This day have I begotten you

[daqq]

We do believe a bit differently there, and the reason I say this is because it says in the Bible that Christ Jesus grew stronger in the spirit as a child.

Luke 2:40

And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom: and the grace of God was upon him.

So he had the spirit of God within him from a child, he had the holy spirit with him from a baby.

I believe that Jesus became even stronger in spirit again once he denied Satan in the wilderness.

And the more we deny sin and follow him, the stronger we become in God.

I believe water emersion is a picture of being covered in the word of God, and once we are emersed in the word, and listen, obey and we have faith then God blesses us with his holy spirit.

I don't believe we are born of God by just saying "I believe". To truly believe is to do, and to do, is to obey God and do his will and follow Jesus.

We may believe differently daqq, but we also agree in much, and I could never condemn anyone, I am only flesh. And God looks at our hearts first and foremost. He wants us to have a clean and loving heart like his son. And we only achieve that through Christ by the power of the holy spirit.

I'm sure that we both agree on that.

Yes we appear to agree on much, and that is great, however, you do also bring up something that truly is important concerning Luke which has not been discussed here in this thread. Have you ever noticed that from conception to birth is about ten years in Luke? It is clearly stated that Messiah is "born" during the time of the first census of Quirinius. However from historical records it is clear that this census occurred somewhere about eight to ten years after the death of Herod, (the census was taken 6-7AD). The evidence is so overwhelming that even Trinitarian scholarship has been forced to confess that, "Luke must have made a mistake", (and there are quite a few that have already openly admitted it). What my theology will tell you, if you pick my brain long enough to find out, is that Luke did not make any mistake at all while at the same time the generally accepting historical record is correct. How long is the incubation period of the Seed of the Word? The Master tells you that you will have tribulation ten days, (O Smyrna). It is like when Daniel and his three friends say, "Prove your servants ten days", and when it is truly all said and done in that writing, it is ten days, (a day for a year).

 

[daqq]

Is this verse from the ASV the correct translation?:

"And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning didst lay the foundation of the earth, And the heavens are the works of thy hands" (Heb.1:10; ASV).​

Close enough but the Hebrew text does not have the Tetragrammaton or any lesser title in it. The word used in the Septuagint and the epistle to the Hebrews is Kurie which is often used for what should have been Adon or Adoniy in the Hebrew text. Comparing it with the Septuagint shows yet another word for word match with the epistle to the Hebrews, (with a slight change in the word order at the beginning of the statement).

Psalm 102:25 LXX (101:26)
25 κατ αρχας συ κυριε την γην εθεμελιωσας και εργα των χειρων σου εισιν οι ουρανοι

Hebrews 1:10 W/H
10 και, συ κατ αρχας κυριε την γην εθεμελιωσας και εργα των χειρων σου εισιν οι ουρανοι

Since it is Kurie and not Kurios it probably read Adon or Adoniy if it was ever in the Hebrew text. That means it speaks of the Son of Elohim through whom all things were created, (which the author of Hebrews is already saying anyways). I have no problem with that but you do because you say that Elohim is a man. The Son of Elohim is the Logos-Word and not a man. We already went over this two or three times also and at least once already here in this thread. You refused to believe the Testimony of Yeshua who tells you himself that he is not the Logos-Word which he speaks.

So now again, since you are back here again, I ask that you please confirm that you do indeed believe these words of Yeshua and the very simple logical conclusion which flows from the very simple systematic logical steps in these very clear emphatic statements which are never going to pass away:

Not better. I answered what he said about the meaning of the Greek word translated "and" at the beginning of Acts 13:34. However, he refuses to answer what I said about the meaning of the Greek word translated "and" at the beginning of Acts 13:32.

Doesn't that make you curious?

I'm curious why you never answered to this when it was posted in your own thread:

Here is the perfect logic behind what I say, Freelight, taken straight from the Testimony of Yeshua himself in the very same Gospel account which so many use to supposedly prove that the man Yeshua or Jesus is "God Almighty born into human flesh" as they say. But when we take certain key statements of the Master himself, as follows, the error of Trinity is clearly exposed by the Testimony of Yeshua himself. The first key statement is that Yeshua says his words are SPIRIT, and even this should be enough to fully support what I have said, but if you follow the logic laid out in sequence from the statements below there is absolutely no denying the outcome of these clear emphatic statements.

The words of Yeshua are Spirit:

John 6:62-63
62 What then if you should behold the Son of Man ascending up [to] where he was before?
63 It is the Spirit that quickens; the flesh profits nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are Spirit, and they are Life.

The Father judges no one but has committed all judgment to the Son:

John 5:22
22. For the Father judges no one, but has committed all judgment unto the Son:

The man Yeshua also states that he himself judges no one:

John 8:15
15. You judge after the flesh: I judge no one.

There is only one who judges and he is the Seeker and the Judge:

John 8:50
50. And I seek not mine own glory: one there is, the Seeker and Judge. [Rev 2:23]

The Memra-Logos-Word which the man Yeshua speaks is not his own:

John 14:24
24. He that loves me not, keeps not my sayings: and the Logos-Word which you hear is not of me, but-contrariwise [it is] of the Father who sent me.

The Memra-Logos-Word is the Seeker and the Judge:

John 12:47-48
47. And if anyone hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but that the world might be delivered.
48. He that rejects me, and receives not my words, has one that judges him: the Logos-Word that I have spoken, that one shall judge him in the last day.

Revelation 19:11-16
11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no one knew but he himself.
13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Logos-Word of God.
14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

The Son of Elohim and Son of Man is the Memra-Logos-Word who descended from the heavens in pneumatikos-spiritual somatiko-bodily form of a dove and abode-remained upon-within the man Yeshua throughout his ministry and Golgotha. No one has seen Elohim at any time because spoken word cannot be seen with the eyes of the flesh. The "new covenant" new Spirit, (Ezekiel 11:19, 18:31, 36:26), is therefore the most holy Word of the Testimony of Yeshua. Anyone claiming to have "the Holy Spirit" but not having and upholding the Testimony of Yeshua in uprightness is therefore deceived.

This is over and above everything else that has been discussed herein just since you arrived in this thread, (this is from where the above post was taken when it was posted in your own thread). The man Yeshua does not even claim to be the Logos or Word as clearly shown in the above statements. You have not understood because you have deliberately closed your eyes to the scripture which is the very Word you claim to believe and follow.

Anyhow, @freelight, we clearly have a critical difference between the man Yeshua and the Son of Elohim now demonstrated in this thread, (Yeshua became a son of Elohim at his immersion and the commencement of his ministry; and the firstborn, and the author of our faith). The Son of Elohim is the Logos-Word and the Son of Man who descended from the heavens in somatiko-corporeal-bodily form of a dove at the immersion of the man Yeshua. That one is the Logos, the only Judge, through whom all things were created:

Psalm 33:6 (32:6) LXX
6 (32:6) τω λογω του κυριου οι ουρανοι εστερεωθησαν και τω πνευματι του στοματος αυτου πασα η δυναμις αυτων
6 (32:6) By the Logos of YHWH the heavens were established; and all their hosts by the Spirit of His mouth.

The Son of Elohim proceeds from the Father because he is the Spirit of His mouth:
In the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with the Elohim, and the Logos was Elohim.
He was not the man Yeshua but the Spirit of the Holy One who abode upon the man Yeshua.

And here it is again outside the quote box so that you may quote it in your reply:

Here is the perfect logic behind what I say, @Jerry Shugart, taken straight from the Testimony of Yeshua himself in the very same Gospel account which you use to supposedly prove that the man Yeshua or Jesus is "God Almighty born into human flesh" as you say. But when we take certain key statements of the Master himself, as follows, your error is clearly exposed by the Testimony of Yeshua himself. The first key statement is that Yeshua says his words are SPIRIT and if you follow the logic laid out in sequence from the statements below there is absolutely no denying the outcome of these clear emphatic statements unless you simply are not a follower and believer of these words and statements.

The words of Yeshua are Spirit:

John 6:62-63
62 What then if you should behold the Son of Man ascending up [to] where he was before?
63 It is the Spirit that quickens; the flesh profits nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are Spirit, and they are Life.

The Father judges no one but has committed all judgment to the Son:

John 5:22
22. For the Father judges no one, but has committed all judgment unto the Son:

The man Yeshua also states that he himself judges no one:

John 8:15
15. You judge after the flesh: I judge no one.

There is only one who judges and he is the Seeker and the Judge:

John 8:50
50. And I seek not mine own glory: one there is, the Seeker and Judge. [Rev 2:23]

The Logos-Word which the man Yeshua speaks is not his own:

John 14:24
24. He that loves me not, keeps not my sayings: and the Logos-Word which you hear is not of me, but-contrariwise [it is] of the Father who sent me.

The Logos-Word is the Seeker and the Judge:

John 12:47-48
47. And if anyone hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but that the world might be delivered.
48. He that rejects me, and receives not my words, has one that judges him: the Logos-Word that I have spoken, that one shall judge him in the last day.

Revelation 19:11-16
11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no one knew but he himself.
13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Logos-Word of God.
14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

The Son of Elohim and Son of Man is the Logos-Word who descended from the heavens in somatiko-corporeal-bodily form like a dove and abode-remained upon-within the man Yeshua throughout his ministry and Golgotha. No one has seen Elohim at any time because spoken word cannot be seen with the eyes of the flesh. The "new covenant" new Spirit, (Eze 11:19, 18:31, 36:26), is thus the most holy Word of the Testimony of Yeshua. Anyone claiming to have "the Holy Spirit" but not having and upholding the Testimony of Yeshua in uprightness is therefore deceived.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Close enough but the Hebrew text does not have the Tetragrammaton or any lesser title in it.

Let us look at this translation:

"In the beginning thou, O Lord, didst lay the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands" (Ps.102:25; LXX).​

When we compare what is said in the book of Hebrews we can know that the preceding verse is referring to the Lord Jesus:

"And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands" (Heb.1:10).​

Therefore, there is nothing in the following translation which contradicts that:

"For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him" (Col.1:16).​

Since all things were created by Him then it becomes obvious that He is not a created Being. That is, unless you want to argue that He created Himself.

You simply are not willing to see or understand what has happened. In my view I am adopted into a family, and because of that the authors and writers of the New Testament are my spiritual brethren, and likewise because of that I adopt their teachings...

Then why do you refuse to adopt what Paul wrote here?:

"But God raised him from the dead: 31 and he was seen for many days of them that came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are now his witnesses unto the people. 32 And we bring you good tidings of the promise made unto the fathers, 33 that God hath fulfilled the same unto our children, in that he raised up Jesus; as also it is written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee" (Acts 13:30-33; ASV).​

In verses 30-31 the subject under discussion is the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. Then the following verse begins with the Greek word kai, which is translated "and." The Greek word is a conjunction, which joins together what is said in verses 30-31 with what is said in the sentence which follows. Therefore, we can understand that the subject spoken of in the following passage is about the resurrection of the Lord Jesus:

"And we bring you good tidings of the promise made unto the fathers, 33 that God hath fulfilled the same unto our children, in that he raised up Jesus" (Acts 13:32-33; ASV).

According to your ideas verse 32 is totally unrelated to what is said in verses 30-31. That is impossible since the Greek word kai serves to join together what is said in verses 30-31 with what is said in verse 32. In fact, Strong's says that the word has "a copulative and sometimes also a cumulative force."

The word "copulative" means "joining together coordinate words or word groups and expressing addition of their meanings" (Merriam-Webster.com).

The word "cumulative" means "increasing by successive additions" (Merriam-Webster.com).

In Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon we read that the word kai "serves as a copulative i.e. to connect...it marks something added to what has already been said" (Joseph Henry Thayer, Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament [Grand Rapids: Baker Book House,1977] 315).

Therefore, with that in mind the following verses can only be in regard to one thing, the resurrection of the Lord Jesus:

"But God raised him from the dead: 31 and he was seen for many days of them that came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are now his witnesses unto the people. 32 And we bring you good tidings of the promise made unto the fathers, 33 that God hath fulfilled the same unto our children, in that he raised up Jesus; as also it is written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee" (Acts 13:30-33; ASV).​

With this in view we can know with certainity that the words in "bold" were spoken when the Lord Jesus was resurrected from the dead.

You still have not addressed the meaning of the Greek word kai which is translated "and" at the beginning of Acts 13:32. When we understand the meaning of that word then we can understand that the discourse of Paul beginning at verse 30 until verse 37 is speaking of nothing but the resurrection of the Lord Jesus.

And you remain mum in regard to the meaning of that word, a word that sinks your ship!

 

[Zeke]

Jesus says He is not of the world. The earthly government is of the world, friend.

Your reading of scripture is not contextual.

Certainly not in the traditional sense, the outward focus will always be looking through a glass darkly.

 

[meshak]

Certainly not in the traditional sense, the outward focus will always be looking through a glass darkly.

would you elaborate?

thank you.

 

[Zeke]

The perceptual son dogma, are you going to be a son forever?

 

[meshak]

The perceptual son dogma, are you going to be a son forever?

Is this your elaboration?

 

[daqq]

Let us look at this translation:

"In the beginning thou, O Lord, didst lay the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands" (Ps.102:25; LXX).​

When we compare what is said in the book of Hebrews we can know that the preceding verse is referring to the Lord Jesus:

"And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands" (Heb.1:10).​

Therefore, there is nothing in the following translation which contradicts that:

"For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him" (Col.1:16).​

Since all things were created by Him then it becomes obvious that He is not a created Being. That is, unless you want to argue that He created Himself.



Then why do you refuse to adopt what Paul wrote here?:

"But God raised him from the dead: 31 and he was seen for many days of them that came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are now his witnesses unto the people. 32 And we bring you good tidings of the promise made unto the fathers, 33 that God hath fulfilled the same unto our children, in that he raised up Jesus; as also it is written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee" (Acts 13:30-33; ASV).​

In verses 30-31 the subject under discussion is the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. Then the following verse begins with the Greek word kai, which is translated "and." The Greek word is a conjunction, which joins together what is said in verses 30-31 with what is said in the sentence which follows. Therefore, we can understand that the subject spoken of in the following passage is about the resurrection of the Lord Jesus:

"And we bring you good tidings of the promise made unto the fathers, 33 that God hath fulfilled the same unto our children, in that he raised up Jesus" (Acts 13:32-33; ASV).

According to your ideas verse 32 is totally unrelated to what is said in verses 30-31. That is impossible since the Greek word kai serves to join together what is said in verses 30-31 with what is said in verse 32. In fact, Strong's says that the word has "a copulative and sometimes also a cumulative force."

The word "copulative" means "joining together coordinate words or word groups and expressing addition of their meanings" (Merriam-Webster.com).

The word "cumulative" means "increasing by successive additions" (Merriam-Webster.com).

In Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon we read that the word kai "serves as a copulative i.e. to connect...it marks something added to what has already been said" (Joseph Henry Thayer, Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament [Grand Rapids: Baker Book House,1977] 315).

Therefore, with that in mind the following verses can only be in regard to one thing, the resurrection of the Lord Jesus:

"But God raised him from the dead: 31 and he was seen for many days of them that came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are now his witnesses unto the people. 32 And we bring you good tidings of the promise made unto the fathers, 33 that God hath fulfilled the same unto our children, in that he raised up Jesus; as also it is written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee" (Acts 13:30-33; ASV).​

With this in view we can know with certainity that the words in "bold" were spoken when the Lord Jesus was resurrected from the dead.

You still have not addressed the meaning of the Greek word kai which is translated "and" at the beginning of Acts 13:32. When we understand the meaning of that word then we can understand that the discourse of Paul beginning at verse 30 until verse 37 is speaking of nothing but the resurrection of the Lord Jesus.

And you remain mum in regard to the meaning of that word, a word that sinks your ship!

You've got to be kidding right? The word "and" sinks my ship? Since you refuse to acknowledge both the Testimony of Yeshua and Paul I have no reason to continue debating the same things over and over with you. Please go away. You are simply harassing me now. You are not a follower of the same Yeshua whom I follow because you reject his clear emphatic statements in favor of your own doctrines. You're nothing more than a thief stealing certain passages and phrases out of context to concoct your own privately held doctrines. I am not following you around trying to disrupt any of your manifold threads so why are you here trying to disrupt one of my very few threads? Would you prefer I start posting two or three threads a day so we can get the ball rolling in the direction of the truth?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

You've got to be kidding right? The word "and" sinks my ship?

It's the Greek word translated "and" that sinks you ship. And you avoid discussing the meaning of that Greek word like the plague. You know it and I know it!

In regard to our previous discussion, let us look at this translation:

"In the beginning thou, O Lord, didst lay the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands" (Ps.102:25; LXX).​

When we compare what is said in the book of Hebrews we can know that the preceding verse is referring to the Lord Jesus:

"And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands" (Heb.1:10).​

Therefore, there is nothing in the following translation which contradicts that:

"For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him" (Col.1:16).​

Since all things were created by Him then it becomes obvious that He is not a created Being. That is, unless you want to argue that He created Himself.

 

[daqq]

It's the Greek word translated "and" that sinks you ship. And you avoid discussing the meaning of that Greek word like the plague. You know it and I know it!

Then why do you refuse to adopt what Paul wrote here?:

"But God raised him from the dead: 31 and he was seen for many days of them that came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are now his witnesses unto the people. 32 And we bring you good tidings of the promise made unto the fathers, 33 that God hath fulfilled the same unto our children, in that he raised up Jesus; as also it is written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee" (Acts 13:30-33; ASV).​

In verses 30-31 the subject under discussion is the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. Then the following verse begins with the Greek word kai, which is translated "and." The Greek word is a conjunction, which joins together what is said in verses 30-31 with what is said in the sentence which follows. Therefore, we can understand that the subject spoken of in the following passage is about the resurrection of the Lord Jesus:

"And we bring you good tidings of the promise made unto the fathers, 33 that God hath fulfilled the same unto our children, in that he raised up Jesus" (Acts 13:32-33; ASV).

You still have not addressed the meaning of the Greek word kai which is translated "and" at the beginning of Acts 13:32. When we understand the meaning of that word then we can understand that the discourse of Paul beginning at verse 30 until verse 37 is speaking of nothing but the resurrection of the Lord Jesus.

And you remain mum in regard to the meaning of that word, a word that sinks your ship!

You're a liar seeking to turn others away from the truth at my expense because you refuse to admit you are in error. I have NEVER said that "kai" does not mean "and" anywhere and especially not in Acts 13:32 as you claim. In fact I have posted that passage time and time again in response to you right here in this thread and never once have I said that "kai" does not mean "and" anywhere. You are intentionally ignoring the actual argument and focusing on a strawman argument that I NEVER made. So why do I need to debate something with you when I already AGREED that "kai" means "and"? I NEVER said that "kai" does not mean "and" but what I did say is that the particle "de" should not have been rendered as "and" in Acts 13:34. How can you not see this when it has been said at least four times now to you? You simply do not even want to see the argument because then you have your excuse to continue believing what you wish to believe. Open your blind eyes and see that I NEVER said there was anything wrong with what is found in Acts 13:32 as you claim. You are insinuating a falsehood on my part so that you may create your own imaginary straw-man and turn a blind eye to the truth.

Notice he quotes what appears to be the KJV but leaves out the contextual parameter from just above the passage he has quoted. By the context it should not read "in that he hath raised up Jesus again" but rather, because Paul is recounting all that had transpired, he refers back to the beginning of the ministry of Yeshua where Elohim raised him up in the sense of raising a Prophet in the Land. That can only actually mean the immersion of Yeshua and commencement of his ministry. The ASV renders the same statement without using the word "again", (because it is not a separate word in the text but rather the KJV typical rendering of the word anastesas-anistemi), so the ASV is apparently giving more recognition to the actual overall context. Beginning at verse thirty-two Paul begins to recount the overall message that he brings from the commencement of the ministry of Yeshua because his message and Gospel includes the Testimony of Yeshua and that necessarily must include the full ministry of Yeshua:

Acts 13:30-34 ASV
30 But God raised him from the dead:
31 and he was seen for many days of them that came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are now his witnesses unto the people.
32 And we bring you good tidings of the promise made unto the fathers,
33 that God hath fulfilled the same unto our children, in that he raised up Jesus; as also it is written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.
34 And as concerning that he raised him up from the dead, now no more to return to corruption, he hath spoken on this wise, I will give you the holy and sure blessings of David.
35 Because he saith also in another psalm, Thou wilt not give thy Holy One to see corruption.

What I was trying to point out at the beginning of this thread on page one is that the word rendered "And" at the beginning of verse thirty-four is actually the particle "de" which very often is rendered as "but". This very strongly implies that the author is much more likely making a distinction between the "raising up of Yeshua" in the sense of a Prophet as opposed to the "raising up of Yeshua" at the Resurrection after his ministry was complete. If we simply correct this one single word in the ASV, at the front of verse thirty-four, (from "And" to "But"), the passage clearly expounds exactly what has been proposed throughout this thread: in fact it is clearly evident that both the author and Paul are making this distinction by quoting several different other passages to make the case for the Resurrection, (Isaiah 55:3 and Psalm 16:10 just for starters here in this passage).

The ASV with "And" corrected to "BUT" at the beginning of the Acts 13:34 statement:

Acts 13:30-34
30 But God raised him from the dead:
31 and he was seen for many days of them that came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are now his witnesses unto the people [end of preceding testimony concerning Yeshua and his resurrection].
32 And we bring you good tidings of the promise made unto the fathers, [from here Paul is recounting from the commencement of the ministry of Yeshua]
33 that God hath fulfilled the same unto our children, in that he raised up Jesus; [at his immersion in the sense of raising up a Prophet to be sent unto Yisrael] as also it is written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee [Psalm 2:7].
34 BUT as concerning that he raised him up from the dead, now no more to return to corruption, he hath spoken on this wise, I will give you the holy and sure blessings of David [Isaiah 55:3].
35 Because he saith also in another psalm, Thou wilt not give thy Holy One to see corruption [Psalm 16:10].

Thus we have herein "The Prophet" raised up and sent to the people just as Moshe foretold. This commenced with the immersion of Yeshua, (Psalm 2:7). Then, after he was crucified by the very same people he was sent to, Elohim raised him up from the dead, (Isaiah 55:3, Psalm 16:10).

AGAIN:

Acts 13:32-35
32 And [και] we bring you good tidings of the promise made unto the fathers:
33 How that Elohim has fulfilled the same unto our children in that he raised up Yeshua, [at his immersion: in the sense of raising up a Prophet to be sent to Yisrael, Deut 18:15-19] as also it is written in the second Psalm, "You are My Son, this day have I begotten you." [Psa 2:7]
34 But [δε] as concerning that He raised him up from the dead, now no more to return to corruption, He has spoken in this manner, "I will give you the holy and sure blessings of David." [Isa 55:3]
35 Because he [David] says also in another Psalm, "You will not give Your Holy One to see corruption." [Psa 16:10]

The statement "raised him up FROM THE DEAD" is nowhere to be found in Acts 13:33. That is why the particle δε is placed at the beginning of Acts 13:34 because it speaks of a different raising up, that is, just as it says: He raised him up from the dead, (Acts 13:34). There are TWO ways in which Yeshua was raised up: the first raising up was at his immersion where he was anointed and raised up to be sent to Israel: THAT PROPHET whom Moses prophesied in Deuteronomy 18:15-19, and this raising up is proclaimed by Paul in Acts 13:33, and concerns the Psalm 2:7 DECLARATION miraculously spoken with Power by the Father at his immersion, (DECLARED Son of Elohim with miraculous Power, Rom 1:4). The second raising up is the raising up FROM THE DEAD, and is proclaimed by Paul with scripture references in Acts 13:34-35.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

I have NEVER said that "kai" does not mean "and" anywhere and especially not in Acts 13:32 as you claim.

I never said that you denied that kai at Acts 13:32 means "and."

AGAIN:

Acts 13:32-35
32 And [και] we bring you good tidings of the promise made unto the fathers:

What I said is that you continue to refuse to discuss the meaning of the Greek word (kai) used at the beginning of Acts 13:32 and once again you just IGNORE the meaning of that Greek word. In fact, you avoid discussing that subject like the plague.

 

[daqq]

I never said that you denied that kai at Acts 13:32 means "and."



What I said is that you continue to refuse to discuss the meaning of the Greek word (kai) used at the beginning of Acts 13:32 and once again you just IGNORE the meaning of that Greek word. In fact, you avoid discussing that subject like the plague.

Yes, you did say that in one of the quotes of your words from my previous post. You said that I "refuse to adopt what Paul wrote here" and then you posted Acts 13:32 and bold-underlined-italicised the word AND as if I do not accept that verse the way it reads. You're lying again as may be clearly seen in my previous post where I clearly AGAIN, (in bold red), rendered it just as you also say that it says.

Originally Posted by Jerry Shugart
Then why do you refuse to adopt what Paul wrote here?:

"But God raised him from the dead: 31 and he was seen for many days of them that came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are now his witnesses unto the people. 32 And we bring you good tidings of the promise made unto the fathers, 33 that God hath fulfilled the same unto our children, in that he raised up Jesus; as also it is written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee" (Acts 13:30-33; ASV).​

You're lying again to save your skin.

AGAIN:

Acts 13:32-35
32 And [και] we bring you good tidings of the promise made unto the fathers:
33 How that Elohim has fulfilled the same unto our children in that he raised up Yeshua, [at his immersion: in the sense of raising up a Prophet to be sent to Yisrael, Deut 18:15-19] as also it is written in the second Psalm, "You are my Son, this day have I begotten you." [Psa 2:7]
34 But [δε] as concerning that He raised him up from the dead, now no more to return to corruption, He has spoken in this manner, "I will give you the holy and sure blessings of David." [Isa 55:3]
35 Because he [David] says also in another Psalm, "You will not give Your Holy One to see corruption." [Psa 16:10]

In addition, as has also already been explained to you, the section of the passage we are debating is a synopsis or summary of what Paul has already laid out previously in the same passage. It is a sermon or sermonette the likes of what your own pastors and teachers do every week on a weekly basis in their own sermons. Paul gives a discourse and then summarizes the main points; and that is why he changes from egeiro to anistemi in the summary verses quoted above.

Acts 13:21-35
21 But then they asked for a king, and Elohim gave them Shaul the son of Kish, a man of the tribe of Binyamin, for forty years.
22 And having removed him, He εγειρω-raised up for them David as king, to whom also He gave witness and said, "I have found David the son of Yishai, a man after My own heart, who shall do all My desires."
23 From the seed of this one, according to the promise, Elohim εγειρω-raised up for Yisrael a Saviour, Yeshua:
24 after Yohanan had first proclaimed the immersion of repentance to all the people of Yisrael before his face.
25 And as Yohanan was completing his mission, he said, "Who do you suppose I am? I am not him, but behold, there comes one after me, the sandals of whose feet I am not worthy to loose."
26 Men, brothers, sons of the race of Abraham and those among you fearing Elohim, to you the word of this deliverance has been sent:
27 for those dwelling in Yerushalem and their rulers, because they knew him not, nor even the voices of the Prophets which are read every Sabbath, have filled them in having judged him.
28 And having found not one cause for death, they asked Pilate that he should be put to death.
29 And when they had accomplished all that was written concerning him, taking him down from the tree, they laid him in a tomb.
30 But Elohim εγειρω-raised him from the dead:
31 and he was seen for many days by those who came up with him from the Galilees to Yerushalem, who are his witnesses to the people.
32 And we bring you good tidings of the promise made unto the fathers:
33 how that Elohim has fulfilled the same [promise] unto our children in that He ανιστημι-raised up Yeshua, as also it is written in the second Psalm, "You are My Son, this day have I begotten you." [Psa 2:7]
34 But as concerning that He ανιστημι-raised him up from the dead, now no more to return to corruption, He has spoken in this manner, "I will give you the holy and sure blessings of David." [Isa 55:3]
35 Because he [David] says also in another Psalm, "You will not give Your Holy One to see corruption." [Psa 16:10]

It is very clear from the context and the words employed that Acts 13:32-35 is a summary statement concerning what was previously stated in Acts 23-31, with scripture references given in Acts 13:33-35, (Psa 2:7, Isa 55:3, Psa 16:10), to drive home the points from the sermon in the summary statement. And, as also previously explained to you in this thread, this sermon is an expansion of what Peter already stated in the Acts 3:22-26 portion of that sermon:

Acts 3:22-26
22 For Moses truly said to the fathers, "A Prophet shall YHWH your Elohim ανιστημι-raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall you hear in all things whatsoever he shall say to you.
23 And it shall come to pass that every soul which will not hear that Prophet shall be destroyed from among the people."
24 Yea, and all the Prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days.
25 You are the children of the Prophets, and of the covenant which Elohim made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, "And in your seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed."
26 Unto you first, Elohim, having ανιστημι-raised up his Son Yeshua, sent him to bless you, [Deut 18:15-19] in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.

My understanding is locked in by the Word held in the upright truth of its context.

:Nineveh::nuke: :Nineveh:

 

[freelight]

You've got to be kidding right? The word "and" sinks my ship? Since you refuse to acknowledge both the Testimony of Yeshua and Paul I have no reason to continue debating the same things over and over with you. Please go away. You are simply harassing me now. You are not a follower of the same Yeshua whom I follow because you reject his clear emphatic statements in favor of your own doctrines. You're nothing more than a thief stealing certain passages and phrases out of context to concoct your own privately held doctrines. I am not following you around trying to disrupt any of your manifold threads so why are you here trying to disrupt one of my very few threads? Would you prefer I start posting two or three threads a day so we can get the ball rolling in the direction of the truth?

:thumb:

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Yes, you did say that in one of the quotes of your words from my previous post. You said that I "refuse to adopt what Paul wrote here" and then you posted Acts 13:32 and bold-underlined-italicised the word AND as if I do not accept that verse the way it reads. You're lying again as may be clearly seen in my previous post where I clearly AGAIN, (in bold red), rendered it just as you also say that it says.

I made it plain what the Greek word translated "and" means and you refuse to even address the meaning of that word. Then in order to divert attention away from your evasion you call me a liar in the hope that no one will notice your evasion.

Now is your chance to give us the meaning which you place on the Greek word kai which is found at the beginning of Acts 13:32. I will repeat what I said about its meaning. Strong's says that the word has "a copulative and sometimes also a cumulative force."

The word "copulative" means "joining together coordinate words or word groups and expressing addition of their meanings" (Merriam-Webster.com).

The word "cumulative" means "increasing by successive additions" (Merriam-Webster.com).

In Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon we read that the word kai "serves as a copulative i.e. to connect...it marks something added to what has already been said" (Joseph Henry Thayer, Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament [Grand Rapids: Baker Book House,1977] 315).

I await the meaning which you place on kai as it is used at the beginning of Acts 13:32.

Now is the time when you can actually demonstrate that you actually welcome an honest discussion on this subject.

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

[MENTION=17195]daqq[/MENTION]

There is an irony here and a point that you and Jerry agree on. May I note it? If I remember correctly.

 

[daqq]

I made it plain what the Greek word translated "and" means and you refuse to even address the meaning of that word. Then in order to divert attention away from your evasion you call me a liar in the hope that no one will notice your evasion.

Now is your chance to give us the meaning which you place on the Greek word kai which is found at the beginning of Acts 13:32. I will repeat what I said about its meaning. Strong's says that the word has "a copulative and sometimes also a cumulative force."

The word "copulative" means "joining together coordinate words or word groups and expressing addition of their meanings" (Merriam-Webster.com).

The word "cumulative" means "increasing by successive additions" (Merriam-Webster.com).

In Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon we read that the word kai "serves as a copulative i.e. to connect...it marks something added to what has already been said" (Joseph Henry Thayer, Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament [Grand Rapids: Baker Book House,1977] 315).

I await the meaning which you place on kai as it is used at the beginning of Acts 13:32.

Now is the time when you can actually demonstrate that you actually welcome an honest discussion on this subject.

To whom it may concern, as anyone with open eyes may plainly see, I have clearly addressed this buffoonery and have even stated on the same page that I already agreed with Jerry Shugart's understanding of "και" as shown previously above on the previous page. Please disregard this chicanery concerning the meaning of "και" as everyone already knows what it means and I know of no one who disagrees. This is absurdity and deflection to the point of an imbecilic infantile temper tantrum so as to ignore the meaning of the particle "δε" as it clearly reads in Acts 13:34.

 

[daqq]

@daqq

There is an irony here and a point that you and Jerry agree on. May I note it? If I remember correctly.

Note whatever you will.

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

Note whatever you will.

I approach this cautiously. I believe "timelessness" is a key to your equation. Am I remembering wrong?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

To whom it may concern, as anyone with open eyes may plainly see, I have clearly addressed this buffoonery and have even stated on the same page that I already agreed with Jerry Shugart's understanding of "και" as shown previously above on the previous page.

Please give me the post number where you said that you agree with the meaning which I gave for the Greek word kai as used at Acts 13:32.

Thanks!

 

[daqq]

Please give me the post number where you said that you agree with the meaning which I gave for the Greek word kai as used at Acts 13:32.

Thanks!

Please READ my posts instead of ignoring everything I say:

You're a liar seeking to turn others away from the truth at my expense because you refuse to admit you are in error. I have NEVER said that "kai" does not mean "and" anywhere and especially not in Acts 13:32 as you claim. In fact I have posted that passage time and time again in response to you right here in this thread and never once have I said that "kai" does not mean "and" anywhere. You are intentionally ignoring the actual argument and focusing on a strawman argument that I NEVER made. So why do I need to debate something with you when I already AGREED that "kai" means "and"? I NEVER said that "kai" does not mean "and" but what I did say is that the particle "de" should not have been rendered as "and" in Acts 13:34. How can you not see this when it has been said at least four times now to you? You simply do not even want to see the argument because then you have your excuse to continue believing what you wish to believe. Open your blind eyes and see that I NEVER said there was anything wrong with what is found in Acts 13:32 as you claim. You are insinuating a falsehood on my part so that you may create your own imaginary straw-man and turn a blind eye to the truth.



AGAIN:

Acts 13:32-35
32 And [και] we bring you good tidings of the promise made unto the fathers:
33 How that Elohim has fulfilled the same unto our children in that he raised up Yeshua, [at his immersion: in the sense of raising up a Prophet to be sent to Yisrael, Deut 18:15-19] as also it is written in the second Psalm, "You are My Son, this day have I begotten you." [Psa 2:7]
34 But [δε] as concerning that He raised him up from the dead, now no more to return to corruption, He has spoken in this manner, "I will give you the holy and sure blessings of David." [Isa 55:3]
35 Because he [David] says also in another Psalm, "You will not give Your Holy One to see corruption." [Psa 16:10]

The statement "raised him up FROM THE DEAD" is nowhere to be found in Acts 13:33. That is why the particle δε is placed at the beginning of Acts 13:34 because it speaks of a different raising up, that is, just as it says: He raised him up from the dead, (Acts 13:34). There are TWO ways in which Yeshua was raised up: the first raising up was at his immersion where he was anointed and raised up to be sent to Israel: THAT PROPHET whom Moses prophesied in Deuteronomy 18:15-19, and this raising up is proclaimed by Paul in Acts 13:33, and concerns the Psalm 2:7 DECLARATION miraculously spoken with Power by the Father at his immersion, (DECLARED Son of Elohim with miraculous Power, Rom 1:4). The second raising up is the raising up FROM THE DEAD, and is proclaimed by Paul with scripture references in Acts 13:34-35.

IT DOES NOT MATTER THAT "AND" IN ACTS 13:32 IS A CONTINUANCE OF WHAT WAS SAID BEFORE BECAUSE THE PARTICLE "DE" DOES NOT COME UNTIL ACTS 13:34 WHERE THE SUBJECT CHANGES TO THE RESURRECTION FROM THE DEAD.