Zone1 Is Jesus God?

[beautress]

I will go over both of your posts later. As Trinitarians, you're not idolaters or offending YHWH Father, provided you sincerely love His Son. The fact you believe that Jesus is co-eternal and consubstantial with the heavenly Father doesn't render your faith illegitimate, even if it's not Biblical. It's an error, and human beings aren't perfect. YHWH knows that. I will go over your prooftexts soon.

My quotation was from Handel's Messiah, which is in accordance with verbatim with the Biblical texts known to mankind from God's amazing creation that included making man in his image to keep him from being lonely and in the case of Moses who was quite interested in who God is, only to be told by God in no uncertain terms, "I am who I am! IOW, God had a sense of humor, or after reading Moses' encounter with the man upstairs, did you not get it? Handel was known as a very picky biblical scholar in addition to have authored one of the most exquisitely beautiful symphonies ever written and called "Messiah" that I have sung in 3 states several times.. God does not change. Our understanding of his Word is best when understood according to the scriptures for us to read. Scholars intentionally used easy-to-understand words not to make us righteous judges of other people, but to bring us closer to God to help us love Him in the fullest. Even the simplest people in the world who can read can understand the Bible because the authors were instructed to make it easy to understand by the common man on the street as well as a child of the age of 11 or 12. They get it.

I will go over both of your posts later. As Trinitarians, you're not idolaters or offending YHWH Father, provided you sincerely love His Son. The fact you believe that Jesus is co-eternal and consubstantial with the heavenly Father doesn't render your faith illegitimate, even if it's not Biblical. It's an error, and human beings aren't perfect. YHWH knows that. I will go over your prooftexts soon.

It's not Biblical? I think that it is.

John 10:30-36

30 I and my Father are one.​

​

31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.​

​

32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?​

​

33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.​

​

34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?​

​

35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;​

​

36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?​

​

Isaiah 9:6-7​

King James Version​

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.​

7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.​

​

​

I do not see the error you are claiming I made. Isaiah couldn't have made it any simpler that people would think of the Messiah, who we Christians believe is Jesus Christ, as is stated in verse 6 of the ninth chapter of Isaiah's book. I did not just dig up the words "the mighty God" anywhere but in the scripture's use of those three words. Isaiah prophesied correctly that people would call Jesus God. Yes, he was God's son, but according to Christ, he is one with God. It sounds to me like he meant God and he are the same spiritual person. It seems to me to be a miracle of God. and I did not make this up, period. Isiah was very close to and greatly loved by God because his prophecies were always true and quite exact, because Isaiah always spoke from the heart of God when he had something to say to his contemporaries.​

 

[kjw47]

In the begining was the word. and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

= error according to the Greek lexicons.
If your scenario was true, then in simple english the 2nd line reads-And God(word) was with God---that is more than 1 God.

 

[TruthNotBS]

[SIZE=7][/HEADING]
[HEADING=3]beautress[/SIZE]​

Always Faithful​

Let me reiterate the fact that even though I disagree with your views on Christ's nature I still consider you a believer. Believing in the trinity doctrine doesn't condemn anyone to perdition, it's just a theological error, based upon centuries of tradition and just bad Biblical hermeneutics.

This is Bible study. To know the Bible, we must thoroughly study it, and that requires time and effort.

You wrote the following:

Isaiah prophesied the Messiah's identity, this: "And his name shall be called Wonderful, Councillor, The Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace," Handel's Messiah sings Isaiah's scripture so very beautifully. And legend has it that Handel was picky, picky, picky, picky about the translations being accurate to the nth degree. I've heard that from more than one choirmasters I had the privilege of singing the Messiah by Handel under their devoted-to-the-Lord praises-style Chorales.

Practically all Christians accept the son mentioned in Isaiah 9:6 as being Jesus Christ (and not as King Hezekiah, as the rabbinic, non-believing Jews assert). I agree with my Christian brethren, in identifying the son in this verse in Isaiah as Christ. Do the names attributed to the son in this passage, "Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace" support the Trinitarian view of Christ being co-equal, co-eternal and consubstantial with Almighty YHWH, His heavenly Father? In my opinion and in that of my Christian denomination, we answer, no.

Jesus Christ is "a mighty god" in the same sense that God's angels were called "gods" and the judges of Israel were called "gods" by God himself (also by Jesus - John 10:34, 35), and Moses was called "a god" by YHWH himself. Yes, men and angels were called gods (elohim - Hebrew; theos - Greek) in a proper, but subordinate, sense by YHWH and his inspired prophets.

Although they were given this elevated title in a proper sense (not false gods), it was obviously with the clear understanding that it in no way implied an ontological equality with the Only True, Almighty God (John 17:3). A bank employee calling his boss, the head of the bank, "the president" would certainly not imply an equality of position, power, etc. with "The President" of the United States Of America. They're both presidents, but they're not of the same kind or category.

The word "god" as understood by those who used that term simply meant a "mighty one", See Young's Concordance or Strongs, Brown Driver Briggs/BDB..etc to verify. The word "Mighty" is found in Is. 9:6 (Gibbor in the original Hebrew) is also applied to the angels at Ps. 103:20 (see a modern concordance such as the New American Standard Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible or any of the aforementioned Hebrew lexicons). It is interesting that the ancient translation of the Old Testament that Jesus and His apostles frequently quoted from, the Septuagint Version, renders Is. 9:6: "and his [the Messiah's] name is called the Angel [aggeloV, messenger] of Great Counsel." It translates "Mighty God/El Gibbor" as the "Angel Of Great Counsel".

The church father, Justin Martyr quoted Is. 9:6 also as "The Angel of mighty counsel" in his "Dialogue With Trypho," ch. LXXVI.

So, just as "Lord" was applied to anyone in authority: angels, masters over servants, husbands, etc., so, too, could "god" be applied to anyone (good or bad) who was considered a "mighty person." Of course, only one person could be called the "Most High God," or the "Only True God," or the "Almighty God"! That is, the Heavenly Father, YHWH.

In the same way, "Eternal Father" could mean that the Messiah is one who has been given eternal life and through him God has brought eternal life to many others. Jesus Christ is the father of salvation and immortality. We might make the comparison that the Heavenly Father, YHWH, has brought men to life in this world through their earthly fathers. I have a heavenly Father, YHWH and I also have a father of my salvation and a biological father. This would be intended in a clearly subordinate sense and not to take anything away from the ultimate honor, glory, worship, etc. due to the Most High God and Father in heaven, YHWH.

At any rate, even Trinitarians do not confuse the two separate persons of the Father and the Son. They do not say the Son is the Father. They say the Father and the Son are two separate individual persons who are equally "God".

Therefore, since we obviously cannot take "Eternal Father" in the literal sense to mean that Jesus is the Father, we cannot take the rest of that same name (esp. `Mighty God') in its literal highest sense and say that Jesus is literally, Mighty God, etc., either. Jesus isn't Almighty God, but He can be divine and mighty, and that is what He is, under the authority of His Heavenly Father, YHWH Almighty.

In addition to the distinct possibility of the use of the secondary subordinate meanings of the titles such as "God/god" as explained by Bible language scholars, we can see by the actual renderings of some trinitarian Bible translators in Is. 9:6 that they believe such subordinate meanings were intended by the inspired Bible writer.

Instead of "Mighty God/El Gibbor," Dr. James Moffatt, a Trinitarian scholar and Bible translator, translated this part of Is. 9:6 as "a divine hero;" Byington, another well-known Trinitarian translator has "Divine Champion;" The New English Bible has "In Battle Godlike;" The Catholic New American Bible (1970 and 1991 revision) renders it "God-Hero;" and the REB says "Mighty Hero." Even the most respected of Biblical Hebrew language experts, Gesenius, translated it as "mighty hero" - p. 45, Gesenius' Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon.

Also, The NIV Study Bible, in a f.n. for Ps 45:6, tells us:

"In this psalm, which praises the king and especially extols his splendor and majesty' (v. 3), it is not unthinkable that he was called god' as a title of honor [cf. Isa 9:6]." (Bracketed information included in original footnote. Emphasis is mine)

In addition, Rotherham has rendered "Eternal Father" as "father of progress," and the New English Bible translates it: "father of a wide realm."

The above-mentioned Bible translations by trinitarian scholars which apply the words in the name at Is. 9:6 in a subordinate sense directly to Jesus clearly show that they do not believe this scripture implies an equality with YHWH the Father.

But, some may ask, if ‘a mighty god’ were intended in this name, why is “God” given a capital ‘G’ in most translations of this name? The answer is that in English translations of names we often find the major words within a name (or title) are capitalized. This is similar to the way book titles, names of buildings, ships, etc. are written in English. ‘The Lord of the Rings,’ ‘The World Trade Center,’ ‘The Empire State Building,’ ‘Allure of the Seas’ (cruise ship), etc., are modern examples.

Another way competent Bible scholars have interpreted the meaning of this name is with the understanding that it (as with many, if not most, of the other Israelites' personal names) does not apply directly to the Messiah (as we have already seen with "Elijah," "Abijah," etc.) but is, instead, a statement praising the Father, Jehovah God.

Personal names in the ancient Hebrew and Greek are often somewhat cryptic to us today. The English Bible translator must fill in the missing minor words (especially in names composed of two or more Hebrew words) such as "my," "is," "of," etc. in whatever way he thinks best in order to make sense for us today in English.

For instance, two of the best Bible concordances (Young's and Strong's) and a popular trinitarian Bible dictionary (Today's Dictionary of the Bible) differ greatly on the exact meaning of many Biblical personal names because of those "minor" words which must be added to bring out the intended meaning.

Strong's Exhaustive Concordance, for example, says the name "Elimelech" (which is literally just "God King") means "God of (the) King." Young's Analytical Concordance says it means "God is King." Today's Dictionary of the Bible says it means " God his king" - p. 206, Bethany House Publ., 1982. And an online meaning is given as “My God is the King.” - http://www.kveller.com/jewish_names/display.php?n=Elimelech&k=840

And, “God is my King.” - http://www.jhom.com/calendar/sivan/symbolism.htm .

I haven’t found any scholar/translator who says the name of Elimelech should be translated with its literal meaning of “God King.”

Those missing minor words that the translator must supply at his own discretion can often make a vital difference! - For example, the footnote for Gen. 17:5 in The NIV Study Bible: The name 'Abram' "means Exalted Father,' probably in reference to God (i.e., [God is] Exalted Father')."- Brackets in original.

This is why another name the Messiah is to be called by at Jer. 23:6 is rendered, `The LORD [YHWH] is Our Righteousness' in the following Bibles: RSV; NRSV; NEB; NJB; JPS (Margolis, ed.); Tanakh; Byington; AT; and ASV (footnote). Of course, other translations render it more literally by calling the Messiah "The LORD [YHWH] Our Righteousness" to help support a `Jesus is God' doctrine. Some of these (such as the NASB) actually render the very same name at Jer. 33:16 as "The LORD [or Jehovah] is Our Righteousness"! - [bracketed information is mine].

(Unfortunately for "Jesus is YHWH" advocates, the very same name given to the Messiah at Jer. 23:16 is given to a city at Jer. 33:16.)

But perhaps most instructive of all is the name given to the prophet’s child in Isaiah 8:3 shortly before his giving the name found in Is. 9:6.

Is. 8:3
Maher-shalal-hash-baz: Literally, “spoil speeds prey hastes” or “swift booty speedy prey.” Translated by various Bible scholars as: “In making speed to the spoil he hasteneth the prey” - - “swift [is] booty, speedy [is] prey” - - “the spoil speeded, the prey hasteth” - - “Speeding for spoil, hastening for plunder” - - “There will soon be looting and stealing”- - “Speeding is the spoil, Hastening is the prey” - - “The Looting Will Come Quickly; the Prey Will Be Easy” - - “Take sway the spoils with speed, quickly take the prey” - - “Swift is the booty, speedy is the prey” - - “Swift the Spoils of War and Speedy Comes the Attacker” - - “Make haste to plunder! Hurry to the spoil!” - - “Make haste to the spoil; fall upon the prey.”

And John Gill wrote:

“‘hasten to seize the prey, and to take away the spoil.’ Some translate it, ‘in hastening the prey, the spoiler hastens’; perhaps it may be better rendered, ‘hasten to the spoil, hasten to the prey.’”

Therefore, the personal name at Is. 9:6 has been honestly translated as:

"And his name is called: Wonderful in counsel is God the Mighty, the everlasting Father, the Ruler of peace" - The Holy Scriptures, JPS Version (Margolis, ed.) to show that it is intended to praise the God of the Messiah who performs great things through the Messiah.

‘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, Counselor [IS] The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.’ The two letter word ‘is,’ is usually not stated in Hebrew. Rather, the ‘is’ is understood.” - https://edward-t-babinski.blogspot.com/2016/04/prophecy-about-jesus-mighty-god.html

The Leeser Bible also translates it:

“Wonderful, counsellor of the mighty God, of the everlasting Father, the prince of peace”

Also, An American Translation (by trinitarians Smith and Goodspeed) says:
"Wonderful counselor is God almighty, Father forever, Prince of peace."

From the Is. 9:6 footnote in the trinity-supporting NET Bible:

".... some have suggested that one to three of the titles that follow ['called'] refer to God, not the king. For example, the traditional punctuation of the Hebrew text suggests the translation, 'and the Extraordinary Strategist, the Mighty God calls his name, "Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace."'"

And,

‘Wonderful in counsel is God the mighty, the Everlasting Father, the Ruler of Peace’ (Hertz 1968).

Of course it could also be honestly translated: "Wonderful Counselor and Mighty God is the Eternal Father of the Prince of Peace."

And the Tanakh by the JPS, 1985, translates it:

[a]"The Mighty God is planning grace;
The Eternal Father [is] a peaceable ruler."

This latter translation seems particularly appropriate since it is in the form of a parallelism. Not only was the previous symbolic personal name introduced by Isaiah at Is. 8:1 a parallelism ("Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz" means [a]"quick to the plunder; swift to the spoil" - NIV footnote) but the very introduction to this Messianic name at Is. 9:6 is itself a parallelism: [a]"For unto us a child is born; unto us a son is given." It would, therefore, be appropriate to find that this name, too, was in the form of a parallelism as translated by the Tanakh above.

So it is clear, even to several trinitarian scholars, that Is. 9:6 does not imply that Jesus is YHWH God. That's not what the passage is saying. It doesn't have to be translated or understood in that way.

 

[boevans]

Mormons believe Jehovah and Jesus are the same being.

 

[TruthNotBS]

My quotation was from Handel's Messiah, which is in accordance with verbatim with the Biblical texts known to mankind from God's amazing creation that included making man in his image to keep him from being lonely and in the case of Moses who was quite interested in who God is, only to be told by God in no uncertain terms, "I am who I am! IOW, God had a sense of humor, or after reading Moses' encounter with the man upstairs, did you not get it? Handel was known as a very picky biblical scholar in addition to have authored one of the most exquisitely beautiful symphonies ever written and called "Messiah" that I have sung in 3 states several times.. God does not change. Our understanding of his Word is best when understood according to the scriptures for us to read. Scholars intentionally used easy-to-understand words not to make us righteous judges of other people, but to bring us closer to God to help us love Him in the fullest. Even the simplest people in the world who can read can understand the Bible because the authors were instructed to make it easy to understand by the common man on the street as well as a child of the age of 11 or 12. They get it.

It's not Biblical? I think that it is.

John 10:30-36

30 I and my Father are one.​

​

31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.​

​

32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?​

​

33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.​

​

34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?​

​

35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;​

​

36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?​

​

Isaiah 9:6-7​

King James Version​

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.​

7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.​

​

​

I do not see the error you are claiming I made. Isaiah couldn't have made it any simpler that people would think of the Messiah, who we Christians believe is Jesus Christ, as is stated in verse 6 of the ninth chapter of Isaiah's book. I did not just dig up the words "the mighty God" anywhere but in the scripture's use of those three words. Isaiah prophesied correctly that people would call Jesus God. Yes, he was God's son, but according to Christ, he is one with God. It sounds to me like he meant God and he are the same spiritual person. It seems to me to be a miracle of God. and I did not make this up, period. Isiah was very close to and greatly loved by God because his prophecies were always true and quite exact, because Isaiah always spoke from the heart of God when he had something to say to his contemporaries.​

I already covered Isaiah 9:5 in my last post. So now I'm going to respond to your prooftext in John 10.

You wrote:

John 10:30-36
30 I and my Father are one.
31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?
33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

John 17:22. “The glory which thou hast given me I have given to them; that they may be one, just as we are one.” - NASB. (Compare John 17:11. - A footnote for John 17:11 in the trinitarian The NIV Study Bible, Zondervan, 1985 says: “the unity is to be like that between the Father and the Son.”)

Not only is it obvious that these Christians are not equally Christ with Jesus, nor equally God with the Father, nor are they all literally one person, but they are all united in “will” and “purpose” with God. That is, they agree with and carry out YHWH's will.

Notice that Jesus clearly defines his being “one” with his Father as being in the very same sense that he wants certain Christians to be “one”: “just as we are one” (NASB). There can be no doubt, then, that John 10:30 does not mean Jesus and the Father are equally God, but that, just as certain Christians were “one” in will and purpose so “the Father and I are one [in will and purpose].”

Although they have the same will and purpose as God, it is because they willingly accept and conform to God’s will and purpose and take them as their own. God does not conform to their wills but they to his! This is exactly the same way that Christ is one in will with the Father (who alone is God). Analyze John 6:38 (compare Luke 22:42 and Mark 14:36.).

Bible Greek expert Joseph H. Thayer tells us “one” can mean:

“to be united most closely (in will, spirit), Jn x.30 [John 10:30]; xvii.11, 21-23 [John 17:11, 21-23]” - p. 186, Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, Baker Book House, tenth printing, August, 1984.

Commenting on John 10:30, J. H. Bernard, D.D. says in his work A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to St. John:

“A unity of fellowship, of will, and of purpose between the Father and the Son is a frequent theme in the Fourth Gospel..., and it is tersely and powerfully expressed here; but to press the words so as to make them indicate identity of ousia [Greek for ‘substance,’ ‘essence’], is to introduce thoughts that were not present to the theologians of the first century."

Even the trinitarian New Testament Greek scholar W. E. Vine when discussing the Greek word for “one” says: “(b) metaphorically [figuratively], union and concord, e.g., John 10:30; 11:52; 17:11, 21, 22....” - An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, p. 809.

Trinitarian Professor William Barclay writes in his popular Daily Study Bible Series, The Gospel of John, Vol. 2, The Westminster Press, 1975, pp. 74, 75, 76 says:

“Now we come to the supreme claim [of John 10:30]. ‘I and the Father are one,’ said Jesus. What did he mean? Is it absolute mystery, or can we understand at least a little of it? Are we driven to interpret it in terms of essence and hypostasis and all the rest of the metaphysical and philosophic notions about which the makers of creeds fought and argued? Has one to be a theologian and a philosopher to grasp even a fragment of the meaning of this tremendous statement?

If we go to the Bible itself for the interpretation,” continues Barclay, “we find that it is in fact so simple that the simplest mind can grasp it. Let us turn to the seventeenth chapter of John’s Gospel, which tells of the prayer of Jesus for his followers before he went to his death: ‘Holy Father, keep them in thy name, which thou hast given me, that they may be one, even as we are one’ (John 17:11). Jesus conceived of the unity of Christian with Christian as the same as his unity with God.”

“Here is the essence of the matter”, says Barclay. “The bond of unity is love; the proof of love is obedience. Christians are one with each other when they are bound by love, and obey the words of Christ. Jesus is one with God, because as no other ever did, he obeyed and loved him. His unity with God is a unity of perfect love, issuing in perfect obedience.:

Barclay continues: "When Jesus said: ‘I and the father are one,’ he was not moving in the world of philosophy and metaphysics and abstractions; he was moving in the world of personal relationships. No one can really understand what a phrase like ‘a unity of essence’ means; but any one can understand what a unity of heart means. Jesus’s unity with God came from the twin facts of perfect love and perfect obedience. He was one with God because he loved and obeyed him perfectly....”

So the Biblical text and even many Trinitarian scholars don't agree with the notion that Jesus actually made himself literally, ontologically one with YHWH, His heavenly Father. It's one in will and purpose, not substance or in being co-equal to His Father, who is the only true God (John 17:3).

 

[TruthNotBS]

Mormons believe Jehovah and Jesus are the same being.

Yes, they do. And the Father is Elohim. They believe Jesus and His Father were once human mortals in another universe or eon, on another planet similar to Earth. Through a process of evolution, they became divine, immortal beings, who have the power to create universes like the one we're in now. So they created this universe with the Earth, to carry out their plan of redemption and allow us to grow and evolve spiritually.

I believe the heavenly Father is an infinite, transcendental consciousness or divine nervous system and state of being, which is everywhere, all in all. The laws of physics, and spiritual laws, are all established by this infinite, all-encompassing divine reality or "nervous system" that rules everything. No one can break the laws of physics or divine law, without disconnecting themselves from the ultimate source of life. Disobedience to YHWH or His divine order leads to chaos and annihilation (corruption and death).

YHWH our Father isn't an individual entity or personality, or an old man with a beard sitting on a giant throne. YHWH our Father is reality itself, with all of its laws. YHWH is alive and awake, but not in the same sense as we are. We are inferior in awareness and consciousness to YHWH, the ultimate reality. YHWH is life itself, the experience of being awake, in a perfectly empowered and ordered state.

 

[ding]

I am not opening that. I never open things like that. Wicked men by satans will put-GOD or LORD in the OT. God willed -YHVH. Ones religions shows whose will they support by the translation they use.

It refutes JW beliefs using humor.

 

[TruthNotBS]

I will return tomorrow and will respond to the John 1:1 proof text and whatever else you might post from now to tomorrow. I need to take a break, my fingers hurt from all of the typing and copying and pasting from Bible commentaries. Goodnight everyone.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

= error according to the Greek lexicons.
If your scenario was true, then in simple english the 2nd line reads-And God(word) was with God---that is more than 1 God.

My scenario? That was John 1:1 word for word.
You're view point is in error. That's not my problem.

 

[hadit]

So you are worshipping Lucifer by just another name?? That explains everything! Thanks.

You should have paid attention "Just as Moses lifted up the serpent (during the time of testing) in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up" John 3:14. This was a warning of a test. Jesus knew he would become the object of Idolatry like the serpent in the wilderness.

So ask yourself. What would Hezekiah do? And then just do it.

If you could display some reading comprehension, you would get further.

 

[surada]

Then let me break it down for you in terms easy enough for a second grade child to understand.

A. The consequence for sin is death, (a curse). True?

B. The first commandment forbids idolatry, (under penalty of death, a curse). True?

C. You worship a first century Jewish man, a human being, which is idolatrous. True?

D. Conclusion. You are dead. (if God is God) True?

Do the math! A+B+C = D.

Any questions?

Not exactly. Some Christians worship God in Jesus name.

 

[surada]

The Canaanite nations were punished because of their extreme wickedness. God did not cast out the Canaanites for being a particular race or ethnic group. God did not send the Israelites into the land of Canaan to destroy a number of righteous nations. On the contrary, the Canaanite nations were horribly depraved. They practiced “abominable customs” (Leviticus 18:30) and did “detestable things” (Deuteronomy 18:9, NASB). They practiced idolatry, witchcraft, soothsaying, and sorcery. They attempted to cast spells upon people and call up the dead (Deuteronomy 18:10-11).


Their “cultic practice was barbarous and thoroughly licentious” (Unger, 1954, p. 175). Their “deities…had no moral character whatever,” which “must have brought out the worst traits in their devotees and entailed many of the most demoralizing practices of the time,” including sensuous nudity, orgiastic nature-worship, snake worship, and even child sacrifice (Unger, p. 175; cf. Albright, 1940, p. 214). As Moses wrote, the inhabitants of Canaan would “burn even their sons and daughters in the fire to their gods” (Deuteronomy 12:30). The Canaanite nations were anything but “innocent.” In truth, “[t]hese Canaanite cults were utterly immoral, decadent, and corrupt, dangerously contaminating and thoroughly justifying the divine command to destroy their devotees” (Unger, 1988). They were so nefarious that God said they defiled the land and the land could stomach them no longer—“the land vomited out its inhabitants” (Leviticus 18:25).

Jesus is God

The Jews demonized their neighbors.. They wanted their land.

 

[surada]

If you could display some reading comprehension, you would get further.

Hezekiah is Emmanuel.

 

[hadit]

Jesus= John 17:3--The one who sent him= THE ONLY TRUE GOD=Father

False teachers=The Father, son and holy spirit make up THE ONLY TRUE GOD
They do not match.

Why are you ignoring the Scripture I've posted multiple times that shows how Yeshua LOWERED Himself to become one of us, separating Himself from the Father, but did not consider it robbery to be EQUAL WITH GOD? You know that it's blasphemy for someone who is not God to think they are equal with God, right?

Are you now accusing Yeshua of blasphemy, of committing the same sin that got Lucifer thrown out of heaven? And, if He is committing the same sin, why does God not kick Him out of heaven? Are you also accusing God of being unjust?

 

[Rigby5]

The Canaanite nations were punished because of their extreme wickedness. God did not cast out the Canaanites for being a particular race or ethnic group. God did not send the Israelites into the land of Canaan to destroy a number of righteous nations. On the contrary, the Canaanite nations were horribly depraved. They practiced “abominable customs” (Leviticus 18:30) and did “detestable things” (Deuteronomy 18:9, NASB). They practiced idolatry, witchcraft, soothsaying, and sorcery. They attempted to cast spells upon people and call up the dead (Deuteronomy 18:10-11).


Their “cultic practice was barbarous and thoroughly licentious” (Unger, 1954, p. 175). Their “deities…had no moral character whatever,” which “must have brought out the worst traits in their devotees and entailed many of the most demoralizing practices of the time,” including sensuous nudity, orgiastic nature-worship, snake worship, and even child sacrifice (Unger, p. 175; cf. Albright, 1940, p. 214). As Moses wrote, the inhabitants of Canaan would “burn even their sons and daughters in the fire to their gods” (Deuteronomy 12:30). The Canaanite nations were anything but “innocent.” In truth, “[t]hese Canaanite cults were utterly immoral, decadent, and corrupt, dangerously contaminating and thoroughly justifying the divine command to destroy their devotees” (Unger, 1988). They were so nefarious that God said they defiled the land and the land could stomach them no longer—“the land vomited out its inhabitants” (Leviticus 18:25).

Jesus is God

Obviously false.
The Canaanites were the longest lasting, most popular, and most inclusive of all the nations in the area.
So then clearly the Hebrew lied.
And the proof is obvious since it was the Hebrew who committed the evil crimes of invading, massacring women and children, etc.

 

[Frankenstein]

The Jews demonized their neighbors.. They wanted their land.

God promised that land and the inhabitants were evil!

 

[kjw47]

Mormons believe Jehovah and Jesus are the same being.

Jehovahs#1 commandment=Thou shalt not have any other God before your face. Thus those serving a non existent trinity are being mislead into breaking Gods #1 commandment daily. Making those- workers of iniquity-, and will hear these words from Jesus as judgement=Matt 7:22-23

 

[kjw47]

It refutes JW beliefs using humor.

The teachings of Jesus back the JW teachers, refute him.

 

[kjw47]

My scenario? That was John 1:1 word for word.
You're view point is in error. That's not my problem.

It is not worded like that in the Greek lexicons.

 

[kjw47]

Why are you ignoring the Scripture I've posted multiple times that shows how Yeshua LOWERED Himself to become one of us, separating Himself from the Father, but did not consider it robbery to be EQUAL WITH GOD? You know that it's blasphemy for someone who is not God to think they are equal with God, right?

Are you now accusing Yeshua of blasphemy, of committing the same sin that got Lucifer thrown out of heaven? And, if He is committing the same sin, why does God not kick Him out of heaven? Are you also accusing God of being unjust?

That not robbery to be equal to God is Catholicism error. Its not like that in all translations.
The same with--The Father, son and holy spirit are the 3 witness bearers. The JW,s were allowed into Catholic archives back in the 60,s or 70,s and came out with proof that the 3 witness bearers are the water, spirit and blood. They weren't allowed back in after that proof exposing Catholicism error. Translations changed because it was proven. Some left both sayings in. Catholicism = 2 Thess 2:3--Her translating screwed it all up. No trinity religion fixed much. Its why those religions are a mass of confusion-disunified-1Cor 1:10 exposes them as false religions.