From ON THE LIFE OF MOSES, II

(102) The candlestick was placed on the southern side of the tabernacle, since by it the maker intimates, in a figurative manner, the motions of the stars which give light; for the sun, and the moon, and the rest of the stars, being all at a great distance from the northern parts of the universe, make all their…

[Read more]

More…The Special Laws I

(81) For if it was necessary to examine the mortal body of the priest that it ought not be imperfect through any misfortune, much more was it necessary to look into his immortal soul, which they say is fashioned in the form of the living God. Now the image of God is the Word, by which all the world was made.

Compare

Jhn 1:1…

[Read more]

Phew…from The Special Laws III

(58) Then the law proceeds to say, the priest, having taken an earthen vessel, shall pour forth pure water, having drawn it from a fountain, and shall also bring a lump of clay from the ground of the temple, which also I think has in it a symbolical reference to the search after truth; for the earthenware vessel is…

[Read more]

Heres some more.

Jhn 6:31 “Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, 'HE GAVE THEM BREAD OUT OF HEAVEN TO EAT.' “Jhn 6:32 Jesus then said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread out of heaven, but it is My Father who gives you the true bread out of heaven.Jhn 6:33 “For the…

[Read more]

Thanks charity.

WJ,Did you read the Philo thread? Can you explain why John's Gospel contains many of the same themes as Philo's writings? I look forward to your answer.Again, Happy Birthday!

Hey, I don't think that Yeshua is Michael .I'll make this quick (its 1 AM where I am!), but the lack of the article is to prevent modalism? What? So “The God” is the Father and “God” Yeshua?C'mon WJ, now you are starting to crack me up. Maybe I'm tired and that just sounds funnier than it is. Let me look at it again when I get some sleep.But I see…[Read more]

Hey, gotta go to bed, and I will reply again soon, but I wanted to take this opportunity to say “Happy Birthday”!Have a great one!

Quote (Not3in1 @ Aug. 03 2007,00:29)Quote (Is 1:18 @ Aug. 03 2007,16:36)That aside, I think that Rev 1:8 most likely refers to Yeshua as in the prior verse He is described as “coming with the clouds”. It seems logical that the one described as coming in one verse would also be the speaker in the next.It does seem logical, but take a look at…[Read more]

One last thing, in relation to Rev 1:8, jump ahead to Revelation 4 for more context.

Rev 4:8 And the four living creatures, each one of them having six wings, are full of eyes around and within; and day and night they do not cease to say, “HOLY, HOLY, HOLY is THE LORD GOD, THE ALMIGHTY, WHO WAS AND WHO IS AND WHO IS TO COME.“Rev 4:9 And when the…

[Read more]

Is 1:18.Please support your view in relation to the “and” at the start of verse 1:5. Lets take the numbers out (the original did not have verse numbers) and look at it.

John to the seven churches that are in Asia: Grace to you and peace, from Him who is and who was and who is to come, and from the seven Spirits who are before His throne, and from…

[Read more]

Quote (Cult Buster @ Aug. 02 2007,22:48)Kejonn. You are still stuck on the following regardles of who you believe is identified as “God” in Rev 1:1. It bears no relevance to and changes nothing of the following.Nope, I'm not stuck because I know who God really is. The Trinity gets stuck on verse 1 because God tells Jesus yet Jesus is supposed to…[Read more]

Quote (Mr. Steve @ Aug. 02 2007,18:30)Are you saying in greek the “ho” means “the” and if the “ho” goes you don't have God but a God? So you need a “ho” to express God, is that correct? I've heard a lot about the “ho” article, but never realized how important the “ho” was to a proper interpretation of John 1:1, and, I suppose wherever else the…[Read more]

Hmmm, seems I made a mistake in my last post. I'm still new to Philo (just started reading today) but the following statement is erroneous:”The creative power is Logos, or the Word. Note that the above says “God” but that is the English translation. No easy way of knowing if this is “theos” or “ho theos”. But there is another reference of on the…[Read more]

Mrs.IM,Yes, scripture is always our first refuge but sometimes it helps to look to other sources to help gain an understanding of obscure passages. John 1 is unique in all of the Bible, so it stands apart and has many people speculating on it. But if you read the work of Philo, much of what was written in the Gospel of John becomes uncannily…[Read more]

CB,Why are you posting again about this? I acknowledged that you answered the question already .

Hey WJ,Check out my various posts about Philo and “ho theos”. Philo of Alexandria developed the Logos theory in relation to God. Either the writer of John's Gospel was influenced by Philo or God both inspired them to use the Logos in relation to an entity that existed with God since the beginning. In any case, Philo's work on Logos preceded John's…[Read more]

Mr. Steve,Sorry to burst your bubble, but Revelation 1:8 is NOT Yeshua. It is God. The KJV uses a manuscript that leaves out “theos” for one thing. But the context is sufficient to overcome this “dilemma”. Check it out.

Rev 1:4 John to the seven churches that are in Asia: Grace to you and peace, from Him who is and who was and who is to come, and…

[Read more]

WJ,Good to have you back.Actually, my post was just saying it could be translated otherwise due to the Greek words being used. But I also said I know of no translation that does not use the masculine pronouns for the HS. Just saying the alternative is there, not necessarily supporting it .The Holy Spirit is the hardest to figure out. It really…[Read more]

Ken,Why do you call the Word scripture? Did the scripture become flesh? I guess you could say so because the scripture predicted his coming. But the Word of God is not the Bible. The Bible is scripture.