LookingForAnswers Posted February 7, 2014 Group: Seeker Followers: 0 Topic Count: 10 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 1,033 Content Per Day: 0.27 Reputation: 67 Days Won: 2 Joined: 12/26/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted February 7, 2014 You want to find a real Christian? Look to YHVH and live your life as He did. We can probably say that no one alive is a true Christian, since we all are so deeply flawed. But, that's the great gift from our Savior, He forgives us for that. People that live contrary to what He taught us, or instruct others to live contrary to His teachings are false witnesses and they must be identified and purged from the Church. We have a responsibility to be good stewards within our Church. Not wanting to be too picky, but YHVH was the name for God the Father, not for Jesus. So it would be a bit hard to see how YHVH lived. No, YHVH is God's Name and Jesus is God. God is the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Was YHVH ever assigned to Jesus in the Bible, or in other words is the name YHVH ever used in conjunction with Jesus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted February 7, 2014 Share Posted February 7, 2014 You want to find a real Christian? Look to YHVH and live your life as He did. We can probably say that no one alive is a true Christian, since we all are so deeply flawed. But, that's the great gift from our Savior, He forgives us for that. People that live contrary to what He taught us, or instruct others to live contrary to His teachings are false witnesses and they must be identified and purged from the Church. We have a responsibility to be good stewards within our Church. Not wanting to be too picky, but YHVH was the name for God the Father, not for Jesus. So it would be a bit hard to see how YHVH lived. No, YHVH is God's Name and Jesus is God. God is the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Was YHVH ever assigned to Jesus in the Bible, or in other words is the name YHVH ever used in conjunction with Jesus. Not in terms of His humanty. But in terms of His deity, Jesus is inseparable from the Father. As God Jesus is YHVH. YHVH is God's redemptive Name and Jesus is the revelation of,among other things, God's redemptive nature. Every refrence in Scripture like, "YHVH Shalom, YHVH Tsidkeinu, YHVH kidshanu, YHVH Rophe, YHVH Roi, YHVH Yeshua (salvation), etc. are references to Jesus. Jesus, real Hebrew name is "Y'shua and Salvation encompasses all of those redemptive Names. Jesus in Revelation 1 refers to Himself as the first and the last the beginning and the end, meaning that Jesus is just as much God as the Father and YHVH is reference to both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
other one Posted February 7, 2014 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 29 Topic Count: 596 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 56,047 Content Per Day: 7.56 Reputation: 27,790 Days Won: 271 Joined: 12/29/2003 Status: Online Share Posted February 7, 2014 Not wanting to be too picky, but YHVH was the name for God the Father, not for Jesus. So it would be a bit hard to see how YHVH lived. Actually that's not possible.... Ex 5:1 5:1 And afterward Moses and Aaron came and said to Pharaoh, "Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel , NASB Ex 24:8-11 e LORD has made with you in accordance with all these words." 9 Then Moses went up with Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel, 10 and they saw the God of Israel ; and under His feet there appeared to be a pavement of sapphire, as clear as the sky itself. 11 Yet He did not stretch out His hand against the nobles of the sons of Israel; and they beheld God, and they ate and drank. NASB John 6:45-46 Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me. 46 "Not that any man has seen the Father , except the One who is from God; He has seen the Father . NASB No man has ever seen the Father, but 70+ people have seen YHVH so either YHVH isn't the Father, or the Jesus is very mistaken.... Since the Bible tells us that Jesus was in the form of God before he set that aside and became flesh, And since He told Moses that his name is (a word translated I AM) and Jesus told the Jews that before Abraham was (I AM) I would think that there is a really good chance that Jesus truly was/is YHVH. Something to ponder.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LookingForAnswers Posted February 7, 2014 Group: Seeker Followers: 0 Topic Count: 10 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 1,033 Content Per Day: 0.27 Reputation: 67 Days Won: 2 Joined: 12/26/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted February 7, 2014 Not wanting to be too picky, but YHVH was the name for God the Father, not for Jesus. So it would be a bit hard to see how YHVH lived. Actually that's not possible.... Ex 5:1 5:1 And afterward Moses and Aaron came and said to Pharaoh, "Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel , NASB Ex 24:8-11 e LORD has made with you in accordance with all these words." 9 Then Moses went up with Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel, 10 and they saw the God of Israel ; and under His feet there appeared to be a pavement of sapphire, as clear as the sky itself. 11 Yet He did not stretch out His hand against the nobles of the sons of Israel; and they beheld God, and they ate and drank. NASB John 6:45-46 Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me. 46 "Not that any man has seen the Father , except the One who is from God; He has seen the Father . NASB No man has ever seen the Father, but 70+ people have seen YHVH so either YHVH isn't the Father, or the Jesus is very mistaken.... Since the Bible tells us that Jesus was in the form of God before he set that aside and became flesh, And since He told Moses that his name is (a word translated I AM) and Jesus told the Jews that before Abraham was (I AM) I would think that there is a really good chance that Jesus truly was/is YHVH. Something to ponder.. I agree that Jesus is God, but there are names/titles given in the Bible for each of the 3 persons of the GodHead. Names like Elohim and Adonai are, at least as far as I understand it, are speaking of God the Father and not the Son or Holy Spirit. But perhaps I am mistaken, it has happened before.! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted February 8, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.76 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.96 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Trying to nail down father vs Son vs Holy Spirit in the OT can sometimes be tricky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
other one Posted February 8, 2014 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 29 Topic Count: 596 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 56,047 Content Per Day: 7.56 Reputation: 27,790 Days Won: 271 Joined: 12/29/2003 Status: Online Share Posted February 8, 2014 Trying to nail down father vs Son vs Holy Spirit in the OT can sometimes be tricky. I don't believe the Father is in the Old Testament specifically........ I think Jesus has always been the representing entity of the Godhead on planet earth. The Spirit came to a few individual people for a specific reason but not to the entire people as after Jesus went to the Father. but that's just my personal beliefs from a half century pondering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted February 8, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.76 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.96 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted February 8, 2014 Trying to nail down father vs Son vs Holy Spirit in the OT can sometimes be tricky. I don't believe the Father is in the Old Testament specifically........ I think Jesus has always been the representing entity of the Godhead on planet earth. The Spirit came to a few individual people for a specific reason but not to the entire people as after Jesus went to the Father. but that's just my personal beliefs from a half century pondering. Completely understood. I was simply noting that the issue isn't without its controversies. (I recall a least one thread with a bunch of us debating if The God of the OT was specifically Jesus or the Father.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gray wolf Posted February 8, 2014 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 28 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,046 Content Per Day: 0.27 Reputation: 194 Days Won: 2 Joined: 09/25/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 09/30/1960 Share Posted February 8, 2014 It is the most common fallacy we see on this board. How many time have we seen comments like " a real Christian....". This forum is awash in this fallacy That isn't the same because the Bible actually does give us the defintion of what real Christianity looks like. The Bible does define what a real Christian is, so it is not a fallacy to make a biblical argument over what a real Christian is. An argument akin to the Scotsman fallacy would be in reference to something that doesn't actually define a real Christian. Something like, "A real Christian always wears a suit and tie to church," would be an example of a Scotsman fallacy with relation to Christians. Oh come now, you know it goes a bit deeper than that. Go to some of the political threads and you find statements like "no true Christian would support that guy or this person". I cannot count how many times you have implied that no true Christian would believe evolution or in an old earth or a great many other things. Then there is the "no real Hebrew scholar" that you throw out all the time. I agree this one pops up frequently, often by implication as you said. Other fallacies surface as well, but in general the discussions go pretty smoothly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted February 9, 2014 Share Posted February 9, 2014 It is the most common fallacy we see on this board. How many time have we seen comments like " a real Christian....". This forum is awash in this fallacy That isn't the same because the Bible actually does give us the defintion of what real Christianity looks like. The Bible does define what a real Christian is, so it is not a fallacy to make a biblical argument over what a real Christian is. An argument akin to the Scotsman fallacy would be in reference to something that doesn't actually define a real Christian. Something like, "A real Christian always wears a suit and tie to church," would be an example of a Scotsman fallacy with relation to Christians. Oh come now, you know it goes a bit deeper than that. Go to some of the political threads and you find statements like "no true Christian would support that guy or this person". I cannot count how many times you have implied that no true Christian would believe evolution or in an old earth or a great many other things. Then there is the "no real Hebrew scholar" that you throw out all the time. I agree this one pops up frequently, often by implication as you said. Other fallacies surface as well, but in general the discussions go pretty smoothly. "By Implication" means, "If I can twist Shiloh's words to make him appear to say or mean something he never said, I can deflect attention away from my inability to substantively address his comments." It's nothing but an attempt to assign values to me in the absence of your ability to make substantive responses to the actual text of comments. It is the last, desperate tactics employed by people who are losing the debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LookingForAnswers Posted February 9, 2014 Group: Seeker Followers: 0 Topic Count: 10 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 1,033 Content Per Day: 0.27 Reputation: 67 Days Won: 2 Joined: 12/26/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted February 9, 2014 "By Implication" means, "If I can twist Shiloh's words to make him appear to say or mean something he never said, I can deflect attention away from my inability to substantively address his comments." It's nothing but an attempt to assign values to me in the absence of your ability to make substantive responses to the actual text of comments. It is the last, desperate tactics employed by people who are losing the debate. Have you ever considered that after large numbers of people have told you they view what you are saying in a certain way that the problem might lie with your words and not with everyone else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts