also you try to get the focus of attention back on me so you can ramble on with your nonsense--im NOT a JH,NOT a 7thDA, IM A BAPTIST
BTW theres nothing wrong with saying the name of the Father and Son in the Hebrew in which they were given..YAH and YESHUA
Sabbath
Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by HisWitness, Jun 29, 2013.
Page 8 of 9
-
-
-
And you claim that "there's nothing wrong with saying the name of the Father and Son in the Hebrew in which they were given..YAH and YESHUA" is not the position you have taken against everyone on this forum. You have not espoused that it is OK to use the name, you have INSISTED that it is MANDATORY and that's a huge difference between that, and what you just said above.
There is no problem with using those names as long as you realize they are translations and transliterations from another language, and that it is not mandatory on all believing Christians to use those terms in their original language context because no matter how you translate lthem, it will never MEAN that outside of the language that you THINK IN. If you can not THINK in Hebrew, then simply using a Hebrew will not aid your understanding because you will THINK of that term in ENGLISH.
However there is a problem with your usage of YAH as the Father. Yah is a shortened version of Yahweh (YHWH) and is used to described the Godhead, not just the Father. By claiming that ONLY the Father is YHWH you are denying that Jesus is YHWH. Yah, nor Yahweh is the Hebrew word for Father.
I would not fault you if you choose to use those terms and they are edifying to YOU. It is when you demand and impose those terms on others and assume that if they DON'T use those terms they are somehow less of a Christian and being rebellious toward some standard of Scripture that does not exist. In Revelation 7:9, there appears in heaven all who came from various nations, people and TONGUES , not all of them used the same name for God as the Hebrews or English speaking people. -
(signed, Your friendly neighborhood Psuedo-Calvinist):applause:
EDITED TO SAY: I really know what HisWitness's beliefs line up best with, but if he really believes Jesus is Michael the archangel (not just asking because it's a curious verse), then he has some serious theological problems. -
I would also explain that out of your whopping 23 total posts, half of them directed at ME is quite suspicious.
I would explain that it takes 2 to dance and if you are non Calvinist, then you shouldn't believe that I FORCED someone else to act out of character :) -
By the way, on a subject related to the pig, you claim to be a Christian. If you are a Christian, and recognize the NT as sacred, why would the picture of the pig offend you, as if you have ever bothered to read Acts, it makes it quite clear that all meat is good and of the Lord. So what is your problem? -
-
-
-
However, that is not the point, those in Christ no longer are guided by their former lives. In Christ, Jew and Gentile are the same, subject to the same Spirit. You have no justification for that image bothering you, if you are who you say you are. None whatsoever. -
Furthermore, you have equally no justification in bringing up an issue of plagiarism that you can not prove every time that you want to attempt disparaging my credibility among other believers, and then in the same breath complain that I keep raising the issue about your pig post, or the fact that you don't answer how you can be a Third Class Petty Officer with an E-3 ranking. You expect me to do what you do not practice. -
-
-
-
-
-
Yea, has God said? -
First of all do you see YAH rebuking Peter for refusing to eat unclean things ?
That vision had nothing to do with Peter eating meats at all-----you misunderstand the whole text friend !!!!!
im gonna shorten this up the best way I can to you-------------------------
How many times was the vision shown to peter--------------------3
How many men was sent to fetch peter---------------------------3
It was unclean and against law for a Jew to be together with a Gentile--these 3 men were Gentiles coming to peter--Peter would have NEVER went with these Gentiles if it had not been for the vision--YAH was getting through to Peter that he was extending his GRACE to the gentiles also
SO therefore Peter figured out what it meant when the 3 men arrived--and he went with them to the other Gentile man.
See friend the vision had NOTHING to do with saying you can transgress YAH's laws and eat as you please to fulfill your lustful desires as men say.
Peter knew YAH wasn't going against his own HOLY LAWS---and Peter never ate ANY of the unclean beasts that YAH said NOT to eat.
YAH was telling Peter that he was about to cleanse that which was unclean---the Gentiles !!! -
-
Page 8 of 9