Religious Truths » Scripture of the Day

iris89 · 5/17/2018 9:29 am

COMBINATION OF [1] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2] DISCOURSE ON THE MYSTERY OF THE CROSS:

[1] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [VOL. 821A]

And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly; 2 Peter 2:5, [authorized King James Bible; AV]

Almighty God (YHWH) wants both the angels and humans He created to be obedient as shown by 2 Peter 2:4, [AV] “For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;” Yes, we must also believe that he is the Creator to win His approval as testified to at Hebrews 11:6 – 7, [AV] “But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. 7 By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.” And this wicked systems will soon be destroyed as shown by 2 Peter 3:5 – 7, [AV] “For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: 6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: 7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men”.

TO LEARN MORE ABOUT RELIGION AND THE BIBLE, GO TO,

1) http://iris89.conforums.com/

2) http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/

3) http://religioustruths.lefora.com/

4) http://religioustruths.boardhost.com/

5) http://religioustruths.forumsland.com/

6) http://religioustruthsbyiris.createmybb3.com/

7) http://religioustruths.forumotion.com/

To enjoy an online Bible study called “Follow the Christ” go to,http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/thread/1417398076/last-1417398076/Digital+Book+On+18+Part+Follow+Christ+Bible+Study

Your Friend in Christ Iris89

Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth. "Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today, and go to WWW.JW.ORG!

[2] DISCOURSE ON THE MYSTERY OF THE CROSS:

Many believe that Jesus died on a cross, but let's consider whether this is so or not. First let's look at the Koine Greek word that many English translators translate as cross as given in Strong's Concordance with
Hebrew and Greek Lexicon shows, with the word commonly translated cross #4716.

4716 staurov stauros stow-ros'

from the base of 2476; TDNT-7:572,1071; n m

AV-cross 28; 28

1) a cross
1a) a well known instrument of most cruel and ignominious punishment, borrowed by the Greeks and Romans from the Phoenicians; to it were affixed among the Romans, down to the time of Constantine the Great, the guiltiest criminals, particularly the basest slaves, robbers, the authors and abetters of insurrections, and occasionally in the provinces, at the arbitrary pleasure of the governors, upright and peaceable men also, and even Roman citizens themselves
1b) the crucifixion which Christ underwent 2 an upright "stake", esp. a pointed one, used as such in fences or palisades

4716. staurov stauros stow-ros'; from the base of 2476; a stake or post (as set upright), i.e. (specifically) a pole or cross (as an instrument of capital punishment); figuratively, exposure to death, i.e. self-denial; by implication, the atonement of Christ:-cross.

As can be seen, there is a translation problem here as the Koine Greek word staurov stauros stow-ros' actually means an upright "stake." But for a clearer understanding let's look at what scholars in this area have to say instead of leaning on our own understanding and/or preconceived concepts.

Hislop and Wilkinson have the following also: "Now, this Pagan symbol seems first to have crept into the Christian Church in Egypt, and generally into Africa. A statement of Tertullian, about the middle of the third century, shows how much, by that time, the Church of Carthage was infected with the old leaven. Egypt especially, which was never thoroughly evangelised, appears to have taken the lead in bringing in this Pagan symbol. The first form of that which is called the Christian Cross, found on Christian monuments there, is the unequivocal Pagan Tau, or Egyptian "Sign of life." Let the reader peruse the following statement of Sir G. Wilkinson: "A still more curious fact may be mentioned respecting this hieroglyphical character [the Tau], that the early Christians of Egypt adopted it in lieu of the cross, which was afterwards substituted for it, prefixing it to inscriptions in the same manner as the cross in later times. For, though Dr. Young had some scruples in believing the statement of Sir A. Edmonstone, that it holds that position in the sepulchres of the great Oasis, I can attest that such is the case, and that numerous inscriptions, headed by the Tau, are preserved to the present day on early Christian monuments." The drift of this statement is evidently this, that in Egypt the earliest form of that which has since been called the cross, was no other than the "Crux Ansata," or "Sign of life," borne by Osiris and all the Egyptian gods; that the ansa or "handle" was afterwards dispensed with, and that it became the simple Tau, or ordinary cross, as it appears at this day, and that the design of its first employment on the sepulchres, therefore, could have no reference to the crucifixion of the Nazarene, but was simply the result of the attachment to old and long-cherished Pagan symbols, which is always strong in those who, with the adoption of the Christian name and profession, are still, to a large extent, Pagan in heart and feeling. This, and this only, is the origin of the worship of the "cross." " [The Two Babylon's, by Reverend Alexander Hilsop]

The Cross and Crucifixion.
This Is Appendix 162 From The Companion Bible.
In the Greek New Testament two words are used for "the cross" on which the Lord was put to death.
1. The word stauros; which denotes an upright pole or stake, to which the crimminals were nailed for execution.
2. The xulon, which generally denotes a piece of a dead log of wood, or timber, for fuel or for any other purpose. Is is not like dendron, which is used of a living, or green tree, as in Matthew 21:8; Revelation 7:1, 3; 8:7; 9:4, etc.
As this latter word xulon is used for the former stauros, it shows us that the meaning of each is exactly the same.
The verb stauroõ means to drive stakes.1
Our English word "cross" is the translation of the Latin crux; but the Greek stauros no more means a crux than the word "stick" means a "crutch".
Homer uses the word stauros of an ordinary pole or stake, or a single piece of timber.2 And this is the meaning and usage of the word throughout the Greek classics.3
It never means two pieces of timber placed across one another at any angle, but always of one piece alone. Hence the use of the word xulon (No. 2, above) in connection with the manner of our Lord's death, and rendered "tree" in Acts 5:30; 10:39; 13:29. Galatians 3:13. 1 Peter 2:24. This is preserved in our old English name rood, or rod. See the Encycl. Brit., 11th (Camb.) ed., volume 7, page 505d.
There is nothing in the Greek of the New Testament even to imply two pieces of timber.
The letter chi, , the initial of the word Christ , was originally used for His Name; or . This was superseded by symbols and , and even the first of these had four equal arms.
These crosses were used as symbols of the Babylonian sun-god, , and are first seen on a coin of Julius Cæsar, 100 - 44 B.C., and then on a coin struck by Cæsar's heir (Augustus), 20 B.C.4
On the coins of Constantine the most frequent symbol is ; but the same symbol is used without the surrounding circle, and with the four equal arms vertical and horizontal; and this was the symbol specially venerated as the "Solar Wheel". It should be stated that Constantine was a sun-god worshipper, and would not enter the "Church" till some quarter of a century after the legend of his having seen such a cross in the heavens (EUSEBIUS, Vit. Const. I. 37).
The evidence is the same as to the pre-Christian (phallic) symbol in Asia, Africa, and Egypt, whether we consult Nineveh by Sir A. H. LAYARD (ii 213), or Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, by Sir J. GARDNER WILKINSON, iii. pages 24, 26, 43, 44, 46, 52, 82, 136.
Dr. SCHLIEMANN gives the same evidence in his Ilios (1880), recording his discoveries on the site of prehistoric Troy. See pages 337, 350, 353, 521, 523.
Dr. MAX OHNEFALSCH - RICHTER gives the same evidence from Cyprus; and these are "the oldest extant Phoenician inscriptions"; see his Kypros, the Bible, and Homer : Oriental Civilisation, Art, and Religion in Ancient Times, Plates XIX, XXV, XXVI, XXX, XXXI, XXXII, XL, LVIII, LXIX, etc.
The Catacombs in Rome bear the same testimony : "Christ" is never represented there as "hanging on a cross", and the cross itself is only pourtrayed in a veiled and hesitating manner. In the Egyptian churches the cross was a pagan symbol of life, borrowed by the Christians, and interpreted in the pagan manner. See the Encycl. Brit., 11th (Camb.) ed., volume 14, page 273.
In his Letter from Rome Dean Burgon says : "I question whether a cross occurs on any Christian monument of the first four centuries".
In Mrs. Jameson's famous History of our Lord as Exemplified in Works of Art, she says (volume ii, page 315) : "It must be owned that ancient objects of art, as far as hitherto known, afford no corroboration of the use of the cross in the simple transverse form familiar to us, at any period preceding, or even closely succeeding, the time of Chrysostom"; and Chrysostom wrote half a century after Constantine!
"The Invention of the Cross" by Helena the mother of Constantine (in 326), though it means her finding of the cross, may or may not be true; but the "invention" of it in pre-Christian times, and the "invention" of its use in later times, are truths of which we need to be reminded in the present day. The evidence is thus complete, that the Lord was put to death upon an upright stake, and not on two piece of timber placed at any angle.
NOTES
1 There are two compounds of it used : sustauroo - to put any one thus to death with another (Matthew 27:44. Mark 15:32. John 19:32. Romans 6:6. Galatians 2:20); and anastauroo - to rise up and fix upon the stake again (Hebrews 6:6). Another word used is equally significant : prospegnumi - to fix or fasten anything (Acts 2:23).
2 Iliad xxiv. 453. Odyssey xiv. 11.
3 For example, Thucydides iv. 90. Xenophon, Anabasis v. 2. 21.
4 Other coins with this symbol were struck by Augustus, also by Hadrian and other Roman emperors. See Early Christian Numismatics, by C. W. King, M.A.
[http://www.therain.org/appendixes/app162.html]

"THE sign of the cross has been a symbol of great antiquity, present in nearly every known culture. Its meaning has eluded anthropologists, though its use in funerary art could well point to a defense against evil. On the other hand, the famous crux ansata of Egypt, depicted coming from the mouth, must refer to life or breath. The universal use of the sign of the cross makes more poignant the striking lack of crosses in early Christian remains, especially any specific reference to the event on Golgotha. Most scholars now agree that the cross, as an artistic reference to the passion event, cannot be found prior to the time of Constantine." [Ante Pacem-Archaeological Evidence of Church Life Before Constantine (1985), by Professor Graydon F. Snyder, page 27]

The Cyclopaedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, by M'Clintock and Strong, comments:
'Much time and trouble have been wasted in disputing as to whether three or four nails were used in fastening the Lord. Nonnus affirms that three only were used, in which he is followed by Gregory Nazianzen. The more general belief gives four nails, an opinion which is supported at much length and by curious arguments by Curtius. Others have carried the number of nails as high as fourteen.'- [The Cyclopaedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, by M'Clintock and Strong, Volume II, page 580]

"It is strange, yet unquestionably a fact, that in ages long before the birth of Christ, and since then in lands untouched by the teaching of the Church, the Cross has been used as a sacred symbol. . . . The Greek Bacchus, the Tyrian Tammuz, the Chaldean Bel, and the Norse Odin, were all symbolized to their votaries by a cruciform device." [The Cross in Ritual, Architecture, and Art (London, 1900), G. S. Tyack, p. 1. ]

"The shape of the [two-beamed cross] had its origin in ancient Chaldea, and was used as the symbol of the god Tammuz (being in the shape of the mystic Tau, the initial of his name) in that country and in adjacent lands, including Egypt. By the middle of the 3rd cent. A.D. the churches had either departed from, or had travestied, certain doctrines of the Christian faith. In order to increase the prestige of the apostate ecclesiastical system pagans were received into the churches apart from regeneration by faith, and were permitted largely to retain their pagan signs and symbols. Hence the Tau or T, in its most frequent form, with the cross-piece lowered, was adopted to stand for the cross of Christ." [n Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (London, 1962), W. E. Vine, p. 256.]

I believe the ANK may have been a form of cross, from the Egyption period. I would need to do some research to back this up, this is just a knee-jerk response to this post. Paul --- Mark McFall <markmcfall@jps.net> wrote: > Heinz (quoting 21st Century NT appendix) > > Christians are sometimes disturbed to learn that > the cross, > > considered for centuries as a Christian symbol, > had its origin long > > before Christ and was actually used in pagan > mythology.It was the > > symbol of the god Tammuz, and Bacchus, and the > Egyptian Osiris. > > Mac: Hey Heinz, I've read and heard similar comments > before. However, in > regards to Osiris, I have never come across > something that suggests that > the ancient Egyptians identified a cross with > Osiris. I've read quite a > bit from _The Book of the Dead_ and other primary > Egyptian texts (by > means of translations of course), but I haven't > found anything that > would hint at that beyond what I read from lazy > scholars like Feke and > Gandy. [Heinz Schmidt, Bible Scholar]

The concept of a cross as an item of veneration is admittedly pagan, "At successive periods this was modified, becoming curved at the extremities, or adding to them more complex lines or ornamental points, which latter also meet at the central intersection. The swastika is a sacred sign in India, and is very ancient and widespread throughout the East. It has a solemn meaning among both Brahmins and Buddhists, though the elder Burnouf ("Le lotus de la bonne loi, traduit du sanscrit", p. 625; Journ. Asiatic Soc. of Great Britain, VI, 454) believes it more common among the latter than among the former. It seems to have represented the apparatus used at one time by the fathers of the human race in kindling fire; and for this reason it was the symbol of living flame, of sacred fire, whose mother is Maia, the personification of productive power (Burnouf, La science des religions). It is also, according to Milani, a symbol of the sun (Bertrand, La religion des Gaulois, p. 159), and seems to denote its daily rotation. Others have seen in it the mystic representation of lightning or of the god of the tempest, and even the emblem of the Aryan pantheon and the primitive Aryan civilization. Emile Burnouf (op. cit., p. 625), taking the Sanskrit word literally, divided it into the particles su-asti-ka, equivalents of the Greek eu-estike. In this way, especially through the adverbial particle, it would mean "sign of benediction", or "of good omen" (svasti), also "of health" or "life". The particle ka seems to have been used in a causative sense (Burnouf, Dictionnaire sanscrit-français, 1866). The swastika sign was very widespread throughout the Orient, the seat of the oldest civilizations. The Buddhist inscriptions carved in certain caves of Western India are usually preceded or closed by this sacred sign (Thomas Edward, "The Indian Swastika", 1880; Philip Greg, "On the Meaning and Origin of the Fylfot and Swastika"). The celebrated excavations of Schliemann at Hissarlik on the site of ancient Troy brought to light numerous examples of the swastika: on spindle-racks, on a cube, sometimes attached to an animal, and even cut upon the womb of a female idol, a detail also noticeable on a small statue of the goddess Athis. The swastika sign is seen on Hittite monuments, e.g. on a cylinder ("The monuments of the Hittites" in "Transactions of the Soc. of Bibl. Archæology", VII, 2, p. 259. For its presence on Galatian and Bithynian monuments, see Guillaume and Perrot, "Exploration archéologique de la Galatie et de la Bithynie", Atlas, Pl. IX). We find it also on the coins of Lycia and of Gaza in Palestine. In the Island of Cyprus it is found on earthenware vessels. It originally represents, as again at Athens and Mycenæ, a flying bird. In Greece we have specimens of it on urns and vases of Botia, on an Attic vase representing a Gorgon, on coins of Corinth (Raoul-Rochette, "Mém. de l'acad. des inscr.", XVI, pt. II, 302 sqq.; "Hercule assyrien", 377-380; Minervini in "Bull. arch. Napolit.", Ser. 2, II, 178-179), and in the treasury of Orchomenus. It seems to have been unknown in Assyria, in Phnicia, and in Egypt. In the West it is most frequently found in Etruria. It appears on a cinerary urn of Chiusi, and on the fibula found in the famous Etruscan tomb at Cere (Grifi, Mon. di Cere, Pl. VI, no. 1). There are many such emblems on the urns found at Capanna di Corneto, Bolsena, and Vetulonia; also in a Samnite tomb at Capua, where it appears in the centre of the tunic of the person there depicted (Minervini, Bull. arch. Napolit., ser. 2, Pl. II, 178-179) This sign is also found in Pompeian mosaics, on Italo-Grecian vases, on coins of Syracuse in Sicily (Raoul-Rochette, "Mém. de l'acad. des inscr." Pl. XVI, pt. II, 302 sqq.; Minervini, "Bull. arch. Nap.", ser. 2, Pl. II, p. 178-179); finally among the ancient Germans, on a rock-carving in Sweden, on a few Celtic stones in Scotland, and on a Celtic stone discovered in the County of Norfolk, England, and now in the British Museum. The swastika, appears in an epitaph on a pagan tombstone of Tebessa in Roman Africa (Annuaire de la Société de Constantine, 1858-59, 205, 87), on a mosaic of the ignispicium (Ennio Quirino Visconti, Opere varie, ed. Milan, I, 141, sqq.), and in a Greek votive inscription at Porto. In the last monument the swastika is imperfect in form, and resembles a Phnician letter. We shall explain below the value and symbolical meaning of this crux gammata when found on Christian monuments. But the swastika is not the only sign of this kind known to antiquity. Cruciform objects have been found in Assyria. The statutes of Kings Asurnazirpal and Sansirauman, now in the British Museum, have cruciform jewels about the neck (Layard, Monuments of Nineveh, II, pl. IV). Cruciform earrings were found by Father Delattre in Punic tombs at Carthage. [The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume IV, Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York]

The Scriptures, by the Institute for Scripture Research, also uses the term "impale" (it also uses "stake"), but the 21st Century NT ignores the term. The Jewish NT has "execute him on a stake." The term "impale" may not be the best rendering here for an English reader, but it can have the meaning other than something being thrust thru. Consider Esther 9:13: "have the bodies of Haman's ten sons hung from the gallows." GNB However, the New Jewish Publication Society has: "let Haman's ten sons be impaled on the stake." [comments by Bible scholars and the New Jewish Publication Society]

A Comprehensive Dictionary of the Original Greek Words with their Precise Meanings for English Readers states: "STAUROS . . . denotes, primarily, an upright pale or stake. On such malefactors were nailed for execution." [A Comprehensive Dictionary of the Original Greek Words with their Precise Meanings for English Readers]

Similarly, the book The Non-Christian Cross observes:
"There is not a single sentence in any of the numerous writings forming the New Testament, which, in the original Greek, bears even indirect evidence to the effect that the stauros used in the case of Jesus was other than an ordinary stauros [pole or stake]; much less to the effect that it consisted, not of one piece of timber, but of two pieces nailed together in the form of a cross." [The Non-Christian Cross]

Paul Wilhelm Schmidt, who was a professor at the University of Basel, in his work Die
Geschichte Jesu made a detailed study of the Greek word stau·ros'. On p. 386 of his work he said: "staur¬V [stau·ros'] means every upright standing pale or tree trunk." [Die Geschichte Jesu (The History of Jesus), Vol. 2, Tübingen and Leipzig, 1904, pp. 386-394]

Was Jesus nailed to the cross or tied with ropes? For many years, some Christian scholars denied that Jesus had been nailed to the cross for they claimed that no evidence could be found in the ancient sources that showed that crucified victims were nailed. They held to this belief, even though the New Testament makes it clear that Jesus was nailed (Luke 24:39; John 20:20, 24-29). Since that time, many examples of nailing have been found in the ancient sources. In addition to this, an archeological breakthrough occurred in June, 1968. For the first time ever, the remains of a crucified man were found in an ancient burial chamber in the northern portion of Jerusalem. The remains were from the time of Jesus, the first century A.D. The name of the crucified man was scratched onto the ossuary. His name was Jehohanan ben Hagqol. The nail driven through his feet was still in place in the feet. It was about 7 inches long and made of iron. Chemical examination of this nail revealed that the cross which the nail had been driven into had been made out of olive wood. Further evidence revealed that the nails had been driven, not through his palms, but through his wrists, between the radius and cubitus. The ancients considered the wrist to be part of the hand. This great archeological find clearly demonstrated once and for all that nails were used in crucifixion. [Hengel, Martin. Crucifixion: In the Ancient World and the Folly of the Message of the Cross. Translated by John Bowden. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977.]

Others show the "cross" as its commonly assumed form, but how reliable? "On 8 April 2000 the Daily Telegraph ran the first part of an extract from C.P. Thiede and Matthew d'Ancona's The Quest for the True Cross. This fragment is in the Church of Santa Croce in Gerusalemme ["Holy Cross in Jerusalem"], Rome, an intriguing clue indeed! The 'Titulus Crucis', as its known, was discovered in 1492 behind a 5th century mosaic being restored. This depicted "the legendary discovery of the True Cross in Jerusalem by the Empress Helena", mother of Emperor Constantine the Great, in 326 AD. In The Son of God / The Sun God I discussed the Holy Cross "vision" that led to Constantine's conversion. [See also Pillars of Fire, Holy Crosses and Flying Wheels ]. Now there's a more substantial reason for it... . D'Ancona says that, in 1998, when he and his co-author first saw the piece, it was with other relics. "in a small room...now known as the Chapel of St Helena, where the Fourth Century stonework of the Empress's palace can still be seen."
Today it is kept "under lock and key in a sequestered side-chapel" of Santa Croce under close scrutiny. Why? The article suggests that it's more than just the Church's unease over the on-going controversy surrounding the Turin Shroud, particularly regarding its authenticity. In 1988 , [http://www.100megsfree4.com/farshores/jj_tcgt.htm]

"The Greek term signifies an upright stake on which criminal were executed, with no suggestion of a cross-beam. In the Latin versions the term 'crux' was used, but according to Livy of the 1st century B.C., the word meant no more than an upright stake; it was only later that crux came to mean a cross. Josephus relates how 2,000 were crucified at one time ('Antiquities' book 17; 10:10) hardly practicable if crosses had to be made for each one. There are Greek words which denote a cross, but none of these appear in the in any of the four gospel accounts of Jesus' execution. At Galatians 3:13 Paul refers to the instrument as 'a timber' (A.V. a tree) a reference to the upright stake on which bodies of criminals were hanged under the Mosaic Law (Deut 21:22), and which Jesus fulfilled by his death.

Although (A.E. Knoch) uses "cross" in the text of the Concordant Literal Version, in the
Keyword Concordance under "cross" he says, "an upright stake or pale, without any crosspiece, now, popularly, cross". Under "crucify" he adds, "Drive a stake into the ground, fasten on a stake, impale, now popular usage, crucify, though there was no crosspiece". [Keyword Concordance by A.E. Knoch]

Some have contended that the Romans did use crosses for execution at that time although Livy refutes this. Even if this were so, the Romans were also careful to observe local customs as fas as possible to avoid unnecessarily upsetting the populace, and so likely would have modified their method to conform to the Jewish practice. A rough upright stake would be in any case less trouble to produce than a hewn cross with a joint strong enough to bear the weight of a man.

Christians are sometimes disturbed to learn that the cross, considered for centuries as a Christian symbol, had its origin long before Christ and was actually used in pagan mythology.It was the symbol of the god Tammuz, and Bacchus, and the Egyptian Osiris. It was worshipped by the Celtic druids and worn on necklaces by the Vestal Virgins of Rome...As the Greek text shows, Christ was not executed on a Cross, that symbol can be regarded for what it is, a pagan corruption of Christian worship introduced in the early centuries of our common era. Thus in harmony with 2 Cor 6:15 although long cherished, it is something that Christians should shun." [21st Century NT appendix ]

Since no ancient historian gave a vivid engineering description of exactly what instrument was actually used for crucifixion and the Koine Greek word actually means 'stake' it could have taken many forms and probably did as it is well known that the Romans varied their methods from time to time, but usually used olive wood in the area of Palestine, I guess this can be called a mystery and not fact as many take its shape or form to be as there is evidence both ways. However, it is an admitted pagan symbol even by the Catholic Encyclopedia and therefore should not be venerated.

Let's face it, I think we will agree that many use the figure of a cross as an object of worship, and where that happens we are no better than the pagans who did the very same thing. The cross is a symbol of Christ's humiliation, but we are saved through his BLOOD that was shed that day. Let us envision it this way. If our Saviour was killed by a gun, would we be hanging that around our necks. It is too macabre to sprinkle blood on our shirts to commemorate this important event, and using the cross as a symbol of our affection in the Lord Jesus Christ is not necessary. After all, we are walking by faith, not by sight. The important thing is " For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many." (Mark 10:45 AV).

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION – BOTH TRUE AND FALSE – AT WWW.JW.ORG

iris89 · 5/19/2018 8:30 am

COMBINATION OF [1] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2] DISCOURSE ON STAYING WITH THE CHRISTIAN ESSENTIALS AND NOT DRIFTING OFF INTO THE TRIVIAL:

[1] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [VOL. 822A]

Be ye therefore followers of God, as dear children; Ephesians 5:1, [authorized King James Bible; AV]

In ancient Israel, many of the religious leaders sought not Almighty God (YHWH) favor, but enrichment of their own position and stature per Matthew 23:4 – 5, [AV] “For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. 5 But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments,” And 1 Corinthians 10:14, [AV] shows we should also, “Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry.”

TO LEARN MORE ABOUT RELIGION AND THE BIBLE, GO TO,

1) http://iris89.conforums.com/

2) http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/

3) http://religioustruths.lefora.com/

4) http://religioustruths.boardhost.com/

5) http://religioustruths.forumsland.com/

6) http://religioustruthsbyiris.createmybb3.com/

7) http://religioustruths.forumotion.com/

To enjoy an online Bible study called “Follow the Christ” go to,http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/thread/1417398076/last-1417398076/Digital+Book+On+18+Part+Follow+Christ+Bible+Study

Your Friend in Christ Iris89

Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth. "Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today, and go to WWW.JW.ORG!

[2] DISCOURSE ON STAYING WITH THE CHRISTIAN ESSENTIALS AND NOT DRIFTING OFF INTO THE TRIVIAL:

It is high time for all true Christians to become/maintain focus as the end times draw ever nearer. Mainstream so called Christian denominations are asleep at the stick so to speak. They debate, argue, and discuss the superfluous and neglect the essentials; obviously they have been blinded to the urgent times we are now living in per 2 Corinthians 4:4, ""In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not dawn upon them." (American Standard Version; ASV). Now this may seem to be a harsh thing to say, but shortly it will be shown to be an accurate statement.

There was an Italian economist, Vilfredo Pareto, who developed a chart or concept of defining what is essential and distinguishing it from what was not. Basically he stated 20% of the items/things in almost any situation would make up 80% or more of the essential or important things and that the remaining 80% of things were relatively unimportant or superfluous. This principle, Pareto's concept, holds with respect Bible items as will be shown, and it is these essential few we should stay focused on.

Some of the essential few are as follows:

1. Love of God (YHWH) and being obedient to him such as not violating the first, second, third, fourth commandments found at Exodus chapter 20, and his Son, Jesus (Yeshua).
2. The vindication of God's (YHWH's) name.
3. Love of neighbor, and the need to preach the Gospel of Christ and his Father (YHWH)..
4. Salvation
5. Repentance
6. Baptism
7. Creation
8. Rejection of false doctrine
9. Rejection of wrong doing and immorality.
10. Being on guard against Satan the Devil and his agents and their sneaky ways.

And the essential few things make up probably 90% of all the things of importance to true followers of Jesus (Yeshua) Christ

Now let's consider a few examples of none essential items that generate heated discussions, but amount to only trivials as they are none essentials:

1. How many nails the Roman executioners used when executing Jesus (Yeshua). A trivial none essential that one mainstream denomination took so seriously that they even had individuals who disagreed with them with respect to the exact nail count burnt at the stake. How trivial and anti-Christian, and a none essential to true Christian faith or a real 'so what.'
2. Whether the Ptolemaic System or the Copernican System was correct, and one mainstream denomination took so seriously their belief in the Ptolemaic System that they even had some who disagreed with them by supporting the Copernican System burnt at the stake. How trivial and none essential to true Christian faith and a real 'so what', and the actions taken by the denomination supporting the Ptolemaic System so anti-Christian.
3. Exactly how to pronounce God's (YHWH's) proper name in English. Some maintain it is Jehovah, others Yahweh, or something else when the important thing is to show reverence for it. Yet many get caught up in useless arguments about its exact pronunciation in English which of course is unknown; a none essential to true Christian faith or a real 'so what.'
4. Whether Jesus (Yeshua) was also Michael the Archangel, there are strong indicators that he might have been. However, whether he was or was not is a trivial and a none essential to true Christian faith or a real 'so what.'
5. One Roman Catholic Priest, The Rev. Paul R. Shanley, in Massachusetts used to argue very vigorously over how many angels could dance on the head of a pin, but sorely violated the essential item for Christians of maintaining good moral conduct per Romans 1:26-27 by sodomizing children and openly supporting an organization dedicated to sodomizing of children. Obviously arguing about trivials was to him essential, but obedience to true Christian principles was NOT. This is what happens when one does NOT keep focused on the essentials.
6. Vigorous arguments by so called Christians over who was the commanding general of the Mehunims who fought against King Uzziah, but whether he was named this or that is a trivial and a none essential to true Christian faith or a real 'so what.'
7. Arguments within one mainstream so called Christian faith over who you should pray to make intercessions and/or mediate on your behalf with Almighty God (YHWH) when the scriptures clearly show at 1 Timothy 2:5, there is only one mediator, "For there is one God, one mediator also between God and men, himself man, Christ Jesus." (ASV). This just shows how far a field a denomination can get when they do not keep focused on the true Christian essentials.
8. Silly arguments about God (YHWH) and what a god is when the Bible clearly states, at John 10:22 "And it was the feast of the dedication at Jerusalem: and it was winter. 23 And Jesus walked in the temple, in Solomon's porch. 24 The Jews therefore came round about him and said to him: How long dost thou hold our souls in suspense? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly. 25 Jesus answered them: I speak to you, and you believe not: the works that I do in the name of my Father, they give testimony of me. 26 But you do not believe, because you are not of my sheep. 27 My sheep hear my voice. And I know them: and they follow me. 28 And I give them life everlasting: and they shall not perish for ever. And no man shall pluck them out of my hand. 29 That which my Father hath given me is greater than all: and no one can snatch them out of the hand of my Father. 30 I and the Father are one. 31 The Jews then took up stones to stone him. 32 Jesus answered them: Many good works I have shewed you from my Father. For which of those works do you stone me? 33 The Jews answered him: For a good work we stone thee not, but for blasphemy: and because that thou. being a, man, makest thyself God. 34 Jesus answered them: Is it not written in your law: I said, you are gods? 35 If he called them gods to whom the word of God was spoken; and the scripture cannot be broken: 36 Do you say of him whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the world: Thou blasphemest; because I said: I am the Son of God? 37 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. 38 But if I do, though you will not believe me, believe the works: that you may know and believe that the Father is in me and I in the Father. 39 They sought therefore to take him: and he escaped out of their hands. 40 And he went again beyond the Jordan, into that place where John was baptizing first. And there he abode. 41 And many resorted to him: and they said: John indeed did no sign. 42 But all things whatsoever John said of this man were true. And many believed n him. (Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible; DRCB) An example provided a ancient people of what can happen when a denomination can get when they do not keep focused on the true godly essentials, they wanted to kill God's (YHWH's) only begotten Son because he told them who he was. Boy can people who do not maintain godly focus really go a field.

And last a admonition from an Apostle Not to become a stumbling block to the weak because of our godly knowledge:

1 Corinthians 8:1-13 "Now concerning those things that are sacrificed to idols: we know we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up: but charity edifieth. 2 And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he hath not yet known as he ought to know. 3 But if any man love God, the same is known by him. 4 But as for the meats that are sacrificed to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world and that there is no God but one. 5 For although there be that are called gods, either in heaven or on earth (for there be gods many and lords many): 6 Yet to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we unto him: and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
7 But there is not knowledge in every one. For some until this present, with conscience of the idol, eat as a thing sacrificed to an idol: and their conscience, being weak, is defiled. 8 But meat doth not commend us to God. For neither, if we eat, shall we have the more: nor, if we eat not, shall we have the less. 9 But take heed lest perhaps this your liberty become a stumblingblock to the weak. 10 For if a man see him that hath knowledge sit at meat in the idol's temple, shall not his conscience, being weak, be emboldened to eat those things which are sacrificed to idols? 11 And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ hath died? 12 Now when you sin thus against the brethren and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ. 13 Wherefore, if meat scandalize my brother, I will never eat flesh, lest I should scandalize my brother. (DRCB).

Conclusion, stay focused on the essentials for Christians and do not allow yourself to lose focus and go off on a tangent.

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION – BOTH TRUE AND FALSE – AT WWW.JW.ORG

iris89 · 5/21/2018 7:23 am

COMBINATION OF [1] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2] THE RARE FRUIT TREES AND VEGETABLES

[1] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [VOL. 823A]

I will remember the works of the LORD: surely I will remember thy wonders of old. 12 I will meditate also of all thy work, and talk of thy doings. Psalms 77:11 – 12, [authorized King James Bible; AV]

This truth is echoed at Matthew 24:12 – 13, [AV] “And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. 13 But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.” And at Acts 26:20, [AV] “But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.” Clearly showing the need to repent and bring our thinking in line with that of the true God.

TO LEARN MORE ABOUT RELIGION AND THE BIBLE, GO TO,

1) http://iris89.conforums.com/

2) http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/

3) http://religioustruths.lefora.com/

4) http://religioustruths.boardhost.com/

5) http://religioustruths.forumsland.com/

6) http://religioustruthsbyiris.createmybb3.com/

7) http://religioustruths.forumotion.com/

To enjoy an online Bible study called “Follow the Christ” go to,http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/thread/1417398076/last-1417398076/Digital+Book+On+18+Part+Follow+Christ+Bible+Study

Your Friend in Christ Iris89

Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth. "Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today, and go to WWW.JW.ORG!

[2] Here is a Commentary on Bountiful Trees and Vegetables God (YHWH) has provided for mankind, specifically the, BACCAUREA ANGULATA - Belimbing Hutan

General Information
Baccaurea angulata is a tree with a dense crown growing 6 - 21 metres tall. The bole is unbuttressed; it can be 10 - 40cm in diameter[
327
The tree is harvested from the wild for its edible fruit, which is eaten locally.
Known Hazards
None known
Range
Southeast Asia - Malaysia, Indonesia.
Habitat
Primary and secondary rain forest, riverine and non-riverine forests at elevations from sea level to 800 metres[
327
Cultivation Details

Found in the wild on sandstone or laterite soils[
327
].

A dioecious species, both male and female forms need to be grown if fruit and seed are required[
327
].
Edible Uses
Fruit - raw[
]. A sweet to sour flavour[

]. The obovoid fruit can be 50cm long and 26mm wide[
Medicinal
We have no specific information on this species, but the bark of several members of this genus is used to relieve eye inflammation[
Agroforestry Uses:
In common with other trees that produce their flowers and fruits on the trunk of the tree, members of this genus are generally considered to be good support trees for the climbing rattan palms, which are grown to provide material for basket making, weaving into furniture, making ropes etc[
Other Uses
We have no specific information for this species, but the bark of several members of this genus is used, along with other ingredients, as a dyestuff to colour silk yellow, red or mauve, using the dyeing process known as 'pekan' in Malay[

Although we have no specific information for this species, most members of this genus produce an excellent timber, which can be used to build houses and boats and to make furniture[ ?[SOURCE - RETRIVED FROM http://tropical.theferns.info/viewtropical.php?id=Baccaurea+angulata ON 3 /17/2018]

Seeds can be obtained from Tradewind, and here is their catalog description, 3565 - Baccaurea angulata - Belimbing Hutan
a.k.a. Rosok. An extremely rare fruit from the jungles of Borneo, rarely seen anywhere else in the world. The fruits are bright red, with a neon sheen and grow to around the size of a golf ball. Flesh is translucent white and is usually eaten fresh. The fruits are very exotic and distinctive in appearance, lending towards their overall ornamental value. Fast-growing tree, needs tropical conditions for growth. ?[SOURCE - RETRIVED FROM https://mail.yahoo.com/d/folders/1/messages/42156 ON 3 /17/2018]

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION – BOTH TRUE AND FALSE – AT WWW.JW.ORG

iris89 · 5/23/2018 2:27 pm

COMBINATION OF [1] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2] A DISCOURSE ON ISAIAH 9:6, WITH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

[1] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [VOL. 824A]

Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews. 23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. 24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. John 4:22 – 24, [authorized King James Bible; AV]

As 2 Corinthians 13:11,says, [AV] “Finally, brethren, farewell. Be perfect, be of good comfort, be of one mind, live in peace; and the God of love and peace shall be with you.” All genuine worshippers of Almighty God (YHWH), whould be per Romans 16:17, [AV] “Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.” And this is further testified to in Romans 15:5 – 6, [AV] “Now the God of patience and consolation grant you to be likeminded one toward another according to Christ Jesus: 6 That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

TO LEARN MORE ABOUT RELIGION AND THE BIBLE, GO TO,

1) http://iris89.conforums.com/

2) http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/

3) http://religioustruths.lefora.com/

4) http://religioustruths.boardhost.com/

5) http://religioustruths.forumsland.com/

6) http://religioustruthsbyiris.createmybb3.com/

7) http://religioustruths.forumotion.com/

To enjoy an online Bible study called “Follow the Christ” go to,http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/thread/1417398076/last-1417398076/Digital+Book+On+18+Part+Follow+Christ+Bible+Study

Your Friend in Christ Iris89

Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth. "Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today, and go to WWW.JW.ORG!

[2] A DISCOURSE ON ISAIAH 9:6, WITH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
“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, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” (Isaiah 9:6 ASV-American Standard Version)
“parvulus enim natus est nobis filius datus est nobis et factus est principatus super umerum eius et vocabitur nomen eius Admirabilis consiliarius Deus fortis Pater futuri saeculi Princeps pacis” (Isaiah 9:6 Latin Vulgate)
“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.” (Isaiah 9:6 AV)
Built around, “Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible” by Fausset B. Jamieson with scriptures given in sets for many different Bible translations to avoid the bias of any one:

1)Isaiah 9:6. For--the ground of these great expectations, unto us--for the benefit of the Jews first, and then the Gentiles (compare "unto you," “for there is born to you this day in the city of David a Saviour, who is Christ the Lord.” ( Luke 2:11 ASV) son . . . given—“I will tell of the decree: Jehovah said unto me, Thou art my son; This day have I begotten thee.” (Psalms 2:7 ASV). God's gratuitous gift, on which man had no claim, ““ For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” (John 3:16 AV) and “ For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” (Romans 6:23 AV). [[You will note that Jehovah (YHWH) called his his son, “Thou art my son” that he have because he so loved the world]]

2)Government . . . upon . . . shoulder--The ensign of office used to be worn on the shoulder, in token of sustaining the government “I will give him the key to the house of David – the highest position in the royal court. He will open doors, and no one will be able to shut them; he will close doors, and no one will be able to open them.” (Isaiah 22:22 New Living Translation). Here the government on Messiah's shoulder is in marked antithesis to the "yoke and staff" of the oppressor on Israel's "shoulder" “For God will break the chains that bind his people and the whip that scourges them, just as he did when he destroyed the army of Midian with Gideon's little band.” (Isaiah 9:4 New Living Translation). He shall receive the kingdom of the earth from the Father, to vindicate it from the misrule of those to whom it was entrusted to hold it for and under the Most High, but who sought to hold it in defiance of His right; the Father asserts His right by the Son, the "Heir of all things," who will hold it for Him “"I saw in the night visions, and behold, one like the Son of Man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of Days, and they brought Him near before Him. [[Notice God (YHWH) figuratively gave him “the key to the house of David” and that he, Jesus (Jeshua) would “receive the kingdom of the earth from his Father (YHWH), so they were obviously two distinct entities with the superior, YHWH, giving things to the lessor, his son, Jesus (Jeshua)]]

3)And there was given Him dominion and glory and a Kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and His Kingdom that which shall not be destroyed” (Daniel 7:13,14 Third Millennium Bible). name . . . called--His essential characteristics shall be. “And the angel of the LORD said unto him, "Why askest thou thus after my name, seeing it is secret?" (Judges 13:18 Third Millennium Bible), “Indeed, the sacred secret of this godly devotion is admittedly great: ‘He was made manifest in flesh, was declared righteous in spirit, appeared to angels, was preached about among nations, was believed upon in [the] world, was received up in glory.’” (1 Timothy 3:16 NWT). [[note, here again they are shown to be two distinct entities with the superior, YHWH, giving things to the lessor, his son, Jesus (Jeshua)]]

4)Counsellor-- “I shall bless Jehovah, who has given me advice. Really, during the nights my kidneys have corrected me.” (Psalms 16:7 NWT), “Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and the knowledge of God! How unsearchable His judgments and untraceable His ways!” (Romans 11:33-34 The Holman Christian Standard Bible), “Yet to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ is God's power and God's wisdom, “ (1 Corinthians 1:24 The Holman Christian Standard Bible), “In him lie hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.” (Colossians 2:3 The New Living Translation).

5)A mighty God—“ A remnant of them will return to the Mighty God.” (Isaiah 10:21 The New Living Translation), “Who is the King of glory? The LORD, strong and mighty, the LORD, mighty in battle!” ( Psalms 24:8 Revised Standard Version), “awaiting our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,” (Titus 2:13 Revised Standard Version). HORSLEY translates: "God the mighty man." "Unto us . . . God" is equivalent to "Immanuel" “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: behold, an almah shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanu'el.” (Isaiah 7:14 Hebrew Names Version). [[Note, here it brings out the lessor one, Jesus (Jeshua), is given by the superior one, God Almighty (WHYH) as a sign, see Isaiah 7:14 above]]

6)Everlasting Father--This marks Him as "Wonderful," that He is "a child," yet the "everlasting Father" “Yeshua said to him, "Have I been with you such a long time, and do you not know me, Pilipos? He who has seen me has seen the Father. How do you say, 'Show us the Father?'” (John 14:9 Hebrew Names Version). Earthly kings leave their people after a short reign; He will reign over and bless them for ever [HENGSTENBERG]. “The sceptre shall not be taken away from Juda, nor a ruler from his thigh, till he come that is to be sent, and he shall be the expectation of nations.” (Genesis 49:10 Douay-Rheims Bible) (Shiloh, "The Tranquillizer"). Finally “And in that day I will make a covenant with them, with the beasts of the field, and with the fowls of the air, and with the creeping things of the earth: and I will destroy the bow, and the sword, and war out of the land: and I will make them sleep secure.” (Hosea 2:18 Douay-RheimsBible). Even already He is "our peace" “Glory to God in the highest, and on the earth peace among men with whom he is well pleased.” (Luke 2:14 The Bible in Basic English), “For he is our peace, who has made the two into one, and by whom the middle wall of division has been broken down,” (Ephesians 2:14 The Bible in Basic English). [[Here Jesus (Jeshua), the lessor one, lets it be known that he is the glory of his Father, the superior one (YHWH)]]

Additional Information:
17 (Philippians 2:5-8 AV). He was referred to in prophecy in the Old Testament as a Mighty God, but not as the Almighty God (YHWH), which clearly shows he was a very powerful spirit creature second in power and glory only to his Father “ 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.” (Isaiah 9:6 AV). When the proper time arrived, he was sent by his Father, ), Almighty God (YHWH), to earth “ But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,” (Galatians 4:4 AV), “And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. 31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. 32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: 33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end. 34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? 35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.” (Luke 1:30-35 AV).

Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) is clearly the son of Almighty God (YHWH). With respect to his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) the scriptures clearly show he always existed “ Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.” (Psalms 90:2 AV); whereas, with Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) the scriptures clearly show “Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:” (Colossians 1:14-15 AV), and likewise call him ““ 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.” (Isaiah 9:6 AV). Notice, he is NOT called Almighty God, but mighty God; quite different from his Father. Furthermore, he is called, “The everlasting Father,” I want you to notice how it says that this Son will be called “Everlasting Father”. But wait, notice it says “Son” will be “called”. How is one to understand that a “Son” will be called a “Father”? We see many people do not understand this scripture, and “think” they do understand.” “ Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?” (Matthew 26:53 AV), Now we understand that there has to be someone else in order for this to be true. “ And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.” (John 17:11 AV), obviously, you do not have to be a scientist to know there is two beings involved here. “ As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.” (John 6:57 AV), here also, it is so obvious that two entities are being spoken about a 4 th. Grader would see it.

Now we understand that The Son is not The Father. So why does it say in Isaiah 9:6 that The Son will be called “Everlasting Father”? Let’s look at some scripture, John 17:22-26 AV, “And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: 23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me. 24 ¶ Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world. 25 O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee: but I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast sent me. 26 And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them.” “ Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.” (John 14:10 AV); The Father dwells in the Son, so now we know why The Son is “called” Everlasting Father, because the Everlasting Father is in the Son. So the understanding is: If I come to to The Son and say to him “Father”, he will reply, Yes, Son?”. But why is he called the mighty God? The Father is the Almighty God, so if I come to to The Son and say to him “mighty God”, he will reply, “Yes, what can I do for you?”. This is because the Almighty God (YHWH) dwells in The Son, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves). To sumarize, I will provide some scripture for a further understanding, “ Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: 13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son: 14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: 15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. 19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell; 20 And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. 21 And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled 22 In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight: 23 If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister; 24 Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body’s sake, which is the church: Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God; 26 Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints: 27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory: 28 Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus: 29 Whereunto I also labour, striving according to his working, which worketh in me mightily.” (Colossians 1:12-29 AV), “ And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.” (1 John 5:20 AV), and this is one of my favorite scriptures that explains that The True God is in The Son, and we are in The True God who is in The Son, try reading the scriptures above where the Father is in The Son and we in The Father and we in The Son. So now the understanding is clear that the Son is not the Almighty God (YHWH), and the Son, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves), is not the Everlasting Father. Let the truth be known, “ Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:” (Deuteronomy 6:4 AV), this is Unsullied Monotheism That Does Not Support Unity For Another.

For additional proof/evidence the Trinity is false dogma, see Post, “Discourse on John 1:1” and the three letters of Bro. Scaramastro on the same thread, “Discourse on Isaiah 9:6,” “Discourse on Isaiah 9:7,” “Discourse on 1 Timothy 3:16,” “The Trinity is False Doctrine – Revised,” etc. on this BB. Also go to the resources mentioned in these writings and especially to the following Links:
http://philologos.org/__eb-ttb/default.htm (The Two Babylons, by Rev. Alexander Hilsop)
http://reslight.addr.com/greatdebate.html (The Great Debate Regarding The Father, Son & Holy Spirit; An exhaustive verse-by-verse, side-by-side; by Roger Wagner)
http://www.heraldmag.org/olb/bsl/Library/Doctrine/Trinity/Debate/TGD1.pdf (book on great trinitarian/arius debate on line)
http://www.christianeducational.org/faq/v1i3.pdf
http://www.antipas.org/magazine/editor/trinity/letter1.html (against Trinity clearly shows father and son different)
http://www.tellway-publishing.com ("Jesus-God or the Son of God?" by Brian Holt – one of the best)
http://members.aol.com/hector3001/christology.htm

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION – BOTH TRUE AND FALSE – AT WWW.JW.ORG

iris89 · 5/24/2018 2:58 pm

COMBINATION OF [1] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2] DISCOURSE ON ISAIAH 9:7

[1] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [VOL. 825A]

in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. Matthew 7:21 – 23, [authorized King James Bible; AV]

As shown in Deuteronomy 32:- 29, [AV] “For they are a nation void of counsel, neither is there any understanding in them. 29 O that they were wise, that they understood this, that they would consider their latter end!” clearly showing that many are ‘stiff necked’ and confident in their own wisdom instead of obeying Almighty God (YHWH). But those who desire truth shall seek after it and win God’s approval per Psalms 51:6, [AV] “Behold, thou desirest truth in the inward parts: and in the hidden part thou shalt make me to know wisdom.”

TO LEARN MORE ABOUT RELIGION AND THE BIBLE, GO TO,

1) http://iris89.conforums.com/

2) http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/

3) http://religioustruths.lefora.com/

4) http://religioustruths.boardhost.com/

5) http://religioustruths.forumsland.com/

6) http://religioustruthsbyiris.createmybb3.com/

7) http://religioustruths.forumotion.com/

To enjoy an online Bible study called “Follow the Christ” go to,http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/thread/1417398076/last-1417398076/Digital+Book+On+18+Part+Follow+Christ+Bible+Study

Your Friend in Christ Iris89

Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth. "Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today, and go to WWW.JW.ORG!

[2] Discourse on Isaiah 9:7
“Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.” (Isaiah 9:7 AV)
Isaiah 9:7 is a prophecy of what we pray for in the prayer given by Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) at “9 ¶ After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. 10 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. 11 Give us this day our daily bread. 12 And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. 13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen. 14 For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: 15 But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.” (Matthew 6:9-15 AV) It shows that God Almighty (YHWH) has purposed to have his righteousness done on earth as it is in Heaven at his own due time and to have his son, by Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves), rule it. This will happen at the end-times, and even God’s son, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves), does not know when this will happen, but only his Father (YHWH), “ But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.” (Matthew 24:36 AV). This clearly shows a superior, the Father (YHWH), who has control of everything, and a lessor or subordinate, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves), who does his Father (YHWH) will. In fact, this arrangement is clearly defined as to order, “ But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.” (1 Corinthians 11:3 AV). The Bible clearly shows that the superior, Almighty God (YHWH) will subject all things onto his son, (Jeshua or YHWH saves), until he gets them into order for him (YHWH) and then the son, (Jeshua or YHWH saves), will subject himself to him, “ And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.” (1 Corinthians 15:28 AV). The son, (Jeshua or YHWH saves), is clearly shown as subordinate and only being able to do what his Father (YHWH) permits, “ Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.” (John 5:19 AV).

The son’s rule is pictured as ruling over a perpetual kingdom where his perpetual princely rule shall increase and be unlimited at “ And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.” (Daniel 2:44 AV), and this is just another prophecy about the fulfillment of the Lord’s prayer previously given. He will figuratively sit on the throne of David “ Therefore now, LORD God of Israel, keep with thy servant David my father that thou promisedst him, saying, There shall not fail thee a man in my sight to sit on the throne of Israel; so that thy children take heed to their way, that they walk before me as thou hast walked before me.” (1 Kings 8:25 AV) to fulfill the promise God (YHWH) had made to David about the Messiah, “ The LORD hath sworn in truth unto David; he will not turn from it; Of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne.” (Psalms 132:11 AV), the Lord (a title and not a name) here being Almighty God (YHWH) as Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) had not yet entered the scene. “Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion. 7 ¶ I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. 8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.” (Psalms 2:6-8 AV), clearly shows God’s (YHWH’s) intent to put his son, (Jeshua or YHWH saves), whom he had begotten, on the figurative throne of David as part of “thine inheritance” with respect “the utter most parts of the earth.” “At that time they shall call Jerusalem the throne of the LORD; and all the nations shall be gathered unto it, to the name of the LORD, to Jerusalem: neither shall they walk any more after the imagination of their evil heart. 18 In those days the house of Judah shall walk with the house of Israel, and they shall come together out of the land of the north to the land that I have given for an inheritance unto your fathers.” (Jeremiah 3:17-18 AV), here it clearly shows that God (YHWH) was applying the throne of David not just to the nation of Israel (Judah), but to the entire earth. God (YHWH) then reiterates his intent, “And I will set up one shepherd over them, and he shall feed them, even my servant David; he shall feed them, and he shall be their shepherd. 24 And I the LORD will be their God, and my servant David a prince among them; I the LORD have spoken it. 25 And I will make with them a covenant of peace, and will cause the evil beasts to cease out of the land: and they shall dwell safely in the wilderness, and sleep in the woods. 26 And I will make them and the places round about my hill a blessing; and I will cause the shower to come down in his season; there shall be showers of blessing.,” (Ezekiel 34:23-26 AV), here God Almighty is likening his son, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) to the ancient King David who was a shepherd, “And I will set up one shepherd over them” “and I the LORD [YHWH] will be their God, and my servant David a prince [Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves)] among them.” “Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions: 17 And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand. 18 And when the children of thy people shall speak unto thee, saying, Wilt thou not shew us what thou meanest by these? 19 Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand. 20 And the sticks whereon thou writest shall be in thine hand before their eyes. 21 And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land: 22 And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all:” (Ezekiel 37:16-22 AV) clearly shows the Lord GOD (YHWH) since Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) had not yet entered the scene and proved his faithfulness to his Father, YHWH, and that he would put the “children of Israel” under a king who would be “one king shall be a king to them all” [all here means everyone obedient to him, otherwise the Lord’s prayer would not be valid]. This is made very sure and clear in the New Testament, “He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: 33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.” Luke 1:32-33 AV), here God the Almighty (YHWH) speaks of his Son, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves), and says he, the Lord (JHWH) shall give it to him, his Son, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves), clearly showing once more a superior, Almighty God (YHWH), giving something to a lessor or subordinate, his son, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves). This relationship is once more reinforced at “ Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;” (Acts 2:30 AV), clearly shows once more a superior, God (YHWH) stating under “sworn with an oath” to give Christ, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves), a lessor or subordinate the figurative throne of David.

This will not be a kingdom of mere might, and triumph of force over its enemies, but of righteousness and justice attainable only in and by the Messiah, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves), and this is made clear “ The LORD is well pleased for his righteousness’ sake; he will magnify the law, and make it honourable.” (Isaiah 42:21 AV), “Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre. 7 Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.” (Psalms 45:6-7 AV). With respect ‘zeal’ this includes not only Christ’s, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves), hidden spiritual victory over the Devil during his first coming, but the principle one that will be accompanied with the ‘judgments’ on the Antichrist and all other enemies at his second coming, “ For he put on righteousness as a breastplate, and an helmet of salvation upon his head; and he put on the garments of vengeance for clothing, and was clad with zeal as a cloke.” (Isaiah 59:17 AV), “O thou enemy, destructions are come to a perpetual end: and thou hast destroyed cities; their memorial is perished with them. 7 But the LORD shall endure for ever: he hath prepared his throne for judgment. 8 And he shall judge the world in righteousness, he shall minister judgment to the people in uprightness.” (Psalms 9:6-8 AV).

Last, but not least, Note, also, that this son did not exist at the time the prophet was giving the message for the future tense is talked about. Note, also, that this son is talked about as having to be conceived and born in order to exist. Note that this special son is not talked about as already existing and taking on a new form as The Trinitarian Doctrine would require it. In fact, how can a son be co-equal and co-existent with his father? The Doctrine of The Trinity defies the universally accepted and historically always held meaning of the words for father and son. Not only does it defy the meaning of these words, it destroys their meaning! This fact is important to realize for God gave us language. It was not invented by man as the evolutionist tries to say. Thus, we are not destroying man made terms, but God-given terms! These terms, as given to us by God, require that the father exists before the son, and for the son to be brought into existence by the father. This universally accepted and recognized definition is what these terms have meant from the beginning of this creation. Therefore, who has given anyone the authority to change these God-given terms now? In fact, The Lord Jesus Christ verifies the meaning of these terms when he says, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him." (John 13:16 AV) "Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I." (John 14:28 AV).

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION – BOTH TRUE AND FALSE – AT WWW.JW.ORG

iris89 · 5/26/2018 7:52 am

COMBINATION OF [1] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2] DISCOURSE ON ISAIAH 9:7

[1] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [VOL. 825A]

in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. Matthew 7:21 – 23, [authorized King James Bible; AV]

As shown in Deuteronomy 32:- 29, [AV] “For they are a nation void of counsel, neither is there any understanding in them. 29 O that they were wise, that they understood this, that they would consider their latter end!” clearly showing that many are ‘stiff necked’ and confident in their own wisdom instead of obeying Almighty God (YHWH). But those who desire truth shall seek after it and win God’s approval per Psalms 51:6, [AV] “Behold, thou desirest truth in the inward parts: and in the hidden part thou shalt make me to know wisdom.”

TO LEARN MORE ABOUT RELIGION AND THE BIBLE, GO TO,

1) http://iris89.conforums.com/

2) http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/

3) http://religioustruths.lefora.com/

4) http://religioustruths.boardhost.com/

5) http://religioustruths.forumsland.com/

6) http://religioustruthsbyiris.createmybb3.com/

7) http://religioustruths.forumotion.com/

To enjoy an online Bible study called “Follow the Christ” go to,http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/thread/1417398076/last-1417398076/Digital+Book+On+18+Part+Follow+Christ+Bible+Study

Your Friend in Christ Iris89

Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth. "Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today, and go to WWW.JW.ORG!

[2] Discourse on Isaiah 9:7
“Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.” (Isaiah 9:7 AV)
Isaiah 9:7 is a prophecy of what we pray for in the prayer given by Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) at “9 ¶ After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. 10 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. 11 Give us this day our daily bread. 12 And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. 13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen. 14 For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: 15 But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.” (Matthew 6:9-15 AV) It shows that God Almighty (YHWH) has purposed to have his righteousness done on earth as it is in Heaven at his own due time and to have his son, by Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves), rule it. This will happen at the end-times, and even God’s son, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves), does not know when this will happen, but only his Father (YHWH), “ But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.” (Matthew 24:36 AV). This clearly shows a superior, the Father (YHWH), who has control of everything, and a lessor or subordinate, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves), who does his Father (YHWH) will. In fact, this arrangement is clearly defined as to order, “ But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.” (1 Corinthians 11:3 AV). The Bible clearly shows that the superior, Almighty God (YHWH) will subject all things onto his son, (Jeshua or YHWH saves), until he gets them into order for him (YHWH) and then the son, (Jeshua or YHWH saves), will subject himself to him, “ And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.” (1 Corinthians 15:28 AV). The son, (Jeshua or YHWH saves), is clearly shown as subordinate and only being able to do what his Father (YHWH) permits, “ Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.” (John 5:19 AV).

The son’s rule is pictured as ruling over a perpetual kingdom where his perpetual princely rule shall increase and be unlimited at “ And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.” (Daniel 2:44 AV), and this is just another prophecy about the fulfillment of the Lord’s prayer previously given. He will figuratively sit on the throne of David “ Therefore now, LORD God of Israel, keep with thy servant David my father that thou promisedst him, saying, There shall not fail thee a man in my sight to sit on the throne of Israel; so that thy children take heed to their way, that they walk before me as thou hast walked before me.” (1 Kings 8:25 AV) to fulfill the promise God (YHWH) had made to David about the Messiah, “ The LORD hath sworn in truth unto David; he will not turn from it; Of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne.” (Psalms 132:11 AV), the Lord (a title and not a name) here being Almighty God (YHWH) as Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) had not yet entered the scene. “Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion. 7 ¶ I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. 8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.” (Psalms 2:6-8 AV), clearly shows God’s (YHWH’s) intent to put his son, (Jeshua or YHWH saves), whom he had begotten, on the figurative throne of David as part of “thine inheritance” with respect “the utter most parts of the earth.” “At that time they shall call Jerusalem the throne of the LORD; and all the nations shall be gathered unto it, to the name of the LORD, to Jerusalem: neither shall they walk any more after the imagination of their evil heart. 18 In those days the house of Judah shall walk with the house of Israel, and they shall come together out of the land of the north to the land that I have given for an inheritance unto your fathers.” (Jeremiah 3:17-18 AV), here it clearly shows that God (YHWH) was applying the throne of David not just to the nation of Israel (Judah), but to the entire earth. God (YHWH) then reiterates his intent, “And I will set up one shepherd over them, and he shall feed them, even my servant David; he shall feed them, and he shall be their shepherd. 24 And I the LORD will be their God, and my servant David a prince among them; I the LORD have spoken it. 25 And I will make with them a covenant of peace, and will cause the evil beasts to cease out of the land: and they shall dwell safely in the wilderness, and sleep in the woods. 26 And I will make them and the places round about my hill a blessing; and I will cause the shower to come down in his season; there shall be showers of blessing.,” (Ezekiel 34:23-26 AV), here God Almighty is likening his son, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) to the ancient King David who was a shepherd, “And I will set up one shepherd over them” “and I the LORD [YHWH] will be their God, and my servant David a prince [Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves)] among them.” “Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions: 17 And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand. 18 And when the children of thy people shall speak unto thee, saying, Wilt thou not shew us what thou meanest by these? 19 Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand. 20 And the sticks whereon thou writest shall be in thine hand before their eyes. 21 And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land: 22 And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all:” (Ezekiel 37:16-22 AV) clearly shows the Lord GOD (YHWH) since Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) had not yet entered the scene and proved his faithfulness to his Father, YHWH, and that he would put the “children of Israel” under a king who would be “one king shall be a king to them all” [all here means everyone obedient to him, otherwise the Lord’s prayer would not be valid]. This is made very sure and clear in the New Testament, “He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: 33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.” Luke 1:32-33 AV), here God the Almighty (YHWH) speaks of his Son, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves), and says he, the Lord (JHWH) shall give it to him, his Son, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves), clearly showing once more a superior, Almighty God (YHWH), giving something to a lessor or subordinate, his son, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves). This relationship is once more reinforced at “ Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;” (Acts 2:30 AV), clearly shows once more a superior, God (YHWH) stating under “sworn with an oath” to give Christ, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves), a lessor or subordinate the figurative throne of David.

This will not be a kingdom of mere might, and triumph of force over its enemies, but of righteousness and justice attainable only in and by the Messiah, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves), and this is made clear “ The LORD is well pleased for his righteousness’ sake; he will magnify the law, and make it honourable.” (Isaiah 42:21 AV), “Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre. 7 Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.” (Psalms 45:6-7 AV). With respect ‘zeal’ this includes not only Christ’s, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves), hidden spiritual victory over the Devil during his first coming, but the principle one that will be accompanied with the ‘judgments’ on the Antichrist and all other enemies at his second coming, “ For he put on righteousness as a breastplate, and an helmet of salvation upon his head; and he put on the garments of vengeance for clothing, and was clad with zeal as a cloke.” (Isaiah 59:17 AV), “O thou enemy, destructions are come to a perpetual end: and thou hast destroyed cities; their memorial is perished with them. 7 But the LORD shall endure for ever: he hath prepared his throne for judgment. 8 And he shall judge the world in righteousness, he shall minister judgment to the people in uprightness.” (Psalms 9:6-8 AV).

Last, but not least, Note, also, that this son did not exist at the time the prophet was giving the message for the future tense is talked about. Note, also, that this son is talked about as having to be conceived and born in order to exist. Note that this special son is not talked about as already existing and taking on a new form as The Trinitarian Doctrine would require it. In fact, how can a son be co-equal and co-existent with his father? The Doctrine of The Trinity defies the universally accepted and historically always held meaning of the words for father and son. Not only does it defy the meaning of these words, it destroys their meaning! This fact is important to realize for God gave us language. It was not invented by man as the evolutionist tries to say. Thus, we are not destroying man made terms, but God-given terms! These terms, as given to us by God, require that the father exists before the son, and for the son to be brought into existence by the father. This universally accepted and recognized definition is what these terms have meant from the beginning of this creation. Therefore, who has given anyone the authority to change these God-given terms now? In fact, The Lord Jesus Christ verifies the meaning of these terms when he says, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him." (John 13:16 AV) "Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I." (John 14:28 AV).

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION – BOTH TRUE AND FALSE – AT WWW.JW.ORG

iris89 · 5/28/2018 7:51 am

COMBINATION OF [1] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2] DISCOURSE ON JESUS BEFORE HE WAS BORN A MAN ON EARTH:

[1] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [VOL. 826A]

And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. John 17:3, [authorized King James Bible; AV]

Yes, life eternal is knowing the only true God, Almighty God (YHWH), and His son, Jesus (Yeshua), and not from greedy gain per Proverbs 15:27, [AV] “He that is greedy of gain troubleth his own house; but he that hateth gifts shall live.” Aman should speak with joy per Proverbs 15:23, [AV] “A man hath joy by the answer of his mouth: and a word spoken in due season, how good is it!” As 1 Samuel 8:23, [AV] “And his sons walked not in his ways, but turned aside after lucre, and took bribes, and perverted judgment.” And onto God and His son.

TO LEARN MORE ABOUT RELIGION AND THE BIBLE, GO TO,

1) http://iris89.conforums.com/

2) http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/

3) http://religioustruths.lefora.com/

4) http://religioustruths.boardhost.com/

5) http://religioustruths.forumsland.com/

6) http://religioustruthsbyiris.createmybb3.com/

7) http://religioustruths.forumotion.com/

To enjoy an online Bible study called “Follow the Christ” go to,http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/thread/1417398076/last-1417398076/Digital+Book+On+18+Part+Follow+Christ+Bible+Study

Your Friend in Christ Iris89

Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth. "Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today, and go to WWW.JW.ORG!

[2] DISCOURSE ON JESUS BEFORE HE WAS BORN A MAN ON EARTH:

Before the life force of Jesus was put into the Virgin Mary, he was the firstborn/created of every creature, ““ Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:” (Colossians 1:15 AV), “ And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;” (Revelation 3:14 AV). He was a powerful spirit being, the only begotten of his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) and had the glory that went with his position at the right hand of his Father “ And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.” (John 17:5 AV). He was created by his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) long before the creation of the earth “ Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.” (John 8:58 AV). Almighty God (YHWH) created all other things through him “For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.” (Colossians 1:16-17 AV), “ He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.” (John 1:10 AV). However, then and now, he was a lessor or subordinate to ). Almighty God (YHWH) “ Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.” (John 14:28 AV), “ But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.” (1 Corinthians 11:3 AV), “ Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.” (John 5:19 AV), “ And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.” (1 Corinthians 15:28 AV), “Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.” (Philippians 2:5-8 AV). He was referred to in prophecy in the Old Testament as a Mighty God, but not as the Almighty God (YHWH), which clearly shows he was a very powerful spirit creature second in power and glory only to his Father “ 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.” (Isaiah 9:6 AV). When the proper time arrived, he was sent by his Father, ), Almighty God (YHWH), to earth “ But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,” (Galatians 4:4 AV), “And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. 31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. 32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: 33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? 35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.” (Luke 1:30-35 AV).

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION – BOTH TRUE AND FALSE – AT WWW.JW.ORG

iris89 · 5/30/2018 5:14 pm

COMBINATION OF [1] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2] A DISCOURSE ON UNDERSTANDING JOHN 1:1.

[1] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [VOL. 827A]

And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. 2 Timothy 3:15 – 17, [authorized King James Bible; AV]

Young Timothy was well reported on by one and all and the Apostle Paul assisted him on becoming more mature is the truth as reported on at acts 16:1 – 3, [AV] “Then came he to Derbe and Lystra: and, behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timotheus, the son of a certain woman, which was a Jewess, and believed; but his father was a Greek: 2 Which was well reported of by the brethren that were at Lystra and Iconium. 3 Him would Paul have to go forth with him; and took and circumcised him because of the Jews which were in those quarters: for they knew all that his father was a Greek.” And as noted by the Apostle John,at John 20:31, [AV] “But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.” And the Apostle John went on to record Jesus (Yeshua) thoughts at, John 14:26, [AV] “But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.”

TO LEARN MORE ABOUT RELIGION AND THE BIBLE, GO TO,

1) http://iris89.conforums.com/

2) http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/

3) http://religioustruths.lefora.com/

4) http://religioustruths.boardhost.com/

5) http://religioustruths.forumsland.com/

6) http://religioustruthsbyiris.createmybb3.com/

7) http://religioustruths.forumotion.com/

To enjoy an online Bible study called “Follow the Christ” go to,http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/thread/1417398076/last-1417398076/Digital+Book+On+18+Part+Follow+Christ+Bible+Study

Your Friend in Christ Iris89

Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth. "Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today, and go to WWW.JW.ORG!

[2] A DISCOURSE ON UNDERSTANDING JOHN 1:1.

This discourse will not go down into an in depth explanation of the translating challenges provided by the rather unusual construction of the Apostle John’s original writing in Koine (ancient) Greek. Sufficient to say the ancient Greek language had a certain amount of ambiguity as does modern English. Most English translations including the Authorized King James Version (AV), The New American Bible (Catholic) (TNAB), New world Translation (NWT), Goodspeed, Torrey, New English of 1961, Moffatt of 1972, International English Bible (IEB), International Bible Translators N.T. 1981 (IBT), Philip Harner of 1974, Translator's NT of 1973 (TNT), Scholar's Version of 1993, etc. have all made an effort to make the scriptures easier to read and have tried to remove ambiguity of the original text. For example, if the literal text were to say: "The love of God". The translator may decide to translate the text: "God's love for you", or he might translate it: "Your love for God". The reader can interpret the original text either way. when the translator chooses one of the ways to translate a text and eliminates the ambiguity, you miss the opportunity to view the text in other ways. The reader must (if objectivity is to be maintained) keep in mind that the translators of any Bible version were believers in one of the doctrine or beliefs with regard how God Almighty (YHWH), Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves), and the spirit or Holy Ghost relate to each other of which there are five principle beliefs, Oneness Theology, Trinitarian Theology, Arian Theology, Unitarian Theology, and Sabellianism Theology. Therefore, bias will and does exist in translation depending on the translator’s theology. This is especially true with respect John 1:1 because of its unique and ambiguous grammatical structure it allows for translators to translate it at least nine different ways that all have equal validity from the language structure point of view, in that none of these can either A discourse on understanding John 1:1.

This discourse will not go down into an in depth explanation of the translating challenges provided by the rather unusual construction of the Apostle John’s original writing in Koine (ancient) Greek. Sufficient to say the ancient Greek language had a certain amount of ambiguity as does modern English. Most English translations including the Authorized King James Version (AV), The New American Bible (Catholic) (TNAB), New world Translation (NWT), Goodspeed, Torrey, New English of 1961, Moffatt of 1972, International English Bible (IEB), International Bible Translators N.T. 1981 (IBT), Philip Harner of 1974, Translator's NT of 1973 (TNT), Scholar's Version of 1993, etc. have all made an effort to make the scriptures easier to read and have tried to remove ambiguity of the original text. For example, if the literal text were to say: "The love of God". The translator may decide to translate the text: "God's love for you", or he might translate it: "Your love for God". The reader can interpret the original text either way. when the translator chooses one of the ways to translate a text and eliminates the ambiguity, you miss the opportunity to view the text in other ways. The reader must (if objectivity is to be maintained) keep in mind that the translators of any Bible version were believers in one of the doctrine or beliefs with regard how God Almighty (YHWH), Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves), and the spirit or Holy Ghost relate to each other of which there are five principle beliefs, Oneness Theology, Trinitarian Theology, Arian Theology, Unitarian Theology, and Sabellianism Theology. Therefore, bias will and does exist in translation depending on the translator’s theology. This is especially true with respect John 1:1 because of its unique and ambiguous grammatical structure it allows for translators to translate it at least nine different ways that all have equal validity from the language structure point of view, in that none of these can either be proven totally correct or incorrect, i.e., a translator’s nightmare. In an unusual case like this the translator can only fall back on related text with similar structure and his own belief system, BIAS.

Now, let’s look at the original Koine Greek writing as shown in the work of Westcott & Hort Interlinear (John 1:1-3):
[[The Bulletin Board can not handle Koine Greek, if you want to see it send me an email, iris89@uymainl.com]]

Now let’s look at the three most common renderings of John 1:1 into modern English with a brief mention of some of the Bibles that follow each:

1. “ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” (John 1:1 AV)
This style rendering is found in most of the Bibles translations made by believers in the Trinitarian Theology and include the Authorized King James Version (AV), The New American Bible (Catholic) (TNAB), etc.

2. “In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.” (John 1:1 NWT)
This style rendering is found in most of the Bible translations made by believers in the Arian theology
And many translators of no particular theology and include The Emphatic Diaglott by Benjamin 1883, NWT, Belsham N.T. 1809, Leicester Ambrose, 1879, Robert Young, 1885, (Concise Commentary), Greek Orthodox /Arabic translation, 1983,etc.

3. “In the beginning there was the Message. The Message was with God. The Message was deity.” (John 1:1 International Bible Translators N.T. 1981).
This style rendering is found in most of the Bible translations made by believers in the Unitarian Theology and by some of Arian Theology And many translators of no particular theology and include the International Bible Translators N.T. (IBT), Translator's NT of 1973, Goodspeed of 1939, Moffatt of 1972, Simple English Bible, etc.

Now a short summary of the various beliefs of the varies theological views with respect the nature of God Almighty (YHWH), Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) and the spirit or Holy Ghost and how each views the relationships between each:

five principle beliefs, Oneness Theology, Trinitarian Theology, Arian Theology, Unitarian Theology, and Sabellianism Theology.

ARIAN THEOLOGY
They believe that there is one God, and that God is one. That God is called the Heavenly Father (YHWH). That we have one Lord who is not God, Jesus Christ (Jeshua or YHWH saves), who is the son of God (son of YHWH). And they believe the holy Spirit is the influence of God's power. The Father (YHWH) and Son (Jeshua or YHWH saves), are separate beings and the Father (YHWH) is superior in power, wisdom and authority. Jesus is God's express image and was given all power on heaven and earth.

Uniqueness - They believe that there is but one God (YHWH) who is one person who is the Father.. That His son, Jesus Christ (Jeshua or YHWH saves), was his first creation and through His son created all of creation.

ONENESS THEOLOGY
They believe that the Father (YHWH), the Son, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) and the Holy Spirit are the same God with no distinction in person or being. That only one God simply manifests himself in these three ways at different times.

Uniqueness - They believe that they are unique in that they conform strictly to the objective of having only one God where as others have more than one God.

Sabellianism THEOLOGY
God is three only in relation to the world, in so many "manifestations" or "modes." The unity and identity of God are such that the Son of God, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) did not exist before the incarnation; because the Father (YHWH) and the Son, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) are thus one, the Father (YHWH) suffered with the Son, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) in his passion and death.

Uniqueness - They believe that God is one in earthly manifestations, but not heavenly. [Branham's Bible Believers, Inc.][ to Branham's 1189 page book "Conduct, Order, Doctrine of the Church," the "First thing is to straighten out you on your 'trinity' Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. "God is like a three-foot rule... The first twelve inches was God, the Father; the second twelve inches, God, the Son, the same God; the third twelve inches was God, the Holy Ghost, the same God," (pp.182 & 184). Branham clarifies his position in a speech given October 2, 1957 when he exclaims, "See, there cannot be an Eternal son, because a son had to have a beginning. And so Jesus had a beginning, God had no beginning," (Ibid, p.273).]
[[Note, this has much in common with Oneness Theology]]

TRINITARIAN THEOLOGY
They believe that there is one but God made up of three separate and distinct persons of but one indivisible essence. That these three persons existed from eternity, and are co-equal in power and substance. These individuals are known as Father (YHWH), Son, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) and the Holy Spirit. The undivided essence of God belongs equally to each of the three persons. The Church (Catholic, Orthodox, and most Protestants) confesses the Trinity to be a mystery beyond the comprehension of man.

Uniqueness - They see a distinction in the persons of God, but hold that there is but one God. It is a mystery, i.e., they are not able to explain it.

UNITARIAN THEOLOGY
They believe that there is one God, the Father (YHWH), and one Lord, Jesus Christ (Jeshua or YHWH saves). Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) became God's son at his birth on earth but had not exist previously. The holy Spirit is God's power.

Uniqueness - They do not believe that their beliefs are similar to Arian, but believe that Jesus's existence began with his earthly birth.

Note: for more details see: The Encyclopedia Britannica; The Great Debate Regarding The Father, Son & Holy Spirit by Roger Wagner (on line at http://reslight.addr.com/greatdebate.html ); The Two Babylons by Rev. Alexander Hilsop (on line at http://philologos.org/__eb-ttb/default.htm ); http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/const1.txt (minutes of the Council of Constantinopile in 381AD); http://mb-soft.com/believe/txn/monarchi.htm ; http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/Sabellianism ; http://www.sandiego.edu/~baber/research/sabellianism.html ; http://members.aol.com/davecrnll/corrupt4.html ; http://www.yashanet.com/library/antisem.htm ; http://www.webzonecom.com/ccn/cults/sabel.txt ; etc.

Now that we have considered who believes what, let’s consider the meaning of John 1:1. The believers in the Trinity Theology of course translate it to make it appear that the Almighty God Father (YHWH) and his, Son, Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) are one ant the same, but is this reasonable when considered with other Bible text? No it is not as Almighty God’s (YHWH’s) son ,Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) is clearly shown to be a lesser one than his father, consider, “ Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.” (John 14:28 AV) where the same writer of John 1:1 clearly shows the Father (YHWH) as being greater as he does again at “ Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.” (John 5:19 AV) where the Apostle John quotes Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) as saying, “The Son can do nothing of himself.” These two verses both in the same book as John 1:1 make it clear that whereas grammatically speaking John 1:1 could be rendered as in the Authorized King James Version it can not be correctly rendered this way due to the contents of the remainder of the Book of John. The writings of Paul even make this clearer, “ And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.” (1 Corinthians 15:28 AV), “ But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.” (1 Corinthians 11:3 AV), “Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.” (Philippians 2:5-8 AV). All these scriptures show Jesus (Jeshua or YHWH saves) was obedient to his father (YHWH) and subordinate to his father (YHWH). Clearly this shows the error of Oneness Theology, Trinitarian Theology, and Sabellianism Theology.

But let’s for argument sake say that the Father and the Son are one God as these three groups claim, we are left with a gap that can not be closed in their theories and the way their biased Bible translators translate John 1:1. Even if we are to accept the way these biased translators translated John 1:1, this verse can in no way be interpreted to justify a “triune” God. Let’s do a little analysis, it is immediately obvious from reading this verse translated with a Trinitarian/Oneness/Sabellianism bias that at most we are speaking of a “duality” and not a “triune” God. Even the most resolute Trinitarian/Oneness/Sabellianism believer will never be able to be able to find any mention in this verse of any “merging” of a Holy Ghost with God and with “the word.” So even if we accept at face value the rendering in the Authorized King James Version, and have faith, even then, we find ourselves commanded/directed to believe in a “duality” and not a “trinity.” In the original ancient (Koine) Greek, manufscript, “the word” is described as “ton theos” (divine/a god) and not as being “ho theos” (the Divine/the God). In my opinion, the writer of this discourse, this verse should be translated something like the following, “In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was divine.” You will note Word was NOT capitalized in this as no indication or grammatical structure in the original would indicates it should be capitalized; of course this is NOT in accordance with any of the common Bibles such as the Authorized King James (AV), The New American Bible (Catholic) TNAB, the New World Translation (NWT), The New Testament, An American Translation, Goodspeed’s Translation, Moffatt’s Translation (which uses Logas instead of Word), etc.

Another point to consider, is other verses using “ho theos” in the Bible in the original Koine Greek; such as “ In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.” (2 Corinthians 4:4 AV) We find the same word (“ho theos”) being used in John 1:1 to describe God Almighty (YHWH) is now used to describe the Devil, then why should it be changed from simply translating it as “the god” when referring to the Devil while “divine” is translated as “God” when referring to “the Word”? Also, as previously dealt with, why is Word capitalized? The term god can be applied to anyone with an elevated position as shown by “ I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.” (Psalms 82:6 AV). In fact, The Catholic New World Dictionary to the New American Bible, 1970 candidly admits, "In the New Testament, the Greek Theos with the article (The God) means the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ (see Rom. 1:7; 1 Cor. 1:3; 2 Cor. 1:2; etc.). Thus God is almost the name of the first person of the blessed Trinity. Without the article, God designates the divinity, and so is applicable to the pre-existing Word (Jn. 1:3). The term God is applied to Jesus in only a few texts, and even their interpretation is under dispute (Jn. 20:28; Rom. 9:5; Tit. 2:13; 2 Pet. 1:1)." This clearly proves the point that the translators with a Trinitarian Theology bias have little or no support for their way of translating John 1:1.

Yet another point to consider is the meaning of Father and of Son, “The Doctrine of The Trinity defies the universally accepted and historically always held meaning of the words for father and son. Not only does it defy the meaning of these words, it destroys their meaning! This fact is important to realize for God gave us language. It was not invented by man as the evolutionist tries to say. Thus, we are not destroying man made terms, but God-given terms! These terms, as given to us by God, require that the father exists before the son, and for the son to be brought into existence by the father. This universally accepted and recognized definition is what these terms have meant from the beginning of this creation. Therefore, who has given anyone the authority to change these God-given terms now? In fact, The Lord Jesus Christ verifies the meaning of these terms when he says, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him." John 13:16 "Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I." John 14:28. Here, he establishes that God is his lord, that he was sent by his lord, that God is his Father, and that his Father is greater than he himself. How could any of these declarations be true if the Doctrine of The Trinity is true? It is clearly impossible for these declarations of The Lord Jesus Christ to be true and the Doctrine of The Trinity to be True! It is easy to see that these words of the Lord Jesus Christ and the Doctrine of the Trinity are mutually exclusive and opposing views!
Now notice that verses fifteen and sixteen of John chapter thirteen require that this special son has to learn the difference between good and evil. If he was God, then how could such a statement apply? Isn't God omniscient? Isn't this passage teaching us that this special son would have to go through a learning process like every other normal natural human being? Isn't it telling us that he at one time did not know the difference between good and evil? Isn't it teaching us that he would have to learn to refuse the evil and choose the good? The answer to these questions is obviously yes! It doesn't take someone with a doctorate degree to answer them. In fact, the only too obvious answer to all of these questions destroys The Trinitarian concept of this special son. Furthermore, this conclusion from this passage is verified by what is said about The Lord Jesus Christ in The New Testament. Consider the following passages:
And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom: and the grace of God was upon him. Luke 2:40.
And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man. Luke 2:52.
But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. Matt. 24:36.
But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father. Mark 13:32.
For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel. John 5:20.
And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power. Acts 1:7
The revelation of Jesus Christ which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John. Rev. 1:1.
At this point, let us briefly look at the implications of the above listed passages. We will take them in the order in which we quoted them.” ( an excerpt from a letter of Bro. Scaramastro).
Now as can be readily seen from the foregoing, John 1:1 can definitely be translated at least nine different ways that all have equal validity from the language structure point of view, in that none of these can either be proven totally correct or incorrect; however, by reasoning and looking at other text using the same word, we can see even if we accept translations having a “triune” God bias there is only a “duality” shown, but the same word used elsewhere indicates this is not the way it should be translated. Since this discourse is meant for ordinary readers and not translators no in-depth details of translation are dealt with; however, for those wanting more detail with respect translation see:
See Appendix on John 1:1:
http://hector3000.future.easyspace.com/germans.htm [probably the best in-depth translation detail anywhere on the subject]; http://www.riverpower.org/John/C01v01-3.htm ; http://users.eggconnect.net/noddy3/John%2011.htm ; http://www.seekgod.org/bible/chapters/1john1.html ; http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/library/jesus-say/ch1.2.2.6.html ; http://web.fares.net/w/.ee7f254 ; http://bibles.datasegment.com/weymouth/1%20John/1 ; http://assemblyoftrueisrael.com/JohnChapterOneCorrected.html ; http://reslight.addr.com/john1.html [excellent background source]; http://www.vocationsvancouver.com/scripture_1_john_1_1_4.htm; http://www.christianeducational.org/faq/v1i3.pdf;
http://www.christianeducational.org/bookpromo.htm [source for interesting book with more information on Trinity] ; http://reslight.addr.com/john20-28.html (source for books and facts on Trinity); http://www.tellway-publishing.com ("Jesus-God or the Son of God?" by Brian Holt – one of the best)

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION – BOTH TRUE AND FALSE – AT WWW.JW.ORG

iris89 · 6/01/2018 12:37 pm

COMBINATION OF [1] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2] THE RARE FRUIT TREES AND VEGETABLES

[1] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [VOL. 828A]

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, 23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. Galatians 5:22 – 23, [authorized King James Bible; AV]

These fruits of the spirit if Christ is to dwell in your heart with you per Ephesians 1:10, [AV] “That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love,” Yes, as Ephesians 5:8 – 10 shows, [AV] “For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light: 9 (For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth;) 10 Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord.” And James 3:17, says with respect the wisdom from above, [AV] “But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy.”

TO LEARN MORE ABOUT RELIGION AND THE BIBLE, GO TO,

1) http://iris89.conforums.com/

2) http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/

3) http://religioustruths.lefora.com/

4) http://religioustruths.boardhost.com/

5) http://religioustruths.forumsland.com/

6) http://religioustruthsbyiris.createmybb3.com/

7) http://religioustruths.forumotion.com/

To enjoy an online Bible study called “Follow the Christ” go to,http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/thread/1417398076/last-1417398076/Digital+Book+On+18+Part+Follow+Christ+Bible+Study

Your Friend in Christ Iris89

Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth. "Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today, and go to WWW.JW.ORG!

[2] Here is a Commentary on Bountiful Trees and Vegetables God (YHWH) has provided for mankind, specifically the, Campomanesia xanthocarpa O, Characterization of Odor-Active Compounds in Gabiroba Fruits (Campomanesia xanthocarpa O. Berg)

By:
Daniele De Freitas Ferreira
Deborah Dos Santos Garruti
Juliano Smanioto Barin
Alexandre José Cichoski
Roger Wagner
First published: 29 October 2015
https://doi.org/10.1111/jfq.12177
Abstract
Headspace solid-phase microextraction was used for isolation of the volatile compounds from gabiroba fruit (Campomanesia xanthocarpa O. Berg) and further quantification by gas chromatography–flame ionization detector and identification by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry and gas chromatography–olfactometry (GC-O). The odor-active compounds were evaluated using the Osme technique. Seventy-nine compounds were identified, from which 39 presented odor activity detected by the judges in GC-O analysis. The major compounds were (E)-2-hexenal, ethanol, ethyl hexanoate, hexanal, ethyl butanoate, hexanoic acid, 1-hexanol, (E)-2-hexen-1-ol, linalool, 1-butanol, methyl acetate and ?-terpineol, but the substances 4-hydroxy-2,5-dimethyl-2(3H)-furanone, 1-penten-3-ol, an unidentified compound, hexanal, (E,E)-2,4-hexadienal, (Z)-3-hexen-1-ol, ethyl hexanoate, ?-eudesmol, linalool and ?-eudesmol were related to the aroma of this fruit. The green and sweet notes were perceived in high frequency of description and intensity, and they were considered important for the characteristic gabiroba aroma.
Practical Applications
Gabiroba is a native fruit from South America with an intense and pleasant flavor, but there is a few information regarding to its chemical profile of volatile compounds. In this work, the compounds that better represent the gabiroba aroma (odor-active substances) were determined by olfactometric analysis. This information was crucial for sensory characterization of fruit and could be used as a tool for evaluation of processing and postharvest quality.
Introduction
Brazil has an abundance of native fruits, which are rich in aromas and flavors, presenting great potential to be economically explored (Franco and Janzantti 2005). The interest of consumers in these fruits is increasing, mainly because of their nutritional value and pleasant sensory characteristics (Oliveira et al. 2006). Among several native plants of Brazilian flora, the Myrtaceae could be highlighted as one of the most studied families (Nakamura et al. 2010) presenting a pleasant and intense aroma (Pino et al. 2001; Guedes et al. 2004; Osorio et al. 2006; Quijano and Pino 2007). Nowadays, some fruits of this family are commercialized, such as guava (Psidium guajava L.), pitanga (Eugenia uniflora L.) and jabuticaba (Myrciaria jabuticaba), but several Myrtaceae fruits have still been poorly explored, such as gabiroba (Campomanesia xanthocarpa O. Berg).
The gabiroba tree grows naturally in the cerrado biome and it is found around all South, Midwest and Southeast Brazil as well as in other South American countries such as Uruguay, Paraguay and Argentina. The harvest period ranges from November to December (Biavatti et al. 2004), but gabiroba fruits are highly perishable and could be stored for only 6 days because of the lack of postharvest treatments (Campos et al. 2012). Gabiroba is a small and round fruit, with color ranging from green to orange, and it presents an intense aroma, considered pleasant and citric (Santos et al. 2013). It is also a rich source of vitamins (mainly vitamin C), minerals (Vallilo et al. 2008), phenolic compounds and antioxidants (mainly carotenoids) (Pereira et al. 2012). The fruit is consumed generally in natura, but it can be also useful for making juice (Santos 2011), jam (Santos et al. 2013) and wine (Duarte et al. 2010). However, the transformation of fruits into industrialized products could be improved by the identification of volatile compounds that carry the unique character of their natural flavor being an important parameter for choosing the best processing method.
Several volatile compounds, such as esters, aldehydes, alcohols, terpenes and their derivatives (Bicas et al. 2011) are involved in the flavor of fruits, which is the sensory characteristic that plays a key role in the acceptability of consumers (Galvão et al. 2011). Among the several volatile compounds present in food, only few of them actually contribute to the overall perceived odor, making the characterization of the odoriferous components a relevant step in flavor research (Zellner et al. 2008). For this purpose, gas chromatography–olfactometry (GC-O) is an effective tool used for the measurement of odor quality and the identification of odor-active compounds (Zellner et al. 2008), which could be classified into three main groups: dilution, detection frequency and time–intensity methods. Osme (from the Greek word meaning smell) is a time–intensity approach considered as satisfactory for GC-O analysis using judges for direct estimation of the odor intensity and time duration of each compound, and reports the odor description perceived (Miranda-Lopez et al. 1992; Garruti et al. 2003). Contrarily to combined hedonic aroma response measurement analysis (CHARM) (Acree et al. 1984) and aroma extraction dilution analysis (AEDA) (Schieberle and Grosch 1987), Osme is not based on odor detection thresholds but on Stevens’ power law, which is a psychophysical law that explains the relationship between the perceived intensity and the odorant concentration (Guen et al. 2008; Zellner et al. 2008).
The objectives of this study were to characterize the volatile compounds of the gabiroba pulp headspace using the headspace solid-phase microextraction (HS-SPME) sampling technique and to determine the key-odor compounds by means of the Osme technique. The identification of volatile compounds from gabiroba fruit headspace was performed and the key volatile compounds that carry the unique character of its natural flavor were determined. ?[SOURCE - RETRIVED FROM https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jfq.12177 ON 3/17/2018]

Seed can be obtained from Tradewind, and here is their catalog description, 3091 - Campomanesia lineatifolia - Perfume Guava
A beautiful guava relative with strongly aromatic, flattened fruits that have an edible, creamy pulp that is mildly sweet and acidic. Small to medium sized tree up to 20-30 feet. Attractive foliage, flowers and fruits make this a desirable tree. Frost hardy to 28-32F, probably slightly less hardy than the tropical guava.

To know more about the Bible and religion, go to:

1) http://religioustruths.forumsland.com/

2) http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/

3) http://religioustruths.lefora.com/

4) http://religioustruths.boardhost.com/

5) http://religious-truths.forums.com/

6) http://religioustruthsbyiris.createmybb3.com/

7) http://religioustruths.forumotion.com/

To enjoy an online Bible study called “Follow the Christ” go to, http://religious-truths.forums.com/default/digital-book-on-18-part-follow-christ-bible-study-3?replies=6#post-1421

Your Friend in Christ Iris89

Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth. "Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today, and go to www.jw.org!

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION – BOTH TRUE AND FALSE – AT WWW.JW.ORG

iris89 · 6/03/2018 5:51 pm

COMBINATION OF [1] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2] A DISCOURSE ON UNDERSTANDING JOHN 1:1. - APPENDIX

[1] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [VOL. 829A]

A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. 35 By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another. John 13:34 – 35, [authorized King James Bible; AV]

Clearly love is the defining attribute for all of Jesus’ (Yeshua’s) followers, and this reality is clearly shown at John 15:9 – 10, [AV] “As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love. 10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in his love.” In fact, Jesus (Yeshua) gave this as a specific commandment at John 15:12, [AV] “This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you.” In addition, he said at Romans 13:8, [AV] “Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.”

TO LEARN MORE ABOUT RELIGION AND THE BIBLE, GO TO,

1) http://iris89.conforums.com/

2) http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/

3) http://religioustruths.lefora.com/

4) http://religioustruths.boardhost.com/

5) http://religioustruths.forumsland.com/

6) http://religioustruthsbyiris.createmybb3.com/

7) http://religioustruths.forumotion.com/

To enjoy an online Bible study called “Follow the Christ” go to,http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/thread/1417398076/last-1417398076/Digital+Book+On+18+Part+Follow+Christ+Bible+Study

Your Friend in Christ Iris89

Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth. "Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today, and go to WWW.JW.ORG!

[2] A DISCOURSE ON UNDERSTANDING JOHN 1:1. - APPENDIX

This discourse will not go down into an in depth explanation of the translating challenges provided by the rather unusual construction of the Apostle John's original writing in Koine (ancient) Greek. Sufficient to say the ancient Greek language had a certain amount of ambiguity as does modern English. Most English translations including the Authorized King James Version (AV), The New American Bible (Catholic) (TNAB), New world Translation (NWT), Goodspeed, Torrey, New English of 1961, Moffatt of 1972, International English Bible (IEB), International Bible Translators N.T. 1981 (IBT), Philip Harner of 1974, Translator's NT of 1973 (TNT), Scholar's Version of 1993, etc. have all made an effort to make the scriptures easier to read and have tried to remove ambiguity of the original text. For example, if the literal text were to say: "The love of God". The translator may decide to translate the text: "God's love for you", or he might translate it: "Your love for God". The reader can interpret the original text either way. when the translator chooses one of the ways to translate a text and eliminates the ambiguity, you miss the opportunity to view the text in other ways. The reader must (if objectivity is to be maintained) keep in mind that the translators of any Bible version were believers in one of the doctrine or beliefs with regard how God Almighty (YHWH), Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves), and the spirit or Holy Ghost relate to each other of which there are five principle beliefs, Oneness Theology, Trinitarian Theology, Arian Theology, Unitarian Theology, and Sabellianism Theology. Therefore, bias will and does exist in translation depending on the translator's theology. This is especially true with respect John 1:1 because of its unique and ambiguous grammatical structure it allows for translators to translate it at least nine different ways that all have equal validity from the language structure point of view, in that none of these can either A discourse on understanding John 1:1.
This discourse will not go down into an in depth explanation of the translating challenges provided by the rather unusual construction of the Apostle John's original writing in Koine (ancient) Greek. Sufficient to say the ancient Greek language had a certain amount of ambiguity as does modern English. Most English translations including the Authorized King James Version (AV), The New American Bible (Catholic) (TNAB), New world Translation (NWT), Goodspeed, Torrey, New English of 1961, Moffatt of 1972, International English Bible (IEB), International Bible Translators N.T. 1981 (IBT), Philip Harner of 1974, Translator's NT of 1973 (TNT), Scholar's Version of 1993, etc. have all made an effort to make the scriptures easier to read and have tried to remove ambiguity of the original text. For example, if the literal text were to say: "The love of God". The translator may decide to translate the text: "God's love for you", or he might translate it: "Your love for God". The reader can interpret the original text either way. when the translator chooses one of the ways to translate a text and eliminates the ambiguity, you miss the opportunity to view the text in other ways. The reader must (if objectivity is to be maintained) keep in mind that the translators of any Bible version were believers in one of the doctrine or beliefs with regard how God Almighty (YHWH), Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves), and the spirit or Holy Ghost relate to each other of which there are five principle beliefs, Oneness Theology, Trinitarian Theology, Arian Theology, Unitarian Theology, and Sabellianism Theology. Therefore, bias will and does exist in translation depending on the translator's theology. This is especially true with respect John 1:1 because of its unique and ambiguous grammatical structure it allows for translators to translate it at least nine different ways that all have equal validity from the language structure point of view, in that none of these can either be proven totally correct or incorrect, i.e., a translator's nightmare. In an unusual case like this the translator can only fall back on related text with similar structure and his own belief system, BIAS.

Now, let's look at the original Koine Greek writing as shown in the work of Westcott & Hort Interlinear (John 1:1-3):
[[The Bulletin Board can not handle Koine Greek, if you want to see it send me an email, iris89@uymainl.com]]

Now let's look at the three most common renderings of John 1:1 into modern English with a brief mention of some of the Bibles that follow each:

1. " In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." (John 1:1 AV)
This style rendering is found in most of the Bibles translations made by believers in the Trinitarian Theology and include the Authorized King James Version (AV), The New American Bible (Catholic) (TNAB), etc.

2. "In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god." (John 1:1 NWT)
This style rendering is found in most of the Bible translations made by believers in the Arian theology
And many translators of no particular theology and include The Emphatic Diaglott by Benjamin 1883, NWT, Belsham N.T. 1809, Leicester Ambrose, 1879, Robert Young, 1885, (Concise Commentary), Greek Orthodox /Arabic translation, 1983,etc.

3. "In the beginning there was the Message. The Message was with God. The Message was deity." (John 1:1 International Bible Translators N.T. 1981).
This style rendering is found in most of the Bible translations made by believers in the Unitarian Theology and by some of Arian Theology And many translators of no particular theology and include the International Bible Translators N.T. (IBT), Translator's NT of 1973, Goodspeed of 1939, Moffatt of 1972, Simple English Bible, etc.

Now a short summary of the various beliefs of the varies theological views with respect the nature of God Almighty (YHWH), Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) and the spirit or Holy Ghost and how each views the relationships between each:

five principle beliefs, Oneness Theology, Trinitarian Theology, Arian Theology, Unitarian Theology, and Sabellianism Theology.

ARIAN THEOLOGY
They believe that there is one God, and that God is one. That God is called the Heavenly Father (YHWH). That we have one Lord who is not God, Jesus Christ (Yeshua or YHWH saves), who is the son of God (son of YHWH). And they believe the holy Spirit is the influence of God's power. The Father (YHWH) and Son (Yeshua or YHWH saves), are separate beings and the Father (YHWH) is superior in power, wisdom and authority. Jesus is God's express image and was given all power on heaven and earth.

Uniqueness - They believe that there is but one God (YHWH) who is one person who is the Father.. That His son, Jesus Christ (Yeshua or YHWH saves), was his first creation and through His son created all of creation.

ONENESS THEOLOGY
They believe that the Father (YHWH), the Son, Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) and the Holy Spirit are the same God with no distinction in person or being. That only one God simply manifests himself in these three ways at different times.

Uniqueness - They believe that they are unique in that they conform strictly to the objective of having only one God where as others have more than one God.

SABELLIANISM THEOLOGY
God is three only in relation to the world, in so many "manifestations" or "modes." The unity and identity of God are such that the Son of God, Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) did not exist before the incarnation; because the Father (YHWH) and the Son, Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) are thus one, the Father (YHWH) suffered with the Son, Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) in his passion and death.

Uniqueness - They believe that God is one in earthly manifestations, but not heavenly. [Branham's Bible Believers, Inc.][ to Branham's 1189 page book "Conduct, Order, Doctrine of the Church," the "First thing is to straighten out you on your 'trinity' Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. "God is like a three-foot rule... The first twelve inches was God, the Father; the second twelve inches, God, the Son, the same God; the third twelve inches was God, the Holy Ghost, the same God," (pp.182 & 184). Branham clarifies his position in a speech given October 2, 1957 when he exclaims, "See, there cannot be an Eternal son, because a son had to have a beginning. And so Jesus had a beginning, God had no beginning," (Ibid, p.273).]
[[Note, this has much in common with Oneness Theology]]

TRINITARIAN THEOLOGY
They believe that there is one but God made up of three separate and distinct persons of but one indivisible essence. That these three persons existed from eternity, and are co-equal in power and substance. These individuals are known as Father (YHWH), Son, Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) and the Holy Spirit. The undivided essence of God belongs equally to each of the three persons. The Church (Catholic, Orthodox, and most Protestants) confesses the Trinity to be a mystery beyond the comprehension of man.

Uniqueness - They see a distinction in the persons of God, but hold that there is but one God. It is a mystery, i.e., they are not able to explain it.

UNITARIAN THEOLOGY
They believe that there is one God, the Father (YHWH), and one Lord, Jesus Christ (Yeshua or YHWH saves). Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) became God's son at his birth on earth but had not exist previously. The holy Spirit is God's power.

Uniqueness - They do not believe that their beliefs are similar to Arian, but believe that Jesus's existence began with his earthly birth.

Note: for more details see: The Encyclopedia Britannica; The Great Debate Regarding The Father, Son & Holy Spirit by Roger Wagner (on line at http://reslight.addr.com/greatdebate.html ); The Two Babylons by Rev. Alexander Hilsop (on line at http://philologos.org/__eb-ttb/default.htm ); http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/const1.txt (minutes of the Council of Constantinopile in 381AD); http://mb-soft.com/believe/txn/monarchi.htm ; http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/Sabellianism ; http://www.sandiego.edu/~baber/research/sabellianism.html ; http://members.aol.com/davecrnll/corrupt4.html ; http://www.yashanet.com/library/antisem.htm ; http://www.webzonecom.com/ccn/cults/sabel.txt ; etc.

Now that we have considered who believes what, let's consider the meaning of John 1:1. The believers in the Trinity Theology of course translate it to make it appear that the Almighty God Father (YHWH) and his, Son, Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) are one and the same, but is this reasonable when considered with other Bible text? No it is not as Almighty God's (YHWH's) son ,Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) is clearly shown to be a lesser one than his father, consider, " Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I." (John 14:28 AV) where the same writer of John 1:1 clearly shows the Father (YHWH) as being greater as he does again at " Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise." (John 5:19 AV) where the Apostle John quotes Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) as saying, "The Son can do nothing of himself." These two verses both in the same book as John 1:1 make it clear that whereas grammatically speaking John 1:1 could be rendered as in the Authorized King James Version it can not be correctly rendered this way due to the contents of the remainder of the Book of John. The writings of Paul even make this clearer, " And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all." (1 Corinthians 15:28 AV), " But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God." (1 Corinthians 11:3 AV), "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross." (Philippians 2:5-8 AV). All these scriptures show Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) was obedient to his father (YHWH) and subordinate to his father (YHWH). Clearly this shows the error of Oneness Theology, Trinitarian Theology, and Sabellianism Theology.

But let's for argument sake say that the Father and the Son are one God as these three groups claim, we are left with a gap that can not be closed in their theories and the way their biased Bible translators translate John 1:1. Even if we are to accept the way these biased translators translated John 1:1, this verse can in no way be interpreted to justify a "triune" God. Let's do a little analysis, it is immediately obvious from reading this verse translated with a Trinitarian/Oneness/Sabellianism bias that at most we are speaking of a "duality" and not a "triune" God. Even the most resolute Trinitarian/Oneness/Sabellianism believer will never be able to be able to find any mention in this verse of any "merging" of a Holy Ghost with God and with "the word." So even if we accept at face value the rendering in the Authorized King James Version, and have faith, even then, we find ourselves commanded/directed to believe in a "duality" and not a "trinity." In the original ancient (Koine) Greek, manufscript, "the word" is described as "ton theos" (divine/a god) and not as being "ho theos" (the Divine/the God). In my opinion, the writer of this discourse, this verse should be translated something like the following, "In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was divine." You will note Word was NOT capitalized in this as no indication or grammatical structure in the original would indicates it should be capitalized; of course this is NOT in accordance with any of the common Bibles such as the Authorized King James (AV), The New American Bible (Catholic) TNAB, the New World Translation (NWT), The New Testament, An American Translation, Goodspeed's Translation, Moffatt's Translation (which uses Logas instead of Word), etc.

Another point to consider, is other verses using "ho theos" in the Bible in the original Koine Greek; such as " In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them." (2 Corinthians 4:4 AV) We find the same word ("ho theos") being used in John 1:1 to describe God Almighty (YHWH) is now used to describe the Devil, then why should it be changed from simply translating it as "the god" when referring to the Devil while "divine" is translated as "God" when referring to "the Word"? Also, as previously dealt with, why is Word capitalized? The term god can be applied to anyone with an elevated position as shown by " I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High." (Psalms 82:6 AV). In fact, The Catholic New World Dictionary to the New American Bible, 1970 candidly admits, "In the New Testament, the Greek Theos with the article (The God) means the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ (see Rom. 1:7; 1 Cor. 1:3; 2 Cor. 1:2; etc.). Thus God is almost the name of the first person of the blessed Trinity. Without the article, God designates the divinity, and so is applicable to the pre-existing Word (Jn. 1:3). The term God is applied to Jesus in only a few texts, and even their interpretation is under dispute (Jn. 20:28; Rom. 9:5; Tit. 2:13; 2 Pet. 1:1)." This clearly proves the point that the translators with a Trinitarian Theology bias have little or no support for their way of translating John 1:1.

Yet another point to consider is the meaning of Father and of Son, "The Doctrine of The Trinity defies the universally accepted and historically always held meaning of the words for father and son. Not only does it defy the meaning of these words, it destroys their meaning! This fact is important to realize for God gave us language. It was not invented by man as the evolutionist tries to say. Thus, we are not destroying man made terms, but God-given terms! These terms, as given to us by God, require that the father exists before the son, and for the son to be brought into existence by the father. This universally accepted and recognized definition is what these terms have meant from the beginning of this creation. Therefore, who has given anyone the authority to change these God-given terms now? In fact, The Lord Jesus Christ verifies the meaning of these terms when he says, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him." John 13:16 "Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I." John 14:28. Here, he establishes that God is his lord, that he was sent by his lord, that God is his Father, and that his Father is greater than he himself. How could any of these declarations be true if the Doctrine of The Trinity is true? It is clearly impossible for these declarations of The Lord Jesus Christ to be true and the Doctrine of The Trinity to be True! It is easy to see that these words of the Lord Jesus Christ and the Doctrine of the Trinity are mutually exclusive and opposing views!

Now notice that " And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom: and the grace of God was upon him." (Luke 2:40 AV) and " And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man." (Luke 2:52 AV) require that this special son has to learn the difference between good and evil. If he was God, then how could such a statement apply? Isn't God omniscient? Isn't this passage teaching us that this special son would have to go through a learning process like every other normal natural human being? Isn't it telling us that he at one time did not know the difference between good and evil? Isn't it teaching us that he would have to learn to refuse the evil and choose the good? The answer to these questions is obviously yes! It doesn't take someone with a doctorate degree to answer them. In fact, the only too obvious answer to all of these questions destroys The Trinitarian concept of this special son. Furthermore, this conclusion from this passage is verified by what is said about The Lord Jesus Christ in The New Testament. Consider the following passages:
And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom: and the grace of God was upon him. Luke 2:40.
And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man. Luke 2:52.
But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. Matt. 24:36.
But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father. Mark 13:32.
For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel. John 5:20.
And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power. Acts 1:7
The revelation of Jesus Christ which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John. Rev. 1:1.
At this point, let us briefly look at the implications of the above listed passages. We will take them in the order in which we quoted them." ( an excerpt from a letter of Bro. Scaramastro).
Now as can be readily seen from the foregoing, John 1:1 can definitely be translated at least nine different ways that all have equal validity from the language structure point of view, in that none of these can either be proven totally correct or incorrect; however, by reasoning and looking at other text using the same word, we can see even if we accept translations having a "triune" God bias there is only a "duality" shown, but the same word used elsewhere indicates this is not the way it should be translated. Since this discourse is meant for ordinary readers and not translators no in-depth details of translation are dealt with; however, for those wanting more detail with respect translation see:
See Appendix on John 1:1:
http://hector3000.future.easyspace.com/germans.htm [probably the best in-depth translation detail anywhere on the subject]; http://www.riverpower.org/John/C01v01-3.htm ; http://users.eggconnect.net/noddy3/John%2011.htm ; http://www.seekgod.org/bible/chapters/1john1.html ; http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/library/jesus-say/ch1.2.2.6.html ; http://web.fares.net/w/.ee7f254 ; http://bibles.datasegment.com/weymouth/1%20John/1 ; http://assemblyoftrueisrael.com/JohnChapterOneCorrected.html ; http://reslight.addr.com/john1.html [excellent background source]; http://www.vocationsvancouver.com/scripture_1_john_1_1_4.htm; http://www.christianeducational.org/faq/v1i3.pdf;
http://www.christianeducational.org/bookpromo.htm [source for interesting book with more information on Trinity] ; http://reslight.addr.com/john20-28.html (source for books and facts on Trinity); http://www.tellway-publishing.com ("Jesus-God or the Son of God?" by Brian Holt - one of the best)

Special Translation Appendix on John 1:1:

This is a short introduction on the translation of the word 'god' in its various forms, for a much more detailed explanation go to http://hector3000.future.easyspace.com/germans.htm.

Item 1) Let's consider what the Greek Scholar Jason BeDuhn from the Northern Arizona University has to say: "The Greek phrase is theos en ho logos, which translated word for word is "a god was the word." Greek has only a definite article, like our the, it does not have an indefeinite article, like our a or an. If a noun is definite, it has the definite article ho. If a noun is indefinite, no article is used. In the phrase from John 1:1, ho logos is "the word." If it was written simply logos, without the definite article ho, we would have to translate it as "a word". So we are not really "inserting" an indefinite article when we translate Greek nouns without the definite article into English, we are simply obeying rules of English grammar that tell us that we cannot say "Snoopy is dog," but must say "Snoopy is a dog."

Now in English we simply say "God"; we do not say "The God." But in Greek, when you mean to refer to the one supreme God, instead of one of the many other beings that were called "gods," you would have to say "The God": ho theos. Even a monotheistic Christian, who beleives there is only one God and no others, would be forced to say in Greek "The God," as John and Paul and the other writers of the New Testament normally do. If you leave off the article in a phrase like John 1:1, then you are saying "a god." (There are some exceptions to this rule: Greek has what are called noun cases, which means the nouns change form depending on how they are used in a sentence. So, if you want to say "of God," which is theou, you don't need the article. But in the nominative case, which is the one in John 1:1, you have to have the article.) So what does John mean by saying "the word was a god"? He is classifying Jesus in a specific category of beings. There are plants and animals and humans and gods, and so on. By calling the Word "a god," John wants to tell his readers that the Word(which becomes Jesus when it takes flesh) belongs to the divine class of things. Notice the word order: "a god was the word." We can't say it like this in English, but you can in Greek. The subject can be after the verb and the object before the verb, the opposite of how we do it in English (subject-verb-object). Research has shown that when ancient Greek writers put a object-noun first in a sentence like John 1:1 (a be-verb sentence: x is y), without the definite article, they are telling us that the subject belongs to the class represented by the object-noun: :"The car is a Volkswagen." In English we would accomplish the same thing by using what we call predicate adjectives. "John is a smart person" = "John is smart." So we would tend to say "The word was divine," rather than "The word was a god." That is how I would translate this phrase. "The word was a god" is more literal, and an improvement over "The word was God," but it raises more problems, since to a modern reader it implies polytheism. No one in John's day would have understood the phrase to mean "The word was God" - the language does not convey that sense, and conceptually it is difficult to grasp such an idea, especially since that author has just said that the word was with God. Someone is not with himself, he is with some other. John clearly differentiates between God from the Word. The latter becomes flesh and is seen; the former cannot be seen. What is the Word? John says it was the agent through whom God made the world. He starts his gospel "In the beginning..." to remind us of Genesis 1. How does God create in Genesis? He speaks words that make things come into existence. So the Word is God's creative power and plan and activity. It is not God himself, but it is not really totally separate from God either. It occupies a kind of ambiguous status. That is why a monotheist like John can get away with calling it "a god" or "divine" without becoming a polytheist. This divine thing does not act on its own, however, does take on a kind of distinct identity, and in becoming flesh brings God's will and plan right down face to face with humans.

Item 2) The fact is that THEOS (=God) is a count noun, not a mass noun or an adjective. As a count noun it MUST BE countable, i.e. either definite or indefinite (i.e. either "a god" or "the God"). The trinitarian argument hinges on stripping THEOS of its count-ability, so that it is purely qualitative. However, if a noun is PURELY qualitative, it is not a count noun. An adjective or a mass noun may fit their requirement for emphasizing qualitativness only, but a count noun MUST BE countable, for that is what *count* means when describing a count noun. If he accepts this rather elementary rule of English grammar, you can demonstrate that, as a count noun, THEOS may be translated either "the Word was God" (="the Word was The God", which is Sabellianism), or "the Word was a god". Since orthodox trinitarians reject "the Word was The God" (=Sabellianism), they are left with "the Word was a god" -- that is, if they remain true to English syntax (and English syntax is what ENGLISH translations are supposed to follow!). If one argues the point, let them provide an example of a non-countable *count noun* that is not used in a contrary-to-fact situation, such as a metaphor. I have yet to find anyone, trinitarian or otherwise, who is able to meet this challenge. Rolf Furuli discusses this in his book, THE ROLE OF THEOLOGY AND BIAS IN BIBLE TRANSLATION, as does Greg Stafford, in his, JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES DEFENDED: AN ANSWER TO SCHOLARS AND CRITICS. There are also some very good posts by Wes Williams on greektheology that discuss this issue. I suppose if you search the greektheology archives using the word "count" or the name "Wes" you will find much helpful information. [source Kats]

Item 3) How some Bible translators who did not have bias translated:

1928: "and the Word was a divine being." La Bible du Centenaire, L'Evangile selon Jean, by Maurice Goguel.
1935: "and the Word was divine." The Bible-An American Translation, by J. M. P. Smith and E. J. Goodspeed.
1946: "and of a divine kind was the Word." Das Neue Testament, by Ludwig Thimme. 1958: "and the Word was a God." The New Testament, by James L. Tomanek.
1975: "and a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word." Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Siegfried Schulz.
1978: "and godlike kind was the Logos." Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Johannes Schneider.
1979: "and a god was the Logos." Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Jurgen Becker Harwood,
1768, "and was himself a divine person" Thompson,
1829, "the Logos was a god Torrey,
1961, "what God was,the Word was" Moffatt,
1972, "the Logos was divine Translator's NT,
1973, "The Word was with God and shared his nature Barclay,
1976, "the nature of the Word was the same as the nature of God" Schonfield,
1985, "the Word was divine Revised English,
1989, "what God was, the Word was Scholar's Version,
1993, "The Divine word and wisdom was there with God, and it was what God was Madsen,
1994, "the Word was <EM>a divine Being" Becker,
1979, "ein Gott war das Logos" [a God/god was the Logos/logos] Stage,
1907, "Das Wort war selbst gttlichen Wesens" [The Word/word was itself a divine Being/being]. Bhmer,
1910, "Es war fest mit Gott verbunden, ja selbst gttlichen Wesens" [It was strongly linked to God, yes itself divine Being/being] Thimme,
1919, "Gott von Art war das Wort" [God of Kind/kind was the Word/word] Baumgarten et al,
1920, "Gott (von Art) war der Logos" [God (of Kind/kind) was the Logos/logos] Holzmann,
1926, "ein Gott war der Gedanke" [a God/god was the Thought/thought] Rittenlmeyer, 1938, "selbst ein Gott war das Wort" [itself a God/god was the Word/word] Lyder Brun (Norw. professor of NT theology),
1945, "Ordet var av guddomsart" [the Word was of divine kind] Pffflin,
1949, "war von gttlicher Wucht [was of divine Kind/kind] Albrecht,
1957, "gttlichen Wesen hatte das Wort" [godlike Being/being had the Word/word] Smit, 1960, "verdensordet var et guddommelig vesen" [the word of the world was a divine being] Menge,
1961, "Gott (= gttlichen Wesens) war das Wort"[God(=godlike Being/being) was the Word/word) Haenchen,
1980, "Gott (von Art) war der Logos" [God (of Kind/kind) was the Logos/logos] Die Bibel in heutigem Deutsch,
1982, "r war bei Gott und in allem Gott gleich"[He was with God and in all like God] Haenchen (tr. By R. Funk),
1984, "divine (of the category divinity)was the Logos" Schultz,
1987, "ein Gott (oder: Gott von Art) war das Wort" [a God/god (or: God/god of Kind/kind) was the Word/word]

Item 4) Amplification on How Some Bible Translators Translated John 1:1 And Why:

"And the word was a god" - The New Testament in An Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Achbishop Newcome's New Translation: With a Corrected Text.

"and a god was the Word" - The Emphatic Diaglott, by Benjamin Wilson.

"and the Word was divine" - The Bible: An American Translation, by J.M.P. Smith and E.J. Goodspeed.

"the Logos was divine" - The New Testament: A New Translation, by James Moffat.

"what God was, the Word was" - The New English Bible.

"He was the same as God" - Today's English Version.

"And the Word was a god" - New World Translation

We notice that these Bibles do not translate John 1:1 with the simple expression "The Word was God" like most Bibles do. Why is that? The footnote to John 1:1 in The New American Bible states the following reason:
"Was God: lack of a definite article with "God" in Greek signifies predication rather than identification."
What the footnote is saying is that first time "God" appears in the verse, "was with God", there is a definite article before God so it literally reads "was with THE God". The second time God appears, "was God," there is no definite article (the). This signifies "God" may be used as a predicate and not as an identification.
Regarding this fact, the Anchor Bible states:

"To preserve in English the different nuance of theos [god] with and without the article, some (Moffat) would translate 'The Word was divine.'"

Notice a literal translation of John 1:1,2:

"In the beginning was the world and the word was toward the god and god was the word. This (one) was in beginning toward the god."

In these two verses we see six nouns, three referring to the Greek word logos (word, which most recognize to be Jesus) and three referring to the Greek word theos (god). We notic each reference to logos (word) is preceded by the definite article "the", while two of the three times the word theos (god) occurs, it too is preceded by the definite article "the". For some reason, John does not provide the definite article with theos when it is associated with "The Word". We thus see two definite individuals mentioned in this verse. "The Word", Jesus Christ, and "The God", who is Almighty God Jehovah. John does not say "The Word" is "The God". (In fact, most Trinitarian scholars would argue that if John had said the word was "ho theos" (The God), it would amount to sabellianism (the belief that Jesus is both the Father and the Son). As such, it is commonly agreed upon that John was not identifying Jesus as God but rather, was describing him as deity.) But if John did not say "The Word" is "The God", then what did he mean by saying, "the word was god"?
In Greek, it is possible for a noun to act as an adjective when it is not accompanied by the definite article. Consider a Biblical example of this in John 6:70. "Jesus replied, "Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is a devil!" (NIV)

Here the noun (devil) is not proceeded by the efinite article (the). To reflect this most Bibles place the indefinite article (a) in front of it. Thus, Jesus was not identifying Judas as "THE Devil", he was saying Judas had the qualities of the devil. He was acting like the devil so he was A devil though not THE devil. This example helps us to see how the lack of the definite article can cause a noun to act as a predication rather than an identification.

Regarding this point, noted Bible scholar William Barclay writes:

"When in Greek two nouns are joined by the verb to be and when both have the definite article, then the one is fully identified with the other; but when one of them is without the article, it become more an adjective than a noun, and describes rather the class of the sphere to which the other belongs...

"John has no definte article before theos, God. The Logos, therefore, is not identified as God or with God; the word theos has become adjectival and describes the sphere to which the logos belongs...

"This passage then [John 1:1] does not identify the Logos and God; it does not say that Jesus was God, nor doesit call him God; but it does say that in his nature and being he belongs to the same class as God."

Mr. Barclay's observations are duly noted in the example we considered with Judas Iscariot being "a devil".

Item 4) The words at Genesis 1:26 have often been used as proof of plurality
in the Godhead:
"Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness" RSV

But are there other examples of the same type of idiom in the OT? The following examples are from the RSV:

Ezr 4:17 The king sent an answer: "To Rehum the commander and Shim'shai the scribe and the rest of their associates who live in Sama'ria and in the rest of the province Beyond the River, greeting. And now Ezr 4:18 the letter which you sent to us has been plainly read before me.

[[note: the use of the Apocrypha as a Historic source only and not as an approved part of the Bible]]
1Maccabees 10:18 "King Alexander to his brother Jonathan, greeting.
1Ma 10:19 We have heard about you, that you are a mighty warrior and worthy to be our friend.
1Ma 10:20 And so we have appointed you today to be the high priest of your nation; you are to be called the king's friend" (and he sent him a purple robe and a golden crown) "and you are to take our side and keep friendship with us."
1Ma 10:21 So Jonathan put on the holy garments in the seventh month of the one hundred and sixtieth year, at the feast of tabernacles, and he recruited troops and equipped them with arms in abundance.
1Ma 10:22 When Demetrius heard of these things he was grieved and said,
1Ma 10:23 "What is this that we have done? Alexander has gotten ahead of us in forming a friendship with the Jews to strengthen himself.
1Ma 10:24 I also will write them words of encouragement and promise them honor and gifts, that I may have their help."
1Ma 10:25 So he sent a message to them in the following words: "King Demetrius to the nation of the Jews, greeting.
1Ma 10:26 Since you have kept your agreement with us and have continued your friendship with us, and have not sided with our enemies, we have heard of it and rejoiced.
1Ma 10:27 And now continue still to keep faith with us, and we will repay you with good for what you do for us.
1Ma 10:28 We will grant you many immunities and give you gifts.

1Ma 11:30 "King Demetrius to Jonathan his brother and to the nation of the Jews, greeting.

1Ma 11:31 This copy of the letter which we wrote concerning you to Lasthenes our kinsman we have written to you also, so that you may know what it says.
1Ma 11:32 'King Demetrius to Lasthenes his father, greeting.
1Ma 11:33 To the nation of the Jews, who are our friends and fulfil their obligations to us, we have determined to do good, because of the good will they show toward us.

1Ma 15:9 When we gain control of our kingdom, we will bestow great honor upon you and your nation and the temple, so that your glory will become manifest in all the earth."

2Sa 24:14 Then David said to Gad, "I am in great distress; let us fall into the hand of the LORD, for his mercy is great; but let me not fall into the hand of man."

Song of Solomon 1:11 We will make you ornaments of gold, studded with silver.

Item 5) Thomas Jefferson on the false doctrine:

"No historical fact is better established, than that the doctrine of
one God, pure and uncompounded, was that of the early ages of
Christianity. . . .Nor was the unity of the Supreme Being ousted
from the Christian creed by the force of reason, but by the sword of
civil government, wielded at the will of the Athanasius. The hocus-
pocus phantasm of a God like another Cerberus, with one body and
three heads, had its birth and growth in the blood of thousands of
martyrs. . . .In fact, the Athanasian paradox that one is three, and
three but one, is so incomprehensible to the human mind, that no
candid man can say he has any idea of it, and how can he believe
what presents no idea? He who thinks he does, only deceives
himself. He proves, also, that man, once surrendering his reason,
has no remaining guard against absurdities the most monstrous, and
like a ship without rudder, is the sport of every wind. With such
persons, gullibility, which they call faith, takes the helm from the
hand of reason, and the mind becomes a wreck."

From: Jefferson, Thomas (b.1743-d.1826). "The Writings of Thomas
Jefferson: Being His Autobiography, Correspondence, Reports,
Messages, Addresses, and Other Writings, Official and Private:
Published by the Order of the Joint Committee of Congress on the
Library, From the Original Manuscripts, Deposited in the Department
of State, with explanatory notes, by the editor, H.A. Washington."
9 vols. (Washington, D.C.: Taylor & Maury, 1853-1854), part of
letter to theologian James Smith - December 8, 1822, vol 7, pp. 269-
70. E302 .J464 / 06-007150. Appearing also at the following
internet web site: Thomas Jefferson's Letters >
http://www.barefootsworld.net/tjletters.html#unity <.

Also, it may interest some to know that, a vast amount of the pre-
1800's non-Trinitarian (anti-Trinitarian) literature which exists at
the Library of Congress (Washington, D.C.), the largest library in
the world, is there because they once belonged to Thomas Jefferson.

A great quote by Thos. Jefferson on the trinity can be found in
The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, edited By H.A. Washington vol.
7, p. 210 :
"When we shall have done away the incomprehensible jargon
of the Trinitarian arithmetic, that three are one, and one is
three; when we shall have knocked down the artificial scaffolding, reared
to mask from view the simple structure of Jesus; when, in short,
we shall have unlearned everything which has been taught since his
day, and got back to the pure and simple doctrines he inculcated, we
shall then be truly and worthily his disciples; and my opinion is
that if nothing had ever been added to what flowed purely from his
lips, the whole world would at this day have been Christian."

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION – BOTH TRUE AND FALSE – AT WWW.JW.ORG

Index
» General Discussion
» Scripture of the Day

5/17/2018 9:29 am #1991

Re: Scripture of the Day

5/19/2018 8:30 am #1992

Re: Scripture of the Day

5/21/2018 7:23 am #1993

Re: Scripture of the Day

5/23/2018 2:27 pm #1994

Re: Scripture of the Day

5/24/2018 2:58 pm #1995

Re: Scripture of the Day

5/26/2018 7:52 am #1996

Re: Scripture of the Day

5/28/2018 7:51 am #1997

Re: Scripture of the Day

5/30/2018 5:14 pm #1998

Re: Scripture of the Day

6/01/2018 12:37 pm #1999

Re: Scripture of the Day

6/03/2018 5:51 pm #2000

Re: Scripture of the Day

Index
» General Discussion
» Scripture of the Day

Board footera