Christian Conservatives

[Ibanez]

I'm not as arrogant on some here

Do you understand the concept of translating from one language to another? Wait...you don't.

Just sayin.

That isn't arrogance. That's be snarky.

[kalm]

Hey guys, I know this book that will truly change your life! It will unlock all the doors to your salvation, and answer the cosmic questions!

It's 1200 pages long and through various mistaken translations has been rendered almost indecipherable.

Best of luck!

(Jesus should've written it in English. He only has himself to blame for being misunderstood. )

The road to salvation cannot be achieved through the use of common sense
Such are the mysteries of Salvation...

Oh.

[Bisonfanatical]

Just sayin.

That isn't arrogance. That's be snarky.

Along the lines of;
Depends upon what your definition of "is" is?


Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[Bisonfanatical]

P.s. the X and P "sign" which Constantine saw in the sun ... fwiw

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[Ibanez]

P.s. the X and P "sign" which Constantine saw in the sun ... fwiw

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

It's called the Chi Rho.

[JoltinJoe]

First, Deuteronomy stated, to be precise, nothing was to be added or taken from the LAW. Nothing in Deuteronomy suggests that there would be no more revelation. The Jews themselves added other revelation to their canon, including Isaiah, in which the prophet foretells that the Messiah would be known as "Immanuel" -- "God among us." And there are many other such references to the Messiah's divinity.

Your second point is just an incorrect understanding of what the term "Christ" means. "Christus" is the Latin word for "Messiah." In Latin, the title of the Messiah would be "Jesu Christus." "Jesu" is Latin for the Hebrew name "Yeshua" and would have been pronounced "Yesu." "Jesu" then translates to Jesus in English, with a hard "J' sound. In Spanish, Jesus is still pronounced "Yesu," as in the Latin. So these are all the same terms, just in different tongues, and they designate the same Messiah by the SAME name and title. Otherwise, I'm fascinated by the level of your indoctrination into the falsities about the "Roman Church" advocated by the Jehovah's Witnesses.

Third, the most common dialect spoken in Israel at the time of Jesus was Aramaic. There is simply no doubt about that.

Fourth, your statement that "the name of Joshua in the old testament was Yeshua" is not true. Ancient Hebrew contained no vowels; therefore, "Yeshua" was a itself phonetic expression. If you think the name "Yeshua" translates better into English as "Joshua," that's fine. "Joshua" and "Jesus" are English spellings of the same name, much the way a name like "Mary" and "Maria" are the same name. But if you start calling Jesus by the word "Joshua" in English, you are going to confuse many people, since the common English name "Jesus" comes into English through Latin -- and not directly from phonetic Ancient Hebrew.

Now here is my question for you. Why do Jehovah's Witnesses spend so much time trying to import significance to the manner in which names have been translated through the centuries? The leaders of the church intend to confuse you.

First of all, in deuteronomy, in the Hebrew, it states that nothing is to be added to or taken away from this TORAH, which is the 5 book of Moss. It is the false western doctrine that teaches us that the law was the 10 commandments, those 10 statements were just a sign of the covenant between the Creator and His chosen people. There were over 600 commandments.
Go re-read Isaiah 7:14 as well as 8:8 in context to understand what "Immanuel" was all about .. remember that even though it is in the new testament doesn't mean it wasn't added later .. for instance the name Jesus and the title christ were never in the original documents.

Secondly ... As far as the title christ in the Latin, that has no value what so ever in this discussion, it is the language of the Romans ... latin vulgate came well after the CoN, and the invented title Christos was defined prior to the CoN ..... latin manuscripts were taken from Greek manuscripts .. and in the Greek manuscripts, according to Strongs concordance, the title Christ has the designation G5547 with the transliteration Christos, and you will see the Greek letters which start with Constantine's X and P ... look at your Roman Missal ... Greek X and P. The name Jesus has the designation G2424 with the transliteration Iesous, it shows the root word in Hebrew is H3091 which is Yehoshuah. ..and guess what? ... the designation in the old testament for joshua is H3091 which is Yehoshuah ... they have the same name ... we should be calling both of them Jesus or both of them Joshua ... you pick ... same name.
As for any connection with a few of my thoughts and the JW's, it is by independent study only .. the Creator's name is not Jehovah ... it is Yehovah.

Third ... the phrase above the Messiah's head was in Hebrew, the Messiah talked to Paul on the road to Damascus in Hebrew, Paul spoke to the masses in the synagogue in Hebrew, the Aleppo codex as well as the Leningrad codex are the oldest complete full HEBREW manuscripts in existance.
P.s. the Creator's full name is in them a couple times, with all the vowel points ... Yehovah.

Fourth .... it doesn't matter what nickname somebody gives you ... your name is what it is ... the angel said "you WILL call his name Yeshua... ... the name above all names is Yeshua ... there is NO OTHER NAME given to us by the Creator by which we MUST BE SAVED.

man cannot over ride the will of the Creator ... you can't sin your way to salvation my friend ... no pope (man) can save you ... sin is shown as disobedience ... you can't come to obedience thru disobedience ... in the Tanakh as well as the NT it states that if the blind lead the blind they both go in the ditch ... if it doesn't have its roots in the Tanakh ... it is man made bologna




Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Alright, then, so you are no longer a Christian, right?

[Bisonfanatical]

First of all, in deuteronomy, in the Hebrew, it states that nothing is to be added to or taken away from this TORAH, which is the 5 book of Moss. It is the false western doctrine that teaches us that the law was the 10 commandments, those 10 statements were just a sign of the covenant between the Creator and His chosen people. There were over 600 commandments.
Go re-read Isaiah 7:14 as well as 8:8 in context to understand what "Immanuel" was all about .. remember that even though it is in the new testament doesn't mean it wasn't added later .. for instance the name Jesus and the title christ were never in the original documents.

Secondly ... As far as the title christ in the Latin, that has no value what so ever in this discussion, it is the language of the Romans ... latin vulgate came well after the CoN, and the invented title Christos was defined prior to the CoN ..... latin manuscripts were taken from Greek manuscripts .. and in the Greek manuscripts, according to Strongs concordance, the title Christ has the designation G5547 with the transliteration Christos, and you will see the Greek letters which start with Constantine's X and P ... look at your Roman Missal ... Greek X and P. The name Jesus has the designation G2424 with the transliteration Iesous, it shows the root word in Hebrew is H3091 which is Yehoshuah. ..and guess what? ... the designation in the old testament for joshua is H3091 which is Yehoshuah ... they have the same name ... we should be calling both of them Jesus or both of them Joshua ... you pick ... same name.
As for any connection with a few of my thoughts and the JW's, it is by independent study only .. the Creator's name is not Jehovah ... it is Yehovah.

Third ... the phrase above the Messiah's head was in Hebrew, the Messiah talked to Paul on the road to Damascus in Hebrew, Paul spoke to the masses in the synagogue in Hebrew, the Aleppo codex as well as the Leningrad codex are the oldest complete full HEBREW manuscripts in existance.
P.s. the Creator's full name is in them a couple times, with all the vowel points ... Yehovah.

Fourth .... it doesn't matter what nickname somebody gives you ... your name is what it is ... the angel said "you WILL call his name Yeshua... ... the name above all names is Yeshua ... there is NO OTHER NAME given to us by the Creator by which we MUST BE SAVED.

man cannot over ride the will of the Creator ... you can't sin your way to salvation my friend ... no pope (man) can save you ... sin is shown as disobedience ... you can't come to obedience thru disobedience ... in the Tanakh as well as the NT it states that if the blind lead the blind they both go in the ditch ... if it doesn't have its roots in the Tanakh ... it is man made bologna




Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Alright, then, so you are no longer a Christian, right?

Correct,
I am not a Christian believer
I am a Messianic believer

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[89Hen]

Alright, then, so you are no longer a Christian, right?

Correct,
I am not a Christian believer
I am a Messianic believer

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[Bisonfanatical]

P.s. the X and P "sign" which Constantine saw in the sun ... fwiw

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

It's called the Chi Rho.

Exactly,
And according to the Roman Church "the symbols of the saviours name" .... ?


Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[JoltinJoe]

Alright, then, so you are no longer a Christian, right?

Correct,
I am not a Christian believer
I am a Messianic believer

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

But you are not a Messianic Jew?

Because Messianic Jews accept the Trinity and the divinity as Christ, as I understand it. In fact, they are properly designated as Christians.

But you've said you don't accept the Trinity and the divinity of Christ. Did I understand that right?

[Bisonfanatical]

Correct,
I am not a Christian believer
I am a Messianic believer

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

But you are not a Messianic Jew?

Because Messianic Jews accept the Trinity and the divinity as Christ, as I understand it. In fact, they are properly designated as Christians.

But you've said you don't accept the Trinity and the divinity of Christ. Did I understand that right?

I am a Messianic believer to the extent that I know there was a Messiah from the Creator, and that this Christ is a man made thing .... I am just a man who knows the truth is in the Tanakh ... Paul and others, including the Messiah, reasoned with the Israelites using the Tanakh about who the Messiah was and what he was there for. That is what I am searching the scriptures for ... without any preconceived teachings .. reading lime I was a Israelite.

The Messiah is our Lord ... that is a form of divinity ... first born of a new creation ... but Yehovah never stated that he would wrap himself in skin and die for us pagans while abandoning his chosen people, The Creator cannot die and did not die, and no "Jesus" is god in the flesh. There is one God and one mediator between God and man, the Messiah Yeshua.
The trinity is a funny concept that can not be explained as 3 in 1 because nothing in the Tanakh supports such a thing ... now I believe in 3 as 3 ... There is the father, and his son, and there is God's spirit .... no 3 headed God ... David said it best ... "Yehovah said to my Adonai, sit here at my right hand until I make your enemies your foot stool".


Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[JoltinJoe]

But you are not a Messianic Jew?

Because Messianic Jews accept the Trinity and the divinity as Christ, as I understand it. In fact, they are properly designated as Christians.

But you've said you don't accept the Trinity and the divinity of Christ. Did I understand that right?

I am a Messianic believer to the extent that I know there was a Messiah from the Creator, and that this Christ is a man made thing .... I am just a man who knows the truth is in the Tanakh ... Paul and others, including the Messiah, reasoned with the Israelites using the Tanakh about who the Messiah was and what he was there for. That is what I am searching the scriptures for ... without any preconceived teachings .. reading lime I was a Israelite.

The Messiah is our Lord ... that is a form of divinity ... first born of a new creation ... but Yehovah never stated that he would wrap himself in skin and die for us pagans while abandoning his chosen people, The Creator cannot die and did not die, and no "Jesus" is god in the flesh. There is one God and one mediator between God and man, the Messiah Yeshua.
The trinity is a funny concept that can not be explained as 3 in 1 because nothing in the Tanakh supports such a thing ... now I believe in 3 as 3 ... There is the father, and his son, and there is God's spirit .... no 3 headed God ... David said it best ... "Yehovah said to my Adonai, sit here at my right hand until I make your enemies your foot stool".


Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Got it. So then, you don't really belong to any particular religion?

Interesting. I know someone who went to a Bible Church where the people got together and read Scripture, and then discussed it. But he found there was nothing that they shared in common as a religious community -- other than a shared, passionate dislike for Catholicism. Other than that, they could agree on nothing. He had been raised a Catholic, and had fallen away from the Church, but these folks passionately hated the Church, a passion he did not share.

He and some others wanted to start a Church ministry to participate in a soup kitchen, to feed the hungry, in the Bronx. But he was accused by some as trying to engage in "good works" in order to gain salvation, which some said was "prideful" and "sinful." So this group had no such outreach. He eventually joined our Church, although he told me that he was not particularly committed to Catholicism at the time. He just felt the need to actually help people. Within time, though, he came to realize that, no matter what the problems with Catholicism, it is a Church that is demonstrably in apostolic succession to the first followers of Christ. If Jesus is the Messiah, then how can the followers of the Church that demonstrably started with Him be so far off the mark? How can what Jesus started, and the Spirit sanctified on Pentecost, been co-opted by any man, like Constantine (something he had been consistently told during his Bible Church period)? How could any man, like Luther, "reform" that which has been sanctified by the Spirit? I was at an event some years ago, and heard him say these things, and I have to admit I have often posed these questions to people who claim that Constantine co-opted the Church that had been sanctified by the Spirit, and that a mere man, Luther, needed to reform what the Spirit had sanctified.

[Jjoey52]

As St. Patrick brilliantly used to convert the Irish, look at a 3 leaf clover, they have 3 separate leaves but are one clover.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Bisonfanatical]

As St. Patrick brilliantly used to convert the Irish, look at a 3 leaf clover, they have 3 separate leaves but are one clover.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

When I witnessed to people about the "trinity" I used to use the picture of 3 candles but only one light.
Just to clarify a point, I do not hate catholics or any other church people ... I was walking the same path for most of my 60 years.
We are all searching
Once I found that I had been witnessing to people, actually touching some hearts, about a "name above all names" that didn't ... even ... EXIST
Things changed
I asked fellow christians .. of all denominations ... if it is a lie to tell your children, month after month, that there is a Santa that flies thru the air, a tooth fairy, an easter bunny etc.
I have lost friends over these conversations (lol), we western believers try to defend what cannot be defended ... we have the "Spirit of truth" in us ... but we "lie" like a Rug?
Most churches promote these lies? Wow!
Those JW'S don't, but they have their no no's according to scripture also .. these lies replace the words of the Creator who forbid all the things western churches practice.
I study with myself diligently, share with my wife when she is receptive ... discuss at times like this.
Would love to find others that just want to read and discuss. In season and out of season, like the bereans did, all they had to read in those days to verify with was the Tanakh.
No new testament yet ... it was being lived out at the time.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[Ivytalk]

Bisonfanatical and JJ trying to convert each other.

Judean People's Front, or Popular Front of Judea?

[AZGrizFan]

This thread whomps.

[Chizzang]

Bisonfanatical and JJ trying to convert each other.

Judean People's Front, or Popular Front of Judea?

[Silenoz]

How could any man, like Luther, "reform" that which has been sanctified by the Spirit? I was at an event some years ago, and heard him say these things, and I have to admit I have often posed these questions to people who claim that Constantine co-opted the Church that had been sanctified by the Spirit, and that a mere man, Luther, needed to reform what the Spirit had sanctified.

Huh?

We're still talking about the "friend" right?

Is the answer to each of those questions "because people are horrible and will twist, ruin, and lie about everything"?

Power and fear

[JoltinJoe]

How could any man, like Luther, "reform" that which has been sanctified by the Spirit? I was at an event some years ago, and heard him say these things, and I have to admit I have often posed these questions to people who claim that Constantine co-opted the Church that had been sanctified by the Spirit, and that a mere man, Luther, needed to reform what the Spirit had sanctified.

Huh?

We're still talking about the "friend" right?

Is the answer to each of those questions "because people are horrible and will twist, ruin, and lie about everything"?

Power and fear

[JoltinJoe]

Huh?

We're still talking about the "friend" right?

Is the answer to each of those questions "because people are horrible and will twist, ruin, and lie about everything"?

Power and fear

Why would it make any difference if it the "friend" was me? People speak of a "friend" when they don't want to admit it they are speaking about themselves. If I had thought of this position, I would happily claim it as my own, since it is wise beyond ordinary human wisdom.

[Chizzang]

Why would it make any difference if it the "friend" was me? People speak of a "friend" when they don't want to admit it they are speaking about themselves. If I had thought of this position, I would happily claim it as my own, since it is wise beyond ordinary human wisdom.

You are a savvy con man Joe...

[kalm]

Why would it make any difference if it the "friend" was me? People speak of a "friend" when they don't want to admit it they are speaking about themselves. If I had thought of this position, I would happily claim it as my own, since it is wise beyond ordinary human wisdom.

So Luther should have or shouldn't have attempted to "reform" the church...?

[Jjoey52]

Kalm, asking that is like asking if Queen Isabella should or should not have commissioned Columbus!s ships


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[JoltinJoe]

Why would it make any difference if it the "friend" was me? People speak of a "friend" when they don't want to admit it they are speaking about themselves. If I had thought of this position, I would happily claim it as my own, since it is wise beyond ordinary human wisdom.

So Luther should have or shouldn't have attempted to "reform" the church...?

Reform the Church; we are all called to reform the Church -- not create a new one.

[JoltinJoe]

Why would it make any difference if it the "friend" was me? People speak of a "friend" when they don't want to admit it they are speaking about themselves. If I had thought of this position, I would happily claim it as my own, since it is wise beyond ordinary human wisdom.

You are a savvy con man Joe...

You're the con man. You pose as a learned fellow, but you avoid any discussion in depth to avoid exposing the depths of your ignorance.