2 years ago
Again you are jumping out of the context of the scripture to prove doctrine. I AM or Ego Eime is also used by the blind man in John 9:9... by the "I AM" usage then He was claiming to be God as well.
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
They didn't try 2 stone YAHSHU'A 4 claiming divinity, The Pharisees were angry at being exposed as liars thru a series of events that led 2 the I am incident and tried 2 stone Yashu'a (Illeagally) When he was brought up on charges Where were the witnesses 2 his offense?. They're were none.John18:19-31. They knew HE was the sent 1 of I am ,BUT They served YAH with their minds, BUT in there flesh NOTHING GOOD DWELLETH like Paul/Saul they knew the LAW BUT did not KEEP/OBEY the LAW. They were FALSE
joekooltrips 2 years ago
Don't you think it could be that Jesus came down as God's son and I'm sure everyone agrees on that, but after His resurrection He became one with Christ? I mean look everything you quoted was before He died and rose again and you think that Paul and Jesus's testimonies are 2 different things but why is it not possible for you to see that Paul's is simply the follow up of Jesus's? Well its up to you to think but personally I believe in the Holy Trinity: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.
Luk3r91 2 years ago
what do u say of the Scripture calling Yahshua ha meshiak "emannuel" or God with us?
SithMage 2 years ago
In Isaiah Emmanuel was born as a sign to King Ahaz... to show him that the two nations who were coming to take over Jerusalem would not succeed... roughly seven hundred years before Yahoshua. A sign is best seen when a person is still alive and Ahaz did not live that long.
As such, the entire addition to Matthew claiming Isaiah was talking about Yahoshua is false.
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
u mean it should not be there?
SithMage 2 years ago
Yes. Isaiah 7 when read in context has nothing to do with Yahoshua whatsoever. Historically, the original Hebrew book of Matthew that was taken from Ebionites... and subsequently hidden away in the Vatican or destroyed completely did not contain this story or the Genealogy that is in the Greek versions and consequently our English bibles.
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
how can one know this if it is no longer around?
SithMage 2 years ago
research. The "Church Fathers" first and foremost agreed that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew and translated to Greek. Secondly it was because of these omissions and other beliefs of the Ebionites that they were called "heretics" and those things that did not agree with Christianity were often outlined by the Christians who were writing against their "heresies".
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
can um define ebionites 4 me please?
SithMage 2 years ago
The Ebionites or Evyonim are known as "the poor". They are sometimes mixed in with Essenes Gnostics Nazarenes... usually by Judaic sources... and called a "cult". Study of them will reveal they were simply followers of Yahoshua who would not conform to Pauline Christianity or Talmudic Judaism... and in turn were hated and persecuted by both. As such, they were in possession of the Hebrew copy of Matthew... until it became a "heresy" and confiscated by the rising Christian Church.
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
They were often mocked and called heretics and "the poor of understanding" by Pauline Christianity... mainly because they did not believe Yahoshua was "God" or a "God man". They also did not take communion or follow christian practices as ritual... and they believed in repentance not human sacrifice... as a means of salvation. Their beliefs were directly opposed to Pauline Christianity... and they were harrassed and attacked... sometimes violently because of those beliefs.
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
finally, according to Josephus, of the three main groups in Jerusalem: The Pharisees, Sadduces, and Essene/Ebionites... only the Essene/Ebionites were "Jews" or Yahudim by birth. Meaning they were actually the only real Israelites by blood and not conversion or dominion in Jerusalem according to Josephus. Makes sense when Yahoshua said he came to the lost sheep of Israel.
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
u should be more specific with your labels. the christian church could mean alot of things. in paul's time there was only one. after the apostles there were differing ideologies creeping in. platonic philosophy began to infect some.
so when u say the christian church, im not sure if u mean the real one, or a fake one.
SithMage 2 years ago
well for me its pretty simple. Paul started "the church" as we know it today. The apostles of Yahoshua (the ecclessia) were not "Christians". That terminology began in Antioch after Paul took it over. The Ebionites/Essenes followed "the way" as they called it and they were not an "institution" but different scattered groups of believers. When I say church it refers strictly to the institutions begun by Paul and maintained as "Christianity" to the present day.
YoelBenYsryael 2 years ago
Just stopping by. I am a christian and applaude the civil dialogue between Fandera and YoelBenYsrael.
This shows how much hope there is. War will never be the way. Keep the dialogue open even if traditions have kept us apart, or did they? It seems not.
Owleyes888 2 years ago
If we are indeed to worship in Spirit and Truth there will be a unity within our voices when we speak most accurately about God. It is not possible to speak a mere opinion or belief in a public forum without in some way teaching. I'm glad that we have no animosity but it will not be possible for me to simply reject your beliefs when they are being posted publicly which is why I commented and questioned as I did. Thanks for your responses and the civil dialogue. The God of Peace keep you.
fandera 3 years ago
well that depends on what one deems to be an accurate depiction of the Most High... one based on doctrine or one based solely on scripture. We will disagree on the definition of teaching... as no one enrolls or is forced to believe what I say... and my main goal is to get people to look it up for themselves... not force feed doctrine to them. In any case... our disagreements aside... I also pray that the Most High shines his light and keep all who seek him.
Shalom.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
You have interpreted based on your own knowledge of Torah and have judged the interpretation of Mark as incorrect. That's all I needed to know. You are near and yet far in some ways. My heart races reading the nearness and farness you exhibit. I will pray in the name of Jesus (y'shua) that I will be taught and you will be taught by the same Spirit and will be brothers. It may mean we both have a distance to travel, but if we do so by abiding in Him we will both have hope.
fandera 3 years ago
well that is not an unexpected response. The fact that I read scripture based on what it SAYS instead of what other people dictate it to MEAN... well that's just terrible. Wisdom is justified of her children. We must worship in spirit and also in truth. I will pray... as Yahoshua taught us... to the Father that we will all learn to hear him and see the narrow road to life... and see Him in peace.
Shalom.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
I think your view of Scripture is somehow limited to what you yourself determine. The writing of Mark is somehow incorrect and yet his recording of Jesus' words are. I cannot see anywhere where this view of the Torah or the prophets is allowed so I do not understand how you are so comfortable teaching this method. Be careful what you teach to others as we both know Jesus' words to teachers. I do apologize for how patronizing my last reply sounded. It's hard to communicate love with despair.
fandera 3 years ago
No problem we simply disagree and that happens sometimes. The record of Mark plainly show that he is addressing the traditions of the Pharisees. He scolds them and even cites passages from the Law.. so it is highly unlikely that he is lauding the law in one scripture and doing away with the food section in another. Secondly, I am not teaching anything. I say what I believe and everyone has a choice to listen and research for themselves or reject what I believe.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
One final question:
Do you think that it is lawful and permissable for a person to eat any foods, including pork, shellfish, etc.?
Mark 7 has some red (and black) letters about this.
fandera 3 years ago
Those foods were forbidden in Torah yes. And no his reference was not to foods. In context his reference was to the ritual of washing of hands... which he reiterates with likening them to bowls which need cleansing from the inside and not just outside.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
How do you deal with Jesus calling himself "Yahweh" - "ego eime" - "I Am". This leads us to the argument of C.S. Lewis that Jesus does not leave us the option to call Him a good guide or teacher. If He is not God how can He ask us to believe in Himself, even to share our faith (pistuete) between God to Jesus (John 14:1). Further, in John 14, Jesus claims that the Father is known by knowing Jesus. If Jesus is not God He is, in the words of Lewis, either a Liar (charlatan) or Lunatic.
fandera 3 years ago
well again... I don't deal with "arguments" especially of the ilk of C.S.Lewis. People made him to be what he was not and never claimed to be. One could suppose the blind man was claiming to be YHWH by that logic.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
Do you really think that the Jews in the temple on that day were so foolish as to mistake what Jesus meant? Do you think Jesus Himself was making a mistake or just using some "interesting grammar" or something of that sort? I think you have put so much effort into many of your videos and your own "arguments" but you are unwilling to really think of the perspectives of others. At the least you can answer: what did Jesus mean and what did the Jews in the Temple perceive His meaning to be?
fandera 3 years ago
To your first question... yes I do. Yahoshua said that they would not understand his words.
Mat 15:14 Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.
I was a christian who was taught from the age of NINE that "Jesus was God"... so those arguments are redundant to me. I choose to let the Father teach as Yahoshua told us to. Others choose to listen to other men.
Its a choice we all make. Paul's doctrine or Yahoshua's. simple
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
There is another perspective worth considering: maybe you are making Him to be something He was not and never claimed to be. It seems that the Jews in the time of Jesus, the early Ecclesia and Jesus Himself knew what Jesus' words about Himself meant - that He was claiming equality with God. Maybe it is you that has stumbled into making Him a guide rather than Lord. I'm sure this will never be posted, but is it not worth considering? And if not, why not?
fandera 3 years ago
again... I spent the greater part of my life listening to man made doctrines and other peoples opinions.
Neither you nor any other person will be accountable for what I know or don't know on judgment day. It is most certainly your prerogative to follow men's doctrines on what is true and what is not... I simply choose not to... which is mine.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
Yes you do. You follow your own prerogative and in so doing have declared, with the help of others no doubt, the words of Paul, John, Peter and the like to be merely men's arguments. It would do me no good to argue against any of Scripture, but based on your understanding and pension to discredit Biblical writers, could we not throw many more into that mix - even Isaiah and Moses?? I would not, but your logic leaves that all open. How do you take the "red letters" out of the pen of John??
fandera 3 years ago
So I should be following Paul's perogative instead? A man who came preaching his own gospel? Spirit and truth dictates that you find out what is true... not what is popular. I take Yahoshua's word as truth and it is in accordance with the Law and the prophets. Paul's is not. Constantines Nicean additions to appease pagans do not appeal to me either. So again I follow Yahoshua... who are YOU following?
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
I'm glad you looked at John 10:30, but this isn't the only, nor the most compelling, verse where Jesus asserts His equality with God. John 8:58 says: "'I tell you the truth,' Jesus answered, 'before Abraham was born, I am.'" At this the Jews present at the temple picked up stones to kill Him. He was not claiming a united purpose with God, but claiming Yahweh as His own name. The Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT) has "ego eime" in Exodus 3:14 - the same words in John's epistle in 8:58.
fandera 3 years ago
Jhn 7:28 Then cried Jesus in the temple as he taught, saying, Ye both know me, and ye know whence I am: and I am not come of myself, but he that sent me is true, whom ye know not.
Eigo Eime is also used by the blind man in John here:
Jhn 9:9 Some said, This is he: others [said], He is like him: [but] he said, I am [he].
Ehyah Asher Ehyah... a little study will reveal that the Hebrew word "Asher" does not mean "that"
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
Very Nice!!
goodtimesrcoming 3 years ago
So then have you ever seen and studied using what is called the "wheel of prophesy" you can find it in Yahoo images... it shows parallel attributes of the Messiah and the creator.. some which are attributed to each solely and individually but said of each in different places... I don't accept the Trinitarian explanation.. knowing it comes from the RC, but also have problems with the Oneness doctrine.. the godhead is a mystery, which I no longer profess to wholly understand.
WONDAWOMAN 3 years ago
God in the flesh hebrews 2:14
thewholetruth12 3 years ago
oh ok. cool. sooo he was praying to... Himself? And the voice out of heaven said... this is my... SELF in whom I am well pleased??? hmmm...
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
ecc. 11:5 you cannot undertstand the work of god the maker of all things so stop trying your argument is not special its been herd before often used by muslims please spare everyone you mid as well be an athiest
thewholetruth12 3 years ago
its a matter of common sense. He was not talking to Himself. and by the way.. an argument doesn't have to be special to be right. Obviously it isn't me here between us with the problem of understanding. So spare us the arrogance... its not special or unique either.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
Don't get hung up on a "J" & "Y". My name is different in other toungues. Your problem is you either follow a Jesus who is God in flesh, or one who blasphemed. You deny Jesus as God in flesh, so you follow a blasphemer, not the true Jesus. You completely miss the point Jesus made in the verses point to. Why were the Jews going to stone Him?
John 10:33
The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
mkzmotorsports 3 years ago
so because the Jews did not understand his words... just has he said they wouldn't... we should believe that they understood who He was? kinda backwards. He never made the claim to be God. He instructed us to pray to the Father not to him. Perhaps you should spend more time listening to what HE said instead of believe other peoples doctrines or opinions about him.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
No, because YOU misunderstand His words you twist Him into not being God in the flesh. John 1:1 & 1:14 attest to it. The Jews present, were Pharisees, quite educated and not idiots. The knew EXACTLY that He had claimed to be God. You have been given over to a reprobate mind and cannot see it.
mkzmotorsports 3 years ago
riiight so because I actually BELIEVE Him when he said of HIMSELF Jhn 6:38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. and oh maybe... Jhn 8:28 Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am [he], and [that] I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things... you know His OWN words about himself and not some doctrine made up about him Im the reprobate one? riiiiight.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
He was doing the will of His father simply because He was not being dependent on His divine nature while here on Earth (Phil 2:5-8). The problem with your view is that you make God a liar. In 1Jn 4:12 we are told no man has seen God. Yet in Genesis 17 & 18 we read different, and these are not the only places. It is GOD there in the tent. This is no problem with the Triune God of the bible because you could see one (Jesus) without seeing God in all His glory. Your view makes God a liar.
mkzmotorsports 3 years ago
Just what I thought. Now who is twisting... and theorizing? Im going off of His Words not some triune doctrine. If He were Yah then He would have instructed His followers to pray to HIM not the Father. You all make it up as you go because you refuse to believe that every word in your canon... put together by Constantine is true and untampered with. If I have a choice to follow Yahoshua's words or Your triune "doctrine"... I'll stick with His words.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
now show me WHERE in those two scriptures... and I can provide more if you would like... did I twist ANYTHING? Those are HIS words... quoted exactly as they are written in scripture.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
Mat 11:25 At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.
apparently their supposed wisdom blinded them from understanding.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
Now I get it!!! When Rasta Bob Marley said a blessin' unto somebody he said "Jah bless", so now i understand that "Jah" is "Yah", right? Or i am still confused!¨=P
qualqui 3 years ago
yes you are correct. because there is no "J" sound in Hebrew the correct pronouciation is YAH.. like in the names of some of the Prophets.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
Read the penteuch (Tora) and psalms (Tehilim), there is only ONE TRUE G-D for all of humanity - learn about the nature of your creator and the signifigance of the 1st and most important commandment. Key word = Monotheism :) May you find meaning and fulfilment and come closer to his majesty, king of kings, HASHEM YITBARACH, amen.
AmanitaReturns 3 years ago
again agreed. It isn't about religion, it is about relationship... both with The Most High and with each other.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
Dear Brother Yoel, messianic judaism and believing in the true message of christ is a stepping stone for humanity to examine their faiths and beliefs and discover the true message of the old testament and Yeshuah Hanotzri (Jesus of Nazareth)-which can be summed up in 1 sentence as "love thy brother as you love thyself" or in hebrew "veahavta lereacha kamocha".
AmanitaReturns 3 years ago
Shalom Amanita. I believe He summed it up as FIRST loving The Most High with all of our hearts souls and minds and then loving our neighbor as ourselves. I agree that it was His message of inner man/spiritual behavioral modification just like the Most High stressed to Moses that is the most importance.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
The answer is absolutely NOT.
GodMythology 3 years ago
Yoel, I'm wondering a couple of things.
1. Do you believe the verses of Luke 1:31-35 and Matthew 1:18-20 are true?
2. What is your understanding of what "the Word" is?
Iannes33 3 years ago
1. His name was not JESUS it was Yashua which actually MEANS salvation. There is no "J" or J sound in the Hebrew/Aramaic languages. It was not invented until the 1700's by Greeks. Mat 21 says the virgin birth scenario was in accordance to Isaiah 7... which is false if you actually READ the entire chapter of Isaiah 7. Furthermore those who KNEW Him did not believe He was born of an immaculate conception...
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
Jhn 6:42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
not to mention that the child born in Isaiah was born nearly 700 years BEFORE Yashua as a sign to King Ahaz... and Yashua was not named Immanuel.
2. Logos is a gnostic term. If John meant to say "in the beginning was Yashua..." he would have said that. Logos means the word of Yah that brings into existence. It means Yah is His word... the very same words given to Yashua and all of prophets before Him. Moses foretold of His coming and that the words of the Father would be spoken by Him.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
1. OK. I agree with you but I wasn't quite sure what your position was.
2. You say "words given". Do you believe the Logos is literally a word or group of words in the sense that we use "word" in English?
Iannes33 3 years ago
Logos... not it the sense of words on paper or human speech... but more like spirit. The essence of the creators thought in action.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
here do you get the nam yahshua????????
bigmoney714 3 years ago
"Jesus" is an English translation of a Latin translation of a Greek translation of the Hebrew name Yashua. If you were to go back in time and ask a Hebrew to speak to "Jesus"... they wouldn't know who you were talking about. There isn't any "J" sound in the entire Hebrew alphabet even TODAY.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
A)Matt1:23 "Behold, the virgin shall be with child and shall bear a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel,which translated means, "God WITH US"."
No man has seen God at anytime AND YET, Moses & the elders DID see God.
Ex24:10
"and they SAW THE GOD OF Israel..."
Jacob saw God
Gen32:30
"..he said, "I have seen God face to face, yet my life has been preserved."
Gideon saw God.
Jud6:22
"Alas, O Lord GOD! For now I have seen the angel of the YWHW face to face."
boltingpuppies 3 years ago
Im not sure what your point is BUT I will point out that Yahshua was never called Immanuel. Secondly, Immanuel was born as a sign to King Ahaz roughly 700 before Yashua's birth.
virgin almah vs. be'tulah one meaning woman of marrying age and the other meaning woman who has never known a man. Isaiah used the former not the latter... which he did use in other scriptures.
If you are making the point that there are additions to the scriptures that were not placed there by Yah then I agree.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
Umm this was supposed to be a 'sign'. Saying that a woman of marrying age would give birth, is not a 'sign'. Saying a virgin who has not been with a man would give birth is a sign. Do you want the truth or to be right? I only wanted the YWHW's side.
boltingpuppies 3 years ago
the truth is always best... but to your question to me... perhaps you should ask it of yourself. A sign is meant to be seen by the person it is given to. In the context of Isaiah 7, the whole chapter and not just the two scriptures people love to yank out and use to prove this virgin birth scenario... the sign was for King Ahaz... again... 700 years before the birth of Yashua. Kinda hard to see a sign meant for you when it happens 700 years after you die now isn't it?
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
Immanuel meant "God with Us" meaning He was with them and Judah would not be taken over by the two kingdoms that had allied themselves against Judah. I know its unpopular... but it just happens to be true IF one actually reads scriptures in the context they were given by Yah... instead of trying to prove religious doctrines created by men.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
So you're saying Mary was NOT a virgin and that she either fornicated with a stranger which is why Joseph wanted to put her away OR you are saying she fornicated with Joseph and they concocted the whole story about the Holy Spirit miraculously implanting Messiah Yeshua in her.
So if Yeshua has an earthly father and He is FULLY man, God's NOT His father, then Yeshua was sinful and His sacrifice was tainted by His own sinful nature. You believe He was NOT the PERFECT sacrifce but tainted.
boltingpuppies 3 years ago
nope. I don't believe He was a sacrifice at all. Son of God simply means one who does the will of God not literal divine offspring. The sacrifice He made was to give us the words the Father gave Him even though He knew He would suffer and die for it. The Pauline sacrifice theology is actually derived in pagan mythology and nowhere is it found in the teaching of Yashua.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
There are several other examples of people seeing God face to face and yet scripture says that no man can see God and live. God is Spirit. Hmmm...sounds like there is more to God than mere man can understand. He's not like you or me.
boltingpuppies 3 years ago
I agree... however... it doesn't shape my belief system one way or another. I simply adhere to the Words of Yashua and the Law. Simple and uncomplicated. Again, if you are trying to prove the point that there are some conflicting points of view in the Bible... I agree. Luckily, I don't worship the Bible, I worship the Father... and adhere to the words of Yashua... whose words were the words of the Father.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
Matthew 28:19: Baptize in the NAME of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost
Acts 2:38, 8:12, 8:16, 10:48, 19:5: The Apostles baptized in the name of the LORD JESUS CHRIST
Isaiah 9:6: For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given:... and his name shall be called... THE MIGHTY GOD, THE EVERLASTING FATHER, ...
Colossians 2:9: For in him dwelt the fulness of the Godhead bodily
Luke 24:47: Preach repentence and the remission of sins in HIS name
BrotherMurray 3 years ago
well first of all... His name was not The Lord Jesus Christ. The J sound is not present in the Hebrew language... nor is an equivalent of the letter J. His correct Hebrew name was Yahshua... which... wonder of wonders contains the name Yah. (Psalms 68:14).
Isaiah9:6 in its proper Hebrew is Pele-joez-el-gibbor-Abi-ad-sar-shalom meaning: Wonderful in counsel is God the Mighty, the Everlasting Father, the Ruler of Peace. These are ATTRIBUTES of Yah. Many prophets were named after His attributes
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
but that did not make THEM Yah. For example Isaiah's name ALSO means Yah is salvation.
Secondly... If you are still following the teaching of Paul... I suggest you actually compare his teachings to Yahshua's. If you are still believing the KJV translation is error proof... you REALLY need to step back and compare the virgin birth story in Matthew to Isaiah 7 in its entirety.
Shalom.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
I know his name was in Hebrew. Common sense. God though created all languages.
Isaiah 9:6 in its proper context says "For unto us a child is born... and his name shall be called...". Its pretty simple.
Before Abraham was, I AM.
I find it very interesting when people have to discredit Biblical books to support their beliefs. You would have to discredit John, Paul, and Luke in the least.
BrotherMurray 3 years ago
interesting. By your admission, we can call him anything we wish... maybe even Buddha or Confucius... seeing as all languages were created by Him. Good luck with that.
Common sense says we don't just believe everything we are taught but that intelligent people actually study. In doing so, one would actually find that while the words of the Most High are IN the Bible... every word in the Bible is not from the Most High.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
Is Buddha an English transliteration of Yahshuah Hamaschiach? Didn't think so.
Given the historical facts, we can see that Paul, Luke, Peter and James were not rivals as Protestant theologeans suggest. Paul's teachings on salvation were the same as those Peter taught to the Jews.
Acts 2:38: Repent, be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins, and you shall receive the Gift of the Holy Ghost
BrotherMurray 3 years ago
Well then it really DOES matter what we call Him now doesn't it.
Given the historical facts, JESUS is not His name.
As to Peter wasn't it him who also said...
Act 2:22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a MAN approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:
Furthermore isn't it a bit counter-productive to mention historical fact yet continue to call Him by a name that isn't His
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
especially given the historical proof that the English language has ALWAYS contained the proper sounds to pronounce His name correctly?
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
Counter-productive? How so? Name one way. One viable way. Has it prevented anyone from casting out demons? Has it prevented anyone from healing the sick? It didn't prevent me.
Again, to backup your theology you have to discredit a good few books in the Bible. All of Paul, Luke, and John's writings.
All the Gospels reveal that Jesus was closest to James, John, and Peter during his 3 and 1/2 year ministry. YET, you have to throw away John's Gospel to back up your beliefs.
BrotherMurray 3 years ago
for starters it is counterproductive to call Him by a name that isn't His because it means you haven't really taken the time to know Him or His word... and He in turn doesn't know them. Many will make that mistake.
Mat 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
You assume much by saying I "throw away" John's book. I asked you about Paul not John.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
to back up my "theology" I simply read the words in red... just as He told us to. Unlike some, I don't worship books of the Bible... I worship the Creator and the one He sent to reiterate His Word.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
Follow Yahushua far enough, and you will find Yahuah - The Holy Father!
Ammyai 3 years ago
Both sides of the argument here are correct,Jesus/Yahshua is God in the form of a man.
aesthetictripp 3 years ago
but I DO believe that you should be praying to the Father.....in the name of his son.
aesthetictripp 3 years ago
Todah Anchi...great video. some of these people will never get this. They will forever learn but never come to the knowledge of the truth. It is truth that makes one free. Too bad many of us want to remain in bondage. Nevertheless, keep bringing the word of truth! Shalom!
Tzephaniyah 3 years ago
"Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures" Luke 24:27).
TrustingJesusChrist 3 years ago
Deu 18:18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.
Deu 18:19 And it shall come to pass, [that] whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require [it] of him.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
Moses was a man... a prophet... not a "God/Man"
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
Jhn 17:14 I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
were the apostles "God/Men" too? No. They were not of the wordly system just as Yahshua was not.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
God's written word disagrees:
Hebrews 1:8: But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom (the Father called the Son "God").
Revelation 1:7-8: BEHOLD, HE IS COMING WITH THE CLOUDS, and every eye will see Him, even those who pierced Him; and all the tribes of the earth will mourn over Him. So it is to be. Amen. I am the Alpha and the Omega, says the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.
TrustingJesusChrist 3 years ago
Well TJC...
If you believe Hebrews over Yahshua HIMSELF... I cant help ya.
Mat 10:32 Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also BEFORE MY FATHER which is in heaven.
Luk 9:26 For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of my words, of him shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he shall come in his own glory, AND [in his] Father's, and of the holy angels.
YAH is the creator Yahshua was the anointed one sent to lead us to salvation.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
Do we even know who wrote Hebrews or Revelations for sure? Yahshua said beware of ANYONE teaching a new gospel. If he didn't say it while he was here on earth, I'm not following it.
slim29205 3 years ago
you are definitely right about that!
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
We are sure John wrote the Revelation. And it was Paul who said if anyone brings a different gospel not to listen to them. The gospel is defined as Jesus dying, being buried and rising on the third day, according to the scriptures or prophecies. Neither Hebrews or Revelation refute this or another gospel.
boltingpuppies 3 years ago
Again... very interesting definition of the gospel. According to Yahshua the gospel was to be all the things He taught them while He walked the earth.
Mat 28:19Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Mat 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, [even] unto the end of the world. Amen.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
last I checked He didn't command them according to His death burial and or resurrection. He taught them to observe the Law, He taught them how to pray, He taught them how to treat their neighbors and their enemies. He taught the same behavioral requirements that Yah gave Moses... but somehow someway... what He taught and how He lived His LIFE... has taken a backseat to Paul's opinion of His death... not unlike Mithraism and all of the other sun worship religions since Nimrod in Babylon.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
Yeshua NEVER contradicted YWHW. Yeshua IS the physical embodiment of the law, the perfect living example of the teaching/instruction aka Torah. Yeshua SAID the scriptures speak of HIM. The scriptures say He would die, be buried and rise again. This is according to scripture/according to the feasts. Therefore this is the gospel which is just a word meaning good news. It has nothing to do with Paul. People twist what Paul said to their own destrution according to Peter.
boltingpuppies 3 years ago
I agree. Yashua never contradicted Yah... but that did not make Him Yah.
Secondly, it is historical fact that the book of Peter, while they MAY have contained some of his notes, was not written BY Peter. It was written by Silvanus... follower of Paul.
Oddly enough, it was written around the same time Paul and several of his books were rejected by the congregations in Asia.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
not to mention the fact that there are several Pauline references repeated almost VERBATIM from different Pauline books included in 1 Peter alone.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
Halleluyah Our Father..Matthew 21:33-46 who is the tenants, the chief priests and the pharisses.. who is the servants, the prophets. who is the son, Yahshua. who is the landowner, Our Father Yah. Halleluyah.. Matthew 22:41-46.. Matthew 16:13-20... Your video could have been 3 hours long there are so many places that tell Yahshua is the son of God. Thank you brother for the Truth..
ath16 3 years ago
I do have the Tankh. Thanks for the reference bro.
Shalom
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
The beat was done by Producer DJ J.B. and... sigh... Im listening.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
Joh 10:31 Again the Yehudim picked up stones to stone Him.Yahushua answered them, Many good works I have shown you from My Father. Because of which of these works do you stone Me? The Yehudim answered Him, saying, We do not stone You for a good work, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself Elohim.
It's clear what was understood with these words. Moments later He would clarify: "so that you know and believe that the Father is in Me, and I in Him."
agat0r 3 years ago
Jhn 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. HOLY FATHER, keep through thine own name those whom THOU hast given me, that they may be one, AS WE [are].
Would the apostles then be The Father too? No. If you are claiming Yahshua is the Father... you are calling Him a liar as HE states he was SENT by The Father. He didn't send Himself.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
If Yahushua never claimed to be God, why is it that the Jews wanted to kill Him?
Joh 10:30 I and My Father are one.
Doesn't say one in "purpose", and every pious Jew in attendance thought they were "one in purpose" with God, so why was it different when this Jew came along and said He was one in purpose with God? It was so obscene to them, it couldn't possibly just mean one in "purpose". It was so obscene, they wanted to stone Him.
agat0r 3 years ago
They did exactly what you just did... misinterpreted what He said. Son of God is not the same thing as GOD.
Jhn 10:36 Say ye of him, whom THE FATHER hath sanctified, and SENT into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
Rev 2:8 And to the messenger of the assembly in Smurna write, This says the First(protos - foremost in time and place, the most important and influential, the first in rank and honor) and the Last(eschatos - the extreme of space-time, the uttermost), who became dead, and came to life:
Yahushua is confirming that He is eternal- infinite in the dimension of time.I could give you more if needed. Plus, Yahuweh declares in Isaiah that He will accomplish His mission as "God existing as man".
agat0r 3 years ago
yep... that is why the lion of Judah, Yahshuah, later on in the same vision... is not seated on the throne. In fact... by that trinitarian logic... He walked up to HIMSELF and took the book out of His own hand. I think not.
The Messiah was never prophesied as God-man. That is pagan theology and misinterpretation of the prophets. If you don't understand that Yah is ONE and that Yahshua was not HIM or you believe otherwise that is totally up to you. I won't argue further.
Shalom.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
Peace,
Nor do I want to debate with you brothers. I appriciate what you brothers do. Brothers, So you admit that Christ is King? Yes He is as in Hebrews King and Priest. Also, Christ said all power has been given unto Me. I am learning and praying and studying the Word. I do not want to fight, I love my brothers
cooleyhigh 3 years ago
I love all who love the Most High so we are definitely at peace bro! As always... I never advocate that any take my word for anything. I state what I believe based on the words of The Master. Everyone else should do the same and listen to what the Spirit teaches them.
Many blessings and may Yah bless you on your quest for truth.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago
To cooleyhigh and Qadosh:
Im not here to prove it to you. If you choose to believe the Christ was actually The Creator.. that is up to you. I believe He was The Messiah... meaning the anointed one... come in the flesth... NOT The Father. They were one in PURPOSE. He made it clear that he was SENT by the Father. He made it clear that his words WERE NOT HIS but the FATHERS.
I don't mean to "dissapoint" you but the only opinion I care about is the Fathers.
YoelBenYsryael 3 years ago