Christians worship Christ; JW's do not!

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Apple7,

To start with, the 'elohim' polemic is a pathetic attempt used by cults, like yours, as a lame attempt to thwart The Trinity.
God's own personal name, Yahweh, is the term that you need to address, NOT elohim! How many mere angels and judges are called Yahweh? That's right, Zero. Any Malek called Yahweh (i.e. Malek Yahweh) refers to Yahweh, and Yahweh does NOT share His name with anyone.

When we are referring to the word “God” in the NT we should also consider Elohim in the OT as expounded by Jesus in John 10:30-36 and Jesus is speaking concerning the Judges who represented God and also consider why Elohim is used in describing the Angels in Psalm 8:5 which is quoted and confirmed in Hebrews 2:7,9. These passages are usually strongly avoided by non-cultic Trinitarians, who like using the word "cult", especially when they do not like looking at important relevant Scriptures. The Angel who represents Yahweh, bears His Name.
Exodus 23:20-21 (KJV): Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. 21 Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him.

Further, let's review your ignorance of the Greek, some more...
Therefore, 1 John 5.20 also refers to Jesus. Trev...your pitiful attempt to compare 2 John 1.7 (a typo on your part btw)does not even consider itself, much less 1 John 5.20.

I prefer all three of my explanations as being valid, but as stated to JudgeRightly I prefer a mild blending of the second and third. The first explanation which you denounce was from two writers who knew their Greek, and I have seen how you work in English sufficiently, and as a result I have grave doubts about your reasoning in Greek. I doubt that even JudgeRightly who approves most of your Posts fully understands your foray into Greek. This shows much learning, but it does not help your discussion with me at least. There is only one chapter in 2 John, but both 2 John 7 which is the correct reference and 2 John 1:7 work on biblia.com, and you will notice that biblia.com corrects your assertion. Possibly biblia.com does not work in your browser, but I am a subscriber to Logos Software.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[keypurr]

Greetings again Apple7,The following is sufficient summary of our differences. Jesus has now been exalted to the right hand of God, and has been given a Name above every Name, and when we bow the knee to Jesus and worship confessing that Jesus is Lord (either in the sense of Master, Ruler, Lord or the Name Yahweh which he has been given), then this redounds to the glory of God the Father.
Philippians 2:9-11 (KJV): 9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: 10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; 11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
This is true worship. There is One God, Yahweh, the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

Kind regards
Trevor

Trevor your right. There is only one God and Jesus has a God. Most can not discard traditional teachings that were handed down from the RCC.

 

[drbrumley]

Trevor your right. There is only one God and Jesus has a God. Most can not discard traditional teachings that were handed down from the RCC.

I'm not RCc, but you really need to stop blaming them for everything ever handed down.

Oh, and I almost forgot....God's two sons is still a topic.

 

[JudgeRightly]

I'm not RCc, but you really need to stop blaming them for everything ever handed down.

Oh, and I almost forgot....God's two sons is still a topic.

Three, if you include Adam....

 

[Bee1]

Trevor your right. There is only one God and Jesus has a God. Most can not discard traditional teachings that were handed down from the RCC.

Which will lead to their doom.

Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk

 

[6days]

There is only one God

Yes..... Biblical

Jesus has a God.

Not Biblical
The Word became flesh. Jesus is not flesh anymore.
You could say 'Jesus HAD a God'.

Most can not discard traditional teachings that were handed down from the RCC.

Its nothing to do with any denomination. Its trusting what God's Word clearly tells us.
Our Creator, the Son was 'the Word'. Heb. 1:8 But about the Son he says,
“Your throne, O God..."

 

[Apple7]

Greetings again Apple7, When we are referring to the word “God” in the NT we should also consider Elohim in the OT as expounded by Jesus in John 10:30-36

John 10 is clearly understood as Jesus being God, Himself....

I and the Father are One! Then again the Jews took up stones, that they might stone Him. Jesus answered them, I showed you many good works from My Father. For which work of them do you stone Me? The Jews answered Him, saying, We do not stone You concerning a good work, but concerning blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself God.(John 10.30 – 33)

Thus…this passage does absolutely nothing for your position, and simply re-enforces mine…

and Jesus is speaking concerning the Judges who represented God

Jesus quotes Psalm 82 beginning in John 10.36, after declaring Himself to be Theos, as fully acknowledged by the Jews who then wished to stone Him.

Thus, since Jesus is God, and He quotes Psalm 82, where are the 'elohim' REPRESENTING Jesus in this chapter?

Further, the term elohim in Psalm 82 NEVER refers to anyone REPRESENTING Yahweh, in the Hebrew.

Yet another failed and desperate attempt on your part…

and also consider why Elohim is used in describing the Angels in Psalm 8:5 which is quoted and confirmed in Hebrews 2:7,9.

We already went over these ‘name and a number’ polemic scriptures of your cult in another thread….as your people only have a baker’s dozen scriptures that you are able to use…and, recycling them ad nausea is all you can do…unlike Trinitarians who have the entire Holy Bible at their disposal.

You ran from them there….will you do the same now?

Let’s review the term, mê·’ĕ·lō·hîm, which you want to be rendered as ‘angels’.

Its location as used in the verse in question…

For You have made him lack a little from God (mê·’ĕ·lō·hîm); and have crowned him with glory and honor. (Psalm 8.5)


Now…let’s compare the same exact term as used in the only two other places in scripture, as thus…


And he sent messengers to him, saying, What do I have to do with you, O king of Judah? I am not coming against you today, but toward the house with which I have war; and God said for me to hasten; stop yourself from opposing God (mê·’ĕ·lō·hîm), who is with me, and He shall not destroy you. (2 Chron 35.21)

Now…please tell us how many translators render mê·’ĕ·lō·hîm as ‘angels’ in 2 Chron 35.21?

That’s correct…none.



And then burned the wrath of Elihu the son of Barachel the Buzite, of the family of Ram; his wrath burned against Job, because he had justified himself rather than God (mê·’ĕ·lō·hîm). (Job 32.2)

Now…please tell us how many translators render mê·’ĕ·lō·hîm as ‘angels’ in Job 32.2?

That’s correct…none.


So…scripturally, we have thus established, beyond any reasonable doubt, that the Hebrew term, mê·’ĕ·lō·hîm, is to be rendered as God….NOT ‘angels’.

 

[Apple7]

These passages are usually strongly avoided by non-cultic Trinitarians, who like using the word "cult", especially when they do not like looking at important relevant Scriptures.

The Trinity already comprehends ALL scripture.

No scripture thwarts The Trinity.

Study up, Trev...

The Angel who represents Yahweh, bears His Name.
Exodus 23:20-21 (KJV): Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. 21 Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him.

This is Malek Yahweh, of which, is Yahweh.

Malek Yahweh does not REPRESENT Yahweh....He IS Yahweh.

I prefer all three of my explanations as being valid, but as stated to JudgeRightly I prefer a mild blending of the second and third. The first explanation which you denounce was from two writers who knew their Greek, and I have seen how you work in English sufficiently, and as a result I have grave doubts about your reasoning in Greek. I doubt that even JudgeRightly who approves most of your Posts fully understands your foray into Greek. This shows much learning, but it does not help your discussion with me at least. There is only one chapter in 2 John, but both 2 John 7 which is the correct reference and 2 John 1:7 work on biblia.com, and you will notice that biblia.com corrects your assertion. Possibly biblia.com does not work in your browser, but I am a subscriber to Logos Software.

Kind regards
Trevor

What you 'prefer' won't sway anyone theologically, Trev.

Show us something more than just your raw feelings about a name and a number.

Show us your own personal exegesis of the original languages.

Show us that God's original word is worthy of your time and effort in stead of hiding behind some one elses' rendering and 'feeling'...

 

[Apple7]

Trevor your right. There is only one God and Jesus has a God. Most can not discard traditional teachings that were handed down from the RCC.

God has a God, even in the OT.....pops...

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Apple7,

John 10 is clearly understood as Jesus being God, Himself....
I and the Father are One! Then again the Jews took up stones, that they might stone Him. Jesus answered them, I showed you many good works from My Father. For which work of them do you stone Me? The Jews answered Him, saying, We do not stone You concerning a good work, but concerning blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself God.(John 10.30 – 33)
Thus…this passage does absolutely nothing for your position, and simply re-enforces mine…

I notice that you carefully avoided quoting the rest of the passage where Jesus answers their charge, and also explains what he actually said in John 10:30:
John 10:33-38 (KJV): 33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. 34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? 35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; 36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? 37 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. 38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.
Instead of simply taking up the charge that they levelled against him, we need to listen to the answer that Jesus gave, including the answer from Psalm 82:6. Add them up, there must be a total of five or six answers against their charge. The most obvious answer is that Jesus does not claim to be God, but the Son of God. Equate the terms, "my Father" and "the Son of God" and thus "are one" is speaking of unity in purpose and character, similar to John 17:11,21.

Jesus quotes Psalm 82 beginning in John 10.36, after declaring Himself to be Theos, as fully acknowledged by the Jews who then wished to stone Him.
Thus, since Jesus is God, and He quotes Psalm 82, where are the 'elohim' REPRESENTING Jesus in this chapter?
Further, the term elohim in Psalm 82 NEVER refers to anyone REPRESENTING Yahweh, in the Hebrew.
Yet another failed and desperate attempt on your part…

Psalm 82:6 is speaking concerning the Judges who were given the responsibility to faithfully judge those who came before them. They thus represented God in judgement. The judges in Psalm 82 were discriminating against the poor and favouring the rich for their own benefit. The reference to where Elohim refers to the Judges is Exodus 21:6.

We already went over these ‘name and a number’ polemic scriptures of your cult in another thread….as your people only have a baker’s dozen scriptures that you are able to use…and, recycling them ad nausea is all you can do…unlike Trinitarians who have the entire Holy Bible at their disposal.
You ran from them there….will you do the same now?
Let’s review the term, mê·’ĕ·lō·hîm, which you want to be rendered as ‘angels’.
Its location as used in the verse in question…
For You have made him lack a little from God (mê·’ĕ·lō·hîm); and have crowned him with glory and honor. (Psalm 8.5)
Now…let’s compare the same exact term as used in the only two other places in scripture, as thus…
2 Chron 35.21 Now…please tell us how many translators render mê·’ĕ·lō·hîm as ‘angels’ in 2 Chron 35.21? That’s correct…none.
Job 32.2 Now…please tell us how many translators render mê·’ĕ·lō·hîm as ‘angels’ in Job 32.2?
That’s correct…none.
So…scripturally, we have thus established, beyond any reasonable doubt, that the Hebrew term, mê·’ĕ·lō·hîm, is to be rendered as God….NOT ‘angels’.

Theres a lot of fancy footwork above, but you fail to answer why the writer to the Hebrews quotes Psalm 8 and renders Psalm 8:5 as “angels” in Hebrews 2:7,9. Not only so, but he bases his argument on this rendition, and seeing he is talking to Hebrews, who may understand Hebrew a little better than you, despite your academic claims, then the rendition “angels” is not only valid but the essential and correct meaning here.

The Trinity already comprehends ALL scripture. No scripture thwarts The Trinity.Study up, Trev...
This is Malek Yahweh, of which, is Yahweh. Malek Yahweh does not REPRESENT Yahweh....He IS Yahweh.

Does Yahweh SEND Yahweh?

What you 'prefer' won't sway anyone theologically, Trev.
Show us something more than just your raw feelings about a name and a number.
Show us your own personal exegesis of the original languages.
Show us that God's original word is worthy of your time and effort in stead of hiding behind some one elses' rendering and 'feeling'...

Again your boast of your academic qualifications. How many on this forum have original language expertise? How many in your normal church congregation? Do you get up each Sunday and say, You have to listen to me, as I alone understand Greek and Hebrew. Despite your original language skills I suggest that your reasoning and understanding of the Bible teaching is defective.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Apple7]

Greetings again Apple7,
I notice that you carefully avoided quoting the rest of the passage where Jesus answers their charge, and also explains what he actually said in John 10:30:
John 10:33-38 (KJV): 33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. 34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? 35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; 36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? 37 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. 38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.

And...?

Instead of simply taking up the charge that they levelled against him, we need to listen to the answer that Jesus gave, including the answer from Psalm 82:6.

Show us...

Add them up, there must be a total of five or six answers against their charge.

Detail each, and every one, for us, Trev...

The most obvious answer is that Jesus does not claim to be God, but the Son of God. Equate the terms, "my Father" and "the Son of God" and thus "are one" is speaking of unity in purpose and character, similar to John 17:11,21.

The Jews said that He claimed to be God...

The Jews answered Him, saying, We do not stone You concerning a good work, but concerning blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself God. (John 10.31)


Even in the only language that you can understand, English, it is clear that the Jews understood that Jesus claimed to be God.

 

[Apple7]

Psalm 82:6 is speaking concerning the Judges who were given the responsibility to faithfully judge those who came before them. They thus represented God in judgement. The judges in Psalm 82 were discriminating against the poor and favouring the rich for their own benefit.

Show us in the Hebrew, Trev...

The reference to where Elohim refers to the Judges is Exodus 21:6.

Lol, no, Trev.

The Hebrew word used in your example of Exo 21.6 is 'haelohim'...and literally means 'all the gods'...yet another referral to The Triune God.

Your constant refusal and failure to even address the original languages is really, really pathetic on your part, Trev...

 

[Apple7]

Theres a lot of fancy footwork above,

If you disagree, then feel free to show your exegetical rebuttal, like any serious student of God's word would do.

Simple enough request...

but you fail to answer why the writer to the Hebrews quotes Psalm 8 and renders Psalm 8:5 as “angels” in Hebrews 2:7,9. Not only so, but he bases his argument on this rendition, and seeing he is talking to Hebrews, who may understand Hebrew a little better than you, despite your academic claims, then the rendition “angels” is not only valid but the essential and correct meaning here.

The writer of Hebrews quoted from the LXX.

Does Yahweh SEND Yahweh?

Why not?

Again your boast of your academic qualifications. How many on this forum have original language expertise? How many in your normal church congregation? Do you get up each Sunday and say, You have to listen to me, as I alone understand Greek and Hebrew. Despite your original language skills I suggest that your reasoning and understanding of the Bible teaching is defective.

Kind regards
Trevor

Stop fishing for excuses, and jump into the word of God, Trev...

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Apple7,

And...? The Jews said that He claimed to be God...
The Jews answered Him, saying, We do not stone You concerning a good work, but concerning blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself God (John 10.31)
Even in the only language that you can understand, English, it is clear that the Jews understood that Jesus claimed to be God.
Detail each, and every one, for us, Trev...

John 10:33-38 (KJV): 33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. 34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? 35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; 36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? 37 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. 38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.
1. Jesus answered them: He did not say, yes I agree with you, I am a Trinitarian.
2. V34-35 The example of the judges
3. The Father sanctified Jesus
4. The Father sent Jesus
5. They accused him of blasphemy because he said he was the Son of God. He did not claim to be God.
6. V37 Jesus did the works of the Father
7. This proves that the Father was in Jesus and Jesus was in the Father.
All of these prove that their charge of blasphemy was wrong, and that Jesus is the Son of God, not God the Son.

(from previous post: Show us). Show us in the Hebrew, Trev... Lol, no, Trev. The Hebrew word used in your example of Exo 21.6 is 'haelohim'...and literally means 'all the gods'...yet another referral to The Triune God.
Your constant refusal and failure to even address the original languages is really, really pathetic on your part, Trev...

The following is my explanation of the word Elohim as used concerning the judges, and should cover the above questions and comments:
Jesus also answers the Jews by speaking concerning the OT usage of the word “God”, “gods”, that is the Hebrew word “Elohim”. Jesus speaks concerning the fact that in the OT the judges were called God or gods. It is interesting to note that the translators had difficulty with the relevant verses where the Judges acted in the role of God (Hebrew Elohim):
Exodus 21:6 (KJV): 6 Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever.
Exodus 21:6 (ASV): then his master shall bring him unto God, and shall bring him to the door, or unto the door-post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him for ever.

Exodus 22:8-9 (KJV): 8 If the thief be not found, then the master of the house shall be brought unto the judges, to see whether he have put his hand unto his neighbour’s goods. 9 For all manner of trespass, whether it be for ox, for donkey, for sheep, for raiment, or for any manner of lost thing, which another challengeth to be his, the cause of both parties shall come before the judges; and whom the judges shall condemn, he shall pay double unto his neighbour.
Exodus 22:8-9 (ASV): 8 If the thief be not found, then the master of the house shall come near unto God, to see whether he have not put his hand unto his neighbor’s goods. 9 For every matter of trespass, whether it be for ox, for donkey, for sheep, for raiment, or for any manner of lost thing, whereof one saith, This is it, the cause of both parties shall come before God; he whom God shall condemn shall pay double unto his neighbor.

The role and responsibility of the judges is indicated in the following:
Deuteronomy 1:17 (KJV): Ye shall not respect persons in judgment; but ye shall hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is God’s: and the cause that is too hard for you, bring it unto me, and I will hear it.
2 Chronicles 19:6 (KJV): And said to the judges, Take heed what ye do: for ye judge not for man, but for the LORD, who is with you in the judgment.
So the judges were called God or gods because they were united in administering the work or judgements of God. Jesus was claiming a similar though superior role as The Son of God, by calling and claiming God as His Father.

If you disagree, then feel free to show your exegetical rebuttal, like any serious student of God's word would do. Simple enough request...

I do not have to go down every side-track that you use.

The writer of Hebrews quoted from the LXX.

Sequence of events. Psalm 8 spoken and written in Hebrew. Many years later LXX translation of this in Greek. Many years later the writer to the Hebrews quotes Psalm 8 and we have the record in Greek. The fact that Hebrews and the LXX have angels rather than God confirms that “angels” is the best translation into Greek, as the writer to the Hebrews does not use “God” here, and he even bases his argument upon the word “angels”. The Book of Hebrews is an inspired record, and thus dismisses your poor translation. "Angels" is the correct understanding of Psalm 8:5 and the KJV translators understood this, while you reject their wisdom here. They may have had better Hebrew schools back in the early 1600s or maybe you only got 51% in your exams.

Stop fishing for excuses, and jump into the word of God, Trev...

Your continual emphasis on original languages reminds me of the circumstances when Tyndale sought to give a translation in English so that all could read and understand the Scriptures. I suppose you would side with those who claimed exclusive right to teach the Bible, and would burn the Tyndale Bible and the KJV and Tyndale himself if you had the chance.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Apple7]

Greetings again Apple7,
John 10:33-38 (KJV): 33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. 34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? 35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; 36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? 37 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. 38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.
1. Jesus answered them: He did not say, yes I agree with you, I am a Trinitarian.
2. V34-35 The example of the judges
3. The Father sanctified Jesus
4. The Father sent Jesus
5. They accused him of blasphemy because he said he was the Son of God. He did not claim to be God.
6. V37 Jesus did the works of the Father
7. This proves that the Father was in Jesus and Jesus was in the Father.
All of these prove that their charge of blasphemy was wrong, and that Jesus is the Son of God, not God the Son.

Kind regards
Trevor

The Trinitarian English rendering that you keep slavishly reposting, because you trust it completely, already proves Jesus' deity.

The very context that you, yourself, provided, clearly shows that the only blasphemous things said in this passage revolve around the Jewish denial of Jesus' deity.

Jesus never once denied His deity - in fact, He provoked the Jews into claiming that He was God, of which, they claimed was blasphemy because they thought he was just a mere man.

The second instance of blasphemy is directed back at the Jews for denying that He was the Son of God, of which, they already made the connection that The Son of God IS God.

That is why the Jews wanted to stone Jesus.

Jesus clearly claimed to be God (John 10.33) The Son (John 10.36).

 

[God's Truth]

Trinitarians have a false doctrine.

Jesus is God.

There is only one God and he is the Father.

That means Jesus is God the Father come in the flesh as a Son.

 

[Apple7]

The following is my explanation of the word Elohim as used concerning the judges, and should cover the above questions and comments:
Jesus also answers the Jews by speaking concerning the OT usage of the word “God”, “gods”, that is the Hebrew word “Elohim”. Jesus speaks concerning the fact that in the OT the judges were called God or gods. It is interesting to note that the translators had difficulty with the relevant verses where the Judges acted in the role of God (Hebrew Elohim):
Exodus 21:6 (KJV): 6 Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever.
Exodus 21:6 (ASV): then his master shall bring him unto God, and shall bring him to the door, or unto the door-post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him for ever.



Kind regards
Trevor

Look at your open admission that not all translators side with your worldview of 'judges' being the rendering of choice.

In fact, over half the translators today render the word 'GOD' in lieu of 'judges'....why?

What do they know that you do not?

Time to start studying the original languages so that you can think for yourself, Trev...

 

[JudgeRightly]

Trinitarians have a false doctrine.

Jesus is God.

There is only one God and he is the Father.

That means Jesus is God the Father come in the flesh as a Son.

Why do you deny that Jesus had a Father and is not the Father?

 

[Apple7]

The role and responsibility of the judges is indicated in the following:
Deuteronomy 1:17 (KJV): Ye shall not respect persons in judgment; but ye shall hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is God’s: and the cause that is too hard for you, bring it unto me, and I will hear it.
2 Chronicles 19:6 (KJV): And said to the judges, Take heed what ye do: for ye judge not for man, but for the LORD, who is with you in the judgment.
So the judges were called God or gods because they were united in administering the work or judgements of God. Jesus was claiming a similar though superior role as The Son of God, by calling and claiming God as His Father.

What in the world do these passages have to do with 'haelohim', Trev...?

These passages use entirely different Hebrew terms!

What a desperate attempt on your part....

I do not have to go down every side-track that you use. Sequence of events. Psalm 8 spoken and written in Hebrew. Many years later LXX translation of this in Greek. Many years later the writer to the Hebrews quotes Psalm 8 and we have the record in Greek. The fact that Hebrews and the LXX have angels rather than God confirms that “angels” is the best translation into Greek, as the writer to the Hebrews does not use “God” here, and he even bases his argument upon the word “angels”. The Book of Hebrews is an inspired record, and thus dismisses your poor translation. "Angels" is the correct understanding of Psalm 8:5 and the KJV translators understood this, while you reject their wisdom here. They may have had better Hebrew schools back in the early 1600s or maybe you only got 51% in your exams.

Don't get mad, Trev....

The original Hebrew word refers to God, as I exegeted to you, at least twice.

Any serious student of scripture always examines the original text to see if the translation was true.

You, however, do not...as it utterly destroys your favorite polemic.

Your continual emphasis on original languages reminds me of the circumstances when Tyndale sought to give a translation in English so that all could read and understand the Scriptures. I suppose you would side with those who claimed exclusive right to teach the Bible, and would burn the Tyndale Bible and the KJV and Tyndale himself if you had the chance.

Kind regards
Trevor

Hey, Trev.....keep those excuses coming.....:rotfl:

 

[Apple7]

Trinitarians have a false doctrine.

Jesus is God.

There is only one God and he is the Father.

That means Jesus is God the Father come in the flesh as a Son.

Got any NEW material to peddle?