Imagine "Jesus is not a 'human' that he should change his mind!" Does that make sense? It's a lie. He clearly changed his mind, everyone does. Even if you say he never changed his mind, then the statement is still wrong because He is still a man, but just one that doesn't change his mind. You are a blinded deceiver even if Jesus actually is God because the verse says God has become my salvation. Even if it were the same word it's not used as a name you son of Hell.
You are mistaken, Exodus 15:2 does *not* say *God* has become my salvation, rather it says *Yah* is become my Yeshuah (salvation).
Only one of the "I am's", in the name "I am that I am", is used in Exodus 15:2, so the verse reads "I am has become my Yeshua". Exodus 15:3 continues and uses the full proper name of God saying: "I am that I am is a man (iysh) of war. I am that I am is His (the man's) name."
@boltingpuppies "I believe what He said." He didn't say that, but even if you misconstrued Hebrew were correct "yeshua" is not used as a name in that context. I called you a son of Hell because you are blind and going off of tradition rather than what the the Deity's word teaches. You, like the Pharisees, Jesus addressed are a son of Hell. The context of "son of Hell" is one who has been trained by false teachers. Do you not think Jesus had the same feeling of animosity toward those Pharisees?
You do not know the poster of this video. You have no idea how they came to the conclusion they have. The conclusion they have arrived at is Scriptural, not based on man's traditions, & the context of the passage you are referencing to justify calling fellow human beings sons of hell was about hypocrisy. Also and importantly, you are NOT Jesus. You have NO idea who is & is not a son of hell. It is not your place to say such things.
@TruthAtlas One last thing, and please consider this: What is your goal? Is your goal to sling insults? Or is your goal to show someone something from the Word of God? If you truly have a heart for God, you will come to people with Scripture and kindness. Anything less is not just unpleasing to Him - you will need to answer for it.
@Jimvesterstallone The Bible also says God hates all who do unrighteousness. I am torn between my emotions for you but I have hate for what kind of person you are. I want that part of you dead. Just like God and Jesus. My goal is to get you to repent and join the true Christian restoration. Or just defend truth. I have his word to tell me who is and who is not a son of Hell. You, being taught trinitarianism, are "twice the son of Hell." I do come to people with Scripture and kindness.
@Jimvesterstallone I was not coming at you with kindness. By going so far as to post this deceitful video you have merited a fierce rebuking and an urge to repent. If I were not to hate when God's word is mocked, then I would not be loving and THEN I would be the nothing Paul talks about. Though even now, I must admit I am barely above nothing! But I have escaped idiotic man-made religion. Religion that makes up passages, twist those that it can and ignores the majority of them!
@Jimvesterstallone Oops, sorry, just apply what I said to who did post it. I wasn't paying attention to the transition where you interjected. All Trinitarians need to repent so start praying about this!
@boltingpuppies I should say he "has" the same feeling since he's alive.
Regardless of what "repent" means in 1 Samuel 15:29 Jesus is an "adam." The Deity, the Father, is not an "adam." So your response to that changes nothing. It still disproves the incarnation of the Deity as Jesus. Next, remember I said even if "ish" is used in "man of war," then it can still merely mean a person. It doesn't necessarily imply "adam." Not sharing this information helps show your own self-delusion.
@TruthAtlas "you son of Hell"?? What a hateful comment. Are you aware that you can have all knowledge but if you have not love Scripture says you are n o t h i n g (1 Cor.13:2). In this case you have demonstrated a lack of both knowledge and love.
@Jimvesterstallone "What a hateful comment." If I were not to have hate for that which the Deity hates, then I would not have love. I do not love you if you do not repent. However, I am torn because I do love you which is why I take time to share with you how delusional this idiotic Deity-mocking doctrine is! It's blasphemy and treason against your supposed master Jesus. You are not obeying his doctrine. You don't deserve to call yourself a Christian. You must repent and let go of this doctrine.
@TruthAtlas "If I were not to have hate for that which the Deity hates, then I would not have love. I do not love you if you do not repent." But God feels much differently from this. While we were yet sinners - yet unrepentant - Christ died for us. God so loved the WORLD that He gave His only begotten Son.
God did become flesh. Do you throw out all of the letters that say so plainly?
@Jimvesterstallone You were not the one who invented this doctrine it was done by evil men blinded by empty philosophy. It's not in that sense "your" doctrine. Don't feel devoted to it. God is raising up a generation of truth seekers to rebuild his called out people from the remnants that exist across the nation. You would be wise to join them as I have chosen to do as a reaction to his grace. I hope to destroy at all costs the religion you hold. You are an enemy of the cross as I once was.
However, in 1 Samuel 15:29 a more definitive word is used so we don't have to go from just the merely extremely helpful context. We can go from the word meaning. The verse says "God is not an 'adam' that he should change His mind."
@TruthAtlas You've translated the Hebrew word 'nacham' as 'change His mind'. It could also be translated as 'regret'. Regardless, this is the rest of the passage context relating to 'nacham'.
@boltingpuppies in all due respect, your rendering of this text is not scripturally accurate. You should probably read it again in it's context, so that you do not appear to be incomprehensive of the scriptures. There is an obvious diff. in the way the word REPENT is used, bcuz Shaul although reject, still remained king. Thus proving that YHVH did not repent for sin, but it saddened him.The gifts of YHVH are without repentance, otherwise David would have reigned immediately upon Shauls rejection
@TheTruthPastor We are not at odds as to what the word REPENT means in regard to YHVH being saddened that He had made Saul king. YHVH 'repented' that he had made Saul king. YHVH *is* able to 'repent', i.e., be saddened, change His mind, etc. YHVH is able to do the thing (repent) that you are saying He is unable to do, depending on how you interpret the word 'repent' in the context of each verse. YHVH does not casually *decree* and then change his mind, i.e., lie. Did Yeshua ever lie?
@boltingpuppies YHVH cannot repent for sin, he has no sin in him. If you think that he can repent for sin, I'll let you take that up with his Holiness, it's not my problem. No Yeshua never lied, as he's representative of YHVH'S kingdom, justified by YHVH himself! Made a High Priest forever, exalted by YHVH, GIVEN a name above every name, beloved of YHVH, and raised from the dead by YHVH'S Divine Ruach! If he had sinned the HOLY ONE(YHVH) would not have justified and raised him.
@TheTruthPastor YHVH cannot repent for sin because YHVH has not sinned--Yeshua has not sinned. There is only *one* who is good (not a sinner) and that is God/YHVH. The Father did exalt the Son---They are the One YHVH. The Father raised the Son...and Yeshua raised Himself. They are One.
Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days *I* will raise it up.”...."and will *You* raise it up in three days?”... But He was speaking of the temple of ***His Body***.
@boltingpuppies Yes he did! But in context of the whole word of God, one must understand the same Jesus said in JOHN 12:49I don't speak on my own authority. The Father who sent me has commanded me what to say and how to say it! Nice try with the false doctrine-mark of the beast.
@TheTruthPastor The context of John 2 shows Jesus saying *I* will raise it up and the Jews clarifying that Jesus is the one who would raise the temple up when they asked *You* will raise it up? You simply don't *want* so see what is written in His word.
Jesus IS Lord of lords. YHVH IS Lord of lords. The Lord of lords ALONE is immortal. Yeshua's days are from the days of eternity (meaning before time/creation). He is the Word of God who IS God.
Correct, the word "man" used in "God is not a man that he should lie" can merely mean "person." However, that's not how it appears from the context because of the contrast. I found no evidence the same word was used in Ex. 15:3 the Hebrew just says "warrior." Even if it is there, then from that context it likely it would just mean "person" based on context.
@TruthAtlas The Hebrew word used in *both* verses is 'iysh'. 'Iysh' is the Hebrew word for man in both verses.
The Hebrew word 'milchamah', a noun that is being used here like an adjective, describes what *kind* of man is being discussed. 'Milchamah' means *war*. So this man is a particular kind of man, ~a man of war~ ~an iysh of war~. This is where you are getting the idea of a different word that means warrior. There is only one word for *man* used in these verses, ~iysh~.
Is this a joke or maybe whoever posted this is a unitarian and is making those who believe Jesus created their flesh look even more foolishly than they are!
@TheTruthPastor Isaiah 43:10-12 "You are My witnesses," declares YHVH, "And My servant whom I have chosen, SO THAT you may know and believe Me and understand that *I am He*. Before *Me* there was no God FORMED, and there will be none *after Me*. I, EVEN I, am YHVH, and there is *NO SAVIOR BESIDES ME*. It is *I* who have *declared and *saved and *proclaimed, and there was *no strange god among you*. So you are *My witnesses*," declaresYHVH, "and I am God."
@boltingpuppies Acts 5:31 Him (YESHUA) hath (((God exalted))) with his(God's) right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.
@boltingpuppies If such is the case then the whole testimony of Yeshua is a lie. John said God gave his son. Therefore we must determine that someone is lying, right? I know how much one can miss when trying to support a religious doctrine without rational thinking. No harm no foul. If such is the case Yeshua the Son's death was vain, by your interpretation. I will never deny Yeshua like that.
@TheTruthPastor God did give his Son (Yeshua). This does not mean that Yeshua is not also YHVH. In fact scripture says the Son that is given is also the Mighty God and the Eternal Father and that this Mighty God is the God of Israel that Israel will *return* to. The Son given can only be the Eternal Father if He is Eternal.
*All* things are possible with YHVH, including YHVH becoming flesh.
YHVH is both Father & Son--but there is only *one YHVH*.
@boltingpuppies May YHVH forgive you, for reducing him to a creation, denying his power to beget a true Son, and for denying his Son to be a obedient, pleasing, justifiable man, whom YHVH sent in to the world, as was his plan from the very beginning. You denied YHVH'S true victory over satan, thru his creaton of man.Denied Yeshua's victory over satan, as a true man YHVH has anointed, with his own Ruach. May he forgive you for this denial & grant you his mercy, in your lacking in understanding!
I am not reducing YHVH to a creation. I am accepting ALL of the scriptures, both new and old testaments. You are rejecting *portions* of it that do not go along with what you consider *rational* thinking.
@TheTruthPastor In regard to my ~Lord of lord's~ post you shared:
"If such is the case then the whole testimony of Yeshua is a lie."
No, it is not a lie rather it shows that YHVH is much more than a mere human being can be.
This is where we DO agree: There is only *one* God. The *one* God is YHVH. Amen.
What I go on to see is that the *one* God, YHVH, is *both* Father & Son. One cannot believe the new testament is true and still believe Yeshua is not YHVH.
These will wage war against the Lamb, and the Lamb will overcome them, because He is *Lord of lords* and King of kings, and those who are with Him are the called and chosen and faithful.
If we believe the NT account of the apostles, we believe Yeshua is YHVH manifested in flesh.
@boltingpuppies I agree,YHVH is immortal. Yeshua was not, but now is. If he were immortal he could never have died in obedience to his father's plan b4 creation. Acts 5: 30 The God of our fathers (YHVH)raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. 31 Him(YESHUA) hath God (YHVH)exalted with his right hand to be ((a)) Prince and ((a)) Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. Yes YHVH is the only one who can save, he did it thru his blessed Son, my messiah Yeshua!
@TheTruthPastor You said, "Yeshua was not, but now is." That is not true.
Yeshua said, "Before Abraham was, I am" (John 8:58). He did NOT say before Abraham was, He was - which would have meant He merely existed before Abraham. Rather, He said "before Abraham was, I AM" ("eimi" - "to be, to exist"). He stated that He *is*. He exists. His flesh had a beginning. Not Yeshua. The Jews all understood Him & were enraged.
Believe Him or refuse to, but there is no mistaking His claim.
@Jimvesterstallone Jim I disagree with your doctrine. It shows no proof of what you say in it's context. I understand what Yeshua is saying, is a reference to the previously asked question, which non-contextual scripture readers ignore. Yeshua is saying,he is greater than Abraham. Go read the whole text. You have shown, that grammar is not your strong suit, as have many others. 53 Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead ? and the prophets are dead : whom makest thou thyself?
@Jimvesterstallone Last response. I am what? Greater than Avraham. Predetermined before Avraham. The messiah my friend, ANOINTED ONE, NOT person of the so called trinity, or the incarnate god. The lack of biblical holy spirit teaching out here baffles me. Antimessiah teaching is an abomination. Yes, Yeshua is an elohim, under the most High. Go read 1 Cor.15:27. The Father put all, but himself under the Son, who in the end, will put all rule down, the Father may be all in all. My God forgive you.
@TheTruthPastor But He did not say "I am greater than Abraham." He said "before Abraham was, I am." He was saying He is outside of time. More context: "'...you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.' Then they said to Him, '***Who*** are You?' And Jesus said to them, 'Just what I have been saying to you from the beginning...' ***They did not understand that He spoke to them of the Father***." -John 8:24-27
@Jimvesterstallone By the way, debating such an issue with, your context of thinking, is depletion of my spiritual energy, so I leave you to your own understanding. In all due respect, please take care..
Amein! Yahushua is YHWH come in the flesh! HalleluYAH! He made us in HIS image, since the beginning of time. Hebrews 13:8 "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever."
Genesis 1:26-27 26. "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." God bless!
guitarguitar, the music on this entire album is soooo good. They are a blessing, helping many needy who living in Israel whether, Jew, Christian or Muslim. Jesus Bless you too and thank you for watching.
I will not execute My fierce anger; I will not destroy Ephraim again For I am God and not man, the Holy One in your midst, And I will not come in wrath. - Hosea 11:9 (NASB)
A) YHWH is not a man period: no amount of twisting the scriptures will change that.
The LORD is a warrior; The LORD is His name. - Exodus 15:3 (NASB)
B) איש מלחמה is a Hebrew idiom which means 'warrior': this is admitted by all Trinitarian scholars.
Only the Holy Spirit can show you the truth. In Hosea YHVH is saying He is not going to do something unmerciful man would do because He is God...the Holy One IN YOUR MIDST...who was in our midst? Yeshua!
[...something unmerciful man would do because he is God]
It wouldn't matter if God said "I don't like french fries because I am not a man". The point is the same no matter what: God is NOT A MAN. God says he isn't but you say he is: who should I trust?
You should trust scripture, but only if you have the Holy Spirit living inside you giving you insight, otherwise you are reading it as the Pharisees of Yeshua's day did.
YHVH is a MAN of war, YHVH is His name.
By the way, the word used for man in Hosea 11:9 is the same one used in Exodus. You can't translate it as 'man' in Hosea and 'warrior' in Exodus...you need to be consistent. 'iysh' is either man in both places or warrior in both places.
bandaidmafia - Even if we assume trinitarianism is untrue, IMO Numbers 23:19 is simply not a verse that should be used to argue against Jesus' deity. The verse is neither pro nor anti-trinitarian. The clear point of the verse is that God is unlike mere men in that He does not lie. That's all it means. It really has to be twisted wildly to get it to mean that God cannot take on a human body and become a man.
Moses was able to see the back parts of God and live, so obviously he has a form, we just aren't able to see his face and live...that is unless either he comes down to our level or we come up to his. Seems reasonable to assume we could meet somewhere in the middle
Rev 12:10"And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of HIS(God's) CHRIST: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night. "
In Revelation 12:10, do you notice HIS CHRIST? Christ means his anointed one. God chosen one.
Are you saying God is his own Christ?? YHVH is his own chosen one? Therefore YHVH is not the Messiah. The Messiah is not his own.
"And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory."
The Father DID send His Son as Christ. Isaiah says the Son would be called the Almighty & the Father.
.. a son is given...& his name shall be called ...The mighty God, the everlasting Father
One must understand what's the meaning of MANIFEST. Manifest doesn't mean incarnation.
Manifest means readily perceived by the eye or the understanding; evident; obvious; apparent; plain (Dictionary)
It means mystery of God was reveal, made known to man-kind through Jesus.
Luk 10:22"All things are delivered to me of my Father: and no man knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and he to whom the Son will REVEAL him."
Gen 17:5"Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee."
Everlasting doesn't mean Eternal Father. Everlasting means lasting forever. Abraham, the father of many nations, will last forever.
Another instance, the name Micheal in the bible means "Who is like God". Gabriel means "Strength of God". Those are just names. Names doesn't make the person.
You're right, manifest doesn't mean incarnation. But "in the flesh" does mean incarnation.
So, using the definition you provided from the dictionary for manifest, when it says "God was manifest in the flesh" - it means "God was *evident; obvious; apparent; plain* in the flesh."
Acts 20:28, "Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood."
The God who purchased the church with His own blood?
Have you heard the term "blood is thicker than water"? That mean family comes before anybody else. Or have you heard someone called one of his family member, "his blood"?
In the dictionary blood(n) means "Family relationship; kinship"
Since Jesus is God only begotten Son, Jesus is God only begotten blood. The Father is the father of Jesus. Which shows kinship. kinship is a synonym of blood. Kinship also means relationship.
"With his own blood" show the relationship between the Father and Jesus.
Therefore "..church of God which He purchased with His own blood" can also be written as "which he purchased with his own Son".
tiger2380 - It's actually called functional subordination. The verse in Corinthians says that man is the head of the woman, but this does NOT prove man and woman are not equal anymore than the Father being called the "head" of Jesus proves they aren't equal. The classic understanding of the trinity has always been that within the Godhead there is ontological equivalence yet also functional subordination.
The term "functional subordination" is only use for Trinitarian belief. Trinitarian believe that God have "Split Personality". One person exist as "a Father", another exist as "a Son" and then "a Spirit".
Who doctrine do you follow? Man or Christ? Christian(dictionary) means of, pertaining to, believing in, or belonging to the religion based on the teachings of Jesus Christ.
I follow Jesus' teachings. Jesus never taught that God exist in 3 different, distinct person.
If you going to referring to "Mat 28:19". You are wrong. Most people who believe in the Trinity sees Mat 28:19 as Jesus referring God to 3 people. But you have to understand the CONTEXT.
" baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost"
The reason why name is singular than plural because the author understand that "name" is prefer to the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.
"The term "functional subordination" is only use for Trinitarian belief."
Of course, but that doesn't really answer my point, which was that I feel you were being inconsistent since you used 1 Cor 11;3 to prove Jesus and the Father aren't ontologically equal, and yet presumably you - and no professing Christian I know of - would use the same verse to prove that men and women aren't ontologically equal.
Ok when you say that the Father and Jesus make up with the same substance or essence, are you saying the same substance or essence of God? Let me ask you a question. Is God a person or just a title? I mean God Almighty.
Since the Father and Jesus are two different, distinct individual being but have the same substance as God, that will make 2 different, distinct individual God. Don't you think?
But that will go against the entire bible, every teaching of Christ.
tiger2380-I don't recall mentioning "susbstance" or "essence" , but trinitarians believe all 3 members of the trinity possess the essential nature of deity; that is, they possess the attributes deity entails. "God" in the Bible is used a a common noun not a proper noun.
I agree that God in the bible used as a common noun.
God himself told Moses that he will be as a God to the Egypt. - Exo 7:1 .
Joh 10:34"Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?"
The bible was translated from Greek. Greeks wrote the bible in all caps. The translators of the bible didn't know when to capitalize God or when to make it lower case. That why when I see Isa 9:6 I think that it was meant to be in lower case than upper case.
Exodus 7:1 merely says he will be "as God" to the Egyptians. On John 10:34, see: w w w . tektonics . o r g/qt/skepticsandjesus . h t m l. Concerning Isaiah 9, note that just one chapter later Jehovah is called "mighty God."
Yes I understand that. But there is only One true God. He is the Father.
1Co 8:6"But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him."
When I hear people called Jesus God, that just hurt me. People are turning their back to the true God and follow man's doctrine. They are making Jesus' teachings go up in vain.
Erm, 1 Cor 8:6 is actually one of the verses scholars believe most emphasises Jesus' deity. As N.T. Wright says, "In 1 Corinthians 8:6, within a specifically Jewish-style monotheistic argument, he adapts the Shema itself, placing Jesus within it: For us there is one God—the Father, from whom are all things and we to him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and we through him. Point is that the terms "Lord" and "God" there are used interchangeably, just as in Deut 6:4.
Interchangeably? You mean 1Cor 8:6 could say "For us there is one Lord-the Father.....one God-Jesus Christ"??
I don't see how they could be interchangeable. That would make Jesus to be the supreme being, then make the Father to be the supreme being. That will not be right at all.
Trinitarian's scholars tried to justify that verse to fit into their belief. You can't put the Son into the Father place or put the Father into the Son place. The Father have higher rank than Jesus.
part2 (cont)...are deity and the only reason to doubt that IMO would be to assume that there cannot be such a thng as a 3 in 1.
"The Father have higher rank than Jesus"
Again we are agree that He has a higher "rank" but only in sense that man has a higher rank than woman (man and women are both human but man is the "head"; likewise, the Father and Son are both deity but the Father is the head)
When I say "interchangeably" what I mean is that both words refer to deity. For example, in Deut 6:4 Jehovah is called both God and Lord, which shows both terms imply deity. Therefore, since the same thing is happening in 1 Cor 8:6 this is a divine claim of both Father and Son.
"That would make Jesus to be the supreme being, then make the Father to be the supreme being"
Depends what definiton you're placing on "supreme being." If you mean "deity," then yes we believe both (cont)....
2Pe 1:4"through which the most precious and great promises have been given to us, so that through these you* shall become participants of a divine nature [or, sharers in [the] divine nature], having escaped from the corruption [that is] in [the] world by lust. "
In 2Pe 1:4, It said that we(saints) become a participant with the deity of God. Which mean become part of God's nature.
I'm not really sure how that verse relates to any of the points I was making about Jesus being YHWH? What do you think the verse you cited means? And what do you make of verses like 1 Corinthians 2:16?
You said Jesus is God because he share/have God's deity(divine nature). As I quoted, by Christ's blood, we will shared with God's divine nature. Does that make us God also?
The point I'm trying to make is, Jesus is not the Father. The Father is the only true Almighty God. Therefore Jesus is not YHWH.
1Co 2:16 said that man doesn't understand God's thoughts alone. But if we allow Christ to come into our heart, follow his teachings, we will clearly understand God's thoughts.
"Jesus is not the Father. The Father is the only true Almighty God"
Although you are not a JW, this argument is the same strawman understanding of trinitarianism they have; we do not believe Jesus is the Father (after all, Jesus spoke to His Father and said He came forth from the Father) or the Son is the H. Spirit or the Father is the H. Spirit, etc. You are simply assuming - without warrant IMO - that God has to be a unipersonal being and that a 3 in 1 can't exist.
Trintarians belief is base 100% on assumptions. The assume that when God said us, he mean the Trinity. When Jesus said, baptizing in the name, they assume that he mean Trinity, etc.
Assumption is not a valid argument. Yes I believe God is only the Father. That is what Jesus taught and that is what I will believe till Jesus come down himself and say he is God.
Just ask yourself, why God want to be 3 in 1? Do you think he's not powerful enough to be just one? Do you think, he's weak if he alone?
"They assume that when God said us, he mean the Trinity. When Jesus said, baptizing in the name, they assume that he mean Trinity, etc."
Our proof is a lot more extensive than that. If you believe they are the main or strongest arguments we use, then I'd urge you to read more of what trinitarians themselves have wrote.
On the actual meaning of 2 Pet 1:4, Robert Bowman has said: "Since the word "divine" is used earlier in the same sentence ("His divine power", verse 3), where it must mean "of God," "divine nature" must mean God's nature. The word "nature," however, should not be understood to mean "essence." Rather, as the context makes evident, Peter is speaking of God's moral nature or character. Thus Christians are by partaking of the divine nature to escape the corruption that is in the world (cont)....
Concerning your other argument, my point is that both the Father and Son possess the divine nature and have always done so. Even if 2 Pet 1:4 were saying humans get the divine nature, this is different because it is not something we possess intrinsically.
Throughout Jesus teachings, he said "the Father authorize, the Father gave, the Father speak, etc.." to him.
The Father gave Jesus the right to sit beside him in his kingdom. If I give you something or give you the right to something, that mostly mean that you didn't have it from the beginning. Just like the Father gave us right to be in his divine nature.
Also, explain "Divine of God"? What is the deity of God?
Concerning Jesus saying that He was authorised by the Father, given something by the Father, etc., can you cite me specific verses so I can see exactly whan you mean?
Mat 28:18"And having approached, Jesus spoke to them, saying, "All authority in heaven and on earth was given to Me. "
Joh 10:18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.
Joh 17:2"As thou hast given him power over all flesh,....."
Joh 14:31 But that the world may know that I love the Father; and as the Father gave me commandment, even so I do. Arise, let us go hence.
Yeah, those verse you cited are genrally answered by the functional subordination principle I spoke of previously. The following stuff goes into this a bit:
w w w . answering-islam . o r g/Shamoun/q_authority_given . h t m
w w w . answering-islam . o r g/Responses/Ghounem/denied . h t m
I did ask this before (you haven't responded to it yet), but I'll ask again: When you said "Michael is called the prince of God. Prince means "a son of a King" were you referring to Dan 10:13 where he's called the "chief prince"?. Also, what is your view on the H. Spirit? Do you subscribe to the JW view?
My problem with Dan 10:13 is it says Michael is "one" of the chief princes, so this implies Michael is one of many others, and this really wouldn't fit Jesus, especailly since Hebrews 1 distingushes Him from the angelic realm (as does Colossians 1:15-16)
God is a spirit. After Jesus die and rose, he was still flesh and bone. So how could Jesus possibly be God?
Are you calling Jesus a liar? Jesus said himself that God is a spirit, you all saying God is full flesh and full spirit. Why you all choose to denied Jesus' doctrine?
Jesus taught to worship the Father as the true only God, man taught to worship the Son as the true only God. Which one would you believe MAN or JESUS?
Well, Jesus was "spirit" before the incarnation. God is as spirit being by nature but that doesn't preclude Him from taking on a human body if He so wishes.
I agree because he is God. But I don't think God would take on human body to die? That would defined who God is.
Yes I believe that Jesus was an angel, therefore a spirit. The Archangel, Michael, is very similar to Jesus. For example: Michael is called the prince of God. Prince means "a son of a King".
Ok hear me out with an open mind. Open your mind on what I'm about to say.
1Th 4:16"For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:" Joh 5:25"Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live."
In 1Th 4:16 it said with the voice of the Archangel(aka Michael), in John 5:25 it said the voice of the Son of God.
"that will make 2 different, distinct individual God"
No the Bible IMO teaches that all 3 possess the same essential qualities, yet is teaches they are one and work together perfectly. You are assuming that there cannot be such a thing as a 3 in 1 but that needs to be proved, and I don't think it can be.
tiger2380 - Concerning the "Split Personality" point you made, that would only be a prob if the 3 person's all contradicted eachother and had different opinions.
The Jews didn't completely understand him. Jesus used the word "ONE" many times.
Joh 17:22"And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: "
Jesus used the same "one" to describe how his disciple to be "one". If the Jews understood "one" to be "same person", that mean Jesus' disciples will be the same person. One means to come together in an agreement. Perfect Unity. Like husband and wife suppose to be, ONE in Perfect Unity.
I just finished reading the Book of Hebrews, it repeatedly refers to Jesus as "this man". Interestingly,the Mormons used to believe that the God of this world was also the literal father of Jesus. They also believed that he is Adam, Adam being a God who fell intentionally that we might be given mortal bodies. This made sense to them because they believe God has many wives, Mary being one of them.
Interesting comment. God said, "Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness." Adam was created from the dust and was not alive *until* the Lord breathed the breath of life into his nostrils. Satan later tempted Eve and Adam through her by saying, "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you WILL be LIKE God, knowing good and evil." If they were already gods they would not need to become like God.
Later in the same passage (Gen 3:22) says "And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever."
This shows Adam was not an eternal being before God breathed life into him. It also shows that Adam *became* like God in the sense that he now knew good and evil.
Mormons believe in 3 degrees of heaven. The highest (Celestial) is the realm of the gods, the middle (Terrestrial) is the realm of the angels, and lowest (Telestial) is the realm of man and then there is hell below that. The idea is that Adam and Eve were at the Terrestrial before they ate the fruit, so they weren't gods. The Fall was the drop from angel to man.
Eating from the tree of life causes you to move the other way up Jacob's Ladder. It would have defeated the purpose of Adam and Eve in having mortal children.
Moses and Jesus are both mythology. And the bible is not the word of God. It's the word of men inspired by their own ignorance of the unknown world around them. They realized there was no God, therefore felt the desperate need to invent one in their own image and culture.
You had better tell that to the Israeli government...apparently the Egyptian government wants them to pay back all of the Jewelry they took with them when they left Egypt in the Exodus.
John10:34Jesus answered them, `Is it not having been written in your law: I said, ye are gods? 35if them he did call gods unto whom the word of God came, (and the Writing is not able to be broken,) 36of him whom the Father did sanctify, and send to the world, do ye say -- Thou speakest evil, because I said, Son of God I am?
Psalm 82:1-- A Psalm of Asaph. God hath stood in the company of God, In the midst God doth judge. 2Till when do ye judge perversely? And the face of the wicked lift up? Selah. 3Judge ye the weak and fatherless, The afflicted and the poor declare righteous. 4Let the weak and needy escape, From the hand of the wicked deliver them. 5They knew not, nor do they understand, In darkness they walk habitually, Moved are all the foundations of earth.
6I -- I have said, `Gods ye [are], And sons of the Most High -- all of you, 7But as man ye die, and as one of the heads ye fall, 8Rise, O God, judge the earth, For Thou hast inheritance among all the nations!
Great passage! Yeshua must be God, as only God can remove sin. If Yeshua is not God; we are lost! The sacrifice of Yeshua has born our sin; praise his holy name!
Excellent! The Scriptures are so clear. When one of Yeshua's disciples asked Him to show them the Father, He replied: "He who has seen Me has seen the Father." Truly He is God manifested in the flesh.
Yes we all look like our Dads. However reading John 14 8 Philip said to Him, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us." 9Jesus said to him, "Have **I** been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how can you say, 'Show us the Father'?
Philip is being rebuked here because by asking to see the Father, He has indicated that he cannot see the Father standing before him.
Imagine "Jesus is not a 'human' that he should change his mind!" Does that make sense? It's a lie. He clearly changed his mind, everyone does. Even if you say he never changed his mind, then the statement is still wrong because He is still a man, but just one that doesn't change his mind. You are a blinded deceiver even if Jesus actually is God because the verse says God has become my salvation. Even if it were the same word it's not used as a name you son of Hell.
TruthAtlas 1 month ago
@TruthAtlas
You are mistaken, Exodus 15:2 does *not* say *God* has become my salvation, rather it says *Yah* is become my Yeshuah (salvation).
Only one of the "I am's", in the name "I am that I am", is used in Exodus 15:2, so the verse reads "I am has become my Yeshua". Exodus 15:3 continues and uses the full proper name of God saying: "I am that I am is a man (iysh) of war. I am that I am is His (the man's) name."
I believe what He said.
boltingpuppies 1 month ago
@boltingpuppies "I believe what He said." He didn't say that, but even if you misconstrued Hebrew were correct "yeshua" is not used as a name in that context. I called you a son of Hell because you are blind and going off of tradition rather than what the the Deity's word teaches. You, like the Pharisees, Jesus addressed are a son of Hell. The context of "son of Hell" is one who has been trained by false teachers. Do you not think Jesus had the same feeling of animosity toward those Pharisees?
TruthAtlas 1 month ago
@TruthAtlas May I interject? I can't help myself.
You do not know the poster of this video. You have no idea how they came to the conclusion they have. The conclusion they have arrived at is Scriptural, not based on man's traditions, & the context of the passage you are referencing to justify calling fellow human beings sons of hell was about hypocrisy. Also and importantly, you are NOT Jesus. You have NO idea who is & is not a son of hell. It is not your place to say such things.
Jimvesterstallone 1 month ago
@TruthAtlas One last thing, and please consider this: What is your goal? Is your goal to sling insults? Or is your goal to show someone something from the Word of God? If you truly have a heart for God, you will come to people with Scripture and kindness. Anything less is not just unpleasing to Him - you will need to answer for it.
Shalom
Jimvesterstallone 1 month ago
@Jimvesterstallone The Bible also says God hates all who do unrighteousness. I am torn between my emotions for you but I have hate for what kind of person you are. I want that part of you dead. Just like God and Jesus. My goal is to get you to repent and join the true Christian restoration. Or just defend truth. I have his word to tell me who is and who is not a son of Hell. You, being taught trinitarianism, are "twice the son of Hell." I do come to people with Scripture and kindness.
TruthAtlas 1 month ago
@Jimvesterstallone I was not coming at you with kindness. By going so far as to post this deceitful video you have merited a fierce rebuking and an urge to repent. If I were not to hate when God's word is mocked, then I would not be loving and THEN I would be the nothing Paul talks about. Though even now, I must admit I am barely above nothing! But I have escaped idiotic man-made religion. Religion that makes up passages, twist those that it can and ignores the majority of them!
TruthAtlas 1 month ago
@TruthAtlas Um, I didn't post this video.
Jimvesterstallone 1 month ago
@Jimvesterstallone Oops, sorry, just apply what I said to who did post it. I wasn't paying attention to the transition where you interjected. All Trinitarians need to repent so start praying about this!
TruthAtlas 1 month ago
@boltingpuppies I should say he "has" the same feeling since he's alive.
Regardless of what "repent" means in 1 Samuel 15:29 Jesus is an "adam." The Deity, the Father, is not an "adam." So your response to that changes nothing. It still disproves the incarnation of the Deity as Jesus. Next, remember I said even if "ish" is used in "man of war," then it can still merely mean a person. It doesn't necessarily imply "adam." Not sharing this information helps show your own self-delusion.
TruthAtlas 1 month ago
@TruthAtlas "you son of Hell"?? What a hateful comment. Are you aware that you can have all knowledge but if you have not love Scripture says you are n o t h i n g (1 Cor.13:2). In this case you have demonstrated a lack of both knowledge and love.
Jimvesterstallone 1 month ago
@Jimvesterstallone "What a hateful comment." If I were not to have hate for that which the Deity hates, then I would not have love. I do not love you if you do not repent. However, I am torn because I do love you which is why I take time to share with you how delusional this idiotic Deity-mocking doctrine is! It's blasphemy and treason against your supposed master Jesus. You are not obeying his doctrine. You don't deserve to call yourself a Christian. You must repent and let go of this doctrine.
TruthAtlas 1 month ago
@TruthAtlas "If I were not to have hate for that which the Deity hates, then I would not have love. I do not love you if you do not repent." But God feels much differently from this. While we were yet sinners - yet unrepentant - Christ died for us. God so loved the WORLD that He gave His only begotten Son.
God did become flesh. Do you throw out all of the letters that say so plainly?
Jimvesterstallone 1 month ago
@Jimvesterstallone You were not the one who invented this doctrine it was done by evil men blinded by empty philosophy. It's not in that sense "your" doctrine. Don't feel devoted to it. God is raising up a generation of truth seekers to rebuild his called out people from the remnants that exist across the nation. You would be wise to join them as I have chosen to do as a reaction to his grace. I hope to destroy at all costs the religion you hold. You are an enemy of the cross as I once was.
TruthAtlas 1 month ago
@TruthAtlas tell the truth bro! Shame the devil!
TheTruthPastor 1 month ago
However, in 1 Samuel 15:29 a more definitive word is used so we don't have to go from just the merely extremely helpful context. We can go from the word meaning. The verse says "God is not an 'adam' that he should change His mind."
TruthAtlas 1 month ago
@TruthAtlas You've translated the Hebrew word 'nacham' as 'change His mind'. It could also be translated as 'regret'. Regardless, this is the rest of the passage context relating to 'nacham'.
1 Samuel 15:29 reads:
"And also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent:for he is not a man, that he should repent."
And yet YHVH *did* repent just a few verses later...
"nevertheless Samuel mourned for Saul:**and YHVH repented** that he had made Saul king over Israel."
boltingpuppies 1 month ago
@boltingpuppies in all due respect, your rendering of this text is not scripturally accurate. You should probably read it again in it's context, so that you do not appear to be incomprehensive of the scriptures. There is an obvious diff. in the way the word REPENT is used, bcuz Shaul although reject, still remained king. Thus proving that YHVH did not repent for sin, but it saddened him.The gifts of YHVH are without repentance, otherwise David would have reigned immediately upon Shauls rejection
TheTruthPastor 1 month ago
@TheTruthPastor We are not at odds as to what the word REPENT means in regard to YHVH being saddened that He had made Saul king. YHVH 'repented' that he had made Saul king. YHVH *is* able to 'repent', i.e., be saddened, change His mind, etc. YHVH is able to do the thing (repent) that you are saying He is unable to do, depending on how you interpret the word 'repent' in the context of each verse. YHVH does not casually *decree* and then change his mind, i.e., lie. Did Yeshua ever lie?
boltingpuppies 1 month ago
@boltingpuppies YHVH cannot repent for sin, he has no sin in him. If you think that he can repent for sin, I'll let you take that up with his Holiness, it's not my problem. No Yeshua never lied, as he's representative of YHVH'S kingdom, justified by YHVH himself! Made a High Priest forever, exalted by YHVH, GIVEN a name above every name, beloved of YHVH, and raised from the dead by YHVH'S Divine Ruach! If he had sinned the HOLY ONE(YHVH) would not have justified and raised him.
TheTruthPastor 1 month ago
@TheTruthPastor YHVH cannot repent for sin because YHVH has not sinned--Yeshua has not sinned. There is only *one* who is good (not a sinner) and that is God/YHVH. The Father did exalt the Son---They are the One YHVH. The Father raised the Son...and Yeshua raised Himself. They are One.
John 2:19-21
Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days *I* will raise it up.”...."and will *You* raise it up in three days?”... But He was speaking of the temple of ***His Body***.
boltingpuppies 1 month ago
@boltingpuppies Yes he did! But in context of the whole word of God, one must understand the same Jesus said in JOHN 12:49I don't speak on my own authority. The Father who sent me has commanded me what to say and how to say it! Nice try with the false doctrine-mark of the beast.
TheTruthPastor 1 month ago
@TheTruthPastor The context of John 2 shows Jesus saying *I* will raise it up and the Jews clarifying that Jesus is the one who would raise the temple up when they asked *You* will raise it up? You simply don't *want* so see what is written in His word.
Jesus IS Lord of lords. YHVH IS Lord of lords. The Lord of lords ALONE is immortal. Yeshua's days are from the days of eternity (meaning before time/creation). He is the Word of God who IS God.
Study this out.
boltingpuppies 1 month ago
Correct, the word "man" used in "God is not a man that he should lie" can merely mean "person." However, that's not how it appears from the context because of the contrast. I found no evidence the same word was used in Ex. 15:3 the Hebrew just says "warrior." Even if it is there, then from that context it likely it would just mean "person" based on context.
TruthAtlas 1 month ago
@TruthAtlas The Hebrew word used in *both* verses is 'iysh'. 'Iysh' is the Hebrew word for man in both verses.
The Hebrew word 'milchamah', a noun that is being used here like an adjective, describes what *kind* of man is being discussed. 'Milchamah' means *war*. So this man is a particular kind of man, ~a man of war~ ~an iysh of war~. This is where you are getting the idea of a different word that means warrior. There is only one word for *man* used in these verses, ~iysh~.
boltingpuppies 1 month ago
Is this a joke or maybe whoever posted this is a unitarian and is making those who believe Jesus created their flesh look even more foolishly than they are!
TruthAtlas 1 month ago
Comment removed
TruthAtlas 1 month ago
Some misuse Numbers 23:19 to say he is a man.
TheTruthPastor 1 month ago
boltingpuppies 1 month ago
@boltingpuppies Acts 5:31 Him (YESHUA) hath (((God exalted))) with his(God's) right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.
TheTruthPastor 1 month ago
@TheTruthPastor
Right....and there is only *One* Savior...YHVH God Himself.
Isaiah 45:21
"Who has long since declared it? Is it not I, YHVH? And there is *no other* God besides Me, a righteous God AND a Savior; There is *none except Me*."
Acts 20:28
"...shepherd the church of GOD which HE purchased with HIS OWN BLOOD."
boltingpuppies 1 month ago
@boltingpuppies My Children are my blood as well!
TheTruthPastor 1 month ago
@TheTruthPastor Acts says God purchased the church with HIS OWN blood, not His sons blood.
Yeshua is Lord of lords. YHVH is Lord of lords. There can only be *one* Lord of lords.
Scripture says the King of kings and Lord of lords ALONE possesses immortality.
boltingpuppies 1 month ago
@boltingpuppies If such is the case then the whole testimony of Yeshua is a lie. John said God gave his son. Therefore we must determine that someone is lying, right? I know how much one can miss when trying to support a religious doctrine without rational thinking. No harm no foul. If such is the case Yeshua the Son's death was vain, by your interpretation. I will never deny Yeshua like that.
TheTruthPastor 1 month ago
@TheTruthPastor God did give his Son (Yeshua). This does not mean that Yeshua is not also YHVH. In fact scripture says the Son that is given is also the Mighty God and the Eternal Father and that this Mighty God is the God of Israel that Israel will *return* to. The Son given can only be the Eternal Father if He is Eternal.
*All* things are possible with YHVH, including YHVH becoming flesh.
YHVH is both Father & Son--but there is only *one YHVH*.
boltingpuppies 1 month ago
@boltingpuppies May YHVH forgive you, for reducing him to a creation, denying his power to beget a true Son, and for denying his Son to be a obedient, pleasing, justifiable man, whom YHVH sent in to the world, as was his plan from the very beginning. You denied YHVH'S true victory over satan, thru his creaton of man.Denied Yeshua's victory over satan, as a true man YHVH has anointed, with his own Ruach. May he forgive you for this denial & grant you his mercy, in your lacking in understanding!
TheTruthPastor 1 month ago
@TheTruthPastor
I am not reducing YHVH to a creation. I am accepting ALL of the scriptures, both new and old testaments. You are rejecting *portions* of it that do not go along with what you consider *rational* thinking.
boltingpuppies 1 month ago
@TheTruthPastor In regard to my ~Lord of lord's~ post you shared:
"If such is the case then the whole testimony of Yeshua is a lie."
No, it is not a lie rather it shows that YHVH is much more than a mere human being can be.
This is where we DO agree: There is only *one* God. The *one* God is YHVH. Amen.
What I go on to see is that the *one* God, YHVH, is *both* Father & Son. One cannot believe the new testament is true and still believe Yeshua is not YHVH.
Yeshua IS Lord of lords.
boltingpuppies 1 month ago
@TheTruthPastor
Deuteronomy 10:17
For YHVH your God is God of gods, and *Lord of lords*, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible, which regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward
Revelation 17:14
These will wage war against the Lamb, and the Lamb will overcome them, because He is *Lord of lords* and King of kings, and those who are with Him are the called and chosen and faithful.
If we believe the NT account of the apostles, we believe Yeshua is YHVH manifested in flesh.
boltingpuppies 1 month ago
@boltingpuppies I agree,YHVH is immortal. Yeshua was not, but now is. If he were immortal he could never have died in obedience to his father's plan b4 creation. Acts 5: 30 The God of our fathers (YHVH)raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. 31 Him(YESHUA) hath God (YHVH)exalted with his right hand to be ((a)) Prince and ((a)) Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. Yes YHVH is the only one who can save, he did it thru his blessed Son, my messiah Yeshua!
TheTruthPastor 1 month ago
@TheTruthPastor You said, "Yeshua was not, but now is." That is not true.
Yeshua said, "Before Abraham was, I am" (John 8:58). He did NOT say before Abraham was, He was - which would have meant He merely existed before Abraham. Rather, He said "before Abraham was, I AM" ("eimi" - "to be, to exist"). He stated that He *is*. He exists. His flesh had a beginning. Not Yeshua. The Jews all understood Him & were enraged.
Believe Him or refuse to, but there is no mistaking His claim.
Jimvesterstallone 1 month ago
@Jimvesterstallone Jim I disagree with your doctrine. It shows no proof of what you say in it's context. I understand what Yeshua is saying, is a reference to the previously asked question, which non-contextual scripture readers ignore. Yeshua is saying,he is greater than Abraham. Go read the whole text. You have shown, that grammar is not your strong suit, as have many others. 53 Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead ? and the prophets are dead : whom makest thou thyself?
TheTruthPastor 1 month ago
@TheTruthPastor Indeed, as you quoted, the question posed was "***whom*** makest thou thyself?" The answer was, "I am." The reaction was outrage.
And it still is today.
Jimvesterstallone 1 month ago
@Jimvesterstallone Last response. I am what? Greater than Avraham. Predetermined before Avraham. The messiah my friend, ANOINTED ONE, NOT person of the so called trinity, or the incarnate god. The lack of biblical holy spirit teaching out here baffles me. Antimessiah teaching is an abomination. Yes, Yeshua is an elohim, under the most High. Go read 1 Cor.15:27. The Father put all, but himself under the Son, who in the end, will put all rule down, the Father may be all in all. My God forgive you.
TheTruthPastor 1 month ago
@TheTruthPastor But He did not say "I am greater than Abraham." He said "before Abraham was, I am." He was saying He is outside of time. More context: "'...you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.' Then they said to Him, '***Who*** are You?' And Jesus said to them, 'Just what I have been saying to you from the beginning...' ***They did not understand that He spoke to them of the Father***." -John 8:24-27
May God open your eyes.
Jimvesterstallone 1 month ago
@Jimvesterstallone By the way, debating such an issue with, your context of thinking, is depletion of my spiritual energy, so I leave you to your own understanding. In all due respect, please take care..
TheTruthPastor 1 month ago
@LordsServant777 Thank you and blessings in our Savior.
boltingpuppies 3 months ago
Nice video friend. :-)
AceInThePines 10 months ago
@AceInThePines Thank you Ace :) God bless.
boltingpuppies 10 months ago
Just watched this again...WOW, I forgot how powerful it is! :o
Jimvesterstallone 1 year ago
@Jimvesterstallone His words are so powerful!
boltingpuppies 1 year ago
Amein! Yahushua is YHWH come in the flesh! HalleluYAH! He made us in HIS image, since the beginning of time. Hebrews 13:8 "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever."
MyLordYahushua 1 year ago 3
@MyLordYahushua Amein! Such a great point, we (man) are made in His image!
boltingpuppies 1 year ago
Genesis 1:26-27 26. "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." God bless!
MyLordYahushua 1 year ago 9
@MyLordYahushua Amein, great verse!
boltingpuppies 1 year ago
wow this totally for CHRIST'S Glory
obadiahmessenger 1 year ago
YHWH
chrisn9ne 1 year ago
Plzzzzzzzz tell me the name of this Song !! plzzzzzzzzzz wonderful song and amazing video !!!!!!!!!!!!
God/Jesus Bless u
123guitarguitar 2 years ago
It is beautiful. The info is all in the sidebar. You can go to their site and purchase. The entire album is good.
boltingpuppies 2 years ago
guitarguitar, the music on this entire album is soooo good. They are a blessing, helping many needy who living in Israel whether, Jew, Christian or Muslim. Jesus Bless you too and thank you for watching.
boltingpuppies 2 years ago
Wonderful video bolting;))).
Yaweh bless and keep you dear sister!!
tigerlamb007 2 years ago
I will not execute My fierce anger; I will not destroy Ephraim again For I am God and not man, the Holy One in your midst, And I will not come in wrath. - Hosea 11:9 (NASB)
A) YHWH is not a man period: no amount of twisting the scriptures will change that.
The LORD is a warrior; The LORD is His name. - Exodus 15:3 (NASB)
B) איש מלחמה is a Hebrew idiom which means 'warrior': this is admitted by all Trinitarian scholars.
bandaidmafia 2 years ago
bandaid,
Only the Holy Spirit can show you the truth. In Hosea YHVH is saying He is not going to do something unmerciful man would do because He is God...the Holy One IN YOUR MIDST...who was in our midst? Yeshua!
Yeshua is YHVH and someday you will know.
boltingpuppies 2 years ago
[...something unmerciful man would do because he is God]
It wouldn't matter if God said "I don't like french fries because I am not a man". The point is the same no matter what: God is NOT A MAN. God says he isn't but you say he is: who should I trust?
bandaidmafia 2 years ago
You should trust scripture, but only if you have the Holy Spirit living inside you giving you insight, otherwise you are reading it as the Pharisees of Yeshua's day did.
YHVH is a MAN of war, YHVH is His name.
By the way, the word used for man in Hosea 11:9 is the same one used in Exodus. You can't translate it as 'man' in Hosea and 'warrior' in Exodus...you need to be consistent. 'iysh' is either man in both places or warrior in both places.
May our Yah annoint you. Sleep well.
boltingpuppies 2 years ago
[By the way...]
A) The phrase איש מלחמה is a Hebrew idiom which means that God is a warrior:
"The word war modifies man to reveal that Yahweh is a warrior." - NET Bible, Exodus 15, 10 [Trinitarian]
B) Your argument isn't with me it is with your own Trinitarian scholars who translate it as "warrior".
Q: According to your beliefs, when did YHWH become a man?
bandaidmafia 2 years ago
bandaidmafia - Even if we assume trinitarianism is untrue, IMO Numbers 23:19 is simply not a verse that should be used to argue against Jesus' deity. The verse is neither pro nor anti-trinitarian. The clear point of the verse is that God is unlike mere men in that He does not lie. That's all it means. It really has to be twisted wildly to get it to mean that God cannot take on a human body and become a man.
james46888 2 years ago 2
Moses was able to see the back parts of God and live, so obviously he has a form, we just aren't able to see his face and live...that is unless either he comes down to our level or we come up to his. Seems reasonable to assume we could meet somewhere in the middle
johntheunique 2 years ago
Wow all you Trinitarian use the same out-of-context to back up the Trinity.
Amazing!!
Have to understand the CONTEXT.
YHVH in Act 3:13, it said the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob glorified his SON.
Act 3:13"The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus;"
That means the God of the Old Testament is the same God of the New Testament.
Because Jesus don't have a son. How could Jesus be both the Father and the Son??
tiger2380 2 years ago
Rev 12:10"And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of HIS(God's) CHRIST: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night. "
In Revelation 12:10, do you notice HIS CHRIST? Christ means his anointed one. God chosen one.
Are you saying God is his own Christ?? YHVH is his own chosen one? Therefore YHVH is not the Messiah. The Messiah is not his own.
God != Christ.
end.
tiger2380 2 years ago
Amen Jimvester.
Amen tiger2380 to the *verses* you shared.
Amen Paul who says in 1Tim 3:16
"And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory."
The Father DID send His Son as Christ. Isaiah says the Son would be called the Almighty & the Father.
.. a son is given...& his name shall be called ...The mighty God, the everlasting Father
boltingpuppies 2 years ago
Wow bolting those are awesome verses.
"GOD was manifest in the flesh."
Well that's cut and dried.
"a son is given...HIS name...the mighty God, the everlasting Father."
Wow.
Thanks for sharing them! "Great IS the mystery of godliness."
Jimvesterstallone 2 years ago
One must understand what's the meaning of MANIFEST. Manifest doesn't mean incarnation.
Manifest means readily perceived by the eye or the understanding; evident; obvious; apparent; plain (Dictionary)
It means mystery of God was reveal, made known to man-kind through Jesus.
Luk 10:22"All things are delivered to me of my Father: and no man knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and he to whom the Son will REVEAL him."
tiger2380 2 years ago
(part: 2)
Luk 8:17"For nothing is secret, that shall not be made MANIFEST; neither any thing hid, that shall not be known and come abroad."
So if manifest mean incarnation, every secret will become flesh, become a living soul.
Therefore, you can't read the bible without understand the context of the scripture.
In Psalm, just because Jesus is being called them names, doesn't mean he is indeed God. If we only go by names, there will be many Gods.
tiger2380 2 years ago
(Part: 3)
Abraham was called the father of many nations.
Gen 17:5"Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee."
Everlasting doesn't mean Eternal Father. Everlasting means lasting forever. Abraham, the father of many nations, will last forever.
Another instance, the name Micheal in the bible means "Who is like God". Gabriel means "Strength of God". Those are just names. Names doesn't make the person.
tiger2380 2 years ago
You're right, manifest doesn't mean incarnation. But "in the flesh" does mean incarnation.
So, using the definition you provided from the dictionary for manifest, when it says "God was manifest in the flesh" - it means "God was *evident; obvious; apparent; plain* in the flesh."
I hope that helps. God bless.
Jimvesterstallone 2 years ago 2
Still have to look at the context. "mystery of godliness". godliness means, which come from God.
Col 1:26"Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:"
Col 1:26 says that the mystery of God, every secrets will be manifest to his saints.
God was manifest in the flesh, mean God was reveal in flesh. Jesus revealed God to man. Jesus said himself that he will reveal the Father.
"God" doesn't mean God himself.
tiger2380 2 years ago
"God" doesn't mean God himself???
Jimvesterstallone 2 years ago
Right...So I'm not sure what you believe? Oneness? Trinity?
boltingpuppies 2 years ago
I believe that the Father is the One, only true God. According to:
Joh 17:3"And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent."
I believe Jesus is the only begotten Son of the Father. Not to be equal with the Father.
Mat 16:16"And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. "
I believe the Holy Spirit is not a person but a gift from God.
- Act 2:38
tiger2380 2 years ago
Do you also believe that Jesus is God?
Acts 20:28, "Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood."
The God who purchased the church with His own blood?
boltingpuppies 2 years ago
(Part: 1)
First let me say this, you can't take every words in the bible too literally.
Second, according to Jesus, God is a spirit. Last time I have known, spirit doesn't have flesh, blood and bones.
Joh 4:24"God is a Spirit:...."
Have you heard the term "blood is thicker than water"? That mean family comes before anybody else. Or have you heard someone called one of his family member, "his blood"?
In the dictionary blood(n) means "Family relationship; kinship"
tiger2380 2 years ago
(Part: 2)
Since Jesus is God only begotten Son, Jesus is God only begotten blood. The Father is the father of Jesus. Which shows kinship. kinship is a synonym of blood. Kinship also means relationship.
"With his own blood" show the relationship between the Father and Jesus.
Therefore "..church of God which He purchased with His own blood" can also be written as "which he purchased with his own Son".
I just had to break that down....... :-)
God bless....
tiger2380 2 years ago
Oh yeah, I DON'T believe that Jesus is God or have the same nature of God.
God is the head of Christ. Jesus is subject to the Father. That show that God and Jesus is not co-equal.
tiger2380 2 years ago
tiger2380 - It's actually called functional subordination. The verse in Corinthians says that man is the head of the woman, but this does NOT prove man and woman are not equal anymore than the Father being called the "head" of Jesus proves they aren't equal. The classic understanding of the trinity has always been that within the Godhead there is ontological equivalence yet also functional subordination.
james46888 2 years ago
The term "functional subordination" is only use for Trinitarian belief. Trinitarian believe that God have "Split Personality". One person exist as "a Father", another exist as "a Son" and then "a Spirit".
Who doctrine do you follow? Man or Christ? Christian(dictionary) means of, pertaining to, believing in, or belonging to the religion based on the teachings of Jesus Christ.
I follow Jesus' teachings. Jesus never taught that God exist in 3 different, distinct person.
tiger2380 2 years ago
(Part: 2)
If you going to referring to "Mat 28:19". You are wrong. Most people who believe in the Trinity sees Mat 28:19 as Jesus referring God to 3 people. But you have to understand the CONTEXT.
" baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost"
The reason why name is singular than plural because the author understand that "name" is prefer to the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.
Please understand what I'm about to say:
tiger2380 2 years ago
(Part: 3)
Ok. Let me break down Mat 28:19 why the author use name(singular) instead names(plural).
If you REMOVE ", and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost"", it will say "baptizing them in the name of the Father"
It will be technical incorrect if the author said "in the NAMES of the Father". NAMES will indicate more than one Fathers. There is only one Father.
If you remove "of the Father" && "and of the Holy Ghost", it will said "baptizing them in the name of the Son" .
tiger2380 2 years ago
(Part: 4)
It will be wrong if the author said, "baptizing them in the NAMES of the Son." That will indicate God have more then one begotten Sons.
That's why the author use "of the" in front of the Fathe, the Son and the Holy Spirit and also used singular tense of "name".
I hope you understand that verse now. It doesn't indicate the Trinity.
If you suggest otherwise, please let me know.
God bless...
tiger2380 2 years ago
"The term "functional subordination" is only use for Trinitarian belief."
Of course, but that doesn't really answer my point, which was that I feel you were being inconsistent since you used 1 Cor 11;3 to prove Jesus and the Father aren't ontologically equal, and yet presumably you - and no professing Christian I know of - would use the same verse to prove that men and women aren't ontologically equal.
james46888 2 years ago
Ok when you say that the Father and Jesus make up with the same substance or essence, are you saying the same substance or essence of God? Let me ask you a question. Is God a person or just a title? I mean God Almighty.
Since the Father and Jesus are two different, distinct individual being but have the same substance as God, that will make 2 different, distinct individual God. Don't you think?
But that will go against the entire bible, every teaching of Christ.
tiger2380 2 years ago
tiger2380-I don't recall mentioning "susbstance" or "essence" , but trinitarians believe all 3 members of the trinity possess the essential nature of deity; that is, they possess the attributes deity entails. "God" in the Bible is used a a common noun not a proper noun.
james46888 2 years ago
I agree that God in the bible used as a common noun.
God himself told Moses that he will be as a God to the Egypt. - Exo 7:1 .
Joh 10:34"Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?"
The bible was translated from Greek. Greeks wrote the bible in all caps. The translators of the bible didn't know when to capitalize God or when to make it lower case. That why when I see Isa 9:6 I think that it was meant to be in lower case than upper case.
tiger2380 2 years ago
Exodus 7:1 merely says he will be "as God" to the Egyptians. On John 10:34, see: w w w . tektonics . o r g/qt/skepticsandjesus . h t m l. Concerning Isaiah 9, note that just one chapter later Jehovah is called "mighty God."
james46888 2 years ago
Yes I understand that. But there is only One true God. He is the Father.
1Co 8:6"But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him."
When I hear people called Jesus God, that just hurt me. People are turning their back to the true God and follow man's doctrine. They are making Jesus' teachings go up in vain.
tiger2380 2 years ago
Erm, 1 Cor 8:6 is actually one of the verses scholars believe most emphasises Jesus' deity. As N.T. Wright says, "In 1 Corinthians 8:6, within a specifically Jewish-style monotheistic argument, he adapts the Shema itself, placing Jesus within it: For us there is one God—the Father, from whom are all things and we to him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and we through him. Point is that the terms "Lord" and "God" there are used interchangeably, just as in Deut 6:4.
james46888 2 years ago
Interchangeably? You mean 1Cor 8:6 could say "For us there is one Lord-the Father.....one God-Jesus Christ"??
I don't see how they could be interchangeable. That would make Jesus to be the supreme being, then make the Father to be the supreme being. That will not be right at all.
Trinitarian's scholars tried to justify that verse to fit into their belief. You can't put the Son into the Father place or put the Father into the Son place. The Father have higher rank than Jesus.
tiger2380 2 years ago
part2 (cont)...are deity and the only reason to doubt that IMO would be to assume that there cannot be such a thng as a 3 in 1.
"The Father have higher rank than Jesus"
Again we are agree that He has a higher "rank" but only in sense that man has a higher rank than woman (man and women are both human but man is the "head"; likewise, the Father and Son are both deity but the Father is the head)
james46888 2 years ago
When I say "interchangeably" what I mean is that both words refer to deity. For example, in Deut 6:4 Jehovah is called both God and Lord, which shows both terms imply deity. Therefore, since the same thing is happening in 1 Cor 8:6 this is a divine claim of both Father and Son.
"That would make Jesus to be the supreme being, then make the Father to be the supreme being"
Depends what definiton you're placing on "supreme being." If you mean "deity," then yes we believe both (cont)....
james46888 2 years ago
2Pe 1:4"through which the most precious and great promises have been given to us, so that through these you* shall become participants of a divine nature [or, sharers in [the] divine nature], having escaped from the corruption [that is] in [the] world by lust. "
In 2Pe 1:4, It said that we(saints) become a participant with the deity of God. Which mean become part of God's nature.
Does that mean believers will become God also?
tiger2380 2 years ago
I'm not really sure how that verse relates to any of the points I was making about Jesus being YHWH? What do you think the verse you cited means? And what do you make of verses like 1 Corinthians 2:16?
james46888 2 years ago
(Part: 1)
You said Jesus is God because he share/have God's deity(divine nature). As I quoted, by Christ's blood, we will shared with God's divine nature. Does that make us God also?
The point I'm trying to make is, Jesus is not the Father. The Father is the only true Almighty God. Therefore Jesus is not YHWH.
1Co 2:16 said that man doesn't understand God's thoughts alone. But if we allow Christ to come into our heart, follow his teachings, we will clearly understand God's thoughts.
tiger2380 2 years ago
Jesus came to reveal the Father. Reveal his plans.
Col 1:26"the mystery which has been hidden from ages and from generations, but has now been made manifest to his saints;"
The truth, the secret of God had been hidden for generations. But Jesus came to reveal, manifest the mysterious.
This also can be referred to:
1Ti 3:16"And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh,....."
God, the mystery of God, was revealed in the flesh by Jesus.
tiger2380 2 years ago
"Jesus is not the Father. The Father is the only true Almighty God"
Although you are not a JW, this argument is the same strawman understanding of trinitarianism they have; we do not believe Jesus is the Father (after all, Jesus spoke to His Father and said He came forth from the Father) or the Son is the H. Spirit or the Father is the H. Spirit, etc. You are simply assuming - without warrant IMO - that God has to be a unipersonal being and that a 3 in 1 can't exist.
james46888 2 years ago
Trintarians belief is base 100% on assumptions. The assume that when God said us, he mean the Trinity. When Jesus said, baptizing in the name, they assume that he mean Trinity, etc.
Assumption is not a valid argument. Yes I believe God is only the Father. That is what Jesus taught and that is what I will believe till Jesus come down himself and say he is God.
Just ask yourself, why God want to be 3 in 1? Do you think he's not powerful enough to be just one? Do you think, he's weak if he alone?
tiger2380 2 years ago
"Do you think he's not powerful enough to be just one? Do you think, he's weak if he alone?"
The fact is that God is eternal and uncreated, so it just happens that this is His nature, so it's not a question of "want".
james46888 2 years ago
"They assume that when God said us, he mean the Trinity. When Jesus said, baptizing in the name, they assume that he mean Trinity, etc."
Our proof is a lot more extensive than that. If you believe they are the main or strongest arguments we use, then I'd urge you to read more of what trinitarians themselves have wrote.
james46888 2 years ago
On the actual meaning of 2 Pet 1:4, Robert Bowman has said: "Since the word "divine" is used earlier in the same sentence ("His divine power", verse 3), where it must mean "of God," "divine nature" must mean God's nature. The word "nature," however, should not be understood to mean "essence." Rather, as the context makes evident, Peter is speaking of God's moral nature or character. Thus Christians are by partaking of the divine nature to escape the corruption that is in the world (cont)....
james46888 2 years ago
part2(cont)...because of sinful lust, and are instead to exhibit the moral attributes of Christ (cf. verses 5-11).
james46888 2 years ago
Concerning your other argument, my point is that both the Father and Son possess the divine nature and have always done so. Even if 2 Pet 1:4 were saying humans get the divine nature, this is different because it is not something we possess intrinsically.
james46888 2 years ago
Throughout Jesus teachings, he said "the Father authorize, the Father gave, the Father speak, etc.." to him.
The Father gave Jesus the right to sit beside him in his kingdom. If I give you something or give you the right to something, that mostly mean that you didn't have it from the beginning. Just like the Father gave us right to be in his divine nature.
Also, explain "Divine of God"? What is the deity of God?
tiger2380 2 years ago
"What is the deity of God?"
The attributes of deity: omniscience, omnipresence, uncreated and eternal, unchangeableness, etc
james46888 2 years ago
Concerning Jesus saying that He was authorised by the Father, given something by the Father, etc., can you cite me specific verses so I can see exactly whan you mean?
james46888 2 years ago
Mat 28:18"And having approached, Jesus spoke to them, saying, "All authority in heaven and on earth was given to Me. "
Joh 10:18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.
Joh 17:2"As thou hast given him power over all flesh,....."
Joh 14:31 But that the world may know that I love the Father; and as the Father gave me commandment, even so I do. Arise, let us go hence.
tiger2380 2 years ago
Yeah, those verse you cited are genrally answered by the functional subordination principle I spoke of previously. The following stuff goes into this a bit:
w w w . answering-islam . o r g/Shamoun/q_authority_given . h t m
w w w . answering-islam . o r g/Responses/Ghounem/denied . h t m
james46888 2 years ago
I hate that this have 500 character limit. I will send you a message regarding that site you sent me.
All I can see is that the author is just another Trinitarian trying to justify his belief.
1Co 5:4"In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, .....,"
1Co 5:4 said that Paul will be with his people when they are gather in the name of Jesus..
Does that mean he possess omnipresence.
I will finish that in the message.
tiger2380 2 years ago
I did ask this before (you haven't responded to it yet), but I'll ask again: When you said "Michael is called the prince of God. Prince means "a son of a King" were you referring to Dan 10:13 where he's called the "chief prince"?. Also, what is your view on the H. Spirit? Do you subscribe to the JW view?
james46888 2 years ago
Yes I was referring to Dan 10:3 . If someone is a prince, there must be a king. The king/Lord of angels is God.
tiger2380 2 years ago
My problem with Dan 10:13 is it says Michael is "one" of the chief princes, so this implies Michael is one of many others, and this really wouldn't fit Jesus, especailly since Hebrews 1 distingushes Him from the angelic realm (as does Colossians 1:15-16)
james46888 2 years ago
When you say "Michael is called the prince of God," are you referring to Dan 10:13 where he's called the chief prince?
james46888 2 years ago
God is a spirit. After Jesus die and rose, he was still flesh and bone. So how could Jesus possibly be God?
Are you calling Jesus a liar? Jesus said himself that God is a spirit, you all saying God is full flesh and full spirit. Why you all choose to denied Jesus' doctrine?
Jesus taught to worship the Father as the true only God, man taught to worship the Son as the true only God. Which one would you believe MAN or JESUS?
tiger2380 2 years ago
Well, Jesus was "spirit" before the incarnation. God is as spirit being by nature but that doesn't preclude Him from taking on a human body if He so wishes.
james46888 2 years ago
(Part: 1)
I agree because he is God. But I don't think God would take on human body to die? That would defined who God is.
Yes I believe that Jesus was an angel, therefore a spirit. The Archangel, Michael, is very similar to Jesus. For example: Michael is called the prince of God. Prince means "a son of a King".
Ok hear me out with an open mind. Open your mind on what I'm about to say.
tiger2380 2 years ago
(Part: 2)
If you read this passage closely:
1Th 4:16"For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:" Joh 5:25"Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live."
In 1Th 4:16 it said with the voice of the Archangel(aka Michael), in John 5:25 it said the voice of the Son of God.
tiger2380 2 years ago
(Part: 3)
Also resemble between Jesus and Michael is in Revelation.
Rev 12:7"And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,"
In the end, Jesus and his angels will fight against Satan and his angels. Dragon is referring to Satan.
IMO, I think that Jesus was Micheal.
BTW I'm not a JW.
tiger2380 2 years ago
"That would defined who God is."
I'm not sure what you meant by that. Did you use the wrong word?
"Michael is called the prince of God. Prince means "a son of a King"."
Are you referring to Dan 10:13 where he's called the chief prince?
"BTW I'm not a JW."
Glad you said that :). The first thing that went through my head when reading the words "Jesus was an angel" were, "Ah, we've got a JW here.'
james46888 2 years ago
"that will make 2 different, distinct individual God"
No the Bible IMO teaches that all 3 possess the same essential qualities, yet is teaches they are one and work together perfectly. You are assuming that there cannot be such a thing as a 3 in 1 but that needs to be proved, and I don't think it can be.
james46888 2 years ago
@tiger2380 Daniel 7:9 describes the MOST HIGH as having white wooly hair and a linen garment on down to the foot.
jatamode 1 year ago
tiger2380 - Concerning the "Split Personality" point you made, that would only be a prob if the 3 person's all contradicted eachother and had different opinions.
james46888 2 years ago
"For in him dwelleth ALL the fulness of the Godhead bodily." Col. 2:9
I don't think we're supposed to completely understand it. "Now we see through a glass, darkly..."
Jesus said "I and the Father are one." The reason they attacked Him for this was BECAUSE they knew what He meant. Do we know what He meant?
Jimvesterstallone 2 years ago
Amen.
boltingpuppies 2 years ago
The Jews didn't completely understand him. Jesus used the word "ONE" many times.
Joh 17:22"And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: "
Jesus used the same "one" to describe how his disciple to be "one". If the Jews understood "one" to be "same person", that mean Jesus' disciples will be the same person. One means to come together in an agreement. Perfect Unity. Like husband and wife suppose to be, ONE in Perfect Unity.
God bless.
tiger2380 2 years ago
I just finished reading the Book of Hebrews, it repeatedly refers to Jesus as "this man". Interestingly,the Mormons used to believe that the God of this world was also the literal father of Jesus. They also believed that he is Adam, Adam being a God who fell intentionally that we might be given mortal bodies. This made sense to them because they believe God has many wives, Mary being one of them.
johntheunique 2 years ago
Interesting comment. God said, "Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness." Adam was created from the dust and was not alive *until* the Lord breathed the breath of life into his nostrils. Satan later tempted Eve and Adam through her by saying, "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you WILL be LIKE God, knowing good and evil." If they were already gods they would not need to become like God.
cont.>
rinseoff 2 years ago 4
Later in the same passage (Gen 3:22) says "And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever."
This shows Adam was not an eternal being before God breathed life into him. It also shows that Adam *became* like God in the sense that he now knew good and evil.
rinseoff 2 years ago
Mormons believe in 3 degrees of heaven. The highest (Celestial) is the realm of the gods, the middle (Terrestrial) is the realm of the angels, and lowest (Telestial) is the realm of man and then there is hell below that. The idea is that Adam and Eve were at the Terrestrial before they ate the fruit, so they weren't gods. The Fall was the drop from angel to man.
johntheunique 2 years ago
Eating from the tree of life causes you to move the other way up Jacob's Ladder. It would have defeated the purpose of Adam and Eve in having mortal children.
johntheunique 2 years ago
The scripture isn't talking about Jesus. It's referring to the God of the Jews. Ask an orthodox Jew. Jesus is a false prophet.
nogogma 2 years ago
If you Deny him to men, he will deny you to the Father. He is the Son of God. He is the Messiah. He is the Root of David.
wayisnarrow 2 years ago 2
More along the lines of the root of the biggest bullshit story ever sold.
nogogma 2 years ago
John 1:1&14
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God......And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us"
WORD = GOD = Made FLESH = YESHUA
1John 2:22
"Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son."
You don't believe Jesus because you don't believe Moses. If you believed Moses you would know he was speaking of Jesus.
boltingpuppies 2 years ago
Moses and Jesus are both mythology. And the bible is not the word of God. It's the word of men inspired by their own ignorance of the unknown world around them. They realized there was no God, therefore felt the desperate need to invent one in their own image and culture.
nogogma 2 years ago
You had better tell that to the Israeli government...apparently the Egyptian government wants them to pay back all of the Jewelry they took with them when they left Egypt in the Exodus.
boltingpuppies 2 years ago
Amazing and sad what ignorance will do to the mind. That's almost laughable. LOL
nogogma 2 years ago
Almost! :) So, what brought you to your current conclusions?
boltingpuppies 2 years ago
Reason.
nogogma 2 years ago
How did you reason there is no creator?
boltingpuppies 2 years ago
John10:34Jesus answered them, `Is it not having been written in your law: I said, ye are gods? 35if them he did call gods unto whom the word of God came, (and the Writing is not able to be broken,) 36of him whom the Father did sanctify, and send to the world, do ye say -- Thou speakest evil, because I said, Son of God I am?
wayisnarrow 2 years ago
Ah, I see I'm singing to the choir
johntheunique 2 years ago
Psalm 82:1-- A Psalm of Asaph. God hath stood in the company of God, In the midst God doth judge. 2Till when do ye judge perversely? And the face of the wicked lift up? Selah. 3Judge ye the weak and fatherless, The afflicted and the poor declare righteous. 4Let the weak and needy escape, From the hand of the wicked deliver them. 5They knew not, nor do they understand, In darkness they walk habitually, Moved are all the foundations of earth.
wayisnarrow 2 years ago
6I -- I have said, `Gods ye [are], And sons of the Most High -- all of you, 7But as man ye die, and as one of the heads ye fall, 8Rise, O God, judge the earth, For Thou hast inheritance among all the nations!
wayisnarrow 2 years ago
Good scripture, Jesus made reference to it when battling with the Pharisees
johntheunique 2 years ago
amazing video god bless you may the lord ess yu and keep you and cause his face to shine upon you in jesu name x shalom
pricemam 2 years ago
Thank you for this loving blessing! May He do the same to you twice over! Shalom
boltingpuppies 2 years ago
Thank you- I love this video- what a beautiful way to express the truth of who Yeshua is.
dgross563 2 years ago
He does show Himself in amazing ways!
boltingpuppies 2 years ago
Great passage! Yeshua must be God, as only God can remove sin. If Yeshua is not God; we are lost! The sacrifice of Yeshua has born our sin; praise his holy name!
rinseoff 2 years ago 3
Comment removed
karendiane 2 years ago
Great video totally makes sense - One God
I will check out and try to get the music because it was so beatiful
Thank you and God Bless
laurieannek 2 years ago
HalleluYAH Our Father.
Brother Phil.
Wisdomcalls1 2 years ago
Excellent! The Scriptures are so clear. When one of Yeshua's disciples asked Him to show them the Father, He replied: "He who has seen Me has seen the Father." Truly He is God manifested in the flesh.
arovir 2 years ago 5
This is a great verse! "He who has seen Me has seen the Father." Thanks for posting it!
Jimvesterstallone 2 years ago 2
Or he could just looks so much like his father that he can say that. I could almost say that about myself
johntheunique 2 years ago
Yes we all look like our Dads. However reading John 14 8 Philip said to Him, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us." 9Jesus said to him, "Have **I** been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how can you say, 'Show us the Father'?
Philip is being rebuked here because by asking to see the Father, He has indicated that he cannot see the Father standing before him.
rinseoff 2 years ago 2
Philip didn't know what he was asking for. No man can see God and live. However, Jesus being in the fallen state of man could be visible to man.
johntheunique 2 years ago
"Why and how we can KNOW that G-d is a man"
karendiane 2 years ago 2
Great message and so clear on the scriptural reasons to know how and why we can G-d is a man....
karendiane 2 years ago 2