I'm glad keypurr finally accepts the Trinity as fact, with all his years of wisdom I knew he would accept the Trinity - thanks keypurr
This day have I begotten you
- Thread starter daqq
- Start date
:thumb: Hi Freelight, having read the first two links, I say, amen. Have not listened to the video yet, but I probably need not, for if he says pretty much the same things I likely already agree. However what the links show conclusively is that, once again, the context of the quotes taken from the Psalms, (and any other Tanach passages), are critical and must be consulted for us to truly begin to understand the meaning that was in the mind of the author(s) of whatever we read in the Apostolic New Covenant writings.
It may be symbolism but immersion is certainly not by physical water in my understanding. In fact, there are seven steps of immersion, (like seven dips, plunges, or "times" in the Yarden), and in the Codex Bezae version there are "seven steps" indicated at the final "immersion" of Peter when he was let out of "the prison of Herod", (the death of the flesh mindset by which Peter would glorify Elohim as foretold in the final episode of the Gospel of John, for he spread forth his hands between to chains but they "fell off" when "the flesh" was done away). Too bad those seven steps were removed from the Acts by the church fathers. I suppose they probably thought of it as "too Jewish". :chuckle:
keypurr
Well-known member
What DIDN'T they think of as "too Jewish?"
beameup
New member
Hypostatic union: the combination of divine and human natures in the single person of Christ.
Yeshua was both fully human (from Mary) and fully Divine (from the Holy Spirit).
Sonship was at the conception.
The Son: "Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 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: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist" [hold together]. - Colossians 1:15-17
Last edited:
LOL, that is a very good question! I suppose what we have left . . . :crackup:
keypurr
Well-known member
I differ, only the flesh son was conceived.
The Son: "Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 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: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist" [hold together]. - Colossians 1:15-17[/QUOTE]
The IMAGE of something is NOT the something. It is just the IMAGE of something. In other words, it is not the real subject. However God did make his exact IMAGE and was pleased that it had his fullness. Now consider that God is a spirit, so his exact image would also be a spirit not a man. That spirit had to become flesh in a body God could trust, A SINLESS BODY. The express image (Christ) came with power and knowledge and when this spirit entered Jesus it was then God declared him as his begotten son.
Jesus was not born as the Christ, he was born to become the Christ when he was anointed with Christ.
keypurr
Well-known member
beameup
New member
Comparing Scripture with Scripture:
For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. - Colossians 2:9
Now, there was a time when the Son did not have a permanent human body. Perhaps that is where the confusion comes in.
Wherefore when he [the Son] cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me - Hebrews 10:5
The "Son" made numerous appearances in the Old Testament - always in a "human form" that could eat and drink, talk and walk.
keypurr
Well-known member
That son was not Jesus. Jesus was born as a man.
The true son is a spirit like his Father.
Consider just this, which old familiar topic has already been pushed herein by the Trinitarians with the so-called great "I AM" statement from John 8:58. But what happens in the following accounts from Mark 13 and Luke 21 if we take a certain instance of ego eimi and render the actual statements for what they actually say in the negative manner in which the Master delivers them? He says "Many shall come in my name saying THAT I AM, and they shall deceive many." Is that not exactly what we see right here in this thread? and in a plethora of constant other threads whenever and wherever this topic is brought up? There are MANY running around IN THE NAME OF JESUS/YESHUA claiming that he is I AM, just as he said they would do. Could this be a hidden reason why the scholars do not render "hoti" in the following critical passages? Why does it always go untranslated in these two instances? Why is it always OMITTED from the words of the Master? Is it not then because if indeed they rendered the passages for what they truly say then the entire meaning of the statements would be reversed and their own three fingers would then be pointing right back at themselves?
Mark 13:6 Textus Receptus
6 πολλοι γαρ ελευσονται επι τω ονοματι μου λεγοντες οτι εγω ειμι και πολλους πλανησουσιν
Luke 21:8 Textus Receptus
8 ο δε ειπε βλεπετε μη πλανηθητε πολλοι γαρ ελευσονται επι τω ονοματι μου λεγοντες οτι εγω ειμι και ο καιρος ηγγικε μη ουν πορευθητε οπισω αυτων
"πολλοι γαρ ελευσονται επι τω ονοματι μου λεγοντες οτι εγω ειμι και πολλους πλανησουσιν"
"For many shall come in my name saying that I AM; and they shall deceive many."
See what has happened here? Omit G3754 ὅτι, (hoti, "that"), and insert commas at will, and suddenly, wallah!, this key of the kingdom is hidden from the eyes of the reader. They therefore do no differently than their own fathers, the Pharisees, Sadducs, and Scribes. At the same time they go about in the name of Yeshua proclaiming that he is I AM, and deceiving many, just as he said they would do. And if you do not agree with them and their "church fathers" then you must be a lost heretic on your way to hell. :chuckle:
beameup
New member
The Second Person in the Godhead goes by many names and titles in the Old Testament. Basically, He is the "action" personage that often appeared to mankind upon the earth as a MAN.
To Joshua, in Joshua 5, He introduces himself as the captain of the LORD'S host:
"as captain of the host of the LORD am I now come. And Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and did worship, and said unto him, What saith my lord unto his servant? And the captain of the LORD'S host said unto Joshua, Loose thy shoe from off thy foot; for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground. And Joshua did so."- Joshua 5:14-15
The Angel of the LORD
The "rider upon the clouds"
The "Word" of the LORD (spoken=action)
The Name, My Name, His Name, etc.
"behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven,
and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him" - Dan 7:13
Often in the O.T., He will not give his real name, which we now know to be Yeshua
Exactly. I never understood why people don't listen to what He said. When He said there is none good but the Father, He was not talking about Himself being the Father, or He would have broken the law of witness.
The Seed Son came to show us the way to the Father, and He never wanted the flesh of Yeshua the man to be worshipped as deity, which is why He dodged them when they tried to make Him an earthly king.
We have the RCC to thank for that additional doctrine, because we can't have Mary being divine unless Yeshua is, and vice versa. But it's the sin of worshipping Nehushtan all over again, while they don't realize that the requirement for receiving the double portion is to see/perceive the FLESH OF HIM LEAVE, just as Elisha did. Which is why hereafter we'll not know Him after the flesh (man).
Amen, yes He is. He is the Father's kind, ie. every tree bears fruit after it's own kind. The Father is a Spirit and according to the law of the seed the Son must also be a Spirit.
You haven't a clue whereof you speak.
All of these are fair and legitimate renderings:
Revelation 13:15 KJV
15 And he had power to give life [pneuma] unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.
Revelation 13:15 YLT
15 and there was given to it to give a spirit [pneuma] to the image of the beast, that also the image of the beast may speak, and that it may cause as many as shall not bow before the image of the beast, that they may be killed.
Revelation 13:15 ASV
15 And it was given unto him to give breath [pneuma] to it, even to the image of the breast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as should not worship the image of the beast should be killed.
John 3:8 KJV
8 The wind [pneuma] bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit [pneuma].
John 3:8 YLT
8 the Spirit [pneuma] where he willeth doth blow, and his voice thou dost hear, but thou hast not known whence he cometh, and whither he goeth; thus is every one who hath been born of the Spirit [pneuma].'
Ignorance is bliss I suppose . . .
Hi dakk,
Maybe this will help?
Gen.7:21. And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both birds, and cattle, and beasts, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man: 22all in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life, of all that was on the dry land, died.
breath of the spirit of life
Str Translit Hebrew English Morph
3605 [e] kōl כֹּ֡ל all Noun
834 [e] ’ă-šer אֲשֶׁר֩ that [had] Prt
5397 [e] niš-maṯ- נִשְׁמַת־ the breath Noun
7307 [e] rū-aḥ ר֨וּחַ of the spirit Noun
2416 [e] ḥay-yîm חַיִּ֜ים of life Adj
639 [e] bə-’ap-pāw, בְּאַפָּ֗יו in the nostrils Noun
3605 [e] mik-kōl מִכֹּ֛ל of all Noun
834 [e] ’ă-šer אֲשֶׁ֥ר that [was] Prt
2724 [e] be-ḥā-rā-ḇāh בֶּחָֽרָבָ֖ה in the dry [land] Noun
4191 [e] mê-ṯū. מֵֽתוּ׃ died Verb
Peace.
Hebrews 1:1-9
[1] Elohim, having spoken of old time in many portions and many ways to the fathers in the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us in a Son,
[2] whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom He also acted out the ages;
[3] who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His essence, bearing | manifesting | all things concerning the word of His power, and having made a cleansing of sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
[4] becoming so much better than the messenger-prophets, inasmuch as he has inherited a more excellent name than they:
[5] for unto which of the messenger-prophets said He ever, You are My Son, this day have I begotten you? and again, I shall be unto him for a Father, and he shall be unto Me for a Son?
[6] Moreover when He leads the prototokos-firstborn, (Yisrael), again into the Land, (of Yisrael), He says, And let all the messenger-prophets of Elohim bow unto him.
[7] And surely of the messengers it says, Who makes His messengers spirits and his ministers a flame of fire [Psalm 104:4].
[8] But to the Son, Your throne, Elohim, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of your kingdom:
[9] You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; therefore your Elohim has anointed you Elohim, with olive-oil of gladness among your fellow partakers [Psalm 45:6-7, cf. Isaiah 45:3 "Elohey Yisrael", ("εγω κυριος ο θεος ο καλων το ονομα σου θεος ισραηλ")].
Yes, same name,
But as for the passage not sure I fully trust it, (though I do appreciate you posting it), but at any rate those who rendered the LXX did not see it that way as pneuma is not found in the most reliable texts:
Genesis 7:22 LXX
22 και παντα οσα εχει πνοην ζωης και πας ος ην επι της ξηρας απεθανεν
"πνοην ζωης" (pnoen zoes) ~ "breath of life"
Doesn't really matter though imo because the point was to "Beameup" that pneuma may be rendered, (according to context), in all the ways that have already been shown. And in addition to that Yeshua clearly says that his words are pneuma. An even broader point one should also take into consideration is that not every time we read pneuma or a form thereof does it always necessarily denote some kind of entity. Our words are spirit also and they can enter into the ears and even the eyes of others, (through reading and writing), either for the good or for the evil. This is producing fruit in the kingdom of Elohim. Unfortunately the carnal man always brings forth a son of perdition first, (Esau-man), which vessel of a spirit is set for destruction; then comes the good son, (because testimony is spirit). But how can one get to that point in a discussion with a mocker and scoffer?
Zeke
Well-known member
Disagree, Mary was a similitude to Sara that represented the Jerusalem above, Galatians 4:22-28, Matt 11:11 also puts the virgin birth of Jesus/Joshua into its proper place which is within Luke 17:20-21, through the little stone Gen 32:30.
When you try and make history out of them you get divisions that are observable, and keeps the dualism of this world alive and well, Jew and Gentile, Cain and Able, Saul and David, etc...