YHWH

[Wootah]

Y - the hand
H - reveals
W - the nail
H - reveals

How is anyone that believes YHWH is God able to negate the evidence above that YHWH is Jesus?

https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/je ... -is-yahweh

YHWH is the name above all names correct?

Philippians 2:9-11 says — Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.

Anyone want to directly confront both pieces of evidence?

[emilynghiem]

I have trouble seeing that either of your statements contradicts each other. This represents the meaning of the three as one. You can each have distinct perceptions of the one God yet these both reflect the one God without conflict.

The simple fact is, Emily, 'A' and 'NOT A' cannot both be true at the same time.

There is only ONE GOD not three.

Right.

And there is a distinction between God manifesting in Jesus and God manifesting as the Holy Spirit. The distinction is between the manfestations.

We're not talking about concepts, Emily. We're talking about persons.

Grace and peace to you.

Of course, what I'm saying is teaching the three as ONE
is NOT TEACHING THREE SEPARATE GODS.

So that is why there isn't a contradiction, if we don't create
a strawman out of it by saying "the THREE means THREE DIFFERENT GODS."

@PinSeeker

[emilynghiem]

I have trouble seeing that either of your statements contradicts each other. This represents the meaning of the three as one. You can each have distinct perceptions of the one God yet these both reflect the one God without conflict.

The simple fact is, Emily, 'A' and 'NOT A' cannot both be true at the same time.

There is only ONE GOD not three.

Right.

And there is a distinction between God manifesting in Jesus and God manifesting as the Holy Spirit. The distinction is between the manfestations.

We're not talking about concepts, Emily. We're talking about persons.

Grace and peace to you.

Dear @PinSeeker:
The way you and I perceive "persons" is by our perception.
The conflict IS between our "perceptions and concepts" IN OUR FINITE MINDS THAT LABEL THESE
and the actual "PERSON of GOD".

So that is why it is necessary to sort out these perceptions/concepts.
THAT Is where the conflict is.

There is no conflict over GOD BEING THE ONE SUPREME.

Where the conflicts are splitting up
IS where human perceptions/concepts are framing this ONE GOD differently.

You are answering your own question.

If people cannot distinguish the perfect ONE GOD WITH NO CONTRADICTIONS
from the conflicting concepts in people's minds,
that is where this problem is coming from.

Do you agree, that it's the concepts in people's minds that isn't matching what God is?
God can only be ONE by definition of what God means, so we seem to agree on that.

Where the "three separate" conflicts are coming in
are BECAUSE people have different CONCEPTS IN THEIR MINDS.

Do you agree that is where the conflict is, in people's internal perceptions or concepts?

[onewithhim]

Sounds ok to me.

(Who is "Fred?")

[onewithhim]

Young's Literal Translation says of Jehovah:

"Thus sayeth Jehovah, thy redeemer, the Holy One of Israel, 'I am Jehovah thy God, teaching thee to profit, causing thee to tread in the way thou goest. O that thou hadst attended to My commands, then as a river is thy peace, and thy righteousness as billows of the sea.'"


.

[PinSeeker]

Dear @PinSeeker:
The way you and I perceive "persons" is by our perception.
The conflict IS between our "perceptions and concepts" IN OUR FINITE MINDS THAT LABEL THESE
and the actual "PERSON of GOD".

So that is why it is necessary to sort out these perceptions/concepts.
THAT Is where the conflict is.

There is no conflict over GOD BEING THE ONE SUPREME.

Where the conflicts are splitting up
IS where human perceptions/concepts are framing this ONE GOD differently.

You are answering your own question.

If people cannot distinguish the perfect ONE GOD WITH NO CONTRADICTIONS
from the conflicting concepts in people's minds,
that is where this problem is coming from.

Do you agree, that it's the concepts in people's minds that isn't matching what God is?
God can only be ONE by definition of what God means, so we seem to agree on that.

Where the "three separate" conflicts are coming in
are BECAUSE people have different CONCEPTS IN THEIR MINDS.

Do you agree that is where the conflict is, in people's internal perceptions or concepts?

It is what it is, Emily. Sure, there are some... many... who, contrary to what God has told us, lean on their own understanding. Grace and peace to you.

[onewithhim]

All Jesus' witnesses can do is keep presenting the clear truth. We hope some will see the light of truth in what we say. Jesus was the finest, most excellent witness of Jehovah, and we follow him closely. (Revelation 1:5; I Peter 2:21)

Jehovah is God, and he alone (Psalm 83:18, KJV)

Jesus is appointed by Jehovah to reign as King for a thousand years, with co-rulers (Daniel 7: 13,14,27; Revelation 5:10; Revelation 20:6)

Jesus finally gives back the Kingdom to his God and Father, after the Millennium, so that the Father can be all things to everyone (I Corinthians 15:24-28)

Very clear, no confusion


.

[PinSeeker]

All Jesus' witnesses can do is keep presenting the clear truth. We hope some will see the light of truth in what we say. Jesus was the finest, most excellent witness of Jehovah, and we follow him closely. (Revelation 1:5; I Peter 2:21)

Agreed. The best witness of God is God Himself.

Jehovah is God, and he alone (Psalm 83:18, KJV)

Agreed. All three Persons of the one God alone. Absolutely.

Jesus is appointed by Jehovah to reign as King for a thousand years, with co-rulers (Daniel 7: 13,14,27; Revelation 5:10; Revelation 20:6)

Not quite. Look at those passages again. They are all referring to Jesus's reign in heaven, before His return and the ensuing final Judgment. The first resurrection of Revelation 20:6 is happening for individual believers as they come to Christ... as they are saved, in this life. This is a dream, remember? A vision. So yes, this will continue to happen for a thousand years, but 1000 is a number symbolizing completeness (which is not unprecedented in God's word). So this millennium is not literally one thousand 365-day periods, but rather symbolic of the fullness of God's time in which His Israel -- consisting of people from every tongue, tribe, and nation -- is saved. So, we are in the midst of the millennium now, as we speak.

Jesus finally gives back the Kingdom to his God and Father, after the Millennium, so that the Father can be all things to everyone (I Corinthians 15:24-28)

Yes. Jesus is now and always will be functionally subordinate to the Father. But this does nothing to diminish the oneness of the Son with the Father and equality in deity the two share (along with the Holy Spirit):

• "...yet for us there is one God, the Father, from Whom are all things and for Whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through Whom are all things and through whom we exist." [1 Corinthians 8:6]

NOTE: Jehovah's Witnesses wrongly impose a false distinction between "God" and "Lord."

• "I and the Father are one." [Jesus, John 10:30]

• “Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?" [John 14:9]

• "But of the Son He -- God the Father -- says, 'Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom.' " [Hebrews 1:8, emphasis added]

NOTE: The mis-translation of the New World Translation is particularly egregious in this verse. God the Father is actually calling Jesus 'God' here, not as if to say "Jesus is His God," but to acknowledge that the Son is just as much God as the Father. The Father is not the Son's throne, as the NWT puts it, but rather the one throne belongs to both the Father and the Son, which is to say the authority of the Father and the Son is the same, because they are one in essence, despite being two distinct Persons.

Very clear, no confusion.

Agreed. But we certainly disagree on exactly what that clarity really is.

Grace and peace to you.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to PinSeeker in post #117]

I beg to differ. Hebrews 1:8 does not show God calling Jesus God. It is referring to where Jesus GETS his power, and that is from the throne of God---a "throne" standing for authority (just as the "Wild beast" receives its power and authority--or, "throne"--from Satan [Rev.13:2b]). Jesus receives the power of his throne from his Father, God Almighty, as the writer of Hebrews says:

"With reference to the Son: 'God is your throne forever and ever, and the scepter of your kingdom is the scepter of uprightness.'"

This is an acceptable translation, and is more probable than the rendering that is more popular such as in the KJV.

The following verse shows that "your throne O God" is not the probable rendering, and does not really make sense. What does the next verse say? "You loved righteousness, and you hated lawlessness. That is why GOD, YOUR GOD, anointed you with the oil of exultation more than your partners."

The Son HAS A GOD. That negates, in my opinion, the whole idea of verse 8 speaking of the Son being "God." The verse makes sense (v.8) by being rendered "God is your throne." It shows where the Son gets his authority and power.


.

[PinSeeker]

I beg to differ.

Well of course you do. But as I said, the mis-translation of the New World Translation is particularly egregious in Hebrews 1:8. Very similar to its egregious mis-translation of John 1:1. Jesus is called God in both verses (among others).

The Son HAS A GOD. That negates, in my opinion, the whole idea of verse 8 speaking of the Son being "God."

I understand your opinion. I understand your mindset, and what you've chosen to believe. But I think if you are honest with me -- and yourself -- you have to admit that upon reading this passage, it is quite possible that both the Son and the Father are being called God, even if you then still choose to reject it. And that is the case. Observe:

One of the main points of Hebrews 1 is that God the Father is speaking. And in verses 8 and 9a He says says -- concerning the Son:

• "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness..."

The Father calls the Son 'God.'

And then in verse 9b He then says:

• "...therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions.”

The Father is speaking here of Himself, saying, "Therefore, I have annointed You."

Again, if you are honest with me -- and yourself -- you will admit that upon reading this passage, it is quite possible that both the Son and the Father are being called God, even if you then still choose to reject it.

Grace and peace to you, OWH.

[tigger 2]

Heb. 1:8

Oxford professor and famous trinitarian Bible translator, Dr. James Moffatt, was described as “probably the greatest biblical scholar of our day.” His respected Bible translation renders Heb. 1:8 as:

“God is thy throne for ever and ever.”

University of Cambridge professor and noted New Testament language scholar, Dr. C. F. D. Moule writes that Heb. 1:8 may be “construed so as to mean Thy throne is God” - p. 32, An Idiom Book of New Testament Greek, Cambridge University Press, 1990 printing.

“In Heb. 1:8 it is not certain whether (Ὁ θρόνος σου ὁ θεὸς) ὁ θεὸς is vocative or nominative.” - A.T. Robertson, Grammar, p. 465. In other words, trinitarian scholar A.T. Robertson is saying that Heb. 1:8 could be rendered as either “Your throne, O God (vocative)” OR “God is your throne (nominative).”

An American Translation (Smith-Goodspeed), renders it: “God is your throne....”

The Bible in Living English (Byington) reads: “God is your throne....”

The Message reads: “Your throne is God’s throne….”

NSB - God is your throne

Mace - "God is thy throne….”

Twentieth Century New Testament - ‘God is thy throne….’

The American Standard Version (ASV), the Revised Standard Version (RSV), the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV), and The New English Bible (NEB) have provided alternate readings to the traditional trinitarian rendering of the KJV at Hebrews 1:8. These alternate readings (found in footnotes) agree with Dr. Moffatt’s, Dr. Barclay’s, Smith-Goodspeed’s, Byington’s, and the New World Translation’s renderings of this scripture (“God is your throne”).

Even Young’s Concise Bible Commentary (written by the famous trinitarian author of Young’s Analytical Concordance to the Bible) admits: “[Heb. 1:8] may be justly rendered ‘God is thy throne ...’ in either case it is applicable to the mediatorial throne only.”

Quoted From Ps. 45

In addition to these admissions by trinitarian translators concerning Heb. 1:8, we need to look back at the Old Testament Hebrew scripture (Ps. 45:6) that Paul was quoting when he wrote Heb. 1:8.

The RSV renders it as “Your Divine throne” and a footnote provides this alternate
reading: “Or ‘your throne is a throne of God.’”

The NRSV says in a footnote: “Or ‘your throne is a throne of God.’”

The NEB says: “Your throne is like God’s throne.”

The Holy Scriptures (JPS version) says: “Thy throne given of God.”

The Bible in Living English (Byington) says: “God is your throne.”

New International Reader’s Version (NIRV): “Your throne is the very throne of God.”

The Good News Bible (GNB), a very trinitarian paraphrase Bible, renders it: “The kingdom
that God has given you will last forever and ever.”

The REB has: “God has enthroned you for all eternity.”


The NJB gives us: “your throne is from God.”

Leeser - “Thy throne, given of God, endureth for ever”

Heb. 1:8 is far from a trinity proof!