On the Nature and Mission of the Lord Jesus

bitehoney · Sep 19, 2018

Also - nPeace. Many, many more other verses - This Greek word = G1909 ἐπί - epi / ep-ee' - is used as the word “ AT “ a total of - 885 times - in the manuscripts.
This Greek word “ AT “ = G1909 - ἐπί - epi / ep-ee'
“ AT “ G1909 - ἐπί - epi - ep-ee'
Mat 8:6 And saying, Lord, my servant lieth “ AT “ home sick of the palsy, grievously tormented.
Never, is Christ said to be “ AT “ the throne or “ AT “ the right hand of anything. This word “ AT “ - ἐπί - epi is never once used concerning Yahoshua in relation to the Father or His throne - in the manuscripts.

It means “ AT “ Rev 21:12 …, and “ AT “ the gates twelve angels, and names …..of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:
Means = “ AT “ (of a place in time, of a place, order, etc.), at, as (touching), beside, from the time of, - to), (because) of, (by, for) the space of, through Also meaning = upon, on, or of or in a subject or matter.
In Heb 1:13. – Christ is prophesied to precede from the “ FROM or OF “ the right of the father.
- Here in Heb 1:13 Yahoshua is prophesied to dwell or “ “ FROM or OF “ “ my right, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
Psa 110:1 A Psalm of David. The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit / Dwell from the right - until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
Heb 1:13 But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit Dwell “ “ FROM or OF “ “ my right, until I make thine enemies thy footstool ?
We know that Christ preceded from the bosom of the Father, was crucified, resurrected and returned to sit “ IN “ the throne of the father.
The Trinitarian translators, even still, changed and perverted the trinity translation from the original,
here In Col 3:1 - the Trinity Translators changed the original that says “ Christ sitteth “ IN “ the right of God.

And they mistranslated it to say -= Christ will Sit / Dwell “ AT “ The Right “ HAND “ of God.

The manuscripts say - Col 3:1 If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above - where Christ sitteth / dwelleth “ IN “ the right of God.
The Manuscripts say that when Christ had ascended and rose from the dead - that Christ was to Sit Dwell “ IN “ the right of God. As to where He was pre - prophesied to Sit / Dwell - comming - FROM or OF - throne and bosom of the father and to earth, to manifest / morph / form into a created being / man

But our Trinitarian translations do not say this.

If these two following verses, translated correctly from the original Greek manuscripts here - should say…
Col 3:1 If ye then be risen with Christ, seek … . where Christ Sits / Dwells “ IN “ the right of God.
And= Heb 1:13 But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit / Dwell “ G1537 - ἐκ / ἐξ - ek - ex FROM or OF “ my right, until I make thine enemies thy footstool?
G1537 - ἐκ / ἐξ - ek - ex = Meaning - From or Of.
ἐκ / ἐξ “ FROM or OF “ is a primary preposition denoting origin (the point whence motion or action proceeds), from, out (of place, time or cause; - after, among, , by (the means of (among, forth (because, by reason) of, off (from).
Heb 1:13 - is a total contradiction in the Trinitarian Manuscripts - because when Yahoshua left the throne and bosom of the Father and came to earth - He did not come to earth to sit “ ON “ the right hand of God - nor did He sit “ ON “ the right hand of the throne - here on earth..
Yet the Trinitarian translators have Christ sitting “ on “ the right hand of God - here on earth- here in Heb 1:13.
From the original Greek manuscripts in Heb 1:13 Christ is to Sit / Dwell “ “ G1537 - ἐκ / ἐξ - ek - ex FROM or OF OUT - from the right of God - until the time that - He made His enemies footstool?...........
This word Greek word ἐκ / ἐξ “ G1537 - ἐκ / ἐξ - ek - ex = Means - FROM or OF OUT OF
It is always used in the context of such verses hare in Heb 1:13 Mat 2:6 For “ FROM / OUT OF “ ἐκ / ἐξ - ek - ex - “ OF “ thee “ Bethlehem “ shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel.

And also as always as we see here Mat 2:15 “ FROM / OUT OF ἐκ / ἐξ “ “ OF “ Egypt have I called my son.

ἐκ / ἐξ - ek - ex is always meaning - “ FROM / OUT OF “ in the manuscripts - Yet the Trinitarian translators have Christ sitting “ on “ the right hand of God - here on earth- here in Heb 1:13.

But the word is not “ ON “ the right hand of God - it is “ FROM / OUT OF “ the right of God

Christ did not sit or dwell at the Fathers Right Hand while here on earth. He was sitting / dwelling - “ IN “ the right of The Father having come “ FROM - OF - OUT OF “ the Father.
And also - Trinitarian translators changed Col 3:1 to translate that the risen and resurrected - Christ - sitteth “ AT “ the right hand of God.

The Greek word in Col 3:1 - is the Greek word “ IN “ … … .. There is no “ AT “ in the manuscripts in Col 3:1… … … .. The risen / resurrected Christ will sit “ IN “ / inside “ the right of God.
The Greek word “ IN “ is G1722 ε ̓ ν - en / en - In place, “ in” , (. . . for the sake of), + (here-) in (because) of, -) on, (-in, -on), (-with), (-in). - G1722 ε ̓ ν - en / en- " IN "

In the Bible Christ is sitting / dwelling “ IN “ the throne, right and “ IN “ the power, right and in the throne of the father and the Trinitarian translators delete the Greek word “ IN “ G1722 ε ̓ ν - en / en - and replace it with “ AT “ the right hand of the throne, power, right and “ AT “ the right hand of God.

instead of what the manuscripts say that Christ will sit “ IN “ the throne of God.

They totally altered and changed and perverted much of the Bible in order to support their trinity doctrine. Trinity is a total contradiction.

nPeace · Sep 19, 2018

bitehoney said:
Dear nPeace. Thank You for responding to me.

I understand what You are saying - Can we both agree that - The scriptures do “ NOT ” literally speak anywhere - of “ PLURAL persons “ sitting on God's throne – ?
Also, please notice - we cannot find anywhere in the Bible where “ God's throne – “ - called David’s throne.
But rather David’s throne is called Gods throne. In a future prophecy of Yahoshua's return to sit on David's throne on earth.
…………………………

Col 3:1 If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above - where Christ sitteth “ IN “ the right of God.

Thanks for taking the time to consider the information, and wow! That's a lot of research you did, which I appreciate.
I also like to have sources information to back up what I am saying, so I appreciate that you are that way also.

When you say of “ PLURAL persons “ sitting on God's throne
Do you mean more than one person sitting at the same time, or at different periods of time?

We know that kings ruled at different periods of time, but we have no reason to expect more than one person ruling at the same time.
However, while earthly kings ruled on God's throne, he himself sat as ruler on his throne, in the heavens.

So we can say that God sat on his throne along with those who ruled Israel at the time.
Is there any mention in the Bible, of anyone sitting on God's throne? Yes.
1 Kings 1:13 Go in to King David and say to him, ‘Was it not you, my lord the king, who swore to your servant, saying: “Your son Solomon will become king after me, and he is the one who will sit on my throne”? So why has Adonijah become king?’
1 Kings 1:17, 1 Chronicles 28:5; Jeremiah 33:20, 21

1 Kings 2:4 that Jehovah may establish his word which he spake concerning me, saying, If thy children take heed to their way, to walk before me in truth with all their heart and with all their soul, there shall not fail thee (said he) a man on the throne of Israel.
1 Chronicles 28:5 and of all my sons (for Jehovah hath given me many sons), he hath chosen Solomon my son to sit upon the throne of the kingdom of Jehovah over Israel.
1 Chronicles 29:23 Then Solomon sat on the throne of Jehovah as king instead of David his father, and prospered; and all Israel obeyed him.

We realize why it is God's throne. Don't we? For we understand who is ruling Israel.
2 Chronicles 9:8 Blessed be Jehovah thy God, who delighted in thee, to set thee on his throne, to be king for Jehovah thy God: because thy God loved Israel, to establish them for ever, therefore made he thee king over them, to do justice and righteousness.

It is as when the people rebelled against Moses, and God said they were rebelling against him. God was their leader, even though he used Moses to lead the people.
God as ruler over Israel used human rulers, so they sat on his throne - not in heaven, of course.

I hope you don't think I believe in the trinity doctrine. I don't.
I will discuss the use of "at" in considering your post below.

bitehoney said:
Also - nPeace. Many, many more other verses - This Greek word = G1909 ἐπί - epi / ep-ee' - is used as the word “ AT “ a total of - 885 times - in the manuscripts.
This Greek word “ AT “ = G1909 - ἐπί - epi / ep-ee'
“ AT “ G1909 - ἐπί - epi - ep-ee'
Mat 8:6 And saying, Lord, my servant lieth “ AT “ home sick of the palsy, grievously tormented.
Never, is Christ said to be “ AT “ the throne or “ AT “ the right hand of anything. This word “ AT “ - ἐπί - epi is never once used concerning Yahoshua in relation to the Father or His throne - in the manuscripts
................

In the Bible Christ is sitting / dwelling “ IN “ the throne, right and “ IN “ the power, right and in the throne of the father and the Trinitarian translators delete the Greek word “ IN “ G1722 ε ̓ ν - en / en - and replace it with “ AT “ the right hand of the throne, power, right and “ AT “ the right hand of God.

instead of what the manuscripts say that Christ will sit “ IN “ the throne of God.

They totally altered and changed and perverted much of the Bible in order to support their trinity doctrine. Trinity is a total contradiction.

I don't see that the text has been altered, and even so, no trinitarian would be happy to change the word to at.
Aside from that, this is what I found.

Acts 2 Interlinear Bible
Acts 2:32-36
32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.
33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.
34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,
35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool.
36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

Greek Interlinear
32 το ῦτον This τὸν the Ἰησοῦν Jesus ἀνέστησεν resurrected ὁ the θεός, God, οὗ of which πάντες all ἡμεῖς we ἐσμὲν are μάρτυρες. witnesses. 33 τῇ To the δεξιᾷ right [hand] οὖν therefore τοῦ of the θεοῦ God ὑψωθεὶς having been put on high ......... 34 οὐ Not γὰρ for Δαυεὶδ David ἀνέβη went up εἰς into τοὺς the οὐρανούς, heavens, λέγει he is saying δὲ but αὐτός he Εἶπεν Said Κύριος Lord τῷ to the κυρίῳ Lord μου of me Κάθου Be sitting ἐκ out of δεξιῶν right [parts] μου of me 35 ἕως until ἂν likely θῶ I should put τοὺς the ἐχθρούς enemies σου of you ὑποπόδιον footstool τῶν of the ποδῶν feet σου. of you.

Strong's Greek: 1722. ἐν (en) -- in, on, at, by, with
Strong's Concordance
en: in, on, at, by, with
Original Word: ἐν
................
Short Definition: in, on, among
Definition: in, on, among.

ἐν - Wiktionary
Preposition
ἐν • (en) (governs the genitive, dative and accusative)
(location) in, on, at; (with plural) among
(elliptical, with genitive) in the house or the land of
surrounded by; wearing
(time) in, at, or during the time of
Descendants
Greek: εν (en)

Strong's Greek: 1537. ἐκ (ek or ex) -- from, from out of
Strong's Concordance
ek or ex: from, from out of
Original Word: ἐκ, ἐξ
................
Short Definition: from out, out from among, from
Definition: from out, out from among, from, suggesting from the interior outwards.

HELPS Word-studies
1537 ek (a preposition, written eks before a vowel) – properly, "out from and to" (the outcome); out from within. 1537 /ek ("out of") is one of the most under-translated (and therefore mis-translated) Greek propositions – often being confined to the meaning "by." 1537 (ek) has a two-layered meaning ("out from and to") which makes it out-come oriented (out of the depths of the source and extending to its impact on the object).

ἐκ - Wiktionary
Preposition
ἐκ • (ek) (governs the genitive)
(of place)
(of motion) Out of, from
from, with the source of
to denote change from one place or condition to another
to express separation of distinction from a number
(of position) outside, beyond
(of time) ..........

Strong's Greek: 3588. ὁ, (ho, hé, to) -- the
Strong's Concordance
ho, hé, to: the
Original Word: ὁ, ἡ, τό
Part of Speech: Definite Article
Transliteration: ho, hé, to
Phonetic Spelling: (ho)
Short Definition: the
Definition: the, the definite article.

Strong's Greek: 1188. δεξιός (dexios) -- the right hand or side
Strong's Concordance
dexios: the right hand or side
Original Word: δεξιός, ά, όν
..............
Short Definition: on the right hand, right hand, right
Definition: on the right hand, right hand, right.

Psalm 110:1 Interlinear: A Psalm of David. The affirmation of Jehovah to my Lord: 'Sit at My right hand, Till I make thine enemies thy footstool.'
1a) right hand
1b) right (of direction)
(לִֽימִינִ֑י) at My right hand

Strong's Hebrew: 3225. יָמִין (yamin) -- right hand
Strong's Concordance
yamin: right hand
Original Word: יָמִין
.........
Short Definition: hand

If we read in Psalms 110:1, literally...
Sit right hand / Sit at my right hand

Could be read as...
Sit at/to/on my right hand
Would it not carry the same meaning?

Peter quotes Psalm 110:1, so the rendering "Sit at my right hand" until... is cool.

Be sitting (ἐκ) out of (δεξιῶν) right (μου) of me == Sit out of (from) me to right of me.
That doesn't seem to create a problem. What do you say?

74x12 · Sep 26, 2018

nPeace said:
These scriptures do not tell us whom God is talking to, but they do indicate that God is talking to someone.
Genesis 1:26 - "Then God said: “Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness,..."
(This harmonizes with the rest of the scriptures - John 1:1; Colossians 1:13-15; Revelation 3:14)
Those aren't the verses you are using to claim that God talks to himself, are they?

Basically you have more than one God if you think that someone other than God was helping to make people in Genesis 1:26.

No, the verse is Messianic prophecy. Jesus is the one who remakes us again into the image of God after we have gone astray and forgotten the face of the Father.

For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

Jesus remakes people into His image as we read in 2 Corinthians 3:18 and John 3:3-5. Thus God says "let us make man in our image" He certainly wasn't talking to an angel because angels are not God. But the Son of God is God therefore God says let "us" make man in "our" image.

The scripture clearly states that man is created in the image of God. (Genesis 1:27) Not the image of any angel.

nPeace said:
Wisdom is always in the feminine gender, in the Hebrew language.
There is no question, I think you agree, that wisdom is being used figuratively, to represent someone.
Brought forth before all other things.
This could only apply to the firstborn son of God.

The gender of the word, does not represent the gender of that "someone".
The word love, is also used in the feminine gender here, at 1 John 4:8 - "God is love", but is is not used to apply gender to God.

Wisdom is being figuratively represented as someone yes. But Proverbs 8 is not trying to make Wisdom into an actual deity. That would have been a sin; as Israel is commanded to only worship Yah. (Exodus 20:3, Deuteronomy 6:4)

The Greeks worshiped Sophia/wisdom as a goddess. Solomon was not a Greek.

Love and Wisdom both feminine. Both personified. Both are truly just aspects of God's own nature. Rather than separate persons.

The idea that God "brought forth" wisdom before anything else is just a figurative way of telling us how that God used the concept of wisdom to create everything. That is, everything created was created wisely. God didn't make anything stupid. Everything was designed very well. Very wisely. Therefore God "brought forth" wisdom first. Or in other words He conceived of it first of all. It would be the governor of all creation. That is everything made would be made according to wisdom.

nPeace said:
The point here is that we have reference from another scripture, supporting the fact that the son of God - the logos, was brought forth, and was with God, before all other creation.
Again, this harmonizes with the rest of the scriptures - John 1:1; Colossians 1:13-15; Revelation 3:14

You're trying to string together something literal with something that you admit is figurative. Wisdom is personified as a female that was "brought forth" whereas on the other hand the Son of God: Jesus is a real being who had a real birth. (Luke 1:35)

Jesus before birth is the Logos or the foreordained/predestined Christ. That is the perfect plan of God: the Son of God who would be "manifest" in the right time. There came a time when He became indeed what He already was in foreordanation. That is He was born the Son of God. (Luke 1:35)

nPeace said:
Sorry, but the verse in Colossians went along with the one in Revelation, and John.
What do you find to be a problem with the verses in Colossians?
I explained your problem.
The fact is, it is apparent there was someone with God - someone God himself begat - brought forth directly, with no help from anyone. That one was there before all other creation, and it was through him that all other things came.
1 Corinthians 8:6 -
yet to us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we unto him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we through him.

Good verse! 1 Corinthians 8:6 proves you are wrong to have two gods rather than one. For us there is one God: the Father. You have two gods because you make John 1:1 mean there are two separate gods. The greater God and the lesser god. How can it be?

1 Corinthians 8:6 is pretty clear the Father is the only true God and the Son: Jesus is Lord. That obviously means in His humanity He is Lord. As it is written:

(Psalm 8:6)
Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet:

But --and this is a huge but-- that doesn't mean in Spirit Jesus the Son is not also God. As we know there is One God. You have two gods. I have one.

As we read in Isaiah 9:6 there is a child that is born. A Son is given. This is clearly speaking of Jesus humanity. His human nature. But then we read on and find out this child will be called both Mighty God and Everlasting Father. So we see the duality of Christ's nature right there. He is the Son in humanity and the mighty God and Father in eternal Spirit.

Isaiah 9:6
6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

nPeace said:
Revelation 3:14 Interlinear: 'And to the messenger of the assembly of the Laodiceans write: These things saith the Amen, the witness -- the faithful and true -- the chief of the creation of God;
HELPS Word-studies
746 arxḗ – properly, from the beginning (temporal sense), i.e. "the initial(starting) point"; (figuratively) what comes first and therefore is chief(foremost), i.e. has the priority because ahead of the rest ("preeminent").

Could you please be more specific, or elaborate on what you are saying about Revelation 3:14?
Are you saying that the faithful and true witness here is not the beginning of God's creation?

It means literally what it says. Jesus is the first of God's creation. That is to mean that God literally set Him forth before anything else. But, that was in predestination and foreordaination. In other words Jesus was foreordained before the foundation of the world to be manifest in a specific time. No one is denying that Jesus is not physically created.

Which is what 1 Peter 1:20 is talking about:
Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,

And again we have a Genesis 1:26 tie in with Romans 8:29. "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren."

And The Lamb was slain from the foundation of the world. (Revelation 13:8) Yet, no one asks how come Jesus died twice? He died once. (Romans 6:9-10) But it was predestined (as a fact with God) from before the world began.

So the "Sonship" of Jesus was a predestined fact from before the world began, but He actually had to do what was predestined at some point. That is to mean, He actually had to be born of a woman. He had to die and He had to rise from the dead. Therefore the predestined Word of God was not a lie but proven true.

So the Logos was always true but Jesus actually proved it which makes Him the Savior and worthy.

nPeace said:
Galatians 4:24
Paul here is speaking of a real event that served as a pattern, or representation of something greater.
Not that the event was not literal.
This is the case with many other literal events and things mentioned in Genesis - like the animal sacrifices, the blood, the tabernacle, the ark of the covenant, the book of the law, Aaron's rod, and many other things - all literal, but used by God because they had a greater significance.
You are not claiming that Moses and Israel were not a real persons are you?

You've completely misunderstood me.

nPeace said:
However, the texts I provided supports the literal rendering of the creation account in Genesis 1 - a number of which you made no comment on. Genesis 2:4, 18-25; Psalms 104; Matthew 19:5

You totally misunderstood me. Genesis is literal.

nPeace · Oct 2, 2018

74x12 said:
Basically you have more than one God if you think that someone other than God was helping to make people in Genesis 1:26.

No please. Please explain how that would make me have more than one God.

74x12 said:
No, the verse is Messianic prophecy. Jesus is the one who remakes us again into the image of God after we have gone astray and forgotten the face of the Father.
...............
Jesus remakes people into His image as we read in 2 Corinthians 3:18 and John 3:3-5.

Yes. 2 Corinthians 3:18 And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into His image with intensifying glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.

I hope you don't mind, but I really want to understand you clearly. In other words, I want to see through your eyes - see what you are seeing, so I hope you don't mind me asking you to explain what you mean, or understand.

Could you explain please, what you understand by "being transformed into his image with ever-increasing glory"?

The Contemporary English Version renders the verse...
So our faces are not covered. They show the bright glory of the Lord, as the Lord's Spirit makes us more and more like our glorious Lord.

New Living Translation says...
So all of us who have had that veil removed can see and reflect the glory of the Lord. And the Lord--who is the Spirit makes us more and more like him as we are changed into his glorious image.

So, do you understand it in this way, that the verse refers to putting on God's personality, by means of Christ our example, so that we reflect God's glory? In other words our new personality becomes like a mirror reflecting God's qualities. Thus we are transformed into his image.

Is that the way you see it, or otherwise? Could you explain?

I was looking at the surrounding verses - the context, and here are some highlights.
(2 Corinthians 3:16-4:6) 6 But when one turns to Jehovah, the veil is taken away. 17 Now Jehovah is the Spirit, and where the spirit of Jehovah is, there is freedom. 18 And all of us, while we with unveiled faces reflect like mirrors the glory of Jehovah, are transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another, exactly as it is done by Jehovah the Spirit. 4 Therefore, since we have this ministry through the mercy that was shown us, we do not give up. 2 But we have renounced the shameful, underhanded things, not walking with cunning or adulterating the word of God; but by making the truth manifest, we recommend ourselves to every human conscience in the sight of God. 3 If, in fact, the good news we declare is veiled, it is veiled among those who are perishing, 4 among whom the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, so that the illumination of the glorious good news about the Christ, who is the image of God, might not shine through. 5 For we are preaching, not about ourselves, but about Jesus Christ as Lord and ourselves as your slaves for Jesus’ sake. 6 For God is the one who said: “Let the light shine out of darkness,” and he has shone on our hearts to illuminate them with the glorious knowledge of God by the face of Christ.

There is also the verse Colossians 3:10 ...and clothe yourselves with the new personality, which through accurate knowledge is being made new according to the image of the One who created it,
...and Ephesians 4:23, 24
23 And you should continue to be made new in your dominant mental attitude, 24 and should put on the new personality that was created according to God’s will in true righteousness and loyalty.

These harmonize nicely, and verifies the above, it would seem.

74x12 said:
Thus God says "let us make man in our image" He certainly wasn't talking to an angel because angels are not God. But the Son of God is God therefore God says let "us" make man in "our" image.

Why do you take a verse written about 4 centuries later, and refer it to an account back then?
What Paul says, in Corinthians is not what God said thousands of years ago.

74x12 said:
The scripture clearly states that man is created in the image of God. (Genesis 1:27) Not the image of any angel.

Yes, and they are made in God's image, so God is man woman. He has breast and chest, a penis and vagina, large and small hips, long and short hair, etc....
No. They were created with his qualifies. That's why in all those places where we see "God's image", it refers to qualities - as previously shown.
Colossians 1:15 . . .He is the image of the invisible God. . .
Hence, Jesus could rightly say...
John 14:9 Jesus said to him: “Even after I have been with you men for such a long time, Philip, have you not come to know me? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father also. How is it you say, ‘Show us the Father’?

nPeace · Oct 2, 2018

74x12 said:
Wisdom is being figuratively represented as someone yes. But Proverbs 8 is not trying to make Wisdom into an actual deity. That would have been a sin; as Israel is commanded to only worship Yah. (Exodus 20:3, Deuteronomy 6:4)
.............
The idea that God "brought forth" wisdom before anything else is just a figurative way of telling us how that God used the concept of wisdom to create everything. That is, everything created was created wisely. God didn't make anything stupid. Everything was designed very well. Very wisely. Therefore God "brought forth" wisdom first. Or in other words He conceived of it first of all. It would be the governor of all creation. That is everything made would be made according to wisdom.

It doesn't appear that Wisdom would need to be mentioned as being brought forth to figuratively represent wisdom as working with God. Power and love were also involved, and these are not mentioned in this way.

Jesus referred to the scriptures as being about him, and wisdom here is not only referred to as having a beginning, but working alongside God, and being delighted in doing so, and also being delighted in the creation - being especially fond of, not just all creation, but the sons of men.

This seem to be a clear reference to the only begotten son of God, who was brought forth, and worked with his father in creating all other things.
Wisdom had no beginning, as God had no beginning.

74x12 said:
You're trying to string together something literal with something that you admit is figurative. Wisdom is personified as a female that was "brought forth" whereas on the other hand the Son of God: Jesus is a real being who had a real birth. (Luke 1:35)

Jesus before birth is the Logos or the foreordained/predestined Christ. That is the perfect plan of God: the Son of God who would be "manifest" in the right time. There came a time when He became indeed what He already was in foreordanation. That is He was born the Son of God. (Luke 1:35)

Jesus said he was not from this realm, but from above, sent by the father, to do not his own will, but the will of the father who sent him.
In fact, Jesus says that he does nothing of his own initiative, but only what he sees the father doing, and what the father taught him, and told him to speak.

This is the one who is described as being in the beginning with God, and who worked with his father in creating all other things.
This is said in 99.999% of the Greek scriptures.
It's not that hard to see at all.

74x12 said:
Good verse! 1 Corinthians 8:6 proves you are wrong to have two gods rather than one. For us there is one God: the Father. You have two gods because you make John 1:1 mean there are two separate gods. The greater God and the lesser god. How can it be?

...................
Isaiah 9:6
6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Good verse, and don't forget prince of peace. How is God a prince?
Unless one God is almighty, and one is mighty.
One God is father to all, while one God is father to humanity - which he brought with his own blood.

I understand why it can be a bit difficult for some to grasp, but I think it can be easily understood, if we remember one rule- Always take the context into consideration". If we do that, I believe it will not be difficult to grasp, at all.

How many Gods, Fathers, and Princes are they?
If we understand that God is a title, Father is a title, Prince is a title, then we know that these titles can be applied fittingly to any who fall into that category.

So when we read 1 Corinthians 8:6, we take the surrounding texts into consideration.
Paul starts chapter 8 with, "Now concerning food offered to idols..."
Right away, we understand he is making a point about idols - lifeless things people call gods.

So when he follows through with his argument he says...
4 Now concerning the eating of food offered to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world and that there is no God but one.
Then he hammers in the point in verses 5, and 6.

Even Jesus, while on earth did not hold such titles. He said, in John 17
1 Jesus spoke these things, and raising his eyes to heaven, he said: “Father, the hour has come. Glorify your son so that your son may glorify you, 3 This means everlasting life, their coming to know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ. 4 I have glorified you on the earth, having finished the work you have given me to do. 5 So now, Father, glorify me at your side with the glory that I had alongside you before the world was. 6 “I have made your name manifest to the men whom you gave me out of the world. . . .

Jesus never called himself Father or God - neither on earth nor in heaven.
He recognized his subordinate position to God, his Father.
However, he was called God and Father, because those titles fitted the role he would play in heaven.
Also, as a spirit son of God, he is rightly called a god in scripture.

I find it interesting that Genesis 14:18 uses the expression "Most high" when referring to the almighty, and this follows that Almighty and True, are at times used.
This makes it clear that the title god can be appropriately used with others, besides the almighty.

74x12 said:
It means literally what it says. Jesus is the first of God's creation. That is to mean that God literally set Him forth before anything else. But, that was in predestination and foreordaination. In other words Jesus was foreordained before the foundation of the world to be manifest in a specific time. No one is denying that Jesus is not physically created.
....................

So the Logos was always true but Jesus actually proved it which makes Him the Savior and worthy.

I'm not quite sure what you are saying here. Would you mind clarifying please?

74x12 said:
You've completely misunderstood me.
You totally misunderstood me. Genesis is literal.

Admittedly you lost me.
So the water is really literal water, and not just a representation?

74x12 · Oct 7, 2018

nPeace said:
No please. Please explain how that would make me have more than one God.

Because by that reasoning; you have more than one Creator. You're made in the image of two or more Creators.

"Let us make man in our image"

But for me I know it is God talking to Himself: that is God talking through prophecy and foretelling to Jesus who would come to make us back into the image of God who have fallen into sin.

nPeace said:
Yes. 2 Corinthians 3:18 And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into His image with intensifying glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.

I hope you don't mind, but I really want to understand you clearly. In other words, I want to see through your eyes - see what you are seeing, so I hope you don't mind me asking you to explain what you mean, or understand.

Could you explain please, what you understand by "being transformed into his image with ever-increasing glory"?

The Contemporary English Version renders the verse...
So our faces are not covered. They show the bright glory of the Lord, as the Lord's Spirit makes us more and more like our glorious Lord.

New Living Translation says...
So all of us who have had that veil removed can see and reflect the glory of the Lord. And the Lord--who is the Spirit makes us more and more like him as we are changed into his glorious image.

So, do you understand it in this way, that the verse refers to putting on God's personality, by means of Christ our example, so that we reflect God's glory? In other words our new personality becomes like a mirror reflecting God's qualities. Thus we are transformed into his image.

Is that the way you see it, or otherwise? Could you explain?

I was looking at the surrounding verses - the context, and here are some highlights.
(2 Corinthians 3:16-4:6) 6 But when one turns to Jehovah, the veil is taken away. 17 Now Jehovah is the Spirit, and where the spirit of Jehovah is, there is freedom. 18 And all of us, while we with unveiled faces reflect like mirrors the glory of Jehovah, are transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another, exactly as it is done by Jehovah the Spirit. 4 Therefore, since we have this ministry through the mercy that was shown us, we do not give up. 2 But we have renounced the shameful, underhanded things, not walking with cunning or adulterating the word of God; but by making the truth manifest, we recommend ourselves to every human conscience in the sight of God. 3 If, in fact, the good news we declare is veiled, it is veiled among those who are perishing, 4 among whom the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, so that the illumination of the glorious good news about the Christ, who is the image of God, might not shine through. 5 For we are preaching, not about ourselves, but about Jesus Christ as Lord and ourselves as your slaves for Jesus’ sake. 6 For God is the one who said: “Let the light shine out of darkness,” and he has shone on our hearts to illuminate them with the glorious knowledge of God by the face of Christ.

There is also the verse Colossians 3:10 ...and clothe yourselves with the new personality, which through accurate knowledge is being made new according to the image of the One who created it,
...and Ephesians 4:23, 24
23 And you should continue to be made new in your dominant mental attitude, 24 and should put on the new personality that was created according to God’s will in true righteousness and loyalty.

These harmonize nicely, and verifies the above, it would seem.

Your choice of translation leaves something to be desired. For debate purposes we should stick to more literal translations. Whoever translated your version has changed "lord" (kuros) to "Jehovah"; selectively. Either kuros should always be Jehovah or it should be what it literally means in English: lord.

We can look at context to prove that when Paul says "lord" (kuros in Greek) in this case; he means Jesus. So for example in chapter 4 verse 5 Paul says they preach Christ Jesus "the Lord". So, keeping with that theme throughout the whole epistle of 2nd Corinthians. We should not see "lord" translated selectively as "Jehovah". The writers intention is to show or preach Jesus as the Lord/kuros/master.

We know it's Jesus being spoken of in 2 Corinthians 3:18 because in 2 Corinthians 4:6 we see that the light of God is seen in the face of Jesus Christ. So, logically we know that the "glory of the Lord" they are seeing in the glass/mirror must be the face of Jesus Christ. Again, we should keep these verses in context of the entire epistle so that we can understand what the writer is saying.

Therefore, 2 Corinthians 3:18 is about looking at Jesus who is "the image of God" as we read in 2 Corinthians 4:4. And we are changed by looking into this mirror and beholding Jesus to be more and more like Jesus. So this is how Jesus fulfills Genesis 1:26. Because even though Adam and Eve were originally made in the image of God they sinned and Jesus came in the express or exact image of God to restore us again to the image of God. So that's why Genesis 1:26 is plural.

nPeace said:
Why do you take a verse written about 4 centuries later, and refer it to an account back then?
What Paul says, in Corinthians is not what God said thousands of years ago.

The Bible interprets itself. We know what it means by comparing it to other scriptures. Not by just reading willynilly.

nPeace said:
Yes, and they are made in God's image, so God is man woman. He has breast and chest, a penis and vagina, large and small hips, long and short hair, etc....
No. They were created with his qualifies. That's why in all those places where we see "God's image", it refers to qualities - as previously shown.
Colossians 1:15 . . .He is the image of the invisible God. . .
Hence, Jesus could rightly say...
John 14:9 Jesus said to him: “Even after I have been with you men for such a long time, Philip, have you not come to know me? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father also. How is it you say, ‘Show us the Father’?

Jesus is the express image of God. The exact imprint of His likeness. Or even the exact copy of God. Therefore Jesus is God revealed in human form.
You make it seem as if Jesus is the exact image of God, but yet somehow not God. That may not be because there is no one like God. (Isaiah 46:5) Not even any angel is like God. As it asks rhetorically in Psalm 89:6 who in heaven can compare to Jehovah? and who among the "sons of the mighty" (AKA angelic beings) can be likened to Jehovah?

74x12 · Oct 7, 2018

nPeace said:
It doesn't appear that Wisdom would need to be mentioned as being brought forth to figuratively represent wisdom as working with God. Power and love were also involved, and these are not mentioned in this way.

The book of Proverbs is about wisdom. Obviously it is about power and love as well, but it's not specifically about power and love. It's specifically a book about wisdom. That's why it personifies wisdom rather than power or love.

nPeace said:
Jesus referred to the scriptures as being about him,

Yes, Jesus said the scriptures speak of Him. But who does the scriptures mention more than any other name? Jehovah. So by your reasoning Jesus must be Jehovah. I would agree with that interpretation. In fact I hold that Jesus partly meant as much. Although He primarily spoke of Messianic prophecies.

nPeace said:
and wisdom here is not only referred to as having a beginning, but working alongside God, and being delighted in doing so, and also being delighted in the creation - being especially fond of, not just all creation, but the sons of men.

You're making a connection between wisdom and Jesus. But you admit that wisdom is being personified here. Do you believe wisdom literally has hewn out her 7 pillars? (Proverbs 9:1) Or is this more likely metaphor describing spiritual principles of wisdom? So my point is that wisdom being brought forth is also not literal but metaphor.
However you haven't really answered my point about Jesus also claiming to be a child of wisdom Himself. (Matthew 11:19) So, is Jesus His own child or was Jesus using metaphor?

nPeace said:
This seem to be a clear reference to the only begotten son of God, who was brought forth, and worked with his father in creating all other things.
Wisdom had no beginning, as God had no beginning.

Well I agree that wisdom had no beginning but it was because wisdom was the very thoughts of God.

nPeace said:
Jesus said he was not from this realm, but from above, sent by the father, to do not his own will, but the will of the father who sent him.
In fact, Jesus says that he does nothing of his own initiative, but only what he sees the father doing, and what the father taught him, and told him to speak.
This is the one who is described as being in the beginning with God, and who worked with his father in creating all other things.
This is said in 99.999% of the Greek scriptures.
It's not that hard to see at all.

No offense, but if even .001% say otherwise then it must be the wrong interpretation.

nPeace said:
Good verse, and don't forget prince of peace. How is God a prince?
Unless one God is almighty, and one is mighty.
One God is father to all, while one God is father to humanity - which he brought with his own blood.

The Hebrew word prince(Sar) is more like the old English definition of prince. It's not necessarily a king's son. Although that would obviously fit Jesus the Son of God. Yet, that's not what it means. It's about being a potentate, ruler, chief etc.

nPeace said:
I understand why it can be a bit difficult for some to grasp, but I think it can be easily understood, if we remember one rule- Always take the context into consideration". If we do that, I believe it will not be difficult to grasp, at all.

We should certainly consider the context. However I don't believe you've got it yet. No offense.

nPeace said:
How many Gods, Fathers, and Princes are they?
If we understand that God is a title, Father is a title, Prince is a title, then we know that these titles can be applied fittingly to any who fall into that category.
So when we read 1 Corinthians 8:6, we take the surrounding texts into consideration.
Paul starts chapter 8 with, "Now concerning food offered to idols..."
Right away, we understand he is making a point about idols - lifeless things people call gods.

If you accept Paul's epistle as scripture or as infallible teaching from God. Then, I conclude that for us(that is the church) there is but one God: the Father. So we can't really get around the fact.

nPeace said:
So when he follows through with his argument he says...
4 Now concerning the eating of food offered to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world and that there is no God but one.
Then he hammers in the point in verses 5, and 6.
Even Jesus, while on earth did not hold such titles. He said, in John 17
1 Jesus spoke these things, and raising his eyes to heaven, he said: “Father, the hour has come. Glorify your son so that your son may glorify you, 3 This means everlasting life, their coming to know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ. 4 I have glorified you on the earth, having finished the work you have given me to do. 5 So now, Father, glorify me at your side with the glory that I had alongside you before the world was. 6 “I have made your name manifest to the men whom you gave me out of the world. . . .

Exactly, Jesus agrees with Paul. There is but one Theos: the Father for us. Yet you say there are two theos for us in your interpretation of John 1:1 and Isaiah 9:6.

nPeace said:
Jesus never called himself Father or God - neither on earth nor in heaven.
He recognized his subordinate position to God, his Father.
However, he was called God and Father, because those titles fitted the role he would play in heaven.
Also, as a spirit son of God, he is rightly called a god in scripture.

Yes He did recognize His subordinate position. He is subordinate being the Son of man. However that doesn't mean He is not one with God. As you know a human is more than just flesh. He is body, soul and spirit. (1 Thessalionians 5:23) So with Jesus we have a human body(Hebrews 10:5) indwelled by God.

nPeace said:
I find it interesting that Genesis 14:18 uses the expression "Most high" when referring to the almighty, and this follows that Almighty and True, are at times used.
This makes it clear that the title god can be appropriately used with others, besides the almighty.

Sure it can, but they can't be our God. We can only have one God.

nPeace said:
I'm not quite sure what you are saying here. Would you mind clarifying please?

The Logos is the predestined Messiah. God foreordained His advent into the world before anything else. This means He was always a Son in predestination but there came a time when He had to actually become in the flesh what He was already in the foreknowledge and infallible promise of God.

For God all things are present tense. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever. (Hebrews 13:8) So He never changes and I believe He never has. Everything is resting on this One: the Chief Cornerstone of all creation. Only those things found built on the Rock will stand. A kingdom that cannot be shaken.

Everything is either on the sure foundation or not. The sure foundation is a new Covenant with God. Life forevermore from the dead. Signed with the blood of Jesus.

Jesus is the Word of Life. Not in vain is this Word spoken. He will speak Life into everyone who believes in the gospel. He will change anything that is truly resting on Him. Because He rewrites it. He will rewrite everything to be for them and not against them. He will rewrite everything.

Our sin has spoken death. Our enemies have spoken condemnation but God speaks life. Jesus holds everything together and He will rewrite everything.

And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.
...

and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.
...

It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

nPeace said:
Admittedly you lost me.
So the water is really literal water, and not just a representation?

The water is literal yes. I speak of symbolism a lot but that doesn't take away from the primary interpretation of the text. The symbolism is strong meat and spiritually discerned.

nPeace · Oct 13, 2018

74x12 said:
Because by that reasoning; you have more than one Creator. You're made in the image of two or more Creators.

"Let us make man in our image"
But for me I know it is God talking to Himself: that is God talking through prophecy and foretelling to Jesus who would come to make us back into the image of God who have fallen into sin.

That argument isn't making sense to me - similar to your argument about having two Gods. There is only one creator, and one worker alongside the creator.
I don't know what more I can say that can help you.

74x12 said:
Your choice of translation leaves something to be desired. For debate purposes we should stick to more literal translations. Whoever translated your version has changed "lord" (kuros) to "Jehovah"; selectively. Either kuros should always be Jehovah or it should be what it literally means in English: lord.
...............
The Bible interprets itself. We know what it means by comparing it to other scriptures. Not by just reading willynilly.

Something to be desired? That's funny.
Are you really serious?
Sorry. You are asking me to stop using an accurate translation and use an erroneous one.
Do you find it appealing, that they find no problem with using spurious texts, such as 1 John 5:7, in their translations?

If you prefer using KJV or others, feel free. That won't hinder us debating. I think it might be more appropriate to thank the translators of NWT for such an easy to read and understand Bible, which clears up the confusion found in many other translations.

It might actually give you an opportunity to attack the NWT, and enhance the debate.
I can use the KJV, to discuss any problems you may have.

Let's start here.
Aramaic Bible in Plain English
2 Corinthians 3:16-18
16 And whenever anyone of them will be turned to THE LORD JEHOVAH, the veil is taken away from him.
17 But The Spirit is THE LORD JEHOVAH, and wherever The Spirit of THE LORD JEHOVAH is, there is freedom.
18 But we all see the glory of THE LORD JEHOVAH with unveiled faces, as in a mirror, and we are changed into the image from glory to glory, as from THE LORD JEHOVAH, THE SPIRIT.

2 Corinthians 4:5
For we have not been preaching ourselves, but The Messiah Yeshua, Our Lord; but we ourselves are your Servants for Yeshua's sake.

Why does the Aramaic Bible say "THE LORD JEHOVAH"?
Please view the first 30 minutes of this program to see why kurios is there, and how and when it got there. Or you can start from 20:00
Jehovah's Witnesses BROADCASTING

74x12 said:
Jesus is the express image of God. The exact imprint of His likeness. Or even the exact copy of God. Therefore Jesus is God revealed in human form.
You make it seem as if Jesus is the exact image of God, but yet somehow not God. That may not be because there is no one like God. (Isaiah 46:5) Not even any angel is like God. As it asks rhetorically in Psalm 89:6 who in heaven can compare to Jehovah? and who among the "sons of the mighty" (AKA angelic beings) can be likened to Jehovah?

Again, you seem to have lost me.

No one has seen God at anytime.
Are you saying Jesus is God's look-alike?
That's not what the scriptures are saying. Jesus is not the exact nature of God. (Anything that Jesus gains, come from his father.) He is a created being. So is man, who is made in God's image. This has nothing to do with appearance. Rather, it involves qualities.

When Jesus said, "He that has seen me, has seen the father", he was evidently referring to God's attributes, not his appearance.
The context verifies this.
John 14:9-12
9 Jesus said to him: “Even after I have been with you men for such a long time, Philip, have you not come to know me? ...
10 Do you not believe that I am in union with the Father and the Father is in union with me? The things I say to you I do not speak of my own originality, but the Father who remains in union with me is doing his works. 11 Believe me that I am in union with the Father and the Father is in union with me; otherwise, believe because of the works themselves. 12 Most truly I say to you, whoever exercises faith in me will also do the works that I do; and he will do works greater than these, because I am going my way to the Father.

If one has a problem with how the NWT renders verse 10, please note.
King James Bible - John 14:10
Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me?

King James Bible - John 17:21
That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

These verses are obviously referring to oneness, or union, in the same way that a married man and women become united as one. The Christian congregation (body) is one with Christ - the head,
John 17:21 so that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in union with me and I am in union with you, that they also may be in union with us, so that the world may believe that you sent me.

nPeace · Oct 13, 2018

74x12 said:
The book of Proverbs is about wisdom. Obviously it is about power and love as well, but it's not specifically about power and love. It's specifically a book about wisdom. That's why it personifies wisdom rather than power or love.

The scriptures also speak of Israel... In fact, more times than Jesus Christ and Messiah.
You are not going to say that Jesus is Israel are you?

No. Jesus is not Jehovah. He said it over are over - too often to require debating it at all.
Apostle John killed off, in fact obliterated that idea before it even got started... There was no need for burial.
However, if you insist, we can debate it. I'll separate it. See post below.

74x12 said:
Yes, Jesus said the scriptures speak of Him. But who does the scriptures mention more than any other name? Jehovah. So by your reasoning Jesus must be Jehovah. I would agree with that interpretation. In fact I hold that Jesus partly meant as much. Although He primarily spoke of Messianic prophecies.

I agree that many scriptures were about the Messiah, but others went before and beyond. See for example, Psalms 2.
Wisdom personified in Proverbs seem to be a reference to before, and it is fitting of the only begotten son, in his pre-human existence, both as workman, and spokesman.

74x12 said:
You're making a connection between wisdom and Jesus. But you admit that wisdom is being personified here. Do you believe wisdom literally has hewn out her 7 pillars? (Proverbs 9:1) Or is this more likely metaphor describing spiritual principles of wisdom? So my point is that wisdom being brought forth is also not literal but metaphor.
However you haven't really answered my point about Jesus also claiming to be a child of wisdom Himself. (Matthew 11:19) So, is Jesus His own child or was Jesus using metaphor?

I'm not seeing the relevance of this argument, since no one is saying that in every place - including Matthews wisdom is mentioned it applies to the firstborn son of God.

Context is always an important consideration. The context in Proverbs 8, seems to lead one to the conclusion that the verses figuratively apply to God's firstborn.

74x12 said:
Well I agree that wisdom had no beginning but it was because wisdom was the very thoughts of God.

Huh? So now you are dealing with thoughts.
We are talking about wisdom, not thoughts.

74x12 said:
No offense, but if even .001% say otherwise then it must be the wrong interpretation.

Only the 0.001% percent does not say otherwise. Say what?
That's the percentage that does not address the subject.

74x12 said:
The Hebrew word prince(Sar) is more like the old English definition of prince. It's not necessarily a king's son. Although that would obviously fit Jesus the Son of God. Yet, that's not what it means. It's about being a potentate, ruler, chief etc.

Does your translation say chief of peace, or ruler of peace?
Why do you think that it doesn't mean prince, but potentate?

Jehovah is the only ruler who has absolute power.
In this context Jesus is called mighty God, not almighty God. He is called prince of peace, and as you admitted, Jesus is fittingly a prince, so there... you have collaboration in scripture.
However, whether you think prince doesn't mean prince but ruler, does not change his role in the will of God.

Please... Jesus is not the same as Jehovah. He is, was, and always will be subject to almighty God, no matter how much authority Jehovah gives him.
1 Corinthians 15:27, 28
27 For God “subjected all things under his feet.” But when he says that ‘all things have been subjected,’ it is evident that this does not include the One who subjected all things to him. 28 But when all things will have been subjected to him, then the Son himself will also subject himself to the One who subjected all things to him, that God may be all things to everyone.

74x12 said:
We should certainly consider the context. However I don't believe you've got it yet. No offense.

If you accept Paul's epistle as scripture or as infallible teaching from God. Then, I conclude that for us(that is the church) there is but one God: the Father. So we can't really get around the fact.

Exactly, Jesus agrees with Paul. There is but one Theos: the Father for us. Yet you say there are two theos for us in your interpretation of John 1:1 and Isaiah 9:6.

For us, there is one God, the Father, from whom all things are and we for him; and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are and we through him.

Notice the expression - the Father.
Does this mean there are no other fathers?

No. We understand why Jehovah is the Father, but like the word God, Father is a title. So we appreciate that God can be applied to others whom that title fits, just as Father is applied to those whom the title fit.

God simply means mighty one, and applies to Godlike ones, or persons in a special role as such - Angels, Men (Moses; Judges in Israel).
We know what a father is. In the case of Isaiah 9:6, Jesus brought forth heads a spiritual family.

So no. I said nothing about there being two Gods for us.
I understand how the term theos is used, but you seem to be saying it is only used for the Father - the almighty, but it is clear as day, that thinking is wrong.

74x12 said:
Yes He did recognize His subordinate position. He is subordinate being the Son of man. However that doesn't mean He is not one with God. As you know a human is more than just flesh. He is body, soul and spirit. (1 Thessalionians 5:23) So with Jesus we have a human body(Hebrews 10:5) indwelled by God.

He is subordinate period - including being the Son of God - according to the scriptures. (Matthew 22:43, 44; Luke 20:42, 43; Acts 2:34, 35; Romans 8:34; 1 Corinthians 15:25, 27, 28; Ephesians 1:20; Hebrews 1:3, 13; 8:1; 10:11-13; 12:2; Revelation 1:6; 3:12 and others)

Hebrews 10:5 ...you prepared a body for me.
A body that was sacrificed in death - gone. Jesus is a life giving spirit (1 Corinthians 15:45).
Doesn't support your argument.

74x12 said:
The Logos is the predestined Messiah. God foreordained His advent into the world before anything else. This means He was always a Son in predestination but there came a time when He had to actually become in the flesh what He was already in the foreknowledge and infallible promise of God.......

There is no need to alter Revelation 3:14. It says what it means, and means what it says.

74x12 said:
The water is literal yes. I speak of symbolism a lot but that doesn't take away from the primary interpretation of the text. The symbolism is strong meat and spiritually discerned.

Of course, before you get to the strong meat, you need to start with the milk.
Some babies want to partake of meat before they even have teeth, only to find that they can't chew, swallow, or digest, so they remain famished, all because the refused to partake of the milk, which really is good for them.
1 Peter 2:2, 3
2 . . .As newborn infants, form a longing for the unadulterated milk of the word, so that by means of it you may grow to salvation, 3  provided you have tasted that the Lord is kind.

Perhaps this is because they prefer to drink the contaminated juices that slowly poison the system.
1 Corinthians 10:20-22
20 No; but I say that what the nations sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons and not to God; and I do not want you to become sharers with the demons. 21 You cannot be drinking the cup of Jehovah and the cup of demons; you cannot be partaking of “the table of Jehovah” and the table of demons. 22 Or ‘are we inciting Jehovah to jealousy’? We are not stronger than he is, are we?

Sad.

nPeace · Oct 13, 2018

@74x12 Jesus is the son of Jehovah - not Jehovah himself.

John 3:34, 35
34 For the one whom God sent speaks the sayings of God, for He does not give the spirit sparingly. 35 The Father loves the Son and has given all things into his hand.
John 5:17-34
17 But he answered them: “My Father has kept working until now, and I keep working.” 18 This is why the Jews began seeking all the more to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath but he was also calling God his own Father, making himself equal to God. 19 Therefore, in response Jesus said to them: “Most truly I say to you, the Son cannot do a single thing of his own initiative, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever things that One does, these things the Son does also in like manner. 20 For the Father has affection for the Son and shows him all the things he himself does, and he will show him works greater than these, so that you may marvel. 21 For just as the Father raises the dead up and makes them alive, so the Son also makes alive whomever he wants to. 22 For the Father judges no one at all, but he has entrusted all the judging to the Son, 23 so that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him. 24 Most truly I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes the One who sent me has everlasting life, and he does not come into judgment but has passed over from death to life.
25 “Most truly I say to you, the hour is coming, and it is now, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who have paid attention will live. 26 For just as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted also to the Son to have life in himself. 27 And he has given him authority to do judging, because he is the Son of man. 28 Do not be amazed at this, for the hour is coming in which all those in the memorial tombs will hear his voice 29 and come out, those who did good things to a resurrection of life, and those who practiced vile things to a resurrection of judgment. 30 I cannot do a single thing of my own initiative. Just as I hear, I judge, and my judgment is righteous because I seek, not my own will, but the will of him who sent me.
31 “If I alone bear witness about myself, my witness is not true. 32 There is another who bears witness about me, and I know that the witness he bears about me is true. 33 You have sent men to John, and he has borne witness to the truth. 34 However, I do not accept the witness from man, but I say these things so that you may be saved. 35 That man was a burning and shining lamp, and for a short time you were willing to rejoice greatly in his light. 36 But I have the witness greater than that of John, for the very works that my Father assigned me to accomplish, these works that I am doing, bear witness that the Father sent me. 37 And the Father who sent me has himself borne witness about me. You have neither heard his voice at any time nor seen his form, 38 and you do not have his word residing in you, because you do not believe the very one whom he sent.
John 6:44-47
44 No man can come to me unless the Father, who sent me, draws him, and I will resurrect him on the last day. 45 It is written in the Prophets: ‘They will all be taught by Jehovah.’ Everyone who has listened to the Father and has learned comes to me. 46 Not that any man has seen the Father, except the one who is from God; this one has seen the Father. 47 Most truly I say to you, whoever believes has everlasting life.
John 7:14-18
14 When the festival was half over, Jesus went up into the temple and began teaching. 15 And the Jews were astonished, saying: “How does this man have such a knowledge of the Scriptures when he has not studied at the schools?” 16 Jesus, in turn, answered them and said: “What I teach is not mine, but belongs to him who sent me. 17 If anyone desires to do His will, he will know whether the teaching is from God or I speak of my own originality. 18 Whoever speaks of his own originality is seeking his own glory; but whoever seeks the glory of the one who sent him, this one is true and there is no unrighteousness in him.
John 8:16-19
16 . . .even if I do judge, my judgment is truthful, because I am not alone, but the Father who sent me is with me. 17 Also, in your own Law it is written: ‘The witness of two men is true.’ 18 I am one who bears witness about myself, and the Father who sent me bears witness about me.” 19 Then they said to him: “Where is your Father?” Jesus answered: “You know neither me nor my Father. If you did know me, you would know my Father also.”
John 8:26-30
26 . . .As a matter of fact, the One who sent me is true, and the very things I heard from him I am speaking in the world.” 27 They did not grasp that he was talking to them about the Father. 28 Jesus then said: “After you have lifted up the Son of man, then you will know that I am he and that I do nothing of my own initiative; but just as the Father taught me, I speak these things. 29 And the One who sent me is with me; he did not abandon me to myself, because I always do the things pleasing to him.” 30 As he was saying these things, many put faith in him.
John 8:54, 55
54 Jesus answered: “If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing. It is my Father who glorifies me, the one who you say is your God. 55 Yet you have not known him, but I know him. And if I said I do not know him, I would be like you, a liar. But I do know him and am observing his word.
John 12:44-50
44 However, Jesus called out and said: “Whoever puts faith in me puts faith not only in me but also in him who sent me; 45 and whoever sees me sees also the One who sent me. 46 I have come as a light into the world, so that everyone putting faith in me may not remain in the darkness. 47 But if anyone hears my sayings and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I came, not to judge the world, but to save the world. 48 Whoever disregards me and does not receive my sayings has one to judge him. The word that I have spoken is what will judge him on the last day. 49 For I have not spoken of my own initiative, but the Father who sent me has himself given me a commandment about what to say and what to speak. 50 And I know that his commandment means everlasting life. So whatever I speak, I speak just as the Father has told me.”
John 13:1-3 1 . . .Now because he knew before the festival of the Passover that his hour had come for him to leave this world and go to the Father, Jesus, having loved his own who were in the world, loved them to the end. 2 The evening meal was going on, and the Devil had already put it into the heart of Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon, to betray him. 3 So Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands and that he came from God and was going to God,

Why do you say Jesus is Jehovah, when this is contrary to what Jesus himself said, along with all the scriptures?

It was Jesus that died, not Jehovah. It was Jesus that was raised from the dead, not Jehovah. It was Jesus that received the holy spirit from the father, not Jehovah...

bitehoney · Nov 7, 2018

Thank You all for responding to my post - However, I respectfully believe that the facts have proven Your Trinitarian faith - to be in great error.

My first response is to the poster - nPeace

Please explain - How is it that You and Trinitarians find it impossible to see the difference between the meanings of the words - such as you listed related to the Strong's Greek: 1722. ἐν (en) / En -- in, on, at, by, with - ( Original Word: ἐν )

The original manuscripts make this very, very clear.

The following examples are clear in the manuscripts - Yet the TRINITARIAN TRANSLATIONS are seen as in contradiction to what You claim in the following verses.

In these verses below - the TRINITARIAN TRANSLATIONS did not use the word { in } - because they clearly seen the difference between the words { En -- in, on, at, by, with } -

Also - nPeace their entire perverted TRINITARIAN translation would fall apart and fail completely - if they took up Your theory.

The TRINITARIAN TRANSLATIONS were happy to acknowledge and accept the difference between the words word in, - From on, at, by, with - from the word { in } - because they perceived the reality that these words are vastly different from the word - { in }

The word used as = ( At ) is the Greek word = G1909 - ἐπί - epi - ep-ee' Meaning = at, on, etc.; of direction (with the accusative case) towards, upon, etc.: - about (the times), above, after, against, among, as long as (touching), at, beside.

Also - nPeace - Why would You use the word { in } - in the following verses. ?

Mat 18:29 And his fellowservant fell down at - { At = G1909 - ἐπί - epi } - his feet.
Act 10:25 And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, and fell down - { At = G1909 - ἐπί - epi } - his feet.
Rev 1:17 And when I saw him, I fell - { At = G1909 - ἐπί - epi } - his feet as dead.

Here - The fellow-servant, Cornelius and John would not fall down { in } His feet - but { AT } His feet.

Mar 16:2 And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came { At = G1909 - ἐπί - epi } the sepulcher at the rising of the sun.

Here in Mar 16:2 - they did not yet go { in } the sepulcher. They were { At } the sepulchre and were asking in verse :3 Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre?
:4 And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great.
Also - nPeace - Joh 8:7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone { At = G1909 - ἐπί - epi } her.

The men were not trying to cast a stone { in } the adulterous woman - but { At } her

Again - Act 25:10 Then said Paul, I stand { At = G1909 - ἐπί - epi } Caesar's judgment seat, where I ought to be judged: to the Jews have I done no wrong, as thou very well knowest.

Paul was never expecting anyone to believe that He was sitting { in } Caesar's judgment seat.
This is the difference in the manuscripts between the words - in, on, at, by, and with.

Dear - nPeace - The TRINITARIAN TRANSLATORS had no problem whatsoever using the correct word here in - Rev 3:21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.

All of these following verses below are mistranslated to change the manuscripts to fit and suit to a TRINITARIAN THEORY.

None of these verses would suggest that Christ is ( AT ) any of these positions in the following verses - especially when Yahoshua Christ clearly declared that He was to sit ( ἐν - en – en “IN“ ) the very throne of the Father.

Yet the Trinitarian Translators refused to use the word ( ἐν - en – en “IN“ ) in the rest of the verses - when they used it correctly in Rev 3:21

Why not continue to use the word correctly ? - - and only use it correctly in the one single verse of - Rev 3:21

Rom 8:34 Christ in G1722 - ἐν - en – en “IN“ the right of God, who also maketh intercession for us.
Eph 1:20 Christ in G1722 - ἐν - en - en “IN“ his own right G1722 - ἐν - en - en in in the heavenly place.
Heb 12:2 Christ is set G1722 - ἐν - en - en “IN“ the right of the throne of God.
Heb 1:3 Christ is..... the express image of The Fathers confidence, .... sat down G1722 - ἐν - en - en “IN“ the right of the Majesty G1722 - ἐ ν - en - en “IN“ the high.

Heb 8:1 Christ is set G1722 - ἐν - en - en “IN“ the right of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;
Heb 10:12 Jesus is forever sat down G1722 - ἐν - en “IN“ the right of God;
1Pe 3:22 Who is gone into heaven, and is G1722 - ἐν - en - en in the right of God;

Also Dear - nPeace - The KJV TRINITARIAN TRANSLATORS did nothing more than produce a Copy Cat ( COPY ) Of The Earlier Roman Catholic Douay Rheims Bible of the 15th Century. The KJV translators copied the Catholic Bible { NEARLY - WORD FOR WORD }

What is the difference between the two translations - other than the few verses contradicting over differences in the doctrinal faiths concerning Mary, Eve and Idols. ?

REMEMBER - The English government who produced the TRINITARIAN TRANSLATION OF THE KJV - burned William Tyndale at the stake on October 6, 1536, for translating the Bible into English.

If the Church Of England that was burning people alive and just after eight years after the KJV was made in 1611 - in 1620 - the Puritans were forced to flee England and Europe because they were being persecuted for their religious beliefs.

What exactly is it that makes You think that the Trinitarians would be so happy and willing to correct the many, many perversions and errors that they forced into the texts in inserting their trinity doctrine into the Bible ?

• If they are still persecuting and threatening and harming and torturing people who disagree with their Trinitarian and other Protestant and Roman Catholic faiths - even up to nearly 100 years after the KJV and still persecuting and driving other religions and denominations from England - How is this a willing happiness and favorability and desire to make changes to anything that they changed in their perverted Trinity Translation. ?
Many thousands of religious people who were enslaved, imprisoned and convicted by the trinitarian Kings and their civil authorities in all of Trinitarian Europe..

Non – Trinitarians and Non – Conformists could expect no mercy and were executed as heretics and driven expelled from The Trinitarian Lawmakers of all Trinitarian Kingdoms.

Please eXplain what willingness would there be to make changes to the Trinitarian faith and changes that were forced onto the Bible Translations.

The Trinitarians Of England had not broken away from the Trinitarian Roman Catholic Church no more than 80 years until the time that they produced their Trinitarian Bible Translation. The first translations ever to be made into another language other than Italian - for nearly 2000 years after Yahoshua, The Anointed. / Christ. - were made by all Trinitarians - who killed, tortured and persecuted and murdered others of other faiths for doing so.

I simply am not seeing any evidence of Your Trinitarian Claims or other related assertions. We can not even move to step two- because Trinitarian literally worships one step theology and a mental object of denial of facts.

On the Nature and Mission of the Lord Jesus

bitehoney

Member

nPeace

Veteran Member

74x12

Well-Known Member

nPeace

Veteran Member

nPeace

Veteran Member

74x12

Well-Known Member

74x12

Well-Known Member

nPeace

Veteran Member

nPeace

Veteran Member

nPeace

Veteran Member

bitehoney

Member