- This topic has 25,959 replies, 116 voices, and was last updated 1 week, 2 days ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (carmel @ Nov. 15 2012,08:01) Quote (Ed J @ Nov. 13 2012,20:13) Quote Jesus lineage explained “Son of Man”: 25%; Mary's mother's lineage was of the tribe of Levi. (Luke 1:5 and Luke 1:36)
“Son of Man”: 25%: Mary's father's lineage was (Judah) through Nathan(son of David). (Luke 3:23-31)
“Son of God”: 50%: Jesus' Father was the “HolySpirit”; NOT Joseph! (Mathew 1:18 / Mathew 1:20 / Luke 1:35)At birth: Jesus was 50%(HolySpirit)God (Matt.1:18 / Matt.1:20 / Luke 1:35), 25%(Levite)Priest and 25%(Judah)King!
At baptism by John the baptizer, Jesus was filled with the HolySpirit(God) beyond measure! (John 3:34 / John 1:14)Edj,
It seems to me from those calculations, that Jesus neither is a complete man, nor a complete God!!!
Now we are at least complete humans!!!
think about that!!!
Tell me why we were complete humans before Jesus came, and we as Christians became split after Jesus redemption 50% man, and 50% God's spirit???
I will join you in the other thread!
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
Hi Charles,Someone who is 50% White and 50% black is called “BLACK”.
Jesus is called a man for this very reason; but he is also
called “The Son of God” because God is his FATHER.
(See Matthew 1:18, 20, and Luke 1:35)God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgHi Charles,
YHVH's spirit is the “HolySpirit”
Jesus' spirit is the “Spirit of Christ”God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (Ed J @ Nov. 15 2012,17:38) Quote (jammin @ Nov. 14 2012,19:38) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 14 2012,12:07) Quote (Ed J @ Nov. 13 2012,05:14) Hi Jammin, If I did, would you then believe me?
Of course not because you speak empty words. Yet
you do believe that very thing that others have done in that regard.
Amen.
the false teacher (mike) says amen. LOL
Hi Jammin,I'm not sure if Mike considers himself “a Teacher”,
but you can know with certainty that I consider myself one.Psalm 119:98-104:
98:Thou through thy commandments hast made me
wiser than mine enemies: for they are ever with me.
I(Ed J) have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditation.100 I understand more than the ancients, because I keep thy precepts.
101 I have refrained my feet from every evil way, that I might keep thy word.
102 I(Ed J) have not departed from thy judgments: for thou(YHVH) hast taught me.
103 How sweet are thy words unto my taste! yea, sweeter than honey to my mouth!
104 Through thy precepts I get understanding: therefore I(Ed J) hate every false way.
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
yes you are a false teacher. i know thatQuote (Ed J @ Nov. 15 2012,17:59) Quote (jammin @ Nov. 15 2012,01:45) Quote (Ed J @ Nov. 14 2012,21:08) Quote (jammin @ Nov. 14 2012,19:55) ok mike here is another question for you
who is the Lord in mat 3.3?
Hi Jammin,I'll take that question,
the same LORD as in Isaiah 40:3.God bless
Ed J
i still a question for you(1)do you believe that there are versions that say yahweh?
yes or no?(2)then if you want you can answer the question for mat 3.3
who is that LORD? you said the same Lord in IS but who is that Lord?
Hi Jammin,1) There are many who use that erroneous name, besides corrupted versions of “The Bible”.
(now please don't start acting like I didn't answer your question; OK? This seems to be a pattern of yours)
Because if you do, I will be forced to re-post this answer again and again.
If bullied by those who hold power I can always use the out “I don't know”.
But I personally believe “Honesty” trumps submission here.2) יהוה YHVH pronounced YÄ-hä-vā. (Link)
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
i said who is that LORD in mat 3.3?btw you are not answering my question
do you believe that some versions says yahweh?pick your answer
1.yes
2.nodo not explain boy coz i dont need your explanation. i just want you to answer my question
Quote (jammin @ Nov. 15 2012,19:43) Quote (Ed J @ Nov. 15 2012,17:59) Quote (jammin @ Nov. 15 2012,01:45) Quote (Ed J @ Nov. 14 2012,21:08) Quote (jammin @ Nov. 14 2012,19:55) ok mike here is another question for you
who is the Lord in mat 3.3?
Hi Jammin,I'll take that question,
the same LORD as in Isaiah 40:3.God bless
Ed J
i still a question for you(1)do you believe that there are versions that say yahweh?
yes or no?(2)then if you want you can answer the question for mat 3.3
who is that LORD? you said the same Lord in IS but who is that Lord?
Hi Jammin,1) There are many who use that erroneous name, besides corrupted versions of “The Bible”.
(now please don't start acting like I didn't answer your question; OK? This seems to be a pattern of yours)
Because if you do, I will be forced to re-post this answer again and again.
If bullied by those who hold power I can always use the out “I don't know”.
But I personally believe “Honesty” trumps submission here.2) יהוה YHVH pronounced YÄ-hä-vā. (Link)
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
(1)said who is that LORD in mat 3.3?(2)btw you are not answering my question
do you believe that some versions says yahweh?pick your answer
1.yes
2.nodo not explain boy coz i dont need your explanation. i just want you to answer my question
Hi Jammin,1) YHVH
2) Already answered.
(please read my post you quoted)Note: If you persist I will be forced to report YOU for being off-topic.
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgHi Jammin,
“The Word” is the “HolySpirit”. (Link)
Now, Please try to stay on topic!God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgLOL
you cant read that in john 1.1
how many times do i need to tell you that you do not need to use your imagination when reading your bible. LOLthe Word is Christ. that is what we can read in john 1.1
Quote (Ed J @ Nov. 15 2012,23:45) Quote (jammin @ Nov. 15 2012,19:43) Quote (Ed J @ Nov. 15 2012,17:59) Quote (jammin @ Nov. 15 2012,01:45) Quote (Ed J @ Nov. 14 2012,21:08) Quote (jammin @ Nov. 14 2012,19:55) ok mike here is another question for you
who is the Lord in mat 3.3?
Hi Jammin,I'll take that question,
the same LORD as in Isaiah 40:3.God bless
Ed J
i still a question for you(1)do you believe that there are versions that say yahweh?
yes or no?(2)then if you want you can answer the question for mat 3.3
who is that LORD? you said the same Lord in IS but who is that Lord?
Hi Jammin,1) There are many who use that erroneous name, besides corrupted versions of “The Bible”.
(now please don't start acting like I didn't answer your question; OK? This seems to be a pattern of yours)
Because if you do, I will be forced to re-post this answer again and again.
If bullied by those who hold power I can always use the out “I don't know”.
But I personally believe “Honesty” trumps submission here.2) יהוה YHVH pronounced YÄ-hä-vā. (Link)
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
(1)said who is that LORD in mat 3.3?(2)btw you are not answering my question
do you believe that some versions says yahweh?pick your answer
1.yes
2.nodo not explain boy coz i dont need your explanation. i just want you to answer my question
Hi Jammin,1) YHVH
2) Already answered.
(please read my post you quoted)Note: If you persist I will be forced to report YOU for being off-topic.
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
you did not answer my question.1. who is that Lord or YHVH?
2. do you believe that some versions say yahweh? yes or no
pls choose your answer.Quote (jammin @ Nov. 16 2012,02:00) you did not answer my question. who is that Lord or YHVH?
Hi Jammin,God. …Now, Please try to stay on topic!
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote YHVH's spirit is the “HolySpirit”
Jesus' spirit is the “Spirit of Christ”Edj,
That's what you beleive!
God's SPIRIT IS ONE. ALMIGHTY. THAT IS THE FIRST AND FORMOST.
BUT IT DOESN'T MEAN ONE ENTITY.
IT IS A COMPOUND ONE.
IT CONSISTS OF:
THE SPIRIT OF THE FATHER, THE SPIRIT OF THE SON, AND THE HOLY SPIRIT.
THEY ARE BOTH ONE AND DISTINCT.
THESE THREE SPIRITS SYMBOLIZING:
ALMIGHTY GOD COMPOUND ONE
THE FATHER LOVE
THE SON WISDOM
THE HOLY SPIRIT POWER
FROM THESE THREE GOD ALSO ACHIEVED FURTHER THREE SPIRITS WHICH FORM A TOTAL OF SEVEN SPIRITS.
AS FOLLOWS:
A SPIRIT BETWEEN THE FATHER AND THE SON ARCHANGEL MICHAEL
A SPIRIT BETWEEN THE FATHER AND THE HOLY SPIRIT ARCHANGEL GABRIEL
A SPIRIT BETWEEN THE SON AND THE HOLY SPIRIT ARCHANGEL LUCIFER
Peace and Love in Jesus
Charles
all
the trinity is like a painter works;
two individuals were inspecting the works of the painter ,and made these comments ,one says the color as been spread evenly and walls and cealing well cut ,I wander say the other who a steady hand the man as to have ,the other answered it is not in the hand but in the brush ,or the roller ,is it ? answer the first man ,I really think it is in the equipment he uses ,you see on a brush there are many hairs but ONE brush,roller are made in a similar way,no,no, say the other i think it his the paint ,that make it so even and smoot ,this argument went on for a while and getting hot ,so they agree to establish agreement understanding ,and it whent like this ;
1) the paint
2) the tools
3) the man
=_
the painter ; and now this is the trinity ( common agreement between parties to an acceptable direction to all involved )
Quote (jammin @ Nov. 14 2012,02:38) Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010)
“For today, The Savior has been born to you, who is THE LORD JEHOVAH The Messiah, in the city of David.”
So the Lord Jehovah was BORN? And the Lord Jehovah is the Messiah OF the Lord Jehovah? Hmmmmm………..I guess the Catholics have been right this whole time, jammin…………. Mary really IS the “Mother of God”.
Quote (jammin @ Nov. 14 2012,02:53) yes one God.
they are one.
One God, but THEY are one? jammin, the plural pronoun “they” doesn't apply to ONE. It applies to more than one.Since you are afraid to answer simple questions, I'll just spell it out for you.
The scriptures say that Jesus is the Son of God. They NEVER teach that Jesus is the Son of only the Father third of God. (Yet for some odd reason, this thing that is never taught in scripture is exactly what you believe.
)So our one Almighty God has a Son named Jesus. Jesus doesn't have a Son named Jesus, so he can't possibly be our one Almighty God.
Also, Jesus already told us that our God is his God. So go and figure out WHO the God of Jesus is, and then start worshipping that One as YOUR God also. If Jesus didn't worship a Father and Son combo as his God, then neither should we – because we and Jesus have the SAME God.
Quote (carmel @ Nov. 14 2012,14:45) THE MAN JESUS HAS A GOD COMPOSED OF : FATHER, SON, AND HOLY SPIRIT.
THE FATHER AND THE SON WERE NEVER TWO SEPARATED BEINGS ONLY, BUT IN THE SAME TIME THEY WERE ALSO ONE SPIRITUAL BEING IN GOD.TOGETHER WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT.
So the “man Jesus” was someone completely different than the “God Jesus”, who made up a third of the “man Jesus' ” own God?Hmmmmm……………
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 13 2012,19:36) Quote (Lightenup @ Nov. 12 2012,21:43)
MRYA is an acronym and used as a placeholder for YHWH in the Aramaic manuscript from what I have been told.
From the site you linked:Meem: Marutha (“Adonship”)
Resh: Rabbutha (“Mightyness/Grandeur, Splendour, Splendor, Greatness”)
Yodh-Aleph: Ethya (“Self-Existence')Where's the “H”? You guys keep saying the word “marya” is really “Mar Yah” – implying that the name “Yah” is part of the word. Where is the “H” in the above acronym, Kathi?
Btw, Kathi and I have been over this and over this. She has offered the biased testimony of a couple of people who believe Jesus is God Almighty. But those people don't even agree amongst themselves, as some believe “marya” is an acronym, and others believe it means Lord (Mar) Jehovah (Yah). But I posted the results of EVERY Aramaic dictionary I could find online for Kathi – and they ALL say that “marya” is simply the emphatic form of “lord” – much like the Hebrew word “adonay” is the emphatic form of adon (lord).
Oh, and I also told Kathi (the first time she showed me this acronym claim) that anyone could do the same thing with the word “lord”. For example:
L = Loves us
O = Overly zealous for us
R = Redeemed us
D = Died for usConclusion: The English word “lord” ALWAYS REFERS TO JESUS CHRIST, AND NOBODY ELSE.
I could say the above, but would that make it true? Similarly, some dude from the 4th century made Kathi's acronym out of an Aramaic word that simply means “lord”. There is no scholarly consensus that the Aramaic word “marya” is an acronym for anything. Plus, she must decide whether to push the acronym claim on us, OR the Mar Yah (with an added “H”) claim on us. She can't push both claims, for one refutes the other.
Mike,
This is the explanation that I got about adding the 'h.'
St. Ephraem in the 4th century defined it as the acronym as detailed in that thread, which clearly shows he understood it to mean YHWH.It is by no means meant to be used as a substitute for YHWH. It is meant to be understood as a title, or a safe placeholder if you will.
We add the H to the end in English, just as we would for any other name in Aramaic that has -Yah in it. Isaiah, Jeremiah, etc., in Aramaic end in Aleph. That's just how it's spelled in Aramaic-which is more phonetic than Hebrew.
If you look at the Aramaic Interlinear for the word 'Isaiah' in John 12:39, you can see that it doesn't have an 'h' at the end like it does in the English spelling. Eshaya is Isaiah in Aramaic apparently. Look at the interlinear for the gospels, not for the NT, and you will see this at Bible.cc.
So then “Mar Yah” is really “marya” – just like all the dictionaries say?
If those dictionaries are all right about that, maybe they are also right that the word is simply the emphatic form of “lord”.
Here Mike,
This helps explain that MRYA is not an emphatic form of Mara. He says that the 'y' or 'yodh' would not be inserted in a noun to make it emphatic.Quote See Matthew 11:25 and Luke 10:21: “Mara de Shmayya” (The Lord of Heaven”). The Emphatic Mara is indicated due to its position prior to the Daleth Proclitic. If it were Absolute it would be Mara Shmayya, without the Proclitic.
See especially Luke 14:23 for the Emphatic – “w Emar Mara l Awadeh” (and said the lord to his servant….). Contextually the only possibility here is the Emphatic.
Do note, Akhi Jerry, that the Absolute and Emphatic for the lexical root MRA are identical, and unaltered from the root. For the Absolute form, see Matthew 13:52, 20:1, 20:11 – “Mara Beytha” (“Lord of the House”) without the Daleth Proclitic. Also Matthew 20:8, “Mara Karma” (“Lord of the Vineyard”)
It is immaterial to the argument whether or not the noun is in the Emphatic, or in the Absolute. In neither case would you introduce a Yodh to form the state. Not for the Emphatic, and not for the Absolute. Nouns don't behave that way in the Emphatic or the Absolute.
Quote Jerry wrote:But if Mau-Rau` is conclusively the emphatic, then I will have to rethink MauR-Yau`, as both can't be the emphatic at the same time. This. If MRYA is not the Emphatic of MRA (and it isn't), then what is it? And why is it only used of God and Christ? Never, for instance, of a king, or a landlord or a male head of household.
Remember that in English you do not add a suffix of “-or” to a noun root, only to a verb root, when creating a substantive. Creat-or is fine, King-or is not. In the same way, you do not add a Yodh to a noun root in Aramaic to form an Emphatic.
Two different grammatical conventions, for two different parts of speech.
from here (fourth post down):
http://www.peshitta.org/forum….art=150Kathi,
You've showed me posts from this guy before. Why do you suppose what HE says doesn't align with what the Aramaic experts of FOUR DIFFERENT dictionaries say?
Do you think it might be because he, like you, is trying hard to FORCE Jesus into being God Almighty? I do.
Your man said, “If MRYA is not the Emphatic of MRA (and it isn't), then what is it? And why is it only used of God and Christ? Never, for instance, of a king, or a landlord or a male head of household.
Hmmmmm…………….. Isn't that the same claim the “experts” make for the emphatic Hebrew word “adonay”? Yet you and I have researched it and found that claim to be false, haven't we?
And if I remember correctly, one poster your Aramaic site said that emphatic form was used of one the Apostles in the NT, right?
Kathi, I have been round and round this “marya” thing with you. And if I want to discuss it further, I will go to one of your threads about it. I only brought it up here to correct jammin when he posted an inaccurate rendering from the Aramaic Bible in Plain English.
(I've also asked him some questions about that verse today. Perhaps you can address them?)
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 15 2012,17:38) Quote (jammin @ Nov. 14 2012,02:53) yes one God.
they are one.
One God, but THEY are one? jammin, the plural pronoun “they” doesn't apply to ONE. It applies to more than one.Since you are afraid to answer simple questions, I'll just spell it out for you.
The scriptures say that Jesus is the Son of God. They NEVER teach that Jesus is the Son of only the Father third of God. (Yet for some odd reason, this thing that is never taught in scripture is exactly what you believe.
)So our one Almighty God has a Son named Jesus. Jesus doesn't have a Son named Jesus, so he can't possibly be our one Almighty God.
Also, Jesus already told us that our God is his God. So go and figure out WHO the God of Jesus is, and then start worshipping that One as YOUR God also. If Jesus didn't worship a Father and Son combo as his God, then neither should we – because we and Jesus have the SAME God.
Mike,
you said:Quote One God, but THEY are one? jammin, the plural pronoun “they” doesn't apply to ONE. It applies to more than one. Correction:
Jesus said I and the Father ARE one. Jesus said 'are' not 'is.' A unity is one group of more than one member. Jesus and the Father, they are one.As for your other comments to jammin, you need to understand that jammin believes in a unity of more than one. The term 'Godhead' is used for this unity with trinitarians. The Godhead of the trinitarians is made up of three persons with common eternally existing deity nature.
The God of Jesus is one with Jesus as God and Lord. If you do not have the God that is one with Jesus, then you do not have the God of Jesus as your saving God.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 15 2012,17:32) Quote (jammin @ Nov. 14 2012,02:38) Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010)
“For today, The Savior has been born to you, who is THE LORD JEHOVAH The Messiah, in the city of David.”
So the Lord Jehovah was BORN? And the Lord Jehovah is the Messiah OF the Lord Jehovah? Hmmmmm………..I guess the Catholics have been right this whole time, jammin…………. Mary really IS the “Mother of God”.
Mike,
The Son's divine nature is from the Father, the Son's human nature is from Mary. Mary is not the mother of the divinity of the Son. He was divinity long before Mary came along.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
