LOL! That's ridiculous!! And you had the nerve to ridicule my beliefs in that other thread while you're here posting this nonsense?
Jesus is God.
- Thread starter jzeidler
- Start date
Those who deny the Divinity of Christ preach a false Christ. Period. End of story.
The Divinity of Christ
http://www.peterkreeft.com/topics/christ-divinity.htm
BRIEF EXCERPT:
The doctrine of Christ's divinity is the central Christian doctrine, for it is like a skeleton key that opens all the others. Christians have not independently reasoned out and tested each of the teachings of Christ received via Bible and Church, but believe them all on his authority. For if Christ is divine, He can be trusted to be infallible in everything He said, even hard things like exalting suffering and poverty, forbidding divorce, giving his Church the authority to teach and forgive sins in his name, warning about hell (very often and very seriously), instituting the scandalous sacrament of eating his flesh—we often forget how many "hard sayings" he taught!
When the first Christian apologists began to give a reason for the faith that was in them to unbelievers, this doctrine of Christ's divinity naturally came under attack, for it was almost as incredible to Gentiles as it was scandalous to Jews. That a man who was born out of a woman's womb and died on a cross, a man who got tired and hungry and angry and agitated and wept at his friend's tomb, that this man who got dirt under his fingernails should be God was, quite simply, the most astonishing, incredible, crazy-sounding idea that had ever entered the mind of man in all human history.
The argument the early apologists used to defend this apparently indefensible doctrine has become a classic one. C.S. Lewis used it often, e.g. in Mere Christianity, the book that convinced Chuck Colson (and thousands of others). I once spent half a book (Between Heaven and Hell) on this one argument alone. It is the most important argument in Christian apologetics, for once an unbeliever accepts the conclusion of this argument (that Christ is divine), everything else in the Faith follows, not only intellectually (Christ's teachings must all then be true) but also personally (if Christ is God, He is also your total Lord and Savior).
The argument, like all effective arguments, is extremely simple: Christ was either God or a bad man.
Unbelievers almost always say he was a good man, not a bad man; that he was a great moral teacher, a sage, a philosopher, a moralist, and a prophet, not a criminal, not a man who deserved to be crucified. But a good man is the one thing he could not possibly have been according to simple common sense and logic. For he claimed to be God. He said, "Before Abraham was, I Am", thus speaking the word no Jew dares to speak because it is God's own private name, spoken by God himself to Moses at the burning bush. Jesus wanted everyone to believe that he was God. He wanted people to worship him. He claimed to forgive everyone's sins against everyone. (Who can do that but God, the One offended in every sin?)....(SNIP)
REST OF ARTICLE >> http://www.peterkreeft.com/topics/christ-divinity.htm
The Divinity of Christ
http://www.peterkreeft.com/topics/christ-divinity.htm
BRIEF EXCERPT:
The doctrine of Christ's divinity is the central Christian doctrine, for it is like a skeleton key that opens all the others. Christians have not independently reasoned out and tested each of the teachings of Christ received via Bible and Church, but believe them all on his authority. For if Christ is divine, He can be trusted to be infallible in everything He said, even hard things like exalting suffering and poverty, forbidding divorce, giving his Church the authority to teach and forgive sins in his name, warning about hell (very often and very seriously), instituting the scandalous sacrament of eating his flesh—we often forget how many "hard sayings" he taught!
When the first Christian apologists began to give a reason for the faith that was in them to unbelievers, this doctrine of Christ's divinity naturally came under attack, for it was almost as incredible to Gentiles as it was scandalous to Jews. That a man who was born out of a woman's womb and died on a cross, a man who got tired and hungry and angry and agitated and wept at his friend's tomb, that this man who got dirt under his fingernails should be God was, quite simply, the most astonishing, incredible, crazy-sounding idea that had ever entered the mind of man in all human history.
The argument the early apologists used to defend this apparently indefensible doctrine has become a classic one. C.S. Lewis used it often, e.g. in Mere Christianity, the book that convinced Chuck Colson (and thousands of others). I once spent half a book (Between Heaven and Hell) on this one argument alone. It is the most important argument in Christian apologetics, for once an unbeliever accepts the conclusion of this argument (that Christ is divine), everything else in the Faith follows, not only intellectually (Christ's teachings must all then be true) but also personally (if Christ is God, He is also your total Lord and Savior).
The argument, like all effective arguments, is extremely simple: Christ was either God or a bad man.
Unbelievers almost always say he was a good man, not a bad man; that he was a great moral teacher, a sage, a philosopher, a moralist, and a prophet, not a criminal, not a man who deserved to be crucified. But a good man is the one thing he could not possibly have been according to simple common sense and logic. For he claimed to be God. He said, "Before Abraham was, I Am", thus speaking the word no Jew dares to speak because it is God's own private name, spoken by God himself to Moses at the burning bush. Jesus wanted everyone to believe that he was God. He wanted people to worship him. He claimed to forgive everyone's sins against everyone. (Who can do that but God, the One offended in every sin?)....(SNIP)
REST OF ARTICLE >> http://www.peterkreeft.com/topics/christ-divinity.htm
".............In John 8:58, when quizzed about how he has special knowledge of Abraham, Jesus replies, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I Am"—invoking and applying to himself the personal name of God—"I Am" (Ex. 3:14). His audience understood exactly what he was claiming about himself. "So they took up stones to throw at him; but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple" (John 8:59).
In John 20:28, Thomas falls at Jesus’ feet, exclaiming, "My Lord and my God!" (Greek: Ho Kurios mou kai ho Theos mou—literally, "The Lord of me and the God of me!")
In Philippians 2:6, Paul tells us that Christ Jesus "[w]ho, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be g.asped" (New International Version). So Jesus chose to be born in humble, human form though he could have simply remained in equal glory with the Father for he was "in very nature God."
Also significant are passages that apply the title "the First and the Last" to Jesus. This is one of the Old Testament titles of Yahweh: "Thus says Yahweh, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, Yahweh of armies: ‘I am the First and I am the Last; besides me there is no god’" (Is. 44:6; cf. 41:4, 48:12).
This title is directly applied to Jesus three times in the book of Revelation: "When I saw him [Christ], I fell at his feet as though dead. But he laid his right hand upon me, saying, ‘Fear not, I am the First and the Last’" (Rev. 1:17). "And to the angel of the church in Smyrna write: ‘The words of the First and the Last, who died and came to life’" (Rev. 2:8). "Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense, to repay every one for what he has done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the beginning and the end" (Rev. 22:12–13).
This last quote is especially significant since it applies to Jesus the parallel title "the Alpha and the Omega," which Revelation earlier applied to the Lord God: "‘I am the Alpha and the Omega,’ says the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty" (Rev. 1:8).
Quote from >> http://www.catholic.com/tracts/the-divinity-of-christ
In John 20:28, Thomas falls at Jesus’ feet, exclaiming, "My Lord and my God!" (Greek: Ho Kurios mou kai ho Theos mou—literally, "The Lord of me and the God of me!")
In Philippians 2:6, Paul tells us that Christ Jesus "[w]ho, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be g.asped" (New International Version). So Jesus chose to be born in humble, human form though he could have simply remained in equal glory with the Father for he was "in very nature God."
Also significant are passages that apply the title "the First and the Last" to Jesus. This is one of the Old Testament titles of Yahweh: "Thus says Yahweh, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, Yahweh of armies: ‘I am the First and I am the Last; besides me there is no god’" (Is. 44:6; cf. 41:4, 48:12).
This title is directly applied to Jesus three times in the book of Revelation: "When I saw him [Christ], I fell at his feet as though dead. But he laid his right hand upon me, saying, ‘Fear not, I am the First and the Last’" (Rev. 1:17). "And to the angel of the church in Smyrna write: ‘The words of the First and the Last, who died and came to life’" (Rev. 2:8). "Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense, to repay every one for what he has done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the beginning and the end" (Rev. 22:12–13).
This last quote is especially significant since it applies to Jesus the parallel title "the Alpha and the Omega," which Revelation earlier applied to the Lord God: "‘I am the Alpha and the Omega,’ says the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty" (Rev. 1:8).
Quote from >> http://www.catholic.com/tracts/the-divinity-of-christ
It doesn't matter what your testimony is if it denies the trinity. If your testimony denies the trinity it isn't worth squat.
Zeke
Well-known member
Galatians 4:20-28 cover's the two fathers, mothers, and sons, one physical and the other spirit, one you observe (flesh and blood) the other (Divine Spirit)you don't. Luke 17:20-21, Mark 7:13, 2Cor 3:6. The inward Kingdom laid out in Metaphoric teaching about the lower and higher nature.
No Male or Female in Christ they are brought together as one Ephesians 1:9-10, that is the marriage scripture is teaching about, not temporal physical kingdom.
Everyone on this thread that professes Jesus as their hope is to be respected.
We fight over the doctrine we hold dear, but I'm posting pictures that represent most of the systems discussed here.
May discussion always be void of judgment and hostility.
The Roman church commissioned barbarians to kill the Arians many years ago.
That was counter to Christ's teachings.
We fight over the doctrine we hold dear, but I'm posting pictures that represent most of the systems discussed here.
May discussion always be void of judgment and hostility.
The Roman church commissioned barbarians to kill the Arians many years ago.
That was counter to Christ's teachings.
Amen, Yerushalaim of above is our mother, (covenant), but they do not truly believe Paul as they profess or they would understand his doctrine and incorporate his teachings into their own. And none of the opposers on the previous page have understood anything posted thus far because most all of what they said was already answered. Coming back after a few pages and ignoring what has just been posted, then demanding the same answers all over again as if they were not just answered, is lying and deceitful.
That was merely "counter to Christ's teachings" ???
:crackup: It is called literal physical MURDER, (not just symbolic as if out of the mouth from the heart, but physical).
Why would anyone believe MURDERERS could properly "formulate" THE ALMIGHTY ELOHIM?
Everyone on this thread that professes Jesus as their hope is to be respected.
We fight over the doctrine we hold dear, but I'm posting pictures that represent most of the systems discussed here.
May discussion always be void of judgment and hostility.
The Roman church commissioned barbarians to kill the Arians many years ago.
That was counter to Christ's teachings.
Do you want to know why none of those representations are accurate? It is because the Elohim Son is always in the Bay or Bosom of the Father, (John 1:18). This is true because of the Hebrew mindset from which the author of the Gospel of John speaks. The Father is all encompassing; the heavens and the heaven of the heavens cannot contain Him, (Deut 10:14, 1 Kgs 8:27, 2 Chr 2:6, 2 Chr 6:18). But the Son is not so because he is within the bosom of the Father. If there was a diagram for this it would show all of the universe INSIDE the Father, and there would be no limits or "circle" in which the Father would be enclosed, and the Son would be imaged as the Messenger sent forth from the Father to the Earth, to the world, and to mankind, (as our Elder Brother). Therefore wheresoever the Son is, upon the earth or in the heavens, he is still within the bosom of the Father because, as Messiah Yeshua says, the Father is greater than himself, (John 14:28).
These are this simplest of things, and straight from the scripture, and yet no one from the Trinitarian mindset has been able to adequately explain the Trinity for seventeen hundred years now; it is "a mystery", "either believe it or your eternal soul is in jeopardy." It is nothing more than a dogmatic assertion, which has never been proven to be true from what is actually written in the scripture; even though there are countless libraries, full of books, spanning seventeen hundred years to the present concerning the Trinity doctrine.
Awesome post.
What is your take on this one?
And this one?
Sent from my HTC One M9 using TheologyOnline mobile app
I too, initially misunderstood Daqq.
I count myself in good company.
Sent from my iPad using TOL ~Jesus is the Theology and the Counselor is the Commentary
Cross Reference
New member
Huh? All of your Gal 4 referal has to to do births and unto what they accomplished, nothing more that changes anything already accepted as the traditional account of things.
Awesome post.
What is your take on this one?
And this one?
Sent from my HTC One M9 using TheologyOnline mobile app
There have been plenty of write ups concerning that image because the NKJV originally displayed it prominently on the front cover and binding, (I do not know if it still does or not but I know it did because I have what is now an old printing). All you need do is know this information and you can search and find plenty of articles written on the NKJV seal, both in defense of it and against it, (calling it an occult symbol which, sorry to say, it is and was even before the NKJV and its publishers, T. Nelson, decided to use it). The only real point I feel the need to make about it is that even if it does simply and innocently represent the Trinitarian viewpoint, still yet, what the NKJV boldly and prominently displays on the front cover and outside of the binder is THE TRINITARIAN BIAS that runs throughout the entire translation, (and at least they are honest about it and I do appreciate that!).
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Spirit is ONE......
Spirit is ONE......
Thank you for sharing different perspectives, formulations, arrangements and relations within The Universal ONE
Note,...there is only one fundamental eternal, infinite, ultimate REALITY, we call by many names, and refer to by many 'forms',...but its the same One and Only SOURCE of All That IS
Adding to my former posts here and here,....whether you prefer a Unitarian, Trinitarian or some other 'spin',...there is still One Universal Spirit and Infinite Intelligence that is the Father-Mother of us all.
I for certain relational purposes often sport a Unitarian view for practicality, but enjoy exploring both orthodox and heterodoxical views on 'God' or the 'Godhead', from Gnostic perspectives to the more cosmic ones revealed in other religious texts. Those of us who are more mystical in orientation often resonate with the esoteric aspects of teaching.
Essence is one, forms are many. One Ocean, many rivers. One Light, many reflections.
Ultimately in a truly religious or spiritual sense, since Deity looks at the heart, and we are all the offspring of THE ONE,....we ought to recognize, appreciate and celebrate our different traditions seeing that all these wonderful colours, shapes and forms make up the mythology of man's experience (his-story), and so are all-inclusive parts of the One Totality.
The One is All,....and All is One. IT is all there is, and more.
Now some more snobbish, dogmatic or rigid fundamentalists may deem this theology too 'new age' or 'universal', but reality is what it is, seeing that infinite light is manifesting itself in a multitude of ways to no end,...but its all the same Light!
One Presence. One Consciousness.
Spirit is ONE......
Everyone on this thread that professes Jesus as their hope is to be respected.
We fight over the doctrine we hold dear, but I'm posting pictures that represent most of the systems discussed here.
May discussion always be void of judgment and hostility.
The Roman church commissioned barbarians to kill the Arians many years ago.
That was counter to Christ's teachings.
Thank you for sharing different perspectives, formulations, arrangements and relations within The Universal ONE
Note,...there is only one fundamental eternal, infinite, ultimate REALITY, we call by many names, and refer to by many 'forms',...but its the same One and Only SOURCE of All That IS
Adding to my former posts here and here,....whether you prefer a Unitarian, Trinitarian or some other 'spin'
,...there is still One Universal Spirit and Infinite Intelligence that is the Father-Mother of us all.I for certain relational purposes often sport a Unitarian view for practicality, but enjoy exploring both orthodox and heterodoxical views on 'God' or the 'Godhead', from Gnostic perspectives to the more cosmic ones revealed in other religious texts. Those of us who are more mystical in orientation often resonate with the esoteric aspects of teaching.
Essence is one, forms are many. One Ocean, many rivers. One Light, many reflections.
Ultimately in a truly religious or spiritual sense, since Deity looks at the heart, and we are all the offspring of THE ONE,....we ought to recognize, appreciate and celebrate our different traditions seeing that all these wonderful colours, shapes and forms make up the mythology of man's experience (his-story), and so are all-inclusive parts of the One Totality.
The One is All,....and All is One. IT is all there is, and more.
Now some more snobbish, dogmatic or rigid fundamentalists may deem this theology too 'new age' or 'universal', but reality is what it is, seeing that infinite light is manifesting itself in a multitude of ways to no end,...but its all the same Light!
One Presence. One Consciousness.
Daqq is one of the smartest posters here Biblically
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Trinity Hilights........
Trinity Hilights........
I love the symbol,....its on my Thomas Nelson NKJV,......its a triquetra.
Of course its an occult symbol, simply meaning its meaning is 'esoteric' or 'hidden',...as a 'symbol' it can refer to any Trinitarian formula or triad,...so its been used anciently and modernly in various ways. Yes,...the NKJV for using it, obviously shows a Trinitarian bias. Granted, the triquetra is also used as a symbol for various magickal systems,...it depends on the meaning and value YOU invest in it, since a symbol can be 'interpreted' variously. Also Christianity doesn't have a monopoly on a Trinitarian view of God,...since various trinities predate it, and can be correlated in the nature of things. It just so happens that if there is a transcendental Trinity existing, that divine pattern is mirrored in Nature herself. "As above, so below". Spirit(invisible essence) and matter (visible forms) reflect one another.
The 'controversy' over it being a 'satanic' symbol (oh dear!) is only pushed by certain KJV Only extremists and other conservatives, but I give the NKJV props for being a more complete and correct 'translation' of the old KJV anyways, so it makes for a wonderful study bible IMO, at least its the one I use for reference purposes....among other translations.
Trinity Hilights........
There have been plenty of write ups concerning that image because the NKJV originally displayed it prominently on the front cover and binding, (I do not know if it still does or not but I know it did because I have what is now an old printing). All you need do is know this information and you can search and find plenty of articles written on the NKJV seal, both in defense of it and against it, (calling it an occult symbol which, sorry to say, it is and was even before the NKJV and its publishers, T. Nelson, decided to use it). The only real point I feel the need to make about it is that even if it does simply and innocently represent the Trinitarian viewpoint, still yet, what the NKJV boldly and prominently displays on the front cover and outside of the binder is THE TRINITARIAN BIAS that runs throughout the entire translation, (and at least they are honest about it and I do appreciate that!).
I love the symbol,....its on my Thomas Nelson NKJV,......its a triquetra.
Of course its an occult symbol, simply meaning its meaning is 'esoteric' or 'hidden',...as a 'symbol' it can refer to any Trinitarian formula or triad,...so its been used anciently and modernly in various ways. Yes,...the NKJV for using it, obviously shows a Trinitarian bias. Granted, the triquetra is also used as a symbol for various magickal systems,...it depends on the meaning and value YOU invest in it, since a symbol can be 'interpreted' variously. Also Christianity doesn't have a monopoly on a Trinitarian view of God,...since various trinities predate it, and can be correlated in the nature of things. It just so happens that if there is a transcendental Trinity existing, that divine pattern is mirrored in Nature herself. "As above, so below". Spirit(invisible essence) and matter (visible forms) reflect one another.
The 'controversy' over it being a 'satanic' symbol (oh dear!) is only pushed by certain KJV Only extremists and other conservatives, but I give the NKJV props for being a more complete and correct 'translation' of the old KJV anyways, so it makes for a wonderful study bible IMO, at least its the one I use for reference purposes....among other translations.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Not 'end of story',....theres more
Not 'end of story',....theres more
Sorry, that's not the "end of the story", since there were early groups of Christians who did NOT profess or even know of what later church councils formulated as their 'orthodox' version of the Godhead. In fact a Unitarian view essentially and relationally is the proper orthodox Jewish context for their Messiah, which was carried over into some of the earlier followers of Jesus, still holding to the fundamentals of Judaism, with some slight innovations.
The RCC's patent formula may give consolation to the sheeple who are happy and secure with their dogma and creeds, but for the more spiritually adventurous, the story doesn't end there. There are many kinds or interpretations of 'Christology',...from one extreme end (Jesus is wholly God) to the other extreme end (Jesus is wholly man)....what you see as the debate of many centuries covers that very 'spectrum' of dissecting and denominating Jesus dual nature(assumably),....so you have a whole potpourri of various 'con-fusions'.
Do note, as per my first few posts accessible here,....a Unitarian View is just as good if not better within a different referential context, so a dogmatic belief in the orthodox formula is only 'necessary' to the 'believer' who assumes it. Many a happy Unitarians are doing just dandy without it
Furthermore, I would bet that if you do meet Jesus in the spirit-world after your transition, it would be the love you shared and your service to others that would be close to his heart, rather than believing some dogma of him being 'God' that would rank high on God's priority list. But yes,...diving deep into Christology issues can be fun
Not 'end of story',....theres more
Sorry, that's not the "end of the story", since there were early groups of Christians who did NOT profess or even know of what later church councils formulated as their 'orthodox' version of the Godhead. In fact a Unitarian view essentially and relationally is the proper orthodox Jewish context for their Messiah, which was carried over into some of the earlier followers of Jesus, still holding to the fundamentals of Judaism, with some slight innovations.
The RCC's patent formula may give consolation to the sheeple who are happy and secure with their dogma and creeds, but for the more spiritually adventurous, the story doesn't end there. There are many kinds or interpretations of 'Christology',...from one extreme end (Jesus is wholly God) to the other extreme end (Jesus is wholly man)....what you see as the debate of many centuries covers that very 'spectrum' of dissecting and denominating Jesus dual nature(assumably),....so you have a whole potpourri of various 'con-fusions'.
Do note, as per my first few posts accessible here,....a Unitarian View is just as good if not better within a different referential context, so a dogmatic belief in the orthodox formula is only 'necessary' to the 'believer' who assumes it. Many a happy Unitarians are doing just dandy without it
Furthermore, I would bet that if you do meet Jesus in the spirit-world after your transition, it would be the love you shared and your service to others that would be close to his heart, rather than believing some dogma of him being 'God' that would rank high on God's priority list. But yes,...diving deep into Christology issues can be fun
Not listening to the video but reading the commentary on the page: it really does not matter whether the reading for the only begotten in John 1:18 is "Son" or whether the only begotten is "God", (Theos). That is because the man Yeshua does not claim to be the Logos-Memra-Word and the rest of the Gospel of John reveals this to be true. Those passages have already been quoted and gone over many times in this and many other threads. There is a chain of clear emphatic statements which, if a person be honest and accept what Yeshua says, then none of this would even be necessary because the arguments would be over. If you would like that I go find them and post them again here, I will, just for you, seriously.
(Quote)
That is because the man Yeshua does not claim to be the Logos-Memra-Word and the rest of the Gospel of John reveals this to be true.
Jn.1:14. And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among (in)us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth. 15John testified about Him and cried out, saying, “This was He of whom I said,
‘He who comes after me has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me.’”
John the Baptist said that.
16For of His fullness we have all received, and grace upon grace. 17For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ. 18No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.
1Jn.1:1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we looked upon and have with our hands, concerning the word of life— 2the life was made manifest, and we have seen it, and testify to it and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was made manifest to us— 3that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ. 4And we are writing these things so that our joy may be complete.
5This is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.
1Jn.5:1 Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God, and everyone who loves the Father loves whoever has been born of him. 2By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and obey his commandments. 3For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome. 4For everyone who has been born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world—our faith. 5Who is it that overcomes the world except the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?
1Jn.4:11. Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another. 12No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.
1Jn.4:20. If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen
Jn.1:18. No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.
Jn.5:37. And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape. 38And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not.
1Tim.1:17. Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen.
Is.48:16. Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me.
Peace.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Amen Freelight, (and I still have my NKJVersion too).
Aumen
- you see, I can sneak occult meaning into this word, and blend a Vedic and Christian 'sense' into this word. Lets not forget also the Egyptian connections :surf: