WolfBitn

This is the last time I am going to tell you this, Wolf. I am not the topic of the debate. I have told you all you need to know. Any further personal questions aboutg me are going to be ignored and/or reported to the moderator as TOS violations. Shiloh im not the one that made it an issue... you did from post 30 from post 32 I am establishing HOW MUCH you know this language... how much of it you actually speak... a few words? How much of it you read and understand without an aid, if you dont claim to be able to write it YOU made this an issue so please clear up for me these apparent discrepencies Reported Thats fine Shiloh, feel free to make the claim and then not answer for it... God bless you brother

This is the last time I am going to tell you this, Wolf. I am not the topic of the debate. I have told you all you need to know. Any further personal questions aboutg me are going to be ignored and/or reported to the moderator as TOS violations. Shiloh im not the one that made it an issue... you did from post 30 from post 32 I am establishing HOW MUCH you know this language... how much of it you actually speak... a few words? How much of it you read and understand without an aid, if you dont claim to be able to write it YOU made this an issue so please clear up for me these apparent discrepencies

Leaving Egypt . . . Egypt -- in Hebrew, Mitzrayim -- literally means a "place of narrowness." Actually Bliindseeker you are right... but this is right also... http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexico...H4714&t=KJV The point being here that 'Egypt" as Shiloh is using it, is not a singular at all, but a plural noun naming the naiton after the PEOPLES that occupied it, the copts. They also occupied a narrow space of Egypt along the nile river because of the fertility of the ground after yearly flooding, hence 'narrow' or 'narrowness'

Oh I see now. The problem is that Levshalom.com is not Messianic Jewish. The article you are citing is talking about mystical meditiation of the Shema IT is not not a Hebrew exegesis. According to article it appeared in "Reformed Jewish Magazine" which is not produced by Messianic Jews. So have already stooped to misrepresenting your sources. AS for Zionmychosen.com, they do not claim to be Jewish, but further offer themselves as Calvinists and refer to the Westminster Catechism, Menonite Catechism and Baptist Catechism as part and parcel of their belief system. So again, you are misprepresenting your sources. oops, youre right ... ONE meesianic Jewish site and one reformed jewish site... showing that whether reformed or messianic they both recognize the same thing ive been telling you I said I read and speak Hebrew. How well do you read hebrew? Do you need a lexicon or another device to read it since you dont actually WRITE in Hebrew? How fluently do you read it without aids? And if you can read it without aid, why arent you able to write it?

wrong... you even Translated Mitzrayim as Egypt, when it means land of the Copts Now once more, youve strongly implied that you speak and write Hebrew... should i now assume this isnt so since you refuse giving an answer?? You made no hesitation when you implied it, why the hesitation now?

When anyone like yourself constantly SPEAKS LIES about Scripture, it is much more telling of you and evidence of your spiritual, moral and intellectual schizophrenia. The fact that others defend the Faith because you MUST attack, you MUST go where Christians congregate simply to trash all things Christian, you MUST accuse and lie as you do; says NOTHING about the strength of our Faith. IT SAYS EVERYTHING ABOUT YOU. Furthermore, you tried that tactic on the other board cvor, remember? It didn't work then, why in the world do you think it will work now? That pretty much says it all. I'm here in the section where its an open invite for atheists to comment. And that's what I do. The board has the Apologetics section here, I didn't bring it. Matrix, God's Blessings. I have questioned why the forum allows atheists to comment at length and I was told that atheists are seeking ... and I suppose that must be true. I think maybe they are seeking validation and assurance that their beliefs (or lack thereof) are right. I do not know why someone who is so sure God doesn't exist would spend so much time in the midst of those who are so sure He Does.... Odd, don't you think? We believe in The Almighty and His Mercy and Grace. We believe His Son, Jesus Christ shed His Blood for our sins. If you believe none of these things - you sure do spend a lot of time here... That is why I pray for your salvation and that God will be merciful to you. His Grace is for all who but only accept it and repent. Blessings. Thats a good point Believer I have found that they are as evangelical as we are... only whereas we seek to convert the nonbeliever, they seek to DEconvert the believer. Ive seen this openly admitted as i have debated scores if not hundreds of atheists

Your reading comprehension skills are depressing, I have never talked like gravity is proven to be a particle. I explained to you that there is a quantum theory of gravity which involves particles called gravitons that is highly speculative and explained the implications of gravity as a depression of spacetime based on the mass of an object. As a human being with a brain that can read you should be able to read back through my posts and figure this out. My conprehension are fine... you went on explaing gravity as though you were sure it was a fact... i merely pointed out that you dont KNOW... because we only have theory Gravity was not working prior to the big bang singularity because there was no matter. Our current laws of physics cannot describe how physics work in a singularity, it's really not much more complicated than that. You can rail all you want about our descriptions of how forces operate are somehow absolute pronouncements of divine knowledge but the fact of the matter is that they are just descriptions. There are no physics police that are going to show up and ticket a black hole for not following the law. Thats what i was waiting for you to say... in the bolded You have quite a quandry here since it takes gravity to hold this ball of energy/matter in its tight lil ball. It took gravity to take it to a pinpoint of infinite density prior to the bang... Guth even postulates that the bang was cause by a sudden powerful inversion of gravity, though he admits he has nothing to back this postulation... this is part of his 'eternal inflation' theory I believe that God was the first cause, but that is an article of faith not science. Scientific observation can take us back to a point where the natural laws of the universe can no longer account for the origin of the universe but it cannot take us past that point in determining what specific deity or weird quantum process actually did (at least not yet). All players need to understand the limits of this game. In your OPINION its only an article of faith not backed by science... i disagree with your opinion. What i am interested in knowing is which God you attribute this bang to? Which do you lean toward if you dont have a sure thought on it and why?

He is making it up and penciling it himself. The answer is just before your post, just right over your head Shiloh now... do you speak and write Hebrew as you stronly implied? i am in serious doubt that you do as your short list of words shows you grasping for more that straw... YOUR LIST Heres the corrected list

From the original Hebrew Elohenyu it taken from the plural Elohim. Heres what messianic jews, who DO speak hebrw, have to say about it From Lev Shalom www.levshalom.org/article_rj.html From Zion my chosen www.zionmychosen.com/index_files/Page368.htm

No, I do not. I said they are separate persons, not separate entities. Stop putting words in my mouth. a person is an entity is it not? Do you agree the Father and Son and Holy Spirit are 3 individuals or not? You said you did, i want to be clear on this. I said nothing of the sort. You are trying to assign a position to me that I have not articulated or even implied. I said that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are separate persons but ONE singular God. They are not singular gods. Yet you also said not only are they individuals they each are God So answer this please... if Christ is God and an individual, would He be God if the Father did not exist? Would the Father be God if CHRIST didnt exist? No, you are the one trying to change the Shema into a polythestic statement. It says, Hear O Israel, The Lord our God, the Lord is ONE. That is what it says. It does not say anything about "Gods." You are butchering the Scriptures and are adding to the Word of God. You are trying to pencil YOUR theology into the Bible. Im changing it to nothing at all... i read each word in the hebrew, and i believe each word in the Hebrew as it is written... you however must reassign the plural where the singular YHWH is used, and then you have to turn the plural Elohim, into the singular Eloah to come up with your understanding The translators had no fear or bias. They simply knew what they were doing and certainly knew Hebrew better than you. I am not interested in what some off the wall Messianic "Hebrew" group thinks. I know the Hebrew language, and I know the difference between good Hebrew and junk theology. These arent off the wall messianic hebrews... id be very careful in judgement, these are all MAINSTREAM hebrew messianics, AND they are your saved brothers believing Jesus to be their savior... AND they actually DO speak and write Hebrew... a direct quesiton youve avoided now after implying that you in fact did No, I am not going to be tested. I am not on trial and I am not the subject of this debate. You will stick to debating the issue and not me. Any attempt to "test" me will simply be ignored, so don't waste your time. So again you ignore the quesiton... thats fine then, dont claim hebrew scholarship if you cant back it up my friend

Shiloh i am about to address this last post, but before i do id like an answer to my straight forward quesiton Do you or do you not read and write Hebrew fluantly? Also let me ask you something... IF only the Father existed, would He be God? IF only Christ exited would HE be God? Nebula, I believe That Jesus is God, yet He is an individual. I believe the same of the Father and the Holy Spirit, and YET, in a way i will NEVER claim to understand, they are united as ONLY ONE Eternal One.

From this description, I consider the Western texts to be flawed representations since: 1) It is translated from the original greek 2) It contains extraneous insertions "so that meaning could be brought out with greater force and definiteness". I had thought most christians believed that the word of god to be inerrant. From my understanding, inerrancy does not permit embellishments. Regards, UF Sorry UF, you came away with the wrong impression Concerning your #1, The Western Texts WERE the FIRST greek texts translated from the latin and POSSIBLY also from an aramaic Concerning #2, they do not contain 'incertions' unless you believe that the alexandrian predate them, and they obviously dont. These 'embellishments' are claimed by people who believe the alexandrian text is correct when they in fact take 16,000 words from the text. The Western type and the Byzentine type, sandwich the Alexandrian type and the 2 match almost exactly, while the alexandrian is controvercial, errant, sloppy, and revised constantly over an 800 - 1200 year period

I suggest you get your version of the Shema correct . . . it say nothing about "eternal" or "three gods." Your version of the Trinity is nothing more than polytheism and is flat out wrong and contrary to the truth of the scriptures. While Shiloh and I do not agree fully on this subject I can thus far say amen to his words as he has endeavor to patiently reason this with you. Blind Seeker "YHWH" is recognized by the Hebrew as meaning "The Eternal One" Elohim is plural... The root word, Eloah meaning god in the singular. Our Elohim is NEVER referred to in the singular... never

What I said was that these three persons are one eternal God. I did not say there were "3 Gods." You are teaching polytheism as Bind pointed out. You are standing outside the pale of Scripture and are trying to fashion the Bible around your views. So lets look at your reasoning and compare it with the Shema You agree Jesus is God and a seperate entity from the Father and the Holy Spirit You agree the Father is God and an individual You agree that the Holy Spirit is God and an individual... YET you suddenly change and say no they cant be ALL Gods AND individual... you sound very mixed up to me You even change the shema saying it states there is ONE eternal God YHWH Elohim YHWH echad = The ETERNAL ONE (Singluar) is GODS (plural) united as ONE ETERNAL ONE (Singular) NOT The eternal oneS (plural) are A GOD Singluar You keep reassigning the singular to the plural and the plural to the singular I am not changing the rules of grammar. I am explaining to you that Hebrew grammar is different than English grammar. There are different rules in play and that has to be taken into account. Tell me this: Haven't you noticed that the English translators of the Bible translated "Elohim" as God, never as "Gods, but translate "elohim" as "gods" never as "God?" Even in our English Bible, the oneness of Elohim is preserved as it should be and stands in contradiction to your attempt to make "Elohim" mean "Gods." Even the translators recognize the nonnumeric plurality of Elohim. Or they had the same fear and bias as you... Messianic Hebrews do not recognize your theory or a plural greatness, but rather they understand it exactly as i have shown you, and ive given you messianic hebrew literature to prove this He is a retired Rabbi and a Holocaust survivor. I do not have his permission to use His name pubilically or to give out his personal information to anyone. He is a very ill man and I will not betray his confidences in me. Besides, you are asking for information that is not pertinent to this debate. You need to stick with the debate at hand. It certainly IS pertinant... Do you actually know how to read and write Hebrew? If so are you fluent? Be careful youre about to be tested lol

It reminds me of this analogy: Although you are new at golf, you have just hit a beautiful 200-yard drive and your ball has landed on a blade of grass near the cup at Hole 3. The green contains ten million blades of grass. The odds of your ball landing on that blade of grass are 9,999,999 to one against, too improbable to have happened by mere chance. What's the explanation? a) The wind guided it b) Your muscles guided it c) There is no need for an explanation d) You consciously designed your shot to land on that particular blade Regards, UF It takes more faith for you to believe energy and matter always existed, has no conscience, yet created all we see AND conscienceness, than it takes for me to believe "God created" Yours is a blind faith, my faith is an educated one, and backed by ALL evidence

Well said. Matrix... im glad you agree... which god do you say created that cause?

A few posts back I introduced you to gravity as the warping of space time by objects with mass according the Eistein's theory of relativity. o stop lol a few posts back you said i was the mixed up one, and talked like gravity is proven to be a particle... then you see its not even decided, there are various theories, and you dont want to look bad, you dont want to admit you were wrong, but you obviously were... as a christian i want to point out that its not the christian grasping for straws and using bad science in this case what i dismissed as bunk was you claiming i was mixed up lol Oh there's plenty of theories addressing the "first cause", for instance there's the Penrose-Hawking singularity theorems, but I don't see any of them as particularly strong since, as of yet, we have no way to test them. Wrong... there may be postulation but there isnt a single theory by scientific definition of 'theory' There's simply nothing to run around. You are asserting that gravity either has to function exactly as we think it should or it shouldn't function at all - this is simply not the case. Deal with it. Theres more running... just because you shy from "God created" you are stuck trying to postulate that physics DIDNT work even when you see gravity was working prior to the bang... what circles godless science must grasp for The evidence indicates a "supernatural" cause in my opinion in that whatever kicked off the big bang must have existed outside all time, space, matter, and energy. That does not, however, indicate the Christian God by default. Ok now we are getting somewhere... your first statement that it took an outside cause Now... let me challenge you on your statement that it isnt the christian God... or do you believe it was? Which God do you postulate created this outside force and whats your evidence of it?

Jesus is a separate, distinct and individual person from the Father, but he is not not a separate God. So Jesus is a seperate individual, and not the Father... The Holy Spirit is a seperate and distinct person.. we have 3 persons who are all God, and yet these 3 Gods are one eternal one... get your shema straight... it doesnt say the 3 eternal ones are God, it says the 3 Gods are ONE ETERNAL ONE I never said it didn't. In those cases it is a numerical plural. But when applied to God Himself, it is not a numerical plural. So you just want to change the rules of grammer for one word... because you just cant bring yourself to believe it as its written... thats cool It is not gymnastics. I am explaining Hebrew grammar to you and how the language works. The verbs distinguish between "gods" and "God." It really is very, very simple, Wolf. Yes its that simple... and in this case echad united 3 into one unit according to Hebrew grammer No, I showed you from the Jewish encyclopedia and it said exactly what I have told you. I realize your pride won't make room for it, but you really don't know what you are talking about. You are not going to accomplish anything but make yourself look foolish if you keep trying resist the truth. Shiloh... tell me who taught you Hebrew

It's not my theory; it is biblical truth and nothing less. The fact that you cannot accept the truth does not make it a "theory." Of COURSE its a theory... you even made up the phrases to describe it... you even admit the Hebrew grammer NEVER refers to a 'plural intensity'... and not only is it a theory, it goes against all common sence to use a plural in EVERYTHING EXCEPT God... youre just scared of it in my opinion I believe that Jesus is God, the Father is God and the Holy Spirit is God. I do NOT believe they are indiviual "gods." Jesus is not an individual god separate from the Father. All three are God, but are three persons within one God. That is how the Bible presents them. That is the simple truth. So then you dont believe Jesus is seperate and individual form the Father? I answered that already, but since you didn't bother READ, I will repost it for your convenience. Well let me post for our convenience that when referring to 'other gods' Elohim is ALWAYS used in the plural... when referring to judges its ALWAYS used in the plural, and both times it MEANS a plural. The fact is you have to go throguh all kind of gymnastics, even making up phrases that dont exist to try to make a point... just to try to say a plural is ALWAYS a plural except when it comes to God I didn't make it up and I provided support from a Jewish source. o you did too make it up... you cant show me a source from hebrews using the term 'plural intensity' lol stop please lol

I'm no physicist, but I've never heard of gravity as a wave. There is a quantum theory of gravity that postulates particles called gravitons, but it has a myriad of problems as no one has figured out how to reconcile it with relativity. There is also something called a gravity wave, but that isn't a theory of gravity, it's an effect of gravity. I still think you're mixing up gravity with light. uh huh, i think you know better http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_wave Like i said, THREE theories concerning the make up of gravity... if you need to see one on the particle wave theory let me know I'm not seeing how this is a problem for the big bang theory since the big bang theory doesn't try to explain it. yes i love atheistic science lol... lets just take it back this far and stop... it works fine to this point, but from there on we're screwed... So again... first cause. Isnt it amazing that without God theres absolutely no theory AT ALL even addressing first cause? Amazingly, the universe doesn't seem to care for your "either/or" scenario. Neither do atheists... they generally run around it very much like you just did Because we are not able to explain how things work in a singularity, all our descriptions for how forces and spacetime should act no longer work. So then you are forced by default to agree that the only thing making sence is a miracle

The thing is, Wolfbtn, I understand the doctrine of the Trinity AND I know the Hebrew. The Trinity refers to God's personage, not His essence or being, which is why He can be ONE God. And yes, if we were to subscribe to your view, it would come across as worshpping three gods. That is why it is wrong. No, it is not the very thing we believe. Because to say "our Eternal One is Gods who are one" is not what the Bible teaches, is not supported by Hebrew and is sloppy theology to boot. He is ONE God in three persons. Ok lets reason out your theory Shiloh Do you believe Jesus is an individual? Do you believe He is God? Do you believe the Father is an individual? Do you believe He is God? Do you believe the Holy Spirit is an individual? Do you believe HE is God? You are aware that when speaking of other GODS in the ot, the plural Elohim is also used. How do you know this isnt 'nonnumerical intensity'? ( nice phrase you made up here by the way lol) ^^^ please answer these for me

Wrong. The majority of the world's religions population is Christian. See here: http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html And, while we will ALL die, we will not all go to the same place. Not even close. Well that depends on what you see as Christianity. If cut into three slices- Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox, Islam becomes number 1. And its the fastest growing religion (while Christianity is on the decline). Yup, right back into the dirt. That big fat 0 I keep talking about. Is it not hypocritical that one minute we are being told that very few who claim to be Christian are really Christians but those "not real Christians" are reclaimed again if it somehow seems they might support some position? If you gave latitude to context, i believe youd see the institution is the largest in the world, while those who are true christian are comparitively small in number On the flip side of your quesiton i might also ask why youre willing to acknowledge the gross hypocracy and ridiculous false doctrines in the church only when its convenient for you? THIS faction is the one we tell you CHRIST is not associated with except by their claim to His name... they certainly dont cling to His doctrine I find the athesitic arguement very dishonest