This day have I begotten you

keypurr

keypurr

Well-known member
Nick M said:
14 And the Logos became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

Paul would blind you. Which is much nicer than what the Lord Jesus Christ is going to do to you.
Click to expand...
The logos is a spirit and it dwelled in the body prepared for it. Read Heb 10:5, learn Nick. The logos is not a man. The logos is the true Son of the most high. Consider the express image as the logos. Think deep.

Sent from my SM-T330NU using TheologyOnline mobile app
 
D

daqq

Well-known member
Clete said:
The point of the passage in John 1 is to directly claim the deity of Jesus Christ. It isn't complicated. Any third grader can read the passage and understand the point that is being made.
Click to expand...

Nick M said:
14 And the Logos became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

Paul would blind you. Which is much nicer than what the Lord Jesus Christ is going to do to you.
Click to expand...

Again, both of you who use the Gospel of John to make your claims: please either confirm or deny the Testimony of Messiah in the following post. Do either of you actually believe the Testimony of Messiah according to his own words? Here is your chance to prove whether you actually do or whether you do not. The clean pure systematic logic is plain for all to see. Do you affirm or deny this little mini-"creed" from the Gospel of John?

Again, the plain simple flow of systematic logic straight from the Testimony of Messiah:

The words of "Jesus" are Spirit:

John 6:62-63
62 What then if you should behold the Son of Man ascending up to where he was before?
63 It is the Spirit that quickens; the flesh profits nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are Spirit, and they are Life.

The Father judges no one but has committed all judgment to the Son:

John 5:22
22. For the Father judges no one, but has committed all judgment unto the Son:

The man "Jesus" does not testify of himself and therefore does not claim to be Elohim:

John 5:31
31 If I testify of myself, my testimony is not true.

The man "Jesus" emphatically states that he himself judges no one:

John 8:15
15. You judge after the flesh: I judge no one.

There is only one who judges and he is the Seeker and the Judge:

John 8:50
50. And I seek not mine own glory: one there is, the Seeker and Judge. [Rev 2:23]

The Logos-Word is the Seeker and the Judge:

John 12:47-48
47. And if anyone hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but that the world might be delivered.
48. He that rejects me, and receives not my words, has one that judges him: the LOGOS-WORD that I have spoken, THAT ONE shall judge him in the last day [Rev 19:11-16].

The Logos-Word which the man "Jesus" speaks is not his own:

John 14:24
24. He that loves me not, keeps not my sayings: and the Logos-Word which you hear is not of me, but of the Father who sent me.

The Father judges no one, (John 5:22).
The man "Jesus" judges no one, (John 8:15, John 12:47-48).
The Father has committed all judgment unto the Son, (John 5:22).
The man "Jesus" does not testify concerning himself, (John 5:31).
The man "Jesus" testifies concerning the Father and the Son.
The Son is therefore the only Judge.

The Father is not the Judge.
The man "Jesus" is not the Judge.
The Logos-Word that "Jesus" spoke is the Judge.
The man "Jesus" therefore cannot be the Logos-Word.
The Logos-Word is the only begotten Elohim-Son of Elohim, (John 1:18).
This holy Testimony is never going to pass away, (Mt 24:35, Mk 13:31, Lk 21:33).

So then, Clete and Nick M, do you confess these words of Messiah or do you deny them?
 
D

daqq

Well-known member
daqq said:
Again, both of you who use the Gospel of John to make your claims: please either confirm or deny the Testimony of Messiah in the following post. Do either of you actually believe the Testimony of Messiah according to his own words? Here is your chance to prove whether you actually do or whether you do not. The clean pure systematic logic is plain for all to see. Do you affirm or deny this little mini-"creed" from the Gospel of John?

Again, the plain simple flow of systematic logic straight from the Testimony of Messiah:

The words of "Jesus" are Spirit:

John 6:62-63
62 What then if you should behold the Son of Man ascending up to where he was before?
63 It is the Spirit that quickens; the flesh profits nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are Spirit, and they are Life.

The Father judges no one but has committed all judgment to the Son:

John 5:22
22. For the Father judges no one, but has committed all judgment unto the Son:

The man "Jesus" does not testify of himself and therefore does not claim to be Elohim:

John 5:31
31 If I testify of myself, my testimony is not true.

The man "Jesus" emphatically states that he himself judges no one:

John 8:15
15. You judge after the flesh: I judge no one.

There is only one who judges and he is the Seeker and the Judge:

John 8:50
50. And I seek not mine own glory: one there is, the Seeker and Judge. [Rev 2:23]

The Logos-Word is the Seeker and the Judge:

John 12:47-48
47. And if anyone hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but that the world might be delivered.
48. He that rejects me, and receives not my words, has one that judges him: the LOGOS-WORD that I have spoken, THAT ONE shall judge him in the last day [Rev 19:11-16].

The Logos-Word which the man "Jesus" speaks is not his own:

John 14:24
24. He that loves me not, keeps not my sayings: and the Logos-Word which you hear is not of me, but of the Father who sent me.

The Father judges no one, (John 5:22).
The man "Jesus" judges no one, (John 8:15, John 12:47-48).
The Father has committed all judgment unto the Son, (John 5:22).
The man "Jesus" does not testify concerning himself, (John 5:31).
The man "Jesus" testifies concerning the Father and the Son.
The Son is therefore the only Judge.

The Father is not the Judge.
The man "Jesus" is not the Judge.
The Logos-Word that "Jesus" spoke is the Judge.
The man "Jesus" therefore cannot be the Logos-Word.
The Logos-Word is the only begotten Elohim-Son of Elohim, (John 1:18).
This holy Testimony is never going to pass away, (Mt 24:35, Mk 13:31, Lk 21:33).

So then, Clete and Nick M, do you confess these words of Messiah or do you deny them?
Click to expand...

So essentially the two of you are making wild claims and accusations that have never been true a day in your lives. How long have the two of you been spreading your false theories while judging and condemning others who disagree with your bogus claims which you have never been able to prove from the scripture? Just Who do you think is actually going to do what to who? Judge yourselves and your own doctrines before it is too late. :)
 
keypurr

keypurr

Well-known member
daqq said:
So essentially the two of you are making wild claims and accusations that have never been true a day in your lives. How long have the two of you been spreading your false theories while judging and condemning others who disagree with your bogus claims which you have never been able to prove from the scripture? Just Who do you think is actually going to do what to who? Judge yourselves and your own doctrines before it is too late. :)
Click to expand...

They have no interest in truth my friend, they are comfortable where they are. They just do not see what we have seen.
 
keypurr

keypurr

Well-known member
daqq said:
Funny how logic is readily apparent when a giant paradigm beam is no longer in the eye. :)
Click to expand...

I understand daqq, it took me about 65 years to see what the logos is. I read right over the words without seeing what they were telling me. Then one day my prayers were answered. I can never go back to being a Trinity believer.
 
D

daqq

Well-known member
keypurr said:
I understand daqq, it took me about 65 years to see what the logos is. I read right over the words without seeing what they were telling me. Then one day my prayers were answered. I can never go back to being a Trinity believer.
Click to expand...

Amen, the Word, and study, and prayer, and faithfulness, and time, removes beams.
 
D

daqq

Well-known member
It is really about rightly dividing because "Christos" can mean both "Anointed one", and "Messiah", but they are not the same person or being. The Anointed one is the adopted Man, a Son of Elohim; while the Meshiah is the Son of Elohim and the very Anointing Himself, that is, Ruach Elohim. And according to Paul, in Rom 8:9, Ruach Meshiah is Ruach Elohim. Ruach Elohim is the same Who we read is "brooding over the waters" in Gen 1:2, (brooding, as in, like a dove). And the same anarthrous usage, without the definite article, is what we find in Matt 3:16, ("πνευμα θεου", as also in Gen 1:2 LXX and Rom 8:9). The Son of Elohim is He that descended from the heavens at the immersion of the Anointed one because the Son of Elohim is Himself the very Anointing who abode-remained upon the Anointed one throughout his physical ministry.
 
1Mind1Spirit

1Mind1Spirit

Literal lunatic
daqq said:
It is really about rightly dividing because "Christos" can mean both "Anointed one", and "Messiah", but they are not the same person or being. The Anointed one is the adopted Man, a Son of Elohim; while the Meshiah is the Son of Elohim and the very Anointing Himself, that is, Ruach Elohim. And according to Paul, in Rom 8:9, Ruach Meshiah is Ruach Elohim. Ruach Elohim is the same Who we read is "brooding over the waters" in Gen 1:2, (brooding, as in, like a dove). And the same anarthrous usage, without the definite article, is what we find in Matt 3:16, ("πνευμα θεου", as also in Gen 1:2 LXX and Rom 8:9). The Son of Elohim is He that descended from the heavens at the immersion of the Anointed one because the Son of Elohim is Himself the very Anointing who abode-remained upon the Anointed one throughout his physical ministry.
Click to expand...

 
D

daqq

Well-known member
1Mind1Spirit said:
Click to expand...

With the Word, and study, and prayer, and faithfulness, and time, the old heavens and earth pass away: and it is easier for that to happen than for one horn to fail from the Torah. When the Pharisees derided him in Luke 16:14-18, the Master said to them, "You are those who justify yourselves before men; but Elohim knows your hearts, for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of Elohim, the Torah, and the Prophets unto Yohanan: from that time the good news of the kingdom of Elohim is preached, and everyone violently-forces into it. But it is easier for the heavens and the earth to pass away than for one horn of the Torah to fail: every one that puts away his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he that marries one that is put away from a husband commits adultery." Therefore one may know that it is the old man which must pass away, that is, your old heavens, (the mind of the flesh), and your old earth, (the deeds of the body of the flesh). Thus putting on the mind of Messiah by way of his Testimony is absolutely and utterly profitable toward the new man in Messiah who is coming. :)
 
keypurr

keypurr

Well-known member
daqq said:
It is really about rightly dividing because "Christos" can mean both "Anointed one", and "Messiah", but they are not the same person or being. The Anointed one is the adopted Man, a Son of Elohim; while the Meshiah is the Son of Elohim and the very Anointing Himself, that is, Ruach Elohim. And according to Paul, in Rom 8:9, Ruach Meshiah is Ruach Elohim. Ruach Elohim is the same Who we read is "brooding over the waters" in Gen 1:2, (brooding, as in, like a dove). And the same anarthrous usage, without the definite article, is what we find in Matt 3:16, ("πνευμα θεου", as also in Gen 1:2 LXX and Rom 8:9). The Son of Elohim is He that descended from the heavens at the immersion of the Anointed one because the Son of Elohim is Himself the very Anointing who abode-remained upon the Anointed one throughout his physical ministry.
Click to expand...
Amen, great post.

Sent from my A622GL using TOL mobile app
 
freelight

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
SERIOUS Quest-ion for Clarity................

SERIOUS Quest-ion for Clarity................

keypurr said:
I understand daqq, it took me about 65 years to see what the logos is. I read right over the words without seeing what they were telling me. Then one day my prayers were answered. I can never go back to being a Trinity believer.
Click to expand...

Do you or daqq see the logos having a 'form' of anykind, or is it a spirit that can take on a form or operate thru a form or personality? As far as the Son's relationship to the Father, could you expand on how you see their relationship, and if the logos is still joined to the soul or spirit of Jesus, the logos embodied by and indwelling, operating thru the Lord Jesus? Or was this just during his earthly ministry?

I think some are interested in if Jesus and the 'Messiah-Son' (are they different?) or as you've referred to before as the 'Christ-spirit' are still one. I believe you and daqq use different terminology at times. Im well aware too within more liberal circles that the man Jesus and the 'Christ' are sometimes differentiated, especially in more liberal new age or spiritualist schools. Jesus is the 'man', and the 'Christ' is the divine spirit.

Readers will have a beter comprehension of how you define the logos as its related to the 'Son' or 'Christ' and how this was related to the man Jesus, since traditional orthodox Christians believe God the Son, who is the logos became flesh, so that Jesus is wholly God and Man incorporeated as one, per their strictly defined creed, per its metaphysical terms and definition. Jesus Christ to them is wholly God, the divine logos made flesh, made into the man Jesus, so this divine incarnation, a holy mystery, has forever changed the nature of God, since God the Son is NOW a deified Man! - the human and divine elements of the Lord Jesus appear to be forever FUSED! It can be confusing. So, if you guys can clarify this carefully for traditional orthodox believers it would help. How and WHY you see there is a logos-Messiah-Son ENTITY that is totally different than the MAN Jesus. I hope this inquiry is clear and direct. I know you explained this before in various way, but maybe you can expand on it.

This would mean that Jesus the man was but the physical vehicle, soul-body who served as the Messenger-Prophet of YHWH, He was anointed with the Spirit of YHWH, who came down in the form of a dove upon him, this Spirit was the logos of YHWH, the Messiah-Son anointing? - so that Jesus was invested, anointed with the logos-spirit (Christ-spirit)...and it was this logos of YHWH what was being manifested thru Jesus, the Holy Spirit empowering, demonstrating the logos thru his life, words and ministry. When Jesus was raised from the dead, did this logos-spirit ascend with him, was the Christ-spirit still upon or within him? Are these two one? Also, Jesus was called both Son of God and Son of Man. Was the man Jesus called these titles ONLY when the Christ-anointing came upon him and qualified him for these titles, or is the 'Son of God/Son of Man' the 'logos-anointing' that came upon him, and is different from the man Jesus, and are Jesus and the logos-Christ-divine spirit (whatever) still merged together????

Seriously,...I think some are confused about this :idunno:
 
D

daqq

Well-known member
Hi Freelight, the confusion is almost entirely due to English translations manufactured from a carnal and unregenerated mindset: people claiming to know Elohim but really having nothing more than a head knowledge about Greek. Sorry to say it so bluntly but that is the reality and I have held my tongue somewhat. My advice would be to dump all other writings and forget about them until you understand the holy Scripture, that is, Torah, Prophets, and Writings, (the Tanak-"Old Testament"), together with the New Testament writings, (all as one holy Word as understood through the new lenses of the all important holy atoning Testimony of Messiah found in the Gospel accounts).

One simple example that puts every English translation into doubt:

1) The name of the Anointed one in the most ancient Greek texts is Ι̅H, (not "Ιησους").
2) The name of the Son in the most ancient Greek texts is also Ι̅H, (Ο Ι̅H, "the Ι̅H").

And yet these two Nomina Sacra, which are identical, are not the same name. All English translations are therefore nothing more than guesses when it comes to this one simple little fact alone. The answers are revealed through the Son, the Word, the Logos, the Memra, who reveals the Father to whomsoever he wills, (Matthew 11:25-26, 27-30), and through prayer, and study, and time, and the entirety of scripture context. This is about proving your love and doing so with your valuable time. If someone comes along and hands you the answers he not only robs you of that opportunity to prove your love but also puts himself in the place of the Master-Teacher.

Revelation 19:12 W/H
12 οι δε οφθαλμοι αυτου φλοξ πυρος και επι την κεφαλην αυτου διαδηματα πολλα εχων ονομα γεγραμμενον ο ουδεις οιδεν ει μη αυτος
I would not trust the English renderings on that one either. :)
 
freelight

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
Jesus, Gods Anointed Son................

Jesus, Gods Anointed Son................

Clete said:
Sheesh! Talk about training at gnats and swallowing camels!

The point of the passage in John 1 is to directly claim the deity of Jesus Christ. It isn't complicated. Any third grader can read the passage and understand the point that is being made.
Click to expand...

Hi Clete,

No gnats or camels, since there other ways to translate John 1:1 :)

I've researched the Unitarian/Trinitarian thing for a long time, even had a thread on both Unitarian and Historical Arian Christianity, so know a little bit about the debated passages involved. I have no problem with various Unitarian interpretations on John 1:1, because I don't see the need to make Jesus into God Almighty (YWHW). I see it as unnecessary and a lot of strain still after so many centuries of Christological politics.

Since I see only 'God' as 'God',...I have no need to confine the INFINITE to an image, man, person, form or concept,...since the Infinite can use any image, form, concept or personification to express, reveal or represent itself :) God is SPIRIT. - so no need to idolize Him/Her/IT. We worship the Father alone as 'God', in spirit and truth, and the Son worships the Father along with us, because we have the SAME FATHER.

Jesus is still wholly loved, honored, worshipped even as God's Son and Messiah within a Biblical Unitarian purview. I honestly still do not see why Jesus has to be the all supreme GOD HIMSELF (well, some 1/3 of him). No reason whatsoever, since He is God's Messenger of Great Counsel (Angel), Prophet, Apostle, Messiah-Son, Anointed Agent, Representative. All that God is...is certainly revealed, expressed, demonstrated thru His Messiah-Son, INDEED. So to see the Son is to see the Father. This doesn't make the Son the Father of course. Jesus is God's Anointed Messenger.

The Lord Jesus holds his special and unique Sonship, definitely,......He is the express image of the Father, but he does not need to be GOD HIMSELF, to be all the scriptures say about him, and Jesus own words reveal his subordination to God as His Messiah-Son. - note as well, my Christology includes aspects beyond a biblical Unitarian one, but I don't share those unless I choose to, but this is sufficient to prove a Unitarian view is rational/logical. Jesus is elohim, and the son of elohim, in as much as He stands in his messianic office of 'Son of God' and 'Son of Man',....sure. Jesus being elohim however does not make him YHWH, the Father. An understanding of names, terms and titles is essential here, from a Unitarian view. Even we are 'elohim' being children of the Most High, sons of God :) Jesus is the firstborn Son among many brethren, we are his children in a sense, adopted under his Sonship, one body. 'God' both fathers and mothers us :)
 
freelight

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
more to nibble on.....

more to nibble on.....

Clete said:
Freelight,
If nothing else, I do appreciate your good humor. I think you're a couple noodles short of a bowl of soup when it comes to your beliefs but at least you're pleasant to speak with.
Click to expand...

Hi Clete :)

Thank you. We both joined TOL in 2003 (wow,....14 years so far) so have a little bit of seniority here, and by now have established our own 'character' and 'persona' if you will.

It isn't a rabbit trail. The claim of these heretics is that God cannot die.

What does it mean to die?

I have a very direct and simple to understand answer to that question that is both rationally and biblically sound.
Click to expand...

Depends on who you ask :) - one can have various definitions for 'death' or even 'life' granted meaning and context.

You, along with nut jobs who deny the clear biblical teaching that Jesus is the incarnation of the Creator, have no answer to the question at all. And there's a good reason why. Any answer you (they) give will put a glaring light on the anti-CHRISTian nature of this blasphemous doctrine, which is why I've asked the question.

When a person can ask one single question that blows someone's doctrine to dust without it ever being answered, the problem usually isn't with the question but with the doctrine.
Click to expand...

I'm somewhat aware of a Trinitarian explanation, at least one 'spin' on it, and that would that only the human nature of Jesus 'died' so to speak. In their Christology, Jesus being both 'man' and 'God' allows lots of wiggle room to explain various features of how God can both partake of mortality and immortality,...simultaneously ;) - as I noted,....orthodox Trinitarian Christology grants such liberties.

This isn't my first trip around this particular barn. They almost never answer the question because they can't without either contradicting half a dozen other Christian doctrines or tacitly admitting that dying is something that God could do (So far, it's always been the former of those two). As I stated when I entered the thread, I have no intention of debating this issue. The people who deny the deity of Christ are stupid to the point that they have zero reading comprehension. I'm here to demonstrate a point and when I'm satisfied it's been demonstrated, I'll be done. It'll take just about as long as it takes for any one of these drool-slurping morons to present a definition of death.
Click to expand...

Now be nice :) no need for name calling, I understand your 'passionate' about defening the Deity of Jesus, but I think some issues may be more understood as we understand that the man Jesus can be differentiated from a divine logos, or Spirit-Son that came upon Jesus, anointed him and operated thru him, during his earthly ministry. It is ONLY the Spirit, the divine WORD that is divine, it being the divine agency, so there could be a differentiation between the man Jesus and the divine logos of God, manifesting thru the Lord Jesus. I just asked this pertinent question to keypurr and daqq...so they could clarify their view a bit more. This whole thread does cover aspects on this, since its from an Adoptionist Christological perspective.
 
keypurr

keypurr

Well-known member
freelight said:
Do you or daqq see the logos having a 'form' of anykind, or is it a spirit that can take on a form or operate thru a form or personality? As far as the Son's relationship to the Father, could you expand on how you see their relationship, and if the logos is still joined to the soul or spirit of Jesus, the logos embodied by and indwelling, operating thru the Lord Jesus? Or was this just during his earthly ministry?

I think some are interested in if Jesus and the 'Messiah-Son' (are they different?) or as you've referred to before as the 'Christ-spirit' are still one. I believe you and daqq use different terminology at times. Im well aware too within more liberal circles that the man Jesus and the 'Christ' are sometimes differentiated, especially in more liberal new age or spiritualist schools. Jesus is the 'man', and the 'Christ' is the divine spirit.

Readers will have a beter comprehension of how you define the logos as its related to the 'Son' or 'Christ' and how this was related to the man Jesus, since traditional orthodox Christians believe God the Son, who is the logos became flesh, so that Jesus is wholly God and Man incorporeated as one, per their strictly defined creed, per its metaphysical terms and definition. Jesus Christ to them is wholly God, the divine logos made flesh, made into the man Jesus, so this divine incarnation, a holy mystery, has forever changed the nature of God, since God the Son is NOW a deified Man! - the human and divine elements of the Lord Jesus appear to be forever FUSED! It can be confusing. So, if you guys can clarify this carefully for traditional orthodox believers it would help. How and WHY you see there is a logos-Messiah-Son ENTITY that is totally different than the MAN Jesus. I hope this inquiry is clear and direct. I know you explained this before in various way, but maybe you can expand on it.

This would mean that Jesus the man was but the physical vehicle, soul-body who served as the Messenger-Prophet of YHWH, He was anointed with the Spirit of YHWH, who came down in the form of a dove upon him, this Spirit was the logos of YHWH, the Messiah-Son anointing? - so that Jesus was invested, anointed with the logos-spirit (Christ-spirit)...and it was this logos of YHWH what was being manifested thru Jesus, the Holy Spirit empowering, demonstrating the logos thru his life, words and ministry. When Jesus was raised from the dead, did this logos-spirit ascend with him, was the Christ-spirit still upon or within him? Are these two one? Also, Jesus was called both Son of God and Son of Man. Was the man Jesus called these titles ONLY when the Christ-anointing came upon him and qualified him for these titles, or is the 'Son of God/Son of Man' the 'logos-anointing' that came upon him, and is different from the man Jesus, and are Jesus and the logos-Christ-divine spirit (whatever) still merged together????

Seriously,...I think some are confused about this :idunno:
Click to expand...
Give me a little time to find the words all can understand friend. I will address this in a day or two.

Sent from my SM-T330NU using TheologyOnline mobile app
 
freelight

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
digging a lil deeper......

digging a lil deeper......

daqq said:
Hi Freelight, the confusion is almost entirely due to English translations manufactured from a carnal and unregenerated mindset: people claiming to know Elohim but really having nothing more than a head knowledge about Greek. Sorry to say it so bluntly but that is the reality and I have held my tongue somewhat. My advice would be to dump all other writings and forget about them until you understand the holy Scripture, that is, Torah, Prophets, and Writings, (the Tanak-"Old Testament"), together with the New Testament writings, (all as one holy Word as understood through the new lenses of the all important holy atoning Testimony of Messiah found in the Gospel accounts).
Click to expand...


Salutations in the Shekinah-light :)

I gather that understanding the original languages, at least in order to 'intuit' the truest meaning of words is essential of course. But you know...there are so many reputable "greek scholars" on the NT manuscripts...have any come to see things the way you do? I know the belief that the canon is only contained in a mere 66 books compiled by man, but I don't hold to that belief - surprise! :angel: - in your study of apocryphal, inter-testamenal works and other non-canonical goodies,...haven't you found complimentary insights into the logos of God? I think there is revelation of God outside of formal canons,....you cannot put the INFINITE in a box, and that is that :) But I understand that the bulk of the traditional canon is your 'contextual word-study' for theology, and so on.

I go on being a happy heretic :jolly: - while I can entertain any number of propositions, dogmas or religious belief-concepts, I have no dogmatic investment in any of them, besides universal truths of reality, being and existence itself....which are Self-evident, as the One I AM :)

One simple example that puts every English translation into doubt:

1) The name of the Anointed one in the most ancient Greek texts is Ι̅H, (not
Click to expand...
"Ιησους").

2) The name of the Son in the most ancient Greek texts is also Ι̅H, (Ο Ι̅H, "the Ι̅H").

And yet these two Nomina Sacra, which are identical, are not the same name. All English translations are therefore nothing more than guesses when it comes to this one simple little fact alone. The answers are revealed through the Son, the Word, the Logos, the Memra, who reveals the Father to whomsoever he wills, (Matthew 11:25-26, 27-30), and through prayer, and study, and time, and the entirety of scripture context. This is about proving your love and doing so with your valuable time. If someone comes along and hands you the answers he not only robs you of that opportunity to prove your love but also puts himself in the place of the Master-Teacher.
Click to expand...

Ok, I recall certain 'nomina sacras' in the NT in other places, which are of particular interest, but I'm not well versed in reading Greek letters, and you did not 'translate' the above word-forms, so I cannot tell if what you propose is valid or logical, granted the context of your proposition. Some cannot read the greek text in greek, so it would be helpful if you could provide a complete English inter-linear translation then specify what is significant about it, and why your 'translation' would appear more tenable.

Revelation 19:12 W/H
12 οι δε οφθαλμοι αυτου φλοξ πυρος και επι την κεφαλην αυτου διαδηματα πολλα εχων ονομα γεγραμμενον ο ουδεις οιδεν ει μη αυτος

I would not trust the English renderings on that one either. :)
Click to expand...


(sorry I had to take out some of your 'accents' above as I had to trade out browsers and was having problems with the formatting)

Okay, this is pretty awesome, I love studying the various 'names' of 'God',...but as a student of universal spirituality, I'm also aware that there is an aspect of 'God' that has no 'name', is beyond naming :) - granted,....God could of course know a particular name that he has not revealed to any mortal, and gives us secret names too as we pass certain initiations, ...pretty cool eh?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top