Is Jesus God?

[outhouse]

No, I'm talking about Yahshuo the Son of David who performed miracles like walking on water, raising the dead, and rising from the dead by Yahweh. And adored by millions around the world for over 2,015 years. In Hebrew, we have the letter "Y" (yod) in our Aleph-Bet.

His real name was Isho. To bad you had to learn it from an atheist LOL

 

[outhouse]

Well, your accounts and sources are lacking and will not stand up to other accounts of Israel's history

What I told you is their history. The bible is theology book, not a history book

Like you said, how can you be so certain?

By study of cultural and social and physical anthropology from the best people who have written on the topic.

Israel's head archeologist can teach you very much. So can William Dever.

Brother, the real history makes the text more beautiful, it does not detract from it.


Using a literal interpretation is to use the darkest sunglasses on the best artwork with vivid colors. Your ruining it. And the sad thing is just don't have a clue of how beautiful it is.

I was once similar to you, until I got hooked on education, and once I learned a little the flood gates were opened..

 

[outhouse]

I would not be surprise that every history is mythology to you.

Some beauty lies in truth when you find the historical core to the mythology, and understand why the authors wrote what they did when they did.

And then have greater understanding when you figure out why later authors changed and edited that text. Then later people changed it yet again.

Or the beauty in books that literally took hundreds of years to take their current form.

You only see one story, I see literally hundreds of small storied not there, and I see where a few big stories were told as one. Without this knowledge your only getting a glimpse of the past and missing the rich heritage these people left behind in text.

 

[JM2C]

I already knew that. Jesus is adni, never used of God. God YHWH is adonai in Septuagint. This is your problem in configuration, not mine.

Psalm 110:1 should read like this, “The Lord (YHWH) says to my Lord (ADNY), Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.”

Isaiah 21:16 DSS VERSION: For thus has the Lord(ADNY/Hebrew/DSS Version) said to me, Within a year, according to the years of a hireling, and all the glory of Kedar shall fail;

IOW, The Lord [ADNY] in Psalm 110:1 is the same Lord [ADNY] in Isaiah 21:16 and Isaiah 6:1 and compare Isaiah 6:1 to John 12:41 and you will see that David and John were talking of the same Lord in the OT and NT, and that is, the Lord Jesus Christ. Stephen saw the same thing in,

AC 7:55 But being full of the Holy Spirit, he gazed intently into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God;

 

[JM2C]

Well, your accounts and sources are lacking and will not stand up to other accounts of Israel's history. Like you said, how can you be so certain?

He can't 'cause all they have are hypothesis. He can’t even tell the difference between the Bronze age and the Iron age. He was so far out from the Bronze age that he started his twisted theory from the Iron age about the history of Israel. He should read Exodus to see the difference.

Here are some of their hypotheses or assumption.

“At some stage the oral traditions became part of the written tradition of thePentateuch; a majority of scholars believes this stage belongs to the Persian period, roughly 520–320 BCE.[6]

The mechanisms by which this came about remain unknown,[13]but there are currently two important hypotheses.[14]

The first, called Persian Imperial authorisation, is that the post-Exilic community devised the Torah as a legal basis on which to function within the Persian Imperial system;

the second is that Pentateuch was written to provide the criteria for who would belong to the post Exilic Jewish community and to establish the power structures and relative positions of its various groups, notably the priesthood and the lay "elders". –Wiki


This is borderline anti-Semitism because if you follow this theory you won’t believe the other things they were saying about how the Israelites got their land inheritance from Abraham. This is what they were trying to do, discredit Abraham first and everything will follow their twisted theory about the Israelites. IOW, no Abraham, no inheritance, as simple as that. Do you think they are really interested about the History of the Israelites? NO! But William Foxwell Albright was.

William Foxwell Albright (May 24, 1891 – September 19, 1971)[1] was an Americanarchaeologist, biblical scholar, philologist, and expert on ceramics.

From the early twentieth century until his death, he was the dean of biblical archaeologists and the acknowledged founder of the Biblical archaeology movement. Most notably, coming from his own background in radical German historical criticism of the historicity of the Biblical accounts, Albright, through his seminal work in archaeology (and most notably his development of the standard pottery typology for Palestine and the Holy Land) arrived at the conclusion that the biblical accounts of Israelite history were, contrary to the dominant German literary criticism of the day, largely accurate. -Wiki

 

[JM2C]

Israelite monotheism factually did not exist then.


Please learn what your doing, your literally blind here.


Start providing credible sources.

No proof at all. What you have are links from wiki.

 

[JM2C]

Sorry not one thing I mentioned comes from that period as Israelites did not exist in the Bronze age.


No Israelite existed prior to 1200 BC.


At that time they were proto Israelites who were basically Canaanite at this point.




You can argue a global flood

You can argue creation mythology

You can argue flat earth


But good luck convincing anyone of apologetic rhetoric.

You have no proof of this but your unproven assumptions only. This is what I’ve been telling you. Start a thread about the History of the Israelites, or ask LOM, and prove your scholastic knowledge there and see what happen. This thread is about apologetics.

 

[JM2C]

Yes a long time ago. Some of his work still serves a good foundation. It also does not mean he was not an apologetic biased man either.


But that does not mean it is accurate today. Nor is he followed today. many things have been discovered that makes his work a model T compared to a modern truck.



You cannot use a source from horse and wagon days just because it says the antiquated apologetic history you want.

I rather use Professor William Albright’s than use your baseless theories.

Professor Albright’s legacy today rests in his extraordinary record of scholarly publication. In 1941 biblical scholar Harry M. Orlinsky of the Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati assembled and published Albright’s bibliography in honor of his 50th birthday (Orlinsky, 1941). At that time there were approximately 500 entries that spanned 30 years of scholarly work—an incredible amount of research that any scholar would be proud of. But this was only the midpoint in Albright’s scholarly career that continued for another 30 years, with an additional 600 scholarly entries in the ledger. The grand total is just under 1,100 items, including books, peer-reviewed articles, notes, book reviews, and other items that must surely set a record for productivity in the field of ancient Near Eastern studies and related fields. A complete record of Albright’s publications spanning 1916 to 1971 was prepared by one of us (D.N.F.) (Freedman, 1975) and was published as a book by the American Schools of Oriental Research. -By Thomas Levy and David Noel Freedman

 

[JM2C]

Hear, O Israel: YAHWEH our God! YAHWEH [is] one." (Deuteronomy 6:4)




There is one Yahweh not two (shnayim) gods nor three (shaloshah) gods as believers of polytheism wants us to believe. AELHYM (Elohim) is plural in power and abilities not gods or persons. Polytheists teach that Elohim is many gods! Well Elohim could be millions of gods with that teaching. Yahweh is the EL (The One). Or God Almighty is the AEL (The One) + HYM (many powers). Hence you have One God, Yahweh, and one The Son of God, Yahshua The Messiah (aka Jesus Christ).

Is that why Maimonides changed “echad” to “yachid” because he saw the Triune God? Is that why you/Unitarians changed “And the Word was God” to “And the Word was the God” because you/Unitarians saw the Triune God?

 

[Nada]

Yes Jehovah Is one God.Jesus is not God.

 

[JM2C]

I did not forget to add anything. I believe I was forwarding someone else's quotes from the Holy Bible in one of my replies.

I do know this, that every son of Adam will bow to the Son of God, even if Yahweh were to make Yahshua (aka Jesus Christ) to be as a god the same way he did for Moses. (Exodus 7:1). And (by the way) what is the name of the Holy Spirit so that I can properly address him or her in my baptism?


I'm sure when you stand before and bow before Yahweh God Almighty, that you will not see Jesus the Son of God sitting on God's Throne. Jesus will forever be seated on the second throne to the right of the first one; he will never sit on the first throne which belongs to Yahweh alone. HalleluYah!

This is exactly what John was saying in John 1:1-a but you and jw interpretation of “and the Word was a god” cannot fit into this verse for the very simple reason that there was no creation before the beginning. If there was no creation before the beginning, then where did the “a god” from the group of “gods” came from? We do not have that information from the bible. What we have is, “In the beginning was the Word”. The “en/was” is suggesting that “the Word” was in existence already continuously, without time limit, from eternity.

Now, if you say that an “a god” can sit right next to “The God” then what are you teaching? POLYTHEISM. IOW, an “a god” or “ANOTHER/DIFFERENT/HETEROS” god/s would be seating right next to “The God” is what you are teaching, and that is, POLYTHEISM.

ONLY GOD CAN SIT NEXT TO GOD AND THIS IS WHAT KING DAVID AND STEPHEN SAW IN PSALM 110:1 AND ACTS 7:55.

 

[JM2C]

Yes Jehovah Is one God.Jesus is not God.

Prove it please.

 

[JM2C]

OneThatGotAway said:↑

Claiming a title as the Son of God denotes some divine power from God and that troubled the Pharisees. Besides, Jesus could not be thesinlesssavior if he had taught his disciples that he isThe God, that he isYahweh.

Parroting the same trolling message will not change the truth. You need to understand monotheism.

If you don't believe Jesus' own words when he said that he is the Son of God, then how can you understand the rest of the Scriptures?

The Lord Jesus Christ DID NOT TEACH ANY OF HIS DISCIPLES THAT He is “The God” nor did He say He is “The God”. Again for the 100 times, AHEM, AHEM, AHEM. “And the Word was with God” here we read two personal beings.

 

[JM2C]

I hate to sound like a record player but: You need to read and understand ALL of the Holy Bible in order for you to understand a single verse like John 1:1. Because this verse is in harmony with all the others and not a change into polytheism. The ancestral trees like Abraham, Moses, Elijah, Jesus, and Paul supported monotheism and the wild grafted branch desires to twist and unravel monotheism into polytheism based upon the misunderstanding of a single verse! Let God be true and all men liars. I say again:


The sons of Yishrael knew this truth that Jesus never claimed to be The God.

Jesus' disciples knew this truth that Jesus Christ never claimed to be The God.

I think Clear made a very clear statement about Monotheism and Polytheism

My point is, that the word is not a strict numeric designation, but rather a description of a different type of union which may be used to describe the type of agreement and unity and “oneness” existing between God the Father, His Son and the Holy Ghost as completely separate individuals who are unified in their purpose, even more easily than it can be used to somehow show that three individuals are really only one individual.

Good journey

Clear

And this is what Deuteronomy 6:4 was saying to us.

Deuteronomy 6:4 "Jehovah our Elohim is one Jehovah" the word “Elohim” being plural shows that God, i.e., [God/Father, God/Son, God/Holy Spirit described in John 10:30, John 14:16, and Acts 5:3-4] is the Lord, is more than one, yet is "ONE/Echad Jehovah". And not “Yachid” an absolute one.

 

[JM2C]

Yahweh did not make any exceptions in those declarations, you are reading into God's commandments.

When it comes to God's Deity as The Almighty God, he reserve that title and glory to himself and He will not share that part of himself with any other including his Son. Why even Jesus taught this truth!


"Thou shalt have no other gods before me." (Exodus 20:3)

Insert here ---> Except for my son, I will have this God before me.


"I [am] YAHWEH: that [is] my name: and my glory will I not give to another" (Isaiah 42:8)

Insert here ---> Except for my son, I will give my glory as God Almighty.

That sir is a quintessential recipe for polytheism and Scriptural disaster!

You and jw are the one teaching that an “a god” can sit next to “The God” and that is POLYTHEISM. Trinitarians do not teach POLYTHEISM ‘cause only GOD CAN SIT NEXT TO GOD and that is MONOTHEISM. If you and jw teach/preach that the Lord Jesus Christ is lesser than God, like an “a god”, then you are teaching POLYTHEISM.

 

[JM2C]

And you need to read the Greek translation from which you base your English translation therein. You need to understand that this single verse does not trump the rest of the Scriptures that show that Jesus is not Yahweh, the Almighty God. This verse (John 1:1) express the oneness shared between the Father and his begotten (created) Son. At least believe Jesus' mouth when he said that "I am the Son of God". Teaching that John 1:1 reveals two equal Gods is simply polytheism. The understanding of the branch (John 1:1) has to be in line with the understanding of the Torah (the tree). Teaching otherwise is like forcing a square peg in a round hole.

John would teach polytheism? No. You and jw are teaching POLYTHEISM. Moses was a Trinitarian. The bible does not teach that the Lord Jesus Christ is “The God” if you read and understand John 1:1-b “and the Word was with God”

 

[lovemuffin]

I probably wouldn't consider trinitarianism a "pure" monotheism. It would end up being a modalism then. It's something like a qualified monotheism, where Islam is more strictly monotheistic. I'm not sure the mono/poly categories are entirely sufficient.

 

[JM2C]

And you need to read ALL of the Holy Bible from Genesis to Revelation in order to understand that no one addressed Jesus as the same God, a God having the same power and Deity as God Almighty Yahweh. Jesus' reference as god is limited to only the power as the Son of God, and not Almighty as Yahweh. You really need to read the Greek translation before you comment on John 1:1 again.

Ge 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

Ge 1:2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

Rev 22:13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.

From the very beginning of Genesis to the end of Revelation we read the Trinity.

 

[JM2C]

It does not matter how you define it. There was no orthodoxy early on.


There is a reason it took 300 years to create a canon.

Did you really think that Christianity, not the hybridized, but the True Christians started reading the bible only after the bible was canonized in the 300 AD?

Marcion was adulterating the gospels and Paul’s epistles in the early 100 AD long before the bible was canonized.

Canonizing the bible was just rubber stamping. These hybridized Christians needed the approval of man and not of God.

True Christians were reading the four gospels and Paul’s before and after Marcion started adulterating them and long before the 300 AD you’re talking about.

BTW, there is no such thing as atheist.

 

[outhouse]

the True Christians

What is a true Christian?