Apple7
New member
Not according to scripture.
I always consult the original languages.
Most interesting that you no longer want to discuss 'The Arm of God', that you, yourself, brought to our attention...
Study up...
God is not a Man
- Thread starter CherubRam
- Start date
- Status
Not according to scripture.
I always consult the original languages.
Most interesting that you no longer want to discuss 'The Arm of God', that you, yourself, brought to our attention...
Study up...
Apple7
New member
He speaks AS Yahweh.
Apple7
New member
Incorrect.
Your assertion fails to address the times when God The Father is present at the SAME time as Malek Yahweh.
Show us scripture in relation to Malek Yahweh...
Malek Yahweh speaks as God...declares that He is God...is accepted as God....and is worshiped as God.
Therefore, He IS God.
Greetings again Apple7,
Exodus 15:3-8 (KJV): 3 The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name. 4 Pharaoh’s chariots and his host hath he cast into the sea: his chosen captains also are drowned in the Red sea.5 The depths have covered them: they sank into the bottom as a stone. 6 Thy right hand, O LORD, is become glorious in power: thy right hand, O LORD, hath dashed in pieces the enemy. 7 And in the greatness of thine excellency thou hast overthrown them that rose up against thee: thou sentest forth thy wrath, which consumed them as stubble. 8 And with the blast of thy nostrils the waters were gathered together, the floods stood upright as an heap, and the depths were congealed in the heart of the sea.
I assumed that you would have studied this passage and seen that the Song uses figurative and poetical language. The figurative or poetical term “right hand” represents God’s power, as it states Thy right hand, O LORD, is become glorious in power. Other figres are used: Was it literally the breath of Yahweh’s nostrils that opened the Red Sea? Did God’s wrath literally issue forth as fire to consume the stubble?
Zechariah 3:1-2 (KJV): 1 And he shewed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right hand to resist him. 2 And the LORD said unto Satan, The LORD rebuke thee, O Satan; even the LORD that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?
Jude 9 (KJV): Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.
Do you interpret every Divine manifestation in the OT as the second person of the Trinity? Do you believe that God used his angels as messengers, and for example two are named in the OT, Gabriel and Michael?
Kind regards
Trevor
But why should we accept your translation when the Trinitarian translations, KJV, NASB, NIV and ESV simply translate this as the Angel of the LORD, and this is another way of saying the messenger of Yahweh.
I am not sure whether you studied the rest of the Song of Moses when we were discussing the figurative and poetical expression “Man of War”. I mentioned the arm of the LORD because it occurs in this Song:
Exodus 15:3-8 (KJV): 3 The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name. 4 Pharaoh’s chariots and his host hath he cast into the sea: his chosen captains also are drowned in the Red sea.5 The depths have covered them: they sank into the bottom as a stone. 6 Thy right hand, O LORD, is become glorious in power: thy right hand, O LORD, hath dashed in pieces the enemy. 7 And in the greatness of thine excellency thou hast overthrown them that rose up against thee: thou sentest forth thy wrath, which consumed them as stubble. 8 And with the blast of thy nostrils the waters were gathered together, the floods stood upright as an heap, and the depths were congealed in the heart of the sea.
I assumed that you would have studied this passage and seen that the Song uses figurative and poetical language. The figurative or poetical term “right hand” represents God’s power, as it states Thy right hand, O LORD, is become glorious in power. Other figres are used: Was it literally the breath of Yahweh’s nostrils that opened the Red Sea? Did God’s wrath literally issue forth as fire to consume the stubble?
The Angel of Yahweh in Zechariah 3, who also is described as Yahweh in this passage, is identified by Jude as Michael the Archangel.
Zechariah 3:1-2 (KJV): 1 And he shewed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right hand to resist him. 2 And the LORD said unto Satan, The LORD rebuke thee, O Satan; even the LORD that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?
Jude 9 (KJV): Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.
Do you interpret every Divine manifestation in the OT as the second person of the Trinity? Do you believe that God used his angels as messengers, and for example two are named in the OT, Gabriel and Michael?
Kind regards
Trevor
Apple7
New member
And...?
There are many ways to translate Malek Yahweh into English.
The translators are still Trinitarian...what do they know that you don't?
If you want to use someone else's translation for your assertions, well....then you need to be able to defend their translation....of which, you most assuredly cannot...you can't even be bothered to look at the original languages of scripture as the very premise...
You're stuck Trev...
More context means MORE proof for the Triune God.
• Exo 15.6 ‘Right Hand’
• Exo 15.8 ‘Spirit’
• Exo 15.10 ‘Spirit’
• Exo 15.12 ‘Right Hand’
Keep it coming, Trev~!
The only thing that you managed to get correct is that Malek Yahweh IS Yahweh.
Then, you go off the deep end, and attempt to blend two entirely different scriptures, as one in the same.
Desperate much, Trev?
Greetings again Apple7,
Kind regards
Trevor
So you admit that there are many ways to translate Malek Yahweh into English, but you seem to demand that your translation must be correct because it agrees with your particular view that the Trinity is being explicitly taught in Exodus 3:2. Of the many ways that Malek Yahweh can be translated into English, is “the Angel of the LORD” as given in the KJV, NASB, NIV and ESV one of the valid ways? If it is valid, then I do not have to substantiate these translations. Nevertheless you are correct as I do not have thorough-going language skills, but rely on others and on reference books. I suggest that the comments in TWOT #1068 for messenger and Exodus 3:2 give a reasonable explanation of this, giving a range of opinions, including your view, without demanding that your view must be correct as you insist.
Only in your imagination and faulty or shallow syllogisms.
I believe that Jude is quoting and alluding to Zechariah 3:1-2. In this incident Jesus is not the Yahweh Angel, but is represented by Joshua the High Priest, labouring to rebuild the Temple. Jesus is the anti-typical Joshua. This vision has prophetical detail concerning Joshua and the Temple of his time, and uses this framework to prophecy of the greater fulfilment in Jesus. Looking at Zechariah 3:1-2, why does the Angel with the Name Yahweh say “Yahweh rebuke thee”. If he was actually Yahweh Himself, would he not say “I rebuke thee”?
Kind regards
Trevor
Apple7
New member
Again...
If you want to use someone else's Trinitarian English rendering, in lieu of your own non-Trinitarian version, then you would have to actually defend why your interpretation supersedes theirs.
Can you do it?
Sounding pretty weak there, Trev...
Again....very weak defense.
Why not show us your own exegesis...if you are confident...
Greetings again Apple7,
Kind regards
Trevor
I do not have a non-Trinitarian version. I mainly use the KJV and compare this with other reputable translations such as RV, NASB, ESV. I am very happy with “Angel of the LORD” or “Messenger of Yahweh”.
Criticism accepted, but I have not seen any real discussion on what I have stated in this Post and others. For example, what is your view on Isaiah 6, apart from holy, holy, holy being three Holies? Does such a concept really fit in with the overall context, where Isaiah only saw one King upon the throne in the Temple?
I am not sure what you are asking here. Are you asking me to describe my understanding of Zechariah 3? I have expressed my view on other threads that there is One God the Father, and that our Lord Jesus Christ is the Son of God. I have also discussed briefly on some threads my understanding of Yahweh as “He will be or become” and Elohim as the One God the Father, who works in and through numerous agents, such as Angels and Judges. This is the background that helps to understand the teaching concerning Jesus, coupled WITH the NT teaching which is the greater revelation.
Kind regards
Trevor
Apple7
New member
And I heard the voice of Yahweh, saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go for Us? Then I said, Behold me. Send me! Isa 6.8
Since 'Plural of Majesty' NEVER existed anywhere in the Ancient Near East (ANE), including Biblical Hebrew, we must assume that Yahweh is plural, of which fits well with the Trisagion, as mentioned earlier.
Greetings again Apple7,
The vision is also Isaiah looking into the Most Holy Place of the Temple, with the Vail now removed, and this is why the ascription is Holy, Holy, Holy but instead of static furniture when Uzziah attempted to usurp the King / Priest role, we have the vision of all that these furniture items depicted, the Most Holy King/Priest enthroned upon the throne of David for the 1000 years. Uzziah was smitten as he approached the Vail. Up to this time Isaiah had failed to effectively fulfil the role of prophet to the king as had his predecessor Zechariah.
The usage of "us" in Isaiah 6 is similar to Genesis 1:26-27 where Yahweh, God the Father invites the surrounding Angels to participate in the creation of man in God's and the Elohim's image. This is verified by David's succinct quotation and allusion to these events in Psalm 8:5 where it states that Yahweh made man a little lower than the Elohim, that is the Angels.
Kind regards
Trevor
I believe that in the context of Isaiah 6 the “Us” is the King upon the throne speaking to and including the Seraphim. They are symbolic creatures, prophetic of the saints. The vision is thus of Jesus enthroned in His Kingdom, upon the Temple Throne of David as King / Priest asking who would go to preach. The vision then has this interplay with Isaiah, who is the first in line to help outwork God’s purpose in the earth, in order to accomplish the final vision of Isaiah 2 and Isaiah 6. Isaiah accomplishes a great deal towards this goal, but he and his name, salvation of Yahweh, are only a precursor to the full accomplishment of God’s purpose in Jesus, Yah’s salvation. The very message that Isaiah is commissioned with, becomes the message outworked in Jesus’ ministry as John 12:36-41 and its immediate context testifies with the visit of the Greeks and the failure of the Jews. The Seraphim, like the Cherubim, not only signify the future saints, but primarily Jesus who is the archetype of all the Tabernacle symbols. He is the serpent on the pole that was lifted up in his crucifixion. He is the one whose wings covered his face, feet and did fly. Thus the vision of Isaiah 6 is multi-layered, but it has nothing to do with a supposed Trinity.
The vision is also Isaiah looking into the Most Holy Place of the Temple, with the Vail now removed, and this is why the ascription is Holy, Holy, Holy but instead of static furniture when Uzziah attempted to usurp the King / Priest role, we have the vision of all that these furniture items depicted, the Most Holy King/Priest enthroned upon the throne of David for the 1000 years. Uzziah was smitten as he approached the Vail. Up to this time Isaiah had failed to effectively fulfil the role of prophet to the king as had his predecessor Zechariah.
The usage of "us" in Isaiah 6 is similar to Genesis 1:26-27 where Yahweh, God the Father invites the surrounding Angels to participate in the creation of man in God's and the Elohim's image. This is verified by David's succinct quotation and allusion to these events in Psalm 8:5 where it states that Yahweh made man a little lower than the Elohim, that is the Angels.
Kind regards
Trevor
Apple7
New member
That's a pretty fanciful theory, Trevor...but, it has no scriptural backing...and you proved that it doesn't...
The Plural Creator is found all throughout scripture, and has NO need to call upon His created angels for help, as thus...
Gen 1.26 - 27
And God said, let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the heavens, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over all the creepers creeping on the earth. And God created (bara) the man in His own image; in the image of God He created (bara) him. He created (bara) them male and female.
This Gen 1 passage informs the reader that our Creator God is plural, via the usage of ‘us’ and ‘our’…repeated three times.
Immediately after this declaration, the creative verb ‘bara’ is utilized in three successive acts when once should have sufficed – in direct correlation with the singular, he/his. Simultaneously singular and plural at the same time. Another clear indicator of The Triune Creator.
Jeremiah 32.17
Ah, Lord Yahweh! (Father) You have made the heavens and the earth by Your great power (Holy Spirit) and Your outstretched arm (Son); not anything is too difficult for You,
Jeremiah 27.4 - 5
And command them to go to their masters, saying, So says Yahweh (Father) of Hosts, the God of Israel: So you shall say to your masters, I have made the earth, the man, and the animals on the face of the earth by My great Power (Holy Spirit) and by My outstretched Arm (Son); and I have given it to whom it seemed right in My eyes.
Psalm 149.2
Let Israel rejoice in his Makers (plural); let the sons of Zion be joyful in their King.
Ecclesiastes 12.1
Remember now your Creators (Plural) in the days of your youth, while the evil days do not come, or the years strike when you shall say, I have no pleasure in them;
And, of course, since we are on the Book of Isaiah, this is where your Yahweh+angels creation theory falls down, and can't ever get up again, as thus...
Isa 54.5
For your Makers (plural) are your husbands (plural) ; Yahweh of Hosts is His name; and your Redeemer is the Holy One of Israel; He is called the God of all the earth.
So...no Trev....The Plural God has absolutely NO need of His angels in Creating anything!
Study your scriptures...
Greetings again Apple7,
Kind regards
Trevor
I appreciate your response, but I will hold to this until someone, and you have not, either adjusts or corrects my view on this.
You have not explained Psalm 8:5 where David quotes and alludes to the creation account and separates Yahweh from Elohim in the creative process of man.
God may have no need to include others, but he actually delights to share his work and purpose with others.
Kind regards
Trevor
NWL
Active member
No, it is simply written such a way that he appears present as the messenger of Yahweh is representing him.
Genesis 16:7,9,10,11;19:1,15,17;22:11,15;28:12;31:11;32:1
Exodus 3:2;14:19
Numbers 22:22-27,31,32,34,35
Judges 2:1,4;5:23;6:11,12,20,21,22;13:9,13,15-18,20,21
1 Samuel 29:9
2 Samuel 14:17,20,27;24:16
1 Kings 19:7
2 Kings 1:3,15;19:35
1 Chronicles 21:12;21:15,16,18,30
2 Chronicles 36:16
Psalm 34:7;35:5,6
Isaiah 37:36
Haggai 1:13
Zechariah 1:11,12;3:1,5,6;12:8
Malachi 2:7
But is not literally God, but declares that he is God, accepted as God and is worshipped as God since he is representing God.
Apple7
New member
Its up to you to scripturally defend your assertions.
You can't keep having others finish your arguments for you...
Best that you first actually study what you want so desperately to use for your position...
Psalm 8
Yahweh, our Lords, how majestic is Your name in all the earth; who have set Your Glory above the heavens! Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings, You have founded strength, on account of Your adversaries, to destroy the enemy taking vengeance. When I look upon Your heavens, the creation of Your fingers: the moon and the stars which You have fixed; what is mankind that You are mindful of him, and The Son of Man, that You observe? For You have made him lack a little of God; and have crowned him with glory and honor. Caused him to rule over the creation of Your hands; You have put all under his feet: all flocks and oxen, and also the animals of the field, the birds of the heavens, and the fish of the sea, all that pass through the sea. Yahweh, our Lords, how majestic is Your name in all the earth!
Apple7
New member
Show us...
A name and a number is all you have?!
Malek Yahweh is Worshiped as Yahweh
And they came to the place which God had said to him. And Abraham built there the altar, and arranged the wood. And he bound his son Isaac and laid him on the altar, on the wood. And Abraham put out his hand and took the knife to slay his son. And Malek Yahweh called to him from the heavens and said, Abraham! Abraham! And he said, Behold me. And He said, Do not lay your hand on the boy, nor do anything to him. For now I know that you are a God-fearer, and you have not withheld your son, your only one, from Me. And Abraham lifted up his eyes and looked. And behold! A ram behind him was entangled in a thicket by its horns. And Abraham went and took the ram and offered it for a burnt offering instead of his son. And Abraham called the name of that place Yahweh Will See; so that it is said until this day, In the mount of Yahweh it will be seen. (Gen 22.9 -14)
Here we have the classic story of Abraham as he is about to sacrifice his son, Isaac, to God.
But, as we can easily see, the sacrifice is to Malek Yahweh.
Now...stop your silly running...
Greetings again Apple7,
You have not stated anything substantial on Isaiah 6, except that Holy, Holy, Holy proves that Yahweh is three Holies. You seem to be simply dismissive of what I have stated, and you even claim that I have proved what I stated had no scriptural backing, and that my arguments are not finished. Yet you have not discussed any element of what I stated.
I come on this forum to learn and to discuss, and any view I present I hope someone will correct if necessary or improve on what I have stated, but I find your treatment of what I have stated is simply dismissive. I feel that, together with your unusual logic on Man of War, the arm of Yahweh and hand of Yahweh, you approach various scriptures to simply impose the Trinity upon them. I have serious doubts that you have read and understood Isaiah 6 and Exodus 15 properly, but imagine that you believe that these Scriptures are only there to extract the Trinity.
I do not accept your explanation. I believe that Jesus refers to Yahweh, God the Father as the Lord of creation in the following when he alludes to and quotes Psalm 8:
Matthew 11:25-26 (KJV): 25 At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. 26 Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy sight.
Kind regards
Trevor
I suggest that what you have stated in this thread so far on Isaiah 6 has been mainly bluff and bluster. I have presented my understanding of Isaiah 6. Your method may be successful in a debate, or in front of an audience when you alone have the floor, with a bit of humour to overcome the error or unusual claims of your statements, the crowd that is on your side against me who has not studied, but it does not help in a discussion.
You have not stated anything substantial on Isaiah 6, except that Holy, Holy, Holy proves that Yahweh is three Holies. You seem to be simply dismissive of what I have stated, and you even claim that I have proved what I stated had no scriptural backing, and that my arguments are not finished. Yet you have not discussed any element of what I stated.
I come on this forum to learn and to discuss, and any view I present I hope someone will correct if necessary or improve on what I have stated, but I find your treatment of what I have stated is simply dismissive. I feel that, together with your unusual logic on Man of War, the arm of Yahweh and hand of Yahweh, you approach various scriptures to simply impose the Trinity upon them. I have serious doubts that you have read and understood Isaiah 6 and Exodus 15 properly, but imagine that you believe that these Scriptures are only there to extract the Trinity.
We have come back to your standard claim that you only rely on the original languages. Could you explain why the Trinitarian translations, KJV, RV, NASB, NIV and ESV all translate this as “Lord”? Are all these translations wrong? Is this an intensive singular or some other explanation?
I do not accept your explanation. I believe that Jesus refers to Yahweh, God the Father as the Lord of creation in the following when he alludes to and quotes Psalm 8:
Matthew 11:25-26 (KJV): 25 At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. 26 Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy sight.
Kind regards
Trevor
Apple7
New member
Having a bout of self-pity, Trev...?
Hiding behind someone else's English Trinitarian rendering will not help you unless YOU are willing to study the original languages yourself.
You claim to be here to learn, and yet, you are unwilling to learn.
Serious students of scripture ALWAYS consult the ORIGINAL words of scripture.
Thus....you are not serious.
Greetings again Apple7,
Getting back to Psalm 8 you have not yet addressed Psalm 8:5, where Yahweh and Elohim is separated when considering the creation of man. In this succinct summary by David of Genesis 1:26-27, the best translation of Elohim here is Angels. Now seeing you are an expert on languages and discovering the Trinity in obscure places, how do you understand this?
Psalm 8:5 (KJV): For thou (Yahweh) hast made him a little lower than the angels (Elohim), and hast crowned him with glory and honour.
This proves that Elohim in Genesis 1:1,26-27 includes Yahweh and the Angels.
Now the reason why I do not accept a plurality of Yahweh in Psalm 8 is because of the above, Psalm 8:5. First, this is the language of creation, but a careful consideration of Psalm 8 is that it takes the language of the creation as a framework to speak of the New Creation. God the Father, Yahweh makes Jesus the Son of God a little lower than the Angels. How and when this was done is clearly revealed in the following:
Luke 1:34-35 (KJV): 34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? 35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: [therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee[/u] shall be called the Son of God.
Now you like searching for passages where the Father, the Holy Spirit and the Son of God are mentioned, here is one of the most important. This shows that God the Father is the father and Mary the mother in the conception, birth process by means of God’s power, the Holy Spirit and the result is the birth of the holy child, the literal Son of God, Jesus. No shrinking of the Second Person of the Trinity, but a normal conception and birth. Yahweh made Jesus a little lower than the Angels, because he was and is a man, not a God/man. He partook of the nature of Mary and was thus subject to mortality and the sentence that was imposed upon Adam and his descendants. As far as nature was concerned he was human flesh, subject to death, and thus lower in nature than the Angels.
You have not answered why the KJV, RV, NIV, NASB and ESV all translated Psalm 8:1 as “O LORD, our Lord” not “Lords”. Are these translations wrong, or is your understanding of Hebrew deficient? Did you get 51 out of 100 in your exam? Thus when I look at Psalm 8 I believe that it is talking about the One Yahweh, God the Father. I also use Psalm 110:1 to clearly distinguish between the One Yahweh as God the Father, and the son of David, yet David’s Lord, the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God.
Kind regards
Trevor
I felt a bit better after writing those comments, but regretted it after. I should put up with most of this. Do you feel better after saying “Study up, Trev”? and “you are not serious” as in this post. Actually I feel that I am too serious, and should let you go on your merry way, but I benefit from looking at these things.
Learning the Hebrew alphabet by means of 12 videos is as far as I have studied Hebrew. I use reference books for the meaning of words, and also interested in comparing translations and use commentaries cautiously.
Getting back to Psalm 8 you have not yet addressed Psalm 8:5, where Yahweh and Elohim is separated when considering the creation of man. In this succinct summary by David of Genesis 1:26-27, the best translation of Elohim here is Angels. Now seeing you are an expert on languages and discovering the Trinity in obscure places, how do you understand this?
Psalm 8:5 (KJV): For thou (Yahweh) hast made him a little lower than the angels (Elohim), and hast crowned him with glory and honour.
This proves that Elohim in Genesis 1:1,26-27 includes Yahweh and the Angels.
Now the reason why I do not accept a plurality of Yahweh in Psalm 8 is because of the above, Psalm 8:5. First, this is the language of creation, but a careful consideration of Psalm 8 is that it takes the language of the creation as a framework to speak of the New Creation. God the Father, Yahweh makes Jesus the Son of God a little lower than the Angels. How and when this was done is clearly revealed in the following:
Luke 1:34-35 (KJV): 34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? 35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: [therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee[/u] shall be called the Son of God.
Now you like searching for passages where the Father, the Holy Spirit and the Son of God are mentioned, here is one of the most important. This shows that God the Father is the father and Mary the mother in the conception, birth process by means of God’s power, the Holy Spirit and the result is the birth of the holy child, the literal Son of God, Jesus. No shrinking of the Second Person of the Trinity, but a normal conception and birth. Yahweh made Jesus a little lower than the Angels, because he was and is a man, not a God/man. He partook of the nature of Mary and was thus subject to mortality and the sentence that was imposed upon Adam and his descendants. As far as nature was concerned he was human flesh, subject to death, and thus lower in nature than the Angels.
You have not answered why the KJV, RV, NIV, NASB and ESV all translated Psalm 8:1 as “O LORD, our Lord” not “Lords”. Are these translations wrong, or is your understanding of Hebrew deficient? Did you get 51 out of 100 in your exam? Thus when I look at Psalm 8 I believe that it is talking about the One Yahweh, God the Father. I also use Psalm 110:1 to clearly distinguish between the One Yahweh as God the Father, and the son of David, yet David’s Lord, the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God.
Kind regards
Trevor
Apple7
New member
- Status