YHWH PIERCED = JESUS PIERCED

[Towerwatchman]

False, but rather the conversation is about Abraham seeing a vision of Jesus when he would come and stand before his descendants in the first person present tense and it was the Jews who twisted his words to mean that he saw Abraham and which would have to do with his age and you are as blind as a bat if you cannot see this.

Sorry, without any scriptural support this is your imagination. And following your standard for what passes for truth, it fails because the author did not write explicitly that it was about Abraham's vision.

Jesus in verse 56 never said any such thing as him seeing Abraham or of him being older than Abraham but only that Abraham had seen his day and which means the day which they were witnessing in their present tense when he said this.

If that is the case, what would have triggered the question in vs. 57 Then the Jews said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?”
Again, you need to proof read your material.

Therefore whether you like it or not, Jesus never moved from speaking of that vision that was given to Abraham of his coming and which vision went back well before Abraham ever existed.

In fact, Abraham only existed to serve God's purpose that he had for his Son and not the other way around and this was also the point in what Jesus was saying, for in verse 53 I believe, they asked him "are you greater than our father Abraham and the prophets who have died"?

Again more imagination. You should start your statements with 'Once upon a time."

And where did Jesus ever say that he saw Abraham?

Who knows? Where does it state that the author penned the conversation word for word? Obviously seeing Abraham was discussed, vs 57 "and have You seen Abraham?”

The Jews twisted his words to find a fault in him worthy of death and therefore God allowed them to continue to be confused, for he had because of their wickedness, to give them over to their own desires in order to fulfill his will for his Son to become the sacrifice for the sins of all men.

Another attempt to save face. Care to explain how you came to this conclusion based on scripture, or is it more imagination.

LOL but yes he was speaking of God's vision and plan, because that is what he was speaking of when he revealed to them that Abraham saw that vision and plan of God, that day when Jesus would finally come to his descendants and therefore he was speaking of Abraham seeing Jesus from God's foreknownledge.

That foreknowledge of Jesus was before Abraham or any other human being was ever in God's conscious thought also.

Dumb. Your laughing out loud while you write circular reasoning, "he was speaking of God's vision and plan, because that is what he was speaking of". Real smart.

1 Peter 1:20 "Who truly was foreknown before the foundation of the world but was in these last days made manifest unto you".

If Jesus existed before the foundation of the world and Peter believed this about Jesus, then why didn't he just say that instead of his being "foreknown"?

???? What does this have to do with the price of tea in China.

LOL, but rather it is quite obvious that you are the one who is confused about these verses instead.,

See the difference between you and me. When I state that you are confused and post dumb things I show you where you failed, and give you the explanation, of how and where Casper keeps failing you. But when you make similar accusations you make empty unsupported accusations.

For parents often already have the name that they want their babies to have while they have begun to exist in the womb and this is where Jesus also began to exist as well and by the way, it was instructed that his name would be Jesus Christ when he began to exist already in the womb but never before this.

Rather illogical to state that Jesus created all things, and then state that Jesus began to exist within the creation He brought about.

Like you said "reading is fundamental and as I said, so is honesty when one is reading, so I would suggest you read about his birth again, for no one picks out names for their children until those would be children are already conceived in the womb which is where their life begins also.

For unto us a Child is born,
Unto us a Son is given;
And the government will be upon His shoulder.
And His name will be called
Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Seems God did.

Show me anywhere in the scripture where the name and Title of Jesus Christ was given before Jesus was actually conceived in the womb, you are not going to find it and you know it also.

One begins to exist when one is named. Foolish.

 

[Towerwatchman]

LOL, what proves you wrong about this, is that if Jesus was the express (exact) image as you are believing, then this would mean that God the Father would also have to be a human being like your "God the Son", for Jesus could not be both God and man and still be the express (exact) image of God as meaning exactly in everyway God for this very reason alone.

Only in your world does this make sense. Jesus is the incarnate express image of God's person. Did Jesus not say 'See me you see the Father" and "The Father is Spirit." Here you are undermining your previous posts. If Cesar had a son who was called the express image of Cesar, would that be considered false since Cesar was not an infant when his son was born.

By the way, the Greek word "charakter" is used of images copied from one substance to another and not the original essence or substance itself.

Therefore, it is apparent that the writer didn't mean this, otherwise he wouldn't have used a word like "charakter" to describe this and being this word was used to refer to images of an Emperor copied and etched into a metal coin or images on a signet ring pressed into a wax seal.,

How is the image of an Emperor on a metal coin the exact same substance and essence as the actual Emperor himself? That is just how foolish this argument is.

It is also proof of how far off base your argument is on this and it is amazing to me that you trins make your many arguments on that note concerning this passage in Hebrews 1:3 also. .

Playing the same game of deception. The author wrote, Express Image of His Person, and you argue express image of.
Huge difference.
The express image of his person (χαρακτήρ=ὁ= ὑπόστασις = αὐτός). Rend. the very image (or impress) of his substance. The primary sense of ὑπόστασις substance is something which stands underneath; foundation, ground of hope or confidence, and so, assurance itself. In a philosophical sense, substantial nature; the real nature of anything which underlies and supports its outward form and properties.

 

[Towerwatchman]

LOL, but rather it is quite obvious that you are the one who is confused about these verses instead.,

See the difference between you and me. When I state that you are confused and post illogical things I show you where you failed, and give you the explanation, you don't.

For parents often already have the name that they want their babies to have while they have begun to exist in the womb and this is where Jesus also began to exist as well and by the way, it was instructed that his name would be Jesus Christ when he began to exist already in the womb but never before this.

Rather illogical to state that Jesus created all things and then state that Jesus began to exist within the creation He brought about.

Like you said "reading is fundamental and as I said, so is honesty when one is reading, so I would suggest you read about his birth again, for no one picks out names for their children until those would be children are already conceived in the womb which is where their life begins also.

For unto us a Child is born,
Unto us a Son is given;
And the government will be upon His shoulder.
And His name will be called
Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Seems God did.

Show me anywhere in the scripture where the name and Title of Jesus Christ was given before Jesus was actually conceived in the womb, you are not going to find it and you know it also.

Arguing that one begins to exist when one is named.

 

[Yahweh will increase]

Sorry, without any scriptural support this is your imagination. And following your standard for what passes for truth, it fails because the author did not write explicitly that it was about Abraham's vision.

LOL, the support is in Jesus' own words, "your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day and saw it and was glad", for it is quite obvious to anyone not already brain washed and brain dead by false doctrine, that Jesus was speaking of Abraham seeing some sort of vision of the day when he would come to his people Israel in the first person present tense.

It was the apostate Jews that twisted his words and made then out to be Jesus claiming that he saw Abraham and which Jesus never said and the same apostate Jews who you have put yourself in league with also who.

Therefore what Jesus was telling them in the Spirit, was that his being with them in the first person present tense was in God's vision before Abraham came into existence or was even thought of by God and which also answered their question "are you greater than our father Abraham"?

If that is the case, what would have triggered the question in vs. 57 Then the Jews said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?”
Again, you need to proof read your material.

What triggered it is quite obvious, for they hated Jesus and because of this, they turned their minds over to their true father the Devil and just as Jesus told them and the Devil lied to them because he wanted Jesus dead and so did they.

Again more imagination. You should start your statements with 'Once upon a time."

Who knows? Where does it state that the author penned the conversation word for word? Obviously seeing Abraham was discussed, vs 57 "and have You seen Abraham?”

They were looking for a reason to have Jesus killed and their father the Devil provided one in their apostate minds and God also allowed it and just as Peter said in Acts 2:22-24 also, for because they had of their own will fallen into apostasy from God and his truth, he turned them over to believe what they wanted so he could use them to offer up his Son for the sins of all men.

Another attempt to save face. Care to explain how you came to this conclusion based on scripture, or is it more imagination.

Nope, for I have already over and over again and therefore I will now leave you to your own delusion and let God explain it to you when you stand before him and I can guarantee you that you will not be able to argue one word with him about it when he does also.

Dumb. Your laughing out loud while you write circular reasoning, "he was speaking of God's vision and plan, because that is what he was speaking of". Real smart.

It is you who are dumb and what makes you dumb is your attempt to understand God through your own wit and human reasoning, for nothing will kill good brain cells faster than doing that.

???? What does this have to do with the price of tea in China.

See the difference between you and me. When I state that you are confused and post dumb things I show you where you failed, and give you the explanation, of how and where Casper keeps failing you. But when you make similar accusations you make empty unsupported accusations.

Rather illogical to state that Jesus created all things, and then state that Jesus began to exist within the creation He brought about.

For unto us a Child is born,
Unto us a Son is given;
And the government will be upon His shoulder.
And His name will be called
Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Seems God did.

One begins to exist when one is named. Foolish

Just like a common trin, for when they can't support the nonsense they believe within the passage that is being discussed, they jump over to another that they think balances the scales for them and which they equally don't understand correctly.

Sorry truth doesn't work that way, it isn't determined by a preponderance of evidence but rather by the witness of the written scriptures along with the witness of the Holy Spirit that inspired them and which is why you will never get to the truth, for you don't have the Spirit of God but have replaced the Spirit with the human intellect and carnal human reasoning instead.

 

[Yahweh will increase]

See the difference between you and me. When I state that you are confused and post illogical things I show you where you failed, and give you the explanation, you don't.

Rather illogical to state that Jesus created all things and then state that Jesus began to exist within the creation He brought about.

For unto us a Child is born,
Unto us a Son is given;
And the government will be upon His shoulder.
And His name will be called
Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Seems God did.

Arguing that one begins to exist when one is named.

Sorry but even the Jews at their most spiritual level knew that the above passage wasn't saying that the child would actually be Yahweh God.

Furthermore, the Bible never says "Jesus created all things" but rather that all things were created through and in Jesus and which has a totally different meaning altogether.

By the way, this passage was never even quoted in the NT as referring to Jesus and that would truly be strange if indeed both God the NT inspired writers wanted us to believe that Jesus was Yahweh God.

 

[Yahweh will increase]

Only in your world does this make sense. Jesus is the incarnate express image of God's person. Did Jesus not say 'See me you see the Father" and "The Father is Spirit." Here you are undermining your previous posts. If Cesar had a son who was called the express image of Cesar, would that be considered false since Cesar was not an infant when his son was born.

Typical for one who attempts to understand the truth in Gods word with his punny mind.

LOL, is that your ridiculous attempt at a rebuttal?

First off, Cesar's son would still be human like Cesar secondly he could never be the same human being as Cesar and when it is stated that Jesus is the "charakter" of the God's "hypostasis" it cannot mean that he is the hypostasis itself and to read that into this, reveals how ignorant you truly are to begin with.

Again, the word "charakter" was used of things copied from one substance into another different substance and like the outward appearance of an Emperor etched or pressed into a metal coin.

So it hardly can mean that Jesus was the same hypostasis as Yahweh God.

Playing the same game of deception. The author wrote, Express Image of His Person, and you argue express image of.
Huge difference.

LOL, you are the one playing the game here, for I don't play games and neither do I come here wanting to win arguments as though this was some game to outwit someone else.

The fact is, I am only hear to present the truth so that God himself can either open your heart to it if you are one of his predestined elect or he can use it as the platform for your judgment at the end of the age when you want to cry like a baby "I never saw that and nobody told me about that".

The express image of his person (χαρακτήρ=ὁ= ὑπόστασις = αὐτός). Rend. the very image (or impress) of his substance. The primary sense of ὑπόστασις substance is something which stands underneath; foundation, ground of hope or confidence, and so, assurance itself. In a philosophical sense, substantial nature; the real nature of anything which underlies and supports its outward form and properties.

Sorry but the history of the use of the word "charakter" is that of a one substance being pressed into another and it cannot mean the same substance or hypostasis like you are trying to do with it.

By the way, are you a want to be hireling and that is why you will not hear the truth about this?

For I can guarantee you, there is no money in the truth and especially now in this time of great apostasy.

So if you want to walk in the truth, you will have to give that up and that is probably why you are so vehemently resisting the truth like you are, for there will be no effeminate easy life for a true believer and especially one unto whom God is revealing his great mysteries unto.


I mean, God forbid that all of that education that you are getting is a total waste of time and money, huh?

 

[Tanachreader]

Sorry but even the Jews at their most spiritual level knew that the above passage wasn't saying that the child would actually be Yahweh God.

Wrong. Elisabeth’s Lord is God.
(1)
it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost: 42 And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. 43 And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?

(2) Yeshua is the Lord and John is great in the sight of the Lord.

For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb. 16 And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God.
Matthew 11:11 (KJV)
Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.


Jesus speaks of Himself.

That in this place is greater than the temple. 7 But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless. 8 For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.

 

[Yahweh will increase]

Wrong. Elisabeth’s Lord is God.
(1)
it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost: 42 And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. 43 And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?

LOL, sorry but Yahweh doesn't have a mother and how are you going to explain this nonsense of yours to Yahweh God when you stand before him?

You better start thinking about that, because that time is drawing nearer for you than ever before.

(2) Yeshua is the Lord and John is great in the sight of the Lord.
For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb. 16 And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God.
Matthew 11:11 (KJV)
Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.

Agreed, the word LORD when it is being used for God is Yahweh and John is Great but Jesus isn't the LORD as Yahweh but rather the Lord as kurios and he is in this way the Highest Lord among all other lords in creation but he is not LORD = Yahweh God.

Jesus speaks of Himself.

That in this place is greater than the temple. 7 But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless. 8 For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.

LOL, again your ignorance is made manifest, for Jesus and the disciples made up a greater Temple than the building made by the hands of men and that is what he was saying by this.

Furthermore in one of the other synoptic gospels the words "therefore the son of man is Lord even of the Sabbath day" followed after the words "for the Sabbath was made for the man and not the man for the Sabbath and that word Therefore always looks back to what was previously stated as the explanation for what was intended in its meaning.

"For the Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath, THEREFORE, THEREFORE, THEREFORE, the son of man is Lord even over the Sabbath day"

Who is a son of man dude?

For it wasn't only Jesus but the disciples and all men born of a man and a woman also and by the way, the Jews at this time were condemning the disciples and that is why Jesus said "But if you had known what this means, "I will have mercy and not sacrifice, you would not have condemned the innocent.

The innocent was in reference to the disciples who the Jews were condemning in this passage and not unto Jesus himself and this is when he said, "one greater than the temple is here" and which means a Temple that surpasses the Temple building made by the hands of men.

Thus the reason why "the son of man is Lord even over the Sabbath Day" is because God made the Sabbath day for the man and not the man for the Sabbath day and this couldn't have been made any clearer by Jesus either.

 

[Tanachreader]

LOL, sorry but Yahweh doesn't have a mother and how are you going to explain this nonsense of yours to Yahweh God when you stand before him?

You better start thinking about that, because that time is drawing nearer for you than ever before.





Agreed, the word LORD when it is being used for God is Yahweh and John is Great but Jesus isn't the LORD as Yahweh but rather the Lord as kurios and he is in this way the Highest Lord among all other lords in creation but he is not LORD = Yahweh God.


LOL, again your ignorance is made manifest, for Jesus and the disciples made up a greater Temple than the building made by the hands of men and that is what he was saying by this.

Furthermore in one of the other synoptic gospels the words "therefore the son of man is Lord even of the Sabbath day" followed after the words "for the Sabbath was made for the man and not the man for the Sabbath and that word Therefore always looks back to what was previously stated as the explanation for what was intended in its meaning.

"For the Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath, THEREFORE, THEREFORE, THEREFORE, the son of man is Lord even over the Sabbath day"

Who is a son of man dude?

For it wasn't only Jesus but the disciples and all men born of a man and a woman also and by the way, the Jews at this time were condemning the disciples and that is why Jesus said "But if you had known what this means, "I will have mercy and not sacrifice, you would not have condemned the innocent.

The innocent was in reference to the disciples who the Jews were condemning in this passage and not unto Jesus himself and this is when he said, "one greater than the temple is here" and which means a Temple that surpasses the Temple building made by the hands of men.

Thus the reason why "the son of man is Lord even over the Sabbath Day" is because God made the Sabbath day for the man and not the man for the Sabbath day and this couldn't have been made any clearer by Jesus either.

John says He is God the creator. John 1-14

There are many times, however, that kurios is equivalent to the divine name Yahweh, or Jehovah.

But Paul chose Silas and left, commended by the brothers to the grace of the Lord (Acts 15:40).

 

[Yahweh will increase]

John says He is God the creator. John 1-14

Where does John actually call Jesus the creator in John 1:1-14?

You are making that up, for all things being created through and in Jesus doesn't mean the same thing as Jesus created all things and the Bible never says Jesus created all thing.

There are many times, however, that kurios is equivalent to the divine name Yahweh, or Jehovah.

Yep but only when the context is applying it to God and likewise there are many times where the word Kurios is used for Jesus that reveals that he is individual and distinct from Yahweh and one such passage is 1 Corinthians 8:6 also.

 

[Tanachreader]

Where does John actually call Jesus the creator in John 1:1-14?

You are making that up, for all things being created through and in Jesus doesn't mean the same thing as Jesus created all things and the Bible never says Jesus created all thing.

All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Yep but only when the context is applying it to God and likewise there are many times where the word Kurios is used for Jesus that reveals that he is individual and distinct from Yahweh and one such passage is 1 Corinthians 8:6 also.

and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

 

[johnny guitar]

Sorry but even the Jews at their most spiritual level knew that the above passage wasn't saying that the child would actually be Yahweh God.

Furthermore, the Bible never says "Jesus created all things" but rather that all things were created through and in Jesus and which has a totally different meaning altogether.

By the way, this passage was never even quoted in the NT as referring to Jesus and that would truly be strange if indeed both God the NT inspired writers wanted us to believe that Jesus was Yahweh God.

Created BY or through has the SAME meaning.
The Mighty God IS God. See Isaiah 10:21

 

[johnny guitar]

Where does John actually call Jesus the creator in John 1:1-14?

You are making that up, for all things being created through and in Jesus doesn't mean the same thing as Jesus created all things and the Bible never says Jesus created all thing.


Yep but only when the context is applying it to God and likewise there are many times where the word Kurios is used for Jesus that reveals that he is individual and distinct from Yahweh and one such passage is 1 Corinthians 8:6 also.

ALL things created through Jesus and Jesus created ALL things is IDENTICAL in meaning.
In 1 Cor. 8:6 the distinction is between Father and Son, NOT Jesus and God.
The Lord is God and vice versa.

 

[Yahweh will increase]

All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

And when I do my art work painting in oils and acrylics, all that I paint, I paint a lot of times from what I perceive in my own mind and thoughts and therefore I can say I painted it by whatever perceived in my own mind and thoughts and when my mind and thoughts never actually touched a paint brush or the canvas to paint the picture.

God had Jesus in mind (His Logos) when he created all things and therefore in this way, God created all things through or by Jesus.

and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Yep, what God thinks in his mind = The Logos = is truly God, for God being perfect, he has no thoughts that are not exclusive to himself and unlike all of us who have sin.