- This topic has 25,959 replies, 116 voices, and was last updated 5 days, 22 hours ago by
.
- Posts
THE HEBREW SCRIPTURES PORTRAY THE MESSIAH AS ONE WHO WAS YET TO EXIST
Did any of the Hebrew scriptures direct Jews of the first century to expect a Messiah who had to give up conscious life as an Archangel in heaven?
Deuteronomy 18:18
“I will raise up a prophet from among their brothers like you [Moses]”. This prophet would originate from human stock not angelic stock. This was shown to be fulfilled in Acts 3:22, 7:37 and John 6:14
Genesis 3:15 “enmity…between your [the serpent’s] seed and her [the woman’s] seed”. Galatians 3:16 “the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed… who is Christ”
2 Samuel 7:14-16
“your [David's] seed…will establish his kingdom to time indefinite. I shall become his father, he will become my son” Quoted in Hebrews 1:5. 2 Sam 7:19 says it is “down to a distant future time”. Evidently the Messiah would be a person who was fully human (Moses had not pre-existed); one promised who would come to be God's Son at a future time.
MESSIAH’S ORIGIN ACCORDING TO
MICAH 5:2
“And you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah, the one too little to get to be among the thousands of Judah from you there will come out to me the one who is to become ruler in Israel, whose origin (goings forth) is from early times, from the {B]days of time indefinite[/B].” Or 'ancient days' Hebrew interlinear, NAB, ESV, NRSV, ROTH, REB, and NIV. Firstly it must be noted that we see that a similar phrase is used to point back, not beyond the world's creation, but only as far as the Hebrew forefathers in:
Micah 7:20
“the loving-kindness given to Abraham, which you swore to our forefathers from days of long ago“
Also, Amos 9:11
“In that day I shall raise up the booth of David that is fallen…I shall build it up as in the days of long ago.”
The New American Bible study notes explain Micah 5:2 as a reference to the Messiah's descent from the ancient Davidic dynasty : “The tiny city and clan of Bethlehem-Ephrathah, from which comes the ancient Davidic dynasty (whose origin is from old, from ancient times)with its messianic king, one who is to be ruler in Israel”
Additionally, the Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges says: “origins” in Micah 5:2 refers to his (the Messiah's) descent from the ancient Davidic family.
If 'origin' in Micah 5:2 referred to that of Jesus' coming into existence it would be in contradiction of Matthew 1:18 which details the 'origin' of Jesus as his ‘begetting by holy spirit’.
ONE CANNOT HAVE 2 POINTS OF ORIGIN. .”. The word for ‘origin’ is also used in Matthew 1:1. There, too, it refers to Jesus’ ancestry as being human – his origin because of his line of descent through David to Abraham. Yet logically Jesus only comes into actual existence at the end of that line –his conception.
Referring to Micah 5:2, James Dunn. Professor of Divinity Durham University comments that:
“The Hebrew does not suggest pre-existence”
Cross-referencing shows that It likely was Micah 5:2 that the1st century Jews had in mind, when they said:
John 7: 42
“Has not scripture said that the Christ is coming from the offspring of David, and from Bethlehem the village where David used to be? Therefore, the Messiah being the final one of the Davidic dynasty is part of and from within a dynasty that is ancient, which thereby makes the Messiah's origin ancient. In context it would be incorrect to assume that this meant that the Messiah existed before the world's creation.
Similarly, in trying to assess who Jesus is :
John 7:40.41
“Some of the crowd …began saying: 'This is for certainty the prophet'. Others were saying: 'This is the Christ.” And when asked by Jesus in:
Matthew 16:13, 14
“Who are men saying the Son of Man is?' They [the disciples] said: 'Some say John the Baptist, others Elijah, still others eremiah or one of the prophets.”
John 1:49 gives:
Nathaniel's recognition of Jesus as: “Rabbi, you are the Son of God, you are king of Israel“
In no case does anyone suggest that Jesus may have been an archangel.
SOURCEWHO IS THE WORD?
John Chapter OneELOHIM: ONE, OR MORE THAN ONE?
Exodus 32
By Voy Wilks
3/9/98The Pre-existence
Philippians 2:5-11
By Voy Wilks
1/29/92Did Yahshua Create Or Pre-exist His Birth?
…
Oh yeah, that reminds me that I left you guys hanging on the “THE god” versus “A god” thing.
The FACTS are that “theos” in John 1:1c can be faithfully translated as either “THE god” (God), or “A god”.
Here is what the 25 Trinitarian scholars of NETNote say about it:
The construction in John 1:1c does not equate the Word with the person of God (this is ruled out by 1:1b, “the Word was with God”)
I thought this would just be common sense to everyone, but apparently many people have their own personal doctrines to maintain. But doctrines or no doctrines, there is no way that the Word can actually be the very God he was with.
The CORRECT translation of John 1:1 is exactly how the NWT has it:
In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.
God cannot be WITH Himself, people. Use your God-given common sense for crying out loud.
Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ Aug. 24 2012,09:53) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 24 2012,09:02) Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ Aug. 22 2012,20:41) No, it was not I who said “the Word in John 1:1 represented the Divine Plan of Yahweh.” I also never once suggested “the Divine Plan actually WAS Yahweh.”
In the beginning was the plan [of Yahweh], and the plan [of Yahweh] was with Him in the beginning, and the plan [of Yahweh] was sublime. The plan [of Yahweh] became flesh, and tabernacled among us with the esteem of Yahweh's only begotten son [Yahshua].Those above words are YOURS, Frank.
Mike,Yes, this is how I had reworded what you had said in accordance to what it is that I believe, but the following are not MY words!
Quote “the Word in John 1:1 represented the Divine Plan of Yahweh.” “the Divine Plan actually WAS Yahweh.”
You can pervert and twist what I have actually said and do the same with Father Yahweh's inspired prophetic word till you are blue in the face! Have at it and have fun in doing so, since this is the only personal reward that you will ever receive!
WHO IS THE WORD?
John Chapter OneELOHIM: ONE, OR MORE THAN ONE?
Exodus 32
By Voy Wilks
3/9/98The Pre-existence
Philippians 2:5-11
By Voy Wilks
1/29/92Did Yahshua Create Or Pre-exist His Birth?
…
Ever?Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 24 2012,10:14) Then let's just use your words as you wrote them: In the beginning was the plan [of Yahweh]
It seems from the first part that you are equating the Greek word “logos” with “the plan of Yahweh”. I called it the “Divine Plan”, because I think one of your cut and pastes listed it that way.
and the plan [of Yahweh] was with Him in the beginning, and the plan [of Yahweh] was sublime.
Where do you get the word “sublime”? The Greek words are “and god was the logos”, not “sublime was the logos”, right? And, like I told you already, since the word “theos” in 1:1c is NOT in the adjectival form, it cannot mean “sublime”. It means either “THE god”, or “A god”.
The plan [of Yahweh] became flesh, and tabernacled among us with the esteem of Yahweh's only begotten son [Yahshua].
On this one, I've asked you why a PLAN of Yahweh would have the esteem of a SON of Yahweh? Why do you suppose that is, Frank?
Mike,
I simply substituted the more acceptable word 'sublime' for the pagan word 'divine', since DIVINation is a pagan practice.
“and god was the” are not Greek words!
Why does the plan of Yahweh have the esteem of the son of Yahweh? Simply because that is what Father Yahweh's inspired prophetic word conveys. Of course, you would not understand and believe such truth, since you believe the foolish, false, deceptive, and demonic teaching that Yahshua pre-existed his birth as LITERALLY being Father Yahweh's word and that he was “a god” in his supposed pre-existence.
WHO IS THE WORD?
John Chapter OneELOHIM: ONE, OR MORE THAN ONE?
Exodus 32
By Voy Wilks
3/9/98The Pre-existence
Philippians 2:5-11
By Voy Wilks
1/29/92Did Yahshua Create Or Pre-exist His Birth?
…
Quote (Ed J @ Aug. 24 2012,10:37) Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ Aug. 24 2012,09:53) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 24 2012,09:02) Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ Aug. 22 2012,20:41) No, it was not I who said “the Word in John 1:1 represented the Divine Plan of Yahweh.” I also never once suggested “the Divine Plan actually WAS Yahweh.”
In the beginning was the plan [of Yahweh], and the plan [of Yahweh] was with Him in the beginning, and the plan [of Yahweh] was sublime. The plan [of Yahweh] became flesh, and tabernacled among us with the esteem of Yahweh's only begotten son [Yahshua].Those above words are YOURS, Frank.
Mike,Yes, this is how I had reworded what you had said in accordance to what it is that I believe, but the following are not MY words!
Quote “the Word in John 1:1 represented the Divine Plan of Yahweh.” “the Divine Plan actually WAS Yahweh.”
You can pervert and twist what I have actually said and do the same with Father Yahweh's inspired prophetic word till you are blue in the face! Have at it and have fun in doing so, since this is the only personal reward that you will ever receive!
WHO IS THE WORD?
John Chapter OneELOHIM: ONE, OR MORE THAN ONE?
Exodus 32
By Voy Wilks
3/9/98The Pre-existence
Philippians 2:5-11
By Voy Wilks
1/29/92Did Yahshua Create Or Pre-exist His Birth?
…
Ever?
Ed J,As long as he persists in teaching foolish, false, deceptive, and demonic doctrine and does not accept reproof and correction in accordance with Father Yahweh's inspired prophetic word that is the only personal reward the he will EVER receive!
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 24 2012,10:33) Oh yeah, that reminds me that I left you guys hanging on the “THE god” versus “A god” thing. The FACTS are that “theos” in John 1:1c can be faithfully translated as either “THE god” (God), or “A god”.
Here is what the 25 Trinitarian scholars of NETNote say about it:
The construction in John 1:1c does not equate the Word with the person of God (this is ruled out by 1:1b, “the Word was with God”)
I thought this would just be common sense to everyone, but apparently many people have their own personal doctrines to maintain. But doctrines or no doctrines, there is no way that the Word can actually be the very God he was with.
The CORRECT translation of John 1:1 is exactly how the NWT has it:
In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.
God cannot be WITH Himself, people. Use your God-given common sense for crying out loud.
Mike,You can cry out loud till you are blue in the face, but you certainly have not left me hanging with YOUR blind “faith”!
I don't have blind “faith”! I BELIEVE!
And I most certainly have never proclaimed that Father Yahweh can be with Himself! That is your perversion, not mine!
WHO IS THE WORD?
John Chapter OneELOHIM: ONE, OR MORE THAN ONE?
Exodus 32
By Voy Wilks
3/9/98The Pre-existence
Philippians 2:5-11
By Voy Wilks
1/29/92Did Yahshua Create Or Pre-exist His Birth?
…
Just WHO is Yeshua the Messiah?
Eternal life is bound up in the answer to this question (John 17:3). Put the question to Jews and they reply he was the son of Joseph and Mary — and that he lived and died in Judea almost 2,000 years ago. Ask it of most clergymen and they will state that he is the second person of a biune or triune God. Others, while rejecting the Trinitarian concept as unscriptural and illogical,teach that he pre-existed. Thus endless controversy has continued; even those who admit that he lives, violently disagree as to WHO he is!
Some say that Yeshua is 50% God and 50% man. Yet others say that he is 100% man as well as 100% God. The last one is generally accepted by most. However, from a mathematical standpoint, 200% cannot go into 100% — would YEHOVAH God, the creator of the science of mathematics, violate His own system of order?
Some of those trying to support the concept of a “pre-existent” savior argue that Yeshua the Messiah and YEHOVAH God are the SAME being, or they argue that Yeshua was YEHOVAH of the Old Testament. Does this argument, when committed to the laws of logic, hold up?
Taking this a step further, if Yeshua pre-existed — then Mary, his mother, would have had to too! Yeshua, being born of Mary, had to have her human genetic makeup in his being as well. If Mary did not pre-exist HOW, then, did YEHOVAH God go into the future and extract her genetic makeup, disassemble Yeshua and insert Mary's genetic code in him? Therefore, logically, if Yeshua pre-existed wouldn't Mary have had to as well?
Did the Messiah divest himself of his previous identity, loose all his former knowledge, power and standing with YEHOVAH God — only to establish all this again after his resurrection? What for? What did it accomplish? Is such a belief logical? This lesson will delve into these many questions and lay bare the TRUTH about the Messiah's origins.
SOURCEWHO IS THE WORD?
John Chapter OneELOHIM: ONE, OR MORE THAN ONE?
Exodus 32
By Voy Wilks
3/9/98The Pre-existence
Philippians 2:5-11
By Voy Wilks
1/29/92Did Yahshua Create Or Pre-exist His Birth?
…
Quote (jammin @ Aug. 23 2012,11:47) mike, when we say God, the bible is saying that God is nature,. (phil 2.6
God is form phil 2.6when we say HUMAN, human is nature. human is your form.
you and your father are both HUMAN. you are truly HUMAN (unless you dont want this truth LOL..are you an animal boy>??)
Christ and his father are both God. truly God! john 1.1
john 1.18
phil 2.6the bible said that. i believe in the bible
Jammin,The Bible did not say that the true God is a nature. You are the one saying it.
Study very well. The next sentence of Philippians 2:6 is this: “did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,
So, the context is, “…did not count the equality with God a thing to be grasped.”
The Bible did not say that Jesus and the true God were in one nature (God)
Your comparison is in error.
Human nature, Father and the son is not in one nature in terms of number but instead with the same nature but two in number in one specie.Human nature compare to Philippians 2:6 is not in accord and inconsistent. Why? Because the son in human nature will not agree that he should not count his equality with his father, but instead just consider it as only something to be grasped.
The common knowledge is, Father is human in nature, the son of course is also in human nature and it could not be discounted for being equality.
The Philippians 2:6 is having a very big different compare to the human nature. “… did not count the equality with God (nature by Jammin) a thing to be grasped.”
To be fair in square with the discussion, the parties concern should present a Biblical proof stating the nature of God, and not by only mere conclusion and opinion of men.
Jammin, show us the biblical proof that the word God, means nature and could be used it as interchangeable word with the same meaning.
Do you have? Yes or No?
There are so many versions of the Bible. Other versions translated the original manuscript from Greek and Hebrews into English differently. Satan knows that if there are so many many translations/ versions of the words of God, can and could cause confusions to the humankind. If Satan knows it, more than knowing is the One and only true God.
That's why He let the Romans 10:14-15, 17 NKJV. Before, God spoke to us through Jesus and Jesus spoke to us through his disciples. Jesus is in heaven sitting at the right side of God and the apostles were already gone. Who is the true preacher or sent by God to spoke to us nowadays? Look around us. Plenty of so called preachers. Who among them is the true sent by God?
There are so many versions of the Bible. Other versions translated the original manuscript from Greek and Hebrews into English differently. Satan knows that if there are so many many translations/ versions of the words of God, can and could cause confusions to the humankind. If Satan knows it, more than knowing is the One and only true God.
That's why He let the Romans 10:14-15, 17 NKJV has been written.
Before, God spoke to us through Jesus and Jesus spoke to us through his disciples. Jesus is in heaven sitting at the right side of God and the apostles were already gone. Who is the true preacher or sent by God to spoke to us nowadays? Look around us. Plenty of so called preachers. Who among them is the true sent by God?
Romans 10:14-15, 17 NKJV
14How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? 15And how shall they preach unless they are sent? As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the gospel of peace, Who bring glad tidings of good things!”
17So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.Deuteronomy 18:18
“I will raise up a prophet from among their brothers like you [Moses]”. This prophet would originate from human stock not angelic stock. This was shown to be fulfilled in Acts 3:22, 7:37 and John 6:14
Jammin, shall counter it by saying again this words ” your father is human nature,.. are you human nature or not? answer me Yes or No? Philippians 2:6
Define the meaning of the word “spokesman”.
Bible saying: “Deuteronomy 18:18 NKJV
18. I will raise up for them a Prophet like you from among their brethren, and will put My words in His mouth, and He shall speak to them all that I command Him.Hebrews 1:1-2 NKJV
1. God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, 2has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds;
Millions of people in this world speaking many Gods and many Lords. Some saying he is the true God and Lord; some others saying no they are Gods and Lords and other is also saying Our God is compose of three but there are One God.?
What was the true preachers/ sent by God to preach,.. preaching/ saying?
Let them talk, let them teach what they wanted to be preached about their so called gods and lords.
BUT FOR US, THERE IS ONE AND ONLY TRUE GOD, THE FATHER AND GOD OF JESUS CHRIST AND THERE IS ONLY ONE LORD, JESUS CHRIST.
ONE AND ONLY TRUE GOD = THE FATHER ALONE
ONE AND ONLY LORD= JESUS CHRIST ALONE.
AS WHAT THE BIBLE SAID, THERE IS ONLY ONE TRUE GOD, THE FATHER AND NO MORE GOD EXCEPT THE FATHER. SUPREME BEING
AS WHAT THE APOSTLES SAID, THERE ONLY ONE LORD JESUS CHRIST. THE NEW MAN HAS NO TWO HEAD BUT ONLY ONE (The head of the church built by Christ is Christ himself alone).
GOD AS ONLY ONE HEAD OF CHRIST AND CHRIST AS THE ONLY ONE HEAD OF MEN AND EACH MAN IS ONLY ONE HEAD OF EACH WIFE.
Very simple and plain to the people of God.
God's plans: Creating everything including the all mankind to be heirs by His anointed to be recognized as His begotten Son. His begotten Son has been made Lord and Messiah of His chosen people. The chosen people must believe to what the Son of God, spoken, live in this world in accordance with the will of his Father, then and after, the reward of everlasting life in heaven, lead by Jesus Christ under the umbrella of the ONE AND ONLY TRUE GOD forver and ever.
Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ Aug. 23 2012,17:41) Why does the plan of Yahweh have the esteem of the son of Yahweh? Simply because that is what Father Yahweh's inspired prophetic word conveys.
Where, Frank?Where does Father Yahweh's inspired prophetic word convey that “the plan of Yahweh” has the glory of “the Son of Yahweh”?
What scripture is that?
Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ Aug. 23 2012,17:58) And I most certainly have never proclaimed that Father Yahweh can be with Himself! That is your perversion, not mine!
Well, it's good to know that you don't believe God can be WITH God, Frank. But how can that be MY perversion, when I constantly argue against such a ludicrous belief?Maybe we should do some research to see if “theos” in 1:1c can be translated as an adjective, such as “sublime”. This is what Kittel's Theological Dictionary of the New Testament says:
The noun form is here used, not the adjectival theios, which would be required to simply classify the Word as “god-like.”
Do you have any scholarly support that “theos” CAN be adjectival in 1:1c?
Quote (limjunus @ Aug. 23 2012,22:29) Define the meaning of the word “spokesman”. Bible saying: “Deuteronomy 18:18 NKJV
18. I will raise up for them a Prophet like you from among their brethren, and will put My words in His mouth, and He shall speak to them all that I command Him.Hebrews 1:1-2 NKJV
1. God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, 2has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds;
Good post. jammin, can you define the word “spokesman”? I believe it is one who speaks on behalf of SOMEONE ELSE. Surely God cannot be His own “spokesman”, right?
But then again, God also can't be His own:
Creation
Son
Anointed One
Sacrificial Lamb
Prophet
Angel
Mediator
Priest
ServantYet these are all things Jesus is of God.
Quote (limjunus @ Aug. 23 2012,21:57) Jammin, The Bible did not say that the true God is a nature. You are the one saying it.
Amen.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
