@proclaimer

What do you think about these things from Origen:

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 t…[Read more]

@Berean

That’s an interesting story about Garcia. Satan is such a big deceiver. I’m expecting heaven to be completely without deception.
The debates on here are great examples of the evidence of deception. For instance the opposing beliefs regarding the keeping of a seventh day Sabbath. One group meets on Saturday as if it is keeping the Sab…[Read more]

@Keith

Do you realize that you put salvation into the hand of Satan to distribute by believing that Satan keeps many from finding “the road?” If Satan keeps many from finding the road than the leading of humanity to salvation belongs to him. Such power you give him. Is that what you want to teach?? Do you have a Bible verse for this?

john 9: 39T…[Read more]

@Keith

Why Some Titles Are Never Applied to Satan — Before or After the Resurrection

1. Titles Satan IS called before the resurrection:
– “ruler of this world” (John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11)
– “the one who had the power of death” (Heb 2:14)
– “deceiver of the whole world” (Rev 12:9)
– “accuser” with access to heaven (Job 1–2; Zech 3:1–2)
– “rule…[Read more]

@Keith

Patristic Support for Reading “the God of This Age” as Christ (2 Cor 4:4)

Several major patristic voices understood “the god of this age” to refer to Christ, not Satan. Their reasoning is rooted in the flow of 2 Cor 3–4, the Isaiah 6 pattern of divine blinding, and the conviction that Christ blinds by glory.

Cyril of Alexandria — Christ…[Read more]

@Keith

Paul’s argument in 2 Cor 3–4 only stays coherent if “the God of this age” refers to Christ, not Satan.

2 Cor 3:12–15 — God veils hardened hearts.
2 Cor 3:16 — Christ removes the veil when one turns.
2 Cor 3:18 — Believers behold Christ’s glory.
2 Cor 4:1–2 — Paul preaches Christ openly.
2 Cor 4:3 — Some remain veiled.
2 Cor 4:4 — The…[Read more]

@Keith
In the 4 gospels, when Jesus was speaking to a crowd, did everybody who was there and saw Jesus, believe He was from God or did some of them, who were there watching Jesus, not believe that He was from God even after they saw Him feed thousands in there presence or raise Lazarus from the dead or heal the lame man and the blind man?

The…[Read more]

@Keith

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

@Keith

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

Hi Keith,

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]

To the general reader:

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]

@DesireTruth

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]

@DesireTruth

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]

@DesireTruth

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]

@DesireTruth

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)

@DesireTruth

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]

@DesireTruth

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]

@Keith

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.

@DesireTruth
In response to post #948121

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]

@Keith

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]