patrick jane forums
Theology, Anthropology & Archaeology => EVANGELISM & THEOLOGY => Topic started by: Billy Evmur on October 20, 2018, 08:33:36 am
-
Reva.13.:11
And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth and he had 2 horns like a lamb and he spake as a dragon.
This is the false prophet and forerunner to the false Messiah Antichrist or the beast. He is a very important person and he will come soon. He will announce the long awaited coming of the Messiah to the Jews, his ministry will be supernatural and he will convince not only the Jews but also the whole world.
The Jews will go home, ALL of them. And they will start the re-building of the temple from whence, he will claim, Messiah is to rule the world.
This is the basis of the pact between Israel and the Antichrist, that all religions must be abolished. This will make believing in Christ our Lord the most odious crime in the whole world...the church is simply not ready for this.
Of course Antichrist will have his heart set on that seat in the temple.
-
The material of Mt24A (before v29) was about 1st century Judea. All its features and details support that. Similarly Lk 23:38 says those who were nursing babes at that moment would see all these things as adults--30 years later or so.
The NT has no events expected in Judea or about Judaism before the day of world wide judgement when this earth will be changed into the NHNE.
-
Reva.13.:11
And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth and he had 2 horns like a lamb and he spake as a dragon.
This is the false prophet and forerunner to the false Messiah Antichrist or the beast. He is a very important person and he will come soon. He will announce the long awaited coming of the Messiah to the Jews, his ministry will be supernatural and he will convince not only the Jews but also the whole world.
The Jews will go home, ALL of them. And they will start the re-building of the temple from whence, he will claim, Messiah is to rule the world.
This is the basis of the pact between Israel and the Antichrist, that all religions must be abolished. This will make believing in Christ our Lord the most odious crime in the whole world...the church is simply not ready for this.
Of course Antichrist will have his heart set on that seat in the temple.
Hi Billy, :)
Already fulfilled in Ananus ben Seth, the Ab-bet-Din, and Kaiaphas, the Nasiy-Prince Kohen: two horns like a lamb but speaking as a dragon, (and by the way those two names in the Luke 3:2 phrase have a Greek gematria value of 666, "αννα και καιαφα" = gematira 666). Moreover the popular dating of the Apocalypse circa 95AD is utterly fallacious and truly incomprehensible in light of the wealth of actual information available in the N/T scripture itself.
For one small example:
Revelation 1:1 ASV
1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show unto his servants, even the things which must shortly come to pass: and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John;
Mark 1:12-13 ASV
12 And straightway the Spirit driveth him forth into the wilderness.
13 And he was in the wilderness forty days tempted of Satan; and he was with the wild beasts; [θηριων] and the angels ministered unto him.
Yes, he was tested by the Satan and was with the θηριων-beasts, same word employed throughout the Apocalypse for the beast, beasts, and wild beasts, (for ex. even in Rev 6:8 ). And if anyone thinks that in this case it means literal lions, leopards, and she-bears robbed of their cubs, the same is surely mistaken: for the scripture speaks from and of itself and the only beasts that count are those found in the scripture, (especially when it comes to prophetic utterances and their fulfillments, see Hos 13:7-8, Dan 7:3-8, etc.).
So then, when do you suppose the Master received this Revelation from God? as it says in Rev 1:1? Was it circa 95AD? Was it more than sixty years after he had already been crucified, resurrected, and had sat down at the right hand of the Father? Should I really be expected to believe that after more than sixty years, sitting at the right hand of the Father on High, that the Master could suddenly be given any kind of new revelation at all? How is that possible? How can there be any new revelation while already dwelling in that totally pure, totally holy, unapproachable light which no man has seen or can see? I cannot in any way imagine it to be possible that he sat down at the right hand of the Father and then, more than sixty years after the fact, received something new. Additionally I have the Gospel of Mark, as quoted herein above, quietly whispering to me precisely when and where the Master received the Revelation.
Moreover when you open this book you are opening up the elusive "Q Source", (which is why the blind scholars cannot find it: they do not even have the dating close, and they see it all as still yet future despite what the author himself says about it being about to shortly come to pass). And when you open up this book you are reading the words of a Kohen: the greatest of men having been born of women, he who immerses you in the water of the Word, (if you keep the sayings of this book). ;D
Edited to remove font color for scripture text. :)
.
-
Reva.13.:11
And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth and he had 2 horns like a lamb and he spake as a dragon.
This is the false prophet and forerunner to the false Messiah Antichrist or the beast. He is a very important person and he will come soon. He will announce the long awaited coming of the Messiah to the Jews, his ministry will be supernatural and he will convince not only the Jews but also the whole world.
The Jews will go home, ALL of them. And they will start the re-building of the temple from whence, he will claim, Messiah is to rule the world.
This is the basis of the pact between Israel and the Antichrist, that all religions must be abolished. This will make believing in Christ our Lord the most odious crime in the whole world...the church is simply not ready for this.
Of course Antichrist will have his heart set on that seat in the temple.
Hi Billy, :)
Already fulfilled in Ananus ben Seth, the Ab-bet-Din, and Kaiaphas, the Nasiy-Prince Kohen: two horns like a lamb but speaking as a dragon, (and by the way those two names in the Luke 3:2 phrase have a Greek gematria value of 666, "αννα και καιαφα" = gematira 666). Moreover the popular dating of the Apocalypse circa 95AD is utterly fallacious and truly incomprehensible in light of the wealth of actual information available in the N/T scripture itself.
For one small example:
Revelation 1:1 ASV
1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show unto his servants, even the things which must shortly come to pass: and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John;
Mark 1:12-13 ASV
12 And straightway the Spirit driveth him forth into the wilderness.
13 And he was in the wilderness forty days tempted of Satan; and he was with the wild beasts; [θηριων] and the angels ministered unto him.
Yes, he was tested by the Satan and was with the θηριων-beasts, same word employed throughout the Apocalypse for the beast, beasts, and wild beasts, (for ex. even in Rev 6:8 ). And if anyone thinks that in this case it means literal lions, leopards, and she-bears robbed of their cubs, the same is surely mistaken: for the scripture speaks from and of itself and the only beasts that count are those found in the scripture, (especially when it comes to prophetic utterances and their fulfillments, see Hos 13:7-8, Dan 7:3-8, etc.).
So then, when do you suppose the Master received this Revelation from God? as it says in Rev 1:1? Was it circa 95AD? Was it more than sixty years after he had already been crucified, resurrected, and had sat down at the right hand of the Father? Should I really be expected to believe that after more than sixty years, sitting at the right hand of the Father on High, that the Master could suddenly be given any kind of new revelation at all? How is that possible? How can there be any new revelation while already dwelling in that totally pure, totally holy, unapproachable light which no man has seen or can see? I cannot in any way imagine it to be possible that he sat down at the right hand of the Father and then, more than sixty years after the fact, received something new. Additionally I have the Gospel of Mark, as quoted herein above, quietly whispering to me precisely when and where the Master received the Revelation.
Moreover when you open this book you are opening up the elusive "Q Source", (which is why the blind scholars cannot find it: they do not even have the dating close, and they see it all as still yet future despite what the author himself says about it being about to shortly come to pass). And when you open up this book you are reading the words of a Kohen: the greatest of men having been born of women, he who immerses you in the water of the Word, (if you keep the sayings of this book). ;D
.
The covenant between Israel and WHO???????certainly not the Antichrist.. The Bible tells us that he confirms (enforces) the covenant.
Please refer to Isaiah 28:14-18....The covenant is between Israel and "Death and Hell". Recognize the Name....You should, it is the last of the four horsemen in Rev 6. The fourth Seal.
The false Prophet is agreed up on by many scholars. The Jezebel of the Roman Catholic Church will ride the beast. Whether it is the Last Pope (another story) is up for grabs. The RCC will be the false Prophet.
Blade
-
The covenant between Israel and WHO???????certainly not the Antichrist.. The Bible tells us that he confirms (enforces) the covenant.
Please refer to Isaiah 28:14-18....The covenant is between Israel and "Death and Hell". Recognize the Name....You should, it is the last of the four horsemen in Rev 6. The fourth Seal.
The false Prophet is agreed up on by many scholars. The Jezebel of the Roman Catholic Church will ride the beast. Whether it is the Last Pope (another story) is up for grabs. The RCC will be the false Prophet.
Blade
The "covenant with death" was disannulled at Golgotha. There were truly many priests, because they of course were not able to continue by reason of death: this is the metathesis-transformation of the Torah spoken of in Hebrews 7, (and foretold in the prophets, just as in Isaiah), for the Levitical priesthood was not given by an oath: but the order of Melki-Tzedek was given the Risen One by an oath, (who lives evermore to make intercession for the faithful), and cannot be suspended by death because, of course, he cannot die anymore, having already suffered death.
As it is written, "You are a priest forever after the order of Melki-Tzedek", and thus there is indeed a disannulling of the commandment going before because of the weakness and unprofitableness thereof: for the priesthood of mortal men was weak in that they could not continue by reason of death, and therefore, indeed, it was a "covenant with death". When one would die, another would be chosen or elected: when that one would die, another would take his place, again, a covenant with death: but it is now already disannulled, (the old way of saying annulled, which is the same).
Moreover the Master confirms all of the covenants at the Last Supper, both the primary covenant concerning the many, (all seven covenants, Daniel 9:27, Matthew 26:28 ASV, Mark 14:24 ASV), which is the cup at the beginning of the Seder, and the new covenant to the chosen ones, (Luke 22:20, "for you"), which is not the same cup but rather another cup during/after the Seder, (only found in Luke 22:20).
PS: "Hell" is of course the grave, Sheol, in the Isaiah passage.
.
-
So there you are, hi. :)
"Shortly" or "the time is at hand" is always a problem in scripture prophecy
But John says "I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day..." he did not mean it was Sunday, he meant in the spirit he was taken to witness what would take place "on the day of the Lord" now I do not reckon the day of the Lord to mean 24 hours.
-
The material of Mt24A (before v29) was about 1st century Judea. All its features and details support that. Similarly Lk 23:38 says those who were nursing babes at that moment would see all these things as adults--30 years later or so.
The NT has no events expected in Judea or about Judaism before the day of world wide judgement when this earth will be changed into the NHNE.
Why would you believe Revs 21 concerning the NHNE but not believe Revs 20. concerning the 1,000 years?
"when you see all these things come to pass...….this generation will not pass away till all be fulfilled"
-
I do believe it, but the information is scant. Do we develop complete doctrines from 2 references in a totally symbolic book that have no reference at all anywhere else in the NT? I don't. The NHNE was already mentioned in Isaiah, as far as solid background goes.
There is also nothing Judaic about the 1000.
It also ends in failure.
There is also a way to read the '1st resurrection -- 2nd death' so that the 1st is Christ's and the 2nd death is the condemnation to punishment at the final judgement, meaning, the 1000 is going on right now.
You must understand that 200 years ago a couple poorly-informed and probably poorly-thinking gentlemen said 'the Bible doesn't make sense; here is how to make sense of the Bible.' They did this inspite of 200 years of Reformation teaching. The answer? that the Bible had two incoherent, unresolvable plans in it. NOTHING in the NT hints of this but they were quite sure that this 'made sense' of it and believed they had finally made sense of it (no one ever, before them). Darby and Scofield.
The worst thing you can do is follow their circus. Please see my essay at TF on the legacy of rationality in the Reformation.
https://theologyforums.com/index.php?threads/the-reformation.3228/
Anyone who thinks the Reformation is limited to clearing up an issue about works and purgatory should be considered as ignorant as Hilary about the Constitution. It was an amazing, divine, social and cultural correction.
-
The material of Mt24A (before v29) was about 1st century Judea. All its features and details support that. Similarly Lk 23:38 says those who were nursing babes at that moment would see all these things as adults--30 years later or so.
The NT has no events expected in Judea or about Judaism before the day of world wide judgement when this earth will be changed into the NHNE.
Mark 13:37
37 And what I say unto you, I say unto all, Watch!
.
-
Try: all of you in 1st century Israel with the zealots dominating.
Not: all of you X000 years later. there would not be the same conditions for them.
Try to read the Bible with as much historical sense as possible before wild flings off to time periods that would not be like theirs. Yes, at the end of the 1000, believers will be harassed, but that's all believers everywhere. Ie, There won't be Judaic issues all around the world to watch for, stated in terms about 1st century Judea.
-
When you don't believe the 1,000 years you see it nowhere in the NT but when you do believe it, it is everywhere. Paul's letters hardly make sense apart from it.
God's plan for the fulness of time is to UNITE in Christ all things, whether they be things in heaven or things on earth
But they are not united now nor shall they be at the moment of Christ's return...there must therefore be a new age.
The creation is to be set FREE from it's bondage to decay....when is that going to happen.
-
Reva.13.:11
And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth and he had 2 horns like a lamb and he spake as a dragon.
This is the false prophet and forerunner to the false Messiah Antichrist or the beast. He is a very important person and he will come soon. He will announce the long awaited coming of the Messiah to the Jews, his ministry will be supernatural and he will convince not only the Jews but also the whole world.
The Jews will go home, ALL of them. And they will start the re-building of the temple from whence, he will claim, Messiah is to rule the world.
This is the basis of the pact between Israel and the Antichrist, that all religions must be abolished. This will make believing in Christ our Lord the most odious crime in the whole world...the church is simply not ready for this.
Of course Antichrist will have his heart set on that seat in the temple.
Hi Billy, :)
Already fulfilled in Ananus ben Seth, the Ab-bet-Din, and Kaiaphas, the Nasiy-Prince Kohen: two horns like a lamb but speaking as a dragon, (and by the way those two names in the Luke 3:2 phrase have a Greek gematria value of 666, "αννα και καιαφα" = gematira 666). Moreover the popular dating of the Apocalypse circa 95AD is utterly fallacious and truly incomprehensible in light of the wealth of actual information available in the N/T scripture itself.
For one small example:
Revelation 1:1 ASV
1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show unto his servants, even the things which must shortly come to pass: and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John;
Mark 1:12-13 ASV
12 And straightway the Spirit driveth him forth into the wilderness.
13 And he was in the wilderness forty days tempted of Satan; and he was with the wild beasts; [θηριων] and the angels ministered unto him.
Yes, he was tested by the Satan and was with the θηριων-beasts, same word employed throughout the Apocalypse for the beast, beasts, and wild beasts, (for ex. even in Rev 6:8 ). And if anyone thinks that in this case it means literal lions, leopards, and she-bears robbed of their cubs, the same is surely mistaken: for the scripture speaks from and of itself and the only beasts that count are those found in the scripture, (especially when it comes to prophetic utterances and their fulfillments, see Hos 13:7-8, Dan 7:3-8, etc.).
So then, when do you suppose the Master received this Revelation from God? as it says in Rev 1:1? Was it circa 95AD? Was it more than sixty years after he had already been crucified, resurrected, and had sat down at the right hand of the Father? Should I really be expected to believe that after more than sixty years, sitting at the right hand of the Father on High, that the Master could suddenly be given any kind of new revelation at all? How is that possible? How can there be any new revelation while already dwelling in that totally pure, totally holy, unapproachable light which no man has seen or can see? I cannot in any way imagine it to be possible that he sat down at the right hand of the Father and then, more than sixty years after the fact, received something new. Additionally I have the Gospel of Mark, as quoted herein above, quietly whispering to me precisely when and where the Master received the Revelation.
Moreover when you open this book you are opening up the elusive "Q Source", (which is why the blind scholars cannot find it: they do not even have the dating close, and they see it all as still yet future despite what the author himself says about it being about to shortly come to pass). And when you open up this book you are reading the words of a Kohen: the greatest of men having been born of women, he who immerses you in the water of the Word, (if you keep the sayings of this book). ;D
Edited to remove font color for scripture text. :)
.
I wish also that you would give consideration to this.
Few NT books were given titles by the authors of them, the titles i.e "The Revelation of St John the divine" was added later.
Suppose in the original the title comprised the opening words of the book, you would have this
The Revelation of John, the revelation of Jesus Christ which God gave to him to show unto His servants, things which must shortly come to pass, and He sent and signified it by His Angel unto His servant John.
The whole meaning is thus transformed. And I totally agree the present understanding of those opening words are clumsy and somewhat amiss scripturally.
Now the revelation is not given to Jesus Christ but to John and not given to John by an angel but by the Angel of the Lord, much more fitting NT doctrine.
But it is not a revelation of Jesus Christ it is THE revelation of Jesus Christ. In other words His revelation when He comes on the Lord's day. With the same meaning Paul gives it when he speaks of creation groaning in travail with us for the revelation of the sons of God.
This sews up nicely the meaning of the whole of chapter 1.
-
I wish also that you would give consideration to this.
Few NT books were given titles by the authors of them, the titles i.e "The Revelation of St John the divine" was added later.
Suppose in the original the title comprised the opening words of the book, you would have this
The Revelation of John, the revelation of Jesus Christ which God gave to him to show unto His servants, things which must shortly come to pass, and He sent and signified it by His Angel unto His servant John.
The whole meaning is thus transformed. And I totally agree the present understanding of those opening words are clumsy and somewhat amiss scripturally.
Now the revelation is not given to Jesus Christ but to John and not given to John by an angel but by the Angel of the Lord, much more fitting NT doctrine.
But it is not a revelation of Jesus Christ it is THE revelation of Jesus Christ. In other words His revelation when He comes on the Lord's day. With the same meaning Paul gives it when he speaks of creation groaning in travail with us for the revelation of the sons of God.
This sews up nicely the meaning of the whole of chapter 1.
Well said, except for one thing, what makes you think his name is not there? His name is Yohanan and the Master himself also says he is Eliyahu, (if anyone will receive it), and therefore he is Yohanan Eliyahu, (in Greek the initials for these two Hebrew names would be Iota and Heta, Ι̅H, (not to be confused with Yah Elohim, Ι̅H)). Chew on that for a while. ;D
.
-
I wish also that you would give consideration to this.
Few NT books were given titles by the authors of them, the titles i.e "The Revelation of St John the divine" was added later.
Suppose in the original the title comprised the opening words of the book, you would have this
The Revelation of John, the revelation of Jesus Christ which God gave to him to show unto His servants, things which must shortly come to pass, and He sent and signified it by His Angel unto His servant John.
The whole meaning is thus transformed. And I totally agree the present understanding of those opening words are clumsy and somewhat amiss scripturally.
Now the revelation is not given to Jesus Christ but to John and not given to John by an angel but by the Angel of the Lord, much more fitting NT doctrine.
But it is not a revelation of Jesus Christ it is THE revelation of Jesus Christ. In other words His revelation when He comes on the Lord's day. With the same meaning Paul gives it when he speaks of creation groaning in travail with us for the revelation of the sons of God.
This sews up nicely the meaning of the whole of chapter 1.
Well said, except for one thing, what makes you think his name is not there? His name is Yohanan and the Master himself also says he is Eliyahu, (if anyone will receive it), and therefore he is Yohanan Eliyahu, (in Greek the initials for these two Hebrew names would be Iota and Heta, Ι̅H, (not to be confused with Yah Elohim, Ι̅H)). Chew on that for a while. ;D
.
Revelation is Book about the Unveiling of Jesus Christ from/by God (the father). To replace Jesus Christ here is close to blasphemy. I would be very careful!
Blade
-
Revelation is Book about the Unveiling of Jesus Christ from/by God (the father). To replace Jesus Christ here is close to blasphemy. I would be very careful!
Blade
And worshiping Yohanan the Immerser as God would not be blasphemy? Therefore it is entirely profitable for one to pray for understanding in all things concerning the kingdom of Elohim and the Word, and especially the Nomina Sacra, for the Son has a name that no one without him knows.
.
-
Revelation is Book about the Unveiling of Jesus Christ from/by God (the father). To replace Jesus Christ here is close to blasphemy. I would be very careful!
Blade
And worshiping Yohanan the Immerser as God would not be blasphemy? Therefore it is entirely profitable for one to pray for understanding in all things concerning the kingdom of Elohim and the Word, and especially the Nomina Sacra, for the Son has a name that no one without him knows.
.
Who is worshiping John the Baptist? He is not even in Revelation!
Blade
-
Revelation is Book about the Unveiling of Jesus Christ from/by God (the father). To replace Jesus Christ here is close to blasphemy. I would be very careful!
Blade
And worshiping Yohanan the Immerser as God would not be blasphemy? Therefore it is entirely profitable for one to pray for understanding in all things concerning the kingdom of Elohim and the Word, and especially the Nomina Sacra, for the Son has a name that no one without him knows.
.
Who is worshiping John the Baptist? He is not even in Revelation!
Blade
Hmmm, I see you do not understand what I said or meant.
Aren't you one of those always using the phrase "rightly divide"?
They both have the same Nomen Sacrum, (Ι̅H).
See also 1Cor 12:3, (and be sure you "rightly divide"). ;D
(PS: English translations will do you no good, in fact, nothing but the oldest Uncial texts with the Nomina Sacra will reveal the "issue" I speak of).
.
-
Revelation is Book about the Unveiling of Jesus Christ from/by God (the father). To replace Jesus Christ here is close to blasphemy. I would be very careful!
Blade
And worshiping Yohanan the Immerser as God would not be blasphemy? Therefore it is entirely profitable for one to pray for understanding in all things concerning the kingdom of Elohim and the Word, and especially the Nomina Sacra, for the Son has a name that no one without him knows.
.
Who is worshiping John the Baptist? He is not even in Revelation!
Blade
Hmmm, I see you do not understand what I said or meant.
Aren't you one of those always using the phrase "rightly divide"?
They both have the same Nomen Sacrum, (Ι̅H).
See also 1Cor 12:3, (and be sure you "rightly divide"). ;D
(PS: English translations will do you no good, in fact, nothing but the oldest Uncial texts with the Nomina Sacra will reveal the "issue" I speak of).
.
Oh, I forgot about the authority of the Talmudic Manuscripts.
As I stated, correctly.....hum...... Who is worshiping John the Baptist (And worshiping Yohanan the Immerser as God would not be blasphemy?)
Your double talk makes no impression here. Simply answer the question. (Who is worshiping John the Baptist?)
Blade
-
Oh, I forgot about the authority of the Talmudic Manuscripts.
As I stated, correctly.....hum...... Who is worshiping John the Baptist (And worshiping Yohanan the Immerser as God would not be blasphemy?)
Your double talk makes no impression here. Simply answer the question. (Who is worshiping John the Baptist?)
Blade
Talmudic Manuscripts? Lol, the Uncial texts are the most ancient GREEK texts in which the New Testament writings were written. Please educate yourself so that you do not make such false accusations and insinuations: or do you enjoy doing such things to those who love the Word?
.
-
Oh, I forgot about the authority of the Talmudic Manuscripts.
As I stated, correctly.....hum...... Who is worshiping John the Baptist (And worshiping Yohanan the Immerser as God would not be blasphemy?)
Your double talk makes no impression here. Simply answer the question. (Who is worshiping John the Baptist?)
Blade
Talmudic Manuscripts? Lol, the Uncial texts are the most ancient GREEK texts in which the New Testament writings were written. Please educate yourself so that you do not make such false accusations and insinuations: or do you enjoy doing such things to those who love the Word?
.
Yes, I must make myself understand what you are trying to say with double talk. "Uncial is a majuscule script " written in Capital letters. around the 5th,6th and 7th centuries (AD).
I do believe there were earlier copies of the letters and writings of the chapters within the NT that were in Greek. Since it was the normal language used among the three languages in the 1st century AD.
Blade
-
Oh, I forgot about the authority of the Talmudic Manuscripts.
As I stated, correctly.....hum...... Who is worshiping John the Baptist (And worshiping Yohanan the Immerser as God would not be blasphemy?)
Your double talk makes no impression here. Simply answer the question. (Who is worshiping John the Baptist?)
Blade
Talmudic Manuscripts? Lol, the Uncial texts are the most ancient GREEK texts in which the New Testament writings were written. Please educate yourself so that you do not make such false accusations and insinuations: or do you enjoy doing such things to those who love the Word?
.
Yes, I must make myself understand what you are trying to say with double talk. "Uncial is a majuscule script " written in Capital letters. around the 5th,6th and 7th centuries (AD).
I do believe there were earlier copies of the letters and writings of the chapters within the NT that were in Greek. Since it was the normal language used among the three languages in the 1st century AD.
Blade
No, the Uncial texts go back to the very earliest manuscripts.
They in fact are the earliest manuscripts and fragments we have.
Your comments are misleading and disingenuous.
Moreover all of the most ancient Uncial texts contain what are called the Nomina Sacra, (sacred name abbreviations), and none of them contain the full written name of "ιησους", or "Jesus", or "Yeshua", but instead, as I have said, the Nomen Sacrum Ι̅H. Moreover the earliest forms are just as I have written it here but the later forms began to have the case endings added to them by scribes when they also began to add case endings to all the names for grammatical purposes. This may be seen by the fact that in the genealogies we still yet do not find the names written with case endings. For the same reason most English translation will render Iakob in the genealogies as Jacob, (because it has no case endings), but in the rest of the texts they render the same name as James, (Iakobos).
You have a serious problem on your hands with this fact alone: for you must trust that there is someone called "Jesus" in all your English translations when in fact that name is nowhere to be found in any of the most ancient texts except where the authors speak of Joshua: for only that name is spelled out in full form in the New Testament, and it is ιησους throughout the LXX, and therefore also in the places in the New Testament where the name for Joshua is written out in full form, (Acts 7:45, Hebrews 4:8 ).
In short your beloved scholars have made a guess, "Jesus" or "Yeshua" are nothing more than interpretations of the Nomen Sacrum Iota-Heta, (Ι̅H), and you trust them over and above what I have already shown you straight from the most ancient texts. Moreover, as I have already said several times now, Yohanan the Immerser and the Son of Elohim have the same Nomen Sacrum, (Ι̅H).
In this case you do not even know there is a choice or a decision to be made: how therefore can you "rightly divide"? You can only know by the Holy Spirit of the New Covenant and that New Spirit foretold in Ezekiel is the Testimony of the Master; just as the Spirit of the Apocalypse Prophecy, according to the author of the Apocalypse, is the Testimony of the Master. Testimony is Spirit: you cannot know the Master or his name if you do not know the Word because he himself is the Word of the Father.
.
-
Oh, I forgot about the authority of the Talmudic Manuscripts.
As I stated, correctly.....hum...... Who is worshiping John the Baptist (And worshiping Yohanan the Immerser as God would not be blasphemy?)
Your double talk makes no impression here. Simply answer the question. (Who is worshiping John the Baptist?)
Blade
Talmudic Manuscripts? Lol, the Uncial texts are the most ancient GREEK texts in which the New Testament writings were written. Please educate yourself so that you do not make such false accusations and insinuations: or do you enjoy doing such things to those who love the Word?
.
Yes, I must make myself understand what you are trying to say with double talk. "Uncial is a majuscule script " written in Capital letters. around the 5th,6th and 7th centuries (AD).
I do believe there were earlier copies of the letters and writings of the chapters within the NT that were in Greek. Since it was the normal language used among the three languages in the 1st century AD.
Blade
No, the Uncial texts go back to the very earliest manuscripts.
They in fact are the earliest manuscripts and fragments we have.
Your comments are misleading and disingenuous.
Moreover all of the most ancient Uncial texts contain what are called the Nomina Sacra, (sacred name abbreviations), and none of them contain the full written name of "ιησους", or "Jesus", or "Yeshua", but instead, as I have said, the Nomen Sacrum Ι̅H. Moreover the earliest forms are just as I have written it here but the later forms began to have the case endings added to them by scribes when they also began to add case endings to all the names for grammatical purposes. This may be seen by the fact that in the genealogies we still yet do not find the names written with case endings. For the same reason most English translation will render Iakob in the genealogies as Jacob, (because it has no case endings), but in the rest of the texts they render the same name as James, (Iakobos).
You have a serious problem on your hands with this fact alone: for you must trust that there is someone called "Jesus" in all your English translations when in fact that name is nowhere to be found in any of the most ancient texts except where the authors speak of Joshua: for only that name is spelled out in full form in the New Testament, and it is ιησους throughout the LXX, and therefore also in the places in the New Testament where the name for Joshua is written out in full form, (Acts 7:45, Hebrews 4:8 ).
In short your beloved scholars have made a guess, "Jesus" or "Yeshua" are nothing more than interpretations of the Nomen Sacrum Iota-Heta, (Ι̅H), and you trust them over and above what I have already shown you straight from the most ancient texts. Moreover, as I have already said several times now, Yohanan the Immerser and the Son of Elohim have the same Nomen Sacrum, (Ι̅H).
In this case you do not even know there is a choice or a decision to be made: how therefore can you "rightly divide"? You can only know by the Holy Spirit of the New Covenant and that New Spirit foretold in Ezekiel is the Testimony of the Master; just as the Spirit of the Apocalypse Prophecy, according to the author of the Apocalypse, is the Testimony of the Master. Testimony is Spirit: you cannot know the Master or his name if you do not know the Word because he himself is the Word of the Father.
.
You said"No, the Uncial texts go back to the very earliest manuscripts."
Would you please gives some references for that last statement. All of My sources state the Uncial texts are from 4 thru the 8th centuries. They may have used the New Testament manuscripts (some 5500 of them) as the Textus Receptus did.
Blade
-
I get really tired of all the false prophets.
-
I get really tired of all the false prophets.
Same here
-
I get really tired of all the false prophets.
Same here
Me too.
-
Billy rocks
-
Billy rocks
Billy knows
-
Billy rocks
Billy knows
He does indeed know
-
Billy rocks
Billy knows
He does indeed know
Who Billy?
-
Billy rocks
Billy knows
He does indeed know
Who Billy?
Blade knows
-
Billy rocks
Billy knows
He does indeed know
Who Billy?
Blade knows
;D
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIbLqzegpgY
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnkrKm1mlzw
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3V0EWMJeGQ
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ySLbOAKy9Y
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_fFBFQ_FUo
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag9VK_8sADY
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnI7A_KAIv8
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQWoW1FFXXA
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeB5oxYEpFI
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVYsCeyhMKg
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lh_pkLd3mKs
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FIqbhUF2eE
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZFYCPVPCrQ
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS5B5U5jLn8
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNy4rAByvls
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ea_PYUNlJ6M