Is the Jewish OT the same as our Christian OT

[called]

yaakov2 once told me that the original jewish old testament written in hebrew is very differnt than our OT such as in the KJVB,

If this is true would someone please tell me just what Isiah 9:6 actully says translated word for word from the original jewish old testament written in hebrew please!

yaakov2

Can you help me here?

[called]

Check this out!

ISAIAH 9 MANIPULATED

Hugh Fogelman



I have often heard Christians boast, “Isaiah 9 foretells Jesus, so why don’t Jewish people understand this too?” When challenged and told that this is a false claim, Christians point to their bible and say, “it says so right here.”

Some background is needed before I proceed. When Christians say “the bible” they mean their “Christian Bible. Many never realize that there is an original bible ─ the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) which stands in contrast to their “Christian bible.” The Christian bible equals the Hebrew Bible plus manipulations, mistranslations and 2,000 years of editing. With this in mind, let us look at how Christianity manipulated the original Hebrew source scriptures in Isaiah 9:5-6.

Isaiah 9 is very straight forward; Isaiah was talking about King Ahaz’ son, Hezekiah.1 However, Christianity, looking for every possible way to plant Jesus in the so-called Old Testament, redacted the Hebrew scripture to put a Jesus “spin” on it. “Presto-chango ─ abracadabra;” suddenly a prophecy about Jesus appears where none existed. This is just the standard Christian method of operation from its very beginning, especially with Isaiah (See Chapters 7:14 and 53).

The Christian deception is readily apparent when the verses are placed side-by-side.


KING JAMES VERSION!!! ISAIAH 9:6. For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.


ISAIAH 9 HEBREW ORIGINAL 5. For a child has been born to us, a son given to us, and the authority is upon his shoulder, and the wondrous adviser, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, called his name, "the prince of peace."

http://www.jdstone.org/cr/files/isaiah9manipulated.html

[called]

"Lucifer" in Isaiah 14:12-17
Translation and Ideology
Dennis Bratcher

The name Lucifer has often been understood to be another name for the devil or the satan. This identification has a long history in the church, going back to at least the fourth century. Its origin is actually from a passage in the Old Testament from the book of Isaiah that, to some, speaks of a being cast out of heaven because of pride. Since there is a reference in the New Testament to the devil being cast out of heaven (Rev 12:9-12; cf. Lk 10:18), it was assumed that the Isaiah passage referred to the same thing.

The passage (NRSV): 14:12

How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of Dawn! How you are cut down to the ground, you who laid the nations low! 13 You said in your heart, ‘I will ascend to heaven; above the stars of God I will set my throne on high; I will sit on the mount of assembly in the far north; 14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds, I will make myself like the Most High.’ 15 But you are brought down to Sheol, to the depths of the Pit. 16 Those who see you will stare at you, and ponder over you: ‘Is this the man who made the earth tremble, who shook kingdoms, 17 who made the world like a desert and overthrew its cities, who did not let his prisoners go home?’

In the King James translation, verse 12 reads:

How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!


http://www.crivoice.org/lucifer.html

[called]

IS SATAN LUCIFER?

by Bert Thompson, Ph.D.



s8int.com graphic. Click and drag photo to resize.

It is sad, but nevertheless true, that on occasion Bible students attribute to God's Word facts and concepts that it neither teaches nor advocates. These ill-advised beliefs run the entire gamut, from harmless misinterpretations to poten- tially soul-threatening false doctrines.

Although there are numerous examples from both categories that could be listed, perhaps one of the most popular misconceptions among Bible believers is that Satan also is designated as Lucifer, within the pages of the Bible.

What is the origin of the name Lucifer, what is its meaning, and is it a synonym for Satan?

Here are the facts. The word, Lucifer is used in the King James Version only once, in Isaiah 14:12:

How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations
http://www.s8int.com/lucifer.html

[yaakov2]

called

<font color="0000ff">yaakov2 once told me that the original jewish old testament written in hebrew is very differnt than our OT such as in the KJVB,

If this is true would someone please tell me just what Isiah 9:6 actully says translated word for word from the original jewish old testament written in hebrew please!</font>

It is true and I have told you multiple times.

Think rationally about it called. It makes far more sense that our religions have different bibles than it is that our bibles are identical and all Jews identically lie about the text.

<font color="0000ff">yaakov2 Can you help me here?</font>

My software doesn’t support Hebrew letters and I don’t know if FACTNET supports them either.

In English, Isa 9:5 For a child has been born to us, a son given to us, and the authority is upon his shoulder, and the wondrous adviser, the mighty G-d, the everlasting Father, called his name, "the prince of peace."

Note the tense and object differences of your bible. Also, for us this is verse 5, for you it is verse 6.

[bluewater2]

I have read many of the verses in the Jewish Bible that are pointed out by christians as being "prophesorial" but, if one reads the text, as in the one mentioned above, they are obviously talking about a character that is already born, or someone alive in the Jewish Bible. In my opinion, christianity is just another religion that was created by purposely misinterpreting the Jewish Bible to fit their own agenda.

I admire the Jews for not being more outspoken and angrier about this. I think that they show great restraint and tolerance in not doing more to expose christianity for what it is. Another knock-off religion.

There are many examples where the Jewish Bible has been miss, or re-interpreted to support the messiahship of Jesus.

[called]

Thanks yaakov2
As the website above states, your OT Bible is the original and a so called Catholic church father named Jerome rewrote it in Vulgate Latin and changed many things which the RCC had no right or power whatsoever to do! This is why she is called the Great Whore and why so called Christianity is so divided today!

God Bless you

I want all you Trinitarians to see just the RCC did here!!! This is what the original Hebrew scripture clearly states word for word-Iah 9:6 For a child has been born to us, a son given to us, and the authority is upon his shoulder, and the wondrous adviser, the mighty G-d, the everlasting Father, called his name, "the prince of peace."

It has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with the coming messiah being God or even being called God in anyway shape or form! You people really need to do some serious studying on just where these scriptures that you hold so precious actually come from.

[hardbones]

Whew!!! I'm glad Called came along to straighten us out. 2000 yrs of christian scholarship out the window just like that!

[termin8d]

called : I'm still waiting for YOU to work through the text.

You will take anything that someone says at face value so long as it agrees with your position, but when someone else provides detailed argumentation, you brush it aside and repeat your tragic errors.

Are you going to deal with the text yourself here on this forum, or are we going to have an actual live debate in IRC? The choice is yours.

hardbones: You took the words out of my mouth.

[termin8d]

Called: You have completely turned your back on the Christian faith. It is a sad thing indeed to see that you still promote your teachings under the guise of a Christian pastor.

In order to defend your position, rather than deal with the scriptural texts that I have placed before you, as I have asked over and over again, you rather to turn to a non-Christian Jew, who doesn't believe the New Testament to be the word of God, and ask Him about a verse that you yourself are not sure about. You might as well throw your bible out and get a copy of the jewish bible, hey while you're at it, why don't you just convert to Judaism? You don't trust the NT yourself anyway.

This is a classic example of your pastorship. I truly feel sorry for the congregation that looks to you for guidance.

You already showed your inability to deal with the text in the past when you linked to two websites, one which actually refuted your position because you were too lazy to actually read what it had to say.

Why should I or any other person on this board take your words seriously? How long will it be until we start to see some solid and serious discussion from you?

[lema_nal]

termin8d, you, members of Local Church, like to judge others so much. And you are so angry when others judge you, especially your favorite Witness Lee. You have dubble standards.

[lema_nal]

termin8d, you, members of Local Church, like to judge others so much. And you are unable to tolerate when others judge you, especially your favorite Witness Lee. You have dubble standards.

[termin8d]

lema_nal: Interesting that you'll come flying to the defense of someone who doesn't believe in the Trinity or the Deity of Christ. Someone who believes that those who tithe are headed for hell and trinitarians are headed for hell.

I on the other hand have never judged called's salvation. I have however challenged his teachings over and over again to deal with the texts in the bible regarding the deity of Christ and the proof of the Trinity.

Do you have anything substantial to add to this thread? Which side of the fence are you on? Do you believe in the Trinity? Do you believe that the bible is corrupted like Called suggests?

[termin8d]

By the way lema_nal, you also seem to get along with areyouachristian (formerly known as churchwork) who judges the salvation of just about anybody who disagrees with him. I really wonder who is practical double standards here.

[called]

termin8d
You or anyone elese here on fact net have taken my challenge as of yet but you expect me to take yours! first things first Brother!!!

{My Personal Challenge to the Trinitarian world at large}

I Pastor/Evangelist Johnny J Christen Jr. of {The Straight and Narrow Gate Apostolic Ministries INC} In the Philippines, Openly challenge {{{The Trinitarian world at large}}} to present or provide for me {Written Scriptural Proof} that the “Doctrine of the Holy Trinity” was “specifically and expressly” {taught} by Christ himself or the Original 12 hand picked Apostles of Christ Almighty in the First Century Church that Christ himself come to establish over 2000 years ago.
In order to meet this challenge you must Present to me at least one Holy spirit inspired scripture from the 27 Epistles of the New Testament Canon, that {Specifically and Expressly Teaches} {Word forWord} The doctrine of the Holy Trinity as Defined by the Councils and Creeds of the Roman Catholic Church, such as {the Nicene and the Athanasian creeds},

And no other Holy spirit inspired scripture found in the 27 Epistles of the New Testament Canon can contradict any part of this teaching whatsoever in anyway shape or form, or the doctrine of the Holy Trinity will automatically be considered nothing more than a Post Apostolic teaching of man that was birthed out of the Roman Catholic Church in The Second Ecumenical Council of Constantinople in 381 AD

“The Basic teaching of the Holy Trinity As Taught in all Trinitarian Churches today”

1. We worship one God “in three persons” and “three persons” in one God.

2. Their are three" separate” and “distinct individual persons” in the Godhead,
. .
3. “God the Father” “God the Son” and “God the Holy Spirit” and these three are one.

. These three “distinct” individual persons” are “co-equal” “co-eternal” and “co- existing”.


4.{God the Father is the First person of the Godhead} {God the Son is the second person of the Godhead} and {God the Holy Spirit is the Third person of the Godhead}.

NOW!!!
I will tear up my license to preach, move to the location of your Church or Ministry with my family, Join your Church or Ministry and faithfully support it until the day I die,

{If} you can present to me just one Holy spirit inspired scripture in the 27 Epistles of the New Testament Canon where Christ himself or one of his hand picked Apostles specifically and expressly taught {in NT Scripture} that { We worship one God “in three persons” or “three persons” in one God}

Or
{If} you can present to me just one Holy spirit inspired scripture in the 27 Epistles of the New Testament Canon where Christ himself or one of his hand picked Apostles specifically and expressly taught {in NT Scripture} that {. Their are three" separate” and “distinct individual persons” in the Godhead,. “God the Father” “God the Son” and “God the Holy Spirit” and these three are one.

Or
{If} you can present to me just one Holy spirit inspired scripture in the 27 Epistles of the New Testament Canon where Christ himself or one of his hand picked Apostles specifically and expressly taught {in NT Scripture} that {God the Father is the First person of the Godhead} {God the Son is the second person of the Godhead} and {God the Holy Spirit is the Third person of the Godhead}.

And {IF} You can show me at least one NT Convert in the 27 Epistles of the NT canon that has ever been Baptized in the {Trinitarian baptismal formula} found in Mat 28:19

Yours in Christ

Pastor/Evangelist Johnny J Christen, of {The Straight and Narrow Gate Apostolic Ministries INC} In the Philippines,

[called]

Isaiah 9:5-6 – Historic Events or Messianic Prophecy?

http://www.messiahtruth.com/isa9.html

Isaiah 9:6 has been corrupted by English translators of our Bibles, The three witness in 1 John 5:7 has been added by the RCC, The Trinitarian baptismal formula found in the tail end of Matthew 28:19 has been added by the RCC, their has been at least two Hebrew manuscripts found in Israel that do not contain this Trinitarian baptismal formula! Not to mention that it was never once practiced in the NT by anyone anywhere at anytime!!! Something is most definitely wrong with the doctrine of the so called holy trinity. All 9 scriptures in the NT that use {FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK} to deceive people into believing in a Sunday resurrection has been corrupted, in the Greek manuscripts it reeds {the First weekly Sabbath} Not First Day of the Week It was the First weekly Sabbath of 7 weekly Sabbaths leading up to the day of Pentecost.

Can you count? Take a calendar and count 50 days from your Sunday resurrection and you will land on a Monday!!!

But in you start with a Sabbath-Saturday resurrection and than count exactly 50 days from their, you will land on Pentecost Sunday!!!

Any other way would be literally impossible.

looking forword to your answer!!!

Johnny

[termin8d]

Johnny: Why do you need an explicit word for word proof?
Why won't you accept implicit statements? Can you show me one verse which says explicitly "Paul was a Christian" ? Do you believe that Paul was a Christian? Please show your explicit proof.

When you're ready to concede that your entire challenge is ridiculous, let me know so we can get this online debate started.

And one more thing I'd just like to say, is as much as I am completely opposed to Bluewater2's position about so many things Christian, I respect him as someone that I can actually discuss issues with thoughtfully and constructively. I think you would do well to heed his example.

[termin8d]

Again we see Johnny bringing up a verse which I used in my arguments.

Again we see him using other people's work rather than doing his own.

Again we see him ignore the texts that have been presented.

Still waiting to have the online debate.

[lema_nal]

termin8d, I personally believe in Trinity. However, I feel that the way how you deal with others is wrong.
Regarding churchwork, no matter if he agrees with you or somebody else, or he does not, I believe that he is a born again Christian.
In addition, I am quite sure that in this thread and in others, you are trying to recruit Christians into Local Church. This is "steeling others' sheep". Since I was in Local Church myself, I know how these things are being done.
You never mention that you are a member of Local Church, you never mention that you present Local Church doctrines that are not necessary Biblical (like the New Jerusalem). Why did not you write that what you wrote about the New Jerusalem is from Witness Lee's teaching?
Very simple. Most Christians believe that Local Church is a cult, and its teachings are heretical. This is why you prefer to hide that you are a member of Local Church and present its teachings.

[termin8d]

Either I am prosyletizing or I'm hiding. Which one is it? Apart from the Witness Lee threads, I have never gone into other threads in Factnet attempting to promote any of the ministry materials of Witness Lee.

You say that you do not like the way I deal with others. I will take this in the context of dealing with Troy Brooks, and Pastor Johnny Christian Jr.

Both of these gentlemen have come to factnet and promoted their teachings and condemned others who do not follow suit. Mr. Brooks has gone so far as to put up personal pages attacking the characters of Christians who do not agree with Him, including myself.

Pastor Johnny Christian Jr has stated that probably less than 5% of "Christians" are saved. He has condemned myself and others to hell because we do not believe the things that he teaches.

I on the other hand have *NEVER* judged another persons salvation on Factnet. Not Troy, not Called, nor yourself.

The only appearances I have seen from you outside the Witness Lee threads are those which are to attack myself. It is curious that in the threads regarding the Trinity, you make absolutely no attempt to defend the Christian faith against the heresy that Called promotes. You would rather drag someone through the mud by trying to expose their character.

Now you are teaching me about the way I deal with others? Perhaps you ought to look at yourself before you condemn my conduct.

Oh and by the way, I never knew that it was a requirement of Factnet to post the name of the ministry I follow or the church that I attend in each thread that I write. I haven't seen you write such in the threads you post in.

For the record, Yes I meet with a Local Church and I enjoy the ministry of Witness Lee and Watchman Nee.

I also enjoy Alpha and Omega Ministries which is quite different, but we are all one Body.
I don't think I have the full knowledge of the bible, nor do I believe Witness Lee or Watchman Nee or any member of the Body of Christ had the full knowledge. I believe that we can learn from one another, even if someone's portion is small.

That said, I think it is highly appropriate that you address your concerns of Witness Lee and Watchman Nee in the appropriate threads because it really does defer from the intention of non-related threads. If someone is a Catholic, I'm not going to track them down on every possible thread and post attacks simply because they are Catholic. It is more effective to deal with the issues of their respective threads.

[hardbones]

I think we should give a lot of room to people for personal belief and doctrinal differences but there are certain core issues you can't give latitude on. I don't see how someone can be born again without believing on Jesus
"For God so loved the world he gave his only begotton SON that whosoever believes on HIM should not perish but have everlasting life"

[called]

Yes hardbones your right!!! And if Jesus Christ is God almighty than John 3:16 and many many other scriptures are a Lie! "For God so loved the world he gave his only begotton {{{SON}}} {{{NOT HIMSELF}}} that whosoever believes on {{{HIM}}} {{{THE SON}}} should not perish but have everlasting life" God sent his {{{Son}}} into the world, the Messiah, The Anointed one, Christ received the Holy Spirit at baptism just like you and I, And God also left him at the cross!!! God was in Christ for 3 and a half years during his earthly ministry, no more and no less!!! Christ is not God.

termin8d

I have nothing whatsoever personally against you or anyone else! But I hate Roman Catholic theology! And that is where the Trinity comes from!

I apologize to you if I made you feel bad in anyway! Please understand where am coming from

Johnny

[called]

Isaiah 9:6 was originally written in Hebrew thousands of years before the birth of Messiah! By a hand picked Holy Spirit inspired Hebrew prophet chosen by God himself! Than here comes Gentile ST Jerome of the Roman Catholic Church and rewrites the OT and NT in Latin Vulgate which no can understand, and completely changes the meaning of not only this scripture but many others!!! I wish someone could show me at least one single Hebrew manuscript that lines up with our so called Christian interruption of Isaiah 9:6

I respectfully ask that you truly consider this

Johnny

[termin8d]

Johnny, I accept your apology. To move things along, because really we are getting off topic and not addressing the issues here, how about this:

I will concede that there is no word for word explicit formula for the Trinity in the Bible, so you can count yourself as victor.

Now I would like to challenge you an online IRC debate as to whether or not the Bible implicitly teaches the doctrine of the Trinity. Please give me an indication of when would be a suitable time and date for you and I'll try to work with that.

[called]

You know what really gets to me is the fact that the Roman Catholic Church rewrote the Bible and “MANIPULATED” changed rearranged or added to the scriptures to text proof their doctrine of the Holy Trinity! WHY???????????????????? Did the RCC go through so much trouble? If this doctrine was already their. Every professing Christian on the face of the earth should truly be concerned about scriptures like Isaiah 9:6, 1 John 5:7 and the baptismal formula found in the tail end of Matthew 28:19 that was never once practiced in scripture!!! What if I am right? It would shake the very foundation of so called orthodox Christianity! I do not believe in this doctrine nor am I told in scripture that it is an issue that concerns my salvation, it was not expressly taught by Christ or his hand picked apostles, so why should it concern me! You say if I don’t believe in this so called trinity I am a heretic! Where does it state this in the Bible! Where does it teach in the Bible that I must confess with my lips that Jesus Christ is God Almighty! All I see in my bible is that we as Christians must confess Christ to be the {{{SON OF GOD}}} and the Messiah! And that’s all he himself ever claimed to be, nothing more and nothing less, I will not debate you over this issue that does not concern my Salvation! Because all it does is lead to bad feelings towards each other and that’s sin

[called]

Witness Lee's Local Church Denomination
(The Recovery Movement)

The Basic Gospel
How to be Born Again
According to the Local Church
"If you sense the oldness and deadness, the emptiness and vanity, the confusion and frustration, and the tragic destiny of the first life, you need Jesus. Only He can enliven you by bringing the life of God into you to give you a new birth, a new life. Only thus can you be born again to be a Christian, a Christ-man, an adherent of Jesus Christ, full of life, joy, peace, rest, purpose, and fulfillment in God.
Say to Him boldly, "Lord Jesus, I need You as my Savior. Save me from eternal death. Give me God's life. I want to be born again of God. Make me a Christian." Then you will receive the life of God to make you a born-again Christian."


Do you truly believe his Brother?

While to many Christians today, this sounds pretty good, it is not a sufficient presentation of the gospel, but rather taken alone advocates easy-believism. That's about as extensive as they get in presentation of the gospel. In actual practice it's even more condensed. Notice in particular the absence of any mention of sin and Christ's atoning work on the cross. The person is portrayed simply as a victim of circumstances rather than guilty of sin and worthy of condemnation as such. And there is no mention of the forgiveness of sins. Contrast this with How the Bible Preaches the Gospel. Now consider also their obsession with the pharse "O Lord Jesus".

[called]

"O Lord Jesus" - Easy Believism
"We have seen that to reach the unbelievers, no preaching is necessary. If we help them say "O Lord" three times, they will be saved. If they open the window, the air will get in. All they have to do is to open their mouths and say, "O Lord, O Lord." Even if they have no intention of believing, still they will be caught! Regardless of whether they have the intention or not, as long as they open the window, the air will get in. It is not a matter of teaching; it is a matter of touching the seven Spirits of God." Witness Lee, Stream Magazine, Vlll: l, Feb l, 1970, 6.

Watchman Nee's Purgatory
Both Witness Lee and Watchman Nee advocate a purgatory idea. In his book "The Gospel of God, Volume III", Watchman Nee says:
"If a person has become a Christian but his hands or feet sin all the time, he will suffer the punishment of the eternal fire in the kingdom of the heavens. He will not suffer this punishment eternally, but will suffer it only in the age of the kingdom" (Meaning the 1000 year Millenial Kingdom)
http://www.bcbsr.com/topics/lc.html Brother their are many born again movements here in south east asia where i live, but none of them truly follow the living word of God as it is written

[termin8d]

Called: If you are so confident that the doctrine of the Trinity is not taught in the bible, then you should feel completely confident to debate this matter. In fact you mentioned in an earlier post that you would love to debate me, but you can't because you have lupis and it takes you a long time to ride on your motorcycle to get to the internet café or whatever it is. That is why I repeatedly stated that I'd allow you to pick the day and the time so that it fits with your schedule. In fact, I've noticed a number of times that your posts have appeared just before or after mine on a number of occasions.

Now you want to discredit me by posting negative material from another site about Watchman Nee and Witness Lee.

I would like to know why it is that you have this constant habit of going onto google, searching for whatever topic you want, and if it suits you, simply paste it on the board here.

Have you read a single book by Witness Lee or Watchman Nee? Have you ever met with any of the local churches under their ministry? Have you ever bothered to sincerely understand what it is that they teach? It seems to me that you actually have done none of the following.

You have already goofed up in the past when one of the sites you linked to actually refuted your position on the Trinity because you didn't bother to read it properly.

You have shown yourself to be a poor researcher. I truly wonder how you can do what you do with a clear conscience.

Anyone can do what you do. There are a lot of people today who promote themselves as ministers of God's word yet have very little understanding of it. It takes more than google. It takes prayer and opening yourself to God and being an empty slate on which to be written on by His speaking.

And in the future, if you really want to discuss the teachings of Witness Lee and Watchman Nee then take it to an appropriate thread, and do so after you have fairly examined the position of those you are refuting.

[lema_nal]

termin8d, you argue about Trinity, but the fact is that Local Church beliefs about Trinity are not orthodoxal either. Local Church believes that God the Son is God the Father and that God the Son became God the Holy Spirit.

Everyone who is interested to know more about wrong teachings of Witness Lee can read the material that I posted on another thread http://www.factnet.org/discus/messages/3/32889.html?1186670136

[loverofchrist]

lema_nal,

termin8d did not bring his association with the "local church" into this thread because it is not pertinent to the issue.

You, however, have brought it into this thread. As such, you have intentionally distracted this thread off-course. Instead of making this an issue of "called's" problem with the Trinity you made it an issue of termin8d of termin8d's association with the "local church."

[called]

Over 50 times in the New Testament Christ is called the Son of God!!! But no where in the NT is Christ called God the Son! Why do Trinitarians add to the word of God to somehow try to prove a teaching or doctrine that took the man made RCC 381 years to fully formulate and develop? Where in the scriptures do we find Jesus Christ called the second person of the Godhead? Or the Holy Spirit called the third person of the Godhead? Trinitarians can’t find answers to these questions so they fall back on it’s a Mystery!!!
If the Great Whore = The RCC didn’t come along years after the death of Christ and the apostles we wouldn’t have a trinity, we wouldn’t be resting and worshiping on Pagan Sunday, we wouldn’t be celebrating Christ-mass or Easter, I wish to God people would grow up and stop following man and start following only what was taught and practiced 2000 years ago by Christ and the apostles themselves! If there is a Hell its going to be overly full!!!

[loverofchrist]

There is an issue of differentiating between nature and position.

(Position: (noun) Condition with reference to place, location, or situation. A place occupied or to be occupied),

(Nature: (noun) The particular combination of qualities belonging to a person, animal, thing, or class by birth.

A king is a Person of royalty. A King is a Person that’s his nature. The fact that he is king is by position, nothing whatsoever to do with his nature. A Prince is not by nature royalty as you say, that is just his position, by nature he is a person.

There have been countless times throughout history where people have become kings who were not born of a royal line, but by nature they are people. As a Britt we have a queen, now our queen can say by my position I am greater than my subjects, but she cannot say she is greater than her subjects by nature, because by nature she is a human being just the same as the rest of us.

Jesus by nature was God not only the Son of God, but God the son by nature. My family name is Jackson, my fathers name was Jackson. Therefore I am the son of Jackson but I am also Jackson the son. (I know that is a bad analogy but it illustrates the point). Jesus didn’t as you say, “inherit the attributes of God”. The Bible says “In the beginning was the word, the word was with God and the word was God. He already was God by nature in the beginning as the word.

It is true that Jesus as a man was subservient to God, but that is the whole point of the “Hypostatic Union”. Jesus shared two natures, as a man he was fully man, and as God he was fully God. I refer you to Philippians 2:5-8 “Who being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made Himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in Human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to death, even death on a cross”.

As the son of God Jesus was divine by nature. The Jews understood what he was saying and that was that he had the nature of God. Having the very nature of God and being God are the same thing, as there is only One True God by Nature.

What is the Nature of God? How do we define it?
The very nature of God is summed up under the word Deity. There are four qualifications of Deity, they Are:

(a)Omnipresent…Everywhere present.
(b)Omniscient…All Knowledge, knows all things.
(c)Omnipotent…Possesses all power.
(d)Eternal…No beginning and no ending. Always has been, always will be.

The Bible clearly affirms that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit all possess these 4 qualifications of Deity. Thus, showing that they are all God by Nature.

[called]

Jesus the {{{Man}}} did not become Christ = the Messiah or the anointed one and receive the full nature of God until 30 after his birth at his baptism! God the Father entered him at that point and stayed with or in him for three and a half years than left him at the cross. Their for Christ is not God the son but the Son of God!!!

“”””What is the Nature of God? How do we define it?

The very nature of God is summed up under the word {{{Deity}}}. There are four qualifications of Deity, they Are:

(a)Omnipresent…Everywhere present.
(b)Omniscient…All Knowledge, knows all things.
(c)Omnipotent…Possesses all power.
(d)Eternal…No beginning and no ending. Always has been, always will be.

Before the Father entered Christ at Baptism Christ did not have these qualifications of Deity!!!

Please rethink this carefully!

[loverofchrist]

Called,

Your answer lacks the support of Scripture. When Mary was visited by the angel of God it was told to her, "That which is in you is begotten of the Holy Spirit." Therefore, Jesus was divine by birth not merely by His baptism. Furthermore, John 1:1-18 testify clearly that Jesus was divine from birth. You should re-think your theology moire carefully in light of the many verses in the New Testament which testify of Jesus' divine nature in His incarnation.

[bluewater2]

Hey Called, why don't you just become a Jew? Everything that you claim that the Catholics did to the NT the Christians did to the Jewish Bible and for the same reasons. Your words: "You know what really gets to me is the fact that the Roman Catholic Church rewrote the Bible and “MANIPULATED” changed rearranged or added to the scriptures to text proof their doctrine of the Holy Trinity!" Change the words "Holy Trinity" with "Messiahship of Jesus" and you have hit the nail on the head.

[termin8d]

Bluewater2: I don't blame you for making such a suggestion, since Called's position is anything but representative of Christian.

As for Hugh Fogelman is an anti-Christian jew. I am not going to repeat some of his unfortunate language. His website is authored by himself and a gentile. Note: no scholarship, just weak arguments combined with insults.

Here's one person's encounter with Hugh and His Gentile sidekick.

http://www.therefinersfire.org/gentile_antimissionary_site.htm

So how about it, called ? Are you ready to jump ship? Hugh Fogelman believes that Jesus was a fallible sinner. That means no perfect sacrifice, no redemption, no justification, no salvation.
You're looking to people like yaakov and hugh fogelman to lead you in the scriptures.

Perhaps jump ship is technically incorrect because one wonders if you ever were on the ship to begin with.

Well done.

[the_rede]

<font color="ff0000">THIS DISCUSSION BELONGS IN THE WITNESS LEE TOPIC OR A NEW TOPIC IN THE DOCTINES/BELIEFS/PRACTICES TOPIC.</font>

(Message edited by admin on August 17, 2007)