Jesus Is Jehovah/Jehovah Is Jesus (page 23)

godrulz

knowsnothing: whole books are written on pneumatology, the person and work of the Holy Spirit. The link I gave establishes His personality and Deity. One verse in context proves the point as much as 100 verses. All relevant verses about the Spirit show His Deity/personality and relation to the Father/Son. Just because all 3 are not mentioned in every verse is not an argument against it. The biggest issue is whether Jesus is Jehovah or not. The WT interprets ruach/pneuma as active force. This is sheer sectarian bias, not what the original languages say or mean.

still thinking

Ok Trans....

This book will short-circuit your brain.

Do you really want to short circuit my brain? Is this a public health warning? Should I take this literally?

I'm gonna have a quick squiz, but be it on your concience if my brain gets fried...hee hee

still thinking

Good grief Trans....you didn't say it was a book!...gonna take more than a quick squiz....

Podobear

@Essan: I don't know why I should apologise for the fickleness of this forum and its relationship to my PC... but I will, in deference! My apologies.

It is hard to maintain continuity of discussion on boards like this... but you did have a shot at trying to understand my own stance in this matter. I have no desire to enter into character assassination, just to evoke different points of view. I am sure you will agree there has been an interesting set of opinions offered.

I was trying to bring the reader back to Galatians 1:8 and the warning of "another Gospel". ... to a Christian Jew listening to that letter from Paul.

Then, I wanted to ask your opinion of that man's understanding of PSALM 2.... the whole of it, not an individual verse.

I am withholding comment deliberately, other that to say, that I have tried my very best to read that Psalm, and many others with a "Triune" concept in mind. It just does not work.

Jesus and Jehovah CANNOT be one and the same. That is my stance. In human terms, I see it as a loving Father and Son relationship, with all the Royal trappings and tributes. My Bible reads easily... I am quite happy to have others chip away at it, and consider those opinions... after all as many have stated here, we are not going to level a 2000 year hot debate with one posting on a dissident notice board.

Thanks for bearing with me and my computer.

watersprout

May I ask where you are getting your teachings from?

Of course you may...I get my teachings from my Lord Jaheshua Mischajah.

So would you describe your belief system as partially based on the quote above?

All of my beliefs are from what my Lord has taught me... I follow no book or man. I very rarely pick up the bible... I didn't know my bible in the time I was raised as a dubbie...

Would you say you are spiritualizing or carnalizing? Or am I going down the wrong path?

I am doing neither... All what I have posted has not come from me, but from the one who teaches all things.

I am very curious so if this is incorrect please point me in the right direction to what your belief is based on.

Like I have said, everything I have been taught has come from the one who teaches all things... I went to the source, not any books or man.

Peace

Essan

Hi Podo.

Something to remember (IMO) is that Pauls letters are not 'first contact'. It was generally people who were already Christians who were reading them, people who had already been preached to. Therefore he is not laying out the entire Christian belief system in them, as if for the first time. He is giving reminders and 'patching up' places where leaks had developed in their faith, so to speak. You can't assume that those reading his letters knew nothing and were getting all their knowledge from the letters of Paul or other Apostles. This would include their understanding of Jesus nature, which would have been something covered pretty early on in their 'conversion'. It's no surprise then that the letters speak of Jesus nature as if they are addressing those who already know, rather than those hearing for the first time. The Deity of Christ is certainly there, but it's not heralded like a new revelation with the stupendous exaggerated obviousness that some today insist is required (despite their not requiring for many other matters of doctrine which they are happy to deduce as solid based on several Scriptures weighed together).

A Jew awaiting the Messiah had already been in for an incredible shock, in that Jesus was nothing like the Messiah they were expecting nor did he do the things they expected the Messiah to do. So appealing to what Jews apparently expected isn't really valid, as most of what they expected and most of their understanding was wrong anyway. Any Jews who converted to Christianity would have had to have radically altered their expectations. Paul himself talked about this. That's why most Jews rejected Jesus, because he wasn't what they expected.

Jews had more than just Psalms 2 to go on. They had all the text regarding the Messiah to consider, including those which suggest he would be God. Few Jews understood this, but so what? What does that prove? Paul said that they were largely insensible regarding the Messiah, so their expectations - mostly false - are irrelevant, and can not be used to dismiss the notion of Jesus being God.

So, in summary, this hypothetical Galation Jew of yours would not be hearing about Jesus and his nature for the first time from such a letter and his supposed expectations of the Messiah are irrelevant, firstly, because they would almost certainly have been wrong and, secondly, he would have had to abandon them some time previously, when he was first preached to.

designs

You know the Jews had a pretty developed concept of the Messiah figure at the time of Jesus and it wasn't like the Jesus figure. Might be good to bone up on it.

Essan

I know Designs, I think I just said that, just not as concisely.

PSacramento

You know the Jews had a pretty developed concept of the Messiah figure at the time of Jesus and it wasn't like the Jesus figure. Might be good to bone up on it.

There was indeed a "laundry list" of requirments, where they came from is still debated, buth there was alist and they did have an idea, according to themselves, who the Messiah shoudl be and WHAT He should do FOR THEM.

They were just in error about it.

You won't find many Jews contemplating a messianic age anymore though.

juni

Hey Sylvia! How have you been?

I believe there was a Jesus - the facts (history) show there was. I believe Jehovah was the name of a tribal god of the people at that time fulfilling their superstitious needs as they had limited knowledge of science.

I feel we've outgrown the usefulness of religion and should educate ourselves with science to get on with finding solutions to serious issues we all face here on earth.

That's my opinion.

Jesus Is Jehovah/Jehovah Is Jesus

Share this