But why would He want to be anything other than who He is? I mean if He is perfect, if He has infinite power and knowledge, what would be the point of His temporarily turning Himself into a frog or a dog or anything else?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Trinity in Luke 2:40-56
- Thread starter rrobs
- Start date
iam1me
Active Member
If you are going to quote me - at least do so correctly. I never said YHWH isn't a personal name of God.
You and I obviously understand Luke 1:37 differently. If you seriously believe that a son can be his own father or a father his own son, then there's really no point in our talking about it further.
74x12
Well-Known Member
Well for that matter why would Jesus want to be human at all? NO matter who Jesus is why did Jesus need to become human?
The answer is kind of obvious if you look to the scriptures. Jesus needed to become human because that was the way He would save the humans. He came to save the humans specifically. He didn't come to save frogs or dogs. He didn't come to save angels or demons. He came to save humans. His mission was very specific.
So in conclusion that is why God the Almighty needed to become a human being. This is why God says that He blots out transgressions for His own sake (Isaiah 43:25) and yet in Ephesians 4:32 we find that God blots out transgressions for Christ's sake. God came in the form of a man to blot out our transgressions.
I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins. (Isaiah 43:25)
And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you. (Ephesians 4:32)
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
You said that Yahweh was used for more than one person. That was the context, not that Yahweh, isn't a personal name of God. In other words, that reference to your opinion, was correct, and contextual.
74x12
Well-Known Member
Why?
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
iam1me
Active Member
What you said, when interpreting my quote, was this:
I never said this - Yahweh is God's personal name. What I DID say is that angels - such as the one in Exodus 3 - were addressed using God's name.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
That's what I wrote. Note the word 'only'.
iam1me
Active Member
And you are still wrong - the name Yahweh is always God's personal name. It is being applied to an angel - but it is God's name.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
@iam1me
This is how it works.
I use the text to check and format arguments, using the other languages, as well, plus other sources, like Josephus, when contextual. So, I know, that a statement, saying that I am twisting scripture, to match an argument, isn't true.
It's a pretty simple equation.
You see, this isn't personal, I'm here for Biblical debate, and I know the methodology.
This is how it works.
I use the text to check and format arguments, using the other languages, as well, plus other sources, like Josephus, when contextual. So, I know, that a statement, saying that I am twisting scripture, to match an argument, isn't true.
It's a pretty simple equation.
You see, this isn't personal, I'm here for Biblical debate, and I know the methodology.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Therefore, in the text, that name is not a distinct name only used for one being. [According to your opinion.
That's the context, here.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
A personal argument, would be completely different, and I generally don't present those.
iam1me
Active Member
The name is being applied to an angel - but it still refers to God Almighty. This is because the angel is an agent of God, his representative. Thus the angel is addressed as if as though God, though we know he is not literally God Almighty himself. Thus, as God's mediator, the mediator was referred to as if God because it is through him that Moses was speaking to God.
iam1me
Active Member
I've seen you twist and ignore scriptures left and right across different issues and threads. That's why you can't accept that the Jewish people are addressed as gods. That's why you can't accept that scripture says that eternal life is the reward for good works. But these scriptures can be difficult to accept at first - since they contradict the interpretations commonly given in church.
74x12
Well-Known Member
You mean Psalm 82?
iam1me
Active Member
Yes, and more specifically Jesus' interpetation thereof.
John 10:34-35 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”? 35 If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside—
74x12
Well-Known Member
Good, but how do you know the Psalm or Jesus is referring to the Jews?
iam1me
Active Member
Jesus makes clear who it applies to: "If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came"
bitehoney
Member
- I took the time to read through all four pages of this great forum.I am the type of poster who try to carefully read through each and every single post in a forum before posting myself, if possible. Some forums have a hundred pages and even then, I even still read at least the last fifteen pages or so
I was interested in replying to several of the posts but there was one post that prompted my attention.
The poster named - Deeje was asking the great question about John 1:1 that says that the "word was "with God". This is a question that I have asked myself in the past. So I studied the Bible to see what the answer could be.
Deeje, asked the question " How can you be "with" someone if you are that someone? "
I believe that the Bible makes this clear by explaining that Yahhoshua's existence consisted as He was " IN " inside the bosom of the father. As the Father Himself - creating all things in heaven and earth.
The Bible says that Yahoshua's spirit is literally the - " Very Holy Spirit - The Comforter, that Yahoshua promised would return and be in His bride..
Joh 14:7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
9 Yahoshua saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
We see that - by looking upon Yahoshua - We are looking at the expressed image of the father's confidence.
Heb_1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his confidence, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down " IN " the right of the Majesty on high;
And REMEMBER that no man has seen the father, but or except for Yahoshua alone. Because Yahoshua is in the life stream / bosom of The Father. We do know that Yahwhea / God is an invisible spirit and that He has power to create. The Son created all things, existing Himself - as the Father Himself and He existed in the stream / bosom of the father from before the time of the creation INSIDE the STREAM / BOSOM, LIFE, FLOW of The Father.
Joh 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is INSIDE / in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
This Greek word bosom is also used in verses such as - Luk 16:22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels INSIDE Abraham's bosom. Also - The Beggar in Joh 1:18 was referred to as a future event. The Beggar was to exist spiritually saved and given eternal life and granted existence INSIDE the future stream of the spiritual bosom as an heir to Abraham or on the path or stream of Abraham.
The Son Of God existed INSIDE the life flow and spiritual bosom and stream of the Father and also existed here on earth - as God Himself, as the Image Of Gods face - filled with the fullness of Gods Holy Spirit. This word bosom is same exact Greek word as CREEK used here in - Act 27:39 And when it was day, they knew not the land: but they discovered a certain CREEK with a shore, into the which they were minded, if it were possible, to thrust in the ship.
CREEK here means BOSOM and is used as a life flow and a spiritual bosom and spiritual streams of generations and future paths and also the heartbeat, chest area and the lifeblood.
We know that The Bible also says that Yahoshua is literally the Blood of The Holy Spirit........ Acts 20:28 Take heed ...... to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
If the Acts 20:28 verse is declaring that - The Holy Spirit has made overseers over the Church that God Himself has Purchased with His own Blood. Then notice that Yahoshua / - is nowhere mentioned in the entire Chapter. -
we can ask - Is the verse saying indirectly and inadvertently, accidentally, or as if though indicating that Yahoshua Himself, is this very God * whom has shed His own Blood. ?
But - We know that He is, Yet the Bible says that God is the one shedding His blood.
We see that Yahoshua was the manifestation / morph and physical form of The invisible Holy Spirit, taking on the manifestation / morph and physical form of a human servant. Equal to the very Father, manifesting as The Face Of The Father which is a spirit - but taking on the morph / form of a servant / man.
Christ was in the bosom, of The Father before He came to earth as Gods son.
Eze 39:27 When I have brought them again from the people, and gathered them out of their enemies' lands, and am sanctified in them in the sight of many nations;
:28 Then shall they know that I am the LORD their God, which caused them to be led into captivity among the heathen: but I have gathered them unto their own land, and have left none of them any more there.
29 I will not hide My face from them any longer, for I will have poured out My Spirit on the house of Israel," declares the Lord GOD.
The Bible clarifies that Yahoshua is the expression, the Image the expressed IMAGE of the Fathers Confidence. - and also the image of His Face. And that by the faith that the shedding of God's own blood has saved us.
When we read our translations here in Heb_1:3 we see that the trinitarian translators deleted the Greek word " CONFIDENCE " and replaced it with the word " CONFIDENCE "
Heb_1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his confidence.
The Greek word is " confidence " - and not " person. " God and His Christ / Anointing - are never called as a person in the original manuscripts. I can demonstrate this fact and prove this by the original manuscripts. Many words are changed as the trinitarian translators when through the entire Bible changing many words to codify, form, mold and invent and Re - create doctrines and ideas and theologies and ideas that are nowhere in the original manuscripts.
Let’ s take a look at all of the five total times that this word exists and is present in the New Testament Greek manuscripts.
1.. 2Co 9:4 in this same confident boasting.
2.. 2Co 11:17 in this confidence of boasting.
3.. Heb 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his confidence.
4.. Heb 3:14 For we are made partakers of Christ if we hold the beginning of our confidence steadfast unto the end;
5.. Heb 11:1 Now faith is the confidence of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
Here also - the original manuscripts say that faith is the confidence of things hoped for.
– Not substance. The word SUBSTANCE was a trinitarian doctrine that was added to the translation.
If anyone has any questions or is curious I can respectfully and easily demonstrate the many errors in our trinitarian translations, that is different from the original manuscripts.
Last edited: