Why Did God Tell Israel That He is One?

[Tambora]

Jesus is Gods master worker( Prov 8:30)= the one who was beside God during the creation-Jesus gives God 100% credit at Prov 8 for creating.
Created-DIRECT- first and last= all other things created through him.

Yes i am= he existed before Abraham--that is what Jesus claimed. He did not claim to be God-the lying pharisees said he claimed to be God.

The unbelieving and lying Pharisees did not believe Jesus was who He said He was.
They knew Jesus was claiming to be God and they refused to believe, which made them unbelievers.
They knew Jesus was claiming to be God and they said He was not, which made them liars.

 

[Arial]

Jesus is Gods master worker( Prov 8:30)= the one who was beside God during the creation-Jesus gives God 100% credit at Prov 8 for creating.
Created-DIRECT- first and last= all other things created through him.

Prove 8 is a personification of wisdom, not Jesus. If you would learn how to read it you might seek wisdom.

Yes i am= he existed before Abraham--that is what Jesus claimed. He did not claim to be God-the lying pharisees said he claimed to be God.

That isn't what it says. Here is what it says: John 8

56 Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad.” 57 So the Jews said to him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?”[b] 58 Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.” 59 So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple.

Now, answer the questions in post #358. They are numbered 1-5. It would be easiest to follow if you quoted them one at a time with your answer following. Don't be evasive this time.

Thanks.

 

[Viking123]

The unbelieving and lying Pharisees did not believe Jesus was who He said He was.
They knew Jesus was claiming to be God and they refused to believe, which made them unbelievers.
They knew Jesus was claiming to be God and they said He was not, which made them liars.

Since there is no i am that i am in the Hebrew written OT--you are being mislead. I will be what i will be is the correct translating of that Hebrew statement. Jesus just said-he existed before Abraham. The Pharisees twisted it out of hate filled hearts.

 

[Viking123]

Prove 8 is a personification of wisdom, not Jesus. If you would learn how to read it you might seek wisdom.

That isn't what it says. Here is what it says: John 8

56 Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad.” 57 So the Jews said to him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?”[b] 58 Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.” 59 So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple.

Now, answer the questions in post #358. They are numbered 1-5. It would be easiest to follow if you quoted them one at a time with your answer following. Don't be evasive this time.

Thanks.

The first few verses, but most of it is about the one who was beside God during the creation process, the one whom God grew especially fond of=his master worker=the one whom he created all other things through.

 

[Arial]

The first few verses, but most of it is about the one who was beside God during the creation process, the one whom God grew especially fond of=his master worker=the one whom he created all other things through.

This is not answering those five questions, yet responds to the post that ask for those answers. So it is trolling. Against the rules and I am warning you to stop it.

 

[Mr GLee]

The first few verses, but most of it is about the one who was beside God during the creation process, the one whom God grew especially fond of=his master worker=the one whom he created all other things through.

I would offer..

Two is the testimony of one . the foundation of Christianity . Called the law of faith (invisible) or power as it is written.

The "let there be. . . " it was good testimony . The us in Genesis 1:26

Numbers 35:30 Whoso killeth any person, the murderer shall be put to death by the mouth of witnessesplural) but one witness shall not testify against any person to cause him to die.

Deuteronomy 17:6 At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, (a family) shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death.

Never one (the invisible eternal one ) then it would be "Let there be" and nothing causes something. Called dead faith in Hebrews 6

The one who was beside God as the testimony of our invisible God during the creation was the made flesh .He as a sign or demonstration to the whole world. . . revealed the labor of the fathers love that worked in him (Emanuel)

The testimony of the dynamic dual. "Let there be" . . .believe and see .It was very good .

 

[Binyawmene]

It proves 100% Jesus is not Jehovah.

No, it doesn't. The Economical/Relational subjection in the incarnation has to do with the human nature. It has nothing whatsoever to do with ontological subordination.

Jesus Christ is equal to the Father according to the Divine Nature.

John 10:30 I and the Father are one.​

Jesus Christ is subordinate to the Father according to the human nature.

John 14:28 the Father is greater than I​

Jesus Christ is not YHWH according to the human nature. Pointing out the humanity of Christ doesn't negate that he isn't YHWH. Logically speaking this is called a Denying the Conjunct fallacy. Most Unitarians I've encounter says, Jesus being tempted, God cannot be tempted, therefore Jesus is not God. Or God is not a man, Jesus is a man, therefore Jesus is not God. These are all different forms of denying the conjunct.

1Cor 15:24-28= (the end of Jesus' 1000 year reign, starting this reality=Rev 21:1)--Jesus must hand the kingdom back to his God and Father and subject himself= forever.

Only to make the Father to be all-in all respectfully to the economical subjection and according to the human nature. After all, Jesus Christ is both YHWH and man. Pointing out functions of the humanity doesn't negate that he isn't YHWH. The Bible teaches us that all things will be subjected to the Son, not only in this world, but also, the world to come. So, his authority and power still continue.

Hebrews 2:5 It is not to angels that he has subjected the world to come, about which we are speaking.​

​

1 Peter 3:22 who has gone into heaven and is at God’s right hand—with angels, authorities and powers in submission to him.​

​

Ephesians 1:21 far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that is invoked, not only in the present age but also in the one to come.​

Lords prayer--Hallowed be--YOUR--name=Father= Jehovah----not our name--your name.

Again, according to the human nature. Jesus Christ has a Father who he calls "My God" and he doesn't have "a god." In the economical function the Son is not YHWH of himself in the same way the Father is not YHWH of himself. The Father does call the Son YHWH (Hebrews 1:10-12, Psalms 102:24-27). And he is called "One LORD" in 1 Corinthians 8:6.

 

[Binyawmene]

Jehovah is sovereign Lord, He is over Jesus---Jesus told you--The Father is greater than i.

One CANNOT sit at their own right hand.

It proves 100% Jesus is not Jehovah.

These are your denial statements, and you are allowed to deny. Do you think you can deal with why Jesus Christ is referred to as one LORD in 1 Corinthians 8:6. It's much better having a discussion then someone standing in denial. Because I will be asserting the positive claim of a denier. After a while that becomes a form of trolling, and a discussion never takes place.

 

[Mr GLee]

No, it doesn't. The Economical/Relational subjection in the incarnation has to do with the human nature. It has nothing whatsoever to do with ontological subordination.

Jesus Christ is equal to the Father according to the Divine Nature.
John 10:30 I and the Father are one.
Jesus Christ is subordinate to the Father according to the human nature.
John 14:28 the Father is greater than I

I would offer. The father is greater in strength. "Let there be" power. The Son of Man Jesus had none .

The father working in him to both give him understanding (faith) and empower him to do it to the good pleasure of the father ..

The father of lies quicks to destroy the seed of light on the path. . . that falls on the wayside

The kind of bread or meat the disciples knew not of at first

.John 4:33-35King James Version33 Therefore said the disciples one to another, Hath any man brought him ought to eat?Jesus saith unto them, My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work.

One think I notice is the use of the phrase "Jesus Christ" .It i not the same as Jesus the Son of man it speaks of the Spirit of the father Christ that worked in the Son of man .Jesus That can be used together . But dying flesh never becomes living flesh a new boy .All die not receiving

2 Corinthians 5:16 Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, (Jesus the Son of man) yet now henceforth know we him no more.

 

[Viking123]

No, it doesn't. The Economical/Relational subjection in the incarnation has to do with the human nature. It has nothing whatsoever to do with ontological subordination.

Jesus Christ is equal to the Father according to the Divine Nature.

John 10:30 I and the Father are one.​

Jesus Christ is subordinate to the Father according to the human nature.

John 14:28 the Father is greater than I​

Jesus Christ is not YHWH according to the human nature. Pointing out the humanity of Christ doesn't negate that he isn't YHWH. Logically speaking this is called a Denying the Conjunct fallacy. Most Unitarians I've encounter says, Jesus being tempted, God cannot be tempted, therefore Jesus is not God. Or God is not a man, Jesus is a man, therefore Jesus is not God. These are all different forms of denying the conjunct.



Only to make the Father to be all-in all respectfully to the economical subjection and according to the human nature. After all, Jesus Christ is both YHWH and man. Pointing out functions of the humanity doesn't negate that he isn't YHWH. The Bible teaches us that all things will be subjected to the Son, not only in this world, but also, the world to come. So, his authority and power still continue.

Hebrews 2:5 It is not to angels that he has subjected the world to come, about which we are speaking.​

​

1 Peter 3:22 who has gone into heaven and is at God’s right hand—with angels, authorities and powers in submission to him.​

​

Ephesians 1:21 far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that is invoked, not only in the present age but also in the one to come.​

Again, according to the human nature. Jesus Christ has a Father who he calls "My God" and he doesn't have "a god." In the economical function the Son is not YHWH of himself in the same way the Father is not YHWH of himself. The Father does call the Son YHWH (Hebrews 1:10-12, Psalms 102:24-27). And he is called "One LORD" in 1 Corinthians 8:6.

It proves 100% to any who can understand English for self. That Jesus is not Jehovah. His Father is Jehovah.
Lords prayer= Hallowed be your( not ours) name=Jehovah=Father.

 

[Viking123]

These are your denial statements, and you are allowed to deny. Do you think you can deal with why Jesus Christ is referred to as one LORD in 1 Corinthians 8:6. It's much better having a discussion then someone standing in denial. Because I will be asserting the positive claim of a denier. After a while that becomes a form of trolling, and a discussion never takes place.

Yet you deny that Paul teaches only the Father is God at 1 Cor 8:6-- Lord at 1 Cor 8:6--not LORD. LORD doesn't even belong in the OT, God put the tetragrammoton in every one of those spots=YHWH or YHVH=Jehovah. Wicked men removed Gods name against his will----to MISLEAD.

 

[Binyawmene]

It proves 100% to any who can understand English for self. That Jesus is not Jehovah. His Father is Jehovah.
Lords prayer= Hallowed be your( not ours) name=Jehovah=Father.

I've already addressed this in post 367. You could try to give feedback or discuss out what I've said. Instead, all you are doing is reasserting your denial. Denials does not produce discussion, but denials are a form of trolling. It's like a child game of "Is not -- Is too."

Yet you deny that Paul teaches only the Father is God at 1 Cor 8:6

This is a classic train of thought from all forms of Unitarianism. See God, think Father, assert only.

Where in 1 Corinthians 8:6 says "only"? Or the phrase "only the Father is God"?

That is unbiblical and eisegesis. You are simply reading your interpretation into the verse.

- Lord at 1 Cor 8:6--not LORD.

Your claim, therefore, your burden of proof.

Asserting something as if it was true doesn't qualify as truth.

You have to prove it from that verse and the context of the verse.

Can you get creative like this article here.? I want to see real discussions from you. Not your denials or unsupported bare asserted claims.

LORD doesn't even belong in the OT, God put the tetragrammoton in every one of those spots=YHWH or YHVH=Jehovah. Wicked men removed Gods name against his will----to MISLEAD.

Criticizing and accusing the ancient Jews as wicked men is not going to make Jehovah Witness true.

 

[Viking123]

I've already addressed this in post 367. You could try to give feedback or discuss out what I've said. Instead, all you are doing is reasserting your denial. Denials does not produce discussion, but denials are a form of trolling. It's like a child game of "Is not -- Is too."



This is a classic train of thought from all forms of Unitarianism. See God, think Father, assert only.

Where in 1 Corinthians 8:6 says "only"? Or the phrase "only the Father is God"?

That is unbiblical and eisegesis. You are simply reading your interpretation into the verse.



Your claim, therefore, your burden of proof.

Asserting something as if it was true doesn't qualify as truth.

You have to prove it from that verse and the context of the verse.

Can you get creative like this article here.? I want to see real discussions from you. Not your denials or unsupported bare asserted claims.



Criticizing and accusing the ancient Jews as wicked men is not going to make Jehovah Witness true.

They fell to false god worship over and over=wicked. Jesus told them your Father is the devil= wicked.
Here is proof Jesus was an angel sent to earth= Heb 1:4--God gave him the name Jesus which made him better than the angels. Psalm 45:7--God anointed Jesus with the oil exultation more than his --companions=angels

God gave Jesus a kingship, God gave Jesus all authority and judging. God taught Jesus everything. Why since God had all those things to begin with= Jesus did not have them.= Jesus is not God, his Father is greater than him.

 

[Mr GLee]

Yet you deny that Paul teaches only the Father is God at 1 Cor 8:6-- Lord at 1 Cor 8:6--not LORD. LORD doesn't even belong in the OT, God put the tetragrammoton in every one of those spots=YHWH or YHVH=Jehovah. Wicked men removed Gods name against his will----to MISLEAD.

There is no secret word needed to enter fellowship. God does not have name as we do to differentiate each one from another .

Every name is a immutable attribute. He magnifies sola scriptura above every attribute or power.. . name

Isaiah 12:2 Behold, God is my salvation; I will trust, and not be afraid: for the Lord Jehovah is my strength and my song; he also is become my salvation.

Jehovah = strength of salvation

Psalm 138:2 I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.

 

[Tambora]

Since there is no i am that i am in the Hebrew written OT--you are being mislead. I will be what i will be is the correct translating of that Hebrew statement.

Typical error when one does not take the context of the whole verse into count.

14 And God said unto Moses, I Am That I Am: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I Am hath sent me unto you.

God did not tell Moses to say "I Am That I Am" sent me to you.
God told Moses to say "I AM" sent me to you.

Jesus just said-he existed before Abraham. The Pharisees twisted it out of hate filled hearts.

The Pharisees were not ignorant to the language.
They rejected the testimony of Jesus and wanted Him killed for claiming He was God.

 

[Mr GLee]

Typical error when one does not take the context of the whole verse into count.

14 And God said unto Moses, I Am That I Am: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I Am hath sent me unto you.

God did not tell Moses to say "I Am That I Am" sent me to you.
God told Moses to say "I AM" sent me to you.



The Pharisees were not ignorant to the language.
They rejected the testimony of Jesus and wanted Him killed for claiming He was God.

I AM. . .The let there be and it was good power of Christ

They thought he was calling his own dying self. . . . God

Christians as sons of God are gods having a spirit No longer called daughters of men or sons of men

John 10:34-36King James Version Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

Jesus the Son of man would never blaspheme the name of I AM

 

[Viking123]

Typical error when one does not take the context of the whole verse into count.

14 And God said unto Moses, I Am That I Am: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I Am hath sent me unto you.

God did not tell Moses to say "I Am That I Am" sent me to you.
God told Moses to say "I AM" sent me to you.



The Pharisees were not ignorant to the language.
They rejected the testimony of Jesus and wanted Him killed for claiming He was God.

The pharisees hearts were filled with hatred for Jesus and his followers. Jesus told them--your Father is the devil))))--they were liars saying Jesus claimed to be God, They lied when saying Jesus got his power from the leader of the demons-- They NEVER said 1 single truth about Jesus. Hate filled hearts-LIE.

 

[Viking123]

I AM. . .The let there be and it was good power of Christ

They thought he was calling his own dying self. . . . God

Christians as sons of God are gods having a spirit No longer called daughters of men or sons of men

John 10:34-36King James Version Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

Jesus the Son of man would never blaspheme the name of I AM

No he wouldn't blaspheme his Fathers name. So why do the false religions have Jesus with long hair in their pictures of him, bringing dishonor to his Fathers name? 1Cor 11:14

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings Viking123,

I will be what i will be is the correct translating of that Hebrew statement.

I agree. I consider Tyndale's translation "I wilbe" and the RV and RSV margins "I will be" are correct and the KJV "I AM" is incorrect.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Mr GLee]

No he wouldn't blaspheme his Fathers name. So why do the false religions have Jesus with long hair in their pictures of him, bringing dishonor to his Fathers name? 1Cor 11:14

Ok Long hair is the issue?

It can takes a little work of digging as for silver or gold But it does not apply in the case of Jesus, the Son of man . A Nazarene from Nazareth. The first denomination or sect listed .

Jesus under a ceremonial vow like that of Samson or Paul who shaved finishing the vow

Acts 18:18 And Paul after this tarried there yet a good while, and then took his leave of the brethren, and sailed thence into Syria, and with him Priscilla and Aquila; having shorn his head in Cenchrea: for he had a vow.

Acts 24: 5 For we have found this man a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes:

1 Corinthians 11:14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?

The vow was gender neutral . Women were required to cover it .Again as a ceremonial law or shdow .

Whenever a new born again believer entered fellowship The women were to pare thier nail and shave thier heads . No beauty salon. . get your nails and hair done up. A picture of the submissive bride .

As man represents the glory of unseen God women covers the glory of men . Woman not left without a presentative glory of her own .She must cover her hair or head.

Upside down today some Jewish men covering thier head (yarmulke) exposing they have no gospel understanding

In the way the only glory is that of the two working as one new creature .

Revelation shows Satan coming in all his false glory ,Face of a man hair as the women .

Revelation 9:6-8King James Version And in those days shall men seek death, and shall not find it; and shall desire to die, and death shall flee from them And the shapes of the locusts were like unto horses prepared unto battle; and on their heads were as it were crowns like gold, and their faces were as the faces of men. And they had hair as the hair of women, and their teeth were as the teeth of lions.

The new unbeauty salon. Pare the nails shave the head . A shave and nail surgery two bits (25 cents

The Christian look

Deuteronomy 21:12 Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house, and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails;