- This topic has 1,826 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (SimplyForgiven @ Jan. 18 2011,13:52) Before I respond Mike You did not answer the whole point of my Last Post.
You claimed that “Elohim” only means “leader” (“Judges” “Ruler”)
Mike, Are you going to deny the other defintions of “Elohim” such as “gods” “gods like” “god” or “the True God”
according to the Net?
The Other definitions that the Net has stated.
D, NETNotes also list “third member of the co-eternal, co-equal triune Godhead” as a “DEFINITION” of the Greek word “pneuma”. Do you think that is a real “DEFINITION” of the word “spirit”?Check out what else NETNotes says about “El Shaddai”, which YOU think literally MEANS “God Almighty”:
El Shaddai is the sovereign king of the world who grants, blesses, and judges. In the Book of Genesis he blesses the patriarchs with fertility and promises numerous descendants. Outside Genesis he both blesses/protects and takes away life/happiness.
http://net.bible.org/verse.php?book=Gen&chapter=17&verse=1
What part of that actually MEANS “Supernatural Heavenly Spirit Being”? Yet, they go on to say it is a NAME of “God”. God has only one name, D. That name is YHVH. All the rest are titles that REFER TO HIM, but don't actually have YHVH as their definition.
D, look at how NETNotes defines “kurios”:
kurios
1) he to whom a person or thing belongs, about which he has power of deciding; master, lord
1a) the possessor and disposer of a thing
1a1) the owner; one who has control of the person, the master
1a2) in the state: the sovereign, prince, chief, the Roman emperor
1b) is a title of honour expressive of respect and reverence, with which servants greet their master
1c) this title is given to: God, the MessiahHere, they do it right. They don't claim that “kurios” actually MEANS “God” or “Jesus”. They correctly explain that it is a title that MEANS “master”, and then go on to say that TITLE sometimes REFERS TO God and Jesus and others.
And THAT'S how they should have done “elohim”. It is a TITLE that MEANS “judge/leader/ruler”, that sometimes REFERS TO God and Jesus and others.
So I reject “God” as a DEFINITION of the word “elohim”. It is not the case. The word never MEANS “Supernatural Supreme Ruler”.
mike
Finally Mike,
Im going to anwer you in TWO Parts since you wrote two post towards me ok?Quote Hi D, If I refer to George Washington as “President”, does the actual word “President” begin to MEAN “George Washington”? YES or NO? For example, if I later call Obama “President”, am I really calling him “George Washington”? And if I say “He was the first President of the United States” and you know I REFER TO George Washington, can you then look up “President” in Webster's Dictionary and find “George Washington” as one of the definitions? Answer this, and you'll see that the rest of this whole discussion is only fodder.
Your Example cannot be Compared to God. Its like saying “is George washington a God?”, of course NOT. Its that simple and anyone can tell you that. However you can go to the webster dictionary and find out that God means “Supreme Being” if it comes to that. Again this is a Identity that is defined by the Context.
The meaning of words are always defined by their context.
If I say “Man the president of the USA is out of control for sending troops home from Iraq”
There are alot of Presidents Mike, yet with common sense you will realize that the reference is only about ONE. and how is that proven? BY character, Ethics, and works we realize who we are talking about.
If I say im the President of the USA, that cannot be true.
Just as Pharaoh claims to be the “Bright and mourning star” thats also NOT true at all.
IDENTITY Mike.Here is a good example.
Mike means- Name: Mike
Gender:Boy
Origin:Hebrew
Meaning:Who is like God?
Origin:English Meaning: Short form of Michael
Pronunciation: (MIEK) [Guide]
Form of: Michael
http://babynamesworld.parentsconnect.com/meaning_of_Mike.html
Your name means “Who is like God?”
So should I say when i refer to Mike i only refer to the definition or the Identity, or the Person, who is You.
Context defines everything.Quote Because the SCRIPTURAL FACT is: Being called by the word “elohim” did NOT mean that one was God Almighty. And many scriptures bear this out. And if the part I bolded is correct, (which it IS), then calling Jesus by this title does not, IN AND OF ITSELF, teach us that Jesus is God Almighty. AND…………….if the part I bolded is correct, (which it IS), then the word “elohim” does not MEAN God Almighty. If it did, then anyone who was ever called by that word would BE God Almighty.
We never claimed that “calling Jesus by this title does not, in and of itslef, teach us that Jesus is God Almighty”
We claimed, the reason WHY he is called “God” is the reason why the scripture teachs that Jesus is God Almighty.
By his Works, Ethics, and Character. The CONTEXT proves this.Quote Now, let's take YOUR assertion and check it out. You say that sometimes, depending on the context, the word doesn't just REFER TO God Almighty, but actually begins to MEAN “God Almighty”. This is not true, but let's say for argument's sake that it is. What is the CONTEXT of Hebrews 1:8 that indicates that the “elohim” mentioned MEANS “God Almighty” in this case? Is it the part where a Psalm that CLEARLY WASN'T about God Almighty was applied to him? Is it the part where HIS ELOHIM SET HIM ABOVE HIS COMPANIONS?
Man dude, i can use the whole chapter.
Where do I start?
I started reading and started reading Chapter two.
Both chapters give the context that Jesus is God.
Chapter two is very specfic of how he was better than the angels and how the angels cannot redeem us, but Jesus could. and was not made in the likenss of angels but of the seed of abraham.
the first chapter, cliams he created in verse 1 and 2, and that he is the expressed image of God.
what else is there left to say?
Also i loved this verse. Sorry i got side tracked and went into chapter 3.
3:3For this man was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as he who hath builded the house hath more honour than the house.
4For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God.
5And Moses verily was faithful in all his house, as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after;
6But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end.
Jesus is not part of the house, but the builder.
Context mike, context.Quote I didn't mean to upset you by not answering all of your post. Two posts earlier, you said you knew I had much on my plate and that I didn't need to respond. But I did respond to every point. This time, I had neither the time nor the patience to go through everything again. If you can't understand that the word “elohim” many times REFERRED TO God Almighty, but never began to actually MEAN “God Almighty”, then what else could I say anyway?
Thats fine. I told you i was cool with it, but than I see a post saying to francis where you accuse me of “running away”. i was like are you “flipping kidding me”.
come on dude? its like setting a fire.
Mike, I define words by the context which Proves to whom does it Refer to.
Elohim is used like Theos to talk about “Supreme beings”.
Paul used “Theos” to speak of the “UNKOWN GOD”.
Was he talking about a leader or a Supreme being?
1 Kings 18 also does the exact same thing.
The Subject is about the Identity of the “supreme being”Post 2
Quote So I reject “God” as a DEFINITION of the word “elohim”. It is not the case. The word never MEANS “Supernatural Supreme Ruler”.
Mike again, a “Master” and a “God” are NOT the same thing.
You WANT to define Elohim as solely “Judges, rulers, leader” but you CANT, why? You would have to prove every instant and every particular usage of Elohim, is used solely as a title, which you, yourself cliam that it is.
Which is not true.
let me repost one of my points again.CONTENTION 1:
Let me go further, for you to render “Elohim” meaning only “leader” only as “ruler” or “judge” is plain right ridculous.
takes these verses.Joshua 24:19
And Joshua said unto the people, Ye cannot serve the LORD: for he is an holy God; he is a jealous God; he will not forgive your transgressions nor your sins.
1 Kings 18:24
And call ye on the name of your gods, and I will call on the name of the LORD: and the God that answereth by fire, let him be God. And all the people answered and said, It is well spoken.
Jeremiah 11:4
Which I commanded your fathers in the day that I brought them forth out of the land of Egypt, from the iron furnace, saying, Obey my voice, and do them, according to all which I command you: so shall ye be my people, a
nd I will be your God:
What are these writers talking about?
Isnt the subject about A TRUE PERFECT SUPREME BEING?
Joshua 24:19- Is talking abuot a GOD, one that is worshipped is holy and a Jealous God.
1 Kings 18:24- Is Elijah contest with the Baal worshippers about the ONLY TRUE GOD.
Jeremiah 11:4- is talking about being a GOD to a People.Look point is that THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH “LEADERS”
but about the TRUE IDENTITY OF THE REAL GOD!
Romans 1- talks about how the people ended up worshipping false gods, and images that they themselves created!
God /gɒd/ Show Spelled
[god] Show IPA
–noun
1. the one Supreme Being, the creator and ruler of the universe
This is the subject they are referring to. Because in reality those people worhshipped many false gods that didnt exist.
1 Kings 18 comeletly destroys your logic that “elohim” is only a title, but instead a Identity of a Supreme God. Why? because the contest was to prove the Identity of the TRUE “ELOHIM” “GOD” NOT LEADER.
How about 1 John 4:8?
What God is Love?Why do people quote whole posts when the post is just above their reply.
Think about it. It is much easier to read a conversation when it has one reply after another. When it is nothing but quotes inside quotes inside quotes, then I don't know about you, but I lose interest in the conversation.
I should also mention that some quote part of the post that is
relevant. That format is much easier to follow.If you can't part-quote, then just make a post and copy and paste the part that you want to quote and click the quote button, paste in the text, and click the quote button again to close the tag. If you can't do that, then quote the text in the same way you would when you are writing.
T8,
I gave you some JavaScript and HTML that would do the job admirably.
The quote only shows the first line (or at least a fixed height the size of an EM).
Clicking on the quote expands it or collapses it.
This way, the posts are more compact and only readers interested in the quotes need read them!just add a 'height=1.1em' to every 'Quote' tag plus the JavaScript to expand or collapse them:
onclick='this.height=this.height==”auto”?1.1em:”auto”Easy…
Quote (Ed J @ Jan. 17 2011,17:04) Answer: “The rudiments”!
EDNo the answer is both the “elements” and the earth will be burned up!
But the heavens and “THE EARTH, (Strong's G1093); WHICH ARE NOW”, by the same word are kept in store, “RESERVED UNTO FIRE AGAINST THE DAY OF JUDGMENT” and perdition of ungodly men. 2 Peter 3:7
But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night;
in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, “THE EARTH (Strong's G1093); ALSO” and the works that are therein “SHALL BE BURNED UP. 2Peter 3:10…“THE EARTH (Strong's G1093); ALSO” and the works that are therein “SHALL BE BURNED UP
WJ
Quote (SimplyForgiven @ Jan. 17 2011,23:12) This is the subject they are referring to. Because in reality those people worhshipped many false gods that didnt exist.
1 Kings 18 comeletly destroys your logic that “elohim” is only a title, but instead a Identity of a Supreme God. Why? because the contest was to prove the Identity of the TRUE “ELOHIM” “GOD” NOT LEADER.
How about 1 John 4:8?
What God is Love?Hi Dennison
Exactly. Genesis :1:1 until God revealed his name YHVH and afterwards proves that “Elohim” identifies the “One True God”. Not to mention the thousands of examples where the saints like David called on or worshipped “God” “Elohim” without using his name YHVH.
Mike has to create these straw man arguments to make it fit his theology.
He outright makes himself greater than “Strongs, the NET, AT Robertoson and litterally thousands of experts.
“Hey Mike, do you have any support anywhere for your claim that “Theos and Elohim” only means “ruler or leader”?
WJ
Marty wrote:
Quote You also have no evidence that God is a Tri-une God, and as you said those who were disciples of Moses were baptized unto him in the red sea, and we who are disciples of the Lord Jesus are baptized unto him having confessed him as our Lord.
Marty,If I have no evidence that God is Tri-une, then why are YOU praying for God to cause the “genuine” manuscript of Matthew 28:19 to be discovered? Come on man!
Again, the “baptizing” in Matthew 28:19 was not a reference to baptism by water. Neither was it a reference to baptism “in the authority of.” It was a baptism UNTO the Tri-une God.
Quote The phrase does not mean, here, by the authority of….To be baptized unto anyone is publically to receive him as a religious teacher or lawgiver; to receive his system of religion Barne's Notes on Matthew, p, 323
Jesus taught His disciples to “baptize” their followers UNTO the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. This kind of “baptism” is not performed not by the appplication of water but by instruction in the Tri-une God.
Therefore, you are disobedient Marty because you instruct people contrary to this. The baptism that was in the name of Jesus alone was water baptism.
Marty:
Quote And as Jesus told us in the following scripture he was ascending to his Father and our Father and to his God and our God. John 20:17Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.
That's it Marty. Just continue on with your selective use of the scriptures. Jesus did not deny He was not God did He? Note the confession of Thomas shortly afterwards and then note Christ's reply:Quote 28 And Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!”
29 Jesus said to him, “Thomas,[a] because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”
If Jesus' statement in verse 17 was a denial of His divinity, then why didn't He correct Thomas when he said to Him, “My Lord and my God.” Jesus did not correct Thomas but rather affirmed his belief in what he said. And then added that others who say the same thing are “blessed.”In other words, you are not “blessed” Marty. But you can be blessed if you repent and I hope you will.
Jack
Quote (Istari @ Jan. 17 2011,18:50) Nonetheless, JustAskin has shown this small point of Scripture to be Trinity-false through his debate with WJ. WJ could give no answer when asked: What is the name of the Father? And, What is the name of the Holy Spirit?
Ha Ha JAAnd you could not give an answer to the exact pronuciation of the name “YHVH”. Check and see…The Debate
You cannot give me a single scripture where the Apostles call YHVH by that name.
So once again the text reveals that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit share a single name. I don't know what that name is no more than you know the name of YHVH. That is why we have “One name” under heaven wherby we are saved.
The problem you have is the text says the 3 (Trinity) share the name. I believe the text but as you can see in the debate you started to deny the text as being a valid text.
You lose JA if you claim the text is corrupt. You lose JA if you do not believe the text teaches there are 3 (Trinity).
WJ
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 17 2011,22:14) D, NETNotes also list “third member of the co-eternal, co-equal triune Godhead” as a “DEFINITION” of the Greek word “pneuma”. Do you think that is a real “DEFINITION” of the word “spirit”?
YepMatt 28:19 -Acts 5:3, 4 – Acts 20:28 shows they are equal.
WJ
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 19 2011,03:11) Quote (Istari @ Jan. 17 2011,18:50) Nonetheless, JustAskin has shown this small point of Scripture to be Trinity-false through his debate with WJ. WJ could give no answer when asked: What is the name of the Father? And, What is the name of the Holy Spirit?
Ha Ha JAAnd you could not give an answer to the exact pronuciation of the name “YHVH”. Check and see…The Debate
You cannot give me a single scripture where the Apostles call YHVH by that name.
So once again the text reveals that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit share a single name. I don't know what that name is no more than you know the name of YHVH. That is why we have “One name” under heaven wherby we are saved.
The problem you have is the text says the 3 (Trinity) share the name. I believe the text but as you can see in the debate you started to deny the text as being a valid text.
You lose JA if you claim the text is corrupt. You lose JA if you do not believe the text teaches there are 3 (Trinity).
WJ
Keith,JA cannot be taken seriously on anything he says.
Jack
Hi All
The following is part of a recent post by Francis to Mike and is excellent in revealing the definition of “Elohim” which is not merely “leader or judge” as Mike claims. Mike has no resource to back up his claims that I know of
[start quote taken from here] “Hello Mike…
you are at times very confusing and hard to follow. For example:
1)… you keep saying that “elohim” MEANS “judge/leader/ruler”, but that it sometimes REFERS to God and Jesus and others.
But in the thread: Forum » BELIEVERS PLACE » Member Profiles » Mikeboll64 vs francis, on Page 62, in a post to Dennison, you wrote the following:
Quote And “elohim” means: 'elohiym
1) (plural)
1a) rulers, judges
1b) divine ones
1c) angels
1d) gods
2) (plural intensive – singular meaning)
2a) god, goddess
2b) godlike one
2c) works or special possessions of God
2d) the (true) God
2e) GodKnow of what you speak, young Dennison. “God” with a capital “G” is only two of the nine definitions given for the word above. And even then, it still simply means “ruler” or “judge”. It was used of humans, angels, Jesus, and the Omniscient Being Who Created All.
Now if that is not confusing… or seemingly contradictory, then I don't what is.
On the one hand you say that “elohim” means judge/leader/ruler… but that it DOES NOT mean God or the true God… that it only sometimes refers to God and Jesus and others. And yet, above, you say that “elohim” means the true God (2d above) and God (2e above). Look at the first line in the above quote from you. YOU SAID: “And “elohim” means”. You then proceeded to list all the possible definitions or words that “elohim” means, including God and the true God.
This is a clear contradiction and a cause for confusion.
2)… In the above quote, you said that “God” with a capital “G” is only two of the nine definitions given for the word above… and yet in the same breath you said: And even then, it still simply means “ruler” or “judge”
Well Mike, what is the difference between “definitions” and “means”? There is none that I'm aware of. So when you say that God is one of the nine DEFINITIONS for the word “elohim”… you can't then turn around and then say in the next breath that even then, it STILL SIMPLY MEANS “ruler” or “judge”.
This is a clear contradiction and a cause for confusion. Why? because defnitions = means…. and… means=definitions.
You even admit that “definitions = means” when you wrote the following to me:
Quote Francis, I want you to take note of the very first definition of the word. This is what the word meant. It meant “judge(s)” or “ruler(s)”… I will repeat it, but this time I will underline the relevant words:
Francis, I want you to take note of the very first definition of the word. This is what the word meant. It meant “judge(s)” or “ruler(s)”…
Can you see that?
Bottom line is that the word “elohim” not only means leader/judge/ruler… but it also can mean.. and it is also defined as God and the true God.
3)… To Dennison you made this remark:
Quote So I reject “God” as a DEFINITION of the word “elohim”. It is not the case. On the one hand you say you REJECT God as a definition of the word “elohim”… but you also say to Dennision: “God” with a capital “G” is only two of the nine definitions given for the word above (elohim).
This is a clear contradiction and a cause for confusion. Why? Because in one statement to Dennison, you reject the definition on the one hand, but you also accept the definition in another statement to Dennison.
You keep contradicting yourself, and then you have the incredible gall to turn around and say to Dennison: “Know of what you speak, young Dennison”.
What does it say in the Bible about pride? Pride goes before the fall? Or is it this: Professing themselves to be wise, they become fools. I am NOT calling you a fool. Not at all. But you are making some very contradictory and confusing statements, and so I would gently encourage you to “know of what you speak” before you tell others to do so. That's my humble opinion anyway.
4)… You made the following statements:
Quote Because the SCRIPTURAL FACT is: Being called by the word “elohim” did NOT mean that one was God Almighty. And many scriptures bear this out. And if the part I bolded is correct, (which it IS), then calling Jesus by this title does not, IN AND OF ITSELF, teach us that Jesus is God Almighty. AND…………….if the part I bolded is correct, (which it IS), then the word “elohim” does not MEAN God Almighty. If it did, then anyone who was ever called by that word would BE God Almighty. CAN YOU GRASP THIS?
Quote If you can't understand that the word “elohim” many times REFERRED TO God Almighty, but never began to actually MEAN “God Almighty”, then what else could I say anyway? Quote Does “elohim” actually MEAN “God Almighty”? No, because others who were NOT God Almighty were called by it. So does it mean that Jesus is God Almighty when HE is called by it? No, because others who were NOT God Almighty were called by it. And yet you will say: “elohim” means judge/leader/ruler… but that it DOES NOT mean God or the true God… that it only sometimes refers to God and Jesus and others.
Well Mike, can't the same objection above also be applied to “ruler/judge/leader”?
For example, I can call you elohim, but that doesn't MEAN you are a leader or a ruler… even though I refer to you as a leader or a ruler.
So how do you know when the word “elohim” should be applied or should refer to a person as MEANING that they are a leader?
In other words… how do you know that “elohim” (leader) is being applied correctly in the first place? Aren't you just ASSUMING that “elohim” (leader) is being applied correctly to a person when you see it in the Bible? I mean, if I can call you elohim (leader), and be wrong, then how do you know that it is being applied correctly in the Bible?
I mean, look at what you wrote and see the arguments that have been going round and round in here…
Above your wrote this: Because the SCRIPTURAL FACT is: Being called by the word “elohim” did NOT mean that one was God Almighty.
Well, in the same way, it is also a scriptural fact that being called by the wo
rd “God” does not MEAN that one was “God”. And therefore, just because someone is being called leader (elohim), it also does not MEAN that one is a leader (elohim). Because they in fact may not be a leader (elohim). Just as there are false gods, so there are false leaders.So… tossing your own question back at you, I will ask: CAN YOU GRASP THIS?
5)… You wrote this:
Quote And THAT'S how they should have done “elohim”. It is a TITLE that MEANS “judge/leader/ruler”, that sometimes REFERS TO God and Jesus and others. I think this is a VERY, VERY telling and revealing remark about your bias. Even maybe arrogance on your part? You will use NETNotes when it suits you, but you will then turn around and reject or ignore or say that NETNotes are wrong, when you don't like what NETNotes says.
Well, if this is okay in your eyes, then how could you even DARE say that I can't do the same thing as you and say that I will reject what you say, and use only those translations that I agree with? If I used that approach, I'm only doing what you are doing with NETNotes, and so therefore you can't object if I do what you do.
You see, you've put yourself on the horns of a dilemma.
6)… You wrote:
Quote The elohim mentioned in Hebrews 1:8 HAS AN ELOHIM, so he can't very well be El Elyon (El Most High), can he? He can if God the Father and God the Son are ONE God. And He certainly can, if as I believe, that the Trinity is true.
So this shows how our beliefs will often color our understanding of a verse we are examining.
7)… You wrote this:
Quote And THAT'S how they should have done “elohim”. It is a TITLE that MEANS “judge/leader/ruler”, that sometimes REFERS TO God and Jesus and others. It's not in NETNotes, so where does it say that “elohim” is a title that ONLY MEANS “judge/leader/ruler”… and never God, but that “elohim” ONLY REFERS to God and Jesus and others?
8)… You wrote this:
Quote Francis had made the claim that Jesus must be “God” because “elohim” was applied to him in Hebrews 1:8. And we all now know that having the word “elohim” applied to you does NOT make you God. No one is suggestting that the word “elohim” MAKES a person God… or even MAKES a person a leader or a judge for that matter. How can a word MAKE someone? Words are just symbols and cannot MAKE someone into something. They are used by humans as identification or as an adjective to DESCRIBE something. But words do not MAKE anything.
9)… Here is another example from you…
Quote We know from scripture that having the word “elohim” applied to you does NOT necessarily mean you are God Almighty. We know the same thing from Strong's definition of “elohim”. And that's really all there is to it. If the word elohim applied to you does NOT necessarily mean you are God Almighty, then that means the opposite of that is equally true… which is that if the word elohim is applied to you, it CAN mean you are God Almighty… its just that it does not necessarily mean you are.
That is how I understand the English language as I speak it and use it.
10)… Here is another example from you…
Quote Bottom line: When that word is applied to Jesus Christ, while it COULD be implying that Jesus is God Almighty, it surely doesn't HAVE to be implying that. If what you say is true, then the reverse is also true. Namely that when elohim is applied to Jesus Christ, it surely doesn't have to be implying that He is God Almighty, but it COULD be implying that He is.
11)… Here is another example from you…
Quote So anyone who ever claims Jesus is God Almighty based ONLY on the fact that he has been called by the title “god” is mistaken and speaking unscripturally. Doesn't this statement of yours open the possibility and chance that Jesus can be God Almighty when He is called by the word elohim… as long as it is not the ONLY thing the claim is based on?
Think about it Mike. Above, elohim can mean “god” and God. So if elohim is applied to Jesus, then because of the list of definitions you gave, the claim can be made that Jesus is God Almighty… if I supply other evidences to go along with the word elohim. Isn't that what you just said above? If not, then this only shows that we are having a major communication problem.
12)… Here is another example from you….
In the thread: Forum » BELIEVERS PLACE » Member Profiles » Mikeboll64 vs francis on page 88, at Jan. 16 2011 at 01:56, you made this comment:
Quote NO. “Elohim” is DEFINED as “judge” or “ruler” or “leader”. But above, you gave more definitions than just these 3. You also said that elohim can be defined as God… and as the true God.
See the confusion?
13)… Here is another example from the same post above…
Quote It is the same with “elohim”. The word “elohim” in and of itself means “ruler”, not “God Almighty”. But above you supplied other definitions or other words that elohim can “in and of itself” MEAN something other than just ruler. And one of them is God… and/or the true God.
See the confusion?
14)… Here is another example from you to Keith…
Quote It wouldn't matter if it only referred to a human being once, Keith. The fact is that “elohim” does NOT literally MEAN “God”……..and you KNOW that fact. The facts that we do know is that according to you and NETNotes (as your above statements show us), “elohim” can literally mean God.
15)… Here is another example which really confused me to heck…
Quote The word CAN be used in referrence to God Almighty, and has been many times in scripture, but the word itself does not MEAN “God Almighty” and was also used as a title for others who were NOT God Almighty. Therefore, CAN it refer to God Almighty? Of course. CAN it also refer to those who AREN'T God Almighty? Of course. So does the word itself MEAN “God Almighty”? Not a chance.
Let me try and explain why I find this comment of yours very confusing.
Isn't it true that I can refer to you as “leader”(elohim) when you are not a leader (elohim)… and I can also refer the word “leader” (elohim) to those who ARE leaders (elohim)? Of course I can. So does the word itself MEAN leader? Yes.
It's the same way about God. In the above quotes I've listed so far, you and NETNotes have both said that elohim can MEAN and be DEFINED as God. So while it is true that just because we can call someone God (elohim)… or call someone Leader (elohim)… or call someone god (elohim)… or call someone angels (elohim)… or call someone goddess (elohim)… or call someone a divine one (elohim)… or call someone godlike… it doesn't MEAN that they are.
How do we know if we are correct in calling someone God or leader or god or goddess or angel, etc? By context only.” [end quote taken from here]
Excellent post and very well put Francis.
It also should be stated that more confusion is caused by statements like these by Mike…
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 05 2011,18:35) Jesus is the god, or “powerful ruler” of all in heaven right now, and of the believer's on earth. Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 06 2011,17:00) And I don't know of a scripture that calls Jesus “the true god”, but I agree that he is. Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 08 2011,14:05) Jesus is one who has been called by the title “god”, so he is also “A god”. He has not specifically been called “THE god” of anything in particular, but knowing that “god” only means “ruler”, I can honestly say that he is “my god”. Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 08 2011,14:49) No Keith, it is YOU who has “lost the debate” by insisting “only true God” must be taken literally. So it stands to reason that if he uses “god” with a little [g] for Jesus then he is sayng that God with a big [G] defines the “One True God”.
Blessings Keith
Quote (shimmer @ Jan. 18 2011,15:56) Sorry about calling you clanging cymbals etc WJ. I didnt really mean it.
Hey ShimmerI hardly remember it. Appology accepted.
In his Love Keith
Hi Jack:
You say:
Quote If I have no evidence that God is Tri-une, then why are YOU praying for God to cause the “genuine” manuscript of Matthew 28:19 to be discovered? Come on man! Because you are teaching this doctrine without evidence, and I am praying that if there is a manuscript that will show without a shadow of a doubt that the Tri-une formula for baptism in Matthew 28:19 is not what Jesus said at all, but is a fabrication of your fellow trinitarians. As I said, I know that this not what Jesus said because the Holy Spirit is not a “Third Person”, and also, the YLT shows the Tri-une formula in parenthesis.
Yes, Jack, he denied that he was God by saying that he was ascending to his God and my God.
And so, because Jesus did not correct Thomas, when he in amazement said “My Lord and my God”, you are saying that Jesus was wrong when he was ascending to his God and my God?
Notice how John the author of the gospel of John finishes these scriptures to which you refer:
Quote John 20:28And Thomas answered and said unto him, My LORD and my God. 29Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.
30And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:
31But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.
See Jack, he said that these scriptures were written that you might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you might have life through his name. He did not say that they were written so that you would believe that Jesus was God.
Study, Jack, to show yourself approved unto God, rightly dividing the Word of Truth. A good place to start is to acknowledge that there “Only One God”, and that there is “One mediator between men and God, “the man”, Christ, Jesus.
You cannot teach others until you are first taught yourself otherwise you will mislead them by your misunderstanding of the Word of God.
Love in Christ,
MartyWJ,
How is Jesus co-eternal except after he was raised from the dead.If Jesus was dead then he cannot be eternal from before he was risen.
If, as I suspect you will say, Jesus didn't die, then you deny Scriptures.Jesus is certainly Eternal from his rising. But he certainly wasn't eternal when he was dead.
Please resolve this anomaly in your views.
Jesus: he who was, then was not, but now is FOR EVER MORE!
WJ,
what is the name of the Father? (p.s. I'm not asking you to pronounce it, just write it)
What is the name of the Son?
What is the name of the Holy Spirit?Quote (Istari @ Jan. 19 2011,09:08) Jack,
Who is the mediator between Man and God?What is his name?
Istari,I went over this a zillion times last year. In the Hebrew culture the mediator was from both parties. I have given the example of the dispute between Jacob and Laban. The dispute was mediated by representatives from both parties, that is, the brothers of both Jacob and Laban (Genesis 31). Each man had a representative of his own. So Jesus is God's representative and our representative in one person.
Our mediator is both God and man. Think like a Hebrew man!
KJ
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
