God is Jesus vs. Jesus is God

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ask Mr. Religion

Ask Mr. Religion

☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) &#9
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
JudgeRightly said:
The Septuagint is greek. Jesus used the Septuagint in His ministry.
Click to expand...
Actually, there is no evidence that the NT ever quotes from a single Greek translation of the Bible. There is no reason why oral teaching traditions might not form the basis for both NT quotations and Greek text forms which have come down to us under the name of the LXX.

I fail to see how a NT writer can be proven to have quoted from a "version" (e.g., the LXX) which has no stable literary tradition. It can't be empirically proven.

The historic Protestant position as contained in Westminster Confession of Faith 1:8 is that only the Hebrew text is the genuine preserved word of God for the Old Testament. So we don't assume Christ read a Greek translation in the Synagogue, nor do we assume He quoted it simply because some post-Apostolic copies of the Greek Old Testament match the New Testament.

Spoiler

8. The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language of the people of God of old), and the New Testament in Greek (which, at the time of the writing of it, was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God, and, by His singular care and providence, kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentical; (Matt. 5:18) so as, in all controversies of religion, the Church is finally to appeal unto them. (Isa. 8:20, Acts 15:15, John 5:39, 46) But, because these original tongues are not known to all the people of God, who have right unto, and interest in the Scriptures, and are commanded, in the fear of God, to read and search them, (John 5:39) therefore they are to be translated into the vulgar language of every nation unto which they come, (1 Cor. 14:6, 9, 11-12, 24, 27-28) that, the Word of God dwelling plentifully in all, they may worship Him in an acceptable manner; (Col. 3:16) and, through patience and comfort of the Scriptures, may have hope. (Rom. 15:4)


The Confession is explicit and leaves no wiggle room at all for the covert re-introduction of authoritative claims for the Greek old testament, only the Hebrew is immediately inspired and of authority. The perpetual re-introduction of authoritative claims for the Greek Old Testament purpose it to undercut the foundation of the Protestant doctrine of Sola Scriptura by stripping away the dogmatic foundation of Hebraic authority of the Old Testament upon which the authentic Received Greek text of the NT rests.

We who affirm the authority of the Hebrew text as being providentially preserved do not believe that Jesus quoted from a translation of the Old Testament which was made according to the details of the fabulous story of 72 translators arriving at the same inspired translation.

Once the literal referent of the "septuagint" is rejected we are left with the more mundane "Greek translation."

If a "Greek translation" is the point of reference, what form does it take—oral or written?
To what extent was this translation completed and/or accepted at the time of Jesus?
Is it even safe to assume that such a Greek translation would have been in use in Palestine at the time of Jesus?

Then there is the perplexing question as to whether Jesus Himself would have used such a translation.

Following on from this is the question of accommodation, To what extent did Jesus simply make use of what was available in order to get His message across?

As might be deduced from this line of questioning, there are a number of factors which influence one's understanding of the facts.

AMR
 
keypurr

keypurr

Well-known member
Ask Mr. Religion said:
Actually, there is no evidence that the NT ever quotes from a single Greek translation of the Bible. There is no reason why oral teaching traditions might not form the basis for both NT quotations and Greek text forms which have come down to us under the name of the LXX.

I fail to see how a NT writer can be proven to have quoted from a "version" (e.g., the LXX) which has no stable literary tradition. It can't be empirically proven.

The historic Protestant position as contained in Westminster Confession of Faith 1:8 is that only the Hebrew text is the genuine preserved word of God for the Old Testament. So we don't assume Christ read a Greek translation in the Synagogue, nor do we assume He quoted it simply because some post-Apostolic copies of the Greek Old Testament match the New Testament.

Spoiler

8. The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language of the people of God of old), and the New Testament in Greek (which, at the time of the writing of it, was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God, and, by His singular care and providence, kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentical; (Matt. 5:18) so as, in all controversies of religion, the Church is finally to appeal unto them. (Isa. 8:20, Acts 15:15, John 5:39, 46) But, because these original tongues are not known to all the people of God, who have right unto, and interest in the Scriptures, and are commanded, in the fear of God, to read and search them, (John 5:39) therefore they are to be translated into the vulgar language of every nation unto which they come, (1 Cor. 14:6, 9, 11-12, 24, 27-28) that, the Word of God dwelling plentifully in all, they may worship Him in an acceptable manner; (Col. 3:16) and, through patience and comfort of the Scriptures, may have hope. (Rom. 15:4)


The Confession is explicit and leaves no wiggle room at all for the covert re-introduction of authoritative claims for the Greek old testament, only the Hebrew is immediately inspired and of authority. The perpetual re-introduction of authoritative claims for the Greek Old Testament purpose it to undercut the foundation of the Protestant doctrine of Sola Scriptura by stripping away the dogmatic foundation of Hebraic authority of the Old Testament upon which the authentic Received Greek text of the NT rests.

We who affirm the authority of the Hebrew text as being providentially preserved do not believe that Jesus quoted from a translation of the Old Testament which was made according to the details of the fabulous story of 72 translators arriving at the same inspired translation.

Once the literal referent of the "septuagint" is rejected we are left with the more mundane "Greek translation."

If a "Greek translation" is the point of reference, what form does it take—oral or written?
To what extent was this translation completed and/or accepted at the time of Jesus?
Is it even safe to assume that such a Greek translation would have been in use in Palestine at the time of Jesus?

Then there is the perplexing question as to whether Jesus Himself would have used such a translation.

Following on from this is the question of accommodation, To what extent did Jesus simply make use of what was available in order to get His message across?

As might be deduced from this line of questioning, there are a number of factors which influence one's understanding of the facts.

AMR
Click to expand...

I understand Jesus spoke in Aramaic, a spinoff from Hebrew. But I am no authority on the subject. Thank you for this post.
 
E

eleventhhour

BANNED
Banned
http://theologyonline.com/showthread.php?127848-God-is-Jesus-vs-Jesus-is-God/page43


Hello. Wow ! this is a huge forum - I am reading many posts here and find them really interesting. I really like this subject.

Has anyone ever noticed that the framers of the Trinity doctrine did not produce a Bible translation until nearly 500 years after Yahoshua. -

However, I do understand what " So-Called " Protestant Trinitarians are trying to say when they describe the doctrine of the Trinity - however, I deeply disagree with the theory and doctrine of The Trinity. I believe that The Trinity Doctrine Is untruthful and is also false

But * - Concerning the Trinity Doctrine, I REMEMBER the Verse here in - Act 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which The Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which He hath purchased with His own blood.
If the verse is declaring that - The Holy Spirit has made overseers over the Church that God Himself has Purchased with His own Blood. And notice that Yahoshua / { Jee Zeus } - is nowhere mentioned in the entire Chapter. -

Is the verse saying indirectly and inadvertently, accidentally, or as if though - that Yahoshua Himself, is this very God * who had shed His Blood ?

The Trinity faith is made up of people who make all types of different claims - such as, some Trinitarians who claim that Yahoshua is never referred to as " God " - He never says " I am God " and the exact phraze or words " Yahoshua is God " also is never in the the Greek manuscripts. - and many, many Trinitarians also add the words " GOD THE SON " and " GOD THE HOLY SPIRIT " and The Person OF Jesus and Person of the HOly Spirit and The Person Of The Father. And we know that the Bible does not come out and directly say the words in Greek - that " Yahoshua is " LITERALLY " " G O D " or that Yahoshua is The Father.
Also - And Yahoshua never personally never comes out and says worship me, praise me and pray to me and bow down and worship me. However Yahoshua does claim that He will sit directly " IN " the throne of the Father and other verses say that Yahoshua is " IN " the RIGHT OF THE THRONE - IN HIGH - and GIVEN - THE RIGHT OF THE POWER OF God.
Also, Yahoshua claims that He is the First And Last - Begening and the end and the " ALMIGHTY "
REV_1:8 I G1473 AM G1510 ALPHA G1 AND G2532 OMEGA,G5598 BEGINNIN GG746 AND G2532 ENDING, G5056 THE G3588 LORD,G2962 THAT CAME AND TO COME G3801 THE G3588 ALMIGHTY.G3841

If we read further in Rev 1:12, - we find that this is Yahoshua Himself, speaking. Claiming to be the very identity and " ROLE and all of the names, titles and characteristics that are given to the Father, Yahoshua also is given these very characteristics, names, titles and all of these exact qualities
Rev 1:12 And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle ............. 18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore. Here, Yahoshua is making very the claim that He is the title and role of Father. - as HE also makes the claim that HE will sit " IN " the fathers throne.

There is so much , much more -- and REV_1:8 is greatly MISTRANSLATED in the Trinity Translation - as i gave the exact, proper and precise and correct translation above there in - REV_1:8
.
We see that the Trinity Doctrine limits the Deity Of Yahoshua and seeks to deny the Biblical Manuscripts that say clearly in Php 2:6{ that Yaahoshua, The Anointed was in the form / morph of God, thought it not robbery or seizing, taking (by force) to be or to eXist as equal to God.

- But a vain, non-effect reputation. Himself, taking or receiving the form / morph of a servant. Was made in the likeness of men:

Here - We see also that Yaahoshua Himself also manifested Himself in various Different Forms. He was Morphing Himself into different manifestations, and Images of different looking features of different persons. And also Again - Mar 16:12 After that He MANIFESTED

Manifested = Greek 5319 φανερο´ω - phaneroo¯ / fan-er-o'-o -

Mar 16:12 He MANIFESTED in another / Different MORPH / FORM unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country. Also again - Mar 16:14 Afterward he MANIFESTED Greek 5319 φανερο´ω - phaneroo¯ / fan-er-o'-o - unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them, which had seen him after he was risen. Here we have The Lord Yaahoshua The Anointed who is changing His form and morphing His physical features into multiple different looking manifestations and morphs, morphing His forms / of the same Deity ( As Himself } The Same Deity. He is eating, walking, talking and rebuking and witnessing to people after He has risen from the dead and His own family, disciples and His own followers do not even know who He is because He is disguising and Morphing His Image as a different looking characteristic of various looks that people are not recognizing Him.

This same morphing and manifesting Deity claims to be the DEITY that will sit " IN " the throne of the father - Because the Bible says that HE is the FACE, MANIFESTATION and the MORPH / FORM and IMAGE of the Fathers confidence - Manifested in the flesh.

I disagree with Trinitarians that Yahoshua is " ANOTHER " PLURAL / SECOND PERSON / PERSONS OF THE THREE HEADS OF GOD.
If each PERSON of The Trinity is each, a single individual HEAD, OF THE SINGLE Trinitarian { three headed } GOD - How is - the totality of all of the fulness of the divinity of The Father (God) Physically - in Yahoshua - who is also the - HEAD of all principalities and powers.

This is another Trinity mistranslation here in Col 2:10

- Col 2:9 For in Him, dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead physically.

Col 2:10 And ye are complete in him, " which " or / WHOM is the HEAD of all principalities and powers.

Trinity doctrine is forced onto the manuscript text,as Trinitarians change God's word throughout the translation. The manuscripts say that in Him physically { in Yahoshua, } the fulness of the IDENTITY of GOD is inhabited / dwelling In Col 2:9 the manuscripts use a different word called theote¯s as the Trinitarian Translators use the word " Godhead "" saying - " For in Him, dwelleth all the fullness of the " Godhead " But this Greek word " theote¯s " has nothing to do with a Head Of God - or a God;s HEAD - - but simply means -- " theote¯s = THE IDENTITY - GOD HOOD - GOD TURE - THE GOD CHARACTER OF GOD "

The Greek word G2320 θεο´της - theote¯s / theh-ot'-ace means " theote¯s = THE IDENTITY - GOD HOOD - GOD TURE - THE GOD CHARACTER OF GOD " - it has nothing to do with the word " GOD HEAD " this is another invented Trinitarian doctrine inserted into the text.

theote¯s has nothing whatsoever to do with the idea of a " HEAD " - The Greek word for Head is [/b]G2776 - κεφαλη´ - kephale¯ / kef-al-ay' = Meaning The head / - head.
Total KJV occurrences: 76

In Col 2:10 We agree that the manuscripts dooes say that He is the [/u HEAD of all principalities and al; powers.

And But - Col 2:9, in the manuscripts - it says that in " Him, dwelleth all the fullness of the " theote¯s = THE IDENTITY - GOD HOOD - GOD TURE - THE GOD CHARACTER OF GOD " physically. theote¯s - this word is not head - in relation to plural Trinitarian heads or " Heads Of God or God;s Heads " or The Head Of God. it means " theote¯s = THE IDENTITY - GOD HOOD - GOD TURE - THE GOD CHARACTER OF GOD "

Yahoshua is simply given the identity as being filled with the identity of - The Head Supreme God
- Not filled with The Head Of God or filled with God's head - But there is a difference in saying HEAD GOD and in saying " GOD HEAD " And Yahoshua is calleed the HEAD / SUPREME God because He is the Only God.
He is not a partiality or a second or third person or a seperate individual of a God's Head, in - Col 2:9. This is a plurality or a trinity. - He is the image and manifestation of the Head / SUPREME / sovereign / almighty Head God of all - Head of all One God.

It just seems so obvious that Trinitarians have literally gone throughout the entire scriptures making up adding and removing things and changing things, to codify, mold, form, morph, re -shape RE - ANIMATE and LITERALLY STAMP into the manuscripts words that are present in individiual verses. And although though a doctrine could be explaind or described in a certain way it shoulkd still be translated in the same exact way that it was written, without inserting doctrinal and theological " MADE UP WORDS sich as " GODHEAD " this is not a Greek word that is in the manuscripts - but a trinitarian explaination to a word that has nothing to do with the word " HEAD
or a body part or a position of status nor power.

" theote¯s = simply and plainly means - = THE IDENTITY - GOD HOOD - GOD TURE - THE GOD CHARACTER OF THE GOD " not GODS HEAD or HEAD POSITION. the translators tried to invent orientations , attitudes, views, positions and placemats and placement levels and catagories of Christs and where he belonged in a first, second and third place in His relation to The Father - when these discriptions and orders are never in the original manuscripts of many verses.

We could easily show a hundred more of other mistranslations. As The Bible says that all believers can be filled with all of the fulness of God. Here Eph 3:19 And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God.

But Yahoshua is fill with all of the fulness of the God Hood. theote¯s -θεότης = meaning = THE IDENTITY - GOD HOOD - GOD TURE - THE GOD CHARACTER OF THE GOD " not GODS HEAD or HEAD POSITION. here in Col 2:9 - The translators were too busy inventing and confirming the pre conceived doctrines that predicated the simplicity and originality of the manuscripts.
 
Apple7

Apple7

New member
eleventhhour said:
We could easily show a hundred more of other mistranslations.
Click to expand...

Show us the 'proper' interpretation of this...

πορευθεντες ουν μαθητευσατε παντα τα εθνη βαπτιζοντες αυτους εις το ονομα του πατρος και του υιου και του αγιου πνευματος
 
keypurr

keypurr

Well-known member
drbrumley said:
Yet you have a doctrine that hinges on it, saying God told you this and that. Balderdash
Click to expand...

So you really do not believe that the Holy Spirit is active today to bring light to us?

I seem to remember Jesus telling Peter that the spirit informed Peter that Jesus was the son of God.

Maybe the HS got tired and quit his job.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top