Search results

In light of your stand on the KJV, what do you believe about the "Bible Codes"? Please elaborate on this statement. Are you saying, for example, that there are no post 1881 translations that use the Masoretic text?

That is like me coming on this forum and proclaiming I am a oneness proponent, but really meaning "the true Oneness" of pure monotheism wherein YHWH is the ONLY true Elohim/God. Your words have been deceiving. Were you afraid you would not be accepted on this site because you do not profess the...

However, you have been hiding it ever since I started discussing anything with you. You have never said you believe in the Oneness doctrine. You ALWAYS say you are a trinitarian. The Apostles' Creed is acceptable since it does not teach oneness or trinity. The Athanasian Creed is a man made...

I agree, but this has nothing to do with Bible Codes. Which is your way of not dealing with how Moby Dick has similar info decoded in it. Any large volume of literature will have similar "codes".

This makes no sense. Who is "the man", Drosnin or McKay? Did the Almighty also put those "codes" in Moby Dick?

In reality, you do not know what you are showing me. In post #1969 you wrote, "And yes I do believe in the true Trinity: that Jesus is God the Son in that He is God (the Father) in human flesh through the virgin birth." Yet, here you wrote, "Jesus is the Father". However, as I showed you in...

What is your point? That the prophecy of Revelation will fail?

There you go mixing up verses again. First you talk about "Jesus" being outside of time, now you give me a verse (Isaiah 57:15) talkinging about Yeshua's Father to support your erroneous conclusion. Here is an excerpt about the author of The Bible Codes, Michael Drosnin; In 1997, in defense of...

Ephesians 4:10 says nothing about heaven being outside of time. Show me some verses that say heaven is outside of time and explain Revelation 8:1 as well. As for Bible codes, we can get them to say whatever we want.

This means that when the Son would be given his throne in the future from the writing of Psalm 45, that it would be his forever into the future. It has no relation to eternity past.

I did not change the position of the word loving. When I clicked reply, that is how it formatted your text. He did preserve His Word, but not in any particular English translation, especially not the KJV which has many errors.

The reason you only understand half of it is because the other half is not true. YHWH (God) is not a trinity and the Son is not part of the one true God. He is the Son of the one true God (John 17:3). God is one person, not three person's.

My opinion is based on Hebrew grammar, not on a desire to support the trinity. [See attached file] So, as usual, you read into the text what you want. Those texts say nothing about YHWH preserving His Word in the KJV. The fact that they have even ONE difference (they have many) refutes...

This is a bunch of lies, false assumptions, gross generalizations and wishful thinking.

It only says "everlasting Father" in biased translations. And please don't call yourself a trinitarian. You are not. Trinitarians firmly believe that the Father is NOT the Son and vice versa. The Spirit in all believers is the Father as well. That does not make us all the Father. Where are we...

I agree the Person of Yeshua matters more than the pronunciation of his name. However, the truth of what his name is matters as well. BTW, the name "Yeshua" is not a "Hebrew pronunciation". It is a heavenly pronunciation given to his Hebrew parents by YHWH through an angel (Luke 2:21). So you...

How ironic. It is Christians that call him by a different name than what he was given at birth. They even call him by a different name than they called him before the letter "J" was invented. He is a 100% male human being that has the indwelling Holy Spirit within him without measure. The...

JWs are certain Jesus is Michael. Is it OK for them to use Jesus whenever the Bible mentions Michael? If not, then your use of it is not OK either. In fact, I would say it is a sin to do so since it is a lie, albeit done in ignorance. Since I would never call YHWH "the LORD", I certainly would...

So, now you not only teach falsely that Jesus is YHWH, but you have the audacity to actually remove "YHWH" from a verse and replace it with "Jesus"?? That is an even graver mistake than removing "YHWH" to replace it with "the LORD". At least they did that out of a misguided reverence for the...

We are not told YHWH was IN those saviours. It may very well be that His Spirit moved them externally. Also, the concept of YHWH's people being His "body" as Yeshua's people are his "body" in the NT is foreign to the OT as is the belief that the YHWH of the OT is the Son. While the Jews...