- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Hi F4Y,
All of the prophets were sent from God-
Messengers anointed with the Spirit of God.
See the call of Isaiah, an adult man.
Is 6
” 8Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go for us? Then said I, Here am I; send me. “But the Son was a son when he was sent.
And it was he who had had glory with the Father and was returning to heaven from whence he came
[Phil 2.5].Lk 20
” 8And Jesus said unto them, Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things.9Then began he to speak to the people this parable; A certain man planted a vineyard, and let it forth to husbandmen, and went into a far country for a long time.
10And at the season he sent a servant to the husbandmen, that they should give him of the fruit of the vineyard: but the husbandmen beat him, and sent him away empty.
11And again he sent another servant: and they beat him also, and entreated him shamefully, and sent him away empty.
12And again he sent a third: and they wounded him also, and cast him out.
13Then said the lord of the vineyard, What shall I do? I will send my beloved son: it may be they will reverence him when they see him.
14But when the husbandmen saw him, they reasoned among themselves, saying, This is the heir: come, let us kill him, that the inheritance may be ours.
15So they cast him out of the vineyard, and killed him. What therefore shall the lord of the vineyard do unto them?
16He shall come and destroy these husbandmen, and shall give the vineyard to others. And when they heard it, they said, God forbid.”
So Frank, when exactly do you believe the Father begat the Son? Don't you believe that the Son was in the beginning, even before the heavens and the earth? Don't you believe that God spoke all things into existance? Don't you believe that Jesus is the Word? Don't you believe that in the beginning was the Word? Don't you believe that all things came into existance by the Word and through the Word?
Was the earth created by the Son who is the will of the Father? Does not the Father call the Son God? If you do not believe the Son is not the perfect will of the Father and that the Son is the full authority of the Godhead, the full unction of the Holy Spirit, then what do you believe. Have you not read John 1.
John 1 KJV
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
Quote (heiscomingintheclouds @ Sep. 07 2006,02:53) So Frank, when exactly do you believe the Father begat the Son? Don't you believe that the Son was in the beginning, even before the heavens and the earth? Don't you believe that God spoke all things into existance? Don't you believe that Jesus is the Word? Don't you believe that in the beginning was the Word? Don't you believe that all things came into existance by the Word and through the Word? Was the earth created by the Son who is the will of the Father? Does not the Father call the Son God? If you do not believe the Son is not the perfect will of the Father and that the Son is the full authority of the Godhead, the full unction of the Holy Spirit, then what do you believe. Have you not read John 1.
John 1 KJV
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
I believe that Yahshua was begotten through Meriam by Father Yahweh. I believe that Yahshua first came into existence in Meriam's womb.No, I do not believe Father Yahweh's son was in the beginning, even before the heavens and the earth. I believe it was Father Yahweh that is the creator of all things.
No, I do not believe the doctrine “Jesus is the Word.” Yahcahanan [John] 1:1 does not say “… and the word was Jesus.”
No, I do not believe that Father Yahweh called Yahshua “God”.
Did Father Yahweh call His Son “God”?
Many will refer to Hebrews 1:8 in the A.K.J.V. and other versions that translate this passage in like manner and say “Yahweh (“Elohim, Adonai, God”) called Yahshua (“Yeshua, Jesus, Christ, Messiah”) God.” One must understand that translations are just that, translations, and not the original documents penned by the writers. To take it even further, they are not even direct translations of the originals. They are copies (made by scribes [copyist]) and translations of translations and revisions of translations of those copys. Many will build a doctrine out of this one single translation of a passage, and will rely only on this particular translation for their doctrine, ignoring all other translations and footnotes to these translations as to how this particular passage is translated. They also will ignore context of Scripture as a whole that are not in accordance with their “private interpretation”. I have had many a Christian go so far as to tell me “The King James Bible is the original Bible.” Well, if they would just read the title page of the K.J.V., they would soon find that they are wrong. On the title page of the K.J.V. it reads as follows:
“TRANSLATATED OUT OF THE ORIGINAL TONGUES WITH FORMER TRANSLATIONS DELIGENTLY COMPARED AND REVISED”
This passage in Hebrews 1:8-9 is actually a quote from Psalms 45:6-7 . The K.J.V. reads as folows:
“But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.”
Verses five and seven are clear and pain; only verse six, as it reads in the K.J.V.. is ambiguous. However, other versions clearly take away this ambiguity so that verse six agrees with other Scriptures: namely, there there is only One true Mighty One (“Elohim, God, deity”). This one true Mighty One is Yahweh (Deuteronomy 6:4; John 17:3; Ephesians 4:4). Now, let us consult the following versions:
Moffatt Translation
“Your throne shall stand for evermore; for, since your sceptre is a sceptre just, since right you love and evil you abhor, so God, your God, crowns you with blissabove your fellow-kings” (Psalm 45:6-7). This would be Yahweh, Yahshua's Mighty One. Yahshua has not crowned himself. Yahweh will crown him when the time id right (Matthew 25:31; Luke 1:32).
“He says of the Son, God is thy throne for ever and ever, …” (Hebrews 1:8, Moffatt). Someone else is the Mighty One (“Elohim, God, deity”), not Yahshua. Yahshua's throne is Yahweh (“Elohim, God, deity”).
New English Bible
“Your throne is like God's throne, eternal, your royal sceptre a sceptre of righteousness” (Psalm 45:6). Yahshua is not Yahweh (“Elohim, God, deity”). Instead, Yahshua's throne is like Yahweh's (“Elohim's, God's”) throne.
“God is thy throne for ever and ever, …” (Hebrews 1:8, Translator's footnote, N.E.B.).
Good News Bible
“Thy kingdom that God has given you will last forever and ever, …” (Psalm 45:6). In this case, the throne represents the kingdom.
“God is your kingdom …” (Hebrews 1:8, Translator's footnote Good News Bible).
Jewish Publication Society, O.T., 1916
“Thy throne given by God is for ever and ever, …” (Psalm 45:7). Yahshua is not declaired to be Yahweh (“Adonai, Elohim, God, deity”). Instead, Yahweh will give to Yahshua a throne which will last forever (Daniel 7:11-14; Luke 1:32; Revelation 3:21).
Isaac Leeser Translation
“Thy throne, given of God, endureth for ever: the sceptre of equity is the sceptre of thy kingdom. Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: therefore hath God, thy God anointed thee with oil of gladness above thy associates.”
The Bible in Living English
'… but as to the Son “God is your throne forever and ever, and the scepter of integrity is the scepter of his reign”.'
Revised Standard Version
“Your throne is a throne of God, …:” (Psalm 45:6, R.S.V. Translator's footnote). The same notation is given in Hebrew 1:8, where this Scripture is quoted. This is true, because Yahshua is (at this time) sitting with the Father in the Father's throne. (Hebrews 1:3). Later, he will sit on his own throne, just as he now sits with the Father in the Father's throne (Revelation 3:21). A footnote in the New Revised Standard Version reads: 'Or, God is your throne …'. A seperate footnote for the passage “… and the righteous sceptre is the sceptre of your …” (the footnote in reference to “your” reads: 'other ancient authorities read his'.
American Standard Version
“Thy throne is the throne of God” (Margin: Psalm 45:6, A.S.V.).
Heinz W. Cassirer Version, N.T.
“… when referring to the Son he says, It is God who is your throne for ever and ever; and the sceptre showing forth the uprightness which you bear is the sceptre of God's kingdom. You have love righteousness and hated lawlessness. And so it is that God, who is your God, has has anointed you with the oil of gladness, giving you a greater share of it than any of your fellows.
Still quoting:
“Then there are these words: You, Lord [meaning Yahweh, Psalm 102:25], laid the foundations of the earth when it first took its rise, and the heavens are the work of thy hands” (Hebrews 1:8-10; cf. Deuteronomy 4:35-39; Isaiah 43:10, 44:24, 45:12-18).
There is no support here for “two Yahwehs, pre-existent, co-creator” Yahshua. Father Yahweh really is the Creator. He did it all ALONE, with no help (Nehemiah 9:6; Psalm 33:6-9).
For a free list of more than 100 Scriptures revealing who is the Creator. It was not Yahshua. Please ask for it at: http://www.halleluyah.org . Also available by E-MAILING THEM you can freely receive some 70+ studies that refute the pre-existence of Yahshua, trinity, and two Yahwehs doctrines.
End Notes:
Weymouth Version N.T. (Translator's footnote, Hebrew 1:8).
Quote:
“8. O God] Psalm 45 is a Royal Marriage song, and this translation involves the direct address of an earthly king by the title 'God.' The obvious diff
iculty has led to various conjectures:(1) 'Thy throne is the throne of God' (so R.V. margin in the Psalm).
(2) 'Thy throne is God for ever and ever.'
(3) A corrupt Hebrew text, 'Yahweh' (God), being a mistake for the almost identical word meaning 'shall be,' – 'Thy throne shall be for ever and ever,' This conjecture is widely accepted, but the writer of the Epistle [to the Hebrews], in applying these words of the Psalm to the Son, would not feel the difficulty; 'Thy throne, O God' may stand.” (Emphasis added).
Weymouth indicates the word Yahweh (God) does not actually appear in the original text. If this is true, then the word 'O God' should not be in the first clause of Psalm 45:6, but should read as #3 above:
“Thy throne shall be for ever and ever …” This is the way Moffatt reads in Psalm 45:6, noted above. The thought is, once Yahshua sits on his own throne (as heir to the throne of David), his rulership will endure forever. There is no support here for two Yahwehs, or for the pre-existence of Yahshua. It is a mistake to take an ambiuous verse in the King James Version and make it into a doctrine which opposes the cardinal principle of the Scriptures,
“Hear O Isryl: Yahweh our Mighty One is ONE YAHWEH” (Deuteronomy 6:4).
Gesenius Hebrew Grammer (Kautzsch-Cowley), 1949 reprint says, on page 415 paragraph (b): “In Psalm 45:7 chis-a-cha' El-o-him' (usually explained as thy divine throne). El-o-him' is most probably a later addition [another suggestion is to read chEl-o-him' like God('s throne: compare section 141 d, note].”
Please see MY WEB PAGE for more indepth information and studies on these false doctrines and for those who believe as I do.
Did Thomas Call Yahshua “God”?
Here is the entire text from the 'New American Standard Bible' John 20:27-28:
“Then he (Yahshua) said to Thomas, 'Reach here your finger, and see my hands, and reach here your hand, and put it into my side; and be not unbelieving, but believing.' Thomas answered and said to him, 'My Lord and my God!'”
Please observe the mark of exclamation (!) at the end of the phrase. The King James Version does not use an exclamation mark.
Please notice there was no question asked in the entire narration. Hence, the text which reads “Thomas answered” is inaccurate.The last phrase “My Lord and my God!” was not an answer but it was an outburst by Thomas, having seen something inexplicable and baffling. It is not unusual that a man cries out; “O' my God!” when he sees something totally bizarre.
Below are the texts from two reputed versions of the Bible
that support what Thomas said was not an answer to any question.'New English Bible': Thomas said, “My Lord and my God!”
'Phillips Modern English Bible': “My Lord and my God!” cried Thomas.
Study Supportive Passage:
Apostle Yahchanan writes, immediately after the discourse between Yahshua and Thomas; “Many other signs therefore Yahshua also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these have been written that you may believe that Yahshua is the Messiah.”
If Yahchanan had recognized the answer by Thomas to be a testimony for the 'Deity of Jesus', and the observed silence by Jesus to be his acquiesce to such a testimony, then the apostle Yahchanan would have asked us to believe “Yahshua is Yahweh”, instead of “Yahshua is the Messiah” in the above verse.
Quote But the Son was a son when he was sent. Nick,
It is so funny how you use an upper case 'S' in your quote above and a lowercase 's' in your second use of the word son.
Trinity Sminity!
“Trinity (theology), in Christian theology, doctrine that God exist as three persons – Father, Son, and Holy Spirit – who are united in one substance or being. The doctrine is not taught explicitly in the New Testament, where the word God almost invaribly refers to the Father; …”
Encarta Encyclopedia
“Nowhere in the New Testament is a fully formulated doctrine of the Trinity stated.”
Baptist Quarterly
Adult Sunday School Edition
January, Febuary, March
1974, Page 26.“Is there one who fears God, … who would not admit that Paganism alone could ever have inspired such a doctrine as that avowed by the Melchites at the Nicene Council, That the Holy Trinity consists of 'the Father, the Virgin Mary, and the Messiah their Son'?”
The Two Babylons,
by Alexander Hislop
Loizeaux Brothers
Neptune, N.J.
Page 89.“Will anyone after this say that the Roman Catholic Church must still be called Christian, because it holds the doctrine of the Trinity? So did the Pagan Babylonians, so did the Egyptians, so do the Hindoos at this hour, in the very sense that Rome does. They all admit a Trinity, but did they worship the Triune Jehovah, the King Eternal, Immortal, and Invisible?”
Ibid, Page 90.
Igdrasil, or Ygdrasil – “Norse myth. The great tree of the universe, having three roots which embrace and support heaven, hell and earth, destined to live until the world comes to an end.”
Winston Dictionary, 1943 Edition
The Catholic Encyclopedia: “For nowhere in the Old Testament do we find any clear indication of a Third Person. Mention is often made of the Spirit of the Lord, but there is nothing to show that the Spirit was viewed as distinct from Yahweh Himself. The term is always employed to signify God considered in His working, whether in the universe or in the soul of man.”
The Encyclopedia Americana: “Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching.”
A Dictionary of Religious Knowledge: “Many say that the Trinity is a corruption borrowed from the heathen religions, and ingrafted on the Christian faith.”
The Paganism in Our Christianity: “The origin of the Trinity is entirely pagan.”
The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge: “The doctrines of the Logos and the Trinity received their shape from Greek Fathers, who were much influenced, directly or indirectly, by the Platonic philosophy. That errors and corruptions crept into the church from this source cannot be denied.”
The Church of the First Few Centuries: “The Doctrine of the Trinity was of gradual and comparatively late formation. It had its origin in a source entirely foreign from that of the Jewish and Christian Scriptures. It grew up, and was ingrafted on Christianity, through the hands of the Platonizing Fathers.”
Outlines of the History of Dogma: “Church doctrine became rooted in the soil of Hellenism (pagan Greek thought). Thereby it became a mystery to the great majority of Christians.”
The Illustrated Bible Dictionary: “The word Trinity is not found in the Bible…It did not find a place formally in the theology of the church till the 4th century.”
The Encyclopedia of Religion: “Theologians agree that the New Testament does not contain an explicit doctrine of the Trinity.”
The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology: “The New Testament does not contain the developed doctrine of the Trinity.”
The Encyclopedia Americana: “Christianity derived from Judaism, and Judaism was strictly Unitarian [believing that God is one person]. The road that led from Jerusalem to Nicaea was scarcely a straight one. Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching.” –(1956), Vol. XXVII, p. 294L.
The Nouveau Dictionary Universel: “The Platonic Trinity, itself merely a rearrangement of older trinities dating back to earlier peoples, appears to be the rational philosophic trinity of attributes that gave rise to the three hypostases or divine persons taught by the Christian churches…This Greek philosopher’s [Plato, fourth century BCE ] conception of the divine trinity…can be found in all the ancient [pagan] religions.” (Paris,1865-1870), edited by M.Lachatre, Vol. 2, p. 1467.
Dictionary of the Bible by John L. Mckenzie, S.J: “The trinity of persons within the unity of nature is defined in terms of ‘person’ and ‘nature’ which are Greek philosophical terms; actually the terms do not appear in the Bible. The Trinitarian definitions arose out of long controversies in which these terms and others such as ‘essence’ and ‘substance’ were erroneously applied to God by some theologians.” – (New York, 1965), p. 899.
The New Encyclopedia Britannica: “Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: ‘Hear O Israel; YHWH our God is one Lord’ (Deut. 6:4)…The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies…By the end of the 4th century the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since.” -(1976), Micropedia, Vol.X, p. 126.
The New Catholic Encyclopedia: “The formulation ‘one God in three persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formula that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.” –(1967), Vol. XIV, p. 299.
“Long ago – right after the Flood, a man named Nimrod
emerged on the scene of history. His name means
“let us rebel”. He led the founding of the first
great civilization – Babylon…He led them to rebel
against God. He had tremendous power, so much that he
became a god in the eyes of the people. When he died,
his wife, Semiramis, recognized that without him she
might loose power herself, so she devised a clever plan.
Semiramis was pregnant. She told everyone that the child
in her womb was none other than Nimrod being reborn.
This was the beginning of the greatest perversion…
the concept of father/son deity, the very first
incomprehensible divine trinity (the unexplainable mystery)…”
– Resurrection Sunday and
the Babylonian Connection; By Errol Hale“Bel (Lord) was the oldest and mightiest of the gods
of Babylonia, one of the earliest trinities. He was
“Lord of the World. The “doctrine of the Trinity” is
first met northeast of the Indus; and, tracing it to Asia
Minor and Europe, one recognizes it among every people
who had anything like an established religion. It was
taught in the oldest Chaldean, Egyptian, and Mithraic
schools. The Chaldean Sun-god, Mithra, was called “Triple”
and the trinitarian idea of the Chaldeans was a doctrine
of the Akkadians who, themselves, belonged to a race which
was the first to conceive a metaphysical trinity.
According to the archeologist Rawlinson, the Chaldeans
were a tribe of the Akkadians who lived in Babylonia from
earliest times…”
– THEOSOPHY, Vol. 52, No. 6, April, 1964
(Pages 175-182) THE CHALDEAN LEGEND“In ancient days Satan seemed to make Babylon
the capital of his evil operation. From this
headquarters was started false religion.”
-(Revelation Illustrated and Made Plain p. 224).“the Tower of Babel was actually the worship of Satan
in the form of fire, the sun and the serpent. However,
Satan worship could not be done openly because of the
many who still believed in the tru
e God of Noah. So a
mystery religion began at Babel where Satan could be
worshipped in secret.”
– Alexander Hislop, The Two Babylons, 2nd American ed.
(Neptune, New Jersey: Loizeaux Brothers, 1959) 5, 24.)
“The researches of modern writers…..
uniformly regard Babylon… as the cradle
of the ancient Paganism.”
–The Worship of the Dead (London; 1904),
Colonel J. Garnier, pg. 8“Babylon was, at that time,
the center of the civilized world;
and thus Paganism…had opportunities
of sending forth its debased counterfeit
of the truth to all the ends of the earth.”
– Hislop, A., The Two Babylons,
Loiseaux Brothers, Neptune, N.J. pg 99.Unlike early Christianity, which worshipped
the Jewish God, Jehovah – The apostate Church
adopted the Trinity god of Ancient Babylon.“The trinity got its start in Ancient Babylon
with Nimrod – Tammuz – and Semiramis.
Semiramis demanded worship for both her husband
and her son as well as herself. She claimed
that her son, was both the father and the son.
Yes, he was “god the father” and “god the son” –
The first divine incomprehensible trinity.”
–The Two Babylons ; Alexander Hislop; p.51“There were triads of gods…”
-(Babylonian and Assyrian Religion,
Norman, Okla.; 1963, S. H. Hooke, pp. 14-40)Rome Adopts Babylon's Errors
“The doctrine
that Jesus Christ the Son of God
was God the son
was decreed by worldly
and ecclesiastical powers.
Men were forced to accept it
at the point of the sword or else,
Thus, the error of the trinity
was propounded to the end
that ultimately people believed it
to be the truth.
Thus Christianity became in essence
like 'Babylonian' heathenism,
with only a veneer of Christian names.”
— Forgers of the Word -1983 Victor Paul Wierwille“The Babylonian pagan worship of Nimrod,
Semiramis, and the god-incarnate son
extended throughout the entire world
and eventually assumed the name of
Trinitarian Christianity.”
– The Two Babylons, pp. 240-252.Babylon is the source of false religion,
Revelation 17:1-6.“Though the city of Babylon was destroyed,
its religious concepts and customs had spread
around the world. Today’s myriad of false religions
have their origin in ancient Babylon.”
-All Roads Lead to Babylon“Ralph Woodrow, in his book, Babylon Mystery Religion
(first published in 1966, now out of print), clearly
traces the practices and teachings of ancient Babylon,
and their modern counterparts in the Roman Catholic
Church and her Protestant daughters. Babylonian ideas
are by no means isolated to professing Christianity.”
-All Roads Lead to Babylon“Mankind in general, has followed variations of
one kind or another, of the religion of Babylon,
to this day.”
-Ralph Woodrow;
Babylon Mystery Religion; 1966“Rome…assimilated religions from her many
conquered territories. All these religions had
commonalities, for they all came from Babylon.
These practices infiltrated and overcame the
professing Christian Church, which later came to be
dominated by Rome itself.”
-Ralph Woodrow;
Babylon Mystery Religion; 1966“This is the cup which the Babylonish system
has made all the world to drink. It is not limited
to the Roman Catholic Church of Rome, but she certainly
plays a major role in today’s religious deception.”
-Ralph Woodrow;
Babylon Mystery Religion; 1966“The Romish system is based upon a mixture.
The word “Catholic” means Universal…the true
Christian goal is not religion based on mixture,
but a return to the original, simple, powerful, and
spiritual faith that was once delivered to the saints.”
-Ralph Woodrow; pg. 161
Babylon Mystery Religion; 1966The Trinity Doctine
was a “CORRUPTION”
of Early Christianity.the Trinity “is a Corruption
borrowed from the heathen religions,
and “ingrafted ” on the Christian faith.”
-Dictionary of Religious KnowledgeThe Trinity ” When she allowed these
idolatries to be engrafted into her church,
Rome re-established the teachings of Nimrod
(and his Babylonian Trinity) – into the
New Testament Age, and into church dogma.”
-Thunder Ministries
The Origin and Development of the Trinity
according to Trinitarian Scholars“The doctrine of the Trinity was not a teaching
of the original Christians, who were either with Jesus
himself or taught directly by the surviving apostles.
This explains why it is not found in the Bible.
If it was a fundamental, core doctrine of such great
importance, it would have been clearly and unmistakably
stated in scripture. The fact that the vast majority
of professed Christians and church doctrine today
maintain a belief in the Trinity does not prove it is
correct. Rather, it suggests that corruption of
Christian doctrinal truths is widespread and deep.”
-Is Jesus God Almighty? Is the Trinity Scriptural?
By Gordon Coulson“Christianity did not destroy paganism;
it adopted it. . . .
From Egypt came the ideas
of a divine trinity.”
(Historian Will Durant)“The pagan trinities had all the prestige
of a vast antiquity and universal adoption…
The Gentile converts therefore eagerly
accepted the Trinity compromise,
and the Church baptized it.
Now at length we know its origin.”
— John Newton
(Origin of Triads and Trinities)Altering the Bible
to Support The Pagan Trinity“Codex B (Vaticanus)…was altered by a later hand
in MORE THAN two THOUSAND places.
Eusebius, therefore, is not without grounds
for accusing the adherents of…the
newly-risen Doctrine of the Trinity of
FALSIFYING the Bible…”
-(Fraternal Visitor 1924, p. 148;
translated from Christadelphian Monatshefte).`
“We certainly know of a great number of
corruptions brought into the Scriptures
by the Athanasians – relating to
the Doctrine of the Trinity.”
-Sir William Whiston
Second letter to the Bishop of London,
1719, p. 15`
Rewriting the Bible
to Support the Trinity Doctrine:
“Learned men, so called Correctores were,
following the church meeting at Nicea 325 AD,
selected by the church authorities to scrutinize
the sacred texts and rewrite them in order to
correct their meaning in accordance with the views
which the church had just sanctioned.”
-Einfhrung in die Textkritik des
griechischen Testaments: Eberhard Nestle`
“Christianity's doctrine of a “holy Trinity”
is simply NOT true. There is nothing in the
scriptures which even suggests that it is,
except to those who have already been taught
to see it there. The doctrine of the Trinity
is a heathen philosophical intrusion into
the faith of Jesus…”
-The Influence of Trinitarian Doctrine
on Translations of the Bible
by John David Clark, Sr.`
“What I discovered in most of the versions
of the Bible produced by trinitarians
which I studied – is irrefutable proof of
intentional mistranslation of words which
refer to God… Christian trinitarians routinely
and purposely mistranslate Greek pronouns,
so as to promote the doctrine of the holy Trinity.”
-The Influence of Trinitarian Doctrine
on Translations of the Bible
by John David Clark, Sr.`
“It's interesting to see that many of the scriptural
“evidences” said to be in favor of the doctrine
of the Trinity, are…sometimes even outright
forgery. These can often be exposed by even a
cursory glance at an English/Greek interlinear
Bible or a Greek concordance.”
-The Trinity-
A Doctrine Overdue for Extinct
ion; Part 2
“Imperfections in the King James Version”
by Ted Whitten`
“the doctrine of the Trinity…is contrary to
common sense. It is contrary to Scripture.
Its origin is Pagan…”
-J.N. Loughborough, Review and Herald,
XVIII, November 5, 1861, p. 184Trinitarians –
“Any true scholar can surely see that
these men did NOT use the “Entire” word
of God to base their theology upon.
Rather they chose specific passages to
build on their theology, because, influence,
pagan tribute in a Roman Nation filled
with paganism, and governing power was
the mindset of Rome. When she allowed these
idolatries to be “engrafted” into her church,
Rome re-established the teachings of Nimrod
into the New Testament Age, and into church dogma.”
-Thunder Ministries
The Origin and Development of the Trinity
according to Trinitarian Scholars`
“The Papacy has in some of its churches,
an image of the Triune God, with three heads
on one body. The Babylonians had something
of the same. So utterly idolatrous was the Babylonian
recognition of the (Triune) Divine unity, that Jehovah,
the Living God, severely condemned his own people
for giving any countenance to it.”
-Alexander Hislop
The Two Babylons (pp. 16-19).THE TRINITY DOCTRINE
CORRUPTS EARLY CHRISTIANITY“It is apparent to me that the Christian religion
has been corrupted from very early times, and that
these corruptions have been mistaken for essential
parts of it, and have been the cause of rendering
the whole religion incredible.”
-Quoted Stannus,
Origin of Doctrine of Trinity, p. 23.“Platonism…was part of the general Nature worship;
it was attempting to renew Paganism, and was the
recognised and leading tenet in the higher Mysteries.
In early Christianity, the Christ had been this Being
which connected mankind with the Eternal Father.”
-Milman, History of Christianity,
Vol. ii., p. 355.“This Platonic philosophy was adopted by…
all those who in this second century presided
in the schools of the Christians at Alexandria,
Athenagoras, Pantaenus, and Clemens Alexandria…”
-Mosheim,
Fourth Century Ecclesiastical History“This cultivation of pagan philosophy by Christian
teachers greatly displeased those who were attached
to the ancient simple faith, as taught by Christ
and His apostles; for they feared, what afterwards
actually happened, that the purity and excellence of
divine truth would suffer by it.”
-The Translator of Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History,
James Murdock, D.D.,“The solemn dedication of the church of St. Sophia
was celebrated by a prelate who denied the
differences between the Father and the Son.
The whole Christian world was in confusion;
these fatal feuds penetrated almost as far
as the Gospel itself had reached.”
-Milman, History of Christianity,
Vol. ii., p. 447.“the Trinity and the Incarnation have never been
learned from Scripture. Surely the sacred volume
was never intended, and is not adapted to teach
us our creed…From the very first, the rule has been,
as a matter of fact, for the Church to teach the truth,
and then appeal to Scripture in vindication of its
own teaching.”
-Cardinal Newman
Arians of the Fourth Century, pp. 55-56.“Our belief in the Trinity…are in Scripture
nowhere to be found.”
-Richard Hooker
The Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity,
book i., sect. xiv.“…the doctrine of the Trinity…is NOT taught
in the Holy Scriptures. What we profess in our prayers,
we nowhere read in Scripture…There is no such text
in Scripture as this.”
-BISHOP SMALRIDGE
Sermons, No. 33, p. 348.“…the Triple Godhead…
is nowhere taught in Scripture.”
-THE OXFORD DOCTORS
Tracts for the Times, vol. i.,
No. 45; vol. v., No. 85.“This TRINITY doctrine does not…belong
to the fundamental articles of the Christian faith;
as appears from the fact that it is NOT set forth
in any passage of the New Testament; for the only one
in which this is done, the passage relating to the
three that bear record (1 John v.), is undoubtedly
spurious (false, a forged later addition)…the
preaching of Jesus Christ as the Messiah;
and the foundation of His religion is designated by Christ,
as faith in the only true God and also in Jesus Christ
whom God hath sent.”
-Dr. Neander
History of Christian Religion and Church,
vol. ii., p. 286.“If a crooked stick is before you, you need not explain how crooked it is. Lay a straight one down by the side of it, and the work is well done. Preach the truth, and error will stand abashed in its presence.” – Charles H. Spurgeon
Try to imagine the astonished reaction of a Jew (who has his monotheism intact) as he discovers that missionaries use his cherished national creed, “Hear O Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is one” (Hebrew: echad), to prove the doctrine of the Trinity. To the surprise of many, Trinitarians will often use this celebrated verse to support their belief in a triune nature of God. Let’s examine this missionary argument more closely.
To support their claim that there are multiple persons within the godhead, missionaries insist that the Hebrew word echad (one) at the end of Deuteronomy 6:4 does not mean an absolute one, but rather it can only signify a compound unity, or many things in one. They will often cite two verses to support this assertion. The first is Numbers 13:23 reads,
Then they came to the Valley of Eshcol, and there cut down a branch with one (echad) cluster of grapes; they carried it between two of them on a pole. They also brought some of the pomegranates and figs.
The second is Genesis 1:5, which reads,
. . . and there was evening and there was morning, one (echad) day.
From these verses, they contend, it is clear that the Hebrew word echad can only mean a fusion of a number of things into one.
Although this “proof” is as flawed as the doctrine it seeks to support, for those who lack an elementary knowledge of the Hebrew language, this argument can be rather puzzling.
The word echad in the Hebrew language functions in precisely the same manner as the word “one” does in the English language. In the English language it can be said, “these four chairs and the table constitute one dinette set,” or alternatively, “There is one penny in my hand.” Using these two examples, it is easy to see how the English word “one” can mean either many things in one, as in the case of the dinette set, or one alone, as in the case of the penny.
Although the Hebrew word echad functions in the exact same manner, evangelical Christians will never offer biblical examples
where the word echad means “one alone.” Thus, by only presenting scriptural verses such as Genesis 1:5 and Numbers 23:13, it creates the illusion to the novice that the word echad is somehow synonymous with a compound unity. Nothing, of course, could be further from the truth. For example, Deuteronomy 17:6 reads,At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one (echad) witness he shall not be put to death.
or Ecclesiastes 4:8 reads,
There is one (echad) alone, without a companion; yes he has neither son . . . .
In the above two verses the exact same Hebrew word is used, and clearly the word echad is referring to one alone, not a
compound unity.The question that immediately comes to mind is: If the Hebrew word echad can signify either a compound unity or one alone, how can one tell which definition is operative when studying a verse? The answer is: In the exact same way the word “one” is understood in t
he English language, that is, from the context. “Four chairs and a table make up one dinette set” is a compound unity, and “Hear O Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is one” is unsullied monotheism.SOURCE
And you must not call any man on earth your 'Father', for you have only One Father, Who is in heaven (Mattithyah 23:9) .
Hi f4y,
You say
“No, I do not believe the doctrine “Jesus is the Word.” Yahcahanan [John] 1:1 does not say “… and the word was Jesus.”But what it did say about Jesus was in 1 Jn 1 is
” 1That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;
2(For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)
3That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.
4And these things write we unto you, that your joy may be full.
5This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.
6If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:
7But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.”
And in Jn 1
“1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.2The same was in the beginning with God.
3All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
4In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
5And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. ”
and
” 10He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.11He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
12But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
13Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
14And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth”
I believe John
Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ Sep. 07 2006,19:12) Quote But the Son was a son when he was sent. Nick,
It is so funny how you use an upper case 'S' in your quote above and a lowercase 's' in your second use of the word son.
Hi f4y,
I am a son. That is a descriptive term.But you and I are not The Son, the beloved MONOGENES Son of God, the glorious divine Son, a Golden vessel for God.
Him we should respect as he is above the angels.
Heb 1.6
” 6And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.”
and scripture says this about angels
2Peter 2
“10But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities.11Whereas angels, which are greater in power and might, bring not railing accusation against them before the Lord.”
Indeed he is mighty from everlasting.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Sep. 07 2006,21:32) Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ Sep. 07 2006,19:12) Quote But the Son was a son when he was sent. Nick,
It is so funny how you use an upper case 'S' in your quote above and a lowercase 's' in your second use of the word son.
Hi f4y,
I am a son. That is a descriptive term.But you and I are not The Son, the beloved MONOGENES Son of God, the glorious divine Son, a Golden vessel for God.
Him we should respect as he is above the angels.
Heb 1.6
” 6And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.”
and scripture says this about angels
2Peter 2
“10But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities.11Whereas angels, which are greater in power and might, bring not railing accusation against them before the Lord.”
Indeed he is mighty from everlasting.
Note that Yahshua was made lower than the angels.For You hast made him a little lower than the angels, and have crowned him with glory and honour (Psalm 8:5).
But we see Yahshua, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the favor of Yahweh should taste death for every man (Hebrews 2:9).
Note that Yahshua is the “FIRST begotten”.
And again, when He brings in the FIRSTbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of Yahweh worship him.” (Hebrews 1:6)
Since Yahshua is the FIRST begotten, there certainly will be many other begotten sons after him.
This is a prophecy of Yahweh come true and fulfilled and also will be fulfilled in other sons.
Yahweh has fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he has raised up Yahshua, as it is also written in the second psalm, You are my son, this day have I begotten you (Acts 13:33).
Study the following passage in the entire context from which it was taken.
For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of His son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren (Romans 8:29).
If brethern, then they are also begotten sons.
Hi f4y
You say quoting Ps 8
“Note that Yahshua was made lower than the angels.“For You hast made him a little lower than the angels, and have crowned him with glory and honour (Psalm 8:5). “
Remember Heb 1 says
” 4Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. “and Heb 2
“or the son of man that thou visitest him?7Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands:”
note that in these verses and Ps 8 Jesus is referred to as
Son of Man
not
Son of God,because the Son of God, as a son of man, was, like all men, made less than the angels.
But it was only for a short time for him.
Frank, is there anything you believe that is in the Word of God and not in the doctrines of men?
And who is Meriam?
Nick, this guy has you beat. Actually, I think if you add up all the false doctrine on the forum and put it together, it still does not add up to the stuff this mystery man. This guy should be on a show called who's seducing spirit is speaking. Even JW, well, that would be pushing it, so even the catholics are this bad.
Frank, just exactly what planet, religion, denomination are you involed in?
Hi f4y,
You quote
“And again, when He brings in the FIRSTbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of Yahweh worship him.” (Hebrews 1:6)”God is not a midwife so this does not relate to the birth of the Christ but a being whom God has already begotten that He then brings into the World.
Hi f4y
You say
“Since Yahshua is the FIRST begotten, there certainly will be many other begotten sons after him.”Indeed there were and are.
They are shown even before the foundations of the earth were laid.Jb 38
” 4Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.5Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
6Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
7When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? “
And at the time of Job.
Jb 1
” 6Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them”
and
Jb 2
“1Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD.”and early in Genesis, ch 6
” 2That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. “
So the Monogenes Son of God preceded all these.
We know that John 1 says that the Word was God, right?
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Joh 1:2 He was in the beginning with God.
Joh 1:3 All things came into being through Him, and without Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being.
Joh 1:4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.
Joh 1:5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overtake it.
Joh 1:6 There was a man sent from God; his name was John.
Joh 1:7 This one came as a witness, to bear witness concerning the Light, so that all might believe through him.
Joh 1:8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.
Joh 1:9 He was the true Light; He enlightens every man coming into the world.
Joh 1:10 He was in the world, and the world came into being through Him, and the world did not know Him.
Joh 1:11 He came to His own, and His own received Him not.
Joh 1:12 But as many as received Him, He gave to them authority to become the children of God, to those who believe on His name,
Joh 1:13 who were born, not of bloods, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but were born of God.
Joh 1:14 And the Word became flesh, and tabernacled among us. And we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and of truth.We also know that Jesus was made a little lower than the angels.
Heb 2:6 But one testified in a certain place, saying, “What is man, that You are mindful of him; or the son of man, that You visit him?
Heb 2:7 You have made him a little lower than the angels. You crowned him with glory and honor and set him over the works of Your hands.
Heb 2:8 You subjected all things under his feet.” For in subjecting all things to Him, He did not leave anything not subjected to Him. But now we do not see all things having been subjected to him.
Heb 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honor, that He by the grace of God should taste death for all.
Heb 2:10 For it became Him, for whom are all things and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons into glory, to perfect the Captain of their salvation through sufferings.
Heb 2:11 For both He who sanctifies and they who are sanctified are all of One, for which cause He is not ashamed to call them brothers,
Heb 2:12 saying, “I will declare Your name to My brothers; in the midst of the assembly I will sing praise to You.”We also know that God will answer the prayer of His Son.
Joh 17:1 Jesus spoke these words and lifted up His eyes to Heaven and said, Father, the hour has come. Glorify Your Son so that Your Son also may glorify You,
Joh 17:2 even as You have given Him authority over all flesh so that He should give eternal life to all You have given Him.
Joh 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.
Joh 17:4 I have glorified You upon the earth. I have finished the work which You have given Me to do.
Joh 17:5 And now Father, glorify Me with Yourself with the glory which I had with You before the world was.And His former glory was that He was God. The Word was with God, and the Word was God.
As far as the Holy Spirit is concerned, Jesus called Him “He” on several occassions in just one verse. I believe Jesus! Joh 16:13 However, when He, the Spirit of Truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth. For He shall not speak of Himself, but whatever He hears, He shall speak. And He will announce to you things to come.
So God Almighty is God..1
Jesus is God……………..2
The Holy Spirit is God…..3Yet God is One.
Just as we are three, body, soul and spirit, but we are one.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Sep. 08 2006,00:00) Hi f4y,
You quote
“And again, when He brings in the FIRSTbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of Yahweh worship him.” (Hebrews 1:6)”God is not a midwife so this does not relate to the birth of the Christ but a being whom God has already begotten that He then brings into the World.
Hmm! Seems I left a word out in that passage of Scriptures in Hebrews. It should properly read:And when he AGAIN brings in the firstborn into the world he says, And let all the angels of Yahweh worship him (Hebrews 1:6)
In the context of this passage it is speaking of Yahshua being the firstborn (or FIRSTbegotten) from the dead (cf. Colossians 1:8).
And to you foolish Trinitarians and those who believe “Jesus is God” … Hebrews 1:8 should be properly translated as follows:
But to the son He says: The throne of your Father is for ever and ever; a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of your kingdom.
Note that passages 5-8 are prophetic. (cf. Psalm 2:7; 97:7; 104:4 45:6-7; 2 Samuyah 7:14; Deuteronomy 32:43 [LXX Septuagint]).
Note also that the prophetic passage from 2 Samuyah in Hebrews 15:b is in the present tense. He was not yet a son begotten from the dead.
The is no evidence of a pre-existent son here!
And as for the Greek word “MONOGENES” a evidence proving a pre-existent son, there is none!
MONOGENES SMONOGENES!
Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ Sep. 08 2006,17:49) Yeah Oxy, I've herad that stupid doctrine all my life.
And still you won't listen? As I've said before, I know how God favours His Son. I would far rather be accused by the Father for thinking too highly of His beloved Son than thinking too little of Him!Hi oxy,
So you would rather be slightly wrong in your own eyes than very wrong?
I respect your reason as being that you fear God but
Truth is truth Oxy.God wants us to cling to truth and reject error.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Sep. 08 2006,20:43) Hi oxy,
So you would rather be slightly wrong in your own eyes than very wrong?
I respect your reason as being that you fear God but
Truth is truth Oxy.God wants us to cling to truth and reject error.
When I was just a new Christian God opened up the Scriptures to me and I consumed eagerly everything I read in Scripture. I started going to the church that God directed me to. I had come out of a pretty heavy occult background and all I wanted was to be kept from the spiritual realm. I was shocked by what I saw at that church. People prophesied, they laid hands on the sick and prayed for them, people spoke in a strange language that was not their own.I was convinced that they were deceived because they were up to their eyeballs in something spiritual. I raced home after church with the idea that I was going to prove to them from the very Bible that they professed to believe in that they were wrong. As I read the Bible God pointed things out to me saying “See, speaking in tongues, see, prophesying, see, laying hands on the sick”
I accepted what God showed me and continued going to that church. Shortly after I heard a man prophesy in a loud voice. I was filled with awe and thought surely this man has got his place in Heaven if anyone has. Later that day I read in Scripture Mat 7:22 Many will say to Me in that day, Lord! Lord! Did we not prophesy in Your name, and through Your name throw out demons, and through Your name do many wonderful works?
Mat 7:23 And then I will say to them I never knew you! Depart from Me, those working lawlessness!I was shocked. I said “Lord, what is it you want from us?”
His answer made simple sense. A relationship.
God is more interested in having a relationship with us than He is in us having all the t's crossed and i's dotted in Scripture. After all, He is the God of the Scripture, not the other way around.
Hi f4y
You say
“… Hebrews 1:8 should be properly translated as follows:But to the son He says: The throne of your Father is for ever and ever; a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of your kingdom.”
I realise you have found this translation to your liking but why do you say it is the correct one again?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
