Who died on the cross?
Did God died on the cross?
The Messiah Jesus of the OT/ NT?
A man?
The God/man? or a representative of the God Heaven?
Can you share any biblical and/or historical light on this matter? CM
Comments
-
@C Mc Can you share any biblical and/or historical light on this matter?
Crucifixion sign above the man Jesus was written in three languages. Four Hebrew/Aramaic words formed acrostic for יהוה (YHVH):
- Yeshua (YHVH Salvation)
- Ha (The) Nazarene
- V ("comma" connector) The King
- Ha (The) of Jews
Google Translate for ישוע הנצרי ומלך היהודים shows Jesus the Nazarene and the King of the Jews (where ו is translated as "and"). Note: Google Translate has Hebrew, but lacks Aramaic (sister language). Biblical Hebrew does not have a comma for connecting clauses so one use of ו Vav is "comma" connector while another use is "and" connector:
וְ is primarily a coordinating conjunction. It typically coordinates syntactically equal phrasal constituents and clauses. The translation values in English of some clauses that are connected suggest a relationship of main clause + dependent clause. In a number instances, וְ has no translation equivalent in English. In some contexts וְ functions as a discourse marker, i.e. the speech-initial וְ. In poetry it may function as a signal of text level transition.
Christo H. J. van der Merwe, Jacobus A. Naudé, and Jan H. Kroeze, A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar, Second Edition. (London; Oxford; New York; New Delhi; Sydney: Bloomsbury; Bloomsbury T&T Clark: An Imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, 2017), 418.
Sanhedrin members (Jewish Religious scholars) who wanted Jesus to die for blasphemy (interpreted Jesus deity claims to be יהוה as cursing יהוה) saw יהוה acrostic (of Holy יהוה Lord God's name) on crucifixion sign so wanted Pilate to change the wording.
John 19:16-22 (LEB) So then he handed him over to them in order that he could be crucified. So they took Jesus, and carrying for himself the cross, he went out to the place called The Place of a Skull (which is called Golgotha in Aramaic), where they crucified him, and with him two others, one on each side, and Jesus in the middle. And Pilate also wrote a notice and placed it on the cross, and it was written: “Jesus the Nazarene, the king of the Jews.” So many of the Jews read this notice, because the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city. And it was written in Aramaic, in Latin, and in Greek. Then the chief priests of the Jews said to Pilate, “Do not write ‘The king of the Jews,’ but, ‘He said, I am king of the Jews.’ ” Pilate replied, “What I have written, I have written.”
To me, יהוה The Word spiritual portion of Holy יהוה Lord God was hosted (dwelling) in a physical human male body (a man) as described in John 1:1-18. Yeshua's name means יהוה Salvation, who choose to show Holy יהוה Lord God Love by freely offering Holy human body as a substitutionary sin sacrifice = The Lamb of God, who is worthy to receive Glory, Honor, Praise, now & forever 😍
Thankful for Holy יהוה Lord God Love providing a way for any sinner who wants to be forgiven and cleansed from unrighteousness, needing only to believe Jesus is יהוה Lord God (risen from the dead) and agree with Holy יהוה Lord God (Father, Son, Breath the Holy) about sins (confess) for instant forgiveness followed by Holy Righteous cleansing, which results in experiencing immensity of Holy Righteous Fruit: Love, Joy, Peace, Patience, Kindness, Goodness, Faithfulness, Humility, Self-Control (words cannot convey awesomeness of Holy יהוה Lord God presence 😍 for one who is poor in spirit)
Caveat: Holy יהוה Lord God Love allows individuals to willfully turn away from loving Holy יהוה Lord God first with awful consequences: Ezekiel 18 & Hebrew 5:11-6:12 (LEB + יהוה) Concerning this we have much to say and it is difficult to explain, since you have become sluggish in hearing. For indeed, although you ought to be teachers by this time, you have need of someone to teach you again the beginning elements of the oracles of יהוה God, and you have need of milk, not solid food. For everyone who partakes of milk is unacquainted with the message of righteousness, because he is an infant. But solid food is for the mature, who because of practice have trained their faculties for the distinguishing of both good and evil. Therefore, leaving behind the elementary message about יהוה Christ, let us move on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and faith in יהוה God, teaching about baptisms and laying on of hands, and resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment. And this we will do, if יהוה God permits. For it is impossible concerning those who have once been enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and become sharers of the יהוה Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of יהוה God and the powers of the coming age, and having fallen away, to renew them again to repentance, because they have crucified again for themselves the יהוה Son of יהוה God and held him up to contempt. For ground that drinks the rain that comes often upon it, and brings forth vegetation usable to those people for whose sake it is also cultivated, shares a blessing from יהוה God. But if it produces thorns and thistles, it is worthless and near to a curse, whose end is for burning. But even if we are speaking in this way, dear friends, we are convinced of better things concerning you, and belonging to salvation. For יהוה God is not unjust, so as to forget your work and the love which you demonstrated for his name by having served the saints, and continuing to serve them. And we desire each one of you to demonstrate the same diligence for the full assurance of your hope until the end, in order that you may not be sluggish, but imitators of those who inherit the promises through faith and patience.
Keep Smiling 😊
-
Crucifixion sign above the man Jesus was written in three languages. Four Hebrew/Aramaic words formed acrostic for יהוה (YHVH):
Yeshua (YHVH Salvation)
Ha (The) Nazarene
V ("comma" connector) The King
Ha (The) of Jews
prime example of private interpretation by @Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus .... we now see nicely exemplified how to read things are read INTO a passage which are NOT in the text. That already suffices for showing plainly the error of the idea propagated .... and all the lengthy text following as "support explanation" is only "smoke and mirrors"
-
Who died on the cross? The plain and simple answer was given by Peter at Pentecost about 50 days after the crucifixion ... as recorded in Acts 2.
Acts 2:22-23 (KJV)
22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: 23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:
-
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus Crucifixion sign above the man Jesus was written in three languages. Four Hebrew/Aramaic words formed acrostic for יהוה (YHVH):
Yeshua (YHVH Salvation)
Ha (The) Nazarene
V ("comma" connector) The King
Ha (The) of Jews
@Wolfgang prime example of private interpretation by @Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus .... we now see nicely exemplified how to read things are read INTO a passage which are NOT in the text. That already suffices for showing plainly the error of the idea propagated .... and all the lengthy text following as "support explanation" is only "smoke and mirrors"
If truly Jesus is יהוה Lord God, would יהוה Jesus be Righteously Angry with "smoke and mirrors" dismissiveness ?
John 19:19 (SBLGNT) ἔγραψεν δὲ καὶ τίτλον ὁ Πιλᾶτος καὶ ἔθηκεν ἐπὶ τοῦ σταυροῦ· ἦν δὲ γεγραμμένον· Ἰησοῦς ὁ Ναζωραῖος ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων.
Greek => Literal translation (Latin INRI)
Ἰησοῦς => Jesus (Iēsus)
ὁ Ναζωραῖος => The Nazarene (Nazarēnus,)
ὁ βασιλεὺς => The King (Rēx)
τῶν Ἰουδαίων => of The Judeans (Iūdaeōrum)
Wikipedia Jesus, King of the Jews includes:
The title "King of the Jews" is only used in the New Testament by gentiles, namely by the Magi, Pontius Pilate, and the Roman soldiers. In contrast, the Jewish leaders use the designation "King of Israel".[2] Although the phrase "King of the Jews" is used in most English translations,[4] it has also been translated "King of the Judeans" (see Ioudaioi).[5]
Google Translate of English phrase "Jesus The Nazarene, The King of The Judeans" into Hebrew is "ישוע הנצרי, מלך היהודים" that has a comma. English "Jesus" translation into Hebrew ישוע has transliteration of Yeshua (that means יהוה salvation). Bibilical Hebrew does not have a comma (unlike Greek, English, and Latin) so changing comma to "and" (most used word in Hebrew Bible is the ו Vav connector, whose variety of English translations include "and") in phrase "Jesus The Nazarene and The King of The Judeans" has Google Translate into Hebrew as "ישוע הנצרי ומלך היהודים" that has יהוה (YHVH) acrostic for crucifixion sign:
Yeshua (Jesus)
Ha (The) Nazarene
V ("comma" connector) The King
Ha (The) of Judeans
The Bible Society in Israel published Hebrew New Testament (2000 copyright) has ״יֵשׁוּעַ מִנָּצְרַת, מֶלֶךְ הַיְּהוּדִים.״ for sign name in John 19:19 that Google translate into English "Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews." reminds me of KJV wording "JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS" (does not have יהוה acrostic along with ὁ Ναζωραῖος "The Nazarene" translated as "of Nazareth")
@Wolfgang Who died on the cross? The plain and simple answer was given by Peter at Pentecost about 50 days after the crucifixion ... as recorded in Acts 2.
22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: 23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:
Acts 2:22-23 (SBLGNT) Ἄνδρες Ἰσραηλῖται, ἀκούσατε τοὺς λόγους τούτους. Ἰησοῦν τὸν Ναζωραῖον, ἄνδρα ἀποδεδειγμένον ἀπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ εἰς ὑμᾶς δυνάμεσι καὶ τέρασι καὶ σημείοις οἷς ἐποίησεν διʼ αὐτοῦ ὁ θεὸς ἐν μέσῳ ὑμῶν, καθὼς αὐτοὶ οἴδατε, τοῦτον τῇ ὡρισμένῃ βουλῇ καὶ προγνώσει τοῦ θεοῦ ἔκδοτον διὰ χειρὸς ἀνόμων προσπήξαντες ἀνείλατε,
Greek word ἄνδρα for "a man" describes human male physical body, which is also used to describe two men (angels) in Luke 24:2 (SBLGNT) καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ ἀπορεῖσθαι αὐτὰς περὶ τούτου καὶ ἰδοὺ ἄνδρες δύο ἐπέστησαν αὐταῖς ἐν ἐσθῆτι ἀστραπτούσῃ. & Acts 1:10 (SBLGNT) καὶ ὡς ἀτενίζοντες ἦσαν εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν πορευομένου αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἰδοὺ ἄνδρες δύο παρειστήκεισαν αὐτοῖς ἐν ἐσθήσεσι λευκαῖς,
Greek lemma ἀνήρ (singular ἄνδρα & plural ἄνδρες) describes human male physical body while not describing spirit inside.
Keep Smiling 😊
-
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus ... I prefer English or German and plain language in forum exchanges ... your reasoning applies solely to Greek / Hebrew word spelling etc .... while you ignore the obvious plain content conveyed by the words.
Perhaps you think that those who read the words on the sign posted on the cross were theologians with a trinitarian background? maybe Peter's audience at Pentecost were theologians and graduates of modern day theological seminaries?
-
@Wolfgang I prefer English or German and plain language in forum exchanges ... your reasoning applies solely to Greek / Hebrew word spelling etc .... while you ignore the obvious plain content conveyed by the words.
Thankful for Holy יהוה Lord God inspiring words to be written in Hebrew/Aramaic (sister languages with similar grammar & word formation) and Greek. Thankful to be learning Hebrew exegetical insights while creating Logos Hebrew Morphology and Logos Aramaic Morphology visual filters with my desire to learn more original יהוה truth in original context. Concur reasoning about crucifixion sign יהוה acrostic is original language specific, does not appear in translation. FWIW: Psalm 119 acrostic alliteration also does not appear in translation. Easy to see in Hebrew Bible sets of eight verses beginning with Hebrew alphabet letter: Psalm 119:1-8 begins with Aleph, Psalms 119:9-16 begins with Bet, ...
@Wolfgang Perhaps you think that those who read the words on the sign posted on the cross were theologians with a trinitarian background?
Amusing as "trinitarian" does not describe Jewish Chief Priests who declared religious legal judgment of Blasphemy in response to deity expressions by Jesus. The Jewish Chief Priests who wanted Jesus to die were the ones who wanted Pilate to change crucifixion sign wording (get rid of acrostic for God's most Holy name), who later bribed Roman soldiers to lie about body of Jesus being stolen (if that actually happened, the Roman soldiers guarding the tomb would have been executed like the prison guards after Peter was released by God in Acts 12:6-19).
John 19:16-22 (LEB) So then he handed him over to them in order that he could be crucified. So they took Jesus, and carrying for himself the cross, he went out to the place called The Place of a Skull (which is called Golgotha in Aramaic), where they crucified him, and with him two others, one on each side, and Jesus in the middle. And Pilate also wrote a notice and placed it on the cross, and it was written: “Jesus the Nazarene, the king of the Jews.” So many of the Jews read this notice, because the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city. And it was written in Aramaic, in Latin, and in Greek. Then the chief priests of the Jews said to Pilate, “Do not write ‘The king of the Jews,’ but, ‘He said, I am king of the Jews.’ ” Pilate replied, “What I have written, I have written.”
Matthew 28:11-15 (LEB) And while they were going, behold, some of the guard of soldiers went into the city and reported to the chief priests everything that had happened. And after they had assembled with the elders and had taken counsel, they gave a rather large sum of money to the soldiers, telling them, “Say ‘His disciples came during the night and stole him while we were sleeping.’ And if this matter is heard before the governor, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble.” So they took the money and did as they were told, and spread abroad this report among the Jews until this very day.
@Wolfgang maybe Peter's audience at Pentecost were theologians and graduates of modern day theological seminaries?
Huh ? (question idea is ridiculous) Luke used Greek lemma ἀνήρ to describe appearance of two angels (messengers from God) for original audiences who love God (also used to describe Joseph being husband, ἀνήρ, of Mary). Peter's audience in Acts 2 were observant Jews gathered for annual Feast of Firstfruits per Leviticus 23:9-14 (ἀνήρ in Acts 2:22 is consistent with Luke 24:2 & Acts 1:10 for describing man appearance).
Keep Smiling 😊
-
Huh ? (question idea is ridiculous)
Your interpretation of passages with modern theology ideas is what is ridiculous ... not the question I asked which arose from your interpretation.
-
Wolfgang said:
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus ... I prefer English or German and plain language in forum exchanges ...
I am not against you sharing resources (I encourage you to continue) from whence you gleamed information to illustrate or to make your points, but please, do so without the unnecessary repetitiveness. What's the necessity for "יהוה" or "Holy יהוה Lord God" in every post and in almost every sentence ("vain repetition")?
It may give one the impression that you're trying to do more than respond to a question or leave a comment to a post. One may misconstrue your intentions as showing off your library holdings; trying to impress people with your knowledge (knowing a little about a lot of things); or highlight your advanced operational knowledge of the Logos Tools Sets.
I hope it's none of the above and just an old habit of sharing things where you think most people are not. I agree with Wolfgang, "I prefer English" (no German for me) and "plain language in forum exchanges." I am not trying to discourage you from showing your work with Greek and Hebrew, but summarize your points in "plain" everyday people's language. It would help with understanding and others maybe able to respond appropriately.
You don't have to impress, just communicate. Until then, keep smiling, @Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus, for Jesus. CM
-
@Wolfgang maybe Peter's audience at Pentecost were theologians and graduates of modern day theological seminaries?
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus Huh ? (question idea is ridiculous)
@Wolfgang Your interpretation of passages with modern theology ideas is what is ridiculous ... not the question I asked which arose from your interpretation.
To my view, your idea question 'maybe Peter's audience at Pentecost were theologians and graduates of modern day theological seminaries?' & subssequent reply assumes a faith belief idea point of view about how original Jewish audiences interpreted a word (man) in the middle of Peter's exhortation as being the most important point while ignoring the rest of Peter's words where Jewish hearts were convicted, repented, and believed Jesus is the promised & resurrected Jewish Messiah (Christ), exalted to the right hand of Holy יהוה Lord God (being One Spiritually).
FWIW: "modern" idea about "man" Jesus not being Holy יהוה Lord God (Being One Spiritually in Father & Breath the Holy) appeared as conspiracy theory (heresy) nearly two centuries ago
Arius first introduced the heresy into the Church
It remains to give some account of the heretical doctrine, which was first promulgated within the Church by Arius. There have been attempts to impute this heresy to Catholic writers previous to his time; yet its contemporaries are express in their testimony that he was the author of it, nor can any thing be adduced from the Ante-Nicene theology to countenance the desired hypothesis. Sozomen expressly says, that Arius was the first to introduce into the Church the doctrine of the ἐξ οὐκ ὄντων, and the ἦν ποτὲ ὅτε οὐκ ἦν, the creation and non-eternity of the Son of God. Alexander and Athanasius, who had the amplest means of information on the subject, confirm his testimony. That the heresy existed before the time of Arius outside the Church, may be true; though little is known on the subject. Although the heresiarch does not venture to adduce in his favour, the evidence of former Catholics, he and his supporters nevertheless speak in a general way of having received their doctrines from others. Arius too, appears to be but a partizan of the Eusebians, and they in turn are referrible to an excommunicated body, the Lucianists of Antioch. But here we lose sight of the heresy; except that Origen assails a doctrine, whose we know not, which bears a resemblance to it; nay, if we may trust Ruffinus, which has adopted the very same heterodox formula which Sozomen declares that Arius was the first to preach within the Church.
Before detailing, however, in what his heresy consisted, it may be right briefly to confront it with such previous doctrines, in or out of the Church, as may be considered to bear a resemblance to it.
Arianism
The fundamental tenet of Arianism was, that the Son of God was a creature, or in the scientific language of the times, ἐξ οὐκ ὄντων, of a substance that once was not; hence the Arians were called, οἱ ἐξ οὐκ ὄντων, or the Exucontii. It followed, that He only possessed a super-angelic nature, being made at God’s good pleasure before the worlds, after the pattern of the attribute Logos or Wisdom, existing in the Divine Mind, gifted with the illumination of it, and in consequence called after it; the instrument of creation and revelation; and at length united to a human body, in the place of its soul, in the person of Jesus Christ.
John Henry Newman, The Arians of the Fourth Century (London: J. G. & F. Rivington, 1833), 218–219.
Conspiracy discussion in Section V spans pages 218-253. Heresy offshoots appeared in the fourth century:
1. The Heresy of Subordinationism.—This heresy involved the Church in many terrific conflicts. It started with an attack on the coequality of the Son with the Father (Arianism), and ultimately impugned the dogma of the Consubstantiality of the Holy Ghost with the Father and the Son (Macedonianism, Pneumatomachians).
a) The salient tenets of Arianism are these: The Logos began His existence in time. Consequently there was a time when the Son of God was not (ἦν ποτε, ὅτε οὐκ ἦν). He is not begotten out of the substance of the Father, but made by the free will of the Father “out of nothing” (ἐξ οὐκ ὄντων γέγονεν ὁ λόγος). Though He existed before all creatures, i. e., before the beginning of time, the Logos does not exist from everlasting, and consequently He is not God, but a creature of the Father (ποίημα, κτίσμα τοῦ πατρός), exalted indeed above all other creatures, because God’s instrument in creating the world. Therefore He is “God” by grace (θέσει, μετοχῇ, καταχρηστικῶς), an intermediary being between God and the world (μέσος γενόμενος). Although it was possible for the Logos to sin, and His will was therefore alterable (τρεπτός, ἀλλοιωτός), still by a perfect use of free will and grace He actually became sinless.
To deceive the unsuspecting faithful, and to veil his errors, Arius played fast and loose with the words γενητός (i. e., creatus, factus) and γεννητός (i. e., genitus) and their contradictories ἀγένητος (i. e., increatus) and ἀγέννητος (i. e., ingenitus), just as the Semi-Arians later did with ὁμοούσιος (i. e., consubstantial) and ὁμοιούσιος (i. e., of like substance).
b) The heresy of Macedonius and Marathon was an offshoot of Semi-Arianism. Macedonius, who was Bishop of Constantinople about A. D. 360, taught that the Holy Ghost is a creature of the Logos, by whom, according to the Arian theory, all things were created. This completed the essential subordination of the Three Persons of the Divine Trinity, whom these heretics ranked as follows: A Great One = the Holy Ghost; a Greater One = the Logos; Greatest of all = God the Father.
Some Semi-Arians were willing to admit the Divinity of Christ; but they refused to forswear the heretical conceit that the Holy Ghost is a mere creature. It was for this reason that St. Athanasius called them “enemies of the Spirit” (πνευματόμαχοι).
Joseph Pohle and Arthur Preuss, The Divine Trinity: A Dogmatic Treatise, Dogmatic Theology (St. Louis, MO: B. Herder, 1915), 123–125.
Humanly wonder if Arius was participating in CD discussions, how much Arius would play "fast and loose" with words to twist them ?
1. The Teaching of Eunomius.—Eunomius, a pupil of Aëtius, about A. D. 360, espoused the cause of strict Arianism and became the leader of the so-called Anomoeans, who, in order to emphasize their belief that the Logos was a creature, substituted for the “ὁμοιούσιον” of the semi-Arians the harsher term “ἀνόμοιον” (unlike). In the interest of Arianism, whose premises he carried to their legitimate conclusions, Eunomius soon added to his Trinitarian heresy a theological one by asserting that there is nothing in the Godhead which can elude the grasp of human reason. The Eunomian heresy may be condensed into the following propositions:
a) Human reason conceives God as adequately as He comprehends Himself. According to St. Chrysostom, Eunomius declared: “Deum sic novi, ut ipse Deus seipsum,” which is merely a more pregnant formulation of the teaching of his master Aëtius: “Tam Deum novi, sicut meipsum, imo non tantum novi meipsum, quantum Deum.”
b) We acquire an adequate knowledge of the Divine Essence by forming the notion of “ἀγεννησία” (uncreatedness), which perfectly expresses that Essence. By sophistically interchanging the terms “ἀγένητος” (uncreated, derived from “γίγνομαι”) and “ἀγέννητος” (not generated, derived from “γεννάω”) Eunomius infected the unsuspecting masses with two heretical errors. On the one hand, he discredited the Logos, Who, (he said), being “γέννητος,” i. e., generated, is a mere creature of the Father; on the other hand, he employed the handy equivocation as a means to confuse the “ἀγεννησία” (innascibilitas) of the Father with the fundamental attribute of God, aseity (“ἀγενησία”), thus poisoning the minds of his hearers with Arianism.
c) Besides “ἀγεννησία” (uncreatedness), he said, there is no other divine attribute. All the other so-called attributes are mere synonyms comprised in the one notion of “ἀγεννησία.” A composite concept of God would necessarily imply composition in the Divine Essence, and therefore could not possibly be true. There is but one simple conception of God that corresponds to the simplicity of the Divine Essence, and that is “ἀγεννησία.”
Joseph Pohle and Arthur Preuss, God: His Knowability, Essence, and Attributes, A Dogmatic Treatise, Dogmatic Theology (St. Louis, MO: B. Herder, 1911), 113–115.
A salient Scripture counter-point to Arianism conspiracy & logical offshoots is John 17:5 (LEB) And now, Father, you glorify me at your side with the glory that I had at your side before the world existed. & John 17:24 (LEB) “Father, those whom you have given to me—I want that those also may be with me where I am, in order that they may see my glory that you have given me because you loved me before the foundation of the world.
Jesus remembered existing (God's Glory & Love) before time was created with physical realm, which is beyond human reasoning to understand.
@C Mc I am not against you sharing resources (I encourage you to continue) from whence you gleamed information to illustrate or to make your points, but please, do so without the unnecessary repetitiveness. What's the necessity for "יהוה" or "Holy יהוה Lord God" in every post and in almost every sentence ("vain repetition")?
Logos Bible Search for <Lemma = lbs/he/יהוה> in Lexham Hebrew Bible has 6,828 results. Searching LXX Swete for <Lemma = lbs/he/יהוה> finds translation by Jewish scholars into Greek as two words: Lord (Κύριος 6,076+) and God (θεὸς 248+). FWIW: "+" indicates Search analysis has "--" 400 results with search result highlighting in LEB while lemma is not highlighted in LXX Swete (so analysis leave a bit to be desired).
Leviticus 19:2 (LEB) “Speak to all the community of the Israelites, and say to them, ‘You must be holy, because I, יהוה Yahweh your God, am holy.
Phrase "Holy יהוה Lord God" succintly combines Leviticus 19:2 with יהוה translation into English. Leviticus 19:2 is consistent with Matthew 6:9
Keep Smiling 😊
-
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus, you argue and write way tooo smart for my little common logically thinking older man ... perhaps that is why you completely missed my point? 🙂
-
Thankful Holy יהוה Lord God planned a way to be spiritually ruling in Heaven while The Word portion of יהוה was dwelling in a male human body. Thankful for Holy sacrifice on the cross by Jesus: fully God (spiritually) & human (male body). Humanly Jesus experienced staggering variety of temptations from our spiritual adversary, but always chose to truly ❤️ Love Holy יהוה Lord God first so He never sinned. Thankful for numerous prophecies fullfilled, includes Genesis 3:15, Psalm 22 & Isaiah 52:13-53:12. Thankful my childlike faith that Jesus is יהוה Lord God 🙏has Holy Hope 😍 to see Father יהוה Lord God (Matthew 5:8 after worshipping יהוה); am looking forward to the wedding feast of the lamb in Holy Heaven 🙏 while enjoying Holy healing from my sins on earth 😍
Keep Smiling 😊
-
Thankful Holy יהוה Lord God planned a way to be spiritually ruling in Heaven while The Word portion of יהוה was dwelling in a male human body. Thankful for Holy sacrifice on the cross by Jesus: fully God (spiritually) & human (male body). Humanly Jesus experienced staggering variety of temptations from our spiritual adversary, but always chose to truly ❤️ Love Holy יהוה Lord God first so He never sinned. Thankful for numerous prophecies fullfilled, includes Genesis 3:15, Psalm 22 & Isaiah 52:13-53:12. Thankful my childlike faith that Jesus is יהוה Lord God🙏has Holy Hope 😍 to see Fatherיהוה Lord God (Matthew 5:8 after worshipping יהוה); am looking forward to the wedding feast of the lamb in Holy Heaven 🙏 while enjoying Holy healing from my sins on earth 😍
And how many of Peter's audience at Pentecost or even the apostles themselves would have thought or understood what you write here in the manner you write???? Did Jesus or his apostles ever teach others in such a theological manner???
I DOUBT THEY DID ... at least no such teaching is recorded in Scripture.
-
Jesus used plain, simple language the people understood and the things in nature. May I challenge you to do the same in these forums? Don't just smile like Jesus, teach and communicate like Him. This way we all can Keep Smiling for Jesus. CM
-
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus Thankful Holy יהוה Lord God planned a way to be spiritually ruling in Heaven while The Word portion of יהוה was dwelling in a male human body. Thankful for Holy sacrifice on the cross by Jesus: fully God (spiritually) & human (male body). Humanly Jesus experienced staggering variety of temptations from our spiritual adversary, but always chose to truly ❤️ Love Holy יהוה Lord God first so He never sinned. Thankful for numerous prophecies fullfilled, includes Genesis 3:15, Psalm 22 & Isaiah 52:13-53:12. Thankful my childlike faith that Jesus is יהוה Lord God🙏has Holy Hope 😍 to see Fatherיהוה Lord God (Matthew 5:8 after worshipping יהוה); am looking forward to the wedding feast of the lamb in Holy Heaven 🙏 while enjoying Holy healing from my sins on earth 😍
@Wolfgang And how many of Peter's audience at Pentecost or even the apostles themselves would have thought or understood what you write here in the manner you write???? Did Jesus or his apostles ever teach others in such a theological manner???
Acts 2:41 described 3,000 Jewish souls believing Peter's conclusion in Acts 2:36 (LEB + יהוה) Therefore let all the house of Israel know beyond a doubt, that God has made him both יהוה Lord and Christ—this Jesus whom you crucified!” ...
Septuagint translated Hebrew יהוה into Greek as two words: Lord (Κύριος) and God (θεὸς). Jewish synagogue reading of יהוה verbally said Adonai (Lord) instead of pronouncing God's most Holy name. FWIW: when desire a Holy prayer pause in my day, thinking about יהוה pronounced properly is effective 🙏❤️ Yahweh leaves out the accented middle vowel. Thankful for Introduction section in "The Scriptures":
THE RESTORATION OF THE NAME
“The Scriptures” differs radically from most other translations in that it does not continue in the tradition of substituting the Name of the Father and of the Son with names ascribed to gentile (pagan) deities. All the names of deities which in the past have been ascribed to the Father, the Son, and even used when engaged in worship, have been avoided.
One of the post-exilic-apostasies of Orthodox Judaism was the avoidance of the Name of the Almighty, the so-called Tetragrammaton, (the four lettered Name, יהוה). Because of this and a similar and continued suppression and substitution of the Name by the Church, much harm was done to the True Worship. When anyone enquires about this he is told: “The Name has been translated into English as LORD, as was similarly done in other languages.” This argument does not hold water. Guiseppe in Italian corresponds to Joseph in English; however, Guiseppe Verdi cannot be translated as Joseph Green in English, even if that is what it means in English! The proper name of any individual is not translated; it is always transliterated or transcribed in order to approximate its original pronunciation. We repeat: the proper name of any individual is simply not translated, more especially when we are dealing with the most important Beings in all the universe: the Most High (יהוה) and His Son (יהושׁע)!
We thought of rendering the Father’s Name (יהוה) as Yahuweh (pronounced with the accent on the “u”). On the other hand, John H. Skilton, The Law and the Prophets, pp. 223, 224, prefers “Yahoweh”. The Assyrians transcribed the Name as “Ya-u-a”, so Mowinckle and other scholars prefer “Yahowah”. Some scholars prefer “Yehowah”, because that is the way the Massoretes vowel-pointed it. (Whether this vowel-pointing of the Name was done in truth, or whether it was done to “disguise” the Name, in accordance with the instruction given in the Mishnaic text of Tamid vii.2 (=Sota vii.6), we do not know for certain. There is also the Rabbinical interpretation of the Massoretic text saying that the vowels e, o and a were added to the Name as a Qerě perpetuum which means that the reading of Adonai or Elohim is to be used instead. However, there is no definite proof that the Massoretes originally did it for this reason). Then again, many scholars favour the rendering “Yahweh”. In any event, we decided to avoid controversy over the precise pronunciation and to render it in Hebrew characters as יהוה.
Such a rendering has solid historical precedent in the earliest copies of the Septuagint (LXX), and has the merit of being true to the text, neither adding nor subtracting by means of substitutions (however well-intended). It has also the additional merit of allowing the individual reader to progress in his own quest for accuracy of pronunciation, as he seeks to obey the scriptural injunctions to call on the Name (Shemoth / Ex. 3:15; Yeshayahu / Is. 12:4; Yirmeyahu / Jer. 10:25; Tehillim / Ps. 105:1, 3;), to make it known (Shemoth / Ex. 9:16; Yeshayahu / Is. 64:1, 2; Ye-ezqěl / Ez. 39:7;), and to not obliterate or forget it (Deḇarim / Dt. 12:3, 4; Yeshayahu / Is. 65:11; Yirmeyahu / Jer. 23:27; Tehillim / Ps. 44:20)! In the same way the Messiah’s Name in Hebrew, יהושׁע, was chosen in order to avoid controversy. All the available authoritative sources and references are in agreement and clearly admit that our Messiah’s Name was יהושׁע (see for instance even Kittel’s Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, under Iesous). However, while some believe that this spelling should be pronounced in the traditional way, i.e. “Yehoshua” others influenced by the Murashu Text suggest the pronunciation “Yahushua”. So we decided to print the Name of the Messiah (יהושׁע) in Hebrew characters as we have done with the Name יהוה.
While the short post-exilic form “Yeshua” (ישׁוע) is popular with many (indeed the Shem Toḇ Hebrew text of Mattithyahu renders it as such, as also the Hebrew translation of the “New Testament” by F. Delitzch), Dr. Solomon Zeitlin refutes this form as the Name of our Messiah, favouring instead the form יהושׁע (see The Jewish Quarterly Review, Jan. 1970, p. 195). Also see Post-exilic Apostasy in the Explanatory Notes at the back.
At this stage we need to explain the word “Elohim” used in this translation. English translations have traditionally rendered it as “God” or as “god(s)” in most instances. However, the Hebrew word “elohim” is the plural form of “eloah”, which has the basic meaning of “mighty one”. This word is not only used for deity, but is used in Scripture for judges, angels and idols (Shemoth / Ex. 7:1; 9:28; 12:12; 22:8, 9; Tehillim / Ps. 8:5; 82:1, 6) besides being used frequently for the Almighty. The shorter forms, “el” and “elim” have the same basic meaning and similar usage. (Needless to say, the same applies to the Aramaic equivalents, such as “elah” and “elahin”). By transliterating these expressions instead of translating them as “Mighty One” we discovered a richness in them, and therefore retained them, with the exception of a few instances (noted in footnotes), where the translation of “mighty one” or “mighty ones” seemed more appropriate.
Institute for Scripture Research, The Scriptures (South Africa: Institute for Scripture Research (Pty) Ltd, 2000), xi–xiii.
@Wolfgang I DOUBT THEY DID
Appreciate honest candor.
@Wolfgang ... at least no such teaching is recorded in Scripture.
Thankful for your interpretation idea about teaching. Faulty assumption is Jesus not being יהוה Lord God. Believing faulty assumption idea prevents recognizing Jesus is יהוה Lord God teaching in Scripture: e.g. Philippians 2:5-11 (LEB + יהוה) Think this in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, existing in the form of God, did not consider being equal with God something to be grasped, but emptied himself by taking the form of a slave, by becoming in the likeness of people. And being found in appearance like a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, that is, death on a cross. Therefore also God exalted him and graciously granted him the name above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven and of those on earth and of those under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is יהוה Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Jesus = YehoSHUa יהושׁע that means יהוה Salvation. Paul's phrase 'existing in the form of God' is consistent with YehoSHUa praying in John 17:5 (LEB) And now, Father, you glorify me at your side with the glory that I had at your side before the world existed. & John 17:24 (LEB) “Father, those whom you have given to me—I want that those also may be with me where I am, in order that they may see my glory that you have given me because you loved me before the foundation of the world.
@C Mc Jesus used plain, simple language the people understood and the things in nature. May I challenge you to do the same in these forums? Don't just smile like Jesus, teach and communicate like Him. This way we all can Keep Smiling for Jesus. CM
Forum words lack facial puzzling look feedback. Thankful for communication challenge. YehoSHUa used language appropriate for original audience. 🙏 praying to write God's Truth in Love using kind words. 🙏praying to bring all my thoughts captive to glorify Holy יהוה Lord God 😍
'The Lexham Syntactic Greek New Testament, SBL Edition: Sentence Analysis' shows Matther 6:9-13 is one Greek sentence (LEB) Therefore you pray in this way: “Our Father who is in heaven, may your name be treated as holy. May your kingdom come, may your will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us today our daily bread, and forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors. And do not bring us into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one.
Keep Smiling 😊
-
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus .... so you wrote another impressive (impressing) post,, that communicates really nothing of essence to me.
-
@Wolfgang so you wrote another impressive (impressing) post,, that communicates really nothing of essence to me.
If truly Jesus is יהוה Lord God, would יהוה Jesus be Righteously angry with one teaching the man Jesus is not יהוה Lord God ?
If truly Jesus is יהוה Lord God, what died on the cross ?
Keep Smiling 😊
-
@Wolfgang wrote:
so you wrote another impressive (impressing) post,, that communicates really nothing of essence to me.
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus wrote:
If truly Jesus is יהוה Lord God, would יהוה Jesus be Righteously angry with one teaching the man Jesus is not יהוה Lord God ?
If truly Jesus is יהוה Lord God, what died on the cross ?
Since Jesus' and our heavenly Father ALONE is truly יהוה Lord God, instances in Scripture where people worshipped someone other than the Father as God clearly show how angry God will be with them !
Your above two questions are plain stupid in that they are based on a false idolatrous premise.
Keep Smiling 😊
There is nothing for you or about you to smile
-
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus wrote:
If truly Jesus is יהוה Lord God, would יהוה Jesus be Righteously angry with one teaching the man Jesus is not יהוה Lord God ?
If truly Jesus is יהוה Lord God, what died on the cross ?
@Wolfgang wrote:
Since Jesus' and our heavenly Father ALONE is truly יהוה Lord God, instances in Scripture where people worshipped someone other than the Father as God clearly show how angry God will be with them !
Your above two questions are plain stupid in that they are based on a false idolatrous premise.
We clearly agree worshipping something other than Holy יהוה Lord God causes Righteous anger => God's Just judgment (at the right time).
Puzzled by idea disconnect between "Since Jesus' and our heavenly Father ALONE is truly יהוה Lord God," and "Your above two questions are plain stupid in that they are based on a false idolatrous premise." First clause "Since ..." appears to agree with my "If truly Jesus is יהוה Lord God, ..."
Remember Jesus experienced Glory & Love of our heavenly Father God before time was created with physical realm (John 17:5 & John 17:24). Greek grammar lesson learned from John 1:1 is: The Word quality was being יהוה Lord God while יהוה Lord God was being more than The Word. Simply consistent with Holy God inspired wording: Eloheinu (plural God of us) and Elohim (plural God) => the Unique God.
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus wrote:
Keep Smiling 😊
@Wolfgang wrote:
There is nothing for you or about you to smile
Thankful for words of יהוה Jesus dwelling richly in me, which provides reason for my Smile to express: Be Rejoicing in יהוה Lord God always 😍
Keep Smiling 😊
-
Puzzled by idea disconnect between "Since Jesus' and our heavenly Father ALONE is truly יהוה Lord God," and "Your above two questions are plain stupid in that they are based on a false idolatrous premise." First clause "Since ..." appears to agree with my "If truly Jesus is יהוה Lord God, ..."
Puzzled? There is only ONE Who Alone is God ... and that One is both Jesus' heavenly Father and our heavenly Father.
If you have someone else beside that One whom you make God, then you actually have TWO Gods ... you call Jesus a liar or ignorant fool not knowing who alone is God ,..
-
-
@Wolfgang If you have someone else beside that One whom you make God, then you actually have TWO Gods ... you call Jesus a liar or ignorant fool not knowing who alone is God ,..
We disagree about definition of God. To me, the One Unique God has more than one voice, which is uniquely different than a human being.
Greek grammar lesson learned from John 1:1 is The Word quality was being יהוה Lord God while יהוה Lord God was being more than The Word. Thankful for the Pastor who taught my first year Greek class, which included John 1:1 explanation. Thankful for Biblical Greek exegetical insight:
The nominative case is the case that the subject is in. When the subject takes an equative verb like “is” (i.e., a verb that equates the subject with something else), then another noun also appears in the nominative case—the predicate nominative. In the sentence, “John is a man,” “John” is the subject and “man” is the predicate nominative. In English the subject and predicate nominative are distinguished by word order (the subject comes first). Not so in Greek. Since word order in Greek is quite flexible and is used for emphasis rather than for strict grammatical function, other means are used to distinguish subject from predicate nominative. For example, if one of the two nouns has the definite article, it is the subject.
As we have said, word order is employed especially for the sake of emphasis. Generally speaking, when a word is thrown to the front of the clause it is done so for emphasis. When a predicate nominative is thrown in front of the verb, by virtue of word order it takes on emphasis. A good illustration of this is John 1:1c. The English versions typically have, “and the Word was God.” But in Greek, the word order has been reversed. It reads,
καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος
and God was the Word.
We know that “the Word” is the subject because it has the definite article, and we translate it accordingly: “and the Word was God.” Two questions, both of theological import, should come to mind: (1) why was θεός thrown forward? and (2) why does it lack the article?
In brief, its emphatic position stresses its essence or quality: “What God was, the Word was” is how one translation brings out this force. Its lack of a definite article keeps us from identifying the person of the Word (Jesus Christ) with the person of “God” (the Father). That is to say, the word order tells us that Jesus Christ has all the divine attributes that the Father has; lack of the article tells us that Jesus Christ is not the Father. John’s wording here is beautifully compact! It is, in fact, one of the most elegantly terse theological statements one could ever find. As Martin Luther said, the lack of an article is against Sabellianism; the word order is against Arianism.
To state this another way, look at how the different Greek constructions would be rendered:
καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν ὁ θεός
“and the Word was the God”
(i.e., the Father; Sabellianism)
καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν θεός
“and the Word was a god”
(Arianism)
καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος
“and the Word was God”
(Orthodoxy).
Jesus Christ is God and has all the attributes that the Father has. But he is not the first person of the Trinity. All this is concisely affirmed in καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος. Daniel B. Wallace
William D. Mounce, Basics of Biblical Greek: Grammar, ed. Verlyn D. Verbrugge, Third Edition. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009), 27–28.
In the Indicative mood (truthful from the speaker's or writer's point of view) are four Greek tenses whose action can be in past time:
Indicative Mood:
Present: imperfective aspect, present time
Future: either perfective or imperfective aspect, expected action or state
Imperfect: imperfective aspect, past time
Aorist: perfective aspect, past time
Perfect: present state of affairs arising from a previous action
Pluperfect: past state of affairs arising from a previous action
Benjamin Chapman and Gary Steven Shogren, Greek New Testament Insert, 2nd ed., revised. (Quakertown, PA: Stylus Publishing, 1994).
The three "is" equative verbs in John 1:1 are imperfect tense, Indicative mood (continuing or progressive action in past time) so John 1:1 can be translated => In the beginning was being the Word, and the Word was being with God, and the Word was being God.
The Word quality was being God is simply consistent with Holy God inspired wording: Eloheinu (plural God of us) and Elohim (plural God) => the Unique God. Also is consistent with Jesus experiencing God's Glory & Love before time was created with physical realm: John 17:5 & John 17:24
Uniqueness of One God is having plural voices while always being One spiritually: who was, who is, who is to come (meaning of Hebrew יהוה)
Keep Smiling 😊
-
@Wolfgang If you have someone else beside that One whom you make God, then you actually have TWO Gods ... you call Jesus a liar or ignorant fool not knowing who alone is God ,..
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus wrote
We disagree about definition of God. To me, the One Unique God has more than one voice, which is uniquely different than a human being.
So you just go by your own definition of terms and words .... makes an exchange basically impossible, since your definition of terms does not apply to others or in general.
The rest of your above post was unnecessary and did not communicate anything relevant to a fruitful exchange.
-
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus wrote
We disagree about definition of God. To me, the One Unique God has more than one voice, which is uniquely different than a human being.
@Wolfgang So you just go by your own definition of terms and words .... makes an exchange basically impossible, since your definition of terms does not apply to others or in general.
@Wolfgang The rest of your above post was unnecessary and did not communicate anything relevant to a fruitful exchange.
Thankful my One Unique God definition is consistent with Holy יהוה God inspired wording (& my spiritual experiences). Searching my Logos Bible Software library for ((divine,quality) WITHIN {Milestone <jn1.1>}) OR (<jn1.1> WITHIN 7 WORDS (divine,quality)) finds over 600 more resources. Hence, we disagree about my Scripture consistent definition of Holy יהוה God lacking applicability 'to others or in general'.
Thankful for Unique Holy God designing human beings so we freely choose what to really, really, really love the most. Also one human being cannot chose what to love for another. Thankful to see the Image of God in your picture. You are special. God Loves You 🙏 Does Holy God like our sins ? No. God Loves us. ❤️
John 3:16-21 (LEB) For in this way God loved the world, so that he gave his one and only Son, in order that everyone who believes in him will not perish, but will have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world in order that he should judge the world, but in order that the world should be saved through him. The one who believes in him is not judged, but the one who does not believe has already been judged, because he has not believed in the name of the one and only Son of God. And this is the judgment: that the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light, because their deeds were evil. For everyone who practices evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds be exposed. But the one who practices the truth comes to the light, in order that his deeds may be revealed, that they are done in God.
Thankful for Love letter of 1st John ❤️We Love God because God first Loved us. YehoSHUa (Jesus) name means יהוה Salvation. YehoSHUa lovingly offered his Holy human body as sin sacrifice for us => freely available for Holy salvation in One Unique God. Each human freely chooses what to love most, which affects our beliefs & subsequent deeds. Thankful to see beautiful red shades in the sky at sunrise & sunset that remind me of God's Love 😍
Keep Smiling 😊
-
Thankful my One Unique God definition is consistent with Holy יהוה God inspired wording (& my spiritual experiences).
As has been shown many times in different exchanges by several posters here, YOUR "One Unique God" definition is NOT consistent with the actual wording found in the inspired text wording in Scripture; however, it is in harmony with YOUR "belief view".
YOU think and have convinced yourself that your belief view = God's inspired wording, but when someone else points out that such is not the case, you claim that such is merely that person's belief view but is inconsistent with God's inspired wording. "Nice" try to hypocritically dismiss the other person and their understanding of God's word ... while indirectly feeding your self-deception and self-elevated your interpretation to equality with being God-inspired.
As you can see, I am not trying to code my words in "sweet talk" thereby giving a false impression of, "Look at how kind and humble I am amidst my impressive knowledge of how to do fancy Logos software searches in Hebrew and Greek".
-
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus Thankful my One Unique God definition is consistent with Holy יהוה God inspired wording (& my spiritual experiences).
@Wolfgang As has been shown many times in different exchanges by several posters here, YOUR "One Unique God" definition is NOT consistent with the actual wording found in the inspired text wording in Scripture; however, it is in harmony with YOUR "belief view".
Another description embedding @Wolfgang ideas as though they were mine (inaccuracy reminds me of Matthew 7:1-5)
שְׁמַ֖ע יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל יְהוָ֥ה אֱלֹהֵ֖ינוּ יְהוָ֥ה׀ אֶחָֽד׃
שְׁמַ֖ע sh'-MA = Hear & Obey (singular Imperative verbal action)
יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל yis-ra-AYL = Israel (singular)
יְהוָ֥ה a-do-NAI (singular) Jews say a-do-NAI (Lord) when reading יְהוָ֥ה (God's Holy Name)
אֱלֹהֵ֖ינוּ e-lo-HAY-nu (plural God noun + plural pronoun suffix "of us")
יְהוָ֥ה a-do-NAI (singular) Jews say a-do-NAI (Lord) when reading יְהוָ֥ה (God's Holy Name)
אֶחָֽד e-KHAD = Unique (singular)
Deuteronomy 6:4 (LEB) “Hear, Israel, Yahweh our God, Yahweh is unique.
Holy יהוה Lord God truly inspired e-lo-HAY-nu to be plural, consistent with us & our => Genesis 1:22 (LEB) And God said, “Let us make humankind in our image and according to our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of heaven, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every moving thing that moves upon the earth.”
In different places, Genesis has Elohim (plural) and Elohe (singular) describing plural unified God: One Spiritual Being, who has more than one voice = Unique God. Humankind design has one voice with one spirit and one body.
Keep Smiling 😊
-
Another description embedding @Wolfgang ideas as though they were mine (inaccuracy reminds me of Matthew 7:1-5)
False accusation ... I indicated who wrote what ! (PS. This forum software's functionality for quoting is rather poor)
שְׁמַ֖ע יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל יְהוָ֥ה אֱלֹהֵ֖ינוּ יְהוָ֥ה׀ אֶחָֽד׃
שְׁמַ֖ע sh'-MA = Hear & Obey (singular Imperative verbal action)
יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל yis-ra-AYL = Israel (singular)
יְהוָ֥ה a-do-NAI (singular) Jews say a-do-NAI (Lord) when reading יְהוָ֥ה (God's Holy Name)
אֱלֹהֵ֖ינוּ e-lo-HAY-nu (plural God noun + plural pronoun suffix "of us")
יְהוָ֥ה a-do-NAI (singular) Jews say a-do-NAI (Lord) when reading יְהוָ֥ה (God's Holy Name)
אֶחָֽד e-KHAD = Unique (singular)
Deuteronomy 6:4 (LEB) “Hear, Israel, Yahweh our God, Yahweh is unique.
Holy יהוה Lord God truly inspired e-lo-HAY-nu to be plural, consistent with us & our => Genesis 1:22 (LEB) And God said, “Let us make humankind in our image and according to our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of heaven, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every moving thing that moves upon the earth.”
In different places, Genesis has Elohim (plural) and Elohe (singular) describing plural unified God: One Spiritual Being, who has more than one voice = Unique God. Humankind design has one voice with one spirit and one body.
A long-winded comment that is essentially proving my point ... it exemplifies YOUR particular interpretation in order to "prooftext" YOUR particular "Polyvoices-God" Belief opinion.
-
Thankful for Proverbs chapters 12 & 21 😍
@Wolfgang A long-winded comment that is essentially proving my point ... it exemplifies YOUR particular interpretation in order to "prooftext" YOUR particular "Polyvoices-God" Belief opinion.
No objective idea(s) to discuss, only unsubstantiated opinion.
Keep Smiling 😊
-
@Wolfgang wrote (in reply to 😊):
A long-winded comment that is essentially proving my point ... it exemplifies YOUR particular interpretation in order to "prooftext" YOUR particular "Polyvoices-God" Belief opinion.
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus replied:
No objective idea(s) to discuss, only unsubstantiated opinion.
Indeed ..
I've tried to point that out about your "One Unique Holy Three Voices God" idea ... it is only an unsubstantiated interpretation opinion. Unfortunately, you do not even realize that your interpretation opinion of certain terms fabricates not just "three voices" but really "three Gods", no matter how often you then try to paint over these THREE Gods with your "One Unique" opinion idea.
-
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus replied:
No objective idea(s) to discuss, only unsubstantiated opinion.
@Wolfgang Indeed ..
@Wolfgang I've tried to point that out about your "One Unique Holy Three Voices God" idea ... it is only an unsubstantiated interpretation opinion. Unfortunately, you do not even realize that your interpretation opinion of certain terms fabricates not just "three voices" but really "three Gods", no matter how often you then try to paint over these THREE Gods with your "One Unique" opinion idea.
Unsubstantiated is assumption the Spiritual God Being who designed & created humans has one voice human limitation (cannot be Unique).
If Holy God inspired words had been consistently singular to describe One God, then my interpretation of God would agree with you (shows your belief about One God is more important to you than your professional language experience, a form of heart deception OR intellectual suicide).
Indeed your interpretation cannot explain Jesus experiencing God's Glory & Love (John 17:5 & John 17:24) before physical realm creation. Also cannot explain original Jewish audience hearing "I AM" to identify eternal God Spirit inside a man body - John 8:58 (LEB) Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly I say to you, before Abraham was, I am!”
Repeatable rules of Greek grammar about equative verbs (e.g. εἰμί) infer "What God was, The Word was" while "One Unique Holy Three Voices God" is more than singular Voice of The Word. Thankful for Unique God showing immense Love for us by offering Holy man body on the cross as substitutionary sin sacrifice: The Lamb of God. The Word spiritual portion of One God continued to exist after physical man body died. Thankful for physical body resurrection hosting The Word => King of Kings, Lord of Lords, King Righteousness, ... who will correctly judge every human per individual choices what to really, really, really love the most (expressed by actions & words).
Keep Smiling 😊
-
@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus, all your super smart scholarly theological ideas which have become the basis for your belief view only "fog" the Biblical truth which would be in plain view with even just an English Bible IF your sight were not impaired by your self-inflicted theological bias.
![[Deleted User]](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/fcddec765be35f238a0844bd23f54b59/?default=https%3A%2F%2Fvanillicon.com%2F8ce8323767a20f0f45db140c4cd2cea1_200.png&rating=g&size=200)