Did Christ appear to other nations?

[may]

Do I wanna be one of Jesus' sheep? I been saved for 32 years. Do I wanna be a JW, no thanks.

LOL the great crowd of other sheep, welcome Jesus as king of Gods heavenly kingdom goverment in the heavens , he was made king of the heavenly goverment in 1914 but the question is,do we welcome him as the rightful king , have we got our palm branch in our hand to welcome him as king
After these things I saw, and, look! a great crowd, which no man was able to number, out of all nations and tribes and peoples and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, dressed in white robes; and there were palm branches in their hands. And they keep on crying with a loud voice, saying: "Salvation [we owe] to our God, who is seated on the throne, and to the Lamb ........Revelation 7;9-10 yes the lamb is Jesus christ and he has been made king, i am waving my palm branch as there is no salvation in any other king ,his kingdom is now established and soon it will do away with all other manmade goverments ..... daniel 2;44

And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom itself will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it itself will stand to times indefinite.............. yes it will stand forever, only the best king on the throne , The legal heir to the throne is Jesus christ

it will certainly become no [one’s] until he comes who has the legal right, and I must give [it] to him. ezekiel 21;27

(Daniel 7:14) And to him there were given rulership and dignity and kingdom, that the peoples, national groups and languages should all serve even him. His rulership is an indefinitely lasting rulership that will not pass away, and his kingdom one that will not be brought to ruin

 

[Popeyesays]

How can you say that the Prophets came in manifestations of God, Jesus (pbuh) i can understand why you could make such a claim, but Muhammed (pbuh) Moses (pbuh), Noah (pbuh) and Abraham (pbuh).............What did they say?
This is a first for me:sarcastic

Respectively, Yasin

Dear Yasin,

I don't mean the man/God duality which most Christianity proposes.

Main Entry: 2manifest
Function: transitive verb
: to make evident or certain by showing or displaying
synonym see [size=-1]SHOW[/size]
- man·i·fest·er noun

God made Muhammed "manifest, evident and certain" by His will.
Same for Jesus.
Same for all the other Rasul. I accept the Bab and Baha`u'llah because I interpret "Seal of the Prophets" differently than most Muslims, but that discussion has been carried on elsewhere.

Regards,
Scott

 

[joeboonda]

hmm. I ask for what you think of the Biblical view of God, versus the Mormon view of God, and nobody responds to my post above. I dunno, I guess, I am sooooo done trying to show the bible truth. Perhaps I am tired, but noboly seems to have an answer for the true Biblical attributes of who God is as stated in my post above, just vain ramblings. Can no one break it down point for point and show me where the Bible is wrong? Again I refer to my post above about what the Bible says about God. Anyone out there? Here is the link, and I refer you to comment on the 2nd half, where it says, what the Bible says about God:

http://www.utlm.org/onlineresources...adictsbible.htm

 

[joeboonda]

Also, I would point out, that someone said these were lies, but they are direct quotes from Smith, Young and other presidents who have 'divine' authority on spiritual doctrines and such, and then, what the Bible says. My point is straightforward and accurate, and if there are any lies they would be the quotes of your prophets, I only quote scripture, analyze it, read it, think about it, where am I in the least wrong on this? Come on, everytime I ask something or show something to be right, I get no response. NO real response to the actual info I present. So read it, and tell me where I am wrong and where the lies are. Again, here is the info. Show me where I err!!!!

http://www.utlm.org/onlineresources...adictsbible.htm

 

[mormonman]

I'll reply, but not right now because I have to go to school. I'll show you where you're wrong tomorrow.

 

[benjosh]

Also, I would point out, that someone said these were lies, but they are direct quotes from Smith, Young and other presidents who have 'divine' authority on spiritual doctrines and such, and then, what the Bible says. My point is straightforward and accurate, and if there are any lies they would be the quotes of your prophets, I only quote scripture, analyze it, read it, think about it, where am I in the least wrong on this? Come on, everytime I ask something or show something to be right, I get no response. NO real response to the actual info I present. So read it, and tell me where I am wrong and where the lies are. Again, here is the info. Show me where I err!!!!

http://www.utlm.org/onlineresources...adictsbible.htm

Hey, Joe

If Joseph Smith Jr. says God was once a man I don't have a big problem with it since it is all a big mystery anyway. That would be a really big miracle wouldn't it?
But if I agreed with you . . . . . God can be reduced to Bible formulas. Any cut and paste, linker can figure that out.
Sure, God used to could speak to prophets. God used to could part oceans, but we all know miracles are over since you guys perfected your BIble System.
So, thank you for draining all the mystery out of God.
Did you ever think heaven is a matter of heart more than it is a matter of head.
You often sign with Jesus loves you. MOst people know that. . . . . it's your love that is in question.
Do you know that Jesus loves you?
Or, is a Mormon qualified to even ask that question?

BenJosh

 

[joeboonda]

Hey, Joe

If Joseph Smith Jr. says God was once a man I don't have a big problem with it since it is all a big mystery anyway. That would be a really big miracle wouldn't it?
But if I agreed with you . . . . . God can be reduced to Bible formulas. Any cut and paste, linker can figure that out.
Sure, God used to could speak to prophets. God used to could part oceans, but we all know miracles are over since you guys perfected your BIble System.
So, thank you for draining all the mystery out of God.
Did you ever think heaven is a matter of heart more than it is a matter of head.
You often sign with Jesus loves you. MOst people know that. . . . . it's your love that is in question.
Do you know that Jesus loves you?
Or, is a Mormon qualified to even ask that question?

BenJosh

Hi, I do not 'drain the mystery out of God', for I understand His ways are far above ours and we are limited in our understanding. I do think Heaven is a matter of the heart, but we mustn't check our brains at the door. Jesus loves you, and me, and His love is far greater than my human ability to love. And yes you can ask me that question, I know Jesus loves me and you because the Bible tells me so. This is why I believe what I believe about God, because the Bible tells me so. The Bible speaks of how great God is and how we are far below understanding Him, but I believe the Bible should be our guide in learning truths about God. The Bible says God had no counselors, that he never changes, that he is holy, therefore never sinned, that he has always been God, that there are and were no other Gods before Him or after Him or besides Him. I must trust the Bible and not man, if the man contradicts the Bible. I hope you can understand why I feel that way.

Thanks,

Mike

 

[Buttons*]

And yes you can ask me that question, I know Jesus loves me and you because the Bible tells me so. This is why I believe what I believe about God, because the Bible tells me so.

Ah, the glory of circular reasoning...

The Bible speaks of how great God is and how we are far below understanding Him, but I believe the Bible should be our guide in learning truths about God. The Bible says God had no counselors, that he never changes, that he is holy, therefore never sinned, that he has always been God, that there are and were no other Gods before Him or after Him or besides Him. I must trust the Bible and not man, if the man contradicts the Bible. I hope you can understand why I feel that way.

Thanks,

Mike

~ The Bible was written by men... dur...
~If God is unknowable, how do you claim to understand his wants and needs by reading Bible scripture written by men?
~No one thinks God had advisors, if he did, he would not BE god
~If there is more to learn about God through other men's perspectives, what's the harm in doing so? Why dont you try seeing what you can gain from something before you crush it with the ignorance you love showing?

 

[benjosh]

The Bible says God had no counselors, that he never changes, that he is holy, therefore never sinned, that he has always been God, that there are and were no other Gods before Him or after Him or besides Him. I must trust the Bible and not man, if the man contradicts the Bible. I hope you can understand why I feel that way.

Genesis 1:1
1. ¶ In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.


In Strong's we read that God of genesis 1:1 is elohiym el-o - hiym or im.
Im or hiym is like our english "s". It indicates plurality, as in more than one.

0430 'elohiym {el-o-heem'}; Usage
plural of 433; TWOT- 93c; n m p
1) (plural)
1a) rulers, judges
1b) divine ones
1c) angels
1d) gods
2) (plural intensive - singular meaning)
2a) god, goddess
2b) godlike one
2c) works or special possessions of God
2d) the (true) God
2e) God

Did the KJV translators miss the plurality or is the Hebrew language wrong?


How do you handle the following?

Genesis 1:26
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.

Genesis 3:22
22. ¶ And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

BenJosh

 

[energize]

First the Apostles didn't convert people to Judaism, they converted people to Christianity. Second, again, Christ didn't go to the Gentiles, He went to the Jews. In John 10:16 He said that He had other sheep that were not in the fold (not in Jerusalem) and the HE must bring them into the fold. Many times Christ was called the "Good Shepherd". Why would a good shepherd send others to bring back the lost sheep? HE WOULDN'T.

I read the story as saying the disciples converted people to Christ and Christ being in Judaism. Do you think Jesus expected his disciples to go into Rome and begin a new form of Judaism? This may be what they intended to do; I don't however read any inference to that being the idea of Jesus. If Jesus were "bringing back" the lost sheep it seems more likely to me that he'd be bringing them back into his own tradition and not a different tradition.

 

[Popeyesays]

Genesis 1:1
1. ¶ In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.


In Strong's we read that God of genesis 1:1 is elohiym el-o - hiym or im.
Im or hiym is like our english "s". It indicates plurality, as in more than one.



Did the KJV translators miss the plurality or is the Hebrew language wrong?


How do you handle the following?

Genesis 1:26
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.

Genesis 3:22
22. ¶ And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

BenJosh

THe Hebrew is not wrong. In this instance Hebrew is just like English and uses the "Imperial 'We'". A king or ruler says: "You have not amused us." God says: the man is become as one of us>" Same usage, neither the ruler nor God is speaking of anyone other than themselves.

There is also the editorial 'we' in English where the editor of a newspaper or periodical uses "WE" instead of "I" when stating the official opinion of the publication.

Regards,

Scott

 

[nutshell]

THe Hebrew is not wrong. In this instance Hebrew is just like English and uses the "Imperial 'We'". A king or ruler says: "You have not amused us." God says: the man is become as one of us>" Same usage, neither the ruler nor God is speaking of anyone other than themselves.

There is also the editorial 'we' in English where the editor of a newspaper or periodical uses "WE" instead of "I" when stating the official opinion of the publication.

Regards,

Scott

Well, that's certainly your opinion and interpretation, but the possibility of a plurality of Gods is just as valid based on the language.

 

[SoyLeche]

THe Hebrew is not wrong. In this instance Hebrew is just like English and uses the "Imperial 'We'". A king or ruler says: "You have not amused us." God says: the man is become as one of us>" Same usage, neither the ruler nor God is speaking of anyone other than themselves.

There is also the editorial 'we' in English where the editor of a newspaper or periodical uses "WE" instead of "I" when stating the official opinion of the publication.

Regards,

Scott

Or was the "imperial we" instituted by copying the laguage they thought God was using? I really don't know - just throwing something out there.

 

[benjosh]

THe Hebrew is not wrong. In this instance Hebrew is just like English and uses the "Imperial 'We'". A king or ruler says: "You have not amused us." God says: the man is become as one of us>" Same usage, neither the ruler nor God is speaking of anyone other than themselves.

There is also the editorial 'we' in English where the editor of a newspaper or periodical uses "WE" instead of "I" when stating the official opinion of the publication.

Regards,

Scott

So, if the king says, go out and make statues in our image what will they look like?

BenJosh



We're waiting for an answer, imperially speaking.

 

[Fluffy]

THe Hebrew is not wrong. In this instance Hebrew is just like English and uses the "Imperial 'We'". A king or ruler says: "You have not amused us." God says: the man is become as one of us>" Same usage, neither the ruler nor God is speaking of anyone other than themselves.

There is also the editorial 'we' in English where the editor of a newspaper or periodical uses "WE" instead of "I" when stating the official opinion of the publication.

I find that highly unlikely. Can you show the passage of the former into the latter or is this just speculation. It seems like a very tenuous connection at best given the gap in culture, language and time.

 

[SoyLeche]

I find that highly unlikely. Can you show the passage of the former into the latter or is this just speculation. It seems like a very tenuous connection at best given the gap in culture, language and time.

Another thing I just thought of: if the "us" in Genesis is the "imperial we" - why is it only used in those few versus. The first commandment doesn't start with "we are the Lord thy God" for instance.

I am not a hebrew schollar, so I really don't know what the origional says.

 

[Popeyesays]

Another thing I just thought of: if the "us" in Genesis is the "imperial we" - why is it only used in those few versus. The first commandment doesn't start with "we are the Lord thy God" for instance.

I am not a hebrew schollar, so I really don't know what the origional says.

The Hebrew uses several phrases for "God". Elohim which is actually a plural noun, and Adonai which is a singular noun. The King James Bible translated accordingly, but NOT from the Hebrew text, from the Greek translation of the Hebrew text known as the Septaguint.
The scholars of the King James Bible never consulted a Hebrew source but depended upon the much earlier translation into Greek.

Hebrew scholars generally regard the Septaguint as an undependable source for the intent of the Hebrew text.

The Hebrew also occasionally uses the Tetragramaton "YHVH". Thi sis one of the bases for believing there were several authors of the Torah - at least five to be exact.

Regards,
Scott

Regards,

 

[Popeyesays]

Another thing I just thought of: if the "us" in Genesis is the "imperial we" - why is it only used in those few versus. The first commandment doesn't start with "we are the Lord thy God" for instance.

I am not a hebrew schollar, so I really don't know what the origional says.

Main Entry: we javascript:popWin('/cgi-bin/audio.pl?we000001.wav=we')
Pronunciation: 'wE
Function: pronoun, plural in construction
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English wE; akin to Old High German wir we, Sanskrit vayam
1 : I and the rest of a group that includes me : you and I : you and I and another or others : I and another or others not including you -- used as pronoun of the first person plural; compare [size=-1]I[/size], [size=-1]OUR[/size], [size=-1]OURS[/size], [size=-1]US[/size]
2 : 1[size=-1]I[/size] -- used by sovereigns; used by writers to keep an impersonal character


This shows the basis for my comment in English grammar.

As to the King James Bible it uses "I" and "We" almost interchangeably. Why? Because the KJV is NOT based on the original Hebrew text of the "Old Testament". "Old Testament" is a Christian book of the Bible, not a Jewish term, since Judaism does not recognize a "New Testament" at all. The name for the Pentateuch is (which is a Greek word by the way), the first five books of the TaNakh, knows as the Books of Moses OR the Torah.

In the Torah (Hebrew) there are several names for God, the most frequent being "Elohim", "Adonai" and the Tetragramaton "YHVH". "Elohim" is a plural noun. "Adonai" and "YHVH" are singular nouns. The Greek translation uses "I" when the Hebrew word was "Adonai", "we" when the Hebrew word was "Elohim", and generally inserts YHVH when the Tetragramaton was used in the Hebrew. That's not PERFECTLY true, and there is some variation, but generally true.

Hebrew scholars generally detest the Septaguint, and blame that Greek translation of the Hebrew text for much of the evil that has befallen Jews since the day it was produced.

Regards,
Scott

 

[greatcalgarian]

THe Hebrew is not wrong. In this instance Hebrew is just like English and uses the "Imperial 'We'". A king or ruler says: "You have not amused us." God says: the man is become as one of us>" Same usage, neither the ruler nor God is speaking of anyone other than themselves.

There is also the editorial 'we' in English where the editor of a newspaper or periodical uses "WE" instead of "I" when stating the official opinion of the publication.

Regards,

Scott

What is the difference in the king said "You have not amused us." and the king said "You have not amused me".?
The 'us' I believed refers to a group of people together with the king when the king made that statement, it is not referring to the king himself. Whereas the 'me' specifically referred to the king or the speaker himself and none other.

Hence the bible statement still implied that the 'us' includes the trinity which can be used as a plural occasionally, or there were many different Gods around during that time, or One super God and surrounded by Angels etc that the God can make the statement using the adjective 'us'.

 

[Popeyesays]

What is the difference in the king said "You have not amused us." and the king said "You have not amused me".?
The 'us' I believed refers to a group of people together with the king when the king made that statement, it is not referring to the king himself. Whereas the 'me' specifically referred to the king or the speaker himself and none other.

Hence the bible statement still implied that the 'us' includes the trinity which can be used as a plural occasionally, or there were many different Gods around during that time, or One super God and surrounded by Angels etc that the God can make the statement using the adjective 'us'.

The old example of the "Imperial we" was Queen Victoria when a her husband made a quip to her (which must have been a rare event) she said to him: "We cannot be amused right now."

I gave you the Merriam-Webster dictionary use of the "Imperial we". Take it or leave it.
In the Hebrew of that particular verse the word is "Elohim" which is indeed plural.

"Sh'ma Yisrael Adonai Elohaynu Adonai Echad. " transliterated Hebrew
"Hear O Israel the Lord your God is One" English translation

Regards,
Scott