The Trinity

[juxtaposeraphim]

.

furthermore, in conclusion to my question

what we see here - in the enormous contradiction and massive difference between these two translations is that the Catholic Translation states that Jesus offered one sacrifice for sins, - then a comma " , " Jesus offered one sacrifice for sins, - - ( FOLLOWED BY A COMMA PUNCTUATION MARKING ))

the Catholic translations go on to say " for ever sitteth on the right hand of God, " - - so the Catholics explain the Trinity to say for sure - Jesus - for ever sitteth on the right hand of God, however the contradiction and difference is that the Protestant K.J.V. places a comma after the word " forever " - to say that Jesus offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, then the comma " , "

followed by - , sat down on the right hand of God.

The K.J.V removes the message that says that Jesus for ever sitteth on the right hand of God because eventually Trinitarians realized that their translation expressly says that Jesus is NOT forever sitting on the right hand of God.


we see verse - - :13 FROM HENCEFORTH EXPECTING UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE HIS FOOTSTOOL.
and
Mar 12:36 Sit ON my right hand, UNTIL I make thy enemies thy footstool.
Luk 20:42 Sit thou ON my right hand, - UNTIL I make thine enemies thy footstool.
Act 2:34 Sit thou ON my right hand, UNTIL I make thy foes thy footstool.
Heb 1:13 Sit ON my right hand, UNTIL I make thine enemies thy footstool?

the translators later translating the Protestant K.J.V. attempted to fix this contradiction by moving and shuffling the punctuation to move the " comma > - NOTICE THE DIFFERENCE



Protestant K.J.V. - - After he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever ,,,,, - sat down ON the right hand of God;

vs the Catholic

Catholic Douay Rheims and the Latin Vulgate - - Offering one sacrifice for sins,,,,, - for ever sitteth ON the right hand of God,



Protestants realizing that they cannot believe in a Trinitarian Jesus who forever sits ON the right hand of Trinitarian God - yet they cannot believe in a Jesus who is not a Trinitarian

so they adjust and simply move a punctuation mark to deny and diminish the very deity of Jesus that had been instituted in the confusing and contradiction of the Trinity Contradiction instituted by their Roman Catholic mother. Can Protestants to this day provide answer to the question using their Translation, - when does Jesus be removed and taken away and loose his seat and position of being GLORIFIED to sit at the right hand of God ? ? ?

do Trinitarians simply take this question to simply mean to them - when is the seating arrangement in heaven changed for the Trinitarian Jesus

 

[juxtaposeraphim]

.

additionally, just to clarify, can the Trinity Provide An Answer


is this something that Trinitarians can answer ? because the original manuscripts of the New Testament are so clear and so precise to explain that Jesus is NOW IN the right of God and this is eternal - as they replace the word IN with the words - AT and ON . - can the Trinitarian provide an answer to this Trinity question from their translations as to why the Catholic translation contradicts and also the Protestant translation ?

when does Trinitarian Jesus be removed and taken away and loose his seat and position of being GLORIFIED to sit at the right hand of God ? ? ?

But this is not at all what the original manuscripts are saying - this is a complete mistranslation and alteration from what the original Greek manuscript message says, this is completely changing and altering the message of the manuscript.
Please notice the - ORIGINAL GREEK MANUSCRIPT MESSAGE

Heb 10:12 - ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS
HIM NOW THE ONE FOR SIN, OFFERED UP A SACRIFICE INTO THAT FOREVER SETTING DOWN “ εν IN “ THE RIGHT OF GOD


Translated word for word exactly -- here - :12

αυτος Him - δε now - μιαν the one - υπερ for - αμαρτιων sin - προσενεγκας offered up -
θυσιαν a sacrifice - εις into - το that - διηνεκες forever - εκαθισεν set down - εν IN -

δεξια the right - του of - θεου God​

The manuscripts are saying - exactly = :12 - HIM NOW THE ONE FOR SIN,, OFFERED UP A SACRIFICE INTO THAT FOREVER SETTING DOWN “ εν IN “ THE RIGHT OF GOD

Meaning that Jesus is - { FOREVER TO DWELL “ εν IN “ - IN THE RIGHT OF GOD )
ACCORDING TO THE MANUSCRIPT ORIGINAL MESSAGE -

this is much different when the original that says -

FOR SIN,, HE OFFERED UP ONE SACRIFICE INTO THAT FOREVER SETTING DOWN IN THE RIGHT OF GOD

truly, how can this contradiction between the two translations and this question in its authenticity be resolved or even answered from the Trinitarian translations ?

.Can my Trinitarian friends to this day provide answer to the question using their Translation, -

when does Trinitarian Jesus be removed and taken away and loose his seat and position of being GLORIFIED to sit at the right hand o f God ? ? ?

their translations says - - :13 FROM HENCEFORTH EXPECTING UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE HIS FOOTSTOOL.

Trinitarian Jesus is expecting that he will maintain his seat and position of being GLORIFIED to sit ON the right hand of God - until his enemies be made a footstool ..
When does Trinitarian Jesus be removed and taken away and loose his seat and position of being GLORIFIED to sit at the right hand of God ? ? ?

 

[Eleanor]

.

additionally, just to clarify, can the Trinity Provide An Answer


is this something that Trinitarians can answer ? because the original manuscripts of the New Testament are so clear and so precise to explain that Jesus is NOW IN the right of God and this is eternal - as they replace the word IN with the words - AT and ON . - can the Trinitarian provide an answer to this Trinity question from their translations as to why the Catholic translation contradicts and also the Protestant translation ?

when does Trinitarian Jesus be removed and taken away and loose his seat and position of being GLORIFIED to sit at the right hand of God ? ? ?

But this is not at all what the original manuscripts are saying - this is a complete mistranslation and alteration from what the original Greek manuscript message says, this is completely changing and altering the message of the manuscript.
Please notice the - ORIGINAL GREEK MANUSCRIPT MESSAGE

Heb 10:12 - ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS
HIM NOW THE ONE FOR SIN, OFFERED UP A SACRIFICE INTO THAT FOREVER SETTING DOWN “ εν IN “ THE RIGHT OF GOD


Translated word for word exactly -- here - :12

αυτος Him - δε now - μιαν the one - υπερ for - αμαρτιων sin - προσενεγκας offered up -
θυσιαν a sacrifice - εις into - το that - διηνεκες forever - εκαθισεν set down - εν IN -

δεξια the right - του of - θεου God​

The manuscripts are saying - exactly = :12 - HIM NOW THE ONE FOR SIN,, OFFERED UP A SACRIFICE INTO THAT FOREVER SETTING DOWN “ εν IN “ THE RIGHT OF GOD

Meaning that Jesus is - { FOREVER TO DWELL “ εν IN “ - IN THE RIGHT OF GOD )
ACCORDING TO THE MANUSCRIPT ORIGINAL MESSAGE -

this is much different when the original that says -

FOR SIN,, HE OFFERED UP ONE SACRIFICE INTO THAT FOREVER SETTING DOWN IN THE RIGHT OF GOD

truly, how can this contradiction between the two translations and this question in its authenticity be resolved or even answered from the Trinitarian translations ?

.Can my Trinitarian friends to this day provide answer to the question using their Translation, -
when does Trinitarian Jesus be removed and taken away and loose his seat and position of being GLORIFIED to sit at the right hand o f God ? ? ?

their translations says - - :13 FROM HENCEFORTH EXPECTING UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE HIS FOOTSTOOL.

Trinitarian Jesus is expecting that he will maintain his seat and position of being GLORIFIED to sit ON the right hand of God - until his enemies be made a footstool ..
When does Trinitarian Jesus be removed and taken away and loose his seat and position of being GLORIFIED to sit at the right hand of God ? ? ?

Can you phrase your question simply?
I don't now whar you are asking.

Are you asking if Jesus loses his position at the right hand of God?

Keep it simple.

 

[juxtaposeraphim]

.
yes friend


please keep in mind the Trinitarian does not rely upon the Manuscripts nor their own Trinitarian Translation for their Trinity Faith System

but from the Translation can Trinitarians answer this simple question

 

[Eleanor]

.
yes friend


please keep in mind the Trinitarian does not rely upon the Manuscripts nor their own Trinitarian Translation for their Trinity Faith System

but from the Translation can Trinitarians answer this simple question

They have resoundingly proven it.

 

[CherubRam]

Trinitarian formula​

Some of the Church Fathers testified that Matthew wrote his gospel in Hebrew. The Trinitarian formula does not appear in the Shem-Tob Hebrew manuscript of Matthew. This Hebrew manuscript does not seem to have been copied from the Greek or Latin either. The omission of the command to baptize and the Trinitarian formula in the Shem-Tob manuscript contributes to the conclusion that the Trinitarian formula did not exist in the original manuscript of Matthew, but was a later addition.

Also:
In the fourth century, a group called the “Pneumatomacki,” who resisted recognizing “the Holy Spirit” as the third person of the Trinity, apparently used a text of Matthew that did not have the Trinitarian formula.

It is known that after the time of Emperor Theodosius (346-395), that writings that did not agree with the official position of the Catholic Church were to be sought out and destroyed.

The teaching of a Trinitarian formula word be something new in Orthodox Judaism, and there is no examples of Christ teaching the Apostles any such thing.

All of the New Testament teaches baptism in the name of Christ. The only place that teaches a different baptism is Matthew 28:19.

So the bottom line is this; there were bible text after the fourth century that did not have the Trinitarian formula.

 

[Eleanor]

Trinitarian formula​

Some of the Church Fathers testified that Matthew wrote his gospel in Hebrew. The Trinitarian formula does not appear in the Shem-Tob Hebrew manuscript of Matthew. This Hebrew manuscript does not seem to have been copied from the Greek or Latin either. The omission of the command to baptize and the Trinitarian formula in the Shem-Tob manuscript contributes to the conclusion that the Trinitarian formula did not exist in the original manuscript of Matthew, but was a later addition.
Also:
In the fourth century, a group called the “Pneumatomacki,” who resisted recognizing “the Holy Spirit” as the third person of the Trinity, apparently used a text of Matthew that did not have the Trinitarian formula.
It is known that after the time of Emperor Theodosius (346-395), that writings that did not agree with the official position of the Catholic Church were to be sought out and destroyed.
The teaching of a Trinitarian formula word be something new in Orthodox Judaism, and there is no examples of Christ teaching the Apostles any such thing.
All of the New Testament teaches baptism in the name of Christ. The only place that teaches a different baptism is Matthew 28:19.

So the bottom line is this; there were bible text after the fourth century that did not have the Trinitarian formula.

The doctrine of the Trinity is not based on a "Trinitarian formula," but on the following NT testimony:

Both Jesus and the Holy Spirit are God, and with the Father all three are presented in NT teaching from the beginning.

1) We have three separate persons (divine agents), Father, Son and Holy Spirit,
presented in the work of salvation:

a)--at its beginning (Luke 1:35),
-----at the inauguration of Jesus' public ministry (Matthew 3:16-17) and
-----in the work of atonement (Hebrews 9:14),

b) the Holy Spirit completing the work (salvation) of the Father through the Son
(Acts 2:38-39; Romans 8:26; 1 Corinthians 12:4-6; Ephesians 1:3-14, Ephesians 2:13-22; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; 1 Peter 1:2),

c) the only way to enter the kingdom of the Father (salvation) is through faith in the Son and regeneration by the Holy Spirit (John 3:1-15).

2) And Jesus shows the personhoods of three distinct and separate divine agents:

The Son is sent by the Father, in the Father's name (John 5:23, 36, 43).
The Spirit is sent by the Father in the Son's name (John 14:26).
The Spirit is subject to the Son as well as to the Father, for the Spirit is sent by the Son as well as the Father (John 15:26, 16:7, 14:26).

One doesn't send oneself, one sends another who is separate from oneself.

The Trinity--one God in three separate divine persons--is presented in NT teaching from the beginning.

 

[juxtaposeraphim]

.
understood, thank you so very much for taking time to respond to my question

I appreciate and value your reply,

please give me some time to study and think about the information you provided and if you wish you may read my response.

 

[CherubRam]

Ephesians 4:5
one Lord, one faith, one baptism;

In regards to water baptism.
The verse says one baptism, and yet we have two. Throughout the New testament we have baptism in Christ name alone. But in Matthew 28:19 we have the Trinitarian formula baptism.

So how do you explain that?

 

[Fred]

Ephesians 4:5
one Lord, one faith, one baptism;

In regards to water baptism.
The verse says one baptism, and yet we have two. Throughout the New testament we have baptism in Christ name alone. But in Matthew 28:19 we have the Trinitarian formula baptism.

So how do you explain that?

Even earlier in the Book of Matthew he presents the gospel being done in Christ's name.
Matthew 10:21-22
(21) Brother will deliver brother over to death, and the father his child, and children will rise against parents and have them put to death,
(22) and you will be hated by all for my name's sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved.

Matthew 12:21
and in his name the Gentiles will hope.

Matthew 19:29
And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands, for my name's sake, will receive a hundredfold and will inherit eternal life.


Matthew 24:9, 14
(9) Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and put you to death, and you will be hated by all nations for my name's sake.
(14) And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.

This isn't to the exclusion of the Father and the Holy Spirit.
Matthew 28:19
Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.


John 5:43
I have come in my Father's name, and you do not receive me. If another comes in his own name, you will receive him.
John 14:26
But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.

Matthew 28:20 (Jesus is 'always' with the believer)
teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.
John 14:16=17 (The Holy Spirit is 'always' with/in the believer)
And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever.
that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you.
John 14:23 (The Father and Jesus will 'always' be with/in the believer)
Jesus answered him, If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him.

 

[juxtaposeraphim]

.



recently, this has been my main question to the Trinitarian world concerning - Hebrews 10 : 12

I have contacted and written to every faithful Trinitarian that I can contact, I have posted and expressed this question to all of the trinitarian world - this is the question that I have worked on day and night, working to assemble my question in the most clear and precise way.


and I have looked at the original manuscripts Greek - we find exactly what the manuscripts are saying - in Hebrews 10 : 12


Please notice the ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPT MESSAGE

Heb 10:12 - ORIGINAL GREEK MANUSCRIPTS


HIM NOW THE ONE FOR SIN,, OFFERED UP A SACRIFICE INTO THAT FOREVER SETTING DOWN “ εν IN “ THE RIGHT OF GOD


Translated word for word exactly -- here
:12


αυτος Him - δε now - μιαν the one - υπερ for - αμαρτιων sin - προσενεγκας offered up -

θυσιαν a sacrifice - εις into - το that - διηνεκες forever - εκαθισεν set down - εν IN -

δεξια the right - του of - θεου God


The manuscripts are saying - exactly =

:12 - HIM NOW THE ONE FOR SIN,, OFFERED UP A SACRIFICE INTO THAT FOREVER SETTING DOWN “ εν IN “ THE RIGHT OF GOD


Meaning that Jesus is - { FOREVER TO DWELL “ εν IN “ - IN THE RIGHT OF GOD ) - ACCORDING TO THE MANUSCRIPT ORIGINAL MESSAGE -


but the Protestant Trinitarian translation omits and changes this to say that

JESUS OFFERED ONE SACRIFICE FOR SINS FOR EVER,,,, - SAT DOWN ON THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD;


this is much different from the original that says that - FOR SIN,,, OFFERED UP A SACRIFICE INTO THAT FOREVER SETTING DOWN IN THE RIGHT OF GOD.

please, can the Trinitarian answer, when does Jesus be removed and taken away and loose his seat and position of being GLORIFIED to sit at the right hand of God ? ?

and why did Protestants change the Catholic translation by simply moving the punctuation mark of a " Comma " " , " instead of just translating the verse as the original message is transmitted in the manuscript.


in Hebrews 10:12 - it is very interesting about the Trinity Doctrine in that how the Catholic Douay Rheims and the Latin Vulgate contradict and disagree with the contrasting Protestant K.J.V.


1. Firstly - Let's look at - Heb 10:12 first from the - Catholic Douay Rheims and the Latin Vulgate

Heb 10:12 :12 But this man, offering one sacrifice for sins, for ever sitteth on the right hand of God,



2. and now - the Protestant K.J.V.

Heb 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

 

[juxtaposeraphim]

what we see here - in the enormous contradiction and massive difference between these two translations is that the Catholic Translation states that Jesus offered one sacrifice for sins, - then a comma " , " Jesus offered one sacrifice for sins, - - ( FOLLOWED BY A COMMA PUNCTUATION MARKING ))

the Catholic translations go on to say " for ever sitteth on the right hand of God, " - - so the Catholics explain the Trinity to say for sure - Jesus - for ever sitteth on the right hand of God, however the contradiction and difference is that the Protestant K.J.V. places a comma after the word " forever " - to say that Jesus offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, then the comma " , "

followed by - , sat down on the right hand of God.

The K.J.V removes the message that says that Jesus for ever sitteth on the right hand of God because eventually Trinitarians realized that their translation expressly says that Jesus is NOT forever sitting on the right hand of God.

again, let’s look at what the Protestant Translation changes compared to the Catholic predecessor


Protestant K.J.V. - - - After he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever ,,,,, - sat down ON the right hand of God;

vs the Catholic

Catholic Douay Rheims and the Latin Vulgate - - - Offering one sacrifice for sins,,,,, - for ever sitteth ON the right hand of God,


Protestants realizing that they cannot believe in a Trinitarian Jesus who forever sits ON the right hand of Trinitarian God - yet they cannot believe in a Jesus who is not a Trinitarian

so they adjust and simply move a punctuation mark to deny and diminish the very deity of Jesus that had been instituted in the confusing and contradiction of the Trinity Contradiction instituted by their Roman Catholic mother. Can Protestants to this day provide answer to the question using their Translation, - when does Jesus be removed and taken away and loose his seat and position of being GLORIFIED to sit at the right hand of God ? ? ?


do Trinitarians simply take this question to simply mean to them - “ when is the seating arrangement in heaven changed for the Trinitarian Jesus “


Heb 10:12 - FROM ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS

HIM NOW THE ONE FOR SIN, OFFERED UP A SACRIFICE INTO THAT FOREVER SETTING DOWN “ εν IN “ THE RIGHT OF GOD

Translated word for word exactly -- here - :12


αυτος Him - δε now - μιαν the one - υπερ for - αμαρτιων sin - προσενεγκας offered up -

θυσιαν a sacrifice - εις into - το that - διηνεκες forever - εκαθισεν set down - εν IN -

δεξια the right - του of - θεου God


The manuscripts are saying - exactly = :12 - HIM NOW THE ONE FOR SIN,, OFFERED UP A SACRIFICE INTO THAT FOREVER SETTING DOWN “ εν IN “ THE RIGHT OF GOD


Meaning that Jesus is - { FOREVER TO DWELL “ εν IN “ - IN THE RIGHT OF GOD )

ACCORDING TO THE MANUSCRIPT ORIGINAL MESSAGE -

FOR SIN,, HE OFFERED UP ONE SACRIFICE INTO THAT FOREVER SETTING DOWN IN THE RIGHT OF GOD

when does Trinitarian Jesus be removed and taken away and loose his seat and position of being GLORIFIED to sit at the right hand of Trinitarian God ? ? ?

their translations says - - :13 FROM HENCEFORTH EXPECTING UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE HIS FOOTSTOOL.

Mar 12:36 Sit ON my right hand, UNTIL I make thy enemies thy footstool.
Luk 20:42 Sit thou ON my right hand, - UNTIL I make thine enemies thy footstool.
Act 2:34 Sit thou ON my right hand, UNTIL I make thy foes thy footstool.
Heb 1:13 Sit ON my right hand, UNTIL I make thine enemies thy footstool?


Trinitarian Jesus is expecting that he will maintain his seat and position of being GLORIFIED to sit ON the right hand of God - until his enemies be made a footstool ..

 

[juxtaposeraphim]

I will do my very best to explain my question and present the reasoning as to why I ask this question.

My intent is never to be disrespectful or harmful to Trinitarian believers but to express and show the evidence
I love Trinitarian believers just as I love all

the truth is, the Trinitarian Translations always translate the passages of the Bible to always say that Jesus is
ON the right hand of God;

but never, ever once is the Greek word - " ON " ἐπί - epi - used to describe Jesus
as " ON " the right of God, in the manuscripts

for example Mat 26:50 ......... they laid hands " ON " ἐπί - epi - Jesus, and took him.

the Greek word " ON " is - - ἐπί - epi -


But - the definition of the Greek word { εν } - means - IN / in
this Greek word " εν - IN " is used a total of 2,720 total times in the New Testament.
that's - two thousand, two hundred, and twenty - total times.



the Greek manuscripts declare that Yahashua is - IN / εν = EN
IN / εν = EN, - in the right of power
IN / εν = EN, - the right of the throne
IN / εν = EN, - the right of the Father
IN / εν = EN, - the right of God

 

[juxtaposeraphim]

Heb 12:2 Christ is set - ἐν - en - - in the right of the throne of God.
Heb 10:12 Jesus is forever sat down - ἐν - en - - in the right of God;
1Pe 3:22 Who is gone into heaven, and is - ἐν - en - - in the right of God;
Rom 8:34 Christ in - ἐν - en - - in the right of God, who also maketh intercession for us.
Eph 1:20 Christ in - ἐν - en - - in his own right - ἐν - en - - in in the heavenly place.
Heb 8:1 Christ is set - ἐν - en - - in the right of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;
Heb 1:3 sat down - ἐν - en - - in the right of the Majesty - ἐν - en - - in the high.


this Greek word " εν " IN - is used a total of 2,720 total times in the manuscripts - and 47 total times in the translation the Trinitarian translators change this word to replace and change this word - into the word {( ON )} -

to replace the word " IN " with the word " ON " is something that is possible to do but very rarely because the true meaning and definition of the Greek word " - ἐν - En - mean literally in Greek - IN

you can replace the Greek word " IN " with the word " ON " - - for example the translation says

Mar 14:2 But they said, Not { ON } the feast day,


however, the Greek word here in " Mar 14:2 " is the Greek word " - ἐν - En - meaning literally in Greek - IN
and should more properly translate as - IN, - as the manuscripts say exactly

:2 But they said, Not { IN } the feast day, - not ON the feast day, the manuscripts say " IN the day of the feast "

because that the the matter was dealing with death and capture of Jesus wherein the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might take him by craft, and put him to death.

PRIESTS AND SCRIBES LITERALLY SAID :2 But they said, Not { IN } the feast day,
they did not say UPON or ON the feast day - - they stated - - :2 Not { IN } the feast day,


you can replace the Greek word " IN " with the word " ON " - however, this is not something that is done in very many examples because these two words have a completely different meaning. The Greek word " IN " means literally " INSIDE " inside of an idea or an object or location and this is where Jesus originates , it is - IN - God,
INSIDE God's Throne and Power and Spirit where Jesus originates



and the Greek manuscripts literally use the Greek word OUT FROM / EXITING " ἐξ - EX " when describing Yahashua exiting / departing out from and out God - the Greek word literally means " ἐξ - EX " =

OUT OF / FROM


Act 7:56 Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " the right of God.


Yahashua is both IN and OUT OF the right of God - He originates and dwells inside the spirit of God


Mat 26:64 see the Son of man sitting " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " the right of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
Mar 14:62 see the Son of man sitting " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " the right of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
Mar 12:36 The LORD said to my Lord, Sit thou " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " my right untill I make thine enemies thy footstool.
Mat 22:44 Sit thou " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " my right until I make thine enemies thy footstool
Mat 22:44 Sit thou " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " my right until I make thine enemies thy footstool
Luk 22:69 the Son of man sitting " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " the right of the power of God.
Act 2:34 The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " my right
Mar 16:19 and sat " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " the right of God.
Luk 20:42 Sit thou " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " my right
Act 2:25 for he is " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " my right

 

[juxtaposeraphim]

.
SO WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR JESUS TO BE IN AND OUT OF THE RIGHT OF GOD ?


WHEN HE APPEARS IN BODILY FORM - HE IS ALWAYS DESCRIBED AS LITERALLY DEPARTING DWELLING OUT OUTSIDE OF THE RIGHT OF GOD - externally - exterior - manifesting externally - the physical visible form of the invisible spirit


OUTSIDE OF GOD - appearing to man


WHEN HE IS IN THE THRONE - HE HAS ENTERED - DWELLING IN THE RIGHT OF GOD - UNSEEN INVISIBLE RETURN BACK IN THE SPIRIT OF THE HOLY WHERE HE ORIGINATES AS AN ATRIBUTE OF GODS SPIRIT

AND HE IS FOREVER IN THE RIGHT OF GOD - BUT CAN DEPART OUT OF THE RIGHT OF GOD - TO DWELL OUT OF THE RIGHT OF GOD.... IN BODILY FORM - VISIBLE

and can exist both at the same time - in and out of the right of God


NEVER - NOT EVEN ONE SINGLE TIME - do we find Yahashua sitting ON or AT the right HAND
of God. - NEVER EVER IN THE MANUSCRIPTS

i promise you this is truth


Heb 12:2 Christ is set - ἐν - en - - in the right of the throne of God.
Heb 10:12 Jesus is forever sat down - ἐν - en - - in the right of God;
1Pe 3:22 Who is gone into heaven, and is - ἐν - en - - in the right of God;
Rom 8:34 Christ in - ἐν - en - - in the right of God, who also maketh intercession for us.
Eph 1:20 Christ in - ἐν - en - - in his own right - ἐν - en - - in in the heavenly place.
Heb 8:1 Christ is set - ἐν - en - - in the right of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;
Heb 1:3 Christ is sat down - ἐν - en - in the right of the Majesty - ἐν - en - - in the high.



the Greek manuscripts always express Yahashua as both


- ἐν - en - - IN

and

" ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " God



the evidence is there in the manuscripts exact and precise - NOT EVEN ONCE - NOT ONE SINGLE TIME - do we find Yahashua EVER, ever sitting " ON " the right HAND of God - truly, not in one single verse within the manuscript of Greek - this concept simply does not exist.

the Greek word " ON " is - ἐπί - epi -

 

[juxtaposeraphim]

i have no sword and I have no power to force you

but that which is the original message of the intent of the Greek and Hebrew inspired by the Spirit Of The Holy

please help me break this violent addiction

 

[Eleanor]

The doctrine of the Trinity is not based on a "Trinitarian formula," but on the following NT testimony:

Both Jesus and the Holy Spirit are God, and with the Father all three are presented in NT teaching from the beginning.

1) We have three distinct persons (divine agents), Father, Son and Holy Spirit,
presented in the work of salvation:

a)--at its beginning (Luke 1:35),
-----at the inauguration of Jesus' public ministry (Matthew 3:16-17) and
-----in the work of atonement (Hebrews 9:14),

b) the Holy Spirit completing the work (salvation) of the Father through the Son
(Acts 2:38-39; Romans 8:26; 1 Corinthians 12:4-6; Ephesians 1:3-14, Ephesians 2:13-22; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; 1 Peter 1:2),

c) the only way to enter the kingdom of the Father (salvation) is through faith in the Son and regeneration by the Holy Spirit (John 3:1-15).

2) And Jesus shows the personhoods of three distinct divine agents:

The Son is sent by the Father, in the Father's name (John 5:23, 36, 43).
The Spirit is sent by the Father in the Son's name (John 14:26).
The Spirit is subject to the Son as well as to the Father, for the Spirit is sent by the Son as well as the Father (John 15:26, 16:7, 14:26).

One doesn't send oneself, one sends another who is distinct from oneself.

The Trinity--one God in three distinct divine persons--is presented in NT teaching from the beginning.

 

[juxtaposeraphim]

How do trinitarian Christians resolve these 2 passages - these are just 2 seeming contradictions that Christians who uphold the Trinity cannot answer from their translations


Luk 23:46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.

Luk 24:39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a Spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.


1..... father, into thy hands I commit my spirit: - and - 2..... a spirit hath not flesh and bones

if the father is a spirit and a spirit has no flesh and bones - no hands, how is Jesus putting forth his spirit into the hands of another spirit. when a spirit does not have flesh and bones or hands

and

if the Father is a trinitarian spirit then this means that there are 2 separate / plural " holy spirits " - unless we do not consider the spirit of the father to be - a holy spirit.


Trinitarians can attempt to answer these questions by putting forth a Trinitarian Perspective and imploring or appealing to emotional human reasoning or personal opinions to explain what these passages mean but when using the Trinitarian Translation - trinitarians have absolutely no answers to provide.

why is the trinitarian father also not considered - a Holy Spirit ? - - are not there 2 or 3 holy spirits ?

what is God = is the trinity Godhead partly holy and partly unholy -- and 2 of the Spirits of the trinity are not holy spirits ? but only 1 single Spirits of the trinity is - a Holy Spirit - the other 2 spirits are not holy spirits ?

who is the trinitarian Jesus, is he also not considered - a Holy Spirit ? - - is the Sprit of Jesus, not a Holy Spirit ?

how is the trinitarian Jesus expecting to commit his spirit into the hands of another spirit. when a spirit does not have flesh and bones or hands - a spirit has no hands - how does this apply to the Old Testament referring to the voice, arm, hands, face
eyes - Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD

where is the voice, arm, hands, face and eyes of the Father - where does the LORD smell a sweet savour and where does the LORD say something in his heart - a spirit has no heartbeat

when the scriptures say that the very sending of Jesus the Son Of God is a mystery that has been hidden since being ordained before the world - none of the princes of this world knew anything about Jesus the Son Of God.

the Old Testament Prophets and Saints of old knew absolutely nothing about the Son Of God

Col 1:26 Jesus Christ is a mystery which hath been hidden from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:

Rom 16:25 Jesus Christ is a mystery, which was kept secret since the world began

if Jesus is crying with a loud voice, - Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit: and he is speaking symbolic and metaphorically concerning the Spirit - why pretend that the Old Testament would not also do the same

:1 many ways, also various ways, long ago the God spoke to their fathers

:2 in their prophets unto these last of days, of these, he spoke to them in his Son

why pretend that Jesus the Son is a literal part of the many ways and various ways that long ago the God spoke in the Old Testament. - when the scriptures declare that Jesus the Son Of God is a mystery, hidden from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:
Jesus Christ is a mystery, which was kept secret since the world began

 

[Eleanor]

How do trinitarian Christians resolve these 2 passages - these are just 2 seeming contradictions that Christians who uphold the Trinity cannot answer from their translations
Luk 23:46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.
Luk 24:39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a Spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.
1..... father, into thy hands I commit my spirit: - and - 2..... a spirit hath not flesh and bones

Apples and oranges. . .that explains a lot.

How do angel spirits get from point A to point B when they don't have physical wings?

1) Why does a spirit have to have flesh and bones to return to the Father?
When I die, my spirit will return to the Father, while my dead body remains in the ground.

if the father is a spirit and a spirit has no flesh and bones - no hands, how is Jesus putting forth his spirit into the hands of another spirit. when a spirit does not have flesh and bones or hands

2) Jesus was demonstrating that they were not seeing a ghost (spirit), but actual flesh and bones of his resurrected body.

and
if the Father is a trinitarian spirit then this means that there are 2 separate / plural " holy spirits " - unless we do not consider the spirit of the father to be - a holy spirit.16:7,

The Holy Spirit
1) coming forth out of (proceeding from within) both the Father (Jn 15:26) and the Son (Rev 22:1, 17),
2) is the spirit of both the Father and the Son, for he is sent by both the Father (Jn 14:26) and the Son (Jn 15:26, 16:7, 14;26).

Trinitarians can attempt to answer these questions by putting forth a Trinitarian Perspective and imploring or appealing to emotional human reasoning or personal opinions to explain what these passages mean but when using the Trinitarian Translation - trinitarians have absolutely no answers to provide.

why is the trinitarian father also not considered - a Holy Spirit ? - - are not there 2 or 3 holy spirits ?
what is God = is the trinity Godhead partly holy and partly unholy -- and 2 of the Spirits of the trinity are not holy spirits ? but only 1 single Spirits of the trinity is - a Holy Spirit - the other 2 spirits are not holy spirits ?

The one God is one Spirit, one Being, in three distinct divine persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, all three of whom are the One God, one Spirit, one Being, and of which God the Son (the Word, Jn 1:1)) became flesh in Jesus of Nazareth (Jn 1:14).

who is the trinitarian Jesus, is he also not considered - a Holy Spirit ? - - is the Sprit of Jesus, not a Holy Spirit ?

Jesus is the second person of the Trinity, God the Son

how is the trinitarian Jesus expecting to commit his spirit into the hands of another spirit. when a spirit does not have flesh and bones or hands - a spirit has no hands - how does this apply to the Old Testament referring to the voice, arm, hands, face
eyes - Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD

where is the voice, arm, hands, face and eyes of the Father - where does the LORD smell a sweet savour and where does the LORD say something in his heart - a spirit has no heartbeat

when the scriptures say that the very sending of Jesus the Son Of God is a mystery that has been hidden since being ordained before the world - none of the princes of this world knew anything about Jesus the Son Of God.

the Old Testament Prophets and Saints of old knew absolutely nothing about the Son Of God

Col 1:26 Jesus Christ is a mystery which hath been hidden from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:

Rom 16:25 Jesus Christ is a mystery, which was kept secret since the world began

if Jesus is crying with a loud voice, - Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit: and he is speaking symbolic and metaphorically concerning the Spirit - why pretend that the Old Testament would not also do the same

:1 many ways, also various ways, long ago the God spoke to their fathers

:2 in their prophets unto these last of days, of these, he spoke to them in his Son

why pretend that Jesus the Son is a literal part of the many ways and various ways that long ago the God spoke in the Old Testament. - when the scriptures declare that Jesus the Son Of God is a mystery, hidden from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:
Jesus Christ is a mystery, which was kept secret since the world began

All of which is a closed book to those who do not believe (Jn 3:3-5, 1 Co 2:14).

So no point in wasting any more time here.

 

[juxtaposeraphim]

Dearest - " Eleanor "

thank you so very much for taking valuable time to reply to my post, I deeply appreciate communicating with you and others pertaining to this topic.

May we see the context of the verses in your post presented - concerning - 1Co 2:14 & Joh 3:3

1Co 2:14 The natural man is - foolishness
&
Joh 3:3 A man whom is not born again, - cannot see - kingdom of God.


I do understand your point - that Jesus was demonstrating that they were not seeing a ghost (spirit), but actual flesh and bones of his resurrected body.


BUT - my question was not about the Wisdom and declaration of excellency of speech as the topic of " 1Co 2:14 " is describing

BUT also - my question was not about accepting miracles that someone whom is not born again cannot see and accept as from God as the topic of " Joh 3:3 " is describing


please - could you as a Trinitarian please respond to my question presentenced in my post



why is the trinitarian father also not considered - a Holy Spirit ? - - are not there 2 or 3 holy spirits ?

what is God = is the trinity Godhead partly holy and partly unholy -- and 2 of the Spirits of the trinity are not holy spirits ? but only 1 single Spirits of the trinity is - a Holy Spirit - the other 2 spirits are not holy spirits ?

who is the trinitarian Jesus, is he also not considered - a Holy Spirit ? - - is the Sprit of Jesus, not a Holy Spirit ?

how is the trinitarian Jesus expecting to commit his spirit into the hands of another spirit. when a spirit does not have flesh and bones or hands - a spirit has no hands - how does this apply to the Old Testament referring to the voice, arm, hands, face
eyes - Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD

where is the voice, arm, hands, face and eyes of the Father - where does the LORD smell a sweet savour and where does the LORD say something in his heart - a spirit has no heartbeat

when the scriptures say that the very sending of Jesus the Son Of God is a mystery that has been hidden since being ordained before the world - none of the princes of this world knew anything about Jesus the Son Of God.


can you as a Trinitarian please provide an answer _ - FROM YOUR TRINITARIAN TRANSLATION