"... the chasm continued widening between West and East".

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

Well, yeah. The OT is Hebrew. It doesn't

make sense to try and say the Greek OT is an older text. The Hebrew is

the original.

Besides, they left Isaiah 9:6 even though they disagree that it speaks of

the Lord Jesus. I don't see how you could possibly say that verse is

unfavorable to the Lord Jesus. You'll have to think of a new argument,

yours isn't making any sense.

Dear Grandpa, Your argument that the Hebrew text from 800 AD (800

years after Christ) is the original Hebrew Bible isn't making any sense.

Don't you know that it is a fact that the original Hebrew Old Testament

has been lost? Don't you know that even the New Testament isn't

exactly the same in each and every extant Greek NT text. There are

some variations in many of the NT text types. If it is difficult to

say exact which is the true Greek NT text, it is difficult to say which

is the original Hebrew OT text. And there is more than one version

of the Greek OT Septuagint Bible, too. The oldest available Hebrew

OT is the Dead Sea Scrolls Bible, and this isn't the original Bible, either.

It is merely one possible version of the original Bible. In both the Old

and in the New Testaments, it is difficult to prove what are the original

words. What we have are approximations, not 100 percent certainties.

But I would venture to say, ISTM, that we possibly do know what 80

percent of the OT and the NT do say in their original form. It is just

a question of which persons know the whole truth about this matter.

One thing is certain: the Masoretic text is not the perfect, inerrant,

original Hebrew Bible. There is none. But I would indeed venture to

say, ISTM, that there is less controversy and more certainty about what

the NT says than what the OT says. All Christians pretty much know

with near absolute certainty what the 27 books of the NT say. It is

less certain about the OT, because there are 6 versions of the OT

1. Eastern Orthodox Old Testament (Septuagint)

2. Ethiopian Orthodox Old Testament (Septuagint plus additional

non-Septuagint books)

3. Roman Catholic Old Testament (Septuagint with less books than

in the Orthodox Septuagint)

4. Protestant Old Testament (contains less books than Orthodox,

Ethiopian, and Catholic versions: does not have the books it wrongly

calls "The Apocrypha". Protestant OT is based on the Hebrew text

of 800 AD0

5. Jewish Old Testament (revised Masoretic Hebrew text of 800 AD)

6. Anglican Old Testament (about the same as the Catholic Old

Testament, contains the Apocrypha in an Appendix)

In Erie PA USA Scott R. Harrington December 2011 AD

 

[Grandpa]

The jewish people have been pretty exacting on bringing the OT down through the generations. God trusted the jewish people to hold the OT sacred and so do I. Why would you think that removing or changing the text as it is done in the septuagint is ok? But more importantly, why do you think that Isaiah 9:6 is unfavorable toward the Lord Jesus?

Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

I would think that by removing this verse from the bible a bigger disservice is done to the Lord Jesus Christ.

It goes pretty well with the I AM statements Jesus makes and John 1:1

 

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

[quote=

Grandpa;595579]The jewish people have been pretty exacting on

bringing the OT down through the generations. God trusted the jewish

people to hold the OT sacred and so do I. Why would you think that

removing or changing the text as it is done in the septuagint is ok? But

more importantly, why do you think that Isaiah 9:6 is unfavorable

toward the Lord Jesus?

Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the

government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called

Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The

Prince of Peace.

I would think that by removing this verse from the bible a bigger

disservice is done to the Lord Jesus Christ.

It goes pretty well with the I AM statements Jesus makes and John 1:1

[/quote]

Grandpa, The only offending words are "The everlasting

Father". Nowhere does the New Testament say, "The Son is

the Father". But Isaiah 9:6 in the KJV teaches the Son is the

Father. That's an ancient heresy known as Sabellianism.

(See Wikipedia article please!).

That makes Isaiah 9:6 in the KJV contradict the whole of the

New Testament!

Evangelical people (like John Hagee and Pat Robertson)

today worship the Jewish people. See: Michael A. Hoffman,

"Judaism's Strange Gods". It's a heresy called

dispensationalism/ Christian Zionism. And premillennialism

(chiliasm). Rejected at the First Council of Constantinople in

381 AD. God trusted the Jewish people until they rejected His

Son. See Romans. It shows OT Israel has been divorced from

God. They will only be married to God again when they, as a

people, accept the Lord Jesus Christ as their Lord God and

Messiah of Israel. Right now, Jesus Christ our Lord is the

Messiah only of the Church, which consists mainly of Gentiles,

and a small remnant of faithful Jews. The majority of Jewish

people still reject Jesus Christ, which is why they can't be

trusted to correctly keep the Hebrew Scriptures. Christ went

so far as to say of the Pharisees, "You (ye) are of your father

the devil." By and large, that is true of most of the whole

world, not only Jewish, but a majority of Gentile nations. The

Septuagint does not change the text: the Septuagint IS the

correct Old Testament text. The Hebrew Masoretic text is an

unbelieving Jewish text, and not even the original Jewish

text. The Septuagint was translated by faithful Jews who

were looking forward to Christ the Messiah. Which is why the

Jews rejected this text in their rabbinic Council of Jamnia in

90 AD. Why, Grandpa, would you follow the Jewish council of

Jamnia's rejection of the Greek Septuagint, when their one

and only sole reason for doing that is because the Septuagint

upholds the Lord Jesus Christ? The Christian Church has

always followed the Septuagint Old Testament, not the

Hebrew texts which have all been corrupted. Even the Dead

Sea Scrolls Bible, which contains a few correct readings in

some places, is not the most faithful Hebrew version. It, too,

has been tampered with. The LXX is the right people for the

people of God, the Body of Christ, the Christian Church.

God save us all. Amen. In December 2011 AD Scott R.

Harrington

PS You are removing the Septuagint from your version of the

church, not just Isaiah 9:6. You are following Jewish

tradition, and not Christian Church tradition, about what is

the correct Old Testament.

 

[Grandpa]

Grandpa, The only offending words are "The everlasting

Father". Nowhere does the New Testament say, "The Son is

the Father". But Isaiah 9:6 in the KJV teaches the Son is the

Father. That's an ancient heresy known as Sabellianism.

(See Wikipedia article please!).

That makes Isaiah 9:6 in the KJV contradict the whole of the

New Testament!



PS You are removing the Septuagint from your version of the

church, not just Isaiah 9:6. You are following Jewish

tradition, and not Christian Church tradition, about what is

the correct Old Testament.

The Lords I Am statements in the NT coincide perfectly with Isaiah 9:6. John 1:1 perfectly coincides with Isaiah 9:6
The Lord Jesus Himself says I and My Father are one.
Why did the Pharisees want to kill Jesus??

The OT is Jewish tradition. They should know more about it than anyone else.

 

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

The Lords I Am statements in the NT coincide perfectly with Isaiah 9:6. John 1:1 perfectly coincides with Isaiah 9:6
The Lord Jesus Himself says I and My Father are one.
Why did the Pharisees want to kill Jesus??

The OT is Jewish tradition. They should know more about it than anyone else.

Dear Grandpa, Please show me where Christ says, "I am My Father".

Please show me, where St. Paul, St.Peter, St. James, St. Jude, say, "The Son is the Father".

Isaiah 9:6 calls the Son "the Everlasting Father", and thus teaches "The Son is the Father".

That's a huge mistake!

Jewish tradition today is not the OT. It's the Talmud, which says, "Christ is in hell, boiling in His own

excrement".

Do you want to follow the "Jewish tradition" of rabbis who wrote the Talmud, and who blaspheme

against our Lord Jesus Christ? The same men who endorse the Talmud gathered together the Masoretic

Hebrew text in 800 AD.

God bless you. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

 

[Grandpa]

Dear Grandpa, Please show me where Christ says, "I am My Father".

Please show me, where St. Paul, St.Peter, St. James, St. Jude, say, "The Son is the Father".

Isaiah 9:6 calls the Son "the Everlasting Father", and thus teaches "The Son is the Father".

That's a huge mistake!

Jewish tradition today is not the OT. It's the Talmud, which says, "Christ is in hell, boiling in His own

excrement".

Do you want to follow the "Jewish tradition" of rabbis who wrote the Talmud, and who blaspheme

against our Lord Jesus Christ? The same men who endorse the Talmud gathered together the Masoretic

Hebrew text in 800 AD.

God bless you. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

Its not a mistake. Jesus said He was God. The Pharisees wanted to put Him to death because He said it. When Moses asks for God's name, God tells him I AM. When Jesus is asked who He is He tells them I AM. There is one God. Jesus is that God, manifested in the flesh, for us. Not an aspect, not a personality, GOD Himself.

If a people who hate Jesus still have bible passages that explain who He is, that is even more evidence. It's not like a bunch of people who Love Jesus have made up a bunch of OT scriptures to explain who He is. Those that hate HIM still keep the Bible that explain who HE IS. We don't throw away Truth because haters of the Truth have it in their bible. We know the Truth, because He IS the Truth.

I hope this helps.

 

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

Its not a mistake. Jesus said He was God. The Pharisees wanted to put Him to death because He said it. When Moses asks for God's name, God tells him I AM. When Jesus is asked who He is He tells them I AM. There is one God. Jesus is that God, manifested in the flesh, for us. Not an aspect, not a personality, GOD Himself.

If a people who hate Jesus still have bible passages that explain who He is, that is even more evidence. It's not like a bunch of people who Love Jesus have made up a bunch of OT scriptures to explain who He is. Those that hate HIM still keep the Bible that explain who HE IS. We don't throw away Truth because haters of the Truth have it in their bible. We know the Truth, because He IS the Truth.

I hope this helps.

Granda, Can you show any NT Scripture that says, "The Father is the Son". Also, do you know anything about Sabellius? Do you know Church history? Do you know about modalism? If you have a Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the KJV, you should know already there is no New Testament text that actually says the exact words "The Father is the Son". God bless you. In Erie Scott R. Harrington
PS Yes, Jesus Christ is God; but He is God the Son. He is not God the Father. Don't you understand that, Grandpa?

 

[Grandpa]

Granda, Can you show any NT Scripture that says, "The Father is the Son". Also, do you know anything about Sabellius? Do you know Church history? Do you know about modalism? If you have a Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the KJV, you should know already there is no New Testament text that actually says the exact words "The Father is the Son". God bless you. In Erie Scott R. Harrington
PS Yes, Jesus Christ is God; but He is God the Son. He is not God the Father. Don't you understand that, Grandpa?

No I can't show any NT scripture that says the father is the son. Nor can I show any NT scripture that says God is a trinity.

I know Jesus Christ is God. But I don't understand putting any qualifications on that statement. If there is one GOD and Jesus Christ is that GOD then why say He is not this other GOD or that other GOD. Maybe this is just too complicated for us. It seemed simple to me but when I try to explain it just doesn't work out.

 

[OldOrthodoxChristian]

No I can't show any NT scripture that says the father is the son. Nor can I show any NT scripture that says God is a trinity.

I know Jesus Christ is God. But I don't understand putting any qualifications on that statement. If there is one GOD and Jesus Christ is that GOD then why say He is not this other GOD or that other GOD. Maybe this is just too complicated for us. It seemed simple to me but when I try to explain it just doesn't work out.

Grandpa:
So in other words, then, beliefs don't have to make sense. If you start with a premise of illogicality, you end up with illogic. But God is God. And that's logical. Nothing illogical about it. It may go beyond our ability to logically understand it all, but it at no point goes against any logic that we can understand. God is unfathomable Mystery in His Nature (Essence), but we can know Him in His Three Persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. God wouldn't inspire a text that says the Son is "The Everlasting Father". It really is quite as simple as that, Grandpa. Isn't that simple enough to understand?
There are at least two NT texts that say God is a Trinity: Matthew 28:19 and 1 John 5:7.
God bless you.
Scott