Genesis 1:26

[101G]

That verse has no capital letters, no use of echad, and the two words that you see as "lord" indicate 2 different subjects because they are, in Hebrew, 2 different words. You fail completely.

again, personal opinions do not move me. now lets examine this verse and verse 5 ...... u didn't see verse 5 coming ..... did U?

Psalms 110:1 "A Psalm of David. The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool."

here, the term "LORD", all caps, is the Hebrew word,
H3068 יְהוָה Yhvah (yeh-vaw') n/p.
יְהוָֹה Yhovah (yeh-ho-vaw')
יְהוֹ Yhow (yeh-ho') [as a prefix]
1. (meaning) the self-Existent or Eternal, the I AM.
2. (person) Yahweh (Yehvah), Jewish national name of God.
3. (anglicized) Jehovah.
4. (as a name prefix) Yeho-.
5. (As expressed in Hebraic Koine Greek) ἐγώ εἰμί, I AM (literally: I myself, I am).
[from H1961]
KJV: Jehovah, the Lord.
Root(s): H1961
the TERM "Lord" here, in verse one, is the same one person who is the "LORD", but shared, or diversified in flesh... Human Natural Flesh, the Christ. how do we know this? two ways. one, by the Lord Jesus himself.
Matthew 22:41 "While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them," 42 "Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The Son of David." Matthew 22:43 "He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying," 44 "The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?" 45 "If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?" 46 "And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions."
so clearly the LORD in Psalms 110:1 is God, as well as "Lord" in verse 1 is God. let's see it in the Definitions, I'm using the Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Dictionaries of the Greek and Hebrew Testaments
Lord: H113 אָדוֹן 'adown (aw-done') n-m.
אָדֹן 'adon (aw-done') [shortened]
1. sovereign (i.e. controller, human or divine).
2. lord.
{also used as a prefix for names}
[from an unused root (meaning to rule)]
KJV: lord, master, owner.
Master? yes, listen, Jesus, (God), in human flesh, John 13:13 "Ye call me Master and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am." see how the KJV got it right.
NOW, lets see the "Lord" who is sitting at the LORD'S right hand in verse #5 same chapter. Psalms 110:5 "The Lord at thy right hand shall strike through kings in the day of his wrath."
here "Lord", only "L" in cap. is the SAME "Lord" at his Right in verse 1,
Lord: H136 אֲדֹנָי 'Adonay (ad-o-noy') n-m.
1. (meaning) Lord (used as a proper name of God only).
2. (person) Adonai, The Lord God of Israel (which is actually “Yahweh God of Israel” - see Exodus 5:1 and 120 other occurrences).
[am emphatic form of H113]
KJV: (my) Lord.
Root(s): H113
see definition #2 .... (smile)... read it again...
and also notice the root word, H113 אָדוֹן 'adown (aw-done') n-m.
אָדֹן 'adon (aw-done') [shortened]
1. sovereign (i.e. controller, human or divine).
2. lord.
{also used as a prefix for names}
[from an unused root (meaning to rule)]
KJV: lord, master, owner.

this is the LORD, same one person, ... "Diversified"...in, in, in , in, flesh, HUMAN flesh better KNOWN as the "Offspring", (Revelation 22:16). and Notice something, he who supposed to be sitting, (NOT ACTUALLY PHYICALLY), but in POWER, (ALL OF IT)... is the "Lord", NOW in .... get this... RESURRECT FLESH. is the one who is striking through the kings of the Earth. understand, the LORD, all caps in 110:1 is the Spirit who is Identified as the CREATOR, and MAKER of all things... the Father, as Deuteronomy 6:4 states, the Ordinal First. and Revelation 22:16 states is the "ROOT", is the SAME one person as H136 אֲדֹנָי 'Adonay (ad-o-noy') whom you calls, "Yahweh God of Israel" as definition #2 there states. and the Lord, in Psalms 110:1, small case except for the "L" is in HUMAN "NATURAL" FLESH FORM, this is why he, JESUS, the same Lord in verse 5 can strke through kings in the day of his wrath, WHY? answer, because NOW, he's in RESURRECTED FLESH

drum rolllllllllllll Lord: H136 אֲדֹנָי 'Adonay (ad-o-noy') n-m. in verse 5 is the emphatic form of H113, (Lord) in verse 1.... it's the same one PERSON.... lol, lol, lol, ..... Oh the beauty of Definitions.

now the Last revelation, the LORD (Spirit) is in Flesh, (the Lord), is Glorified in HEAVENLY FLESH.

this is clear as DAY, only the LOST cannot see this.

the two different subjects is the same one PERSON in the ECHAD as LORD, Spirit/CREATOR, and MAKER OF ALL THINGS. ECHAD #1.
Lord, spirit/REDEEMER and SAVIOUR OF SLL THINGS. ECHAD #2.

this is 2 easy.

101G.

 

[rosends]

again, personal opinions do not move me. now lets examine this verse and verse 5 ...... u didn't see verse 5 coming ..... did U?

I suspect you don't understand verse 4 which introduces the quote which continues into verse 5, and explains who the speaker is.

here, the term "LORD", all caps, is the Hebrew word,

You mean in your English evrsion it is in all caps. In Hebrew, there are no capital letters. is there a reason you don't want to discuss the actual hebrew?

the TERM "Lord" here, in verse one, is the same one person who is the "LORD", but shared, or diversified in flesh

No it isn't. That's your opinion -- that two different words point to the same subject. They don't though.

... Human Natural Flesh, the Christ. how do we know this? two ways. one, by the Lord Jesus himself.

So your "proof" that the two terms refer to the same subject is that Jesus says so? But since Jesus was no one of import why would I believe his self-serving lie? If a guy Fred said he was God would you believe him? But, he says, "I have a book in which people who believe I'm God wrote that I'm God!"

So you ask "why do they believe that you are God?" and he says, "because it says so in the book!"

So useless and not a logical argument.

here "Lord", only "L" in cap. is the SAME "Lord" at his Right in verse 1,

the use of capitals is a fucntion of the English -- as I said, no caps in Hebrew.

Lord: H136 אֲדֹנָי 'Adonay (ad-o-noy') n-m.

This word does not appear in 110:1. If you read Hebrew you would know that and you wouldn't let yourself make such a simple error.

drum rolllllllllllll Lord: H136 אֲדֹנָי 'Adonay (ad-o-noy') n-m. in verse 5 is the emphatic form of H113, (Lord) in verse 1.... it's the same one PERSON.... lol, lol, lol, ..... Oh the beauty of Definitions.

In verse 5, the speaker explains that the subject of the second person statement in verse four has God at his right hand, so the word אֲדֹנָי in verse 5 refers to God, same as always. Claiming there is a second person here just reflects ignorance.

You really know nothing.

 

[101G]

I suspect you don't understand verse 4 which introduces the quote which continues into verse 5, and explains who the speaker is.

the Speaker is David..... lol, lol, lol, oh my.

You mean in your English evrsion it is in all caps. In Hebrew, there are no capital letters. is there a reason you don't want to discuss the actual hebrew?

I can care less. these definitions are not going to change.....

other words u really don't have nothing to say.

understand this JUDISM, and the HEBREW language is over with /// only for reference to the NEW COVENANT. the Hebrew language is no better than any other Language. ....... bottom Line it's Obsolete, just like the religion itself....... Obsolete, done away with.

101G

 

[rosends]

the Speaker is David..... lol, lol, lol, oh my.

so you don't understand.

I can care less. these definitions are not going to change.....

other words u really don't have nothing to say.

understand this JUDISM, and the HEBREW language is over with /// only for reference to the NEW COVENANT. the Hebrew language is no better than any other Language. ....... bottom Line it's Obsolete, just like the religion itself....... Obsolete, done away with.

101G

You are making your position eminently clear. You know nothing and care less. Have a great day.

 

[dybmh]

Luke 1:35 "And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing, (thing, here means flesh), which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God".

the word overshadow, it's the Greek word G1982 ἐπισκιάζω episkiazo (ep-ee-skee-ad'-zo) v.
1. to cast a shade upon
2. (by analogy) to envelop in a haze of brilliancy
3. (figuratively) to invest with preternatural influence
take note of the 3rd. reference. "to invest with preternatural influence", what do preternatural means. It means, "out of the ordinary course of nature; exceptional or abnormal". the meaning here, not in the natural way of conception between a man and a women. this body as I have said, God conceived or God made, and “formed” in Mary’s womb. Did he not formed Jeremiah body in his mothers womb before he was born, or brought forth. God spoke a whole universe into existence, so also a fleshly body.

OK, you had to go to the third defintion, but, at least it's something. Thank you.

now his lineage, not a false lineage, but a "LEGAL" lineage by the sheer birth in the house of David, by the surrogate mother Marry. without biological mother or biological father, ..... this is just 2 easy.

OK. So she was his legal mother. What does that mean? It means according to the law she is his mother. If the law says to honor your mother, it's talking about a LEGAL mother. That means LEGALLY, according to the law, Jesus violated one of the 10 commandments. He dishonored his LEGAL mother.

Hebrews 4:14 "Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession."Hebrews 4:15 "For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin."
as said, personal opinions do not move me, scriptures do.

So, that's just what one his his biggest fans said. Anyway, clearly he dishonered his legal mother, thus breaking the law.

 

[YoursTrue]

if so, how GREATER? did you not understand the post I gave you?

again, if Greater, how... in Quality, or Quantity that's the Only two choices you have.

101G.

Here's what I must say -- greater does not mean equal.

 

[101G]

OK. So she was his legal mother.

did not Mary birth the body that the Lord Jesus came in? is she not the surrogate mother?

What does that mean? It means according to the law she is his mother.

only by BIRTH, and that's why he called her WOMAN.

If the law says to honor your mother, it's talking about a LEGAL mother.

how many times must we tell you, he, Jesus the Spirit, the Son of Man has no mother, only the flesh that was born do. do you understand the terms son of Man and Son of God?

Jesus violated one of the 10 commandments. He dishonored his LEGAL mother.

see above. if the scriptures say he did not violate any, then case closed. what u or any other man may say, (without scripture support), do not move me. it is irreverent.

So, that's just what one his his biggest fans said. Anyway, clearly he dishonered his legal mother, thus breaking the law.

again, personal opinions are no good.

understand something here. the Lord Jesus is God himself in flesh. what you're saying God sinned. and God don't sin.

101G.

 

[101G]

Here's what I must say -- greater does not mean equal.

let's see, John 14:12 "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father."

now this scripture. John 13:16 "Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him."
do you really understand what the Lord Jesus is saying in both verses?

101G.

 

[101G]

now, back to the Topic at hand. "why does "God" refer to himself in plural?". himself, himself, yes himself and nobody else..... only one answer, he is the "EQUAL" .... SHARE .... of himself in Ordinal Designation.... in TIME, PLACE, ORDER, or RANK. ........ one day....one day some may get the understanding.

101G.

 

[YoursTrue]

now, back to the Topic at hand. "why does "God" refer to himself in plural?". himself, himself, yes himself and nobody else..... only one answer, he is the "EQUAL" .... SHARE .... of himself in Ordinal Designation.... in TIME, PLACE, ORDER, or RANK. ........ one day....one day some may get the understanding.

101G.

Royalty. God has no equal. He is one not 3. Besides, eternal doesn't have to mean no beginning despite what some dictionaries say. It can mean unending, like if a person is granted ETERNAL LIFE. Doesn't mean he never had a beginning.

 

[101G]

Royalty. God has no equal.

GINOLJC, to all
Are you sure? understand the difference between, "Equal to", vs, "Equal With".

now watch this, Isaiah 41:4 "Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he."

here, the LORD, GOD, is the First correct, and he, the Lord is "WITH" the Last, understand. the First is one, and the Last is one.

now this,

Isaiah 48:12 "Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last.".

but was he not, the LORD, the First, ..... WITH ....... the Last? so how is he God the First and the Last the same person? answer because the Last is HIM .... "ALSO, just as Philippians 2:6 state, "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:" just as in John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

this is just 2 easy not to be understood.

101G.

 

[dybmh]

did not Mary birth the body that the Lord Jesus came in? is she not the surrogate mother?

Is she his legal mother or not? If so, refusing an audience with her, and denying her position is a legal transgression.

only by BIRTH, and that's why he called her WOMAN.

Calling your Mother, "woman" is dishonoring her.

how many times must we tell you, he, Jesus the Spirit, the Son of Man has no mother, only the flesh that was born do. do you understand the terms son of Man and Son of God?

You're the one who said she was his legal Mother. If you want to restate your position, that's perfectly fine. Everyone makes mistakes / misspeaks sometimes.

Regarding son-of-man, any argument based on this label is silly. Psalms 146:3 ( son-of-man cannot be trusted ), Job 25:6 ( son-of-man is a worm ), Numbers 23:19 ( son-of-man is not God ).

Son-of-God is equally silly, any male can claim this on a spiritual level. That would render the commandment to honor one's parents irrelevent. Clearly this is an important directive. The question is: why? Why is honoring the parents part of the 10 commandments alongside serving 1 God, prohibtions on making idols, muder, theft, adultery? Why was it given at that time? If you haven't contemplated these questions deeply, you probably aren't in a position to accurately assess whether or not Jesus transgressed.

I don't want to spoil it, but I'll give you a hint to the answer to these questions. The reason Jesus denied an audience with his Mother, is the precise reason why it's prohibited in Jewish law. He didn't spend the passover with his family, doesn't spend Shabot with his family. There's a reason for this. But I won't give it away, it's a very important spiritual lesson. The point is, he not only broke the law physically, he broke the law in spirit as well. He subverted its divine intention.

see above. if the scriptures say he did not violate any, then case closed. what u or any other man may say, (without scripture support), do not move me. it is irreverent.

You want scripture, but you also ignore it. ( This is kind of like how you seem to be ignoring Isaiah 44:24, and instead choose to make the creator a divine plurality. )

Anyway:

Exodus 20:12 - "honor your father and mother"
Matthew 12:48-50 - "Jesus dishonors his mother"

Super simple, obvious transgression. But, it's really not a big deal. He doesn't need to be perfect to be a savior to the other nations, to lead to belief in 1 God, to encourage compassion, faith, and repentence. All it means is that he's not the perfect example for Jewish people to emulate.

again, personal opinions are no good.

understand something here. the Lord Jesus is God himself in flesh. what you're saying God sinned. and God don't sin.

And this points back to what I said originally. People rationalize Jesus' transgressions, claiming the rules don't apply to him. That means that Jesus is NOT the example Jewish people should follow. The rules absolutley apply to us ( The Jewish people ). They may not apply to the other nations, which is perfectly fine, and seems to be the will of the all-mighty.

 

[dybmh]

now, back to the Topic at hand. "why does "God" refer to himself in plural?". himself, himself, yes himself and nobody else..... only one answer, he is the "EQUAL" .... SHARE .... of himself in Ordinal Designation.... in TIME, PLACE, ORDER, or RANK. ........ one day....one day some may get the understanding.

101G.

God doesn't refer to himself in the plural. That is your imagination, my friend. Is God revealed in multiple ways? Sure. Is God plural? No.

It's easy to get confused by these concepts. That's part of why, in my view, the Jewish people in the prophets had so much trouble remaining devoted. Then comes Isaiah in a time of crisis to clarify and tell the Jewish people what they need to know.

Isaiah 2:11, and Isaiah 2:17 - repeated for emphasis, the exact same words in Hebrew. YHVH is *alone*. Unity without division.

Isaiah 37:16. This one is especially interesting. Notice, God of Israel is singular, "elohai", THE "Elohim" is also singular prefaced by "You are" NOT "They are". And both of those titles are unified "alone" into YHVH who is again asserted to be the solitary creator. Isaiah is saying "Don't be confused by these different monikers, YHVH is the creator *alone*"

The there's Isaiah 44:24. I already brought it, you already ignored it. But here it is again:

So, there you have it. Unity without division. Completely from scripture. The creator is not a "word", a word is a vessel that carries intention. It is nothing but an empty shell. Saying "the word is God / a God" is like saying that a "law" is God, or that "light" is God, or even that "love" is God. All of these are creations. Ultimately, there is just 1 divine power, just 1 creator, that is what is intended by the Hebrew bible.

 

[dybmh]

now watch this, Isaiah 41:4 "Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he."

here, the LORD, GOD, is the First correct, and he, the Lord is "WITH" the Last, understand. the First is one, and the Last is one.

Ah! Not so fast... The word for last is not "last one" it is plural... If you look at the Hebrew I'm sure you can see it for yourself. So that verse doesn't really show a plurality of first combined with last.

A proper translation would be, "I, YHVH, am first, and with the last ones I am He."

Isaiah 48:12 "Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last.".

but was he not, the LORD, the First, ..... WITH ....... the Last? so how is he God the First and the Last the same person?

This one is also a bit of a wierd translation; but, the fault is the *assumption* that God is a person.

Where else can we turn to for clarification on this? How about Psalms 90:2? God is "from everlasting even to everlasting". That's pretty simple to understand. That includes both first and last. No plurality needed.

 

[101G]

Is she his legal mother or not? If so, refusing an audience with her, and denying her position is a legal transgression.

in her marriage, yes, and no, it's not. he's grown also. reproved again.

Calling your Mother, "woman" is dishonoring her.

according to WHO? is she not a woman?

You're the one who said she was his legal Mother.

get it right, "legal BIRTH mother",

Regarding son-of-man, any argument based on this label is silly. Psalms 146:3 ( son-of-man cannot be trusted ), Job 25:6 ( son-of-man is a worm ), Numbers 23:19 ( son-of-man is not God ).

This son of Man has EVERLASTING LIFE..... YIKES!

I don't want to spoil it, but I'll give you a hint to the answer to these questions. The reason Jesus denied an audience with his Mother, is the precise reason why it's prohibited in Jewish law. He didn't spend the passover with his family, doesn't spend Shabot with his family. There's a reason for this. But I won't give it away, it's a very important spiritual lesson. The point is, he not only broke the law physically, he broke the law in spirit as well. He subverted its divine intention.

that's not his Family..... lol, who is my Mother and brothers...... lol, reproved again.

You want scripture, but you also ignore it. ( This is kind of like how you seem to be ignoring Isaiah 44:24, and instead choose to make the creator a divine plurality. )

he is a plurality of, of, of, of, himself. that's bible, not 101G.

Anyway:

Exodus 20:12 - "honor your father and mother"
Matthew 12:48-50 - "Jesus dishonors his mother"

No he did not, next.

Super simple,

Super IGNORANCE.

But, it's really not a big deal. He doesn't need to be perfect to be a savior to the other nations, to lead to belief in 1 God, to encourage compassion, faith, and repentence. All it means is that he's not the perfect example for Jewish people to emulate.

Jews included......

And this points back to what I said originally. People rationalize Jesus' transgressions, claiming the rules don't apply to him.

he wrote the rules.

KNOW YOUR BIBLE BETTER

101G.

 

[101G]

God doesn't refer to himself in the plural. That is your imagination, my friend. Is God revealed in multiple ways? Sure. Is God plural? No

Isaiah 48:12 "Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last." is this a plurality of "ONE?" yes or No.

It's easy to get confused by these concepts. That's part of why, in my view, the Jewish people in the prophets had so much trouble remaining devoted. Then comes Isaiah in a time of crisis to clarify and tell the Jewish people what they need to know.

Isaiah 2:11, and Isaiah 2:17 - repeated for emphasis, the exact same words in Hebrew. YHVH is *alone*. Unity without division.

it is the IGNORANCE of the Jewish people and a few others, who misunderstand God word. EXAMPLE
Isaiah 66:22 "For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain."

Now this, Revelation 21:5 "And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful."

is this the same one PERSON in both scriptures, who will MAKE ALL THINGS NEW? yes or no..... YOUR ANSWER PLEASE.

101G.

 

[101G]

The there's Isaiah 44:24. I already brought it, you already ignored it. But here it is again

don't be silly. this is nothing new to me. for John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:2 "The same was in the beginning with God." John 1:3 "All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made." same person, but in Ordinal Designations. Reproved.

Ultimately, there is just 1 divine power, just 1 creator, that is what is intended by the Hebrew bible.

see Genesis 1:1..... lol. Oh Dear.
101G.

 

[dybmh]

in her marriage, yes, and no, it's not. he's grown also. reproved again.

There is no age limit on the commandment to honor one's parents.

according to WHO? is she not a woman?

Next time you speak with your mom, call her "woman" instead of "mom". Deny that she is your mother. See how that goes over.

get it right, "legal BIRTH mother",

Yes, Jewish law requires honoring the "legal birth mother". That means you can't call your mom by their first name or any other title which subverts or denies her position. If your mom asks to speak with you, you can't just say "no, I don't want to". That is breaking the law.

This son of Man has EVERLASTING LIFE..... YIKES!

Then the title son-of-man really doesn't capture it, does it?

he is a plurality of, of, of, of, himself. that's bible, not 101G.

Not the Hebrew bible.

No he did not, next.

personal opinions don't move me, you need to bring scripture... sound familiar? All you've done is stamp your feet and cross your arms and ignore the truth.

Super IGNORANCE.

Not at all. I brought verses, you simply don't like what they say.

Jews included......

I'm not really sure what you're saying. But no one is saying Jews are perfect role models. You're the one who claims Jesus was perfect, and he wasn't.

he wrote the rules.

but didn't follow them

KNOW YOUR BIBLE BETTER

I know enough that a son-of-man is not God.

 

[101G]

A proper translation would be, "I, YHVH, am first, and with the last ones I am He."

question, if so, was your "Last ones" from the beginning? ....... well, read the scripture again, Isaiah 41:4 "Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he."

Now using bible hub. according to Brown-Driver-Briggs on 314. acharon
b. of time, latter or last (according to context)
but Isaiah 41:4 the last, the, the, the, meaning one that is Last
you can find it at Strong's Hebrew: 314. אַחֲרוֹן (acharon) -- coming after or behind (biblehub.com) ,,,,,,, REPROVE, you better check all of the context...... so, your Hebrew is faulty.
REPROVED

101G.

 

[101G]

There is no age limit on the commandment to honor one's parents.

Next time you speak with your mom, call her "woman" instead of "mom". Deny that she is your mother. See how that goes over.

Yes, Jewish law requires honoring the "legal birth mother". That means you can't call your mom by their first name or any other title which subverts or denies her position. If your mom asks to speak with you, you can't just say "no, I don't want to". That is breaking the law.

Then the title son-of-man really doesn't capture it, does it?

Not the Hebrew bible.

personal opinions don't move me, you need to bring scripture... sound familiar? All you've done is stamp your feet and cross your arms and ignore the truth.

Not at all. I brought verses, you simply don't like what they say.

I'm not really sure what you're saying. But no one is saying Jews are perfect role models. You're the one who claims Jesus was perfect, and he wasn't.

but didn't follow them

I know enough that a son-of-man is not God.

Well what about who make all things NEW? is the Person the LORD in Isaiah 66:22 the same one Person in Rev 21:5 your answer PLEASE

101G.