Religious Cults & False Prophets~ Discussions and DebatesOneness debateApple Pie, for a person of intelligence your last post calls your intelligence and credibility into question. First, the fact translators of the NAS and other modern versions capitalize "him" when referring to Jesus does not make Him God. The first English translations of the Scripture did not capitalize any pronoun that referred to God or Jesus, which is also true of the Greek manuscripts, so that comment is ludicrous. Does God have a God? Now you can appeal to trinitarian interpretations of Scripture that ignore the obvious meaning of "His God", however by doing so you expose that the plain meaning of Scripture is immaterial to you just as the plain meaning of Scripture was immaterial to Origen and those who developed the doctrine of the Trinity. As to elohiym, following are just a few Scriptures that translate "elohiym" in the singular. If you have access to an Englishman's Concordance you can look up all the Scriptures that contain Strong's #430 for yourself. How did I refute your Shema exegesis? Really Apple Pie, your Shema exegesis does not work in Greek since theos, heis, and monos do not indicate a compound unity. First century converts to Christianity did not have 1700+ years of interpretations that deny the Hebraic roots of Christianity, interpretations that even modern trinitarian scholars have discarded. Jesus who was a Jew taught God's truth and explained His own words. So why did Jesus teach the Shema is the most important part of the Law? Also to appeal to "kai" to show that a connective conjunction indicates the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one in substance and nature is ludicrous. Revelation was given by the Father to an angel who then communicated Revelation to John. All this triune greeting tells us is that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit work in and with true believers to accomplish God’s predetermined plan for our salvation. Tell us Apple Pie what does classic Arabic have to do with God’s word? We are discussing Christianity not Islam and Jews view the use of “elohiym” as a plural of majesty, which as I posted above is how modern trinitarian scholars now understand this Hebrew word. Googles, I left you post alone since it demonstrates that you need to take your own advice and study Scripture instead of trinitarian apologetics. First, what does your living in California have to do with understanding God’s word? We have a large Hispanic population in Colorado but when our Governor speaks to the citizens of Colorado he uses English not Spanish and the same in true of the Governor of California. When I lived in Houston the mayor communicated in English, he did not communicate to the citizens in Spanish for the Hispanic population or in the many Asian dialects used by the Asian population. You vain attempt to show that Jesus is the Lord's demonstrates your ignorance of why we refer to the Lord as Jesus instead of Joshua. Now your sarcasm is not only unwarranted it is juvenile since I have never adopted the practice of substituting a “-“ for any letter in God, Jesus, or Lord. Jesus’ earthly ministry was only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. It took a vision from God to get Peter to go to Cornelius, read Acts 10. Jesus communicated His gospel to Jews in Aramaic not Greek. You appeal to Matthew who was employed as a tax collector, which means in order to communicate with Rome’s governors he would have used Greek, and since Peter was a fisherman who lived near and sold fish in Capernaum he also had a working knowledge of Greek. However we can discern from John’s Gospel that Jesus communicated with His disciples in Aramaic. You also need to take your own advice concerning the study of Paleo Hebrew as well as Paleo Greek. Koine, which means “common”, was considered a “decayed” version of classical Greek by 3rd century Alexandrian scholars. Now, when are either or both of you going to address the plain language meaning of the verses I posted and how you can interpret Greek words to line up with your interpretations of a few Hebrew words that modern scholars have rejected? Jesus refers to the Father as His God in many Scriptures and Paul does not support your interpretations of a few Hebrew words. In fact Paul warns against striving or wrangling over words, which has been your main defense of the Trinity. Now both of you have tried to obfuscate this thread by wrangling over words, appealing to one source that disagrees with modern scholars as well as with Judaism, which is the foundation of God's household. It is time you addressed Scripture and unless you are willing to do so your posts will be deleted. You see Apple Pie and Googles your interpretations introduce contradictions into Scripture that do not exist. |
🌈Pride🌈 goeth before Destruction
When 🌈Pride🌈 cometh, then cometh Shame