Shadows and Realities

[gadar perets]

Well if we want to be totally honest, that statement is a BLATANT LIE.

We know from Exodus that the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob told Moses that He was "I AM THAT I AM ", and that Moses should tell the Israelites that "I AM" had sent him to deliver them. Furthermore He added this to establish this name: ...this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations (Exod 3:15).

We know from the Gospel of John that Jesus said that He was "I AM". For Christians that alone settles the issue. But the naysayers make Jesus a liar when they insist that Jesus never claimed to be God. And that is a very serious sin.

Exodus 3:14-15 reads, "And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and He said, Thus shall you say unto the children of Israel, I AM has sent me unto you. And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shall you say unto the children of Israel, YHWH, God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations." Therefore, the "I AM" is identified as "YHWH."

And what does YHWH and Yeshua say in Psalm 2:7? "I will declare the decree: YHWH has said unto me, You are my Son; this day have I begotten thee." This verse was also quoted in Acts 13:33 as a reference to Yeshua. YHWH is the Father of Yeshua. Yeshua is the Son of YHWH. Yeshua is not YHWH and the Son is not the Father. Therefore, Yeshua (the Son of YHWH) cannot be the I AM (YHWH). That alone should be sufficient to discredit the belief that Yeshua was claiming to be the "I AM." However, we can also see this in Acts 3:13;

The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified his Son Yeshua; whom you delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go.
​

This verse teaches us a very important fact. Yeshua is the Son of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Recall that Exodus 3:14-15 said the "I AM" was the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Therefore, Yeshua is the Son of the great "I AM".

It is trinitarians who lie by saying Yeshua is the great "I AM" and worship him as such. That is the sin of idolatry. A very serious sin.

 

[Triumph1300]

It is trinitarians who lie by saying Yeshua is the great "I AM" and worship him as such.

Are you a supporter of "Oneness" ?

 

[BreadOfLife]

That is what I said. Therefore, the interpretation of the vision is exactly what YHWH told Peter, NOT what you are telling me.

It's difficult to get through to a dense mind - so I'll "dumb" it down a little.
If you break into a house, hold a family hostage, rob them and kill one of them - you will be charged with murder. That DOESN'T mean that you won't also be guilty of breaking and entering, kidnapping and robbery.
Peter's vision lifted the dietary requirements of the Law. it made no mention of any of the other aspects of the Law[/QUOTE]

You mean the second God in your triune, polytheistic "Godhead".

The Godhead isn't "polytheistic". ONE God manifested as Three Persons.
It's still ONE What (God - but there are THREE Whos (Persons).

I know Mounce is trinitarian and does not hold my view. However, he fully understands that the Greek is NOT to be translated, "and the Word was God".

Mounce states that the verse should be read as: "and God was the Word"
This completely substantiates the Trinitarian position because verse 14 says that "And the Word became FLESH and made His dwelling among us."

EITHER way - the "The Word was God" or "God was the Word" shows that the manifestation in the flesh (Jesus) is GOD.

Correct, but I never said Yeshua claimed to be a human being whereas you said he claimed to be "God". He did no such thing.

Jesus called himself "Son of Man".
This is the SAME title given to Ezekiel (Ezek. 2:1), Daniel (Dan. 8:17) and ALL humans (Psalm 115:16)

So then, do you believe John 10:30 is teaching us that The Son is the Father? That is not what trinitarians believe. Nor is it what Yeshua meant. Are you a oneness proponent? That's even more ridiculous than the trinity.

Where are you getting this manure??
I never said that the Son was the Father. NEITHER did I ever even imply that I am a "oneness" proponent.

The Trinity consists of THREE distinct Persons.

If your interpretation of John 10:30 is correct, then Yeshua prayed that his followers would also become God as well (John 17:11, 22). Yeshua did NOT say "my Father and I are God". Nor did he say of believers, "that they may be God, even as we are God". The truth is, Yeshua wants us to be one in the same exact sense as he and the Father are one. That is NOT a oneness of being or deity, but of purpose, goals, etc.

They are ONE GOD - not the same person.
No WONDER you're so confused . . .

I see you did not bring up Rev 1:8 again. Do you now realize that is the Father speaking?
As for Rev 22:12, YHWH is coming as well.

Isaiah 40:10 Behold, Adonai YHWH will come with strong hand, and His arm shall rule for Him: behold, His reward is with him, and His work before him.
​

"His arm" is a reference to Yeshua. They are both coming in a sense. Yeshua will come as YHWH's representative. When he comes, it will be as though YHWH (Yeshua's Father and "God") will come as well. Yeshua will bring YHWH's reward/recompense with him and will do the work YHWH assigned him to do.

Rev. 1:8 states that the LORD GOD is speaking when He calls Himself "the Alpha and the Omega."
In Rev. 22:12, Jesus is saying the SAME thing and calles Himself, "the Alpha and the Omega."

You can dance ALL around this fact - but you will NEVER be able to change what is written.

 

[gadar perets]

Are you a supporter of "Oneness" ?

Absolutely not. The Father and the Son are two different beings and only one of them is the only true God.

 

[Triumph1300]

The Father and the Son are two different beings and only one of them is the only true God.

But the greatest difference between Jesus Christ and all other religious leaders is that,
according to Christians, he claimed to be God .

If this claim of his is false, the message of the gospel loses all credibility.

Thus, if Jesus is not God, then we have been lied to.

(But then, who am I ?
I might be wrong.?)

 

[gadar perets]

But the greatest difference between Jesus Christ and all other religious leaders is that,
according to Christians, he claimed to be God .

If this claim of his is false, the message of the gospel loses all credibility.

First you said, "according to Christians". Then you said, "this claim of his". That is two different claims, Christians and Yeshua's. His claim was that he is the Son of God. Christians claim he is God. I believe Yeshua's claim. The Gospel is that God sent His only begotten Son ... It is not that God sent Himself ... or that God sent God ...

Thus, if Jesus is not God, then we have been lied to.

(But then, who am I ?
I might be wrong.?)

Yes, you have been lied to and yes, you are wrong. However, it is not too late to undo the lies and embrace the truth.

 

[gadar perets]

It's difficult to get through to a dense mind - so I'll "dumb" it down a little.

This will probably be my last reply to you unless you show more maturity in your next reply to me. I have no desire to continue a discussion with a man who can't stop calling me names and saying all sorts of derogatory things about me personally rather than discussing the subject matter in a mature way.

Mounce

states that the verse should be read as: "and God was the Word"
This completely substantiates the Trinitarian position because verse 14 says that "And the Word became FLESH and made His dwelling among us."

EITHER way - the "The Word was God" or "God was the Word" shows that the manifestation in the flesh (Jesus) is GOD.

Mounce wrote, "In brief, its emphatic position stresses its essence or quality: 'What God was, the Word was' is how one translation brings out this force." He cites this translation because he agrees with it. Mounce showed that "and God was the Word" is simply the Greek word order, not the intent of the words.

Where

are you getting this manure??
I never said that the Son was the Father. NEITHER did I ever even imply that I am a "oneness" proponent.

That "manure" came from your own mind. I never said you said those things or implied them. I asked you if you believed those things. A yes or no answer would have sufficed.

The Trinity consists of THREE distinct Persons.

They are ONE GOD - not the same person.
No WONDER you're so confused . . .

It is not I that am confused. It is the trinity doctrine and the entire Christian world, who cannot even understand the doctrine or express it, that are confused. That is why they ALWAYS fall back on the "Its a mystery" line. If you have three distinct persons and each on is God, then you have three distinct Gods. If I have three distinct apples and each one is red, then I have three distinct red apples. To carry that analogy over to your view I would have "one red apple". Who is confused?

 

[BreadOfLife]

This will probably be my last reply to you unless you show more maturity in your next reply to me. I have no desire to continue a discussion with a man who can't stop calling me names and saying all sorts of derogatory things about me personally rather than discussing the subject matter in a mature way.

Sooooo, YOU telling LIES about me is a better approach??
Stop telling lies and I'll stop having to condescend to you.

Mounce wrote, "In brief, its emphatic position stresses its essence or quality: 'What God was, the Word was' is how one translation brings out this force." He cites this translation because he agrees with it. Mounce showed that "and God was the Word" is simply the Greek word order, not the intent of the words.

Doesn't matter.
"What God was, the Word was" perfectly illustrates the Trinitarian position as well.

That "manure" came from your own mind. I never said you said those things or implied them. I asked you if you believed those things. A yes or no answer would have sufficed.

THIS is what YOU said:
"So then, do you believe John 10:30 is teaching us that The Son is the Father? That is not what trinitarians believe. Nor is it what Yeshua meant. Are you a oneness proponent? That's even more ridiculous than the trinity."

This is an implication that I believe what you said above in bold.
Either learn how to communicate or admit that you falsely accused me - but don't play coy . . .

It is not I that am confused. It is the trinity doctrine and the entire Christian world, who cannot even understand the doctrine or express it, that are confused. That is why they ALWAYS fall back on the "Its a mystery" line. If you have three distinct persons and each on is God, then you have three distinct Gods. If I have three distinct apples and each one is red, then I have three distinct red apples. To carry that analogy over to your view I would have "one red apple". Who is confused?

WRONG.

As I sated before - it's NOT three "Whats" (Gods).
It's ONE What (God) and Three WHOS (Persons).

Some people falsely illustrate the Trinity by Water (liquid, ice and vapor). This is heresy of Modalism. God is not in 3 Modes because that would imply that He has to change from one to another.

God is ALWAYS Father, Son and Holy Spirit - always the same God.
It would be like having a glass of water that was ALWAYS liquid, ice and vapor - and therein lies the mystery.

 

[Pilgrimer]

Quick question:

Can a shadow be fulfilled to the point that it is abolished before the reality comes?

I haven't read through this thread so may have something more to contribute, but no, a shadow is predictive of a particular event and that event must come to pass for the shadow to be fulfilled.

In Christ,
Pilgrimer

 

[farouk]

I haven't read through this thread so may have something more to contribute, but no, a shadow is predictive of a particular event and that event must come to pass for the shadow to be fulfilled.

In Christ,
Pilgrimer

We do indeed now have fullness of revelation in Christ according to the NewTestament, and gloriously so.

 

[Pilgrimer]

Also, if Yeshua is the reality of those things, then we should easily be able to state how he fulfilled them.

I'm afraid it's not quite that simple. The field of study you are referring to is Biblical Typology and it's generally not a branch of study that most Bible students delve into but is usually relegated to academicians and historians ... unfortunately. The reason it seems to be so easy to grasp the symbolism of, for instance, Jesus' fulfillment of the Passover, is that it is expressly pointed out in Scripture as such. But there is enough typological fulfillment expressly pointed out in Scripture to lead us in further study of what is not expressly pointed out.

But just because all the fulfillment of the types and shadows of the Scriptures is unfamiliar to the general student doesn't mean those types and figures haven't been fulfilled.

In Christ,
Pilgrimer

 

[gadar perets]

I'm afraid it's not quite that simple. The field of study you are referring to is Biblical Typology and it's generally not a branch of study that most Bible students delve into but is usually relegated to academicians and historians ... unfortunately. The reason it seems to be so easy to grasp the symbolism of, for instance, Jesus' fulfillment of the Passover, is that it is expressly pointed out in Scripture as such. But there is enough typological fulfillment expressly pointed out in Scripture to lead us in further study of what is not expressly pointed out.

I agree.

But just because all the fulfillment of the types and shadows of the Scriptures is unfamiliar to the general student doesn't mean those types and figures haven't been fulfilled.

If a type or shadow is fulfilled, Scripture will be clear enough to lead us to that conclusion. However, we must not force a fulfillment simply because we believe Yeshua fulfilled all types and shadows.

 

[Pilgrimer]

If a type or shadow is fulfilled, Scripture will be clear enough to lead us to that conclusion.

If that were true Bible students would agree on everything. But I'm afraid Scripture is very much up to widely different interpretations, and they seem to be as common as noses.

However, we must not force a fulfillment simply because we believe Yeshua fulfilled all types and shadows.

And we also must not reject fulfillment simply because we believe Jesus has not fulfilled all types and shadows.

So an honest question: if Jesus has not fulfilled the fall feasts, why did their observance pass away along with all the rest? Can a shadow pass away without having been fulfilled?

In Christ,
Pilgrimer

 

[Pilgrimer]

Absolutely not. The Father and the Son are two different beings and only one of them is the only true God.

Have you ever thought that we are created in God's image and we have a triune nature, body, soul, and spirit, and yet we are one being. Why is it anathema to view God as a triune being. Are we created clay mortals more complex than God?

In Christ,
Pilgrimer

 

[gadar perets]

So an honest question: if Jesus has not fulfilled the fall feasts, why did their observance pass away along with all the rest? Can a shadow pass away without having been fulfilled?

That is the point of the OP. A shadow cannot pass until it is fulfilled. Several feasts have not been fulfilled. Therefore, they should not pass away. Christians who do not understand the feasts or their fulfillment have continually taught they are fulfilled and so have passed away for them, but they are not passed away in the eyes of Almighty YHWH.

 

[gadar perets]

Have you ever thought that we are created in God's image and we have a triune nature, body, soul, and spirit, and yet we are one being. Why is it anathema to view God as a triune being. Are we created clay mortals more complex than God?

In Christ,
Pilgrimer

I don't believe we have souls. I believe we are souls. The body + the spirit = a living soul (a person). God is a spirit. That is His nature. There is no "triune nature" in God. The Father is God and Yeshua is the Son of God. Two separate persons/beings.

 

[Pilgrimer]

That is the point of the OP. A shadow cannot pass until it is fulfilled. Several feasts have not been fulfilled. Therefore, they should not pass away. Christians who do not understand the feasts or their fulfillment have continually taught they are fulfilled and so have passed away for them, but they are not passed away in the eyes of Almighty YHWH.

But my friend, they have passed away. They haven't ceased to exist on the calendar, or where they were written in the Scriptures, but that's true of all the feasts. By "passed away" we mean they have ceased to be observed according to the Law.

When God brought an end to the Temple and priesthood, he didn't just remove those parts you contend have passed away and let the rest remain. He took them all away. The Feast of Trumpets, the Day of Atonement, Tabernacles, they have gone the way of Passover, Firstfruits and Pentecost. They have all ceased to be observed. They have all passed away.

You can say they have not passed away because you are attempting to observe them in some way, but Judaism continues to observe Passover in some form, but does that mean since Judaism is still observing a form of Passover that it has not therefore passed away? The passing away of the Law refers to the removing of those things that God had provided for the Law's observance, the end of the observance of what is called the Mosaic economy. All of it was removed, all of it ceased to be observed, all of it passed away, not some of it.

So again, how can the fall feasts have passed away in the same sense that the spring feasts have unless they too have been fulfilled?

In Christ,
Pilgrimer

 

[Pilgrimer]

I don't believe we have souls. I believe we are souls. The body + the spirit = a living soul (a person). God is a spirit. That is His nature. There is no "triune nature" in God. The Father is God and Yeshua is the Son of God. Two separate persons/beings.

I understand, I was just pointing out that we mere mortals are a perfect example of how a single being can have a triune nature without being three separate beings. I'll take your response as agreement on that point. Whether or not you think that could apply to God is entirely up to you.

In Christ,
Pilgrimer

 

[gadar perets]

But my friend, they have passed away. They haven't ceased to exist on the calendar, or where they were written in the Scriptures, but that's true of all the feasts. By "passed away" we mean they have ceased to be observed according to the Law.

When God brought an end to the Temple and priesthood, he didn't just remove those parts you contend have passed away and let the rest remain. He took them all away. The Feast of Trumpets, the Day of Atonement, Tabernacles, they have gone the way of Passover, Firstfruits and Pentecost. They have all ceased to be observed. They have all passed away.

You can say they have not passed away because you are attempting to observe them in some way, but Judaism continues to observe Passover in some form, but does that mean since Judaism is still observing a form of Passover that it has not therefore passed away? The passing away of the Law refers to the removing of those things that God had provided for the Law's observance, the end of the observance of what is called the Mosaic economy. All of it was removed, all of it ceased to be observed, all of it passed away, not some of it.

So again, how can the fall feasts have passed away in the same sense that the spring feasts have unless they too have been fulfilled?

In Christ,
Pilgrimer

This is all just wishful thinking. I have been celebrating the Feasts for 32 years. Sukkot is the highlight of my family's year. Not the man made holidays of Christmas or Easter. While the sacrifices on the feast days have passed away, the days themselves have not. They are either observed as memorials such as Passover or as future events such as Yom Teruah and Sukkot. Pentecost/Shavuot has only been partially fulfilled by the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in Acts 2 as the former rain. The latter rain is yet to come (a second outpouring of the Holy Spirit).
The anti-typical Jubilee trumpet has yet to be blown setting the captives of death free on Yom Kippurim. The Millennium has yet to begin fulfilling Sukkot. Yom Teruah has yet to be fulfilled when the 7 trumpets of Revelation begin to sound beginning the Day of YHWH .

 

[gadar perets]

I understand, I was just pointing out that we mere mortals are a perfect example of how a single being can have a triune nature without being three separate beings. I'll take your response as agreement on that point. Whether or not you think that could apply to God is entirely up to you.

In Christ,
Pilgrimer

What is the triune nature of God? Our body and spirit are not separate persons that make up our nature. They are simply part of us. Yet, the trinity makes the Son to be part of God's nature? Sorry, but that is not in Scripture.