No, you're trying to make what I've written fit your definition. Scripture says:
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in the flesh, Justified in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Preached among the Gentiles, Believed on in the world, Received up in glory. 1 Timothy 3:16
I was confirmed in the RCC 26 years before being born again and they are about as trinitarian as you can get. Their doctrine declares one God in three persons.
From Bing's on line dictionary:
manifestHebrews 10:5 says God the Father prepared a body for God the Son, declaring the preexistance of the Son of God.
[ˈmanəˌfest]
VERB
manifested (past tense) · manifested (past participle)
display or show (a quality or feeling) by one's acts or appearance; demonstrate.
"Ray manifested signs of severe depression"
synonyms:
display · show · exhibit · demonstrate · betray · present · evince · reveal · indicate · make plain · express · declare
(be manifested in)
be evidence of; prove.
"bad industrial relations are often manifested in disputes and strikes"
synonyms:
be evidence of · be a sign of · indicate · show · attest ·
[more](of an ailment) become apparent through the appearance of symptoms."a disorder that usually manifests in middle age"(of a ghost or spirit) appear."one deity manifested in the form of a bird."
Therefore, when He came into the world, He said: “Sacrifice and offering You did not desire, But a body You have prepared for Me. Hebrews 10:5
Jesus declared His equality with the Father as the presence of the Father within Him, even declaring His works as the works of the Father.
36 do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’? 37 If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me; 38 but if I do, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, that you may know and believe that the Father is in Me, and I in Him.” John 10:36-38
9 Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works. 11 Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father in Me, or else believe Me for the sake of the works themselves. John 14:9-11
Jesus couldn't have said it more plainly. He described Himself as the tabernacle of the living God, the Father manifested in flesh. He was a man born of a woman, yet simultaneously He is the Eternal God. Two persons who are One eternal God along with the Holy Spirit, One like Him, the eternal God manifesting in time (a spatial dimension and part of creation.)
The Case For The Triune GodHead!
- Thread starter GRACE ambassador
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Jesus didn't declare Himself equal with the Father. Nor is He the Father manifested in flesh. Paul said that no one has seen nor can see the Father. Therefore Jesus cannot be the Father.
14 That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ:
15 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords;
16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen. (1 Tim. 6:14-16 KJV)
Here Paul says that when Jesus comes He will show who is the ONLY Potentate. This ONLY Potentate no man has seen, not can see. That is not Jesus, that is the Father. John said,
No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. (Jn. 1:18 KJV)
Again, no man has seen God.
So, how do we reconcile the passage that says God was manifested in the flesh? It's how we understand the word God. God is a title. Just as Deity is a title. God is Deity, Jesus is Deity. God manifested in the flesh is Deity manifested in the flesh. The Son of God, who is Deity, was manifested in the flesh. The Father who is also Deity was not manifested in the flesh. As we've seen John and Paul both say that no man has seen the Father, God. As I posted before, we have two beings called God, one is the Father and one is the Son. We had Jehovah on earth calling down fire and brimstone from Jehovah in Heaven. That's two Jehovah's. One of them, the Son, was manifested in the flesh. The superior one or the ONLY Potentate was not manifested in the flesh
5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus,
6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, (Phil. 2:5-6 NAS)
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
God was also manifested by a burning bush, a wrestler and in the voice of the prophets. Your problem is arbitrarily equating one singular manifestation with being God incarnate.
Of course, none of this supports the trinity as you are only actually defending the man-is-God thesis. 2 a trinity does not make. Isaiah said these words but it does not make him God. Notice the singular, not plural, pronouns.
I am the first and I am the last, and apart from me there is no God.
Isaiah 44:6
tigger 2
Well-Known Member
Scripture does not say "God was manifested in the flesh"!
1 Tim. 3:16 ("He who was manifest in the flesh") - most Bibles.
As this is translated in the KJV it makes Paul say that Jesus is God “manifest in the flesh.”
Although the KJV translates 1 Tim. 3:16 with “God” as above, nearly all other translations today use a word which refers, not to God, but to Jesus: “he” (NIV; RSV; NRSV; JB; NJB; REB; NAB [‘70]; AT; GNB; CBW; and Beck’s translation), “he who” (ASV; NASB; NEB; MLB; BBE; Phillips; and Moffatt), “who,” or “which.” Even the equally old Douay version has “which was manifested in the flesh.” All the very best modern NT texts by trinitarian scholars (including Westcott and Hort, Nestle, and the text by the United Bible Societies) have the NT Greek word ὃς (“who”) here instead of θεὸς (“God”).Why do the very best trinitarian scholars support this NON-trinitarian translation of 1 Tim. 3:16?
Noted Bible scholar Dr. Frederick C. Grant writes:
“A capital example [of NT manuscript changes] is found in 1 Timothy 3:16, where ‘OS’ (OC or ὃς, ‘who’) was later taken for theta sigma with a bar above, which stood for theos (θεὸς, ‘god’). Since the new reading suited …. the orthodox doctrine of the church [trinitarian, at this later date], it got into many of the later manuscripts .....” – p. 656, Encyclopedia Americana, vol. 3, 1957 ed. (This same statement by Dr. Grant was still to be found in the latest Encyclopedia Americana that I examined – the 1990 ed., pp.696-698, vol. 3.)
A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament by the United Bible Societies (1971 ed.) tells why the trinitarian UBS Committee chose ὃς [‘who’ or ‘he who’] as the original reading in their NT text for this verse:
“it is supported by the earliest and best uncials.” And, “Thus, no uncial (in the first hand [by the ORIGINAL writer]) earlier than the eighth or ninth century supports θεὸς [“God”]; all ancient versions presuppose ὃς [or OC, “who” - masc.] or ὅ [“which” - neut.]; and no patristic writer prior to the last third of the fourth century [370 A.D.] testifies to the reading θεὸς. The reading θεὸς arose either (a) accidentally, through the misreading of OC as ΘC, or (b) deliberately....” - p. 641.
In actuality it appears to be a combination of both (with the emphasis on the latter). You see, the word ὃς was written in the most ancient manuscripts as OC (“C” being a common form for the ancient Greek letter “S” at that time). Most often at this time the word for God (θεὸς) was written in abbreviated form as ΘC. However, to show that it was an abbreviated form a straight line, or bar, was always drawn above ΘC. So no copyist should have mistaken ὃς (or OC) for ΘC, in spite of their similarities, simply because of the prominent bar which appeared over the one and not over the other.
What may have happened was discovered by John J. Wetstein in 1714. As he was carefully examining one of the oldest NT manuscripts then known (the Alexandrine Manuscript in London) he noticed at 1 Tim. 3:16 that the word originally written there was OC but that a horizontal stroke from one of the words written on the other side of the manuscript showed through very faintly in the middle of the O. This still would not qualify as an abbreviation for θεὸς, of course, but Wetstein discovered that some person at a much later date and in a different style from the original writer had deliberately added a bar above the original word! Anyone copying from this manuscript after it had been deliberately changed would be likely to incorporate the counterfeit ΘC [with bar above it] into his new copy (especially since it reflected his own trinitarian views)!
Of course, since Wetstein’s day many more ancient NT manuscripts have been discovered and none of them before the eighth century A.D. have been found with ΘC (“God”) at this verse!
Trinitarian scholar Murray J. Harris also concludes: “The strength of the external evidence favoring OC [‘who’], along with considerations of transcriptional and intrinsic probability, have prompted textual critics virtually unanimously to regard OC as the original text, a judgment reflected in NA(26) [Nestle-Aland text] and UBS (1,2,3) [United Bible Societies text] (with a ‘B’ rating) [also the Westcott and Hort text]. Accordingly, 1 Tim 3:16 is not an instance of the Christological [‘Jesus is God’] use of θεὸς.” - Jesus as God, p. 268, Baker Book House, 1992.
And very trinitarian (Southern Baptist) NT Greek scholar A. T. Robertson wrote about this scripture:
“He who (hos [or OC in the original text]). The correct text, not theos (God) the reading of the Textus Receptus ... nor ho (neuter relative [pronoun]), agreeing with [the neuter] musterion [‘mystery’] the reading of Western documents.” - p. 577, Vol. 4, Word Pictures in the New Testament, Broadman Press.
And even trinitarian NT Greek scholar, Daniel B. Wallace uses the relative pronoun ὃς (‘who’) in this scripture and tells us:
“The textual variant θεὸς [‘god’] in the place of ὃς [‘who’ or ‘he who’] has been adamantly defended by some scholars, particularly those of the ‘majority text’ school. Not only is such a reading poorly attested, but the syntactical argument that ‘mystery’ (μυστήριον) being a neuter noun, cannot be followed by the masculine pronoun (ὃς) is entirely without weight. As attractive theologically [for trinitarians, of course] as the reading θεὸς may be, it is spurious. To reject it is not to deny the deity of Christ, of course; it is just to deny any explicit reference in this text.” [italicized emphasis is by Wallace]. - pp. 341-342, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, Zondervan, 1996.
The correct rendering of 1 Tim. 3:16, then, is: “He who was revealed in the flesh ….” - NASB. Cf. ASV; RSV; NRSV; NAB; JB; NJB; NIV; NEB; REB; ESV; Douay-Rheims; TEV; CEV; BBE; NLV; God’s Word; New Century Version; Holman NT; ISV NT; Lexham English Bible; The Message; Weymouth; Moffatt; etc.
Even if we were to insist that those later manuscripts that used theos were, somehow, correct, we would have to recognize that it is the anarthrous (without the definite article) theos which we find. This is rarely, if ever, the form used for the only true God (when the known exceptions are taken into account - see MARTIN study). Instead, it either points to the probability that it is a corrupted OC (which of course would not have the article in the first place), or, less probable, but still possible, that Christ is being called “a god”
1 Tim. 3:16 ("He who was manifest in the flesh") - most Bibles.
As this is translated in the KJV it makes Paul say that Jesus is God “manifest in the flesh.”
Although the KJV translates 1 Tim. 3:16 with “God” as above, nearly all other translations today use a word which refers, not to God, but to Jesus: “he” (NIV; RSV; NRSV; JB; NJB; REB; NAB [‘70]; AT; GNB; CBW; and Beck’s translation), “he who” (ASV; NASB; NEB; MLB; BBE; Phillips; and Moffatt), “who,” or “which.” Even the equally old Douay version has “which was manifested in the flesh.” All the very best modern NT texts by trinitarian scholars (including Westcott and Hort, Nestle, and the text by the United Bible Societies) have the NT Greek word ὃς (“who”) here instead of θεὸς (“God”).Why do the very best trinitarian scholars support this NON-trinitarian translation of 1 Tim. 3:16?
Noted Bible scholar Dr. Frederick C. Grant writes:
“A capital example [of NT manuscript changes] is found in 1 Timothy 3:16, where ‘OS’ (OC or ὃς, ‘who’) was later taken for theta sigma with a bar above, which stood for theos (θεὸς, ‘god’). Since the new reading suited …. the orthodox doctrine of the church [trinitarian, at this later date], it got into many of the later manuscripts .....” – p. 656, Encyclopedia Americana, vol. 3, 1957 ed. (This same statement by Dr. Grant was still to be found in the latest Encyclopedia Americana that I examined – the 1990 ed., pp.696-698, vol. 3.)
A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament by the United Bible Societies (1971 ed.) tells why the trinitarian UBS Committee chose ὃς [‘who’ or ‘he who’] as the original reading in their NT text for this verse:
“it is supported by the earliest and best uncials.” And, “Thus, no uncial (in the first hand [by the ORIGINAL writer]) earlier than the eighth or ninth century supports θεὸς [“God”]; all ancient versions presuppose ὃς [or OC, “who” - masc.] or ὅ [“which” - neut.]; and no patristic writer prior to the last third of the fourth century [370 A.D.] testifies to the reading θεὸς. The reading θεὸς arose either (a) accidentally, through the misreading of OC as ΘC, or (b) deliberately....” - p. 641.
In actuality it appears to be a combination of both (with the emphasis on the latter). You see, the word ὃς was written in the most ancient manuscripts as OC (“C” being a common form for the ancient Greek letter “S” at that time). Most often at this time the word for God (θεὸς) was written in abbreviated form as ΘC. However, to show that it was an abbreviated form a straight line, or bar, was always drawn above ΘC. So no copyist should have mistaken ὃς (or OC) for ΘC, in spite of their similarities, simply because of the prominent bar which appeared over the one and not over the other.
What may have happened was discovered by John J. Wetstein in 1714. As he was carefully examining one of the oldest NT manuscripts then known (the Alexandrine Manuscript in London) he noticed at 1 Tim. 3:16 that the word originally written there was OC but that a horizontal stroke from one of the words written on the other side of the manuscript showed through very faintly in the middle of the O. This still would not qualify as an abbreviation for θεὸς, of course, but Wetstein discovered that some person at a much later date and in a different style from the original writer had deliberately added a bar above the original word! Anyone copying from this manuscript after it had been deliberately changed would be likely to incorporate the counterfeit ΘC [with bar above it] into his new copy (especially since it reflected his own trinitarian views)!
Of course, since Wetstein’s day many more ancient NT manuscripts have been discovered and none of them before the eighth century A.D. have been found with ΘC (“God”) at this verse!
Trinitarian scholar Murray J. Harris also concludes: “The strength of the external evidence favoring OC [‘who’], along with considerations of transcriptional and intrinsic probability, have prompted textual critics virtually unanimously to regard OC as the original text, a judgment reflected in NA(26) [Nestle-Aland text] and UBS (1,2,3) [United Bible Societies text] (with a ‘B’ rating) [also the Westcott and Hort text]. Accordingly, 1 Tim 3:16 is not an instance of the Christological [‘Jesus is God’] use of θεὸς.” - Jesus as God, p. 268, Baker Book House, 1992.
And very trinitarian (Southern Baptist) NT Greek scholar A. T. Robertson wrote about this scripture:
“He who (hos [or OC in the original text]). The correct text, not theos (God) the reading of the Textus Receptus ... nor ho (neuter relative [pronoun]), agreeing with [the neuter] musterion [‘mystery’] the reading of Western documents.” - p. 577, Vol. 4, Word Pictures in the New Testament, Broadman Press.
And even trinitarian NT Greek scholar, Daniel B. Wallace uses the relative pronoun ὃς (‘who’) in this scripture and tells us:
“The textual variant θεὸς [‘god’] in the place of ὃς [‘who’ or ‘he who’] has been adamantly defended by some scholars, particularly those of the ‘majority text’ school. Not only is such a reading poorly attested, but the syntactical argument that ‘mystery’ (μυστήριον) being a neuter noun, cannot be followed by the masculine pronoun (ὃς) is entirely without weight. As attractive theologically [for trinitarians, of course] as the reading θεὸς may be, it is spurious. To reject it is not to deny the deity of Christ, of course; it is just to deny any explicit reference in this text.” [italicized emphasis is by Wallace]. - pp. 341-342, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, Zondervan, 1996.
The correct rendering of 1 Tim. 3:16, then, is: “He who was revealed in the flesh ….” - NASB. Cf. ASV; RSV; NRSV; NAB; JB; NJB; NIV; NEB; REB; ESV; Douay-Rheims; TEV; CEV; BBE; NLV; God’s Word; New Century Version; Holman NT; ISV NT; Lexham English Bible; The Message; Weymouth; Moffatt; etc.
Even if we were to insist that those later manuscripts that used theos were, somehow, correct, we would have to recognize that it is the anarthrous (without the definite article) theos which we find. This is rarely, if ever, the form used for the only true God (when the known exceptions are taken into account - see MARTIN study). Instead, it either points to the probability that it is a corrupted OC (which of course would not have the article in the first place), or, less probable, but still possible, that Christ is being called “a god”
What does this quote have to do with the conversation or topic? For that matter, how does the opinion of a relatively uneducated man bear any weight against scripture?
You provide scripture that proves Jesus is God and in the same post declare the opposite. Which cult do you belong to?
Yes, Jesus manifested as a burning bush. Yes, He wrestled with Jacob and visited the tents of Abraham. Yes, His name is Yah, Yah havah in the giving of the Old covenant and Yah shua in the new. At least you've got that much right. Pray to the Lord Jesus for His Spirit, believing His promises and you may know Him too.
No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him. John 1:18
What exactly is it about "No one has seen God at any time," that you can't understand?
There is no sanity in the cults, nor can there be without the indwelling of His Spirit. You must be born again.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
You are just making this up from whole cloth. Asserting Jesus is God is not what this thread is about, right?
I didn't write the scriptures, and as far as I can see this thread is about cultists denying the divinity of Christ, attempting to redefine the trinity of orthodox Christianity with the carnal minded and somewhat feeble claims of Masonic cultists.
That's a interesting reply considering you hold to the doctrine of Modalism. Again, the issue is how people understand the word God. It's a title. If I said, the President, Americans would think of the American president. Would Mexicans think of the American president or the Mexican president? There is an American and Mexican president. Would you submit that they are one and the same being manifesting as two different presidents? As I've pointed out several times now, the Bible clearly shows us two Jehovahs.
Then the LORD rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven,
25 and He overthrew those cities, and all the valley, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and what grew on the ground. (Gen. 19:24-25 NAS)
We have one Jehovah one earth and one in Heaven. It is the one that was on earth that was manifested in the flesh.
tigger 2
Well-Known Member
In answer to your post 178 and again above:
Butch5 wrote above:
"In Genesis we have Jehovah on earth and Jehovah in Heaven. Clearly two separate beings.
'Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven;
25 And he overthrew those cities, and all the plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew upon the ground.' (Gen. 19:24-25 KJV)
"Here we have Jehovah on earth raining down fire and brimstone from Jehovah in Heaven. That's two Jehovahs."
..............................
Even if we assume this to be a correct translation, it seems obvious that it can be honestly interpreted as a simple repetition of the same person's name. That is, the very same person who produced the brimstone and fire, Jehovah, is also the one who rained it down upon these cities.
The explanatory note by trinitarian Dr. Young in Young's Concise Critical Bible Commentary, Baker Book House, for this verse states: "JEHOVAH...JEHOVAH, i.e. from Himself."
If that is the correct explanation, then this scripture might provide a somewhat parallel example: "And King Solomon gave to the Queen of Sheba all that she desired, whatever she asked besides what was given her by the bounty of King Solomon." - 1 Kings 10:13, RSV. (Cf. KJV.) Even though this is a very literal translation of the original manuscripts and the one personal name of King Solomon is actually used twice, we surely don't believe there were two different persons making up the one King Solomon! Wouldn't we interpret this as Dr. Young (and others) have done with "Jehovah" above? That is obviously how the Living Bible, NIV, MLB, NASB, etc. have interpreted it. ("King Solomon gave her everything she asked him for, besides the presents he had already planned." - LB.)
Another honest explanation for Gen. 19:24 given by trinitarian scholars themselves is that the use of the phrase in question ("from the LORD out of heaven") is in doubt. The very trinitarian New American Bible, 1970 ed. (Catholic) encloses the last part of Gen. 19:24 in brackets: "the LORD rained down sulphurous fire upon Sodom and Gomorrah [from the LORD out of heaven]." And the preface to the NAB tells us: "Doubtful readings ... appear within brackets." - p. 45, St. Joseph Edition.
That is why these trinitarian Bible translations have actually omitted that doubtful portion: ASV; AT; CEB; CEV; ERV; EXB; GNT; GW; ICB; Mo; NCV; TLB; NEB; NLV; NLT; REB. (E.g. “then the LORD rained down fire and brimstone from the skies on Sodom and Gomorrah.” - New English Bible.) And others, like the NJB, have rendered it “[Jehovah] rained down on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire of his own sending.”
Certainly no trinitarian Bible translation would do this if it could possibly be used as honest trinitarian evidence!
Butch5 wrote above:
"In Genesis we have Jehovah on earth and Jehovah in Heaven. Clearly two separate beings.
'Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven;
25 And he overthrew those cities, and all the plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew upon the ground.' (Gen. 19:24-25 KJV)
"Here we have Jehovah on earth raining down fire and brimstone from Jehovah in Heaven. That's two Jehovahs."
..............................
Even if we assume this to be a correct translation, it seems obvious that it can be honestly interpreted as a simple repetition of the same person's name. That is, the very same person who produced the brimstone and fire, Jehovah, is also the one who rained it down upon these cities.
The explanatory note by trinitarian Dr. Young in Young's Concise Critical Bible Commentary, Baker Book House, for this verse states: "JEHOVAH...JEHOVAH, i.e. from Himself."
If that is the correct explanation, then this scripture might provide a somewhat parallel example: "And King Solomon gave to the Queen of Sheba all that she desired, whatever she asked besides what was given her by the bounty of King Solomon." - 1 Kings 10:13, RSV. (Cf. KJV.) Even though this is a very literal translation of the original manuscripts and the one personal name of King Solomon is actually used twice, we surely don't believe there were two different persons making up the one King Solomon! Wouldn't we interpret this as Dr. Young (and others) have done with "Jehovah" above? That is obviously how the Living Bible, NIV, MLB, NASB, etc. have interpreted it. ("King Solomon gave her everything she asked him for, besides the presents he had already planned." - LB.)
Another honest explanation for Gen. 19:24 given by trinitarian scholars themselves is that the use of the phrase in question ("from the LORD out of heaven") is in doubt. The very trinitarian New American Bible, 1970 ed. (Catholic) encloses the last part of Gen. 19:24 in brackets: "the LORD rained down sulphurous fire upon Sodom and Gomorrah [from the LORD out of heaven]." And the preface to the NAB tells us: "Doubtful readings ... appear within brackets." - p. 45, St. Joseph Edition.
That is why these trinitarian Bible translations have actually omitted that doubtful portion: ASV; AT; CEB; CEV; ERV; EXB; GNT; GW; ICB; Mo; NCV; TLB; NEB; NLV; NLT; REB. (E.g. “then the LORD rained down fire and brimstone from the skies on Sodom and Gomorrah.” - New English Bible.) And others, like the NJB, have rendered it “[Jehovah] rained down on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire of his own sending.”
Certainly no trinitarian Bible translation would do this if it could possibly be used as honest trinitarian evidence!
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Nor do you cite the Scriptures in ‘supporting’ doctrine not found there. The trinity is not in the Bible - not the word and not the doctrine.
Jesus manifested as a burning bush? What a hoot. Jesus said his Father is the one true God. According to your doctrine, Jesus doesn’t know what he was talking about!
Now you're just lying and fall into the category of child of the devil. Good luck with that.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Non-sequitor. Being born again, which I am, does not change the words of God.
robert derrick
Well-Known Member
Created Christ believers say that God has no soul, neither can He.
And I will set my tabernacle among you: and my soul shall not abhor you. And I will walk among you, and will be your God, and ye shall be my people.
And I will destroy your high places, and cut down your images, and cast your carcases upon the carcases of your idols, and my soul shall abhor you.
The Lord God Jehovah's soul.
Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.
They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture. But be not thou far from me, O LORD: O my strength, haste thee to help me. Deliver my soul from the sword; my darling from the power of the dog.
The Lord Jehovah prophesying of His soul Jesus on earth and upon the cross.
Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.
The soul of Jesus not left in hell.
Jesus was the soul of Jehovah come in the flesh.
God the Word Jehovah spake of His soul in the Old Covenant, and God the Son allowed His soul to be pay the price for sin on the cross.
God the Father has no soul, neither God that is a Spirit, but only the Word Jehovah and God the Son have a soul.
Now, the created christ believers will need change their doctrine to now say God has a soul, or go to the Hebrew to show how soul is no soul when speaking of the soul of the LORD God. Or 'my' does not mean 'his'.
And I will set my tabernacle among you: and my soul shall not abhor you. And I will walk among you, and will be your God, and ye shall be my people.
And I will destroy your high places, and cut down your images, and cast your carcases upon the carcases of your idols, and my soul shall abhor you.
The Lord God Jehovah's soul.
Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.
They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture. But be not thou far from me, O LORD: O my strength, haste thee to help me. Deliver my soul from the sword; my darling from the power of the dog.
The Lord Jehovah prophesying of His soul Jesus on earth and upon the cross.
Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.
The soul of Jesus not left in hell.
Jesus was the soul of Jehovah come in the flesh.
God the Word Jehovah spake of His soul in the Old Covenant, and God the Son allowed His soul to be pay the price for sin on the cross.
God the Father has no soul, neither God that is a Spirit, but only the Word Jehovah and God the Son have a soul.
Now, the created christ believers will need change their doctrine to now say God has a soul, or go to the Hebrew to show how soul is no soul when speaking of the soul of the LORD God. Or 'my' does not mean 'his'.
robert derrick
Well-Known Member
In the beginning the One God Being God became Three Being God, and the Word Being Christ was with god, and was God, and was made flesh Being God come in the flesh, and called Jesus Christ, and no more known by His name Jehovah.
JW's are idolizing a name, not witnessing of the Lord Jesus.
Even as if the one sun became perfectly three side by side, so the One God became Three perfectly with each other.
And so, the Scripture is fulfilled in the risen Christ:
But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings.
Jesus was the One Being God in the flesh on earth, and the man Christ Jesus is the One Being God with resurrected body in heaven:
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
Only God could ever forgive sins on earth, and only the One Being God could ever pay the price for sins on the cross.
JW's are idolizing a name, not witnessing of the Lord Jesus.
Even as if the one sun became perfectly three side by side, so the One God became Three perfectly with each other.
And so, the Scripture is fulfilled in the risen Christ:
But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings.
Jesus was the One Being God in the flesh on earth, and the man Christ Jesus is the One Being God with resurrected body in heaven:
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
Only God could ever forgive sins on earth, and only the One Being God could ever pay the price for sins on the cross.
Last edited:
Similar threads
