If you are responding to me, I quoted from the Psalm, (Psa 40:12), which Beameup referenced when he quoted Heb 10:5-7 which quotes Psa 40:6-8. That passage I quoted makes my point because Psa 40:12 is still the same context together with the verses which Beameup quoted. What has happened is that Beameup failed to check the context from which the author of Hebrews was quoting, (as most fail to do). The authors of the New Testament are not doing what most here seem to like to do, that is, to rip things out of their context and use scripture one-liners to say something else besides what the scripture actually teaches in a given passage; no, but rather, when the author of Hebrews quotes from that passage he intends for the reader to check that passage context because that is the context from which he speaks or writes when he quotes the passage, (or any other passage). In other words the author of Hebrews is not doing what Beameup is doing with the scripture: the author of Hebrews no doubt means his words in the context of the passage which he quotes from, (Psalm 40 in this case). Moreover the only thing "Beameup" and "Lazy afternoon" are revealing is that they only know Messiah according to the flesh. Those truly in Messiah, that is, born from above, know nothing and no one according to the flesh; even if we have known Messiah according to the flesh in the past; yet now we know not the Messiah according to the flesh anymore: if anyone truly be in Messiah, the same is a new creature, old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
JESUS IS NOT YHWH
- Thread starter KingdomRose
- Start date
- Status
If you are responding to me, I quoted from the Psalm, (Psa 40:12), which Beameup referenced when he quoted Heb 10:5-7 which quotes Psa 40:6-8. That passage I quoted makes my point because Psa 40:12 is still the same context together with the verses which Beameup quoted. What has happened is that Beameup failed to check the context from which the author of Hebrews was quoting, (as most fail to do). The authors of the New Testament are not doing what most here seem to like to do, that is, to rip things out of their context and use scripture one-liners to say something else besides what the scripture actually teaches in a given passage; no, but rather, when the author of Hebrews quotes from that passage he intends for the reader to check that passage context because that is the context from which he speaks or writes when he quotes the passage, (or any other passage). In other words the author of Hebrews is not doing what Beameup is doing with the scripture: the author of Hebrews no doubt means his words in the context of the passage which he quotes from, (Psalm 40 in this case). Moreover the only thing "Beameup" and "Lazy afternoon" are revealing is that they only know Messiah according to the flesh. Those truly in Messiah, that is, born from above, know nothing and no one according to the flesh; even if we have known Messiah according to the flesh in the past; yet now we know not the Messiah according to the flesh anymore: if anyone truly be in Messiah, the same is a new creature, old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
God's Truth
New member
You do not even believe Jesus is the Greatest Love and sacrifice. You say Jesus did not come from heaven.
oatmeal
Well-known member
Maybe you could reply this time.
God is able to make children of Abraham out of stones. What species would they be? Who is their parents?
Are they stones or children of Abraham?
oatmeal
Well-known member
Since the Greek word kai can be translated "and" or "even" the context requires that in Titus 2:13 it be translated "even".
Jesus Christ is the glory of the Great God.
The context I refer to is the rest of scripture. Especially scriptures like Nehemiah 9:27 where we learn that God has sent saviours (plural) God is in the business of saving people. He is the CEO of salvation, and He has the management skills to know when and where and to whom to delegate that saving grace.
Besides the OT champions of scripture like David, Samson, Esther..... that list includes His son, Jesus Christ.
God is the author of salvation, Jesus Christ (and the others God appointed this duty) are the agents of God's salvation.
7 Therefore thou deliveredst them into the hand of their enemies, who vexed them: and in the time of their trouble, when they cried unto thee, thou heardest them from heaven; and according to thy manifold mercies thou gavest them saviours, who saved them out of the hand of their enemies.
I did reply to your question, I said, "And he has done so."
"Coming to Him as to a living stone, rejected indeed by men, but chosen by God and precious, you also as living stones are being built up a spiritual house" (1 Peter 2:4)
Peter claimed Jesus was a living stone and Paul referred to him as a Rock.
What species was the Rock?
God's Truth
New member
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
So you are saying that we are not waiting for the appearing of the glory of the Lord Jesus?:
"But our citizenship is in heaven. And we eagerly await a Savior from there, the Lord Jesus Christ, who, by the power that enables him to bring everything under his control, will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body" (Phil.3:20-21).
The following verse can only be speaking about the appearing of the Lord Jesus, our great God and savior:
"...while we wait for the blessed hope--the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ" (Titus 2:13).
Tell me how you think that verse should be translated since you obviously do not think that it is translated correctly.
Why are you trying to correct the SCRIPTURE which I quoted?
Is it not because the SCRIPTURE does not agree with YOU? :chuckle:
CherubRam
New member
Most Semitic scholars transliterate waw as a "w" or a "u", depending on school and pronunciation. Vav and the use of V, did not originate till later.
You're wrong. That is why there is a distinction between the Father and the Son.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Titus 2:13
Titus 2:13
This verse can be variously translated and does NOT indicate or prove Jesus is YHWH, but simply refers to the appearing of God's glory in the person of the Lord Jesus. Paul in the previous chapter and almost all of his epistles clearly makes a distinction between God the Father and the Lord Jesus.
For more on this passage go Link Removed. :thumb:
Titus 2:13
This verse can be variously translated and does NOT indicate or prove Jesus is YHWH, but simply refers to the appearing of God's glory in the person of the Lord Jesus. Paul in the previous chapter and almost all of his epistles clearly makes a distinction between God the Father and the Lord Jesus.
For more on this passage go Link Removed. :thumb:
Last edited by a moderator:
KingdomRose
New member
You slickly pervert those scriptures to seem to be melding Jesus and Jehovah into one, but that is not the case. As I have explained many times before, Jehovah says that He is the Saviour and there is none beside Him. That means that He is the Source of salvation. He planned the mode of salvation and He has all of the power to make sure it happens. He assigned His Son to accomplish an act of salvation that would be the method of the salvation of mankind. That is why Jehovah can say that He IS the Saviour. Jesus is also called the Saviour because he was Jehovah's means of accomplishing what was needed to bring about salvation to the human race.
Your citation of I Timothy 4:10 refers to the Father, by the way. Paul included the Father in all of his letters, referring to Him as God.
Two individuals called "Saviour," yet one of them is the Most High and the Source of salvation, whereas the other one is the means by which the Saviour of Isaiah 45:21 saves.
Can we not call both of two chefs working together the maker of a cake? The chief chef gives the apprentice chef who is working under him the recipe and stands beside him, directing him as he makes the cake. The chief chef is the Maker, and so is the apprentice. Even though the top chef is the designer and architect of the cake, and his specifications are followed, and it's his kitchen, and everything goes just as He says it should, and he is called the Maker of the cake, the other chef is also the Maker of the cake, because he followed the top chef's instructions. They both made the cake. Both are makers, or, bakers. Yet they are not the same person. And the top chef can be called THE baker, because he has all the experience and all the money and he owns the kitchen and he tells other bakers what to do. He is THE baker; there is really none beside him, that can equal him.
The same can be said concerning Jehovah and His Son.
KingdomRose
New member
Er, no, I'm not limiting God to anything. There are certain ways that the universe is conducted. It has not happened anywhere in its history that a son is his own father. It just doesn't work that way.
You have a problem in understanding not only the uniqueness but the nature of God. In being Triune, He is three persons in one essence. But of course, I do not expect you to understand that.
God's Truth
New member
God came as a Man.
Never said that that did not happen. But the Father did not become a man, the Son did.
glorydaz
Well-known member
Except the "chief chef" came down from heaven and mixed, baked and frosted the cake, Himself. :chew:
glorydaz
Well-known member
The universe was created by our triune God, so I'm quite positive He is able to come, to send, and to be born of a woman if He so desires. It works any way He says it will.
- Status