JESUS IS NOT YHWH

[freelight]

As above, so below......

As above, so below......

Why is it that you side with the people that deny absolute atonement, the ill of self righteousness and the presence of God that displayed immeasurable Love for all of creation?

Salutations EE

My commentaries hold,....as different opinions, perspectives and points of view CAN be taken. A commentary is to be considered upon its own contents, interpreted within the contextual understanding of the commentator.

As far as atonement goes, my commentary over the years on 'blood atonement' remains essentially the same, as 'atonement' can be had apart from bloodshed, and the way is genuine repentance,...all else is merely figurative. One can have as many animals slain or men or god-men for that matter, and unless true repentance has begun within the heart/soul,...there can be no atonement, let alone change/transformation, no matter how many souls are SLAIN, which is a barbaric practice to say nothing of the grossest cruelty). As far as 'absolute atonement' goes, well you know thats a rather 'loaded' sentence - there is nothing 'absolute' but what is 'absolute' in essence and being itself, which is DEITY. - all else is relative and subject to distortion, translation, interpretation.

I present no concept of 'self-righteousness' that is not tenable since 'God' still wills and desires for his children TO DO RIGHT. Is this not so? 'Right-doing' CERTAINLY has its place for someone who CLAIMS to love 'God',....for God's sake.

The Unitarians that have shared so far in this thread certainly do not DENY the 'Presence of God', much less the respect of recognizing Jesus as both 'lord' and 'Christ', because God the Father gave him these titles. How do these observations in any way DIMINISH the immeasurable LOVE of God?

Only 'God' (the unborn, undying, imperishable, immortal, infinite BEING, the I AM) is 'God'. - all else are but forms, personifications, representations, offsprings, creations OF this Infinite ONE (as Spirit-Energy-Consciousness).

A wonderful thing to consider is that a fragment of the Infinite I AM indwells our own souls And there is an aspect of this Universal Light known as the 'Christos' that also, is that divine seed in us, wherein our 'sonship with God' is sealed, unfolded and brought into GLORY. "Christ in you, the hope of glory". - 'Man' is the glory of God, in as much as what is of God in man in substance, potential and pattern.....mirrors 'God' himself. - and so we as the Christ-body (the Messiah) are the robe of God revealed in express form, God's own Temple. In occult science and wisdom, we can go even further, since these are but seminal esoteric insights into literal teachings, which are but the outer vestments of truths, principles and concepts of the inner teaching.

 

[freelight]

God and His creative offspring..............

God and His creative offspring..............

"For the LORD is our Judge, the LORD is our Lawgiver, the LORD is our King; He will save us."
(Isaiah 33:22)

The word LORD is a substitute for YHVH.

The Father judges no one but has committed all judgement to his Son, the LORD.

The law was given by his Son, the LORD.

The King is the Son, the LORD.

We are saved by the Son's life, the LORD.

God and His Messiah-Son are ONE, of course....as that Messiah-Son serves as the 'lord' and 'Messiah' by divine office/appointment/calling....since the Spirit of the LORD is upon this one. The Messiah as well as divinely called/anointed leaders, rulers, kings and judges are rightly called 'elohim' (God/gods)...because of their role/office/authority.

We however recognize the relational difference and distinctions of the LORD and the 'arm'(s) of the LORD as they operate/function in the earth realm. There is 'God', and the various personifications/personalities (arms) of 'God' that function to reveal his purpose, will and glory in space/time. In this sense, 'God' is a manifold One. (I'm using 'arms' here as a metaphor of course).

'God' acts and reveals himself THRU his Messiah-Son. I think this is all that is essential to know,...the rest are 'details' that vary within the conceptual models taken up by various religionists.

'God' is Spirit.

 

[daqq]

Why is it that you side with the people that deny absolute atonement, the ill of self righteousness and the presence of God that displayed immeasurable Love for all of creation?

Your view of "Absolute Atonement" is a lie. YHWH is neither "our brother", nor is He "our Son", as you have blasphemously asserted elsewhere.

Originally Posted by daqq

What else can be said to one who by default claims that YHWH is his brother?
You make yourself equal with the Father who is YHWH Elohim Almighty.

Again....

Easily addressed! He is our most intimate relationship!

You fall flat on your face at Revelation 21:22

YHWH is our God who entered the Flesh of His creation, through Spiritual means of His design and is His only Son and our Son.

He is our Brother.

He is not a God of Pride! His crown is Humility!


You just proved that God walked amongst us! Who but God could declare all humans his relatives?

You are so mighty at so many duels... but you miss the deepest Revelation of Love in scripture!

Anyone may plainly see the end result of what Evil.Eye actually believes; for by saying that "Jesus is YHWH" he must eventually take that doctrine to its conclusion. And the blasphemous conclusion is just as Evil.Eye admitted in the above post, that is, that he believes YHWH is His own "only begotten Son", (i.e. YHWH gave birth to Himself), and therefore He is also our brother, (according to Evil.Eye's false doctrine), and that He is even "our Son", according to Evil.Eye when he is forced to admit the conclusion of his heretical and divisive doctrine.

 

[freelight]

Elder Bro. Jesus.......

Elder Bro. Jesus.......

Anyone may plainly see the end result of what Evil.Eye actually believes; for by saying that "Jesus is YHWH" he must eventually take that doctrine to its conclusion. And the blasphemous conclusion is just as Evil.Eye admitted in the above post, that is, that he believes YHWH is His own "only begotten Son", (i.e. YHWH gave birth to Himself), and therefore He is also our brother, (according to Evil.Eye's false doctrine), and that He is even "our Son", according to Evil.Eye when he is forced to admit the conclusion of his heretical and divisive doctrine.

I think the thing about being our 'brother' is a sentimental term, since the Spirit thru the man Jesus is relating to us, in brotherly fashion. YHWH himself however could not have brothers, since He is not part of a begotten family at all, being the sole unbegotten One, who is timeles, having no beginning or end. But this would be more understandable from the human Jesus perspective, since he is firstborn among many brethren, and a human Messiah would certainly be a 'brother' to mankind, as one of the seed of David, anointed/appointed by YHWH.

The 'Elder Bro. Jesus' concept has made its way into some circles, but I think this is mostly the human sentiment side of things, since he partook of our same human flesh. Getting warm? I suppose if Jesus were YHWH,....he couldnt be our brother,...but you know the Trinitarians will say this refers to the 'humanity' of the God-Man Jesus,...so, concerning Jesus we can be most versatile on any 'human' or 'divine' spin on his person. Its a cake you can eat in all ways

 

[daqq]

I think the thing about being our 'brother' is a sentimental term, since the Spirit thru the man Jesus is relating to us, in brotherly fashion. YHWH himself however could not have brothers, since He is not part of a begotten family at all, being the sole unbegotten One, who is timeles, having no beginning or end. But this would be more understandable from the human Jesus perspective, since he is firstborn among many brethren, and a human Messiah would certainly be a 'brother' to mankind, as one of the seed of David, anointed/appointed by YHWH.

The 'Elder Bro. Jesus' concept has made its way into some circles, but I think this is mostly the human sentiment side of things, since he partook of our same human flesh. Getting warm? I suppose if Jesus were YHWH,....he couldnt be our brother,...but you know the Trinitarians will say this refers to the 'humanity' of the God-Man Jesus,...so, concerning Jesus we can be most versatile on any 'human' or 'divine' spin on his person. Its a cake you can eat in all ways

Evil.Eye is forced to admit those things because the scripture plainly says that the Master was not ashamed to call those willing to become sanctified his brethren, "For it became him, for whom are all things, and through whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfected through sufferings. For both he that sanctifies and they who are sanctified are all from One, [YHWH], for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren, saying, I will declare Thy Name [YHWH] unto my brethren, in the midst of the congregation will I sing praise unto Thee, [YHWH]." (Heb 2:10-12 quoting Psa 22:22).

Evil.Eye has effectively eliminated the need for a Mediator of the Covenant because he has replaced the Father YHWH with His Son who is the Word. Evil.Eye has no Mediator between himself and the Almighty because he has replaced the Almighty with the Son of the Almighty. Evil.Eye apparently does not see the need for a Mediator because he has also sidelined or "abolished" the Torah from his own heart, mind, and doctrine, (just as most of mainstream Christianity has done by way of twisting the writings of Paul). Whoever the Father is, whom the Master prays to in John 17 and many other places in the Gospel accounts, it is not YHWH according to Evil.Eye's doctrine: so whoever that is supposed to be cannot be said, according to Evil.Eye; for according to Evil.Eye "Jesus is YHWH" and therefore, because YHWH is clearly the heavenly Father, "Jesus is the heavenly Father", (according to the twisted logic of Evil.Eye).

As for cake: the Word is spiritual food . . .
That is to say, the Word of the Father, not the Father Himself, (as per Evil.Eye). :chuckle:

 

[jamie]

God and His Messiah-Son are ONE

Are we ONE with them?

 

[jamie]

God is able to make children of Abraham from stones

And he has done so.

 

[jamie]

Yahwah reveals His name to Moses
Exodus 3:13-15.
13 And Moses said to Elohiym, “Suppose I go to the siblings of the Israelites and say to them, 'The Elohiym of your forefathers has sent me to you,' and they ask me, 'What is His name?' What shall I say to them?”
14 And Elohiym said to Moses, “The Living that Lives. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'The Living has sent me to you.”
15 And Elohiym also said to Moses, “Say to the Israelites, 'Yahwah, the Elohiym of your forefathers; the Elohiym of Abraham, the Elohiym of Isaac and the Elohiym of Jacob has sent me to you.' That’s my name forever, the name by which I’m to be remembered, from generation to generation.”

How does any of that preclude YHVH from being self-existent?

 

[CherubRam]

How does any of that preclude YHVH from being self-existent?

Quote Originally Posted by jamie View Post
The term YHWH simply means self-existent, i.e., immortal.

Scripture says Jesus Christ is immortal, i.e., YHWH.

YHWH is not a proper name.




Yahwah is God's personal name. It means "Life Began."

 

[beameup]

So if "Jesus is YHWH" then from the day He was conceived in the womb, YHWH was holy?

Since you seem to be lacking in discernment,
perhaps this passage will lead to further confusion
on your part:
:readthis:
Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith,
Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not,
but a body hast thou prepared for me:

In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin
thou hast had no pleasure.

Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book
it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.

 

[daqq]

Since you seem to be lacking in discernment,
perhaps this passage will lead to further confusion
on your part:
:readthis:
Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith,
Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not,
but a body hast thou prepared for me:

In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin
thou hast had no pleasure.

Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book
it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.

Nope, no confusion on my part whatsoever, (Atzei Chayim).

 

[beameup]

Nope, no confusion on my part whatsoever, (Atzei Chayim).

You've already displayed, to all, your "confusion" (ignorance?) on the referenced post #170

 

[beameup]

Yes, the child of a holy being would be a holy being.

:duh:

I see you left out the part where he is a human being.

 

[jamie]

Yahwah is God's personal name. It means "Life Began."

How is life began different from Strong's definition of self-existent?

 

[JudgeRightly]

I see you left out the part where he is a human being.

He is both, Son of God, and Son of Man.

 

[jamie]

I see you left out the part where he is a human being.

How so? The Most High commanded Israel to be holy.

 

[daqq]

You've already displayed, to all, your "confusion" (ignorance?) on the referenced post #170

It is funny how every time you and yours level your accusations you always end up accusing others of the very things you yourselves are the most guilty of doing.

Since you seem to be lacking in discernment,
perhaps this passage will lead to further confusion
on your part:
:readthis:
Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith,
Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not,
but a body hast thou prepared for me:

In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin
thou hast had no pleasure.

Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book
it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.

Nope, no confusion on my part whatsoever, (Atzei Chayim).

So you therefore openly admit by your doctrine that your atonement theory is entirely bogus because the passage you quoted also quotes from a Psalm: and the critical context of that Psalm clearly shows that by your viewpoint your own spotless human-Man-Lamb is not spotless at all, but rather, as the Psalmist clearly says, his iniquities overtook him:

Psalm 40:6-13 KJV
6 Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required.
7 Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me,
8 I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart.
9 I have preached righteousness in the great congregation: lo, I have not refrained my lips, O LORD, thou knowest.
10 I have not hid thy righteousness within my heart; I have declared thy faithfulness and thy salvation: I have not concealed thy lovingkindness and thy truth from the great congregation.
11 Withhold not thou thy tender mercies from me, O LORD: let thy lovingkindness and thy truth continually preserve me.
12 For innumerable evils have compassed me about: mine iniquities have taken hold upon me, so that I am not able to look up; they are more than the hairs of mine head: therefore my heart faileth me.
13 Be pleased, O LORD, to deliver me: O LORD, make haste to help me.

So much for your spotless sacrificial Man-Lamb: his iniquities took hold of him and overtook him according to the same context of the passage referenced and quoted in the Hebrews passage which you yourself quoted to supposedly defend your view. Your own carnal minded theology is nothing but a mass of confusion by which you are only dooming yourself.

 

[CherubRam]

How is life began different from Strong's definition of self-existent?

Self-Existent is an interpretation, and Life Began is a translation.

 

[beameup]

So you therefore openly admit by your doctrine that your atonement theory is entirely bogus because the passage you quoted also quotes from a Psalm: and the critical context of that Psalm clearly shows that by your viewpoint your own spotless human-Man-Lamb is not spotless at all, but rather, as the Psalmist clearly says, his iniquities overtook him

He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross,
so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness;
for by His wounds you were healed. - 1 Peter 2:24

 

[KingdomRose]

All Kingdom Rose did was insult and slander me. She couldn't defend her beliefs with God's Truth or she would have done it instead of what she did; and, you're too blind to see it because all you did was come on and insult and slander too.

Your fairly long post was so full of nonsense I couldn't muster up the strength to blow it out of the water, which I could've easily done, but it was just so ridiculous. Anybody who cares to, go to that post #122 and read it and then tell me that I am being needlessly insulting to this poor misled individual. I will stand corrected if you can explain to me how I am in error.