Did Jesus say he was God???

[Shermana]

Lione D’ ea: False…that’s why Jews understand what he meant is because the word I am is denoting in God in was, why Christ didn’t say this is my name nor etc., what the Lord God said in was about that case, let us read Exodus 3”14-15 Read?

Ummm, is that basically a big "nuh uh" as if no one can look up what I said? Looks like it.

And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
(King James Version)

'

You do understand that you can't just say "False" because the KJV says differently right?

Lione D’ ea: Why Christ didn’t necessary say “my name nor etc.” is because according in exodus 3:15 it is his name for ever, and memorial unto all generations that’s why Jews understand what he to express…wherefore they anger into him that’s why they said:

Wrong, a name is a totally different concept than stating a response to someone.

“The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.” (John 10:33 King James Version)

Okay, so you think you can just post the KJV version and dismiss the grammatical concerns.

Lione D’ ea: you said: “Did you totally ignore what I posted about how it should be translated as "makest thyself a god"? It's an anarthrous Theos. Just because your favorite translation uses "God" doesn't mean its correct. If there was an article before it, then you'd have a point. But they are accusing Jesus of making himself to be a god.” Let us find out, first I must read the transcript:

Yes, read the manuscript and you will see no article.

Translation:
The Jews answered him: For a good work we stone thee not, but for blasphemy, and because thou, being man, makest thyself God.

That is the common translation, but you completely ignored everything I said and posted as if you can just dismiss the actual grammar.

Lione D’ ea: First in Greek: (ανθρωπο&#1010 is equivalent term in English: as (a man) correct, if you read meticolously the verse, you notice the little comma before the “makest thyself God” it is not anarthrous Theos like you said because there is little comma before the makest, you have to considered that in scriptures because Jesus Christ said in Matthew 5:18 Read:

You have no idea what anarthros Theos means. It is in fact an anarthrous Theon.

“For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” (King James Version)

Wow, you have NO clue what you are talking about.

Lione D’ ea: You have to considered that law, therefore my investigation is correct more than in you, I never base in one translation I use lots of translation to see what the verse express to the reader, you have to step aside your own opinion, let the scriptures opinion dominate in our mind not us...Christ didn’t not necessary to say my name is, nor etc. because there is memorial what the exodus tells us, that’s why Jews are angry to him, regarding in Exodus about “I shall be” If there a book was translate it, I will never remove that text, after all we can sence if that translation...

Ummm, I have no idea what the Law has anything to do with the translation of an Anarthrous Theos. I can't even understand what your last sentence is saying. The scriptures says exactly what I'm saying, your translation is common but incorrect.

Lione D’ ea: It is not prohibited in Bible if it takes billions times why, Eclessiastes 3:15 Read:

Holy moly you are not even close to being on the same page. I'd suggest you stop embarassing yourself.

“That which hath been is now; and that which is to be hath already been; and God requireth that which is past.” (King James Version)

You're not even on the same page.

Lione D’ ea: Why requireth that which is past, because God want to reiterate to clarify what is blard a someone like you, that's why I state it is not only one meaning of “I am” is because one meaning have a thousand law you have to counted Hosea 8:12 Read:

You really need to stop, this has NOTHING to do with the grammar in question.

I have written to him the great things of my law, but they were counted as a strange thing. (King James Version)

That has absolutely nothing to do with this.

Lione D’ ea: Wherefore even it states existed in your vesion, there is no problem for me, after all it is past tence so we can say He is not just a Man, why I believe he is not just a Man, because when everything was not yet created He was exist there, Proverbs 8:22-30 Read:

Proverbs 8:22-30 is talking about the Logos, who is a separate, and Created being and is a focal point of my arguments against the Trinity.

The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old.

23I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was.

24When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water.

25Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth:

26While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world.

27When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth:

The concept of the Logos as the Firstborn of Creation is here, as a separate being.

28When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep:

29When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth:

30Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him;

Lione D’ ea: Who is this Person in verse 12 it say’s?

“I wisdom dwell with prudence, and find out knowledge of witty inventions.” (King James Version)

As you can see, Wisdom is a Separate, personified being, not "part of the Godhead". This also applies in Wisdom of Solomon.

Lione D’ ea: Who is this Wisdom, I Corinthians 2:6-8 Read:

Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought:
7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:

Wisdom OF G-d. OF does not mean "The same being as".

8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. (King James Version)

All that does is show they are separate beings.

Lione D’ ea: The Person who crucified in cross by Jews is the Christ, to testify in I Corinthians 1:24 Read:

And how does that prove its the same being as the Father? It doesn't.
What part about "Wisdom of G-d" makes you think its the same being.

Lione D’ ea: Jesus Christ is the power and wisdom of God, that is why Christ said in (John 8:58) I am is because He was existed before Abraham was, therefore He is God, why I believe He is God, because He is the Son of God, He was with the Father long time ago, the Bible dictionary NASB Word Usage accompanied is correct He came in God, That’s why I believe He is “I am” he translation is correct, I AM hath sent me unto you meaning name of God, if you read in verse 15 it reads

Wow, that is some serious circular reasoning that totally disregards the grammar.

And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this ismy memorial unto all generations.

Again, you are thinking it's the same "I am" you think Exodus 3:14 means as a name, even though it's clearly a different concept, despite you saying that I'm wrong because your translation says differently without getting into the grammar.

Lione D’ ea: if you notify the word “THIS” it denoting in I am, which is He was existed in from Adam, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob…that is why the word I am is God, Christ itself state He is God, another proof Jesus is I am in John 18:4-6 Read:

That is not proof whatsoever. You're welcome to believe so though.

Jesus therefore, knowing all things that should come upon him, went forth, and said unto them, Whom seek ye?

5 They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus saith unto them, I am he. And Judas also, which betrayed him, stood with them.

"I am he" means "I am the one you are seeking". Another example of how Trinitarians will jump feverishly anytime Jesus say "I am" in any way.

6 As soon then as he had said unto them, I am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground.

He said "I am he" as in "I am the one you are looking for." Use of this verse, which is very common, demonstrates that Trinitarians don't even care about what use of "I am" is meaning, as to eternal existence or simply "Yes I'm the one you're looking for" as long as he says "I am". As for falling to the ground, that's more about them being astonished at him being the Christ as he claims.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Lione D’ ea: False…that’s why Jews understand what he meant is because the word I am is denoting in God in was, why Christ didn’t say this is my name nor etc., what the Lord God said in was about that case, let us read Exodus 3”14-15 Read?

They misunderstood what he was trying to say. He wasn't trying to saying he was "God". That's why he had to clarify and quote the Psalms "Ye are gods". In John chpater 8 they sought to kill him because he supposedly disrespected their patriarch Abraham by stating he existed before Abraham. That's why right before that they said to him...'You're not even 50 so how could you have known Abraham?'...The other thing that really ticked them off is when he said he was the son of "God" and that "God" was his father. That was blasphemous to do so..just as it is in Islam (which is very similar and has its roots in Judaism).

Lione D’ ea: Why Christ didn’t necessary say “my name nor etc.” is because according in exodus 3:15 it is his name for ever, and memorial unto all generations that’s why Jews understand what he to express…wherefore they anger into him that’s why they said:

Except that at verse 15 the name is actually revealed and it's not (I am). Yahweh is the name.

http://bible.ort.org/books/torahd5.asp?action=displaypage&book=2&chapter=3&verse=15&portion=13
God then said to Moses, 'You must [then] say to the Israelites, 'YHVH, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, sent me to you.' This is My eternal name, and this is how I am to be recalled for all generations.

Where have you ever heard the Jews refer to "God" as (eyheh asher eyheh - I shall be/will be)? They don't. They refer to "God" as (Adonai, The LORD) and these are the descriptions they use in place of YHVH (Yahweh).

 

[LioneDea]

Shermana< Oh, so you ARE a modalist, which I actually have more respect for (a little at least) because Modalism is actually what the Trinitarian perceptions of their proof texts come out to in the end. I wish more Trinitarians would wake up to the fact that their beliefs are actually Modalism and go join Oneness Pentacostalism where they belong. But I don't get what you mean that it cannot change from past to future.


Lione D&#8217; ea: Wrong Brother, the word PENTACOSTALISM is not Biblical, there is no name you can read church of Pentacostal in whole Bible&#8230;



Shermana< As you can see, Wisdom is a Separate, personified being, not "part of the Godhead". This also applies in Wisdom of Solomon.

Lione D&#8217;ea Don&#8217;t be mad brother&#8230;you are wrong in that perspective, in Bible Solomon have wisdom give by God to him, but he is not the Wisdom, the wisdom is God, if you read the proverbs 8:22 it speaks a person who exist in was, when you read in verse (24) that before the depths was create He was existed, therefore He is not Solomon who speak here&#8230;it is the Son of God&#8230;


Proverbs 8:22-30 is talking about the Logos, who is a separate, and Created being and is a focal point of my arguments against the Trinity.

The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old.

Quote:
23I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was.

24When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water.

25Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth:

26While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world.

27When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth:

The concept of the Logos as the Firstborn of Creation is here, as a separate being.


Lione D&#8217; ea: That&#8217;s why I&#8217;m not believer of(Trinity and Oneness), it is erroneous doctrine, because it is different that beget than to born&#8230;


Shermana< 1. A Conspicuous Translation Inconsistency
In the Greek text, the definite article is missing before the Greek word anthropos ("man") and the Greek word theos (God/god). Because of the missing article, Trinitarians are happy to translate the passage as "you being A man." But the same is true for the word theos yet they refuse to consistently translate the passage as "make yourself A god."
This passage most naturally reads, "you being a man make yourself a god." If an ancient Koine Greek speaker had wanted to say, "make yourself a god" this is precisely how he would say it.
Trinitarians render the words kai hoti su anthropos (no definite article) as "a man" but they will turn right around and say you can't translate "poieis seauton theon in the exact same manner as "a god! Why? Because it does not suit their agenda. There is no other reason.


Shermana< You have no idea what anarthros Theos means. It is in fact an anarthrous Theon.

Lione D&#8217; ea: Are you referring John 1:1?





(end.)

 

[LioneDea]

Shermana< We have debunked this like 10 times in a row. First off, the name itself is not really "I am", it is "I shall be". If you can find a single use of the word Eyheh meaning "I am" other than in Exodus 3:14, show it. Otherwise, it is clearly "I shall be"


Lione D&#8217; ea: There is no problem with that fact brother, because the word Eyheh is not ONLY means as &#8220;I shall be&#8221;, because it can be as &#8220;I will be&#8221; nor &#8220;I Will Become&#8221;, there is no contrary on what I believe, but the best translation which translate is &#8220;I AM&#8221; because he was exist before everything happened&#8230;that is why Christ the Son of God saith I AM, he was existed before Abraham was meaning he is not Man, there is no contrary to me in that fact &#8220;I am, I existed nor exist&#8221;...


(end.)

 

[LioneDea]

Dirty Penguin< Except that at verse 15 the name is actually revealed and it's not (I am). Yahweh is the name.




Lione D' ea: That name is invented...there is no exact pronunciation of YHWH... the best name we call in God is Father...because he have a Son, Jesus Christ teach us in Mathew 5:9 it Read:

"After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name."


(end.)

 

[Dirty Penguin]

PENTACOSTALISM [/COLOR]is not Biblical, there is no name you can read church of Pentacostal in whole Bible…

There most definitely is a "Pentecost" mentioned in the book of Acts chapter two. I'm sure this is where the "Pentecostal Church" derives its name from. Christianity has hundreds of denominations and many of them aren't biblical including "Catholic"..

Actually it's both John 1:1 and John 10:33

 

[LioneDea]

There most definitely is a "Pentecost" mentioned in the book of Acts chapter two. I'm sure this is where the "Pentecostal Church" derives its name from. Christianity has hundreds of denominations and many of them aren't biblical including "Catholic"..

Actually it's both John 1:1 and John 10:33

Lione D' ea: The Man mention in John 10:33 brother is in John 1:14 it say's:

"And the Word was made flesh,"

Lione D' ea: The verse did not tell us He is flesh, it states that He was made flesh, meaning He is not began in this world, the question is Where did He come from?, in 1:1-3 of John Read:?

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 The same was in the beginning with God.

3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made." (King James Version)

Lione D' ea: There are 2 mention in verse 1...the God and the Word, which is the Word is came from God, He is also a God because He is came from God, He was made flesh only according in verse 14, the question is how He was made flesh in Hebrews 10:5 Read?

"Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:" (King James Version)

Lione D' ea: When the Word which is the Son of God cometh into the world, there is a body He come upon, He enter that body which God prepared to him, that body in that time was conceive by Mary in Matthew 1:18 made by Holy Spirit, the Word enter that Body, and When he was born of Mary, they name it Jesus Christ which interpret God with us, Matthew 1:23 Read:

"Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us." (King James Version)

Lione D' ea: When he is in the world, what said about him Philippians 2:5 forward?

"Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:

6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

Lione D' ea: Why?

7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:" (King James Version)


Lione D' ea: That is the Man the flesh which Jews saw in John 10:33, that is why in John 8:58 it say's:

"Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am." (King James Version)

Lione D' ea: He is existed in the beginning therefore Jesus Christ saith in John 10:30 forward:

"I and my Father are one.

Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.

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

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


Lione D' ea: That is my answer, I hope you understand...


(end.)

 

[LioneDea]

There most definitely is a "Pentecost" mentioned in the book of Acts chapter two. I'm sure this is where the "Pentecostal Church" derives its name from. Christianity has hundreds of denominations and many of them aren't biblical including "Catholic"..

Lione D&#8217; ea: Let us read Acts 2:1 it say&#8217;s:

And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.

Lione D&#8217; ea: The verse did not tell us a church, it state a day which is every 50 Jews celebrate their fest...the Pentecostal Church is not Biblical...





(end.)

 

[garrydons]

One question. If jesus was God, How can he be the son of God?

Jesus (Yeshua) is the image of the invisible God.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Shermana< We have debunked this like 10 times in a row. First off, the name itself is not really "I am", it is "I shall be". If you can find a single use of the word Eyheh meaning "I am" other than in Exodus 3:14, show it. Otherwise, it is clearly "I shall be"
Lione D’ ea: There is no problem with that fact brother, because the word Eyheh is not ONLY means as “I shall be”, because it can be as “I will be” nor “I Will Become”, there is no contrary on what I believe, but the best translation which translate is “I AM” because he was exist before everything happened…that is why Christ the Son of God saith I AM, he was existed before Abraham was meaning he is not Man, there is no contrary to me in that fact “I am, I existed nor exist”...
(end.)

The Tetragrammaton [YHWH] name itself applies to the LORD that is in all capital letters [KJV] of Psalm 110v1. The other Lord [not in all upper case letters] stands for Jesus. The Tetragrammaton is only applied to the LORD [YHWH]

Jesus did exist in the heavens before everything happened because according to Revelation [3v14] Jesus is the beginning of the creation by God.
In other words, all things were created through the pre-human Jesus by God.
Whereas God had no beginning. God was before the beginning. Psalm 90v2.
Jesus was not before the beginning as God was before the beginning.

The Greek grammar root at John [8v58] does have 'am' in the present tense.
However, that expression of past time when used in the present-tense verb can be as if it has begun in past time and continues up to the present time.
That makes 'I am' in that tense to be correct as 'I have been' as seen in the old Ethiopic, Georgian, Syriac Pe****ta, Curetonian Syriac, and Syriac Editions.

 

[LioneDea]

The Tetragrammaton [YHWH] name itself applies to the LORD that is in all capital letters [KJV] of Psalm 110v1. The other Lord [not in all upper case letters] stands for Jesus. The Tetragrammaton is only applied to the LORD [YHWH]

Lione' D' ea: I Agree, and the 4 letter that cannot pronounce is attribute only for Father not in Son, second the word ELOHIM in Exodus 3:14 God is not ALONE because in the beginning the Son was with the Father...

Jesus did exist in the heavens before everything happened because according to Revelation [3v14] Jesus is the beginning of the creation by God.
In other words, all things were created through the pre-human Jesus by God.
Whereas God had no beginning. God was before the beginning. Psalm 90v2.
Jesus was not before the beginning as God was before the beginning.

Lione D' ea: Because if God have beginning God will die...

The Greek grammar root at John [8v58] does have 'am' in the present tense.
However, that expression of past time when used in the present-tense verb can be as if it has begun in past time and continues up to the present time.
That makes 'I am' in that tense to be correct as 'I have been' as seen in the old Ethiopic, Georgian, Syriac Pe****ta, Curetonian Syriac, and Syriac Editions.

Lione D' ea: because of the I use lots of translation...

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Lione D&#8217; ea: Let us read Acts 2:1 it say&#8217;s:

And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.

Lione D&#8217; ea: The verse did not tell us a church, it state a day which is every 50 Jews celebrate their fest...the Pentecostal Church is not Biblical...





(end.)

And my point still stands. They "derived" the name of their church in accordance to scripture. There's no mention of a "Baptist" church in the scripture yet they exist and derive the name from an action performed in your scripture....the same with "The Church of the Immaculate Conception"...They're not mentioned anywhere in the bible yet they exist. Why are we debating over mere semantics?

 

[Dirty Penguin]

You're all over the place with your interpretations of your scripture which is probably where the confusion comes from.

Lione D' ea: The Man mention in John 10:33 brother is in John 1:14 it say's:

"And the Word was made flesh,"

Lione D' ea: The verse did not tell us He is flesh, it states that He was made flesh, meaning He is not began in this world, the question is Where did He come from?, in 1:1-3 of John Read:?

Let's start with the obvious question you asked. "Where did he come from?"

John 6:38 (Etheridge - Pe****ta)
I descended from heaven not to do mine own will, but the will of Him who sent me.

So we have just in this one statement that Yeshua (Jesus) came from heaven, he had his own will before coming here, did not come to do his own will rather he came to do the will of "him" that sent him. Now the obvious question is 'Who sent him?'. This one is easy because Yeshua answers the question himself. Where would we find such an answer? Well right there in the same book of John where we find Yeshua praying to his god.

John 17:3 (Etheridge - Pe****ta)
But this is the life which is eternal, that they know thee, who art the true Aloha, and Him whom thou hast sent, Jeshu Meshich.

So the "him" at 6:38 is referring to Aloha (YHWH) who "sent" Yeshua. In order to be sent there must be a sender.

No need to address John 1:1 etc. because the above does a decent job at it.

"Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us." (King James Version)

This has absolutely nothing to do with Yeshua. The prophecy was given to King Ahaz and to the people of Israel in that day and time of a prophecy that was to come to fruition. One that they would see. Not to mention the (KJV) in many respects is a horrible bible when it comes to translations.

This is is far better.
Yeshayahu - Chapter 7 - Tanakh Online - Torah - Bible
Therefore, the Lord, of His own, shall give you a sign; behold, the young woman is with child, and she shall bear a son, and she shall call his name Immanuel.

"The young woman", NOT (virgin)...IS...with child...and she will call him Immanuel.

So the young woman was already pregnant and would call him Immanuel. Nowhere in the NT was Yeshua ever addressed by the title "Immanuel".

Lione D' ea: That is the Man the flesh which Jews saw in John 10:33, that is why in John 8:58 it say's:

"Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am." (King James Version)

And we have already shown using the Greek and Hebrew grammar that "I am" at John 8:58 is not a reference to Exodus 3:14. The context of John 8 outweighs the connection "some" Christians desperately try to make to associate Yeshua with "God".

Lione D' ea: He is existed in the beginning therefore Jesus Christ saith in John 10:30 forward:

"I and my Father are one.

But did he exit in the beginning as "God" or "WITH" his god? Your scriptures say with his god. John 6:38 shows him to be separate from his god while in heaven.

Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.

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

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

And I've already given you Yeshua's response to them to try and clear up the misconception they had with what he said to them.

John 10:34 (Etheridge - Pe****ta)
Jeshu saith to them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are Alohee? If them he calleth Alohee, because with them was the word of Aloha, and the scripture cannot be loosed, to him whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the world, say you, Thou blasphemest, because I have said to you, I am the Son of Aloha? And if I do not the works of my Father, believe me not; but if I do, though you believe not me, the works believe, that you may know and believe that the Father is in me, and (that) I (am) in the Father.

Meaning he and the father are of one purpose. (John 6:38 - ' I didn't come down here to do my own will but the will of him (my god - the father) who sent me).

 

[LioneDea]

You're all over the place with your interpretations of your scripture which is probably where the confusion comes from.



Let's start with the obvious question you asked. "Where did he come from?"

John 6:38 (Etheridge - Pe****ta)
I descended from heaven not to do mine own will, but the will of Him who sent me.

So we have just in this one statement that Yeshua (Jesus) came from heaven, he had his own will before coming here, did not come to do his own will rather he came to do the will of "him" that sent him. Now the obvious question is 'Who sent him?'. This one is easy because Yeshua answers the question himself. Where would we find such an answer? Well right there in the same book of John where we find Yeshua praying to his god.

John 17:3 (Etheridge - Pe****ta)
But this is the life which is eternal, that they know thee, who art the true Aloha, and Him whom thou hast sent, Jeshu Meshich.

So the "him" at 6:38 is referring to Aloha (YHWH) who "sent" Yeshua. In order to be sent there must be a sender.

No need to address John 1:1 etc. because the above does a decent job at it.

Lione D' ea: First the cited is true that He came from in heaven, but the question there is when heaven are not yet created where is he...my answer is when heaven and earth are not yet created He is came from the Father in was, second you are contrary of what John 6:38 and John 17:3 tells it..because Jesus Christ itself saith that: I descended from heaven not to do mine own will, FOR WHOM ?, but the will of Him( the Father) who sent me meaning not the will of Son but the Father, you can notify the word SENT there, meaning not the will of Christ, there is person who is higher than him, therefore not the will of Son, but the will of the Father, because the Father is greater than all John 10:29 Read:

My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; (Adj.)

Lione D' ea: Therefore the will of the Father must follow, and I not interpret my own, Bible interpret itself, the Bible answer you question not me...

This has absolutely nothing to do with Yeshua. The prophecy was given to King Ahaz and to the people of Israel in that day and time of a prophecy that was to come to fruition. One that they would see. Not to mention the (KJV) in many respects is a horrible bible when it comes to translations.

This is is far better.
Yeshayahu - Chapter 7 - Tanakh Online - Torah - Bible
Therefore, the Lord, of His own, shall give you a sign; behold, the young woman is with child, and she shall bear a son, and she shall call his name Immanuel.

"The young woman", NOT (virgin)...IS...with child...and she will call him Immanuel.

So the young woman was already pregnant and would call him Immanuel. Nowhere in the NT was Yeshua ever addressed by the title "Immanuel".

Lione D' ea: There is no doubt the meaning also of young woman is virgin, in Israel a woman is not a virgin they will die in no mercy in the law of Moses...you cannot separate the meaning of young woman in virgin...and what is the basis of the scripture that prophecy is given for King Ahaz can you testify it it is for Ahaz?

And we have already shown using the Greek and Hebrew grammar that "I am" at John 8:58 is not a reference to Exodus 3:14. The context of John 8 outweighs the connection "some" Christians desperately try to make to associate Yeshua with "God".



But did he exit in the beginning as "God" or "WITH" his god? Your scriptures say with his god. John 6:38 shows him to be separate from his god while in heaven.

Lione D' ea: Let us read in Greek

(Codex Sinaiticus) 4th century

Transcript:
&#945;
&#947;
&#949;&#957; &#945;&#961;&#967;&#951; &#951;&#957; &#959; &#955;&#959;&#947;&#959;&#1010;
&#954;&#945;&#953; &#959; &#955;&#959;&#947;&#959;&#1010; &#951;&#957;
&#960;&#961;&#959;&#1010; &#964;&#959;&#957; &#952;&#957; &#954;&#945;&#953;

Translation:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.


Lione D' ea: The verse tell us He was WITH God, meaning He was with the Father, where in John 1:18 read:

No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

Lione D' ea: He is in the bossom of the Father, what did Father do, in Psalms 2:7 Read:

I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

Lione D' ea: Wherefore the Son was in the bosom of the Father, they are in one body on that time, when Father beget him, the Lord declare Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee...therefore He is God He came in God..


(to be continue)

And I've already given you Yeshua's response to them to try and clear up the misconception they had with what he said to them.

John 10:34 (Etheridge - Pe****ta)
Jeshu saith to them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are Alohee? If them he calleth Alohee, because with them was the word of Aloha, and the scripture cannot be loosed, to him whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the world, say you, Thou blasphemest, because I have said to you, I am the Son of Aloha? And if I do not the works of my Father, believe me not; but if I do, though you believe not me, the works believe, that you may know and believe that the Father is in me, and (that) I (am) in the Father.

Meaning he and the father are of one purpose. (John 6:38 - ' I didn't come down here to do my own will but the will of him (my god - the father) who sent me).

 

[Muffled]

and the reason jesus body had to be murdered was because...?

Because all men have to be drawn to God; they don't come of their own volition.

 

[Muffled]

And he said "Let them be one AS we are one". You have yet to understand this "as" concept.

I understand the "as" concept and believe it to be true but you have not undestood the "let" concept.

 

[waitasec]

Because all men have to be drawn to God;

everyone dies...and what i find interesting is that believers still get sick and die
so the question remains, why did jesus have to be murdered?

they don't come of their own volition.

ones faith contradicts that notion

 

[Muffled]

everyone dies...and what i find interesting is that believers still get sick and die
so the question remains, why did jesus have to be murdered?

ones faith contradicts that notion

That is not germaine to my answer.

The question does not remain because it has been answered.

This is news to me. Do you have any evidence to support it? I went by scripture, the words of Jesus.

John3:14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up;
15 that whosoever believeth may in him have eternal life.
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life.

 

[waitasec]

That is not germaine to my answer.

The question does not remain because it has been answered.

The problem with the incarnation is that people have a tendency to worship the body instead of God.

and the reason jesus body had to be murdered was because...?

Because all men have to be drawn to God; they don't come of their own volition.

that was not germane to my question

 

[waitasec]

This is news to me. Do you have any evidence to support it?

no one has to go through scripture to understand that faith is something of our own volition...

belief relies on ones power of will....thusly one plays an integral role in their own salvation
go figure.