Search Members

[Proclaimer]

The Jesus says, “the person who believes in me will perform the miraculous deeds that I am doing, and will perform greater deeds than these”, now please back up to verse 11, “Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father is in me, but if you do not believe me, believe because of the miraculous deeds themselves.”

Fact: About 95 percent or more of English Bible translations use the word “works” in this passage, while only a small minority render it as “miracles” or “miraculous deeds”, mainly the NET Bible and some paraphrased versions. The reason is that the Greek word ἔργα (erga) simply means “works” or “deeds”, so translating it as “miracles” is an interpretive choice that narrows the meaning beyond what the original word explicitly states.

 

 

[Proclaimer]

Concerning your other post about adoption; the adoption narrative is moot and really a waste of time to debate UNLESS you can back up what you are saying with proof, because what you’re presenting is “hear say” and you’re really applying today’s standards of an “adoption” to an event 2000 years ago; did you read the link I gave you, it’s what the Jewish community follows today and seems to align with the Tanakh; so what’s said on the website isn’t new, but comes from old.

It’s not moot or speculation. It is fact.

Jacob adopts Ephraim and Manasseh

“Your two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, who were born to you in Egypt before I came to you in Egypt, are mine; Ephraim and Manasseh shall be mine, just as Reuben and Simeon are.”

Here Jacob formally adopts Joseph’s sons as his own, and they become full tribal ancestors of Israel. Their legal status does not fully depend on being Jacob’s biological sons.

Moses becomes Pharaoh’s daughter’s son

“She brought him to Pharaoh’s daughter, and he became her son.”

While not being adopted into a tribe of Israel, Moses is raised as the son of Pharaoh’s daughter, showing that formal recognition could establish sonship in a legal or social sense. So this is not restricted to Israel.

Eliezer as Abraham’s heir

Before Isaac was born, Abraham expected his servant to inherit his household in Book of Genesis 15:2 to 3. This reflects the ancient Near Eastern custom that a non biological heir could legally inherit if recognised as the household successor.

But Abram said, “O Lord GOD, what will you give me, for I continue childless, and the heir of my house is Eliezer of Damascus?”
And Abram said, “Behold, you have given me no offspring, and a member of my household will be my heir.”

Taken together, these examples show that legal sonship and inheritance were recognised concepts in the Old Testament world.

[Proclaimer]

These are the facts:

The Greek wording does not specifically say “miracles”. The immediate context emphasises belief and mission, it’s not miracle competition.

“Greater” (Greek: μείζονα, meizona) in its context is about Jesus’ ministry which was largely confined to Judea and Galilee, but his followers later carried the message across the Roman world. Jesus also said that this age will end when the gospel is preached to all the world. This is certainly greater and understandably so. Jesus was a single person and didn’t have the tools like the Internet or air travel. He was confined to a geographical area. He got the ball rolling so to speak.

The Gospel still presents Jesus’ works as uniquely authoritative, portraying his signs as revealing his divine identity rather than as miracles that ordinary believers would later surpass.

“Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.”

After all, we are not the Messiah and Son of God. His miracles testified to this.

That said, God can use us to perform miracles, I have seen it first hand. But I am not the messiah. But on pure numbers, this website has reached more people than Jesus reached directly.

[Proclaimer]

In John 14:12, Jesus says: “Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I am going to the Father.” (John 14:12)

So the claim that Jesus said believers would do “greater works” than he did is correct in the sense that the statement appears in the Gospel of John.

However, the text uses the Greek word ἔργα (erga), which means works, not necessarily miracles specifically. The Gospel sometimes uses the word “works” to include miracles, but it can also refer more broadly to the mission and impact of Jesus’ followers.

Immediately after this verse, Jesus adds: “And whatever you ask in my name, this I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.” (John 14:13)

The broader context of John’s Gospel emphasises that these “greater works” are connected with the coming of the Holy Spirit and the spread of the message after Jesus’ departure.

Many biblical scholars interpret “greater works” to mean the global spread of the message about Jesus, the conversion of large numbers of people, and the continuation of Jesus’ mission after his ascension rather than greater miraculous power than Jesus himself.

For example, this website has probably reached more people than Jesus reached directly with over 1 million people.

As for my involvement in miracles, I believe I have been involved in many. However, I acknowledge that I have never been involved in something like raising the dead, which would certainly be an extraordinary miracle.

[Proclaimer]

Your response contains some correct elements, but the conclusion you draw is much stronger than what the biblical and historical evidence actually supports. The issue involves several separate questions: tribal lineage, legal descent, and the Davidic line.

You are correct that in the Hebrew Bible tribal affiliation normally follows the father. Passages such as Numbers 1:2 and 1:18 show that Israelite men were registered according to their father’s house. In the ordinary legal structure of ancient Israel, a person’s tribe and inheritance were therefore tied to paternal descent.

However, this does not mean legal status had no role. In Jewish society, legal fatherhood and adoption could establish household identity and inheritance rights. Once Joseph publicly accepted Jesus as his son and named him (Matthew 1:24 to 25), Jesus would be regarded socially and legally as belonging to Joseph’s house. In the context of first century Jewish society, that meant he was recognised as part of the house of David.

[Proclaimer]

The phrase “coming up out of the earth” in Revelation 13:11 contrasts deliberately with the earlier description of the first beast, which rises “out of the sea”. In apocalyptic language, the sea often represents the restless mass of nations or the broader Gentile world, while the earth (Greek: γῆ, gē) can refer to the land or a more settled, local population. Because of this contrast, many see the second beast as arising from within the established world or from a particular land rather than emerging from the chaotic mass of nations symbolised by the sea.

[Proclaimer]

The term “Great Sea” is usually a literal geographical reference to the Mediterranean Sea. By contrast, the phrase “many waters” in Revelation 17 is symbolic language representing many peoples and nations. In apocalyptic literature such as Daniel and Revelation, seas and waters often symbolise the mass of humanity or groups of nations, but when the Old Testament uses the specific term “the Great Sea”, it normally refers to the Mediterranean rather than a symbolic body of water.

In the Greek Old Testament (the Septuagint), the Mediterranean is typically written as:

ἡ θάλασσα ἡ μεγάλη
literally “the sea the great”, which in natural English becomes “the Great Sea”.

Greek often repeats the article when an adjective modifies a noun. The structure is:

ἡ (the) + θάλασσα (sea) + ἡ (the) + μεγάλη (great)

This construction emphasises that it is a specific, well known sea, not just any large sea. In the biblical context it refers to the Mediterranean Sea, which lay west of Israel.

In contrast, when Revelation talks about “many waters” (Revelation 17:1), the Greek is:

ὑδάτων πολλῶν
meaning “many waters”.

Here there is no definite article referring to a specific sea, and the phrase is later explained symbolically in Revelation 17:15 as representing peoples, multitudes, nations, and languages.

[Proclaimer]

The phrase “coming up out of the earth” contrasts with the earlier beast from the sea and suggests a different origin or type of power. The second beast appears righteous like a lamb but actually speaks with the authority of the dragon, indicating deceptive religious influence that supports the first beast’s rule.

[Proclaimer]

@berean

I disagree with your denominations teaching about this. Here is part of the reason.

Daniel states that his vision occurred while he was in the Babylon during the reign of Belshazzar (Daniel 7:1).

Babylon was located deep inland in Mesopotamia, hundreds of kilometres from the sea.

For someone in Babylon, there was essentially only one “great sea” in the known world to the west. That was the Mediterranean Sea.

The Persian Gulf existed to the south, but it was usually called simply “the sea” or “the lower sea”, not “the Great Sea” in Hebrew geography.

---

In the Hebrew worldview the Mediterranean marked the edge of the known land toward the sunset.

For example Book of Joshua 1:4 describes Israel’s territory extending:

“…unto the Great Sea toward the going down of the sun.”

That phrase literally means the sea in the direction of the sunset, which fits the Mediterranean perfectly.

---

Daniel 7:2 says:

“The four winds of heaven stirred up the great sea.”

The imagery suggests a large open sea being churned by winds from all four directions.

The Mediterranean fits this image well because:

• It was the largest sea known to the biblical writers.
• Storm systems frequently moved across it from multiple directions.
• It sat at the centre of the political world that produced the great empires.

---

The four beasts in Book of Daniel 7 are commonly associated with empires that dominated the Mediterranean basin:

1. Babylonian Empire
2. Achaemenid Empire
3. Macedonian Empire
4. Roman Empire

By the time of Rome, the Mediterranean was literally called “Mare Nostrum” meaning “Our Sea” because the empire surrounded it.

So the image of kingdoms rising from the “Great Sea” naturally fits the Mediterranean political world.

---

In Book of Revelation 13:1, a beast rises out of the sea.

Many interpreters see this as deliberately echoing Daniel 7, using the same imagery of world powers emerging from the nations around the Mediterranean world.

---

So, the Mediterranean interpretation is supported by:

• The Hebrew term “Great Sea”, which elsewhere clearly means the Mediterranean
• Daniel’s location in Babylon looking west toward that sea
• The historical empires centred around the Mediterranean
• The continuity of imagery later used in Revelation

Together these make the Mediterranean the most natural identification.

Modern eschatology that tries to fit in other areas outside of the Mediterranean Sea are done for cultural or biased reasons. For example, the US as being part of this beast rising out of the Great Sea is believed because Americans think their country should be in the Bible somewhere. While it may be in the Bible explicitly or not, it is not there as part of the Beast.

As for the Vatican, I tend to think this belongs more to Mystery Babylon that rides the back of the Beast in Revelation.

[Proclaimer]

@desiretruth

If Jesus was a Jew, which house or tribe would he belong to?

He would have to come from one of the tribes of Israel, right?

In the time of Jesus, Jews still saw themselves as descendants of the twelve tribes of Israel, but many tribal identities had been lost. This largely happened after the Northern Kingdom was conquered by the Assyrians in 722 BC and many of the northern tribes were scattered.

By the first century, the main tribal groups that remained identifiable were Judah, Benjamin, and Levi. The southern kingdom that survived was the Kingdom of Judah, and the term “Jew” itself comes from Judah.

Because most of the population in Judea descended from that kingdom, it made it more likely that people there, including Jesus, were associated with the tribe of Judah, which is also the tribe the New Testament says he came from.

[Proclaimer]

@desiretruth

Unfortunately the Jesus fails on being a member of the tribe of Judah; biologically he isn’t connected to the line of David because the spirit is the one who fathered him (Luke 1:26-35, Matt 1:18). It is of the seed of David the Messiah is to be born of (2 Sam 7:12-17, I Chron 11-14). Lineage is associated with the father and not the mother (Num 1:2,18); so Luke’s genealogical account is irrelevant as it points to Mary and Matthew’s is beyond messed up by including Jeconiah in the lineage.

Although Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus, he was Jesus’ legal father. In Jewish culture, legal paternity established family lineage and inheritance rights. He also had a biological descent through Mary, who may also have been a descendant of David. So that is a legal and a possible biological descent.

Either way, the New Testament presents Jesus as fulfilling the prophecy that the Messiah would come from the house of David. If Jesus was a Jew, what house would you place him?

[Proclaimer]

In fact, the Jesus tells us in John 14:12

12 Most certainly I tell you, he who believes in me, the works that I do, he will do also; and he will do greater works than these, because I am going to my Father.

Yet, these who are doing these “greater works”, the Jesus says he doesn’t know. By the way, when was the last time you raised someone from the dead, caste out a demon, or healed someone?

People have claimed to raise the dead. I saw a demon with my own eyes one time and was able to deliver my brother. The only reason greater works are even possible is because we stand on the shoulders of giants.

Also, much of what future generations have achieved is possible because Jesus is with the Father and he intercedes for us. We perhaps do not understand most of what we do and how it impacts people and the world.

Jesus discipled 12 people and taught many thousands. It is possible that some have discipled more and reached more for example.

[Proclaimer]

Not the verse I was referencing I was speaking on Matt 7:21-23 where the Jesus is speaking.

21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the Kingdom of Heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will tell me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, didn’t we prophesy in your name, in your name cast out demons, and in your name do many mighty works?’ 23 Then I will tell them, ‘I never knew you. Depart from me, you who work iniquity.’

Here the Jesus is definitely speaking of the “final judgment” and condemning those who thought they were doing what the Jesus taught, but apparently didn’t meet his expectations and are thus condemned.

How does one know if they are truly doing “the will of my Father”? Because if you aren’t, you’re condemned.

For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.

You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart… and your neighbour as yourself.

At the end of the day, the wicked, no matter the religious traditions and rituals they stick to will not be saved because they are not doing the will of the Father. If you do not know the will of God, then one word can sum it up. LOVE.

If you love God and your fellow man, then you will do the will of God because you love and that means God and all that he has made.

Your nature will change from fleshly to spiritual.

[Proclaimer]

Matt 11:25 At that time Jesus said, “I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent, and have revealed them to infants.

1 Cor 2:14 But a natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.

These have nothing to do with interpreting Genesis. The bible teaches us to be innocent like children, but is not telling us to be childish / immature and believing of myths and tall stories like children do. After all, Father Christmas and the Tooth Fairy are lies for children to believe, not adults.

[Proclaimer]

Genesis 1:14

And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years.

Your take on this is not a contradiction of the text, but it doesn’t add up with the rest of the text and with science.

You can equally read it in a way that does agree with the surrounding text and science. So which one is the correct one? I don’t think it is your view.

The location the scripture is referring to is the atmosphere / sky. It is not only feasible but also taught in science that the stars / suns were already in the sky. But they were not in the firmament. At some point in the young earth, the atmosphere was very thick with gasses as the planet was being created. This means that the stars were not in the firmament. Once the atmosphere cleared and became habitable for life, then the sun could be seen clearly on cloudless days and likewise the stars on cloudless nights.

So if you were on earth, you wouldn’t see the sun or the stars until the firmament was cleared of volcanic gasses and other thick plumes of gas.

Think of the planet Venus right now. It is covered in thick gases. Here is a representation of the surface of Venus and the sky above. Perhaps Venus will one day be terraformed like the earth?

 

[Proclaimer]

Isaiah 7:14
Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

Matthew 1:22 to 23
This was to fulfil what the Lord had spoken by the prophet: ‘Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son…

Luke 1:34 to 35
Mary asks how she can have a child, and the angel says the Holy Spirit will come upon her, indicating a miraculous conception.

Christians also connect other Old Testament passages describing the coming Messiah:

Isaiah 9:6 – A child born who is called “Mighty God” and “Prince of Peace”.
Micah 5:2 – The ruler of Israel will come from Bethlehem.

Together these passages are understood in as pointing to the birth of Jesus as the promised Messiah.

But does Isaiah 9:6 say “virgin”? It says “young woman”, but Mary being a virgin fits with the prophecy of a young woman / almah,

Almah generally means a young woman of marriageable age. It does not explicitly state virginity, but in the culture of ancient Israel such a woman was normally assumed to be unmarried and therefore a virgin. The Hebrew Bible also has another word, “bethulah”, that more explicitly means virgin.

When the Hebrew scriptures were translated into Greek, the translators rendered almah as “parthenos”, a Greek word that clearly means virgin.

In Isaiah the word literally means “young woman”, but it could imply virginity in context, which is why the ancient Greek translators rendered it as virgin, leading to the Christian interpretation.

Regardless, a young woman has more chance of being a virgin and according to the New Testament, Mary was a virgin and obviously a young woman. So the prophecy still fits if you take the young woman meaning only. The New Testament then provides more detail, not contradicting detail.

[Proclaimer]

It’s not the geographical setting that matters here, but rather 👉the interpretation of a symbol

In the Hebrew Bible the term “the Great Sea” was a common name for the Mediterranean. For example, in Numbers 34:6, Joshua 1:4, and Ezekiel 47:10, the same phrase clearly refers to the Mediterranean coastline west of Israel. So geographically, the phrase naturally points to that sea.

Daniel 7:2–3
Daniel spake and said, I saw in my vision by night, and, behold, the four winds of the heaven strove upon the great sea.
And four great beasts came up from the sea, diverse one from another.

@genebalthrop you guys would have us believe that all the empires were from this geographical area except for the USA?

@berean, what about you?

[Proclaimer]

@mikeboll64

Why don’t they point the Hubble Telescope at earth?

[Proclaimer]

The F Curve

A recently released video has sparked widespread online debate, with some viewers suggesting it prompts renewed scrutiny of the 2020 U.S. election.

[Proclaimer]

@edj

Yes post the links.

[Author]

Posts