Why Does the Lord Jesus Christ Have An Archangel's Voice?

[nPeace]

I have no idea where you are getting, 'scripture vs doctrine', what doctrine? Doctrine from where?

The New Testament says a lot of things, however one thing it doesn't say, is that Jesus is an angel. There actually is no reason to even refute the idea, since it isn't in Scripture.

Godhood and Godhead mean the same thing, basically.

If you want to get complicated here, when I say Godhood, it can actually include what you are calling angels. In other words, I am revising my arguments, to match your theoretical scriptural adherence, not presenting my own beliefs, in the manner I would, if talking about my beliefs.

Other than that, until you actually explain verses like Hebrews 1:8, I don't have to refute, your theory, at all, to be 'scripturally correct'.

I don't understand.
You provided Hebrews 1:8 as proof of the Godhead.
All I asked was that you explain how it proved the Godhead, and explain what the Godhead is exactly, since I am not familiar with that, and, or what your understanding of it is.
What did I say wrong. Is that a problem?

 

[Desert Snake]

I don't understand.
You provided Hebrews 1:8 as proof of the Godhead.
All I asked was that you explain how it proved the Godhead, and explain what the Godhead is exactly, since I am not familiar with that, and, or what your understanding of it is.
What did I say wrong. Is that a problem?

Your argumentation is the problem. The scripture actually does call Jesus 'G-d' in various places.

What is there to 'explain'?

 

[nPeace]

Your argumentation is the problem. The scripture actually does call Jesus 'G-d' in various places.

What is there to 'explain'?

Well, based on the fact that you already stated you do not accept that the term God, also applied to humans, and you include angels in God, how can I have a discussion with you, if I do not understand the Godhood, and you don't want to explain? All I can do is say, Thank you, ...unless you are willing to explain.

Are you saying everyone in heaven is God?

 

[Desert Snake]

and explain what the Godhead is exactly, since I am not familiar with that, and, or what your understanding of it is.

Then you can explain what you mean by 'god', specifically, I take it? That would be even more important to this discussion, because it us clearly a 'non-literalism', of some sort.

 

[Desert Snake]

Well, based on the fact that you already stated you do not accept that the term God, also applied to humans, and you include angels in God, how can I have a discussion with you, if I do not understand the Godhood, and you don't want to explain? All I can do is say, Thank you, ...unless you are willing to explain.

Are you saying everyone in heaven is God?

Angels are included contextually, in the word Elohim. Again, I'm revising my argument to match the necessary scripture and words used.

I already explained that 'G-d', without specification, actually does not refer to humans. That idea, is nonsense, and makes the Bible completely vague. In other words, if you say that, great, however you don't actually follow your own methodology, and arrive at a meaningless discussion.

 

[Desert Snake]

The argument that 'god' without specification, like, the god Thor, false gods, his own gods, etc, means 'G-d' without specification,

Means that

Everytime you say 'g-d' without specification, there is no idea who you are talking about.

Satan? Baal ashtoreth? Thor?

 

[Desert Snake]

Your argument, your argument, or question, to prove a Godhead, is by your own methodology completely vague, because you believe that 'G-d' without specification, can refer to anyone, or any entity.

The problem is that you don't actually understand your own argument. Your argument necessitates, specification as to which god, you are talking about,
Otherwise
It is completely vague, and a meaningless discussion.

This also means, that everytime you say g-d , you need to specify which g-d you are talking about.

In other words, by your own definition of the words, you can't use the word or name g-d, without specifying which g-d you are talking about.

 

[nPeace]

Angels are included contextually, in the word Elohim. Again, I'm revising my argument to match the necessary scripture and words used.

I don't know how to interpret that, so do you have an example to show how you include and exclude angel in the term God - Elohim?

I already explained that 'G-d', without specification, actually does not refer to humans. That idea, is nonsense, and makes the Bible completely vague. In other words, if you say that, great, however you don't actually follow your own methodology, and arrive at a meaningless discussion.

I understand God to mean "Mighty One" or "Great One". Are you saying you think that is wrong?

Exodus 7:1
וַיֹּ֤אמֶר so said יְהוָה֙ YHVH אֶל־ to מֹשֶׁ֔ה Moses רְאֵ֛ה See נְתַתִּ֥יךָ I have made you אֱלֹהִ֖ים (Elohim) God לְפַרְעֹ֑ה to Pharaoh וְאַהֲרֹ֥ן and Aaron אָחִ֖יךָ your brother יִהְיֶ֥ה shall be נְבִיאֶֽךָ׃ your prophet

What is your explanation as to why a human is called God - Elohim?

 

[Desert Snake]

I don't know how to interpret that, so do you have an example to show how you include and exclude angel in the term God - Elohim?


I understand God to mean "Mighty One" or "Great One". Are you saying you think that is wrong?

Exodus 7:1
וַיֹּ֤אמֶר so said יְהוָה֙ YHVH אֶל־ to מֹשֶׁ֔ה Moses רְאֵ֛ה See נְתַתִּ֥יךָ I have made you אֱלֹהִ֖ים (Elohim) God לְפַרְעֹ֑ה to Pharaoh וְאַהֲרֹ֥ן and Aaron אָחִ֖יךָ your brother יִהְיֶ֥ה shall be נְבִיאֶֽךָ׃ your prophet

What is your explanation as to why a human is called God - Elohim?

Lucifer is a fallen angel. Contextually, Lucifer is considered, as the higher realm being designation. This is why, Lucifer, is an 'angel', and also called 'a g-d', [with limited power.

So, if Jesus or one of the yeshuas, in the bible, is under the power of Lucifer, then that character would call lucifer his father, and, would be associated with that, in a religious sense.

So, the yeshua who is possessed by lucifer, by religious configuration, is also a manifestation of lucifer, who is a 'g-d'.

 

[nPeace]

Your argument, your argument, or question, to prove a Godhead, is by your own methodology completely vague, because you believe that 'G-d' without specification, can refer to anyone, or any entity.

The problem is that you don't actually understand your own argument. Your argument necessitates, specification as to which god, you are talking about,
Otherwise
It is completely vague, and a meaningless discussion.

This also means, that everytime you say g-d , you need to specify which g-d you are talking about.

In other words, by your own definition of the words, you can't use the word or name g-d, without specifying which g-d you are talking about.

You just told me that you include angels as God, based on context. How is that different?

 

[Desert Snake]

You just told me that you include angels as God, based on context. How is that different?

Because angels aren't actually people. It doesn't match the text, in other words. If you forego the text, then you might configure that, however the human nature of the yeshuas, in the NT, would basically disqualify them as 'angels'.

Has more to do with the nature of what an angel is, than theology.

 

[nPeace]

Lucifer is a fallen angel. Contextually, Lucifer is considered, as the higher realm being designation. This is why, Lucifer, is an 'angel', and also called 'a g-d', [with limited power.

So, if Jesus or one of the yeshuas, in the bible, is under the power of Lucifer, then that character would call lucifer his father, and, would be associated with that, in a religious sense.

So, the yeshua who is possessed by lucifer, by religious configuration, is also a manifestation of lucifer, who is a 'g-d'.

Why did you just say a god, when you refer to "Lucifer". Is Jesus ever referred to as a god?

 

[nPeace]

@Disciple of Jesus You didn't actually answer my questions though.
I understand God to mean "Mighty One" or "Great One". Are you saying you think that is wrong?

Exodus 7:1
וַיֹּ֤אמֶר so said יְהוָה֙ YHVH אֶל־ to מֹשֶׁ֔ה Moses רְאֵ֛ה See נְתַתִּ֥יךָ I have made you אֱלֹהִ֖ים (Elohim) God לְפַרְעֹ֑ה to Pharaoh וְאַהֲרֹ֥ן and Aaron אָחִ֖יךָ your brother יִהְיֶ֥ה shall be נְבִיאֶֽךָ׃ your prophet

What is your explanation as to why a human is called God - Elohim?

 

[Desert Snake]

Why did you just say a god, when you refer to "Lucifer". Is Jesus ever referred to as a god?

If you are 'going by the text', that is the idea. So it doesn't have to be specified. Just like, before the fall, lucifer is is one if the words used for g-d, as well, presumably.

This is sort if why the deity has to specified, unless its completely contextual, to a set of books, or whatever. Then its just a matter of belief, right, you can just as easily say jesus is lucifer, or the son of lucifer, whatever.

The texts are separate from belief, if you are discussing them literally.

 

[nPeace]

Lucifer is a fallen angel. Contextually, Lucifer is considered, as the higher realm being designation. This is why, Lucifer, is an 'angel', and also called 'a g-d', [with limited power.

So, if Jesus or one of the yeshuas, in the bible, is under the power of Lucifer, then that character would call lucifer his father, and, would be associated with that, in a religious sense.

So, the yeshua who is possessed by lucifer, by religious configuration, is also a manifestation of lucifer, who is a 'g-d'.

What scriptural suport do you have for any of this?

 

[nPeace]

Because angels aren't actually people. It doesn't match the text, in other words. If you forego the text, then you might configure that, however the human nature of the yeshuas, in the NT, would basically disqualify them as 'angels'.

Has more to do with the nature of what an angel is, than theology.

What's a yeshua, and what scripture shows there are yeshuas?

 

[Desert Snake]

What scriptural suport do you have for any of this?

My actual belief us that there is more than one Yeshua. The texts reflect both, in other words, requiring parsing of the texts. The religious aspect, has many parallels, however, I believe better for another thread. If I start that thread, will notify you, if interested.

 

[nPeace]

If you are 'going by the text', that is the idea. So it doesn't have to be specified. Just like, before the fall, lucifer is is one if the words used for g-d, as well, presumably.

This is sort if why the deity has to specified, unless its completely contextual, to a set of books, or whatever. Then its just a matter of belief, right, you can just as easily say jesus is lucifer, or the son of lucifer, whatever.

The texts are separate from belief, if you are discussing them literally.

Which scriptures say that

before the fall, lucifer is is one if the words used for g-d

unless its completely contextual, to a set of books, or whatever.

Pardon me?

 

[nPeace]

My actual belief us that there is more than one Yeshua. The texts reflect both, in other words, requiring parsing of the texts. The religious aspect, has many parallels, however, I believe better for another thread. If I start that thread, will notify you, if interested.

I'm only asking for scripture, not explanation.
Do you have at least one or two scriptures?

 

[nPeace]

@Disciple of Jesus Still you have not answered my questions.
Why is that, may I ask?