Beameup also switches to Modalism whenever the situation calls for it; but when called to the carpet for it the obvious truth of what he was doing was vehemently denied, (probably because he has a thread against Modalism and does not even truly know what the word means). :chuckle:
THE ANGEL of YHWH appeared to Moses out of the burning bush - Exodus 3
- Thread starter beameup
- Start date
Beameup also switches to Modalism whenever the situation calls for it; but when called to the carpet for it the obvious truth of what he was doing was vehemently denied, (probably because he has a thread against Modalism and does not even truly know what the word means). :chuckle:
Come to think of it I have to wonder if beameup has ever even read a basic definition of Modalism?
The above is very close to what beameup often presents in different situations.
PS -- And I do wonder the same about Apple7.
beameup
New member
Come to think of it I have to wonder if beameup has ever even read a basic definition of Modalism?
The above is very close to what beameup often presents in different situations.
PS -- And I do wonder the same about Apple7.
How would someone like you that had the horrible and prolonged experience of death be clearly focused on what others believe, when your clarity of thought in your posts is extremely questionable?
That is perhaps one of the greatest mistakes on your part and those like yourself: you never listen to, read, nor actually hear what others are saying, and you assume that everyone else is just like you. But I'm not like you: I do pay attention to what others say because I respect them and wish to have fruitful discussion with those who are willing. Here was one of the times you spoke in modalistic terms and I responded according to what you wrote just as I am doing here and now with you:
You said, "Jesus Christ is YHWH", in the following statement:
And the reason you used the term "HaShem" at the close of the above post is because you know that most religious Jews use that in the place of the Tetragrammaton and you had been tossing it around in various places in the forum until you got called out on it. There is therefore no doubt that you knew exactly what you were saying when you stated, "HaShem = Jesus" in the close of the above post. I then responded according to what you said in the post that followed:
Beameup, I did not know you had it in you: what a shocker, two blasphemies in two days! This appears to be stage two right before our very eyes; or is it stage three for you? First it was all about Trinitarianism and the "threesome", (as you sacrilegiously called it), then it seems it was all about the "two powers" in the heavens, and now all of a sudden, "Jesus Christ is YHWH", in your latest new confession. It is like you opened up your mouth and suddenly out came the spirit of the Oneness doctrine like an unclean frog. I wonder if you were even expecting that to come out yourself? Did it catch you by surprise too? The truth has a way of doing that to people but sorry for your euonumos-left hand sided luck; that genos will not come out except with prayer and fasting. Take a good look around you at some of the other Oneness heretics roaming to and fro around this desert: there is one here already in the sixth or seventh stage, and the seventh stage is Legion. Oh what a mighty one too; nothing can bind her, and she is always in the tombs and caves, shrieking and crying out, and cutting herself with sharp stones. Don't you perhaps think it might be about time you bow the knee to the Testimony of Yeshua before it is too late? Or perhaps it already is too late, eh? Yes, your own private Armageddon may be fast approaching; better keep that conscience of a garment clean! Oops! too late! :chuckle:
So you like Isaiah 45? Did you happen to notice what was posted from that passage on the previous page? Why are you always a day late and a gill, a fin, a scale, or a belly mite short when it comes to these things? (to those without all things are done in parables
Paul quotes from the passage in the section which you quoted but you fail to realize that he speaks of the very opening line when he uses Kurios in the way in which you have rendered it, (without the article). Thus he speaks of YHWH's Mashiach, which is Koresh, "the Furnace of Fire", and His Christos in Greek, which is right there in Isaiah 45:1 from the Septuagint as referenced on the previous page. Here is the actual quote from the Septuagint:
Isaiah 45:1 LXX-Septuagint
1 ουτως λεγει κυριος ο θεος τω χριστω μου κυρω ου εκρατησα της δεξιας επακουσαι εμπροσθεν αυτου εθνη και ισχυν βασιλεων διαρρηξω ανοιξω εμπροσθεν αυτου θυρας και πολεις ου συγκλεισθησονται
"ουτως λεγει κυριος ο θεος τω χριστω μου κυρω"
"Thus says YHWH Elohim, to My Christos, [χριστω], to Kuros [κυρω]"
Do you know what this means when you read Philippians 2:11 which you terribly misquoted? It does not mean that you get to make it say whatever you want and turn the Son into the Father at your leisure, or whenever it fits your doctrinal situation, but rather that you must follow the CONTEXT of the ENTIRE passage from which Paul is quoting, (and he does quote from Isaiah 45:23). This means that if you truly desire to be fair to the authors and the text, and you truly seek to find the truth for yourself and truly want to help others, then you must include the whole passage in your thinking and understanding.
We already know from Isaiah 45:1 that Koresh-Kuros is YHWH's Meshiah or Christos:
Therefore:
Philippians 2:11 W/H
11 και πασα γλωσσα εξομολογησηται οτι κυριος ιησους χριστος εις δοξαν θεου πατρος
11 and every tongue shall confess that YHWH's Anointed-Meshiah-Christos is Yeshua, to the glory of Elohim, the Father.
OR:
11 and every tongue shall confess that Yeshua is YHWH's Anointed-Meshiah-Christos, to the glory of Elohim, the Father.
See there? And also the confession must be to the glory of the Father! But you take that glory away in your interpretation so that you may give it all to Yeshua. The above does not violate any of the Isaiah 45 passage and just might keep one from sliding deeper into heresy.
And in this instance your response was to double down and confirm your stance:
Again, sorry for your euonumos-left hand sided luck, billy goat gruff . . . :chuckle:
:sheep:
beameup
New member
Sorry, but my ministry isn't to the handicapped.
:rotfl:
Of course not, you're way too important: why would *you* be sent to the handicapped? :crackup:
Zechariah 11:15-17
15 And YHWH said to me, Take unto yourself yet again the instruments of a foolish shepherd:
16 For behold, I raise up a shepherd in the land, who will not visit those that are cut off, neither will seek out those that are scattered, nor heal that which is broken, nor feed that which is sound; but he will eat the flesh of the fat ones, and will tear their hoofs in pieces.
17 Woe to the idol shepherd that abandons the flock: the sword shall be upon his arm, and upon his right eye; his arm shall be clean dried up, and his right eye shall be utterly darkened.
The lamp-light to light the inside of the body is the eye: if therefore your eye be singular, your whole body shall be full of light: but if your eye be evil, your whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is inside you be darkness; how great is that darkness! If therefore your right eye offends you, pluck him out, and cast him from you: for it is advantageous for you that one of your members should perish, and that not that your whole body should be cast into Gei-Hinnom.
:sheep:
Apple7
New member
Three, of the very first four translations that you posited as your response, have the very words that you asked for, and support my rendering, and not yours.
As I ready mentioned, and it is most certainly worth repeating in your case, if you insist on slavishly pasting-in material from an arbitrary google search, and least have the decency to read it first…
Apple7
New member
NT Greek is not translational Greek,
You just proved my point for me! Thank you!
That is where you got your rendering because it is not in the text. :chuckle:
The "New Testament" quotes from the LXX all over the place! Get over it: you have been deceived and you like it so because it allows you to separate the "New" from the "Old" and cherry pick from the "Old" whenever it serves your purposes and love for Trinity. :chuckle:
Apple7
New member
You just proved my point for me! Thank you!
That is where you got your rendering because it is not in the text. :chuckle:
Furthermore, not a single solitary rendering from your web-paste used 'elohim' in the rendering.
Apple7
New member
Not in John 1.18, which is the verse in question.
If you want to use the plural 'elohim', then that would be upon you...
Blahahahah :rotfl:
Do you suppose that might be because I did not get my rendering from them? :chuckle:
Finally! That is absolutely correct and that is how those who rendered the Septuagint from the Hebrew used it in the opening Genesis account. Do you not think this has massive implications for your doctrine? the fact that θεος is employed in the Septuagint basically as a loan word from another language to describe the word Elohim? Do you not suppose that the Apostolic writers knew very well and took serious note of this fact? Look at how it is used in the following statement:
Genesis 1:26 M/T Translation
26 And Elohim said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.
Genesis 1:26 LXX
26 και ειπεν ο θεος ποιησωμεν ανθρωπον κατ εικονα ημετεραν και καθ ομοιωσιν και αρχετωσαν των ιχθυων της θαλασσης και των πετεινων του ουρανου και των κτηνων και πασης της γης και παντων των ερπετων των ερποντων επι της γης
Genesis 1:26 LXX Brenton English Translation
26 And God said, Let us make man according to our image and likeness, and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the flying creatures of heaven, and over the cattle and all the earth, and over all the reptiles that creep on the earth.
Can you see what I mean now? θεος is nothing more than a "loan word" from Greek because it is employed exactly as Elohim to render the Hebrew Text into another language. θεος therefore takes on the quality and meaning of the word of Elohim because it is being used to translate Elohim into another language. If you do not recognize this fact in your reading of the texts then you cannot even begin to properly understand such critically important passages as John 1:1.
Mark 12:29
29 απεκριθη ο ιησους οτι πρωτη εστιν ακουε ισραηλ [Hear, O Yisrael] κυριος [YHWH] ο θεος ημων [our Elohim] κυριος [YHWH] εις εστιν [is one]
You are not going to try to argue the above with me are you?
You know the text from which it is quoted and therefore the words mean the same.
Daqq ... My KJV reads No man ... That is a silly point to be debating ... no one ... no man. The sentence is still talking about people and anyone can tell that from the context of the entire chapter.
But I guess you don't like my interpretations so I'll bow out. Thanks for your responses.
But I guess you don't like my interpretations so I'll bow out. Thanks for your responses.
I will cede your point on this but only here because it does become more critical in other places.
However, not all people are men, (physically speaking), and neither was Balaam's donkey.
Nice talking to you.
Apple7
New member
That's 3 - 0, my favor, from your googled reference...
Apple7
New member
Finally! That is absolutely correct and that is how those who rendered the Septuagint from the Hebrew used it in the opening Genesis account. Do you not think this has massive implications for your doctrine? the fact that θεος is employed in the Septuagint basically as a loan word from another language to describe the word Elohim? Do you not suppose that the Apostolic writers knew very well and took serious note of this fact? Look at how it is used in the following statement:
Genesis 1:26 M/T Translation
26 And Elohim said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.
Genesis 1:26 LXX
26 και ειπεν ο θεος ποιησωμεν ανθρωπον κατ εικονα ημετεραν και καθ ομοιωσιν και αρχετωσαν των ιχθυων της θαλασσης και των πετεινων του ουρανου και των κτηνων και πασης της γης και παντων των ερπετων των ερποντων επι της γης
Genesis 1:26 LXX Brenton English Translation
26 And God said, Let us make man according to our image and likeness, and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the flying creatures of heaven, and over the cattle and all the earth, and over all the reptiles that creep on the earth.
Can you see what I mean now? θεος is nothing more than a "loan word" from Greek because it is employed exactly as Elohim to render the Hebrew Text into another language. θεος therefore takes on the quality and meaning of the word of Elohim because it is being used to translate Elohim into another language. If you do not recognize this fact in your reading of the texts then you cannot even begin to properly understand such critically important passages as John 1:1.
Mark 12:29
29 απεκριθη ο ιησους οτι πρωτη εστιν ακουε ισραηλ [Hear, O Yisrael] κυριος [YHWH] ο θεος ημων [our Elohim] κυριος [YHWH] εις εστιν [is one]
You are not going to try to argue the above with me are you?
You know the text from which it is quoted and therefore the words mean the same.
A plural Creator is a Triune Creator.
You could have many more Trinitarian translations on your side; but does that mean you are correct if what has been inserted is not found in the original text? I trow not.
That is an awfully big leap! :crackup: