First Word of Jesus was repent
- Thread starter Blik
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
No.
You understand the concept about yourself. I was saying that the same concept applies to the Father.
There is a very close connection in scripture between mind and spirit.
“Who has directed the spirit of the LORD? Or as his counselor has informed Him?”
(Isaiah 40:13)
”For who has known the mind of the LORD, that he will instruct Him? But we have the mind of Christ.“
(1 Corinthians 2:16)
I agree with your point. When we read “God“ in scripture it is almost always one person, the Father.
“Essence“ is a Greek philosophical concept. When we use it to understand God we lose the unitarian belief of Jesus.
Trinitarian terminology.
He meant they are one in will and purpose.
No. As I’ve said several times, the life of Jesus began in the womb of his mother. Jesus is not presented in scripture as an eternally existing person.
Your understanding of worship is too narrow.
See my comment above concerning the Greek philosophical concept.
There is no plurality in the word echad, only singularity. Echad may be used to modify a collective noun. When that occurs the plurality is in the collective noun, not in echad. One means one, not more than one.
In your example, how many clusters of grapes are there? One, not more than one. The plurality is in the collective noun “cluster,” not in the word one.
Now let’s look at the Hebrew phrase “echad elohim” - “one God”. Where is the plurality in that phrase?
One (echad) God, not more than one God. There is no plurality in the word echad/one.
One God (elohim). If there is plurality in the phrase it would be found in the word elohim.
Elohim is a word which is plural in form but may be rendered either singular or plural in meaning, depending on the context in which the word is used.
When the context indicates that the word is plural in meaning it is translated as “gods”. When the context indicates that the word is singular in meaning it is translated as “God” or “god”.
When the word is applied to the deity of Israel it is always singular in meaning and translated as “God”.
If elohim should be understood as plural in meaning when applied to the deity of Israel (who is also the deity of Jesus - confirming the elementary point that the God of Israel and Jesus is only one person, the Father) then the phrase echad elohim should be translated “one gods”.
One final point on this. That the word elohim is singular in meaning, not plural in meaning, when applied to the deity of Israel/Jesus is confirmed by LXX. The singular Greek word theos (“God”) is used to translate the Hebrew word elohim[/] word, not the plural Greek word theoi (“gods”).
There is no plurality in the phrase “one God”.
The one God (the Father) is speaking to his angelic court.
There is tension here between the statements and the one God of Israel/Jesus.
The God of Israel/Jesus. The Father.
I’m not struggling to accept any of them.
The people marveled that the one God (the Father) gave such prerogatives to a human being. Jesus is godlike.
Maybe, but I doubt it.
P.S. I’m sorry about the bolding. I haven’t quite figured out how to use it yet. It wasn’t my intention to bold everything.
You understand the concept about yourself. I was saying that the same concept applies to the Father.
There is a very close connection in scripture between mind and spirit.
“Who has directed the spirit of the LORD? Or as his counselor has informed Him?”
(Isaiah 40:13)
”For who has known the mind of the LORD, that he will instruct Him? But we have the mind of Christ.“
(1 Corinthians 2:16)
I agree with your point. When we read “God“ in scripture it is almost always one person, the Father.
“Essence“ is a Greek philosophical concept. When we use it to understand God we lose the unitarian belief of Jesus.
Trinitarian terminology.
He meant they are one in will and purpose.
No. As I’ve said several times, the life of Jesus began in the womb of his mother. Jesus is not presented in scripture as an eternally existing person.
Your understanding of worship is too narrow.
See my comment above concerning the Greek philosophical concept.
There is no plurality in the word echad, only singularity. Echad may be used to modify a collective noun. When that occurs the plurality is in the collective noun, not in echad. One means one, not more than one.
In your example, how many clusters of grapes are there? One, not more than one. The plurality is in the collective noun “cluster,” not in the word one.
Now let’s look at the Hebrew phrase “echad elohim” - “one God”. Where is the plurality in that phrase?
One (echad) God, not more than one God. There is no plurality in the word echad/one.
One God (elohim). If there is plurality in the phrase it would be found in the word elohim.
Elohim is a word which is plural in form but may be rendered either singular or plural in meaning, depending on the context in which the word is used.
When the context indicates that the word is plural in meaning it is translated as “gods”. When the context indicates that the word is singular in meaning it is translated as “God” or “god”.
When the word is applied to the deity of Israel it is always singular in meaning and translated as “God”.
If elohim should be understood as plural in meaning when applied to the deity of Israel (who is also the deity of Jesus - confirming the elementary point that the God of Israel and Jesus is only one person, the Father) then the phrase echad elohim should be translated “one gods”.
One final point on this. That the word elohim is singular in meaning, not plural in meaning, when applied to the deity of Israel/Jesus is confirmed by LXX. The singular Greek word theos (“God”) is used to translate the Hebrew word elohim[/] word, not the plural Greek word theoi (“gods”).
There is no plurality in the phrase “one God”.
The one God (the Father) is speaking to his angelic court.
There is tension here between the statements and the one God of Israel/Jesus.
The God of Israel/Jesus. The Father.
I’m not struggling to accept any of them.
The people marveled that the one God (the Father) gave such prerogatives to a human being. Jesus is godlike.
Maybe, but I doubt it.
P.S. I’m sorry about the bolding. I haven’t quite figured out how to use it yet. It wasn’t my intention to bold everything.
-
1
- Show all
It is not true of scripture, it is not actually true, it is absolutely false to state that we are saved by our works. If I am stating this in any way that it is said in scripture it would be better for me to have a millstone around my neck and I dropped into the sea. When you accuse me of this you are the same as a murderer, accusing me of something that would cause my death.
You are putting me on trial---prove it!
You are putting me on trial---prove it!
It is contrary to scripture to say you are saved by your faith too.*
And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not. Jonah 3:10
Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.**
* See Hebrew 11:6
** See Romans 8:24
And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not. Jonah 3:10
Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.**
* See Hebrew 11:6
** See Romans 8:24
We are saved by what Christ did for us, there has never been any salvation except by blood. It is what scripture tells us and what I have always stated. The book of Romans gives details of this. Paul explains how works are looked at by God. God does not give our salvation based on works, but we are told God looks at our works, they expose our heart,
Again, you have failed to answer my question:
Why do Peter and Luke call the Holy Spirit "God"?
You're taking the word "one" out of context. He didn't just say "one", He said "are one".
ἐσμεν = exist
"The Father and I exist as one (or unity). It is a statement of existence, not will and purpose. They happen to be one in will and purpose, but we get that from other scriptures. This verse is a verse about their existence.
When I talk about the eternal nature of "Jesus", I am referring to who he is, not what He is. I am referring to the Son of God. Do you believe that the Son of God had a beginning?
In the most respectful way I can say this...You don't know what you're talking about. There are singular and plural for many Hebrew words. There is a singular form of echad, and there is a plural form or echad. Moses could have used either, but he used the plural form of the word. Some Hebrew words can only have one form, so with those words (like Elohim), context has to determine the meaning. But echad has concrete congregations, meaning there is no ambiguity in the number of the word's case.
I will illustrate with this verse from Luke 22:
“Simon, Simon, behold, Satan has demanded permission to sift you like wheat; but I have prayed for you, that your faith may not fail; and you, when once you have turned again, strengthen your brothers."
Question 1. Who has Satan demanded permission to sift?
Question 2. Who's faith has Jesus prayed for (according to this verse)?
(I'll wait for your answers)
The passage here in Num 13 uses the plural form of echad to refer to a collective whole. Every use of the plural form of echad refers to a collective whole (e.g. a group of people)Here the plural form is used because the "cluster" is a collective whole (containing many grapes).
The parallel to the Trinity would be:
Cluster= The being "God" (a collective whole containing...)
...3 Grapes= 3 persons (namely, Father, Son, Spirit)
If there was only one grape on the vine in Num 13, then the singular for of echad would have been used. But when the plural form is used, it is indicating plurality within the "one" thing it refers to.
So we are made in the image and likeness of angels too?
I already explained why this is totally in line with trinitarianism. You either don't understand my trinitarianism, or you don't understand what you said, or you don't understand the explanation I gave about how it is consistent with trinitarianism.
When did he die?
Why do Peter and Luke call the Holy Spirit "God"?
You're taking the word "one" out of context. He didn't just say "one", He said "are one".
ἐσμεν = exist
"The Father and I exist as one (or unity). It is a statement of existence, not will and purpose. They happen to be one in will and purpose, but we get that from other scriptures. This verse is a verse about their existence.
When I talk about the eternal nature of "Jesus", I am referring to who he is, not what He is. I am referring to the Son of God. Do you believe that the Son of God had a beginning?
In the most respectful way I can say this...You don't know what you're talking about. There are singular and plural for many Hebrew words. There is a singular form of echad, and there is a plural form or echad. Moses could have used either, but he used the plural form of the word. Some Hebrew words can only have one form, so with those words (like Elohim), context has to determine the meaning. But echad has concrete congregations, meaning there is no ambiguity in the number of the word's case.
I will illustrate with this verse from Luke 22:
“Simon, Simon, behold, Satan has demanded permission to sift you like wheat; but I have prayed for you, that your faith may not fail; and you, when once you have turned again, strengthen your brothers."
Question 1. Who has Satan demanded permission to sift?
Question 2. Who's faith has Jesus prayed for (according to this verse)?
(I'll wait for your answers)
The passage here in Num 13 uses the plural form of echad to refer to a collective whole. Every use of the plural form of echad refers to a collective whole (e.g. a group of people)Here the plural form is used because the "cluster" is a collective whole (containing many grapes).
The parallel to the Trinity would be:
Cluster= The being "God" (a collective whole containing...)
...3 Grapes= 3 persons (namely, Father, Son, Spirit)
If there was only one grape on the vine in Num 13, then the singular for of echad would have been used. But when the plural form is used, it is indicating plurality within the "one" thing it refers to.
So we are made in the image and likeness of angels too?
I already explained why this is totally in line with trinitarianism. You either don't understand my trinitarianism, or you don't understand what you said, or you don't understand the explanation I gave about how it is consistent with trinitarianism.
When did he die?
Just as your spirit is you, the Holy Spirit is God.
The verse isn’t about their existence. It’s about their relationship.
Listen again to what the angel said to Mary,
”The angel answered and said to her, ‘The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God.’”
(Luke 1:35, NASB)
The begetting by God, the conceiving by Mary, is the reason given by the angel for the child to be called the Son of God. As I have stated repeatedly, the life of Jesus, the life of the Son of God, began in the womb of his mother.
Scripture tells us in the birth narratives that the Son of God had a beginning. I believe the Son of God had a beginning.
Peter.
Peter.
Let’s count to ten together in Hebrew. 1. Echad. 2. Shtaim. 3. Shalosh. 4. Arba. 5. Hamesh. 6. Shesh. 7. Sheva. 8. Shmone. 9. Tesha. 10. Eser.
How many clusters are there in your example? One or more than one? Only one. In Hebrew, echad. One cluster, not more than one cluster. One - singular. More than one - plural.
How many grapes in our cluster? Scripture doesn’t tell us the exact number but we know that it is more than 1 (Heb. echad). Was it 2 (Heb. shtaim) grapes? Was it 3 (Heb. shalosh) grapes? We could continue counting the speculative number of grapes in the cluster but let’s stop at 3 for the sake of your analogy.
Equating grapes to persons we have a group of 3 (Heb. shtaim). Here is the plurality in your analogy.
How many clusters of grapes? 1. Only 1. Singular.
What if there had been more than 1 cluster of grapes? Let’s say there were 2 (Heb. shtaim) Plural. Let‘s say there were 3 (Heb. shalosh). Plural.
There is no plurality in 1. Plurality is more than 1.
There is only 1 (Heb. echad, singular) God (Heb. elohim, singular).
Angels are made in the image and likeness of God. You‘ve acknowledged that an angel may be referred to as theos in scripture.
God cannot die.
The verse isn’t about their existence. It’s about their relationship.
Listen again to what the angel said to Mary,
”The angel answered and said to her, ‘The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God.’”
(Luke 1:35, NASB)
The begetting by God, the conceiving by Mary, is the reason given by the angel for the child to be called the Son of God. As I have stated repeatedly, the life of Jesus, the life of the Son of God, began in the womb of his mother.
Scripture tells us in the birth narratives that the Son of God had a beginning. I believe the Son of God had a beginning.
Peter.
Peter.
Let’s count to ten together in Hebrew. 1. Echad. 2. Shtaim. 3. Shalosh. 4. Arba. 5. Hamesh. 6. Shesh. 7. Sheva. 8. Shmone. 9. Tesha. 10. Eser.
How many clusters are there in your example? One or more than one? Only one. In Hebrew, echad. One cluster, not more than one cluster. One - singular. More than one - plural.
How many grapes in our cluster? Scripture doesn’t tell us the exact number but we know that it is more than 1 (Heb. echad). Was it 2 (Heb. shtaim) grapes? Was it 3 (Heb. shalosh) grapes? We could continue counting the speculative number of grapes in the cluster but let’s stop at 3 for the sake of your analogy.
Equating grapes to persons we have a group of 3 (Heb. shtaim). Here is the plurality in your analogy.
How many clusters of grapes? 1. Only 1. Singular.
What if there had been more than 1 cluster of grapes? Let’s say there were 2 (Heb. shtaim) Plural. Let‘s say there were 3 (Heb. shalosh). Plural.
There is no plurality in 1. Plurality is more than 1.
There is only 1 (Heb. echad, singular) God (Heb. elohim, singular).
Angels are made in the image and likeness of God. You‘ve acknowledged that an angel may be referred to as theos in scripture.
God cannot die.
-
1
- Show all
So when the Bible says things like; "The Holy Spirit says...", It is meaning that the Father is speaking (through His Spirit), but not a separate person from the Father?
The lexical data I provided says otherwise. You need to show why you think this verse is merely a relational statement rather than what I suggested if you're going to disagree.
1. You're using circular reasoning. The point of these sub-conversations is to determine when the begetting happened. So you and I cannot refer to the timing of the begetting in our explanations.
2. Gabriel is referring to the prophecy in Isa 9 where it is said that this child that will be born will be called "Mighty God". Side-note, "The Son is not born, the Son is given. The child is born. One statement is of the person, the other is a statement of the body of this person.
Here is why I brought you to this verse...to illustrate why singular and plural forms are important:
"Satan has demanded permission to sift you like wheat".
In this verse, Luke used the word ὑμᾶς (the plural form of "you")
"But I have prayed for you, that your faith may not fail; and you, when once you have turned again, strengthen your brothers"
In the following verse, Luke used σοῦ (the singular form of "you")
What does this mean hermetically? It means that the "you" in the first verse is really "you all" or "you (as a group) (the 12 disciples...not just Peter)
So Jesus told Peter that Satan has demanded permission to sift all of them like wheat, but He comforted him that He had prayed for his (just Peter's) faith so that he could later strengthen the rest of the 12.
Words like "you" (umas) and "one" (echad) seem to be exclusively singular when understood by a mear English speaker. But if one knows the original languages, he/she can discern more precise communication from the Biblical authors.
So just as ὑμᾶς is the plural for "you", אֶחָד is the plural form of "one".
According to Jesus, we are not like the angels now, but we will be after our resurrection:
33 “In the resurrection, therefore, which one’s wife will she be? For 1all seven 2had married her.”
34 Jesus said to them, “The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage,
35 but those who are considered worthy to attain to that age and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage;
36 for they cannot even die anymore, because they are like angels, and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.
"And to the angel of the church in Smyrna write:
The First and the Last, who was dead, and has come to life, says this:..."
(Rev 2:8)
The lexical data I provided says otherwise. You need to show why you think this verse is merely a relational statement rather than what I suggested if you're going to disagree.
1. You're using circular reasoning. The point of these sub-conversations is to determine when the begetting happened. So you and I cannot refer to the timing of the begetting in our explanations.
2. Gabriel is referring to the prophecy in Isa 9 where it is said that this child that will be born will be called "Mighty God". Side-note, "The Son is not born, the Son is given. The child is born. One statement is of the person, the other is a statement of the body of this person.
Here is why I brought you to this verse...to illustrate why singular and plural forms are important:
"Satan has demanded permission to sift you like wheat".
In this verse, Luke used the word ὑμᾶς (the plural form of "you")
"But I have prayed for you, that your faith may not fail; and you, when once you have turned again, strengthen your brothers"
In the following verse, Luke used σοῦ (the singular form of "you")
What does this mean hermetically? It means that the "you" in the first verse is really "you all" or "you (as a group) (the 12 disciples...not just Peter)
So Jesus told Peter that Satan has demanded permission to sift all of them like wheat, but He comforted him that He had prayed for his (just Peter's) faith so that he could later strengthen the rest of the 12.
Words like "you" (umas) and "one" (echad) seem to be exclusively singular when understood by a mear English speaker. But if one knows the original languages, he/she can discern more precise communication from the Biblical authors.
So just as ὑμᾶς is the plural for "you", אֶחָד is the plural form of "one".
According to Jesus, we are not like the angels now, but we will be after our resurrection:
33 “In the resurrection, therefore, which one’s wife will she be? For 1all seven 2had married her.”
34 Jesus said to them, “The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage,
35 but those who are considered worthy to attain to that age and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage;
36 for they cannot even die anymore, because they are like angels, and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.
"And to the angel of the church in Smyrna write:
The First and the Last, who was dead, and has come to life, says this:..."
(Rev 2:8)
Isaiah 59 is warning the church (and all mean) against their adding man's ideas to scripture, I wish the church would listen and search the scriptures. I'm retired and can spend most of my time with scripture, I feel so blessed.
This post mentions repentance, and the responses avoid speaking of repentance. I think people mix repentant up with works and obedience, a no no subject. I am even accused of speaking against Christ's salvation for mentioning it. If Christ was writing to us here, there would be the same outcry against His words as there is about mine, for I only use the teachings of Christ.
Popular subjects are how the new covenant teaches against celebrating the Lord's plan for our salvation, or how Christ forgives us even if we don't repent, or how Christ was against any personal discipline. It is popular to say that man had every right to add to scripture, it is called interpretation.
This post mentions repentance, and the responses avoid speaking of repentance. I think people mix repentant up with works and obedience, a no no subject. I am even accused of speaking against Christ's salvation for mentioning it. If Christ was writing to us here, there would be the same outcry against His words as there is about mine, for I only use the teachings of Christ.
Popular subjects are how the new covenant teaches against celebrating the Lord's plan for our salvation, or how Christ forgives us even if we don't repent, or how Christ was against any personal discipline. It is popular to say that man had every right to add to scripture, it is called interpretation.
When your spirit talks it is you audibly expressing yourself, not a separate person speaking. When the Holy Spirit speaks it is the Father audibly expressing himself, not a separate person speaking.
The close relationship between them is the nature of their respective existence at the time Jesus made the statement. Jesus is in close relationship with his God. (This is a close relationship between a human person and his God.) His enemies thought they were in close relationship with his/their God and that he wasn’t.
The begetting happened at a specific point in time and at a specific location on earth.
The Son (Jesus) was born. The Son (Jesus) was the child. The Son (Jesus) was given. It’s all about the human person, Jesus.
That’s fine.
Echad is not the plural form of one. It is singular; the cardinal number 1.
If there is plurality it is to be found in elohim, not in the cardinal number.
When elohim is plural, it is always translated as “gods” in English.
When elohim is singular, it is always translated as “God“ or “god“ in English.
When elohim is used in reference to the 1 deity of Israel, elohim is always translated as “God” in English.
This can be verified by consulting any English translation of your choosing.
Jesus is speaking about a particular way that we are not like the angels. He isn’t saying that we aren’t like the angels in every way.
This is Jesus speaking about himself, not speaking about God.
Jesus died and came to life.
God cannot die and did not die. God cannot come to life and did not come to life.
The close relationship between them is the nature of their respective existence at the time Jesus made the statement. Jesus is in close relationship with his God. (This is a close relationship between a human person and his God.) His enemies thought they were in close relationship with his/their God and that he wasn’t.
The begetting happened at a specific point in time and at a specific location on earth.
The Son (Jesus) was born. The Son (Jesus) was the child. The Son (Jesus) was given. It’s all about the human person, Jesus.
That’s fine.
Echad is not the plural form of one. It is singular; the cardinal number 1.
If there is plurality it is to be found in elohim, not in the cardinal number.
When elohim is plural, it is always translated as “gods” in English.
When elohim is singular, it is always translated as “God“ or “god“ in English.
When elohim is used in reference to the 1 deity of Israel, elohim is always translated as “God” in English.
This can be verified by consulting any English translation of your choosing.
Jesus is speaking about a particular way that we are not like the angels. He isn’t saying that we aren’t like the angels in every way.
This is Jesus speaking about himself, not speaking about God.
Jesus died and came to life.
God cannot die and did not die. God cannot come to life and did not come to life.
There is no "if you are saved by works". You are saved by what Christ did for us. What does Christ say about obedience to Him? Does Christ use the word "must"? What do you mean by this must keep the law? Christ tells us "if you love me you will------. That is asking us to follow Him, and there is no 'must" in it. Do you think it is permissible to discuss following Jesus? Or is this a taboo subject. Is loving the Lord a permissible subject in that mind of yours?
Actually, it depends on whether a person is walking by the Spirit or not. For example, in Psalm 103, David speaks from his spirit to tell his soul "Bless the Lord and forget none of His benefits". The Psalmists actually speak to their own soul many times: Psalm 42:5, 11; 43:5; 103:1-2, 22; 104:1, 35; 116:7; 146:1; Jer 4:19.
Paul said that he did both: "I will pray with the spirit and I will pray with the mind also; I will sing with the spirit and I will sing with the mind also".
This is all possible because there is a battle within us and we are at war with ourselves. Jesus said that we should deny ourselves. How can that be? It is because part of us is doing the denying and part of us is being denied. We are a composite whole. The difference between us and Elohimis that He is divine and all composite parts of Elohim are in agreement. "For there are three that testify in heaven"
All throughout the Gospel according to John, Jesus is declaring His equality with God. They crucified Him for this...because they perceived Him as a blasphemer. Do you think He was?
We both have already expressed that. I am just pointing out that you can't repeat what you are arguing as a reason for your argument.
They both are fine. My point here is that you misunderstood the meaning of the passage because you were unaware of the conjugation of a word. The same is true for Deuteronomy 6:4. You either haven't been taught this or you just haven't studied it yet. But I have now moderately explained it and used an equivalent situation to illustrate what most people miss without looking deeply at the manuscript texts. At this point, you are just making assertions without lexical support. I hope what I have shared with you here draws you closer to the Lord and His Word.
Biblically, how did you come to that conclusion?
Apparently, He can, and did...
You conceited that "the First and the Last" is Jesus and the Father:
So how do you make sense of this?:
two people are speaking here, yet they say "There is no God besides me".
How can you possibly deny thte Godhead with verses like this.
Revelation says that "the First and the Last" was dead and has come to life.
Paul said that he did both: "I will pray with the spirit and I will pray with the mind also; I will sing with the spirit and I will sing with the mind also".
This is all possible because there is a battle within us and we are at war with ourselves. Jesus said that we should deny ourselves. How can that be? It is because part of us is doing the denying and part of us is being denied. We are a composite whole. The difference between us and Elohimis that He is divine and all composite parts of Elohim are in agreement. "For there are three that testify in heaven"
All throughout the Gospel according to John, Jesus is declaring His equality with God. They crucified Him for this...because they perceived Him as a blasphemer. Do you think He was?
We both have already expressed that. I am just pointing out that you can't repeat what you are arguing as a reason for your argument.
They both are fine. My point here is that you misunderstood the meaning of the passage because you were unaware of the conjugation of a word. The same is true for Deuteronomy 6:4. You either haven't been taught this or you just haven't studied it yet. But I have now moderately explained it and used an equivalent situation to illustrate what most people miss without looking deeply at the manuscript texts. At this point, you are just making assertions without lexical support. I hope what I have shared with you here draws you closer to the Lord and His Word.
Biblically, how did you come to that conclusion?
Apparently, He can, and did...
You conceited that "the First and the Last" is Jesus and the Father:
So how do you make sense of this?:
two people are speaking here, yet they say "There is no God besides me".
How can you possibly deny thte Godhead with verses like this.
Revelation says that "the First and the Last" was dead and has come to life.
you avoided the question , so i will make it more dircect.
gentile Christ followers are not required to keep the Law and the Sabbath, as gentiles were never under the Law, ( not mandated by rome, but by God and the specific covenant He made with Israel only),
gentile Christ followers are to follow the N.T. teachings.
do you agree or disagree with this statement??
gentile Christ followers are not required to keep the Law and the Sabbath, as gentiles were never under the Law, ( not mandated by rome, but by God and the specific covenant He made with Israel only),
gentile Christ followers are to follow the N.T. teachings.
do you agree or disagree with this statement??
