Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

RECOVERING THE TRUTH & A COMING TO A CORRECT UNDERSTANDING OF JESUS
Bet Emet Ministries ^ | Unknown | Craig Lyons

Posted on 07/01/2003 10:22:12 AM PDT by ksen

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260 ... 1,861 next last
To: milan
well if I tell spiritual jokes I may as well team up with the refrigerator-- after all its inner light is always on
221 posted on 07/01/2003 5:33:11 PM PDT by JesseShurun (The Hazzardous Duke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies]

To: Invincibly Ignorant; A_Thinker
Micah 5:2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

YHWH has always know His plan for Messiah. This scripture, again, doesn't prove Messiah is YHWH. Another retroactive reading. Why do you think the doctrine of the trinity wasn't required for salvation until 425 ad

Except the scripture says HE was from everlasting not a thought from everlasting .Your savior had a beginning as such he is not from everlasting

Steve of course we look retroactively at the Old Testament . Jesus used it to prove who he is and His purpose. It was prophetic.

As a historian wrote it does not matter what it says it matters what it means. The Jews did not and do not know what it means .

222 posted on 07/01/2003 5:33:45 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: milan
a quartet with stevie
223 posted on 07/01/2003 5:34:14 PM PDT by JesseShurun (The Hazzardous Duke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies]

To: milan; JesseShurun
Okay...maybe we have a trio of comedians!

Ignorant would never allow it. There's no "trio" in the Torah. He works strictly mono.

224 posted on 07/01/2003 5:35:46 PM PDT by Alex Murphy (Athanasius contra mundum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies]

Comment #225 Removed by Moderator

To: JesseShurun; ET(end tyranny)
are pretending to be Jewish?

Just someone that wants to work his way to salvation to make the death of Christ of no account.

Gal 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness [come] by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

226 posted on 07/01/2003 5:40:50 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: JesseShurun
you sir are funnier than me and that's funny!! We must alert Eckleburg who is a conneissieur, (and can spell besides,) of fine music. Methinks you could replace Marlowe in her esteemitidy

'twern't nothin' but the right application of the Socramedic Axion:

Comedian, Amuse Thyself.

227 posted on 07/01/2003 5:41:17 PM PDT by Alex Murphy (Athanasius contra mundum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 207 | View Replies]

To: Invincibly Ignorant
when you were a little kid, did you jump up and say "Look what I can do?"
228 posted on 07/01/2003 5:41:24 PM PDT by JesseShurun (The Hazzardous Duke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
right on the old noggin as usual. I told him to wear a helmet
229 posted on 07/01/2003 5:42:43 PM PDT by JesseShurun (The Hazzardous Duke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 226 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy; Dr. Eckleburg
'course if you replace him, I'm fixin' to get jealous
230 posted on 07/01/2003 5:43:52 PM PDT by JesseShurun (The Hazzardous Duke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 227 | View Replies]

I stand corrected.
231 posted on 07/01/2003 5:46:37 PM PDT by Alex Murphy (Athanasius contra mundum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy
lol
232 posted on 07/01/2003 5:48:24 PM PDT by JesseShurun (The Hazzardous Duke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 231 | View Replies]

To: JesseShurun
when you were a little kid, did you jump up and say "Look what I can do?"

No. I could already read. lol.

233 posted on 07/01/2003 6:04:05 PM PDT by Invincibly Ignorant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 228 | View Replies]

To: Invincibly Ignorant
"Let me enlighten all those that believe Yahshua (jesus) the Messiah is God."

Would you enlighten St. Thomas - a good Jewish Christian?:

John 20:28 "Thomas answered, and said to him: My Lord, and MY GOD.
29 Jesus saith to him: Because thou hast seen me, Thomas, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and have believed."

And do you claim that the saints in heaven worship a mere creature rather than their creator?:

Apoc 5:8 "And when he had opened the book, the four living creatures, and the four and twenty ancients fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints:
9 And they sung a new canticle, saying: Thou art worthy, O Lord, to take the book, and to open the seals thereof; because thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God, in thy blood, out of every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation.
10 And hast made us to our God a kingdom and priests, and we shall reign on the earth.
11 And I beheld, and I heard the voice of many angels round about the throne, and the living creatures, and the ancients; and the number of them was thousands of thousands,
12 Saying with a loud voice: The Lamb that was slain is worthy to receive power, and divinity, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and benediction.
13 And every creature, which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them: I heard all saying: To him that sitteth on the throne, and to the Lamb, benediction, and honour, and glory, and power, for ever and ever.
14 And the four living creatures said: Amen. And the four and twenty ancients fell down on their faces, and adored him that liveth for ever and ever."

Or maybe you believe that the Johannine corpus has been corrupted as well?

234 posted on 07/01/2003 6:34:02 PM PDT by Tantumergo (Ignorance is usually vincible where apostates are concerned.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: Invincibly Ignorant; RnMomof7
The term lord (Hebrew - Adon) is used numerous times to refer to men - NOT YHVH.

Well, at least you prove you've earned your screen name here. The Jews used the Hebrew plural name Adonai to refer to God, as synonymous with Jehovah. Its used some 431 times that way in the Tanakh. The technical term is "semantic domain," viz., that a word can mean many different things. Yes, it could refer to a woman's husband, but it also could refer to Deity. Context helps us determine which is which. Word translations are not just one-to-one.

You forget that grand-daddy of all Trinitarian texts, John 1.

1 ¶ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 He was in the beginning with God.
3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being....
14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.

- John 1:1-3, 14
It doesn't get any simpler than that. The Logos existed with God uncreated, and indeed it was God. That Logos became flesh and lived among men. I fail to see any other conclusion than Jesus Christ was God and was man.

You accuse Christians of being polytheists; that is a gross misrepresentation of Christianity. It's no different than the accusation that Jehovah is a cruel, vidictively petty fiend in the Tanakh -- both rely upon an understanding of reality unsuitable for all but the most unquestioning of children, and makes that the focus of one's attack. The Trinity, in short, is this, and nothing more: there is one God in all of heaven and Earth. The Father is God. The Son is God. The Holy Spirit is God. Its simple, yet profoundly mysterious.

235 posted on 07/01/2003 6:37:46 PM PDT by jude24 ("Facts? You can use facts to prove anything that's even REMOTELY true!" - Homer Simpson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: jude24
I won't waste time rebutting scriptures I've already covered.

Its simple, yet profoundly mysterious.

Always comes down to this when you can't explain satisfactorily. "Its a mystery". What's simple is that its eject from the argument crap.

236 posted on 07/01/2003 7:05:26 PM PDT by Invincibly Ignorant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 235 | View Replies]

To: Invincibly Ignorant
Always comes down to this when you can't explain satisfactorily.

Except I have.

You just can't answer John 1.

I still have in my reserve Colossians.

237 posted on 07/01/2003 7:11:54 PM PDT by jude24 ("Facts? You can use facts to prove anything that's even REMOTELY true!" - Homer Simpson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 236 | View Replies]

To: Tantumergo
Would you enlighten St. Thomas - a good Jewish Christian?:

I would praise my Lord and my God as well, as a matter of fact I did when I realized YHWH raised Yeshua from the dead. Why do people always think this is some kind of proof of trinity scripture?

And do you claim that the saints in heaven worship a mere creature rather than their creator?:

Yes I do. People fell down before Moses and Abraham and worshipped as well. "Received Divinity"? Which Catholic translation are you using? I thought he pre-existed with power and divinity. What's this about Him receiving it?

Or maybe you believe that the Johannine corpus has been corrupted as well?

Yawn. Try again.

238 posted on 07/01/2003 7:14:29 PM PDT by Invincibly Ignorant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies]

To: jude24
Get ready with your Colossians because your John 1 is about to bite the dust.

Our English Bible gradually developed over the last six hundred years. John Wycliffe is credited with the first English translation of the New Testament which was completed about 1380 C.E. Until that time the Word of YHWH was locked up in the Latin tongue which was unknown to the common people. The Latin Vulgate translated by Jerome about 400 C.E. was the standard Bible used in the Catholic Church.

Wycliffe's translation is based upon the Latin Vulgate, not the Greek. It is therefore a "version of a version." In Wycliffe's version, John 1:3-4 use the word "him" in reference to the "Word" of verse 1 and is a translation of the Latin "ipsum" and "ipso" (he, she, or it).

The next great English translator was William Tyndale. He was an excellent Greek scholar who had access to the Greek text of Erasmus which Wycliffe did not have. The hand of the Almighty was upon Tyndale as He used him to give us our first English translation based upon the Hebrew and Greek. His New Testament was published in 1526 and revised to its final state in 1534.

Tyndale's translation of John 1:3-4 reads,

John 1:3,4 - All things were made by it, and without it, was made nothing that was made. In it was life, and the life was the light of men. As you can see, Tyndale used "it" instead of "him." "It" is a translation of the Greek "autou" meaning he, she, or it. What this tells us is that Tyndale did not read Messiah into the "logos" or "word" of verse 1 and he was not influenced by the Latin Vulgate or Wycliffe.

Miles Coverdale, a friend of Tyndale, gave us the first complete Bible printed in English in 1535. It was not a firsthand translation from the Hebrew and Greek, but was based on the Latin Vulgate and Tyndale's translation. Coverdale used "him" in John 1:3-4.

In 1537, John Rogers, using the pseudonym "Thomas Matthew," published a translation based largely on Tyndale and Coverdale which became known as Matthew's Bible. He uses "it" in John 1:3-4.

The Great Bible followed in 1539 and was a revision of Matthew's Bible. The first edition was prepared by Miles Coverdale. For some reason Coverdale decided "it" was more correct than "him" which appeared in his 1535 version based on the Latin Vulgate and left John 1:3-4 as it was in Matthew's translation, "it" instead of "him." The Great Bible was the first authorized English version and was ordered to be placed in every church.

Under Queen Mary the printing of the English Bible ended and its use in the churches was forbidden. This gave rise to a version completed in Geneva. The Geneva Bible of 1560 was the first Bible to have numbered verses, each set off as a separate paragraph. This Bible became the "household Bible of the English-speaking nations." It held that position for about 75 years. It was Shakespeare's Bible and that of the Puritans who settled New England. Once again, the translation of John 1:3-4 follows Tyndale's example, "it" instead of "him."

Queen Elizabeth eventually reinstated the order that a copy of the Bible be placed in every church and she encouraged its reading. Since there were not enough copies of the Great Bible, the bishops themselves made a new revision known as the Bishop's Bible. It was published in 1568. It was used mostly by the clergy, not being very popular with the common people. It, too, renders John 1:3-4 using "it," not "him."

In 1582, the Roman Catholic version of the New Testament was completed and known as the Rheims New Testament. It was the result of a battle between Papists and Protestants, the former believing the Latin Vulgate to be the standard upon which all translations should be made. It was the work of Roman Catholic scholars based on the Latin. They chose to render John 1:3-4 using "him" as did the previous versions based on the Vulgate.

From that point on, all future versions, beginning with the King James version of 1611, used "him" instead of "it" in their translation of John 1:3-4. As you can see, the following translation of John 1:3-4 is not without historic and linguistic foundation;

"All things were made by it, and without it, was made nothing that was made. In it was life, and the life was the light of men."

The "logos" (Word) of John 1:1 means "the spoken word" or "something said (including the thought)." In that sense the word is an "it," not a person but a thing. In other words, YHWH spoke creation into existence. This understanding agrees perfectly with passages such as Gen.1:3,6,9,11,14,20, and 24, all of which begin, "And Elohim said." YHWH spoke and it was done.

Ps.33:6,9 - By the word of YHWH were the heavens made; and all the host by the breath of his mouth. . . For He spoke and it was; He commanded, and it stood fast. Not only did YHWH speak creation into existence, but He also spoke His Son Yahshua into existence; "And the word (YHWH's spoken word) was made flesh" (Jn.1:14). Yahshua did not become the "Word of YHWH" until his birth as a flesh and blood male child.

To say the "logos" of John 1:1 is a reference to Messiah is to read him into the text. Roman Catholic scholars had to do this in order to support their unscriptural trinity doctrine. If Messiah did not pre-exist, the trinity doctrine would collapse, it being based upon the belief that all three members of the "godhead" were co-eternal. Since Messiah only pre-existed in YHWH's plan of salvation and not literally, the trinity doctrine is without foundation.

Bring on Colossians.

239 posted on 07/01/2003 7:23:18 PM PDT by Invincibly Ignorant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies]

Comment #240 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260 ... 1,861 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson