Jesus believed One-True-God, he did not believe in Trinity. Did he?
Jesus was a Jew and followed Moses' teachings. His core teaching was :
Matthew 22 (NIV)
The Greatest Commandment
34Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. 35One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: 36“Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?�
37Jesus replied: “ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’c 38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’d 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.�
http://biblehub.com/niv/matthew/22.htm
The above is the same as Moses told:
Deuteronomy 6:5-7New International Version (NIV)
5 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. 6 These commandments that I give you today are to be on your hearts. 7 Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... my+6%3A5-7
So the "heart and soul" and essence of Jesus belief and his teaching was to believe in One-True-God whom he used to address in love or poetic way as God-the-Father, and to worship no other god.
This is Jesus' overwhelming teaching and all other creeds must be within it and in no way the slightest repugnant to it. If a creed is against it then one is not following the way Jesus was following nor heading to the light Jesus followed.
Right,please?
Regards
Jesus believed One-True-God, he did not believe in Trinity
Moderator: Moderators
-
paarsurrey1
- Sage
- Posts: 940
- Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2017 3:19 pm
Re: Jesus believed One-True-God, he did not believe in Trini
Post #21[Replying to post 1 by paarsurrey1]
The Trinity doctrine was formulated by non-Jews centuries after Jesus's death, so Jesus could not have believed in the Trinity.
"High christology" probably began in the mind of Jesus, but it did not consist in a claim to "be God".
Even in John's high christology, Jesus never claims to be God. In fact, he excludes himself from the Godhead in John 17:3. He also tells Mary that he himself has a God: "I ascend to your God and my God".
Moreover, Jesus denies any Godhood to himself because he consistently says that all his power and authority are derived from the Father and that "I can do nothing of myself", but "onlyby the will of the Father". In the NT, therefore, Jesus is not God and not the Trinitarian Son/Second Person. But he does claim - in all the Gospels - to be more than a mere mortal.
John's Jesus is both the Nazarene carpenter-sage, and the embodiment of the Logos, which for John makes Jesus God's "Son". Not in an ontological Trinitarian sense, but rather as an ancient, primordial, archangelic figure, at God's side in a heavenly preexistence, and through whom "all was made". Remarkably, the Synoptic Gospels to a greater or lesser extent, tend to echo major attributes of this high christology.
In the Synoptics, when Jesus is on trial before the Sanhedrin, he identifies himself with the heavenly Son of Man from the book of Daniel - a preexistent figure, living in the clouds of heaven, present to Yahweh, the Ancient of Days, in the heavenly court. Jesus tells the Sanhedrin that they themselves will see this celestial Son of Man coming in the clouds, gloriously, accompanied by "Power" (God's living Presence). In other places, Jesus says that the Son of Man is charged with execution of divine judgment which will come on "the last day".
The priest cries "blasphemy" and tears his robes when he hears Jesus's expression of high christology. Not because Jesus is claiming to "be God", but rather because Jesus - a mere man - is claiming to be "a Second Power in heaven", who was also associated with Yahweh's chief assisting angel, the Great Angel of ancient Israel, who bore the divine name and executed divine judgment.
The priest saw in Jesus's claim a lying attempt to identify himself with the Great Angel and with the sacred Son of Man. Hence the charge of blasphemy: Jesus in fact (so thought the Sanhedrin) was no more the Son of Man or the Great Angel than he was the true Messiah. His crucifixion was consequent to the Sanhedrin's condemnation of Jesus's claim to be the preexistent heavenly figure.
Some of the earliest Jewish christologies held that a great angel, or the heavenly Christ, or the Adam Kadmon, or the Son of Man, had descended upon and dwelled in Jesus at least from the time of his baptism by John. Which meant that Jesus was God's Son in a high christological sense that expanded beyond mere Adoptionist christology. Jesus carried in himself the spirit of the Preexistent One.
This primordial "Power" was transformed into the Trinity's Second Person centuries after Jesus's death, the error being that the Church Councils mistook the Jewish/monotheistic Son of Man to be "God" - but, knowing that "God" always meant the Father-Creator in heaven while Jesus was only the Son on earth - the Councils elevated Jesus into full Godhood, turning the Son of Man into God the Son.
The Trinity doctrine was formulated by non-Jews centuries after Jesus's death, so Jesus could not have believed in the Trinity.
"High christology" probably began in the mind of Jesus, but it did not consist in a claim to "be God".
Even in John's high christology, Jesus never claims to be God. In fact, he excludes himself from the Godhead in John 17:3. He also tells Mary that he himself has a God: "I ascend to your God and my God".
Moreover, Jesus denies any Godhood to himself because he consistently says that all his power and authority are derived from the Father and that "I can do nothing of myself", but "onlyby the will of the Father". In the NT, therefore, Jesus is not God and not the Trinitarian Son/Second Person. But he does claim - in all the Gospels - to be more than a mere mortal.
John's Jesus is both the Nazarene carpenter-sage, and the embodiment of the Logos, which for John makes Jesus God's "Son". Not in an ontological Trinitarian sense, but rather as an ancient, primordial, archangelic figure, at God's side in a heavenly preexistence, and through whom "all was made". Remarkably, the Synoptic Gospels to a greater or lesser extent, tend to echo major attributes of this high christology.
In the Synoptics, when Jesus is on trial before the Sanhedrin, he identifies himself with the heavenly Son of Man from the book of Daniel - a preexistent figure, living in the clouds of heaven, present to Yahweh, the Ancient of Days, in the heavenly court. Jesus tells the Sanhedrin that they themselves will see this celestial Son of Man coming in the clouds, gloriously, accompanied by "Power" (God's living Presence). In other places, Jesus says that the Son of Man is charged with execution of divine judgment which will come on "the last day".
The priest cries "blasphemy" and tears his robes when he hears Jesus's expression of high christology. Not because Jesus is claiming to "be God", but rather because Jesus - a mere man - is claiming to be "a Second Power in heaven", who was also associated with Yahweh's chief assisting angel, the Great Angel of ancient Israel, who bore the divine name and executed divine judgment.
The priest saw in Jesus's claim a lying attempt to identify himself with the Great Angel and with the sacred Son of Man. Hence the charge of blasphemy: Jesus in fact (so thought the Sanhedrin) was no more the Son of Man or the Great Angel than he was the true Messiah. His crucifixion was consequent to the Sanhedrin's condemnation of Jesus's claim to be the preexistent heavenly figure.
Some of the earliest Jewish christologies held that a great angel, or the heavenly Christ, or the Adam Kadmon, or the Son of Man, had descended upon and dwelled in Jesus at least from the time of his baptism by John. Which meant that Jesus was God's Son in a high christological sense that expanded beyond mere Adoptionist christology. Jesus carried in himself the spirit of the Preexistent One.
This primordial "Power" was transformed into the Trinity's Second Person centuries after Jesus's death, the error being that the Church Councils mistook the Jewish/monotheistic Son of Man to be "God" - but, knowing that "God" always meant the Father-Creator in heaven while Jesus was only the Son on earth - the Councils elevated Jesus into full Godhood, turning the Son of Man into God the Son.
Post #22
paarsurrey1 wrote:It is not required as Moses and other prophets/messengers did not believe in any trinity. Trinity is made-in-Rome by Pauline-Christianity, imported from other people.Wootah wrote: You aren't demonstrating how there is a conflict between the one true God and the trinity.
Regards
your wrong there
there is Abraham the father Isaac the beloved son who was offered and Jacob who's name was changed by God to Israel of which starting with twelve all are the children of.
there's God the Father of which the Son said He had in Heaven of which John the Baptist witnessed God say Jesus was His Beloved Son and the Holy Spirit of which was witnessed again by John the Baptist as a dove and of which Jesus said was to be a comforter to the disciples and one needs to be born of. which makes those born of the Holy Spirit children of God through the Son in the Holy Spirit which so happened to start with twelve.
also in the beginning God created, then His Spirit moved on the face of the waters or hovered, and said hence His Word of which all is created through.
God, His Spirit and His Word. all three are one. and yes guys like Moses knew this. he is the one who documented it for you to read.
-
puddleglum
- Sage
- Posts: 685
- Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 12:35 pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
- Contact:
Post #23
When the wise men came to see Jesus they worshipped him. They knew that the King of the Jews would be God incarnated in human form. It is quite possilbe that the Jews knew that God was a trinity. They rejected Jesus as their Messiah and this rejection affected their ability to understand the scriptures.
The Bible says, "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might." But the word for God is Elohim, which is plural. The three persons of the Trinity can be one God in the same sense that a man and woman who are married can be one flesh.
The Bible says, "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might." But the word for God is Elohim, which is plural. The three persons of the Trinity can be one God in the same sense that a man and woman who are married can be one flesh.
His invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made.
Romans 1:20 ESV
Romans 1:20 ESV
Re: Jesus believed One-True-God, he did not believe in Trini
Post #24As a monotheistic Jew, Jesus had no concept of a Trinity, and in John's Gospel (John 17:3) he explicitly excluded himself from the Godhead, saying, "You [heavenly Father] are the only true God". Elsewhere in John Jesus says that he is a man who has heard God's word and obeys it - at most a claim to an ardent, faithful kind of Sonship, but not to ontological deity.paarsurrey1 wrote: Jesus believed One-True-God, he did not believe in Trinity. Did he?
Jesus was a Jew and followed Moses' teachings. His core teaching was :
Matthew 22 (NIV)
The Greatest Commandment
34Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. 35One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: 36“Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?�
37Jesus replied: “ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’c 38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’d 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.�
http://biblehub.com/niv/matthew/22.htm
The above is the same as Moses told:
Deuteronomy 6:5-7New International Version (NIV)
5 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. 6 These commandments that I give you today are to be on your hearts. 7 Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... my+6%3A5-7
So the "heart and soul" and essence of Jesus belief and his teaching was to believe in One-True-God whom he used to address in love or poetic way as God-the-Father, and to worship no other god.
This is Jesus' overwhelming teaching and all other creeds must be within it and in no way the slightest repugnant to it. If a creed is against it then one is not following the way Jesus was following nor heading to the light Jesus followed.
Right,please?
Regards
Not that Jesus considered himself an ordinary mortal. His confession before the Sanhedrin proves that. In this scene, Jesus identifies himself with a pre-existent heavenly figure called "the Son of Man" - one who gloriously comes in the clouds, accompanied by "Power" - the very Presence of God. The Gospels portray Jesus as Son of Man being able to forgive sin, and being charged with a crucial role in the final judgment.
Clearly the priests were correct in charging Jesus with a kind of secondary blasphemy because, while he neither cursed God or claimed to be God, Jesus still abrogated to himself the superhuman prerogatives, knowledge, and power of a hitherto only celestial companion of God. That was blasphemy enough for the Sanhedrin, and understandably so.
-
Falling Light 101
- Apprentice
- Posts: 192
- Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2017 3:16 pm
- Been thanked: 3 times
Trinity Imagined By Allah.
Post #25I have noticed that The Quran does indeed declare that any ideas, theories, conceptions or notions of " any " Trinity existing concerning god, are all wholly completely false, error and truly evil and those who adhere to this faith - are deserving condemnation and punishment from god.
This can not be denied, when we read the Quran this message is crystal clear.
However, the only hint or even mentioning whatsoever at all concerning The Trinity Doctrine in Islam - is a description concerning - Mary, Allah, and Yahoshua, and it calls these three as "Allah, Allah's wife Mary and their conceived son Yahoshua "
This is the only focus of the " Trinity " and only single description of the Trinity as an explanation or description - in the Quran.
Although the Holy Spirit - is mentioned in the Quran - but it is only mentioned in the context of - giving revelation and Holy Books, giving signs and strength - also the breath of life and in the Quran The Holy Spirit is also breathing into Mary’s womb to conceive Yahoshua. The Quran condemns and - decries and warns against the Christians who believe that these three are considered “ the three “ as partners or calls on the title or phrase of - “ THE THREE “ to say that Christians falsely believe in - “ The Three “ as - = Allah, Mary and their conceived son Yahoshua.
This is the only condemnation and objection to any form or elusion or insinuation or any hint of any Trinity believe in existence - in The Quran. The Holy Spirit is never mentioned in the context of " The Three " that Christians have attributed as partners with Allah.
If we take The Quran upon the intended message and upon the word of what it literally says and explains concerning what Allah and Mohammad are saying, that Christians believe that Mary and Allah are a part of the Trinity Doctrine.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah ) said: - Mary is mentioned alongside the Messiah, because some Christians took her as another god and worshipped her as they worshipped the Messiah. As for those who do not believe in that, they still ask of her what should be asked of God, to the extent that they say to her: Forgive me, have mercy on me, and so on, based on a belief that she will intercede with her son concerning that.
Sometimes they say: O mother of God, intercede for us with God. And sometimes they ask her for their needs, which should be sought from God, and they do not mention intercession. Others worship her as they worshipped the Messiah. - Al-Jawaab as-Saheeh (4/255-256).
The Holy Spirit is not mentioned in The Quran as a part of “ the three / { trinity } “ but the Quran makes its stand against The Trinity, only by the reasoning - of stating “ that God cannot have a son since he has no wife “
Sura. 72:3 - The truth is that - exalted be the Majesty of our Lord - HE has taken unto Himself neither wife nor son.
Tafsir al-Jalalayn - Disbelievers say, 'God is the third of three', gods, that is, He is one of them, the other two being Jesus and his mother, are - [those] who are fixed upon unbelief, shall suffer a painful chastisement, namely, the Fire.
The entire concept of The Trinity Doctrine involving The Father, Son and Spirit are completely absent and nonexistent in the Quran -
I, myself, personally - for me - I do not believe that The Father, Son, and Spirit are Three Separate, Individual, Distinct Persons - and I have found that The Trinitarians have altered, changed, added to and removed words from the Original Manuscripts in creating their Trinitarian Translations. - - I simply truly believe what the Original Manuscripts say - that these three are One. And not mentioned or described - as Three Persons.
As it explains in - Php 2:4 Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others. - :5 For think or regard this in / You / yourselves who { You whom also exist } or ( to ) - You who are - also in Christ Jesus.
6 Who, existed in the form / morph of God, thought it not robbery or seizing, taking (by force) being or eXisting equally God: - :7 But an ineffective / vain / voided / non-effect reputation Himself, taking or receiving the form / morph of a servant was in the likeness of men: = human nature.
Yahoshua admitted that He was not a CO EQUAl " not a CO ETERNAL " INDIVIDUAL " who was a - SEPARATE DISTINCT PERSON - from the Father. Nor a part of a Trinitarian concept, nor one in unity or agreement with the Father. But He was in the form / morph of God, - eXisting equally God: - :
But also at the same time - here on earth, as a man - God took on the MORPH - ONLY - JUST as a vain / voided / non-effect - reputation of Himself - and - MADE INTO - and taking or receiving - the form / morph of a servant, - He, THE FATHER - was MORPHED into the likeness of a man: / human. - Yahoshua defines the terms in His message - by saying that He does nothing of His own self - saying that I can do nothing whatsoever of my own doing. - I do not have any power of miracles, of my own " I do not have a will of my own - I CANNOT DO anything, whatsoever - OF MY OWN ... Saying that it is the father only, that does the miracles and the works.
He was not a distinct separated part of God, nor of a trinity in a partnership as a second PERSON of a triune CO EQUAL GODHEAD with a head and a tail. The word GODHEAD - = simply does not exist in the Bible. - He was not a separate identity or separate person " separated nor individual PERSON - from the father " His will was not " CO EQUAL " nor the same as " in the same WILL as Gods will. He has no power, no control, no miracles, no knowledge and there is no good, no honor and no REPUTATION in Him. -
Saying - why do you call me " good " ? -- " There is NO ONE good but God alone " - - Every time He spoke of his own will, power, majesty and desire and purpose " I find that He denied the trinity doctrine- Yet at the same time, he and the scriptures declare that He was God Himself - He was from heaven, and He PRE EXISTED / ORIGINATED - in the bosom of the father and EXITED from { out from } the bosom of the father to sit in the RIGHT of God until his enemies are a footstool " And the Trinitarian Translation denies and deletes and removes the words that say that He EXITED from { out from } the bosom of the father. = replacing the word ( OUT FROM ) the right of the Father - to say He only sits " AT " or " ON " the right hand.
I believe that Trinitarians and Muslims both deny and reject and or and simply have deleted or excluded from where He originated, in their scripture and translations. And that Trinitarians forever and eternally leave him sitting. dweling at or on the right hand of God.
This can not be denied, when we read the Quran this message is crystal clear.
However, the only hint or even mentioning whatsoever at all concerning The Trinity Doctrine in Islam - is a description concerning - Mary, Allah, and Yahoshua, and it calls these three as "Allah, Allah's wife Mary and their conceived son Yahoshua "
This is the only focus of the " Trinity " and only single description of the Trinity as an explanation or description - in the Quran.
Although the Holy Spirit - is mentioned in the Quran - but it is only mentioned in the context of - giving revelation and Holy Books, giving signs and strength - also the breath of life and in the Quran The Holy Spirit is also breathing into Mary’s womb to conceive Yahoshua. The Quran condemns and - decries and warns against the Christians who believe that these three are considered “ the three “ as partners or calls on the title or phrase of - “ THE THREE “ to say that Christians falsely believe in - “ The Three “ as - = Allah, Mary and their conceived son Yahoshua.
This is the only condemnation and objection to any form or elusion or insinuation or any hint of any Trinity believe in existence - in The Quran. The Holy Spirit is never mentioned in the context of " The Three " that Christians have attributed as partners with Allah.
If we take The Quran upon the intended message and upon the word of what it literally says and explains concerning what Allah and Mohammad are saying, that Christians believe that Mary and Allah are a part of the Trinity Doctrine.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah ) said: - Mary is mentioned alongside the Messiah, because some Christians took her as another god and worshipped her as they worshipped the Messiah. As for those who do not believe in that, they still ask of her what should be asked of God, to the extent that they say to her: Forgive me, have mercy on me, and so on, based on a belief that she will intercede with her son concerning that.
Sometimes they say: O mother of God, intercede for us with God. And sometimes they ask her for their needs, which should be sought from God, and they do not mention intercession. Others worship her as they worshipped the Messiah. - Al-Jawaab as-Saheeh (4/255-256).
The Holy Spirit is not mentioned in The Quran as a part of “ the three / { trinity } “ but the Quran makes its stand against The Trinity, only by the reasoning - of stating “ that God cannot have a son since he has no wife “
Sura. 72:3 - The truth is that - exalted be the Majesty of our Lord - HE has taken unto Himself neither wife nor son.
Tafsir al-Jalalayn - Disbelievers say, 'God is the third of three', gods, that is, He is one of them, the other two being Jesus and his mother, are - [those] who are fixed upon unbelief, shall suffer a painful chastisement, namely, the Fire.
The entire concept of The Trinity Doctrine involving The Father, Son and Spirit are completely absent and nonexistent in the Quran -
I, myself, personally - for me - I do not believe that The Father, Son, and Spirit are Three Separate, Individual, Distinct Persons - and I have found that The Trinitarians have altered, changed, added to and removed words from the Original Manuscripts in creating their Trinitarian Translations. - - I simply truly believe what the Original Manuscripts say - that these three are One. And not mentioned or described - as Three Persons.
As it explains in - Php 2:4 Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others. - :5 For think or regard this in / You / yourselves who { You whom also exist } or ( to ) - You who are - also in Christ Jesus.
6 Who, existed in the form / morph of God, thought it not robbery or seizing, taking (by force) being or eXisting equally God: - :7 But an ineffective / vain / voided / non-effect reputation Himself, taking or receiving the form / morph of a servant was in the likeness of men: = human nature.
Yahoshua admitted that He was not a CO EQUAl " not a CO ETERNAL " INDIVIDUAL " who was a - SEPARATE DISTINCT PERSON - from the Father. Nor a part of a Trinitarian concept, nor one in unity or agreement with the Father. But He was in the form / morph of God, - eXisting equally God: - :
But also at the same time - here on earth, as a man - God took on the MORPH - ONLY - JUST as a vain / voided / non-effect - reputation of Himself - and - MADE INTO - and taking or receiving - the form / morph of a servant, - He, THE FATHER - was MORPHED into the likeness of a man: / human. - Yahoshua defines the terms in His message - by saying that He does nothing of His own self - saying that I can do nothing whatsoever of my own doing. - I do not have any power of miracles, of my own " I do not have a will of my own - I CANNOT DO anything, whatsoever - OF MY OWN ... Saying that it is the father only, that does the miracles and the works.
He was not a distinct separated part of God, nor of a trinity in a partnership as a second PERSON of a triune CO EQUAL GODHEAD with a head and a tail. The word GODHEAD - = simply does not exist in the Bible. - He was not a separate identity or separate person " separated nor individual PERSON - from the father " His will was not " CO EQUAL " nor the same as " in the same WILL as Gods will. He has no power, no control, no miracles, no knowledge and there is no good, no honor and no REPUTATION in Him. -
Saying - why do you call me " good " ? -- " There is NO ONE good but God alone " - - Every time He spoke of his own will, power, majesty and desire and purpose " I find that He denied the trinity doctrine- Yet at the same time, he and the scriptures declare that He was God Himself - He was from heaven, and He PRE EXISTED / ORIGINATED - in the bosom of the father and EXITED from { out from } the bosom of the father to sit in the RIGHT of God until his enemies are a footstool " And the Trinitarian Translation denies and deletes and removes the words that say that He EXITED from { out from } the bosom of the father. = replacing the word ( OUT FROM ) the right of the Father - to say He only sits " AT " or " ON " the right hand.
I believe that Trinitarians and Muslims both deny and reject and or and simply have deleted or excluded from where He originated, in their scripture and translations. And that Trinitarians forever and eternally leave him sitting. dweling at or on the right hand of God.
-
onewithhim
- Savant
- Posts: 9690
- Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
- Location: Norwich, CT
- Has thanked: 1367 times
- Been thanked: 358 times
Re: Jesus believed One-True-God, he did not believe in Trini
Post #26[Replying to post 1 by paarsurrey1]
paar, you are absolutely right.
How can people think that Jesus was God when he constantly prayed to God, he said that he was obedient to God, he did and spoke the things God told him to do and speak, and he said to God (the Father) in prayer:
"...YOU [are] the only true God." (John 17:3)
People have to ignore ALOT to hold on to the belief that Jesus is God.
paar, you are absolutely right.
How can people think that Jesus was God when he constantly prayed to God, he said that he was obedient to God, he did and spoke the things God told him to do and speak, and he said to God (the Father) in prayer:
"...YOU [are] the only true God." (John 17:3)
People have to ignore ALOT to hold on to the belief that Jesus is God.
-
thomasdixon
- Apprentice
- Posts: 241
- Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2020 3:19 pm
- Location: usa
- Has thanked: 22 times
- Been thanked: 26 times
- Contact:
Re: Jesus believed One-True-God, he did not believe in Trinity
Post #27The Truth About Jesus’ Death
It is a long read but the truth must be told completely
https://tinyurl.com/yfezuvc8
It is a long read but the truth must be told completely
https://tinyurl.com/yfezuvc8
-
Falling Light 101
- Apprentice
- Posts: 192
- Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2017 3:16 pm
- Been thanked: 3 times
Re: Jesus believed One-True-God, he did not believe in Trinity
Post #28.
recently, this has been my main question to the Trinitarian world concerning - Hebrews 10 : 12
I have contacted and written to every faithful Trinitarian that I can contact, I have posted and expressed this question to all of the trinitarian world - this is the question that I have worked on day and night, working to assemble my question in the most clear and precise way.
and I have looked at the original manuscripts Greek - we find exactly what the manuscripts are saying - in Hebrews 10 : 12
Please notice the ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPT MESSAGE
Heb 10:12 - ORIGINAL GREEK MANUSCRIPTS
HIM NOW THE ONE FOR SIN,, OFFERED UP A SACRIFICE INTO THAT FOREVER SETTING DOWN “ εν IN “ THE RIGHT OF GOD
Translated word for word exactly -- here
:12
αυτος Him - δε now - μιαν the one - υπερ for - αμαρτιων sin - προσενεγκας offered up -
θυσιαν a sacrifice - εις into - το that - διηνεκες forever - εκαθισεν set down - εν IN -
δεξια the right - του of - θεου God
The manuscripts are saying - exactly =
:12 - HIM NOW THE ONE FOR SIN,, OFFERED UP A SACRIFICE INTO THAT FOREVER SETTING DOWN “ εν IN “ THE RIGHT OF GOD
Meaning that Jesus is - { FOREVER TO DWELL “ εν IN “ - IN THE RIGHT OF GOD ) - ACCORDING TO THE MANUSCRIPT ORIGINAL MESSAGE -
but the Protestant Trinitarian translation omits and changes this to say that
JESUS OFFERED ONE SACRIFICE FOR SINS FOR EVER,,,, - SAT DOWN ON THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD;
this is much different from the original that says that - FOR SIN,,, OFFERED UP A SACRIFICE INTO THAT FOREVER SETTING DOWN IN THE RIGHT OF GOD.
please, can the Trinitarian answer, when does Jesus be removed and taken away and loose his seat and position of being GLORIFIED to sit at the right hand of God ? ?
and why did Protestants change the Catholic translation by simply moving the punctuation mark of a " Comma " " , " instead of just translating the verse as the original message is transmitted in the manuscript.
in Hebrews 10:12 - it is very interesting about the Trinity Doctrine in that how the Catholic Douay Rheims and the Latin Vulgate contradict and disagree with the contrasting Protestant K.J.V.
1. Firstly - Let's look at - Heb 10:12 first from the - Catholic Douay Rheims and the Latin Vulgate
Heb 10:12 :12 But this man, offering one sacrifice for sins, for ever sitteth on the right hand of God,
2. and now - the Protestant K.J.V.
Heb 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
what we see here - in the enormous contradiction and massive difference between these two translations is that the Catholic Translation states that Jesus offered one sacrifice for sins, - then a comma " , " Jesus offered one sacrifice for sins, - - ( FOLLOWED BY A COMMA PUNCTUATION MARKING ))
the Catholic translations go on to say " for ever sitteth on the right hand of God, " - - so the Catholics explain the Trinity to say for sure - Jesus - for ever sitteth on the right hand of God, however the contradiction and difference is that the Protestant K.J.V. places a comma after the word " forever " - to say that Jesus offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, then the comma " , "
followed by - , sat down on the right hand of God.
The K.J.V removes the message that says that Jesus for ever sitteth on the right hand of God because eventually Trinitarians realized that their translation expressly says that Jesus is NOT forever sitting on the right hand of God.
again, let’s look at what the Protestant Translation changes compared to the Catholic predecessor
Protestant K.J.V. - - - After he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever ,,,,, - sat down ON the right hand of God;
vs the Catholic
Catholic Douay Rheims and the Latin Vulgate - - - Offering one sacrifice for sins,,,,, - for ever sitteth ON the right hand of God,
Protestants realizing that they cannot believe in a Trinitarian Jesus who forever sits ON the right hand of Trinitarian God - yet they cannot believe in a Jesus who is not a Trinitarian
so they adjust and simply move a punctuation mark to deny and diminish the very deity of Jesus that had been instituted in the confusing and contradiction of the Trinity Contradiction instituted by their Roman Catholic mother. Can Protestants to this day provide answer to the question using their Translation, - when does Jesus be removed and taken away and loose his seat and position of being GLORIFIED to sit at the right hand of God ? ? ?
do Trinitarians simply take this question to simply mean to them - “ when is the seating arrangement in heaven changed for the Trinitarian Jesus “
Heb 10:12 - FROM ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS
HIM NOW THE ONE FOR SIN, OFFERED UP A SACRIFICE INTO THAT FOREVER SETTING DOWN “ εν IN “ THE RIGHT OF GOD
Translated word for word exactly -- here - :12
αυτος Him - δε now - μιαν the one - υπερ for - αμαρτιων sin - προσενεγκας offered up -
θυσιαν a sacrifice - εις into - το that - διηνεκες forever - εκαθισεν set down - εν IN -
δεξια the right - του of - θεου God
The manuscripts are saying - exactly = :12 - HIM NOW THE ONE FOR SIN,, OFFERED UP A SACRIFICE INTO THAT FOREVER SETTING DOWN “ εν IN “ THE RIGHT OF GOD
Meaning that Jesus is - { FOREVER TO DWELL “ εν IN “ - IN THE RIGHT OF GOD )
ACCORDING TO THE MANUSCRIPT ORIGINAL MESSAGE -
FOR SIN,, HE OFFERED UP ONE SACRIFICE INTO THAT FOREVER SETTING DOWN IN THE RIGHT OF GOD
when does Trinitarian Jesus be removed and taken away and loose his seat and position of being GLORIFIED to sit at the right hand of Trinitarian God ? ? ?
their translations says - - :13 FROM HENCEFORTH EXPECTING UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE HIS FOOTSTOOL.
Mar 12:36 Sit ON my right hand, UNTIL I make thy enemies thy footstool.
Luk 20:42 Sit thou ON my right hand, - UNTIL I make thine enemies thy footstool.
Act 2:34 Sit thou ON my right hand, UNTIL I make thy foes thy footstool.
Heb 1:13 Sit ON my right hand, UNTIL I make thine enemies thy footstool?
Trinitarian Jesus is expecting that he will maintain his seat and position of being GLORIFIED to sit ON the right hand of God - until his enemies be made a footstool ..
I will do my very best to explain my question and present the reasoning as to why I ask this question.
My intent is never to be disrespectful or harmful to Trinitarian believers but to express and show the evidence
I love Trinitarian believers just as I love all
the truth is, the Trinitarian Translations always translate the passages of the Bible to always say that Jesus is
ON the right hand of God;
but never, ever once is the Greek word - " ON " ἐπί - epi - used to describe Jesus
as " ON " the right of God, in the manuscripts
for example Mat 26:50 ......... they laid hands " ON " ἐπί - epi - Jesus, and took him.
the Greek word " ON " is - - ἐπί - epi -
But - the definition of the Greek word { εν } - means - IN / in
this Greek word " εν - IN " is used a total of 2,720 total times in the New Testament.
that's - two thousand, two hundred, and twenty - total times.
the Greek manuscripts declare that Yahashua is - IN / εν = EN
IN / εν = EN, - in the right of power
IN / εν = EN, - the right of the throne
IN / εν = EN, - the right of the Father
IN / εν = EN, - the right of God
Heb 12:2 Christ is set - ἐν - en - - in the right of the throne of God.
Heb 10:12 Jesus is forever sat down - ἐν - en - - in the right of God;
1Pe 3:22 Who is gone into heaven, and is - ἐν - en - - in the right of God;
Rom 8:34 Christ in - ἐν - en - - in the right of God, who also maketh intercession for us.
Eph 1:20 Christ in - ἐν - en - - in his own right - ἐν - en - - in in the heavenly place.
Heb 8:1 Christ is set - ἐν - en - - in the right of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;
Heb 1:3 sat down - ἐν - en - - in the right of the Majesty - ἐν - en - - in the high.
this Greek word " εν " IN - is used a total of 2,720 total times in the manuscripts - and 47 total times in the translation the Trinitarian translators change this word to replace and change this word - into the word {( ON )} -
to replace the word " IN " with the word " ON " is something that is possible to do but very rarely because the true meaning and definition of the Greek word " - ἐν - En - mean literally in Greek - IN
you can replace the Greek word " IN " with the word " ON " - - for example the translation says
Mar 14:2 But they said, Not { ON } the feast day,
however, the Greek word here in " Mar 14:2 " is the Greek word " - ἐν - En - meaning literally in Greek - IN
and should more properly translate as - IN, - as the manuscripts say exactly
:2 But they said, Not { IN } the feast day, - not ON the feast day, the manuscripts say " IN the day of the feast "
because that the the matter was dealing with death and capture of Jesus wherein the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might take him by craft, and put him to death.
PRIESTS AND SCRIBES LITERALLY SAID :2 But they said, Not { IN } the feast day,
they did not say UPON or ON the feast day - - they stated - - :2 Not { IN } the feast day,
you can replace the Greek word " IN " with the word " ON " - however, this is not something that is done in very many examples because these two words have a completely different meaning. The Greek word " IN " means literally " INSIDE " inside of an idea or an object or location and this is where Jesus originates , it is - IN - God,
INSIDE God's Throne and Power and Spirit where Jesus originates
and the Greek manuscripts literally use the Greek word OUT FROM / EXITING " ἐξ - EX " when describing Yahashua exiting / departing out from and out God - the Greek word literally means " ἐξ - EX " =
OUT OF / FROM
Act 7:56 Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " the right of God.
Yahashua is both IN and OUT OF the right of God - He originates and dwells inside the spirit of God
Mat 26:64 see the Son of man sitting " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " the right of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
Mar 14:62 see the Son of man sitting " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " the right of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
Mar 12:36 The LORD said to my Lord, Sit thou " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " my right untill I make thine enemies thy footstool.
Mat 22:44 Sit thou " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " my right until I make thine enemies thy footstool
Mat 22:44 Sit thou " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " my right until I make thine enemies thy footstool
Luk 22:69 the Son of man sitting " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " the right of the power of God.
Act 2:34 The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " my right
Mar 16:19 and sat " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " the right of God.
Luk 20:42 Sit thou " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " my right
Act 2:25 for he is " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " my right
SO WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR JESUS TO BE IN AND OUT OF THE RIGHT OF GOD ?
WHEN HE APPEARS IN BODILY FORM - HE IS ALWAYS DESCRIBED AS LITERALLY DEPARTING DWELLING OUT OUTSIDE OF THE RIGHT OF GOD - externally - exterior - manifesting externally - the physical visible form of the invisible spirit
OUTSIDE OF GOD - appearing to man
WHEN HE IS IN THE THRONE - HE HAS ENTERED - DWELLING IN THE RIGHT OF GOD - UNSEEN INVISIBLE RETURN BACK IN THE SPIRIT OF THE HOLY WHERE HE ORIGINATES AS AN ATRIBUTE OF GODS SPIRIT
AND HE IS FOREVER IN THE RIGHT OF GOD - BUT CAN DEPART OUT OF THE RIGHT OF GOD - TO DWELL OUT OF THE RIGHT OF GOD.... IN BODILY FORM - VISIBLE
and can exist both at the same time - in and out of the right of God
NEVER - NOT EVEN ONE SINGLE TIME - do we find Yahashua sitting ON or AT the right HAND
of God. - NEVER EVER IN THE MANUSCRIPTS
i promise you this is truth
Heb 12:2 Christ is set - ἐν - en - - in the right of the throne of God.
Heb 10:12 Jesus is forever sat down - ἐν - en - - in the right of God;
1Pe 3:22 Who is gone into heaven, and is - ἐν - en - - in the right of God;
Rom 8:34 Christ in - ἐν - en - - in the right of God, who also maketh intercession for us.
Eph 1:20 Christ in - ἐν - en - - in his own right - ἐν - en - - in in the heavenly place.
Heb 8:1 Christ is set - ἐν - en - - in the right of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;
Heb 1:3 Christ is sat down - ἐν - en - in the right of the Majesty - ἐν - en - - in the high.
the Greek manuscripts always express Yahashua as both
- ἐν - en - - IN
and
" ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " God
the evidence is there in the manuscripts exact and precise - NOT EVEN ONCE - NOT ONE SINGLE TIME - do we find Yahashua EVER, ever sitting " ON " the right HAND of God - truly, not in one single verse within the manuscript of Greek - this concept simply does not exist.
the Greek word " ON " is - ἐπί - epi -
recently, this has been my main question to the Trinitarian world concerning - Hebrews 10 : 12
I have contacted and written to every faithful Trinitarian that I can contact, I have posted and expressed this question to all of the trinitarian world - this is the question that I have worked on day and night, working to assemble my question in the most clear and precise way.
and I have looked at the original manuscripts Greek - we find exactly what the manuscripts are saying - in Hebrews 10 : 12
Please notice the ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPT MESSAGE
Heb 10:12 - ORIGINAL GREEK MANUSCRIPTS
HIM NOW THE ONE FOR SIN,, OFFERED UP A SACRIFICE INTO THAT FOREVER SETTING DOWN “ εν IN “ THE RIGHT OF GOD
Translated word for word exactly -- here
:12
αυτος Him - δε now - μιαν the one - υπερ for - αμαρτιων sin - προσενεγκας offered up -
θυσιαν a sacrifice - εις into - το that - διηνεκες forever - εκαθισεν set down - εν IN -
δεξια the right - του of - θεου God
The manuscripts are saying - exactly =
:12 - HIM NOW THE ONE FOR SIN,, OFFERED UP A SACRIFICE INTO THAT FOREVER SETTING DOWN “ εν IN “ THE RIGHT OF GOD
Meaning that Jesus is - { FOREVER TO DWELL “ εν IN “ - IN THE RIGHT OF GOD ) - ACCORDING TO THE MANUSCRIPT ORIGINAL MESSAGE -
but the Protestant Trinitarian translation omits and changes this to say that
JESUS OFFERED ONE SACRIFICE FOR SINS FOR EVER,,,, - SAT DOWN ON THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD;
this is much different from the original that says that - FOR SIN,,, OFFERED UP A SACRIFICE INTO THAT FOREVER SETTING DOWN IN THE RIGHT OF GOD.
please, can the Trinitarian answer, when does Jesus be removed and taken away and loose his seat and position of being GLORIFIED to sit at the right hand of God ? ?
and why did Protestants change the Catholic translation by simply moving the punctuation mark of a " Comma " " , " instead of just translating the verse as the original message is transmitted in the manuscript.
in Hebrews 10:12 - it is very interesting about the Trinity Doctrine in that how the Catholic Douay Rheims and the Latin Vulgate contradict and disagree with the contrasting Protestant K.J.V.
1. Firstly - Let's look at - Heb 10:12 first from the - Catholic Douay Rheims and the Latin Vulgate
Heb 10:12 :12 But this man, offering one sacrifice for sins, for ever sitteth on the right hand of God,
2. and now - the Protestant K.J.V.
Heb 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
what we see here - in the enormous contradiction and massive difference between these two translations is that the Catholic Translation states that Jesus offered one sacrifice for sins, - then a comma " , " Jesus offered one sacrifice for sins, - - ( FOLLOWED BY A COMMA PUNCTUATION MARKING ))
the Catholic translations go on to say " for ever sitteth on the right hand of God, " - - so the Catholics explain the Trinity to say for sure - Jesus - for ever sitteth on the right hand of God, however the contradiction and difference is that the Protestant K.J.V. places a comma after the word " forever " - to say that Jesus offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, then the comma " , "
followed by - , sat down on the right hand of God.
The K.J.V removes the message that says that Jesus for ever sitteth on the right hand of God because eventually Trinitarians realized that their translation expressly says that Jesus is NOT forever sitting on the right hand of God.
again, let’s look at what the Protestant Translation changes compared to the Catholic predecessor
Protestant K.J.V. - - - After he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever ,,,,, - sat down ON the right hand of God;
vs the Catholic
Catholic Douay Rheims and the Latin Vulgate - - - Offering one sacrifice for sins,,,,, - for ever sitteth ON the right hand of God,
Protestants realizing that they cannot believe in a Trinitarian Jesus who forever sits ON the right hand of Trinitarian God - yet they cannot believe in a Jesus who is not a Trinitarian
so they adjust and simply move a punctuation mark to deny and diminish the very deity of Jesus that had been instituted in the confusing and contradiction of the Trinity Contradiction instituted by their Roman Catholic mother. Can Protestants to this day provide answer to the question using their Translation, - when does Jesus be removed and taken away and loose his seat and position of being GLORIFIED to sit at the right hand of God ? ? ?
do Trinitarians simply take this question to simply mean to them - “ when is the seating arrangement in heaven changed for the Trinitarian Jesus “
Heb 10:12 - FROM ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS
HIM NOW THE ONE FOR SIN, OFFERED UP A SACRIFICE INTO THAT FOREVER SETTING DOWN “ εν IN “ THE RIGHT OF GOD
Translated word for word exactly -- here - :12
αυτος Him - δε now - μιαν the one - υπερ for - αμαρτιων sin - προσενεγκας offered up -
θυσιαν a sacrifice - εις into - το that - διηνεκες forever - εκαθισεν set down - εν IN -
δεξια the right - του of - θεου God
The manuscripts are saying - exactly = :12 - HIM NOW THE ONE FOR SIN,, OFFERED UP A SACRIFICE INTO THAT FOREVER SETTING DOWN “ εν IN “ THE RIGHT OF GOD
Meaning that Jesus is - { FOREVER TO DWELL “ εν IN “ - IN THE RIGHT OF GOD )
ACCORDING TO THE MANUSCRIPT ORIGINAL MESSAGE -
FOR SIN,, HE OFFERED UP ONE SACRIFICE INTO THAT FOREVER SETTING DOWN IN THE RIGHT OF GOD
when does Trinitarian Jesus be removed and taken away and loose his seat and position of being GLORIFIED to sit at the right hand of Trinitarian God ? ? ?
their translations says - - :13 FROM HENCEFORTH EXPECTING UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE HIS FOOTSTOOL.
Mar 12:36 Sit ON my right hand, UNTIL I make thy enemies thy footstool.
Luk 20:42 Sit thou ON my right hand, - UNTIL I make thine enemies thy footstool.
Act 2:34 Sit thou ON my right hand, UNTIL I make thy foes thy footstool.
Heb 1:13 Sit ON my right hand, UNTIL I make thine enemies thy footstool?
Trinitarian Jesus is expecting that he will maintain his seat and position of being GLORIFIED to sit ON the right hand of God - until his enemies be made a footstool ..
I will do my very best to explain my question and present the reasoning as to why I ask this question.
My intent is never to be disrespectful or harmful to Trinitarian believers but to express and show the evidence
I love Trinitarian believers just as I love all
the truth is, the Trinitarian Translations always translate the passages of the Bible to always say that Jesus is
ON the right hand of God;
but never, ever once is the Greek word - " ON " ἐπί - epi - used to describe Jesus
as " ON " the right of God, in the manuscripts
for example Mat 26:50 ......... they laid hands " ON " ἐπί - epi - Jesus, and took him.
the Greek word " ON " is - - ἐπί - epi -
But - the definition of the Greek word { εν } - means - IN / in
this Greek word " εν - IN " is used a total of 2,720 total times in the New Testament.
that's - two thousand, two hundred, and twenty - total times.
the Greek manuscripts declare that Yahashua is - IN / εν = EN
IN / εν = EN, - in the right of power
IN / εν = EN, - the right of the throne
IN / εν = EN, - the right of the Father
IN / εν = EN, - the right of God
Heb 12:2 Christ is set - ἐν - en - - in the right of the throne of God.
Heb 10:12 Jesus is forever sat down - ἐν - en - - in the right of God;
1Pe 3:22 Who is gone into heaven, and is - ἐν - en - - in the right of God;
Rom 8:34 Christ in - ἐν - en - - in the right of God, who also maketh intercession for us.
Eph 1:20 Christ in - ἐν - en - - in his own right - ἐν - en - - in in the heavenly place.
Heb 8:1 Christ is set - ἐν - en - - in the right of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;
Heb 1:3 sat down - ἐν - en - - in the right of the Majesty - ἐν - en - - in the high.
this Greek word " εν " IN - is used a total of 2,720 total times in the manuscripts - and 47 total times in the translation the Trinitarian translators change this word to replace and change this word - into the word {( ON )} -
to replace the word " IN " with the word " ON " is something that is possible to do but very rarely because the true meaning and definition of the Greek word " - ἐν - En - mean literally in Greek - IN
you can replace the Greek word " IN " with the word " ON " - - for example the translation says
Mar 14:2 But they said, Not { ON } the feast day,
however, the Greek word here in " Mar 14:2 " is the Greek word " - ἐν - En - meaning literally in Greek - IN
and should more properly translate as - IN, - as the manuscripts say exactly
:2 But they said, Not { IN } the feast day, - not ON the feast day, the manuscripts say " IN the day of the feast "
because that the the matter was dealing with death and capture of Jesus wherein the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might take him by craft, and put him to death.
PRIESTS AND SCRIBES LITERALLY SAID :2 But they said, Not { IN } the feast day,
they did not say UPON or ON the feast day - - they stated - - :2 Not { IN } the feast day,
you can replace the Greek word " IN " with the word " ON " - however, this is not something that is done in very many examples because these two words have a completely different meaning. The Greek word " IN " means literally " INSIDE " inside of an idea or an object or location and this is where Jesus originates , it is - IN - God,
INSIDE God's Throne and Power and Spirit where Jesus originates
and the Greek manuscripts literally use the Greek word OUT FROM / EXITING " ἐξ - EX " when describing Yahashua exiting / departing out from and out God - the Greek word literally means " ἐξ - EX " =
OUT OF / FROM
Act 7:56 Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " the right of God.
Yahashua is both IN and OUT OF the right of God - He originates and dwells inside the spirit of God
Mat 26:64 see the Son of man sitting " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " the right of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
Mar 14:62 see the Son of man sitting " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " the right of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
Mar 12:36 The LORD said to my Lord, Sit thou " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " my right untill I make thine enemies thy footstool.
Mat 22:44 Sit thou " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " my right until I make thine enemies thy footstool
Mat 22:44 Sit thou " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " my right until I make thine enemies thy footstool
Luk 22:69 the Son of man sitting " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " the right of the power of God.
Act 2:34 The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " my right
Mar 16:19 and sat " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " the right of God.
Luk 20:42 Sit thou " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " my right
Act 2:25 for he is " ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " my right
SO WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR JESUS TO BE IN AND OUT OF THE RIGHT OF GOD ?
WHEN HE APPEARS IN BODILY FORM - HE IS ALWAYS DESCRIBED AS LITERALLY DEPARTING DWELLING OUT OUTSIDE OF THE RIGHT OF GOD - externally - exterior - manifesting externally - the physical visible form of the invisible spirit
OUTSIDE OF GOD - appearing to man
WHEN HE IS IN THE THRONE - HE HAS ENTERED - DWELLING IN THE RIGHT OF GOD - UNSEEN INVISIBLE RETURN BACK IN THE SPIRIT OF THE HOLY WHERE HE ORIGINATES AS AN ATRIBUTE OF GODS SPIRIT
AND HE IS FOREVER IN THE RIGHT OF GOD - BUT CAN DEPART OUT OF THE RIGHT OF GOD - TO DWELL OUT OF THE RIGHT OF GOD.... IN BODILY FORM - VISIBLE
and can exist both at the same time - in and out of the right of God
NEVER - NOT EVEN ONE SINGLE TIME - do we find Yahashua sitting ON or AT the right HAND
of God. - NEVER EVER IN THE MANUSCRIPTS
i promise you this is truth
Heb 12:2 Christ is set - ἐν - en - - in the right of the throne of God.
Heb 10:12 Jesus is forever sat down - ἐν - en - - in the right of God;
1Pe 3:22 Who is gone into heaven, and is - ἐν - en - - in the right of God;
Rom 8:34 Christ in - ἐν - en - - in the right of God, who also maketh intercession for us.
Eph 1:20 Christ in - ἐν - en - - in his own right - ἐν - en - - in in the heavenly place.
Heb 8:1 Christ is set - ἐν - en - - in the right of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;
Heb 1:3 Christ is sat down - ἐν - en - in the right of the Majesty - ἐν - en - - in the high.
the Greek manuscripts always express Yahashua as both
- ἐν - en - - IN
and
" ἐξ - EX " = OUT OF " God
the evidence is there in the manuscripts exact and precise - NOT EVEN ONCE - NOT ONE SINGLE TIME - do we find Yahashua EVER, ever sitting " ON " the right HAND of God - truly, not in one single verse within the manuscript of Greek - this concept simply does not exist.
the Greek word " ON " is - ἐπί - epi -
-
Falling Light 101
- Apprentice
- Posts: 192
- Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2017 3:16 pm
- Been thanked: 3 times
Re: Jesus believed One-True-God, he did not believe in Trinity
Post #29.
i have no sword and I have no power to force you
but that which is the original message of the intent of the Greek and Hebrew inspired by the Spirit Of The Holy
please help me break this violent addiction
i have no dope to provide to your local addicted Government Agency Of Liberal Democrats
i have no sword and I have no power to force you
but that which is the original message of the intent of the Greek and Hebrew inspired by the Spirit Of The Holy
please help me break this violent addiction
i have no dope to provide to your local addicted Government Agency Of Liberal Democrats
Re: Jesus believed One-True-God, he did not believe in Trinity
Post #30[Replying to paarsurrey1 in post #1]
All the faithful followers of Yahweh knew that Yahweh and Yahshua are one, echad. Never heard of any such thing as 'trinity' except in / from babylon/foreign religions .
Those foreign religions had lots of people, which constantine wanted to control, as did other unfaithful religious and politic leaders, so they brought the false concept and forced it on the people , on Jews and gentiles alike.
Looking up the origin of the trinity used to reveal that it was not from Scripture, not in Scripture, and not by the Will nor Purpose of the Father in His people/ never in true believers.
All the faithful followers of Yahweh knew that Yahweh and Yahshua are one, echad. Never heard of any such thing as 'trinity' except in / from babylon/foreign religions .
Those foreign religions had lots of people, which constantine wanted to control, as did other unfaithful religious and politic leaders, so they brought the false concept and forced it on the people , on Jews and gentiles alike.
Looking up the origin of the trinity used to reveal that it was not from Scripture, not in Scripture, and not by the Will nor Purpose of the Father in His people/ never in true believers.
