The…[Read more]

Show us specifically what the author wrote within the book that is a lie and then show us why it is a lie.

You wrote:

All know it is satan spoken of at 2 Cor 4:4

The fact that you just wrote that should show the general reader that you are not concerned with being truthful. I just showed you a book that says

I moved your post to here for continuity purposes. You said:

“satan does not have the article, it happens The is the first word of the paragraph.”

I assume you are referring to 2 Cor 4:4. I’m not sure what you are saying there? Are you aware that there is the article with the first theos in that verse or are you not aware?

2Cor 4:4 I…[Read more]

This discussion has circled around one repeated claim: that Jesus cannot be the Messiah because “the Messiah must have a biological father from Solomon’s line.” The problem is that this requirement is not found anywhere in the Tanakh. It is an assumption being treated as a divine rule.

Here are the key points that have…[Read more]

You keep insisting that the Messiah must have a human biological father because “that’s how lineage works in the Tanakh.” But the Tanakh itself gives you a direct counterexample that destroys your argument: Eve.

Eve is fully human.
Eve has no biological father.
Eve has no biological mother.
Eve’s existence comes directly from Go…[Read more]

You keep saying “Prove Jesus is the Messiah” and then narrowing that demand to one point: “He has no biological father, therefore his lineage cannot be traced, therefore he cannot be the Messiah.” That is not a Tanakh argument; it is your assumption about how God must work.

Let’s separate two issues:

1) What the Tanakh actually…[Read more]

You’re stacking assumptions and then calling them “Tanakh.” Let’s untangle them.

1. “Zera means biological only.”

You say “zera” means biological only. But “zera” (seed) in the Tanakh is used both for physical descendants and for promised lines where God Himself guarantees the continuation. The promise to Abraham’s “zera” is…[Read more]

Jesus did not have a biological father.
Jesus’ tribal lineage is traced the same way the Tanakh traces tribal lineage in multiple cases: – biologically through Mary (David → Nathan → Mary → Jesus) – legally through Joseph (David → Solomon → Joseph → Jesus) – divinely through God’s appointment (Psalm 2; Psalm 110)

You are now agreeing with the textual points but shifting everything back to one question: “Is Jesus the true Messiah?” That is fine, but you are skipping the necessary step that comes before that. Hebrews 1 is not trying to prove Jesus is the Messiah by quoting the Tanakh. Hebrews 1 is explaining who the Son is, assuming the mes…[Read more]

You keep trying to change the subject from the actual question.

You asked:
“Does Hebrews chapter one claim all that is quoted from the Tanakh is applied to Jesus or not?”

Answer: Yes, Hebrews 1 applies those passages to the Son. That is explicit in the text.

Hebrews 1:1–2: God spoke through the prophets, but now has spoken in Hi…[Read more]

James 1:5 tells us that if we lack wisdom, we should ask God. With that in mind, would you be willing to sincerely ask God the Father whether His Son, Jesus, ever began to exist, or whether the Son has always existed in some manner? I am not asking you to accept my view—only to ask the Father directly and be open to whatever He shows you.

You still haven’t engaged the actual evidence.
You’re reacting to translations and modern opinions, not to the manuscripts, not to the pre‑Christian Jewish sources, and not to the logic of Hebrews itself.

Let’s go point by point.

————————————————————
1. SEPTUAG…[Read more]

You said this

“So The true God=Jehovah gave Jesus(Word) authority. If Jesus were God he would already have had the authority.”

If within the unity of Jehovah there is one God and one Lord who are a father and son, then one can expect that the son would be perfectly under the authority of the father if it were a perfect father/son rel…[Read more]

Do you have a response?

“You missed that theos in 2 Corinthians 4:4 does have the article — but the presence or absence of the article never determines whether theos refers to the true God or a false god. Greek doesn’t work that way. The article marks specificity, not deity.”

You didn’t address anything I wrote.
You simply repeated your conclusion: “Hebrews isn’t about Jesus.”
But you didn’t engage a single textual point.

Let’s be clear about what actually happened in your reply:

1. You did not answer the Septuagint issue.
Every “corruption” you claimed was shown to be the LXX wording — the Jewish Sc…[Read more]

Your entire critique rests on a single assumption that is historically false:

You are comparing Hebrews to the medieval Masoretic Text (MT), finalized around 900–1000 AD.
Hebrews is quoting the Septuagint (LXX), the Jewish Scriptures used in the first century.
Every “corruption” you think you see is simply the LXX wording, not a Chr…[Read more]

In Psalm 102, the thing that “will be rolled up like a garment” is the created order itself—the heavens and the earth. Psalm 102:25–26 says that the heavens are the work of God’s hands, and that they “will perish,” and “will all wear out like a garment.”

The one who rolls them up (or “changes them like a robe”) is God—YHWH—the same…[Read more]

YHWH the Father of Jesus identified the Son as the YHWH as well in Hebrews 1:10-12.

Heaven and earth will be someday rolled up like a garment by the Son.

YHWH is both God and Lord

More from Origen:

1. Psalm 102 → Hebrews 1:10–12 applied to the Son
Source: Contra Celsum 1.67
“In speaking of the Son he says: ‘Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth…’”

2. Psalm 102 → The Son as Creator
Source: De Principiis 1.2.2
“The Son… is said in the Epistle to the Hebrews to have laid the found…[Read more]

The theos of John 1:1b identifies the theos of John 1:1c as the YHWH who laid the foundation of the world and the heavens were the work of His hands and not only that but that as YHWH, this theos who is the Son, will at a future time, fold them up like a garment and they will be changed in Hebrews 1:10-12.

Amazing!

The theos of John 1:1b identifies the theos of John 1:1c as the YHWH who laid the foundation of the world and the heavens were the work of His hands and not only that but that as YHWH, this theos who is the Son, will at a future time, fold them up like a garment and they will be changed in Hebrews 1:10-12.

Amazing!

Are you claiming that Jesus — the theos who now has all authority in heaven and on earth — is a false god?

Which “theos” was given all authority in heaven and on earth after the resurrection of Christ?

Thank you — you said the “You” in both Psalm 102 and Hebrews 1:10 is Jehovah.

So according to your own answer:

– The “You” in Psalm 102 = Jehovah
– The “You” in Hebrews 1:10 = Jehovah
– Hebrews 1:10 is spoken to the Son

Therefore the Father identifies the Son as Jehovah.

This is exactly the point I’ve been asking you to consider.

What…[Read more]

You are bringing up John 1:1 and 2 Corinthians 4:4, but those points don’t answer the specific question I asked you. That’s a discussion for another time.

Let’s stay with the passage I quoted, because it is the Father speaking, and the wording is identical to Psalm 102.

Hebrews 1:8 says clearly: “But about the Son He says…”…[Read more]

How do you define “Christians?”

Jehovah the Father—the One speaking to David’s Lord in Psalm 110:1—identifies His Son in Hebrews 1 with the Jehovah described in Psalm 102.

Psalm 110:1 shows Jehovah (the Father) speaking to someone distinct: “my Lord.”

Psalm 102 describes Jehovah as the eternal, unchanging Creator of heaven and earth.

H…[Read more]

One of my sons lives in NY also. I’m in TN, in the Bible Belt of America. 🙂

So you have been a JW basically all your life. Do JW’s say that they are Christians? Do you know where in the Bible it is written where God the Father identifies Jesus as Jehovah?

Amen, Jesus is the Messiah! I set up a one-on-one discussion with you to discuss and share our beliefs. I’m not a JW but always like to discuss the distinctions. If interested, go to the discussion here: https://heavennet.net/forums/topic/lightenup-keith-discussion/#post-948050

Hope to see you there,

Lightenup (LU)

Hoping to discuss your JW beliefs here.

Hi there, I’ve noticed your comments in the forum, especially the ones where you explain how you understand Scripture from a Jehovah’s Witness perspective. If you’re open to it, I’d like to have a one‑on‑one discussion with you — not an argument, but a focused conversation where we can each explain our beliefs directly and clearly.

I’m…[Read more]

The Tanakh presents a consistent pattern for God’s chosen figures: suffering or rejection first, followed by vindication and restoration. This pattern appears in Joseph, Moses, David, the Servant in Isaiah, and the pierced…[Read more]

Below is a simple comparison of what the Tanakh says the Messiah must do, and how Jesus either fulfilled it already or is said to fulfill it in the future. This avoids going in circles and keeps everything text‑anchored.

Messianic Expectation (Tanakh) / Jesus in NT / Messianic Age Fulfillment

Born from David (Jer 23:5; 2 Sam 7…[Read more]

You’ve made it very clear who you believe the Messiah is *not*.
So let me ask the obvious question you’ve avoided:

Who do you believe the Messiah is?

Not “what the Messiah will do.”
Not “why Jesus isn’t the Messiah.”
Not “what Christianity gets wrong.”
I’m asking for a name.

According to your own reading of the Tanakh:

• Who is t…[Read more]

1. ISAIAH 53
If the servant is Israel, then explain why the servant is righteous (53:11) when Israel is repeatedly called sinful (Isa 1:4; 48:8). Explain why the servant suffers for the sins of others (53:5–6) when Israel suffers for its own sins (Isa 40:2). Explain why the servant dies (53:8–9) when Israel never dies. Explain why…[Read more]

Calling Proverbs 8 “just poetry” doesn’t erase what the text actually says. Hebrew poetry uses personification to reveal truth, not to hide it. And the truth in Proverbs 8 is that Wisdom is portrayed as a real, pre‑creation figure distinct from God in role and relationship.

If Wisdom “is God,” then explain why the text says:
– “YH…[Read more]

You’re demanding that the Messiah fulfill every *end‑time* prophecy in His first appearance, but the Tanakh never says that. Not once. You invented that rule.

The Tanakh’s actual pattern is always the same:
first suffering/rejection,
then exaltation,
then worldwide restoration.

This is Joseph, Moses, David, the Servant in Isaia…[Read more]

You asked: “Can you show me anywhere in the Tanakh where the Messiah was going to die for the sins of mankind?”

Yes. The Tanakh teaches this in multiple passages.

1. Isaiah 53
The Servant dies as a substitutionary sacrifice:
• “He was pierced for our transgressions” (53:5)
• “The LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all” (53:6…[Read more]

Regarding point 5:

You said that wisdom in Proverbs 8 is just a characteristic with human-like qualities, and definitely not a reference to Jesus. But the problem is that Proverbs 8 does not describe a characteristic. It describes a pre-existent, active, relational person.

1. Proverbs 8 uses verbs of personal agency:
Wisdom calls,…[Read more]

Regarding the dynasty concern:

SUMMARY: JESUS AND SOLOMON’S DYNASTY

Jesus did NOT come from Solomon’s dynasty biologically, but He DID come from Solomon’s dynasty legally. This distinction is essential for understanding how the Messiah fulfills both the biological and royal requirements of the Davidic covenant.

1. Biological Desce…[Read more]

1. “Battle of translations”? No — the issue is the Hebrew text itself.
Your Jewish translation is translating the same Hebrew verbs:
• קָנָנִי (qanani) — Qal perfect of קָנָה
• חוֹלָלְתִּי (cholalti) — Pual perfect of חוּל
The de…[Read more]

See Proverbs 8:24-25 and look at the parallel Bibles to see that the word “born” or “brought forth” is in nearly all of the versions. There you will see the evidence.

ACTIONS OF WISDOM IN PROVERBS 8 — FULL CHAPTER (NASB)

────────────────────────────────────────
PART 1 — PROVERBS 8:1–21
────────────────────────────────────────

1. Calls out publicly (v.1)
2. Takes her stand in prominent places (v.2)
3. Cries aloud at the city gates (v.3)
4. Calls to all humanity (v.4)
5. Commands the simple to…[Read more]

Proverbs 8:1 begins with the narrator of the chapter who quotes the person referred to as wisdom.

The Son was born/begotten before the creation of the depths and mountains. A birth is not a beginning of existence, a birth requires that which is born to have existed so that he could be born. The Son existed eternally within the…[Read more]

There is much more than the word “craftsman” that shows wisdom is referring to a person who was with God before creation.
The Tanakh itself uses these words to show that:

• “I was born” — Proverbs 8:24
• “I was born” — Proverbs 8:25
• “From everlasting I was established” — Proverbs 8:23
• “When He established the heavens, I was…[Read more]

My claim is not that Philo, Sirach, or the Targums are “Scripture.” My claim is that ancient Jews before Christianity interpreted Proverbs 8 as describing a real, personal, pre‑existent figure who comes forth…[Read more]

Just to clarify: the idea that Proverbs 8 describes a divine, pre‑existent figure who participates in creation is not a Christian invention. Multiple ancient Jewish sources — long before Christianity — interpreted it that way.

Philo of Alexandria (20 BC–AD 50), a Jewish philosopher, explicitly identified the figure in Proverb…[Read more]

I mentioned the part of the chapter that was dealing with the topic of creation because that is what we were discussing.

Also I addressed your point about “wisdom” being feminine to tell you that just because Hebrew words have a gender for their grammatical construction doesn’t really mean anything significant when the noun is inani…[Read more]