Still waiting for you to identify my heresy, which isn't Sabellianism.Look in the mirror, genius. That is what you do by your accusations of me holding to Sabellianism.
Get a serious clue.
Still waiting for you to identify my heresy, which isn't Sabellianism.Look in the mirror, genius. That is what you do by your accusations of me holding to Sabellianism.
Get a serious clue.
No kidding. That is what you accused me of!Still waiting for you to identify my heresy, which isn't Sabellianism.
Still waiting for you to identify my heresy.No kidding. That is what you accused me of!
You affirmed in post 3 of the link below:
There is not a single verse in the NT directing prayer to Jesus as YHWH
This is heresy because the gospel message included praying to Jesus as being YHWH (Romans 10:13).
- Paul applies YHWH from Joel 3:5 (LXX) unto the Lord Jesus in Romans 10:13
Romans 10:8-14 (8) But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart” (that is, the word of faith which we preach): (9) that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. (10) For with...forums.carm.org
Keep waiting, genius because I already did in my previous post.Still waiting for you to identify my heresy.
This is heresy because the gospel message included praying to Jesus as being YHWH (Romans 10:13).Keep waiting, genius because I already did in my previous post.
This is heresy because the gospel message included praying to Jesus as being YHWH (Romans 10:13).
"For whosoever shall acall upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."
Did I say that people should not call upon the Lord to be saved?
Never. You filthy slanderer.
Everyone can now see that to disagree with Fred is a "heresy" is his eyes.Strawman.
Thanks for making that easy for me.
Going from whimpering to lashing out like that is really unimpressive, cjab.
...that Paul applied YHWH from Joel 3:5(LXX) in reference to Jesus being the 'Lord' in Romans 10:13.Everyone can now see
If Jesus is the salvation of YHWH., why shouldn't he? Jesus had the authority of YHWH, and as the Jews said, made himself equal to God (in this sense of having YHWH's authority). This doesn't give you a licence to confound the persons of Jesus and YHWH (his Father in heaven)....that Paul applied YHWH from Joel 3:5(LXX) in reference to Jesus being the 'Lord' in Romans 10:13.
If Jesus is the salvation of YHWH., why shouldn't he? Jesus had the authority of YHWH
Nonsense. Angels are explicitly alluded to as YHWH on numerous occasions (e.g. Moses and the burning bush where the text expressly calls the "angel" by the "YHWH" name). It doesn't mean that they're YHWH in person but acting on his authority. You are so much in error it is profoundly disturbing.Which proves He is YHWH.
Others had the authority of YHWH but nowhere in the NT is "Lord" used in reference to them based on an OT text about YHWH.
Nonsense. Angels are explicitly alluded to as YHWH on numerous occasions (e.g. Moses and the burning bush where the text expressly calls the "angel" by the "YHWH" name). It doesn't mean that they're YHWH in person but acting on his authority. You are so much in error it is profoundly disturbing.
Non sequitur on every point. The point you originally made was that Jesus is YHWH just because you insist that every usage of the name "YHWH" in scripture is an allusion to YHWH (the person in heaven).You need to learn how to read.
Others had the authority of YHWH but nowhere in the NT is "Lord" used in reference to them based on an OT text about YHWH.
Genesis 48:16 makes no reference to "latreuō".Furthermore, the Messenger of YHWH is YHWH in that He is the proper recipient of worship (Genesis 48:16).
I don't even know why I give you the time of day. It seems that all I ever do is pander to your overweening vanity, that presumably derives from reading a few lexicons. Why don't you heed the scriptural warning that knowledge "puffs up?" (Not that I would necessarily describe the lexicons that you read as "knowledge.")It is so easy to refute your heresy.
The point you originally made was that Jesus is YHWH just because you insist that every usage of the name "YHWH" in scripture is an allusion to YHWH (the person in heaven).
I have proved you wrong.
Genesis 48:16 makes no reference to "latreuō"
Well, this explains why you don’t know Greek, but I still don’t know why you claim that you do.Why don't you heed the scriptural warning that knowledge "puffs up?" (Not that I would necessarily describe the lexicons that you read as "knowledge.")
One thing I forgot on this topic: Rev 19:9,10:Furthermore, the Messenger of YHWH is YHWH in that He is the proper recipient of worship (Genesis 48:16).
One thing I forgot on this topic: Rev 19:9,10:
The angel to John: "So [John] fell at his feet to worship [the angel]. But [the angel] told me, “Do not do that! I am a fellow servant with you and your brothers who rely on the testimony of Jesus. Worship God! For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.”
Why does Fred spend his entire life looking for people to worship besides God?
Cf. the commentary on Rev 20:6 by Camebridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
"Notice, however, that the word “God” in this book always means the Father; and so throughout the N. T., with few exceptions."
That's the problem, -- the word is προσκυνέω and it can simply denote reverence as well. For example this same word is also used of the "worship" of the saints (see Rev. 3:9). There is a word for the kind of "worship" reserved by the saints for their God , it is λατρεύω. This word is never used by the faithful for the worship of anyone other than the only true God, namely the Father in heaven. Jesus is never given λατρεύω in the GNT.The same Greek word for worship is used in reference to the Lord Jesus (John 9:38). I already cited this passage to you in post 13. Perhaps if it hit you in the head a few times more it might sink in.
An assertion without proof. See my next response which blasts your confusion to bits.
You conveniently left this part out:
The strongest proof, perhaps, in the book of the doctrine of Christ's coequal Deity. If we read these words in the light of St John’s Gospel, or of the Nicene Creed, they suggest no difficulty, but without the doctrine there taught, they make salvation to consist in the deadly sin which the Moslems call “association”—the worshipping the creature by the side of the Creator.
Since Jesus isn't a creature - this means He is the Creator, cjab - then it is proper to worship Him because He is God.
Thanks for making this so easy for me. It's not difficult to see why you left out most of the quotation, but coming from you it isn't surprising.
Hey cjab,
Notice what it says concerning Revelation 22:3:
his servants] Note the singular pronoun, implying the Unity of the Persons named.
And Revelation 22:4:
his name [shall be] in their foreheads] So in Revelation 14:1, where, according to the true text, we see that “His” still means the Name of God, both the Father and the Son.
The singular pronoun does not infer a Sabellian unity, as you make out. As per Rev 14:1, the Son and the Father have seperate names. As God is the head of Christ, per 1 Cor 11:3, the singular pronoun has the primary denotation of God (viz. Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges infra), as I suggested earlier.Hey cjab,
Notice what it says concerning Revelation 22:3:
his servants] Note the singular pronoun, implying the Unity of the Persons named.
Per Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges on Rev 22:3, "We see that “His” still means the Name of God, both the Father and the Son." Actually, the second part of the Cambridge comment is misleading, because it fails to distinguish "God" qua person (Jn 1:1b) and "God" qua doctrine respecting the ruler & Lord of creation , which includes the Son inferentially and anarthrously, as made explicit by Jn 1:1c. It is just this kind of loose English diction that may be misinterpreted as Sabellianism by the naive (there is obviously no Sabellian intent in the commentary itself).And Revelation 22:4:
his name [shall be] in their foreheads] So in Revelation 14:1, where, according to the true text, we see that “His” still means the Name of God, both the Father and the Son.
Revelation 22:3 teaches otherwise.Jesus is never given λατρεύω in the GNT.