What is the express image of God?

[daqq]

More obfuscation and no scripture.

On the contrary I post scripture, not just opinion as you and keypurr do.
Posting the actual response instead of the verbose denial would have been much more credible.

I uphold and agree with EVERYTHING Jesus taught, not just equivocate and prevaricate on SOME scriptures.

Jesus said: I and the Father are one.
Jesus said: If you've seen me you've seen the Father.
Jesus said: If you knew me, you would know my Father also.
Jesus said: You shall worship the Lord your God, and serve Him only.
Jesus said: If you do not believe that I am He, you will indeed die in your sins.
Jesus said: You call me ‘Teacher’ and ‘Lord,’ and rightly so, for that is what I am.
Jesus said: Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work.
2 Peter 1:1
Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours:
2 Peter 1:11
and you will receive a rich welcome into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
2 Peter 2:20
If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and are overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning.
2 Peter 3:2
I want you to recall the words spoken in the past by the holy prophets and the command given by our Lord and Savior through your apostles.
2 Peter 3:18
But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and forever! Amen.
Col 1:19-20
For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.
Col 1:9-10
For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, and in Christ you have been brought to fullness. He is the head over every power and authority.
Titus 1:3
and which now at his appointed season he has brought to light through the preaching entrusted to me by the command of God our Savior,
Titus 1:4
To Titus, my true son in our common faith: Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior.
Titus 2:10
and not to steal from them, but to show that they can be fully trusted, so that in every way they will make the teaching about God our Savior attractive.
Titus 2:13
while we wait for the blessed hope—the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ,
Titus 3:4
But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared,
Titus 3:6
whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior
Is 9:6
For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Is 43:11-12
I, yes I, am the LORD, and apart from me there is no savior. I’ve revealed and saved and proclaimed, when there as no foreign god among you — and you are my witnesses,” declares the LORD.

Every instance of "Lord and Savior" can be rendered as "Master and Deliverer" because, as already shown to you previously, there were many "deliverer-saviors" in the O/T writings which are the sole reference background material for all of the N/T writers. Likewise "God" in 2 Peter 1:1 is equivalent to Elohim and as also already stated I do in fact believe that the Son is the Elohim of Creation but that does not make him the same as, or equal to, the Father who is YHWH Elohim, (and this comes directly from the John 1:1-2 statement which you claim to uphold). "In the beginning was the Logos-Memra, and the Logos-Memra was with the Theon-Elohim, and Theos-Elohim was the Logos-Memra: the same was in the beginning with the Theon-Elohim."

As for "Lord", which is Kurios, if you pay close attention you will notice that whenever the Name of YHWH is rendered as Kurios in the N/T the definite article is not employed because the Greek follows the Hebraic practice of not using the definite article with a proper name. Therefore when we read "ho Kurios" with the definite article in the N/T it generally means "the Master" and is not the same as when Kurios becomes the substitute for the Tetragrammaton Name of YHWH. This shows up blazingly clear in the Shema where Kurios without the definite article is substituted for the Name of YHWH:

Deuteronomy 6:4 Transliterated Unaccented
4. Shma`, Yisra'el! YHWH 'Eloheynuw YHWH 'echad!

Deuteronomy 6:4
4. Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God is one Lord:

Mark 12:29 Transliterated Unaccented
29. Apekrithe ho Iesous hoti, "Prote estin, "Akoue, Israel, Kurios ho Theos hemon Kurios heis estin,

Mark 12:29
29. And Yeshua answered that, "[the] First is, "Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord"--"

The definite article must be inserted in the English with "Lord" ("the Lord") in both instances but it is not found in either of the original languages and the Greek here follows the Hebraic practice of not using the definite article because in this case Kurios is a substitution word for the proper Name of YHWH.

"YHWH Elohey-nuw YHWH echad"
"Kurios ho Theos hemon Kurios heis estin"

The N/T speaks of the Father YHWH using Kurios without the definite article.
Kurios with the definite article, ("ho Kurios") more generally means "the Master".

Here is another example:

Luke 1:68 KJV
68. Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people:

Luke 1:68 Transliterated Unaccented
68. "Eulogetos Kurios ho Theos tou Israel, hoti epeskepsato kai epoiesen lutrosin to lao autou:

There is no definite article with Kurios because it represents the Name of YHWH:

Luke 1:68
68. Blessed be YHWH, the Elohim of Yisrael, for He hath visited and redeemed His people:

And did you notice what the above text says about redemption? It states that YHWH has visited and redeemed His people. And how does He do this? By sending His own Deliverer-Savior to His people. It is the Father YHWH who is the ultimate Redeemer: the Son can do nothing of himself, (John 5:19). The English language has pulled some fast ones on us but that does not excuse you from seeking out the Truth if indeed you love Yeshua and his Father and our Father YHWH.

As for your quoting "I and my Father are one" Keypurr has already explained that to you. Yeshua uses the same terminology for us and him being one with him as he is one with the Father:

John 17:11-23
11. And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.
12. While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.
13. And now come I to thee; and these things I speak in the world, that they might have my joy fulfilled in themselves.
14. I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
15. I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.
16. They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
17. Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
18. As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.
19. And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.
20. Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;
21. That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
22. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:
23. I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

Therefore by making Yeshua into God you at the same time by default make yourself God because if we can be one with him in the same way that he and the Father are one, and that makes him God, then it likewise makes you God by default because he prays the same for you as it is with himself with the Father. You worship your brother as God and by default claim to be God yourself because both your brother and your Father are equal Gods. :crackup:

 

[StanJ]

Every instance of "Lord and Savior" can be rendered as "Master and Deliverer" because, as already shown to you previously, there were many "deliverer-saviors" in the O/T writings which are the sole reference background material for all of the N/T writers.

What CAN be done in translation and what should be done are NOT the same thing. I trust the scholars that are credentialed, which I doubt you are. Regardless, God says He is our only savior so if Jesus IS our savior then quite simply Jesus is God. That should NOT require a degree in anything to comprehend, only a simple understanding of basic English, or whatever language one uses.

 

[StanJ]

As for your quoting "I and my Father are one" Keypurr has already explained that to you. Yeshua uses the same terminology for us and him being one with him as he is one with the Father:

Good, so you and he see that and yet equivocate about the proper connotation of one in God is ONE. So you either use the connotation that goes with the context that the word is used in, or you treat all occasions of ONE as the same meaning. Which do you prefer, the former or latter?

 

[daqq]

Good, so you and he see that and yet equivocate about the proper connotation of one in God is ONE. So you either use the connotation that goes with the context that the word is used in, or you treat all occasions of ONE as the same meaning. Which do you prefer, the former or latter?

One does not equate to equal. Two can be one but that does not necessarily make them equal. If you are speaking of Echad why not start with the principle of first usage precedence?

Genesis 1:5 KJV
5. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

If you take a quick look at FIRST DAY you will easily see that the words are Yom Echad. So echad here is used to say FIRST. Could this first usage in all of holy writ impact our understanding of what follows? In some cases most certainly.

Exodus 20:2-3 KJV
2. I am the Lord [YHWH] thy God, [Elohey-Elohim] which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
3. Thou shalt have no other gods [elohim] before me.

The first of the Ten Words tells everyone willing to submit to the God of Israel that we shall have no elohim before YHWH Elohim, which "little e" elohim includes ourselves because He says: You are elohim, and all of you are sons of the Most High, (to whom the Logos of Elohim has come). Therefore if you too are a "little e" elohim then the Father YHWH is to be FIRST, (echad).

Shema, Yisrael, YHWH Eloheynu YHWH [is] first!

Must it absolutely be read that way?
No but I can certainly read it either way.
So I am become third ruler of my dominion.

 

[keypurr]

I note that I post scripture and all you respond with is denial and subterfuge. Why is that keypurr?
Do you deny what Jesus said as I have pointed out?
EXACT means just that. If you continue to equivocate on another word it is obvious that word doesn't suit your false teaching and erroneous eisegesis.
Where does the scripture actually say Jesus is created and not born?
Ignoring John 1 won't make it go away.

Mystical mumbo jumbo is not what God's Word is all about keypurr. The TRUTH is and advocating that people study until they see what you see is ludicrous and only shows you CAN'T show how you arrived at your conclusions. If you can't defend your POV by actually showing it in scriptures, while others do, then obviously that short coming discounts your so-called understanding of what the Bible DOES say or convey.
You say you had a revelation 3 years ago and I say you swallowed a lie of the enemy hook, line and sinker. Time will show who is right, but in the interim here's more repetition for you, FROM God's Word.

Jesus said: I and the Father are one.
Jesus said: If you've seen me you've seen the Father.
Jesus said: If you knew me, you would know my Father also.
Jesus said: You shall worship the Lord your God, and serve Him only.
Jesus said: If you do not believe that I am He, you will indeed die in your sins.
Jesus said: You call me ‘Teacher’ and ‘Lord,’ and rightly so, for that is what I am.
Jesus said: Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work.
2 Peter 1:1
Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours:
2 Peter 1:11
and you will receive a rich welcome into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
2 Peter 2:20
If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and are overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning.
2 Peter 3:2
I want you to recall the words spoken in the past by the holy prophets and the command given by our Lord and Savior through your apostles.
2 Peter 3:18
But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and forever! Amen.
Col 1:19-20
For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.
Col 1:9-10
For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, and in Christ you have been brought to fullness. He is the head over every power and authority.
Titus 1:3
and which now at his appointed season he has brought to light through the preaching entrusted to me by the command of God our Savior,
Titus 1:4
To Titus, my true son in our common faith: Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior.
Titus 2:10
and not to steal from them, but to show that they can be fully trusted, so that in every way they will make the teaching about God our Savior attractive.
Titus 2:13
while we wait for the blessed hope—the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ,
Titus 3:4
But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared,
Titus 3:6
whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior
Is 9:6
For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Is 43:11-12
I, yes I, am the LORD, and apart from me there is no savior. I’ve revealed and saved and proclaimed, when there as no foreign god among you — and you are my witnesses,” declares the LORD.

Exactly what are your verses trying to prove?
None of which equate God and Christ. You stick to one or two translations are get the wrong message.

We all can be sons of God. We all can be one with God. But that does not make us God. You read words but fail to see what it us saying. ALL things come from the Father, even Christ. The Christ is NOT the Father, Christ is the saviour SENT BY GOD. Christ is Lord not God, you need to see that.

You must add thought to your reading Stan and open your mind to what others are saying. No one has all truth, but truth can be found.

 

[keypurr]

More obfuscation and no scripture.




On the contrary I post scripture, not just opinion as you and keypurr do.
Posting the actual response instead of the verbose denial would have been much more credible.



I uphold and agree with EVERYTHING Jesus taught, not just equivocate and prevaricate on SOME scriptures.

Jesus said: I and the Father are one.
Jesus said: If you've seen me you've seen the Father.
Jesus said: If you knew me, you would know my Father also.
Jesus said: You shall worship the Lord your God, and serve Him only.
Jesus said: If you do not believe that I am He, you will indeed die in your sins.
Jesus said: You call me ‘Teacher’ and ‘Lord,’ and rightly so, for that is what I am.

Teacher and Lord is NOT God Stan.

Jesus said: Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work.

Does the Father live in you also?

2 Peter 1:1
Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours:

Did you notice the AND, God AND Savior, two

2 Peter 1:11
and you will receive a rich welcome into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

2 Peter 2:20
If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and are overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning.

2 Peter 3:2
I want you to recall the words spoken in the past by the holy prophets and the command given by our Lord and Savior through your apostles.

2 Peter 3:18
But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and forever! Amen.
Col 1:19-20

Lord and Savior is not the same as God and Savior.

For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.

This is speaking of the spiritual son Christ, not Jesus.

Col 1:9-10
For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, and in Christ you have been brought to fullness. He is the head over every power and authority.

Titus 1:3
and which now at his appointed season he has brought to light through the preaching entrusted to me by the command of God our Savior,

Titus 1:4
To Titus, my true son in our common faith: Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior.

God sent Christ.

Titus 2:10
and not to steal from them, but to show that they can be fully trusted, so that in every way they will make the teaching about God our Savior attractive.

Titus 2:13
while we wait for the blessed hope—the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ,

Titus 3:4
But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared,

Titus 3:6
whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior

Is 9:6
For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Is 43:11-12

I, yes I, am the LORD, and apart from me there is no savior. I’ve revealed and saved and proclaimed, when there as no foreign god among you — and you are my witnesses,” declares the LORD.

Is 9.6 has been discussed many times, I would not build my faith on it. Some say Mighty Warrior not Might God.

 

[daqq]

Is 9.6 has been discussed many times, I would not build my faith on it. Some say Mighty Warrior not Might God.

Especially since the portion used by those who quote it most does not even appear in the Septuagint and the YLT gives a completely different rendering of it:

Esaias 9:6 Septuagint (Brenton Translation)
6 For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, whose government is upon his shoulder: and his name is called the Messenger of great counsel: for I will bring peace upon the princes, and health to him.
http://biblehub.com/sep/isaiah/9.htm

But look how Young's Literal Bible renders the passage:

Isaiah 9:6 YLT
6. For a Child hath been born to us, A Son hath been given to us, And the princely power is on his shoulder, And He doth call his name Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace.

It is exactly as has been laid out herein: the Princely Power of the Empire is the Father who is upon the shoulder, (the neck like a yoke) of the man Yeshua. This is the Father and He alone gives the key of the House of David prophesied also in Isaiah:

Isaiah 22:21-22
20. And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will call my servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah:
21. And I will clothe him with thy robe, and strengthen him with thy girdle, and I will commit thy government into his hand: and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah.
22. And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder; so he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open [Revelation 3:7].

The Father is UPON the shoulder-neck of the man, the Teacher, Yeshua. The Son is INSIDE the heart of the man, the Teacher, Yeshua. The Father is the Princely Power of the Empire and the man Yeshua calls His name: Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace.

 

[StanJ]

One does not equate to equal. Two can be one but that does not necessarily make them equal. If you are speaking of Echad why not start with the principle of first usage precedence?

Well I guess THAT depends on how you use it doesn't it? All you say is the scripture but don't expound on the ONE. What is the Shema saying? Is it saying that God is ONE numerically/singularly? If so how does that negate a triune nature? Is it saying ONE means in accord? If so why would they NOT be equal, and where would you see they are not equal?

Genesis 1:5 KJV
5. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
If you take a quick look at FIRST DAY you will easily see that the words are Yom Echad. So echad here is used to say FIRST. Could this first usage in all of holy writ impact our understanding of what follows? In some cases most certainly.

This is NOT the topic of the OP on this thread. Feel free to pose this in the appropriate thread and try to stay ON topic.

Exodus 20:2-3 KJV
2. I am the Lord [YHWH] thy God, [Elohey-Elohim] which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
3. Thou shalt have no other gods [elohim] before me.
The first of the Ten Words tells everyone willing to submit to the God of Israel that we shall have no elohim before YHWH Elohim, which "little e" elohim includes ourselves because He says: You are elohim, and all of you are sons of the Most High, (to whom the Logos of Elohim has come). Therefore if you too are a "little e" elohim then the Father YHWH is to be FIRST, (echad).

Again not the issue I brought up. You seem to deflect whenever you can't make a direct answer?
Let's try to keep the Hebrew words out of the English shall we. You use them to cloud and obfuscate the issue rather than deal with it. Are you Hebrew?
YHWH is not meant to be pronounced, it is a name that was used in the OT instead of God's name. We don't have an issue in English using God so try to stick to one language. Pick a modern English translation and stick to it.
Those that did them are known credentialed scholars. The same can NOT be said for you.
Verse 2 & 3 use the SAME Hebrew word, 'ĕlôhıym, which you attempt to equivocate on above. That is a typical tactic by people like you who eisegete the word.
Father is NOT translated as YHWH, and is in fact NOT used in the OT to describe God.
Regardless, 'ĕlôhıym is a plural word for God, so thus it conveys the triune nature of our God. Gen 1:26-27 (NIV) uses OUR image in v26 and then His image in v27. Seems clear the two refer to the same being.

Shema, Yisrael, YHWH Eloheynu YHWH [is] first!
Must it absolutely be read that way?
No but I can certainly read it either way.
So I am become third ruler of my dominion.

In FACT, the Shema starts with; "Shema Yisrael Adonai eloheinu Adonai ehad", which is from Deut 6:4, so no, it is NOT absolutely read that way.
In any event, the Trinity find it's full expression and recognition in the NT, so by trying to stay in the OT all the time you simply show you have no idea about who God is, fully revealed in Jesus.

 

[daqq]

Well I guess THAT depends on how you use it doesn't it? All you say is the scripture but don't expound on the ONE. What is the Shema saying? Is it saying that God is ONE numerically/singularly? If so how does that negate a triune nature? Is it saying ONE means in accord? If so why would they NOT be equal, and where would you see they are not equal?

This is NOT the topic of the OP on this thread. Feel free to pose this in the appropriate thread and try to stay ON topic.

Again not the issue I brought up. You seem to deflect whenever you can't make a direct answer?
Let's try to keep the Hebrew words out of the English shall we. You use them to cloud and obfuscate the issue rather than deal with it. Are you Hebrew?
YHWH is not meant to be pronounced, it is a name that was used in the OT instead of God's name. We don't have an issue in English using God so try to stick to one language. Pick a modern English translation and stick to it.
Those that did them are known credentialed scholars. The same can NOT be said for you.
Verse 2 & 3 use the SAME Hebrew word, 'ĕlôhıym, which you attempt to equivocate on above. That is a typical tactic by people like you who eisegete the word.
Father is NOT translated as YHWH, and is in fact NOT used in the OT to describe God.
Regardless, 'ĕlôhıym is a plural word for God, so thus it conveys the triune nature of our God. Gen 1:26-27 (NIV) uses OUR image in v26 and then His image in v27. Seems clear the two refer to the same being.

In FACT, the Shema starts with; "Shema Yisrael Adonai eloheinu Adonai ehad", which is from Deut 6:4, so no, it is NOT absolutely read that way.
In any event, the Trinity find it's full expression and recognition in the NT, so by trying to stay in the OT all the time you simply show you have no idea about who God is, fully revealed in Jesus.

Since when do you get to bring something up and then disallow others to quote a related passage? You treat others the same as you treat the scriptures: it is you yourself that picks and chooses which portions you will accept or ignore in your doctrine. In addition it is clear that you do not comprehend what others write because I clearly said to you that "the First Day" in Genesis 1:5 is "Yom Echad" and thus the first usage of the word echad or ehad in the scripture, (you yourself brought up this topic here on more than one occasion). By the way it is also quite possible that echad may sometimes be meant in the sense of "only", as in "alone", and this would also be a naturally compatible fit with the opening line of the Shema:

Shema, Yisrael, YHWH Eloheynu YHWH echad!
Hear, O Israel, YHWH our Elohim YHWH Only!

This also seems to be implied in the answer given by the scribe to Yeshua in the Mark quotation of the Shema. Yeshua then notes that the scribe answered discreetly and tells him that he is not far from the kingdom of Elohim:

Mark 12:29-34
29. Yeshua answered that, [the] First is, "Hear, O Israel; YHWH our Elohey, YHWH is [the] Only: [GSN#1520 heis]
30. And thou shalt love YHWH thy Elohey with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength."
31. The second is this, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." There is none other commandment greater than these.
32. And the scribe said unto him, Of a truth, Teacher, thou hast well said that, "[the] Only [GSN#1520 heis] He is and there is none other besides Him!"
33. And to love Him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the strength, and to love ones neighbor as himself, is much more than all whole burnt-offerings and sacrifices.
34. And when Yeshua saw that he answered discreetly, [prudently] he said unto him, Thou art not far from the kingdom of Elohim. And no man after that durst ask him any question.

And if you think the above understanding cannot be possible with the word "heis" then please take a look at what has already occurred in a previous statement, from the same Gospel account, and again with scribes who surely know about such things:

Mark 2:6-7 YLT
6. And there were certain of the scribes there sitting, and reasoning in their hearts,
7. 'Why doth this one thus speak evil words? who is able to forgive sins except one [GSN#1520 heis] - God?'

Mark 2:6-7 KJV
6. But there were certain of the scribes sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts,
7. Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only?

Mark 2:6-7 RSV (Revised Standard Version)
6. Now some of the scribes were sitting there, questioning in their hearts,
7. "Why does this man speak thus? It is blasphemy! Who can forgive sins but God alone?"

Here above we see the famous "one" word, ("heis") employed by the scribes and recorded by Mark in a usage of "only" and "alone" while speaking of only God alone. Can you follow the flow of the logic this time or are you simply too afraid your paradigm will implode? Your theology is supposed to implode when it is corrupt: that way you do not end up deceived.

Better yet have it your way . . . :carryon:

 

[meshak]

The Father is UPON the shoulder-neck of the man, the Teacher, Yeshua. The Son is INSIDE the heart of the man, the Teacher, Yeshua. The Father is the Princely Power of the Empire and the man Yeshua calls His name: Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace.

Please forgive me for butting in.

Isn't it written that Jesus is Wonderful Counselor, Might God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace? Are you saying this is His Father, not Jesus?

thanks.

BTW, I am a non-trin.

 

[keypurr]

Daqq, you talking to a wall. Stan is not open to learn.

 

[StanJ]

Since when do you get to bring something up and then disallow others to quote a related passage? You treat others the same as you treat the scriptures: it is you yourself that picks and chooses which portions you will accept or ignore in your doctrine. In addition it is clear that you do not comprehend what others write because I clearly said to you that "the First Day" in Genesis 1:5 is "Yom Echad" and thus the first usage of the word echad or ehad in the scripture, (you yourself brought up this topic here on more than one occasion).

What I have brought up in OTHER topics is based on that topic. This topic has NOTHING to do with Gen 1 other than it shows God as a triune being. Deflecting to a different scriptures and try to use it to prove your premise on this subject is typical of your ilk, but not unexpected as all Unis do it.
Deal with that issue and not what you think a day means in Gen 1, or respond to my posts in the appropriate thread.

This also seems to be implied in the answer given by the scribe to Yeshua in the Mark quotation of the Shema. Yeshua then notes that the scribe answered discreetly and tells him that he is not far from the kingdom of Elohim:

As the NT was written in Greek, this only shows how you insist on obfuscating the issue. Even in Mark, the Shema was stated in Greek, NOT Hebrew.

And if you think the above understanding cannot be possible with the word "heis" then please take a look at what has already occurred in a previous statement, from the same Gospel account, and again with scribes who surely know about such things:
Here above we see the famous "one" word, ("heis") employed by the scribes and recorded by Mark in a usage of "only" and "alone" while speaking of only God alone. Can you follow the flow of the logic this time or are you simply too afraid your paradigm will implode? Your theology is supposed to implode when it is corrupt: that way you do not end up deceived.

The connotation of εἱς (heis), as any other word, is based on context.
In Mark 12 it has the connotation of one virtually by union. NOT a singular connotation.
The FACT is that the Pharisees here recognized that Jesus claimed to be God by forgiving sins, and said so. Apparently you didn't read Mark 2:8-12 (NIV)?
I wouldn't cast dispersions about logic if I were you. You continually self implode and it doesn't seem to negate your desire to preach false teachings.
God is one indeed...a triune one.

 

[daqq]

Please forgive me for butting in.

Isn't it written that Jesus is Wonderful Counselor, Might God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace? Are you saying this is His Father, not Jesus?

thanks.

BTW, I am a non-trin.

Hi Meshak, I do believe that is what the YLT is saying:

Isaiah 9:6 YLT
6. For a Child hath been born to us, A Son hath been given to us, And the princely power is on his shoulder, And He doth call his name Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace.

1) A child is born to us and a Son is given to us.
2) The Princely Power, (the Father) is upon his shoulder.
3) And he calls the Name of the Princely Power of the empire:

Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace.

Father of Eternity or Everlasting Father is like saying "Heavenly Father".

Young's simply has some caps in wrong places imo:

Isaiah 9:6
6. For a child hath been born to us, a son hath been given to us, and the Princely Power is upon his shoulder, and he doth call His name, Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace.

 

[StanJ]

Daqq, you talking to a wall. Stan is not open to learn.

Stan has learned, not fallen away into apostasy keypurr.

BIG difference for those who still believe.

 

[StanJ]

Please forgive me for butting in.

Isn't it written that Jesus is Wonderful Counselor, Might God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace? Are you saying this is His Father, not Jesus?

thanks.

BTW, I am a non-trin.

Yes it is, and that shows that Jesus IS God. Is 9:6 (NIV)

 

[StanJ]

Teacher and Lord is NOT God Stan.

It IS in the context it is being used in. Do you think God only has one name?

Does the Father live in you also?

No God does not LIVE in me, but the Holy Spirit dwells in me because I am a temple. Did God live in the Holy of Holies?

Did you notice the AND, God AND Savior, two

No, God and Savior is one with two aspects/attributes or purposes.
David used it a lot. Read Psalms 42:5,11 (NIV) as an example.

Lord and Savior is not the same as God and Savior.

As your friend daqq has already admitted, LORD replaced YHWH, so yes it connotes God.

This is speaking of the spiritual son Christ, not Jesus.

the word son here, ONLY connotes a physical being.

God sent Christ.

God (the WORD) became Christ in the flesh. John 1:14 (NIV)

Is 9.6 has been discussed many times, I would not build my faith on it. Some say Mighty Warrior not Might God.

Not with me it hasn't, and I don't base my faith on it, my faith is in God and his infallible word, despite your efforts to make it contradict itself.
If you can refute what Is 9:6 says, then do so, instead of just denying my point.

 

[StanJ]

Exactly what are your verses trying to prove?
None of which equate God and Christ. You stick to one or two translations are get the wrong message.

We all can be sons of God. We all can be one with God. But that does not make us God. You read words but fail to see what it us saying. ALL things come from the Father, even Christ. The Christ is NOT the Father, Christ is the saviour SENT BY GOD. Christ is Lord not God, you need to see that.

You must add thought to your reading Stan and open your mind to what others are saying. No one has all truth, but truth can be found.

Well to you maybe not, but to those who have eyes and ears they sure do.

Yes, and IN context we all are. Being equivocal about that doesn't really further your argument but just shows you like to obfuscate.

It's always people who have become apostate that say OPEN your mind.
God has ALL the truth, as IS all the truth. If you don't know that then there is NO hope for you.

Who did you confess as your savior? Jesus your God and Messiah, or Jesus the created man?
Of course I mean WHEN you got saved not when you became apostate.

 

[daqq]

Well I guess THAT depends on how you use it doesn't it? All you say is the scripture but don't expound on the ONE. What is the Shema saying? Is it saying that God is ONE numerically/singularly? If so how does that negate a triune nature? Is it saying ONE means in accord? If so why would they NOT be equal, and where would you see they are not equal?



This is NOT the topic of the OP on this thread. Feel free to pose this in the appropriate thread and try to stay ON topic.



Again not the issue I brought up. You seem to deflect whenever you can't make a direct answer?
Let's try to keep the Hebrew words out of the English shall we. You use them to cloud and obfuscate the issue rather than deal with it. Are you Hebrew?
YHWH is not meant to be pronounced, it is a name that was used in the OT instead of God's name. We don't have an issue in English using God so try to stick to one language. Pick a modern English translation and stick to it.
Those that did them are known credentialed scholars. The same can NOT be said for you.
Verse 2 & 3 use the SAME Hebrew word, 'ĕlôhıym, which you attempt to equivocate on above. That is a typical tactic by people like you who eisegete the word.
Father is NOT translated as YHWH, and is in fact NOT used in the OT to describe God.
Regardless, 'ĕlôhıym is a plural word for God, so thus it conveys the triune nature of our God. Gen 1:26-27 (NIV) uses OUR image in v26 and then His image in v27. Seems clear the two refer to the same being.



In FACT, the Shema starts with; "Shema Yisrael Adonai eloheinu Adonai ehad", which is from Deut 6:4, so no, it is NOT absolutely read that way.
In any event, the Trinity find it's full expression and recognition in the NT, so by trying to stay in the OT all the time you simply show you have no idea about who God is, fully revealed in Jesus.

You only prove yourself a hypocrite because you just posted all those verses from 2 Peter and Titus which also have nothing to do with the thread title "What is the express image of God". The hypocrite says: "I can use other scripture passages to make my points but if you do then you are off topic :devil: . . .", and it is clear to everyone with eyes to see that this is exactly what you have done. You say that Yeshua is equal to the Father and yet you do the same thing with his words. You despise context because it is the context which destroys your ripped out of context one-liner theology. In addition my post from Genesis 1:5 was not about Yom, which is Day, but rather Echad, which is FIRST in that passage as may be clearly seen by all who are willing to read it; and echad was indeed under discussion because YOU brought it up when you kept posting "I and my Father are one", and everyone knows that is where the argument leads. Therefore the same things you accuse me and others of doing, those things you do, and you are apparently one of the worst offenders. You are not here to discuss but rather to maim, lame, rob, steal, and kill. :crackup:

 

[meshak]

Hi Meshak, I do believe that is what the YLT is saying:

Isaiah 9:6 YLT
6. For a Child hath been born to us, A Son hath been given to us, And the princely power is on his shoulder, And He doth call his name Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace.

1) A child is born to us and a Son is given to us.
2) The Princely Power, (the Father) is upon his shoulder.
3) And he calls the Name of the Princely Power of the empire:

Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace.

Father of Eternity or Everlasting Father is like saying "Heavenly Father".

Young's simply has some caps in wrong places imo:

Isaiah 9:6
6. For a child hath been born to us, a son hath been given to us, and the Princely Power is upon his shoulder, and he doth call His name, Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace.

thank you that is contextual.

 

[keypurr]

Well to you maybe not, but to those who have eyes and ears they sure do.

Yes, and IN context we all are. Being equivocal about that doesn't really further your argument but just shows you like to obfuscate.

It's always people who have become apostate that say OPEN your mind.
God has ALL the truth, as IS all the truth. If you don't know that then there is NO hope for you.

Who did you confess as your savior? Jesus your God and Messiah, or Jesus the created man?
Of course I mean WHEN you got saved not when you became apostate.

Jesus is not my God, he is my Lord. Do you know the difference?
I will pray that you get an understanding of what you read.

Jesus was a man, like you, that makes him a creation. Like you. That is what qualified him to be the Lamb of God. But you do not understand that, do you.