Search Members

[Proclaimer]

One prominent scholar called Origen is sometimes quoted by Trinitarians who appeal to his wisdom for other purposes. However, they avoid this particular quotation for obvious reasons. Origen wrote in the early 200’s A.D and was a noted expert in Koine Greek.

“We next notice John’s use of the article [“the”] in these sentences. He does not write without care in this respect, nor is he unfamiliar with the niceties of the Greek tongue. In some cases he uses the article, and in some he omits it. He adds the article to the Word, but to the name of theos he adds it sometimes only. He uses the article, when the name of theos refers to the uncreated cause of all things, and omits it when the Word is named theos. Does the same difference which we observe between theos with the article and theos without it prevail also between the Word with it and without it? We must enquire into this. As the theos who is over all is theos with the article not without it, so the Word is the source of that reason (Logos) which dwells in every reasonable creature; the reason which is in each creature is not, like the former called par excellence the Word. Now there are many who are sincerely concerned about religion, and who fall here into great perplexity. They are afraid that they may be proclaiming two theos [gods] and their fear drives them into doctrines which are false and wicked. Either they deny that the Son has a distinct nature of His own besides that of the Father, and make Him whom they call the Son to be theos all but the name, or they deny divinity of the Son, giving Him a separate existence of His own, and making His sphere of essence fall outside that of the Father, so that they are separable from each other. To such persons we have to say that “the theos” on the one hand is Autotheos [God of himself] and so the Saviour says in His prayer to the Father, “That they may know Thee the only true theos [God]; “but that all beyond the theos [God] is made theos by participation in His deity, and is not to be called simply “theos” but rather “the theos “. And thus the first-born of all creation, who is the first to be with the theos , and to attract to Himself deity, is a being of more exalted rank than the other theos [gods] beside Him, of which theos is the theos [God], as it is written, “The theos [God] of theos [gods], the Lord, hath spoken and called the earth.” It was by the offices of the first-born that they became theos [gods], for He drew from the theos [God] in generous measure that they should be made theos [gods], and He communicated it to them according to His own bounty. The true theos [God], then, is “the theos ,” [“the God” as opposed to “god”] and those who are formed after Him are theos [such as the Son of God], images, as it were, of Him the prototype. But the archetypal image, again, of all these images is the word of the theos [God], who was in the beginning, and who by being with the theos [God] is at all times deity, not possessing that of Himself, but by His being with the Father, and not continuing to be theos , if we should think of this, except by remaining always in uninterrupted contemplation of the depths of the Father.”
(Origen’s Commentary on the Gospel of John, Book II, 2)

[Proclaimer]

The Old Testament does not explicitly say the Messiah comes twice. But there appears to be two phases in the prophecies. A suffering and rejection, then later glory and kingship. Judaism generally does not read these as two separate comings of the same Messiah, whereas logically speaking, it would normally take at least two phases.

Rejected

Isaiah 53
The servant is rejected, suffers, is pierced, and bears the sins of many.

Psalm 22
A righteous sufferer is mocked and surrounded by enemies.

Zechariah 12:10
“They shall look upon me whom they have pierced…”

Daniel 9:26
“Messiah shall be cut off, but not for himself…”

Victorious

Daniel 7:13–14
One like a son of man receives everlasting dominion.

Isaiah 9:6–7
A royal child rules on David’s throne with justice and peace.

Psalm 110
The Lord’s chosen king rules at God’s right hand.

Zechariah 14
The Lord comes in victory and reigns as king over all the earth.

So yes, two phases can explain all of it.

[Proclaimer]

No one is arguing that Trump is King Cyrus reincarnated. It goes without question that there will be differences.

[Proclaimer]

@mikeboll64

Do you want to continue this debate?

Perhaps you have seen the error of your ways now?

I hope and pray that you are not pedaling lies anymore.

[Proclaimer]

As far as Trump being chosen by G-d; last I checked G-d wasn’t running the voting machines…man chose Trump.

He changes times and seasons;
he deposes kings and raises up others.
He gives wisdom to the wise
and knowledge to the discerning.

Daniel 2:21

[Proclaimer]

Search Warrant: What the Courts Actually Found

[Proclaimer]

You shall not bear false witness against your neighbour

[Proclaimer]

Obama to be arrested?

[Proclaimer]

Why Some Believe He Was Sent for the End Times

He also said that God would not show him who this man was, but that the word “gold” was associated with this future president. Further, he said he would be a two term president. When Trump lost the 2020 election, it looked like it wouldn’t be fulfilled.

[Proclaimer]

Lol. No, way off. But I understand that of the 45,000+ denominations that exist, they cover just about every theory and possibility.

But if you delve into the Bible, Daniel and John primarily speak of the empires around the Great Sea. Not empires in other areas of the world.

Why? Because the Bible is focussed around Israel which happens to be in that area.

Yes, there are references to the end of the world etc, but the empires spoken of are in and around the Great Sea which is the Mediterranean Sea.

The doctrine you espouse is incorrect.

The Old Testament is a book that is focussed on the Jews, not the Americans, or the Chinese.

[Proclaimer]

@berean

You need to be careful how you judge things.

What if the USA had a good purpose in God’s plans. If so, calling them the dragon is not blasphemy of the Holy Spirit (I don’t think), but is heading in that direction.

Some Christians pass harsh judgements on other Christians because they understand them not. Often those that have a calling in God are judged harshly to begin with and eventually people see the truth.

[Proclaimer]

Trump Is Playing a Much Bigger Game Than You Think

[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.

[Author]

Posts