Today con men are very much in the news and deceit is being practiced by many; however, con jobs and deceit are nothing new. The greatest deceit of all history, however, was the slipping into so called Christianity of a pagan God dishonoring doctrine by a worshipper of the Unconquered Sun, one Emperor Constantine, with the tacit approval of many bishops of an apostate church that was seeking to become 'respectable' with its pagan neighbors. This occurred in 325 AD at the Council of Nicea.
Why was this pagan Emperor so concerned with getting this God dishonoring doctrine into the so called Christian church. Well let's examine the political situation of the time. The Roman Empire at this time was being torn apart by religious differences between pagans, mostly Sun God worshippers, and Christianity. Constantine the Emporer was a worshipper of the Unconquered Sun, but he was a very pragmatic individual and saw the need to bring religious unity to his empire. The central doctrine of the pagans was the dogma of a Trinity that they had received from earlier pagans in Babylon (Chaldea). In this, the pagan Emperor, Constantine, saw a possibility for unifying his empire if he could only lead the majority of the Christians to accept a Trinity or a Duality. He knew however that he had to make them think it was their own idea. To this end, he, the Roman emperor Constantine summoned all bishops to Nicaea, about 300, but even though it was the emperor's direction, only a fraction actually attended.
Let's regress for a moment and see how this all came about. A feud started within the church between two theologians, Alexander and Arius over theology. All Arius said was that if the Father begat the Son, then the Son must have had a birth, and therefore there was a time when the Son of God did not exist. But his simple statement of truth by Arius started the greatest theological controversy of all times between the forces for maintaining strict adherence to the Bible and the forces for attachment of personal ideas and compromise.
Inevitably it came to the ears of the emperor, who discussed with Hosius, the saintly bishop of Cordova, what should be done to put an end to the quarrels among the sects. Like James I of England, Constantine regarded unity as "the mother of order," and he was not overmuch concerned with the theological truths at stake: he decided to send Hosius to Nicomedia and Alexandria with a letter written in his own hand, ordering by imperial rescript an end to the quarrel.
The letter-one of the most astonishing letters ever written by an emperor to priests-has come down to us in a version that shows no signs of being edited. It is hot-tempered, querulous, disjointed, and commanding. It is abundantly clear that the emperor is not quite clear in his own mind what the quarrel is about. He observes that "these questions are the idle cobwebs of contention, spun by curious wits," and he asks, "Who is capable of distinguishing such deep and hidden mysteries?" He recognizes that the contestants are well-armed with arguments, but he can make neither head nor tail of them.
[The Holy Fire: The Story of the Early Centuries of the Christian Churches in the Near East" (1957).]
It makes no difference to Emperor Constantine that, "In Scripture there is as yet no single term by which the Three Divine Persons are denoted together. The word trias (of which the Latin trinitas is a translation) is first found in Theophilus of Antioch, about A.D. 180. He speaks of "the Trinity of God [the Father], His Word and His Wisdom ("Ad. Autol.", II, 15). [The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XV]
His concern is to unite his empire religiously so that he has unity. This council went on for a very long time and the emperor worked behind the scene to get support for a Trinity or a Duality. His opening speech started out as, ""When I gained my victories over my enemies, I thought nothing remained for me but to give thanks unto God and to rejoice with those who have been delivered by me. But when I learned, contrary to all expectations, that there were divisions among you, then I solemnly considered them, and praying that these discords might also be healed with my assistance, I summoned you here without delay. I rejoice to see you here, yet I should be more pleased to see unity and affection among you. I entreat you, therefore, beloved ministers of God, to remove the causes of dissension among you and to establish peace." [The Holy Fire: The Story of the Early Centuries of the Christian Churches in the Near East" (1957).]
This effort was not completely successful, but finally he got a majority and declared under imperial degree that this hence forth would be the central doctrinal pillar of the Christian church, which by this time was apostate. Even with this declaration by the emperor himself not all bishops signed the creed.
So is was the political product of an apostate church, an apostate church that allowed a pagan Roman Emporer, Constantine, to tell it which dogma to accept at the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D., and then have it rammed down their throats as blessed dogma by another Roman Emporer, Theodosius, at the Council of Constantinople in 381 A.D. This in direct violation of God's (YHWH's) word found in the Bible " Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God." (James 4:4 AV), " If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." (John 15:19 AV). [DISCOURSE ON MAINSTREAM RELIGION: which can be read at,
http://religioustruths.proboards59.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=none&thread=1162919759&page=1, Iris89, 2002 and John the 15 chapter]
Now how illogical this doctrine is for genuine Christianity can not only be seen from a historic point of view, but from a doctrinal point of view:
Robert Ingersoll makes the following comments in Ingersoll's Works, Vol. 4, p. 266-67:
Christ, according to the faith, is the second person in the Trinity, the Father being the first and the Holy Ghost third.
Each of these persons is God. Christ is his own father and his own son. The Holy Ghost is neither father nor son, but both.
The son was begotten by the father, but existed before he was begotten--just the same before as after. Christ is just as old as his father, and the father is just as young as his son.
The Holy Ghost proceeded from the Father and Son, but was equal to the Father and Son before he proceeded, that is to say, before he existed, but he is of the same age as the other two.
So it is declared that the Father is God, and the Son and the Holy Ghost God, and these three Gods make one God. According to the celestial multiplication table, once one is three, and three time one is one, and according to heavenly subtraction if we take two from three, three are left. The addition is equally peculiar: if we add two to one we have but one. Each one equal to himself and to the other two. Nothing ever was, nothing ever can be more perfectly idiotic and absurd than the dogma of the Trinity. [Ingersoll's Works, Vol. 4, p. 266-67: by Robert Ingersoll]
Christians therefore are presented with a dilemma, accept the Bible or accept the doctrine of man put forth as the greatest deceit in all human history. This choice will separate the genuine from the counterfeit.
To quickly determine which is which from the Holy Bible, let's look at some pertinent text:
" I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour." (Isaiah 43:11 AV - Authorized King James Version)
"Salvation belongeth unto Jehovah: Thy blessing be upon thy people." (Psalms 3:8 ASV - American Standard Version of 1901)
"For, I,-Yahweh, am, Thy God, The Holy One of Israel Ready to save thee,-I have given, as thy ransom, Egypt, Ethiopia and Seba, in thy stead." (Isaiah 43:3 Rothrham Bible)
Now let's consider the reality, that according to the Old Testament (OT) only God (YHWH) can be the Savior; therefore in order for Jesus Christ (Yeshua or YHWH saves) to be the Savior, he would have to be God (YHWH). But is this so? Advocates of this con job try and support it with scriptures that in reality do not:
" I and my Father are one." (John 10:30 AV), but forget to mention this is one in purpose.
" And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:" (John 17:22 AV), but on close examination this clearly shows only one in purpose.
" In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." (John 1:1 AV), use this product of a biased translation to try and prove their point, but overlook the scripture of a few verses later that sheds light onto reality, " And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth." (John 1:14 AV), which clearly shows Biblical truth.
" Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?" (John 14:9 AV), but overlook the scripture a few verses later that clearly show what is meant, " Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father." (John 14:12 AV)
" And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are." (John 17:11 AV), but forget that says his Father (YHWH) has given them to his Son, Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves); therefore could not be the same spiritual person.
"Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. 9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. (Colossians 2:8-9 AV), but overlook the meaning here of Godhead per Easton's Revised Bible Dictionary, #Ac 17:29 Ro 1:20 Col 2:9 the essential being or the nature of God. In reality, it only shows, Preeminent position given to Christ: He is the image of God, the firstborn of all creation, the one through whom all other things were created, the head of the congregation, the firstborn from the dead and Through Christ reconciliation to God is effected. Also, for those interested in translation, in the New Testament (NT), certain words derived from the•os' (god) appear and relate to that which is divine. The related words thei'os, thei•o'tes, and the•o'tes occur at Acts 17:29, Romans 1:20, Colossians 2:9, and 2 Peter 1:3, 4. Thus is vital position is highlighted, Yehovah (Almighty God) "saw fit to make his firstborn Son the central, or key, figure in the outworking of all His purposes (Joh 1:14-18; Col 1:18-20; 2:8, 9), the focal point on which the light of all prophecies would concentrate and from which their light would radiate (1Pe 1:10-12; Re 19:10; Joh 1:3-9), the solution to all the problems that Satan's rebellion had raised (Heb 2:5-9, 14, 15; 1Jo 3:, and the foundation upon which God would build all future arrangements for the eternal good of His universal family in heaven and earth. (Eph 1:8-10; 2:20; 1Pe 2:4- Because of the vital role he thus plays in God's purpose, Jesus could say, rightly and without exaggeration: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."-Joh 14:6." [Insight, Vol. 2]
Likewise, they overlook the many scriptures that make clear there can be no such thing as the Trinity:
" And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments." (Matthew 19:17 AV), and this is Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) speaking.
" Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me." (John 7:16 AV); here Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) clearly shows that the doctrine is not his but his Father's (YHWH), and that he had been sent by him.
" Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I." (John 14:28 AV); here Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) clearly shows that his Father (YHWH) is greater than he is. For any one to argue against this, they would be calling the Son a liar and he is not.
" And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt." (Matthew 26:39 AV); here Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) clearly is praying to his Father (YHWH) and recognizing that all worship belongs exclusively to him in keeping with " Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve." (Matthew 4:10 AV).
" And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46 AV); clearly Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) he was speaking to his Father (YHWH) and not to himself.
" But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father." (Mark 13:32 AV); here Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) clearly reveals that only his Father (YHWH) and not he knows that hour for the end times. If their relationship were that which is claimed by Trinitarians this would definitely not be the case.
There are, of course, more scriptures. The passages quoted are a representative of the opposing concepts.
Thus as can be seen, early Christians that had gone astray adopted the Trinity doctrine to please a pagan emperor who worshipped the Unconquered Sun as God in a pagan religion that had a Trinity. The emperor really did not care much about doctrine and certainly did not care about Biblical truths, but for political reasons, not doctrinal, wanted a religiously united empire. He obtained this by winning most of the bishops that attended the Council of Nicea that he, not the so called church fathers, over to the point of view that was politically expedient for him. Thereby, creating a dilemma for all Christians, genuine and counterfeit. To get away from the dilemma, this false dogma creates, those Christians departing from Bible truths have come up with a great con cover-up, "these wayward Christians go to nearly any length to prove the Trinity including the declaration that its a "mystery" and we "just don't have the mind to understand it". [DISCOURSE ON MAINSTREAM RELIGION: which can be read at,
http://religioustruths.proboards59.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=none&thread=1162919759&page=1,Iris89, 2002] Now this begs the question, Is the bible the perfect, in-errant word of God?
Truly, The arrival of the Trinity doctrine into errant Christianity is appalling. Like most historic issues pertaining to Christianity, there was much deceit and bloodshed. Many lives were lost before 'Trinitarianism' was finally adopted, and imposed at the point of the sword.
As many Christians know, the word "trinity" does not appear in the Bible. It doesn't because it is a doctrine which evolved after being borrowed in early Christianity from the pagans. It was a manipulated, bloody and deadly process before it finally arrived as an 'accepted' doctrine of the so called church. In other words, the founders of the early Christian church had no idea that the Trinity concept would evolve, be voted upon by politicians, forced by emperors and eventually become an integral part of so called Christianity such as we have it today. Is it any wonder that its "difficult" to explain?
Is there one Christian God or Three In One? The majority of Christian churches hold to the Trinity doctrine but there are still Christian church holdouts who reject the teaching. We now enjoy the freedom to believe either doctrine but at risk of ridicule if we choose non-Trinitarian beliefs.
Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth."Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today!
Most well know that the Jews and the “orthodox” Christians, that accept the political product of the apostate church’s Council of Nicea and Council of 325 AD and the Council of Constantinople of 381 AD, i.e., the Catholic, Eastern, and Protestant (most) have very differnet concepts of who God (YHWH) is.
The Jews, from the time of Abraham, have worshipped God (YHWH) as one undivided being, one "spirit person"; the Father. Never before Christ did God (YHWH) reprove the Jews for their strict monotheism; nor did Almighty God (YHWH) ever give them any reason to suspect that their conception of Him was incomplete in any way.
On the other hand the so called “orthodox” Christians accepted the same pagan belief at the great church council (Nicea) under the direction of a pagan worshipper of the Unconquered Sun, Emperor Constantine, that God (YHWH) is a three in one being, and that Jesus Christ (Yeshua or YHWH saves) is one of the three "persons" who make up a Trinity.
However, “ No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.” (John 1:18 AV), this scripture tells us us that Jesus Christ (Yeshua or YHWH saves) came for the express purpose of declaring or making known God (YHWH) to man. In Matthew “ But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (Matthew 15:24 AV); Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves)declared that he had been sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Therefore, if, then, Israel, the Jews, had the wrong idea about who they were to worship as God (YHWH), and if Jesus Christ's (Yeshua or YHWH) saves primary purpose during his ministry in the flesh and blood was to make known God (YHWH) to Israel, it seems that clarifying the trinity in unity that is God (YHWH) should have been at or near the top of his list of priorities.
Is this what he did? The gospels have made it very clear that it is not. In fact, he did just the opposite. He confirmed the truth of what they believed, without qualifying or correcting it.
In Jesus' (Yeshua or YHWH saves) encounter with the Samaritan woman at the well as recorded in John the 4 th. chapter. At one point in their discussion she asked a pointed theological question:
“The woman saith unto him, Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet.
20 Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship.
21 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father.
22 Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews. 23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.
24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.” (John 4:19-24 AV).
When Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) answered her, he gave his assent to the worship of the Jews as being the correct way of worship.
But Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) did more. Notice that three times in this passage, once in verse 21 and twice in verse 23, Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) identified the Father (YHWH) as the only proper object of man's worship. By doing so, he effectively was excluding not only himself, but the Holy Spirit (HS) as well, from being proper objects of our worship. Thereby dealing not only with her question about worship in the present, but he, Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) also went on to talk about worship in the future as well.
There are many instances in which Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) reaffirmed this strict monotheism of the Jews. We see this also, for exaple, in Mark where we have the record of a scribe who asked Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) a question about which of the commandments was the greatest, see below:
“And one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well, asked him, Which is the first commandment of all?
29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:
30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.
31 And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.
32 And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he:” (Mark 12:28-33 AV).
This scribe was laboring under the very none-Trinitarian notion that God (YHWH) consists of one "person" alone: the Father (YHWH). If Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) himself had been God (YHWH), he had not only the right but the responsibility to set the record straight. But Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) did no such thing. He clearly told the scribe that he had answered well.
Likewise at “ And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, he said unto him, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God. And no man after that durst ask him any question.” (Mark 12:34 AV)
Note, these are but two examples of many scriptures in the Bible affirming the same truth. There is no record of Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) reproving the Jews for their strict monotheism, nor of any attempt to set the record straight about the triune nature of the one true God (YHWH); therefore, we can be sure this is false dogma, and God (YHWH) does not have a triune nature.
Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth."Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today!
Many claim are made with respect the Divinity of Jesus Christ, but when we use a little reasoning on the subject it is seen as much ado about nothing.
Sure he is divine as clearly shown by common sense as follows:
The son of a dog is a dog; whereas, a son of Almighty God (YHWH) is of course a god or godlike thus divine. This is clearly shown by the meaning of the word as follows:
(from Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary)
divine (GOD-LIKE) adjective
connected with a god, or like a god:
The Ayatollah described the earthquake in Iran as a divine test.
Some fans seem to regard footballers as divine beings.
England have fallen so far behind in the championship that their only hope of victory is divine intervention (= help from God).
Just because you've been promoted that doesn't give you a divine right (= one like that of a god) to tell us all what to do.
Oxford Dictionary
divine = /d"van/ adjective (-r, -st) 1 of, from, or like God or a god; sacred. 2 colloquial excellent. verb (-ning) 1 discover by intuition or guessing. 2 foresee. 3 practise divination. noun theologian. divining-rod dowser's forked twig. divinely adverb.
Wordsmyth Dictionary
1. a religious scholar or clergyman. Similar Words exegete , minister , cleric , clergyman , bishop , theologian , prelate , priest , religious
2. Definition 2. (cap.) God (usu. prec. by the). Synonyms Godhead {godhead (2)} , Divinity {divinity (2)} , Omnipotent {omnipotent} , Omniscient {omniscient} , God {god (2)} , Deity {deity (4)} Similar Words celestial
3. Definition 3. (sometimes cap.) the spiritual or godlike, as opposed to the earthly or worldly. Similar Words divinity
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. Divine
SYLLABICATION: di•vine PRONUNCIATION: /61/wavs/43/D0304300.wav/61/wavs/43/D0304300.wavd-vn ADJECTIVE: Inflected forms: di•vin•er, di•vin•est
1a. Having the nature of or being a deity. b. Of, relating to, emanating from, or being the expression of a deity: sought divine guidance through meditation. c. Being in the service or worship of a deity; sacred. 2. Superhuman; godlike. 3a. Supremely good or beautiful; magnificent: a divine performance of the concerto. b. Extremely pleasant; delightful: had a divine time at the ball. 4. Heavenly; perfect. NOUN: 1. A cleric. 2. A theologian. VERB: Inflected forms: di•vined, di•vin•ing, di•vines
TRANSITIVE VERB: 1. To foretell through or as if through the art of divination. See synonyms at foretell. 2a. To know by inspiration, intuition, or reflection. b. To guess. 3. To locate (underground water or minerals) with a divining rod; douse. INTRANSITIVE VERB: 1. To practice divination. 2. To guess. ETYMOLOGY: Middle English, from Old French devine, from Latin dvnus, divine, foreseeing, from dvus, god. See dyeu- in Appendix I. V., Middle English divinen, from Old French deviner, from Latin dvnre, from dvnus.
A very intense subject easily put to rest by a little common sense and reasoning.
Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth."Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today!
Isaiah 44:6 has been one of the scriptures that the preachers of false doctrines such as the Trinity, Mol dualism, and Oneness have twisted the most to try and show support for their none Biblical doctrines, but in reality it supports the Truth of the Bible and not the false reasonings and doctrines of men. But before seeing why this is so, let's look at the scripture in several different Bibles to get a better perspective of it before discussing it - Isaiah 44:6:
"And who, as I, can proclaim--let him declare it, and set it in order for Me--since I appointed the ancient people? And the things that are coming, and that shall come to pass, let them declare". [Jewish Publication Society 1917 OT]
"kh-`mr yhvh mlk-ysr`l vg`lv yhvh &b`vt `ny r`svn v`ny `xrvn vmbljdy `yn `lhym". [Hebrew Transliteration Bible][[so as to give all some feel for how it looks in Hebrew, but with English Characters]]
"Thus saith Jehovah, the King of Israel, and his Redeemer, Jehovah of hosts: I am the first, and I am the last; and besides me there is no God." [American Standard Version, ASV]
"Thus saith the Lord the king of Israel, and his redeemer the Lord of hosts: I am the first, and I am the last, and besides me there is no God. " [Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible; DRCB]
"Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God." [Authorized King James Bible; AV]
"Thus says the LORD, the King of Yisra'el, and his Redeemer, the LORD of Hosts: I am the first, and I am the last; and besides me there is no God" [Hebrew Names Version of World English Bible]
"Thus said Jehovah, king of Israel, And his Redeemer, Jehovah of Hosts: `I [am] the first, and I the last, And besides Me there is no God." [Youngs Literal Translation]
"Thus saith Jehovah, the King of Israel, and his Redeemer, Jehovah of hosts: I [am] the first, and I [am] the last, and beside me there is no God." [The Darby Translation]
"Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I [am] the first, and I [am] the last; and besides me [there is] no God." [The Noah Webster Bible; NWB]
TRANSLATION COMPARISON:
Now that we have the opportunity to look at the translation constructs in various Bibles with respect Isaiah 44:6, let's start considering its significance and meaning. As can readily be seen from the Youngs Literal Translation, The Darby Translation, American Standard Version, and Jewish Publication Society 1917 OT [note, the Jews are strict monotheist and well know the 1 Commandment at Exodus 20:3 that would rule out any three-in-one god] clearly show that this scripture applies solely to God Almighty (YHWH). The Youngs Literal Translation clearly says, "And his Redeemer, Jehovah of Hosts," leaving no doubt that it is referring to God (YHWH) and not to his Son, Jesus (Yeshua). However, some supporters of the Trinity claim the son is just a different manifestation of God (YHWH), but many scriptures show them as two distinct beings, such as, John 14:6, "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, and the truth, and the life: no one cometh unto the Father, but by me." (ASV); and John 14:28, "Ye have heard that I said to you, I go away, and come [again] to you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go to the Father: for my Father is greater than I." (NWB). In fact their false contention is actually is just a different manifestation of God (YHWH) is part of three false doctrines with the first being Modulism which many religious dictionaries state is, "The belief that God is a single entity who has appeared in different modes at different times. This is the same as "SABELLIANISM THEOLOGY-- God is three only in relation to the world, in so many "manifestations" or "modes." The unity and identity of God are such that the Son of God, Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) did not exist before the incarnation; because the Father (YHWH) and the Son, Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) are thus one, the Father (YHWH) suffered with the Son, Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) in his passion and death.
AN ALL ANSWERING ARTICLE ON ISAIAH 44:6 - USED WITH PERMISSION:
In fact the Restoration Light Bible Study Services, P.O. Box 2360, Philadelphia, PA , has already dealt with this question in an answer to one of these believers in false doctrine. Their answer is as follows, "We have shown that Jesus is a created being (See Did Jesus Have a Beginning?), thus the question has arisen concerning the various uses of the scripture regarding alpha and omega, as this title, as well as some others, seem to be applied to both.
In Isaiah 41:4; 44:6; 48:12 we find the expression "first and last" used of Yahweh. From Isaiah 44:6,7 this expression, "first and last" appears to mean that which is begun is carried through to completion, something which the false gods of the heathen cannot do. However, most of our trinitarian and oneness neighbors appear to read into this expression 'from eternity past to the eternal future,' although there is nothing in the scritpures to warrant this meaning.
In the last book of the Bible, we again find this expression "first and last". At least twice it is applied to Jesus in Revelation 1:17 and Revelation 2:8.Thus our trinitarian and oneness neighbors would have us accept this as proof that Jesus is Yahweh, since the phrase is applied to both Yahweh and Jesus. The phrase appears also in Revelation 22:13, where Yahweh applies it to himself.
Another similar phrase found in Revelation 21:6 and 22:13 is "beginning and the end". These scriptures apply to Yahweh; thus this phrase is not applied to Jesus . Still another phrase used in the book of Revelation is "alpha and omega." We find this phrase in Revelation 1:8; 21:6; 22:13 -- all three of which refer to Yahweh. This phrase is therefore not used of Jesus.
Let us go into more detail to support the above applications of these terms. Looking at Revelation 1:1, we note that the Revelation is from God who gave it to Jesus. (This should be enough to prove that Jesus is not God.) The message is delivered through an angel to John. In Revelation 1:4 John says the message is from the Father, Yahweh, who is and who was and who is to come. Then in verse 5, John says: "and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and Him who loved us and washed us from our sins in His own blood." Thus John identifies two individuals which the messages are from, the Father, Yahweh, and Jesus, God's Son. Then in verse 8 we find the quote: "'I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End', says the Lord God, 'the being who was and who is to come -- the Almighty.'"
"The Lord" in this verse is Yahweh, not Jesus, as shown from Revelation 1:4. The phrase "Lord God" is based on the later Septuagint usage of substituting Kurios for Yahweh. The Hebrew phrase is Yahweh Elohim. The later Septuagint has substituted Yahweh with Kurios [Lord] and Elohim with Theos [God]. This can be seen by comparing Acts 3:22; 7:37 with the Hebrew of Deuteronomy 18:15. In all instances where the phrase occurs in the NT, it is in reference to Yahweh, the Father of our Lord Jesus. -- Luke 1:32; 1 Peter 3:10-15; Revelation 11:17,19; 15:3; 16:7; 18:8; 21:11; 22:6. See Divine Name .
Likewise, with the phrases "the Lord our God" and "the Lord your God". These phrases are always used in reference to Yahweh, the God and Father of our Lord Jesus. -- Matthew 4:7 (Deuteronomy 6:16); Matthew 4:10 (Deuteronomy 6:13; 10:20); Matthew 22:37 (Deuteronomy 6:5); Mark 12:29 (Deuteronomy 6:4); etc.
However, many of the Christian translators in the past must have thought that this was Yahweh speaking, for in their translations into Hebrew, they inserted the tetragrammaton into this verse. The following are some Hebrew translations that contain the tetragrammaton in Revelation 1:8: NT, by W. Robertson, 1661; NT, by J. C. Reichardt, 1846; NT, by J. C. Reichardt & J. H. R. Biesenthal, 1866; NT, by F. Delitzsch, 1981 edition; NT, by I. Salkinson & C. D. Ginsburg, 1891.
The fact that the NT copies we have give a substitute for God's name does not take away the fact that it is Yahweh, not his Son Jesus, who is speaking in Revelation 1:8. In verses 9 and 10 John refers to himself when he heard a loud voice, as of a trumpet, (verse 11) saying, "Write what you see... This quote is from Jesus, not Yahweh, as described in the following verses. In verse 18 Jesus says: "I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore." Jesus was actually dead and not alive anywhere, if this is to make any sense at all, for he contrasts his being dead with being alive forevermore. Now we know that God cannot die, so Jesus is thus by this verse proved to not be God Almighty.
Many translations have the words added in verse 11, before the word "Write": "I am the Alpha and Omega, the First and the Last." However, this sentence does not appear in the oldest Greek manuscripts and therefore does not appear in many Bible translations, and thus we do not include them as part of our discussion.
Revelation 22:12-16: "See, I am coming soon; my reward is with me, to repay according to everyone's work. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end." Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they will have the right to the tree of life and may enter the city by the gates. Outside are the dogs and sorcerers and fornicators and murderers and idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood. "It is I, Jesus, who sent my angel to you with this testimony for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star."
The angel delivering the message recorded Revelation 22:13 is quoting Yahweh, the Father of Jesus, who comes to judge the world, not only with and by means of Jesus, but also the saints. -- Malachi 3:1-6; Psalm 96:13; 98:9; Daniel 7:18,22; Isaiah 40:10,11; Micah 1:3; Zechariah 14:5; Acts 17:31; 2 Peter 3:7,8; 1 Corinthians 6:2; Psalm 90:4; Revelaton 1:1; 20:4,11-13; 22:6.
Earlier, John says that the angel spoke these words, which he states are from Yahweh. (verse 6) In verse 7 the angel is evidently quoting Jesus. In verse 8 John is the one speaking, and the angel rebukes him in verse 9. In verse 10 John begins to quote the angel again, but in verse 12, the angel is delivering the words of Yahweh (see verse 6) -- it is evident that the angel is not referring to himself. Verses 14 and 15 could be either Jesus or the angel speaking. In verse 16, it is evident that the angel is quoting Jesus, and then in verse 17 the angel is prophetically quoting the spirit and the bride. In verses 18-19, the angel is again speaking (although he could be quoting Jesus), but in verse 20 he quotes Jesus, while the last part of verse 20 and all of verse 21 is John himself speaking.
But let us assume that Jesus is the one speaking in Revelation 22:12,13, as many have claimed. All this would mean is that these titles or phrases applied to Yahweh are also applied to Jesus. Does this mean that Jesus is Yahweh, the God who is identified also as the Father and God of Jesus? Absolutely not!
First we note that none of the passages say that the Father is the Son, or even that the Son equals the Father. Nor do any of these passages directly say anything about the non-creation of either the Father or the Son.
One must admit that just because the same title is applied to individuals, this does not make these two individuals one individual. Else every ruler who has ever used the title "king" would have to be the same individual as every other ruler who has used the title "king." Each ruler who uses this title, however, uses it with respect to his peculiar realm of domain and time. Thus just because the same titles are given to both the Father and the Son does not mean they are the same being.
That Jesus has not always existed throughout eternity can be seen from our earlier discussion, "Did Jesus Have a Beginning?". Thus these titles applied to him must not mean that he existed throughout eternity.
Nor can they refer especially to the Father's being from eternity (which, as a matter of fact, he is), since that would be incompatible with their being used of the Son, who is not from eternity.
Likewise, we have shown elsewhere that the word "beginning" does not mean eternity, but rather a point when something begins, or a person or thing at the start of something. Additionally the word "first" does not mean eternity but a person or thing at the start of something. Similarly can be said concerning the words "last" and "end": neither of these denote eternity, but rather, just as it says, the last or end of something. The Alpha and Omega symbolism only emphasizes the same thing, since Alpha is the first or start of the Greek alphabet, and Omega is the last or end of the Greek alphabet.
How, then, do these terms apply to both the Father and the Son within the domain of each? We have already pointed out that these expressions seem to carry the thought of that which is begun is carried through to completion: Isaiah 44:6,7. This would apply both to Yahweh as originator of his divine plan and the one who designed it from beginning to the completed end, and to the Son as the one who carries out the divine plan by means of his death, resurrection and the coming day of judgment. Some have noted that Jesus is the first human to be raised to life without end by Yahweh his Father, thus he is called the "firstborn of the dead". (Colossians 1:1 He is also the last to be so resurrected since all others who eventually receive such a resurrection will be through Jesus, not by Yahweh directly. (John 5:21,22; 6:39,44; 11:25) Thus there appears to be a connection between his statements that he became dead was now alive forever and ever. His holding the keys of death and Hades (Revelation 1:1 shows the authority given to him by his God of releasing all who are in death and hades. -- John 5:27-29 (New American Standard); Revelation 20:11-13
However, there is also another application that could be meant. Each -- both Jesus and Yahweh -- is the first and the last of his peculiar kind: Yahweh is the first and the last of his peculiar kind, in that he is the first and the last one to be increate, that is, never to have been created. No one was before Yahweh in this sense and no one will be after him in this sense. The Son is the first and the last of his peculiar kind, in that he is the first and the last to have been directly created by God, all other creatures having been indirectly created by God, that is, through the agency of the Logos. Thus the Father and the Son are both unique -- which is the meaning of these three expressions -- but each of them is unique in a different sense: The Father is unique in that he is the only -- the first and the last -- being never created; the Son is unique in that he is the only -- the first and the last -- being ever directly created by Yahweh without the assistance of an agent, which creative assistance by the Logos occurred in the case of all the rest of creation -- the Logos himself being excepted. (John 1:3; 1 Corinthians 15:27; See Question: John 1:1) Thus Yahweh is the first and the last, the alpha and omega, the beginning and the end of increation -- the only being who never was created. The Logos is the first and the last, the alpha and omega, the beginning and the end of God's direct creation. These terms used with reference to the Son are equivalent to his being called: "the only begotten of the Father." (John 1:14,18; 3:16,18; 1 John 4:9) Their use with reference to the Father implies that he is from eternity, though not directly teaching it, the direct teaching being his uniqueness in that he never was created or begotten, as was the Son.
Answers to Objections
Some have replied that there can only be one first and last, although their reasons for saying this are vague, to say the least. It seems they wish demand a restricted application of the term so that it could only apply to God Almighty. It is true that there can only be on who is first and last as God Almighty. But we have no reason to restrict the term in application to God Almighty, except to satisfy the whims of those who wish to use it thus to prove that Jesus is Yahweh, which, in effect, would make the whole argument circular, that is, 'we believe that Jesus is Yahweh, thus we believe that the expression first and last must be used in application to God Almighty only, and thus this proves that Jesus is Yahweh.'
We have already shown above that there can be more than one first and last, depending on what is being spoken of and its application. We can also provide the following illustrations: Suppose Brother A goes to a Bible study in SW Philadelphia, and Brother B goes to a Bible study in South Philadelphia. Brother A is the first arrive at the Bible study and SW Philadelphia, and Brother B is the first to arrive at the study in South Philadelphia. Likewise Brother A is the last one to leave the study in SW. Philadelphia, and Brother B. is the last to leave the study in South Philadelphia. You have two who are first and two who are last. Additionally the first and the last line of one book is not the same as the first and last line of another book. Likewise, both Yahweh and Jesus are first and last in their respective applications of that term. Regardless, our trinitarian neighbors will have to agree that there are two persons who are referred to as 'first and last', both God the Father and His Son." [This document is presented by Restoration Light Bible Study Services, P.O. Box 2360, Philadelphia, PA 19142. Permission is given to duplicate this document in its entirety, including this statement, for not-for-profit usage in Bible studies and general distribution.]
It is not our object in this list of scriptures to refute all the arguments used by many who try to prove that Jesus is Yahweh. We simply present some of the scriptures that most definitely show that the Father is Yahweh and that Jesus is not Yahweh [his Father]:
Jesus was sent by Yahweh, speaks for Yahweh, represents Yahweh. Jesus is not Yahweh [who is the Father] whom he represents and speaks for.
Deuteronomy 18:15-19; Matthew 23:39; Mark 11:9,10; Luke 13:35; John 3:2,17; 5:19,43; 6:57; 7:16,28; 8:26,28,38; 10:25; 12:49,50; 14:10; 15:15; 17:8,26; Hebrews 1:1,2; Revelation 1:1
Jesus receives his inheritance and dominion (power) from Yahweh. Jesus is not Yahweh [the Father] who gives him this dominion.
Psalm 2:7,8; 110:1,2; Isaiah 9:6,7; Luke 1:32; Jeremiah 23:5; Daniel 7:13,14; Hebrews 1:2,6.
Jesus is son of the Most High Yahweh. He is not the Most High Yahweh.
Genesis 14:22; Psalm 7:17; 83:18; 92:1; Luke 1:32; John 13:16.
Jesus is anointed [made christ, the anointed one] by Yahweh. He is not Yahweh who thus anoints him.
Psalm 2:2; 45:7; Isaiah 61:1; Acts 2:36.
Yahweh speaks to Jesus. Jesus is not Yahweh who speaks to him.
Psalm 2:7,8; 110:1; Matthew 22:41-45.
Jesus is the servant of Yahweh; he is not Yahweh whom he serves.
Isaiah 42:1; 53:11; Matthew 12:18; John 13:16; Acts 4:27,30
Jesus is given the power of life in himself from Yahweh. Jesus is not Yahweh who gives him this power.
1 Samuel 2:6; Psalm 36:9; John 5:21,25-29.
Yahweh [the Father] is the only Most High. Jesus is not the Most High Yahweh who is his Father.
Deuteronomy 4:35,39; Psalm 2:7; 83:18; Luke 1:32; John 10:29; 17:1,3; Hebrews 1:5; Revelation 5:7
Yahweh appoints and gives Jesus authority as judge and to judge in his [Yahweh's] stead. Jesus is not Yahweh who gives this authority to him.
Isaiah 11:1-4; 42:1; John 5:22,23,27-30; Acts 17:31.
Jesus is never described as the father of Jesus, and Yahweh is never described as the son of Yahweh. The term "everlasting father" refers to Jesus' role toward mankind that he purchased, and of whom he has become father as the second or "last Adam." (Romans 5:15-19; 1 Corinthians 15:21,22,45,47; Psalm 45:16). Jesus came in the name of Yahweh his Father. (Deuteronomy 18:15,18; Matthew 23:39; Mark 11:9,10; Luke 13:35; John 3:2,17; 5:19,43; 6:57; 7:16,28; 8:26,28,38; 10:25; 12:49,50; 14:10; 15:15; 17:8,26; Hebrews 1:1,2; Revelation 1:1) Yahweh never came in the name of any other than himself, thus since there is none higher, he swore by himself. -- Hebrews 6:13
Jesus' role as Mighty EL refers to the power and authority given to him by the Mighty EL that is mightier than he, the only true Supreme Being, Yahweh. -- Psalm 2:2,7,8; 110:1,2; Isaiah 9:6,7; 61:1; Luke 1:32; Jeremiah 23:5; Daniel 7:13,14; John 17:1,3; Acts 2:36; Hebrews 1:2,6.
No scripture says that Jesus was God Almighty in the flesh, although possessing the mighty power of Yahweh as did Moses, he could be referred to as God (ELOHIM, THEOS) in a manner similar to Moses. (Exodus 7:1; Deuteronomy 18:15,18; Acts 3:18-22) Neither in the case of Moses nor Jesus does this make either of them into God Almighty who gives them their power and authority.
[This document is presented by Restoration Light Bible Study Services, P.O. Box 2360, Philadelphia, PA 19142. Permission is given to duplicate this document in its entirety, including this statement, for not-for-profit usage in Bible studies and general distribution.][[Special note, Much of Restoration Light Bible Study Service for this article came from, Paul S. L. Johnson's book, Creation, pages 51-53. Now a brief Background of Paul S. L. Johnson: Paul S. L. Johnson graduated from from Capital University in Columbus, OH on May 25, 1898. He won the valedictory and also the highest honors ever given in the history of that university. He also graduated from the Theological Seminary of the Ohio Synod of the Lutheran Church. He was thoroughly educated in both Hebrew and Greek; this gave him the skills necessary to understand the Bible from the original languages. He had been taught in the seminary the doctrine of eternal torture of those not saved; through his studies of the Bible itself he came to understand that a God of perfect, wisdom, justice, power and love, would not, could not, punish his enemies with such a punishment as eternal roasting. He also came to see the Hebraic viewpoint of God, as opposed to the trinitarian or oneness views.]][[[Restoration's article was used as no reason to go to Johnson's works and re-invent the wheel]]]
COMMENTARIES ON ISAIAH 44:6 BY RENOWN SCHOLARS:
By Theodore Beza:
44:6 Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; f I [am] the first, and I [am] the last; and besides me [there is] no God.
(f) I am always like myself, that is, merciful toward my Church, and most able to maintain it, as in (Isaiah 41:4,48:12; Revelation 1:17,22:13). [Beza, Theodore. "Commentary on Isaiah 44". "The 1599 Geneva Study Bible", 1600-1645.]
By A.R. Faussett, A.M.:.
6. Here follows an argument for Jehovah, as the only God, and against the idols, as vanity [Fausset, A. R., A.M. "Commentary on Isaiah 44". "Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible", 1871]
By Matthew Henry:
Chapter 44
God, by the prophet, goes on in this chapter, as before, I. To encourage his people with the assurance of great blessings he had in store for them at their return out of captivity, and those typical of much greater which the gospel church, his spiritual Israel, should partake of in the days of the Messiah; and hereby he proves himself to be God alone against all pretenders (v. 1-. II. To expose the sottishness and amazing folly of idol-makers and idol-worshippers (v. 9-20). III. To ratify and confirm the assurances he had given to his people of those great blessings, and to raise their joyful and believing expectations of them (v. 21-2.
Verses 1-8 Two great truths are abundantly made out in these verses:- I. That the people of God are a happy people, especially upon account of the covenant that is between them and God. The people of Israel were so as a figure of the gospel Israel. Three things complete their happiness:- 1. The covenant-relations wherein they stand to God, v. 1, 2. Israel is here called Jeshurun-the upright one; for those only, like Nathanael, are Israelites indeed, in whom is no guile, and those only shall have the everlasting benefit of these promises. Jacob and Israel had been represented, in the close of the foregoing chapter, as very provoking and obnoxious to God's wrath, and already given to the curse and to reproaches; but, as if God's bowels yearned towards him and his repentings were kindled together, mercy steps in with a non-obstante-notwithstanding, to all these quarrels: "Yet now, hear, O Jacob my servant! thou and I will be friends again for all this.'' God had said (ch. 43:25), I am he that blotteth out thy transgression, which is the only thing that creates this distance; and when that is taken away the streams of mercy run again in their former channel. The pardon of sin is the inlet of all the other blessings of the covenant. So and so I will do for them, says God (Heb. 8:12), for I will be merciful to their unrighteousness. Therefore hear, O Jacob! hear these comfortable words; therefore fear not, O Jacob! fear not thy troubles, for by the pardon of sin the property of them too is altered. Now the relations wherein they stand to him are very encouraging. (1.) They are his servants; and those that serve him he will own and stand by and see that they be not wronged. (2.) They are his chosen, and he will abide by his choice; he knows those that are his, and those whom he has chosen he takes under special protection. (3.) They are his creatures. He made them, and brought them into being; he formed them, and cast them into shape; he began betimes with them, for he formed them from the womb; and therefore he will help them over their difficulties and help them in their services. 2. The covenant-blessings which he has secured to them and theirs, v. 3, 4. (1.) Those that are sensible of their spiritual wants, and the insufficiency of the creature to supply them, shall have abundant satisfaction in God: I will pour water upon him that is thirsty, that thirsts after righteousness; he shall be filled. Water shall be poured out to those who truly desire spiritual blessings above all the delights of sense. (2.) Those that are barren as the dry ground shall be watered with the grace of God, with floods of that grace, and God will himself give the increase. If the ground be ever so dry, God has floods of grace to water it with. (3.) The water God will pour out is his Spirit (Jn. 7:39), which God will pour out without measure upon the seed, that is, Christ (Gal. 3:16), and by measure upon all the seed of the faithful, upon all the praying wrestling seed of Jacob, Lu. 11:13. This is the great New-Testament promise, that God, having sent his servant Christ, and upheld him, will send his Spirit to uphold us. (4.) This gift of the Holy Ghost is the great blessing God had reserved the plentiful effusion of for the latter days: I will pour my Spirit, that is, my blessing; for where God gives his Spirit he will give all other blessings. (5.) This is reserved for the seed and offspring of the church; for so the covenant of grace runs: I will be a God to thee and to thy seed. To all who are thus made to partake of the privileges of adoption God will give the spirit of adoption. (6.) Hereby there shall be a great increase of the church. Thus it shall be spread to distant places. Thus it shall be propagated and perpetuated to after-times: They shall spring up and grow as fast as willows by the watercourses, and in every thing that is virtuous and praiseworthy shall be eminent and excel all about them, as the willows overtop the grass among which they grow, v. 4. Note, It is a great happiness to the church, and a great pleasure to good men, to see the rising generation hopeful and promising. And it will be so if God pour his Spirit upon them, that blessing, that blessing of blessings. 3. The consent they cheerfully give to their part of the covenant, v. 5. When the Jews returned out of captivity they renewed their covenant with God (Jer. 50:5), particularly that they would have no more to do with idols, Hos. 14:2, 3, 8. Backsliders must thus repent and do their first works. Many of those that were without did at that time join themselves to them, invited by that glorious appearance of God for them, Zec. 8:23; Esth. 8:17. And they say, We are the Lord's and call themselves by the name of Jacob; for there was one law, one covenant, for the stranger and for those that were born in the land. And doubtless it looks further yet, to the conversion of the Gentiles, and the multitudes of them who, upon the effusion of the Spirit, after Christ's ascension, should be joined to the Lord and added to the church. These converts are one and another, very many, of different ranks and nations, and all welcome to God, Col. 3:11. When one does it another shall by his example be invited to do it, and then another; thus the zeal of one may provoke many. (1.) They shall resign themselves to God: not one in the name of the rest, but every one for himself shall say, "I am the Lord's; he has an incontestable right to rule me, and I submit to him, to all his commands, to all his disposal. I am, and will be, his only, his wholly, his for ever, will be for his interests, will be for his praise; living and dying I will be his.'' (2.) They shall incorporate themselves with the people of God, call themselves by the name of Jacob, forgetting their own people and their fathers' house, and desirous to wear the character and livery of God's family. They shall love all God's people, shall associate with them, give them the right hand of fellowship, espouse their cause, seek the good of the church in general and of all the particular members of it, and be willing to take their lot with them in all conditions. (3.) They shall do this very solemnly. Some of them shall subscribe with their hand unto the Lord, as, for the confirming of a bargain, a man sets his hand to it, and delivers it as his act and deed. The more express we are in our covenanting with God the better, Ex. 24:7; Jos. 24:26, 27; Neh. 9:38. Fast bind, fast find. II. That, as the Israel of God are a happy people, so the God of Israel is a great God, and he is God alone. This also, as the former, speaks abundant satisfaction to all that trust in him, v. 6-8. Observe here, to God's glory and our comfort, 1. That the God we trust in is a God of incontestable sovereignty and irresistible power. He is the Lord, Jehovah, self-existent and self-sufficient; and he is the Lord of hosts, of all the hosts of heaven and earth, of angels and men. 2. That he stands in relation to, and has a particular concern for, his church. He is the King of Israel and his Redeemer; therefore his Redeemer because his King; and those that take God for their King shall have him for their Redeemer. When God would assert himself God alone he proclaims himself Israel's God, that his people may be encouraged both to adhere to him and to triumph in him. 3. That he is eternal- the first and the last. He is God from everlasting, before the worlds were, and will be so to everlasting, when the world shall be no more. If there were not a God to create, nothing would ever have been; and, if there were not a God to uphold, all would soon come to nothing again. He is all in all, is the first cause, from whom are all things, and the last end, to and for whom are all things (Rom. 11:36), the Alpha and the Omega, Rev. 1:11. 4. That he is God alone (v. 6): Besides me there is no God. Is there a God besides me? v. 8. We will appeal to the greatest scholars. Did they ever in all their reading meet with any other? To those that have had the largest acquaintance with the world. Did they ever meet with any other? There are gods many (1 Co. 8:5, 6), called gods, and counterfeit gods: but is there any besides our God that is infinite and eternal, any besides him that is the creator of the world and the protector and benefactor of the whole creation, any besides him that can do that for their worshippers which he can and will do for his? "You are my witnesses. I have been a nonsuch to you. You have tried other gods; have you found any of them all-sufficient to you, or any of them like me? Yea, there is no god,'' no rock (so the word is), none besides Jehovah that can be a rock for a foundation to build on, a rock for shelter to flee to. God is the rock, and their rock is not as ours, Deu. 32:4, 31. I know not any; as if he had said, "I never met with any that offered to stand in competition with me, or that durst bring their pretensions to a fair trial; if I did know of any that could befriend you better than I can, I would recommend you to them; but I know not any.'' There is no God besides Jehovah. He is infinite, and therefore there can be no other; he is all-sufficient, and therefore there needs no other. This is designed for the confirming of the hopes of God's people in the promise of their deliverance out of Babylon, and, in order to that, for the curing of them of their idolatry; when the affliction had done its work it should be removed. They are reminded of the first and great article of their creed, that the Lord their God is one Lord, Deu. 6:4. And therefore, (1.) They needed not to hope in any other god. Those on whom the sun shines need neither moon nor stars, nor the light of their own fire. (2.) They needed not to fear any other god. Their own God was more able to do them good than all the false and counterfeit gods of their enemies were to do them hurt. 5. That none besides could foretel these things to come, which God now by his prophet gave notice of to the world, above 200 years before they came to pass (v. 7): "Who, as I, shall call, shall call Cyrus to Babylon? Is there any but God that can call effectually, and has every creature, every heart, at his beck? Who shall declare it, how it shall be, and by whom, as I do?'' Nay, God goes further; he not only sees it in order, as having the foreknowledge of it, but sets it in order, as having the sole management and direction of it. Can any other pretend to this? He has always set things in order according to the counsel of his own will, ever since he appointed the ancient people, the people of Israel, who could give a truer and fuller account of the antiquities of their own nation than any other kingdom in the world could give of theirs. Ever since he appointed that people to be his peculiar people his providence was particularly conversant about them, and he told them beforehand the events that should occur respecting them-their bondage in Egypt, their deliverance from it, and their settlement in Canaan. All was set in order in the divine predictions as well as in the divine purposes. Could any other have done so? Would any other have been so far concerned for them? He challenges the pretenders to show the things that shall come hereafter: "Let them, if they can, tell us the name of the man that shall destroy Babylon ad deliver Israel? Nay, if they cannot pretend to tell us the things that shall come hereafter, let them tell us the things that are coming, that are nigh at hand and at the door. Let them tell us what shall come to pass to-morrow; but they cannot do that; fear them not therefore, nor be afraid of them. What harm can they do you? What hindrance can they give to your deliverance, when I have told thee it shall be accomplished in its season, and I have solemnly declared it?'' Note, Those who have the word of God's promise to depend upon need not be afraid of any adverse powers or policies whatsoever. [Henry, Matthew. "Commentary on Isaiah 44". "Matthew Henry Complete Commentary on the Whole," 1706]
By Reverand R.A. Torrey:
Torrey's Topical Textbook under God
None beside him Deuteronomy 4:35; Isaiah 44:6. [Torrey, R.A., Reverand. "Entry for 'God'". "The New Topical Text Book", 1897]
Easton's Bible Dictionary by M.G. Easton, M.A., D.D."
God [N] [T] [B] [S]
(A.S. and Dutch God; Dan. Gud; Ger. Gott), the name of the Divine Being. It is the rendering (1) of the Hebrew 'El , from a word meaning to be strong; (2) of 'Eloah_, plural _'Elohim . The singular form, Eloah , is used only in poetry. The plural form is more commonly used in all parts of the Bible, The Hebrew word Jehovah (q.v.), the only other word generally employed to denote the Supreme Being, is uniformly rendered in the Authorized Version by "LORD," printed in small capitals. The existence of God is taken for granted in the Bible. There is nowhere any argument to prove it. He who disbelieves this truth is spoken of as one devoid of understanding (Psalms 14:1).
The arguments generally adduced by theologians in proof of the being of God are:
? The a priori argument, which is the testimony afforded by reason.
? The a posteriori argument, by which we proceed logically from the facts of experience to causes. These arguments are,
(a) The cosmological, by which it is proved that there must be a First Cause of all things, for every effect must have a cause.
(b) The teleological, or the argument from design. We see everywhere the operations of an intelligent Cause in nature.
(c) The moral argument, called also the anthropological argument, based on the moral consciousness and the history of mankind, which exhibits a moral order and purpose which can only be explained on the supposition of the existence of God. Conscience and human history testify that "verily there is a God that judgeth in the earth."
The attributes of God are set forth in order by Moses in Exodus 34:6,7. (see also Deuteronomy 6:4; 10:17; Numbers 16:22; Exodus 15:11; 33:19; Isaiah 44:6; Habakkuk 3:6; Psalms 102:26; Job 34:12.) They are also systematically classified in Revelation 5:12 and 7:12. [M.G. Easton M.A., D.D., Illustrated Bible Dictionary, Third Edition, 1897.]
CONCLUSION:
As can readily be seen from the foregoing, Isaiah 44:6 applies to God (YHWH) alone and not to his Son, Jesus (Yeshua) who acts as his agent and has after his assertion been given authority over all except his Father (YHWH) as clearly testified to at 1 Corinthians 15:22-28, "For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; then they that are Christ's, at his coming. 24 Then [cometh] the end, when he shall deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have abolished all rule and all authority and power. 25 For he must reign, till he hath put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy that shall be abolished is death. 27 For, He put all things in subjection under his feet. But when he saith, All things are put in subjection, it is evident that he is excepted who did subject all things unto him. 28 And when all things have been subjected unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subjected to him that did subject all things unto him, that God may be all in all." (ASV). Especially note verse 27, "For, He put all things in subjection under his feet. But when he saith, All things are put in subjection, it is evident that he is excepted who did subject all things unto him. " which clearly shows the Father (YHWH) and the Son, Jesus (Yeshua) as two distinct beings, with one being subject to the other; hence no co-equality. Therefore, no Trinity, Duality, or Modulism; ther are thus proved to be false doctrines of men
in keeping with 2 Corinthians 4:4, "in whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not dawn [upon them]." (ASV)
TRYING TO KEEP PEOPLE FROM LEARNING THE TRUTH IS JUST PLAIN WICKED AND EVIL, may Almighty God (YHWH) punish him.
If you wish more information and/or wish to ask a question or what ever, contact me by leaving a PM (personal message) at http://religioustruths.yuku.com/
Your Friend in Christ Iris89
Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth."Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today!
Discourse On The Trinity Mystery With Three Questions:
Many groups and denominations often claim hat trinity myth is a big mystery.
With their claim of it being a mystery, it is, the Trinity is a mystery just like all frauds worked against mankind. It is nothing but the deceitful product of the human mind and absolutely finds not support in reality. It was adopted because of the driving force of two Roman Empire Emperors over two great church councils of an apostate church, the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D. under the absolute control of Emperor Constantine, a pagan Emperor who worshipped a sun God, and the Council of Constantinople of 381 A.D., under the control of Emperor Theodosius. In other words this fraud was the political product of two Roman Empire Emperors who knew little about Christianity and cared less. Their objective was not to keep the faith pure, but to do what ever was necessary to obtain religious unity within the empire to strengthen it. "A Short History of Christian Doctrine," states, "Constantine had basically no understanding whatsoever of the questions that were being asked in Greek theology." However, both emperors, Constantine and Theodosius, understood very well that the religious division of the empire at that time was a very real threat to the empire (Roman) and they wanted to solidify their domain.
Of this so called mystery the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, volume 4 [From page 3012-3014], states,
"The term 'Trinity' is not a Biblical term and we are not using Biblical language when we define what is expressed by it as the doctrine that there is one only and true God, but in the unity of the Godhead there are three coeternal and coequal Persons, the same in substance but distinct in subsistence. A doctrine so defined can be spoken of as a Biblical doctrine only on the principle that the sense of Scripture is Scripture. And the definition of a Biblical doctrine in such un-Biblical language can be justified only on the principle that it is better to preserve the truth of Scripture than the words of Scripture.
"...the doctrine of the Trinity is given to us in Scripture, not in formulated doctrine, but in fragmentary allusions.
"The doctrine of the Trinity is purely a revealed doctrine. That is to say, it embodies a truth which has never been discovered, and is indiscoverable, by natural reason.
"Triads of divinities, no doubt, occur in nearly all polytheistic religions, formed under very various influences. Sometimes, as in the Egyptian triad of Osiris, Isis and Horus, it is the analogy of the human family with its father, mother and son which lies at their basis. Sometimes they are the effect of mere syncretism, three deities worshipped in different localities being brought together in the common worship of all.
"Sometimes they are the result apparently of nothing more than odd human tendency to think in threes, which has given the number three wide-spread standing as a sacred number.
"It should be needless to say that none of these triads has the slightest resemblance to the Christian doctrine of the Trinity.
"As the doctrine of the Trinity is indiscoverable by reason, so it is incapable of proof from reason. There are no analogies to it in Nature, not even in the spiritual nature of man, who is made in the image of God. In His Trinitarian mode of being, God is unique; and, as there is nothing in the universe like Him in this respect, so there is nothing which can help us to comprehend Him. Many attempts have, nevertheless, been made to construct a rational proof of the Trinity of the Godhead.
"Certainly we cannot speak broadly of the revelation of the doctrine of the Trinity in the Old Testament. It is a plain matter of fact that none who have depended on the revelation embodied in the Old Testament alone have ever attained to the doctrine of the Trinity.
"It would seem clear that we must recognize in the Old Testament doctrine of the relation of God to His revelation by the creative Word and the Spirit, at least the germ of the distinctions in the Godhead afterward fully made known in the Christian revelation."
NOW QUESTION TIME FOR THOSE NOT UNDERSTANDING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MYTHS AND REALITY:
(1-question) Now a question for you, Matthew says of the temptation of Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves), "Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil. 2 And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward an hungred.
3 And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread.
4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. 5 Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple, 6 And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone. 7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God. 8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; 9 And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me. 10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. 11 Then the devil leaveth him, and, behold, angels came and ministered unto him." (Matthew 4:1-11, Authorized King James Bible, AV).
This was clearly a test of loyalty, would Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH) keep his loyalty to Almighty God (YHWH) or not. However, if he were God as per the Trinity doctrine, how could God rebel against himself and be disloyal to himself? [Please explain]
2-question) Let's assume for a moment that Jesus were part of a Godhead, i.e., a Trinity, the ransom price would have been infinitely higher than what God's (YHWH's) own Law required per "And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, 24 Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe." (Exodus 21:23-25 AV) and "And if a man cause a blemish in his neighbour; as he hath done, so shall it be done to him; 20 Breach for breach, eye for eye, tooth for tooth: as he hath caused a blemish in a man, so shall it be done to him again. 21 And he that killeth a beast, he shall restore it: and he that killeth a man, he shall be put to death." (Leviticus 24:19-21, AV).
Remember it was only a perfect human, Adam, who sinned in Eden, not God. Thus the ransom, to be equivalent or in line with God's (YHWH's) justice, had to be strictly an equivalent, i.e., a perfect human, "the last Adam." Therefore, when God sent Jesus to earth as the ransom, he made Jesus to be what would equate or satisfy justice, not an incarnation, nor a god-man, but a perfect man, " But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man." (Hebrews 2:9 AV). How could any part of an almighty Godhead (Trinity) of Father (YHWH) , Son (Jesus), or holy spirit ever be lower than angels? [Please explain]
3-question) Supporters of the Trinity claim that in the case of Jesus, "only-begotten" is different from the dictionary definition of "begetting," that is "to procreate as the father," [Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary]. They claim that in Jesus case it means "a sort of only son relationship without the begetting; however, "Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words." Now does that sound logical to you? Can a man father a son without begetting him? [Please explain]
Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth."Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today!
With regard John 8:58 “ Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.” (John 8:58 AV). Now let’s look at some of the Bible scriptures impinging on this:
a) That Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) did not always exist, but was created long before the foundation or creation of the earth in which he participated:
“ And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;” (Revelation 3:14 AV)
“ Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:” (Colossians 1:15 AV)
Thus, Jesus’ statement that he was, “, Before Abraham was, I am.” Is obviously correct as he was created before the foundations of the earth were created.
b) Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) participated in the creation of the earth also showing he existed before Abraham:
“16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.” (Colossians 1:16-17 AV)
“ He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.” (John 1:10 AV)
c) When he was down on earth he said he was going back to where he came from and asked his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) to give him back his glory that he previously had, expressed in earthly terms, at the right hand of his Father (YHWH):
“ And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.” (John 17:5 AV)
“ What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?” (John 6:62 AV)
“ But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;” (Hebrews 10:12 AV)
“ But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,” (Acts 7:55 AV)
“ Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.” (Acts 2:33 AV)
“ So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.” (Mark 16:19 AV)
“ And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.” (Mark 14:62 AV)
“ Hereafter shall the Son of man sit on the right hand of the power of God.” (Luke 22:69 AV)
d) God has given his Son, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) power over everything but himself until conditions are turned around:
“22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming. 24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. 25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. 27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. 28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.” (1 Coronthians 15:22-28 AV)
e) When asked by the mother some of his followers to let her sons sit on his right hand in heaven, he said:
“ And he saith unto them, Ye shall drink indeed of my cup, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with: but to sit on my right hand, and on my left, is not mine to give, but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared of my Father.” (Matthew 20:23 AV)
f) Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) never claimed to be God, but the son of God:
“ 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?” (John 10:36 AV)
“ And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.” (John 5:37 AV)
“17 It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true. 18 I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me. 19 Then said they unto him, Where is thy Father? Jesus answered, Ye neither know me, nor my Father: if ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also.” (John 8:17-19 AV)
f) Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) is the one mediator between mankind and God, one can not be a mediator with himself proving they are separate entities in heaven where he is the mediator:
“ For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;” (1 Timothy 2:5 AV)
g) The God of Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) is his Father, Almighty God:
“ Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.” (John 20:17 AV)
“ Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,” (1 Peter 1:3 AV)
“ And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Mark 15:34 AV)
h) His first century followers did not believe he was God:
“ But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.” (1 Corinthians 8:6 AV)
i) Jesus called his Father the only true God:
“1 ¶ These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: 2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. 3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” (John 17:1-3 AV)
j) His Apostles and the Virgin Mary and his first century followers considered him God’s Son and not Almighty God (YHWH):
“ Then they that were in the ship came and worshipped him, saying, Of a truth thou art the Son of God.” (Matthew 14:33 AV)
“ Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.” (1 John 4:15 AV)
“ And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.” (Luke 1:35 AV)
“ And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.” (John 1:34 AV)
“16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.” (John 3:16-18 AV)
“29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed. 30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: 31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.” (John 20:29-31 AV)
Now one scholar said this about John 8:58:
“I note two recurring assumptions made by several participants regarding this pericope.
(1) That Jesus' response somehow directly answers his interlocuter's question. I hold that this assumption is invalidated given the tendency of Jesus to answer a question with a question (and to rarely answer any question directly, particularly when addressed to him by an interlocuter, and never in a spiral of ad homonym violence).
(2) That both parties (Jesus and "the Jews") understood the statement of the other(s) unequivocally. I hold that given the emotionally charged context (the (il)legitimacy
of Jesus) that it is very likely there was misunderstanding, hence, when Jesus says "Abraham rejoiced to see my day" (disregarding the variant MSS evidence and patristic commentary which suggests "Abraham desired to see my day") that he could well have been commenting on Abraham's celebrating the birth of Jesus in the presence of the saints (i.e., the bosom of Abraham). The fact that "the Jews" understand him to be saying something different (or that a later redactor makes a convenient change of nuance to signify something different) should not be construed as "obvious." Jesus (in the midst of an ad homonym spiral of violence) is commenting that Abraham (the professed Father of his interlocuters) behaves more admirably than his interlocuters where he (Jesus) is concerned, and finally, that YHWH is the pattern (source) of Jesus' works, and not Abraham (which, Jesus maintains, is not the pattern (source) of his interlocuter's actions either (which leads to the attempted stoning)).
Until an exegesis can be forwarded that doesn't make these assumptions a priori, other alternatives which can make sense of the text without relying on these assumptions (i.e., by not multiplying entities unnecessarily) should hold sway given that the Greek does not differentiate _in and of itself_(apart from theological assumptions) between the alternatives.” [“Mike Phillips (mphilli3@mail.tds.net)]
Now some may ask about the meaning of “I AM” at the end of John 8:58. See broken down by Strong #s:
58 Jesus <2424> said <2036> (5627) unto them <846>, Verily <281>, verily <281>, I say <3004> (5719) unto you <5213>, Before <4250> Abraham <11> was <1096> (5635), I <[1473]> am <[1510> (5748).]
[1473] egw ego eg-o’
a primary pronoun of the first person I (only expressed when emphatic); TDNT-2:343,196; pron
AV-I 365, my 2, me 2, not tr 1; 370
1) I, me, my
[1510] eimi eimi i-mee’
the first person singular present indicative; a prolonged form of a primary and defective verb; TDNT-2:398,206; v
AV-I am + 1473 74, am 55, it is I + 1473 6, be 2, I was + 1473 1, have been 1, not tr 7; 146
1) to be, to exist, to happen, to be present
[5748] Tense-Present See 5774
Voice-No Voice Stated See 5799
Mood - Indicative See 5791
Count-1617
Therefore the example of “I am” used in John 8:58 is quite different than for example the “I am” used at Exodus 3:14, see the following breakdown by Strong #s of Exodus 3:14:
14 And God <0430> said <0559> (8799) unto Moses <04872>, I AM <[01961> (8799)] THAT I AM <01961> (8799): and he said <0559> (8799), Thus shalt thou say <0559> (8799) unto the children <01121> of Israel <03478>, I AM hath sent <07971> (8804) me unto you.
[01961] hyh hayah haw-yaw
a primitive root [compare 01933]; TWOT-491; v
AV-was, come to pass, came, has been, were happened, become, pertained, better for thee; 75
1) to be, become, come to pass, exist, happen, fall out
1a) (Qal)
1a1) ——-
1a1a) to happen, fall out, occur, take place, come about, come to pass
1a1b) to come about, come to pass
1a2) to come into being, become
1a2a) to arise, appear, come
1a2b) to become
1a2b1) to become
1a2b2) to become like
1a2b3) to be instituted, be established
1a3) to be
1a3a) to exist, be in existence
1a3b) to abide, remain, continue (with word of place or time)
1a3c) to stand, lie, be in, be at, be situated (with word of locality)
1a3d) to accompany, be with
1b) (Niphal)
1b1) to occur, come to pass, be done, be brought about
1b2) to be done, be finished, be gone
[08799] Stem - Qal See 08851
Mood - Imperfect See 08811
Count-19885
As can be seen, although two things may appear similar due to translation into English a language quite different from the original, but when you make reference back the original language, you see the differences that at times can be quite significant. Therefore, no assumption of similarity should ever be made without a check to the original language using Strong or an equivalent method.
Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth."Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today!
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
, and the foundation upon which God would build all future arrangements for the eternal good of His universal family in heaven and earth. (Eph 1:8-10; 2:20; 1Pe 2:4-
