Jesus CANNOT be Jehovah/YHVH God

[SabathMoon]

Have you heard of Valentinus?

 

[genuineoriginal]

Would you say that what you just posted has any relevance to what Paul wrote, in 2 Corinthians 11:4 KJV?

Would you say that Paul was referring to Jesus Ernesto Gonzales Jr by his phrase "another Jesus"?

No, but Paul could have been prophesying about Jesus ben Ananias.

Jesus ben Ananias ("the son of Ananias") [rendered as the "son of Ananus" in the Whiston translation] was a plebeian farmer, who, four years before the First Jewish-Roman War began in 66 AD, went around Jerusalem prophesying the city's destruction. The Jewish leaders of Jerusalem turned him over to the Romans, who tortured him. The procurator Albinus took him to be a madman and released him. He continued his prophecy for more than seven years until he was killed by a stone from a catapult during the Roman siege of Jerusalem during the war.

​

Or, instead, would you say that Paul's expression, "preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached", was simply a figure of speech, by which he meant something along the lines of "preach things about Jesus contrary to what we have preached about Jesus"?

Paul is well known for his creative figures of speech and hyperbole.

All seriousness aside, having read the little wikipedia bio of the second Jesus you listed, it appears that Paul wouldn't likely have approved of him as a valid choice to fill the office of a bishop, according to 1 Timothy 3:3 KJV:

:chuckle:

 

[genuineoriginal]

Moses destroyed a version of the 10 Commandments and changed them to a second version.

Are you claiming that Moses abolished God's commandments and substituted his own commandments in their place?

 

[aikido7]

Are you claiming that Moses abolished God's commandments and substituted his own commandments in their place?

Which version are you talking about?
The Bible mentions more than one version.
Moses broke the first set of commandments.

It would be insteresting to be able to see what that version orinially said, wouldn’t it?

 

[aikido7]

Are you claiming that Moses abolished God's commandments and substituted his own commandments in their place?

Noah was channeling God to the Israelites.

I posted another version of the 10 Commandments from the Bible earlier.
What do you think of it?

My original post about the different versions of the tablets was written to encourage believers to actually see what is IN the text.

The way it is now, pastors, ministers and priests put the Bible in a blender and they end up unable to recognize or communicate the context that surrounds the different traditions, theologies, remembered history, oral traditions. myths and metaphors and parables that make the Bible what it is.

 

[Dartman]

You couldn't have proven that because God has never changed any of His commandments.

LOL .... that's called "begging the question".
"The meaning of the idiom [beg the question] is to assume as true the very point that is under discussion. "

https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-begging-the-question-fallacy-1689167

Jehovah/YHVH God changed the "herbs only" commandment He had given before the flood, to the "anything that moves and lives" commandment of Gen 9. About 850 years Later Jehovah/YHVH God changed the post-flood commandment to now require Israel to avoid certain meats.

 

[genuineoriginal]

Which version are you talking about?

What makes you think that there is more than one version?

The Bible mentions more than one version.

Not quite, try again.

Moses broke the first set of commandments.

Yes, and he replaced the ones that were broken with another set that contained the same words.

Exodus 34:28 28 And he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.​

It would be insteresting to be able to see what that version orinially said, wouldn’t it?

The tablets are supposedly kept in a church in Aksum, Ethiopia.

 

[genuineoriginal]

1. Do not worship any other god, for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God.

2. Do not make any idols.

3. Celebrate the Festival of Unleavened Bread. For seven days eat bread made without yeast, as I commanded you. Do this at the appointed time in the month of Aviv, for in that month you came out of Egypt.

4. The first offspring of every womb belongs to me, including all the firstborn males of your livestock, whether from herd or flock.

5. Redeem the firstborn donkey with a lamb, but if you do not redeem it, break its neck. Redeem all your firstborn sons. No one is to appear before me empty-handed.

6. Six days you shall labor, but on the seventh day you shall rest; even during the plowing season and harvest, you must rest.

7. Celebrate the Festival of Weeks with the firstfruits of the wheat harvest, and the Festival of Ingathering at the turn of the year.

8. Three times a year all your men are to appear before the Sovereign LORD, the God of Israel.

9. Do not offer the blood of a sacrifice to me along with anything containing yeast and do not let any of the sacrifices from the Passover Festival remain until morning.

10. Thou shalt not cook a young kid in its mother's milk.

I posted another version of the 10 Commandments from the Bible earlier.
What do you think of it?

Those are not the ten commandments.

 

[Dartman]

No.
The incapacity to grasp one being in three person's does not change Christianity as monotheistic. It just means some people are incapable of grasping the reality of one being in three person's.

Sorry, no.
1) Eventually every trinitarian/oneness debater MUST admit the theory defies comprehension. If you claim to "grasp" it, you're dishonest.
2) The tenets unique to the trinity, or oneness, doctrine are EASY to grasp. They are merely illogical, and contradict the real world ..... but most importantly, they contradict the simple, clear and direct statements of Scripture.

 

[genuineoriginal]

Jehovah/YHVH God changed the "herbs only" commandment He had given before the flood, to the "anything that moves and lives" commandment of Gen 9. About 850 years Later Jehovah/YHVH God changed the post-flood commandment to now require Israel to avoid certain meats.

I haven't seen a "herbs only" commandment and an "anything that moves and lives" commandment.

Do you know what a commandment is?

 

[MennoSota]

Sorry, no.
1) Eventually every trinitarian/oneness debater MUST admit the theory defies comprehension. If you claim to "grasp" it, you're dishonest.
2) The tenets unique to the trinity, or oneness, doctrine are EASY to grasp. They are merely illogical, and contradict the real world ..... but most importantly, they contradict the simple, clear and direct statements of Scripture.

Eventually every one being, one person debater MUST admit they're no different than a Muslim and ultimately have no fellowship with the Creator. But, most importantly they are incapable of grasping the clear truth of Scripture because they are dead in their trespasses and sins. Spiritually dead persons have no faith and therefore fail to believe. Arguing with a dead person becomes a fruitless waste of time because only God can make them alive. So I dust my sandals on them and leave them to their deadness.

 

[aikido7]

​

Those are not the ten commandments.

Sometimes it’s easier for some believers to pick and choose biblical details to avoid getting upset or confused by other biblical details.

I think we all strive to find a faith that makes sense to us.
We all look out our own window.
And when all is considered, it’s not the words of the Bible that we deal with. It’s the meaning we give the words that makes all the difference.


Do we define the word “faith” as people did in Jesus’ day as “trust”?
Or do we use the modern and the altered way as “belief”?
Do we take the word “salvation” as transformation in this life or do we put the modern spin on it as meaning “belief”so we can go to heaven?
Do we go along with sacrifice as spilling blood for humankind’s sins or do we factor in what Jesus preached that God desires mercy and not sacrifice?

In my opinion, you seem to be unwilling to beleive that the different versions are not all commandments from God.

You may be thinking that if there are different versions of the commandments, then this means to you that your faith is in vain.

"I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven."
--Luke 10:18

God has already won.
Rome and other powers & principalities didn’t.
Death has been vanquished.
Jesus is Lord and Caesar AIN’T !!!
Nor is any other earthly ruler.

 

[SabathMoon]

Eventually every one being, one person debater MUST admit they're no different than a Muslim and ultimately have no fellowship with the Creator. But, most importantly they are incapable of grasping the clear truth of Scripture because they are dead in their trespasses and sins. Spiritually dead persons have no faith and therefore fail to believe. Arguing with a dead person becomes a fruitless waste of time because only God can make them alive. So I dust my sandals on them and leave them to their deadness.

Where is the trinity doctrine, a requirement for the afterlife?

 

[Dartman]

I haven't seen a "herbs only" commandment and an "anything that moves and lives" commandment.

Of course you have, you just don't WANT to "see" it.

Do you know what a commandment is?

 

[Dartman]

Eventually every one being, one person debater MUST admit they're no different than a Muslim and ultimately have no fellowship with the Creator.

Hmmmm .... that doesn't match ANY of the debates I've seen in the last 65 years.

But, most importantly they are incapable of grasping the clear truth of Scripture because they are dead in their trespasses and sins.

Incorrect. Many that WERE dead in their trespasses and sins have grasped the clear truth of Scripture, WHILE they were still "dead in their sins"..... and then made the choice to BELIEVE what they grasped, and OBEY what they believed.

 

[7djengo7]

Greetings again Apple7,You seem to be confused here. Philippians 2:10-11 says that when we bow the knee to Jesus, then this gives glory to God the Father. Also you have not responded to my explanation of Philippians 2 in Post 451 on page 31 and Post 477 on page 32 which you have bypassed in your usual method. It reminds me of your run around when you refused to acknowledge that Mary is the mother of Jesus. If you answer these two Posts with a substantial answer then I will continue, as I am not interested in playing your game and waste time.

Kind regards
Trevor

Are you denying what Apple7 stated? Are you denying that Jesus--the Son of God--IS the glory of God the Father? If the glory of God the Father is NOT the Son, then whom, or what, would you say IS the glory of God the Father?

Where, in Philippians 2:9-11 KJV, does Paul say that something "gives glory to God the Father"? Instead, what we read there is that something is "to the glory of God the Father".

Also, in v. 10, we see that God highly exalts Jesus, and gives Jesus a name above every name. Is Paul telling us that God the Father is giving glory to God the Father? Is Paul telling us that God the Father is glorifying Himself?

 

[aikido7]

Are you denying what Apple7 stated? Are you denying that Jesus--the Son of God--IS the glory of God the Father? If the glory of God the Father is NOT the Son, then whom, or what, would you say IS the glory of God the Father?

Where, in Philippians 2:9-11 KJV, does Paul say that something "gives glory to God the Father"? Instead, what we read there is that something is "to the glory of God the Father".

Also, in v. 10, we see that God highly exalts Jesus, and gives Jesus a name above every name. Is Paul telling us that God the Father is giving glory to God the Father? Is Paul telling us that God the Father is glorifying Himself?

There’s a big difference between worshiping Christ and following Jesus.

I think a self-focus on making sure they get to heaven is what most believers are after.


Worshiping Christ demands nothing of us.
“Bow down and believe” they say in low, sonorous tones yet they suffer not the slightest urge to change their own behavior.

Letting Jesus speak for himself is something that many Christians don’t bother about. Jesus was said to teach “ALL” in parables, yet in most churches rarely set aside time to actually study them.

 

[clefty]

The ONLY reason I have continued to use Jehovah, rather than Yahweh, or some other variant, is the ASV uses Jehovah, which is VERY familiar to everyone ..... yes, I do still get the occasional whining about the letter "J", and that kind of trivia .... but, as I mentioned, I am sure NO ONE knows how YHVH was pronounced 3,500 years ago, when Jehovah introduced it to Moses, and Israel.

Suit jourself...

More accurately, we have no RECORD of any other laws.

no record? so maybe they WERE allowed to worship other gods, erect idols, kill randomly, steal anything, commit adultery, covet etc?

Seems like the Egyptians had a “don’t kill” law as moses had to flee...maybe Yah learned some good laws from the Egyptians?

There certainly WERE others, since there were certainly expectations regarding sacrifices, and there were"clean and unclean" animals for those sacrifices.

oh phew...was worried He was clueless on what He expected or what would NOT survive in a life WITH HIM...a rebellious heart disobedient to Him HIS WAYS

There is sufficient record of the first commandments to prove beyond doubt, Jehovah/YHVH God has changed the commandments at HIS choice.

feel free to try...the default remains...amendments to the original do NOT abrogate the original...I mean He instructed them to kill, steal, to even make images...Hosea to marry a whore...so do these replace the original set? Are we now able to?

Not a "reminder", a NEW covenant;

Deut 5:1-3 And Moses called unto all Israel, and said unto them, Hear, O Israel, the statutes and the ordinances which I speak in your ears this day, that ye may learn them, and observe to do them. 2 Jehovah our God made a covenant with us in Horeb. 3 Jehovah made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day.
ASV

right!... the covenant contract was moving them from egypt to the promise land...their FATHERS NEEDED NO SUCH MOVE thus NO SUCH CONTRACT...the terms however well...the FATHERS DID OBEYED yes?...

or you think Abraham IF not informed about the don’t steal law would disobey it once informed? How about IF uninformed about worshiping other gods would Abraham being told of the Law would reject it as “TOO HARD or NOT dispensed to me prior!”?

Absolutely.

well you missed it twice previous...

so that is 3 things from the OT about the dietary law...which remains binding on goyim believers STILL...as it did when the church was in the wilderness...

So do you eat SUNDAY HAM? He NEVER did...You follow Him do you?

Sorry, the fact that James acknowledged the Scriptures were still being read in the Synagogues is NOT a New Testament commandment like "meat offered to idols" ....

and why not pray tell...it was after all jewish FALSE WITNESS that claim Yahushua had changed the customs Moses delivered...Act 6:13-14 so they were NOT changed thus still binding...

it's merely an observation.

observation of what James expected and assumed would continue to occur...believing gentiles crowding every Sabbath...

We know Paul spoke in the Synagogues, AND in the market place;
Acts 17:17 Therefore disputed he in the synagogue with the Jews, and with the devout persons, and in the market daily with them that met with him. KJV

the gentiles requested Paul teach again the next SABBATH not the next day or whenever...and the next Sabbath almost the entire city showed up...

First European convert baptized on a Sabbath...NOT told come back tomorrow when we celebrate our power hour praise...

This is in PERFECT harmony with the liberty explained here;

Rom 14:5-6 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks. KJV

absolutely NOT...no Sabbath there at all...Sabbath was not a doubtful thing to jews...the chapter starts with disputations over doub disputable matters...Sabbath is NOT disputable...and NOWHERE in Romans 14

Imagine if Paul taught the Sabbath changed...he could never have claimed that he followed the Way as it worshipped in accordance to the the customs of the fathers...Paul could NOT have claimed he taught against the temple its law...

Imagine if Paul taught gentiles to worship another god on Sunday Caesar’s day...LOL

He claimed innocence on both counts...

Nope.

Heb 3:17-19 And with whom was He angry for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies fell in the wilderness? 18 And to whom did He swear that they would not enter His rest, but to those who were disobedient? 19 So we see that they were not able to enter because of unbelief.


The "rest" in Heb 3 & 4 is the Kingdom of God. Israel was keeping the 7th day Sabbath ALL during the 40 years, so we know it's not the sabbath DAY. It is God's rest.

Oh my...there is promised land rest and a SABBATISMOS...greek has a word for rest...Paul used a made up word SABBATISMOS which immediately points to Hebrew’s SABBATH KEEPING...no greek word for that...

Is why Isaiah 66:23 from Sabbath to Sabbath ALL flesh will come to worship...

Matt 24:20 Is clear that in the future time to come Yahushua fully expected winters and Sabbaths to continue...

The 10 words are 10 descriptions of what life is like where “I AM”...describes HIS CHARACTER...

“I CHANGE NOT”...

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings 7djengo7,

Are you denying what Apple7 stated? Are you denying that Jesus--the Son of God--IS the glory of God the Father? If the glory of God the Father is NOT the Son, then whom, or what, would you say IS the glory of God the Father?

Where, in Philippians 2:9-11 KJV, does Paul say that something "gives glory to God the Father"? Instead, what we read there is that something is "to the glory of God the Father".

Also, in v. 10, we see that God highly exalts Jesus, and gives Jesus a name above every name. Is Paul telling us that God the Father is giving glory to God the Father? Is Paul telling us that God the Father is glorifying Himself?

Instead of trying to follow Apple7’s confused logic and reasoning which you seem to be defending, I will initially state my perspective. Firstly there is One God the Father, and 2000 years ago God became the father of Jesus and Mary was his mother, and the child born was thus the Son of God Luke 1:34-35, and also a son of man or a descendant of Adam through Mary. When Jesus was nearing his ministry, he had grown in wisdom and the Divine character, so that when Jesus was revealed to Israel, John says that they beheld his glory, and that glory was derived from the fact that he was the only begotten (conceived) of the Father Matthew 1:20-21, and this glory could be summarised as that he was full of grace and truth John 1:14.

Thus God the Father is the One God, and he has a Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God. God the Father’s glory is underived. Jesus’ glory has been derived from God, and now he fully reveals this glory. My overall perspective of Philippians 2 is in Post 451 on page 31 and Post 477 on page 32 and Apple7 has bypassed this.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Apple7]

Gnaw on this...

Gnaw on this...

God the Father’s glory is underived. Jesus’ glory has been derived from God, and now he fully reveals this glory. My overall perspective of Philippians 2 is in Post 451 on page 31 and Post 477 on page 32 and Apple7 has bypassed this.

Kind regards
Trevor

The Glory of The Father is Jesus Christ

• The Word became flesh, and we beheld His Glory, The Glory of an only begotten from The Father. (John 1.14)
• The Glory of Christ who is the image of God; The Glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. (2 Cor 4.6)
• The Son is the shining splendor of His Glory, and the express image of His essence. (Heb 1.3)
• Stephen looked to the heaven and saw God’s Glory, Jesus, The Son of man, standing at the Right of God. (Acts 7.55 – 56)
• The likeness of The Throne was a likeness like a man on it from above; this was the appearance of the likeness of The Glory of Yahweh. (Eze 1.26 – 28)
• Moses asked to see Yahweh’s Glory; Yahweh’s Glory passed before Moses and Moses saw Yahweh’s back, but not His face. (Exo 33.18 – 23)
• The Word (Eze 1.3) is also referred to as The Glory (Eze 1.28)
• The Glory has the appearance of a Man (Eze 1.26 – 28)
• Compare how the NT refers to the Son as the Glory & the Word (John 1.14; Heb 1.3)
• Ezekiel states that The Glory by the river (Eze 1.3, 28) is the same Glory as mentioned throughout the book (Eze 3.22 – 23; 10.18 – 20; 43.3)
• The Spirit & the Glory are mentioned together – but at the same time, distinction is made between them (Eze 1.28 – 2.2; 3.12 – 14, 23 – 24; 8.3 – 4; 10.18 – 11.1, 22 – 23; 43.1 – 5)
• The Man quotes the Father (Yahweh) (Eze 44.6; 45.9, 18; 46.1, 16; 47.13)
• The Glory quotes the Father (Yahweh) (Eze 3.11 – 12; 11.5; 43.18, 19, 27)
• The Man (Eze 44.1) referred the Glory, and went through the east gate into the temple (Eze 43.2 – 5), as Yahweh the Father (Eze 44.2)
• Therefore, the Glory (the Word) is the Son